From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 29649 invoked from network); 26 Jul 2001 18:22:29 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 26 Jul 2001 18:22:29 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 4820 invoked from network); 26 Jul 2001 18:24:17 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 26 Jul 2001 18:24:17 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA01160; Thu, 26 Jul 2001 11:17:53 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 85958 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 26 Jul 2001 18:17:41          +0000
Received: from bucky.excite.com (bucky-rwcmex.excite.com [198.3.99.218]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA01114 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 26 Jul 2001 11:07:40 -0700
Received: from seamore.excite.com ([199.172.148.163]) by bucky.excite.com          (InterMail vM.4.01.02.39 201-229-119-122) with ESMTP id          <20010726180700.MKY6361.bucky.excite.com@seamore.excite.com>; Thu, 26          Jul 2001 11:07:00 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Excite Inbox
X-Sender-Ip: 216.167.144.187
Message-ID:  <8480310.996170820070.JavaMail.imail@seamore.excite.com>
Date:         Thu, 26 Jul 2001 11:07:00 -0700
Reply-To: "bill moyer" <bmoyer007@EXCITE.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "bill moyer" <bmoyer007@EXCITE.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Fw: LDRS 21, its official!!
Comments: cc: commander@rocketsilo.safeshopper.com
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

On Thu, 26 Jul 2001 09:08:19 -0700, rocketsilo wrote:

>
>  Bill-
>
>  Thanks for the email.  If you could do me a favor, please copy or post
the
>  following message to your fellow Texas rocketeers:
>
>  ======
>  July 26, 2001
>  Las Vegas, Nevada
>
>  RocketSilo to attend LDRS 21!
>
>  Following their tremendous showing last week at LDRS XX in Lucerne, CA -
>  Steve Moore, RocketSilo Commander announced today that plans are already
>  underway to attend LDRS XXI in Amarillo, TX!  "RocketSilo is fortunate to
>  have a large number of loyal customers in the Lone Star State and we
>  couldn't be happier that Tripoli has chosen Texas as the 2001 host of
LDRS,"
>  commented Moore.  "Texas rocketeers have a reputation for doing things
big,
>  bold and with style."  Moore added,  "On a personal note, it will be like
>  'going home' since I am a native Texan."
>  ======
>
>
>  --
>  Stephen D. Moore
>  Full Spectrum LLC
>  dba RocketSilo
>  http://www.rocketsilo.com
>  1315 Carson Avenue
>  Las Vegas, NV 89101
>  p. (702) 471-7004
>  f. (702) 471-7098
>
>
>  From: bill moyer <bmoyer007@excite.com>
>  Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2001 06:33:33 -0700 (PDT)
>  To: otpeck@hotmail.com
>  Cc: dburnam@zianet.com, daveclary@dfn.com,
rockettech@OrbitalDynamics.com,
>  JNJDARBY@cs.com, commander@rocketsilo.safeshopper.com,
mdsalamo@zianet.com,
>  rocket@pdrpip.com, space-cur@zianet.com, djveitch@hotmail.com
>  Subject: Re: [AR] Fw: LDRS 21, its official!!
>
>
>
>  Hello All:
>
>  Check this out about LDRS 21 in our neighborhood.
>
>  Bill
>
>  On Wed, 25 Jul 2001 15:59:54 -0500, Rick VanVoorhis wrote:
>
>  >  Yes it is here in the great state of Texas and we do launch EX.  So
far a
>  P motor has gone off the field that is being used for LDRS 21.  As one of
>  the workers and fliers in Texas that is helping to bring this event to
you
>  we welcome you and hope that with two days EX we can have all of you
amateur
>  folks there in mass.  Mark your calendars for July 15 & 16, 2002.
>
>  >
>  >  Rick VanVoorhis
>  >  ----- Original Message -----
>  >  From: Brian Kosko <bkosko1@HOME.COM>
>  >  To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
>  >  Sent: Wednesday, July 25, 2001 12:50 PM
>  >  Subject: [AR] Fw: LDRS 21, its official!!
>  >
>  >
>  >  > YEE HA!!
>  >  >
>  >  > Now we're talking! Let's get LDRS back where we can shoot rockets
>  without
>  >  > all the helpful prohibitions Kalifornia so thoughtfully provided.
And
>  >  there
>  >  > will be EX, and lots of it.
>  >  >
>  >  > OK wild boys, here's an arocket challenge. I bet I'll fly something
on
>  at
>  >  > least an O motor of my own making. Anyone want to top it? Let's
start
>  >  > planning now. I'd better tell Firefox Gary to stock up on AP.
>  >  >
>  >  >
>  Brian
>  >  > > Sent: Monday, July 23, 2001 9:47 PM
>  >  > > Subject: LDRS 21, its official!!
>  >  > >
>  >  > >
>  >  > > > Greetings peoples,
>  >  > > >
>  >  > > >     Just got off the phone with Bruce Lee, Calgary 0, Potrocs 1,
>  >  another
>  >  > > club
>  >  > > > bid but withdrew when they found out we were bidding for it. The
>  dates
>  >  > are
>  >  > > > July 11,12,13,14,
>  >  > > > Commercial, 15 and 16 EX. It'll be hot, but the landowner put in
>  for
>  >  us
>  >  > > > electricity and a water well at our site to accomodate us, gonna
>  need
>  >  > > water
>  >  > > > for the pool. Yippers, finished negotiating a deal for a soft
body
>  4
>  >  > foot
>  >  > > > deep by 17 wide by 32 foot long pool complete with deck and
sandy
>  >  beach
>  >  > at
>  >  > > > the site, charge is 7.50 per day per person, 1 hour max time so
we
>  >  don't
>  >  > > have
>  >  > > > people dominate pool time (Now you folks wouldn't do that would
>  ya?).
>  >  I
>  >  > > know
>  >  > > > I'll be a customer to cool off with frequent dips during the
day.
>  >  Colby,
>  >  > > Jim
>  >  > > > M, leave yore thongs at home, can't stomach that gig. We need
>  >  volunteers
>  >  > > to
>  >  > > > make this show fast and greasy, there were people at Lucerne
with
>  >  > rockets
>  >  > > on
>  >  > > > the pad for over 2 hours, Kloudbusters, you know how to launch a
>  >  rocket
>  >  > a
>  >  > > > minute ave. during the whole day, show us how it's done. I am
gonna
>  be
>  >  > > asking
>  >  > > > a lot from you folks (TX, OKLA, KS, NM) to pull this thing off,
I
>  know
>  >  I
>  >  > > can
>  >  > > > count on ya. I will be posting further details on our web site,
<A
>  >  > > > HREF="http://www.potrocs.org/">Tripoli Amarillo</A> , plus will
>  start
>  >  up
>  >  > a
>  >  > > > new site for LDRS 21, >>>>>>Http://www.LDRS21.org shortly, (give
me
>  a
>  >  > > coupla
>  >  > > > weeks). Neil Milburn, yure the guy that pushed me over the edge
to
>  bid
>  >  > for
>  >  > > > this, I need a Co-Launch Director, yore it bucko........To quote
my
>  >  dear
>  >  > > old
>  >  > > > limey buddy, "Time to put up or shut up". There are things in
the
>  >  works
>  >  > > that
>  >  > > > could easily triple HPR participation media wise, and if that
>  happens,
>  >  > it
>  >  > > > could be a zoo at LDRS 21, (details forthcoming).
>  >  > > >
>  >  > > > Congrats ya pukes, you asked for it, ya got it.
>  >  > > >
>  >  > > > Pat G
>  >  > > >
>  >  > > > BTW  the presentation vid to the BOD is on our web site in the
>  video
>  >  > > section,
>  >  > > > I was told they liked it.
>  >  > > >
>  >  > > > and PS   Derik Deville was the third man nominated for BOD, good
>  man.
>  >  > >
>
>
>
>
>
>  _______________________________________________________
>  Send a cool gift with your E-Card
>  http://www.bluemountain.com/giftcenter/
>
>
>
>
>





_______________________________________________________
Send a cool gift with your E-Card
http://www.bluemountain.com/giftcenter/

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 26601 invoked from network); 28 Jul 2001 00:57:06 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 28 Jul 2001 00:57:06 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 6681 invoked from network); 28 Jul 2001 00:58:59 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 28 Jul 2001 00:58:59 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA11222; Fri, 27 Jul 2001 17:55:32 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 87094 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 28 Jul 2001 00:55:31          +0000
Received: from femail40.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail40.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.254.60.34]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA11205          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 27 Jul 2001 17:55:30 -0700
Received: from c396957-b.home.net ([24.17.249.10]) by          femail40.sdc1.sfba.home.com (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20          201-229-121-120-20010223) with ESMTP id          <20010728005525.FRGL13445.femail40.sdc1.sfba.home.com@c396957-b.home.net> for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 27          Jul 2001 17:55:25 -0700
X-Sender: spiegl@mail
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
References: <Your message of Thu, 26 Jul 2001 19:37:44 -0700>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <5.1.0.14.2.20010727195353.00b9d3a8@mail>
Date:         Fri, 27 Jul 2001 19:55:40 -0500
Reply-To: "Mark C Spiegl" <spiegl@HOME.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Mark C Spiegl" <spiegl@HOME.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] solid state relays
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <CMM.0.90.4.996218069.billw@cypher>

> FWIW, I would certainly use a separate battery from the pyro. For a
> time you have a dead short between +V to -V. This transient can/will
> reset sensitive electronics.  (like a CPU)


The big disadvantage to these designs (actually to all simple designs)
is that if the FET/SCR/whatever turns-on while the pyro is shunted,
the device will glow orange until it burns-up... and you will not know
until the rocket tent-pegs back into the ground.


--MCS

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 22431 invoked from network); 28 Jul 2001 02:32:06 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 28 Jul 2001 02:32:06 -0000
Received: (qmail 17580 invoked from network); 28 Jul 2001 02:34:03 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 28 Jul 2001 02:34:03 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA11702; Fri, 27 Jul 2001 19:30:19 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 87160 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 28 Jul 2001 02:30:14          +0000
Received: from imo-r05.mx.aol.com (imo-r05.mx.aol.com [152.163.225.101]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA11685 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Fri, 27 Jul 2001 19:30:13 -0700
Received: from JMKrell@aol.com by imo-r05.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v31.9.) id          w.c.19276a81 (4218) for <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Fri, 27 Jul 2001          22:30:09 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0A60_01C56B69.44E36AE0"
X-Mailer: AOL 6.0 for Windows US sub 10528
Message-ID:  <c.19276a81.28937db1@aol.com>
Date:         Fri, 27 Jul 2001 22:30:09 EDT
Reply-To: <JMKrell@AOL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <JMKrell@AOL.COM>
Subject:      [AR] EPDM Insulation
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0A60_01C56B69.44E36AE0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Brian,

Silica filled EPDM is the best insulator that I have found. I use a 0.075"
layer to insulate my 6" diameter moon burner motor. The first static test
used two 0.075" layers, but only the first layer was charred. I place the
EPDM seam opposite the core with no overlap and no other sealing.

HTPB propellant formulas adhere very well to the EPDM.

What was the burn time for your test?

John K.

------=_NextPart_000_0A60_01C56B69.44E36AE0
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<HTML><FONT FACE=arial,helvetica><FONT  SIZE=2>Brian,
<BR>
<BR>Silica filled EPDM is the best insulator that I have found. I use a 0.075"
<BR>layer to insulate my 6" diameter moon burner motor. The first static test
<BR>used two 0.075" layers, but only the first layer was charred. I place the
<BR>EPDM seam opposite the core with no overlap and no other sealing.
<BR>
<BR>HTPB propellant formulas adhere very well to the EPDM. &nbsp;
<BR>
<BR>What was the burn time for your test?
<BR>
<BR>John K.</FONT></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0A60_01C56B69.44E36AE0--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 26643 invoked from network); 28 Jul 2001 02:33:15 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 28 Jul 2001 02:33:15 -0000
Received: (qmail 18066 invoked from network); 28 Jul 2001 02:35:12 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 28 Jul 2001 02:35:12 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA11727; Fri, 27 Jul 2001 19:31:46 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 87159 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 28 Jul 2001 02:31:45          +0000
Received: from smtp.snet.net (smtp.snet.net [204.60.6.55]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA11659 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri,          27 Jul 2001 19:21:21 -0700
Received: from pop.snet.net (pop.snet.net [204.60.6.9]) by smtp.snet.net          (8.11.1/8.11.1/SNET-mx-1.4/D-1.10/O-1.7) with ESMTP id f6S2LFp02662          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 27 Jul 2001 22:21:16 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from CORJULO (12.9.252.64.snet.net [64.252.9.12]) by pop.snet.net          (8.11.1/8.11.1/SNET-pop-1.5/D-1.8/O-1.6) with ESMTP id f6S2LFr27578          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 27 Jul 2001 22:21:15 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook, Build 10.0.2627
Importance: Normal
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <000001c1170c$1a8673b0$ab47fea9@CORJULO>
Date:         Fri, 27 Jul 2001 22:22:09 -0400
Reply-To: "Peter Corjulo" <corjulop@JAVANET.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Peter Corjulo" <corjulop@JAVANET.COM>
Subject:      [AR] FW: [AR] pressurization (was Re: [AR] 3Re: [AR] 2Re: [AR]              dark se              crets)
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

If there is no visible plume coming from an N2O motor, might this
explain why the Air Force slapped a secrecy order on Goll's design? One
would think that surface-to-air missiles with no visible plume would be
harder for fighter pilots to detect and evade, not to mention harder for
law enforcement to find someone who might be inclined to fire such a
rocket at a passing passenger plane. (No plume makes it harder for
witnesses to pinpoint firing locations, sort of like the visual
equivalent of a silencer.) Just wondering.

-----Original Message-----
From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU] On
Behalf Of Marcus Leech
Sent: Thursday, July 26, 2001 9:55 AM
To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
Subject: Re: [AR] pressurization (was Re: [AR] 3Re: [AR] 2Re: [AR] dark
se crets)

Paul Kelly wrote:
>
> Sounds like your friend knows what he's doing, but just in case, don't
try to
> regen-cool a graphite CC using NOX, you'll quickly find out just how
porous
> that graphite is!
>
> I built an ethanol/NOX biprop with a copper CC this way once.
Unfortunatley I
> tried to make it too simple and opted for pyrovalve ignition, much
like Dave
> G's early biprops.
> What's the quote, "Loudest noise I ever heard" :-)
>
> PK
My friend has been using the same basic design for a couple of years,
with
  29mm, 38mm, and 54mm versions all working quite well.  Hard starts
*have*
  happened occasionally, resulting in shattered CCs.


A couple of weeks ago, when we were testing some new 38mm Propulsion
Polymers
  stuff out at my test range, we also test-fired his 54mm biprop.  A tad
slow
  starting, but once it was running, it was 9 seconds of pretty
  spectacular thrustage.  The cool thing about these (N2O+Methanol)
motors
  is that there's *no* visible plume.  You get a flash of smokey yellow
on
  startup (he coats the inside of his CC with Vaseline to boost his
  CCV+Steel wool ignition sequence), and then just *noise*.

--
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Marcus Leech                             Mail:   Dept 8M70, MS 012, FITZ
Advisor                                  Phone: (ESN) 393-9145  +1 613
763 9145
Security Architecture and Planning       Fax:   (ESN) 393-9435  +1 613
763 9435
Nortel Networks                          mleech@nortelnetworks.com
-----------------Expressed opinions are my own, not my employer's------

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 28385 invoked from network); 28 Jul 2001 03:07:29 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 28 Jul 2001 03:07:29 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 8538 invoked from network); 28 Jul 2001 03:09:26 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 28 Jul 2001 03:09:26 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA11843; Fri, 27 Jul 2001 19:52:34 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 87190 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 28 Jul 2001 02:52:31          +0000
Received: from cyclone.comcen.com.au (cyclone.comcen.com.au [203.23.236.100])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA11826 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 27 Jul 2001 19:52:29 -0700
Received: (from nobody@localhost) by cyclone.comcen.com.au (8.11.1/8.11.1) id          f6S2qKT23202; Sat, 28 Jul 2001 12:52:20 +1000 (EST) (envelope-from          pkelly@comcen.com.au)
X-Authentication-Warning: cyclone.comcen.com.au: nobody set sender to                         pkelly@comcen.com.au using -f
References: <Your message of Thu, 26 Jul 2001 19:37:44 -0700>             <5.1.0.14.2.20010727194851.00ba63a0@mail>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
User-Agent: IMP/PHP IMAP webmail program 2.2.3
X-Originating-IP: 203.2.125.3
Message-ID:  <996288740.3b6228e44baef@webmail.comcen.com.au>
Date:         Sat, 28 Jul 2001 12:52:20 +1000
Reply-To: "Paul Kelly" <pkelly@COMCEN.COM.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Paul Kelly" <pkelly@COMCEN.COM.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] solid state relays
Comments: To: Mark C Spiegl <spiegl@HOME.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <5.1.0.14.2.20010727194851.00ba63a0@mail>

Quoting Mark C Spiegl <spiegl@HOME.NET>:
<SNIP lots of good stuff>

> FWIW, I would certainly use a separate battery for the pyro. For a
> time you have a dead short between +V and -V. This transient can/will
> reset sensitive electronics.  (like a CPU)
Design you code to have persistant state. ie even if it is reset, or has the
power removed, it will come back up in the same state. This makes your whole
system quite robust.


PK
>
>
> --MCS
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 18570 invoked from network); 28 Jul 2001 04:56:44 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 28 Jul 2001 04:56:44 -0000
Received: (qmail 25423 invoked from network); 28 Jul 2001 04:57:57 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 28 Jul 2001 04:57:57 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA12451; Fri, 27 Jul 2001 21:54:14 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 87258 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 28 Jul 2001 04:54:03          +0000
Received: from femail20.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail20.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.0.95.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA12433          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 27 Jul 2001 21:54:03 -0700
Received: from cc334751a ([65.13.214.65]) by femail20.sdc1.sfba.home.com          (InterMail vM.4.01.03.00 201-229-121) with SMTP id          <20010728045356.PTFG612.femail20.sdc1.sfba.home.com@cc334751a>; Fri,          27 Jul 2001 21:53:56 -0700
References:  <c.19276a81.28937db1@aol.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0A65_01C56B69.44E5DBE0"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2462.0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <005d01c11721$1be90460$6401a8c0@home.com>
Date:         Fri, 27 Jul 2001 22:52:30 -0600
Reply-To: "Brian Kosko" <bkosko1@HOME.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Brian Kosko" <bkosko1@HOME.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] EPDM Insulation
Comments: To: JMKrell@AOL.COM
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0A65_01C56B69.44E5DBE0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

John,

You make 6 in moon burners? I'm way impressed! I do have some silica =
filled EPDM, but it's a little thicker so I didn't use it. We figured =
the 1/4 in PVC liner wasn't going to need much else. I thought about =
casting right into the PVC, but were worried that the grain might come =
loose. As you mentioned, HTPB composites bond quite well to EPDM.

Do you pretreat the EPDM with your binder? Do you any other liner =
besides the EPDM? Do you 'cap' the top of the grain in any way? If so, =
how? You wouldn't happen to have a thrust curve or two you'd like to =
share with us would you? I'd be real interested. What kind of propellant =
and motor cases do you use?

The motor we tested burned for about ten seconds at very low (< 100) =
psi.

Brian

------=_NextPart_000_0A65_01C56B69.44E5DBE0
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Diso-8859-1">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 6.00.2462.0" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>John,</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>You make 6 in moon burners? I'm way =
impressed! I do=20
have some silica filled EPDM, but it's a little thicker so I didn't use =
it. We=20
figured the 1/4 in PVC liner wasn't going to need much else. I thought =
about=20
casting right into the PVC, but were worried that the grain might come =
loose. As=20
you mentioned, HTPB composites bond quite well to EPDM.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Do you pretreat the EPDM with your =
binder? Do you=20
any other liner besides the EPDM? Do you 'cap' the top of the grain in =
any way?=20
If so, how? You wouldn't happen to have a thrust curve or two you'd like =
to=20
share with us would you? I'd be real interested. What kind of propellant =
and=20
motor cases do you use?</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>The motor we tested burned for about =
ten seconds at=20
very low (&lt; 100) psi.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Brian</FONT></DIV></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0A65_01C56B69.44E5DBE0--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 17060 invoked from network); 28 Jul 2001 06:38:53 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 28 Jul 2001 06:38:53 -0000
Received: (qmail 6331 invoked from network); 28 Jul 2001 06:41:08 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 28 Jul 2001 06:41:08 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA13030; Fri, 27 Jul 2001 23:36:05 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 87347 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 28 Jul 2001 06:35:59          +0000
Received: from idsoftware.com (predator.idsoftware.com [192.246.40.34]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA13013 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Fri, 27 Jul 2001 23:35:59 -0700
Received: from [192.246.40.144] (account johnc HELO pluto.idsoftware.com) by          idsoftware.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 3.4.7) with ESMTP id 318083 for          AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 28 Jul 2001 01:34:44 -0500
X-Sender: johnc@mail.idsoftware.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <4.3.1.2.20010728012618.02bf5008@mail.idsoftware.com>
Date:         Sat, 28 Jul 2001 01:46:58 -0500
Reply-To: "John Carmack" <johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Carmack" <johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM>
Subject:      [AR] hybrid regression rates
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Something has been troubling me regarding hybrid design.  This is all just
thought experiment level for me right now, but I propose an experiment that
I will try if nobody clearly explains the gap in my understanding.

The regression rate formula is expressed as a constant times the oxidizer
mass flux raised to a constant power.

"Oxidizer mass flux" just doesn't sound like a reasonable thing to be the
sole determination of regression rate.  It certainly has the implied
assumption that there is stable combustion going on, and I assume the
constants are different for each oxidizer / fuel combination.

If combustion is only occurring in the gas phase, then regression rate
should just be the vaporization rate, which should be determined by chamber
temperature and pressure.

I have seen several papers that have a few data points on regression rates,
but with two constants to fiddle with, you can make just about any equation
fit a couple data points with moderate error bars.

Even in the papers that have more data points, the way that the oxidizer
mass flux is varied also involves changing the combustion chamber pressure,
because a constant size nozzle is used.

By the standard equation, if you fire a hybrid grain in a reference motor,
and the same grain in a motor with twice the chamber pressure and half the
nozzle area, the regression rates should be identical because the oxidizer
mass flux rates are identical.

Intuitively, I would expect the high pressure motor to show a higher
regression rate.


John Carmack

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 17165 invoked from network); 28 Jul 2001 08:07:52 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 28 Jul 2001 08:07:52 -0000
Received: (qmail 7876 invoked from network); 28 Jul 2001 08:09:48 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 28 Jul 2001 08:09:48 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id BAA13450; Sat, 28 Jul 2001 01:06:01 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 87412 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 28 Jul 2001 08:05:54          +0000
Received: from femail11.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail11.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.0.95.107]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id BAA13433          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 28 Jul 2001 01:05:54 -0700
Received: from hal2001 ([24.77.53.16]) by femail11.sdc1.sfba.home.com          (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20 201-229-121-120-20010223) with SMTP id          <20010728080553.EIBW19048.femail11.sdc1.sfba.home.com@hal2001> for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 28 Jul 2001 01:05:53 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <000901c1173b$044f4de0$0400a8c0@hatjs>
Date:         Sat, 28 Jul 2001 00:57:57 -0700
Reply-To: "Jamie Morken" <jmorken@HOME.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jamie Morken" <jmorken@HOME.COM>
Subject:      [AR] end: solid state relays
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Thanks all for the great info on SSR's!

best regards,
Jamie

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 21470 invoked from network); 28 Jul 2001 10:06:51 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 28 Jul 2001 10:06:51 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 22877 invoked from network); 28 Jul 2001 10:08:19 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 28 Jul 2001 10:08:19 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id DAA13733; Sat, 28 Jul 2001 03:02:49 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 87432 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 28 Jul 2001 10:02:35          +0000
Received: from cyclone.comcen.com.au (cyclone.comcen.com.au [203.23.236.100])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id DAA13716 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Sat, 28 Jul 2001 03:02:34 -0700
Received: (from nobody@localhost) by cyclone.comcen.com.au (8.11.1/8.11.1) id          f6SA2RU24263; Sat, 28 Jul 2001 20:02:27 +1000 (EST) (envelope-from          pkelly@comcen.com.au)
X-Authentication-Warning: cyclone.comcen.com.au: nobody set sender to                         pkelly@comcen.com.au using -f
References: <4.3.1.2.20010728012618.02bf5008@mail.idsoftware.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
User-Agent: IMP/PHP IMAP webmail program 2.2.3
X-Originating-IP: 203.2.125.3
Message-ID:  <996314547.3b628db3669d6@webmail.comcen.com.au>
Date:         Sat, 28 Jul 2001 20:02:27 +1000
Reply-To: "Paul Kelly" <pkelly@COMCEN.COM.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Paul Kelly" <pkelly@COMCEN.COM.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] hybrid regression rates
Comments: To: John Carmack <johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <4.3.1.2.20010728012618.02bf5008@mail.idsoftware.com>

Quoting John Carmack <johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM>:

> Something has been troubling me regarding hybrid design.  This is all
> just
> thought experiment level for me right now, but I propose an experiment
> that
> I will try if nobody clearly explains the gap in my understanding.
>
> The regression rate formula is expressed as a constant times the
> oxidizer
> mass flux raised to a constant power.
>
> "Oxidizer mass flux" just doesn't sound like a reasonable thing to be
> the
> sole determination of regression rate.  It certainly has the implied
> assumption that there is stable combustion going on, and I assume the
> constants are different for each oxidizer / fuel combination.
>
> If combustion is only occurring in the gas phase, then regression rate
> should just be the vaporization rate, which should be determined by
> chamber
> temperature and pressure.
Why pressure?

>
> I have seen several papers that have a few data points on regression
> rates,
> but with two constants to fiddle with, you can make just about any
> equation
> fit a couple data points with moderate error bars.
>
> Even in the papers that have more data points, the way that the
> oxidizer
> mass flux is varied also involves changing the combustion chamber
> pressure,
> because a constant size nozzle is used.
>
> By the standard equation, if you fire a hybrid grain in a reference
> motor,
> and the same grain in a motor with twice the chamber pressure and half
> the
> nozzle area, the regression rates should be identical because the
> oxidizer
> mass flux rates are identical.
Yep.
>
> Intuitively, I would expect the high pressure motor to show a higher
> regression rate.
Why? your flowing oxidiser onto the top of the fuel, rather than liberating it
from a fuel/binder matrix where expanding gasses push the flame front away from
the grain surface and reduce radiative energy transfer.  Your assumption that
it's all about vaporisation rate of fuel is correct. More oxidiser per unit
area per second, more burning, more heat per second, more fuel boiling. Not a
great deal more to it than that.
Some fuels (notably the softer ones, PP springs to mind) exhibit an erosive
type effect where fuel comes off in bigger chunks at high Gox values. Of
interest, I have anecdotal evidence that metalised propellants do exhibit
pressure dependancies. Sutton makes reference to this phenomenon too.


PK
>
>
> John Carmack
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 21798 invoked from network); 28 Jul 2001 16:48:08 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 28 Jul 2001 16:48:08 -0000
Received: (qmail 23521 invoked from network); 28 Jul 2001 16:49:35 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 28 Jul 2001 16:49:35 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA15001; Sat, 28 Jul 2001 09:45:24 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 87543 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 28 Jul 2001 16:45:12          +0000
Received: from imo-m09.mx.aol.com (imo-m09.mx.aol.com [64.12.136.164]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA14984 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Sat, 28 Jul 2001 09:45:11 -0700
Received: from JMKrell@aol.com by imo-m09.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v31.9.) id          w.6c.d9da320 (4207) for <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Sat, 28 Jul 2001          12:44:39 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0A68_01C56B69.44EF78D0"
X-Mailer: AOL 6.0 for Windows US sub 10528
Message-ID:  <6c.d9da320.289445f7@aol.com>
Date:         Sat, 28 Jul 2001 12:44:39 EDT
Reply-To: <JMKrell@AOL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <JMKrell@AOL.COM>
Subject:      [AR] EPDM Insulation
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0A68_01C56B69.44EF78D0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

The carbon filled EPDM works almost as good as the silica filled. The filler
I would like to test is MgO. I think it would be better than silica. Your
0.25" PVC liner should be sufficient alone.  What grain design are you using?

The only pretreatment of the EPDM is a good solvent cleaning. No other liners
are used. The grain is cast into the casing. Epoxy end caps are cast on both
ends of the grain. I'll see if I can salvage the pressure curve data. It
operated in the 450-500 psig range. I had it on an older computer that
crashed. The tests were conducted to evaluate EPDM as an insulator and not
for a flight motor. The static test motor weight was 110 lb.

The propellant was a medium solids loaded 70%AP / 10%Al / 20%HTPB
composition. The casing was a composite fiberglass/phenolic. The calculated
thrust was 110 lbf average with 170 lbf peak with a burn time of 36 seconds.
The motor was tested twice.

John


------=_NextPart_000_0A68_01C56B69.44EF78D0
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<HTML><FONT FACE=arial,helvetica><FONT  SIZE=2>The carbon filled EPDM works almost as good as the silica filled. The filler
<BR>I would like to test is MgO. I think it would be better than silica. Your
<BR>0.25" PVC liner should be sufficient alone. &nbsp;What grain design are you using?
<BR>
<BR>The only pretreatment of the EPDM is a good solvent cleaning. No other liners
<BR>are used. The grain is cast into the casing. Epoxy end caps are cast on both
<BR>ends of the grain. I'll see if I can salvage the pressure curve data. It
<BR>operated in the 450-500 psig range. I had it on an older computer that
<BR>crashed. The tests were conducted to evaluate EPDM as an insulator and not
<BR>for a flight motor. The static test motor weight was 110 lb.
<BR>
<BR>The propellant was a medium solids loaded 70%AP / 10%Al / 20%HTPB
<BR>composition. The casing was a composite fiberglass/phenolic. The calculated
<BR>thrust was 110 lbf average with 170 lbf peak with a burn time of 36 seconds.
<BR>The motor was tested twice.
<BR>
<BR>John
<BR> &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;</FONT></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0A68_01C56B69.44EF78D0--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 22823 invoked from network); 28 Jul 2001 16:48:26 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 28 Jul 2001 16:48:26 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 8956 invoked from network); 28 Jul 2001 16:50:21 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 28 Jul 2001 16:50:21 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA15028; Sat, 28 Jul 2001 09:45:57 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 87551 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 28 Jul 2001 16:45:55          +0000
Received: from grucom2.gru.net (grucom2.gru.net [209.251.129.7]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA15010 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat,          28 Jul 2001 09:45:55 -0700
Received: from [209.251.151.196] by grucom2.sfcc.net (NTMail          6.03.0009/NU4112.00.db1c8a4b) with ESMTP id ngdsgaaa for          AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 28 Jul 2001 12:45:50 -0400
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.75 [en] (Win95; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <CMM.0.90.4.995224583.billw@cypher>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B62EE75.1FA90AB6@sfcc.net>
Date:         Sat, 28 Jul 2001 12:55:18 -0400
Reply-To: "James Yawn" <jyawn@SFCC.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "James Yawn" <jyawn@SFCC.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Non-black powder ejection
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Last weekend I ran a few tests using smokeless powder in simulated ejections,
and obtained some promising results.  The tests are described at:

http://members.fortunecity.com/jyawn/eject/index.htm

The first page is as concise as I could stand to make it, but still contains
too many photos and words.  There is a link to an even-longer version, which
includes pictures of the damage caused by burning powder, among other things.

In brief, a PVC tube 2 inches in diameter and 1 foot long was used to
approximate the top part of a modest-sized rocket, and a "recovery system"
load was simulated with paper wadding and a golf ball.  In most cases,
ejection was forceful but not destructive.  A surprisingly wide range of
power charges was effective in these static tests:  0.3 gram Red Dot was
barely enough to get the load out of the tube, 5 grams caused no noticeable
damage.  10 grams damaged the wadding a bit, but not badly.  A slower-burning
powder (Alcan AL-8) was not nearly as effective in its one test as the
faster-burning Red Dot.

Confining the powder in a small space in the ejection tube (6 to 8 cubic
inches) seemed adequate to ensure full combustion.  Tests with
powder-containment capsules did not improve performance but decreased it
somewhat, were less consistent, and often caused greater damage to the
ejection wadding.  A better-designed capsule might compensate for these
flaws, as mine are pretty crude.

Please feel free to send any comments, questions, suggestions, or
criticisms.  I am not a rocket scientist, as many of you have deduced, but a
passionate and somewhat naive amateur, wanting to know how to do things
better.

Respectfully submitted,
James Yawn



William Chops Westfield wrote:

> One of the model rocketeers recently did some research on using smokeless
> powder as rejection charges for a NAR R&D entry (I think.)
>
> See http://www.alaska.net/~aleckson/rockets/smokless.html
>
> BillW

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 22348 invoked from network); 28 Jul 2001 17:06:56 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 28 Jul 2001 17:06:56 -0000
Received: (qmail 19330 invoked from network); 28 Jul 2001 17:09:14 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 28 Jul 2001 17:09:14 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA15129; Sat, 28 Jul 2001 10:03:28 -0700
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 87569 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 28 Jul 2001 17:03:22          +0000
Received: from zcars0m9.ca.nortel.com ([47.129.242.157]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA15111 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat,          28 Jul 2001 10:03:21 -0700
Received: from zcars04e.ca.nortel.com (zcars04e.ca.nortel.com [47.129.242.56])          by zcars0m9.ca.nortel.com (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f6SH2I922804          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 28 Jul 2001 13:02:18 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from rftzy232.ca.nortel.com by zcars04e.ca.nortel.com; Sat, 28 Jul          2001 13:02:37 -0400
Received: from nortelnetworks.com (acart12s.ca.nortel.com [47.129.8.135]) by          rftzy232.ca.nortel.com with SMTP (Microsoft Exchange Internet Mail          Service Version 5.5.2653.13) id NKPL5Z3X; Sat, 28 Jul 2001 13:02:25          -0400
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.77 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.19 i686)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <CMM.0.90.4.995224583.billw@cypher> <3B62EE75.1FA90AB6@sfcc.net>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Orig: <mleech@nortelnetworks.com>
Message-ID:  <3B62F0CA.47A0A1A2@nortelnetworks.com>
Date:         Sat, 28 Jul 2001 13:05:14 -0400
Reply-To: "Marcus Leech" <mleech@NORTELNETWORKS.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Marcus Leech" <mleech@NORTELNETWORKS.COM>
Organization: Nortel Networks: Information Systems
Subject:      Re: [AR] Non-black powder ejection
Comments: To: James Yawn <jyawn@SFCC.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

James Yawn wrote:
>
> Last weekend I ran a few tests using smokeless powder in simulated ejections,
> and obtained some promising results.  The tests are described at:
>
> http://members.fortunecity.com/jyawn/eject/index.htm
>
> The first page is as concise as I could stand to make it, but still contains
> too many photos and words.  There is a link to an even-longer version, which
> includes pictures of the damage caused by burning powder, among other things.
>
> In brief, a PVC tube 2 inches in diameter and 1 foot long was used to
> approximate the top part of a modest-sized rocket, and a "recovery system"
> load was simulated with paper wadding and a golf ball.  In most cases,
> ejection was forceful but not destructive.  A surprisingly wide range of
> power charges was effective in these static tests:  0.3 gram Red Dot was
> barely enough to get the load out of the tube, 5 grams caused no noticeable
> damage.  10 grams damaged the wadding a bit, but not badly.  A slower-burning
> powder (Alcan AL-8) was not nearly as effective in its one test as the
> faster-burning Red Dot.
>
> Confining the powder in a small space in the ejection tube (6 to 8 cubic
> inches) seemed adequate to ensure full combustion.  Tests with
> powder-containment capsules did not improve performance but decreased it
> somewhat, were less consistent, and often caused greater damage to the
> ejection wadding.  A better-designed capsule might compensate for these
> flaws, as mine are pretty crude.
>
> Please feel free to send any comments, questions, suggestions, or
> criticisms.  I am not a rocket scientist, as many of you have deduced, but a
> passionate and somewhat naive amateur, wanting to know how to do things
> better.
>
> Respectfully submitted,
> James Yawn
Something I should probably do sometime is do some tests with Pyrodex
*Pellets*.
  I was considering using 0.50cal pyrodex pellets as hybrid starter
grains for
  22mm motors, but they burn way to freeping fast for that application.
I know that
  loose pyrodex requires considerable confinement to produce the rapid
pressure rise
  necessary for recovery deployment, but the pellets seem to burn quite
rapidly.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 4663 invoked from network); 28 Jul 2001 17:47:14 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 28 Jul 2001 17:47:14 -0000
Received: (qmail 27111 invoked from network); 28 Jul 2001 17:49:32 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 28 Jul 2001 17:49:32 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA15445; Sat, 28 Jul 2001 10:42:49 -0700
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 87637 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 28 Jul 2001 17:42:47          +0000
Received: from noralf.uib.no (noralf.uib.no [129.177.30.12]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA15424 for <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Sat,          28 Jul 2001 10:42:46 -0700
Received: from malurt.uib.no [129.177.30.50] by noralf.uib.no with esmtp (Exim          3.16) id 15QY6b-000402-00; Sat, 28 Jul 2001 19:42:25 +0200
Received: from nobody by malurt.uib.no with local (Exim 3.16) id          15QY6a-0004pW-00; Sat, 28 Jul 2001 19:42:24 +0200
References: <4.3.1.2.20010728012618.02bf5008@mail.idsoftware.com>            <996314547.3b628db3669d6@webmail.comcen.com.au>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
User-Agent: IMP/PHP IMAP webmail program 2.2.1/UIB-1f2
X-Sent-Through: webmail.uib.no
X-User-Agent: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 5.0; Windows 98; DigExt;              SP/5.52/0.95/FS2)
X-Originating-IP: 130.67.196.22
Message-ID:  <996342144.3b62f98059516@webmail.uib.no>
Date:         Sat, 28 Jul 2001 19:42:24 +0200
Reply-To: <Emil.Johnsen@STUDENT.UIB.NO>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <Emil.Johnsen@STUDENT.UIB.NO>
Subject:      Re: [AR] hybrid regression rates
Comments: To: Paul Kelly <pkelly@COMCEN.COM.AU>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <996314547.3b628db3669d6@webmail.comcen.com.au>

>interest, I have anecdotal evidence that metalised propellants do exhibit
>pressure dependancies. Sutton makes reference to this phenomenon too.

"Space Propulsion Ananlysis and Design" mentiones this as well. Different
methods for determining regression rate are compared to test data, the most
accurate methods for metalized propellants are those that take into account the
chamber pressure.


Emil Johnsen

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 24499 invoked from network); 28 Jul 2001 17:53:24 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 28 Jul 2001 17:53:24 -0000
Received: (qmail 24697 invoked from network); 28 Jul 2001 17:55:04 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 28 Jul 2001 17:55:04 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA15405; Sat, 28 Jul 2001 10:41:22 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 87624 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 28 Jul 2001 17:41:19          +0000
Received: from femail20.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail20.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.0.95.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA15388          for <arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 28 Jul 2001 10:41:19 -0700
Received: from cc334751a ([65.13.214.65]) by femail20.sdc1.sfba.home.com          (InterMail vM.4.01.03.00 201-229-121) with SMTP id          <20010728174113.QDTG612.femail20.sdc1.sfba.home.com@cc334751a> for          <arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 28 Jul 2001 10:41:13 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0A6D_01C56B69.44F433C0"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2462.0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <00ba01c1178c$3a6d81c0$6401a8c0@home.com>
Date:         Sat, 28 Jul 2001 11:39:17 -0600
Reply-To: "Brian Kosko" <bkosko1@HOME.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Brian Kosko" <bkosko1@HOME.COM>
Subject:      [AR] Long burn grain design
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0A6D_01C56B69.44F433C0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

I was thinking about a less standard way of getting a long burn, =
moderate thrust motor. The classic ways are endburners or some type of =
c-slot/moonburner. How about a design with high volumetric loading, lots =
of burn area, and a large nozzle throat? I was thinking of some kind of =
finocyl design to have the good loading and surface area. Then just pick =
a nozzle throat that gets a low enough pressure to give the long burn.

This seems like a more practical amateur way to get a long burn. An =
endburner is tough because of the high burn rate needed for the =
propellant. The finocyl's main drawback is the mandril, but that seems =
like an easier problem to solve. My machinist buddy didn't think he'd =
have any trouble making the mandril.

Any insights, experience, wild rantings, etc. on this would be =
appreciated.

                                                                    =
Brian

------=_NextPart_000_0A6D_01C56B69.44F433C0
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Diso-8859-1">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 6.00.2462.0" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>I was thinking about a less standard =
way of getting=20
a long burn, moderate thrust motor. The classic ways are endburners or =
some type=20
of c-slot/moonburner. How about a design with high volumetric loading, =
lots of=20
burn area, and a large nozzle throat? I was thinking of some kind of =
finocyl=20
design to have the good loading and surface area. Then just pick a =
nozzle throat=20
that gets a low enough pressure to give the long burn.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>This seems like a more practical =
amateur way to get=20
a long burn. An endburner is tough because of the high burn rate needed =
for the=20
propellant. The finocyl's main drawback is the mandril, but that seems =
like an=20
easier problem to solve. My machinist buddy didn't think he'd have any =
trouble=20
making the mandril.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Any insights, experience, wild =
rantings, etc. on=20
this would be appreciated.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;=20
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; =
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;=20
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; =
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;=20
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; =
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;=20
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;=20
Brian</FONT></DIV></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0A6D_01C56B69.44F433C0--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 2395 invoked from network); 28 Jul 2001 18:23:16 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 28 Jul 2001 18:23:16 -0000
Received: (qmail 5134 invoked from network); 28 Jul 2001 18:25:34 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 28 Jul 2001 18:25:34 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA15756; Sat, 28 Jul 2001 11:19:59 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 87698 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 28 Jul 2001 18:19:51          +0000
Received: from smtprelay1.abs.adelphia.net (smtprelay.abs.adelphia.net          [64.8.20.11]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA15738 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 28 Jul 2001 11:19:50 -0700
Received: from jlgrady ([63.124.251.47]) by smtprelay1.abs.adelphia.net          (Netscape Messaging Server 4.15) with SMTP id GH747Q02.J2U for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 28 Jul 2001 14:19:02 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook CWS, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
Importance: Normal
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <000a01c11792$09553e10$0200a8c0@prestige.net>
Date:         Sat, 28 Jul 2001 14:20:51 -0400
Reply-To: "Jeff Grady" <jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jeff Grady" <jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Non-black powder ejection
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <3B62EE75.1FA90AB6@sfcc.net>

Shotgun primers may generate enough gas/pressure for certain sized
rockets/designs. A mechanical means such as a solenoid type initiator
(firing pin) would be required to fire it though. I'd stay away from
anything "spring-loaded" unless some safety mechanism could be integrated.
Their physical size vs. energy is impressive as is the weight to size ratio.
May need to be supplemented w/smokeless powder for larger applications, but
a primer/powder system will no doubt generate a LOT of pressure for its
size. Being an avid skeet shooter/reloader, I have a good supply. Will try
this out myself and post results...Will begin with 10 fingers. Excellent
results will include retaining 10 of the same.

Jeff

-----Original Message-----
From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@itc.uci.edu]On
Behalf Of James Yawn
Sent: Saturday, July 28, 2001 12:55 PM
To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
Subject: Re: [AR] Non-black powder ejection


Last weekend I ran a few tests using smokeless powder in simulated
ejections,
and obtained some promising results.  The tests are described at:

http://members.fortunecity.com/jyawn/eject/index.htm

The first page is as concise as I could stand to make it, but still contains
too many photos and words.  There is a link to an even-longer version, which
includes pictures of the damage caused by burning powder, among other
things.

In brief, a PVC tube 2 inches in diameter and 1 foot long was used to
approximate the top part of a modest-sized rocket, and a "recovery system"
load was simulated with paper wadding and a golf ball.  In most cases,
ejection was forceful but not destructive.  A surprisingly wide range of
power charges was effective in these static tests:  0.3 gram Red Dot was
barely enough to get the load out of the tube, 5 grams caused no noticeable
damage.  10 grams damaged the wadding a bit, but not badly.  A
slower-burning
powder (Alcan AL-8) was not nearly as effective in its one test as the
faster-burning Red Dot.

Confining the powder in a small space in the ejection tube (6 to 8 cubic
inches) seemed adequate to ensure full combustion.  Tests with
powder-containment capsules did not improve performance but decreased it
somewhat, were less consistent, and often caused greater damage to the
ejection wadding.  A better-designed capsule might compensate for these
flaws, as mine are pretty crude.

Please feel free to send any comments, questions, suggestions, or
criticisms.  I am not a rocket scientist, as many of you have deduced, but a
passionate and somewhat naive amateur, wanting to know how to do things
better.

Respectfully submitted,
James Yawn



William Chops Westfield wrote:

> One of the model rocketeers recently did some research on using smokeless
> powder as rejection charges for a NAR R&D entry (I think.)
>
> See http://www.alaska.net/~aleckson/rockets/smokless.html
>
> BillW

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 13328 invoked from network); 28 Jul 2001 18:26:32 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 28 Jul 2001 18:26:32 -0000
Received: (qmail 15278 invoked from network); 28 Jul 2001 18:28:28 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 28 Jul 2001 18:28:28 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA15791; Sat, 28 Jul 2001 11:24:47 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 87706 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 28 Jul 2001 18:24:45          +0000
Received: from smtprelay1.abs.adelphia.net (smtprelay.abs.adelphia.net          [64.8.20.11]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA15774 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 28 Jul 2001 11:24:44 -0700
Received: from jlgrady ([63.124.251.47]) by smtprelay1.abs.adelphia.net          (Netscape Messaging Server 4.15) with SMTP id GH74FW00.72C for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 28 Jul 2001 14:23:56 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0A70_01C56B69.44F67DB0"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook CWS, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
Importance: Normal
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <000b01c11792$b8c978c0$0200a8c0@prestige.net>
Date:         Sat, 28 Jul 2001 14:25:46 -0400
Reply-To: "Jeff Grady" <jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jeff Grady" <jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Long burn grain design
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <00ba01c1178c$3a6d81c0$6401a8c0@home.com>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0A70_01C56B69.44F67DB0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Does anyone have compiled data showing pressure correlation between nozzle
throat area to motor casing area for given propellant grain configurations?
  -----Original Message-----
  From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@itc.uci.edu]On
Behalf Of Brian Kosko
  Sent: Saturday, July 28, 2001 1:39 PM
  To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
  Subject: [AR] Long burn grain design


  I was thinking about a less standard way of getting a long burn, moderate
thrust motor. The classic ways are endburners or some type of
c-slot/moonburner. How about a design with high volumetric loading, lots of
burn area, and a large nozzle throat? I was thinking of some kind of finocyl
design to have the good loading and surface area. Then just pick a nozzle
throat that gets a low enough pressure to give the long burn.

  This seems like a more practical amateur way to get a long burn. An
endburner is tough because of the high burn rate needed for the propellant.
The finocyl's main drawback is the mandril, but that seems like an easier
problem to solve. My machinist buddy didn't think he'd have any trouble
making the mandril.

  Any insights, experience, wild rantings, etc. on this would be
appreciated.

                                                                      Brian

------=_NextPart_000_0A70_01C56B69.44F67DB0
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META HTTP-EQUIV=3D"Content-Type" CONTENT=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Diso-8859-1">


<META content=3D"MSHTML 5.50.4522.1800" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial color=3D#0000ff size=3D2><SPAN =
class=3D410142218-28072001>Does=20
anyone have compiled data showing pressure correlation between nozzle =
throat=20
area to motor casing area for given propellant grain=20
configurations?</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE dir=3Dltr style=3D"MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
  <DIV class=3DOutlookMessageHeader dir=3Dltr align=3Dleft><FONT =
face=3DTahoma=20
  size=3D2>-----Original Message-----<BR><B>From:</B> Amateur Rocketry =
discussion=20
  list [mailto:AROCKET@itc.uci.edu]<B>On Behalf Of </B>Brian=20
  Kosko<BR><B>Sent:</B> Saturday, July 28, 2001 1:39 PM<BR><B>To:</B>=20
  AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU<BR><B>Subject:</B> [AR] Long burn grain=20
  design<BR><BR></FONT></DIV>
  <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>I was thinking about a less standard =
way of=20
  getting a long burn, moderate thrust motor. The classic ways are =
endburners or=20
  some type of c-slot/moonburner. How about a design with high =
volumetric=20
  loading, lots of burn area, and a large nozzle throat? I was thinking =
of some=20
  kind of finocyl design to have the good loading and surface area. Then =
just=20
  pick a nozzle throat that gets a low enough pressure to give the long=20
  burn.</FONT></DIV>
  <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
  <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>This seems like a more practical =
amateur way to=20
  get a long burn. An endburner is tough because of the high burn rate =
needed=20
  for the propellant. The finocyl's main drawback is the mandril, but =
that seems=20
  like an easier problem to solve. My machinist buddy didn't think he'd =
have any=20
  trouble making the mandril.</FONT></DIV>
  <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
  <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Any insights, experience, wild =
rantings, etc. on=20
  this would be appreciated.</FONT></DIV>
  <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
  <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; =

  &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; =
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;=20
  &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; =
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;=20
  &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; =
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;=20
  &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;=20
Brian</FONT></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0A70_01C56B69.44F67DB0--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 28960 invoked from network); 28 Jul 2001 19:08:50 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 28 Jul 2001 19:08:50 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 16434 invoked from network); 28 Jul 2001 19:10:46 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 28 Jul 2001 19:10:46 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA16110; Sat, 28 Jul 2001 12:05:24 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 87760 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 28 Jul 2001 19:05:16          +0000
Received: from hall.mail.mindspring.net (hall.mail.mindspring.net          [207.69.200.60]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA16093          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 28 Jul 2001 12:05:15 -0700
Received: from mindspring.com (sdn-ar-006casfrMP218.dialsprint.net          [158.252.213.220]) by hall.mail.mindspring.net (8.9.3/8.8.5) with          ESMTP id PAA15561 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 28 Jul 2001          15:05:13 -0400 (EDT)
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 (Macintosh; U; PPC)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <000901c1173b$044f4de0$0400a8c0@hatjs>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B630E2D.2268A297@mindspring.com>
Date:         Sat, 28 Jul 2001 12:10:39 -0700
Reply-To: "Alan Shinn" <alshinn@MINDSPRING.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Alan Shinn" <alshinn@MINDSPRING.COM>
Subject:      [AR] attachments
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Lately, many posts seem to be coming through as attachments rather than
text. What do you (we) suppose that is all about? At any rate, in the
present virus infested environment, I am not opening any of them.

--
Looking forward:
Alan Shinn


Experience the
beginnings of microscopy.
Make your own replica
of one of Antony van Leeuwenhoek's microscopes.
visit    http://www.mindspring.com/~alshinn/

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 23117 invoked from network); 28 Jul 2001 19:35:11 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 28 Jul 2001 19:35:11 -0000
Received: (qmail 11494 invoked from network); 28 Jul 2001 19:37:07 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 28 Jul 2001 19:37:07 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA16270; Sat, 28 Jul 2001 12:33:12 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 87787 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 28 Jul 2001 19:33:07          +0000
Received: from smtprelay2.abs.adelphia.net (smtprelay.abs.adelphia.net          [64.8.20.11]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA16253 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 28 Jul 2001 12:33:06 -0700
Received: from jlgrady ([63.124.251.47]) by smtprelay2.abs.adelphia.net          (Netscape Messaging Server 4.15) with SMTP id GH77LU01.H8A for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 28 Jul 2001 15:32:18 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook CWS, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <000801c1179c$461123f0$0200a8c0@prestige.net>
Date:         Sat, 28 Jul 2001 15:34:08 -0400
Reply-To: "Jeff Grady" <jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jeff Grady" <jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] attachments
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <3B630E2D.2268A297@mindspring.com>

>> I am not opening any of them. <<

Neither do I. Even though my mail is scanned by Norton... I won't open the
attachment unless I specifically solicited it.

Jeff

-----Original Message-----
From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@itc.uci.edu]On
Behalf Of Alan Shinn
Sent: Saturday, July 28, 2001 3:11 PM
To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
Subject: [AR] attachments


Lately, many posts seem to be coming through as attachments rather than
text. What do you (we) suppose that is all about? At any rate, in the
present virus infested environment, I am not opening any of them.

--
Looking forward:
Alan Shinn


Experience the
beginnings of microscopy.
Make your own replica
of one of Antony van Leeuwenhoek's microscopes.
visit    http://www.mindspring.com/~alshinn/

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 13776 invoked from network); 28 Jul 2001 19:51:52 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 28 Jul 2001 19:51:51 -0000
Received: (qmail 1443 invoked from network); 28 Jul 2001 19:53:48 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 28 Jul 2001 19:53:48 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA16369; Sat, 28 Jul 2001 12:49:05 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 87805 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 28 Jul 2001 19:49:01          +0000
Received: from www.rocketry.org (root@rocketry.org [65.101.31.84]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA16352 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 28 Jul 2001 12:49:01 -0700
Received: from localhost (tim@localhost) by www.rocketry.org (8.10.2/8.10.2)          with ESMTP id f6SJl1U00311 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 28 Jul          2001 12:47:01 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.LNX.4.21.0107281245500.32753-100000@www.rocketry.org>
Date:         Sat, 28 Jul 2001 12:47:01 -0700
Reply-To: "T.J." <tim@ROCKETRY.ORG>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "T.J." <tim@ROCKETRY.ORG>
Subject:      Re: [AR] attachments
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <3B630E2D.2268A297@mindspring.com>

Some email clients will send things ahead as an attachment when you
forward a message, even if it's only plain text..

On Sat, 28 Jul 2001, Alan Shinn wrote:

> Lately, many posts seem to be coming through as attachments rather than
> text. What do you (we) suppose that is all about? At any rate, in the
> present virus infested environment, I am not opening any of them.
>
> --
> Looking forward:
> Alan Shinn
>
>
> Experience the
> beginnings of microscopy.
> Make your own replica
> of one of Antony van Leeuwenhoek's microscopes.
> visit    http://www.mindspring.com/~alshinn/
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 12098 invoked from network); 28 Jul 2001 20:01:12 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 28 Jul 2001 20:01:12 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 8189 invoked from network); 28 Jul 2001 20:03:09 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 28 Jul 2001 20:03:09 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA16441; Sat, 28 Jul 2001 12:59:35 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 87817 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 28 Jul 2001 19:59:33          +0000
Received: from hawk.mail.pas.earthlink.net (hawk.mail.pas.earthlink.net          [207.217.120.22]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA16386          for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Sat, 28 Jul 2001 12:49:32 -0700
Received: from earthlink.net (dialup-209.245.143.95.Dial1.SanJose1.Level3.net          [209.245.143.95]) by hawk.mail.pas.earthlink.net (EL-8_9_3_3/8.9.3)          with ESMTP id MAA25203; Sat, 28 Jul 2001 12:49:31 -0700 (PDT)
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.75 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.16-22 i686)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <000901c1173b$044f4de0$0400a8c0@hatjs>            <3B630E2D.2268A297@mindspring.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B631757.BF5A733A@earthlink.net>
Date:         Sat, 28 Jul 2001 12:49:43 -0700
Reply-To: "David Weinshenker" <daze39@EARTHLINK.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "David Weinshenker" <daze39@EARTHLINK.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] attachments
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Alan Shinn wrote:
>
> Lately, many posts seem to be coming through as attachments rather than
> text. What do you (we) suppose that is all about? At any rate, in the
> present virus infested environment, I am not opening any of them.

I think some folks' mailer software is formatting in HTML -
and some software will do that if it receives a message in
HTML format even if it is set to compose new messages as plain
text.

Does your mail viewer have a "view document source" command?

-dave w

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 19926 invoked from network); 28 Jul 2001 20:33:25 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 28 Jul 2001 20:33:25 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: (qmail 26720 invoked from network); 28 Jul 2001 20:33:38 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 28 Jul 2001 20:33:38 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA16555; Sat, 28 Jul 2001 13:27:48 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 87833 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 28 Jul 2001 20:27:45          +0000
Received: from cisco.com (cypher.cisco.com [171.69.11.18]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA16538 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat,          28 Jul 2001 13:27:45 -0700
Received: (from billw@localhost) by cisco.com (8.8.8/2.6/Cisco List          Logging/8.8.8) id NAA08683; Sat, 28 Jul 2001 13:27:13 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID:  <CMM.0.90.4.996352033.billw@cypher>
Date:         Sat, 28 Jul 2001 13:27:13 PDT
Reply-To: "Bill Westfield" <billw@cisco.com>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "William Chops Westfield" <billw@cisco.com>
Subject:      Re: [AR] attachments
Comments: To: Jeff Grady <jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  Your message of Sat, 28 Jul 2001 15:34:08 -0400

FWIW, I've been receiving a LOT (10 a day?) of email from which our
firewall has stripped some new virus/worm.  Most of these have text
along the lines of "I'm asking for your advice"...

BillW


From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 21638 invoked from network); 28 Jul 2001 20:53:00 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 28 Jul 2001 20:53:00 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 14307 invoked from network); 28 Jul 2001 20:55:16 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 28 Jul 2001 20:55:16 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA16676; Sat, 28 Jul 2001 13:50:56 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 87853 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 28 Jul 2001 20:50:47          +0000
Received: from ceres.triton.ch (ceres.triton.ch [212.254.218.98]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA16659 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 28 Jul 2001 13:50:45 -0700
Received: from spl.ch (robot.triton.ch [212.254.218.101]) by ceres.triton.ch          (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id WAA16149 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat,          28 Jul 2001 22:50:42 +0200
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.75 [en] (Win98; U)
X-Accept-Language: en,ja
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <CMM.0.90.4.996352033.billw@cypher>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B632588.6FBEBC6A@spl.ch>
Date:         Sat, 28 Jul 2001 22:50:16 +0200
Reply-To: "Bruno Berger" <bruno.berger@SPL.CH>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Bruno Berger" <bruno.berger@SPL.CH>
Subject:      Re: [AR] attachments
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

William Chops Westfield wrote:
>
> FWIW, I've been receiving a LOT (10 a day?) of email from which our
> firewall has stripped some new virus/worm.  Most of these have text
> along the lines of "I'm asking for your advice"...
>
> BillW

Yes, the so called SIRCAM worm ... see also:

http://www.cert.org/advisories/CA-2001-22.html

It seems that this worm has been accidentally released by the FBI (no
joke!). An outbreak from their virus labor ...

Bruno
--
Bruno Berger
Swiss Propulsion Laboratory
E-Mail: bruno.berger@spl.ch
WWW:    http://www.spl.ch

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 6085 invoked from network); 29 Jul 2001 00:04:17 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 29 Jul 2001 00:04:17 -0000
Received: (qmail 20913 invoked from network); 29 Jul 2001 00:05:46 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 29 Jul 2001 00:05:46 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA17802; Sat, 28 Jul 2001 17:02:23 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 88083 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 29 Jul 2001 00:00:55          +0000
Received: from mta03.mail.mel.aone.net.au (mta03.mail.au.uu.net [203.2.192.83])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA17780 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 28 Jul 2001 17:00:54 -0700
Received: from win2pk ([63.34.210.128]) by mta03.mail.mel.aone.net.au with SMTP          id <20010729000049.OTDA23157.mta03.mail.mel.aone.net.au@win2pk>; Sun,          29 Jul 2001 10:00:49 +1000
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0A74_01C56B69.45001AA0"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <NEBBJIGOELOLIBCCPKDCMEKBCBAA.geordi@c031.aone.net.au>
Date:         Sun, 29 Jul 2001 10:21:23 +1000
Reply-To: "Troy Prideaux" <geordi@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Troy Prideaux" <geordi@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Long burn grain design
Comments: To: Brian Kosko <bkosko1@HOME.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <00ba01c1178c$3a6d81c0$6401a8c0@home.com>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0A74_01C56B69.45001AA0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit


  -----Original Message-----
  From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@itc.uci.edu]On
Behalf Of Brian Kosko
  Sent: Sunday, 29 July 2001 3:39 AM
  To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
  Subject: [AR] Long burn grain design


  I was thinking about a less standard way of getting a long burn, moderate
thrust motor. The classic ways are endburners or some type of
c-slot/moonburner. How about a design with high volumetric loading, lots of
burn area,

  Lots of burn area "generally" = shorter burn times.


   and a large nozzle throat? I was thinking of some kind of finocyl design
to have the good loading and surface area. Then just pick a nozzle throat
that gets a low enough pressure to give the long burn.

  Finocyl geometries are good, but I'm interested in how you expect to
obtain longer burn times with them?


  This seems like a more practical amateur way to get a long burn. An
endburner is tough because of the high burn rate needed for the propellant.
The finocyl's main drawback is the mandril, but that seems like an easier
problem to solve. My machinist buddy didn't think he'd have any trouble
making the mandril.

  Any insights, experience, wild rantings, etc. on this would be
appreciated.


  My spreadsheet lists a couple of ways of increasing propellant loadings
whilst keeping a reasonably neutral profile and erosive burning down which
I've posted to the list on a few past occasions.

                                                                      Brian

------=_NextPart_000_0A74_01C56B69.45001AA0
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META content=3D"text/html; charset=3Diso-8859-1" =
http-equiv=3DContent-Type>
<META content=3D"MSHTML 5.00.2919.6307" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE=20
style=3D"BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: =
0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px">
  <DIV align=3Dleft class=3DOutlookMessageHeader dir=3Dltr><FONT =
face=3DTahoma><FONT=20
  size=3D2>-----Original Message-----<BR><B>From:</B> Amateur Rocketry =
discussion=20
  list [mailto:AROCKET@itc.uci.edu]<B>On Behalf Of </B>Brian=20
  Kosko<BR><B>Sent:</B> Sunday, 29 July 2001 3:39 AM<BR><B>To:</B>=20
  AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU<BR><B>Subject:</B> [AR] Long burn grain=20
  design<BR><BR></FONT></DIV></FONT>
  <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>I was thinking about a less standard =
way of=20
  getting a long burn, moderate thrust motor. The classic ways are =
endburners or=20
  some type of c-slot/moonburner. How about a design with high =
volumetric=20
  loading, lots of burn area,&nbsp;<SPAN =
class=3D530341000-29072001><FONT=20
  color=3D#0000ff>&nbsp;</FONT></SPAN></FONT></DIV>
  <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2><SPAN=20
  class=3D530341000-29072001></SPAN></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
  <DIV><FONT color=3D#0000ff face=3DArial size=3D2><SPAN =
class=3D530341000-29072001>Lots=20
  of burn area "generally" =3D shorter burn times.</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
  <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2><SPAN=20
  class=3D530341000-29072001></SPAN></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
  <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2><SPAN=20
  class=3D530341000-29072001></SPAN></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
  <DIV><FONT size=3D2><FONT face=3DArial><SPAN=20
  class=3D530341000-29072001>&nbsp;</SPAN>and a large nozzle throat? I =
was=20
  thinking of some kind of finocyl design to have the good loading and =
surface=20
  area. Then just pick a nozzle throat that gets a low enough pressure =
to give=20
  the long burn.<FONT color=3D#0000ff><SPAN=20
  class=3D530341000-29072001>&nbsp;</SPAN></FONT></FONT></FONT></DIV>
  <DIV><FONT size=3D2><FONT face=3DArial><FONT color=3D#0000ff><SPAN=20
  class=3D530341000-29072001></SPAN></FONT></FONT></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
  <DIV><FONT color=3D#0000ff face=3DArial size=3D2><SPAN=20
  class=3D530341000-29072001>Finocyl geometries are good, but I'm =
interested in=20
  how you expect to obtain longer burn times with =
them?</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
  <DIV><FONT size=3D2><FONT face=3DArial><FONT color=3D#0000ff><SPAN=20
  class=3D530341000-29072001>&nbsp;</SPAN></FONT></FONT></FONT></DIV>
  <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
  <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>This seems like a more practical =
amateur way to=20
  get a long burn. An endburner is tough because of the high burn rate =
needed=20
  for the propellant. The finocyl's main drawback is the mandril, but =
that seems=20
  like an easier problem to solve. My machinist buddy didn't think he'd =
have any=20
  trouble making the mandril.</FONT></DIV>
  <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
  <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Any insights, experience, wild =
rantings, etc. on=20
  this would be appreciated.</FONT></DIV>
  <DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
  <DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
  <DIV><FONT size=3D2><FONT face=3DArial>My spreadsheet lists a couple =
of ways of=20
  increasing propellant loadings whilst keeping a<SPAN =
class=3D530341000-29072001>=20
  reasonably neutral profile and er</SPAN>osive burning<FONT =
color=3D#0000ff><SPAN=20
  class=3D530341000-29072001><FONT color=3D#000000>&nbsp;down which I've =
posted to=20
  the list on a few past=20
  occasions.</FONT>&nbsp;</SPAN></FONT></FONT></FONT></DIV>
  <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
  <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; =

  &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; =
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;=20
  &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; =
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;=20
  &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; =
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;=20
  &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;=20
Brian</FONT></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0A74_01C56B69.45001AA0--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 15714 invoked from network); 29 Jul 2001 00:07:28 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 29 Jul 2001 00:07:28 -0000
Received: (qmail 22491 invoked from network); 29 Jul 2001 00:08:56 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 29 Jul 2001 00:08:56 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA17844; Sat, 28 Jul 2001 17:05:38 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 88095 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 29 Jul 2001 00:04:17          +0000
Received: from mta04.mail.mel.aone.net.au (mta04.mail.au.uu.net [203.2.192.84])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA17820 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 28 Jul 2001 17:04:15 -0700
Received: from win2pk ([63.34.210.128]) by mta04.mail.mel.aone.net.au with SMTP          id <20010729000411.PFIA12944.mta04.mail.mel.aone.net.au@win2pk>; Sun,          29 Jul 2001 10:04:11 +1000
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0A78_01C56B69.45028BA0"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <NEBBJIGOELOLIBCCPKDCAEKCCBAA.geordi@c031.aone.net.au>
Date:         Sun, 29 Jul 2001 10:24:45 +1000
Reply-To: "Troy Prideaux" <geordi@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Troy Prideaux" <geordi@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Long burn grain design
Comments: To: Jeff Grady <jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <000b01c11792$b8c978c0$0200a8c0@prestige.net>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0A78_01C56B69.45028BA0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

My "Grains 2000" spreadsheet will simulate about 20 of the most popular
grain geometries.

Troy.
  -----Original Message-----
  From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@itc.uci.edu]On
Behalf Of Jeff Grady
  Sent: Sunday, 29 July 2001 4:26 AM
  To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
  Subject: Re: [AR] Long burn grain design


  Does anyone have compiled data showing pressure correlation between nozzle
throat area to motor casing area for given propellant grain configurations?
    -----Original Message-----
    From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@itc.uci.edu]On
Behalf Of Brian Kosko
    Sent: Saturday, July 28, 2001 1:39 PM
    To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
    Subject: [AR] Long burn grain design


    I was thinking about a less standard way of getting a long burn,
moderate thrust motor. The classic ways are endburners or some type of
c-slot/moonburner. How about a design with high volumetric loading, lots of
burn area, and a large nozzle throat? I was thinking of some kind of finocyl
design to have the good loading and surface area. Then just pick a nozzle
throat that gets a low enough pressure to give the long burn.

    This seems like a more practical amateur way to get a long burn. An
endburner is tough because of the high burn rate needed for the propellant.
The finocyl's main drawback is the mandril, but that seems like an easier
problem to solve. My machinist buddy didn't think he'd have any trouble
making the mandril.

    Any insights, experience, wild rantings, etc. on this would be
appreciated.


Brian

------=_NextPart_000_0A78_01C56B69.45028BA0
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META content=3D"text/html; charset=3Diso-8859-1" =
http-equiv=3DContent-Type>
<META content=3D"MSHTML 5.00.2919.6307" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT color=3D#0000ff face=3DArial size=3D2><SPAN =
class=3D660312100-29072001>My=20
"Grains 2000" spreadsheet will simulate about 20 of the most popular =
grain=20
geometries. </SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=3D#0000ff face=3DArial size=3D2><SPAN=20
class=3D660312100-29072001></SPAN></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=3D#0000ff face=3DArial size=3D2><SPAN=20
class=3D660312100-29072001>Troy.</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE dir=3Dltr=20
style=3D"BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: =
0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px">
  <DIV align=3Dleft class=3DOutlookMessageHeader dir=3Dltr><FONT =
face=3DTahoma=20
  size=3D2>-----Original Message-----<BR><B>From:</B> Amateur Rocketry =
discussion=20
  list [mailto:AROCKET@itc.uci.edu]<B>On Behalf Of </B>Jeff=20
  Grady<BR><B>Sent:</B> Sunday, 29 July 2001 4:26 AM<BR><B>To:</B>=20
  AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU<BR><B>Subject:</B> Re: [AR] Long burn grain=20
  design<BR><BR></DIV></FONT>
  <DIV><FONT color=3D#0000ff face=3DArial size=3D2><SPAN =
class=3D410142218-28072001>Does=20
  anyone have compiled data showing pressure correlation between nozzle =
throat=20
  area to motor casing area for given propellant grain=20
  configurations?</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
  <BLOCKQUOTE dir=3Dltr style=3D"MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
    <DIV align=3Dleft class=3DOutlookMessageHeader dir=3Dltr><FONT =
face=3DTahoma=20
    size=3D2>-----Original Message-----<BR><B>From:</B> Amateur Rocketry =

    discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@itc.uci.edu]<B>On Behalf Of =
</B>Brian=20
    Kosko<BR><B>Sent:</B> Saturday, July 28, 2001 1:39 PM<BR><B>To:</B>=20
    AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU<BR><B>Subject:</B> [AR] Long burn grain=20
    design<BR><BR></FONT></DIV>
    <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>I was thinking about a less =
standard way of=20
    getting a long burn, moderate thrust motor. The classic ways are =
endburners=20
    or some type of c-slot/moonburner. How about a design with high =
volumetric=20
    loading, lots of burn area, and a large nozzle throat? I was =
thinking of=20
    some kind of finocyl design to have the good loading and surface =
area. Then=20
    just pick a nozzle throat that gets a low enough pressure to give =
the long=20
    burn.</FONT></DIV>
    <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
    <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>This seems like a more practical =
amateur way to=20
    get a long burn. An endburner is tough because of the high burn rate =
needed=20
    for the propellant. The finocyl's main drawback is the mandril, but =
that=20
    seems like an easier problem to solve. My machinist buddy didn't =
think he'd=20
    have any trouble making the mandril.</FONT></DIV>
    <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
    <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Any insights, experience, wild =
rantings, etc.=20
    on this would be appreciated.</FONT></DIV>
    <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
    <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; =
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;=20
    &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; =
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;=20
    &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; =
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;=20
    &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; =
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;=20
    &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;=20
  Brian</FONT></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0A78_01C56B69.45028BA0--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 15681 invoked from network); 29 Jul 2001 01:28:18 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 29 Jul 2001 01:28:18 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 29674 invoked from network); 29 Jul 2001 01:30:36 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 29 Jul 2001 01:30:36 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA18209; Sat, 28 Jul 2001 18:15:29 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 88165 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 29 Jul 2001 01:13:52          +0000
Received: from mail.aros.net (mail.aros.net [207.173.16.20]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA18183 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Sat,          28 Jul 2001 18:13:51 -0700
Received: from biomicro.com (dm3-114.slc.aros.net [207.173.25.114]) by          mail.aros.net (8.11.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id f6T1Dn760933 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Sat, 28 Jul 2001 19:13:50 -0600 (MDT)
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.77 [en] (Win98; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <CMM.0.90.4.996352033.billw@cypher>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B62B279.9952CCF8@biomicro.com>
Date:         Sat, 28 Jul 2001 06:39:21 -0600
Reply-To: "Mark K. Spute" <mks@BIOMICRO.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Mark K. Spute" <mks@BIOMICRO.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] attachments
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Do NOT open ANY attachment with words to that effect.  Our HR manager
got an attachement like that last wednesday, attached to a resume, and
it completely trashed her computer.  It installs a small EXE file and
registers it in your windows registry and then proceeds to wreak all
manner of havoc on your system.  Most current antivirus software will
not stop it.  It's too new.  Or so says our Systems guy.

William Chops Westfield wrote:

> FWIW, I've been receiving a LOT (10 a day?) of email from which our
> firewall has stripped some new virus/worm.  Most of these have text
> along the lines of "I'm asking for your advice"...
>
> BillW

--
Mark K. Spute
Senior Research Engineer
BioMicro Systems Inc.

KD7IWE,  RRS

"It is difficult to say what is impossible, for the dream of yesterday
is the hope of today and the reality of tomorrow."
     Dr. Robert H. Goddard

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 788 invoked from network); 29 Jul 2001 02:37:49 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 29 Jul 2001 02:37:49 -0000
Received: (qmail 21538 invoked from network); 29 Jul 2001 02:39:47 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 29 Jul 2001 02:39:47 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA18645; Sat, 28 Jul 2001 19:33:21 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 88204 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 29 Jul 2001 02:31:45          +0000
Received: from pike.netdoor.com (netdoor.com [208.137.128.6]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA18606 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat,          28 Jul 2001 19:21:44 -0700
Received: from oemcomputer (port467.jxn.netdoor.com [208.148.193.167]) by          pike.netdoor.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id VAA17113 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 28 Jul 2001 21:21:43 -0500 (CDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
Importance: Normal
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <LPBBKHPJIOKEICHDGDOPEEGICDAA.tim@sumrallworks.com>
Date:         Sat, 28 Jul 2001 21:22:12 -0500
Reply-To: "Tim Sumrall" <tim@SUMRALLWORKS.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Tim Sumrall" <tim@SUMRALLWORKS.COM>
Subject:      [AR] Plywood Tubing
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

May be of interest....

http://www.brandnew.net/hollowood/holwood.shtml

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 6529 invoked from network); 29 Jul 2001 04:48:16 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 29 Jul 2001 04:48:16 -0000
Received: (qmail 16875 invoked from network); 29 Jul 2001 04:50:34 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 29 Jul 2001 04:50:34 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA20098; Sat, 28 Jul 2001 21:45:01 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 88280 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 29 Jul 2001 04:43:17          +0000
Received: from femail17.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail17.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.0.95.144]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA20077          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 28 Jul 2001 21:43:16 -0700
Received: from cc334751a ([65.13.214.65]) by femail17.sdc1.sfba.home.com          (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20 201-229-121-120-20010223) with SMTP id          <20010729044311.QDWR3370.femail17.sdc1.sfba.home.com@cc334751a>; Sat,          28 Jul 2001 21:43:11 -0700
References:  <NEBBJIGOELOLIBCCPKDCMEKBCBAA.geordi@c031.aone.net.au>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0A7C_01C56B69.450C0180"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2462.0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <005d01c117e9$0385be40$6401a8c0@home.com>
Date:         Sat, 28 Jul 2001 22:43:29 -0600
Reply-To: "Brian Kosko" <bkosko1@HOME.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Brian Kosko" <bkosko1@HOME.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Long burn grain design
Comments: To: Troy Prideaux <geordi@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0A7C_01C56B69.450C0180
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Troy,

I was thinking of using the lower pressure to mitigate the burn rate. BR =
is a function of pressure; I'd just have to see how much :). The first =
step will be to try some finocyl motors to get a feeling of where a =
neutral burn is. I'm getting a real strong 54mm test motor made. It's =
twelve inches of stainless steel with 1/4 in walls; that'll be tougher =
to turn into sheet metal than that Aerotech stuff! I then plan to do a =
four finned mandril with various fin lengths (2,4,6,8,10 in for =
example). The core will be 3/8 in. My rough calcs show this should hold =
15 to 25% more propellant than a corresponding Bates grain geometry. We =
shall see.

Troy, I don't have the link to your spreadsheet. Could you please =
provide it? Does it take into account nozzle erosion?

Thanks,

Brian


------=_NextPart_000_0A7C_01C56B69.450C0180
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Diso-8859-1">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 6.00.2462.0" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Troy,</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>I was thinking of using the lower =
pressure to=20
mitigate the burn rate. BR is a function of pressure; I'd just have to =
see how=20
much :). The first step will be to try some finocyl motors to get a =
feeling of=20
where a neutral burn is. I'm getting a real strong 54mm test motor made. =
It's=20
twelve inches of stainless steel with 1/4 in walls; that'll be tougher =
to turn=20
into sheet metal than that Aerotech stuff! I then plan to do a four =
finned=20
mandril with various fin lengths (2,4,6,8,10 in for example). The core =
will be=20
3/8 in. My rough calcs show this should hold 15 to 25% more propellant =
than a=20
corresponding Bates grain geometry. We shall see.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Troy, I don't have the link to your =
spreadsheet.=20
Could you please provide it? Does it take into account nozzle=20
erosion?</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Thanks,</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Brian</FONT></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE dir=3Dltr=20
style=3D"PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; =
BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px"><FONT=20
  face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0A7C_01C56B69.450C0180--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 14126 invoked from network); 29 Jul 2001 05:57:57 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 29 Jul 2001 05:57:57 -0000
Received: (qmail 10047 invoked from network); 29 Jul 2001 06:00:15 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 29 Jul 2001 06:00:15 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA20378; Sat, 28 Jul 2001 22:53:35 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 88319 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 29 Jul 2001 05:52:04          +0000
Received: from email.uah.edu (email.uah.edu [146.229.1.200]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA20360 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat,          28 Jul 2001 22:52:04 -0700
Received: from philski ([146.229.182.50]) by email.uah.edu (8.11.2/8.11.2) with          SMTP id f6T5tCt24984; Sun, 29 Jul 2001 00:55:12 -0500 (CDT)
References: <000901c1173b$044f4de0$0400a8c0@hatjs>                       <3B630E2D.2268A297@mindspring.com>             <3B631757.BF5A733A@earthlink.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <002a01c117f2$d00111a0$32b6e592@uah.edu>
Date:         Sun, 29 Jul 2001 00:53:37 -0500
Reply-To: "Phil" <phil@NETWURX.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Phil" <phil@NETWURX.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] attachments
Comments: To: David Weinshenker <daze39@EARTHLINK.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

in Outlook Express (probably what most of you are using who arent using
pine, elm, or some other Li/U -nix system) ... go to Format -> Plain Text to
chage it to a plain text message when replying to all/forwarding... I
believe that will not attatch the file...
    Phil

----- Original Message -----
From: "David Weinshenker" <daze39@EARTHLINK.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Saturday, July 28, 2001 2:49 PM
Subject: Re: [AR] attachments


> Alan Shinn wrote:
> >
> > Lately, many posts seem to be coming through as attachments rather than
> > text. What do you (we) suppose that is all about? At any rate, in the
> > present virus infested environment, I am not opening any of them.
>
> I think some folks' mailer software is formatting in HTML -
> and some software will do that if it receives a message in
> HTML format even if it is set to compose new messages as plain
> text.
>
> Does your mail viewer have a "view document source" command?
>
> -dave w
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 25695 invoked from network); 29 Jul 2001 08:33:16 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 29 Jul 2001 08:33:16 -0000
Received: (qmail 10334 invoked from network); 29 Jul 2001 08:35:12 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 29 Jul 2001 08:35:12 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id BAA20930; Sun, 29 Jul 2001 01:27:39 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 88373 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 29 Jul 2001 08:26:07          +0000
Received: from idsoftware.com (predator.idsoftware.com [192.246.40.34]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id BAA20911 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Sun, 29 Jul 2001 01:26:06 -0700
Received: from [192.246.40.144] (account johnc HELO pluto.idsoftware.com) by          idsoftware.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 3.4.7) with ESMTP id 318877 for          AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 29 Jul 2001 03:24:52 -0500
X-Sender: johnc@mail.idsoftware.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <4.3.1.2.20010729033713.02b1f090@mail.idsoftware.com>
Date:         Sun, 29 Jul 2001 03:37:49 -0500
Reply-To: "John Carmack" <johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Carmack" <johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM>
Subject:      [AR] Free Flight
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

We have a good video in our latest update.

http://www.armadilloaerospace.com/Updates/jul28_01.htm

John Carmack

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 11327 invoked from network); 29 Jul 2001 22:19:41 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 29 Jul 2001 22:19:41 -0000
Received: (qmail 3690 invoked from network); 29 Jul 2001 22:21:10 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 29 Jul 2001 22:21:10 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA25611; Sun, 29 Jul 2001 15:04:34 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 88886 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 29 Jul 2001 22:03:06          +0000
Received: from barry.mail.mindspring.net (barry.mail.mindspring.net          [207.69.200.25]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA25592          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 29 Jul 2001 15:03:06 -0700
Received: from oemcomputer (user-38ldc43.dialup.mindspring.com          [209.86.176.131]) by barry.mail.mindspring.net (8.9.3/8.8.5) with          SMTP id SAA05438 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 29 Jul 2001 18:03:04          -0400 (EDT)
References:  <LPBBKHPJIOKEICHDGDOPEEGICDAA.tim@sumrallworks.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <000601c11879$a511c840$83b056d1@oemcomputer>
Date:         Sun, 29 Jul 2001 17:58:43 -0400
Reply-To: "Robert" <OlympusMons@MINDSPRING.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Robert" <OlympusMons@MINDSPRING.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Plywood Tubing
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This post especially caught my eye because I read that the USSR's first
ICBM, the R1, was made out of wood. I was wondering about amateurs and/or
fledgling space companies resorting to such a design.

----- Original Message -----
From: Tim Sumrall <tim@SUMRALLWORKS.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Saturday, July 28, 2001 10:22 PM
Subject: [AR] Plywood Tubing


> May be of interest....
>
> http://www.brandnew.net/hollowood/holwood.shtml

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 16083 invoked from network); 30 Jul 2001 01:11:36 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 30 Jul 2001 01:11:36 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 13692 invoked from network); 30 Jul 2001 01:12:00 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 30 Jul 2001 01:12:00 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA26753; Sun, 29 Jul 2001 17:58:15 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 88955 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 30 Jul 2001 00:55:27          +0000
Received: from smtp7ve.mailsrvcs.net (smtp7vepub.gte.net [206.46.170.28]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA26732 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 29 Jul 2001 17:55:26 -0700
Received: from me-513q3sc0zun0.pengar.com          (adsl-64-223-147-206.mannh.adsl.bellatlantic.net [64.223.147.206]) by          smtp7ve.mailsrvcs.net (8.9.1/8.9.1) with ESMTP id AAA49732722 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 30 Jul 2001 00:54:53 GMT
X-Sender: seth-pc@hobbiton.shire.net
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
References: <LPBBKHPJIOKEICHDGDOPEEGICDAA.tim@sumrallworks.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <5.1.0.14.0.20010729205730.02ab5290@hobbiton.shire.net>
Date:         Sun, 29 Jul 2001 20:59:42 -0400
Reply-To: "Seth Leigh" <seth@PENGAR.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Seth Leigh" <seth@PENGAR.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Plywood Tubing
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <000601c11879$a511c840$83b056d1@oemcomputer>

Wood and plutonium, that is.  ;-)  Sheesh why does that sound funny to my
ears?  It is about as ironic as the fact that the Bismarck was sunk
precisely because the Swordfish torpedo bombers that jammed its rudder were
an old design covered with cloth rather than a metal skin.

Seth


At 05:58 PM 7/29/2001, Robert wrote:
>This post especially caught my eye because I read that the USSR's first
>ICBM, the R1, was made out of wood. I was wondering about amateurs and/or
>fledgling space companies resorting to such a design.
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: Tim Sumrall <tim@SUMRALLWORKS.COM>
>To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
>Sent: Saturday, July 28, 2001 10:22 PM
>Subject: [AR] Plywood Tubing
>
>
> > May be of interest....
> >
> > http://www.brandnew.net/hollowood/holwood.shtml

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 24720 invoked from network); 30 Jul 2001 01:38:01 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 30 Jul 2001 01:38:01 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 20657 invoked from network); 30 Jul 2001 01:39:32 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 30 Jul 2001 01:39:32 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA26791; Sun, 29 Jul 2001 18:01:31 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 88965 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 30 Jul 2001 01:00:10          +0000
Received: from gig.centurytel.net (gig.centurytel.net [209.206.160.248]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA26760 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 29 Jul 2001 17:59:45 -0700
Received: from centurytel.net (pppoe0185.gh.centurytel.net [209.206.170.224])          by gig.centurytel.net (8.11.4/8.11.4) with ESMTP id f6U0xhI27977;          Sun, 29 Jul 2001 17:59:43 -0700 (PDT)
X-Sender: "Christopher Scott" <ctn41957@mail.nw.centurytel.net> (Unverified)
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.76 [en]C-gatewaynet  (Win98; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <LPBBKHPJIOKEICHDGDOPEEGICDAA.tim@sumrallworks.com>            <000601c11879$a511c840$83b056d1@oemcomputer>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B64B192.7DB60934@centurytel.net>
Date:         Sun, 29 Jul 2001 18:00:02 -0700
Reply-To: "Christopher Scott" <ChristopherJ@CENTURYTEL.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Christopher Scott" <ChristopherJ@CENTURYTEL.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Plywood Tubing
Comments: To: Robert <OlympusMons@MINDSPRING.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Uhmm, the R1 was not an ICBM and was definately NOT made of wood! Maybe
you were joking and I missed it (I am dense sometime). THe R1 was the V2
clone that the Russians made shortly after WWII.

The first ICBM in the world was the Russian 8K71 (SS-6 Sapwood)
Definately not made of wood either. It was deployed c1957.

I know of no rocket made of wood that has flown to space. I would be
interested in any such vehicle.

Christopher

Robert wrote:
>
> This post especially caught my eye because I read that the USSR's first
> ICBM, the R1, was made out of wood. I was wondering about amateurs and/or
> fledgling space companies resorting to such a design.
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Tim Sumrall <tim@SUMRALLWORKS.COM>
> To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
> Sent: Saturday, July 28, 2001 10:22 PM
> Subject: [AR] Plywood Tubing
>
> > May be of interest....
> >
> > http://www.brandnew.net/hollowood/holwood.shtml

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 7671 invoked from network); 30 Jul 2001 01:49:39 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 30 Jul 2001 01:49:39 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 29507 invoked from network); 30 Jul 2001 01:51:58 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 30 Jul 2001 01:51:58 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA27014; Sun, 29 Jul 2001 18:42:28 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 88998 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 30 Jul 2001 01:40:52          +0000
Received: from idsoftware.com (predator.idsoftware.com [192.246.40.34]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA26995 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Sun, 29 Jul 2001 18:40:52 -0700
Received: from [192.246.40.144] (account johnc HELO pluto.idsoftware.com) by          idsoftware.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 3.4.7) with ESMTP id 319545 for          AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 29 Jul 2001 20:39:37 -0500
X-Sender: johnc@mail.idsoftware.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.1
References: <LPBBKHPJIOKEICHDGDOPEEGICDAA.tim@sumrallworks.com>            <000601c11879$a511c840$83b056d1@oemcomputer>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <4.3.1.2.20010729205117.02bb4a60@mail.idsoftware.com>
Date:         Sun, 29 Jul 2001 20:52:36 -0500
Reply-To: "John Carmack" <johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Carmack" <johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Plywood Tubing
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <3B64B192.7DB60934@centurytel.net>

AFAIK, wood was used briefly as an ablative nozzle material (or heat
shield?) in some early Russian rockets, but not for any structural elements.

John Carmack

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 614 invoked from network); 30 Jul 2001 04:14:41 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 30 Jul 2001 04:14:41 -0000
Received: (qmail 15820 invoked from network); 30 Jul 2001 04:15:23 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 30 Jul 2001 04:15:23 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA28057; Sun, 29 Jul 2001 21:12:09 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 89064 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 30 Jul 2001 04:10:43          +0000
Received: from blount.mail.mindspring.net (blount.mail.mindspring.net          [207.69.200.226]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA28039          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 29 Jul 2001 21:10:42 -0700
Received: from oemcomputer (user-38ldco5.dialup.mindspring.com [209.86.179.5])          by blount.mail.mindspring.net (8.9.3/8.8.5) with SMTP id AAA20658 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 30 Jul 2001 00:10:40 -0400 (EDT)
References: <LPBBKHPJIOKEICHDGDOPEEGICDAA.tim@sumrallworks.com>            <000601c11879$a511c840$83b056d1@oemcomputer>            <3B64B192.7DB60934@centurytel.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <000e01c118ac$fff56b80$05b356d1@oemcomputer>
Date:         Mon, 30 Jul 2001 00:06:19 -0400
Reply-To: "Robert" <OlympusMons@MINDSPRING.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Robert" <OlympusMons@MINDSPRING.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Plywood Tubing
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

No, I'm not joking. I definitely read that somewhere. I'll really have to
think. But I don't have as many sources as a lot of you guys probably have.
I don't think it was the internet because I can remember trying look up the
R1 on the internet to get more details. I didn't get many, as far as I
checked: we all know how internet searches can go! If it wasn't on some
science TV program, then it may have been Smithsonian Air&Space magazine or
possibly - but my impression is that this is not the case - one of the two
British Interplanetary Society magazines, Spaceflight or J(ournal of
the)BIS. But I also pick other publications here and there, subscribe to
Science News mag, etc. So if I can remember and find the source, I'll let
you know.

----- Original Message -----
From: Christopher Scott <ChristopherJ@centurytel.net>
To: Robert <OlympusMons@MINDSPRING.COM>
Cc: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Sunday, July 29, 2001 9:00 PM
Subject: Re: [AR] Plywood Tubing


> Uhmm, the R1 was not an ICBM and was definately NOT made of wood! Maybe
> you were joking and I missed it (I am dense sometime). THe R1 was the V2
> clone that the Russians made shortly after WWII.
>
> The first ICBM in the world was the Russian 8K71 (SS-6 Sapwood)
> Definately not made of wood either. It was deployed c1957.
>
> I know of no rocket made of wood that has flown to space. I would be
> interested in any such vehicle.
>
> Christopher
>
> Robert wrote:
> >
> > This post especially caught my eye because I read that the USSR's first
> > ICBM, the R1, was made out of wood. I was wondering about amateurs
and/or
> > fledgling space companies resorting to such a design.
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: Tim Sumrall <tim@SUMRALLWORKS.COM>
> > To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
> > Sent: Saturday, July 28, 2001 10:22 PM
> > Subject: [AR] Plywood Tubing
> >
> > > May be of interest....
> > >
> > > http://www.brandnew.net/hollowood/holwood.shtml

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 16711 invoked from network); 30 Jul 2001 05:28:47 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 30 Jul 2001 05:28:47 -0000
Received: (qmail 18039 invoked from network); 30 Jul 2001 05:30:48 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 30 Jul 2001 05:30:48 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA28282; Sun, 29 Jul 2001 22:24:43 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 89091 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 30 Jul 2001 05:23:18          +0000
Received: from dune.gnc.net (root@dune.gnc.net [207.203.72.4]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA28264 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun,          29 Jul 2001 22:23:17 -0700
Received: from beowulf (sw2-13.gnc.net [207.203.72.93]) by dune.gnc.net          (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id BAA06672 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon,          30 Jul 2001 01:23:15 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <LPBBKJMJEOFKAMFJJNNHMEALCGAA.landofgrey@gnc.net>
Date:         Mon, 30 Jul 2001 01:22:20 -0400
Reply-To: <landofgrey@gnc.net>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Matthew Travis" <landofgrey@gnc.net>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Plywood Tubing
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <000e01c118ac$fff56b80$05b356d1@oemcomputer>

Whatever the source, it's possible they used the term "ICBM" instead of the
more general, and accurate "ballistic missile". To most people not versed in
the nomenclature (people without a daily interest in the suject), there's no
difference between "ICBM", "IRBM", "SLBM", and "ballistic missile". To them
everything is an ICBM. Terminology and precision of semantics is not as
important to most people as it is to those of us who rely on such precision
as the normal course. That much nitpicking aside, the R1 was definitely not
an ICBM. The term "ballistic missile" is also proably a bit generous.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU]On
> Behalf Of Robert
> Sent: Monday, July 30, 2001 12:06 AM
> To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
> Subject: Re: [AR] Plywood Tubing
>
>
> No, I'm not joking. I definitely read that somewhere. I'll really have to
> think. But I don't have as many sources as a lot of you guys
> probably have.
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 22513 invoked from network); 30 Jul 2001 05:40:13 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 30 Jul 2001 05:40:13 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 22075 invoked from network); 30 Jul 2001 05:42:15 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 30 Jul 2001 05:42:15 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA28374; Sun, 29 Jul 2001 22:32:02 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 89101 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 30 Jul 2001 05:30:40          +0000
Received: from gj.net (mail.gj.net [216.169.77.40]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA28356 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun,          29 Jul 2001 22:30:40 -0700
Received: from gj.net [216.169.65.97] by gj.net with ESMTP (SMTPD32-6.06) id          A1D92BCC0146; Sun, 29 Jul 2001 23:34:17 -0600
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en]C-CCK-MCD NSCPCD47  (Win98; I)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <LPBBKJMJEOFKAMFJJNNHMEALCGAA.landofgrey@gnc.net>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B64F06A.57EBBE8F@gj.net>
Date:         Sun, 29 Jul 2001 23:28:10 -0600
Reply-To: "Carlo Godel" <regiaero@GJ.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Carlo Godel" <regiaero@GJ.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Plywood Tubing
Comments: To: landofgrey@GNC.NET
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

The term "ballistic missile" is also proably a bit generous.

A bullet is a ballistic missile once fired. So it must be a ballistic
missile
Carlo

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 1118 invoked from network); 30 Jul 2001 06:03:47 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 30 Jul 2001 06:03:47 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 1570 invoked from network); 30 Jul 2001 06:05:49 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 30 Jul 2001 06:05:49 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA28479; Sun, 29 Jul 2001 23:01:15 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 89117 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 30 Jul 2001 05:59:28          +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (f10.law14.hotmail.com [64.4.21.10]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA28434 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun,          29 Jul 2001 22:49:28 -0700
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Sun,          29 Jul 2001 22:48:58 -0700
Received: from 207.220.223.11 by lw14fd.law14.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Mon,          30 Jul 2001 05:48:58 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [207.220.223.11]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 30 Jul 2001 05:48:58.0281 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[538D6190:01C118BB]
Message-ID:  <F10FkuutSgcOrBLSAQV000091f2@hotmail.com>
Date:         Mon, 30 Jul 2001 05:48:58 +0000
Reply-To: "Matt Faulkner" <mattfaulkner9@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Matt Faulkner" <mattfaulkner9@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      [AR] stump remover
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

I went to look for stump remover today, but the container did not mention
potassium nitrate; are there different types of stump remover, or are they
all (more or less) good for making rocket fuel?
It just seemed odd that any container that should contain an oxidizer would
fail to clearly state as such.
                          -Matt Faulkner

_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 23464 invoked from network); 30 Jul 2001 10:35:32 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 30 Jul 2001 10:35:32 -0000
Received: (qmail 25816 invoked from network); 30 Jul 2001 10:37:32 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 30 Jul 2001 10:37:32 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id DAA29183; Mon, 30 Jul 2001 03:32:04 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 89182 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 30 Jul 2001 10:28:52          +0000
Received: from dune.gnc.net (root@dune.gnc.net [207.203.72.4]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id DAA29158 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon,          30 Jul 2001 03:28:52 -0700
Received: from beowulf (sw2-32.gnc.net [207.203.72.112]) by dune.gnc.net          (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id GAA10061 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon,          30 Jul 2001 06:28:50 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <LPBBKJMJEOFKAMFJJNNHCEANCGAA.landofgrey@gnc.net>
Date:         Mon, 30 Jul 2001 06:28:45 -0400
Reply-To: <landofgrey@gnc.net>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Matthew Travis" <landofgrey@gnc.net>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Plywood Tubing
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <3B64F06A.57EBBE8F@gj.net>

There were several variants of the R-1, all SLBM's. The R-1 SS-1A was the
one that was a virtual direct copy of the V-2. There was also the SS-1A,
SS-1B, SS-1C, SS-1D and SS-1V, and all were progressive evolutions of the
previous. The final refienment was actually the SS-1C R-17, which we have
all come to know as the Scud B used in the Gulf War. In fact, all the
variants after the original SS-1 were called Scud.

For the interested, check out the Encyclopedia Astronautica at:
http://www.friends-partners.org/mwade/


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU]On
> Behalf Of Carlo Godel
> Sent: Monday, July 30, 2001 1:28 AM
> To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
> Subject: Re: [AR] Plywood Tubing
>
>
> The term "ballistic missile" is also proably a bit generous.
>
> A bullet is a ballistic missile once fired. So it must be a ballistic
> missile
> Carlo
>
That may be technically so, but a bullet, or snowball, or whatever, is not
the common connotation of what a ballistic missile is.  This is the kind of
overly anal nitpicking I was talking about. To be even more technical, it is
only a "missil" when used as a weapon, so unless the bullet or rocket or
snowball is being used as a weapon at the time, it is not really a ballistic
missile, only a ballistic projectile. Now, if you want to go with the
common-use connotation of the term "ballistic missile", then a bullet
doesn't count and the SS-1 only barely.

Many fighrs have occurred because of the confusion of and conflict between
denotation and connotation.

But I think that I am beginning to stray thoroughly off-topic, so I will
spare the list and post to this thread no more. And apologies to anyone who
is rolling his eyes now.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 8116 invoked from network); 30 Jul 2001 15:04:50 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 30 Jul 2001 15:04:50 -0000
Received: (qmail 2066 invoked from network); 30 Jul 2001 15:01:41 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 30 Jul 2001 15:01:41 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA30049; Mon, 30 Jul 2001 07:56:12 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 89236 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 30 Jul 2001 14:54:27          +0000
Received: from localhost (rcalkins@localhost) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with          ESMTP id HAA30024; Mon, 30 Jul 2001 07:54:26 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.LNX.4.10.10107300750350.29996-100000@itc.uci.edu>
Date:         Mon, 30 Jul 2001 07:54:26 -0700
Reply-To: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
Subject:      Re: [AR] stump remover
Comments: To: Matt Faulkner <mattfaulkner9@HOTMAIL.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <F10FkuutSgcOrBLSAQV000091f2@hotmail.com>

There are at least two types of stump remover.  One type, an acid that
attacks the ligand bonds, is totally unsuitable as a propellant.  In my
experience, if it contains KN,it generally says something about it on the
label.  However, I have noticed that this information is beginning to go
away, most likely to prevent pyro experimenters from using it for purposes
other than it's intended purpose.

Ray

On Mon, 30 Jul 2001, Matt Faulkner wrote:

> I went to look for stump remover today, but the container did not mention
> potassium nitrate; are there different types of stump remover, or are they
> all (more or less) good for making rocket fuel?
> It just seemed odd that any container that should contain an oxidizer would
> fail to clearly state as such.
>                           -Matt Faulkner
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 18874 invoked from network); 30 Jul 2001 15:21:27 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 30 Jul 2001 15:21:27 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 16586 invoked from network); 30 Jul 2001 15:22:45 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 30 Jul 2001 15:22:45 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA30227; Mon, 30 Jul 2001 08:16:42 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 89261 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 30 Jul 2001 15:15:09          +0000
Received: from imo-d07.mx.aol.com (imo-d07.mx.aol.com [205.188.157.39]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA30202 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Mon, 30 Jul 2001 08:15:08 -0700
Received: from Azt28@aol.com by imo-d07.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v31.9.) id          w.69.18a6ca9d (4249) for <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Mon, 30 Jul 2001          11:14:34 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="ISO-8859-1"
X-Mailer: AOL 5.0 for Windows sub 116
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by itc.uci.edu id IAA30203
Message-ID:  <69.18a6ca9d.2896d3da@aol.com>
Date:         Mon, 30 Jul 2001 11:14:34 EDT
Reply-To: <Azt28@AOL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <Azt28@AOL.COM>
Subject:      [AR] ARocket projects Jully 2001
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

***************
*ARocket-Projects*
***************

I plan to send to ARocket nearly every month that list of projects or ideas.
Some authors have been informed, other no.
If you want to be removed from that list, tell me.
If you want to change something, tell me too.
If you are not on that list and want to be here, tell me, best: send me a
resume of your project..

The purpose of that monthly message is to give to readers of ARocket a taste
of what is done here. It is a way to mount collaborative works.

To be in that list, you must have build something, hardware or software or
project to do so. If you are on topic on ARocket you are on this message.

I hope you'll find useful elements or components for you own project, may be
you'll find interesting to fuse it with another... If launching a project is
too much for your free time or free money, look at a similar idea and contact
the authors. You may find more practical to enter in a collaborative
undertaking.

Some hints:
- The most interesting projects are not to launch a satellite, this is too
much for the present state of art in amateur rocketry.
- Look at components, for example simple turbopump, nobody ask for the SSME
system! then trade them against other products made by ARocket members.
- Assume at least half of all projects will not be completed, so don't worry
if someone else has a project similar to your own.
- If there are three similar projects underway, look at something else, your
effort would be wasted here.
- Never think about making a single element, if you produce a pyrovalve a
anithing else, think about "mass producing" it.
- X-prize is not the way to make money from rocket activities: Look at an
element, for example ablative nozzles, test them, use them, swap some units
against other elements and when some tens will have flown, market your
product.

%%%%%%%%%%
Jully issue:

I have included a list of most X-Prize projects.  Strictly speaking, they are
not amateur projects, neverthless, some contenders may be interested to sell
some rocket parts to amateurs.I have sent some request along that way to some
would-be space operators, the answers cover a broad spectrum: The millenium
project was interested, Truax would work only with registered corporations,
XCOR want to sell plain iron at gold price... Try them and others, after some
enquiries, some may figure out that there is a market for them and a service
for amateurs.

%%%%%%%%%%%
There is the  projects batch:

FACILITIES:

***Ray Calkins, Terry Spath, Brian Kosko, Dave Johnson, Ken Goldstein,
Rodney Earwood:

 Upgrades to the aRocket static test stand.
 Completed:  10,000 horizontal stand,

 High speed computer data collection and control systems,
 bunker, berm, initial testing

 Undone:  overhead protection for bunker, generator shelter, perimenter
 fencing, onsite secure storage and LEUP
2,000 lb vertical stand. Estimated completion:  14JUL2001.
Materials acquired, initial design approved.

***Ray Calkins, Ken Goldstein:

Filament winder
Completed:  initial analysis
Next step:  framework construction
Undone:  adapt motors, linkages, power supplies, control systems, write
computer control code.
Status:  project on hold while I get a means to transport materials.

***Big winder:

The objective is to produce large parts from carbon-epoxy composites, for
example nozzles. There are 3 elements:
1/ A rotating platform for element up to 2.5 m in diameter and up to 3 m high.
2/ An owen to cure element up to 1 m in dia. and 1 m high, help wanted for
the thermal regulator. This system (1 and 2)is near complete.
3/ A big winder for tanks up to 2.5 m in dia. and 35m long. This system will
be near the sea with a channel nearby so that big elements can be moved
without using roads.
There is the field, but no more up to now.

***David Crisalli
see: http://www.rrs.org
Big Static test stand:
Reaction Research Society, MTA, South California
Test to up to 50 000 lbs
Some hardware and hours of work wanted.

***Mike Cohan
mdc@geosciencebook.com
Construction of a small wind tunnel
help wanted

MOTORS / LIQUID:

***Big CH4-LOX motor.

Yvan Bozzonetti
azt28@aol.com

The "quantum jump" motor is a 15 000 + lbs thrust motor with ablative chamber
cooling
and pintle injector so it can readily be adapted to nearly any F/O. After
some tests, the objective is to produce it in small batch and sell/swap the
full motor or components world wide for amateur projects. You may enter the
project and produce one element for example. You'll be then the source for
that element, a way to start a rocket business.

***Arocket open source liquid motor
Jay
kc2csh@JUNO.COM
 I would like to propose a joint development and production project for
an Arocket open source liquid motor.
  In substance, what I really propose is a set of well documented parts,
like an erector set, much like a commercial RMS case is for solids.

  I would propose that the jointly developed and produced motor be
designed as a H2O2 bi-prop with enough design flexibility to permit both
a wide range of experimentation and also so optomization as a  componant
basis for more ambitious projects.  The objective is to get a somewhat
optomized set of parts that can be implemented in such a way as to
facilitate a wide range of configurations and propellants, including
perhaps as peroxide monopropellant..

  I would suggest some basic parameters:

        1.  Somewhere between 6-8" airframe in size.
        2.  Designed to work with 70% peroxide or up.
        3.  A pre-cat chamber of some type.
        4.  prevision for an optional ignitor slug of some sort, like a model
rocket motor.
        5. Provision for optional liquid injection, fuel or cat, in
                 both cat and combustion chambers
         6. Provision for adequate cooling for sustained operation of perhaps
60 seconds.
        7. Provision to operate as a hybrid by putting a solid fuel in the
combustion chamber.

  I would also propose that we attempt to push the envelope in terms of
performance, and shoot to develop a set of componants useful for a more
ambitious undertaking.

MOTORS / HYBRIDS:

***Ray Calkins, Terry Spath, Brian Kosko, Ken Goldstein, Rodney Earwood, Dave
Johnson.:

HPR N2O to LOx hybrid conversion
Completed:  evaluation and planning, dewar conversion LN2->LO2,
fill/vent/drain
plumbing & valving, nitrogen pressurization adaptor

Next step:  hydrostatic and water flow tests

Undone:  fill system needs only lox cleaning and minor fitting, will be
completed tonight, vertical test stand begun.


***FAR (germain group)

http://www.optipoint.com/far/gbhome.htm

working on hybrids, turbopump and X-Prize.

***wshamblin@ac.net (Bill Shamblin)

38mm X 26in hybrid built from scratch
http://www.rocketryonline.com/cgi-bin/goto/goto.cgi?url=http://www.HybridsHybr

ids.homestead.com&name=Bill%20Shamblin's%20Hybrid%20Page&db_id=1591

MOTORS/SOLID.

***simple solid motor
dakdude@geocities.com
http://www.geocities.com/SiliconValley/Network/7403/amateur.html#solids

*** bkosko1@HOME.COM (Brian Kosko)
O motor with 38 lbs propellant using: AP/Al/HTPB


MOTORS/ SOLID/SUGAR :

***Ray Calkins:
Large Sugar

 I am experimenting with Jimmy Yawn's sugar propellant process for
application to rocket motors of arbitrary large sizes.  My near-term
goal is a 8.5" x 5' motor, but larger versions are envisioned and
motor cases/nozzles have been sourced.

 Initial simulations are promising. Using AN they show
 comparable performance to AP/HTPB or AP/PSAN propellants, with a
 fraction the cost, handling, cleanup and environmental concerns. First
 (uninstrumented) test firings of 1" and 2" motors are expected in two
 weeks, doublings are expected every two weeks after that, culminating
 in testing of the large motor in two months.


***Sugar rockets

Richard Nakkas
http://members.aol.com/ricnakk/index.html

Everything you want about sugar rockets.
Cirrus rocket project, going up to 10 km.

***New recipes for sugar rockets

Jimmy Yawn
jyawn@sfcc.net
http://user.sfcc.net/jyawn/rcandy.htm


***NEAR
http://www.near.no/projects/sca_tm2/sca_tm2_Rocket_System.htm
Phenix 300A TM/FM
KN-Sorbitol 2 segments, 7.6 kg each class: O
Total impulse: 20500 N.s diameter I/O: 140/160mm
Statute: testing.

***NEAR
Phenix 150A, same as above in desing, 5 segments

MOTOR-ROCKETS/SOLID/ZnS :

***Zinc-Sulfur

http://users.cybercity.dk/~dko7904/Notes/znsbook.htm

ROCKETS/SOLID :

***CAR ( Cheap Access to Rocket)

Solid rockets for aerial photography and more.
Philippe REIGNER, France, reignier@high-sky.net
http://www.high-sky.net
Project:  Sky Eye, an "hand made" J/K class rocket for aerial photography.
Cooperation : sharing information and components (pieces like nozzle,
timers...).

'High-Sky.net' is a new web site created by Philippe Reignier of France. The
objective of the featured 'Sky Eye' project is to build from scratch a 2
meter rocket, powered by an amateur KN-Sucrose 1000 N.s solid propellant
motor,embarking a camera & a tape recorder,and fly it to an altitude of over
1000 meter, making a series of photos, and, of course, getting everything
back safely.
A lot of development work is presented on PVC rocket motors powered by
KN-Sucrose propellant. A novel method of thermal shaping the PVC tubing for
nozzle and bulkhead retention is described.
English."

***skyward@gmx.ch (Raphal Jubin)
Aerial photography in Switzerland
I've made two camera-rockets, that have given good results. I obtained nice
pictures of my region from an altitude of about 1500m (4900 feet).
I plan to put a video camera (small digital camcorder or wireless) into a
rocket, but I don't know if it will be the purpose of my level 2 rocket.
1b. I'll also improve airframe quality (strength/weight ratio), using new
materials like carbon fiber, to realize that goal.
2. Another great goal of mines is to attain very high altitudes (>10 Km).
I've to work with other people on that !

***NEAR
http://www.near.no/

Two stages solid AN-Mg-HTPB
first stage, diameter 310 mm total impulse: 588 000 N.s
Second stage: diam: 160mm total impulse 74 000 N.s

ROCKETS/HYBRID :

***Small hybrids

CEC, France (in French)
http://www.multimania.fr/general/pub/popup/perso.phtml?category=/science/unive

rs/astronautik&search_query=

Has build some rockets with Hypertek motors, look now at its own hybrid
motors.



ROCKETS/ ROCKOON :

*** Rockoon (rocket launched from balloon)

www.jpaerospace.com
help wanted at:
jpaerospace@jpaerospace.com
Project: Launch at 100 000 feets from a balloon and get up to 50 mi.

***Rockoon:

The da Vinci Project
 65 Carl Hall Road,Downsview Park,
Toronto, Ontario, Canada, M3K 2B6
 tel: 416.631.6540
 bfeeney@davinciproject.com
 http://www.davinciproject.com

The da Vinci Projects rocket will be air launched from a balloon from a
 minimum of 40,000 feet. A balloon is neither harder or easier than other
 forms of air launches. It is totally unique with it's own +'s and -'s. Our
 rocket is in the 6,000 lbs gross weight class.

ROCKETS/LIQUID.

***SPL
http/www.spl.ch
Send civilians into orbit at afordable price.
SPL  has a step by step program to get its final objective.


***ASRI
asri@asri.org.au
http://www.asri.org.au/ASRI/index.xml
Australian group, objective: to produce a small sat. launcher, the ausroc iv.


***Interorbital Systems
cyberplex@aol.com
http://www.interorbital.com/Sounding_Rockets.htm
liquid biprop. WFNA/Furfuryl, presure feed.
Done.
In project: Neptune, RLV TSTO 7000lbs. payload.
1st stage: WFNA/kerosene, 2nd. stage: LOX/CH4.



X-PRIZE TEAMS.

***Canyon Space Team
http://canyonspaceteam.freeservers.com
Looking for X-Prize
SubScale Super Sonic Vehicle
Rocket Engine Development

Propulsion : Pressure fed kerosene-oxygen engines
Ship Name : MICHELLE-B
Team Leader :Kent Ewing
Citizenship : USA, Bethesda, Maryland
Launch : Vertical takeoff under primary propulsion
Landing : Vertical/Soft with reduced engine power
Website : www.tgv-rockets.com

Propulsion : Turbofan and LOX/Kerosene Rockets
Ship Name : Thunderbird
Team Leader : Steven Bennett
Citizenship : United Kingdom, Cheshire, England
Launch : Jet Powered Veritcal Takeoff
Landing : Vertical Landing
Website : www.starchaser.co.uk

Propulsion : Undisclosed Rocket Power
Ship Name : Proteus
Team Leader : Burt Rutan
Citizenship : Mojave, California, USA
Launch : Air Launch
Landing : Undisclosed
Website : www.scaled.com


Propulsion : Rocket Power
Ship Name : Pathfinder
Team Leader : Mitchell Clap
Citizenship : Ann Arbor, MI, USA
Launch : Conventional Runway
Landing : Conventional Runway
Website : www.rocketplane.com

Propulsion : Jet and Rocket Engines
Ship Name : XVan2001
Team Leader : Len Cormier
Citizenship : Washington DC, USA
Launch : Conventional runway
Landing : Vertical landing
Website : www.tour2space.com

Propulsion : Rocket Powered, hybrid
Ship Name : Gauchito (The Little Cowboy)
Team Leader : Pablo DeLeon
Citizenship : Buenos Aires, Argentina
Launch : Vertical
Landing : Parachute

Propulsion : Jet and Rocket Engines
Ship Name : Cosmos Mariner
Team Leader : Dr. Norman LaFave
Citizenship : Houston, Texas, USA
Launch : Conventional Runway
Landing : Conventional Runway
Website : www.lonestarspace.com

Propulsion : LOX / Kerosene Rocket Engines
Ship Name : Eclipse Astroliner
Team Leader : Michael Kelly
Citizenship : San Bernadino, California, USA
Launch : Air Towed launch from a 747
Landing : Conventional Runway
Website : www.kellyspace.com

Propulsion : Throttlable Kerosene & Hydrogen
Peroxide Rocket Engine
Ship Name : Aurora
Team Leader : Ray Nielsen
Citizenship : Orlando, FL, USA
Launch Site : Conventional Runway
Landing : Conventional Runway
Website : www.funtechsystems.com

Propulsion : Liquid Oxygen/Kerosene System
Ship Name : daVinci
Team Leader : Brian Feeney
Citizenship : Canada
Launch Site : Air launch from hot air balloon
Landing : Parachute
Website : www.davinciproject.com


Propulsion : Rocket Engines
Ship Name : Cosmopolis XXI
Team Leader : Sergey Kostenko
Citizenship : Moscow, Russia
Launch Site : Undecided
Landing : Airplane style, or parachute
Website : www.cosmopolis21.ru

Propulsion : Methane & Liquid Oxygen
Ship Name : Kitten
Team Leader : James Hill
Citizenship : Oroville, Washington, USA
Launch : Conventional Runway
Landing : Conventional Runway
Website : www.thriftyspace.com

Propulsion : : Liquid Fuel Rocket Engine
Ship Name : Canadian Arrow
Team Leader : Geoffrey Sheerin
Citizenship : Ontario, Canada
Launch Site : Coastal location
Landing : Floatation in water
Website : www.canadianarrow.com

Propulsion : Jet and Rocket Engines
Ship Name : Ascender
Team Leader : David Ashford
Citizenship : United Kingdom, Bristol, England
Launch : Conventional Runway
Landing : Conventional Runway
Website : www.bristolspaceplanes.com

Propulsion : Rocket Engines
Ship Name : Lucky Seven
Team Leader : Mickey Badgero
Citizenship : USA
Launch : Rocket Powered Verical Launch
Landing : Parasail Landing

Propulsion : PA-E LOX / Kerosene Rocket Engine
Ship Name : PA-X2
Team Leader : Dr. Rick Fleeter
Citizenship : Herndon, Virginia, USA
Launch : Rocket Powered Verical Launch
Landing : Guided Deployable Parafoil Recovery
Website : www.aeroastro.com

Propulsion : Oxygen/Natural Gas Rocket
Ship Name : Advent
Team Leader : James Akkerman
Citizenship : Houston, Texas, USA
Launch Site : Water, Vertical
Landing : Water, Horizontal
Website : www.ghg.net/jimakkerman/



STUDIES :

***Studie of a modular mini launcher:

ttocs@GTE.NET (Aaron Smith):

t'll be heavy, ~1750 Kg for a 5 kg payload.  I chose N2O/Kerosene, single
tank,
seperated by a piston because it's just so simple.  I did not choose solids
because I want to have different thrust profiles for the different stages,
and that would be hard to do with identical modules with solids (with
N2O/Kerosene modules, you keep the same tanks and make different engines
for each stage).

The layout that is beginning to take shape is this: 7 modules, each with a
mass of 250 Kg.  These modules are 44 cm in diameter and around 220 cm
long.  The dry mass of one of these modules is around 37 Kg.  The tanks are
made from Al-Li alloy.

The first stage consists of 5 modules, the second stage and the third stage
each having 1 module.  On ignition, the engines on all 5 modules of the
first stage ignite, but only 2 modules are feeding these engines.  when
their fuel is exhausted, they are jettisoned, then the next 2 outboard
modules start feeding the engines.  When they are empty, they are
jettisonned and the core module burns until empty.  The second and third
stages continue and stage like a normal rocket.


***Hybrid project in Sweden.
trinity@passagen.se
Mattias

hybrid. Semi done on paper, no hardware
built yet. Have started an amaterur rocketry club in Sweden.

AIR USING SYSTEMS :

***Ramjet/Scramjet:

rockitman@SPRINTMAIL.COM (Anthony Colette)

6'' motor:
The ramjet I am currently working on is a modification of my first design.  I
initially started with a subsonic/transonic ramjet but the design evolved to
supersonic as I learned more about shock dynamics and the ramjet cycle.  A
subsonic design could work just fine, but given a cascade of  limitations that
only an amateur would be confronted with, I found the margin of  thrust
coefficient (reliability) would be significantly enhanced in the supersonic
region.

*** Ramjet sites:

Information from:Andrew Ritchie
apritchie@pacific.net.au

http://www.primenet.com/~kaiser/ramjets.htm

***Glen Olson:

"Garage Level Ramjet Construction":
http://home.networkone.net/~oglenn/trimode/rj-const.htm
http://home.networkone.net/~oglenn/trimode/3m-arla.htm

SUB-SCALE SYSTEMS :

***VTVL:
John Carmack

www.armadilloaerospace.com


X-PRIZE:

***Looking for X-prize

http://www.canadianarrow.com/

A V2-like rocket for suborbital trips.



COMPUTERS :

***dickcoyote@EARTHLINK.NET (John Horton)
Kn2Nozzle has been partly rewritten and I am pretty sure this it until v2.0.
Kn2Nozzle can be found at :
http://home.earthlink.net/~dickcoyote/
Please let me know what you think.


***BreadcrumbsXR software.
dickcoyote@EARTHLINK.NET (John Horton)

BreadcrumbsXR.  I do plan to store in the
database any data that is vital and not easily recreated.  Breadcrumbs is a
way to view, store, catalog and compare data and notes.

The HUGE dream is a database that is accessible by all members of the
community that holds all submitted  non-proprietary formulations and
characterizations. Imagine that you have a totally characterized
formulation, with Breadcrumbs you could then go look for correlations with
all if the other  formulations. I know and understand that we will never
know how a formulation will work until we try it, but if we had dozens or
hundreds of similar characterized formulations, don't you think that you
could save some time on your own development??? Now this phase of
BreadcrumbsXR would be a huge undertaking, but has to be worth thinking
about.
Ok so I have a dream. Is the dream of BreadcrumbsXR unrealistic for a
weekend programmer? I do not know but I plan to find out. I do know that for
"BreadcrumbsXR" to take shape in the way that I presently imagine it, I will
need some help from this group.

***Hybrid rocket software
Main features:
- Fuel regression rate, ox/fuel ratio, oxidizer mass flux and port diameter
etc. is calculated for the entire burn with user selectable time steps from
1 ms to 1 second.
- Calculates size of injector orifice(s).
- Calculates throat diameter as well as other dimensions of the nozzle and
estimates nozzle performance.
- Estimates performance of motor.
- Single or multiple fuel ports.
- Graphical representation of burn parameters
- Easy and efficient graphical user interface

Many more features are planned and I am working on implementing the new
features as soon as possible. Please try the program and send me
suggestions, comments, criticism and bug reports.

For more information and screen shots or for downloading the program:
http://www.lstud.ii.uib.no/~s0646/hdp.htm

**************
Some ideas to be taken:

^^^MHD: Magneto-HydroDynamics is a way to directly convert energy in a plume
rocket into electricity
MHD generators open up a new technological domain, from high temperature
plasma, to powerful lasers to test on the ground of plasma engines.

^^^Chemical lasers The hot temperature and shock wave in a rocket exhaust may
be used to drive a laser, another use for ground test motors. Such lasers
would be the basis element for laser launchers.

^^^Double, multi flux motors: High velocity gas at the nozzle tip may be
mixed with air, this may increase thrust... May be tested with marketed
motors.

^^^Hoovercraft with rocket pumped air support: this could the launching
element of an Horizontal Take-off system without landing gears. Same remark
as above.

^^^Liquid-gas or solid-gas motors : Thrust to weight would be under one, that
may be OK for  aircraft-like first stage with H Take off.

^^^Rocket powered helicopter with motors at blade tip "a la Roton" (first
desing) . Suitable for hybrid systems, including gox oxidizer.

^^^Rotojet: liquid motor on a wheel, the centrifugal force gives the
pressurization (Roton, second desing).

Kapton tank: Kapton a Du Pont product may be used with a cryogenic liquid. A
bolted aluminium tank would give the rigidity.

More ideas suitable for amateur projects? Let us know.

Yvan Bozzonetti.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 18959 invoked from network); 30 Jul 2001 15:28:23 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 30 Jul 2001 15:28:23 -0000
Received: (qmail 3204 invoked from network); 30 Jul 2001 15:28:48 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 30 Jul 2001 15:28:48 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA30290; Mon, 30 Jul 2001 08:24:39 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 89276 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 30 Jul 2001 15:23:08          +0000
Received: from castor.ridgenet.net (IDENT:root@castor.ridgenet.net          [199.120.150.29]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA30270          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 30 Jul 2001 08:23:08 -0700
Received: from kristinscomp (pm168.ridgenet.net [204.154.246.168]) by          castor.ridgenet.net (8.11.0/8.11.0) with SMTP id f6UFFnS23395; Mon,          30 Jul 2001 08:15:49 -0700
References: <LPBBKJMJEOFKAMFJJNNHMEALCGAA.landofgrey@gnc.net>             <3B64F06A.57EBBE8F@gj.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <001f01c1190c$9a575080$1b30fea9@kristinscomp>
Date:         Mon, 30 Jul 2001 08:30:44 -0700
Reply-To: "Kristin & David Hall" <thehalls@RIDGENET.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Kristin & David Hall" <thehalls@RIDGENET.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Plywood Tubing
Comments: To: Carlo Godel <regiaero@GJ.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

> A bullet is a ballistic missile once fired. So it must be a ballistic
> missile

Not so.  Or at least, not in the accepted industry terms.  The dictionary
may define just about anything that flies as a missile, but the industry
basically says, "If it ain't guided, it ain't a missile - it's a rocket!"

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 13120 invoked from network); 30 Jul 2001 17:45:30 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 30 Jul 2001 17:45:30 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 29651 invoked from network); 30 Jul 2001 17:47:01 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 30 Jul 2001 17:47:01 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA31507; Mon, 30 Jul 2001 10:42:15 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 89425 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 30 Jul 2001 17:40:43          +0000
Received: from zcars0m9.ca.nortel.com ([47.129.242.157]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA31486 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Mon,          30 Jul 2001 10:40:42 -0700
Received: from zcars04f.ca.nortel.com (zcars04f.ca.nortel.com [47.129.242.57])          by zcars0m9.ca.nortel.com (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f6UHdn919027          for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Mon, 30 Jul 2001 13:39:49 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from rftzy232.ca.nortel.com by zcars04f.ca.nortel.com; Mon, 30 Jul          2001 13:39:48 -0400
Received: from nortelnetworks.com (acart13v.ca.nortel.com [47.129.8.171]) by          rftzy232.ca.nortel.com with SMTP (Microsoft Exchange Internet Mail          Service Version 5.5.2653.13) id NKPL56R7; Mon, 30 Jul 2001 13:39:36          -0400
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.77 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.19 i686)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Orig: <mleech@nortelnetworks.com>
Message-ID:  <3B659C4F.1B69C284@nortelnetworks.com>
Date:         Mon, 30 Jul 2001 13:41:35 -0400
Reply-To: "Marcus Leech" <mleech@NORTELNETWORKS.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Marcus Leech" <mleech@NORTELNETWORKS.COM>
Organization: Nortel Networks: Information Systems
Subject:      [AR] 22mm 'D' hybrid motor attempt
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

With only a few minutes left in our launch window, I attempted to fly my
22mm 'D'
  hybrid at CFD Mountainview this past weekend, as part of the
"Midsummers Archer"
  HPR/Model rocket event.

I filled the motor, and it filled nearly instantly, with the vent plume
coming out
  the side causing the rocket to spin around the launch rod about 270
degrees, before,
  I guess, the nylon fill hose prevented it from going any further.  I
decided to try
  and launch anyway.  I got a burnthrough without ignition, and at the
same moment, the
  airframe pressurised with enough N2O to cause the payload section to
pop off, which
  triggered the M.A.D.  No damage, but I think that for rockets this
small on hybrids,
  a ventless approach will be preferrable--the side thrust from the vent
gasses was
  much higher than I was expecting.  The rocket for this test was only
about 100g
  of airframe.

So, I'll be replacing the vent fitting with a nylon plug, and try again
in the next
  couple of days from my own launch field.  I'll use the fill-dump-fill
approach to
  get the tank full.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 23619 invoked from network); 30 Jul 2001 20:20:48 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 30 Jul 2001 20:20:48 -0000
Received: (qmail 3266 invoked from network); 30 Jul 2001 20:21:48 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 30 Jul 2001 20:21:48 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA32411; Mon, 30 Jul 2001 13:14:36 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 89557 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 30 Jul 2001 20:12:55          +0000
Received: from pike.rtlogic.com (firewall.rtlogic.com [206.247.196.122]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA32388 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 30 Jul 2001 13:12:55 -0700
Received: from RTLWS18 ([192.168.3.14]) by pike.rtlogic.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with          SMTP id OAA18727 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 30 Jul 2001 14:12:24          -0600
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <FGEJKGFBGDNDMLOJJDPOIECBCEAA.punder@rtlogic.com>
Date:         Mon, 30 Jul 2001 14:14:08 -0600
Reply-To: "Patrick Underwood" <punder@RTLOGIC.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Patrick Underwood" <punder@RTLOGIC.COM>
Subject:      [AR] Rocket Racing
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <3B659C4F.1B69C284@nortelnetworks.com>

>From spaceref.com:

PRESS RELEASE
Date Released: Saturday, July 28, 2001
X-Rocket, LLC

Rocketship Will Tour Airshow Circuit in 2002

X-Rocket, LLC announced today that the world's first rocketship act is now
available for airshow booking and sponsorship. "The XCOR EZ-Rocket will tour
the airshow circuit during 2002, giving millions of Americans their first
chance to see a fully reusable, piloted rocketship in action," said X-Rocket
president Edward Wright. "X-Rocket is proud to bring this act to the
American public during the 2002 airshow season."

The EZ-Rocket, built by Mojave, CA-based XCOR Aerospace, made its first test
flight on July 21, 2001, under the command of test pilot Dick Rutan. Rutan,
who won aviation's highest honors by piloting the Voyager on its historic
round-the-world flight in1986, said the EZ-Rocket performed smoothly and the
first test flight was a resounding success. Flight testing will continue
when the rocketship returns to Mojave from Oshkosh, WI, where it is
currently on static display at one of the nation's largest airshows,
AirVenture 2001.

Speaking at an AirVenture press conference, Wright congratulated Dick Rutan
and XCOR Aerospace on their accomplishment. "X-Rocket is proud to have
contributed to this project, and we are pleased to see our investment begin
to pay off."

Wright said that a number of major airshows have already indicated their
interest in presenting a rocketship act. Wright urged interested shows and
businesses to contact X-Rocket as soon as possible. "We provide one-stop
shopping for all your EZ-Rocket performance, sponsorship, and merchandise
needs."

X-Rocket, LLC believes that rocket racing can become a major driver for the
development of reusable rocket technology and sees the XCOR EZ-Rocket as the
first step toward that goal. "Prior to World War II, air racing was the
major driver for the development of aviation technology," Wright said.
X-Rocket would like to see rocket racing beginning with a vertical drag race
to 100,000 feet. "The 100,000-foot time to climb record has been held by a
Russian MiG-25 variant since the 1970's," Wright said. "We think it's time
to bring that record home to the United States. The XCOR EZ-Rocket is the
first step toward the development of such racers - racers which, in turn,
will develop the technology that enables a new era of routine, affordable
space travel for science, business, and personal leisure."

-- 30 --

Contact:
Edward Wright
(425) 830-3571
press@racing-rockets.org

X-Rocket, LLC (aka The Experimental Rocket Racing Association, LLC)
9609 NE 195th Circle #L-11
Bothell, WA 98011
marketing@racing-rockets.org
(425) 830-3571

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 14634 invoked from network); 30 Jul 2001 20:41:24 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 30 Jul 2001 20:41:24 -0000
Received: (qmail 864 invoked from network); 30 Jul 2001 20:43:45 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 30 Jul 2001 20:43:45 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA32522; Mon, 30 Jul 2001 13:37:19 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 89571 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 30 Jul 2001 20:35:37          +0000
Received: from smtp02.mail.onemain.com (SMTP-OUT003.ONEMAIN.COM          [63.208.208.73]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id NAA32502          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 30 Jul 2001 13:35:36 -0700
Received: (qmail 26269 invoked from network); 30 Jul 2001 20:34:19 -0000
Received: from ilqui01-211-123.dialup.dstream.net (HELO pentiumiii1g)          ([216.73.211.123]) (envelope-sender <hugh@rnet.com>) by          smtp02.mail.onemain.com (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; 30 Jul 2001 20:34:19 -0000
References:  <LPBBKHPJIOKEICHDGDOPEEGICDAA.tim@sumrallworks.com>              <000601c11879$a511c840$83b056d1@oemcomputer>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <003401c11937$83031ec0$0800a8c0@pentiumiii1g>
Date:         Mon, 30 Jul 2001 15:37:17 -0500
Reply-To: "Hugh Prescott" <hugh@RNET.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Hugh Prescott" <hugh@RNET.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Plywood Tubing
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Greetings

Did some searching and this may be the basis for the plywood ICBM

The "ICBM" in question was included in a May Day parade which more or less
shocked the Americans and our allies. First time anybody actually showed one
to the public, not a common Russian trait.

They had a "near working / working" ICBM but it was too fragile/ valuable/
secret to haul in the parade

sooo

they built a plywood/metal/etc. dummy and a hauler for the May Day parade.
Was apparently was very good model / replica that fooled us into thinking
they had a much more advanced program than we had and that they were
transportable.

Hugh


----- Original Message -----
From: Robert <OlympusMons@MINDSPRING.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Sunday, July 29, 2001 4:58 PM
Subject: Re: [AR] Plywood Tubing


> This post especially caught my eye because I read that the USSR's first
> ICBM, the R1, was made out of wood. I was wondering about amateurs and/or
> fledgling space companies resorting to such a design.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 10100 invoked from network); 30 Jul 2001 20:55:29 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 30 Jul 2001 20:55:29 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 5906 invoked from network); 30 Jul 2001 20:50:18 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 30 Jul 2001 20:50:18 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA32623; Mon, 30 Jul 2001 13:45:32 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 89585 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 30 Jul 2001 20:44:10          +0000
Received: from mail.aros.net (mail.aros.net [207.173.16.20]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA32596 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon,          30 Jul 2001 13:44:10 -0700
Received: from biomicro.com ([208.187.122.40]) by mail.aros.net (8.11.3/8.9.3)          with ESMTP id f6UKi9p50358 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 30 Jul          2001 14:44:09 -0600 (MDT)
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.77 [en] (Win98; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <LPBBKHPJIOKEICHDGDOPEEGICDAA.tim@sumrallworks.com>            <000601c11879$a511c840$83b056d1@oemcomputer>            <003401c11937$83031ec0$0800a8c0@pentiumiii1g>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B65C793.FB1302D1@biomicro.com>
Date:         Mon, 30 Jul 2001 14:46:11 -0600
Reply-To: "Mark K. Spute" <mks@BIOMICRO.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Mark K. Spute" <mks@BIOMICRO.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Plywood Tubing
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

It seems to me the basis for all this came from the V2.  My
understanding is, (and I could be wrong) that the V2 had a plywood frame
that supported the propellant tanks, and the external skin.  Engine
mounts were metal, but bolted to the plywood frame.

Wish I could find that book on the V2 again.



Hugh Prescott wrote:
>
> Greetings
>
> Did some searching and this may be the basis for the plywood ICBM
>
> The "ICBM" in question was included in a May Day parade which more or less
> shocked the Americans and our allies. First time anybody actually showed one
> to the public, not a common Russian trait.
>
> They had a "near working / working" ICBM but it was too fragile/ valuable/
> secret to haul in the parade
>
> sooo
>
> they built a plywood/metal/etc. dummy and a hauler for the May Day parade.
> Was apparently was very good model / replica that fooled us into thinking
> they had a much more advanced program than we had and that they were
> transportable.
>
> Hugh
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Robert <OlympusMons@MINDSPRING.COM>
> To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
> Sent: Sunday, July 29, 2001 4:58 PM
> Subject: Re: [AR] Plywood Tubing
>
> > This post especially caught my eye because I read that the USSR's first
> > ICBM, the R1, was made out of wood. I was wondering about amateurs and/or
> > fledgling space companies resorting to such a design.

--
Mark K. Spute
Senior Research Engineer
BioMicro Systems Inc.

KD7IWE,  RRS

"It is difficult to say what is impossible, for the dream of yesterday
is the hope of today and the reality of tomorrow."
     Dr. Robert H. Goddard

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 10712 invoked from network); 30 Jul 2001 21:31:16 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 30 Jul 2001 21:31:16 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 17687 invoked from network); 30 Jul 2001 21:33:37 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 30 Jul 2001 21:33:37 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA00412; Mon, 30 Jul 2001 14:28:43 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 89636 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 30 Jul 2001 21:27:10          +0000
Received: from melete.ch.intel.com (chfdns02.ch.intel.com [143.182.246.25]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA00386 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 30 Jul 2001 14:27:10 -0700
Received: from snmeng1.rr.intel.com (snmeng1.rr.intel.com [128.215.231.11]) by          melete.ch.intel.com (8.9.1a+p1/8.9.1/d: relay.m4,v 1.41 2001/07/09          21:06:22 root Exp $) with ESMTP id VAA15095; Mon, 30 Jul 2001          21:27:08 GMT
Received: from snmeng30.rr.intel.com (snmeng30.rr.intel.com [128.215.52.76]) by          snmeng1.rr.intel.com (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id PAA25214; Mon, 30          Jul 2001 15:24:18 -0600 (MDT)
Received: from snmeng30.rr.intel.com (snmeng30.rr.intel.com [128.215.52.76]) by          snmeng30.rr.intel.com (8.9.1a/8.9.1/d: client.m4,v 1.3 1998/09/29          16:36:11 sedayao Exp sedayao $) with SMTP id PAA01588; Mon, 30 Jul          2001 15:24:14 -0600 (MDT)
X-Mailer: dtmail 1.2.1 CDE Version 1.2.1 SunOS 5.6 sun4m sparc
X-Sun-Text-Type: ascii
Message-ID:  <200107302124.PAA01588@snmeng30.rr.intel.com>
Date:         Mon, 30 Jul 2001 15:24:14 -0600
Reply-To: "Ray Calkins 100660207" <rcalkins@SNMENG1.RR.INTEL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Ray Calkins 100660207" <rcalkins@SNMENG1.RR.INTEL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Plywood Tubing
Comments: To: mks@BIOMICRO.COM
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Mark wrote:
> It seems to me the basis for all this came from the V2.  My
> understanding is, (and I could be wrong) that the V2 had a plywood frame
> that supported the propellant tanks, and the external skin.  Engine
> mounts were metal, but bolted to the plywood frame.

We've got a few rusting V2 hulks around White Sands Missile Range.  It's
difficult to tell after all these years, but it looks like they are full steel
truss structures, skinned with riveted steel.  Next time I have a chance, I'll
take some pics and put them up on the site.  They certainly have steel interior
supports, but it is unknown whether they had wood as well.  I think it would be
highly likely.

> Wish I could find that book on the V2 again.
What was the title or author?  Might be worthwhile to get on Inter-Library Loan!

Ray Calkins
rcalkins@snmeng1.rr.intel.com           raymond.calkins@intel.com
"My opinions are my own, and do not reflect those of my employer."


From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 242 invoked from network); 30 Jul 2001 21:50:24 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 30 Jul 2001 21:50:24 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 1683 invoked from network); 30 Jul 2001 21:52:24 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 30 Jul 2001 21:52:24 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA00519; Mon, 30 Jul 2001 14:48:22 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 89656 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 30 Jul 2001 21:46:54          +0000
Received: from inet03.citec.qld.gov.au (firewall-user@inet03.citec.qld.gov.au          [203.5.10.10]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA00498          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.edu>; Mon, 30 Jul 2001 14:46:53 -0700
Received: by inet03.citec.qld.gov.au; id HAA00309; Tue, 31 Jul 2001 07:46:51          +1000 (EST)
Received: from citec.com.au(pcux.citec.qld.gov.au 147.132.17.12) by          inet03.citec.qld.gov.au via smap (V2.0) id xma000279; Tue, 31 Jul 01          07:46:48 +1000
Received: from CITEC-Message_Server by citec.com.au with Novell_GroupWise; Tue,          31 Jul 2001 07:46:27 +1000
X-Mailer: Novell GroupWise 5.5.4
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by itc.uci.edu id OAA00499
Message-ID:  <sb666253.077@citec.com.au>
Date:         Tue, 31 Jul 2001 07:46:23 +1000
Reply-To: "Des Bromilow" <Des.Bromilow@CITEC.COM.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Des Bromilow" <Des.Bromilow@CITEC.COM.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Plywood Tubing
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Don't know which V2 book he was referring to, but every rmr denizen knows Peter Alway (Saturn press - author of Rockets of the World) has a history of the V2 book in his offerings.

HTH,
Des

>>> Ray Calkins 100660207 <rcalkins@snmeng1.rr.intel.com> 31/07/01 7:24:14 am >>>
Mark wrote:
> It seems to me the basis for all this came from the V2.  My
> understanding is, (and I could be wrong) that the V2 had a plywood frame
> that supported the propellant tanks, and the external skin.  Engine
> mounts were metal, but bolted to the plywood frame.

We've got a few rusting V2 hulks around White Sands Missile Range.  It's
difficult to tell after all these years, but it looks like they are full steel
truss structures, skinned with riveted steel.  Next time I have a chance, I'll
take some pics and put them up on the site.  They certainly have steel interior
supports, but it is unknown whether they had wood as well.  I think it would be
highly likely.

> Wish I could find that book on the V2 again.
What was the title or author?  Might be worthwhile to get on Inter-Library Loan!

Ray Calkins
rcalkins@snmeng1.rr.intel.com           raymond.calkins@intel.com
"My opinions are my own, and do not reflect those of my employer."

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 15032 invoked from network); 30 Jul 2001 23:32:33 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 30 Jul 2001 23:32:33 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 2412 invoked from network); 30 Jul 2001 23:34:56 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 30 Jul 2001 23:34:56 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA00971; Mon, 30 Jul 2001 16:29:37 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 89690 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 30 Jul 2001 23:27:57          +0000
Received: from mail.aros.net (mail.aros.net [207.173.16.20]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA00951 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon,          30 Jul 2001 16:27:56 -0700
Received: from biomicro.com ([208.187.122.40]) by mail.aros.net (8.11.3/8.9.3)          with ESMTP id f6UNRu908855 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 30 Jul          2001 17:27:56 -0600 (MDT)
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.77 [en] (Win98; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <sb666253.077@citec.com.au>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B65EDF6.41DE7E5B@biomicro.com>
Date:         Mon, 30 Jul 2001 17:29:58 -0600
Reply-To: "Mark K. Spute" <mks@BIOMICRO.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Mark K. Spute" <mks@BIOMICRO.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Plywood Tubing
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

The book was an old book I ran across about 10 years ago, hidden in the
stacks at the university library.  It was sort of an engineering history
of the V2, and had all kinds of drawings and diagrams of the
construction of the V2, plus construction details AND it had a copy of
the original field manual (in german of course) detailing how to service
it, set it up, and launch it.

Unfortunately, I have been back there looking for it, and can't find
it.  I don't remember the title, or the author, or anything.  It was a
small book, about 8-1/2 inches tall I recall, and it seems about 200
pages including the manual.

Does anyone know anything about it.  I'd love to look at it again.  I
didn't know enough then to even ask the right questions.




Des Bromilow wrote:
>
> Don't know which V2 book he was referring to, but every rmr denizen knows Peter Alway (Saturn press - author of Rockets of the World) has a history of the V2 book in his offerings.
>
> HTH,
> Des
>
> >>> Ray Calkins 100660207 <rcalkins@snmeng1.rr.intel.com> 31/07/01 7:24:14 am >>>
> Mark wrote:
> > It seems to me the basis for all this came from the V2.  My
> > understanding is, (and I could be wrong) that the V2 had a plywood frame
> > that supported the propellant tanks, and the external skin.  Engine
> > mounts were metal, but bolted to the plywood frame.
>
> We've got a few rusting V2 hulks around White Sands Missile Range.  It's
> difficult to tell after all these years, but it looks like they are full steel
> truss structures, skinned with riveted steel.  Next time I have a chance, I'll
> take some pics and put them up on the site.  They certainly have steel interior
> supports, but it is unknown whether they had wood as well.  I think it would be
> highly likely.
>
> > Wish I could find that book on the V2 again.
> What was the title or author?  Might be worthwhile to get on Inter-Library Loan!
>
> Ray Calkins
> rcalkins@snmeng1.rr.intel.com           raymond.calkins@intel.com
> "My opinions are my own, and do not reflect those of my employer."

--
Mark K. Spute
Senior Research Engineer
BioMicro Systems Inc.

KD7IWE,  RRS

"It is difficult to say what is impossible, for the dream of yesterday
is the hope of today and the reality of tomorrow."
     Dr. Robert H. Goddard

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 20616 invoked from network); 30 Jul 2001 23:41:19 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 30 Jul 2001 23:41:19 -0000
Received: (qmail 5594 invoked from network); 30 Jul 2001 23:43:17 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 30 Jul 2001 23:43:17 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA01049; Mon, 30 Jul 2001 16:37:49 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 89704 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 30 Jul 2001 23:36:27          +0000
Received: from castor.ridgenet.net (IDENT:root@castor.ridgenet.net          [199.120.150.29]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA01030          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 30 Jul 2001 16:36:27 -0700
Received: from kristinscomp (pm078.ridgenet.net [204.154.246.78]) by          castor.ridgenet.net (8.11.0/8.11.0) with SMTP id f6UNT0S09533; Mon,          30 Jul 2001 16:29:00 -0700
References:  <200107302124.PAA01588@snmeng30.rr.intel.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <001501c11951$8110ece0$1b30fea9@kristinscomp>
Date:         Mon, 30 Jul 2001 16:43:57 -0700
Reply-To: "Kristin & David Hall" <thehalls@RIDGENET.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Kristin & David Hall" <thehalls@RIDGENET.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Plywood Tubing
Comments: To: Ray Calkins 100660207 <rcalkins@SNMENG1.RR.INTEL.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Been watching this thread and have decided to throw in my $0.02....

While I'm unaware of plywood being used for major structural work, plywood
most certainly has been (and still is) used in military systems for things
like "a big board to strap all the gyros/etc. down to".  Sorry, no cite,
just something I've seen with my own two eyes.

--
Dave and/or Kristin Hall

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 881 invoked from network); 31 Jul 2001 01:41:31 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 31 Jul 2001 01:41:31 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 25361 invoked from network); 31 Jul 2001 01:43:53 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 31 Jul 2001 01:43:53 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA02381; Mon, 30 Jul 2001 18:35:09 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 89826 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 31 Jul 2001 01:33:16          +0000
Received: from femail39.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail39.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.254.60.33]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA02302          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 30 Jul 2001 18:23:16 -0700
Received: from coastnet.com ([24.77.48.219]) by femail39.sdc1.sfba.home.com          (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20 201-229-121-120-20010223) with ESMTP id          <20010731012310.KBSK6298.femail39.sdc1.sfba.home.com@coastnet.com>          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 30 Jul 2001 18:23:10 -0700
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.61 [en]C-AtHome0407  (Win95; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <F10FkuutSgcOrBLSAQV000091f2@hotmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B660844.F30EF288@coastnet.com>
Date:         Mon, 30 Jul 2001 18:22:12 -0700
Reply-To: "Ross Borden" <rborden@COASTNET.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Ross Borden" <rborden@COASTNET.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] stump remover
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Matt Faulkner wrote:
>
> I went to look for stump remover today, but the container did not mention
> potassium nitrate; are there different types of stump remover, or are they
> all (more or less) good for making rocket fuel?
> It just seemed odd that any container that should contain an oxidizer would
> fail to clearly state as such.

We sell stump remover in my family's feed store and there's no
indication on the label what the active ingredient is (it IS potassium
nitrate.)  However, I wouldn't bother with it because of the price.
It's about $21/kg versus $1.60/kg for the large, fertilizer grade bags.
Any feed store in your area should have it.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 982 invoked from network); 31 Jul 2001 02:16:39 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 31 Jul 2001 02:16:39 -0000
Received: (qmail 19159 invoked from network); 31 Jul 2001 02:18:39 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 31 Jul 2001 02:18:39 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA02613; Mon, 30 Jul 2001 19:14:11 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 89851 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 31 Jul 2001 02:12:41          +0000
Received: from yellowdog.featuretech.com ([63.121.63.69]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA02592 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon,          30 Jul 2001 19:12:40 -0700
Received: from duncan (sdsl-64-139-32-247.dsl.sjc.megapath.net [64.139.32.247])          by yellowdog.featuretech.com with SMTP (Microsoft Exchange Internet          Mail Service Version 5.5.2448.0) id PBMT4AJ3; Mon, 30 Jul 2001          19:24:07 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <NEBBLECGKLLOLFCCBNPECENJDBAA.duncan@transim.com>
Date:         Mon, 30 Jul 2001 19:12:16 -0700
Reply-To: "Duncan McDonald" <duncan@TRANSIM.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Duncan McDonald" <duncan@TRANSIM.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] ARocket projects Jully 2001
Comments: To: Azt28@AOL.COM
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <69.18a6ca9d.2896d3da@aol.com>

Good job Yvan! Nice to see an overview of some of the projects going on.
Personally, I would like to see it formatted as an HTML document so that it
is easier to scan and read, but it is a good resource in any event. I hope
you can keep it going every month.

Duncan

-----Original Message-----
From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@itc.uci.edu]On
Behalf Of Azt28@AOL.COM
Sent: Monday, July 30, 2001 8:15 AM
To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
Subject: [AR] ARocket projects Jully 2001


***************
*ARocket-Projects*
***************

I plan to send to ARocket nearly every month that list of projects or ideas.
Some authors have been informed, other no.
If you want to be removed from that list, tell me.
If you want to change something, tell me too.
If you are not on that list and want to be here, tell me, best: send me a
resume of your project..

The purpose of that monthly message is to give to readers of ARocket a taste
of what is done here. It is a way to mount collaborative works.

To be in that list, you must have build something, hardware or software or
project to do so. If you are on topic on ARocket you are on this message.

I hope you'll find useful elements or components for you own project, may be
you'll find interesting to fuse it with another... If launching a project is
too much for your free time or free money, look at a similar idea and
contact
the authors. You may find more practical to enter in a collaborative
undertaking.

Some hints:
- The most interesting projects are not to launch a satellite, this is too
much for the present state of art in amateur rocketry.
- Look at components, for example simple turbopump, nobody ask for the SSME
system! then trade them against other products made by ARocket members.
- Assume at least half of all projects will not be completed, so don't worry
if someone else has a project similar to your own.
- If there are three similar projects underway, look at something else, your
effort would be wasted here.
- Never think about making a single element, if you produce a pyrovalve a
anithing else, think about "mass producing" it.
- X-prize is not the way to make money from rocket activities: Look at an
element, for example ablative nozzles, test them, use them, swap some units
against other elements and when some tens will have flown, market your
product.

%%%%%%%%%%
Jully issue:

I have included a list of most X-Prize projects.  Strictly speaking, they
are
not amateur projects, neverthless, some contenders may be interested to sell
some rocket parts to amateurs.I have sent some request along that way to
some
would-be space operators, the answers cover a broad spectrum: The millenium
project was interested, Truax would work only with registered corporations,
XCOR want to sell plain iron at gold price... Try them and others, after
some
enquiries, some may figure out that there is a market for them and a service
for amateurs.

%%%%%%%%%%%
There is the  projects batch:

FACILITIES:

***Ray Calkins, Terry Spath, Brian Kosko, Dave Johnson, Ken Goldstein,
Rodney Earwood:

 Upgrades to the aRocket static test stand.
 Completed:  10,000 horizontal stand,

 High speed computer data collection and control systems,
 bunker, berm, initial testing

 Undone:  overhead protection for bunker, generator shelter, perimenter
 fencing, onsite secure storage and LEUP
2,000 lb vertical stand. Estimated completion:  14JUL2001.
Materials acquired, initial design approved.

***Ray Calkins, Ken Goldstein:

Filament winder
Completed:  initial analysis
Next step:  framework construction
Undone:  adapt motors, linkages, power supplies, control systems, write
computer control code.
Status:  project on hold while I get a means to transport materials.

***Big winder:

The objective is to produce large parts from carbon-epoxy composites, for
example nozzles. There are 3 elements:
1/ A rotating platform for element up to 2.5 m in diameter and up to 3 m
high.
2/ An owen to cure element up to 1 m in dia. and 1 m high, help wanted for
the thermal regulator. This system (1 and 2)is near complete.
3/ A big winder for tanks up to 2.5 m in dia. and 35m long. This system will
be near the sea with a channel nearby so that big elements can be moved
without using roads.
There is the field, but no more up to now.

***David Crisalli
see: http://www.rrs.org
Big Static test stand:
Reaction Research Society, MTA, South California
Test to up to 50 000 lbs
Some hardware and hours of work wanted.

***Mike Cohan
mdc@geosciencebook.com
Construction of a small wind tunnel
help wanted

MOTORS / LIQUID:

***Big CH4-LOX motor.

Yvan Bozzonetti
azt28@aol.com

The "quantum jump" motor is a 15 000 + lbs thrust motor with ablative
chamber
cooling
and pintle injector so it can readily be adapted to nearly any F/O. After
some tests, the objective is to produce it in small batch and sell/swap the
full motor or components world wide for amateur projects. You may enter the
project and produce one element for example. You'll be then the source for
that element, a way to start a rocket business.

***Arocket open source liquid motor
Jay
kc2csh@JUNO.COM
 I would like to propose a joint development and production project for
an Arocket open source liquid motor.
  In substance, what I really propose is a set of well documented parts,
like an erector set, much like a commercial RMS case is for solids.

  I would propose that the jointly developed and produced motor be
designed as a H2O2 bi-prop with enough design flexibility to permit both
a wide range of experimentation and also so optomization as a  componant
basis for more ambitious projects.  The objective is to get a somewhat
optomized set of parts that can be implemented in such a way as to
facilitate a wide range of configurations and propellants, including
perhaps as peroxide monopropellant..

  I would suggest some basic parameters:

        1.  Somewhere between 6-8" airframe in size.
        2.  Designed to work with 70% peroxide or up.
        3.  A pre-cat chamber of some type.
        4.  prevision for an optional ignitor slug of some sort, like a
model
rocket motor.
        5. Provision for optional liquid injection, fuel or cat, in
                 both cat and combustion chambers
         6. Provision for adequate cooling for sustained operation of
perhaps
60 seconds.
        7. Provision to operate as a hybrid by putting a solid fuel in the
combustion chamber.

  I would also propose that we attempt to push the envelope in terms of
performance, and shoot to develop a set of componants useful for a more
ambitious undertaking.

MOTORS / HYBRIDS:

***Ray Calkins, Terry Spath, Brian Kosko, Ken Goldstein, Rodney Earwood,
Dave
Johnson.:

HPR N2O to LOx hybrid conversion
Completed:  evaluation and planning, dewar conversion LN2->LO2,
fill/vent/drain
plumbing & valving, nitrogen pressurization adaptor

Next step:  hydrostatic and water flow tests

Undone:  fill system needs only lox cleaning and minor fitting, will be
completed tonight, vertical test stand begun.


***FAR (germain group)

http://www.optipoint.com/far/gbhome.htm

working on hybrids, turbopump and X-Prize.

***wshamblin@ac.net (Bill Shamblin)

38mm X 26in hybrid built from scratch
http://www.rocketryonline.com/cgi-bin/goto/goto.cgi?url=http://www.HybridsHy
br

ids.homestead.com&name=Bill%20Shamblin's%20Hybrid%20Page&db_id=1591

MOTORS/SOLID.

***simple solid motor
dakdude@geocities.com
http://www.geocities.com/SiliconValley/Network/7403/amateur.html#solids

*** bkosko1@HOME.COM (Brian Kosko)
O motor with 38 lbs propellant using: AP/Al/HTPB


MOTORS/ SOLID/SUGAR :

***Ray Calkins:
Large Sugar

 I am experimenting with Jimmy Yawn's sugar propellant process for
application to rocket motors of arbitrary large sizes.  My near-term
goal is a 8.5" x 5' motor, but larger versions are envisioned and
motor cases/nozzles have been sourced.

 Initial simulations are promising. Using AN they show
 comparable performance to AP/HTPB or AP/PSAN propellants, with a
 fraction the cost, handling, cleanup and environmental concerns. First
 (uninstrumented) test firings of 1" and 2" motors are expected in two
 weeks, doublings are expected every two weeks after that, culminating
 in testing of the large motor in two months.


***Sugar rockets

Richard Nakkas
http://members.aol.com/ricnakk/index.html

Everything you want about sugar rockets.
Cirrus rocket project, going up to 10 km.

***New recipes for sugar rockets

Jimmy Yawn
jyawn@sfcc.net
http://user.sfcc.net/jyawn/rcandy.htm


***NEAR
http://www.near.no/projects/sca_tm2/sca_tm2_Rocket_System.htm
Phenix 300A TM/FM
KN-Sorbitol 2 segments, 7.6 kg each class: O
Total impulse: 20500 N.s diameter I/O: 140/160mm
Statute: testing.

***NEAR
Phenix 150A, same as above in desing, 5 segments

MOTOR-ROCKETS/SOLID/ZnS :

***Zinc-Sulfur

http://users.cybercity.dk/~dko7904/Notes/znsbook.htm

ROCKETS/SOLID :

***CAR ( Cheap Access to Rocket)

Solid rockets for aerial photography and more.
Philippe REIGNER, France, reignier@high-sky.net
http://www.high-sky.net
Project:  Sky Eye, an "hand made" J/K class rocket for aerial photography.
Cooperation : sharing information and components (pieces like nozzle,
timers...).

'High-Sky.net' is a new web site created by Philippe Reignier of France. The
objective of the featured 'Sky Eye' project is to build from scratch a 2
meter rocket, powered by an amateur KN-Sucrose 1000 N.s solid propellant
motor,embarking a camera & a tape recorder,and fly it to an altitude of over
1000 meter, making a series of photos, and, of course, getting everything
back safely.
A lot of development work is presented on PVC rocket motors powered by
KN-Sucrose propellant. A novel method of thermal shaping the PVC tubing for
nozzle and bulkhead retention is described.
English."

***skyward@gmx.ch (Raphal Jubin)
Aerial photography in Switzerland
I've made two camera-rockets, that have given good results. I obtained nice
pictures of my region from an altitude of about 1500m (4900 feet).
I plan to put a video camera (small digital camcorder or wireless) into a
rocket, but I don't know if it will be the purpose of my level 2 rocket.
1b. I'll also improve airframe quality (strength/weight ratio), using new
materials like carbon fiber, to realize that goal.
2. Another great goal of mines is to attain very high altitudes (>10 Km).
I've to work with other people on that !

***NEAR
http://www.near.no/

Two stages solid AN-Mg-HTPB
first stage, diameter 310 mm total impulse: 588 000 N.s
Second stage: diam: 160mm total impulse 74 000 N.s

ROCKETS/HYBRID :

***Small hybrids

CEC, France (in French)
http://www.multimania.fr/general/pub/popup/perso.phtml?category=/science/uni
ve

rs/astronautik&search_query=

Has build some rockets with Hypertek motors, look now at its own hybrid
motors.



ROCKETS/ ROCKOON :

*** Rockoon (rocket launched from balloon)

www.jpaerospace.com
help wanted at:
jpaerospace@jpaerospace.com
Project: Launch at 100 000 feets from a balloon and get up to 50 mi.

***Rockoon:

The da Vinci Project
 65 Carl Hall Road,Downsview Park,
Toronto, Ontario, Canada, M3K 2B6
 tel: 416.631.6540
 bfeeney@davinciproject.com
 http://www.davinciproject.com

The da Vinci Projects rocket will be air launched from a balloon from a
 minimum of 40,000 feet. A balloon is neither harder or easier than other
 forms of air launches. It is totally unique with it's own +'s and -'s. Our
 rocket is in the 6,000 lbs gross weight class.

ROCKETS/LIQUID.

***SPL
http/www.spl.ch
Send civilians into orbit at afordable price.
SPL  has a step by step program to get its final objective.


***ASRI
asri@asri.org.au
http://www.asri.org.au/ASRI/index.xml
Australian group, objective: to produce a small sat. launcher, the ausroc
iv.


***Interorbital Systems
cyberplex@aol.com
http://www.interorbital.com/Sounding_Rockets.htm
liquid biprop. WFNA/Furfuryl, presure feed.
Done.
In project: Neptune, RLV TSTO 7000lbs. payload.
1st stage: WFNA/kerosene, 2nd. stage: LOX/CH4.



X-PRIZE TEAMS.

***Canyon Space Team
http://canyonspaceteam.freeservers.com
Looking for X-Prize
SubScale Super Sonic Vehicle
Rocket Engine Development

Propulsion : Pressure fed kerosene-oxygen engines
Ship Name : MICHELLE-B
Team Leader :Kent Ewing
Citizenship : USA, Bethesda, Maryland
Launch : Vertical takeoff under primary propulsion
Landing : Vertical/Soft with reduced engine power
Website : www.tgv-rockets.com

Propulsion : Turbofan and LOX/Kerosene Rockets
Ship Name : Thunderbird
Team Leader : Steven Bennett
Citizenship : United Kingdom, Cheshire, England
Launch : Jet Powered Veritcal Takeoff
Landing : Vertical Landing
Website : www.starchaser.co.uk

Propulsion : Undisclosed Rocket Power
Ship Name : Proteus
Team Leader : Burt Rutan
Citizenship : Mojave, California, USA
Launch : Air Launch
Landing : Undisclosed
Website : www.scaled.com


Propulsion : Rocket Power
Ship Name : Pathfinder
Team Leader : Mitchell Clap
Citizenship : Ann Arbor, MI, USA
Launch : Conventional Runway
Landing : Conventional Runway
Website : www.rocketplane.com

Propulsion : Jet and Rocket Engines
Ship Name : XVan2001
Team Leader : Len Cormier
Citizenship : Washington DC, USA
Launch : Conventional runway
Landing : Vertical landing
Website : www.tour2space.com

Propulsion : Rocket Powered, hybrid
Ship Name : Gauchito (The Little Cowboy)
Team Leader : Pablo DeLeon
Citizenship : Buenos Aires, Argentina
Launch : Vertical
Landing : Parachute

Propulsion : Jet and Rocket Engines
Ship Name : Cosmos Mariner
Team Leader : Dr. Norman LaFave
Citizenship : Houston, Texas, USA
Launch : Conventional Runway
Landing : Conventional Runway
Website : www.lonestarspace.com

Propulsion : LOX / Kerosene Rocket Engines
Ship Name : Eclipse Astroliner
Team Leader : Michael Kelly
Citizenship : San Bernadino, California, USA
Launch : Air Towed launch from a 747
Landing : Conventional Runway
Website : www.kellyspace.com

Propulsion : Throttlable Kerosene & Hydrogen
Peroxide Rocket Engine
Ship Name : Aurora
Team Leader : Ray Nielsen
Citizenship : Orlando, FL, USA
Launch Site : Conventional Runway
Landing : Conventional Runway
Website : www.funtechsystems.com

Propulsion : Liquid Oxygen/Kerosene System
Ship Name : daVinci
Team Leader : Brian Feeney
Citizenship : Canada
Launch Site : Air launch from hot air balloon
Landing : Parachute
Website : www.davinciproject.com


Propulsion : Rocket Engines
Ship Name : Cosmopolis XXI
Team Leader : Sergey Kostenko
Citizenship : Moscow, Russia
Launch Site : Undecided
Landing : Airplane style, or parachute
Website : www.cosmopolis21.ru

Propulsion : Methane & Liquid Oxygen
Ship Name : Kitten
Team Leader : James Hill
Citizenship : Oroville, Washington, USA
Launch : Conventional Runway
Landing : Conventional Runway
Website : www.thriftyspace.com

Propulsion : : Liquid Fuel Rocket Engine
Ship Name : Canadian Arrow
Team Leader : Geoffrey Sheerin
Citizenship : Ontario, Canada
Launch Site : Coastal location
Landing : Floatation in water
Website : www.canadianarrow.com

Propulsion : Jet and Rocket Engines
Ship Name : Ascender
Team Leader : David Ashford
Citizenship : United Kingdom, Bristol, England
Launch : Conventional Runway
Landing : Conventional Runway
Website : www.bristolspaceplanes.com

Propulsion : Rocket Engines
Ship Name : Lucky Seven
Team Leader : Mickey Badgero
Citizenship : USA
Launch : Rocket Powered Verical Launch
Landing : Parasail Landing

Propulsion : PA-E LOX / Kerosene Rocket Engine
Ship Name : PA-X2
Team Leader : Dr. Rick Fleeter
Citizenship : Herndon, Virginia, USA
Launch : Rocket Powered Verical Launch
Landing : Guided Deployable Parafoil Recovery
Website : www.aeroastro.com

Propulsion : Oxygen/Natural Gas Rocket
Ship Name : Advent
Team Leader : James Akkerman
Citizenship : Houston, Texas, USA
Launch Site : Water, Vertical
Landing : Water, Horizontal
Website : www.ghg.net/jimakkerman/



STUDIES :

***Studie of a modular mini launcher:

ttocs@GTE.NET (Aaron Smith):

t'll be heavy, ~1750 Kg for a 5 kg payload.  I chose N2O/Kerosene, single
tank,
seperated by a piston because it's just so simple.  I did not choose solids
because I want to have different thrust profiles for the different stages,
and that would be hard to do with identical modules with solids (with
N2O/Kerosene modules, you keep the same tanks and make different engines
for each stage).

The layout that is beginning to take shape is this: 7 modules, each with a
mass of 250 Kg.  These modules are 44 cm in diameter and around 220 cm
long.  The dry mass of one of these modules is around 37 Kg.  The tanks are
made from Al-Li alloy.

The first stage consists of 5 modules, the second stage and the third stage
each having 1 module.  On ignition, the engines on all 5 modules of the
first stage ignite, but only 2 modules are feeding these engines.  when
their fuel is exhausted, they are jettisoned, then the next 2 outboard
modules start feeding the engines.  When they are empty, they are
jettisonned and the core module burns until empty.  The second and third
stages continue and stage like a normal rocket.


***Hybrid project in Sweden.
trinity@passagen.se
Mattias

hybrid. Semi done on paper, no hardware
built yet. Have started an amaterur rocketry club in Sweden.

AIR USING SYSTEMS :

***Ramjet/Scramjet:

rockitman@SPRINTMAIL.COM (Anthony Colette)

6'' motor:
The ramjet I am currently working on is a modification of my first design.
I
initially started with a subsonic/transonic ramjet but the design evolved to
supersonic as I learned more about shock dynamics and the ramjet cycle.  A
subsonic design could work just fine, but given a cascade of  limitations
that
only an amateur would be confronted with, I found the margin of  thrust
coefficient (reliability) would be significantly enhanced in the supersonic
region.

*** Ramjet sites:

Information from:Andrew Ritchie
apritchie@pacific.net.au

http://www.primenet.com/~kaiser/ramjets.htm

***Glen Olson:

"Garage Level Ramjet Construction":
http://home.networkone.net/~oglenn/trimode/rj-const.htm
http://home.networkone.net/~oglenn/trimode/3m-arla.htm

SUB-SCALE SYSTEMS :

***VTVL:
John Carmack

www.armadilloaerospace.com


X-PRIZE:

***Looking for X-prize

http://www.canadianarrow.com/

A V2-like rocket for suborbital trips.



COMPUTERS :

***dickcoyote@EARTHLINK.NET (John Horton)
Kn2Nozzle has been partly rewritten and I am pretty sure this it until v2.0.
Kn2Nozzle can be found at :
http://home.earthlink.net/~dickcoyote/
Please let me know what you think.


***BreadcrumbsXR software.
dickcoyote@EARTHLINK.NET (John Horton)

BreadcrumbsXR.  I do plan to store in the
database any data that is vital and not easily recreated.  Breadcrumbs is a
way to view, store, catalog and compare data and notes.

The HUGE dream is a database that is accessible by all members of the
community that holds all submitted  non-proprietary formulations and
characterizations. Imagine that you have a totally characterized
formulation, with Breadcrumbs you could then go look for correlations with
all if the other  formulations. I know and understand that we will never
know how a formulation will work until we try it, but if we had dozens or
hundreds of similar characterized formulations, don't you think that you
could save some time on your own development??? Now this phase of
BreadcrumbsXR would be a huge undertaking, but has to be worth thinking
about.
Ok so I have a dream. Is the dream of BreadcrumbsXR unrealistic for a
weekend programmer? I do not know but I plan to find out. I do know that for
"BreadcrumbsXR" to take shape in the way that I presently imagine it, I will
need some help from this group.

***Hybrid rocket software
Main features:
- Fuel regression rate, ox/fuel ratio, oxidizer mass flux and port diameter
etc. is calculated for the entire burn with user selectable time steps from
1 ms to 1 second.
- Calculates size of injector orifice(s).
- Calculates throat diameter as well as other dimensions of the nozzle and
estimates nozzle performance.
- Estimates performance of motor.
- Single or multiple fuel ports.
- Graphical representation of burn parameters
- Easy and efficient graphical user interface

Many more features are planned and I am working on implementing the new
features as soon as possible. Please try the program and send me
suggestions, comments, criticism and bug reports.

For more information and screen shots or for downloading the program:
http://www.lstud.ii.uib.no/~s0646/hdp.htm

**************
Some ideas to be taken:

^^^MHD: Magneto-HydroDynamics is a way to directly convert energy in a plume
rocket into electricity
MHD generators open up a new technological domain, from high temperature
plasma, to powerful lasers to test on the ground of plasma engines.

^^^Chemical lasers The hot temperature and shock wave in a rocket exhaust
may
be used to drive a laser, another use for ground test motors. Such lasers
would be the basis element for laser launchers.

^^^Double, multi flux motors: High velocity gas at the nozzle tip may be
mixed with air, this may increase thrust... May be tested with marketed
motors.

^^^Hoovercraft with rocket pumped air support: this could the launching
element of an Horizontal Take-off system without landing gears. Same remark
as above.

^^^Liquid-gas or solid-gas motors : Thrust to weight would be under one,
that
may be OK for  aircraft-like first stage with H Take off.

^^^Rocket powered helicopter with motors at blade tip "a la Roton" (first
desing) . Suitable for hybrid systems, including gox oxidizer.

^^^Rotojet: liquid motor on a wheel, the centrifugal force gives the
pressurization (Roton, second desing).

Kapton tank: Kapton a Du Pont product may be used with a cryogenic liquid. A
bolted aluminium tank would give the rigidity.

More ideas suitable for amateur projects? Let us know.

Yvan Bozzonetti.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 2738 invoked from network); 31 Jul 2001 07:07:57 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 31 Jul 2001 07:07:57 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: (qmail 18543 invoked from network); 31 Jul 2001 07:08:26 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 31 Jul 2001 07:08:26 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA04170; Mon, 30 Jul 2001 23:59:48 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 89994 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 31 Jul 2001 06:59:38          +0000
Received: from cisco.com (cypher.cisco.com [171.69.11.18]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA04152 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon,          30 Jul 2001 23:59:38 -0700
Received: (from billw@localhost) by cisco.com (8.8.8/2.6/Cisco List          Logging/8.8.8) id XAA13973; Mon, 30 Jul 2001 23:58:37 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID:  <CMM.0.90.4.996562717.billw@cypher>
Date:         Mon, 30 Jul 2001 23:58:37 PDT
Reply-To: "Bill Westfield" <billw@cisco.com>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "William Chops Westfield" <billw@cisco.com>
Subject:      Re: [AR] stump remover
Comments: To: Ross Borden <rborden@COASTNET.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  Your message of Mon, 30 Jul 2001 18:22:12 -0700

The last box of stump remover I bought said "Ely Miller Stump remover and
postassium nitrate", and it appears to be pure KNO3 prills (at about $5/lb.)
I've seen other stump removers with ingredient lists indicating that they
contained large amounts of additional ingredients (sulfer, in one case.)
When in doubt, you should be able to ask for an MSDS for the product.

Given the existance of numerous pyrotechnic dealers selling KNO3 for about
$3/lb (no questions asked, even though they'll be assuming a pyro
application), and at least the rumor of large bags of hydroponics grade
material at $0.60/lb or less, I don't think "stump remover" of unknown
composition is worth playing with...

BillW


From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 11639 invoked from network); 31 Jul 2001 09:22:48 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 31 Jul 2001 09:22:48 -0000
Received: (qmail 11358 invoked from network); 31 Jul 2001 09:24:22 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 31 Jul 2001 09:24:22 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id CAA04541; Tue, 31 Jul 2001 02:01:47 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 90025 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 31 Jul 2001 09:01:36          +0000
Received: from femail14.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail14.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.0.95.141]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id CAA04523          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 31 Jul 2001 02:01:35 -0700
Received: from hal2001 ([24.77.53.16]) by femail14.sdc1.sfba.home.com          (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20 201-229-121-120-20010223) with SMTP id          <20010731090129.NOWJ2721.femail14.sdc1.sfba.home.com@hal2001> for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 31 Jul 2001 02:01:29 -0700
References:  <CMM.0.90.4.996562717.billw@cypher>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <001d01c1199e$472dde00$0400a8c0@hatjs>
Date:         Tue, 31 Jul 2001 01:53:32 -0700
Reply-To: "Jamie Morken" <jmorken@HOME.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jamie Morken" <jmorken@HOME.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] stump remover
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

> The last box of stump remover I bought said "Ely Miller Stump remover and
> postassium nitrate", and it appears to be pure KNO3 prills (at about
$5/lb.)
> I've seen other stump removers with ingredient lists indicating that they
> contained large amounts of additional ingredients (sulfer, in one case.)
> When in doubt, you should be able to ask for an MSDS for the product.

How does KNO3 help remove stumps?  Surely icing sugar must be involved
somehow :)

best regards,
Jamie

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 28018 invoked from network); 31 Jul 2001 10:19:25 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 31 Jul 2001 10:19:25 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 16729 invoked from network); 31 Jul 2001 10:14:05 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 31 Jul 2001 10:14:05 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id DAA04712; Tue, 31 Jul 2001 03:04:51 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 90037 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 31 Jul 2001 10:04:37          +0000
Received: from harrier.mail.pas.earthlink.net (harrier.mail.pas.earthlink.net          [207.217.121.12]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id CAA04664          for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Tue, 31 Jul 2001 02:54:37 -0700
Received: from earthlink.net (dialup-209.245.142.215.Dial1.SanJose1.Level3.net          [209.245.142.215]) by harrier.mail.pas.earthlink.net          (EL-8_9_3_3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id CAA15996; Tue, 31 Jul 2001 02:54:36          -0700 (PDT)
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.75 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.16-22 i686)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <CMM.0.90.4.996562717.billw@cypher>            <001d01c1199e$472dde00$0400a8c0@hatjs>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B66806E.73A0FC31@earthlink.net>
Date:         Tue, 31 Jul 2001 02:54:54 -0700
Reply-To: "David Weinshenker" <daze39@EARTHLINK.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "David Weinshenker" <daze39@EARTHLINK.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] stump remover
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Jamie Morken wrote:
> How does KNO3 help remove stumps?  Surely icing sugar must be involved
> somehow :)

I think the only fuel involved is the wood of the stump.
Drill holes in stump, pour in concentrated KNO3 solution to
saturate wood, allow water in solution to evaporate, ignite.

-dave w

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 19315 invoked from network); 31 Jul 2001 12:17:30 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 31 Jul 2001 12:17:30 -0000
Received: (qmail 2312 invoked from network); 31 Jul 2001 12:18:52 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 31 Jul 2001 12:18:52 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id FAA05168; Tue, 31 Jul 2001 05:09:24 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 90064 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 31 Jul 2001 12:09:17          +0000
Received: from mailrelay2.inwind.it ([212.141.54.102]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id FAA05149 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue,          31 Jul 2001 05:09:16 -0700
Received: from ziostefo (62.98.230.187) by mailrelay2.inwind.it (5.5.029) id          3B4502A1006DE042 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 31 Jul 2001 14:08:34          +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2014.211
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <015401c119b9$0b2c95c0$3900fd80@ziostefo>
Date:         Tue, 31 Jul 2001 14:01:39 +0200
Reply-To: "Stefano Innocenti" <s.innocenti@AGORA.STM.IT>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Stefano Innocenti" <s.innocenti@AGORA.STM.IT>
Subject:      Re: [AR] ARocket projects Jully 2001
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Hi list,

In Italy, also, we are testing an Hybrid motor, 29mm diameter, with about
360 Ns. It has 115 g. of N2O. Nozzle is an used aerotech phenolic. Grain is
2 concentric PVC cilinders (for electrical use), and inside, again, a piece
of gum tube.

You can see it's 14th test at:

http://members.xoom.it/laserist/hyb3.mpg

We are working on test's stand... too...

ciao, Stefo

--------------------------------Stefano
Innocenti ---------------------------------
http://www.razzimodellismo.it    http://utenti.tripod.it/missilistica

-----Messaggio Originale-----
Da: <Azt28@AOL.COM>
A: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Data invio: luned 30 luglio 2001 17.14
Oggetto: [AR] ARocket projects Jully 2001


>
> MOTORS / HYBRIDS:
>
> ***Ray Calkins, Terry Spath, Brian Kosko, Ken Goldstein, Rodney Earwood,
Dave
> Johnson.:
>
> HPR N2O to LOx hybrid conversion
> Completed:  evaluation and planning, dewar conversion LN2->LO2,
> fill/vent/drain
> plumbing & valving, nitrogen pressurization adaptor
>
> Next step:  hydrostatic and water flow tests
>
> Undone:  fill system needs only lox cleaning and minor fitting, will be
> completed tonight, vertical test stand begun.
>
>
> ***FAR (germain group)
>
> http://www.optipoint.com/far/gbhome.htm
>
> working on hybrids, turbopump and X-Prize.
>
> ***wshamblin@ac.net (Bill Shamblin)
>
> 38mm X 26in hybrid built from scratch
>
http://www.rocketryonline.com/cgi-bin/goto/goto.cgi?url=http://www.HybridsHy
br
>
> ids.homestead.com&name=Bill%20Shamblin's%20Hybrid%20Page&db_id=1591
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 23659 invoked from network); 31 Jul 2001 12:54:31 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 31 Jul 2001 12:54:31 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: (qmail 89 invoked from network); 31 Jul 2001 12:56:34 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 31 Jul 2001 12:56:34 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id FAA05366; Tue, 31 Jul 2001 05:46:32 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 90086 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 31 Jul 2001 12:46:29          +0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id FAA05341 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue,          31 Jul 2001 05:46:03 -0700
Message-ID:  <200107311246.FAA05341@itc.uci.edu>
Date:         Tue, 31 Jul 2001 12:46:03 +0000
Reply-To: "Bruno Berger" <bruno.berger@SPL.CH>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Bruno Berger" <bruno.berger@SPL.CH>
Subject:      Re: [AR] ARocket projects Jully 2001
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Yvan,

A hint:

> **SPL http:///www.spl.ch Send civilians into orbit at
> afordable price. SPL has a step by step program to get
> its final objective.

We do not send civilians into orbit, but we want to do that with civilian
"payloads". Ok, civilians may be also payloads... but we are *very* far from
that and this isn't our goal anyway...

Cheers
Bruno

--
**********************************************************
Bruno Berger
Swiss Propulsion Laboratory
E-Mail: bruno.berger@spl.ch
WWW:    http://www.spl.ch
**********************************************************


From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 26686 invoked from network); 31 Jul 2001 14:11:27 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 31 Jul 2001 14:11:26 -0000
Received: (qmail 111 invoked from network); 31 Jul 2001 14:13:49 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 31 Jul 2001 14:13:49 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA05973; Tue, 31 Jul 2001 07:06:42 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 90174 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 31 Jul 2001 14:06:32          +0000
Received: from c002.snv.cp.net (c002-h001.c002.snv.cp.net [209.228.32.165]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id HAA05955 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 31 Jul 2001 07:06:32 -0700
Received: (cpmta 10607 invoked from network); 31 Jul 2001 07:06:01 -0700
Received: from 0-1pool243-26.nas1.norfolk1.va.us.da.qwest.net (HELO default)          (63.233.243.26) by smtp.peoplepc.com (209.228.32.165) with SMTP; 31          Jul 2001 07:06:01 -0700
X-Sent: 31 Jul 2001 14:06:01 GMT
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0A7F_01C56B69.4547AAF0"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <001e01c119cb$8ed713c0$1af3e93f@default>
Date:         Tue, 31 Jul 2001 10:17:38 -0400
Reply-To: "David Muesing" <dmuesing@PEOPLEPC.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "David Muesing" <dmuesing@PEOPLEPC.COM>
Subject:      [AR] Potassium Nitrate-----K-POWER
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0A7F_01C56B69.4547AAF0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

K-POWER fertilizer is commonly used as an oxidizer. It comes in prill =
form at about 50 pounds for $15. The manufacturer is Vicksburg Chemical =
Co. in MS. Goto: www.kpower.com for more details. You will have to grind =
it.

Dave Muesing
Yorktown, VA

------=_NextPart_000_0A7F_01C56B69.4547AAF0
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Diso-8859-1">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 5.50.4616.200" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=3DOCRA color=3D#0000ff>K-POWER fertilizer is commonly =
used as an=20
oxidizer. It comes in prill form at about 50 pounds for $15. The =
manufacturer is=20
Vicksburg Chemical Co. in MS. Goto: <A=20
href=3D"http://www.kpower.com">www.kpower.com</A> for more details. You =
will have=20
to grind it.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DOCRA color=3D#0000ff></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DOCRA color=3D#0000ff>Dave Muesing</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DOCRA color=3D#0000ff>Yorktown, =
VA</FONT></DIV></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0A7F_01C56B69.4547AAF0--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 1839 invoked from network); 31 Jul 2001 15:01:56 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 31 Jul 2001 15:01:56 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 10632 invoked from network); 31 Jul 2001 15:03:52 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 31 Jul 2001 15:03:52 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA06150; Tue, 31 Jul 2001 07:58:16 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 90189 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 31 Jul 2001 14:56:52          +0000
Received: from mailgw1a.lmco.com (mailgw1a.lmco.com [192.31.106.7]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA06127 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 31 Jul 2001 07:56:51 -0700
Received: from emss02g01.ems.lmco.com (relay2.ems.lmco.com [166.29.2.54]) by          mailgw1a.lmco.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id IAA22243 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 31 Jul 2001 08:56:50 -0600 (MDT)
Received: from CONVERSION-DAEMON by lmco.com (PMDF V5.2-33 #38887) id          <0GHC00M01EU3F7@lmco.com> for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 31 Jul 2001          08:56:42 -0600 (MDT)
Received: from emss02i00.ems.lmco.com ([166.29.2.48]) by lmco.com (PMDF V5.2-33          #38887) with ESMTP id <0GHC00ICZETT14@lmco.com> for          AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 31 Jul 2001 08:56:18 -0600 (MDT)
Received: by emss02i00.ems.lmco.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) id          <PS6QZLA9>; Tue, 31 Jul 2001 08:56:24 -0600
Content-return: allowed
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19)
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <EDB5E5136094D311BF1800508B12205E08D290AF@emss02m07.ems.lmco.com>
Date:         Tue, 31 Jul 2001 08:56:21 -0600
Reply-To: "Bendel, Timothy B" <timothy.b.bendel@LMCO.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Bendel, Timothy B" <timothy.b.bendel@LMCO.COM>
Subject:      [AR] Portable data aquisition devices
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Hi all,

About a month ago there were a few posts on using a Palm to aquire data from
motor static tests instead of a laptop. It was mentioned that there were
products like MELD out there that allowed the Palm to be hooked up to
external sensors (like a load cell). I have a Cassiopeia E-125 Pocket PC -
is there anything out there that will let me use that instead of a laptop?

Tim Bendel

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 8636 invoked from network); 31 Jul 2001 15:03:31 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 31 Jul 2001 15:03:31 -0000
Received: (qmail 11472 invoked from network); 31 Jul 2001 15:04:58 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 31 Jul 2001 15:04:58 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA06174; Tue, 31 Jul 2001 07:59:41 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 90197 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 31 Jul 2001 14:58:20          +0000
Received: from mailrelay3.inwind.it ([212.141.54.103]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA06142 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue,          31 Jul 2001 07:57:33 -0700
Received: from ziostefo (62.98.201.76) by mailrelay3.inwind.it (5.5.029) id          3B45958F00767728; Tue, 31 Jul 2001 16:56:49 +0200
References: <000601c119c8$59cf5c80$5d38d940@texnet.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2014.211
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <021e01c119d0$8cf8eba0$3900fd80@ziostefo>
Date:         Tue, 31 Jul 2001 16:52:40 +0200
Reply-To: "Stefano Innocenti" <s.innocenti@AGORA.STM.IT>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Stefano Innocenti" <s.innocenti@AGORA.STM.IT>
Subject:      Re: [AR] ARocket projects Jully 2001
Comments: To: Charles Barnett <cbarnett@texnet.net>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

It was a good surprise... the maximum range of dynamometer was 20kg... the
planned thrust should be 180Ns of total impulse with 90N of average impulse.


-----Messaggio Originale-----
Da: Charles Barnett <cbarnett@texnet.net>
A: 'Stefano Innocenti' <s.innocenti@agora.stm.it>
Data invio: marted 31 luglio 2001 15.54
Oggetto: RE: [AR] ARocket projects Jully 2001


> Stefo,
>
> The thrust vectoring on this motor would have made for a flight which was
> much more interesting than planned.  Do you know the cause of it?
>
> Charles
>
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 17995 invoked from network); 31 Jul 2001 15:41:44 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 31 Jul 2001 15:41:44 -0000
Received: (qmail 8102 invoked from network); 31 Jul 2001 15:43:49 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 31 Jul 2001 15:43:49 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA06357; Tue, 31 Jul 2001 08:36:28 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 90217 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 31 Jul 2001 15:34:56          +0000
Received: from spsystems.net (spsystems.net [209.47.149.227]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA06330 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Tue,          31 Jul 2001 08:34:55 -0700
Received: (from henry@localhost) by spsystems.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id LAA20697;          Tue, 31 Jul 2001 11:34:16 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010731113249.20041D-100000@spsystems.net>
Date:         Tue, 31 Jul 2001 11:34:15 -0400
Reply-To: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] ARocket projects Jully 2001
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <200107311246.FAA05341@itc.uci.edu>

On Tue, 31 Jul 2001, Bruno Berger wrote:
> We do not send civilians into orbit, but we want to do that with civilian
> "payloads". Ok, civilians may be also payloads... but we are *very* far from
> that and this isn't our goal anyway...

Also, a point of usage:  the term you want is "private citizens" or
"commercial payloads".  Many civilians have flown in space already;
Neil Armstrong was a civilian.

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 14833 invoked from network); 31 Jul 2001 16:32:50 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 31 Jul 2001 16:32:50 -0000
Received: (qmail 13467 invoked from network); 31 Jul 2001 16:35:13 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 31 Jul 2001 16:35:13 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA06818; Tue, 31 Jul 2001 09:28:05 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 90303 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 31 Jul 2001 16:26:42          +0000
Received: from spsystems.net (spsystems.net [209.47.149.227]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA06799 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Tue,          31 Jul 2001 09:26:42 -0700
Received: (from henry@localhost) by spsystems.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id MAA21489;          Tue, 31 Jul 2001 12:26:02 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010731121924.20041E-100000@spsystems.net>
Date:         Tue, 31 Jul 2001 12:26:02 -0400
Reply-To: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] solid state relays
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <CMM.0.90.4.996218069.billw@cypher>

On Fri, 27 Jul 2001, William Chops Westfield wrote:
> A solid state relay is usually (always?) constructed with an opto-isolator
> (the "coil") driving some high-power TRIACs in the output stage.  They tend
> to be designed for hefty AC loads...

That's the "classical" solid-state relay, which switches AC *only* (since
triacs rely on the AC zero crossing to turn them off).  However, there are
DC solid-state relays now too, using power MOSFETs instead of triacs.  The
Digi-Key catalog includes many of both types.

The disadvantage of SSRs, compared to building your own with transistors,
is that they cost rather more.  The advantage is fewer design hassles.  If
you don't know much about electronics, and would rather get on with flying
rockets, SSRs are probably the way to go.

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 27745 invoked from network); 31 Jul 2001 16:36:07 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 31 Jul 2001 16:36:07 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 10152 invoked from network); 31 Jul 2001 16:37:05 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 31 Jul 2001 16:37:05 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA06876; Tue, 31 Jul 2001 09:31:40 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 90311 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 31 Jul 2001 16:30:19          +0000
Received: from pan.ch.intel.com (chfdns01.ch.intel.com [143.182.246.24]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA06834 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 31 Jul 2001 09:30:19 -0700
Received: from snmeng1.rr.intel.com (snmeng1.rr.intel.com [128.215.231.11]) by          pan.ch.intel.com (8.9.1a+p1/8.9.1/d: relay.m4,v 1.41 2001/07/09          21:06:22 root Exp $) with ESMTP id QAA17003; Tue, 31 Jul 2001          16:30:17 GMT
Received: from snmeng30.rr.intel.com (snmeng30.rr.intel.com [128.215.52.76]) by          snmeng1.rr.intel.com (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id KAA01636; Tue, 31          Jul 2001 10:27:26 -0600 (MDT)
Received: from snmeng30.rr.intel.com (snmeng30.rr.intel.com [128.215.52.76]) by          snmeng30.rr.intel.com (8.9.1a/8.9.1/d: client.m4,v 1.3 1998/09/29          16:36:11 sedayao Exp sedayao $) with SMTP id KAA06893; Tue, 31 Jul          2001 10:27:24 -0600 (MDT)
X-Mailer: dtmail 1.2.1 CDE Version 1.2.1 SunOS 5.6 sun4m sparc
X-Sun-Text-Type: ascii
Message-ID:  <200107311627.KAA06893@snmeng30.rr.intel.com>
Date:         Tue, 31 Jul 2001 10:27:24 -0600
Reply-To: "Ray Calkins 100660207" <rcalkins@snmeng1.rr.intel.com>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Ray Calkins 100660207" <rcalkins@snmeng1.rr.intel.com>
Subject:      [AR] OT: [AR] stump remover (somewhat)
Comments: To: daze39@EARTHLINK.NET
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

> Jamie Morken wrote:
> > How does KNO3 help remove stumps?  Surely icing sugar must be involved
> > somehow :)
>
> I think the only fuel involved is the wood of the stump.
> Drill holes in stump, pour in concentrated KNO3 solution to
> saturate wood, allow water in solution to evaporate, ignite.

You don't even need to ignite it.  The addition of the KNO3 balances the
Carbon-Nitrogen ratio, and promotes rapid bacterial decomposition.  Of course,
it's not as rapid as burning, but more thorough and better for the environment.

I use scrap sugar propellant to balance my compost.  The normal method to
balance your compost is the addition of nitrogen-rich "green matter" (fresh
grass clippings, manure, etc) to your brown matter (dried leaves, sawdust, etc).

Ray Calkins
rcalkins@snmeng1.rr.intel.com           raymond.calkins@intel.com
"My opinions are my own, and do not reflect those of my employer."


From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 6702 invoked from network); 31 Jul 2001 17:07:57 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 31 Jul 2001 17:07:57 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 25734 invoked from network); 31 Jul 2001 17:10:20 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 31 Jul 2001 17:10:20 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA07348; Tue, 31 Jul 2001 10:05:09 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 90360 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 31 Jul 2001 17:03:35          +0000
Received: from ingntwebsvr01.ingconnect.net (ns1.ingconnect.net          [207.194.3.194]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA07090          for <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Tue, 31 Jul 2001 09:53:34 -0700
Received: from datatrac.ca (unverified [24.77.172.231]) by          ingntwebsvr01.ingconnect.net (Vircom SMTPRS 4.3.182) with ESMTP id          <B0000358364@ingntwebsvr01.ingconnect.net> for <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>;          Tue, 31 Jul 2001 09:53:32 -0700
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (Windows NT 5.0; I)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B66E1FD.835C6F99@datatrac.ca>
Date:         Tue, 31 Jul 2001 09:51:09 -0700
Reply-To: "Gerhard Riedman" <grie@DATATRAC.CA>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Gerhard Riedman" <grie@DATATRAC.CA>
Subject:      [AR] R45HT
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Hi,
does anyone out there know of a Canadian source for Hydroxyl Terminated
Polybutadiene (HTPB), like the R45HT variety?
Thanks for letting me know.
--
Gerhard

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 19913 invoked from network); 31 Jul 2001 17:40:15 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 31 Jul 2001 17:40:15 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 6047 invoked from network); 31 Jul 2001 17:42:39 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 31 Jul 2001 17:42:39 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA08137; Tue, 31 Jul 2001 10:36:04 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 90523 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 31 Jul 2001 17:34:41          +0000
Received: from ns.vanguard.com (ns.VANGUARD.COM [192.175.173.31]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA08107 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 31 Jul 2001 10:34:40 -0700
Received: from eagle1.vanguard.com (eagle1.VANGUARD.COM [192.175.141.70]) by          ns.vanguard.com (Switch-2.1.3/Switch-2.1.0) with ESMTP id          f6VHYcv14883 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 31 Jul 2001 13:34:39          -0400 (EDT)
Received: from vgi4mail.vanguard.com (vgi4mail.vanguard.com [10.254.65.16]) by          eagle1.vanguard.com (Switch-2.1.3/Switch-2.1.0) with SMTP id          f6VHYba05773 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 31 Jul 2001 13:34:37          -0400 (EDT)
Received: by vgi4mail.vanguard.com(Lotus SMTP MTA v4.6.6  (890.1 7-16-1999))           id 85256A9A.0060C179 ; Tue, 31 Jul 2001 13:36:49 -0400
X-Lotus-FromDomain: VGINOTES
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Disposition: inline
Message-ID:  <85256A9A.00609C44.00@vgi4mail.vanguard.com>
Date:         Tue, 31 Jul 2001 13:33:00 -0400
Reply-To: <Waysie_Atkins@VANGUARD.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <Waysie_Atkins@VANGUARD.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] ARocket projects Jully 2001
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

> **SPL http:///www.spl.ch Send civilians into orbit at
> afordable price. SPL has a step by step program to get
> its final objective.


Thanks for the link.  On the puplications page many of the papers, when clicked
on, require a username and password to view.  How does one accquire such and is
a fee required?  A number of them look quite interesting.

Thanks,

Waysie

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 17453 invoked from network); 31 Jul 2001 18:08:29 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 31 Jul 2001 18:08:29 -0000
Received: (qmail 15624 invoked from network); 31 Jul 2001 18:10:51 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 31 Jul 2001 18:10:51 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA08455; Tue, 31 Jul 2001 11:02:30 -0700
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 90607 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 31 Jul 2001 18:01:04          +0000
Received: from zcars0m9.ca.nortel.com ([47.129.242.157]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA08435 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue,          31 Jul 2001 11:01:03 -0700
Received: from zcars04f.ca.nortel.com (zcars04f.ca.nortel.com [47.129.242.57])          by zcars0m9.ca.nortel.com (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f6VI01900586          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 31 Jul 2001 14:00:01 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from rftzy232.ca.nortel.com by zcars04f.ca.nortel.com; Tue, 31 Jul          2001 13:59:59 -0400
Received: from NORTELNETWORKS.COM (wftzh00e.ca.nortel.com [47.130.116.9]) by          rftzy232.ca.nortel.com with SMTP (Microsoft Exchange Internet Mail          Service Version 5.5.2653.13) id NKPL58T7; Tue, 31 Jul 2001 13:59:47          -0400
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.73C-CCK-MCD [en] (X11; U; HP-UX B.10.20 9000/785)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <3B66E1FD.835C6F99@datatrac.ca>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Orig: <mleech@NORTELNETWORKS.COM>
Message-ID:  <3B66F22C.8869FC07@NORTELNETWORKS.COM>
Date:         Tue, 31 Jul 2001 14:00:12 -0400
Reply-To: "Marcus Leech" <mleech@NORTELNETWORKS.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Marcus Leech" <mleech@NORTELNETWORKS.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] R45HT
Comments: To: Gerhard Riedman <grie@DATATRAC.CA>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Gerhard Riedman wrote:
>
> Hi,
> does anyone out there know of a Canadian source for Hydroxyl Terminated
> Polybutadiene (HTPB), like the R45HT variety?
> Thanks for letting me know.
I think Elf Atochem (who make R45HT) have a sales office in Toronto.
  In fact, one of their people there is a rocket head, Robert <mumble>.

David Wakarchuk, of BC, who frequents this list, uses polybutadiene resins
  in his professional life, so probably has a good handle on suppliers
  of the stuff in Canada.

--
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Marcus Leech                             Mail:   Dept 8M70, MS 012, FITZ
Advisor                                  Phone: (ESN) 393-9145  +1 613 763 9145
Security Architecture and Planning       Fax:   (ESN) 393-9435  +1 613 763 9435
Nortel Networks                          mleech@nortelnetworks.com
-----------------Expressed opinions are my own, not my employer's------

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 22490 invoked from network); 31 Jul 2001 19:08:47 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 31 Jul 2001 19:08:47 -0000
Received: (qmail 2700 invoked from network); 31 Jul 2001 19:11:08 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 31 Jul 2001 19:11:08 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA09384; Tue, 31 Jul 2001 12:04:14 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 90775 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 31 Jul 2001 19:02:49          +0000
Received: from smtprelay3.abs.adelphia.net (smtprelay.abs.adelphia.net          [64.8.20.11]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA09357 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 31 Jul 2001 12:02:48 -0700
Received: from jlgrady ([63.124.251.47]) by smtprelay3.abs.adelphia.net          (Netscape Messaging Server 4.15) with SMTP id GHCQ7N01.J80 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 31 Jul 2001 15:02:11 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook CWS, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <000c01c119f3$9ac6ed40$0200a8c0@prestige.net>
Date:         Tue, 31 Jul 2001 15:04:19 -0400
Reply-To: "Jeff Grady" <jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jeff Grady" <jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] R45HT
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <3B66E1FD.835C6F99@datatrac.ca>

I'd like a US Source as well. Prefereably in the South East (Atlanta?)...

Jeff

-----Original Message-----
From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@itc.uci.edu]On
Behalf Of Gerhard Riedman
Sent: Tuesday, July 31, 2001 12:51 PM
To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
Subject: [AR] R45HT


Hi,
does anyone out there know of a Canadian source for Hydroxyl Terminated
Polybutadiene (HTPB), like the R45HT variety?
Thanks for letting me know.
--
Gerhard

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 22732 invoked from network); 31 Jul 2001 19:08:50 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 31 Jul 2001 19:08:50 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 22107 invoked from network); 31 Jul 2001 19:10:51 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 31 Jul 2001 19:10:51 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA09430; Tue, 31 Jul 2001 12:05:47 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 90788 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 31 Jul 2001 19:04:26          +0000
Received: from clio.sc.intel.com (scfdns01.sc.intel.com [143.183.152.25]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA09376 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 31 Jul 2001 12:03:36 -0700
Received: from snmeng1.rr.intel.com (snmeng1.rr.intel.com [128.215.231.11]) by          clio.sc.intel.com (8.9.1a+p1/8.9.1/d: relay.m4,v 1.41 2001/07/09          21:06:22 root Exp $) with ESMTP id TAA12552; Tue, 31 Jul 2001          19:03:01 GMT
Received: from snmeng30.rr.intel.com (snmeng30.rr.intel.com [128.215.52.76]) by          snmeng1.rr.intel.com (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id NAA02718; Tue, 31          Jul 2001 13:00:05 -0600 (MDT)
Received: from snmeng30.rr.intel.com (snmeng30.rr.intel.com [128.215.52.76]) by          snmeng30.rr.intel.com (8.9.1a/8.9.1/d: client.m4,v 1.3 1998/09/29          16:36:11 sedayao Exp sedayao $) with SMTP id NAA05033; Tue, 31 Jul          2001 13:00:02 -0600 (MDT)
X-Mailer: dtmail 1.2.1 CDE Version 1.2.1 SunOS 5.6 sun4m sparc
X-Sun-Text-Type: ascii
Message-ID:  <200107311900.NAA05033@snmeng30.rr.intel.com>
Date:         Tue, 31 Jul 2001 13:00:02 -0600
Reply-To: "Ray Calkins 100660207" <rcalkins@snmeng1.rr.intel.com>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Ray Calkins 100660207" <rcalkins@snmeng1.rr.intel.com>
Subject:      Re: [AR] ARocket projects Jully 2001
Comments: To: Waysie_Atkins@VANGUARD.COM
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Hi Waysie:

Pretty much all the papers on Bruno's site are mirrored on the aRocket sites.
Not all are immediately visible, as I have to create index pages for the new
servers, they don't allow contents to be shown.  Let me know which one you are
interested in and I will make those indexes my priority.

All but the propulsion section can be found at:
http://arocket.mid-south.net/library

Ray

> > **SPL http:///www.spl.ch Send civilians into orbit at
> > afordable price. SPL has a step by step program to get
> > its final objective.
>
>
> Thanks for the link.  On the puplications page many of the papers, when
clicked
> on, require a username and password to view.  How does one accquire such and
is
> a fee required?  A number of them look quite interesting.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Waysie

Ray Calkins
rcalkins@snmeng1.rr.intel.com           raymond.calkins@intel.com
"My opinions are my own, and do not reflect those of my employer."


From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 17293 invoked from network); 31 Jul 2001 19:22:37 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 31 Jul 2001 19:22:37 -0000
Received: (qmail 5013 invoked from network); 31 Jul 2001 19:24:41 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 31 Jul 2001 19:24:41 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA09679; Tue, 31 Jul 2001 12:19:04 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 90857 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 31 Jul 2001 19:17:42          +0000
Received: from mail1.murraystate.edu (mail1.murraystate.edu [216.249.159.50])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id MAA09657 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 31 Jul 2001 12:17:42 -0700
Received: from jjcomputer.murraystate.edu (216.249.150.117) by          mail1.murraystate.edu (NPlex 5.5.031) id 3B5DE1730002CFBE for          AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 31 Jul 2001 14:15:46 -0500
X-Sender: terry.mccreary@mail.murraystate.edu (Unverified)
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <5.1.0.14.0.20010731135944.00a12250@mail.murraystate.edu>
Date:         Tue, 31 Jul 2001 14:18:45 -0500
Reply-To: "Terry McCreary" <terry.mccreary@MURRAYSTATE.EDU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Terry McCreary" <terry.mccreary@MURRAYSTATE.EDU>
Subject:      [AR] Whoops-I-did-it-a-gain...
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Saturday I headed down to TN to do a little motor testing.  A 54mm motor
was assembled, using a 0.245" nozzle throat, Kn=240.  One Bates grain 3"
long, 1.8" dia, 0.75" core, 195 grams.  Propellant was 82% solids
Al/Zn/AP/HTPB, nice strong stuff, well-bonded to the casting tube.  The
motor was clamped to a stake.  5-4-3-2-1-and a nice yellow-white flame and
lots of white smoke.

Okay, assemble a 3-grain 29mm motor, same batch of propellant, this time at
Kn=310.  Put her on the thrust stand.  1.6 second burn, about 85 N average
thrust, Isp just under 200 s.

The 54 mm hardware has cooled off by now, so a second grain from the same
batch (196 grams) went into the motor.  Same nozzle as before,
Kn=240.  About a tenth of a second into the burn, the nozzle decided that
it was unhappy with its role and left the motor, tearing off the casing
below the snap ring groove, failing just like it's spozed to.  The motor
made its displeasure felt by having an argument with the load cell.  The
load cell lost the argument, going from a nicely machined piece of aluminum
and strain gages to a scrapheap in about a millisecond.  The propellant
grain was ejected from the motor, and continued to burn as it scampered
merrily away.

The CATO was accompanied by a loud report.  I never found the nozzle,
washer, or snap ring.

The only thing I can figure is that the igniter got wadded up in the nozzle
before it was completely ejected.  I am Not Happy...

P'rfesser
...living proof that $#!+ happens...

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 4016 invoked from network); 31 Jul 2001 19:34:13 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 31 Jul 2001 19:34:14 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 10307 invoked from network); 31 Jul 2001 19:36:06 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 31 Jul 2001 19:36:06 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA09989; Tue, 31 Jul 2001 12:31:53 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 90937 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 31 Jul 2001 19:30:31          +0000
Received: from scaup.mail.pas.earthlink.net (scaup.mail.pas.earthlink.net          [207.217.121.49]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA09966          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 31 Jul 2001 12:30:31 -0700
Received: from earthlink.net (dialup-209.245.136.38.Dial1.SanJose1.Level3.net          [209.245.136.38]) by scaup.mail.pas.earthlink.net (EL-8_9_3_3/8.9.3)          with ESMTP id MAA22431; Tue, 31 Jul 2001 12:30:27 -0700 (PDT)
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (Win98; I)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <5.1.0.14.0.20010731135944.00a12250@mail.murraystate.edu>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B670A74.5AA8D69B@earthlink.net>
Date:         Tue, 31 Jul 2001 12:43:48 -0700
Reply-To: <thomgaf@energyrs.com>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Thomas M. Mcgaffey" <energyrelease@EARTHLINK.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Whoops-I-did-it-a-gain...
Comments: To: Terry McCreary <terry.mccreary@MURRAYSTATE.EDU>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Hi Terry,

Had this type of thing happen to me more then once due to igniter
blockage of the nozzle.  I changed to head end igniter placement and
have not had this problem reoccur.  This also solved the slow
(poor ignition) motor start ups I was having.

Thom

--
Thomas M. McGaffey
Energy Release Systems
408-226-7502
thomgaf@energyrs.com

"The world needs dreamers and the world needs doers.
But above all, the world needs dreamers who do.  Don't
just entrust your hopes and wishes to the stars. Today,
begin learning the craft that will enable you to reach
for them."  -- Sarah Ban Breathnach



Terry McCreary wrote:
>
> Saturday I headed down to TN to do a little motor testing.  A 54mm motor
> was assembled, using a 0.245" nozzle throat, Kn=240.  One Bates grain 3"
> long, 1.8" dia, 0.75" core, 195 grams.  Propellant was 82% solids
> Al/Zn/AP/HTPB, nice strong stuff, well-bonded to the casting tube.  The
> motor was clamped to a stake.  5-4-3-2-1-and a nice yellow-white flame and
> lots of white smoke.
>
> Okay, assemble a 3-grain 29mm motor, same batch of propellant, this time at
> Kn=310.  Put her on the thrust stand.  1.6 second burn, about 85 N average
> thrust, Isp just under 200 s.
>
> The 54 mm hardware has cooled off by now, so a second grain from the same
> batch (196 grams) went into the motor.  Same nozzle as before,
> Kn=240.  About a tenth of a second into the burn, the nozzle decided that
> it was unhappy with its role and left the motor, tearing off the casing
> below the snap ring groove, failing just like it's spozed to.  The motor
> made its displeasure felt by having an argument with the load cell.  The
> load cell lost the argument, going from a nicely machined piece of aluminum
> and strain gages to a scrapheap in about a millisecond.  The propellant
> grain was ejected from the motor, and continued to burn as it scampered
> merrily away.
>
> The CATO was accompanied by a loud report.  I never found the nozzle,
> washer, or snap ring.
>
> The only thing I can figure is that the igniter got wadded up in the nozzle
> before it was completely ejected.  I am Not Happy...
>
> P'rfesser
> ...living proof that $#!+ happens...

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 11959 invoked from network); 31 Jul 2001 19:36:17 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 31 Jul 2001 19:36:17 -0000
Received: (qmail 4449 invoked from network); 31 Jul 2001 19:38:20 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 31 Jul 2001 19:38:20 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA10019; Tue, 31 Jul 2001 12:33:49 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 90945 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 31 Jul 2001 19:32:28          +0000
Received: from spock.alohanet.com (spock.alohanet.com [209.31.4.252]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA09999 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Tue, 31 Jul 2001 12:32:27 -0700
Received: from NATE2 (NATE2.alohanet.com [192.168.233.104]) by          spock.alohanet.com (Post.Office MTA v3.5.2 release 221 ID#          0-55447U100L2S100V35) with SMTP id com for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>;          Tue, 31 Jul 2001 12:31:24 -0700
References:  <5.1.0.14.0.20010731135944.00a12250@mail.murraystate.edu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <004b01c119f7$e8433660$68e9a8c0@NATE2>
Date:         Tue, 31 Jul 2001 12:35:08 -0700
Reply-To: "Nathan Hays" <nhays@ALOHANET.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Nathan Hays" <nhays@ALOHANET.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Whoops-I-did-it-a-gain...
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Same thing happened to me.  In my case (NPI), I dug a hole and put in the
motor fore down.  When the nozzle went for a joy ride, it took the igniter
and hookup wires with it.  I was back about 30 feet.  The wire from battery
to motor arced back over my head.  I found the nozzle 30 feet behind me,
still tethered to the battery cable.  We were treated to a beautiful crimson
fountain...

I've been concerned about igniter ejection ever since.

- Nate


----- Original Message -----
From: "Terry McCreary" <terry.mccreary@MURRAYSTATE.EDU>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Tuesday, July 31, 2001 12:18 PM
Subject: [AR] Whoops-I-did-it-a-gain...


> Saturday I headed down to TN to do a little motor testing.  A 54mm motor
> was assembled, using a 0.245" nozzle throat, Kn=240.  One Bates grain 3"
> long, 1.8" dia, 0.75" core, 195 grams.  Propellant was 82% solids
> Al/Zn/AP/HTPB, nice strong stuff, well-bonded to the casting tube.  The
> motor was clamped to a stake.  5-4-3-2-1-and a nice yellow-white flame and
> lots of white smoke.
>
> Okay, assemble a 3-grain 29mm motor, same batch of propellant, this time
at
> Kn=310.  Put her on the thrust stand.  1.6 second burn, about 85 N average
> thrust, Isp just under 200 s.
>
> The 54 mm hardware has cooled off by now, so a second grain from the same
> batch (196 grams) went into the motor.  Same nozzle as before,
> Kn=240.  About a tenth of a second into the burn, the nozzle decided that
> it was unhappy with its role and left the motor, tearing off the casing
> below the snap ring groove, failing just like it's spozed to.  The motor
> made its displeasure felt by having an argument with the load cell.  The
> load cell lost the argument, going from a nicely machined piece of
aluminum
> and strain gages to a scrapheap in about a millisecond.  The propellant
> grain was ejected from the motor, and continued to burn as it scampered
> merrily away.
>
> The CATO was accompanied by a loud report.  I never found the nozzle,
> washer, or snap ring.
>
> The only thing I can figure is that the igniter got wadded up in the
nozzle
> before it was completely ejected.  I am Not Happy...
>
> P'rfesser
> ...living proof that $#!+ happens...

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 9092 invoked from network); 31 Jul 2001 20:30:31 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 31 Jul 2001 20:30:31 -0000
Received: (qmail 23801 invoked from network); 31 Jul 2001 20:32:23 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 31 Jul 2001 20:32:23 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA10454; Tue, 31 Jul 2001 13:02:12 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 91040 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 31 Jul 2001 20:00:49          +0000
Received: from smtp6.mindspring.com (smtp6.mindspring.com [207.69.200.110]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA10433 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 31 Jul 2001 13:00:49 -0700
Received: from oemcomputer (user-38lddeg.dialup.mindspring.com          [209.86.181.208]) by smtp6.mindspring.com (8.9.3/8.8.5) with SMTP id          QAA14424 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 31 Jul 2001 16:00:47 -0400          (EDT)
References:  <200107302124.PAA01588@snmeng30.rr.intel.com>              <001501c11951$8110ece0$1b30fea9@kristinscomp>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <006401c119fa$dd0204e0$d0b556d1@oemcomputer>
Date:         Tue, 31 Jul 2001 15:56:14 -0400
Reply-To: "Robert" <OlympusMons@MINDSPRING.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Robert" <OlympusMons@MINDSPRING.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Plywood Tubing
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

I haven't got to checking most avenues to find my source yet. I'm wondering:
Buzz Aldrin's "Men From Earth?" I checked that out of the library a couple
years ago. My source could well be misguided, like and old Russian ICBM.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 19542 invoked from network); 31 Jul 2001 20:32:58 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 31 Jul 2001 20:32:58 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 2901 invoked from network); 31 Jul 2001 20:35:02 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 31 Jul 2001 20:35:02 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA10483; Tue, 31 Jul 2001 13:03:43 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 91026 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 31 Jul 2001 20:02:22          +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (f42.pav1.hotmail.com [64.4.31.42]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA10356 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue,          31 Jul 2001 12:50:54 -0700
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Tue,          31 Jul 2001 12:50:24 -0700
Received: from 63.87.136.59 by pv1fd.pav1.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Tue, 31          Jul 2001 19:50:23 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [63.87.136.59]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 31 Jul 2001 19:50:24.0119 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[09DEA870:01C119FA]
Message-ID:  <F42LkTgbLYluLCTaogx00009c35@hotmail.com>
Date:         Tue, 31 Jul 2001 12:50:23 -0700
Reply-To: "Brian Reddeman" <breddeman@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Brian Reddeman" <breddeman@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      [AR] Nano/Micro Pumps
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Hello Everyone;

I pretty much nieve to liquid fuel model rocketry (and engineering etc...)
but I do know a decent amount about liquid fuel rockets themselves.

I want to build a rocket motor no more than 12mm wide and 8cm tall. Anyone
know where I can find some sources of nano/micro pumps, valves and
compressed gas cylinders (I have a funny feeling I'm going to making most of
the stuff myself...)

Brian Reddeman
"I can't do it? Not possible? Too expensive? HA!"

_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 11947 invoked from network); 31 Jul 2001 21:07:13 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 31 Jul 2001 21:07:13 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: (qmail 8348 invoked from network); 31 Jul 2001 21:09:16 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 31 Jul 2001 21:09:16 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA11065; Tue, 31 Jul 2001 14:02:53 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 91163 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 31 Jul 2001 21:01:08          +0000
Received: from cisco.com (cypher.cisco.com [171.69.11.18]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA11043 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue,          31 Jul 2001 14:01:08 -0700
Received: (from billw@localhost) by cisco.com (8.8.8/2.6/Cisco List          Logging/8.8.8) id OAA17339; Tue, 31 Jul 2001 14:00:37 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID:  <CMM.0.90.4.996613237.billw@cypher>
Date:         Tue, 31 Jul 2001 14:00:37 PDT
Reply-To: "Bill Westfield" <billw@cisco.com>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "William Chops Westfield" <billw@cisco.com>
Subject:      Re: [AR] stump remover
Comments: To: Jamie Morken <jmorken@HOME.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  Your message of Tue, 31 Jul 2001 01:53:32 -0700

    How does KNO3 help remove stumps?  Surely icing sugar must be involved
    somehow :)

No, there's plenty of poly-sugar (cellulose) available.

One method involves letting the KNO3 soak in and then igniting the stump.
The KNO3 allows more of the stump to burn in the same way that KNO3-treated
tabbacco in a cigarette will stay lit on its own whereas a pipe or cigar
requires smoker-induced oxygen supply.

The other is that even at "normal" temperatures, KNO3 is a fine oxidizer and
fertilizer, and encourages the "natural" rotting of the stump...

BillW


From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 5528 invoked from network); 31 Jul 2001 21:13:00 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 31 Jul 2001 21:13:00 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 19280 invoked from network); 31 Jul 2001 21:15:03 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 31 Jul 2001 21:15:03 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA11185; Tue, 31 Jul 2001 14:09:59 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 91179 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 31 Jul 2001 21:08:36          +0000
Received: from ns.vanguard.com (ns.VANGUARD.COM [192.175.173.31]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA11160 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 31 Jul 2001 14:08:36 -0700
Received: from eagle1.vanguard.com (eagle1.VANGUARD.COM [192.175.141.70]) by          ns.vanguard.com (Switch-2.1.3/Switch-2.1.0) with ESMTP id          f6VL8Yv00047 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 31 Jul 2001 17:08:34          -0400 (EDT)
Received: from vgi4mail.vanguard.com (vgi4mail.vanguard.com [10.254.65.16]) by          eagle1.vanguard.com (Switch-2.1.3/Switch-2.1.0) with SMTP id          f6VL8Xa26090 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 31 Jul 2001 17:08:33          -0400 (EDT)
Received: by vgi4mail.vanguard.com(Lotus SMTP MTA v4.6.6  (890.1 7-16-1999))           id 85256A9A.0074583D ; Tue, 31 Jul 2001 17:10:47 -0400
X-Lotus-FromDomain: VGINOTES
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Disposition: inline
Message-ID:  <85256A9A.00743745.00@vgi4mail.vanguard.com>
Date:         Tue, 31 Jul 2001 17:07:06 -0400
Reply-To: <Waysie_Atkins@VANGUARD.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <Waysie_Atkins@VANGUARD.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Whoops-I-did-it-a-gain...
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

< I changed to head end igniter placement


By this do you mean the igniter leads go through the forward case closure??


Waysie

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 3864 invoked from network); 31 Jul 2001 21:27:26 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 31 Jul 2001 21:27:26 -0000
Received: (qmail 15747 invoked from network); 31 Jul 2001 21:29:29 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 31 Jul 2001 21:29:29 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA11364; Tue, 31 Jul 2001 14:17:32 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 91196 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 31 Jul 2001 21:16:10          +0000
Received: from yellowdog.featuretech.com ([63.121.63.69]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA11342 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue,          31 Jul 2001 14:16:10 -0700
Received: from duncan (sdsl-64-139-32-247.dsl.sjc.megapath.net [64.139.32.247])          by yellowdog.featuretech.com with SMTP (Microsoft Exchange Internet          Mail Service Version 5.5.2448.0) id QA2W3KWN; Tue, 31 Jul 2001          14:27:17 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <NEBBLECGKLLOLFCCBNPECEOHDBAA.duncan@transim.com>
Date:         Tue, 31 Jul 2001 14:15:38 -0700
Reply-To: "Duncan McDonald" <duncan@TRANSIM.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Duncan McDonald" <duncan@TRANSIM.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Plywood Tubing
Comments: To: "Mark K. Spute" <mks@BIOMICRO.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <3B65EDF6.41DE7E5B@biomicro.com>

Mark,

Try checking http://www.v2rocket.com/start/others/reference.html which is a
great resource on V2/A4 stuff.

The book couldn't be "A4 - Fibel", German Field Technical Manual, Army
Ballistic Missile Agency - Redstone Arsenal, Alabama, John A. Bitzer & Ted
A. Woerner, 1957 (ISBN 0-9696169-5-X)*" could it?

Good luck!

Duncan




-----Original Message-----
From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@itc.uci.edu]On
Behalf Of Mark K. Spute
Sent: Monday, July 30, 2001 4:30 PM
To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
Subject: Re: [AR] Plywood Tubing


The book was an old book I ran across about 10 years ago, hidden in the
stacks at the university library.  It was sort of an engineering history
of the V2, and had all kinds of drawings and diagrams of the
construction of the V2, plus construction details AND it had a copy of
the original field manual (in german of course) detailing how to service
it, set it up, and launch it.

Unfortunately, I have been back there looking for it, and can't find
it.  I don't remember the title, or the author, or anything.  It was a
small book, about 8-1/2 inches tall I recall, and it seems about 200
pages including the manual.

Does anyone know anything about it.  I'd love to look at it again.  I
didn't know enough then to even ask the right questions.




Des Bromilow wrote:
>
> Don't know which V2 book he was referring to, but every rmr denizen knows
Peter Alway (Saturn press - author of Rockets of the World) has a history of
the V2 book in his offerings.
>
> HTH,
> Des
>
> >>> Ray Calkins 100660207 <rcalkins@snmeng1.rr.intel.com> 31/07/01 7:24:14
am >>>
> Mark wrote:
> > It seems to me the basis for all this came from the V2.  My
> > understanding is, (and I could be wrong) that the V2 had a plywood frame
> > that supported the propellant tanks, and the external skin.  Engine
> > mounts were metal, but bolted to the plywood frame.
>
> We've got a few rusting V2 hulks around White Sands Missile Range.  It's
> difficult to tell after all these years, but it looks like they are full
steel
> truss structures, skinned with riveted steel.  Next time I have a chance,
I'll
> take some pics and put them up on the site.  They certainly have steel
interior
> supports, but it is unknown whether they had wood as well.  I think it
would be
> highly likely.
>
> > Wish I could find that book on the V2 again.
> What was the title or author?  Might be worthwhile to get on Inter-Library
Loan!
>
> Ray Calkins
> rcalkins@snmeng1.rr.intel.com           raymond.calkins@intel.com
> "My opinions are my own, and do not reflect those of my employer."

--
Mark K. Spute
Senior Research Engineer
BioMicro Systems Inc.

KD7IWE,  RRS

"It is difficult to say what is impossible, for the dream of yesterday
is the hope of today and the reality of tomorrow."
     Dr. Robert H. Goddard

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 14463 invoked from network); 31 Jul 2001 21:51:21 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 31 Jul 2001 21:51:21 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 14880 invoked from network); 31 Jul 2001 21:53:46 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 31 Jul 2001 21:53:46 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA11772; Tue, 31 Jul 2001 14:48:30 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 91270 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 31 Jul 2001 21:46:41          +0000
Received: from kronos.usol.com (IDENT:root@[208.232.58.25]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA11745 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue,          31 Jul 2001 14:46:40 -0700
Received: from fredflin (pm5-13.usol.com [63.64.149.29]) by kronos.usol.com          (8.11.1/8.11.0) with SMTP id f6VLnF801917 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>;          Tue, 31 Jul 2001 17:49:15 -0400
X-Sender: mycrump@pop3.usol.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.5 (32)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <3.0.5.32.20010731174156.007afb90@pop3.usol.com>
Date:         Tue, 31 Jul 2001 17:41:56 -0400
Reply-To: "Daryl P. Dacko" <mycrump@USOL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Daryl P. Dacko" <mycrump@USOL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Whoops-I-did-it-a-gain...
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <5.1.0.14.0.20010731135944.00a12250@mail.murraystate.edu>

At 02:18 PM 7/31/01 -0500, you wrote:

>Saturday I headed down to TN to do a little motor testing.

<Big Snip>

>The only thing I can figure is that the igniter got wadded up in the nozzle
>before it was completely ejected.  I am Not Happy...
>
>P'rfesser
>...living proof that $#!+ happens...

My apologies, but it is truly good to see that the Master Himself has, and
admits to, failures ;')

It helps give strength to the rest of us poor schmuks who are struggling
to catch up with him...

We too had a test fireing this weekend, and can report good success with
four diffrent propellent formulations.

This was my third try at HTPB based propellent with my first two tries
resulting in little pieces of caseing and unburned fuel raining down
upon my head...

So to balance your failure, we had success, again restoreing balance to
the cosmos ;')

Oh, and just how large of leads do you use in your ignitors ???

I've never seen a failure of that type before

Your humble student,

Daryl

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 14642 invoked from network); 31 Jul 2001 22:12:52 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 31 Jul 2001 22:12:52 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 14660 invoked from network); 31 Jul 2001 22:14:55 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 31 Jul 2001 22:14:55 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA12420; Tue, 31 Jul 2001 15:10:47 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 91356 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 31 Jul 2001 22:09:16          +0000
Received: from ns.vanguard.com (ns.VANGUARD.COM [192.175.173.31]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA12389 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Tue, 31 Jul 2001 15:09:16 -0700
Received: from eagle1.vanguard.com (eagle1.VANGUARD.COM [192.175.141.70]) by          ns.vanguard.com (Switch-2.1.3/Switch-2.1.0) with ESMTP id          f6VM9Fv14285 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Tue, 31 Jul 2001 18:09:15          -0400 (EDT)
Received: from vgi4mail.vanguard.com (vgi4mail.vanguard.com [10.254.65.16]) by          eagle1.vanguard.com (Switch-2.1.3/Switch-2.1.0) with SMTP id          f6VM9Ea10816 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Tue, 31 Jul 2001 18:09:14          -0400 (EDT)
Received: by vgi4mail.vanguard.com(Lotus SMTP MTA v4.6.6  (890.1 7-16-1999))           id 85256A9A.0079E6BA ; Tue, 31 Jul 2001 18:11:29 -0400
X-Lotus-FromDomain: VGINOTES
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Disposition: inline
Message-ID:  <85256A9A.0078EDF6.00@vgi4mail.vanguard.com>
Date:         Tue, 31 Jul 2001 17:58:35 -0400
Reply-To: <Waysie_Atkins@VANGUARD.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <Waysie_Atkins@VANGUARD.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] pressurization (was Re: [AR] 3Re: [AR] 2Re: [AR] dark              secrets)
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Having been out last week I'm getting caught up on the posts.  Bruno's site
(SPL's site) has the (an) answer to this thread I believe.  Does their Tridyne
Heating system not do a similar thing.  It doesn't self-pressurize but by
minimizing the helium tank may effect similar results (T/W).  Perhaps would be
as effiecient as plumbing....

If not, still a great approach, IMHO.

Waysie

<Perhaps just sa well to have a separate electrical heating unit. Heavy, but
<no plumbing. I have heard of (marginal) success routing small amounts of
<oxidizer and fuel seperately around the powerplant and then sending the gas
<back up to their respective tanks. Seems very tricky though and more an
<intellectual exercise than someting of practical use.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 28397 invoked from network); 31 Jul 2001 22:45:25 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 31 Jul 2001 22:45:25 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 26408 invoked from network); 31 Jul 2001 22:47:30 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 31 Jul 2001 22:47:30 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA13638; Tue, 31 Jul 2001 15:41:59 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 91523 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 31 Jul 2001 22:40:34          +0000
Received: from avocet.mail.pas.earthlink.net (avocet.mail.pas.earthlink.net          [207.217.121.50]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA13604          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 31 Jul 2001 15:40:34 -0700
Received: from earthlink.net (dialup-209.247.136.210.Dial1.SanJose1.Level3.net          [209.247.136.210]) by avocet.mail.pas.earthlink.net          (EL-8_9_3_3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id PAA04162; Tue, 31 Jul 2001 15:40:31          -0700 (PDT)
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (Win98; I)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <85256A9A.00743745.00@vgi4mail.vanguard.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B6736FF.394850F0@earthlink.net>
Date:         Tue, 31 Jul 2001 15:53:51 -0700
Reply-To: <thomgaf@energyrs.com>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Thomas M. Mcgaffey" <energyrelease@EARTHLINK.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Whoops-I-did-it-a-gain...
Comments: To: Waysie_Atkins@VANGUARD.COM
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Yes, The igniter is screwed into the forward closure.  This placement is
used for the shuttle SRBs and is also used by the RRS in its solid
motors.  Safety is not an issue as the igniter is not installed until
just before launch (not so in SRBs).  I find that a small access door is
all that is needed in a rocket to allow the installation of the igniter.
Tiny motors of course would not be good candidates for forward installed
igniters, on the other hand..... .

Thom

Thomas M. McGaffey
Energy Release Systems
thomgaf@energyrs.com
San Jose, Kalifornia
408-226-7502

Waysie_Atkins@VANGUARD.COM wrote:
>
> < I changed to head end igniter placement
>
> By this do you mean the igniter leads go through the forward case closure??
>
> Waysie

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 24687 invoked from network); 31 Jul 2001 23:13:21 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 31 Jul 2001 23:13:21 -0000
Received: (qmail 8733 invoked from network); 31 Jul 2001 23:15:26 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 31 Jul 2001 23:15:26 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA14223; Tue, 31 Jul 2001 16:10:01 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 91614 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 31 Jul 2001 23:08:24          +0000
Received: from mta03.mail.mel.aone.net.au (mta03.mail.au.uu.net [203.2.192.83])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA14186 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 31 Jul 2001 16:08:23 -0700
Received: from unknown ([63.34.212.157]) by mta03.mail.mel.aone.net.au with          SMTP id <20010731230821.HRXX23157.mta03.mail.mel.aone.net.au@unknown>          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 1 Aug 2001 09:08:21 +1000
References: Conversation <85256A9A.00743745.00@vgi4mail.vanguard.com> with last            message <3B6736FF.394850F0@earthlink.net>
Priority: Normal
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Priority: 3
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	X-MAPIextension=.TXT;
	charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>
Date:         Tue, 31 Jul 2001 23:08:24 +0000
Reply-To: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Whoops-I-did-it-a-gain...
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <3B6736FF.394850F0@earthlink.net>

"Solid Propellant Technology" is a good reference for different types of
igniters.

Troy.

----------
> Yes, The igniter is screwed into the forward closure.  This placement is
> used for the shuttle SRBs and is also used by the RRS in its solid
> motors.  Safety is not an issue as the igniter is not installed until
> just before launch (not so in SRBs).  I find that a small access door is
> all that is needed in a rocket to allow the installation of the igniter.
> Tiny motors of course would not be good candidates for forward installed
> igniters, on the other hand..... .
>
> Thom
>
> Thomas M. McGaffey
> Energy Release Systems
> thomgaf@energyrs.com
> San Jose, Kalifornia
> 408-226-7502
>
> Waysie_Atkins@VANGUARD.COM wrote:
> >
> > < I changed to head end igniter placement
> >
> > By this do you mean the igniter leads go through the forward case
closure??
> >
> > Waysie

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 16320 invoked from network); 1 Aug 2001 00:02:39 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 1 Aug 2001 00:02:39 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 17060 invoked from network); 1 Aug 2001 00:04:41 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 1 Aug 2001 00:04:41 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA15270; Tue, 31 Jul 2001 17:00:00 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 91758 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 31 Jul 2001 23:58:37          +0000
Received: from mail.aros.net (mail.aros.net [207.173.16.20]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA15242 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue,          31 Jul 2001 16:58:37 -0700
Received: from biomicro.com ([208.187.122.40]) by mail.aros.net (8.11.3/8.9.3)          with ESMTP id f6VNwah43046 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 31 Jul          2001 17:58:36 -0600 (MDT)
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.77 [en] (Win98; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <F42LkTgbLYluLCTaogx00009c35@hotmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B6688D8.F6ACDEF9@biomicro.com>
Date:         Tue, 31 Jul 2001 04:30:48 -0600
Reply-To: "Mark K. Spute" <mks@BIOMICRO.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Mark K. Spute" <mks@BIOMICRO.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Nano/Micro Pumps
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Brian;

Your definition of micro/nano may be different than industry's.  I'm
presuming you are looking for pumps with internal volumes in the
microliter/nanoliter range.

I don't know of any source of commercially available micro/nano pumps.

Berkely sensor labs may have some available for sale.  Also CalTech, and
MIT.  Be aware however that these units are highly experimental, may not
be completely reliable, and may run in the thousands to tens of
thousands of dollars.  Each.

Incidentally, if you do find a source of cheap micro/nano scale pumps,
my company would be very interested in knowing about it.





Brian Reddeman wrote:
>
> Hello Everyone;
>
> I pretty much nieve to liquid fuel model rocketry (and engineering etc...)
> but I do know a decent amount about liquid fuel rockets themselves.
>
> I want to build a rocket motor no more than 12mm wide and 8cm tall. Anyone
> know where I can find some sources of nano/micro pumps, valves and
> compressed gas cylinders (I have a funny feeling I'm going to making most of
> the stuff myself...)
>
> Brian Reddeman
> "I can't do it? Not possible? Too expensive? HA!"
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

--
Mark K. Spute
Senior Research Engineer
BioMicro Systems Inc.

KD7IWE,  RRS

"It is difficult to say what is impossible, for the dream of yesterday
is the hope of today and the reality of tomorrow."
     Dr. Robert H. Goddard

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 11601 invoked from network); 1 Aug 2001 00:08:59 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 1 Aug 2001 00:08:59 -0000
Received: (qmail 19940 invoked from network); 1 Aug 2001 00:10:53 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 1 Aug 2001 00:10:53 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA14999; Tue, 31 Jul 2001 16:52:39 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 91725 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 31 Jul 2001 23:51:14          +0000
Received: from mta02.mail.mel.aone.net.au (mta02.mail.au.uu.net [203.2.192.82])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA14976 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 31 Jul 2001 16:51:14 -0700
Received: from unknown ([63.34.210.14]) by mta02.mail.mel.aone.net.au with SMTP          id <20010731235111.WDSW8316.mta02.mail.mel.aone.net.au@unknown>; Wed,          1 Aug 2001 09:51:11 +1000
References: Conversation <F42LkTgbLYluLCTaogx00009c35@hotmail.com> with last            message <F42LkTgbLYluLCTaogx00009c35@hotmail.com>
Priority: Normal
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Priority: 3
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	X-MAPIextension=.TXT;
	charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>
Date:         Tue, 31 Jul 2001 23:51:14 +0000
Reply-To: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Nano/Micro Pumps
Comments: To: Brian Reddeman <breddeman@HOTMAIL.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <F42LkTgbLYluLCTaogx00009c35@hotmail.com>

Brian,
 Why do it with pumps? Lemme guess....the ahh, challenge?  The pumps will
almost certainly not be available off the shelf and it's likely the parts
won't be either (gears, turbines, impellers etc). Not even the model jet
guys go that small for their gear. A rotary style injection/feed/pump
system maybe the only option for such a small "pumped" system.

Troy.

----------
> Hello Everyone;
>
> I pretty much nieve to liquid fuel model rocketry (and engineering etc...)
> but I do know a decent amount about liquid fuel rockets themselves.
>
> I want to build a rocket motor no more than 12mm wide and 8cm tall. Anyone
> know where I can find some sources of nano/micro pumps, valves and
> compressed gas cylinders (I have a funny feeling I'm going to making most
of
> the stuff myself...)
>
> Brian Reddeman
> "I can't do it? Not possible? Too expensive? HA!"
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 15099 invoked from network); 1 Aug 2001 00:09:56 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 1 Aug 2001 00:09:56 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 1172 invoked from network); 1 Aug 2001 00:12:02 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 1 Aug 2001 00:12:02 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA15508; Tue, 31 Jul 2001 17:06:12 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 91791 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 1 Aug 2001 00:04:50 +0000
Received: from mail.aros.net (mail.aros.net [207.173.16.20]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA15459 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Tue,          31 Jul 2001 17:04:39 -0700
Received: from biomicro.com ([208.187.122.40]) by mail.aros.net (8.11.3/8.9.3)          with ESMTP id f7104ch44898 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Tue, 31 Jul          2001 18:04:38 -0600 (MDT)
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.77 [en] (Win98; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B668A42.5001535F@biomicro.com>
Date:         Tue, 31 Jul 2001 04:36:50 -0600
Reply-To: "Mark K. Spute" <mks@BIOMICRO.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Mark K. Spute" <mks@BIOMICRO.COM>
Subject:      [AR] Amateur Rocketry Association
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Does anyone know whatever happened to the Amateur Rocketry Association?
They published a boatload of papers and stuff in the 1960's.  Where'd
they go?



--
Mark K. Spute
Senior Research Engineer
BioMicro Systems Inc.

KD7IWE,  RRS

"It is difficult to say what is impossible, for the dream of yesterday
is the hope of today and the reality of tomorrow."
     Dr. Robert H. Goddard

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 960 invoked from network); 1 Aug 2001 00:13:52 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 1 Aug 2001 00:13:52 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 2781 invoked from network); 1 Aug 2001 00:15:57 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 1 Aug 2001 00:15:57 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA15468; Tue, 31 Jul 2001 17:04:48 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 91781 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 1 Aug 2001 00:03:30 +0000
Received: from mail.aros.net (mail.aros.net [207.173.16.20]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA15442 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue,          31 Jul 2001 17:03:29 -0700
Received: from biomicro.com ([208.187.122.40]) by mail.aros.net (8.11.3/8.9.3)          with ESMTP id f7103Th44548 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 31 Jul          2001 18:03:29 -0600 (MDT)
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.77 [en] (Win98; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <NEBBLECGKLLOLFCCBNPECEOHDBAA.duncan@transim.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B6689FD.6442A351@biomicro.com>
Date:         Tue, 31 Jul 2001 04:35:41 -0600
Reply-To: "Mark K. Spute" <mks@BIOMICRO.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Mark K. Spute" <mks@BIOMICRO.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Plywood Tubing
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Could have been.  I checked their catalogs today for anything remotely
resembling that bood by title, author, subject, keyword, etc. and came
up negative.  If they did have it, they don't anymore.

Don't know where I could get a copy, do you?



Duncan McDonald wrote:
>
> Mark,
>
> Try checking http://www.v2rocket.com/start/others/reference.html which is a
> great resource on V2/A4 stuff.
>
> The book couldn't be "A4 - Fibel", German Field Technical Manual, Army
> Ballistic Missile Agency - Redstone Arsenal, Alabama, John A. Bitzer & Ted
> A. Woerner, 1957 (ISBN 0-9696169-5-X)*" could it?
>
> Good luck!
>
> Duncan
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@itc.uci.edu]On
> Behalf Of Mark K. Spute
> Sent: Monday, July 30, 2001 4:30 PM
> To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
> Subject: Re: [AR] Plywood Tubing
>
> The book was an old book I ran across about 10 years ago, hidden in the
> stacks at the university library.  It was sort of an engineering history
> of the V2, and had all kinds of drawings and diagrams of the
> construction of the V2, plus construction details AND it had a copy of
> the original field manual (in german of course) detailing how to service
> it, set it up, and launch it.
>
> Unfortunately, I have been back there looking for it, and can't find
> it.  I don't remember the title, or the author, or anything.  It was a
> small book, about 8-1/2 inches tall I recall, and it seems about 200
> pages including the manual.
>
> Does anyone know anything about it.  I'd love to look at it again.  I
> didn't know enough then to even ask the right questions.
>
> Des Bromilow wrote:
> >
> > Don't know which V2 book he was referring to, but every rmr denizen knows
> Peter Alway (Saturn press - author of Rockets of the World) has a history of
> the V2 book in his offerings.
> >
> > HTH,
> > Des
> >
> > >>> Ray Calkins 100660207 <rcalkins@snmeng1.rr.intel.com> 31/07/01 7:24:14
> am >>>
> > Mark wrote:
> > > It seems to me the basis for all this came from the V2.  My
> > > understanding is, (and I could be wrong) that the V2 had a plywood frame
> > > that supported the propellant tanks, and the external skin.  Engine
> > > mounts were metal, but bolted to the plywood frame.
> >
> > We've got a few rusting V2 hulks around White Sands Missile Range.  It's
> > difficult to tell after all these years, but it looks like they are full
> steel
> > truss structures, skinned with riveted steel.  Next time I have a chance,
> I'll
> > take some pics and put them up on the site.  They certainly have steel
> interior
> > supports, but it is unknown whether they had wood as well.  I think it
> would be
> > highly likely.
> >
> > > Wish I could find that book on the V2 again.
> > What was the title or author?  Might be worthwhile to get on Inter-Library
> Loan!
> >
> > Ray Calkins
> > rcalkins@snmeng1.rr.intel.com           raymond.calkins@intel.com
> > "My opinions are my own, and do not reflect those of my employer."
>
> --
> Mark K. Spute
> Senior Research Engineer
> BioMicro Systems Inc.
>
> KD7IWE,  RRS
>
> "It is difficult to say what is impossible, for the dream of yesterday
> is the hope of today and the reality of tomorrow."
>      Dr. Robert H. Goddard

--
Mark K. Spute
Senior Research Engineer
BioMicro Systems Inc.

KD7IWE,  RRS

"It is difficult to say what is impossible, for the dream of yesterday
is the hope of today and the reality of tomorrow."
     Dr. Robert H. Goddard

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 23997 invoked from network); 1 Aug 2001 00:19:41 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 1 Aug 2001 00:19:41 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 15614 invoked from network); 1 Aug 2001 00:20:51 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 1 Aug 2001 00:20:51 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA15920; Tue, 31 Jul 2001 17:16:12 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 91831 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 1 Aug 2001 00:14:48 +0000
Received: from mail1.murraystate.edu (mail1.murraystate.edu [216.249.159.50])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id RAA15897 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 31 Jul 2001 17:14:48 -0700
Received: from jjcomputer.murraystate.edu (216.249.158.68) by          mail1.murraystate.edu (NPlex 5.5.031) id 3B5DE1730002E3B3 for          AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 31 Jul 2001 19:12:53 -0500
X-Sender: terry.mccreary@mail.murraystate.edu
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
References: <5.1.0.14.0.20010731135944.00a12250@mail.murraystate.edu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <5.1.0.14.0.20010731190453.01d879e0@mail.murraystate.edu>
Date:         Tue, 31 Jul 2001 19:15:55 -0500
Reply-To: "Terry McCreary" <terry.mccreary@MURRAYSTATE.EDU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Terry McCreary" <terry.mccreary@MURRAYSTATE.EDU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Whoops-I-did-it-a-gain...
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <3.0.5.32.20010731174156.007afb90@pop3.usol.com>

At 05:41 PM 7/31/01 -0400, you wrote:

>It helps give strength to the rest of us poor schmuks who are struggling
>to catch up with him...

I can honestly say that a LOT of the good folk on this list are way past
me.  I like smaller motors, 24-38 mm diameter.

>This was my third try at HTPB based propellent with my first two tries
>resulting in little pieces of caseing and unburned fuel raining down
>upon my head...
>
>So to balance your failure, we had success, again restoreing balance to
>the cosmos ;')

Ahhh... it must be karma.  Whatever that is...


>Oh, and just how large of leads do you use in your ignitors ???

The leads were 24 gauge "shooting wire", very soft copper, it bends much
more easily and in tighter radii than the network twisted-pair wire I've
used in the past.

I suspect that this failure mode is unlikely in a flight motor because the
motor leaves the igniter.  Usually.

P'rfesser

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 26934 invoked from network); 1 Aug 2001 00:50:30 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 1 Aug 2001 00:50:30 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 5906 invoked from network); 1 Aug 2001 00:52:31 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 1 Aug 2001 00:52:31 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA16262; Tue, 31 Jul 2001 17:46:53 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 91877 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 1 Aug 2001 00:45:30 +0000
Received: from robin.mail.pas.earthlink.net (robin.mail.pas.earthlink.net          [207.217.120.65]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA16240          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 31 Jul 2001 17:45:30 -0700
Received: from m0a2q0.earthlink.net          (pool0780.cvx23-bradley.dialup.earthlink.net [209.179.207.15]) by          robin.mail.pas.earthlink.net (EL-8_9_3_3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id          RAA26163 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 31 Jul 2001 17:45:29 -0700          (PDT)
X-Sender: apendragn@mail.earthlink.net
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <4.3.1.1.20010731174316.00bbe9f0@mail.earthlink.net>
Date:         Tue, 31 Jul 2001 17:47:14 -0700
Reply-To: "Arthur Ed LeBouthillier" <apendragn@EARTHLINK.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Arthur Ed LeBouthillier" <apendragn@EARTHLINK.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Nano/Micro Pumps
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <F42LkTgbLYluLCTaogx00009c35@hotmail.com>

At 12:50 PM 7/31/01 -0700, you wrote:
>.... Anyone know where I can find some sources of nano/micro pumps, valves\
>  and compressed gas cylinders (I have a funny feeling I'm going to making
> most of
>the stuff myself...)

MIT's Gas Turbine Lab is working on them right now:

         http://web.mit.edu/aeroastro/www/labs/GTL/

and

http://web.mit.edu/aeroastro/www/labs/GTL/research/micro/micro.html

You'll have to build the stuff yourself, more than likely.

Cheers,
Art Ed LeBouthillier

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 27821 invoked from network); 1 Aug 2001 01:53:42 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 1 Aug 2001 01:53:42 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 20033 invoked from network); 1 Aug 2001 01:56:06 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 1 Aug 2001 01:56:06 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA16790; Tue, 31 Jul 2001 18:49:34 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 91944 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 1 Aug 2001 01:48:13 +0000
Received: from smtp01.roc.gblx.net (smtp01.roc.gblx.net [209.130.222.196]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA16763 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 31 Jul 2001 18:47:45 -0700
Received: (from daemon@localhost) by smtp01.roc.gblx.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id          VAA93712 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 31 Jul 2001 21:46:40 -0400
Received: from 64-208-224-82.nas2.TBR.gblx.net(64.208.224.82),          claiming to be "frontiernet.net" via SMTP by smtp01.roc.gblx.net,          id smtpddpsNUa; Tue Jul 31 21:46:25 2001
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.74 [en] (Win98; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <4.3.1.1.20010731174316.00bbe9f0@mail.earthlink.net>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B6760A0.79C1E961@frontiernet.net>
Date:         Tue, 31 Jul 2001 21:51:28 -0400
Reply-To: <tbinford@frontiernet.net>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Tom Binford" <tbinford@frontiernet.net>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Nano/Micro Pumps
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Arthur Ed LeBouthillier wrote:
>
> At 12:50 PM 7/31/01 -0700, you wrote:
> >.... Anyone know where I can find some sources of nano/micro pumps, valves\
> >  and compressed gas cylinders (I have a funny feeling I'm going to making
> > most of
> >the stuff myself...)

> http://web.mit.edu/aeroastro/www/labs/GTL/research/micro/micro.html
>
> You'll have to build the stuff yourself, more than likely.

Why not use pressure feed?

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 3030 invoked from network); 1 Aug 2001 01:55:00 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 1 Aug 2001 01:55:00 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 4547 invoked from network); 1 Aug 2001 01:56:32 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 1 Aug 2001 01:56:32 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA16761; Tue, 31 Jul 2001 18:47:31 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 91936 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 1 Aug 2001 01:46:43 +0000
Received: from smtp01.roc.gblx.net (smtp01.roc.gblx.net [209.130.222.196]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA16737 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 31 Jul 2001 18:46:43 -0700
Received: (from daemon@localhost) by smtp01.roc.gblx.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id          VAA11294 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 31 Jul 2001 21:45:34 -0400
Received: from 64-208-224-82.nas2.TBR.gblx.net(64.208.224.82),          claiming to be "frontiernet.net" via SMTP by smtp01.roc.gblx.net,          id smtpdDElPya; Tue Jul 31 21:45:26 2001
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.74 [en] (Win98; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <5.1.0.14.0.20010731135944.00a12250@mail.murraystate.edu>            <5.1.0.14.0.20010731190453.01d879e0@mail.murraystate.edu>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B67605D.A01F9AE9@frontiernet.net>
Date:         Tue, 31 Jul 2001 21:50:21 -0400
Reply-To: <tbinford@frontiernet.net>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Tom Binford" <tbinford@frontiernet.net>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Whoops-I-did-it-a-gain...
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Terry McCreary wrote:
>
> At 05:41 PM 7/31/01 -0400, you wrote:
>
> >It helps give strength to the rest of us poor schmuks who are struggling
> >to catch up with him...
>
> I can honestly say that a LOT of the good folk on this list are way past
> me.  I like smaller motors, 24-38 mm diameter.

I just made another batch of 13 mm C20's last week. 300g propellant made
23 motors :-)

I did CATO a 54 mm motor last time I flew some motors.

Tom

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 6121 invoked from network); 1 Aug 2001 02:11:02 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 1 Aug 2001 02:11:03 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 21827 invoked from network); 1 Aug 2001 02:12:18 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 1 Aug 2001 02:12:18 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA17006; Tue, 31 Jul 2001 19:06:39 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 91998 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 1 Aug 2001 02:05:16 +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (f106.law14.hotmail.com [64.4.21.106]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA16981 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 31 Jul 2001 19:05:16 -0700
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Tue,          31 Jul 2001 19:04:46 -0700
Received: from 199.182.112.23 by lw14fd.law14.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Wed,          01 Aug 2001 02:04:45 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [199.182.112.23]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 01 Aug 2001 02:04:46.0263 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[5659D470:01C11A2E]
Message-ID:  <F106beUzmRf6Ci6nx8d0000b0c8@hotmail.com>
Date:         Wed, 1 Aug 2001 02:04:45 +0000
Reply-To: "Matt Faulkner" <mattfaulkner9@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Matt Faulkner" <mattfaulkner9@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Portable data aquisition devices
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Hi Tim-
I don't know much about palm pilots, so let me first ask what type of
input/output ports it has, as well as what I/O ports are available from your
external sensors. Does your Palm have a serial port (9-pin connector)? Are
you using commercial or home-brew sensors?
  Also, try www.nutsvolts.com they have a very helpful electronics forum.

_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp
C.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 15110 invoked from network); 1 Aug 2001 09:40:33 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 1 Aug 2001 09:40:33 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 5334 invoked from network); 1 Aug 2001 09:42:59 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 1 Aug 2001 09:42:59 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id CAA19741; Wed, 1 Aug 2001 02:37:23 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 92352 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 1 Aug 2001 09:33:29 +0000
Received: from stud.uni-goettingen.de (root@s2.stud.uni-goettingen.de          [134.76.60.22]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id CAA19716          for <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Wed, 1 Aug 2001 02:33:28 -0700
Received: from router.atw.stud.uni-goettingen.de ([134.76.62.65]          helo=stud.uni-goettingen.de) by stud.uni-goettingen.de with esmtp          (Exim 2.12 #8) id 15RsNZ-000585-00 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 1          Aug 2001 11:33:25 +0200
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [de] (Win98; I)
X-Accept-Language: de
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B67CCEB.5A853F29@stud.uni-goettingen.de>
Date:         Wed, 1 Aug 2001 11:33:31 +0200
Reply-To: "Thomas Engelhardt" <tengelh@STUD.UNI-GOETTINGEN.DE>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Thomas Engelhardt" <tengelh@STUD.UNI-GOETTINGEN.DE>
Organization: =?iso-8859-1?Q?Rocket_Research_G=F6ttingen_=28RRG=29?=
Subject:      [AR] Head end igniters
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

That concept sounds very interesting - could anyone here post a
reference (internet, literature etc.)?
It must be a challenge to keep the whole closure/igniter assembly gas
tight so no motor exhaust will escape into the airframe.

Cheers,

Tom

--
Atheism is a non-prophet organization.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 21321 invoked from network); 1 Aug 2001 11:20:19 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 1 Aug 2001 11:20:19 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 5971 invoked from network); 1 Aug 2001 11:22:43 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 1 Aug 2001 11:22:43 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id EAA20198; Wed, 1 Aug 2001 04:17:49 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 92388 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 1 Aug 2001 11:16:20 +0000
Received: from snipe.mail.pas.earthlink.net (snipe.mail.pas.earthlink.net          [207.217.120.62]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id EAA20178          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 1 Aug 2001 04:16:20 -0700
Received: from earthlink.net (dialup-209.247.141.223.Dial1.SanJose1.Level3.net          [209.247.141.223]) by snipe.mail.pas.earthlink.net (EL-8_9_3_3/8.9.3)          with ESMTP id EAA21957; Wed, 1 Aug 2001 04:16:15 -0700 (PDT)
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (Win98; I)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <3B67CCEB.5A853F29@stud.uni-goettingen.de>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B67E822.8E1D0A44@earthlink.net>
Date:         Wed, 1 Aug 2001 04:29:38 -0700
Reply-To: <thomgaf@energyrs.com>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Thomas M. Mcgaffey" <energyrelease@EARTHLINK.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Head end igniters
Comments: To: Thomas Engelhardt <tengelh@STUD.UNI-GOETTINGEN.DE>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Hi Tom,

Literature:

Sutton's ROCKET PROPULSION ELEMENTS (sixth edition) pages 366-369 and
489-493, SPACE PROPULSION ANALYSIS AND DESIGN (1995) PAGES 298-300 and a
number of pages in AEROSPACE ORDNANCE HANDBOOK (Prentice Hall 1966).

Keeping it gas tight:

A way to keep things gas tight is to use a Army Navy fitting with an
oring seal.  On motors ~ 2.5" diameter I use an AN814-4 steel bleeder
fitting (with oring seal) a small aluminum tube is inserted into the
bleeder fitting and an electric match is epoxied into tube/fitting,
.0625" holes are drilled through the fitting for the match leads, the
epoxy seals the fitting, tube and the match together so no gas leaks
out. The aluminum tube has a wall thickness of .011" and holds the
igniter charge.  The charge is often made up of 60/40 potassium
chlorate and fine (<30 micron) aluminum powder.  This mixture is
refereed to AlCO or in the pyro world as "FLASH" powder.  I use a 50/50
mixture of 2 micron magnesium and fine teflon powder for my igniters.

If you are interested I can email you a drawing of igniter assembly
shown installed in the motor head end closure.

Thom

Thomas M. McGaffey
Energy Release Systems
thomgaf@energyrs.com
408-226-7502
San Jose, Kalifornia



Thomas Engelhardt wrote:
>
> That concept sounds very interesting - could anyone here post a
> reference (internet, literature etc.)?
> It must be a challenge to keep the whole closure/igniter assembly gas
> tight so no motor exhaust will escape into the airframe.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Tom
>
> --
> Atheism is a non-prophet organization.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 18093 invoked from network); 1 Aug 2001 13:17:42 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 1 Aug 2001 13:17:42 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 21752 invoked from network); 1 Aug 2001 13:19:47 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 1 Aug 2001 13:19:47 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA20656; Wed, 1 Aug 2001 06:15:21 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 92417 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 1 Aug 2001 13:13:50 +0000
Received: from stud.uni-goettingen.de (root@s2.stud.uni-goettingen.de          [134.76.60.22]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA20617          for <Arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Wed, 1 Aug 2001 06:13:49 -0700
Received: from router.atw.stud.uni-goettingen.de ([134.76.62.65]          helo=stud.uni-goettingen.de) by stud.uni-goettingen.de with esmtp          (Exim 2.12 #8) id 15Rvol-0004KZ-00; Wed, 1 Aug 2001 15:13:43 +0200
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [de] (Win98; I)
X-Accept-Language: de
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <3B67CCEB.5A853F29@stud.uni-goettingen.de>            <3B67E822.8E1D0A44@earthlink.net>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B68008D.B7882682@stud.uni-goettingen.de>
Date:         Wed, 1 Aug 2001 15:13:50 +0200
Reply-To: "Thomas Engelhardt" <tengelh@STUD.UNI-GOETTINGEN.DE>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Thomas Engelhardt" <tengelh@STUD.UNI-GOETTINGEN.DE>
Organization: =?iso-8859-1?Q?Rocket_Research_G=F6ttingen_=28RRG=29?=
Subject:      Re: [AR] Head end igniters
Comments: To: thomgaf@energyrs.com
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Hi Thom,

thanks for the literature tips! I hope my parents agree that the Sutton
makes a wonderful exam present :-).

About the flash powder ignition: is the mixture particularly slow burning? I
would be afraid that the amount of gas generated in a short period of time
destroys or weakens the ignitor/head end assembly before the motor can build
up pressure.
For my liquid biprop, I use potassium nitrate/sorbitol pellets, because they
are much less likely to detonate...OTOH, I don't need the rapid pressure
build up like solid rocket motors do, but instead a nice long burn and large
flame front so the H2O2 can start to decompose.

I would be very intersted in the drawing of the igniter principle - maybe
that is something I can incorporate into future desingns!

Best wishes,

Tom

"Thomas M. Mcgaffey" schrieb:

> Hi Tom,
>
> Literature:
>
> Sutton's ROCKET PROPULSION ELEMENTS (sixth edition) pages 366-369 and
> 489-493, SPACE PROPULSION ANALYSIS AND DESIGN (1995) PAGES 298-300 and a
> number of pages in AEROSPACE ORDNANCE HANDBOOK (Prentice Hall 1966).
>
> Keeping it gas tight:
>
> A way to keep things gas tight is to use a Army Navy fitting with an
> oring seal.  On motors ~ 2.5" diameter I use an AN814-4 steel bleeder
> fitting (with oring seal) a small aluminum tube is inserted into the
> bleeder fitting and an electric match is epoxied into tube/fitting,
> .0625" holes are drilled through the fitting for the match leads, the
> epoxy seals the fitting, tube and the match together so no gas leaks
> out. The aluminum tube has a wall thickness of .011" and holds the
> igniter charge.  The charge is often made up of 60/40 potassium
> chlorate and fine (<30 micron) aluminum powder.  This mixture is
> refereed to AlCO or in the pyro world as "FLASH" powder.  I use a 50/50
> mixture of 2 micron magnesium and fine teflon powder for my igniters.
>
> If you are interested I can email you a drawing of igniter assembly
> shown installed in the motor head end closure.
>
> Thom
>
> Thomas M. McGaffey
> Energy Release Systems
> thomgaf@energyrs.com
> 408-226-7502
> San Jose, Kalifornia
>
> Thomas Engelhardt wrote:
> >
> > That concept sounds very interesting - could anyone here post a
> > reference (internet, literature etc.)?
> > It must be a challenge to keep the whole closure/igniter assembly gas
> > tight so no motor exhaust will escape into the airframe.
> >
> > Cheers,
> >
> > Tom
> >
> > --
> > Atheism is a non-prophet organization.

--
Atheism is a non-prophet organization.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 14208 invoked from network); 1 Aug 2001 14:43:09 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 1 Aug 2001 14:43:09 -0000
Received: (qmail 26719 invoked from network); 1 Aug 2001 14:43:57 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 1 Aug 2001 14:43:57 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA21008; Wed, 1 Aug 2001 07:18:26 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 92473 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 1 Aug 2001 14:16:54 +0000
Received: from smtp014.mail.yahoo.com (smtp014.mail.yahoo.com [216.136.173.58])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id HAA20982 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Wed, 1 Aug 2001 07:16:54 -0700
Received: from unknown (HELO athlon) (61.74.147.117) by          smtp.mail.vip.sc5.yahoo.com with SMTP; 1 Aug 2001 14:16:53 -0000
X-Apparently-From: <baxendell25@yahoo.com>
References:  <EDB5E5136094D311BF1800508B12205E08D290AF@emss02m07.ems.lmco.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <009001c11ab9$8963de20$75934a3d@athlon>
Date:         Wed, 1 Aug 2001 11:40:30 -0700
Reply-To: "Sean Baxendell" <baxendell25@YAHOO.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Sean Baxendell" <baxendell25@YAHOO.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Portable data aquisition devices
Comments: To: "Bendel, Timothy B" <timothy.b.bendel@LMCO.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Hi Tim,

I'm not aware of any software available for that one.  It should have a
serial port, so
hardware-wise it would be pretty easy.  Good luck with finding sofware
though. :-) I
was considering programing the Palm Pilot to acquire data, but ended up
getting a used Toshiba Libretto, which is not much bigger than a video
cassette.  It runs Win98, so it can use any PC software such as DataQ's
WinDAQ.  It only has a 133 MHz CPU, but is great for what I need it for.  I
use a compact flash card and PCMCIA adaptor for data transfer, since it has
no internal FDD.

(See picture link below)


The following mini notebooks are the smallest I found

1. Toshiba Libretto (only sold in Japan now?)
2. Casio Fiva
3. Palmax PD-1100
4. Sony VAIO (built in video camera, Expensive, limited to memory stick)

Librettos are going on ebay  for about US$300.  You need a port extender to
use the serial port (most come with one).  The battery only lasts about an
hour, but some users have used 12V gel cells and a small circuit to get 6
hours run time.

One great thing about using a notebook is that you escape the 50Hz/60 Hz
noise from the mains power.  I don't think filter capacitors will work very
well, since some of the phenomena you are measuring may be close to 60 Hz
anyway.  Does anyone else use filters in their load cell amp?  If so, what
type?

Regards,
Sean


My data aquisition setup.
http://uk.y42.photos.yahoo.com/bc/baxendell25/vwp2?.tok=bcj74j7AsKrmR7Yi&.di
r=/My+Photos&.dnm=Fig.+1.jpg&.src=ph



> About a month ago there were a few posts on using a Palm to aquire data
from
> motor static tests instead of a laptop. It was mentioned that there were
> products like MELD out there that allowed the Palm to be hooked up to
> external sensors (like a load cell). I have a Cassiopeia E-125 Pocket PC -
> is there anything out there that will let me use that instead of a laptop?
>
> Tim Bendel



_________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 26381 invoked from network); 1 Aug 2001 14:46:03 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 1 Aug 2001 14:46:03 -0000
Received: (qmail 23344 invoked from network); 1 Aug 2001 14:48:04 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 1 Aug 2001 14:48:04 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA21192; Wed, 1 Aug 2001 07:43:32 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 92511 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 1 Aug 2001 14:42:10 +0000
Received: from femail25.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail25.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.254.60.15]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA21172          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 1 Aug 2001 07:42:10 -0700
Received: from officenew ([24.1.27.168]) by femail25.sdc1.sfba.home.com          (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20 201-229-121-120-20010223) with SMTP id          <20010801144204.BDZK18714.femail25.sdc1.sfba.home.com@officenew>;          Wed, 1 Aug 2001 07:42:04 -0700
References:  <3B67CCEB.5A853F29@stud.uni-goettingen.de>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2462.0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <000701c11a98$217743e0$8300a8c0@olmpi1.wa.home.com>
Date:         Wed, 1 Aug 2001 07:42:03 -0700
Reply-To: "Tomm Aldridge" <taldridge@HOME.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Tomm Aldridge" <taldridge@HOME.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Head end igniters
Comments: To: Thomas Engelhardt <tengelh@STUD.UNI-GOETTINGEN.DE>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

one concept is to use an appropriately sized small (commercial) rocket motor
to spew hot exhaust down the core of the larger motor.  It could be sized to
fit the head end closure in place of the usual delay element in 54 and 38 mm
RMS cases.  For larger or EX the head end could be machined to accept a 24
or 29mm ignition motor.  Not tried, just an idea I've had for some time.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Thomas Engelhardt" <tengelh@STUD.UNI-GOETTINGEN.DE>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Wednesday, August 01, 2001 2:33 AM
Subject: [AR] Head end igniters


> That concept sounds very interesting - could anyone here post a
> reference (internet, literature etc.)?
> It must be a challenge to keep the whole closure/igniter assembly gas
> tight so no motor exhaust will escape into the airframe.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Tom
>
> --
> Atheism is a non-prophet organization.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 26777 invoked from network); 1 Aug 2001 14:53:11 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 1 Aug 2001 14:53:11 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 5131 invoked from network); 1 Aug 2001 14:54:45 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 1 Aug 2001 14:54:45 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA21130; Wed, 1 Aug 2001 07:36:09 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 92497 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 1 Aug 2001 14:34:40 +0000
Received: from seldon.dtek.chalmers.se          (IDENT:PNaKGzHcmyjko/IvdAlq6IIVmnat6PR6@seldon.dtek.chalmers.se          [129.16.30.6]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA21077          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 1 Aug 2001 07:24:39 -0700
Received: from licia.dtek.chalmers.se          (UizIb5jI26fvzZ+p5/V6mu008n7FD7Cp@licia.dtek.chalmers.se          [129.16.30.88]) by seldon.dtek.chalmers.se (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP          id QAA00775; Wed, 1 Aug 2001 16:24:34 +0200 (MEST)
Received: (from d3august@localhost) by licia.dtek.chalmers.se (8.9.3/8.9.3) id          QAA12416; Wed, 1 Aug 2001 16:24:32 +0200 (MEST)
References: <3B67CCEB.5A853F29@stud.uni-goettingen.de>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Disposition: inline
User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i
Message-ID:  <20010801162432.A11290@licia.dtek.chalmers.se>
Date:         Wed, 1 Aug 2001 16:24:32 +0200
Reply-To: "Bj|rn Augustsson" <d3august@DTEK.CHALMERS.SE>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Bj|rn Augustsson" <d3august@DTEK.CHALMERS.SE>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Head end igniters
Comments: To: Thomas Engelhardt <tengelh@STUD.UNI-GOETTINGEN.DE>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <3B67CCEB.5A853F29@stud.uni-goettingen.de>; from              tengelh@STUD.UNI-GOETTINGEN.DE on Wed, Aug 01,              2001 at 11:33:31AM +0200

Quoting Thomas Engelhardt <tengelh@STUD.UNI-GOETTINGEN.DE>:
> That concept sounds very interesting - could anyone here post a
> reference (internet, literature etc.)?
> It must be a challenge to keep the whole closure/igniter assembly gas
> tight so no motor exhaust will escape into the airframe.

I talked to a brit  (sorry, can't remember whom) at UKRA2001, and he
said they had made head-end igniters for aerotech type motors by simply
pulling an ignitor thru the delay liner and filling it with epoxy.
(Ie the epoxy goes where the normal delay element would fit.)

He said it worked fine, and it seems simple enough. Might want to use
high-temp epoxy or maybe epoxy-clay or something though.

/August, sorry I can't remember who the source was.
--
Wrong on most accounts.  const Foo *foo; and Foo const *foo; mean the same: foo
being a pointer to const Foo.  const Foo const *foo; would mean the same but is
illegal (double const).  You are confusing this with Foo * const foo; and const
Foo * const foo; respectively. -David Kastrup, comp.os.linux.development.system

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 21195 invoked from network); 1 Aug 2001 15:22:11 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 1 Aug 2001 15:22:11 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 26165 invoked from network); 1 Aug 2001 15:23:44 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 1 Aug 2001 15:23:44 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA21539; Wed, 1 Aug 2001 08:10:24 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 92572 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 1 Aug 2001 15:09:01 +0000
Received: from ceres.triton.ch (ceres.triton.ch [212.254.218.98]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA21509 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 1 Aug 2001 08:09:00 -0700
Received: from spl.ch (robot.triton.ch [212.254.218.101]) by ceres.triton.ch          (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id RAA00845 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed,          1 Aug 2001 17:08:57 +0200
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.75 [en] (Win98; U)
X-Accept-Language: en,ja
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <3B67CCEB.5A853F29@stud.uni-goettingen.de>            <3B67E822.8E1D0A44@earthlink.net>            <3B68008D.B7882682@stud.uni-goettingen.de>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B681B70.6B0CD80A@spl.ch>
Date:         Wed, 1 Aug 2001 17:08:32 +0200
Reply-To: "Bruno Berger" <bruno.berger@SPL.CH>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Bruno Berger" <bruno.berger@SPL.CH>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Head end igniters
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Thomas Engelhardt wrote:
>
> Hi Thom,
>
> thanks for the literature tips! I hope my parents agree that the Sutton
> makes a wonderful exam present :-).
>
> About the flash powder ignition: is the mixture particularly slow burning? I
> would be afraid that the amount of gas generated in a short period of time
> destroys or weakens the ignitor/head end assembly before the motor can build
> up pressure.
> For my liquid biprop, I use potassium nitrate/sorbitol pellets, because they
> are much less likely to detonate...OTOH, I don't need the rapid pressure
> build up like solid rocket motors do, but instead a nice long burn and large
> flame front so the H2O2 can start to decompose.
>
> I would be very intersted in the drawing of the igniter principle - maybe
> that is something I can incorporate into future desingns!
>
> Best wishes,

Thomas,

I highly recommend the NASA SP-8051 "Solid rocket motor igniters"
(Downloadable from:
http://mtrs.msfc.nasa.gov/mtrs/refer/71/sp8051.refer.html )

Also a good source are the following AIAA papers:

AIAA-72-1195 Igniter Material Considerations and Applications

and some patent from Thiokol like US4080901 etc. and Richard Nakkas page
about small igniters:
http://members.aol.com/nonillion/igniter.html


AlClo used as powder burn *very* fast (confined, it can even detonate with
about 1.5 -2 km/s). We have used it successfully to ignite small motors. For
big motors the pressure shock will probably damage the grain and case. you
should switch to palletized AlClo or build up a pyrogen igniter (also
described in SP-8051) like we have build for our TETHIS-I motor:

http://www.spl.ch/temp/igniter.pdf (german description we have used in a
frame of an exhibition in January)
http://www.spl.ch/temp/DSCN0003.JPG

As Thomas Mcgaffey has already mentioned, the use of MagTef
(magnesium/Teflon) as a igniter composition is also very promising. It
releases a lot of heat and IR radiation (but less gases), can be pressed and
even sintered to a monolithic igniter body and we will use this design as
the final design for our TETHIS-I motor.

info's about MagTef:

- "Design and development of a hot particle igniter", AIAA PAPER 72-1196
- "Investigation of pyrotechnic MTV (Magnesium/Teflon/Viton) compositions
for rocket motor igniters", AIAA PAPER 82-1189
- "Development of MTV Compositions as Igniter for HTPB/AP Based Composite
Propellants"  (Propellants, Explosives, Pyrotechnics 24, 65-69 (1999)
- "Combustion and Sensitivity Characteristics of Mg/TEFLON Pyrolants"
(Propellants, Explosives, Pyrotechnics 22, 198-202 (1997)
- "Thermochemistry and Kinetics Models for Magnesium/Teflon/Viton
Pyrotechnic Compositions" (Department of Defense, Australia)

Bruno


--
Bruno Berger
Swiss Propulsion Laboratory
E-Mail: bruno.berger@spl.ch
WWW:    http://www.spl.ch

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 4428 invoked from network); 1 Aug 2001 15:25:53 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 1 Aug 2001 15:25:53 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 19587 invoked from network); 1 Aug 2001 15:27:37 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 1 Aug 2001 15:27:37 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA21668; Wed, 1 Aug 2001 08:22:12 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 92602 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 1 Aug 2001 15:20:43 +0000
Received: from mailgw1a.lmco.com (mailgw1a.lmco.com [192.31.106.7]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA21649 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 1 Aug 2001 08:20:42 -0700
Received: from emss02g01.ems.lmco.com (relay2.ems.lmco.com [166.29.2.54]) by          mailgw1a.lmco.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id JAA11566 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 1 Aug 2001 09:20:41 -0600 (MDT)
Received: from CONVERSION-DAEMON by lmco.com (PMDF V5.2-33 #38887) id          <0GHE00B01AM4SN@lmco.com> for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 1 Aug 2001          09:20:32 -0600 (MDT)
Received: from emss02i00.ems.lmco.com ([166.29.2.48]) by lmco.com (PMDF V5.2-33          #38887) with ESMTP id <0GHE00A71AM1GS@lmco.com> for          AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 01 Aug 2001 09:20:25 -0600 (MDT)
Received: by emss02i00.ems.lmco.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) id          <QB29Q4V3>; Wed, 01 Aug 2001 09:20:32 -0600
Content-return: allowed
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19)
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <EDB5E5136094D311BF1800508B12205E08D290B2@emss02m07.ems.lmco.com>
Date:         Wed, 1 Aug 2001 09:20:26 -0600
Reply-To: "Bendel, Timothy B" <timothy.b.bendel@LMCO.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Bendel, Timothy B" <timothy.b.bendel@LMCO.COM>
Subject:      [AR] Portable data aquisition devices
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

> Matt,
>
> I have a Casio E-125 Personal PC - it runs on a hand-held verion of
> Windows and not the Palm OS. It has Serial port -RS-232C and USB
> capability, runs at 150 MHz and has 32Mb RAM. The weak link in using it
> appears to be software. I have a Dataq DI-151RS D/A converter and the
> software for that is only in the full-version of Windows. I was hoping
> that someone would know how to file the raw data in the E-125 so I could
> download the data for analysis on a desktop.
>
> Tim Bendel
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Matt Faulkner [SMTP:mattfaulkner9@HOTMAIL.COM]
> Sent: Tuesday, July 31, 2001 8:05 PM
> To:   AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
> Subject:      Re: [AR] Portable data aquisition devices
>
> Hi Tim-
> I don't know much about palm pilots, so let me first ask what type of
> input/output ports it has, as well as what I/O ports are available from
> your
> external sensors. Does your Palm have a serial port (9-pin connector)? Are
> you using commercial or home-brew sensors?
>   Also, try www.nutsvolts.com they have a very helpful electronics forum.
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 7909 invoked from network); 1 Aug 2001 15:43:21 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 1 Aug 2001 15:43:21 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 21660 invoked from network); 1 Aug 2001 15:45:45 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 1 Aug 2001 15:45:45 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA21718; Wed, 1 Aug 2001 08:26:28 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 92612 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 1 Aug 2001 15:25:07 +0000
Received: from mailgw1a.lmco.com (mailgw1a.lmco.com [192.31.106.7]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA21693 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 1 Aug 2001 08:25:06 -0700
Received: from emss02g01.ems.lmco.com (relay2.ems.lmco.com [166.29.2.54]) by          mailgw1a.lmco.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id JAA21309; Wed, 1 Aug          2001 09:25:05 -0600 (MDT)
Received: from CONVERSION-DAEMON by lmco.com (PMDF V5.2-33 #38887) id          <0GHE00D01ATJ3F@lmco.com>; Wed, 1 Aug 2001 09:24:56 -0600 (MDT)
Received: from emss02i00.ems.lmco.com ([166.29.2.48]) by lmco.com (PMDF V5.2-33          #38887) with ESMTP id <0GHE007W9ATEAO@lmco.com>; Wed, 01 Aug 2001          09:24:50 -0600 (MDT)
Received: by emss02i00.ems.lmco.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) id          <QB29Q45J>; Wed, 01 Aug 2001 09:24:57 -0600
Content-return: allowed
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19)
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <EDB5E5136094D311BF1800508B12205E08D290B3@emss02m07.ems.lmco.com>
Date:         Wed, 1 Aug 2001 09:24:56 -0600
Reply-To: "Bendel, Timothy B" <timothy.b.bendel@LMCO.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Bendel, Timothy B" <timothy.b.bendel@LMCO.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Portable data aquisition devices
Comments: To: Sean Baxendell <baxendell25@yahoo.com>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Sean,

Thanks for the info. I think I will have to pick up a $300 laptop/notebook
like you specified because of the software issue (I am also using WinDAQ).
It would be more trouble than it's worth to get software for the handheld PC
(unless, of course, someone out there knows where to get it...)

Tim

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Sean Baxendell [SMTP:baxendell25@yahoo.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, August 01, 2001 12:41 PM
> To:   AR; Bendel, Timothy B
> Subject:      Re:      [AR] Portable data aquisition devices
>
> Hi Tim,
>
> I'm not aware of any software available for that one.  It should have a
> serial port, so
> hardware-wise it would be pretty easy.  Good luck with finding sofware
> though. :-) I
> was considering programing the Palm Pilot to acquire data, but ended up
> getting a used Toshiba Libretto, which is not much bigger than a video
> cassette.  It runs Win98, so it can use any PC software such as DataQ's
> WinDAQ.  It only has a 133 MHz CPU, but is great for what I need it for.
> I
> use a compact flash card and PCMCIA adaptor for data transfer, since it
> has
> no internal FDD.
>
> (See picture link below)
>
>
> The following mini notebooks are the smallest I found
>
> 1. Toshiba Libretto (only sold in Japan now?)
> 2. Casio Fiva
> 3. Palmax PD-1100
> 4. Sony VAIO (built in video camera, Expensive, limited to memory stick)
>
> Librettos are going on ebay  for about US$300.  You need a port extender
> to
> use the serial port (most come with one).  The battery only lasts about an
> hour, but some users have used 12V gel cells and a small circuit to get 6
> hours run time.
>
> One great thing about using a notebook is that you escape the 50Hz/60 Hz
> noise from the mains power.  I don't think filter capacitors will work
> very
> well, since some of the phenomena you are measuring may be close to 60 Hz
> anyway.  Does anyone else use filters in their load cell amp?  If so, what
> type?
>
> Regards,
> Sean
>
>
> My data aquisition setup.
> http://uk.y42.photos.yahoo.com/bc/baxendell25/vwp2?.tok=bcj74j7AsKrmR7Yi&.
> di
> r=/My+Photos&.dnm=Fig.+1.jpg&.src=ph
>
>
>
> > About a month ago there were a few posts on using a Palm to aquire data
> from
> > motor static tests instead of a laptop. It was mentioned that there were
> > products like MELD out there that allowed the Palm to be hooked up to
> > external sensors (like a load cell). I have a Cassiopeia E-125 Pocket PC
> -
> > is there anything out there that will let me use that instead of a
> laptop?
> >
> > Tim Bendel
>
>
>
> _________________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 21205 invoked from network); 1 Aug 2001 15:47:12 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 1 Aug 2001 15:47:12 -0000
Received: (qmail 23483 invoked from network); 1 Aug 2001 15:49:32 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 1 Aug 2001 15:49:32 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA21932; Wed, 1 Aug 2001 08:40:21 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 92654 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 1 Aug 2001 15:38:55 +0000
Received: from albatross.wgn.net (www.wgn.net [64.14.252.81] (may be forged))          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA21899 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 1 Aug 2001 08:38:55 -0700
Received: from cronos (eli-208-187-17-49.wgn.net [208.187.17.49]) by          albatross.wgn.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id IAA24657 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 1 Aug 2001 08:40:39 -0700
References: <3B67CCEB.5A853F29@stud.uni-goettingen.de>                       <3B67E822.8E1D0A44@earthlink.net>                       <3B68008D.B7882682@stud.uni-goettingen.de>             <3B681B70.6B0CD80A@spl.ch>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <033901c11aa0$37338f60$c36122c0@cronos>
Date:         Wed, 1 Aug 2001 08:39:55 -0700
Reply-To: "Wedge Oldham" <wedge@WESTWORLD.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Wedge Oldham" <wedge@WESTWORLD.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Head end igniters
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

I can attest to using the of MagTef (magnesium/Teflon) as a pyrogen
composition, in commercial (Aerotech) motors.

I drill the delay grain with a 1/4" hole about 3/8" deep. After the delay
grain is inserted into the forward closure, I pack a thin disk of the MagTef
onto the top of the delay grain. The hole (packed with MagTef) in the delay
grain acts as a spitting gerb to shower the core with sparks.

I think the main advantage in using this approach in clusters is, when the
Daveyfire goes off, the MagTef is ignited. Ignites *very* easily. Should
some of the other motors in the cluster come up to pressure, and the rocket
lifts off, the unlit motor will take the first stage of the ignition train
with it.

I've used this approach in all my cluster rockets  where failure to ignite
would cause a disaster. I've had great results.

For pictures & video of lighting three K700 motors in Locomotive Breath see:
http://nikeproject.com/LocomotiveBreath/

For pictures & video of lighting four K700 motors in my 1/3 scale Nike
Hercules see:
http://NikeProject.com

Wedge Oldham
http://NikeProject.com
Only those who risk going too far,
will ever know how far they can go.



----- Original Message -----
From: "Bruno Berger" <bruno.berger@SPL.CH>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Wednesday, August 01, 2001 8:08 AM
Subject: Re: [AR] Head end igniters


> Thomas Engelhardt wrote:
> >
> > Hi Thom,
> >
> > thanks for the literature tips! I hope my parents agree that the Sutton
> > makes a wonderful exam present :-).
> >
> > About the flash powder ignition: is the mixture particularly slow
burning? I
> > would be afraid that the amount of gas generated in a short period of
time
> > destroys or weakens the ignitor/head end assembly before the motor can
build
> > up pressure.
> > For my liquid biprop, I use potassium nitrate/sorbitol pellets, because
they
> > are much less likely to detonate...OTOH, I don't need the rapid pressure
> > build up like solid rocket motors do, but instead a nice long burn and
large
> > flame front so the H2O2 can start to decompose.
> >
> > I would be very intersted in the drawing of the igniter principle -
maybe
> > that is something I can incorporate into future desingns!
> >
> > Best wishes,
>
> Thomas,
>
> I highly recommend the NASA SP-8051 "Solid rocket motor igniters"
> (Downloadable from:
> http://mtrs.msfc.nasa.gov/mtrs/refer/71/sp8051.refer.html )
>
> Also a good source are the following AIAA papers:
>
> AIAA-72-1195 Igniter Material Considerations and Applications
>
> and some patent from Thiokol like US4080901 etc. and Richard Nakkas page
> about small igniters:
> http://members.aol.com/nonillion/igniter.html
>
>
> AlClo used as powder burn *very* fast (confined, it can even detonate with
> about 1.5 -2 km/s). We have used it successfully to ignite small motors.
For
> big motors the pressure shock will probably damage the grain and case. you
> should switch to palletized AlClo or build up a pyrogen igniter (also
> described in SP-8051) like we have build for our TETHIS-I motor:
>
> http://www.spl.ch/temp/igniter.pdf (german description we have used in a
> frame of an exhibition in January)
> http://www.spl.ch/temp/DSCN0003.JPG
>
> As Thomas Mcgaffey has already mentioned, the use of MagTef
> (magnesium/Teflon) as a igniter composition is also very promising. It
> releases a lot of heat and IR radiation (but less gases), can be pressed
and
> even sintered to a monolithic igniter body and we will use this design as
> the final design for our TETHIS-I motor.
>
> info's about MagTef:
>
> - "Design and development of a hot particle igniter", AIAA PAPER 72-1196
> - "Investigation of pyrotechnic MTV (Magnesium/Teflon/Viton) compositions
> for rocket motor igniters", AIAA PAPER 82-1189
> - "Development of MTV Compositions as Igniter for HTPB/AP Based Composite
> Propellants"  (Propellants, Explosives, Pyrotechnics 24, 65-69 (1999)
> - "Combustion and Sensitivity Characteristics of Mg/TEFLON Pyrolants"
> (Propellants, Explosives, Pyrotechnics 22, 198-202 (1997)
> - "Thermochemistry and Kinetics Models for Magnesium/Teflon/Viton
> Pyrotechnic Compositions" (Department of Defense, Australia)
>
> Bruno
>
>
> --
> Bruno Berger
> Swiss Propulsion Laboratory
> E-Mail: bruno.berger@spl.ch
> WWW:    http://www.spl.ch

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 18878 invoked from network); 1 Aug 2001 15:54:22 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 1 Aug 2001 15:54:22 -0000
Received: (qmail 23502 invoked from network); 1 Aug 2001 15:54:55 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 1 Aug 2001 15:54:55 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA22069; Wed, 1 Aug 2001 08:47:40 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 92686 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 1 Aug 2001 15:46:18 +0000
Received: from spsystems.net (spsystems.net [209.47.149.227]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA22042 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Wed,          1 Aug 2001 08:46:17 -0700
Received: (from henry@localhost) by spsystems.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id LAA10088;          Wed, 1 Aug 2001 11:45:45 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010801114310.7155D-100000@spsystems.net>
Date:         Wed, 1 Aug 2001 11:45:44 -0400
Reply-To: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Portable data aquisition devices
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <009001c11ab9$8963de20$75934a3d@athlon>

On Wed, 1 Aug 2001, Sean Baxendell wrote:
> The following mini notebooks are the smallest I found
> 1. Toshiba Libretto (only sold in Japan now?)
> 2. Casio Fiva
> 3. Palmax PD-1100
> 4. Sony VAIO (built in video camera, Expensive, limited to memory stick)

An alternative to these, if you're willing to deal with software issues
yourself, is the Psion Series 5 machines.  These are mini-notebooks, just
barely big enough for touch typing, which will run 15-20hr on a pair of AA
alkalines.  They have a normal RS232 serial port, and Compact Flash for
storage.  They are completely non-Intel and non-Microsoft, however, like
the Palms, so Win98 software won't be useful.

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 18334 invoked from network); 1 Aug 2001 16:31:17 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 1 Aug 2001 16:31:17 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 13888 invoked from network); 1 Aug 2001 16:33:19 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 1 Aug 2001 16:33:19 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA22229; Wed, 1 Aug 2001 08:55:41 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 92716 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 1 Aug 2001 15:54:12 +0000
Received: from stud.uni-goettingen.de (root@s2.stud.uni-goettingen.de          [134.76.60.22]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA22196          for <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Wed, 1 Aug 2001 08:54:11 -0700
Received: from router.atw.stud.uni-goettingen.de ([134.76.62.65]          helo=stud.uni-goettingen.de) by stud.uni-goettingen.de with esmtp          (Exim 2.12 #8) id 15RyK0-0001LR-00 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 1          Aug 2001 17:54:08 +0200
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [de] (Win98; I)
X-Accept-Language: de
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <3B67CCEB.5A853F29@stud.uni-goettingen.de>            <3B67E822.8E1D0A44@earthlink.net>            <3B68008D.B7882682@stud.uni-goettingen.de>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B682628.74580702@stud.uni-goettingen.de>
Date:         Wed, 1 Aug 2001 17:54:16 +0200
Reply-To: "Bruno Berger" <bruno.berger@SPL.CH>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Thomas Engelhardt" <tengelh@STUD.UNI-GOETTINGEN.DE>
Organization: =?iso-8859-1?Q?Rocket_Research_G=F6ttingen_=28RRG=29?=
Subject:      Re: [AR] Head end igniters
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Bruno Berger schrieb:

Thomas,

I highly recommend the NASA SP-8051 "Solid rocket motor igniters"
(Downloadable from:
http://mtrs.msfc.nasa.gov/mtrs/refer/71/sp8051.refer.html )

<snip wealth of information>

Thanks Bruno,

that is more info than I expected!! I'll start downloading now, I hope I
can read most of it when the exams are over (T-three weeks and
counting).

Cheers,

Thomas

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 17103 invoked from network); 1 Aug 2001 19:03:03 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 1 Aug 2001 19:03:03 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 24693 invoked from network); 1 Aug 2001 19:04:50 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 1 Aug 2001 19:04:50 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA23593; Wed, 1 Aug 2001 12:00:46 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 92916 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 1 Aug 2001 19:00:45 +0000
Received: from m1.jersey.juno.com (m1.jersey.juno.com [64.136.16.64]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA23575 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 1 Aug 2001 12:00:45 -0700
Received: from cookie.juno.com by cookie.juno.com for          <"H3WK6e6N+bsCVJQMHM9sZO8MRdc3gNrCKm43Tl2Nsi2CHj5r6M9VbA==">
Received: (from kc2csh@juno.com) by m1.jersey.juno.com (queuemail) id GBSEYT4Q;          Wed, 01 Aug 2001 14:59:36 EDT
X-Mailer: Juno 4.0.11
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Juno-Line-Breaks: 6-9,11-23
X-Juno-Att: 0
X-Juno-RefParts: 0
Message-ID:  <20010801.150357.-3952643.2.kc2csh@juno.com>
Date:         Wed, 1 Aug 2001 14:33:38 -0400
Reply-To: <kc2csh@JUNO.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <kc2csh@JUNO.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Portable data aquisition devices
Comments: To: timothy.b.bendel@LMCO.COM
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

  You may want to look for "ruggedized" notebooks like the panasonic and
a few others.  They are popular for a wide variety of uses that demand
high end equipment and replace frequently( network news, boat racing,
etc.).  These are highly resistant to moisture, dust, temperature
extreemes and rapid change, shock, etc.  New they carry a very high
premium price, but once they become "obsolute" interest in them drops
fairly fast.

          Jay

On Wed, 1 Aug 2001 09:24:56 -0600 "Bendel, Timothy B"
<timothy.b.bendel@LMCO.COM> writes:
> Sean,
>
> Thanks for the info. I think I will have to pick up a $300
> laptop/notebook
> like you specified because of the software issue (I am also using
> WinDAQ).
> It would be more trouble than it's worth to get software for the
> handheld PC
> (unless, of course, someone out there knows where to get it...)
>
> Tim
>

________________________________________________________________
GET INTERNET ACCESS FROM JUNO!
Juno offers FREE or PREMIUM Internet access for less!
Join Juno today!  For your FREE software, visit:
http://dl.www.juno.com/get/tagj.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 17372 invoked from network); 1 Aug 2001 19:03:07 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 1 Aug 2001 19:03:07 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 521 invoked from network); 1 Aug 2001 19:04:39 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 1 Aug 2001 19:04:39 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA23557; Wed, 1 Aug 2001 12:00:13 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 92908 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 1 Aug 2001 19:00:02 +0000
Received: from m1.jersey.juno.com (m1.jersey.juno.com [64.136.16.64]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA23539 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 1 Aug 2001 12:00:02 -0700
Received: from cookie.juno.com by cookie.juno.com for          <"H3WK6e6N+bsCVJQMHM9sZO8MRdc3gNrCb6Xj1nRQibaEAedae4Sy3A==">
Received: (from kc2csh@juno.com) by m1.jersey.juno.com (queuemail) id GBSEYUCS;          Wed, 01 Aug 2001 14:59:36 EDT
X-Mailer: Juno 4.0.11
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Juno-Line-Breaks: 3
X-Juno-Att: 0
X-Juno-RefParts: 0
Message-ID:  <20010801.150357.-3952643.4.kc2csh@juno.com>
Date:         Wed, 1 Aug 2001 14:52:01 -0400
Reply-To: <kc2csh@JUNO.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <kc2csh@JUNO.COM>
Subject:      [AR] Alternative grain liner material  KNO3/paper?
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

  Has anyone explored using thick windings of K nitrate solution soaked
paper as an insulator and grain liner for long duration solids like end
burners, something perhaps in the nature of an abative cooling process?
Does this work?  Is it worthwhile?
                                                         Jay

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 24549 invoked from network); 1 Aug 2001 19:13:00 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 1 Aug 2001 19:13:00 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 15550 invoked from network); 1 Aug 2001 19:15:27 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 1 Aug 2001 19:15:27 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA23667; Wed, 1 Aug 2001 12:09:48 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 92932 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 1 Aug 2001 19:09:47 +0000
Received: from ns.vanguard.com (ns.VANGUARD.COM [192.175.173.31]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA23649 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Wed, 1 Aug 2001 12:09:47 -0700
Received: from eagle1.vanguard.com (eagle1.VANGUARD.COM [192.175.141.70]) by          ns.vanguard.com (Switch-2.1.3/Switch-2.1.0) with ESMTP id          f71J9kv16650 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Wed, 1 Aug 2001 15:09:46          -0400 (EDT)
Received: from vgi4mail.vanguard.com (vgi4mail.vanguard.com [10.254.65.16]) by          eagle1.vanguard.com (Switch-2.1.3/Switch-2.1.0) with SMTP id          f71J9ja19142 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Wed, 1 Aug 2001 15:09:45          -0400 (EDT)
Received: by vgi4mail.vanguard.com(Lotus SMTP MTA v4.6.6  (890.1 7-16-1999))           id 85256A9B.00697B81 ; Wed, 1 Aug 2001 15:12:08 -0400
X-Lotus-FromDomain: VGINOTES
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Disposition: inline
Message-ID:  <85256A9B.00694CD9.00@vgi4mail.vanguard.com>
Date:         Wed, 1 Aug 2001 15:07:41 -0400
Reply-To: <Waysie_Atkins@VANGUARD.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <Waysie_Atkins@VANGUARD.COM>
Subject:      [AR] JATO Misapplication
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

A bit off-topic, but thought there might be an interest on this list.   The
story was told to me initially by an aquantince of the decedent, the copy below
was taken from The Darwin Awards.  (not trying to be morbid, or slight the
gentleman involved, just the only quotable source I have on the incident).


The Arizona Highway Patrol came upon a pile of smoldering metal embedded into
the side of a cliff rising above the road at the apex of a curve. The wreckage
resembled the site of an airplane crash, but it was a car. The type of car was
unidentifiable at the scene. The lab finally figured out what it was and what
had happened.

It seems that a guy had somehow gotten hold of a JATO unit (Jet Assisted Take
Off - actually a solid fuel rocket) that is used to give heavy military
transport planes an extra "push" for taking off from short airfields. He had
driven his Chevy Impala out into the desert and found a long, straight stretch
of road. Then he attached the JATO unit to his car, jumped in, got up some speed
and fired off the JATO!

The facts as best as could be determined are that the operator of the 1967
Impala hit JATO ignition at a distance of approximately 3.0 miles from the crash
site. This was established by the prominent scorched and melted asphalt at that
location. The JATO, if operating properly, would have reached maximum thrust
within 5 seconds, causing the Chevy to reach speeds well in excess of 350 mph
and continuing at full power for an additional 20-25 seconds. The driver, soon
to be pilot, most likely would have experienced G-forces usually reserved for
dog-fighting F-14 jocks under full afterburners, basically causing him to become
insignificant for the remainder of the event. However, the automobile remained
on the straight highway for about 2.5 miles (15-20) seconds before the driver
applied and completely melted the brakes, blowing the tires and leaving thick
rubber marks on the road surface, then becoming airborne for an additional 1.4
miles and impacting the cliff face at a height of 125 feet leaving a blackened
crater 3 feet deep in the rock.

Most of the driver's remains were not recoverable; however, small fragments of
bone, teeth and hair were extracted from the crater and fingernail and bone
shards were removed from a piece of debris believed to be a portion of the
steering wheel.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 9845 invoked from network); 1 Aug 2001 19:32:32 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 1 Aug 2001 19:32:32 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 21101 invoked from network); 1 Aug 2001 19:34:38 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 1 Aug 2001 19:34:38 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA23944; Wed, 1 Aug 2001 12:29:54 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 92989 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 1 Aug 2001 19:29:52 +0000
Received: from ns.vanguard.com (ns.VANGUARD.COM [192.175.173.31]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA23926 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 1 Aug 2001 12:29:52 -0700
Received: from eagle1.vanguard.com (eagle1.VANGUARD.COM [192.175.141.70]) by          ns.vanguard.com (Switch-2.1.3/Switch-2.1.0) with ESMTP id          f71JTpv25590 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 1 Aug 2001 15:29:51          -0400 (EDT)
Received: from vgi4mail.vanguard.com (vgi4mail.vanguard.com [10.254.65.16]) by          eagle1.vanguard.com (Switch-2.1.3/Switch-2.1.0) with SMTP id          f71JTna28071 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 1 Aug 2001 15:29:49          -0400 (EDT)
Received: by vgi4mail.vanguard.com(Lotus SMTP MTA v4.6.6  (890.1 7-16-1999))           id 85256A9B.006B4F82 ; Wed, 1 Aug 2001 15:32:07 -0400
X-Lotus-FromDomain: VGINOTES
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Disposition: inline
Message-ID:  <85256A9B.00685BBC.00@vgi4mail.vanguard.com>
Date:         Wed, 1 Aug 2001 14:57:25 -0400
Reply-To: <Waysie_Atkins@VANGUARD.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <Waysie_Atkins@VANGUARD.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Head end igniters
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

For larger motors I had sketched out a forward closure that would provide
*leads* thru it for the ignitor.  Would need to have a center plug that was not
electrically conductive with a couple of  pieces of all-thread epoxied thru it.
Or might be able to use only one insulated lead.

It would not allow for motor based ejection charge though, so electronic
initiated recovery would be required, and would require the ignitor to be
installed prior to engine installation.

Is good to see others mention the use of commercially made small motors as
ignitors for large motors,  had considered that as well.  Anyone try this one
yet?

Waysie

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 27887 invoked from network); 1 Aug 2001 19:37:40 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 1 Aug 2001 19:37:40 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: (qmail 2597 invoked from network); 1 Aug 2001 19:38:37 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 1 Aug 2001 19:38:37 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA23865; Wed, 1 Aug 2001 12:24:01 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 92969 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 1 Aug 2001 19:23:53 +0000
Received: from volsb01.libertyville.com          (sdsl-216-36-100-106.dsl.chi.megapath.net [66.80.36.106] (may be          forged)) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA23847 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 1 Aug 2001 12:23:50 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Message-ID:  <22B7BC0B5778D311B0B3000629507A96574B19@VOLSB01>
Date:         Wed, 1 Aug 2001 14:21:02 -0500
Reply-To: "Ed Dewey" <edewey@LIBERTYVILLE.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Ed Dewey" <edewey@LIBERTYVILLE.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] JATO Misapplication
Comments: To: "Waysie_Atkins@VANGUARD.COM" <Waysie_Atkins@VANGUARD.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

That story went around a while ago.  The "true" story (seems legit to me) is
far more interesting, and a good read if you have the time.  I have the text
of the story, and I did get it off a website, but I can't find the website
now.  Here's the text.  Some people didn't like it.  I really enjoyed it and
laughed a lot as I read through it.

FAST FOREWORD

          The first thing you should know about the legend of the Rocket Car
(especially if you got the story via E-mail or the Web) is that it's been
around a lot longer than most people think. It started years ago, as a vague
rumor passed from one guy to the next by word of mouth, usually in bars or
during lunch-break bullshit sessions. The kind of story someone hears from a
friend who read it in a magazine, or a half-remembered newspaper story that
someone read a long time ago. It's a story that comes out of nowhere, gets
passed around for awhile, then dies out, like one of those weird strains of
flu that keep coming back every few years. The period of dormancy varies,
but whenever the story springs back to life, it seems to spread like a grass
fire. I used to think it was funny how the legend of the Rocket Car managed
to spread so far (and fast) purely by word-of-mouth, but now that it's
become a subject of Internet interest, it's popularity has become downright
spooky.

          If you've never heard the legend before (in which case I can't
imagine why you'd be reading this), here's the bare bones of it: Once upon a
time, in some out-of-the way part of the country (take your pick of
locations) a maniac took a rocket of some sort, and mounted it on the back
of a car (make and model depend on automotive trends when the story is
told). The maniac then sped down a deserted stretch of highway, and when he
reached an appropriate spot, he lit the rocket. Unfortunately, the rocket
(which was either a JATO bottle, a surplus ICBM engine, or an experimental
Shuttle booster) proved to be far more powerful than the maniac anticipated.
The car reached an incredible speed in a matter of seconds (somewhere
between 150 miles per hour and Warp 9) at which point the car's brakes and
steering became... ineffective. This development would've been bad enough on
a straightaway, but through some error in planning or navigation, the maniac
found himself hurtling down a road that curved sharply, not far from where
he ignited the rocket. When the car arrived at the curve, it went straight
ahead instead of negotiating the turn. Pilot and car then flew like an arrow
(for a distance only limited by the imagination of the person telling the
story), before crashing into an inconveniently-placed mountainside.

          Nifty.

          I'm sure this sounds pretty ridiculous if it's the first time
you've heard the Legend of the Rocket Car, but that's because I didn't go
out of my way to make it sound good. Most people do try to make it sound
convincing, embellishing the story with all sorts of little facts and
details to make it easier to swallow. I've personally heard a dozen versions
of this story over the past 20 years, and I'm constantly amazed at how the
story grows, shrinks, and generally mutates with each retelling. Maybe I
notice these changes more than most people because I've always paid close
attention to this particular rumor. Oh, I'm not a car expert or an aerospace
engineer or anything, and I really don't have much interest in urban
legends. Even if I did, from an intellectual point of view, this story isn't
as entertaining as some of the others that have come and gone. The one about
McDonalds shoveling worms into the grinders that produce Big Macs, for
instance, beats it by a mile. I only pay attention to the Rocket Car legend
because I'm 99% sure that I started the whole thing in the spring of 1978.

          Not intentionally, of course.

          Now, before you draw any conclusions, I don't want you to get the
impression that I, myself, claim to be the maniac who drove the Rocket Car
into the wild blue yonder. I said I was probably responsible for the rumor,
not that I actually performed the test flight. As far as I know, the flight
in question never happened. Like all legends, the root of the story might be
true (or partially true), but once the tale started circulating, the root
was lost in the embellishments. If the Legend of the Rocket Car survives, my
great-grandchildren will probably end up talking about a guy from Lunartown
who nailed an anti-matter pod onto an old Apollo moon-rover and flew into
the side of Tycho Crater.

          That's how it goes with legends.

          Like I said, I'm not a rocket scientist or motorhead. I don't even
KNOW any rocket scientists or motorheads. I'm a high-school biology teacher.
I know, this must sound like I'm the most unqualified person in the world to
give opinions about things like jet-propelled cars, but I wasn't always a
biology teacher. The fact that I'm a biology teacher today is only relevant
to the extent that it's responsible for my writing this story down.

          Last year, a week or two before Thanksgiving, I was taking my
class through some of the particulars of evolution ("how human beings were
raised from monkeys" as one of my students phrased it). We were discussing
Charles Darwin and The Origin of Species when one of my students asked me
how Darwin's research ship ever got the name "H.M.S. Beagle".

          Damned good question, when you stop and think about it.

          Since I've been teaching this subject for 11 years, it's rare when
a student asks a question I can't answer. But this one was a real pisser.
Anyone who's ever taught in a classroom knows that sometimes you get a
student that likes to play "Stump the Teacher". A kid who asks questions he
doesn't really care about, just to see if he can find a gap in the teachers
knowledge. Usually these questions are pretty easy to evade or ignore (or
even lie about) but sometimes one will catch my interest. This was one of
them. You have to admit, "The Beagle" is a pretty dumb name for a ship that
cruised the Galapagos in search of exciting bird-beak variations. So I told
the student that I had no idea where the ship's name came from, but I'd find
out. After all, I've been teaching the same class for 11 years, so I've
amassed a pretty good variety of books on the subject. Surely the answer
would be in one of them.

          Hah. I couldn't find the answer anywhere. My reference books
concerned themselves with headier subjects, the Scopes trial and genetic
mutations and whatnot, NOT the name of Darwin's boat. I looked through every
book I could find, but came up dry. After exhausting all my research
options, I was thinking about conceding this particular round of Stump the
Teacher when one of my kids asked if I'd looked for the information on the
World Wide Web.

          I said "Of course I looked there. It's the first thing I checked.
Go play in traffic."

          Truth be told, I not only hadn't checked the Web, I didn't know
how to check it. In addition to being a non-rocket scientist, I'm not (or at
least I wasn't) very interested in computers or the Internet. I know this is
a shameful thing for a teacher to say in 1998, but it's true. I kept meaning
to take a look at the Internet-connected computers in the school library,
just to see what all the hoo-hah was about, but I simply hadn't gotten
around to it. Actually I was a little bit intimidated by the machines, and
kept putting off the inevitable confrontation due to embarrassment. Sure, I
could've walked into the library during my free period, sat down at one of
the machines and tried to figure out what to do on my own, but what if I
couldn't make it work? It wouldn't be long before someone spotted my baffled
expression and realized I was completely lost. So the next day I went to the
library during my free period and asked the librarian for help, feeling like
Crocodile Dundee asking how to work the bidet. But the librarian had
obviously dealt with the situation before, and gave me her ten-minute
"Internet For Stupid Teachers" course without making me feel any dumber than
she had to. As soon as she left me alone with Netscape running and a search
engine online, I typed "Darwin" into space provided, and let the machine do
it's thing. When the results of my search started filling the screen, the
first thing I noticed was that there were over two MILLION sites listed as
being Darwin-related.

          The second thing I noticed was that none of them seemed to pertain
to Charles Darwin, the most famous naturalist in history. Instead, they all
seemed to focus on "The Darwin Award", an "...honor (posthumously) bestowed
on people who did the most good for humanity by removing themselves from the
communal gene-pool".

          Which really isn't a bad idea, when you think about it.

          Of course I expected this "award" to be a piece of tongue-
in-cheek humor, the sort of thing that used to make the rounds via smudgy
Xeroxes in the days before E-mail and the World Wide Web. And that's exactly
what it turned out to be. What I wasn't prepared for was my very first
encounter with the story of the Rocket Car in print. Not only in print, but
in a format that can reach around the world. When I read the story, I didn't
know whether to laugh or cry or get nauseous, but I think if I were alone,
I'd have done all three. Based on the number of different Websites
cross-referenced to the word "Darwin", I'll bet that if you read the Rocket
Car story from a computer monitor, the version you saw looked something like
the one that follows.  The text, anyway. The high-tech, precision-drafted
engineering diagrams are my own addition. Don't bust my balls about them,
either. I already told you that I'm not a motorhead or a rocket scientist,
and I'm no Leonardo da Vinci, either.



----------------------------------------------------------------------------
----


The Arizona Highway Patrol came upon a pile of smoldering metal embedded
into the side of a cliff rising above the road at the apex of a curve. The
wreckage resembled the site of an airplane crash, but it was a car. The type
of car was unidentifiable at the scene. The lab finally figured out what it
was and what had happened.

It seems that a guy had somehow obtained a JATO unit (Jet Assisted Take
Off-actually a solid fuel rocket) that is used to give heavy military
transport planes an extra "push" for taking off from short airfields. He had
driven his Chevy Impala out into the desert and found a long, straight
stretch of road. Then he attached the JATO unit to his car, jumped in, got
up some speed and fired off the JATO!

The facts as best could be determined are that the operator of the 1967
Impala hit JATO ignition at a distance of approximately 3.0 miles from the
crash site. This was established by the prominent scorched and melted
asphalt at that location. The JATO, if operating properly, would have
reached maximum thrust within 5 seconds, causing the Chevy to reach speeds
well in excess of 350 mph and continuing at full power for an additional
20-25 seconds. The driver, soon to be pilot, most likely would have
experienced G-forces usually reserved for dog-fighting F-14 jocks under full
afterburners, basically causing him to become insignificant for the
remainder of the event. However, the automobile remained on the straight
highway for about 2.5 miles (15-20)seconds before the driver applied and
completely melted the brakes, blowing the tires and leaving thick rubber
marks on the road surface, then becoming airborne for an additional 1.4
miles and impacting the cliff face at a height of 125 feet leaving a
blackened crater 3 feet deep in the rock.

Most of the driver's remains were not recoverable; however, small fragments
of bone, teeth and hair were extracted from the crater and fingernail and
bone shards were removed from a piece of debris believed to be a portion of
the steering wheel.



----------------------------------------------------------------------------
----


          As I said earlier, for the past 20 years I've kept an eye out for
stories like this, and I've heard plenty of them. But the stories I'd heard
up until then had always been vague and somewhat skimpy on technical
details, making them marginally easier to swallow. Or at least to repeat.
But the Darwin Award version was different. It was chock full of numbers and
specifics, which is always bad news for a legend. Oh, initially it might
make the story more believable, but throwing in a lot of facts and figures
also gives the non-believers plenty of details they can use to refute the
story. In the case of the Darwin Awards version, I'm surprised that anyone,
anywhere, believed the story well enough to repeat it the first time. For
instance, there's the fact that this event was supposedly investigated by
the Arizona Highway Patrol. Well, that's not too hard to check, is it? One
call to the state police in Arizona would be all it took to get a
confirmation or denial. If you don't believe me, give it a try. You'll get
an irritated denial before you've even finished asking the question.
Actually, the AHP is so sick of answering questions about this whole thing
that they may well hang up in your ear.

          Don't feel like making a long-distance call just to have someone
hang up on you? Then ask yourself this: If the Darwin Award story is true,
then why was it never reported in the national media? Why has nobody ever
produced pictures of the crash site? And how about the unfortunate "pilot"?
Nobody was ever able to attach a name to this person? Specify the location?

          If you want to explain these questions away by blaming human error
or police indifference or whatever, that's okay. There's too much apathy and
incompetence in the world to pretend that couldn't be the case. But if you
look at the physics of the story, you'll see that the whole pile of bullshit
is impossible, regardless of the human angle. It's simple stuff, too. You
don't have to be an aerospace engineer to see what I'm talking about. For
instance, when the Chevy left the road with it's rocket still going
full-blast, why did it go in a straight line?  Take a look at a missile
sometime. You'll notice that it's... missile-shaped. Nice pointy nose, tail
fins, stuff like that. It's built that way so it'll go in a straight line.
The 1967 Chevrolet was a nice looking car, sure. But it doesn't look much
like a missile. Mount a big rocket on a `67 Chevy and it may go straight as
long as it's on the ground. But once it got airborne, the weight of the
engine would immediately pull the nose down. And if the JATO was still
blazing away, the car would drill itself into the ground like a tent-spike
before it got fifty feet from the cliff.

          This story is obviously bullshit to anyone willing to give it a
little thought, but it persists, mainly because people WANT it to be true.
And most of those people are men. As a story that got it's start when it was
still being shouted across pool tables in noisy bars, women were left out of
the loop until it hit the Internet. Sort of like the story about the deadly
gas that lies inside the core of a golf ball. Little boys learn this one
too, but not little girls. And when the little boys grow up (to whatever
extent they actually do grow up), the Golf Ball Toxin story is replaced with
the Rocket Car story.

          One "urban legend" debunker attributes the huge popularity of this
story to the fact that it's "...a real-life version of the Road Runner
cartoon. Wile E. Coyote nails an Acme Jato Rocket onto the back of a Chevy
Impala and flies into a canyon wall."

          Works for me.

          The question is, how did such a story ever get started in the
first place?  Oh, don't get me wrong, I'm not trying to say that nobody
would ever be dumb enough to attempt a stunt like this. Anyone who followed
the O.J. Simpson trial will probably agree that there simply aren't any
limits to the depths of human stupidity anymore. It's just mighty unlikely
that someone stupid enough to pilot the Rocket Car would be smart enough to
build it in the first place. The story probably started with an event that
that bears some similarity to the final version, a much smaller event that
gradually evolved into the final legend.

          All I know for sure is that myself and three other guys were
getting up to some awfully weird shit out in the desert back in the spring
of 1978, shit that was more than weird enough to start the Legend of the
Rocket Car. And only one of us was stupid enough to be the pilot in the
Darwin Awards story.

          At least that's what I keep telling myself.



WHY THE ROCKET CAR DOESN'T WORK

         One thing I want to make clear from the start is that I'm not
pissing on the Rocket Car legend purely as an academic exercise. When my
friends and I set out to build the vehicle we test-fired in the spring of
1978, a real-life jet-powered, road-traveling car was exactly what we had in
mind. Craig Breedlove was busy breaking land speed records in the Spirit of
America, Evel Knievel had graduated from "biker" to "payload" while
attempting to jump the Snake River Canyon a few years earlier, and
rocket-powered vehicles were a pretty popular notion. Unfortunately,
machines like this require a lot of time and money and engineering skill to
build and operate.

          My friends and I had none of these things.

          In 1978, I was 22 years old and still living with my parents. My
father owned a scrapyard, twenty-two acres of barren desert scrub ideally
suited to having junk thrown on it. The yard was a salvage smorgasbord,
covered with everything from dead water heaters to junked airplane cockpits.
And since we lived near a major Army storage facility, a lot of the scrap my
father bought and sold came from government auctions. To be brutally honest,
the main yard looked like a cross between Sanford & Sons and Apocalypse Now.
My father would go to the auctions held at the post from time to time, bid
on pre-marked lots of God only knew what, then send me out he next day with
the big flatbed to collect the latest pile of junk he'd bought. Plenty of
people who went to these auctions ended up with nothing more than tons of
unusable junk that was worth less than they paid for it, but my Dad always
seemed to find the lots that contained valuable stuff. He also knew plenty
of people who owned military surplus stores, and usually had some idea of
what was in demand and what wasn't. But since the nearby Army base was a
huge storage depot, the auctions weren't the sort of affairs that the
average man-off-the-street would be interested in. The lots for sale were
usually measured by the ton, and if a lot seemed to have a few items you
were interested in, you had to buy the whole mess. Because of this, my Dad
ended up with an amazing amount of unusable military surplus, things like
gas-masks and vehicle parts that were worthless in the civilian world.

          But from time to time, we'd get weapons, too.

          No , he never bought a pile of crap and ended up with a crate full
of M-16's or a Shrike missile, the military was usually careful enough to
keep THAT from happening. But from time to time we did end up with stuff we
weren't supposed to have. Once day I opened a crate marked "heater assembly"
and found it full of smoke grenades. My Dad found a steel ammo box full of
blank M-60 rounds once. And even though these instances were a rarity, the
Army had a very strict policy toward scrap dealers who found such things:
You had to give them back. No two ways about it. Before even being allowed
to place a bid, dealers at an auction were required to sign several forms,
one of which stated that they'd return any "explosive, ordnance, fuse,
detonator, or other chemically viable part or assembly of a weapons system."
I remember that paragraph well, since it's the only part of the Army red
tape that ever directly pertained to me. The penalties for non-compliance
outlined at the end of the paragraph sounded pretty scary (five-figure
fines, possible imprisonment, etc), and were enough to make my Dad return
the crate of smoke grenades, but not the blank ammo. These were judged to be
too trivial to warrant a drive to the base, and my Dad ended up keeping them
draped over a file cabinet in his office, as a decoration.

          Of course I'm telling you this because it's how I managed to get
hold of the JATO bottle we used for our rocket car. Actually there were four
of them, each in a long, hay-filled crate with "BARREL ASSEMBLY" stenciled
on the side. One day I went out to the base to pick up a load of junk my Dad
had bought at the auction, and while we were going through the stuff back at
the yard, I spotted the crates and took a look. And even though I didn't
know what the hell it was at first glance, I knew it wasn't a barrel for
anything. The JATO bottle was a round metal cylinder about four feet long,
and less than a foot in diameter. At first I thought it was a gas cylinder
of some sort, but written on the side in red paint were the words "M-23 JET
ASSIST UNIT". And rather than the sort of valve assembly you'd see on a gas
cylinder, the end of the bottle had an inverted funnel shape to it, with a
rubber plug at the lowest point. It was obviously a rocket of some sort. And
judging from the weight (it took two people to even budge the things) they
were still full of something.

          Once I figured out what they were, I decided I had to call Jimmy.

          Jimmy and I met in the third grade (or thereabouts), and were best
friends for most of our growing-up. His family lived just down the street,
and his father ran an auto body shop in town. On more than one occasion
Jimmy's Dad and my own traded parts or services, and our families were
pretty close. But while I went to work for my father after graduating high
school, Jimmy went to college to study mechanical engineering. He had a
natural talent for figuring out things in the physical world, but was never
much good at putting them into practice. He could design and visualize, but
when it came to hands-on applications, he just wasn't very talented.

          Nevertheless, he was the first person I showed the JATO bottles
to.

          Actually, I didn't show them to anyone right away. The campus
where Jimmy took classes was almost 150 miles away, so he spent his weekdays
in a rented room and only came home on the weekends. I found the JATO's on a
Wednesday, which meant I had three days before I could tell Jimmy about
them. More than enough time for me to cook up the idea of the Rocket Car. As
a matter of fact, as soon as I realized what that dull metal cylinder
represented, I thought about attaching it to a car and taking a
jet-propelled ride. I spent the rest of Wednesday, Thursday and Friday
planning how it could be done. The principle certainly seemed simple enough.
Nail the rocket onto one of the junkers in my Dad's field, point it down a
straight stretch of road, and light the mother up. Sure there'd be minor
details to be worked out, but the basic idea was fairly straightforward.

          All I can say is thank God I consulted with Jimmy before actually
doing anything. If it wasn't for his intervention, I'd have probably ended
up a damp spot on a highway somewhere.

          Jimmy came over to the house on Saturday morning, we drove to the
yard, and I showed him the rocket. He immediately knew what it was, or at
least what it seemed to be. A solid fuel rocket, the kind they'd used in
Vietnam to give cargo planes a kick in the ass when they needed to take off
from short runways. Very simple, very straightforward. Also very dangerous.
I described the idea of the Rocket Car to him, and at first he was pretty
enthusiastic. But after thinking the whole thing over for awhile, he not
only lost his enthusiasm, but made me promise I wouldn't actually do
anything with the JATO until he had time to check a few things out. I
agreed, mainly because I knew I'd need Jimmy's help if I was ever going to
make the Rocket Car work.

          We talked about design possibilities for the rest of the weekend,
and when Jimmy went back to campus, I stashed the JATO's in the back of a
wasted milk truck rusting in the field. When Jimmy came back the following
weekend, we sat down at his kitchen table and he explained precisely why the
rocket car wouldn't work.

          It was a sobering (and depressing) lecture.

          The main problem was control. Jimmy explained that the JATO bottle
would produce something like 2,500 pounds of thrust (albeit for a very short
time), which sounded like more than enough to ensure a fun ride.
Unfortunately, this huge amount of thrust would not only be unstoppable once
it was started, it would probably have to be applied to a point on the car
that wasn't designed to handle such a such a force. Under normal
circumstances, a car gets it's forward thrust from the back axle, by way of
tires against the pavement. Which means that a normal car will never exceed
a certain amount of thrust due to the fact that the tires have to touch the
pavement to move the car forward. Jimmy described the whole thing using
top-fuel dragsters as an example. When the driver hits the gas, the back end
of the car tries to lift into the air due to the sudden force applied to the
rear axle. But as soon as the ass end starts to lift, the tires lose
traction, and the thrust decreases. The back end drops, thrust is restored,
and the process starts all over again. So a car of a given weight using
driven wheels can only get so much forward thrust. The limiting factors are
the weight, the distribution of the weight, size of the tires, and torque
applied to the wheels. The fact that a car uses driven wheels creates a
self-damping system that ensures the wheels will stay on the ground (at
least most of the time). The only reason dragsters and funny cars pop
wheelies is that they use oversized tires that screw up the relationship
between torque and traction. Unfortunately, a rocket car has no such
restraints. A massive amount of thrust is suddenly being applied to a point
on the car that wasn't designed to handle it, and there's no telling what
happens next. Maybe the front end lifts off the ground. Maybe the rear.
Maybe the ass end would slew around sideways. The only thing that was
certain was that the car would not go in a straight line, and would continue
to not go in a straight line at a very high rate of speed.

          Naturally I asked how Craig Breedlove managed to drive the Spirit
of America at 600+ miles an hour, but I knew the answer before I even spit
the question out. He hired a team of aerospace engineers and rocket
scientists to design a car that was built to have a jet engine sticking out
it's ass.

          After hearing this, Jimmy didn't even have to outline the rest of
the reasons why my idea wouldn't work, but he did anyway. There was also the
fact that store-bought tires couldn't handle the sort of acceleration a
rocket would provide, which was why all land-speed record cars used
custom-made, solid-rubber tires. Simply spinning a regular tire at
rocket-car speeds would probably create enough centrifugal force to tear it
right off the rim. And if that wasn't enough, there was the problem of
stopping the thing once it got rolling. And structural stress. And so on and
so on.

          By this time I'd pretty much decided that the whole idea was
stupid and suicidal, which was why I was amazed when Jimmy proceeded to tell
me exactly how the rocket car could work.



TRAIN OF THOUGHT

          One thing that remains constant in every re-telling of the Rocket
Car legend is that it reportedly took place somewhere in the southwest
United States. I've heard versions stating that the whole thing happened in
Arizona, Nevada, New Mexico, western Texas and southwestern California, and
in each case, the location seemed to be a critical part of the plot. Which
makes sense, considering the premise that the story is based on. The Rocket
Car would have to be launched on a fairly long, flat stretch of road, away
from prying eyes. The Mojave is an ideal place to find such a road, as
anyone who's ever driven across the desert will tell you. The Darwin Award
version specifies Arizona, which is covered with roads that would be ideal
for the event described in the story. But one thing that strikes me as
incredibly silly about this version is the fact that the test pilot chose to
test his vehicle on a road with a curve in it. The story specifies that the
cliff where the car impacted was at the "apex of a curve", and that the test
pilot ran under JATO power for 2.4 miles before hitting the turn and
becoming airborne.

          This suggests a pretty obvious question: If you were going to test
drive a rocket-powered car, what sort of road would you pick for the ride?
Would you choose a section of highway less than three miles from a turn in
the road that overlooked a canyon?

          I don't think I would.

          Even if Jimmy hadn't been around to talk sense into me and I had
attempted to drive the rocket car, I'm sure I could've found a stretch of
highway that didn't include a hairpin turn. The desert contains thousands of
miles of highways and dirt roads, and it would've been much harder to find
the kind of road in the Darwin story than to find a nice level straightaway.
On the other hand, when Wile E. Coyote lights the big skyrocket tied to his
jalopy, he always seems to be near an unexpected turn. I guess whoever wrote
the Darwin story must have assumed this was standard procedure.

          Fortunately, highways aren't the only long, straight thoroughfares
through the desert. After Jimmy was through demolishing my plans to build
the Rocket Car, he pointed out that the control problem could easily be
overcome if the car was actually a rocket sled, running on rails rather than
asphalt. Mounting the rocket on a railroad car would not only solve the
problems of control and traction, but if an abandoned stretch of track was
used, traffic wouldn't even be an issue. And the Mojave is covered with
abandoned railroad track, most of it the old-fashioned narrow-gauge kind
used for mining trains near the turn of the century. I knew of at least
three such pieces of track within five miles of town. Finding a railroad car
that would actually run on the old-fashioned track was a whole nother story,
but by the time Jimmy finished explaining his idea, I already had a plan in
mind to deal with that part of the equation.

          The following morning I found myself bouncing across the desert in
a battered four-wheel drive pickup with the remaining two members of Team
Rocket Car (my tongue is firmly in cheek when I use that term), Sal and
Beck. Beck and I were almost as close as Jimmy and I when we were kids, but
Beck had a "wild streak" that caused most of the trouble we got into from
time to time. During high school his "wild streak" got out of control, Beck
turned into "one of those dope-smoking degenerates" (Mom's preferred term)
and he dropped out a year shy of graduation. Sal was Beck's junior brother,
junior not only by calendar-count but by any sort of I.Q. measurement. Sal
wasn't retarded or anything, but people tended to use phrases like "not too
swift" and "a few bricks short of a load", a lot more often than usual when
he was around. Just like "dope smoking degenerate" tended to pop up in
conversations that involved Beck.

          Okay, so they weren't exactly Nobel Prize laureates, but I didn't
have much choice in my selection of assistants. I needed their truck.

          The truck actually belonged to Beck's father, who used it in the
performance of his job. Whatever that was. Nobody knew for sure what Beck's
Dad did for a living but the truck was ugly and battered, sat on huge
mud-grabber tires, and came with a massive 454 engine. Beck's father would
drive the thing out of town occasionally, sometimes staying gone for days at
a time. When he returned, the truck always looked as if it had spent the
entire time driving around in the desert. If Beck knew what his father did
for a living, he never said. But Jimmy and I figured the man used his pickup
for transporting something (ahem) back and forth from remote desert
locations. Contraband vegetation arriving at an isolated airstrip was one
possibility, and people desperate to become American citizens without a lot
of government interference was another. The only relevant fact is that the
truck was very good for cruising the desert, which is why we used it to
visit an abandoned silver mine a few miles from town that morning. The mine
had been out of commission and the entrance boarded over for as long as any
of us could remember, but at least a few brave kids had explored the
interior of the shaft. Everyone knew there was nothing of value left in the
mine, with the exception of some ancient equipment that was worthless, even
as scrap. Worthless to most people, anyway. That's because very few people
went into the mine looking for old mining equipment.

          We did. And we found some, too.

          Actually, Beck himself was one of the juvenile delinquents who'd
poked around in the mine years earlier, so he knew just what to expect when
we pried off the old wooden planks covering the entrance. Less than a dozen
feet into the shaft was a train of ancient bucket-cars, the tiny railcars
used to haul ore out of the mine while it was in use. Probably parked so
close to the entrance to discourage people from going any further. I wasn't
too thrilled about entering a man-made tunnel that could cave in at any
moment, but I could see from my flashlight beam that the "train" only
consisted of three bucket-cars linked together. And despite the fact that
they'd probably been parked for forty years or more, they seemed to be in
reasonably good condition. Shit lasts forever in the desert, it really does.
Beck dragged a towchain into the mine, looped it around the hitch on the
last car, then used the pickup to drag the whole line of cars closer to the
entrance. When the cars were nearly clear of the overhang, I went inside and
used a five-pound pony-sledge to bash the connection on the last car until
it came free. When Beck threw the pickup into gear and dragged the first two
cars clear of the mine, and the metal wheels screeched so loud I thought it
would bring the shaft down on my head. Of course the wheels were frozen with
rust, but they were far from destroyed. The first thing we did when we got
the bucket cars into the light of day was turn them upside-down, then slop
grease onto the axles. After a few well-placed whacks with the sledge, we
got the wheels to turn. A few more whacks, and we had them turning freely
enough to push the bucket-cars up a ramp and into the back of the pickup.
Once the bucket cars were loaded, we replaced the boards over the mine
entrance, then took the cars back to the scrapyard.

           The Rocket Car was off to a fine start.



LUXURY AT THE SPEED OF SOUND

          One aspect of the Rocket Car legend that always tickles me is that
no matter how much the story varies, the make, model and year of the car is
always specified. Sure this is a nice detail to have on hand, but
considering the details left out of the description, it looks... sorta
silly. In the Darwin Award version, there's no mention of which highway the
car was on, or even whereabouts in Arizona the story took place. And Arizona
is a pretty big place. There's also no mention of any investigation that
took place afterwards. But despite all these oversights, the story did
specify that the car was a 1967 Chevy Impala. I think the reason this detail
is always supplied is because it's critical to make the listener think the
test pilot at least looked cool when he flew into the cliff. You'll never
hear someone tell a story about a guy in a rocket-powered K-car or a
Volkswagen Beetle. It has to be a car that deserves to have a rocket
attached to it.

          In the case of our Rocket Car, we gave some serious thought to not
even using a car body. As soon as we got back to the scrapyard, Beck wanted
to weld one of the JATO's to a bucket car, stick the car on a track, and
light the rocket. He was doubtless the craziest member of Team Rocket Car,
and if I'd been willing to go along with his idea, I have no doubt he'd have
climbed in and lit the fuse himself. Fortunately, they were my JATOs, so I
had veto power over all the dumb ideas. Or at least the real dumb ones. Of
course sticking a JATO on a bucket car was out of the question, but building
a simple platform on a bucket-car base with a car seat bolted onto it
sounded like the easiest way to build a rocket sled. Actually, this is
pretty much what the NASA rocket sleds looked like. But this arrangement
would mean that each run would be limited to a single passenger, and I only
had four JATO's. When Jimmy and I discussed the details of the project, he
seemed pretty confident that the thrust from the rocket would be enough to
push a four-passenger car at a reasonable speed. And if we used a car body,
we'd have a windshield, doors, and some degree of protection if anything
went wrong. Granted, a car body wouldn't do us much good if we hit something
(like a canyon wall) at jet-fighter speed, but it was better than wiping out
in a director's chair at 300 miles per hour.

          Despite Beck's impatience, I got started building the Rocket Car
the next day.

          Our car wasn't a 1967 Chevy Impala, but a 1959 Chevy Impala. A
bone-white Impala, with a red interior. I know how bizarre that sounds, but
once a story starts to mutate into a legend, there's no telling which parts
of the truth will stick. Obviously the Chevy Impala part made the cut.

          We didn't choose the `59 Impala for it's aerodynamics or
structural qualities, but because one was available. My father happened to
have one, resting on cinderblocks, in a forgotten corner of his lot. Engine,
transmission and wheels were all missing, sold to Jimmy's father at some
point. The only reason this car was otherwise intact was that Chevrolet only
used the 1959 style for a single year, which meant the body parts would only
be usable on another 1959 Impala. This particular car was obscure enough so
that once the mechanical parts were stripped, it was pretty much useless.
And this is why what was left of my Dad's `59 Impala was left to decay in a
field.

          Fortunately, the leftovers were all that we needed.

          Cutting the bodies from the bucket cars was a chore, but not as
bad as I expected. The thin metal of the buckets was rusted to tatters in
spots, so burning through it was fairly easy. But despite this, I still used
almost an entire tank of oxy getting the bodies cut away from the bases, and
I knew my Dad would be suspicious when he found I'd used all the oxygen in
an almost- full tank. Luckily, Jimmy was able to help out in that
department. When I told him about my predicament the following weekend, he
simply took my empty oxygen cylinder and swapped it with one of the dozen or
so his Dad kept on hand at his body shop. My father might notice if a brand
new tank of oxygen were suddenly empty, but Jimmy's Dad's shop used so much
gas he'd never know the difference.

          Attaching the cut-away rail car bases to the Chevy frame was
pretty easy too. Jimmy stressed the importance of getting the two sets of
wheels precisely aligned, but it wasn't that hard. The old Chevy frame had
plenty of places for bolts and welds, so picking spots where the wheels
would line up was a snap. And since the Impala was already up on blocks, it
was no problem to slide the wheel frames underneath and lift them into place
with a floor jack, then weld away. I'm sure that these days my students
would laugh like hell at the thought of me laying underneath a car with an
oxyacetylene torch in my hand, but the fact is, I learned how to draw a bead
and cut metal when I was 14 or 15 years old. Growing up around a scrapyard
did have certain advantages, and learning how to work with a torch was one
of them. So aligning the wheel frames and welding them to the car was a
fairly straightforward process.

          The propulsion unit (hah!) consisted of a five-foot length of
steel water pipe, welded to both the rear bucket car and the Chevy's frame.
This might sound like overkill, but at the time I had no idea how much
thrust to expect from the JATO bottle, so it seemed best to err on the side
of caution. I plugged the end of the pipe facing the front of the car with a
slug of scrap steel and welded it into place, and even cut the center out of
a threaded cap to screw onto the exhaust end to hold the JATO bottle
securely once it was installed. The end-cap seemed like a good idea while I
was doing it, but Jimmy laughed like hell when he came in the following
weekend and saw my handiwork. He pointed at the steel cap, and said "That
rocket is gonna be pushing against the car hard enough to make it fly like a
bullet, and you're afraid it'll fall out the BACK end?"

          What can I say? This is one of the reasons Jimmy was doing all the
brainwork.

          Unfortunately, his critique wasn't only limited to the job I did
on the "propulsion unit". He also asked how I planned to stop the thing once
the ride was over, and I had to admit that I didn't have the slightest idea.




TOUGH BRAKES

          In the Darwin version of the Rocket Car tale, the car burned out
it's brakes instantly, and was eventually stopped by a cliff face. We hoped
to come up with a somewhat more elegant braking system, and we did. But not
without considerable brainwork.

          The night Jimmy inspected my work on the Chevy, all four members
of Team Rocket Car gathered at a neighborhood bar to discuss the
considerable problem of stopping the car once it was moving. When I started
putting the car together, I assumed Jimmy would have some idea what we'd do.
But as it turned out, he was just as clueless as the rest of us. So we
gathered at the bar in the hope that one of us could come up with a workable
idea.

          Of course the lack of any way to stop the Rocket Car was
considered a very minor point with Beck. He was perfectly willing to haul
the car out to a long stretch of empty track, get in, fire it up, and hope
he slowed down before he ran out of track. In his eyes, worrying about
something as trivial as brakes was a sign of cowardice.

          Like I said, he was out of his fucking mind.

          Fortunately, Beck didn't have much say about the situation, so we
decided that we wouldn't launch the car until we had some sort of braking
mechanism to slow it down.

          The most popular idea was, naturally, a drogue chute. The Spirit
of America used one, as did a few types of fighter planes, top fuel
dragsters, etc. But like the optimal solutions to most of our problems, the
question was where to find one. Nobody had any idea how to go about getting
a parachute. Nobody except for me, that is. My father actually had six Army
surplus parachutes sitting in a storage shed near the office at the
scrapyard, the spoils of particularly good auction years before. Five of
them were standard personnel chutes, and one was a massive cargo-drop
canopy. But Dad also knew he had six of them. He'd started out with a dozen,
and occasionally sold one to a skydiver or army/navy store. A good surplus
parachute was worth upwards of $200. There was no telling what the cargo
chute would be worth to the right buyer. But if one were to turn up missing,
Dad would certainly notice. Of course we might have gotten away with using a
parachute, then returning it once we were finished with it, but even this
presented problems. It might work okay for the first ride, but how about the
second? I certainly knew nothing about parachute rigging. All I was sure of
was that there was a lot of cloth that had to be stuffed into a very small
pack.

          Besides, I'd already stuck my neck out pretty far for the sake of
the Rocket Car, and I didn't want to stick it out any further. So I kept the
existence of Dad's parachutes to myself, and hoped someone else would come
up with an alternate plan.

          Using a retro-rocket was discussed briefly, but it only took Jimmy
a minute to punch that idea full of holes. Even though rigging a retro would
mean nothing more than sticking a second JATO on the front of the car to
oppose the one in the rear, it would mean a maximum of two rides before we
ran out of JATO's. This much was obvious. What wasn't obvious was the
physics of the whole thing, which Jimmy was happy to explain. Firing the
first rocket would provide a huge forward thrust for a very short time, but
a retro rocket would produce an identical thrust (if we were lucky) in the
opposite direction, for the same duration. Which would mean the only way to
bring the car to a dead stop would be to fire the retro as soon as the
thrust rocket burned out. That would result in a 0-to-300 acceleration in
seconds, followed by a 300-to-0 deceleration in the same amount of time.

          Doesn't sound like much fun, does it?

          And if the retro was fired a little too late, it could easily
result in the whole rig traveling backwards. Possibly at a high rate of
speed. Or even worse, the retro might be a dud. Or the ignition system might
not work.

          Needless to say, we shitcanned the retro-rocket idea in a hurry.

          Sal suggested outfitting the car with a huge anchor, one that
could be heaved out the window at the critical moment. The rest of us
suggested that Sal shut the fuck up and get us another round of beers.

          I brought up one idea I'd been toying with, stretching a cable
across the track and fitting the Rocket Car with a tailhook to slow it down.
Why not? After all, aircraft carriers had been using this system to stop
incoming planes for years, and it seemed to work just fine. But before I
could explain the idea, Beck started laughing his ass off, then asked if I
wanted to use a rubber inner-tube to catch the car, or just tie a rope
between two fence-posts. And I clearly remember how much this pissed me off.
Here was a guy willing to strap a military rocket onto his back and sit in a
rusty rail-car while someone lit the fuse, but he was laughing at my ideas.
Unfortunately, he did have a point. It wasn't until years later that I found
out how aircraft carriers absorbed the shock of a plane catching an
arresting wire (it involves huge pistons moving through cylinders of
hydraulic fluid), but I knew that rigging a similar system would be next to
impossible. Putting a tailhook on the car and catching an arresting wire was
simple. But it sure as hell couldn't be stationary wire. There would have to
be some system to absorb the impact of a car moving at high speeds, and we
couldn't come up with anything. We went through a slew of ideas for
mechanical systems, but I rejected them all because they were either too
complicated, too expensive, or too impractical.

          Jimmy pointed out that rocket sleds usually ended up in a pool of
water, which both acted as a brake and cooled the whole contraption down.
Beck pointed out that all the narrow-gauge railroad tracks he'd ever seen
were in the middle of the desert, where pools of water were pretty tough to
come by.

          Overall, we ended up batting exactly zero for the evening.

          I remember that I was pretty damned depressed when Jimmy and I
left the bar that night, despite the fact that I was pretty drunk.
Considering the progress I'd made on the rocket car up to that point, I
figured that a braking system would be a minor point. Surely if we put all
three of our heads together (well, 3-1/2, counting Sal) we could come up
with something.

          But it hadn't happened.

          Or at least it hadn't happened while we were all sitting at the
bar. Jimmy tried to blow some optimistic sunshine up my ass while we walked
up the street toward our houses, saying that one of us might be able to come
up with something later, once we were all sober. I didn't consider it
likely. Beck and Sal seemed to think better when they were drunk, and they
were both pretty shitfaced when we left them. If they hadn't come up with
anything at the bar, chances are they never would. And Jimmy and I weren't
having any brainstorms drunk or sober.

          Anyway, there's no telling how Sal and Beck spent the rest of
their evening, but the next morning my Dad woke me up by pounding on my
bedroom door. When I finally peeled my eyes open, he asked me who was
delivering my car parts in the middle of the night.

          I had no idea what he was talking about.

          Part of my incomprehension was from a hangover, but even if I'd
spent the previous night drinking Kool Aid, I would've been pretty confused.
So he led me out to the front porch and pointed to a bundle of four thick
metal rods, tied together with twine, laying on the porch swing. When I
looked closer, I saw that they were actually a set of heavy-duty
air-adjustable car shock absorbers. Jammed under the twine was a note
written in what looked like crayon on a crumpled paper bag.

          It said this:

          Problum solved.

          Call me later

          Major Tom



HEAT OF THE MOMENTUM

          I stared at the note for quite awhile, trying to figure out what
it meant. At first I figured Jimmy must have left the bundle of shocks,
since his father stocked such things at his body shop. But there was no way
a college student like Jimmy would misspell a common word like "problem",
drunk or sober. And the fact that most of the words were spelled correctly
pretty much eliminated Sal. Which meant that the shock-absorber care package
must have been Beck's doing, and as soon as I realized this, I hustled the
bundle into the house and stashed it in my room. Obviously Beck's creative
juices hadn't really started flowing until Jimmy and I left the previous
night, and he'd eventually come up with some sort of solution to the braking
problem. It also seemed that he had enough confidence in his idea to act on
it. At the time I had no idea what sort of solution Beck could've come up
with for our "problum", I just hoped it turned out to be as sensible in the
light of day as it seemed when Beck came up with it the night before. The
bundle of shocks I stuck under my bed were relatively new, but covered with
dust and road-grime. They obviously hadn't come from an all-night auto parts
store. I guessed that Beck had been struck with a burst of twisted
inspiration after Jimmy and I left, then spent the rest of the night
staggering around town with his brother, a bumper jack, and a crescent
wrench. Looking for donor to contribute some hardware to our cause. It
seemed as if they'd found one, too. And if someone was going to wake up that
morning to a car that was mysteriously missing all four shock absorbers, I
hoped like hell Beck's plan was worth it.

          But I never actually asked Beck where the shocks came from, and he
never volunteered the information. I didn't consider it critical to the
mission.

          I did, however, call him later in the day to ask what I was
supposed to do with the shocks. His first suggestion was that I stick them
up my ass. I assumed that he was just in a bad mood from a hangover, since
there was no way an assfull of shock absorbers would help to slow a
fast-moving Rocket Car. So I kept interrogating him until he finally
remembered the details of his Grand Plan, and agreed to meet me at the
scrapyard later on. When he finally showed up at the gates to the yard he
looked like hammered shit, but I expected as much. Go spend a night getting
drunk and stealing auto parts and see how you feel the next day. But he was
also reasonably coherent, and described his idea while we walked out to the
weedy corner of the field where the Rocket Car was still perched on
cinderblocks.

          And I have to admit, it was good. Real good. Better than anything
we'd figured out up to that point, anyway. But the best part (to me, anyway)
was that it didn't involve me stealing anything else that my father might
notice.

          Beck's idea was simple, elegant, and easy to put into practice.
I'd install the air shocks on the Rocket Car normally, just as if the car
would be riding on pavement instead of rails. But I'd also bolt a pair of
wooden beams onto the belly of the car, runners that were placed exactly
between the front and rear train wheels. Each runner would be thick enough
to reach almost all the way down to the tracks, and the bottom would be
covered with rubber cut from old tires. The effect would be that the car
would roll freely while the air shocks were inflated, with the twin runners
suspended inches above the steel tracks. When it was time to stop the car,
the pilot would activate a release valve which would dump the air from all
four shock absorbers simultaneously. The car would drop until it's entire
weight was resting on the runners, which would be pressing into the railroad
tracks. This would provide two brake shoes three feet long, pushed against
the track under the weight of the car's body, providing a huge amount of
stopping-power. And since the wheel flanges would also still be firmly on
the tracks, the car would remain traveling in a straight line.

          When Beck finished explaining his idea, I stood there with my
mouth hanging open. Actually we both stood there with our mouths open, but
while my jaw was flopping due to surprise, Beck's was caused by a powerful
hangover that was still affecting his motor control. I must admit, though, I
was pretty impressed with his thinking. We'd talked about dozens of ways to
stop the rocket car the previous evening, but nothing that even came close
to Beck's plan. It was simple to build, easy to install, and stood a fair
chance of working. I knew that sooner or later I'd have to talk to Jimmy
about the whole thing, but that didn't stop me from getting to work
installing the air shocks on the Chevy as soon as Beck slouched out of the
scrapyard and went home.

          I worked on the car for the rest of the afternoon, wanting to get
as much done as I could on a Sunday, while the yard was closed. By the end
of the day, I had the shocks installed on the car and a pair of
three-foot-long runners made from sections of 2 x 4 bolted together to make
them thick enough to reach the rails. All that was left to do was bolt the
runners to the car frame and arrange the air hoses for the shock absorbers,
and the car would be ready to test. It was THEN that I finally called Jimmy
and asked him to come down to the yard. Talking to him sooner would've been
the sensible thing to do, but I didn't want to take a chance that he'd come
up with some laughably obvious reason the brake-runner system wouldn't work.
At the time, my thinking on the subject was pretty clear: There were only
two ways were going to be able to stop the Rocket Car, either by using a
drogue chute or by Beck's braking system. And although I wasn't too keen on
the idea of taking one of my Dad's parachutes, I'd do it if it was the only
way to get the Rocket Car to work. But even if we did use a drogue chute,
the car would need an additional braking system anyway. A parachute will
slow a car, but it won't stop it. You still need regular brakes for that.

          The way I figured it, we'd need Beck's idea no matter what
happened. So I decided to show Jimmy the braking system I was building and
see what he thought. If he pointed out some reason why it was completely
foolish, I'd show him Dad's parachute collection, then tell him that the
brake runners were the standby system, and we were actually going to use a
parachute to slow the car to reasonable speed.

          It not only sounded reasonable, but it kept me from looking like a
total asshole.

          All my planning was unnecessary, though. When Jimmy heard me
describe the rail-braking system and saw what I'd done to the car so far, he
was very impressed. I think he was also a little pissed off that Beck had
come up with the idea, and not him. But here's a thought that never occurred
to me back in 1978, and to be honest, I'm glad it didn't: We never really
had any proof that it was Beck who came up with the idea. For all we know,
it was Sal who dreamed up the notion of using runners to stop the car. Yes,
yes, I know, it's a ridiculous thought. Like having your pet hamster wake up
one morning with a revolutionary process for splitting atoms. After all,
we're talking about the guy who wanted the pilot of the Rocket Car to hoist
a goddamned anchor out the window to slow down.

          Still, you never know. And Jimmy, if you're reading this, I'm
sorry I even brought it up now. I know you'll lose some sleep over it. But I
couldn't resist.

          Anyway, Jimmy did give the braking system his stamp of approval,
and I never had to admit that Dad had a bunch of parachutes stashed in the
shed. The only reservation Jimmy had about the system was one that should've
been obvious to me from the start: heat. If the car were traveling as fast
as we expected it to, rubber-coated planks pressing against metal rails
would probably get hotter than hell. On the other hand, this was basically
the same system used by every car on the road, as well as racing cars. Drum
and disc brakes are essentially nothing more than pads or shoes pressing
against moving pieces of steel to stop the car. The only difference between
their system and ours was that standard brakes pressed brake pads against
steel that was spinning, while ours used steel moving in a straight line.
And even though our car would be traveling a lot faster than most, we had
much more overall braking surface. So Jimmy and I talked about ways to cool
the runners for awhile, just in case heat buildup turned out to be a real
problem. Actually, I think Jimmy might have made the heat problem sound
worse than it really was, just so Beck wouldn't get ALL the credit for
solving the brake problem. But to give credit where it's due, we did wind up
with a heat problem, so whatever Jimmy's motivations might have been, it's a
good thing I listened to him.

          Then again, if I'd ignored him, I doubt it would've changed the
final outcome too much.

          With the conceptual details taken care of, all that was left was
construction. Even though the braking and brake-cooling systems were the
hardest part of the car to fabricate, it didn't take long to get them built
and installed. Bolting the runners to the car frame was quick work, and even
though it took a little doing to get the air-dump valve connected to all
four shock absorbers, I had plenty of materials to work with laying around
the scrap yard. After removing the valve stems from the air inlets to the
shocks, I attached sections of air-compressor hose to the valves themselves.
The other ends of the hoses ran to an air valve that started life as the
door-opening lever on a city bus. With the lever in the "open" position, all
four shocks could be inflated from a single air inlet near the dump lever.
Once the shocks were pressurized, releasing the lever kept them inflated
until the lever was pushed again.

          I first tested the air-valve system on Tuesday afternoon, and when
I saw that it worked the way it was supposed to, I immediately called Beck.
He came to the yard with Sal, and the three of us took turns raising and
lowering the car for almost an hour before the novelty wore off. Despite the
fact that it wasn't very exciting to watch, there was something distinctly
satisfying about seeing the system work the way it was supposed to. Of
course Beck was more anxious to "take the car for a spin" than ever, and he
actually got a little pissed off when I pointed out that we weren't out of
the woods yet. There was still a heat problem to deal with, but this detail
didn't cut much ice with Beck. He was positive that it wouldn't be a
problem, which meant that our next step was to take the Chevy out and light
the rocket. So rather than dwell on the heat problem, I said "Haul it out
WHERE, and light the rocket with WHAT?"

          That took the wind out of his sails in a hurry.

          See, we still hadn't considered how we were going to ignite the
JATO, but to be honest, this wasn't a major sticking point. There was a
rubber plug in the end of the exhaust nozzle of the rocket I'd inspected,
and it seemed logical to assume that some sort of igniter plugged into the
hole. Probably an electrical fuse, something along the lines of the igniters
used for model rockets. Whatever fueled the rocket (ammonium perchlorate, I
later found out) was no doubt highly flammable, and shouldn't be too tough
to ignite.

          But I knew I could come up with something better than a fuse.

          A much bigger problem was the launch site. Beck got sulky and
petulant when I pointed out that we had no idea where we'd actually run the
car, but he didn't argue too much. Even if I agreed to hoist the car onto
Dad's flatbed right then and there and drive around searching for a spot to
use, I'm sure Beck would've realized how dumb the idea was before we even
got out of the yard. So I put Beck in charge of finding a suitable launch
site, which I'd have done even if he wasn't being a royal pain in the ass
and keeping me from my work. His Dad's four-wheel drive was the perfect
vehicle for location-scouting, and he and Sal were more familiar with the
surrounding desert than anyone I knew. Beck and Sal headed for the gates
deep in conversation, and I got back to work.

          The brake-cooling system I ended up building was pretty cheesy,
I'll be the first to admit that. But since we weren't even sure it was
necessary, I didn't want to spend a lot of time messing with it. I ran a
length of garden hose along each wooden runner, near the point where the
runner was attached to the car. Took the ends near the front of each runner,
and led them into the empty engine compartment. I tied off the ends under
the car, then punched holes along the sections near the runners with an awl.
Water entering the ends in the engine compartment would leak out through the
perforations, soaking the runners and pads.

          I told you it was pretty cheesy.

          The only part of the cooling arrangement that even came close to
sophistication was the result of a brainstorm that came to me while I was
strapping a five-gallon jerry can under the hood of the Rocket Car. I
started putting the sprinkler system together with the idea that we'd simply
open a valve before launch, letting water leak out of the hoses and onto the
runners for the duration of the run. But while I was attaching the jerry
can, a better method occurred to me. Instead of attaching the garden hoses
to a valve, I drilled a pair of holes directly into the top of the jerry
can, and fed the hoses through the holes. Then I drilled a third, smaller
hole, and connected another hose from the jerry can to the air-dump handle
for the shock absorbers. I sealed all the hose connections with massive
amounts of rubber cement, then called it quits for the day.

          No word from Beck or Sal that night, so I assumed finding a launch
site wasn't as easy as they'd thought it would be.

          When I checked the Rocket Car the next day, the rubber cement
sealant had dried to the consistency of a hockey puck, so I tested the
entire system. I filled the air shocks from Dad's portable compressor, then
closed the dump valve. Filled the jerry can with water, and screwed the top
down tight. Said a quick prayer, and hit the dump-valve lever. There was a
slight hiss as the air rushed out of the shocks, through the dump valve. But
instead of being vented into the open, the last air-hose I'd installed
directed the escaping air into the jerry can full of water under the hood,
forcing water out through the sprinkler hoses. When I checked under the car
there was an impressive puddle, and water was still jetting out of the holes
in the garden hoses.

          I was thrilled beyond words.

          And when Jimmy saw the whole system in action a few days later, he
said he was "..really impressed with my application of Bernoulli's
Principle." Hell, I didn't even know that the Italians built rocket cars.



AFFATUS  INTERRRUPTUS

          Before I go on, I think I should take a minute to explain why this
whole story is getting so lengthy. Actually, my wife says I should issue a
formal apology for inflicting such a long-winded pile of shit on anyone who
reads this. And I halfway agree with her. But I want to make you aware of
one thing: I did not plan it this way. When I decided to write down the
story of the Rocket Car, I figured it would take all of two pages, maybe
three. Four at the outside. That's because I was working from a set of
20-year-old recollections, and a lot of the details were missing. I didn't
realize that once I started dredging up these old memories, all sorts of
bits and pieces would start to fill themselves in, whether I wanted them to
or not. Four pages became five, then six, etc. etc. I originally planned to
have the whole thing done by the beginning of April, so that it would be
ready to go on the 20th anniversary of the first (and last) run of our
Rocket Car, but April came and went, and I was still hunting and pecking. So
did May, then June.

          Nothing I can do about it now.

          Besides the miscellaneous details that came flooding back when I
started to write this story down, the technical details of the whole project
turned out to be more involved than I remembered when I started writing.
When I began, I remembered a simple 1-2-3 process that took place over the
course of a few weeks, and seemed fairly simple. But as the story
progressed, I realized I had to supply a lot more detail than I originally
intended, just to keep it from sounding completely stupid. And I'm still not
sure I've accomplished the not-sounding-stupid part. Even though the project
was executed one step at a time, it had a goofy, ill-planned, Li'l Rascals
feel to it, and no amount of explaining is going to change that. Because
basically it WAS a Li'l Rascals undertaking. The only thing missing was a
sign saying "He-Man Rocket Kar Klub" over a treehouse door. But I'm not
going to lie about the facts or try to make the whole thing sound less silly
than it actually was. If someone had been hurt or killed, or even we'd been
caught trying to run a homemade rocket car through the desert, I'm sure we'd
all have ended up in the pokey. Even if a judge were willing to overlook the
instances of theft and trespassing and illegal possession of military
fireworks, we'd have probably been charged with something, just on general
principal. Conspiracy To Commit Flagrant Stupidity, maybe. If Beck had
gotten his way, a charge of attempted suicide would've been a sure thing.

          But nothing like this ever happened.

          Having said that, I'd now like to issue a formal apology for
inflicting such a long-winded pile of shit on you.

          Sorry about that.  It won't happen again.

          There you go, Lily. I did it. Happy?



LOCATION, LOCATION, LOCATION

          The idea of the Rocket Car sitting on cinderblocks in the
scrapyard, just waiting for a place to run it, was driving Beck crazy. I
have to admit, I was getting anxious to take it for a test run myself, but
Beck was really going nuts. I didn't hear anything from him for the rest of
the week, and I assumed it was because he hadn't found a suitable launch
site. It was actually because his Dad had taken the four-wheel drive out for
one of his mysterious desert jaunts, and was gone for the rest of the week.
That left Beck and Sal with only one option, driving Sal's beat-to-shit Ford
Falcon, a car that barely held it's own on pavement, never mind in the
desert.

          Meanwhile, the Rocket Car waited in the field.

          I tried to think about it as little as possible, since I didn't
want to end up afflicted with the mania had gotten hold of Beck. I worked at
the scrapyard, just as I always had, trying to avoid the far corner of the
lot where the Rocket Car was. More than once I thought about what I'd do if
my Dad suddenly got a buyer for that 1959 Chevy Impala, but there was really
no point worrying about such things. If it happened, I was simply screwed.
No way to explain my way out of a situation like that.

          So I simply waited.

          Actually, I did get one minor detail taken care of during the
delay, building igniters for the JATOs. I removed all the taillights and
turn-signal lights from the Impala (no matter what became of the Rocket Car,
signaling for a turn wouldn't be an issue) and soldered two wires to each
bulb. Next I carefully cracked the glass on each bulb, leaving the filaments
intact. The bare filaments would heat to white-hot when connected to car
battery, but simply laying a hot filament inside the JATO nozzle didn't seem
like it would do the trick. Maybe it would have, but since Beck and Sal
still hadn't found a place to use for a launch site, I had time to come up
with something better. So I pulled a dozen of the blank M-60 rounds from the
ammo belt my father kept in his office as a decoration, tore off the skinny
end of each shell, and dumped out the powder inside. I poured a little of
the powder into each of seven squares of newspaper, folded the newspaper
squares into packets around the filaments of the light bulbs, and trussed
each one up with masking tape. When I connected one of them to a battery to
test the idea, it made an impressive little flare.

          Surely enough to light the JATO. I hoped.

          When Sal and Beck still hadn't reported finding a launch site by
Friday morning, I even went through the trouble of putting an old car
battery on the charger at the shop, installing it in the Rocket Car, and
wiring it to a switch on the dashboard. I considered painting the switch
bright red, with the word IGNITION! underneath, just because I had the time.
In retrospect I'm glad I didn't go through the trouble, since we never used
the switch anyway. But at that point I realized that if Beck and Sal didn't
find a good spot soon, I might end up hauling the car out to the nearest set
of tracks and trying it out myself.

          Jimmy came back from college again that weekend, just about the
same time Beck's father came back from who-knows-where with the
four-wheel-drive. During the week I had high hopes that we'd be able to
launch over the weekend, but when everyone gathered at the scrapyard on
Saturday afternoon, I knew it wasn't going to happen. Jimmy took a look at
the sprinkler system and pronounced it workable, although I could tell he
still had some grave misgivings about how well a couple of pissing garden
hoses would cool down the brake runners. I had the same misgivings myself,
but the amount of heat generated would depend on so many unknown factors
that is wasn't something we could really plan for. We didn't have any idea
how fast the car would actually go, what shape the tracks would be in, or
even how much the car weighed. From my point of view, the sprinklers were
there for only one reason: To keep the runners from burning up like
matchsticks when they hit the rails. After all, they were made from wood. If
the sprinklers could keep the runners from turning into torches, they'd
fulfill my expectations.

          While Jimmy was inspecting the rocket car and telling us what he'd
found out about my JATO bottles (which turned out to be very little), Sal
and Beck told us about the launch locations they'd scouted out over the
week. And the news they had was grim indeed. Within ten miles of town there
were a total of three sections of track long enough to run the rocket car
on, and in my opinion they were all dead losers. Beck and Sal knew the area
well enough to realize that most of the modern wide-gauge tracks had been
laid either directly on top of, or very close to, the places where
narrow-gauge tracks had once existed. So naturally they started their search
at the switching yard near the city limits. There they found an excellent
set of narrow-gauge tracks roughly paralleling a shiny set of wide-gauge
rails that were probably used every day. But despite the fact that the
old-style tracks stretched for miles, they ran right through a busy
switching yard. Not a good place to test a jet-propelled boxcar.

          Another possibility was a set of rails that started in the desert,
continued for five miles or more, and ended in a soft dirt field that would
have been ideal for cushioning any crash that might happen. Unfortunately,
this set ran directly through the middle of town, and the field at the end
was the Jaycees Softball Field, right across the street from the police
station. Even though Beck must've realized we'd never go for that idea, it
was obvious that he liked it. I imagine he wanted to set the Rocket Car on
the tracks across from the police station in the dead of night, then blow
the horn and scream until a dozen cops came running out of the station to
see what the ruckus was. At that point he'd hang a moon out the window, then
light off the JATO and blaze out of town.

          Or maybe this wasn't what he had in mind. But if you knew Beck,
you'd probably agree with me.

          The last location Sal and Beck found was even worse than the
tracks that ran past the police station. The Mystery Mine was a
bargain-basement tourist attraction a few miles from town that promised to
show visitors the INNER WORKINGS OF AN AUTHENTIC SILVER MINE. People who
paid the $2.50 admission were loaded aboard an ancient, rattling, mine-car
and hauled through a few hundred feet of cavern, while a tour guide in a
hardhat and goggles pointed at rusted pieces of machinery and chunks of
rock, explaining what they were. We'd all been on the Mystery Mine tour at
one time or another, and everyone agreed that the only thing even vaguely
interesting about it was wondering if a cave-in would trap you in the bowels
of the mine. Possibly forcing you to eat the other tourists to survive.
There was an old song that used to play on the radio that described this
scenario, and there was a popular joke around town about being trapped in
the Mystery Mine and having to eat your way out. A discreet sign near the
mine's entrance proclaimed that it was inspected for safety by the U.S.
Bureau of Mines on a yearly basis, but everyone knew that ancient mines
tended to cave in weather the U.S. Bureau of Mines said it was okay to or
not. Therefore, new folks in town were always advised not to take the
Mystery Mine tour without packing a sharp knife and a salt shaker.

          Cannibalism and the U.S. Bureau of Mines really weren't our
problem. But the fact that the Mystery Mine was a tourist attraction
presented all SORTS of difficulties. The land around the Mystery Mine did
have plenty of narrow-gauge track, that much was true. More than enough to
suit our needs. But it also had lots of fences, lots of lights, a couple of
security guards, and a handful of vicious Dobermans that patrolled the
grounds at night. We all knew it, too. I think Beck and Sal really just went
out to the Mystery Mine to take the tour and kill an afternoon. Jimmy and I
wouldn't have even wasted time with the trip.

         The end result was that the Rocket Car was ready to roll, but we
had no place to roll it. Beck and Sal were confident that they'd be able to
find a good spot the following week (since they were once again
desert-capable) but Jimmy and I had serious doubts. We knew the area around
town as well as anyone, and the chances of finding a good place to run the
car were starting to look grim.

          When Jimmy spent the weekend in town, he usually headed back to
the college on Sunday evening, right after dinner. So it surprised me when I
got a call from him at 6:00 Sunday evening, asking me if I wanted to take a
ride with him to "discuss a few things". I said sure, no trouble. He told me
to drive over to his house, and when I got there, he was already in his car.
He signaled for me to follow him, and I did. I had no idea where we were
going, but I followed anyway. After a few minutes I saw that we were heading
out of town, and I wondered what he was up to. But I stopped wondering a
little while later, when he pulled to the side of the road near the
abandoned mine shaft where we'd liberated the two ancient bucket cars. He
got out of his car, opened the trunk and took out a tire iron, then headed
toward the mine entrance without a word. When I asked what we were doing, he
held up one finger in a wait-a-minute gesture.

          I shut up.

          Jimmy walked down the slope and stopped in front of the boards
we'd re-nailed over the entrance. Even though the sun was almost down, there
was still plenty of light to see by. I thought he'd brought the tire iron to
pry off the boards near the entrance, but when I reached the place he was
standing, he started walking down the tracks, away from the entrance. Ten
paces later he'd reached the point where the tracks ended, buried in sand.
He took a few more paces, then bent over and jabbed the pointy end of the
tire iron into the sand.

          To my surprise, it clanked.

          Jimmy looked at me with a goofy little smile on his face, and when
I realized what he was doing, I smiled myself. Probably just as goofily. He
pulled the tire iron out of the sand, walked a few more paces, then stuck it
into the ground again. No clank this time. But when he stuck it in again, a
few inches to the left, he got the same metallic clank. He was now standing
a good fifty feet from the mine entrance, and at least twenty feet from the
spot where we all assumed the tracks terminated. He looked up at me, with
that dumb smirk still plastered across his face, and said "So, how far out
do you think these tracks actually go?"



SAFETY FIRST (OR SECOND)

          Why none of us thought to take a look at the tracks coming out of
that abandoned silver mine before this is anyone's guess. Beck and Sal and I
had stood right on top of them when we got the bucket cars, but none of us
considered the possibility that a long section of the track might still be
there, only underground. As a matter of fact "underground" is a pretty
drastic term for what we found. The tracks were actually covered by a fairly
thin layer of drifted sand and dust. The outcrop around the mine shaft broke
the wind enough to keep the tracks clear near the entrance, but beyond that,
the rails must have been a good place for drifting sand to pile up, and
eventually cover the rails. But Jimmy's tire iron sank no more than an inch
or two before striking metal, and we didn't so much have to dig for the
rails as brush the sand off them. We ended up walking more than a half mile
from the mine entrance, Jimmy stopping occasionally to stick the tire iron
into the sand, and striking metal every time. Eventually it started getting
too dark to see where we were going, so we made our way back up the slope to
where the cars were parked. I told Jimmy I'd be back bright and early the
next day to find out exactly how far the tracks ran, but Jimmy seemed
confident we'd have more than enough.

          He didn't seem too confident of the Rocket Car, though.

          When we got back to the cars, I found that Jimmy had me follow him
in my own car because he was going back to school directly from the mine
entrance. But there was still a matter he wanted to discuss, that matter
being the first run of the Rocket Car. Without a good launch site the matter
could wait, but since it seemed as if we'd found one, Jimmy figured we'd
better discuss the whole thing immediately. It turned out that he was very
worried about the first run of the car, particularly the idea of having a
person inside when we fired it. Of course I already knew there were plenty
of things that could go wrong, since I'd built the thing in a junkyard. But
when Jimmy started to lay out the possible ways a person inside the car
could get hurt or killed, he made it sound a little less safe than going
over Niagara Falls in a barrel. First, we were dealing with a highly
volatile chemical propellant we knew nothing about. We didn't know how old
it was, where it came from, or how it was supposed to behave. There was
actually a very real possibility that the JATO could explode like a bomb,
reducing the car to flame and shrapnel in a split-second. But even if it did
work as expected, the rocket was held in place by a length of water pipe
welded to the bottom half of a train car that was God only knew how old. If
any of the welds didn't hold, there was no telling what the outcome would
be. Then there was the matter of the brakes. All we had was a setup that
looked good and sounded like it might work. But if someone inside the car
found themselves going 100+ miles per and the brakes DIDN'T work...

          The way he described the whole thing made it sound like suicidal
insanity, and I started to get a little pissed off at him. If he'd been
thinking about all this shit the whole time, why hadn't he SAID anything?

          As it turned out, he wasn't suggesting that we scrap the project
outright, just that we perform a "test run" before trying it for real. An
unmanned test run. Rig a system to activate the brakes at some point after
the JATO had burned out, point the Rocket Car down the tracks, and let it
run pilotless the first time. After all, it wasn't as if we needed a man at
the tiller while the car was moving. The person we'd been referring to as
the "pilot" would actually be the "passenger", his sole duty being to hit
the dump valve before the car ran out of track. And since we had four JATOS,
wasting one for the sake of safety seemed like a prudent move.

          I had to admit, he made a LOT of sense.

          I pointed out that Beck would probably have a bird when he found
out we weren't going to let him drive the car on it's maiden voyage, but we
both agreed that it wouldn't be a major problem as long as Beck got to drive
it on the first manned run. We'd just take a second JATO along, and if the
car ran successfully the first time, Beck could take it out the second time.
If the car ended up a twisted lump of smoking metal, Beck would be happy we
decided to take the precaution.

          With these details settled, I said goodbye to Jimmy and headed
home. On the way I was thinking about how to kick in the braking system with
nobody inside the car, but since we'd only need it for the trial run, it
didn't have to be anything fancy. The next day I was busy at the yard
sorting through the latest load of junk my Dad had bought at an auction over
the weekend, but I DID find time to rig the brakes for our test run. All I
did was twist a screw-eye into each brake runner, then run a length of piano
wire through the openings in each eye and up through a hole in the Chevy's
floor. I tied the ends of the wire to a short stick, and used it to prop the
brake's dump valve in the "up" position. Then I looped a piece of rubber
from a bicycle inner tube over the lever, and tied it under the valve box.
The bike tube pulled the lever toward the "dump" position, but the lever
couldn't move due to the stick propping it up. I figured that once we found
a good section of track, all we'd have to do was drive a spike into one of
the rail-ties at the point where we wanted the brakes to kick in. When the
car passed over the spike, the spike would snag the wire, pull out the
stick, and the dump valve would snap down, activating the brakes.

          Now, if you're getting tired of hearing about all the Rube
Goldberg bullshit I was adding to this machine, take a minute to think about
how I felt while I was doing the work. By the time Jimmy suggested that "we"
rig "some sort of automatic brake system", I was getting mighty sick of
rigging and drilling and bolting and cutting. Let's face it, despite the
fact that we came up with a few clever ways to solve pretty tough problems,
the Rocket Car was still just a pile of shit that I knocked together in a
junkyard. And I was tired of trying to figure out ways to make important
things happen by using other people's garbage. I made up my mind that the
auto-brake was the last piece of work I was going to do on the car. If what
I'd built at that point wasn't good enough, I'd simply turn the whole mess
over to Beck and let him drive the fucking thing into the Mystery Mine, or
past the police station, or whatever he wanted to do.

          However, there was still the matter of the launch site preparation
to take care of, so on Tuesday I called Beck and told him to swing by the
yard in his Dad's pickup and get me after work. He and Sal both showed up,
and when I took them to the abandon mine and showed them how far from the
entrance the tracks extended, they were ecstatic. I didn't bother to explain
that Jimmy had come up with the idea two days earlier, since they'd probably
spent Monday and Tuesday driving around in the desert looking for a decent
set of tracks themselves. I brought a tire iron along, and sat on the
tailgate of the pickup while Beck drove away from the mine entrance. Every
now and then he stopped the truck, and I plunged the tire iron into the sand
where the tracks should be. And I kept striking metal over and over. Finally
the truck stopped and stayed stopped, and when I looked over my shoulder, I
saw that we'd come to the end of the line. Or at least the end of the usable
line. Exactly 1.9 miles from the mine entrance, the narrow-gauge tracks
intersected a set of modern, standard-gauge tracks leading into town. Which
made sense, after I'd thought about it awhile. The newer tracks were
probably laid on the bed of some old narrow-gauge tracks, and the rails
leading toward the abandoned mine were probably a spur coming off the main
tracks.

          But who cared? We had two miles of narrow gauge track, more than
enough to run the Rocket Car on.

          I hoped.

          Beck was thrilled over the discovery, until I explained that the
buried rails would have to be cleared before we could take the car out for a
test run. He enthusiastically assured me that he and Sal would have the
tracks cleared the next day, but I had my doubts. And my doubts turned out
to be well-grounded. I didn't hear anything from Beck and Sal the next day,
or the day after that. I assumed they were in the process of clearing the
tracks, and it turned out they were. And the process turned out to be a lot
harder than either of them imagined. They started out with Beck driving the
truck while Sal sat on the tailgate, dragging a street-sweepers broom along
the rails. It worked, but not as well as they expected. After driving that
two-mile stretch of track twice, Beck came up with a much better idea. They
simply broke back into the abandoned mine, grabbed the last bucket-car we'd
found near the entrance, and pushed it down the length of the tracks with
the bumper of the pickup. Once the wheels loosened up, the bucket car worked
like a snowplow and cleared the tracks with a single pass. I had my doubts
that this method worked as well as they claimed, but when I drove out to the
abandoned mine after work on Thursday, I saw that it had. Two rusty metal
rails poked out of the hardpan, starting at the mine entrance and extending
out into the distance. When I took a closer look at the rails, I saw that
they were indeed rusty as hell, but still solid. When I banged one with a
rock, I saw plenty of good steel under the rust.

          Best of all, they were straight as an arrow.

          For me, this was the point where the whole project made the
transition from theory to reality. I squatted next to those tracks and
realized that the last obstacle had suddenly been removed, that we really
were going to run the car. And to my surprise, it didn't feel good at all.
Suddenly the whole thing seemed stupid and insane and dangerous and illegal
as hell. But by then it was way too late to stop.



COUNTING DOWN

          If the track had been ready on Monday, I don't think I could've
convinced Beck to let the maiden voyage of the rocket car wait until Jimmy
came in on the weekend. He was far too anxious to get moving on the whole
thing. As a matter of fact, the only way I was able to get him to wait as
long as I did was by agreeing to start getting things ready on Friday. After
my Dad and I went home from the yard on Friday, I returned to the yard and
found Sal and Beck waiting for me. We backed the flatbed into the weedy
field where the Rocket Car was docked, set up the ramps, and hoisted the car
onto the flatbed with the winch. I drove the flatbed out to the abandoned
mine and down the slope to tracks, scared shitless that I'd get the truck
stuck in the soft sand. But I made it down the slope okay, and we lowered
the Rocket Car onto the tracks.

          It looked perfectly at home sitting on the rails. Like that's were
it was meant to be all the time.

          But we didn't have time to stand around admiring the way the
Rocket Car looked on the tracks. Even though we were a hundred yards from a
fairly secluded stretch of highway, the sight of a five-ton flatbed, a
four-wheel-drive pickup, and a rocket powered `59 Chevy on railroad wheels
would've looked pretty peculiar to anyone coming down the road. So as soon
as the car was on the rails, I climbed into the Chevy's drivers' seat and
Beck pushed me down the tracks with the pickup's bumper until the car was
close to the mine entrance. Actually, it almost went through the boarded- up
hole in the mountain. I was sitting there enjoying the ride, halfway to the
mine entrance, when I suddenly realized that hitting the dump valve would
stop the car permanently. Or at least until we went back to the scrapyard
and snagged the portable compressor to re-inflate the shocks. About a
quarter mile from the mine entrance I started waving out the window and
screaming for Beck to stop, and when he finally hit the brakes, I must've
been doing about forty or so. By the time the car coasted to a stop, I was
no more than fifty feet from the entrance.

          Close call.

          We pulled the boards from the mine entrance again, and Beck used
the pickup to ease the Chevy into the mine. Very slowly. Once it was all the
way inside, he took me back to the flatbed, and followed me back to the
yard. I parked the flatbed where it usually spent the night, we loaded the
portable compressor into the pickup, and returned to the mine.

          Since we didn't have a tow chain, we had to muscle the car far
enough out of the mine for Beck to get the truck in front of the Chevy and
push it back down the tracks. When we got the car about a mile from the
entrance, we let the car coast to a stop, Beck got out of the pickup, and
Sal slipped into the driver's seat. Beck jumped into the Rocket Car with a
maniac grin on his face, and Sal maneuvered the pickup behind the Chevy.
Beck gave us a jaunty thumbs-up, and Sal hit the gas. We picked up speed
until we were doing about fifty, and just before I was about to scream at
Sal to stop, he hit the brakes. We watched the rocket car pull away at
goodly clip.

          And keep going.

          And keep going.

          And just as I was wondering if the brake system might have
malfunctioned, I saw the ass end of the Chevy pitch up slightly as Beck hit
the dump lever. Sal and I both let out the breath we'd been holding, and
drove down to where the car was stopped. When we got there, the car was
resting on the runners and Beck was sitting on the hood. Less than twenty
feet from the mine entrance.

          I'll say it again: Beck was a fucking maniac.

          I thought he might make up an excuse for waiting so long to stop,
that the brakes didn't work or whatever, but he didn't even bother. The
runners had scraped the rust off ten feet of the rails, and when I looked
under the Rocket Car, water was still squirting out of the hoses. When I
asked what the fuck was wrong with him, Beck said "Hey, I didn't feel like
pushing this fucker all the way to the garage, so I let it coast most of the
way. You have a problem with that?"

          Actually, I didn't. The "garage" he was referring to was actually
the mine shaft, where we planned to stash the car until the firing test the
next day. Nobody wanted to go through the bullshit of hauling the car back
to the yard, so we decided to simply push it into the mine, replace the
boards, and leave it there overnight. And after re-inflating the shocks from
the compressor in the pickup, that's exactly what we did. But every time I
looked at those two bright spots on the rails, less than twenty feet from
the boards covering that mine shaft, I wondered if it would ever be a good
idea to let Beck drive the thing while a rocket was pushing it.



LEFTOFF!

          The first (and last) test run of the Rocket Car happened on Holy
Saturday, 1978. For the non-Christians in the house, Holy Saturday is the
day before Easter, a day the faithful are supposed to spend preparing for
the Easter feast and quietly contemplating the Miracle of the Resurrection.
My family has been Catholic for about a thousand generations, so I suppose
this put me firmly among the ranks of "The Faithful". Which means the Pope
probably would've frowned on my spending the day before Easter experimenting
with illegal military ordnance and trespassing on private property, but I'm
also confident that nothing in the Bible covers what we were doing that
Saturday morning, so I probably had some wiggle-room.

          We assembled at the abandoned mine early in the morning, just
before dawn. The prefabricated story to my parents was that Jimmy and I were
driving up to.... a big city in the area (you'll excuse me if I don't
specify which one), and wanted to get an early start. Jimmy was using the
same excuse for anyone at his house who was curious. Dad wasn't even going
into the yard on Holy Saturday, so I had the day to myself. I went to
Jimmy's house and found him waiting for me on the front porch, and we left
for the mine.

          When we arrived, I was tremendously relieved to find that Sal and
Beck were already there, sitting on the hood of the pickup, which was parked
near the mine entrance. They even had the boards pulled from the mine
entrance and the car pushed out into the open. My relief wasn't due to the
fact that they'd showed up (you couldn't have kept Beck away with a court
order) but because they were just sitting on the hood of the pickup,
patiently waiting for Jimmy and I to arrive. See, the night before, we'd
loaded two of the JATO's, the portable compressor, and three five-gallon
jerry cans of water into the back of Beck's pickup, for convenience's sake.
It was way too much stuff to haul in my car, and we figured the gear would
be safe spending the night in Beck's truck, covered with a tarp. What hadn't
occurred to me until I got home was that Beck was in possession of
everything he needed to test the car himself, on the sly. I even considered
taking a ride past his house around midnight to see if the truck was still
there, when it occurred to me that even though he did have the ignition
button on the dashboard, he had no way to light the rocket. And I didn't
think he was stupid enough to set the car up and strap himself in while Sal
stuffed lit matches into the JATO, trying to get it started.

          Sal would've done it without hesitation. But not Beck.

          I'd like to say that depriving Beck of the igniters was a piece of
intelligent foresight on my part, but it was really exactly the opposite.
I'd just forgotten them. We had to stop at the scrapyard to get the igniters
and a hundred-foot roll of field-phone wire before we went to the mine.

          Anyway, I left my car parked on the shoulder of the road, and we
walked down the slope to find that Beck and Sal were aching to get the test
under way. Beck shot a look at the igniters in my hand as he was getting
into the truck, but it was still too dark out to read his expression. If I
had to guess, I'd say it was an irritated one. Beck started the truck and
drove around to the front of the Rocket Car, then left it in low gear as he
pushed it to the opposite end of the track, with the rest of us riding on
the tailgate. It wasn't until the car was stopped at the end of the track
that Jimmy looked the car over and asked what turned out to be a VERY
important question.

          He said "So why is the car pointing THIS way?"

          Sal and Beck and I stared at the car for a minute, and although I
can't speak for the other two, I was trying to come up with something to
say. To be honest, I'd never given it much thought. I suppose that when the
car was brought to my Dad's scrapyard, it was hauled onto the flatbed
rear-first, because the front end was further from the path winding through
the yard. When we loaded the car to bring it to the mine, winching it onto
the flatbed rear-first was simply the easiest thing to do, so that's what we
did. And when we got to the tracks, I'd simply driven the flatbed to the end
opposite the mine shaft and parked facing away from the entrance. It seemed
like a good way to avoid driving the flatbed over the tracks themselves,
which might have damaged them. So when we rolled the car down the planks and
onto the tracks, it ended up facing the mine entrance. Sure, we could've set
it on the tracks facing the opposite way, but... nobody thought of it.
Actually, nobody even thought to think about it. The whole process seemed
simple and straightforward, even the part where we pushed the Chevy into the
mine entrance and boarded it up. I mean, you drive a car into a garage, you
don't back it in, right?

          So the three of us gave Jimmy a shrug, and I asked him what
difference it made. He walked around the car looking thoughtful, and after
awhile said "None. This is good" But later on I figured out what he'd been
thinking about. If something went wrong with car (specifically the brakes),
which way would we want it to be pointing? If the brakes failed while it was
heading away from the mine, the car would eventually run onto the wide-gauge
rails at the end of our track. And with the flatbed back in the yard, it
wasn't likely we'd be able to get the car off the tracks if it got stuck
there. But with the car pointed toward the mine, a brake failure would mean
the car simply flew into an abandoned silver mine. We could declare the
experiment a failure, nail the boards back up, and call it a day. Of course
the equation looked a lot different with a passenger on board, but that's
why we were doing a test run first.

          Ah yes, the test run.

          Once Jimmy was through looking the car over, I broke the news to
Beck that the first run would be unmanned. He didn't like the sound of that
a bit, even after I explained to him that it was in his best interest.
Personally, I wouldn't have gone near the thing unless we'd had at least one
trial, but Beck's mind didn't work that way. He wanted to ride in the car on
the first run, and it took awhile to convince him that it simply wasn't
going to happen. But after a little arguing he grudgingly accepted our
logic. We took one of the JATOS out of it's crate and loaded into the pipe
at the rear of the car, then I had Sal drive me down the tracks toward the
mine. When the odometer had ticked off exactly a mile, I made him stop while
I got out and pounded an eight-inch spike into one of the wooden ties. The
lumber was still solid enough to hold the spike well, which was nice to see,
since I had no alternative plan to activate the brakes. We drove back to the
Rocket Car and found that Jimmy and Beck had already shoved one of my
igniters into the JATO nozzle, attached the leads to the roll of field-phone
cable with wirenuts, and were unrolling the cable away from the tracks. I
told Sal to park about fifty feet away from the Chevy, with the broad side
of the truck facing the tracks. Jimmy had mentioned the chance of the JATO
exploding like a bomb when it was ignited, and I wanted to have the pickup
truck between me and the JATO when it was lit.

          I filled the can under the Chevy's hood with water from one of the
jerry cans, closed the hood and rigged the automatic brake. The wire
stretched between the runners was only five or six inches above the railroad
ties, and it looked low enough to catch on the spike with no problem. Beck
came over to watch the whole procedure, a little miffed that the unmanned
test had obviously been planned out well in advance. But by then it was too
late for him to raise any serious objections. If the car ran okay, he'd get
his ride. If not, he'd be grateful we made the test.

          Once the brakes were rigged and the water can filled, there was
only one thing left to do: Light the mother and see what happened.

          We all gathered around the truck, Beck popped the hood, and I cut
the field phone wire from the roll and stripped the ends. By then the sun
had climbed over the top of the mountains, and we had a clear view of the
entire track. I wrapped one of the field phone wires around the corroded
negative post of the truck's battery, and just as I was about to touch the
other wire to the positive, Sal yelled "Wait!"

          He scared the shit out of me.

          I said "What? What? What's the problem?"

          Sal looked slightly embarrassed, and said "Shouldn't we have a
countdown?"

          Jesus Christ.

          Beck gave him a smack in the back of the head, but I told him
sure, if he wanted a countdown, we'd have a countdown. So Sal counted down
from ten, and when he reached zero, I touched the wire to the lead of the
battery.

          Liftoff.

          The sequence of events that followed happened so damned fast that
I'm surprised my mind was able to record everything that occurred. But even
though parts of this story have grown foggy over the years, the memory of
the actual Flight of the Rocket Car remains crystal-clear.

          When I touched the wire to battery post, we heard a little fizz
from the JATO. I knew what it was, since I'd heard it before. The igniter
going off. I didn't expect to hear it, since I figured the rocket would
light instantly. Instead, it hissed for a second, then stopped. But before I
could start to worry if the rocket was a dud, there was a massive eruption
of orange flame from the ass of the Chevy, as if it had just laid the worst
fart in history. Along with the flame was a huge, howling roar, something
nobody had counted on. We'd all seen the Apollo launches on TV, and we knew
that rockets were noisy, but nothing had prepared us for this. It sounded
like.... I don't know what. Like a solid-fuel rocket igniting, I suppose.
And the noise and smoke continued for what seemed like a long time before
the Rocket Car took off.

          No , scratch that. It didn't take off, it JUMPED.

          I've been trying to figure out a way to put it into words, but the
sight is almost impossible to describe. Think of this: You know what it
looks like when you shoot a paper clip with a rubber band? One second the
clip is between your fingers, and the next it's just... gone. You can't
track it with your eyes, because it moves too fast. All you can do is hope
to shift your eyes to where it was going, so you can see where it hits.

          Think of the same thing happening with a 1500-pound car.

          And I remember thinking later that there was no way in hell I was
ever going to ride in the thing. I could only imagine what would've happened
to Beck if we'd let him ride in it. I'm sure the seat would've been torn
from it's mounts, and Beck probably would've made a hasty exit through the
back windshield. I don't know much about G-forces or rocket construction,
but I can't think of any way a regular car seat could've stood up to that
kind of acceleration.

          In the space of a second, the car jumped down the track, heading
away from us, and we were enveloped in thick, chemical-smelling smoke.
Another bit of poor planning. We all ran up the slope to get out of the
artificial fogbank, but the roar from the rocket stopped as quickly as it
started. Jimmy says the burn time on our JATO was 2.2 seconds, but at the
time it seemed a lot longer than that. I staggered up the slope and looked
down the tracks, to see that the Rocket Car was moving along at a rapid
pace, toward the spike I'd driven in the railroad tie. And although it was
moving damned fast, it was far enough away so that I can't even take a guess
as to how fast it was going. My eyes were still burning from the rocket
smoke, but I did see it pass the point where I'd planted the spike, and
then...

          Something happened.

          Intellectually, I know exactly what happened. The spike caught the
piano wire, pulled the stick out from under the dump-valve lever, and the
air shocks lowered the car to the rails. I didn't actually see the car drop,
but it must have happened. Because a second later, more smoke started
pouring out of the car. Only this time it was coming from under the car, and
it was steam, not smoke. The runners had heated up, and the water shooting
onto the hot brakes was turning into steam.

          But it kept going.

          And going.

          It didn't seem to be slowing down very much, either. It must have
been, since the runners were obviously pushing against the rails hard enough
to create a lot of heat. But I guess it wasn't enough. The car kept moving,
closer and closer to the mine. The last coherent thought I had was that it
had been a very good move to point the car toward the mine. It was still
moving at a good clip, highway-speed at least, when it was fifty yards from
the entrance. It obviously wasn't going to stop in time, and I remember
wondering just how far into the mine it would go before stopping.

          But it never made to the entrance.

          Later on, Jimmy and I had a long discussion about what happened
next, but we were too far away for anyone to have a clear view. Maybe one of
the runners burned away and got caught in the ground. Or on the tracks.
Maybe one of the old axles finally reached it's breaking point. Or one of my
welds couldn't take the strain. Whatever it was, the Rocket Car derailed
about twenty yards from the mine entrance. It still had plenty of inertia,
and continued moving toward the mine, but the wheels were no longer on the
tracks. Actually it was straddling one of the rails, screeching and
screaming and kicking up a cloud of sparks from the point where the frame
slid along the rail.

           And it was no longer aligned with the mine entrance, either.

           Things were still moving too fast for my brain to process the
information, but when I saw the car skidding toward the mine entrance at
sixty or seventy miles an hour, and not firmly on the rails, I knew that
Something Bad Was About To Happen. Exactly what was still a mystery at that
point, but a second later I found out. The Chevy slid down the tracks, but
instead of driving through the mine entrance, it went in at an angle with
the ass end canted toward the road. The front end smashed into one of the
huge timbers that outlined the mine entrance, cracking it in half. After a
very short pause, the timber collapsed, immediately followed by the overhead
timber it supported. Those timbers must have been under considerable stress,
because a second later the entire entrance to the mine collapsed on top of
the Rocket Car with a huge grinding rumble and a cloud of dust.

          I just gawked.

          I remember that part clearly, standing there looking at the car in
the distance, just before dust obscured the picture. My Rocket Car was
sitting there like a busted Tonka truck while a mountain fell on it.

           I almost cried.

           A second later I became aware of voices shouting behind me. I
turned around and saw Jimmy and Sal in the bed of the pickup, and Beck
behind the wheel. They'd obviously had the sense to get into the truck and
chase down the rocket car, while I stood there with my mouth hanging open. I
jumped into the bed, and Beck floored it toward the mine entrance. Toward
the former mine entrance. During the short ride I was wondering how we were
going to haul the car out of the pile of rubble and get it out of there, but
when we got closer I saw that it was a foolish idea. The front half of the
car was crushed like a beer can, under boulders ranging from the size of a
watermelon to the size of the car itself. Smaller pieces were still coming
down when we got there. The only way that car was ever coming out was if
someone torched off the back end and hauled it out with a winch.

           The front end was never going to see the light of day again.

           Beck stopped the truck a safe distance from the wreckage, and we
all got out to look. But there wasn't much to look at. The only thing not
buried by the cave-in was the last four feet of the car, and that was about
it. The trunk lid and rear bumper were visible, but the rest of the car was
buried under boulders and rubble. It was obvious that the car would have to
stay were it was, but after we gaped at it awhile, I decided that there was
one part of the Rocket Car that absolutely couldn't stay where it was.

          The rocket itself.

          Up to that point we were guilty of little more than trespassing.
Sure we'd caused a mine to cave in, but the mine had been closed for
decades, and it wasn't likely anyone would be too upset about it. But that
fucking JATO bottle was sticking out of the wreckage in a very obvious way,
and had to go. So I cautiously made my way over to the remains of the Chevy,
hoping an expended JATO would be a lot lighter than the full one.

          I gave it a tug, but it wouldn't budge.

          Beck came over and gave me a hand, but we still couldn't make it
move. It wouldn't even wiggle. All we could figure was that the pipe must
have been twisted or squashed further in, where we couldn't see it. After a
little more grunting and pushing, Beck went back to the pickup for his jack.
We figured that if we took some of the weight off the pipe, we might be able
to budge the rocket. But before he could get back, the pile of rubble
shifted, sending a good-sized boulder careening past me.

          Suddenly jacking the car up seemed like a very poor idea.

          And shortly after that, even staying in the area didn't seem very
smart. Jimmy quickly summed the situation up for us. At that particular
moment, there wasn't much we could do in the way of damage control. The car
was stuck, and there was nothing we could do about it. The JATO was wedged
in too tightly to remove too. And if we couldn't move it, then it was
unlikely anyone else could. Not without a major effort. Fortunately, the
only thing to show that we'd even been there was the piece of field-phone
wire at the other end of the tracks, and the remains of the Rocket Car
itself. Which meant that it was an excellent time to get the hell out of
there, before someone came down the road and wondered what was going on.

          We needed no more encouragement. Beck and Sal ran for the cab of
the pickup, Jimmy and I piled into the bed, Beck pointed the truck toward
the road, and stomped the gas. I guess he didn't have the four-wheel drive
engaged, because the back wheels of the truck threw up rooster-tails of sand
as we took off up the slope, but not the front wheels. But we didn't get
stuck, which was the one thing I was afraid of. We shot up the slope,
bounced onto the asphalt, and as soon as the rear wheels hit the asphalt
they started burning rubber. Beck steered back toward town, only stopping
long enough for Jimmy and I to bail out and run to my car. I jumped in and
started, it, but Jimmy ran back down the slope, toward the end of the
railroad track. I yelled after him, but instead of yelling back, he stooped
and grabbed something from the ground.

          The field-phone wire.

           He was reeling it up in his hands as he ran back up the slope,
and when he reached the car he tossed the wad of wire in the back seat and
jumped in.

          I punched the gas, spun the car around, and headed back toward
town. And that was the last I ever saw of the Rocket Car.



COVERUP

          So there you go. That's the whole story of the Rocket Car, or at
least the part that I was involved with. I never went back to the mine, and
as far as I know, neither did Jimmy. We discussed what we'd do about the
wreckage while driving back to town, but nothing we came up with seemed to
make a lot of sense. The road running past the mine wasn't very
well-travelled, but we knew that the only reason we hadn't been spotted was
because the whole thing happened so early in the morning. If we went back to
the site later that day, there was a fair chance we'd be spotted. Of course
we'd taken that chance before, especially during the brake test the day
before. But then we had the option of rolling the car into the mine shaft
and getting out of there if anyone seemed curious. And at the very worst,
we'd get nailed for putting train wheels on a Chevy, then sticking it on an
abandoned track. I'm pretty sure there no law against that.

          But now there was a very obvious piece of forbidden military
hardware in plain view, and no easy way to get it out of there. The thing
that kept repeating over and over in my head as I drove back to town was
that paragraph in my Dad's auction paperwork. The one dealing with
possession of controlled military hardware. Specifically, the part detailing
prison sentences and outrageous fines. It was then that I started to think
that the best way to handle the whole thing would be to not handle it at
all. Pretend it never happened, and hope nobody connected the car wreck to
us.

          And that's exactly what we did.

          Actually, timing and nature lent a hand. The following day was
Easter Sunday, and there was no way Jimmy or I were going to avoid spending
it with our families. And even if we wanted to, it wasn't a good day to be
screwing around out in the desert. Late Saturday night a windstorm kicked
up, strong enough to make the local TV stations interrupt programming with
traveler's advisories in our area. Nothing very odd about that, not in our
area in the springtime. Actually it was a pretty common occurrence. But this
time I was thrilled to hear the reports. High winds and blowing sand could
only serve to obscure the signs of what we'd been doing in the desert that
morning, and the fewer signs, the better. When I got up on Easter morning, I
saw patches of sand that had blown around on the street in front of the
house, and was encouraged by the sight. If sand was blowing across the
streets in the middle of town, it must've really been kicking ass in the
desert. Later that morning I saw Jimmy at church, and even though we weren't
alone long enough to talk about anything, we exchanged several Significant
Looks.

          And the next day, Jimmy went back to college.

          I went back to work at the scrapyard, and I have no idea what Beck
and Sal did. I just spent the next few days trying to act as normal as
possible, expecting a police car to show up at the yard any minute. But
curiosity finally got the best of me, and I called Beck on Wednesday. We met
that night at the same bar where we'd discussed brakes for the Rocket Car,
and Beck told me he had been out to the mine, actually a couple of times.
Once he even brought a camera and took a few pictures, because what he saw
was so damned funny.

          Funny?

          I couldn't figure out what he could think was funny about the
whole thing, since I was there when it happened. But he explained it to me,
and afterwards I had to agree, it WAS kind of funny. The storm that blew
through the area on Saturday night had indeed eliminated most of the signs
of what we'd been doing near the mine over the past few days. The tire
tracks made by his Dad's pickup were completely eliminated, and the railroad
tracks themselves were almost re-buried. But the Rocket Car was still
exactly the same as it was when we left, ass end hanging out of a pile of
rubble with a rocket sticking out of it. I'd hoped Beck was going to tell me
that drifting sand had covered the remains of the car, but it hadn't.

         I was waiting for the funny part, but it didn't seem to be coming.

         Finally Beck reminded me of what the scene looked like to a person
driving toward the crash site. I had to visualize it, since I'd never
actually seen it. You drive down the stretch of road, toward a butte that
used to have a mine entrance in the side of it. But now there is no mine
shaft, just the rear end of a car sticking out of the side of the butte.

          And, of course, the twin skidmarks on the highway where Beck's
truck leaped onto the roadway. Skidmarks pointing directly at the Rocket
Car. Just like you'd see in a Roadrunner cartoon.



AFTERMYTH

          There you go.

          Now, I have to admit one thing, I didn't start hearing any Rocket
Car rumors right away. Nobody did. I didn't see any articles in the paper,
the cops never came to visit anyone (not that I'm aware of, anyway) and I
never went back to see what happened with the Rocket Car.

          Explanations?

          Your guess is as good as mine.

          The town I've been talking about isn't a huge one, but it's not
small enough so that everyone knows each other's business, either. The road
wasn't a busy one, and although the Rocket Car was visible to someone
driving past, they could easily miss it. All I can say for sure is that
whoever discovered the car sticking out of the butte didn't make a big fuss
about it. And I'm pretty sure someone did discover it. I saw Beck once more
after our meeting in the bar, at a Memorial Day party a few weeks later. He
was pretty drunk at the party, wanted to talk about the whole thing, and I
had a bitch of a time getting him to a private spot so I could listen to
what he had to say. He said he'd gone out to the crash site a few days
earlier, and the Rocket Car was gone.

          I said "What do you mean, gone?"

          But "gone" is just what he meant. He drove past the spot, couldn't
see the car from the highway, and went down the slope to take a look. When
he got there, he couldn't find any trace of the car ever having been stuck
in the mine entrance. All I could think at the time is that the rubble-pile
must have eventually shifted to the point where it covered the car
completely. Beck seemed doubtful when I suggested it, but like I said, he
was pretty drunk at the time. He said it looked more like the car was pulled
out of the hole and taken away, but that's a bunch of bullshit. It has to
be. To start with, none of us were there long enough for the scene to form a
lasting impression. We looked at the wreckage for maybe fifteen minutes
before we were back in Beck's truck and hauling ass out of there. Maybe Beck
saw enough so that he could tell if the car had been moved, but I wouldn't
be able to tell.

          On the other hand...

          Later on I started thinking about what would have happened if the
county sheriff had driven by and seen the Chevy sticking out of a rockslide.
Or even if someone had called the sheriff and reported it. See, the
abandoned mine was far enough from town so that it probably wasn't inside
the city limits, which means that it wouldn't be the business of the city
cops. And folks who don't live in town learn real quickly who they're
supposed to call when there's trouble. So if the site was spotted by someone
who didn't live in town, chances are they'd have called the sheriff. Of
course it might have been the business of the State Police, but I don't know
anyone who'd call the State Police in a situation like this. Most people
wouldn't even know how to call the State Police. Oh, I'm sure a trooper
would've stopped to check it out if he'd spotted it while driving past, but
the troopers mainly stick to the Interstates, occasionally pulling into one
of the towns along the way for donuts or coffee. No, if some law-enforcement
outfit stopped to investigate the crash site, it almost certainly would've
been the county sheriff.

           So what would he have done?

            I honestly don't know. I've got no idea if they have set
procedures for dealing with stuff like this (yeah, Section 203.1 of the
Civil Code, Disposal of Jet-Propelled Railroad Equipment), but the sheriff's
office wouldn't have called the city cops unless they had to. My Dad always
hinted that there was some animosity between the two departments, the city
cops considering the sheriff's department a bunch of hick-assed Deputy
Dawgs, and the sheriff's department thinking the city cops were a gang of
self-important pricks. And neither group liked the State Police, who, by all
accounts, ARE self-important pricks. If someone from the sheriff's
department came along the wreckage of the Rocket Car, I doubt like hell
they'd have told any other law-enforcement agencies unless they had to. And
until they found out if there was a body inside the car, there really
wouldn't be any reason to share the info. So their next logical step would
be to find out if there was anyone inside the car.

          How?

          Dig through the rubble? That's about the only way it could be
accomplished. But it sure as hell isn't a job for the county sheriff and a
couple of deputies with shovels. It would take heavy equipment and people
who knew what they were doing. On the other hand, why go through the
trouble? When you see a car that appears to be plugged directly into a
mountainside, you don't even assume that there are any survivors. I try to
think of what the sheriff would've done if he'd come across the crash site,
and it occurs to me that the first thing he'd have seen was what appeared to
be a rocket nozzle sticking out of the back end of a car. If I were the
sheriff, I'd have immediately called the Army base where Dad and I got the
JATOS in the first place. Who else would be qualified to deal with such a
thing? NASA? Evel Knievel?

          And if the Sheriff did call the Army, and they had some EOD people
come out and take a look, anything could've happened next. The military
bomb-squad might have taken one look at the expended rocket, told someone at
the base to send out a truck with a winch, and they may have yanked the car
right out of the rubble and taken it away. After they determined that there
was no corpse in the car, it wouldn't be the sheriff's business anymore. Or
anyone else's.

          Case closed.

          But I never did any serious investigation of these possibilities,
for two reasons. One, I didn't want to do any snooping that might look
suspicious. Two, I didn't hang around town very long after that. Two weeks
after the test of the Rocket Car, I drove to.... the big-ish city I
mentioned earlier, and took the ASVAB test. That's the test they give you
before you join the military. And a few weeks after talking to Beck for the
last time, I shipped out for Navy basic training.

          Before you make any assumptions about my joining the Navy to
escape the repercussions of the Rocket Car incident, let me tell you that I
absolutely did not. Get that thought right out of your head. I'd been
thinking about it for a long time, and if the Rocket Car had anything to do
with my joining the Navy, it was just to give me a gentle nudge in a
direction I was already heading. Hey, take a look at the situation I was in.
I was 22 years old, living with my folks,and working for my Dad in a
junkyard at the edge of a shitty little town in the desert. Not exactly A
Future With Promise. I guess college was a possibility, but Dad didn't
really make enough to pay my way, and I didn't feel like re-paying student
loans until I was 100 years old.

          Why the Navy? Well, because of that song by the Village People, of
course.

          No, no, just a little joke there. Don't EVEN take that seriously.
Actually, there was never any question about which branch of the service I
wanted to join. I joined the Navy because I wanted to get as far away from
the desert as I possibly could. Some people grow up around sand and scrub
and get to like it, they can't imagine living anywhere else. Some (like me)
take a look around and realize they've always hated it, and didn't want to
hang around for another minute. For awhile I thought I'd be considered an
oddball when the rest of the sailors found out where I came from, but I
found out it wasn't as uncommon as I assumed. Take a look at a list of the
home towns of all Navy members, and you'll see that quite a few of the boys
come from Nevada, Arizona, New Mexico and southern Texas. Joining the Navy
to get away from the desert turns out to be a pretty common practice.

           Anyway, I went home on leave whenever I got a chance, and saw
Jimmy whenever I went back. On my second visit, I found out that Beck and
Sal had hauled stakes and split for California a few months after I'd left
for boot camp. Not on foot, either. They'd stolen their Dad's monster
pickup, but rumor had it their Dad never even swore out a complaint about
the theft of his truck. Maybe he figured it was a small price to pay to get
rid of his sons for good. Or maybe the truck wasn't empty when they jumped
in and headed west. Their Dad was still up to unknown hanky-panky out in the
desert somewhere, hanky-panky that quite possibly involved the distribution
of illegal vegetation from Mexico. Beck and Sal may have been waited for an
occasion where Dad brought some work home with him, and headed for
California with a few bales of Columbian contraband in the bed. I wouldn't
put it past them. And if that is what happened, I doubt Dad would've been
too anxious for the cops to collect his boys. Or his cargo.

          Whatever the case, nobody ever found out. The next update I got on
that situation was the following Christmas. My Dad told me that Beck had
been busted in California for God-only-knew what, and had died in prison.
The facts were sketchy, but I didn't press details. Dad obviously considered
it a case of "good riddance" but didn't actually say the words, because he
knew Beck was a friend of mine.

          Sal was MIA, and as far as I know, nobody ever heard from him
again. But without Beck to take care of him, it's doubtful that he came to a
good end.

          So that leaves Jimmy. He finished college, got his degree, and
started working for a big company, designing various kinds of equipment. I
don't want to specify the company, or even the exact type of equipment.
Let's just say that you'd recognize the company name if I mentioned it, and
Jimmy is head of the department that builds machines for making cold things
hot and hot things cold. If that's not good enough for you, too bad.

          My Dad kept the scrapyard, continued going to auctions and making
a profit, all the way up until he retired last year. He and Mom moved to
Phoenix, where they're probably the only retired couple who don't complain
about the heat. They came up to visit a few months ago, to see Lily and me
and the kids, and while they were here I took my Dad out one night to shoot
some pool. I told him the story of the Rocket Car, not knowing what his
reaction would be. I was more than a little pleased to see that he laughed
so hard that I thought I'd end up having to call the paramedics. Seems that
over the years he had heard various bullshit-artists mention a car driven
into a cliff, but nobody ever provided any specifics, so he's always
dismissed it as just another stupid story. The one important thing he had to
say on the subject did not please me, not even a little. When I told him
about how I built the car, I mentioned that I didn't want to take one of the
parachutes from the shed, because I knew he'd find out one was missing.

          He said "You mean there were still some parachutes left in that
shed? Shit I'd thought I'd sold them all."

          Son of a bitch.

          Jimmy and I drifted apart while I was in the Navy, but we got back
in touch once I got my discharge and started college. I know 26 is a pretty
ripe old age to be a freshman, but I'd taken a bunch of courses and
equivalency tests during my hitch in the Navy, so it only took two years to
finish off my degree. One thing about living on a ship, you have plenty of
time to study. I've stayed in touch with Jimmy over the years, he's met my
family and I've met his, but beyond the occasional phone call and Christmas
card, we haven't been very close. Part of it is that we live pretty far
apart, and part of it the pressures of family, careers, etc. But Jimmy never
forgot about the Rocket Car, and over the years he's taken great joy in
tweaking my balls about it from time to time. Every now and then I'd get
something in the mail to remind me of the whole thing, something Jimmy
thought I'd think was funny. At first it was just the odd newspaper clipping
or magazine article, but once VCR's became popular, he started sending
videotapes. And even though there was never a note or explanation with a
tape he sent, I always knew what to look for when I watched the movie. One
was "The Right Stuff", and I laughed out loud when scenes of the rocket-sled
tests came on the screen. Another was more recent, a Charlie Sheen flick
called "Terminal Velocity". I kept my eyes peeled for whatever it was Jimmy
wanted me to see, and sure enough, there was a scene where Charlie and some
blonde bimbo escape from the bad guys in a homemade rocket sled.

          I got a chuckle out of that one, too.

          The one movie he sent that I didn't find very amusing came a few
years ago, at a point where I hadn't heard anything from Jimmy in a long
time. A box came in the mail, and when I opened it up, it was a videotape,
just like the others. But instead of being a stand-alone movie, this was the
third part of a three-movie series. And although I'd seen the first one a
couple of times (it was old enough to be shown on network TV by then), I'd
never seen the second part. So I had to rent Part II at the video store down
the street, which I watched with my family one Friday night. The next day my
wife took the kids to visit her parents, and I stayed home and put Jimmy's
movie in the VCR. And I must admit, I DID enjoy it, but the similarities
between the movie and our little adventure in 1978 were too close for
comfort at some points. The part at the beginning of the movie, where Doc
Brown and Marty McFly find the DeLorean in the abandoned mine shaft was bad
enough. But toward the end, when they mounted railroad wheels on the
time-machine and pushed it down the tracks with the locomotive...

          Like I said, too close for comfort. And I'm really glad I watched
that movie alone. I don't know what sort of expression was on my face while
I watched, but it must've been a scary one. As a matter of fact, when the
movie was over, I got up close to the TV and read each and every name in the
credits. I didn't think I'd actually find a name I'd recognize, but we never
did find out what happened to Sal after he was left on his own in
California.

          I guess we never will. Not for sure, anyway.

          Anyway, that's my story, take it or leave it. And even if everyone
who sees it thinks it's bullshit, I'm glad I told it. If I never decided to
sit down and tell it, my wife probably never would've given me this nifty
computer last Christmas. As a result, I not only got to write most of it
from the comfort of my own bedroom, but I've also re-established contact
with Jimmy. E-mail is a terrific way to stay in touch with people, and as
soon as I told Jimmy I was going to write this whole thing down, he started
spouting out facts and details I'd long since forgotten. That's one of the
reasons this story is running so long. So I suppose that if an apology has
to be made, it should be a joint apology from Jimmy as well as me.

          One last thing before I call it quits:

          When I originally ran this story up the flagpole for Jimmy, he
looked around on the Web for the "Darwin Awards" I'd told him about, and was
as shocked as I was at how far and wide the Rocket Car story had spread. But
he also seemed a little miffed about the whole thing. He seemed to think
that if anyone deserved the Darwin Award, it was us.

          It's tough to tell just how serious a person is when you're
carrying on a conversation via E-mail.

           I pointed out that not only was the Darwin Award completely
intellectual in nature (I doubt like hell a gold-plated trophy exists
anywhere), but it was not the sort of thing a person goes out of his way to
win.

          Jimmy thought differently.

           Have you ever seen those silver Jesus-fish emblems that
Christians decorate their bumpers with? Well, not too long ago, someone came
up with a variation on the emblem, sort of a counterpart to the Christian
fish. It's the same outline of the fish that the Christians use, but instead
of saying "Jesus" (or whatever) inside the body of the fish, it says
"Darwin". And the fish itself has little feet on the underside. The message
(for those academic enough to grasp it) is supposed to be a rebuttal of
sorts. Evolution over creation.

           Very cerebral, eh?

          Well, I've seen these things around from time to time, both the
Christian version and the Darwin version. And to be honest, neither one made
much of an impression. But this past Easter, I got yet another package from
Jimmy, the first one in a long time. I thought it was another video, but
when I opened it up, I found it wasn't. Inside was a Hallmark card
congratulating me on a happy 20th anniversary. Along with the card was one
of the fish emblems, the "Darwin" version instead of the standard Christian
model. But not exactly the Darwin version. Instead of little feet at the
bottom of the fish, this one had little wheels. And there were curly lines
coming from the rear of the fish. Lines that looked like jet exhaust, coming
from a tail that looked surprisingly like a JATO exhaust nozzle.

          Maybe Jimmy had a novelty store make it up, or maybe he made it
himself. Myself, I like to think the latter. But I ran right out to my car
(a boring old Toyota Camry, gasoline-powered), wiped down the trunk lid, and
stuck it on. And even though nobody else knows what the hell it is, I get a
chuckle every time I look at it.

          It ain't a gold statue, but it's good enough for me.





If you have any questions or feedback about this whole thing (or if you just
want to compliment me on my fine drafting skills), I can be reached at:

ROCKETCAR@CARDHOUSE.COM

I only ask that you please be gentle.  If you piss me off, I'll end up
taking it out on my wife, kids, or students, and I know you don't want that
on your conscience.

Click here for (slightly) more information on the naming of the HMS Beagle,
and other bits and pieces....

-----Original Message-----
From: Waysie_Atkins@VANGUARD.COM [mailto:Waysie_Atkins@VANGUARD.COM]
Sent: Wednesday, August 01, 2001 2:08 PM
To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
Subject: [AR] JATO Misapplication


A bit off-topic, but thought there might be an interest on this list.   The
story was told to me initially by an aquantince of the decedent, the copy
below
was taken from The Darwin Awards.  (not trying to be morbid, or slight the
gentleman involved, just the only quotable source I have on the incident).


The Arizona Highway Patrol came upon a pile of smoldering metal embedded
into
the side of a cliff rising above the road at the apex of a curve. The
wreckage
resembled the site of an airplane crash, but it was a car. The type of car
was
unidentifiable at the scene. The lab finally figured out what it was and
what
had happened.

It seems that a guy had somehow gotten hold of a JATO unit (Jet Assisted
Take
Off - actually a solid fuel rocket) that is used to give heavy military
transport planes an extra "push" for taking off from short airfields. He had
driven his Chevy Impala out into the desert and found a long, straight
stretch
of road. Then he attached the JATO unit to his car, jumped in, got up some
speed
and fired off the JATO!

The facts as best as could be determined are that the operator of the 1967
Impala hit JATO ignition at a distance of approximately 3.0 miles from the
crash
site. This was established by the prominent scorched and melted asphalt at
that
location. The JATO, if operating properly, would have reached maximum thrust
within 5 seconds, causing the Chevy to reach speeds well in excess of 350
mph
and continuing at full power for an additional 20-25 seconds. The driver,
soon
to be pilot, most likely would have experienced G-forces usually reserved
for
dog-fighting F-14 jocks under full afterburners, basically causing him to
become
insignificant for the remainder of the event. However, the automobile
remained
on the straight highway for about 2.5 miles (15-20) seconds before the
driver
applied and completely melted the brakes, blowing the tires and leaving
thick
rubber marks on the road surface, then becoming airborne for an additional
1.4
miles and impacting the cliff face at a height of 125 feet leaving a
blackened
crater 3 feet deep in the rock.

Most of the driver's remains were not recoverable; however, small fragments
of
bone, teeth and hair were extracted from the crater and fingernail and bone
shards were removed from a piece of debris believed to be a portion of the
steering wheel.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 14420 invoked from network); 1 Aug 2001 19:42:30 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 1 Aug 2001 19:42:30 -0000
Received: (qmail 25413 invoked from network); 1 Aug 2001 19:44:30 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 1 Aug 2001 19:44:30 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA24023; Wed, 1 Aug 2001 12:36:38 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 92988 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 1 Aug 2001 19:36:29 +0000
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net [207.44.96.86]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id MAA23915 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 1 Aug 2001 12:26:29 -0700
Received: (qmail 7108 invoked from network); 1 Aug 2001 19:26:27 -0000
Received: from mail1.ha-net.ptd.net (HELO mail.ptd.net) ([207.44.96.65])          (envelope-sender <baumans@ptdprolog.net>) by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net          (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; 1 Aug 2001          19:26:27 -0000
Received: (qmail 17453 invoked from network); 1 Aug 2001 19:26:27 -0000
Received: from du57072.con.ptd.net (HELO 204) ([204.186.57.72])          (envelope-sender <baumans@ptdprolog.net>) by mail.ptd.net          (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; 1 Aug 2001          19:26:27 -0000
References:  <85256A9B.00694CD9.00@vgi4mail.vanguard.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <002201c11abf$a4b3b140$0100a8c0@186.0.201.mshome.net>
Date:         Wed, 1 Aug 2001 15:24:51 -0400
Reply-To: "Baumans" <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Baumans" <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] JATO Misapplication
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Check out www.officialdarwinawards.com .  They say on the front page that
it's an urban legend.
----- Original Message -----
From: <Waysie_Atkins@VANGUARD.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Wednesday, August 01, 2001 3:07 PM
Subject: [AR] JATO Misapplication


> A bit off-topic, but thought there might be an interest on this list.
The
> story was told to me initially by an aquantince of the decedent, the copy
below
> was taken from The Darwin Awards.  (not trying to be morbid, or slight the
> gentleman involved, just the only quotable source I have on the incident).
>
>
> The Arizona Highway Patrol came upon a pile of smoldering metal embedded
into
> the side of a cliff rising above the road at the apex of a curve. The
wreckage
> resembled the site of an airplane crash, but it was a car. The type of car
was
> unidentifiable at the scene. The lab finally figured out what it was and
what
> had happened.
>
> It seems that a guy had somehow gotten hold of a JATO unit (Jet Assisted
Take
> Off - actually a solid fuel rocket) that is used to give heavy military
> transport planes an extra "push" for taking off from short airfields. He
had
> driven his Chevy Impala out into the desert and found a long, straight
stretch
> of road. Then he attached the JATO unit to his car, jumped in, got up some
speed
> and fired off the JATO!
>
> The facts as best as could be determined are that the operator of the 1967
> Impala hit JATO ignition at a distance of approximately 3.0 miles from the
crash
> site. This was established by the prominent scorched and melted asphalt at
that
> location. The JATO, if operating properly, would have reached maximum
thrust
> within 5 seconds, causing the Chevy to reach speeds well in excess of 350
mph
> and continuing at full power for an additional 20-25 seconds. The driver,
soon
> to be pilot, most likely would have experienced G-forces usually reserved
for
> dog-fighting F-14 jocks under full afterburners, basically causing him to
become
> insignificant for the remainder of the event. However, the automobile
remained
> on the straight highway for about 2.5 miles (15-20) seconds before the
driver
> applied and completely melted the brakes, blowing the tires and leaving
thick
> rubber marks on the road surface, then becoming airborne for an additional
1.4
> miles and impacting the cliff face at a height of 125 feet leaving a
blackened
> crater 3 feet deep in the rock.
>
> Most of the driver's remains were not recoverable; however, small
fragments of
> bone, teeth and hair were extracted from the crater and fingernail and
bone
> shards were removed from a piece of debris believed to be a portion of the
> steering wheel.
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 25872 invoked from network); 1 Aug 2001 19:53:27 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 1 Aug 2001 19:53:27 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: (qmail 27916 invoked from network); 1 Aug 2001 19:55:32 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 1 Aug 2001 19:55:32 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA24200; Wed, 1 Aug 2001 12:51:05 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 93040 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 1 Aug 2001 19:51:02 +0000
Received: from cisco.com (cypher.cisco.com [171.69.11.18]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA24182 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed,          1 Aug 2001 12:51:02 -0700
Received: (from billw@localhost) by cisco.com (8.8.8/2.6/Cisco List          Logging/8.8.8) id MAA03911 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 1 Aug 2001          12:50:31 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID:  <CMM.0.90.4.996695431.billw@cypher>
Date:         Wed, 1 Aug 2001 12:50:31 PDT
Reply-To: "Bill Westfield" <billw@cisco.com>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "William Chops Westfield" <billw@cisco.com>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Portable data aquisition devices
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  Your message of Wed, 1 Aug 2001 11:45:44 -0400

Note that there's a complete development environment for PalmOS (based on
GNU, runs on wintel PCs or Macs) available for free...

BillW


From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 7112 invoked from network); 1 Aug 2001 21:40:57 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 1 Aug 2001 21:40:57 -0000
Received: (qmail 19384 invoked from network); 1 Aug 2001 21:41:54 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 1 Aug 2001 21:41:54 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA25035; Wed, 1 Aug 2001 14:36:44 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 93104 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 1 Aug 2001 21:36:37 +0000
Received: from smtprelay3.abs.adelphia.net (smtprelay.abs.adelphia.net          [64.8.20.11]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA25017 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 1 Aug 2001 14:36:37 -0700
Received: from jlgrady ([63.124.251.47]) by smtprelay3.abs.adelphia.net          (Netscape Messaging Server 4.15) with SMTP id GHES0301.3M5 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 1 Aug 2001 17:36:03 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook CWS, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <000801c11ad2$3d336fc0$0200a8c0@prestige.net>
Date:         Wed, 1 Aug 2001 17:38:00 -0400
Reply-To: "Jeff Grady" <jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jeff Grady" <jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Head end igniters
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <85256A9B.00685BBC.00@vgi4mail.vanguard.com>

A word of caution:

        I believe that (and correct me if I'm wrong) if a smaller motor is used as
an ignitor for the larger one, and the smaller motor CATO's that means
DETONATION of the larger motor. Use this method with extreme caution.

Jeff



-----Original Message-----
From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@itc.uci.edu]On
Behalf Of Waysie_Atkins@VANGUARD.COM
Sent: Wednesday, August 01, 2001 2:57 PM
To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
Subject: Re: [AR] Head end igniters


For larger motors I had sketched out a forward closure that would provide
*leads* thru it for the ignitor.  Would need to have a center plug that was
not
electrically conductive with a couple of  pieces of all-thread epoxied thru
it.
Or might be able to use only one insulated lead.

It would not allow for motor based ejection charge though, so electronic
initiated recovery would be required, and would require the ignitor to be
installed prior to engine installation.

Is good to see others mention the use of commercially made small motors as
ignitors for large motors,  had considered that as well.  Anyone try this
one
yet?

Waysie

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 23816 invoked from network); 1 Aug 2001 21:45:20 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 1 Aug 2001 21:45:20 -0000
Received: (qmail 19113 invoked from network); 1 Aug 2001 21:47:45 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 1 Aug 2001 21:47:45 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA25083; Wed, 1 Aug 2001 14:41:21 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 93114 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 1 Aug 2001 21:41:20 +0000
Received: from fep3-orange.clear.net.nz (fep3-orange.clear.net.nz          [203.97.32.3]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA25065          for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Wed, 1 Aug 2001 14:41:19 -0700
Received: from mkbs (203-167-160-105.dialup.clear.net.nz [203.167.160.105]) by          fep3-orange.clear.net.nz (1.5/1.8) with SMTP id JAA25578; Thu, 2 Aug          2001 09:40:18 +1200 (NZST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="Windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <00c801c11ad2$c84f9e80$0100a8c0@mkbs>
Date:         Thu, 2 Aug 2001 00:09:51 +1200
Reply-To: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Organization: Applied Technology
Subject:      [AR] Steam Rocket
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Apogee 4400 feet
Isp = 50 approximately

        http://www.rrs.org/Projects/Launches/Steam_Rocket/steam_rocket.html




Builder/owner:  William J. Inman
"Team Steam": William J. Inman, Timothy C. Clifford, Jeanne Hoover, and Dale
L. Talcott (not in attendance)
 Flight Vehicle:  "Scalded Cat"
 Length: 7.5 ft.
 Diameter: 4.5 in.
 Weight (loaded):  53.2 lbs.    (empty): 34.5 lbs.
 Type of propulsion:  hot water (or steam)
 Propellant capacity:  8.5 liters (2.25 gallons) or 18.7 lbs.
 Construction:  tank; welded stainless steel,  payload section; phenolic,
 fiberglass, and plastic
 Temp. and pressure of water at launch:  600 degrees F and 1500 psi
 Calculated thrust:  273 lbs. (peak)
 Duration of thrust:  slightly less than 5 seconds
 Altitude achieved:  4479 ft. (Adept ALTS-2), 4400 ft. (Blacksky AltAcc2)
 Acceleration: 4 g's +/-
 Max. velocity: 506 ft. per second (from AltAcc2)
 Coast time: 15 seconds (from AltAcc2)

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 4780 invoked from network); 1 Aug 2001 21:48:16 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 1 Aug 2001 21:48:16 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 18065 invoked from network); 1 Aug 2001 21:49:33 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 1 Aug 2001 21:49:33 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA25142; Wed, 1 Aug 2001 14:44:03 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 93126 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 1 Aug 2001 21:44:01 +0000
Received: from ns.vanguard.com (ns.VANGUARD.COM [192.175.173.31]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA25124 for          <ARocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 1 Aug 2001 14:44:01 -0700
Received: from eagle1.vanguard.com (eagle1.VANGUARD.COM [192.175.141.70]) by          ns.vanguard.com (Switch-2.1.3/Switch-2.1.0) with ESMTP id          f71Li0v06838 for <ARocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 1 Aug 2001 17:44:00          -0400 (EDT)
Received: from vgi4mail.vanguard.com (vgi4mail.vanguard.com [10.254.65.16]) by          eagle1.vanguard.com (Switch-2.1.3/Switch-2.1.0) with SMTP id          f71Lhva10519 for <ARocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 1 Aug 2001 17:43:57          -0400 (EDT)
Received: by vgi4mail.vanguard.com(Lotus SMTP MTA v4.6.6  (890.1 7-16-1999))           id 85256A9B.00779A84 ; Wed, 1 Aug 2001 17:46:23 -0400
X-Lotus-FromDomain: VGINOTES
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Disposition: inline
Message-ID:  <85256A9B.0074F7BD.00@vgi4mail.vanguard.com>
Date:         Wed, 1 Aug 2001 17:15:07 -0400
Reply-To: <Waysie_Atkins@VANGUARD.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <Waysie_Atkins@VANGUARD.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] JATO Misapplication
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

I may have swallowed a fish story on this one.  Thought it was legit.....not
looking to spread rumors or 'Urban Legends'.     Wasn't on the list last time
around.

Had not thought about the physics of it beyond the fact that it was a bad idea.
I've seen unstable rockets go in all directions, including up just not in a
straight line:-)


Waysie

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 2685 invoked from network); 1 Aug 2001 21:55:53 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 1 Aug 2001 21:55:53 -0000
Received: (qmail 23467 invoked from network); 1 Aug 2001 21:57:21 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 1 Aug 2001 21:57:21 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA25240; Wed, 1 Aug 2001 14:54:00 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 93142 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 1 Aug 2001 21:53:58 +0000
Received: from smtprelay3.abs.adelphia.net (smtprelay.abs.adelphia.net          [64.8.20.11]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA25221 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 1 Aug 2001 14:53:58 -0700
Received: from jlgrady ([63.124.251.47]) by smtprelay3.abs.adelphia.net          (Netscape Messaging Server 4.15) with SMTP id GHEST003.MNT for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 1 Aug 2001 17:53:24 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook CWS, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <000901c11ad4$a997eea0$0200a8c0@prestige.net>
Date:         Wed, 1 Aug 2001 17:55:21 -0400
Reply-To: "Jeff Grady" <jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jeff Grady" <jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Portable data aquisition devices
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010801114310.7155D-100000@spsystems.net>

FYI,

        OMEGA has tons of data aquisition sensors, cards and some RF telemetry
equipment. Most to do with temprature and pressure sensing. Go to
http://www.omega.com and request all their catalogs. I did, and about a week
later I came into the office and there sat about 50 lbs of HARDBACK books
chocked full of good stuff. You can even request free copies of a poster
showing all the "Rockets of the World" on one side and all shuttle mission
patches up to STS- 101...

Enjoy!

Jeff

-----Original Message-----
From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@itc.uci.edu]On
Behalf Of Henry Spencer
Sent: Wednesday, August 01, 2001 11:46 AM
To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
Subject: Re: [AR] Portable data aquisition devices


On Wed, 1 Aug 2001, Sean Baxendell wrote:
> The following mini notebooks are the smallest I found
> 1. Toshiba Libretto (only sold in Japan now?)
> 2. Casio Fiva
> 3. Palmax PD-1100
> 4. Sony VAIO (built in video camera, Expensive, limited to memory stick)

An alternative to these, if you're willing to deal with software issues
yourself, is the Psion Series 5 machines.  These are mini-notebooks, just
barely big enough for touch typing, which will run 15-20hr on a pair of AA
alkalines.  They have a normal RS232 serial port, and Compact Flash for
storage.  They are completely non-Intel and non-Microsoft, however, like
the Palms, so Win98 software won't be useful.

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 20585 invoked from network); 1 Aug 2001 22:08:35 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 1 Aug 2001 22:08:35 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 28714 invoked from network); 1 Aug 2001 22:10:47 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 1 Aug 2001 22:10:47 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA25411; Wed, 1 Aug 2001 15:05:58 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 93161 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 1 Aug 2001 22:05:56 +0000
Received: from adobe.com (smtp-relay-1.adobe.com [192.150.11.1]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA25393 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed,          1 Aug 2001 15:05:55 -0700
Received: from inner-relay-2.corp.adobe.com ([153.32.1.52]) by adobe.com          (1.0.0/8.11.4) with ESMTP id f71M5m703716 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>;          Wed, 1 Aug 2001 15:05:48 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mailsj-v1.corp.adobe.com (mailsj-dev.corp.adobe.com          [153.32.1.192]) by inner-relay-2.corp.adobe.com (8.11.4/8.11.4) with          ESMTP id f71M58b24970 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 1 Aug 2001          15:05:08 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from sronald.earthlink.net ([153.32.63.111]) by          mailsj-v1.corp.adobe.com (Netscape Messaging Server 4.15 v1 Jul 11          2001 16:32:57) with ESMTP id GHETCQ00.LRN for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>;          Wed, 1 Aug 2001 15:05:14 -0700
X-Sender: forkbomb@mail.earthlink.net
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
References: <85256A9B.00685BBC.00@vgi4mail.vanguard.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <5.1.0.14.0.20010801145927.02905820@mail.earthlink.net>
Date:         Wed, 1 Aug 2001 15:07:33 -0700
Reply-To: <forkbomb@EARTHLINK.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <forkbomb@EARTHLINK.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Head end igniters
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <000801c11ad2$3d336fc0$0200a8c0@prestige.net>

At 05:38 PM 8/1/01 -0400, Jeff Grady wrote:
>A word of caution:
>
>         I believe that (and correct me if I'm wrong) if a smaller motor
> is used as
>an ignitor for the larger one, and the smaller motor CATO's that means
>DETONATION of the larger motor. Use this method with extreme caution.


         Is that necessarily true? It seems like the result could be a CATO
of the larger motor, but not necessarily. The result of the smaller motor
CATO'ing would be a sharp spike in the internal pressure of the larger
motor. If this was enough of a pressure rise to cause case failure, then
the result would be CATO. If it raised the internal pressure of the motor
into an unstable regime, then CATO. However, if the motor is strong enough
and the elevated pressure does not result in unstable combustion, it might
just result in a higher thrust for the period of time it took for the
internal pressure to decay to normal values. I don't see how it could cause
a detonation.

         -p



>Jeff
>
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@itc.uci.edu]On
>Behalf Of Waysie_Atkins@VANGUARD.COM
>Sent: Wednesday, August 01, 2001 2:57 PM
>To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
>Subject: Re: [AR] Head end igniters
>
>
>For larger motors I had sketched out a forward closure that would provide
>*leads* thru it for the ignitor.  Would need to have a center plug that was
>not
>electrically conductive with a couple of  pieces of all-thread epoxied thru
>it.
>Or might be able to use only one insulated lead.
>
>It would not allow for motor based ejection charge though, so electronic
>initiated recovery would be required, and would require the ignitor to be
>installed prior to engine installation.
>
>Is good to see others mention the use of commercially made small motors as
>ignitors for large motors,  had considered that as well.  Anyone try this
>one
>yet?
>
>Waysie

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 6343 invoked from network); 1 Aug 2001 22:35:50 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 1 Aug 2001 22:35:50 -0000
Received: (qmail 9067 invoked from network); 1 Aug 2001 22:37:58 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 1 Aug 2001 22:37:58 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA25777; Wed, 1 Aug 2001 15:31:33 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 93201 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 1 Aug 2001 22:31:30 +0000
Received: from smtprelay2.abs.adelphia.net (smtprelay.abs.adelphia.net          [64.8.20.11]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA25758 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 1 Aug 2001 15:31:29 -0700
Received: from jlgrady ([63.124.251.47]) by smtprelay2.abs.adelphia.net          (Netscape Messaging Server 4.15) with SMTP id GHEUJ501.ARZ for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 1 Aug 2001 18:30:41 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook CWS, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <000a01c11ad9$dd748170$0200a8c0@prestige.net>
Date:         Wed, 1 Aug 2001 18:32:35 -0400
Reply-To: "Jeff Grady" <jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jeff Grady" <jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Head end igniters
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <5.1.0.14.0.20010801145927.02905820@mail.earthlink.net>

Just basing that on the difference between burning dynamite and detonating
it with a blasting cap. If you light smokeless gunpowder with a match you
get a flash. Ignite it with a primer inside a cartridge and it detonates
with much greater force. The ignition of and pressure produced by the primer
causes rapid decomposition of any adjacent fuel which results in much more
pressure. The fuels used in composite rocket motors seems to be just as or
more powerful than a similar amount of smokeless gunpowder. The motor casing
being the "cartridge", the smaller motor CATOing becomes the "primer" and
the larger motor's fuel becomes the equivalent of a 105mm round "cooking
off"...

Just my opinion/fear - no science to back it up.

Jeff

-----Original Message-----
From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@itc.uci.edu]On
Behalf Of forkbomb@EARTHLINK.NET
Sent: Wednesday, August 01, 2001 6:08 PM
To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
Subject: Re: [AR] Head end igniters


At 05:38 PM 8/1/01 -0400, Jeff Grady wrote:
>A word of caution:
>
>         I believe that (and correct me if I'm wrong) if a smaller motor
> is used as
>an ignitor for the larger one, and the smaller motor CATO's that means
>DETONATION of the larger motor. Use this method with extreme caution.


         Is that necessarily true? It seems like the result could be a CATO
of the larger motor, but not necessarily. The result of the smaller motor
CATO'ing would be a sharp spike in the internal pressure of the larger
motor. If this was enough of a pressure rise to cause case failure, then
the result would be CATO. If it raised the internal pressure of the motor
into an unstable regime, then CATO. However, if the motor is strong enough
and the elevated pressure does not result in unstable combustion, it might
just result in a higher thrust for the period of time it took for the
internal pressure to decay to normal values. I don't see how it could cause
a detonation.

         -p



>Jeff
>
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@itc.uci.edu]On
>Behalf Of Waysie_Atkins@VANGUARD.COM
>Sent: Wednesday, August 01, 2001 2:57 PM
>To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
>Subject: Re: [AR] Head end igniters
>
>
>For larger motors I had sketched out a forward closure that would provide
>*leads* thru it for the ignitor.  Would need to have a center plug that was
>not
>electrically conductive with a couple of  pieces of all-thread epoxied thru
>it.
>Or might be able to use only one insulated lead.
>
>It would not allow for motor based ejection charge though, so electronic
>initiated recovery would be required, and would require the ignitor to be
>installed prior to engine installation.
>
>Is good to see others mention the use of commercially made small motors as
>ignitors for large motors,  had considered that as well.  Anyone try this
>one
>yet?
>
>Waysie

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 24906 invoked from network); 1 Aug 2001 23:03:09 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 1 Aug 2001 23:03:09 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 19728 invoked from network); 1 Aug 2001 23:05:35 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 1 Aug 2001 23:05:35 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA26321; Wed, 1 Aug 2001 16:00:41 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 93234 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 1 Aug 2001 23:00:28 +0000
Received: from adobe.com (smtp-relay-1.adobe.com [192.150.11.1]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA26302 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed,          1 Aug 2001 16:00:27 -0700
Received: from inner-relay-2.corp.adobe.com ([153.32.1.52]) by adobe.com          (1.0.0/8.11.4) with ESMTP id f71N0J719571 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>;          Wed, 1 Aug 2001 16:00:19 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mailsj-v1.corp.adobe.com (mailsj-dev.corp.adobe.com          [153.32.1.192]) by inner-relay-2.corp.adobe.com (8.11.4/8.11.4) with          ESMTP id f71Mxdb08347 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 1 Aug 2001          15:59:39 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from sronald.earthlink.net ([153.32.63.111]) by          mailsj-v1.corp.adobe.com (Netscape Messaging Server 4.15 v1 Jul 11          2001 16:32:57) with ESMTP id GHEVVM00.9RH; Wed, 1 Aug 2001 15:59:46          -0700
X-Sender: forkbomb@mail.earthlink.net
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
References: <5.1.0.14.0.20010801145927.02905820@mail.earthlink.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <5.1.0.14.0.20010801155438.0290a7a0@mail.earthlink.net>
Date:         Wed, 1 Aug 2001 16:02:05 -0700
Reply-To: <forkbomb@EARTHLINK.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <forkbomb@EARTHLINK.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Head end igniters
Comments: To: Jeff Grady <jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <000a01c11ad9$dd748170$0200a8c0@prestige.net>

At 06:32 PM 8/1/01 -0400, Jeff Grady wrote:
>Just basing that on the difference between burning dynamite and detonating
>it with a blasting cap.


         Ahh, but dynamite is a different animal all together -- it is a
high explosive, and composite rocket propellants are certainly not.


>If you light smokeless gunpowder with a match you
>get a flash. Ignite it with a primer inside a cartridge and it detonates
>with much greater force.


         If smokeless powder detonated, it would blow the bolt back into
your face. It just burns far more rapidly under pressure inside a gun than
when unconfined. Sort of like AP composite propellant.


>The ignition of and pressure produced by the primer
>causes rapid decomposition of any adjacent fuel which results in much more
>pressure. The fuels used in composite rocket motors seems to be just as or
>more powerful than a similar amount of smokeless gunpowder.


         In terms of total energy, you are correct. However, the burn rate
for smokeless increases much faster with pressure than the burn rate of
most common composite propellants. This means that the peak pressure from
burning a quantity of smokeless powder in a leaky but confined space (like
the inside of a cartridge or a rocket motor) results in a much higher peak
pressure than burning a similar quantity of composite propellant in the
same enclosure.


>The motor casing
>being the "cartridge", the smaller motor CATOing becomes the "primer" and
>the larger motor's fuel becomes the equivalent of a 105mm round "cooking
>off"...


         Ok, I can see where you are coming from, but the devil is in the
details here -- there are subtle but important differences between the
cases. Also, I believe what happens when a round cooks off in a fire is
that the heat from the fire causes the propellant inside the cartridge to
ignite. Without a gun barrel to support it, the cartridge bursts, and it
looks a lot like an explosion.

         -p

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 18317 invoked from network); 2 Aug 2001 00:27:43 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 2 Aug 2001 00:27:43 -0000
Received: (qmail 3224 invoked from network); 2 Aug 2001 00:29:44 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 2 Aug 2001 00:29:44 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA26929; Wed, 1 Aug 2001 17:24:42 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 93298 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 2 Aug 2001 00:23:16 +0000
Received: from smtprelay3.abs.adelphia.net (smtprelay.abs.adelphia.net          [64.8.20.11]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA26904 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 1 Aug 2001 17:23:15 -0700
Received: from jlgrady ([63.124.251.47]) by smtprelay3.abs.adelphia.net          (Netscape Messaging Server 4.15) with SMTP id GHEZPT00.6L7 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 1 Aug 2001 20:22:41 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook CWS, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <000201c11ae9$83f83af0$0200a8c0@prestige.net>
Date:         Wed, 1 Aug 2001 20:24:37 -0400
Reply-To: "Jeff Grady" <jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jeff Grady" <jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Head end igniters
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <5.1.0.14.0.20010801155438.0290a7a0@mail.earthlink.net>

>>Ahh, but dynamite is a different animal all together -- it is a
>>high explosive, and composite rocket propellants are certainly not.

        True, but an organic compound does not have to be categorized as a high
        explosive to be detonated. Cotton or coal dust can be ignited by flame or
heat.
        In a confined area, it can be detonated by a smaller initiating blast that
        raises the pressure to sufficient levels that support rapid decomposition.

>>If smokeless powder detonated, it would blow the bolt back into
>>your face. It just burns far more rapidly under pressure inside a gun than
>>when unconfined. Sort of like AP composite propellant.

        You just defined rapid decomposition - i.e. detonation.

        Rim and center fire ammo powder DOES detonate. The brass cartridge and the
        barrel of the firearm that cartridge is designed for are "matched" so to
        speak, to contain the explosion. Reload the round with too much powder or
        with a faster burning powder for which the cartridge and weapon were not
        designed, and you get the bolt in the face, splinters in the forearms, etc.


>>In terms of total energy, you are correct. However, the burn rate
>>for smokeless increases much faster with pressure than the burn rate of
>>most common composite propellants.

        Regardless of fuel type, the burn rate increases dramatically because
        of the high pressure generated by a cartridge primer or a cato'ed
        "igniter" motor.

>>Also, I believe what happens when a round cooks off in a fire is
>>that the heat from the fire causes the propellant inside the cartridge to
>>ignite. Without a gun barrel to support it, the cartridge bursts, and it
>>looks a lot like an explosion.

        Depends on which is most sensitive to heat - the powder or the primer.
        Some ammo will cook off the powder first, others the primer first. Big
        difference in the bang.

I simply wanted to bring that to people's attention, whether I'm right,
partially right
or completely wrong, it may cause someone to think "....it could happen" and
thus cause
them to take more care when experimenting.

Jeff

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 25231 invoked from network); 2 Aug 2001 01:07:32 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 2 Aug 2001 01:07:32 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: (qmail 5452 invoked from network); 2 Aug 2001 01:09:06 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 2 Aug 2001 01:09:06 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA27330; Wed, 1 Aug 2001 18:05:38 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 93334 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 2 Aug 2001 01:05:29 +0000
Received: from cisco.com (cypher.cisco.com [171.69.11.18]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA27311 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed,          1 Aug 2001 18:05:28 -0700
Received: (from billw@localhost) by cisco.com (8.8.8/2.6/Cisco List          Logging/8.8.8) id SAA02756; Wed, 1 Aug 2001 18:04:57 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID:  <CMM.0.90.4.996714296.billw@cypher>
Date:         Wed, 1 Aug 2001 18:04:56 PDT
Reply-To: "Bill Westfield" <billw@cisco.com>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "William Chops Westfield" <billw@cisco.com>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Head end igniters
Comments: To: Jeff Grady <jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  Your message of Wed, 1 Aug 2001 20:24:37 -0400

    >>If smokeless powder detonated, it would blow the bolt back into
    >>your face. It just burns far more rapidly under pressure inside
    >>a gun than when unconfined. Sort of like AP composite propellant.

        You just defined rapid decomposition - i.e. detonation.

well, no.  Detonation is fundamentally different from combustion, even very
fast combustion.  A detonation is propagated by a shock wave at a speed
greater than the speed of sound in the substance, while combustion is
propagated by other, slower, mechanism.  Note that being able to make a
noticable BANG without confinement is NOT an indication that a detonation
has occured (personal theory - it only means that you're evolving gas faster
than the speed of sound in AIR.)

You can find numerous arguments in the pyrotechnic crowd on whether flash
powder is capable of being detonated.  And more arguments on whether it is
capable of transitioning from burning to detonation.  And probably arguments
in the terrorist community (including would-be terrorists and B!G B0M$
crowd) as to whether you can use something like flash powder as an initiator
for a high explosive.  It's not very likely...

Still, the possibility has catastrophic results, so it's a good idea to make
sure that your ignitors can't detonate.  It makes me very nervous to hear
recomendations for using flash powder (or similar compositions) as ignitors
for composite motors.  There are all sorts of reasons to avoid flash, and
possible detonation after intentional ignition is not one of the major
reasons!  (let's talk about precautions for mixing dry static-y powders...)
In this case, we were talking about using head end ignitors as a way of
avoiding wires that might block the nozzle, right?  There wasn't any problem
with achieving ignition.  Therefore, in a head-end ignitor aimed at THIS
problem, there doesn't need to be more pyrogen, and there doesn't need to be
a hotter pyrogen.  A scrap or two of propellant oughta be more than enough.
(More exotic propellants requiring partiularly high ignition temperatures
and "external" pressurization of the combustion chamber may be a different
matter.)


BillW


From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 21395 invoked from network); 2 Aug 2001 02:21:27 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 2 Aug 2001 02:21:27 -0000
Received: (qmail 20003 invoked from network); 2 Aug 2001 02:23:21 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 2 Aug 2001 02:23:21 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA27827; Wed, 1 Aug 2001 19:14:02 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 93377 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 2 Aug 2001 02:13:58 +0000
Received: from wrench.toolcity.net (root@wrench.toolcity.net [208.0.188.2]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA27809 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 1 Aug 2001 19:13:57 -0700
Received: from [63.169.102.115]          (dap-63-169-102-115.meadville-tnt-1.pa.toolcity.net [63.169.102.115])          by wrench.toolcity.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id WAA01286; Wed, 1          Aug 2001 22:13:51 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <v01510100b78e71b374af@[63.169.102.29]>
Date:         Wed, 1 Aug 2001 22:16:10 -0500
Reply-To: "al bradley" <abradley@TOOLCITY.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "al bradley" <abradley@TOOLCITY.NET>
Subject:      [AR] 2Re: [AR] Alternative grain liner material  KNO3/paper?
Comments: To: kc2csh@JUNO.COM
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Don't know why this made me grin except it seems to be the opposite of what
my Gilbert Chemistry Kit taught this 7 year old some 60 years ago. Its
recipe for a fuse was to soak a length of cotton cord in KNO3 solution and
let it dry. Well I guess it was a kind of fuse, very slow and persistent
smouldering, but really safe enough for a 7 year old--after stealing some
matches, which weren't as safe for a kid :-)

However, I must say that I have coated Bates "candy" grains (pressed with a
6-ton hydraulic jack) with furnace cement on the outside. As an ablative.
These grain were a bit loose in the motor case, and I was willing to have
them burn from the inside out, but not burn on all surfaces simultaneously.
KNO3 as part of an ablative? I can't see it from here? Furnace cement for
end-burners? Perhaps?

best,
al bradley

------------


>  Has anyone explored using thick windings of K nitrate solution soaked
>paper as an insulator and grain liner for long duration solids like end
>burners, something perhaps in the nature of an abative cooling process?
>Does this work?  Is it worthwhile?
>                                                         Jay

------------------------------------------------------------------
Can you live Life with this?: "Unless there is a law, an agreement, or a
long-standing custom, No one `Deserves' Anything -- Either Good or Bad!"

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 11149 invoked from network); 2 Aug 2001 02:57:34 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 2 Aug 2001 02:57:34 -0000
Received: (qmail 3117 invoked from network); 2 Aug 2001 03:00:02 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 2 Aug 2001 03:00:02 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA28021; Wed, 1 Aug 2001 19:54:16 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 93404 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 2 Aug 2001 02:54:01 +0000
Received: from fep3-orange.clear.net.nz (fep3-orange.clear.net.nz          [203.97.32.3]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA28002          for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Wed, 1 Aug 2001 19:54:01 -0700
Received: from mkbs (b002-m010-p027.acld.clear.net.nz [203.167.200.91]) by          fep3-orange.clear.net.nz (1.5/1.8) with SMTP id OAA05035; Thu, 2 Aug          2001 14:53:58 +1200 (NZST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <01af01c11afe$9539e7e0$0100a8c0@mkbs>
Date:         Thu, 2 Aug 2001 11:22:20 +1200
Reply-To: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Organization: Applied Technology
Subject:      [AR] Fw: Rutan Blasts Off
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

For those not on the ERPS list - here are two extracts from a thread
relating to the XCOR lox / alcohol powered Rutan Long-EZ.
Not an impressive performer by rocket plane standards but an interesting
proof of concept starting point.


RM

____________________________________

From: "David Weinshenker" <daze39@earthlink.net>
To: <erps-list@LunaCity.com>
Sent: Wednesday, 25 July 2001 11:59
Subject: Re: Rutan Blasts Off
> Bill Elrod wrote:
> > Hello Everyone,
> > The XCOR website must be checked out today, there is a most
> > interesting press release there now.
> > <www.xcor.com/ezrocket.html>

> Wow! A Long-EZ with twin XCOR lox/alky 400's! Way cool!
> (I wonder what the burntime on a full propellant load is?)
_______________________________________________

From: "Aleta Jackson" <rocketshadow@earthlink.net>

> With both engines, about two minutes. At the end of those two minutes
> you're at 12,000 feet.
> Range? Zip. It's a test bed for our engines. But certainly an E-ticket
> ride! ;->  Aleta


________________________________________________

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 28056 invoked from network); 2 Aug 2001 03:18:28 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 2 Aug 2001 03:18:28 -0000
Received: (qmail 13143 invoked from network); 2 Aug 2001 03:20:55 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 2 Aug 2001 03:20:55 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA28265; Wed, 1 Aug 2001 20:14:30 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 93462 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 2 Aug 2001 03:14:21 +0000
Received: from wrench.toolcity.net (root@wrench.toolcity.net [208.0.188.2]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA28247 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 1 Aug 2001 20:14:20 -0700
Received: from [63.169.102.115]          (dap-63-169-102-115.meadville-tnt-1.pa.toolcity.net [63.169.102.115])          by wrench.toolcity.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id XAA19897; Wed, 1          Aug 2001 23:14:13 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <v01510102b78e7cf91ad1@[63.169.102.115]>
Date:         Wed, 1 Aug 2001 23:16:32 -0500
Reply-To: "al bradley" <abradley@TOOLCITY.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "al bradley" <abradley@TOOLCITY.NET>
Subject:      [AR] 2Ignition versus Detonation -- was Re: [AR] Head end igniters
Comments: To: Bill Westfield <billw@cisco.com>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

I find this discussion rather interesting. Some years back I did small
"construction contract" explosive work using at times low sensitivity
ammonium-base dynamite which was detonated in a "bundle" and, other times,
nitroglycerine-base ditching dynamite in which 1 stick within about 12" of
another would propagate the explosion (You could put a row hundreds of
yards long of the latter in muck), touch off the one on the end and make a
very nice ditch.

I was taught that all high explosives (which includes the dynamites)
required a primer that furnished heat and shock to detonate.  However, the
ditching dynamites were a slight exception to this, as, back in those days,
occasionally there were rifle shooting contests in which a stick of
ditching dynamite was fixed to a heavy steel plate (called a "dynamite
shoot"). If a contestant hit a bullseye everyone knew it immediately!
(200-300 yard shoots)

In researching some of the discussion on this list about using smokeless
powder as a "blowing charge" for parachutes, etc. in rockets I was amazed
to turn up reference to the fact that land and naval artillery igniters
utilize black powder to initiate the smokeless grains of the main
propellant! This was quite a surprise as I had always considered smokeless
(nitrocellulose) powder to be faster burning than black powder and therein
lay one advantage. It seems that the longer barrells (as found on
battleships for example) could never get proper acceleration from black
powder, but with the slower smokeless grain it gave them tremendous range.

It makes me wonder if there are rocket propellants based on something
similar to smokeless powder? Anyone know?

best,
al bradley


---------------------------
>    >>If smokeless powder detonated, it would blow the bolt back into
>    >>your face. It just burns far more rapidly under pressure inside
>    >>a gun than when unconfined. Sort of like AP composite propellant.
>
>        You just defined rapid decomposition - i.e. detonation.
>
>well, no.  Detonation is fundamentally different from combustion, even very
>fast combustion.  A detonation is propagated by a shock wave at a speed
>greater than the speed of sound in the substance, while combustion is
>propagated by other, slower, mechanism.  Note that being able to make a
>noticable BANG without confinement is NOT an indication that a detonation
>has occured (personal theory - it only means that you're evolving gas faster
>than the speed of sound in AIR.)
>
>You can find numerous arguments in the pyrotechnic crowd on whether flash
>powder is capable of being detonated.  And more arguments on whether it is
>capable of transitioning from burning to detonation.  And probably arguments
>in the terrorist community (including would-be terrorists and B!G B0M$
>crowd) as to whether you can use something like flash powder as an initiator
>for a high explosive.  It's not very likely...
>
>Still, the possibility has catastrophic results, so it's a good idea to make
>sure that your ignitors can't detonate.  It makes me very nervous to hear
>recomendations for using flash powder (or similar compositions) as ignitors
>for composite motors.  There are all sorts of reasons to avoid flash, and
>possible detonation after intentional ignition is not one of the major
>reasons!  (let's talk about precautions for mixing dry static-y powders...)
>In this case, we were talking about using head end ignitors as a way of
>avoiding wires that might block the nozzle, right?  There wasn't any problem
>with achieving ignition.  Therefore, in a head-end ignitor aimed at THIS
>problem, there doesn't need to be more pyrogen, and there doesn't need to be
>a hotter pyrogen.  A scrap or two of propellant oughta be more than enough.
>(More exotic propellants requiring partiularly high ignition temperatures
>and "external" pressurization of the combustion chamber may be a different
>matter.)
>
>
>BillW

------------------------------------------------------------------
Can you live Life with this?: "Unless there is a law, an agreement, or a
long-standing custom, No one `Deserves' Anything -- Either Good or Bad!"

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 4895 invoked from network); 2 Aug 2001 03:28:24 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 2 Aug 2001 03:28:24 -0000
Received: (qmail 291 invoked from network); 2 Aug 2001 03:30:00 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 2 Aug 2001 03:30:00 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA28351; Wed, 1 Aug 2001 20:26:37 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 93479 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 2 Aug 2001 03:26:35 +0000
Received: from smtprelay1.abs.adelphia.net (smtprelay.abs.adelphia.net          [64.8.20.11]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA28333 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 1 Aug 2001 20:26:34 -0700
Received: from jlgrady ([63.124.251.47]) by smtprelay1.abs.adelphia.net          (Netscape Messaging Server 4.15) with SMTP id GHF86Z02.LXF for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 1 Aug 2001 23:25:47 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook CWS, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <000301c11b03$14f6e060$0200a8c0@prestige.net>
Date:         Wed, 1 Aug 2001 23:27:38 -0400
Reply-To: "Jeff Grady" <jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jeff Grady" <jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] 2Re: [AR] Alternative grain liner material  KNO3/paper?
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <v01510100b78e71b374af@[63.169.102.29]>

Has anyone tried casting a grain with a paper tube as the liner/form, then
place the casting inside a motor tube having a slightly larger inside
diameter leaving say 1/8" or more gap between the liner and motor tube. Then
inject a material such as durham's water putty into this 1/8" gap? Would the
paper tube be easily removed if it still existed? Would this not leave a
reusable water putty liner that would take numerous firings?

Jeff

-----Original Message-----
From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@itc.uci.edu]On
Behalf Of al bradley
Sent: Wednesday, August 01, 2001 11:16 PM
To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
Subject: [AR] 2Re: [AR] Alternative grain liner material KNO3/paper?


Don't know why this made me grin except it seems to be the opposite of what
my Gilbert Chemistry Kit taught this 7 year old some 60 years ago. Its
recipe for a fuse was to soak a length of cotton cord in KNO3 solution and
let it dry. Well I guess it was a kind of fuse, very slow and persistent
smouldering, but really safe enough for a 7 year old--after stealing some
matches, which weren't as safe for a kid :-)

However, I must say that I have coated Bates "candy" grains (pressed with a
6-ton hydraulic jack) with furnace cement on the outside. As an ablative.
These grain were a bit loose in the motor case, and I was willing to have
them burn from the inside out, but not burn on all surfaces simultaneously.
KNO3 as part of an ablative? I can't see it from here? Furnace cement for
end-burners? Perhaps?

best,
al bradley

------------


>  Has anyone explored using thick windings of K nitrate solution soaked
>paper as an insulator and grain liner for long duration solids like end
>burners, something perhaps in the nature of an abative cooling process?
>Does this work?  Is it worthwhile?
>                                                         Jay

------------------------------------------------------------------
Can you live Life with this?: "Unless there is a law, an agreement, or a
long-standing custom, No one `Deserves' Anything -- Either Good or Bad!"

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 18810 invoked from network); 2 Aug 2001 03:41:39 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 2 Aug 2001 03:41:39 -0000
Received: (qmail 6351 invoked from network); 2 Aug 2001 03:43:15 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 2 Aug 2001 03:43:15 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA28539; Wed, 1 Aug 2001 20:40:06 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 93509 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 2 Aug 2001 03:39:56 +0000
Received: from mta02.mail.mel.aone.net.au (mta02.mail.au.uu.net [203.2.192.82])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA28516 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 1 Aug 2001 20:39:55 -0700
Received: from unknown ([63.34.212.107]) by mta02.mail.mel.aone.net.au with          SMTP id <20010802033948.BVVT8316.mta02.mail.mel.aone.net.au@unknown>;          Thu, 2 Aug 2001 13:39:48 +1000
References: Conversation <v01510102b78e7cf91ad1@[63.169.102.115]> with last            message <v01510102b78e7cf91ad1@[63.169.102.115]>
Priority: Normal
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Priority: 3
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	X-MAPIextension=.TXT;
	charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>
Date:         Thu, 2 Aug 2001 03:39:56 +0000
Reply-To: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] 2Ignition versus Detonation -- was Re: [AR] Head end              igniters
Comments: To: al bradley <abradley@TOOLCITY.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <v01510102b78e7cf91ad1@[63.169.102.115]>

> In researching some of the discussion on this list about using smokeless
> powder as a "blowing charge" for parachutes, etc. in rockets I was amazed
> to turn up reference to the fact that land and naval artillery igniters
> utilize black powder to initiate the smokeless grains of the main
> propellant! This was quite a surprise as I had always considered smokeless
> (nitrocellulose) powder to be faster burning than black powder and therein
> lay one advantage.

 BP will liberate more heat than SP. Maybe that's the reason??? Dunno..


 It seems that the longer barrells (as found on
> battleships for example) could never get proper acceleration from black
> powder, but with the slower smokeless grain it gave them tremendous range.
>
> It makes me wonder if there are rocket propellants based on something
> similar to smokeless powder? Anyone know?

Double base propellants.

Troy.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 25267 invoked from network); 2 Aug 2001 03:54:17 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 2 Aug 2001 03:54:17 -0000
Received: (qmail 29163 invoked from network); 2 Aug 2001 03:56:42 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 2 Aug 2001 03:56:42 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA28636; Wed, 1 Aug 2001 20:51:40 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 93525 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 2 Aug 2001 03:51:38 +0000
Received: from smtprelay2.abs.adelphia.net (smtprelay.abs.adelphia.net          [64.8.20.11]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA28618 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 1 Aug 2001 20:51:37 -0700
Received: from jlgrady ([63.124.251.47]) by smtprelay2.abs.adelphia.net          (Netscape Messaging Server 4.15) with SMTP id GHF9CP02.C10 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 1 Aug 2001 23:50:49 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook CWS, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <000601c11b06$94d2a0f0$0200a8c0@prestige.net>
Date:         Wed, 1 Aug 2001 23:52:41 -0400
Reply-To: "Jeff Grady" <jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jeff Grady" <jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Head end igniters
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <CMM.0.90.4.996714296.billw@cypher>

Points taken, but I'll try one more time to make my case. I am no expert by
any stretch of the imagination on rocketry or ordinance, but I have reloaded
ammunition for rifles, shotguns and pistols, for over 30 years now (yep,
still got all 10 fingers too). I'm an old dog that can and will learn new
tricks from others, and that's what I intend to take away from this
conversation. I think we may all be right depending on several variables
that each of us are thinking of.

My understanding of a shock wave is much the way you described it. Its a
pressure wave moving faster than the speed of sound due to the rapid
expansion of gases. Within a rifle cartridge, the primer is a small but
powerful device that does expel gases faster than the speed of sound. How
fast in ft/sec I don't know. I have had reason to test the trigger jobs on
pistols where the firing pin spring has been replaced with a heavier spring
to prevent accidental discharge if dropped, and the mainspring has been
lighten to allow for lighter trigger pull. To test the pistol to make sure
it will dent the primer, I press new primers into several empty casings and
fire them.

If they all go bang, fine otherwise more adjustments are needed. The noise a
primer makes when it fires is VERY loud. It is my belief (based on limited
knowledge and what I have read) that the shock wave coming from the primer
is sufficient in speed and pressure to cause detonation of the powder in a
fully loaded cartridge.

When that happens, there is no doubt that detonation has just occurred,
because the bullet that just left the rifle is traveling faster than the
speed of sound, pushed by gases expanding even faster. A very hot .22-250
round can easily exceed 4,000 fps, well over the speed of sound. It got
there by the shockwave initiated by the primer.

An exploding motor used as an igniter inside a much larger one will most
likely do so faster than the speed of sound, propagate a shock wave through
the grain of the larger one.

As Forrest Gump would say "thats all I have to say about that..."

Jeff

-----Original Message-----
From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@itc.uci.edu]On
Behalf Of William Chops Westfield
Sent: Wednesday, August 01, 2001 9:05 PM
To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
Subject: Re: [AR] Head end igniters


    >>If smokeless powder detonated, it would blow the bolt back into
    >>your face. It just burns far more rapidly under pressure inside
    >>a gun than when unconfined. Sort of like AP composite propellant.

        You just defined rapid decomposition - i.e. detonation.

well, no.  Detonation is fundamentally different from combustion, even very
fast combustion.  A detonation is propagated by a shock wave at a speed
greater than the speed of sound in the substance, while combustion is
propagated by other, slower, mechanism.  Note that being able to make a
noticable BANG without confinement is NOT an indication that a detonation
has occured (personal theory - it only means that you're evolving gas faster
than the speed of sound in AIR.)

You can find numerous arguments in the pyrotechnic crowd on whether flash
powder is capable of being detonated.  And more arguments on whether it is
capable of transitioning from burning to detonation.  And probably arguments
in the terrorist community (including would-be terrorists and B!G B0M$
crowd) as to whether you can use something like flash powder as an initiator
for a high explosive.  It's not very likely...

Still, the possibility has catastrophic results, so it's a good idea to make
sure that your ignitors can't detonate.  It makes me very nervous to hear
recomendations for using flash powder (or similar compositions) as ignitors
for composite motors.  There are all sorts of reasons to avoid flash, and
possible detonation after intentional ignition is not one of the major
reasons!  (let's talk about precautions for mixing dry static-y powders...)
In this case, we were talking about using head end ignitors as a way of
avoiding wires that might block the nozzle, right?  There wasn't any problem
with achieving ignition.  Therefore, in a head-end ignitor aimed at THIS
problem, there doesn't need to be more pyrogen, and there doesn't need to be
a hotter pyrogen.  A scrap or two of propellant oughta be more than enough.
(More exotic propellants requiring partiularly high ignition temperatures
and "external" pressurization of the combustion chamber may be a different
matter.)


BillW

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 12266 invoked from network); 2 Aug 2001 04:31:45 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 2 Aug 2001 04:31:45 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: (qmail 16753 invoked from network); 2 Aug 2001 04:34:12 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 2 Aug 2001 04:34:12 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA29003; Wed, 1 Aug 2001 21:29:15 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 93563 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 2 Aug 2001 04:28:58 +0000
Received: from localhost (dmccue@localhost) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with          ESMTP id VAA28985 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Wed, 1 Aug 2001 21:28:58          -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.LNX.4.10.10108012127240.28430-100000@itc.uci.edu>
Date:         Wed, 1 Aug 2001 21:28:58 -0700
Reply-To: "David J. McCue" <dmccue@itc.uci.edu>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "David J. McCue" <dmccue@itc.uci.edu>
Subject:      [AR] OK kids, here we go!
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

I am about to process a request to add Jerry Irvine to aRocket. If this
place turns into another RMR, I'm going home...  ;-)

-Dave McCue

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 24702 invoked from network); 2 Aug 2001 04:45:05 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 2 Aug 2001 04:45:05 -0000
Received: (qmail 22726 invoked from network); 2 Aug 2001 04:47:30 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 2 Aug 2001 04:47:30 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA29194; Wed, 1 Aug 2001 21:42:21 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 93600 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 2 Aug 2001 04:42:17 +0000
Received: from castor.ridgenet.net (IDENT:root@castor.ridgenet.net          [199.120.150.29]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA29175          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 1 Aug 2001 21:42:16 -0700
Received: from kristinscomp (pm286.ridgenet.net [204.154.247.32]) by          castor.ridgenet.net (8.11.0/8.11.0) with SMTP id f724ZdS07411; Wed, 1          Aug 2001 21:35:40 -0700
References:  <000601c11b06$94d2a0f0$0200a8c0@prestige.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <002501c11b0e$b29229a0$1b30fea9@kristinscomp>
Date:         Wed, 1 Aug 2001 21:50:46 -0700
Reply-To: "Kristin & David Hall" <thehalls@RIDGENET.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Kristin & David Hall" <thehalls@RIDGENET.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Head end igniters
Comments: To: Jeff Grady <jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

> When that happens, there is no doubt that detonation has just occurred,
> because the bullet that just left the rifle is traveling faster than the
> speed of sound, pushed by gases expanding even faster. A very hot .22-250
> round can easily exceed 4,000 fps, well over the speed of sound. It got
> there by the shockwave initiated by the primer.

Oh geez... Where to begin?  (no offense intended)

First, no, smokeless powder does not detonate during rifle operation.  Look
at it this way:  A rifle chamber may see what, 40,000 psi?  Detonations
create pressures that can be measured in *millions* of psi.  There's just no
comparison between the burning that takes place in a gun and a true
detonation.

And, no, your bullet is not coming out faster than the speed of sound.  In
fact, it is coming out significantly slower than the speed of sound.  What's
that?  The speed of sound is only 1100ish fps and the rifle bullet is moving
at 4000?  True, but it turns out that for the purposes of this conversation
the "normal" speed of sound (ie, the speed of sound in air) is irrelevent.
What *IS* relevent is the speed of sound in the working fluid (IE, the gas
you are using to push the bullet) of your gun.

It turns out that the theoretical maximum velocity allowable within a gun is
Mach 1.00000 - where the speed of sound in question is (as stated
previously) the speed of sound within the working fluid.  Now, if the
working fluid is air (pellet/BB guns), then the Mach 1.0000 just happens to
be the same Mach 1 you are familiar with.  But what if you don't use air?
Well, different gasses at different temperatures have different speeds of
sound.  More to the point:

Mach = SQRT( G * R * T)

Now, G * R is a constant that depends upon the gas in question.  T is
temperature.  Now, go back to the inside of your rifle.  Notice that powder
that is *BURNING*?  T is very large in those combustion gases.  Agree?
Thus, the speed of sound *within your rifle barrel* is very large as well.
In fact, the speed of sound in your rifle barrel will be somewhere on the
order of 9,000 fps.  In other words, your 4,000 fps bullet is moving at less
than half the speed of sound when you consider the speed of sound in the gas
that matters.

Clear as mud?

> An exploding motor used as an igniter inside a much larger one will most
> likely do so faster than the speed of sound, propagate a shock wave
through
> the grain of the larger one.

There are two types of motor explosions:  case failures and detonations.  At
work we have a rule of thumb:  "If you walk up to the test stand and it is
destroyed beyond repair, it is a case failure.  If you can't find the test
stand, it is a detonation."

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 11627 invoked from network); 2 Aug 2001 04:50:19 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 2 Aug 2001 04:50:19 -0000
Received: (qmail 24609 invoked from network); 2 Aug 2001 04:52:26 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 2 Aug 2001 04:52:26 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA29364; Wed, 1 Aug 2001 21:48:40 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 93593 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 2 Aug 2001 04:48:38 +0000
Received: from smtp-out.nrtc.net (host-216-163-120-25.nrtc.net [216.163.120.25]          (may be forged)) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA29108          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 1 Aug 2001 21:38:38 -0700
Received: from foy (dial-12-21-155-44.wfeca.net [12.21.155.44]) by          smtp-out.nrtc.net (8.9.3/8.9.1) with SMTP id AAA28026 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 2 Aug 2001 00:38:36 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0A82_01C56B69.45E4FC60"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <000a01c11b0c$3ca9c100$2c9b150c@foy>
Date:         Wed, 1 Aug 2001 23:33:09 -0500
Reply-To: "foy" <foy@WFECA.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "foy" <foy@WFECA.NET>
Subject:      [AR] night
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0A82_01C56B69.45E4FC60
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

    latter all

------=_NextPart_000_0A82_01C56B69.45E4FC60
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Diso-8859-1">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 5.50.4134.600" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; latter=20
all</FONT></DIV></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0A82_01C56B69.45E4FC60--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 19495 invoked from network); 2 Aug 2001 05:14:46 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 2 Aug 2001 05:14:46 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 3373 invoked from network); 2 Aug 2001 05:14:06 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 2 Aug 2001 05:14:06 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA29449; Wed, 1 Aug 2001 21:50:18 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 93619 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 2 Aug 2001 04:50:17 +0000
Received: from femail45.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail45.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.254.60.39]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA29431          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 1 Aug 2001 21:50:17 -0700
Received: from c1649002-a.earthlink.net ([24.20.95.67]) by          femail45.sdc1.sfba.home.com (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20          201-229-121-120-20010223) with ESMTP id          <20010802045011.SDDK12579.femail45.sdc1.sfba.home.com@c1649002-a.earthlink.net> for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>;          Wed, 1 Aug 2001 21:50:11 -0700
X-Sender: forkbomb@mail.earthlink.net
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.0.2
References: <CMM.0.90.4.996714296.billw@cypher>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <5.0.2.1.0.20010801214355.00ac2368@mail.earthlink.net>
Date:         Wed, 1 Aug 2001 21:50:07 -0700
Reply-To: "Pierce Nichols" <forkbomb@EARTHLINK.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Pierce Nichols" <forkbomb@EARTHLINK.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Head end igniters
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <000601c11b06$94d2a0f0$0200a8c0@prestige.net>

At 11:52 PM 8/1/2001 -0400, Jeff Grady wrote:
>If they all go bang, fine otherwise more adjustments are needed. The noise a
>primer makes when it fires is VERY loud. It is my belief (based on limited
>knowledge and what I have read) that the shock wave coming from the primer
>is sufficient in speed and pressure to cause detonation of the powder in a
>fully loaded cartridge.


         It's not detonation -- it's deflagration (combustion) occurring.
If it was detonation, the ideal form for propellant to take would be a
solid block within the case, because it would propagate the shock wave more
effectively :).


>When that happens, there is no doubt that detonation has just occurred,
>because the bullet that just left the rifle is traveling faster than the
>speed of sound, pushed by gases expanding even faster. A very hot .22-250
>round can easily exceed 4,000 fps, well over the speed of sound. It got
>there by the shockwave initiated by the primer.


         It's going faster than the speed of sound in *air*, but it is
*not* going faster than the speed of sound in the propellant gasses. It
turns out to be very, very difficult to make a bullet travel faster than
the speed of sound in the propellant gasses due to the formation of shock
waves in the barrel, which sap energy. This is, btw, the rationale behind
light gas guns -- the speed of sound in hot hydrogen is the highest of any
gas, allowing projectiles to be fired at very high speeds.


>An exploding motor used as an igniter inside a much larger one will most
>likely do so faster than the speed of sound, propagate a shock wave through
>the grain of the larger one.


         No, because composite propellants are incapable of sustaining a
detonation front.

         -p


Mars or Bust!
www.marssociety.com

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 24467 invoked from network); 2 Aug 2001 05:37:44 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 2 Aug 2001 05:37:44 -0000
Received: (qmail 25998 invoked from network); 2 Aug 2001 05:39:52 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 2 Aug 2001 05:39:52 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA29792; Wed, 1 Aug 2001 22:34:45 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 93673 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 2 Aug 2001 05:34:38 +0000
Received: from smtprelay1.abs.adelphia.net (smtprelay.abs.adelphia.net          [64.8.20.11]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA29774 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 1 Aug 2001 22:34:37 -0700
Received: from jlgrady ([63.124.251.47]) by smtprelay1.abs.adelphia.net          (Netscape Messaging Server 4.15) with SMTP id GHFE2W00.BYK for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 2 Aug 2001 01:32:56 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook CWS, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <000f01c11b14$d84dd580$0200a8c0@prestige.net>
Date:         Thu, 2 Aug 2001 01:34:47 -0400
Reply-To: "Jeff Grady" <jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jeff Grady" <jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Head end igniters
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <002501c11b0e$b29229a0$1b30fea9@kristinscomp>

That sounds better than yes it does or no it don't.

This article seems to contradict itself in a place or two:
http://www.comptons.com/encyclopedia/ARTICLES/0050/00628736_A.html

I concede the contest...My bladder is empty.

Time to photograph the moon and mars...

Jeff

-----Original Message-----
From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@itc.uci.edu]On
Behalf Of Kristin & David Hall
Sent: Thursday, August 02, 2001 12:51 AM
To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
Subject: Re: [AR] Head end igniters


> When that happens, there is no doubt that detonation has just occurred,
> because the bullet that just left the rifle is traveling faster than the
> speed of sound, pushed by gases expanding even faster. A very hot .22-250
> round can easily exceed 4,000 fps, well over the speed of sound. It got
> there by the shockwave initiated by the primer.

Oh geez... Where to begin?  (no offense intended)

First, no, smokeless powder does not detonate during rifle operation.  Look
at it this way:  A rifle chamber may see what, 40,000 psi?  Detonations
create pressures that can be measured in *millions* of psi.  There's just no
comparison between the burning that takes place in a gun and a true
detonation.

And, no, your bullet is not coming out faster than the speed of sound.  In
fact, it is coming out significantly slower than the speed of sound.  What's
that?  The speed of sound is only 1100ish fps and the rifle bullet is moving
at 4000?  True, but it turns out that for the purposes of this conversation
the "normal" speed of sound (ie, the speed of sound in air) is irrelevent.
What *IS* relevent is the speed of sound in the working fluid (IE, the gas
you are using to push the bullet) of your gun.

It turns out that the theoretical maximum velocity allowable within a gun is
Mach 1.00000 - where the speed of sound in question is (as stated
previously) the speed of sound within the working fluid.  Now, if the
working fluid is air (pellet/BB guns), then the Mach 1.0000 just happens to
be the same Mach 1 you are familiar with.  But what if you don't use air?
Well, different gasses at different temperatures have different speeds of
sound.  More to the point:

Mach = SQRT( G * R * T)

Now, G * R is a constant that depends upon the gas in question.  T is
temperature.  Now, go back to the inside of your rifle.  Notice that powder
that is *BURNING*?  T is very large in those combustion gases.  Agree?
Thus, the speed of sound *within your rifle barrel* is very large as well.
In fact, the speed of sound in your rifle barrel will be somewhere on the
order of 9,000 fps.  In other words, your 4,000 fps bullet is moving at less
than half the speed of sound when you consider the speed of sound in the gas
that matters.

Clear as mud?

> An exploding motor used as an igniter inside a much larger one will most
> likely do so faster than the speed of sound, propagate a shock wave
through
> the grain of the larger one.

There are two types of motor explosions:  case failures and detonations.  At
work we have a rule of thumb:  "If you walk up to the test stand and it is
destroyed beyond repair, it is a case failure.  If you can't find the test
stand, it is a detonation."

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 22806 invoked from network); 2 Aug 2001 05:47:35 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 2 Aug 2001 05:47:35 -0000
Received: (qmail 17434 invoked from network); 2 Aug 2001 05:50:02 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 2 Aug 2001 05:50:02 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA29732; Wed, 1 Aug 2001 22:28:43 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 93661 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 2 Aug 2001 05:28:29 +0000
Received: from albqpop1.albq.uswest.net (albqpop1.albq.uswest.net          [207.108.240.1]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id WAA29710          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 1 Aug 2001 22:28:29 -0700
Received: (qmail 12558 invoked by alias); 2 Aug 2001 05:27:57 -0000
Delivered-To: fixup-AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU@fixme
Received: (qmail 12528 invoked by uid 0); 2 Aug 2001 05:27:56 -0000
Received: from cc898542-a.prdise1.nm.home.com (HELO cc898542a) (65.7.151.152)          by albqpop1.albq.uswest.net with SMTP; 2 Aug 2001 05:27:56 -0000
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0A85_01C56B69.45E4FC60"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <007d01c11b14$6aa3cc60$0100a8c0@prdise1.nm.home.com>
Date:         Wed, 1 Aug 2001 23:31:43 -0600
Reply-To: "Pax" <darkspunge@USWEST.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Pax" <darkspunge@USWEST.NET>
Subject:      [AR] Catalysts for KNO3
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0A85_01C56B69.45E4FC60
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Looking for a few catalysts for KNO3 in general, or "candy" propellant. =
Would iron oxide or copper oxide do anything to a KNO3 based propellant? =
Besides the copper oxide maybe making it blue flamed? Any theoretical =
ideas, or good experience are both welcomed.

Paxton

------=_NextPart_000_0A85_01C56B69.45E4FC60
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Diso-8859-1">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 5.50.4522.1800" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Looking for a few catalysts for KNO3 in =
general, or=20
"candy" propellant. Would iron oxide or copper oxide do anything to a =
KNO3 based=20
propellant? Besides the copper oxide maybe making it blue flamed? Any=20
theoretical ideas, or good experience are both welcomed.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Paxton</FONT></DIV></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0A85_01C56B69.45E4FC60--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 16229 invoked from network); 2 Aug 2001 06:05:55 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 2 Aug 2001 06:05:55 -0000
Received: (qmail 17642 invoked from network); 2 Aug 2001 06:08:03 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 2 Aug 2001 06:08:03 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA29999; Wed, 1 Aug 2001 23:02:35 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 93719 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 2 Aug 2001 06:02:34 +0000
Received: from tcsnpop1.tcsn.uswest.net (tcsnpop1.tcsn.uswest.net          [207.108.112.1]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id XAA29980          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 1 Aug 2001 23:02:33 -0700
Received: (qmail 65628 invoked by uid 50); 2 Aug 2001 06:02:19 -0000
Delivered-To: fixup-AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU@fixme
Received: (qmail 65295 invoked by uid 0); 2 Aug 2001 06:02:08 -0000
Received: from cpe-24-221-155-19.az.sprintbbd.net (HELO tus20054)          (24.221.155.19) by tcsnpop1.tcsn.uswest.net with SMTP; 2 Aug 2001          06:02:08 -0000
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <NEBBLMGNCMMGBANIEOEHOEBACIAA.jmrosson@uswest.net>
Date:         Wed, 1 Aug 2001 23:02:18 -0700
Reply-To: <jmrosson@USWEST.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <jmrosson@USWEST.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] OK kids, here we go!
Comments: To: "David J. McCue" <dmccue@ITC.UCI.EDU>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <Pine.LNX.4.10.10108012127240.28430-100000@itc.uci.edu>

I agree
his mandatory 2 posts to every message on rmr will not be tolerated by me.
Count me gone in short order.

#->-----Original Message-----
#->From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@itc.uci.edu]On
#->Behalf Of David J. McCue
#->Sent: Wednesday, August 01, 2001 9:29 PM
#->To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
#->Subject: [AR] OK kids, here we go!
#->
#->
#->I am about to process a request to add Jerry Irvine to aRocket. If this
#->place turns into another RMR, I'm going home...  ;-)
#->
#->-Dave McCue
#->

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 29000 invoked from network); 2 Aug 2001 06:10:25 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 2 Aug 2001 06:10:25 -0000
Received: (qmail 622 invoked from network); 2 Aug 2001 06:12:00 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 2 Aug 2001 06:12:00 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA29925; Wed, 1 Aug 2001 22:55:10 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 93693 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 2 Aug 2001 05:55:08 +0000
Received: from smtp005.mailsrvcs.net (smtp005pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.184])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA29855 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 1 Aug 2001 22:45:08 -0700
Received: from [63.15.225.77] (1Cust221.tnt2.rancho-cucamonga.ca.da.uu.net          [63.15.225.221]) by smtp005.mailsrvcs.net  with ESMTP for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; id f725iap29447 Thu, 2 Aug 2001 00:44:36 -0500          (CDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: GTE/01rocket@mail.gte.net
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <a05100301b78e991d0c10@[63.15.225.77]>
Date:         Wed, 1 Aug 2001 22:44:33 -0700
Reply-To: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Subject:      [AR] new member
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Hello all.
--
Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
Opinion, the whole thing.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 6421 invoked from network); 2 Aug 2001 06:13:18 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 2 Aug 2001 06:13:18 -0000
Received: (qmail 21086 invoked from network); 2 Aug 2001 06:15:23 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 2 Aug 2001 06:15:23 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA29955; Wed, 1 Aug 2001 22:57:55 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 93711 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 2 Aug 2001 05:57:54 +0000
Received: from mta03.mail.mel.aone.net.au (mta03.mail.au.uu.net [203.2.192.83])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA29937 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 1 Aug 2001 22:57:50 -0700
Received: from unknown ([63.60.247.232]) by mta03.mail.mel.aone.net.au with          SMTP id <20010802055737.QZXH23157.mta03.mail.mel.aone.net.au@unknown>          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 2 Aug 2001 15:57:37 +1000
References: Conversation <000601c11b06$94d2a0f0$0200a8c0@prestige.net> with            last message <002501c11b0e$b29229a0$1b30fea9@kristinscomp>
Priority: Normal
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Priority: 3
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	X-MAPIextension=.TXT;
	charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>
Date:         Thu, 2 Aug 2001 05:57:54 +0000
Reply-To: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Head end igniters
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <002501c11b0e$b29229a0$1b30fea9@kristinscomp>

>
> > An exploding motor used as an igniter inside a much larger one will most
> > likely do so faster than the speed of sound, propagate a shock wave
> through
> > the grain of the larger one.
>
> There are two types of motor explosions:  case failures and detonations.
At
> work we have a rule of thumb:  "If you walk up to the test stand and it is
> destroyed beyond repair, it is a case failure.  If you can't find the test
> stand, it is a detonation."

Note: according to Mr Alfred Zaehringer "an *explosion* is a medium rate
reaction depending on the degree of confinement. This process is a surface
effect, taking place from layer to layer but never proceeding below the
surface layer".
If true, then maybe a better definition for both outcomes might be "CATO"
or "spontaneous disassembly" or as Mike-Chopper-Limpus may say "There are
various pieces of the motor now in ahhh....various places" :-)


This may sound like nit-picking, but I'm actually interested to hear any
responses to that definition.

Troy.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 10631 invoked from network); 2 Aug 2001 06:14:51 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 2 Aug 2001 06:14:51 -0000
Received: (qmail 27083 invoked from network); 2 Aug 2001 06:17:18 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 2 Aug 2001 06:17:18 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA30057; Wed, 1 Aug 2001 23:10:46 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 93731 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 2 Aug 2001 06:10:31 +0000
Received: from wrench.toolcity.net (root@wrench.toolcity.net [208.0.188.2]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA30038 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 1 Aug 2001 23:10:31 -0700
Received: from [63.169.101.37]          (dap-63-169-101-37.meadville-tnt-1.pa.toolcity.net [63.169.101.37])          by wrench.toolcity.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id CAA09436; Thu, 2          Aug 2001 02:10:22 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <v01510100b78ea95bf1e7@[63.169.102.115]>
Date:         Thu, 2 Aug 2001 02:12:41 -0500
Reply-To: "al bradley" <abradley@TOOLCITY.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "al bradley" <abradley@TOOLCITY.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] 4Ignition versus Detonation -- was Re: [AR] Head end               igniters
Comments: To: Troy Prideaux <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

> It seems that the longer barrels (as found on
>> battleships for example) could never get proper acceleration from black
>> powder, but with the slower smokeless grain it gave them tremendous range.
>>
>> It makes me wonder if there are rocket propellants based on something
>> similar to smokeless powder? Anyone know?
>
>Double base propellants.
>
>Troy.

Appropriate thought!  Is my memory correct that double base propellants are
one or more chemical variations of combining nitroglycerine and
nitrocellulose?

And this jogs my memory a bit that for some years in Europe some smokeless
artillery propellants called something like ammonipulver (sp?) were used
quite widely. Were based on ammonium nitrate and something else. It becomes
obvious to me that *propellants* in rockets and artillery have much in
common and should never be generally be viewed as destructive devices in
themselves -- Unless we have people such as Timothy McVay who are willing
to distort right and wrong to satisfy their own twisted minds.

And thanks for your comments.

best regards,
al bradley

------------------------------------------------------------------
Can you live Life with this?: "Unless there is a law, an agreement, or a
long-standing custom, No one `Deserves' Anything -- Either Good or Bad!"

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 29458 invoked from network); 2 Aug 2001 06:32:08 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 2 Aug 2001 06:32:08 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: (qmail 5150 invoked from network); 2 Aug 2001 06:33:36 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 2 Aug 2001 06:33:36 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA30222; Wed, 1 Aug 2001 23:28:58 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 93769 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 2 Aug 2001 06:28:48 +0000
Received: from wrench.toolcity.net (root@wrench.toolcity.net [208.0.188.2]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA30204 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 1 Aug 2001 23:28:48 -0700
Received: from [63.169.101.37]          (dap-63-169-101-37.meadville-tnt-1.pa.toolcity.net [63.169.101.37])          by wrench.toolcity.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id CAA13344 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 2 Aug 2001 02:28:43 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <v01510101b78eb0eab883@[63.169.101.37]>
Date:         Thu, 2 Aug 2001 02:31:03 -0500
Reply-To: "al bradley" <abradley@TOOLCITY.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "al bradley" <abradley@TOOLCITY.NET>
Subject:      [AR] bs messages -- is Re: [AR] night
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Ray -- sure wish we could not have this stuff inflicted on the list -- it
takes us nowhere -- Just as bad is the habit of dumping HTML on top of the
nonsense -- it uses up bandwidth and some folks, I hear, have to pay extra
for that.
al bradley

>    latter all
>
><!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
><HTML><HEAD>
><META http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1">
><META content="MSHTML 5.50.4134.600" name=GENERATOR>
><STYLE></STYLE>
></HEAD>
><BODY bgColor=#ffffff>
><DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; latter
>all</FONT></DIV></BODY></HTML>

------------------------------------------------------------------
Can you live Life with this?: "Unless there is a law, an agreement, or a
long-standing custom, No one `Deserves' Anything -- Either Good or Bad!"

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 1438 invoked from network); 2 Aug 2001 06:32:57 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 2 Aug 2001 06:32:57 -0000
Received: (qmail 22896 invoked from network); 2 Aug 2001 06:34:32 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 2 Aug 2001 06:34:32 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA30269; Wed, 1 Aug 2001 23:31:02 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 93778 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 2 Aug 2001 06:31:01 +0000
Received: from mta03.mail.mel.aone.net.au (mta03.mail.au.uu.net [203.2.192.83])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA30251 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 1 Aug 2001 23:31:01 -0700
Received: from unknown ([63.34.216.159]) by mta03.mail.mel.aone.net.au with          SMTP id <20010802063052.RSJD23157.mta03.mail.mel.aone.net.au@unknown>          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 2 Aug 2001 16:30:52 +1000
References: Conversation <v01510100b78ea95bf1e7@[63.169.102.115]> with last            message <v01510100b78ea95bf1e7@[63.169.102.115]>
Priority: Normal
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Priority: 3
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	X-MAPIextension=.TXT;
	charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>
Date:         Thu, 2 Aug 2001 06:31:01 +0000
Reply-To: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] 4Ignition versus Detonation -- was Re: [AR] Head end               igniters
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <v01510100b78ea95bf1e7@[63.169.102.115]>

----------
> > It seems that the longer barrels (as found on
> >> battleships for example) could never get proper acceleration from black
> >> powder, but with the slower smokeless grain it gave them tremendous
range.
> >>
> >> It makes me wonder if there are rocket propellants based on something
> >> similar to smokeless powder? Anyone know?
> >
> >Double base propellants.
> >
> >Troy.
>
> Appropriate thought!  Is my memory correct that double base propellants
are
> one or more chemical variations of combining nitroglycerine and
> nitrocellulose?

Yep.

Another one to add to the first question is Cordtite.

Troy.

>
> And this jogs my memory a bit that for some years in Europe some smokeless
> artillery propellants called something like ammonipulver (sp?) were used
> quite widely. Were based on ammonium nitrate and something else. It
becomes
> obvious to me that *propellants* in rockets and artillery have much in
> common and should never be generally be viewed as destructive devices in
> themselves -- Unless we have people such as Timothy McVay who are willing
> to distort right and wrong to satisfy their own twisted minds.
>
> And thanks for your comments.
>
> best regards,
> al bradley
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------
> Can you live Life with this?: "Unless there is a law, an agreement, or a
> long-standing custom, No one `Deserves' Anything -- Either Good or Bad!"
>
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 5729 invoked from network); 2 Aug 2001 08:11:12 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 2 Aug 2001 08:11:12 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: (qmail 8402 invoked from network); 2 Aug 2001 08:13:40 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 2 Aug 2001 08:13:40 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA30996; Thu, 2 Aug 2001 00:43:04 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 93856 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 2 Aug 2001 07:41:44 +0000
Received: from cisco.com (cypher.cisco.com [171.69.11.18]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA30975 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu,          2 Aug 2001 00:41:44 -0700
Received: (from billw@localhost) by cisco.com (8.8.8/2.6/Cisco List          Logging/8.8.8) id AAA28238; Thu, 2 Aug 2001 00:41:13 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID:  <CMM.0.90.4.996738073.billw@cypher>
Date:         Thu, 2 Aug 2001 00:41:13 PDT
Reply-To: "Bill Westfield" <billw@cisco.com>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "William Chops Westfield" <billw@cisco.com>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Catalysts for KNO3
Comments: To: Pax <darkspunge@USWEST.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  Your message of Wed, 1 Aug 2001 23:31:43 -0600

Vanadium pentoxide is supposed to be catalyst for KNO3 mixtures.
Iron sulfate can significantly decrease ignition temperature of
"baked" sugar/KNO3 (ie the baking procedure that used to make a
nice charcoal/sugar/KNO3 foam, produced only smoke when some FeSO4
was added... :-)  I don't know whether it would increase burn rate
in "candy" (but watch out for that decreased ignition temperature.
IIRC from chemistry, increased reaction rates and lowered activation
energy go hand-in-hand...)

BillW


From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 29473 invoked from network); 2 Aug 2001 09:13:24 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 2 Aug 2001 09:13:24 -0000
Received: (qmail 28691 invoked from network); 2 Aug 2001 09:15:29 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 2 Aug 2001 09:15:29 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id BAA31263; Thu, 2 Aug 2001 01:49:05 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 93896 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 2 Aug 2001 08:48:58 +0000
Received: from mta03.mail.mel.aone.net.au (mta03.mail.au.uu.net [203.2.192.83])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id BAA31245 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 2 Aug 2001 01:48:57 -0700
Received: from win2pk ([63.34.221.67]) by mta03.mail.mel.aone.net.au with SMTP          id <20010802084855.UZOT23157.mta03.mail.mel.aone.net.au@win2pk> for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 2 Aug 2001 18:48:55 +1000
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
Importance: Normal
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <NEBBJIGOELOLIBCCPKDCCEKFCBAA.geordi@c031.aone.net.au>
Date:         Thu, 2 Aug 2001 19:09:47 +1000
Reply-To: "Troy Prideaux" <geordi@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Troy Prideaux" <geordi@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Catalysts for KNO3
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <CMM.0.90.4.996738073.billw@cypher>

>-----Original Message-----
>From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@itc.uci.edu]On
>Behalf Of William Chops Westfield
>Sent: Thursday, 2 August 2001 5:41 PM
>To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
>Subject: Re: [AR] Catalysts for KNO3
>
>
>Vanadium pentoxide is supposed to be catalyst for KNO3 mixtures.
>Iron sulfate can significantly decrease ignition temperature of
>"baked" sugar/KNO3 (ie the baking procedure that used to make a
>nice charcoal/sugar/KNO3 foam, produced only smoke when some FeSO4
>was added... :-)

I've tried Ferric Oxide (69-29-2) a few years ago and found a noticeable
improvement in burn rate (for candy) at 1 atm but an even more noticeable
*reduction* under low motor pressures (<300 Psi). I didn't attempt to
investigate it much further. The strange outcome could also be attributed to
our less than perfect methods of measurement & analysis back then so don't
take those results as gospel.

  I don't know whether it would increase burn rate
>in "candy" (but watch out for that decreased ignition temperature.
>IIRC from chemistry, increased reaction rates and lowered activation
>energy go hand-in-hand...)

Yep, that's generally the case.

Troy.

>
>BillW
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 17271 invoked from network); 2 Aug 2001 10:10:46 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 2 Aug 2001 10:10:46 -0000
Received: (qmail 14436 invoked from network); 2 Aug 2001 10:13:13 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 2 Aug 2001 10:13:13 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id CAA31442; Thu, 2 Aug 2001 02:50:39 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 93912 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 2 Aug 2001 09:50:30 +0000
Received: from femail14.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail14.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.0.95.141]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id CAA31423          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 2 Aug 2001 02:50:29 -0700
Received: from hal2001 ([24.77.53.16]) by femail14.sdc1.sfba.home.com          (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20 201-229-121-120-20010223) with SMTP id          <20010802095029.EXSW18675.femail14.sdc1.sfba.home.com@hal2001> for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 2 Aug 2001 02:50:29 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <000d01c11b37$728bcb80$0400a8c0@hatjs>
Date:         Thu, 2 Aug 2001 02:42:29 -0700
Reply-To: "Jamie Morken" <jmorken@HOME.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jamie Morken" <jmorken@HOME.COM>
Subject:      [AR] pressure transducers on ebay
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Hi all,

http://cgi.ebay.com/aw-cgi/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=1622251359

"Brand new high quality pressure transducer MSP-300 from Microfused
Technology. For liquid or gas pressure, even for difficult media such as
contaminated water, steam, and mildly corrosive fluids or gases. Transducer
is operated with 10-30 VDC, output range is 1.0 to 5.0 VDC. Pressure port is
1/4" NPT. Check out manufacturer website:
http://www.msiusa.com/pressure_transducers.htm Model # MSP-300-01K-P-4N-1,
P/N 2000048"

best regards,
Jamie

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 1412 invoked from network); 2 Aug 2001 13:31:24 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 2 Aug 2001 13:31:24 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 2430 invoked from network); 2 Aug 2001 13:33:29 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 2 Aug 2001 13:33:29 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id FAA31966; Thu, 2 Aug 2001 05:05:11 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 93940 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 2 Aug 2001 12:05:04 +0000
Received: from cyclone.comcen.com.au (cyclone.comcen.com.au [203.23.236.100])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id FAA31948 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 2 Aug 2001 05:05:03 -0700
Received: (from nobody@localhost) by cyclone.comcen.com.au (8.11.1/8.11.1) id          f72C4wi46903; Thu, 2 Aug 2001 22:04:58 +1000 (EST) (envelope-from          pkelly@comcen.com.au)
X-Authentication-Warning: cyclone.comcen.com.au: nobody set sender to                         pkelly@comcen.com.au using -f
References: Conversation <000601c11b06$94d2a0f0$0200a8c0@prestige.net> with                last message <002501c11b0e$b29229a0$1b30fea9@kristinscomp>            <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
User-Agent: IMP/PHP IMAP webmail program 2.2.3
X-Originating-IP: 203.2.125.3
Message-ID:  <996753898.3b6941ea4d972@webmail.comcen.com.au>
Date:         Thu, 2 Aug 2001 22:04:58 +1000
Reply-To: "Paul Kelly" <pkelly@COMCEN.COM.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Paul Kelly" <pkelly@COMCEN.COM.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Head end igniters
Comments: To: Troy Prideaux <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>

You mis quote the man. I was there and he said.
"Various pieces of Paul's rocket are now in various places, mostly not attached
to each other!"

Paul (Hybrids can't CATO!) Kelly


Quoting Troy Prideaux <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>:

> >
> > > An exploding motor used as an igniter inside a much larger one will
> most
> > > likely do so faster than the speed of sound, propagate a shock wave
> > through
> > > the grain of the larger one.
> >
> > There are two types of motor explosions:  case failures and
> detonations.
> At
> > work we have a rule of thumb:  "If you walk up to the test stand and
> it is
> > destroyed beyond repair, it is a case failure.  If you can't find the
> test
> > stand, it is a detonation."
>
> Note: according to Mr Alfred Zaehringer "an *explosion* is a medium
> rate
> reaction depending on the degree of confinement. This process is a
> surface
> effect, taking place from layer to layer but never proceeding below the
> surface layer".
> If true, then maybe a better definition for both outcomes might be
> "CATO"
> or "spontaneous disassembly" or as Mike-Chopper-Limpus may say "There
> are
> various pieces of the motor now in ahhh....various places" :-)
>
>
> This may sound like nit-picking, but I'm actually interested to hear
> any
> responses to that definition.
>
> Troy.
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 13578 invoked from network); 2 Aug 2001 14:51:37 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 2 Aug 2001 14:51:37 -0000
Received: (qmail 27895 invoked from network); 2 Aug 2001 14:53:42 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 2 Aug 2001 14:53:42 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA32241; Thu, 2 Aug 2001 06:35:06 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 93960 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 2 Aug 2001 13:34:53 +0000
Received: from smtp3_gateway.engelhard.com ([206.128.51.10]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA32220 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu,          2 Aug 2001 06:34:52 -0700
X-Mailer: Lotus Notes Release 5.0.5  September 22, 2000
X-MIMETrack: Serialize by Router on             SMTP3_GATEWAY/EXT/ENGELHARD-EXTERNAL(Release 5.07a |May 14,             2001) at 08/02/2001 09:34:06 AM
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <OFF3C5E67B.6037B3E9-ON85256A9C.0048AC3C@engelhard.com>
Date:         Thu, 2 Aug 2001 09:15:40 -0400
Reply-To: <Brian_Roberts@ENGELHARD.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <Brian_Roberts@ENGELHARD.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] OK kids, here we go!
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Not just RMR, either.  There was a lot of biting, kicking, & screaming on
the ROL forum too, until the they pulled the plug on him.  I'd be
proactive.




                    jmrosson@USWE
                    ST.NET               To:     AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
                    Sent by:             cc:
                    Amateur              Subject:     Re: [AR] OK kids, here we go!
                    Rocketry
                    discussion
                    list
                    <AROCKET@itc.
                    uci.edu>


                    08/02/01
                    02:02 AM
                    Please
                    respond to
                    jmrosson






I agree
his mandatory 2 posts to every message on rmr will not be tolerated by me.
Count me gone in short order.

#->-----Original Message-----
#->From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@itc.uci.edu]On
#->Behalf Of David J. McCue
#->Sent: Wednesday, August 01, 2001 9:29 PM
#->To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
#->Subject: [AR] OK kids, here we go!
#->
#->
#->I am about to process a request to add Jerry Irvine to aRocket. If this
#->place turns into another RMR, I'm going home...  ;-)
#->
#->-Dave McCue
#->

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 20639 invoked from network); 2 Aug 2001 15:22:05 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 2 Aug 2001 15:22:05 -0000
Received: (qmail 29379 invoked from network); 2 Aug 2001 15:24:06 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 2 Aug 2001 15:24:06 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA32133; Thu, 2 Aug 2001 06:01:06 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 93948 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 2 Aug 2001 13:01:03 +0000
Received: from mail1.murraystate.edu (mail1.murraystate.edu [216.249.159.50])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id GAA32115 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 2 Aug 2001 06:01:02 -0700
Received: from jjcomputer.murraystate.edu (216.249.158.65) by          mail1.murraystate.edu (NPlex 5.5.031) id 3B5DE17300035E7B for          AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 2 Aug 2001 07:59:06 -0500
X-Sender: terry.mccreary@mail.murraystate.edu
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <5.1.0.14.0.20010802074303.00a20870@mail.murraystate.edu>
Date:         Thu, 2 Aug 2001 08:02:11 -0500
Reply-To: "Terry McCreary" <terry.mccreary@MURRAYSTATE.EDU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Terry McCreary" <terry.mccreary@MURRAYSTATE.EDU>
Subject:      [AR] Administrivia:  Arocket
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

It's been quite a while since this was posted, and some have asked about
unsubscribing, so...

Administrivia updated 2 Aug 2001

Arocket is a mailing list for amateur (experimental) rocketry.  It is a
fairly active list with about four hundred members worldwide.  Expect
20-100 messages daily from the list, depending on the topic; some topics
generate more response than others.  The list manager is Ray Calkins.  The
person sending this email is just a helper...

SUBSCRIBING AND UNSUBSCRIBING:
      -go to http://arocket.mid-south.net
      -select "Forum"
      -fill out the form.

Posting:

A.  Send posts to arocket@itc.uci.edu

B.  The subject is "amateur rocketry".  Other subjects such as nuclear
weaponry, prop aircraft, and the general stupidity of the Ugly American may
be popular subjects -- but are off-topic.  Please stay on-topic.

C.  Be nice.  No flames.  If you feel duty-bound to flame or to reply to
such, take it to private e-mail.

D.  Text only.  No HTML.  Go to the 'HELP' of your email program or browser
for info on how to turn off HTML.

E.  Text only.  No attachments, figures, JPGs, BMPs, programs, etc.  Keep
in mind that some poor slugs on the list have very slow access, and long
attachments can cause their ISPs to spasm and disconnect.

If you have a program or figure that might be of widespread interest,
contact the list manager to have it placed on the web site (see (G)).  That
way you won't tickoff people who don't want it, and future subscribers will
be able to get it.

F.  Archives and FAQ:  http://arocket.mid-south.net then go to the "FAQ",
"Library", or "Site Map".  Thanks to Ray, Dave McCue, Ross Borden et al for
their efforts on the list and web site.

G.  New list members:  please read the list for a week or so before
posting, to get a feel for what goes on here.  Read the FAQ to find out
what subjects are FARTs (frequently annoying recurring threads).  The
library on the Arocket site has more information than you will know what to
do with.  Take a little time to browse the library.

H.  Replying to messages:  note that the arocket email address does NOT
necessarily appear as the 'reply to' address.  You may have to delete the
original poster's address and paste the arocket address in its place.

J.  More replying to messages:  please save bandwidth, listee time, and
annoyance by snipping unrelated or unnecessary text from the original
message(s).  Fifty lines of quoted text followed by a one-line reply or
"Me-Too" is simply rude.

K.  Spamming:   may get you booted from the list.  In addition, many
listees feel rather strongly about spam, and may send large, hairy men with
tree-trunk arms to visit your home and wreak havoc on your bodily functions.

L.  Advertisements:  brief, occasional, amateur-rocketry-specific ads are
ok.  Preface the subject with "[AD]" so that those who don't want to read
it can delete it.  Frequent, long, or other-related ads:  see (K).

Announcements of group purchases not-for-profit are ok.

M.  Many persons prefer mailing lists to newsgroups because of the
goofiness that shows up on newsgroups.  Please leave rocket-related
goofiness in the newsgroup rec.models.rockets or elsewhere.

N.  Administrative problems:  if you are having problems posting, receiving
messages, etc., do not post your problems to the list.  It may make listees
unhappy, and (K) may apply.  The list manager can help you at
listmgr@arocket.mid-south.net.

Thanks!

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 13613 invoked from network); 2 Aug 2001 15:48:54 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 2 Aug 2001 15:48:54 -0000
Received: (qmail 20524 invoked from network); 2 Aug 2001 15:50:56 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 2 Aug 2001 15:50:56 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA32532; Thu, 2 Aug 2001 07:18:33 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 94006 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 2 Aug 2001 14:18:25 +0000
Received: from spsystems.net (spsystems.net [209.47.149.227]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA32514 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Thu,          2 Aug 2001 07:18:24 -0700
Received: (from henry@localhost) by spsystems.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id KAA25178;          Thu, 2 Aug 2001 10:17:45 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010802100352.24820B-100000@spsystems.net>
Date:         Thu, 2 Aug 2001 10:17:45 -0400
Reply-To: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] 4Ignition versus Detonation -- was Re: [AR] Head end              igniters
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <v01510100b78ea95bf1e7@[63.169.102.115]>

On Thu, 2 Aug 2001, al bradley wrote:
> >> It makes me wonder if there are rocket propellants based on something
> >> similar to smokeless powder? Anyone know?
> >Double base propellants.
>
> Appropriate thought!  Is my memory correct that double base propellants are
> one or more chemical variations of combining nitroglycerine and
> nitrocellulose?

More or less correct.  There are versions which substitute TNT or other
similar explosives for the nitroglycerine.  And usually other minor
ingredients have to be added as stabilizers.

Nitrocellulose by itself isn't a good propellant for either guns or
rockets -- it burns too rapidly and somewhat inconsistently.  Single-base
smokeless powders modify it by adding a variety of more-or-less inert
ingredients to gel the nitrocellulose.  Double-base powders came out of
the realization that the additives need not be inert.

Double-base propellants for rockets are not quite the same as those used
as gun propellants, of course; notably, they're usually slower-burning.
They were essentially universal in WW2 and immediately-post-WW2 solid
rockets, black powder being inferior in performance and harder to work
with.

The development of composite propellants, which are generally better
behaved and safer, pushed double-base types out of most applications.

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 22986 invoked from network); 2 Aug 2001 15:51:07 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 2 Aug 2001 15:51:07 -0000
Received: (qmail 21723 invoked from network); 2 Aug 2001 15:53:12 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 2 Aug 2001 15:53:12 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA32271; Thu, 2 Aug 2001 06:36:58 -0700
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 93968 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 2 Aug 2001 13:36:57 +0000
Received: from zcars0m9.ca.nortel.com ([47.129.242.157]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA32252; Thu, 2 Aug 2001 06:36:57 -0700
Received: from zcars04f.ca.nortel.com (zcars04f.ca.nortel.com [47.129.242.57])          by zcars0m9.ca.nortel.com (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f72DZv909598;          Thu, 2 Aug 2001 09:35:57 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from rftzy232.ca.nortel.com by zcars04f.ca.nortel.com; Thu, 2 Aug          2001 09:35:56 -0400
Received: from nortelnetworks.com (acart13p.ca.nortel.com [47.129.8.165]) by          rftzy232.ca.nortel.com with SMTP (Microsoft Exchange Internet Mail          Service Version 5.5.2653.13) id NKPL6ARA; Thu, 2 Aug 2001 09:35:42          -0400
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.77 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.19 i686)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <Pine.LNX.4.10.10108012127240.28430-100000@itc.uci.edu>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Orig: <mleech@nortelnetworks.com>
Message-ID:  <3B695771.7EEA827@nortelnetworks.com>
Date:         Thu, 2 Aug 2001 09:36:49 -0400
Reply-To: "Marcus Leech" <mleech@NORTELNETWORKS.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Marcus Leech" <mleech@NORTELNETWORKS.COM>
Organization: Nortel Networks: Information Systems
Subject:      Re: [AR] OK kids, here we go!
Comments: To: "David J. McCue" <dmccue@itc.uci.edu>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

"David J. McCue" wrote:
>
> I am about to process a request to add Jerry Irvine to aRocket. If this
> place turns into another RMR, I'm going home...  ;-)
>
> -Dave McCue
Keep in mind that this is a private e-mail list, so we aren't obligated
by law or
 anything to accept his membership.  I'm certainly nervous about him
joining.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 24367 invoked from network); 2 Aug 2001 15:51:26 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 2 Aug 2001 15:51:26 -0000
Received: (qmail 8636 invoked from network); 2 Aug 2001 15:53:54 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 2 Aug 2001 15:53:54 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA32736; Thu, 2 Aug 2001 07:25:24 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 94038 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 2 Aug 2001 14:25:23 +0000
Received: from imo-d09.mx.aol.com (imo-d09.mx.aol.com [205.188.157.41]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA32718 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Thu, 2 Aug 2001 07:25:21 -0700
Received: from Azt28@aol.com by imo-d09.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v31.9.) id          w.69.18cd3972 (4117) for <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Thu, 2 Aug 2001          10:22:44 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: AOL 5.0 for Windows sub 116
Message-ID:  <69.18cd3972.289abc34@aol.com>
Date:         Thu, 2 Aug 2001 10:22:44 EDT
Reply-To: <Azt28@AOL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <Azt28@AOL.COM>
Subject:      [AR] KNO3 in Europe?
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

 Hi,

Do anyone know about a mail order address for KNO3 in Europe?

Yvan Bozzonetti.
azt28@aol.com
In rocket we thrust.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 8453 invoked from network); 2 Aug 2001 16:02:17 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 2 Aug 2001 16:02:17 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 19296 invoked from network); 2 Aug 2001 16:03:51 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 2 Aug 2001 16:03:51 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA00320; Thu, 2 Aug 2001 07:27:02 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 94001 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 2 Aug 2001 14:27:01 +0000
Received: from izzy6.izzy.net (izzy6.izzy.net [207.158.132.178]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA32484 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu,          2 Aug 2001 07:17:01 -0700
Received: from izzy.net (host-224.subnet-140.med.umich.edu [141.214.140.224])          by izzy6.izzy.net (8.9.2/8.9.3) with ESMTP id KAA03839 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 2 Aug 2001 10:16:59 -0400 (EDT)
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.77 [en] (WinNT; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <Pine.LNX.4.10.10108012127240.28430-100000@itc.uci.edu>            <3B695771.7EEA827@nortelnetworks.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B6960CC.FC9F711@izzy.net>
Date:         Thu, 2 Aug 2001 10:16:44 -0400
Reply-To: <cscholl@IZZY.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Curtis Scholl" <cscholl@IZZY.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] OK kids, here we go!
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

To All:

  I am normally one to allow anyone the benefit of the doubt. But,
Arocket, being a private list, Ray and David are not obligated.

  Considering that ROL kicked him off is one thing. It is a model rocket
web site and NAR and TRA members and others are the primary focus. RMR
can't get rid of him because of the public nature of newsgroups. If
there were a newsgroup called rec.rockets.amateur or some such, then he
would possibly be there. We could all be there or avoid it. But there
isn't such a group.

  His own list died. I don't know why. I was a member of the list at one
time.

  This list is not TRA oriented, not NAR oriented, or IAR or MODEL
ROCKET related society. Hopefully he would have no axes to grind here.
There is no certification body to deal with such as NAR S&T or the TRA
TMT. As far as I know there is only the regulations of the state of
residence, state of safety and state of mind. We don't have any thing
that would keep him on the defensive of offensive all the time.

  He is a vendor, dealer or manufacturer or other nomenclature related
to rockets and rocket motors. This is an amateur list. He may be an
amateur with some products to sell.

  I am not the administrator or owner of this list. I would give him
enough rope to hang himself with. We will not be the ones to do the
hanging. His actions will be judged by the list owners.

Curtis Scholl

>
> "David J. McCue" wrote:
> >
> > I am about to process a request to add Jerry Irvine to aRocket. If this
> > place turns into another RMR, I'm going home...  ;-)
> >
> > -Dave McCue

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 18539 invoked from network); 2 Aug 2001 16:04:45 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 2 Aug 2001 16:04:45 -0000
Received: (qmail 20650 invoked from network); 2 Aug 2001 16:06:19 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 2 Aug 2001 16:06:19 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA32323; Thu, 2 Aug 2001 06:45:07 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 93980 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 2 Aug 2001 13:45:06 +0000
Received: from femail2.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail2.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.0.95.82]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA32305 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 2 Aug 2001 06:45:06 -0700
Received: from cc334751a ([65.13.214.65]) by femail2.sdc1.sfba.home.com          (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20 201-229-121-120-20010223) with SMTP id          <20010802134455.MSTB12480.femail2.sdc1.sfba.home.com@cc334751a>; Thu,          2 Aug 2001 06:44:55 -0700
References: <CMM.0.90.4.996714296.billw@cypher>             <5.0.2.1.0.20010801214355.00ac2368@mail.earthlink.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2462.0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <015d01c11b59$5a915dc0$6401a8c0@home.com>
Date:         Thu, 2 Aug 2001 07:45:12 -0600
Reply-To: "Brian Kosko" <bkosko1@HOME.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Brian Kosko" <bkosko1@HOME.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Head end igniters
Comments: To: Pierce Nichols <forkbomb@EARTHLINK.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

>
>          No, because composite propellants are incapable of sustaining a
> detonation front.

Unfortunately, only true most of the time. True, the critical diameter for
most composite propellants is much larger than the actual grain diameter.
The more highly catalyzed the propellant, the smaller the CD, the lower the
autoignition temp, etc. In addition, cook-offs of AP composites have been
known to detonate.

I just read somewhere, probably in the new AIAA book, that having a straight
core made a propellant more likely to undergo DDT.

Brian

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 28511 invoked from network); 2 Aug 2001 16:07:07 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 2 Aug 2001 16:07:08 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 27996 invoked from network); 2 Aug 2001 16:09:10 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 2 Aug 2001 16:09:10 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA32633; Thu, 2 Aug 2001 07:23:36 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 94014 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 2 Aug 2001 14:23:35 +0000
Received: from imo-d08.mx.aol.com (imo-d08.mx.aol.com [205.188.157.40]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA32615 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Thu, 2 Aug 2001 07:23:33 -0700
Received: from Azt28@aol.com by imo-d08.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v31.9.) id          h.96.17e7a374 (4117); Thu, 2 Aug 2001 10:22:41 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: AOL 5.0 for Windows sub 116
Message-ID:  <96.17e7a374.289abc31@aol.com>
Date:         Thu, 2 Aug 2001 10:22:41 EDT
Reply-To: <Azt28@AOL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <Azt28@AOL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Steam Rocket
Comments: To: apptech@clear.net.nz
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

HI all,

Very interesting project/program. That technology outperform zinc sulfur on
the Isp. It could be scaled up, any project in that domain? It could be a
good booster for liquid rocket or the main propulsion engine on a cheap
rocket plane...

Yvan Bozzonetti.

<< Apogee 4400 feet
 Isp = 50 approximately

         http://www.rrs.org/Projects/Launches/Steam_Rocket/steam_rocket.html




 Builder/owner:  William J. Inman
 "Team Steam": William J. Inman, Timothy C. Clifford, Jeanne Hoover, and Dale
 L. Talcott (not in attendance)
  Flight Vehicle:  "Scalded Cat"
  Length: 7.5 ft.
  Diameter: 4.5 in.
  Weight (loaded):  53.2 lbs.    (empty): 34.5 lbs.
  Type of propulsion:  hot water (or steam) >>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 21651 invoked from network); 2 Aug 2001 16:12:31 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 2 Aug 2001 16:12:32 -0000
Received: (qmail 169 invoked from network); 2 Aug 2001 16:14:31 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 2 Aug 2001 16:14:31 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA32688; Thu, 2 Aug 2001 07:23:48 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 94030 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 2 Aug 2001 14:23:46 +0000
Received: from imo-d10.mx.aol.com (imo-d10.mx.aol.com [205.188.157.42]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA32660 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Thu, 2 Aug 2001 07:23:45 -0700
Received: from Azt28@aol.com by imo-d10.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v31.9.) id          w.64.113322ca (4117) for <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Thu, 2 Aug 2001          10:22:47 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: AOL 5.0 for Windows sub 116
Message-ID:  <64.113322ca.289abc37@aol.com>
Date:         Thu, 2 Aug 2001 10:22:47 EDT
Reply-To: <Azt28@AOL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <Azt28@AOL.COM>
Subject:      [AR] ARocket ressource, Jully 2001
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Ressource, Jully

This is somewhat late, a time relativity effect on rocket I assume:-)
I think many amateurs here may have something to *market* to other amateurs.
For example if you have a lathe, and want to work on it some hours/month, you
could make many elements for amateur projects.

Well, you could sell elements difficult to find in the open market, but as I
understand it, money is scarce for many. The best option would then to start
on a swap basis. Each element would then be valued as Rocket $ (R$)
When your product has been used/tested by many here, you could shift to plain
$ value and true market, may be a way to make some money from a hobby.

Try to be innovative, for example amateur rockets work at low presure, why
not then a plastic valve?

Ressources:

***Unrestricted GPS produced by:

www.trimble.com or:
http://www.laipac.com/msg4.htm    ($79).
GUIDANCE AND CONTROL

I think that Armadillo will have most of the guidance and control issues in
hand in a year or so.  Orbit isn't on my radar for several years yet, but
if someone builds a mighty rocket in the meantime, we would be glad to help
with G&C.

TEST FACILITY :

***Ray Calkins rcalkins@itc.uci.edu :

Rocket static testing:
aRocket rate R$.05 per lb-sec + expenses
Solid/liquid/hybrid
LOx, nitrous, H2O2
horizontal to 10,000 lb thrust,
vertical to 2,000 lb thrust
Vertical to 10,000 lb thrust on advance notice

COMPOSITE TECHNOLOGY :

*** Yvan Bozzonetti azt28@aol.com :

Oven to cure high performance carbon-epoxy.
base surface: 1 x 1 m
height: from  0.4 m to 2 m with movable elements.
controled temperature from 50 deg. C to 650 deg. C
Heating power : 4 kW
Fan mixed air inside.
swap price: R$ 30 + R$ 1/hour.
suitable too for first cooking of ceramics ( nozzle throat...).

CERAMICS

***John Horton
dickcoyote@earthlink.net
Coyote Brothers Rocket Software and Vaporware
http://home.earthlink.net/~dickcoyote/

I have 3 kilns in storage, sitting next to my level 3 project, potters
wheel, 1/4 ton of clay, propellant mixer, a least 15 never used 3" casings,
big roll of carbon fiber, water skies, wetsuits, and lord knows what else.
Point is that if someone wants to fire something in So.Cal, let me know.

TOOLS:

***NEAR, contact: Jan-Erik.Ronningen@raufoss.nammo.com

we are interested in swap. We can machine
quite triky metall pieces and mix and cast advanced solid propellant
formulas. In addition we can help out with performing interal and external
ballstic calculations and analysis. We also have good knowlege in different
high temperature materials and their properities.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 29078 invoked from network); 2 Aug 2001 16:14:17 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 2 Aug 2001 16:14:17 -0000
Received: (qmail 13634 invoked from network); 2 Aug 2001 16:16:45 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 2 Aug 2001 16:16:45 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA32764; Thu, 2 Aug 2001 07:26:10 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 94046 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 2 Aug 2001 14:26:09 +0000
Received: from imo-d10.mx.aol.com (imo-d10.mx.aol.com [205.188.157.42]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA32746 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Thu, 2 Aug 2001 07:26:07 -0700
Received: from JMKrell@aol.com by imo-d10.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v31.9.) id          w.fd.9f39c5b (24898) for <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Thu, 2 Aug 2001          10:25:03 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0A88_01C56B69.4608B100"
X-Mailer: AOL 6.0 for Windows US sub 10528
Message-ID:  <fd.9f39c5b.289abcbf@aol.com>
Date:         Thu, 2 Aug 2001 10:25:03 EDT
Reply-To: <JMKrell@AOL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <JMKrell@AOL.COM>
Subject:      [AR] OT "dynamite shoot"
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0A88_01C56B69.4608B100
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Al

>occasionally there were rifle shooting contests in which a stick of
>ditching dynamite was fixed to a heavy steel plate (called a "dynamite
>shoot"). If a contestant hit a bullseye everyone knew it immediately!
>(200-300 yard shoots)

These competitions are fun. I've competed in both pistol and rife shoots with
"Blasting Gel" targets. Even a 22 can detonate the target.

John Krell


------=_NextPart_000_0A88_01C56B69.4608B100
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<HTML><FONT FACE=arial,helvetica><FONT  SIZE=2>Al
<BR>
<BR>&gt;occasionally there were rifle shooting contests in which a stick of
<BR>&gt;ditching dynamite was fixed to a heavy steel plate (called a "dynamite
<BR>&gt;shoot"). If a contestant hit a bullseye everyone knew it immediately!
<BR>&gt;(200-300 yard shoots)
<BR>
<BR>These competitions are fun. I've competed in both pistol and rife shoots with
<BR>"Blasting Gel" targets. Even a 22 can detonate the target.
<BR>
<BR>John Krell
<BR></FONT></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0A88_01C56B69.4608B100--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 18685 invoked from network); 2 Aug 2001 16:18:54 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 2 Aug 2001 16:18:54 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 27741 invoked from network); 2 Aug 2001 16:19:24 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 2 Aug 2001 16:19:24 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA00894; Thu, 2 Aug 2001 08:41:31 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 94126 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 2 Aug 2001 15:41:27 +0000
Received: from mail.aros.net (mail.aros.net [207.173.16.20]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA00876 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu,          2 Aug 2001 08:41:26 -0700
Received: from biomicro.com ([208.187.122.40]) by mail.aros.net (8.11.3/8.9.3)          with ESMTP id f72FfPV49141 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 2 Aug 2001          09:41:25 -0600 (MDT)
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.77 [en] (Win98; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <000601c11b06$94d2a0f0$0200a8c0@prestige.net>            <002501c11b0e$b29229a0$1b30fea9@kristinscomp>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B68B11F.7FA592D2@biomicro.com>
Date:         Wed, 1 Aug 2001 19:47:11 -0600
Reply-To: "Mark K. Spute" <mks@BIOMICRO.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Mark K. Spute" <mks@BIOMICRO.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Head end igniters
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Well.

There you have it.



Kristin & David Hall wrote:

> There are two types of motor explosions:  case failures and detonations.  At
> work we have a rule of thumb:  "If you walk up to the test stand and it is
> destroyed beyond repair, it is a case failure.  If you can't find the test
> stand, it is a detonation."

--
Mark K. Spute
Senior Research Engineer
BioMicro Systems Inc.

KD7IWE,  RRS

"It is difficult to say what is impossible, for the dream of yesterday
is the hope of today and the reality of tomorrow."
     Dr. Robert H. Goddard

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 635 invoked from network); 2 Aug 2001 16:21:41 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 2 Aug 2001 16:21:41 -0000
Received: (qmail 4372 invoked from network); 2 Aug 2001 16:23:46 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 2 Aug 2001 16:23:46 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA32666; Thu, 2 Aug 2001 07:23:45 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 94022 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 2 Aug 2001 14:23:44 +0000
Received: from imo-d10.mx.aol.com (imo-d10.mx.aol.com [205.188.157.42]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA32641 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Thu, 2 Aug 2001 07:23:42 -0700
Received: from Azt28@aol.com by imo-d10.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v31.9.) id          w.5b.1993ba77 (4117) for <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Thu, 2 Aug 2001          10:22:45 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: AOL 5.0 for Windows sub 116
Message-ID:  <5b.1993ba77.289abc35@aol.com>
Date:         Thu, 2 Aug 2001 10:22:45 EDT
Reply-To: <Azt28@AOL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <Azt28@AOL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] pressure transducers on ebay
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Hi,
What about pressure transducer from paint gun? Has anyone a link to one
address for such an item?

Yvan Bozzonetti.
azt28@aol.com
in rocket we thrust.

<< Hi all,

 http://cgi.ebay.com/aw-cgi/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=1622251359

 "Brand new high quality pressure transducer MSP-300 from Microfused
 Technology. >>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 11601 invoked from network); 2 Aug 2001 16:31:09 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 2 Aug 2001 16:31:09 -0000
Received: (qmail 26344 invoked from network); 2 Aug 2001 16:32:48 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 2 Aug 2001 16:32:48 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA00654; Thu, 2 Aug 2001 08:11:34 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 94097 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 2 Aug 2001 15:11:28 +0000
Received: from localhost (rcalkins@localhost) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with          ESMTP id IAA00636; Thu, 2 Aug 2001 08:11:26 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.LNX.4.10.10108020808320.618-100000@itc.uci.edu>
Date:         Thu, 2 Aug 2001 08:11:26 -0700
Reply-To: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
Subject:      Re: [AR] bs messages -- is Re: [AR] night
Comments: To: al bradley <abradley@TOOLCITY.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <v01510101b78eb0eab883@[63.169.101.37]>

Hi Al, et al

The Ideal Solution woud be for all users to turn the HTML off in their
e-mail software.  Of course, this is an unlikely scenario, despite the
obvious advanges.

I will look into a technical solution, possibly there is a way to strip
the embedded html from a message before it is posted to the list.

Ray

On Thu, 2 Aug 2001, al bradley wrote:

> Ray -- sure wish we could not have this stuff inflicted on the list -- it
> takes us nowhere -- Just as bad is the habit of dumping HTML on top of the
> nonsense -- it uses up bandwidth and some folks, I hear, have to pay extra
> for that.
> al bradley
>
> >    latter all
> >
> ><!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
> ><HTML><HEAD>
> ><META http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1">
> ><META content="MSHTML 5.50.4134.600" name=GENERATOR>
> ><STYLE></STYLE>
> ></HEAD>
> ><BODY bgColor=#ffffff>
> ><DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; latter
> >all</FONT></DIV></BODY></HTML>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------
> Can you live Life with this?: "Unless there is a law, an agreement, or a
> long-standing custom, No one `Deserves' Anything -- Either Good or Bad!"
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 4571 invoked from network); 2 Aug 2001 16:50:16 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 2 Aug 2001 16:50:16 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 14723 invoked from network); 2 Aug 2001 16:51:41 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 2 Aug 2001 16:51:41 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA00960; Thu, 2 Aug 2001 08:48:50 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 94143 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 2 Aug 2001 15:48:43 +0000
Received: from mail.aros.net (mail.aros.net [207.173.16.20]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA00942 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Thu,          2 Aug 2001 08:48:43 -0700
Received: from biomicro.com ([208.187.122.40]) by mail.aros.net (8.11.3/8.9.3)          with ESMTP id f72FmeV51602; Thu, 2 Aug 2001 09:48:41 -0600 (MDT)
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.77 [en] (Win98; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <a05100301b78e991d0c10@[63.15.225.77]>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B68B2D2.13B51812@biomicro.com>
Date:         Wed, 1 Aug 2001 19:54:26 -0600
Reply-To: "Mark K. Spute" <mks@BIOMICRO.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Mark K. Spute" <mks@BIOMICRO.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] new member
Comments: To: Jerry Irvine <01rocket@GTE.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Hi Jerry;

Welcome aboard.


Jerry Irvine wrote:
>
> Hello all.
> --
> Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
> Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
> Opinion, the whole thing.

--
Mark K. Spute
Senior Research Engineer
BioMicro Systems Inc.

KD7IWE,  RRS

"It is difficult to say what is impossible, for the dream of yesterday
is the hope of today and the reality of tomorrow."
     Dr. Robert H. Goddard

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 7309 invoked from network); 2 Aug 2001 18:57:08 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 2 Aug 2001 18:57:08 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: (qmail 27858 invoked from network); 2 Aug 2001 18:59:16 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 2 Aug 2001 18:59:16 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA02666; Thu, 2 Aug 2001 11:52:22 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 94349 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 2 Aug 2001 18:52:11 +0000
Received: from localhost (dmccue@localhost) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with          ESMTP id LAA02398 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 2 Aug 2001 11:28:24          -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.LNX.4.10.10108021123070.1658-100000@itc.uci.edu>
Date:         Thu, 2 Aug 2001 11:28:24 -0700
Reply-To: "David J. McCue" <dmccue@itc.uci.edu>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "David J. McCue" <dmccue@itc.uci.edu>
Subject:      Re: [AR] OK kids, here we go!
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <3B695771.7EEA827@nortelnetworks.com>

Indeed, it is Ray's list, and we all are responsible for following his
rules, reasonable and few they may be - I'm just the administrivia guy.
Without speaking for him, I would expect that even patient, tolerant Ray
is quite willing to draw the line at repeated bad behavior.

-Dave Mc

On Thu, 2 Aug 2001, Marcus Leech wrote:

> "David J. McCue" wrote:
> >
> > I am about to process a request to add Jerry Irvine to aRocket. If this
> > place turns into another RMR, I'm going home...  ;-)
> >
> > -Dave McCue
> Keep in mind that this is a private e-mail list, so we aren't obligated
> by law or
>  anything to accept his membership.  I'm certainly nervous about him
> joining.
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 26522 invoked from network); 2 Aug 2001 19:01:27 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 2 Aug 2001 19:01:27 -0000
Received: (qmail 3015 invoked from network); 2 Aug 2001 19:03:57 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 2 Aug 2001 19:03:57 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA02688; Thu, 2 Aug 2001 11:52:39 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 94236 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 2 Aug 2001 18:52:38 +0000
Received: from femail12.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail12.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.0.95.108]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA01458          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 2 Aug 2001 09:40:07 -0700
Received: from cc334751a ([65.13.214.65]) by femail12.sdc1.sfba.home.com          (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20 201-229-121-120-20010223) with SMTP id          <20010802163951.QKQH19709.femail12.sdc1.sfba.home.com@cc334751a>;          Thu, 2 Aug 2001 09:39:51 -0700
References: <000601c11b06$94d2a0f0$0200a8c0@prestige.net>                       <002501c11b0e$b29229a0$1b30fea9@kristinscomp>             <3B68B11F.7FA592D2@biomicro.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2462.0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <020601c11b71$c8913b20$6401a8c0@home.com>
Date:         Thu, 2 Aug 2001 10:40:04 -0600
Reply-To: "Brian Kosko" <bkosko1@HOME.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Brian Kosko" <bkosko1@HOME.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Head end igniters
Comments: To: "Mark K. Spute" <mks@BIOMICRO.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

A good rule of thumb! Thanks Dave.

I can relate. I noticed the same sort of thing when I first popped off some
real explosive while I was in the Army. My buddy and I decided to set off a
couple of shape charges. I'd convinced the CO we Lt's needed a little actual
hands-on explosives experience.

We got a fifteen pound shaped charge, it had ten pounds of Comp B as I
recall, and headed for the hills. This shape charge was made to destroy our
small nukes. We made a small sandbag wall about three feet long and two feet
high and placed the charge behind it.. We lit the fuse and ran and hid
behind our vehicle. A loud boom and an impressively long, and quite
inadvertant, shower of rocks followed. When we went back to check out the
site our sandbagged wall was GONE. Not just blown apart, but gone as in
disintegrated. The shape charge did make a near perfect cylindrical hole
about four feet deep in our very rocky Turkish soil. Quite impressive.
Yessiree, a detonation is a very different beast.

Brian

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 10002 invoked from network); 2 Aug 2001 19:04:29 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 2 Aug 2001 19:04:29 -0000
Received: (qmail 13977 invoked from network); 2 Aug 2001 19:06:35 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 2 Aug 2001 19:06:35 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA02796; Thu, 2 Aug 2001 12:01:09 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 94416 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 2 Aug 2001 19:01:07 +0000
Received: from Blastzone.com (consumersinterest.com [207.195.143.118] (may be          forged)) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA02778 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 2 Aug 2001 12:01:07 -0700
Received: from deputydog [131.107.3.84] by Blastzone.com with ESMTP          (SMTPD32-6.04) id A6C7180600AA; Thu, 02 Aug 2001 12:15:19 -0700
References: <000601c11b06$94d2a0f0$0200a8c0@prestige.net>                                  <002501c11b0e$b29229a0$1b30fea9@kristinscomp>                        <3B68B11F.7FA592D2@biomicro.com>             <020601c11b71$c8913b20$6401a8c0@home.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2462.0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <016301c11b85$581d7390$730c379d@redmond.corp.microsoft.com>
Date:         Thu, 2 Aug 2001 12:00:06 -0700
Reply-To: "Greg Deputy" <greg@BLASTZONE.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Greg Deputy" <greg@BLASTZONE.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Head end igniters
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Well, if we're sharing high explosives stories...

We had a guy in our local rocket group who was in the blasting business, and
got out.  He had some excess inventory to dispose of.  The landowner where
we held launches had no problem (was actually excited) with him disposing of
it on his property.  He dug a smal hole, dropped in about 6 'sticks' of
emulex with a cap, and poured about 100lbs of ANFO blasting explosives on
top.  Hit the button from a few hundred yards back.  Wow.  I've done a lot
of playing (in my earlier years) with flash, salutes, etc...  Not even
close.


----- Original Message -----
From: "Brian Kosko" <bkosko1@HOME.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Thursday, August 02, 2001 9:40 AM
Subject: Re: [AR] Head end igniters


> A good rule of thumb! Thanks Dave.
>
> I can relate. I noticed the same sort of thing when I first popped off
some
> real explosive while I was in the Army. My buddy and I decided to set off
a
> couple of shape charges. I'd convinced the CO we Lt's needed a little
actual
> hands-on explosives experience.
>
> We got a fifteen pound shaped charge, it had ten pounds of Comp B as I
> recall, and headed for the hills. This shape charge was made to destroy
our
> small nukes. We made a small sandbag wall about three feet long and two
feet
> high and placed the charge behind it.. We lit the fuse and ran and hid
> behind our vehicle. A loud boom and an impressively long, and quite
> inadvertant, shower of rocks followed. When we went back to check out the
> site our sandbagged wall was GONE. Not just blown apart, but gone as in
> disintegrated. The shape charge did make a near perfect cylindrical hole
> about four feet deep in our very rocky Turkish soil. Quite impressive.
> Yessiree, a detonation is a very different beast.
>
> Brian
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 16386 invoked from network); 2 Aug 2001 19:19:42 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 2 Aug 2001 19:19:42 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 10050 invoked from network); 2 Aug 2001 19:22:12 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 2 Aug 2001 19:22:12 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA03093; Thu, 2 Aug 2001 12:16:13 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 94471 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 2 Aug 2001 19:16:11 +0000
Received: from m1.jersey.juno.com (m1.jersey.juno.com [64.136.16.64]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA03075 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 2 Aug 2001 12:16:10 -0700
Received: from cookie.juno.com by cookie.juno.com for          <"H3WK6e6N+bsCVJQMHM9sZNbooGMkb7ya8WXd9VSotI6BdDdqAeOlSw==">
Received: (from kc2csh@juno.com) by m1.jersey.juno.com (queuemail) id GBU2A49Q;          Thu, 02 Aug 2001 15:15:45 EDT
X-Mailer: Juno 4.0.11
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Juno-Line-Breaks: 0-3,5-10,12-14,16-41
X-Juno-Att: 0
X-Juno-RefParts: 0
Message-ID:  <20010802.151943.-3903049.0.kc2csh@juno.com>
Date:         Thu, 2 Aug 2001 15:00:20 -0400
Reply-To: <kc2csh@JUNO.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <kc2csh@JUNO.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] OK kids, here we go!
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

  I agree in the strongest possible terms.
  Welcome Jerry!
                                     Jay

On Thu, 2 Aug 2001 10:16:44 -0400 Curtis Scholl <cscholl@IZZY.NET>
writes:
> To All:
>
>   I am normally one to allow anyone the benefit of the doubt. But,
> Arocket, being a private list, Ray and David are not obligated.
>
>   Considering that ROL kicked him off is one thing. It is a model
rocket
> web site and NAR and TRA members and others are the primary focus.  RMR
> can't get rid of him because of the public nature of newsgroups. If
> there were a newsgroup called rec.rockets.amateur or some such, then
he
> would possibly be there. We could all be there or avoid it. But
> there isn't such a group.



>   This list is not TRA oriented, not NAR oriented, or IAR or MODEL
> ROCKET related society. Hopefully he would have no axes to grind
> here.
> There is no certification body to deal with such as NAR S&T or the
> TRA
> TMT. As far as I know there is only the regulations of the state of
> residence, state of safety and state of mind. We don't have any
> thing
> that would keep him on the defensive of offensive all the time.
>
>   He is a vendor, dealer or manufacturer or other nomenclature
> related
> to rockets and rocket motors. This is an amateur list. He may be an
> amateur with some products to sell.
>
>   I am not the administrator or owner of this list. I would give him
> enough rope to hang himself with. We will not be the ones to do the
> hanging. His actions will be judged by the list owners.
>
> Curtis Scholl
>
________________________________________________________________
GET INTERNET ACCESS FROM JUNO!
Juno offers FREE or PREMIUM Internet access for less!
Join Juno today!  For your FREE software, visit:
http://dl.www.juno.com/get/tagj.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 17457 invoked from network); 2 Aug 2001 19:49:17 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 2 Aug 2001 19:49:17 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 22032 invoked from network); 2 Aug 2001 19:51:17 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 2 Aug 2001 19:51:17 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA03321; Thu, 2 Aug 2001 12:44:09 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 94510 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 2 Aug 2001 19:44:07 +0000
Received: from ae.poss.com (adam-m.poss.com [198.70.184.161]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA03261 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Thu,          2 Aug 2001 12:34:06 -0700
Received: from perfectorder.com ([198.70.184.156]) by ae.poss.com (Netscape          Messaging Server 4.1) with ESMTP id GHGH0U00.8JO for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Thu, 2 Aug 2001 15:34:06 -0400
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (X11; I; SunOS 5.8 sun4u)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B69AB64.C3A7DD44@perfectorder.com>
Date:         Thu, 2 Aug 2001 15:35:00 -0400
Reply-To: "Doug Bell" <dbell@PERFECTORDER.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Doug Bell" <dbell@PERFECTORDER.COM>
Organization: Perfect Order
Subject:      [AR] X-price article
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

There is an article about one of the X-Prize competitors (the Canadian
DaVinci project) in this article:

<http://www.nationalpost.com/home/story.html?f=/stories/20010802/634478.html>

I find it mildly amusing that the Canadian space agencies are actually
working with them in order to help them prepare.  So different from here
in the US, where to get single ride on a NASA centrifuge for such a
purpose would be a huge effort.

Doug Bell

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 20778 invoked from network); 2 Aug 2001 20:03:57 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 2 Aug 2001 20:03:57 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 17455 invoked from network); 2 Aug 2001 20:01:11 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 2 Aug 2001 20:01:11 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA03454; Thu, 2 Aug 2001 12:56:38 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 94538 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 2 Aug 2001 19:56:23 +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (f42.pav1.hotmail.com [64.4.31.42]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA03429 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu,          2 Aug 2001 12:56:23 -0700
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Thu,          2 Aug 2001 12:55:52 -0700
Received: from 63.87.137.173 by pv1fd.pav1.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Thu, 02          Aug 2001 19:55:52 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [63.87.137.173]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 02 Aug 2001 19:55:52.0547 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[22744B30:01C11B8D]
Message-ID:  <F42LQZwbVcxjXHzfAbP0000bf1b@hotmail.com>
Date:         Thu, 2 Aug 2001 12:55:52 -0700
Reply-To: "Brian Reddeman" <breddeman@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Brian Reddeman" <breddeman@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      [AR] H20/Na Hybrid Motor
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

A few days ago I made a real simple Hybrid motor using H20 as the oxidizer
and and Sodium as the fuel. Much to my annoyance, the nozel blew out
resulting in a large volume of steam. Has anyone experimented with a more
stable chemical variant?

_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 8817 invoked from network); 2 Aug 2001 20:08:07 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 2 Aug 2001 20:08:07 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 28402 invoked from network); 2 Aug 2001 20:04:07 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 2 Aug 2001 20:04:07 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA03477; Thu, 2 Aug 2001 12:56:48 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 94546 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 2 Aug 2001 19:56:47 +0000
Received: from falcon.mail.pas.earthlink.net (falcon.mail.pas.earthlink.net          [207.217.120.74]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA03443          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 2 Aug 2001 12:56:24 -0700
Received: from earthlink.net (dialup-209.247.138.210.Dial1.SanJose1.Level3.net          [209.247.138.210]) by falcon.mail.pas.earthlink.net          (EL-8_9_3_3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id MAA02231 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>;          Thu, 2 Aug 2001 12:56:22 -0700 (PDT)
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (Win98; I)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B69B384.FF025F2F@earthlink.net>
Date:         Thu, 2 Aug 2001 13:09:40 -0700
Reply-To: <thomgaf@energyrs.com>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Thomas M. Mcgaffey" <energyrelease@EARTHLINK.NET>
Subject:      [AR] New Member
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Hi Jerry,

Welcome aboard.   Hope you enjoy the list,  I do, sometimes.

Thom

Thomas M. McGaffey
Energy Release Systems
thomgaf@energyrs.com
408-226-7502
San Jose, Kalifornia

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 28278 invoked from network); 2 Aug 2001 20:20:08 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 2 Aug 2001 20:20:08 -0000
Received: (qmail 29212 invoked from network); 2 Aug 2001 20:16:29 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 2 Aug 2001 20:16:29 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA03618; Thu, 2 Aug 2001 13:11:28 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 94574 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 2 Aug 2001 20:11:25 +0000
Received: from smtp3_gateway.engelhard.com ([206.128.51.10]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA03600 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu,          2 Aug 2001 13:11:25 -0700
X-Mailer: Lotus Notes Release 5.0.5  September 22, 2000
X-MIMETrack: Serialize by Router on             SMTP3_GATEWAY/EXT/ENGELHARD-EXTERNAL(Release 5.07a |May 14,             2001) at 08/02/2001 04:10:39 PM
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <OFC12C3B42.655B6DA4-ON85256A9C.006E0730@engelhard.com>
Date:         Thu, 2 Aug 2001 16:05:10 -0400
Reply-To: <Brian_Roberts@ENGELHARD.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <Brian_Roberts@ENGELHARD.COM>
Subject:      [AR] Cheaper Carbon fiber?
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Mildly interesting, I thought.
BDR

Kick-starting composites.

It is sort of a Catch-22 situation. People have long talked about carbon
fiber-- based composite materials as being as beneficial to automotive
components as they are to skis and tennis rackets and even stealthy
aircraft. In fact, in some ways, they could be even more beneficial in
automotive, when you take into account the facts that there isn't a
corrosion issue and compared to steel, the composite component can be as
little as one-fifth the mass but without reductions in strength or
stiffness. But there has always been a bit of a snag with regard to
automotive. OK: not a bit of a snag, but a big snag. Cost.

With the exceptions of a handful of specialty applications, carbon- fiber
is seen in greater abundance on the F1 circuit than on Woodward Avenue.
Which is part of the Catch-22 nature: As long as few people use it, it will
remain expensive. The cost won't come down until more people use it. But
since it costs so much (20X steel-or more), only a few people will use it.

A large factor in this cost equation is capacity to produce the material in
automotive quantities. And the production facilities needed to produce the
materials are capital intensive.

John W. Powers, automotive development manager for the Carbon Fibers
business of Conoco Inc. (Houston, TX), says that the energy company, which
has developed proprietary carbon fiber technology that allows it to produce
comparatively lower-cost carbon fibers (they use mesophase pitch rather
than the more common PAN-or polyacrylonitrile- material), wants to show the
auto industry (as well as other interested parties) that they are serious
about providing carbon fibers by building a new plant in Ponca City, OK,
that is scheduled to come on line early in 2002. This plant will have the
capacity to produce eight million pounds of carbon fiber per year. While
Powers admits that when the material comes into its own that capacity will
be small, that single plant will be a measurable boost in the world's
overall production of carbon fibers. Applications range from body panels to
carbon-to-carbon brakes.

Alternative aluminum alloy.

Speaking of light-weight materials, according to Hsien-Yang Yeh, a
professor in the Department of Mechanical Engineering, California State
University, Long Beach, some of his colleagues at that school as well as a
professor from East China University and he have developed a process that
permits the casting of aluminum silicon alloys for applications including
pistons, cylinder heads, blocks, and wear-parts. The process, for which a
patent is pending, causes the silicon particles that are used In the
alloying to become nodulized and to have an average size of not more than
40 microns. The professor says that ordinarily, when silicon is alloyed in
aluminum there is a tendency for it to form in the shape of needles, which
can lead to crack propagation.

Because of the new process, the ends are blunt. Although he acknowledges
that there is a price premium, the wear resistance is said to be greatly
enhanced (by as much as 100% compared with traditional AI-Si alloys, he
says), so the cost differential could be offset.

Copyright Gardner Publications, Inc. Jul 2001

(C) 2001, YellowBrix, Inc. Company MultiLinkTM

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 8585 invoked from network); 2 Aug 2001 20:29:25 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 2 Aug 2001 20:29:25 -0000
Received: (qmail 18356 invoked from network); 2 Aug 2001 20:31:29 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 2 Aug 2001 20:31:29 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA03822; Thu, 2 Aug 2001 13:24:41 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 94611 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 2 Aug 2001 20:24:39 +0000
Received: from dune.gnc.net (root@dune.gnc.net [207.203.72.4]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA03803 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu,          2 Aug 2001 13:24:38 -0700
Received: from beowulf (sw2-29.gnc.net [207.203.72.109]) by dune.gnc.net          (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id QAA10624 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 2          Aug 2001 16:24:38 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <LPBBKJMJEOFKAMFJJNNHOECMCGAA.landofgrey@gnc.net>
Date:         Thu, 2 Aug 2001 16:24:29 -0400
Reply-To: <landofgrey@gnc.net>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Matthew Travis" <landofgrey@gnc.net>
Subject:      Re: [AR] X-price article
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <3B69AB64.C3A7DD44@perfectorder.com>

The US government isn't in the business of generally providing assistance to
amateurs, for space, medicine, environmental or any kind of projects (it's
not just a NASA thing). The problem is that spending money helping
non-professionals is considered by politicians and the vast majority of the
voting public to be an inefficient use and even waste of valuable taxpayer
dollars (i.e. joe schmoe says "not with my dollars"). That sentiment killed
Apollo, so it's no wonder amateurs don't have it easy. If you are working in
partnership with a University, then it isn't unreasonable to get a grant or
MOU with a government agency for use of facilities. The main drawback is the
usual necessity of making anbd submitting a proposal and working through the
red tape, which all takes time. That is necessary since there are always far
more people wanting government help than can be accomodated. Now, on the
other hand, if you are a private (even if non-commercial) concern and have
the money, it is no big deal to book time for use and payment of facilities
such as wind tunnels. Lastly, in regards to the government picking specific
groups and providing help on an individual basis, this is not nearly as
practical as in some other countries. Why? Because in the U.S., when dealing
with the government, particularly with NASA, DOD, and DOE, without special,
specific exemption (which is not easy to get), the government agency is
required to put out competitive bids for all contracts, except under special
circumstances (such as company x is the only company that makes a particular
product, in which case competition would be pointless). NASA does accept
unsolicitied proposals. In fact, right now I am preparing one for submission
to KSC. But that has to follow certain guidelines. And the simple fact is
that the money isn't usually in the budget for the government to make any
significant contribution to an amateur or small business effort, outside of
the normal procurement process for things that have to be purchased anyway.
Considering the possibility of spending time on a wind tunnel that costs
upwards of $1 million an hour to run, asking NASA to let "me and my group of
10 amateur scientists" use the tunnel for a few hours would be, in essence,
asking for a $3 million donation from NASA. And two months later, Sen.
Mikulski would be screaming on the Senate floor about how Dan Goldin just
gave away millions of dollars with no return to the government all the while
the space station has a $4 billion overrun. Blah Blah. Obviously, the whole
idea of asking for a donation from NASA is pretty much a non-starter.
Especially since there are plenty of paying customers to fill up all
available time in the facilities.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU]On
> Behalf Of Doug Bell
> Sent: Thursday, August 02, 2001 3:35 PM
> To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
> Subject: [AR] X-price article
>
>
> There is an article about one of the X-Prize competitors (the Canadian
> DaVinci project) in this article:
>
> <http://www.nationalpost.com/home/story.html?f=/stories/20010802/6
> 34478.html>
>
> I find it mildly amusing that the Canadian space agencies are actually
> working with them in order to help them prepare.  So different from here
> in the US, where to get single ride on a NASA centrifuge for such a
> purpose would be a huge effort.
>
> Doug Bell
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 25414 invoked from network); 2 Aug 2001 20:33:40 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 2 Aug 2001 20:33:40 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 20021 invoked from network); 2 Aug 2001 20:35:36 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 2 Aug 2001 20:35:36 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA03870; Thu, 2 Aug 2001 13:29:52 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 94621 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 2 Aug 2001 20:29:50 +0000
Received: from melete.ch.intel.com (chfdns02.ch.intel.com [143.182.246.25]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA03851; Thu, 2 Aug 2001          13:29:49 -0700
Received: from snmeng1.rr.intel.com (snmeng1.rr.intel.com [128.215.231.11]) by          melete.ch.intel.com (8.9.1a+p1/8.9.1/d: relay.m4,v 1.41 2001/07/09          21:06:22 root Exp $) with ESMTP id UAA04549; Thu, 2 Aug 2001 20:29:48          GMT
Received: from snmeng30.rr.intel.com (snmeng30.rr.intel.com [128.215.52.76]) by          snmeng1.rr.intel.com (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id OAA17223; Thu, 2          Aug 2001 14:26:58 -0600 (MDT)
Received: from snmeng30.rr.intel.com (snmeng30.rr.intel.com [128.215.52.76]) by          snmeng30.rr.intel.com (8.9.1a/8.9.1/d: client.m4,v 1.3 1998/09/29          16:36:11 sedayao Exp sedayao $) with SMTP id OAA02609; Thu, 2 Aug          2001 14:26:54 -0600 (MDT)
X-Mailer: dtmail 1.2.1 CDE Version 1.2.1 SunOS 5.6 sun4m sparc
X-Sun-Text-Type: ascii
Message-ID:  <200108022026.OAA02609@snmeng30.rr.intel.com>
Date:         Thu, 2 Aug 2001 14:26:54 -0600
Reply-To: "Ray Calkins 100660207" <rcalkins@snmeng1.rr.intel.com>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Ray Calkins 100660207" <rcalkins@snmeng1.rr.intel.com>
Subject:      Re: [AR] OK kids, here we go!
Comments: To: dmccue@ITC.UCI.EDU
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

> Dave said:
> ...I would expect that even patient, tolerant Ray
> is quite willing to draw the line at repeated bad
> behavior.

Those that have been here for a while will note that
I have NO tolerance when it comes to flaming and/or
baiting/trolling.  If you engage in this behaivor,
you get a _single_ gentle reminder to apologize
publicly to the offended person(s) and the list as a
whole.  If you feel it unwarranted, you have the
choice to freely leave the list on your own or be
manually removed.

Now that everybody's had their say, note that Mr.
Irvine has made and successfully fired a greater
total impulse than about 90% of the people on the
list.  I think many aRocketeers can learn a great
deal from him in the science and art of motor making,
and hope he can learn a great deal from the other
aRocketeers.

Welcome, Jerry!

Ray Calkins
rcalkins@snmeng1.rr.intel.com
raymond.calkins@intel.com


From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 9897 invoked from network); 2 Aug 2001 21:13:07 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 2 Aug 2001 21:13:07 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 18564 invoked from network); 2 Aug 2001 21:14:44 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 2 Aug 2001 21:14:44 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA04155; Thu, 2 Aug 2001 14:06:11 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 94663 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 2 Aug 2001 21:06:10 +0000
Received: from ae.poss.com (adam-m.poss.com [198.70.184.161]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA04059 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu,          2 Aug 2001 13:55:13 -0700
Received: from perfectorder.com ([198.70.184.156]) by ae.poss.com (Netscape          Messaging Server 4.1) with ESMTP id GHGKS600.VJ3 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 2 Aug 2001 16:55:18 -0400
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (X11; I; SunOS 5.8 sun4u)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <OFC12C3B42.655B6DA4-ON85256A9C.006E0730@engelhard.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B69BE6E.924B969D@perfectorder.com>
Date:         Thu, 2 Aug 2001 16:56:14 -0400
Reply-To: "Doug Bell" <dbell@PERFECTORDER.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Doug Bell" <dbell@PERFECTORDER.COM>
Organization: Perfect Order
Subject:      Re: [AR] Cheaper Carbon fiber?
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

I spent 5 years building three solar-powered racing vehicles, with one of the
models being entirely composite except for the suspension arms, which were
aluminum (for time's sake).  I discovered the potential that is in composites,
and the possibilities they hold, especially in unusual applications.  During
that time though, the price of carbon did not go down, it actually went up.
The price of a yard of prepreg 6K carbon twill in '96 was about $40, but in
'98 was over $60.  The reason was that the number of carbon fiber suppliers
was dwindling.  I would love to see the industry grow even more than it is, to
bring down the cost again.  Also, part of the reason that composites can be so
expensive is because of the molds that need to be built for every part, and
the cost that goes into them can be almost as much as the part itself.

I am actually in the process of trying to get some startup funding to build a
business based exactly on that:  Getting carbon fiber into the mainstream as
best as possible.  I am starting a company to build composite products aimed
at the performance and specialty market.  I am planning to start out building
hoods, body panels and such for import-type street performance cars because it
is an open market, but would love to expand into other applications (i.e.
rockets of all types).  My goal is to make the applications of composites more
common.  Also, by composites in this term I mean fiberglass, Kevlar, boron,
and graphite fiber laminates (with and without core material) etc., because in
the general term composites can also mean fiber-reinforced polymers, which are
actually becoming more common then you may think.

Now all I need to do get some help with initial funding, because the facility
startup and tooling costs can be kind of steep (and because I do my job
because I like it, not because it pays well).

Doug Bell

P.S. [AD] If anyone's interested in doing composites on some of their projects
I have been reading about, drop me a line.


Brian_Roberts@ENGELHARD.COM wrote:

> Mildly interesting, I thought.
> BDR
>
> Kick-starting composites.
>
> It is sort of a Catch-22 situation. People have long talked about carbon
> fiber-- based composite materials as being as beneficial to automotive
> components as they are to skis and tennis rackets and even stealthy
> aircraft. In fact, in some ways, they could be even more beneficial in
> automotive, when you take into account the facts that there isn't a
> corrosion issue and compared to steel, the composite component can be as
> little as one-fifth the mass but without reductions in strength or
> stiffness. But there has always been a bit of a snag with regard to
> automotive. OK: not a bit of a snag, but a big snag. Cost.
>
> With the exceptions of a handful of specialty applications, carbon- fiber
> is seen in greater abundance on the F1 circuit than on Woodward Avenue.
> Which is part of the Catch-22 nature: As long as few people use it, it will
> remain expensive. The cost won't come down until more people use it. But
> since it costs so much (20X steel-or more), only a few people will use it.
>

<snip>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 12198 invoked from network); 2 Aug 2001 21:13:38 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 2 Aug 2001 21:13:38 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 18804 invoked from network); 2 Aug 2001 21:15:16 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 2 Aug 2001 21:15:16 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA04128; Thu, 2 Aug 2001 14:05:18 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 94667 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 2 Aug 2001 21:05:13 +0000
Received: from mail.aros.net (mail.aros.net [207.173.16.20]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA04110 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu,          2 Aug 2001 14:05:13 -0700
Received: from biomicro.com ([208.187.122.40]) by mail.aros.net (8.11.3/8.9.3)          with ESMTP id f72L5C873741 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 2 Aug 2001          15:05:12 -0600 (MDT)
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.77 [en] (Win98; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <200108022026.OAA02609@snmeng30.rr.intel.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B69C0E0.C3818303@biomicro.com>
Date:         Thu, 2 Aug 2001 15:06:40 -0600
Reply-To: "Mark K. Spute" <mks@BIOMICRO.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Mark K. Spute" <mks@BIOMICRO.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] OK kids, here we go!
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

I agree.  In spite of some bad press, deserved or not, he also has a
reputation as a serious, experienced, knowlegable rocketeer.  I have
seen some of the vehicles Jerry has launched and hope that he will share
his knowledge and experience with those of us who are trying to amass
more knowledge and experience.

I've seen him launch at MTA and I'd like to invite him to launch up here
in Utah.

I'll say it again; Welcome aboard Jerry.

Ray Calkins 100660207 wrote:

[snip]

> Now that everybody's had their say, note that Mr.
> Irvine has made and successfully fired a greater
> total impulse than about 90% of the people on the
> list.  I think many aRocketeers can learn a great
> deal from him in the science and art of motor making,
> and hope he can learn a great deal from the other
> aRocketeers.
>
> Welcome, Jerry!
>
> Ray Calkins
> rcalkins@snmeng1.rr.intel.com
> raymond.calkins@intel.com

--
Mark K. Spute
Senior Research Engineer
BioMicro Systems Inc.

KD7IWE,  RRS

"It is difficult to say what is impossible, for the dream of yesterday
is the hope of today and the reality of tomorrow."
     Dr. Robert H. Goddard

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 20422 invoked from network); 2 Aug 2001 21:15:29 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 2 Aug 2001 21:15:29 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 17005 invoked from network); 2 Aug 2001 21:17:57 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 2 Aug 2001 21:17:57 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA04192; Thu, 2 Aug 2001 14:06:52 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 94682 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 2 Aug 2001 21:06:51 +0000
Received: from mail1.murraystate.edu (mail1.murraystate.edu [216.249.159.50])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id OAA04173 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 2 Aug 2001 14:06:51 -0700
Received: from jjcomputer.murraystate.edu (216.249.150.117) by          mail1.murraystate.edu (NPlex 5.5.031) id 3B5DE17300038707 for          AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 2 Aug 2001 16:04:57 -0500
X-Sender: terry.mccreary@mail.murraystate.edu
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
References: <002501c11b0e$b29229a0$1b30fea9@kristinscomp>            <000601c11b06$94d2a0f0$0200a8c0@prestige.net>            <002501c11b0e$b29229a0$1b30fea9@kristinscomp>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <5.1.0.14.0.20010802070737.01dad870@mail.murraystate.edu>
Date:         Thu, 2 Aug 2001 16:08:10 -0500
Reply-To: "Terry McCreary" <terry.mccreary@MURRAYSTATE.EDU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Terry McCreary" <terry.mccreary@MURRAYSTATE.EDU>
Subject:      [AR] Explosion, was:  [AR] Head end igniters
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC8 22>

At 05:57 AM 8/2/01 +0000, you wrote:
> >
> > > An exploding motor used as an igniter inside a much larger one will most
> > > likely do so faster than the speed of sound, propagate a shock wave
> > through
> > > the grain of the larger one.
> >
> > There are two types of motor explosions:  case failures and detonations.
>At
> > work we have a rule of thumb:  "If you walk up to the test stand and it is
> > destroyed beyond repair, it is a case failure.  If you can't find the test
> > stand, it is a detonation."

I like that one!  Thanks, Dave.

>Note: according to Mr Alfred Zaehringer "an *explosion* is a medium rate
>reaction depending on the degree of confinement. This process is a surface
>effect, taking place from layer to layer but never proceeding below the
>surface layer".

How's about this'un?

"Much of the controversy surrounding explosives and propellants has as its
basis a misconception -- that an explosion is a chemical reaction.  It
should be realized that an explosion is a physical process, sometimes
colloquially stated as a 'going away of things rapidly from where they were
before.'  An explosion is the (possible but not necessary) result of either
a chemical reaction or another physical process.

Detonation of HE is always accompanied by an explosion, and confinement is
not necessary.  Combustion of any sort may be accompanied by an explosion
if the reaction continues while the material is (sufficiently)
confined.  Oxygen in some form is usually involved but is not necessary
(e.g., zinc and sulfur, aluminum and sulfur, magnesium and PTFE).

A chemical reaction is not necessary for an explosion, however.  Consider
the so-called 'dry ice bomb', in which dry ice is placed in a PETE soft
drink container.  Obviously the device explodes; it is potentially damaging
and deadly.  Yet no chemical reaction has occurred; the destructive energy
arises from the physical vaporization of a solid.  Likewise, accounts of
explosions of steam pipes and compressed air tanks are legion, with no
accompanying chemical process."

P'rfesser
...okay, so it's my own writing and not from a reference...  :-S

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 12291 invoked from network); 2 Aug 2001 22:02:35 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 2 Aug 2001 22:02:35 -0000
Received: (qmail 4630 invoked from network); 2 Aug 2001 22:04:41 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 2 Aug 2001 22:04:41 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA04533; Thu, 2 Aug 2001 14:58:29 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 94719 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 2 Aug 2001 21:58:19 +0000
Received: from cpimssmtpu08.email.msn.com (cpimssmtpu08.email.msn.com          [207.46.181.83]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA04516          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 2 Aug 2001 14:58:18 -0700
Received: from kelly ([63.23.239.192]) by cpimssmtpu08.email.msn.com with          Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.3779); Thu, 2 Aug 2001 14:57:50 -0700
References:  <a05100301b78e991d0c10@[63.15.225.77]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 02 Aug 2001 21:57:51.0488 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[2CE21000:01C11B9E]
Message-ID:  <005c01c11b9e$70de8ae0$c0ef173f@kelly>
Date:         Thu, 2 Aug 2001 17:59:33 -0400
Reply-To: "kellyrmercer" <kellyrmercer@MSN.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "kellyrmercer" <kellyrmercer@MSN.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] new member
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Jerry,

Glad to have you here. I hope you find peaceful exchanges commonplace here
and I welcome your insight to this list.

Kelly Mercer


----- Original Message -----
From: Jerry Irvine <01rocket@GTE.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Thursday, August 02, 2001 1:44 AM
Subject: [AR] new member


> Hello all.
> --
> Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
> Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
> Opinion, the whole thing.
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 21810 invoked from network); 2 Aug 2001 22:26:11 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 2 Aug 2001 22:26:11 -0000
Received: (qmail 15604 invoked from network); 2 Aug 2001 22:21:36 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 2 Aug 2001 22:21:36 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA04646; Thu, 2 Aug 2001 15:17:21 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 94735 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 2 Aug 2001 22:17:08 +0000
Received: from imo-r02.mx.aol.com (imo-r02.mx.aol.com [152.163.225.98]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA04629 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Thu, 2 Aug 2001 15:17:07 -0700
Received: from Ricanakk@aol.com by imo-r02.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v31.9.) id          w.89.a317c91 (4570) for <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Thu, 2 Aug 2001          18:17:02 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: AOL 5.0 for Windows sub 108
Message-ID:  <89.a317c91.289b2b5d@aol.com>
Date:         Thu, 2 Aug 2001 18:17:01 EDT
Reply-To: <Ricanakk@AOL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <Ricanakk@AOL.COM>
Subject:      [AR] head end & nozzle end igniters
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Although I prefer the head-end ignition system and use it on new
designs, my older designs use throat inserted igniters. To minimize the
throat restriction, I use fine gauge (#30) "wire -wrap"  wire for the
igniter leads. Not only is the copper core fine gauge, but also the insulation
is very thin "kynar" (which is tough telfon-like material). The current
carrying capacity of this wire is more than adequate. The nichrome
"filament" I use is #36 gauge, and quite short, about 3-4 mm length. Four AA
batteries provide all the power necessary to fire the igniter pyro
charge.

Richard Nakka

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 25065 invoked from network); 2 Aug 2001 22:47:28 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 2 Aug 2001 22:47:28 -0000
Received: (qmail 27802 invoked from network); 2 Aug 2001 22:48:10 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 2 Aug 2001 22:48:10 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA04840; Thu, 2 Aug 2001 15:41:10 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 94760 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 2 Aug 2001 22:41:07 +0000
Received: from mta04.mail.mel.aone.net.au (mta04.mail.au.uu.net [203.2.192.84])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA04823 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 2 Aug 2001 15:41:07 -0700
Received: from unknown ([63.34.214.138]) by mta04.mail.mel.aone.net.au with          SMTP id <20010802224103.DKHK10590.mta04.mail.mel.aone.net.au@unknown>          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 3 Aug 2001 08:41:03 +1000
References: Conversation <v01510100b78ea95bf1e7@[63.169.102.115]> with last            message <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010802100352.24820B-100000@spsystems.net>
Priority: Normal
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Priority: 3
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	X-MAPIextension=.TXT;
	charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>
Date:         Thu, 2 Aug 2001 22:41:07 +0000
Reply-To: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] 4Ignition versus Detonation -- was Re: [AR] Head end              igniters
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010802100352.24820B-100000@spsystems.net>

----------
> On Thu, 2 Aug 2001, al bradley wrote:
> > >> It makes me wonder if there are rocket propellants based on something
> > >> similar to smokeless powder? Anyone know?
> > >Double base propellants.
> >
> > Appropriate thought!  Is my memory correct that double base propellants
are
> > one or more chemical variations of combining nitroglycerine and
> > nitrocellulose?
>
> More or less correct.  There are versions which substitute TNT or other
> similar explosives for the nitroglycerine.  And usually other minor
> ingredients have to be added as stabilizers.
>
> Nitrocellulose by itself isn't a good propellant for either guns or
> rockets -- it burns too rapidly and somewhat inconsistently.

It's very pressure dependant and there's NC and there's NC.

  Single-base
> smokeless powders modify it by adding a variety of more-or-less inert
> ingredients to gel the nitrocellulose.  Double-base powders came out of
> the realization that the additives need not be inert.

Note: NC is also a "fuel rich" monopropellant. NG is an oxygen rich
monopropellant. NG too suffers stability problems from autocatalytic
reactions and effects but when the 2 are combined together many of these
problems are removed.

Troy.

>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 19619 invoked from network); 2 Aug 2001 23:34:34 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 2 Aug 2001 23:34:34 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 29721 invoked from network); 2 Aug 2001 23:37:03 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 2 Aug 2001 23:37:03 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA05628; Thu, 2 Aug 2001 16:29:48 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 94813 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 2 Aug 2001 23:29:04 +0000
Received: from femail4.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail4.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.0.95.84]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA05608 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 2 Aug 2001 16:29:04 -0700
Received: from home.com ([24.13.246.32]) by femail4.sdc1.sfba.home.com          (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20 201-229-121-120-20010223) with ESMTP id          <20010802232854.ZVAF19638.femail4.sdc1.sfba.home.com@home.com> for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 2 Aug 2001 16:28:54 -0700
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.77 [en] (Win98; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <200108021901.MAA02781@itc.uci.edu>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B69E2D0.5289FB95@home.com>
Date:         Thu, 2 Aug 2001 19:31:28 -0400
Reply-To: "Alex Fraser" <beatnic@HOME.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Alex Fraser" <beatnic@HOME.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Head end igniters
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Defining a detonation is like defining pornography, you know it when you
see it.

--
<<***********************************>>
~~~~~~~~ Alex Fraser  N3DER ~~~~~~~~~~~
--------- beatnic@home.com ------------
~~~~ http://members.home.com/beatnic ~~
>>***********************************<<

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 29833 invoked from network); 2 Aug 2001 23:36:55 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 2 Aug 2001 23:36:55 -0000
Received: (qmail 25010 invoked from network); 2 Aug 2001 23:39:05 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 2 Aug 2001 23:39:05 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA05748; Thu, 2 Aug 2001 16:34:42 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 94821 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 2 Aug 2001 23:34:41 +0000
Received: from mta05.mail.mel.aone.net.au (mta05.mail.au.uu.net [203.2.192.85])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA05730 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 2 Aug 2001 16:34:40 -0700
Received: from unknown ([63.34.212.147]) by mta05.mail.mel.aone.net.au with          SMTP id <20010802233436.GLKO28112.mta05.mail.mel.aone.net.au@unknown>          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 3 Aug 2001 09:34:36 +1000
References: Conversation <002501c11b0e$b29229a0$1b30fea9@kristinscomp> with            last message            <5.1.0.14.0.20010802070737.01dad870@mail.murraystate.edu>
Priority: Normal
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Priority: 3
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	X-MAPIextension=.TXT;
	charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>
Date:         Thu, 2 Aug 2001 23:34:41 +0000
Reply-To: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Explosion, was:  [AR] Head end igniters
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <5.1.0.14.0.20010802070737.01dad870@mail.murraystate.edu>

Yep, I have to agree Terry. Just like an "implosion" is a physical process.

Troy.

> How's about this'un?
>
> "Much of the controversy surrounding explosives and propellants has as its
> basis a misconception -- that an explosion is a chemical reaction.  It
> should be realized that an explosion is a physical process, sometimes
> colloquially stated as a 'going away of things rapidly from where they
were
> before.'  An explosion is the (possible but not necessary) result of
either
> a chemical reaction or another physical process.
>
> Detonation of HE is always accompanied by an explosion, and confinement is
> not necessary.  Combustion of any sort may be accompanied by an explosion
> if the reaction continues while the material is (sufficiently)
> confined.  Oxygen in some form is usually involved but is not necessary
> (e.g., zinc and sulfur, aluminum and sulfur, magnesium and PTFE).
>
> A chemical reaction is not necessary for an explosion, however.  Consider
> the so-called 'dry ice bomb', in which dry ice is placed in a PETE soft
> drink container.  Obviously the device explodes; it is potentially
damaging
> and deadly.  Yet no chemical reaction has occurred; the destructive energy
> arises from the physical vaporization of a solid.  Likewise, accounts of
> explosions of steam pipes and compressed air tanks are legion, with no
> accompanying chemical process."
>
> P'rfesser
> ...okay, so it's my own writing and not from a reference...  :-S
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 27953 invoked from network); 3 Aug 2001 01:09:09 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 3 Aug 2001 01:09:09 -0000
Received: (qmail 2047 invoked from network); 3 Aug 2001 01:10:44 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 3 Aug 2001 01:10:44 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA06503; Thu, 2 Aug 2001 18:04:59 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 94899 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 3 Aug 2001 01:04:47 +0000
Received: from imo-r08.mx.aol.com (imo-r08.mx.aol.com [152.163.225.104]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA06326 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Thu, 2 Aug 2001 17:54:47 -0700
Received: from IBPYRONSKI@aol.com by imo-r08.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v31.9.) id          w.dc.9ff60c4 (4405) for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Thu, 2 Aug 2001          20:54:42 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0A8D_01C56B69.462C8CB0"
X-Mailer: AOL 6.0 for Windows US sub 10530
Message-ID:  <dc.9ff60c4.289b5051@aol.com>
Date:         Thu, 2 Aug 2001 20:54:41 EDT
Reply-To: <IBPYRONSKI@AOL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <IBPYRONSKI@AOL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Cheaper Carbon fiber?WARNING
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0A8D_01C56B69.462C8CB0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Carbon fiber is conductive,be carefull how you transport carbon overlaid fins
and\or airframe.
 When returning to Victorville Friday evening from the days activities at
LDRS I had to drive up an embankment to avoid a headon collision with a truck
that was passing a car.This caused everything in the back of the camper to
shift around.Among other things in the camper was a length of 3.9 inch carbon
airframe and a fully charged automotive 12 volt battery.
 Unknown to me the airframe had bounced from the middle of the truck to the
far side and landed on top of the battery.By the time I got to Victorville
and parked smoke was coming out of the camper and a small fire was going.The
carbon airframe(the epoxy part at least)and a small cardboard box were
burning quite nicely.I doused the fire and got my heart going again,The top
of the battery was melted and one post was arced off.The carbon airframe was
toasted as well.
 With more and more fliers using carbon for airframe or as an overlay on
large fins we need to be a lot more carefull where we place the launch
batteries.I knew that CF was conductive,and had it well away from the
battery.I never related it to starting a fire though.Please take care how you
transport that carbon fiber rocket and your lauch power supply.
 Tom Cloud

------=_NextPart_000_0A8D_01C56B69.462C8CB0
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<HTML><FONT FACE=arial,helvetica><FONT  SIZE=2>Carbon fiber is conductive,be carefull how you transport carbon overlaid fins
<BR>and\or airframe.
<BR> When returning to Victorville Friday evening from the days activities at
<BR>LDRS I had to drive up an embankment to avoid a headon collision with a truck
<BR>that was passing a car.This caused everything in the back of the camper to
<BR>shift around.Among other things in the camper was a length of 3.9 inch carbon
<BR>airframe and a fully charged automotive 12 volt battery.
<BR> Unknown to me the airframe had bounced from the middle of the truck to the
<BR>far side and landed on top of the battery.By the time I got to Victorville
<BR>and parked smoke was coming out of the camper and a small fire was going.The
<BR>carbon airframe(the epoxy part at least)and a small cardboard box were
<BR>burning quite nicely.I doused the fire and got my heart going again,The top
<BR>of the battery was melted and one post was arced off.The carbon airframe was
<BR>toasted as well.
<BR> With more and more fliers using carbon for airframe or as an overlay on
<BR>large fins we need to be a lot more carefull where we place the launch
<BR>batteries.I knew that CF was conductive,and had it well away from the
<BR>battery.I never related it to starting a fire though.Please take care how you
<BR>transport that carbon fiber rocket and your lauch power supply.
<BR> Tom Cloud</FONT></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0A8D_01C56B69.462C8CB0--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 10061 invoked from network); 3 Aug 2001 01:11:45 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 3 Aug 2001 01:11:45 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 7026 invoked from network); 3 Aug 2001 01:13:54 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 3 Aug 2001 01:13:54 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA06605; Thu, 2 Aug 2001 18:09:31 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 94919 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 3 Aug 2001 01:09:30 +0000
Received: from sys32.hou.wt.net ([205.230.159.32]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7)          with ESMTP id SAA06588 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 2 Aug 2001          18:09:29 -0700
Received: from localhost (216-119-138-163.ipset18.wt.net [216.119.138.163]) by          sys32.hou.wt.net (8.9.1/8.9.1) with ESMTP id UAA12960 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 2 Aug 2001 20:09:30 -0500 (CDT)
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.388)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <200108030109.UAA12960@sys32.hou.wt.net>
Date:         Thu, 2 Aug 2001 20:09:25 -0500
Reply-To: "Donald McCorvey" <dlm3@NETAXS.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Donald McCorvey" <dlm3@NETAXS.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] X-prize article
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <LPBBKJMJEOFKAMFJJNNHOECMCGAA.landofgrey@gnc.net>

You're right, however there are (as usual) exceptions. For example, were
you aware that an exact replica of the Wright Flyer spent a month in the
100'x50' subsonic wind tunnel at NASA Ames ? It was for an all-volunteer
group (with sponsorship from the Smithsonian and/or one or more
aerospace contractors), and they were operating on a shoestring budget.
NASA either provided the wind tunnel time free of charge or for a
nominal fee.

And for what it's worth, there are numerous research contracts let to
small businesses for the Small Business Innovation Research program
(SBIR) by NASA and other government agencies.  Obviously, this isn't
free money, and is no doubt competitive, but it might well be a way to
get access to those facilities.

There's more information on NASA's SBIR program at:

        http://sbir.gsfc.nasa.gov/SBIR/nasasbir.htm


Don McCorvey
Houston, Tx



On Thursday, August 2, 2001, at 03:24 PM, Matthew Travis wrote:

> Considering the possibility of spending time on a wind tunnel that costs
> upwards of $1 million an hour to run, asking NASA to let "me and my
> group of
> 10 amateur scientists" use the tunnel for a few hours would be, in
> essence,
> asking for a $3 million donation from NASA. And two months later, Sen.
> Mikulski would be screaming on the Senate floor about how Dan Goldin
> just
> gave away millions of dollars with no return to the government all the
> while
> the space station has a $4 billion overrun. Blah Blah. Obviously, the
> whole
> idea of asking for a donation from NASA is pretty much a non-starter.
> Especially since there are plenty of paying customers to fill up all
> available time in the facilities.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 11021 invoked from network); 3 Aug 2001 01:25:49 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 3 Aug 2001 01:25:49 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 16561 invoked from network); 3 Aug 2001 01:25:36 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 3 Aug 2001 01:25:36 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA06784; Thu, 2 Aug 2001 18:21:39 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 94962 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 3 Aug 2001 01:21:36 +0000
Received: from imo-m05.mx.aol.com (imo-m05.mx.aol.com [64.12.136.8]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA06767 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Thu, 2 Aug 2001 18:21:36 -0700
Received: from Sociald84@aol.com by imo-m05.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v31.9.) id          i.117.29e9729 (3854); Thu, 2 Aug 2001 21:20:59 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: AOL 5.0 for Windows sub 138
Message-ID:  <117.29e9729.289b567a@aol.com>
Date:         Thu, 2 Aug 2001 21:20:58 EDT
Reply-To: <Sociald84@AOL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <Sociald84@AOL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Nano/Micro Pumps
Comments: To: breddeman@hotmail.com
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

In a message dated 7/31/01 2:17:48 PM Mountain Daylight Time,
breddeman@HOTMAIL.COM writes:

> Hello Everyone;
>
>  I pretty much nieve to liquid fuel model rocketry (and engineering etc...)
>  but I do know a decent amount about liquid fuel rockets themselves.
>
>  I want to build a rocket motor no more than 12mm wide and 8cm tall. Anyone
>  know where I can find some sources of nano/micro pumps, valves and
>  compressed gas cylinders (I have a funny feeling I'm going to making most
of
>  the stuff myself...)
>
>  Brian Reddeman
>  "I can't do it? Not possible? Too expensive? HA!"
>

Prety demanding task there Brian. How about atleast upping the diameter to a
workable 21mm? You can fit an 8g N2O cylender in that.

Mark

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 15697 invoked from network); 3 Aug 2001 01:48:10 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 3 Aug 2001 01:48:10 -0000
Received: (qmail 6792 invoked from network); 3 Aug 2001 01:49:07 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 3 Aug 2001 01:49:07 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA06960; Thu, 2 Aug 2001 18:43:15 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 94981 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 3 Aug 2001 01:43:06 +0000
Received: from castor.ridgenet.net (IDENT:root@castor.ridgenet.net          [199.120.150.29]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA06943          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 2 Aug 2001 18:43:06 -0700
Received: from kristinscomp (pm011.ridgenet.net [204.154.246.11]) by          castor.ridgenet.net (8.11.0/8.11.0) with SMTP id f731aIS10614; Thu, 2          Aug 2001 18:36:18 -0700
References:  <200108030109.UAA12960@sys32.hou.wt.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <001301c11bbe$cfb58300$1b30fea9@kristinscomp>
Date:         Thu, 2 Aug 2001 18:51:27 -0700
Reply-To: "Kristin & David Hall" <thehalls@RIDGENET.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Kristin & David Hall" <thehalls@RIDGENET.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] X-prize article
Comments: To: Donald McCorvey <dlm3@NETAXS.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

> You're right, however there are (as usual) exceptions. For example, were
> you aware that an exact replica of the Wright Flyer spent a month in the
> 100'x50' subsonic wind tunnel at NASA Ames ? It was for an all-volunteer
> group (with sponsorship from the Smithsonian and/or one or more
> aerospace contractors), and they were operating on a shoestring budget.
> NASA either provided the wind tunnel time free of charge or for a
> nominal fee.

But do not forget who the primary intellectual sponsor was (IE, folks who
provided the volunteers):  The AIAA.  A *VERY* well connected group in the
aviation industry.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 1702 invoked from network); 3 Aug 2001 02:12:42 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 3 Aug 2001 02:12:42 -0000
Received: (qmail 27059 invoked from network); 3 Aug 2001 02:10:00 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 3 Aug 2001 02:10:00 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA07071; Thu, 2 Aug 2001 19:06:09 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 94999 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 3 Aug 2001 02:06:04 +0000
Received: from dune.gnc.net (root@dune.gnc.net [207.203.72.4]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA07054 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu,          2 Aug 2001 19:06:03 -0700
Received: from beowulf (sw2-18.gnc.net [207.203.72.98]) by dune.gnc.net          (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id WAA19112 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 2          Aug 2001 22:06:04 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
Importance: Normal
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <LPBBKJMJEOFKAMFJJNNHAEDACGAA.landofgrey@gnc.net>
Date:         Thu, 2 Aug 2001 22:05:54 -0400
Reply-To: <landofgrey@gnc.net>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Matthew Travis" <landofgrey@gnc.net>
Subject:      Re: [AR] X-prize article
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <001301c11bbe$cfb58300$1b30fea9@kristinscomp>

There's also a longer-term interest in the project, and so some desire by
other parties to see it succeed.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU]On
> Behalf Of Kristin & David Hall
> Sent: Thursday, August 02, 2001 9:51 PM
> To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
> Subject: Re: [AR] X-prize article
>
>
> > You're right, however there are (as usual) exceptions. For example, were
> > you aware that an exact replica of the Wright Flyer spent a month in the
> > 100'x50' subsonic wind tunnel at NASA Ames ? It was for an all-volunteer
> > group (with sponsorship from the Smithsonian and/or one or more
> > aerospace contractors), and they were operating on a shoestring budget.
> > NASA either provided the wind tunnel time free of charge or for a
> > nominal fee.
>
> But do not forget who the primary intellectual sponsor was (IE, folks who
> provided the volunteers):  The AIAA.  A *VERY* well connected group in the
> aviation industry.
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 10432 invoked from network); 3 Aug 2001 02:14:33 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 3 Aug 2001 02:14:33 -0000
Received: (qmail 5217 invoked from network); 3 Aug 2001 02:16:41 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 3 Aug 2001 02:16:41 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA07133; Thu, 2 Aug 2001 19:09:59 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 95018 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 3 Aug 2001 02:09:58 +0000
Received: from dune.gnc.net (root@dune.gnc.net [207.203.72.4]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA07116 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu,          2 Aug 2001 19:09:57 -0700
Received: from beowulf (sw2-18.gnc.net [207.203.72.98]) by dune.gnc.net          (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id WAA19162 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 2          Aug 2001 22:09:58 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
Importance: Normal
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <LPBBKJMJEOFKAMFJJNNHEEDACGAA.landofgrey@gnc.net>
Date:         Thu, 2 Aug 2001 22:09:48 -0400
Reply-To: <landofgrey@gnc.net>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Matthew Travis" <landofgrey@gnc.net>
Subject:      Re: [AR] X-prize article
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <200108030109.UAA12960@sys32.hou.wt.net>

This is true and emphasizes my point. SBIR is for commercial interests, not
non business-oriented amateur activities. SBIR and TRDA and the space
grants, etc. are all geared to one long-term objective, that being
investment. For example, NASA views SBIR contracts as investments in small
business growth. These same small business then, hopefully, become long-term
contractors and industry players. That is the return on investment that the
government looks at. Once again, this doesn't apply (except for the
occasional exception) to amateur activities.

Matt

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU]On
> Behalf Of Donald McCorvey
>
> And for what it's worth, there are numerous research contracts let to
> small businesses for the Small Business Innovation Research program
> (SBIR) by NASA and other government agencies.  Obviously, this isn't
> free money, and is no doubt competitive, but it might well be a way to
> get access to those facilities.
>
> There's more information on NASA's SBIR program at:
>
>         http://sbir.gsfc.nasa.gov/SBIR/nasasbir.htm
>
>
> Don McCorvey
> Houston, Tx
>
>
>
> On Thursday, August 2, 2001, at 03:24 PM, Matthew Travis wrote:
>
> > Considering the possibility of spending time on a wind tunnel that costs
> > upwards of $1 million an hour to run, asking NASA to let "me and my
> > group of
> > 10 amateur scientists" use the tunnel for a few hours would be, in
> > essence,
> > asking for a $3 million donation from NASA. And two months later, Sen.
> > Mikulski would be screaming on the Senate floor about how Dan Goldin
> > just
> > gave away millions of dollars with no return to the government all the
> > while
> > the space station has a $4 billion overrun. Blah Blah. Obviously, the
> > whole
> > idea of asking for a donation from NASA is pretty much a non-starter.
> > Especially since there are plenty of paying customers to fill up all
> > available time in the facilities.
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 10620 invoked from network); 3 Aug 2001 02:21:54 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 3 Aug 2001 02:21:54 -0000
Received: (qmail 7940 invoked from network); 3 Aug 2001 02:23:30 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 3 Aug 2001 02:23:30 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA07190; Thu, 2 Aug 2001 19:19:52 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 95030 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 3 Aug 2001 02:19:47 +0000
Received: from fep3-orange.clear.net.nz (fep3-orange.clear.net.nz          [203.97.32.3]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA07173          for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Thu, 2 Aug 2001 19:19:46 -0700
Received: from mkbs (203-167-164-26.dialup.clear.net.nz [203.167.164.26]) by          fep3-orange.clear.net.nz (1.5/1.8) with SMTP id OAA08225; Fri, 3 Aug          2001 14:19:43 +1200 (NZST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="Windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <044301c11bc2$fa0c4cc0$0100a8c0@mkbs>
Date:         Fri, 3 Aug 2001 11:05:40 +1200
Reply-To: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Organization: Applied Technology
Subject:      [AR] Fw:      Jet engine FADEC
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Not quite rocketry but may be of interest to some.
Keen man it seems !

RM

_________________________________________


From: "Scott Beatty" <Scott.Beatty@ECLIPSEAVIATION.COM>
To: <PICLIST@MITVMA.MIT.EDU>
Sent: Friday, 3 August 2001 00:55
Subject: Jet engine FADEC


> Hello
>
>         For the last year I have been building a jet engine and a FADEC
> (Full Authority Digital Electronic Controller) for it.  I have finished
the
> engine and donated it to a local university.  I am in the process of
> designing a new engine and have completed the design of the intake,
> compressor and diffuser.  The engine should have an output thrust of 300
to
> 500 lbs. with the afterburner off / on.  I used a PIC 17C766 for my FADEC
> processor and PBP (Pic Basic Pro) to program it.  The FADEC reads 50
> instruments and has 20 outputs.  The instruments include thermocouples,
> pressure transmitters, current sensors, strain gauges, proximity switches,
> etc. and the outputs drive pumps, valves and glow plugs.  Would anyone
here
> be interested in helping me debug the code.  The code has about 1000 lines
> of basic.  I can provide more details to those who help.
>
> Thanks
> Scott Beatty
>
> --
> http://www.piclist.com hint: The PICList is archived three different
> ways.  See http://www.piclist.com/#archives for details.
>
>
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 20988 invoked from network); 3 Aug 2001 03:01:27 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 3 Aug 2001 03:01:27 -0000
Received: (qmail 7307 invoked from network); 3 Aug 2001 03:03:03 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 3 Aug 2001 03:03:03 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA07474; Thu, 2 Aug 2001 19:56:05 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 95067 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 3 Aug 2001 02:56:01 +0000
Received: from overnight.request.net (overnight.request.net [207.150.192.30])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA07414 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 2 Aug 2001 19:46:00 -0700
Received: from furina.request.net ([207.150.192.11]) by overnight.request.net          with ESMTP id <135616-16995>; Thu, 2 Aug 2001 21:45:08 -0400
Received: from JuleeD ([24.160.114.184]) by furina.request.net with SMTP id          <157774301-1962361>; Thu, 2 Aug 2001 22:40:26 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0A92_01C56B69.46360290"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2314.1300
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <008301c11bc6$32d6d860$b872a018@petschoice.com>
Date:         Thu, 2 Aug 2001 21:44:20 -0500
Reply-To: "Phil Bellmore" <pfish@CATFISHDESIGNS.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Phil Bellmore" <pfish@CATFISHDESIGNS.COM>
Subject:      [AR]
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0A92_01C56B69.46360290
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Can anyone provide a source for lightweight butterfly valves, 2 to 4 =
inches in diameter?

------=_NextPart_000_0A92_01C56B69.46360290
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Diso-8859-1">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 5.50.4522.1800" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Can anyone provide a source for =
lightweight=20
butterfly valves, 2 to 4 inches in diameter?</FONT></DIV></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0A92_01C56B69.46360290--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 9584 invoked from network); 3 Aug 2001 03:52:10 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 3 Aug 2001 03:52:10 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 13655 invoked from network); 3 Aug 2001 03:54:17 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 3 Aug 2001 03:54:17 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA07741; Thu, 2 Aug 2001 20:48:36 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 95109 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 3 Aug 2001 03:45:52 +0000
Received: from harrier.mail.pas.earthlink.net (harrier.mail.pas.earthlink.net          [207.217.121.12]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA07721          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 2 Aug 2001 20:45:43 -0700
Received: from sprintmail.com (pool0314.cvx18-bradley.dialup.earthlink.net          [209.179.239.59]) by harrier.mail.pas.earthlink.net          (EL-8_9_3_3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id UAA14519; Thu, 2 Aug 2001 20:45:31          -0700 (PDT)
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.74 [en] (Win98; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <a05100301b78e991d0c10@[63.15.225.77]>            <3B68B2D2.13B51812@biomicro.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B69712B.AE617E27@sprintmail.com>
Date:         Thu, 2 Aug 2001 08:26:35 -0700
Reply-To: "Anthony Colette" <Rockitman@SPRINTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Anthony Colette" <Rockitman@SPRINTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] new member
Comments: To: "Mark K. Spute" <mks@BIOMICRO.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

What?!!!   Irvine?...  The Infamous JERRY IRVINE?!!

OOOHHH!  NOOOO!

We can't have that!  What will TRA and Kosdon think of that? ;-)


"Mark K. Spute" wrote:

> Hi Jerry;
>
> Welcome aboard.
>
> Jerry Irvine wrote:
> >
> > Hello all.
> > --
> > Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
> > Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
> > Opinion, the whole thing.
>
> --
> Mark K. Spute
> Senior Research Engineer
> BioMicro Systems Inc.
>
> KD7IWE,  RRS
>
> "It is difficult to say what is impossible, for the dream of yesterday
> is the hope of today and the reality of tomorrow."
>      Dr. Robert H. Goddard

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 18668 invoked from network); 3 Aug 2001 04:02:49 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 3 Aug 2001 04:02:49 -0000
Received: (qmail 9625 invoked from network); 3 Aug 2001 04:04:26 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 3 Aug 2001 04:04:26 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA07860; Thu, 2 Aug 2001 20:59:47 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 95140 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 3 Aug 2001 03:59:17 +0000
Received: from fep3-orange.clear.net.nz (fep3-orange.clear.net.nz          [203.97.32.3]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA07842          for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Thu, 2 Aug 2001 20:59:16 -0700
Received: from mkbs (b002-m008-p013.acld.clear.net.nz [203.167.199.205]) by          fep3-orange.clear.net.nz (1.5/1.8) with SMTP id PAA03186; Fri, 3 Aug          2001 15:59:11 +1200 (NZST)
References:  <dc.9ff60c4.289b5051@aol.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <04c401c11bd0$dfa27cc0$0100a8c0@mkbs>
Date:         Fri, 3 Aug 2001 14:54:42 +1200
Reply-To: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Organization: Applied Technology
Subject:      Re: [AR] Cheaper Carbon fiber?WARNING
Comments: To: IBPYRONSKI@AOL.COM
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

___________________

Unknown to me the airframe had bounced from the middle of the truck to the
far side and landed on top of the battery.By the time I got to Victorville
and parked smoke was coming out of the camper and a small fire was going.The
carbon airframe(the epoxy part at least)and a small cardboard box were
burning quite nicely.I doused the fire and got my heart going again,The top
of the battery was melted and one post was arced off.The carbon airframe was
toasted as well.
_____________________


An even sillier idea to avoid is carrying Nickel camium cells and keys and
coins in your trouser pocket :-)
NiCd's can deliver very lrge currents into a short circuit.
>From personal experience I can assure you that tThe pain can be severe and
that injury could definitely occur.

I did this many years ago. Somewhat to my surprise I recently met soemone
wjho had had the same experience!




RM

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 3867 invoked from network); 3 Aug 2001 04:37:16 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 3 Aug 2001 04:37:16 -0000
Received: (qmail 10205 invoked from network); 3 Aug 2001 04:37:58 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 3 Aug 2001 04:37:58 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA08121; Thu, 2 Aug 2001 21:33:15 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 95197 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 3 Aug 2001 04:33:09 +0000
Received: from smtprelay1.abs.adelphia.net (smtprelay.abs.adelphia.net          [64.8.20.11]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA08104 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 2 Aug 2001 21:33:08 -0700
Received: from jlgrady ([63.124.251.47]) by smtprelay1.abs.adelphia.net          (Netscape Messaging Server 4.15) with SMTP id GHH5XW01.HFQ for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 3 Aug 2001 00:32:20 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook CWS, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <000c01c11bd5$986def10$0200a8c0@prestige.net>
Date:         Fri, 3 Aug 2001 00:34:32 -0400
Reply-To: "Jeff Grady" <jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jeff Grady" <jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Head end igniters
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <3B69E2D0.5289FB95@home.com>

Speaking of: >>you know it when you see it. <<

I had obtained a 4" diameter 24" long paper tube that had a 1/2" wall and
was VERY rigid. It appeared to have been wound using a resin (as opposed to
glue) to bond the paper. It was nearing the 4th of July so I thought I'd use
it as a mortar tube to launch a bunch of skyrockets (same as bottle rockets
but 2' long variety). I cut a plug from a piece of 2-by-12 and plugged one
end. I mounted that to a square piece of 2-by-12 by running a lag screw
through the bottom of the square piece and into the plug in the tube. A hole
for a cannon fuse was made just above the top of the plug.

The fireworks had not arrived (illegal in Ga...Had not made the run to Bama
yet) so I set out to test the strength of this cannon by firing tennis balls
using Pyrodex. Using wadded up aluminum foil like a shot shell wad, I could
shoot tennis balls nearly out of sight. Made the run to Bama on July 3rd.
Took the mortar to a friend's house who was having a 4th party. All the
women were chattering in the house and about a dozen of us guys were outside
launching all the fireworks we'd just bought.

After firing several rockets from the mortar, and a few tennis balls I had
left over, I decided to use some Pyrodex in the bottom of the mortar to mass
ignite several rockets at once. That worked great. Figured we could stuff a
few more in there and get even better results. That's when the jarhead in
the crowd said "Hey man I have a bag of M-80's right here"...He dumped the
bag of crackers in the tube on top of the Pyrodex, then four or five rockets
went in on top of that.

Fearing the unknown, everyone ran back behind the cars while I lit the 2'
fuse. I ducked behind a car and looked upward expecting to see lots of cool
fireworks. Instead, I saw a blinding flash, and a yellow/orange spherical
wave like the shockwave you see in Vietnam footage of bombs being dropped.
Then the loudest, sharpest damned boom I have ever heard.

Ears felt like I had smoke detectors going off next to them. Paper tube was
gone, 2-by was toothpicks and 4" tall grass was cut to dirt level for 12-14
feet around a smoking hole in the ground. The women ran out raising hell
because a bunch of pictures and figurines were knocked onto the floor.
Scared me so bad I dropped a full beer.

Call it an explosion or a detonation - I call it a lesson in stupidity.
Since then I prefer to err on the side of caution.

BTW, I was 20 at the time...That's my excuse.

Jeff

-----Original Message-----
From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@itc.uci.edu]On
Behalf Of Alex Fraser
Sent: Thursday, August 02, 2001 7:31 PM
To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
Subject: Re: [AR] Head end igniters


Defining a detonation is like defining pornography, you know it when you
see it.

--
<<***********************************>>
~~~~~~~~ Alex Fraser  N3DER ~~~~~~~~~~~
--------- beatnic@home.com ------------
~~~~ http://members.home.com/beatnic ~~
>>***********************************<<

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 7450 invoked from network); 3 Aug 2001 04:38:09 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 3 Aug 2001 04:38:09 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: (qmail 1386 invoked from network); 3 Aug 2001 04:40:15 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 3 Aug 2001 04:40:15 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA08164; Thu, 2 Aug 2001 21:35:18 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 95209 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 3 Aug 2001 04:35:17 +0000
Received: from cisco.com (cypher.cisco.com [171.69.11.18]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA08147 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu,          2 Aug 2001 21:35:17 -0700
Received: (from billw@localhost) by cisco.com (8.8.8/2.6/Cisco List          Logging/8.8.8) id VAA06325; Thu, 2 Aug 2001 21:34:45 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID:  <CMM.0.90.4.996813285.billw@cypher>
Date:         Thu, 2 Aug 2001 21:34:45 PDT
Reply-To: "Bill Westfield" <billw@cisco.com>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "William Chops Westfield" <billw@cisco.com>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Nano/Micro Pumps
Comments: To: Sociald84@AOL.COM
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  Your message of Thu, 2 Aug 2001 21:20:58 EDT

>  I want to build a rocket motor no more than 12mm wide and 8cm tall.

I don't think I see any reason you couldn't make a N20 hybrid Monocoque
design that was about that size.  It could presumably have very thin walls,
since pressure capability for a give wall thickness goes up as diameter goes
down.  Now, ignition might be a problem, and I don't know if it could lift
it's own weight...

BillW


From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 20926 invoked from network); 3 Aug 2001 05:12:51 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 3 Aug 2001 05:12:51 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 19182 invoked from network); 3 Aug 2001 05:14:28 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 3 Aug 2001 05:14:28 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA08640; Thu, 2 Aug 2001 22:09:40 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 95270 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 3 Aug 2001 05:09:35 +0000
Received: from smtp08.phx.gblx.net (smtp08.phx.gblx.net [64.211.219.57]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA08623 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 2 Aug 2001 22:09:35 -0700
Received: (from daemon@localhost) by smtp08.phx.gblx.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id          WAA540380 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 2 Aug 2001 22:09:28 -0700
Received: from 64-208-236-177.nas1.TBR.gblx.net(64.208.236.177),          claiming to be "frontiernet.net" via SMTP by smtp08.phx.gblx.net,          id smtpdZLyXaa; Thu Aug  2 22:06:33 2001
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.74 [en] (Win98; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <CMM.0.90.4.996813285.billw@cypher>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B6A324A.AB76481B@frontiernet.net>
Date:         Fri, 3 Aug 2001 01:10:34 -0400
Reply-To: <tbinford@frontiernet.net>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Tom Binford" <tbinford@frontiernet.net>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Nano/Micro Pumps
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

William Chops Westfield wrote:
>
> >  I want to build a rocket motor no more than 12mm wide and 8cm tall.
>
> I don't think I see any reason you couldn't make a N20 hybrid Monocoque
> design that was about that size.  It could presumably have very thin walls,
> since pressure capability for a give wall thickness goes up as diameter goes
> down.  Now, ignition might be a problem, and I don't know if it could lift
> it's own weight...
>
> BillW

The latest issue of the AIAA Journal of Propulsion and Power has an
article on miniature bipropellant liquid motors. The combustion
chambers, turbopumps, regenerative cooling passages, and valves are
micro-machined from silicon (or silicon carbide) wafers that are then
laminated. Motors are about 18 x 13 x 3 mm, not including propellant
tankage.

Tom

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 22063 invoked from network); 3 Aug 2001 05:28:35 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 3 Aug 2001 05:28:35 -0000
Received: (qmail 4975 invoked from network); 3 Aug 2001 05:30:45 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 3 Aug 2001 05:30:45 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA08711; Thu, 2 Aug 2001 22:12:34 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 95282 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 3 Aug 2001 05:12:33 +0000
Received: from femail17.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail17.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.0.95.144]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA08694          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 2 Aug 2001 22:12:33 -0700
Received: from hal2001 ([24.77.53.16]) by femail17.sdc1.sfba.home.com          (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20 201-229-121-120-20010223) with SMTP id          <20010803051218.GTKX8659.femail17.sdc1.sfba.home.com@hal2001> for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 2 Aug 2001 22:12:18 -0700
References:  <89.a317c91.289b2b5d@aol.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <004501c11bd9$c12587c0$0400a8c0@hatjs>
Date:         Thu, 2 Aug 2001 22:04:19 -0700
Reply-To: "Jamie Morken" <jmorken@HOME.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jamie Morken" <jmorken@HOME.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] head end & nozzle end igniters
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Hi Richard,


> carrying capacity of this wire is more than adequate. The nichrome
> "filament" I use is #36 gauge, and quite short, about 3-4 mm length. Four
AA
> batteries provide all the power necessary to fire the igniter pyro
> charge.
>
> Richard Nakka

How do you connect the nichrome ignitors to the copper leads?
I find it a bit tricky to make good ignitors with nichrome wire,
since it is hard to solder it and wrapping the wire on may be a bit
unreliable!

One good soldering method I found was looping the copper in a small circle
at the end
and putting the nichrome through this, then filling the inside of the small
loop with solder
(these ignitors are a bit bulky though)

best regards,
Jamie

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 4307 invoked from network); 3 Aug 2001 05:53:15 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 3 Aug 2001 05:53:15 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 17170 invoked from network); 3 Aug 2001 05:55:19 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 3 Aug 2001 05:55:19 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA09138; Thu, 2 Aug 2001 22:50:28 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 95361 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 3 Aug 2001 05:50:21 +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (f131.pav1.hotmail.com [64.4.31.131]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA09121 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu,          2 Aug 2001 22:50:20 -0700
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Thu,          2 Aug 2001 22:49:50 -0700
Received: from 64.156.155.186 by pv1fd.pav1.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Fri, 03          Aug 2001 05:49:50 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [64.156.155.186]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 03 Aug 2001 05:49:50.0458 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[1C4DF5A0:01C11BE0]
Message-ID:  <F131SnRMWuLn5U9T3TG000048f0@hotmail.com>
Date:         Thu, 2 Aug 2001 22:49:50 -0700
Reply-To: "Brian Reddeman" <breddeman@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Brian Reddeman" <breddeman@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Nano/Micro Pumps
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Tom Binford wrote:
>
>The latest issue of the AIAA Journal of Propulsion and Power has an
>article on miniature bipropellant liquid motors. The combustion
>chambers, turbopumps, regenerative cooling passages, and valves are
>micro-machined from silicon (or silicon carbide) wafers that are then
>laminated. Motors are about 18 x 13 x 3 mm, not including propellant
>tankage.
>
>Tom

Before I had started posting to this forum and had seen the articles on this
type of rocket motors I had already considered the idea of some sort of
material sandwiched together. I just couldn't think of the materials to use.
It's great someone has already gone down that route with great success as
well.

Last night I drew up some designs. One of wich is a larger scale version and
rather different than the one made by the MIT microturbine team. I'm going
to laser cut it into some plastic sheets. It'll be a low pressure model
using water I think...

The turbines are going to be the biggest challenge, and I may forgo that
route for the time being. Perhaps an "at ignition" pressurzation scheme?
ideas, ideas...half the challenge and half the fun.

-Brian
"BOOM! Oops, alright what'd I not calculate this time."

_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 14306 invoked from network); 3 Aug 2001 06:44:25 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 3 Aug 2001 06:44:25 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: (qmail 28836 invoked from network); 3 Aug 2001 06:46:32 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 3 Aug 2001 06:46:32 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA09513; Thu, 2 Aug 2001 23:39:56 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 95442 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 3 Aug 2001 06:39:46 +0000
Received: from cisco.com (cypher.cisco.com [171.69.11.18]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA09496 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu,          2 Aug 2001 23:39:46 -0700
Received: (from billw@localhost) by cisco.com (8.8.8/2.6/Cisco List          Logging/8.8.8) id XAA04334; Thu, 2 Aug 2001 23:39:11 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID:  <CMM.0.90.4.996820751.billw@cypher>
Date:         Thu, 2 Aug 2001 23:39:11 PDT
Reply-To: "Bill Westfield" <billw@cisco.com>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "William Chops Westfield" <billw@cisco.com>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Nano/Micro Pumps
Comments: To: tbinford@frontiernet.net
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  Your message of Fri, 3 Aug 2001 01:10:34 -0400

> I don't think I see any reason you couldn't make a N20 hybrid Monocoque
> design that was about that size.

Another possibility would be a steam motor.  More fuel, less ISP...  (so
could I just fill the nozzle with an appropriate solder, and have it melt
away when the temperature gets where I want it?  Standard tin/lead solder
has a MP in the appropriate range, yes?  A bit unpredictable, though...)

BillW


From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 22814 invoked from network); 3 Aug 2001 06:47:30 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 3 Aug 2001 06:47:30 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: (qmail 1974 invoked from network); 3 Aug 2001 06:49:09 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 3 Aug 2001 06:49:09 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA09581; Thu, 2 Aug 2001 23:42:38 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 95459 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 3 Aug 2001 06:42:37 +0000
Received: from cisco.com (cypher.cisco.com [171.69.11.18]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA09564 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu,          2 Aug 2001 23:42:36 -0700
Received: (from billw@localhost) by cisco.com (8.8.8/2.6/Cisco List          Logging/8.8.8) id XAA04874; Thu, 2 Aug 2001 23:42:03 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID:  <CMM.0.90.4.996820923.billw@cypher>
Date:         Thu, 2 Aug 2001 23:42:03 PDT
Reply-To: "Bill Westfield" <billw@cisco.com>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "William Chops Westfield" <billw@cisco.com>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Nano/Micro Pumps
Comments: To: tbinford@frontiernet.net
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  Your message of Fri, 3 Aug 2001 01:10:34 -0400

    The latest issue of the AIAA Journal of Propulsion and Power has an
    article on miniature bipropellant liquid motors.

One of the micro-motors at MIT ("near" the web page that was mentioned here
a while ago) was spec'ed at a thrust of about 3lb.  That's a pretty
respectable model rocket motor.  An interesting consequence of the
manufacturing methods employed (ie similar to semiconductor manufacturing)
is the potential for easy scaling of production to mass quantities...

BillW


From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 18345 invoked from network); 3 Aug 2001 06:57:13 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 3 Aug 2001 06:57:13 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: (qmail 3130 invoked from network); 3 Aug 2001 06:59:20 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 3 Aug 2001 06:59:20 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA09710; Thu, 2 Aug 2001 23:53:21 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 95495 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 3 Aug 2001 06:53:19 +0000
Received: from cisco.com (cypher.cisco.com [171.69.11.18]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA09693 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu,          2 Aug 2001 23:53:19 -0700
Received: (from billw@localhost) by cisco.com (8.8.8/2.6/Cisco List          Logging/8.8.8) id XAA07037; Thu, 2 Aug 2001 23:52:48 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID:  <CMM.0.90.4.996821568.billw@cypher>
Date:         Thu, 2 Aug 2001 23:52:48 PDT
Reply-To: "Bill Westfield" <billw@cisco.com>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "William Chops Westfield" <billw@cisco.com>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Nano/Micro Pumps
Comments: To: Brian Reddeman <breddeman@HOTMAIL.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  Your message of Thu, 2 Aug 2001 22:49:50 -0700

    >micro-machined from silicon (or silicon carbide) wafers that are then
    >laminated. Motors are about 18 x 13 x 3 mm

    Before I had started posting to this forum and had seen the articles
    on this type of rocket motors I had already considered the idea of
    some sort of material sandwiched together. I just couldn't think of
    the materials to use. ... [I'll] laser cut it into some plastic sheets.

Hmm.  IIRC, it's pretty easy to find surplus carbon fiber sheets (some
project that didn't work out) in rather substantial thicknesses.
(I've got a couple of 2.5foot squares out in the gararge that vary
from about 1/4 to 3/8 inch thick, although that particular supplier
seems to have dissappeared...)  Anything you can do in plastic sheet
ought to scale to stronger, higher-temp versions in carbon fiber (or
G10/FR4 fiberglass...)

BillW


From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 21045 invoked from network); 3 Aug 2001 07:26:46 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 3 Aug 2001 07:26:46 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 15989 invoked from network); 3 Aug 2001 07:28:52 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 3 Aug 2001 07:28:52 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA09837; Fri, 3 Aug 2001 00:23:13 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 95515 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 3 Aug 2001 07:23:10 +0000
Received: from imo-m07.mx.aol.com (imo-m07.mx.aol.com [64.12.136.162]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA09820 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Fri, 3 Aug 2001 00:23:09 -0700
Received: from Sociald84@aol.com by imo-m07.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v31.9.) id          d.44.111bf358 (4004); Fri, 3 Aug 2001 03:21:50 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: AOL 5.0 for Windows sub 138
Message-ID:  <44.111bf358.289bab0d@aol.com>
Date:         Fri, 3 Aug 2001 03:21:49 EDT
Reply-To: <Sociald84@AOL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <Sociald84@AOL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] 2Ignition versus Detonation -- was Re: [AR] Head end              igniters
Comments: To: abradley@toolcity.net
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

In a message dated 8/1/01 9:16:01 PM Mountain Daylight Time,
abradley@TOOLCITY.NET writes:

> I find this discussion rather interesting. Some years back I did small
>  "construction contract" explosive work using at times low sensitivity
>  ammonium-base dynamite which was detonated in a "bundle" and, other times,
>  nitroglycerine-base ditching dynamite in which 1 stick within about 12" of
>  another would propagate the explosion (You could put a row hundreds of
>  yards long of the latter in muck), touch off the one on the end and make a
>  very nice ditch.

If your willing to do enough research you can probably find real numbers with
maximum distances and minimum charge sizes for detonation propagation through
different mediums.

>  I was taught that all high explosives (which includes the dynamites)
>  required a primer that furnished heat and shock to detonate.  However, the
>  ditching dynamites were a slight exception to this, as, back in those days,
>  occasionally there were rifle shooting contests in which a stick of
>  ditching dynamite was fixed to a heavy steel plate (called a "dynamite
>  shoot"). If a contestant hit a bullseye everyone knew it immediately!
>  (200-300 yard shoots)

In most explosives you do need a blasting cap. But dynamite is very sensitive
that's why thats what most blasters use to set off ANFO. Alfred Nobel's lab
was blown up when a small amount of Nitroglycerine in a beaker fell over
exploded and set off the entire amount of explosive in the building.


>  In researching some of the discussion on this list about using smokeless
>  powder as a "blowing charge" for parachutes, etc. in rockets I was amazed
>  to turn up reference to the fact that land and naval artillery igniters
>  utilize black powder to initiate the smokeless grains of the main
>  propellant! This was quite a surprise as I had always considered smokeless
>  (nitrocellulose) powder to be faster burning than black powder and therein
>  lay one advantage. It seems that the longer barrells (as found on
>  battleships for example) could never get proper acceleration from black
>  powder, but with the slower smokeless grain it gave them tremendous range.

In shooting it is most advantageous to have the charge burning for the entire
duration of projectile being in the barrell. It's the samething as getting
more altitude out of your rockets by using a lower thrust/longer burn time
with the same total impulse. Same energy delivered in a longer amount of time
gives a longer range. (assuming you've got enough barrell.)

>  It makes me wonder if there are rocket propellants based on something
>  similar to smokeless powder? Anyone know?
>
>  best,
>  al bradley

There are several double base rocket propellants. I don't recall exactly what
they are but some contain nitrocellulose and nitroguanadine.

Mark

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 2805 invoked from network); 3 Aug 2001 07:46:02 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 3 Aug 2001 07:46:02 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 25458 invoked from network); 3 Aug 2001 07:48:09 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 3 Aug 2001 07:48:09 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA09910; Fri, 3 Aug 2001 00:41:34 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 95527 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 3 Aug 2001 07:41:29 +0000
Received: from imo-r09.mx.aol.com (imo-r09.mx.aol.com [152.163.225.105]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA09893 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Fri, 3 Aug 2001 00:41:29 -0700
Received: from Sociald84@aol.com by imo-r09.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v31.9.) id          t.1e.196df6fd (4004); Fri, 3 Aug 2001 03:41:23 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: AOL 5.0 for Windows sub 138
Message-ID:  <1e.196df6fd.289bafa3@aol.com>
Date:         Fri, 3 Aug 2001 03:41:23 EDT
Reply-To: <Sociald84@AOL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <Sociald84@AOL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Head end igniters
Comments: To: jgrady@ga.prestige.net
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Jeff,

I don't intend to be hostile but your approaching a very scientific matter
with an oppinionated method.


In a message dated 8/1/01 9:52:43 PM Mountain Daylight Time,
jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET writes:

> Points taken, but I'll try one more time to make my case. I am no expert by
>  any stretch of the imagination on rocketry or ordinance, but I have
reloaded
>  ammunition for rifles, shotguns and pistols, for over 30 years now (yep,
>  still got all 10 fingers too). I'm an old dog that can and will learn new
>  tricks from others, and that's what I intend to take away from this
>  conversation. I think we may all be right depending on several variables
>  that each of us are thinking of.

>  My understanding of a shock wave is much the way you described it. Its a
>  pressure wave moving faster than the speed of sound due to the rapid
>  expansion of gases. Within a rifle cartridge, the primer is a small but
>  powerful device that does expel gases faster than the speed of sound. How
>  fast in ft/sec I don't know. I have had reason to test the trigger jobs on
>  pistols where the firing pin spring has been replaced with a heavier spring
>  to prevent accidental discharge if dropped, and the mainspring has been
>  lighten to allow for lighter trigger pull. To test the pistol to make sure
>  it will dent the primer, I press new primers into several empty casings and
>  fire them.
>
>  If they all go bang, fine otherwise more adjustments are needed. The noise
a
>  primer makes when it fires is VERY loud. It is my belief (based on limited
>  knowledge and what I have read) that the shock wave coming from the primer
>  is sufficient in speed and pressure to cause detonation of the powder in a
>  fully loaded cartridge.
>
>  When that happens, there is no doubt that detonation has just occurred,
>  because the bullet that just left the rifle is traveling faster than the
>  speed of sound, pushed by gases expanding even faster. A very hot .22-250
>  round can easily exceed 4,000 fps, well over the speed of sound. It got
>  there by the shockwave initiated by the primer. __No it didn't__ it got
there by the volumetric expansion of the gasses produced by the combustion of
the smokeless gunpowder.

Some reccommended reading: Newtons laws. An object in motion will accelerate
if a force is applied. This is true regardless of the speed of the force. IE
a propelled object is capable of exceeding the velocity of the exaust of it's
propellant. A rocket can go faster than the velocity of the exaust. Also the
shock wave which causes detonation is a sonic wave which travels a velocity
independant of the gas expansion. That is why when you see slow motion
photography of explosives being detonated a "ripple" is seen moving out
before the "real visual effect" of the explosive is seen.

yes primers do detonate. However double based smokeless shot gun, riffle, and
pistol powders as high order explosives are quite insensitive and require far
more initiation energy than a pistol or shot gun primer is able to provide.
The ammount of smokeless powder in a cartridge makes no difference on the
ability to detonate. I assure you the powder in your 30-06 does not detonate.
It deflagerates.  The shockwave from the lead stifnate (not sure if that's
right) primer charge is powerful enough to initiate detonation of
nitrocellulose, BUT not in the quantities present in one primer. It would
require close to a gram.


>  An exploding motor used as an igniter inside a much larger one will most
>  likely do so faster than the speed of sound, propagate a shock wave through
>  the grain of the larger one.
>
>  As Forrest Gump would say "thats all I have to say about that..."
>
>  Jeff

Once again an explosion is not nessicarily a detonation.

Mark

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 7639 invoked from network); 3 Aug 2001 07:55:15 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 3 Aug 2001 07:55:15 -0000
Received: (qmail 169 invoked from network); 3 Aug 2001 07:57:22 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 3 Aug 2001 07:57:22 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA09970; Fri, 3 Aug 2001 00:51:13 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 95539 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 3 Aug 2001 07:51:07 +0000
Received: from imo-r04.mx.aol.com (imo-r04.mx.aol.com [152.163.225.100]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA09953 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Fri, 3 Aug 2001 00:51:07 -0700
Received: from Sociald84@aol.com by imo-r04.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v31.9.) id          w.a1.191f9a66 (4004) for <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Fri, 3 Aug 2001          03:51:02 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: AOL 5.0 for Windows sub 138
Message-ID:  <a1.191f9a66.289bb1e5@aol.com>
Date:         Fri, 3 Aug 2001 03:51:01 EDT
Reply-To: <Sociald84@AOL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <Sociald84@AOL.COM>
Subject:      [AR] explosion
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Hey list,

I just wanted to clarify one thing realy quickly.

in this link
http://www.comptons.com/encyclopedia/ARTICLES/0050/00628736_A.html
provided in another post it says "  An Explosion Is a Chemical Reaction "
I just want to point out that an explosion is not a chemical reaction. An
explosion is often times the RESULT of a chemical reaction. The explosion
itself is an effect, not a cause.
An explosion can be made by putting a few pieces of dry ice in a 2L. bottle
with some warm watter and capping it.


Mark

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 16609 invoked from network); 3 Aug 2001 07:57:42 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 3 Aug 2001 07:57:42 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 21239 invoked from network); 3 Aug 2001 08:00:13 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 3 Aug 2001 08:00:13 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA09997; Fri, 3 Aug 2001 00:53:33 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 95547 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 3 Aug 2001 07:53:32 +0000
Received: from imo-r08.mx.aol.com (imo-r08.mx.aol.com [152.163.225.104]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA09980 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Fri, 3 Aug 2001 00:53:32 -0700
Received: from Sociald84@aol.com by imo-r08.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v31.9.) id          y.40.f20239f (4004); Fri, 3 Aug 2001 03:53:20 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: AOL 5.0 for Windows sub 138
Message-ID:  <40.f20239f.289bb270@aol.com>
Date:         Fri, 3 Aug 2001 03:53:20 EDT
Reply-To: <Sociald84@AOL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <Sociald84@AOL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Head end igniters
Comments: To: GEORDI@c031.aone.net.au
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

In a message dated 8/2/01 12:11:57 AM Mountain Daylight Time,
GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU writes:

> Note: according to Mr Alfred Zaehringer "an *explosion* is a medium rate
>  reaction depending on the degree of confinement. This process is a surface
>  effect, taking place from layer to layer but never proceeding below the
>  surface layer".
>  If true, then maybe a better definition for both outcomes might be "CATO"
>  or "spontaneous disassembly" or as Mike-Chopper-Limpus may say "There are
>  various pieces of the motor now in ahhh....various places" :-)
>
>
>  This may sound like nit-picking, but I'm actually interested to hear any
>  responses to that definition.
>
>  Troy.

I like it.

Mark

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 14590 invoked from network); 3 Aug 2001 08:13:29 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 3 Aug 2001 08:13:29 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 6361 invoked from network); 3 Aug 2001 08:15:03 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 3 Aug 2001 08:15:03 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id BAA10114; Fri, 3 Aug 2001 01:11:34 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 95572 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 3 Aug 2001 08:11:28 +0000
Received: from imo-m05.mx.aol.com (imo-m05.mx.aol.com [64.12.136.8]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id BAA10097 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Fri, 3 Aug 2001 01:11:27 -0700
Received: from Sociald84@aol.com by imo-m05.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v31.9.) id          m.ff.9fee264 (4004); Fri, 3 Aug 2001 04:10:52 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: AOL 5.0 for Windows sub 138
Message-ID:  <ff.9fee264.289bb68c@aol.com>
Date:         Fri, 3 Aug 2001 04:10:52 EDT
Reply-To: <Sociald84@AOL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <Sociald84@AOL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Head end igniters
Comments: To: greg@blastzone.com
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

My sister's X-Marine Corps ord. trainer X-boyfriend and i went into the
mountains with a 1.5lb block of composition C-4, a box of blasting caps, and
a roll of fuse. A forked tree became a pile of fire wood. A small clear
stream became a very wide a deep muddy hole. and a small charge detonated in
the open produced a nice little wind rushing past my head. One more fun
project involving C-4. Scrape out the clay from an estes D motor fill the cap
with BP, make a nose cone from C-4 and get a long stick. put it together.

Mark

In a message dated 8/2/01 1:02:25 PM Mountain Daylight Time,
greg@BLASTZONE.COM writes:

> Well, if we're sharing high explosives stories...
>
>  We had a guy in our local rocket group who was in the blasting business,
and
>  got out.  He had some excess inventory to dispose of.  The landowner where
>  we held launches had no problem (was actually excited) with him disposing
of
>  it on his property.  He dug a smal hole, dropped in about 6 'sticks' of
>  emulex with a cap, and poured about 100lbs of ANFO blasting explosives on
>  top.  Hit the button from a few hundred yards back.  Wow.  I've done a lot
>  of playing (in my earlier years) with flash, salutes, etc...  Not even
>  close.
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 17219 invoked from network); 3 Aug 2001 08:22:02 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 3 Aug 2001 08:22:02 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 28939 invoked from network); 3 Aug 2001 08:24:33 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 3 Aug 2001 08:24:33 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id BAA10173; Fri, 3 Aug 2001 01:19:33 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 95585 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 3 Aug 2001 08:19:28 +0000
Received: from stud.uni-goettingen.de (root@s2.stud.uni-goettingen.de          [134.76.60.22]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id BAA10156          for <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Fri, 3 Aug 2001 01:19:28 -0700
Received: from router.atw.stud.uni-goettingen.de ([134.76.62.65]          helo=stud.uni-goettingen.de) by stud.uni-goettingen.de with esmtp          (Exim 2.12 #8) id 15SaB3-0003c6-00 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 3          Aug 2001 10:19:25 +0200
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [de] (Win98; I)
X-Accept-Language: de
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B6A5E8A.6413859F@stud.uni-goettingen.de>
Date:         Fri, 3 Aug 2001 10:19:22 +0200
Reply-To: <Sociald84@AOL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Thomas Engelhardt" <tengelh@STUD.UNI-GOETTINGEN.DE>
Organization: =?iso-8859-1?Q?Rocket_Research_G=F6ttingen_=28RRG=29?=
Subject:      Re: [AR] Head end igniters - thanks for the info!
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Hi group,

thanks for all the useful info (literature, drawings and tips) - this is
exactly the reason why I like this list so much!!

Cheers,

Tom

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 22349 invoked from network); 3 Aug 2001 13:38:38 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 3 Aug 2001 13:38:38 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 21589 invoked from network); 3 Aug 2001 13:40:48 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 3 Aug 2001 13:40:48 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA11319; Fri, 3 Aug 2001 06:32:59 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 95732 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 3 Aug 2001 13:32:37 +0000
Received: from po3.glue.umd.edu (po3.glue.umd.edu [128.8.10.123]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA11277 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 3 Aug 2001 06:22:36 -0700
Received: from z.glue.umd.edu (IDENT:root@z.glue.umd.edu [128.8.10.71]) by          po3.glue.umd.edu (8.10.1/8.10.1) with ESMTP id f73DMZH00657 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 3 Aug 2001 09:22:35 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from z.glue.umd.edu (IDENT:sendmail@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by          z.glue.umd.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id JAA07298 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 3 Aug 2001 09:22:35 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from localhost (acase@localhost) by z.glue.umd.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with          ESMTP id JAA07294 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 3 Aug 2001 09:22:34          -0400 (EDT)
X-Authentication-Warning: z.glue.umd.edu: acase owned process doing -bs
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.GSO.4.21.0108030911490.5698-100000@z.glue.umd.edu>
Date:         Fri, 3 Aug 2001 09:22:34 -0400
Reply-To: "Andrew Case" <acase@GLUE.UMD.EDU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Andrew Case" <acase@GLUE.UMD.EDU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Head end igniters
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <1e.196df6fd.289bafa3@aol.com>

On Fri, 3 Aug 2001 Sociald84@AOL.COM wrote:
> jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET writes:
> >  When that happens, there is no doubt that detonation has just occurred,
> >  because the bullet that just left the rifle is traveling faster than the
> >  speed of sound, pushed by gases expanding even faster. A very hot .22-250
> >  round can easily exceed 4,000 fps, well over the speed of sound. It got
> >  there by the shockwave initiated by the primer.
> __No it didn't__ it got
> there by the volumetric expansion of the gasses produced by the combustion of
> the smokeless gunpowder.

Disclaimer: I'm a physicist, not a professional rocketeer, explosive
specialist, or any kind of expert in detonation/deflagration, so this
may be worth no more than what you paid for it:

I think a key point that may be causing needless confusion here is that
the bullet travels well over the speed of sound in STP air, *but* it
never exceeds the speed of sound of the gases pushing it - namely the
high temperature and high pressure combustion products in the barrel.
This is the relevant sound speed, not the 300 m/s speed of sound in STP
air. Since the bullet never exceeds the relevant sound speed, using the
heuristic "faster than sound implies detonation" doesn't work (quite apart
from the fact that the heuristic is unreliable anyway, but that's a
different story). IOW the volumetric expansion of the combustion
products never exceeds the sound speed at the relevant temperature
and pressure.

......Andrew

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 29488 invoked from network); 3 Aug 2001 13:54:14 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 3 Aug 2001 13:54:14 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 17845 invoked from network); 3 Aug 2001 13:56:10 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 3 Aug 2001 13:56:10 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA11434; Fri, 3 Aug 2001 06:48:46 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 95746 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 3 Aug 2001 13:48:44 +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (f13.law4.hotmail.com [216.33.149.13]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA11345 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 3 Aug 2001 06:38:43 -0700
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Fri,          3 Aug 2001 06:38:13 -0700
Received: from 192.36.140.38 by lw4fd.law4.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Fri, 03          Aug 2001 13:38:13 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [192.36.140.38]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 03 Aug 2001 13:38:13.0446 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[8AFD9E60:01C11C21]
Message-ID:  <F130C9guA8M6XQQez1e00000e9c@hotmail.com>
Date:         Fri, 3 Aug 2001 13:38:13 +0000
Reply-To: "Carsten Glans" <cag@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Carsten Glans" <cag@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] explosion
Comments: To: Sociald84@AOL.COM
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Furthermore there are detonations...

Regards

Carsten Glans
http://www.min-sajt.com/cag



>From: Sociald84@AOL.COM
>Reply-To: Sociald84@AOL.COM
>To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
>Subject: [AR] explosion
>Date: Fri, 3 Aug 2001 03:51:01 EDT
>
>Hey list,
>
>I just wanted to clarify one thing realy quickly.
>
>in this link
>http://www.comptons.com/encyclopedia/ARTICLES/0050/00628736_A.html
>provided in another post it says "  An Explosion Is a Chemical Reaction "
>I just want to point out that an explosion is not a chemical reaction. An
>explosion is often times the RESULT of a chemical reaction. The explosion
>itself is an effect, not a cause.
>An explosion can be made by putting a few pieces of dry ice in a 2L. bottle
>with some warm watter and capping it.
>
>
>Mark


_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 24898 invoked from network); 3 Aug 2001 14:00:14 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 3 Aug 2001 14:00:14 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 13119 invoked from network); 3 Aug 2001 14:01:52 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 3 Aug 2001 14:01:52 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA11530; Fri, 3 Aug 2001 06:56:16 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 95785 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 3 Aug 2001 13:56:15 +0000
Received: from waltz.SoftHome.net ([204.144.231.8]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id GAA11513 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 3          Aug 2001 06:56:14 -0700
Received: (qmail 30752 invoked by uid 417); 3 Aug 2001 14:03:15 -0000
References: <44.111bf358.289bab0d@aol.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Sender: erohrbaugh@softhome.net
Message-ID:  <20010803140315.30751.qmail@softhome.net>
Date:         Fri, 3 Aug 2001 14:03:15 GMT
Reply-To: <erohrbaugh@SOFTHOME.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <erohrbaugh@SOFTHOME.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] 2Ignition versus Detonation (DB Propellants)
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <44.111bf358.289bab0d@aol.com>

There are numerous double based propellants that are used.  They are mostly
used in missile propulsion (as opposed to space).  The main advantage of
these types of propellants, of course, is that they produce very little
smoke.  Hence, they are called minimum smoke propellants (or smokeless
powder when used in ammunition).  They usually consist of nitroglycerin
(NG) and nitrocellulose (NC)with several other ingredients.  These
propellants are pretty high energy.  They also have the drawback of being
considerd class 1.1.  One example of a double based propellant is M-36
which is used in the Hellfire, Dragon, and Predator missiles.  It is an
NC/NG propellant.  The propellant looks like a orange/brown crayon with the
wrappen taken off.  Pretty nice propellants.

-Eric

Sociald84@AOL.COM writes:

> In a message dated 8/1/01 9:16:01 PM Mountain Daylight Time,
> abradley@TOOLCITY.NET writes:
>
> > I find this discussion rather interesting. Some years back I did small
> >  "construction contract" explosive work using at times low sensitivity
> >  ammonium-base dynamite which was detonated in a "bundle" and, other times,
> >  nitroglycerine-base ditching dynamite in which 1 stick within about 12" of
> >  another would propagate the explosion (You could put a row hundreds of
> >  yards long of the latter in muck), touch off the one on the end and make a
> >  very nice ditch.
>
> If your willing to do enough research you can probably find real numbers with
> maximum distances and minimum charge sizes for detonation propagation through
> different mediums.
>
> >  I was taught that all high explosives (which includes the dynamites)
> >  required a primer that furnished heat and shock to detonate.  However, the
> >  ditching dynamites were a slight exception to this, as, back in those days,
> >  occasionally there were rifle shooting contests in which a stick of
> >  ditching dynamite was fixed to a heavy steel plate (called a "dynamite
> >  shoot"). If a contestant hit a bullseye everyone knew it immediately!
> >  (200-300 yard shoots)
>
> In most explosives you do need a blasting cap. But dynamite is very sensitive
> that's why thats what most blasters use to set off ANFO. Alfred Nobel's lab
> was blown up when a small amount of Nitroglycerine in a beaker fell over
> exploded and set off the entire amount of explosive in the building.
>
>
> >  In researching some of the discussion on this list about using smokeless
> >  powder as a "blowing charge" for parachutes, etc. in rockets I was amazed
> >  to turn up reference to the fact that land and naval artillery igniters
> >  utilize black powder to initiate the smokeless grains of the main
> >  propellant! This was quite a surprise as I had always considered smokeless
> >  (nitrocellulose) powder to be faster burning than black powder and therein
> >  lay one advantage. It seems that the longer barrells (as found on
> >  battleships for example) could never get proper acceleration from black
> >  powder, but with the slower smokeless grain it gave them tremendous range.
>
> In shooting it is most advantageous to have the charge burning for the entire
> duration of projectile being in the barrell. It's the samething as getting
> more altitude out of your rockets by using a lower thrust/longer burn time
> with the same total impulse. Same energy delivered in a longer amount of time
> gives a longer range. (assuming you've got enough barrell.)
>
> >  It makes me wonder if there are rocket propellants based on something
> >  similar to smokeless powder? Anyone know?
> >
> >  best,
> >  al bradley
>
> There are several double base rocket propellants. I don't recall exactly what
> they are but some contain nitrocellulose and nitroguanadine.
>
> Mark

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 1289 invoked from network); 3 Aug 2001 14:01:45 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 3 Aug 2001 14:01:45 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 5122 invoked from network); 3 Aug 2001 14:04:15 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 3 Aug 2001 14:04:15 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA11490; Fri, 3 Aug 2001 06:54:56 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 95774 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 3 Aug 2001 13:54:54 +0000
Received: from harrier.mail.pas.earthlink.net (harrier.mail.pas.earthlink.net          [207.217.121.12]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA11473          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 3 Aug 2001 06:54:53 -0700
Received: from sprintmail.com (pool0151.cvx18-bradley.dialup.earthlink.net          [209.179.238.151]) by harrier.mail.pas.earthlink.net          (EL-8_9_3_3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id GAA19394 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>;          Fri, 3 Aug 2001 06:54:52 -0700 (PDT)
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.74 [en] (Win98; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B69FFA0.6370AB06@sprintmail.com>
Date:         Thu, 2 Aug 2001 18:34:24 -0700
Reply-To: "Anthony Colette" <Rockitman@SPRINTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Anthony Colette" <Rockitman@SPRINTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      [AR] US Standard Atmosphere - 1962
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Does anyone on this list know where I can find polynomials expressing
the US 1962 Standard Atmosphere?
(Altitude Vs' Temp, Pressure, Q, S.O.S, and density)

Thanks in advance,
Tony

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 10764 invoked from network); 3 Aug 2001 14:59:24 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 3 Aug 2001 14:59:24 -0000
Received: (qmail 22857 invoked from network); 3 Aug 2001 15:01:52 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 3 Aug 2001 15:01:52 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA12299; Fri, 3 Aug 2001 07:52:58 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 95832 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 3 Aug 2001 14:52:52 +0000
Received: from yellowdog.featuretech.com ([63.121.63.69]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA12282 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri,          3 Aug 2001 07:52:51 -0700
Received: from duncan (sdsl-64-139-32-247.dsl.sjc.megapath.net [64.139.32.247])          by yellowdog.featuretech.com with SMTP (Microsoft Exchange Internet          Mail Service Version 5.5.2448.0) id QA2W3LZ6; Fri, 3 Aug 2001          08:04:09 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <NEBBLECGKLLOLFCCBNPEEECBDCAA.duncan@transim.com>
Date:         Fri, 3 Aug 2001 07:52:18 -0700
Reply-To: "Duncan McDonald" <duncan@TRANSIM.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Duncan McDonald" <duncan@TRANSIM.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] US Standard Atmosphere - 1962
Comments: To: Anthony Colette <Rockitman@SPRINTMAIL.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <3B69FFA0.6370AB06@sprintmail.com>

Tony,

Not quite what you want but here is a javascript that will do the
computations:

http://aero.stanford.edu/StdAtm.html

A fancier one is at

http://www.digitaldutch.com/atmoscalc/


Duncan

-----Original Message-----
From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@itc.uci.edu]On
Behalf Of Anthony Colette
Sent: Thursday, August 02, 2001 6:34 PM
To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
Subject: [AR] US Standard Atmosphere - 1962


Does anyone on this list know where I can find polynomials expressing
the US 1962 Standard Atmosphere?
(Altitude Vs' Temp, Pressure, Q, S.O.S, and density)

Thanks in advance,
Tony

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 15789 invoked from network); 3 Aug 2001 15:51:32 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 3 Aug 2001 15:51:32 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 12479 invoked from network); 3 Aug 2001 15:53:10 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 3 Aug 2001 15:53:10 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA12540; Fri, 3 Aug 2001 08:47:14 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 95851 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 3 Aug 2001 15:47:10 +0000
Received: from stud.uni-goettingen.de (root@s2.stud.uni-goettingen.de          [134.76.60.22]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA12523          for <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Fri, 3 Aug 2001 08:47:10 -0700
Received: from router.atw.stud.uni-goettingen.de ([134.76.62.65]          helo=stud.uni-goettingen.de) by stud.uni-goettingen.de with esmtp          (Exim 2.12 #8) id 15ShAI-0003lk-00 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 3          Aug 2001 17:47:06 +0200
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [de] (Win98; I)
X-Accept-Language: de
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <44.111bf358.289bab0d@aol.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B6AC77A.DE75A9F9@stud.uni-goettingen.de>
Date:         Fri, 3 Aug 2001 17:47:06 +0200
Reply-To: <erohrbaugh@SOFTHOME.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Thomas Engelhardt" <tengelh@STUD.UNI-GOETTINGEN.DE>
Organization: =?iso-8859-1?Q?Rocket_Research_G=F6ttingen_=28RRG=29?=
Subject:      [AR] [FYI] DB Propellants
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

>One example of a double based propellant is M-36
>which is used in the Hellfire, Dragon, and Predator missiles.  It is an
>NC/NG propellant.  The propellant looks like a orange/brown crayon with the
>wrappen taken off.  Pretty nice propellants.

>-Eric

In Germany, we do have a commercially available rocket motor with a
double base propellant block. You can see a picture of two propellant
blocks here http://private.addcom.de/RMV/t2_wert/31.jpg and see me
holding the motor here http://private.addcom.de/RMV/t2_wert/33.jpg .
Fun fact: apart from that motor (an I 200), there are _no_ legal HPR
motors in Germany. There is a CE certification process for the Aerotech
motors, but other than that, we have to rely on clusters of E6 motors
for larger rockets. Plus you need to be a certified pyrotechnics
operator (which is the occasion where the pictures were taken).
Motor facts:
47-50% NC
34-37% NG
Rest are stabilisators, softeners and burning rate catalysts
Propellant mass: 200g
Burntime: 1.4 s
Thrust: 257.5N
Pc: 95 bar (1378 PSI)

Because of the non-visible exhaust, we usually add two or three BP
motors. A typical launch without the latter looks like this
http://www.experimentalraketen.de/hog3/hog3_3.jpg and with the latter
like this
http://www.experimentalraketen.de/blackb/blackb13.jpg (the BC 360 being
the main and two F100 the boosters)

Oh well. I thought I'd let you know.....:-)

Cheers,

Tom

P.S. Nitroglycerine has a very distinct smell - I like it! *g*

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 15842 invoked from network); 3 Aug 2001 16:41:50 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 3 Aug 2001 16:41:50 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 10853 invoked from network); 3 Aug 2001 16:43:57 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 3 Aug 2001 16:43:57 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA12767; Fri, 3 Aug 2001 09:37:05 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 95874 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 3 Aug 2001 16:36:46 +0000
Received: from imo-m02.mx.aol.com (imo-m02.mx.aol.com [64.12.136.5]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA12747 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Fri, 3 Aug 2001 09:36:46 -0700
Received: from Ricanakk@aol.com by imo-m02.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v31.9.) id          t.f5.d5689fc (3842); Fri, 3 Aug 2001 12:36:10 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: AOL 5.0 for Windows sub 108
Message-ID:  <f5.d5689fc.289c2cfa@aol.com>
Date:         Fri, 3 Aug 2001 12:36:10 EDT
Reply-To: <Ricanakk@AOL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <Ricanakk@AOL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] head end & nozzle end igniters
Comments: To: jmorken@home.com
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

In a message dated 01/08/03 01:14:58 Eastern Daylight Time, jmorken@HOME.COM
writes:

<< How do you connect the nichrome ignitors to the copper leads?
 I find it a bit tricky to make good ignitors with nichrome wire,
 since it is hard to solder it and wrapping the wire on may be a bit
 unreliable!
  One good soldering method I found was looping the copper in a small circle
 at the end
 and putting the nichrome through this, then filling the inside of the small
 loop with solder
 (these ignitors are a bit bulky though) >>

I use a very similar method..check out my web page:
http://members.aol.com/nonillion/igniter.html
I find this method works very well, as its easy to make a small loop with
"wire-wrap" wire.

Richard

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 1879 invoked from network); 3 Aug 2001 16:45:33 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 3 Aug 2001 16:45:33 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 12534 invoked from network); 3 Aug 2001 16:47:12 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 3 Aug 2001 16:47:12 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA12827; Fri, 3 Aug 2001 09:42:03 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 95882 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 3 Aug 2001 16:42:01 +0000
Received: from imo-m04.mx.aol.com (imo-m04.mx.aol.com [64.12.136.7]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA12809 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Fri, 3 Aug 2001 09:42:00 -0700
Received: from Ricanakk@aol.com by imo-m04.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v31.9.) id          m.90.181cfbb2 (3842); Fri, 3 Aug 2001 12:41:00 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: AOL 5.0 for Windows sub 108
Message-ID:  <90.181cfbb2.289c2e1c@aol.com>
Date:         Fri, 3 Aug 2001 12:41:00 EDT
Reply-To: <Ricanakk@AOL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <Ricanakk@AOL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] US Standard Atmosphere - 1962
Comments: To: Rockitman@sprintmail.com
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

In a message dated 01/08/03 10:04:31 Eastern Daylight Time,
Rockitman@SPRINTMAIL.COM writes:

<< Does anyone on this list know where I can find polynomials expressing
 the US 1962 Standard Atmosphere?
 (Altitude Vs' Temp, Pressure, Q, S.O.S, and density) >>

Tony,
ESDU data sheet 77021 provides this information.
www.esdu.com
If you can't access the site (password may be needed) contact me directly.

Richard Nakka

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 22470 invoked from network); 3 Aug 2001 17:04:24 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 3 Aug 2001 17:04:24 -0000
Received: (qmail 23597 invoked from network); 3 Aug 2001 17:06:01 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 3 Aug 2001 17:06:01 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA12956; Fri, 3 Aug 2001 10:00:50 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 95902 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 3 Aug 2001 17:00:43 +0000
Received: from spock.alohanet.com (spock.alohanet.com [209.31.4.252]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA12937 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Fri, 3 Aug 2001 10:00:42 -0700
Received: from NATE2 (spock.alohanet.com [209.31.4.252]) by spock.alohanet.com          (Post.Office MTA v3.5.2 release 221 ID# 0-55447U100L2S100V35) with          SMTP id com for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Fri, 3 Aug 2001 09:59:49 -0700
References:  <ff.9fee264.289bb68c@aol.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <002f01c11c3e$360e6e30$68e9a8c0@NATE2>
Date:         Fri, 3 Aug 2001 10:03:26 -0700
Reply-To: "Nathan Hays" <nhays@ALOHANET.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Nathan Hays" <nhays@ALOHANET.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Head end igniters
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Could we not share high explosive stories on arocket?  If it is about
whether to use flash powder as an igniter or not, I'm for it.  However, I'm
uncomfortable mixing things from the Bad Toy Box and our hobby.  We have
enough scrutiny already.

- Nate

> > Well, if we're sharing high explosives stories...
> >

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 22806 invoked from network); 3 Aug 2001 17:11:31 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 3 Aug 2001 17:11:31 -0000
Received: (qmail 25902 invoked from network); 3 Aug 2001 17:13:39 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 3 Aug 2001 17:13:39 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA12997; Fri, 3 Aug 2001 10:04:59 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 95912 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 3 Aug 2001 17:04:57 +0000
Received: from spock.alohanet.com (spock.alohanet.com [209.31.4.252]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA12979 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Fri, 3 Aug 2001 10:04:56 -0700
Received: from NATE2 (spock.alohanet.com [209.31.4.252]) by spock.alohanet.com          (Post.Office MTA v3.5.2 release 221 ID# 0-55447U100L2S100V35) with          SMTP id com for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Fri, 3 Aug 2001 10:03:53 -0700
References: <44.111bf358.289bab0d@aol.com>             <3B6AC77A.DE75A9F9@stud.uni-goettingen.de>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <004501c11c3e$c78d4980$68e9a8c0@NATE2>
Date:         Fri, 3 Aug 2001 10:07:30 -0700
Reply-To: "Nathan Hays" <nhays@ALOHANET.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Nathan Hays" <nhays@ALOHANET.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] [FYI] DB Propellants
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Has anyone experimented with adding say, Pyrodex to composite propellant?
It seems to me it might serve the same function as HMX or RDX.

- Nate


----- Original Message -----
From: "Thomas Engelhardt" <tengelh@STUD.UNI-GOETTINGEN.DE>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Friday, August 03, 2001 8:47 AM
Subject: [AR] [FYI] DB Propellants


> >One example of a double based propellant is M-36
> >which is used in the Hellfire, Dragon, and Predator missiles.  It is an
> >NC/NG propellant.  The propellant looks like a orange/brown crayon with
the
> >wrappen taken off.  Pretty nice propellants.
>
> >-Eric
>
> In Germany, we do have a commercially available rocket motor with a
> double base propellant block. You can see a picture of two propellant
> blocks here http://private.addcom.de/RMV/t2_wert/31.jpg and see me
> holding the motor here http://private.addcom.de/RMV/t2_wert/33.jpg .
> Fun fact: apart from that motor (an I 200), there are _no_ legal HPR
> motors in Germany. There is a CE certification process for the Aerotech
> motors, but other than that, we have to rely on clusters of E6 motors
> for larger rockets. Plus you need to be a certified pyrotechnics
> operator (which is the occasion where the pictures were taken).
> Motor facts:
> 47-50% NC
> 34-37% NG
> Rest are stabilisators, softeners and burning rate catalysts
> Propellant mass: 200g
> Burntime: 1.4 s
> Thrust: 257.5N
> Pc: 95 bar (1378 PSI)
>
> Because of the non-visible exhaust, we usually add two or three BP
> motors. A typical launch without the latter looks like this
> http://www.experimentalraketen.de/hog3/hog3_3.jpg and with the latter
> like this
> http://www.experimentalraketen.de/blackb/blackb13.jpg (the BC 360 being
> the main and two F100 the boosters)
>
> Oh well. I thought I'd let you know.....:-)
>
> Cheers,
>
> Tom
>
> P.S. Nitroglycerine has a very distinct smell - I like it! *g*
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 10439 invoked from network); 3 Aug 2001 17:36:54 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 3 Aug 2001 17:36:54 -0000
Received: (qmail 14035 invoked from network); 3 Aug 2001 17:38:25 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 3 Aug 2001 17:38:25 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA13338; Fri, 3 Aug 2001 10:32:16 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 95939 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 3 Aug 2001 17:32:09 +0000
Received: from albatross.wgn.net (www.wgn.net [64.14.252.81] (may be forged))          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA13320 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 3 Aug 2001 10:32:09 -0700
Received: from hogwild (sc-66-74-70-20.socal.rr.com [66.74.70.20]) by          albatross.wgn.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id KAA10784 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 3 Aug 2001 10:33:51 -0700
References: <44.111bf358.289bab0d@aol.com>                        <3B6AC77A.DE75A9F9@stud.uni-goettingen.de>             <004501c11c3e$c78d4980$68e9a8c0@NATE2>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <002a01c11c42$275b5200$14464a42@socal.rr.com>
Date:         Fri, 3 Aug 2001 10:31:39 -0700
Reply-To: "Wedge Oldham" <wedge@WESTWORLD.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Wedge Oldham" <wedge@WESTWORLD.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] [FYI] DB Propellants
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

I've used pyrodex pellets as pyrogen in 38mm commercial motors.

The .50 caliber 50 grain pellet, fits the core of a 38mm Aerotech motor
perfectly. A Daveyfire 28F fits the center hole of a pyrodex pellet
perfectly.

I suspect that this was *not* what the question was about.

Wedge Oldham
http://NikeProject.com
----- Original Message -----
From: "Nathan Hays" <nhays@ALOHANET.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Friday, August 03, 2001 10:07 AM
Subject: Re: [AR] [FYI] DB Propellants


> Has anyone experimented with adding say, Pyrodex to composite propellant?
> It seems to me it might serve the same function as HMX or RDX.
>
> - Nate
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Thomas Engelhardt" <tengelh@STUD.UNI-GOETTINGEN.DE>
> To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
> Sent: Friday, August 03, 2001 8:47 AM
> Subject: [AR] [FYI] DB Propellants
>
>
> > >One example of a double based propellant is M-36
> > >which is used in the Hellfire, Dragon, and Predator missiles.  It is an
> > >NC/NG propellant.  The propellant looks like a orange/brown crayon with
> the
> > >wrappen taken off.  Pretty nice propellants.
> >
> > >-Eric
> >
> > In Germany, we do have a commercially available rocket motor with a
> > double base propellant block. You can see a picture of two propellant
> > blocks here http://private.addcom.de/RMV/t2_wert/31.jpg and see me
> > holding the motor here http://private.addcom.de/RMV/t2_wert/33.jpg .
> > Fun fact: apart from that motor (an I 200), there are _no_ legal HPR
> > motors in Germany. There is a CE certification process for the Aerotech
> > motors, but other than that, we have to rely on clusters of E6 motors
> > for larger rockets. Plus you need to be a certified pyrotechnics
> > operator (which is the occasion where the pictures were taken).
> > Motor facts:
> > 47-50% NC
> > 34-37% NG
> > Rest are stabilisators, softeners and burning rate catalysts
> > Propellant mass: 200g
> > Burntime: 1.4 s
> > Thrust: 257.5N
> > Pc: 95 bar (1378 PSI)
> >
> > Because of the non-visible exhaust, we usually add two or three BP
> > motors. A typical launch without the latter looks like this
> > http://www.experimentalraketen.de/hog3/hog3_3.jpg and with the latter
> > like this
> > http://www.experimentalraketen.de/blackb/blackb13.jpg (the BC 360 being
> > the main and two F100 the boosters)
> >
> > Oh well. I thought I'd let you know.....:-)
> >
> > Cheers,
> >
> > Tom
> >
> > P.S. Nitroglycerine has a very distinct smell - I like it! *g*
> >

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 16883 invoked from network); 3 Aug 2001 17:45:44 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 3 Aug 2001 17:45:44 -0000
Received: (qmail 19074 invoked from network); 3 Aug 2001 17:48:10 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 3 Aug 2001 17:48:10 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA13409; Fri, 3 Aug 2001 10:41:51 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 95957 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 3 Aug 2001 17:41:45 +0000
Received: from Blastzone.com (consumersinterest.com [207.195.143.118] (may be          forged)) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA13390 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 3 Aug 2001 10:41:45 -0700
Received: from deputydog [131.107.3.84] by Blastzone.com with ESMTP          (SMTPD32-6.04) id A5A91D26014A; Fri, 03 Aug 2001 10:55:53 -0700
References: <44.111bf358.289bab0d@aol.com>                                   <3B6AC77A.DE75A9F9@stud.uni-goettingen.de>                        <004501c11c3e$c78d4980$68e9a8c0@NATE2>             <002a01c11c42$275b5200$14464a42@socal.rr.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2462.0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <02ec01c11c43$7efa1630$730c379d@redmond.corp.microsoft.com>
Date:         Fri, 3 Aug 2001 10:41:15 -0700
Reply-To: "Greg Deputy" <greg@BLASTZONE.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Greg Deputy" <greg@BLASTZONE.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] [FYI] DB Propellants
Comments: To: Wedge Oldham <wedge@WESTWORLD.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Where can you get pyrodex pellets?

----- Original Message -----
From: "Wedge Oldham" <wedge@WESTWORLD.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Friday, August 03, 2001 10:31 AM
Subject: Re: [AR] [FYI] DB Propellants


> I've used pyrodex pellets as pyrogen in 38mm commercial motors.
>
> The .50 caliber 50 grain pellet, fits the core of a 38mm Aerotech motor
> perfectly. A Daveyfire 28F fits the center hole of a pyrodex pellet
> perfectly.
>
> I suspect that this was *not* what the question was about.
>
> Wedge Oldham
> http://NikeProject.com
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Nathan Hays" <nhays@ALOHANET.COM>
> To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
> Sent: Friday, August 03, 2001 10:07 AM
> Subject: Re: [AR] [FYI] DB Propellants
>
>
> > Has anyone experimented with adding say, Pyrodex to composite
propellant?
> > It seems to me it might serve the same function as HMX or RDX.
> >
> > - Nate
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Thomas Engelhardt" <tengelh@STUD.UNI-GOETTINGEN.DE>
> > To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
> > Sent: Friday, August 03, 2001 8:47 AM
> > Subject: [AR] [FYI] DB Propellants
> >
> >
> > > >One example of a double based propellant is M-36
> > > >which is used in the Hellfire, Dragon, and Predator missiles.  It is
an
> > > >NC/NG propellant.  The propellant looks like a orange/brown crayon
with
> > the
> > > >wrappen taken off.  Pretty nice propellants.
> > >
> > > >-Eric
> > >
> > > In Germany, we do have a commercially available rocket motor with a
> > > double base propellant block. You can see a picture of two propellant
> > > blocks here http://private.addcom.de/RMV/t2_wert/31.jpg and see me
> > > holding the motor here http://private.addcom.de/RMV/t2_wert/33.jpg .
> > > Fun fact: apart from that motor (an I 200), there are _no_ legal HPR
> > > motors in Germany. There is a CE certification process for the
Aerotech
> > > motors, but other than that, we have to rely on clusters of E6 motors
> > > for larger rockets. Plus you need to be a certified pyrotechnics
> > > operator (which is the occasion where the pictures were taken).
> > > Motor facts:
> > > 47-50% NC
> > > 34-37% NG
> > > Rest are stabilisators, softeners and burning rate catalysts
> > > Propellant mass: 200g
> > > Burntime: 1.4 s
> > > Thrust: 257.5N
> > > Pc: 95 bar (1378 PSI)
> > >
> > > Because of the non-visible exhaust, we usually add two or three BP
> > > motors. A typical launch without the latter looks like this
> > > http://www.experimentalraketen.de/hog3/hog3_3.jpg and with the latter
> > > like this
> > > http://www.experimentalraketen.de/blackb/blackb13.jpg (the BC 360
being
> > > the main and two F100 the boosters)
> > >
> > > Oh well. I thought I'd let you know.....:-)
> > >
> > > Cheers,
> > >
> > > Tom
> > >
> > > P.S. Nitroglycerine has a very distinct smell - I like it! *g*
> > >
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 3283 invoked from network); 3 Aug 2001 18:10:32 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 3 Aug 2001 18:10:32 -0000
Received: (qmail 3107 invoked from network); 3 Aug 2001 18:12:09 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 3 Aug 2001 18:12:09 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA13572; Fri, 3 Aug 2001 11:01:56 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 95994 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 3 Aug 2001 18:01:53 +0000
Received: from castor.ridgenet.net (IDENT:root@castor.ridgenet.net          [199.120.150.29]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA13554          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 3 Aug 2001 11:01:52 -0700
Received: from kristinscomp (pm205.ridgenet.net [204.154.246.205]) by          castor.ridgenet.net (8.11.0/8.11.0) with SMTP id f73HtCS17864; Fri, 3          Aug 2001 10:55:12 -0700
References:  <3B69FFA0.6370AB06@sprintmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <005d01c11c47$9185b800$1b30fea9@kristinscomp>
Date:         Fri, 3 Aug 2001 11:10:23 -0700
Reply-To: "Kristin & David Hall" <thehalls@RIDGENET.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Kristin & David Hall" <thehalls@RIDGENET.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] US Standard Atmosphere - 1962
Comments: To: Anthony Colette <Rockitman@SPRINTMAIL.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Anothony,

It's not the 1962 atmosphere, but you might be interested in my little
atmosphere routine (1976 IIRC).  It's on my webpage,
http://www.ridgenet.net/~thehalls.  Just follow the links.

--
Dave and/or Kristin Hall
----- Original Message -----
From: Anthony Colette <Rockitman@SPRINTMAIL.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Thursday, August 02, 2001 6:34 PM
Subject: [AR] US Standard Atmosphere - 1962


> Does anyone on this list know where I can find polynomials expressing
> the US 1962 Standard Atmosphere?
> (Altitude Vs' Temp, Pressure, Q, S.O.S, and density)
>
> Thanks in advance,
> Tony
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 25315 invoked from network); 3 Aug 2001 18:15:46 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 3 Aug 2001 18:15:46 -0000
Received: (qmail 2912 invoked from network); 3 Aug 2001 18:18:16 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 3 Aug 2001 18:18:16 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA13669; Fri, 3 Aug 2001 11:10:26 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 96007 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 3 Aug 2001 18:10:24 +0000
Received: from castor.ridgenet.net (IDENT:root@castor.ridgenet.net          [199.120.150.29]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA13651          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 3 Aug 2001 11:10:24 -0700
Received: from kristinscomp (pm205.ridgenet.net [204.154.246.205]) by          castor.ridgenet.net (8.11.0/8.11.0) with SMTP id f73I3IS18606; Fri, 3          Aug 2001 11:03:18 -0700
References: <44.111bf358.289bab0d@aol.com>             <20010803140315.30751.qmail@softhome.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <006301c11c48$b35b1b40$1b30fea9@kristinscomp>
Date:         Fri, 3 Aug 2001 11:18:29 -0700
Reply-To: "Kristin & David Hall" <thehalls@RIDGENET.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Kristin & David Hall" <thehalls@RIDGENET.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] 2Ignition versus Detonation (DB Propellants)
Comments: To: erohrbaugh@SOFTHOME.NET
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

> There are numerous double based propellants that are used.  They are
mostly
> used in missile propulsion (as opposed to space).  The main advantage of
> these types of propellants, of course, is that they produce very little
> smoke.  Hence, they are called minimum smoke propellants (or smokeless
> powder when used in ammunition).

Not true.  At least, not true within the US DoD community.  Double base
propellants are double base propellants.  Minimum smoke propellants are HTPB
+ RDX or HMX (depending on how much money you want to spend).

> They usually consist of nitroglycerin
> (NG) and nitrocellulose (NC)with several other ingredients.  These
> propellants are pretty high energy.

Again, untrue.  Double base propellants are actually of a lower energy than
APCP.  Add the safety (read: aging) problems with them into the mix and you
find that today's military only uses double base propellants when they need
to make *A LOT* of motors (double base propellants can be extruded very
easily).  In fact, I only know of one system that uses them (2.75)...and
even that one is changing, IIRC.

> They also have the drawback of being
> considerd class 1.1.  One example of a double based propellant is M-36
> which is used in the Hellfire, Dragon, and Predator missiles.  It is an
> NC/NG propellant.  The propellant looks like a orange/brown crayon with
the
> wrappen taken off.  Pretty nice propellants.

I've no knowledge of the Dragon and Predator, but as one who has spent a
good portion of my professional career dealing with the Hellfire's
propulsion system I can assure you that it is most certainly *NOT* powered
by a double base propellant.

OBDisclaimer:  The Hellfire has had a couple different motors.  The very
first one may have been double base.  I don't know.  That motor was retired
from service many moons before I came onto the scene.  But none of the
others had/have double base propellants.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 21846 invoked from network); 3 Aug 2001 18:29:09 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 3 Aug 2001 18:29:09 -0000
Received: (qmail 18932 invoked from network); 3 Aug 2001 18:31:21 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 3 Aug 2001 18:31:21 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA13773; Fri, 3 Aug 2001 11:21:57 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 96025 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 3 Aug 2001 18:21:50 +0000
Received: from castor.ridgenet.net (IDENT:root@castor.ridgenet.net          [199.120.150.29]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA13755          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 3 Aug 2001 11:21:49 -0700
Received: from kristinscomp (pm205.ridgenet.net [204.154.246.205]) by          castor.ridgenet.net (8.11.0/8.11.0) with SMTP id f73IF9S19902; Fri, 3          Aug 2001 11:15:09 -0700
References:  <1e.196df6fd.289bafa3@aol.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <006d01c11c4a$5b0e3560$1b30fea9@kristinscomp>
Date:         Fri, 3 Aug 2001 11:30:21 -0700
Reply-To: "Kristin & David Hall" <thehalls@RIDGENET.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Kristin & David Hall" <thehalls@RIDGENET.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Head end igniters
Comments: To: Sociald84@AOL.COM
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

> Some reccommended reading: Newtons laws. An object in motion will
accelerate
> if a force is applied. This is true regardless of the speed of the force.
IE
> a propelled object is capable of exceeding the velocity of the exaust of
it's
> propellant. A rocket can go faster than the velocity of the exaust. Also
the

True for rockets.  Not true for guns.

> independant of the gas expansion. That is why when you see slow motion
> photography of explosives being detonated a "ripple" is seen moving out
> before the "real visual effect" of the explosive is seen.

Ah....How to be diplomatic here.  By the time you see a "real visual
effect", the detonation has been over a very long time.  In fact, by the
time the bomb case ruptures, the detonation is very likely over.
Detonations are *FAST*.  So what's all that "real visual effect"?  Well,
gases that have been heated to several thousand degrees do tend to glow even
if they are no longer reacting.  But it's not quite that simple because the
gases *are* reacting.  They just aren't detonating anymore - they're
burning.  What?  Burning?  Yep, burning.  Many times a detonation will
produce gases that one normally associates with incomplete combustion.  For
example, carbon monoxide.  Now, throw 6000 degree carbon monoxide into an
oxygen rich environment (ie, air) and voila! "Spontaneous" combustion.  In
other words, it is extremely rare to actually "see" a detonation.  What you
see in that fireball is the combustion of the post-detonation gases.  Which
brings us back to the ripple...'tis nothing more than a shockwave traveling
at Mach 1.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 1340 invoked from network); 3 Aug 2001 18:59:44 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 3 Aug 2001 18:59:44 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 22209 invoked from network); 3 Aug 2001 19:02:04 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 3 Aug 2001 19:02:04 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA14026; Fri, 3 Aug 2001 11:52:24 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 96047 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 3 Aug 2001 18:52:11 +0000
Received: from avocet.mail.pas.earthlink.net (avocet.mail.pas.earthlink.net          [207.217.121.50]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA13903          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 3 Aug 2001 11:42:11 -0700
Received: from earthlink.net (dialup-209.247.143.51.Dial1.SanJose1.Level3.net          [209.247.143.51]) by avocet.mail.pas.earthlink.net (EL-8_9_3_3/8.9.3)          with ESMTP id LAA07732; Fri, 3 Aug 2001 11:42:09 -0700 (PDT)
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.75 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.16-22 i686)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <44.111bf358.289bab0d@aol.com>            <20010803140315.30751.qmail@softhome.net>            <006301c11c48$b35b1b40$1b30fea9@kristinscomp>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B6AF09B.9082EE10@earthlink.net>
Date:         Fri, 3 Aug 2001 11:42:35 -0700
Reply-To: "David Weinshenker" <daze39@EARTHLINK.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "David Weinshenker" <daze39@EARTHLINK.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] 2Ignition versus Detonation (DB Propellants)
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Kristin & David Hall wrote:
> HTPB + RDX or HMX

How does this work - you use nitro-organic explosives
(are HMX and RDX in the "oxygen-rich monopropellant" category?)
dispersed in a polymeric binder, which must somehow inhibit
the propagation of a detonation front but allow them to contribute
oxygen and energy to surface combustion?

Doesn't sound like anything that would be of much use to anyone
but the military - "conventional" oxidizers sound like they'd
be rather safer to handle than the raw explosive ingredients
of the "smokeless" composition you describe... especially at
both extremes of the size/complexity scale (i.e., the extremely
large quantities involved in a space booster, or the relatively
simple processes and facilities involved in much amateur work.)
And the military is probably the only entity for whom "smokeless"
is any advantage - for others, "we can track it easily" may be
an advantage, and whether "they can see where it came from" is
not an issue.

-dave w

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 12855 invoked from network); 3 Aug 2001 19:02:29 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 3 Aug 2001 19:02:29 -0000
Received: (qmail 7928 invoked from network); 3 Aug 2001 19:04:41 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 3 Aug 2001 19:04:41 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA14142; Fri, 3 Aug 2001 11:58:34 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 96062 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 3 Aug 2001 18:58:32 +0000
Received: from albatross.wgn.net (www.wgn.net [64.14.252.81] (may be forged))          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA14124 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 3 Aug 2001 11:58:32 -0700
Received: from hogwild (sc-66-74-70-20.socal.rr.com [66.74.70.20]) by          albatross.wgn.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id MAA25338 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 3 Aug 2001 12:00:14 -0700
References: <44.111bf358.289bab0d@aol.com>                                              <3B6AC77A.DE75A9F9@stud.uni-goettingen.de>                                   <004501c11c3e$c78d4980$68e9a8c0@NATE2>                        <002a01c11c42$275b5200$14464a42@socal.rr.com>             <02ec01c11c43$7efa1630$730c379d@redmond.corp.microsoft.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <012d01c11c4e$2f00e860$14464a42@socal.rr.com>
Date:         Fri, 3 Aug 2001 11:57:45 -0700
Reply-To: "Wedge Oldham" <wedge@WESTWORLD.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Wedge Oldham" <wedge@WESTWORLD.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] [FYI] DB Propellants
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This may be the easiest way to answer that question.
http://www.hodgdon.com/dealers/index.htm
Wedge Oldham
http://NikeProject.com

----- Original Message -----
From: "Greg Deputy" <greg@BLASTZONE.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Friday, August 03, 2001 10:41 AM
Subject: Re: [AR] [FYI] DB Propellants


> Where can you get pyrodex pellets?
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Wedge Oldham" <wedge@WESTWORLD.COM>
> To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
> Sent: Friday, August 03, 2001 10:31 AM
> Subject: Re: [AR] [FYI] DB Propellants
>
>
> > I've used pyrodex pellets as pyrogen in 38mm commercial motors.
> >
> > The .50 caliber 50 grain pellet, fits the core of a 38mm Aerotech motor
> > perfectly. A Daveyfire 28F fits the center hole of a pyrodex pellet
> > perfectly.
> >
> > I suspect that this was *not* what the question was about.
> >
> > Wedge Oldham
> > http://NikeProject.com
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Nathan Hays" <nhays@ALOHANET.COM>
> > To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
> > Sent: Friday, August 03, 2001 10:07 AM
> > Subject: Re: [AR] [FYI] DB Propellants
> >
> >
> > > Has anyone experimented with adding say, Pyrodex to composite
> propellant?
> > > It seems to me it might serve the same function as HMX or RDX.
> > >
> > > - Nate
> > >
> > >
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: "Thomas Engelhardt" <tengelh@STUD.UNI-GOETTINGEN.DE>
> > > To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
> > > Sent: Friday, August 03, 2001 8:47 AM
> > > Subject: [AR] [FYI] DB Propellants
> > >
> > >
> > > > >One example of a double based propellant is M-36
> > > > >which is used in the Hellfire, Dragon, and Predator missiles.  It
is
> an
> > > > >NC/NG propellant.  The propellant looks like a orange/brown crayon
> with
> > > the
> > > > >wrappen taken off.  Pretty nice propellants.
> > > >
> > > > >-Eric
> > > >
> > > > In Germany, we do have a commercially available rocket motor with a
> > > > double base propellant block. You can see a picture of two
propellant
> > > > blocks here http://private.addcom.de/RMV/t2_wert/31.jpg and see me
> > > > holding the motor here http://private.addcom.de/RMV/t2_wert/33.jpg .
> > > > Fun fact: apart from that motor (an I 200), there are _no_ legal HPR
> > > > motors in Germany. There is a CE certification process for the
> Aerotech
> > > > motors, but other than that, we have to rely on clusters of E6
motors
> > > > for larger rockets. Plus you need to be a certified pyrotechnics
> > > > operator (which is the occasion where the pictures were taken).
> > > > Motor facts:
> > > > 47-50% NC
> > > > 34-37% NG
> > > > Rest are stabilisators, softeners and burning rate catalysts
> > > > Propellant mass: 200g
> > > > Burntime: 1.4 s
> > > > Thrust: 257.5N
> > > > Pc: 95 bar (1378 PSI)
> > > >
> > > > Because of the non-visible exhaust, we usually add two or three BP
> > > > motors. A typical launch without the latter looks like this
> > > > http://www.experimentalraketen.de/hog3/hog3_3.jpg and with the
latter
> > > > like this
> > > > http://www.experimentalraketen.de/blackb/blackb13.jpg (the BC 360
> being
> > > > the main and two F100 the boosters)
> > > >
> > > > Oh well. I thought I'd let you know.....:-)
> > > >
> > > > Cheers,
> > > >
> > > > Tom
> > > >
> > > > P.S. Nitroglycerine has a very distinct smell - I like it! *g*
> > > >
> >

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 26097 invoked from network); 3 Aug 2001 19:05:40 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 3 Aug 2001 19:05:40 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: (qmail 4533 invoked from network); 3 Aug 2001 19:07:17 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 3 Aug 2001 19:07:17 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA14219; Fri, 3 Aug 2001 12:02:16 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 96079 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 3 Aug 2001 19:02:14 +0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA14191 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri,          3 Aug 2001 12:01:57 -0700
Message-ID:  <200108031901.MAA14191@itc.uci.edu>
Date:         Fri, 3 Aug 2001 19:01:57 +0000
Reply-To: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Subject:      [AR] IF you know Jerry you love Jerry (was Re: OK kids,              here we go!
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

On Thu, 2 Aug 2001 14:26:54 -0600, Ray Calkins 100660207 <
rcalkins@SNMENG1.RR.INTEL.COM> wrote:


>Those that have been here for a while will note that
>I have NO tolerance when it comes to flaming and/or
>baiting/trolling.  If you engage in this behaivor,

Whew!  I am sure glad to hear that!

>Now that everybody's had their say, note that Mr.

And I have let all the baseless stuff slide but find the posts unprofessional
and attacking.  All I did was say hello for goodness sake.

>Irvine has made and successfully fired a greater
>total impulse than about 90% of the people on the
>list.  I think many aRocketeers can learn a great
>deal from him in the science and art of motor making,
>and hope he can learn a great deal from the other
>aRocketeers.

I hope people calm down long enough to notice that.

Oh, By the way let my first "real" post be of a technical nature if you folks
don't mind.

http://www.v-serv.com/-upload/5KS5000.mov

May your ignitions be brief and smooth and may your trail offs be short and
sweet.

>
>Welcome, Jerry!
>
>Ray Calkins
>rcalkins@snmeng1.rr.intel.com
>raymond.calkins@intel.com

Jerry Irvine


From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 13106 invoked from network); 3 Aug 2001 19:17:17 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 3 Aug 2001 19:17:17 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: (qmail 25905 invoked from network); 3 Aug 2001 19:19:24 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 3 Aug 2001 19:19:24 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA14416; Fri, 3 Aug 2001 12:11:11 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 96096 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 3 Aug 2001 19:11:09 +0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA14396 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri,          3 Aug 2001 12:11:09 -0700
Message-ID:  <200108031911.MAA14396@itc.uci.edu>
Date:         Fri, 3 Aug 2001 19:11:09 +0000
Reply-To: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Head end igniters
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

On Wed, 1 Aug 2001 15:07:33 -0700, forkbomb@EARTHLINK.NET wrote:

>At 05:38 PM 8/1/01 -0400, Jeff Grady wrote:
>>A word of caution:
>>
>>         I believe that (and correct me if I'm wrong) if a smaller motor
>> is used as
>>an ignitor for the larger one, and the smaller motor CATO's that means
>>DETONATION of the larger motor. Use this method with extreme caution.
>
>
>         Is that necessarily true? It seems like the result could be a CATO
>of the larger motor, but not necessarily. The result of the smaller motor
>CATO'ing would be a sharp spike in the internal pressure of the larger
>motor. If this was enough of a pressure rise to cause case failure, then
>the result would be CATO.

Correct.  We have seen nozzle frags on igniter motors, crappy propellant
which deflagrates and produces a pressure spike and all with very little but
a slight blip on the thrust curce.  These were intentional to test this
issue.  I find an H is sufficient to ignite a Q reliable for example.

Jerry Irvine

Invite me to an amateur launch and I will come.  If I am not already firing
motors that weekend :)


From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 14718 invoked from network); 3 Aug 2001 19:25:08 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 3 Aug 2001 19:25:08 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: (qmail 16590 invoked from network); 3 Aug 2001 19:26:39 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 3 Aug 2001 19:26:39 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA14542; Fri, 3 Aug 2001 12:14:11 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 96105 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 3 Aug 2001 19:14:08 +0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA14517 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri,          3 Aug 2001 12:14:02 -0700
Message-ID:  <200108031914.MAA14517@itc.uci.edu>
Date:         Fri, 3 Aug 2001 19:14:02 +0000
Reply-To: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Head end igniters
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

On Thu, 2 Aug 2001 07:45:12 -0600, Brian Kosko <bkosko1@HOME.COM> wrote:

>>
>>          No, because composite propellants are incapable of sustaining a
>> detonation front.
>
>Unfortunately, only true most of the time. True, the critical diameter for
>most composite propellants is much larger than the actual grain diameter.
>The more highly catalyzed the propellant, the smaller the CD, the lower the
>autoignition temp, etc. In addition, cook-offs of AP composites have been
>known to detonate.

The MDQ of APCP of typical formulations is about a 36" solid cylinder

>
>I just read somewhere, probably in the new AIAA book, that having a straight
>core made a propellant more likely to undergo DDT.
>
>Brian

Jerry Irvine

Rocket manufacturers make better lovers.


From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 16827 invoked from network); 3 Aug 2001 19:32:48 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 3 Aug 2001 19:32:48 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: (qmail 22037 invoked from network); 3 Aug 2001 19:34:02 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 3 Aug 2001 19:34:02 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA14804; Fri, 3 Aug 2001 12:27:04 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 96122 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 3 Aug 2001 19:27:02 +0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA14783 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri,          3 Aug 2001 12:27:01 -0700
Message-ID:  <200108031927.MAA14783@itc.uci.edu>
Date:         Fri, 3 Aug 2001 19:27:01 +0000
Reply-To: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Portable data aquisition devices
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

On Wed, 1 Aug 2001 17:55:21 -0400, Jeff Grady <jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET> wrote:

>FYI,
>
>        OMEGA has tons of data aquisition sensors, cards and some RF telemetry
>equipment. Most to do with temprature and pressure sensing.

Pardon me if this is a fopah.  It is a semi-commercial post.  U.S. Rockets
does sell and has sold for several years a static test stand, computer, AD
box, load cells and software as an integrated package.  I admit I do not
recall the price but vaguely seem to recall universities paying $2500 but
that included a spare calibrated load cell (typically 100 pound and either
250 or 500 pound) and typical solid motor mounting stuff.

There was a version planned but nobody purchased that dealt with hybrids and
liquids and if there was any interest in a turn-key solutrion then I am sure
it could be found.

Naturally I assume by default everybody is looking for the absolute cheapest,
most crippled solution, but if not, this is a good one.  It has been used on
hundreds of motors firings.

Jerry Irvine


From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 14459 invoked from network); 3 Aug 2001 19:53:59 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 3 Aug 2001 19:53:59 -0000
Received: (qmail 3151 invoked from network); 3 Aug 2001 19:55:37 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 3 Aug 2001 19:55:37 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA15149; Fri, 3 Aug 2001 12:44:24 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 96158 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 3 Aug 2001 19:44:23 +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (oe73.law12.hotmail.com [64.4.18.208]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA15131 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 3 Aug 2001 12:44:23 -0700
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Fri,          3 Aug 2001 12:43:52 -0700
X-Originating-IP: [24.29.188.254]
References:  <200108031901.MAA14191@itc.uci.edu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 03 Aug 2001 19:43:52.0903 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[9FED1570:01C11C54]
Message-ID:  <OE73rmTiKTrVUny3UiI00007909@hotmail.com>
Date:         Fri, 3 Aug 2001 14:45:26 -0500
Reply-To: "Mark Kruep" <mkruep@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Mark Kruep" <mkruep@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] IF you know Jerry you love Jerry (was Re: OK kids,              here we go!
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Ya know Jerry, most of us know you've been in this hobby forever. While I'm
not real sure you are the "HPR Founder", I know you were a contributor and
for that, I thank you. However, if you always make some sinical, sarcastic,
or smart ass remark to everything everybody says....you're gonna get the
letters that swirled here upon your acceptance to the list. A good man
doesn't need to remind everyone how good he is. I'm quite sure you are
capable of making a positive contribution to this list so please don't
muddle it up by putting everyone on the offensive (or defensive depending on
the post). I thought some of the remarks made after your membership was
announced were a bit unprofessional, but by responding in a negative manner,
you just reinforce the same opinions that have caused you problems on ROL,
RMR, and with TRA & NAR. I don't know you from Jack, but your reputation
precedes you and maybe this list is a way for you to change that
preconception. I hope you don't find this email to be hostile because that
was not my intention. I look forward to receiving your experienced opinion
on the topics related to this list. Welcome to the list.

Mark Kruep

----- Original Message -----
From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Friday, August 03, 2001 2:01 PM
Subject: [AR] IF you know Jerry you love Jerry (was Re: OK kids, here we go!


> On Thu, 2 Aug 2001 14:26:54 -0600, Ray Calkins 100660207 <
> rcalkins@SNMENG1.RR.INTEL.COM> wrote:
>
>
> >Those that have been here for a while will note that
> >I have NO tolerance when it comes to flaming and/or
> >baiting/trolling.  If you engage in this behaivor,
>
> Whew!  I am sure glad to hear that!
>
> >Now that everybody's had their say, note that Mr.
>
> And I have let all the baseless stuff slide but find the posts
unprofessional
> and attacking.  All I did was say hello for goodness sake.
>
> >Irvine has made and successfully fired a greater
> >total impulse than about 90% of the people on the
> >list.  I think many aRocketeers can learn a great
> >deal from him in the science and art of motor making,
> >and hope he can learn a great deal from the other
> >aRocketeers.
>
> I hope people calm down long enough to notice that.
>
> Oh, By the way let my first "real" post be of a technical nature if you
folks
> don't mind.
>
> http://www.v-serv.com/-upload/5KS5000.mov
>
> May your ignitions be brief and smooth and may your trail offs be short
and
> sweet.
>
> >
> >Welcome, Jerry!
> >
> >Ray Calkins
> >rcalkins@snmeng1.rr.intel.com
> >raymond.calkins@intel.com
>
> Jerry Irvine
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 24378 invoked from network); 3 Aug 2001 19:56:18 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 3 Aug 2001 19:56:18 -0000
Received: (qmail 12276 invoked from network); 3 Aug 2001 19:58:24 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 3 Aug 2001 19:58:24 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA15017; Fri, 3 Aug 2001 12:41:12 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 96140 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 3 Aug 2001 19:40:58 +0000
Received: from dune.gnc.net (root@dune.gnc.net [207.203.72.4]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA14999 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri,          3 Aug 2001 12:40:58 -0700
Received: from beowulf (sw2-4.gnc.net [207.203.72.84]) by dune.gnc.net          (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id PAA06518 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 3          Aug 2001 15:40:58 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <LPBBKJMJEOFKAMFJJNNHOEDHCGAA.landofgrey@gnc.net>
Date:         Fri, 3 Aug 2001 15:40:47 -0400
Reply-To: <landofgrey@gnc.net>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Matthew Travis" <landofgrey@gnc.net>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Head end igniters
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <200108031914.MAA14517@itc.uci.edu>

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU]On
> Behalf Of Jerry Irvine
>
> Rocket manufacturers make better lovers.
>

But the breakups can be really harsh

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 25339 invoked from network); 3 Aug 2001 19:56:32 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 3 Aug 2001 19:56:32 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: (qmail 13862 invoked from network); 3 Aug 2001 19:59:02 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 3 Aug 2001 19:59:02 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA15053; Fri, 3 Aug 2001 12:41:38 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 96150 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 3 Aug 2001 19:41:37 +0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA15032 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri,          3 Aug 2001 12:41:37 -0700
Message-ID:  <200108031941.MAA15032@itc.uci.edu>
Date:         Fri, 3 Aug 2001 19:41:37 +0000
Reply-To: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] new member
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

On Thu, 2 Aug 2001 08:26:35 -0700, Anthony Colette <Rockitman@SPRINTMAIL.COM>
wrote:

>What?!!!   Irvine?...  The Infamous JERRY IRVINE?!!
>
>OOOHHH!  NOOOO!
>
>We can't have that!  What will TRA and Kosdon think of that? ;-)
>

I am not sure which greeting to frame to honor my long awaited reentry to
arocket, this one or the one that essentially predicted the list would be
doomed.

Oh, and on that topic yes I used to do amrocnet and Ray was doing such a
sensational job with arocket and had a decidedly more "amateur" focus
himself, that when my listproc changed software making admin 4 times as hard,
I simply quit.

I see all is well.

Jerry

>
>"Mark K. Spute" wrote:
>
>> Hi Jerry;
>>
>> Welcome aboard.
>>


From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 733 invoked from network); 3 Aug 2001 19:57:53 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 3 Aug 2001 19:57:53 -0000
Received: (qmail 6942 invoked from network); 3 Aug 2001 20:00:03 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 3 Aug 2001 20:00:03 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA15221; Fri, 3 Aug 2001 12:49:53 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 96171 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 3 Aug 2001 19:49:51 +0000
Received: from castor.ridgenet.net (IDENT:root@castor.ridgenet.net          [199.120.150.29]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA15203          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 3 Aug 2001 12:49:51 -0700
Received: from kristinscomp (pm044.ridgenet.net [204.154.246.44]) by          castor.ridgenet.net (8.11.0/8.11.0) with SMTP id f73JhAS27992; Fri, 3          Aug 2001 12:43:11 -0700
References: <44.111bf358.289bab0d@aol.com>                      <20010803140315.30751.qmail@softhome.net>                      <006301c11c48$b35b1b40$1b30fea9@kristinscomp>             <3B6AF09B.9082EE10@earthlink.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <00a101c11c56$a751b6c0$1b30fea9@kristinscomp>
Date:         Fri, 3 Aug 2001 12:58:23 -0700
Reply-To: "Kristin & David Hall" <thehalls@RIDGENET.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Kristin & David Hall" <thehalls@RIDGENET.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] 2Ignition versus Detonation (DB Propellants)
Comments: To: David Weinshenker <daze39@EARTHLINK.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

> > HTPB + RDX or HMX
>
> How does this work - you use nitro-organic explosives
> (are HMX and RDX in the "oxygen-rich monopropellant" category?)
> dispersed in a polymeric binder, which must somehow inhibit
> the propagation of a detonation front but allow them to contribute
> oxygen and energy to surface combustion?

Sounds like you've got a pretty good handle on the concept...Except that the
binder does little to prevent detonation (the motors will in fact detonate
if appropriately mis-treated).  What does?  Nothing beyond the fact that RDX
and HMX are pretty stable explosives; no cap means no boom (for the most
part).

> Doesn't sound like anything that would be of much use to anyone
> but the military - "conventional" oxidizers sound like they'd

Again it sounds as if you've got a good handle on the concept.  Min smoke
propellants are used exclusively within military circles.  Compared to APCP
they're more difficult to customize (burn rates), more dangerous to make,
more dangerous to use, more expensive, and don't deliver as much energy.
Their *ONLY* advantage is the fact that they don't make much smoke.  Which
is, of course, only advantageous if you don't want anybody to know where
that rocket came from....

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 10499 invoked from network); 3 Aug 2001 20:14:42 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 3 Aug 2001 20:14:42 -0000
Received: (qmail 14574 invoked from network); 3 Aug 2001 20:16:20 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 3 Aug 2001 20:16:20 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA15431; Fri, 3 Aug 2001 13:11:59 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 96221 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 3 Aug 2001 20:11:54 +0000
Received: from albatross.wgn.net (www.wgn.net [64.14.252.81] (may be forged))          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA15413 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 3 Aug 2001 13:11:53 -0700
Received: from hogwild (sc-66-74-70-20.socal.rr.com [66.74.70.20]) by          albatross.wgn.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id NAA05571 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 3 Aug 2001 13:13:35 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0A95_01C56B69.467D92E0"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <01fc01c11c58$690acda0$14464a42@socal.rr.com>
Date:         Fri, 3 Aug 2001 13:10:58 -0700
Reply-To: "Wedge Oldham" <wedge@WESTWORLD.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Wedge Oldham" <wedge@WESTWORLD.COM>
Subject:      [AR] Looking for a motor
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0A95_01C56B69.467D92E0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

I am *toying* with the idea of upscaling my Nike Hercules from it's =
original 1/3 size to 1/2.=20

To do so would require a sustainer motor larger than is currently =
commercially available.

I'm am looking for someone who can produce a motor that would have the =
following characteristics.
1. Total impulse around 20K to 30K NS
2. Long burn time somewhere between 10 to 14 seconds.
3. Diameter 98mm or 6"
4. Length less than 60"
5. Taking delivery in about 18-24 months

If you can, or know someone who can produce such a motor, please contact =
me privately.

Again, I am only toying with the idea.

Wedge Oldham
http://NikeProject.com

------=_NextPart_000_0A95_01C56B69.467D92E0
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Diso-8859-1">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 5.50.4616.200" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>I am *toying* with the idea of =
upscaling my Nike=20
Hercules from it's original 1/3 size to 1/2. </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT><FONT face=3DArial =
size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>To do so would require a sustainer =
motor larger=20
than is currently commercially available.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>I'm am looking for someone who can =
produce a motor=20
that would have the following characteristics.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>1. Total impulse around 20K to=20
30K&nbsp;NS</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>2. Long burn time somewhere between 10 =
to 14=20
seconds.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>3. Diameter 98mm&nbsp;or =
6"</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>4. Length less than 60"</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>5. Taking delivery in about 18-24=20
months</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>If you can, or know someone who can =
produce such a=20
motor, please contact me privately.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Again, I am only toying with the =
idea.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Wedge Oldham<BR><A=20
href=3D"http://NikeProject.com">http://NikeProject.com</A></FONT></DIV></=
BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0A95_01C56B69.467D92E0--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 9302 invoked from network); 3 Aug 2001 20:28:57 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 3 Aug 2001 20:28:57 -0000
Received: (qmail 25174 invoked from network); 3 Aug 2001 20:31:28 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 3 Aug 2001 20:31:28 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA15511; Fri, 3 Aug 2001 13:21:13 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 96238 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 3 Aug 2001 20:21:03 +0000
Received: from web10506.mail.yahoo.com (web10506.mail.yahoo.com          [216.136.130.156]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id NAA15489          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 3 Aug 2001 13:21:00 -0700
Received: from [129.219.23.220] by web10506.mail.yahoo.com; Fri, 03 Aug 2001          13:20:55 PDT
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <20010803202055.55894.qmail@web10506.mail.yahoo.com>
Date:         Fri, 3 Aug 2001 13:20:55 -0700
Reply-To: "Justin Pucci" <drrockit5150@YAHOO.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Justin Pucci" <drrockit5150@YAHOO.COM>
Subject:      [AR] Hybrid Test Setup
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <00a101c11c56$a751b6c0$1b30fea9@kristinscomp>

Hey guys,

I have a quick question that I want to hear everyone's
opinion on...  I am testing a 250 lb-thrust N2O/HDPE
hybrid with a separate oxidizer tank and combustion
chamber (not monocoque).  Do I build a teststand that
fires up, down, or horizontally?  Let me know what you
think and why!  Thanks!!!


-->Justin Pucci

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Make international calls for as low as $.04/minute with Yahoo! Messenger
http://phonecard.yahoo.com/

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 29779 invoked from network); 3 Aug 2001 21:04:44 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 3 Aug 2001 21:04:44 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: (qmail 15460 invoked from network); 3 Aug 2001 21:06:39 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 3 Aug 2001 21:06:39 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA15967; Fri, 3 Aug 2001 13:44:43 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 96312 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 3 Aug 2001 20:44:40 +0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA15946 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri,          3 Aug 2001 13:44:26 -0700
Message-ID:  <200108032044.NAA15946@itc.uci.edu>
Date:         Fri, 3 Aug 2001 20:44:26 +0000
Reply-To: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] IF you know Jerry you love Jerry (was Re: OK kids,              here we go!
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

On Fri, 3 Aug 2001 14:45:26 -0500, Mark Kruep <mkruep@HOTMAIL.COM> wrote:

>Ya know Jerry, most of us know you've been in this hobby forever. While I'm
>not real sure you are the "HPR Founder", I know you were a contributor and
>for that, I thank you. However, if you always make some sinical, sarcastic,
>or smart ass remark to everything everybody says....you're gonna get the
>letters that swirled here upon your acceptance to the list. A good man
>doesn't need to remind everyone how good he is. I'm quite sure you are
>capable of making a positive contribution to this list so please don't
>muddle it up by putting everyone on the offensive (or defensive depending on
>the post). I thought some of the remarks made after your membership was
>announced were a bit unprofessional, but by responding in a negative manner,
>you just reinforce the same opinions that have caused you problems on ROL,
>RMR, and with TRA & NAR. I don't know you from Jack, but your reputation
>precedes you and maybe this list is a way for you to change that
>preconception. I hope you don't find this email to be hostile because that
>was not my intention. I look forward to receiving your experienced opinion
>on the topics related to this list. Welcome to the list.
>
>Mark Kruep

Don't punch me in the face, then kick me in the balls then complain if I
whine.  That's exactly what you just did.  Again.  Done.

Jerry

>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
>To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
>Sent: Friday, August 03, 2001 2:01 PM
>Subject: [AR] IF you know Jerry you love Jerry (was Re: OK kids, here we go!
>
>
>> On Thu, 2 Aug 2001 14:26:54 -0600, Ray Calkins 100660207 <
>> rcalkins@SNMENG1.RR.INTEL.COM> wrote:
>>
>>
>> >Those that have been here for a while will note that
>> >I have NO tolerance when it comes to flaming and/or
>> >baiting/trolling.  If you engage in this behaivor,
>>
>> Whew!  I am sure glad to hear that!
>>
>> >Now that everybody's had their say, note that Mr.
>>
>> And I have let all the baseless stuff slide but find the posts
>unprofessional
>> and attacking.  All I did was say hello for goodness sake.
>>
>> >Irvine has made and successfully fired a greater
>> >total impulse than about 90% of the people on the
>> >list.  I think many aRocketeers can learn a great
>> >deal from him in the science and art of motor making,
>> >and hope he can learn a great deal from the other
>> >aRocketeers.
>>
>> I hope people calm down long enough to notice that.
>>
>> Oh, By the way let my first "real" post be of a technical nature if you
>folks
>> don't mind.
>>
>> http://www.v-serv.com/-upload/5KS5000.mov
>>
>> May your ignitions be brief and smooth and may your trail offs be short
>and
>> sweet.
>>
>> >
>> >Welcome, Jerry!
>> >
>> >Ray Calkins
>> >rcalkins@snmeng1.rr.intel.com
>> >raymond.calkins@intel.com
>>
>> Jerry Irvine
>>


From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 6005 invoked from network); 3 Aug 2001 21:22:31 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 3 Aug 2001 21:22:31 -0000
Received: (qmail 20055 invoked from network); 3 Aug 2001 21:24:09 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 3 Aug 2001 21:24:09 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA16487; Fri, 3 Aug 2001 14:18:34 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 96405 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 3 Aug 2001 21:18:29 +0000
Received: from smtp-out.nrtc.net (host-216-163-120-25.nrtc.net [216.163.120.25]          (may be forged)) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA16468          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 3 Aug 2001 14:18:28 -0700
Received: from foy (dial-12-21-155-26.wfeca.net [12.21.155.26]) by          smtp-out.nrtc.net (8.9.3/8.9.1) with SMTP id RAA04102 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 3 Aug 2001 17:18:23 -0400
References:  <20010803202055.55894.qmail@web10506.mail.yahoo.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <000501c11c61$139630e0$1a9b150c@foy>
Date:         Fri, 3 Aug 2001 16:12:59 -0500
Reply-To: "foy" <foy@WFECA.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "foy" <foy@WFECA.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Hybrid Test Setup
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

     I would fire up! It would be easier to build stand and you would get a
great view of the plume.
cheers Foy>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 6992 invoked from network); 3 Aug 2001 21:22:49 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 3 Aug 2001 21:22:49 -0000
Received: (qmail 28443 invoked from network); 3 Aug 2001 21:24:57 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 3 Aug 2001 21:24:57 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA16512; Fri, 3 Aug 2001 14:18:51 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 96412 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 3 Aug 2001 21:18:50 +0000
Received: from localhost (rcalkins@localhost) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with          ESMTP id OAA16479; Fri, 3 Aug 2001 14:18:31 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.LNX.4.10.10108031406390.16319-100000@itc.uci.edu>
Date:         Fri, 3 Aug 2001 14:18:31 -0700
Reply-To: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
Subject:      Re: [AR] IF you know Jerry you love Jerry (was Re: OK kids,              here we go!
Comments: To: Jerry Irvine <01rocket@GTE.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <200108032044.NAA15946@itc.uci.edu>

Okay, enough everybody!  Disparaging comments have been made by several
people, coupled with flammatory replies.  I expect public apologies from
all parties involved.  Address your sincere redress to the parties you
offended and to the list as a whole.  This type of behavior is uncalled
for, take it to rmr where such actions are acceptable.

If you are unfamiliar with list policies, I STRONGLY recommend you read
them now -
http://www.arocket.net/arweb/policy.html

If you have a problem with somebody on the list, you take it off the list.
Either directly to that person, or to me.

This is your only warning.  I have no further tolerance in this matter.

Ray

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 1011 invoked from network); 3 Aug 2001 21:29:48 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 3 Aug 2001 21:29:48 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 1230 invoked from network); 3 Aug 2001 21:31:55 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 3 Aug 2001 21:31:55 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA16611; Fri, 3 Aug 2001 14:26:33 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 96440 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 3 Aug 2001 21:26:28 +0000
Received: from femail46.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail46.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.254.60.40]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA16596          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 3 Aug 2001 14:26:27 -0700
Received: from c1649002-a.earthlink.net ([24.20.95.67]) by          femail46.sdc1.sfba.home.com (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20          201-229-121-120-20010223) with ESMTP id          <20010803212622.FLTW16795.femail46.sdc1.sfba.home.com@c1649002-a.earthlink.net>; Fri, 3 Aug 2001 14:26:22          -0700
X-Sender: forkbomb@mail.earthlink.net
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.0.2
References: <00a101c11c56$a751b6c0$1b30fea9@kristinscomp>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <5.0.2.1.0.20010803142522.02499570@mail.earthlink.net>
Date:         Fri, 3 Aug 2001 14:26:18 -0700
Reply-To: "Pierce Nichols" <forkbomb@EARTHLINK.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Pierce Nichols" <forkbomb@EARTHLINK.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Hybrid Test Setup
Comments: To: Justin Pucci <drrockit5150@YAHOO.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <20010803202055.55894.qmail@web10506.mail.yahoo.com>

At 01:20 PM 8/3/2001 -0700, Justin Pucci wrote:
>Hey guys,
>
>I have a quick question that I want to hear everyone's
>opinion on...  I am testing a 250 lb-thrust N2O/HDPE
>hybrid with a separate oxidizer tank and combustion
>chamber (not monocoque).  Do I build a teststand that
>fires up, down, or horizontally?  Let me know what you
>think and why!  Thanks!!!


         Horizontal. That way, you don't have to take into account the
(variable) weight of the motor when analyzing your thrust data.

         -p


Mars or Bust!
www.marssociety.com

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 20950 invoked from network); 3 Aug 2001 21:44:09 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 3 Aug 2001 21:44:09 -0000
Received: (qmail 25460 invoked from network); 3 Aug 2001 21:46:39 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 3 Aug 2001 21:46:39 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA16783; Fri, 3 Aug 2001 14:39:38 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 96491 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 3 Aug 2001 21:39:36 +0000
Received: from smtp-out.nrtc.net (host-216-163-120-25.nrtc.net [216.163.120.25]          (may be forged)) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA16768          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 3 Aug 2001 14:39:35 -0700
Received: from foy (dial-12-21-155-205.wfeca.net [12.21.155.205]) by          smtp-out.nrtc.net (8.9.3/8.9.1) with SMTP id RAA06969 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 3 Aug 2001 17:39:30 -0400
References: <000c01c11c5f$e6b0c5a0$1a9b150c@foy>            <008d01c11c61$43885c60$14464a42@socal.rr.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0A98_01C56B69.468708C0"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <000801c11c64$06fc7440$cd9b150c@foy>
Date:         Fri, 3 Aug 2001 16:33:32 -0500
Reply-To: "foy" <foy@WFECA.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "foy" <foy@WFECA.NET>
Subject:      [AR] ? thermal bariers
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0A98_01C56B69.468708C0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

      Has any one tried to use ceramic coatings to deter heat transfer ( =
nozzle) ? Also can I attach pics on this list?  I have lit an h class =
pvc motor similar to nakka's but with machined stainless nozzle it has =
now been coated with ceramic maybe it won't melt the pvc this time. I =
plan to try again Sunday.  Any input would be apreciated.

------=_NextPart_000_0A98_01C56B69.468708C0
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Diso-8859-1">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 5.50.4134.600" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Has any =
one tried to=20
use ceramic coatings to deter heat transfer ( nozzle) ? Also can I =
attach pics=20
on this list?&nbsp; I have lit an h class pvc motor similar to nakka's =
but with=20
machined stainless nozzle it has now been coated with ceramic maybe it =
won't=20
melt the pvc this time. I plan to try again Sunday.&nbsp;&nbsp;Any input =
would=20
be apreciated.</FONT></DIV></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0A98_01C56B69.468708C0--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 27815 invoked from network); 3 Aug 2001 21:46:13 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 3 Aug 2001 21:46:13 -0000
Received: (qmail 481 invoked from network); 3 Aug 2001 21:47:51 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 3 Aug 2001 21:47:51 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA16856; Fri, 3 Aug 2001 14:42:39 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 96509 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 3 Aug 2001 21:42:38 +0000
Received: from dune.gnc.net (root@dune.gnc.net [207.203.72.4]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA16841 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri,          3 Aug 2001 14:42:37 -0700
Received: from beowulf (sw2-4.gnc.net [207.203.72.84]) by dune.gnc.net          (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id RAA09670 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 3          Aug 2001 17:42:38 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <LPBBKJMJEOFKAMFJJNNHCEDKCGAA.landofgrey@gnc.net>
Date:         Fri, 3 Aug 2001 17:42:24 -0400
Reply-To: <landofgrey@gnc.net>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Matthew Travis" <landofgrey@gnc.net>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Hybrid Test Setup
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <20010803202055.55894.qmail@web10506.mail.yahoo.com>

My personal opinion (known to be occasionally mistaken) is that fabricating
a vertically-upward firing test stand is easier than horizontal or downward.
At least for smaller motors (< 100,000 ns). Downard firing stands usually
require some sort of active cooling below the exhaust (which *can* give a
cool steam effect) as well as anchoring against the upward thrust of the
motor. Horizontal stands require anchoring against the thrust as well. This
complicates making portable stands. But... depending on how much you want to
spend and how much work you want to do, each kind of stand is equally good
from a performance standpoint.

Matt

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU]On
> Behalf Of Justin Pucci
> Sent: Friday, August 03, 2001 4:21 PM
> To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
> Subject: [AR] Hybrid Test Setup
>
>
> Hey guys,
>
> I have a quick question that I want to hear everyone's
> opinion on...  I am testing a 250 lb-thrust N2O/HDPE
> hybrid with a separate oxidizer tank and combustion
> chamber (not monocoque).  Do I build a teststand that
> fires up, down, or horizontally?  Let me know what you
> think and why!  Thanks!!!
>
>
> -->Justin Pucci
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Make international calls for as low as $.04/minute with Yahoo! Messenger
> http://phonecard.yahoo.com/
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 2882 invoked from network); 3 Aug 2001 21:47:38 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 3 Aug 2001 21:47:38 -0000
Received: (qmail 1416 invoked from network); 3 Aug 2001 21:49:16 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 3 Aug 2001 21:49:16 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA16899; Fri, 3 Aug 2001 14:45:31 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 96520 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 3 Aug 2001 21:45:26 +0000
Received: from imo-m04.mx.aol.com (imo-m04.mx.aol.com [64.12.136.7]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA16884 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Fri, 3 Aug 2001 14:45:26 -0700
Received: from MONTMACH@aol.com by imo-m04.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v31.9.) id          w.3d.f63e026 (24899) for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Fri, 3 Aug 2001          17:44:52 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0A9B_01C56B69.468979C0"
X-Mailer: AOL 6.0 for Windows US sub 10532
Message-ID:  <3d.f63e026.289c7553@aol.com>
Date:         Fri, 3 Aug 2001 17:44:51 EDT
Reply-To: <MONTMACH@AOL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <MONTMACH@AOL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Hybrid Test Setup
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0A9B_01C56B69.468979C0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit




> I have a quick question that I want to hear everyone's
> opinion on...  I am testing a 250 lb-thrust N2O/HDPE
> hybrid with a separate oxidizer tank and combustion
> chamber (not monocoque).  Do I build a teststand that
> fires up, down, or horizontally?  Let me know what you
> think and why!  Thanks!!!
>
 Hello justin go to:
http://www.rrs.org/Projects/projects.html
 scroll to the right and you will see Kory Kline's (Hypertec fame) original
hybrid test stand, his motors were test fired pointing up. Back in 1994 I saw
one of his static test firings at a PRS launch ,thats what inspired me to
make my own hybrid motors.
 Dave Griffith

------=_NextPart_000_0A9B_01C56B69.468979C0
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<HTML><FONT FACE=arial,helvetica><FONT  SIZE=2>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR><BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE style="BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px">I have a quick question that I want to hear everyone's
<BR>opinion on... &nbsp;I am testing a 250 lb-thrust N2O/HDPE
<BR>hybrid with a separate oxidizer tank and combustion
<BR>chamber (not monocoque). &nbsp;Do I build a teststand that
<BR>fires up, down, or horizontally? &nbsp;Let me know what you
<BR>think and why! &nbsp;Thanks!!!
<BR></BLOCKQUOTE>
<BR> Hello justin go to:
<BR>http://www.rrs.org/Projects/projects.html
<BR> scroll to the right and you will see Kory Kline's (Hypertec fame) original
<BR>hybrid test stand, his motors were test fired pointing up. Back in 1994 I saw
<BR>one of his static test firings at a PRS launch ,thats what inspired me to
<BR>make my own hybrid motors.
<BR> Dave Griffith</FONT></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0A9B_01C56B69.468979C0--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 28354 invoked from network); 3 Aug 2001 22:12:00 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 3 Aug 2001 22:12:00 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 24426 invoked from network); 3 Aug 2001 22:14:03 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 3 Aug 2001 22:14:03 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA17383; Fri, 3 Aug 2001 15:07:26 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 96577 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 3 Aug 2001 22:07:23 +0000
Received: from crotus.sc.intel.com (scfdns02.sc.intel.com [143.183.152.26]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA17368 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 3 Aug 2001 15:07:23 -0700
Received: from snmeng1.rr.intel.com (snmeng1.rr.intel.com [128.215.231.11]) by          crotus.sc.intel.com (8.9.1a+p1/8.9.1/d: relay.m4,v 1.41 2001/07/09          21:06:22 root Exp $) with ESMTP id WAA20585; Fri, 3 Aug 2001 22:06:52          GMT
Received: from snmeng30.rr.intel.com (snmeng30.rr.intel.com [128.215.52.76]) by          snmeng1.rr.intel.com (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id QAA23964; Fri, 3          Aug 2001 16:04:00 -0600 (MDT)
Received: from snmeng30.rr.intel.com (snmeng30.rr.intel.com [128.215.52.76]) by          snmeng30.rr.intel.com (8.9.1a/8.9.1/d: client.m4,v 1.3 1998/09/29          16:36:11 sedayao Exp sedayao $) with SMTP id QAA29823; Fri, 3 Aug          2001 16:03:57 -0600 (MDT)
X-Mailer: dtmail 1.2.1 CDE Version 1.2.1 SunOS 5.6 sun4m sparc
X-Sun-Text-Type: ascii
Message-ID:  <200108032203.QAA29823@snmeng30.rr.intel.com>
Date:         Fri, 3 Aug 2001 16:03:57 -0600
Reply-To: "Ray Calkins 100660207" <rcalkins@snmeng1.rr.intel.com>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Ray Calkins 100660207" <rcalkins@snmeng1.rr.intel.com>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Hybrid Test Setup
Comments: To: drrockit5150@YAHOO.COM
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Justin asks -
> <for a N2O hybrid>  Do I build a teststand
that
> fires up, down, or horizontally?

Horizontal.  It's easy to build, easy to
calibrate and safe to run.

I strongly recommend against building _any_
liquid propellant test stand that fires up, even
N2O.  In case of a misfire, you can easily fill
a hot chamber with oxidizer and fuel, or light a
chamber filled with oxidizer/fuel with
predictable results.

Generally, N2O will evaporate out, however in a
self-pressurizing system, it will subcool and
can hang around waiting to be an oxidizer.

LOx and H2O2 are progressively more dangerous in
this situation.  An additional problem is
spraying oxizider

Better from a safety standpoint is to build your
horizontal stand firing slightly down, at an
angle a little greater than that of your
convergent section.  This allows any residual
liquid propellants to gravity drain away.  It's
a little more complex than a simple horizontal
stand and a little more difficult to calibrate.

Vertical firing down is always nice, being the
attitude you plan to fly, but this requires a
fair bit more fabrication and preload against
the load cell to counter the weight of the
motor.

Ray Calkins
rcalkins@snmeng1.rr.intel.com
raymond.calkins@intel.com
"My opinions are my own, and do not reflect
those of my employer."


From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 6780 invoked from network); 3 Aug 2001 22:14:30 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 3 Aug 2001 22:14:30 -0000
Received: (qmail 22957 invoked from network); 3 Aug 2001 22:16:30 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 3 Aug 2001 22:16:30 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA17453; Fri, 3 Aug 2001 15:09:44 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 96584 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 3 Aug 2001 22:09:43 +0000
Received: from localhost (rcalkins@localhost) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with          ESMTP id PAA17436; Fri, 3 Aug 2001 15:09:41 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.LNX.4.10.10108031507100.16319-100000@itc.uci.edu>
Date:         Fri, 3 Aug 2001 15:09:41 -0700
Reply-To: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
Subject:      Re: [AR] ? thermal bariers
Comments: To: foy <foy@WFECA.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <000801c11c64$06fc7440$cd9b150c@foy>

Send pics to me and I'll generally have them up on the list within a few
hours.

One thing that may work to insulate your nozzle from your PVC is a nice
thick coating red RTV silicone rubber.

Ray

On Fri, 3 Aug 2001, foy wrote:

>       Has any one tried to use ceramic coatings to deter heat transfer ( nozzle) ? Also can I attach pics on this list?  I have lit an h class pvc motor similar to nakka's but with machined stainless nozzle it has now been coated with ceramic maybe it won't melt the pvc this time. I plan to try again Sunday.  Any input would be apreciated.
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 3561 invoked from network); 3 Aug 2001 22:30:47 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 3 Aug 2001 22:30:47 -0000
Received: (qmail 3508 invoked from network); 3 Aug 2001 22:32:53 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 3 Aug 2001 22:32:53 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA17770; Fri, 3 Aug 2001 15:26:32 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 96625 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 3 Aug 2001 22:25:48 +0000
Received: from dune.gnc.net (root@dune.gnc.net [207.203.72.4]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA17749 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri,          3 Aug 2001 15:25:47 -0700
Received: from beowulf (sw2-4.gnc.net [207.203.72.84]) by dune.gnc.net          (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id SAA10727 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 3          Aug 2001 18:25:48 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <LPBBKJMJEOFKAMFJJNNHCEDLCGAA.landofgrey@gnc.net>
Date:         Fri, 3 Aug 2001 18:25:32 -0400
Reply-To: <landofgrey@gnc.net>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Matthew Travis" <landofgrey@gnc.net>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Hybrid Test Setup
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <5.0.2.1.0.20010803142522.02499570@mail.earthlink.net>

That could be an advantage of sorts. But onbe would likely be calculating
that (or acquiring the data necessary to calculate it) anyway, so it might
not be a terribly difficult deal to account for it. But I don't think that
is a significant issue either way.



Matt

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU]On
> Behalf Of Pierce Nichols
> Sent: Friday, August 03, 2001 5:26 PM
> To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
> Subject: Re: [AR] Hybrid Test Setup
>
>
>          Horizontal. That way, you don't have to take into account the
> (variable) weight of the motor when analyzing your thrust data.
>
>          -p
>
>
> Mars or Bust!
> www.marssociety.com
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 13781 invoked from network); 3 Aug 2001 22:33:44 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 3 Aug 2001 22:33:44 -0000
Received: (qmail 4489 invoked from network); 3 Aug 2001 22:35:52 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 3 Aug 2001 22:35:52 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA17795; Fri, 3 Aug 2001 15:28:44 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 96634 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 3 Aug 2001 22:28:43 +0000
Received: from localhost (rcalkins@localhost) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with          ESMTP id PAA17525; Fri, 3 Aug 2001 15:15:10 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.LNX.4.10.10108031511290.16319-100000@itc.uci.edu>
Date:         Fri, 3 Aug 2001 15:15:09 -0700
Reply-To: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Hybrid Test Setup
Comments: To: Ray Calkins 100660207 <rcalkins@snmeng1.rr.intel.com>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <200108032203.QAA29823@snmeng30.rr.intel.com>

Hmm, I didn't finish a this:

An additional problem (of firing hybrids/liquids up) is spraying oxizider
and/or fuel all over your test setup if you fail ignition or blow a
chamber.  A particular nasty problem with something like Nitric Acid.

Ray

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 16051 invoked from network); 3 Aug 2001 22:34:21 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 3 Aug 2001 22:34:21 -0000
Received: (qmail 4757 invoked from network); 3 Aug 2001 22:36:29 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 3 Aug 2001 22:36:29 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA17856; Fri, 3 Aug 2001 15:31:30 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 96650 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 3 Aug 2001 22:31:28 +0000
Received: from dune.gnc.net (root@dune.gnc.net [207.203.72.4]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA17837 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri,          3 Aug 2001 15:31:07 -0700
Received: from beowulf (sw2-4.gnc.net [207.203.72.84]) by dune.gnc.net          (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id SAA10849 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 3          Aug 2001 18:31:08 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <LPBBKJMJEOFKAMFJJNNHKEDLCGAA.landofgrey@gnc.net>
Date:         Fri, 3 Aug 2001 18:30:52 -0400
Reply-To: <landofgrey@gnc.net>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Matthew Travis" <landofgrey@gnc.net>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Hybrid Test Setup
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <200108032203.QAA29823@snmeng30.rr.intel.com>

It's interesting to note that RRS and other organizations all choose to have
their liquid firing stands nozzle down. It's also interesting to note how
much they spend on them.

MAtt

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU]On
> Behalf Of Ray Calkins 100660207
>
> Vertical firing down is always nice, being the
> attitude you plan to fly, but this requires a
> fair bit more fabrication and preload against
> the load cell to counter the weight of the
> motor.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 18817 invoked from network); 3 Aug 2001 22:35:06 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 3 Aug 2001 22:35:06 -0000
Received: (qmail 5026 invoked from network); 3 Aug 2001 22:37:14 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 3 Aug 2001 22:37:14 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA17828; Fri, 3 Aug 2001 15:30:07 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 96643 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 3 Aug 2001 22:30:06 +0000
Received: from dune.gnc.net (root@dune.gnc.net [207.203.72.4]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA17800 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri,          3 Aug 2001 15:28:57 -0700
Received: from beowulf (sw2-4.gnc.net [207.203.72.84]) by dune.gnc.net          (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id SAA10790 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 3          Aug 2001 18:28:57 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <LPBBKJMJEOFKAMFJJNNHGEDLCGAA.landofgrey@gnc.net>
Date:         Fri, 3 Aug 2001 18:28:42 -0400
Reply-To: <landofgrey@gnc.net>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Matthew Travis" <landofgrey@gnc.net>
Subject:      Re: [AR] ? thermal bariers
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <000801c11c64$06fc7440$cd9b150c@foy>

I accidentally attached an image instead of a URL link to an image (thank
you Outlook) and was promptly corrected on my actions. Also, I believe that
posts are supposed to be in ASCII rather than HTML format. Doesn't matter to
me, but it is an issue with many people, especially ones who use PINE or
ELM.

Along these lines, it would be nice to have an web site available for people
to upload/download files for the group. Not permananent storage, maybe
someplace where things will stay for a week before purging. Idunno. That
kinda turns things into a forum instead of a mailing list.

Matt


-----Original Message-----
From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU]On Behalf
Of foy
Sent: Friday, August 03, 2001 5:34 PM
To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
Subject: [AR] ? thermal bariers


      Has any one tried to use ceramic coatings to deter heat transfer (
nozzle) ? Also can I attach pics on this list?  I have lit an h class pvc
motor similar to nakka's but with machined stainless nozzle it has now been
coated with ceramic maybe it won't melt the pvc this time. I plan to try
again Sunday.  Any input would be apreciated.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 28391 invoked from network); 3 Aug 2001 22:37:54 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 3 Aug 2001 22:37:54 -0000
Received: (qmail 18077 invoked from network); 3 Aug 2001 22:40:26 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 3 Aug 2001 22:40:26 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA17892; Fri, 3 Aug 2001 15:32:52 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 96659 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 3 Aug 2001 22:32:51 +0000
Received: from dune.gnc.net (root@dune.gnc.net [207.203.72.4]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA17866; Fri, 3 Aug 2001 15:31:55 -0700
Received: from beowulf (sw2-4.gnc.net [207.203.72.84]) by dune.gnc.net          (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id SAA10861; Fri, 3 Aug 2001 18:31:56 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <LPBBKJMJEOFKAMFJJNNHOEDLCGAA.landofgrey@gnc.net>
Date:         Fri, 3 Aug 2001 18:31:40 -0400
Reply-To: <landofgrey@gnc.net>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Matthew Travis" <landofgrey@gnc.net>
Subject:      Re: [AR] ? thermal bariers
Comments: To: Ray Calkins <rcalkins@ITC.UCI.EDU>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <Pine.LNX.4.10.10108031507100.16319-100000@itc.uci.edu>

 -----Original Message-----
> From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU]On
> Behalf Of Ray Calkins
>
>
> Send pics to me and I'll generally have them up on the list within a few
> hours.

I wasn't aware we could do that (as evidenced by a previous post of mine :)
Okay, so I need to read the administrivia more often.

Matt

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 4625 invoked from network); 3 Aug 2001 22:57:20 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 3 Aug 2001 22:57:20 -0000
Received: (qmail 27258 invoked from network); 3 Aug 2001 22:59:36 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 3 Aug 2001 22:59:36 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA18382; Fri, 3 Aug 2001 15:52:26 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 96685 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 3 Aug 2001 22:52:24 +0000
Received: from fep3-orange.clear.net.nz (fep3-orange.clear.net.nz          [203.97.32.3]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA18363          for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Fri, 3 Aug 2001 15:52:15 -0700
Received: from mkbs (203-167-164-50.dialup.clear.net.nz [203.167.164.50]) by          fep3-orange.clear.net.nz (1.5/1.8) with SMTP id KAA27159; Sat, 4 Aug          2001 10:51:41 +1200 (NZST)
References:  <1e.196df6fd.289bafa3@aol.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <063801c11c6f$17247f60$0100a8c0@mkbs>
Date:         Sat, 4 Aug 2001 02:52:20 +1200
Reply-To: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Organization: Applied Technology
Subject:      Re: [AR] Head end igniters
Comments: To: Sociald84@AOL.COM
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

> Some reccommended reading: Newtons laws. An object in motion will
accelerate
> if a force is applied. This is true regardless of the speed of the force.
IE
> a propelled object is capable of exceeding the velocity of the exaust of
it's
> propellant. A rocket can go faster than the velocity of the exaust.

An object can only go faster than the velocity of the propelling gas IF the
gas source is carried with the projectile.
This applies in a rocket and not in a gun.

In a rocket the exhaust velocity is measured relative to the projectile, in
a gun it is relative to the pre-firing frame of reference (ignoring minor
effects from eg recoil).




            Russell McMahon

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 22550 invoked from network); 3 Aug 2001 23:02:32 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 3 Aug 2001 23:02:32 -0000
Received: (qmail 29020 invoked from network); 3 Aug 2001 23:02:53 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 3 Aug 2001 23:02:53 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA18449; Fri, 3 Aug 2001 15:54:38 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 96700 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 3 Aug 2001 22:54:36 +0000
Received: from localhost (rcalkins@localhost) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with          ESMTP id PAA18434; Fri, 3 Aug 2001 15:54:35 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.LNX.4.10.10108031533130.16319-100000@itc.uci.edu>
Date:         Fri, 3 Aug 2001 15:54:35 -0700
Reply-To: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
Subject:      Re: [AR] ? thermal bariers
Comments: To: Matthew Travis <landofgrey@gnc.net>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <LPBBKJMJEOFKAMFJJNNHGEDLCGAA.landofgrey@gnc.net>

Matt suggests -
>
> ...it would be nice to have an web site available for people
> to upload/download files for the group.
I have considered this option and ask for some assistance in this matter.
I don't currently have a way I can automate this on the aRocket site or
any of it's mirrors, your assistance is requested.

Ray

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 28327 invoked from network); 3 Aug 2001 23:12:37 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 3 Aug 2001 23:12:37 -0000
Received: (qmail 4807 invoked from network); 3 Aug 2001 23:15:09 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 3 Aug 2001 23:15:09 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA18759; Fri, 3 Aug 2001 16:07:20 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 96735 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 3 Aug 2001 23:07:18 +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (oe35.law12.hotmail.com [64.4.18.92]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA18744 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri,          3 Aug 2001 16:07:18 -0700
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Fri,          3 Aug 2001 16:06:48 -0700
X-Originating-IP: [24.29.188.254]
References:  <Pine.LNX.4.10.10108031406390.16319-100000@itc.uci.edu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 03 Aug 2001 23:06:48.0195 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[F8F73530:01C11C70]
Message-ID:  <OE35tMjg9vOXGbQtF8t00006b62@hotmail.com>
Date:         Fri, 3 Aug 2001 18:08:20 -0500
Reply-To: "Mark Kruep" <mkruep@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Mark Kruep" <mkruep@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] IF you know Jerry you love Jerry (was Re: OK kids,              here we go!
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Jerry and list,

Since I evoked the most volatile response, I guess I'll go first. Let me
start by saying just as I did in the initial letter, I did not intend for my
post to be inflammatory. I have trouble saying to others what I am actually
trying to say. What sounds non-threatening to me is usually not perceived
that way by others. And, perception is, of course, an individual thing. My
point was that obviously you (Jerry) have wisdom beyond many of us and maybe
a different approach would be beneficial. I hope that statement is not
misunderstood as well. This is of course my own personal opinion and it may
be perceived as a derogatory comment. I realize now (not only because of
Ray's post) that I picked an inappropriate forum to view my opinions
especially since they were unsolicited, and I should have kept the matter
more private. Jerry, I really don't know you at all other than what I've
heard and hope you will accept my apology for reacting poorly and for
getting caught up in a series of inappropriate posts. Being a relatively
newcomer to amateur rocketry and still being a novice in commercial rockets,
I look forward to receiving input from you as I have received from the other
fine folks on arocket. I would also like to take the opportunity to
apologize to Ray for helping create an environment in which he felt the need
to intervene. To all, it was not my intention to cause a problem.


Mark Kruep


----- Original Message -----
From: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Friday, August 03, 2001 4:18 PM
Subject: Re: [AR] IF you know Jerry you love Jerry (was Re: OK kids, here we
go!


> Okay, enough everybody!  Disparaging comments have been made by several
> people, coupled with flammatory replies.  I expect public apologies from
> all parties involved.  Address your sincere redress to the parties you
> offended and to the list as a whole.  This type of behavior is uncalled
> for, take it to rmr where such actions are acceptable.
>
> If you are unfamiliar with list policies, I STRONGLY recommend you read
> them now -
> http://www.arocket.net/arweb/policy.html
>
> If you have a problem with somebody on the list, you take it off the list.
> Either directly to that person, or to me.
>
> This is your only warning.  I have no further tolerance in this matter.
>
> Ray
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 29766 invoked from network); 3 Aug 2001 23:38:58 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 3 Aug 2001 23:38:58 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: (qmail 16907 invoked from network); 3 Aug 2001 23:41:30 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 3 Aug 2001 23:41:30 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA19502; Fri, 3 Aug 2001 16:35:46 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 96794 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 3 Aug 2001 23:35:37 +0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA19480 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri,          3 Aug 2001 16:35:23 -0700
Message-ID:  <200108032335.QAA19480@itc.uci.edu>
Date:         Fri, 3 Aug 2001 23:35:23 +0000
Reply-To: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Subject:      [AR] My idea of fun
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

I think I need to set a good example.

My idea of fun:

1. A technically stimulating conversation with a high level of tolerance for
a bit of emotional overshooting so long as it is not hateful or destructive.
People get excited and that's why we all love rockets.

2. A little tidbit here and there among the chaff of something you never
heard of or something that adds to the repoirtoire of skills or best of all
something that solves a problem you are working RIGHT NOW.  arocket is live!

3. Flying rockets.

4. Hanging with the guys while flying rockets, having an adult beverage,
shooting the breeze, comparing rocket lovemaking skills and generally having
a social interaction with like minded geeks.  Sorry. I am a geek.

5. Publishing results.

6. Arguing on a technical level about the technical results.

7. Arguing on an irrational level about the color of underwear you are
wearing while the rocket failed (on rec.models.rockets of course).

8. Photography of building, prepping, launching, crashing and burning,
recovery, impact, cleaan-up and repair.

9. The web is my demi-god. :)

10. Having a launch that is so cool you insist on inviting 5 friends and all
your friends do the same.

Jerry Irvine


From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 25699 invoked from network); 3 Aug 2001 23:46:52 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 3 Aug 2001 23:46:52 -0000
Received: (qmail 11239 invoked from network); 3 Aug 2001 23:49:01 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 3 Aug 2001 23:49:01 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA19663; Fri, 3 Aug 2001 16:45:15 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 96823 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 3 Aug 2001 23:45:13 +0000
Received: from imo-r10.mx.aol.com (imo-r10.mx.aol.com [152.163.225.106]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA19648 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Fri, 3 Aug 2001 16:45:13 -0700
Received: from BASE358@aol.com by imo-r10.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v31.9.) id          w.92.186db878 (4242) for <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Fri, 3 Aug 2001          19:45:05 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0AA0_01C56B69.469560A0"
X-Mailer: AOL 6.0 for Windows US sub 10531
Message-ID:  <92.186db878.289c9181@aol.com>
Date:         Fri, 3 Aug 2001 19:45:05 EDT
Reply-To: <BASE358@AOL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <BASE358@AOL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Head end igniters
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0AA0_01C56B69.469560A0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

We have been experimenting with head in ignitors, with some success.
Blacksky has adapters that fit in the delay cavity of an Aerotech motor.  You
drill a 1/4" hole in the front closure and the adapter has O-ring to seal it.
 However in our flight the gerb ignitors failed and we had flames forward in
our rocket damaging it badly.  From the ground you could not tell anything
went wrong.  A new version of the gerb ignitor was tested at ROCstock and
worked in a M-1315 (3-4 second burn) but failed in a N-2000 (6 second burn)
Still trying to nail it down....  We launched a rocket successfully with a
forward ignitor, but the burn has been in the 3-4 second range.  Paul
Robinson is working on forward ignitors for Balls, we will be lighting a
central P motor, and airstarting 6 N motors in pairs, Definitely need forward
ignition!

Erik Gates
Gates Brothers Rocketry
www.gbrocketry.com

------=_NextPart_000_0AA0_01C56B69.469560A0
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<HTML><FONT FACE=arial,helvetica><FONT  SIZE=2>We have been experimenting with head in ignitors, with some success. &nbsp;
<BR>Blacksky has adapters that fit in the delay cavity of an Aerotech motor. &nbsp;You
<BR>drill a 1/4" hole in the front closure and the adapter has O-ring to seal it.
<BR>&nbsp;However in our flight the gerb ignitors failed and we had flames forward in
<BR>our rocket damaging it badly. &nbsp;From the ground you could not tell anything
<BR>went wrong. &nbsp;A new version of the gerb ignitor was tested at ROCstock and
<BR>worked in a M-1315 (3-4 second burn) but failed in a N-2000 (6 second burn) &nbsp;
<BR>Still trying to nail it down.... &nbsp;We launched a rocket successfully with a
<BR>forward ignitor, but the burn has been in the 3-4 second range. &nbsp;Paul
<BR>Robinson is working on forward ignitors for Balls, we will be lighting a
<BR>central P motor, and airstarting 6 N motors in pairs, Definitely need forward
<BR>ignition!
<BR>
<BR>Erik Gates
<BR>Gates Brothers Rocketry
<BR>www.gbrocketry.com</FONT></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0AA0_01C56B69.469560A0--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 20551 invoked from network); 4 Aug 2001 00:11:50 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 4 Aug 2001 00:11:50 -0000
Received: (qmail 24413 invoked from network); 4 Aug 2001 00:14:00 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 4 Aug 2001 00:14:00 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA20270; Fri, 3 Aug 2001 17:09:20 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 96873 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 4 Aug 2001 00:09:17 +0000
Received: from imo-m10.mx.aol.com (imo-m10.mx.aol.com [64.12.136.165]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA20255 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Fri, 3 Aug 2001 17:09:17 -0700
Received: from Balthezar@aol.com by imo-m10.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v31.9.) id          w.39.189238e5 (4399) for <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Fri, 3 Aug 2001          20:08:36 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0AA5_01C56B69.469560A0"
X-Mailer: AOL 6.0 for Windows US sub 10532
Message-ID:  <39.189238e5.289c9703@aol.com>
Date:         Fri, 3 Aug 2001 20:08:35 EDT
Reply-To: <Balthezar@AOL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <Balthezar@AOL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] IF you know Jerry you love Jerry (was Re: OK kids,              here we go!
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0AA5_01C56B69.469560A0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Welcome to the list Jerry!

Business practices, politics and personalities aside, I think we can all
benefit from your knowledge on the subject.

So, fired or made anything interesting lately?

Bruce Kirchner

------=_NextPart_000_0AA5_01C56B69.469560A0
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<HTML><FONT FACE=arial,helvetica><FONT  SIZE=2>Welcome to the list Jerry!
<BR>
<BR>Business practices, politics and personalities aside, I think we can all
<BR>benefit from your knowledge on the subject.
<BR>
<BR>So, fired or made anything interesting lately?
<BR>
<BR>Bruce Kirchner</FONT></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0AA5_01C56B69.469560A0--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 13204 invoked from network); 4 Aug 2001 00:18:34 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 4 Aug 2001 00:18:34 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: (qmail 3430 invoked from network); 4 Aug 2001 00:21:07 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 4 Aug 2001 00:21:07 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA20407; Fri, 3 Aug 2001 17:13:33 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 96891 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 4 Aug 2001 00:13:32 +0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA20389; Fri, 3 Aug 2001 17:13:31 -0700
Message-ID:  <200108040013.RAA20389@itc.uci.edu>
Date:         Sat, 4 Aug 2001 00:13:31 +0000
Reply-To: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Head end igniters
Comments: To: BASE358@AOL.COM
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

On Fri, 3 Aug 2001 19:45:05 EDT, BASE358@AOL.COM wrote:

>We have been experimenting with head in ignitors, with some success.
>Blacksky has adapters that fit in the delay cavity of an Aerotech motor.  You
>drill a 1/4" hole in the front closure and the adapter has O-ring to seal it.
> However in our flight the gerb ignitors failed and we had flames forward in
>our rocket damaging it badly.  From the ground you could not tell anything
>went wrong.  A new version of the gerb ignitor was tested at ROCstock and
>worked in a M-1315 (3-4 second burn) but failed in a N-2000 (6 second burn)
>Still trying to nail it down....  We launched a rocket successfully with a
>forward ignitor, but the burn has been in the 3-4 second range.  Paul
>Robinson is working on forward ignitors for Balls, we will be lighting a
>central P motor, and airstarting 6 N motors in pairs, Definitely need forward
>ignition!

We have had 100% success with our head end igniters.  We would be willing to
make proper commercial bulkheads for your project.

>
>Erik Gates
>Gates Brothers Rocketry
>www.gbrocketry.com
>


From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 15938 invoked from network); 4 Aug 2001 00:19:16 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 4 Aug 2001 00:19:16 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: (qmail 12109 invoked from network); 4 Aug 2001 00:20:50 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 4 Aug 2001 00:20:50 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA20501; Fri, 3 Aug 2001 17:17:03 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 96905 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 4 Aug 2001 00:16:57 +0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA20479 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri,          3 Aug 2001 17:16:25 -0700
Message-ID:  <200108040016.RAA20479@itc.uci.edu>
Date:         Sat, 4 Aug 2001 00:16:25 +0000
Reply-To: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] IF you know Jerry you love Jerry (was Re: OK kids,              here we go!
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

On Fri, 3 Aug 2001 20:08:35 EDT, Balthezar@AOL.COM wrote:

>Welcome to the list Jerry!
>
>Business practices, politics and personalities aside, I think we can all
>benefit from your knowledge on the subject.
>
>So, fired or made anything interesting lately?

www.v-serv.com/-upload has a few firings I have done, some titled/mistitled
videos from LDRS, a couple of hybrid photos from Cesaroni and some photos of
the old days including no doubt Dave Griffith, Gary Rosenfield, and myself.

Jerry

>
>Bruce Kirchner
>


From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 28027 invoked from network); 4 Aug 2001 01:47:27 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 4 Aug 2001 01:47:27 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 10271 invoked from network); 4 Aug 2001 01:50:00 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 4 Aug 2001 01:50:00 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA21239; Fri, 3 Aug 2001 18:30:40 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 97035 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 4 Aug 2001 01:30:18 +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (f7.law9.hotmail.com [64.4.9.7]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA21064; Fri, 3 Aug 2001 18:20:17 -0700
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Fri,          3 Aug 2001 18:19:47 -0700
Received: from 4.16.58.48 by lw9fd.law9.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Sat, 04 Aug          2001 01:19:47 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [4.16.58.48]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 04 Aug 2001 01:19:47.0583 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[8D0D30F0:01C11C83]
Message-ID:  <F7mKo4HjHD7PQ0rsnji0001181e@hotmail.com>
Date:         Fri, 3 Aug 2001 20:19:47 -0500
Reply-To: "ben romashko" <pleaselaunchme@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "ben romashko" <pleaselaunchme@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Picture forum (was: ? thermal bariers)
Comments: To: rcalkins@itc.uci.edu
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

I would gladly set somthing up on my web site, if interest is here for it.
Or, Ray, I could refer you to a service that will set it up through your
site, on their servers.  Let me know what ya'll think.



--------------------
Ben Romashko
pleaslaunchme@hotmail.com
AIM- Attican123
--------------------



>From: Ray Calkins <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
>Reply-To: Ray Calkins <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
>To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
>Subject: Re: [AR] ? thermal bariers
>Date: Fri, 3 Aug 2001 15:54:35 -0700
>
>Matt suggests -
> >
> > ...it would be nice to have an web site available for people
> > to upload/download files for the group.
>I have considered this option and ask for some assistance in this matter.
>I don't currently have a way I can automate this on the aRocket site or
>any of it's mirrors, your assistance is requested.
>
>Ray


_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 22517 invoked from network); 4 Aug 2001 01:54:53 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 4 Aug 2001 01:54:53 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: (qmail 12230 invoked from network); 4 Aug 2001 01:56:59 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 4 Aug 2001 01:56:59 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA21450; Fri, 3 Aug 2001 18:37:47 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 97088 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 4 Aug 2001 01:37:46 +0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA21432 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri,          3 Aug 2001 18:37:46 -0700
Message-ID:  <200108040137.SAA21432@itc.uci.edu>
Date:         Sat, 4 Aug 2001 01:37:46 +0000
Reply-To: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] ARocket ressource, Jully 2001
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Sometimes it takes a newbie to notice these things, but what would be more
useful than the (xx lines) attribute would be (date).

Referring to the web view of arocket at

http://itc.uci.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A0=arocket&D=0&F=lfPPP&H=0&O=T&S=&T=1&X=
L689C890A60663D88E5&Y=01rocket@gte.net

I think yo have to remove X and Y for you.

Jerry

Newbie has a nice ring to it.


From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 19989 invoked from network); 4 Aug 2001 02:03:00 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 4 Aug 2001 02:03:00 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: (qmail 16408 invoked from network); 4 Aug 2001 02:05:31 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 4 Aug 2001 02:05:31 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA21532; Fri, 3 Aug 2001 18:45:00 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 97104 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 4 Aug 2001 01:44:55 +0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA21514 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri,          3 Aug 2001 18:44:54 -0700
Message-ID:  <200108040144.SAA21514@itc.uci.edu>
Date:         Sat, 4 Aug 2001 01:44:54 +0000
Reply-To: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] ARocket ressource, Jully 2001
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

On Thu, 2 Aug 2001 10:22:47 EDT, Azt28@AOL.COM wrote:

>TEST FACILITY :
>
>***Ray Calkins rcalkins@itc.uci.edu :
>
>Rocket static testing:
>aRocket rate R$.05 per lb-sec + expenses
>Solid/liquid/hybrid
>LOx, nitrous, H2O2
>horizontal to 10,000 lb thrust,
>vertical to 2,000 lb thrust
>Vertical to 10,000 lb thrust on advance notice

proposed listing

SOLID PROPELLANT:

Jerry Irvine 01rocket@gte.net

10 styles of solid propellant
some include EX numbers for shipment
some include export permits
no minimum or maximum power or quantity
Generally based on $0.50 per #-s
Special casings extra
Commercial, military, FX experienced
"Get high.  And fast"
Fun projects very welcome.


From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 27792 invoked from network); 4 Aug 2001 02:41:54 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 4 Aug 2001 02:41:54 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: (qmail 1280 invoked from network); 4 Aug 2001 02:44:04 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 4 Aug 2001 02:44:04 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA21810; Fri, 3 Aug 2001 19:24:42 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 97134 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 4 Aug 2001 02:24:36 +0000
Received: from localhost (dmccue@localhost) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with          ESMTP id TAA21795 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 3 Aug 2001 19:24:36          -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.LNX.4.10.10108031810180.19579-100000@itc.uci.edu>
Date:         Fri, 3 Aug 2001 19:24:36 -0700
Reply-To: "David J. McCue" <dmccue@itc.uci.edu>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "David J. McCue" <dmccue@itc.uci.edu>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Hybrid Test Setup
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <20010803202055.55894.qmail@web10506.mail.yahoo.com>

On Fri, 3 Aug 2001, Justin Pucci wrote:

> Hey guys,
>
> I have a quick question that I want to hear everyone's
> opinion on...  I am testing a 250 lb-thrust N2O/HDPE
> hybrid with a separate oxidizer tank and combustion
> chamber (not monocoque).  Do I build a teststand that
> fires up, down, or horizontally?  Let me know what you
> think and why!  Thanks!!!
>
> -->Justin Pucci

I would suggest firing the motor in the flight orientation as the simplest
answer. This has the chief benefit that the feed from the oxidizer tank
into the combustion chamber and any other bleed ports you have will not
need to be rearranged.

I also suggest that you hang the motor from your load cell and rig a
restraint to ensure that the motor stays pointed straight up. Your load
cell output will swing from one polarity to the other and back again
because the motor is hanging from it. You can easily account for that by
adjusting the zero point in your acquistion system.

The downside to this approach is that you must contend with the upward
thrust of the motor and that your measurements will be polluted by the
change in weight of the motor.

To get a cleaner read of thrust alone you're gonna want a horizontal
thrust stand, but now you have to change your N2O feed from the oxidizer
tank. A way I have seen this done is to orient the tank in flight attitude
and add a right-angle connector to the combustion chamber. Of course, now
you worry about what effect the new component has on motor performance,
but few things in life come without tradeoffs. ;-)

One really nice thing about N2O is that you can ignore many of the
concerns you would usually have with liquids. N2O evaporates very quickly
at 1 Atm pressure, so pooling of propellants is not a real source of
worry.

Have fun!

-Dave Mc

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 3167 invoked from network); 4 Aug 2001 02:43:32 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 4 Aug 2001 02:43:32 -0000
Received: (qmail 7454 invoked from network); 4 Aug 2001 02:45:44 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 4 Aug 2001 02:45:44 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA21849; Fri, 3 Aug 2001 19:28:11 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 97143 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 4 Aug 2001 02:28:10 +0000
Received: from femail16.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail16.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.0.95.143]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA21834          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 3 Aug 2001 19:28:09 -0700
Received: from cc334751a ([65.13.214.65]) by femail16.sdc1.sfba.home.com          (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20 201-229-121-120-20010223) with SMTP id          <20010804022808.FDVE15839.femail16.sdc1.sfba.home.com@cc334751a>;          Fri, 3 Aug 2001 19:28:08 -0700
References: <000c01c11c5f$e6b0c5a0$1a9b150c@foy>                       <008d01c11c61$43885c60$14464a42@socal.rr.com>             <000801c11c64$06fc7440$cd9b150c@foy>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0AAA_01C56B69.469EFD90"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2462.0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <012401c11c8d$21864a60$6401a8c0@home.com>
Date:         Fri, 3 Aug 2001 20:28:21 -0600
Reply-To: "Brian Kosko" <bkosko1@HOME.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Brian Kosko" <bkosko1@HOME.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] ? thermal bariers
Comments: To: foy <foy@WFECA.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0AAA_01C56B69.469EFD90
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

One easy solution is to buy Aerotech nozzles. The 29mm ones are only a =
buck or two. I've used them on up to 54mm single use motors. Whatever =
their minuses; thermal conduction to the case isn't one of them.

Another possibility (maybe anyway depending on your design) is to put a =
layer of EPDM, carbon cloth, etc. between the outside of the nozzle and =
case.

Brian

------=_NextPart_000_0AAA_01C56B69.469EFD90
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Diso-8859-1">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 6.00.2462.0" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>One easy solution is to buy Aerotech =
nozzles. The=20
29mm ones are only a buck or two. I've used them on up to 54mm single =
use=20
motors. Whatever their minuses; thermal conduction to the case isn't one =
of=20
them.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Another possibility (maybe anyway =
depending on your=20
design) is to put a layer of EPDM, carbon cloth, etc. between the =
outside of the=20
nozzle and case.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Brian</FONT></DIV></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0AAA_01C56B69.469EFD90--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 18645 invoked from network); 4 Aug 2001 02:58:46 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 4 Aug 2001 02:58:46 -0000
Received: (qmail 23427 invoked from network); 4 Aug 2001 03:00:23 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 4 Aug 2001 03:00:23 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA21931; Fri, 3 Aug 2001 19:43:10 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 97160 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 4 Aug 2001 02:43:05 +0000
Received: from albatross.wgn.net (www.wgn.net [64.14.252.81] (may be forged))          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA21914 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 3 Aug 2001 19:43:01 -0700
Received: from hogwild (sc-66-74-70-20.socal.rr.com [66.74.70.20]) by          albatross.wgn.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id TAA03735 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 3 Aug 2001 19:44:39 -0700
References:  <200108040013.RAA20389@itc.uci.edu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <017401c11c8e$f415fce0$14464a42@socal.rr.com>
Date:         Fri, 3 Aug 2001 19:41:24 -0700
Reply-To: "Wedge Oldham" <wedge@WESTWORLD.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Wedge Oldham" <wedge@WESTWORLD.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Head end igniters
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

I'd be interested in "Head-End" igniters for either the Dr. Rocket or
Aerotech cases.

I'm sure the question is rather academic, but when you say you've had 100%
success, is that you've never had a forward closure leak, or you've never
failed to light a motor with head-end igniters. I have a feeling the answer
is both, but just wanna make sure.

Wedge Oldham
http://NikeProject.com

----- Original Message -----
From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Friday, August 03, 2001 5:13 PM
Subject: Re: [AR] Head end igniters


> On Fri, 3 Aug 2001 19:45:05 EDT, BASE358@AOL.COM wrote:
>
> >We have been experimenting with head in ignitors, with some success.
> >Blacksky has adapters that fit in the delay cavity of an Aerotech motor.
You
> >drill a 1/4" hole in the front closure and the adapter has O-ring to seal
it.
> > However in our flight the gerb ignitors failed and we had flames forward
in
> >our rocket damaging it badly.  From the ground you could not tell
anything
> >went wrong.  A new version of the gerb ignitor was tested at ROCstock and
> >worked in a M-1315 (3-4 second burn) but failed in a N-2000 (6 second
burn)
> >Still trying to nail it down....  We launched a rocket successfully with
a
> >forward ignitor, but the burn has been in the 3-4 second range.  Paul
> >Robinson is working on forward ignitors for Balls, we will be lighting a
> >central P motor, and airstarting 6 N motors in pairs, Definitely need
forward
> >ignition!
>
> We have had 100% success with our head end igniters.  We would be willing
to
> make proper commercial bulkheads for your project.
>
> >
> >Erik Gates
> >Gates Brothers Rocketry
> >www.gbrocketry.com
> >

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 8313 invoked from network); 4 Aug 2001 04:58:07 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 4 Aug 2001 04:58:07 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 8198 invoked from network); 4 Aug 2001 05:00:19 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 4 Aug 2001 05:00:19 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA22576; Fri, 3 Aug 2001 21:55:44 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 97203 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 4 Aug 2001 04:55:10 +0000
Received: from smtp4ve.mailsrvcs.net (smtp4vepub.gte.net [206.46.170.25]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA22561 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Fri, 3 Aug 2001 21:55:09 -0700
Received: from me-513q3sc0zun0.pengar.com          (adsl-64-223-147-206.mannh.adsl.bellatlantic.net [64.223.147.206]) by          smtp4ve.mailsrvcs.net (8.9.1/8.9.1) with ESMTP id EAA64238366 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Sat, 4 Aug 2001 04:54:38 GMT
X-Sender: seth-pc@hobbiton.shire.net
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <5.1.0.14.0.20010804005831.02ad2220@hobbiton.shire.net>
Date:         Sat, 4 Aug 2001 00:59:38 -0400
Reply-To: "Seth Leigh" <seth@PENGAR.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Seth Leigh" <seth@PENGAR.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] explosion
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <a1.191f9a66.289bb1e5@aol.com>

At 03:51 AM 8/3/2001, Sociald84@AOL.COM wrote:
>Hey list,
>
>I just wanted to clarify one thing realy quickly.
>
>in this link
>http://www.comptons.com/encyclopedia/ARTICLES/0050/00628736_A.html
>provided in another post it says "  An Explosion Is a Chemical Reaction "
>I just want to point out that an explosion is not a chemical reaction. An
>explosion is often times the RESULT of a chemical reaction. The explosion
>itself is an effect, not a cause.
>An explosion can be made by putting a few pieces of dry ice in a 2L. bottle
>with some warm watter and capping it.

Oh yes, I know all about this.  ;-)  And it's one of the loudest sounds
you'll ever hear.  Of course I haven't been present at a Space Shuttle launch.

Seth

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 21725 invoked from network); 4 Aug 2001 07:36:48 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 4 Aug 2001 07:36:48 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 3504 invoked from network); 4 Aug 2001 07:38:58 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 4 Aug 2001 07:38:58 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA23208; Sat, 4 Aug 2001 00:30:12 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 97263 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 4 Aug 2001 07:30:01 +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (f109.law14.hotmail.com [64.4.21.109]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA23193 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 4 Aug 2001 00:30:01 -0700
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Sat,          4 Aug 2001 00:29:31 -0700
Received: from 207.220.223.239 by lw14fd.law14.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Sat,          04 Aug 2001 07:29:30 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [207.220.223.239]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 04 Aug 2001 07:29:31.0017 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[33689790:01C11CB7]
Message-ID:  <F109KQpQq5pneeFUtLc0000e018@hotmail.com>
Date:         Sat, 4 Aug 2001 07:29:30 +0000
Reply-To: "Matt Faulkner" <mattfaulkner9@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Matt Faulkner" <mattfaulkner9@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      [AR] high pressure tanks
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Does anyone know of a supplier of inexpensive, lightweight pressure tanks
for N2O (or even gOX)? Or, better yet, a reliable way to make them? Maybe
about 700-1000 cc?
                               Thanks.

_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 12515 invoked from network); 4 Aug 2001 09:32:11 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 4 Aug 2001 09:32:11 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 2940 invoked from network); 4 Aug 2001 09:34:43 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 4 Aug 2001 09:34:43 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id CAA23679; Sat, 4 Aug 2001 02:25:59 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 97319 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 4 Aug 2001 09:25:52 +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (f12.law3.hotmail.com [209.185.241.12]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id CAA23663 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Sat, 4 Aug 2001 02:25:52 -0700
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Sat,          4 Aug 2001 02:25:22 -0700
Received: from 213.224.83.166 by lw3fd.law3.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Sat, 04          Aug 2001 09:25:21 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [213.224.83.166]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 04 Aug 2001 09:25:22.0287 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[62B037F0:01C11CC7]
Message-ID:  <F12DiKBsuZ2K4xDh9vX00003a29@hotmail.com>
Date:         Sat, 4 Aug 2001 09:25:52 +0000
Reply-To: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] high pressure tanks
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

MF wrote:
>
>Does anyone know of a supplier of inexpensive, lightweight pressure tanks
>for N2O (or even gOX)? Or, better yet, a reliable way to make them? Maybe
>about 700-1000 cc?

Camping gas canisters?

jd
>                               Thanks.
>
>_________________________________________________________________
>Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp


_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 29437 invoked from network); 4 Aug 2001 12:24:28 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 4 Aug 2001 12:24:28 -0000
Received: (qmail 3145 invoked from network); 4 Aug 2001 12:26:37 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 4 Aug 2001 12:26:37 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id FAA24283; Sat, 4 Aug 2001 05:20:24 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 97348 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 4 Aug 2001 12:20:09 +0000
Received: from fep3-orange.clear.net.nz (fep3-orange.clear.net.nz          [203.97.32.3]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id FAA24268          for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Sat, 4 Aug 2001 05:20:08 -0700
Received: from mkbs (203-167-160-20.dialup.clear.net.nz [203.167.160.20]) by          fep3-orange.clear.net.nz (1.5/1.8) with SMTP id AAA17198; Sun, 5 Aug          2001 00:20:06 +1200 (NZST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="Windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <072201c11ce0$066c56e0$0100a8c0@mkbs>
Date:         Sun, 5 Aug 2001 00:21:15 +1200
Reply-To: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Organization: Applied Technology
Subject:      [AR] X33 as a long range bomber ! :-)
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

What will they think of next?



http://www.nationalpost.com/home/story.html?f=/stories/20010730/632106.html

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 333 invoked from network); 4 Aug 2001 12:24:51 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 4 Aug 2001 12:24:51 -0000
Received: (qmail 3237 invoked from network); 4 Aug 2001 12:27:00 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 4 Aug 2001 12:27:00 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id FAA24307; Sat, 4 Aug 2001 05:20:39 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 97355 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 4 Aug 2001 12:20:38 +0000
Received: from fep3-orange.clear.net.nz (fep3-orange.clear.net.nz          [203.97.32.3]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id FAA24290          for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Sat, 4 Aug 2001 05:20:37 -0700
Received: from mkbs (203-167-160-20.dialup.clear.net.nz [203.167.160.20]) by          fep3-orange.clear.net.nz (1.5/1.8) with SMTP id AAA17201; Sun, 5 Aug          2001 00:20:07 +1200 (NZST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="Windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <072301c11ce0$09029220$0100a8c0@mkbs>
Date:         Sun, 5 Aug 2001 00:21:39 +1200
Reply-To: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Organization: Applied Technology
Subject:      [AR] Peroxide powered rocket
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Here's what it's like to ride a peroxide powered rocket - in this case
horizontally over a  quarter of a mile.
12g plus acceleration with accompanying tunnel vision.
700 psi, 20 gallons of HTP, silver screen catalysts.
17,000 lbs thrust.


0-60 in 0.25 seconds (that's about 20 times faster than a really good modern
rally car).
300 mph in 1.6s

Third link below has a few technical details.

http://www.dragracingonline.com/features/miller_1.htm
http://www.dragracingonline.com/features/miller_2.htm
http://www.dragracingonline.com/features/miller_3.htm


Pictures of car & plumbing - rocket motor proper not especially visible.
670 kB video of part of a 3.6 second 1/4 mile drag run on this page.
(Noisier than John Carmack's rocket :-) )

    http://www.au004a2814.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/miller.htm


Steam Rocket car

    http://blastwavejet.com/rocketcar.htm

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 871 invoked from network); 4 Aug 2001 12:35:47 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 4 Aug 2001 12:35:47 -0000
Received: (qmail 6860 invoked from network); 4 Aug 2001 12:37:56 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 4 Aug 2001 12:37:56 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id FAA24397; Sat, 4 Aug 2001 05:31:05 -0700
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 97378 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 4 Aug 2001 12:31:02 +0000
Received: from zcars0m9.ca.nortel.com ([47.129.242.157]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id FAA24382 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat,          4 Aug 2001 05:31:01 -0700
Received: from zcars04f.ca.nortel.com (zcars04f.ca.nortel.com [47.129.242.57])          by zcars0m9.ca.nortel.com (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f74CU1911241          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 4 Aug 2001 08:30:01 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from rftzy232.ca.nortel.com by zcars04f.ca.nortel.com; Sat, 4 Aug          2001 08:30:11 -0400
Received: from nortelnetworks.com (acart3xg.ca.nortel.com [47.129.49.21]) by          rftzy232.ca.nortel.com with SMTP (Microsoft Exchange Internet Mail          Service Version 5.5.2653.13) id NKPL6DTR; Sat, 4 Aug 2001 08:29:55          -0400
X-Sybari-Space: 00000000 00000000 00000000
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (Win95; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <F12DiKBsuZ2K4xDh9vX00003a29@hotmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Orig: <mleech@nortelnetworks.com>
Message-ID:  <3B6BEBB3.AAC7A98F@nortelnetworks.com>
Date:         Sat, 4 Aug 2001 08:33:55 -0400
Reply-To: "Marcus Leech" <mleech@NORTELNETWORKS.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Marcus Leech" <mleech@NORTELNETWORKS.COM>
Organization: Not Terribly
Subject:      Re: [AR] high pressure tanks
Comments: To: John Dom <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

John Dom wrote:
>
> MF wrote:
> >
> >Does anyone know of a supplier of inexpensive, lightweight pressure tanks
> >for N2O (or even gOX)? Or, better yet, a reliable way to make them? Maybe
> >about 700-1000 cc?
>
> Camping gas canisters?
>
Yikes! propane cylinders are rated for a MEOP of about 100PSI, and
  even with standard  consumer-grade overbuilding by a factor of
  four or five, you still don't get close enough to 750PSI to
  be safe!

Use a T6 6061 tube of appropriate wall thickness for the diameter
  you're using, then make up simple, 'O' ring sealed flat ends that
  are retained with a snap-ring.  It'll be heavier than optimal, since
  you're using flat, rather than hemispherical ends, but it'll be
  lighter than any commercial cylinder that's reasonably affordable.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 1977 invoked from network); 4 Aug 2001 12:56:50 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 4 Aug 2001 12:56:50 -0000
Received: (qmail 1418 invoked from network); 4 Aug 2001 12:59:24 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 4 Aug 2001 12:59:24 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id FAA24530; Sat, 4 Aug 2001 05:52:06 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 97401 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 4 Aug 2001 12:52:04 +0000
Received: from mail.cac.net (IDENT:root@mail.cac.net [209.44.14.13]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id FAA24515 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 4 Aug 2001 05:52:03 -0700
Received: from jfackert.cac.net (tc3-07.cac.net [209.44.14.182]) by          mail.cac.net (Pro-8.9.3/Pro-8.9.3) with SMTP id IAA19084 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 4 Aug 2001 08:51:57 -0400
References:  <F109KQpQq5pneeFUtLc0000e018@hotmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2314.1300
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <066501c11ce5$54c6fca0$4e0e2cd1@cac.net>
Date:         Sat, 4 Aug 2001 08:59:40 -0400
Reply-To: "Jim Fackert" <jfackert@CAC.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jim Fackert" <jfackert@CAC.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] high pressure tanks
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

paintball... search the web.

Jim


----- Original Message -----
From: Matt Faulkner <mattfaulkner9@HOTMAIL.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Saturday, August 04, 2001 3:29 AM
Subject: [AR] high pressure tanks


> Does anyone know of a supplier of inexpensive, lightweight pressure tanks
> for N2O (or even gOX)? Or, better yet, a reliable way to make them? Maybe
> about 700-1000 cc?
>                                Thanks.
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 12035 invoked from network); 4 Aug 2001 14:58:04 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 4 Aug 2001 14:58:04 -0000
Received: (qmail 28022 invoked from network); 4 Aug 2001 15:00:38 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 4 Aug 2001 15:00:38 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA24980; Sat, 4 Aug 2001 07:55:15 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 97439 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 4 Aug 2001 14:54:58 +0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA24954 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat,          4 Aug 2001 07:54:34 -0700
Message-ID:  <200108041454.HAA24954@itc.uci.edu>
Date:         Sat, 4 Aug 2001 14:54:34 +0000
Reply-To: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] head end & nozzle end igniters
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Related to the head end igniter thread we have made some nozzle mounted
igniters for endburners and partial coreburners that employ many of the same
techniques of our bulkhead mounted igniters.  This allows for extended
burning times, something the military tends to need, while providing a very
sure ignition reliability and timing.

In rare instances these have been used to restart motors so they are designed
to withstand certain amounts of live combustion.

I am not sure how amateurs would use this stuff, maybe large endburning
motors 3-6" diameter, or a guided rocket or plane that is even restartable.

I suppose the igniters we use on solids would work fairly well on liquids or
hybrids as well.

Jerry


From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 17461 invoked from network); 4 Aug 2001 14:59:54 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 4 Aug 2001 14:59:54 -0000
Received: (qmail 29112 invoked from network); 4 Aug 2001 15:02:27 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 4 Aug 2001 15:02:27 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA25031; Sat, 4 Aug 2001 07:57:53 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 97447 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 4 Aug 2001 14:57:52 +0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA25010 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat,          4 Aug 2001 07:57:00 -0700
Message-ID:  <200108041457.HAA25010@itc.uci.edu>
Date:         Sat, 4 Aug 2001 14:57:00 +0000
Reply-To: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] high pressure tanks
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

On Sat, 4 Aug 2001 08:59:40 -0400, Jim Fackert <jfackert@CAC.NET> wrote:

>paintball... search the web.
>> Does anyone know of a supplier of inexpensive, lightweight pressure tanks
>> for N2O (or even gOX)? Or, better yet, a reliable way to make them? Maybe
>> about 700-1000 cc?
>>                                Thanks.
>>

Yes order them from Dave Griffith who is set up to do this easily and
quickly.  MONTMACH@aol.com IIRC and yes he is on the list.

Jerry


From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 15292 invoked from network); 4 Aug 2001 15:09:19 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 4 Aug 2001 15:09:19 -0000
Received: (qmail 635 invoked from network); 4 Aug 2001 15:11:29 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 4 Aug 2001 15:11:29 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA25150; Sat, 4 Aug 2001 08:06:32 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 97475 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 4 Aug 2001 15:06:31 +0000
Received: from castor.ridgenet.net (IDENT:root@castor.ridgenet.net          [199.120.150.29]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA25134          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 4 Aug 2001 08:06:30 -0700
Received: from kristinscomp (pm162.ridgenet.net [204.154.246.162]) by          castor.ridgenet.net (8.11.0/8.11.0) with SMTP id f74ExmS03565; Sat, 4          Aug 2001 07:59:48 -0700
References:  <F109KQpQq5pneeFUtLc0000e018@hotmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <003601c11cf8$3bfeb560$1b30fea9@kristinscomp>
Date:         Sat, 4 Aug 2001 08:15:01 -0700
Reply-To: "Kristin & David Hall" <thehalls@RIDGENET.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Kristin & David Hall" <thehalls@RIDGENET.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] high pressure tanks
Comments: To: Matt Faulkner <mattfaulkner9@HOTMAIL.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Why, as a matter of fact, *I* am a supplier of inexpensive (relatively
speaking), lightweight pressure tanks for....well....they're designed for
N2, but I suspect N2O is doable.  I'm a paintball geek on the side!

OK, here's the deal:  The tanks are rated for 3000 psi.  They normally come
with regulators on them, but the factory has no problems selling them to me
sans regulator (minus warrenty, of course - since they won't be used for
paintball).  I don't know the prices off the top of my head, but they'll be
lower than price with regulator.  How much lower?  I don't know, probably on
the order of $30 but don't quote me on that.  Beyond that, the cost is my
cost + 5% + shipping.  What can I get?  OK, this is straight out of my
dealer price sheet....

47 ci (aluminum): $85
68 ci (fiber): $165
91 ci (fiber): $180
110 ci (fiber): $186

Figure sans regulator but plus shipping, etc. those prices aren't too far
off the mark.  At the risk of sounding like a used car dealer.... I
challenge you to find a better price anywhere!  (Translation:  I don't do
the paintball thing for the money.  I do it to keep ready access to cheap
stuff for myself.  The only reason I take orders from others is a
combination of favors/staying in good standing with the factory.  The 5%
profit is to keep the IRS off my back - they think that a business that
doesn't make money is a money laundering operation!)

Of course, if you *want* the regulators....that can be arranged to.  There
are two types of regulators:  pre-set or adjustable.  The pre-sets are set
to 850 psi.  The adjustables are adjustable from 200 psi to 850 psi.  The
prices quoted above are for pre-set.  Adjustable would cost more, of course.

Ironic timing, really, Monday I'm putting in an order for a tank for
ARocketeer-who's-name-I-won't-use-without-permission.

--
Dave and/or Kristin Hall
----- Original Message -----
From: Matt Faulkner <mattfaulkner9@HOTMAIL.COM>

> Does anyone know of a supplier of inexpensive, lightweight pressure tanks
> for N2O (or even gOX)? Or, better yet, a reliable way to make them? Maybe
> about 700-1000 cc?
>                                Thanks.
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 5853 invoked from network); 4 Aug 2001 15:26:25 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 4 Aug 2001 15:26:25 -0000
Received: (qmail 10381 invoked from network); 4 Aug 2001 15:28:59 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 4 Aug 2001 15:28:59 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA25249; Sat, 4 Aug 2001 08:21:24 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 97494 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 4 Aug 2001 15:21:17 +0000
Received: from albatross.wgn.net (www.wgn.net [64.14.252.81] (may be forged))          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA25234 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 4 Aug 2001 08:21:17 -0700
Received: from hogwild (sc-66-74-70-20.socal.rr.com [66.74.70.20]) by          albatross.wgn.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id IAA01467 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 4 Aug 2001 08:22:58 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0AAD_01C56B69.46AD2E60"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <031301c11cf8$c69364a0$14464a42@socal.rr.com>
Date:         Sat, 4 Aug 2001 08:18:54 -0700
Reply-To: "Wedge Oldham" <wedge@WESTWORLD.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Wedge Oldham" <wedge@WESTWORLD.COM>
Subject:      [AR] Material Strenght
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0AAD_01C56B69.46AD2E60
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

I saw a post about material strength whiz by a few weeks ago. But at =
that time, I was interested in that info.

Unfortunately, now I am.....

What I'd like to know is:
If I replace all of the 1/2" Aircraft Birch plywood centering rings with =
G10.=20
What thickness of G10 would I need to achieve the *same* strength I had =
with plywood? And more importantly would this result in a weight =
savings?

Wedge Oldham
http://NikeProject.com

------=_NextPart_000_0AAD_01C56B69.46AD2E60
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Diso-8859-1">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 5.50.4616.200" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>I saw a post about material strength =
whiz by a few=20
weeks ago. But at that time, I was interested in that info.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Unfortunately, now I =
am.....</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>What I'd like to know is:</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>If I replace all of the 1/2" Aircraft =
Birch plywood=20
centering rings with G10. </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>What thickness of G10 would I need to =
achieve the=20
*same* strength I had with plywood? And more importantly would this =
result in a=20
weight savings?</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Wedge Oldham<BR><A=20
href=3D"http://NikeProject.com">http://NikeProject.com</A></FONT></DIV></=
BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0AAD_01C56B69.46AD2E60--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 12329 invoked from network); 4 Aug 2001 15:38:05 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 4 Aug 2001 15:38:05 -0000
Received: (qmail 6632 invoked from network); 4 Aug 2001 15:39:45 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 4 Aug 2001 15:39:45 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA25331; Sat, 4 Aug 2001 08:35:33 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 97509 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 4 Aug 2001 15:35:31 +0000
Received: from mail.argotech.net ([209.76.235.6]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7)          with ESMTP id IAA25316 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 4 Aug 2001          08:35:31 -0700
Received: from Wayne ([209.76.232.83]) by mail.argotech.net (Post.Office MTA          v3.5.3 release 223 ID# 0-55624U2500L250S0V35) with SMTP id net for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 4 Aug 2001 08:35:54 -0700
References:  <F109KQpQq5pneeFUtLc0000e018@hotmail.com>              <003601c11cf8$3bfeb560$1b30fea9@kristinscomp>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <005301c11cfb$22a9b1c0$6501a8c0@Argotech.net>
Date:         Sat, 4 Aug 2001 08:35:48 -0700
Reply-To: "Wayne Mrazek" <wmrazek@earthlink.net>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Wayne Mrazek" <wmrazek@earthlink.net>
Subject:      Re: [AR] high pressure tanks
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Dave,

What are the outer dimensions (L & diam)  and port size of these?

Thx,

Wayne

----- Original Message -----
From: "Kristin & David Hall" <thehalls@RIDGENET.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Saturday, August 04, 2001 8:15 AM
Subject: Re: [AR] high pressure tanks


> Why, as a matter of fact, *I* am a supplier of inexpensive (relatively
> speaking), lightweight pressure tanks for....well....they're designed for
> N2, but I suspect N2O is doable.  I'm a paintball geek on the side!
>
> OK, here's the deal:  The tanks are rated for 3000 psi.  They normally
come
> with regulators on them, but the factory has no problems selling them to
me
> sans regulator (minus warrenty, of course - since they won't be used for
> paintball).  I don't know the prices off the top of my head, but they'll
be
> lower than price with regulator.  How much lower?  I don't know, probably
on
> the order of $30 but don't quote me on that.  Beyond that, the cost is my
> cost + 5% + shipping.  What can I get?  OK, this is straight out of my
> dealer price sheet....
>
> 47 ci (aluminum): $85
> 68 ci (fiber): $165
> 91 ci (fiber): $180
> 110 ci (fiber): $186
>
> Figure sans regulator but plus shipping, etc. those prices aren't too far
> off the mark.  At the risk of sounding like a used car dealer.... I
> challenge you to find a better price anywhere!  (Translation:  I don't do
> the paintball thing for the money.  I do it to keep ready access to cheap
> stuff for myself.  The only reason I take orders from others is a
> combination of favors/staying in good standing with the factory.  The 5%
> profit is to keep the IRS off my back - they think that a business that
> doesn't make money is a money laundering operation!)
>
> Of course, if you *want* the regulators....that can be arranged to.  There
> are two types of regulators:  pre-set or adjustable.  The pre-sets are set
> to 850 psi.  The adjustables are adjustable from 200 psi to 850 psi.  The
> prices quoted above are for pre-set.  Adjustable would cost more, of
course.
>
> Ironic timing, really, Monday I'm putting in an order for a tank for
> ARocketeer-who's-name-I-won't-use-without-permission.
>
> --
> Dave and/or Kristin Hall
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Matt Faulkner <mattfaulkner9@HOTMAIL.COM>
>
> > Does anyone know of a supplier of inexpensive, lightweight pressure
tanks
> > for N2O (or even gOX)? Or, better yet, a reliable way to make them?
Maybe
> > about 700-1000 cc?
> >                                Thanks.
> >
> > _________________________________________________________________
> > Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at
http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp
> >

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 22485 invoked from network); 4 Aug 2001 15:52:05 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 4 Aug 2001 15:52:05 -0000
Received: (qmail 20034 invoked from network); 4 Aug 2001 15:54:38 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 4 Aug 2001 15:54:38 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA25403; Sat, 4 Aug 2001 08:46:00 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 97524 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 4 Aug 2001 15:45:58 +0000
Received: from c002.snv.cp.net (c002-h003.c002.snv.cp.net [209.228.32.167]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id IAA25388 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 4 Aug 2001 08:45:57 -0700
Received: (cpmta 26734 invoked from network); 4 Aug 2001 08:45:26 -0700
Received: from 0-1pool241-15.nas1.norfolk1.va.us.da.qwest.net (HELO default)          (63.233.241.15) by smtp.peoplepc.com (209.228.32.167) with SMTP; 4          Aug 2001 08:45:26 -0700
X-Sent: 4 Aug 2001 15:45:26 GMT
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0AB0_01C56B69.46AD2E60"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <008501c11cfe$0adcd4c0$0ff1e93f@default>
Date:         Sat, 4 Aug 2001 11:56:34 -0400
Reply-To: "David Muesing" <dmuesing@PEOPLEPC.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "David Muesing" <dmuesing@PEOPLEPC.COM>
Subject:      [AR] Ad-----Mr. Fiberglass------Big Discount on Glass & Carbon
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0AB0_01C56B69.46AD2E60
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Greetings Friends/Customers,

If you are interested in a high quantity (10+ yards) of glass or Carbon =
fabric, please contact me. I can probably give you a real bargain.

Thanks!=20

Dave Muesing
www.mrfiberglass.com

------=_NextPart_000_0AB0_01C56B69.46AD2E60
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Diso-8859-1">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 5.50.4616.200" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=3DOCRA color=3D#0000ff>
<DIV><FONT face=3DOCRA color=3D#0000ff>Greetings =
Friends/Customers,</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DOCRA color=3D#0000ff></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DOCRA color=3D#0000ff>If you are interested in a high =
quantity (10+=20
yards)&nbsp;of glass or Carbon fabric, </FONT><FONT face=3DOCRA=20
color=3D#0000ff>please contact me. I can probably give you a real=20
bargain.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DOCRA color=3D#0000ff>Thanks!</FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DOCRA color=3D#0000ff></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DOCRA color=3D#0000ff>Dave Muesing<BR><A=20
href=3D"http://www.mrfiberglass.com">www.mrfiberglass.com</A></FONT></DIV=
></FONT></DIV></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0AB0_01C56B69.46AD2E60--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 27303 invoked from network); 4 Aug 2001 16:14:09 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 4 Aug 2001 16:14:09 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 29510 invoked from network); 4 Aug 2001 16:16:43 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 4 Aug 2001 16:16:43 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA25565; Sat, 4 Aug 2001 09:12:18 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 97540 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 4 Aug 2001 16:12:13 +0000
Received: from po3.glue.umd.edu (po3.glue.umd.edu [128.8.10.123]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA25550 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.edu>; Sat, 4 Aug 2001 09:12:12 -0700
Received: from y.glue.umd.edu (IDENT:root@y.glue.umd.edu [128.8.10.68]) by          po3.glue.umd.edu (8.10.1/8.10.1) with ESMTP id f74GCBk12010 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.edu>; Sat, 4 Aug 2001 12:12:11 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from y.glue.umd.edu (IDENT:sendmail@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by          y.glue.umd.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id MAA08865 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.edu>; Sat, 4 Aug 2001 12:12:10 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from localhost (acase@localhost) by y.glue.umd.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with          ESMTP id MAA08861 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.edu>; Sat, 4 Aug 2001 12:12:10          -0400 (EDT)
X-Authentication-Warning: y.glue.umd.edu: acase owned process doing -bs
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.GSO.4.21.0108041211120.7210-100000@y.glue.umd.edu>
Date:         Sat, 4 Aug 2001 12:12:10 -0400
Reply-To: "Andrew Case" <acase@GLUE.UMD.EDU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Andrew Case" <acase@GLUE.UMD.EDU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] high pressure tanks
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

On Sat, 4 Aug 2001, Marcus Leech wrote:
> Use a T6 6061 tube of appropriate wall thickness for the diameter
>   you're using, then make up simple, 'O' ring sealed flat ends that
>   are retained with a snap-ring.  It'll be heavier than optimal, since
>   you're using flat, rather than hemispherical ends, but it'll be
>   lighter than any commercial cylinder that's reasonably affordable.

I've been working through some design options for a peroxide thruster,
and one of the issues that's come up over and over again is materials
compatibility. I'm surprised to find that Aluminum is OK for tanks (I'll
be even more surprised if it's OK for the combustion chamber, though).
Anyway - Is there a single relaiable source for information on
peroxide compatibility (and the flipside, good catalysts, and what
poisons them)?

One issue is that I'd really like to braze some of the parts, and
something tells me silver solder isn't the way to go :)

I'm actually headed for the library right after this, so maybe I'll find
something handy there, but I figured I should ask. Even if the answer is
that there's no good reference on this it's  a step in the right
direction.


Thanks,
......Andrew

Andrew Case                             |
acase@plasma.umd.edu                    |
Institute for Plasma Research           |
University of Maryland, College Park    |

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 3369 invoked from network); 4 Aug 2001 16:16:19 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 4 Aug 2001 16:16:19 -0000
Received: (qmail 21737 invoked from network); 4 Aug 2001 16:17:59 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 4 Aug 2001 16:17:59 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA25590; Sat, 4 Aug 2001 09:13:11 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 97547 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 4 Aug 2001 16:13:10 +0000
Received: from spsystems.net (spsystems.net [209.47.149.227]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA25575 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Sat,          4 Aug 2001 09:13:09 -0700
Received: (from henry@localhost) by spsystems.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id MAA02330;          Sat, 4 Aug 2001 12:12:29 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010804120946.1965B-100000@spsystems.net>
Date:         Sat, 4 Aug 2001 12:12:29 -0400
Reply-To: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] high pressure tanks
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <003601c11cf8$3bfeb560$1b30fea9@kristinscomp>

On Sat, 4 Aug 2001, Kristin & David Hall wrote:
> Why, as a matter of fact, *I* am a supplier of inexpensive (relatively
> speaking), lightweight pressure tanks for....well....they're designed for
> N2, but I suspect N2O is doable...
> Of course, if you *want* the regulators....that can be arranged to...

A note of caution (something I'm sure Dave already knows):  a regulator
for N2 and a regulator for N2O are two different pieces of hardware.  The
latter has to be made with careful attention to oxidizer compatibility of
materials and lubricants.  (This goes triple for GOX, which is much more
aggressive than N2O.)

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 11428 invoked from network); 4 Aug 2001 16:19:24 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 4 Aug 2001 16:19:24 -0000
Received: (qmail 22715 invoked from network); 4 Aug 2001 16:21:04 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 4 Aug 2001 16:21:04 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA25628; Sat, 4 Aug 2001 09:15:37 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 97558 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 4 Aug 2001 16:15:36 +0000
Received: from smtp-out.nrtc.net (host-216-163-120-25.nrtc.net [216.163.120.25]          (may be forged)) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA25613          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 4 Aug 2001 09:15:35 -0700
Received: from foy (dial-12-21-155-206.wfeca.net [12.21.155.206]) by          smtp-out.nrtc.net (8.9.3/8.9.1) with SMTP id MAA09085 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 4 Aug 2001 12:15:31 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0AB3_01C56B69.46AF9F60"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <001801c11cff$ee27aba0$ce9b150c@foy>
Date:         Sat, 4 Aug 2001 11:10:06 -0500
Reply-To: "foy" <foy@WFECA.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "foy" <foy@WFECA.NET>
Subject:      [AR] upload/download
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0AB3_01C56B69.46AF9F60
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

        I have web page space I don't use or know how to use.    Could =
this be used to post pics?

------=_NextPart_000_0AB3_01C56B69.46AF9F60
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Diso-8859-1">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 5.50.4134.600" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial =
size=3D2>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; I have=20
web page space I don't use or know how to use.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Could =
this be=20
used to post pics?</FONT></DIV></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0AB3_01C56B69.46AF9F60--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 17282 invoked from network); 4 Aug 2001 16:21:28 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 4 Aug 2001 16:21:28 -0000
Received: (qmail 2689 invoked from network); 4 Aug 2001 16:24:02 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 4 Aug 2001 16:24:02 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA25682; Sat, 4 Aug 2001 09:19:32 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 97569 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 4 Aug 2001 16:19:30 +0000
Received: from localhost (rcalkins@localhost) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with          ESMTP id JAA25667; Sat, 4 Aug 2001 09:19:29 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.LNX.4.10.10108040915230.25476-100000@itc.uci.edu>
Date:         Sat, 4 Aug 2001 09:19:29 -0700
Reply-To: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
Subject:      Re: [AR] high pressure tanks
Comments: To: Andrew Case <acase@GLUE.UMD.EDU>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <Pine.GSO.4.21.0108041211120.7210-100000@y.glue.umd.edu>

On Sat, 4 Aug 2001, Andrew Case wrote:
>
> ...peroxide thruster, materials compatibility.
You are familiar with the 1st HTP PROPULSION WORKSHOP papers availible
online?
http://www.ee.surrey.ac.uk/SSC/H2O2CONF/
Lots of good stuff there.

Ray

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 14829 invoked from network); 4 Aug 2001 17:01:23 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 4 Aug 2001 17:01:23 -0000
Received: (qmail 22081 invoked from network); 4 Aug 2001 17:03:36 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 4 Aug 2001 17:03:36 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA25881; Sat, 4 Aug 2001 09:56:39 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 97604 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 4 Aug 2001 16:56:32 +0000
Received: from spsystems.net (spsystems.net [209.47.149.227]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA25866 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Sat,          4 Aug 2001 09:56:31 -0700
Received: (from henry@localhost) by spsystems.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id MAA03206;          Sat, 4 Aug 2001 12:55:51 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010804124353.3034A-100000@spsystems.net>
Date:         Sat, 4 Aug 2001 12:55:51 -0400
Reply-To: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] high pressure tanks
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <Pine.GSO.4.21.0108041211120.7210-100000@y.glue.umd.edu>

On Sat, 4 Aug 2001, Andrew Case wrote:
> I've been working through some design options for a peroxide thruster,
> and one of the issues that's come up over and over again is materials
> compatibility. I'm surprised to find that Aluminum is OK for tanks...

It's actually one of the better materials for peroxide, although you have
to be careful about what *else* is in aluminum alloys.

> (I'll
> be even more surprised if it's OK for the combustion chamber, though).

For the combustion chamber, peroxide compatibility is actually not much of
an issue -- the peroxide doesn't spend very long in the chamber!  You have
to avoid gross incompatibility if you're doing regenerative cooling, but
otherwise it's pretty much a non-issue.

Aluminum has been used for rocket combustion chambers, by the way,
although its low melting point imposes design limitations.

> Anyway - Is there a single relaiable source for information on
> peroxide compatibility...

Kit&Evered's "Rocket Propellant Handbook" is a good place to start, if you
can find a copy.  More recent material is pretty scattered.

> (and the flipside, good catalysts, and what poisons them)?

Peroxide catalysis is still pretty much a black art, I'm afraid.

> One issue is that I'd really like to braze some of the parts, and
> something tells me silver solder isn't the way to go :)

Depends on exactly what's in it.  Many brazing alloys contain copper,
which is a no-no for peroxide.

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 9427 invoked from network); 4 Aug 2001 17:27:12 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 4 Aug 2001 17:27:12 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 3136 invoked from network); 4 Aug 2001 17:29:45 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 4 Aug 2001 17:29:45 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA25982; Sat, 4 Aug 2001 10:24:19 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 97615 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 4 Aug 2001 17:24:14 +0000
Received: from stud.uni-goettingen.de (root@s2.stud.uni-goettingen.de          [134.76.60.22]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA25967          for <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Sat, 4 Aug 2001 10:24:13 -0700
Received: from router.atw.stud.uni-goettingen.de ([134.76.62.65]          helo=stud.uni-goettingen.de) by stud.uni-goettingen.de with esmtp          (Exim 2.12 #8) id 15T59l-00024J-00 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 4          Aug 2001 19:24:09 +0200
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [de] (Win98; I)
X-Accept-Language: de
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010804124353.3034A-100000@spsystems.net>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B6C3008.1E8A7EC0@stud.uni-goettingen.de>
Date:         Sat, 4 Aug 2001 19:25:29 +0200
Reply-To: "Thomas Engelhardt" <tengelh@STUD.UNI-GOETTINGEN.DE>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Thomas Engelhardt" <tengelh@STUD.UNI-GOETTINGEN.DE>
Organization: =?iso-8859-1?Q?Rocket_Research_G=F6ttingen_=28RRG=29?=
Subject:      [AR] Peroxide catalyts (was: high pressure tanks)
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Andrew Case schrieb:

> > (and the flipside, good catalysts, and what poisons them)?

Hi Andrew,

I use potassium permanganate for my H2O2/Isopropanol biprop. It can be solved
in the fuel prior to filling the tank with altering its burning
characteristics by much (according to GDL PROPEP).
I find that the easiest method...maybe you can find a reference on peroxide
catalysts on Olaf Tofts webpage? He's at
http://users.cybercity.dk/~dko7904/linklib.htm

Cheers,

Tom
--
Atheism is a non-prophet organization.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 28791 invoked from network); 4 Aug 2001 17:33:57 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 4 Aug 2001 17:33:57 -0000
Received: (qmail 305 invoked from network); 4 Aug 2001 17:35:35 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 4 Aug 2001 17:35:35 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA26035; Sat, 4 Aug 2001 10:32:18 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 97626 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 4 Aug 2001 17:32:15 +0000
Received: from castor.ridgenet.net (IDENT:root@castor.ridgenet.net          [199.120.150.29]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA26020          for <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Sat, 4 Aug 2001 10:32:15 -0700
Received: from kristinscomp (pm162.ridgenet.net [204.154.246.162]) by          castor.ridgenet.net (8.11.0/8.11.0) with SMTP id f74HPWS13055; Sat, 4          Aug 2001 10:25:32 -0700
References:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010804120946.1965B-100000@spsystems.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <002501c11d0c$97731800$1b30fea9@kristinscomp>
Date:         Sat, 4 Aug 2001 10:40:44 -0700
Reply-To: "Kristin & David Hall" <thehalls@RIDGENET.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Kristin & David Hall" <thehalls@RIDGENET.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] high pressure tanks
Comments: To: Henry Spencer <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

> On Sat, 4 Aug 2001, Kristin & David Hall wrote:
> > Why, as a matter of fact, *I* am a supplier of inexpensive (relatively
> > speaking), lightweight pressure tanks for....well....they're designed
for
> > N2, but I suspect N2O is doable...
> > Of course, if you *want* the regulators....that can be arranged to...

> A note of caution (something I'm sure Dave already knows):  a regulator
> for N2 and a regulator for N2O are two different pieces of hardware.  The
> latter has to be made with careful attention to oxidizer compatibility of
> materials and lubricants.  (This goes triple for GOX, which is much more
> aggressive than N2O.)

Absolutely!  Sorry if I implied anything else.  The tanks should be OK with
a bit of cleaning, but the regulators are NOT made for oxygen service.  I
only mentioned regs because I know some folks are interested in such items
as pressurant bottles, not just fuel/oxidizer tanks.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 27009 invoked from network); 4 Aug 2001 17:52:45 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 4 Aug 2001 17:52:45 -0000
Received: (qmail 15931 invoked from network); 4 Aug 2001 17:54:59 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 4 Aug 2001 17:54:59 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA26121; Sat, 4 Aug 2001 10:49:34 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 97639 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 4 Aug 2001 17:49:28 +0000
Received: from c002.snv.cp.net (c002-h007.c002.snv.cp.net [209.228.32.171]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id KAA26106 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 4 Aug 2001 10:49:28 -0700
Received: (cpmta 29506 invoked from network); 4 Aug 2001 10:48:57 -0700
Received: from 1Cust24.tnt1.williamsburg.va.da.uu.net (HELO default)          (63.21.80.24) by smtp.peoplepc.com (209.228.32.171) with SMTP; 4 Aug          2001 10:48:57 -0700
X-Sent: 4 Aug 2001 17:48:57 GMT
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0AB6_01C56B69.46B93C50"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <002401c11d0f$5ed951a0$1850153f@default>
Date:         Sat, 4 Aug 2001 14:00:37 -0400
Reply-To: "David Muesing" <dmuesing@PEOPLEPC.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "David Muesing" <dmuesing@PEOPLEPC.COM>
Subject:      [AR] Elite Sugar Propellant Group Forming.
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0AB6_01C56B69.46B93C50
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

OK, maybe not so elite.

How many would be interested in a dedicated Sugar Propellant News/EMail =
group? This would be centered around Sucrose, Dextrose, Sorbitol and =
closely related propellants.=20

Please email me at:  dmuesing@peoplepc.com so I can determine if the =
interest is high, low or indifferent. Is there someone who would be =
interested in heading up the group?

Thanks!

Dave Muesing



------=_NextPart_000_0AB6_01C56B69.46B93C50
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Diso-8859-1">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 5.50.4616.200" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=3DOCRA color=3D#0000ff>OK, maybe not so =
elite.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DOCRA color=3D#0000ff></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DOCRA color=3D#0000ff>How many would be interested in a =
dedicated=20
Sugar Propellant News/EMail group? This would be centered around =
Sucrose,=20
Dextrose, Sorbitol and closely related propellants. </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DOCRA color=3D#0000ff></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DOCRA color=3D#0000ff>Please email me at:&nbsp; <A=20
href=3D"mailto:dmuesing@peoplepc.com">dmuesing@peoplepc.com</A> so I can =
determine=20
if the interest is high, low or indifferent.&nbsp;Is there someone who =
would be=20
interested in heading up the group?</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DOCRA color=3D#0000ff></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DOCRA color=3D#0000ff>Thanks!</FONT></DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DOCRA color=3D#0000ff>Dave Muesing</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DOCRA color=3D#0000ff></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DOCRA color=3D#0000ff></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0AB6_01C56B69.46B93C50--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 29478 invoked from network); 4 Aug 2001 18:04:16 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 4 Aug 2001 18:04:16 -0000
Received: (qmail 20925 invoked from network); 4 Aug 2001 18:06:49 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 4 Aug 2001 18:06:49 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA26199; Sat, 4 Aug 2001 11:02:00 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 97652 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 4 Aug 2001 18:01:58 +0000
Received: from localhost (rcalkins@localhost) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with          ESMTP id LAA26184; Sat, 4 Aug 2001 11:01:58 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.LNX.4.10.10108041056230.25476-100000@itc.uci.edu>
Date:         Sat, 4 Aug 2001 11:01:58 -0700
Reply-To: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Elite Sugar Propellant Group Forming.
Comments: To: David Muesing <dmuesing@PEOPLEPC.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <002401c11d0f$5ed951a0$1850153f@default>

Hi Dave,

I think there are probably at least 15 active sugar prop explorers I am
aware of, I'm sure Richard Nakka knows of several more.

If there is enough interest to make a dedicated sugar list work, it would
be great.

In a related matter, I got 4 1/2 50 pound bags of GG Flowable this week,
I'm going to be a propellant making fool the next several weeks.

Ray

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 8173 invoked from network); 4 Aug 2001 19:14:27 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 4 Aug 2001 19:14:27 -0000
Received: (qmail 6395 invoked from network); 4 Aug 2001 19:16:36 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 4 Aug 2001 19:16:36 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA26502; Sat, 4 Aug 2001 12:11:18 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 97683 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 4 Aug 2001 19:11:01 +0000
Received: from overnight.request.net (overnight.request.net [207.150.192.30])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA26487 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 4 Aug 2001 12:11:00 -0700
Received: from furina.request.net ([207.150.192.11]) by overnight.request.net          with ESMTP id <136232-31792>; Sat, 4 Aug 2001 14:10:30 -0400
Received: from JuleeD ([24.160.114.184]) by furina.request.net with SMTP id          <157766693-4260352>; Sat, 4 Aug 2001 15:05:54 -0400
References: <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010804124353.3034A-100000@spsystems.net>            <3B6C3008.1E8A7EC0@stud.uni-goettingen.de>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2314.1300
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <002101c11d19$048816a0$b872a018@petschoice.com>
Date:         Sat, 4 Aug 2001 14:09:36 -0500
Reply-To: "Phil Bellmore" <pfish@CATFISHDESIGNS.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Phil Bellmore" <pfish@CATFISHDESIGNS.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Peroxide catalyts (was: high pressure tanks)
Comments: To: Thomas Engelhardt <tengelh@STUD.UNI-GOETTINGEN.DE>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

We've tried various catalysts (silver, manganese, ruthenium, platinum,
copper, aluminum, iron, various rocks and minerals, ammonia, chlorine,
etc.).  Some work great on the bench but fail to produce inside a high
pressure/temperature environment (e.g. manganese).  Some get poisioned
(silver, ruthenium, platinum).  Some seem to work only as very fine
particles (aluminum, copper).  Some are rather caustic (ammonia, chlorine).
Our current favorite is plain old iron.  Actually, iron oxide.  We have
shown to our own satisfaction that properly rusted iron has the same
catalytic action as silver, pound per pound, is very cheap (actually free),
and can be readily regenerated.  We get is at the hardware store as the
trash from cutting galvanized pipe.  One caution though - iron can melt and
burn.  We've had a few tests where we've actually melted the iron inside the
reaction chamber (T >= 1500 deg F?) and one test where the molten iron
welded the exhaust nozzle shut, causing approximately 4.3 seconds of anxiety
as we waited for the inevitable spontaneous dis-assembly of our motor.

----- Original Message -----
From: Thomas Engelhardt <tengelh@STUD.UNI-GOETTINGEN.DE>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Saturday, August 04, 2001 12:25 PM
Subject: [AR] Peroxide catalyts (was: high pressure tanks)


> Andrew Case schrieb:
>
> > > (and the flipside, good catalysts, and what poisons them)?
>
> Hi Andrew,
>
> I use potassium permanganate for my H2O2/Isopropanol biprop. It can be
solved
> in the fuel prior to filling the tank with altering its burning
> characteristics by much (according to GDL PROPEP).
> I find that the easiest method...maybe you can find a reference on
peroxide
> catalysts on Olaf Tofts webpage? He's at
> http://users.cybercity.dk/~dko7904/linklib.htm
>
> Cheers,
>
> Tom
> --
> Atheism is a non-prophet organization.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 28763 invoked from network); 4 Aug 2001 20:15:59 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 4 Aug 2001 20:15:59 -0000
Received: (qmail 25336 invoked from network); 4 Aug 2001 20:18:33 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 4 Aug 2001 20:18:33 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA26761; Sat, 4 Aug 2001 13:10:37 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 97713 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 4 Aug 2001 20:10:34 +0000
Received: from conint.consumersinterest.com (consumersinterest.com          [207.195.143.118] (may be forged)) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with          ESMTP id NAA26746 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 4 Aug 2001 13:10:33          -0700
Received: from greg [208.187.15.146] by conint.consumersinterest.com          (SMTPD32-6.04) id AA041F650128; Sat, 04 Aug 2001 13:24:36 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <NDBBIBAMIMKJPANDCAHGAENDEPAA.greg@blastzone.com>
Date:         Sat, 4 Aug 2001 13:23:21 -0700
Reply-To: <greg@blastzone.com>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Greg Deputy" <greg@blastzone.com>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Hybrid Test Setup
Comments: To: landofgrey@gnc.net
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <LPBBKJMJEOFKAMFJJNNHCEDKCGAA.landofgrey@gnc.net>

The test stand I use is horizontal firing, and was super easy/inexpensive to
build.  Its based on the design in Terry's book, but a little bigger.  Piece
of steel channel, 12" wide 4' long.  A 1/4" steel box welded to one end
houses the s-type load cell and is what the motor bears against.  The
channel has 'ears' welded to it which we use to stake it down with 4 2' long
steel stakes.  Motors are retained with plywood L-squares that bolt to the
channel with appropriate sized holes in them for tubing that the motor
slides in.  Just got done firing an M on it with a peak thrust of 300lbs
(biggest so far), worked great!

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@itc.uci.edu]On
> Behalf Of Matthew Travis
> Sent: Friday, August 03, 2001 2:42 PM
> To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
> Subject: Re: [AR] Hybrid Test Setup
>
>
> My personal opinion (known to be occasionally mistaken) is that
> fabricating
> a vertically-upward firing test stand is easier than horizontal
> or downward.
> At least for smaller motors (< 100,000 ns). Downard firing stands usually
> require some sort of active cooling below the exhaust (which *can* give a
> cool steam effect) as well as anchoring against the upward thrust of the
> motor. Horizontal stands require anchoring against the thrust as
> well. This
> complicates making portable stands. But... depending on how much
> you want to
> spend and how much work you want to do, each kind of stand is equally good
> from a performance standpoint.
>
> Matt
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU]On
> > Behalf Of Justin Pucci
> > Sent: Friday, August 03, 2001 4:21 PM
> > To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
> > Subject: [AR] Hybrid Test Setup
> >
> >
> > Hey guys,
> >
> > I have a quick question that I want to hear everyone's
> > opinion on...  I am testing a 250 lb-thrust N2O/HDPE
> > hybrid with a separate oxidizer tank and combustion
> > chamber (not monocoque).  Do I build a teststand that
> > fires up, down, or horizontally?  Let me know what you
> > think and why!  Thanks!!!
> >
> >
> > -->Justin Pucci
> >
> > __________________________________________________
> > Do You Yahoo!?
> > Make international calls for as low as $.04/minute with Yahoo! Messenger
> > http://phonecard.yahoo.com/
> >
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 4610 invoked from network); 4 Aug 2001 20:39:45 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 4 Aug 2001 20:39:45 -0000
Received: (qmail 18884 invoked from network); 4 Aug 2001 20:41:58 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 4 Aug 2001 20:41:58 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA26827; Sat, 4 Aug 2001 13:26:13 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 97724 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 4 Aug 2001 20:26:08 +0000
Received: from wrench.toolcity.net (root@wrench.toolcity.net [208.0.188.2]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA26812 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 4 Aug 2001 13:26:07 -0700
Received: from [208.22.189.7] (dap-208-22-189-7.meadville-tnt-0.pa.toolcity.net          [208.22.189.7]) by wrench.toolcity.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id          QAA17167; Sat, 4 Aug 2001 16:26:02 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <v01510100b79213dec837@[208.22.189.155]>
Date:         Sat, 4 Aug 2001 16:28:22 -0500
Reply-To: "al bradley" <abradley@TOOLCITY.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "al bradley" <abradley@TOOLCITY.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] 2[AR] Peroxide catalyts (was: high pressure tanks)
Comments: To: Phil Bellmore <pfish@CATFISHDESIGNS.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Curioisity question Phil:

>We have
>shown to our own satisfaction that properly rusted iron has the same
>catalytic action as silver, pound per pound, is very cheap (actually free),
>and can be readily regenerated.  We get it at the hardware store as the
>trash from cutting galvanized pipe.
------------------

Question: Is this pipe being torch-cut?  If so, isn't zinc oxide from
cutting the galvanize a residual factor accompanying the pieces?

If not, how do you eliminate the thin layer of solid zinc on the galvanized
pieces you want to rust?

TIA
al bradley

------------------------------------------------------------------
Can you live Life with this?: "Unless there is a law, an agreement, or a
long-standing custom, No one `Deserves' Anything -- Either Good or Bad!"

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 4738 invoked from network); 4 Aug 2001 20:51:40 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 4 Aug 2001 20:51:40 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 23652 invoked from network); 4 Aug 2001 20:53:19 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 4 Aug 2001 20:53:19 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA26929; Sat, 4 Aug 2001 13:49:42 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 97737 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 4 Aug 2001 20:49:32 +0000
Received: from po4.glue.umd.edu (po4.glue.umd.edu [128.8.10.124]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA26914 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 4 Aug 2001 13:49:31 -0700
Received: from z.glue.umd.edu (IDENT:root@z.glue.umd.edu [128.8.10.71]) by          po4.glue.umd.edu (8.10.1/8.10.1) with ESMTP id f74KnTT22397 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 4 Aug 2001 16:49:30 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from z.glue.umd.edu (IDENT:sendmail@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by          z.glue.umd.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id QAA14727 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 4 Aug 2001 16:49:29 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from localhost (acase@localhost) by z.glue.umd.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with          ESMTP id QAA14723 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 4 Aug 2001 16:49:29          -0400 (EDT)
X-Authentication-Warning: z.glue.umd.edu: acase owned process doing -bs
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.GSO.4.21.0108041636150.13728-100000@z.glue.umd.edu>
Date:         Sat, 4 Aug 2001 16:49:29 -0400
Reply-To: "Andrew Case" <acase@GLUE.UMD.EDU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Andrew Case" <acase@GLUE.UMD.EDU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] high pressure tanks
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010804124353.3034A-100000@spsystems.net>

On Sat, 4 Aug 2001, Henry Spencer wrote:

> Kit&Evered's "Rocket Propellant Handbook" is a good place to start, if you
> can find a copy.  More recent material is pretty scattered.

Aargh! I just spent over an hour in the library trying to find that
*exact* book :( - It's listed as being in the stacks but it's not on
the shelf, and the librarian has no idea where it might be. Oh well.
Perhaps it will turn up before too long.

OTOH, I did find a nice book titled "Hydrogen Peroxide" by Schumb,
Satterfield, & Wentworth, an ACS monograph from 1955. It at least has
a table of compatible and incompatible materials. Very good compatibility
is listed for some Al alloys, tin, borosilicate glass, polyethylene,
teflon, and synthetic saphire, along with various flourocarbon lubricants.
No doubt there are things that didn't make it onto their list, though, so
I'm planning to keep looking (also I'd like to double check everything
before I do anything that might lead to damage or injury).

Thanks,
......Andrew


Andrew Case                             |
acase@plasma.umd.edu                    |
Institute for Plasma Research           |
University of Maryland, College Park    |

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 10554 invoked from network); 4 Aug 2001 21:27:44 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 4 Aug 2001 21:27:44 -0000
Received: (qmail 7106 invoked from network); 4 Aug 2001 21:29:24 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 4 Aug 2001 21:29:24 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA27164; Sat, 4 Aug 2001 14:13:36 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 97752 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 4 Aug 2001 21:13:24 +0000
Received: from femail14.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail14.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.0.95.141]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA27149          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 4 Aug 2001 14:13:24 -0700
Received: from cc334751a ([65.13.214.65]) by femail14.sdc1.sfba.home.com          (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20 201-229-121-120-20010223) with SMTP id          <20010804211323.ZQAV18675.femail14.sdc1.sfba.home.com@cc334751a>;          Sat, 4 Aug 2001 14:13:23 -0700
References:  <031301c11cf8$c69364a0$14464a42@socal.rr.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0AB9_01C56B69.46C9DE20"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2462.0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <020401c11d2a$4e1deae0$6401a8c0@home.com>
Date:         Sat, 4 Aug 2001 15:13:27 -0600
Reply-To: "Brian Kosko" <bkosko1@HOME.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Brian Kosko" <bkosko1@HOME.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Material Strenght
Comments: To: Wedge Oldham <wedge@WESTWORLD.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0AB9_01C56B69.46C9DE20
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Wedge,

I'm not the material wizard, but I'll throw in my bit. I've used 1/32, =
1/16, 3/32 and 1/8 inch G10 for all sorts of different rocket =
applications. You'd be fine with either the 3/32 or the 1/8 inch, the =
1/16 would be iffy. The 3/32 and 1/8 stuff are pretty rigid.

As for the weight, let me run out to the garage and weigh a hunk. It'd =
also help if you'd beef-up the joints by adding some fiberglass cloth. =
Of course that will add a little weight. The 3/32 in I have is 4.5 =
g/sq-in. I know the Hawk Mountain guy sells it for around $10 /sq-ft.

Hope that helps.

Brian


------=_NextPart_000_0AB9_01C56B69.46C9DE20
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Diso-8859-1">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 6.00.2462.0" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Wedge,</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>I'm not the material wizard, but I'll =
throw in my=20
bit. I've used 1/32, 1/16, 3/32 and 1/8 inch G10 for all sorts of =
different=20
rocket applications. You'd be fine with either the 3/32 or the 1/8 inch, =
the=20
1/16 would be iffy. The 3/32 and 1/8 stuff&nbsp;are pretty =
rigid.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>As for the weight, let me run out to =
the garage and=20
weigh a hunk. It'd also help if you'd beef-up the joints by adding some=20
fiberglass cloth. Of course that will add a little weight. The 3/32 in I =
have is=20
4.5 g/sq-in. I know the Hawk Mountain guy sells it for around $10=20
/sq-ft.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Hope that helps.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Brian</FONT></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE dir=3Dltr=20
style=3D"PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; =
BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: =
0px">&nbsp;</BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0AB9_01C56B69.46C9DE20--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 27291 invoked from network); 4 Aug 2001 21:34:10 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 4 Aug 2001 21:34:10 -0000
Received: (qmail 15772 invoked from network); 4 Aug 2001 21:36:45 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 4 Aug 2001 21:36:45 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA27206; Sat, 4 Aug 2001 14:22:52 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 97759 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 4 Aug 2001 21:22:50 +0000
Received: from femail15.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail15.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.0.95.142]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA27191          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 4 Aug 2001 14:22:50 -0700
Received: from cc334751a ([65.13.214.65]) by femail15.sdc1.sfba.home.com          (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20 201-229-121-120-20010223) with SMTP id          <20010804212235.XUPW21777.femail15.sdc1.sfba.home.com@cc334751a>;          Sat, 4 Aug 2001 14:22:35 -0700
References:  <200108032335.QAA19480@itc.uci.edu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2462.0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <026901c11d2b$97226ee0$6401a8c0@home.com>
Date:         Sat, 4 Aug 2001 15:22:39 -0600
Reply-To: "Brian Kosko" <bkosko1@HOME.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Brian Kosko" <bkosko1@HOME.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] My idea of fun
Comments: To: Jerry Irvine <01rocket@GTE.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Welcome aboard. As an amateur solid fuel guy, I'm tickled pink to have a pro
on board.

So while we're all here why not a question or two?

What's the deal with EX numbers? Can someone explain the basic process,
timelines, costs, etc. Does each particular formulation require it's own EX
number? If you get an EX number does that mean nothing with that formulation
can change? Any other info would be great. The scuttlebutt seems more
mysterious than an X-Files.

Thanks,

Brian

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 26163 invoked from network); 4 Aug 2001 22:08:50 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 4 Aug 2001 22:08:50 -0000
Received: (qmail 21491 invoked from network); 4 Aug 2001 22:11:24 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 4 Aug 2001 22:11:24 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA27415; Sat, 4 Aug 2001 15:04:27 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 97780 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 4 Aug 2001 22:04:15 +0000
Received: from overnight.request.net (overnight.request.net [207.150.192.30])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA27400 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 4 Aug 2001 15:04:15 -0700
Received: from furina.request.net ([207.150.192.11]) by overnight.request.net          with ESMTP id <135365-31792>; Sat, 4 Aug 2001 17:03:47 -0400
Received: from JuleeD ([24.160.114.184]) by furina.request.net with SMTP id          <157774326-4345928>; Sat, 4 Aug 2001 17:59:11 -0400
References: <v01510100b79213dec837@[208.22.189.155]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2314.1300
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <000901c11d31$390ad9e0$b872a018@petschoice.com>
Date:         Sat, 4 Aug 2001 17:02:57 -0500
Reply-To: "Phil Bellmore" <pfish@CATFISHDESIGNS.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Phil Bellmore" <pfish@CATFISHDESIGNS.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] 2[AR] Peroxide catalyts (was: high pressure tanks)
Comments: To: al bradley <abradley@TOOLCITY.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Typically the pipe is cut using a saw then the thread is cut.  The cut is
deep enough to expose the raw iron in sufficient quantity to rust.  The
tough part is getting the oil off.

----- Original Message -----
From: al bradley <abradley@TOOLCITY.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Saturday, August 04, 2001 4:28 PM
Subject: Re: [AR] 2[AR] Peroxide catalyts (was: high pressure tanks)


> Curioisity question Phil:
>
> >We have
> >shown to our own satisfaction that properly rusted iron has the same
> >catalytic action as silver, pound per pound, is very cheap (actually
free),
> >and can be readily regenerated.  We get it at the hardware store as the
> >trash from cutting galvanized pipe.
> ------------------
>
> Question: Is this pipe being torch-cut?  If so, isn't zinc oxide from
> cutting the galvanize a residual factor accompanying the pieces?
>
> If not, how do you eliminate the thin layer of solid zinc on the
galvanized
> pieces you want to rust?
>
> TIA
> al bradley
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------
> Can you live Life with this?: "Unless there is a law, an agreement, or a
> long-standing custom, No one `Deserves' Anything -- Either Good or Bad!"

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 13665 invoked from network); 5 Aug 2001 00:23:06 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 5 Aug 2001 00:23:06 -0000
Received: (qmail 9636 invoked from network); 5 Aug 2001 00:25:17 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 5 Aug 2001 00:25:17 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA27828; Sat, 4 Aug 2001 17:20:07 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 97814 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 5 Aug 2001 00:19:56 +0000
Received: from cpimssmtpu02.email.msn.com (cpimssmtpu02.email.msn.com          [207.46.181.78]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA27780          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 4 Aug 2001 17:09:56 -0700
Received: from dell ([63.36.51.69]) by cpimssmtpu02.email.msn.com with          Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.3779); Sat, 4 Aug 2001 17:09:04 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 05 Aug 2001 00:09:05.0390 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[D6EBA8E0:01C11D42]
Message-ID:  <NEBBKOMCBADKPODEGOGFCEBJGLAA.jim_amos_aps@msn.com>
Date:         Sat, 4 Aug 2001 17:43:48 -0600
Reply-To: "Jim Amos" <jim_amos_aps@MSN.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jim Amos" <jim_amos_aps@MSN.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] My idea of fun / now EX numbers
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <026901c11d2b$97226ee0$6401a8c0@home.com>

> What's the deal with EX numbers? Can someone explain the basic process,
> timelines, costs, etc. Does each particular formulation require
> it's own EX
> number? If you get an EX number does that mean nothing with that
> formulation
> can change? Any other info would be great. The scuttlebutt seems more
> mysterious than an X-Files.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Brian

Brian -

Having done a bit of first hand research, I can share some personal
knowledge.  Procedurally the process is broadly outlined in 49CFR Part
173.57/173.58. In essence the propellant(s) must be subjected to a series of
test methods per UN standards by a DOT approved testing entity.  Once
tested, the recommendation of the testing facility results are considered by
the DOT-RSPA, and ultimately (with enough time and money) you are granted a
"Competent Authority Approval" with a corresponding EX number and a hazard
class.  This is a *non-transferable per-location* approval.  The RSPA will
consider special exceptions to the testing process, however they are HIGHLY
contingent upon the *original* grantee of the EX-numbers.......(for example
the Kosdon by Aerotech EX approval).  Not to dis Jerry, but the purchase of
a facility/technology (ACS Reaction Labs) *does not* provide a
grandfathering of EX numbers.....period.

Depending upon the scope of the testing and the formulations included in the
test, you may/may not require EX numbers for *all* formulations.  You must
provide ingredient tolerance within your testing scope, and then operate
within those tolerances.

There's other procedural crap you'll need to worry about independent of
EX-numbers (BATF permits, storage, hazmat, shipping exemptions, packaging
issues, hazmat training/shipping) however these go beyond the scope of your
original question.

J.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 26890 invoked from network); 5 Aug 2001 01:20:24 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 5 Aug 2001 01:20:24 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 8445 invoked from network); 5 Aug 2001 01:22:38 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 5 Aug 2001 01:22:38 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA28154; Sat, 4 Aug 2001 18:16:58 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 97850 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 5 Aug 2001 01:16:51 +0000
Received: from snipe.mail.pas.earthlink.net (snipe.mail.pas.earthlink.net          [207.217.120.62]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA28087          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 4 Aug 2001 18:06:51 -0700
Received: from earthlink.net (dialup-209.247.140.93.Dial1.SanJose1.Level3.net          [209.247.140.93]) by snipe.mail.pas.earthlink.net (EL-8_9_3_3/8.9.3)          with ESMTP id SAA23054; Sat, 4 Aug 2001 18:06:49 -0700 (PDT)
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.75 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.16-22 i686)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <NEBBKOMCBADKPODEGOGFCEBJGLAA.jim_amos_aps@msn.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B6C9C46.F95F0C7C@earthlink.net>
Date:         Sat, 4 Aug 2001 18:07:18 -0700
Reply-To: "David Weinshenker" <daze39@EARTHLINK.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "David Weinshenker" <daze39@EARTHLINK.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] My idea of fun / now EX numbers
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Jim Amos wrote:
> This is a *non-transferable per-location*
> approval.  ... the purchase of a facility/technology
> *does not* provide a grandfathering of EX numbers...

So if a manufacturer were to open a new production facility,
producing propellant of a previously approved composition,
this propellant would have to be tested and approved all
over again as if it were a "new type" that had never been
previously given a hazard classification?

-dave w

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 18829 invoked from network); 5 Aug 2001 02:39:45 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 5 Aug 2001 02:39:44 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 8463 invoked from network); 5 Aug 2001 02:41:57 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 5 Aug 2001 02:41:57 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA28398; Sat, 4 Aug 2001 19:38:01 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 97870 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 5 Aug 2001 02:37:46 +0000
Received: from mail.sirinet.net (mail.sirinet.net [198.203.196.92]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA28381 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 4 Aug 2001 19:37:45 -0700
Received: from sirinet.net (ppp2-144.sirinet.net [207.3.88.144]) by          mail.sirinet.net (8.11.3/8.11.3) with ESMTP id f752cJ023799; Sat, 4          Aug 2001 21:38:19 -0500
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.51 [en] (Win98; I)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <986117663.3ac6f61f3c9b8@webmail.comcen.com.au>            <001401c0bb0f$553f76e0$98aed6d1@net>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B6CB19C.3459D41F@sirinet.net>
Date:         Sat, 4 Aug 2001 21:38:20 -0500
Reply-To: "Robert & Judy Huffstutler" <jnix@SIRINET.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Robert & Judy Huffstutler" <jnix@SIRINET.NET>
Subject:      [AR] Robert Huffstutler signing off.
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Hello all, I have enjoyed the list for several months now and have found
new friends world wide.I want to say Thanks for ALL THE HELP,And hope
I've given some help in return.
I've got to go out of town for several months  work and so am asking to
be removed from the list temporarily.
Thanks especially to Sean Baxendall and Kevin Reyes and theres really
too many to list that have answered some of my q'S.
      Hope to come back in the near future.
Robert Huffstutler

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 16395 invoked from network); 5 Aug 2001 03:10:16 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 5 Aug 2001 03:10:16 -0000
Received: (qmail 21649 invoked from network); 5 Aug 2001 03:12:30 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 5 Aug 2001 03:12:30 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA28543; Sat, 4 Aug 2001 19:54:24 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 97887 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 5 Aug 2001 02:54:15 +0000
Received: from cpimssmtpu05.email.msn.com (cpimssmtpu05.email.msn.com          [207.46.181.81]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA28528          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 4 Aug 2001 19:54:14 -0700
Received: from dell ([63.36.43.91]) by cpimssmtpu05.email.msn.com with          Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.3779); Sat, 4 Aug 2001 19:53:25 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 05 Aug 2001 02:53:26.0262 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[CC755160:01C11D59]
Message-ID:  <NEBBKOMCBADKPODEGOGFAEBLGLAA.jim_amos_aps@msn.com>
Date:         Sat, 4 Aug 2001 20:28:06 -0600
Reply-To: "Jim Amos" <jim_amos_aps@MSN.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jim Amos" <jim_amos_aps@MSN.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] My idea of fun / now EX numbers
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <3B6C9C46.F95F0C7C@earthlink.net>

> So if a manufacturer were to open a new production facility,
> producing propellant of a previously approved composition,
> this propellant would have to be tested and approved all
> over again as if it were a "new type" that had never been
> previously given a hazard classification?
>
> -dave w
>

Dave -

Yes, new testing is most often required, *however* the RSPA will evaluate
requests on a "per case basis".  Look at the Kosdon/AT EX Approval (on the
AT web site).  They were able to circumvent re-testing per the contingencies
and guarantees made in the CAA verbiage.  Had they not pulled this off, a
full-blown re-test would have been required.

It's all a matter of fiscal and legal responsibility to the feds.......and
of course getting the RSPA (and their stable of lawyers) to buy into your
proposal.  Interesting bunch they are (when you can get them to talk with
you)!!

J

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 4551 invoked from network); 5 Aug 2001 03:28:01 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 5 Aug 2001 03:28:01 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 8791 invoked from network); 5 Aug 2001 03:29:42 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 5 Aug 2001 03:29:42 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA28812; Sat, 4 Aug 2001 20:25:29 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 97906 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 5 Aug 2001 03:25:21 +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (f128.law14.hotmail.com [64.4.21.128]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA28798 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 4 Aug 2001 20:25:21 -0700
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Sat,          4 Aug 2001 20:24:51 -0700
Received: from 207.220.211.156 by lw14fd.law14.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Sun,          05 Aug 2001 03:24:50 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [207.220.211.156]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 05 Aug 2001 03:24:51.0102 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[2FE913E0:01C11D5E]
Message-ID:  <F128XWzRPTNZStgLzhV0000e5d5@hotmail.com>
Date:         Sun, 5 Aug 2001 03:24:50 +0000
Reply-To: "Matt Faulkner" <mattfaulkner9@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Matt Faulkner" <mattfaulkner9@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Elite Sugar Propellant Group Forming.
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

>From: Ray Calkins <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
>"Hi Dave,
>
>I think there are probably at least 15 active sugar prop explorers I am
>aware of, I'm sure Richard Nakka knows of several more."

I'm just getting into sugar propellants, and I think the list would be
really helpful.

                          Matt Faulkner


_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 6590 invoked from network); 5 Aug 2001 03:39:54 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 5 Aug 2001 03:39:54 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: (qmail 2713 invoked from network); 5 Aug 2001 03:42:04 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 5 Aug 2001 03:42:04 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA28927; Sat, 4 Aug 2001 20:38:12 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 97920 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 5 Aug 2001 03:38:07 +0000
Received: from imo-r06.mx.aol.com (imo-r06.mx.aol.com [152.163.225.102]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA28912 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Sat, 4 Aug 2001 20:38:06 -0700
Received: from TSmith1315@aol.com by imo-r06.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v31.9.) id          w.87.e1e849c (18708) for <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Sat, 4 Aug 2001          23:38:01 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0ABC_01C56B69.46D5C500"
X-Mailer: AOL 6.0 for Windows US sub 10532
Message-ID:  <87.e1e849c.289e1999@aol.com>
Date:         Sat, 4 Aug 2001 23:38:01 EDT
Reply-To: <TSmith1315@AOL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <TSmith1315@AOL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Material Strength
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0ABC_01C56B69.46D5C500
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

In a message dated 8/4/01 5:40:43 PM Eastern Daylight Time, bkosko1@HOME.COM=
=20
writes:


> As for the weight, let me run out to the garage and weigh a hunk. It'd als=
o=20
> help if you'd beef-up the joints by adding some fiberglass cloth. Of cours=
e=20
> that will add a little weight. The 3/32 in I have is 4.5 g/sq-in.=20

 In response to Wedge's question:
<<If I replace all of the 1/2" Aircraft Birch plywood centering rings with=20
G10.=20
What thickness of G10 would I need to achieve the *same* strength I had with=
=20
plywood? And more importantly would this result in a weight savings?>>


  Dynacom lists their G-10 tubing density at 0.069 lbs/sq inch, and their=20
G-10 sheet (0.125") at 0.14 oz/sq inch.=20

 I've used 3 layers of 0.125" G-10 laminated for centering rings. Though I=20
can't give you real strength data, I can tell you they survived a 5500'=20
ballistic "recovery" that core sampled 30" deep into clay, withstanding the=20
inertia of the burnt I-211 motor. In fact the whole rocket survived, and fle=
w=20
again without repair. Of course, some paint was missing :)

 Someone out there could probably tell you what kind of force was involved=20
with that...(Cd of 0.55, weight of 4.5lbs, acceleration of 1G for 5500',=20
final velocity>0 in 2.5 feet).=20

 I don't know what size CR you're talking about (the larger Nike project you=
=20
mentioned earlier?), but have you considered <A HREF=3D"http://www.shadowaer=
o.com/Materials.htm">Shadow Composites</A>' =BC" carbon=20
sheet?=20


Tim

------=_NextPart_000_0ABC_01C56B69.46D5C500
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<HTML><FONT FACE=3Darial,helvetica><FONT  SIZE=3D2>In a message dated 8/4/01=
 5:40:43 PM Eastern Daylight Time, bkosko1@HOME.COM=20
<BR>writes:
<BR>
<BR>
<BR><BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=3DCITE style=3D"BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-=
LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px">As for the weight, let me r=
un out to the garage and weigh a hunk. It'd also=20
<BR>help if you'd beef-up the joints by adding some fiberglass cloth. Of cou=
rse=20
<BR>that will add a little weight. The 3/32 in I have is 4.5 g/sq-in. </FONT=
><FONT  COLOR=3D"#000000" SIZE=3D3 FAMILY=3D"SANSSERIF" FACE=3D"Arial" LANG=
=3D"0"></BLOCKQUOTE>
<BR></FONT><FONT  COLOR=3D"#000000" SIZE=3D2 FAMILY=3D"SANSSERIF" FACE=3D"Ar=
ial" LANG=3D"0">
<BR> In response to Wedge's question:
<BR>&lt;&lt;If I replace all of the 1/2" Aircraft Birch plywood centering ri=
ngs with=20
<BR>G10. </FONT><FONT  COLOR=3D"#000000" SIZE=3D3 FAMILY=3D"SANSSERIF" FACE=
=3D"Arial" LANG=3D"0">
<BR></FONT><FONT  COLOR=3D"#000000" SIZE=3D2 FAMILY=3D"SANSSERIF" FACE=3D"Ar=
ial" LANG=3D"0">What thickness of G10 would I need to achieve the *same* str=
ength I had with=20
<BR>plywood? And more importantly would this result in a weight savings?&gt;=
&gt;
<BR>
<BR></FONT><FONT  COLOR=3D"#000000" SIZE=3D3 FAMILY=3D"SANSSERIF" FACE=3D"Ar=
ial" LANG=3D"0">
<BR></FONT><FONT  COLOR=3D"#000000" SIZE=3D2 FAMILY=3D"SANSSERIF" FACE=3D"Ar=
ial" LANG=3D"0"> &nbsp;Dynacom lists their G-10 tubing density at 0.069 lbs/=
sq inch, and their=20
<BR>G-10 sheet (0.125") at 0.14 oz/sq inch.=20
<BR>
<BR> I've used 3 layers of 0.125" G-10 laminated for centering rings. Though=
 I=20
<BR>can't give you real strength data, I can tell you they survived a 5500'=20
<BR>ballistic "recovery" that core sampled 30" deep into clay, withstanding=20=
the=20
<BR>inertia of the burnt I-211 motor. In fact the whole rocket survived, and=
 flew=20
<BR>again without repair. Of course, some paint was missing :)
<BR>
<BR> Someone out there could probably tell you what kind of force was involv=
ed=20
<BR>with that...(Cd of 0.55, weight of 4.5lbs, acceleration of 1G for 5500',=
=20
<BR>final velocity&gt;0 in 2.5 feet).=20
<BR>
<BR> I don't know what size CR you're talking about (the larger Nike project=
 you=20
<BR>mentioned earlier?), but have you considered <A HREF=3D"http://www.shado=
waero.com/Materials.htm">Shadow Composites</A>' =BC" carbon=20
<BR>sheet?=20
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>Tim</FONT></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0ABC_01C56B69.46D5C500--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 24994 invoked from network); 5 Aug 2001 04:22:52 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 5 Aug 2001 04:22:52 -0000
Received: (qmail 15847 invoked from network); 5 Aug 2001 04:25:03 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 5 Aug 2001 04:25:03 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA29108; Sat, 4 Aug 2001 21:15:28 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 97948 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 5 Aug 2001 04:15:17 +0000
Received: from albqpop1.albq.uswest.net (albqpop1.albq.uswest.net          [207.108.240.1]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id VAA29093          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 4 Aug 2001 21:15:17 -0700
Received: (qmail 56250 invoked by alias); 5 Aug 2001 04:14:28 -0000
Delivered-To: fixup-AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU@fixme
Received: (qmail 55403 invoked by uid 0); 5 Aug 2001 04:13:55 -0000
Received: from cc898542-a.prdise1.nm.home.com (HELO cc898542a) (65.7.151.152)          by albqpop1.albq.uswest.net with SMTP; 5 Aug 2001 04:13:55 -0000
References:  <F128XWzRPTNZStgLzhV0000e5d5@hotmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <007301c11d65$97c8b4a0$0100a8c0@prdise1.nm.home.com>
Date:         Sat, 4 Aug 2001 22:17:50 -0600
Reply-To: "Pax" <darkspunge@USWEST.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Pax" <darkspunge@USWEST.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Elite Sugar Propellant Group Forming.
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Well, A list for sugar would give alot of the newbies that choose that route
a place to hang. And hopefully keep all the same old questions from poping
up on the main Arocket list.

Of course Ray is trying to remove the associations between sugar propellant
and newbies with small motors :-)

Pax

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 12786 invoked from network); 5 Aug 2001 04:43:48 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 5 Aug 2001 04:43:48 -0000
Received: (qmail 24029 invoked from network); 5 Aug 2001 04:45:59 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 5 Aug 2001 04:45:59 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA29216; Sat, 4 Aug 2001 21:41:57 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 97970 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 5 Aug 2001 04:41:47 +0000
Received: from odyssey.rlpotter.com (IDENT:root@[204.131.176.254]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA29201 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 4 Aug 2001 21:41:46 -0700
Received: from Jane (jane.rlpotter.com [204.131.176.34]) by          odyssey.rlpotter.com (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id VAA16425 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 4 Aug 2001 21:56:08 -0600
References: <000c01c11c5f$e6b0c5a0$1a9b150c@foy>                                  <008d01c11c61$43885c60$14464a42@socal.rr.com>                        <000801c11c64$06fc7440$cd9b150c@foy>             <012401c11c8d$21864a60$6401a8c0@home.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0ABF_01C56B69.46D5C500"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <006b01c11d6a$01d59d00$22b083cc@rlpotter.com>
Date:         Sat, 4 Aug 2001 22:49:27 -0600
Reply-To: "Ryan" <ryan@RLPOTTER.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Ryan" <ryan@RLPOTTER.COM>
Subject:      [AR] EPDM
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0ABF_01C56B69.46D5C500
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

I've got an insulation question:

I've been hearing about EPDM from this list for a while now, and most =
seem to think that it's pretty good stuff for casing insulation.  I =
checked the web, and it seems to be for either roofing or making pools.  =
Is this the right stuff?  Is there a preferred manufacturer of EPDM by =
people on this list?

Is it really that good?
If not, what's better?

Thanks,

Ryan
potterr@colorado.edu



------=_NextPart_000_0ABF_01C56B69.46D5C500
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META content=3D"text/html; charset=3Diso-8859-1" =
http-equiv=3DContent-Type>
<META content=3D"MSHTML 5.00.3211.1700" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>I've got an insulation =
question:</FONT></DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>I've been hearing about EPDM from this =
list for a=20
while now, and most seem to think that it's pretty good stuff for casing =

insulation.&nbsp; I checked the web, and it seems to be for either =
roofing or=20
making pools.&nbsp; Is this the right stuff?&nbsp; Is there a preferred=20
manufacturer of EPDM by people on this list?</FONT></DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Is it really that good?</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>If not, what's better?</FONT></DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Thanks,</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Ryan</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2><A=20
href=3D"mailto:potterr@colorado.edu">potterr@colorado.edu</A></FONT></DIV=
>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE=20
style=3D"BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: =
0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; PADDING-RIGHT: 0px">
  <DIV>&nbsp;</DIV></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0ABF_01C56B69.46D5C500--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 15974 invoked from network); 5 Aug 2001 05:10:14 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 5 Aug 2001 05:10:14 -0000
Received: (qmail 3975 invoked from network); 5 Aug 2001 05:12:24 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 5 Aug 2001 05:12:24 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA29332; Sat, 4 Aug 2001 22:05:01 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 97989 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 5 Aug 2001 05:04:54 +0000
Received: from femail15.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail15.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.0.95.142]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA29313          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 4 Aug 2001 22:04:53 -0700
Received: from cc334751a ([65.13.214.65]) by femail15.sdc1.sfba.home.com          (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20 201-229-121-120-20010223) with SMTP id          <20010805050431.FLWX21777.femail15.sdc1.sfba.home.com@cc334751a>;          Sat, 4 Aug 2001 22:04:31 -0700
References: <000c01c11c5f$e6b0c5a0$1a9b150c@foy>                                           <008d01c11c61$43885c60$14464a42@socal.rr.com>                                  <000801c11c64$06fc7440$cd9b150c@foy>                        <012401c11c8d$21864a60$6401a8c0@home.com>             <006b01c11d6a$01d59d00$22b083cc@rlpotter.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0AC2_01C56B69.46D5C500"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2462.0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <000c01c11d6c$237c32a0$6401a8c0@home.com>
Date:         Sat, 4 Aug 2001 23:04:42 -0600
Reply-To: "Brian Kosko" <bkosko1@HOME.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Brian Kosko" <bkosko1@HOME.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] EPDM
Comments: To: Ryan <ryan@RLPOTTER.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0AC2_01C56B69.46D5C500
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Ryan,

It's that good! You're right, it does come in many different forms. =
Firefox sells several thicknesses that have various fillers. I've tried =
most of them and they all work well. Our application has been as liners =
for AP composite motors. Recently we've been using the roofing stuff =
that we can buy locally for a buck or so a linear foot. We cast the =
grains for our 8 inch motor into it. A test burn last week worked like a =
champ.

We've used epoxy and RTV gasket compound when adhesives are called for. =
The RTV seems to stand up better. Another great find at firefox is their =
carbon impregnated cloth. It's a great ablative layer. We've attached =
small Aerotech nozzles to the stuff and then just epoxied them in. The =
cloth had hardly any signs of wear. We also use it to cover motor =
bulkheads, parts exposed to ejection charges, as a grain liner, etc. And =
it's dirt cheap!

Brian

P.S. No, I get no kickback from Firefox.

------=_NextPart_000_0AC2_01C56B69.46D5C500
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Diso-8859-1">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 6.00.2462.0" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Ryan,</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>It's that good! You're right, it does =
come in many=20
different forms. Firefox sells several thicknesses that have various =
fillers.=20
I've tried most of them and they all work well. Our application has been =
as=20
liners for&nbsp;AP composite motors.&nbsp;Recently we've been using the =
roofing=20
stuff that we can buy locally for a buck or so a linear foot. We cast =
the grains=20
for our 8 inch motor into it. A test burn last week worked like a=20
champ.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>We've used epoxy and RTV gasket =
compound when=20
adhesives are called for. The RTV seems to stand up better. Another =
great find=20
at firefox is their carbon impregnated cloth. It's a great ablative =
layer. We've=20
attached small Aerotech nozzles to the stuff and then just epoxied them =
in. The=20
cloth had hardly any signs of wear. We also use it to cover motor =
bulkheads,=20
parts exposed to ejection charges, as a grain liner, etc. And it's dirt=20
cheap!</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Brian</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>P.S. No, I get no kickback from=20
Firefox.</FONT></DIV></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0AC2_01C56B69.46D5C500--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 23481 invoked from network); 5 Aug 2001 05:13:25 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 5 Aug 2001 05:13:25 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: (qmail 28235 invoked from network); 5 Aug 2001 05:16:00 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 5 Aug 2001 05:16:00 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA29358; Sat, 4 Aug 2001 22:07:50 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 97996 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 5 Aug 2001 05:07:48 +0000
Received: from cisco.com (cypher.cisco.com [171.69.11.18]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA29343 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat,          4 Aug 2001 22:07:48 -0700
Received: (from billw@localhost) by cisco.com (8.8.8/2.6/Cisco List          Logging/8.8.8) id WAA22383; Sat, 4 Aug 2001 22:07:17 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID:  <CMM.0.90.4.996988037.billw@cypher>
Date:         Sat, 4 Aug 2001 22:07:17 PDT
Reply-To: "Bill Westfield" <billw@cisco.com>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "William Chops Westfield" <billw@cisco.com>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Material Strenght
Comments: To: Brian Kosko <bkosko1@HOME.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  Your message of Sat, 4 Aug 2001 15:13:27 -0600

Speaking of G10, has anyone used copper-clad PCB material for structural
components in rockets, WITHOUT removing the copper?  This sells in thickness
of about 1/16 and less for $0.01/sq in of copper ($2.88 a square foot for
the usual double sided material) as electronics surplus, and I'm not sure
how well-attached the copper is, nor am I sure that that matters in typical
applications.

For that matter, there's all manner of thicknesses of "oops" multi-layer
circuit boards around, assuming that the assorted copper, laminating glues,
soldermask and silkscreens won't do anything bad.

(intuition says that rigidity is an important component of centering rings,
moreso than inate material strength (?), so you may be better off with a
composite sandwich of thinner G10 on either side of foam, or corrogated
cardboard, or something like that...)

BillW


From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 5874 invoked from network); 5 Aug 2001 05:30:38 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 5 Aug 2001 05:30:38 -0000
Received: (qmail 1134 invoked from network); 5 Aug 2001 05:33:14 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 5 Aug 2001 05:33:14 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA29451; Sat, 4 Aug 2001 22:22:09 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 98019 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 5 Aug 2001 05:22:07 +0000
Received: from localhost (rcalkins@localhost) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with          ESMTP id WAA29436; Sat, 4 Aug 2001 22:22:06 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.LNX.4.10.10108042156270.29267-100000@itc.uci.edu>
Date:         Sat, 4 Aug 2001 22:22:06 -0700
Reply-To: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Elite Sugar Propellant Group Forming.
Comments: To: Pax <darkspunge@USWEST.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <007301c11d65$97c8b4a0$0100a8c0@prdise1.nm.home.com>

On Sat, 4 Aug 2001, Pax wrote:

> Of course Ray is trying to remove the associations between sugar propellant
> and newbies with small motors :-)
Hey, I'm a newbie in this too, you know!

I just want to make sugar more appreciated, it's got such a bad rap
because it's Isp, but when it's an order of ten cheaper, I can overlook an
order of two in performance _very_ easily.  If I can learn how to scale
it, then the next issues are burn rate and Isp.  I've never seen a
metalized sugar propellant for example.

Ray

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 2060 invoked from network); 5 Aug 2001 06:34:26 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 5 Aug 2001 06:34:26 -0000
Received: (qmail 7021 invoked from network); 5 Aug 2001 06:37:02 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 5 Aug 2001 06:37:02 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA29729; Sat, 4 Aug 2001 23:31:13 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 98058 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 5 Aug 2001 06:31:06 +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (oe53.law12.hotmail.com [64.4.18.46]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA29714 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat,          4 Aug 2001 23:31:05 -0700
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Sat,          4 Aug 2001 23:30:35 -0700
X-Originating-IP: [24.29.188.254]
References:  <031301c11cf8$c69364a0$14464a42@socal.rr.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0AC5_01C56B69.46D83600"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 05 Aug 2001 06:30:35.0401 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[226E2790:01C11D78]
Message-ID:  <OE53FGoSbiCbhMKXgIL00008026@hotmail.com>
Date:         Sun, 5 Aug 2001 01:32:09 -0500
Reply-To: "Mark Kruep" <mkruep@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Mark Kruep" <mkruep@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Material Strenght
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0AC5_01C56B69.46D83600
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

I am not a materials expert, but I can give you the response most =
engineers would give you. Not enough info. There are too many different =
grades of materials available and without knowing those figures to =
reasonable accuracy would result in a S.W.A.G. answer. Obviously G10 is =
more dense than plywood which you can see by the fact that you can make =
imprints on wood with moderate pressure. Your application is also =
important. If I were to guess, the G10 would win hands down on tension =
loads, but it may have problems with cracking or splitting under =
compression (more so than plywood anyway). If you need it for fins on a =
fast rocket, the flexibilty of G10 could cause fin flutter and a shred =
regardless of its strength, but this can be fixed with some carbon fiber =
laminates too. Strength is a relative term.

Your best bet is to do some destructive testing on the materials you are =
actually using. Make some mock ups of a loading similar to what you want =
to do and then load it to failure. If you keep track of the force =
required to break it, the cross sectional area times the applied force =
will give you the stress value. In english, measure the cross section of =
the material that is perpendicular to the applied load, take that times =
the force you used to break it, and voila, you get stress. Make =
identical tests out of each material and which ever requires the least =
stress for failure is not the winner. Side note, ultimate strength =
(failure) is usually higher than yield strength (highest force without =
deformation) so if it breaks right at a value you are expecting to have =
in the real project, you need to step up a level or 2 on the material. =
Also keep in mind that drilling holes, curves, or irregularities in the =
sample can cause stress concentrations to form and will cause premature =
failure. From here you should be able to figure weight costs or savings =
by measuring the weight per some area value times what it will take to =
do the job. Clear as mud?


Mark
  ----- Original Message -----=20
  From: Wedge Oldham=20
  To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU=20
  Sent: Saturday, August 04, 2001 10:18 AM
  Subject: [AR] Material Strenght


  I saw a post about material strength whiz by a few weeks ago. But at =
that time, I was interested in that info.

  Unfortunately, now I am.....

  What I'd like to know is:
  If I replace all of the 1/2" Aircraft Birch plywood centering rings =
with G10.=20
  What thickness of G10 would I need to achieve the *same* strength I =
had with plywood? And more importantly would this result in a weight =
savings?

  Wedge Oldham
  http://NikeProject.com

------=_NextPart_000_0AC5_01C56B69.46D83600
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Diso-8859-1">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 5.50.4616.200" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>I am not a materials expert, but I can =
give you the=20
response most engineers would give you. Not enough info. There are too =
many=20
different grades of materials available and without knowing those =
figures to=20
reasonable accuracy would result in a S.W.A.G. answer. Obviously G10 is =
more=20
dense than plywood which you can see by the fact that you can make =
imprints on=20
wood with moderate pressure. Your application is also important. If I =
were to=20
guess, the G10 would win hands down on tension loads, but it may have =
problems=20
with cracking or splitting under compression&nbsp;(more so than plywood =
anyway).=20
If you need it for fins on a fast rocket, the flexibilty of G10 could =
cause fin=20
flutter and a shred regardless of its strength, but this can be fixed =
with some=20
carbon fiber laminates too. Strength is a relative term.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Your best bet is to do some destructive =
testing on=20
the materials you are actually using. Make some mock ups of a loading =
similar to=20
what you want to do and then load it to failure. If you keep track of =
the force=20
required to break it, the cross sectional area times the applied force =
will give=20
you the stress value. In english, measure the cross section of the =
material that=20
is perpendicular to the applied load, take that times the force you used =
to=20
break it, and voila, you get stress. Make identical tests out of each =
material=20
and which ever requires the least stress for failure is not the winner. =
Side=20
note, ultimate strength (failure) is usually higher than yield strength =
(highest=20
force without deformation) so if it breaks right at a value you are =
expecting to=20
have in the real project, you need to step up a level or 2 on the =
material. Also=20
keep in mind that drilling holes, curves,&nbsp;or irregularities in the =
sample=20
can cause stress concentrations to form and will cause premature =
failure. From=20
here you should be able to figure weight costs or savings by measuring =
the=20
weight per some area value times what it will take to do the job. Clear =
as=20
mud?</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Mark</FONT></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE dir=3Dltr=20
style=3D"PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; =
BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
  <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial">----- Original Message ----- </DIV>
  <DIV=20
  style=3D"BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; FONT: 10pt arial; font-color: =
black"><B>From:</B>=20
  <A title=3Dwedge@WESTWORLD.COM =
href=3D"mailto:wedge@WESTWORLD.COM">Wedge=20
  Oldham</A> </DIV>
  <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A =
title=3DAROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU=20
  href=3D"mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU">AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU</A> </DIV>
  <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> Saturday, August 04, 2001 =
10:18=20
  AM</DIV>
  <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> [AR] Material =
Strenght</DIV>
  <DIV><BR></DIV>
  <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>I saw a post about material strength =
whiz by a=20
  few weeks ago. But at that time, I was interested in that =
info.</FONT></DIV>
  <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
  <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Unfortunately, now I =
am.....</FONT></DIV>
  <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
  <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>What I'd like to know =
is:</FONT></DIV>
  <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>If I replace all of the 1/2" Aircraft =
Birch=20
  plywood centering rings with G10. </FONT></DIV>
  <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>What thickness of G10 would I need to =
achieve the=20
  *same* strength I had with plywood? And more importantly would this =
result in=20
  a weight savings?</FONT></DIV>
  <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
  <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Wedge Oldham<BR><A=20
  =
href=3D"http://NikeProject.com">http://NikeProject.com</A></FONT></DIV></=
BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0AC5_01C56B69.46D83600--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 14454 invoked from network); 5 Aug 2001 07:10:38 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 5 Aug 2001 07:10:38 -0000
Received: (qmail 10640 invoked from network); 5 Aug 2001 07:13:14 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 5 Aug 2001 07:13:14 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA29875; Sun, 5 Aug 2001 00:08:07 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 98081 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 5 Aug 2001 07:08:04 +0000
Received: from femail27.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail27.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.254.60.17]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA29860          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 5 Aug 2001 00:08:03 -0700
Received: from officenew ([24.1.27.168]) by femail27.sdc1.sfba.home.com          (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20 201-229-121-120-20010223) with SMTP id          <20010805070757.EVSN5667.femail27.sdc1.sfba.home.com@officenew>; Sun,          5 Aug 2001 00:07:57 -0700
References:  <87.e1e849c.289e1999@aol.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0AC8_01C56B69.46E1ABE0"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2462.0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <01c001c11d7d$596519c0$8300a8c0@olmpi1.wa.home.com>
Date:         Sun, 5 Aug 2001 00:07:54 -0700
Reply-To: "Tomm Aldridge" <taldridge@HOME.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Tomm Aldridge" <taldridge@HOME.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Material Strength
Comments: To: TSmith1315@AOL.COM
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0AC8_01C56B69.46E1ABE0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

By the way Shadow Composite's 1/4 carbon sheet is actually .280" thick.  =
I know because I made some fin brackets before receipt of the material =
and I had to mill them out to fit the .280 nominal thickness of the =
carbon sheet.  I notified Shadow and they may have already changed their =
data on the web.  Great material, a bugger to work with though.  Wear a =
dust mask or respirator and use expendable saws or diamond blades.  One =
HSS bandsaw blade per fin caused me to go to Harbor Freight and buy a =
diamond blade for my table saw.

Tomm
  ----- Original Message -----=20
  From: TSmith1315@AOL.COM=20
  To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU=20
  Sent: Saturday, August 04, 2001 8:38 PM
  Subject: Re: [AR] Material Strength


  In a message dated 8/4/01 5:40:43 PM Eastern Daylight Time, =
bkosko1@HOME.COM=20
  writes:=20



    As for the weight, let me run out to the garage and weigh a hunk. =
It'd also=20
    help if you'd beef-up the joints by adding some fiberglass cloth. Of =
course=20
    that will add a little weight. The 3/32 in I have is 4.5 g/sq-in.=20


  In response to Wedge's question:=20
  <<If I replace all of the 1/2" Aircraft Birch plywood centering rings =
with=20
  G10.=20
  What thickness of G10 would I need to achieve the *same* strength I =
had with=20
  plywood? And more importantly would this result in a weight savings?>> =



   Dynacom lists their G-10 tubing density at 0.069 lbs/sq inch, and =
their=20
  G-10 sheet (0.125") at 0.14 oz/sq inch.=20

  I've used 3 layers of 0.125" G-10 laminated for centering rings. =
Though I=20
  can't give you real strength data, I can tell you they survived a =
5500'=20
  ballistic "recovery" that core sampled 30" deep into clay, =
withstanding the=20
  inertia of the burnt I-211 motor. In fact the whole rocket survived, =
and flew=20
  again without repair. Of course, some paint was missing :)=20

  Someone out there could probably tell you what kind of force was =
involved=20
  with that...(Cd of 0.55, weight of 4.5lbs, acceleration of 1G for =
5500',=20
  final velocity>0 in 2.5 feet).=20

  I don't know what size CR you're talking about (the larger Nike =
project you=20
  mentioned earlier?), but have you considered Shadow Composites' =BC" =
carbon=20
  sheet?=20


  Tim=20

------=_NextPart_000_0AC8_01C56B69.46E1ABE0
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Diso-8859-1">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 6.00.2462.0" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>By the way Shadow Composite's 1/4 =
carbon sheet is=20
actually .280" thick.&nbsp; I know because I made some fin brackets =
before=20
receipt of the material and I had to mill them out to fit the .280 =
nominal=20
thickness of the carbon sheet.&nbsp; I notified Shadow and they may have =
already=20
changed their data on the web.&nbsp; Great material, a bugger to work =
with=20
though.&nbsp; Wear a dust mask or respirator and use expendable saws or =
diamond=20
blades.&nbsp; One HSS bandsaw blade per fin caused me to go to Harbor =
Freight=20
and buy a diamond blade for my table saw.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Tomm</FONT></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE=20
style=3D"PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; =
BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
  <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial">----- Original Message ----- </DIV>
  <DIV=20
  style=3D"BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; FONT: 10pt arial; font-color: =
black"><B>From:</B>=20
  <A title=3DTSmith1315@AOL.COM=20
  href=3D"mailto:TSmith1315@AOL.COM">TSmith1315@AOL.COM</A> </DIV>
  <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A =
title=3DAROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU=20
  href=3D"mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU">AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU</A> </DIV>
  <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> Saturday, August 04, 2001 =
8:38=20
  PM</DIV>
  <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> Re: [AR] Material =
Strength</DIV>
  <DIV><BR></DIV><FONT face=3Darial,helvetica><FONT size=3D2>In a =
message dated=20
  8/4/01 5:40:43 PM Eastern Daylight Time, <A=20
  href=3D"mailto:bkosko1@HOME.COM">bkosko1@HOME.COM</A> <BR>writes: =
<BR><BR><BR>
  <BLOCKQUOTE=20
  style=3D"PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px =
solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px"=20
  TYPE=3D"CITE">As for the weight, let me run out to the garage and =
weigh a=20
    hunk. It'd also <BR>help if you'd beef-up the joints by adding some=20
    fiberglass cloth. Of course <BR>that will add a little weight. The =
3/32 in I=20
    have is 4.5 g/sq-in. </FONT><FONT lang=3D0 face=3DArial =
color=3D#000000 size=3D3=20
    FAMILY=3D"SANSSERIF"></BLOCKQUOTE><BR></FONT><FONT lang=3D0 =
face=3DArial=20
  color=3D#000000 size=3D2 FAMILY=3D"SANSSERIF"><BR>In response to =
Wedge's question:=20
  <BR>&lt;&lt;If I replace all of the 1/2" Aircraft Birch plywood =
centering=20
  rings with <BR>G10. </FONT><FONT lang=3D0 face=3DArial color=3D#000000 =
size=3D3=20
  FAMILY=3D"SANSSERIF"><BR></FONT><FONT lang=3D0 face=3DArial =
color=3D#000000 size=3D2=20
  FAMILY=3D"SANSSERIF">What thickness of G10 would I need to achieve the =
*same*=20
  strength I had with <BR>plywood? And more importantly would this =
result in a=20
  weight savings?&gt;&gt; <BR><BR></FONT><FONT lang=3D0 face=3DArial =
color=3D#000000=20
  size=3D3 FAMILY=3D"SANSSERIF"><BR></FONT><FONT lang=3D0 face=3DArial =
color=3D#000000=20
  size=3D2 FAMILY=3D"SANSSERIF">&nbsp;Dynacom lists their G-10 tubing =
density at=20
  0.069 lbs/sq inch, and their <BR>G-10 sheet (0.125") at 0.14 oz/sq =
inch.=20
  <BR><BR>I've used 3 layers of 0.125" G-10 laminated for centering =
rings.=20
  Though I <BR>can't give you real strength data, I can tell you they =
survived a=20
  5500' <BR>ballistic "recovery" that core sampled 30" deep into clay,=20
  withstanding the <BR>inertia of the burnt I-211 motor. In fact the =
whole=20
  rocket survived, and flew <BR>again without repair. Of course, some =
paint was=20
  missing :) <BR><BR>Someone out there could probably tell you what kind =
of=20
  force was involved <BR>with that...(Cd of 0.55, weight of 4.5lbs, =
acceleration=20
  of 1G for 5500', <BR>final velocity&gt;0 in 2.5 feet). <BR><BR>I don't =
know=20
  what size CR you're talking about (the larger Nike project you =
<BR>mentioned=20
  earlier?), but have you considered <A=20
  href=3D"http://www.shadowaero.com/Materials.htm">Shadow =
Composites</A>' =BC"=20
  carbon <BR>sheet? <BR><BR><BR>Tim</FONT> =
</FONT></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0AC8_01C56B69.46E1ABE0--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 19706 invoked from network); 5 Aug 2001 07:13:26 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 5 Aug 2001 07:13:26 -0000
Received: (qmail 18695 invoked from network); 5 Aug 2001 07:15:38 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 5 Aug 2001 07:15:38 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA29906; Sun, 5 Aug 2001 00:10:54 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 98088 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 5 Aug 2001 07:10:53 +0000
Received: from albqpop1.albq.uswest.net (albqpop1.albq.uswest.net          [207.108.240.1]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id AAA29891          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 5 Aug 2001 00:10:52 -0700
Received: (qmail 61702 invoked by alias); 5 Aug 2001 07:10:21 -0000
Delivered-To: fixup-AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU@fixme
Received: (qmail 61671 invoked by uid 0); 5 Aug 2001 07:10:19 -0000
Received: from cc898542-a.prdise1.nm.home.com (HELO cc898542a) (65.7.151.152)          by albqpop1.albq.uswest.net with SMTP; 5 Aug 2001 07:10:19 -0000
References:  <001801c11cff$ee27aba0$ce9b150c@foy>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0ACB_01C56B69.46E1ABE0"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <00fb01c11d7e$3c757520$0100a8c0@prdise1.nm.home.com>
Date:         Sun, 5 Aug 2001 01:14:14 -0600
Reply-To: "Pax" <darkspunge@USWEST.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Pax" <darkspunge@USWEST.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] upload/download
Comments: To: foy <foy@WFECA.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0ACB_01C56B69.46E1ABE0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

depends. What isp is it? If it is web based it is probably junk. But if =
you can upload via FTP it should be perfect. There are other factors =
also, but it should at least help out. ummm, I am not up on my scripting =
or I would make something useful out of it.
  ----- Original Message -----=20
  From: foy=20
  To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU=20
  Sent: Saturday, August 04, 2001 10:10 AM
  Subject: [AR] upload/download


          I have web page space I don't use or know how to use.    Could =
this be used to post pics?

------=_NextPart_000_0ACB_01C56B69.46E1ABE0
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Diso-8859-1">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 5.50.4522.1800" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>depends. What isp is it? If it is web =
based it is=20
probably junk. But if you can upload via FTP it should be perfect. There =
are=20
other factors also, but it should at least help out. ummm, I am not up =
on my=20
scripting or I would make something useful out of it.</FONT></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE dir=3Dltr=20
style=3D"PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; =
BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
  <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial">----- Original Message ----- </DIV>
  <DIV=20
  style=3D"BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; FONT: 10pt arial; font-color: =
black"><B>From:</B>=20
  <A title=3Dfoy@WFECA.NET href=3D"mailto:foy@WFECA.NET">foy</A> </DIV>
  <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A =
title=3DAROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU=20
  href=3D"mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU">AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU</A> </DIV>
  <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> Saturday, August 04, 2001 =
10:10=20
  AM</DIV>
  <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> [AR] =
upload/download</DIV>
  <DIV><BR></DIV>
  <DIV><FONT face=3DArial =
size=3D2>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; I have=20
  web page space I don't use or know how to use.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Could =
this be=20
  used to post pics?</FONT></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0ACB_01C56B69.46E1ABE0--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 26863 invoked from network); 5 Aug 2001 07:17:18 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 5 Aug 2001 07:17:18 -0000
Received: (qmail 29525 invoked from network); 5 Aug 2001 07:18:58 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 5 Aug 2001 07:18:58 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA29956; Sun, 5 Aug 2001 00:14:38 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 98103 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 5 Aug 2001 07:14:36 +0000
Received: from femail29.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail29.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.254.60.19]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA29941          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 5 Aug 2001 00:14:36 -0700
Received: from officenew ([24.1.27.168]) by femail29.sdc1.sfba.home.com          (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20 201-229-121-120-20010223) with SMTP id          <20010805071431.DEBR22490.femail29.sdc1.sfba.home.com@officenew> for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 5 Aug 2001 00:14:31 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0ACE_01C56B69.46E1ABE0"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2462.0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <01d701c11d7e$427da5a0$8300a8c0@olmpi1.wa.home.com>
Date:         Sun, 5 Aug 2001 00:14:25 -0700
Reply-To: "Tomm Aldridge" <taldridge@HOME.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Tomm Aldridge" <taldridge@HOME.COM>
Subject:      [AR] non streamlined fins
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0ACE_01C56B69.46E1ABE0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

All,

I have this L3 and EX capable airframe about ready to go and it uses =
Shadow Composite's .280 carbon/epoxy for the fins.  The stuff is a bear =
to work and I am thinking that I will fly without streamlining the fins' =
LE or TE; just leave them square.  The rocket will go sonic.  Will there =
be any real issues with turbulance or shocks generated by teh square fin =
LE or TE?  Anything else I may have missed that would cause me to really =
want to go tto the trouble to streamline these pieces of rock hard =
material?

Thanks

Tomm

------=_NextPart_000_0ACE_01C56B69.46E1ABE0
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Diso-8859-1">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 6.00.2462.0" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>All,</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>I have this L3 and EX capable airframe =
about ready=20
to go and it uses Shadow Composite's .280 carbon/epoxy for the =
fins.&nbsp; The=20
stuff is a bear to work and I am thinking that I will fly without =
streamlining=20
the fins' LE or TE; just leave them square.&nbsp; The rocket will go=20
sonic.&nbsp; Will there be any real issues with turbulance or shocks =
generated=20
by teh square fin LE or TE?&nbsp; Anything else I may have missed that =
would=20
cause me to really want to go tto the trouble to streamline these pieces =
of rock=20
hard material?</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Thanks</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Tomm</FONT></DIV></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0ACE_01C56B69.46E1ABE0--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 28578 invoked from network); 5 Aug 2001 08:53:53 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 5 Aug 2001 08:53:53 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 29076 invoked from network); 5 Aug 2001 08:56:08 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 5 Aug 2001 08:56:08 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id BAA30306; Sun, 5 Aug 2001 01:51:59 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 98150 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 5 Aug 2001 08:51:43 +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (f8.law15.hotmail.com [64.4.23.8]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id BAA30291 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Sun,          5 Aug 2001 01:51:43 -0700
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Sun,          5 Aug 2001 01:51:12 -0700
Received: from 213.224.83.70 by lw15fd.law15.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Sun, 05          Aug 2001 08:51:12 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [213.224.83.70]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 05 Aug 2001 08:51:12.0371 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[C7419C30:01C11D8B]
Message-ID:  <F8bti2SbPkPuOlvX6D90001329e@hotmail.com>
Date:         Sun, 5 Aug 2001 08:51:43 +0000
Reply-To: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Peroxide catalyts (was: high pressure tanks)
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

> > Andrew Case schrieb:

> > I use potassium permanganate for my H2O2/Isopropanol biprop. It can be
>solved
> > in the fuel prior to filling the tank with altering its burning
> > characteristics by much (according to GDL PROPEP).
> > I find that the easiest method...

Indeed, to blow your tank up due to the reaction of permanganate with the
alcohol (CO2 gas). It starts slowly. After 1/2 hour the dissolved
parmanganate has become a manganese dioxide deposit.

jd

_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 21059 invoked from network); 5 Aug 2001 09:38:20 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 5 Aug 2001 09:38:20 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 20048 invoked from network); 5 Aug 2001 09:40:01 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 5 Aug 2001 09:40:01 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id CAA30399; Sun, 5 Aug 2001 02:09:23 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 98173 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 5 Aug 2001 09:09:12 +0000
Received: from cicero1.cybercity.dk (cicero1.cybercity.dk [212.242.40.4]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id CAA30384 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 5 Aug 2001 02:09:11 -0700
Received: from usr02.cybercity.dk (usr02.cybercity.dk [212.242.40.82]) by          cicero1.cybercity.dk (Postfix) with ESMTP id E395615FD0A for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun,  5 Aug 2001 11:09:09 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from vip.cybercity.dk (port46.cvx1-noe.ppp.cybercity.dk          [217.157.69.239]) by usr02.cybercity.dk (8.11.2/8.11.0) with ESMTP id          f75998C25747 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 5 Aug 2001 11:09:09          +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from hot@vip.cybercity.dk)
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.75 [en] (Win95; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <Pine.LNX.4.10.10108042156270.29267-100000@itc.uci.edu>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B6D0F68.925B4128@vip.cybercity.dk>
Date:         Sun, 5 Aug 2001 11:18:32 +0200
Reply-To: "Hans Olaf Toft" <hot@VIP.CYBERCITY.DK>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Hans Olaf Toft" <hot@VIP.CYBERCITY.DK>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Elite Sugar Propellant Group Forming.
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Ray Calkins wrote:
<snip>

> I've never seen a
> metalized sugar propellant for example.
>

Ray,
If You are making experiments with metalized sugar propellant, then start with
small contents and work Your way up. It might be slightly off topic, but with my
work on KNO3/epoxy propellants, I ran into trouble with only 5% aluminium. 2%
works fine though - and it makes wonders to the burn rate.

Hans Olaf Toft

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 29377 invoked from network); 5 Aug 2001 13:59:56 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 5 Aug 2001 13:59:56 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 11688 invoked from network); 5 Aug 2001 14:02:08 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 5 Aug 2001 14:02:08 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA31553; Sun, 5 Aug 2001 06:37:48 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 98307 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 5 Aug 2001 13:37:25 +0000
Received: from femail45.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail45.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.254.60.39]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA31536          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 5 Aug 2001 06:37:25 -0700
Received: from home.com ([24.22.71.82]) by femail45.sdc1.sfba.home.com          (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20 201-229-121-120-20010223) with ESMTP id          <20010805133720.ZVGH12579.femail45.sdc1.sfba.home.com@home.com> for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 5 Aug 2001 06:37:20 -0700
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.75 [en] (Win98; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <a05100301b78e991d0c10@[63.15.225.77]>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <39D73E61.AEFD6511@home.com>
Date:         Sun, 1 Oct 2000 09:38:41 -0400
Reply-To: "Mark Simpson" <mark.simpson@HOME.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Mark Simpson" <mark.simpson@HOME.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] new member
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Jerry,
Having just returned from Germany, this is my first chance to welcome
you.  I look forward to some interesting input from you  on solids
development and other related issues.

Mark Simpson

Jerry Irvine wrote:

> Hello all.
> --
> Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
> Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
> Opinion, the whole thing.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 8932 invoked from network); 5 Aug 2001 14:47:24 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 5 Aug 2001 14:47:24 -0000
Received: (qmail 16566 invoked from network); 5 Aug 2001 14:49:04 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 5 Aug 2001 14:49:04 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA31746; Sun, 5 Aug 2001 07:45:13 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 98322 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 5 Aug 2001 14:45:07 +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (oe67.law12.hotmail.com [64.4.18.202]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA31731 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 5 Aug 2001 07:45:07 -0700
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Sun,          5 Aug 2001 07:44:37 -0700
X-Originating-IP: [24.29.188.254]
References:  <01d701c11d7e$427da5a0$8300a8c0@olmpi1.wa.home.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 05 Aug 2001 14:44:37.0290 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[265F78A0:01C11DBD]
Message-ID:  <OE67n5pmJujS410wSgr00008258@hotmail.com>
Date:         Sun, 5 Aug 2001 09:46:12 -0500
Reply-To: "Mark Kruep" <mkruep@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Mark Kruep" <mkruep@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] non streamlined fins
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Tomm,

I'm not an aerodynamics expert, but all the books I have ever seen say that
for supersonic flight, rocket fins need to have a tapered leading and
trailing edge to avoid turbulent airflow (and yes the trailing edge can
cause problems from eddy currents). Airfoiling isn't necessary and actually
wasn't recommended in the books I read. It (square TE & LE) could create
little mini-shock waves along the fin which individually don't mean much,
but collectively can be bad (this also applies to irregularities on the body
itself too). You might also keep in mind how far the fins stick out and just
how fast you're gonna go. As the rocket is enveloped in the mach cone if
your fins protrude into it, that's not good. If they protrude AND have a lot
of surface area to catch (i.e. square leading edge), that's really not good.

If you do decide to taper them, make life easy and use a dremel to do the
hard work and then finish up with a sanding block. You might also look at
the router attachment they have for dremel tools and see if there is a bit
small enough to router those fins. I am of course citing information I read
for my own entertainment more than a year ago, so if the resident missile
gods know different, then by all means listen to them. Now since someone has
told me before that they read orange peel surfaces and blunt objects
actually have less drag, let me say that the above info applies to
supersonic and transonic only. The orange peel effect only applies to
vehicles with looow Reynold's numbers such as bumblebees and sharks(or so I
have been told by one of my fluids instructors) and usually at low speeds.


Mark


----- Original Message -----
From: Tomm Aldridge
To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
Sent: Sunday, August 05, 2001 2:14 AM
Subject: [AR] non streamlined fins


All,

I have this L3 and EX capable airframe about ready to go and it uses Shadow
Composite's .280 carbon/epoxy for the fins.  The stuff is a bear to work and
I am thinking that I will fly without streamlining the fins' LE or TE; just
leave them square.  The rocket will go sonic.  Will there be any real issues
with turbulance or shocks generated by teh square fin LE or TE?  Anything
else I may have missed that would cause me to really want to go tto the
trouble to streamline these pieces of rock hard material?

Thanks

Tomm

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 9236 invoked from network); 5 Aug 2001 14:47:30 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 5 Aug 2001 14:47:30 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 28355 invoked from network); 5 Aug 2001 14:49:43 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 5 Aug 2001 14:49:43 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA31770; Sun, 5 Aug 2001 07:45:27 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 98329 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 5 Aug 2001 14:45:25 +0000
Received: from stud.uni-goettingen.de (root@s2.stud.uni-goettingen.de          [134.76.60.22]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA31755          for <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Sun, 5 Aug 2001 07:45:24 -0700
Received: from router.atw.stud.uni-goettingen.de ([134.76.62.65]          helo=stud.uni-goettingen.de) by stud.uni-goettingen.de with esmtp          (Exim 2.12 #8) id 15TP9d-0007q0-00 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 5          Aug 2001 16:45:21 +0200
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [de] (Win98; I)
X-Accept-Language: de
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B6D5BEC.FBE5B772@stud.uni-goettingen.de>
Date:         Sun, 5 Aug 2001 16:45:00 +0200
Reply-To: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Thomas Engelhardt" <tengelh@STUD.UNI-GOETTINGEN.DE>
Organization: =?iso-8859-1?Q?Rocket_Research_G=F6ttingen_=28RRG=29?=
Subject:      Re: [AR] Peroxide catalyts (was: high pressure tanks)
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

John Dom schrieb:

>Indeed, to blow your tank up due to the reaction of permanganate with the
>alcohol (CO2 gas). It starts slowly. After 1/2 hour the dissolved
>parmanganate has become a manganese dioxide deposit.

Not with a safety valve :-).

So far, I haven't seen any manganese dioxide forming in the isopropanol
in that short time.
I mixed a batch of 50ml with potassium permanganate, evacuated the
vessel and observed.
The mixture started to turn brown after approximately 55 minutes, which
more than enough time for me. The whole fill/check/pressurize/check/fire
cycle of my motor shouldn't take more than 20 minutes which IMVHO is a
large enough saftety margin.

Cheers,

Tom

P.S. BTW, my propellant and oxidiser tanks are rated for a MEOP of 200
bar (2900 PSI). They can handle the stress.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 17754 invoked from network); 5 Aug 2001 15:00:57 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 5 Aug 2001 15:00:57 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: (qmail 20566 invoked from network); 5 Aug 2001 15:02:37 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 5 Aug 2001 15:02:37 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA31869; Sun, 5 Aug 2001 07:58:28 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 98352 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 5 Aug 2001 14:58:26 +0000
Received: from localhost (rcalkins@localhost) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with          ESMTP id HAA31854 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Sun, 5 Aug 2001 07:58:26          -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.LNX.4.10.10108050757210.31427-100000@itc.uci.edu>
Date:         Sun, 5 Aug 2001 07:58:26 -0700
Reply-To: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
Subject:      [AR] Ode of Static Testing Large Rocket Motors
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

A faint flame appears and suddenly it bursts to life!
The ground trembles beneath your feet, the valley
quickly fills with the thunder of a million roaring
Harleys. Demons moan in pain within your creation,
their anguished screams drill into your soul as the
barely contained inferno tears their writhing flesh.
Your body buzzes, the unbearable noise crushes you.
Your eyes alight upon a strange site:  angels trapped
in the exhaust.  Everything else fades from awareness
as your gaze locks on the compelling sight in the
supersonic jet of burning fluid.

Ghostly and elusive, they flitter faintly within the
exhaust plume, giant butterflies of glowing energy.
Somehow they dance to the cacaphony, unaffected by the
fury streaming through them.  The violence relaxes a
little, loses some of it's snarl;  the angels lock in
place, frozen in their line dance. Your awareness
snaps you back to the world around you:  the sound
pressing on your eyeballs, chafing your skin, gripping
your very bones.  You turn away from the heavenly
splendor, then realize you can't see the numbers on
the computer screen; you have been staring at a baby
sun on the desert floor, dazzled by the scene.

It fades, ghosts of smoke wisping from the nozzle.
Silence falls over the area, untill the echoes fade in
from the mountains around the valley, softly seeping
in through the ringing in your ears.  The rest of the
day, nothing seems quite real, something of this
feeling persists untill the next firing...

Ray Calkins 05AUG2001

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 5566 invoked from network); 5 Aug 2001 16:12:42 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 5 Aug 2001 16:12:42 -0000
Received: (qmail 26263 invoked from network); 5 Aug 2001 16:14:53 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 5 Aug 2001 16:14:53 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA32141; Sun, 5 Aug 2001 09:10:00 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 98388 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 5 Aug 2001 16:09:51 +0000
Received: from castor.ridgenet.net (IDENT:root@castor.ridgenet.net          [199.120.150.29]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA32126          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 5 Aug 2001 09:09:51 -0700
Received: from kristinscomp (pm164.ridgenet.net [204.154.246.164]) by          castor.ridgenet.net (8.11.0/8.11.0) with SMTP id f75G2mS18918; Sun, 5          Aug 2001 09:02:48 -0700
References:  <01d701c11d7e$427da5a0$8300a8c0@olmpi1.wa.home.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0AD1_01C56B69.46F72FB0"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <002301c11dca$37f83fe0$1b30fea9@kristinscomp>
Date:         Sun, 5 Aug 2001 09:18:09 -0700
Reply-To: "Kristin & David Hall" <thehalls@RIDGENET.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Kristin & David Hall" <thehalls@RIDGENET.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] non streamlined fins
Comments: To: Tomm Aldridge <taldridge@HOME.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0AD1_01C56B69.46F72FB0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable


Every once in a great while you may get bit in the butt, but most of the =
time a blunt leading/trailing fin edge won't do anything more than raise =
drag through the roof (You sure it's going sonic ;)?  For the life of me =
I can't remember which one it was, but there was a small tactical system =
(I want to say either Tiny Tim, but am not sure of that) that just used =
stamped sheet metal for fins - no tapering at all!  Admittedly, you =
won't see anything like that anymore but the point stands.

--
Dave and/or Kristin Hall
  ----- Original Message -----=20
  From: Tomm Aldridge=20
  To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU=20
  Sent: Sunday, August 05, 2001 12:14 AM
  Subject: [AR] non streamlined fins


  All,
  =20
  I have this L3 and EX capable airframe about ready to go and it uses =
Shadow Composite's .280 carbon/epoxy for the fins.  The stuff is a bear =
to work and I am thinking that I will fly without streamlining the fins' =
LE or TE; just leave them square.  The rocket will go sonic.  Will there =
be any real issues with turbulance or shocks generated by teh square fin =
LE or TE?  Anything else I may have missed that would cause me to really =
want to go tto the trouble to streamline these pieces of rock hard =
material?
  =20
  Thanks
  =20
  Tomm

------=_NextPart_000_0AD1_01C56B69.46F72FB0
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META content=3D"text/html; charset=3Diso-8859-1" =
http-equiv=3DContent-Type>
<META content=3D"MSHTML 5.00.2614.3500" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Every once in a great while you may get =
bit in the=20
butt, but most of the time a blunt leading/trailing fin edge won't do =
anything=20
more than raise drag through the roof (You sure it's going sonic =
;)?&nbsp; For=20
the life of me I can't remember which one it was, but there was a small =
tactical=20
system (I want to say&nbsp;either Tiny Tim, but am not sure of that) =
that just=20
used stamped sheet metal for fins - no tapering at all!&nbsp; =
Admittedly, you=20
won't see anything like that anymore but the point stands.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>--<BR>Dave and/or Kristin Hall</DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE=20
style=3D"BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: =
0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; PADDING-RIGHT: 0px">
  <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial">----- Original Message ----- </DIV>
  <DIV=20
  style=3D"BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; FONT: 10pt arial; font-color: =
black"><B>From:</B>=20
  <A href=3D"mailto:taldridge@HOME.COM" title=3Dtaldridge@HOME.COM>Tomm =
Aldridge</A>=20
  </DIV>
  <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A =
href=3D"mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU"=20
  title=3DAROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU</A> </DIV>
  <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> Sunday, August 05, 2001 =
12:14=20
  AM</DIV>
  <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> [AR] non streamlined =
fins</DIV>
  <DIV><BR></DIV>
  <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>All,</FONT></DIV>
  <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
  <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>I have this L3 and EX capable =
airframe about=20
  ready to go and it uses Shadow Composite's .280 carbon/epoxy for the=20
  fins.&nbsp; The stuff is a bear to work and I am thinking that I will =
fly=20
  without streamlining the fins' LE or TE; just leave them square.&nbsp; =
The=20
  rocket will go sonic.&nbsp; Will there be any real issues with =
turbulance or=20
  shocks generated by teh square fin LE or TE?&nbsp; Anything else I may =
have=20
  missed that would cause me to really want to go tto the trouble to =
streamline=20
  these pieces of rock hard material?</FONT></DIV>
  <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
  <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Thanks</FONT></DIV>
  <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
  <DIV><FONT face=3DArial =
size=3D2>Tomm</FONT></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0AD1_01C56B69.46F72FB0--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 28940 invoked from network); 5 Aug 2001 16:44:06 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 5 Aug 2001 16:44:06 -0000
Received: (qmail 28923 invoked from network); 5 Aug 2001 16:45:47 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 5 Aug 2001 16:45:47 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA32264; Sun, 5 Aug 2001 09:36:33 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 98410 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 5 Aug 2001 16:36:31 +0000
Received: from dune.gnc.net (root@dune.gnc.net [207.203.72.4]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA32249 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun,          5 Aug 2001 09:36:30 -0700
Received: from beowulf (sw2-24.gnc.net [207.203.72.104]) by dune.gnc.net          (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id MAA19449 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 5          Aug 2001 12:36:25 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0AD4_01C56B69.46F72FB0"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <LPBBKJMJEOFKAMFJJNNHIEEJCGAA.landofgrey@gnc.net>
Date:         Sun, 5 Aug 2001 12:36:13 -0400
Reply-To: <landofgrey@gnc.net>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Matthew Travis" <landofgrey@gnc.net>
Subject:      Re: [AR] non streamlined fins
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <002301c11dca$37f83fe0$1b30fea9@kristinscomp>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0AD4_01C56B69.46F72FB0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

I believe a number of rockets with retractable (fold-out) fins used
non-stramlined fins.

Matt
  -----Original Message-----
  From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU]On
Behalf Of Kristin & David Hall
  Sent: Sunday, August 05, 2001 12:18 PM
  To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
  Subject: Re: [AR] non streamlined fins



  Every once in a great while you may get bit in the butt, but most of the
time a blunt leading/trailing fin edge won't do anything more than raise
drag through the roof (You sure it's going sonic ;)?  For the life of me I
can't remember which one it was, but there was a small tactical system (I
want to say either Tiny Tim, but am not sure of that) that just used stamped
sheet metal for fins - no tapering at all!  Admittedly, you won't see
anything like that anymore but the point stands.

------=_NextPart_000_0AD4_01C56B69.46F72FB0
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Diso-8859-1">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 5.50.4208.1700" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial color=3D#0000ff size=3D2><SPAN =
class=3D610323416-05082001>I=20
believe a number of rockets with retractable (fold-out) fins used =
non-stramlined=20
fins. </SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial color=3D#0000ff size=3D2><SPAN=20
class=3D610323416-05082001></SPAN></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial color=3D#0000ff size=3D2><SPAN=20
class=3D610323416-05082001>Matt</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE dir=3Dltr=20
style=3D"PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px =
solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
  <DIV class=3DOutlookMessageHeader dir=3Dltr align=3Dleft><FONT =
face=3DTahoma=20
  size=3D2>-----Original Message-----<BR><B>From:</B> Amateur Rocketry =
discussion=20
  list [mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU]<B>On Behalf Of </B>Kristin &amp; =
David=20
  Hall<BR><B>Sent:</B> Sunday, August 05, 2001 12:18 PM<BR><B>To:</B>=20
  AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU<BR><B>Subject:</B> Re: [AR] non streamlined=20
  fins<BR><BR></FONT></DIV>
  <DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
  <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Every once in a great while you may =
get bit in=20
  the butt, but most of the time a blunt leading/trailing fin edge won't =
do=20
  anything more than raise drag through the roof (You sure it's going =
sonic=20
  ;)?&nbsp; For the life of me I can't remember which one it was, but =
there was=20
  a small tactical system (I want to say&nbsp;either Tiny Tim, but am =
not sure=20
  of that) that just used stamped sheet metal for fins - no tapering at=20
  all!&nbsp; Admittedly, you won't see anything like that anymore but =
the point=20
  stands.</FONT></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0AD4_01C56B69.46F72FB0--
in

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 6357 invoked from network); 5 Aug 2001 16:57:37 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 5 Aug 2001 16:57:37 -0000
Received: (qmail 19567 invoked from network); 5 Aug 2001 16:59:53 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 5 Aug 2001 16:59:53 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA32235; Sun, 5 Aug 2001 09:34:56 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 98403 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 5 Aug 2001 16:34:54 +0000
Received: from dune.gnc.net (root@dune.gnc.net [207.203.72.4]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA32220 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun,          5 Aug 2001 09:34:53 -0700
Received: from beowulf (sw2-24.gnc.net [207.203.72.104]) by dune.gnc.net          (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id MAA19394 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 5          Aug 2001 12:34:43 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0AD8_01C56B69.46F72FB0"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <LPBBKJMJEOFKAMFJJNNHEEEJCGAA.landofgrey@gnc.net>
Date:         Sun, 5 Aug 2001 12:34:31 -0400
Reply-To: <landofgrey@gnc.net>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Matthew Travis" <landofgrey@gnc.net>
Subject:      Re: [AR] non streamlined fins
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <01d701c11d7e$427da5a0$8300a8c0@olmpi1.wa.home.com>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0AD8_01C56B69.46F72FB0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

If it's going to go sonic, make sure the fins are mounted exceedingly well
or they'll strip from the airframe. Even well-mounted, the airframe could
fail under the stress at the attach point. That's one reason for
streamlining the edges. Also, if yo uplan to go sonic without streamlining,
use a paint that can tolerate the termperature increase without discoloring
or warping.
  -----Original Message-----
  From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU]On
Behalf Of Tomm Aldridge
  Sent: Sunday, August 05, 2001 3:14 AM
  To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
  Subject: [AR] non streamlined fins


  All,

  I have this L3 and EX capable airframe about ready to go and it uses
Shadow Composite's .280 carbon/epoxy for the fins.  The stuff is a bear to
work and I am thinking that I will fly without streamlining the fins' LE or
TE; just leave them square.  The rocket will go sonic.  Will there be any
real issues with turbulance or shocks generated by teh square fin LE or TE?
Anything else I may have missed that would cause me to really want to go tto
the trouble to streamline these pieces of rock hard material?

  Thanks

  Tomm

------=_NextPart_000_0AD8_01C56B69.46F72FB0
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Diso-8859-1">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 5.50.4208.1700" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial color=3D#0000ff size=3D2><SPAN =
class=3D260343116-05082001>If=20
it's going to go sonic, make sure the fins are mounted exceedingly well =
or=20
they'll strip from the airframe. Even well-mounted, the airframe could =
fail=20
under the stress at the attach point. That's one reason for streamlining =
the=20
edges. Also, if yo uplan to go sonic without streamlining, use a paint =
that can=20
tolerate the termperature increase without discoloring or=20
warping.</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE dir=3Dltr=20
style=3D"PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px =
solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
  <DIV class=3DOutlookMessageHeader dir=3Dltr align=3Dleft><FONT =
face=3DTahoma=20
  size=3D2>-----Original Message-----<BR><B>From:</B> Amateur Rocketry =
discussion=20
  list [mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU]<B>On Behalf Of </B>Tomm=20
  Aldridge<BR><B>Sent:</B> Sunday, August 05, 2001 3:14 AM<BR><B>To:</B> =

  AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU<BR><B>Subject:</B> [AR] non streamlined=20
  fins<BR><BR></FONT></DIV>
  <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>All,</FONT></DIV>
  <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
  <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>I have this L3 and EX capable =
airframe about=20
  ready to go and it uses Shadow Composite's .280 carbon/epoxy for the=20
  fins.&nbsp; The stuff is a bear to work and I am thinking that I will =
fly=20
  without streamlining the fins' LE or TE; just leave them square.&nbsp; =
The=20
  rocket will go sonic.&nbsp; Will there be any real issues with =
turbulance or=20
  shocks generated by teh square fin LE or TE?&nbsp; Anything else I may =
have=20
  missed that would cause me to really want to go tto the trouble to =
streamline=20
  these pieces of rock hard material?</FONT></DIV>
  <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
  <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Thanks</FONT></DIV>
  <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
  <DIV><FONT face=3DArial =
size=3D2>Tomm</FONT></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0AD8_01C56B69.46F72FB0--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 26303 invoked from network); 5 Aug 2001 17:15:14 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 5 Aug 2001 17:15:14 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 14766 invoked from network); 5 Aug 2001 17:17:27 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 5 Aug 2001 17:17:27 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA32430; Sun, 5 Aug 2001 10:10:03 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 98436 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 5 Aug 2001 17:09:58 +0000
Received: from grucom2.gru.net (grucom2.gru.net [209.251.129.7]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA32410 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun,          5 Aug 2001 10:09:57 -0700
Received: from [209.251.150.217] by grucom2.sfcc.net (NTMail          6.03.0009/NU4112.00.db1c8a4b) with ESMTP id pbjbhaaa for          AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 5 Aug 2001 13:09:54 -0400
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (Win95; I)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B6D7E37.4672FF2F@sfcc.net>
Date:         Sun, 5 Aug 2001 13:11:19 -0400
Reply-To: "James Yawn" <jyawn@SFCC.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "James Yawn" <jyawn@SFCC.NET>
Subject:      [AR] H2O2 Conference Website
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

My apologies to any who already know about this, but I just discovered
the website for the International Hydrogen Peroxide Propulsion
Conference, which includes full-text of many of papers.

http://www.ee.surrey.ac.uk/SSC/H2O2CONF/index.htm

This links to the index page for their 1998 conference.  It includes an
article by Peter R. Stokes on the history of H2O2 propulsion which
filled me in on many details about Hellmuth Walter and his hot toys.
There are technical articles as well.

I hope this is of interest to some.

Jimmy Yawn

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 19679 invoked from network); 5 Aug 2001 17:23:04 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 5 Aug 2001 17:23:04 -0000
Received: (qmail 23861 invoked from network); 5 Aug 2001 17:25:19 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 5 Aug 2001 17:25:19 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA32386; Sun, 5 Aug 2001 10:03:15 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 98429 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 5 Aug 2001 17:02:56 +0000
Received: from femail27.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail27.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.254.60.17]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA32370          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 5 Aug 2001 10:02:56 -0700
Received: from officenew ([24.1.27.168]) by femail27.sdc1.sfba.home.com          (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20 201-229-121-120-20010223) with SMTP id          <20010805170250.NYSB5667.femail27.sdc1.sfba.home.com@officenew>; Sun,          5 Aug 2001 10:02:50 -0700
References:  <01d701c11d7e$427da5a0$8300a8c0@olmpi1.wa.home.com>             <002301c11dca$37f83fe0$1b30fea9@kristinscomp>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0ADC_01C56B69.46FE5BA0"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2462.0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <020a01c11dd0$708bd5a0$8300a8c0@olmpi1.wa.home.com>
Date:         Sun, 5 Aug 2001 10:02:41 -0700
Reply-To: "Tomm Aldridge" <taldridge@HOME.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Tomm Aldridge" <taldridge@HOME.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] non streamlined fins
Comments: To: Kristin & David Hall <thehalls@ridgenet.net>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0ADC_01C56B69.46FE5BA0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Thanks Dave.  The sim results are:
Vmax =3D 1259 ft/sec
Altitude =3D 13,383 ft
Time to Apogee =3D 26.50
M1315 commercial motor

Fin span root to tip =3D4"
Fin root =3D 8"
Fin tip =3D 4"
LE sweep =3D 26.4 deg
TE sweep =3D -26.4 deg
Fin thickness =3D 0.280
Fin Material =3D Graphite / Epoxy composite (Shadow autoclaved sheet =
stock)


  ----- Original Message -----=20
  From: Kristin & David Hall=20
  To: Tomm Aldridge ; AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU=20
  Sent: Sunday, August 05, 2001 9:18 AM
  Subject: Re: [AR] non streamlined fins



  Every once in a great while you may get bit in the butt, but most of =
the time a blunt leading/trailing fin edge won't do anything more than =
raise drag through the roof (You sure it's going sonic ;)?  For the life =
of me I can't remember which one it was, but there was a small tactical =
system (I want to say either Tiny Tim, but am not sure of that) that =
just used stamped sheet metal for fins - no tapering at all!  =
Admittedly, you won't see anything like that anymore but the point =
stands.

  --
  Dave and/or Kristin Hall
    ----- Original Message -----=20
    From: Tomm Aldridge=20
    To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU=20
    Sent: Sunday, August 05, 2001 12:14 AM
    Subject: [AR] non streamlined fins


    All,

    I have this L3 and EX capable airframe about ready to go and it uses =
Shadow Composite's .280 carbon/epoxy for the fins.  The stuff is a bear =
to work and I am thinking that I will fly without streamlining the fins' =
LE or TE; just leave them square.  The rocket will go sonic.  Will there =
be any real issues with turbulance or shocks generated by teh square fin =
LE or TE?  Anything else I may have missed that would cause me to really =
want to go tto the trouble to streamline these pieces of rock hard =
material?

    Thanks

    Tomm

------=_NextPart_000_0ADC_01C56B69.46FE5BA0
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Diso-8859-1">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 6.00.2462.0" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Thanks Dave.&nbsp; The sim results=20
are:</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Vmax =3D 1259 ft/sec</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Altitude =3D 13,383 ft</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Time to Apogee =3D 26.50</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>M1315 commercial motor</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Fin span root to tip =3D4"</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Fin root =3D 8"</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Fin tip =3D 4"</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>LE sweep =3D 26.4 deg</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>TE sweep =3D -26.4 deg</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Fin thickness =3D 0.280</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Fin Material =3D Graphite / Epoxy =
composite (Shadow=20
autoclaved sheet stock)</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE dir=3Dltr=20
style=3D"PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; =
BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
  <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial">----- Original Message ----- </DIV>
  <DIV=20
  style=3D"BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; FONT: 10pt arial; font-color: =
black"><B>From:</B>=20
  <A title=3Dthehalls@ridgenet.net =
href=3D"mailto:thehalls@ridgenet.net">Kristin=20
  &amp; David Hall</A> </DIV>
  <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A =
title=3Dtaldridge@HOME.COM=20
  href=3D"mailto:taldridge@HOME.COM">Tomm Aldridge</A> ; <A=20
  title=3DAROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU=20
  href=3D"mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU">AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU</A> </DIV>
  <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> Sunday, August 05, 2001 =
9:18=20
  AM</DIV>
  <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> Re: [AR] non =
streamlined=20
  fins</DIV>
  <DIV><BR></DIV>
  <DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
  <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Every once in a great while you may =
get bit in=20
  the butt, but most of the time a blunt leading/trailing fin edge won't =
do=20
  anything more than raise drag through the roof (You sure it's going =
sonic=20
  ;)?&nbsp; For the life of me I can't remember which one it was, but =
there was=20
  a small tactical system (I want to say&nbsp;either Tiny Tim, but am =
not sure=20
  of that) that just used stamped sheet metal for fins - no tapering at=20
  all!&nbsp; Admittedly, you won't see anything like that anymore but =
the point=20
  stands.</FONT></DIV>
  <DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
  <DIV>--<BR>Dave and/or Kristin Hall</DIV>
  <BLOCKQUOTE=20
  style=3D"PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; =
BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
    <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial">----- Original Message ----- </DIV>
    <DIV=20
    style=3D"BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; FONT: 10pt arial; font-color: =
black"><B>From:</B>=20
    <A title=3Dtaldridge@HOME.COM =
href=3D"mailto:taldridge@HOME.COM">Tomm=20
    Aldridge</A> </DIV>
    <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A =
title=3DAROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU=20
    href=3D"mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU">AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU</A> </DIV>
    <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> Sunday, August 05, 2001 =
12:14=20
    AM</DIV>
    <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> [AR] non streamlined =

fins</DIV>
    <DIV><BR></DIV>
    <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>All,</FONT></DIV>
    <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
    <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>I have this L3 and EX capable =
airframe about=20
    ready to go and it uses Shadow Composite's .280 carbon/epoxy for the =

    fins.&nbsp; The stuff is a bear to work and I am thinking that I =
will fly=20
    without streamlining the fins' LE or TE; just leave them =
square.&nbsp; The=20
    rocket will go sonic.&nbsp; Will there be any real issues with =
turbulance or=20
    shocks generated by teh square fin LE or TE?&nbsp; Anything else I =
may have=20
    missed that would cause me to really want to go tto the trouble to=20
    streamline these pieces of rock hard material?</FONT></DIV>
    <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
    <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Thanks</FONT></DIV>
    <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
    <DIV><FONT face=3DArial=20
size=3D2>Tomm</FONT></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0ADC_01C56B69.46FE5BA0--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 26542 invoked from network); 5 Aug 2001 18:28:57 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 5 Aug 2001 18:28:57 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: (qmail 9513 invoked from network); 5 Aug 2001 18:31:33 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 5 Aug 2001 18:31:33 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA32701; Sun, 5 Aug 2001 11:26:45 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 98477 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 5 Aug 2001 18:26:34 +0000
Received: from localhost (rcalkins@localhost) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with          ESMTP id LAA32686 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Sun, 5 Aug 2001 11:26:34          -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.LNX.4.10.10108051116170.32582-100000@itc.uci.edu>
Date:         Sun, 5 Aug 2001 11:26:34 -0700
Reply-To: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
Subject:      [AR] aRocket Uploads
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Hey all!

Greg Deputy has generously provided a file upload service for the aRocket
community.

I have placed an Excel Ascent trajectory analysis tool developed by Terry
Spath there for your use.  He appreciates feedback on this.  The default
numbers are for the NM Space Shot several of us are working on.  (Details
about the project are here:
http://www.arocket.net/projects/hybrid/launcher.html ).  The tool
calculates flow rates/weight, acceleration, thrust, pressure ratio,
velocity, and accounts for a realistic atmosphere and supersonic drag.

Feel free to upload your photos and other files of interest to fellow
aRocketeers.

Thanks Greg!

Ray

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 5522 invoked from network); 5 Aug 2001 18:32:22 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 5 Aug 2001 18:32:22 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: (qmail 10967 invoked from network); 5 Aug 2001 18:34:38 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 5 Aug 2001 18:34:38 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA32727; Sun, 5 Aug 2001 11:28:36 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 98484 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 5 Aug 2001 18:28:35 +0000
Received: from localhost (rcalkins@localhost) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with          ESMTP id LAA32712 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 5 Aug 2001 11:28:34          -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.LNX.4.10.10108051127040.32582-100000@itc.uci.edu>
Date:         Sun, 5 Aug 2001 11:28:34 -0700
Reply-To: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
Subject:      Re: [AR] aRocket Uploads
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <Pine.LNX.4.10.10108051116170.32582-100000@itc.uci.edu>

Greg Deputy has generously provided a file upload service for the aRocket
community.

To use this tool, visit http://www.blastzone.com/arocket/uploads.asp
Username:       arocket
Password:       uploads

Thanks again, Greg.

Ray

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 11638 invoked from network); 5 Aug 2001 18:34:39 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 5 Aug 2001 18:34:39 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 10549 invoked from network); 5 Aug 2001 18:36:50 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 5 Aug 2001 18:36:50 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA00321; Sun, 5 Aug 2001 11:32:33 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 98503 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 5 Aug 2001 18:32:32 +0000
Received: from snipe.mail.pas.earthlink.net (snipe.mail.pas.earthlink.net          [207.217.120.62]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA00306          for <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Sun, 5 Aug 2001 11:32:31 -0700
Received: from sprintmail.com (pool0196.cvx18-bradley.dialup.earthlink.net          [209.179.238.196]) by snipe.mail.pas.earthlink.net (EL-8_9_3_3/8.9.3)          with ESMTP id LAA20931; Sun, 5 Aug 2001 11:32:28 -0700 (PDT)
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.74 [en] (Win98; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <90.181cfbb2.289c2e1c@aol.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B6CE3FD.1FA17024@sprintmail.com>
Date:         Sat, 4 Aug 2001 23:13:17 -0700
Reply-To: "Anthony Colette" <Rockitman@SPRINTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Anthony Colette" <Rockitman@SPRINTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] US Standard Atmosphere - 1962
Comments: To: Ricanakk@aol.com
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Thanks everyone for your replies.

Duncan,
Unfortunately the Javascript won't help.  I was hoping to copy and paste a
polynomial out of it.  (Or at least I can't see the polynomials if they are
there.)

Richard,
I visited the web site you suggested but it does require a password to get to
the good stuff.

Dave,
Your program may have the info I am looking for but I dont know the first
thing about Fortran.



I have hard copies of very large tables listing the 1962 ATM properties and I
wanted to avoid entering all of it by hand into excel to generate the
polynomials.  It would take several weeks.  I wanted to generate curve fits so
I could compress the massive amount of data tables into compact, easy to use
polynomials.

While calculating the ramjet cycle analysis I had to do multiple iterations to
simulate the increasing altitude and changing velocity.  _This has been very
time consuming._   I have been doing these calculations to predict O/F and the
fuel flow rate required by the ramjet.  But because I do not have the exact
length of the parachute compartment of the center body nailed down, the
corresponding center body pressure drop is also not nailed down.

The center body delta P significantly affects air mdot, therefore the fuel
flow rate can only be ballpark estimated. So far I am making the assumption
the parachute compartment will be 13 inches long (with + -3") because I still
dont have the parachute in hand.  LDRS only had two parachute vendors with
products on display.  I thought there would be many more vendors.

When I get the drogue and main parachute and trim the parachute compartment to
final length I can finalize the delta P Vs air Mdot and calculate an exact
fuel Mdot.

Tony



Ricanakk@aol.com wrote:

> In a message dated 01/08/03 10:04:31 Eastern Daylight Time,
> Rockitman@SPRINTMAIL.COM writes:
>
> << Does anyone on this list know where I can find polynomials expressing
>  the US 1962 Standard Atmosphere?
>  (Altitude Vs' Temp, Pressure, Q, S.O.S, and density) >>
>
> Tony,
> ESDU data sheet 77021 provides this information.
> www.esdu.com
> If you can't access the site (password may be needed) contact me directly.
>
> Richard Nakka

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 17665 invoked from network); 5 Aug 2001 18:47:37 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 5 Aug 2001 18:47:37 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: (qmail 15537 invoked from network); 5 Aug 2001 18:49:48 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 5 Aug 2001 18:49:48 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA00394; Sun, 5 Aug 2001 11:40:50 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 98518 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 5 Aug 2001 18:40:48 +0000
Received: from imo-r10.mx.aol.com (imo-r10.mx.aol.com [152.163.225.106]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA00379 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Sun, 5 Aug 2001 11:40:47 -0700
Received: from MONTMACH@aol.com by imo-r10.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v31.9.) id          w.42.1897ba40 (3959) for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Sun, 5 Aug 2001          14:40:43 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0ADF_01C56B69.46FE5BA0"
X-Mailer: AOL 6.0 for Windows US sub 10531
Message-ID:  <42.1897ba40.289eed2b@aol.com>
Date:         Sun, 5 Aug 2001 14:40:43 EDT
Reply-To: <MONTMACH@AOL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <MONTMACH@AOL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Ode of Static Testing Large Rocket Motors
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0ADF_01C56B69.46FE5BA0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Ray wrote


> A faint flame appears and suddenly it bursts to life!
> The ground trembles beneath your feet, the valley
> quickly fills with the thunder of a million roaring
> Harleys. Demons moan in pain within your creation,
> their anguished screams drill into your soul as the
> barely contained inferno tears their writhing flesh.
> Your body buzzes, the unbearable noise crushes you.
> Your eyes alight upon a strange site:  angels trapped
> in the exhaust.  Everything else fades from awareness
> as your gaze locks on the compelling sight in the
> supersonic jet of burning fluid.
>
>  Sounds like a ode from the group "Moody Blues " now all you need is some
> music to go with it. :)
>
>



------=_NextPart_000_0ADF_01C56B69.46FE5BA0
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<HTML><FONT FACE=arial,helvetica><FONT  SIZE=2>Ray wrote
<BR>
<BR>
<BR><BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE style="BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px">A faint flame appears and suddenly it bursts to life!
<BR>The ground trembles beneath your feet, the valley
<BR>quickly fills with the thunder of a million roaring
<BR>Harleys. Demons moan in pain within your creation,
<BR>their anguished screams drill into your soul as the
<BR>barely contained inferno tears their writhing flesh.
<BR>Your body buzzes, the unbearable noise crushes you.
<BR>Your eyes alight upon a strange site: &nbsp;angels trapped
<BR>in the exhaust. &nbsp;Everything else fades from awareness
<BR>as your gaze locks on the compelling sight in the
<BR>supersonic jet of burning fluid.
<BR>
<BR> Sounds like a ode from the group "Moody Blues " now all you need is some
<BR>music to go with it. :)
<BR>
<BR> &nbsp;Dave</BLOCKQUOTE>
<BR>
<BR> </FONT></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0ADF_01C56B69.46FE5BA0--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 20312 invoked from network); 5 Aug 2001 18:48:37 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 5 Aug 2001 18:48:37 -0000
Received: (qmail 11563 invoked from network); 5 Aug 2001 18:50:19 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 5 Aug 2001 18:50:19 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA00437; Sun, 5 Aug 2001 11:45:20 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 98525 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 5 Aug 2001 18:45:18 +0000
Received: from localhost (rcalkins@localhost) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with          ESMTP id LAA00421; Sun, 5 Aug 2001 11:45:13 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.LNX.4.10.10108051144160.32582-100000@itc.uci.edu>
Date:         Sun, 5 Aug 2001 11:45:13 -0700
Reply-To: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Ode of Static Testing Large Rocket Motors
Comments: To: MONTMACH@AOL.COM
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <42.1897ba40.289eed2b@aol.com>

On Sun, 5 Aug 2001 MONTMACH@AOL.COM wrote:
> >  Sounds like a ode from the group "Moody Blues " now all you need is some
> > music to go with it. :)
Funny you should mention it.  The Moody Blues are in town today.  I was
going to go but decided to get some work done instead.

Ray

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 13897 invoked from network); 5 Aug 2001 19:07:12 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 5 Aug 2001 19:07:12 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: (qmail 16224 invoked from network); 5 Aug 2001 19:08:54 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 5 Aug 2001 19:08:54 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA00649; Sun, 5 Aug 2001 12:01:05 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 98579 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 5 Aug 2001 19:01:03 +0000
Received: from imo-r10.mx.aol.com (imo-r10.mx.aol.com [152.163.225.106]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA00634 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Sun, 5 Aug 2001 12:01:02 -0700
Received: from MONTMACH@aol.com by imo-r10.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v31.9.) id          w.15.182f55c4 (3959) for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Sun, 5 Aug 2001          15:00:55 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0AE4_01C56B69.470A4280"
X-Mailer: AOL 6.0 for Windows US sub 10531
Message-ID:  <15.182f55c4.289ef1e7@aol.com>
Date:         Sun, 5 Aug 2001 15:00:55 EDT
Reply-To: <MONTMACH@AOL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <MONTMACH@AOL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Ode of Static Testing Large Rocket Motors
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0AE4_01C56B69.470A4280
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit




> Funny you should mention it.  The Moody Blues are in town today.  I was
> going to go but decided to get some work done instead.
>
     Hello Ray,
  You should go, i saw them in the '80's, one of my favorite songs was
"Higher and Higher".  a line from the ode was "The power a billion butterfly
sneezes"with the sound of a large rocket motor in the back ground.

 Dave


------=_NextPart_000_0AE4_01C56B69.470A4280
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<HTML><FONT FACE=arial,helvetica><FONT  SIZE=2>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR><BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE style="BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px">Funny you should mention it. &nbsp;The Moody Blues are in town today. &nbsp;I was
<BR>going to go but decided to get some work done instead.
<BR></BLOCKQUOTE>
<BR> &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Hello Ray,
<BR> &nbsp;You should go, i saw them in the '80's, one of my favorite songs was
<BR>"Higher and Higher". &nbsp;a line from the ode was "The power a billion butterfly
<BR>sneezes"with the sound of a large rocket motor in the back ground.
<BR>
<BR> Dave
<BR></FONT></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0AE4_01C56B69.470A4280--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 14588 invoked from network); 5 Aug 2001 19:07:27 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 5 Aug 2001 19:07:27 -0000
Received: (qmail 19385 invoked from network); 5 Aug 2001 19:09:43 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 5 Aug 2001 19:09:43 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA00540; Sun, 5 Aug 2001 11:52:02 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 98556 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 5 Aug 2001 18:51:57 +0000
Received: from localhost (rcalkins@localhost) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with          ESMTP id LAA00525; Sun, 5 Aug 2001 11:51:56 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.LNX.4.10.10108051147470.32582-100000@itc.uci.edu>
Date:         Sun, 5 Aug 2001 11:51:56 -0700
Reply-To: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
Subject:      Re: [AR] US Standard Atmosphere - 1962
Comments: To: Anthony Colette <Rockitman@SPRINTMAIL.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <3B6CE3FD.1FA17024@sprintmail.com>

Hello Tony,

On Sat, 4 Aug 2001, Anthony Colette wrote:

> I have hard copies of very large tables listing the 1962 ATM properties and I
> wanted to avoid entering all of it by hand into excel to generate the
> polynomials.
I have just uploaded an excel spreadsheet that includes a standard
atmosphere look-up table.  At least you won't have to enter the values by
hand.

You can download it from:
http://www.blastzone.com/arocket/uploads.asp

Ray

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 480 invoked from network); 5 Aug 2001 19:34:38 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 5 Aug 2001 19:34:38 -0000
Received: (qmail 29125 invoked from network); 5 Aug 2001 19:36:49 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 5 Aug 2001 19:36:49 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA00862; Sun, 5 Aug 2001 12:31:01 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 98619 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 5 Aug 2001 19:31:00 +0000
Received: from castor.ridgenet.net (IDENT:root@castor.ridgenet.net          [199.120.150.29]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA00847          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 5 Aug 2001 12:30:59 -0700
Received: from kristinscomp (pm004.ridgenet.net [204.154.246.4]) by          castor.ridgenet.net (8.11.0/8.11.0) with SMTP id f75JOCS30741; Sun, 5          Aug 2001 12:24:12 -0700
References: <90.181cfbb2.289c2e1c@aol.com>  <3B6CE3FD.1FA17024@sprintmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <004101c11de6$5aeab7a0$1b30fea9@kristinscomp>
Date:         Sun, 5 Aug 2001 12:39:33 -0700
Reply-To: "Kristin & David Hall" <thehalls@RIDGENET.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Kristin & David Hall" <thehalls@RIDGENET.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] US Standard Atmosphere - 1962
Comments: To: Anthony Colette <Rockitman@SPRINTMAIL.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

> Dave,
> Your program may have the info I am looking for but I dont know the first
> thing about Fortran.

Huh?  There's no Fortran in it.  It's ANSI compliant C.

> I have hard copies of very large tables listing the 1962 ATM properties
and I
> wanted to avoid entering all of it by hand into excel to generate the
> polynomials.  It would take several weeks.  I wanted to generate curve
fits so
> I could compress the massive amount of data tables into compact, easy to
use
> polynomials.

In which case I'll tell you that the equations you'll find in my routine are
about as concise as any you'll find anywhere (while maintaining any kind of
accuracy, that is).

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 5845 invoked from network); 5 Aug 2001 19:36:17 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 5 Aug 2001 19:36:17 -0000
Received: (qmail 20274 invoked from network); 5 Aug 2001 19:38:53 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 5 Aug 2001 19:38:53 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA00822; Sun, 5 Aug 2001 12:27:22 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 98608 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 5 Aug 2001 19:27:13 +0000
Received: from castor.ridgenet.net (IDENT:root@castor.ridgenet.net          [199.120.150.29]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA00804          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 5 Aug 2001 12:27:12 -0700
Received: from kristinscomp (pm004.ridgenet.net [204.154.246.4]) by          castor.ridgenet.net (8.11.0/8.11.0) with SMTP id f75JKFS30494; Sun, 5          Aug 2001 12:20:15 -0700
References:  <01d701c11d7e$427da5a0$8300a8c0@olmpi1.wa.home.com>             <002301c11dca$37f83fe0$1b30fea9@kristinscomp>             <020a01c11dd0$708bd5a0$8300a8c0@olmpi1.wa.home.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0AE9_01C56B69.470C8C70"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <003101c11de5$cd9513a0$1b30fea9@kristinscomp>
Date:         Sun, 5 Aug 2001 12:34:47 -0700
Reply-To: "Kristin & David Hall" <thehalls@RIDGENET.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Kristin & David Hall" <thehalls@RIDGENET.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] non streamlined fins
Comments: To: Tomm Aldridge <taldridge@home.com>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0AE9_01C56B69.470C8C70
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable


But what was the assumed fin cross section?  Depending upon what it was, =
I'm betting that your barely supersonic bird would no longer be =
supersonic.

--
Dave and/or Kristin Hall
  ----- Original Message -----=20
  From: Tomm Aldridge=20
  To: Kristin & David Hall ; AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU=20
  Sent: Sunday, August 05, 2001 10:02 AM
  Subject: Re: [AR] non streamlined fins


  Thanks Dave.  The sim results are:
  Vmax =3D 1259 ft/sec
  Altitude =3D 13,383 ft
  Time to Apogee =3D 26.50
  M1315 commercial motor
  =20
  Fin span root to tip =3D4"
  Fin root =3D 8"
  Fin tip =3D 4"
  LE sweep =3D 26.4 deg
  TE sweep =3D -26.4 deg
  Fin thickness =3D 0.280
  Fin Material =3D Graphite / Epoxy composite (Shadow autoclaved sheet =
stock)


    ----- Original Message -----=20
    From: Kristin & David Hall=20
    To: Tomm Aldridge ; AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU=20
    Sent: Sunday, August 05, 2001 9:18 AM
    Subject: Re: [AR] non streamlined fins



    Every once in a great while you may get bit in the butt, but most of =
the time a blunt leading/trailing fin edge won't do anything more than =
raise drag through the roof (You sure it's going sonic ;)?  For the life =
of me I can't remember which one it was, but there was a small tactical =
system (I want to say either Tiny Tim, but am not sure of that) that =
just used stamped sheet metal for fins - no tapering at all!  =
Admittedly, you won't see anything like that anymore but the point =
stands.

    --
    Dave and/or Kristin Hall
      ----- Original Message -----=20
      From: Tomm Aldridge=20
      To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU=20
      Sent: Sunday, August 05, 2001 12:14 AM
      Subject: [AR] non streamlined fins


      All,
      =20
      I have this L3 and EX capable airframe about ready to go and it =
uses Shadow Composite's .280 carbon/epoxy for the fins.  The stuff is a =
bear to work and I am thinking that I will fly without streamlining the =
fins' LE or TE; just leave them square.  The rocket will go sonic.  Will =
there be any real issues with turbulance or shocks generated by teh =
square fin LE or TE?  Anything else I may have missed that would cause =
me to really want to go tto the trouble to streamline these pieces of =
rock hard material?
      =20
      Thanks
      =20
      Tomm

------=_NextPart_000_0AE9_01C56B69.470C8C70
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META content=3D"text/html; charset=3Diso-8859-1" =
http-equiv=3DContent-Type>
<META content=3D"MSHTML 5.00.2614.3500" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>But what was the assumed fin cross =
section?&nbsp;=20
Depending upon what it was, I'm betting that your barely supersonic bird =
would=20
no longer be supersonic.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>--<BR>Dave and/or Kristin Hall</DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE dir=3Dltr=20
style=3D"BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: =
0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; PADDING-RIGHT: 0px">
  <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial">----- Original Message ----- </DIV>
  <DIV=20
  style=3D"BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; FONT: 10pt arial; font-color: =
black"><B>From:</B>=20
  <A href=3D"mailto:taldridge@home.com" title=3Dtaldridge@home.com>Tomm =
Aldridge</A>=20
  </DIV>
  <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A=20
  href=3D"mailto:thehalls@ridgenet.net" =
title=3Dthehalls@ridgenet.net>Kristin &amp;=20
  David Hall</A> ; <A href=3D"mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU"=20
  title=3DAROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU</A> </DIV>
  <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> Sunday, August 05, 2001 =
10:02=20
  AM</DIV>
  <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> Re: [AR] non =
streamlined=20
  fins</DIV>
  <DIV><BR></DIV>
  <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Thanks Dave.&nbsp; The sim results=20
  are:</FONT></DIV>
  <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Vmax =3D 1259 ft/sec</FONT></DIV>
  <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Altitude =3D 13,383 ft</FONT></DIV>
  <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Time to Apogee =3D 26.50</FONT></DIV>
  <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>M1315 commercial motor</FONT></DIV>
  <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
  <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Fin span root to tip =
=3D4"</FONT></DIV>
  <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Fin root =3D 8"</FONT></DIV>
  <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Fin tip =3D 4"</FONT></DIV>
  <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>LE sweep =3D 26.4 deg</FONT></DIV>
  <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>TE sweep =3D -26.4 deg</FONT></DIV>
  <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Fin thickness =3D 0.280</FONT></DIV>
  <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Fin Material =3D Graphite / Epoxy =
composite (Shadow=20
  autoclaved sheet stock)</FONT></DIV>
  <DIV><BR></DIV>
  <BLOCKQUOTE dir=3Dltr=20
  style=3D"BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; =
MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; PADDING-RIGHT: 0px">
    <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial">----- Original Message ----- </DIV>
    <DIV=20
    style=3D"BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; FONT: 10pt arial; font-color: =
black"><B>From:</B>=20
    <A href=3D"mailto:thehalls@ridgenet.net" =
title=3Dthehalls@ridgenet.net>Kristin=20
    &amp; David Hall</A> </DIV>
    <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A =
href=3D"mailto:taldridge@HOME.COM"=20
    title=3Dtaldridge@HOME.COM>Tomm Aldridge</A> ; <A=20
    href=3D"mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU"=20
    title=3DAROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU</A> </DIV>
    <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> Sunday, August 05, 2001 =
9:18=20
    AM</DIV>
    <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> Re: [AR] non =
streamlined=20
    fins</DIV>
    <DIV><BR></DIV>
    <DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
    <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Every once in a great while you may =
get bit in=20
    the butt, but most of the time a blunt leading/trailing fin edge =
won't do=20
    anything more than raise drag through the roof (You sure it's going =
sonic=20
    ;)?&nbsp; For the life of me I can't remember which one it was, but =
there=20
    was a small tactical system (I want to say&nbsp;either Tiny Tim, but =
am not=20
    sure of that) that just used stamped sheet metal for fins - no =
tapering at=20
    all!&nbsp; Admittedly, you won't see anything like that anymore but =
the=20
    point stands.</FONT></DIV>
    <DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
    <DIV>--<BR>Dave and/or Kristin Hall</DIV>
    <BLOCKQUOTE=20
    style=3D"BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; =
MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; PADDING-RIGHT: 0px">
      <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial">----- Original Message ----- =
</DIV>
      <DIV=20
      style=3D"BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; FONT: 10pt arial; font-color: =
black"><B>From:</B>=20
      <A href=3D"mailto:taldridge@HOME.COM" =
title=3Dtaldridge@HOME.COM>Tomm=20
      Aldridge</A> </DIV>
      <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A=20
      href=3D"mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU"=20
      title=3DAROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU</A> </DIV>
      <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> Sunday, August 05, =
2001 12:14=20
      AM</DIV>
      <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> [AR] non =
streamlined=20
      fins</DIV>
      <DIV><BR></DIV>
      <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>All,</FONT></DIV>
      <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
      <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>I have this L3 and EX capable =
airframe about=20
      ready to go and it uses Shadow Composite's .280 carbon/epoxy for =
the=20
      fins.&nbsp; The stuff is a bear to work and I am thinking that I =
will fly=20
      without streamlining the fins' LE or TE; just leave them =
square.&nbsp; The=20
      rocket will go sonic.&nbsp; Will there be any real issues with =
turbulance=20
      or shocks generated by teh square fin LE or TE?&nbsp; Anything =
else I may=20
      have missed that would cause me to really want to go tto the =
trouble to=20
      streamline these pieces of rock hard material?</FONT></DIV>
      <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
      <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Thanks</FONT></DIV>
      <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
      <DIV><FONT face=3DArial=20
size=3D2>Tomm</FONT></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE></BLOCKQUOTE></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY><=
/HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0AE9_01C56B69.470C8C70--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 3518 invoked from network); 5 Aug 2001 20:06:14 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 5 Aug 2001 20:06:14 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 7168 invoked from network); 5 Aug 2001 20:08:26 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 5 Aug 2001 20:08:26 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA01140; Sun, 5 Aug 2001 12:56:35 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 98661 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 5 Aug 2001 19:56:29 +0000
Received: from harrier.mail.pas.earthlink.net (harrier.mail.pas.earthlink.net          [207.217.121.12]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA01125          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 5 Aug 2001 12:56:28 -0700
Received: from sprintmail.com (pool0162.cvx18-bradley.dialup.earthlink.net          [209.179.238.162]) by harrier.mail.pas.earthlink.net          (EL-8_9_3_3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id MAA27361 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>;          Sun, 5 Aug 2001 12:56:27 -0700 (PDT)
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.74 [en] (Win98; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <90.181cfbb2.289c2e1c@aol.com>  <3B6CE3FD.1FA17024@sprintmail.com>            <004101c11de6$5aeab7a0$1b30fea9@kristinscomp>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B6CF7BE.569A0F19@sprintmail.com>
Date:         Sun, 5 Aug 2001 00:37:34 -0700
Reply-To: "Anthony Colette" <Rockitman@SPRINTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Anthony Colette" <Rockitman@SPRINTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] US Standard Atmosphere - 1962
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

> > Dave,
> > Your program may have the info I am looking for but I dont know the first
> > thing about Fortran.
>
> Huh?  There's no Fortran in it.  It's ANSI compliant C.

Oh well.  Just goes to show how programming language illiterate I am.  I hope to
change that some day soon.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 17670 invoked from network); 5 Aug 2001 20:11:21 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 5 Aug 2001 20:11:21 -0000
Received: (qmail 8880 invoked from network); 5 Aug 2001 20:13:33 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 5 Aug 2001 20:13:33 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA01223; Sun, 5 Aug 2001 13:08:36 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 98680 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 5 Aug 2001 20:08:29 +0000
Received: from localhost (rcalkins@localhost) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with          ESMTP id NAA01208; Sun, 5 Aug 2001 13:08:28 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.LNX.4.10.10108051304190.1160-100000@itc.uci.edu>
Date:         Sun, 5 Aug 2001 13:08:28 -0700
Reply-To: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
Subject:      Re: [AR] US Standard Atmosphere - 1962
Comments: To: Anthony Colette <Rockitman@SPRINTMAIL.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <3B6CF7BE.569A0F19@sprintmail.com>

I have two things on the website for atmospheric modeling:
A javascript browser program for atmospheric properties
http://arocket.itc.uci.edu/software/online/atmospheric.html

A table and graph of atmospheric values.
http://arocket.itc.uci.edu/library/Environment/Atmosphere/

Ray

On Sun, 5 Aug 2001, Anthony Colette wrote:

> > > Dave,
> > > Your program may have the info I am looking for but I dont know the first
> > > thing about Fortran.
> >
> > Huh?  There's no Fortran in it.  It's ANSI compliant C.
>
> Oh well.  Just goes to show how programming language illiterate I am.  I hope to
> change that some day soon.
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 15590 invoked from network); 5 Aug 2001 20:32:17 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 5 Aug 2001 20:32:17 -0000
Received: (qmail 26025 invoked from network); 5 Aug 2001 20:34:54 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 5 Aug 2001 20:34:54 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA01324; Sun, 5 Aug 2001 13:24:33 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 98703 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 5 Aug 2001 20:24:30 +0000
Received: from smtp-out.nrtc.net (host-216-163-120-25.nrtc.net [216.163.120.25]          (may be forged)) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA01309          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 5 Aug 2001 13:24:29 -0700
Received: from foy (dial-12-21-155-26.wfeca.net [12.21.155.26]) by          smtp-out.nrtc.net (8.9.3/8.9.1) with SMTP id QAA18541 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 5 Aug 2001 16:24:24 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0AEC_01C56B69.470C8C70"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <000a01c11deb$dc5eb980$1a9b150c@foy>
Date:         Sun, 5 Aug 2001 15:18:57 -0500
Reply-To: "foy" <foy@WFECA.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "foy" <foy@WFECA.NET>
Subject:      [AR] north florida
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0AEC_01C56B69.470C8C70
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

      Is anyone around Marianna Fl on this list. If so please contact me =
foy@wfeca.net .    Foy

------=_NextPart_000_0AEC_01C56B69.470C8C70
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Diso-8859-1">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 5.50.4134.600" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Is =
anyone around=20
Marianna Fl on this list. If so please contact me <A=20
href=3D"mailto:foy@wfeca.net">foy@wfeca.net</A> .&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;=20
Foy</FONT></DIV></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0AEC_01C56B69.470C8C70--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 1370 invoked from network); 5 Aug 2001 20:49:07 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 5 Aug 2001 20:49:07 -0000
Received: (qmail 16536 invoked from network); 5 Aug 2001 20:51:22 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 5 Aug 2001 20:51:22 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA01451; Sun, 5 Aug 2001 13:42:59 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 98734 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 5 Aug 2001 20:42:54 +0000
Received: from femail9.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail9.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.0.95.89]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA01436 for          <arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 5 Aug 2001 13:42:54 -0700
Received: from cc334751a ([65.13.214.65]) by femail9.sdc1.sfba.home.com          (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20 201-229-121-120-20010223) with SMTP id          <20010805204242.TKAQ7798.femail9.sdc1.sfba.home.com@cc334751a> for          <arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 5 Aug 2001 13:42:42 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0AEF_01C56B69.47189A60"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2462.0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <004e01c11def$334602a0$6401a8c0@home.com>
Date:         Sun, 5 Aug 2001 14:42:53 -0600
Reply-To: "Brian Kosko" <bkosko1@HOME.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Brian Kosko" <bkosko1@HOME.COM>
Subject:      [AR] Material Science SWAG needed
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0AEF_01C56B69.47189A60
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

I'm looking to make a single shot N motor using some fiberglass tube =
that I have. Trying to see how cheaply I can make an N motor. The =
trouble is it isn't standard tubing and I haven't a clue about it's =
properties: tensile strength, etc.

I'll tell what I know about it and you're free to SWAG from there. And =
no, I won't hold you to any of the answers. I was told the tubes were =
chaff dispensers used by the U.S. Navy. They certainly look more rugged =
than any G10 tubing I've seen. The tube O.D. os 4 1/8 in and the I.D. is =
3 7/8 in. The wall thickness is 5/32 in and there are three distinct =
layers. The inner layer is 3/32 and looks like G10, albiet with some =
large threadlike fibers. The middle layer is 1/32 and is black. It's =
probably some kind of carbon layer. The outer layer is 1/32 and is green =
G10 that is obviously wrapped 'around' the tube. It has large, =
string-like fibers.

Once again, any and all guesses are welcomed.

Brian

------=_NextPart_000_0AEF_01C56B69.47189A60
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Diso-8859-1">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 6.00.2462.0" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>I'm looking to make a single shot N =
motor using=20
some fiberglass tube that I have. Trying to see how cheaply I can make =
an N=20
motor. The trouble is it isn't standard tubing and I haven't a clue =
about it's=20
properties: tensile strength, etc.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>I'll tell what I know about it and =
you're free to=20
SWAG from there. And no, I won't hold you to any of the answers. I was =
told the=20
tubes were chaff dispensers used by the U.S. Navy. They certainly look =
more=20
rugged than any G10 tubing I've seen. The tube O.D. os 4 1/8 in and the =
I.D. is=20
3 7/8 in. The wall thickness is 5/32 in and there are three distinct =
layers. The=20
inner layer is 3/32 and looks like G10, albiet with some large =
threadlike=20
fibers. The middle layer is 1/32 and is black. It's probably some kind =
of carbon=20
layer. The outer layer is 1/32 and is green G10 that is obviously =
wrapped=20
'around' the tube. It has large, string-like fibers.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Once again, any and all guesses are=20
welcomed.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Brian</FONT></DIV></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0AEF_01C56B69.47189A60--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 16254 invoked from network); 5 Aug 2001 21:39:01 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 5 Aug 2001 21:39:01 -0000
Received: (qmail 3373 invoked from network); 5 Aug 2001 21:41:38 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 5 Aug 2001 21:41:38 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA01685; Sun, 5 Aug 2001 14:32:26 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 98780 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 5 Aug 2001 21:32:23 +0000
Received: from granger.mail.mindspring.net (granger.mail.mindspring.net          [207.69.200.148]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA01670          for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Sun, 5 Aug 2001 14:32:22 -0700
Received: from pavilion (user-33qt9j2.dialup.mindspring.com [199.174.166.98])          by granger.mail.mindspring.net (8.9.3/8.8.5) with SMTP id RAA16066          for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Sun, 5 Aug 2001 17:32:20 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="Windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <002101c11df6$9b848c40$62a6aec7@pavilion>
Date:         Sun, 5 Aug 2001 16:35:53 -0500
Reply-To: "Michael Dilsaver" <michaeldilsaver@MINDSPRING.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Michael Dilsaver" <michaeldilsaver@MINDSPRING.COM>
Subject:      [AR] PGI rocket competition
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

I'd like to call attention to a rocket competition that's probably on the
edge of OT:

http://www.pgi.org/rules.htm#D2

What's the Orv Carlisle Rocketman Trophy?

Mike Dilsaver

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 14520 invoked from network); 5 Aug 2001 21:49:13 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 5 Aug 2001 21:49:13 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 3958 invoked from network); 5 Aug 2001 21:51:51 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 5 Aug 2001 21:51:51 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA01745; Sun, 5 Aug 2001 14:40:32 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 98795 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 5 Aug 2001 21:40:30 +0000
Received: from inet03.citec.qld.gov.au (firewall-user@inet03.citec.qld.gov.au          [203.5.10.10]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA01730          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 5 Aug 2001 14:40:28 -0700
Received: by inet03.citec.qld.gov.au; id HAA18270; Mon, 6 Aug 2001 07:40:25          +1000 (EST)
Received: from citec.com.au(pcux.citec.qld.gov.au 147.132.17.12) by          inet03.citec.qld.gov.au via smap (V2.0) id xma018230; Mon, 6 Aug 01          07:40:21 +1000
Received: from CITEC-Message_Server by citec.com.au with Novell_GroupWise; Mon,          06 Aug 2001 07:39:56 +1000
X-Mailer: Novell GroupWise 5.5.4
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by itc.uci.edu id OAA01731
Message-ID:  <sb6e49cc.063@citec.com.au>
Date:         Mon, 6 Aug 2001 07:39:38 +1000
Reply-To: "Des Bromilow" <Des.Bromilow@CITEC.COM.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Des Bromilow" <Des.Bromilow@CITEC.COM.AU>
Subject:      [AR] Ignitor Q for AP motors
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

HI,

I thought I had an ignitor design worked out the other day, but in flight it appears to have failed.

I used 38g Nichrome to make a 3 ohm bridge which was lightly dipped in Nitrocelluose (Dope) and then dusted with 4Fg BP as a prime. I then redipped in NC and stuck shavings of Aerotech T propellant, and the head of a copperhead ignitor on it.

I tested several and they all appeared to work fine off a half flat 9V alkline battery. (bench tested only... ran out time for a single stage test)

Day of the flight (see posting on rmr if you're intersted) and the sustainer failed to light off a fresh battery.

Things I noticed, the nichrome bridge had increased in resistance overnight (built the ignitor at 3am, flew it at 4pm same day) from 2.8 ohm to 4.1 ohm.
Leads were 26g (0.040mm) copper telephony wire, close twisted. Nichrome was applied as per the article on ROL a while ago.

Anyone else building their own ignitors for airstarting composites?
How are you doing it?
I now (day after) have a small amount of Si metal fines for adding to an ignitor mix.
I have a small quantity of various chemicals including KNO3, KClO3,C,Al,Mg,S, plus sugar, 4Fg BP, and NC.


Suggestions? (bear in mind I'm limited to G or less at this stage, therefore the ignitor has to pass through the nozzle of a F)


Thanks,
Des

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 28597 invoked from network); 5 Aug 2001 22:13:45 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 5 Aug 2001 22:13:45 -0000
Received: (qmail 5810 invoked from network); 5 Aug 2001 22:16:00 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 5 Aug 2001 22:16:00 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA02116; Sun, 5 Aug 2001 15:11:23 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 98847 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 5 Aug 2001 22:11:22 +0000
Received: from dune.gnc.net (root@dune.gnc.net [207.203.72.4]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA02101 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun,          5 Aug 2001 15:11:21 -0700
Received: from beowulf (sw2-2.gnc.net [207.203.72.82]) by dune.gnc.net          (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id SAA24901 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 5          Aug 2001 18:11:17 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <LPBBKJMJEOFKAMFJJNNHCEEMCGAA.landofgrey@gnc.net>
Date:         Sun, 5 Aug 2001 18:11:06 -0400
Reply-To: <landofgrey@gnc.net>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Matthew Travis" <landofgrey@gnc.net>
Subject:      Re: [AR] north florida
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <000a01c11deb$dc5eb980$1a9b150c@foy>

Hope you don't get flooded out from Barry tonight.

Marianna? I've been there on my way to/from Maxico City Beach. I don't think
there are many (any?) people from Florida on the list. I'm from the Brevard
County/Cape Canaveral area and I don't know of anyone else down in this part
of the state who's on the list.

So, anyone else form Florida?

-Matt

-----Original Message-----
From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU]On Behalf
Of foy
Sent: Sunday, August 05, 2001 4:19 PM
To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
Subject: [AR] north florida


      Is anyone around Marianna Fl on this list. If so please contact me
foy@wfeca.net .    Foy

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 25677 invoked from network); 5 Aug 2001 22:33:16 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 5 Aug 2001 22:33:16 -0000
Received: (qmail 9582 invoked from network); 5 Aug 2001 22:35:32 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 5 Aug 2001 22:35:32 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA02060; Sun, 5 Aug 2001 15:07:20 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 98833 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 5 Aug 2001 22:07:13 +0000
Received: from localhost (rcalkins@localhost) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with          ESMTP id PAA02045; Sun, 5 Aug 2001 15:07:12 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.LNX.4.10.10108051501580.1195-100000@itc.uci.edu>
Date:         Sun, 5 Aug 2001 15:07:12 -0700
Reply-To: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
Subject:      Re: [AR] PGI rocket competition
Comments: To: Michael Dilsaver <michaeldilsaver@MINDSPRING.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <002101c11df6$9b848c40$62a6aec7@pavilion>

On Sun, 5 Aug 2001, Michael Dilsaver wrote:

> I'd like to call attention to a rocket competition that's probably on the
> edge of OT:
>
> http://www.pgi.org/rules.htm#D2
I like it except for this one thing:
"Level 4 (Unlimited):  Maximum rocket motor i.d. is 1 1/2"."

Wait a minute, what is this?
"Division 2-B: Best Large Rocket
Rocket motor bore must be larger than 7/8"."

How much would they freak if somebody showed up with a 12" diameter
rocket?  Heh heh heh!

Ray

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 8640 invoked from network); 5 Aug 2001 23:19:12 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 5 Aug 2001 23:19:12 -0000
Received: (qmail 29729 invoked from network); 5 Aug 2001 23:20:52 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 5 Aug 2001 23:20:52 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA02410; Sun, 5 Aug 2001 16:02:40 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 98918 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 5 Aug 2001 23:02:33 +0000
Received: from wrench.toolcity.net (root@wrench.toolcity.net [208.0.188.2]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA02394; Sun, 5 Aug 2001          16:02:32 -0700
Received: from [63.169.101.177]          (dap-63-169-101-177.meadville-tnt-1.pa.toolcity.net [63.169.101.177])          by wrench.toolcity.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id TAA23106; Sun, 5          Aug 2001 19:02:28 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <v01510100b7938d812494@[208.22.189.7]>
Date:         Sun, 5 Aug 2001 19:04:48 -0500
Reply-To: "al bradley" <abradley@TOOLCITY.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "al bradley" <abradley@TOOLCITY.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] 2[AR] US Standard Atmosphere - 1962
Comments: To: Ray Calkins <rcalkins@ITC.UCI.EDU>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

>I have two things on the website for atmospheric modeling:
>A javascript browser program for atmospheric properties
>http://arocket.itc.uci.edu/software/online/atmospheric.html
>
>A table and graph of atmospheric values.
>http://arocket.itc.uci.edu/library/Environment/Atmosphere/
>
>Ray
------------------------
I never thought I had to consider anything about atmosphere except its
pressure at sea leavel. So you Physics-202 types are setting me off to
learn more. Before I start to reference "U.S. Standard Atmosphere" from
scratch can some of you tell me the significance of this term for rocketry,
what we are talking about?

Thanks to any and all,
al bradley

------------------------------------------------------------------
Can you live Life with this?: "Unless there is a law, an agreement, or a
long-standing custom, No one `Deserves' Anything -- Either Good or Bad!"

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 27126 invoked from network); 5 Aug 2001 23:25:18 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 5 Aug 2001 23:25:18 -0000
Received: (qmail 895 invoked from network); 5 Aug 2001 23:26:58 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 5 Aug 2001 23:26:58 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA02510; Sun, 5 Aug 2001 16:19:36 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 98937 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 5 Aug 2001 23:19:27 +0000
Received: from smtp-out.nrtc.net (host-216-163-120-25.nrtc.net [216.163.120.25]          (may be forged)) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA02495          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 5 Aug 2001 16:19:27 -0700
Received: from foy (dial-12-21-155-21.wfeca.net [12.21.155.21]) by          smtp-out.nrtc.net (8.9.3/8.9.1) with SMTP id TAA31845 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 5 Aug 2001 19:19:21 -0400
References:  <sb6e49cc.063@citec.com.au>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <000801c11e04$49e918c0$159b150c@foy>
Date:         Sun, 5 Aug 2001 18:13:49 -0500
Reply-To: "foy" <foy@WFECA.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "foy" <foy@WFECA.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Ignitor Q for AP motors
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

     Try disolving smokeless powder with acetone. It makes tar that will
harden. I tried this for a fuel not an igniter  it shrank too much for fuel
though it burned pretty good.                            Foy
----- Original Message -----
From: "Des Bromilow" <Des.Bromilow@CITEC.COM.AU>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Sunday, August 05, 2001 4:39 PM
Subject: [AR] Ignitor Q for AP motors


> HI,
>
> I thought I had an ignitor design worked out the other day, but in flight
it appears to have failed.
>
> I used 38g Nichrome to make a 3 ohm bridge which was lightly dipped in
Nitrocelluose (Dope) and then dusted with 4Fg BP as a prime. I then redipped
in NC and stuck shavings of Aerotech T propellant, and the head of a
copperhead ignitor on it.
>
> I tested several and they all appeared to work fine off a half flat 9V
alkline battery. (bench tested only... ran out time for a single stage test)
>
> Day of the flight (see posting on rmr if you're intersted) and the
sustainer failed to light off a fresh battery.
>
> Things I noticed, the nichrome bridge had increased in resistance
overnight (built the ignitor at 3am, flew it at 4pm same day) from 2.8 ohm
to 4.1 ohm.
> Leads were 26g (0.040mm) copper telephony wire, close twisted. Nichrome
was applied as per the article on ROL a while ago.
>
> Anyone else building their own ignitors for airstarting composites?
> How are you doing it?
> I now (day after) have a small amount of Si metal fines for adding to an
ignitor mix.
> I have a small quantity of various chemicals including KNO3,
KClO3,C,Al,Mg,S, plus sugar, 4Fg BP, and NC.
>
>
> Suggestions? (bear in mind I'm limited to G or less at this stage,
therefore the ignitor has to pass through the nozzle of a F)
>
>
> Thanks,
> Des
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 3824 invoked from network); 5 Aug 2001 23:27:23 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 5 Aug 2001 23:27:23 -0000
Received: (qmail 22013 invoked from network); 5 Aug 2001 23:29:39 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 5 Aug 2001 23:29:39 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA02581; Sun, 5 Aug 2001 16:24:16 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 98956 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 5 Aug 2001 23:24:14 +0000
Received: from spsystems.net (spsystems.net [209.47.149.227]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA02565 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Sun,          5 Aug 2001 16:24:14 -0700
Received: (from henry@localhost) by spsystems.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id TAA22743;          Sun, 5 Aug 2001 19:23:24 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010805191722.22718A-100000@spsystems.net>
Date:         Sun, 5 Aug 2001 19:23:24 -0400
Reply-To: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] 2[AR] US Standard Atmosphere - 1962
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <v01510100b7938d812494@[208.22.189.7]>

On Sun, 5 Aug 2001, al bradley wrote:
> I never thought I had to consider anything about atmosphere except its
> pressure at sea leavel. So you Physics-202 types are setting me off to
> learn more. Before I start to reference "U.S. Standard Atmosphere" from
> scratch can some of you tell me the significance of this term for rocketry,
> what we are talking about?

The issue is, just how do the pressure, temperature, density, and
composition of the atmosphere vary with altitude?  This is actually
somewhat variable, with time and location, but the variations are small
enough that they usually aren't too important.  So for performance
calculations, what you want to use is a "standard" atmosphere, precisely
defined so that calculation results can be compared easily, corresponding
to average conditions.  There are several standard atmospheres, and
several editions of some of them, but the differences are quite small
except at very high altitudes (where we have learned a lot from satellite
data over the last 40 years).

The official standard atmospheres are defined by fairly large tables,
which you are supposed to interpolate within.  An alternative is to try
to fit a curve, or several curves, to the data.

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 26247 invoked from network); 5 Aug 2001 23:53:25 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 5 Aug 2001 23:53:25 -0000
Received: (qmail 9710 invoked from network); 5 Aug 2001 23:55:06 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 5 Aug 2001 23:55:06 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA02941; Sun, 5 Aug 2001 16:51:33 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 99038 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 5 Aug 2001 23:51:26 +0000
Received: from albqpop1.albq.uswest.net (albqpop1.albq.uswest.net          [207.108.240.1]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id QAA02921          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 5 Aug 2001 16:51:25 -0700
Received: (qmail 40183 invoked by alias); 5 Aug 2001 23:50:54 -0000
Delivered-To: fixup-AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU@fixme
Received: (qmail 40170 invoked by uid 0); 5 Aug 2001 23:50:53 -0000
Received: from cc898542-a.prdise1.nm.home.com (HELO cc898542a) (65.7.151.152)          by albqpop1.albq.uswest.net with SMTP; 5 Aug 2001 23:50:53 -0000
References:  <sb6e49cc.063@citec.com.au>  <000801c11e04$49e918c0$159b150c@foy>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <005201c11e0a$051d5840$0100a8c0@prdise1.nm.home.com>
Date:         Sun, 5 Aug 2001 17:54:51 -0600
Reply-To: "Pax" <darkspunge@USWEST.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Pax" <darkspunge@USWEST.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Ignitor Q for AP motors
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

>      Try disolving smokeless powder with acetone. It makes tar that will
> harden. I tried this for a fuel not an igniter  it shrank too much for
fuel
> though it burned pretty good.                            Foy

You just described NC lacquer.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 20353 invoked from network); 6 Aug 2001 00:10:25 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 6 Aug 2001 00:10:25 -0000
Received: (qmail 28031 invoked from network); 6 Aug 2001 00:12:39 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 6 Aug 2001 00:12:39 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA03079; Sun, 5 Aug 2001 17:05:32 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 99070 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 6 Aug 2001 00:05:30 +0000
Received: from conint.consumersinterest.com (consumersinterest.com          [207.195.143.118] (may be forged)) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with          ESMTP id RAA03064 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 5 Aug 2001 17:05:29          -0700
Received: from greg [208.187.15.136] by conint.consumersinterest.com          (SMTPD32-6.04) id A2A219AD0132; Sun, 05 Aug 2001 17:19:46 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <NDBBIBAMIMKJPANDCAHGCEOCEPAA.greg@blastzone.com>
Date:         Sun, 5 Aug 2001 17:18:36 -0700
Reply-To: <greg@blastzone.com>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Greg Deputy" <greg@blastzone.com>
Subject:      Re: [AR] aRocket Uploads
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <Pine.LNX.4.10.10108051127040.32582-100000@itc.uci.edu>

My pleasure!  Also, you dont need the uploads.asp on the end of the url, all
you need to type to get into the uploads area is

http://blastzone.com/arocket/




> -----Original Message-----
> From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@itc.uci.edu]On
> Behalf Of Ray Calkins
> Sent: Sunday, August 05, 2001 11:29 AM
> To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
> Subject: Re: [AR] aRocket Uploads
>
>
> Greg Deputy has generously provided a file upload service for the aRocket
> community.
>
> To use this tool, visit http://www.blastzone.com/arocket/uploads.asp
> Username:       arocket
> Password:       uploads
>
> Thanks again, Greg.
>
> Ray
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 9894 invoked from network); 6 Aug 2001 00:25:40 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 6 Aug 2001 00:25:40 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 25912 invoked from network); 6 Aug 2001 00:28:16 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 6 Aug 2001 00:28:16 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA03282; Sun, 5 Aug 2001 17:22:02 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 99101 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 6 Aug 2001 00:21:54 +0000
Received: from grucom2.gru.net (grucom2.gru.net [209.251.129.7]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA03267 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun,          5 Aug 2001 17:21:53 -0700
Received: from [198.190.223.238] by grucom2.sfcc.net (NTMail          6.03.0009/NU4112.00.db1c8a4b) with ESMTP id snqbhaaa for          AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 5 Aug 2001 20:21:46 -0400
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (Win95; I)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <LPBBKJMJEOFKAMFJJNNHCEEMCGAA.landofgrey@gnc.net>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B6DE36F.2CE6DCA3@sfcc.net>
Date:         Sun, 5 Aug 2001 20:23:11 -0400
Reply-To: "James Yawn" <jyawn@SFCC.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "James Yawn" <jyawn@SFCC.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] north florida
Comments: To: landofgrey@gnc.net
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

 I am in Gainesville, FL - a little closer but still a drive...
Jimmy Yawn

Matthew Travis wrote:

> Hope you don't get flooded out from Barry tonight.
>
> Marianna? I've been there on my way to/from Maxico City Beach. I don't think
> there are many (any?) people from Florida on the list. I'm from the Brevard
> County/Cape Canaveral area and I don't know of anyone else down in this part
> of the state who's on the list.
>
> So, anyone else form Florida?
>
> -Matt
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU]On Behalf
> Of foy
> Sent: Sunday, August 05, 2001 4:19 PM
> To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
> Subject: [AR] north florida
>
>       Is anyone around Marianna Fl on this list. If so please contact me
> foy@wfeca.net .    Foy

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 14610 invoked from network); 6 Aug 2001 00:54:09 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 6 Aug 2001 00:54:09 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 1015 invoked from network); 6 Aug 2001 00:56:44 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 6 Aug 2001 00:56:44 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA03473; Sun, 5 Aug 2001 17:50:42 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 99136 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 6 Aug 2001 00:50:38 +0000
Received: from noralf.uib.no (noralf.uib.no [129.177.30.12]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA03458 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Sun,          5 Aug 2001 17:50:37 -0700
Received: from malurt.uib.no [129.177.30.50] by noralf.uib.no with esmtp (Exim          3.16) id 15TYak-0007BD-00; Mon, 06 Aug 2001 02:49:58 +0200
Received: from nobody by malurt.uib.no with local (Exim 3.16) id          15TYak-0002R1-00; Mon, 06 Aug 2001 02:49:58 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
User-Agent: IMP/PHP IMAP webmail program 2.2.1/UIB-1f2
X-Sent-Through: webmail.uib.no
X-User-Agent: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 5.0; Windows 98; DigExt;              SP/5.51/0.90/FriSurf)
X-Originating-IP: 130.67.15.249
Message-ID:  <997058997.3b6de9b601b3a@webmail.uib.no>
Date:         Mon, 6 Aug 2001 02:49:58 +0200
Reply-To: <Emil.Johnsen@STUDENT.UIB.NO>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <Emil.Johnsen@STUDENT.UIB.NO>
Subject:      [AR] Melting PE for hybrid fuel grains
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

I have been experimenting with melting polyethylene to use as hybrid fuel
grains. One problem I have encountered is that the molten PE is extremely
viscous, it certainly looks like it would be problematic to cast a fuel grain
with this material.

Are there any special methods for making PE more liquid? Do I need to keep it
at high temperature for a long time? (So far I have tried up to 50min at 200C.)

Would it be easier to grind the PE to a powder and mix it with a binder?


Emil

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 18502 invoked from network); 6 Aug 2001 01:13:14 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 6 Aug 2001 01:13:14 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: (qmail 4669 invoked from network); 6 Aug 2001 01:15:50 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 6 Aug 2001 01:15:50 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA03581; Sun, 5 Aug 2001 18:10:45 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 99155 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 6 Aug 2001 01:10:36 +0000
Received: from cisco.com (cypher.cisco.com [171.69.11.18]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA03565; Sun, 5 Aug 2001 18:10:35 -0700
Received: (from billw@localhost) by cisco.com (8.8.8/2.6/Cisco List          Logging/8.8.8) id SAA06936; Sun, 5 Aug 2001 18:10:05 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID:  <CMM.0.90.4.997060205.billw@cypher>
Date:         Sun, 5 Aug 2001 18:10:05 PDT
Reply-To: "Bill Westfield" <billw@cisco.com>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "William Chops Westfield" <billw@cisco.com>
Subject:      Re: [AR] PGI rocket competition
Comments: To: Ray Calkins <rcalkins@ITC.UCI.EDU>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  Your message of Sun, 5 Aug 2001 15:07:12 -0700

    > I'd like to call attention to a rocket competition that's probably on the
    > edge of OT:
    >
    > http://www.pgi.org/rules.htm#D2

    Wait a minute, what is this?
        "Level 4 (Unlimited):  Maximum rocket motor i.d. is 1 1/2"."
        " Best Large Rocket: Rocket motor bore must be larger than 7/8"."

    How much would they freak if somebody showed up with a 12" diameter
    rocket?  Heh heh heh!

It wouldn't win.  Part of the idea is that you burn all your fuel down
low enough for people to see all the neat-o effects you've managed to
make the exhaust do.  That's typically a couple hundred feet.  A rocket
that burns a pound or two of fuel in two hundred feet can be pretty
spectactular.

Of course, it's not uncommon for those 7/8inch ID rockets to have a 6 inch
ball shell as a "payload"...

BillW


From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 14249 invoked from network); 6 Aug 2001 02:15:16 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 6 Aug 2001 02:15:16 -0000
Received: (qmail 12498 invoked from network); 6 Aug 2001 02:17:53 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 6 Aug 2001 02:17:53 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA03804; Sun, 5 Aug 2001 18:58:45 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 99205 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 6 Aug 2001 01:58:36 +0000
Received: from femail40.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail40.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.254.60.34]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA03789          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 5 Aug 2001 18:58:35 -0700
Received: from officenew ([24.1.27.168]) by femail40.sdc1.sfba.home.com          (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20 201-229-121-120-20010223) with SMTP id          <20010806015818.WCPP1553.femail40.sdc1.sfba.home.com@officenew> for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 5 Aug 2001 18:58:18 -0700
References:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010805191722.22718A-100000@spsystems.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2462.0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <028001c11e1b$4146e500$8300a8c0@olmpi1.wa.home.com>
Date:         Sun, 5 Aug 2001 18:58:14 -0700
Reply-To: "Tomm Aldridge" <taldridge@HOME.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Tomm Aldridge" <taldridge@HOME.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] 2[AR] US Standard Atmosphere - 1962
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

I found a vbasic macro in an old spreadsheet of mine that calculates density
(RHO) based on Temp and altitude:
Function RHO(Altitude, Temperature)

    RHO = (288.3 / (273.3 + Temperature)) * 1.225 - 0.117 * Altitude / 1000
+ 0.00427 * (Altitude / 1000) ^ 2 - 0.0000639 * (Altitude / 1000) ^ 3

End Function

I recall curve fitting to get this then finding it in a text somwhere.

Tomm
----- Original Message -----
From: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Sunday, August 05, 2001 4:23 PM
Subject: Re: [AR] 2[AR] US Standard Atmosphere - 1962


> On Sun, 5 Aug 2001, al bradley wrote:
> > I never thought I had to consider anything about atmosphere except its
> > pressure at sea leavel. So you Physics-202 types are setting me off to
> > learn more. Before I start to reference "U.S. Standard Atmosphere" from
> > scratch can some of you tell me the significance of this term for
rocketry,
> > what we are talking about?
>
> The issue is, just how do the pressure, temperature, density, and
> composition of the atmosphere vary with altitude?  This is actually
> somewhat variable, with time and location, but the variations are small
> enough that they usually aren't too important.  So for performance
> calculations, what you want to use is a "standard" atmosphere, precisely
> defined so that calculation results can be compared easily, corresponding
> to average conditions.  There are several standard atmospheres, and
> several editions of some of them, but the differences are quite small
> except at very high altitudes (where we have learned a lot from satellite
> data over the last 40 years).
>
> The official standard atmospheres are defined by fairly large tables,
> which you are supposed to interpolate within.  An alternative is to try
> to fit a curve, or several curves, to the data.
>
>                                                           Henry Spencer
>                                                        henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 25924 invoked from network); 6 Aug 2001 02:28:31 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 6 Aug 2001 02:28:31 -0000
Received: (qmail 15710 invoked from network); 6 Aug 2001 02:30:43 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 6 Aug 2001 02:30:43 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA03956; Sun, 5 Aug 2001 19:26:36 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 99244 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 6 Aug 2001 02:26:25 +0000
Received: from spsystems.net (spsystems.net [209.47.149.227]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA03941 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Sun,          5 Aug 2001 19:26:24 -0700
Received: (from henry@localhost) by spsystems.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id WAA24603;          Sun, 5 Aug 2001 22:25:34 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010805222153.24594A-100000@spsystems.net>
Date:         Sun, 5 Aug 2001 22:25:33 -0400
Reply-To: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Melting PE for hybrid fuel grains
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <997058997.3b6de9b601b3a@webmail.uib.no>

On Mon, 6 Aug 2001 Emil.Johnsen@STUDENT.UIB.NO wrote:
> Would it be easier to grind the PE to a powder and mix it with a binder?

Consider grinding it (or perhaps buying it as pellets) and then
consolidating it under heat and a bit of pressure -- a low-temperature
equivalent of sintering.

I think you'll have trouble finding a binder which will get much of a grip
on PE, so that approach would use a lot of binder.

The alternative, given suitable sources of supply, is to buy PE rod and
drill it.

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 8473 invoked from network); 6 Aug 2001 02:32:40 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 6 Aug 2001 02:32:40 -0000
Received: (qmail 4578 invoked from network); 6 Aug 2001 02:34:15 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 6 Aug 2001 02:34:15 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA04009; Sun, 5 Aug 2001 19:30:41 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 99259 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 6 Aug 2001 02:30:37 +0000
Received: from femail29.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail29.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.254.60.19]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA03994          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 5 Aug 2001 19:30:37 -0700
Received: from officenew ([24.1.27.168]) by femail29.sdc1.sfba.home.com          (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20 201-229-121-120-20010223) with SMTP id          <20010806023031.XTTY22490.femail29.sdc1.sfba.home.com@officenew> for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 5 Aug 2001 19:30:31 -0700
References:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010805191722.22718A-100000@spsystems.net>              <028001c11e1b$4146e500$8300a8c0@olmpi1.wa.home.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2462.0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <028601c11e1f$c187b380$8300a8c0@olmpi1.wa.home.com>
Date:         Sun, 5 Aug 2001 19:30:27 -0700
Reply-To: "Tomm Aldridge" <taldridge@HOME.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Tomm Aldridge" <taldridge@HOME.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] 2[AR] US Standard Atmosphere - 1962
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

...and Temperature varies with Altitude in the following manner:

"Conditions very over different regions of the Earth, and from day
to day, but the ICAO "standard atmosphere" begins at 59F at sea level
and drops linearly to -70F at the tropopause, which is at 11 km
(36089 feet).  The pressure drops from 14.7 to 2.9 psia over this
range."

My spreadsheet function to get temperature at an altitude with a launch site
bias is:

=TMP(F43)+(Launch_Temperature-TMP(A0))

where TMP is the calling function for temperature, F43 is the altitude for
that iteration and A0 is the launch site altitude.  TMP is:

Function TMP(a)

    If a < 10000 Then
        TMP = 15 - (0.00649 * a)
    Else
        TMP = ((0.000000115 * (a ^ 2)) - (0.004127 * a) - 20.215)

    End If

End Function

----- Original Message -----
From: "Tomm Aldridge" <taldridge@HOME.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Sunday, August 05, 2001 6:58 PM
Subject: Re: [AR] 2[AR] US Standard Atmosphere - 1962


> I found a vbasic macro in an old spreadsheet of mine that calculates
density
> (RHO) based on Temp and altitude:
> Function RHO(Altitude, Temperature)
>
>     RHO = (288.3 / (273.3 + Temperature)) * 1.225 - 0.117 * Altitude /
1000
> + 0.00427 * (Altitude / 1000) ^ 2 - 0.0000639 * (Altitude / 1000) ^ 3
>
> End Function
>
> I recall curve fitting to get this then finding it in a text somwhere.
>
> Tomm
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
> To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
> Sent: Sunday, August 05, 2001 4:23 PM
> Subject: Re: [AR] 2[AR] US Standard Atmosphere - 1962
>
>
> > On Sun, 5 Aug 2001, al bradley wrote:
> > > I never thought I had to consider anything about atmosphere except its
> > > pressure at sea leavel. So you Physics-202 types are setting me off to
> > > learn more. Before I start to reference "U.S. Standard Atmosphere"
from
> > > scratch can some of you tell me the significance of this term for
> rocketry,
> > > what we are talking about?
> >
> > The issue is, just how do the pressure, temperature, density, and
> > composition of the atmosphere vary with altitude?  This is actually
> > somewhat variable, with time and location, but the variations are small
> > enough that they usually aren't too important.  So for performance
> > calculations, what you want to use is a "standard" atmosphere, precisely
> > defined so that calculation results can be compared easily,
corresponding
> > to average conditions.  There are several standard atmospheres, and
> > several editions of some of them, but the differences are quite small
> > except at very high altitudes (where we have learned a lot from
satellite
> > data over the last 40 years).
> >
> > The official standard atmospheres are defined by fairly large tables,
> > which you are supposed to interpolate within.  An alternative is to try
> > to fit a curve, or several curves, to the data.
> >
> >                                                           Henry Spencer
> >
henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 19599 invoked from network); 6 Aug 2001 02:36:00 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 6 Aug 2001 02:36:00 -0000
Received: (qmail 15251 invoked from network); 6 Aug 2001 02:38:37 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 6 Aug 2001 02:38:37 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA04047; Sun, 5 Aug 2001 19:32:28 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 99270 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 6 Aug 2001 02:32:23 +0000
Received: from femail43.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail43.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.254.60.37]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA04032          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 5 Aug 2001 19:32:22 -0700
Received: from officenew ([24.1.27.168]) by femail43.sdc1.sfba.home.com          (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20 201-229-121-120-20010223) with SMTP id          <20010806023217.OICP14554.femail43.sdc1.sfba.home.com@officenew>;          Sun, 5 Aug 2001 19:32:17 -0700
References:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010805191722.22718A-100000@spsystems.net>              <028001c11e1b$4146e500$8300a8c0@olmpi1.wa.home.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2462.0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <028b01c11e20$0038e540$8300a8c0@olmpi1.wa.home.com>
Date:         Sun, 5 Aug 2001 19:32:12 -0700
Reply-To: "Tomm Aldridge" <taldridge@HOME.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Tomm Aldridge" <taldridge@HOME.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] 2[AR] US Standard Atmosphere - 1962
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

I'll upload the spreadsheet if anyone wants it.  Its kinda fun and many of
you have seen it in prior years as ROCKET.XLS on my now defunct web site.

Tomm
----- Original Message -----
From: "Tomm Aldridge" <taldridge@HOME.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Sunday, August 05, 2001 6:58 PM
Subject: Re: [AR] 2[AR] US Standard Atmosphere - 1962


> I found a vbasic macro in an old spreadsheet of mine that calculates
density
> (RHO) based on Temp and altitude:
> Function RHO(Altitude, Temperature)
>
>     RHO = (288.3 / (273.3 + Temperature)) * 1.225 - 0.117 * Altitude /
1000
> + 0.00427 * (Altitude / 1000) ^ 2 - 0.0000639 * (Altitude / 1000) ^ 3
>
> End Function
>
> I recall curve fitting to get this then finding it in a text somwhere.
>
> Tomm
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
> To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
> Sent: Sunday, August 05, 2001 4:23 PM
> Subject: Re: [AR] 2[AR] US Standard Atmosphere - 1962
>
>
> > On Sun, 5 Aug 2001, al bradley wrote:
> > > I never thought I had to consider anything about atmosphere except its
> > > pressure at sea leavel. So you Physics-202 types are setting me off to
> > > learn more. Before I start to reference "U.S. Standard Atmosphere"
from
> > > scratch can some of you tell me the significance of this term for
> rocketry,
> > > what we are talking about?
> >
> > The issue is, just how do the pressure, temperature, density, and
> > composition of the atmosphere vary with altitude?  This is actually
> > somewhat variable, with time and location, but the variations are small
> > enough that they usually aren't too important.  So for performance
> > calculations, what you want to use is a "standard" atmosphere, precisely
> > defined so that calculation results can be compared easily,
corresponding
> > to average conditions.  There are several standard atmospheres, and
> > several editions of some of them, but the differences are quite small
> > except at very high altitudes (where we have learned a lot from
satellite
> > data over the last 40 years).
> >
> > The official standard atmospheres are defined by fairly large tables,
> > which you are supposed to interpolate within.  An alternative is to try
> > to fit a curve, or several curves, to the data.
> >
> >                                                           Henry Spencer
> >
henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 20678 invoked from network); 6 Aug 2001 02:36:20 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 6 Aug 2001 02:36:20 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 7160 invoked from network); 6 Aug 2001 02:38:01 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 6 Aug 2001 02:38:01 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA04082; Sun, 5 Aug 2001 19:34:26 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 99281 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 6 Aug 2001 02:34:25 +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (f194.law9.hotmail.com [64.4.9.194]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA04067 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun,          5 Aug 2001 19:34:24 -0700
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Sun,          5 Aug 2001 19:33:54 -0700
Received: from 4.16.58.17 by lw9fd.law9.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Mon, 06 Aug          2001 02:33:54 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [4.16.58.17]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 06 Aug 2001 02:33:54.0536 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[3C77DE80:01C11E20]
Message-ID:  <F194AH2JZZJfwTXSRdZ000068bb@hotmail.com>
Date:         Sun, 5 Aug 2001 21:33:54 -0500
Reply-To: "ben romashko" <pleaselaunchme@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "ben romashko" <pleaselaunchme@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] aRocket Uploads
Comments: To: greg@blastzone.com
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Greg- thanks, looks nice.  Also saves me some work = )



--------------------
Ben Romashko
pleaslaunchme@hotmail.com
AIM- Attican123
--------------------




>
>My pleasure!  Also, you dont need the uploads.asp on the end of the url,
>all
>you need to type to get into the uploads area is
>
>http://blastzone.com/arocket/
>
>
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@itc.uci.edu]On
> > Behalf Of Ray Calkins
> > Sent: Sunday, August 05, 2001 11:29 AM
> > To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
> > Subject: Re: [AR] aRocket Uploads
> >
> >
> > Greg Deputy has generously provided a file upload service for the
>aRocket
> > community.
> >
> > To use this tool, visit http://www.blastzone.com/arocket/uploads.asp
> > Username:       arocket
> > Password:       uploads
> >
> > Thanks again, Greg.
> >
> > Ray
> >


_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 28882 invoked from network); 6 Aug 2001 02:59:31 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 6 Aug 2001 02:59:31 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 18565 invoked from network); 6 Aug 2001 03:02:08 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 6 Aug 2001 03:02:08 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA04192; Sun, 5 Aug 2001 19:51:09 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 99308 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 6 Aug 2001 02:51:02 +0000
Received: from smtp4ve.mailsrvcs.net (smtp4vepub.gte.net [206.46.170.25]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA04176 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 5 Aug 2001 19:51:01 -0700
Received: from me-513q3sc0zun0.pengar.com          (adsl-64-223-144-117.mannh.adsl.bellatlantic.net [64.223.144.117]) by          smtp4ve.mailsrvcs.net (8.9.1/8.9.1) with ESMTP id CAA65685947; Mon, 6          Aug 2001 02:50:30 GMT
X-Sender: seth-pc@hobbiton.shire.net
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
References: <007301c11d65$97c8b4a0$0100a8c0@prdise1.nm.home.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <5.1.0.14.0.20010805224805.02ae5e70@hobbiton.shire.net>
Date:         Sun, 5 Aug 2001 22:52:47 -0400
Reply-To: "Seth Leigh" <seth@PENGAR.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Seth Leigh" <seth@PENGAR.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Elite Sugar Propellant Group Forming.
Comments: cc: dmuesing@peoplepc.com
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <Pine.LNX.4.10.10108042156270.29267-100000@itc.uci.edu>

I know I'd like to be on the sugar list.  I have mixed up some sugar and
KNO3 once so far, but haven't yet made any actual propellant from it.  I
just built a workbench up in my attic this past saturday, so I don't know
what I'm waiting for.  Oh yeah.  After I finished the workbench, I
immediately opened a Great Planes PT-40 radio-controlled airplane kit and
started building.  It's gonna have a Magnum XL .52 4-stroke up front, my
first 4-stroker ever.

Oh yeah, back to rockets.  Well, I imagine before I mix up any actual
propellant I need to find out what I'm gonna cast it in.  I've read of many
folks using PVC and liners and such, I suppose I'd be very interested to
hear more about that.  It's precisely the kind of thing I think the sugar
list would be for.  When I have setup the proper casing and liner and such
I'll try my first batch of actual propellant.

Seth


At 01:22 AM 8/5/2001, Ray Calkins wrote:
>On Sat, 4 Aug 2001, Pax wrote:
>
> > Of course Ray is trying to remove the associations between sugar propellant
> > and newbies with small motors :-)
>Hey, I'm a newbie in this too, you know!
>
>I just want to make sugar more appreciated, it's got such a bad rap
>because it's Isp, but when it's an order of ten cheaper, I can overlook an
>order of two in performance _very_ easily.  If I can learn how to scale
>it, then the next issues are burn rate and Isp.  I've never seen a
>metalized sugar propellant for example.
>
>Ray

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 14191 invoked from network); 6 Aug 2001 03:04:54 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 6 Aug 2001 03:04:54 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 14122 invoked from network); 6 Aug 2001 03:07:11 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 6 Aug 2001 03:07:11 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA04235; Sun, 5 Aug 2001 19:57:43 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 99315 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 6 Aug 2001 02:57:42 +0000
Received: from smtp5ve.mailsrvcs.net (smtp5vepub.gte.net [206.46.170.26]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA04220 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 5 Aug 2001 19:57:41 -0700
Received: from me-513q3sc0zun0.pengar.com          (adsl-64-223-144-117.mannh.adsl.bellatlantic.net [64.223.144.117]) by          smtp5ve.mailsrvcs.net (8.9.1/8.9.1) with ESMTP id CAA37835807 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 6 Aug 2001 02:57:10 GMT
X-Sender: seth-pc@hobbiton.shire.net
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
References: <997058997.3b6de9b601b3a@webmail.uib.no>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <5.1.0.14.0.20010805230054.02b02180@hobbiton.shire.net>
Date:         Sun, 5 Aug 2001 23:02:13 -0400
Reply-To: "Seth Leigh" <seth@PENGAR.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Seth Leigh" <seth@PENGAR.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Melting PE for hybrid fuel grains
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010805222153.24594A-100000@spsystems.net>

Excuse my ignorance, but isn't PE the same plastic that's used to make milk
jugs?  Could someone thoroughly clean out some old milk jugs, melt them,
and cast a PE cylinder useful as a fuel grain?  I don't know how many milk
jugs that might take.  But given enough milk jugs, is this feasible?

Seth

At 10:25 PM 8/5/2001, Henry Spencer wrote:
>On Mon, 6 Aug 2001 Emil.Johnsen@STUDENT.UIB.NO wrote:
> > Would it be easier to grind the PE to a powder and mix it with a binder?
>
>Consider grinding it (or perhaps buying it as pellets) and then
>consolidating it under heat and a bit of pressure -- a low-temperature
>equivalent of sintering.
>
>I think you'll have trouble finding a binder which will get much of a grip
>on PE, so that approach would use a lot of binder.
>
>The alternative, given suitable sources of supply, is to buy PE rod and
>drill it.
>
>                                                           Henry Spencer
>                                                        henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 29131 invoked from network); 6 Aug 2001 03:54:54 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 6 Aug 2001 03:54:54 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: (qmail 13637 invoked from network); 6 Aug 2001 03:57:06 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 6 Aug 2001 03:57:06 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA04478; Sun, 5 Aug 2001 20:32:23 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 99353 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 6 Aug 2001 03:30:47 +0000
Received: from imo-m10.mx.aol.com (imo-m10.mx.aol.com [64.12.136.165]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA04459 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Sun, 5 Aug 2001 20:30:47 -0700
Received: from JMKrell@aol.com by imo-m10.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v31.9.) id          w.38.19f95a0c (18559) for <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Sun, 5 Aug 2001          23:30:38 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0AF2_01C56B69.4732B210"
X-Mailer: AOL 6.0 for Windows US sub 10528
Message-ID:  <38.19f95a0c.289f695e@aol.com>
Date:         Sun, 5 Aug 2001 23:30:38 EDT
Reply-To: <JMKrell@AOL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <JMKrell@AOL.COM>
Subject:      [AR] PGI rocket competition
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0AF2_01C56B69.4732B210
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Back in '78 or '79 Randy Sobczak used a PlasmaJet "I" motor in the rocket
competition, lofting a 4" or 6" shell. The launch was very impressive. PGI
members were not familiar with compost motors then. The shell burst was not
impressive due to the extreme altitude, 2000 - 3000 ft on the way down.

Most compost motors rockets would not due well in the PGI competition unless
they use special effects compositions. The biggest problem is keeping the
altitude down were the judges can see the shell burst. A 12" shell at 5000 ft
is not very impressive.

John


------=_NextPart_000_0AF2_01C56B69.4732B210
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<HTML><FONT FACE=arial,helvetica><FONT  SIZE=2>Back in '78 or '79 Randy Sobczak used a PlasmaJet "I" motor in the rocket
<BR>competition, lofting a 4" or 6" shell. The launch was very impressive. PGI
<BR>members were not familiar with compost motors then. The shell burst was not
<BR>impressive due to the extreme altitude, 2000 - 3000 ft on the way down.
<BR>
<BR>Most compost motors rockets would not due well in the PGI competition unless
<BR>they use special effects compositions. The biggest problem is keeping the
<BR>altitude down were the judges can see the shell burst. A 12" shell at 5000 ft
<BR>is not very impressive.
<BR>
<BR>John
<BR> &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;</FONT></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0AF2_01C56B69.4732B210--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 7297 invoked from network); 6 Aug 2001 04:45:47 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 6 Aug 2001 04:45:47 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 28865 invoked from network); 6 Aug 2001 04:48:25 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 6 Aug 2001 04:48:25 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA04874; Sun, 5 Aug 2001 21:35:09 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 99404 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 6 Aug 2001 04:33:47 +0000
Received: from smtp5ve.mailsrvcs.net (smtp5vepub.gte.net [206.46.170.26]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA04835 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 5 Aug 2001 21:32:12 -0700
Received: from me-513q3sc0zun0.pengar.com          (adsl-64-223-144-117.mannh.adsl.bellatlantic.net [64.223.144.117]) by          smtp5ve.mailsrvcs.net (8.9.1/8.9.1) with ESMTP id EAA39864395 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 6 Aug 2001 04:31:40 GMT
X-Sender: seth-pc@hobbiton.shire.net
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <5.1.0.14.0.20010806003610.02b788c0@hobbiton.shire.net>
Date:         Mon, 6 Aug 2001 00:36:42 -0400
Reply-To: "Seth Leigh" <seth@PENGAR.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Seth Leigh" <seth@PENGAR.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] PGI rocket competition
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <38.19f95a0c.289f695e@aol.com>

It may not be impressive to the judges, but it would be fun as hell for
people like us!  ;-)

Seth

At 11:30 PM 8/5/2001, JMKrell@AOL.COM wrote:
>Back in '78 or '79 Randy Sobczak used a PlasmaJet "I" motor in the rocket
>competition, lofting a 4" or 6" shell. The launch was very impressive. PGI
>members were not familiar with compost motors then. The shell burst was not
>impressive due to the extreme altitude, 2000 - 3000 ft on the way down.
>
>Most compost motors rockets would not due well in the PGI competition unless
>they use special effects compositions. The biggest problem is keeping the
>altitude down were the judges can see the shell burst. A 12" shell at 5000 ft
>is not very impressive.
>
>John
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 10081 invoked from network); 6 Aug 2001 04:46:47 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 6 Aug 2001 04:46:47 -0000
Received: (qmail 4233 invoked from network); 6 Aug 2001 04:49:02 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 6 Aug 2001 04:49:02 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA04904; Sun, 5 Aug 2001 21:36:37 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 99413 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 6 Aug 2001 04:35:15 +0000
Received: from granger.mail.mindspring.net (granger.mail.mindspring.net          [207.69.200.148]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA04839          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 5 Aug 2001 21:32:53 -0700
Received: from pavilion (user-33qt94h.dialup.mindspring.com [199.174.164.145])          by granger.mail.mindspring.net (8.9.3/8.8.5) with SMTP id AAA13551          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 6 Aug 2001 00:32:51 -0400 (EDT)
References:  <CMM.0.90.4.997060205.billw@cypher>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <001e01c11e31$53aa8740$91a4aec7@pavilion>
Date:         Sun, 5 Aug 2001 23:36:13 -0500
Reply-To: "Michael Dilsaver" <michaeldilsaver@MINDSPRING.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Michael Dilsaver" <michaeldilsaver@MINDSPRING.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] PGI rocket competition
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This part sounds like fun:

"Level 3 (Advanced)

                            Maximum rocket motor i.d. is 1-1/4". A maximum
of three batteries are
                            allowed in this level with each battery not to
exceed 15 rockets. A
                            battery is considered 1 rocket, however they
must be fired in close
                            sequence. Each competitor must supply a minimum
of 8 rockets and
                            may supply up to a maximum of 12 rockets fired
individually. Grand
                            Master Point Code "B" "

Sent: Sunday, August 05, 2001 8:10 PM
Subject: Re: [AR] PGI rocket competition


>     > I'd like to call attention to a rocket competition that's probably
on the
>     > edge of OT:
>     >
>     > http://www.pgi.org/rules.htm#D2
>
>     Wait a minute, what is this?
>         "Level 4 (Unlimited):  Maximum rocket motor i.d. is 1 1/2"."
>         " Best Large Rocket: Rocket motor bore must be larger than 7/8"."
>
>     How much would they freak if somebody showed up with a 12" diameter
>     rocket?  Heh heh heh!
>
> It wouldn't win.  Part of the idea is that you burn all your fuel down
> low enough for people to see all the neat-o effects you've managed to
> make the exhaust do.  That's typically a couple hundred feet.  A rocket
> that burns a pound or two of fuel in two hundred feet can be pretty
> spectactular.
>
> Of course, it's not uncommon for those 7/8inch ID rockets to have a 6 inch
> ball shell as a "payload"...
>
> BillW

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 18349 invoked from network); 6 Aug 2001 04:50:14 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 6 Aug 2001 04:50:14 -0000
Received: (qmail 29769 invoked from network); 6 Aug 2001 04:52:52 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 6 Aug 2001 04:52:52 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA04848; Sun, 5 Aug 2001 21:33:31 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 99397 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 6 Aug 2001 04:32:01 +0000
Received: from conint.consumersinterest.com (consumersinterest.com          [207.195.143.118] (may be forged)) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with          ESMTP id VAA04824 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 5 Aug 2001 21:32:01          -0700
Received: from greg [208.187.15.150] by conint.consumersinterest.com          (SMTPD32-6.04) id A11AAD2013E; Sun, 05 Aug 2001 21:46:18 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <NDBBIBAMIMKJPANDCAHGCEOJEPAA.greg@blastzone.com>
Date:         Sun, 5 Aug 2001 21:45:09 -0700
Reply-To: <greg@blastzone.com>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Greg Deputy" <greg@blastzone.com>
Subject:      [AR] uploads area username and password
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

I've gotten a couple emails from people asking me to set up username and
passwords for them on the uploads area.  The username and password is the
same for everyone.  Username arocket password uploads.  The username and
password screen is mainly there to prevent non-rocketry types from uploading
porn, mp3's, etc.  I had that problem on another site...  Enjoy!

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 17340 invoked from network); 6 Aug 2001 05:12:57 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 6 Aug 2001 05:12:57 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 10078 invoked from network); 6 Aug 2001 05:14:39 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 6 Aug 2001 05:14:39 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA05130; Sun, 5 Aug 2001 22:10:31 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 99473 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 6 Aug 2001 05:08:51 +0000
Received: from femail28.sdc1.sfba.home.com (imail@femail28.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.254.60.18]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA05107          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 5 Aug 2001 22:08:50 -0700
Received: from c1649002-a.earthlink.net ([24.20.95.67]) by          femail28.sdc1.sfba.home.com (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20          201-229-121-120-20010223) with ESMTP id          <20010806050849.YGPN863.femail28.sdc1.sfba.home.com@c1649002-a.earthlink.net>; Sun, 5 Aug 2001 22:08:49          -0700
X-Sender: forkbomb@mail.earthlink.net
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.0.2
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <5.0.2.1.0.20010805220547.02339258@mail.earthlink.net>
Date:         Sun, 5 Aug 2001 22:08:46 -0700
Reply-To: "Pierce Nichols" <forkbomb@EARTHLINK.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Pierce Nichols" <forkbomb@EARTHLINK.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] high pressure tanks
Comments: To: Andrew Case <acase@GLUE.UMD.EDU>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <Pine.GSO.4.21.0108041211120.7210-100000@y.glue.umd.edu>

At 12:12 PM 8/4/2001 -0400, Andrew Case wrote:
>On Sat, 4 Aug 2001, Marcus Leech wrote:
> > Use a T6 6061 tube of appropriate wall thickness for the diameter
> >   you're using, then make up simple, 'O' ring sealed flat ends that
> >   are retained with a snap-ring.  It'll be heavier than optimal, since
> >   you're using flat, rather than hemispherical ends, but it'll be
> >   lighter than any commercial cylinder that's reasonably affordable.
>
>I've been working through some design options for a peroxide thruster,
>and one of the issues that's come up over and over again is materials
>compatibility. I'm surprised to find that Aluminum is OK for tanks (I'll
>be even more surprised if it's OK for the combustion chamber, though).


         Not all aluminum is ok; in fact 6061 is NOT OK for peroxide, as it
contains copper. 1000 and 2000 series aluminum is peroxide compatible, but
no other aluminums should be used.


>One issue is that I'd really like to braze some of the parts, and
>something tells me silver solder isn't the way to go :)


         Nope :).

         -p


Mars or Bust!
www.marssociety.com

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 15877 invoked from network); 6 Aug 2001 05:23:57 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 6 Aug 2001 05:23:57 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 13634 invoked from network); 6 Aug 2001 05:25:39 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 6 Aug 2001 05:25:39 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA05237; Sun, 5 Aug 2001 22:21:58 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 99492 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 6 Aug 2001 05:21:43 +0000
Received: from femail38.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail38.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.254.60.32]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA05222          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 5 Aug 2001 22:21:43 -0700
Received: from c1649002-a.earthlink.net ([24.20.95.67]) by          femail38.sdc1.sfba.home.com (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20          201-229-121-120-20010223) with ESMTP id          <20010806052137.ZYBH27925.femail38.sdc1.sfba.home.com@c1649002-a.earthlink.net> for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>;          Sun, 5 Aug 2001 22:21:37 -0700
X-Sender: forkbomb@mail.earthlink.net
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.0.2
References: <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010804124353.3034A-100000@spsystems.net>            <3B6C3008.1E8A7EC0@stud.uni-goettingen.de>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <5.0.2.1.0.20010805221429.0234eec0@mail.earthlink.net>
Date:         Sun, 5 Aug 2001 22:21:34 -0700
Reply-To: "Pierce Nichols" <forkbomb@EARTHLINK.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Pierce Nichols" <forkbomb@EARTHLINK.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Peroxide catalyts (was: high pressure tanks)
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <002101c11d19$048816a0$b872a018@petschoice.com>

At 02:09 PM 8/4/2001 -0500, Phil Bellmore wrote:
>We've tried various catalysts (silver, manganese, ruthenium, platinum,
>copper, aluminum, iron, various rocks and minerals, ammonia, chlorine,
>etc.).  Some work great on the bench but fail to produce inside a high
>pressure/temperature environment (e.g. manganese).  Some get poisioned
>(silver, ruthenium, platinum).


         Do you know whether tin, and tin alone, poisons catalyst packs? It
would be nice to have an HTP stabilizer that doesn't poison cat packs.


>   Some are rather caustic (ammonia, chlorine).


         Ammonia is quite a nice rocket fuel in and of itself -- is the
mixture hypergolic?


>Our current favorite is plain old iron.  Actually, iron oxide.  We have
>shown to our own satisfaction that properly rusted iron has the same
>catalytic action as silver, pound per pound, is very cheap (actually free),
>and can be readily regenerated.  We get is at the hardware store as the
>trash from cutting galvanized pipe.  One caution though - iron can melt and
>burn.  We've had a few tests where we've actually melted the iron inside the
>reaction chamber (T >= 1500 deg F?) and one test where the molten iron
>welded the exhaust nozzle shut, causing approximately 4.3 seconds of anxiety
>as we waited for the inevitable spontaneous dis-assembly of our motor.


         How do you build cat packs from the scraps? And having molten bits
of iron running around my motor does not sound good.

         -p


Mars or Bust!
www.marssociety.com

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 2769 invoked from network); 6 Aug 2001 06:31:56 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 6 Aug 2001 06:31:56 -0000
Received: (qmail 29160 invoked from network); 6 Aug 2001 06:34:10 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 6 Aug 2001 06:34:10 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA05485; Sun, 5 Aug 2001 23:27:25 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 99526 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 6 Aug 2001 06:26:27 +0000
Received: from mta02.mail.mel.aone.net.au (mta02.mail.au.uu.net [203.2.192.82])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA05469 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 5 Aug 2001 23:26:26 -0700
Received: from unknown ([63.34.218.100]) by mta02.mail.mel.aone.net.au with          SMTP id <20010806062619.COGN8316.mta02.mail.mel.aone.net.au@unknown>          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 6 Aug 2001 16:26:19 +1000
References: Conversation            <Pine.GSO.4.21.0108041211120.7210-100000@y.glue.umd.edu> with last            message <5.0.2.1.0.20010805220547.02339258@mail.earthlink.net>
Priority: Normal
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Priority: 3
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	X-MAPIextension=.TXT;
	charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>
Date:         Mon, 6 Aug 2001 06:26:27 +0000
Reply-To: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] high pressure tanks
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <5.0.2.1.0.20010805220547.02339258@mail.earthlink.net>

I was under the impression that it was the 2000 series which contained the
copper as its major alloy grouping.

Table taken from somewhere:

Major Alloying Element
----------------------------------
1xxx    Al 99.00% and greater
2xxx    Copper
3xxx    Manganese
4xxx    Silicon
5xxx    Magnesium
6xxx    Magnesium & silicon
7xxx    Zinc
8xxx    Other element

The second digit generally indicates a modification of the original alloy,
and the last 2 digits indicate the particular alloy within the family.

Troy.

----------
> At 12:12 PM 8/4/2001 -0400, Andrew Case wrote:
> >On Sat, 4 Aug 2001, Marcus Leech wrote:
> > > Use a T6 6061 tube of appropriate wall thickness for the diameter
> > >   you're using, then make up simple, 'O' ring sealed flat ends that
> > >   are retained with a snap-ring.  It'll be heavier than optimal, since
> > >   you're using flat, rather than hemispherical ends, but it'll be
> > >   lighter than any commercial cylinder that's reasonably affordable.
> >
> >I've been working through some design options for a peroxide thruster,
> >and one of the issues that's come up over and over again is materials
> >compatibility. I'm surprised to find that Aluminum is OK for tanks (I'll
> >be even more surprised if it's OK for the combustion chamber, though).
>
>
>          Not all aluminum is ok; in fact 6061 is NOT OK for peroxide, as
it
> contains copper. 1000 and 2000 series aluminum is peroxide compatible, but
> no other aluminums should be used.
>
>
> >One issue is that I'd really like to braze some of the parts, and
> >something tells me silver solder isn't the way to go :)
>
>
>          Nope :).
>
>          -p
>
>
> Mars or Bust!
> www.marssociety.com

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 28537 invoked from network); 6 Aug 2001 07:23:03 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 6 Aug 2001 07:23:03 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 10915 invoked from network); 6 Aug 2001 07:24:44 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 6 Aug 2001 07:24:44 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA05733; Mon, 6 Aug 2001 00:20:54 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 99568 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 6 Aug 2001 07:19:28 +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (f134.law15.hotmail.com [64.4.23.134]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA05712 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Mon, 6 Aug 2001 00:19:27 -0700
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Mon,          6 Aug 2001 00:18:57 -0700
Received: from 213.224.83.150 by lw15fd.law15.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Mon,          06 Aug 2001 07:18:57 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [213.224.83.150]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 06 Aug 2001 07:18:57.0452 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[0E99BEC0:01C11E48]
Message-ID:  <F134JY4kJSFsxf4yp8A00000ade@hotmail.com>
Date:         Mon, 6 Aug 2001 07:19:28 +0000
Reply-To: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Peroxide catalysts (was: high pressure tanks)
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

PN wrote:



>Ammonia is quite a nice rocket fuel in and of itself -- is the mixture
>hypergolic?

yes and explosive

>How do you build cat packs from the scraps? And having molten bits of iron
>running around my motor does not sound good.

The decomposition temperature of any HP concentration in a cat pack is not
high enough to melt iron. The reaction in such packs is always the
monopropellant mode. In bipropellant mode, with cat packs or without,
HP/fuel combustion temperatures could melt iron and may so may need
cooling.

Dissolving potassium permanganate in alcohol, even if used immediately
before it oxidises the alcohol is pointless still, as KMnO4 solubility in
water or alcohol is too low for propulsion purposes and certainly to reach
hypergolicity that way. Has to do with reaction rate which is cat
concentration dependent. NaMnO4 or Ca(MnO4)2 can be used here, but in water
only.
Potassium permaganate in water (6 % saturated solution) was used indirectly
in rocket motors to drive their propellant turbines, like in V2.

Reading on the development of the Messerschmitt Me-163 A or B HP motors 'll
reveal a lot to those interested. In order to reach hypergolicity,
hydrazine/alcohol mixes had to be used as fuel with 80 % HP in those days.
90 % HP was then considered unsafe to produce.

A 15 % manganous acetate solution in methanol is hypergolic with 90 % HP or
more only. Such biprop mode avoids the use of cat packs and the worry about
them getting poisoned by HP impurities.

The recently mentioned (albeit from 1998) Surrey papers URL on this list has
a few good papers in it on this matter.

jd

_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 27227 invoked from network); 6 Aug 2001 08:15:43 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 6 Aug 2001 08:15:43 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 3502 invoked from network); 6 Aug 2001 08:17:25 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 6 Aug 2001 08:17:25 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id BAA05950; Mon, 6 Aug 2001 01:13:42 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 99607 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 6 Aug 2001 08:12:10 +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (f198.law14.hotmail.com [64.4.21.198]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id BAA05933 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 6 Aug 2001 01:12:10 -0700
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Mon,          6 Aug 2001 01:11:40 -0700
Received: from 199.182.113.89 by lw14fd.law14.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Mon,          06 Aug 2001 08:11:39 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [199.182.113.89]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 06 Aug 2001 08:11:40.0109 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[6BB0E7D0:01C11E4F]
Message-ID:  <F198rM3TbhyF2fPmsSV0000639e@hotmail.com>
Date:         Mon, 6 Aug 2001 08:11:39 +0000
Reply-To: "Matt Faulkner" <mattfaulkner9@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Matt Faulkner" <mattfaulkner9@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Material Strenght pcb
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

I've never used circuit board in a rocket, but I have used it (structurally)
in robotics, and it has proven to be very sturdy for its weight. Also, if
you leave the copper on, you can solder pcb to pcb or any other material you
can solder to, and (of course!) you can always integrate electronics into
it. You could make circular circuit boards which would act as both flight
electronics and as structural pieces.


_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 27395 invoked from network); 6 Aug 2001 09:34:11 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 6 Aug 2001 09:34:11 -0000
Received: (qmail 6161 invoked from network); 6 Aug 2001 09:35:53 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 6 Aug 2001 09:35:53 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id CAA06360; Mon, 6 Aug 2001 02:30:34 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 99651 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 6 Aug 2001 09:28:54 +0000
Received: from femail24.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail24.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.0.95.149]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id CAA06337          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 6 Aug 2001 02:28:54 -0700
Received: from hal2001 ([24.77.53.16]) by femail24.sdc1.sfba.home.com          (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20 201-229-121-120-20010223) with SMTP id          <20010806092848.FURO24642.femail24.sdc1.sfba.home.com@hal2001> for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 6 Aug 2001 02:28:48 -0700
References:  <Pine.LNX.4.10.10108051147470.32582-100000@itc.uci.edu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <00ea01c11e59$15845040$0400a8c0@hatjs>
Date:         Mon, 6 Aug 2001 02:20:49 -0700
Reply-To: "Jamie Morken" <jmorken@HOME.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jamie Morken" <jmorken@HOME.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] US Standard Atmosphere - 1962
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Hi all,

> I have just uploaded an excel spreadsheet that includes a standard
> atmosphere look-up table.  At least you won't have to enter the values by
> hand.
>
> You can download it from:
> http://www.blastzone.com/arocket/uploads.asp
>
> Ray
>

Why does the viscosity not change much between sea level and 90000m?
What rocket related things does viscosity affect?  ie. surface heating,
drag, etc?

At sea level the viscosity is: 1.79E-05
At 90000m the viscosity is: 1.22E-05

while at sea level the pressure is: 1.01E+05
and at 90000m the pressure is: 1.64E-01

best regards,
Jamie

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 2963 invoked from network); 6 Aug 2001 11:35:17 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 6 Aug 2001 11:35:17 -0000
Received: (qmail 10128 invoked from network); 6 Aug 2001 11:37:34 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 6 Aug 2001 11:37:34 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id EAA06800; Mon, 6 Aug 2001 04:29:10 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 99693 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 6 Aug 2001 11:27:35 +0000
Received: from overnight.request.net (overnight.request.net [207.150.192.30])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id EAA06784 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 6 Aug 2001 04:27:34 -0700
Received: from furina.request.net ([207.150.192.11]) by overnight.request.net          with ESMTP id <135416-24223>; Mon, 6 Aug 2001 06:26:43 -0400
Received: from JuleeD ([24.160.114.184]) by furina.request.net with SMTP id          <157750141-6359090>; Mon, 6 Aug 2001 07:22:04 -0400
References: <F134JY4kJSFsxf4yp8A00000ade@hotmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2314.1300
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <001f01c11e6a$8bd2cfe0$b872a018@petschoice.com>
Date:         Mon, 6 Aug 2001 06:25:48 -0500
Reply-To: "Phil Bellmore" <pfish@CATFISHDESIGNS.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Phil Bellmore" <pfish@CATFISHDESIGNS.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Peroxide catalysts (was: high pressure tanks)
Comments: To: John Dom <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Don't forget, irons burns in the presence of high concentrations of oxygen.
Steel wool shows this nicely.  Our cat pack is a bed of small iron
particles.  If the particles are small enough, and their is enough O2, then
ignition will occur.  On occasion, our motor has run "motor rich".  We've
speculated regarding the increase in ISP.

----- Original Message -----
From: John Dom <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Monday, August 06, 2001 2:19 AM
Subject: Re: [AR] Peroxide catalysts (was: high pressure tanks)


> PN wrote:
>
>
>
> >Ammonia is quite a nice rocket fuel in and of itself -- is the mixture
> >hypergolic?
>
> yes and explosive
>
> >How do you build cat packs from the scraps? And having molten bits of
iron
> >running around my motor does not sound good.
>
> The decomposition temperature of any HP concentration in a cat pack is not
> high enough to melt iron. The reaction in such packs is always the
> monopropellant mode. In bipropellant mode, with cat packs or without,
> HP/fuel combustion temperatures could melt iron and may so may need
> cooling.
>
> Dissolving potassium permanganate in alcohol, even if used immediately
> before it oxidises the alcohol is pointless still, as KMnO4 solubility in
> water or alcohol is too low for propulsion purposes and certainly to reach
> hypergolicity that way. Has to do with reaction rate which is cat
> concentration dependent. NaMnO4 or Ca(MnO4)2 can be used here, but in
water
> only.
> Potassium permaganate in water (6 % saturated solution) was used
indirectly
> in rocket motors to drive their propellant turbines, like in V2.
>
> Reading on the development of the Messerschmitt Me-163 A or B HP motors
'll
> reveal a lot to those interested. In order to reach hypergolicity,
> hydrazine/alcohol mixes had to be used as fuel with 80 % HP in those days.
> 90 % HP was then considered unsafe to produce.
>
> A 15 % manganous acetate solution in methanol is hypergolic with 90 % HP
or
> more only. Such biprop mode avoids the use of cat packs and the worry
about
> them getting poisoned by HP impurities.
>
> The recently mentioned (albeit from 1998) Surrey papers URL on this list
has
> a few good papers in it on this matter.
>
> jd
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 13913 invoked from network); 6 Aug 2001 14:08:13 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 6 Aug 2001 14:08:13 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 5099 invoked from network); 6 Aug 2001 14:09:52 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 6 Aug 2001 14:09:52 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA07299; Mon, 6 Aug 2001 06:51:53 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 99764 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 6 Aug 2001 13:50:13 +0000
Received: from noralf.uib.no (noralf.uib.no [129.177.30.12]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA07282 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Mon,          6 Aug 2001 06:50:12 -0700
Received: from malurt.uib.no [129.177.30.50] by noralf.uib.no with esmtp (Exim          3.16) id 15Tkl3-0004pj-00; Mon, 06 Aug 2001 15:49:25 +0200
Received: from nobody by malurt.uib.no with local (Exim 3.16) id          15Tkkn-0004BM-00; Mon, 06 Aug 2001 15:49:09 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
User-Agent: IMP/PHP IMAP webmail program 2.2.1/UIB-1f2
X-Sent-Through: webmail.uib.no
X-User-Agent: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 5.0; Windows 98; DigExt;              SP/5.51/0.90/FriSurf)
X-Originating-IP: 130.67.15.246
Message-ID:  <997105749.3b6ea05568243@webmail.uib.no>
Date:         Mon, 6 Aug 2001 15:49:09 +0200
Reply-To: <Emil.Johnsen@STUDENT.UIB.NO>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <Emil.Johnsen@STUDENT.UIB.NO>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Melting PE for hybrid fuel grains
Comments: To: seth@PENGAR.COM
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

>Excuse my ignorance, but isn't PE the same plastic that's used to make milk
>jugs?  Could someone thoroughly clean out some old milk jugs, melt them,
>and cast a PE cylinder useful as a fuel grain?  I don't know how many milk
>jugs that might take.  But given enough milk jugs, is this feasible?

That's what I'm trying to do, but I'm not using milk jugs (don't have those
around here). I use 20-30L jugs that are used for water, fuel and various
chemicals etc. Each is a bit over 1kg, enough for several fuel grains in the
size I'm working on now.


Emil

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 29602 invoked from network); 6 Aug 2001 14:35:56 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 6 Aug 2001 14:35:56 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 1401 invoked from network); 6 Aug 2001 14:38:09 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 6 Aug 2001 14:38:09 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA07346; Mon, 6 Aug 2001 07:03:36 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 99771 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 6 Aug 2001 14:02:10 +0000
Received: from noralf.uib.no (noralf.uib.no [129.177.30.12]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA07329 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Mon,          6 Aug 2001 07:02:09 -0700
Received: from malurt.uib.no [129.177.30.50] by noralf.uib.no with esmtp (Exim          3.16) id 15TkxD-0007RG-00; Mon, 06 Aug 2001 16:01:59 +0200
Received: from nobody by malurt.uib.no with local (Exim 3.16) id          15Tkx7-0004PA-00; Mon, 06 Aug 2001 16:01:53 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
User-Agent: IMP/PHP IMAP webmail program 2.2.1/UIB-1f2
X-Sent-Through: webmail.uib.no
X-User-Agent: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 5.0; Windows 98; DigExt;              SP/5.51/0.90/FriSurf)
X-Originating-IP: 130.67.15.246
Message-ID:  <997106513.3b6ea351cda54@webmail.uib.no>
Date:         Mon, 6 Aug 2001 16:01:53 +0200
Reply-To: <Emil.Johnsen@STUDENT.UIB.NO>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <Emil.Johnsen@STUDENT.UIB.NO>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Melting PE for hybrid fuel grains
Comments: To: henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

>Consider grinding it (or perhaps buying it as pellets) and then
>consolidating it under heat and a bit of pressure -- a low-temperature
>equivalent of sintering.

Thanks. I will try that.

>The alternative, given suitable sources of supply, is to buy PE rod and
>drill it.

I have considered doing that, but the only source of PE rods I have been able
to locate is somewhat expensive.


Emil

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 1772 invoked from network); 6 Aug 2001 16:22:12 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 6 Aug 2001 16:22:12 -0000
Received: (qmail 26019 invoked from network); 6 Aug 2001 16:23:51 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 6 Aug 2001 16:23:51 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA07705; Mon, 6 Aug 2001 08:31:13 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 99806 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 6 Aug 2001 15:29:37 +0000
Received: from wrench.toolcity.net (root@wrench.toolcity.net [208.0.188.2]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA07677 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 6 Aug 2001 08:29:33 -0700
Received: from [208.22.189.115]          (dap-208-22-189-115.meadville-tnt-0.pa.toolcity.net [208.22.189.115])          by wrench.toolcity.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id LAA16766; Mon, 6          Aug 2001 11:29:26 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <v01510100b794758caa9b@[63.169.101.177]>
Date:         Mon, 6 Aug 2001 11:31:46 -0500
Reply-To: "al bradley" <abradley@TOOLCITY.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "al bradley" <abradley@TOOLCITY.NET>
Subject:      [AR] 2Re: [AR] Melting PE for hybrid fuel grains
Comments: To: Emil.Johnsen@STUDENT.UIB.NO
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

IIRC the sticks of "glue" I have here for my hot glue gun are PE. These
particular ones are "low temp" sticks that are listed as melting at 240
degrees F.

al bradley


-------------------------
>>Consider grinding it (or perhaps buying it as pellets) and then
>>consolidating it under heat and a bit of pressure -- a low-temperature
>>equivalent of sintering.
>
>Thanks. I will try that.
>
>>The alternative, given suitable sources of supply, is to buy PE rod and
>>drill it.
>
>I have considered doing that, but the only source of PE rods I have been able
>to locate is somewhat expensive.
>
>
>Emil

------------------------------------------------------------------
Can you live Life with this?: "Unless there is a law, an agreement, or a
long-standing custom, No one `Deserves' Anything -- Either Good or Bad!"

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 2296 invoked from network); 6 Aug 2001 16:30:15 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 6 Aug 2001 16:30:15 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 28666 invoked from network); 6 Aug 2001 16:31:57 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 6 Aug 2001 16:31:57 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA07894; Mon, 6 Aug 2001 09:07:13 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 99838 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 6 Aug 2001 16:05:46 +0000
Received: from ceres.triton.ch (ceres.triton.ch [212.254.218.98]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA07876 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 6 Aug 2001 09:05:44 -0700
Received: from spl.ch (robot.triton.ch [212.254.218.101]) by ceres.triton.ch          (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id SAA16707 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon,          6 Aug 2001 18:05:42 +0200
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.75 [en] (Win98; U)
X-Accept-Language: en,ja
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <38.19f95a0c.289f695e@aol.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B6EC03E.7AE6D140@spl.ch>
Date:         Mon, 6 Aug 2001 18:05:18 +0200
Reply-To: "Bruno Berger" <bruno.berger@SPL.CH>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Bruno Berger" <bruno.berger@SPL.CH>
Subject:      [AR] Cesaroni's DataCAD THRUST
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Cesaroni has released a Beta of their DataCAD THRUST software. Has anybody
ever worked with this software? I filled out their application form, but
never received an answer yet :-( (maybe we are not a "Qualified beta site"
:-) )

the link:  http://www.cesaronitech.com/newspage.html#01july1701

Bruno
--
Bruno Berger
Swiss Propulsion Laboratory
E-Mail: bruno.berger@spl.ch
WWW:    http://www.spl.ch

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 15859 invoked from network); 6 Aug 2001 17:28:24 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 6 Aug 2001 17:28:24 -0000
Received: (qmail 4235 invoked from network); 6 Aug 2001 17:30:42 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 6 Aug 2001 17:30:42 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA08227; Mon, 6 Aug 2001 10:11:16 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 99878 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 6 Aug 2001 17:09:53 +0000
Received: from spsystems.net (spsystems.net [209.47.149.227]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA08197 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Mon,          6 Aug 2001 10:09:53 -0700
Received: (from henry@localhost) by spsystems.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id NAA05570;          Mon, 6 Aug 2001 13:09:20 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010806130810.5343A-100000@spsystems.net>
Date:         Mon, 6 Aug 2001 13:09:20 -0400
Reply-To: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Melting PE for hybrid fuel grains
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <997106513.3b6ea351cda54@webmail.uib.no>

On Mon, 6 Aug 2001 Emil.Johnsen@STUDENT.UIB.NO wrote:
> >Consider grinding it (or perhaps buying it as pellets) and then
> >consolidating it under heat and a bit of pressure -- a low-temperature
> >equivalent of sintering.
>
> Thanks. I will try that.

Unless you do it in vacuum, it's likely to leave bubbles (in the same way
that sintering generally results in porous metals), but in a hybrid that
shouldn't be particularly harmful.

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 26588 invoked from network); 6 Aug 2001 17:38:58 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 6 Aug 2001 17:38:58 -0000
Received: (qmail 21868 invoked from network); 6 Aug 2001 17:41:12 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 6 Aug 2001 17:41:12 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA08113; Mon, 6 Aug 2001 09:54:08 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 99857 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 6 Aug 2001 16:52:42 +0000
Received: from mail8.wlv.netzero.net (mail8.wlv.netzero.net [209.247.163.58])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id JAA08061 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 6 Aug 2001 09:42:42 -0700
Received: (qmail 1064 invoked from network); 6 Aug 2001 16:42:22 -0000
Received: from dialup-64.154.123.199.dial1.omaha1.level3.net (HELO oemcomputer)          (64.154.123.199) by mail8.wlv.netzero.net with SMTP; 6 Aug 2001          16:42:22 -0000
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 8.5, Build 4.71.2173.0
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <000401c11e96$c8a26c60$c77b9a40@oemcomputer>
Date:         Mon, 6 Aug 2001 11:42:30 -0500
Reply-To: "Dan Cramer" <dan.cramer@NETZERO.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Dan Cramer" <dan.cramer@NETZERO.NET>
Subject:      [AR] Please remove me from the list
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

----------------------------------------------------
NetZero Platinum
Sign Up Today - Only $9.95 per month!
http://my.netzero.net/s/signup?r=platinum&refcd=PT97

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 16111 invoked from network); 6 Aug 2001 18:58:53 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 6 Aug 2001 18:58:53 -0000
Received: (qmail 19151 invoked from network); 6 Aug 2001 19:00:34 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 6 Aug 2001 19:00:34 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA08826; Mon, 6 Aug 2001 11:38:25 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 99955 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 6 Aug 2001 18:37:22 +0000
Received: from pilot10.cl.msu.edu (pilot10.cl.msu.edu [35.9.5.30]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA08810 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 6 Aug 2001 11:37:21 -0700
Received: from moid.msu.edu (moid.com.msu.edu [35.8.240.36]) by          pilot10.cl.msu.edu (8.10.2/8.10.2) with ESMTP id f76IbJ330582 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 6 Aug 2001 14:37:19 -0400
X-Sender: asman@pilot.msu.edu
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.2
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <4.3.2.7.2.20010806143720.02b4b5b8@pilot.msu.edu>
Date:         Mon, 6 Aug 2001 14:37:26 -0400
Reply-To: "Stephen W. Asman" <asman@PILOT.MSU.EDU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Stephen W. Asman" <asman@PILOT.MSU.EDU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Peroxide catalyts (was: high pressure tanks)
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

At 08:51 AM 8/5/2001 +0000, you wrote:
>> > Andrew Case schrieb:
>
>> > I use potassium permanganate for my H2O2/Isopropanol biprop. It can be
>>solved
>> > in the fuel prior to filling the tank with altering its burning
>> > characteristics by much (according to GDL PROPEP).
>> > I find that the easiest method...
>
>Indeed, to blow your tank up due to the reaction of permanganate with the
>alcohol (CO2 gas). It starts slowly. After 1/2 hour the dissolved
>parmanganate has become a manganese dioxide deposit.
>
>jd

Indeed yes, I tried permanganate in several potential fuels and found
Isopropyl to be rather unstable. Acetone remained stable (purple) for the
longest, it took about three days for the solution to go clear and all the
manganese dioxide to settle out.

Anyone try acetic acid?  That was next on my list.





-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Stephen W. Asman                             | Room A339 East Fee Hall
Microcomputer Hardware & Software Coordinator| Michigan State University
MSU-COM                                      | East Lansing, MI 48824
asman@msu.edu                                | (517) 432-0492

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 3639 invoked from network); 6 Aug 2001 20:24:47 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 6 Aug 2001 20:24:47 -0000
Received: (qmail 21196 invoked from network); 6 Aug 2001 20:27:26 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 6 Aug 2001 20:27:26 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA09459; Mon, 6 Aug 2001 13:15:50 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 100023 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 6 Aug 2001 20:13:03          +0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA09415 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon,          6 Aug 2001 13:13:03 -0700
Message-ID:  <200108062013.NAA09415@itc.uci.edu>
Date:         Mon, 6 Aug 2001 20:13:03 +0000
Reply-To: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Material Science SWAG needed
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

On Sun, 5 Aug 2001 14:42:53 -0600, Brian Kosko <bkosko1@HOME.COM> wrote:

>I'm looking to make a single shot N motor using some fiberglass tube that I have. Trying to see how cheaply I can make an N motor. The trouble is it isn't standard tubing and I haven't a clue about it's properties: tensile strength, etc.
>
>I'll tell what I know about it and you're free to SWAG from there. And no, I won't hold you to any of the answers. I was told the tubes were chaff dispensers used by the U.S. Navy. They certainly look more rugged than any G10 tubing I've seen. The tube O.D. os 4 1/8 in and the I.D. is 3 7/8 in. The wall thickness is 5/32 in and there are three distinct layers. The inner layer is 3/32 and looks like G10, albiet with some large threadlike fibers. The middle layer is 1/32 and is black. It's probably some kind of carbon layer. The outer layer is 1/32 and is green G10 that is obviously wrapped 'around' the tube. It has large, string-like fibers.
>

My guess is based on making motors of very close to those specs.  I would
think the burst pressure is a little under 3000psi and I would not operate a
motor over 1000psi and more likely 700psi.  That depends on your closure
method of course.  Frankenstein bolts is probably the most expedient but
glued closures the lowest profile.

>Once again, any and all guesses are welcomed.
>
>Brian
>


From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 58 invoked from network); 6 Aug 2001 20:40:08 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 6 Aug 2001 20:40:08 -0000
Received: (qmail 26311 invoked from network); 6 Aug 2001 20:42:21 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 6 Aug 2001 20:42:21 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA09585; Mon, 6 Aug 2001 13:22:56 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 100043 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 6 Aug 2001 20:20:09          +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (oe34.law12.hotmail.com [64.4.18.91]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA09563 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon,          6 Aug 2001 13:20:09 -0700
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Mon,          6 Aug 2001 13:19:38 -0700
X-Originating-IP: [24.29.188.254]
References:  <01d701c11d7e$427da5a0$8300a8c0@olmpi1.wa.home.com>                         <002301c11dca$37f83fe0$1b30fea9@kristinscomp>                         <020a01c11dd0$708bd5a0$8300a8c0@olmpi1.wa.home.com>              <003101c11de5$cd9513a0$1b30fea9@kristinscomp>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0AF7_01C56B69.474F61D0"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 06 Aug 2001 20:19:38.0699 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[1E28D1B0:01C11EB5]
Message-ID:  <OE34Nii59RkIM7XANaz00008aaa@hotmail.com>
Date:         Mon, 6 Aug 2001 15:21:13 -0500
Reply-To: "Mark Kruep" <mkruep@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Mark Kruep" <mkruep@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] non streamlined fins
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0AF7_01C56B69.474F61D0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

One other thing to keep in mind here is how long it will be traveling at =
those speeds. Back when they were doing the X-1 and it's predecessors, =
alot of them got toasted because they didn't go supersonic fast enough =
and hung around the transonic high buffeting zone. If you are gonna go =
supersonic, ideally you should pass through as quickly as possible. If =
your rocket is in the .95-.99 Mach range after you adjust for the draggy =
fins, I'd add some weight and slow it down. Since you're using a level 3 =
motor I am assuming you will spend several seconds at these high speeds =
and that isn't a real good plan. I'm not saying it can't work. Just that =
ole Murphy is always lookin for a way to get ya.=20

I also noticed something that could add to the above. Since you are =
showing identical angles for your leading and trailing edges, I'm =
guessing the LE & TE are identical in length.? I have been told that =
this can create flutter or failure in a fin. The explanation I got was a =
bit iffy, but they said that as the air moves over the fin, each edge =
will have or create a particular resonant frequency. If you have 2 edges =
the same length, the vibrations become additive and can ultimately lead =
to failure. I don't know this to be fact and missile systems like the =
Nike series kinda discredit this theory, but maybe someone here knows =
more about this.

Mark

  ----- Original Message -----=20
  From: Kristin & David Hall=20
  To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU=20
  Sent: Sunday, August 05, 2001 2:34 PM
  Subject: Re: [AR] non streamlined fins



  But what was the assumed fin cross section?  Depending upon what it =
was, I'm betting that your barely supersonic bird would no longer be =
supersonic.

  --
  Dave and/or Kristin Hall
    ----- Original Message -----=20
    From: Tomm Aldridge=20
    To: Kristin & David Hall ; AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU=20
    Sent: Sunday, August 05, 2001 10:02 AM
    Subject: Re: [AR] non streamlined fins


    Thanks Dave.  The sim results are:
    Vmax =3D 1259 ft/sec
    Altitude =3D 13,383 ft
    Time to Apogee =3D 26.50
    M1315 commercial motor

    Fin span root to tip =3D4"
    Fin root =3D 8"
    Fin tip =3D 4"
    LE sweep =3D 26.4 deg
    TE sweep =3D -26.4 deg
    Fin thickness =3D 0.280
    Fin Material =3D Graphite / Epoxy composite (Shadow autoclaved sheet =
stock)


      ----- Original Message -----=20
      From: Kristin & David Hall=20
      To: Tomm Aldridge ; AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU=20
      Sent: Sunday, August 05, 2001 9:18 AM
      Subject: Re: [AR] non streamlined fins



      Every once in a great while you may get bit in the butt, but most =
of the time a blunt leading/trailing fin edge won't do anything more =
than raise drag through the roof (You sure it's going sonic ;)?  For the =
life of me I can't remember which one it was, but there was a small =
tactical system (I want to say either Tiny Tim, but am not sure of that) =
that just used stamped sheet metal for fins - no tapering at all!  =
Admittedly, you won't see anything like that anymore but the point =
stands.

      --
      Dave and/or Kristin Hall
        ----- Original Message -----=20
        From: Tomm Aldridge=20
        To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU=20
        Sent: Sunday, August 05, 2001 12:14 AM
        Subject: [AR] non streamlined fins


        All,

        I have this L3 and EX capable airframe about ready to go and it =
uses Shadow Composite's .280 carbon/epoxy for the fins.  The stuff is a =
bear to work and I am thinking that I will fly without streamlining the =
fins' LE or TE; just leave them square.  The rocket will go sonic.  Will =
there be any real issues with turbulance or shocks generated by teh =
square fin LE or TE?  Anything else I may have missed that would cause =
me to really want to go tto the trouble to streamline these pieces of =
rock hard material?

        Thanks

        Tomm

------=_NextPart_000_0AF7_01C56B69.474F61D0
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Diso-8859-1">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 5.50.4616.200" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>One other thing to keep in mind here is =
how long it=20
will be traveling at those speeds. Back when they were doing the X-1 and =
it's=20
predecessors, alot of them got toasted because they didn't go supersonic =
fast=20
enough and hung around the transonic high buffeting zone. If you are =
gonna go=20
supersonic, ideally you should pass through as quickly as possible. If =
your=20
rocket is in the .95-.99 Mach range after you adjust for the draggy =
fins, I'd=20
add some weight and slow it down. Since you're using a level 3 motor I =
am=20
assuming you will spend several seconds at these high speeds and that =
isn't a=20
real good plan. I'm not saying it can't work. Just that ole Murphy is =
always=20
lookin for a way to get ya. </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>I also&nbsp;noticed something that =
could add to the=20
above. Since you are showing identical angles for your leading and =
trailing=20
edges, I'm guessing the LE &amp; TE are identical in length.? I have =
been told=20
that this can create flutter or failure in a fin. The explanation I got =
was a=20
bit iffy, but they said that as the air moves over the fin, each edge =
will have=20
or create a particular resonant frequency. If you have 2 edges the same =
length,=20
the vibrations become additive and can ultimately lead to failure. I =
don't know=20
this to be fact and missile systems like the Nike series kinda discredit =
this=20
theory, but maybe someone here knows more about this.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Mark</FONT></DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE dir=3Dltr=20
style=3D"PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; =
BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
  <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial">----- Original Message ----- </DIV>
  <DIV=20
  style=3D"BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; FONT: 10pt arial; font-color: =
black"><B>From:</B>=20
  <A title=3Dthehalls@RIDGENET.NET =
href=3D"mailto:thehalls@RIDGENET.NET">Kristin=20
  &amp; David Hall</A> </DIV>
  <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A =
title=3DAROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU=20
  href=3D"mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU">AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU</A> </DIV>
  <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> Sunday, August 05, 2001 =
2:34=20
  PM</DIV>
  <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> Re: [AR] non =
streamlined=20
  fins</DIV>
  <DIV><BR></DIV>
  <DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
  <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>But what was the assumed fin cross =
section?&nbsp;=20
  Depending upon what it was, I'm betting that your barely supersonic =
bird would=20
  no longer be supersonic.</FONT></DIV>
  <DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
  <DIV>--<BR>Dave and/or Kristin Hall</DIV>
  <BLOCKQUOTE dir=3Dltr=20
  style=3D"PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; =
BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
    <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial">----- Original Message ----- </DIV>
    <DIV=20
    style=3D"BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; FONT: 10pt arial; font-color: =
black"><B>From:</B>=20
    <A title=3Dtaldridge@home.com =
href=3D"mailto:taldridge@home.com">Tomm=20
    Aldridge</A> </DIV>
    <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A =
title=3Dthehalls@ridgenet.net=20
    href=3D"mailto:thehalls@ridgenet.net">Kristin &amp; David Hall</A> ; =
<A=20
    title=3DAROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU=20
    href=3D"mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU">AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU</A> </DIV>
    <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> Sunday, August 05, 2001 =
10:02=20
    AM</DIV>
    <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> Re: [AR] non =
streamlined=20
    fins</DIV>
    <DIV><BR></DIV>
    <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Thanks Dave.&nbsp; The sim results=20
    are:</FONT></DIV>
    <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Vmax =3D 1259 ft/sec</FONT></DIV>
    <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Altitude =3D 13,383 ft</FONT></DIV>
    <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Time to Apogee =3D =
26.50</FONT></DIV>
    <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>M1315 commercial motor</FONT></DIV>
    <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
    <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Fin span root to tip =
=3D4"</FONT></DIV>
    <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Fin root =3D 8"</FONT></DIV>
    <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Fin tip =3D 4"</FONT></DIV>
    <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>LE sweep =3D 26.4 deg</FONT></DIV>
    <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>TE sweep =3D -26.4 deg</FONT></DIV>
    <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Fin thickness =3D =
0.280</FONT></DIV>
    <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Fin Material =3D Graphite / Epoxy =
composite=20
    (Shadow autoclaved sheet stock)</FONT></DIV>
    <DIV><BR></DIV>
    <BLOCKQUOTE dir=3Dltr=20
    style=3D"PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; =
BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
      <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial">----- Original Message ----- =
</DIV>
      <DIV=20
      style=3D"BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; FONT: 10pt arial; font-color: =
black"><B>From:</B>=20
      <A title=3Dthehalls@ridgenet.net =
href=3D"mailto:thehalls@ridgenet.net">Kristin=20
      &amp; David Hall</A> </DIV>
      <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A =
title=3Dtaldridge@HOME.COM=20
      href=3D"mailto:taldridge@HOME.COM">Tomm Aldridge</A> ; <A=20
      title=3DAROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU=20
      href=3D"mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU">AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU</A> </DIV>
      <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> Sunday, August 05, =
2001 9:18=20
      AM</DIV>
      <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> Re: [AR] non =
streamlined=20
      fins</DIV>
      <DIV><BR></DIV>
      <DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
      <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Every once in a great while you =
may get bit=20
      in the butt, but most of the time a blunt leading/trailing fin =
edge won't=20
      do anything more than raise drag through the roof (You sure it's =
going=20
      sonic ;)?&nbsp; For the life of me I can't remember which one it =
was, but=20
      there was a small tactical system (I want to say&nbsp;either Tiny =
Tim, but=20
      am not sure of that) that just used stamped sheet metal for fins - =
no=20
      tapering at all!&nbsp; Admittedly, you won't see anything like =
that=20
      anymore but the point stands.</FONT></DIV>
      <DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
      <DIV>--<BR>Dave and/or Kristin Hall</DIV>
      <BLOCKQUOTE=20
      style=3D"PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; =
BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
        <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial">----- Original Message ----- =
</DIV>
        <DIV=20
        style=3D"BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; FONT: 10pt arial; font-color: =
black"><B>From:</B>=20
        <A title=3Dtaldridge@HOME.COM =
href=3D"mailto:taldridge@HOME.COM">Tomm=20
        Aldridge</A> </DIV>
        <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A =
title=3DAROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU=20
        href=3D"mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU">AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU</A> =
</DIV>
        <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> Sunday, August 05, =
2001 12:14=20
        AM</DIV>
        <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> [AR] non =
streamlined=20
        fins</DIV>
        <DIV><BR></DIV>
        <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>All,</FONT></DIV>
        <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
        <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>I have this L3 and EX capable =
airframe=20
        about ready to go and it uses Shadow Composite's .280 =
carbon/epoxy for=20
        the fins.&nbsp; The stuff is a bear to work and I am thinking =
that I=20
        will fly without streamlining the fins' LE or TE; just leave =
them=20
        square.&nbsp; The rocket will go sonic.&nbsp; Will there be any =
real=20
        issues with turbulance or shocks generated by teh square fin LE =
or=20
        TE?&nbsp; Anything else I may have missed that would cause me to =
really=20
        want to go tto the trouble to streamline these pieces of rock =
hard=20
        material?</FONT></DIV>
        <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
        <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Thanks</FONT></DIV>
        <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
        <DIV><FONT face=3DArial=20
  =
size=3D2>Tomm</FONT></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE></BLOCKQUOTE></BLOCKQUOTE></BLOCKQ=
UOTE></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0AF7_01C56B69.474F61D0--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 1507 invoked from network); 6 Aug 2001 21:52:55 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 6 Aug 2001 21:52:55 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: (qmail 20617 invoked from network); 6 Aug 2001 21:52:24 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 6 Aug 2001 21:52:24 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA10026; Mon, 6 Aug 2001 14:22:53 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 100103 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 6 Aug 2001 21:21:48          +0000
Received: from localhost (rcalkins@localhost) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with          ESMTP id OAA10005 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Mon, 6 Aug 2001 14:21:47          -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.LNX.4.10.10108061415310.9913-100000@itc.uci.edu>
Date:         Mon, 6 Aug 2001 14:21:47 -0700
Reply-To: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
Subject:      Re: [AR] north florida
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Forwarding this to the list for Don:

   I am also from Brevard County Florida and also work at Kennedy Space
Center.  I mainly lurck on this list, I am also finishing my Aerospace
Engineering PhD part-time and am working on a mono-propellant hydrazine
microthruster with some support from JPL.  I find some useful and
interesting information on this list.

Don Platt


On Sun, 5 Aug 2001, James Yawn wrote:

>  I am in Gainesville, FL - a little closer but still a drive...
> Jimmy Yawn
>
> Matthew Travis wrote:
>
> > Hope you don't get flooded out from Barry tonight.
> >
> > Marianna? I've been there on my way to/from Maxico City Beach. I don't think
> > there are many (any?) people from Florida on the list. I'm from the Brevard
> > County/Cape Canaveral area and I don't know of anyone else down in this part
> > of the state who's on the list.
> >
> > So, anyone else form Florida?
> >
> > -Matt
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU]On Behalf
> > Of foy
> > Sent: Sunday, August 05, 2001 4:19 PM
> > To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
> > Subject: [AR] north florida
> >
> >       Is anyone around Marianna Fl on this list. If so please contact me
> > foy@wfeca.net .    Foy
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 12213 invoked from network); 6 Aug 2001 22:10:32 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 6 Aug 2001 22:10:32 -0000
Received: (qmail 15485 invoked from network); 6 Aug 2001 22:12:46 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 6 Aug 2001 22:12:46 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA10311; Mon, 6 Aug 2001 14:51:26 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 100135 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 6 Aug 2001 21:50:04          +0000
Received: from smtprelay1.abs.adelphia.net (smtprelay.abs.adelphia.net          [64.8.20.11]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA10289 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 6 Aug 2001 14:50:03 -0700
Received: from jlgrady ([63.124.251.47]) by smtprelay1.abs.adelphia.net          (Netscape Messaging Server 4.15) with SMTP id GHO1Y300.10H for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 6 Aug 2001 17:49:15 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook CWS, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <000c01c11ec1$ea0a4eb0$0200a8c0@prestige.net>
Date:         Mon, 6 Aug 2001 17:51:13 -0400
Reply-To: "Jeff Grady" <jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jeff Grady" <jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Melting PE for hybrid fuel grains
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <997105749.3b6ea05568243@webmail.uib.no>

Anyone ever try PET (Polyethylene Terephthalate)? Same material used in
plastic cola bottles...

-----Original Message-----
From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@itc.uci.edu]On
Behalf Of Emil.Johnsen@STUDENT.UIB.NO
Sent: Monday, August 06, 2001 9:49 AM
To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
Subject: Re: [AR] Melting PE for hybrid fuel grains


>Excuse my ignorance, but isn't PE the same plastic that's used to make milk
>jugs?  Could someone thoroughly clean out some old milk jugs, melt them,
>and cast a PE cylinder useful as a fuel grain?  I don't know how many milk
>jugs that might take.  But given enough milk jugs, is this feasible?

That's what I'm trying to do, but I'm not using milk jugs (don't have those
around here). I use 20-30L jugs that are used for water, fuel and various
chemicals etc. Each is a bit over 1kg, enough for several fuel grains in the
size I'm working on now.


Emil

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 26990 invoked from network); 6 Aug 2001 22:50:23 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 6 Aug 2001 22:50:23 -0000
Received: (qmail 15301 invoked from network); 6 Aug 2001 22:52:36 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 6 Aug 2001 22:52:36 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA10457; Mon, 6 Aug 2001 15:17:12 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 100150 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 6 Aug 2001 22:15:43          +0000
Received: from mtiwmhc24.worldnet.att.net (mtiwmhc24.worldnet.att.net          [204.127.131.49]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA10441          for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Mon, 6 Aug 2001 15:15:43 -0700
Received: from ejabd ([12.83.23.211]) by mtiwmhc24.worldnet.att.net (InterMail          vM.4.01.03.16 201-229-121-116-20010115) with SMTP id          <20010806221509.YAUW3707.mtiwmhc24.worldnet.att.net@ejabd> for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Mon, 6 Aug 2001 22:15:09 +0000
References:  <01d701c11d7e$427da5a0$8300a8c0@olmpi1.wa.home.com>                            <002301c11dca$37f83fe0$1b30fea9@kristinscomp>                                  <020a01c11dd0$708bd5a0$8300a8c0@olmpi1.wa.home.com>                         <003101c11de5$cd9513a0$1b30fea9@kristinscomp>              <OE34Nii59RkIM7XANaz00008aaa@hotmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0AFA_01C56B69.475B48B0"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <002801c11ebf$5b1b7f00$d317530c@ejabd>
Date:         Mon, 6 Aug 2001 16:32:54 -0500
Reply-To: "Rick VanVoorhis" <rickv2@WORLDNET.ATT.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Rick VanVoorhis" <rickv2@WORLDNET.ATT.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] non streamlined fins
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0AFA_01C56B69.475B48B0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

One of the ways that the Nike series of rockets got around the problem =
was the profiling and construction of the fins.  With that constant =
taper to a center chord and large center beam the fins were able to =
handle any of the problems associated with symmetry.

Rick VanVoorhis
  ----- Original Message -----=20
  From: Mark Kruep=20
  To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU=20
  Sent: Monday, August 06, 2001 3:21 PM
  Subject: Re: [AR] non streamlined fins


  One other thing to keep in mind here is how long it will be traveling =
at those speeds. Back when they were doing the X-1 and it's =
predecessors, alot of them got toasted because they didn't go supersonic =
fast enough and hung around the transonic high buffeting zone. If you =
are gonna go supersonic, ideally you should pass through as quickly as =
possible. If your rocket is in the .95-.99 Mach range after you adjust =
for the draggy fins, I'd add some weight and slow it down. Since you're =
using a level 3 motor I am assuming you will spend several seconds at =
these high speeds and that isn't a real good plan. I'm not saying it =
can't work. Just that ole Murphy is always lookin for a way to get ya.=20
  =20
  I also noticed something that could add to the above. Since you are =
showing identical angles for your leading and trailing edges, I'm =
guessing the LE & TE are identical in length.? I have been told that =
this can create flutter or failure in a fin. The explanation I got was a =
bit iffy, but they said that as the air moves over the fin, each edge =
will have or create a particular resonant frequency. If you have 2 edges =
the same length, the vibrations become additive and can ultimately lead =
to failure. I don't know this to be fact and missile systems like the =
Nike series kinda discredit this theory, but maybe someone here knows =
more about this.
  =20
  Mark

    ----- Original Message -----=20
    From: Kristin & David Hall=20
    To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU=20
    Sent: Sunday, August 05, 2001 2:34 PM
    Subject: Re: [AR] non streamlined fins



    But what was the assumed fin cross section?  Depending upon what it =
was, I'm betting that your barely supersonic bird would no longer be =
supersonic.

    --
    Dave and/or Kristin Hall
      ----- Original Message -----=20
      From: Tomm Aldridge=20
      To: Kristin & David Hall ; AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU=20
      Sent: Sunday, August 05, 2001 10:02 AM
      Subject: Re: [AR] non streamlined fins


      Thanks Dave.  The sim results are:
      Vmax =3D 1259 ft/sec
      Altitude =3D 13,383 ft
      Time to Apogee =3D 26.50
      M1315 commercial motor
      =20
      Fin span root to tip =3D4"
      Fin root =3D 8"
      Fin tip =3D 4"
      LE sweep =3D 26.4 deg
      TE sweep =3D -26.4 deg
      Fin thickness =3D 0.280
      Fin Material =3D Graphite / Epoxy composite (Shadow autoclaved =
sheet stock)


        ----- Original Message -----=20
        From: Kristin & David Hall=20
        To: Tomm Aldridge ; AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU=20
        Sent: Sunday, August 05, 2001 9:18 AM
        Subject: Re: [AR] non streamlined fins



        Every once in a great while you may get bit in the butt, but =
most of the time a blunt leading/trailing fin edge won't do anything =
more than raise drag through the roof (You sure it's going sonic ;)?  =
For the life of me I can't remember which one it was, but there was a =
small tactical system (I want to say either Tiny Tim, but am not sure of =
that) that just used stamped sheet metal for fins - no tapering at all!  =
Admittedly, you won't see anything like that anymore but the point =
stands.

        --
        Dave and/or Kristin Hall
          ----- Original Message -----=20
          From: Tomm Aldridge=20
          To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU=20
          Sent: Sunday, August 05, 2001 12:14 AM
          Subject: [AR] non streamlined fins


          All,
          =20
          I have this L3 and EX capable airframe about ready to go and =
it uses Shadow Composite's .280 carbon/epoxy for the fins.  The stuff is =
a bear to work and I am thinking that I will fly without streamlining =
the fins' LE or TE; just leave them square.  The rocket will go sonic.  =
Will there be any real issues with turbulance or shocks generated by teh =
square fin LE or TE?  Anything else I may have missed that would cause =
me to really want to go tto the trouble to streamline these pieces of =
rock hard material?
          =20
          Thanks
          =20
          Tomm

------=_NextPart_000_0AFA_01C56B69.475B48B0
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META content=3D"text/html; charset=3Diso-8859-1" =
http-equiv=3DContent-Type>
<META content=3D"MSHTML 5.00.2614.3500" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>One of the ways that the Nike series of =
rockets got=20
around the problem was the profiling and construction of the fins.&nbsp; =
With=20
that constant taper to a center chord and large center beam the fins =
were able=20
to handle any of the problems associated with symmetry.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Rick VanVoorhis</FONT></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE dir=3Dltr=20
style=3D"BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: =
0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; PADDING-RIGHT: 0px">
  <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial">----- Original Message ----- </DIV>
  <DIV=20
  style=3D"BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; FONT: 10pt arial; font-color: =
black"><B>From:</B>=20
  <A href=3D"mailto:mkruep@HOTMAIL.COM" title=3Dmkruep@HOTMAIL.COM>Mark =
Kruep</A>=20
  </DIV>
  <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A =
href=3D"mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU"=20
  title=3DAROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU</A> </DIV>
  <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> Monday, August 06, 2001 =
3:21=20
  PM</DIV>
  <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> Re: [AR] non =
streamlined=20
  fins</DIV>
  <DIV><BR></DIV>
  <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>One other thing to keep in mind here =
is how long=20
  it will be traveling at those speeds. Back when they were doing the =
X-1 and=20
  it's predecessors, alot of them got toasted because they didn't go =
supersonic=20
  fast enough and hung around the transonic high buffeting zone. If you =
are=20
  gonna go supersonic, ideally you should pass through as quickly as =
possible.=20
  If your rocket is in the .95-.99 Mach range after you adjust for the =
draggy=20
  fins, I'd add some weight and slow it down. Since you're using a level =
3 motor=20
  I am assuming you will spend several seconds at these high speeds and =
that=20
  isn't a real good plan. I'm not saying it can't work. Just that ole =
Murphy is=20
  always lookin for a way to get ya. </FONT></DIV>
  <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
  <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>I also&nbsp;noticed something that =
could add to=20
  the above. Since you are showing identical angles for your leading and =

  trailing edges, I'm guessing the LE &amp; TE are identical in length.? =
I have=20
  been told that this can create flutter or failure in a fin. The =
explanation I=20
  got was a bit iffy, but they said that as the air moves over the fin, =
each=20
  edge will have or create a particular resonant frequency. If you have =
2 edges=20
  the same length, the vibrations become additive and can ultimately =
lead to=20
  failure. I don't know this to be fact and missile systems like the =
Nike series=20
  kinda discredit this theory, but maybe someone here knows more about=20
  this.</FONT></DIV>
  <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
  <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Mark</FONT></DIV>
  <DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
  <BLOCKQUOTE dir=3Dltr=20
  style=3D"BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; =
MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; PADDING-RIGHT: 0px">
    <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial">----- Original Message ----- </DIV>
    <DIV=20
    style=3D"BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; FONT: 10pt arial; font-color: =
black"><B>From:</B>=20
    <A href=3D"mailto:thehalls@RIDGENET.NET" =
title=3Dthehalls@RIDGENET.NET>Kristin=20
    &amp; David Hall</A> </DIV>
    <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A=20
    href=3D"mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU"=20
    title=3DAROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU</A> </DIV>
    <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> Sunday, August 05, 2001 =
2:34=20
    PM</DIV>
    <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> Re: [AR] non =
streamlined=20
    fins</DIV>
    <DIV><BR></DIV>
    <DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
    <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>But what was the assumed fin cross=20
    section?&nbsp; Depending upon what it was, I'm betting that your =
barely=20
    supersonic bird would no longer be supersonic.</FONT></DIV>
    <DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
    <DIV>--<BR>Dave and/or Kristin Hall</DIV>
    <BLOCKQUOTE dir=3Dltr=20
    style=3D"BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; =
MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; PADDING-RIGHT: 0px">
      <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial">----- Original Message ----- =
</DIV>
      <DIV=20
      style=3D"BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; FONT: 10pt arial; font-color: =
black"><B>From:</B>=20
      <A href=3D"mailto:taldridge@home.com" =
title=3Dtaldridge@home.com>Tomm=20
      Aldridge</A> </DIV>
      <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A=20
      href=3D"mailto:thehalls@ridgenet.net" =
title=3Dthehalls@ridgenet.net>Kristin=20
      &amp; David Hall</A> ; <A href=3D"mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU"=20
      title=3DAROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU</A> </DIV>
      <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> Sunday, August 05, =
2001 10:02=20
      AM</DIV>
      <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> Re: [AR] non =
streamlined=20
      fins</DIV>
      <DIV><BR></DIV>
      <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Thanks Dave.&nbsp; The sim =
results=20
      are:</FONT></DIV>
      <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Vmax =3D 1259 ft/sec</FONT></DIV>
      <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Altitude =3D 13,383 =
ft</FONT></DIV>
      <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Time to Apogee =3D =
26.50</FONT></DIV>
      <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>M1315 commercial =
motor</FONT></DIV>
      <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
      <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Fin span root to tip =
=3D4"</FONT></DIV>
      <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Fin root =3D 8"</FONT></DIV>
      <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Fin tip =3D 4"</FONT></DIV>
      <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>LE sweep =3D 26.4 =
deg</FONT></DIV>
      <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>TE sweep =3D -26.4 =
deg</FONT></DIV>
      <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Fin thickness =3D =
0.280</FONT></DIV>
      <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Fin Material =3D Graphite / Epoxy =
composite=20
      (Shadow autoclaved sheet stock)</FONT></DIV>
      <DIV><BR></DIV>
      <BLOCKQUOTE dir=3Dltr=20
      style=3D"BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; =
MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; PADDING-RIGHT: 0px">
        <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial">----- Original Message ----- =
</DIV>
        <DIV=20
        style=3D"BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; FONT: 10pt arial; font-color: =
black"><B>From:</B>=20
        <A href=3D"mailto:thehalls@ridgenet.net"=20
        title=3Dthehalls@ridgenet.net>Kristin &amp; David Hall</A> =
</DIV>
        <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A=20
        href=3D"mailto:taldridge@HOME.COM" =
title=3Dtaldridge@HOME.COM>Tomm=20
        Aldridge</A> ; <A href=3D"mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU"=20
        title=3DAROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU</A> </DIV>
        <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> Sunday, August 05, =
2001 9:18=20
        AM</DIV>
        <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> Re: [AR] non =
streamlined=20
        fins</DIV>
        <DIV><BR></DIV>
        <DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
        <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Every once in a great while you =
may get bit=20
        in the butt, but most of the time a blunt leading/trailing fin =
edge=20
        won't do anything more than raise drag through the roof (You =
sure it's=20
        going sonic ;)?&nbsp; For the life of me I can't remember which =
one it=20
        was, but there was a small tactical system (I want to =
say&nbsp;either=20
        Tiny Tim, but am not sure of that) that just used stamped sheet =
metal=20
        for fins - no tapering at all!&nbsp; Admittedly, you won't see =
anything=20
        like that anymore but the point stands.</FONT></DIV>
        <DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
        <DIV>--<BR>Dave and/or Kristin Hall</DIV>
        <BLOCKQUOTE=20
        style=3D"BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; =
MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; PADDING-RIGHT: 0px">
          <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial">----- Original Message ----- =
</DIV>
          <DIV=20
          style=3D"BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; FONT: 10pt arial; font-color: =
black"><B>From:</B>=20
          <A href=3D"mailto:taldridge@HOME.COM" =
title=3Dtaldridge@HOME.COM>Tomm=20
          Aldridge</A> </DIV>
          <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A=20
          href=3D"mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU"=20
          title=3DAROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU</A> </DIV>
          <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> Sunday, August =
05, 2001=20
          12:14 AM</DIV>
          <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> [AR] non =
streamlined=20
          fins</DIV>
          <DIV><BR></DIV>
          <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>All,</FONT></DIV>
          <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
          <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>I have this L3 and EX capable =
airframe=20
          about ready to go and it uses Shadow Composite's .280 =
carbon/epoxy for=20
          the fins.&nbsp; The stuff is a bear to work and I am thinking =
that I=20
          will fly without streamlining the fins' LE or TE; just leave =
them=20
          square.&nbsp; The rocket will go sonic.&nbsp; Will there be =
any real=20
          issues with turbulance or shocks generated by teh square fin =
LE or=20
          TE?&nbsp; Anything else I may have missed that would cause me =
to=20
          really want to go tto the trouble to streamline these pieces =
of rock=20
          hard material?</FONT></DIV>
          <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
          <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Thanks</FONT></DIV>
          <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
          <DIV><FONT face=3DArial=20
    =
size=3D2>Tomm</FONT></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE></BLOCKQUOTE></BLOCKQUOTE></BLOCKQ=
UOTE></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0AFA_01C56B69.475B48B0--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 11603 invoked from network); 7 Aug 2001 01:24:21 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 7 Aug 2001 01:24:21 -0000
Received: (qmail 14254 invoked from network); 7 Aug 2001 01:26:34 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 7 Aug 2001 01:26:34 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA11601; Mon, 6 Aug 2001 18:19:14 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 100385 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 7 Aug 2001 01:18:26          +0000
Received: from femail9.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail9.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.0.95.89]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA11586 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 6 Aug 2001 18:18:25 -0700
Received: from sean ([65.14.214.3]) by femail9.sdc1.sfba.home.com (InterMail          vM.4.01.03.20 201-229-121-120-20010223) with SMTP id          <20010807011818.CNGN7798.femail9.sdc1.sfba.home.com@sean> for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 6 Aug 2001 18:18:18 -0700
References: <38.19f95a0c.289f695e@aol.com>  <3B6EC03E.7AE6D140@spl.ch>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <004901c11ede$fc954ae0$647ba8c0@annapolis1.md.home.com>
Date:         Mon, 6 Aug 2001 21:19:04 -0400
Reply-To: "Sean McAndrew" <seanmca79@HOME.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Sean McAndrew" <seanmca79@HOME.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Cesaroni's DataCAD THRUST
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

I too have filed out and sent in a beta testing application. In the message
that was sent with the application, they said the selection process may take
a few weeks. I'm sure with the facilities that you guys have, you would
certainly qualify for beta testing.

I have a screen shot of the program that Anthony sent. It looks really good.
I will post it to the arocket uploads area if Anthony grants me permission
to do so.

Sean McAndrew

----- Original Message -----
From: Bruno Berger <bruno.berger@SPL.CH>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Monday, August 06, 2001 12:05 PM
Subject: [AR] Cesaroni's DataCAD THRUST


> Cesaroni has released a Beta of their DataCAD THRUST software. Has anybody
> ever worked with this software? I filled out their application form, but
> never received an answer yet :-( (maybe we are not a "Qualified beta site"
> :-) )
>
> the link:  http://www.cesaronitech.com/newspage.html#01july1701
>
> Bruno
> --
> Bruno Berger
> Swiss Propulsion Laboratory
> E-Mail: bruno.berger@spl.ch
> WWW:    http://www.spl.ch
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 16139 invoked from network); 7 Aug 2001 02:11:29 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 7 Aug 2001 02:11:29 -0000
Received: (qmail 16630 invoked from network); 7 Aug 2001 02:13:47 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 7 Aug 2001 02:13:47 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA11941; Mon, 6 Aug 2001 19:06:48 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 100460 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 7 Aug 2001 02:06:38          +0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA11924 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon,          6 Aug 2001 19:06:37 -0700
Message-ID:  <200108070206.TAA11924@itc.uci.edu>
Date:         Tue, 7 Aug 2001 02:06:37 +0000
Reply-To: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Subject:      [AR] Polite apology
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

I have now read the rules mailed to all members when joining and see I owe
you folks an apology for replying in kind to the recent bait.

I apologize.

I feel and hope I have reformed.  If I slip again please nudge me gently as I
hope to contribute on topics in my areas of specialty.

Jerry


From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 1178 invoked from network); 7 Aug 2001 04:23:13 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 7 Aug 2001 04:23:13 -0000
Received: (qmail 22454 invoked from network); 7 Aug 2001 04:25:28 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 7 Aug 2001 04:25:28 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA12725; Mon, 6 Aug 2001 21:10:13 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 100496 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 7 Aug 2001 04:08:35          +0000
Received: from femail34.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail34.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.254.60.24]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA12058          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 6 Aug 2001 19:18:39 -0700
Received: from officenew ([24.1.27.168]) by femail34.sdc1.sfba.home.com          (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20 201-229-121-120-20010223) with SMTP id          <20010807021811.EZOR15269.femail34.sdc1.sfba.home.com@officenew> for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 6 Aug 2001 19:18:11 -0700
References:  <01d701c11d7e$427da5a0$8300a8c0@olmpi1.wa.home.com>                            <002301c11dca$37f83fe0$1b30fea9@kristinscomp>                                  <020a01c11dd0$708bd5a0$8300a8c0@olmpi1.wa.home.com>                            <003101c11de5$cd9513a0$1b30fea9@kristinscomp>                          <OE34Nii59RkIM7XANaz00008aaa@hotmail.com>              <002801c11ebf$5b1b7f00$d317530c@ejabd>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0AFD_01C56B69.4764E5A0"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2462.0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <031e01c11ee7$3498eac0$8300a8c0@olmpi1.wa.home.com>
Date:         Mon, 6 Aug 2001 19:18:10 -0700
Reply-To: "Tomm Aldridge" <taldridge@HOME.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Tomm Aldridge" <taldridge@HOME.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] non streamlined fins
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0AFD_01C56B69.4764E5A0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

All,

Thanks for the input.  I believe I will go ahead and fly the beast as is =
and repot the outcome to you all in October.  For now check out this =
link:

http://www.info-central.org/design_finflutter.shtml

Lots of good fin flutter stuff.

Tomm
  ----- Original Message -----=20
  From: Rick VanVoorhis=20
  To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU=20
  Sent: Monday, August 06, 2001 2:32 PM
  Subject: Re: [AR] non streamlined fins


  One of the ways that the Nike series of rockets got around the problem =
was the profiling and construction of the fins.  With that constant =
taper to a center chord and large center beam the fins were able to =
handle any of the problems associated with symmetry.

  Rick VanVoorhis
    ----- Original Message -----=20
    From: Mark Kruep=20
    To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU=20
    Sent: Monday, August 06, 2001 3:21 PM
    Subject: Re: [AR] non streamlined fins


    One other thing to keep in mind here is how long it will be =
traveling at those speeds. Back when they were doing the X-1 and it's =
predecessors, alot of them got toasted because they didn't go supersonic =
fast enough and hung around the transonic high buffeting zone. If you =
are gonna go supersonic, ideally you should pass through as quickly as =
possible. If your rocket is in the .95-.99 Mach range after you adjust =
for the draggy fins, I'd add some weight and slow it down. Since you're =
using a level 3 motor I am assuming you will spend several seconds at =
these high speeds and that isn't a real good plan. I'm not saying it =
can't work. Just that ole Murphy is always lookin for a way to get ya.=20

    I also noticed something that could add to the above. Since you are =
showing identical angles for your leading and trailing edges, I'm =
guessing the LE & TE are identical in length.? I have been told that =
this can create flutter or failure in a fin. The explanation I got was a =
bit iffy, but they said that as the air moves over the fin, each edge =
will have or create a particular resonant frequency. If you have 2 edges =
the same length, the vibrations become additive and can ultimately lead =
to failure. I don't know this to be fact and missile systems like the =
Nike series kinda discredit this theory, but maybe someone here knows =
more about this.

    Mark

      ----- Original Message -----=20
      From: Kristin & David Hall=20
      To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU=20
      Sent: Sunday, August 05, 2001 2:34 PM
      Subject: Re: [AR] non streamlined fins



      But what was the assumed fin cross section?  Depending upon what =
it was, I'm betting that your barely supersonic bird would no longer be =
supersonic.

      --
      Dave and/or Kristin Hall
        ----- Original Message -----=20
        From: Tomm Aldridge=20
        To: Kristin & David Hall ; AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU=20
        Sent: Sunday, August 05, 2001 10:02 AM
        Subject: Re: [AR] non streamlined fins


        Thanks Dave.  The sim results are:
        Vmax =3D 1259 ft/sec
        Altitude =3D 13,383 ft
        Time to Apogee =3D 26.50
        M1315 commercial motor

        Fin span root to tip =3D4"
        Fin root =3D 8"
        Fin tip =3D 4"
        LE sweep =3D 26.4 deg
        TE sweep =3D -26.4 deg
        Fin thickness =3D 0.280
        Fin Material =3D Graphite / Epoxy composite (Shadow autoclaved =
sheet stock)


          ----- Original Message -----=20
          From: Kristin & David Hall=20
          To: Tomm Aldridge ; AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU=20
          Sent: Sunday, August 05, 2001 9:18 AM
          Subject: Re: [AR] non streamlined fins



          Every once in a great while you may get bit in the butt, but =
most of the time a blunt leading/trailing fin edge won't do anything =
more than raise drag through the roof (You sure it's going sonic ;)?  =
For the life of me I can't remember which one it was, but there was a =
small tactical system (I want to say either Tiny Tim, but am not sure of =
that) that just used stamped sheet metal for fins - no tapering at all!  =
Admittedly, you won't see anything like that anymore but the point =
stands.

          --
          Dave and/or Kristin Hall
            ----- Original Message -----=20
            From: Tomm Aldridge=20
            To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU=20
            Sent: Sunday, August 05, 2001 12:14 AM
            Subject: [AR] non streamlined fins


            All,

            I have this L3 and EX capable airframe about ready to go and =
it uses Shadow Composite's .280 carbon/epoxy for the fins.  The stuff is =
a bear to work and I am thinking that I will fly without streamlining =
the fins' LE or TE; just leave them square.  The rocket will go sonic.  =
Will there be any real issues with turbulance or shocks generated by teh =
square fin LE or TE?  Anything else I may have missed that would cause =
me to really want to go tto the trouble to streamline these pieces of =
rock hard material?

            Thanks

            Tomm

------=_NextPart_000_0AFD_01C56B69.4764E5A0
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Diso-8859-1">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 6.00.2462.0" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>All,</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Thanks for the input.&nbsp; I believe I =
will go=20
ahead and fly the beast as is and repot the outcome to you all in =
October.&nbsp;=20
For now check out this link:</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2><A=20
href=3D"http://www.info-central.org/design_finflutter.shtml">http://www.i=
nfo-central.org/design_finflutter.shtml</A></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Lots of good fin flutter =
stuff.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Tomm</FONT></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE dir=3Dltr=20
style=3D"PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; =
BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
  <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial">----- Original Message ----- </DIV>
  <DIV=20
  style=3D"BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; FONT: 10pt arial; font-color: =
black"><B>From:</B>=20
  <A title=3Drickv2@WORLDNET.ATT.NET =
href=3D"mailto:rickv2@WORLDNET.ATT.NET">Rick=20
  VanVoorhis</A> </DIV>
  <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A =
title=3DAROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU=20
  href=3D"mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU">AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU</A> </DIV>
  <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> Monday, August 06, 2001 =
2:32=20
  PM</DIV>
  <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> Re: [AR] non =
streamlined=20
  fins</DIV>
  <DIV><BR></DIV>
  <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>One of the ways that the Nike series =
of rockets=20
  got around the problem was the profiling and construction of the =
fins.&nbsp;=20
  With that constant taper to a center chord and large center beam the =
fins were=20
  able to handle any of the problems associated with =
symmetry.</FONT></DIV>
  <DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
  <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Rick VanVoorhis</FONT></DIV>
  <BLOCKQUOTE dir=3Dltr=20
  style=3D"PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; =
BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
    <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial">----- Original Message ----- </DIV>
    <DIV=20
    style=3D"BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; FONT: 10pt arial; font-color: =
black"><B>From:</B>=20
    <A title=3Dmkruep@HOTMAIL.COM =
href=3D"mailto:mkruep@HOTMAIL.COM">Mark Kruep</A>=20
    </DIV>
    <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A =
title=3DAROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU=20
    href=3D"mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU">AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU</A> </DIV>
    <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> Monday, August 06, 2001 =
3:21=20
    PM</DIV>
    <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> Re: [AR] non =
streamlined=20
    fins</DIV>
    <DIV><BR></DIV>
    <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>One other thing to keep in mind =
here is how=20
    long it will be traveling at those speeds. Back when they were doing =
the X-1=20
    and it's predecessors, alot of them got toasted because they didn't =
go=20
    supersonic fast enough and hung around the transonic high buffeting =
zone. If=20
    you are gonna go supersonic, ideally you should pass through as =
quickly as=20
    possible. If your rocket is in the .95-.99 Mach range after you =
adjust for=20
    the draggy fins, I'd add some weight and slow it down. Since you're =
using a=20
    level 3 motor I am assuming you will spend several seconds at these =
high=20
    speeds and that isn't a real good plan. I'm not saying it can't =
work. Just=20
    that ole Murphy is always lookin for a way to get ya. </FONT></DIV>
    <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
    <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>I also&nbsp;noticed something that =
could add to=20
    the above. Since you are showing identical angles for your leading =
and=20
    trailing edges, I'm guessing the LE &amp; TE are identical in =
length.? I=20
    have been told that this can create flutter or failure in a fin. The =

    explanation I got was a bit iffy, but they said that as the air =
moves over=20
    the fin, each edge will have or create a particular resonant =
frequency. If=20
    you have 2 edges the same length, the vibrations become additive and =
can=20
    ultimately lead to failure. I don't know this to be fact and missile =
systems=20
    like the Nike series kinda discredit this theory, but maybe someone =
here=20
    knows more about this.</FONT></DIV>
    <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
    <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Mark</FONT></DIV>
    <DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
    <BLOCKQUOTE dir=3Dltr=20
    style=3D"PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; =
BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
      <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial">----- Original Message ----- =
</DIV>
      <DIV=20
      style=3D"BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; FONT: 10pt arial; font-color: =
black"><B>From:</B>=20
      <A title=3Dthehalls@RIDGENET.NET =
href=3D"mailto:thehalls@RIDGENET.NET">Kristin=20
      &amp; David Hall</A> </DIV>
      <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A =
title=3DAROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU=20
      href=3D"mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU">AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU</A> </DIV>
      <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> Sunday, August 05, =
2001 2:34=20
      PM</DIV>
      <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> Re: [AR] non =
streamlined=20
      fins</DIV>
      <DIV><BR></DIV>
      <DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
      <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>But what was the assumed fin =
cross=20
      section?&nbsp; Depending upon what it was, I'm betting that your =
barely=20
      supersonic bird would no longer be supersonic.</FONT></DIV>
      <DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
      <DIV>--<BR>Dave and/or Kristin Hall</DIV>
      <BLOCKQUOTE dir=3Dltr=20
      style=3D"PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; =
BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
        <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial">----- Original Message ----- =
</DIV>
        <DIV=20
        style=3D"BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; FONT: 10pt arial; font-color: =
black"><B>From:</B>=20
        <A title=3Dtaldridge@home.com =
href=3D"mailto:taldridge@home.com">Tomm=20
        Aldridge</A> </DIV>
        <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A =
title=3Dthehalls@ridgenet.net=20
        href=3D"mailto:thehalls@ridgenet.net">Kristin &amp; David =
Hall</A> ; <A=20
        title=3DAROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU=20
        href=3D"mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU">AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU</A> =
</DIV>
        <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> Sunday, August 05, =
2001 10:02=20
        AM</DIV>
        <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> Re: [AR] non =
streamlined=20
        fins</DIV>
        <DIV><BR></DIV>
        <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Thanks Dave.&nbsp; The sim =
results=20
        are:</FONT></DIV>
        <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Vmax =3D 1259 =
ft/sec</FONT></DIV>
        <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Altitude =3D 13,383 =
ft</FONT></DIV>
        <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Time to Apogee =3D =
26.50</FONT></DIV>
        <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>M1315 commercial =
motor</FONT></DIV>
        <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
        <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Fin span root to tip =
=3D4"</FONT></DIV>
        <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Fin root =3D 8"</FONT></DIV>
        <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Fin tip =3D 4"</FONT></DIV>
        <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>LE sweep =3D 26.4 =
deg</FONT></DIV>
        <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>TE sweep =3D -26.4 =
deg</FONT></DIV>
        <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Fin thickness =3D =
0.280</FONT></DIV>
        <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Fin Material =3D Graphite / =
Epoxy composite=20
        (Shadow autoclaved sheet stock)</FONT></DIV>
        <DIV><BR></DIV>
        <BLOCKQUOTE dir=3Dltr=20
        style=3D"PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: =
5px; BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
          <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial">----- Original Message ----- =
</DIV>
          <DIV=20
          style=3D"BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; FONT: 10pt arial; font-color: =
black"><B>From:</B>=20
          <A title=3Dthehalls@ridgenet.net=20
          href=3D"mailto:thehalls@ridgenet.net">Kristin &amp; David =
Hall</A>=20
</DIV>
          <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A =
title=3Dtaldridge@HOME.COM=20
          href=3D"mailto:taldridge@HOME.COM">Tomm Aldridge</A> ; <A=20
          title=3DAROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU=20
          href=3D"mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU">AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU</A> =
</DIV>
          <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> Sunday, August =
05, 2001=20
          9:18 AM</DIV>
          <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> Re: [AR] non =
streamlined=20
          fins</DIV>
          <DIV><BR></DIV>
          <DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
          <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Every once in a great while =
you may get=20
          bit in the butt, but most of the time a blunt leading/trailing =
fin=20
          edge won't do anything more than raise drag through the roof =
(You sure=20
          it's going sonic ;)?&nbsp; For the life of me I can't remember =
which=20
          one it was, but there was a small tactical system (I want to=20
          say&nbsp;either Tiny Tim, but am not sure of that) that just =
used=20
          stamped sheet metal for fins - no tapering at all!&nbsp; =
Admittedly,=20
          you won't see anything like that anymore but the point=20
          stands.</FONT></DIV>
          <DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
          <DIV>--<BR>Dave and/or Kristin Hall</DIV>
          <BLOCKQUOTE=20
          style=3D"PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: =
5px; BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
            <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial">----- Original Message ----- =
</DIV>
            <DIV=20
            style=3D"BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; FONT: 10pt arial; font-color: =
black"><B>From:</B>=20
            <A title=3Dtaldridge@HOME.COM =
href=3D"mailto:taldridge@HOME.COM">Tomm=20
            Aldridge</A> </DIV>
            <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A=20
            title=3DAROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU=20
            href=3D"mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU">AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU</A> =
</DIV>
            <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> Sunday, August =
05, 2001=20
            12:14 AM</DIV>
            <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> [AR] non =
streamlined=20
            fins</DIV>
            <DIV><BR></DIV>
            <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>All,</FONT></DIV>
            <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
            <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>I have this L3 and EX =
capable airframe=20
            about ready to go and it uses Shadow Composite's .280 =
carbon/epoxy=20
            for the fins.&nbsp; The stuff is a bear to work and I am =
thinking=20
            that I will fly without streamlining the fins' LE or TE; =
just leave=20
            them square.&nbsp; The rocket will go sonic.&nbsp; Will =
there be any=20
            real issues with turbulance or shocks generated by teh =
square fin LE=20
            or TE?&nbsp; Anything else I may have missed that would =
cause me to=20
            really want to go tto the trouble to streamline these pieces =
of rock=20
            hard material?</FONT></DIV>
            <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
            <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Thanks</FONT></DIV>
            <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
            <DIV><FONT face=3DArial=20
      =
size=3D2>Tomm</FONT></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE></BLOCKQUOTE></BLOCKQUOTE></BLOCKQ=
UOTE></BLOCKQUOTE></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0AFD_01C56B69.4764E5A0--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 10206 invoked from network); 7 Aug 2001 18:03:56 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 7 Aug 2001 18:03:56 -0000
Received: (qmail 15843 invoked from network); 7 Aug 2001 18:06:36 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 7 Aug 2001 18:06:36 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA16111; Tue, 7 Aug 2001 10:54:44 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 101020 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 7 Aug 2001 17:54:19          +0000
Received: from c002.snv.cp.net (c002-h000.c002.snv.cp.net [209.228.32.164]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id KAA16095 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 7 Aug 2001 10:54:19 -0700
Received: (cpmta 14768 invoked from network); 7 Aug 2001 10:53:47 -0700
Received: from 1Cust128.tnt2.williamsburg.va.da.uu.net (HELO default)          (63.21.81.128) by smtp.peoplepc.com (209.228.32.164) with SMTP; 7 Aug          2001 10:53:47 -0700
X-Sent: 7 Aug 2001 17:53:47 GMT
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0B00_01C56B69.4764E5A0"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <003d01c11f6b$93eb07e0$8051153f@default>
Date:         Tue, 7 Aug 2001 14:05:42 -0400
Reply-To: "David Muesing" <dmuesing@PEOPLEPC.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "David Muesing" <dmuesing@PEOPLEPC.COM>
Subject:      [AR] NASA Bookstore Online
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0B00_01C56B69.4764E5A0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

I thought some would be interested in this.

Dave Muesing

NEW ON THE WEB
NASA Tech Briefs has opened an online bookstore where you can get =
discounts on
new titles from major publishers of engineering/scientific books and =
reference
works, including Academic Press, Wiley, the American Institute of
Aeronautics and Astronautics (AIAA), and the International Society for =
Optical
Engineering (SPIE).

You can search by subject or category. The categories span Electronic
Engineering, Mechanical Engineering, Materials Science, Photonics, =
Physical
Sciences, Computer Science, and more. Please visit the store regularly, =
as the
selections will be expanding rapidly in coming weeks.

Go to www.nasatech.com/store .




------=_NextPart_000_0B00_01C56B69.4764E5A0
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Diso-8859-1">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 5.50.4616.200" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=3DOCRA color=3D#0000ff>I thought some would be =
interested in=20
this.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DOCRA color=3D#0000ff></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DOCRA color=3D#0000ff>Dave Muesing</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DOCRA color=3D#0000ff><FONT face=3DOCRA=20
color=3D#0000ff></FONT></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DOCRA color=3D#0000ff><FONT face=3D"Times New Roman"=20
color=3D#000000>NEW ON THE WEB<BR>NASA Tech Briefs has opened an online =
bookstore=20
where you can get discounts on<BR>new titles from major publishers of=20
engineering/scientific books and reference<BR>works, including Academic =
Press,=20
Wiley, the American Institute of<BR>Aeronautics and Astronautics (AIAA), =
and the=20
International Society for Optical<BR>Engineering (SPIE).<BR><BR>You can =
search=20
by subject or category. The categories span Electronic<BR>Engineering,=20
Mechanical Engineering, Materials Science, Photonics, =
Physical<BR>Sciences,=20
Computer Science, and more. Please visit the store regularly, as=20
the<BR>selections will be expanding rapidly in coming weeks.<BR><BR>Go =
to=20
</FONT><A href=3D"http://www.nasatech.com/store"><FONT=20
face=3D"Times New Roman">www.nasatech.com/store</FONT></A><FONT=20
face=3D"Times New Roman" color=3D#000000>=20
.<BR><BR><BR></FONT></DIV></FONT></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0B00_01C56B69.4764E5A0--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 8242 invoked from network); 7 Aug 2001 22:09:02 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 7 Aug 2001 22:09:02 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA17519; Tue, 7 Aug 2001 14:10:43 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 101199 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 7 Aug 2001 21:10:31          +0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA17492 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue,          7 Aug 2001 14:09:34 -0700
Message-ID:  <200108072109.OAA17492@itc.uci.edu>
Date:         Tue, 7 Aug 2001 21:09:34 +0000
Reply-To: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Head end igniters
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

On Fri, 3 Aug 2001 19:41:24 -0700, Wedge Oldham <wedge@WESTWORLD.COM> wrote:

>I'd be interested in "Head-End" igniters for either the Dr. Rocket or
>Aerotech cases.
>
>I'm sure the question is rather academic, but when you say you've had 100%
>success, is that you've never had a forward closure leak, or you've never
>failed to light a motor with head-end igniters. I have a feeling the answer
>is both, but just wanna make sure.
>

We have used igniter bulkheads aka head end igniters for about 20 years now.
In commercial and consumer systems the reliability is 100% based on all
motors igniting as agreed.

There is occasionally a variance with an entirely new design where the
ignition rise time exceeds 0.15 sec or the system has slight leaks.  However
on the systems with heritage the results are excellent.

It is important to note igniter bulkheads are more expensive to machine and
manufacture and require the igniter to have special treatments so it is also
more expensive to replace.  Not uncommon to have an igniter be $5-10 instead
of $2.  Not uncommon to have an igniter grain be $10-20.

However what you do get is reliable go when and how you instruct it whether
it be clustering, staging, sequencing or retro.

I believe the Russian Soyuz capsule uses solid retro motors for landing speed
reduction for example.

Since most consumers are fairly thrifty I doubt it will become "popular" to
ignite your motor on the head end, but on a motor with any more power than an
L or more complexity than a single motor it sure makes sense to properly
ignite it.

Jerry


From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 18962 invoked from network); 7 Aug 2001 22:44:09 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 7 Aug 2001 22:44:09 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 11345 invoked from network); 7 Aug 2001 22:46:26 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 7 Aug 2001 22:46:26 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA17958; Tue, 7 Aug 2001 15:09:13 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 101277 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 7 Aug 2001 22:09:07          +0000
Received: from stud.uni-goettingen.de (root@s2.stud.uni-goettingen.de          [134.76.60.22]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA17943          for <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Tue, 7 Aug 2001 15:09:06 -0700
Received: from router.atw.stud.uni-goettingen.de ([134.76.62.65]          helo=stud.uni-goettingen.de) by stud.uni-goettingen.de with esmtp          (Exim 2.12 #8) id 15UF28-0000DJ-00 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 8          Aug 2001 00:09:04 +0200
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [de] (Win98; I)
X-Accept-Language: de
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B7066C9.6B93FC74@stud.uni-goettingen.de>
Date:         Wed, 8 Aug 2001 00:08:09 +0200
Reply-To: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Thomas Engelhardt" <tengelh@STUD.UNI-GOETTINGEN.DE>
Organization: =?iso-8859-1?Q?Rocket_Research_G=F6ttingen_=28RRG=29?=
Subject:      Re: [AR] Head end igniters
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Jerry Irvine schrieb:

<snip>

>It is important to note igniter bulkheads are more expensive to machine and
>manufacture and require the igniter to have special treatments so it is also
>more expensive to replace.  Not uncommon to have an igniter be $5-10 instead
>of $2.  Not uncommon to have an igniter grain be $10-20.

>However what you do get is reliable go when and how you instruct it whether
>it be clustering, staging, sequencing or retro.

<snip>

Yes, I had those things im my mind when I asked....I wouldn't mind
paying those 20-30 dollars extra when I have a project for over 2000
dollars or more if there were any commercially made head end ignitors.
There are not many things that make you feel more stupid than saving
money on the wrong item.


Cheers,

Tom

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 14815 invoked from network); 7 Aug 2001 22:50:56 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 7 Aug 2001 22:50:56 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA17811; Tue, 7 Aug 2001 14:53:31 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 101238 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 7 Aug 2001 21:53:27          +0000
Received: from dune.gnc.net (root@dune.gnc.net [207.203.72.4]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA17796 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue,          7 Aug 2001 14:53:26 -0700
Received: from beowulf (sw2-20.gnc.net [207.203.72.100]) by dune.gnc.net          (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id RAA14389 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 7          Aug 2001 17:53:26 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
Importance: Normal
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <LPBBKJMJEOFKAMFJJNNHEEFHCGAA.landofgrey@gnc.net>
Date:         Tue, 7 Aug 2001 17:53:15 -0400
Reply-To: <landofgrey@gnc.net>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Matthew Travis" <landofgrey@gnc.net>
Subject:      [AR] Slightly OT humor: Engineering corrolaries to Murphy's Law
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <200108072109.OAA17492@itc.uci.edu>

Corrolaries to Murphy's Law:

A. the necessity of making a major design change increases as the
fabrication of the system approaches completion

B. firmness of delivery dates is inversely propportional to the tightness of
the schedule

C. Dimensions will always be expressed in the least usable terms

D. Original drawings will be mangled by the copying machine

E. All constants are variable

F. In a complex calculation, one factor from the numerator will always move
to the denominator

G. Identical units tested under identical conditions will not be identical
in the field

H. If a project requires "n" components, there will be "n-1" units in stock

I. A dropped tool will land where it can do the most damage (Also known as
the law of selective gravitation)

J. A device selected at random from a group having 99% reliability will be a
member of the 1% group

K. Interchangeable parts won't

L. After the last of 16 mounting screws has been removed from an access
cover, it will be discovered that the wrong access coverhas been removed

M. After an access cover has been secured by 16 hold-down screws, it will be
discovered that the gasket has been omitted.

                           - Found on an Orbital Sciences satellite team
bulletin board

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 23297 invoked from network); 7 Aug 2001 23:00:51 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 7 Aug 2001 23:00:51 -0000
Received: (qmail 12358 invoked from network); 7 Aug 2001 23:03:32 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 7 Aug 2001 23:03:32 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA18126; Tue, 7 Aug 2001 15:39:36 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 101302 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 7 Aug 2001 22:39:18          +0000
Received: from smtprelay3.abs.adelphia.net (smtprelay.abs.adelphia.net          [64.8.20.11]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA18110 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 7 Aug 2001 15:39:17 -0700
Received: from jlgrady ([63.124.251.47]) by smtprelay3.abs.adelphia.net          (Netscape Messaging Server 4.15) with SMTP id GHPYWJ00.JSV for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 7 Aug 2001 18:38:43 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0B03_01C56B69.47672F90"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook CWS, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <001001c11f91$f9537600$0200a8c0@prestige.net>
Date:         Tue, 7 Aug 2001 18:40:33 -0400
Reply-To: "Jeff Grady" <jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jeff Grady" <jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] NASA Bookstore Online
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <003d01c11f6b$93eb07e0$8051153f@default>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0B03_01C56B69.47672F90
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Whew! Now that's some price book store!   2,850.00 for a set of
books...BOOKS!  20 cents a page!


https://listserv.abpi.net/cgi-bin/miva?/Merchant2/merchant.mv+Screen=PROD&St
ore_Code=NTB&Product_Code=AP-EPS&Category_Code=
  -----Original Message-----
  From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@itc.uci.edu]On
Behalf Of David Muesing
  Sent: Tuesday, August 07, 2001 2:06 PM
  To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
  Subject: [AR] NASA Bookstore Online


  I thought some would be interested in this.

  Dave Muesing

  NEW ON THE WEB
  NASA Tech Briefs has opened an online bookstore where you can get
discounts on
  new titles from major publishers of engineering/scientific books and
reference
  works, including Academic Press, Wiley, the American Institute of
  Aeronautics and Astronautics (AIAA), and the International Society for
Optical
  Engineering (SPIE).

  You can search by subject or category. The categories span Electronic
  Engineering, Mechanical Engineering, Materials Science, Photonics,
Physical
  Sciences, Computer Science, and more. Please visit the store regularly, as
the
  selections will be expanding rapidly in coming weeks.

  Go to www.nasatech.com/store .




------=_NextPart_000_0B03_01C56B69.47672F90
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META HTTP-EQUIV=3D"Content-Type" CONTENT=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Diso-8859-1">


<META content=3D"MSHTML 5.50.4522.1800" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial><FONT color=3D#0000ff><FONT size=3D2><SPAN=20
class=3D509023822-07082001>Whew! Now that's some price book=20
store!</SPAN>&nbsp;&nbsp;<SPAN class=3D509023822-07082001> 2,850.00 for =
a set of=20
books...BOOKS!&nbsp; 20 cents a page!</SPAN></FONT></FONT></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial><FONT size=3D2><FONT=20
color=3D#0000ff></FONT></FONT></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial><FONT size=3D2><FONT color=3D#0000ff><SPAN=20
class=3D509023822-07082001></SPAN></FONT></FONT></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial color=3D#0000ff size=3D2><SPAN =
class=3D509023822-07082001><A=20
href=3D"https://listserv.abpi.net/cgi-bin/miva?/Merchant2/merchant.mv+Scr=
een=3DPROD&amp;Store_Code=3DNTB&amp;Product_Code=3DAP-EPS&amp;Category_Co=
de">https://listserv.abpi.net/cgi-bin/miva?/Merchant2/merchant.mv+Screen=3D=
PROD&amp;Store_Code=3DNTB&amp;Product_Code=3DAP-EPS&amp;Category_Code</A>=
=3D</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE dir=3Dltr style=3D"MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
  <DIV class=3DOutlookMessageHeader dir=3Dltr align=3Dleft><FONT =
face=3DTahoma=20
  size=3D2>-----Original Message-----<BR><B>From:</B> Amateur Rocketry =
discussion=20
  list [mailto:AROCKET@itc.uci.edu]<B>On Behalf Of </B>David=20
  Muesing<BR><B>Sent:</B> Tuesday, August 07, 2001 2:06 PM<BR><B>To:</B> =

  AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU<BR><B>Subject:</B> [AR] NASA Bookstore=20
  Online<BR><BR></FONT></DIV>
  <DIV><FONT face=3DOCRA color=3D#0000ff>I thought some would be =
interested in=20
  this.</FONT></DIV>
  <DIV><FONT face=3DOCRA color=3D#0000ff></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
  <DIV><FONT face=3DOCRA color=3D#0000ff>Dave Muesing</FONT></DIV>
  <DIV><FONT face=3DOCRA color=3D#0000ff><FONT face=3DOCRA=20
  color=3D#0000ff></FONT></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
  <DIV><FONT face=3DOCRA color=3D#0000ff><FONT face=3D"Times New Roman"=20
  color=3D#000000>NEW ON THE WEB<BR>NASA Tech Briefs has opened an =
online=20
  bookstore where you can get discounts on<BR>new titles from major =
publishers=20
  of engineering/scientific books and reference<BR>works, including =
Academic=20
  Press, Wiley, the American Institute of<BR>Aeronautics and =
Astronautics=20
  (AIAA), and the International Society for Optical<BR>Engineering=20
  (SPIE).<BR><BR>You can search by subject or category. The categories =
span=20
  Electronic<BR>Engineering, Mechanical Engineering, Materials Science,=20
  Photonics, Physical<BR>Sciences, Computer Science, and more. Please =
visit the=20
  store regularly, as the<BR>selections will be expanding rapidly in =
coming=20
  weeks.<BR><BR>Go to </FONT><A =
href=3D"http://www.nasatech.com/store"><FONT=20
  face=3D"Times New Roman">www.nasatech.com/store</FONT></A><FONT=20
  face=3D"Times New Roman" color=3D#000000>=20
.<BR><BR><BR></FONT></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE></FONT></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0B03_01C56B69.47672F90--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 16360 invoked from network); 7 Aug 2001 23:14:08 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 7 Aug 2001 23:14:08 -0000
Received: (qmail 4854 invoked from network); 7 Aug 2001 23:14:12 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 7 Aug 2001 23:14:12 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA18167; Tue, 7 Aug 2001 15:45:10 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 101309 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 7 Aug 2001 22:45:08          +0000
Received: from idsoftware.com (predator.idsoftware.com [192.246.40.34]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA18152 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Tue, 7 Aug 2001 15:45:07 -0700
Received: from [192.246.40.129] (account johnc HELO lightning.idsoftware.com)          by idsoftware.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 3.4.7) with ESMTP id 339481          for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 07 Aug 2001 17:45:07 -0500
X-Sender: johnc@mail.idsoftware.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <4.3.1.2.20010807173822.02fdd008@mail.idsoftware.com>
Date:         Tue, 7 Aug 2001 17:43:54 -0500
Reply-To: "John Carmack" <johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Carmack" <johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM>
Subject:      [AR] Aerospace / Military electronics
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Can anyone recommend good books on "best practices" for aerospace /
military electronics fabrication work?

I think I have reached the conclusion that bare-wire screw terminals are
the source of our last electronics glitches.  I use ring terminals for
everything I build, but a few of our boards have screw terminals clamped on
stranded wire, and I found at least two of them that were probably loose
enough to cause problems.

John Carmack

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 9264 invoked from network); 7 Aug 2001 23:58:01 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 7 Aug 2001 23:58:01 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 28926 invoked from network); 7 Aug 2001 23:59:40 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 7 Aug 2001 23:59:40 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA18486; Tue, 7 Aug 2001 16:52:40 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 101355 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 7 Aug 2001 23:51:32          +0000
Received: from melete.ch.intel.com (chfdns02.ch.intel.com [143.182.246.25]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA18469 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 7 Aug 2001 16:51:31 -0700
Received: from snmeng1.rr.intel.com (snmeng1.rr.intel.com [128.215.231.11]) by          melete.ch.intel.com (8.9.1a+p1/8.9.1/d: relay.m4,v 1.41 2001/07/09          21:06:22 root Exp $) with ESMTP id XAA07142; Tue, 7 Aug 2001 23:51:18          GMT
Received: from snmeng30.rr.intel.com (snmeng30.rr.intel.com [128.215.52.76]) by          snmeng1.rr.intel.com (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id RAA14410; Tue, 7          Aug 2001 17:48:25 -0600 (MDT)
Received: from snmeng30.rr.intel.com (snmeng30.rr.intel.com [128.215.52.76]) by          snmeng30.rr.intel.com (8.9.1a/8.9.1/d: client.m4,v 1.3 1998/09/29          16:36:11 sedayao Exp sedayao $) with SMTP id RAA14944; Tue, 7 Aug          2001 17:48:21 -0600 (MDT)
X-Mailer: dtmail 1.2.1 CDE Version 1.2.1 SunOS 5.6 sun4m sparc
X-Sun-Text-Type: ascii
Message-ID:  <200108072348.RAA14944@snmeng30.rr.intel.com>
Date:         Tue, 7 Aug 2001 17:48:21 -0600
Reply-To: "Ray Calkins 100660207" <rcalkins@snmeng1.rr.intel.com>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Ray Calkins 100660207" <rcalkins@snmeng1.rr.intel.com>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Aerospace / Military electronics
Comments: To: johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

JohnC asks:
> Can anyone recommend good books on "best
practices" for aerospace /
> military electronics fabrication work?
>
> I think I have reached the conclusion that
bare-wire screw terminals are
> the source of our last electronics glitches.
I use ring terminals for
> everything I build, but a few of our boards
have screw terminals clamped on
> stranded wire, and I found at least two of
them that were probably loose
> enough to cause problems.

Hi John,

I've been putting wires together for the
military and aerospace for about 20 years and
used a number of different systems.

The standard military system is the "Cannon
Plug".  Basically a screw-together pin/socket
coupler with each pin soldered to the wire.
They tend to be rather pricey new, but very
cheap in surplus.  Most of these are gasketed
and typically aluminum, they should work fine in
H2O2 proximity.  They are highly robust and
reliable, I have never had one fail in
reasonable service (and a few unreasonable ones
too).  In fact, only failure I can recall is one
crushed after being run over by a heavily loaded
fork lift.  Something about being between
concrete and solid steel (with an inch of solid
rubber) and a few tons loading seems to have not
agreed with it.

I don't have a suplier handy (mostly I use
surplus material scavenged locally).  Let me
know if you need a sales contact, I have a
catalog out at the rocket test site and can
bring it back next weekend.

Whenever practical, I solder all wire
connections using a "Telegraph Tie" joint for
maximum strength, eschewing a connector.  If
using screw terminals on straight wire, I
additionally tin the wire for greater strength,
the soft lead also deforms against the screw for
better contact.  Where the screw terminal allows
room for it, I make a small loop in the wire,
and fill the loop with a film of solder.  The
screw grips the resulting concave solder/wire
cup very well, I have never had a failure in
some very high vibration environments.  Make
sure to clean all solder flux off with
iso-propyl alcohol (97% rubbing alcohol) and
cotton swab, the flux can promote contact
corrosion in some materials.


Ray Calkins
rcalkins@snmeng1.rr.intel.com
raymond.calkins@intel.com
"My opinions are my own, and do not reflect
those of my employer."


From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 16503 invoked from network); 8 Aug 2001 01:15:35 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 8 Aug 2001 01:15:35 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 20819 invoked from network); 8 Aug 2001 01:18:17 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 8 Aug 2001 01:18:17 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA18991; Tue, 7 Aug 2001 17:56:10 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 101481 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 8 Aug 2001 00:55:56          +0000
Received: from sys27.hou.wt.net ([205.230.159.27]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7)          with ESMTP id RAA18976 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 7 Aug 2001          17:55:55 -0700
Received: from localhost (216-119-138-194.ipset18.wt.net [216.119.138.194]) by          sys27.hou.wt.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id TAA32029; Tue, 7 Aug          2001 19:55:48 -0500 (CDT)
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.388)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <200108080055.TAA32029@sys27.hou.wt.net>
Date:         Tue, 7 Aug 2001 19:56:11 -0500
Reply-To: "Donald McCorvey" <dlm3@NETAXS.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Donald McCorvey" <dlm3@NETAXS.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Aerospace / Military electronics
Comments: To: John Carmack <johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <4.3.1.2.20010807173822.02fdd008@mail.idsoftware.com>

John,

A good starting point would be to go to a local technical library and
start wading through the military specs and standards. MIL-W-5088,
MIL-STD-454 and MIL-E-5400 should cover your particular problem.  You
might also read through FAR Part 25 and see what it calls out for its
wiring standard, if any - I'm not all that familiar with it.

As for screw terminals - you should always use crimped or soldered-on
terminal lugs, especially for high-vibration applications, and connect
them to a terminal post secured with a flat washer and self-locking nut.
Terminal boards of over 20 such posts are available, per MIL spec, and
include accessories such as bus bars and terminal covers to prevent
inadvertent contact with high voltages.

Another alternative are modular terminal blocks made by Deutsch, which
use crimp-on pins to secure the wire in a locking insert of various
connection configurations. They're expensive and require special tools,
but they are small, lightweight, simple to work with, and deal well with
vibration. I'd provide you with a reference, but I had no luck with
numerous searches. They're out there someplace....

With rare exceptions, however, I would strongly suggest you use good
quality circular connectors (e.g., MIL-C-38999 Series III) or military
grade rectangular connectors for all component-to-component
interconnections, and PC board edge connectors and custom-made
motherboards for internal board-to-board communication. They don't cost
as much as you might think for what you get.

Powell Electronics is a good supplier if you know what you're looking
for. You might also try Arrow Electronics and Newark.

I hate to say this, but there's a reason why the mil and commercial
stuff costs so much - it's because vibration and temperature extremes
drive a lot of the design of every part, and only aerospace has these
requirements. Even automotive is less harsh. The industrial grade stuff
you can buy cheaply works fine for things that don't move, but for
things that fly, the rules are different and you have to accommodate
them.

But that said, there's plenty of room for innovation.

Good luck!

Don McCorvey
Houston, Tx

On Tuesday, August 7, 2001, at 05:43 PM, John Carmack wrote:

> Can anyone recommend good books on "best practices" for aerospace /
> military electronics fabrication work?
>
> I think I have reached the conclusion that bare-wire screw terminals are
> the source of our last electronics glitches.  I use ring terminals for
> everything I build, but a few of our boards have screw terminals
> clamped on
> stranded wire, and I found at least two of them that were probably loose
> enough to cause problems.
>
> John Carmack
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 11073 invoked from network); 8 Aug 2001 01:59:46 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 8 Aug 2001 01:59:46 -0000
Received: (qmail 16027 invoked from network); 8 Aug 2001 02:02:02 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 8 Aug 2001 02:02:02 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA19330; Tue, 7 Aug 2001 18:55:37 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 101534 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 8 Aug 2001 01:55:27          +0000
Received: from pimout4-int.prodigy.net (pimout4-ext.prodigy.net          [207.115.63.103]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA19264          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 7 Aug 2001 18:45:26 -0700
Received: from k2 (A010-0179.DLL2.splitrock.net [209.254.212.179]) by          pimout4-int.prodigy.net (8.11.0/8.11.0) with SMTP id f781jOX242056          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 7 Aug 2001 21:45:25 -0400
References:  <3B7066C9.6B93FC74@stud.uni-goettingen.de>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.3018.1300
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <001f01c11fab$1bd13a50$b3d4fed1@k2>
Date:         Tue, 7 Aug 2001 20:40:29 -0500
Reply-To: "Ken" <HAWARDEN@PRODIGY.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Ken" <HAWARDEN@PRODIGY.NET>
Organization: Prodigy Internet
Subject:      Re: [AR] Head end igniters
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Doesn't NASA use 10 Ga. ignitor leads about 300ft long to shove up their
SRB's nozzle up to the top, and then hope that it all gets blown out the
nozzle after ignition? hehehe! I've been thinkin' about a decent head-end
design for about the last 8-9 months. I guess I'll start up on it again.
I'll try to keep it cheap!

Ken Howerton
hawarden@prodigy.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 21612 invoked from network); 8 Aug 2001 02:55:42 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 8 Aug 2001 02:55:42 -0000
Received: (qmail 3044 invoked from network); 8 Aug 2001 02:57:58 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 8 Aug 2001 02:57:58 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA19754; Tue, 7 Aug 2001 19:47:17 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 101606 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 8 Aug 2001 02:47:05          +0000
Received: from castor.ridgenet.net (IDENT:root@castor.ridgenet.net          [199.120.150.29]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA19739          for <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Tue, 7 Aug 2001 19:47:05 -0700
Received: from kristinscomp (pm257.ridgenet.net [204.154.247.3]) by          castor.ridgenet.net (8.11.0/8.11.0) with SMTP id f782eAS10491 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Tue, 7 Aug 2001 19:40:10 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0B07_01C56B69.4770CC80"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <002801c11fb5$9cc0b0a0$1b30fea9@kristinscomp>
Date:         Tue, 7 Aug 2001 19:55:40 -0700
Reply-To: "Kristin & David Hall" <thehalls@RIDGENET.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Kristin & David Hall" <thehalls@RIDGENET.NET>
Subject:      [AR] Paintball (High Pressure) Tanks
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0B07_01C56B69.4770CC80
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

A number of you asked me about the dimensions of the 110 ci paintball =
tank.  I said I would have one in my mits today and would report.  Alas, =
I do not.  It seems that the paintball boys decided the 110 ci tank was =
too big (unwieldy) on the field and stopped making them in late =
spring/early summer. =20

The guy who was going to buy the 110 is deciding whether or not he wants =
the next size (91 ci).  If he does, then I'll obviously measure it on =
it's way out the door.  If not...well then, I won't.

--
Dave and/or Kristin Hall

------=_NextPart_000_0B07_01C56B69.4770CC80
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META content=3D"text/html; charset=3Diso-8859-1" =
http-equiv=3DContent-Type>
<META content=3D"MSHTML 5.00.2614.3500" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#b8b8b8>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>A number of you asked me about the =
dimensions of=20
the 110 ci paintball tank.&nbsp; I said I would have one in my mits =
today and=20
would report.&nbsp; Alas, I do not.&nbsp; It seems that the paintball =
boys=20
decided the 110 ci tank was too big (unwieldy) on the field and stopped =
making=20
them in late spring/early summer.&nbsp; </FONT></DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>The guy who was going to buy the 110 is =
deciding=20
whether or not he wants the next size (91 ci).&nbsp; If he does, then =
I'll=20
obviously measure it on it's way out the door.&nbsp; If not...well then, =
I=20
won't.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>--<BR>Dave and/or Kristin=20
Hall</FONT></DIV></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0B07_01C56B69.4770CC80--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 12341 invoked from network); 8 Aug 2001 04:41:52 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 8 Aug 2001 04:41:52 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 13377 invoked from network); 8 Aug 2001 04:43:36 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 8 Aug 2001 04:43:36 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA20266; Tue, 7 Aug 2001 21:29:36 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 101715 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 8 Aug 2001 04:29:19          +0000
Received: from idsoftware.com (predator.idsoftware.com [192.246.40.34]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA20250 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Tue, 7 Aug 2001 21:29:18 -0700
Received: from [192.246.40.129] (account johnc HELO lightning.idsoftware.com)          by idsoftware.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 3.4.7) with ESMTP id 339957          for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 07 Aug 2001 23:29:18 -0500
X-Sender: johnc@mail.idsoftware.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <4.3.1.2.20010807231118.02e15a10@mail.idsoftware.com>
Date:         Tue, 7 Aug 2001 23:28:05 -0500
Reply-To: "John Carmack" <johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Carmack" <johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Aerospace / Military electronics
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <200108072348.RAA14944@snmeng30.rr.intel.com>

I appreciate all the various electronics advice I have gotten here over the
past year.

I need to get together a big update on our web site about all the things
that I have managed to learn during the building of the electronics
boxes.  I am probably going to be starting on electronics box version three
within a couple months.

One interesting note is that I have had experienced and knowledgeable
people give me conflicting advice on a couple electronics matters:

"Crimp, don't solder" vs "solder all connections"

"tin all stranded wire" vs "tinned wire is more likely to loosen in a screw
terminal"

I have never been all that handy with solder, so I am inclined to believe
that I can live without it. :-)

John Carmack

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 1571 invoked from network); 8 Aug 2001 05:09:51 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 8 Aug 2001 05:09:51 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 15205 invoked from network); 8 Aug 2001 05:12:09 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 8 Aug 2001 05:12:09 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA20385; Tue, 7 Aug 2001 21:49:57 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 101738 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 8 Aug 2001 04:49:50          +0000
Received: from sys32.hou.wt.net (sys32.hou.wt.net [205.230.159.32]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA20370 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 7 Aug 2001 21:49:49 -0700
Received: from localhost (216-119-138-174.ipset18.wt.net [216.119.138.174]) by          sys32.hou.wt.net (8.9.1/8.9.1) with ESMTP id XAA26541; Tue, 7 Aug          2001 23:49:55 -0500 (CDT)
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.388)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <200108080449.XAA26541@sys32.hou.wt.net>
Date:         Tue, 7 Aug 2001 23:50:03 -0500
Reply-To: "Donald McCorvey" <dlm3@NETAXS.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Donald McCorvey" <dlm3@NETAXS.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Slightly OT humor: Engineering corrolaries to Murphy's              Law
Comments: To: landofgrey@gnc.net
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <LPBBKJMJEOFKAMFJJNNHEEFHCGAA.landofgrey@gnc.net>

Here's a few more:

N. Whatever can go wrong, however unlikely, will eventually happen,
usually when you least expect it.

O. The more parts you have, the more parts you have to break

P. Wiring is the root of all evil. Reliable systems minimize wiring as
much as practicable.

Q. System reliability is inversely proportional to the amount of regular
maintenance performed on a vehicle

R. Software is 100% reliable. It reliably does the wrong thing as easily
as the right thing.

S. Redundancy isn't a panacea. Just because you have two or more of
something doesn't mean they won't all do the wrong thing at the same
time.

T. Conversely, don't put all your eggs in one basket - life's too
precious to hang on a single thread.

U. Simplicity always wins over complexity.

V. In fault tolerant systems, the fault that kills you is the one you
don't detect.

W. Machines don't fix themselves. If you have an intermittent fault but
the machine works, it does not mean that the machine is not broken - it
only means you haven't found the problem yet.

X. Noisy electronics are usually the result of inadequate or improper
grounding.

Y. Design for test as rigorously as you do for the primary function(s)
of the component.

Z. Paranoia can be functional. Systems designed by engineers convinced
it will break (and do something about it) are infinitely safer than
those whose designers assume it won't.

Source: too many years of blown electronics, busted wires, broken
airplanes, and optimistic pointy-haired managers

On Tuesday, August 7, 2001, at 04:53 PM, Matthew Travis wrote:

> Corrolaries to Murphy's Law:
>
> A. the necessity of making a major design change increases as the
> fabrication of the system approaches completion
>
> B. firmness of delivery dates is inversely propportional to the
> tightness of
> the schedule
>
> C. Dimensions will always be expressed in the least usable terms
>
> D. Original drawings will be mangled by the copying machine
>
> E. All constants are variable
>
> F. In a complex calculation, one factor from the numerator will always
> move
> to the denominator
>
> G. Identical units tested under identical conditions will not be
> identical
> in the field
>
> H. If a project requires "n" components, there will be "n-1" units in
> stock
>
> I. A dropped tool will land where it can do the most damage (Also known
> as
> the law of selective gravitation)
>
> J. A device selected at random from a group having 99% reliability will
> be a
> member of the 1% group
>
> K. Interchangeable parts won't
>
> L. After the last of 16 mounting screws has been removed from an access
> cover, it will be discovered that the wrong access coverhas been removed
>
> M. After an access cover has been secured by 16 hold-down screws, it
> will be
> discovered that the gasket has been omitted.
>
>                            - Found on an Orbital Sciences satellite team
> bulletin board
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 27143 invoked from network); 8 Aug 2001 07:49:29 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 8 Aug 2001 07:49:29 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 12533 invoked from network); 8 Aug 2001 07:51:14 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 8 Aug 2001 07:51:14 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA21185; Wed, 8 Aug 2001 00:44:24 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 101864 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 8 Aug 2001 07:44:17          +0000
Received: from smtp007.mailsrvcs.net (smtp007pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.186])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA21170 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 8 Aug 2001 00:44:17 -0700
Received: from [63.10.201.166] (1Cust166.tnt3.hilo.hi.da.uu.net          [63.10.201.166]) by smtp007.mailsrvcs.net  with ESMTP for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; id f787hiW04195 Wed, 8 Aug 2001 02:43:44 -0500          (CDT)
X-Sender: ttocs@mail.gte.net
References: <LPBBKJMJEOFKAMFJJNNHEEFHCGAA.landofgrey@gnc.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <l03130301b7969e194cfb@[63.10.189.91]>
Date:         Tue, 7 Aug 2001 21:43:52 -1000
Reply-To: "Aaron Smith" <ttocs@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Aaron Smith" <ttocs@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Slightly OT humor: Engineering corrolaries to Murphy's              Law
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <200108080449.XAA26541@sys32.hou.wt.net>

Can I quote you on Z?

Aaron

>Z. Paranoia can be functional. Systems designed by engineers convinced
>it will break (and do something about it) are infinitely safer than
>those whose designers assume it won't.
>
>Source: too many years of blown electronics, busted wires, broken
>airplanes, and optimistic pointy-haired managers
>
>On Tuesday, August 7, 2001, at 04:53 PM, Matthew Travis wrote:
>
>> Corrolaries to Murphy's Law:
>>
>> A. the necessity of making a major design change increases as the
>> fabrication of the system approaches completion
>>
>> B. firmness of delivery dates is inversely propportional to the
>> tightness of
>> the schedule
>>
>> C. Dimensions will always be expressed in the least usable terms
>>
>> D. Original drawings will be mangled by the copying machine
>>
>> E. All constants are variable
>>
>> F. In a complex calculation, one factor from the numerator will always
>> move
>> to the denominator
>>
>> G. Identical units tested under identical conditions will not be
>> identical
>> in the field
>>
>> H. If a project requires "n" components, there will be "n-1" units in
>> stock
>>
>> I. A dropped tool will land where it can do the most damage (Also known
>> as
>> the law of selective gravitation)
>>
>> J. A device selected at random from a group having 99% reliability will
>> be a
>> member of the 1% group
>>
>> K. Interchangeable parts won't
>>
>> L. After the last of 16 mounting screws has been removed from an access
>> cover, it will be discovered that the wrong access coverhas been removed
>>
>> M. After an access cover has been secured by 16 hold-down screws, it
>> will be
>> discovered that the gasket has been omitted.
>>
>>                            - Found on an Orbital Sciences satellite team
>> bulletin board
>>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 22366 invoked from network); 8 Aug 2001 09:20:42 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 8 Aug 2001 09:20:42 -0000
Received: (qmail 3113 invoked from network); 8 Aug 2001 09:22:59 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 8 Aug 2001 09:22:59 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id CAA21483; Wed, 8 Aug 2001 02:09:41 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 101897 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 8 Aug 2001 09:09:26          +0000
Received: from fep4-orange.clear.net.nz (fep4-orange.clear.net.nz          [203.97.32.4]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id CAA21467          for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Wed, 8 Aug 2001 02:09:25 -0700
Received: from mkbs (203-167-158-50.dialup.clear.net.nz [203.167.158.50]) by          fep4-orange.clear.net.nz (1.5/1.7) with SMTP id VAA25605; Wed, 8 Aug          2001 21:09:22 +1200 (NZST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="Windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <01e601c11fea$107cb0a0$0100a8c0@mkbs>
Date:         Wed, 8 Aug 2001 20:07:41 +1200
Reply-To: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Organization: Applied Technology
Subject:      Re: [AR] Aerospace / Military electronics
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

> One interesting note is that I have had experienced and knowledgeable
> people give me conflicting advice on a couple electronics matters:

> "Crimp, don't solder" vs "solder all connections"

If this is re joining a connector to a wire then both have their place.
Professionally executed crimps with the PROPER tools & dies (and there are
many improper tools for crimping) with the CORRECT connector for the wire,
the CORRECT wire preparation and the CORRECT crimping pressures will produce
an excellent durable result.
HOWEVER - at one stage I was involved with electronics in an automotive
application involving several hundred vehicles and saw various crimping jobs
performed by field staff with typical auto-electrical backgrounds. It was my
personal conclusion that approximately ALL crimped connections carried out
by people with typical experience levels failed in an automotive environment
sooner or later. The time period was very variable.
My personal preference for field crimped connections is to solder the wire
end, crimp it and then reflow the wire. This is a very nonstandard method
and is labour intensive. It also works for me. The solder reflow is an
essential part. If not reflowing then the soldering stage would be a
mistake.

> "tin all stranded wire" vs "tinned wire is more likely to loosen in a
screw
> terminal"

This one is easier.

           Fully tinning a lead which is then going to be pressure crimped
is
           *definitely*  inadvisable.

even though it intuitively would seem superior.
*This practice is expressly forbidden by the electrical wiring regulations
in my country and also in at least some others* (this has been discussed on
an International list but I can't remember which countries people who
commented came from).
It is very understandable that amateurs recommend this practice and I used
to do it myself, believing that it gave a superior result. The initial
result is more pleasing to look at, easier to terminate and seems to be a
superior method. If you have a small sample to work with the results may
indeed be superior. However, industry wide experience (backed by
regulations) indicates that the gains are outweighed by the problems caused
by subsequent creeping of solder and reduction in joint pressure. A spring
loaded terminal block would probably allow the use of soldered wire ends
with superior results PROVIDED there was only one wire per terminal
receptacle.

When compelled to use "chocolate block" terminal strip connectors to join
wires where I need to be able to depend on the result I have two methods
that give good results.

i - run each wire right through the block so that both wires joined are held
by both screws or
ii - twist both wires together first and then insert into connector so that
the screw increases the already existing inter-wire contact.

A rising clamp type connector is a better solution if you have control over
the connector type.



        Russell McMahon

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 14185 invoked from network); 8 Aug 2001 10:14:33 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 8 Aug 2001 10:14:33 -0000
Received: (qmail 21343 invoked from network); 8 Aug 2001 10:16:53 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 8 Aug 2001 10:16:53 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id CAA21607; Wed, 8 Aug 2001 02:35:08 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 101924 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 8 Aug 2001 09:35:02          +0000
Received: from femail14.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail14.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.0.95.141]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id CAA21592          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 8 Aug 2001 02:35:02 -0700
Received: from hal2001 ([24.77.53.16]) by femail14.sdc1.sfba.home.com          (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20 201-229-121-120-20010223) with SMTP id          <20010808093501.VLLK18675.femail14.sdc1.sfba.home.com@hal2001> for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 8 Aug 2001 02:35:01 -0700
References:  <90.181cfbb2.289c2e1c@aol.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <002501c11fec$47e1ae40$0400a8c0@hatjs>
Date:         Wed, 8 Aug 2001 02:27:01 -0700
Reply-To: "Jamie Morken" <jmorken@HOME.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jamie Morken" <jmorken@HOME.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] US Standard Atmosphere - 1962
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Hi all,

I converted the standard atmosphere info off of Arocket.net into polynomials
(using tablecurve software)
Please contact me if you want the output from tablecurve which contains the
standard deviation of these functions etc (I think they are pretty close to
the data on Arocket.net..)

best regards,
Jamie


ps. here it is!:

    x = altitude

    'density calculation
    a = 0.816329267409428
    b = 7.89656837331484E-05
    c = 4.70772116155895E-09
    d = 1.53644444040785E-13
    e = 4.51715967589257E-18
    f = 1.63058118831337E-21
    y = a + b * x + c * x ^ 2 + d * x ^ 3 + e * x ^ 4 + f * x ^ 5
    ramCalc.density1 = y ^ -1

    'pressure calculation
    a = 9.87112869543132E-06
    b = 1.17197158509061E-09
    c = 8.20619500918129E-14
    d = 4.24431702536488E-18
    e = 2.20462329250301E-22
    f = 1.4696038908295E-26
    y = a + b * x + c * x ^ 2 + d * x ^ 3 + e * x ^ 4 + f * x ^ 5
    ramCalc.pressure1 = y ^ -1

    'temperature calculation
    a = 3.49302722882021E-03
    b = 8.7722320539364E-08
    c = 8.66573513750265E-13
    d = -1.74418088309309E-16
    e = 3.38160082090756E-21
    f = -1.82238855205536E-26
    y = a + b * x + c * x ^ 2 + d * x ^ 3 + e * x ^ 4 + f * x ^ 5
    ramCalc.temperature1 = y ^ -1




> In a message dated 01/08/03 10:04:31 Eastern Daylight Time,
> Rockitman@SPRINTMAIL.COM writes:
>
> << Does anyone on this list know where I can find polynomials expressing
>  the US 1962 Standard Atmosphere?
>  (Altitude Vs' Temp, Pressure, Q, S.O.S, and density) >>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 23399 invoked from network); 8 Aug 2001 11:47:38 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 8 Aug 2001 11:47:38 -0000
Received: (qmail 17556 invoked from network); 8 Aug 2001 11:49:51 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 8 Aug 2001 11:49:51 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id EAA21993; Wed, 8 Aug 2001 04:16:11 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 101959 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 8 Aug 2001 11:15:53          +0000
Received: from web14404.mail.yahoo.com (web14404.mail.yahoo.com          [216.136.174.61]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id EAA21959          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 8 Aug 2001 04:05:52 -0700
Received: from [65.100.121.109] by web14404.mail.yahoo.com; Wed, 08 Aug 2001          04:05:51 PDT
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <20010808110551.21469.qmail@web14404.mail.yahoo.com>
Date:         Wed, 8 Aug 2001 04:05:51 -0700
Reply-To: "Debora Levos" <doobiedust@YAHOO.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Debora Levos" <doobiedust@YAHOO.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Slightly OT humor: Engineering corrolaries to Murphy's              Law
Comments: To: Donald McCorvey <dlm3@NETAXS.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <200108080449.XAA26541@sys32.hou.wt.net>

--- Donald McCorvey <dlm3@NETAXS.COM> wrote:
> Here's a few more:
>
> N. Whatever can go wrong, however unlikely, will
> eventually happen,
> usually when you least expect it.
>
> O. The more parts you have, the more parts you have
> to break
>
> P. Wiring is the root of all evil. Reliable systems
> minimize wiring as
> much as practicable.
>
> Q. System reliability is inversely proportional to
> the amount of regular
> maintenance performed on a vehicle
>
> R. Software is 100% reliable. It reliably does the
> wrong thing as easily
> as the right thing.
>
> S. Redundancy isn't a panacea. Just because you have
> two or more of
> something doesn't mean they won't all do the wrong
> thing at the same
> time.
>
> T. Conversely, don't put all your eggs in one basket
> - life's too
> precious to hang on a single thread.
>
> U. Simplicity always wins over complexity.
>
> V. In fault tolerant systems, the fault that kills
> you is the one you
> don't detect.
>
> W. Machines don't fix themselves. If you have an
> intermittent fault but
> the machine works, it does not mean that the machine
> is not broken - it
> only means you haven't found the problem yet.
>
> X. Noisy electronics are usually the result of
> inadequate or improper
> grounding.
>
> Y. Design for test as rigorously as you do for the
> primary function(s)
> of the component.
>
> Z. Paranoia can be functional. Systems designed by
> engineers convinced
> it will break (and do something about it) are
> infinitely safer than
> those whose designers assume it won't.
>
> Source: too many years of blown electronics, busted
> wires, broken
> airplanes, and optimistic pointy-haired managers
>
> On Tuesday, August 7, 2001, at 04:53 PM, Matthew
> Travis wrote:
>
> > Corrolaries to Murphy's Law:
> >
> > A. the necessity of making a major design change
> increases as the
> > fabrication of the system approaches completion
> >
> > B. firmness of delivery dates is inversely
> propportional to the
> > tightness of
> > the schedule
> >
> > C. Dimensions will always be expressed in the
> least usable terms
> >
> > D. Original drawings will be mangled by the
> copying machine
> >
> > E. All constants are variable
> >
> > F. In a complex calculation, one factor from the
> numerator will always
> > move
> > to the denominator
> >
> > G. Identical units tested under identical
> conditions will not be
> > identical
> > in the field
> >
> > H. If a project requires "n" components, there
> will be "n-1" units in
> > stock
> >
> > I. A dropped tool will land where it can do the
> most damage (Also known
> > as
> > the law of selective gravitation)
> >
> > J. A device selected at random from a group having
> 99% reliability will
> > be a
> > member of the 1% group
> >
> > K. Interchangeable parts won't
> >
> > L. After the last of 16 mounting screws has been
> removed from an access
> > cover, it will be discovered that the wrong access
> coverhas been removed
> >
> > M. After an access cover has been secured by 16
> hold-down screws, it
> > will be
> > discovered that the gasket has been omitted.
> >
> >                            - Found on an Orbital
> Sciences satellite team
> > bulletin board
> >


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Make international calls for as low as $.04/minute with Yahoo! Messenger
http://phonecard.yahoo.com/

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 3325 invoked from network); 8 Aug 2001 11:50:54 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 8 Aug 2001 11:50:54 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 5768 invoked from network); 8 Aug 2001 11:52:38 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 8 Aug 2001 11:52:38 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id EAA22100; Wed, 8 Aug 2001 04:46:18 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 101974 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 8 Aug 2001 11:46:06          +0000
Received: from df01-e11.danfoss.dk (mailx.danfoss.com [193.162.34.6]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id EAA22085 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 8 Aug 2001 04:46:05 -0700
Received: from df01-e11.danfoss.dk (dkdnisvw.danfoss.dk [10.6.2.10]) by          df01-e11.danfoss.dk with SMTP (Microsoft Exchange Internet Mail          Service Version 5.5.2653.13) id PVX51V9F; Wed, 8 Aug 2001 13:45:02          +0200
Received: from 10.8.13.35 by df01-e11.danfoss.dk (InterScan E-Mail VirusWall          NT); Wed, 08 Aug 2001 13:45:02 +0200
Received: by maily.danfoss.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) id          <Q3HDKRJ8>; Wed, 8 Aug 2001 13:47:01 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19)
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by itc.uci.edu id EAA22086
Message-ID:  <61A2F0A8E936D311876A0008C74BF1EC96AA8A@DD21AE02>
Date:         Wed, 8 Aug 2001 13:48:30 +0200
Reply-To: "Nielson Byron" <BYRONNIELSON@DANFOSS.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Nielson Byron" <BYRONNIELSON@DANFOSS.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Aerospace / Military electronics
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

The best terminals I have used are made by Wago.
They are a spring loaded clamp that never comes loose.
A screwdriver is used to open it for wire insertion or removal.


Mit freundlichen Gren,
Med Venlig Hilsen,
Best Regards,
Byron



-----Original Message-----
From: John Carmack [mailto:johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM]
Sent: Tuesday, August 07, 2001 5:44 PM
To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
Subject: [AR] Aerospace / Military electronics


Can anyone recommend good books on "best practices" for aerospace /
military electronics fabrication work?

I think I have reached the conclusion that bare-wire screw terminals are
the source of our last electronics glitches.  I use ring terminals for
everything I build, but a few of our boards have screw terminals clamped on
stranded wire, and I found at least two of them that were probably loose
enough to cause problems.

John Carmack

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 19528 invoked from network); 8 Aug 2001 12:20:00 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 8 Aug 2001 12:20:00 -0000
Received: (qmail 17699 invoked from network); 8 Aug 2001 12:22:22 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 8 Aug 2001 12:22:22 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id FAA22238; Wed, 8 Aug 2001 05:14:12 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 102000 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 8 Aug 2001 12:13:56          +0000
Received: from fep4-orange.clear.net.nz (fep4-orange.clear.net.nz          [203.97.32.4]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id FAA22223          for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Wed, 8 Aug 2001 05:13:54 -0700
Received: from mkbs (203-167-161-36.dialup.clear.net.nz [203.167.161.36]) by          fep4-orange.clear.net.nz (1.5/1.7) with SMTP id AAA11663; Thu, 9 Aug          2001 00:13:12 +1200 (NZST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="Windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <026501c12003$c4a01220$0100a8c0@mkbs>
Date:         Wed, 8 Aug 2001 22:43:00 +1200
Reply-To: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Organization: Applied Technology
Subject:      [AR] [EE]: Guide to amateur surface mount soldering.
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Guide to amateur surface mount component soldering.
Good introduction


    http://www.geocities.com/vk3em/smtguide/websmt.html

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 16940 invoked from network); 8 Aug 2001 13:27:41 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 8 Aug 2001 13:27:41 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 25357 invoked from network); 8 Aug 2001 13:30:23 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 8 Aug 2001 13:30:23 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA22482; Wed, 8 Aug 2001 06:12:48 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 102041 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 8 Aug 2001 13:12:36          +0000
Received: from po4.glue.umd.edu (po4.glue.umd.edu [128.8.10.124]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA22467 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 8 Aug 2001 06:12:35 -0700
Received: from y.glue.umd.edu (IDENT:root@y.glue.umd.edu [128.8.10.68]) by          po4.glue.umd.edu (8.10.1/8.10.1) with ESMTP id f78DCYb12685 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 8 Aug 2001 09:12:34 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from y.glue.umd.edu (IDENT:sendmail@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by          y.glue.umd.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id JAA07177 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 8 Aug 2001 09:12:33 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from localhost (acase@localhost) by y.glue.umd.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with          ESMTP id JAA07173 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 8 Aug 2001 09:12:33          -0400 (EDT)
X-Authentication-Warning: y.glue.umd.edu: acase owned process doing -bs
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.GSO.4.21.0108080904320.6395-100000@y.glue.umd.edu>
Date:         Wed, 8 Aug 2001 09:12:33 -0400
Reply-To: "Andrew Case" <acase@GLUE.UMD.EDU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Andrew Case" <acase@GLUE.UMD.EDU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Slightly OT humor: Engineering corrolaries to Murphy's              Law
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <LPBBKJMJEOFKAMFJJNNHEEFHCGAA.landofgrey@gnc.net>

On Tue, 7 Aug 2001, Matthew Travis wrote:
[...]
> Corrolaries to Murphy's Law:

> C. Dimensions will always be expressed in the least usable terms

Last night I was looking through the MSC big book to get an idea of
component prices and I found solenoid valves with hold off pressures
given in kgf/cm2 (!?) - I assume this is a naive conversion from
pounds (force) per square inch into kilograms (force!) per square
centimeter. I'm perfectly happy working in either metric (preferred)
or Imperial (or gaussian cgs :), this mule of a hybrid set of units
worries me. I'm not sufficiently confident of either the original
conversion or my interpretation of it to risk money one it.

......Andrew

Andrew Case                             |
acase@plasma.umd.edu                    |
Institute for Plasma Research           |
University of Maryland, College Park    |

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 4608 invoked from network); 8 Aug 2001 15:32:29 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 8 Aug 2001 15:32:29 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 21690 invoked from network); 8 Aug 2001 15:34:50 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 8 Aug 2001 15:34:50 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA22840; Wed, 8 Aug 2001 07:48:26 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 102097 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 8 Aug 2001 14:48:12          +0000
Received: from mail-srv1.micron.com (masquerade.micron.com [137.201.242.130])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA22825 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 8 Aug 2001 07:48:11 -0700
Received: from mail-srv1.micron.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by          mail-srv1.micron.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id IAA06018 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 8 Aug 2001 08:47:41 -0600 (MDT)
Received: from ntexchange01.micron.com (ntexchange01 [137.201.104.84]) by          mail-srv1.micron.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id IAA06008 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 8 Aug 2001 08:47:40 -0600 (MDT)
Received: by ntexchange01.micron.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19)          id <3M9TVS8Z>; Wed, 8 Aug 2001 08:47:39 -0600
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19)
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Message-ID:  <2DCA36C44BF3D211917F0008C7C9C9DD067ECF26@ntexchange06.micron.com>
Date:         Wed, 8 Aug 2001 08:47:38 -0600
Reply-To: "gacrowell" <gacrowell@MICRON.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "gacrowell" <gacrowell@MICRON.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] US Standard Atmosphere - 1962
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

How does 'Density Altitude' fit into the use of the standard atmosphere?

In a flight simulation, would it be proper to calculate the density altitude
of the launch site, and then use that as the starting altitude in the
standard atmosphere tables/calculations?

That seems to be what this site says:
http://www.usatoday.com/weather/wdenalt.htm


Gary Crowell

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 17870 invoked from network); 8 Aug 2001 16:09:04 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 8 Aug 2001 16:09:04 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 29619 invoked from network); 8 Aug 2001 16:11:25 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 8 Aug 2001 16:11:25 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA23057; Wed, 8 Aug 2001 08:32:34 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 102131 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 8 Aug 2001 15:32:32          +0000
Received: from melete.ch.intel.com (chfdns02.ch.intel.com [143.182.246.25]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA23041 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 8 Aug 2001 08:32:31 -0700
Received: from snmeng1.rr.intel.com (snmeng1.rr.intel.com [128.215.231.11]) by          melete.ch.intel.com (8.9.1a+p1/8.9.1/d: relay.m4,v 1.41 2001/07/09          21:06:22 root Exp $) with ESMTP id PAA23822; Wed, 8 Aug 2001 15:32:30          GMT
Received: from snmeng30.rr.intel.com (snmeng30.rr.intel.com [128.215.52.76]) by          snmeng1.rr.intel.com (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id JAA16972; Wed, 8          Aug 2001 09:29:36 -0600 (MDT)
Received: from snmeng30.rr.intel.com (snmeng30.rr.intel.com [128.215.52.76]) by          snmeng30.rr.intel.com (8.9.1a/8.9.1/d: client.m4,v 1.3 1998/09/29          16:36:11 sedayao Exp sedayao $) with SMTP id JAA02988; Wed, 8 Aug          2001 09:29:33 -0600 (MDT)
X-Mailer: dtmail 1.2.1 CDE Version 1.2.1 SunOS 5.6 sun4m sparc
X-Sun-Text-Type: ascii
Message-ID:  <200108081529.JAA02988@snmeng30.rr.intel.com>
Date:         Wed, 8 Aug 2001 09:29:33 -0600
Reply-To: "Ray Calkins 100660207" <rcalkins@snmeng1.rr.intel.com>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Ray Calkins 100660207" <rcalkins@snmeng1.rr.intel.com>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Aerospace / Military electronics
Comments: To: johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

JohnC said:
> "Crimp, don't solder" vs "solder all connections"?

When I refer to solder all connections, what I mean
is where possible, avoid connectors completely, just
solder the leads directly together.  There's nothing
more reliable.  Of course, it's time consuming.
Especially in a development project, where you are
often changing out components.


Ray Calkins
rcalkins@snmeng1.rr.intel.com
raymond.calkins@intel.com
"My opinions are my own, and do not reflect those of
my employer."


From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 18779 invoked from network); 8 Aug 2001 16:17:18 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 8 Aug 2001 16:17:18 -0000
Received: (qmail 953 invoked from network); 8 Aug 2001 16:19:39 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 8 Aug 2001 16:19:39 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA23022; Wed, 8 Aug 2001 08:27:22 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 102124 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 8 Aug 2001 15:27:19          +0000
Received: from spsystems.net (spsystems.net [209.47.149.227]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA23007 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Wed,          8 Aug 2001 08:27:18 -0700
Received: (from henry@localhost) by spsystems.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id LAA13538;          Wed, 8 Aug 2001 11:26:46 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010808111356.10441E-100000@spsystems.net>
Date:         Wed, 8 Aug 2001 11:26:45 -0400
Reply-To: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] US Standard Atmosphere - 1962
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <2DCA36C44BF3D211917F0008C7C9C9DD067ECF26@ntexchange06.micron.com>

On Wed, 8 Aug 2001, gacrowell wrote:
> How does 'Density Altitude' fit into the use of the standard atmosphere?

Density altitude is just the altitude which, in a standard atmosphere,
would produce the current air density.  This differs from true altitude
because air density changes with temperature, humidity, and weather
systems.  Rather than figuring all those things into your calculations
separately, it's simpler to just pretend that they change your altitude
in a standard atmosphere slightly.

The concept is of rather limited use for rockets because of their
near-vertical flight paths; the relationship between density altitude and
true altitude typically changes with height.  (It's much more useful for
aircraft, which fly almost horizontally.)

> In a flight simulation, would it be proper to calculate the density altitude
> of the launch site, and then use that as the starting altitude in the
> standard atmosphere tables/calculations?

There is no "density altitude of a launch site", except on a specific day.
The whole point of density altitude is that it varies with air density,
e.g. with temperature and weather.  If you were being very fussy, you
might compute an average density altitude for a given launch site, based
on its weather history.  But it is not going to differ very much from the
true altitude except in areas of unusual climate.  Unless you are
exploring the changes in performance with variations in weather, this is
almost certainly an unnecessary level of detail; ignore the whole issue.

> That seems to be what this site says:
> http://www.usatoday.com/weather/wdenalt.htm

Beware of using USA Today as a source of technical information. :-)

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 29896 invoked from network); 8 Aug 2001 16:57:43 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 8 Aug 2001 16:57:43 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 29089 invoked from network); 8 Aug 2001 16:59:29 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 8 Aug 2001 16:59:29 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA23251; Wed, 8 Aug 2001 09:07:37 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 102162 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 8 Aug 2001 16:07:31          +0000
Received: from mailgw1a.lmco.com (mailgw1a.lmco.com [192.31.106.7]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA23235 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 8 Aug 2001 09:07:29 -0700
Received: from emss02g01.ems.lmco.com (relay2.ems.lmco.com [166.29.2.54]) by          mailgw1a.lmco.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id KAA10786 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 8 Aug 2001 10:07:28 -0600 (MDT)
Received: from CONVERSION-DAEMON by lmco.com (PMDF V5.2-33 #38887) id          <0GHR00P01BGD61@lmco.com> for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 8 Aug 2001          10:07:27 -0600 (MDT)
Received: from emss02i00.ems.lmco.com ([166.29.2.48]) by lmco.com (PMDF V5.2-33          #38887) with ESMTP id <0GHR0059ZBGCIT@lmco.com> for          AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 08 Aug 2001 10:07:24 -0600 (MDT)
Received: by emss02i00.ems.lmco.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) id          <QPWNCDGL>; Wed, 08 Aug 2001 10:08:29 -0600
Content-return: allowed
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19)
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <EDB5E5136094D311BF1800508B12205E08D290C1@emss02m07.ems.lmco.com>
Date:         Wed, 8 Aug 2001 10:08:19 -0600
Reply-To: "Bendel, Timothy B" <timothy.b.bendel@LMCO.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Bendel, Timothy B" <timothy.b.bendel@LMCO.COM>
Subject:      [AR] More propellant questions:
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

I keep my propellant ingredients (not mixed propellant- that's done at the
launch site) in a small shed, with a concrete floor. Normally, it is pretty
cool in there, but recently I went in and thought it was pretty hot. I took
a thermometer, and it was 91F at the floor. Several of the ingredients I
have - Tepanol(HX-878), HTPB (R45), DOA and IPDI may be sensitive to heat.
My question is: How sensitive and how do I know if the ingredient in
question is "bad"?

Tim Bendel

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 3931 invoked from network); 8 Aug 2001 20:29:27 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 8 Aug 2001 20:29:27 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 17356 invoked from network); 8 Aug 2001 20:31:50 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 8 Aug 2001 20:31:50 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA24386; Wed, 8 Aug 2001 13:09:41 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 102290 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 8 Aug 2001 20:09:30          +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (f89.pav1.hotmail.com [64.4.31.89]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA24369 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed,          8 Aug 2001 13:09:30 -0700
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Wed,          8 Aug 2001 13:08:59 -0700
Received: from 63.87.136.249 by pv1fd.pav1.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Wed, 08          Aug 2001 20:08:59 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [63.87.136.249]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 08 Aug 2001 20:08:59.0412 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[F5F0DD40:01C12045]
Message-ID:  <F894ZneAzdfTVSxzW230000221f@hotmail.com>
Date:         Wed, 8 Aug 2001 13:08:59 -0700
Reply-To: "Brian Reddeman" <breddeman@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Brian Reddeman" <breddeman@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      [AR] MicroPump/Turbine. Problems with freezing.
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

I've made a prototype Micropump/motor for my mini-liquid fuel rocket motor.
The pump is about 1cm in size. When I test it with LOX the motor freezes and
the turbine blades sheer off at only a few hundred RPM. I expect poor
performance with such a crude design (it's made of tin at the momment)but my
worries are what materials I should use to prevent freezing and general
destruction of the motor itself at high speeds.

Hmmm...actually I really shouldn't complain about it working poorly, it's a
miracle it works at all. :-)

And to repeat myself on why I'm going the pump route on such a tiny motor:
"Because I want to"


-Brian

_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 17196 invoked from network); 8 Aug 2001 20:32:43 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 8 Aug 2001 20:32:43 -0000
Received: (qmail 17796 invoked from network); 8 Aug 2001 20:35:05 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 8 Aug 2001 20:35:05 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA24523; Wed, 8 Aug 2001 13:24:05 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 102323 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 8 Aug 2001 20:23:54          +0000
Received: from localhost (rcalkins@localhost) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with          ESMTP id NAA24507; Wed, 8 Aug 2001 13:23:53 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.LNX.4.10.10108081314450.24056-100000@itc.uci.edu>
Date:         Wed, 8 Aug 2001 13:23:52 -0700
Reply-To: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
Subject:      Re: [AR] MicroPump/Turbine. Problems with freezing.
Comments: To: Brian Reddeman <breddeman@HOTMAIL.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <F894ZneAzdfTVSxzW230000221f@hotmail.com>

On Wed, 8 Aug 2001, Brian Reddeman wrote:

> I've made a prototype Micropump/motor for my mini-liquid fuel rocket motor.
> The pump is about 1cm in size. When I test it with LOX the motor freezes
Two issues will make your turbine freeze:

1: Small amounts of water will freeze rocket hard at LOx temps.  Dry your
motor very well before introducing LOx.

2: Thermal shrinkage.  Don't know what to suggest for clearances there,
but if you've ruled out water, increase shaft clearances.

> the turbine blades sheer off at only a few hundred RPM.
Are you able to get higher RPM in open air tests?  I would think LOx would
strengthen tin, but maybe the structural load is putting too much stress
on it.

> (it's made of tin at the moment) but my worries are what materials I
> should use to prevent freezing and general destruction of the motor
> itself at high speeds.
Aluminum might work.  It gains significant strength at LOx temps, and as
it is low density, it will have less of a tendancy to sling itself apart.
Maybe stainless steel or nickel for the hot side.

Cool project!  Have you looked into photoetching or selective plating the
parts?  Cool thing about these processes is they scale well for production
numbers and you can get great detail.

Ray

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 1533 invoked from network); 8 Aug 2001 21:31:18 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 8 Aug 2001 21:31:18 -0000
Received: (qmail 9285 invoked from network); 8 Aug 2001 21:33:38 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 8 Aug 2001 21:33:38 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA24754; Wed, 8 Aug 2001 13:53:20 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 102364 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 8 Aug 2001 20:53:10          +0000
Received: from smtp007.mailsrvcs.net (smtp007pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.186])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA24739 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 8 Aug 2001 13:53:09 -0700
Received: from [63.10.189.36] (1Cust36.tnt2.hilo.hi.da.uu.net [63.10.189.36])          by smtp007.mailsrvcs.net  with ESMTP for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; id          f78KqbW16079 Wed, 8 Aug 2001 15:52:37 -0500 (CDT)
X-Sender: ttocs@mail.gte.net
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <l03130301b79756fab506@[63.10.189.36]>
Date:         Wed, 8 Aug 2001 10:52:43 -1000
Reply-To: "Aaron Smith" <ttocs@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Aaron Smith" <ttocs@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] US Standard Atmosphere - 1962
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <2DCA36C44BF3D211917F0008C7C9C9DD067ECF26@ntexchange06.micron.com>

At 8:47 AM -0600 8/8/01, gacrowell wrote:
>How does 'Density Altitude' fit into the use of the standard atmosphere?
>
>In a flight simulation, would it be proper to calculate the density altitude
>of the launch site, and then use that as the starting altitude in the
>standard atmosphere tables/calculations?
>
>That seems to be what this site says:
>http://www.usatoday.com/weather/wdenalt.htm
>
>
>Gary Crowell

http://www.printwares.com/densalt2.html
Density altitude calculator.

Aaron

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 14392 invoked from network); 8 Aug 2001 21:42:04 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 8 Aug 2001 21:42:04 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: (qmail 12963 invoked from network); 8 Aug 2001 21:44:23 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 8 Aug 2001 21:44:23 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA24970; Wed, 8 Aug 2001 14:31:43 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 102399 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 8 Aug 2001 21:31:33          +0000
Received: from localhost (rcalkins@localhost) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with          ESMTP id OAA24954; Wed, 8 Aug 2001 14:31:31 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.LNX.4.10.10108081428480.24945-100000@itc.uci.edu>
Date:         Wed, 8 Aug 2001 14:31:31 -0700
Reply-To: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
Subject:      [AR] Useful Page of Engineering Material Properties
Comments: cc: chad.kious@intel.com
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Density, Elastic Modulus, Electrical Resistivity, Heat Capacity, heat of
combustoin, heat of fusion, heat of vaporization, heat transfer coef,
kinematic viscosity, poisson's ratio, ...  for lots of common materials.

http://www.apo.nmsu.edu/Telescopes/SDSS/eng.papers/19950926_ConversionFactors/19950926_MProperties.html

Recommended.

Ray

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 25382 invoked from network); 8 Aug 2001 22:14:39 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 8 Aug 2001 22:14:39 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 21229 invoked from network); 8 Aug 2001 22:16:52 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 8 Aug 2001 22:16:52 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA25143; Wed, 8 Aug 2001 14:56:45 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 102430 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 8 Aug 2001 21:56:36          +0000
Received: from smtp.snet.net (smtp.snet.net [204.60.6.55]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA25123 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed,          8 Aug 2001 14:56:35 -0700
Received: from snet.net (41.75.252.64.snet.net [64.252.75.41]) by smtp.snet.net          (8.12.0.Beta12/8.12.0.Beta12/SNET-mx-1.5/D-evisionO-evision$) with          ESMTP id f78LuVuu006446 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 8 Aug 2001          17:56:32 -0400 (EDT)
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.75 [en] (Win98; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <200108080055.TAA32029@sys27.hou.wt.net>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B71B8A1.BABC58BF@snet.net>
Date:         Wed, 8 Aug 2001 18:09:37 -0400
Reply-To: "Blake Mantel" <BMantel@SNET.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Blake Mantel" <BMantel@SNET.NET>
Organization: done through the use of very fuzzy logic!
Subject:      Re: [AR] Aerospace / Military electronics
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Donald McCorvey wrote:

> John,
> A good starting point would be to go to a local technical library and
> start wading through the military specs and standards.

or try:

http://www.aeroelectric.com/

Good stuff,
Blake
--
CUM CATAPULTAE PROSCRIPTAE ERUNT TUM SOLI PROSCRIPTI CATAPULTAS HABEBUNT.
(When catapults are outlawed, only outlaws will have catapults....)
Triumph Tiger Motorcycle page at: http://pages.cthome.net/bmantel/

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 27092 invoked from network); 8 Aug 2001 22:58:40 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 8 Aug 2001 22:58:40 -0000
Received: (qmail 6284 invoked from network); 8 Aug 2001 23:01:00 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 8 Aug 2001 23:01:00 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA25442; Wed, 8 Aug 2001 15:51:56 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 102471 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 8 Aug 2001 22:51:49          +0000
Received: from fep4-orange.clear.net.nz (fep4-orange.clear.net.nz          [203.97.32.4]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA25427          for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Wed, 8 Aug 2001 15:51:46 -0700
Received: from mkbs (203-167-156-132.dialup.clear.net.nz [203.167.156.132]) by          fep4-orange.clear.net.nz (1.5/1.7) with SMTP id KAA28502; Thu, 9 Aug          2001 10:51:42 +1200 (NZST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="Windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <047d01c1205c$f48017c0$0100a8c0@mkbs>
Date:         Thu, 9 Aug 2001 04:12:30 +1200
Reply-To: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Organization: Applied Technology
Subject:      [AR] Fw: [amsat-bb] The First Ever Image from SCOPE/RUDAK/AO40 in              Space !
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Just a glimpse at what the satellite using amateurs are getting up to -

RM

______________________________________


> From: "Takeyasu" <ja6xkq@jamsat.or.jp>
> To: <amsat-bb@AMSAT.Org>
> > The First Ever Image from SCOPE/RUDAK/AO40 in Space !
> > -----------------------------------------------------
> > Dear All,
> >
> > JAMSAT is pleased to announce that SCOPE camera on AO-40
> > successfully captured the first image in orbit.
> >
> > Commissioning of SCOPE has been continued by RUDAK/SCOPE
> > team since 30th. July. Good operation of Cam-A (narrow
> > FOV) and Cam-B (wide FOV) were confirmed and some shots
> > were tried to determine exposure time using the Cam-B. The
> > first perfect image was captured by the Cam-B in Orbit
> > 354, 7th. August. The image is published at JAMSAT SCOPE
> > home page:
> >
> > http://www.jamsat.or.jp/scope/index_e.html
> > http://www.jamsat.or.jp/scope/010808/index_e.html
> >
> > The image shows a crescent "blue" earth and suggests us
> > possibilities of SCOPE cameras. There are some blobs in
> > the image and they may be related to "December incident".
> > Please note the image was captured (30msec exposure) in
> > spinning S/C so that it is smeared a little bit. It would
> > be possible to compensate the smear like the YACE image.
> >
> > Special thanks to Jim White, Bdale Garbee the RUDAK team,
> > and Stacey Mills the command station for their great job
> > in the commissioning. Also AO-40 users should be appreciated
> > for their kind patience during the interruption of passband.
> >
> > Congratulations to SCOPE project members on their superb
> > work!
> >
> > SCOPE - YOUR EYES IN SPACE

 > Via the amsat-bb mailing list at AMSAT.ORG courtesy of AMSAT-NA.
> > To unsubscribe, send "unsubscribe amsat-bb" to Majordomo@amsat.org

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 7528 invoked from network); 9 Aug 2001 03:22:59 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 9 Aug 2001 03:22:59 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 28095 invoked from network); 9 Aug 2001 03:25:22 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 9 Aug 2001 03:25:22 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA27329; Wed, 8 Aug 2001 20:04:28 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 102844 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 9 Aug 2001 03:03:27          +0000
Received: from dns2.seanet.com (dns2.seanet.com [199.181.164.2]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA27313 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed,          8 Aug 2001 20:03:26 -0700
Received: from seanet.com (ssstolt.seanet.com [204.182.68.23]) by          dns2.seanet.com (8.11.3/8.11.2) with ESMTP id f7933Ln07474; Wed, 8          Aug 2001 20:03:22 -0700 (PDT)
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.73 [en] (Win98; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <997106513.3b6ea351cda54@webmail.uib.no>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B71FBF5.4AFC074D@seanet.com>
Date:         Wed, 8 Aug 2001 19:56:53 -0700
Reply-To: "Sherwood Stolt" <ssstolt@SEANET.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Sherwood Stolt" <ssstolt@SEANET.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Melting PE for hybrid fuel grains
Comments: cc: Emil.Johnsen@STUDENT.UIB.NO
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Put the thick glob in a heated motor casing and spin it up to say
a hundred Gs (assuming you want one circular port).

Emil.Johnsen@STUDENT.UIB.NO wrote:

> >Consider grinding it (or perhaps buying it as pellets) and then
> >consolidating it under heat and a bit of pressure -- a low-temperature
> >equivalent of sintering.
>
> Thanks. I will try that.
>
> >The alternative, given suitable sources of supply, is to buy PE rod and
> >drill it.
>
> I have considered doing that, but the only source of PE rods I have been able
> to locate is somewhat expensive.
>
> Emil

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 18024 invoked from network); 9 Aug 2001 03:44:06 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 9 Aug 2001 03:44:06 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 2767 invoked from network); 9 Aug 2001 03:46:26 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 9 Aug 2001 03:46:26 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA27416; Wed, 8 Aug 2001 20:14:44 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 102867 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 9 Aug 2001 03:14:39          +0000
Received: from cyclone.comcen.com.au (cyclone.comcen.com.au [203.23.236.100])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA27400 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Wed, 8 Aug 2001 20:14:37 -0700
Received: (from nobody@localhost) by cyclone.comcen.com.au (8.11.1/8.11.1) id          f793EVe75830 for arocket@itc.uci.edu; Thu, 9 Aug 2001 13:14:31 +1000          (EST) (envelope-from pkelly@comcen.com.au)
X-Authentication-Warning: cyclone.comcen.com.au: nobody set sender to                         pkelly@comcen.com.au using -f
References: <997106513.3b6ea351cda54@webmail.uib.no>            <3B71FBF5.4AFC074D@seanet.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
User-Agent: IMP/PHP IMAP webmail program 2.2.3
X-Originating-IP: 203.2.125.3
Message-ID:  <997326871.3b720017e0396@webmail.comcen.com.au>
Date:         Thu, 9 Aug 2001 13:14:31 +1000
Reply-To: "Paul Kelly" <pkelly@COMCEN.COM.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Paul Kelly" <pkelly@COMCEN.COM.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Melting PE for hybrid fuel grains
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <3B71FBF5.4AFC074D@seanet.com>

> > >The alternative, given suitable sources of supply, is to buy PE rod
> and
> > >drill it.
> >
> > I have considered doing that, but the only source of PE rods I have
> been able
> > to locate is somewhat expensive.
> >
How expensive is somewhat expensive?

PK
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 19094 invoked from network); 9 Aug 2001 04:12:53 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 9 Aug 2001 04:12:53 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 7349 invoked from network); 9 Aug 2001 04:15:16 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 9 Aug 2001 04:15:16 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA27742; Wed, 8 Aug 2001 20:55:44 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 102962 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 9 Aug 2001 03:55:36          +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (f112.law14.hotmail.com [64.4.21.112]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA27726 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 8 Aug 2001 20:55:36 -0700
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Wed,          8 Aug 2001 20:55:05 -0700
Received: from 207.220.223.10 by lw14fd.law14.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Thu,          09 Aug 2001 03:55:05 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [207.220.223.10]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 09 Aug 2001 03:55:05.0817 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[13379C90:01C12087]
Message-ID:  <F112ZYhtBct79xdTDrk00002330@hotmail.com>
Date:         Thu, 9 Aug 2001 03:55:05 +0000
Reply-To: "Matt Faulkner" <mattfaulkner9@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Matt Faulkner" <mattfaulkner9@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      [AR] southern california
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

   As a general newbie to rockets larger than model rocketry, I have no idea
where I can launch or even test my homebrew creations. So far, this has not
been a serious limitation, as my rockets have been very small; but soon I
plan to begin construction of larger rockets, and a test site is becoming
very necessary. My question is: Does anyone know of either a place where I
can test/launch in peace, or of someone I should talk to? What are the legal
technicalities that I need to take care of? Thanks in advance to everyone.
                                       -Matt Faulkner

_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 13021 invoked from network); 9 Aug 2001 04:30:02 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 9 Aug 2001 04:30:02 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 27351 invoked from network); 9 Aug 2001 04:31:49 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 9 Aug 2001 04:31:49 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA28217; Wed, 8 Aug 2001 21:26:14 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 103091 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 9 Aug 2001 04:26:09          +0000
Received: from smtp02.roc.gblx.net (smtp02.roc.gblx.net [209.130.222.197]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA28202 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 8 Aug 2001 21:26:08 -0700
Received: (from daemon@localhost) by smtp02.roc.gblx.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id          AAA86174; Thu, 9 Aug 2001 00:24:37 -0400
Received: from 64-208-224-71.nas2.TBR.gblx.net(64.208.224.71),          claiming to be "frontiernet.net" via SMTP by smtp02.roc.gblx.net,          id smtpdVTVEia; Thu Aug  9 00:24:28 2001
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.74 [en] (Win98; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <F112ZYhtBct79xdTDrk00002330@hotmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B7211D3.F13AC943@frontiernet.net>
Date:         Thu, 9 Aug 2001 00:30:11 -0400
Reply-To: <tbinford@frontiernet.net>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Tom Binford" <tbinford@frontiernet.net>
Subject:      Re: [AR] southern california
Comments: To: Matt Faulkner <mattfaulkner9@HOTMAIL.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Matt Faulkner wrote:
>
>    As a general newbie to rockets larger than model rocketry, I have no idea
> where I can launch or even test my homebrew creations. So far, this has not
> been a serious limitation, as my rockets have been very small; but soon I
> plan to begin construction of larger rockets, and a test site is becoming
> very necessary. My question is: Does anyone know of either a place where I
> can test/launch in peace, or of someone I should talk to? What are the legal
> technicalities that I need to take care of? Thanks in advance to everyone.
>                                        -Matt Faulkner
>

The people at http://www.rrs.org have all the info and a CA launch site.

Tom

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 15660 invoked from network); 9 Aug 2001 04:50:00 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 9 Aug 2001 04:50:00 -0000
Received: (qmail 4369 invoked from network); 9 Aug 2001 04:51:45 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 9 Aug 2001 04:51:45 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA28164; Wed, 8 Aug 2001 21:21:30 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 103078 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 9 Aug 2001 04:21:28          +0000
Received: from spsystems.net (spsystems.net [209.47.149.227]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA28149 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Wed,          8 Aug 2001 21:21:27 -0700
Received: (from henry@localhost) by spsystems.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id AAA21958;          Thu, 9 Aug 2001 00:20:50 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010809001715.21564B-100000@spsystems.net>
Date:         Thu, 9 Aug 2001 00:20:50 -0400
Reply-To: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] MicroPump/Turbine. Problems with freezing.
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <F894ZneAzdfTVSxzW230000221f@hotmail.com>

On Wed, 8 Aug 2001, Brian Reddeman wrote:
> the turbine blades sheer off at only a few hundred RPM. I expect poor
> performance with such a crude design (it's made of tin at the momment)but my
> worries are what materials I should use to prevent freezing and general
> destruction of the motor itself at high speeds.

At LOX temperatures, some metals become brittle, and that may be part of
your problem.  I can't immediately find a statement about whether tin does
or not.  One choice to avoid is ordinary steel, which definitely does
become brittle.  Most types of stainless steel are okay, but they're a
pain to work with.  Ray's suggestion of aluminum is a good one; it usually
has good low-temperature properties and it's easy to machine.

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 10046 invoked from network); 9 Aug 2001 05:08:07 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 9 Aug 2001 05:08:07 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA28019; Wed, 8 Aug 2001 21:12:54 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 103004 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 9 Aug 2001 04:12:43          +0000
Received: from imo-m02.mx.aol.com (imo-m02.mx.aol.com [64.12.136.5]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA27872 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Wed, 8 Aug 2001 21:02:42 -0700
Received: from SLaduke37@aol.com by imo-m02.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v31.9.) id          w.99.18ec0cbc (4426) for <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Thu, 9 Aug 2001          00:02:06 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0B0A_01C56B69.47A06800"
X-Mailer: AOL 6.0 for Windows US sub 10527
Message-ID:  <99.18ec0cbc.28a3653d@aol.com>
Date:         Thu, 9 Aug 2001 00:02:05 EDT
Reply-To: <SLaduke37@AOL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <SLaduke37@AOL.COM>
Subject:      [AR] possible removal from list
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0B0A_01C56B69.47A06800
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

I have been thinking about having my name removed from this list, if I decide
to, what message do I send ,and to what address??   Thank you in advance
Stacy LaDuke




------=_NextPart_000_0B0A_01C56B69.47A06800
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<HTML><FONT FACE=arial,helvetica><FONT  SIZE=2>I have been thinking about having my name removed from this list, if I decide
<BR>to, what message do I send ,and to what address?? &nbsp;&nbsp;Thank you in advance
<BR>Stacy LaDuke &nbsp;
<BR>
<BR>
<BR> &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;</FONT></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0B0A_01C56B69.47A06800--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 14873 invoked from network); 9 Aug 2001 06:14:57 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 9 Aug 2001 06:14:57 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: (qmail 1103 invoked from network); 9 Aug 2001 06:16:42 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 9 Aug 2001 06:16:42 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA29451; Wed, 8 Aug 2001 22:43:46 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 103338 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 9 Aug 2001 05:43:27          +0000
Received: from cisco.com (cypher.cisco.com [171.69.11.18]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA29435 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed,          8 Aug 2001 22:43:26 -0700
Received: (from billw@localhost) by cisco.com (8.8.8/2.6/Cisco List          Logging/8.8.8) id WAA12482; Wed, 8 Aug 2001 22:42:55 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID:  <CMM.0.90.4.997335775.billw@cypher>
Date:         Wed, 8 Aug 2001 22:42:55 PDT
Reply-To: "Bill Westfield" <billw@cisco.com>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "William Chops Westfield" <billw@cisco.com>
Subject:      Re: [AR] southern california
Comments: To: Matt Faulkner <mattfaulkner9@HOTMAIL.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  Your message of Thu, 9 Aug 2001 03:55:05 +0000

In southern california, you should join the RRS and launch at their
Mojave test range, assuming that you can meet their requirements (ie
no mixing pyro expect on-site, although I'm not sure what their reaction would
be if you showed up with a completely solid fuel composite motor...)

BillW


From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 5690 invoked from network); 9 Aug 2001 07:34:53 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 9 Aug 2001 07:34:53 -0000
Received: (qmail 2556 invoked from network); 9 Aug 2001 07:37:11 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 9 Aug 2001 07:37:11 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA29930; Thu, 9 Aug 2001 00:07:25 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 103444 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 9 Aug 2001 07:07:08          +0000
Received: from imo-m07.mx.aol.com (imo-m07.mx.aol.com [64.12.136.162]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA29914; Thu, 9 Aug 2001          00:07:07 -0700
Received: from JimSwen@aol.com by imo-m07.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v31.9.) id          w.104.75b104c (660); Thu, 9 Aug 2001 03:07:01 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0B0F_01C56B69.47A2D900"
X-Mailer: AOL 6.0 for Windows US sub 10527
Message-ID:  <104.75b104c.28a39095@aol.com>
Date:         Thu, 9 Aug 2001 03:07:01 EDT
Reply-To: <JimSwen@AOL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <JimSwen@AOL.COM>
Subject:      [AR] Big Sugar - support with Al screen?
Comments: To: rcalkins@itc.uci.edu
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0B0F_01C56B69.47A2D900
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Ray -

>
  If I can learn how to scale it, then the next issues are burn rate and Isp.
 I've never seen a metalized sugar propellant for example.
>

an offbeat hybrid idea:

  Scaling up, you might need to support the fuel.  I've put aluminum window
screen in a few zinc/sulfur rockets.  The first thing it does is support the
fuel.
The other things, rate and Isp, need work.  But I think it sounds like
something that would work for sugar, contributing more to Isp than iron mesh,
organic fibers, or inert structures.
  The Al strands might accelerate burning by conducting heat, unless they are
parallel to the burning front.  Not sure if that's true or false, good or
bad. The high conductivity could make ignition slow or difficult, or melt too
deep a layer of sugar.   I can see where the 660C melting point of aluminum
might be a little low for burning, and don't know how that would play out.

Window screen is so coarse that the surface area is low and the ignition
energy is very high, so it should be one of the safer metals to put into
melted propellant.  The surface might be able to oxide-passivate in a nitrate
stew, and an aluminum oxide surface wouldn't be catalytic.

Jim Swenson



------=_NextPart_000_0B0F_01C56B69.47A2D900
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<HTML><FONT FACE=arial,helvetica><FONT  SIZE=2 FAMILY="FIXED" FACE="Courier New" LANG="0">Ray -
<BR>
<BR>&gt;
<BR> &nbsp;If I can learn how to scale it, then the next issues are burn rate and Isp.
<BR>&nbsp;I've never seen a metalized sugar propellant for example.
<BR>&gt;
<BR>
<BR>an offbeat hybrid idea:
<BR>
<BR> &nbsp;Scaling up, you might need to support the fuel. &nbsp;I've put aluminum window
<BR>screen in a few zinc/sulfur rockets. &nbsp;The first thing it does is support the
<BR>fuel.
<BR>The other things, rate and Isp, need work. &nbsp;But I think it sounds like
<BR>something that would work for sugar, contributing more to Isp than iron mesh,
<BR>organic fibers, or inert structures. &nbsp;
<BR> &nbsp;The Al strands might accelerate burning by conducting heat, unless they are
<BR>parallel to the burning front. &nbsp;Not sure if that's true or false, good or
<BR>bad. The high conductivity could make ignition slow or difficult, or melt too
<BR>deep a layer of sugar. &nbsp;&nbsp;I can see where the 660C melting point of aluminum
<BR>might be a little low for burning, and don't know how that would play out.
<BR>
<BR>Window screen is so coarse that the surface area is low and the ignition
<BR>energy is very high, so it should be one of the safer metals to put into
<BR>melted propellant. &nbsp;The surface might be able to oxide-passivate in a nitrate
<BR>stew, and an aluminum oxide surface wouldn't be catalytic. &nbsp;
<BR>
<BR>Jim Swenson
<BR>
<BR></FONT></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0B0F_01C56B69.47A2D900--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 11875 invoked from network); 9 Aug 2001 07:36:59 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 9 Aug 2001 07:36:59 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 9734 invoked from network); 9 Aug 2001 07:39:22 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 9 Aug 2001 07:39:22 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA30037; Thu, 9 Aug 2001 00:25:36 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 103464 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 9 Aug 2001 07:25:30          +0000
Received: from johnson.mail.mindspring.net (johnson.mail.mindspring.net          [207.69.200.177]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA30022          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 9 Aug 2001 00:25:29 -0700
Received: from mindspring.com (sdn-ar-006casfrMP053.dialsprint.net          [158.252.213.55]) by johnson.mail.mindspring.net (8.9.3/8.8.5) with          ESMTP id DAA17796; Thu, 9 Aug 2001 03:24:49 -0400 (EDT)
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 (Macintosh; U; PPC)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010809001715.21564B-100000@spsystems.net>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B723C1B.DC2D9DBE@mindspring.com>
Date:         Thu, 9 Aug 2001 00:30:36 -0700
Reply-To: "Alan Shinn" <alshinn@MINDSPRING.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Alan Shinn" <alshinn@MINDSPRING.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] MicroPump/Turbine. Problems with freezing.
Comments: To: Henry Spencer <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

I suspect that Brian meant ordinary steel- perhaps tinned- when he said
tin. A common usage. And yes, at least if it has carbon in it the steal
will be brittle when very cold.
Brian, what does your turbine do with compressed air?


Henry Spencer wrote:
>
> On Wed, 8 Aug 2001, Brian Reddeman wrote:
> > the turbine blades sheer off at only a few hundred RPM. I expect poor
> > performance with such a crude design (it's made of tin at the momment)but my
> > worries are what materials I should use to prevent freezing and general
> > destruction of the motor itself at high speeds.
>
> At LOX temperatures, some metals become brittle, and that may be part of
> your problem.  I can't immediately find a statement about whether tin does
> or not.  One choice to avoid is ordinary steel, which definitely does
> become brittle.  Most types of stainless steel are okay, but they're a
> pain to work with.  Ray's suggestion of aluminum is a good one; it usually
> has good low-temperature properties and it's easy to machine.
>
>                                                           Henry Spencer
>                                                        henry@spsystems.net

--
Looking forward:
Alan Shinn


Experience the
beginnings of microscopy.
Make your own replica
of one of Antony van Leeuwenhoek's microscopes.
visit    http://www.mindspring.com/~alshinn/

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 29834 invoked from network); 9 Aug 2001 12:10:35 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 9 Aug 2001 12:10:35 -0000
Received: (qmail 11968 invoked from network); 9 Aug 2001 12:12:23 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 9 Aug 2001 12:12:23 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id EAA31991; Thu, 9 Aug 2001 04:46:14 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 103961 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 9 Aug 2001 11:45:46          +0000
Received: from fep4-orange.clear.net.nz (fep4-orange.clear.net.nz          [203.97.32.4]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id EAA31971          for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Thu, 9 Aug 2001 04:45:44 -0700
Received: from mkbs (203-167-162-160.dialup.clear.net.nz [203.167.162.160]) by          fep4-orange.clear.net.nz (1.5/1.7) with SMTP id XAA11537; Thu, 9 Aug          2001 23:45:13 +1200 (NZST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="Windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <061901c120c9$064cdb20$0100a8c0@mkbs>
Date:         Thu, 9 Aug 2001 23:46:26 +1200
Reply-To: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Organization: Applied Technology
Subject:      [AR] Hydrogen Peroxide synthesis
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

    Overview

        http://www.friends-partners.org/mwade/props/h2o2cxhy.htm

On site peroxide production to ^%
Inputs Oxygen and electricity.

    http://www.psicorp.com/html/prod/hyperox.htm


In situ electrolytic generation

        http://www.herts.ac.uk/natsci/Cem/DIVPAGE/CleanRes.htm

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 16894 invoked from network); 9 Aug 2001 13:10:06 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 9 Aug 2001 13:10:06 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id FAA32080; Thu, 9 Aug 2001 05:05:54 -0700
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 103972 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 9 Aug 2001 12:05:35          +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (f75.law15.hotmail.com [64.4.23.75]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id FAA32064 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Thu,          9 Aug 2001 05:05:34 -0700
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Thu,          9 Aug 2001 05:05:03 -0700
Received: from 193.121.251.246 by lw15fd.law15.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Thu,          09 Aug 2001 12:05:03 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [193.121.251.246]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 09 Aug 2001 12:05:03.0843 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[85CE6330:01C120CB]
Message-ID:  <F750mqvgCBoE1pbzE3z00003195@hotmail.com>
Date:         Thu, 9 Aug 2001 12:05:35 +0000
Reply-To: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Hydrogen Peroxide synthesis
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Russell McMahon wrote:


>     http://www.friends-partners.org/mwade/props/h2o2cxhy.htm

Wade's prices of 90-98 % HP seem too low. At least for small quantities, say
5-10 L. JC might confirm this one.

>     http://www.psicorp.com/html/prod/hyperox.htm
>     http://www.herts.ac.uk/natsci/Cem/DIVPAGE/CleanRes.htm

Setups described in these URLs produce only low % HP, not suitable for
propellant use. 'd require distillation enrichment anyway.

jd


_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 25915 invoked from network); 9 Aug 2001 13:12:28 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 9 Aug 2001 13:12:28 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id FAA32241; Thu, 9 Aug 2001 05:35:20 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 103994 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 9 Aug 2001 12:34:51          +0000
Received: from fep3-orange.clear.net.nz (fep3-orange.clear.net.nz          [203.97.32.3]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id FAA32222          for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Thu, 9 Aug 2001 05:34:50 -0700
Received: from mkbs (203-167-161-29.dialup.clear.net.nz [203.167.161.29]) by          fep3-orange.clear.net.nz (1.5/1.8) with SMTP id AAA28392; Fri, 10 Aug          2001 00:34:45 +1200 (NZST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="Windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <007001c120cf$efdc5d00$0100a8c0@mkbs>
Date:         Fri, 10 Aug 2001 00:11:54 +1200
Reply-To: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Organization: Applied Technology
Subject:      [AR] Fw: Jonathan's Space Report, No. 458
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Note comment on GPS use by satellite.
If NASA can do it then .........  :-)

The 52 kg, 0.48m dia, 0.66m high octagonal cylinder  Simplesat was
developed by NASA-Goddard and will be ejected from a canister as a
free-flying satellite to test out GPS attitude control.




________________________________________________________________


Jonathan's Space Report
No. 458                                          2001 Aug 8  Cambridge, MA
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
---
Sender: owner-jsr@head-cfa.harvard.edu
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: jmcdowell@head-cfa.harvard.edu

Shuttle and Station
--------------------

The next Shuttle flight is STS-105, scheduled for Aug 9. Discovery will
be flown by Scott Horowitz and Rick Sturckow, with mission specialists
Dan Barry and Patrick Forrester. Space Station Expedition Three
crewmembers Frank Culbertson, Vladimir Dezhurov and Mikhail Tyurin will
also fly aboard Discovery and will relieve the Expedition Two crew
currently aboard the ISS.

The cargo bay contains the Integrated Cargo Carrier platform and
the Leonardo module, and a set of canisters on the sidewall.
The ICC will carry the Early Ammonia Servicer for the P6 truss,
and two small exposure experiments PEC-1 and PEC-2 under the
MISSE materials exposure program, which will be installed on Quest.
The Leonardo module contains Express Racks 4 and 5, as well
as resupply stowage racks.

HEAT is a Hitchhiker payload comprising Simplesat, G-774 and SEM-10, on
two adapter beams on the port and starboard sides of bay 13. The 13P
beam carries G-774 in the forward position and SEM-10 in the aft
position. G-774 is the Microgravity Smoldering Combustion (MSC)
experiment. SEM-10 is a canister with 11 school experiments.  The 13S
beam carries  the Simplesat can forward and the ACE avionics plate aft.
The 52 kg, 0.48m dia, 0.66m high octagonal cylinder  Simplesat was
developed by NASA-Goddard and will be ejected from a canister as a
free-flying satellite to test out GPS attitude control.

Another adapter beam in Bay 4 port  carries two half-size (2.5 cubic
foot) GAS canisters. G-780 is a Mayo High School (Rochester, Minnesota)
experiment to study germination of faba beans; aft of it is the PSP-1
(Program Support Package 1) canister for NASA-GSFC which contains
passive experiments and ballast. (Thanks to NASA-GSFC for providing
some of the info on the payload).


Jonathan's cargo manifest estimate:

                                                            Mass/kg
Bay 1-2   Orbiter Docking System/External Airlock            1800
          3 EMU spacesuits?                                   360?
Bay 4P    Adapter beam with G-780 and PSP-1                   200?
Bay 5     Integrated Cargo Carrier/KYD                       1280
          Early Ammonia Servicer                              640
Bay 7-12  MPLM FM1 (Leonardo) module                         9800?
Bay 13P   Adapter beam with G-774 and SEM-10                  410
Bay 13S   Adapter beam with Simplesat and ACE avionics        355
          Simplesat                                            52
Sill      RMS arm                                             410
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total                                                       15107?


Recent Launches
---------------

MAP flew past the Moon on Jul 30 at 1639 UTC at a distance of 5200 km
above the lunar surface.

Galileo passed Io at a distance of 200 km at 0459 UTC on Aug 6.
Closest approach to Jupiter on this orbit was an altitude of 350000 km
at 0452 UTC on Aug 6.

The satellite launched on Jul 20 was given the name Molniya-3 after
reaching orbit. It is a Molniya-3K satellite, and not a Molniya-1K
satellite as erroneously reported earlier.

A Peackeeper missile was launched from Vandenberg on flight test 30PA on
Jul 27 at around 0801 UTC, but was destroyed during flight and did not
reach its planned 1000 km apogee.

Russia's first scientific satellite in several years was launched on Jul
31. A Yuzhnoe Tsiklon-3 vehicle took off from Plesetsk at 0800 UTC and
reached transfer orbit at 0807 UTC. The S5M second stage restarted at
0850 UTC and separated a minute later delivering Koronas-F to a 486 x
529 km x 82.5 deg orbit. Koronas-F, an AUOS-SM type solar-pointing
satellite built by Yuzhnoe in Dnepropetrovsk, Ukraine, carries a set of
solar physics instruments.

There were 11 launches of earth-oriented AUOS-Z satellites between 1976
and 1991, followed by development of the two solar-pointing AUOS-SM
satellites AUOS-SM-KI (Koronas-I) and  AUOS-SM-KF (Koronas-F), whose
names reflect the two research insitutes who were the original principal
investigators for the experiment payloads.  The I satellite, for the
IZMIRAN geophysics institute, was launched in 1994 and reentered earlier
this year. The new F satellite carries that designation  because the
original lead organization was the Lebedev institute known as FIAN in
Russian, although it also carries experiments from IZMIRAN and other
research centers.

A new US Air Force Defense Support Program infrared missile early
warning satellite was launched on Aug 6. The Lockheed Martin Titan 4B
took off from Cape Canaveral into a  328 x 663 km x 28.7 deg parking
orbit. The Boeing IUS-16 upper stage then fired its first solid motor to
enter geostationary transfer orbit. The second IUS solid motor fired at
around 1400 UTC placing DSP Flight 21 in near-geosynchronous orbit. The
DSP satellites are built by TRW and have a mass of about 2300 kg.


The Genesis probe was launched from Cape Canaveral on Aug 8. Genesis
will fly to the Earth-Sun L1 point and spend two years collecting
samples of the solar wind. A follow on to such experiments as the solar
wind collectors exposed on the Moon by Apollo astronauts, Genesis will
allow scientists to determine the chemical and isotopic composition of
the Sun. The collected samples will be physically returned to Earth
(landing in Utah) and analysed in ground-based laboratories. Among the
goals are an attempt to study why the oxygen isotopic composition seems
to vary in the solar system, accurate measurement of argon, xenon and
neon abundances, and isotope ratio abundance measurements accurate to
one percent for a broad range of elements.

Genesis is part of NASA's Discovery program. The spacecraft and sample
return capsule were built by Lockheed Martin Astronautics; mass is 494
kg dry (includin the 220 kg return capsule), 636 kg at launch. The craft
is 1.3m high with a 1.52m diameter capsule,  and has a 6.8m span when
deployed. The vehicle will enter a 6-month-period halo orbit around L1
with a radius of 800000 km when it arrives on station later this year.
The craft carries a pure hydrazine propulsion system, and a sample
return capsule with deployable sample collection plates and an ion
concentrator that rejects protons (80 percent of the solar wind) in
favour of the trace elements it is trying to study.

Launch was by a Boeing Delta 7326 vehicle, a Delta II variant with three
strap-on motors and a lightweight Star 37 third stage. The first burn of
the Delta second stage put Genesis in a  185 x 197 km x 28.5 deg parking
orbit at 1624 UTC. At 1712 UTC the second burn raised the orbit to 182 x
3811 km, and at 1713 UTC the third stage fired to put Genesis on its
trajectory to L1 with a nominal apogee of around 1.2 million km.

Table of Recent Launches
-----------------------

Date UT       Name            Launch Vehicle  Site            Mission
INTL.

DES.

Jul 12 0904   Atlantis STS-104) Shuttle        Kennedy LC39B    Spaceship
28A
              Quest           )                                 Station
module
Jul 12 2158   Artemis   )       Ariane 5G      Kourou ELA3      Expt. comms
29A
              BSAT-2b   )                                       Ku video
29B
Jul 20 0017   Molniya-3         Molniya-M      Plesetsk LC43/4  Comms
30A
Jul 23 0723   GOES 12           Atlas IIA      Canaveral SLC36A Weather
31A
Jul 31 0800   Koronas-F         Tsiklon-3      Plesetsk LC32    Astronomy
32A
Aug  6 0728   DSP 21            Titan 4B/IUS   Canaveral SLC40  Early Warn
33A
Aug  8 1613   Genesis           Delta 7326     Canaveral SLC17A Space probe


Current Shuttle Processing Status
_________________________________

Orbiters               Location   Mission    Launch Due

OV-102 Columbia        OPF Bay 3     STS-109 2002 Jan 17  HST SM-3B
OV-103 Discovery       LC39A         STS-105 2001 Aug  9  ISS 7A.1
OV-104 Atlantis        OPF Bay 2     STS-110 2002 Feb 28  ISS 8A
OV-105 Endeavour       OPF Bay 1     STS-108 2001 Nov 29  ISS UF-1

.-------------------------------------------------------------------------.
|  Jonathan McDowell                 |  phone : (617) 495-7176            |
|  Harvard-Smithsonian Center for    |                                    |
|   Astrophysics                     |                                    |
|  60 Garden St, MS6                 |                                    |
|  Cambridge MA 02138                |  inter : jcm@cfa.harvard.edu       |
|  USA                               |          jmcdowell@cfa.harvard.edu |
|                                                                         |
| JSR: http://hea-www.harvard.edu/~jcm/space/jsr/jsr.html                 |
| Back issues:  http://hea-www.harvard.edu/~jcm/space/jsr/back            |
| Subscribe/unsub: mail majordomo@head-cfa.harvard.edu, (un)subscribe jsr |
'-------------------------------------------------------------------------'

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 27201 invoked from network); 9 Aug 2001 15:15:59 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 9 Aug 2001 15:15:59 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 7526 invoked from network); 9 Aug 2001 15:17:45 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 9 Aug 2001 15:17:45 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA00302; Thu, 9 Aug 2001 07:58:28 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 104050 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 9 Aug 2001 14:58:10          +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (f118.pav1.hotmail.com [64.4.31.118]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA32755 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu,          9 Aug 2001 07:58:08 -0700
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Thu,          9 Aug 2001 07:57:37 -0700
Received: from 63.87.137.105 by pv1fd.pav1.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Thu, 09          Aug 2001 14:57:36 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [63.87.137.105]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 09 Aug 2001 14:57:37.0770 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[A13A44A0:01C120E3]
Message-ID:  <F118kpLkTgbLYluLCTa00002e66@hotmail.com>
Date:         Thu, 9 Aug 2001 07:57:36 -0700
Reply-To: "Brian Reddeman" <breddeman@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Brian Reddeman" <breddeman@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] MicroPump/Turbine. Problems with freezing.
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Thank you everyone for your insights. I've a lot to consider when I redesign
my pump/turbine. After some diagnosis, I found that a piece of dust/dirt
that managed to find it's way between the blades and wall the of the pump.


>From: Alan Shinn <alshinn@MINDSPRING.COM>
>Reply-To: Alan Shinn <alshinn@MINDSPRING.COM>
>To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
>Subject: Re: [AR] MicroPump/Turbine. Problems with freezing.
>Date: Thu, 9 Aug 2001 00:30:36 -0700
>
>I suspect that Brian meant ordinary steel- perhaps tinned- when he said
>tin. A common usage. And yes, at least if it has carbon in it the steal
>will be brittle when very cold.
>Brian, what does your turbine do with compressed air?
>
>
>Henry Spencer wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, 8 Aug 2001, Brian Reddeman wrote:
> > > the turbine blades sheer off at only a few hundred RPM. I expect poor
> > > performance with such a crude design (it's made of tin at the
>momment)but my
> > > worries are what materials I should use to prevent freezing and
>general
> > > destruction of the motor itself at high speeds.
> >
> > At LOX temperatures, some metals become brittle, and that may be part of
> > your problem.  I can't immediately find a statement about whether tin
>does
> > or not.  One choice to avoid is ordinary steel, which definitely does
> > become brittle.  Most types of stainless steel are okay, but they're a
> > pain to work with.  Ray's suggestion of aluminum is a good one; it
>usually
> > has good low-temperature properties and it's easy to machine.
> >
> >                                                           Henry Spencer
> >
>henry@spsystems.net
>
>--
>Looking forward:
>Alan Shinn
>
>
>Experience the
>beginnings of microscopy.
>Make your own replica
>of one of Antony van Leeuwenhoek's microscopes.
>visit    http://www.mindspring.com/~alshinn/
Brian Reddeman
"Don't run, you'll only die tired."

_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 35 invoked from network); 9 Aug 2001 16:28:18 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 9 Aug 2001 16:28:18 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA00462; Thu, 9 Aug 2001 08:18:26 -0700
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 104082 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 9 Aug 2001 15:18:03          +0000
Received: from ns.vanguard.com (ns.VANGUARD.COM [192.175.173.31]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA00446 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Thu, 9 Aug 2001 08:18:02 -0700
Received: from eagle1.vanguard.com (eagle1.VANGUARD.COM [192.175.141.70]) by          ns.vanguard.com (Switch-2.1.3/Switch-2.1.0) with ESMTP id          f79FI0v27052 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Thu, 9 Aug 2001 11:18:00          -0400 (EDT)
Received: from vgi4mail.vanguard.com (vgi4mail.vanguard.com [10.254.65.16]) by          eagle1.vanguard.com (Switch-2.1.3/Switch-2.1.0) with SMTP id          f79FHxa21347 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Thu, 9 Aug 2001 11:17:59          -0400 (EDT)
Received: by vgi4mail.vanguard.com(Lotus SMTP MTA v4.6.6  (890.1 7-16-1999))           id 85256AA3.0054199D ; Thu, 9 Aug 2001 11:18:35 -0400
X-Lotus-FromDomain: VGINOTES
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Disposition: inline
Message-ID:  <85256AA3.0050A195.00@vgi4mail.vanguard.com>
Date:         Thu, 9 Aug 2001 10:40:04 -0400
Reply-To: <Waysie_Atkins@VANGUARD.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <Waysie_Atkins@VANGUARD.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Hydrogen Peroxide synthesis
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

<<Wade's prices of 90-98 % HP seem too low. At least for small quantities, say
<<5-10 L. JC might confirm this one.

The indicated price is from 1959:


<Estimated United States production for 1959 was 50,000 tonnes based upon 100
per cent
< hydrogen peroxide. In large quantities, 95 per cent hydrogen peroxide then
cost approximately
<$1.00 per kg. In small drum lots, 98 per cent solutions cost $ 2.00 per kg.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 8132 invoked from network); 9 Aug 2001 16:59:28 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 9 Aug 2001 16:59:28 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 9041 invoked from network); 9 Aug 2001 17:01:15 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 9 Aug 2001 17:01:15 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA00952; Thu, 9 Aug 2001 09:53:39 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 104144 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 9 Aug 2001 16:53:26          +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (f103.law15.hotmail.com [64.4.23.103]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA00937 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Thu, 9 Aug 2001 09:53:25 -0700
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Thu,          9 Aug 2001 09:52:54 -0700
Received: from 213.224.83.46 by lw15fd.law15.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Thu, 09          Aug 2001 16:52:54 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [213.224.83.46]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 09 Aug 2001 16:52:54.0629 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[BBFF3150:01C120F3]
Message-ID:  <F103miR9Odutox7nyeK000036d1@hotmail.com>
Date:         Thu, 9 Aug 2001 16:53:26 +0000
Reply-To: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] MicroPump/Turbine.
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Maybe I missed the start of this thread but what about micropumps
themselves?
I seem to recall the URL on a micro- or nano-centrifugal pump project (MIT?)
which was being designed for micro (nano?)rockets and wonder what pressure
such are supposed to deliver. I do not think this rating was mentioned.

They are probably of the planar type and not for amateur budgets.

But maybe upscaling such planar designs to micro instead of nanoscale can be
realised using simple lithographic etching of stainless steel.
Laser cutting by a dedicated company of such scale-up combined with
resistive welding might do the trick.

That is if you fancy having very small vehicles hovering about.

jd

_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 13467 invoked from network); 9 Aug 2001 17:15:09 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 9 Aug 2001 17:15:09 -0000
Received: (qmail 13870 invoked from network); 9 Aug 2001 17:16:56 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 9 Aug 2001 17:16:56 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA01043; Thu, 9 Aug 2001 10:03:42 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 104163 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 9 Aug 2001 17:03:34          +0000
Received: from localhost (rcalkins@localhost) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with          ESMTP id KAA01028; Thu, 9 Aug 2001 10:03:32 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.LNX.4.10.10108090941270.527-100000@itc.uci.edu>
Date:         Thu, 9 Aug 2001 10:03:32 -0700
Reply-To: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
Subject:      Re: [AR] possible removal from list
Comments: To: SLaduke37@AOL.COM
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <99.18ec0cbc.28a3653d@aol.com>

First of all, I apologize for sending this message to the hundreds of
people that WANT to remain on the list.  I do this in the hope that it
will prevent messages like this in the future.  Sorry.

Hmm.  This info was posted to the list less than a week ago.  I post the
info about once a month.  I'll search for a way to make it more obvious,
maybe the list management software can tag a footer on every message with
instructions.  I've briefly looked for this functionality but haven't
found it yet.  It seems inelegant, and a waste of bandwidth.

After the instructions, READ about other ways to find the information on
your own.

Send an e-mail to:

                listserv@itc.uci.edu

Write the message:

                signoff arocket

Ways to find this information without sending a message to hundreds of
people that don't want to read yet another unsub request:

1. You are sent the information when you first subscribe.  This
information tells you to keep it because it tells you how to leave the
list.  Follow the instructions.

2. The web interface to subscribe to the list also includes an unsubscribe
option, with a note at the very top of the page saying the same.

3. This information is regularly posted to the list.  Save one of those
messages for future use.

4. This information is regularly posted to the list.  Check the archives.

5. This information is a Frequently Asked Question.  Check the FAQ.  The
FAQ is mirrored around the world.

6. If all else fails, rather than writing to the 500 people on the list,
write the list managers. A casual reading of the list should make these
addresses readily apparent.

Sorry for the rant,

Ray

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 15579 invoked from network); 9 Aug 2001 18:14:17 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 9 Aug 2001 18:14:17 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 25172 invoked from network); 9 Aug 2001 18:16:40 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 9 Aug 2001 18:16:40 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA01602; Thu, 9 Aug 2001 11:10:12 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 104267 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 9 Aug 2001 18:10:04          +0000
Received: from idsoftware.com (predator.idsoftware.com [192.246.40.34]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA01587 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Thu, 9 Aug 2001 11:10:03 -0700
Received: from [192.246.40.144] (account johnc HELO pluto.idsoftware.com) by          idsoftware.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 3.4.7) with ESMTP id 343225 for          AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 09 Aug 2001 13:10:02 -0500
X-Sender: johnc@mail.idsoftware.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <4.3.1.2.20010809131916.02dbfd08@mail.idsoftware.com>
Date:         Thu, 9 Aug 2001 13:22:14 -0500
Reply-To: "John Carmack" <johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Carmack" <johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Hydrogen Peroxide synthesis
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <F750mqvgCBoE1pbzE3z00003195@hotmail.com>

At 12:05 PM 8/9/2001 +0000, you wrote:
>Russell McMahon wrote:
>
>
>>     http://www.friends-partners.org/mwade/props/h2o2cxhy.htm
>
>Wade's prices of 90-98 % HP seem too low. At least for small quantities, say
>5-10 L. JC might confirm this one.

The prices quoted there are for 1959.  The current prices are $10/lb
($22/kg) for 98% from X-L Space Systems and $4/lb ($8.80/kg) for 90% from FMC.

I also noticed that the densities are off: it is 1.44 g/cc, not 2.44 g,cc
for 98%.

John Carmack

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 24542 invoked from network); 9 Aug 2001 20:01:13 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 9 Aug 2001 20:01:13 -0000
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 12544 invoked from network); 9 Aug 2001 20:03:38 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 9 Aug 2001 20:03:38 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA02106; Thu, 9 Aug 2001 12:31:59 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 104358 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 9 Aug 2001 19:31:41          +0000
Received: from c0mailgw06.prontomail.com (mailgw.prontomail.com          [216.163.180.10]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA02090          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 9 Aug 2001 12:31:37 -0700
Received: from c0web111 (216.163.180.10) by c0mailgw06.prontomail.com (NPlex          5.5.029) id 3B5CAB700037D005 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 9 Aug 2001          12:25:40 -0700
X-Version: about 6.0.2393.0
X-Priority: 3
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-Mailer: Web Based Pronto
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <C012AFFB8BC85D115A650005B83762B3@nickz5715.about.com>
Date:         Thu, 9 Aug 2001 15:14:02 -0400
Reply-To: "nick z" <nickz5715@ABOUT.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "nick z" <nickz5715@ABOUT.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] north florida
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

<html><head><meta Name='keywords' Content='commtouch, pronto, mail, free email, free, branded, web based, free web based email, communications, internet, software, advertising banners, e-mail, free software'></head><body   ><div align='left'><font   ><blockquote><blockquote><TT>I'm from South Florida in Broward County. Not many good places you <BR>
can launch down here. Anyone know of some launching spots in South <BR>
Florida? &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp;<BR>
-Nick<BR>
</TT><br><br><br><br><br><br><font><p align=left><br><TT>Sign up for a free About Email account at http://About.com </TT></blockquote></blockquote></div></font></body></html>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 12275 invoked from network); 9 Aug 2001 21:00:33 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 9 Aug 2001 21:00:33 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 22737 invoked from network); 9 Aug 2001 21:02:56 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 9 Aug 2001 21:02:56 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA02445; Thu, 9 Aug 2001 13:16:27 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 104390 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 9 Aug 2001 20:16:06          +0000
Received: from smtp005.mailsrvcs.net (smtp005pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.184])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA02430 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 9 Aug 2001 13:16:05 -0700
Received: from [63.10.189.182] (1Cust182.tnt2.hilo.hi.da.uu.net          [63.10.189.182]) by smtp005.mailsrvcs.net  with ESMTP for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; id f79KFQ715715 Thu, 9 Aug 2001 15:15:27 -0500          (CDT)
X-Sender: ttocs@mail.gte.net
References: <F750mqvgCBoE1pbzE3z00003195@hotmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <l03130300b7989e86866e@[63.10.189.47]>
Date:         Thu, 9 Aug 2001 10:14:41 -1000
Reply-To: "Aaron Smith" <ttocs@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Aaron Smith" <ttocs@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Hydrogen Peroxide synthesis
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <4.3.1.2.20010809131916.02dbfd08@mail.idsoftware.com>

At 1:22 PM -0500 8/9/01, John Carmack wrote:
>At 12:05 PM 8/9/2001 +0000, you wrote:
>>Russell McMahon wrote:
>>
>>
>>>     http://www.friends-partners.org/mwade/props/h2o2cxhy.htm
>>
>>Wade's prices of 90-98 % HP seem too low. At least for small quantities, say
>>5-10 L. JC might confirm this one.
>
>The prices quoted there are for 1959.  The current prices are $10/lb
>($22/kg) for 98% from X-L Space Systems and $4/lb ($8.80/kg) for 90% from FMC.
>
>I also noticed that the densities are off: it is 1.44 g/cc, not 2.44 g,cc
>for 98%.
>
>John Carmack

It's $1.11 / Kg for 1500 to 2800 pound lots of 70% from FMC.

Aaron

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 11275 invoked from network); 9 Aug 2001 22:33:44 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 9 Aug 2001 22:33:44 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 19915 invoked from network); 9 Aug 2001 22:36:06 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 9 Aug 2001 22:36:06 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA03033; Thu, 9 Aug 2001 14:49:08 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 104511 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 9 Aug 2001 21:48:50          +0000
Received: from cyclone.comcen.com.au (cyclone.comcen.com.au [203.23.236.100])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA03017 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Thu, 9 Aug 2001 14:48:48 -0700
Received: (from nobody@localhost) by cyclone.comcen.com.au (8.11.1/8.11.1) id          f79LmSO78974; Fri, 10 Aug 2001 07:48:28 +1000 (EST) (envelope-from          pkelly@comcen.com.au)
X-Authentication-Warning: cyclone.comcen.com.au: nobody set sender to                         pkelly@comcen.com.au using -f
References: <997374637.3b72baad57018@webmail.uib.no>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
User-Agent: IMP/PHP IMAP webmail program 2.2.3
X-Originating-IP: 203.2.125.3
Message-ID:  <997393708.3b73052ca4342@webmail.comcen.com.au>
Date:         Fri, 10 Aug 2001 07:48:28 +1000
Reply-To: "Paul Kelly" <pkelly@COMCEN.COM.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Paul Kelly" <pkelly@COMCEN.COM.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Melting PE for hybrid fuel grains
Comments: To: Emil.Johnsen@student.uib.no
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <997374637.3b72baad57018@webmail.uib.no>

Quoting Emil.Johnsen@student.uib.no:

> >How expensive is somewhat expensive?
>
> ~NOK340 (us$36.5) from the local RS Componets for a 40mm diameter, 1
> meter long rod. (Stock no. 680555). Not un-afordable, but considering
> plans to scale up and the availibilty of free PE (if I melt it myelf),
> it doesn't seem like a good option.
>
>
> Emil
>

Perhaps a small investment of time in locating a low cost supplier (I pay
around US$25-$30 for 3' of 3" bar) might save you in the long run.


PK

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 6153 invoked from network); 9 Aug 2001 23:17:07 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 9 Aug 2001 23:17:07 -0000
Received: (qmail 13414 invoked from network); 9 Aug 2001 23:19:31 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 9 Aug 2001 23:19:31 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA03380; Thu, 9 Aug 2001 16:01:02 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 104569 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 9 Aug 2001 23:00:51          +0000
Received: from mta05.mail.mel.aone.net.au (mta05.mail.au.uu.net [203.2.192.85])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA03362 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 9 Aug 2001 16:00:50 -0700
Received: from unknown ([63.34.216.168]) by mta05.mail.mel.aone.net.au with          SMTP id <20010809230047.BKKW9180.mta05.mail.mel.aone.net.au@unknown>          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 10 Aug 2001 09:00:47 +1000
References: Conversation            <EDB5E5136094D311BF1800508B12205E08D290C1@emss02m07.ems.lmco.com>            with last message            <EDB5E5136094D311BF1800508B12205E08D290C1@emss02m07.ems.lmco.com>
Priority: Normal
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Priority: 3
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	X-MAPIextension=.TXT;
	charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>
Date:         Thu, 9 Aug 2001 23:00:51 +0000
Reply-To: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] More propellant questions:
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <EDB5E5136094D311BF1800508B12205E08D290C1@emss02m07.ems.lmco.com>

----------
> I keep my propellant ingredients (not mixed propellant- that's done at the
> launch site) in a small shed, with a concrete floor. Normally, it is
pretty
> cool in there, but recently I went in and thought it was pretty hot. I
took
> a thermometer, and it was 91F at the floor. Several of the ingredients I
> have - Tepanol(HX-878), HTPB (R45), DOA and IPDI may be sensitive to heat.
> My question is: How sensitive and how do I know if the ingredient in
> question is "bad"?

The only real sensitive one (from that list) that I'm aware of is the
Tepanol but I'm not familiar with any noticeable changes in physical
appearance.

Troy.

>
> Tim Bendel

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 25628 invoked from network); 9 Aug 2001 23:29:38 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 9 Aug 2001 23:29:38 -0000
Received: (qmail 2947 invoked from network); 9 Aug 2001 23:31:24 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 9 Aug 2001 23:31:24 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA03557; Thu, 9 Aug 2001 16:24:40 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 104609 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 9 Aug 2001 23:23:30          +0000
Received: from dune.gnc.net (root@dune.gnc.net [207.203.72.4]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA03541 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu,          9 Aug 2001 16:23:28 -0700
Received: from beowulf (sw2-8.gnc.net [207.203.72.88]) by dune.gnc.net          (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id TAA09510 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 9          Aug 2001 19:23:27 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0B14_01C56B69.47B835C0"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
Importance: Normal
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <LPBBKJMJEOFKAMFJJNNHCEGACGAA.landofgrey@gnc.net>
Date:         Thu, 9 Aug 2001 19:23:14 -0400
Reply-To: <landofgrey@gnc.net>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Matthew Travis" <landofgrey@gnc.net>
Subject:      Re: [AR] north florida
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <C012AFFB8BC85D115A650005B83762B3@nickz5715.about.com>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0B14_01C56B69.47B835C0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Tripoli South Florida might be a place to start:
http://www.tripoli-sofla.org/
They have regular HPR as well as EX launches in Florida City, the next EX
being on Aug. 26

Matt
  -----Original Message-----
  From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU]On
Behalf Of nick z
  Sent: Thursday, August 09, 2001 3:14 PM
  To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
  Subject: Re: [AR] north florida


      I'm from South Florida in Broward County. Not many good places you
      can launch down here. Anyone know of some launching spots in South
      Florida?
      -Nick








      Sign up for a free About Email account at http://About.com


------=_NextPart_000_0B14_01C56B69.47B835C0
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Diso-8859-1">
<META=20
content=3D"commtouch, pronto, mail, free email, free, branded, web =
based, free web based email, communications, internet, software, =
advertising banners, e-mail, free software"=20
name=3Dkeywords>
<META content=3D"MSHTML 5.50.4208.1700" name=3DGENERATOR></HEAD>
<BODY>
<DIV><SPAN class=3D460262023-09082001><FONT face=3DArial color=3D#0000ff =

size=3D2>Tripoli South Florida might be a place to start: <A=20
href=3D"http://www.tripoli-sofla.org/">http://www.tripoli-sofla.org/</A><=
/FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=3D460262023-09082001><FONT face=3DArial color=3D#0000ff =
size=3D2>They=20
have regular HPR as well as EX launches in Florida City, the next EX =
being on=20
Aug. 26</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=3D460262023-09082001><FONT face=3DArial color=3D#0000ff =

size=3D2></FONT></SPAN>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=3D460262023-09082001><FONT face=3DArial color=3D#0000ff =

size=3D2>Matt</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE dir=3Dltr=20
style=3D"PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px =
solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
  <DIV class=3DOutlookMessageHeader dir=3Dltr align=3Dleft><FONT =
face=3DTahoma=20
  size=3D2>-----Original Message-----<BR><B>From:</B> Amateur Rocketry =
discussion=20
  list [mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU]<B>On Behalf Of </B>nick =
z<BR><B>Sent:</B>=20
  Thursday, August 09, 2001 3:14 PM<BR><B>To:</B>=20
  AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU<BR><B>Subject:</B> Re: [AR] north=20
  florida<BR><BR></FONT></DIV>
  <DIV align=3Dleft><FONT size=3D+0>
  <BLOCKQUOTE>
    <BLOCKQUOTE><TT>I'm from South Florida in Broward County. Not many =
good=20
      places you <BR>can launch down here. Anyone know of some launching =
spots=20
      in South <BR>Florida? &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; =
&nbsp;=20
      &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; =
&nbsp;=20
      &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; =
&nbsp;=20
      &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; =
&nbsp;<BR>-Nick<BR></TT><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><FONT=20
      size=3D+0>
      <P align=3Dleft><BR><TT>Sign up for a free About Email account at=20
      http://About.com=20
</TT></P></BLOCKQUOTE></BLOCKQUOTE></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE></FONT></FONT></BOD=
Y></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0B14_01C56B69.47B835C0--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 473 invoked from network); 10 Aug 2001 05:20:30 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 10 Aug 2001 05:20:30 -0000
Received: (qmail 905 invoked from network); 10 Aug 2001 05:22:19 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 10 Aug 2001 05:22:19 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA05145; Thu, 9 Aug 2001 22:17:58 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 104864 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 10 Aug 2001 05:17:28          +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (oe60.law12.hotmail.com [64.4.18.195]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA05130 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 9 Aug 2001 22:17:27 -0700
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Thu,          9 Aug 2001 18:24:39 -0700
X-Originating-IP: [24.29.188.254]
References:  <Pine.LNX.4.10.10108081314450.24056-100000@itc.uci.edu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 10 Aug 2001 01:24:39.0247 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[396015F0:01C1213B]
Message-ID:  <OE60XifWoqFXfyY0QUU0000a692@hotmail.com>
Date:         Thu, 9 Aug 2001 20:26:14 -0500
Reply-To: "Mark Kruep" <mkruep@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Mark Kruep" <mkruep@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] MicroPump/Turbine. Problems with freezing.
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

> Aluminum might work.  It gains significant strength at LOx temps, and as
> it is low density, it will have less of a tendancy to sling itself apart.

I would not suggest using aluminum for turbine blades no matter how small.
Since a turbine operates at high RPMs (usually), you will cycle the blades
into fatigue in a short period of time. No matter how much you over build
it, it will fail eventually and flying aluminum turbine blades don't sound
very friendly. Aluminum is one of the few metals that doesn't have a "knee"
in its strength vs. cycles fatigue chart. It will always have a finite life
span regardless of factor of safety. I don't know how cryogenic fluids
affect the fatigue life, so someone will have to enlighten me if these
conditions either improve or shorten fatigue life.

Mark

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 24914 invoked from network); 10 Aug 2001 05:40:04 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 10 Aug 2001 05:40:04 -0000
Received: (qmail 10925 invoked from network); 10 Aug 2001 05:42:27 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 10 Aug 2001 05:42:27 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA05321; Thu, 9 Aug 2001 22:24:03 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 104907 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 10 Aug 2001 05:23:57          +0000
Received: from conint.consumersinterest.com (consumersinterest.com          [207.195.143.118] (may be forged)) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with          ESMTP id WAA05306 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 9 Aug 2001 22:23:56          -0700
Received: from greg [208.187.15.150] by conint.consumersinterest.com          (SMTPD32-6.04) id A6844E60072; Thu, 09 Aug 2001 19:27:16 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <NDBBIBAMIMKJPANDCAHGKEDMFAAA.greg@blastzone.com>
Date:         Thu, 9 Aug 2001 19:26:18 -0700
Reply-To: <greg@blastzone.com>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Greg Deputy" <greg@blastzone.com>
Subject:      [AR] pressure transducers
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

OK, so I got these 1000 psi pressure transducers, MSP-300-01K-P-4-N-1.
They're 1~5 V output.  When I get voltage out, how do I translate that to
pressure?  I've had the load cell setup running for a while, and its easy
enough to calibrate that with known weights, but I dont have any way of
producing 1000 psi or thereabouts in any kind of precise manner to calibrate
the transducer.  Whats the secret?

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 15510 invoked from network); 10 Aug 2001 05:47:21 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 10 Aug 2001 05:47:21 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 23086 invoked from network); 10 Aug 2001 05:49:45 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 10 Aug 2001 05:49:45 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA05344; Thu, 9 Aug 2001 22:24:12 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 104914 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 10 Aug 2001 05:24:09          +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (f26.law14.hotmail.com [64.4.21.26]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA05327 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu,          9 Aug 2001 22:24:08 -0700
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Thu,          9 Aug 2001 18:16:43 -0700
Received: from 199.182.113.140 by lw14fd.law14.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Fri,          10 Aug 2001 01:16:43 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [199.182.113.140]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 10 Aug 2001 01:16:43.0234 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[1DA64420:01C1213A]
Message-ID:  <F260MBHKzlFlN7SIt8600003042@hotmail.com>
Date:         Fri, 10 Aug 2001 01:16:43 +0000
Reply-To: "Matt Faulkner" <mattfaulkner9@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Matt Faulkner" <mattfaulkner9@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] southern california
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

>From: Curtis Scholl <cscholl@izzy.net>
"How far
are you from the Mojave Test Area of the RRS?"

  Mojave is about a two-hour drive for me, but I don't know the exact
location of their test site, so that's just an estimate.

I checked out their website - pretty impressive facility (more than adequate
for anything I'll be building!).
           Thanks for the help,
                                  -Matt

_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 2992 invoked from network); 10 Aug 2001 05:53:19 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 10 Aug 2001 05:53:19 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 24164 invoked from network); 10 Aug 2001 05:55:43 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 10 Aug 2001 05:55:43 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA05552; Thu, 9 Aug 2001 22:35:24 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 104958 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 10 Aug 2001 05:35:18          +0000
Received: from ostrich.mail.pas.earthlink.net (ostrich.mail.pas.earthlink.net          [207.217.120.14]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA05536          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 9 Aug 2001 22:35:17 -0700
Received: from hawk.mail.pas.earthlink.net (hawk.mail.pas.earthlink.net          [207.217.120.22]) by ostrich.mail.pas.earthlink.net (8.9.3/8.9.3)          with ESMTP id UAA24102 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 9 Aug 2001          20:18:00 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from sprintmail.com (pool0054.cvx18-bradley.dialup.earthlink.net          [209.179.238.54]) by hawk.mail.pas.earthlink.net (EL-8_9_3_3/8.9.3)          with ESMTP id UAA26106; Thu, 9 Aug 2001 20:17:52 -0700 (PDT)
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.74 [en] (Win98; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <104.75b104c.28a39095@aol.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0B18_01C56B69.47BAA6C0"
Message-ID:  <3B72A535.56D15D58@sprintmail.com>
Date:         Thu, 9 Aug 2001 07:59:01 -0700
Reply-To: "Anthony Colette" <Rockitman@SPRINTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Anthony Colette" <Rockitman@SPRINTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Big Sugar - support with Al screen?
Comments: To: JimSwen@AOL.COM
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0B18_01C56B69.47BAA6C0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit


Aluminum screen rolled up in a Beta. I thought that was a great idea.
It also seemed to work very well too


>  Scaling up, you might need to support the fuel.  I've put aluminum
> window
> screen in a few zinc/sulfur rockets.  The first thing it does is
> support the
> fuel.
> The other things, rate and Isp, need work.  But I think it sounds like
>
> something that would work for sugar, contributing more to Isp than
> iron mesh,
> organic fibers, or inert structures.

------=_NextPart_000_0B18_01C56B69.47BAA6C0
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<!doctype html public "-//w3c//dtd html 4.0 transitional//en">
<html>
&nbsp;
<br>Aluminum screen rolled up in a Beta. I thought that was a great idea.&nbsp;
It also seemed to work very well too
<br>&nbsp;
<blockquote TYPE=CITE><font face="Courier New"><font size=-1>&nbsp;Scaling
up, you might need to support the fuel.&nbsp; I've put aluminum window</font></font>
<br><font face="Courier New"><font size=-1>screen in a few zinc/sulfur
rockets.&nbsp; The first thing it does is support the</font></font>
<br><font face="Courier New"><font size=-1>fuel.</font></font>
<br><font face="Courier New"><font size=-1>The other things, rate and Isp,
need work.&nbsp; But I think it sounds like</font></font>
<br><font face="Courier New"><font size=-1>something that would work for
sugar, contributing more to Isp than iron mesh,</font></font>
<br><font face="Courier New"><font size=-1>organic fibers, or inert structures.</font></font></blockquote>
</html>

------=_NextPart_000_0B18_01C56B69.47BAA6C0--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 21542 invoked from network); 10 Aug 2001 06:21:12 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 10 Aug 2001 06:21:12 -0000
Received: (qmail 18257 invoked from network); 10 Aug 2001 06:22:52 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 10 Aug 2001 06:22:52 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA05929; Thu, 9 Aug 2001 23:05:15 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 105053 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 10 Aug 2001 06:05:12          +0000
Received: from imo-m07.mx.aol.com (imo-m07.mx.aol.com [64.12.136.162]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA05914 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Thu, 9 Aug 2001 23:05:11 -0700
Received: from Tjpoulton@aol.com by imo-m07.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v31.9.) id          w.81.e60a92c (30962) for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Fri, 10 Aug 2001          02:04:35 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: AOL 5.0 for Windows sub 138
Message-ID:  <81.e60a92c.28a4d373@aol.com>
Date:         Fri, 10 Aug 2001 02:04:35 EDT
Reply-To: <Tjpoulton@AOL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <Tjpoulton@AOL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] pressure transducers
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Another possibility would be to connect it to a partially filled liquid CO2
tank, held at a known temperature in a water bath.  Measure the output
voltage at a few different temperatures, and calculate the equivalent
pressures from the pressure vs. temperature curves of CO2.  If you have
access to a paintball-sized tank, this may be the easiest way to get a decent
calibration over almost the whole range of the sensor.
Mike Poulton

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 370 invoked from network); 10 Aug 2001 06:35:10 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 10 Aug 2001 06:35:10 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 20737 invoked from network); 10 Aug 2001 06:37:31 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 10 Aug 2001 06:37:31 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA05803; Thu, 9 Aug 2001 22:51:55 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 105023 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 10 Aug 2001 05:51:38          +0000
Received: from sys27.hou.wt.net (sys27.hou.wt.net [205.230.159.27]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA05788 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 9 Aug 2001 22:51:37 -0700
Received: from localhost (216-119-138-126.ipset18.wt.net [216.119.138.126]) by          sys27.hou.wt.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id AAA49536; Fri, 10 Aug          2001 00:51:27 -0500 (CDT)
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.388)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <200108100551.AAA49536@sys27.hou.wt.net>
Date:         Fri, 10 Aug 2001 00:51:52 -0500
Reply-To: "Donald McCorvey" <dlm3@NETAXS.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Donald McCorvey" <dlm3@NETAXS.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] pressure transducers
Comments: To: greg@blastzone.com
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <NDBBIBAMIMKJPANDCAHGKEDMFAAA.greg@blastzone.com>

Was there no datasheet with the part ? You might check with the
manufacturer (or their web site) and see if they have a spec curve (they
should). This would give you a rough estimate you could use to translate
from counts into  psia.

If not, how accurate do you need to be ? If you can get a source for,
say, 100psia  (like a well-regulated air compressor) and you use a
barometer to tell you current air pressure, you can get two points on a
curve for a simple linear fit. It's probably not linear, of course, but
you have to decide how accurate you really need it to be and
characterize the sensor accordingly.

I'm sure there are more accurate means to get a cal curve, however. What
comes to mind is an avionics shop at a local airport - someone should
have an air data test system (hand-pump variety) that should get you at
least a few accurate points on the curve. You probably won't get past a
couple hundred PSI, but the test set should be calibrated and at least
some of the curve can be characterized accurately.

Aside from that, and I'm sure someone on this list knows where, you
should be able to find a calibration lab either locally or over the 'net
which will produce a rail-to-rail cal curve for a fee.

Don McCorvey

On Thursday, August 9, 2001, at 09:26 PM, Greg Deputy wrote:

> OK, so I got these 1000 psi pressure transducers, MSP-300-01K-P-4-N-1.
> They're 1~5 V output.  When I get voltage out, how do I translate that
> to
> pressure?  I've had the load cell setup running for a while, and its
> easy
> enough to calibrate that with known weights, but I dont have any way of
> producing 1000 psi or thereabouts in any kind of precise manner to
> calibrate
> the transducer.  Whats the secret?
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 3455 invoked from network); 10 Aug 2001 06:47:27 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 10 Aug 2001 06:47:27 -0000
Received: (qmail 23715 invoked from network); 10 Aug 2001 06:49:48 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 10 Aug 2001 06:49:48 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA06314; Thu, 9 Aug 2001 23:43:37 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 105152 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 10 Aug 2001 06:42:07          +0000
Received: from femail8.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail8.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.0.95.88]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA06297 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 9 Aug 2001 23:42:07 -0700
Received: from hal2001 ([24.77.53.16]) by femail8.sdc1.sfba.home.com (InterMail          vM.4.01.03.20 201-229-121-120-20010223) with SMTP id          <20010810050450.TYPN26846.femail8.sdc1.sfba.home.com@hal2001> for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 9 Aug 2001 22:04:50 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <002001c12158$dd5294e0$0400a8c0@hatjs>
Date:         Thu, 9 Aug 2001 21:56:48 -0700
Reply-To: "Jamie Morken" <jmorken@HOME.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jamie Morken" <jmorken@HOME.COM>
Subject:      [AR] parasail control / solenoid linear actuators
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Hi all,

Does anyone know where I could find a DC solenoid that has a stroke of at
least 2"?  I'd like to use this for a linear actuator if it exists with the
end application being parasail line control.  The parasail would be
controlled from one line (both lines anchored and one line pulled sideways
to reduce its length and turn the parasail for control)

I've thought about it for awhile and think that parasail control would be
best with only one line of control for mechanical simplicity.  This relies
on having a slight right turn by default and then a stronger left turn by
pulling on the control line.
I can think of two obvious ways to control the line.  Is there a better more
robust method?

1. worm gear with a spool
advantages: locking at any desired length to "lock in" the desired heading
or turnrate.  Since a spool can pull a larger length of line than a linear
actuator can, there is less chance of losing right turn functionality.
drawbacks: Without feedback, it could potentially overwind and cause havoc
(spiral of death)

2. simple linear actuation (pneumatic cylinder or arm motor* or long bore
solenoid or musclewire)
advantages: provides an on/off solution with "off" having the rocket slowly
drifting towards the right and "on" having the rocket pulse back to the
left.
drawbacks: line length must be calibrated properly to ensure that the rocket
drifts to the right with the actuator turned off or there will only be left
turns.

Also more complex variable length linear actuators would be cool but I'm not
sure where to start with these.

* see http://www.cadvision.com/albertaw/Home.htm

best regards,
Jamie

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 4838 invoked from network); 10 Aug 2001 07:45:03 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 10 Aug 2001 07:45:03 -0000
Received: (qmail 7535 invoked from network); 10 Aug 2001 07:47:28 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 10 Aug 2001 07:47:28 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA06479; Fri, 10 Aug 2001 00:26:37 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 105182 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 10 Aug 2001 07:25:05          +0000
Received: from femail15.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail15.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.0.95.142]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA06462          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 10 Aug 2001 00:25:05 -0700
Received: from hal2001 ([24.77.53.16]) by femail15.sdc1.sfba.home.com          (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20 201-229-121-120-20010223) with SMTP id          <20010810072459.VQHP22744.femail15.sdc1.sfba.home.com@hal2001>; Fri,          10 Aug 2001 00:24:59 -0700
References:  <NDBBIBAMIMKJPANDCAHGKEDMFAAA.greg@blastzone.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <001f01c1216c$7096cc40$0400a8c0@hatjs>
Date:         Fri, 10 Aug 2001 00:16:56 -0700
Reply-To: "Jamie Morken" <jmorken@HOME.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jamie Morken" <jmorken@HOME.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] pressure transducers
Comments: To: greg@blastzone.com
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Hi Greg,

The transducer is 1 to 5 volts out linearly so 1 volt is 0 psi and 5 volts
is 1000psi (wont be exact but this should be close if the transducer is any
good)

So the formula for pressure is:
pressure (psi) = (voltage-1)*250

If there are adjustment screws on this transducer then:
the zero screw should be turned so that the transducer outputs 1 volt at 0
psi (or ~1.06V at atmospheric pressure)
the span screw should be set to output 5 volts at 1000psi (a bit trickier to
set! :)

If you want to calibrate it then that is the hard part!  You need an
accurate guage that goes up to 1000psi or so (but this is why you bought the
one you have!) chicken or egg problem..... which came first the sensor or
the calibration?

best regards,
Jamie

----- Original Message -----
From: Greg Deputy <greg@blastzone.com>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Thursday, August 09, 2001 7:26 PM
Subject: [AR] pressure transducers


> OK, so I got these 1000 psi pressure transducers, MSP-300-01K-P-4-N-1.
> They're 1~5 V output.  When I get voltage out, how do I translate that to
> pressure?  I've had the load cell setup running for a while, and its easy
> enough to calibrate that with known weights, but I dont have any way of
> producing 1000 psi or thereabouts in any kind of precise manner to
calibrate
> the transducer.  Whats the secret?
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 9854 invoked from network); 10 Aug 2001 08:32:00 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 10 Aug 2001 08:32:00 -0000
Received: (qmail 14403 invoked from network); 10 Aug 2001 08:34:24 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 10 Aug 2001 08:34:24 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id BAA06723; Fri, 10 Aug 2001 01:27:46 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 105219 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 10 Aug 2001 08:25:55          +0000
Received: from fep3-orange.clear.net.nz (fep3-orange.clear.net.nz          [203.97.32.3]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id BAA06698          for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Fri, 10 Aug 2001 01:25:51 -0700
Received: from mkbs (203-167-165-194.dialup.clear.net.nz [203.167.165.194]) by          fep3-orange.clear.net.nz (1.5/1.8) with SMTP id UAA18014; Fri, 10 Aug          2001 20:25:43 +1200 (NZST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="Windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <025d01c12176$53daf2c0$0100a8c0@mkbs>
Date:         Fri, 10 Aug 2001 18:55:45 +1200
Reply-To: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Organization: Applied Technology
Subject:      [AR] Linseed Oil / H(T)P
Comments: To: erps-list@LunaCity.com
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

I spoke to someone today who claimed to have successfully produced a
blowdown biprop using Hydrogen Peroxide & Linseed Oil. He also claimed to
have achieved auto ignition using a small amount of Platinum wire as startup
catalyst. He further claimed to do this using only 50 vol Peroxide as this
was all that was available. He claimed an achieved burn time of 35 seconds
until unplanned midair dismantlement. He says that it was launched from a
remote location "down country" from here and made the local newspapers at
the time.

The combination of claims make this all seem rather unlikely except that he
is a mechanically capable sort, usually reasonably trustworthy and produced
the various pieces of information without "cues".

Any thoughts on this combination of propellants in practice and probable
practical Isp?


regards,


    Russell McMahon

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 11555 invoked from network); 10 Aug 2001 09:05:31 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 10 Aug 2001 09:05:31 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 17737 invoked from network); 10 Aug 2001 09:07:55 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 10 Aug 2001 09:07:55 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id BAA06804; Fri, 10 Aug 2001 01:41:28 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 105234 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 10 Aug 2001 08:39:58          +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (f138.law15.hotmail.com [64.4.23.138]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id BAA06782 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 10 Aug 2001 01:39:56 -0700
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Fri,          10 Aug 2001 01:39:25 -0700
Received: from 63.212.132.28 by lw15fd.law15.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Fri, 10          Aug 2001 08:39:25 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [63.212.132.28]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 10 Aug 2001 08:39:25.0954 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[F643AE20:01C12177]
Message-ID:  <F1381kg3AmsfGdMNFmW00004351@hotmail.com>
Date:         Fri, 10 Aug 2001 01:39:25 -0700
Reply-To: "CalPoly RADES" <cp_rades@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "CalPoly RADES" <cp_rades@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] southern california
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

If you use a site like maps.excite.com or something like that, use the the
destination address of motel 6 in mojave (16958 State Highway 58) and then
add approximately 30 miles (about 21 paved and the remainder on various dirt
roads,) your at the MTA.  Hope to see ya out there.
Dale H.
Cal Poly RADES

>From: Matt Faulkner <mattfaulkner9@HOTMAIL.COM>
>Reply-To: Matt Faulkner <mattfaulkner9@HOTMAIL.COM>
>To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
>Subject: Re: [AR] southern california
>Date: Fri, 10 Aug 2001 01:16:43 +0000
>
>>From: Curtis Scholl <cscholl@izzy.net>
>"How far
>are you from the Mojave Test Area of the RRS?"
>
>  Mojave is about a two-hour drive for me, but I don't know the exact
>location of their test site, so that's just an estimate.
>
>I checked out their website - pretty impressive facility (more than
>adequate
>for anything I'll be building!).
>           Thanks for the help,
>                                  -Matt
>
>_________________________________________________________________
>Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp


_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 16354 invoked from network); 10 Aug 2001 13:40:30 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 10 Aug 2001 13:40:30 -0000
Received: (qmail 8752 invoked from network); 10 Aug 2001 13:42:54 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 10 Aug 2001 13:42:54 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA07871; Fri, 10 Aug 2001 06:34:28 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 105389 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 10 Aug 2001 13:33:37          +0000
Received: from Blastzone.com (consumersinterest.com [207.195.143.118] (may be          forged)) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA07856 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 10 Aug 2001 06:33:36 -0700
Received: from deputydog [131.107.3.85] by Blastzone.com with ESMTP          (SMTPD32-6.04) id A61015C6007A; Fri, 10 Aug 2001 06:48:00 -0700
References:  <NDBBIBAMIMKJPANDCAHGKEDMFAAA.greg@blastzone.com>              <001f01c1216c$7096cc40$0400a8c0@hatjs>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2462.0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <003601c121a1$0d0ef5a0$730c379d@redmond.corp.microsoft.com>
Date:         Fri, 10 Aug 2001 06:33:33 -0700
Reply-To: "Greg Deputy" <greg@BLASTZONE.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Greg Deputy" <greg@BLASTZONE.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] pressure transducers
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Ok, thanks for the info.  The spec sheets (http://www.msiusa.com/msp300.htm)
on the transducers (these are new in the box) does not have any kind of
curve, but I was kind of suspecting the 1-5 volt = 0 to 1000psi.  The spec
sheet does indicate the accuracy as 1%, and indicates they're factory
calibrated.   I guess I trust 'em.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Jamie Morken" <jmorken@HOME.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Friday, August 10, 2001 12:16 AM
Subject: Re: [AR] pressure transducers


> Hi Greg,
>
> The transducer is 1 to 5 volts out linearly so 1 volt is 0 psi and 5 volts
> is 1000psi (wont be exact but this should be close if the transducer is
any
> good)
>
> So the formula for pressure is:
> pressure (psi) = (voltage-1)*250
>
> If there are adjustment screws on this transducer then:
> the zero screw should be turned so that the transducer outputs 1 volt at 0
> psi (or ~1.06V at atmospheric pressure)
> the span screw should be set to output 5 volts at 1000psi (a bit trickier
to
> set! :)
>
> If you want to calibrate it then that is the hard part!  You need an
> accurate guage that goes up to 1000psi or so (but this is why you bought
the
> one you have!) chicken or egg problem..... which came first the sensor or
> the calibration?
>
> best regards,
> Jamie
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Greg Deputy <greg@blastzone.com>
> To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
> Sent: Thursday, August 09, 2001 7:26 PM
> Subject: [AR] pressure transducers
>
>
> > OK, so I got these 1000 psi pressure transducers, MSP-300-01K-P-4-N-1.
> > They're 1~5 V output.  When I get voltage out, how do I translate that
to
> > pressure?  I've had the load cell setup running for a while, and its
easy
> > enough to calibrate that with known weights, but I dont have any way of
> > producing 1000 psi or thereabouts in any kind of precise manner to
> calibrate
> > the transducer.  Whats the secret?
> >
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 16661 invoked from network); 10 Aug 2001 15:06:05 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 10 Aug 2001 15:06:05 -0000
Received: (qmail 24174 invoked from network); 10 Aug 2001 15:08:29 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 10 Aug 2001 15:08:29 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA00895; Fri, 10 Aug 2001 07:56:22 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 80407 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 10 Aug 2001 14:56:17          +0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA00877; Fri, 10 Aug 2001 07:56:16 -0700
Message-ID:  <200108101456.HAA00877@itc.uci.edu>
Date:         Fri, 10 Aug 2001 14:56:16 +0000
Reply-To: "Joe Perez" <rocketman6965@AOL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Joe Perez" <rocketman6965@AOL.COM>
Subject:      [AR] AL/Mag question
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Hi All,

I have a formula that calls for 7%AL.  On FPRED it gives me an exponent
of .35.  I want to mix the AL400 mesh with Mag400 mesh.  What would that do
to my exponent if anything, or would it just brighten my flame?  I would
like to get up to a 4%/3% AL/Mag mix.
The real reason is I have very little AL left and plenty of Mag and am
getting ready to batch.
Any comments would be greatly appreciated.

Joe Perez

P.S.: My first batch of motors flown were in 5 flights with J-L impulses.
NO CATO's!!!!


From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 2045 invoked from network); 10 Aug 2001 15:25:48 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 10 Aug 2001 15:25:48 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 14716 invoked from network); 10 Aug 2001 15:28:33 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 10 Aug 2001 15:28:33 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA01026; Fri, 10 Aug 2001 08:23:03 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 80420 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 10 Aug 2001 15:23:01          +0000
Received: from lekstutis.com (emu.webminders.com [209.176.27.130]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA01009 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 10 Aug 2001 08:23:00 -0700
Received: from Lekstutis.com [12.34.119.151] by lekstutis.com with ESMTP          (SMTPD32-5.05) id A050AEB30134; Fri, 10 Aug 2001 11:40:00 -0400
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.75 [en] (WinNT; U)
X-Accept-Language: en,pdf
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <002001c12158$dd5294e0$0400a8c0@hatjs>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B73FC50.85ADD928@Lekstutis.com>
Date:         Fri, 10 Aug 2001 11:22:56 -0400
Reply-To: "Arthur J. Lekstutis" <Artie@LEKSTUTIS.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Arthur J. Lekstutis" <Artie@LEKSTUTIS.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] parasail control / solenoid linear actuators
Comments: To: Jamie Morken <jmorken@HOME.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Jamie Morken wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> Does anyone know where I could find a DC solenoid that has a stroke of at
> least 2"?  I'd like to use this for a linear actuator if it exists with the
> end application being parasail line control.  The parasail would be
> controlled from one line (both lines anchored and one line pulled sideways
> to reduce its length and turn the parasail for control)

How large, and what sort of margins are you looking for?

A buddy of mine is experimenting with using parasails for the automated
recovery of high power rockets. His initial experiments will be done
with an RC parasail kit. Later he hopes to use RC sailboat servos to
control larger chutes.

Anyway, what I'm trying to say is that RC sailboat servos are very
powerful, have that sort of swing, and are easily controlled. They are
just not big enough for really large projects.

DC solenoids are probably the wrong thing. They tend to be very heavy
for the available force*throw, have fairly limited throws and typically
have only two stable positions.

Later,
Artie Lekstutis

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 9876 invoked from network); 10 Aug 2001 15:36:46 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 10 Aug 2001 15:36:46 -0000
Received: (qmail 10753 invoked from network); 10 Aug 2001 15:39:06 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 10 Aug 2001 15:39:06 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA01094; Fri, 10 Aug 2001 08:30:53 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 80435 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 10 Aug 2001 15:30:51          +0000
Received: from corinth.bossig.com (corinth.bossig.com [208.26.239.66]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA01079 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Fri, 10 Aug 2001 08:30:51 -0700
Received: from BruceE.Watson (unverified [208.26.232.31]) by corinth.bossig.com          (Rockliffe SMTPRA 4.5.4) with SMTP id          <B0067555414@corinth.bossig.com> for <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Fri, 10          Aug 2001 08:34:29 -0700
References:  <NDBBIBAMIMKJPANDCAHGKEDMFAAA.greg@blastzone.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2314.1300
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <002201c121b1$53f86400$1fe81ad0@Watson>
Date:         Fri, 10 Aug 2001 08:30:02 -0700
Reply-To: "Bruce E. Watson" <bwatson@3-CITIES.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Bruce E. Watson" <bwatson@3-CITIES.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] pressure transducers
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Why not use a hydraulic hand pump (Enerpac is one brand), accurately
calibrated pressure gauge, and ram.  These go all the way to 10,000 psi.
You can make up the entire data sheet yourself.  These pumps can be rented
from equipment rental companies (Star Rental for example).

Regards,
Bruce E. Watson

> OK, so I got these 1000 psi pressure transducers, MSP-300-01K-P-4-N-1.
> They're 1~5 V output.  When I get voltage out, how do I translate that to
> pressure?  I've had the load cell setup running for a while, and its easy
> enough to calibrate that with known weights, but I dont have any way of
> producing 1000 psi or thereabouts in any kind of precise manner to
calibrate
> the transducer.  Whats the secret?

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 6136 invoked from network); 10 Aug 2001 16:01:41 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 10 Aug 2001 16:01:41 -0000
Received: (qmail 6034 invoked from network); 10 Aug 2001 16:04:07 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 10 Aug 2001 16:04:07 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA01146; Fri, 10 Aug 2001 08:41:22 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 80446 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 10 Aug 2001 15:41:20          +0000
Received: from localhost (rcalkins@localhost) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with          ESMTP id IAA01131; Fri, 10 Aug 2001 08:41:07 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.LNX.4.10.10108100838470.654-100000@itc.uci.edu>
Date:         Fri, 10 Aug 2001 08:41:07 -0700
Reply-To: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
Subject:      Re: [AR] pressure transducers
Comments: To: "Bruce E. Watson" <bwatson@3-CITIES.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <002201c121b1$53f86400$1fe81ad0@Watson>

The traditional amateur way to do this has been to fill a grease gun with
honey, hook it up with a known accurate gague and the 'ducer.  Pump the
pressure while logging the outputs psi/volt.

Why honey?  Easier to clean up than grease, especially important for
oxidier service.

Thanks to Bill Colburn for this timeless tip.

Ray

On Fri, 10 Aug 2001, Bruce E. Watson wrote:

> Why not use a hydraulic hand pump (Enerpac is one brand), accurately
> calibrated pressure gauge, and ram.  These go all the way to 10,000 psi.
> You can make up the entire data sheet yourself.  These pumps can be rented
> from equipment rental companies (Star Rental for example).
>
> Regards,
> Bruce E. Watson
>
> > OK, so I got these 1000 psi pressure transducers, MSP-300-01K-P-4-N-1.
> > They're 1~5 V output.  When I get voltage out, how do I translate that to
> > pressure?  I've had the load cell setup running for a while, and its easy
> > enough to calibrate that with known weights, but I dont have any way of
> > producing 1000 psi or thereabouts in any kind of precise manner to
> calibrate
> > the transducer.  Whats the secret?
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 5977 invoked from network); 10 Aug 2001 16:48:33 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 10 Aug 2001 16:48:33 -0000
Received: (qmail 26511 invoked from network); 10 Aug 2001 16:50:54 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 10 Aug 2001 16:50:54 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA01447; Fri, 10 Aug 2001 09:44:32 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 80481 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 10 Aug 2001 16:44:25          +0000
Received: from spsystems.net (spsystems.net [209.47.149.227]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA01432 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Fri,          10 Aug 2001 09:44:25 -0700
Received: (from henry@localhost) by spsystems.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id LAA19975;          Fri, 10 Aug 2001 11:47:19 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010810114451.19309B-100000@spsystems.net>
Date:         Fri, 10 Aug 2001 11:47:19 -0400
Reply-To: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] pressure transducers
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <NDBBIBAMIMKJPANDCAHGKEDMFAAA.greg@blastzone.com>

On Thu, 9 Aug 2001, Greg Deputy wrote:
> ...I dont have any way of
> producing 1000 psi or thereabouts in any kind of precise manner to calibrate
> the transducer.  Whats the secret?

A grease gun will produce pressures higher than that.  (If you fill it with
honey instead of grease, any messes can be cleaned up with water.)  But
you'll need to borrow or rent a calibrated pressure gauge.

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 4687 invoked from network); 10 Aug 2001 17:10:08 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 10 Aug 2001 17:10:08 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: (qmail 2328 invoked from network); 10 Aug 2001 17:12:30 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 10 Aug 2001 17:12:30 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA01567; Fri, 10 Aug 2001 10:06:03 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 80492 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 10 Aug 2001 17:06:01          +0000
Received: from localhost (rcalkins@localhost) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with          ESMTP id KAA01552 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Fri, 10 Aug 2001          10:06:01 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.LNX.4.10.10108101003180.1496-100000@itc.uci.edu>
Date:         Fri, 10 Aug 2001 10:06:01 -0700
Reply-To: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
Subject:      [AR] Shipping Rocket Motors
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Before I start calling every shipper in town, does anybody have a
preferred shipper for transporting solids?

What is a typical price for sending motor/grain of size X to location Y?
What type of packaging do they require?

Thanks in advance,

Ray

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 16376 invoked from network); 10 Aug 2001 20:28:26 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 10 Aug 2001 20:28:26 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA02378; Fri, 10 Aug 2001 12:46:29 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 80558 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 10 Aug 2001 19:46:12          +0000
Received: from mail1.murraystate.edu (mail1.murraystate.edu [216.249.159.50])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id MAA02355 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 10 Aug 2001 12:46:12 -0700
Received: from jjcomputer.murraystate.edu (216.249.150.117) by          mail1.murraystate.edu (NPlex 5.5.031) id 3B5DE1730005C7EE for          AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 10 Aug 2001 14:44:09 -0500
X-Sender: terry.mccreary@mail.murraystate.edu
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <5.1.0.14.0.20010810144324.01db8e80@mail.murraystate.edu>
Date:         Fri, 10 Aug 2001 14:48:24 -0500
Reply-To: "Terry McCreary" <terry.mccreary@MURRAYSTATE.EDU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Terry McCreary" <terry.mccreary@MURRAYSTATE.EDU>
Subject:      [AR] OT:  Free "Compute's Gazette"
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

I figured someone on the list has to be Commodore 64 nut...

Have about a two foot stack of Compute! and Compute!'s Gazette magazines
from roughly 85 through 89, not necessarily all-inclusive.  You have to
agree to take the whole stack, I won't sort through it.  You have to agree
to pay shipping (I'll pack and box them, no charge).  First one to say
'yes' to both, gets them.

The C64 is one of those things I'd like to get "back into" but know I never
will.  Sigh...

P'rfesser

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 4800 invoked from network); 10 Aug 2001 20:33:14 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 10 Aug 2001 20:33:14 -0000
Received: (qmail 16466 invoked from network); 10 Aug 2001 20:35:39 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 10 Aug 2001 20:35:39 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA02600; Fri, 10 Aug 2001 13:20:21 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 80591 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 10 Aug 2001 20:20:19          +0000
Received: from mail1.murraystate.edu (mail1.murraystate.edu [216.249.159.50])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id NAA02585 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 10 Aug 2001 13:20:18 -0700
Received: from jjcomputer.murraystate.edu (216.249.150.117) by          mail1.murraystate.edu (NPlex 5.5.031) id 3B5DE1730005CAB7 for          AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 10 Aug 2001 15:18:24 -0500
X-Sender: terry.mccreary@mail.murraystate.edu
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <5.1.0.14.0.20010810152201.01dc0860@mail.murraystate.edu>
Date:         Fri, 10 Aug 2001 15:22:38 -0500
Reply-To: "Terry McCreary" <terry.mccreary@MURRAYSTATE.EDU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Terry McCreary" <terry.mccreary@MURRAYSTATE.EDU>
Subject:      [AR] Compute!s Gazette taken...
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Thanks for the interest, but someone has already spoken for the magazines.

P'rfesser

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 29532 invoked from network); 10 Aug 2001 21:04:01 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 10 Aug 2001 21:04:01 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: (qmail 29556 invoked from network); 10 Aug 2001 21:06:48 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 10 Aug 2001 21:06:48 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA02743; Fri, 10 Aug 2001 13:46:35 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 80617 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 10 Aug 2001 20:45:42          +0000
Received: from imo-r06.mx.aol.com (imo-r06.mx.aol.com [152.163.225.102]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA02727 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Fri, 10 Aug 2001 13:45:41 -0700
Received: from Balthezar@aol.com by imo-r06.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v31.9.) id          w.83.e51a491 (4394) for <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Fri, 10 Aug 2001          16:45:36 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0B1D_01C56B69.47D75680"
X-Mailer: AOL 6.0 for Windows US sub 10532
Message-ID:  <83.e51a491.28a5a1ef@aol.com>
Date:         Fri, 10 Aug 2001 16:45:35 EDT
Reply-To: <Balthezar@AOL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <Balthezar@AOL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] OT:  Free "Compute's Gazette"
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0B1D_01C56B69.47D75680
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

In a message dated 8/10/01 3:47:39 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
terry.mccreary@MURRAYSTATE.EDU writes:


> I figured someone on the list has to be Commodore 64 nut...
>
> Have about a two foot stack of Compute! and Compute!'s Gazette magazines
>

Dang! The memories. A C64 got me through my senior year of college!

Bruce (feeling like an old fart) Kirchner

------=_NextPart_000_0B1D_01C56B69.47D75680
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<HTML><FONT FACE=arial,helvetica><FONT  SIZE=2>In a message dated 8/10/01 3:47:39 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
<BR>terry.mccreary@MURRAYSTATE.EDU writes:
<BR>
<BR>
<BR><BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE style="BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px">I figured someone on the list has to be Commodore 64 nut...
<BR>
<BR>Have about a two foot stack of Compute! and Compute!'s Gazette magazines
<BR>from roughly 85 through 89,</BLOCKQUOTE>
<BR>
<BR>Dang! The memories. A C64 got me through my senior year of college!
<BR>
<BR>Bruce (feeling like an old fart) Kirchner</FONT></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0B1D_01C56B69.47D75680--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 21913 invoked from network); 10 Aug 2001 22:04:27 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 10 Aug 2001 22:04:27 -0000
Received: (qmail 21854 invoked from network); 10 Aug 2001 22:07:16 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 10 Aug 2001 22:07:16 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA03018; Fri, 10 Aug 2001 14:44:19 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 80651 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 10 Aug 2001 21:44:17          +0000
Received: from proxy2.ba.best.com (root@proxy2.ba.best.com [206.184.139.14]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA03003 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Fri, 10 Aug 2001 14:44:17 -0700
Received: from [10.0.0.2] (snvadslgw2poold155.snjs.uswestqwest.net          [168.103.213.155]) by proxy2.ba.best.com (8.9.3/8.9.2/best.out) with          ESMTP id OAA25495 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Fri, 10 Aug 2001          14:42:59 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Sender:  (Unverified)
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <v04210109b79a05b4d2bb@[10.0.0.2]>
Date:         Fri, 10 Aug 2001 14:42:26 -0700
Reply-To: "bob fortune" <bob@FORTUNEPAINT.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "bob fortune" <bob@FORTUNEPAINT.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] parasail control / solenoid linear actuators
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Hey Jamie,

You think muscle wire might work?  I don't know if it would be strong
enough to take the opening loads of the chute or if it has enough
"shrinkage" (for lack of a more accurate term) to give you the
actuation you are looking for.  It certainly would be an elegant
solution though, one wire on and the other off to turn. Both on to
flare the chute.

Or how about 2 toothed strips of plastic running between sets of
gears?  The plastic strips would be connected to the risers and the
gears would shuttle the strips back and forth as necessary.  I've
seen them on industrial machines but not in the small scale you are
looking for.

Sounds like fun!

Bob



>Hi all,
>
>Does anyone know where I could find a DC solenoid that has a stroke of at
>least 2"?  I'd like to use this for a linear actuator if it exists with the
>end application being parasail line control.  The parasail would be
>controlled from one line (both lines anchored and one line pulled sideways
>to reduce its length and turn the parasail for control)
>
>I've thought about it for awhile and think that parasail control would be
>best with only one line of control for mechanical simplicity.  This relies
>on having a slight right turn by default and then a stronger left turn by
>pulling on the control line.
>I can think of two obvious ways to control the line.  Is there a better more
>robust method?
>
>1. worm gear with a spool
>advantages: locking at any desired length to "lock in" the desired heading
>or turnrate.  Since a spool can pull a larger length of line than a linear
>actuator can, there is less chance of losing right turn functionality.
>drawbacks: Without feedback, it could potentially overwind and cause havoc
>(spiral of death)
>
>2. simple linear actuation (pneumatic cylinder or arm motor* or long bore
>solenoid or musclewire)
>advantages: provides an on/off solution with "off" having the rocket slowly
>drifting towards the right and "on" having the rocket pulse back to the
>left.
>drawbacks: line length must be calibrated properly to ensure that the rocket
>drifts to the right with the actuator turned off or there will only be left
>turns.
>
>Also more complex variable length linear actuators would be cool but I'm not
>sure where to start with these.
>
>* see http://www.cadvision.com/albertaw/Home.htm
>
>best regards,
>Jamie

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 26460 invoked from network); 10 Aug 2001 22:54:41 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 10 Aug 2001 22:54:41 -0000
Received: (qmail 11499 invoked from network); 10 Aug 2001 22:57:31 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 10 Aug 2001 22:57:31 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA03250; Fri, 10 Aug 2001 15:46:28 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 80678 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 10 Aug 2001 22:46:13          +0000
Received: from proxima.whro.net (proxima.whro.net [64.5.129.2]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA03235 for <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Fri,          10 Aug 2001 15:46:13 -0700
Received: from EDROWE (25.di.whro.net [64.5.132.25]) by proxima.whro.net          (Rockliffe SMTPRA 3.4.6) with SMTP id <B0007443634@proxima.whro.net>;          Fri, 10 Aug 2001 18:44:55 -0400
References:  <83.e51a491.28a5a1ef@aol.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0B22_01C56B69.47D9A070"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <002301c121ed$8823d520$19840540@EDROWE>
Date:         Fri, 10 Aug 2001 18:40:58 -0400
Reply-To: "Ed Rowe" <edrowe@WHRO.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Ed Rowe" <edrowe@WHRO.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] OT:  Free "Compute's Gazette"
Comments: To: Balthezar@AOL.COM
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0B22_01C56B69.47D9A070
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Still have my old C64 in original boxes. Ah, what fun it was. I use to =
get copied games from here and there and one had a virus that caused the =
thing to freeze up in the middle of a good game of Bungling Bay. =
Borderbund is still around I think.
....Ed
  ----- Original Message -----=20
  From: Balthezar@AOL.COM=20
  To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU=20
  Sent: Friday, August 10, 2001 4:45 PM
  Subject: Re: [AR] OT: Free "Compute's Gazette"


  Dang! The memories. A C64 got me through my senior year of college!=20

  Bruce (feeling like an old fart) Kirchner=20

------=_NextPart_000_0B22_01C56B69.47D9A070
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META content=3D"text/html; charset=3Diso-8859-1" =
http-equiv=3DContent-Type>
<META content=3D"MSHTML 5.00.3105.105" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Still have my old C64 in original =
boxes. Ah, what=20
fun it was.&nbsp;I use to get&nbsp;copied games from here and there and =
one had=20
a virus that caused the thing to freeze up in the middle of a good game =
of=20
Bungling Bay. Borderbund is still around I think.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>....Ed</FONT></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE=20
style=3D"BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: =
0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; PADDING-RIGHT: 0px">
  <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial">----- Original Message ----- </DIV>
  <DIV=20
  style=3D"BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; FONT: 10pt arial; font-color: =
black"><B>From:</B>=20
  <A href=3D"mailto:Balthezar@AOL.COM"=20
  title=3DBalthezar@AOL.COM>Balthezar@AOL.COM</A> </DIV>
  <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A =
href=3D"mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU"=20
  title=3DAROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU</A> </DIV>
  <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> Friday, August 10, 2001 =
4:45=20
  PM</DIV>
  <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> Re: [AR] OT: Free =
"Compute's=20
  Gazette"</DIV>
  <DIV><BR></DIV><FONT face=3Darial,helvetica><FONT size=3D2>Dang! The =
memories. A=20
  C64 got me through my senior year of college! <BR><BR>Bruce (feeling =
like an=20
  old fart) Kirchner</FONT> </FONT></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0B22_01C56B69.47D9A070--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 12928 invoked from network); 11 Aug 2001 00:33:31 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 11 Aug 2001 00:33:31 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA03586; Fri, 10 Aug 2001 17:11:03 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 80724 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 11 Aug 2001 00:10:17          +0000
Received: from wrench.toolcity.net (root@wrench.toolcity.net [208.0.188.2]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA03570 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 10 Aug 2001 17:10:17 -0700
Received: from [63.169.101.3] (dap-63-169-101-3.meadville-tnt-1.pa.toolcity.net          [63.169.101.3]) by wrench.toolcity.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id          UAA01470; Fri, 10 Aug 2001 20:10:12 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <v01510100b79a33c46467@[63.169.101.172]>
Date:         Fri, 10 Aug 2001 20:12:32 -0500
Reply-To: "al bradley" <abradley@TOOLCITY.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "al bradley" <abradley@TOOLCITY.NET>
Subject:      [AR] More on the Commodores: was -- [AR] OT:  Free "Compute's              Gazette"
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

The post at the bottom reminded me that I have a nearly new Commodore 128
with their DOS system, setting on the shelf here, unused for several years.
Also a seldom used line printer (daisy wheel type). Only flaw in this
flower is that the monitor shut down on me, and when I found the trouble
wasn't in a V. regulator that I suspected I didn't fool with it any longer.
How to find it a good home for the elderly and infirm while not losing a
lot of time in packing and shipping?

best,
al bradley


-----------------------------
>I figured someone on the list has to be Commodore 64 nut...
>
>Have about a two foot stack of Compute! and Compute!'s Gazette magazines
>from roughly 85 through 89, not necessarily all-inclusive.  You have to
>agree to take the whole stack, I won't sort through it.  You have to agree
>to pay shipping (I'll pack and box them, no charge).  First one to say
>'yes' to both, gets them.
>
>The C64 is one of those things I'd like to get "back into" but know I never
>will.  Sigh...
>
>P'rfesser

------------------------------------------------------------------
Can you live Life with this?: "Unless there is a law, an agreement, or a
long-standing custom, No one `Deserves' Anything -- Either Good or Bad!"

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 9856 invoked from network); 11 Aug 2001 00:59:04 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 11 Aug 2001 00:59:04 -0000
Received: (qmail 8364 invoked by uid 50005); 11 Aug 2001 00:49:30 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (. Clean. Processed in 1.697718 secs); 11 Aug 2001 00:49:30 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 11 Aug 2001 00:49:27 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA03754; Fri, 10 Aug 2001 17:45:44 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 80761 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 11 Aug 2001 00:45:42          +0000
Received: from imo-r07.mx.aol.com (imo-r07.mx.aol.com [152.163.225.103]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA03739 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Fri, 10 Aug 2001 17:45:41 -0700
Received: from Balthezar@aol.com by imo-r07.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v31.9.) id          w.94.182f06b3 (4207) for <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Fri, 10 Aug 2001          20:45:37 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0B25_01C56B69.47D9A070"
X-Mailer: AOL 6.0 for Windows US sub 10532
Message-ID:  <94.182f06b3.28a5da30@aol.com>
Date:         Fri, 10 Aug 2001 20:45:36 EDT
Reply-To: <Balthezar@AOL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <Balthezar@AOL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] OT:  Free "Compute's Gazette"
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0B25_01C56B69.47D9A070
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

In a message dated 8/10/01 6:46:30 PM Eastern Daylight Time, edrowe@whro.net
writes:


> Still have my old C64 in original boxes. Ah, what fun it was. I use to get
> copied games from here and there and one had a virus that caused the thing
> to freeze up in the middle of a good game of Bungling Bay. Borderbund is
> still around I think.
>

I must have had every game made for the C64 (or at least a boat load of em)
and I vaguely remember Raid on Bungeling bay. I won my machine in a contest
at work. This is when it sold for, IIRC, ~$500. Way cool! I went out and
bought the external floppy for ~$200 immediately and an 11 pin thermal
printer from GE with an interface for about the same money a year or so
later. I wowed my perfessors (sorry Terry) with papers turned in devoid of
spelling errors and justified including knock your socks off graphics and
some spreadsheet analyses'. Now if I could only remember the software package
that allowed all that. Was it MultiMate? Anyway, amazing what could be done
without a DOS on only a 360k single sided floppy and 64k of memory. Ah, yes,
those were the days! Speaking of memory - I just shelled out a whopping $45
for a 256mb PC100 DRAM. Dang!

Bruce Kirchner

------=_NextPart_000_0B25_01C56B69.47D9A070
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<HTML><FONT FACE=arial,helvetica><FONT  SIZE=2>In a message dated 8/10/01 6:46:30 PM Eastern Daylight Time, edrowe@whro.net
<BR>writes:
<BR>
<BR>
<BR><BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE style="BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px">Still have my old C64 in original boxes. Ah, what fun it was. I use to get
<BR>copied games from here and there and one had a virus that caused the thing
<BR>to freeze up in the middle of a good game of Bungling Bay. Borderbund is
<BR>still around I think.</FONT><FONT  COLOR="#000000" SIZE=3 FAMILY="SANSSERIF" FACE="Arial" LANG="0">
<BR></BLOCKQUOTE>
<BR></FONT><FONT  COLOR="#000000" SIZE=2 FAMILY="SANSSERIF" FACE="Arial" LANG="0">
<BR>I must have had every game made for the C64 (or at least a boat load of em)
<BR>and I vaguely remember Raid on Bungeling bay. I won my machine in a contest
<BR>at work. This is when it sold for, IIRC, ~$500. Way cool! I went out and
<BR>bought the external floppy for ~$200 immediately and an 11 pin thermal
<BR>printer from GE with an interface for about the same money a year or so
<BR>later. I wowed my perfessors (sorry Terry) with papers turned in devoid of
<BR>spelling errors and justified including knock your socks off graphics and
<BR>some spreadsheet analyses'. Now if I could only remember the software package
<BR>that allowed all that. Was it MultiMate? Anyway, amazing what could be done
<BR>without a DOS on only a 360k single sided floppy and 64k of memory. Ah, yes,
<BR>those were the days! Speaking of memory - I just shelled out a whopping $45
<BR>for a 256mb PC100 DRAM. Dang!
<BR>
<BR>Bruce Kirchner</FONT></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0B25_01C56B69.47D9A070--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 19890 invoked from network); 11 Aug 2001 02:08:41 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 11 Aug 2001 02:08:41 -0000
Received: (qmail 27905 invoked from network); 11 Aug 2001 02:11:08 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 11 Aug 2001 02:11:08 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA04336; Fri, 10 Aug 2001 18:52:13 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 80808 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 11 Aug 2001 01:52:03          +0000
Received: from www.rocketry.org (root@rocketry.org [65.101.31.84]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA04321 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 10 Aug 2001 18:52:03 -0700
Received: from localhost (tim@localhost) by www.rocketry.org (8.10.2/8.10.2)          with ESMTP id f7B1nd617933 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 10 Aug          2001 18:49:39 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.LNX.4.21.0108101847410.17930-100000@www.rocketry.org>
Date:         Fri, 10 Aug 2001 18:49:38 -0700
Reply-To: "T.J." <tim@ROCKETRY.ORG>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "T.J." <tim@ROCKETRY.ORG>
Subject:      Re: [AR] More on the Commodores: was -- [AR] OT:  Free "Compute's              Gazette"
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <v01510100b79a33c46467@[63.169.101.172]>

I used to lust after getting a Commodore 128 back in the day when my
machine was an Atari 800xl. Couldn't afford a floppy drive, so I had to
use an Atari audio cassette drive. D'oh.

You should throw it up on eBay just for kicks. Someone might pick it up
for nostalgia reasons. =)

On Fri, 10 Aug 2001, al bradley wrote:

> The post at the bottom reminded me that I have a nearly new Commodore 128
> with their DOS system, setting on the shelf here, unused for several years.
> Also a seldom used line printer (daisy wheel type). Only flaw in this
> flower is that the monitor shut down on me, and when I found the trouble
> wasn't in a V. regulator that I suspected I didn't fool with it any longer.
> How to find it a good home for the elderly and infirm while not losing a
> lot of time in packing and shipping?
>
> best,
> al bradley
>
>
> -----------------------------
> >I figured someone on the list has to be Commodore 64 nut...
> >
> >Have about a two foot stack of Compute! and Compute!'s Gazette magazines
> >from roughly 85 through 89, not necessarily all-inclusive.  You have to
> >agree to take the whole stack, I won't sort through it.  You have to agree
> >to pay shipping (I'll pack and box them, no charge).  First one to say
> >'yes' to both, gets them.
> >
> >The C64 is one of those things I'd like to get "back into" but know I never
> >will.  Sigh...
> >
> >P'rfesser
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------
> Can you live Life with this?: "Unless there is a law, an agreement, or a
> long-standing custom, No one `Deserves' Anything -- Either Good or Bad!"
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 28830 invoked from network); 11 Aug 2001 05:58:21 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 11 Aug 2001 05:58:21 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA05609; Fri, 10 Aug 2001 22:38:26 -0700
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 81056 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 11 Aug 2001 05:38:19          +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (f269.law14.hotmail.com [64.4.20.144]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA05595 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 10 Aug 2001 22:38:19 -0700
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Fri,          10 Aug 2001 22:37:49 -0700
Received: from 206.216.228.254 by lw14fd.law14.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Sat,          11 Aug 2001 05:37:49 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [206.216.228.254]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 11 Aug 2001 05:37:49.0366 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[C1CE0D60:01C12227]
Message-ID:  <F2695V3GykBbKP7Ie8t00003ff3@hotmail.com>
Date:         Sat, 11 Aug 2001 05:37:49 +0000
Reply-To: "Matt Faulkner" <mattfaulkner9@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Matt Faulkner" <mattfaulkner9@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      [AR] potassium nitrate
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

   I've been looking for a good supply of potassium nitrate, but so far I
haven't found one. Firefox seems okay, but at $2/pound (compared to $.30 for
fertilizer), I'm not sure if they're the best way. I also checked all the
gardening supplies but I only found things that had KN as one of the
ingredients (nothing pure, no K Power). Has anyone had good results using
fertilizer that contains other chemicals (Ammonium Nitrate was among them,
for example)? And, again, what are the three %s on the bag ( xx-yy-zz) that
I should look for? Thanks.
                                          -Matt


_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 8973 invoked from network); 11 Aug 2001 06:02:39 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 11 Aug 2001 06:02:39 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 21854 invoked from network); 11 Aug 2001 06:05:29 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 11 Aug 2001 06:05:29 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA05676; Fri, 10 Aug 2001 22:47:25 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 81065 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 11 Aug 2001 05:47:23          +0000
Received: from grucom2.gru.net (grucom2.gru.net [209.251.129.7]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA05661 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri,          10 Aug 2001 22:47:23 -0700
Received: from [209.251.151.14] by grucom2.sfcc.net (NTMail          6.04.0010/NU4112.00.db1c8a4b) with ESMTP id qvsihaaa for          AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 11 Aug 2001 01:47:19 -0400
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.75 [en] (Win95; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <200106061531.JAA05584@snmeng30.rr.intel.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B74C93E.531720BB@sfcc.net>
Date:         Sat, 11 Aug 2001 01:57:18 -0400
Reply-To: "James Yawn" <jyawn@SFCC.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "James Yawn" <jyawn@SFCC.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Candy tutorial
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Revised candy recipe:  Several folks have mentioned having difficulty in getting recrystallized
candy to coalesce into the plastic putty-like form.  I must admit that I have had some trouble
too.  The batch I made for the tutorial was fine, but several subsequent batches were troublesome
in this regard.

Finally I realized that the formula for Karo Syrup must have changed since I last made lots of
this in the early 80's.  I put the bottle in the refrigerator to keep it from molding, and noticed
that it poured readily when cold.  I recalled that in times past I would have to warm it up to get
it out of the bottle.  The demo batch was made with a different brand of corn syrup
(Roddenberry's) which did turn thick in the fridge.  I suspect that Best Foods is putting less
and/or different sugars in their current version of Karo Syrup.

So I have started adding a bit more Karo Syrup to the mix, and have found that it comes together
more readily.  It is still necessary to knead it a bit while hot, and that the amount of residual
moisture is still critical.  The best kneading technique seems to be to roll it into sticks, where
it becomes quite pliable.  I wonder about automating this using my food processor and a long
extension cord, or maybe trying Jay Ward's idea of a bread machine.

Revised formula is at:  http://user.sfcc.net/jyawn/rcandy.htm

Also, a question for the list:  I tried the tensile-strength test suggested by Richard Nakka, and
found that a 1/4 inch diameter strand supports about 10 pounds.  This is more than I expected, as
it snaps easily when bent.  Is this common?  Is it adequate for larger engines?

I tried making this fuel with sodium nitrate, and encountered much the same result as Ray
describes below, it took a long time to dry out, turned tootsie-roll brown and will not support
its own combustion without an external heat source.

I will be out in the boonies for the weekend, suffering computer withdrawal.  So please don't feel
slighted if I do not respond until Monday.

Respectfully submitted,
James Yawn



Ray Calkins 100660207 wrote:

> I have been really excited with James Yawn's recrystalized candy propellant.  So, I decided to
> try it with AN.  Bad news.
>
> The AN seems to have attacked the sugar under heat, carbonizing it.
>
> What happened here?  Why doesn't the KN do this?
>
> Ray Calkins
> rcalkins@snmeng1.rr.intel.com           raymond.calkins@intel.com
> "My opinions are my own, and do not reflect those of my employer."

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 12987 invoked from network); 11 Aug 2001 06:04:20 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 11 Aug 2001 06:04:20 -0000
Received: (qmail 13964 invoked from network); 11 Aug 2001 06:06:46 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 11 Aug 2001 06:06:46 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA05715; Fri, 10 Aug 2001 22:48:49 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 81077 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 11 Aug 2001 05:48:48          +0000
Received: from mta02.mail.mel.aone.net.au (mta02.mail.au.uu.net [203.2.192.82])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA05687 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 10 Aug 2001 22:48:44 -0700
Received: from unknown ([63.34.220.151]) by mta02.mail.mel.aone.net.au with          SMTP id          <20010811054841.ELOC27411.mta02.mail.mel.aone.net.au@unknown>; Sat,          11 Aug 2001 15:48:41 +1000
References: Conversation <200108101456.HAA00877@itc.uci.edu> with last message            <200108101456.HAA00877@itc.uci.edu>
Priority: Normal
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Priority: 3
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	X-MAPIextension=.TXT;
	charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>
Date:         Sat, 11 Aug 2001 05:48:48 +0000
Reply-To: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] AL/Mag question
Comments: To: Joe Perez <rocketman6965@AOL.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <200108101456.HAA00877@itc.uci.edu>

>From my experience fine Mag generally increases burn rate but it seems to
alter the coefficient and not so much the exponent. Theoretically you lose
out both ways (density & Isp) by replacing Al with Mg but practically (in
real life STS) you can gain Isp depending on proportions, type of Mag used,
size of motor, propellants O:F + N:F balance, particle sizing of the Al
being used and many other factors. But most importantly expect a slight
increase in burn rate though.

Troy.

----------
>
> Hi All,
>
> I have a formula that calls for 7%AL.  On FPRED it gives me an exponent
> of .35.  I want to mix the AL400 mesh with Mag400 mesh.  What would that
do
> to my exponent if anything, or would it just brighten my flame?  I would
> like to get up to a 4%/3% AL/Mag mix.
> The real reason is I have very little AL left and plenty of Mag and am
> getting ready to batch.
> Any comments would be greatly appreciated.
>
> Joe Perez
>
> P.S.: My first batch of motors flown were in 5 flights with J-L impulses.
> NO CATO's!!!!
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 22456 invoked from network); 11 Aug 2001 06:21:44 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 11 Aug 2001 06:21:44 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 27094 invoked by uid 50005); 11 Aug 2001 06:22:08 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (. Clean. Processed in 0.344494 secs); 11 Aug 2001 06:22:08 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
X-Qmail-Scanner-Mail-From: owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU via smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net
X-Qmail-Scanner-Rcpt-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
X-Qmail-Scanner: 0.96 (No viruses found. Processed in 0.344494 secs)
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 11 Aug 2001 06:22:07 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA05855; Fri, 10 Aug 2001 23:00:59 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 81104 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 11 Aug 2001 06:00:57          +0000
Received: from idsoftware.com (predator.idsoftware.com [192.246.40.34]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA05840 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Fri, 10 Aug 2001 23:00:57 -0700
Received: from [192.246.40.144] (account johnc HELO pluto.idsoftware.com) by          idsoftware.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 3.4.7) with ESMTP id 344608 for          AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 11 Aug 2001 01:00:56 -0500
X-Sender: johnc@mail.idsoftware.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <4.3.1.2.20010811010934.03213ef8@mail.idsoftware.com>
Date:         Sat, 11 Aug 2001 01:13:11 -0500
Reply-To: "John Carmack" <johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Carmack" <johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM>
Subject:      [AR] parasails
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

I have seen dozens of references to steerable parasail recovery projects in
various states of contemplation and test.

Does anyone know of a HPR / experimental parasail project that was actually
brought to reliable, routine, effective operational status?  Not "heard
about", but actually seen working as designed, multiple times?

John Carmack

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 29340 invoked from network); 11 Aug 2001 06:38:21 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 11 Aug 2001 06:38:21 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: (qmail 19412 invoked from network); 11 Aug 2001 06:40:47 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 11 Aug 2001 06:40:47 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA06136; Fri, 10 Aug 2001 23:22:59 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 81181 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 11 Aug 2001 06:22:50          +0000
Received: from cisco.com (cypher.cisco.com [171.69.11.18]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA06118; Fri, 10 Aug 2001 23:22:49 -0700
Received: (from billw@localhost) by cisco.com (8.8.8/2.6/Cisco List          Logging/8.8.8) id XAA29288; Fri, 10 Aug 2001 23:22:19 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID:  <CMM.0.90.4.997510939.billw@cypher>
Date:         Fri, 10 Aug 2001 23:22:19 PDT
Reply-To: "Bill Westfield" <billw@cisco.com>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "William Chops Westfield" <billw@cisco.com>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Shipping Rocket Motors
Comments: To: Ray Calkins <rcalkins@ITC.UCI.EDU>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  Your message of Fri, 10 Aug 2001 10:06:01 -0700 -0700

    Before I start calling every shipper in town, does anybody have a
    preferred shipper for transporting solids?

I wasn't aware that such a thing was even possible (in a fully legal sense),
short of lengthy and expensive DOT classification procedures and such...

BillW


From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 8042 invoked from network); 11 Aug 2001 06:42:10 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 11 Aug 2001 06:42:10 -0000
Received: (qmail 14308 invoked by uid 50005); 11 Aug 2001 06:42:34 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (. Clean. Processed in 0.187604 secs); 11 Aug 2001 06:42:34 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
X-Qmail-Scanner-Mail-From: owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU via smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net
X-Qmail-Scanner-Rcpt-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
X-Qmail-Scanner: 0.96 (No viruses found. Processed in 0.187604 secs)
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 11 Aug 2001 06:42:34 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA06196; Fri, 10 Aug 2001 23:27:30 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 81158 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 11 Aug 2001 06:27:29          +0000
Received: from gull.mail.pas.earthlink.net (gull.mail.pas.earthlink.net          [207.217.121.85]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA06034          for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Fri, 10 Aug 2001 23:17:29 -0700
Received: from earthlink.net (dialup-209.245.140.69.Dial1.SanJose1.Level3.net          [209.245.140.69]) by gull.mail.pas.earthlink.net (EL-8_9_3_3/8.9.3)          with ESMTP id XAA10437; Fri, 10 Aug 2001 23:17:28 -0700 (PDT)
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.75 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.16-22 i686)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <4.3.1.2.20010811010934.03213ef8@mail.idsoftware.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B74CE22.D871AB83@earthlink.net>
Date:         Fri, 10 Aug 2001 23:18:10 -0700
Reply-To: "David Weinshenker" <daze39@EARTHLINK.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "David Weinshenker" <daze39@EARTHLINK.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] parasails
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

John Carmack wrote:
> I have seen dozens of references to steerable parasail recovery projects in
> various states of contemplation and test.
>
> Does anyone know of a HPR / experimental parasail project that was actually
> brought to reliable, routine, effective operational status?  Not "heard
> about", but actually seen working as designed, multiple times?

No, but I've got some fragmentary ideas of my own on how such a thing might
be arranged (specifically, actuator/harness anchor configurations intended
to isolate the steering mechanism from deployment shocks)...

This seems to be an invention-trying-to-happen, an idea for which the time
is ripe, doesn't it? :)

-dave w

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 82 invoked from network); 11 Aug 2001 07:03:53 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 11 Aug 2001 07:03:53 -0000
Received: (qmail 28958 invoked by uid 50005); 11 Aug 2001 07:04:09 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (. Clean. Processed in 0.298111 secs); 11 Aug 2001 07:04:09 -0000
X-Qmail-Scanner-Mail-From: owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU via smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net
X-Qmail-Scanner-Rcpt-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
X-Qmail-Scanner: 0.96 (No viruses found. Processed in 0.298111 secs)
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 11 Aug 2001 07:04:09 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA06431; Fri, 10 Aug 2001 23:47:20 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 81255 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 11 Aug 2001 06:47:14          +0000
Received: from femail11.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail11.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.0.95.107]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA06416          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 10 Aug 2001 23:47:14 -0700
Received: from hal2001 ([24.77.53.16]) by femail11.sdc1.sfba.home.com          (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20 201-229-121-120-20010223) with SMTP id          <20010811064713.TDXP22307.femail11.sdc1.sfba.home.com@hal2001> for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 10 Aug 2001 23:47:13 -0700
References:  <v04210109b79a05b4d2bb@[10.0.0.2]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <002601c12230$548d3740$0400a8c0@hatjs>
Date:         Fri, 10 Aug 2001 23:39:10 -0700
Reply-To: "Jamie Morken" <jmorken@HOME.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jamie Morken" <jmorken@HOME.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] parasail control / solenoid linear actuators
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Hi Bob,

> You think muscle wire might work?  I don't know if it would be strong
> enough to take the opening loads of the chute or if it has enough
> "shrinkage" (for lack of a more accurate term) to give you the
> actuation you are looking for.  It certainly would be an elegant
> solution though, one wire on and the other off to turn. Both on to
> flare the chute.

The shrinkage of musclewires is only 3 to 5% so there would have to be a
lever
that increases the length of the line pull.  The bigger muscle wire that
robotstore.com sells (still only 375micron
diameter!) can pull 2 kg but can cycle only about 4 times a minute.  The
smaller wires are weaker but
cycle faster.

Here is a 2 page pdf from a place that sells the wires (they are pretty damn
expensive!!)
http://www.robotstore.com/download/Muscle_Wire_FAQ_V3.pdf

To protect the musclewire (or whatever other actuator is used) from being
damaged by the deployment shock, I think the simplest? method would be to
pass the parachute control line through a hole in a bulkhead and tie a knot
in the parachute control line so that when the actuator is not pulling on
the line the knot will be tight against the bulkhead taking all the load of
the chute (and saving the actuator from getting demolished etc! :)

>
> Or how about 2 toothed strips of plastic running between sets of
> gears?  The plastic strips would be connected to the risers and the
> gears would shuttle the strips back and forth as necessary.  I've
> seen them on industrial machines but not in the small scale you are
> looking for.
>

This or a heavy duty servo may be the way to go!
Why are boat servo's more powerful than R/C plane servo's?

best regards,
Jamie

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 23473 invoked from network); 11 Aug 2001 07:55:41 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 11 Aug 2001 07:55:41 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 5724 invoked by uid 50005); 11 Aug 2001 07:56:05 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (. Clean. Processed in 0.208934 secs); 11 Aug 2001 07:56:05 -0000
X-Qmail-Scanner-Mail-From: owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU via smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net
X-Qmail-Scanner-Rcpt-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
X-Qmail-Scanner: 0.96 (No viruses found. Processed in 0.208934 secs)
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 11 Aug 2001 07:56:05 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA06585; Sat, 11 Aug 2001 00:12:00 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 81283 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 11 Aug 2001 07:11:57          +0000
Received: from cisco.com (cypher.cisco.com [171.69.11.18]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA06570 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat,          11 Aug 2001 00:11:57 -0700
Received: (from billw@localhost) by cisco.com (8.8.8/2.6/Cisco List          Logging/8.8.8) id AAA04168; Sat, 11 Aug 2001 00:11:25 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID:  <CMM.0.90.4.997513885.billw@cypher>
Date:         Sat, 11 Aug 2001 00:11:25 PDT
Reply-To: "Bill Westfield" <billw@cisco.com>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "William Chops Westfield" <billw@cisco.com>
Subject:      Re: [AR] OT: Free "Compute's Gazette"
Comments: To: Balthezar@AOL.COM
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  Your message of Fri, 10 Aug 2001 20:45:36 EDT

As long as we're all so nostalgic, I thought I'd point out that a lot of
those "old favorite" computer systems now have emulators available that run
on modern PCs.  There's a reasonable selection at

        http://www.zophar.net/index.phtml

although they don't have the cosmac Elf simulator that blew me alway:

        http://incolor.inetnebr.com/bill_r/computer_simulators.htm

BillW


From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 19715 invoked from network); 11 Aug 2001 08:23:37 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 11 Aug 2001 08:23:37 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 30839 invoked by uid 50005); 11 Aug 2001 08:22:36 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (. Clean. Processed in 0.261775 secs); 11 Aug 2001 08:22:36 -0000
X-Qmail-Scanner-Mail-From: owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU via smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net
X-Qmail-Scanner-Rcpt-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
X-Qmail-Scanner: 0.96 (No viruses found. Processed in 0.261775 secs)
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 11 Aug 2001 08:22:36 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA06697; Sat, 11 Aug 2001 00:26:45 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 81302 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 11 Aug 2001 07:26:43          +0000
Received: from cisco.com (cypher.cisco.com [171.69.11.18]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA06682 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat,          11 Aug 2001 00:26:43 -0700
Received: (from billw@localhost) by cisco.com (8.8.8/2.6/Cisco List          Logging/8.8.8) id AAA05688; Sat, 11 Aug 2001 00:26:12 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID:  <CMM.0.90.4.997514772.billw@cypher>
Date:         Sat, 11 Aug 2001 00:26:12 PDT
Reply-To: "Bill Westfield" <billw@cisco.com>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "William Chops Westfield" <billw@cisco.com>
Subject:      Re: [AR] potassium nitrate
Comments: To: Matt Faulkner <mattfaulkner9@HOTMAIL.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  Your message of Sat, 11 Aug 2001 05:37:49 +0000

    I also checked all the gardening supplies but I only found things that
    had KN as one of the ingredients (nothing pure, no K Power).

You need to skip the (consumer retail) "gardening supply" stores and look
for nursery/farm supply stores ("industrial".)  Don't expect to be able to
buy less than 50lb at a time, and they might be a little leery of selling
you that little ("probaby wants it for pipebombs or something.")

Around here, it's also sold by some ceramics/clay dealers (again, you need
to find the "industrial suppliers.)  I don't know if its actually used as a
glaze ingredient (one site mentioned use as a flux for glass), or whether
they simply found it profittable to carry once they ended up as a defacto
chemical supplier...

Personally, I haven't searched very hard.  Where I'm at now, a 50lb bag is
too much of a temptation to do something stupid, and for smaller amounts
the "common" price of <$5/lb isn't so bad...

BillW


From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 13642 invoked from network); 11 Aug 2001 13:39:04 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 11 Aug 2001 13:39:04 -0000
Received: (qmail 881 invoked by uid 50005); 11 Aug 2001 13:39:27 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (. Clean. Processed in 0.261947 secs); 11 Aug 2001 13:39:27 -0000
X-Qmail-Scanner-Mail-From: owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU via smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net
X-Qmail-Scanner-Rcpt-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
X-Qmail-Scanner: 0.96 (No viruses found. Processed in 0.261947 secs)
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 11 Aug 2001 13:39:26 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id FAA08258; Sat, 11 Aug 2001 05:43:55 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 81612 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 11 Aug 2001 12:43:38          +0000
Received: from fep3-orange.clear.net.nz (fep3-orange.clear.net.nz          [203.97.32.3]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id FAA08242          for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Sat, 11 Aug 2001 05:43:35 -0700
Received: from mkbs (203-167-162-160.dialup.clear.net.nz [203.167.162.160]) by          fep3-orange.clear.net.nz (1.5/1.8) with SMTP id AAA00691; Sun, 12 Aug          2001 00:43:30 +1200 (NZST)
References:  <4.3.1.2.20010811010934.03213ef8@mail.idsoftware.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <017001c12263$8015bee0$0100a8c0@mkbs>
Date:         Sun, 12 Aug 2001 00:37:28 +1200
Reply-To: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Organization: Applied Technology
Subject:      Re: [AR] parasails
Comments: To: John Carmack <johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM>
Comments: cc: XOD <captn.beaky@paradise.net.nz>,          Ken and Louise Mardle <louisem@adr.co.nz>, BBob <billyleebob@home.com>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

> I have seen dozens of references to steerable parasail recovery projects
in
> various states of contemplation and test.
>
> Does anyone know of a HPR / experimental parasail project that was
actually
> brought to reliable, routine, effective operational status?  Not "heard
> about", but actually seen working as designed, multiple times?


f you'll excuse and even worse than "heard of" - within the last year I
found a website advertising for sale a commercial steerable parachute
arrangement that has AFAIR something like 20 + miles range from 30,000 feet,
GPS control, waypointing etc and target accuracy of a few tens of feet. They
showed (alleged) photos of it in operation, showed maps of a course eg down
a valley and around a bend and showed a photo of a landing targeted at a
road end and coming in just off the road.

I don't remember the chute shape properly but AFAIR it was a wide rectangle.
NOT a parasail but going in the right direction.
Can't find website reference in my records alas.


      Russell McMahon

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 21319 invoked from network); 11 Aug 2001 14:28:23 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 11 Aug 2001 14:28:23 -0000
Received: (qmail 18690 invoked by uid 50005); 11 Aug 2001 14:27:00 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (. Clean. Processed in 0.236187 secs); 11 Aug 2001 14:27:00 -0000
X-Qmail-Scanner-Mail-From: owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU via smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net
X-Qmail-Scanner-Rcpt-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
X-Qmail-Scanner: 0.96 (No viruses found. Processed in 0.236187 secs)
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 11 Aug 2001 14:26:59 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA08590; Sat, 11 Aug 2001 07:11:04 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 81658 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 11 Aug 2001 14:11:03          +0000
Received: from c002.snv.cp.net (c002-h003.c002.snv.cp.net [209.228.32.167]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id HAA08562 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 11 Aug 2001 07:09:36 -0700
Received: (cpmta 29179 invoked from network); 11 Aug 2001 07:09:05 -0700
Received: from 1Cust159.tnt2.williamsburg.va.da.uu.net (HELO default)          (63.21.81.159) by smtp.peoplepc.com (209.228.32.167) with SMTP; 11          Aug 2001 07:09:05 -0700
X-Sent: 11 Aug 2001 14:09:05 GMT
References:  <F2695V3GykBbKP7Ie8t00003ff3@hotmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <000f01c12270$df5bc720$9f51153f@default>
Date:         Sat, 11 Aug 2001 10:21:08 -0400
Reply-To: "David Muesing" <dmuesing@PEOPLEPC.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "David Muesing" <dmuesing@PEOPLEPC.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] potassium nitrate---Source
Comments: To: Matt Faulkner <mattfaulkner9@HOTMAIL.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Matt,

Goto:  www.kpower.com and look for sales information for your area. Where do
you live? I think K-Power is the best cheapest way to go. You will have to
grind the prills. The best thing I've found for grinding is a 2 compartment
coffee grinder purchased from Lowe's home center for $30. I trickle the
prills into it as to not overload the motor.

Dave Muesing
Yorktown, VA


----- Original Message -----
From: "Matt Faulkner" <mattfaulkner9@HOTMAIL.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Saturday, August 11, 2001 1:37 AM
Subject: [AR] potassium nitrate


>    I've been looking for a good supply of potassium nitrate, but so far I
> haven't found one. Firefox seems okay, but at $2/pound (compared to $.30
for
> fertilizer), I'm not sure if they're the best way. I also checked all the
> gardening supplies but I only found things that had KN as one of the
> ingredients (nothing pure, no K Power). Has anyone had good results using
> fertilizer that contains other chemicals (Ammonium Nitrate was among them,
> for example)? And, again, what are the three %s on the bag ( xx-yy-zz)
that
> I should look for? Thanks.
>                                           -Matt
>
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 23299 invoked from network); 11 Aug 2001 14:38:58 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 11 Aug 2001 14:38:58 -0000
Received: (qmail 27282 invoked by uid 50005); 11 Aug 2001 14:34:19 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (. Clean. Processed in 0.255509 secs); 11 Aug 2001 14:34:19 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
X-Qmail-Scanner-Mail-From: owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU via smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net
X-Qmail-Scanner-Rcpt-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
X-Qmail-Scanner: 0.96 (No viruses found. Processed in 0.255509 secs)
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 11 Aug 2001 14:34:19 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA08561; Sat, 11 Aug 2001 07:09:34 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 81651 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 11 Aug 2001 14:09:27          +0000
Received: from lekstutis.com (emu.webminders.com [209.176.27.130]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA08546 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 11 Aug 2001 07:09:26 -0700
Received: from Lekstutis.com [64.34.51.25] by lekstutis.com with ESMTP          (SMTPD32-5.05) id A09A2FBE0292; Sat, 11 Aug 2001 10:26:34 -0400
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.78 [en] (Win98; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <v04210109b79a05b4d2bb@[10.0.0.2]>            <002601c12230$548d3740$0400a8c0@hatjs>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B753C93.8A39D826@Lekstutis.com>
Date:         Sat, 11 Aug 2001 10:09:23 -0400
Reply-To: "Arthur J. Lekstutis" <Artie@LEKSTUTIS.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Arthur J. Lekstutis" <Artie@LEKSTUTIS.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] parasail control / solenoid linear actuators
Comments: To: Jamie Morken <jmorken@HOME.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Jamie Morken wrote:

> This or a heavy duty servo may be the way to go!
> Why are boat servo's more powerful than R/C plane servo's?

RC Sail boats. Power boats don't need that much torque. Sail boats have large
control surfaces with high momentum, but don't really need to move as fast as
control surface on an aircraft. Typically sail boat servos are very powerful, if
a bit slow.

An example of a sail boat servo (231 oz/in, .46 seconds/140 degrees):
http://www2.towerhobbies.com/cgi-bin/wti0001p.pgm?Q=1&I=LXN668&P=0

That's almost five times the torque of a standard servo.

A standard aircraft servo (42 oz/in, 0.19 sec/60 deg):
http://www2.towerhobbies.com/cgi-bin/wti0001p.pgm?Q=1&I=LXN575&P=0
Or a "giant scale" aircraft servo (161 oz/in, 0.27 sec/60 deg):
http://www2.towerhobbies.com/cgi-bin/wti0001p.pgm?Q=1&I=LXN600&P=0

Later,
Artie

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 9598 invoked from network); 11 Aug 2001 15:26:36 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 11 Aug 2001 15:26:36 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 28038 invoked from network); 11 Aug 2001 15:29:26 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 11 Aug 2001 15:29:26 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA08767; Sat, 11 Aug 2001 08:11:43 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 81673 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 11 Aug 2001 15:11:33          +0000
Received: from femail25.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail25.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.254.60.15]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA08752          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 11 Aug 2001 08:11:33 -0700
Received: from home.com ([24.22.71.82]) by femail25.sdc1.sfba.home.com          (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20 201-229-121-120-20010223) with ESMTP id          <20010811151126.DAUI16290.femail25.sdc1.sfba.home.com@home.com>; Sat,          11 Aug 2001 08:11:26 -0700
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.75 [en] (Win98; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <94.182f06b3.28a5da30@aol.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0B2A_01C56B69.47EF2440"
Message-ID:  <39D20E6B.E4001F9@home.com>
Date:         Wed, 27 Sep 2000 11:12:43 -0400
Reply-To: "Mark Simpson" <mark.simpson@HOME.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Mark Simpson" <mark.simpson@HOME.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] OT:  Free "Compute's Gazette"
Comments: To: Balthezar@AOL.COM
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0B2A_01C56B69.47EF2440
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

I have an old Commodore Plus 4 still in its original box.  Another relic
of a bygone age. :-)

Mark Simpson

Balthezar@AOL.COM wrote:

> In a message dated 8/10/01 6:46:30 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
> edrowe@whro.net
> writes:
>
>
>
>> Still have my old C64 in original boxes. Ah, what fun it was. I use
>> to get
>> copied games from here and there and one had a virus that caused the
>> thing
>> to freeze up in the middle of a good game of Bungling Bay.
>> Borderbund is
>> still around I think.
>
> I must have had every game made for the C64 (or at least a boat load
> of em)
> and I vaguely remember Raid on Bungeling bay. I won my machine in a
> contest
> at work. This is when it sold for, IIRC, ~$500. Way cool! I went out
> and
> bought the external floppy for ~$200 immediately and an 11 pin thermal
>
> printer from GE with an interface for about the same money a year or
> so
> later. I wowed my perfessors (sorry Terry) with papers turned in
> devoid of
> spelling errors and justified including knock your socks off graphics
> and
> some spreadsheet analyses'. Now if I could only remember the software
> package
> that allowed all that. Was it MultiMate? Anyway, amazing what could be
> done
> without a DOS on only a 360k single sided floppy and 64k of memory.
> Ah, yes,
> those were the days! Speaking of memory - I just shelled out a
> whopping $45
> for a 256mb PC100 DRAM. Dang!
>
> Bruce Kirchner

------=_NextPart_000_0B2A_01C56B69.47EF2440
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<!doctype html public "-//w3c//dtd html 4.0 transitional//en">
<html>
I have an old Commodore Plus 4 still in its original box.&nbsp; Another
relic of a bygone age. :-)
<p>Mark Simpson
<p>Balthezar@AOL.COM wrote:
<blockquote TYPE=CITE><font face="arial,helvetica"><font size=-1>In a message
dated 8/10/01 6:46:30 PM Eastern Daylight Time, edrowe@whro.net</font></font>
<br><font face="arial,helvetica"><font size=-1>writes:</font></font>
<br>&nbsp;
<br>&nbsp;
<blockquote TYPE=CITE style="BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px"><font face="arial,helvetica"><font size=-1>Still
have my old C64 in original boxes. Ah, what fun it was. I use to get</font></font>
<br><font face="arial,helvetica"><font size=-1>copied games from here and
there and one had a virus that caused the thing</font></font>
<br><font face="arial,helvetica"><font size=-1>to freeze up in the middle
of a good game of Bungling Bay. Borderbund is</font></font>
<br><font face="arial,helvetica"><font size=-1>still around I think.</font></font></blockquote>

<p><font face="Arial"><font color="#000000"><font size=-1>I must have had
every game made for the C64 (or at least a boat load of em)</font></font></font>
<br><font face="Arial"><font color="#000000"><font size=-1>and I vaguely
remember Raid on Bungeling bay. I won my machine in a contest</font></font></font>
<br><font face="Arial"><font color="#000000"><font size=-1>at work. This
is when it sold for, IIRC, ~$500. Way cool! I went out and</font></font></font>
<br><font face="Arial"><font color="#000000"><font size=-1>bought the external
floppy for ~$200 immediately and an 11 pin thermal</font></font></font>
<br><font face="Arial"><font color="#000000"><font size=-1>printer from
GE with an interface for about the same money a year or so</font></font></font>
<br><font face="Arial"><font color="#000000"><font size=-1>later. I wowed
my perfessors (sorry Terry) with papers turned in devoid of</font></font></font>
<br><font face="Arial"><font color="#000000"><font size=-1>spelling errors
and justified including knock your socks off graphics and</font></font></font>
<br><font face="Arial"><font color="#000000"><font size=-1>some spreadsheet
analyses'. Now if I could only remember the software package</font></font></font>
<br><font face="Arial"><font color="#000000"><font size=-1>that allowed
all that. Was it MultiMate? Anyway, amazing what could be done</font></font></font>
<br><font face="Arial"><font color="#000000"><font size=-1>without a DOS
on only a 360k single sided floppy and 64k of memory. Ah, yes,</font></font></font>
<br><font face="Arial"><font color="#000000"><font size=-1>those were the
days! Speaking of memory - I just shelled out a whopping $45</font></font></font>
<br><font face="Arial"><font color="#000000"><font size=-1>for a 256mb
PC100 DRAM. Dang!</font></font></font>
<p><font face="Arial"><font color="#000000"><font size=-1>Bruce Kirchner</font></font></font></blockquote>
</html>

------=_NextPart_000_0B2A_01C56B69.47EF2440--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 13256 invoked from network); 11 Aug 2001 17:09:03 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 11 Aug 2001 17:09:03 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 5897 invoked from network); 11 Aug 2001 17:11:31 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 11 Aug 2001 17:11:31 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA09255; Sat, 11 Aug 2001 10:03:56 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 81727 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 11 Aug 2001 17:03:54          +0000
Received: from femail25.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail25.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.254.60.15]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA09184          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 11 Aug 2001 09:53:54 -0700
Received: from localhost ([24.13.24.185]) by femail25.sdc1.sfba.home.com          (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20 201-229-121-120-20010223) with ESMTP id          <20010811165349.FAOJ16290.femail25.sdc1.sfba.home.com@localhost>;          Sat, 11 Aug 2001 09:53:49 -0700
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.388)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <20010811165349.FAOJ16290.femail25.sdc1.sfba.home.com@localhost>
Date:         Sat, 11 Aug 2001 09:53:49 -0700
Reply-To: "Joe Balsamo" <jbalsamo@CARBONBASEDLIFE.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Joe Balsamo" <jbalsamo@CARBONBASEDLIFE.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] parasails
Comments: To: David Weinshenker <daze39@EARTHLINK.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <3B74CE22.D871AB83@earthlink.net>

On Friday, August 10, 2001, at 11:18 PM, David Weinshenker wrote:

> John Carmack wrote:
>> I have seen dozens of references to steerable parasail recovery
>> projects in
>> various states of contemplation and test.
>>
>> Does anyone know of a HPR / experimental parasail project that was
>> actually
>> brought to reliable, routine, effective operational status?  Not "heard
>> about", but actually seen working as designed, multiple times?
>
> No, but I've got some fragmentary ideas of my own on how such a thing
> might
> be arranged (specifically, actuator/harness anchor configurations
> intended
> to isolate the steering mechanism from deployment shocks)...
>
> This seems to be an invention-trying-to-happen, an idea for which the
> time
> is ripe, doesn't it? :)


Absolutely! BTW, I'm new to the list, but y'all are discussing something
I am personally working on, so forgive me for jumping in a bit earlier
than my "normal" 1 month lurk period.

Dave, you are 100% correct, my friend, the snowball is gathering
momentum and I suspect that many DYI's will be on the web soon and a few
commercial packages are sure to follow.

My own personal system is currently in the R&D phase and I would very
much like to correspond with anyone who is interested in doing GPS
automated parafoil recovery (or anything similar, really.)

My current system uses all off-the-shelf components. I was building my
own GPS-PCM interpreter from a BASIC Stamp kit, but I found an
off-the-shelf device which is used by the "big scale" R/C community who
are also doing GPS navigation.
Anyway, I will go into more detail if anyone is interested, but my basic
R&D system consists of a Garmin eTrex GPS unit, a Unav PDC10 GPS
interface, a Futaba radio system with a Futaba heli tailrotor servo.
Works like a charm in my R/C buggy test vehicle.

For the air portion of things, I'm using a PML Endeavor which will
contain my special payload package, all above, plus a parafoil.
Currently, the parafoil I have is way too small for the Endeavor, but
works fine on "set GPS unit, drop off cliff and see what happens"
testing.

Right now, I'm trying to find (build or buy, pehaps) a large, efficient
parafoil.

OK, that's my status now. I'd be very interested in furthering this
discussion either here or in private email, depending on the list's
interest in this subject.

My best,

Joe Balsamo

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 11547 invoked from network); 11 Aug 2001 17:18:04 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 11 Aug 2001 17:18:04 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 23123 invoked by uid 50005); 11 Aug 2001 16:58:02 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (. Clean. Processed in 0.178206 secs); 11 Aug 2001 16:58:02 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
X-Qmail-Scanner-Mail-From: owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU via smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net
X-Qmail-Scanner-Rcpt-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
X-Qmail-Scanner: 0.96 (No viruses found. Processed in 0.178206 secs)
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 11 Aug 2001 16:58:02 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA09208; Sat, 11 Aug 2001 09:55:49 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 81728 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 11 Aug 2001 16:55:38          +0000
Received: from imo-d03.mx.aol.com (imo-d03.mx.aol.com [205.188.157.35]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA09193 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Sat, 11 Aug 2001 09:55:37 -0700
Received: from BASE358@aol.com by imo-d03.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v31.9.) id          1.12c.2d0646a (3967); Sat, 11 Aug 2001 12:55:03 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0B2F_01C56B69.47F16E30"
X-Mailer: AOL 6.0 for Windows US sub 10531
Message-ID:  <12c.2d0646a.28a6bd66@aol.com>
Date:         Sat, 11 Aug 2001 12:55:02 EDT
Reply-To: <BASE358@AOL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <BASE358@AOL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] parasail control / solenoid linear actuators
Comments: To: Artie@lekstutis.com
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0B2F_01C56B69.47F16E30
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

A great control device would be a small Makita drill. Forward, reverse,
variable speed, lots of torque and a square parachute needs the brake lines
pulled as much as 3'.  You would need spools for the lines.  I have 800
parachute jumps, and close to 50 BASE jumps, and have been playing with the
idea of steerable parachutes.  You do NOT want a parasail, get a Ram Air
Parachute.  Size it app a square foot of chute to a pound of weight.  The
draw back is a parachute has a forward speed of app 15 mph and you need to
flair, or stall the canopy at the right height to stop it as the rocket is
just above the ground, much as a bird stalls when it lands.  Good luck!

Erik Gates
Gates Brothers Rocketry
www.gbrocketry.com

------=_NextPart_000_0B2F_01C56B69.47F16E30
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<HTML><FONT FACE=arial,helvetica><FONT  SIZE=2>A great control device would be a small Makita drill. Forward, reverse,
<BR>variable speed, lots of torque and a square parachute needs the brake lines
<BR>pulled as much as 3'. &nbsp;You would need spools for the lines. &nbsp;I have 800
<BR>parachute jumps, and close to 50 BASE jumps, and have been playing with the
<BR>idea of steerable parachutes. &nbsp;You do NOT want a parasail, get a Ram Air
<BR>Parachute. &nbsp;Size it app a square foot of chute to a pound of weight. &nbsp;The
<BR>draw back is a parachute has a forward speed of app 15 mph and you need to
<BR>flair, or stall the canopy at the right height to stop it as the rocket is
<BR>just above the ground, much as a bird stalls when it lands. &nbsp;Good luck!
<BR>
<BR>Erik Gates
<BR>Gates Brothers Rocketry
<BR>www.gbrocketry.com</FONT></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0B2F_01C56B69.47F16E30--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 15382 invoked from network); 11 Aug 2001 17:36:54 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 11 Aug 2001 17:36:54 -0000
Received: (qmail 27966 invoked by uid 50005); 11 Aug 2001 17:37:16 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (. Clean. Processed in 0.136981 secs); 11 Aug 2001 17:37:16 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
X-Qmail-Scanner-Mail-From: owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU via smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net
X-Qmail-Scanner-Rcpt-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
X-Qmail-Scanner: 0.96 (No viruses found. Processed in 0.136981 secs)
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 11 Aug 2001 17:37:16 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA09434; Sat, 11 Aug 2001 10:21:43 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 81774 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 11 Aug 2001 17:21:37          +0000
Received: from lekstutis.com (emu.webminders.com [209.176.27.130]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA09419 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Sat, 11 Aug 2001 10:21:36 -0700
Received: from Lekstutis.com [64.34.51.25] by lekstutis.com with ESMTP          (SMTPD32-5.05) id ADA7E6860138; Sat, 11 Aug 2001 13:38:47 -0400
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.78 [en] (Win98; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <12c.2d0646a.28a6bd66@aol.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B75699E.C07739C9@Lekstutis.com>
Date:         Sat, 11 Aug 2001 13:21:34 -0400
Reply-To: "Arthur J. Lekstutis" <Artie@LEKSTUTIS.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Arthur J. Lekstutis" <Artie@LEKSTUTIS.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] parasail control / solenoid linear actuators
Comments: To: BASE358@aol.com
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

BASE358@aol.com wrote:

> idea of steerable parachutes.  You do NOT want a parasail, get a Ram
> Air
> Parachute.

Why is that? What exactly is the difference?

Any good general reading material available on parachutes (types,
folding, deployment, etc...)?

Thanks!

Later,
Artie Lekstutis

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 18239 invoked from network); 11 Aug 2001 17:37:53 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 11 Aug 2001 17:37:53 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 28933 invoked by uid 50005); 11 Aug 2001 17:38:15 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (. Clean. Processed in 0.164694 secs); 11 Aug 2001 17:38:15 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
X-Qmail-Scanner-Mail-From: owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU via smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net
X-Qmail-Scanner-Rcpt-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
X-Qmail-Scanner: 0.96 (No viruses found. Processed in 0.164694 secs)
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 11 Aug 2001 17:38:15 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA09489; Sat, 11 Aug 2001 10:36:02 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 81781 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 11 Aug 2001 17:36:00          +0000
Received: from imo-d01.mx.aol.com (imo-d01.mx.aol.com [205.188.157.33]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA09474 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Sat, 11 Aug 2001 10:36:00 -0700
Received: from BASE358@aol.com by imo-d01.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v31_r1.3.) id          w.9a.186cad73 (3967); Sat, 11 Aug 2001 13:31:49 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0B34_01C56B69.47F16E30"
X-Mailer: AOL 6.0 for Windows US sub 10531
Message-ID:  <9a.186cad73.28a6c604@aol.com>
Date:         Sat, 11 Aug 2001 13:31:48 EDT
Reply-To: <BASE358@AOL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <BASE358@AOL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] parasails
Comments: To: jbalsamo@carbonbasedlife.com
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0B34_01C56B69.47F16E30
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

I thought I might add that the military has used remote controlled parachutes
to drop supplies, and can be purchased, quite costly.  Yes they do exist.

Erik Gates
Gates Brothers Rocketry
www.gbrocketry.com

------=_NextPart_000_0B34_01C56B69.47F16E30
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<HTML><FONT FACE=arial,helvetica><FONT  SIZE=2>I thought I might add that the military has used remote controlled parachutes
<BR>to drop supplies, and can be purchased, quite costly. &nbsp;Yes they do exist.
<BR>
<BR>Erik Gates
<BR>Gates Brothers Rocketry
<BR>www.gbrocketry.com</FONT></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0B34_01C56B69.47F16E30--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 24051 invoked from network); 11 Aug 2001 17:39:49 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 11 Aug 2001 17:39:49 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 30498 invoked by uid 50005); 11 Aug 2001 17:39:38 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (. Clean. Processed in 0.381631 secs); 11 Aug 2001 17:39:38 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
X-Qmail-Scanner-Mail-From: owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU via smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net
X-Qmail-Scanner-Rcpt-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
X-Qmail-Scanner: 0.96 (No viruses found. Processed in 0.381631 secs)
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 11 Aug 2001 17:39:37 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA09524; Sat, 11 Aug 2001 10:37:37 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 81792 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 11 Aug 2001 17:37:36          +0000
Received: from imo-r03.mx.aol.com (imo-r03.mx.aol.com [152.163.225.99]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA09509 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Sat, 11 Aug 2001 10:37:36 -0700
Received: from BASE358@aol.com by imo-r03.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v31.9.) id          1.11a.2f4a4c1 (3967); Sat, 11 Aug 2001 13:37:25 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0B39_01C56B69.47FB0B20"
X-Mailer: AOL 6.0 for Windows US sub 10531
Message-ID:  <11a.2f4a4c1.28a6c759@aol.com>
Date:         Sat, 11 Aug 2001 13:37:29 EDT
Reply-To: <BASE358@AOL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <BASE358@AOL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] parasail control / solenoid linear actuators
Comments: To: Artie@lekstutis.com
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0B39_01C56B69.47FB0B20
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

A parasail is designed to open and inflated by runing with it to inflate.
They are what you see off of cliffs and hills.  A ram air parachute is
designed to be deployed at a high rate of speed (120mph).  This is what is
used to skydive with.  If you purchase a new chute from a skydiving shop it
will come with instruction...  wiser to buy a used chute and have a rigger at
the skydive shop show you how to pack it for a few extra dollars.

Erik Gates
Gates Brothers Rocketry
www.gbrocketry.com

------=_NextPart_000_0B39_01C56B69.47FB0B20
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<HTML><FONT FACE=arial,helvetica><FONT  SIZE=2>A parasail is designed to open and inflated by runing with it to inflate.
<BR>They are what you see off of cliffs and hills. &nbsp;A ram air parachute is
<BR>designed to be deployed at a high rate of speed (120mph). &nbsp;This is what is
<BR>used to skydive with. &nbsp;If you purchase a new chute from a skydiving shop it
<BR>will come with instruction... &nbsp;wiser to buy a used chute and have a rigger at
<BR>the skydive shop show you how to pack it for a few extra dollars.
<BR>
<BR>Erik Gates
<BR>Gates Brothers Rocketry
<BR>www.gbrocketry.com</FONT></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0B39_01C56B69.47FB0B20--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 11572 invoked from network); 11 Aug 2001 18:26:10 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 11 Aug 2001 18:26:10 -0000
Received: (qmail 14461 invoked from network); 11 Aug 2001 18:28:38 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 11 Aug 2001 18:28:38 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA09892; Sat, 11 Aug 2001 11:23:07 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 81885 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 11 Aug 2001 18:23:02          +0000
Received: from robin.mail.pas.earthlink.net (robin.mail.pas.earthlink.net          [207.217.120.65]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA09873          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 11 Aug 2001 11:23:02 -0700
Received: from scottje (1Cust29.tnt1.holman.wi.da.uu.net [63.20.200.29]) by          robin.mail.pas.earthlink.net (EL-8_9_3_3/8.9.3) with SMTP id LAA04432          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 11 Aug 2001 11:23:00 -0700 (PDT)
References:  <F2695V3GykBbKP7Ie8t00003ff3@hotmail.com>              <000f01c12270$df5bc720$9f51153f@default>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <001201c1228b$1c828980$f072fea9@scottje>
Date:         Sat, 11 Aug 2001 13:28:59 -0400
Reply-To: "Scott & Jeanette" <frazer2001@EARTHLINK.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Scott & Jeanette" <frazer2001@EARTHLINK.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] potassium nitrate---Source
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a good source as well.  They also sell other components and the
potassium nitrate is somewhat pre-ground and pretty pure

http://www.ssaerospace.com/


> Matt,
>
> Goto:  www.kpower.com and look for sales information for your area. Where
do
> you live? I think K-Power is the best cheapest way to go. You will have to
> grind the prills. The best thing I've found for grinding is a 2
compartment
> coffee grinder purchased from Lowe's home center for $30. I trickle the
> prills into it as to not overload the motor.
>
> Dave Muesing
> Yorktown, VA
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Matt Faulkner" <mattfaulkner9@HOTMAIL.COM>
> To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
> Sent: Saturday, August 11, 2001 1:37 AM
> Subject: [AR] potassium nitrate
>
>
> >    I've been looking for a good supply of potassium nitrate, but so far
I
> > haven't found one. Firefox seems okay, but at $2/pound (compared to $.30
> for
> > fertilizer), I'm not sure if they're the best way. I also checked all
the
> > gardening supplies but I only found things that had KN as one of the
> > ingredients (nothing pure, no K Power). Has anyone had good results
using
> > fertilizer that contains other chemicals (Ammonium Nitrate was among
them,
> > for example)? And, again, what are the three %s on the bag ( xx-yy-zz)
> that
> > I should look for? Thanks.
> >                                           -Matt
> >
> >
> > _________________________________________________________________
> > Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at
http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp
> >

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 23681 invoked from network); 11 Aug 2001 19:20:27 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 11 Aug 2001 19:20:27 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 25190 invoked from network); 11 Aug 2001 19:22:55 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 11 Aug 2001 19:22:55 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA10131; Sat, 11 Aug 2001 12:18:11 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 81933 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 11 Aug 2001 19:18:08          +0000
Received: from m1.jersey.juno.com (m1.jersey.juno.com [64.136.16.64]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA10116 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 11 Aug 2001 12:18:08 -0700
Received: from cookie.juno.com by cookie.juno.com for          <"H3WK6e6N+bsCVJQMHM9sZBUXQkWNoXMbajDeeldP6aTpgqx9bknMzg==">
Received: (from kc2csh@juno.com) by m1.jersey.juno.com (queuemail) id GCK7YRVV;          Sat, 11 Aug 2001 15:17:29 EDT
X-Mailer: Juno 4.0.11
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Juno-Line-Breaks: 4,7,10,16-21,23-32
X-Juno-Att: 0
X-Juno-RefParts: 0
Message-ID:  <20010811.152235.-4031441.0.kc2csh@juno.com>
Date:         Sat, 11 Aug 2001 14:56:54 -0400
Reply-To: <kc2csh@JUNO.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <kc2csh@JUNO.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Shipping Rocket Motors
Comments: To: billw@cisco.com
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

  Its possible, but expensive.  In the old days of highly regulated motor
common carriers in the US it used to be possible to look up who had  "the
rights" to move such cargos, and they had both the legal right and the
obligation to move the freight.  All that changed about 1980, and it got
more complicated instead of easier.
  Odds are there are some small specialty carriers in your area that
specialize in moving explosives; finding them will not be easy.  I'd try
calling a few blasting materials dealers and see who they can recommend.
  At least here on the east coast, be prepared to pay for a dedicated
truck and escort; not as outragious a price as you may expect, but it
will be expensive.
  A big part of the issues are the route involved; around here you have
to go around many specified citied, bridges, tunnels, etc.  Can make for
a very difficult process.  I know of one case where "the route" is about
300 miles to go what is about 10 miles by air.  Then again, that is the
northeast US where pretty much every bridge, tunnel, and city is off
limits.
  Good luck.

        Jay


On Fri, 10 Aug 2001 23:22:19 PDT William Chops Westfield
<billw@cisco.com> writes:
>     Before I start calling every shipper in town, does anybody have a
>     preferred shipper for transporting solids?
>
> I wasn't aware that such a thing was even possible (in a fully legal
> sense),
> short of lengthy and expensive DOT classification procedures and
> such...
>
> BillW

________________________________________________________________
GET INTERNET ACCESS FROM JUNO!
Juno offers FREE or PREMIUM Internet access for less!
Join Juno today!  For your FREE software, visit:
http://dl.www.juno.com/get/tagj.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 3794 invoked from network); 11 Aug 2001 20:40:59 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 11 Aug 2001 20:40:59 -0000
Received: (qmail 9880 invoked from network); 11 Aug 2001 20:43:28 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 11 Aug 2001 20:43:28 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA10404; Sat, 11 Aug 2001 13:39:09 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 81970 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 11 Aug 2001 20:38:57          +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (oe40.law12.hotmail.com [64.4.18.97]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA10389 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat,          11 Aug 2001 13:38:57 -0700
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Sat,          11 Aug 2001 13:38:27 -0700
X-Originating-IP: [24.29.188.254]
References:  <12c.2d0646a.28a6bd66@aol.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0B3E_01C56B69.4806F200"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 11 Aug 2001 20:38:27.0183 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[92DA8FF0:01C122A5]
Message-ID:  <OE403SOlbpH71yEXUIE00008859@hotmail.com>
Date:         Sat, 11 Aug 2001 15:40:03 -0500
Reply-To: "Mark Kruep" <mkruep@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Mark Kruep" <mkruep@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] parasail control / solenoid linear actuators
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0B3E_01C56B69.4806F200
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

What about using the parasail or whatever in tandem with a GPS unit? =
This keeps the rocket in a specific geographical location. Then when you =
hit say 100 feet AGL, use a device like BlackSky's pyro release =
mechanism that would release a conventional chute to bring it in at low =
speed. With units like the R-DAS available, you should be able to get =
one system to run the whole thing. You could also engineer a multi-stage =
release mechanism that pops a pilot at apogee, then the parasail (can =
you reef a parasail?), then the main just before landing. Would this =
just be far too complicated? My guess is this would be a pretty =
difficult task no matter the system used.

Mark

  ----- Original Message -----=20
  From: BASE358@AOL.COM=20
  To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU=20
  Sent: Saturday, August 11, 2001 11:55 AM
  Subject: Re: [AR] parasail control / solenoid linear actuators


  A great control device would be a small Makita drill. Forward, =
reverse,=20
  variable speed, lots of torque and a square parachute needs the brake =
lines=20
  pulled as much as 3'.  You would need spools for the lines.  I have =
800=20
  parachute jumps, and close to 50 BASE jumps, and have been playing =
with the=20
  idea of steerable parachutes.  You do NOT want a parasail, get a Ram =
Air=20
  Parachute.  Size it app a square foot of chute to a pound of weight.  =
The=20
  draw back is a parachute has a forward speed of app 15 mph and you =
need to=20
  flair, or stall the canopy at the right height to stop it as the =
rocket is=20
  just above the ground, much as a bird stalls when it lands.  Good =
luck!=20

  Erik Gates=20
  Gates Brothers Rocketry=20
  www.gbrocketry.com=20

------=_NextPart_000_0B3E_01C56B69.4806F200
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Diso-8859-1">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 5.50.4616.200" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ebf2fc>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>What about using the parasail or =
whatever in tandem=20
with a GPS unit? This keeps the rocket in a specific geographical =
location. Then=20
when you hit say 100 feet AGL, use a device like BlackSky's pyro release =

mechanism that would release a conventional chute to bring it in at low =
speed.=20
With units like the R-DAS available, you should be able to get one =
system to run=20
the whole thing. You could also engineer a multi-stage release mechanism =
that=20
pops a pilot at apogee, then the parasail (can you reef a parasail?), =
then the=20
main just before landing. Would this just be far too complicated? My =
guess is=20
this would be a pretty difficult task no matter the system =
used.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Mark</FONT></DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE=20
style=3D"PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; =
BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
  <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial">----- Original Message ----- </DIV>
  <DIV=20
  style=3D"BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; FONT: 10pt arial; font-color: =
black"><B>From:</B>=20
  <A title=3DBASE358@AOL.COM =
href=3D"mailto:BASE358@AOL.COM">BASE358@AOL.COM</A>=20
  </DIV>
  <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A =
title=3DAROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU=20
  href=3D"mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU">AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU</A> </DIV>
  <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> Saturday, August 11, 2001 =
11:55=20
  AM</DIV>
  <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> Re: [AR] parasail =
control /=20
  solenoid linear actuators</DIV>
  <DIV><BR></DIV><FONT face=3Darial,helvetica><FONT size=3D2>A great =
control device=20
  would be a small Makita drill. Forward, reverse, <BR>variable speed, =
lots of=20
  torque and a square parachute needs the brake lines <BR>pulled as much =
as 3'.=20
  &nbsp;You would need spools for the lines. &nbsp;I have 800 =
<BR>parachute=20
  jumps, and close to 50 BASE jumps, and have been playing with the =
<BR>idea of=20
  steerable parachutes. &nbsp;You do NOT want a parasail, get a Ram Air=20
  <BR>Parachute. &nbsp;Size it app a square foot of chute to a pound of =
weight.=20
  &nbsp;The <BR>draw back is a parachute has a forward speed of app 15 =
mph and=20
  you need to <BR>flair, or stall the canopy at the right height to stop =
it as=20
  the rocket is <BR>just above the ground, much as a bird stalls when it =
lands.=20
  &nbsp;Good luck! <BR><BR>Erik Gates <BR>Gates Brothers Rocketry=20
  <BR>www.gbrocketry.com</FONT> </FONT></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0B3E_01C56B69.4806F200--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 28304 invoked from network); 11 Aug 2001 22:21:53 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 11 Aug 2001 22:21:53 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 22353 invoked from network); 11 Aug 2001 22:24:43 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 11 Aug 2001 22:24:43 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA10855; Sat, 11 Aug 2001 15:20:19 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 82055 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 11 Aug 2001 22:20:18          +0000
Received: from femail32.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail32.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.254.60.22]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA10840          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 11 Aug 2001 15:20:18 -0700
Received: from c1649002-a.earthlink.net ([24.20.95.67]) by          femail32.sdc1.sfba.home.com (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20          201-229-121-120-20010223) with ESMTP id          <20010811222011.MTTU20799.femail32.sdc1.sfba.home.com@c1649002-a.earthlink.net>; Sat, 11 Aug 2001 15:20:11          -0700
X-Sender: forkbomb@mail.earthlink.net
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.0.2
References: <4.3.1.2.20010811010934.03213ef8@mail.idsoftware.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <5.0.2.1.0.20010811151920.02347790@mail.earthlink.net>
Date:         Sat, 11 Aug 2001 15:20:08 -0700
Reply-To: "Pierce Nichols" <forkbomb@EARTHLINK.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Pierce Nichols" <forkbomb@EARTHLINK.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] parasails
Comments: To: Russell McMahon <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <017001c12263$8015bee0$0100a8c0@mkbs>

At 12:37 AM 8/12/2001 +1200, Russell McMahon wrote:
> > I have seen dozens of references to steerable parasail recovery projects
>in
> > various states of contemplation and test.
> >
> > Does anyone know of a HPR / experimental parasail project that was
>actually
> > brought to reliable, routine, effective operational status?  Not "heard
> > about", but actually seen working as designed, multiple times?
>
>
>f you'll excuse and even worse than "heard of" - within the last year I
>found a website advertising for sale a commercial steerable parachute
>arrangement that has AFAIR something like 20 + miles range from 30,000 feet,
>GPS control, waypointing etc and target accuracy of a few tens of feet. They
>showed (alleged) photos of it in operation, showed maps of a course eg down
>a valley and around a bend and showed a photo of a landing targeted at a
>road end and coming in just off the road.


         Saw the same... looked pretty damn cool.


>I don't remember the chute shape properly but AFAIR it was a wide rectangle.
>NOT a parasail but going in the right direction.
>Can't find website reference in my records alas.


         Sounds like a large parasail to me -- or more specifically, a
ram-air wing.

         -p


Mars or Bust!
www.marssociety.com

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 26784 invoked from network); 11 Aug 2001 22:33:24 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 11 Aug 2001 22:33:24 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 3852 invoked by uid 50005); 11 Aug 2001 22:33:46 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (. Clean. Processed in 0.181594 secs); 11 Aug 2001 22:33:46 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
X-Qmail-Scanner-Mail-From: owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU via smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net
X-Qmail-Scanner-Rcpt-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
X-Qmail-Scanner: 0.96 (No viruses found. Processed in 0.181594 secs)
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 11 Aug 2001 22:33:45 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA10822; Sat, 11 Aug 2001 15:16:51 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 82048 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 11 Aug 2001 22:16:42          +0000
Received: from femail41.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail41.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.254.60.35]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA10807          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 11 Aug 2001 15:16:42 -0700
Received: from c1649002-a.earthlink.net ([24.20.95.67]) by          femail41.sdc1.sfba.home.com (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20          201-229-121-120-20010223) with ESMTP id          <20010811221635.MFDF2348.femail41.sdc1.sfba.home.com@c1649002-a.earthlink.net>; Sat, 11 Aug 2001 15:16:35          -0700
X-Sender: forkbomb@mail.earthlink.net
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.0.2
References: <4.3.1.2.20010811010934.03213ef8@mail.idsoftware.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <5.0.2.1.0.20010811151226.02357e98@mail.earthlink.net>
Date:         Sat, 11 Aug 2001 15:16:32 -0700
Reply-To: "Pierce Nichols" <forkbomb@EARTHLINK.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Pierce Nichols" <forkbomb@EARTHLINK.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] parasails
Comments: To: David Weinshenker <daze39@earthlink.net>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <3B74CE22.D871AB83@earthlink.net>

At 11:18 PM 8/10/2001 -0700, David Weinshenker wrote:
>John Carmack wrote:
> > I have seen dozens of references to steerable parasail recovery projects in
> > various states of contemplation and test.
> >
> > Does anyone know of a HPR / experimental parasail project that was actually
> > brought to reliable, routine, effective operational status?  Not "heard
> > about", but actually seen working as designed, multiple times?
>
>No, but I've got some fragmentary ideas of my own on how such a thing might
>be arranged (specifically, actuator/harness anchor configurations intended
>to isolate the steering mechanism from deployment shocks)...


         I fly four-line parasails as kites on a regular basis. In those,
the control lines and the load lines are seperate. Control is possible
using only the control lines. They are available commercially in a variety
of sizes, and those are certainly light enough. My only concern would be
stability -- the ones sold as kites are not particularly stable in kite use
(there may be environmental factors causing this -- localized wind-shear,
etc).

         -p


Mars or Bust!
www.marssociety.com

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 18438 invoked from network); 11 Aug 2001 22:41:26 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 11 Aug 2001 22:41:26 -0000
Received: (qmail 28051 invoked from network); 11 Aug 2001 22:44:16 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 11 Aug 2001 22:44:16 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA10983; Sat, 11 Aug 2001 15:39:55 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 82078 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 11 Aug 2001 22:39:51          +0000
Received: from c002.snv.cp.net (c002-h001.c002.snv.cp.net [209.228.32.165]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id PAA10968 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 11 Aug 2001 15:39:51 -0700
Received: (cpmta 20390 invoked from network); 11 Aug 2001 15:39:19 -0700
Received: from 1Cust192.tnt3.williamsburg.va.da.uu.net (HELO default)          (63.15.116.192) by smtp.peoplepc.com (209.228.32.165) with SMTP; 11          Aug 2001 15:39:19 -0700
X-Sent: 11 Aug 2001 22:39:19 GMT
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0B41_01C56B69.4806F200"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <008701c122b8$25b48940$c0740f3f@default>
Date:         Sat, 11 Aug 2001 18:51:22 -0400
Reply-To: "David Muesing" <dmuesing@PEOPLEPC.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "David Muesing" <dmuesing@PEOPLEPC.COM>
Subject:      [AR] Silica Gel Hydration
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0B41_01C56B69.4806F200
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Hello Group,

Would anyone know how much water a 100 gram package of Silica Gel (Fresh =
Step Crystals cat litter) could take on in the process of protecting an =
oxidizer from moisture absorption?=20

And, what temperature/time is needed to rejuvenate it?

Thank you very much!

Dave Muesing

------=_NextPart_000_0B41_01C56B69.4806F200
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Diso-8859-1">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 5.50.4616.200" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=3DOCRA color=3D#0000ff>Hello Group,</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DOCRA color=3D#0000ff></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DOCRA color=3D#0000ff>Would anyone know how much water =
a 100 gram=20
package&nbsp;of Silica Gel (Fresh Step Crystals cat litter)&nbsp;could =
take on=20
in the process of </FONT><FONT face=3DOCRA color=3D#0000ff>protecting an =
oxidizer=20
from moisture absorption? </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DOCRA color=3D#0000ff></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DOCRA color=3D#0000ff>And, what temperature/time is =
needed to=20
rejuvenate it?</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DOCRA color=3D#0000ff></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DOCRA color=3D#0000ff>Thank you very much!</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DOCRA color=3D#0000ff></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DOCRA color=3D#0000ff>Dave =
Muesing</FONT></DIV></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0B41_01C56B69.4806F200--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 19197 invoked from network); 12 Aug 2001 02:16:04 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 12 Aug 2001 02:16:04 -0000
Received: (qmail 4626 invoked by uid 50005); 12 Aug 2001 02:11:38 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (. Clean. Processed in 0.179427 secs); 12 Aug 2001 02:11:38 -0000
X-Qmail-Scanner-Mail-From: owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU via smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net
X-Qmail-Scanner-Rcpt-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
X-Qmail-Scanner: 0.96 (No viruses found. Processed in 0.179427 secs)
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 12 Aug 2001 02:11:38 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA11834; Sat, 11 Aug 2001 19:08:27 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 82199 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 12 Aug 2001 02:07:54          +0000
Received: from albqpop1.albq.uswest.net (albqpop1.albq.uswest.net          [207.108.240.1]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id TAA11818          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 11 Aug 2001 19:07:53 -0700
Received: (qmail 1952 invoked by alias); 12 Aug 2001 02:07:22 -0000
Delivered-To: fixup-AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU@fixme
Received: (qmail 1938 invoked by uid 0); 12 Aug 2001 02:07:22 -0000
Received: from cc898542-a.prdise1.nm.home.com (HELO cc898542a) (65.7.151.152)          by albqpop1.albq.uswest.net with SMTP; 12 Aug 2001 02:07:22 -0000
References:  <008701c122b8$25b48940$c0740f3f@default>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0B44_01C56B69.480E1DF0"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <006901c122d4$0910ed80$0100a8c0@prdise1.nm.home.com>
Date:         Sat, 11 Aug 2001 20:11:01 -0600
Reply-To: "Pax" <darkspunge@USWEST.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Pax" <darkspunge@USWEST.NET>
Subject:      [AR] WOOHOO!! Success
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0B44_01C56B69.480E1DF0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

My first successful motor burn! Only did 2 others, and they were both =
witht he same PVC casing and both had forward bulkhead issues..

Anyway. This was a successful burn using John Lyngdal's 2 grain 38mm =
motor hardware. I used a long single grain. KNO3 and (this is going to =
be silly) Dextrose or sorbital. I think It was the dextrose grain, I had =
two, but marked neither when they were cast a while back.

It came up to pressure almost instantly due to the davyfire and =
thermalite donated by Brian Kosko :-)
Burn time was not measured, and the video camera did not have time =
recording enabled,(I think) however It was very quick, about 1 second + =
or - .1 or so.

Anyway, just pretty happy I got one working. I WILL get a PVC motor =
working, but these 38mm grains are easier to cast and work with.

Hopefully one of these motors will be fired in a rocket at Albuquerque's =
Thrust in the Dust.

Thanks for all the help over the past 2 years!

Paxton

------=_NextPart_000_0B44_01C56B69.480E1DF0
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Diso-8859-1">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 5.50.4522.1800" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>My first successful motor burn! Only =
did 2 others,=20
and they were both witht he same PVC casing and both had forward =
bulkhead=20
issues..</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Anyway. This was a successful burn =
using John=20
Lyngdal's 2 grain 38mm motor hardware. I used a long single grain. KNO3 =
and=20
(this is going to be silly) Dextrose or sorbital. I think It was the =
dextrose=20
grain, I had two, but marked neither when they were cast a while=20
back.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>It came up to pressure almost instantly =
due to the=20
davyfire and thermalite donated by Brian Kosko :-)</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Burn time was not measured, and the =
video camera=20
did not have time recording enabled,(I think) however It was very quick, =
about 1=20
second + or - .1 or so.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Anyway, just pretty happy I got one =
working. I WILL=20
get a PVC motor working, but these 38mm grains are easier to cast and =
work=20
with.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Hopefully one of these motors will be =
fired in a=20
rocket at Albuquerque's Thrust in the Dust.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Thanks for all the help over the past 2 =

years!</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Paxton</FONT></DIV></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0B44_01C56B69.480E1DF0--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 19332 invoked from network); 12 Aug 2001 02:36:51 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 12 Aug 2001 02:36:51 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 29981 invoked by uid 50005); 12 Aug 2001 02:37:10 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (. Clean. Processed in 0.20881 secs); 12 Aug 2001 02:37:10 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
X-Qmail-Scanner-Mail-From: owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU via smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net
X-Qmail-Scanner-Rcpt-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
X-Qmail-Scanner: 0.96 (No viruses found. Processed in 0.20881 secs)
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 12 Aug 2001 02:37:10 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA11958; Sat, 11 Aug 2001 19:35:08 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 82223 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 12 Aug 2001 02:34:57          +0000
Received: from imo-d07.mx.aol.com (imo-d07.mx.aol.com [205.188.157.39]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA11939 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Sat, 11 Aug 2001 19:34:57 -0700
Received: from BASE358@aol.com by imo-d07.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v31.9.) id          i.9a.18767311 (3968); Sat, 11 Aug 2001 22:34:48 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0B47_01C56B69.480E1DF0"
X-Mailer: AOL 6.0 for Windows US sub 10531
Message-ID:  <9a.18767311.28a74547@aol.com>
Date:         Sat, 11 Aug 2001 22:34:47 EDT
Reply-To: <BASE358@AOL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <BASE358@AOL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] parasail control / solenoid linear actuators
Comments: To: mkruep@hotmail.com
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0B47_01C56B69.480E1DF0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

I think with drop testing, you could learn to flair and stall the parachute
with good results.  A steerable main is on our to do list, but will not
happen until next year.  We are funding, and designing a 1/10 scale Saturn V,
ROC our local rocket club is planing on flying it at LDRS next year, so our
front burner is full.  I can steer you in the right direction for parachute
riggers and designers...

Erik Gates
Gates Brothers Rocketry
gbrocketry.com

------=_NextPart_000_0B47_01C56B69.480E1DF0
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<HTML><FONT FACE=arial,helvetica><FONT  SIZE=2>I think with drop testing, you could learn to flair and stall the parachute
<BR>with good results. &nbsp;A steerable main is on our to do list, but will not
<BR>happen until next year. &nbsp;We are funding, and designing a 1/10 scale Saturn V,
<BR>ROC our local rocket club is planing on flying it at LDRS next year, so our
<BR>front burner is full. &nbsp;I can steer you in the right direction for parachute
<BR>riggers and designers...
<BR>
<BR>Erik Gates
<BR>Gates Brothers Rocketry
<BR>gbrocketry.com</FONT></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0B47_01C56B69.480E1DF0--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 18516 invoked from network); 12 Aug 2001 03:19:13 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 12 Aug 2001 03:19:13 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 25118 invoked from network); 12 Aug 2001 03:21:42 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 12 Aug 2001 03:21:42 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA12133; Sat, 11 Aug 2001 20:14:37 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 82247 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 12 Aug 2001 03:14:32          +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (f4.law9.hotmail.com [64.4.9.4]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA12118 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat,          11 Aug 2001 20:14:32 -0700
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Sat,          11 Aug 2001 20:14:02 -0700
Received: from 4.16.58.47 by lw9fd.law9.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Sun, 12 Aug          2001 03:14:01 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [4.16.58.47]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 12 Aug 2001 03:14:02.0121 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[D5FAAF90:01C122DC]
Message-ID:  <F4b1s7nlT2NqFJ3sl3x00000039@hotmail.com>
Date:         Sat, 11 Aug 2001 22:14:01 -0500
Reply-To: "ben romashko" <pleaselaunchme@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "ben romashko" <pleaselaunchme@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] potassium nitrate---Source
Comments: To: frazer2001@EARTHLINK.NET
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Aren't these the guys who recently had problems getting product out in a
timely manner, and notifying people of this?


--------------------
Ben Romashko
pleaslaunchme@hotmail.com
AIM- Attican123
--------------------



>From: Scott & Jeanette <frazer2001@EARTHLINK.NET>
>Reply-To: Scott & Jeanette <frazer2001@EARTHLINK.NET>
>To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
>Subject: Re: [AR] potassium nitrate---Source
>Date: Sat, 11 Aug 2001 13:28:59 -0400
>
>This is a good source as well.  They also sell other components and the
>potassium nitrate is somewhat pre-ground and pretty pure
>
>http://www.ssaerospace.com/
>
>
> > Matt,
> >
> > Goto:  www.kpower.com and look for sales information for your area.
>Where
>do
> > you live? I think K-Power is the best cheapest way to go. You will have
>to
> > grind the prills. The best thing I've found for grinding is a 2
>compartment
> > coffee grinder purchased from Lowe's home center for $30. I trickle the
> > prills into it as to not overload the motor.
> >
> > Dave Muesing
> > Yorktown, VA
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Matt Faulkner" <mattfaulkner9@HOTMAIL.COM>
> > To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
> > Sent: Saturday, August 11, 2001 1:37 AM
> > Subject: [AR] potassium nitrate
> >
> >
> > >    I've been looking for a good supply of potassium nitrate, but so
>far
>I
> > > haven't found one. Firefox seems okay, but at $2/pound (compared to
>$.30
> > for
> > > fertilizer), I'm not sure if they're the best way. I also checked all
>the
> > > gardening supplies but I only found things that had KN as one of the
> > > ingredients (nothing pure, no K Power). Has anyone had good results
>using
> > > fertilizer that contains other chemicals (Ammonium Nitrate was among
>them,
> > > for example)? And, again, what are the three %s on the bag ( xx-yy-zz)
> > that
> > > I should look for? Thanks.
> > >                                           -Matt
> > >
> > >
> > > _________________________________________________________________
> > > Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at
>http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp
> > >


_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 2754 invoked from network); 12 Aug 2001 03:50:25 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 12 Aug 2001 03:50:25 -0000
Received: (qmail 29485 invoked from network); 12 Aug 2001 03:52:54 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 12 Aug 2001 03:52:54 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA12248; Sat, 11 Aug 2001 20:41:26 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 82258 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 12 Aug 2001 03:41:23          +0000
Received: from smtprelay3.abs.adelphia.net (smtprelay.abs.adelphia.net          [64.8.20.11]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA12233 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 11 Aug 2001 20:41:23 -0700
Received: from jlgrady ([63.124.251.47]) by smtprelay3.abs.adelphia.net          (Netscape Messaging Server 4.15) with SMTP id GHXRJY02.I6S for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 11 Aug 2001 23:40:46 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook CWS, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <000401c122e0$dd3c4da0$0200a8c0@prestige.net>
Date:         Sat, 11 Aug 2001 23:42:50 -0400
Reply-To: "Jeff Grady" <jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jeff Grady" <jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET>
Subject:      [AR] BP Powder mill questions: do's and don'ts???
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

I have just completed a powder mill resembling a kid's rock tumbler. I
intend to mill charcoal & KNO3 separately to begin with, but would like to
mix charcoal, sulfur and KNO3 together later. I know the inherent dangers of
doing this and it will be done at a distance using a drop cord. Lead balls
will be used to grind the ingredients inside the rotating container.
My first thoughts were to use a plastic container due to the low resistance
of pressure that could be generated if a static spark sets off the mixture.
Then I remember how badly I get shocked by static charges when stepping out
of my truck. I'm the kind of person that gets NAILED by static when no one
else does. SO, I began to think of ways to prevent static charges from ME
setting off the mixtures. I could not care less if it happens at 100' away,
but Murphy says it will happen when I pick up and handle the mixing
container. NOT WHAT I PREFER.
Maybe some of you electrical engineers or others with powder mill experience
can help. I thought of using a metal quart can for the mixing container
(bought new/empty at home depot) and a spring-like piece of metal that would
constantly make contact with the bottom end (axial area) of the can while it
rotates. This piece of spring metal would then be copper-wired to a ground
rod below the mill's stand. The stand is also metal (shop bench by Black &
Decker) and could be grounded it the same way. The motor that turns all this
is electrically insulated by being wood mounted. Rubber belts are used to
turn the PVC rollers. Would using a static discharger (wrist-type) connected
to the stand drastically reduce static charge to a harmless level? What
about when leaving the grounded safety(???) of the stand while holding the
container?
Thanks for your help in advance...
Jeff

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 4821 invoked from network); 12 Aug 2001 04:18:49 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 12 Aug 2001 04:18:49 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 26014 invoked by uid 50005); 12 Aug 2001 04:19:09 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (. Clean. Processed in 0.184132 secs); 12 Aug 2001 04:19:09 -0000
X-Qmail-Scanner-Mail-From: owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU via smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net
X-Qmail-Scanner-Rcpt-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
X-Qmail-Scanner: 0.96 (No viruses found. Processed in 0.184132 secs)
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 12 Aug 2001 04:19:08 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA12392; Sat, 11 Aug 2001 21:15:07 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 82281 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 12 Aug 2001 04:15:01          +0000
Received: from localhost (rcalkins@localhost) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with          ESMTP id VAA12374; Sat, 11 Aug 2001 21:14:59 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.LNX.4.10.10108112050430.12266-100000@itc.uci.edu>
Date:         Sat, 11 Aug 2001 21:14:59 -0700
Reply-To: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
Subject:      Re: [AR] BP Powder mill questions: do's and don'ts???
Comments: To: Jeff Grady <jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <000401c122e0$dd3c4da0$0200a8c0@prestige.net>

Caveat:  I have only operated commercial ceramic ball mills where static
discharge isn't a concern.  My static knowledge is largely based on a few
decades as an electech.  Surely others will have more relevant knowledge
to share.

Jeff wote:
> I have just completed a powder mill resembling a kid's rock tumbler.
> I intend to mill charcoal & KNO3 separately to begin with, but would
> like to mix charcoal, sulfur and KNO3 together later. I know the
> inherent dangers of doing this and it will be done at a distance using
> a drop cord.
<snip>
> ...but Murphy says it will happen when I pick up and handle the
> mixing container.

<snip>
> using a metal quart can for the mixing container (bought new/empty at
> home depot) and a spring-like piece of metal that would constantly
> make contact with the bottom end (axial area) of the can while it
> rotates.
Grounding strap, a thick braided copper conductor (availible at Home
Depot) might work better in this application.  Spread the end to resemble
a brush, mount it to whisk along the surface of the can.
Securely bolt/clamp/solder the other end to a grounding rod or metal
plumbing where it goes into the ground. <snip>

> Rubber belts are used to turn the PVC rollers.
Rubber against PVC sounds very much like a static generator.  You might
consider rethinking this part.  It would probably be okay untill you
plugged in the 100' drop cord.  I can see the rollers building up a static
charge, attracting a little spilled powder, which gets between belt and
roller, a little friction heating/static discharge and whoosh!

> Would using a static discharger (wrist-type) connected to the stand
> drastically reduce static charge to a harmless level?
Highly recommended.  It's probably overkill, but you might also consider
laying some metal screen on the floor (suitably grounded to the common
ground) to stand on.

> What about when leaving the grounded safety(???) of the stand while
> holding the container.
Main source of personal static is synthetic fabrics.  Avoid all
synthetics, a general rule when dealing with firestuffs.  Also avoid dry,
dusty shop floors, this can create static charges when you walk.
Consider a grounded metal screen walkway, it's cheap insurance. Locate
grounded areas to touch and discharge any built-up static charge often.

Please correct any inadvertant mistakes.

Thanks,

Ray

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 29028 invoked from network); 12 Aug 2001 05:35:15 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 12 Aug 2001 05:35:15 -0000
Received: (qmail 7078 invoked from network); 12 Aug 2001 05:38:08 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 12 Aug 2001 05:38:08 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA12763; Sat, 11 Aug 2001 22:22:17 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 82344 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 12 Aug 2001 05:22:10          +0000
Received: from wrench.toolcity.net (root@wrench.toolcity.net [208.0.188.2]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA12748 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 11 Aug 2001 22:22:10 -0700
Received: from [63.169.101.30]          (dap-63-169-101-30.meadville-tnt-1.pa.toolcity.net [63.169.101.30])          by wrench.toolcity.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id BAA27025; Sun, 12          Aug 2001 01:22:01 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <v01510107b79bbd9d0c75@[63.169.101.30]>
Date:         Sun, 12 Aug 2001 01:24:21 -0500
Reply-To: "al bradley" <abradley@TOOLCITY.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "al bradley" <abradley@TOOLCITY.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] 2[AR] BP Powder mill questions: do's and don'ts???
Comments: To: Jeff Grady <jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

>I have just completed a powder mill resembling a kid's rock tumbler. I
>intend to mill charcoal & KNO3 separately to begin with, but would like to
>mix charcoal, sulfur and KNO3 together later. I know the inherent dangers of
>doing this and it will be done at a distance using a drop cord. Lead balls
>will be used to grind the ingredients inside the rotating container.

Your mill, using lead balls will resemble mine which will mill 5+ lbs. of
powder batch, also great for milling homemade charcoal.
-------------------------

>My first thoughts were to use a plastic container due to the low resistance
>of pressure that could be generated if a static spark sets off the mixture.
>Then I remember how badly I get shocked by static charges when stepping out
>of my truck. I'm the kind of person that gets NAILED by static when no one
>else does. SO, I began to think of ways to prevent static charges from ME
>setting off the mixtures. I could not care less if it happens at 100' away,
>but Murphy says it will happen when I pick up and handle the mixing
>container. NOT WHAT I PREFER.

I too do milling at a distance. Start and stop at a distance. The barrel of
my mill is 12" dia PVC pipe with a wooden head (which I suppose could
generate static). Nonetheless, if you are really concerned about this you
can mill a slightly dampened mixture, although I don't do this. If you are
really concerned about generating static about your body you can do the
same thing advised when we open electronic packages marked "sensitive to
static" -- ground your personal person! By winding a bare copper wire
several times around your wrist and connecting that to a ground. (such as
the ground wire (3rd wire) in common electric household circuits. Don't use
the white wire for this! And definitely not the blackwire! You can even
drive a copperized 5' ground rod in the area of your milling site and
connect your wrist wire to that. Once you are wrist-connected do what you
like in handling the mixture you are milling.
----------------

>Maybe some of you electrical engineers or others with powder mill experience
>can help. I thought of using a metal quart can for the mixing container
>(bought new/empty at home depot) and a spring-like piece of metal that would
>constantly make contact with the bottom end (axial area) of the can while it
>rotates.

I would disagree with the idea of using any metal for your mixing barrel. A
rubber-lined barrel as used with rock tumblers would be nice but hard to
improvise. If you go with the idea of the mixing barrel being made of PVC
pipe then consider the idea  of making a "dragging" type of copper brush
from #10 or #12 copper wire, grounded, resting across the revolving barrel.
(Similar to outlined below)


<This piece of spring metal would then be copper-wired to a ground
>rod below the mill's stand. The stand is also metal (shop bench by Black &
>Decker) and could be grounded it the same way. The motor that turns all this
>is electrically insulated by being wood mounted. Rubber belts are used to
>turn the PVC rollers. Would using a static discharger (wrist-type) connected
>to the stand drastically reduce static charge to a harmless level? What
>about when leaving the grounded safety(???) of the stand while holding the
>container?
>Thanks for your help in advance...
>Jeff

I really don't think you are in trouble here but you might look at the belt
pulleys and the pvc rollers as possible static accumulation points and
provide some type of improvised grounding for them such as "brushes" from a
bit of copper wire that will drag against these rotating items. Then
connect the "brushes" to  your preferred ground source.

These are only suggestions, in extremis for me, as to what I would do for
safety around this piece of equipment. Of course, the max safety is
provided for milling "start, run, stop" all from a distance.

It will be interesting to me to see what others come up with on these questions.

good luck,
al bradley

------------------------------------------------------------------
Can you live Life with this?: "Unless there is a law, an agreement, or a
long-standing custom, No one `Deserves' Anything -- Either Good or Bad!"

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 9438 invoked from network); 12 Aug 2001 09:13:53 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 12 Aug 2001 09:13:53 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 15270 invoked by uid 50005); 12 Aug 2001 09:14:12 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (. Clean. Processed in 0.290446 secs); 12 Aug 2001 09:14:12 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
X-Qmail-Scanner-Mail-From: owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU via smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net
X-Qmail-Scanner-Rcpt-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
X-Qmail-Scanner: 0.96 (No viruses found. Processed in 0.290446 secs)
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 12 Aug 2001 09:14:12 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id CAA13613; Sun, 12 Aug 2001 02:11:36 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 82460 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 12 Aug 2001 09:11:25          +0000
Received: from imo-d09.mx.aol.com (imo-d09.mx.aol.com [205.188.157.41]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id CAA13598 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Sun, 12 Aug 2001 02:11:25 -0700
Received: from Sociald84@aol.com by imo-d09.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v31.9.) id          1.11.18a1d940 (25512); Sun, 12 Aug 2001 05:11:19 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0B4C_01C56B69.481A04D0"
X-Mailer: AOL 6.0 for Windows US sub 10532
Message-ID:  <11.18a1d940.28a7a236@aol.com>
Date:         Sun, 12 Aug 2001 05:11:18 EDT
Reply-To: <Sociald84@AOL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <Sociald84@AOL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] parasail control / solenoid linear actuators
Comments: To: Artie@lekstutis.com
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0B4C_01C56B69.481A04D0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

What about using something like a geared down DC motor to wind up a bit of
the parachute line? It would be very simple and you could just reverse
polarity to unwind. Depending on how you rigged it up you could use one or
two motors to give you movement in 2 directions.

Mark


In a message dated 8/10/2001 9:52:34 AM Mountain Daylight Time,
Artie@LEKSTUTIS.COM writes:


> Jamie Morken wrote:
> >
> > Hi all,
> >
> > Does anyone know where I could find a DC solenoid that has a stroke of at
> > least 2"?  I'd like to use this for a linear actuator if it exists with
> the
> > end application being parasail line control.  The parasail would be
> > controlled from one line (both lines anchored and one line pulled sideways
> > to reduce its length and turn the parasail for control)
>
> How large, and what sort of margins are you looking for?
>
> A buddy of mine is experimenting with using parasails for the automated
> recovery of high power rockets. His initial experiments will be done
> with an RC parasail kit. Later he hopes to use RC sailboat servos to
> control larger chutes.
>
> Anyway, what I'm trying to say is that RC sailboat servos are very
> powerful, have that sort of swing, and are easily controlled. They are
> just not big enough for really large projects.
>
> DC solenoids are probably the wrong thing. They tend to be very heavy
> for the available force*throw, have fairly limited throws and typically
> have only two stable positions.
>
> Later,
>



------=_NextPart_000_0B4C_01C56B69.481A04D0
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<HTML><FONT FACE=arial,helvetica><FONT  SIZE=3>What about using something like a geared down DC motor to wind up a bit of
<BR>the parachute line? It would be very simple and you could just reverse
<BR>polarity to unwind. Depending on how you rigged it up you could use one or
<BR>two motors to give you movement in 2 directions.
<BR>
<BR>Mark
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>In a message dated 8/10/2001 9:52:34 AM Mountain Daylight Time,
<BR>Artie@LEKSTUTIS.COM writes:
<BR>
<BR></FONT><FONT  COLOR="#000000" SIZE=2 FAMILY="SANSSERIF" FACE="Arial" LANG="0">
<BR><BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE style="BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px">Jamie Morken wrote:
<BR>&gt;
<BR>&gt; Hi all,
<BR>&gt;
<BR>&gt; Does anyone know where I could find a DC solenoid that has a stroke of at
<BR>&gt; least 2"? &nbsp;I'd like to use this for a linear actuator if it exists with
<BR>the
<BR>&gt; end application being parasail line control. &nbsp;The parasail would be
<BR>&gt; controlled from one line (both lines anchored and one line pulled sideways
<BR>&gt; to reduce its length and turn the parasail for control)
<BR>
<BR>How large, and what sort of margins are you looking for?
<BR>
<BR>A buddy of mine is experimenting with using parasails for the automated
<BR>recovery of high power rockets. His initial experiments will be done
<BR>with an RC parasail kit. Later he hopes to use RC sailboat servos to
<BR>control larger chutes.
<BR>
<BR>Anyway, what I'm trying to say is that RC sailboat servos are very
<BR>powerful, have that sort of swing, and are easily controlled. They are
<BR>just not big enough for really large projects.
<BR>
<BR>DC solenoids are probably the wrong thing. They tend to be very heavy
<BR>for the available force*throw, have fairly limited throws and typically
<BR>have only two stable positions.
<BR>
<BR>Later,
<BR>Artie Lekstutis</BLOCKQUOTE>
<BR></FONT><FONT  COLOR="#000000" SIZE=3 FAMILY="SANSSERIF" FACE="Arial" LANG="0">
<BR></FONT></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0B4C_01C56B69.481A04D0--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 2646 invoked from network); 12 Aug 2001 11:16:29 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 12 Aug 2001 11:16:29 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 22277 invoked by uid 50005); 12 Aug 2001 11:16:47 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (. Clean. Processed in 0.142525 secs); 12 Aug 2001 11:16:47 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
X-Qmail-Scanner-Mail-From: owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU via smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net
X-Qmail-Scanner-Rcpt-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
X-Qmail-Scanner: 0.96 (No viruses found. Processed in 0.142525 secs)
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 12 Aug 2001 11:16:47 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id EAA14151; Sun, 12 Aug 2001 04:13:58 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 82524 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 12 Aug 2001 11:13:52          +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (f123.law15.hotmail.com [64.4.23.123]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id EAA14136 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Sun, 12 Aug 2001 04:13:52 -0700
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Sun,          12 Aug 2001 04:13:21 -0700
Received: from 213.224.83.78 by lw15fd.law15.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Sun, 12          Aug 2001 11:13:21 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [213.224.83.78]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 12 Aug 2001 11:13:21.0737 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[CC0BD390:01C1231F]
Message-ID:  <F123jUYXJVW3r4ZTaV500005fbd@hotmail.com>
Date:         Sun, 12 Aug 2001 11:13:52 +0000
Reply-To: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Silica Gel Hydration
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

For DM:

Most silicagels have a colored material embedded which changes color after
the silicagel is saturated with water.

The blue version is no longer advisable as the cobalt salt is now regarded
unsafe (cancer hazard, last year only). There is a safe reddish version
which turns yellow IIRC. Check fine chicals catalogs.

The water absorption capacity can be measured gravimetrically. Or ask the
manufacturor company.

jd

_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 16246 invoked from network); 12 Aug 2001 12:50:45 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 12 Aug 2001 12:50:45 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 4885 invoked by uid 50005); 12 Aug 2001 12:51:03 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (. Clean. Processed in 0.193303 secs); 12 Aug 2001 12:51:03 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
X-Qmail-Scanner-Mail-From: owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU via smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net
X-Qmail-Scanner-Rcpt-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
X-Qmail-Scanner: 0.96 (No viruses found. Processed in 0.193303 secs)
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 12 Aug 2001 12:51:03 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id FAA14485; Sun, 12 Aug 2001 05:47:47 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 82535 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 12 Aug 2001 12:47:41          +0000
Received: from kronos.usol.com (IDENT:root@[208.232.58.25]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id FAA14469 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun,          12 Aug 2001 05:47:40 -0700
Received: from fredflin (pm11-21.usol.com [63.64.150.85]) by kronos.usol.com          (8.11.1/8.11.0) with SMTP id f7CCoah18086 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>;          Sun, 12 Aug 2001 08:50:36 -0400
X-Sender: mycrump@pop3.usol.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.5 (32)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <3.0.5.32.20010812085346.007f98a0@pop3.usol.com>
Date:         Sun, 12 Aug 2001 08:53:46 -0400
Reply-To: "Daryl P. Dacko" <mycrump@USOL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Daryl P. Dacko" <mycrump@USOL.COM>
Subject:      [AR] BP Powder mill questions: do's and don'ts???
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <v01510107b79bbd9d0c75@[63.169.101.30]>

At 01:24 AM 8/12/01 -0500, you wrote:
>>I have just completed a powder mill resembling a kid's rock tumbler. I
>>intend to mill charcoal & KNO3 separately to begin with, but would like
>>to mix charcoal, sulfur and KNO3 together later. I know the inherent
>>dangers of doing this and it will be done at a distance using a drop
>>cord. Lead balls will be used to grind the ingredients inside the
rotating container.

<big snip>

If you're thinking of useing a grounding brush to help prevent static
INSIDE of your drum, it won't work.

Every few years in the chemical industry there is a nice explosion, due
to static build-up inside of a tank, usually during pumping of a powder
or liquid.

There will be static generated any time a non-conductor rubs against
nearly anything, be it conductor or non-conductor.

Industrial practice says to ground everything together, be it a solid
connection, or, only if needed, through a moveing connection.

I've seen a continuious stream of small arcs between a brush and a
rotating object, due to the static jumping between them. Use a
conductive grease instead.

I know that if I were building a mill, I'd use a metal drum with a
conductive rubber blowout port in one of the lids, and the rollers
would be covered with a conductive rubber tubeing. The rollers them
selves would use graphite grease for lubrication, and I'd make sure
that I'd use a comercial v-belt to drive them with, since most good
belts are made conductive to eliminate static. I'd then ground the
motor frame to a good earth ground. I'd then expect to see an
explosion only every few years, so I'd use a remote start/stop in
a protectied location...

Most black rubber is made somewhat conductive, to help dissipate
any static generated by friction.

If you really want to protect against static, I'd consult a good
handbook on chemistry, they usually have a large section on static
prevention and protection.

Daryl

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 29420 invoked from network); 12 Aug 2001 13:06:23 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 12 Aug 2001 13:06:23 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 2769 invoked from network); 12 Aug 2001 13:09:15 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 12 Aug 2001 13:09:15 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA14556; Sun, 12 Aug 2001 06:04:11 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 82546 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 12 Aug 2001 13:04:10          +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (f84.law15.hotmail.com [64.4.23.84]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA14541 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Sun,          12 Aug 2001 06:04:09 -0700
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Sun,          12 Aug 2001 06:03:39 -0700
Received: from 213.224.83.150 by lw15fd.law15.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Sun,          12 Aug 2001 13:03:37 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [213.224.83.150]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 12 Aug 2001 13:03:39.0573 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[34957650:01C1232F]
Message-ID:  <F842ZN9KAy4MoSn03t300005fa2@hotmail.com>
Date:         Sun, 12 Aug 2001 13:04:10 +0000
Reply-To: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] BP Powder mill questions: do's and don'ts???
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

> >> I intend to mill charcoal & KNO3 separately to begin with, but would
>like
> >>to mix charcoal, sulfur and KNO3 together later. I know the inherent
> >>dangers of doing this and it will be done at a distance using a drop
> >>cord. Lead balls will be used to grind the ingredients inside the
>rotating container.

If your ingredients are already finely ground, what is the point to further
have balls in your mill? Or even to tumble-mix them for long times? Short
times 'll do; like 5-10 minutes, without balls or anything else inside.

jd

_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 1928 invoked from network); 12 Aug 2001 14:29:19 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 12 Aug 2001 14:29:19 -0000
Received: (qmail 31793 invoked by uid 50005); 12 Aug 2001 14:29:36 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (. Clean. Processed in 0.5352 secs); 12 Aug 2001 14:29:36 -0000
X-Qmail-Scanner-Mail-From: owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU via smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net
X-Qmail-Scanner-Rcpt-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
X-Qmail-Scanner: 0.96 (No viruses found. Processed in 0.5352 secs)
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 12 Aug 2001 14:29:35 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA14813; Sun, 12 Aug 2001 07:26:19 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 82572 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 12 Aug 2001 14:26:11          +0000
Received: from smtp.polymtl.ca (root@smtp.polymtl.ca [132.207.4.11]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA14770 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 12 Aug 2001 07:16:11 -0700
Received: from boulder (49-063.tr.cgocable.ca [205.237.49.63]) by          smtp.polymtl.ca (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id KAA31556 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 12 Aug 2001 10:16:10 -0400
References:  <000401c122e0$dd3c4da0$0200a8c0@prestige.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <000c01c12339$cfd47580$3f31edcd@mshome.net>
Date:         Sun, 12 Aug 2001 10:19:34 -0400
Reply-To: "Jonathan Provencher" <jonathan.provencher@POLYMTL.CA>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jonathan Provencher" <jonathan.provencher@POLYMTL.CA>
Subject:      Re: [AR] BP Powder mill questions: do's and don'ts???
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

You might want to have a look at this mill design:
http://pages.infinit.net/linux/rocket/homemade.html

You can see the ground cable crawling down the wood frame.


Jonathan P.
Mech. Eng. Student
Ecole Polytechnique de Montreal

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 29324 invoked from network); 12 Aug 2001 18:10:53 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 12 Aug 2001 18:10:53 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 30712 invoked by uid 50005); 12 Aug 2001 18:10:33 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (. Clean. Processed in 0.177669 secs); 12 Aug 2001 18:10:33 -0000
X-Qmail-Scanner-Mail-From: owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU via smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net
X-Qmail-Scanner-Rcpt-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
X-Qmail-Scanner: 0.96 (No viruses found. Processed in 0.177669 secs)
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 12 Aug 2001 18:10:33 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA15470; Sun, 12 Aug 2001 11:07:58 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 82653 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 12 Aug 2001 18:07:51          +0000
Received: from wrench.toolcity.net (root@wrench.toolcity.net [208.0.188.2]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA15455 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 12 Aug 2001 11:07:50 -0700
Received: from [63.169.102.150]          (dap-63-169-102-150.meadville-tnt-1.pa.toolcity.net [63.169.102.150])          by wrench.toolcity.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id OAA28603; Sun, 12          Aug 2001 14:07:43 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <v01510100b79c836e0180@[63.169.101.30]>
Date:         Sun, 12 Aug 2001 14:10:03 -0500
Reply-To: "al bradley" <abradley@TOOLCITY.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "al bradley" <abradley@TOOLCITY.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] BP Powder mill questions: do's and don'ts???
Comments: To: John Dom <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

If one reads a sufficiently detailed description of commercial black powder
manufacture it will reveal that there are more principles involved than
just "tumble mixing" of the finely ground ingredients.

al bradley

----------------------
>> >> I intend to mill charcoal & KNO3 separately to begin with, but would
>>like
>> >>to mix charcoal, sulfur and KNO3 together later. I know the inherent
>> >>dangers of doing this and it will be done at a distance using a drop
>> >>cord. Lead balls will be used to grind the ingredients inside the
>>rotating container.
>
>If your ingredients are already finely ground, what is the point to further
>have balls in your mill? Or even to tumble-mix them for long times? Short
>times 'll do; like 5-10 minutes, without balls or anything else inside.
>
>jd
>
>_________________________________________________________________
>Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

------------------------------------------------------------------
Can you live Life with this?: "Unless there is a law, an agreement, or a
long-standing custom, No one `Deserves' Anything -- Either Good or Bad!"

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 3438 invoked from network); 12 Aug 2001 18:43:02 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 12 Aug 2001 18:43:02 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 23478 invoked from network); 12 Aug 2001 18:45:32 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 12 Aug 2001 18:45:32 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA15659; Sun, 12 Aug 2001 11:40:34 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 82677 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 12 Aug 2001 18:40:31          +0000
Received: from albatross.prod.itd.earthlink.net          (albatross.mail.pas.earthlink.net [207.217.120.120]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA15621 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Sun,          12 Aug 2001 11:30:31 -0700
Received: from earthlink.net (dialup-209.245.129.170.Dial1.SanJose1.Level3.net          [209.245.129.170]) by albatross.prod.itd.earthlink.net          (EL-8_9_3_3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id LAA10676; Sun, 12 Aug 2001 11:30:29          -0700 (PDT)
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.75 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.16-22 i686)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <v01510100b79c836e0180@[63.169.101.30]>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B76CB73.508F4F9F@earthlink.net>
Date:         Sun, 12 Aug 2001 11:31:15 -0700
Reply-To: "David Weinshenker" <daze39@EARTHLINK.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "David Weinshenker" <daze39@EARTHLINK.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] BP Powder mill questions: do's and don'ts???
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

al bradley wrote:
>
> If one reads a sufficiently detailed description of commercial black powder
> manufacture it will reveal that there are more principles involved than
> just "tumble mixing" of the finely ground ingredients.

The general scheme seems to be wet mixing, pressing into cakes,
drying, and then _carefully_ milling to desired fineness...

-dave w

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 3148 invoked from network); 12 Aug 2001 19:36:23 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 12 Aug 2001 19:36:23 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 21663 invoked by uid 50005); 12 Aug 2001 19:36:39 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (. Clean. Processed in 0.294573 secs); 12 Aug 2001 19:36:39 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
X-Qmail-Scanner-Mail-From: owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU via smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net
X-Qmail-Scanner-Rcpt-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
X-Qmail-Scanner: 0.96 (No viruses found. Processed in 0.294573 secs)
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 12 Aug 2001 19:36:39 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA15863; Sun, 12 Aug 2001 12:34:10 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 82711 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 12 Aug 2001 19:34:05          +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (f136.law15.hotmail.com [64.4.23.136]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA15848 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Sun, 12 Aug 2001 12:34:05 -0700
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Sun,          12 Aug 2001 12:33:34 -0700
Received: from 213.224.83.46 by lw15fd.law15.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Sun, 12          Aug 2001 19:33:34 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [213.224.83.46]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 12 Aug 2001 19:33:34.0874 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[AD4517A0:01C12365]
Message-ID:  <F136PEpnAsL7fvWAaYb000062ea@hotmail.com>
Date:         Sun, 12 Aug 2001 19:34:05 +0000
Reply-To: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] BP Powder mill questions: do's and don'ts???
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Black powder and gunpowders are very special and not so representative for
other solid combinations like AP&..., KN/sugars etc. as  far as I read on
these matters. Or?

jd

>From: David Weinshenker <daze39@EARTHLINK.NET>
>Reply-To: David Weinshenker <daze39@EARTHLINK.NET>
>To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
>Subject: Re: [AR] BP Powder mill questions: do's and don'ts???
>Date: Sun, 12 Aug 2001 11:31:15 -0700
>
>al bradley wrote:
> >
> > If one reads a sufficiently detailed description of commercial black
>powder
> > manufacture it will reveal that there are more principles involved than
> > just "tumble mixing" of the finely ground ingredients.
>
>The general scheme seems to be wet mixing, pressing into cakes,
>drying, and then _carefully_ milling to desired fineness...
>
>-dave w


_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 17131 invoked from network); 12 Aug 2001 22:07:00 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 12 Aug 2001 22:07:00 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 13747 invoked by uid 50005); 12 Aug 2001 22:07:16 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (. Clean. Processed in 0.192078 secs); 12 Aug 2001 22:07:16 -0000
X-Qmail-Scanner-Mail-From: owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU via smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net
X-Qmail-Scanner-Rcpt-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
X-Qmail-Scanner: 0.96 (No viruses found. Processed in 0.192078 secs)
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 12 Aug 2001 22:07:16 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA16498; Sun, 12 Aug 2001 15:02:52 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 82766 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 12 Aug 2001 22:02:45          +0000
Received: from cisco.com (cypher.cisco.com [171.69.11.18]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA16483 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun,          12 Aug 2001 15:02:45 -0700
Received: (from billw@localhost) by cisco.com (8.8.8/2.6/Cisco List          Logging/8.8.8) id PAA01631; Sun, 12 Aug 2001 15:02:13 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID:  <CMM.0.90.4.997653732.billw@cypher>
Date:         Sun, 12 Aug 2001 15:02:12 PDT
Reply-To: "Bill Westfield" <billw@cisco.com>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "William Chops Westfield" <billw@cisco.com>
Subject:      Re: [AR] BP Powder mill questions: do's and don'ts???
Comments: To: Jeff Grady <jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  Your message of Sat, 11 Aug 2001 23:42:50 -0400

Well, you can certainly try your mill out with no KNO3, and see how much
static builds up.  No apparent static might not grant you a lot of
confidence, but large and obvious static will certain confirm fears...

BillW


From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 5957 invoked from network); 12 Aug 2001 22:32:11 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 12 Aug 2001 22:32:11 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 31746 invoked by uid 50005); 12 Aug 2001 22:32:27 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (. Clean. Processed in 0.211127 secs); 12 Aug 2001 22:32:27 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
X-Qmail-Scanner-Mail-From: owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU via smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net
X-Qmail-Scanner-Rcpt-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
X-Qmail-Scanner: 0.96 (No viruses found. Processed in 0.211127 secs)
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 12 Aug 2001 22:32:26 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA16620; Sun, 12 Aug 2001 15:30:14 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 82785 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 12 Aug 2001 22:30:12          +0000
Received: from angel.comcen.com.au (angel.comcen.com.au [203.23.236.69]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA16605 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 12 Aug 2001 15:30:11 -0700
Received: (from nobody@localhost) by angel.comcen.com.au (8.11.4/8.10.1) id          f7CMaZm48462; Mon, 13 Aug 2001 08:36:35 +1000 (EST)
X-Mailer: NeoMail 1.24
X-IPAddress: 203.2.125.3
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Message-ID:  <200108122236.f7CMaZm48462@angel.comcen.com.au>
Date:         Mon, 13 Aug 2001 08:36:35 +1000
Reply-To: "Paul Kelly" <pkelly@COMCEN.COM.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Paul Kelly" <pkelly@COMCEN.COM.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] parasail control / solenoid linear actuators
Comments: To: Jamie Morken <jmorken@HOME.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

My 2c worth.
If you are not interested in controlling the rate of descent, only the
direction, then you can use a continuous line at the rear of the
parasail and simply loop it around a spool you'll need much less torque
and shock loading isn't a problem.

PK

> Hi Bob,
>
> > You think muscle wire might work?  I don't know if it would be
strong
> > enough to take the opening loads of the chute or if it has enough
> > "shrinkage" (for lack of a more accurate term) to give you the
> > actuation you are looking for.  It certainly would be an elegant
> > solution though, one wire on and the other off to turn. Both on to
> > flare the chute.
>
> The shrinkage of musclewires is only 3 to 5% so there would have to
be a
> lever
> that increases the length of the line pull.  The bigger muscle wire
that
> robotstore.com sells (still only 375micron
> diameter!) can pull 2 kg but can cycle only about 4 times a minute.
The
> smaller wires are weaker but
> cycle faster.
>
> Here is a 2 page pdf from a place that sells the wires (they are
pretty damn
> expensive!!)
> http://www.robotstore.com/download/Muscle_Wire_FAQ_V3.pdf
>
> To protect the musclewire (or whatever other actuator is used) from
being
> damaged by the deployment shock, I think the simplest? method would
be to
> pass the parachute control line through a hole in a bulkhead and tie
a knot
> in the parachute control line so that when the actuator is not
pulling on
> the line the knot will be tight against the bulkhead taking all the
load of
> the chute (and saving the actuator from getting demolished etc! :)
>
> >
> > Or how about 2 toothed strips of plastic running between sets of
> > gears?  The plastic strips would be connected to the risers and the
> > gears would shuttle the strips back and forth as necessary.  I've
> > seen them on industrial machines but not in the small scale you are
> > looking for.
> >
>
> This or a heavy duty servo may be the way to go!
> Why are boat servo's more powerful than R/C plane servo's?
>
> best regards,
> Jamie
>
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 14931 invoked from network); 12 Aug 2001 22:35:03 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 12 Aug 2001 22:35:03 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 23826 invoked from network); 12 Aug 2001 22:35:06 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 12 Aug 2001 22:35:06 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA16652; Sun, 12 Aug 2001 15:33:16 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 82795 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 12 Aug 2001 22:33:15          +0000
Received: from shield.castle (modemcable154.29-201-24.mtl.mc.videotron.ca          [24.201.29.154]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA16637          for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Sun, 12 Aug 2001 15:33:15 -0700
Received: from mace (mace [192.168.104.3]) by shield.castle (Postfix) with          ESMTP id BA4258450 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Sun, 12 Aug 2001          18:33:13 -0400 (EDT)
Received: by mace (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 47A0D1BA1B; Sun, 12 Aug 2001          18:33:13 -0400 (EDT)
References: <000401c122e0$dd3c4da0$0200a8c0@prestige.net>            <000c01c12339$cfd47580$3f31edcd@mshome.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Disposition: inline
User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i
Message-ID:  <20010812183312.A18342@mace.ddts.net>
Date:         Sun, 12 Aug 2001 18:33:12 -0400
Reply-To: <antoinelefebvre@SOFTHOME.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Antoine Lefebvre" <antoine@SHIELD.DDTS.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] BP Powder mill questions: do's and don'ts???
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <000c01c12339$cfd47580$3f31edcd@mshome.net>; from              jonathan.provencher@POLYMTL.CA on Sun, Aug 12,              2001 at 10:19:34AM -0400

This is not a ground cable, it is the electrical plug for the motor.
The motor is grounded but not the plastic barrel. I just discharge
myself as well as the barrel prior to open it and never gor problems.

As I stop working with black powder a while back, I just use it to
refined chemical when they are too coarse. There is a lot of limitation
with black powder motor and I do not recommend working with it. For cheap
propellants, sugar rocket gives more performance, are easier do work with
and much less dangerous.

On Sun, Aug 12, 2001 at 10:19:34AM -0400, Jonathan Provencher wrote:
> You might want to have a look at this mill design:
> http://pages.infinit.net/linux/rocket/homemade.html
>
> You can see the ground cable crawling down the wood frame.
>
>
> Jonathan P.
> Mech. Eng. Student
> Ecole Polytechnique de Montreal

--
Antoine Lefebvre
antoine.lefebvre@polymtl.ca

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 2321 invoked from network); 12 Aug 2001 22:50:35 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 12 Aug 2001 22:50:35 -0000
Received: (qmail 4913 invoked from network); 12 Aug 2001 22:53:28 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 12 Aug 2001 22:53:28 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA16749; Sun, 12 Aug 2001 15:48:56 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 82817 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 12 Aug 2001 22:48:54          +0000
Received: from smtprelay1.abs.adelphia.net (smtprelay.abs.adelphia.net          [64.8.20.11]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA16734 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 12 Aug 2001 15:48:53 -0700
Received: from jlgrady ([63.124.251.47]) by smtprelay1.abs.adelphia.net          (Netscape Messaging Server 4.15) with SMTP id GHZ8O503.HOK for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 12 Aug 2001 18:48:05 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook CWS, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
Importance: Normal
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <000001c12381$384bce50$0200a8c0@prestige.net>
Date:         Sun, 12 Aug 2001 18:50:44 -0400
Reply-To: "Jeff Grady" <jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jeff Grady" <jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] BP Powder mill questions: do's and don'ts???
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <20010812183312.A18342@mace.ddts.net>

>>There is a lot of limitation
>>with black powder motor and I do not recommend working with it.

I intend to make a couple dozen BP motors to work out various other
issues/techniques (nozzles, motor casings, etc). Then my only use of BP will
be in making my own igniters.

>>For cheap propellants, sugar rocket gives more performance, are easier do
work with
>>and much less dangerous.

I agree.

JG

-----Original Message-----
From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@itc.uci.edu]On
Behalf Of Antoine Lefebvre
Sent: Sunday, August 12, 2001 6:33 PM
To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
Subject: Re: [AR] BP Powder mill questions: do's and don'ts???


This is not a ground cable, it is the electrical plug for the motor.
The motor is grounded but not the plastic barrel. I just discharge
myself as well as the barrel prior to open it and never gor problems.

As I stop working with black powder a while back, I just use it to
refined chemical when they are too coarse. There is a lot of limitation
with black powder motor and I do not recommend working with it. For cheap
propellants, sugar rocket gives more performance, are easier do work with
and much less dangerous.

On Sun, Aug 12, 2001 at 10:19:34AM -0400, Jonathan Provencher wrote:
> You might want to have a look at this mill design:
> http://pages.infinit.net/linux/rocket/homemade.html
>
> You can see the ground cable crawling down the wood frame.
>
>
> Jonathan P.
> Mech. Eng. Student
> Ecole Polytechnique de Montreal

--
Antoine Lefebvre
antoine.lefebvre@polymtl.ca

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 15578 invoked from network); 13 Aug 2001 03:50:34 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 13 Aug 2001 03:50:34 -0000
Received: (qmail 24250 invoked from network); 13 Aug 2001 03:53:05 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 13 Aug 2001 03:53:05 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA17824; Sun, 12 Aug 2001 20:46:58 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 82951 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 13 Aug 2001 03:46:39          +0000
Received: from corlabs (24-216-244-100.hsacorp.net [24.216.244.100]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA17810 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Sun, 12 Aug 2001 20:46:38 -0700
Received: from [192.168.0.11] by corlabs (ArGoSoft Mail Server Plus,          Version 1.3 (1.3.0.1)); Sun, 12 Aug 2001 23:12:50 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook CWS, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
Importance: Normal
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <000a01c123ab$9e1f5d80$0b00a8c0@star>
Date:         Sun, 12 Aug 2001 22:54:14 -0500
Reply-To: "Carl A. Blood" <cablood@CORLABS.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Carl A. Blood" <cablood@CORLABS.COM>
Subject:      [AR] BHR Launch
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

To All

The Minnesota BHR launched yesterday. The movies are now out on
www.pad17.com for your viewing pleasure.

Thanks
Carl Blood

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 16342 invoked from network); 13 Aug 2001 17:54:49 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 13 Aug 2001 17:54:49 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 28265 invoked from network); 13 Aug 2001 17:54:54 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 13 Aug 2001 17:54:54 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA20577; Mon, 13 Aug 2001 10:36:28 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 83229 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 13 Aug 2001 17:36:17          +0000
Received: from stud.uni-goettingen.de (root@s2.stud.uni-goettingen.de          [134.76.60.22]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA20563          for <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Mon, 13 Aug 2001 10:36:16 -0700
Received: from router.atw.stud.uni-goettingen.de ([134.76.62.65]          helo=stud.uni-goettingen.de) by stud.uni-goettingen.de with esmtp          (Exim 2.12 #8) id 15WLdM-0002mh-00 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 13          Aug 2001 19:36:12 +0200
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [de] (Win98; I)
X-Accept-Language: de
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B781017.D7A85879@stud.uni-goettingen.de>
Date:         Mon, 13 Aug 2001 19:36:24 +0200
Reply-To: "Thomas Engelhardt" <tengelh@STUD.UNI-GOETTINGEN.DE>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Thomas Engelhardt" <tengelh@STUD.UNI-GOETTINGEN.DE>
Organization: =?iso-8859-1?Q?Rocket_Research_G=F6ttingen_=28RRG=29?=
Subject:      [AR] Pendulum fallacy
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Hi group,

can anyone point me towards a source where the pendulum fallacy is
explained in detail? Jim Bowery's site is good, but I need detailed
info, maybe an example etc. to explain to someone why it works in theory
but not in real life.

Thanks for your help!!

Tom

--
Atheism is a non-prophet organization.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 5336 invoked from network); 13 Aug 2001 18:33:47 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 13 Aug 2001 18:33:47 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 21851 invoked from network); 13 Aug 2001 18:33:53 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 13 Aug 2001 18:33:53 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA20820; Mon, 13 Aug 2001 11:15:39 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 83254 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 13 Aug 2001 18:15:31          +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (f92.law9.hotmail.com [64.4.9.92]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA20730 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon,          13 Aug 2001 11:05:30 -0700
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Mon,          13 Aug 2001 11:05:00 -0700
Received: from 164.54.85.209 by lw9fd.law9.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Mon, 13          Aug 2001 18:05:00 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [164.54.85.209]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 13 Aug 2001 18:05:00.0639 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[7826EEF0:01C12422]
Message-ID:  <F92Zy3w28fOuSenAbcZ000074b7@hotmail.com>
Date:         Mon, 13 Aug 2001 12:05:00 -0600
Reply-To: "Cletus Scharle" <cletusscharle@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Cletus Scharle" <cletusscharle@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Shipping Rocket Motors
Comments: To: kc2csh@JUNO.COM
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Would not rocket propellents be shipped under similar or the same
regulations as smokeless powder and ammunition?


>From: kc2csh@JUNO.COM
>Reply-To: kc2csh@JUNO.COM
>To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
>Subject: Re: Shipping Rocket Motors
>Date: Sat, 11 Aug 2001 14:56:54 -0400
>
>   Its possible, but expensive.  In the old days of highly regulated motor
>common carriers in the US it used to be possible to look up who had  "the
>rights" to move such cargos, and they had both the legal right and the
>obligation to move the freight.  All that changed about 1980, and it got
>more complicated instead of easier.
>   Odds are there are some small specialty carriers in your area that
>specialize in moving explosives; finding them will not be easy.  I'd try
>calling a few blasting materials dealers and see who they can recommend.
>   At least here on the east coast, be prepared to pay for a dedicated
>truck and escort; not as outragious a price as you may expect, but it
>will be expensive.
>   A big part of the issues are the route involved; around here you have
>to go around many specified citied, bridges, tunnels, etc.  Can make for
>a very difficult process.  I know of one case where "the route" is about
>300 miles to go what is about 10 miles by air.  Then again, that is the
>northeast US where pretty much every bridge, tunnel, and city is off
>limits.
>   Good luck.
>
>         Jay
>
>
>On Fri, 10 Aug 2001 23:22:19 PDT William Chops Westfield
><billw@cisco.com> writes:
> >     Before I start calling every shipper in town, does anybody have a
> >     preferred shipper for transporting solids?
> >
> > I wasn't aware that such a thing was even possible (in a fully legal
> > sense),
> > short of lengthy and expensive DOT classification procedures and
> > such...
> >
> > BillW
>
>________________________________________________________________
>GET INTERNET ACCESS FROM JUNO!
>Juno offers FREE or PREMIUM Internet access for less!
>Join Juno today!  For your FREE software, visit:
>http://dl.www.juno.com/get/tagj.


_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 21820 invoked from network); 13 Aug 2001 18:51:47 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 13 Aug 2001 18:51:47 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: (qmail 11178 invoked from network); 13 Aug 2001 18:54:41 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 13 Aug 2001 18:54:41 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA20980; Mon, 13 Aug 2001 11:35:17 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 83300 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 13 Aug 2001 18:35:15          +0000
Received: from localhost (rcalkins@localhost) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with          ESMTP id LAA20966; Mon, 13 Aug 2001 11:35:14 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.LNX.4.10.10108131123210.19358-100000@itc.uci.edu>
Date:         Mon, 13 Aug 2001 11:35:14 -0700
Reply-To: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Shipping Rocket Motors
Comments: To: Cletus Scharle <cletusscharle@HOTMAIL.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <F92Zy3w28fOuSenAbcZ000074b7@hotmail.com>

> >   Its possible, but expensive.

Okay, what are the issues involved in hauling it yourself (across state
lines)?


I'm not thinking about large motors, just some small "G" sized sugar
motors for non-commercial use.


Is there a difference in whether they are fully assembled vs reload
grains?

Thanks,

Ray

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 29781 invoked from network); 13 Aug 2001 18:53:35 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 13 Aug 2001 18:53:35 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 11903 invoked from network); 13 Aug 2001 18:56:29 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 13 Aug 2001 18:56:29 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA21012; Mon, 13 Aug 2001 11:37:28 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 83307 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 13 Aug 2001 18:37:25          +0000
Received: from idsoftware.com (predator.idsoftware.com [192.246.40.34]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA20998 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Mon, 13 Aug 2001 11:37:25 -0700
Received: from [192.246.40.129] (account johnc HELO lightning.idsoftware.com)          by idsoftware.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 3.4.7) with ESMTP id 346114          for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 13 Aug 2001 13:37:24 -0500
X-Sender: johnc@mail.idsoftware.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <4.3.1.2.20010813133102.02d0a938@mail.idsoftware.com>
Date:         Mon, 13 Aug 2001 13:36:09 -0500
Reply-To: "John Carmack" <johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Carmack" <johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Pendulum fallacy
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <3B781017.D7A85879@stud.uni-goettingen.de>

At 07:36 PM 8/13/2001 +0200, you wrote:
>Hi group,
>
>can anyone point me towards a source where the pendulum fallacy is
>explained in detail? Jim Bowery's site is good, but I need detailed
>info, maybe an example etc. to explain to someone why it works in theory
>but not in real life.

It doesn't work in theory or in real life.  It seems "intuitively" correct,
but you just need to draw a little free body diagram, perturb the rocket
direction, and ask someone to tell you were the "corrective" force is going
to come from.  The rocket thrust doesn't change the orientation of the
vehicle, and gravity doesn't change the orientation of the
vehicle.  Without any active attitude control, all that matters is the CG /
CP locations, not the source of the thrust.

John Carmack

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 3812 invoked from network); 13 Aug 2001 19:22:17 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 13 Aug 2001 19:22:17 -0000
Received: (qmail 20162 invoked from network); 13 Aug 2001 19:24:48 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 13 Aug 2001 19:24:48 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA21337; Mon, 13 Aug 2001 12:17:19 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 83370 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 13 Aug 2001 19:17:16          +0000
Received: from dune.gnc.net (root@dune.gnc.net [207.203.72.4]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA21321 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon,          13 Aug 2001 12:17:16 -0700
Received: from beowulf (sw2-37.gnc.net [207.203.72.117]) by dune.gnc.net          (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id PAA31589 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon,          13 Aug 2001 15:17:14 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
Importance: Normal
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <LPBBKJMJEOFKAMFJJNNHAEHBCGAA.landofgrey@gnc.net>
Date:         Mon, 13 Aug 2001 15:17:00 -0400
Reply-To: <landofgrey@gnc.net>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Matthew Travis" <landofgrey@gnc.net>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Pendulum fallacy
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <4.3.1.2.20010813133102.02d0a938@mail.idsoftware.com>

You're absolutely right. The only way for something to be inherently stable
is for the CP/CG relationship to be correct. In *all* cases, the way a
rocket corrects its course, or keeps itself stable in the firat place (and
this is true for active stabilization like with vernier rockets as well as
passive means such as fins) is for a force (or forces) to be applied at some
angle > 0 degrees to the lengthwise axis of the rocket. This force "pushes"
the rocket back to its trajectory, either keeping it stable or correcting
its stability. In the case of fins, or finless inherently stable rockets,
the force is a torquing momentthat is greater atthe back of the rocket than
the front, which keeps the rocket aligned. The more the rocket tries to turn
away from its course, the greater the moment arm. In a pendulum "stabilized"
rocket, there is *no* moment arm, no force from the side (so to speak) that
will keep the rocket aligned with its preferred trajectory. The only forces
involved are along the rocket's axis, and no energy is expended keeping it
from pitching or yaawing (which, by definition, require a "side" force or
torque). You may say, "but there is air resistance and gravity". However,
air resistance only provides stability when the CG/CP relationship is
proper, and then you have traditional, passive, "arrow" stability (as with
fins). And there is no such thing a gravity-gradient stabilization of a
moving rocket, since the whole purpose of moving the rocket is to conteract
and overcome gravity.

Blah blah blah. Sorry for going on, I just wanted to use the word "torque".
Actually, though you can look at stability from the perspective of
aerodynamics, it is, in reality or also, a matter of simple mechanical
engineering. Moment arms and such. A different way of looking at the
problem.

Oh, and to find out more, a good source is Goddard's early writings prior to
1930. Unfortunately, most of his comments about this topic are in
unpublished papers at the Clark U. library in Mass.

Matt

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU]On
> Behalf Of John Carmack
> Sent: Monday, August 13, 2001 2:36 PM
> To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
> Subject: Re: [AR] Pendulum fallacy
>
>
> At 07:36 PM 8/13/2001 +0200, you wrote:
> >Hi group,
> >
> >can anyone point me towards a source where the pendulum fallacy is
> >explained in detail? Jim Bowery's site is good, but I need detailed
> >info, maybe an example etc. to explain to someone why it works in theory
> >but not in real life.
>
> It doesn't work in theory or in real life.  It seems
> "intuitively" correct,
> but you just need to draw a little free body diagram, perturb the rocket
> direction, and ask someone to tell you were the "corrective"
> force is going
> to come from.  The rocket thrust doesn't change the orientation of the
> vehicle, and gravity doesn't change the orientation of the
> vehicle.  Without any active attitude control, all that matters
> is the CG /
> CP locations, not the source of the thrust.
>
> John Carmack
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 6349 invoked from network); 13 Aug 2001 20:05:29 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 13 Aug 2001 20:05:29 -0000
Received: (qmail 10909 invoked from network); 13 Aug 2001 20:08:24 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 13 Aug 2001 20:08:24 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA21511; Mon, 13 Aug 2001 12:59:52 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 83390 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 13 Aug 2001 19:57:02          +0000
Received: from mailhost0.trib.com (mailhost0.trib.com [63.229.150.3]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA21493; Mon, 13 Aug 2001          12:57:02 -0700
Received: from mail.trib.com (mail.trib.com [12.10.158.17]) by          mailhost0.trib.com (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f7DJv0T57166; Mon,          13 Aug 2001 13:57:01 -0600 (MDT) (envelope-from          jwckman@space-rockets.com)
Received: from [63.229.151.20] (HELO hppav) by mail.trib.com (CommuniGate Pro          SMTP 3.4.6) with SMTP id 42333081; Mon, 13 Aug 2001 13:57:00 -0600
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <NKEHJAOOKBPGIKOOPDEFAEDICBAA.jwckman@space-rockets.com>
Date:         Mon, 13 Aug 2001 13:55:29 -0600
Reply-To: "John Wickman" <jwckman@SPACE-ROCKETS.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Wickman" <jwckman@SPACE-ROCKETS.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Shipping Rocket Motors
Comments: To: Ray Calkins <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <Pine.LNX.4.10.10108131123210.19358-100000@itc.uci.edu>

Ray,

As I recall from looking at the DOT regulations a few years ago, you are
allowed up to 1000 lbs of hazardous material for the consumer without
getting into the same requirements as a commercial carrier, i.e., placards,
insurance, etc.  Many states like California have reduced this to 500 lbs of
solid material and lower amounts for gases and certain chemicals.

For the ATF, you are restricted by the 125 gram nonsense without the
glorious LEUP.   The key for them is putting your pinkie across the state
lines.  You can make a 100,000 ton motor for your own use and as long as you
use it in the state you made it, ATF could care less.

John Wickman

-----Original Message-----
From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@itc.uci.edu]On
Behalf Of Ray Calkins
Sent: Monday, August 13, 2001 12:35 PM
To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
Subject: Re: [AR] Shipping Rocket Motors


> >   Its possible, but expensive.

Okay, what are the issues involved in hauling it yourself (across state
lines)?


I'm not thinking about large motors, just some small "G" sized sugar
motors for non-commercial use.


Is there a difference in whether they are fully assembled vs reload
grains?

Thanks,

Ray

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 27039 invoked from network); 13 Aug 2001 20:18:02 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 13 Aug 2001 20:18:02 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 11898 invoked from network); 13 Aug 2001 20:18:06 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 13 Aug 2001 20:18:06 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA21597; Mon, 13 Aug 2001 13:09:39 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 83389 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 13 Aug 2001 20:06:51          +0000
Received: from mail44.fg.online.no (mail44-s.fg.online.no [148.122.161.44]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA21488 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 13 Aug 2001 12:56:37 -0700
Received: from oemcomputer (ti10a11-0204.dialup.online.no [130.67.212.204]) by          mail44.fg.online.no (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id VAA16100 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 13 Aug 2001 21:56:12 +0200 (MET DST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400
Content-Type: multipart/mixed;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0B51_01C56B69.4874A7F0"
Content-Disposition: Multipart message
Message-ID:  <200108131956.VAA16100@mail44.fg.online.no>
Date:         Mon, 13 Aug 2001 19:00:46 +0200
Reply-To: =?iso-8859-1?B?UGF1bCBGcvhu5nM=?= <paulolav@ONLINE.NO>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: =?iso-8859-1?B?UGF1bCBGcvhu5nM=?= <paulolav@ONLINE.NO>
Subject: =?iso-8859-1?Q?_____=5BAR=5D_DET_DIDAKTISK_M=D8TET?=
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0B51_01C56B69.4874A7F0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Disposition: message text

Hi! How are you=3F

I send you this file in order to have your advice

See you later=2E Thanks

------=_NextPart_000_0B51_01C56B69.4874A7F0
Content-Type: application/mixed;
	name="=?iso-8859-1?Q?DET_DIDAKTISK_M=D8TET.doc.pif?="
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
Content-Disposition: attachment;
	filename="=?iso-8859-1?Q?DET_DIDAKTISK_M=D8TET.doc.pif?="
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------=_NextPart_000_0B51_01C56B69.4874A7F0
Content-Type: text/plain
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: attachment


------=_NextPart_000_0B51_01C56B69.4874A7F0--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 1155 invoked from network); 13 Aug 2001 20:18:59 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 13 Aug 2001 20:18:59 -0000
Received: (qmail 11712 invoked by uid 50005); 13 Aug 2001 20:19:10 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (. Clean. Processed in 0.194954 secs); 13 Aug 2001 20:19:10 -0000
X-Qmail-Scanner-Mail-From: owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU via smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net
X-Qmail-Scanner-Rcpt-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
X-Qmail-Scanner: 0.96 (No viruses found. Processed in 0.194954 secs)
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 13 Aug 2001 20:19:09 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA21655; Mon, 13 Aug 2001 13:15:17 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 83416 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 13 Aug 2001 20:12:26          +0000
Received: from Blastzone.com (consumersinterest.com [207.195.143.118] (may be          forged)) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA21587; Mon, 13          Aug 2001 13:09:13 -0700
Received: from deputydog [131.107.3.83] by Blastzone.com with ESMTP          (SMTPD32-6.04) id A74D63F014C; Mon, 13 Aug 2001 13:23:41 -0700
References:  <Pine.LNX.4.10.10108131123210.19358-100000@itc.uci.edu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2462.0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <064c01c12433$cfa2a780$730c379d@redmond.corp.microsoft.com>
Date:         Mon, 13 Aug 2001 13:09:08 -0700
Reply-To: "Greg Deputy" <greg@BLASTZONE.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Greg Deputy" <greg@BLASTZONE.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Shipping Rocket Motors
Comments: To: Ray Calkins <rcalkins@ITC.UCI.EDU>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

I'm quite sure the feds dont care about you carrying small amounts of motors
in your vehicle across state lines, when for personal use only.  Much like
they dont require you to get a manufacturing permit when you're
manufacturing for personal, non-business use.  If you're transporting and
then selling these motors, well, that would be a different story.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Monday, August 13, 2001 11:35 AM
Subject: Re: [AR] Shipping Rocket Motors


> > >   Its possible, but expensive.
>
> Okay, what are the issues involved in hauling it yourself (across state
> lines)?
>
>
> I'm not thinking about large motors, just some small "G" sized sugar
> motors for non-commercial use.
>
>
> Is there a difference in whether they are fully assembled vs reload
> grains?
>
> Thanks,
>
> Ray
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 14646 invoked from network); 13 Aug 2001 20:22:09 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 13 Aug 2001 20:22:09 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: (qmail 13705 invoked from network); 13 Aug 2001 20:22:15 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 13 Aug 2001 20:22:15 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA21730; Mon, 13 Aug 2001 13:19:57 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 83427 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 13 Aug 2001 20:18:00          +0000
Received: from spsystems.net (spsystems.net [209.47.149.227]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA21613 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Mon,          13 Aug 2001 13:10:33 -0700
Received: (from henry@localhost) by spsystems.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id QAA13406;          Mon, 13 Aug 2001 16:09:59 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010813160552.12853B-100000@spsystems.net>
Date:         Mon, 13 Aug 2001 16:09:59 -0400
Reply-To: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Pendulum fallacy
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <LPBBKJMJEOFKAMFJJNNHAEHBCGAA.landofgrey@gnc.net>

On Mon, 13 Aug 2001, Matthew Travis wrote:
> ...And there is no such thing a gravity-gradient stabilization of a
> moving rocket, since the whole purpose of moving the rocket is to conteract
> and overcome gravity.

Well, not exactly.  It's true that there is no gravity-gradient
stabilization, but that's not because the effect doesn't operate, but
rather because it is so feeble by comparison to thrust misalignments,
aerodynamic torques, etc. etc.

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 23362 invoked from network); 13 Aug 2001 20:24:16 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 13 Aug 2001 20:24:16 -0000
Received: (qmail 16757 invoked by uid 50005); 13 Aug 2001 20:23:51 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (. Clean. Processed in 0.180214 secs); 13 Aug 2001 20:23:51 -0000
X-Qmail-Scanner-Mail-From: owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU via smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net
X-Qmail-Scanner-Rcpt-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
X-Qmail-Scanner: 0.96 (No viruses found. Processed in 0.180214 secs)
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 13 Aug 2001 20:23:50 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA21817; Mon, 13 Aug 2001 13:21:34 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 83474 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 13 Aug 2001 20:21:27          +0000
Received: from dune.gnc.net (root@dune.gnc.net [207.203.72.4]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA21716 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon,          13 Aug 2001 13:18:32 -0700
Received: from beowulf (sw2-37.gnc.net [207.203.72.117]) by dune.gnc.net          (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id QAA00735 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon,          13 Aug 2001 16:18:32 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <LPBBKJMJEOFKAMFJJNNHAEHCCGAA.landofgrey@gnc.net>
Date:         Mon, 13 Aug 2001 16:18:16 -0400
Reply-To: <landofgrey@gnc.net>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Matthew Travis" <landofgrey@gnc.net>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Shipping Rocket Motors
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <NKEHJAOOKBPGIKOOPDEFAEDICBAA.jwckman@space-rockets.com>

The tricky part is getting it to another state. Every state has their own
regulations so it's also important to check exactly which states you are
transferring from/to. the federal government has jurisdiction over
interstate commerce (and transportation), but once it crosses state lines,
the individual states have their own jurisdiction for intra-state
transportation.

Matt

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU]On
> Behalf Of John Wickman
> Sent: Monday, August 13, 2001 3:55 PM
> To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
> Subject: Re: [AR] Shipping Rocket Motors

> For the ATF, you are restricted by the 125 gram nonsense without the
> glorious LEUP.   The key for them is putting your pinkie across the state
> lines.  You can make a 100,000 ton motor for your own use and as
> long as you
> use it in the state you made it, ATF could care less.
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 20769 invoked from network); 13 Aug 2001 20:38:06 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 13 Aug 2001 20:38:06 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 24159 invoked from network); 13 Aug 2001 20:40:50 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 13 Aug 2001 20:40:50 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA21946; Mon, 13 Aug 2001 13:34:52 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 83509 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 13 Aug 2001 20:34:50          +0000
Received: from stud.uni-goettingen.de (root@s2.stud.uni-goettingen.de          [134.76.60.22]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA21932          for <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Mon, 13 Aug 2001 13:34:49 -0700
Received: from router.atw.stud.uni-goettingen.de ([134.76.62.65]          helo=stud.uni-goettingen.de) by stud.uni-goettingen.de with esmtp          (Exim 2.12 #8) id 15WOQ9-0001RH-00 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 13          Aug 2001 22:34:45 +0200
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [de] (Win98; I)
X-Accept-Language: de
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B7839F1.1CE17ABC@stud.uni-goettingen.de>
Date:         Mon, 13 Aug 2001 22:34:59 +0200
Reply-To: "Thomas Engelhardt" <tengelh@STUD.UNI-GOETTINGEN.DE>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Thomas Engelhardt" <tengelh@STUD.UNI-GOETTINGEN.DE>
Organization: =?iso-8859-1?Q?Rocket_Research_G=F6ttingen_=28RRG=29?=
Subject:      [AR] Attn: virus warning!!
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Hi group,

I don't know whether it was just me, but I received an AR message from a
Paul Fronaes (paulolav@online.no) with the header DET DIDAKTISK MOTET.
It contains two attachments with a worm virus in it. please delete
without opening.
And Paul, check your harddrives for a virus!!

Tom

--
Atheism is a non-prophet organization.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 18020 invoked from network); 13 Aug 2001 20:44:27 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 13 Aug 2001 20:44:27 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: (qmail 27189 invoked from network); 13 Aug 2001 20:47:22 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 13 Aug 2001 20:47:22 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA22062; Mon, 13 Aug 2001 13:40:37 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 83542 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 13 Aug 2001 20:40:35          +0000
Received: from volsb01.libertyville.com          (sdsl-216-36-100-106.dsl.chi.megapath.net [66.80.36.106] (may be          forged)) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA22048 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 13 Aug 2001 13:40:35 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Message-ID:  <22B7BC0B5778D311B0B3000629507A96574C28@VOLSB01>
Date:         Mon, 13 Aug 2001 15:36:46 -0500
Reply-To: "Ed Dewey" <edewey@LIBERTYVILLE.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Ed Dewey" <edewey@LIBERTYVILLE.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Attn: virus warning!!
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Yah, I got it too.  Our firewall stripped out the content.

-----Original Message-----
From: Thomas Engelhardt [mailto:tengelh@STUD.UNI-GOETTINGEN.DE]
Sent: Monday, August 13, 2001 3:35 PM
To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
Subject: [AR] Attn: virus warning!!


Hi group,

I don't know whether it was just me, but I received an AR message from a
Paul Fronaes (paulolav@online.no) with the header DET DIDAKTISK MOTET.
It contains two attachments with a worm virus in it. please delete
without opening.
And Paul, check your harddrives for a virus!!

Tom

--
Atheism is a non-prophet organization.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 26319 invoked from network); 13 Aug 2001 20:46:27 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 13 Aug 2001 20:46:27 -0000
Received: (qmail 28162 invoked from network); 13 Aug 2001 20:49:21 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 13 Aug 2001 20:49:21 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA22091; Mon, 13 Aug 2001 13:43:53 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 83549 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 13 Aug 2001 20:43:52          +0000
Received: from pimout4-int.prodigy.net (pimout4-ext.prodigy.net          [207.115.63.103]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA22077          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 13 Aug 2001 13:43:52 -0700
Received: from k2 (A010-0268.DLL2.splitrock.net [209.254.213.14]) by          pimout4-int.prodigy.net (8.11.0/8.11.0) with SMTP id f7DKhnh121726          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 13 Aug 2001 16:43:50 -0400
References:  <3B7839F1.1CE17ABC@stud.uni-goettingen.de>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.3018.1300
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <001901c12437$f23fe740$0ed5fed1@k2>
Date:         Mon, 13 Aug 2001 15:38:43 -0500
Reply-To: "Ken" <HAWARDEN@PRODIGY.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Ken" <HAWARDEN@PRODIGY.NET>
Organization: Prodigy Internet
Subject:      Re: [AR] Attn: virus warning!!
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

I recieved it, but deleted without opening...I never open stuff from those I
don't know.

Ken

----- Original Message -----
From: "Thomas Engelhardt" <tengelh@STUD.UNI-GOETTINGEN.DE>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Monday, August 13, 2001 3:34 PM
Subject: [AR] Attn: virus warning!!


> Hi group,
>
> I don't know whether it was just me, but I received an AR message from a
> Paul Fronaes (paulolav@online.no) with the header DET DIDAKTISK MOTET.
> It contains two attachments with a worm virus in it. please delete
> without opening.
> And Paul, check your harddrives for a virus!!
>
> Tom
>
> --
> Atheism is a non-prophet organization.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 15401 invoked from network); 13 Aug 2001 20:51:06 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 13 Aug 2001 20:51:06 -0000
Received: (qmail 9346 invoked from network); 13 Aug 2001 20:53:38 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 13 Aug 2001 20:53:38 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA22146; Mon, 13 Aug 2001 13:47:14 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 83564 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 13 Aug 2001 20:47:11          +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (oe23.law4.hotmail.com [216.33.148.16]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA22131 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 13 Aug 2001 13:47:11 -0700
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Mon,          13 Aug 2001 13:46:41 -0700
X-Originating-IP: [130.235.245.103]
References:  <200108131956.VAA16100@mail44.fg.online.no>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4807.1700
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 13 Aug 2001 20:46:41.0268 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[0E2D7340:01C12439]
Message-ID:  <OE23D6gx3lKy8VBDUfd00006d43@hotmail.com>
Date:         Mon, 13 Aug 2001 22:36:07 +0100
Reply-To: "Carsten Glans" <cag@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Carsten Glans" <cag@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject: =?iso-8859-1?Q?_____=5BAR=5D_Re:______=5BAR=5D_DET_DIDAKTISK_M=D8TET?=
Comments: To: =?iso-8859-1?B?UGF1bCBGcvhu5nM=?= <paulolav@ONLINE.NO>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Hi folks!

I would advise all NOT to open this is a virus attack! Paul, your computer
is already infected, please update your antivirus software.

Regards

Carsten Glans
----- Original Message -----
From: "Paul Frns" <paulolav@ONLINE.NO>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Monday, August 13, 2001 6:00 PM
Subject: [AR] DET DIDAKTISK MTET


Hi! How are you?

I send you this file in order to have your advice

See you later. Thanks



----------------------------------------------------------------------------
----


>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 25508 invoked from network); 13 Aug 2001 20:53:37 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 13 Aug 2001 20:53:37 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: (qmail 392 invoked from network); 13 Aug 2001 20:56:32 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 13 Aug 2001 20:56:32 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA22205; Mon, 13 Aug 2001 13:49:46 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 83579 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 13 Aug 2001 20:49:44          +0000
Received: from www.rocketry.org (root@rocketry.org [65.101.31.84]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA22191 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 13 Aug 2001 13:49:43 -0700
Received: from localhost (tim@localhost) by www.rocketry.org (8.10.2/8.10.2)          with ESMTP id f7DKlFC22817 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 13 Aug          2001 13:47:15 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.LNX.4.21.0108131346490.22815-100000@www.rocketry.org>
Date:         Mon, 13 Aug 2001 13:47:15 -0700
Reply-To: "T.J." <tim@ROCKETRY.ORG>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "T.J." <tim@ROCKETRY.ORG>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Attn: virus warning!! (fwd)
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

You guys aren't gonna fill up my email box w/ virus discussion again are
ya? :)

---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Mon, 13 Aug 2001 15:38:43 -0500
From: Ken <HAWARDEN@PRODIGY.NET>
To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
Subject: Re: [AR] Attn: virus warning!!

I recieved it, but deleted without opening...I never open stuff from those I
don't know.

Ken

----- Original Message -----
From: "Thomas Engelhardt" <tengelh@STUD.UNI-GOETTINGEN.DE>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Monday, August 13, 2001 3:34 PM
Subject: [AR] Attn: virus warning!!


> Hi group,
>
> I don't know whether it was just me, but I received an AR message from a
> Paul Fronaes (paulolav@online.no) with the header DET DIDAKTISK MOTET.
> It contains two attachments with a worm virus in it. please delete
> without opening.
> And Paul, check your harddrives for a virus!!
>
> Tom
>
> --
> Atheism is a non-prophet organization.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 27995 invoked from network); 13 Aug 2001 20:54:18 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 13 Aug 2001 20:54:18 -0000
Received: (qmail 13348 invoked by uid 50005); 13 Aug 2001 20:54:29 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (. Clean. Processed in 0.168466 secs); 13 Aug 2001 20:54:29 -0000
X-Qmail-Scanner-Mail-From: owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU via smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net
X-Qmail-Scanner-Rcpt-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
X-Qmail-Scanner: 0.96 (No viruses found. Processed in 0.168466 secs)
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 13 Aug 2001 20:54:28 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA22237; Mon, 13 Aug 2001 13:51:08 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 83586 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 13 Aug 2001 20:51:07          +0000
Received: from dune.gnc.net (root@dune.gnc.net [207.203.72.4]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA22221 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon,          13 Aug 2001 13:50:54 -0700
Received: from beowulf (sw2-37.gnc.net [207.203.72.117]) by dune.gnc.net          (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id QAA01734 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon,          13 Aug 2001 16:50:55 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <LPBBKJMJEOFKAMFJJNNHAEHDCGAA.landofgrey@gnc.net>
Date:         Mon, 13 Aug 2001 16:50:38 -0400
Reply-To: <landofgrey@gnc.net>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Matthew Travis" <landofgrey@gnc.net>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Attn: virus warning!!
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <3B7839F1.1CE17ABC@stud.uni-goettingen.de>

I received it as well and deleted immediately. Since the list policy is NO
ATTACHMENTS, it should be assumed that if you receive a message with one or
more, do not open them.

Matt

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU]On
> Behalf Of Thomas Engelhardt
> Sent: Monday, August 13, 2001 4:35 PM
> To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
> Subject: [AR] Attn: virus warning!!
>
>
> Hi group,
>
> I don't know whether it was just me, but I received an AR message from a

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 5391 invoked from network); 13 Aug 2001 20:56:06 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 13 Aug 2001 20:56:06 -0000
Received: (qmail 28262 invoked from network); 13 Aug 2001 20:56:08 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 13 Aug 2001 20:56:08 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA22272; Mon, 13 Aug 2001 13:52:32 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 83593 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 13 Aug 2001 20:52:30          +0000
Received: from dune.gnc.net (root@dune.gnc.net [207.203.72.4]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA22241 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon,          13 Aug 2001 13:51:10 -0700
Received: from beowulf (sw2-37.gnc.net [207.203.72.117]) by dune.gnc.net          (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id QAA01746 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon,          13 Aug 2001 16:51:10 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <LPBBKJMJEOFKAMFJJNNHEEHDCGAA.landofgrey@gnc.net>
Date:         Mon, 13 Aug 2001 16:50:53 -0400
Reply-To: <landofgrey@gnc.net>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Matthew Travis" <landofgrey@gnc.net>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Pendulum fallacy
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010813160552.12853B-100000@spsystems.net>

True, there's always gravity after all. I was trying to avoid the
tempatation to go off on a tangent abotu the theoretical possibilities.
Gravity-gradient works on the fact that there are moment arms of different
"strengths" at each end of the object. Usually difference between the two
isn't enough to keep a rocket "upright" on its own (weebles wobbling but not
falling down notwithstanding). In orbit, even that small difference is
enough to keep an object oriented in a fixed attitude relative to the
Earth's gravitational field. But it doesn't work (usually) for objects not
in free-fall orbit. The other forces are too strong. Since the purpose of a
rocket it to counteract the effects of gravity, and this includes, by
necessity, the gravity-gradient torque. An trajectory control system
generally corrects for all undesired forces regardless of whether it's from
gravity-gradient effects or thrust misalignment or whatever. I know that
with the control system of the Atlas (which is where my experience is,
although I suppose it's the same for the others) the control system would
see a gravity-gradient induced torque as an undesirable force and counteract
it. That is, unless the force is expected and is actually used to assist the
control system. Gravity-turns are not uncommon. In actuality, the force is
too slight for a nearly vertical ascent to even be measured with the systems
in use today. Still, the force is just a force. That's what is meant by "And
there is no such thing a gravity-gradient stabilization of a moving rocket,
since the whole purpose of moving the rocket is to conteract and overcome
gravity". However, you're correct that I wasn't exactly correct in my
statement. Again, rockets that use a gravity-turn to aid them in
establishing their trajectory come to mind.

This is where I start contemplating a very long rocket with the weight
distributed at the ends. It'd have to be rather long and very heavy to get
enough of a moment though.

Matt

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU]On
> Behalf Of Henry Spencer
> Sent: Monday, August 13, 2001 4:10 PM
> To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
> Subject: Re: [AR] Pendulum fallacy
>
>
> On Mon, 13 Aug 2001, Matthew Travis wrote:
> > ...And there is no such thing a gravity-gradient stabilization of a
> > moving rocket, since the whole purpose of moving the rocket is
> to conteract
> > and overcome gravity.
>
> Well, not exactly.  It's true that there is no gravity-gradient
> stabilization, but that's not because the effect doesn't operate, but
> rather because it is so feeble by comparison to thrust misalignments,
> aerodynamic torques, etc. etc.
>
>                                                           Henry Spencer
>                                                        henry@spsystems.net
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 9875 invoked from network); 13 Aug 2001 21:12:13 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 13 Aug 2001 21:12:13 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 4714 invoked from network); 13 Aug 2001 21:12:16 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 13 Aug 2001 21:12:16 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA22424; Mon, 13 Aug 2001 14:07:47 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 83616 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 13 Aug 2001 21:07:38          +0000
Received: from fcexgw03.efi.com ([192.68.228.82]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7)          with SMTP id NAA22330 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Mon, 13 Aug 2001          13:57:38 -0700
Received: from 10.10.12.104 by fcexgw03.efi.com (InterScan E-Mail VirusWall          NT); Mon, 13 Aug 2001 13:57:27 -0700
Received: from earthlink.net (peroxide.efi.com [10.10.89.46]) by          EX-IMC3-CORP.efi.com with SMTP (Microsoft Exchange Internet Mail          Service Version 5.5.2653.13) id QNQGHB0B; Mon, 13 Aug 2001 13:57:27          -0700
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.14-5.0 i686)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Message-ID:  <3B783F57.34044CA3@earthlink.net>
Date:         Mon, 13 Aug 2001 13:57:59 -0700
Reply-To: "David Weinshenker" <daze39@EARTHLINK.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "David Weinshenker" <daze39@EARTHLINK.NET>
Subject: =?iso-8859-1?Q?_____=5BAR=5D_caution:_=22DET_DIDAKTISK_M=D8TET=22_-?=
	=?iso-8859-1?Q?=3E_virus______________alert?=
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

The message titled "DET DIDAKTISK MTET" that just
appeared seems to have that virus that was going
around lately - the one that attaches documents
from your PC with a message that says something
like "I need your advice on this", and includes
code to infect your PC when you open the document.
(In this case, the attached file is called
"DET DIDAKTISK MTET.doc.pif" - double filename
extensions are a warning of this sort of thing...)

-dave w

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 2957 invoked from network); 13 Aug 2001 22:26:50 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 13 Aug 2001 22:26:50 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 9287 invoked from network); 13 Aug 2001 22:29:45 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 13 Aug 2001 22:29:45 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA22843; Mon, 13 Aug 2001 15:24:23 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 83717 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 13 Aug 2001 22:24:17          +0000
Received: from cascara.uvic.ca (root@cascara.uvic.ca [142.104.5.28]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA22829 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 13 Aug 2001 15:24:17 -0700
Received: from wolfke.home.com (wolfke.cfs.me.UVic.CA [142.104.121.117]) by          cascara.uvic.ca (8.11.3/8.11.3) with ESMTP id f7DMOGE263034 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 13 Aug 2001 15:24:16 -0700
X-Sender: jmorken@netmail.home.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
References: <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010813160552.12853B-100000@spsystems.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <5.1.0.14.1.20010813151913.00add098@netmail.home.com>
Date:         Mon, 13 Aug 2001 15:24:17 -0700
Reply-To: "Jamie Morken" <jmorken@HOME.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jamie Morken" <jmorken@HOME.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Pendulum fallacy
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <LPBBKJMJEOFKAMFJJNNHEEHDCGAA.landofgrey@gnc.net>

Hi all,

>  In orbit, even that small difference is
>enough to keep an object oriented in a fixed attitude

So a typical satellite that is spinning will eventually stop spinning and
orbit the earth like the moon does?  Is this why we only see one face of
the moon (gravity gradient?)


>Earth's gravitational field. But it doesn't work (usually) for objects not
>in free-fall orbit. The other forces are too strong. Since the purpose of a

What isn't a free fall orbit?

best regards,
Jamie

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 26481 invoked from network); 13 Aug 2001 22:40:21 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 13 Aug 2001 22:40:21 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 2451 invoked from network); 13 Aug 2001 22:42:52 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 13 Aug 2001 22:42:52 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA22987; Mon, 13 Aug 2001 15:38:40 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 83746 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 13 Aug 2001 22:38:38          +0000
Received: from localhost (dmccue@localhost) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with          ESMTP id PAA22973 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Mon, 13 Aug 2001          15:38:37 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.10.10108131533562.20894@itc.uci.edu>
Content-Disposition: MESSAGE
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from QUOTED-PRINTABLE to 8bit by itc.uci.edu id PAA22974
Message-ID:  <Pine.LNX.4.10.10108131533560.20894-100000@itc.uci.edu>
Date:         Mon, 13 Aug 2001 15:38:37 -0700
Reply-To: "David J. McCue" <dmccue@itc.uci.edu>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "David J. McCue" <dmccue@itc.uci.edu>
Subject: =?iso-8859-1?Q?_____=5BAR=5D_DET_DIDAKTISK_M=D8TET_=28fwd=29?=
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Hi all,

Well, it happened - someone who is a list member got infected with the
sircam virus...

Do not open the attachment that cam with original of the message I copied
below, or it will send itself to everyone in your addressbook. That is
how we got it on the list. If you are going to use Microsoft Outlook as
your email program, you must buy and use anti virus software AND UPDATE
IT REGULARLY! Outlook's weaknesses are responsable for for viruses than
all other sources combined.

-Dave McCue


---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Mon, 13 Aug 2001 19:00:46 +0200
From: "[ISO-8859-1] Paul Frns" <paulolav@ONLINE.NO>
To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
Subject: [AR] [ISO-8859-1] DET DIDAKTISK MTET

Hi! How are you?

I send you this file in order to have your advice

See you later. Thanks

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 8952 invoked from network); 13 Aug 2001 22:58:00 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 13 Aug 2001 22:58:00 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: (qmail 23845 invoked from network); 13 Aug 2001 22:58:05 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 13 Aug 2001 22:58:05 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA23232; Mon, 13 Aug 2001 15:55:32 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 83787 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 13 Aug 2001 22:55:30          +0000
Received: from localhost (rcalkins@localhost) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with          ESMTP id PAA23218; Mon, 13 Aug 2001 15:55:28 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.LNX.4.10.10108131554070.23085-100000@itc.uci.edu>
Date:         Mon, 13 Aug 2001 15:55:28 -0700
Reply-To: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
Subject: =?iso-8859-1?Q?_____Re:_=5BAR=5D_DET_DIDAKTISK_M=D8TET?=
Comments: To: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Paul=20Fr=F8n=E6s?= <paulolav@ONLINE.NO>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <200108131956.VAA16100@mail44.fg.online.no>

Interesting, this.  All previous SirCam viruses I've gotten have spoofed
the sender's address, but this one seems to actually have come from Mr.
Frns.  He is no longer with the list, pending his system's disinfection.

If you got the virus, or are unsure, go to
http://www.symantec.com/avcenter/w32sircam.worm@mm.removal.tool.html to
get the repair.

If you post a virus to the list, you will be removed.

Ray

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 17400 invoked from network); 13 Aug 2001 23:00:01 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 13 Aug 2001 23:00:01 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: (qmail 21641 invoked from network); 13 Aug 2001 23:02:56 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 13 Aug 2001 23:02:56 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA23066; Mon, 13 Aug 2001 15:46:29 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 83758 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 13 Aug 2001 22:46:22          +0000
Received: from localhost (dmccue@localhost) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with          ESMTP id PAA23040; Mon, 13 Aug 2001 15:46:16 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.LNX.4.10.10108131542350.23002-100000@itc.uci.edu>
Date:         Mon, 13 Aug 2001 15:46:16 -0700
Reply-To: "David J. McCue" <dmccue@itc.uci.edu>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "David J. McCue" <dmccue@itc.uci.edu>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Attn: virus warning!!
Comments: To: Ken <HAWARDEN@prodigy.net>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <001901c12437$f23fe740$0ed5fed1@k2>

On Mon, 13 Aug 2001, Ken wrote:

> I recieved it, but deleted without opening...I never open stuff from those I
> don't know.
>
> Ken

A note on the above-- it is not a very effective strategy, since most
viruses (worms, technically) are forwarded from machine to machine via
email address books, you are most likely to get a virus from someone you
know.

A better policy is not to open attachments unless you expected them. You
can always confirm with a sender that they intended to send you the
attachment.

-Dave McCue

>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Thomas Engelhardt" <tengelh@STUD.UNI-GOETTINGEN.DE>
> To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
> Sent: Monday, August 13, 2001 3:34 PM
> Subject: [AR] Attn: virus warning!!
>
>
> > Hi group,
> >
> > I don't know whether it was just me, but I received an AR message from a
> > Paul Fronaes (paulolav@online.no) with the header DET DIDAKTISK MOTET.
> > It contains two attachments with a worm virus in it. please delete
> > without opening.
> > And Paul, check your harddrives for a virus!!
> >
> > Tom
> >
> > --
> > Atheism is a non-prophet organization.
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 27874 invoked from network); 13 Aug 2001 23:09:37 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 13 Aug 2001 23:09:37 -0000
Received: (qmail 19247 invoked from network); 13 Aug 2001 23:11:30 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 13 Aug 2001 23:11:30 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA23369; Mon, 13 Aug 2001 16:06:15 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 83818 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 13 Aug 2001 23:05:20          +0000
Received: from dune.gnc.net (root@dune.gnc.net [207.203.72.4]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA23350 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon,          13 Aug 2001 16:05:19 -0700
Received: from beowulf (sw2-37.gnc.net [207.203.72.117]) by dune.gnc.net          (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id TAA04740 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon,          13 Aug 2001 19:05:15 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <LPBBKJMJEOFKAMFJJNNHEEHFCGAA.landofgrey@gnc.net>
Date:         Mon, 13 Aug 2001 19:04:48 -0400
Reply-To: <landofgrey@gnc.net>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Matthew Travis" <landofgrey@gnc.net>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Pendulum fallacy
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <5.1.0.14.1.20010813151913.00add098@netmail.home.com>

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU]On
> Behalf Of Jamie Morken
> Sent: Monday, August 13, 2001 6:24 PM
> To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
> Subject: Re: [AR] Pendulum fallacy
>
>
> Hi all,
>
> >  In orbit, even that small difference is
> >enough to keep an object oriented in a fixed attitude
>
> So a typical satellite that is spinning will eventually stop spinning and
Most spinning satellites are spinning along the vertical axis, and there's
no gravity gradient acting on the spin. Satellites that are spun up
horizontal (look at footage from the Mars Odyssey launch) are usually spun
up to provide *temporary* stabilization during the injection phase. After
injection into orbit, they are despun with a yo-yo device at which time the
satellite is placed into its intended attitude and the onboard ACS takes
control.

Grsvity gradient works on the principle that, for a sufficiently large
object (actually, any object), the center of gravity is not the same as the
center of mass. An object wants to orient itself so that the center of
gravity is aligned with the center of mass and the center of the Earth, with
the center of gravity in between the center of mass and the center of the
Earth.

> orbit the earth like the moon does?  Is this why we only see one face of
> the moon (gravity gradient?)
The Moon is a unique case. First, it's center of Mass is offset from its
physical center, and the impact that flung it from Earth helped give it a
spin close to the rate at which it revolves around the Earth. This is one
current theory. The result is that one face always points to Earth. I guess
there's a gravity gradient involved.

>
>
> >Earth's gravitational field. But it doesn't work (usually) for
> objects not
> >in free-fall orbit. The other forces are too strong. Since the
> purpose of a
>
> What isn't a free fall orbit?
>
> best regards,
> Jamie
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 17410 invoked from network); 13 Aug 2001 23:14:24 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 13 Aug 2001 23:14:24 -0000
Received: (qmail 23500 invoked from network); 13 Aug 2001 23:16:54 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 13 Aug 2001 23:16:54 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA23403; Mon, 13 Aug 2001 16:09:59 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 83829 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 13 Aug 2001 23:09:58          +0000
Received: from dune.gnc.net (root@dune.gnc.net [207.203.72.4]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA23389 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon,          13 Aug 2001 16:09:57 -0700
Received: from beowulf (sw2-37.gnc.net [207.203.72.117]) by dune.gnc.net          (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id TAA04813 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon,          13 Aug 2001 19:09:58 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <LPBBKJMJEOFKAMFJJNNHIEHFCGAA.landofgrey@gnc.net>
Date:         Mon, 13 Aug 2001 19:09:29 -0400
Reply-To: <landofgrey@gnc.net>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Matthew Travis" <landofgrey@gnc.net>
Subject:      [AR] RE: [AR] DET DIDAKTISK MOTET
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <Pine.LNX.4.10.10108131554070.23085-100000@itc.uci.edu>

Maybe it's just me but it looks like the link changed to:

http://www.symantec.com/avcenter/venc/data/w32.sircam.worm@mm.html


I got a page not found, and then went to the "Security Updates" link at the
bottom of the page and found the SirCam link from there.


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU]On
> Behalf Of Ray Calkins

> If you got the virus, or are unsure, go to
> http://www.symantec.com/avcenter/w32sircam.worm@mm.removal.tool.html to
> get the repair.
>
> If you post a virus to the list, you will be removed.
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 19522 invoked from network); 13 Aug 2001 23:14:54 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 13 Aug 2001 23:14:54 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 27229 invoked from network); 13 Aug 2001 23:17:50 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 13 Aug 2001 23:17:50 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA23435; Mon, 13 Aug 2001 16:11:22 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 83836 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 13 Aug 2001 23:11:20          +0000
Received: from ns.vanguard.com (ns.VANGUARD.COM [192.175.173.31]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA23419 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Mon, 13 Aug 2001 16:11:16 -0700
Received: from eagle1.vanguard.com (eagle1.VANGUARD.COM [192.175.141.70]) by          ns.vanguard.com (Switch-2.1.3/Switch-2.1.0) with ESMTP id          f7DNBFv16649 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Mon, 13 Aug 2001 19:11:15          -0400 (EDT)
Received: from vgi4mail.vanguard.com (vgi4mail.vanguard.com [10.254.65.16]) by          eagle1.vanguard.com (Switch-2.1.3/Switch-2.1.0) with SMTP id          f7DNBEa21739 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Mon, 13 Aug 2001 19:11:14          -0400 (EDT)
Received: by vgi4mail.vanguard.com(Lotus SMTP MTA v4.6.6  (890.1 7-16-1999))           id 85256AA7.007F6D52 ; Mon, 13 Aug 2001 19:11:34 -0400
X-Lotus-FromDomain: VGINOTES
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Disposition: inline
Message-ID:  <85256AA7.007F6639.00@vgi4mail.vanguard.com>
Date:         Mon, 13 Aug 2001 19:11:10 -0400
Reply-To: <Waysie_Atkins@VANGUARD.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <Waysie_Atkins@VANGUARD.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] potassium nitrate---Source
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

<Goto:  www.kpower.com and look for sales information for your area. Where do
<you live? I think K-Power is the best cheapest way to go. You will have to
<grind the prills. The best thing I've found for grinding is a 2 compartment
<coffee grinder purchased from Lowe's home center for $30. I trickle the
<prills into it as to not overload the motor.
<
<Dave Muesing
<Yorktown, VA


Their website lists KNO3 in prill form as well as miniprill, microprill and
flowable(crystals).   Has anyone used other than the prill form?  Might the
microprill or flowable work as well without grinding?


Thanks,

Waysie

PS

Would be interested in the *sugar list* as well.  Am seriously considering a try
at the KNO3/Sorbital.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 28585 invoked from network); 13 Aug 2001 23:16:59 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 13 Aug 2001 23:16:59 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 25024 invoked from network); 13 Aug 2001 23:19:30 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 13 Aug 2001 23:19:30 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA23495; Mon, 13 Aug 2001 16:15:17 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 83851 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 13 Aug 2001 23:15:16          +0000
Received: from fw1-bv.tek.com (fw1-bv.tek.com [192.65.40.16]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA23481 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon,          13 Aug 2001 16:15:16 -0700
Received: from fw1-bv.tek.com (root@localhost) by fw1-bv.tek.com with ESMTP id          f7DNEjU24076 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 13 Aug 2001 16:14:45          -0700 (PDT)
Received: from tektronix.tek.com (tektronix.tek.com [128.181.6.43]) by          fw1-bv.tek.com with ESMTP id f7DNEj424071 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>;          Mon, 13 Aug 2001 16:14:45 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from us-bv-u07.bv.tek.com (webshield.tek.com [128.181.2.130]) by          tektronix.tek.com (8.9.3+Sun/8.9.3) with SMTP id QAA19111 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 13 Aug 2001 16:14:45 -0700 (PDT)
Received: FROM us-bv-m01.bv.tek.com BY us-bv-u07.bv.tek.com ; Mon Aug 13          16:14:44 2001 -0700
Received: by us-bv-m01.bv.tek.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2448.0) id          <QY786583>; Mon, 13 Aug 2001 16:14:43 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2448.0)
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Message-ID:  <5832AFF5FC75D411844300508BC216B70302A6EB@us-bv-m07.bv.tek.com>
Date:         Mon, 13 Aug 2001 16:14:41 -0700
Reply-To: <john.w.lyngdal@EXGATE.TEK.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <john.w.lyngdal@EXGATE.TEK.COM>
Subject:      [AR] TMDI
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Has anyone tried TMDI(2,4,4-trimethyl-hexamethylene-diisocynate and
2,2,4-trimethyl-hexamethylene-diisocynate isomers) as a R45 curative? In
particular I was wondering what the cure rate was in comparison to MDI and
IPDI at say 30-40C.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 27301 invoked from network); 13 Aug 2001 23:31:14 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 13 Aug 2001 23:31:14 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: (qmail 2000 invoked from network); 13 Aug 2001 23:33:46 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 13 Aug 2001 23:33:46 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA23596; Mon, 13 Aug 2001 16:26:51 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 83870 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 13 Aug 2001 23:26:45          +0000
Received: from spsystems.net (spsystems.net [209.47.149.227]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA23582 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Mon,          13 Aug 2001 16:26:44 -0700
Received: (from henry@localhost) by spsystems.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id TAA15878;          Mon, 13 Aug 2001 19:26:09 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010813191902.15811A-100000@spsystems.net>
Date:         Mon, 13 Aug 2001 19:26:09 -0400
Reply-To: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Pendulum fallacy
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <5.1.0.14.1.20010813151913.00add098@netmail.home.com>

On Mon, 13 Aug 2001, Jamie Morken wrote:
> >  In orbit, even that small difference is
> >enough to keep an object oriented in a fixed attitude
>
> So a typical satellite that is spinning will eventually stop spinning and
> orbit the earth like the moon does?

Generally not, not unless it's designed to do so.  As its spin carries it
toward the preferred attitude, the gravity gradient will speed the spin
up, and as its spin then carries it away again, the g.g. will slow the
spin down... but the effects are *very* small and balance out.  In
general, gravity gradient is significant only to objects whose rotation
speeds are minimal.

> Is this why we only see one face of the moon (gravity gradient?)

Yes, but less directly.  Gravity gradients also drive tidal forces, which
are important -- in the long run -- in objects that are big enough to be
flexible.  Tidal forces gradually slowed, and eventually stopped, the
Moon's rotation (with respect to the Earth).  Once that happened, gravity
gradient played a more direct role in deciding which face was pointed
Earthward permanently.

> >...But it doesn't work (usually) for objects not
> >in free-fall orbit. The other forces are too strong...
>
> What isn't a free fall orbit?

He's just using odd terminology.  The point is that gravity-gradient
forces are quite small, so that unless the time periods are involved are
quite long and the other forces minimal, gravity-gradient torques are
generally insignificant.

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 21141 invoked from network); 13 Aug 2001 23:36:59 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 13 Aug 2001 23:36:59 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: (qmail 4776 invoked from network); 13 Aug 2001 23:39:30 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 13 Aug 2001 23:39:30 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA23684; Mon, 13 Aug 2001 16:35:08 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 83888 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 13 Aug 2001 23:35:06          +0000
Received: from spsystems.net (spsystems.net [209.47.149.227]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA23670 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Mon,          13 Aug 2001 16:35:05 -0700
Received: (from henry@localhost) by spsystems.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id TAA15922;          Mon, 13 Aug 2001 19:34:31 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010813192637.15811B-100000@spsystems.net>
Date:         Mon, 13 Aug 2001 19:34:31 -0400
Reply-To: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Pendulum fallacy
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <LPBBKJMJEOFKAMFJJNNHEEHFCGAA.landofgrey@gnc.net>

On Mon, 13 Aug 2001, Matthew Travis wrote:
> Most spinning satellites are spinning along the vertical axis, and there's
> no gravity gradient acting on the spin.

Not really true.  "Spinning along the vertical axis" is kind of an odd
concept, because the direction of "vertical" changes as the satellite goes
around Earth.  It's possible to arrange such a spin -- the DSP missile-
warning satellites do it -- but it requires rotating the spin axis 360deg
per orbit, which is awkward enough that it's not done without urgent
reason.  (The DSP birds do it because the spinning motion is essential
to the scan mechanism of their big infrared telescopes.)

The most common direction of spin axis for a spin-stabilized satellite is
perpendicular to the orbit plane, although there are lots of variations.

Spin-stabilized geostationary comsats, for example, spin on an axis
perpendicular to the orbit plane, i.e. on a north-south axis since their
orbit plane is that of the equator.  (Their antennas are despun and point
toward Earth at all times.)

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 13175 invoked from network); 13 Aug 2001 23:42:10 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 13 Aug 2001 23:42:10 -0000
Received: (qmail 8319 invoked from network); 13 Aug 2001 23:43:42 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 13 Aug 2001 23:43:42 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA23725; Mon, 13 Aug 2001 16:39:22 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 83899 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 13 Aug 2001 23:38:00          +0000
Received: from dune.gnc.net (root@dune.gnc.net [207.203.72.4]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA23705 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon,          13 Aug 2001 16:38:00 -0700
Received: from beowulf (sw2-37.gnc.net [207.203.72.117]) by dune.gnc.net          (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id TAA05338 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon,          13 Aug 2001 19:38:00 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
Importance: Normal
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <LPBBKJMJEOFKAMFJJNNHGEHHCGAA.landofgrey@gnc.net>
Date:         Mon, 13 Aug 2001 19:37:27 -0400
Reply-To: <landofgrey@gnc.net>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Matthew Travis" <landofgrey@gnc.net>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Pendulum fallacy
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010813191902.15811A-100000@spsystems.net>

>
> He's just using odd terminology.  The point is that gravity-gradient

Sorry about that. I was being needlessly redundant. I started to type
"free-fall" but realized that "orbit" was more precise but forgot to use the
delete key. Prrof again that I'm a terrible typist. While an orbit is
free-fall, not all free-falls are orbits, as we classically think of them.

Matt

> forces are quite small, so that unless the time periods are involved are
> quite long and the other forces minimal, gravity-gradient torques are
> generally insignificant.
>
>                                                           Henry Spencer
>                                                        henry@spsystems.net
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 16797 invoked from network); 13 Aug 2001 23:42:58 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 13 Aug 2001 23:42:58 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 11815 invoked from network); 13 Aug 2001 23:45:38 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 13 Aug 2001 23:45:38 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA23656; Mon, 13 Aug 2001 16:31:28 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 83881 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 13 Aug 2001 23:31:27          +0000
Received: from melete.ch.intel.com (chfdns02.ch.intel.com [143.182.246.25]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA23642 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 13 Aug 2001 16:31:27 -0700
Received: from snmeng1.rr.intel.com (snmeng1.rr.intel.com [128.215.231.11]) by          melete.ch.intel.com (8.9.1a+p1/8.9.1/d: relay.m4,v 1.41 2001/07/09          21:06:22 root Exp $) with ESMTP id XAA00701; Mon, 13 Aug 2001          23:31:26 GMT
Received: from snmeng30.rr.intel.com (snmeng30.rr.intel.com [128.215.52.76]) by          snmeng1.rr.intel.com (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id RAA21250; Mon, 13          Aug 2001 17:28:32 -0600 (MDT)
Received: from snmeng30.rr.intel.com (snmeng30.rr.intel.com [128.215.52.76]) by          snmeng30.rr.intel.com (8.9.1a/8.9.1/d: client.m4,v 1.3 1998/09/29          16:36:11 sedayao Exp sedayao $) with SMTP id RAA15957; Mon, 13 Aug          2001 17:28:28 -0600 (MDT)
X-Mailer: dtmail 1.2.1 CDE Version 1.2.1 SunOS 5.6 sun4m sparc
X-Sun-Text-Type: ascii
Message-ID:  <200108132328.RAA15957@snmeng30.rr.intel.com>
Date:         Mon, 13 Aug 2001 17:28:28 -0600
Reply-To: "Ray Calkins 100660207" <rcalkins@SNMENG1.RR.INTEL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Ray Calkins 100660207" <rcalkins@SNMENG1.RR.INTEL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] potassium nitrate---Source
Comments: To: Waysie_Atkins@VANGUARD.COM
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Waysie asks:
> Their website lists KNO3 in prill form as well as
miniprill, microprill and
> flowable(crystals).   Has anyone used other than
the prill form?  Might the
> microprill or flowable work as well without
grinding?

Dak and I are using the GG Flowable, and it seems to
work great.  I think Dak still grinds his, and I
dissolve mine in boiling water, so in our case prill
size is rather irrelevant.  I'm sure the flowable
will work as is, but will have a slower burn rate and
may have some rough combustion.


Ray Calkins
rcalkins@snmeng1.rr.intel.com
raymond.calkins@intel.com
"My opinions are my own, and do not reflect those of
my employer."


From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 24987 invoked from network); 13 Aug 2001 23:44:49 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 13 Aug 2001 23:44:49 -0000
Received: (qmail 5829 invoked by uid 50005); 13 Aug 2001 23:44:59 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (. Clean. Processed in 0.252278 secs); 13 Aug 2001 23:44:59 -0000
X-Qmail-Scanner-Mail-From: owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU via smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net
X-Qmail-Scanner-Rcpt-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
X-Qmail-Scanner: 0.96 (No viruses found. Processed in 0.252278 secs)
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 13 Aug 2001 23:44:59 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA23780; Mon, 13 Aug 2001 16:43:09 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 83911 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 13 Aug 2001 23:41:47          +0000
Received: from fep3-orange.clear.net.nz (fep3-orange.clear.net.nz          [203.97.32.3]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA23752          for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Mon, 13 Aug 2001 16:41:46 -0700
Received: from mkbs (203-167-156-215.dialup.clear.net.nz [203.167.156.215]) by          fep3-orange.clear.net.nz (1.5/1.8) with SMTP id LAA23901; Tue, 14 Aug          2001 11:41:41 +1200 (NZST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <065601c12451$ca643400$0100a8c0@mkbs>
Date:         Tue, 14 Aug 2001 11:40:54 +1200
Reply-To: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Organization: Applied Technology
Subject:      [AR] Fw: AMES COMPLETES SUCCESSFUL TEST OF MARS AIRPLANE PROTOTYPE
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Not quite rocketry but relates to recent discussions of high altitude
performance.


_______________________________________

Michael Mewhinney Aug. 13, 2001
NASA Ames Research Center, Moffett Field, CA
Phone: 650-604-5026 or 604-9000
jbluck@mail.arc.nasa.gov  or mmewhinney@mail.arc.nasa.gov

AMES COMPLETES SUCCESSFUL TEST OF MARS AIRPLANE PROTOTYPE

Soaring gracefully down to Earth from a balloon floating 101,000 feet high
above Oregon, a NASA prototype of an airplane that someday may fly over
Mars successfully completed a high-altitude flight test this week.

Conducted at Oregon's Tillamook airport by the Kitty Hawk 3 project at NASA
Ames Research Center, Moffett Field, CA, the test was designed to validate
the  aerodynamic performance of the prototype.  Nicknamed "Orville" after
one of the famed Wright brothers who first flew on Dec. 17, 1903, the NASA
731 glider was dropped from a helium-filled balloon that towed it up to an
altitude of 101,000 feet - the highest ever for such a test - before
releasing it. Engineers and scientists hailed the test as a great success.

"It was a great flight and everything went really well.  It appears that we
realized all of our test objectives," exclaimed a jubilant Andy Gonzales,
an Ames aerospace engineer who served as the flight test director.
Low-altitude tests of NASA 729, another prototype called "Wilbur," were
conducted last month at Ames.

"Mars has always fascinated people," said Larry Lemke, an aerospace
engineer at NASA Ames who serves as Ames' project manager for advanced Mars
mobility concepts, which include airplanes as well as other systems.
"Every time we send a mission up there, we come back with fascinating
discoveries."

According to Lemke, a Mars airplane is an idea whose time has come.  "The
Mars airplane is an idea that has been around for about 25 years, and over
the past five years or so, it has been growing in popularity," he said.  "I
think a Mars airplane will play a role in exploring the Red Planet."

Conventional in appearance, the Mars airplane concept developed by Ames
engineers features a long, straight wing and twin tails in the rear. The
remote-controlled glider tested in Oregon featured an approximately
four-foot-long fuselage and an eight-foot wing span.

"The flying we have successfully completed in Oregon is very similar to the
flying that we will be doing over Mars during a productive exploration
mission," Lemke said.  "One unique aspect of flying a Mars mission with an
airplane is that it must be constructed in a fold-up configuration in order
to fit inside a spacecraft."

In its future configuration for Mars, the aircraft is expected to have its
own propeller propulsion system capable of operating in the Mars
atmosphere, which is comprised mostly of carbon dioxide.  It will also
carry a variety of sophisticated instruments to observe and conduct science
experiments.

"The possibility of life on Mars is a very hot topic and an interesting
question, so I'm sure you will find instruments on board that are designed
to find signs of water on Mars, which is necessary for life," Lemke said.

"In addition, we would have a large array of cameras on the airplane to be
able to see large areas of the Mars terrain in very high resolution," Lemke
said.  He said the cameras aboard the aircraft would be so precise, they
could see objects on Mars as small as the size of a quarter.  "I think the
images will be stunning," he said. "During a Mars airplane mission, we will
be able to view the planet at very close proximity and this will convey to
the public that there is a real planet there, not just an abstract."

"Our test flight at Tillamook airport showed the airplane's flight was very
smooth and stable which makes for a good platform for science instruments,"
said Gonzales.

Ames engineers predict the next few years will be challenging, as they
prepare for a potential mission to Mars. "We will be expanding the envelope
and developing a much more complex aircraft for exploring Mars," Lemke
said.  The next step will be to develop a Mars airplane model with folding
wings and later, one with a propeller propulsion system.




To receive Ames news releases, send an email with the word "subscribe" in
the subject line to: ames-releases-request@lists.arc.nasa.gov.  To
unsubscribe, send an email to the same address with "unsubscribe" in the
subject line. Also, the NASA Ames News homepage at URL,
http://amesnews.arc.nasa.gov includes news releases and JPEG images in AP
Leaf Desk format minus embedded captions

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 8248 invoked from network); 14 Aug 2001 00:02:05 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 14 Aug 2001 00:02:05 -0000
Received: (qmail 24219 invoked from network); 14 Aug 2001 00:02:10 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 14 Aug 2001 00:02:10 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA23907; Mon, 13 Aug 2001 17:00:28 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 83938 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 13 Aug 2001 23:59:02          +0000
Received: from castor.ridgenet.net (IDENT:root@castor.ridgenet.net          [199.120.150.29]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA23883          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 13 Aug 2001 16:59:02 -0700
Received: from kristinscomp (pm024.ridgenet.net [204.154.246.24]) by          castor.ridgenet.net (8.11.0/8.11.0) with SMTP id f7DNosS02414; Mon,          13 Aug 2001 16:50:54 -0700
References:  <LPBBKJMJEOFKAMFJJNNHEEHFCGAA.landofgrey@gnc.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <003101c12455$04b55fa0$1b30fea9@kristinscomp>
Date:         Mon, 13 Aug 2001 17:05:42 -0700
Reply-To: "Kristin & David Hall" <thehalls@RIDGENET.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Kristin & David Hall" <thehalls@RIDGENET.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Pendulum fallacy
Comments: To: landofgrey@gnc.net
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

> > orbit the earth like the moon does?  Is this why we only see one face of
> > the moon (gravity gradient?)

> The Moon is a unique case. First, it's center of Mass is offset from its
> physical center, and the impact that flung it from Earth helped give it a
> spin close to the rate at which it revolves around the Earth. This is one
> current theory. The result is that one face always points to Earth. I
guess
> there's a gravity gradient involved.

It's called "tidal locking" and it does indeed involve gravity gradients....

We're all familiar with the mechanics of the high/low tides on Earth, right?
Gravity gradients.  So what?  Well, do you think that moving around that
much water doesn't absorb energy?  It does.  Where does the energy come
from?  The Earth's rotational velocity with respect to the moon's orbital
velocity.  That's right, folks, the days are getting longer and longer
because of the tides.  One day, if the Sun doesn't nova first, people on the
Moon will be able to look up and comment about how only one side of the
Earth faces the Moon.  The Moon, being much less massive and perhaps having
started with a rotational velocity closer to "optimum" finished this process
many many moons ago (even solid rocks can have "tides" albeit tiny
ones....but they still absorb energy!).

Nor is this effect unique to the Earth.  Moons around Jupiter and Saturn
have tidal locked.  Similarly, Mercury has sync'ed up with the Sun in a
stable - albeit unlikely - 3:2 rotational sync.

...all this assuming I recall my orbital mech class correctly, of course :).

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 11432 invoked from network); 14 Aug 2001 00:16:51 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 14 Aug 2001 00:16:51 -0000
Received: (qmail 28324 invoked from network); 14 Aug 2001 00:19:44 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 14 Aug 2001 00:19:44 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA24006; Mon, 13 Aug 2001 17:14:52 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 83964 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 14 Aug 2001 00:13:28          +0000
Received: from dune.gnc.net (root@dune.gnc.net [207.203.72.4]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA23987 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon,          13 Aug 2001 17:13:27 -0700
Received: from beowulf (sw2-37.gnc.net [207.203.72.117]) by dune.gnc.net          (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id UAA06031 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon,          13 Aug 2001 20:13:28 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
Importance: Normal
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <LPBBKJMJEOFKAMFJJNNHIEHICGAA.landofgrey@gnc.net>
Date:         Mon, 13 Aug 2001 20:12:53 -0400
Reply-To: <landofgrey@gnc.net>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Matthew Travis" <landofgrey@gnc.net>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Pendulum fallacy
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010813192637.15811B-100000@spsystems.net>

Perhaps most spinning satellites are not spinning along the vertical axis as
I don't actually know the numbers. I should have said "many", but that's
just semantics in relation to the point I was making and would only start a
debate as to the definition of "many". The point was that gravity-gradient
concerns don't affect the spinning. In reality, this is true no matter how
the spacecraft is spinning, since the spinning causes all the force vectors
normal to the spin axis to rotate about 360 degrees and, hence, cancel each
themselves out. However, satellites that are spin-stabilized but which also
require a particular side to be facing the Earth are in orbit, a fair number
of them, in fact. Most spacecraft that require a particular side to face the
Earth are not spinning, but there's nothing intrinsic about the orientation
that prevents it. It's just spacecraft design. TDRSS is an example. It's a
"simple" matter, simple meaning there are well-established techniques, to
spin up a satellite and use a combination of gravitational forces, magnetic
torquers and the like to maintain the axis in a fixed orientation to the
surface of the Earth, vertical in this case meaning the axis that intercepts
the center of the Earth. This is also one of the biggest advantages of
gravity-gradient stabilization: the ability to keep a satellite oriented so
that the same side always faces the Earth. Or out into space.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU]On
> Behalf Of Henry Spencer
> Sent: Monday, August 13, 2001 7:35 PM
> To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
> Subject: Re: [AR] Pendulum fallacy
>
>
> On Mon, 13 Aug 2001, Matthew Travis wrote:
> > Most spinning satellites are spinning along the vertical axis,
> and there's
> > no gravity gradient acting on the spin.
>
> Not really true.  "Spinning along the vertical axis" is kind of an odd
> concept, because the direction of "vertical" changes as the satellite goes
> around Earth.  It's possible to arrange such a spin -- the DSP missile-
> warning satellites do it -- but it requires rotating the spin axis 360deg
> per orbit, which is awkward enough that it's not done without urgent
> reason.  (The DSP birds do it because the spinning motion is essential
> to the scan mechanism of their big infrared telescopes.)
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 23779 invoked from network); 14 Aug 2001 00:19:40 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 14 Aug 2001 00:19:40 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: (qmail 29697 invoked from network); 14 Aug 2001 00:22:28 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 14 Aug 2001 00:22:28 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA24030; Mon, 13 Aug 2001 17:17:40 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 83971 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 14 Aug 2001 00:16:18          +0000
Received: from spsystems.net (spsystems.net [209.47.149.227]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA23999 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Mon,          13 Aug 2001 17:14:37 -0700
Received: (from henry@localhost) by spsystems.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id UAA16493;          Mon, 13 Aug 2001 20:14:02 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010813200729.15811D-100000@spsystems.net>
Date:         Mon, 13 Aug 2001 20:14:02 -0400
Reply-To: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Pendulum fallacy
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <003101c12455$04b55fa0$1b30fea9@kristinscomp>

On Mon, 13 Aug 2001, Kristin & David Hall wrote:
> ...Similarly, Mercury has sync'ed up with the Sun in a
> stable - albeit unlikely - 3:2 rotational sync.

In fact, it's not unlikely at all, for an object in Mercury's fairly
elliptical orbit.  The gravity gradient scales with the inverse cube of
distance (it's the derivative of inverse-square gravity), and various
consequences of tidal effects scale with even higher powers, so the
effects are *much* stronger at Mercury's perihelion than elsewhere in its
orbit.  Tidal locking favors a spin that roughly matches the orbital
motion there, and since Mercury moves faster in its orbit there, you get a
3:2 relationship rather than the 1:1 that is normal in circular orbits.

(This all was obvious only after the 3:2 relationship was discovered, mind
you.  Which wasn't easy, because good observing opportunities for Mercury
tend to occur every two orbits, and there's no visible difference between
a 1:1 and a 3:2 then!  Everybody thought it was 1:1, until the radar
astronomers measured Mercury's rotation directly, by Doppler shift.)

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 19540 invoked from network); 14 Aug 2001 00:25:46 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 14 Aug 2001 00:25:46 -0000
Received: (qmail 11807 invoked by uid 50005); 14 Aug 2001 00:25:49 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (. Clean. Processed in 0.243807 secs); 14 Aug 2001 00:25:49 -0000
X-Qmail-Scanner-Mail-From: owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU via smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net
X-Qmail-Scanner-Rcpt-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
X-Qmail-Scanner: 0.96 (No viruses found. Processed in 0.243807 secs)
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 14 Aug 2001 00:25:49 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA24108; Mon, 13 Aug 2001 17:24:02 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 83994 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 14 Aug 2001 00:22:35          +0000
Received: from dune.gnc.net (root@dune.gnc.net [207.203.72.4]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA24092 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon,          13 Aug 2001 17:22:35 -0700
Received: from beowulf (sw2-37.gnc.net [207.203.72.117]) by dune.gnc.net          (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id UAA06244 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon,          13 Aug 2001 20:22:35 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
Importance: Normal
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <LPBBKJMJEOFKAMFJJNNHEEHJCGAA.landofgrey@gnc.net>
Date:         Mon, 13 Aug 2001 20:22:00 -0400
Reply-To: <landofgrey@gnc.net>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Matthew Travis" <landofgrey@gnc.net>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Pendulum fallacy
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <003101c12455$04b55fa0$1b30fea9@kristinscomp>

 -----Original Message-----
> From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU]On
> Behalf Of Kristin & David Hall
> Sent: Monday, August 13, 2001 8:06 PM
> To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
> Subject: Re: [AR] Pendulum fallacy
>

> > current theory. The result is that one face always points to Earth. I
> guess
> > there's a gravity gradient involved.
>
> It's called "tidal locking" and it does indeed involve gravity
> gradients....

I agree. I just didn't want to use the term "gravity gradient" for fear of
someone saying "No, it's called tidal forces" or going into an explanation
of tides. It's word choice, but I don't like semantic debate.

It's interesting to note that it's not just gravity gradients affecting the
Moon, but also the Earth as all that water (and indeed land) moves around.
Basic mechanics. Gravity affects both bodies.

> velocity.  That's right, folks, the days are getting longer and longer
> because of the tides.  One day, if the Sun doesn't nova first,

Scientific proof that the workweek is, indeed, getting longer.


> Nor is this effect unique to the Earth.  Moons around Jupiter and Saturn
> have tidal locked.  Similarly, Mercury has sync'ed up with the Sun in a
> stable - albeit unlikely - 3:2 rotational sync.

Is it Pluto and Charon who are locked into each other so that each only
shows one side to the other?

>
> ...all this assuming I recall my orbital mech class correctly, of
> course :).
>

Throw it all into Satellite Toolkit and play around to see what happens.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 29331 invoked from network); 14 Aug 2001 00:35:27 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 14 Aug 2001 00:35:27 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 20604 invoked by uid 50005); 14 Aug 2001 00:35:32 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (. Clean. Processed in 0.152542 secs); 14 Aug 2001 00:35:32 -0000
X-Qmail-Scanner-Mail-From: owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU via smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net
X-Qmail-Scanner-Rcpt-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
X-Qmail-Scanner: 0.96 (No viruses found. Processed in 0.152542 secs)
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 14 Aug 2001 00:35:31 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA24297; Mon, 13 Aug 2001 17:33:37 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 84014 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 14 Aug 2001 00:32:11          +0000
Received: from spsystems.net (spsystems.net [209.47.149.227]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA24279 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Mon,          13 Aug 2001 17:32:11 -0700
Received: (from henry@localhost) by spsystems.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id UAA22801;          Mon, 13 Aug 2001 20:31:36 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010813203057.15811E-100000@spsystems.net>
Date:         Mon, 13 Aug 2001 20:31:36 -0400
Reply-To: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Pendulum fallacy
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <LPBBKJMJEOFKAMFJJNNHEEHJCGAA.landofgrey@gnc.net>

On Mon, 13 Aug 2001, Matthew Travis wrote:
> Is it Pluto and Charon who are locked into each other so that each only
> shows one side to the other?

Right.  Plus there are some double asteroids that are *probably* the same
way, although we can't be sure of that yet.

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 29333 invoked from network); 14 Aug 2001 01:39:23 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 14 Aug 2001 01:39:23 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 22604 invoked from network); 14 Aug 2001 01:39:29 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 14 Aug 2001 01:39:29 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA24600; Mon, 13 Aug 2001 18:36:41 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 84079 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 14 Aug 2001 01:35:14          +0000
Received: from mail1.murraystate.edu (mail1.murraystate.edu [216.249.159.50])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id SAA24583 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 13 Aug 2001 18:35:14 -0700
Received: from jjcomputer.murraystate.edu (216.249.158.67) by          mail1.murraystate.edu (NPlex 5.5.031) id 3B75A7FC00007197 for          AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 13 Aug 2001 20:33:13 -0500
X-Sender: terry.mccreary@mail.murraystate.edu
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <5.1.0.14.0.20010813203241.01dd3af0@mail.murraystate.edu>
Date:         Mon, 13 Aug 2001 20:37:56 -0500
Reply-To: "Terry McCreary" <terry.mccreary@MURRAYSTATE.EDU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Terry McCreary" <terry.mccreary@MURRAYSTATE.EDU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] TMDI
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <5832AFF5FC75D411844300508BC216B70302A6EB@us-bv-m07.bv.tek. com>

At 04:14 PM 8/13/01 -0700, you wrote:
>Has anyone tried TMDI(2,4,4-trimethyl-hexamethylene-diisocynate and
>2,2,4-trimethyl-hexamethylene-diisocynate isomers) as a R45 curative? In
>particular I was wondering what the cure rate was in comparison to MDI and
>IPDI at say 30-40C.


Very limited experience, test batchettes only...

Much faster than IPDI, a little slower than most MDI mixtures.  It didn't
thicken significantly over a couple of hours, and took overnight at about
40 C for full cure.  Low equivalent weight.  IIRC it took about 1 part TMDI
to cure about 14 parts R45.  Very low viscosity, lower than most PAPI and
other MDI mixtures.

P'rfesser

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 19872 invoked from network); 14 Aug 2001 01:58:54 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 14 Aug 2001 01:58:54 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 4771 invoked by uid 50005); 14 Aug 2001 01:59:00 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (. Clean. Processed in 0.235179 secs); 14 Aug 2001 01:59:00 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
X-Qmail-Scanner-Mail-From: owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU via smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net
X-Qmail-Scanner-Rcpt-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
X-Qmail-Scanner: 0.96 (No viruses found. Processed in 0.235179 secs)
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 14 Aug 2001 01:58:58 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA24703; Mon, 13 Aug 2001 18:50:09 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 84091 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 14 Aug 2001 01:48:42          +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (f160.law15.hotmail.com [64.4.23.160]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA24682 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 13 Aug 2001 18:48:42 -0700
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Mon,          13 Aug 2001 18:48:12 -0700
Received: from 134.71.99.32 by lw15fd.law15.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Tue, 14          Aug 2001 01:48:11 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [134.71.99.32]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 14 Aug 2001 01:48:12.0226 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[2D3A9220:01C12463]
Message-ID:  <F160tniFKULPEhGD1Xy00007ac1@hotmail.com>
Date:         Mon, 13 Aug 2001 18:48:11 -0700
Reply-To: "CalPoly RADES" <cp_rades@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "CalPoly RADES" <cp_rades@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] parasail control / solenoid linear actuators
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

On the experience of a friend who has 100 sky dives I wanted to recommend
testing this kind of thing by the "tie it to your truck" method.  You will
have much more luck getting controllable, consistent results and it will
also allow you to make certain "in-flight" mods.  Plus you don't have to
worry about finding tall buildings, throwing your arm out, or having the
dumb thing drift back into an old friend's house or his mother's rose
bushes.
Another 2cents,
Dale H


>From: BASE358@AOL.COM
>Reply-To: BASE358@AOL.COM
>To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
>Subject: Re: [AR] parasail control / solenoid linear actuators
>Date: Sat, 11 Aug 2001 22:34:47 EDT
>
>I think with drop testing, you could learn to flair and stall the parachute
>with good results.  A steerable main is on our to do list, but will not
>happen until next year.  We are funding, and designing a 1/10 scale Saturn
>V,
>ROC our local rocket club is planing on flying it at LDRS next year, so our
>front burner is full.  I can steer you in the right direction for parachute
>riggers and designers...
>
>Erik Gates
>Gates Brothers Rocketry
>gbrocketry.com


_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 29338 invoked from network); 14 Aug 2001 02:08:20 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 14 Aug 2001 02:08:20 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 15725 invoked by uid 50005); 14 Aug 2001 02:08:29 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (. Clean. Processed in 0.778405 secs); 14 Aug 2001 02:08:29 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
X-Qmail-Scanner-Mail-From: owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU via smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net
X-Qmail-Scanner-Rcpt-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
X-Qmail-Scanner: 0.96 (No viruses found. Processed in 0.778405 secs)
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 14 Aug 2001 02:08:27 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA24783; Mon, 13 Aug 2001 19:05:56 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 84102 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 14 Aug 2001 02:04:28          +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (f115.law3.hotmail.com [209.185.241.115]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA24760 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 13 Aug 2001 19:04:28 -0700
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Mon,          13 Aug 2001 19:03:58 -0700
Received: from 63.49.117.28 by lw3fd.law3.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Tue, 14          Aug 2001 02:03:57 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [63.49.117.28]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 14 Aug 2001 02:03:58.0077 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[60FFFAD0:01C12465]
Message-ID:  <F115IOiV3XpfbFT9tcY0000883e@hotmail.com>
Date:         Mon, 13 Aug 2001 22:03:57 -0400
Reply-To: "rocket Man" <varocketry@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "rocket Man" <varocketry@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      [AR] Group Buy forming - CARBON CLOTH - need any?
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

<html><div style='background-color:'><DIV>
<P>Need any CARBON CLOTH? </P></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>Assessing the interest in a GROUP BUY of 5.7 oz and/or 8.3 oz CARBON cloth.
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>Either $15.00 per yard plus nominal actual shipping.
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>Details on the two cloth types are included below.
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>Email me with your interest.
<DIV></DIV>Thanks,
<DIV></DIV>Jim SUTTON
<DIV></DIV>___________________________________________________________________________
<DIV></DIV>Style: Carbon Woven cloth 12x12 pic's per 1"
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>Weave: Its a 3K Plain.
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>Weight: 5.70oz/yd.
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>Width: 26"
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>Thickness: .011
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>Available: Approx. 10 Yards at a time. 100yards available.
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>Price $15.00 /yard
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>You can see each strand of carbon is 3K weave that makes up repeating pattern. Each inch there is 12 strands of carbon x 12 strands. Also note that one end is not sewn.
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>This is Good looking Harness (Satin Weave). 3K-5HS 22" wide 8.3oz./yd
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>This Material was slit from another roll so one end is not sewn.
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>Style: Carbon Woven cloth
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>Weave: Its a 5 K Harness.
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>Weight: 8.30oz/yd.
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>Width: 22"
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>Thickness: .013
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>Price $15.00 /yard
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>Note that one end is not sewn.
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV></div><br clear=all><hr>Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at <a href='http://go.msn.com/bql/hmtag_itl_EN.asp'>http://explorer.msn.com</a><br></html>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 24166 invoked from network); 14 Aug 2001 03:00:49 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 14 Aug 2001 03:00:49 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 1032 invoked by uid 50005); 14 Aug 2001 02:59:58 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (. Clean. Processed in 0.440086 secs); 14 Aug 2001 02:59:58 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
X-Qmail-Scanner-Mail-From: owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU via smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net
X-Qmail-Scanner-Rcpt-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
X-Qmail-Scanner: 0.96 (No viruses found. Processed in 0.440086 secs)
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 14 Aug 2001 02:59:58 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA25040; Mon, 13 Aug 2001 19:55:25 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 84140 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 14 Aug 2001 02:53:59          +0000
Received: from imo-d06.mx.aol.com (imo-d06.mx.aol.com [205.188.157.38]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA25021 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Mon, 13 Aug 2001 19:53:59 -0700
Received: from BASE358@aol.com by imo-d06.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v31.9.) id          i.f6.def131a (17235); Mon, 13 Aug 2001 22:53:32 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0B55_01C56B69.48AB6F60"
X-Mailer: AOL 6.0 for Windows US sub 10531
Message-ID:  <f6.def131a.28a9ecab@aol.com>
Date:         Mon, 13 Aug 2001 22:53:31 EDT
Reply-To: <BASE358@AOL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <BASE358@AOL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] parasail control / solenoid linear actuators
Comments: To: cp_rades@hotmail.com
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0B55_01C56B69.48AB6F60
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

When we drop test, it's out of a Cessna in the dessert at a drop zone.  If
you want to see great video of professional parachute rigging, check out our
Jayhawk footage in our web site's "Movie Theater"  Two 26' Navy man-rated
chutes, packed in two deployment bags sewn together, lines stowed in a diaper
on the chutes as well as on line stows on the bag.  Both chutes were tied to
the deployment bag with 80lb test string.  The drouge pulled the bag out,
streched the lines, broke the strings and simultaneous deployment was
acheived.  We used a Blacksky ARRD to release the mains.  Was picture
perfect.  In our opinion, as much time spent on design of your rocket should
be spent on recovery, our 16' tall 12" dia, 160lb rocket has flown 3 times,
and is ready for another flight!

Erik Gates
Gates Brothers Rocketry
www.gb rocketry.com

------=_NextPart_000_0B55_01C56B69.48AB6F60
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<HTML><FONT FACE=arial,helvetica><FONT  SIZE=2>When we drop test, it's out of a Cessna in the dessert at a drop zone. &nbsp;If
<BR>you want to see great video of professional parachute rigging, check out our
<BR>Jayhawk footage in our web site's "Movie Theater" &nbsp;Two 26' Navy man-rated
<BR>chutes, packed in two deployment bags sewn together, lines stowed in a diaper
<BR>on the chutes as well as on line stows on the bag. &nbsp;Both chutes were tied to
<BR>the deployment bag with 80lb test string. &nbsp;The drouge pulled the bag out,
<BR>streched the lines, broke the strings and simultaneous deployment was
<BR>acheived. &nbsp;We used a Blacksky ARRD to release the mains. &nbsp;Was picture
<BR>perfect. &nbsp;In our opinion, as much time spent on design of your rocket should
<BR>be spent on recovery, our 16' tall 12" dia, 160lb rocket has flown 3 times,
<BR>and is ready for another flight!
<BR>
<BR>Erik Gates
<BR>Gates Brothers Rocketry
<BR>www.gb rocketry.com</FONT></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0B55_01C56B69.48AB6F60--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 4851 invoked from network); 14 Aug 2001 04:52:43 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 14 Aug 2001 04:52:43 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 20844 invoked by uid 50005); 14 Aug 2001 04:20:32 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (. Clean. Processed in 0.321774 secs); 14 Aug 2001 04:20:32 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
X-Qmail-Scanner-Mail-From: owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU via smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net
X-Qmail-Scanner-Rcpt-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
X-Qmail-Scanner: 0.96 (No viruses found. Processed in 0.321774 secs)
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 14 Aug 2001 04:20:32 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA25498; Mon, 13 Aug 2001 21:18:01 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 84261 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 14 Aug 2001 04:16:35          +0000
Received: from cascara.uvic.ca (root@cascara.uvic.ca [142.104.5.28]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA25482 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 13 Aug 2001 21:16:35 -0700
Received: from wolfke.home.com (wolfke.cfs.me.UVic.CA [142.104.121.117]) by          cascara.uvic.ca (8.11.3/8.11.3) with ESMTP id f7E4GYE120436 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 13 Aug 2001 21:16:34 -0700
X-Sender: jmorken@netmail.home.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
References: <003101c12455$04b55fa0$1b30fea9@kristinscomp>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <5.1.0.14.1.20010813210724.00b01f80@netmail.home.com>
Date:         Mon, 13 Aug 2001 21:16:34 -0700
Reply-To: "Jamie Morken" <jmorken@HOME.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jamie Morken" <jmorken@HOME.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Pendulum fallacy
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010813200729.15811D-100000@spsystems.net>

Hi all,


>In fact, it's not unlikely at all, for an object in Mercury's fairly
>elliptical orbit.  The gravity gradient scales with the inverse cube of
>distance (it's the derivative of inverse-square gravity), and various
>consequences of tidal effects scale with even higher powers, so the
>effects are *much* stronger at Mercury's perihelion than elsewhere in its
>orbit.  Tidal locking favors a spin that roughly matches the orbital
>motion there, and since Mercury moves faster in its orbit there, you get a
>3:2 relationship rather than the 1:1 that is normal in circular orbits.
>
>(This all was obvious only after the 3:2 relationship was discovered, mind
>you.  Which wasn't easy, because good observing opportunities for Mercury
>tend to occur every two orbits, and there's no visible difference between
>a 1:1 and a 3:2 then!  Everybody thought it was 1:1, until the radar
>astronomers measured Mercury's rotation directly, by Doppler shift.)
>
>                                                           Henry Spencer
>                                                        henry@spsystems.net

Is Mercury indefinetely stable in this 3:2 (3 rotations every 2 orbits?)
orientation in regards to the Sun's gravity or is it speeding up or
slowing down its rotation due to a "mismatching" of its eliptical orbit to
the 3:2 rotate:orbit ratio?

is the ratio exactly 3/2?! :)

best regards,
Jamie

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 23934 invoked from network); 14 Aug 2001 05:04:44 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 14 Aug 2001 05:04:44 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: (qmail 14378 invoked from network); 14 Aug 2001 05:06:48 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 14 Aug 2001 05:06:48 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA25721; Mon, 13 Aug 2001 22:01:28 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 84304 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 14 Aug 2001 05:01:26          +0000
Received: from spsystems.net (spsystems.net [209.47.149.227]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA25707 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Mon,          13 Aug 2001 22:01:25 -0700
Received: (from henry@localhost) by spsystems.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id BAA25881;          Tue, 14 Aug 2001 01:00:49 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010814005612.25820A-100000@spsystems.net>
Date:         Tue, 14 Aug 2001 01:00:48 -0400
Reply-To: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Pendulum fallacy
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <5.1.0.14.1.20010813210724.00b01f80@netmail.home.com>

On Mon, 13 Aug 2001, Jamie Morken wrote:
> Is Mercury indefinetely stable in this 3:2 (3 rotations every 2 orbits?)
> orientation in regards to the Sun's gravity or is it speeding up or
> slowing down its rotation due to a "mismatching" of its eliptical orbit to
> the 3:2 rotate:orbit ratio?
> is the ratio exactly 3/2?! :)

It's exactly 3:2, and this is thought to be permanently stable.  The
angular momentum of a planet's rotation is enormous, and tidal forces
change it only very slowly, so there is no rotation variation within
the orbit.

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 25839 invoked from network); 14 Aug 2001 07:39:22 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 14 Aug 2001 07:39:22 -0000
Received: (qmail 16645 invoked from network); 14 Aug 2001 07:42:19 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 14 Aug 2001 07:42:19 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA26172; Tue, 14 Aug 2001 00:23:28 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 84362 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 14 Aug 2001 07:23:21          +0000
Received: from fep4-orange.clear.net.nz (fep4-orange.clear.net.nz          [203.97.32.4]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA26158          for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Tue, 14 Aug 2001 00:23:20 -0700
Received: from mkbs (203-167-159-127.dialup.clear.net.nz [203.167.159.127]) by          fep4-orange.clear.net.nz (1.5/1.7) with SMTP id TAA29305; Tue, 14 Aug          2001 19:23:11 +1200 (NZST)
References:  <LPBBKJMJEOFKAMFJJNNHGEHHCGAA.landofgrey@gnc.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <00f201c12492$454a31c0$0100a8c0@mkbs>
Date:         Tue, 14 Aug 2001 16:56:11 +1200
Reply-To: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Organization: Applied Technology
Subject:      Re: [AR] Pendulum fallacy
Comments: To: landofgrey@gnc.net
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

> Sorry about that. I was being needlessly redundant. I started to type
> "free-fall" but realized that "orbit" was more precise but forgot to use
the
> delete key. Prrof again that I'm a terrible typist. While an orbit is
> free-fall, not all free-falls are orbits, as we classically think of them.

I think that you were actually correct initially. Gravity gradient affects
are no more or less prevalent for bodies in "free fall" or "orbit" because
they are in fact the same thing. The "noticeability" of such affects does of
course vary with situation).

If we consider earth as one body and an object travelling at less than
"earth escape velocity" as the other, then the second body is ALWAYS in
orbit about the earth until/if it impacts the earth. This applies to a
ballistic missile or a stick thrown in the air (with or without black
monolith involved). We tend to miss this point because most such orbits have
the inconvenient property of intersecting the earth at some point in the
orbit :-). (Most thrown objects are very close to Apogee at point of release
and would have a Perigee a few metres from the centre of the earth IF it was
a point mass). Also, other forces (such as drag & thrust ) tend to keep
reshaping the orbit before the affects of gravity become apparent.

This may sound pedantic (it is :-) ) but the important point is, any affect
that applies "in orbit"  occurs at all other stages of a rockets flight,
even if the object goes nowhere near orbit as we know it and the affects are
swamped by other factors. As regards gravity gradient stabilisation, a
ballistic flight that crossed the orbit of an orbiting satellite would
result in identical affect on both vehicles but they would not be noticed in
practice on the ballistic vehicle due to the short time that they would
apply for.

(Henry may now point out where I have slipped up :-( ).



regards


                    Russell McMahon

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 16077 invoked from network); 14 Aug 2001 12:22:16 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 14 Aug 2001 12:22:16 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 11295 invoked from network); 14 Aug 2001 12:23:40 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 14 Aug 2001 12:23:40 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id FAA26985; Tue, 14 Aug 2001 05:05:48 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 84423 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 14 Aug 2001 12:05:33          +0000
Received: from angel.comcen.com.au (angel.comcen.com.au [203.23.236.69]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id FAA26971 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 14 Aug 2001 05:05:31 -0700
Received: (from nobody@localhost) by angel.comcen.com.au (8.11.4/8.10.1) id          f7EC5RJ20631; Tue, 14 Aug 2001 22:05:27 +1000 (EST)
X-Mailer: NeoMail 1.24
X-IPAddress: 203.2.125.3
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Message-ID:  <200108141205.f7EC5RJ20631@angel.comcen.com.au>
Date:         Tue, 14 Aug 2001 22:05:27 +1000
Reply-To: "Paul Kelly" <pkelly@COMCEN.COM.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Paul Kelly" <pkelly@COMCEN.COM.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Pendulum fallacy
Comments: To: Thomas Engelhardt <tengelh@STUD.UNI-GOETTINGEN.DE>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Woohoo! my favorite thread!
The pendulum fallacy is, in practice, a metafallacy!

PK

> Hi group,
>
> can anyone point me towards a source where the pendulum fallacy is
> explained in detail? Jim Bowery's site is good, but I need detailed
> info, maybe an example etc. to explain to someone why it works in
theory
> but not in real life.
>
> Thanks for your help!!
>
> Tom
>
> --
> Atheism is a non-prophet organization.
>
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 11428 invoked from network); 14 Aug 2001 15:28:06 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 14 Aug 2001 15:28:06 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 2068 invoked by uid 50005); 14 Aug 2001 15:28:43 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.269164 secs); 14 Aug 2001 15:28:43 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 14 Aug 2001 15:28:42 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA27750; Tue, 14 Aug 2001 08:23:08 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 84551 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 14 Aug 2001 15:22:50          +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (f98.pav1.hotmail.com [64.4.31.98]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA27735 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue,          14 Aug 2001 08:22:50 -0700
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Tue,          14 Aug 2001 08:22:19 -0700
Received: from 63.87.137.144 by pv1fd.pav1.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Tue, 14          Aug 2001 15:22:19 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [63.87.137.144]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 14 Aug 2001 15:22:19.0853 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[E8AEEFD0:01C124D4]
Message-ID:  <F98xe0ymQ1WE9ql2Rke0000729c@hotmail.com>
Date:         Tue, 14 Aug 2001 08:22:19 -0700
Reply-To: "Brian Reddeman" <breddeman@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Brian Reddeman" <breddeman@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      [AR] Sources of liquid fuel rocket motor design
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

What are some good sources of information on liquid fuel rocket motor
design? I need to re-think my whole motor design. Also are there any good
websites on pump* design?


*Note the word "pump" is a term used by the author for a thingy that pushes
out lots of really cold liquid really fast under lots of pressure.

-Brian
"I may not be an engineer, but dammit I can do anything with lots of duct
tape."



_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 26286 invoked from network); 14 Aug 2001 16:15:52 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 14 Aug 2001 16:15:52 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: (qmail 12445 invoked from network); 14 Aug 2001 16:18:49 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 14 Aug 2001 16:18:49 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA28035; Tue, 14 Aug 2001 09:00:12 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 84609 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 14 Aug 2001 16:00:10          +0000
Received: from spsystems.net (spsystems.net [209.47.149.227]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA28020 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Tue,          14 Aug 2001 09:00:09 -0700
Received: (from henry@localhost) by spsystems.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id LAA05597;          Tue, 14 Aug 2001 11:59:29 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010814115751.3877G-100000@spsystems.net>
Date:         Tue, 14 Aug 2001 11:59:29 -0400
Reply-To: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Sources of liquid fuel rocket motor design
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <F98xe0ymQ1WE9ql2Rke0000729c@hotmail.com>

On Tue, 14 Aug 2001, Brian Reddeman wrote:
> What are some good sources of information on liquid fuel rocket motor
> design?

For anything very deep, you'll have to read books, not web pages. :-)
Sutton's "Rocket Propulsion Elements" (7th ed. is current) and Huzel &
Huang's "Modern Engineering for Design of Liquid-Propellant Rocket Engines"
are the classical primary references.  Check your local university library;
you won't like how much it costs to buy them.

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 29575 invoked from network); 14 Aug 2001 17:43:23 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 14 Aug 2001 17:43:23 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: (qmail 24673 invoked from network); 14 Aug 2001 17:45:56 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 14 Aug 2001 17:45:56 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA28551; Tue, 14 Aug 2001 10:34:38 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 84648 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 14 Aug 2001 17:34:32          +0000
Received: from imo-m07.mx.aol.com (imo-m07.mx.aol.com [64.12.136.162]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA28536 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Tue, 14 Aug 2001 10:34:32 -0700
Received: from Tjpoulton@aol.com by imo-m07.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v31_r1.3.) id          w.76.e4396c3 (3975) for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Tue, 14 Aug 2001          13:33:58 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/mixed;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0B5A_01C56B69.48B75640"
X-Mailer: AOL 5.0 for Windows sub 138
Message-ID:  <76.e4396c3.28aabb05@aol.com>
Date:         Tue, 14 Aug 2001 13:33:57 EDT
Reply-To: <Tjpoulton@AOL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <Tjpoulton@AOL.COM>
Subject:      [AR] Fwd: [AR] Sources of liquid fuel rocket motor design
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0B5A_01C56B69.48B75640
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit



------=_NextPart_000_0B5A_01C56B69.48B75640
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Type: message/rfc822
Content-Disposition: inline

Return-path: <Tjpoulton@aol.com>
From: Tjpoulton@aol.com
Full-name: Tjpoulton
Message-ID: <51.fbf8fc2.28aabac7@aol.com>
Date: Tue, 14 Aug 2001 13:32:55 EDT
Subject: Re: [AR] Sources of liquid fuel rocket motor design
To: henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: AOL 5.0 for Windows sub 138

In a message dated 8/14/01 11:02:54 AM Central Daylight Time,
henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET writes:

> > What are some good sources of information on liquid fuel rocket motor
>  > design?
>
>  For anything very deep, you'll have to read books, not web pages. :-)
>  Sutton's "Rocket Propulsion Elements" (7th ed. is current) and Huzel &
>  Huang's "Modern Engineering for Design of Liquid-Propellant Rocket Engines"
>  are the classical primary references.  Check your local university library;
>  you won't like how much it costs to buy them.

I own Sutton's book and, while it is a wonderful reference for many aspects
of rocket engineering, it is kinda short on pump design -- and liquid
propellant rocket design in general.  It's good if you're starting out not
knowing much.  I have not yet read H&H's book, but it is supposedly coming
soon via inter-library-loan.
Mike P.

------=_NextPart_000_0B5A_01C56B69.48B75640--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 1984 invoked from network); 14 Aug 2001 19:09:43 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 14 Aug 2001 19:09:43 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: (qmail 15789 invoked from network); 14 Aug 2001 19:12:34 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 14 Aug 2001 19:12:34 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA28924; Tue, 14 Aug 2001 12:03:36 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 84686 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 14 Aug 2001 19:03:04          +0000
Received: from spsystems.net (spsystems.net [209.47.149.227]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA28904 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Tue,          14 Aug 2001 12:03:03 -0700
Received: (from henry@localhost) by spsystems.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id PAA11218;          Tue, 14 Aug 2001 15:02:22 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010814145427.3877T-100000@spsystems.net>
Date:         Tue, 14 Aug 2001 15:02:22 -0400
Reply-To: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Sources of liquid fuel rocket motor design
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <51.fbf8fc2.28aabac7@aol.com>

On Tue, 14 Aug 2001 Tjpoulton@aol.com wrote:
> ...I have not yet read H&H's book, but it is supposedly coming
> soon via inter-library-loan.

H&H has a much more pragmatic attitude and gives detailed design rules
for a lot of things.

Unfortunately, by the time you've reached the end of those two, you have
just about exhausted the general-purpose "how to design a rocket engine"
literature.  Oops, I did forget one:  Bragg's "Rocket Engines" is also
worth a look, although it may be hard to find.

Hill&Peterson's "Mechanics and Thermodynamics of Propulsion" (2nd ed) is
good reading for the thermodynamic background in particular.  Ziebland&
Parkinson's "Heat Transfer in Rocket Engines" (AGARDograph 148, 1971) is
valuable beyond its ostensible topic, as is Harrje&Reardon's "Liquid
Propellant Rocket Combustion Instability" (NASA SP-194, 1972).

Beyond that, you're into specialized material on individual topics or
individual engines, and it's scattered and often hard to find.

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 11541 invoked from network); 14 Aug 2001 19:12:06 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 14 Aug 2001 19:12:06 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 29612 invoked by uid 50005); 14 Aug 2001 19:12:43 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.353247 secs); 14 Aug 2001 19:12:43 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 14 Aug 2001 19:12:42 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA28961; Tue, 14 Aug 2001 12:09:37 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 84693 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 14 Aug 2001 19:09:36          +0000
Received: from mail.aros.net (mail.aros.net [207.173.16.20]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA28946 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Tue,          14 Aug 2001 12:09:35 -0700
Received: from biomicro.com ([208.187.122.40]) by mail.aros.net (8.11.3/8.9.3)          with ESMTP id f7EJ9YM10606 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Tue, 14 Aug          2001 13:09:34 -0600 (MDT)
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.77 [en] (Win98; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <76.e4396c3.28aabb05@aol.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B78C9D6.842FDD28@biomicro.com>
Date:         Tue, 14 Aug 2001 00:48:54 -0600
Reply-To: "Mark K. Spute" <mks@BIOMICRO.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Mark K. Spute" <mks@BIOMICRO.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Fwd: [AR] Sources of liquid fuel rocket motor design
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

I own both Sutton and Huzel & Huang.  Of the two, H&H is far better for
designing liquid propellant rockets.


Tjpoulton@AOL.COM wrote:
>
>   ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Subject: Re: [AR] Sources of liquid fuel rocket motor design
> Date: Tue, 14 Aug 2001 13:32:55 EDT
> From: Tjpoulton@aol.com
> To: henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET
>
> In a message dated 8/14/01 11:02:54 AM Central Daylight Time,
> henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET writes:
>
> > > What are some good sources of information on liquid fuel rocket motor
> >  > design?
> >
> >  For anything very deep, you'll have to read books, not web pages. :-)
> >  Sutton's "Rocket Propulsion Elements" (7th ed. is current) and Huzel &
> >  Huang's "Modern Engineering for Design of Liquid-Propellant Rocket Engines"
> >  are the classical primary references.  Check your local university library;
> >  you won't like how much it costs to buy them.
>
> I own Sutton's book and, while it is a wonderful reference for many aspects
> of rocket engineering, it is kinda short on pump design -- and liquid
> propellant rocket design in general.  It's good if you're starting out not
> knowing much.  I have not yet read H&H's book, but it is supposedly coming
> soon via inter-library-loan.
> Mike P.

--
Mark K. Spute
Senior Research Engineer
BioMicro Systems Inc.

KD7IWE,  RRS

"It is difficult to say what is impossible, for the dream of yesterday
is the hope of today and the reality of tomorrow."
     Dr. Robert H. Goddard

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 16535 invoked from network); 14 Aug 2001 20:23:45 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 14 Aug 2001 20:23:45 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: (qmail 11948 invoked from network); 14 Aug 2001 20:26:41 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 14 Aug 2001 20:26:41 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA29261; Tue, 14 Aug 2001 13:03:04 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 84742 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 14 Aug 2001 20:02:32          +0000
Received: from localhost (rcalkins@localhost) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with          ESMTP id NAA29246; Tue, 14 Aug 2001 13:02:30 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.LNX.4.10.10108141257050.29057-100000@itc.uci.edu>
Date:         Tue, 14 Aug 2001 13:02:30 -0700
Reply-To: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Sources of liquid fuel rocket motor design
Comments: To: Brian Reddeman <breddeman@HOTMAIL.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <F98xe0ymQ1WE9ql2Rke0000729c@hotmail.com>

I'm sure there are better ones than this, but you might find this useful
as a starter: http://www.animatedsoftware.com/pumpglos/pumpglos.htm and
has several links to more pump info.

Ray



On Tue, 14 Aug 2001, Brian Reddeman wrote:

> What are some good sources of information on liquid fuel rocket motor
> design? I need to re-think my whole motor design. Also are there any good
> websites on pump* design?
>
>
> *Note the word "pump" is a term used by the author for a thingy that pushes
> out lots of really cold liquid really fast under lots of pressure.
>
> -Brian
> "I may not be an engineer, but dammit I can do anything with lots of duct
> tape."
>
>
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 17044 invoked from network); 14 Aug 2001 21:26:47 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 14 Aug 2001 21:26:47 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 1335 invoked from network); 14 Aug 2001 21:29:11 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 14 Aug 2001 21:29:11 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA29496; Tue, 14 Aug 2001 14:06:26 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 84766 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 14 Aug 2001 21:06:17          +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (f19.law15.hotmail.com [64.4.23.19]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA29480 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Tue,          14 Aug 2001 14:06:16 -0700
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Tue,          14 Aug 2001 14:05:46 -0700
Received: from 213.224.83.46 by lw15fd.law15.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Tue, 14          Aug 2001 21:05:46 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [213.224.83.46]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 14 Aug 2001 21:05:46.0479 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[E33087F0:01C12504]
Message-ID:  <F19nfpM9vKosJXggP6r00008c12@hotmail.com>
Date:         Tue, 14 Aug 2001 21:06:17 +0000
Reply-To: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] bananas was Pendulum fallacy
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Since the thread has become celestial mechanics I risk this one: does
everyone agree that all bananas in a bunch, grown in orbit 'd be straight,
none curved?
(Er, this was a recent work debate on genome and gravity.)

jd

_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 15566 invoked from network); 14 Aug 2001 21:33:59 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 14 Aug 2001 21:33:59 -0000
Received: (qmail 5328 invoked from network); 14 Aug 2001 21:36:29 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 14 Aug 2001 21:36:29 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA29545; Tue, 14 Aug 2001 14:19:49 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 84773 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 14 Aug 2001 21:19:44          +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (oe36.law12.hotmail.com [64.4.18.93]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA29530 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue,          14 Aug 2001 14:19:44 -0700
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Tue,          14 Aug 2001 14:19:14 -0700
X-Originating-IP: [24.29.188.254]
References:  <F19nfpM9vKosJXggP6r00008c12@hotmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 14 Aug 2001 21:19:14.0032 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[C4875700:01C12506]
Message-ID:  <OE36dbI6bICZeL6uXHa00006723@hotmail.com>
Date:         Tue, 14 Aug 2001 16:20:40 -0500
Reply-To: "Mark Kruep" <mkruep@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Mark Kruep" <mkruep@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] bananas was Pendulum fallacy
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Bananas?? All we need now is a debate on the heat death of the universe, how
eventually our galaxy will be swallowed by another galaxy, or maybe that as
our solar system oscillates in the galaxy it may eventually collide with
another solar system or celestial body. Throw in some rogue asteroids,
anti-matter, and stray planets cruising around without orbiting anything and
we could have one hell of a doomsday novel :-).

Mark


----- Original Message -----
From: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Tuesday, August 14, 2001 4:06 PM
Subject: Re: [AR] bananas was Pendulum fallacy


> Since the thread has become celestial mechanics I risk this one: does
> everyone agree that all bananas in a bunch, grown in orbit 'd be straight,
> none curved?
> (Er, this was a recent work debate on genome and gravity.)
>
> jd
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 28600 invoked from network); 14 Aug 2001 21:37:08 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 14 Aug 2001 21:37:08 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 17566 invoked by uid 50005); 14 Aug 2001 21:37:14 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (. Clean. Processed in 0.236865 secs); 14 Aug 2001 21:37:14 -0000
X-Qmail-Scanner-Mail-From: owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU via smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net
X-Qmail-Scanner-Rcpt-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
X-Qmail-Scanner: 0.96 (No viruses found. Processed in 0.236865 secs)
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 14 Aug 2001 21:37:13 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA29591; Tue, 14 Aug 2001 14:22:03 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 84784 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 14 Aug 2001 21:22:01          +0000
Received: from localhost (rcalkins@localhost) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with          ESMTP id OAA29576; Tue, 14 Aug 2001 14:22:00 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.LNX.4.10.10108141409271.29057-100000@itc.uci.edu>
Date:         Tue, 14 Aug 2001 14:22:00 -0700
Reply-To: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
Subject:      [AR] [OT] Nulgrav fruit Re: [AR] bananas was Pendulum fallacy
Comments: To: John Dom <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <F19nfpM9vKosJXggP6r00008c12@hotmail.com>

Depends on too many factors.  Moving light source?  Airflow from the same
direction?  Nutrient influx location?

I think most would tend to be straight, but a few would be curved and some
even spiraled, depending on the previous factors.  But yes, banannas
generally seem to curve under the gravitational pull of their own weight.
The smaller the fruit, the less curve, some of the fancy finger-sized
banannas have very little curvature.

Ray (Who dreams of growing giant veggies in microgravity...)
On Tue, 14 Aug 2001, John Dom wrote:

> Since the thread has become celestial mechanics I risk this one: does
> everyone agree that all bananas in a bunch, grown in orbit 'd be straight,
> none curved?
> (Er, this was a recent work debate on genome and gravity.)
>
> jd
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 21472 invoked from network); 14 Aug 2001 22:13:29 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 14 Aug 2001 22:13:29 -0000
Received: (qmail 22544 invoked by uid 50005); 14 Aug 2001 22:14:05 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.548886 secs); 14 Aug 2001 22:14:05 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 14 Aug 2001 22:14:03 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA29778; Tue, 14 Aug 2001 15:09:28 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 84812 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 14 Aug 2001 22:09:13          +0000
Received: from fep3-orange.clear.net.nz (fep3-orange.clear.net.nz          [203.97.32.3]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA29760          for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Tue, 14 Aug 2001 15:09:12 -0700
Received: from mkbs (203-167-163-38.dialup.clear.net.nz [203.167.163.38]) by          fep3-orange.clear.net.nz (1.5/1.8) with SMTP id KAA12344; Wed, 15 Aug          2001 10:09:06 +1200 (NZST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="Windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <010b01c1250e$0a05b2c0$0100a8c0@mkbs>
Date:         Wed, 15 Aug 2001 10:10:16 +1200
Reply-To: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Organization: Applied Technology
Subject:      [AR] Fw: NASA SOLAR AIRCRAFT SETS ALTITUDE RECORD; COMMUNICATIONS,              ENVIRONMENTAL BREAKTHROUGHS EXPECTED
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

NASA claim new non-rocket assisted aircraft altitude record.
AFAIR this is far lower than was suggested here recently.

It clearly didn't find "Space" at that altitude :-)




RM

_______________________________________

From: <NASANews@hq.nasa.gov>
To: <undisclosed-recipients:>
Sent: Wednesday, 15 August 2001 07:00
Subject: NASA SOLAR AIRCRAFT SETS ALTITUDE RECORD; COMMUNICATIONS,
ENVIRONMENTAL BREAKTHROUGHS EXPECTED


> Mike Braukus
> Headquarters, Washington                   August 14, 2001
> (Phone: 202/358-1979)
>
> Frederick A. Johnsen
> Dryden Flight Research Center, Edwards, CA
> (Phone: 661/276-2998)
>
> RELEASE: 01-165
>
> NASA SOLAR AIRCRAFT SETS ALTITUDE RECORD; COMMUNICATIONS,
> ENVIRONMENTAL BREAKTHROUGHS EXPECTED
>
>      NASA's solar-powered, propeller-driven Helios aircraft
> set a new world record altitude of 96,500 feet on Monday,
> surpassing the old record for aircraft without rocket power
> by more than 10,000 feet. Sustained operations at that
> altitude promise to enable capabilities ranging from
> environmental monitoring to radically improved communications
> on Earth to simulating flight in the atmosphere of Mars.
>
> NASA Adminstrator Daniel S. Goldin, who has been a strong
> supporter of solar-powered flight, said, "This is a ground
> breaking accomplishment which will advance this technology to
> new heights."
>
> The remotely piloted wing, built by AeroVironment, Inc.,
> Monrovia, CA, took off from the U.S. Navy's Pacific Missile
> Range Facility on the Hawaiian island of Kauai at 8:48 a.m.
> local time.  Flying at about 25 miles an hour, the aircraft
> stayed aloft almost 17 hours, passing the old altitude
> records of 80,200 feet for propeller-driven aircraft and
> 85,068 feet for any aircraft not powered by rockets. Helios
> reached its highest altitude at 4:08 p.m. local time and
> landed at 1:43 a.m. Tuesday local time.
>
> The record flight sets the stage for follow-on missions that
> will use a regenerative fuel system now under development to
> enable Helios to remain aloft 24 hours a day for months at a
> time.  The aircraft reached record altitude during daylight
> hours, relying on solar cells on the wing's surface to
> provide electrical power.  Descent after dark was possible as
> the 14 electric motors were no longer needed to maintain
> altitude. During descent the propellers acted as generators,
> providing electrical power to control the aircraft.
>
> Production variants of Helios might see service as long-term
> Earth environmental monitors or as communications relays,
> reducing dependence on satellites and providing service in
> areas not covered by satellites.  The successful flight at
> high altitude also provides NASA with information about
> flight on Mars, since the atmosphere at that height above
> Earth replicates the atmosphere near the Martian surface.
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 20845 invoked from network); 14 Aug 2001 22:29:13 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 14 Aug 2001 22:29:13 -0000
Received: (qmail 4993 invoked by uid 50005); 14 Aug 2001 22:29:50 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.19476 secs); 14 Aug 2001 22:29:50 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 14 Aug 2001 22:29:49 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA29849; Tue, 14 Aug 2001 15:25:16 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 84823 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 14 Aug 2001 22:25:11          +0000
Received: from smtp001.mailsrvcs.net (smtp001pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.180])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA29834 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 14 Aug 2001 15:25:10 -0700
Received: from [63.27.96.152] (1Cust87.tnt1.san-bernardino.ca.da.uu.net          [63.27.96.87]) by smtp001.mailsrvcs.net  with ESMTP for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; id f7EMOO717974 Tue, 14 Aug 2001 17:24:24          -0500 (CDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: GTE/01rocket@mail.gte.net
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <a05100307b79f55136e0f@[63.27.96.152]>
Date:         Tue, 14 Aug 2001 15:24:43 -0700
Reply-To: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Subject:      [AR] Fw: NASA SOLAR AIRCRAFT SETS ALTITUDE RECORD; COMMUNICATIONS,              ENVIRONMENTAL BREAKTHROUGHS EXPECTED
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Press release clip:

>  The remotely piloted wing, built by AeroVironment, Inc.,
>  Monrovia, CA, took off from the U.S. Navy's Pacific Missile
>  Range Facility on the Hawaiian island of Kauai at 8:48 a.m.
>  local time.  Flying at about 25 miles an hour, the aircraft
>  stayed aloft almost 17 hours, passing the old altitude

Aerovironment is being run by rocket geeks.  These people were
setting trends in rocketry in the 70's and moved on to low speed aero
from their model rocketry roots.

It's working.

Jerry

--
Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
Opinion, the whole thing.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 21472 invoked from network); 14 Aug 2001 22:13:29 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 14 Aug 2001 22:13:29 -0000
Received: (qmail 22544 invoked by uid 50005); 14 Aug 2001 22:14:05 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.548886 secs); 14 Aug 2001 22:14:05 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 14 Aug 2001 22:14:03 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA29778; Tue, 14 Aug 2001 15:09:28 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 84812 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 14 Aug 2001 22:09:13          +0000
Received: from fep3-orange.clear.net.nz (fep3-orange.clear.net.nz          [203.97.32.3]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA29760          for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Tue, 14 Aug 2001 15:09:12 -0700
Received: from mkbs (203-167-163-38.dialup.clear.net.nz [203.167.163.38]) by          fep3-orange.clear.net.nz (1.5/1.8) with SMTP id KAA12344; Wed, 15 Aug          2001 10:09:06 +1200 (NZST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="Windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <010b01c1250e$0a05b2c0$0100a8c0@mkbs>
Date:         Wed, 15 Aug 2001 10:10:16 +1200
Reply-To: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Organization: Applied Technology
Subject:      [AR] Fw: NASA SOLAR AIRCRAFT SETS ALTITUDE RECORD; COMMUNICATIONS,              ENVIRONMENTAL BREAKTHROUGHS EXPECTED
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

NASA claim new non-rocket assisted aircraft altitude record.
AFAIR this is far lower than was suggested here recently.

It clearly didn't find "Space" at that altitude :-)




RM

_______________________________________

From: <NASANews@hq.nasa.gov>
To: <undisclosed-recipients:>
Sent: Wednesday, 15 August 2001 07:00
Subject: NASA SOLAR AIRCRAFT SETS ALTITUDE RECORD; COMMUNICATIONS,
ENVIRONMENTAL BREAKTHROUGHS EXPECTED


> Mike Braukus
> Headquarters, Washington                   August 14, 2001
> (Phone: 202/358-1979)
>
> Frederick A. Johnsen
> Dryden Flight Research Center, Edwards, CA
> (Phone: 661/276-2998)
>
> RELEASE: 01-165
>
> NASA SOLAR AIRCRAFT SETS ALTITUDE RECORD; COMMUNICATIONS,
> ENVIRONMENTAL BREAKTHROUGHS EXPECTED
>
>      NASA's solar-powered, propeller-driven Helios aircraft
> set a new world record altitude of 96,500 feet on Monday,
> surpassing the old record for aircraft without rocket power
> by more than 10,000 feet. Sustained operations at that
> altitude promise to enable capabilities ranging from
> environmental monitoring to radically improved communications
> on Earth to simulating flight in the atmosphere of Mars.
>
> NASA Adminstrator Daniel S. Goldin, who has been a strong
> supporter of solar-powered flight, said, "This is a ground
> breaking accomplishment which will advance this technology to
> new heights."
>
> The remotely piloted wing, built by AeroVironment, Inc.,
> Monrovia, CA, took off from the U.S. Navy's Pacific Missile
> Range Facility on the Hawaiian island of Kauai at 8:48 a.m.
> local time.  Flying at about 25 miles an hour, the aircraft
> stayed aloft almost 17 hours, passing the old altitude
> records of 80,200 feet for propeller-driven aircraft and
> 85,068 feet for any aircraft not powered by rockets. Helios
> reached its highest altitude at 4:08 p.m. local time and
> landed at 1:43 a.m. Tuesday local time.
>
> The record flight sets the stage for follow-on missions that
> will use a regenerative fuel system now under development to
> enable Helios to remain aloft 24 hours a day for months at a
> time.  The aircraft reached record altitude during daylight
> hours, relying on solar cells on the wing's surface to
> provide electrical power.  Descent after dark was possible as
> the 14 electric motors were no longer needed to maintain
> altitude. During descent the propellers acted as generators,
> providing electrical power to control the aircraft.
>
> Production variants of Helios might see service as long-term
> Earth environmental monitors or as communications relays,
> reducing dependence on satellites and providing service in
> areas not covered by satellites.  The successful flight at
> high altitude also provides NASA with information about
> flight on Mars, since the atmosphere at that height above
> Earth replicates the atmosphere near the Martian surface.
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 20845 invoked from network); 14 Aug 2001 22:29:13 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 14 Aug 2001 22:29:13 -0000
Received: (qmail 4993 invoked by uid 50005); 14 Aug 2001 22:29:50 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.19476 secs); 14 Aug 2001 22:29:50 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 14 Aug 2001 22:29:49 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA29849; Tue, 14 Aug 2001 15:25:16 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 84823 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 14 Aug 2001 22:25:11          +0000
Received: from smtp001.mailsrvcs.net (smtp001pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.180])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA29834 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 14 Aug 2001 15:25:10 -0700
Received: from [63.27.96.152] (1Cust87.tnt1.san-bernardino.ca.da.uu.net          [63.27.96.87]) by smtp001.mailsrvcs.net  with ESMTP for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; id f7EMOO717974 Tue, 14 Aug 2001 17:24:24          -0500 (CDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: GTE/01rocket@mail.gte.net
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <a05100307b79f55136e0f@[63.27.96.152]>
Date:         Tue, 14 Aug 2001 15:24:43 -0700
Reply-To: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Subject:      [AR] Fw: NASA SOLAR AIRCRAFT SETS ALTITUDE RECORD; COMMUNICATIONS,              ENVIRONMENTAL BREAKTHROUGHS EXPECTED
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Press release clip:

>  The remotely piloted wing, built by AeroVironment, Inc.,
>  Monrovia, CA, took off from the U.S. Navy's Pacific Missile
>  Range Facility on the Hawaiian island of Kauai at 8:48 a.m.
>  local time.  Flying at about 25 miles an hour, the aircraft
>  stayed aloft almost 17 hours, passing the old altitude

Aerovironment is being run by rocket geeks.  These people were
setting trends in rocketry in the 70's and moved on to low speed aero
from their model rocketry roots.

It's working.

Jerry

--
Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
Opinion, the whole thing.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 15873 invoked from network); 15 Aug 2001 01:18:28 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 15 Aug 2001 01:18:28 -0000
Received: (qmail 7147 invoked by uid 50005); 15 Aug 2001 01:19:04 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.241354 secs); 15 Aug 2001 01:19:04 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 15 Aug 2001 01:19:03 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA30315; Tue, 14 Aug 2001 18:10:58 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 84870 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 15 Aug 2001 01:10:13          +0000
Received: from femail45.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail45.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.254.60.39]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA30297;          Tue, 14 Aug 2001 18:10:13 -0700
Received: from officenew ([24.1.27.168]) by femail45.sdc1.sfba.home.com          (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20 201-229-121-120-20010223) with SMTP id          <20010815011007.QFXJ13347.femail45.sdc1.sfba.home.com@officenew>;          Tue, 14 Aug 2001 18:10:07 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
Importance: Normal
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: <NFBBKGGJCLONFHCIKEFNEEDKCBAA.taldridge@home.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="Windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <NFBBKGGJCLONFHCIKEFNEEDKCBAA.taldridge@home.com>
Date:         Tue, 14 Aug 2001 18:10:06 -0700
Reply-To: "Tomm Aldridge" <taldridge@HOME.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Tomm Aldridge" <taldridge@HOME.COM>
Subject:      [AR]
Comments: To: Ray Calkins <rcalkins@ITC.UCI.EDU>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <Pine.LNX.4.10.10108141409271.29057-100000@itc.uci.edu>

I am getting tons of blank mails.  Anyone know why???

>  -----Original Message-----
> From:         Amateur Rocketry discussion list
> [mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU]  On Behalf Of Ray Calkins
> Sent: Tuesday, August 14, 2001 2:22 PM
> To:   AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
> Subject:
>
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 15637 invoked from network); 15 Aug 2001 02:01:02 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 15 Aug 2001 02:01:02 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 6861 invoked from network); 15 Aug 2001 02:00:36 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 15 Aug 2001 02:00:36 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA30512; Tue, 14 Aug 2001 18:41:17 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 84891 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 15 Aug 2001 01:41:07          +0000
Received: from mxout1.cac.washington.edu (mxout1.cac.washington.edu          [140.142.32.5]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA30429          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 14 Aug 2001 18:31:06 -0700
Received: from mailhost1.u.washington.edu (mailhost1.u.washington.edu          [140.142.32.2]) by mxout1.cac.washington.edu          (8.11.2+UW01.01/8.11.2+UW01.04) with ESMTP id f7F1V6108268; Tue, 14          Aug 2001 18:31:06 -0700
Received: from hymn02.u.washington.edu (hymn02.u.washington.edu          [140.142.15.156]) by mailhost1.u.washington.edu          (8.11.2+UW01.01/8.11.2+UW01.04) with ESMTP id f7F1V6i01503; Tue, 14          Aug 2001 18:31:06 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.LNX.4.33.0108141831050.12703@hymn02.u.washington.edu>
Date:         Tue, 14 Aug 2001 18:31:05 -0700
Reply-To: "Andrew Rhines" <arhines@U.WASHINGTON.EDU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Andrew Rhines" <arhines@U.WASHINGTON.EDU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Fw: NASA SOLAR AIRCRAFT SETS ALTITUDE RECORD;              COMMUNICATIONS,              ENVIRONMENTAL BREAKTHROUGHS EXPECTED
Comments: To: Jerry Irvine <01rocket@GTE.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <a05100307b79f55136e0f@[63.27.96.152]>

AeroVironment is a company full of very innovative people.  I have had the pleasure of working with MacCready (owner/founder/etc...)'s son, and he is full of great ideas.  His passion is fluid dynamics, though, and he has great fun creating things like pogo-powered personal watercraft which travel very fast and are human powered.  I agree, though.  MacCready is exactly the sort of person who used to be very seriously into rocketry.
_.-''-.___.--.__..__._
 Andrew Rhines
 programmer @ apl.washington
 moderator@ hardocp
(206)522-5753 (home)
(206)543-2982 (work)
 -.__.--..--.----------

On Tue, 14 Aug 2001, Jerry Irvine wrote:

> Press release clip:
>
> >  The remotely piloted wing, built by AeroVironment, Inc.,
> >  Monrovia, CA, took off from the U.S. Navy's Pacific Missile
> >  Range Facility on the Hawaiian island of Kauai at 8:48 a.m.
> >  local time.  Flying at about 25 miles an hour, the aircraft
> >  stayed aloft almost 17 hours, passing the old altitude
>
> Aerovironment is being run by rocket geeks.  These people were
> setting trends in rocketry in the 70's and moved on to low speed aero
> from their model rocketry roots.
>
> It's working.
>
> Jerry
>
> --
> Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
> Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
> Opinion, the whole thing.
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 23130 invoked from network); 15 Aug 2001 02:28:02 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 15 Aug 2001 02:28:02 -0000
Received: (qmail 31890 invoked by uid 50005); 15 Aug 2001 02:28:36 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.16653 secs); 15 Aug 2001 02:28:36 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 15 Aug 2001 02:28:36 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA30684; Tue, 14 Aug 2001 19:25:19 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 84918 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 15 Aug 2001 02:25:10          +0000
Received: from mta05.mail.mel.aone.net.au (mta05.mail.au.uu.net [203.2.192.85])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA30669 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 14 Aug 2001 19:25:09 -0700
Received: from unknown ([63.34.210.95]) by mta05.mail.mel.aone.net.au with SMTP          id <20010815022506.HYCK19580.mta05.mail.mel.aone.net.au@unknown> for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 15 Aug 2001 12:25:06 +1000
References: Conversation <010b01c1250e$0a05b2c0$0100a8c0@mkbs> with last            message <011a01c1252e$ff9717e0$0100a8c0@prdise1.nm.home.com>
Priority: Normal
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Priority: 3
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	X-MAPIextension=.TXT;
	charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>
Date:         Wed, 15 Aug 2001 02:25:10 +0000
Reply-To: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] AP/Dextrose propellant issues.
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <011a01c1252e$ff9717e0$0100a8c0@prdise1.nm.home.com>

I don't know what the mechanism is but that'll happen with any NH4+ based
oxidiser including AN, sulphates and persulphates and probably all Ammonium
based compounds for that matter.

Troy.

----------
> Guys, isn't the point where AP starts to decompose 260 degrees C?
> I was trying to make a small 100 gram batch of AP/Dextrose and had the
> temperature set at between 250-300 degrees F. I was changing it. However
at
> 275 degrees F the composition started to blacken. I was using a ratio of
> 70/30 AP/Dex. In powder form this stuff burns neat. It seems very uniform.
> Will AP just not handle the heating process, or are there other issues I
was
> not taking into effect. Sorbitol melts at about 235 degrees F, would that
> provide better results?
>
> Paxton

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 29231 invoked from network); 15 Aug 2001 02:36:57 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 15 Aug 2001 02:36:57 -0000
Received: (qmail 29099 invoked by uid 50005); 15 Aug 2001 02:37:01 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (. Clean. Processed in 0.131683 secs); 15 Aug 2001 02:37:01 -0000
X-Qmail-Scanner-Mail-From: owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU via smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net
X-Qmail-Scanner-Rcpt-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
X-Qmail-Scanner: 0.96 (No viruses found. Processed in 0.131683 secs)
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 15 Aug 2001 02:37:01 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA30603; Tue, 14 Aug 2001 19:06:47 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 84903 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 15 Aug 2001 02:06:41          +0000
Received: from albqpop1.albq.uswest.net (albqpop1.albq.uswest.net          [207.108.240.1]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id TAA30588          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 14 Aug 2001 19:06:40 -0700
Received: (qmail 86289 invoked by alias); 15 Aug 2001 02:04:56 -0000
Delivered-To: fixup-AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU@fixme
Received: (qmail 83654 invoked by uid 0); 15 Aug 2001 02:03:26 -0000
Received: from cc898542-a.prdise1.nm.home.com (HELO cc898542a) (65.7.151.152)          by albqpop1.albq.uswest.net with SMTP; 15 Aug 2001 02:03:26 -0000
References:  <010b01c1250e$0a05b2c0$0100a8c0@mkbs>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="Windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <011a01c1252e$ff9717e0$0100a8c0@prdise1.nm.home.com>
Date:         Tue, 14 Aug 2001 20:07:11 -0600
Reply-To: "Pax" <darkspunge@USWEST.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Pax" <darkspunge@USWEST.NET>
Subject:      [AR] AP/Dextrose propellant issues.
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Guys, isn't the point where AP starts to decompose 260 degrees C?
I was trying to make a small 100 gram batch of AP/Dextrose and had the
temperature set at between 250-300 degrees F. I was changing it. However at
275 degrees F the composition started to blacken. I was using a ratio of
70/30 AP/Dex. In powder form this stuff burns neat. It seems very uniform.
Will AP just not handle the heating process, or are there other issues I was
not taking into effect. Sorbitol melts at about 235 degrees F, would that
provide better results?

Paxton

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 10904 invoked from network); 15 Aug 2001 02:53:32 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 15 Aug 2001 02:53:32 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: (qmail 14358 invoked from network); 15 Aug 2001 02:56:30 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 15 Aug 2001 02:56:30 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA30778; Tue, 14 Aug 2001 19:38:28 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 84929 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 15 Aug 2001 02:38:26          +0000
Received: from spsystems.net (spsystems.net [209.47.149.227]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA30762 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Tue,          14 Aug 2001 19:38:25 -0700
Received: (from henry@localhost) by spsystems.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id WAA16329;          Tue, 14 Aug 2001 22:37:42 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010814223523.16133A-100000@spsystems.net>
Date:         Tue, 14 Aug 2001 22:37:41 -0400
Reply-To: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] AP/Dextrose propellant issues.
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <011a01c1252e$ff9717e0$0100a8c0@prdise1.nm.home.com>

On Tue, 14 Aug 2001, Pax wrote:
> Guys, isn't the point where AP starts to decompose 260 degrees C?

Remember that such temperatures are not sharp break points; decomposition
rates gradually accelerate as temperature rises.  Other substances in the
mix might also act as catalysts for decomposition, I suppose.

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 19013 invoked from network); 15 Aug 2001 04:49:37 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 15 Aug 2001 04:49:37 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 23422 invoked by uid 50005); 15 Aug 2001 04:49:41 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (. Clean. Processed in 0.179673 secs); 15 Aug 2001 04:49:41 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
X-Qmail-Scanner-Mail-From: owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU via smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net
X-Qmail-Scanner-Rcpt-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
X-Qmail-Scanner: 0.96 (No viruses found. Processed in 0.179673 secs)
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 15 Aug 2001 04:49:41 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA31190; Tue, 14 Aug 2001 21:45:30 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 84961 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 15 Aug 2001 04:45:23          +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (f133.law14.hotmail.com [64.4.21.133]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA31175 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 14 Aug 2001 21:45:23 -0700
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Tue,          14 Aug 2001 21:44:53 -0700
Received: from 207.220.227.249 by lw14fd.law14.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Wed,          15 Aug 2001 04:44:53 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [207.220.227.249]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 15 Aug 2001 04:44:53.0093 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[06404150:01C12545]
Message-ID:  <F1339o154KpewQ1XpIL00007030@hotmail.com>
Date:         Wed, 15 Aug 2001 04:44:53 +0000
Reply-To: "Matt Faulkner" <mattfaulkner9@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Matt Faulkner" <mattfaulkner9@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Sources of liquid fuel rocket motor design
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

>On Tue, 14 Aug 2001, Brian Reddeman wrote:
>
> > What are some good sources of information on liquid fuel rocket motor
> > design? I need to re-think my whole motor design. Also are there any
>good
> > websites on pump* design?

  A paper was written a while back and is downloadable called "How to
design, build, and test small liquid fuel rockets". I forget the author's
name, but if you search the name (e.g. yahoo) you'll find it. If you can't
find it, I have it somewhere in my computer and will dig it up for you.
There's no mention of pumps though.
                Good Luck
                             -Matt Faulkner



_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 9590 invoked from network); 15 Aug 2001 05:07:18 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 15 Aug 2001 05:07:18 -0000
Received: (qmail 6322 invoked from network); 15 Aug 2001 05:09:54 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 15 Aug 2001 05:09:54 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA31316; Tue, 14 Aug 2001 22:04:24 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 84984 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 15 Aug 2001 05:04:18          +0000
Received: from mta05.mail.mel.aone.net.au (mta05.mail.au.uu.net [203.2.192.85])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA31301 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 14 Aug 2001 22:04:17 -0700
Received: from unknown ([63.60.249.142]) by mta05.mail.mel.aone.net.au with          SMTP id <20010815050414.KIUG19580.mta05.mail.mel.aone.net.au@unknown>          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 15 Aug 2001 15:04:14 +1000
References: Conversation <76.e4396c3.28aabb05@aol.com> with last message            <3B78C9D6.842FDD28@biomicro.com>
Priority: Normal
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Priority: 3
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	X-MAPIextension=.TXT;
	charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>
Date:         Wed, 15 Aug 2001 05:04:18 +0000
Reply-To: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Fwd: [AR] Sources of liquid fuel rocket motor design
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <3B78C9D6.842FDD28@biomicro.com>

Another probably worth a mention (oldie but a goodie) is Rocketdyne's
"Introduction to rocket missile propulsion". Whilst most of the content is
based on the V2, it's easy to read and contains most of the fundamentals.

Troy.

----------
> I own both Sutton and Huzel & Huang.  Of the two, H&H is far better for
> designing liquid propellant rockets.
>
>
> Tjpoulton@AOL.COM wrote:
> >
> >
------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >
> > Subject: Re: [AR] Sources of liquid fuel rocket motor design
> > Date: Tue, 14 Aug 2001 13:32:55 EDT
> > From: Tjpoulton@aol.com
> > To: henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET
> >
> > In a message dated 8/14/01 11:02:54 AM Central Daylight Time,
> > henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET writes:
> >
> > > > What are some good sources of information on liquid fuel rocket
motor
> > >  > design?
> > >
> > >  For anything very deep, you'll have to read books, not web pages. :-)
> > >  Sutton's "Rocket Propulsion Elements" (7th ed. is current) and Huzel
&
> > >  Huang's "Modern Engineering for Design of Liquid-Propellant Rocket
> Engines"
> > >  are the classical primary references.  Check your local university
> library;
> > >  you won't like how much it costs to buy them.
> >
> > I own Sutton's book and, while it is a wonderful reference for many
aspects
> > of rocket engineering, it is kinda short on pump design -- and liquid
> > propellant rocket design in general.  It's good if you're starting out
not
> > knowing much.  I have not yet read H&H's book, but it is supposedly
coming
> > soon via inter-library-loan.
> > Mike P.
>
> --
> Mark K. Spute
> Senior Research Engineer
> BioMicro Systems Inc.
>
> KD7IWE,  RRS
>
> "It is difficult to say what is impossible, for the dream of yesterday
> is the hope of today and the reality of tomorrow."
>      Dr. Robert H. Goddard

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 15011 invoked from network); 15 Aug 2001 05:50:49 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 15 Aug 2001 05:50:49 -0000
Received: (qmail 14001 invoked from network); 15 Aug 2001 05:53:48 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 15 Aug 2001 05:53:48 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA31474; Tue, 14 Aug 2001 22:47:54 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 85003 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 15 Aug 2001 05:47:48          +0000
Received: from imo-m09.mx.aol.com (imo-m09.mx.aol.com [64.12.136.164]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA31431 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Tue, 14 Aug 2001 22:37:47 -0700
Received: from Mdilsave@aol.com by imo-m09.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v31_r1.3.) id          w.cd.ac85bbc (4392) for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Wed, 15 Aug 2001          01:37:11 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: AOL 4.0 for Windows 95 sub 123
Message-ID:  <cd.ac85bbc.28ab6487@aol.com>
Date:         Wed, 15 Aug 2001 01:37:11 EDT
Reply-To: <Mdilsave@AOL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Michael Dilsaver" <Mdilsave@AOL.COM>
Subject:      [AR] A couple of rocket engines on ebay
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Sensibly priced too.

"This auction is for 1 Aerobee rocket engine which I am told has flown in an
Aerobee years ago and suffered by getting a dent inthe fuel feed tube as
shown in the photo."
http://cgi.ebay.com/aw-cgi/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=1177763660

"This auction is for 1 unused Atlas vernier rocket engine motor"
http://cgi.ebay.com/aw-cgi/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=1177786388

Mike Dilsaver

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 5590 invoked from network); 15 Aug 2001 06:44:32 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 15 Aug 2001 06:44:32 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 15942 invoked by uid 50005); 15 Aug 2001 06:44:35 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (. Clean. Processed in 0.437011 secs); 15 Aug 2001 06:44:35 -0000
X-Qmail-Scanner-Mail-From: owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU via smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net
X-Qmail-Scanner-Rcpt-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
X-Qmail-Scanner: 0.96 (No viruses found. Processed in 0.437011 secs)
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 15 Aug 2001 06:44:34 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA31646; Tue, 14 Aug 2001 23:42:29 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 85030 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 15 Aug 2001 06:42:22          +0000
Received: from wrench.toolcity.net (root@wrench.toolcity.net [208.0.188.2]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA31630 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 14 Aug 2001 23:42:21 -0700
Received: from [208.22.189.128]          (dap-208-22-189-128.meadville-tnt-0.pa.toolcity.net [208.22.189.128])          by wrench.toolcity.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id CAA24616; Wed, 15          Aug 2001 02:42:12 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <v01510101b79fd5943cff@[208.22.189.128]>
Date:         Wed, 15 Aug 2001 02:44:32 -0500
Reply-To: "al bradley" <abradley@TOOLCITY.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "al bradley" <abradley@TOOLCITY.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] 2[AR] AP/Dextrose propellant issues.
Comments: To: Pax <darkspunge@USWEST.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

candy rocketeers:

I have been watching a lot of issues over the past couple of years of this
class of propellants. One of the main themes seems to be as to whether the
grain is resiliant during combustion, rather than actual thrust data (with
comparisons) during the burn life. Seems to be a enduring preoccupation. I
wonder who all have recorded data that actually says that a rather brittle
grain denigrates "candy" performance? Wrong-tree barking?

best regards,
al bradley
------------------
>Guys, isn't the point where AP starts to decompose 260 degrees C?
>I was trying to make a small 100 gram batch of AP/Dextrose and had the
>temperature set at between 250-300 degrees F. I was changing it. However at
>275 degrees F the composition started to blacken. I was using a ratio of
>70/30 AP/Dex. In powder form this stuff burns neat. It seems very uniform.
>Will AP just not handle the heating process, or are there other issues I was
>not taking into effect. Sorbitol melts at about 235 degrees F, would that
>provide better results?
>
>Paxton

------------------------------------------------------------------
Can you live Life with this?: "Unless there is a law, an agreement, or a
long-standing custom, No one `Deserves' Anything -- Either Good or Bad!"

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 3553 invoked from network); 15 Aug 2001 08:03:12 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 15 Aug 2001 08:03:12 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 17384 invoked from network); 15 Aug 2001 08:05:46 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 15 Aug 2001 08:05:46 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA31831; Wed, 15 Aug 2001 00:58:34 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 85041 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 15 Aug 2001 07:58:27          +0000
Received: from stud.uni-goettingen.de (root@s2.stud.uni-goettingen.de          [134.76.60.22]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA31814          for <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Wed, 15 Aug 2001 00:58:26 -0700
Received: from router.atw.stud.uni-goettingen.de ([134.76.62.65]          helo=stud.uni-goettingen.de) by stud.uni-goettingen.de with esmtp          (Exim 2.12 #8) id 15WvZH-0006gS-00 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 15          Aug 2001 09:58:23 +0200
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [de] (Win98; I)
X-Accept-Language: de
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Message-ID:  <3B7A2B78.DEA1C939@stud.uni-goettingen.de>
Date:         Wed, 15 Aug 2001 09:57:44 +0200
Reply-To: "Thomas Engelhardt" <tengelh@STUD.UNI-GOETTINGEN.DE>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Thomas Engelhardt" <tengelh@STUD.UNI-GOETTINGEN.DE>
Organization: =?iso-8859-1?Q?Rocket_Research_G=F6ttingen_=28RRG=29?=
Subject:      [AR] Online source here (was: [AR] Sources of liquid fuel rocket              motor              design])
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

-------- Original Message --------
Betreff: Re: [AR] Sources of liquid fuel rocket motor design
Datum: Wed, 15 Aug 2001 04:44:53 +0000
Von: Matt Faulkner <mattfaulkner9@HOTMAIL.COM>
Rckantwort: Matt Faulkner <mattfaulkner9@HOTMAIL.COM>
An: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU

  A paper was written a while back and is downloadable called "How to
design, build, and test small liquid fuel rockets". I forget the
author's
name, but if you search the name (e.g. yahoo) you'll find it. If you
can't
find it, I have it somewhere in my computer and will dig it up for you.
There's no mention of pumps though.
                Good Luck
                             -Matt Faulkner


Hi group,

the paper mentioned can be downloaded here
http://www.im.lcs.mit.edu/rocket/

It is a good starting point, but I can wholeheartedly recommend the
Huzel/Huang book mentioned in an earlier post. It is my favorite book, I
think the library man already knows me as he asked me if I already know
everything off by heart....I wish :-).
I should drop more hints around Christmas time...

Tom

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 3783 invoked from network); 15 Aug 2001 08:46:52 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 15 Aug 2001 08:46:52 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 17190 invoked by uid 50005); 15 Aug 2001 08:47:25 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.351975 secs); 15 Aug 2001 08:47:25 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 15 Aug 2001 08:47:23 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id BAA31959; Wed, 15 Aug 2001 01:44:19 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 85052 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 15 Aug 2001 08:44:14          +0000
Received: from albatross.prod.itd.earthlink.net          (albatross.mail.pas.earthlink.net [207.217.120.120]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id BAA31925 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Wed,          15 Aug 2001 01:34:13 -0700
Received: from earthlink.net (dialup-209.244.106.7.Dial1.SanJose1.Level3.net          [209.244.106.7]) by albatross.prod.itd.earthlink.net          (EL-8_9_3_3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id BAA24322; Wed, 15 Aug 2001 01:34:12          -0700 (PDT)
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.75 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.16-22 i686)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B7A3437.EB910057@earthlink.net>
Date:         Wed, 15 Aug 2001 01:35:04 -0700
Reply-To: "David Weinshenker" <daze39@EARTHLINK.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "David Weinshenker" <daze39@EARTHLINK.NET>
Subject:      [AR] ERPS successfully runs H2O2 engine
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Last Saturday, August 11, the Experimental Rocket Propulsion Society
successfully ran a hydrogen peroxide monopropellant engine using its
proprietary catalyst composition. The engine developed approx.
40-50 lb. of thrust on two successive sustained runs with 99%
unstabilized H2O2. Theoretical decomposition temperatures of
approximately 1750 F appear to have been approached in practice -
the stainless steel engine chamber wall was visibly glowing dull
red during the test as the engine reached radiation-cooled thermal
equilibrium.

A key factor in this success appears to have been the purity of the
peroxide - prepared by Michael Carden of XL Space Systems, it was
concentrated by fractional freezing and supplied without added stabilizers.
The session, which also saw the successful firing of an engine using
silver-plated metal foam (using the same propellant diluted to 85%)
marks a refreshing change from a series of inconsistent results which
we now believe were influenced by contamination of the catalyst by
stabilizing ingredients (we suspect phosphorous and/or tin) in our
previous batch of 90% peroxide.

Sutton comments, in his discussion of hydrazine monopropellant engines,
that propellant purity is critical to avoid catalyst problems. It appears
that the same is true, to some extent at least, with H2O2... but given
sufficient purity, we have a catalyst which will survive the decomposition
of peroxide concentrations which would destroy a silver pack.

The ERPS general mailing list is archived at http://www.erps.org/email -
see message 8056 for the initial announcement. Subsequent messages
include some additional details and links to images.

-dave w

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 10658 invoked from network); 15 Aug 2001 09:01:34 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 15 Aug 2001 09:01:34 -0000
Received: (qmail 8537 invoked from network); 15 Aug 2001 09:04:35 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 15 Aug 2001 09:04:35 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id BAA32032; Wed, 15 Aug 2001 01:57:58 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 85063 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 15 Aug 2001 08:57:56          +0000
Received: from fep4-orange.clear.net.nz (fep4-orange.clear.net.nz          [203.97.32.4]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id BAA32017          for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Wed, 15 Aug 2001 01:57:55 -0700
Received: from mkbs (203-167-158-213.dialup.clear.net.nz [203.167.158.213]) by          fep4-orange.clear.net.nz (1.5/1.7) with SMTP id UAA17606; Wed, 15 Aug          2001 20:57:49 +1200 (NZST)
References:  <v01510101b79fd5943cff@[208.22.189.128]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <00da01c12568$aa2284e0$0100a8c0@mkbs>
Date:         Wed, 15 Aug 2001 20:53:45 +1200
Reply-To: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Organization: Applied Technology
Subject:      [AR] Re [AR] AP/Dextrose propellant issues.
Comments: To: al bradley <abradley@TOOLCITY.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

> I have been watching a lot of issues over the past couple of years of this
> class of propellants. One of the main themes seems to be as to whether the
> grain is resiliant during combustion, rather than actual thrust data (with
> comparisons) during the burn life. Seems to be a enduring preoccupation. I
> wonder who all have recorded data that actually says that a rather brittle
> grain denigrates "candy" performance? Wrong-tree barking?


Richard Nakka has some calculations (of course :-) ) on his site re tensile
strength and modulus of elasticity of Candy grains and the implications for
rocketry. The latter is of more concern - a "rubbery" propellant grain is an
advantage.

My understanding of the issues is -
        If you want to case bond it (which gives good mechanical location,
and longer burn times than all face burning) then the case flexure has to be
such as to not exceed the grains maximum allowable deformation. The
calculations show that using eg a steel case, then the case has to be much
thicker and therefore heavier than would be required for the pressure
typically used.
Case bonding is arguably the easiest on a grain mechanically as the stresses
are distributed over a very wide area.
It MAY be possible to design a case which has very high stiffness for its
weight by employing external ribs. An added complexity.

In a typical amateur core burning solid fuel rocket, burn times are in the
order of a few seconds (say 1 to 6) and if all faces burn, times may be
under 1 second, even for Candy. Richard lists some figures for candy burn
times with various face passivations. Even with a 2 second burn and a mass
fraction of say 1.5 (1/3 fuel mass, 2/3 body mass) and an Isp of 100
(typical to low for Candy) and a fairly linear burn, the initial
acceleration will be around 15g (   Isp* Mf / tburn /  [Mf+Mr  ]   rising to
around 25g (  Isp * Mf / tburn / Mr ) just before burnout !The fuel grain
then weighs that many times more than when at rest. Imagine placing a 25 kg
weight on the top of a 1 kg Candy grain. Imagine doing the same thing with a
1kg AP + rubber grain. Practical aspects probably make the problems worse as
size increases.

Minimum stress on a grain due to acceleration is probably achieved with a
case bonded grain with an ideal case. As seen above, this requires a very
heavy case if the case deflection by itself is not to fracture the grain.
However, if we don't case bond then the grain is subject to heavy end
loading due to the high g forces.
If we break ANY pieces of grain off we are in deep trouble - either due to
throat blocking (instant death) or sudden spike in burn rate (fairly instant
death).



    Russell McMahon

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 18039 invoked from network); 15 Aug 2001 10:26:13 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 15 Aug 2001 10:26:13 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 24981 invoked from network); 15 Aug 2001 10:28:49 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 15 Aug 2001 10:28:49 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id DAA32277; Wed, 15 Aug 2001 03:23:44 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 85086 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 15 Aug 2001 10:23:33          +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (f141.law15.hotmail.com [64.4.23.141]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id DAA32262 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Wed, 15 Aug 2001 03:23:33 -0700
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Wed,          15 Aug 2001 03:23:03 -0700
Received: from 213.224.83.78 by lw15fd.law15.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Wed, 15          Aug 2001 10:23:02 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [213.224.83.78]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 15 Aug 2001 10:23:03.0183 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[441649F0:01C12574]
Message-ID:  <F141XHwGrRDyjLQoOuD0000943b@hotmail.com>
Date:         Wed, 15 Aug 2001 10:23:33 +0000
Reply-To: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] ERPS successfully runs H2O2 engine
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

DW wrote:

>Last Saturday, August 11, the Experimental Rocket Propulsion Society
>successfully ran a hydrogen peroxide monopropellant engine using its
>proprietary catalyst composition. The engine developed approx.
>40-50 lb. of thrust on two successive sustained runs with 99%
>unstabilized H2O2. Theoretical decomposition temperatures of
>approximately 1750 F appear to have been approached in practice -
>the stainless steel engine chamber wall was visibly glowing dull
>red during the test as the engine reached radiation-cooled thermal
>equilibrium.

Monoprop HP? Isp 150 s. Big deal.

>A key factor in this success appears to have been the purity of the
>peroxide - prepared by Michael Carden of XL Space Systems, it was
>concentrated by fractional freezing and supplied without added stabilizers.

MC never used ff for purification AFAIR. Who told you this?

>The session, which also saw the successful firing of an engine using
>silver-plated metal foam (using the same propellant diluted to 85%)
>marks a refreshing change from a series of inconsistent results which
>we now believe were influenced by contamination of the catalyst by
>stabilizing ingredients (we suspect phosphorous and/or tin) in our
>previous batch of 90% peroxide.

This is the cat pack JC uses also.

Who needs cat packs? Who needs clean expensive inhibitor-free HP?
Go hypergolic using manganese acetate:alcohol/HP biprop. Isp 280-300!

jd

_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 15713 invoked from network); 15 Aug 2001 11:44:50 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 15 Aug 2001 11:44:50 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 25851 invoked from network); 15 Aug 2001 11:47:26 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 15 Aug 2001 11:47:26 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id EAA32568; Wed, 15 Aug 2001 04:40:40 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 85101 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 15 Aug 2001 11:40:34          +0000
Received: from stud.uni-goettingen.de (root@s2.stud.uni-goettingen.de          [134.76.60.22]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id EAA32553          for <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Wed, 15 Aug 2001 04:40:33 -0700
Received: from router.atw.stud.uni-goettingen.de ([134.76.62.65]          helo=stud.uni-goettingen.de) by stud.uni-goettingen.de with esmtp          (Exim 2.12 #8) id 15Wz2E-0006hR-00 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 15          Aug 2001 13:40:30 +0200
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [de] (Win98; I)
X-Accept-Language: de
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Message-ID:  <3B7A5F87.A8095165@stud.uni-goettingen.de>
Date:         Wed, 15 Aug 2001 13:39:52 +0200
Reply-To: "Thomas Engelhardt" <tengelh@STUD.UNI-GOETTINGEN.DE>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Thomas Engelhardt" <tengelh@STUD.UNI-GOETTINGEN.DE>
Organization: =?iso-8859-1?Q?Rocket_Research_G=F6ttingen_=28RRG=29?=
Subject:      [AR] [Fwd: Re: [AR] ERPS successfully runs H2O2 engine]
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

-------- Original Message --------
Betreff: Re: [AR] ERPS successfully runs H2O2 engine
Datum: Wed, 15 Aug 2001 10:23:33 +0000
Von: John Dom <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Rckantwort: John Dom <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
An: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU

DW wrote:

>>successfully ran a hydrogen peroxide monopropellant engine using its
>>proprietary catalyst composition. The engine developed approx.
>>40-50 lb. of thrust on two successive sustained runs with 99%
>>unstabilized H2O2. Theoretical decomposition temperatures of
>>approximately 1750 F appear to have been approached in practice -
>>the stainless steel engine chamber wall was visibly glowing dull
>>red during the test as the engine reached radiation-cooled thermal
>>equilibrium.

>Monoprop HP? Isp 150 s. Big deal.

I think it IS a big deal, building a liquid rocket engine that
successfully fires twice in a row and is in usable condition afterwards.
So what if the Isp is low compared to bipropellant rocket engines? So
what if the thrust is low? It is the deed that counts.
Any rocketeer fit to fulfill that task is to be commended.

Tom

P.S. Any rocketeer building a solid or hybrid rocket motor is to be
commended as well, mind you.
I was just trying to get a point across.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 11185 invoked from network); 15 Aug 2001 12:09:53 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 15 Aug 2001 12:09:53 -0000
Received: (qmail 21462 invoked by uid 50005); 15 Aug 2001 12:10:26 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.21091 secs); 15 Aug 2001 12:10:26 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 15 Aug 2001 12:10:25 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id FAA32662; Wed, 15 Aug 2001 05:05:48 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 85116 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 15 Aug 2001 12:05:43          +0000
Received: from mta02.mail.mel.aone.net.au (mta02.mail.au.uu.net [203.2.192.82])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id FAA32647 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 15 Aug 2001 05:05:42 -0700
Received: from unknown ([63.34.214.221]) by mta02.mail.mel.aone.net.au with          SMTP id <20010815120539.HHLE4158.mta02.mail.mel.aone.net.au@unknown>          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 15 Aug 2001 22:05:39 +1000
References: Conversation <3B7A5F87.A8095165@stud.uni-goettingen.de> with last            message <3B7A5F87.A8095165@stud.uni-goettingen.de>
Priority: Normal
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Priority: 3
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	X-MAPIextension=.TXT;
	charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>
Date:         Wed, 15 Aug 2001 12:05:43 +0000
Reply-To: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] [Fwd: Re: [AR] ERPS successfully runs H2O2 engine]
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <3B7A5F87.A8095165@stud.uni-goettingen.de>

Yep, hear! hear!, hats off to them.

> I think it IS a big deal, building a liquid rocket engine that
> successfully fires twice in a row and is in usable condition afterwards.
> So what if the Isp is low compared to bipropellant rocket engines? So
> what if the thrust is low? It is the deed that counts.
> Any rocketeer fit to fulfill that task is to be commended.
>
> Tom
>
> P.S. Any rocketeer building a solid or hybrid rocket motor is to be
> commended as well, mind you.
> I was just trying to get a point across.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 18169 invoked from network); 15 Aug 2001 13:39:50 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 15 Aug 2001 13:39:50 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 11977 invoked by uid 50005); 15 Aug 2001 13:40:23 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.096816 secs); 15 Aug 2001 13:40:23 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 15 Aug 2001 13:40:23 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA00444; Wed, 15 Aug 2001 06:36:26 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 85138 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 15 Aug 2001 13:36:19          +0000
Received: from grucom2.gru.net (grucom2.gru.net [209.251.129.7]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA00428 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed,          15 Aug 2001 06:36:19 -0700
Received: from [209.251.151.115] by grucom2.sfcc.net (NTMail          6.04.0010/NU4112.00.db1c8a4b) with ESMTP id ahhnhaaa for          AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 15 Aug 2001 09:36:17 -0400
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (Win95; I)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <000001c12381$384bce50$0200a8c0@prestige.net>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B7A7B32.654CEDE9@sfcc.net>
Date:         Wed, 15 Aug 2001 09:37:54 -0400
Reply-To: "James Yawn" <jyawn@SFCC.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "James Yawn" <jyawn@SFCC.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] BP Powder mill questions: do's and don'ts???
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Jeff:  As mentioned in a previous post, if your BP components are already finely
ground, you may not need a ball mill.  I have successfully mixed batches up to a
pound in my food-processor.  Please don't freak out - this is always done wet,
with just enough water to make a "dough" and with a long drop cord so that I can
hide the food processor a long way off and behind something sturdy.

I mix it for about 10 minutes, screen it onto flat pans and let it dry in the
back window of an old car.  It doesn't run anymore, has no gas in the tank, and
is sitting in the sun thus becoming a solar dryer.  I recommend a Datsun 210 for
this purpose, leaving the windows open enough for ventilation, closed enough to
keep the cats out.

When I drove this car, I used to dry my herbs in the back window (mostly sweet
basil and oregano - I make lots of pizza).  Then I noticed the police giving my
car careful scrutiny - now I dry herbs in a crock-pot in the safety of my own
home.

I add a bit of dextrine to make the resulting BP cohesive.  My product is not
nearly as fast-burning as commercial BP, and does not work very well in my
muzzle-loaders.  But for rocket engines you probably want a slower burn anyway.
And wetting before packing is standard procedure, so the wet mixing might not be
any disadvantage.

One final warning:  BP is addictive!  Aaah, the sweet stench of sulfur!  Candy
smoke has its appeal but doesn't quite match BP.  Plastics smell horrible, no
offense intended.  Hmm...  Is there an inverse relation between ISP and
olfactory appeal?  :)

Hope this is of some use.

Respectfully,
Jimmy Yawn



Jeff Grady wrote:

> >>There is a lot of limitation
> >>with black powder motor and I do not recommend working with it.
>
> I intend to make a couple dozen BP motors to work out various other
> issues/techniques (nozzles, motor casings, etc). Then my only use of BP will
> be in making my own igniters.
>
> >>For cheap propellants, sugar rocket gives more performance, are easier do
> work with
> >>and much less dangerous.
>
> I agree.
>
> JG
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@itc.uci.edu]On
> Behalf Of Antoine Lefebvre
> Sent: Sunday, August 12, 2001 6:33 PM
> To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
> Subject: Re: [AR] BP Powder mill questions: do's and don'ts???
>
> This is not a ground cable, it is the electrical plug for the motor.
> The motor is grounded but not the plastic barrel. I just discharge
> myself as well as the barrel prior to open it and never gor problems.
>
> As I stop working with black powder a while back, I just use it to
> refined chemical when they are too coarse. There is a lot of limitation
> with black powder motor and I do not recommend working with it. For cheap
> propellants, sugar rocket gives more performance, are easier do work with
> and much less dangerous.
>
> On Sun, Aug 12, 2001 at 10:19:34AM -0400, Jonathan Provencher wrote:
> > You might want to have a look at this mill design:
> > http://pages.infinit.net/linux/rocket/homemade.html
> >
> > You can see the ground cable crawling down the wood frame.
> >
> >
> > Jonathan P.
> > Mech. Eng. Student
> > Ecole Polytechnique de Montreal
>
> --
> Antoine Lefebvre
> antoine.lefebvre@polymtl.ca

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 7839 invoked from network); 15 Aug 2001 14:33:32 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 15 Aug 2001 14:33:32 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: (qmail 24796 invoked from network); 15 Aug 2001 14:36:05 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 15 Aug 2001 14:36:05 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA00751; Wed, 15 Aug 2001 07:27:42 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 85158 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 15 Aug 2001 14:27:33          +0000
Received: from smtp3_gateway.engelhard.com ([206.128.51.10]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA00736 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed,          15 Aug 2001 07:27:32 -0700
X-Mailer: Lotus Notes Release 5.0.5  September 22, 2000
X-MIMETrack: Serialize by Router on             SMTP3_GATEWAY/EXT/ENGELHARD-EXTERNAL(Release 5.07a |May 14,             2001) at 08/15/2001 10:26:59 AM
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <OF7030D3FE.40887B77-ON85256AA9.004E1935@engelhard.com>
Date:         Wed, 15 Aug 2001 10:21:07 -0400
Reply-To: <Brian_Roberts@ENGELHARD.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <Brian_Roberts@ENGELHARD.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] AP/Dextrose propellant issues.
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

I believe what's happening is called the Maillard reaction.  It is well
known in food chemistry circles (I never heard of it until my dietician
wife told me that it is what happens when toast darkens).  Normally it is
thought of as a reaction of amino groups (from proteins) with aldehydes
(from sugars).  But I suspect the ammonium ion in AP, AN, etc. does the
same thing as the amino group.  Do a web search on Maillard reaction for
lots more info, including possible ways to supress it (eg., add citrate
buffer?).

BDR




                    Henry Spencer
                    <henry@SPSYST        To:     AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
                    EMS.NET>             cc:
                    Sent by:             Subject:     Re: [AR] AP/Dextrose propellant issues.
                    Amateur
                    Rocketry
                    discussion
                    list
                    <AROCKET@itc.
                    uci.edu>


                    08/14/01
                    10:37 PM
                    Please
                    respond to
                    Henry Spencer






On Tue, 14 Aug 2001, Pax wrote:
> Guys, isn't the point where AP starts to decompose 260 degrees C?

Remember that such temperatures are not sharp break points; decomposition
rates gradually accelerate as temperature rises.  Other substances in the
mix might also act as catalysts for decomposition, I suppose.

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 4525 invoked from network); 15 Aug 2001 14:39:17 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 15 Aug 2001 14:39:17 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 15194 invoked from network); 15 Aug 2001 14:42:17 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 15 Aug 2001 14:42:17 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA00810; Wed, 15 Aug 2001 07:36:57 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 85165 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 15 Aug 2001 14:36:48          +0000
Received: from clio.sc.intel.com (scfdns01.sc.intel.com [143.183.152.25]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA00795 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 15 Aug 2001 07:36:48 -0700
Received: from snmeng1.rr.intel.com (snmeng1.rr.intel.com [128.215.231.11]) by          clio.sc.intel.com (8.9.1a+p1/8.9.1/d: relay.m4,v 1.41 2001/07/09          21:06:22 root Exp $) with ESMTP id OAA13661; Wed, 15 Aug 2001          14:36:17 GMT
Received: from snmeng30.rr.intel.com (snmeng30.rr.intel.com [128.215.52.76]) by          snmeng1.rr.intel.com (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id IAA28858; Wed, 15          Aug 2001 08:33:23 -0600 (MDT)
Received: from snmeng30.rr.intel.com (snmeng30.rr.intel.com [128.215.52.76]) by          snmeng30.rr.intel.com (8.9.1a/8.9.1/d: client.m4,v 1.3 1998/09/29          16:36:11 sedayao Exp sedayao $) with SMTP id IAA11848; Wed, 15 Aug          2001 08:33:19 -0600 (MDT)
X-Mailer: dtmail 1.2.1 CDE Version 1.2.1 SunOS 5.6 sun4m sparc
X-Sun-Text-Type: ascii
Message-ID:  <200108151433.IAA11848@snmeng30.rr.intel.com>
Date:         Wed, 15 Aug 2001 08:33:19 -0600
Reply-To: "Ray Calkins 100660207" <rcalkins@SNMENG1.RR.INTEL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Ray Calkins 100660207" <rcalkins@SNMENG1.RR.INTEL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR]
Comments: To: taldridge@HOME.COM
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

> I am getting tons of blank mails.  Anyone know
why???
Yeah, it's because some people are sending mail in
HTML format only despite list policies.

Ray


From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 21268 invoked from network); 15 Aug 2001 15:54:42 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 15 Aug 2001 15:54:42 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 2871 invoked by uid 50005); 15 Aug 2001 15:54:43 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (. Clean. Processed in 0.179654 secs); 15 Aug 2001 15:54:43 -0000
X-Qmail-Scanner-Mail-From: owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU via smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net
X-Qmail-Scanner-Rcpt-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
X-Qmail-Scanner: 0.96 (No viruses found. Processed in 0.179654 secs)
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 15 Aug 2001 15:54:43 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA01094; Wed, 15 Aug 2001 08:50:24 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 85190 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 15 Aug 2001 15:50:14          +0000
Received: from mail.conpute.com ([207.164.87.145]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7)          with ESMTP id IAA01079 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 15 Aug 2001          08:50:12 -0700
Received: by MAIL with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) id <QSNHQ1Q7>; Wed,          15 Aug 2001 11:47:19 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19)
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Message-ID:  <814DCE01F6D7D311994D204C4F4F50201889B5@MAIL>
Date:         Wed, 15 Aug 2001 11:47:18 -0400
Reply-To: "Earl Pottinger" <earlcp@CONPUTE.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Earl Pottinger" <earlcp@CONPUTE.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] ERPS successfully runs H2O2 engine
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Yes, this is a big deal.  Have you tried to do it yourself yet to judge how
hard it is to do in real life?  My test units leaked in all the wrong places
and MnO2 was sprayed out of the noozles all over the place!  This was with
50% H2O2, I would have been taking my life into my own hands and throwing it
away if I tried 99% H2O2 with any of my designs.  The fact that they have
handled 99% peroxide safely is a major success in itself.  And as for 150s,
150s of a working rocket is better than 300s from a rocket that does not
exist.

Since ERPS paid for and recieved delivery from XL Space Systems, if MC used
fractional freezing as a final step they are more likely to know than you.
It is alright to ask if they are sure FF was used, it is not ok to demand as
if you automaticly know better that ERPS.

How can this be the same catalyst pack as JC's?  ERPS developed thier own
catalyst from day one, and as far as I know have not shared it with any one
else.  Plus, while I have spent a lot of time looking into catalyst that can
be mixed into the fuel if the catalyst requires a heavy loading such as
manganese acetate does then for max. ISP you want to go the ERPS route where
the hot gases coming off the catalyst pack can now be mixed with ***ANY***
fuel you desire and still have a clean and stable burn.   ERPS does not have
to worry about the catalyst being able to dissolve into the fuel choosen,
they will be able to burn anything Solid, Liquid or Gas.

Hats off to ERPS.

             Earl Colby Pottinger

-----Original Message-----
From: John Dom [mailto:j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM]
Sent: Wednesday, August 15, 2001 6:24 AM
To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
Subject: Re: [AR] ERPS successfully runs H2O2 engine


DW wrote:

>Last Saturday, August 11, the Experimental Rocket Propulsion Society
>successfully ran a hydrogen peroxide monopropellant engine using its
>proprietary catalyst composition. The engine developed approx.
>40-50 lb. of thrust on two successive sustained runs with 99%
>unstabilized H2O2. Theoretical decomposition temperatures of
>approximately 1750 F appear to have been approached in practice -
>the stainless steel engine chamber wall was visibly glowing dull
>red during the test as the engine reached radiation-cooled thermal
>equilibrium.

Monoprop HP? Isp 150 s. Big deal.

>A key factor in this success appears to have been the purity of the
>peroxide - prepared by Michael Carden of XL Space Systems, it was
>concentrated by fractional freezing and supplied without added stabilizers.

MC never used ff for purification AFAIR. Who told you this?

>The session, which also saw the successful firing of an engine using
>silver-plated metal foam (using the same propellant diluted to 85%)
>marks a refreshing change from a series of inconsistent results which
>we now believe were influenced by contamination of the catalyst by
>stabilizing ingredients (we suspect phosphorous and/or tin) in our
>previous batch of 90% peroxide.

This is the cat pack JC uses also.

Who needs cat packs? Who needs clean expensive inhibitor-free HP?
Go hypergolic using manganese acetate:alcohol/HP biprop. Isp 280-300!

jd

_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 3158 invoked from network); 15 Aug 2001 16:47:06 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 15 Aug 2001 16:47:06 -0000
Received: (qmail 24030 invoked by uid 50005); 15 Aug 2001 16:47:38 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.148795 secs); 15 Aug 2001 16:47:38 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 15 Aug 2001 16:47:37 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA01285; Wed, 15 Aug 2001 09:37:07 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 85212 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 15 Aug 2001 16:37:06          +0000
Received: from albqpop1.albq.uswest.net (albqpop1.albq.uswest.net          [207.108.240.1]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id JAA01268          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 15 Aug 2001 09:37:05 -0700
Received: (qmail 48825 invoked by alias); 15 Aug 2001 16:34:54 -0000
Delivered-To: fixup-AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU@fixme
Received: (qmail 14987 invoked by uid 0); 15 Aug 2001 16:24:25 -0000
Received: from cc898542-a.prdise1.nm.home.com (HELO cc898542a) (65.7.151.152)          by albqpop1.albq.uswest.net with SMTP; 15 Aug 2001 16:24:25 -0000
References:  <OF7030D3FE.40887B77-ON85256AA9.004E1935@engelhard.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <000c01c125a7$48d3f0e0$0100a8c0@prdise1.nm.home.com>
Date:         Wed, 15 Aug 2001 10:28:14 -0600
Reply-To: "Pax" <darkspunge@USWEST.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Pax" <darkspunge@USWEST.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] AP/Dextrose propellant issues.
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

What's with all this research and stuff, this is EX rocketry! I just want to
cast my grains and go!

:-)  :-)
Kidding of course.

I will try some potassium perc next. Propep says over 190ISP so it is worth
a shot.


Paxton

----- Original Message -----
From: <Brian_Roberts@ENGELHARD.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Wednesday, August 15, 2001 8:21 AM
Subject: Re: [AR] AP/Dextrose propellant issues.


> I believe what's happening is called the Maillard reaction.  It is well
> known in food chemistry circles (I never heard of it until my dietician
> wife told me that it is what happens when toast darkens).  Normally it is
> thought of as a reaction of amino groups (from proteins) with aldehydes
> (from sugars).  But I suspect the ammonium ion in AP, AN, etc. does the
> same thing as the amino group.  Do a web search on Maillard reaction for
> lots more info, including possible ways to supress it (eg., add citrate
> buffer?).
>
> BDR
>
>
>
>
>                     Henry Spencer
>                     <henry@SPSYST        To:     AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
>                     EMS.NET>             cc:
>                     Sent by:             Subject:     Re: [AR] AP/Dextrose
propellant issues.
>                     Amateur
>                     Rocketry
>                     discussion
>                     list
>                     <AROCKET@itc.
>                     uci.edu>
>
>
>                     08/14/01
>                     10:37 PM
>                     Please
>                     respond to
>                     Henry Spencer
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Tue, 14 Aug 2001, Pax wrote:
> > Guys, isn't the point where AP starts to decompose 260 degrees C?
>
> Remember that such temperatures are not sharp break points; decomposition
> rates gradually accelerate as temperature rises.  Other substances in the
> mix might also act as catalysts for decomposition, I suppose.
>
>                                                           Henry Spencer
>                                                        henry@spsystems.net
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 24790 invoked from network); 15 Aug 2001 16:52:31 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 15 Aug 2001 16:52:31 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 23129 invoked by uid 50005); 15 Aug 2001 16:52:32 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (. Clean. Processed in 0.2409 secs); 15 Aug 2001 16:52:32 -0000
X-Qmail-Scanner-Mail-From: owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU via smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net
X-Qmail-Scanner-Rcpt-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
X-Qmail-Scanner: 0.96 (No viruses found. Processed in 0.2409 secs)
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 15 Aug 2001 16:52:31 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA01257; Wed, 15 Aug 2001 09:35:44 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 85205 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 15 Aug 2001 16:35:37          +0000
Received: from spsystems.net (spsystems.net [209.47.149.227]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA01242 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Wed,          15 Aug 2001 09:35:37 -0700
Received: (from henry@localhost) by spsystems.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id MAA01668;          Wed, 15 Aug 2001 12:35:04 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010815123014.27630H-100000@spsystems.net>
Date:         Wed, 15 Aug 2001 12:35:04 -0400
Reply-To: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] ERPS successfully runs H2O2 engine
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <814DCE01F6D7D311994D204C4F4F50201889B5@MAIL>

On Wed, 15 Aug 2001, Earl Pottinger wrote:
> How can this be the same catalyst pack as JC's?  ERPS developed thier own
> catalyst from day one, and as far as I know have not shared it...

Note that there were two different engines involved -- one using ERPS's
proprietary 99%-peroxide catalyst, the other using silver-plated foam and
85% peroxide.  The foam is, in fact, exactly the same that John Carmack's
group uses, because he sent them a sample for comparison testing.

> ...if the catalyst requires a heavy loading such as
> manganese acetate does then for max. ISP you want to go the ERPS route where
> the hot gases coming off the catalyst pack can now be mixed with ***ANY***
> fuel you desire...

This is particularly relevant because ERPS's nominal long-term goal is
SSTO, so they seriously care about Isp.

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 19401 invoked from network); 15 Aug 2001 17:41:41 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 15 Aug 2001 17:41:41 -0000
Received: (qmail 15516 invoked from network); 15 Aug 2001 17:44:12 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 15 Aug 2001 17:44:12 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA01513; Wed, 15 Aug 2001 10:35:09 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 85222 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 15 Aug 2001 17:35:04          +0000
Received: from albqpop1.albq.uswest.net (albqpop1.albq.uswest.net          [207.108.240.1]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id KAA01498          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 15 Aug 2001 10:35:03 -0700
Received: (qmail 15155 invoked by alias); 15 Aug 2001 17:32:01 -0000
Delivered-To: fixup-AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU@fixme
Received: (qmail 75200 invoked by uid 0); 15 Aug 2001 17:16:39 -0000
Received: from cc898542-a.prdise1.nm.home.com (HELO cc898542a) (65.7.151.152)          by albqpop1.albq.uswest.net with SMTP; 15 Aug 2001 17:16:39 -0000
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0B5E_01C56B69.48F2FFB0"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <004f01c125ae$94de0500$0100a8c0@prdise1.nm.home.com>
Date:         Wed, 15 Aug 2001 11:20:28 -0600
Reply-To: "Pax" <darkspunge@USWEST.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Pax" <darkspunge@USWEST.NET>
Subject:      [AR] Cutting out a C-slot.
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0B5E_01C56B69.48F2FFB0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

I cast a regular KN/Dex grain yesterday after my failed AP/Dex and just =
made a 38mm x 4" solid slug. This was with the hopes to be able to gut a =
3mm x 16mm slot in the grain. Any suggestions on how to do it? Or should =
I forget it, and cast a new one with a aluminum rectangle, or piece or =
ply/bass wood strip covered in Teflon tape?


Paxton

------=_NextPart_000_0B5E_01C56B69.48F2FFB0
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Diso-8859-1">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 5.50.4522.1800" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>I cast a regular KN/Dex grain yesterday =
after my=20
failed AP/Dex and just made a 38mm x 4" solid slug. This was with the =
hopes to=20
be able to gut a 3mm x 16mm slot in the grain. Any suggestions on how to =
do it?=20
Or should I forget it, and cast a new one with a aluminum rectangle, or =
piece or=20
ply/bass wood strip covered in Teflon tape?</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Paxton</FONT></DIV></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0B5E_01C56B69.48F2FFB0--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 15475 invoked from network); 15 Aug 2001 18:02:33 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 15 Aug 2001 18:02:33 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 10605 invoked by uid 50005); 15 Aug 2001 18:03:05 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.211347 secs); 15 Aug 2001 18:03:05 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 15 Aug 2001 18:03:04 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA01702; Wed, 15 Aug 2001 10:58:12 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 85245 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 15 Aug 2001 17:58:05          +0000
Received: from df01-e12.danfoss.dk (mailx.danfoss.com [193.162.34.6]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA01687 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 15 Aug 2001 10:58:04 -0700
Received: from df01-e12.danfoss.dk (dkdnisvw.danfoss.dk [10.6.2.20]) by          df01-e12.danfoss.dk with SMTP (Microsoft Exchange Internet Mail          Service Version 5.5.2653.13) id Q9SB46GC; Wed, 15 Aug 2001 19:57:13          +0200
Received: from 10.8.13.36 by df01-e12.danfoss.dk (InterScan E-Mail VirusWall          NT); Wed, 15 Aug 2001 19:57:13 +0200
Received: by mailx.danfoss.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) id          <Q7WH34WY>; Wed, 15 Aug 2001 19:55:49 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19)
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Message-ID:  <61A2F0A8E936D311876A0008C74BF1EC96AA9F@DD21AE02>
Date:         Wed, 15 Aug 2001 20:01:23 +0200
Reply-To: "Nielson Byron" <BYRONNIELSON@DANFOSS.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Nielson Byron" <BYRONNIELSON@DANFOSS.COM>
Subject:      [AR] Strontium Nitrate - Sorbitol
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

I was looking at a chemical vendor's page and the formula for
strontium nitrate just popped out at me - all that O :)

I have never really thought of it as anything other than something pretty.

I ran it through propep with sorbitol and it showed a significant increase
in ISP over potassium nitrate.

Is there a reason it is not used much?
Too hygroscopic?

Thanks,
Byron

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 7928 invoked from network); 15 Aug 2001 18:08:00 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 15 Aug 2001 18:08:00 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 25241 invoked by uid 50005); 15 Aug 2001 18:08:01 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (. Clean. Processed in 0.213879 secs); 15 Aug 2001 18:08:01 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
X-Qmail-Scanner-Mail-From: owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU via smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net
X-Qmail-Scanner-Rcpt-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
X-Qmail-Scanner: 0.96 (No viruses found. Processed in 0.213879 secs)
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 15 Aug 2001 18:08:00 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA01766; Wed, 15 Aug 2001 11:05:00 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 85252 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 15 Aug 2001 18:04:59          +0000
Received: from imo-d10.mx.aol.com (imo-d10.mx.aol.com [205.188.157.42]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA01748 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Wed, 15 Aug 2001 11:04:58 -0700
Received: from Azt28@aol.com by imo-d10.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v31_r1.3.) id          w.5b.1a4bd0e4 (4155) for <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Wed, 15 Aug 2001          14:04:50 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: AOL 5.0 for Windows sub 116
Message-ID:  <5b.1a4bd0e4.28ac13c2@aol.com>
Date:         Wed, 15 Aug 2001 14:04:50 EDT
Reply-To: <Azt28@AOL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <Azt28@AOL.COM>
Subject:      [AR] H2O2 dumb question
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Hi list,

I have never worked with H2O2, so I am the perfect specialist on the
subject... At least to put dumb questions:

>From what I have read on the subject, it seems the big problem here is with
the catalyst. My question is: Why to use it?
As I understand, when the engine is running it may decompose H2O2 thermally.
So why not put a solid propellant initial load in the combustion chamber,
fire it and open the H2O2 valve half a second later? For hybrids, it would
even be simpler: Coat the fuel with solid propellant and run the motor as a
solid rocket for one second or two.

There is no restart capability with that design, but who matter about it in
the amateur world? Why not let silver screens and the like to satellite
atitude motors?

Well, it seems nobody use that solution, so I assume there is a major flaw,
where is it? It is not about long time molecular breaking as that could be
solved by a large combustion chamber similar to the one used with pintle
injector...

Yvan Bozzonetti.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 25956 invoked from network); 15 Aug 2001 18:26:33 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 15 Aug 2001 18:26:33 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: (qmail 16778 invoked by uid 50005); 15 Aug 2001 18:25:22 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smpte.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.152173 secs); 15 Aug 2001 18:25:22 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 15 Aug 2001 18:25:21 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA02118; Wed, 15 Aug 2001 11:22:20 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 85278 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 15 Aug 2001 18:22:14          +0000
Received: from localhost (dmccue@localhost) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with          ESMTP id LAA02103 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 15 Aug 2001          11:22:14 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.LNX.4.10.10108151112210.1723-100000@itc.uci.edu>
Date:         Wed, 15 Aug 2001 11:22:13 -0700
Reply-To: "David J. McCue" <dmccue@itc.uci.edu>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "David J. McCue" <dmccue@itc.uci.edu>
Subject:      Re: [AR]
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <200108151433.IAA11848@snmeng30.rr.intel.com>

On Wed, 15 Aug 2001, Ray Calkins 100660207 wrote:

> > I am getting tons of blank mails.  Anyone know
> why???
> Yeah, it's because some people are sending mail in
> HTML format only despite list policies.
>
> Ray
>
I haven't seen this problem from here and I don't think it's due to HTML
formatted messages.

I sent a note to the original poster off-list wherein I gave him some
tests to perform to determine the cause of his problem. From his symptoms,
I am guessing that his ISP's mailserver is at fault. (A clue is that
the messages are arriving without anything in the Subject: field.
Listserv always puts the list name in the Subject: field, unless you mess
with your account profile.)

-Dave McCue

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 26623 invoked from network); 15 Aug 2001 18:40:52 -0000
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 15 Aug 2001 18:40:52 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 25782 invoked by uid 50005); 15 Aug 2001 18:40:07 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smptf.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 1.055279 secs); 15 Aug 2001 18:40:07 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 15 Aug 2001 18:40:04 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA02257; Wed, 15 Aug 2001 11:38:10 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 85294 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 15 Aug 2001 18:38:01          +0000
Received: from mail.aros.net (mail.aros.net [207.173.16.20]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA02238 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Wed,          15 Aug 2001 11:38:00 -0700
Received: from biomicro.com ([208.187.122.40]) by mail.aros.net (8.11.3/8.9.3)          with ESMTP id f7FIbxN13392 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Wed, 15 Aug          2001 12:37:59 -0600 (MDT)
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.77 [en] (Win98; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B7AC207.52164E3F@biomicro.com>
Date:         Wed, 15 Aug 2001 12:40:07 -0600
Reply-To: "Mark K. Spute" <mks@BIOMICRO.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Mark K. Spute" <mks@BIOMICRO.COM>
Subject:      [AR] Amateur Rocketry Association
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

I asked this about a week ago and no one answered.  Perhaps no one
knows.  What ever happened to the Amateur Rocketry Association?  They
published lots of books and papers in many areas of rocketry in the late
50's and 60's and seem to have just disappeared.  Anyone know if they
are still around, perhaps under another name? Who they were?  What
happened to them?

Ray?  Henry?  Jerry?
--
Mark K. Spute
Senior Research Engineer
BioMicro Systems Inc.

KD7IWE,  RRS

"It is difficult to say what is impossible, for the dream of yesterday
is the hope of today and the reality of tomorrow."
     Dr. Robert H. Goddard

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 26454 invoked from network); 15 Aug 2001 18:47:46 -0000
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 15 Aug 2001 18:47:46 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 8569 invoked by uid 50005); 15 Aug 2001 18:46:34 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smpte.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.255508 secs); 15 Aug 2001 18:46:34 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 15 Aug 2001 18:46:34 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA02315; Wed, 15 Aug 2001 11:44:34 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 85289 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 15 Aug 2001 18:44:29          +0000
Received: from scaup.mail.pas.earthlink.net (scaup.mail.pas.earthlink.net          [207.217.121.49]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA02204          for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Wed, 15 Aug 2001 11:34:29 -0700
Received: from earthlink.net (dialup-209.247.138.46.Dial1.SanJose1.Level3.net          [209.247.138.46]) by scaup.mail.pas.earthlink.net (EL-8_9_3_3/8.9.3)          with ESMTP id LAA01458; Wed, 15 Aug 2001 11:34:27 -0700 (PDT)
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.75 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.16-22 i686)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <5b.1a4bd0e4.28ac13c2@aol.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B7AC0E6.AF8816F3@earthlink.net>
Date:         Wed, 15 Aug 2001 11:35:18 -0700
Reply-To: "David Weinshenker" <daze39@EARTHLINK.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "David Weinshenker" <daze39@EARTHLINK.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] H2O2 dumb question
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Azt28@AOL.COM wrote:
> There is no restart capability with that design, but who matter about it in
> the amateur world? Why not let silver screens and the like to satellite
> atitude motors?

ERPS' long-term design goals in particular include VTVL by thrust control
of multiple engines. We're quite specifically interested in easy-to-throttle
systems with high performance potential. Single-start systems that require
manual re-preparation of the engine each time it runs once are of little
interest to us. (There are plenty of HPR solids available, in thrust ranges
spanning our zone of present interest, if we just want to ignite, boost, and
shut down. We've been using standard Aerotech motors, for example, to validate
the general aerodynamics and recovery systems of the vehicle that will eventually
fly as the "KISS" rocket - an HPR-style blowdown-pressurized booster. The solid
propellant "KISS-beta" configuration has flown 4 times so far (flight 4: 5959 ft.;
L1120 motor) and gained us experience in rocket launch operations.)

As of now, we have engines that run on 99% peroxide and can be full-range throttled
with a ball valve. And, as has been mentioned, the hot oxidizing gas from the cat-pack
should be perfectly hypergolic with nearly any fuel. Performance of peroxide/kerosene,
for example, is in the same ballpark as LOX/kerosene; peroxide/alcohol may be
easier to work with for our first biprops.

The "precat" biprop cycle will let us ramp our engines up from zero as monoprops
and then approximately double their thrust at the same peroxide flow by injecting
a small (1/7 F/O ratio for kero/perox) flow of fuel downstream of the cat pack, where
we expect it to ignite spontaneously in the hot oxidizing gas - no pyro slugs or
spark plugs needed, just open valve 1, let the peroxide start, open valve 2 for the
fuel, and you're going. Adjust thrust as desired. Shut down and restart at will.
That's our long-term goal.

-dave w

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 4756 invoked from network); 15 Aug 2001 19:03:56 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 15 Aug 2001 19:03:56 -0000
Received: (qmail 21150 invoked by uid 50005); 15 Aug 2001 19:03:13 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smptf.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.337773 secs); 15 Aug 2001 19:03:13 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 15 Aug 2001 19:03:12 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA02398; Wed, 15 Aug 2001 11:58:36 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 85322 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 15 Aug 2001 18:58:33          +0000
Received: from localhost (rcalkins@localhost) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with          ESMTP id LAA02382; Wed, 15 Aug 2001 11:58:32 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.LNX.4.10.10108151145200.793-100000@itc.uci.edu>
Date:         Wed, 15 Aug 2001 11:58:32 -0700
Reply-To: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Amateur Rocketry Association
Comments: To: "Mark K. Spute" <mks@BIOMICRO.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <3B7AC207.52164E3F@biomicro.com>

On Wed, 15 Aug 2001, Mark K. Spute asked:
> What ever happened to the Amateur Rocketry Association?

Hi Mark,

I don't really know what happened to them, I've read a couple of their
publications.  It's times like these I sure wish Bill Colburn was still
here.  He posted the answer to this question some time ago, but I can't
seem to find it right now.

RRS has had several splinter groups over the years, I assume the ARA was
one of them, and they gradually withered away for one reason or another.

Maybe they were an east coast group that couldn't find a flying field.
Next time I talk to Mr. Colburn, I'll ask him about it.

Ray

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 9618 invoked from network); 15 Aug 2001 19:12:15 -0000
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 15 Aug 2001 19:12:15 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 3976 invoked by uid 50005); 15 Aug 2001 19:11:04 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smpte.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.248826 secs); 15 Aug 2001 19:11:04 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 15 Aug 2001 19:11:04 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA02512; Wed, 15 Aug 2001 12:09:14 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 85333 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 15 Aug 2001 19:09:12          +0000
Received: from izzy6.izzy.net (izzy6.izzy.net [207.158.132.178]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA02497; Wed, 15 Aug 2001 12:09:11 -0700
Received: from izzy.net (host-224.subnet-140.med.umich.edu [141.214.140.224])          by izzy6.izzy.net (8.9.2/8.9.3) with ESMTP id PAA19979; Wed, 15 Aug          2001 15:07:44 -0400 (EDT)
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.78 [en] (WinNT; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <Pine.LNX.4.10.10108151145200.793-100000@itc.uci.edu>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B7AC844.55279DE7@izzy.net>
Date:         Wed, 15 Aug 2001 15:06:44 -0400
Reply-To: <cscholl@IZZY.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Curtis Scholl" <cscholl@IZZY.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Amateur Rocketry Association
Comments: To: Ray Calkins <rcalkins@ITC.UCI.EDU>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Hi:

   I remember that the ARA became the AIAA(?) or Do I have the wrong
group?

   I asked about an amateur group that had a magazine. I have a few of
them and was informed that the group that produced the magazine had
grown up and divorced themselves from the "amateur" status to become the
AIAA.

   Now they do high power professional stuff. The price is high for the
reports now.

Curtis Scholl

Ray Calkins wrote:
>
> On Wed, 15 Aug 2001, Mark K. Spute asked:
> > What ever happened to the Amateur Rocketry Association?
>
> Hi Mark,
>
> I don't really know what happened to them, I've read a couple of their
> publications.  It's times like these I sure wish Bill Colburn was still
> here.  He posted the answer to this question some time ago, but I can't
> seem to find it right now.
>
> RRS has had several splinter groups over the years, I assume the ARA was
> one of them, and they gradually withered away for one reason or another.
>
> Maybe they were an east coast group that couldn't find a flying field.
> Next time I talk to Mr. Colburn, I'll ask him about it.
>
> Ray

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 1304 invoked from network); 15 Aug 2001 19:45:29 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 15 Aug 2001 19:45:30 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 26929 invoked by uid 50005); 15 Aug 2001 19:45:56 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.169239 secs); 15 Aug 2001 19:45:56 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 15 Aug 2001 19:45:55 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA02650; Wed, 15 Aug 2001 12:42:23 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 85348 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 15 Aug 2001 19:42:18          +0000
Received: from fcexgw03.efi.com ([192.68.228.82]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7)          with SMTP id MAA02609 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 15 Aug 2001          12:32:17 -0700
Received: from 10.10.12.104 by fcexgw03.efi.com (InterScan E-Mail VirusWall          NT); Wed, 15 Aug 2001 12:32:17 -0700
Received: from earthlink.net (peroxide.efi.com [10.10.89.46]) by          EX-IMC3-CORP.efi.com with SMTP (Microsoft Exchange Internet Mail          Service Version 5.5.2653.13) id QNQGHQ5B; Wed, 15 Aug 2001 12:32:16          -0700
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.14-5.0 i686)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <Pine.LNX.4.10.10108151145200.793-100000@itc.uci.edu>            <3B7AC844.55279DE7@izzy.net>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B7ACE64.EBEB12C0@earthlink.net>
Date:         Wed, 15 Aug 2001 12:32:52 -0700
Reply-To: "David Weinshenker" <daze39@EARTHLINK.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "David Weinshenker" <daze39@EARTHLINK.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Amateur Rocketry Association
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Curtis Scholl wrote:
> I remember that the ARA became the AIAA(?) or Do I have the wrong group?

I think that was the American Rocket Society.

-dave w

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 4561 invoked from network); 15 Aug 2001 19:53:04 -0000
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 15 Aug 2001 19:53:04 -0000
Received: (qmail 28877 invoked by uid 50005); 15 Aug 2001 19:51:52 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smpte.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 1.926185 secs); 15 Aug 2001 19:51:52 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 15 Aug 2001 19:51:48 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA02714; Wed, 15 Aug 2001 12:48:29 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 85361 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 15 Aug 2001 19:48:24          +0000
Received: from dune.gnc.net (root@dune.gnc.net [207.203.72.4]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA02700 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed,          15 Aug 2001 12:48:23 -0700
Received: from beowulf (sw2-38.gnc.net [207.203.72.118]) by dune.gnc.net          (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id PAA25227 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed,          15 Aug 2001 15:48:23 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
Importance: Normal
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <LPBBKJMJEOFKAMFJJNNHGEIGCGAA.landofgrey@gnc.net>
Date:         Wed, 15 Aug 2001 15:47:56 -0400
Reply-To: <landofgrey@gnc.net>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Matthew Travis" <landofgrey@gnc.net>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Amateur Rocketry Association
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <3B7ACE64.EBEB12C0@earthlink.net>

The American Rocket Society combined with the (insert name of organization
that I am forgetting here) to become the AIAA. I believe it was in 1956,
give or take a couple years.

I have come to the conclusion that there are too many 'A's and 'R's in our
acronyms.

Matt

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU]On
> Behalf Of David Weinshenker
> Sent: Wednesday, August 15, 2001 3:33 PM
> To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
> Subject: Re: [AR] Amateur Rocketry Association
>
>
> Curtis Scholl wrote:
> > I remember that the ARA became the AIAA(?) or Do I have the wrong group?
>
> I think that was the American Rocket Society.
>
> -dave w
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 1070 invoked from network); 15 Aug 2001 20:47:14 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 15 Aug 2001 20:47:14 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 29499 invoked by uid 50005); 15 Aug 2001 20:46:01 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smpte.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 2.641763 secs); 15 Aug 2001 20:46:01 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 15 Aug 2001 20:45:55 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA03030; Wed, 15 Aug 2001 13:43:42 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 85396 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 15 Aug 2001 20:43:36          +0000
Received: from mail1.murraystate.edu (mail1.murraystate.edu [216.249.159.50])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id NAA03016 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 15 Aug 2001 13:43:35 -0700
Received: from jjcomputer.murraystate.edu (216.249.150.117) by          mail1.murraystate.edu (NPlex 5.5.031) id 3B75A7FC00012455 for          AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 15 Aug 2001 15:41:34 -0500
X-Sender: terry.mccreary@mail.murraystate.edu
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <5.1.0.14.0.20010815145535.01dfda30@mail.murraystate.edu>
Date:         Wed, 15 Aug 2001 15:46:26 -0500
Reply-To: "Terry McCreary" <terry.mccreary@MURRAYSTATE.EDU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Terry McCreary" <terry.mccreary@MURRAYSTATE.EDU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Cutting out a C-slot.
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <004f01c125ae$94de0500$0100a8c0@prdise1.nm.home.com>

At 11:20 AM 8/15/01 -0600, you wrote:
>I cast a regular KN/Dex grain yesterday after my failed AP/Dex and just
>made a 38mm x 4" solid slug. This was with the hopes to be able to gut a
>3mm x 16mm slot in the grain. Any suggestions on how to do it? Or should I
>forget it, and cast a new one with a aluminum rectangle, or piece or
>ply/bass wood strip covered in Teflon tape?
>
>
>Paxton

Hi Pax:

I'm speaking from nonexperience here...but two or three hacksaw blades held
simultaneously in a hacksaw frame may make a decent tool for hand
slotting.  It works pretty well for AP/HTPB propellant.  Or possibly an
ordinary handsaw blade held in a vice.  Move the work rather than the saw.

P'rfesser

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 16628 invoked from network); 15 Aug 2001 20:50:34 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 15 Aug 2001 20:50:34 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 2581 invoked by uid 50005); 15 Aug 2001 20:49:22 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smpte.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.869916 secs); 15 Aug 2001 20:49:22 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 15 Aug 2001 20:49:20 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA03076; Wed, 15 Aug 2001 13:48:11 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 85407 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 15 Aug 2001 20:48:10          +0000
Received: from idsoftware.com (predator.idsoftware.com [192.246.40.34]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA03062 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Wed, 15 Aug 2001 13:48:10 -0700
Received: from [192.246.40.129] (account johnc HELO lightning.idsoftware.com)          by idsoftware.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 3.4.7) with ESMTP id 348453          for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 15 Aug 2001 15:48:09 -0500
X-Sender: johnc@mail.idsoftware.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <4.3.1.2.20010815152804.02e56f08@mail.idsoftware.com>
Date:         Wed, 15 Aug 2001 15:46:54 -0500
Reply-To: "John Carmack" <johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Carmack" <johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] ERPS successfully runs H2O2 engine
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <F141XHwGrRDyjLQoOuD0000943b@hotmail.com>

John Dom wrote:

 > Monoprop HP? Isp 150 s. Big deal.

...

 > Who needs cat packs? Who needs clean expensive inhibitor-free HP?
 > go hypergolic using manganese acetate:alcohol/HP biprop. Isp 280-300!

This is radically missing the point.

Making a rocket engine is only a small part of being able to carry out
operations in space.

All of the other things, like telemetry, guidance and control, ground
support, manufacturability, etc, are a whole lot easier to develop with a
simple, reliable rocket engine than with a higher performance one.

Sure, the long term solution will probably be a regeneratively cooled
biprop engine, but developing that from the beginning will make many other
lessons much more painful to learn.

While it isn't an advancement to the state of the art by any means,
building and reliably firing ANY liquid rocket engine is still an
accomplishment to be proud of.

By all means, please do show us a manganese acetate:alcohol/HP biprop with
a 280 Isp.  My propulsion prize is still sitting here with $2000 for a
similar accomplishment.

Would you recommend hypergolic biprop over cat packs even for attitude
thrusters?

John Carmack

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 4497 invoked from network); 15 Aug 2001 21:01:46 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 15 Aug 2001 21:01:46 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 30842 invoked by uid 50005); 15 Aug 2001 21:00:13 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smptf.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.391146 secs); 15 Aug 2001 21:00:13 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 15 Aug 2001 21:00:12 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA03135; Wed, 15 Aug 2001 13:57:02 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 85414 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 15 Aug 2001 20:57:00          +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (f132.law15.hotmail.com [64.4.23.132]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA03121 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Wed, 15 Aug 2001 13:57:00 -0700
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Wed,          15 Aug 2001 13:56:29 -0700
Received: from 213.224.83.110 by lw15fd.law15.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Wed,          15 Aug 2001 20:56:29 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [213.224.83.110]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 15 Aug 2001 20:56:29.0920 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[C1DE1E00:01C125CC]
Message-ID:  <F132sTDWWcuZcGwM0OO00009ee1@hotmail.com>
Date:         Wed, 15 Aug 2001 20:57:00 +0000
Reply-To: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] ERPS successfully runs H2O2 engine
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

JC wrote:

>Would you recommend hypergolic biprop over cat packs even for attitude
>thrusters?

Definitely yes. Besides the biprop combination I mentioned is being
considered for mid course control of missile intercepting rockets.

jd

_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 17468 invoked from network); 15 Aug 2001 21:12:29 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 15 Aug 2001 21:12:29 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 4105 invoked by uid 50005); 15 Aug 2001 21:13:00 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.492878 secs); 15 Aug 2001 21:13:00 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 15 Aug 2001 21:12:59 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA03212; Wed, 15 Aug 2001 14:07:51 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 85421 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 15 Aug 2001 21:07:45          +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (f176.law15.hotmail.com [64.4.23.176]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA03198 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Wed, 15 Aug 2001 14:07:44 -0700
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Wed,          15 Aug 2001 14:07:14 -0700
Received: from 213.224.83.110 by lw15fd.law15.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Wed,          15 Aug 2001 21:07:14 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [213.224.83.110]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 15 Aug 2001 21:07:14.0549 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[4218B250:01C125CE]
Message-ID:  <F1761nF7ZguRmewP9TQ00009f05@hotmail.com>
Date:         Wed, 15 Aug 2001 21:07:45 +0000
Reply-To: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] ERPS successfully runs H2O2 engine
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

>Have you tried to do it yourself yet to judge how
>hard it is to do in real life?

yes, no problem

>My test units leaked in all the wrong places
>and MnO2 was sprayed out of the noozles all over the place!

MnO2? I mentioned a manganous acetate solution in an alcohol. MnO2 is a
archeology heterogenous cat used to coat stone packs (Me 163 turbopump
drive) or at best cellular ceramics.

jd

_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 13785 invoked from network); 15 Aug 2001 21:55:27 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 15 Aug 2001 21:55:27 -0000
Received: (qmail 9334 invoked by uid 50005); 15 Aug 2001 21:55:56 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.292549 secs); 15 Aug 2001 21:55:56 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 15 Aug 2001 21:55:55 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA03326; Wed, 15 Aug 2001 14:42:57 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 85432 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 15 Aug 2001 21:42:51          +0000
Received: from c002.snv.cp.net (c002-h003.c002.snv.cp.net [209.228.32.167]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id OAA03312 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 15 Aug 2001 14:42:50 -0700
Received: (cpmta 21681 invoked from network); 15 Aug 2001 14:42:19 -0700
Received: from 1Cust151.tnt2.williamsburg.va.da.uu.net (HELO default)          (63.21.81.151) by smtp.peoplepc.com (209.228.32.167) with SMTP; 15          Aug 2001 14:42:19 -0700
X-Sent: 15 Aug 2001 21:42:19 GMT
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0B61_01C56B69.49015790"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <003b01c125d4$dfe36240$9751153f@default>
Date:         Wed, 15 Aug 2001 17:54:33 -0400
Reply-To: "David Muesing" <dmuesing@PEOPLEPC.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "David Muesing" <dmuesing@PEOPLEPC.COM>
Subject:      [AR] AD-----Carbon Fabric Available
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0B61_01C56B69.49015790
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Greetings Fellow Rocketeers:=20

I'm having another sale on Carbon fabric. I have only 68 yards at the =
moment so you might want to order soon. This fabric is 5.9 oz, 48.5" =
wide, 4 Harness Satin weave (more flexible than plain weave).
This fabric is classified as 2nd quality in that it is not quite =
perfect. It may have a very few minor cosmetic imperfections. I have =
sold and used it with no complaints.

The price is $19.20 per yard plus shipping. I'm requesting a minimum =
order of 4 yards but I'm flexible. It will be shipped by UPS Ground =
unless otherwise arranged.

Feel free to call or email me with questions/comments.

Thank you.

Dave Muesing    dmuesing@peoplepc.com  757-865-6281
www.mrfiberglass.com

------=_NextPart_000_0B61_01C56B69.49015790
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Diso-8859-1">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 5.50.4616.200" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=3DOCRA color=3D#0000ff>Greetings Fellow Rocketeers:<FONT =

color=3D#ff0000> </FONT></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DOCRA color=3D#ff0000></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DOCRA color=3D#0000ff>I'm having another sale on Carbon =
fabric. I=20
have only 68 yards at the moment so you might want to order soon. This =
fabric is=20
5.9 oz, 48.5" wide, 4 Harness Satin weave (more flexible than plain=20
weave).</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DOCRA color=3D#0000ff>This fabric is classified as 2nd =
quality in=20
that it is not quite perfect. It may have a very few minor cosmetic=20
imperfections. I have sold&nbsp;and used it with no =
complaints.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DOCRA color=3D#0000ff></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DOCRA color=3D#0000ff>The price is $19.20 per yard plus =

shipping.&nbsp;I'm requesting a minimum order of 4 yards but I'm =
flexible. It=20
will be shipped by UPS Ground unless otherwise arranged.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DOCRA color=3D#0000ff></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DOCRA color=3D#0000ff>Feel free to call or email me =
with=20
questions/comments.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DOCRA color=3D#0000ff></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DOCRA color=3D#0000ff>Thank you.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DOCRA color=3D#0000ff></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DOCRA color=3D#0000ff>Dave Muesing&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; <A =

href=3D"mailto:dmuesing@peoplepc.com">dmuesing@peoplepc.com</A>&nbsp;=20
757-865-6281<BR><A=20
href=3D"http://www.mrfiberglass.com">www.mrfiberglass.com</A></FONT></DIV=
></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0B61_01C56B69.49015790--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 25604 invoked from network); 15 Aug 2001 22:05:39 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 15 Aug 2001 22:05:39 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 21517 invoked by uid 50005); 15 Aug 2001 21:51:01 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smptf.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 2.098216 secs); 15 Aug 2001 21:51:01 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 15 Aug 2001 21:50:57 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA03362; Wed, 15 Aug 2001 14:48:50 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 85440 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 15 Aug 2001 21:48:36          +0000
Received: from idsoftware.com (predator.idsoftware.com [192.246.40.34]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA03348 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Wed, 15 Aug 2001 14:48:35 -0700
Received: from [192.246.40.129] (account johnc HELO lightning.idsoftware.com)          by idsoftware.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 3.4.7) with ESMTP id 348538          for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 15 Aug 2001 16:48:35 -0500
X-Sender: johnc@mail.idsoftware.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <4.3.1.2.20010815163111.02dc2f08@mail.idsoftware.com>
Date:         Wed, 15 Aug 2001 16:41:22 -0500
Reply-To: "John Carmack" <johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Carmack" <johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] ERPS successfully runs H2O2 engine
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <F1761nF7ZguRmewP9TQ00009f05@hotmail.com>

At 09:07 PM 8/15/2001 +0000, you wrote:
>>Have you tried to do it yourself yet to judge how
>>hard it is to do in real life?
>
>yes, no problem

I'm assuming you mean monoprop, not biprop, right?

Have you made any documentation of your engine dimensions, cat packs, test
stand, data acquisition, and the results you got?

I would certainly be interested in seeing as much data as possible from
everyone that has fired any type of peroxide motor.

John Carmack

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 23815 invoked from network); 15 Aug 2001 22:27:39 -0000
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 15 Aug 2001 22:27:40 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 27752 invoked by uid 50005); 15 Aug 2001 22:13:08 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smptf.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.43094 secs); 15 Aug 2001 22:13:08 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 15 Aug 2001 22:13:06 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA03643; Wed, 15 Aug 2001 15:10:53 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 85464 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 15 Aug 2001 22:10:47          +0000
Received: from mailgw1a.lmco.com (mailgw1a.lmco.com [192.31.106.7]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA03629 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 15 Aug 2001 15:10:46 -0700
Received: from emss02g01.ems.lmco.com (relay2.ems.lmco.com [166.29.2.54]) by          mailgw1a.lmco.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id QAA21927 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 15 Aug 2001 16:10:45 -0600 (MDT)
Received: from CONVERSION-DAEMON by lmco.com (PMDF V5.2-33 #38887) id          <0GI400101QXVQ5@lmco.com> for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 15 Aug 2001          16:10:44 -0600 (MDT)
Received: from emss02i00.ems.lmco.com ([166.29.2.48]) by lmco.com (PMDF V5.2-33          #38887) with ESMTP id <0GI400EB1QXRKL@lmco.com> for          AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 15 Aug 2001 16:10:39 -0600 (MDT)
Received: by emss02i00.ems.lmco.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) id          <Q9D98NBZ>; Wed, 15 Aug 2001 16:10:40 -0600
Content-return: allowed
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19)
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <EDB5E5136094D311BF1800508B12205E08D290EA@emss02m07.ems.lmco.com>
Date:         Wed, 15 Aug 2001 16:10:39 -0600
Reply-To: "Bendel, Timothy B" <timothy.b.bendel@LMCO.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Bendel, Timothy B" <timothy.b.bendel@LMCO.COM>
Subject:      [AR] Cutting out a C-slot.
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

> Pax,
>
> If you do plan to hold the grains and move the saw, make sure that the
> grains are held in a vise with adequate padding to distribute the pressure
> along the outside of the grain. If you squeeze too hard, the grain can
> crack and de-bond along the inner wall. It will probably be undetectable
> from view, but will cause a failure during burn.
>
> Tim Bendel
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Terry McCreary [SMTP:terry.mccreary@MURRAYSTATE.EDU]
> Sent: Wednesday, August 15, 2001 2:46 PM
> To:   AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
> Subject:      Re: [AR] Cutting out a C-slot.
>
> At 11:20 AM 8/15/01 -0600, you wrote:
> >I cast a regular KN/Dex grain yesterday after my failed AP/Dex and just
> >made a 38mm x 4" solid slug. This was with the hopes to be able to gut a
> >3mm x 16mm slot in the grain. Any suggestions on how to do it? Or should
> I
> >forget it, and cast a new one with a aluminum rectangle, or piece or
> >ply/bass wood strip covered in Teflon tape?
> >
> >
> >Paxton
>
> Hi Pax:
>
> I'm speaking from nonexperience here...but two or three hacksaw blades
> held
> simultaneously in a hacksaw frame may make a decent tool for hand
> slotting.  It works pretty well for AP/HTPB propellant.  Or possibly an
> ordinary handsaw blade held in a vice.  Move the work rather than the saw.
>
> P'rfesser

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 11249 invoked from network); 15 Aug 2001 22:31:50 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 15 Aug 2001 22:31:50 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 28260 invoked by uid 50005); 15 Aug 2001 22:31:50 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (. Clean. Processed in 0.184836 secs); 15 Aug 2001 22:31:50 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
X-Qmail-Scanner-Mail-From: owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU via smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net
X-Qmail-Scanner-Rcpt-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
X-Qmail-Scanner: 0.96 (No viruses found. Processed in 0.184836 secs)
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 15 Aug 2001 22:31:50 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA03782; Wed, 15 Aug 2001 15:28:13 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 85497 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 15 Aug 2001 22:28:10          +0000
Received: from ns.vanguard.com (ns.VANGUARD.COM [192.175.173.31]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA03768 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 15 Aug 2001 15:28:10 -0700
Received: from eagle1.vanguard.com (eagle1.VANGUARD.COM [192.175.141.70]) by          ns.vanguard.com (Switch-2.1.3/Switch-2.1.0) with ESMTP id          f7FMS9v06719 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 15 Aug 2001 18:28:09          -0400 (EDT)
Received: from vgi4mail.vanguard.com (vgi4mail.vanguard.com [10.254.65.16]) by          eagle1.vanguard.com (Switch-2.1.3/Switch-2.1.0) with SMTP id          f7FMS8a11619 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 15 Aug 2001 18:28:08          -0400 (EDT)
Received: by vgi4mail.vanguard.com(Lotus SMTP MTA v4.6.6  (890.1 7-16-1999))           id 85256AA9.007B7E59 ; Wed, 15 Aug 2001 18:28:52 -0400
X-Lotus-FromDomain: VGINOTES
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Disposition: inline
Message-ID:  <85256AA9.007B7CC8.00@vgi4mail.vanguard.com>
Date:         Wed, 15 Aug 2001 18:28:03 -0400
Reply-To: <Waysie_Atkins@VANGUARD.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <Waysie_Atkins@VANGUARD.COM>
Subject:      [AR] New Valve Actuator
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

New electronic actuator could benefit future spacecraft

NASA's Marshall Center is testing new electronic actuator technology that
could save time and money in the development of main propulsion systems for
future spacecraft.



For more information, please visit:
http://www.spacetransportation.com


Thought many on the list would find this of interest.

Respectfully,

Waysie

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 27729 invoked from network); 16 Aug 2001 00:23:30 -0000
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 16 Aug 2001 00:23:30 -0000
Received: (qmail 11119 invoked by uid 50005); 16 Aug 2001 00:22:16 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smpte.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.561284 secs); 16 Aug 2001 00:22:16 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 16 Aug 2001 00:22:14 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA04256; Wed, 15 Aug 2001 17:19:13 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 85574 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 00:18:44          +0000
Received: from mta05.mail.mel.aone.net.au (mta05.mail.au.uu.net [203.2.192.85])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA04242 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 15 Aug 2001 17:18:43 -0700
Received: from unknown ([63.34.220.105]) by mta05.mail.mel.aone.net.au with          SMTP id <20010816001835.XUEK19580.mta05.mail.mel.aone.net.au@unknown>          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 10:18:35 +1000
References: Conversation <61A2F0A8E936D311876A0008C74BF1EC96AA9F@DD21AE02> with            last message <61A2F0A8E936D311876A0008C74BF1EC96AA9F@DD21AE02>
Priority: Normal
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Priority: 3
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	X-MAPIextension=.TXT;
	charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>
Date:         Thu, 16 Aug 2001 00:18:44 +0000
Reply-To: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Strontium Nitrate - Sorbitol
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <61A2F0A8E936D311876A0008C74BF1EC96AA9F@DD21AE02>

----------
> I was looking at a chemical vendor's page and the formula for
> strontium nitrate just popped out at me - all that O :)
>
> I have never really thought of it as anything other than something pretty.
>
> I ran it through propep with sorbitol and it showed a significant increase
> in ISP over potassium nitrate.
>
> Is there a reason it is not used much?
> Too hygroscopic?

All the alkaline group nitrates contain virtually twice the amount of
oxygen per molecule as the alkali group nitrates due to their ionic
valencies but unfortunately also have a tendency to be quite hydrated @STP
conditions. They often form these hydrated ring type structures that I'm
not too familiar with. I don't have much info at hand right now regarding
SrNO3 but I would have assumed the Sr ion would be too heavy to obtain a
noticeable performance improvement (and NO I haven't done the calcs so ..).
I couldn't imagine SrNO3 to have much of a commercial use? Wouldn't it be
too toxic to use as a fertiliser?

Troy.

>
> Thanks,
> Byron

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 22017 invoked from network); 16 Aug 2001 01:06:09 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 16 Aug 2001 01:06:09 -0000
Received: (qmail 23273 invoked by uid 50005); 16 Aug 2001 01:04:55 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smpte.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.705385 secs); 16 Aug 2001 01:04:55 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 16 Aug 2001 01:04:54 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA04435; Wed, 15 Aug 2001 17:49:58 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 85607 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 00:49:54          +0000
Received: from smtp001.mailsrvcs.net (smtp001pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.180])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA04421 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 15 Aug 2001 17:49:54 -0700
Received: from [63.27.96.152] (1Cust60.tnt3.san-bernardino.ca.da.uu.net          [63.25.57.60]) by smtp001.mailsrvcs.net  with ESMTP for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; id f7G0n7729221 Wed, 15 Aug 2001 19:49:07          -0500 (CDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: GTE/01rocket@mail.gte.net
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <a0510030ab7a0c6165de0@[63.27.96.152]>
Date:         Wed, 15 Aug 2001 17:49:29 -0700
Reply-To: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Subject:      [AR] Amateur Rocketry Association
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

"Mark K. Spute" <mks@BIOMICRO.COM> wrote:

I asked this about a week ago and no one answered.  Perhaps no one
knows.  What ever happened to the Amateur Rocketry Association?  They
published lots of books and papers in many areas of rocketry in the late
50's and 60's and seem to have just disappeared.  Anyone know if they
are still around, perhaps under another name? Who they were?  What
happened to them?

Ray?  Henry?  Jerry?

I was not aware of ARA unless it is what became ARS (American Rocket
Society) which itself became AIAA and jettisoned JPL, RRS, PRS.

Jerry

--
Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
Opinion, the whole thing.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 11514 invoked from network); 16 Aug 2001 01:11:11 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 16 Aug 2001 01:11:11 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 20382 invoked by uid 50005); 16 Aug 2001 01:11:41 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.18083 secs); 16 Aug 2001 01:11:41 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 16 Aug 2001 01:11:41 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA04475; Wed, 15 Aug 2001 17:55:40 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 85614 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 00:55:35          +0000
Received: from sys27.hou.wt.net (sys27.hou.wt.net [205.230.159.27]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA04460 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 15 Aug 2001 17:55:34 -0700
Received: from localhost (216-119-138-116.ipset18.wt.net [216.119.138.116]) by          sys27.hou.wt.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id TAA67010; Wed, 15 Aug          2001 19:55:27 -0500 (CDT)
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.388)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <200108160055.TAA67010@sys27.hou.wt.net>
Date:         Wed, 15 Aug 2001 19:55:54 -0500
Reply-To: "Donald McCorvey" <dlm3@NETAXS.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Donald McCorvey" <dlm3@NETAXS.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] New Valve Actuator
Comments: To: Waysie_Atkins@VANGUARD.COM
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <85256AA9.007B7CC8.00@vgi4mail.vanguard.com>

Waysie,

I'm sure there will be many who disagree with me, but my experience with
hydraulics vs. electric actuation systems favors hydraulics - and for a
simple reason: Hydraulic actuators fail soft.

When an electric actuator fails, it's usually the result of a burned out
coil, a broken wire, a busted contact in a connector, or a torched
driver/controller box. And all these are characterized by zero motion.

When a hydraulic actuator fails, it begins leaking internally, causing
it to heat up and waste energy. It doesn't stop operating. It doesn't
lock up solid. It just works poorly.  (broken wires are a problem too
but there are important differences - noted below)

The attitude of the EMA crowd is that hydraulic leaks are the number one
problem with hydraulic systems and that electrical systems will be more
reliable because they can't leak.

It's true.

Instead, they burn up, cause fires, blow fuses, vaporize transistors,
jam or overheat their gearboxes... Least of all they suffer from broken
wires which bring on their most common failure mode - total loss of
function.

Large currents, such as large-horsepower EMAs require, are difficult to
handle, even when you know what you're doing. There are many secondary
and tertiary effects that can't be modeled and can result in strange, if
not dangerous behavior. Work on this topic alone has been underway for
more than a century and still it's a black art.

And contrary to their claims, the weight of these systems is not all
that low. The wiring is going to be larger than most hydraulic tubes and
weigh more than the tube filled with fluid. I don't know how familiar
you are with switching components like contactors and bus breakers, but
they're heavy too. So are the heat sinks needed to properly cool the
electronics, which themselves must be fairly chunky (and expensive) in
order to control the motion of the actuator with any kind of reliability.

EMAs are more religion than art, much like practical electric cars - the
concept has been around for a century but practical, reliable results
are hard in coming. Contrarily, hydraulic systems are several centuries
old and are near their peak in performance and reliability.

----------------

There's a time and place for EMAs. Anywhere that you don't already have
some sort of shaft which can harnessed to drive a pump, and anywhere
that electricity is your only power source. For amateur rocketry, it's
probably the only solution for all but the largest vehicles.

For 1e-9 (manned) flight control systems, hydraulics are still the
better answer.

When will this change ? About the same time you see superconducting
wires used commonly and electric cars are cheaper than equivalent-sized
gasoline or diesel fueled automobiles and trucks of the same sizes in
common use today. When the wiring and the silicon advance beyond their
current physical limitations with different technology, only then will
electrical systems be superior. It's coming, and it's worthy of lots of
research, but it isn't there yet, IMHO.

Don McCorvey


On Wednesday, August 15, 2001, at 05:28 PM, Waysie_Atkins@VANGUARD.COM
wrote:

> New electronic actuator could benefit future spacecraft
>
> NASA's Marshall Center is testing new electronic actuator technology
> that
> could save time and money in the development of main propulsion systems
> for
> future spacecraft.
>
>
>
> For more information, please visit:
> http://www.spacetransportation.com
>
>
> Thought many on the list would find this of interest.
>
> Respectfully,
>
> Waysie
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 13924 invoked from network); 16 Aug 2001 01:26:45 -0000
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 16 Aug 2001 01:26:45 -0000
Received: (qmail 21427 invoked by uid 50005); 16 Aug 2001 01:13:06 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smptf.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 2.850914 secs); 16 Aug 2001 01:13:06 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 16 Aug 2001 01:13:01 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA04508; Wed, 15 Aug 2001 17:58:11 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 85625 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 00:58:09          +0000
Received: from dune.gnc.net (root@dune.gnc.net [207.203.72.4]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA04494 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed,          15 Aug 2001 17:58:09 -0700
Received: from beowulf (sw2-21.gnc.net [207.203.72.101]) by dune.gnc.net          (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id UAA32608 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed,          15 Aug 2001 20:58:09 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
Importance: Normal
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <LPBBKJMJEOFKAMFJJNNHCEIJCGAA.landofgrey@gnc.net>
Date:         Wed, 15 Aug 2001 20:57:49 -0400
Reply-To: <landofgrey@gnc.net>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Matthew Travis" <landofgrey@gnc.net>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Amateur Rocketry Association
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <a0510030ab7a0c6165de0@[63.27.96.152]>

I have heard of ARA and thought I had an answer for the question. I was
looking around but am still tryingto find it. I think there was some
informal connection with either the ARS, RRS, or RRI (many people belonged
to all of those organizations at one time or another back then).

Matt

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 28689 invoked from network); 16 Aug 2001 01:30:27 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 16 Aug 2001 01:30:27 -0000
Received: (qmail 13334 invoked by uid 50005); 16 Aug 2001 01:30:57 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.133977 secs); 16 Aug 2001 01:30:57 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 16 Aug 2001 01:30:57 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA04611; Wed, 15 Aug 2001 18:11:54 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 85648 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 01:11:51          +0000
Received: from fep4-orange.clear.net.nz (fep4-orange.clear.net.nz          [203.97.32.4]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA04597          for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Wed, 15 Aug 2001 18:11:50 -0700
Received: from mkbs (203-167-167-133.dialup.clear.net.nz [203.167.167.133]) by          fep4-orange.clear.net.nz (1.5/1.7) with SMTP id NAA22327; Thu, 16 Aug          2001 13:11:43 +1200 (NZST)
References: <F82NY30kkZIhTrBoe2U000094d4@hotmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="Windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <01a801c125f0$b93324c0$0100a8c0@mkbs>
Date:         Thu, 16 Aug 2001 12:01:22 +1200
Reply-To: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Organization: Applied Technology
Subject:      [AR] Case bonding <- Re [AR] AP/Dextrose propellant issues.
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

> >My understanding of the issues is - If you want to case bond it...
>
>  ........ what do you mean by "case bond"?

Case bonding is the mechanical joining / gluing / connection of the outside
surface of the grain to the case. This may be achieved by pouring the grain
into the case and allowing it to cure in place or by applying an outer
sealer / binder / glue.

Some advantages are - protection of the outside of the grain from burning
(slower burn), protection of the case from combustion and imparting the
stiffness and "location" of the casing to the grain so that it does not
shift or slump during combustion. A case bound grain is held in place at all
locations on its outer surface and tends to be stressed in shear by
acceleration forces. It is also stressed by any flexure of the casing as it
is tightly connected to it. Each grain's loading by acceleration forces is
substantially independent of adjacent ones.

An "unbound" grain tends to be supported from its lower end and adds its
"weight" during acceleration to other grains below it.
Case flexure has minimal affects on grain deformation. However, as the
grains are not "supported" in place forces are compressive and the
bottom-most grain will be most loaded. (A motor with N grains which burns
for Y seconds will have a force in excess of Isp x N / Y  times the weight
of one grain exerted on the base of the bottom grain. ( = Gmax x N).  For a
typical AP motor with say 4 grains and a 4 second burn this could be over
200 times the weight of a single grain.)

I imagine that a candy type propellant MAY be able to gain some of the
advantages of case bonding by using a grain-to-casing adhesive of a suitably
plastic nature and adequate thickness to absorb case flexure without
transferring it to the grain. It would need to be suitably noncombustible to
resist attack at the grain ends during firing. A suitably thick layer of
"RTV" silicon rubber comes to mind as a possible substance. As this forms a
ring at the case diameter the volume it takes up would be large compared to
its thickness.




            Russell McMahon

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 9891 invoked from network); 16 Aug 2001 04:20:23 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 16 Aug 2001 04:20:23 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 27948 invoked by uid 50005); 16 Aug 2001 04:19:38 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smptf.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.209326 secs); 16 Aug 2001 04:19:38 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 16 Aug 2001 04:19:38 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA05448; Wed, 15 Aug 2001 21:18:25 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 85702 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 04:18:24          +0000
Received: from c012.sfo.cp.net (c012-h011.c012.sfo.cp.net [209.228.13.211]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id TAA04926 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 15 Aug 2001 19:18:13 -0700
Received: (cpmta 20210 invoked from network); 15 Aug 2001 19:17:43 -0700
X-Sent: 16 Aug 2001 02:17:43 GMT
Received: from [24.49.222.43] by mail.altavista.com with HTTP; 15 Aug 2001          19:17:43 PDT
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Disposition: inline
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Web Mail 3.9.3.5
X-Sent-From: jgrassi@altavista.com
Message-ID:  <20010816021743.20209.cpmta@c012.sfo.cp.net>
Date:         Wed, 15 Aug 2001 19:17:43 -0700
Reply-To: "john grassi" <jgrassi@ALTAVISTA.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "john grassi" <jgrassi@ALTAVISTA.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Cutting out a C-slot.
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

You could very easily use a radial arm saw or even a table saw if you are careful.  Raise the blade to cut the depth you want.  The blade should in normal cases take out 1/8"

On Wed, 15 August 2001, "Bendel, Timothy B" wrote:

>
> > Pax,
> >
> > If you do plan to hold the grains and move the saw, make sure that the
> > grains are held in a vise with adequate padding to distribute the pressure
> > along the outside of the grain. If you squeeze too hard, the grain can
> > crack and de-bond along the inner wall. It will probably be undetectable
> > from view, but will cause a failure during burn.
> >
> > Tim Bendel
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Terry McCreary [SMTP:terry.mccreary@MURRAYSTATE.EDU]
> > Sent: Wednesday, August 15, 2001 2:46 PM
> > To:   AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
> > Subject:      Re: [AR] Cutting out a C-slot.
> >
> > At 11:20 AM 8/15/01 -0600, you wrote:
> > >I cast a regular KN/Dex grain yesterday after my failed AP/Dex and just
> > >made a 38mm x 4" solid slug. This was with the hopes to be able to gut a
> > >3mm x 16mm slot in the grain. Any suggestions on how to do it? Or should
> > I
> > >forget it, and cast a new one with a aluminum rectangle, or piece or
> > >ply/bass wood strip covered in Teflon tape?
> > >
> > >
> > >Paxton
> >
> > Hi Pax:
> >
> > I'm speaking from nonexperience here...but two or three hacksaw blades
> > held
> > simultaneously in a hacksaw frame may make a decent tool for hand
> > slotting.  It works pretty well for AP/HTPB propellant.  Or possibly an
> > ordinary handsaw blade held in a vice.  Move the work rather than the saw.
> >
> > P'rfesser


Find the best deals on the web at AltaVista Shopping!
http://www.shopping.altavista.com

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 11515 invoked from network); 16 Aug 2001 04:21:00 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 16 Aug 2001 04:21:00 -0000
Received: (qmail 10344 invoked by uid 50005); 16 Aug 2001 04:19:46 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smpte.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 2.900571 secs); 16 Aug 2001 04:19:46 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 16 Aug 2001 04:19:40 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA05427; Wed, 15 Aug 2001 21:16:50 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 85682 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 04:16:41          +0000
Received: from smtp003.mailsrvcs.net (smtp003pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.182])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA04811 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 15 Aug 2001 18:55:51 -0700
Received: from [63.27.96.152] (1Cust60.tnt3.san-bernardino.ca.da.uu.net          [63.25.57.60]) by smtp003.mailsrvcs.net  with ESMTP for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; id f7G1sxg23738 Wed, 15 Aug 2001 20:54:59          -0500 (CDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: GTE/01rocket@mail.gte.net
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <a0510030db7a0d7747287@[63.27.96.152]>
Date:         Wed, 15 Aug 2001 18:55:20 -0700
Reply-To: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Subject:      [AR] Amateur Rocketry Association
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

"Mark K. Spute" <mks@BIOMICRO.COM> wrote:

I asked this about a week ago and no one answered.  Perhaps no one
knows.  What ever happened to the Amateur Rocketry Association?  They
published lots of books and papers in many areas of rocketry in the late
50's and 60's and seem to have just disappeared.  Anyone know if they
are still around, perhaps under another name? Who they were?  What
happened to them?

Ray?  Henry?  Jerry?

==

I was not aware of ARA unless it is what became ARS (American Rocket
Society) which itself became AIAA and jettisoned JPL, RRS, PRS.

==

Yes I forgot to mention RRI

JPL=Jet propulsion Laboratory (Pasadena, CA)
AIAA = American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics
RRS= Rocket Research Society (Los Angeles, CA)
PRS= Pacific Rocket Society (Mojave, CA)
RRI - Rocket Research Institute (Sacramento, CA)

California Rules!!!

Generally if you started a major rocket technology you resided in CA.
If you wanted to maintain it, you had to escape its socialist laws
and move out.

Jerry

--
Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
Opinion, the whole thing.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 14450 invoked from network); 16 Aug 2001 04:22:03 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 16 Aug 2001 04:22:03 -0000
Received: (qmail 19724 invoked by uid 50005); 16 Aug 2001 04:22:33 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.124298 secs); 16 Aug 2001 04:22:33 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 16 Aug 2001 04:22:33 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA05469; Wed, 15 Aug 2001 21:19:52 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 85721 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 04:19:50          +0000
Received: from mta05.mail.mel.aone.net.au (mta05.mail.au.uu.net [203.2.192.85])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA05041 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 15 Aug 2001 19:40:22 -0700
Received: from unknown ([63.34.210.187]) by mta05.mail.mel.aone.net.au with          SMTP id <20010816024020.HOS19580.mta05.mail.mel.aone.net.au@unknown>          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 12:40:20 +1000
Priority: Normal
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Priority: 3
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	X-MAPIextension=.TXT;
	charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>
Date:         Thu, 16 Aug 2001 04:19:50 +0000
Reply-To: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Subject:      [AR] Fw: [AR] Case bonding <- Re [AR] AP/Dextrose propellant              issues.
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

> > An "unbound" grain tends to be supported from its lower end and adds its
> > "weight" during acceleration to other grains below it.
> > Case flexure has minimal affects on grain deformation. However, as the
> > grains are not "supported" in place forces are compressive and the
> > bottom-most grain will be most loaded. (A motor with N grains which
burns
> > for Y seconds will have a force in excess of Isp x N / Y  times the
weight
> > of one grain exerted on the base of the bottom grain. ( = Gmax x N).
For
> a
> > typical AP motor with say 4 grains and a 4 second burn this could be
over
> > 200 times the weight of a single grain.)
>
> What does Isp have to do with it?  Where'd ya pull that one from???

Rephrasing the question: From a practical viewpoint, why use Isp for such
an assessment?

Troy.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 17696 invoked from network); 16 Aug 2001 04:23:15 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 16 Aug 2001 04:23:15 -0000
Received: (qmail 20776 invoked by uid 50005); 16 Aug 2001 04:23:44 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.132514 secs); 16 Aug 2001 04:23:44 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 16 Aug 2001 04:23:44 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA05492; Wed, 15 Aug 2001 21:21:15 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 85661 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 04:21:14          +0000
Received: from mta05.mail.mel.aone.net.au (mta05.mail.au.uu.net [203.2.192.85])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA04726 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 15 Aug 2001 18:42:37 -0700
Received: from unknown ([63.60.220.253]) by mta05.mail.mel.aone.net.au with          SMTP id <20010816014233.ZEWF19580.mta05.mail.mel.aone.net.au@unknown>          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 11:42:33 +1000
References: Conversation <F82NY30kkZIhTrBoe2U000094d4@hotmail.com> with last            message <01a801c125f0$b93324c0$0100a8c0@mkbs>
Priority: Normal
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Priority: 3
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	X-MAPIextension=.TXT;
	charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>
Date:         Thu, 16 Aug 2001 04:21:14 +0000
Reply-To: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Case bonding <- Re [AR] AP/Dextrose propellant issues.
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <01a801c125f0$b93324c0$0100a8c0@mkbs>

----------
> > >My understanding of the issues is - If you want to case bond it...
> >
> >  ........ what do you mean by "case bond"?
>
> Case bonding is the mechanical joining / gluing / connection of the
outside
> surface of the grain to the case. This may be achieved by pouring the
grain
> into the case and allowing it to cure in place or by applying an outer
> sealer / binder / glue.
>
> Some advantages are - protection of the outside of the grain from burning
> (slower burn), protection of the case from combustion and imparting the
> stiffness and "location" of the casing to the grain so that it does not
> shift or slump during combustion. A case bound grain is held in place at
all
> locations on its outer surface and tends to be stressed in shear by
> acceleration forces. It is also stressed by any flexure of the casing as
it
> is tightly connected to it. Each grain's loading by acceleration forces is
> substantially independent of adjacent ones.
>
> An "unbound" grain tends to be supported from its lower end and adds its
> "weight" during acceleration to other grains below it.
> Case flexure has minimal affects on grain deformation. However, as the
> grains are not "supported" in place forces are compressive and the
> bottom-most grain will be most loaded. (A motor with N grains which burns
> for Y seconds will have a force in excess of Isp x N / Y  times the weight
> of one grain exerted on the base of the bottom grain. ( = Gmax x N).  For
a
> typical AP motor with say 4 grains and a 4 second burn this could be over
> 200 times the weight of a single grain.)

What does Isp have to do with it?  Where'd ya pull that one from???

>
> I imagine that a candy type propellant MAY be able to gain some of the
> advantages of case bonding by using a grain-to-casing adhesive of a
suitably
> plastic nature and adequate thickness to absorb case flexure without
> transferring it to the grain. It would need to be suitably noncombustible
to
> resist attack at the grain ends during firing. A suitably thick layer of
> "RTV" silicon rubber comes to mind as a possible substance. As this forms
a
> ring at the case diameter the volume it takes up would be large compared
to
> its thickness.

Problem is grain shrinkage, especially with the larger grains. RTV has been
used in many candy applications and is a semi proven method that often
produces good results but (depending on the thickness) you start to
question is it still case bonding? Remember the primary advantage
*generally* of case bonding is to increase propellant loadings. To
successfully case bond candy may require a centrifugal casing process as
discussed a month or so ago or the application of pressure.

Troy.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 7338 invoked from network); 16 Aug 2001 04:40:04 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 16 Aug 2001 04:40:04 -0000
Received: (qmail 8097 invoked by uid 50005); 16 Aug 2001 04:40:02 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (. Clean. Processed in 1.232019 secs); 16 Aug 2001 04:40:02 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
X-Qmail-Scanner-Mail-From: owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU via smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net
X-Qmail-Scanner-Rcpt-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
X-Qmail-Scanner: 0.96 (No viruses found. Processed in 1.232019 secs)
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 16 Aug 2001 04:40:00 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA05570; Wed, 15 Aug 2001 21:31:43 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 85781 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 04:31:41          +0000
Received: from dns2.seanet.com (dns2.seanet.com [199.181.164.2]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA05556 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed,          15 Aug 2001 21:31:41 -0700
Received: from seanet.com (ssstolt.seanet.com [204.182.68.23]) by          dns2.seanet.com (8.11.5/8.11.2) with ESMTP id f7G4VWk23415; Wed, 15          Aug 2001 21:31:33 -0700 (PDT)
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.73 [en] (Win98; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <200108160055.TAA67010@sys27.hou.wt.net>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B7B4AF3.1F2F7C6@seanet.com>
Date:         Wed, 15 Aug 2001 21:24:20 -0700
Reply-To: "Sherwood Stolt" <ssstolt@SEANET.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Sherwood Stolt" <ssstolt@SEANET.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] New Valve Actuator
Comments: cc: Donald McCorvey <dlm3@NETAXS.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

How do these EMAs work (for example those used on the linear aerospike).
Are they solenoids or motors (AC, DC, stepper, ...)?   Do they drive gears,
worms or screws?

Donald McCorvey wrote:

> Waysie,
>
> I'm sure there will be many who disagree with me, but my experience with
> hydraulics vs. electric actuation systems favors hydraulics - and for a
> simple reason: Hydraulic actuators fail soft.
>
> When an electric actuator fails, it's usually the result of a burned out
> coil, a broken wire, a busted contact in a connector, or a torched
> driver/controller box. And all these are characterized by zero motion.
>
> When a hydraulic actuator fails, it begins leaking internally, causing
> it to heat up and waste energy. It doesn't stop operating. It doesn't
> lock up solid. It just works poorly.  (broken wires are a problem too
> but there are important differences - noted below)
>
> The attitude of the EMA crowd is that hydraulic leaks are the number one
> problem with hydraulic systems and that electrical systems will be more
> reliable because they can't leak.
>
> It's true.
>
> Instead, they burn up, cause fires, blow fuses, vaporize transistors,
> jam or overheat their gearboxes... Least of all they suffer from broken
> wires which bring on their most common failure mode - total loss of
> function.
>
> Large currents, such as large-horsepower EMAs require, are difficult to
> handle, even when you know what you're doing. There are many secondary
> and tertiary effects that can't be modeled and can result in strange, if
> not dangerous behavior. Work on this topic alone has been underway for
> more than a century and still it's a black art.
>
> And contrary to their claims, the weight of these systems is not all
> that low. The wiring is going to be larger than most hydraulic tubes and
> weigh more than the tube filled with fluid. I don't know how familiar
> you are with switching components like contactors and bus breakers, but
> they're heavy too. So are the heat sinks needed to properly cool the
> electronics, which themselves must be fairly chunky (and expensive) in
> order to control the motion of the actuator with any kind of reliability.
>
> EMAs are more religion than art, much like practical electric cars - the
> concept has been around for a century but practical, reliable results
> are hard in coming. Contrarily, hydraulic systems are several centuries
> old and are near their peak in performance and reliability.
>
> ----------------
>
> There's a time and place for EMAs. Anywhere that you don't already have
> some sort of shaft which can harnessed to drive a pump, and anywhere
> that electricity is your only power source. For amateur rocketry, it's
> probably the only solution for all but the largest vehicles.
>
> For 1e-9 (manned) flight control systems, hydraulics are still the
> better answer.
>
> When will this change ? About the same time you see superconducting
> wires used commonly and electric cars are cheaper than equivalent-sized
> gasoline or diesel fueled automobiles and trucks of the same sizes in
> common use today. When the wiring and the silicon advance beyond their
> current physical limitations with different technology, only then will
> electrical systems be superior. It's coming, and it's worthy of lots of
> research, but it isn't there yet, IMHO.
>
> Don McCorvey
>
> On Wednesday, August 15, 2001, at 05:28 PM, Waysie_Atkins@VANGUARD.COM
> wrote:
>
> > New electronic actuator could benefit future spacecraft
> >
> > NASA's Marshall Center is testing new electronic actuator technology
> > that
> > could save time and money in the development of main propulsion systems
> > for
> > future spacecraft.
> >
> >
> >
> > For more information, please visit:
> > http://www.spacetransportation.com
> >
> >
> > Thought many on the list would find this of interest.
> >
> > Respectfully,
> >
> > Waysie
> >

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 9086 invoked from network); 16 Aug 2001 04:40:41 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 16 Aug 2001 04:40:40 -0000
Received: (qmail 9065 invoked by uid 50005); 16 Aug 2001 04:40:39 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (. Clean. Processed in 0.445036 secs); 16 Aug 2001 04:40:39 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
X-Qmail-Scanner-Mail-From: owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU via smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net
X-Qmail-Scanner-Rcpt-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
X-Qmail-Scanner: 0.96 (No viruses found. Processed in 0.445036 secs)
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 16 Aug 2001 04:40:37 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA05643; Wed, 15 Aug 2001 21:38:49 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 85797 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 04:38:47          +0000
Received: from sys32.hou.wt.net (sys32.hou.wt.net [205.230.159.32]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA05628 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 15 Aug 2001 21:38:46 -0700
Received: from localhost (216-119-130-170.ipset10.wt.net [216.119.130.170]) by          sys32.hou.wt.net (8.9.1/8.9.1) with ESMTP id XAA23751; Wed, 15 Aug          2001 23:38:53 -0500 (CDT)
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.388)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <200108160438.XAA23751@sys32.hou.wt.net>
Date:         Wed, 15 Aug 2001 23:39:07 -0500
Reply-To: "Donald McCorvey" <dlm3@NETAXS.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Donald McCorvey" <dlm3@NETAXS.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] New Valve Actuator
Comments: To: Sherwood Stolt <ssstolt@SEANET.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <3B7B4AF3.1F2F7C6@seanet.com>

I'm just guessing, mind you, but I would think they're using a
permanent-magnet, brushless DC servomotor driving some sort of
ball-screw via a small planetary gearbox or a train of spur gears. They
should have some sort of tachometer feedback as well as an LVDT on the
output rod for servoloop closure.

That's pretty much where the state of the art is at the moment.

Don McCorvey

On Wednesday, August 15, 2001, at 11:24 PM, Sherwood Stolt wrote:

> How do these EMAs work (for example those used on the linear aerospike).
> Are they solenoids or motors (AC, DC, stepper, ...)?   Do they drive
> gears,
> worms or screws?
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 26331 invoked from network); 16 Aug 2001 04:46:32 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 16 Aug 2001 04:46:32 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 14096 invoked by uid 50005); 16 Aug 2001 04:47:02 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.29946 secs); 16 Aug 2001 04:47:02 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 16 Aug 2001 04:47:01 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA05702; Wed, 15 Aug 2001 21:44:26 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 85804 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 04:44:21          +0000
Received: from sys32.hou.wt.net (sys32.hou.wt.net [205.230.159.32]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA05688 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 15 Aug 2001 21:44:20 -0700
Received: from localhost (216-119-130-170.ipset10.wt.net [216.119.130.170]) by          sys32.hou.wt.net (8.9.1/8.9.1) with ESMTP id XAA24153; Wed, 15 Aug          2001 23:44:26 -0500 (CDT)
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0B64_01C56B69.491DE040"
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.388)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID:  <200108160444.XAA24153@sys32.hou.wt.net>
Date:         Wed, 15 Aug 2001 23:44:39 -0500
Reply-To: "Donald McCorvey" <dlm3@NETAXS.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Donald McCorvey" <dlm3@NETAXS.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] New Valve Actuator
Comments: cc: aol.comAROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0B64_01C56B69.491DE040
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"

Well, not exactly. Aviation-grade contactors and relays are lighter and
stronger than you might think. Just because they're not used on the
Space Shuttle doesn't mean you can't use them on small-to-medium-size
rockets.

You can buy hi-rel relays which can handle several G and high vibration.
They're used on military jets and helicopters (and you haven't seen real
vibration 'till you've taken a ride on a helicopter) for everything from
switching main bus power to turning on the windshield wipers. Needless
to say, they don't come from Radio Shack. Instead, they come from Eaton,
Guardian Electric, and others - and you can buy them from anybody who
deals in military parts for outrageous prices (a simple-but-tiny 4PDT
relay with solder hooks can cost as much as $100, but can be had for
much less if you can find them at a surplus store).

But if a simple relay will do the job, it can be a lot easier to
implement, and is far less sensitive to noise and other interference
than silicon parts are. Don't write them off just because they're
mechanical.

FWIW: Fifteen years ago, I was a big believer in silicon solutions. I
still am, in fact, but not for power unless it's absolutely necessary,
and then only for high frequency switching where there's no other
choice. They're ugly and ungainly, but mechanical relays and contactors
are a simpler solution most of the time if you can use them - and you
should if your design permits it. For low power (i.e., <1-5A continuous
@28Vdc), small MOSFET transistors and logic gates are usually the best
answer if you're at all good with a soldering iron.

Don McCorvey

On Wednesday, August 15, 2001, at 09:30 PM, Tjpoulton@aol.com wrote:

In a message dated 8/15/01 7:56:52 PM Central Daylight Time,
dlm3@NETAXS.COM
writes:

And contrary to their claims, the weight of these systems is not all
  that low. The wiring is going to be larger than most hydraulic tubes and
  weigh more than the tube filled with fluid. I don't know how familiar
  you are with switching components like contactors and bus breakers, but
  they're heavy too. So are the heat sinks needed to properly cool the
  electronics, which themselves must be fairly chunky (and expensive) in
  order to control the motion of the actuator with any kind of reliability

In a rocket vehicle application, the heavy switching equipment found in
similar ground-based systems would not be used.  Contactors and
mechanical
switches are subject to G-force and vibration-related problems.  Solid
state
switching would be used all-around.  As you mention, these electronics
must
be cooled.  In normal applications, they are cooled using massive, bulky
heatsinks.  In a rocket, however, you typically have large amounts of
liquid
propellants available to do this cooling for you.  Moreover, the systems
do
not have to run continuous-duty -- the flight times for non-orbital
vehicles
are typically short enough to allow heat-soak "cooling" and somewhat
non-optimal component temperatures.  However, I am definitely in
agreement
with you that hydraulics are better for most applications.
Mike P.


------=_NextPart_000_0B64_01C56B69.491DE040
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Type: text/enriched;
	charset="us-ascii"

Well, not exactly. Aviation-grade contactors and relays are lighter
and stronger than you might think. Just because they're not used on
the Space Shuttle doesn't mean you can't use them on
small-to-medium-size rockets.


You can buy hi-rel relays which can handle several G and high
vibration. They're used on military jets and helicopters (and you
haven't seen real vibration 'till you've taken a ride on a helicopter)
for everything from switching main bus power to turning on the
windshield wipers. Needless to say, they don't come from Radio Shack.
Instead, they come from Eaton, Guardian Electric, and others - and you
can buy them from anybody who deals in military parts for outrageous
prices (a simple-but-tiny 4PDT relay with solder hooks can cost as
much as $100, but can be had for much less if you can find them at a
surplus store).


But if a simple relay will do the job, it can be a lot easier to
implement, and is far less sensitive to noise and other interference
than silicon parts are. Don't write them off just because they're
mechanical.


FWIW: Fifteen years ago, I was a big believer in silicon solutions. I
still am, in fact, but not for power unless it's absolutely necessary,
and then only for high frequency switching where there's no other
choice. They're ugly and ungainly, but mechanical relays and
contactors are a simpler solution most of the time if you can use them
- and you should if your design permits it. For low power (i.e.,
<<1-5A continuous @28Vdc), small MOSFET transistors and logic gates
are usually the best answer if you're at all good with a soldering
iron.


Don McCorvey


On Wednesday, August 15, 2001, at 09:30 PM, Tjpoulton@aol.com wrote:


<color><param>0000,0000,DEDE</param>In a message dated 8/15/01 7:56:52
PM Central Daylight Time, dlm3@NETAXS.COM

writes:


</color><color><param>0000,6363,1212</param>And contrary to their
claims, the weight of these systems is not all

 that low. The wiring is going to be larger than most hydraulic tubes
and

 weigh more than the tube filled with fluid. I don't know how familiar

 you are with switching components like contactors and bus breakers,
but

 they're heavy too. So are the heat sinks needed to properly cool the

 electronics, which themselves must be fairly chunky (and expensive) in

 order to control the motion of the actuator with any kind of
reliability

</color><color><param>0000,0000,DEDE</param>

In a rocket vehicle application, the heavy switching equipment found in

similar ground-based systems would not be used.  Contactors and
mechanical

switches are subject to G-force and vibration-related problems.  Solid
state

switching would be used all-around.  As you mention, these electronics
must

be cooled.  In normal applications, they are cooled using massive,
bulky

heatsinks.  In a rocket, however, you typically have large amounts of
liquid

propellants available to do this cooling for you.  Moreover, the
systems do

not have to run continuous-duty -- the flight times for non-orbital
vehicles

are typically short enough to allow heat-soak "cooling" and somewhat

non-optimal component temperatures.  However, I am definitely in
agreement

with you that hydraulics are better for most applications.

Mike P.


</color>=

------=_NextPart_000_0B64_01C56B69.491DE040--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 29922 invoked from network); 16 Aug 2001 04:47:38 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 16 Aug 2001 04:47:38 -0000
Received: (qmail 15368 invoked by uid 50005); 16 Aug 2001 04:48:07 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.351476 secs); 16 Aug 2001 04:48:07 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 16 Aug 2001 04:48:07 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA05734; Wed, 15 Aug 2001 21:45:50 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 85811 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 04:45:49          +0000
Received: from albatross.wgn.net (www.wgn.net [64.14.252.81] (may be forged))          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA05713 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 15 Aug 2001 21:45:23 -0700
Received: from hogwild (sc-66-74-70-20.socal.rr.com [66.74.70.20]) by          albatross.wgn.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id VAA03899 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 15 Aug 2001 21:46:44 -0700
References:  <20010816021743.20209.cpmta@c012.sfo.cp.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <021101c1260e$78903980$14464a42@socal.rr.com>
Date:         Wed, 15 Aug 2001 21:46:52 -0700
Reply-To: "Wedge Oldham" <wedge@WESTWORLD.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Wedge Oldham" <wedge@WESTWORLD.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Cutting out a C-slot.
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Instead of cutting a slot, how about you just drill a hole and turn it into
a moon burner.
Wedge Oldham
http://NikeProject.com
----- Original Message -----
From: "john grassi" <jgrassi@ALTAVISTA.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Wednesday, August 15, 2001 7:17 PM
Subject: Re: [AR] Cutting out a C-slot.


> You could very easily use a radial arm saw or even a table saw if you are
careful.  Raise the blade to cut the depth you want.  The blade should in
normal cases take out 1/8"
>
> On Wed, 15 August 2001, "Bendel, Timothy B" wrote:
>
> >
> > > Pax,
> > >
> > > If you do plan to hold the grains and move the saw, make sure that the
> > > grains are held in a vise with adequate padding to distribute the
pressure
> > > along the outside of the grain. If you squeeze too hard, the grain can
> > > crack and de-bond along the inner wall. It will probably be
undetectable
> > > from view, but will cause a failure during burn.
> > >
> > > Tim Bendel
> > >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Terry McCreary [SMTP:terry.mccreary@MURRAYSTATE.EDU]
> > > Sent: Wednesday, August 15, 2001 2:46 PM
> > > To:   AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
> > > Subject:      Re: [AR] Cutting out a C-slot.
> > >
> > > At 11:20 AM 8/15/01 -0600, you wrote:
> > > >I cast a regular KN/Dex grain yesterday after my failed AP/Dex and
just
> > > >made a 38mm x 4" solid slug. This was with the hopes to be able to
gut a
> > > >3mm x 16mm slot in the grain. Any suggestions on how to do it? Or
should
> > > I
> > > >forget it, and cast a new one with a aluminum rectangle, or piece or
> > > >ply/bass wood strip covered in Teflon tape?
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >Paxton
> > >
> > > Hi Pax:
> > >
> > > I'm speaking from nonexperience here...but two or three hacksaw blades
> > > held
> > > simultaneously in a hacksaw frame may make a decent tool for hand
> > > slotting.  It works pretty well for AP/HTPB propellant.  Or possibly
an
> > > ordinary handsaw blade held in a vice.  Move the work rather than the
saw.
> > >
> > > P'rfesser
>
>
> Find the best deals on the web at AltaVista Shopping!
> http://www.shopping.altavista.com

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 20565 invoked from network); 16 Aug 2001 04:54:55 -0000
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 16 Aug 2001 04:54:55 -0000
Received: (qmail 8732 invoked by uid 50005); 16 Aug 2001 04:54:09 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smptf.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 2.949688 secs); 16 Aug 2001 04:54:09 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 16 Aug 2001 04:54:03 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA05843; Wed, 15 Aug 2001 21:50:49 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 85839 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 04:50:43          +0000
Received: from mta01.mail.mel.aone.net.au (mta01.mail.au.uu.net [203.2.192.81])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA05829 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 15 Aug 2001 21:50:42 -0700
Received: from unknown ([63.34.210.119]) by mta01.mail.mel.aone.net.au with          SMTP id <20010816045039.BWJV3755.mta01.mail.mel.aone.net.au@unknown>          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 14:50:39 +1000
References: Conversation <20010816021743.20209.cpmta@c012.sfo.cp.net> with last            message <021101c1260e$78903980$14464a42@socal.rr.com>
Priority: Normal
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Priority: 3
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	X-MAPIextension=.TXT;
	charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>
Date:         Thu, 16 Aug 2001 04:50:43 +0000
Reply-To: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Cutting out a C-slot.
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <021101c1260e$78903980$14464a42@socal.rr.com>

Different burn profile (not as neutral).

Troy.

----------
> Instead of cutting a slot, how about you just drill a hole and turn it
into
> a moon burner.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 8780 invoked from network); 16 Aug 2001 05:00:43 -0000
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 16 Aug 2001 05:00:43 -0000
Received: (qmail 18786 invoked by uid 50005); 16 Aug 2001 04:59:57 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smptf.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 1.617645 secs); 16 Aug 2001 04:59:57 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 16 Aug 2001 04:59:53 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA05907; Wed, 15 Aug 2001 21:58:08 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 85858 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 04:58:06          +0000
Received: from mta05.mail.mel.aone.net.au (mta05.mail.au.uu.net [203.2.192.85])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA05893 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 15 Aug 2001 21:58:05 -0700
Received: from unknown ([63.34.210.119]) by mta05.mail.mel.aone.net.au with          SMTP id <20010816045803.CUVD19580.mta05.mail.mel.aone.net.au@unknown>          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 14:58:03 +1000
References: Conversation <20010816021743.20209.cpmta@c012.sfo.cp.net> with last            message <021101c1260e$78903980$14464a42@socal.rr.com>
Priority: Normal
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Priority: 3
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	X-MAPIextension=.TXT;
	charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>
Date:         Thu, 16 Aug 2001 04:58:06 +0000
Reply-To: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Cutting out a C-slot.
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <021101c1260e$78903980$14464a42@socal.rr.com>

Cutting into candy is often a pain in the neck with any tool whether it
would be a saw blade or drill piece. Things tend to clog up.

Troy.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 25268 invoked from network); 16 Aug 2001 05:28:55 -0000
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 16 Aug 2001 05:28:55 -0000
Received: (qmail 18745 invoked by uid 50005); 16 Aug 2001 05:28:10 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smptf.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.184495 secs); 16 Aug 2001 05:28:10 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 16 Aug 2001 05:28:09 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA06105; Wed, 15 Aug 2001 22:26:56 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 85900 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 05:26:47          +0000
Received: from mta02.mail.mel.aone.net.au (mta02.mail.au.uu.net [203.2.192.82])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA06091 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 15 Aug 2001 22:26:46 -0700
Received: from unknown ([63.60.249.190]) by mta02.mail.mel.aone.net.au with          SMTP id <20010816052644.TXOF4158.mta02.mail.mel.aone.net.au@unknown>          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 15:26:44 +1000
References: Conversation <a0510030db7a0d7747287@[63.27.96.152]> with last            message <a0510030db7a0d7747287@[63.27.96.152]>
Priority: Normal
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Priority: 3
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	X-MAPIextension=.TXT;
	charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>
Date:         Thu, 16 Aug 2001 05:26:47 +0000
Reply-To: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Amateur Rocketry Association
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <a0510030db7a0d7747287@[63.27.96.152]>

> JPL=Jet propulsion Laboratory (Pasadena, CA)
> AIAA = American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics
> RRS= Rocket Research Society (Los Angeles, CA)

Reaction Research Society IIRC?

Troy.

> PRS= Pacific Rocket Society (Mojave, CA)
> RRI - Rocket Research Institute (Sacramento, CA)
>
> California Rules!!!
>
> Generally if you started a major rocket technology you resided in CA.
> If you wanted to maintain it, you had to escape its socialist laws
> and move out.
>
> Jerry
>
> --
> Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
> Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
> Opinion, the whole thing.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 12784 invoked from network); 16 Aug 2001 05:47:45 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 16 Aug 2001 05:47:45 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 6939 invoked by uid 50005); 16 Aug 2001 05:47:43 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (. Clean. Processed in 1.431496 secs); 16 Aug 2001 05:47:43 -0000
X-Qmail-Scanner-Mail-From: owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU via smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net
X-Qmail-Scanner-Rcpt-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
X-Qmail-Scanner: 0.96 (No viruses found. Processed in 1.431496 secs)
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 16 Aug 2001 05:47:40 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA06183; Wed, 15 Aug 2001 22:45:29 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 85912 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 05:45:23          +0000
Received: from wrench.toolcity.net (root@wrench.toolcity.net [208.0.188.2]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA06169 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 15 Aug 2001 22:45:22 -0700
Received: from [63.169.101.149]          (dap-63-169-101-149.meadville-tnt-1.pa.toolcity.net [63.169.101.149])          by wrench.toolcity.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id BAA01821; Thu, 16          Aug 2001 01:45:18 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <v01510100b7a1155a6c56@[208.11.233.116]>
Date:         Thu, 16 Aug 2001 01:47:38 -0500
Reply-To: "al bradley" <abradley@TOOLCITY.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "al bradley" <abradley@TOOLCITY.NET>
Subject:      [AR] Back to "Candy" -- Re: [AR] Case bonding <- Re [AR]              AP/Dextrose              propellant issues.
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

>> An "unbound" grain tends to be supported from its lower end and adds its
>> "weight" during acceleration to other grains below it.
>> Case flexure has minimal affects on grain deformation. However, as the
>> grains are not "supported" in place forces are compressive and the
>> bottom-most grain will be most loaded. (A motor with N grains which burns
>> for Y seconds will have a force in excess of Isp x N / Y  times the weight
>> of one grain exerted on the base of the bottom grain. ( = Gmax x N).  For
>a
>> typical AP motor with say 4 grains and a 4 second burn this could be over
>> 200 times the weight of a single grain.)
------------------
So tensile tests on "candy grain material" are not particularly important?!

It seems that even the best case-bonding might not withstand the
compressive stress of the bottom grains -- that the integrity of the grain
itself under those conditions may be more important than case-bonding.

What say you all? Richard Nakka?

respectfully,
al bradley

------------------------------------------------------------------
Can you live Life with this?: "Unless there is a law, an agreement, or a
long-standing custom, No one `Deserves' Anything -- Either Good or Bad!"

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 26579 invoked from network); 16 Aug 2001 05:53:13 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 16 Aug 2001 05:53:13 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 9430 invoked by uid 50005); 16 Aug 2001 05:53:42 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.304783 secs); 16 Aug 2001 05:53:42 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 16 Aug 2001 05:53:41 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA06238; Wed, 15 Aug 2001 22:51:22 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 85911 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 05:51:15          +0000
Received: from falcon.mail.pas.earthlink.net (falcon.mail.pas.earthlink.net          [207.217.120.74]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA06154          for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Wed, 15 Aug 2001 22:41:14 -0700
Received: from earthlink.net (dialup-209.245.134.20.Dial1.SanJose1.Level3.net          [209.245.134.20]) by falcon.mail.pas.earthlink.net (EL-8_9_3_3/8.9.3)          with ESMTP id WAA05740; Wed, 15 Aug 2001 22:41:13 -0700 (PDT)
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.75 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.16-22 i686)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: Conversation <a0510030db7a0d7747287@[63.27.96.152]> with last            message <a0510030db7a0d7747287@[63.27.96.152]>            <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B7B5D2D.80625872@earthlink.net>
Date:         Wed, 15 Aug 2001 22:42:05 -0700
Reply-To: "David Weinshenker" <daze39@EARTHLINK.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "David Weinshenker" <daze39@EARTHLINK.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Amateur Rocketry Association
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Troy Prideaux wrote:
> > RRS= Rocket Research Society (Los Angeles, CA)
> Reaction Research Society IIRC?

I believe so: www.rrs.org...

-dave w

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 6922 invoked from network); 16 Aug 2001 06:30:27 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 16 Aug 2001 06:30:27 -0000
Received: (qmail 6408 invoked by uid 50005); 16 Aug 2001 06:30:25 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (. Clean. Processed in 0.148936 secs); 16 Aug 2001 06:30:25 -0000
X-Qmail-Scanner-Mail-From: owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU via smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net
X-Qmail-Scanner-Rcpt-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
X-Qmail-Scanner: 0.96 (No viruses found. Processed in 0.148936 secs)
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 16 Aug 2001 06:30:25 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA06356; Wed, 15 Aug 2001 23:25:30 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 85941 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 06:25:23          +0000
Received: from dune.gnc.net (root@dune.gnc.net [207.203.72.4]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA06342 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed,          15 Aug 2001 23:25:22 -0700
Received: from beowulf (sw2-45.gnc.net [207.203.72.125]) by dune.gnc.net          (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id CAA06227 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu,          16 Aug 2001 02:25:20 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
Importance: Normal
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <LPBBKJMJEOFKAMFJJNNHKEILCGAA.landofgrey@gnc.net>
Date:         Thu, 16 Aug 2001 02:25:04 -0400
Reply-To: <landofgrey@gnc.net>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Matthew Travis" <landofgrey@gnc.net>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Amateur Rocketry Association
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <3B7B5D2D.80625872@earthlink.net>

These days, RRS means Reaction Research Society, a still active
organization. There was a Rocket Research Society some time back ('fore my
birth). Every reference to RRS that I've ever seen was to the Reaction
Research Society. California and southwest U.S. history is replete with
acronyms for a surprising number of amateur rocketry organizations. Glendale
Rocket Society, Southern California Rocket Society, etc. Ray was right, it
would be nice to have Bill Colburn here right now; he knows all of 'em.

Matt

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU]On
> Behalf Of David Weinshenker
> Sent: Thursday, August 16, 2001 1:42 AM
> To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
> Subject: Re: [AR] Amateur Rocketry Association
>
>
> Troy Prideaux wrote:
> > > RRS= Rocket Research Society (Los Angeles, CA)
> > Reaction Research Society IIRC?
>
> I believe so: www.rrs.org...
>
> -dave w
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 13981 invoked from network); 16 Aug 2001 06:32:57 -0000
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 16 Aug 2001 06:32:57 -0000
Received: (qmail 27347 invoked by uid 50005); 16 Aug 2001 06:31:43 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smpte.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 3.897483 secs); 16 Aug 2001 06:31:43 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 16 Aug 2001 06:31:35 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA06391; Wed, 15 Aug 2001 23:28:47 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 85952 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 06:28:44          +0000
Received: from mta01.mail.mel.aone.net.au (mta01.mail.au.uu.net [203.2.192.81])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA06377 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 15 Aug 2001 23:28:43 -0700
Received: from unknown ([63.60.249.105]) by mta01.mail.mel.aone.net.au with          SMTP id <20010816062841.DOAJ3755.mta01.mail.mel.aone.net.au@unknown>          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 16:28:41 +1000
References: Conversation <v01510100b7a1155a6c56@[208.11.233.116]> with last            message <v01510100b7a1155a6c56@[208.11.233.116]>
Priority: Normal
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Priority: 3
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	X-MAPIextension=.TXT;
	charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>
Date:         Thu, 16 Aug 2001 06:28:44 +0000
Reply-To: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Back to "Candy" -- Re: [AR] Case bonding <- Re [AR]              AP/Dextrose
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <v01510100b7a1155a6c56@[208.11.233.116]>

>
> It seems that even the best case-bonding might not withstand the
> compressive stress of the bottom grains -- that the integrity of the grain
> itself under those conditions may be more important than case-bonding.

Given that the entire outside of the propellant will be case bonded
(assuming we're case bonding?) what difference does compressive stress play
at any point along the grain? Remember the propellant will be supported by
the casing bond ie. pulling it away from the wall (tensile) stress, not a
compressive stress. We are talking about stresses created from high vehicle
acceleration here not high Pc's yeah? I'm probably missing something though?

Troy.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 9819 invoked from network); 16 Aug 2001 07:39:46 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 16 Aug 2001 07:39:46 -0000
Received: (qmail 15738 invoked by uid 50005); 16 Aug 2001 07:39:00 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smptf.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.123477 secs); 16 Aug 2001 07:39:00 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 16 Aug 2001 07:39:00 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA06592; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 00:36:06 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 85974 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 07:35:59          +0000
Received: from wrench.toolcity.net (root@wrench.toolcity.net [208.0.188.2]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA06578 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 00:35:58 -0700
Received: from [63.169.101.149]          (dap-63-169-101-149.meadville-tnt-1.pa.toolcity.net [63.169.101.149])          by wrench.toolcity.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id DAA20170; Thu, 16          Aug 2001 03:35:51 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <v01510103b7a12e2f4204@[63.169.101.149]>
Date:         Thu, 16 Aug 2001 03:38:11 -0500
Reply-To: "al bradley" <abradley@TOOLCITY.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "al bradley" <abradley@TOOLCITY.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Back to "Candy" -- Re: [AR] Case bonding <- Re [AR]              AP/Dextrose
Comments: To: Troy Prideaux <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Ah, Troy:
I didn't present my mental image of this possibility very well!

My supposition about this stemmed from a possibility of what would happen
if case bonding would be eliminated, but the outer layer (not the ends) of
the grain might be coated with an ablative or refractory material so that
combustion on the outermost layer would not occur until, perhaps the last
microseconds of burn. (Which leads us back to inquiry of the compressive
strength of the grain under acceleration.) CATO's in the final microseconds
of burn due to fragments of that ablative layer lodging in the nozzle?
Perhaps, but this is in the time frame where the pressure is falling off
sharply..

Might not work? Mebbe not. But my limited tests tell me not to rule it out!

best regards
al bradley

-------------------------
>>
>> It seems that even the best case-bonding might not withstand the
>> compressive stress of the bottom grains -- that the integrity of the grain
>> itself under those conditions may be more important than case-bonding.
>
>Given that the entire outside of the propellant will be case bonded
>(assuming we're case bonding?) what difference does compressive stress play
>at any point along the grain? Remember the propellant will be supported by
>the casing bond ie. pulling it away from the wall (tensile) stress, not a
>compressive stress. We are talking about stresses created from high vehicle
>acceleration here not high Pc's yeah? I'm probably missing something though?
>
>Troy.

------------------------------------------------------------------
Can you live Life with this?: "Unless there is a law, an agreement, or a
long-standing custom, No one `Deserves' Anything -- Either Good or Bad!"

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 11476 invoked from network); 16 Aug 2001 08:26:29 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 16 Aug 2001 08:26:29 -0000
Received: (qmail 21799 invoked by uid 50005); 16 Aug 2001 08:26:58 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.168044 secs); 16 Aug 2001 08:26:58 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 16 Aug 2001 08:26:58 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id BAA06797; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 01:24:23 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 86016 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 08:24:19          +0000
Received: from albqpop1.albq.uswest.net (albqpop1.albq.uswest.net          [207.108.240.1]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id BAA06783          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 01:24:19 -0700
Received: (qmail 44532 invoked by alias); 16 Aug 2001 08:23:47 -0000
Delivered-To: fixup-AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU@fixme
Received: (qmail 44505 invoked by uid 0); 16 Aug 2001 08:23:46 -0000
Received: from cc898542-a.prdise1.nm.home.com (HELO cc898542a) (65.7.151.152)          by albqpop1.albq.uswest.net with SMTP; 16 Aug 2001 08:23:46 -0000
References: Conversation <20010816021743.20209.cpmta@c012.sfo.cp.net> with last            message <021101c1260e$78903980$14464a42@socal.rr.com>             <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <005c01c1262d$4dd0d500$0100a8c0@prdise1.nm.home.com>
Date:         Thu, 16 Aug 2001 02:27:35 -0600
Reply-To: "Pax" <darkspunge@USWEST.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Pax" <darkspunge@USWEST.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Cutting out a C-slot.
Comments: To: Troy Prideaux <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Yeah that would be one of them. Plus, if you want to avoid erosive burning
you would have to make the core large as a regular BATE right? Well, I want
the propellant loadings and burn time of a c-slot. Finocyl would be fun, but
I don't have the mandrels for it. Brian K might be getting some made pretty
soon though. Yummy propellant loadings and lots of thrust!

What kind of experience have you all had with large C-slots? Are they worth
the effort? I know extra insulation would be needed, but I was thinking
about a 4" PVC C-slot motor. I should probably see if I can get a regular
BATES to not fail though. It would be a fun $20 failure, and a even more fun
$20 success.

Paxton


----- Original Message -----
From: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Wednesday, August 15, 2001 10:50 PM
Subject: Re: [AR] Cutting out a C-slot.


> Different burn profile (not as neutral).
>
> Troy.
>
> ----------
> > Instead of cutting a slot, how about you just drill a hole and turn it
> into
> > a moon burner.
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 19848 invoked from network); 16 Aug 2001 08:30:03 -0000
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 16 Aug 2001 08:30:03 -0000
Received: (qmail 29718 invoked by uid 50005); 16 Aug 2001 08:28:48 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smpte.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 1.211184 secs); 16 Aug 2001 08:28:48 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 16 Aug 2001 08:28:46 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id BAA06825; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 01:27:15 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 86023 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 08:27:12          +0000
Received: from albqpop1.albq.uswest.net (albqpop1.albq.uswest.net          [207.108.240.1]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id BAA06811          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 01:27:12 -0700
Received: (qmail 47603 invoked by alias); 16 Aug 2001 08:26:41 -0000
Delivered-To: fixup-AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU@fixme
Received: (qmail 47593 invoked by uid 0); 16 Aug 2001 08:26:40 -0000
Received: from cc898542-a.prdise1.nm.home.com (HELO cc898542a) (65.7.151.152)          by albqpop1.albq.uswest.net with SMTP; 16 Aug 2001 08:26:40 -0000
References: Conversation <20010816021743.20209.cpmta@c012.sfo.cp.net> with last            message <021101c1260e$78903980$14464a42@socal.rr.com>             <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <006601c1262d$b59047c0$0100a8c0@prdise1.nm.home.com>
Date:         Thu, 16 Aug 2001 02:30:29 -0600
Reply-To: "Pax" <darkspunge@USWEST.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Pax" <darkspunge@USWEST.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Cutting out a C-slot.
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

That is what I was worried about. Even cutting a grain to length is a
hassle. With the heat from the friction of cutting on a powered saw you
would get a nice layer of newly melted propellant goo. I think I will hand
cut this one and try Teflon coated mandrels next time.

Paxton


----- Original Message -----
From: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Wednesday, August 15, 2001 10:58 PM
Subject: Re: [AR] Cutting out a C-slot.


> Cutting into candy is often a pain in the neck with any tool whether it
> would be a saw blade or drill piece. Things tend to clog up.
>
> Troy.
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 6382 invoked from network); 16 Aug 2001 08:36:33 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 16 Aug 2001 08:36:33 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 5496 invoked by uid 50005); 16 Aug 2001 08:35:18 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smpte.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.316314 secs); 16 Aug 2001 08:35:18 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 16 Aug 2001 08:35:18 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id BAA06860; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 01:31:07 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 86030 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 08:31:05          +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (f6.law15.hotmail.com [64.4.23.6]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id BAA06846 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Thu,          16 Aug 2001 01:31:05 -0700
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Thu,          16 Aug 2001 01:30:34 -0700
Received: from 193.121.251.246 by lw15fd.law15.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Thu,          16 Aug 2001 08:30:34 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [193.121.251.246]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 16 Aug 2001 08:30:34.0958 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[B83E9EE0:01C1262D]
Message-ID:  <F60Y66KnCdxRYhMleSn0000a75f@hotmail.com>
Date:         Thu, 16 Aug 2001 08:31:05 +0000
Reply-To: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Strontium Nitrate - Sorbitol
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Adding some SrNO3 to your KNO3 'd not hurt: it offers a beautiful RED flame.
And is used for that in fireworks recipes.

jd




>From: Troy Prideaux <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
>Reply-To: Troy Prideaux <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
>To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
>Subject: Re: [AR] Strontium Nitrate - Sorbitol
>Date: Thu, 16 Aug 2001 00:18:44 +0000
>
>----------
> > I was looking at a chemical vendor's page and the formula for
> > strontium nitrate just popped out at me - all that O :)
> >
> > I have never really thought of it as anything other than something
>pretty.
> >
> > I ran it through propep with sorbitol and it showed a significant
>increase
> > in ISP over potassium nitrate.
> >
> > Is there a reason it is not used much?
> > Too hygroscopic?
>
>All the alkaline group nitrates contain virtually twice the amount of
>oxygen per molecule as the alkali group nitrates due to their ionic
>valencies but unfortunately also have a tendency to be quite hydrated @STP
>conditions. They often form these hydrated ring type structures that I'm
>not too familiar with. I don't have much info at hand right now regarding
>SrNO3 but I would have assumed the Sr ion would be too heavy to obtain a
>noticeable performance improvement (and NO I haven't done the calcs so ..).
>I couldn't imagine SrNO3 to have much of a commercial use? Wouldn't it be
>too toxic to use as a fertiliser?
>
>Troy.
>
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Byron


_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 13463 invoked from network); 16 Aug 2001 08:51:06 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 16 Aug 2001 08:51:06 -0000
Received: (qmail 28881 invoked by uid 50005); 16 Aug 2001 08:51:03 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (. Clean. Processed in 0.458621 secs); 16 Aug 2001 08:51:03 -0000
X-Qmail-Scanner-Mail-From: owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU via smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net
X-Qmail-Scanner-Rcpt-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
X-Qmail-Scanner: 0.96 (No viruses found. Processed in 0.458621 secs)
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 16 Aug 2001 08:51:02 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id BAA07025; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 01:48:55 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 86078 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 08:48:50          +0000
Received: from fep4-orange.clear.net.nz (fep4-orange.clear.net.nz          [203.97.32.4]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id BAA07011          for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 01:48:48 -0700
Received: from mkbs (203-167-162-129.dialup.clear.net.nz [203.167.162.129]) by          fep4-orange.clear.net.nz (1.5/1.7) with SMTP id UAA08146; Thu, 16 Aug          2001 20:48:42 +1200 (NZST)
References:  <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <026601c12630$92257aa0$0100a8c0@mkbs>
Date:         Thu, 16 Aug 2001 18:49:08 +1200
Reply-To: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Organization: Applied Technology
Subject:      [AR] Re [AR] Case bonding <- Re [AR] AP/Dextrose propellant              issues.
Comments: To: Troy Prideaux <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

> > > An "unbound" grain tends to be supported from its lower end and adds
its
> > > "weight" during acceleration to other grains below it.
> > > As the grains are not "supported" in place forces are compressive and
the
> > > bottom-most grain will be most loaded.
>>> (A motor with N grains which burns
> > > for Y seconds will have a force in excess of Isp x N / Y  times the
>>> weight of one grain exerted on the base of the bottom grain.
>>> ( = Gmax x N).

> > What does Isp have to do with it?  Where'd ya pull that one from???

> Rephrasing the question: From a practical viewpoint, why use Isp for such
> an assessment?

Well, the logic went like this (criticism welcome).

Simple answer: More Isp gives more thrust for a given burn time = a rougher
ride.

Longer answer =

Assumptions:

- Here's the main assumption (I actually explicitly allowed for this in a
prior post but this was close enough) - In a reasonably high mass ratio
rocket the fuel mass is approx the mass of the rocket.
- In a reasonably design rocket, real world conditions will produce a thrust
peak somewhat above the average level but not vastly so.

So:

At one g a grain weighs what a grain weighs.

Pile N in a heap and the y weigh N times as much.
Place them in a rocket where they are supported on the nozzle ring and the
weight of Ngrains will be supported by the bottom grain.
Friction and its friends will partially relieve this force at rest.

A unit of propellant produces Isp units of thrust-seconds.
(eg 1 kg of AP/PBAN with Isp 220 yields 220 kgm.seconds)(ok ok about 2200
NS).
Leaving thrust as kg.mass makes life a tiny bit easier here).

For a uniform burn of T seconds the thrust produced by unit propellant will
be Isp/T units of thrust.

If a rocket is accelerating at G x gravities the weight of a fuel grain will
be G times its rest mass and N grains will weigh GN times a single grain at
rest.

If the rocket is mainly fuel then, at average burn rate, and when little
fuel has been burnt the thrust will be Isp x Mgrain x N / T and the mass
will be Mgrain  x N  so acceleration in g's will be Thrust/Mass = Isp/T

Force on bottom grain will be N x acceleration = N . Isp / T

QED.

More easily, the weight of the grain stack pressing on the thrust ring and
the bottom of the bottom grain at a given time will be the "weight" of the
total propellant under acceleration = current acceleration in g's x the mass
of the total propellant at the time less any restraining forces from
friction, case bonding etc *. .
For relatively constant thrust, acceleration rises with time but propellant
mass drops and as some of the mass is non-propellant the worst case probably
occurs soon after ignition. Real world factors will alter this but as a rule
of thumb it should be in the order of right.


        Russell McMahon

* - I'm mixing mass and weight here for brevity - point is hopefully clear
enough.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 4616 invoked from network); 16 Aug 2001 09:31:50 -0000
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 16 Aug 2001 09:31:50 -0000
Received: (qmail 2055 invoked by uid 50005); 16 Aug 2001 09:31:03 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smptf.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.152852 secs); 16 Aug 2001 09:31:03 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 16 Aug 2001 09:31:03 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id CAA07194; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 02:29:35 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 86109 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 09:29:29          +0000
Received: from mta03.mail.mel.aone.net.au (mta03.mail.au.uu.net [203.2.192.83])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id CAA07180 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 02:29:28 -0700
Received: from unknown ([63.34.216.171]) by mta03.mail.mel.aone.net.au with          SMTP id          <20010816092925.GXOV23992.mta03.mail.mel.aone.net.au@unknown>; Thu,          16 Aug 2001 19:29:25 +1000
Priority: Normal
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Priority: 3
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	X-MAPIextension=.TXT;
	charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>
Date:         Thu, 16 Aug 2001 09:29:29 +0000
Reply-To: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Re [AR] Case bonding <- Re [AR] AP/Dextrose propellant              issues.
Comments: To: Russell McMahon <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <026601c12630$92257aa0$0100a8c0@mkbs>

----------
> > > > An "unbound" grain tends to be supported from its lower end and adds
> its
> > > > "weight" during acceleration to other grains below it.
> > > > As the grains are not "supported" in place forces are compressive
and
> the
> > > > bottom-most grain will be most loaded.
> >>> (A motor with N grains which burns
> > > > for Y seconds will have a force in excess of Isp x N / Y  times the
> >>> weight of one grain exerted on the base of the bottom grain.
> >>> ( = Gmax x N).
>
> > > What does Isp have to do with it?  Where'd ya pull that one from???
>
> > Rephrasing the question: From a practical viewpoint, why use Isp for
such
> > an assessment?
>
> Well, the logic went like this (criticism welcome).
>
> Simple answer: More Isp gives more thrust for a given burn time = a
rougher
> ride.

Depends on Dead weight, Cd, gravitational force etc...

I'd like to see you do the math for the shuttles SRB grains or a completely
solid version of a fully loaded Titan IV or a staged solid? Point being why
don't you just relate the inertial force on the propellant to the
acceleration of the vehicle, simple? The above formula factors in too many
assumption that really need to be considered for most applications with
vehicle dead weight on top of the list.

Troy.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 22666 invoked from network); 16 Aug 2001 10:45:48 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 16 Aug 2001 10:45:48 -0000
Received: (qmail 23102 invoked by uid 50005); 16 Aug 2001 10:46:16 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.123778 secs); 16 Aug 2001 10:46:16 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 16 Aug 2001 10:46:16 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id DAA07402; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 03:35:58 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 86140 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 10:34:20          +0000
Received: from fep4-orange.clear.net.nz (fep4-orange.clear.net.nz          [203.97.32.4]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id DAA07383          for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 03:34:19 -0700
Received: from mkbs (203-167-161-237.dialup.clear.net.nz [203.167.161.237]) by          fep4-orange.clear.net.nz (1.5/1.7) with SMTP id WAA01816; Thu, 16 Aug          2001 22:34:11 +1200 (NZST)
References: Conversation <v01510100b7a1155a6c56@[208.11.233.116]> with last                message <v01510100b7a1155a6c56@[208.11.233.116]>             <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <02a101c1263f$4cfc8fe0$0100a8c0@mkbs>
Date:         Thu, 16 Aug 2001 22:35:40 +1200
Reply-To: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Organization: Applied Technology
Subject:      Re: [AR] Back to "Candy" -- Re: [AR] Case bonding <- Re [AR]              AP/Dextrose
Comments: To: Troy Prideaux <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

----- Original Message -----
From: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Thursday, 16 August 2001 18:28
Subject: Re: [AR] Back to "Candy" -- Re: [AR] Case bonding <- Re [AR]
AP/Dextrose


> >
> > It seems that even the best case-bonding might not withstand the
> > compressive stress of the bottom grains -- that the integrity of the
grain
> > itself under those conditions may be more important than case-bonding.
>
> Given that the entire outside of the propellant will be case bonded
> (assuming we're case bonding?) what difference does compressive stress
play
> at any point along the grain? Remember the propellant will be supported by
> the casing bond ie. pulling it away from the wall (tensile) stress, not a
> compressive stress. We are talking about stresses created from high
vehicle
> acceleration here not high Pc's yeah? I'm probably missing something
though?

Yes - Pc not discussed (and it should be relatively neutral in this
situation).

It would be better for Richard Nakka was commenting on this.
The discussion was vaguely wandering around candy's strength(s) and
case-bonding versus not case-bonding candy.
Candy is very non-elastic and if it is to be case bound needs an EXTREMELY
stiff, and therefore relatively heavy, case to avoid fracturing the grain.
HTPB/PBAN etc bound grains deform non-destructively under such stresses.
With Candy you can case bond and make it very heavy, or passivate the
outside (or not) but not bond and suffer the high compressive stresses
instead.



         Russell McMahon

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 7428 invoked from network); 16 Aug 2001 10:50:56 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 16 Aug 2001 10:50:56 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 23172 invoked by uid 50005); 16 Aug 2001 10:49:41 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smpte.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.171394 secs); 16 Aug 2001 10:49:41 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 16 Aug 2001 10:49:41 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id DAA07448; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 03:40:15 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 86150 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 10:40:14          +0000
Received: from ares.idirect.com (ares.idirect.com [207.136.80.180]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id DAA07431 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 03:40:13 -0700
Received: from .idirect.com (on-osh-ahp-01-123.look.ca [216.154.47.123]) by          ares.idirect.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id GAA52076; Thu, 16 Aug          2001 06:40:59 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="ISO-8859-1"
X-Mailer: BeOS Mail
Message-ID:  <200108161040.GAA52076@ares.idirect.com>
Date:         Thu, 16 Aug 2001 06:39:12 EDT
Reply-To: <earlcp@idirect.com>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Earl Colby Pottinger" <earlcp@idirect.com>
Subject:      Re: [AR] ERPS successfully runs H2O2 engine
Comments: To: Henry Spencer <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Opps, I made a big mistake.  I just reread JD reply, he did not says that all tests were with silver only, that was me misreading his message!  Sorry JD, I may disagree with the tone of your first message, but that is no reason for me to misrepresent what you really did say.  I will try to read a little slower next time.

           Earl Colby Pottinger

>On Wed, 15 Aug 2001, Earl Pottinger wrote:
>> How can this be the same catalyst pack as JC's?  ERPS developed thier own
>> catalyst from day one, and as far as I know have not shared it...
>
>Note that there were two different engines involved -- one using ERPS's
>proprietary 99%-peroxide catalyst, the other using silver-plated foam and
>85% peroxide.  The foam is, in fact, exactly the same that John Carmack's
>group uses, because he sent them a sample for comparison testing.
>
>
>                                                          Henry Spencer
>                                                       henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 25593 invoked from network); 16 Aug 2001 10:57:03 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 16 Aug 2001 10:57:03 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 2139 invoked by uid 50005); 16 Aug 2001 10:57:31 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.22567 secs); 16 Aug 2001 10:57:31 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 16 Aug 2001 10:57:31 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id DAA07467; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 03:41:39 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 86157 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 10:41:37          +0000
Received: from ares.idirect.com (ares.idirect.com [207.136.80.180]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id DAA07432 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 03:40:13 -0700
Received: from .idirect.com (on-osh-ahp-01-123.look.ca [216.154.47.123]) by          ares.idirect.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id GAA52032; Thu, 16 Aug          2001 06:40:54 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="ISO-8859-1"
X-Mailer: BeOS Mail
Message-ID:  <200108161040.GAA52032@ares.idirect.com>
Date:         Thu, 16 Aug 2001 06:31:56 EDT
Reply-To: <earlcp@idirect.com>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Earl Colby Pottinger" <earlcp@idirect.com>
Subject:      Re: [AR] ERPS successfully runs H2O2 engine
Comments: To: Henry Spencer <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

The way the orginal message from JD was written, it reads as if all the testing was done with the silver catalyst that JC supplied, when infact ERPS tested thier own inhouse catalyst with 99% peroxide.

Please correct me if I am wrong, but have anyone ever successfully use 99% catalysted peroxide in a rocket before?  I don't ever remember seeing that anywhere, if so then ERPS has done something that has never been done before by anybody including the all the major space programs around the world!

                 Earl Colby Pottinger

>On Wed, 15 Aug 2001, Earl Pottinger wrote:
>> How can this be the same catalyst pack as JC's?  ERPS developed thier own
>> catalyst from day one, and as far as I know have not shared it...
>
>Note that there were two different engines involved -- one using ERPS's
>proprietary 99%-peroxide catalyst, the other using silver-plated foam and
>85% peroxide.  The foam is, in fact, exactly the same that John Carmack's
>group uses, because he sent them a sample for comparison testing.
>
>> ...if the catalyst requires a heavy loading such as
>> manganese acetate does then for max. ISP you want to go the ERPS route where
>> the hot gases coming off the catalyst pack can now be mixed with ***ANY***
>> fuel you desire...
>
>This is particularly relevant because ERPS's nominal long-term goal is
>SSTO, so they seriously care about Isp.
>
>                                                          Henry Spencer
>                                                       henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 23588 invoked from network); 16 Aug 2001 11:05:47 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 16 Aug 2001 11:05:47 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 16894 invoked by uid 50005); 16 Aug 2001 11:04:31 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smpte.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 1.740167 secs); 16 Aug 2001 11:04:31 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 16 Aug 2001 11:04:27 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id DAA07565; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 03:58:49 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 86164 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 10:58:46          +0000
Received: from ares.idirect.com (ares.idirect.com [207.136.80.180]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id DAA07551 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 03:58:44 -0700
Received: from .idirect.com (on-osh-ahp-01-123.look.ca [216.154.47.123]) by          ares.idirect.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id GAA60759; Thu, 16 Aug          2001 06:59:59 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="ISO-8859-1"
X-Mailer: BeOS Mail
Message-ID:  <200108161059.GAA60759@ares.idirect.com>
Date:         Thu, 16 Aug 2001 06:58:11 EDT
Reply-To: <earlcp@idirect.com>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Earl Colby Pottinger" <earlcp@idirect.com>
Subject:      Re: [AR] ERPS successfully runs H2O2 engine
Comments: To: John Dom <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

First, any websites on your work?  I would like to see the results myself - IE live and learn.

Second, MnO2 is cheap, it is available everywhere, it is free.  Why not use it?

And you seemed to miss the point that when designing any rocket motor no matter what the fuel/oxider/catalyst used that there is always something to go wrong.  ERPS's design worked!  Are you going to tell me that all you designs worked the first time with no errors or suprises?

Also I spent a lot of time looking at catalysts to add to fuel too, however there are a number of problems:

1) Catalyst loading cuts into the max ISP you can get, there are ways to lower the percentage used but the ones I have figured out don't work well in a small engine.

2) Catalysts will only dissolve in a limited number of fuels, what happens when I want to use an non-alcohol based fuel like propane, coleman's fuel or even solids?

3) What make you think that MnO2 is the only catalyst that I am working with?  A check of my home page will show that I have tried a number of chemicals, lately I have been spending the time trying to design a new engine that will use 100 PSI input feeds and still get good results.

Just because you have found one way that works does not mean that others can not look to other designs.

                  Earl Colby Pottinger
>>Have you tried to do it yourself yet to judge how
>>hard it is to do in real life?
>
>yes, no problem
>
>>My test units leaked in all the wrong places
>>and MnO2 was sprayed out of the noozles all over the place!
>
>MnO2? I mentioned a manganous acetate solution in an alcohol. MnO2 is a
>archeology heterogenous cat used to coat stone packs (Me 163 turbopump
>drive) or at best cellular ceramics.
>
>jd
>
>_________________________________________________________________
>Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 1566 invoked from network); 16 Aug 2001 13:04:21 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 16 Aug 2001 13:04:21 -0000
Received: (qmail 21999 invoked by uid 50005); 16 Aug 2001 13:04:48 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.248791 secs); 16 Aug 2001 13:04:48 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 16 Aug 2001 13:04:47 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id FAA07980; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 05:48:49 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 86200 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 12:48:31          +0000
Received: from spsystems.net (spsystems.net [209.47.149.227]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id FAA07965 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Thu,          16 Aug 2001 05:48:30 -0700
Received: (from henry@localhost) by spsystems.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id IAA17407;          Thu, 16 Aug 2001 08:47:52 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010816084604.17254A-100000@spsystems.net>
Date:         Thu, 16 Aug 2001 08:47:51 -0400
Reply-To: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] ERPS successfully runs H2O2 engine
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <200108161040.GAA52032@ares.idirect.com>

On Thu, 16 Aug 2001, Earl Colby Pottinger wrote:
> Please correct me if I am wrong, but have anyone ever successfully use
> 99% catalysted peroxide in a rocket before?  I don't ever remember
> seeing that anywhere, if so then ERPS has done something that has never
> been done before by anybody including the all the major space programs
> around the world!

It may have been done with liquid catalysts, but as far as I know,
nobody's ever done it with a solid catalyst (one that survived the test!)
before.

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 11965 invoked from network); 16 Aug 2001 14:02:13 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 16 Aug 2001 14:02:13 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 8973 invoked by uid 50005); 16 Aug 2001 14:01:02 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smptf.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.29458 secs); 16 Aug 2001 14:01:02 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 16 Aug 2001 14:01:01 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA08192; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 06:45:07 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 86224 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 13:44:40          +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (f44.law15.hotmail.com [64.4.23.44]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA08175 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Thu,          16 Aug 2001 06:44:40 -0700
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Thu,          16 Aug 2001 06:44:09 -0700
Received: from 193.121.251.246 by lw15fd.law15.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Thu,          16 Aug 2001 13:44:09 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [193.121.251.246]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 16 Aug 2001 13:44:09.0822 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[86C707E0:01C12659]
Message-ID:  <F44FFsAitVGeSJIEoPX0000a879@hotmail.com>
Date:         Thu, 16 Aug 2001 13:44:40 +0000
Reply-To: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] ERPS successfully runs H2O2 engine
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

EP wrote:

>Just because you have found one way that works does not mean that others
>can not look to other designs.

MnO2 is and remains history; I can speak in what *I believe* to be correct,
no? I do not have to justify what I say. This is not a court of law. Besides
there may be people who want to remake ancient flying machines. Why not if
such amuses them?

Unless MnO2 layers are deposited inside cellular ceramics after wetting with
NaMnO4 40 % and calcination at well described temperatures.
This option was reported in detail in one of the papers of the 1st Hydrogen
Peroxide conference (Surrey university 1998). It is probably mentioned in
the HP bibliography on your own website.

In principle such ceramic packs can take 100 % HP decomposition
temperatures. Unlike most metals. If this has been tried I do not know.
Guess so.

I do not see anything special in foam catpacks compared to the proven
stainless silver plated sieve types. Except the latter can be taken apart
and cleaned or replated more easily.

jd


_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 29055 invoked from network); 16 Aug 2001 14:13:21 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 16 Aug 2001 14:13:21 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 27176 invoked by uid 50005); 16 Aug 2001 14:13:47 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.477164 secs); 16 Aug 2001 14:13:47 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 16 Aug 2001 14:13:46 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA08237; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 06:55:45 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 86231 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 13:55:32          +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (f229.law15.hotmail.com [64.4.23.229]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA08222 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 06:55:31 -0700
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Thu,          16 Aug 2001 06:55:01 -0700
Received: from 193.121.251.246 by lw15fd.law15.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Thu,          16 Aug 2001 13:55:01 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [193.121.251.246]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 16 Aug 2001 13:55:01.0488 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[0B335F00:01C1265B]
Message-ID:  <F229AGUjGnAKYoo9tjx0000aa09@hotmail.com>
Date:         Thu, 16 Aug 2001 13:55:32 +0000
Reply-To: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] ERPS successfully runs H2O2 engine
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

EP wrote:

>First, any websites on your work?  I would like to see the results myself -
>IE live and learn.

Websites? work? For the n-th time it is not *my* work but former USN John
Rusek's and described in his patent in great detail. All I did was a micro
flowtest to check hypergolicity and the ease of it. Proving one does not
really need cat packs nor super pure HP *at all* when chosing this option.
Bad advice?

No I never constructed a big motor nor do I intend to in the forseeable
future. In my country one is not allowed to launch rockets. Only fireworks.
Which does not diminish my fascination for the theme.

jd

_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 12779 invoked from network); 16 Aug 2001 14:31:01 -0000
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 16 Aug 2001 14:31:01 -0000
Received: (qmail 5854 invoked by uid 50005); 16 Aug 2001 14:29:44 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smpte.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 3.083918 secs); 16 Aug 2001 14:29:44 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 16 Aug 2001 14:29:38 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA08347; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 07:26:40 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 86246 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 14:26:34          +0000
Received: from c002.snv.cp.net (c002-h008.c002.snv.cp.net [209.228.32.172]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id HAA08333 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 07:26:34 -0700
Received: (cpmta 23413 invoked from network); 16 Aug 2001 07:25:59 -0700
Received: from 1Cust83.tnt2.williamsburg.va.da.uu.net (HELO default)          (63.21.81.83) by smtp.peoplepc.com (209.228.32.172) with SMTP; 16 Aug          2001 07:25:59 -0700
X-Sent: 16 Aug 2001 14:25:59 GMT
References: Conversation <20010816021743.20209.cpmta@c012.sfo.cp.net> with last            message <021101c1260e$78903980$14464a42@socal.rr.com>                        <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>             <005c01c1262d$4dd0d500$0100a8c0@prdise1.nm.home.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <002601c12661$1683bca0$fa51153f@default>
Date:         Thu, 16 Aug 2001 10:38:14 -0400
Reply-To: "David Muesing" <dmuesing@PEOPLEPC.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "David Muesing" <dmuesing@PEOPLEPC.COM>
Subject:      [AR] Cutting out a C-slot.
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

I would not try cutting as molding the core is much easier.

I have had very much success forming a slot with 3-5 rods in a row. Just
after I pour the molten propellant, I insert the rods through a guide into
the propellant. After cooling, couple hours, I twist gently and pull the
rods out. I use AL solid and brass tubes greased with wheel bearing grease
for this.

I have also used slightly tapered (helps removal) greased epoxied Balsa wood
to form slots. The epoxy coating keeps the Balsa from outgassing when it
hits the hot propellant. Be gentle and patient when removing this shape
since it doesn't twist very well. Gently rock the coring tool (Balsa wood)
back and forth until it breaks free.

Dave Muesing


----- Original Message -----
From: "Pax" <darkspunge@USWEST.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Thursday, August 16, 2001 4:27 AM
Subject: Re: [AR] Cutting out a C-slot.


> Yeah that would be one of them. Plus, if you want to avoid erosive burning
> you would have to make the core large as a regular BATE right? Well, I
want
> the propellant loadings and burn time of a c-slot. Finocyl would be fun,
but
> I don't have the mandrels for it. Brian K might be getting some made
pretty
> soon though. Yummy propellant loadings and lots of thrust!
>
> What kind of experience have you all had with large C-slots? Are they
worth
> the effort? I know extra insulation would be needed, but I was thinking
> about a 4" PVC C-slot motor. I should probably see if I can get a regular
> BATES to not fail though. It would be a fun $20 failure, and a even more
fun
> $20 success.
>
> Paxton
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
> To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
> Sent: Wednesday, August 15, 2001 10:50 PM
> Subject: Re: [AR] Cutting out a C-slot.
>
>
> > Different burn profile (not as neutral).
> >
> > Troy.
> >
> > ----------
> > > Instead of cutting a slot, how about you just drill a hole and turn it
> > into
> > > a moon burner.
> >
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 12924 invoked from network); 16 Aug 2001 14:51:41 -0000
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 16 Aug 2001 14:51:41 -0000
Received: (qmail 12351 invoked by uid 50005); 16 Aug 2001 14:50:23 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smpte.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 4.294708 secs); 16 Aug 2001 14:50:23 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 16 Aug 2001 14:50:16 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA08459; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 07:46:21 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 86269 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 14:46:18          +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (oe48.law12.hotmail.com [64.4.18.20]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA08445 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu,          16 Aug 2001 07:46:18 -0700
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Thu,          16 Aug 2001 07:45:47 -0700
X-Originating-IP: [24.29.188.254]
References:  <F229AGUjGnAKYoo9tjx0000aa09@hotmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 16 Aug 2001 14:45:47.0737 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[22E81490:01C12662]
Message-ID:  <OE48YZkxOjmfCHJr1Wt00006b8f@hotmail.com>
Date:         Thu, 16 Aug 2001 09:46:51 -0500
Reply-To: "Mark Kruep" <mkruep@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Mark Kruep" <mkruep@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] ERPS successfully runs H2O2 engine
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Ummm, I can read the plans for the V2, Saturn 5, and the Shuttle's Liquid
motors "in great detail". That does not mean I could realistically
*successfully* recreate any of those propulsion systems nor give me any
meaningful right to criticize others who have done so. Granted the monoprop
in discussion probably isn't as complicated as the above systems, but from
what I've heard, testing a liquid rocket motor and not discussing explosions
in that discussion is one hell of an accomplishment. Congrats to ERPS.

Furthermore, proving that ultra high purity HP isn't needed is a matter of
opinion. People on this list build candy, AN, & AP solid motors everyday
despite the fact that the technology is old and higher ISP propellants are
available. Also, wouldn't having hypergolic fuels present be orders of
magnitude more dangerous and complicated than a monoprop even if it's pure
HP? I've read several stories about Russian rockets blowing up on the pad
because of hypergolic fuels. If a professional space agency that takes
immense pride in their space program has problems with it, why do you think
it would be so easy to replicate? Critiquing someone else's work requires
having accomplished a task of similar nature and complexity in my mind.

Mark


----- Original Message -----
From: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Thursday, August 16, 2001 8:55 AM
Subject: Re: [AR] ERPS successfully runs H2O2 engine


> EP wrote:
>
> >First, any websites on your work?  I would like to see the results
myself -
> >IE live and learn.
>
> Websites? work? For the n-th time it is not *my* work but former USN John
> Rusek's and described in his patent in great detail. All I did was a micro
> flowtest to check hypergolicity and the ease of it. Proving one does not
> really need cat packs nor super pure HP *at all* when chosing this option.
> Bad advice?
>
> No I never constructed a big motor nor do I intend to in the forseeable
> future. In my country one is not allowed to launch rockets. Only
fireworks.
> Which does not diminish my fascination for the theme.
>
> jd
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 24794 invoked from network); 16 Aug 2001 15:17:06 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 16 Aug 2001 15:17:06 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 17502 invoked by uid 50005); 16 Aug 2001 15:15:48 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smpte.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.615984 secs); 16 Aug 2001 15:15:48 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 16 Aug 2001 15:15:47 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA08629; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 08:13:27 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 86306 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 15:13:20          +0000
Received: from smtp008.mailsrvcs.net (smtp008pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.187])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA08615 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 08:13:20 -0700
Received: from [63.27.96.152] (1Cust246.tnt1.san-bernardino.ca.da.uu.net          [63.27.96.246]) by smtp008.mailsrvcs.net  with ESMTP for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; id f7GFCVZ23822 Thu, 16 Aug 2001 10:12:31          -0500 (CDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: GTE/01rocket@mail.gte.net
References: Conversation <20010816021743.20209.cpmta@c012.sfo.cp.net> with last            message <021101c1260e$78903980$14464a42@socal.rr.com>            <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>            <005c01c1262d$4dd0d500$0100a8c0@prdise1.nm.home.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <a0510030eb7a1905101a7@[63.27.96.152]>
Date:         Thu, 16 Aug 2001 08:12:32 -0700
Reply-To: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Cutting out a C-slot.
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <005c01c1262d$4dd0d500$0100a8c0@prdise1.nm.home.com>

>Yeah that would be one of them. Plus, if you want to avoid erosive burning
>you would have to make the core large as a regular BATE right? Well, I want


Generally but the very low burning rates and motor lengths make
erosivity a non issue for most amateur motors I have ever seen.

BATES BTW

A BATES grain design with cores about 1/3 the diameter and lengths
about 1.7-2.5 the diameter give better thrust curve shape and LOWER
case damage than a c-slot.

The main benefit to a c-slot is if you make a million of them you can
cut the cores continuoulsy.

Even errortech has switched back to BATES over c-slots for their
highest volume products.  This indicates the savings in time are
offset by other factors such as stackability, case damage over many
uses, and inventory control issues.


>the propellant loadings and burn time of a c-slot. Finocyl would be fun, but
>I don't have the mandrels for it. Brian K might be getting some made pretty
>soon though. Yummy propellant loadings and lots of thrust!


A star burn can be made from off the shelf extrudings of aluminum and
plastics and the relatively short length of amateur motors makes
pulling mandrels fairly practical with a small press which can be
fabricated very cheaply.

We made a much larger commercial version of this (custom mandrel,
large press, wonderful mold releases at high cost), on a 6" x 48"
system.  We displayed photos of it at the RRS meeting late last year
and fired an 8 foot version of it at a PRS event (happened to be our
best date).  This system is slated for use with several hypersonic
research aircraft boost applications.  It has a FLAT thrust curve,
excellent loading and almost zero case damage.


>
>What kind of experience have you all had with large C-slots? Are they worth
>the effort? I know extra insulation would be needed, but I was thinking


Errortech used to make a c-slot 29mm H125 (320ns) which had to be
modified because it was erosive with WL with a 1/8" x 7/8" slot.
Scott Pearce drilled a cylindrical core part way into the c-slot to
solve the erisivity issue.  Crude but effective.  Disclaimer: I was
Aerotech's first, largest and for quite some time its key dealer.


>about a 4" PVC C-slot motor. I should probably see if I can get a regular
>BATES to not fail though. It would be a fun $20 failure, and a even more fun
>$20 success.


BATES is an amateur rocketeer's friend.  Apparantly an HPR
monopolists friend too.

Copy that.


>
>Paxton
>
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
>To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
>Sent: Wednesday, August 15, 2001 10:50 PM
>Subject: Re: [AR] Cutting out a C-slot.
>
>
>>  Different burn profile (not as neutral).
>>
>>  Troy.
>>
>>  ----------
>>  > Instead of cutting a slot, how about you just drill a hole and turn it
>  > into
>  > > a moon burner.
>  >


--
Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
Opinion, the whole thing.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 12832 invoked from network); 16 Aug 2001 15:43:44 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 16 Aug 2001 15:43:44 -0000
Received: (qmail 17120 invoked by uid 50005); 16 Aug 2001 15:44:11 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.133024 secs); 16 Aug 2001 15:44:11 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 16 Aug 2001 15:44:11 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA08732; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 08:38:13 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 86317 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 15:38:10          +0000
Received: from albatross.wgn.net (www.wgn.net [64.14.252.81] (may be forged))          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA08718 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 08:38:10 -0700
Received: from cronos (eli-208-187-17-35.wgn.net [208.187.17.35]) by          albatross.wgn.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id IAA05418 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 08:39:29 -0700
References: Conversation <20010816021743.20209.cpmta@c012.sfo.cp.net> with last            message <021101c1260e$78903980$14464a42@socal.rr.com>                       <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>                 <005c01c1262d$4dd0d500$0100a8c0@prdise1.nm.home.com>             <a0510030eb7a1905101a7@[63.27.96.152]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <009901c12669$968673e0$c36122c0@cronos>
Date:         Thu, 16 Aug 2001 08:39:06 -0700
Reply-To: "Wedge Oldham" <wedge@WESTWORLD.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Wedge Oldham" <wedge@WESTWORLD.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Cutting out a C-slot.
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Jerry:
Got any video of the 8' motor on your site?
Wedge Oldham
http://NikeProject.com
Only those who risk going too far,
will ever know how far they can go.




----- Original Message -----
From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Thursday, August 16, 2001 8:12 AM
Subject: Re: [AR] Cutting out a C-slot.


> We made a much larger commercial version of this (custom mandrel,
> large press, wonderful mold releases at high cost), on a 6" x 48"
> system.  We displayed photos of it at the RRS meeting late last year
> and fired an 8 foot version of it at a PRS event (happened to be our
> best date).

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 11319 invoked from network); 16 Aug 2001 16:33:10 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 16 Aug 2001 16:33:10 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: (qmail 11635 invoked by uid 50005); 16 Aug 2001 16:32:21 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smptf.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 1.760414 secs); 16 Aug 2001 16:32:21 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 16 Aug 2001 16:32:16 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA09003; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 09:27:36 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 86364 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 16:27:29          +0000
Received: from localhost (rcalkins@localhost) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with          ESMTP id JAA08989 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Thu, 16 Aug 2001          09:27:28 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.LNX.4.10.10108160855320.8170-100000@itc.uci.edu>
Date:         Thu, 16 Aug 2001 09:27:28 -0700
Reply-To: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
Subject:      Re: [AR] (fwd)
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Forwarding this to the list for another amateur rocketeer:

"I am looking for a source for 55 gal drums of R 45 HT and matching
amounts of N - 3200."

Can anybody recommend a source for this guy?

Thanks,

Ray

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 23698 invoked from network); 16 Aug 2001 17:25:19 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 16 Aug 2001 17:25:19 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 5022 invoked by uid 50005); 16 Aug 2001 17:25:46 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.139676 secs); 16 Aug 2001 17:25:46 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 16 Aug 2001 17:25:45 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA09391; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 10:19:12 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 86445 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 17:19:05          +0000
Received: from ns.vanguard.com (ns.VANGUARD.COM [192.175.173.31]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA09375 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 10:19:04 -0700
Received: from eagle1.vanguard.com (eagle1.VANGUARD.COM [192.175.141.70]) by          ns.vanguard.com (Switch-2.1.3/Switch-2.1.0) with ESMTP id          f7GHJ2B16464; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 13:19:03 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from vgi4mail.vanguard.com (vgi4mail.vanguard.com [10.254.65.16]) by          eagle1.vanguard.com (Switch-2.1.3/Switch-2.1.0) with SMTP id          f7GHJ2a23905; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 13:19:02 -0400 (EDT)
Received: by vgi4mail.vanguard.com(Lotus SMTP MTA v4.6.6  (890.1 7-16-1999))           id 85256AAA.005F2CE9 ; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 13:19:34 -0400
X-Lotus-FromDomain: VGINOTES
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Disposition: inline
Message-ID:  <85256AAA.005F2A37.00@vgi4mail.vanguard.com>
Date:         Thu, 16 Aug 2001 13:18:31 -0400
Reply-To: <Waysie_Atkins@VANGUARD.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <Waysie_Atkins@VANGUARD.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] New Valve Actuator
Comments: To: peter kuhns <pkuhns@yahoo.com>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

<Nice find. I wonder if there are reasonably priced
<actuators an amateur club (ERPS) could test. I'm
<searching google right now to see what comes up. Do
<you know of any manufacturer?


Unfortunately no.  I receive e-mail updates from various space/rocketry
institutions  to keep abreast of developments and
further my knowledge of the field. [Do to various reason I ended up in a field
not in alignment with my true interests :-( ].
For application purposes this is well beyond my current technical level. There
does seem to be those on the list which are at this level though.  Will be glad
to do some research for add'l info, no promises though. Given that NASA's
Marshall Space center is involved it might be all inhouse.  (ps  congrats on the
engine!)

<I'm sure there will be many who disagree with me, but my experience with
<hydraulics vs. electric actuation systems favors hydraulics -
(snip)

Don,
To have only a fraction of your knowledge of electronics would put me well ahead
of where I'm at now.  I really enjoy the postings, gradually I'm getting quite
an introduction to their applications, and current state of the art.
Electronics certainly sound alot easier than hydraulics, but as you point out
the devil is in the details.  Personally I have more experience with hydraulics
and pneumatics from my oilfield days than with electronics.  I'm hoping to do
some R/C type work to help get acquainted with the electronic end of things and
build from there.  (decent/sensible starting place?).  Anything and everything I
learn from the list is most appreciated.

Have a great day all,

Waysie

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 1202 invoked from network); 16 Aug 2001 17:34:27 -0000
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 16 Aug 2001 17:34:27 -0000
Received: (qmail 11602 invoked by uid 50005); 16 Aug 2001 17:33:10 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smpte.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.378318 secs); 16 Aug 2001 17:33:10 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 16 Aug 2001 17:33:10 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA09494; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 10:31:21 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 86460 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 17:31:15          +0000
Received: from albqpop1.albq.uswest.net (albqpop1.albq.uswest.net          [207.108.240.1]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id KAA09480          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 10:31:14 -0700
Received: (qmail 55806 invoked by alias); 16 Aug 2001 17:30:41 -0000
Delivered-To: fixup-AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU@fixme
Received: (qmail 55453 invoked by uid 0); 16 Aug 2001 17:30:35 -0000
Received: from cc898542-a.prdise1.nm.home.com (HELO cc898542a) (65.7.151.152)          by albqpop1.albq.uswest.net with SMTP; 16 Aug 2001 17:30:35 -0000
References: Conversation <20010816021743.20209.cpmta@c012.sfo.cp.net> with last            message <021101c1260e$78903980$14464a42@socal.rr.com>                          <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>                 <005c01c1262d$4dd0d500$0100a8c0@prdise1.nm.home.com>                        <a0510030eb7a1905101a7@[63.27.96.152]>             <009901c12669$968673e0$c36122c0@cronos>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <000d01c12679$b299b280$0100a8c0@prdise1.nm.home.com>
Date:         Thu, 16 Aug 2001 11:34:25 -0600
Reply-To: "Pax" <darkspunge@USWEST.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Pax" <darkspunge@USWEST.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Cutting out a C-slot.
Comments: To: Wedge Oldham <wedge@WESTWORLD.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

That would be kick ass video, I wanna see, I wanna see :-)

> Jerry:
> Got any video of the 8' motor on your site?
> Wedge Oldham
> http://NikeProject.com
> Only those who risk going too far,
> will ever know how far they can go.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 1152 invoked from network); 16 Aug 2001 17:41:25 -0000
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 16 Aug 2001 17:41:25 -0000
Received: (qmail 21716 invoked by uid 50005); 16 Aug 2001 17:40:09 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smpte.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.161745 secs); 16 Aug 2001 17:40:09 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 16 Aug 2001 17:40:08 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA09564; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 10:37:55 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 86471 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 17:37:53          +0000
Received: from albqpop1.albq.uswest.net (albqpop1.albq.uswest.net          [207.108.240.1]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id KAA09550          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 10:37:52 -0700
Received: (qmail 71001 invoked by alias); 16 Aug 2001 17:36:40 -0000
Delivered-To: fixup-AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU@fixme
Received: (qmail 69268 invoked by uid 0); 16 Aug 2001 17:35:57 -0000
Received: from cc898542-a.prdise1.nm.home.com (HELO cc898542a) (65.7.151.152)          by albqpop1.albq.uswest.net with SMTP; 16 Aug 2001 17:35:57 -0000
References:  <F60Y66KnCdxRYhMleSn0000a75f@hotmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <001a01c1267a$72a58400$0100a8c0@prdise1.nm.home.com>
Date:         Thu, 16 Aug 2001 11:39:48 -0600
Reply-To: "Pax" <darkspunge@USWEST.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Pax" <darkspunge@USWEST.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Strontium Nitrate - Sorbitol
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Are you sure? I will have to try it with dry powders, but I don't think
there are any chlorine donors in that formulation. Or is it not needed in
this case?

Paxton


----- Original Message -----
From: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Thursday, August 16, 2001 2:31 AM
Subject: Re: [AR] Strontium Nitrate - Sorbitol


> Adding some SrNO3 to your KNO3 'd not hurt: it offers a beautiful RED
flame.
> And is used for that in fireworks recipes.
>
> jd

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 23221 invoked from network); 16 Aug 2001 17:46:47 -0000
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 16 Aug 2001 17:46:47 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 25608 invoked by uid 50005); 16 Aug 2001 17:45:59 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smptf.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.444496 secs); 16 Aug 2001 17:45:59 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 16 Aug 2001 17:45:58 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA09643; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 10:43:26 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 86482 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 17:43:23          +0000
Received: from priv-edtnes09-hme0.telusplanet.net (mtaout.telus.net          [199.185.220.235]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id          KAA09629 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 10:43:23 -0700
Received: from telus.net ([216.232.246.21]) by          priv-edtnes09-hme0.telusplanet.net (InterMail vM.4.01.03.10          201-229-121-110) with ESMTP id          <20010816174252.PLGH887.priv-edtnes09-hme0.telusplanet.net@telus.net>          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 11:42:52 -0600
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (Win95; I)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <Pine.LNX.4.10.10108160855320.8170-100000@itc.uci.edu>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B7C077E.862EC0DD@telus.net>
Date:         Thu, 16 Aug 2001 10:48:46 -0700
Reply-To: "David Wakarchuk" <dwakarchuk@TELUS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "David Wakarchuk" <dwakarchuk@TELUS.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] (fwd)
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Ray Calkins wrote:

> Forwarding this to the list for another amateur rocketeer:
>
> "I am looking for a source for 55 gal drums of R 45 HT and matching
> amounts of N - 3200."
>
> Can anybody recommend a source for this guy?
>
> Thanks,
>
> Ray

The conventional source for R45HT made in the USA is Sartomer in Exton,
Pa. The product comes out of the plant in Channelview Texas.  See their
website

http://www.sartomer.com/index.html.

There are also apparently Chinese and Brazillian sources but I don't
have any first hand experiance with any of these.

I am not familiar with N-3200 so I can't help here.

David Wakarchuk

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 11490 invoked from network); 16 Aug 2001 18:13:21 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 16 Aug 2001 18:13:21 -0000
Received: (qmail 18384 invoked by uid 50005); 16 Aug 2001 18:13:16 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (. Clean. Processed in 0.37915 secs); 16 Aug 2001 18:13:16 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
X-Qmail-Scanner-Mail-From: owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU via smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net
X-Qmail-Scanner-Rcpt-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
X-Qmail-Scanner: 0.96 (No viruses found. Processed in 0.37915 secs)
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 16 Aug 2001 18:13:16 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA09827; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 11:09:36 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 86509 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 18:09:31          +0000
Received: from mail.aros.net (mail.aros.net [207.173.16.20]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA09805 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu,          16 Aug 2001 11:09:30 -0700
Received: from biomicro.com ([208.187.122.40]) by mail.aros.net (8.11.3/8.9.3)          with ESMTP id f7GI9MB72400 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 16 Aug          2001 12:09:24 -0600 (MDT)
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.77 [en] (Win98; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <F60Y66KnCdxRYhMleSn0000a75f@hotmail.com>            <001a01c1267a$72a58400$0100a8c0@prdise1.nm.home.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B7C0C9D.1674AAF1@biomicro.com>
Date:         Thu, 16 Aug 2001 12:10:37 -0600
Reply-To: "Mark K. Spute" <mks@BIOMICRO.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Mark K. Spute" <mks@BIOMICRO.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Strontium Nitrate - Sorbitol
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

I'm not a solids guy, but I do appreciate a good Zn/S micrograin launch
from time to time.  So what would SrNO3 do to a micrograin?  Would you
be able to see the red flame?  Would it make the propellant explosive?

Pax wrote:
>
> Are you sure? I will have to try it with dry powders, but I don't think
> there are any chlorine donors in that formulation. Or is it not needed in
> this case?
>
> Paxton
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
> To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
> Sent: Thursday, August 16, 2001 2:31 AM
> Subject: Re: [AR] Strontium Nitrate - Sorbitol
>
> > Adding some SrNO3 to your KNO3 'd not hurt: it offers a beautiful RED
> flame.
> > And is used for that in fireworks recipes.
> >
> > jd

--
Mark K. Spute
Senior Research Engineer
BioMicro Systems Inc.

KD7IWE,  RRS

"It is difficult to say what is impossible, for the dream of yesterday
is the hope of today and the reality of tomorrow."
     Dr. Robert H. Goddard

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 14593 invoked from network); 16 Aug 2001 18:34:35 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 16 Aug 2001 18:34:35 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 10376 invoked by uid 50005); 16 Aug 2001 18:34:30 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (. Clean. Processed in 0.466415 secs); 16 Aug 2001 18:34:30 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
X-Qmail-Scanner-Mail-From: owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU via smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net
X-Qmail-Scanner-Rcpt-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
X-Qmail-Scanner: 0.96 (No viruses found. Processed in 0.466415 secs)
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 16 Aug 2001 18:34:29 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA10097; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 11:31:00 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 86526 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 18:30:57          +0000
Received: from ns.vanguard.com (ns.VANGUARD.COM [192.175.173.31]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA10083 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 11:30:57 -0700
Received: from eagle1.vanguard.com (eagle1.VANGUARD.COM [192.175.141.70]) by          ns.vanguard.com (Switch-2.1.3/Switch-2.1.0) with ESMTP id          f7GIUtB14614 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 14:30:55          -0400 (EDT)
Received: from vgi4mail.vanguard.com (vgi4mail.vanguard.com [10.254.65.16]) by          eagle1.vanguard.com (Switch-2.1.3/Switch-2.1.0) with SMTP id          f7GIUsa22720 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 14:30:54          -0400 (EDT)
Received: by vgi4mail.vanguard.com(Lotus SMTP MTA v4.6.6  (890.1 7-16-1999))           id 85256AAA.0065C8E0 ; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 14:31:45 -0400
X-Lotus-FromDomain: VGINOTES
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Disposition: inline
Message-ID:  <85256AAA.0065ABEE.00@vgi4mail.vanguard.com>
Date:         Thu, 16 Aug 2001 14:29:30 -0400
Reply-To: <Waysie_Atkins@VANGUARD.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <Waysie_Atkins@VANGUARD.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] potassium nitrate---Source
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

<Dak and I are using the GG Flowable, and it seems to
<work great.  I think Dak still grinds his, and I
<dissolve mine in boiling water, so in our case prill
<size is rather irrelevant.  I'm sure the flowable
<will work as is, but will have a slower burn rate and
<may have some rough combustion.
<
<
<Ray Calkins

Thank you for the response.  I'm curious now as to how you proceed from there.
Do you evaporate the water out of the KNO3 before mixing with the fuel (and
which fuel) or do you mix and cast while wet then allow the grains to dry?  And
what size motor would be a reasonable starting place?  I have some 54mm Kosdon
hardware I'd like to be able to make loads for, should I start out smaller and
work up.

BTW  I take full responsibility for any action I take- I'm looking for
*opinions* not *advice*- the consequences of what I do, who I listen to, what I
believe w/o further investigation/research etc. are my responsibility, not the
responsibility of those I may have chosen to listen to.    Ought to go without
saying, but to add to your, and others, comfort level regarding opinions given.


And to throw out a exceedingly basic question.....  What's a moonburner, how is
it different from a c-slot, and does is a c-slot opening within the grain, or
does it extend to the outer edges (length wise) of the grain.......trying to
make sense of the hacksaw/table saw/drill stuff.


Respectfully,

Waysie

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 5293 invoked from network); 16 Aug 2001 18:39:10 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 16 Aug 2001 18:39:10 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 32034 invoked by uid 50005); 16 Aug 2001 18:37:57 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smptf.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.387409 secs); 16 Aug 2001 18:37:57 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 16 Aug 2001 18:37:57 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA10134; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 11:36:36 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 86533 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 18:35:09          +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (f179.law15.hotmail.com [64.4.23.179]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA10112 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 11:35:09 -0700
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Thu,          16 Aug 2001 11:34:39 -0700
Received: from 213.224.83.110 by lw15fd.law15.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Thu,          16 Aug 2001 18:34:36 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [213.224.83.110]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 16 Aug 2001 18:34:39.0034 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[1B65B9A0:01C12682]
Message-ID:  <F179aH8kvLMxLQnS5Ph0000b0fc@hotmail.com>
Date:         Thu, 16 Aug 2001 18:35:09 +0000
Reply-To: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Strontium Nitrate - Sorbitol
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

It is the strontium metal ions which emit red light in the ignited mix. The
usual chlorate (where you got your chlorine idea from I guess) present in
such composition and a fuel (eg shellac) are for combustion. Chlorine has
nothing to do with the red emission and its presence is not required. Just
put some SrNO3 on a spoon and heat it in a flame...

jd

>From: Pax <darkspunge@USWEST.NET>
>Reply-To: Pax <darkspunge@USWEST.NET>
>To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
>Subject: Re: [AR] Strontium Nitrate - Sorbitol
>Date: Thu, 16 Aug 2001 11:39:48 -0600
>
>Are you sure? I will have to try it with dry powders, but I don't think
>there are any chlorine donors in that formulation. Or is it not needed in
>this case?
>
>Paxton
>
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
>To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
>Sent: Thursday, August 16, 2001 2:31 AM
>Subject: Re: [AR] Strontium Nitrate - Sorbitol
>
>
> > Adding some SrNO3 to your KNO3 'd not hurt: it offers a beautiful RED
>flame.
> > And is used for that in fireworks recipes.
> >
> > jd


_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 2626 invoked from network); 16 Aug 2001 18:45:30 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 16 Aug 2001 18:45:30 -0000
Received: (qmail 28588 invoked by uid 50005); 16 Aug 2001 18:44:12 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smpte.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.312134 secs); 16 Aug 2001 18:44:12 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 16 Aug 2001 18:44:11 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA10156; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 11:38:01 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 86540 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 18:38:00          +0000
Received: from smtp005.mailsrvcs.net (smtp005pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.184])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA10138 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 11:36:41 -0700
Received: from [63.27.96.152] (1Cust140.tnt2.san-bernardino.ca.da.uu.net          [63.27.97.140]) by smtp005.mailsrvcs.net  with ESMTP for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; id f7GIa9723650 Thu, 16 Aug 2001 13:36:09          -0500 (CDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: GTE/01rocket@mail.gte.net
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <a05100313b7a1c2b82fcd@[63.27.96.152]>
Date:         Thu, 16 Aug 2001 11:36:17 -0700
Reply-To: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Subject:      [AR] 6 x 96 inch star grain solid videos (enjoy)
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

>Jerry:
>Got any video of the 8' motor on your site?
>Wedge Oldham

Short test motor:
http://www.v-serv.com/-upload/152mm4.5KS2200-F-P.mov

96" star test firing
http://www.v-serv.com/-upload/5KS5000.mov

Thrust curve:
http://www.v-serv.com/theproject/4.3KS4800.htm

Available for amateur projects as well.


From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
>  > system.  We displayed photos of it at the RRS meeting late last year
>  > and fired an 8 foot version of it at a PRS event (happened to be our
>  > best date).


--
Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
Opinion, the whole thing.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 17711 invoked from network); 16 Aug 2001 18:48:53 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 16 Aug 2001 18:48:53 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 30628 invoked by uid 50005); 16 Aug 2001 18:48:47 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (. Clean. Processed in 0.143322 secs); 16 Aug 2001 18:48:47 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
X-Qmail-Scanner-Mail-From: owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU via smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net
X-Qmail-Scanner-Rcpt-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
X-Qmail-Scanner: 0.96 (No viruses found. Processed in 0.143322 secs)
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 16 Aug 2001 18:48:47 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA10197; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 11:44:53 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 86547 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 18:44:51          +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (f194.law15.hotmail.com [64.4.23.194]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA10183 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 11:44:51 -0700
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Thu,          16 Aug 2001 11:44:20 -0700
Received: from 213.224.83.110 by lw15fd.law15.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Thu,          16 Aug 2001 18:44:20 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [213.224.83.110]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 16 Aug 2001 18:44:20.0777 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[7624A990:01C12683]
Message-ID:  <F194Rd72IfBvjTZUl3W0000b183@hotmail.com>
Date:         Thu, 16 Aug 2001 18:44:51 +0000
Reply-To: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Strontium Nitrate - Sorbitol
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

My guess is the greenish zinc ion emission might mask the strontium flare.
Depends on the emission intensity of both ions. Worth a spoon test.

jd

>From: "Mark K. Spute" <mks@BIOMICRO.COM>
>Reply-To: "Mark K. Spute" <mks@BIOMICRO.COM>
>To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
>Subject: Re: [AR] Strontium Nitrate - Sorbitol
>Date: Thu, 16 Aug 2001 12:10:37 -0600
>
>I'm not a solids guy, but I do appreciate a good Zn/S micrograin launch
>from time to time.  So what would SrNO3 do to a micrograin?  Would you
>be able to see the red flame?  Would it make the propellant explosive?
>
>Pax wrote:
> >
> > Are you sure? I will have to try it with dry powders, but I don't think
> > there are any chlorine donors in that formulation. Or is it not needed
>in
> > this case?
> >
> > Paxton
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
> > To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
> > Sent: Thursday, August 16, 2001 2:31 AM
> > Subject: Re: [AR] Strontium Nitrate - Sorbitol
> >
> > > Adding some SrNO3 to your KNO3 'd not hurt: it offers a beautiful RED
> > flame.
> > > And is used for that in fireworks recipes.
> > >
> > > jd
>
>--
>Mark K. Spute
>Senior Research Engineer
>BioMicro Systems Inc.
>
>KD7IWE,  RRS
>
>"It is difficult to say what is impossible, for the dream of yesterday
>is the hope of today and the reality of tomorrow."
>      Dr. Robert H. Goddard


_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 25500 invoked from network); 16 Aug 2001 18:50:35 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 16 Aug 2001 18:50:35 -0000
Received: (qmail 32406 invoked by uid 50005); 16 Aug 2001 18:50:30 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (. Clean. Processed in 0.144323 secs); 16 Aug 2001 18:50:30 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
X-Qmail-Scanner-Mail-From: owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU via smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net
X-Qmail-Scanner-Rcpt-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
X-Qmail-Scanner: 0.96 (No viruses found. Processed in 0.144323 secs)
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 16 Aug 2001 18:50:30 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA10223; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 11:46:21 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 86554 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 18:46:19          +0000
Received: from izzy6.izzy.net (izzy6.izzy.net [207.158.132.178]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA10209 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu,          16 Aug 2001 11:46:19 -0700
Received: from izzy.net (host-224.subnet-140.med.umich.edu [141.214.140.224])          by izzy6.izzy.net (8.9.2/8.9.3) with ESMTP id OAA17814; Thu, 16 Aug          2001 14:41:38 -0400 (EDT)
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.78 [en] (WinNT; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <85256AAA.0065ABEE.00@vgi4mail.vanguard.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B7C13BC.6741948B@izzy.net>
Date:         Thu, 16 Aug 2001 14:41:00 -0400
Reply-To: <cscholl@IZZY.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Curtis Scholl" <cscholl@IZZY.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] potassium nitrate---Source
Comments: To: Waysie_Atkins@VANGUARD.COM
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Waysie:

  C-Slot is a cut from the outside of the grain to the center of the
grain for the full length of the grain.

  Moon burner is an offset core from the center of the grain sometimes
as far out from center as the edge of the grain.

Curtis Scholl



> And to throw out a exceedingly basic question.....  What's a moonburner, how is
> it different from a c-slot, and does is a c-slot opening within the grain, or
> does it extend to the outer edges (length wise) of the grain.......trying to
> make sense of the hacksaw/table saw/drill stuff.
>
> Respectfully,
>
> Waysie

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 29289 invoked from network); 16 Aug 2001 19:31:29 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 16 Aug 2001 19:31:29 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 1695 invoked by uid 50005); 16 Aug 2001 19:19:05 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smptf.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.910659 secs); 16 Aug 2001 19:19:05 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 16 Aug 2001 19:19:02 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA10387; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 12:15:20 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 86574 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 19:15:13          +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (f20.law15.hotmail.com [64.4.23.20]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA10373 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Thu,          16 Aug 2001 12:15:13 -0700
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Thu,          16 Aug 2001 12:14:42 -0700
Received: from 213.224.83.110 by lw15fd.law15.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Thu,          16 Aug 2001 19:14:38 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [213.224.83.110]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 16 Aug 2001 19:14:42.0889 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[B434E390:01C12687]
Message-ID:  <F20S8J6XXlm1TlbRRu60000b2a0@hotmail.com>
Date:         Thu, 16 Aug 2001 19:15:13 +0000
Reply-To: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] ERPS successfully runs H2O2 engine
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

>Furthermore, proving that ultra high purity HP isn't needed is a matter of
>opinion.

High purity 90 % or more is beyond the budget of most amateurs. Vacuum
distilling HP takes years to accomplish successfully for people without
chemistry background (and even with) and here I talk from experience. So
this blocks amateur progress in this field substantially.

Atmospheric evaporative enrichment of HP in beakers is realizable without
much equipment and the bottom still (rich in inhibitors possibly) *can be
used if one deletes the necessity of delicate poisonable metallic catpacks*.
I am only saying what is possible. I am not telling anyone what to do. I am
offering easier options which cost me years of study and discussions. I
believe one should consider the options before starting anything.

>Also, wouldn't having hypergolic fuels present be orders of
>magnitude more dangerous and complicated than a monoprop even if it's >pure
>HP?

Sure. But then rockets are dangerous stuff always. I'd not promote
hypergolic strap-on motors for bikes or rocketmen drives. But I guess we're
talking launching rockets, not daredevils. And *for rockets* spending time
and energy on a 150 s Isp system is IMHO pure waste. My 2 cents.

jd

_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 28127 invoked from network); 16 Aug 2001 19:38:08 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 16 Aug 2001 19:38:08 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 4449 invoked by uid 50005); 16 Aug 2001 19:38:35 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.163472 secs); 16 Aug 2001 19:38:35 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 16 Aug 2001 19:38:34 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA10506; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 12:35:08 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 86598 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 19:35:02          +0000
Received: from adobe.com (smtp-relay-1.adobe.com [192.150.11.1]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA10492 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu,          16 Aug 2001 12:35:01 -0700
Received: from inner-relay-2.corp.adobe.com ([153.32.1.52]) by adobe.com          (1.0.0/8.11.4) with ESMTP id f7GJYwB03039 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>;          Thu, 16 Aug 2001 12:34:58 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mailsj-v1.corp.adobe.com (mailsj-dev.corp.adobe.com          [153.32.1.192]) by inner-relay-2.corp.adobe.com (8.11.4/8.11.4) with          ESMTP id f7GJY7b29404 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 16 Aug 2001          12:34:07 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from sronald.earthlink.net ([153.32.63.111]) by          mailsj-v1.corp.adobe.com (Netscape Messaging Server 4.15 v1 Jul 11          2001 16:32:57) with ESMTP id GI6ED700.DUA; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 12:34:19          -0700
X-Sender: forkbomb@mail.earthlink.net
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <5.1.0.14.0.20010816122935.02741c10@mail.earthlink.net>
Date:         Thu, 16 Aug 2001 12:36:54 -0700
Reply-To: <forkbomb@EARTHLINK.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <forkbomb@EARTHLINK.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] ERPS successfully runs H2O2 engine
Comments: To: John Dom <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <F20S8J6XXlm1TlbRRu60000b2a0@hotmail.com>

At 07:15 PM 8/16/01 +0000, John Dom wrote:

>Atmospheric evaporative enrichment of HP in beakers is realizable without
>much equipment and the bottom still (rich in inhibitors possibly) *can be
>used if one deletes the necessity of delicate poisonable metallic catpacks*.
>I am only saying what is possible. I am not telling anyone what to do. I am
>offering easier options which cost me years of study and discussions. I
>believe one should consider the options before starting anything.

         Sparging will get you ~85% peroxide, starting from 50% feedstock,
with good yield. It's also pretty easy.

<SNIP>

>Sure. But then rockets are dangerous stuff always. I'd not promote
>hypergolic strap-on motors for bikes or rocketmen drives. But I guess we're
>talking launching rockets, not daredevils. And *for rockets* spending time
>and energy on a 150 s Isp system is IMHO pure waste. My 2 cents.


         The H2O2 system is useful because it does all of the following things:

1) builds experience and capability for the ERPS team
2) provides relatively cheap, safe, and reliable propulsion for flights
testing other systems -- guidance, recovery, etc.
3) provides components for hybrid and bi-prop motors.

         All in all, it's a step on a progression. Consider it a subsystem
test if it makes you feel better.

         -p

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 42 invoked from network); 16 Aug 2001 19:45:49 -0000
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 16 Aug 2001 19:45:49 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 1649 invoked by uid 50005); 16 Aug 2001 19:44:32 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smpte.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.238265 secs); 16 Aug 2001 19:44:32 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 16 Aug 2001 19:44:31 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA10549; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 12:42:14 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 86609 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 19:41:57          +0000
Received: from mail.aros.net (mail.aros.net [207.173.16.20]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA10535 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Thu,          16 Aug 2001 12:41:56 -0700
Received: from biomicro.com ([208.187.122.40]) by mail.aros.net (8.11.3/8.9.3)          with ESMTP id f7GJfuB18386 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Thu, 16 Aug          2001 13:41:56 -0600 (MDT)
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.77 [en] (Win98; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <F60Y66KnCdxRYhMleSn0000a75f@hotmail.com>            <001a01c1267a$72a58400$0100a8c0@prdise1.nm.home.com>            <3B7C0C9D.1674AAF1@biomicro.com>            <a05100312b7a1c19aecd4@[63.27.96.152]>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B7C224F.DCD1FAFA@biomicro.com>
Date:         Thu, 16 Aug 2001 13:43:11 -0600
Reply-To: "Mark K. Spute" <mks@BIOMICRO.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Mark K. Spute" <mks@BIOMICRO.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Strontium Nitrate - Sorbitol
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

I suspected that.  Thanks.

Jerry Irvine wrote:
>
> >I'm not a solids guy, but I do appreciate a good Zn/S micrograin launch
> >from time to time.  So what would SrNO3 do to a micrograin?  Would you
> >be able to see the red flame?  Would it make the propellant explosive?
>
> The heavy smoke would probably obscure the reddish flame from the
> Strontium Nitrate.
>
> Even in low aluminum APCP compositions there must be a sufficiently
> high concentration of SrNO3 to degrade ISP substantially to make the
> red flame visible as evidenced by USR Redstar and recent AT Redline
> which is a close derivative.
>
> Jerry
>
> --
> Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
> Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
> Opinion, the whole thing.

--
Mark K. Spute
Senior Research Engineer
BioMicro Systems Inc.

KD7IWE,  RRS

"It is difficult to say what is impossible, for the dream of yesterday
is the hope of today and the reality of tomorrow."
     Dr. Robert H. Goddard

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 5721 invoked from network); 16 Aug 2001 19:54:07 -0000
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 16 Aug 2001 19:54:07 -0000
Received: (qmail 14667 invoked by uid 50005); 16 Aug 2001 19:52:50 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smpte.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.163602 secs); 16 Aug 2001 19:52:50 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 16 Aug 2001 19:52:49 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA10620; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 12:51:23 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 86623 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 19:51:21          +0000
Received: from albqpop1.albq.uswest.net (albqpop1.albq.uswest.net          [207.108.240.1]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id MAA10606          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 12:51:20 -0700
Received: (qmail 9555 invoked by alias); 16 Aug 2001 19:47:34 -0000
Delivered-To: fixup-AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU@fixme
Received: (qmail 1653 invoked by uid 0); 16 Aug 2001 19:43:51 -0000
Received: from cc898542-a.prdise1.nm.home.com (HELO cc898542a) (65.7.151.152)          by albqpop1.albq.uswest.net with SMTP; 16 Aug 2001 19:43:51 -0000
References:  <a05100313b7a1c2b82fcd@[63.27.96.152]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <001301c1268c$5020fa60$0100a8c0@prdise1.nm.home.com>
Date:         Thu, 16 Aug 2001 13:47:41 -0600
Reply-To: "Pax" <darkspunge@USWEST.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Pax" <darkspunge@USWEST.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] 6 x 96 inch star grain solid videos (enjoy)
Comments: To: Jerry Irvine <01rocket@GTE.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

I am sad now. I wanted to see those hybrid photos!! :-) Damn broken links.
And did you HAVE to do quicktime? Huh?
kidding.
Nice photos, but I have to go get QT for the movies.

Paxton


----- Original Message -----
From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Thursday, August 16, 2001 12:36 PM
Subject: [AR] 6 x 96 inch star grain solid videos (enjoy)


> >Jerry:
> >Got any video of the 8' motor on your site?
> >Wedge Oldham
>
> Short test motor:
> http://www.v-serv.com/-upload/152mm4.5KS2200-F-P.mov
>
> 96" star test firing
> http://www.v-serv.com/-upload/5KS5000.mov
>
> Thrust curve:
> http://www.v-serv.com/theproject/4.3KS4800.htm
>
> Available for amateur projects as well.
>
>
> From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
> >  > system.  We displayed photos of it at the RRS meeting late last year
> >  > and fired an 8 foot version of it at a PRS event (happened to be our
> >  > best date).
>
>
> --
> Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
> Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
> Opinion, the whole thing.
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 11193 invoked from network); 16 Aug 2001 20:02:38 -0000
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 16 Aug 2001 20:02:38 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 15081 invoked by uid 50005); 16 Aug 2001 19:48:14 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smptf.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 1.08886 secs); 16 Aug 2001 19:48:14 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 16 Aug 2001 19:48:11 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA10572; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 12:43:43 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 86616 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 19:43:42          +0000
Received: from mail.aros.net (mail.aros.net [207.173.16.20]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA10555 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu,          16 Aug 2001 12:42:57 -0700
Received: from biomicro.com ([208.187.122.40]) by mail.aros.net (8.11.3/8.9.3)          with ESMTP id f7GJgvB18774 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 16 Aug          2001 13:42:57 -0600 (MDT)
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.77 [en] (Win98; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <F194Rd72IfBvjTZUl3W0000b183@hotmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B7C228D.4F843B9C@biomicro.com>
Date:         Thu, 16 Aug 2001 13:44:13 -0600
Reply-To: "Mark K. Spute" <mks@BIOMICRO.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Mark K. Spute" <mks@BIOMICRO.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Strontium Nitrate - Sorbitol
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Yep.  I guess I'll try it.  Thanks.

John Dom wrote:
>
> My guess is the greenish zinc ion emission might mask the strontium flare.
> Depends on the emission intensity of both ions. Worth a spoon test.
>
> jd
>
> >From: "Mark K. Spute" <mks@BIOMICRO.COM>
> >Reply-To: "Mark K. Spute" <mks@BIOMICRO.COM>
> >To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
> >Subject: Re: [AR] Strontium Nitrate - Sorbitol
> >Date: Thu, 16 Aug 2001 12:10:37 -0600
> >
> >I'm not a solids guy, but I do appreciate a good Zn/S micrograin launch
> >from time to time.  So what would SrNO3 do to a micrograin?  Would you
> >be able to see the red flame?  Would it make the propellant explosive?
> >
> >Pax wrote:
> > >
> > > Are you sure? I will have to try it with dry powders, but I don't think
> > > there are any chlorine donors in that formulation. Or is it not needed
> >in
> > > this case?
> > >
> > > Paxton
> > >
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
> > > To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
> > > Sent: Thursday, August 16, 2001 2:31 AM
> > > Subject: Re: [AR] Strontium Nitrate - Sorbitol
> > >
> > > > Adding some SrNO3 to your KNO3 'd not hurt: it offers a beautiful RED
> > > flame.
> > > > And is used for that in fireworks recipes.
> > > >
> > > > jd
> >
> >--
> >Mark K. Spute
> >Senior Research Engineer
> >BioMicro Systems Inc.
> >
> >KD7IWE,  RRS
> >
> >"It is difficult to say what is impossible, for the dream of yesterday
> >is the hope of today and the reality of tomorrow."
> >      Dr. Robert H. Goddard
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

--
Mark K. Spute
Senior Research Engineer
BioMicro Systems Inc.

KD7IWE,  RRS

"It is difficult to say what is impossible, for the dream of yesterday
is the hope of today and the reality of tomorrow."
     Dr. Robert H. Goddard

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 16909 invoked from network); 16 Aug 2001 20:47:42 -0000
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 16 Aug 2001 20:47:42 -0000
Received: (qmail 4318 invoked by uid 50005); 16 Aug 2001 20:46:24 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smpte.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 2.354875 secs); 16 Aug 2001 20:46:24 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 16 Aug 2001 20:46:20 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA10767; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 13:30:46 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 86634 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 20:30:44          +0000
Received: from femail6.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail6.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.0.95.86]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA10753 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 13:30:43 -0700
Received: from cc334751a ([65.13.214.65]) by femail6.sdc1.sfba.home.com          (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20 201-229-121-120-20010223) with SMTP id          <20010816203042.QVOW15121.femail6.sdc1.sfba.home.com@cc334751a>; Thu,          16 Aug 2001 13:30:42 -0700
References:  <F179aH8kvLMxLQnS5Ph0000b0fc@hotmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2462.0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <021701c12692$4f49c580$6601a8c0@home.com>
Date:         Thu, 16 Aug 2001 14:30:37 -0600
Reply-To: "Brian Kosko" <bkosko1@HOME.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Brian Kosko" <bkosko1@HOME.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Strontium Nitrate - Sorbitol
Comments: To: John Dom <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

As for AP composites; we've gotten a very rich red by using SrCO3 instead of
SrNO3. It was hard to light at first, but we added a bunch of fine AP and
that took care of things.

Brian

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 27231 invoked from network); 16 Aug 2001 20:50:34 -0000
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 16 Aug 2001 20:50:34 -0000
Received: (qmail 9546 invoked by uid 50005); 16 Aug 2001 20:49:16 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smpte.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 2.354133 secs); 16 Aug 2001 20:49:16 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 16 Aug 2001 20:49:11 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA10796; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 13:34:35 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 86641 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 20:34:34          +0000
Received: from femail1.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail1.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.0.95.81]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA10782 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 13:34:34 -0700
Received: from cc334751a ([65.13.214.65]) by femail1.sdc1.sfba.home.com          (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20 201-229-121-120-20010223) with SMTP id          <20010816203428.PXPB25967.femail1.sdc1.sfba.home.com@cc334751a>; Thu,          16 Aug 2001 13:34:28 -0700
References:  <a05100313b7a1c2b82fcd@[63.27.96.152]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2462.0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <022c01c12692$d5e7bf20$6601a8c0@home.com>
Date:         Thu, 16 Aug 2001 14:34:23 -0600
Reply-To: "Brian Kosko" <bkosko1@HOME.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Brian Kosko" <bkosko1@HOME.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] 6 x 96 inch star grain solid videos (enjoy)
Comments: To: Jerry Irvine <01rocket@GTE.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Jerry,

Awesome video Jerry! How'd you make the nozzle for that bugger? As I'm
destined to make a six inch motor this year I'd appreciate any details you'd
like to share.

Brian

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 14095 invoked from network); 16 Aug 2001 22:20:44 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 16 Aug 2001 22:20:44 -0000
Received: (qmail 22075 invoked by uid 50005); 16 Aug 2001 22:19:54 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smptf.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 2.533668 secs); 16 Aug 2001 22:19:55 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 16 Aug 2001 22:19:47 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA11198; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 15:17:41 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 86682 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 22:17:35          +0000
Received: from localhost (rcalkins@localhost) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with          ESMTP id PAA11184; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 15:17:34 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.LNX.4.10.10108161447540.8170-100000@itc.uci.edu>
Date:         Thu, 16 Aug 2001 15:17:34 -0700
Reply-To: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
Subject:      Re: [AR] potassium nitrate---Source
Comments: To: Waysie_Atkins@VANGUARD.COM
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <85256AAA.0065ABEE.00@vgi4mail.vanguard.com>

Hi Waysie,

> <dissolve mine in boiling water

> I'm curious now as to how you proceed from there.
> Do you evaporate the water out of the KNO3 before mixing with the fuel (and
> which fuel) or do you mix and cast while wet then allow the grains to dry?
I follow Mr. Yawn's work, which can be found online at
user.sfcc.net/jyawn/rcandy.htm

In this process, both potassium nitrate and sucrose are dissolved with
corn syrup in boiling water, then the water is evaporated out in the oven.
I like this method as it allows me to suspend a slurry of cellulose fibers
in the material, which provides a fiber-reinforced propellant with
different physical characteristics.

As the propellant is approaching a dry state, I lower the temp so I have
better control and for safety purposes.  Also for safety purposes, I use
pyrex casserole dishes that are much larger than the propellant being
mixed.  This gives me a slosh safety factor to prevent spilling hot
propellant in the oven.

I have made potassium nitrate/cellulose/corn syrup grains, but they showed
minor surface cracking at these sizes when drying.  They had a very nice
burn rate, though.


> And what size motor would be a reasonable starting place?

I have been building 3/4" PVC end-burners at this point, I recommend
something in this range for starting out.


> I have some 54mm Kosdon hardware I'd like to be able to make loads
> for, should I start out smaller and work up.
I'd recommend starting smaller and cheaper, that hardware is kind of
expensive.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 20894 invoked from network); 16 Aug 2001 22:30:11 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 16 Aug 2001 22:30:11 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 21750 invoked by uid 50005); 16 Aug 2001 22:30:37 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.15637 secs); 16 Aug 2001 22:30:37 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 16 Aug 2001 22:30:36 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA11273; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 15:26:51 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 86696 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 22:26:50          +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (f21.law9.hotmail.com [64.4.9.21]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA11259 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu,          16 Aug 2001 15:26:49 -0700
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Thu,          16 Aug 2001 15:26:19 -0700
Received: from 4.54.140.88 by lw9fd.law9.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Thu, 16 Aug          2001 22:26:19 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [4.54.140.88]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 16 Aug 2001 22:26:19.0417 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[78ABD890:01C126A2]
Message-ID:  <F21o69rPHuJIQSP9lk30000b881@hotmail.com>
Date:         Thu, 16 Aug 2001 17:26:19 -0500
Reply-To: "ben romashko" <pleaselaunchme@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "ben romashko" <pleaselaunchme@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Strontium Nitrate - Sorbitol
Comments: To: j_dom@hotmail.com
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Chlorate is on ixidizer.  A chlorine donor, in pyrotechnics (PVC, etc), are
used.  it brightens the flame color and depth, and is often times needed.
Not sure of the mechanics of it in an  engine, i suspect it would help the
flame color though.

--------------------
Ben Romashko
pleaslaunchme@hotmail.com
AIM- Attican123
--------------------

>
>It is the strontium metal ions which emit red light in the ignited mix. The
>usual chlorate (where you got your chlorine idea from I guess) present in
>such composition and a fuel (eg shellac) are for combustion. Chlorine has
>nothing to do with the red emission and its presence is not required. Just
>put some SrNO3 on a spoon and heat it in a flame...
>
>jd
>

_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 11503 invoked from network); 16 Aug 2001 22:35:25 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 16 Aug 2001 22:35:25 -0000
Received: (qmail 6024 invoked by uid 50005); 16 Aug 2001 22:35:20 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (. Clean. Processed in 0.154164 secs); 16 Aug 2001 22:35:20 -0000
X-Qmail-Scanner-Mail-From: owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU via smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net
X-Qmail-Scanner-Rcpt-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
X-Qmail-Scanner: 0.96 (No viruses found. Processed in 0.154164 secs)
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 16 Aug 2001 22:35:19 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA11333; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 15:32:47 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 86711 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 22:32:45          +0000
Received: from mta02.mail.mel.aone.net.au (mta02.mail.au.uu.net [203.2.192.82])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA11319 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 15:32:44 -0700
Received: from win2pk ([63.34.216.173]) by mta02.mail.mel.aone.net.au with SMTP          id <20010816223242.FQYU4158.mta02.mail.mel.aone.net.au@win2pk>; Fri,          17 Aug 2001 08:32:42 +1000
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
Importance: Normal
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <NEBBJIGOELOLIBCCPKDCIELKCBAA.geordi@c031.aone.net.au>
Date:         Fri, 17 Aug 2001 08:54:36 +1000
Reply-To: "Troy Prideaux" <geordi@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Troy Prideaux" <geordi@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] ERPS successfully runs H2O2 engine
Comments: To: Mark Kruep <mkruep@HOTMAIL.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <OE48YZkxOjmfCHJr1Wt00006b8f@hotmail.com>

>Furthermore, proving that ultra high purity HP isn't needed is a matter of
>opinion. People on this list build candy, AN, & AP solid motors everyday
>despite the fact that the technology is old and higher ISP propellants are
>available.

I build AP solids because they outperform anything that can be achieved by
amateurs using any other propulsion system ,simple really. I have achieved a
dIsp of over 400sec in motor sizes down as far as 29mm and higher in larger
sized motors (and that's with a straight conical style nozzle).

Please research your facts before making such statements.


Troy.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 11812 invoked from network); 16 Aug 2001 22:43:11 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 16 Aug 2001 22:43:11 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 13191 invoked by uid 50005); 16 Aug 2001 22:43:05 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (. Clean. Processed in 0.288067 secs); 16 Aug 2001 22:43:05 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
X-Qmail-Scanner-Mail-From: owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU via smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net
X-Qmail-Scanner-Rcpt-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
X-Qmail-Scanner: 0.96 (No viruses found. Processed in 0.288067 secs)
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 16 Aug 2001 22:43:05 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA11414; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 15:40:47 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 86734 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 22:40:45          +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (f195.law9.hotmail.com [64.4.9.195]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA11400 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu,          16 Aug 2001 15:40:45 -0700
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Thu,          16 Aug 2001 15:40:15 -0700
Received: from 4.54.140.88 by lw9fd.law9.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Thu, 16 Aug          2001 22:40:14 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [4.54.140.88]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 16 Aug 2001 22:40:15.0237 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[6ADBDB50:01C126A4]
Message-ID:  <F195PiZxOASWTgZu6WY0000b812@hotmail.com>
Date:         Thu, 16 Aug 2001 17:40:14 -0500
Reply-To: "ben romashko" <pleaselaunchme@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "ben romashko" <pleaselaunchme@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Strontium Nitrate - Sorbitol
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Excuse the spelling, school started yesterday, just did a bunch of English
work, and my brain is fried = )



--------------------
Ben Romashko
pleaslaunchme@hotmail.com
AIM- Attican123
--------------------



>From: ben romashko <pleaselaunchme@HOTMAIL.COM>
>Reply-To: ben romashko <pleaselaunchme@HOTMAIL.COM>
>To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
>Subject: Re: [AR] Strontium Nitrate - Sorbitol
>Date: Thu, 16 Aug 2001 17:26:19 -0500
>
>Chlorate is on ixidizer.  A chlorine donor, in pyrotechnics (PVC, etc), are
>used.  it brightens the flame color and depth, and is often times needed.
>Not sure of the mechanics of it in an  engine, i suspect it would help the
>flame color though.
>
>--------------------
>Ben Romashko
>pleaslaunchme@hotmail.com
>AIM- Attican123
>--------------------
>
>>
>>It is the strontium metal ions which emit red light in the ignited mix.
>>The
>>usual chlorate (where you got your chlorine idea from I guess) present in
>>such composition and a fuel (eg shellac) are for combustion. Chlorine has
>>nothing to do with the red emission and its presence is not required. Just
>>put some SrNO3 on a spoon and heat it in a flame...
>>
>>jd
>>
>
>_________________________________________________________________
>Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp


_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 17610 invoked from network); 16 Aug 2001 22:52:52 -0000
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 16 Aug 2001 22:52:52 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 6175 invoked by uid 50005); 16 Aug 2001 22:52:02 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smptf.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.498387 secs); 16 Aug 2001 22:52:02 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 16 Aug 2001 22:52:01 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA11490; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 15:49:55 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 86753 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 22:49:49          +0000
Received: from imo-r02.mx.aol.com (imo-r02.mx.aol.com [152.163.225.98]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA11476 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 15:49:48 -0700
Received: from Ricanakk@aol.com by imo-r02.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v31_r1.3.) id          w.103.7a779d0 (4353) for <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Thu, 16 Aug 2001          18:49:42 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: AOL 5.0 for Windows sub 108
Message-ID:  <103.7a779d0.28ada806@aol.com>
Date:         Thu, 16 Aug 2001 18:49:42 EDT
Reply-To: <Ricanakk@AOL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <Ricanakk@AOL.COM>
Subject:      [AR] Case bonding <- Re [AR] AP/Dextrose prop...
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

For case bonded motors, tensile strength of the propellant is not particulary
significant, IF the case is perfectly rigid. Rather, compressive strength and
shear strength are. If the grain was bonded to the case (and not supported at
the base), and the case was very rigid, the propellant would see :
-Compressive stress from pressurization
-Shear stress from its inertia under acceleration

If the case bonded grain was also supported at the base, then it gets more
complicated. The grain would then also see bearing  stress at the base,
compressive stress within the grain from inertia, but in a different
direction than the compressive stress from pressurization, and some shear
stress as the case bonding shares some of the inertial loading. Basically
this becomes a 3-D stress situation, and principal or Von Mises stress
becomes the criterion to determine whether or not the grain will fracture.

But what it boils down to is that the combined stresses in either scenario
will be quite low, due to the relatively large grain areas that the shear and
compressive forces act over. Combine this with the fact that even brittle
materials are usually strong in shear and compression (e.g. concrete), its
unlikely that a case bonded grain will fail from anything other than tensile
stresses resulting from a case that is insufficiently rigid.

Hope this explanation helps somewhat.

Richard Nakka

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 25110 invoked from network); 16 Aug 2001 22:54:57 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 16 Aug 2001 22:54:57 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 24026 invoked by uid 50005); 16 Aug 2001 22:54:51 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (. Clean. Processed in 0.273139 secs); 16 Aug 2001 22:54:51 -0000
X-Qmail-Scanner-Mail-From: owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU via smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net
X-Qmail-Scanner-Rcpt-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
X-Qmail-Scanner: 0.96 (No viruses found. Processed in 0.273139 secs)
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 16 Aug 2001 22:54:50 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA11536; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 15:52:50 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 86764 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 22:52:48          +0000
Received: from cisco.com (cypher.cisco.com [171.69.11.18]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA11522 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu,          16 Aug 2001 15:52:48 -0700
Received: (from billw@localhost) by cisco.com (8.8.8/2.6/Cisco List          Logging/8.8.8) id PAA24014; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 15:52:14 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID:  <CMM.0.90.4.998002333.billw@cypher>
Date:         Thu, 16 Aug 2001 15:52:13 PDT
Reply-To: "Bill Westfield" <billw@cisco.com>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "William Chops Westfield" <billw@cisco.com>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Strontium Nitrate - Sorbitol
Comments: To: ben romashko <pleaselaunchme@HOTMAIL.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  Your message of Thu, 16 Aug 2001 17:26:19 -0500

    Chlorate is on ixidizer.  A chlorine donor, in pyrotechnics (PVC,
    etc), are used.  it brightens the flame color and depth, and is
    often times needed.  Not sure of the mechanics of it in an
    engine, i suspect it would help the flame color though.


color emissions of pyrotechnic compositions are seldom caused by the
metallic elements themselves.  Usually, it is assorted gasseous ionic
combustion products (mOH, mCl, etc) that emit colors.  Solid combustion
products emit black body raditation ("white") that interfere with colors.

"Chlorine donors" in pyrotechnics can include chlorine containing Oxidizers
(NH4ClO4, KClO3), Fuels (Parlon, PVC, Saran), or additives (C6Cl6, C2Cl6)
The chlorine donor performs at least two distinct functions.  First, it can
result mCl- emitters having different (better) spectral emissions than the
mOH- ions (BaOH- is pretty crappy, while BaCl- emits a nice green.)
Second, it can help prevent the formation of solid refractory oxides that
wash out the colors with white.  Notably, Mg burning in a excess of
chloring forms MgCl- (emits in the infrared!) rather than MgO.

IIRC, Strontium is pretty "easy" - both SrCl- and SrOH- emit "red-ish"
light, so the addition of a chlorine donner may "improve" things but is not
necessary.  Your typical road flare is mostly Sr(NO3)2 with nothing much in
the way of chlorine added.  A fireworks enthusiast might decry it as a
washed-out pinkish red-wannabe, but it looks pretty red to the rest of us.

Copper blues are the most difficult - CuOH and some other likely ionic
species aren't blue at all, and the "good" CuCl- ions aren't stable at
high temperatures...

See Conkling "Chemistry of Pyrotechnics" and Shimizu "Fireworks, the Art,
Science, and Technique."

BillW


From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 26618 invoked from network); 16 Aug 2001 23:10:52 -0000
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 16 Aug 2001 23:10:52 -0000
Received: (qmail 5104 invoked by uid 50005); 16 Aug 2001 23:09:34 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smpte.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.154515 secs); 16 Aug 2001 23:09:34 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 16 Aug 2001 23:09:33 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA11617; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 16:04:33 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 86781 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 23:04:30          +0000
Received: from mail3.nc.rr.com (fe3.southeast.rr.com [24.93.67.50]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA11603 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 16:04:30 -0700
Received: from freddy ([24.25.5.88]) by mail3.nc.rr.com  with Microsoft          SMTPSVC(5.5.1877.687.68); Thu, 16 Aug 2001 19:04:28 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <NBEJKDFBFOEFALBMBCDPOENKCCAA.jtaylor@nc.rr.com>
Date:         Thu, 16 Aug 2001 19:07:13 -0400
Reply-To: "Jeff Taylor" <jtaylor@NC.RR.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jeff Taylor" <jtaylor@NC.RR.COM>
Subject:      [AR] AP solid motor performance  [Was:  [AR] ERPS successfully              runs              H2O2 engine]
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <NEBBJIGOELOLIBCCPKDCIELKCBAA.geordi@c031.aone.net.au>

>
>I build AP solids because they outperform anything that can be achieved by
>amateurs using any other propulsion system ,simple really. I have
>achieved a
>dIsp of over 400sec in motor sizes down as far as 29mm and higher in larger
>sized motors (and that's with a straight conical style nozzle).
>
>Please research your facts before making such statements.
>
>
>Troy.



Troy, you typed "dIsp" above, is that Isp + a typo, or is "dIsp" a different
term?  From the number 400, I'm guessing that it must be a different term.
Personally, I haven't been able to get anything with an Isp of over about
220 or maybe 230-sec from my feeble attempts at propellant making.

Anyone care to comment on the theoretical maximum Isp for AP based
propellants?

- Jeff Taylor

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 9509 invoked from network); 16 Aug 2001 23:21:51 -0000
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 16 Aug 2001 23:21:51 -0000
Received: (qmail 15372 invoked by uid 50005); 16 Aug 2001 23:21:02 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smptf.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 1.583954 secs); 16 Aug 2001 23:21:02 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 16 Aug 2001 23:20:59 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA11706; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 16:18:57 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 86796 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 23:18:44          +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (oe54.law12.hotmail.com [64.4.18.47]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA11692 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu,          16 Aug 2001 16:18:44 -0700
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Thu,          16 Aug 2001 16:18:13 -0700
X-Originating-IP: [24.29.188.254]
References: <NEBBJIGOELOLIBCCPKDCIELKCBAA.geordi@c031.aone.net.au>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 16 Aug 2001 23:18:13.0783 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[B8FA6270:01C126A9]
Message-ID:  <OE54Vs1aLxGYiH1ZRJ60000d739@hotmail.com>
Date:         Thu, 16 Aug 2001 18:19:10 -0500
Reply-To: "Mark Kruep" <mkruep@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Mark Kruep" <mkruep@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] ERPS successfully runs H2O2 engine
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Most people build solid motors because they are attainable for amateurs. I
wasn't saying it was a bad thing to use them. Quite the contrary. I know
that I, as well as many people who read this list I'm sure, either don't
have the skills, at this time anyway (and please don't take that as a
negative thing towards anyone), or the funds to make any kind of liquid
rocket motor. Solid motors are much safer and economical for the
experimenter. I didn't claim anything other than that solid motor technology
is old, which it is, and that there are propellants available with higher
Isp, which there are.

The point I was trying to make was that successfully making a reusable
liquid rocket motor, of any Isp rating, is an accomplishment all on it's own
and a little respect should be payed to those who have actually done it.
Candy doesn't match AP for Isp, but that does not mean it's easy to do or
that I can pass judgement after reading Richard Nakka's whole web site while
still not having made a single candy motor. What am I supposed to research?
Are you suggesting that solid motor tech. as used in this hobby isn't quite
old and that higher specific impulse propellants don't exist? I don't mean
for this email to come across as a flame, but I'm confused as to what
incorrect data I supplied.?

Mark



----- Original Message -----
From: "Troy Prideaux" <geordi@c031.aone.net.au>
To: "Mark Kruep" <mkruep@HOTMAIL.COM>; <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Thursday, August 16, 2001 5:54 PM
Subject: RE: [AR] ERPS successfully runs H2O2 engine


>
> >Furthermore, proving that ultra high purity HP isn't needed is a matter
of
> >opinion. People on this list build candy, AN, & AP solid motors everyday
> >despite the fact that the technology is old and higher ISP propellants
are
> >available.
>
> I build AP solids because they outperform anything that can be achieved by
> amateurs using any other propulsion system ,simple really. I have achieved
a
> dIsp of over 400sec in motor sizes down as far as 29mm and higher in
larger
> sized motors (and that's with a straight conical style nozzle).
>
> Please research your facts before making such statements.
>
>
> Troy.
>
>
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 12749 invoked from network); 16 Aug 2001 23:22:40 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 16 Aug 2001 23:22:40 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 22515 invoked by uid 50005); 16 Aug 2001 23:23:06 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.144283 secs); 16 Aug 2001 23:23:06 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 16 Aug 2001 23:23:06 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA11736; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 16:20:28 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 86803 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 23:20:27          +0000
Received: from smtp01.roc.gblx.net (smtp01.roc.gblx.net [209.130.222.196]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA11713 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 16:19:16 -0700
Received: (from daemon@localhost) by smtp01.roc.gblx.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id          TAA53562 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 19:17:53 -0400
Received: from 64-208-236-245.nas1.TBR.gblx.net(64.208.236.245),          claiming to be "frontiernet.net" via SMTP by smtp01.roc.gblx.net,          id smtpdu6AEia; Thu Aug 16 19:17:47 2001
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.74 [en] (Win98; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: Conversation <20010816021743.20209.cpmta@c012.sfo.cp.net> with last            message <021101c1260e$78903980$14464a42@socal.rr.com>            <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>            <005c01c1262d$4dd0d500$0100a8c0@prdise1.nm.home.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B7C55F9.37377A4E@frontiernet.net>
Date:         Thu, 16 Aug 2001 19:23:37 -0400
Reply-To: <tbinford@frontiernet.net>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Tom Binford" <tbinford@frontiernet.net>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Cutting out a C-slot.
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Pax wrote:
>
> Yeah that would be one of them. Plus, if you want to avoid erosive burning
> you would have to make the core large as a regular BATE right? Well, I want
> the propellant loadings and burn time of a c-slot. Finocyl would be fun, but
> I don't have the mandrels for it. Brian K might be getting some made pretty
> soon though. Yummy propellant loadings and lots of thrust!

I've gone to D grains. Even a slightly longer burn and the heat is a
little less concentrated on one spot of the liner. I use AP based
propellants though.

Tom


>
> What kind of experience have you all had with large C-slots? Are they worth
> the effort? I know extra insulation would be needed, but I was thinking
> about a 4" PVC C-slot motor. I should probably see if I can get a regular
> BATES to not fail though. It would be a fun $20 failure, and a even more fun
> $20 success.
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 1112 invoked from network); 16 Aug 2001 23:27:24 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 16 Aug 2001 23:27:24 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 24351 invoked by uid 50005); 16 Aug 2001 23:26:34 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smptf.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.262007 secs); 16 Aug 2001 23:26:34 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 16 Aug 2001 23:26:33 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA11799; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 16:25:21 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 86818 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 23:25:19          +0000
Received: from smtp004.mailsrvcs.net (smtp004pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.183])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA11785 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 16:25:18 -0700
Received: from [63.27.96.152] (1Cust138.tnt2.san-bernardino.ca.da.uu.net          [63.27.97.138]) by smtp004.mailsrvcs.net  with ESMTP for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; id f7GNOkL19018 Thu, 16 Aug 2001 18:24:46          -0500 (CDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: GTE/01rocket@mail.gte.net
References: <NEBBJIGOELOLIBCCPKDCIELKCBAA.geordi@c031.aone.net.au>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <a05100315b7a206405099@[63.27.96.152]>
Date:         Thu, 16 Aug 2001 16:24:55 -0700
Reply-To: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] ERPS successfully runs H2O2 engine
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <NEBBJIGOELOLIBCCPKDCIELKCBAA.geordi@c031.aone.net.au>

>I build AP solids because they outperform anything that can be achieved by
>amateurs using any other propulsion system ,simple really. I have achieved a
>dIsp of over 400sec in motor sizes down as far as 29mm and higher in larger
>sized motors (and that's with a straight conical style nozzle).


I understand that disp can be higher at sea level than isp, but I am
curious if this achievement is documented in any way with say a pep
run and/or a time-thrust trace or any tangible test results.

I think it would be a welcome citation on the list.

Jerry

>
>Please research your facts before making such statements.
>
>
>Troy.


--
Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
Opinion, the whole thing.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 13709 invoked from network); 16 Aug 2001 23:38:26 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 16 Aug 2001 23:38:26 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 15346 invoked by uid 50005); 16 Aug 2001 23:38:51 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 1.993587 secs); 16 Aug 2001 23:38:51 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 16 Aug 2001 23:38:46 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA11873; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 16:32:23 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 86836 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 23:32:22          +0000
Received: from smtp007.mailsrvcs.net (smtp007pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.186])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA11856 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 16:31:57 -0700
Received: from [63.27.96.152] (1Cust138.tnt2.san-bernardino.ca.da.uu.net          [63.27.97.138]) by smtp007.mailsrvcs.net  with ESMTP for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; id f7GNVKW16148 Thu, 16 Aug 2001 18:31:21          -0500 (CDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: GTE/01rocket@mail.gte.net
References: <NEBBJIGOELOLIBCCPKDCIELKCBAA.geordi@c031.aone.net.au>            <OE54Vs1aLxGYiH1ZRJ60000d739@hotmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <a05100317b7a2079ba23d@[63.27.96.152]>
Date:         Thu, 16 Aug 2001 16:31:31 -0700
Reply-To: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] ERPS successfully runs H2O2 engine
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <OE54Vs1aLxGYiH1ZRJ60000d739@hotmail.com>

>Mark:




>The point I was trying to make was that successfully making a reusable
>liquid rocket motor, of any Isp rating, is an accomplishment all on it's own
>and a little respect should be payed to those who have actually done it.


I fully agree.  I tell customers to budget more than 20 times for R&D
of a liquid over a solid.  I am underestimating.


>Candy doesn't match AP for Isp, but that does not mean it's easy to do or


I am a candy dis-advocate.


>that I can pass judgement after reading Richard Nakka's whole web site while
>still not having made a single candy motor. What am I supposed to research?
>Are you suggesting that solid motor tech. as used in this hobby isn't quite
>old and that higher specific impulse propellants don't exist? I don't mean
>for this email to come across as a flame, but I'm confused as to what
>incorrect data I supplied.?


I am one of the few people on this list with a healthy supply of H2O2
in his shop of very high purity and a place to use it.

Solids are simple, and very rarely have I seen an amateur liquid as
high performance as even a crude solid.

Their main benefit seems to be legal compliance issues.

Jerry

>
>Mark
>
>
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Troy Prideaux" <geordi@c031.aone.net.au>
>To: "Mark Kruep" <mkruep@HOTMAIL.COM>; <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
>Sent: Thursday, August 16, 2001 5:54 PM
>Subject: RE: [AR] ERPS successfully runs H2O2 engine
>
>
>>
>>  >Furthermore, proving that ultra high purity HP isn't needed is a matter
>of
>>  >opinion. People on this list build candy, AN, & AP solid motors everyday
>>  >despite the fact that the technology is old and higher ISP propellants
>are
>>  >available.
>>
>>  I build AP solids because they outperform anything that can be achieved by
>>  amateurs using any other propulsion system ,simple really. I have achieved
>a
>>  dIsp of over 400sec in motor sizes down as far as 29mm and higher in
>larger
>>  sized motors (and that's with a straight conical style nozzle).
>  >
>  > Please research your facts before making such statements.
>  >
>  >
>  > Troy.
>  >
>  >
>  >


--
Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
Opinion, the whole thing.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 14721 invoked from network); 16 Aug 2001 23:38:43 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 16 Aug 2001 23:38:43 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 11574 invoked by uid 50005); 16 Aug 2001 23:37:25 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smpte.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.187998 secs); 16 Aug 2001 23:37:25 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 16 Aug 2001 23:37:24 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA11837; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 16:29:37 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 86829 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 23:28:16          +0000
Received: from smtp008.mailsrvcs.net (smtp008pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.187])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA11822 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 16:28:15 -0700
Received: from [63.27.96.152] (1Cust138.tnt2.san-bernardino.ca.da.uu.net          [63.27.97.138]) by smtp008.mailsrvcs.net  with ESMTP for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; id f7GNRhC09133 Thu, 16 Aug 2001 18:27:43          -0500 (CDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: GTE/01rocket@mail.gte.net
References: <NBEJKDFBFOEFALBMBCDPOENKCCAA.jtaylor@nc.rr.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <a05100316b7a207138212@[63.27.96.152]>
Date:         Thu, 16 Aug 2001 16:27:53 -0700
Reply-To: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] AP solid motor performance  [Was:  [AR] ERPS successfully              runs               H2O2 engine]
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <NBEJKDFBFOEFALBMBCDPOENKCCAA.jtaylor@nc.rr.com>

>  >
>>I build AP solids because they outperform anything that can be achieved by
>>amateurs using any other propulsion system ,simple really. I have
>>achieved a
>>dIsp of over 400sec in motor sizes down as far as 29mm and higher in larger
>>sized motors (and that's with a straight conical style nozzle).
>>
>>Please research your facts before making such statements.
>>
>>
>>Troy.
>
>
>
>Troy, you typed "dIsp" above, is that Isp + a typo, or is "dIsp" a different


In theory he is referring to density isp.


>term?  From the number 400, I'm guessing that it must be a different term.
>Personally, I haven't been able to get anything with an Isp of over about
>220 or maybe 230-sec from my feeble attempts at propellant making.


I achieved isp 237 in 1979 or so with APCP with about 15% binder and
very optimized loading.  Approx 8% Al.

I am still impressed many years later.

I have not calculated the Disp.

Jerry

>
>Anyone care to comment on the theoretical maximum Isp for AP based
>propellants?
>
>- Jeff Taylor


--
Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
Opinion, the whole thing.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 8711 invoked from network); 16 Aug 2001 23:45:00 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 16 Aug 2001 23:45:00 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 21735 invoked by uid 50005); 16 Aug 2001 23:43:42 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smpte.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.211234 secs); 16 Aug 2001 23:43:42 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 16 Aug 2001 23:43:42 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA11960; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 16:42:47 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 86855 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 23:42:41          +0000
Received: from adobe.com (smtp-relay-2.adobe.com [192.150.11.2]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA11945 for <arOCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu,          16 Aug 2001 16:42:40 -0700
Received: from inner-relay-1.corp.adobe.com ([153.32.1.51]) by adobe.com          (1.0.0/8.11.4) with ESMTP id f7GNfnh10930 for <arOCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>;          Thu, 16 Aug 2001 16:41:49 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mailsj-v1.corp.adobe.com (mailsj-dev.corp.adobe.com          [153.32.1.192]) by inner-relay-1.corp.adobe.com (8.11.4/8.11.4) with          ESMTP id f7GNgD215774 for <arOCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 16 Aug 2001          16:42:14 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from sronald.earthlink.net ([153.32.63.111]) by          mailsj-v1.corp.adobe.com (Netscape Messaging Server 4.15 v1 Jul 11          2001 16:32:57) with ESMTP id GI6PTY00.PA6; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 16:41:58          -0700
X-Sender: forkbomb@mail.earthlink.net
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <5.1.0.14.0.20010816142422.0275b330@mail.earthlink.net>
Date:         Thu, 16 Aug 2001 16:44:34 -0700
Reply-To: <forkbomb@EARTHLINK.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <forkbomb@EARTHLINK.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] ERPS successfully runs H2O2 engine
Comments: To: John Dom <j_dom@hotmail.com>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <F108jgJKVApwOLZCHus00001d4a@hotmail.com>

At 07:59 PM 8/16/01 +0000, John Dom wrote:
>>Sparging will get you ~85% peroxide, starting from 50% feedstock...It's
>>also pretty easy.
>
>Yep, combining heat and N2 stripping if this is what is meant, it goes
>even faster. A 30 % HP reduced to 1/4 of its volume: 80-85 %. Reduced to
>1/5 original volume: 90-92 %. Did this many times myself, in the lab,
>under a fume cupboard.


         Sparging is just bubbling air (preferably warm) through the
peroxide. It preferentially strips out volatile impurities and water.
However, it concentrates non-volatile impurities, which includes
stabilizers, so start with unstabilized electronics grade. You can do it in
any room with adequate ventilation -- no fume cupboard is necessary.

>>The H2O2 system is useful because it does all of the following things:
>>
>>1) builds experience and capability for the ERPS team
>>2) provides relatively cheap, safe, and reliable propulsion for flights
>>testing other systems -- guidance, recovery, etc.
>>3) provides components for hybrid and bi-prop motors.
>
>For such, simple off the shelve rocket motors can be used (except 3).


         I would be interested to hear about simple, off-the-shelf liquid
rocket motors of any kind. Where can I get them?

         -p

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 13495 invoked from network); 16 Aug 2001 23:46:13 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 16 Aug 2001 23:46:13 -0000
Received: (qmail 14960 invoked by uid 50005); 16 Aug 2001 23:46:07 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (. Clean. Processed in 0.768184 secs); 16 Aug 2001 23:46:07 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
X-Qmail-Scanner-Mail-From: owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU via smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net
X-Qmail-Scanner-Rcpt-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
X-Qmail-Scanner: 0.96 (No viruses found. Processed in 0.768184 secs)
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 16 Aug 2001 23:46:05 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA11984; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 16:44:10 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 86862 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 23:44:08          +0000
Received: from smtp09.phx.gblx.net (smtp09.phx.gblx.net [64.211.219.58]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA11965 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 16:42:55 -0700
Received: (from daemon@localhost) by smtp09.phx.gblx.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id          QAA30482 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 16:42:52 -0700
Received: from 64-208-236-245.nas1.TBR.gblx.net(64.208.236.245),          claiming to be "frontiernet.net" via SMTP by smtp09.phx.gblx.net,          id smtpdkDjDia; Thu Aug 16 16:42:44 2001
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.74 [en] (Win98; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <NEBBJIGOELOLIBCCPKDCIELKCBAA.geordi@c031.aone.net.au>            <a05100315b7a206405099@[63.27.96.152]>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B7C5B82.37E31023@frontiernet.net>
Date:         Thu, 16 Aug 2001 19:47:14 -0400
Reply-To: <tbinford@frontiernet.net>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Tom Binford" <tbinford@frontiernet.net>
Subject:      Re: [AR] ERPS successfully runs H2O2 engine
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Jerry Irvine wrote:
>
> >I build AP solids because they outperform anything that can be achieved by
> >amateurs using any other propulsion system ,simple really. I have achieved a
> >dIsp of over 400sec in motor sizes down as far as 29mm and higher in larger
> >sized motors (and that's with a straight conical style nozzle).
>
> I understand that disp can be higher at sea level than isp, but I am
> curious if this achievement is documented in any way with say a pep
> run and/or a time-thrust trace or any tangible test results.

I believe he speaking of density Isp here, Isp * propellant density
(g/cc).

Tom

>
> I think it would be a welcome citation on the list.
>
> Jerry
>
> >
> >Please research your facts before making such statements.
> >
> >
> >Troy.
>
> --
> Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
> Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
> Opinion, the whole thing.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 592 invoked from network); 16 Aug 2001 23:58:02 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 16 Aug 2001 23:58:02 -0000
Received: (qmail 27379 invoked by uid 50005); 16 Aug 2001 23:57:56 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (. Clean. Processed in 0.179504 secs); 16 Aug 2001 23:57:56 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
X-Qmail-Scanner-Mail-From: owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU via smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net
X-Qmail-Scanner-Rcpt-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
X-Qmail-Scanner: 0.96 (No viruses found. Processed in 0.179504 secs)
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 16 Aug 2001 23:57:56 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA12083; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 16:53:39 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 86889 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 23:53:33          +0000
Received: from mail.aros.net (mail.aros.net [207.173.16.20]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA12069 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu,          16 Aug 2001 16:53:32 -0700
Received: from biomicro.com ([208.187.122.40]) by mail.aros.net (8.11.3/8.9.3)          with ESMTP id f7GNrWj60836 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 16 Aug          2001 17:53:32 -0600 (MDT)
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.77 [en] (Win98; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <NEBBJIGOELOLIBCCPKDCIELKCBAA.geordi@c031.aone.net.au>            <OE54Vs1aLxGYiH1ZRJ60000d739@hotmail.com>            <a05100317b7a2079ba23d@[63.27.96.152]>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B7C5D46.801F1472@biomicro.com>
Date:         Thu, 16 Aug 2001 17:54:46 -0600
Reply-To: "Mark K. Spute" <mks@BIOMICRO.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Mark K. Spute" <mks@BIOMICRO.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] ERPS successfully runs H2O2 engine
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Jerry Irvine wrote:
>
> >Mark:
>
> >The point I was trying to make was that successfully making a reusable
> >liquid rocket motor, of any Isp rating, is an accomplishment all on it's own
> >and a little respect should be payed to those who have actually done it.
>
> I fully agree.  I tell customers to budget more than 20 times for R&D
> of a liquid over a solid.  I am underestimating.

I'd have to agree there.  I have spent years and thousands of dollars
designing and building a liquid propellant rocket and it still hasn't
flown.  Yet.



> >Candy doesn't match AP for Isp, but that does not mean it's easy to do or
>
> I am a candy dis-advocate.
>
> >that I can pass judgement after reading Richard Nakka's whole web site while
> >still not having made a single candy motor. What am I supposed to research?
> >Are you suggesting that solid motor tech. as used in this hobby isn't quite
> >old and that higher specific impulse propellants don't exist? I don't mean
> >for this email to come across as a flame, but I'm confused as to what
> >incorrect data I supplied.?
>
> I am one of the few people on this list with a healthy supply of H2O2
> in his shop of very high purity and a place to use it.
>
> Solids are simple, and very rarely have I seen an amateur liquid as
> high performance as even a crude solid.
>
> Their main benefit seems to be legal compliance issues.

To each his own opinion.  JMHO, I think that liquids are much safer than
solids.  Espescially in manned aplications.  Most readers on the list
are not working towards manned rockets, but I'd like to think that
someday, maybe, I could build one big enough.  Now all I need is a fat
bank to knock over and I'll get started on it.
>
> Jerry

--
Mark K. Spute
Senior Research Engineer
BioMicro Systems Inc.

KD7IWE,  RRS

"It is difficult to say what is impossible, for the dream of yesterday
is the hope of today and the reality of tomorrow."
     Dr. Robert H. Goddard

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 17437 invoked from network); 17 Aug 2001 00:17:20 -0000
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 17 Aug 2001 00:17:20 -0000
Received: (qmail 11203 invoked by uid 50005); 17 Aug 2001 00:16:01 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smpte.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 1.623614 secs); 17 Aug 2001 00:16:01 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 17 Aug 2001 00:15:57 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA12187; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 17:15:25 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 86906 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 00:15:22          +0000
Received: from mta02.mail.mel.aone.net.au (mta02.mail.au.uu.net [203.2.192.82])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA12173 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 17:15:22 -0700
Received: from win2pk ([63.60.247.35]) by mta02.mail.mel.aone.net.au with SMTP          id <20010817001518.HLCJ4158.mta02.mail.mel.aone.net.au@win2pk>; Fri,          17 Aug 2001 10:15:18 +1000
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <NEBBJIGOELOLIBCCPKDCKELMCBAA.geordi@c031.aone.net.au>
Date:         Fri, 17 Aug 2001 10:37:13 +1000
Reply-To: "Troy Prideaux" <geordi@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Troy Prideaux" <geordi@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] ERPS successfully runs H2O2 engine
Comments: To: Mark Kruep <mkruep@HOTMAIL.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <OE54Vs1aLxGYiH1ZRJ60000d739@hotmail.com>

>-----Original Message-----
>From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@itc.uci.edu]On
>Behalf Of Mark Kruep
>Sent: Friday, 17 August 2001 9:19 AM
>To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
>Subject: Re: [AR] ERPS successfully runs H2O2 engine
>
>
>Most people build solid motors because they are attainable for amateurs. I
>wasn't saying it was a bad thing to use them. Quite the contrary. I know
>that I, as well as many people who read this list I'm sure, either don't
>have the skills, at this time anyway (and please don't take that as a
>negative thing towards anyone), or the funds to make any kind of liquid
>rocket motor. Solid motors are much safer and economical for the
>experimenter. I didn't claim anything other than that solid motor
>technology
>is old, which it is, and that there are propellants available with higher
>Isp, which there are.
>
>The point I was trying to make was that successfully making a reusable
>liquid rocket motor, of any Isp rating, is an accomplishment all
>on it's own
>and a little respect should be payed to those who have actually done it.
>Candy doesn't match AP for Isp, but that does not mean it's easy to do or
>that I can pass judgement after reading Richard Nakka's whole web
>site while
>still not having made a single candy motor. What am I supposed to research?
>Are you suggesting that solid motor tech. as used in this hobby isn't quite
>old and that higher specific impulse propellants don't exist? I don't mean
>for this email to come across as a flame, but I'm confused as to what
>incorrect data I supplied.?
>

Simple, much of the bi-prop & H2O2 technology and even Hybrid technology you
refer to is older than APCP technology. (2) APCP will outperform most if not
all the other available technologies available to the amateur or
professional for that matter when densities are taken into account ie.
thrust per unit volume.

(On my way to Sydney - to fly rockets of course - right now and probably
won't be able to reply to any other posts until next week)

Seeya,

Troy.

>Mark
>
>
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Troy Prideaux" <geordi@c031.aone.net.au>
>To: "Mark Kruep" <mkruep@HOTMAIL.COM>; <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
>Sent: Thursday, August 16, 2001 5:54 PM
>Subject: RE: [AR] ERPS successfully runs H2O2 engine
>
>
>>
>> >Furthermore, proving that ultra high purity HP isn't needed is a matter
>of
>> >opinion. People on this list build candy, AN, & AP solid motors everyday
>> >despite the fact that the technology is old and higher ISP propellants
>are
>> >available.
>>
>> I build AP solids because they outperform anything that can be
>achieved by
>> amateurs using any other propulsion system ,simple really. I
>have achieved
>a
>> dIsp of over 400sec in motor sizes down as far as 29mm and higher in
>larger
>> sized motors (and that's with a straight conical style nozzle).
>>
>> Please research your facts before making such statements.
>>
>>
>> Troy.
>>
>>
>>
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 6589 invoked from network); 17 Aug 2001 00:37:20 -0000
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 17 Aug 2001 00:37:20 -0000
Received: (qmail 8028 invoked by uid 50005); 17 Aug 2001 00:36:01 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smpte.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.18676 secs); 17 Aug 2001 00:36:01 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 17 Aug 2001 00:36:01 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA12287; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 17:32:52 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 86926 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 00:32:42          +0000
Received: from femail1.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail1.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.0.95.81]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA12272 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 17:32:41 -0700
Received: from cc334751a ([65.13.214.65]) by femail1.sdc1.sfba.home.com          (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20 201-229-121-120-20010223) with SMTP id          <20010817003236.WLHU25967.femail1.sdc1.sfba.home.com@cc334751a>; Thu,          16 Aug 2001 17:32:36 -0700
References:  <NEBBJIGOELOLIBCCPKDCKELMCBAA.geordi@c031.aone.net.au>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2462.0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <029901c126b4$19974f80$6601a8c0@home.com>
Date:         Thu, 16 Aug 2001 18:32:30 -0600
Reply-To: "Brian Kosko" <bkosko1@HOME.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Brian Kosko" <bkosko1@HOME.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] ERPS successfully runs H2O2 engine
Comments: To: Troy Prideaux <geordi@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Watch out you liquid guys! Next thing you know, you'll hear mutterings of
liquid motors just being inelegant plumbing. Hope it doesn't come to that
:-).

Brian  (A terminally solid guy)

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 12020 invoked from network); 17 Aug 2001 01:00:25 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 17 Aug 2001 01:00:25 -0000
Received: (qmail 28555 invoked by uid 50005); 17 Aug 2001 01:00:18 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (. Clean. Processed in 0.291365 secs); 17 Aug 2001 01:00:18 -0000
X-Qmail-Scanner-Mail-From: owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU via smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net
X-Qmail-Scanner-Rcpt-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
X-Qmail-Scanner: 0.96 (No viruses found. Processed in 0.291365 secs)
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 17 Aug 2001 01:00:17 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA12423; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 17:58:05 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 86947 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 00:58:03          +0000
Received: from overnight.request.net (overnight.request.net [207.150.192.30])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA12409 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 17:58:02 -0700
Received: from furina.request.net ([207.150.192.11]) by overnight.request.net          with ESMTP id <136102-21814>; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 19:52:32 -0400
Received: from JuleeD ([24.160.114.184]) by furina.request.net with SMTP id          <157730649-13918274>; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 20:48:08 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0B68_01C56B69.49761260"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2314.1300
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <007201c126b6$d7ae1ce0$b872a018@petschoice.com>
Date:         Thu, 16 Aug 2001 19:52:07 -0500
Reply-To: "Phil Bellmore" <pfish@CATFISHDESIGNS.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Phil Bellmore" <pfish@CATFISHDESIGNS.COM>
Subject:      [AR] Help with recovery
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0B68_01C56B69.49761260
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

I need some assistance in altimeter based recovery.  Specifically, =
details regarding altimeter recommendations, ejection charges, airframe =
construction to support drogue and main, etc.  Any help will be =
appreciated.

------=_NextPart_000_0B68_01C56B69.49761260
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Diso-8859-1">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 5.50.4522.1800" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>I need some assistance in altimeter =
based=20
recovery.&nbsp; Specifically, details regarding altimeter =
recommendations,=20
ejection charges, airframe construction to support drogue and main, =
etc.&nbsp;=20
Any help will be appreciated.</FONT></DIV></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0B68_01C56B69.49761260--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 17883 invoked from network); 17 Aug 2001 01:01:48 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 17 Aug 2001 01:01:48 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 3853 invoked by uid 50005); 17 Aug 2001 01:00:50 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smptf.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 1.868612 secs); 17 Aug 2001 01:00:50 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 17 Aug 2001 01:00:46 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA12445; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 17:59:33 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 86954 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 00:59:32          +0000
Received: from ares.idirect.com (ares.idirect.com [207.136.80.180]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA12429 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 17:59:15 -0700
Received: from .idirect.com (on-osh-ahp-01-70.look.ca [216.154.47.70]) by          ares.idirect.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id VAA27677; Thu, 16 Aug          2001 21:00:31 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="ISO-8859-1"
X-Mailer: BeOS Mail
Message-ID:  <200108170100.VAA27677@ares.idirect.com>
Date:         Thu, 16 Aug 2001 20:58:44 EDT
Reply-To: <earlcp@idirect.com>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Earl Colby Pottinger" <earlcp@idirect.com>
Subject:      Re: [AR] ERPS successfully runs H2O2 engine
Comments: To: Troy Prideaux <geordi@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

>Simple, much of the bi-prop & H2O2 technology and even Hybrid technology you
>refer to is older than APCP technology. (2) APCP will outperform most if not
>all the other available technologies available to the amateur or
>professional for that matter when densities are taken into account ie.
>thrust per unit volume.
>
>(On my way to Sydney - to fly rockets of course - right now and probably
>won't be able to reply to any other posts until next week)
>
>Seeya,
>
>Troy.

Opps, this seems to be the opposite/same mistake as the H2/O2 fans made.

They concentrated on the ISP value only, and did not take in account volume taken up, cross-section air resistance, hardware support and the costs of handling liquid hydrogen.

The above reads like dISP is the only value being looked at.  Restarting, thrust control, scaling all are things that liquids do better than solids.

Personally, I am not interested in things that go whoops into the sky, I want to see control.

              Earl Colby Pottinger

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 12503 invoked from network); 26 Jul 2001 18:55:25 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 26 Jul 2001 18:55:25 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 12716 invoked from network); 26 Jul 2001 18:57:37 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 26 Jul 2001 18:57:37 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA01238; Thu, 26 Jul 2001 11:34:01 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 85968 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 26 Jul 2001 18:33:55          +0000
Received: from dnvrpop2.dnvr.uswest.net (dnvrpop2.dnvr.uswest.net          [206.196.128.4]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id LAA01180          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 26 Jul 2001 11:23:54 -0700
Received: (qmail 64928 invoked by uid 0); 26 Jul 2001 18:23:53 -0000
Received: from dnvr-dsl-gw25-poolc52.dnvr.uswest.net (HELO qwest.net)          (65.101.216.52) by dnvrpop2.dnvr.uswest.net with SMTP; 26 Jul 2001          18:23:53 -0000
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.75 [en]C-CCK-MCD (Qwest.net)  (Windows NT 5.0; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <02a301c112ff$675a0dc0$6401a8c0@home.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B606023.86F4F39E@qwest.net>
Date:         Thu, 26 Jul 2001 12:23:31 -0600
Reply-To: <ldangi1@QWEST.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "David Lautenschlager" <ldangi1@QWEST.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] More about that Z/S book
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

What is the Isp for Z/S (and what are the chamber/nozzle
conditions for this value)?

Thanks,
Dave

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 28984 invoked from network); 26 Jul 2001 19:29:02 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 26 Jul 2001 19:29:02 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 15370 invoked from network); 26 Jul 2001 19:30:51 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 26 Jul 2001 19:30:51 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA01358; Thu, 26 Jul 2001 11:54:34 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 85987 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 26 Jul 2001 18:54:31          +0000
Received: from cicero0.cybercity.dk (cicero0.cybercity.dk [212.242.40.52]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA01339 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 26 Jul 2001 11:54:30 -0700
Received: from usr02.cybercity.dk (usr02.cybercity.dk [212.242.40.82]) by          cicero0.cybercity.dk (Postfix) with ESMTP id C44E2102934 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 26 Jul 2001 20:54:28 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from vip.cybercity.dk (port8.cvx1-noe.ppp.cybercity.dk          [217.157.69.201]) by usr02.cybercity.dk (8.11.2/8.11.0) with ESMTP id          f6QIsRO43098 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 26 Jul 2001 20:54:28          +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from hot@vip.cybercity.dk)
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.75 [en] (Win95; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <02a301c112ff$675a0dc0$6401a8c0@home.com>            <3B606023.86F4F39E@qwest.net>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B606980.BDE09F5E@vip.cybercity.dk>
Date:         Thu, 26 Jul 2001 21:03:28 +0200
Reply-To: "Hans Olaf Toft" <hot@VIP.CYBERCITY.DK>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Hans Olaf Toft" <hot@VIP.CYBERCITY.DK>
Subject:      Re: [AR] More about that Z/S book
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

David Lautenschlager wrote:

> What is the Isp for Z/S (and what are the chamber/nozzle
> conditions for this value)?

That depends on the composition, but theese are numbers that are
representative for our experiments:
Composition: Zn/S 3:1 (by weight)
Chamber dimensions: Inner diameter 68.1mm, length 620mm, wall thickness
4.0mm
Chamber material: stainless steel tube (type unknown)
Nozzle dimensions: Throat diameter 14mm, convergense half angle 45 deg,
divergense half angle 15 deg, exit diameter 56mm.
Nozzle material: steel (type unknown, but not to soft - mind the
erosion!)
Propellant mass: 5.3kg (powdered and vibrated)
Delivered Isp: 37s
Duration of burn: 1.3s (static test) and 0.7s (flight).

Hans Olaf Toft

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 10673 invoked from network); 26 Jul 2001 23:01:01 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 26 Jul 2001 23:01:01 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 24926 invoked from network); 26 Jul 2001 22:52:22 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 26 Jul 2001 22:52:22 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA02791; Thu, 26 Jul 2001 15:47:53 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 86095 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 26 Jul 2001 22:47:12          +0000
Received: from dnvrpop4.dnvr.uswest.net (dnvrpop4.dnvr.uswest.net          [206.196.128.6]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id PAA02773          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 26 Jul 2001 15:47:11 -0700
Received: (qmail 49372 invoked by uid 0); 26 Jul 2001 22:47:07 -0000
Received: from dnvr-dsl-gw25-poolc52.dnvr.uswest.net (HELO qwest.net)          (65.101.216.52) by dnvrpop4.dnvr.uswest.net with SMTP; 26 Jul 2001          22:47:07 -0000
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.75 [en]C-CCK-MCD (Qwest.net)  (Windows NT 5.0; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <02a301c112ff$675a0dc0$6401a8c0@home.com>            <3B606023.86F4F39E@qwest.net> <3B606980.BDE09F5E@vip.cybercity.dk>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B609DD5.625DC82C@qwest.net>
Date:         Thu, 26 Jul 2001 16:46:45 -0600
Reply-To: <ldangi1@QWEST.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "David Lautenschlager" <ldangi1@QWEST.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] More about that Z/S book
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Dou you have an chamber pressure (estimated or measured)?

Hans Olaf Toft wrote:
>
> David Lautenschlager wrote:
>
> > What is the Isp for Z/S (and what are the chamber/nozzle
> > conditions for this value)?
>
> That depends on the composition, but theese are numbers that are
> representative for our experiments:
> Composition: Zn/S 3:1 (by weight)
> Chamber dimensions: Inner diameter 68.1mm, length 620mm, wall thickness
> 4.0mm
> Chamber material: stainless steel tube (type unknown)
> Nozzle dimensions: Throat diameter 14mm, convergense half angle 45 deg,
> divergense half angle 15 deg, exit diameter 56mm.
> Nozzle material: steel (type unknown, but not to soft - mind the
> erosion!)
> Propellant mass: 5.3kg (powdered and vibrated)
> Delivered Isp: 37s
> Duration of burn: 1.3s (static test) and 0.7s (flight).
>
> Hans Olaf Toft

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 14924 invoked from network); 26 Jul 2001 23:51:18 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 26 Jul 2001 23:51:18 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 16578 invoked from network); 26 Jul 2001 23:53:30 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 26 Jul 2001 23:53:30 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA03050; Thu, 26 Jul 2001 16:38:22 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 86141 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 26 Jul 2001 23:37:07          +0000
Received: from blow.trej.net (root@blow.trej.net [195.42.209.193]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA03032 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 26 Jul 2001 16:37:05 -0700
Received: from slc.se (d212-151-184-16.swipnet.se [212.151.184.16]) by          blow.trej.net (8.11.1/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f6QNarg19069 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 27 Jul 2001 01:36:53 +0200
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (Win98; I)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <3B5E91BA.34C69523@biomicro.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B60AB7E.EECA87A7@slc.se>
Date:         Fri, 27 Jul 2001 01:45:02 +0200
Reply-To: "Sture" <racing@SLC.SE>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Sture" <racing@SLC.SE>
Subject: =?iso-8859-1?Q?_____=5BAR=5D_Time=B4s_up?=
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

OK guys, this is it. It has been interesting, and I have collected a lot of
knowledge about amateur rocketry. Unfortunately, the list tends to generate
a lot of OT mail, as well as repeating topics over and over. I now have
20,000 mails in my thrash folder - and most of them are AR.
Hoping that You all are successful in Your respective projects,
Sture Bloom

--
http://sites.netscape.net/conecha/ebmracing

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 28353 invoked from network); 27 Jul 2001 00:02:03 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 27 Jul 2001 00:02:03 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 14088 invoked from network); 27 Jul 2001 00:03:53 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 27 Jul 2001 00:03:53 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA03134; Thu, 26 Jul 2001 16:56:25 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 86154 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 26 Jul 2001 23:54:13          +0000
Received: from cyclone.comcen.com.au (cyclone.comcen.com.au [203.23.236.100])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA03112 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Thu, 26 Jul 2001 16:54:12 -0700
Received: (from nobody@localhost) by cyclone.comcen.com.au (8.11.1/8.11.1) id          f6QNrve15953; Fri, 27 Jul 2001 09:53:57 +1000 (EST) (envelope-from          pkelly@comcen.com.au)
X-Authentication-Warning: cyclone.comcen.com.au: nobody set sender to                         pkelly@comcen.com.au using -f
References: <GGEIJGNNFHFPEBENACBAMELDCGAA.ghartung13@home.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
User-Agent: IMP/PHP IMAP webmail program 2.2.3
X-Originating-IP: 203.2.125.3
Message-ID:  <996191637.3b60ad9580901@webmail.comcen.com.au>
Date:         Fri, 27 Jul 2001 09:53:57 +1000
Reply-To: "Paul Kelly" <pkelly@COMCEN.COM.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Paul Kelly" <pkelly@COMCEN.COM.AU>
Subject:      [AR] Pyrovalves
Comments: To: Greg Hartung <ghartung13@home.com>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <GGEIJGNNFHFPEBENACBAMELDCGAA.ghartung13@home.com>

For hybrid applications it's superb. Absolutely reliable ignition and the
ability to be able to use real injectors, you have to either use dot rated
tanks or a more complex fill on the pad setup. For larger motors this is not a
problem.
For biprop applications I believe it can work, you just need to use a lot more
solid, and have a BIG slug burning in the CC when the NOX gets there. Time your
burn for NOX lead  (ie pyrovalve clears NOX injectors first).

This is essentially how Dave G does it. But he starts the motor in hybrid mode.

You need to use something energetic and mechanically robust for your pyrovalve
pyrogen. I use 80/20/1 AP/Epoxy/Copper Oxide  with some Ti added so you can
tell it's burning.
PK


Quoting Greg Hartung <ghartung13@home.com>:

> Any words of wisdom on pyro valve ignition?  Can it work?
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU]On
> Behalf Of Paul Kelly
> Sent: Wednesday, July 25, 2001 8:43 PM
> To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
> Subject: Re: [AR] pressurization (was Re: [AR] 3Re: [AR] 2Re: [AR] dark
> se crets)
>
>
> Sounds like your friend knows what he's doing, but just in case, don't
> try
> to
> regen-cool a graphite CC using NOX, you'll quickly find out just how
> porous
> that graphite is!
>
> I built an ethanol/NOX biprop with a copper CC this way once.
> Unfortunatley
> I
> tried to make it too simple and opted for pyrovalve ignition, much like
> Dave
> G's early biprops.
> What's the quote, "Loudest noise I ever heard" :-)
>
> PK
>
>
> Quoting Marcus Leech <mleech@nortelnetworks.com>:
>
> > Paul Kelly wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > make the whole aft piston (snap ring motor)+nozzle+cc out of a
> chunk
> > of copper.
> > > Make the injector slide into the top of the CC (o'ring seal) no
> need
> > to secure
> > > it in place ullage pressure will do that (hard starts aside).
> > >
> > > PK
> > >
> > My friend with the all-graphite combustion-chamber/nozzle assembly
> uses
> > EXACTLY
> >   that technique in a monotube style bipropellant design.  The
> > injector/piston
> >   seats against the CC exactly as if it were seating against a fuel
> > grain in
> >   a hybrid.  His graphite CCs hang out the back of the rocket, and
> are
> > thus
> >   radiatively cooled.  His larger motor (6" 'P' motor) will be
> > regeneratively
> >   cooled using N2O as the coolant.
> >
>
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 7939 invoked from network); 27 Jul 2001 01:17:51 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 27 Jul 2001 01:17:51 -0000
Received: (qmail 13462 invoked from network); 27 Jul 2001 01:19:44 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 27 Jul 2001 01:19:44 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA03427; Thu, 26 Jul 2001 18:09:51 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 86191 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 27 Jul 2001 01:09:42          +0000
Received: from sys27.hou.wt.net (sys27.hou.wt.net [205.230.159.27]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA03409 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 26 Jul 2001 18:09:42 -0700
Received: from localhost (216-119-138-127.ipset18.wt.net [216.119.138.127]) by          sys27.hou.wt.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id UAA59464 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 26 Jul 2001 20:09:35 -0500 (CDT)
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.388)
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <200107270109.UAA59464@sys27.hou.wt.net>
Date:         Thu, 26 Jul 2001 20:09:52 -0500
Reply-To: "Donald McCorvey" <dlm3@NETAXS.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Donald McCorvey" <dlm3@NETAXS.COM>
Subject:      [AR] Rocket Powered Long-EZ at Oshkosh
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Someone asked if XCOR's rocket-powered Long-EZ was going to go on the
airshow circuit - indeed it has - at the EAA Annual Convention in
Oshkosh, WI:

        http://www.avweb.com/toc/homenew.html#ez

There's a photo of the airplane at:

        http://www.avweb.com/oshkosh/osh2001/gallery3/photo13.html

and the engine, operating, at:

        http://www.avweb.com/oshkosh/osh2001/gallery3/photo23.html

Sounds (and looks) like an interesting ride.

Don McCorvey
Houston, Tx

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 13392 invoked from network); 27 Jul 2001 01:19:12 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 27 Jul 2001 01:19:12 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 2350 invoked from network); 27 Jul 2001 01:20:36 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 27 Jul 2001 01:20:36 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA03480; Thu, 26 Jul 2001 18:15:53 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 86199 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 27 Jul 2001 01:15:50          +0000
Received: from iron.carolina.net (iron.carolina.net [208.170.147.84]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA03463 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Thu, 26 Jul 2001 18:15:50 -0700
Received: from ac.net (ip232-as5300-1-7lakes-nc.carolina.net [206.100.51.232])          by iron.carolina.net (Vircom SMTPRS 5.0.193) with ESMTP id          <B0002832954@iron.carolina.net>; Thu, 26 Jul 2001 21:31:23 -0400
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Win 9x 4.90; en-US; m18) Gecko/20001108            Netscape6/6.0
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <3B5E91BA.34C69523@biomicro.com> <3B60AB7E.EECA87A7@slc.se>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B60C0C0.1060307@ac.net>
Date:         Thu, 26 Jul 2001 21:15:44 -0400
Reply-To: "Bill Shamblin" <wshamblin@AC.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Bill Shamblin" <wshamblin@AC.NET>
Subject: =?iso-8859-1?Q?_____Re:_=5BAR=5D_Time=B4s_up?=
Comments: To: Sture <racing@SLC.SE>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Sture,
   This sounds like you are checking out of the list. I hope not... It
is true that there have been a lot of OT postings here (I'm guilty,
myself), but, there is a lot of good information passing through here,
too. Off topic postings seem to be just a part of the experience on
e-mail lists. Part of me wishes it wasn't so, but, part of me has
enjoyed some of those threads, as well. I would suggest that, when a
thread becomes too long and boring, you just set up a filter in your
e-mail program to tune it out. It's easy in Netscape, and I suspect it
is the same in others. Check your tool-bar to see what options are
available to you.
   I have seen, and enjoyed many posts from you. Personally, I would
hate to see you go.
Best Regards! Bill KU4QB TRA# 07455 L2

Sture wrote:

> OK guys, this is it. It has been interesting, and I have collected a lot of
> knowledge about amateur rocketry. Unfortunately, the list tends to generate
> a lot of OT mail, as well as repeating topics over and over. I now have
> 20,000 mails in my thrash folder - and most of them are AR.
> Hoping that You all are successful in Your respective projects,
> Sture Bloom
>
> --
> http://sites.netscape.net/conecha/ebmracing
>
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 11203 invoked from network); 27 Jul 2001 02:49:17 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 27 Jul 2001 02:49:17 -0000
Received: (qmail 17001 invoked from network); 27 Jul 2001 02:51:11 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 27 Jul 2001 02:51:11 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA03893; Thu, 26 Jul 2001 19:45:55 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 86238 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 27 Jul 2001 02:45:41          +0000
Received: from femail19.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail19.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.0.95.128]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA03875          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 26 Jul 2001 19:45:41 -0700
Received: from hal2001 ([24.77.53.16]) by femail19.sdc1.sfba.home.com          (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20 201-229-121-120-20010223) with SMTP id          <20010727024540.LSZK19329.femail19.sdc1.sfba.home.com@hal2001> for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 26 Jul 2001 19:45:40 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <001701c11645$1dff2720$0400a8c0@hatjs>
Date:         Thu, 26 Jul 2001 19:37:44 -0700
Reply-To: "Jamie Morken" <jmorken@HOME.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jamie Morken" <jmorken@HOME.COM>
Subject:      [AR] solid state relays
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Hi all,

I am looking for a small and relatively cheap 5 volt direct current solid
state relay (at least 5amp rated) to use for pyro charges.  I have been
using 5 volt radioshack mechanical relays but don't think they are a good
idea for use in a rocket since the G forces could trigger the switch
mechanism.  How do the solid state relays work?

best regards,
Jamie

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 17625 invoked from network); 27 Jul 2001 03:36:23 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 27 Jul 2001 03:36:23 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 2678 invoked from network); 27 Jul 2001 03:38:15 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 27 Jul 2001 03:38:15 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA04101; Thu, 26 Jul 2001 20:34:41 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 86265 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 27 Jul 2001 03:34:35          +0000
Received: from sys27.hou.wt.net (sys27.hou.wt.net [205.230.159.27]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA04084 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 26 Jul 2001 20:34:34 -0700
Received: from localhost (216-119-130-183.ipset10.wt.net [216.119.130.183]) by          sys27.hou.wt.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id WAA69739; Thu, 26 Jul          2001 22:34:07 -0500 (CDT)
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.388)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <200107270334.WAA69739@sys27.hou.wt.net>
Date:         Thu, 26 Jul 2001 22:34:24 -0500
Reply-To: "Donald McCorvey" <dlm3@NETAXS.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Donald McCorvey" <dlm3@NETAXS.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] solid state relays
Comments: To: Jamie Morken <jmorken@HOME.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <001701c11645$1dff2720$0400a8c0@hatjs>

Solid state relays aren't much more than a simple transistor. What's
different is that they include things like bias and protection circuitry
inside the package, making implementation a bit simpler.

You might be able to get more bang for your buck out of something along
the lines of a 2n2222 transistor for low current (<1A) applications -
they're easy to use and cost, literally, less than a buck. For larger
loads, you can look around for larger transistors. For higher-power
apps, you'll need to look for something along the lines of a power
MOSFET - International Rectifier and Powerex make devices up to 100A or
more. Since you're only using them in a switching application, the
circuit will be fairly simple - at most the transistor and one or two
resistors (at most).

The end result will be small, lightweight, and should be fairly cheap.

Don McCorvey
Houston, Tx

On Thursday, July 26, 2001, at 09:37 PM, Jamie Morken wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> I am looking for a small and relatively cheap 5 volt direct current
> solid
> state relay (at least 5amp rated) to use for pyro charges.  I have been
> using 5 volt radioshack mechanical relays but don't think they are a
> good
> idea for use in a rocket since the G forces could trigger the switch
> mechanism.  How do the solid state relays work?
>
> best regards,
> Jamie
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 16702 invoked from network); 27 Jul 2001 03:45:54 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 27 Jul 2001 03:45:54 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 9261 invoked from network); 27 Jul 2001 03:47:35 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 27 Jul 2001 03:47:35 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA04151; Thu, 26 Jul 2001 20:41:36 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 86273 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 27 Jul 2001 03:41:34          +0000
Received: from idsoftware.com (predator.idsoftware.com [192.246.40.34]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA04134 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Thu, 26 Jul 2001 20:41:34 -0700
Received: from [192.246.40.129] (account johnc HELO lightning.idsoftware.com)          by idsoftware.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 3.4.7) with ESMTP id 316570          for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 26 Jul 2001 22:40:20 -0500
X-Sender: johnc@mail.idsoftware.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <4.3.1.2.20010726223641.02e03f00@mail.idsoftware.com>
Date:         Thu, 26 Jul 2001 22:40:27 -0500
Reply-To: "John Carmack" <johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Carmack" <johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] solid state relays
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <001701c11645$1dff2720$0400a8c0@hatjs>

At 07:37 PM 7/26/2001 -0700, you wrote:
>Hi all,
>
>I am looking for a small and relatively cheap 5 volt direct current solid
>state relay (at least 5amp rated) to use for pyro charges.  I have been
>using 5 volt radioshack mechanical relays but don't think they are a good
>idea for use in a rocket since the G forces could trigger the switch
>mechanism.  How do the solid state relays work?
>
>best regards,
>Jamie

We use lots of different SSR, either Crydom or Omron.  I just buy them from
Digikey.  They are really easy to use.

You can control them directly from a TTL logic level, like a parallel port,
they are optically isolated, and come in a variety of current levels.  We
usually use 12vdc on the switched side, but we have also used an AC SSR for
one valve on the test stand.

The screw terminal versions are very convenient for trying things out, but
are heavier than the pin packages.

John Carmack

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 24740 invoked from network); 27 Jul 2001 04:00:02 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 27 Jul 2001 04:00:02 -0000
Received: (qmail 14396 invoked from network); 27 Jul 2001 04:01:58 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 27 Jul 2001 04:01:58 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA04307; Thu, 26 Jul 2001 20:56:45 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 86281 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 27 Jul 2001 03:56:34          +0000
Received: from femail13.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail13.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.0.95.140]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA04284          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 26 Jul 2001 20:56:33 -0700
Received: from hal2001 ([24.77.53.16]) by femail13.sdc1.sfba.home.com          (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20 201-229-121-120-20010223) with SMTP id          <20010727035628.GUHP18422.femail13.sdc1.sfba.home.com@hal2001> for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 26 Jul 2001 20:56:28 -0700
References: <200107270334.WAA69739@sys27.hou.wt.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <003b01c1164f$01c37a20$0400a8c0@hatjs>
Date:         Thu, 26 Jul 2001 20:48:32 -0700
Reply-To: "Jamie Morken" <jmorken@HOME.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jamie Morken" <jmorken@HOME.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] solid state relays
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Hi Don,

> Solid state relays aren't much more than a simple transistor. What's
> different is that they include things like bias and protection circuitry
> inside the package, making implementation a bit simpler.

I've never been good with transistors (think I have a 3:1 fry:success ratio
when I make circuits with them,
so I better ask if there would be any problems using the microcontroller to
feed the gate of the transistor.
What I'm worried about is whether I should use two different batteries (one
for the microcontroller and one for the source->drain of the transistor) and
even if I did use two seperate batteries if there could be a brownout from
the small gate current that could potentially reset the microcontroller (not
during ground testing of course but murphy law likely in the air? ;)

> You might be able to get more bang for your buck out of something along
> the lines of a 2n2222 transistor for low current (<1A) applications -

I'm using a 2n2222 to drive a mechanical relay for the ground test system.
It was the only one I could get to work with
5V on the base and 3V on the collector->emitter.  I remember reading
something about how most N channel devices need to have a voltage on the
gate a couple volts higher than across the collector->emitter - which I have
found makes things a bit more tricky since 5V logic (or 3.3V logic) doesn't
have a very high voltage to turn one of these devices on (for someone with a
3:1 fry:success ratio anyway!)

best regards,
Jamie

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 3952 invoked from network); 27 Jul 2001 04:44:47 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 27 Jul 2001 04:44:47 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 29647 invoked from network); 27 Jul 2001 04:46:41 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 27 Jul 2001 04:46:41 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA04714; Thu, 26 Jul 2001 21:41:17 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 86289 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 27 Jul 2001 04:41:14          +0000
Received: from snipe.mail.pas.earthlink.net (snipe.mail.pas.earthlink.net          [207.217.120.62]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA04661          for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Thu, 26 Jul 2001 21:31:14 -0700
Received: from earthlink.net (dialup-209.247.140.15.Dial1.SanJose1.Level3.net          [209.247.140.15]) by snipe.mail.pas.earthlink.net (EL-8_9_3_3/8.9.3)          with ESMTP id VAA24580; Thu, 26 Jul 2001 21:31:12 -0700 (PDT)
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.75 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.16-22 i686)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <200107270334.WAA69739@sys27.hou.wt.net>            <003b01c1164f$01c37a20$0400a8c0@hatjs>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B60EE9B.3CD57856@earthlink.net>
Date:         Thu, 26 Jul 2001 21:31:23 -0700
Reply-To: "David Weinshenker" <daze39@EARTHLINK.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "David Weinshenker" <daze39@EARTHLINK.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] solid state relays
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Jamie Morken wrote:
> which I have
> found makes things a bit more tricky since 5V logic (or 3.3V logic) doesn't
> have a very high voltage to turn one of these devices on (for someone with a
> 3:1 fry:success ratio anyway!)

Look through data sheets on various power MOSFET devices for
the "gate-source threshold voltage" Vgs(on) rating. (The required
voltage is actually a transistor characteristic rather than a
function of the drain-source supply voltage). You should be able
to find some which will turn on with 4-5 volts of available gate
drive. (The current requirements are extremely low, so if you have
a separate battery to actually power the controlled igniter, the
CPU power supply won't be significantly loaded by the MOSFET gate.
A large MOSFET may have significant input capacitance which will
slow the transition somewhat, but we're talking microseconds here:
it can be an issue in the design of high-freuency power switching
circuitry, but won't make a noticeable difference in an igniter-firing
circuit.)

-dave w

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 87 invoked from network); 27 Jul 2001 05:04:18 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 27 Jul 2001 05:04:18 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 29847 invoked from network); 27 Jul 2001 05:06:09 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 27 Jul 2001 05:06:09 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA04899; Thu, 26 Jul 2001 21:50:00 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 86302 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 27 Jul 2001 04:49:56          +0000
Received: from sys32.hou.wt.net (sys32.hou.wt.net [205.230.159.32]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA04882 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 26 Jul 2001 21:49:55 -0700
Received: from localhost (216-119-130-183.ipset10.wt.net [216.119.130.183]) by          sys32.hou.wt.net (8.9.1/8.9.1) with ESMTP id XAA02090; Thu, 26 Jul          2001 23:49:48 -0500 (CDT)
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0A55_01C56B69.44CB9D20"
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.388)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID:  <200107270449.XAA02090@sys32.hou.wt.net>
Date:         Thu, 26 Jul 2001 23:49:49 -0500
Reply-To: "Donald McCorvey" <dlm3@NETAXS.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Donald McCorvey" <dlm3@NETAXS.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] solid state relays
Comments: To: Jamie Morken <jmorken@HOME.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <003b01c1164f$01c37a20$0400a8c0@hatjs>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0A55_01C56B69.44CB9D20
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"


Jamie,
>
>> Solid state relays aren't much more than a simple transistor. What's
>> different is that they include things like bias and protection
>> circuitry
>> inside the package, making implementation a bit simpler.
>
> I've never been good with transistors (think I have a 3:1 fry:success
> ratio
> when I make circuits with them,
> so I better ask if there would be any problems using the
> microcontroller to
> feed the gate of the transistor.

Just make sure the uC can source or sink the current needed to turn on
the transistor, then put a current limiting resistor in between the uC
output and the base of the transistor to ensure you don't exceed it. The
value of the resistor can be calculated by working out difference
between your supply (Vcc) and the base-emitter junction
forward-conduction voltage (Vbe, usually 0.7v) and dividing by the
current you need to drive the transistor into saturation (Is):

        R = (Vcc-Vbe)/Is

You then pick a resistor of appropriate resistance and wattage and
you're ready to go. The simplest configuration is to use an 'open
collector', i.e., connect the high side of your load to power and the
low side to the collector end of the transistor, grounding the emitter.

On the other hand, if you want to drive out of the collector, you use a
pull-up resistor (chosen so that current through the transistor does not
exceed the maximum collector-emitter current and is still sufficient to
drive your load), and drive power to your load by turning the transistor
OFF (inverse logic).

The above is for BIPOLAR transistors. The process is similar for
MOSFETs, but I don't recall the specifics - it's been a while. I do
recall that the gate current is usually very low (making it good for
working with uC's) and you're really just manipulating the gate voltage
to control the source to drain current. As a result, you might well get
away with fewer components using MOSFETs, and should find it easier to
get higher-current devices than bipolar transistors.

Amplifier design isn't much more than reading the spec sheets and doing
the math. Get the application notes for your uC and see how they
approach your switching problem.

> What I'm worried about is whether I should use two different batteries
> (one
> for the microcontroller and one for the source->drain of the
> transistor) and
> even if I did use two seperate batteries if there could be a brownout
> from
> the small gate current that could potentially reset the microcontroller
> (not
> during ground testing of course but murphy law likely in the air? ;)

Does whatever you're controlling operate on the same voltage as your
uC ? If not, using a different battery is copacetic. Just realize that
you MUST tie the grounds together at the battery and nowhere else to
avoid ground loops.

If you find evidence of switching interference between your uC and your
switching circuits, you can start looking at suppressing the noise at
the source (anti-kickback diodes across inductive loads and filter
capacitors), or if the noise persists, use optical isolation to keep the
two power systems completely separate. For low power, you shouldn't need
to go that far.

>
>> You might be able to get more bang for your buck out of something along
>> the lines of a 2n2222 transistor for low current (<1A) applications -
>
> I'm using a 2n2222 to drive a mechanical relay for the ground test
> system.
> It was the only one I could get to work with
> 5V on the base and 3V on the collector->emitter.

The 2n2222 is really easy to work with. Other transistors may be a bit
more work, but it's not that much more difficult. CMOS devices are a
little more challenging since they may be ESD sensitive (or at least
used to be), but my most recent experience with power MOSFETS was that
they were very durable, high-reliability devices that were hard to burn
up - not that I didn't try (and succeed).

> I remember reading
> something about how most N channel devices need to have a voltage on the
> gate a couple volts higher than across the collector->emitter - which I
> have
> found makes things a bit more tricky since 5V logic (or 3.3V logic)
> doesn't
> have a very high voltage to turn one of these devices on (for someone
> with a
> 3:1 fry:success ratio anyway!)

My usual method for not frying things I care about is to try building up
the circuit on a breadboard first, tweaking it until it does exactly
what I expect it to do using 'disposable' components like TTL drivers
and inverters, then move or connect it over to the area on the
breadboard where I have the other components staked out and test it
there. After that, you convert to a perfboard or an etched PC board for
your final installation. It sounds like it would take longer, but you
don't burn up quite as much valuable stuff (and I've blown thousands of
dollars worth of hardware - but that's another story).

John Carmack also had some excellent advice in a previous msg - you
might find implementation with SSR's easier (but transistors are still
small and cheap).

Good Luck!

Don McCorvey
Houston, Tx

------=_NextPart_000_0A55_01C56B69.44CB9D20
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Type: text/enriched;
	charset="us-ascii"


Jamie,<color><param>0000,0000,DEB7</param>

</color><excerpt>

<excerpt>Solid state relays aren't much more than a simple transistor.
What's

different is that they include things like bias and protection
circuitry

inside the package, making implementation a bit simpler.

</excerpt>

I've never been good with transistors (think I have a 3:1 fry:success
ratio

when I make circuits with them,

so I better ask if there would be any problems using the
microcontroller to

feed the gate of the transistor.

</excerpt>

Just make sure the uC can source or sink the current needed to turn on
the transistor, then put a current limiting resistor in between the uC
output and the base of the transistor to ensure you don't exceed it.
The value of the resistor can be calculated by working out difference
between your supply (Vcc) and the base-emitter junction
forward-conduction voltage (Vbe, usually 0.7v) and dividing by the
current you need to drive the transistor into saturation (Is):


        R = (Vcc-Vbe)/Is


You then pick a resistor of appropriate resistance and wattage and
you're ready to go. The simplest configuration is to use an 'open
collector', i.e., connect the high side of your load to power and the
low side to the collector end of the transistor, grounding the
emitter.


On the other hand, if you want to drive out of the collector, you use
a pull-up resistor (chosen so that current through the transistor does
not exceed the maximum collector-emitter current and is still
sufficient to drive your load), and drive power to your load by
turning the transistor OFF (inverse logic).


The above is for BIPOLAR transistors. The process is similar for
MOSFETs, but I don't recall the specifics - it's been a while. I do
recall that the gate current is usually very low (making it good for
working with uC's) and you're really just manipulating the gate
voltage to control the source to drain current. As a result, you might
well get away with fewer components using MOSFETs, and should find it
easier to get higher-current devices than bipolar transistors.


Amplifier design isn't much more than reading the spec sheets and
doing the math. Get the application notes for your uC and see how they
approach your switching problem.

<color><param>0000,0000,DEB7</param>

</color><excerpt>What I'm worried about is whether I should use two
different batteries (one

for the microcontroller and one for the source->drain of the
transistor) and

even if I did use two seperate batteries if there could be a brownout
from

the small gate current that could potentially reset the
microcontroller (not

during ground testing of course but murphy law likely in the air? ;)

</excerpt>

Does whatever you're controlling operate on the same voltage as your
uC ? If not, using a different battery is copacetic. Just realize that
you MUST tie the grounds together at the battery and nowhere else to
avoid ground loops.


If you find evidence of switching interference between your uC and
your switching circuits, you can start looking at suppressing the
noise at the source (anti-kickback diodes across inductive loads and
filter capacitors), or if the noise persists, use optical isolation to
keep the two power systems completely separate. For low power, you
shouldn't need to go that far.


<excerpt>

<excerpt>You might be able to get more bang for your buck out of
something along

the lines of a 2n2222 transistor for low current (<<1A) applications -

</excerpt>

I'm using a 2n2222 to drive a mechanical relay for the ground test
system.

It was the only one I could get to work with

5V on the base and 3V on the collector->emitter.

</excerpt>

The 2n2222 is really easy to work with. Other transistors may be a bit
more work, but it's not that much more difficult. CMOS devices are a
little more challenging since they may be ESD sensitive (or at least
used to be), but my most recent experience with power MOSFETS was that
they were very durable, high-reliability devices that were hard to
burn up - not that I didn't try (and succeed).


<excerpt>I remember reading

something about how most N channel devices need to have a voltage on
the

gate a couple volts higher than across the collector->emitter - which
I have

found makes things a bit more tricky since 5V logic (or 3.3V logic)
doesn't

have a very high voltage to turn one of these devices on (for someone
with a

3:1 fry:success ratio anyway!)

</excerpt>

My usual method for not frying things I care about is to try building
up the circuit on a breadboard first, tweaking it until it does
exactly what I expect it to do using 'disposable' components like TTL
drivers and inverters, then move or connect it over to the area on the
breadboard where I have the other components staked out and test it
there. After that, you convert to a perfboard or an etched PC board
for your final installation. It sounds like it would take longer, but
you don't burn up quite as much valuable stuff (and I've blown
thousands of dollars worth of hardware - but that's another story).


John Carmack also had some excellent advice in a previous msg - you
might find implementation with SSR's easier (but transistors are still
small and cheap).


Good Luck!


Don McCorvey

Houston, Tx
------=_NextPart_000_0A55_01C56B69.44CB9D20--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 16670 invoked from network); 27 Jul 2001 07:23:19 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 27 Jul 2001 07:23:19 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: (qmail 10616 invoked from network); 27 Jul 2001 07:25:11 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 27 Jul 2001 07:25:11 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA05449; Fri, 27 Jul 2001 00:15:07 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 86370 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 27 Jul 2001 07:15:01          +0000
Received: from cisco.com (cypher.cisco.com [171.69.11.18]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA05432 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri,          27 Jul 2001 00:15:00 -0700
Received: (from billw@localhost) by cisco.com (8.8.8/2.6/Cisco List          Logging/8.8.8) id AAA10319; Fri, 27 Jul 2001 00:14:29 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID:  <CMM.0.90.4.996218069.billw@cypher>
Date:         Fri, 27 Jul 2001 00:14:29 PDT
Reply-To: "Bill Westfield" <billw@cisco.com>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "William Chops Westfield" <billw@cisco.com>
Subject:      Re: [AR] solid state relays
Comments: To: Jamie Morken <jmorken@HOME.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  Your message of Thu, 26 Jul 2001 19:37:44 -0700

    I am looking for a small and relatively cheap 5 volt direct current solid
    state relay (at least 5amp rated) to use for pyro charges.  I have been
    using 5 volt radioshack mechanical relays but don't think they are a good
    idea for use in a rocket since the G forces could trigger the switch
    mechanism.  How do the solid state relays work?

A solid state relay is usually (always?) constructed with an opto-isolator
(the "coil") driving some high-power TRIACs in the output stage.  They tend
to be designed for hefty AC loads, and I don't know if they'd tend to work
well with the low-voltage pulses typical in rocketry flight systems (The
high current pulse isn't likely to be a problem, but "low voltage DC" might
be.  They tend to include nice zero-crossing detectors to minimize
electrical noise, and, well, DC doesn't ever cross zero :-)

On the flip side, it shouldn't be hard to design your own "solid state
relay" using an optoisolator ($0.50), a couple of resistors, and a general
purpose 5A transistor, Triac, or SCR ($1)   There are some non-zero-crossing
triac-output optoisolators rated for about 1 amp - they might be able to
handle short pulses of 5A "as-is"...

BillW


From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 3839 invoked from network); 27 Jul 2001 07:30:13 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 27 Jul 2001 07:30:13 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 20568 invoked from network); 27 Jul 2001 07:32:09 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 27 Jul 2001 07:32:09 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA05091; Thu, 26 Jul 2001 22:50:32 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 86320 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 27 Jul 2001 05:50:21          +0000
Received: from hall.mail.mindspring.net (hall.mail.mindspring.net          [207.69.200.60]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA05074          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 26 Jul 2001 22:50:21 -0700
Received: from mindspring.com (sdn-ar-006casfrMP161.dialsprint.net          [158.252.213.163]) by hall.mail.mindspring.net (8.9.3/8.8.5) with          ESMTP id BAA22589; Fri, 27 Jul 2001 01:50:14 -0400 (EDT)
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 (Macintosh; U; PPC)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <200107270334.WAA69739@sys27.hou.wt.net>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B610234.5E625DDE@mindspring.com>
Date:         Thu, 26 Jul 2001 22:55:02 -0700
Reply-To: "Alan Shinn" <alshinn@MINDSPRING.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Alan Shinn" <alshinn@MINDSPRING.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] solid state relays
Comments: To: Donald McCorvey <dlm3@NETAXS.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Digikey sells logic level fets. Turns on hard with logic levels on the
gate. If the pyro charge goes open circuit after actuation, then you
could use an SCR but they don't turn back off till the current goes to ~ zero.
By the way, I just read on the Piclist about using FETs - seems that
during certain initialisation and reset periods (with the pic chip), the
outputs briefly become high impedence inputs. This can possibly allow
the gate of a FET to float high and turn on the FET. This would be BAD
with a pyrocharge!! The cure is to have a high value pull down resistor
to prevent the gate from floating up but not low enough to load down the
microcontroller output (100K?? - I don't remember what "they" said).

Donald McCorvey wrote:
>
> Solid state relays aren't much more than a simple transistor. What's
> different is that they include things like bias and protection circuitry
> inside the package, making implementation a bit simpler.
>
> You might be able to get more bang for your buck out of something along
> the lines of a 2n2222 transistor for low current (<1A) applications -
> they're easy to use and cost, literally, less than a buck. For larger
> loads, you can look around for larger transistors. For higher-power
> apps, you'll need to look for something along the lines of a power
> MOSFET - International Rectifier and Powerex make devices up to 100A or
> more. Since you're only using them in a switching application, the
> circuit will be fairly simple - at most the transistor and one or two
> resistors (at most).
>
> The end result will be small, lightweight, and should be fairly cheap.
>
> Don McCorvey
> Houston, Tx
>
> On Thursday, July 26, 2001, at 09:37 PM, Jamie Morken wrote:
>
> > Hi all,
> >
> > I am looking for a small and relatively cheap 5 volt direct current
> > solid
> > state relay (at least 5amp rated) to use for pyro charges.  I have been
> > using 5 volt radioshack mechanical relays but don't think they are a
> > good
> > idea for use in a rocket since the G forces could trigger the switch
> > mechanism.  How do the solid state relays work?
> >
> > best regards,
> > Jamie
> >

--
Looking forward:
Alan Shinn


Experience the
beginnings of microscopy.
Make your own replica
of one of Antony van Leeuwenhoek's microscopes.
visit    http://www.mindspring.com/~alshinn/

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 11849 invoked from network); 27 Jul 2001 12:48:07 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 27 Jul 2001 12:48:07 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 21029 invoked from network); 27 Jul 2001 12:50:03 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 27 Jul 2001 12:50:03 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id FAA06345; Fri, 27 Jul 2001 05:29:17 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 86423 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 27 Jul 2001 12:28:55          +0000
Received: from df01-e11.danfoss.dk (mailx.danfoss.com [193.162.34.6]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id FAA06327 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 27 Jul 2001 05:28:54 -0700
Received: from df01-e11.danfoss.dk (dkdnisvw.danfoss.dk [10.6.2.10]) by          df01-e11.danfoss.dk with SMTP (Microsoft Exchange Internet Mail          Service Version 5.5.2653.13) id PVXZ5FYH; Fri, 27 Jul 2001 14:28:16          +0200
Received: from 10.8.13.36 by df01-e11.danfoss.dk (InterScan E-Mail VirusWall          NT); Fri, 27 Jul 2001 14:28:16 +0200
Received: by mailx.danfoss.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) id          <PXJY02H0>; Fri, 27 Jul 2001 14:28:16 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19)
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Message-ID:  <61A2F0A8E936D311876A0008C74BF1EC96AA6E@DD21AE02>
Date:         Fri, 27 Jul 2001 14:29:51 +0200
Reply-To: "Nielson Byron" <BYRONNIELSON@DANFOSS.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Nielson Byron" <BYRONNIELSON@DANFOSS.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] solid state relays
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

You might try a Zetex ZTX1048A.
It is an NPN transistor.
        VCEO            17.5V           Collector to emitter voltage
        IC              4A              Continuous collector current
        IC max  20A             Max. collector current
        VCE sat .21V            Collector to emitter voltage at saturation
                                        (this is really good for an NPN
transistor)

Digikey part number ZTX1048A-ND $1.14

You could use this as a direct replacement for the 2N2222 and drive the load
(up to 4A) directly.
The base resistor should be sized to deliver about 20mA.
At 5V, 5/.02 = 250 ohms.
Note that micro controllers usually don't put out the whole 5V.
I would try a 220 ohm or even a 180 ohm resistor and check it out.

Logic level mosfet transistors are the next bet if you need more current.
They usually specify their Rdson at a Vgs of 4.5V.

For a surface mount part try Fairchild.
        Digikey part number NDS8410CT-ND        $1.44
        VDS                             30V             Drain to source
voltage
        RDSon at Vgs = 4.5V     .02 Ohms        Drain to source resistance
at Gate to source voltage
        ID                              10A             Continuous drain
current
        PD                              2.5W            Package power
dissipation
        Package                 SO-8

At      VGS             4.5V
        RDSon           .02 Ohms
        ID              5A
        Voltage drop across the transistor will be 0.1V.
        Package dissipation will be 0.5W.

For a through hole part try Fairchild.
        Digikey part number NDB603AL-ND $1.31
        VDS                             30V             Drain to source
voltage
        RDSon at Vgs = 4.5V     .04 Ohms        Drain to source resistance
at Gate to source voltage
        ID                              25A             Continuous drain
current
        PD                              50W             Package power
dissipation
        Package                 TO-220AB

At      VGS             4.5V
        RDSon           .04 Ohms
        ID              5A
        Voltage drop across the transistor will be 0.2V.
        Package dissipation will be 1.0W.

Remember to use a pull down resistor to make sure that the device is not
turned on if the micro controller port powers up as an input.  This is
common for a lot of micros.
I like the smallest resistor value that will not draw too much power from
the micro.
1K ohm is what I think of as a good rule of thumb value.
This requires 4.5mA from the port pin to turn on the mosfet.
This is guaranteed overkill and the resistance may need to be increased due
to low power requirements.

Best Regards,
Byron



-----Original Message-----
From: David Weinshenker [mailto:daze39@EARTHLINK.NET]
Sent: Thursday, July 26, 2001 11:31 PM
To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
Subject: Re: [AR] solid state relays


Jamie Morken wrote:
> which I have
> found makes things a bit more tricky since 5V logic (or 3.3V logic)
doesn't
> have a very high voltage to turn one of these devices on (for someone with
a
> 3:1 fry:success ratio anyway!)

Look through data sheets on various power MOSFET devices for
the "gate-source threshold voltage" Vgs(on) rating. (The required
voltage is actually a transistor characteristic rather than a
function of the drain-source supply voltage). You should be able
to find some which will turn on with 4-5 volts of available gate
drive. (The current requirements are extremely low, so if you have
a separate battery to actually power the controlled igniter, the
CPU power supply won't be significantly loaded by the MOSFET gate.
A large MOSFET may have significant input capacitance which will
slow the transition somewhat, but we're talking microseconds here:
it can be an issue in the design of high-freuency power switching
circuitry, but won't make a noticeable difference in an igniter-firing
circuit.)

-dave w

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 8983 invoked from network); 27 Jul 2001 14:29:28 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 27 Jul 2001 14:29:28 -0000
Received: (qmail 1217 invoked from network); 27 Jul 2001 14:31:24 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 27 Jul 2001 14:31:24 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA06836; Fri, 27 Jul 2001 07:23:54 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 86470 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 27 Jul 2001 14:23:45          +0000
Received: from femail22.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail22.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.0.95.147]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA06818          for <arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 27 Jul 2001 07:23:45 -0700
Received: from cc334751a ([65.13.214.65]) by femail22.sdc1.sfba.home.com          (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20 201-229-121-120-20010223) with SMTP id          <20010727142339.QMSF5372.femail22.sdc1.sfba.home.com@cc334751a> for          <arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 27 Jul 2001 07:23:39 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0A5A_01C56B69.44D78400"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2462.0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <007201c116a7$9db02200$6401a8c0@home.com>
Date:         Fri, 27 Jul 2001 08:22:49 -0600
Reply-To: "Brian Kosko" <bkosko1@HOME.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Brian Kosko" <bkosko1@HOME.COM>
Subject:      [AR] Fw: Zn/S book - higher thrusts in flight
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0A5A_01C56B69.44D78400
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Guys,

Here's a little more info on some of the Z/S stuff we were discussing by =
Antoon, the book's author.
----- Original Message -----=20
From: Tony Vijverman=20
To: Brian Kosko=20
Sent: Wednesday, July 25, 2001 10:02 AM
Subject: Zn/S book - higher thrusts in flight


Dear Brian,

Your conversation with Henry Spencer about the higher thrust in flight =
for Zn/S rockets was transmitted to me yesterday. Let me clarify a few =
things. It was only observed with powder Zn/S. So it has nothing to do =
with higher burning rates, since in Zn/S powders the reaction is almost =
instantaneous. The reason  I believe must be sought in the fact that the =
reaction products contain a very high amount of condensed material (ZnS =
solid and Zn liquid). According to the modeling (see chapter 8), this =
condensed material has a very low speed as compared to the gases. At the =
throat I expect it to be lower than 27 m/s and even only about 5 m/s. =
Due to the strong acceleration during launch these condensed particles =
almost "stand still" relative to the earth (inertion)  but get a higher =
speed relative to the rocket (think of what water would do). So, since =
these particles represent roughly 90% of the total mass any change in =
their speed relative to the nozzle will drastically increase the mass =
rate and hence the thrust. The acceleration of the rocket makes it =
easier for the condensed material to travel through the nozzle. This =
explanation should not change the specific impulse (the energy system is =
not changed), though a higher Isp was measured ! This could have =
something to do with less loss of speed (friction) of the gases because =
of the higher speeds of the solids. Also in hot cast rockets there =
should be a similar effect, but we have no evidence yet. I expect it to =
lower the solid content in the chamber and hence reduce the temperature =
because of evaporation of the remaining solids. It would be very =
interesting to find out.

Go ahead Brian. I hope many will read the book and get interested by =
this facinating propellant. The main novelties(I believe) are:
- the generalised thrust curve (p.26): it allows to predict with high =
accuracy what you will get (under static conditions)
- the effect of acceleration on the thrust curve (I believe a =
confirmation of my understanding of how Zn/S behaves)
- how hot cast Zn/S propellants burn: the fact that it is a good heat =
conductor (under about 25% of S and with aluminium) makes it totally =
different from double base or composite !
- the modeling, which clearly shows that we have a good idea now what is =
happening in the nozzle

Greetings,
Antoon (Tony)


------=_NextPart_000_0A5A_01C56B69.44D78400
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Diso-8859-1">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 6.00.2462.0" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Guys,</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Here's a little more info on some of =
the Z/S stuff=20
we were discussing by Antoon, the book's author.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial">----- Original Message -----=20
<DIV style=3D"BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; font-color: black"><B>From:</B> <A=20
title=3Dascent.bvba@pandora.be =
href=3D"mailto:ascent.bvba@pandora.be">Tony=20
Vijverman</A> </DIV>
<DIV><B>To:</B> <A title=3Dbkosko1@HOME.com =
href=3D"mailto:bkosko1@HOME.com">Brian=20
Kosko</A> </DIV>
<DIV><B>Sent:</B> Wednesday, July 25, 2001 10:02 AM</DIV>
<DIV><B>Subject:</B> Zn/S book - higher thrusts in flight</DIV></DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Dear Brian,</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Your conversation with Henry Spencer =
about the=20
higher thrust in flight for Zn/S rockets was transmitted to me =
yesterday. Let me=20
clarify a few things. It was only observed with powder Zn/S. So it has =
nothing=20
to do with higher burning rates, since in Zn/S powders the reaction is =
almost=20
instantaneous. The reason&nbsp; I believe must be sought in the fact =
that the=20
reaction products contain a very high amount of condensed material (ZnS =
solid=20
and Zn liquid). According to the modeling (see chapter 8), this =
condensed=20
material has a very low speed as compared to the gases. At the =
throat&nbsp;I=20
expect it to be lower than 27 m/s&nbsp;and even only about 5 m/s. Due to =
the=20
strong acceleration during launch these condensed particles =
almost&nbsp;"stand=20
still" relative to the earth (inertion) &nbsp;but&nbsp;get a higher =
speed=20
relative to the rocket (think of what water would do). So, since these =
particles=20
represent roughly 90% of the total mass any change in their speed =
relative to=20
the nozzle will drastically increase the mass rate and hence the thrust. =
The=20
acceleration of the rocket makes it easier for the=20
condensed&nbsp;material&nbsp;to travel through the nozzle. This=20
explanation&nbsp;should not change the specific impulse (the energy =
system is=20
not changed), though a higher Isp was measured ! This could have =
something to do=20
with less loss of speed (friction) of the gases because of the higher =
speeds of=20
the solids. Also in hot cast rockets there should be a similar effect, =
but we=20
have no evidence yet. I expect it to lower the solid content in the =
chamber and=20
hence reduce the temperature because of evaporation of the remaining =
solids. It=20
would be very interesting to find out.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Go ahead Brian. I hope many will read =
the book and=20
get interested by this&nbsp;facinating propellant. The main novelties(I =
believe)=20
are:</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>- the generalised thrust curve (p.26): =
it allows to=20
predict with high accuracy what you will get (under static=20
conditions)</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>- the effect of acceleration on the =
thrust curve (I=20
believe a confirmation of my understanding of how Zn/S =
behaves)</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>- how hot cast Zn/S propellants burn: =
the fact that=20
it is a good heat conductor (under about 25% of S and with aluminium) =
makes it=20
totally different from double base or composite !</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>- the modeling, which clearly shows =
that we have a=20
good idea now what is happening in the nozzle</FONT></DIV></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Greetings,</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Antoon (Tony)</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0A5A_01C56B69.44D78400--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 6953 invoked from network); 27 Jul 2001 14:58:05 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 27 Jul 2001 14:58:05 -0000
Received: (qmail 1442 invoked from network); 27 Jul 2001 14:59:55 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 27 Jul 2001 14:59:55 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA06938; Fri, 27 Jul 2001 07:51:44 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 86483 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 27 Jul 2001 14:51:41          +0000
Received: from femail22.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail22.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.0.95.147]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA06921          for <arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 27 Jul 2001 07:51:41 -0700
Received: from cc334751a ([65.13.214.65]) by femail22.sdc1.sfba.home.com          (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20 201-229-121-120-20010223) with SMTP id          <20010727145134.RKDQ5372.femail22.sdc1.sfba.home.com@cc334751a> for          <arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 27 Jul 2001 07:51:34 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0A5D_01C56B69.44D78400"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2462.0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <009b01c116ab$839ce200$6401a8c0@home.com>
Date:         Fri, 27 Jul 2001 08:50:44 -0600
Reply-To: "Brian Kosko" <bkosko1@HOME.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Brian Kosko" <bkosko1@HOME.COM>
Subject:      [AR] Post Firing Insulation Analysis
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0A5D_01C56B69.44D78400
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Thought I'd report on how the insulation survived our test firing. The =
propellant was 3.5 lbs of 85% solids AP composite with 7% Al.

There were two main areas of concern. The first was the interface =
between the 60 lb solid graphite nozzle and the liner tube. The nozzle =
had a 1/2 in lip that the liner tube sat on. Also that nozzle surface =
was anything but smooth and uniform. We put an o-ring and about a tube =
of high temp Si RTV gasket maker on the nozzle lip and motor case wall. =
The liner with the fuel grain was then pushed onto the nozzle lip. A =
large weight was placed on top and we let it sit for three days.=20

It held perfectly, no leakage at all! As  matter of fact, we had to use =
a jack to remove the case from the nozzle post firing. The RTV oozed =
around the nozzle and liner and made a great seal.

The other main concern was the grain and liner assembly. We used an 8 in =
PVC tube as liner, it was cheap; free actually, and has 1/4 in walls. =
The grain was cast into an EPDM liner. The EPDM was 1/16 in, bought =
locally at our gasket place. We first made the liners by RTV'ing the =
EPDM together. We overlapped the stuff about an inch and used the same =
RTV to glue it together. After the grain was cast, we used the RTV to =
put it into the PVC liner.

After the burn, the PVC and the EPDM were basically intact. The EPDM =
liner was still glued into the liner tube. There was a small spot where =
the gases got between the liner and the PVC. I'll be sure to seal the =
top and bottom edges of the liner better to prevent this in the future.

All in all the insulation worked as expected. Good thing, the next =
firing will have 35 lbs of propellant.

Brian

------=_NextPart_000_0A5D_01C56B69.44D78400
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Diso-8859-1">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 6.00.2462.0" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Thought I'd report on how the =
insulation survived=20
our test firing. The propellant&nbsp;was 3.5 lbs of 85% solids AP =
composite with=20
7% Al.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>There were two main areas of concern. =
The first was=20
the interface between the 60 lb solid graphite nozzle and the liner =
tube. The=20
nozzle had a 1/2 in lip that the liner tube sat on. Also that nozzle =
surface was=20
anything but smooth and uniform. We put an o-ring and about a tube of =
high temp=20
Si RTV gasket maker on the nozzle lip and motor case wall. The liner =
with the=20
fuel grain was then pushed onto the nozzle lip. A large weight was =
placed on top=20
and we let it sit for three days. </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>It held perfectly, no leakage at all! =
As&nbsp;=20
matter of fact, we had to use a jack to remove the case from the nozzle =
post=20
firing. The RTV oozed around the nozzle and liner and made a great=20
seal.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>The other main concern was the grain =
and liner=20
assembly. We used an 8 in PVC tube as liner, it was cheap; free =
actually, and=20
has 1/4 in walls. The grain was cast into an EPDM liner. The EPDM was =
1/16 in,=20
bought locally at our gasket place. We first made the liners by RTV'ing =
the EPDM=20
together. We overlapped the stuff about an inch and used the same RTV to =
glue it=20
together. After the grain was cast, we used the RTV to put it into the =
PVC=20
liner.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>After the burn, the PVC and the EPDM =
were basically=20
intact. The EPDM liner was still glued into the liner tube. There was a =
small=20
spot where the gases got between the liner and the PVC. I'll be sure to =
seal the=20
top and bottom edges of the liner better to prevent this in the=20
future.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>All in all the insulation worked as =
expected. Good=20
thing, the next firing will have 35 lbs of propellant.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Brian</FONT></DIV></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0A5D_01C56B69.44D78400--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 1994 invoked from network); 27 Jul 2001 16:33:32 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 27 Jul 2001 16:33:32 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 10097 invoked from network); 27 Jul 2001 16:34:57 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 27 Jul 2001 16:34:57 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA07458; Fri, 27 Jul 2001 09:23:54 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 86561 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 27 Jul 2001 16:23:27          +0000
Received: from crotus.sc.intel.com (scfdns02.sc.intel.com [143.183.152.26]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA07440 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 27 Jul 2001 09:23:27 -0700
Received: from snmeng1.rr.intel.com (snmeng1.rr.intel.com [128.215.231.11]) by          crotus.sc.intel.com (8.9.1a+p1/8.9.1/d: relay.m4,v 1.41 2001/07/09          21:06:22 root Exp $) with ESMTP id QAA21647; Fri, 27 Jul 2001          16:22:55 GMT
Received: from snmeng30.rr.intel.com (snmeng30.rr.intel.com [128.215.52.76]) by          snmeng1.rr.intel.com (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id KAA03005; Fri, 27          Jul 2001 10:20:05 -0600 (MDT)
Received: from snmeng30.rr.intel.com (snmeng30.rr.intel.com [128.215.52.76]) by          snmeng30.rr.intel.com (8.9.1a/8.9.1/d: client.m4,v 1.3 1998/09/29          16:36:11 sedayao Exp sedayao $) with SMTP id KAA21818; Fri, 27 Jul          2001 10:20:01 -0600 (MDT)
X-Mailer: dtmail 1.2.1 CDE Version 1.2.1 SunOS 5.6 sun4m sparc
X-Sun-Text-Type: ascii
Message-ID:  <200107271620.KAA21818@snmeng30.rr.intel.com>
Date:         Fri, 27 Jul 2001 10:20:01 -0600
Reply-To: "Ray Calkins 100660207" <rcalkins@SNMENG1.RR.INTEL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Ray Calkins 100660207" <rcalkins@SNMENG1.RR.INTEL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Times up
Comments: To: racing@SLC.SE
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Sture wrote:
>
> Unfortunately, the list tends to generate a lot of OT mail...
Please accept my apologies about this, I accept responsibility for this.
Partly, amateur/experimental rocketry is a broad field, encompasing a wide range
of technologies.  Partly, I feel a certain amound of OT discussion enhances
community.  And partly, I enjoy learning broadly.

However, I am making an effort to bring the focus back on Am/EX rocketry, please
bear with me during this transition.  Please also accept my apologies if I
offend anybody, this is far from my intentions.

Ray Calkins
rcalkins@snmeng1.rr.intel.com           raymond.calkins@intel.com
"My opinions are my own, and do not reflect those of my employer."


From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 18196 invoked from network); 27 Jul 2001 17:14:09 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 27 Jul 2001 17:14:09 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: (qmail 25535 invoked from network); 27 Jul 2001 17:15:56 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 27 Jul 2001 17:15:56 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA07936; Fri, 27 Jul 2001 10:08:47 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 86634 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 27 Jul 2001 17:08:43          +0000
Received: from flu-smtp-01.datacomm.ch (smtp.datacomm.ch [212.40.5.52]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA07919 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 27 Jul 2001 10:08:42 -0700
Received: from isbsec.isb.admin.ch (ceres.triton.ch [212.254.218.98]) by          flu-smtp-01.datacomm.ch (8.11.3/8.11.3) with SMTP id f6RH8em00749 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 27 Jul 2001 19:08:40 +0200
X-Mailer: Endymion MailMan Standard Edition v3.0.19
Message-ID:  <200107271708.f6RH8em00749@flu-smtp-01.datacomm.ch>
Date:         Fri, 27 Jul 2001 17:08:40 GMT
Reply-To: <bruno.berger@SPL.CH>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <bruno.berger@SPL.CH>
Subject:      Re: [AR] N2O density graph
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Arthur,
if you can live with metric units try this:

http://www.hybridraketen.de/Antares/Teststand/N2O/n2o_documentation.htm

Bruno
SPL

> Ray,
>
> You had two graphs showing some of the relationships of
> temperature/pressure/density for N2O. I lost my local copy and can't
> find it on aRocket.net. Could you please send me (and perhaps the whole
> list) a copy?
>
> Thanks!
>
> Later,
> Artie Lekstutis
>


From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 20335 invoked from network); 27 Jul 2001 17:29:29 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 27 Jul 2001 17:29:29 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 2710 invoked from network); 27 Jul 2001 17:09:08 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 27 Jul 2001 17:09:08 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA07576; Fri, 27 Jul 2001 09:33:52 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 86589 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 27 Jul 2001 16:33:49          +0000
Received: from lekstutis.com (emu.webminders.com [209.176.27.130]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA07559 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 27 Jul 2001 09:33:49 -0700
Received: from Lekstutis.com [12.34.119.103] by lekstutis.com with ESMTP          (SMTPD32-5.05) id AC082B770076; Fri, 27 Jul 2001 12:51:20 -0400
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.75 [en] (WinNT; U)
X-Accept-Language: en,pdf
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <200107271620.KAA21818@snmeng30.rr.intel.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B6197E8.FDF9CE2D@Lekstutis.com>
Date:         Fri, 27 Jul 2001 12:33:44 -0400
Reply-To: "Arthur J. Lekstutis" <Artie@LEKSTUTIS.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Arthur J. Lekstutis" <Artie@LEKSTUTIS.COM>
Subject:      [AR] N2O density graph
Comments: To: Ray Calkins 100660207 <rcalkins@SNMENG1.RR.INTEL.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Ray,

You had two graphs showing some of the relationships of
temperature/pressure/density for N2O. I lost my local copy and can't
find it on aRocket.net. Could you please send me (and perhaps the whole
list) a copy?

Thanks!

Later,
Artie Lekstutis

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 10429 invoked from network); 27 Jul 2001 19:24:24 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 27 Jul 2001 19:24:24 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 15299 invoked from network); 27 Jul 2001 19:26:18 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 27 Jul 2001 19:26:18 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA08573; Fri, 27 Jul 2001 12:13:39 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 86698 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 27 Jul 2001 19:13:05          +0000
Received: from clio.sc.intel.com (scfdns01.sc.intel.com [143.183.152.25]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA08556 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 27 Jul 2001 12:13:00 -0700
Received: from snmeng1.rr.intel.com (snmeng1.rr.intel.com [128.215.231.11]) by          clio.sc.intel.com (8.9.1a+p1/8.9.1/d: relay.m4,v 1.41 2001/07/09          21:06:22 root Exp $) with ESMTP id TAA24389; Fri, 27 Jul 2001          19:12:29 GMT
Received: from snmeng30.rr.intel.com (snmeng30.rr.intel.com [128.215.52.76]) by          snmeng1.rr.intel.com (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id NAA03767; Fri, 27          Jul 2001 13:09:39 -0600 (MDT)
Received: from snmeng30.rr.intel.com (snmeng30.rr.intel.com [128.215.52.76]) by          snmeng30.rr.intel.com (8.9.1a/8.9.1/d: client.m4,v 1.3 1998/09/29          16:36:11 sedayao Exp sedayao $) with SMTP id NAA03806; Fri, 27 Jul          2001 13:09:37 -0600 (MDT)
X-Mailer: dtmail 1.2.1 CDE Version 1.2.1 SunOS 5.6 sun4m sparc
X-Sun-Text-Type: ascii
Message-ID:  <200107271909.NAA03806@snmeng30.rr.intel.com>
Date:         Fri, 27 Jul 2001 13:09:37 -0600
Reply-To: "Ray Calkins 100660207" <rcalkins@SNMENG1.RR.INTEL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Ray Calkins 100660207" <rcalkins@SNMENG1.RR.INTEL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] N2O density graph
Comments: To: Artie@LEKSTUTIS.COM
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Artie Said:
> You had two graphs showing some of the relationships of
> temperature/pressure/density for N2O. I lost my local copy and can't
> find it on aRocket.net. Could you please send me (and perhaps the whole
> list) a copy?
http://www.arocket.net/library/Propulsion/Propellants/N2O/N2O.html
http://arocket.itc.uci.edu/library/Propulsion/Propellants/N2O/N2O.html

I think the density units are incorrect, and need to be changed from lb/in3 to
lb/ft3.  Please confirm this and I'll take care of it.

Ray Calkins
rcalkins@snmeng1.rr.intel.com           raymond.calkins@intel.com
"My opinions are my own, and do not reflect those of my employer."


From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 14512 invoked from network); 27 Jul 2001 20:09:06 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 27 Jul 2001 20:09:06 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 6245 invoked from network); 27 Jul 2001 20:11:20 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 27 Jul 2001 20:11:20 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA08823; Fri, 27 Jul 2001 12:55:03 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 86732 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 27 Jul 2001 19:55:00          +0000
Received: from lekstutis.com (emu.webminders.com [209.176.27.130]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA08803 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 27 Jul 2001 12:55:00 -0700
Received: from Lekstutis.com [12.34.119.103] by lekstutis.com with ESMTP          (SMTPD32-5.05) id AB307023004E; Fri, 27 Jul 2001 16:12:32 -0400
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.75 [en] (WinNT; U)
X-Accept-Language: en,pdf
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <200107271909.NAA03806@snmeng30.rr.intel.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B61C70F.12EA3A7B@Lekstutis.com>
Date:         Fri, 27 Jul 2001 15:54:55 -0400
Reply-To: "Arthur J. Lekstutis" <Artie@LEKSTUTIS.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Arthur J. Lekstutis" <Artie@LEKSTUTIS.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] N2O density graph
Comments: To: Ray Calkins 100660207 <rcalkins@SNMENG1.RR.INTEL.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Ray Calkins 100660207 wrote:
> I think the density units are incorrect, and need to be changed from lb/in3 to
> lb/ft3.  Please confirm this and I'll take care of it.

Uranium is only 0.68 lb/in3, so I'd say that yes: the units should be
lb/ft3 ;-)

Seriously though: N2O at room temperature is around 48 lb/ft3 from what
I remember. The graph would seem accurate with lb/ft3 instead of lb/in3
as a scale.

Thanks!!

Later,
Artie Lekstutis

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 5326 invoked from network); 28 Jul 2001 00:51:40 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 28 Jul 2001 00:51:40 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 3027 invoked from network); 28 Jul 2001 00:53:07 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 28 Jul 2001 00:53:07 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA11138; Fri, 27 Jul 2001 17:49:16 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 87073 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 28 Jul 2001 00:48:32          +0000
Received: from femail43.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail43.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.254.60.37]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA11120          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 27 Jul 2001 17:48:32 -0700
Received: from c396957-b.home.net ([24.17.249.10]) by          femail43.sdc1.sfba.home.com (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20          201-229-121-120-20010223) with ESMTP id          <20010728004826.LVFT14213.femail43.sdc1.sfba.home.com@c396957-b.home.net> for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 27          Jul 2001 17:48:26 -0700
X-Sender: spiegl@mail
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
References: <Your message of Thu, 26 Jul 2001 19:37:44 -0700>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <5.1.0.14.2.20010727194743.00b8b8b0@mail>
Date:         Fri, 27 Jul 2001 19:48:41 -0500
Reply-To: "Mark C Spiegl" <spiegl@HOME.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Mark C Spiegl" <spiegl@HOME.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] solid state relays
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <CMM.0.90.4.996218069.billw@cypher>

> Bill Westfield <billw@cisco.com> writes:
> A solid state relay is usually (always?) constructed with an opto-isolator
> (the "coil") driving some high-power TRIACs in the output stage.

Yes yes... good point. Unlike a mechanical relay, a solid state relay
needs the switched current/voltage to be in the right ballpark.
IE a solid state relay rated at 110VAC is going to have problems
switching 3 VDC.

--MCS

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 21364 invoked from network); 28 Jul 2001 00:55:44 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 28 Jul 2001 00:55:44 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 5090 invoked from network); 28 Jul 2001 00:57:12 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 28 Jul 2001 00:57:12 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA11192; Fri, 27 Jul 2001 17:53:35 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 87086 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 28 Jul 2001 00:53:34          +0000
Received: from femail37.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail37.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.254.60.31]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA11174          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 27 Jul 2001 17:53:33 -0700
Received: from c396957-b.home.net ([24.17.249.10]) by          femail37.sdc1.sfba.home.com (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20          201-229-121-120-20010223) with ESMTP id          <20010728005328.NSPD12917.femail37.sdc1.sfba.home.com@c396957-b.home.net> for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 27          Jul 2001 17:53:28 -0700
X-Sender: spiegl@mail
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
References: <Your message of Thu, 26 Jul 2001 19:37:44 -0700>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <5.1.0.14.2.20010727194851.00ba63a0@mail>
Date:         Fri, 27 Jul 2001 19:53:43 -0500
Reply-To: "Mark C Spiegl" <spiegl@HOME.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Mark C Spiegl" <spiegl@HOME.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] solid state relays
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <CMM.0.90.4.996218069.billw@cypher>

(IHMO) The right answer is an N channel PowerFET. Transistor biasing
and design is not always as simple as it seems. Power FETs handle
tremendous currents and are pretty hard to get wrong. They can be
found for about a buck at Radio Shack.


For an N-FET
        Drain:  to +V
        Source: to -V
        Gate:   +bias  (MUST use 1K-10K pulldown resistor to ground)


For a P-FET just reverse polarity
        Drain:  to -V
        Source: to +V
        Gate:   -bias  (resistor to +V)


Note that a lot of Power FETs don't really care about the D and S
polarity, but for academic sake you should wire them properly anyway.
For a buck just build a little test circuit with an LED.


FWIW, I would certainly use a separate battery for the pyro. For a
time you have a dead short between +V and -V. This transient can/will
reset sensitive electronics.  (like a CPU)


--MCS

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 20427 invoked from network); 17 Aug 2001 01:24:38 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 17 Aug 2001 01:24:38 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 6799 invoked by uid 50005); 17 Aug 2001 01:23:36 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smptf.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 1.356469 secs); 17 Aug 2001 01:23:37 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 17 Aug 2001 01:23:33 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA12534; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 18:22:18 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 86961 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 01:22:15          +0000
Received: from idsoftware.com (predator.idsoftware.com [192.246.40.34]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA12520 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 18:22:15 -0700
Received: from [192.246.40.129] (account johnc HELO lightning.idsoftware.com)          by idsoftware.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 3.4.7) with ESMTP id 349879          for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 20:22:14 -0500
X-Sender: johnc@mail.idsoftware.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.1
References: <NEBBJIGOELOLIBCCPKDCIELKCBAA.geordi@c031.aone.net.au>            <OE54Vs1aLxGYiH1ZRJ60000d739@hotmail.com>            <a05100317b7a2079ba23d@[63.27.96.152]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <4.3.1.2.20010816201429.02e80498@mail.idsoftware.com>
Date:         Thu, 16 Aug 2001 20:20:58 -0500
Reply-To: "John Carmack" <johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Carmack" <johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] ERPS successfully runs H2O2 engine
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <3B7C5D46.801F1472@biomicro.com>

>
>To each his own opinion.  JMHO, I think that liquids are much safer than
>solids.  Espescially in manned aplications.  Most readers on the list
>are not working towards manned rockets, but I'd like to think that
>someday, maybe, I could build one big enough.  Now all I need is a fat
>bank to knock over and I'll get started on it.
>
>--
>Mark K. Spute
>Senior Research Engineer
>BioMicro Systems Inc.

We will have a man off the ground in one of our vehicles within two months.

It will still be a "parking lot VTVL", but I am damn proud of the progress
we have made in our first year, and I am willing to go on the record saying
that we will have a supersonic manned rocket ship in 2002.

John Carmack
www.armadilloaerospace.com

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 6562 invoked from network); 17 Aug 2001 12:38:23 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 17 Aug 2001 12:38:23 -0000
Received: (qmail 23332 invoked by uid 50005); 17 Aug 2001 12:37:31 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smptf.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.542163 secs); 17 Aug 2001 12:37:31 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 17 Aug 2001 12:37:30 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id FAA15901; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 05:36:23 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 87599 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 12:36:22          +0000
Received: from spsystems.net (spsystems.net [209.47.149.227]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id FAA15887 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Fri,          17 Aug 2001 05:36:21 -0700
Received: (from henry@localhost) by spsystems.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id IAA08538;          Fri, 17 Aug 2001 08:35:50 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010817083502.8394A-100000@spsystems.net>
Date:         Fri, 17 Aug 2001 08:35:49 -0400
Reply-To: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] optoisolators
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <007801c12717$6a56f7a0$0400a8c0@hatjs>

On Fri, 17 Aug 2001, Jamie Morken wrote:
> Does the input of the optoisolator require a resistor?

In general, yes, unless there is some other provision for current limiting.
(Some microcontrollers have current-limited power-driving outputs.)

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 2967 invoked from network); 17 Aug 2001 13:15:04 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 17 Aug 2001 13:15:04 -0000
Received: (qmail 7842 invoked by uid 50005); 17 Aug 2001 13:14:55 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (. Clean. Processed in 0.213661 secs); 17 Aug 2001 13:14:55 -0000
X-Qmail-Scanner-Mail-From: owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU via smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net
X-Qmail-Scanner-Rcpt-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
X-Qmail-Scanner: 0.96 (No viruses found. Processed in 0.213661 secs)
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 17 Aug 2001 13:14:54 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA16075; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 06:11:15 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 87630 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 13:11:01          +0000
Received: from femail15.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail15.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.0.95.142]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA16061          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 06:11:00 -0700
Received: from hal2001 ([24.77.53.16]) by femail15.sdc1.sfba.home.com          (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20 201-229-121-120-20010223) with SMTP id          <20010817131055.JXCF8323.femail15.sdc1.sfba.home.com@hal2001> for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 06:10:55 -0700
References:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010817083502.8394A-100000@spsystems.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <008a01c1271c$ebaf8240$0400a8c0@hatjs>
Date:         Fri, 17 Aug 2001 06:02:50 -0700
Reply-To: "Jamie Morken" <jmorken@HOME.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jamie Morken" <jmorken@HOME.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] optoisolators
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Hi all,

I am attempting to figure out how to hook the optoisolator output (npn) to
the n channel mosfet gate to turn it on but am not sure how to do this.
Should I be using a pnp optoisolator?  Here is the optoisolator I am using:
http://www.isocomoptocouplers.com/is817.htm  (the IS847)

and here is the mosfet I am using:
http://www.fairchildsemi.com/ds/ND/NDB603AL.pdf

Thanks for your time,

best regards,
Jamie


----- Original Message -----
From: Henry Spencer <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Friday, August 17, 2001 5:35 AM
Subject: Re: [AR] optoisolators


> On Fri, 17 Aug 2001, Jamie Morken wrote:
> > Does the input of the optoisolator require a resistor?
>
> In general, yes, unless there is some other provision for current
limiting.
> (Some microcontrollers have current-limited power-driving outputs.)
>
>                                                           Henry Spencer
>                                                        henry@spsystems.net
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 11606 invoked from network); 17 Aug 2001 13:59:33 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 17 Aug 2001 13:59:33 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 22607 invoked by uid 50005); 17 Aug 2001 13:59:24 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (. Clean. Processed in 0.322788 secs); 17 Aug 2001 13:59:24 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
X-Qmail-Scanner-Mail-From: owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU via smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net
X-Qmail-Scanner-Rcpt-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
X-Qmail-Scanner: 0.96 (No viruses found. Processed in 0.322788 secs)
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 17 Aug 2001 13:59:23 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA16263; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 06:57:06 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 87662 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 13:56:53          +0000
Received: from smtp003.mailsrvcs.net (smtp003pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.182])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA16249 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 06:56:52 -0700
Received: from [63.27.96.152] (1Cust164.tnt1.san-bernardino.ca.da.uu.net          [63.27.96.164]) by smtp003.mailsrvcs.net  with ESMTP for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; id f7HDtxg12725 Fri, 17 Aug 2001 08:56:00          -0500 (CDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: GTE/01rocket@mail.gte.net
References: <4.3.1.2.20010817030701.02690e60@mail.idsoftware.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <a0510031eb7a2d18b2bff@[63.27.96.152]>
Date:         Fri, 17 Aug 2001 06:56:31 -0700
Reply-To: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Solid rocket boosters
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <4.3.1.2.20010817030701.02690e60@mail.idsoftware.com>

>Is anyone here confident enough in their solids that they would ride in a
>vehicle that required two of them to perform safely and substantially
>identically?


I would ride in a vehicle with solids I designed and tested.
Apparantly so would Burt Rutan as he suggested doing just that before
going the x-cor route for the "recurring operations experience".

An x-prixe motor has already been built and tested as a single solid
and it has no crew capsule to launch because 3 crew capsule partners
have failed to perform and quit.

I figure an x-prize flight WITH PERMITS is possible in under a year
with this system.  The money has already been invested and the only
shortage now is a replacement crew compartment.  Crew seem to be a
dime a dozen for historical missions.

But drifting back on topic, any supplier who has had 3 consecutive
firings of a particular design is a candidate for this 2 strap-on
mission so long as some additional dynamic testing also occurs.  It
wouldn't hurt to select a supplier with a few years of strap-on
experience.

Jerry


>
>What design and process steps would you take if you were tasked with
>providing the boosters?
>
>If I was in that situation, I would almost certainly rebuild the vehicle,
>or add a pressurized drop tank or something, but I could easily see someone
>that is nearly out of funding, or in a real race with a competitor, going
>for the band-aid fix.
>
>I have mixed feelings about solids.  They take one of my dearest principles
>to the logical extreme -- do all the complex stuff in preprocessing to make
>the runtime as simple as possible, but the variability and lack of
>individual testability, combined with the obvious throttle / shutdown /
>restart issues, are serious.
>
>John Carmack


--
Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
Opinion, the whole thing.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 7367 invoked from network); 17 Aug 2001 14:20:07 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 17 Aug 2001 14:20:07 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 5742 invoked by uid 50005); 17 Aug 2001 14:19:56 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (. Clean. Processed in 0.16815 secs); 17 Aug 2001 14:19:56 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
X-Qmail-Scanner-Mail-From: owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU via smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net
X-Qmail-Scanner-Rcpt-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
X-Qmail-Scanner: 0.96 (No viruses found. Processed in 0.16815 secs)
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 17 Aug 2001 14:19:56 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA16405; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 07:17:51 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 87683 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 14:17:43          +0000
Received: from mail1.murraystate.edu (mail1.murraystate.edu [216.249.159.50])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id HAA16390 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 07:17:42 -0700
Received: from jjcomputer.murraystate.edu (216.249.150.117) by          mail1.murraystate.edu (NPlex 5.5.031) id 3B75A7FC0001C442 for          AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 09:15:40 -0500
X-Sender: terry.mccreary@mail.murraystate.edu
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
References: <011b01c126c8$45e5fe60$0100a8c0@mkbs>            <NEBBJIGOELOLIBCCPKDCIELKCBAA.geordi@c031.aone.net.au>            <OE54Vs1aLxGYiH1ZRJ60000d739@hotmail.com>            <a05100317b7a2079ba23d@[63.27.96.152]>            <011b01c126c8$45e5fe60$0100a8c0@mkbs>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <5.1.0.14.0.20010817062713.01ee1130@mail.murraystate.edu>
Date:         Fri, 17 Aug 2001 09:20:52 -0500
Reply-To: "Terry McCreary" <terry.mccreary@MURRAYSTATE.EDU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Terry McCreary" <terry.mccreary@MURRAYSTATE.EDU>
Subject:      [AR] Candy propellant,              was:  Re: [AR] ERPS successfully runs H2O2 engine
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <a0510031db7a239fb551e@[63.27.96.152]>

At 08:05 PM 8/16/01 -0700, you wrote:

>It is brittle.
>It has a high burning rate exponent.

KN-sucrose has an exponent of 0.32, according to Richard Nakka's web
site.  AP propellants run 0.2-0.45.  Summerfield's model of AP combustion
says that AP propellant should have an exponent of 0.33.

http://members.aol.com/riccnakk/bntest.html
Richard describes the behavior of KN propellants with other
fuels.  Interesting mesa and plateau behavior there.  How about a
propellant with near-constant burn rate in some rather useful pressure regions?

>It has poor physical properties and is only suitable for small motors.

And that, I think, is an area wherein the amateur can make some real
contribution.


>It has low delivered ISP
>It is processed using a heat level dangerously close to autoignition
>   This factor has caused more accidents than any propellant I
>personally know of

Query for the entire list:  I (and many others, I'm sure) would be
interested in details and specifics of accidents.  Not just with candy
propellant but with all others as well.  Preferably accidents of the "I was
there and saw this as it happened" type, with objective details such as
propellant composition, temperature of processing, etc.  Such information
would be enormously helpful to the list.

I'll start.  I've prepared a few hundred pounds of AP propellant; not much,
compared to the experience of some on this list.  Most of it has been
standard stuff; 400-200-90 micron AP, HTPB, PBAN.  Additives were pretty
standard:  Al, Mg, transition-metal-oxide burn rate catalysts, suppressants
such as oxamide.  Some work was with AN/HTPB/Mg.  Perhaps 200 batches over
the last 6-7 years or so.  Propellant was mixed four different ways:  hand;
KitchenAid 4.5 qt; drill with Jiffy Mixer (sort of a paint mixer);
hand-cranked Donvier-type ice cream maker.

I've cut (by hand) and drilled (hand and power) a few hundred cores,
stripped coring rods (Al) out of a few hundred more.

If you don't count CATOs, the only "accident" I've had was only
incidentally related to amateur rocketry, in that the motor was
mine.  Motor is nozzle up for test.  Slide igniter into motor.  Clip one
lead to microclip.  Clip other lead... I hear ssssSSSS.  Bowels
loosen.  Tuck and roll.  The motor ignited, and a fraction of a second
later the epoxy let loose and the motor blew its nozzle straight up into
the air a few dozen feet.

Faulty relay in the launch system.  From that day on, I've ALWAYS connected
the igniter leads to the clips FIRST.  Only then do I insert the
igniter.  Bring extra shorts anyway...

P'rfesser

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 19253 invoked from network); 17 Aug 2001 14:23:03 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 17 Aug 2001 14:23:03 -0000
Received: (qmail 21846 invoked by uid 50005); 17 Aug 2001 14:21:41 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smpte.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.92533 secs); 17 Aug 2001 14:21:41 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 17 Aug 2001 14:21:39 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA16427; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 07:19:14 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 87690 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 14:19:13          +0000
Received: from localhost (rcalkins@localhost) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with          ESMTP id HAA16411; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 07:18:53 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.LNX.4.10.10108170717260.16330-100000@itc.uci.edu>
Date:         Fri, 17 Aug 2001 07:18:53 -0700
Reply-To: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
Subject:      Re: [AR] candy R&D
Comments: To: John Dom <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <F79REKyQARlWMceIDE00000bcf9@hotmail.com>

On Fri, 17 Aug 2001, John Dom wrote:

> To avoid the step of melting: has anyone ever tried to compress
> KN/sugar/sorbitol mixtures

Al does this, perhaps he'll be so kind as to describe his approach in
detail.  It seems that grains made this way would be very brittle.

Ray

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 27173 invoked from network); 17 Aug 2001 14:39:23 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 17 Aug 2001 14:39:23 -0000
Received: (qmail 10092 invoked by uid 50005); 17 Aug 2001 14:39:45 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.346939 secs); 17 Aug 2001 14:39:45 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 17 Aug 2001 14:39:44 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA16520; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 07:35:21 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 87709 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 14:35:07          +0000
Received: from fep4-orange.clear.net.nz (fep4-orange.clear.net.nz          [203.97.32.4]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA16504          for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 07:35:06 -0700
Received: from mkbs (203-167-160-222.dialup.clear.net.nz [203.167.160.222]) by          fep4-orange.clear.net.nz (1.5/1.7) with SMTP id CAA09943; Sat, 18 Aug          2001 02:34:57 +1200 (NZST)
References:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010817083502.8394A-100000@spsystems.net>              <008a01c1271c$ebaf8240$0400a8c0@hatjs>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <00af01c1272a$1b44fbe0$0100a8c0@mkbs>
Date:         Sat, 18 Aug 2001 02:36:52 +1200
Reply-To: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Organization: Applied Technology
Subject:      Re: [AR] optoisolators
Comments: To: Jamie Morken <jmorken@HOME.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

> I am attempting to figure out how to hook the optoisolator output (npn) to
> the n channel mosfet gate to turn it on but am not sure how to do this.
> Should I be using a pnp optoisolator?  Here is the optoisolator I am
using:
> http://www.isocomoptocouplers.com/is817.htm  (the IS847)
>
> and here is the mosfet I am using:
> http://www.fairchildsemi.com/ds/ND/NDB603AL.pdf
>

The optocoupler page says a surface mount version is also available.
The FET SAYS that it is a logic level device but it is less suited to 5 volt
gate operation than some other true logic level FETs.
The spec sheet shows that up to aboutv 20A load it performs OK but above
this the effective on resistance (Rdson) begins to rise.
The suitability depends on the application

        - what are you driving?
        - what is the available supply voltage
        - what is the desired load current.

If you describe the application more fully I can provide better advice.

As the FET is rated at 25A continuous and 100A pulse chances are you are
using it under 20A anyway.

The processor will presumably run from a 5 volt supply.
If this is the only supply then driving the FET gate directly from the
processor output via  a small resistor (say 47 ohms) will be entirely
sutable for most applications. Place a .reverse biased Schoyyky diode from
gate to ground mounted near the FET to damp possibnl;e partasitic
oscillations. (black magic area).

If the available supply is more than 5 volts then you could still use the
above method as long as you don't need more than about 20 A.or don't mind
the extra drop across the FEt at high currents.

If you want to use opto isolation then you would procede as folows using the
4 channel isolatyor that you have selected.

Opto pin 1 = anode 1
pin 2 = cathode 1
pin 16 = collector 1
pin 15 = emitter 1

You can duplicate the following for the other optos by substituting
appropriate pin numbers from the diagram.

I will assume that you are driving on/off loads with relatively slow
response time requirements ie NOT pulse width modulation. For PWM a simple
driver circuit will be needed. The opto has a max output rating of 35 volts
so I assume the supply is rather less than this.
The FET has a maximum gate voltage of 20 volts so supply MUST be below this
value - highe rvalues require a slightly more complex circuit.

Micro output via a 220 ohm resistor (= R1) to opto anode
Opto cathode to ground.
Opto cathode to FET gate (labelled g on diagram on page 1 of data sheet).
Opto Anode via 100 ohm resistor (= R2) to positive supply.
FET Source (S) to ground
FET  Drain (D) to negative side of load.
Positive side of load to positive supply.

Small Schottky diode (BAT85 or similar) connected cathode to FET gate and
anode to ground.
If the supply is more than 10 volts a 10 volt zener should be used in place
of the Schottly - same connections.
This limits gate voltage to a "safe" value.

The FET will be "on" when the processor output is high (5 volts)

Exact drive current will depend on processor and actual opto  but is about -

    Processor output high = 4.5V say (5v supply)
    Opto voltage drop = 1.5 V (1.4v max in spec sheet)
    Drive current = V/R = (4.5-1.5)/220r = 14 mA

Most processors will supply around this value OK
Even 10 mA (or less if necessary) would be OK
If battery energy is not a major factor then scrimping on drive power is not
desirable. If battery energy is a factor then a detailed kniowledge of the
requirement would help.

Output drive to FET gate will be about 3 or 4 times the input (MAY be as low
as 1.5 times sez spec sheet).
This allows max FET drive of from 20 mA to 50 mA.

The actal FET gate current is usually VERY small and only "surges" during
switching.
At switching the peak value possible is about Vsupply/R2. For a 12 volt
supply this would be 12/100 = 120 mA.
The opto would limit this value as it hasn't got enough drive to support 120
mA.
This is ENTIRELY UNIMPORTANT in an on/off application such as eg driving
ignitors, solenoids. motors etc. For PWM with rapid ongoing switching a
driver cicruit is needed. Costs very littel (2 x  cheap transistors and  a
few resistors) but is un-needed in most cases.

The FET will need to be heatsunk to solid metal if currents are high enough.
Rdson will be up to about 0.05 ohms at 5 volts drive and less with 10 volts
drive.

For no heatsinking max semi-continuous current is about 4 amps = approaching
1 watt dissipation.


Provide more details and we should be able to refine this design.


regards


            Russell McMahon.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 13800 invoked from network); 17 Aug 2001 15:04:49 -0000
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 17 Aug 2001 15:04:49 -0000
Received: (qmail 13544 invoked by uid 50005); 17 Aug 2001 15:03:56 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smptf.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.998028 secs); 17 Aug 2001 15:03:56 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 17 Aug 2001 15:03:54 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA16674; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 07:56:54 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 87738 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 14:56:52          +0000
Received: from fep4-orange.clear.net.nz (fep4-orange.clear.net.nz          [203.97.32.4]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA16660          for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 07:56:51 -0700
Received: from mkbs (203-167-161-55.dialup.clear.net.nz [203.167.161.55]) by          fep4-orange.clear.net.nz (1.5/1.7) with SMTP id CAA13184; Sat, 18 Aug          2001 02:56:48 +1200 (NZST)
References: <3B78C6DE.3386CF57@earthlink.net> <3B7917F2.CBEDF344@home.com>            <3B7B76B0.709B18FF@earthlink.net>            <5.0.2.1.0.20010816230752.023e6ff8@mail.earthlink.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <010301c1272d$28d45460$0100a8c0@mkbs>
Date:         Sat, 18 Aug 2001 02:55:23 +1200
Reply-To: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Organization: Applied Technology
Subject:      Re: [AR] turbine temps with peroxide precat cycle
Comments: To: erps-list@LunaCity.com
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

> >     I think an in line turbine could be made to work, but it would not
> >be easy. It would be so hard that I don't think ERPS can do it. allow me
> >to hedge, I think it would take a long time to get it good enough and
> >reliable enough to use and that ERPS will be ready for the pumps before
> >in line pumps would be ready. Nobody even talks about the seals.

I've been avoiding commenting but my* "Pistonless Piston Pump concept really
invites investigation here. I hope to get to a proof of concept demonstrator
in the next few months but I'm happy to discuss it with anyone else
interested in trying the very simple ideas out.

I've posted a description on Arocket several times before. Basically it
consists of a gas powered two cylinder pump where the gas acts directly on
the propellants without any pistons per se. Controlled valves pass only gas
and there are two non return valves which pass propellant. The gains result
from pressurising only the pump rather than the whole propellant tank.
Oxygen from decomposed HTP could be used to drive the HTP pump but a non
reactive gas would be better for fuel pumping. In an HTP monoprop there is
only one two-chambered pump.



regards


            Russell McMahon


* "my" means I though it up "this time round". No doubt it exists in various
incarnations since time immemorial.
I can mention of the design on the net.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 23793 invoked from network); 17 Aug 2001 15:07:16 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 17 Aug 2001 15:07:16 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 16106 invoked by uid 50005); 17 Aug 2001 15:07:06 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (. Clean. Processed in 0.149204 secs); 17 Aug 2001 15:07:06 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
X-Qmail-Scanner-Mail-From: owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU via smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net
X-Qmail-Scanner-Rcpt-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
X-Qmail-Scanner: 0.96 (No viruses found. Processed in 0.149204 secs)
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 17 Aug 2001 15:07:06 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA16633; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 07:51:42 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 87731 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 14:51:39          +0000
Received: from smtp007.mailsrvcs.net (smtp007pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.186])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA16619 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 07:51:39 -0700
Received: from [63.27.96.152] (1Cust164.tnt1.san-bernardino.ca.da.uu.net          [63.27.96.164]) by smtp007.mailsrvcs.net  with ESMTP for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; id f7HEp6W10526 Fri, 17 Aug 2001 09:51:06          -0500 (CDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: GTE/01rocket@mail.gte.net
References: <011b01c126c8$45e5fe60$0100a8c0@mkbs>            <NEBBJIGOELOLIBCCPKDCIELKCBAA.geordi@c031.aone.net.au>            <OE54Vs1aLxGYiH1ZRJ60000d739@hotmail.com>            <a05100317b7a2079ba23d@[63.27.96.152]>            <011b01c126c8$45e5fe60$0100a8c0@mkbs>            <5.1.0.14.0.20010817062713.01ee1130@mail.murraystate.edu>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <a05100320b7a2dd2de7cd@[63.27.96.152]>
Date:         Fri, 17 Aug 2001 07:51:17 -0700
Reply-To: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Subject:      [AR] Candy propellant (past accidents and future greatness)
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <5.1.0.14.0.20010817062713.01ee1130@mail.murraystate.edu>

>At 08:05 PM 8/16/01 -0700, you wrote:
>
>>It is brittle.


I believe this could be solved with some research.  At least improved
enough to make a large difference.


>>It has a high burning rate exponent.
>
>KN-sucrose has an exponent of 0.32, according to Richard Nakka's web
>site.  AP propellants run 0.2-0.45.  Summerfield's model of AP combustion
>says that AP propellant should have an exponent of 0.33.


I do not use it anymore.  It may be I was referring to my own very
early tests and this does not stand up to load cell test scrutiny.
But I have received anecdotal reports from candy users I am correct
in this claim.  So there may be a usage issue.  Also this might be a
second order effect which frankly would be even more critical than a
first order effect.


>
>http://members.aol.com/riccnakk/bntest.html
>Richard describes the behavior of KN propellants with other
>fuels.  Interesting mesa and plateau behavior there.  How about a
>propellant with near-constant burn rate in some rather useful
>pressure regions?
>
>>It has poor physical properties and is only suitable for small motors.
>
>And that, I think, is an area wherein the amateur can make some real
>contribution.

Again some effort could at least improve it substanyailly.

But I ask this simple question.  Why?  I know some will say to do it
for the sake of pure science and to add to general knowledge.  Fine.
Go away, do it and don't bother me till you have a breakthrough :)

Today, now, we have substantially better options with APCP
propellants, nice commercial electronics, some above average rocket
building skills and even some track records of very technically
interesting flights.

Might I suggest a radical idea?

Focus on missions and procedures to make THOSE missions successful.
Make arocket another JPL.

Do you have any idea how crude the folks were who ran ARS back in the
late 50's and early 60's were by today's standards?  We have the
technology and knowledge base and communication and testing assets to
kick some serious as*.

Pardon me.  I suggest we do.

Jerry Irvine

>
>
>>It has low delivered ISP
>>It is processed using a heat level dangerously close to autoignition
>>   This factor has caused more accidents than any propellant I
>>personally know of
>
>Query for the entire list:  I (and many others, I'm sure) would be
>interested in details and specifics of accidents.  Not just with candy


Brian Teeling (burned his house)
Bob  Baker (severely injured)
Frank Kosdon (burned down garage)


>propellant but with all others as well.  Preferably accidents of the "I was
>there and saw this as it happened" type, with objective details such as
>propellant composition, temperature of processing, etc.  Such information
>would be enormously helpful to the list.
>
>I'll start.  I've prepared a few hundred pounds of AP propellant; not much,
>compared to the experience of some on this list.  Most of it has been
>standard stuff; 400-200-90 micron AP, HTPB, PBAN.  Additives were pretty
>standard:  Al, Mg, transition-metal-oxide burn rate catalysts, suppressants
>such as oxamide.  Some work was with AN/HTPB/Mg.  Perhaps 200 batches over
>the last 6-7 years or so.  Propellant was mixed four different ways:  hand;
>KitchenAid 4.5 qt; drill with Jiffy Mixer (sort of a paint mixer);
>hand-cranked Donvier-type ice cream maker.
>
>I've cut (by hand) and drilled (hand and power) a few hundred cores,
>stripped coring rods (Al) out of a few hundred more.
>
>If you don't count CATOs, the only "accident" I've had was only
>incidentally related to amateur rocketry, in that the motor was
>mine.  Motor is nozzle up for test.  Slide igniter into motor.  Clip one
>lead to microclip.  Clip other lead... I hear ssssSSSS.  Bowels
>loosen.  Tuck and roll.  The motor ignited, and a fraction of a second
>later the epoxy let loose and the motor blew its nozzle straight up into
>the air a few dozen feet.
>
>Faulty relay in the launch system.  From that day on, I've ALWAYS connected
>the igniter leads to the clips FIRST.  Only then do I insert the
>igniter.  Bring extra shorts anyway...
>
>P'rfesser


--
Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
Opinion, the whole thing.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 9957 invoked from network); 17 Aug 2001 15:25:51 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 17 Aug 2001 15:25:51 -0000
Received: (qmail 6723 invoked by uid 50005); 17 Aug 2001 15:26:13 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.231737 secs); 17 Aug 2001 15:26:13 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 17 Aug 2001 15:26:13 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA16780; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 08:21:38 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 87753 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 15:21:29          +0000
Received: from localhost (rcalkins@localhost) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with          ESMTP id IAA16766; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 08:21:28 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.LNX.4.10.10108170757240.16330-100000@itc.uci.edu>
Date:         Fri, 17 Aug 2001 08:21:28 -0700
Reply-To: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Candy propellant (past accidents and future greatness)
Comments: To: Jerry Irvine <01rocket@GTE.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <a05100320b7a2dd2de7cd@[63.27.96.152]>

INMHO, candy's greatest advantage is its cost/performance ratio, a major
advantage when things begin to scale.


Long ago, somebody here calculated minimium propellant to get a point mass
to orbit using sugar.  The number came in right at a ton.  Prices for 1/8
ton sugar propellant materials is just over $0.30 per pound.  Assuming no
further price reduction, this equates to theoretical $600 to orbit.  I
expect this number to drop by at least 33% with bulk purchacing.  I don't
know how cheap APCP can be made, and look forward to BrianK's results in
this area, but commercial "M" reloads are not much cheaper than $600, and
they show high production.

Sure, this number is unrealistic, there's a lot of structural mass
unaccounted for, lots of development work to pay for, etc.  Let's compare
apples and oranges:  What's the price per pound of APCP in large
quantities?  It has a little less than twice the performance of sugar.

Anybody have the price/lb figure of PSAN propellant?  I think this
propellant is a sleeping giant as well, with an Isp comparable to APCP.

Ray

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 6009 invoked from network); 17 Aug 2001 15:32:28 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 17 Aug 2001 15:32:28 -0000
Received: (qmail 21778 invoked by uid 50005); 17 Aug 2001 15:31:35 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smptf.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.669087 secs); 17 Aug 2001 15:31:35 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 17 Aug 2001 15:31:34 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA16838; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 08:28:13 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 87761 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 15:28:11          +0000
Received: from mail.conpute.com ([207.164.87.145]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7)          with ESMTP id IAA16824 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 17 Aug 2001          08:28:09 -0700
Received: by MAIL with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) id <QSNHQ10X>; Fri,          17 Aug 2001 11:25:17 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19)
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Message-ID:  <814DCE01F6D7D311994D204C4F4F50201889B6@MAIL>
Date:         Fri, 17 Aug 2001 11:25:16 -0400
Reply-To: "Earl Pottinger" <earlcp@CONPUTE.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Earl Pottinger" <earlcp@CONPUTE.COM>
Subject:      [AR] Pistonless Piston Pumps with peroxide precat cycle
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

-----Original Message-----
From: Russell McMahon [mailto:apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ]
Sent: Friday, August 17, 2001 10:55 AM
To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
Subject: Re: [AR] turbine temps with peroxide precat cycle


> >     I think an in line turbine could be made to work, but it would not
> >be easy. It would be so hard that I don't think ERPS can do it. allow me
> >to hedge, I think it would take a long time to get it good enough and
> >reliable enough to use and that ERPS will be ready for the pumps before
> >in line pumps would be ready. Nobody even talks about the seals.

>I've been avoiding commenting but my* "Pistonless Piston Pump concept
really
>invites investigation here. I hope to get to a proof of concept
demonstrator
>in the next few months but I'm happy to discuss it with anyone else
>interested in trying the very simple ideas out.

Hello,
      I tried looking on the web to see if others have made such pumps
before.  However, I mostly only found liquid ring pumps that are only good
for pumping gases and Stirling engines which are not what you are talking
about.  Looks like a new area to explore.

>I've posted a description on Arocket several times before. Basically it
>consists of a gas powered two cylinder pump where the gas acts directly on
>the propellants without any pistons per se. Controlled valves pass only gas
>and there are two non return valves which pass propellant. The gains result
>from pressurising only the pump rather than the whole propellant tank.
>Oxygen from decomposed HTP could be used to drive the HTP pump but a non
>reactive gas would be better for fuel pumping. In an HTP monoprop there is
>only one two-chambered pump.

What I don't understand is your timing control, if you run your cycles too
short you waste power, if you run them too long gas get trapped in flow.

How do you sense went to stop feeding in gas, and when to exhaust it?
Timing?

If you add a free floating piston with seals you prevent gas mixing into
your liquid stream, and the possibility to use catalysted peroxide as your
driving/working gas.

>regards
>            Russell McMahon

              Earl Colby Pottinger

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 8041 invoked from network); 17 Aug 2001 15:40:20 -0000
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 17 Aug 2001 15:40:20 -0000
Received: (qmail 32378 invoked by uid 50005); 17 Aug 2001 15:39:27 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smptf.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.465503 secs); 17 Aug 2001 15:39:27 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 17 Aug 2001 15:39:26 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA16903; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 08:37:44 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 87773 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 15:37:42          +0000
Received: from m1.jersey.juno.com (m1.jersey.juno.com [64.136.16.64]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA16889 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 08:37:41 -0700
Received: from cookie.juno.com by cookie.juno.com for          <"H3WK6e6N+bsCVJQMHM9sZFShf4uY6mKg9KLN3HEbe2pZ0uuAWdFc6A==">
Received: (from kc2csh@juno.com) by m1.jersey.juno.com (queuemail) id GC29R64P;          Fri, 17 Aug 2001 11:37:27 EDT
X-Mailer: Juno 4.0.11
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Juno-Line-Breaks: 2-16
X-Juno-Att: 0
X-Juno-RefParts: 0
Message-ID:  <20010817.114019.-3821583.0.kc2csh@juno.com>
Date:         Fri, 17 Aug 2001 08:54:33 -0400
Reply-To: <kc2csh@JUNO.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <kc2csh@JUNO.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] candy R&D
Comments: To: j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

  Since all the materials are water soluable, what happens if you simply
make a saturated solution in distilled water, then let the water
evaporate off?

              Jay

On Fri, 17 Aug 2001 10:33:17 +0000 John Dom <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM> writes:
> To avoid the step of melting: has anyone ever tried to compress
> KN/sugar/sorbitol mixtures it into, say, a Bates burner type
> cylindrical
> mould? Or heard of such method? Richard?
>
> jd
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at
> http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

________________________________________________________________
GET INTERNET ACCESS FROM JUNO!
Juno offers FREE or PREMIUM Internet access for less!
Join Juno today!  For your FREE software, visit:
http://dl.www.juno.com/get/tagj.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 20194 invoked from network); 17 Aug 2001 15:43:17 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 17 Aug 2001 15:43:17 -0000
Received: (qmail 30787 invoked by uid 50005); 17 Aug 2001 15:43:39 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.247855 secs); 17 Aug 2001 15:43:39 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 17 Aug 2001 15:43:38 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA16981; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 08:40:47 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 87794 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 15:40:46          +0000
Received: from femail15.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail15.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.0.95.142]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA16967          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 08:40:46 -0700
Received: from hal2001 ([24.77.53.16]) by femail15.sdc1.sfba.home.com          (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20 201-229-121-120-20010223) with SMTP id          <20010817154040.MZIZ8323.femail15.sdc1.sfba.home.com@hal2001> for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 08:40:40 -0700
References:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010817083502.8394A-100000@spsystems.net>              <008a01c1271c$ebaf8240$0400a8c0@hatjs>             <00af01c1272a$1b44fbe0$0100a8c0@mkbs>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <00ca01c12731$d7590220$0400a8c0@hatjs>
Date:         Fri, 17 Aug 2001 08:32:35 -0700
Reply-To: "Jamie Morken" <jmorken@HOME.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jamie Morken" <jmorken@HOME.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] optoisolators
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Hi all,


> If you want to use opto isolation then you would procede as folows using
the
> 4 channel isolatyor that you have selected.
>
> Opto pin 1 = anode 1
> pin 2 = cathode 1
> pin 16 = collector 1
> pin 15 = emitter 1
>

Russell, I don't think you hooked up the gate of the mosfet to the
optoisolator output in your last email which is the part I am stuck at. :)
Here is a link to the optoisolator circuit I have so far.  The 4 control
wires leading out to the left are going to the microcontroller (to turn the
mosfets on and off)  I have some extra resistors in there that I'm not sure
if I should have included or not as well as a few unconnected wires that I
can't figure out.  The mosfets would be used for ignitors and potentially
motors for parasail control etc.

Here is the link:
www.rocketresearch.org/optoisolators.bmp
(114KB)

best regards,
Jamie

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 2426 invoked from network); 17 Aug 2001 15:53:42 -0000
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 17 Aug 2001 15:53:42 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 17163 invoked by uid 50005); 17 Aug 2001 15:52:49 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smptf.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.250634 secs); 17 Aug 2001 15:52:49 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 17 Aug 2001 15:52:49 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA17054; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 08:51:11 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 87807 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 15:51:09          +0000
Received: from mail.aros.net (mail.aros.net [207.173.16.20]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA17040 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Fri,          17 Aug 2001 08:51:09 -0700
Received: from biomicro.com ([208.187.122.40]) by mail.aros.net (8.11.3/8.9.3)          with ESMTP id f7HFp8n19807 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Fri, 17 Aug          2001 09:51:08 -0600 (MDT)
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.77 [en] (Win98; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <LPBBKJMJEOFKAMFJJNNHKEJFCGAA.landofgrey@gnc.net>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B7C866B.9AED0636@biomicro.com>
Date:         Thu, 16 Aug 2001 20:50:19 -0600
Reply-To: "Mark K. Spute" <mks@BIOMICRO.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Mark K. Spute" <mks@BIOMICRO.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] ERPS successfully runs H2O2 engine
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Interesting stuff.

As you say though, this document was written by the Solid Propulsion
Industry Action Group, a very pro-solids group.  As my mother's
statistics professor used to say, "There are white lies, damn lies, and
statistics."  AFAIK the only astronauts or cosmonauts to ever die as a
direct result of a catastrophic failure of the main propulsion system
did so atop a solid rocket booster.  Liquid propellant failures *may*
occur with somewhat higher frequency, but as you pointed out the results
tend to be somewhat more benign.  I've personally witnessed two biprops
hard start on the pad.  The result was essentially losing the lower part
of the rocket from the main fuel valves down, but the upper part of the
vehicle, including the tankage, was fine.  I'd rather have the engine
come apart "way down there" than up around my hips.

Just my personal opinion though.

I used to believe that the only viable use that a solid propellant
rockets had was
as a weapon.  I have since changed my mind.  I've seen a lot of great
amateur/experimental work done with solids.  They are reasonably cheap,
simple, and can lob instruments, guidance systems, computers, etc. etc.
often enough to get some really great data.  Plus, they are fun.  (Not
an inconsequential factor.)

However, if and when the time ever come that I wedge my butt onto a
rocket, it will probably be a LOx/hydrocarbon bipropellant.

Matthew Travis wrote:
>
> I've got the document laying around here somewhere... According to the Solid
> Propulsion Industry Action Group, it is quantifiable that liquids have a
> *lower* history of reliability than solids. In fact, since 1957, the space
> launch history shows that 39% of failures were due to liquid propulsion, and
> 20% to solid propulsion (17% G&C, 8% staging, 5% fairing, 2% destruct system
> failure, 1% lightning, and 7% unknown). Also, upper stage solid motors have
> a 98.41% reliability (10 failures out of 627 attempts), monolithic boosters
> 99.76% reliability (6 failures out of 2464 attempts), and segmented boosters
> 99.25% reliability (3 failures out of 402 attempts). Totals: 19 failures in
> 3493 attempts for a reliability of 99.46%. These figures are for
> satellite-carrying vehicles, BTW. comparing, liquid-fuel systems have a
> reliability of 98.03% (37 failures out of 1880 attempts). Also, 70% of
> failures of liquid propulsion systems occur outside of the engine. Solids
> have failed at a rate of 1 per 179 boosters, while liquids have failed at a
> rate of 1 per every 51 stages. As far a numbers of catastrophic failure
> points (places where failure can occur), the space shuttle RSRM's have 91
> single-point catastrophic failure modes and 50 failure modes with redundancy
> (141 total failure modes). The SSME's have 921 catastrophic failure modes. I
> admit the SSME's are the most complex liquid engines ever built, but they
> are also the most reliable.
>
> Out of 19 total failures, solids had 7 catastrophic failures, for a
> catastrophic ratio of 37%. Out of 37 total failures, liquids also had seven
> catastrophic failures, a rate of 19%. This is where solids get their bad
> reputation. When they fail, they are more likely to be catastrophic than
> when liquids fail. However... with a failure rate of 0.0054 and a
> catastrophic ratio of 37%, solids have a catastrophic failure rate of
> 0.0020. Liquids, with a failure rate of 0.0197 and a catastrophic ratio of
> 19%, have a catastrophic failure rate of 0.0037. Liquids are more likely to
> fail catastrophically than solids. Historically.
>
> Since 1985, though, solids and liquids have about the same failure rate.
> Solids have failed 6 out of 1423 times and liquids have failed 7 out of 505
> times. The numeric failure rate for liquids is higher than solids, but since
> solid boosters are usually used in multiples of 2, 4, 5, or 9, the failure
> rate per stage (when considering, e.g. 2 solid strap-ons firing at the same
> time to be one stage) is essesntially the same.
>
> Anyhow, I got these figures from the SPIAG's Solid Rocket Motor Briefing
> from June 1999. You can find it on their website at http://www.spiag.org/
>
> Oh yeah, disclaimer: I am not expressing a personal opinion as to which is
> safer. I am merely re-iterating the SPIAG's document (duh, they're biased
> toward solids and not ashamed of it). My personal opinion is that all forms
> of propulsion are equally valid and useful and neat and cool (and that
> should pacify everyone).
>
> -Matt
>
> > >
> > >To each his own opinion.  JMHO, I think that liquids are much safer than
> > >solids.  Espescially in manned aplications.  Most readers on the list
> > >are not working towards manned rockets, but I'd like to think that
> > >someday, maybe, I could build one big enough.  Now all I need is a fat
> > >bank to knock over and I'll get started on it.
> > >

--
Mark K. Spute
Senior Research Engineer
BioMicro Systems Inc.

KD7IWE,  RRS

"It is difficult to say what is impossible, for the dream of yesterday
is the hope of today and the reality of tomorrow."
     Dr. Robert H. Goddard

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 6458 invoked from network); 17 Aug 2001 15:54:41 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 17 Aug 2001 15:54:41 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 10823 invoked by uid 50005); 17 Aug 2001 15:55:02 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.377435 secs); 17 Aug 2001 15:55:02 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 17 Aug 2001 15:55:02 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA17077; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 08:52:40 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 87814 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 15:52:39          +0000
Received: from mail.aros.net (mail.aros.net [207.173.16.20]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA17060 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri,          17 Aug 2001 08:52:21 -0700
Received: from biomicro.com ([208.187.122.40]) by mail.aros.net (8.11.3/8.9.3)          with ESMTP id f7HFqIn20229 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 17 Aug          2001 09:52:19 -0600 (MDT)
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.77 [en] (Win98; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <NEBBJIGOELOLIBCCPKDCIELKCBAA.geordi@c031.aone.net.au>            <OE54Vs1aLxGYiH1ZRJ60000d739@hotmail.com>            <a05100317b7a2079ba23d@[63.27.96.152]>            <4.3.1.2.20010816201429.02e80498@mail.idsoftware.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B7C86B2.561EFE85@biomicro.com>
Date:         Thu, 16 Aug 2001 20:51:30 -0600
Reply-To: "Mark K. Spute" <mks@BIOMICRO.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Mark K. Spute" <mks@BIOMICRO.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] ERPS successfully runs H2O2 engine
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Cool!  No, Wait.  WAY COOL!

What would I have to do to hitch a ride sometime?

John Carmack wrote:
>
> >
> >To each his own opinion.  JMHO, I think that liquids are much safer than
> >solids.  Espescially in manned aplications.  Most readers on the list
> >are not working towards manned rockets, but I'd like to think that
> >someday, maybe, I could build one big enough.  Now all I need is a fat
> >bank to knock over and I'll get started on it.
> >
> >--
> >Mark K. Spute
> >Senior Research Engineer
> >BioMicro Systems Inc.
>
> We will have a man off the ground in one of our vehicles within two months.
>
> It will still be a "parking lot VTVL", but I am damn proud of the progress
> we have made in our first year, and I am willing to go on the record saying
> that we will have a supersonic manned rocket ship in 2002.
>
> John Carmack
> www.armadilloaerospace.com

--
Mark K. Spute
Senior Research Engineer
BioMicro Systems Inc.

KD7IWE,  RRS

"It is difficult to say what is impossible, for the dream of yesterday
is the hope of today and the reality of tomorrow."
     Dr. Robert H. Goddard

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 7083 invoked from network); 17 Aug 2001 16:02:16 -0000
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 17 Aug 2001 16:02:16 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 28394 invoked by uid 50005); 17 Aug 2001 16:01:23 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smptf.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.198713 secs); 17 Aug 2001 16:01:23 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 17 Aug 2001 16:01:23 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA17153; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 08:59:35 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 87831 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 15:59:33          +0000
Received: from mail.aros.net (mail.aros.net [207.173.16.20]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA17139 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri,          17 Aug 2001 08:59:32 -0700
Received: from biomicro.com ([208.187.122.40]) by mail.aros.net (8.11.3/8.9.3)          with ESMTP id f7HFxVn22592 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 17 Aug          2001 09:59:31 -0600 (MDT)
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.77 [en] (Win98; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <F41sFFsAitVGeSJIEoP000037d2@hotmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B7C8862.FB95BD4@biomicro.com>
Date:         Thu, 16 Aug 2001 20:58:42 -0600
Reply-To: "Mark K. Spute" <mks@BIOMICRO.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Mark K. Spute" <mks@BIOMICRO.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] urethane fuel?
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

The typical method in the plastics industry for quick and dirty
identification of unknown materials is the flame test.  Simply, hold a
part of the unknown material over a flame for a few seconds and see what
the smoke smells like.  Each major thermoplastic material has a distinct
smell.  I.e. urethanes smell different from ethelyenes, which smell
different from nylons, which smell differeent from propylenes, etc.  You
may need to burn a sample of a known urethane to compare it to.  Be
aware that co-polymers, and additives can affect the smell
substantially.

Matt Faulkner wrote:
>
> Hi list,
>   today I re-discovered two cylindrical rods of what I suspect are urethane.
> They are from an old printer I junked, are black, about 10.5" long by about
> 1.5" outer diameter with a 3/8" hole down the center. My questions are: 1.
> can anyone help me determine their material?, and 2. as a ballpark figure,
> how much nitrous should I need to burn them (assuming they're urethane)? Any
> idea of the performance?
>                                     Thanks,
>                                         Matt Faulkner
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

--
Mark K. Spute
Senior Research Engineer
BioMicro Systems Inc.

KD7IWE,  RRS

"It is difficult to say what is impossible, for the dream of yesterday
is the hope of today and the reality of tomorrow."
     Dr. Robert H. Goddard

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 24635 invoked from network); 17 Aug 2001 16:06:41 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 17 Aug 2001 16:06:41 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 12445 invoked by uid 50005); 17 Aug 2001 16:06:32 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (. Clean. Processed in 0.148264 secs); 17 Aug 2001 16:06:32 -0000
X-Qmail-Scanner-Mail-From: owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU via smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net
X-Qmail-Scanner-Rcpt-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
X-Qmail-Scanner: 0.96 (No viruses found. Processed in 0.148264 secs)
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 17 Aug 2001 16:06:32 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA17221; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 09:04:42 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 87847 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 16:04:30          +0000
Received: from spsystems.net (spsystems.net [209.47.149.227]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA17207 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Fri,          17 Aug 2001 09:04:29 -0700
Received: (from henry@localhost) by spsystems.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id MAA11188;          Fri, 17 Aug 2001 12:03:57 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010817120310.10687D-100000@spsystems.net>
Date:         Fri, 17 Aug 2001 12:03:57 -0400
Reply-To: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] urethane fuel?
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <3B7C8862.FB95BD4@biomicro.com>

On Thu, 16 Aug 2001, Mark K. Spute wrote:
> You may need to burn a sample of a known urethane to compare it to.  Be
> aware that co-polymers, and additives can affect the smell
> substantially.

Be aware, also, that breathing the smoke from burning plastics is
generally not good for you...

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 17750 invoked from network); 17 Aug 2001 16:12:19 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 17 Aug 2001 16:12:19 -0000
Received: (qmail 12400 invoked by uid 50005); 17 Aug 2001 16:10:57 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smpte.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.118271 secs); 17 Aug 2001 16:10:57 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 17 Aug 2001 16:10:56 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA17298; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 09:10:02 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 87865 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 16:10:00          +0000
Received: from localhost (rcalkins@localhost) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with          ESMTP id JAA17272; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 09:09:00 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.LNX.4.10.10108170857321.16330-100000@itc.uci.edu>
Date:         Fri, 17 Aug 2001 09:09:00 -0700
Reply-To: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
Subject:      Re: [AR] candy R&D
Comments: To: kc2csh@JUNO.COM
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <20010817.114019.-3821583.0.kc2csh@juno.com>

On Fri, 17 Aug 2001 kc2csh@JUNO.COM wrote:

>   Since all the materials are water soluable, what happens if you simply
> make a saturated solution in distilled water, then let the water
> evaporate off?
This is Yawn's process, which I've been working with.  It works great.
Difficulty is getting an consistient water content in the end product,
which greately affects burn rate and physical characteristics.

Here in NM, we're in our seasonal Monsoon and high humidity.  The last
several batches I've made have been too wet, so I'm starting to look at
the melt-cast process, although possibly using the recrystalized
propellant as a feedstock.

Ray

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 17948 invoked from network); 17 Aug 2001 16:12:22 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 17 Aug 2001 16:12:22 -0000
Received: (qmail 17218 invoked by uid 50005); 17 Aug 2001 16:12:12 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (. Clean. Processed in 0.094462 secs); 17 Aug 2001 16:12:12 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
X-Qmail-Scanner-Mail-From: owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU via smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net
X-Qmail-Scanner-Rcpt-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
X-Qmail-Scanner: 0.96 (No viruses found. Processed in 0.094462 secs)
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 17 Aug 2001 16:12:11 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA17266; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 09:08:38 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 87858 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 16:08:37          +0000
Received: from mail.aros.net (mail.aros.net [207.173.16.20]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA17252 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri,          17 Aug 2001 09:08:36 -0700
Received: from biomicro.com ([208.187.122.40]) by mail.aros.net (8.11.3/8.9.3)          with ESMTP id f7HG8Zn25548 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 17 Aug          2001 10:08:35 -0600 (MDT)
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.77 [en] (Win98; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <F103COWHJVkl4AU1O6Y0000bc7f@hotmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B7C8A83.94230D2E@biomicro.com>
Date:         Thu, 16 Aug 2001 21:07:47 -0600
Reply-To: "Mark K. Spute" <mks@BIOMICRO.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Mark K. Spute" <mks@BIOMICRO.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] liq vs solid
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

I think Matthew is referring to valves, pumps, pressurization systems,
wiring, electronic controls, hydraulic actuators, etc.

Is that right, Matthew?

John Dom wrote:
>
> MT wrote:
>
> >                     ...BTW. comparing, liquid-fuel systems have a
> >reliability of 98.03% (37 failures out of 1880 attempts). Also, 70% of
> >failures of liquid propulsion systems occur outside of the engine.
>
> "outside of the engine": Meaning?
>
> JD
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

--
Mark K. Spute
Senior Research Engineer
BioMicro Systems Inc.

KD7IWE,  RRS

"It is difficult to say what is impossible, for the dream of yesterday
is the hope of today and the reality of tomorrow."
     Dr. Robert H. Goddard

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 23322 invoked from network); 17 Aug 2001 16:20:56 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 17 Aug 2001 16:20:56 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 22712 invoked by uid 50005); 17 Aug 2001 16:20:03 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smptf.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.215523 secs); 17 Aug 2001 16:20:03 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 17 Aug 2001 16:20:02 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA17447; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 09:17:51 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 87903 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 16:17:44          +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (f168.law15.hotmail.com [64.4.23.168]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA17432 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 09:17:43 -0700
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Fri,          17 Aug 2001 09:17:13 -0700
Received: from 213.224.83.110 by lw15fd.law15.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Fri,          17 Aug 2001 16:17:13 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [213.224.83.110]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 17 Aug 2001 16:17:13.0674 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[133162A0:01C12738]
Message-ID:  <F168N39x6HHGNZ4mF1I0000c29e@hotmail.com>
Date:         Fri, 17 Aug 2001 16:17:44 +0000
Reply-To: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] candy R&D
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Jay wrote:

>   Since all the materials are water soluable, what happens if you simply
>make a saturated solution in distilled water, then let the water
>evaporate off?

After dissolving both, you'll have to evaporate the water (1).
Next you end up with a crystal cake. Albeit probably more intimately mixed
than attainable by fine powder mixing, you'll have to mill the cake (2) and
eventually screen this powder (3).

So, apart from perhaps a better mixing, after much toil, you'll end up where
you started from.

Unless crystillisation adds something essential to the mixture, I cannot
think of a reason why, this leads nowhere.

Compressing fine mixed powder at high pressures into ylinders maybe a trick
to avoid melting the sugars. But I know of no report if such works.
High pressure presses are perhaps not so difficult to realize or buy 2nd
hand. Making the mould cylinders and pressing cone (star?): you'll need a
big lathe I guess.

jd

_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 17380 invoked from network); 17 Aug 2001 16:34:44 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 17 Aug 2001 16:34:44 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 26205 invoked by uid 50005); 17 Aug 2001 16:35:06 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.199292 secs); 17 Aug 2001 16:35:06 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 17 Aug 2001 16:35:05 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA17543; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 09:28:28 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 87925 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 16:28:24          +0000
Received: from mail.aros.net (mail.aros.net [207.173.16.20]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA17529 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri,          17 Aug 2001 09:28:23 -0700
Received: from biomicro.com ([208.187.122.40]) by mail.aros.net (8.11.3/8.9.3)          with ESMTP id f7HGSMn31936 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 17 Aug          2001 10:28:22 -0600 (MDT)
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.77 [en] (Win98; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <007801c12717$6a56f7a0$0400a8c0@hatjs>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B7C8F26.3A4D7EA9@biomicro.com>
Date:         Thu, 16 Aug 2001 21:27:34 -0600
Reply-To: "Mark K. Spute" <mks@BIOMICRO.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Mark K. Spute" <mks@BIOMICRO.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] optoisolators
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Thanks for the link Jamie.  I downloaded the software today and will try
it out.  I have been using ExpressPCB, but it does not have any
provision for importing schematics or autorouting.

Now if I could just find a good freeware SPICE program capable of
handling 2.4 GHz mixed signal circuits that will run on WinDoze 98.  ;)


Jamie Morken wrote:

[snip of stuff about optoisolators]

> Eagle cad is free and a great tool for designing PCB's:
> http://www.cadsoftusa.com/

--
Mark K. Spute
Senior Research Engineer
BioMicro Systems Inc.

KD7IWE,  RRS

"It is difficult to say what is impossible, for the dream of yesterday
is the hope of today and the reality of tomorrow."
     Dr. Robert H. Goddard

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 20129 invoked from network); 17 Aug 2001 16:35:20 -0000
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 17 Aug 2001 16:35:20 -0000
Received: (qmail 11721 invoked by uid 50005); 17 Aug 2001 16:33:57 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smpte.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 1.047487 secs); 17 Aug 2001 16:33:57 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 17 Aug 2001 16:33:55 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA17572; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 09:29:59 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 87932 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 16:29:58          +0000
Received: from dune.gnc.net (root@dune.gnc.net [207.203.72.4]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA17549 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri,          17 Aug 2001 09:29:12 -0700
Received: from beowulf (sw2-44.gnc.net [207.203.72.124]) by dune.gnc.net          (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id MAA14779 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri,          17 Aug 2001 12:29:11 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <LPBBKJMJEOFKAMFJJNNHAEJNCGAA.landofgrey@gnc.net>
Date:         Fri, 17 Aug 2001 12:28:46 -0400
Reply-To: <landofgrey@gnc.net>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Matthew Travis" <landofgrey@gnc.net>
Subject:      Re: [AR] ERPS successfully runs H2O2 engine
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <3B7C866B.9AED0636@biomicro.com>

I think the fairest assessment would be that the reliability histories of
solids and liquids show them to have success rates within one-tenth of one
percent of each other. Some may argue with me, but I think that is an
insignificant difference. Besides, the vast majority of failures have been
due to non-propulsion causes.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU]On
> Behalf Of Mark K. Spute
>
> AFAIK the only astronauts or cosmonauts to ever die as a
> direct result of a catastrophic failure of the main propulsion system
> did so atop a solid rocket booster.
I won't espouse my true feelings toward statistics. I voted in Florida and
have determined that the inventor of statistics also invented the punch-card
ballot. It's all in how you interpret the numbers.

True, but, in fairness, that was only a single failure instance.
Additionally, the failure happened in a way such that if the orbiter had
been designed properly without trying to cut corners to *cough* save money,
there would have been a means of escape. Escape rockets would have saved
them. The failure happened over the course of 72 seconds, which for all
other manned vehicles would have been enough time to fire an escape rocket
or ejection seat. Remember, it wasn't one of those cases of "everything was
perfect, then boom". By way of note, in 1982 a Sooyuz rocket caught fire and
blew up on the pad. It was an escape rocket that carried the cosmonauts to
safety. Two things to point out here. If the Soyuz was like the shuttle,
without a means of escape, they would have died. Lqiquid, solid, doesn't
matter. Second, the escape rocket was solid-fueled. So, perhaps in this
case, we can say that a solid propellant rocket saved lives (I'm being silly
here). We also can't forget that hundreds of Soviet engineers have been
killed due to liquid fueled rockets blowing up on the pad. It could have
happened with solid rockets too, but they tend to be stable while sitting
around waiting for launch.

> Liquid propellant failures *may*
> occur with somewhat higher frequency, but as you pointed out the results
> tend to be somewhat more benign.
I agree and I think this is the main point to keep in mind. Advocates of
solids point out that liquids fail more often. Proponents of liquid
propellants point out that liquids are less likely to fail catastrophically
when they do fail. I guess you just have to pick the stat that you like
better.

A good example is STS-51F. An SSME detected a redline at approx. 5 1/2
minutes into flight and shutdown. The shuttle still made it to orbit. While
there was a failure, it was "benign"; it didn't explode and the engine could
be turned off. There's another lesson, though, as well. The redline was a
misreading due to vibration. The shutdown was unecessary and had it occurred
15 seconds earlier, Challenger (that was the orbiter for STS-51F) would have
ended up at the bottom of the Atlantic. So this other lesson is that liquid
engines have more opportunities to fail (more failure points). So here you
have the tradeoff. An engine less likely to fail at all, or an engine less
likely to fail catastrophically when it does fail. The SSME's are more
likely to fail (they have failed after ignition 5 times during shuttle
launches) but have never failed catastrophically. The SRB's have failed once
(not counting the close calls with O-ring charring and such), but it was
catastrophic. Tradeoffs tradeoffs.

I've personally witnessed two biprops
> hard start on the pad.  The result was essentially losing the lower part
> of the rocket from the main fuel valves down, but the upper part of the
> vehicle, including the tankage, was fine.  I'd rather have the engine
> come apart "way down there" than up around my hips.
The Delta III is infamous around here. I went to 3 launches. One succeeded.
One blew up due to (I think) a solid motor failure, and one failed due to a
liquid motor failure. The lesson here: they all can fail, they all can
succeed, period.

I personally think that liquids are more suitable for manned operations.
They are infintely more flexible in terms of on-demand throttling, shutdown,
etc. And, although it can be argued, I think they offer more opportunities
to escape in case of problems. They do offer the ability to build in
contingency plans. With solids, that doesn't hold true.

Solids have advantages with unmanned rockets, though. They are much simpler
to build, they have storability, on-demand firing, etc. And as for
throttling, that isn't an issue. Sure solids can't be throttled except by
way of shaping the grain just so. However, the only American ELV that
throttles its liquid engine is the Atlas III (and that is a Russian engine).
The Delta II, Delta III, Atlas 2, Titan IV, Titan II, and the rest do not
use throttling (this is one reason they are too expensive and inefficient).
So, in this particular case, the fact that solids can't be throttled and
liquids (theoretically) can is a moot point.

>
> However, if and when the time ever come that I wedge my butt onto a
> rocket, it will probably be a LOx/hydrocarbon bipropellant.
>
I definitely agree. Even if solids and liquids were exactly the same in
terms of reliability and such, I still remember Challenger. Give me a liquid
and a means of escape. If nothing else, I'd *feel* safer.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 17680 invoked from network); 17 Aug 2001 16:49:52 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 17 Aug 2001 16:49:52 -0000
Received: (qmail 12524 invoked by uid 50005); 17 Aug 2001 16:50:13 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.699732 secs); 17 Aug 2001 16:50:13 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 17 Aug 2001 16:50:12 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA17801; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 09:47:37 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 87997 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 16:47:31          +0000
Received: from spsystems.net (spsystems.net [209.47.149.227]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA17787 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Fri,          17 Aug 2001 09:47:30 -0700
Received: (from henry@localhost) by spsystems.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id MAA11667;          Fri, 17 Aug 2001 12:46:58 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010817124204.11514A-100000@spsystems.net>
Date:         Fri, 17 Aug 2001 12:46:57 -0400
Reply-To: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Subject:      [AR] reliability (was Re: [AR] ERPS successfully runs H2O2 engine)
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <LPBBKJMJEOFKAMFJJNNHAEJNCGAA.landofgrey@gnc.net>

On Fri, 17 Aug 2001, Matthew Travis wrote:
> I won't espouse my true feelings toward statistics. I voted in Florida and
> have determined that the inventor of statistics also invented the punch-card
> ballot. It's all in how you interpret the numbers.

Actually, any real statistician would cringe at a lot of the fluff that
gets put out about rocket reliability -- for example, quoting reliability
numbers to three or four decimal places based on a few dozen trials!  This
is not statistics, this is numerical bullshit, pure and simple.

A good rule of thumb for evaluating such numbers is:  how much would the
number change if *one launch* had gone differently?  That gives you some
idea of how precise, or rather imprecise, most of those figures are.

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 22571 invoked from network); 17 Aug 2001 16:51:06 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 17 Aug 2001 16:51:06 -0000
Received: (qmail 14665 invoked by uid 50005); 17 Aug 2001 16:51:27 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.505871 secs); 17 Aug 2001 16:51:27 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 17 Aug 2001 16:51:26 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA17829; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 09:49:01 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 88006 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 16:48:59          +0000
Received: from mailgw1a.lmco.com (mailgw1a.lmco.com [192.31.106.7]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA17806 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 09:47:48 -0700
Received: from emss02g01.ems.lmco.com (relay2.ems.lmco.com [166.29.2.54]) by          mailgw1a.lmco.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id KAA06075; Fri, 17 Aug          2001 10:47:46 -0600 (MDT)
Received: from CONVERSION-DAEMON by lmco.com (PMDF V5.2-33 #38887) id          <0GI800I011BLQH@lmco.com>; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 10:47:45 -0600 (MDT)
Received: from emss02i00.ems.lmco.com ([166.29.2.48]) by lmco.com (PMDF V5.2-33          #38887) with ESMTP id <0GI800OV61BGDF@lmco.com>; Fri, 17 Aug 2001          10:47:40 -0600 (MDT)
Received: by emss02i00.ems.lmco.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) id          <Q9D99MPG>; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 10:48:46 -0600
Content-return: allowed
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19)
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <EDB5E5136094D311BF1800508B12205E08D290F1@emss02m07.ems.lmco.com>
Date:         Fri, 17 Aug 2001 10:48:44 -0600
Reply-To: "Bendel, Timothy B" <timothy.b.bendel@LMCO.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Bendel, Timothy B" <timothy.b.bendel@LMCO.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Solid rocket boosters
Comments: To: John Carmack <johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

John,

We all have opinions on this subject, and I guess I am one of the people who
feel that solids have been given a "bad rap". I do not think that the
ability to throttle and shut down is that big a deal for a booster
(definitely a very big deal for attitude control thrusters!) In general, a
launch vehicle that goes to orbit either makes it / doesn't make it. The one
example I can think of is the Space Shuttle which performed a single "abort
to orbit" in the last twenty years (it turned out to be a sensor failure,
IIRC).

What all this means is, if you have an engine failure in a liquid, you've
lost the mission anyway. A properly designed solid can have blast ports to
terminate thrust, and an Apollo-style escape system would work equally well
with either a liquid or solid booster. The Shuttle's solids have a burn
profile that coincides with the throttle settings on the liquids (throttle
down for max Q) and so active real-time throttling isn't really necessary.

In my circle of friends, we have several "pro-liquid" types. Whenever a
solid lets go, I get the "see- solids aren't reliable!" argument. But when a
liquid fails (and a benign failure is still a failure) all sorts of excuses
fly: "It shut down early do to a software glitch"  or such. Solids don't
need flight software (for engine performance, obviously they need guidance).


I can think of several liquid failures in recent years, but they don't get
much press: Cosmos upper stage early shut down last year, Ariane V last
month, two Japanese H-2 engine failures, Delta 3 upper stage failure...but
all of these are somehow re-categorized.

I think that for both liquids and solids, the inherent safety is directly
proportional to the margin in the design. So for your hypothetical X-Prize
question I think a pair of robust solids with plenty of margin (case wall,
thickness, robust nozzle insulation, etc.) would be much more preferable to
a liquid hydrogen engine with turbopumps spinning at 80K RPM, 3500 psi
chamber pressure, etc.

Tim Bendel

> -----Original Message-----
> From: John Carmack [SMTP:johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM]
> Sent: Friday, August 17, 2001 2:21 AM
> To:   AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
> Subject:      [AR] Solid rocket boosters
>
> Since liquid vs solid and manned rockets have come up, let me pose this
> hypothetical situation:
>
> Say someone built an X-Prize vehicle, got it all tested, and found that it
> only went to 80 km instead of 100 km.  Strapping two big (50,000+ pound
> seconds) solids on the side is suggested.
>
> Is anyone here confident enough in their solids that they would ride in a
> vehicle that required two of them to perform safely and substantially
> identically?
>
> What design and process steps would you take if you were tasked with
> providing the boosters?
>
> If I was in that situation, I would almost certainly rebuild the vehicle,
> or add a pressurized drop tank or something, but I could easily see
> someone
> that is nearly out of funding, or in a real race with a competitor, going
> for the band-aid fix.
>
> I have mixed feelings about solids.  They take one of my dearest
> principles
> to the logical extreme -- do all the complex stuff in preprocessing to
> make
> the runtime as simple as possible, but the variability and lack of
> individual testability, combined with the obvious throttle / shutdown /
> restart issues, are serious.
>
> John Carmack

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 25142 invoked from network); 17 Aug 2001 16:58:59 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 17 Aug 2001 16:58:59 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 12282 invoked by uid 50005); 17 Aug 2001 16:57:36 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smpte.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.110995 secs); 17 Aug 2001 16:57:36 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 17 Aug 2001 16:57:36 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA17889; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 09:56:07 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 88019 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 16:56:05          +0000
Received: from po4.glue.umd.edu (po4.glue.umd.edu [128.8.10.124]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA17874 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 09:56:04 -0700
Received: from z.glue.umd.edu (IDENT:root@z.glue.umd.edu [128.8.10.71]) by          po4.glue.umd.edu (8.10.1/8.10.1) with ESMTP id f7HGu3t24512 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 12:56:03 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from z.glue.umd.edu (IDENT:sendmail@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by          z.glue.umd.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id MAA27599 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 12:56:03 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from localhost (acase@localhost) by z.glue.umd.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with          ESMTP id MAA27595 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 17 Aug 2001          12:56:03 -0400 (EDT)
X-Authentication-Warning: z.glue.umd.edu: acase owned process doing -bs
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.GSO.4.21.0108171247060.26363-100000@z.glue.umd.edu>
Date:         Fri, 17 Aug 2001 12:56:03 -0400
Reply-To: "Andrew Case" <acase@GLUE.UMD.EDU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Andrew Case" <acase@GLUE.UMD.EDU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] turbine temps with peroxide precat cycle
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <010301c1272d$28d45460$0100a8c0@mkbs>

On Sat, 18 Aug 2001, Russell McMahon wrote:

> I've posted a description on Arocket several times before. Basically it
> consists of a gas powered two cylinder pump where the gas acts directly on
> the propellants without any pistons per se. Controlled valves pass only gas
> and there are two non return valves which pass propellant. The gains result
> from pressurising only the pump rather than the whole propellant tank.

I thought up something similar (you know what they say about great
minds :) - anyway, my conclusion was that you want three pressure
chambers so you have fewer problems with switching between them. In
it's simplest incarnation, what you describe sounds pretty good to me.
Only when you need smooth transitions does it become advantageous to
add a chamber, and maybe not even then - perhaps just a smart method
of buffering the pressure during the switchover. Sounds like it's well
worth a shot.

good luck,
......Andrew

Andrew Case                             |
acase@plasma.umd.edu                    |
Institute for Plasma Research           |
University of Maryland, College Park    |

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 359 invoked from network); 17 Aug 2001 17:00:15 -0000
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 17 Aug 2001 17:00:15 -0000
Received: (qmail 14238 invoked by uid 50005); 17 Aug 2001 16:58:53 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smpte.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.521284 secs); 17 Aug 2001 16:58:53 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 17 Aug 2001 16:58:51 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA17924; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 09:57:34 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 88026 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 16:57:33          +0000
Received: from mailhost0.trib.com (mailhost0.trib.com [63.229.150.3]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA17897; Fri, 17 Aug 2001          09:56:58 -0700
Received: from mail.trib.com (mail.trib.com [12.10.158.17]) by          mailhost0.trib.com (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f7HGuvT74819; Fri,          17 Aug 2001 10:56:57 -0600 (MDT) (envelope-from          jwckman@space-rockets.com)
Received: from [63.229.150.83] (HELO hppav) by mail.trib.com (CommuniGate Pro          SMTP 3.4.6) with SMTP id 42825399; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 10:56:56 -0600
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
Importance: Normal
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <NKEHJAOOKBPGIKOOPDEFGEFGCBAA.jwckman@space-rockets.com>
Date:         Fri, 17 Aug 2001 10:55:23 -0600
Reply-To: "John Wickman" <jwckman@SPACE-ROCKETS.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Wickman" <jwckman@SPACE-ROCKETS.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Candy propellant (past accidents and future greatness)
Comments: To: Ray Calkins <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <Pine.LNX.4.10.10108170757240.16330-100000@itc.uci.edu>

I think the one ton propellant weight is way low.   I took the launch
vehicles that were all solids and plotted their payload weight to orbit(LEO)
vs. propellant weight.   When you curve fit the data, you come up with about
12,000 lb of propellant for zero payload to LEO.   Essentially, the spend
3rd or 4th stage, depending on the vehicle, just makes it to orbit without a
payload.   All of those vehicles were AP composite propellant.   As you
mention, sugar propellants have an Isp of about half so their propellant
weight would be on the order of 24,000 lb, not 2,000 lb based on the curve.
That would make the cost $7,200 which is still a bargain.

For PSAN propellant in bulk (materials only), the cost would be about $1.65
per pound.   The price for AP I would think would be a little higher as AP
is more expensive in bulk than PSAN (PSAN bulk price about $0.75/lb).   The
propellant cost for composites is definitely higher than sugar even using
less propellant.   What's missing is the labor cost to process the
propellants and the state of the art in the technology in using the
propellant in a launch vehicle.   AP propellant is proven technology in
launch vehicles and has the highest labor cost.   PSAN has yet to be proven
in a launch vehicle although no show stoppers are seen.   The labor cost is
cheaper as the propellant is easier to process with less steps and less
manhours.   Sugar propellants have a way to go for them to be usable in
launch vehicle class motors, but the labor required to process the
propellant is the probably the least of any solid propellant out there.

John Wickman

-----Original Message-----
From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU]On
Behalf Of Ray Calkins
Sent: Friday, August 17, 2001 9:21 AM
To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
Subject: Re: [AR] Candy propellant (past accidents and future greatness)


INMHO, candy's greatest advantage is its cost/performance ratio, a major
advantage when things begin to scale.


Long ago, somebody here calculated minimium propellant to get a point mass
to orbit using sugar.  The number came in right at a ton.  Prices for 1/8
ton sugar propellant materials is just over $0.30 per pound.  Assuming no
further price reduction, this equates to theoretical $600 to orbit.  I
expect this number to drop by at least 33% with bulk purchacing.  I don't
know how cheap APCP can be made, and look forward to BrianK's results in
this area, but commercial "M" reloads are not much cheaper than $600, and
they show high production.

Sure, this number is unrealistic, there's a lot of structural mass
unaccounted for, lots of development work to pay for, etc.  Let's compare
apples and oranges:  What's the price per pound of APCP in large
quantities?  It has a little less than twice the performance of sugar.

Anybody have the price/lb figure of PSAN propellant?  I think this
propellant is a sleeping giant as well, with an Isp comparable to APCP.

Ray

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 3475 invoked from network); 17 Aug 2001 17:01:02 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 17 Aug 2001 17:01:02 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 15548 invoked by uid 50005); 17 Aug 2001 16:59:40 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smpte.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.452303 secs); 17 Aug 2001 16:59:40 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 17 Aug 2001 16:59:38 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA17949; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 09:58:57 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 88033 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 16:58:55          +0000
Received: from mail-srv1.micron.com (masquerade.micron.com [137.201.242.130])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA17928 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 09:57:36 -0700
Received: from mail-srv1.micron.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by          mail-srv1.micron.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id KAA13961 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 10:57:05 -0600 (MDT)
Received: from ntexchange01.micron.com (ntexchange01 [137.201.104.84]) by          mail-srv1.micron.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id KAA13944; Fri, 17          Aug 2001 10:57:04 -0600 (MDT)
Received: by ntexchange01.micron.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19)          id <RADJP055>; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 10:57:03 -0600
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19)
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Message-ID:  <2DCA36C44BF3D211917F0008C7C9C9DD067ECF31@ntexchange06.micron.com>
Date:         Fri, 17 Aug 2001 10:57:02 -0600
Reply-To: "gacrowell" <gacrowell@MICRON.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "gacrowell" <gacrowell@MICRON.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] optoisolators
Comments: To: "Mark K. Spute" <mks@BIOMICRO.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

I didn't pay attention the beginning of this conversation, but I noticed the
comment about PCB software.  I thought I might mention that I do PCB layouts
pretty often and have some fairly high-end layout and schematic tools at
hand.  I am willing to do layouts on the cheap, typically free to way below
professional rates, or for a copy of the completed device if its something
I'm interested in, depending upon the complexity, and effort involved.
Things that go straight up get preference.

I design high-speed IC test equipment for a living, and have done boards up
to 20 layers, 6000 components, smt, just about everything except RF.
Autorouting is available, but a good hand route will give a better layout if
time permits.

Gary Crowell
Micron Technology
gacrowell@micron.com



-----Original Message-----
From: Mark K. Spute [mailto:mks@BIOMICRO.COM]
Sent: Thursday, August 16, 2001 9:28 PM
To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
Subject: Re: [AR] optoisolators


Thanks for the link Jamie.  I downloaded the software today and will try
it out.  I have been using ExpressPCB, but it does not have any
provision for importing schematics or autorouting.

Now if I could just find a good freeware SPICE program capable of
handling 2.4 GHz mixed signal circuits that will run on WinDoze 98.  ;)


Jamie Morken wrote:

[snip of stuff about optoisolators]

> Eagle cad is free and a great tool for designing PCB's:
> http://www.cadsoftusa.com/

--
Mark K. Spute
Senior Research Engineer
BioMicro Systems Inc.

KD7IWE,  RRS

"It is difficult to say what is impossible, for the dream of yesterday
is the hope of today and the reality of tomorrow."
     Dr. Robert H. Goddard

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 8846 invoked from network); 17 Aug 2001 17:02:22 -0000
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 17 Aug 2001 17:02:22 -0000
Received: (qmail 17275 invoked by uid 50005); 17 Aug 2001 17:00:58 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smpte.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.309007 secs); 17 Aug 2001 17:00:58 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 17 Aug 2001 17:00:57 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA17972; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 10:00:20 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 88040 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 17:00:19          +0000
Received: from mailhost0.trib.com (mailhost0.trib.com [63.229.150.3]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA17903 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 09:57:06 -0700
Received: from mail.trib.com (mail.trib.com [12.10.158.17]) by          mailhost0.trib.com (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f7HGuxT74832; Fri,          17 Aug 2001 10:57:03 -0600 (MDT) (envelope-from          jwckman@space-rockets.com)
Received: from [63.229.150.83] (HELO hppav) by mail.trib.com (CommuniGate Pro          SMTP 3.4.6) with SMTP id 42825402; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 10:56:58 -0600
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
Importance: Normal
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <NKEHJAOOKBPGIKOOPDEFIEFGCBAA.jwckman@space-rockets.com>
Date:         Fri, 17 Aug 2001 10:55:25 -0600
Reply-To: "John Wickman" <jwckman@SPACE-ROCKETS.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Wickman" <jwckman@SPACE-ROCKETS.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Solid rocket boosters
Comments: To: John Carmack <johnc@idsoftware.com>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <4.3.1.2.20010817030701.02690e60@mail.idsoftware.com>

I think solids are generally safer than liquids and more reliable.   They
can be shut down during operation with thrust termination ports.  It is done
on all ICBMs since the 1950's.   Thrust termination ports were on the
Shuttle SRB initial designs, but some idiot took them out.  Solids can
actually the throttled by gas injection.  That was done in the 1980's at
Edwards using hydrogen gas to increase thrust.   It can be decreased by
injecting N2 or CO2.   At Aerojet, we developed a multiple stop-start solid
rocket engine for tactical applications.   Boost and then coast and then
boost again as you close in on the target.   Four thrust pulses were
possible in that motor.

John Wickman

-----Original Message-----
From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@itc.uci.edu]On
Behalf Of John Carmack
Sent: Friday, August 17, 2001 2:21 AM
To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
Subject: [AR] Solid rocket boosters


Since liquid vs solid and manned rockets have come up, let me pose this
hypothetical situation:

Say someone built an X-Prize vehicle, got it all tested, and found that it
only went to 80 km instead of 100 km.  Strapping two big (50,000+ pound
seconds) solids on the side is suggested.

Is anyone here confident enough in their solids that they would ride in a
vehicle that required two of them to perform safely and substantially
identically?

What design and process steps would you take if you were tasked with
providing the boosters?

If I was in that situation, I would almost certainly rebuild the vehicle,
or add a pressurized drop tank or something, but I could easily see someone
that is nearly out of funding, or in a real race with a competitor, going
for the band-aid fix.

I have mixed feelings about solids.  They take one of my dearest principles
to the logical extreme -- do all the complex stuff in preprocessing to make
the runtime as simple as possible, but the variability and lack of
individual testability, combined with the obvious throttle / shutdown /
restart issues, are serious.

John Carmack

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 15565 invoked from network); 17 Aug 2001 17:03:54 -0000
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 17 Aug 2001 17:03:54 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 19613 invoked by uid 50005); 17 Aug 2001 17:02:32 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smpte.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.278319 secs); 17 Aug 2001 17:02:32 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 17 Aug 2001 17:02:32 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA18006; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 10:01:44 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 88047 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 17:01:42          +0000
Received: from mail.aros.net (mail.aros.net [207.173.16.20]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA17985 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri,          17 Aug 2001 10:01:28 -0700
Received: from biomicro.com ([208.187.122.40]) by mail.aros.net (8.11.3/8.9.3)          with ESMTP id f7HH1Sn46987 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 17 Aug          2001 11:01:28 -0600 (MDT)
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.77 [en] (Win98; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010817120310.10687D-100000@spsystems.net>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B7C96E7.5506D82A@biomicro.com>
Date:         Thu, 16 Aug 2001 22:00:39 -0600
Reply-To: "Mark K. Spute" <mks@BIOMICRO.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Mark K. Spute" <mks@BIOMICRO.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] urethane fuel?
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

True.  But to paraphrase Bill Clinton, "you're not supposed to inhale."

Henry Spencer wrote:
>
> On Thu, 16 Aug 2001, Mark K. Spute wrote:
> > You may need to burn a sample of a known urethane to compare it to.  Be
> > aware that co-polymers, and additives can affect the smell
> > substantially.
>
> Be aware, also, that breathing the smoke from burning plastics is
> generally not good for you...
>
>                                                           Henry Spencer
>                                                        henry@spsystems.net

--
Mark K. Spute
Senior Research Engineer
BioMicro Systems Inc.

KD7IWE,  RRS

"It is difficult to say what is impossible, for the dream of yesterday
is the hope of today and the reality of tomorrow."
     Dr. Robert H. Goddard

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 3114 invoked from network); 17 Aug 2001 17:08:18 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 17 Aug 2001 17:08:18 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 4800 invoked by uid 50005); 17 Aug 2001 17:08:08 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (. Clean. Processed in 0.292272 secs); 17 Aug 2001 17:08:08 -0000
X-Qmail-Scanner-Mail-From: owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU via smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net
X-Qmail-Scanner-Rcpt-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
X-Qmail-Scanner: 0.96 (No viruses found. Processed in 0.292272 secs)
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 17 Aug 2001 17:08:07 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA18088; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 10:04:29 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 88077 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 17:04:28          +0000
Received: from spsystems.net (spsystems.net [209.47.149.227]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA18074 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Fri,          17 Aug 2001 10:04:27 -0700
Received: (from henry@localhost) by spsystems.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id NAA11820;          Fri, 17 Aug 2001 13:03:54 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010817125624.11514C-100000@spsystems.net>
Date:         Fri, 17 Aug 2001 13:03:52 -0400
Reply-To: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Solid rocket boosters
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <EDB5E5136094D311BF1800508B12205E08D290F1@emss02m07.ems.lmco.com>

On Fri, 17 Aug 2001, Bendel, Timothy B wrote:
> ...In general, a
> launch vehicle that goes to orbit either makes it / doesn't make it...

Gary Hudson likes to show a slide, a photo of a two-page spread in
Aviation Week which has two stories, both running across the two pages.
The headline on the top story is "DC-X Makes Emergency Landing".  The one
on the bottom story is "First Pegasus XL Lost".

Solids become rather less appealing if you want your vehicle to have
*options* in emergencies.  Their inflexibility becomes a grave problem
if you want to have possibilities somewhere in between "successful flight"
and "vehicle and contents destroyed".

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 17934 invoked from network); 17 Aug 2001 17:11:47 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 17 Aug 2001 17:11:47 -0000
Received: (qmail 13397 invoked by uid 50005); 17 Aug 2001 17:12:07 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.350758 secs); 17 Aug 2001 17:12:07 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 17 Aug 2001 17:12:07 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA18154; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 10:09:34 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 88092 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 17:09:32          +0000
Received: from dune.gnc.net (root@dune.gnc.net [207.203.72.4]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA18140 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri,          17 Aug 2001 10:09:31 -0700
Received: from beowulf (sw2-8.gnc.net [207.203.72.88]) by dune.gnc.net          (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id NAA15704 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri,          17 Aug 2001 13:09:31 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <LPBBKJMJEOFKAMFJJNNHOEJOCGAA.landofgrey@gnc.net>
Date:         Fri, 17 Aug 2001 13:09:06 -0400
Reply-To: <landofgrey@gnc.net>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Matthew Travis" <landofgrey@gnc.net>
Subject:      Re: [AR] reliability (was Re: [AR] ERPS successfully runs H2O2              engine)
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010817124204.11514A-100000@spsystems.net>

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU]On
> Behalf Of Henry Spencer
>
> Actually, any real statistician would cringe at a lot of the fluff that
> gets put out about rocket reliability -- for example, quoting reliability
> numbers to three or four decimal places based on a few dozen trials!  This
> is not statistics, this is numerical bullshit, pure and simple.

I agree absolutely. I think the people who advertise those figures either
never took or have forgotten basic college statistics and QA. you can't have
good figures without a substantial sample size. Some of the figures for
solids vs. liquids had sample sizes over a thousand. I somewhat trust those
numbers in and of themselves. You can get good statistics (as if there were
such a thing) from that. I wouldn't trust taking it out to 3 or 4 decimal
places though. But some of the figures were based on a couple failures in a
couple dozen launches. That's not nearly enough. I learned in college (way
back when) that one use for statistics is to basically extrapolate more
information from less actual data (trendlines and statistical weighting and
all that crap). My background is in engineering. I don't trust the idea of
getting more from less. That's why I say when you stop clouding the issue
with too many numbers and look at it in the real world, solids and liquids
are, in fact, essentially just as reliable as the other. And when you have
to take the numbers out 3 or 4 decimal places in order to get a statistical
difference between the two, well, that's just hogwash. The reason I brought
up the SPIAG document wasn't to try ot show that solids are more reliable
than liquids, but only that some people can make a mathematical argument as
to that (in counter to the argument that liquids are more reliable). In
reality, as I pointed out, unless you are making 10,000 motors, the failure
rates are essentially the same. A difference of 0.1% over 1000 motors is
only 1 motor. Statistically insignificant. There is an axiom that says the
qauntity of figures used to present an argument is inversely proportional to
the validity of the argument. It's interesting to note how, after
Challenger, that ass Mulloy and his cohorts at Marshall and Thiokol spat out
figures and stats and all sorts of jibberish to try to make their case. Then
the physicist Richard Feynman (someone who you might think would rely too
much on numbers) simply took a piece of o-ring, dunked it in cold water, and
said look, it doesn't work. That one simple, non-mathematical, demonstration
(in the public's eye) outweighed all the numeric junk. Statistical failure
rates be damned. Sometimes genius and insight means throwing away the
numbers and just looking at the issue. And I won't even get into complex DNA
analysis vs. "let him put the glove on".

-Matt

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 3455 invoked from network); 17 Aug 2001 17:15:38 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 17 Aug 2001 17:15:38 -0000
Received: (qmail 1915 invoked by uid 50005); 17 Aug 2001 17:14:45 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smptf.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.953397 secs); 17 Aug 2001 17:14:45 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 17 Aug 2001 17:14:43 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA18226; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 10:12:53 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 88111 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 17:12:51          +0000
Received: from spsystems.net (spsystems.net [209.47.149.227]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA18212 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Fri,          17 Aug 2001 10:12:50 -0700
Received: (from henry@localhost) by spsystems.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id NAA11979;          Fri, 17 Aug 2001 13:12:18 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010817130614.11514D-100000@spsystems.net>
Date:         Fri, 17 Aug 2001 13:12:17 -0400
Reply-To: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Solid rocket boosters
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <NKEHJAOOKBPGIKOOPDEFIEFGCBAA.jwckman@space-rockets.com>

On Fri, 17 Aug 2001, John Wickman wrote:
> I think solids are generally safer than liquids and more reliable.   They
> can be shut down during operation with thrust termination ports.  It is done
> on all ICBMs since the 1950's.   Thrust termination ports were on the
> Shuttle SRB initial designs, but some idiot took them out.

They were taken out because thrust termination that way is a rather
violent process, and preliminary investigation indicated that neither the
ET nor the orbiter would survive it.  Works okay for Mil-Spec ICBMs, but
for launch vehicles it has to be considered the equivalent of firing the
destruct charges -- fine if the stuff you care about has already departed
via an escape system, not so fine if you actually want to save the vehicle.

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 11958 invoked from network); 17 Aug 2001 17:25:09 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 17 Aug 2001 17:25:09 -0000
Received: (qmail 16032 invoked by uid 50005); 17 Aug 2001 17:23:46 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smpte.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.261285 secs); 17 Aug 2001 17:23:46 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 17 Aug 2001 17:23:46 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA18326; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 10:22:03 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 88130 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 17:21:55          +0000
Received: from spsystems.net (spsystems.net [209.47.149.227]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA18312 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Fri,          17 Aug 2001 10:21:54 -0700
Received: (from henry@localhost) by spsystems.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id NAA12070;          Fri, 17 Aug 2001 13:21:22 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010817131952.11514E-100000@spsystems.net>
Date:         Fri, 17 Aug 2001 13:21:21 -0400
Reply-To: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] turbine temps with peroxide precat cycle
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <Pine.GSO.4.21.0108171247060.26363-100000@z.glue.umd.edu>

On Fri, 17 Aug 2001, Andrew Case wrote:
> ...anyway, my conclusion was that you want three pressure
> chambers so you have fewer problems with switching between them...

Whether you have switching problems depends on the relative speeds of the
pump stroke and the refill stroke.  If refill is faster than pump, there
is no need for a third chamber, because two chambers can have overlapping
pump strokes.

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 13303 invoked from network); 17 Aug 2001 17:25:32 -0000
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 17 Aug 2001 17:25:32 -0000
Received: (qmail 15475 invoked by uid 50005); 17 Aug 2001 17:24:38 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smptf.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.640265 secs); 17 Aug 2001 17:24:38 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 17 Aug 2001 17:24:37 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA18355; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 10:23:27 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 88140 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 17:23:26          +0000
Received: from dune.gnc.net (root@dune.gnc.net [207.203.72.4]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA18341 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri,          17 Aug 2001 10:23:25 -0700
Received: from beowulf (sw2-8.gnc.net [207.203.72.88]) by dune.gnc.net          (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id NAA16025 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri,          17 Aug 2001 13:23:25 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <LPBBKJMJEOFKAMFJJNNHMEJPCGAA.landofgrey@gnc.net>
Date:         Fri, 17 Aug 2001 13:22:59 -0400
Reply-To: <landofgrey@gnc.net>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Matthew Travis" <landofgrey@gnc.net>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Solid rocket boosters
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <EDB5E5136094D311BF1800508B12205E08D290F1@emss02m07.ems.lmco.com>

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU]On
> Behalf Of Bendel, Timothy B

>
> We all have opinions on this subject, and I guess I am one of the
> people who
> feel that solids have been given a "bad rap".

Well, in fact, they have. Challenger changed everything. I am at every
shuttle launch. And it doesn't matter if someone is a NASA or USA employee
who puts it together or if someone is a tourist from Holland (I met one at
the last launch). Everyone, *everyone*, cheers and breathes relief at SRB
staging. That's because of Challenger. People didn't do that before
Challenger.

Personally, I like solids, liquids, and hybrids. I don't think that, in
practical terms, in general, any of them has in total a greater or lesser
advtange overthe others. The only advantages and drawbacks are when you look
at specific uses or rockets. But, in general, none of the propellant types
is superior to the others. They all have their advantages and disadvtanges
in specific areas, but when you add it all up, they are equals. And that's
why they are all used in real life, by amateurs and professionals. Maybe I'm
a propellant slut, but I love them all. And besides, this is engineering,
not religion. A person can't be religious about they're propellant
philosophy and be purely objective. Personally, my religion is Catholic, not
AP or LOX, and not Linux or MS Windows, and not open source vs. closed
source. People who get religious over things like propellant type or
computer operating systems or whatever technical more often than not end up
closing themselves out of potential solutions to problems because their
"religion" prevents them from considering certain alternatives. Many times I
have heard a Linux geek (btw, I love Linux) talk about a particular problem
he was having yet refuse to use a solution because it would involve the evil
Windows, and so he created more work, more delays, and more frustration for
himself and made himself look bad to the rest of the world, all to preserve
his hatred for Windows. I have also put up with the reverse situation with
Windows users. I remember, about 6 years ago, when X-Windows got the
drag-n-drop feature. A co-worker Linux-only freak I worked with was so
stoked about it. Had to show everyone the cool new feature, as though it was
another reason Linux/X-Windows ruled over Windows. Then I pointed out that
Windows had had that feature for 5 years already. He was pissed to high
heaven. But it was his only fault. Because of his loathing toward Microsoft,
he had not used Windows since 1990. He no longer had any idea what MS
Windows was like or what features, drawbacks, etc. it had. He closed himself
off completely because he got religious over something that is solely
technical. And he looked incredibly stupid for it.

-Matt

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 7935 invoked from network); 17 Aug 2001 17:31:41 -0000
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 17 Aug 2001 17:31:41 -0000
Received: (qmail 24524 invoked by uid 50005); 17 Aug 2001 17:30:19 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smpte.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.303246 secs); 17 Aug 2001 17:30:19 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 17 Aug 2001 17:30:18 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA18497; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 10:29:33 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 88182 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 17:29:29          +0000
Received: from dune.gnc.net (root@dune.gnc.net [207.203.72.4]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA18483 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri,          17 Aug 2001 10:29:28 -0700
Received: from beowulf (sw2-8.gnc.net [207.203.72.88]) by dune.gnc.net          (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id NAA16137 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri,          17 Aug 2001 13:29:29 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <LPBBKJMJEOFKAMFJJNNHCEKACGAA.landofgrey@gnc.net>
Date:         Fri, 17 Aug 2001 13:29:03 -0400
Reply-To: <landofgrey@gnc.net>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Matthew Travis" <landofgrey@gnc.net>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Solid rocket boosters
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <NKEHJAOOKBPGIKOOPDEFIEFGCBAA.jwckman@space-rockets.com>

Good points. I agree that it's not necessarily true that solids can't be
stopped (without blowing them up) or throttled. I have to say that I think
you're flexibility (for throttling and startup/shutdown) is somewhat more
limited with solids, but that doesn't mean the options aren't there. And
with good engineering, they can be utilized.

One question I have concerns thrust termination ports on boosters for manned
vehicles. I would think (not being an expert in this area) that achieving
termination without sending the vehicle out of control would be difficult.
And it seems it would be more difficult on the shuttle since the ports would
have to located away from the ET and Orbiter. I would think you'd only be
able to locate them on one side of the stack, which would cause a
significant pitching impulse at termination.

-Matt

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU]On
> Behalf Of John Wickman
> Sent: Friday, August 17, 2001 12:55 PM
> To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
> Subject: Re: [AR] Solid rocket boosters
>
>
> I think solids are generally safer than liquids and more reliable.   They
> can be shut down during operation with thrust termination ports.
> It is done
> on all ICBMs since the 1950's.   Thrust termination ports were on the
> Shuttle SRB initial designs, but some idiot took them out.  Solids can
> actually the throttled by gas injection.  That was done in the 1980's at
> Edwards using hydrogen gas to increase thrust.   It can be decreased by
> injecting N2 or CO2.   At Aerojet, we developed a multiple
> stop-start solid
> rocket engine for tactical applications.   Boost and then coast and then
> boost again as you close in on the target.   Four thrust pulses were
> possible in that motor.
>
> John Wickman

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 21244 invoked from network); 17 Aug 2001 17:35:05 -0000
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 17 Aug 2001 17:35:05 -0000
Received: (qmail 28699 invoked by uid 50005); 17 Aug 2001 17:33:41 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smpte.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.159788 secs); 17 Aug 2001 17:33:41 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 17 Aug 2001 17:33:41 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA18548; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 10:31:12 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 88190 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 17:31:09          +0000
Received: from dune.gnc.net (root@dune.gnc.net [207.203.72.4]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA18534 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri,          17 Aug 2001 10:31:09 -0700
Received: from beowulf (sw2-8.gnc.net [207.203.72.88]) by dune.gnc.net          (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id NAA16187 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri,          17 Aug 2001 13:31:09 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <LPBBKJMJEOFKAMFJJNNHGEKACGAA.landofgrey@gnc.net>
Date:         Fri, 17 Aug 2001 13:30:44 -0400
Reply-To: <landofgrey@gnc.net>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Matthew Travis" <landofgrey@gnc.net>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Solid rocket boosters
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010817125624.11514C-100000@spsystems.net>

Paper engineers like to come up with degrees of failure, but it really
doesn't matter to the payload.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU]On
> Behalf Of Henry Spencer

>
> On Fri, 17 Aug 2001, Bendel, Timothy B wrote:
> > ...In general, a
> > launch vehicle that goes to orbit either makes it / doesn't make it...
>
> Gary Hudson likes to show a slide, a photo of a two-page spread in
> Aviation Week which has two stories, both running across the two pages.
> The headline on the top story is "DC-X Makes Emergency Landing".  The one
> on the bottom story is "First Pegasus XL Lost".

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 2739 invoked from network); 17 Aug 2001 17:37:49 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 17 Aug 2001 17:37:49 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 19241 invoked by uid 50005); 17 Aug 2001 17:38:11 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.736059 secs); 17 Aug 2001 17:38:11 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 17 Aug 2001 17:38:10 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA18630; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 10:35:47 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 88216 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 17:35:45          +0000
Received: from adobe.com (smtp-relay-1.adobe.com [192.150.11.1]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA18612 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri,          17 Aug 2001 10:35:12 -0700
Received: from inner-relay-2.corp.adobe.com ([153.32.1.52]) by adobe.com          (1.0.0/8.11.4) with ESMTP id f7HHZ9B04205 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>;          Fri, 17 Aug 2001 10:35:09 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mailsj-v1.corp.adobe.com (mailsj-dev.corp.adobe.com          [153.32.1.192]) by inner-relay-2.corp.adobe.com (8.11.4/8.11.4) with          ESMTP id f7HHXIb05931 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 17 Aug 2001          10:33:18 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from sronald.earthlink.net ([153.32.63.111]) by          mailsj-v1.corp.adobe.com (Netscape Messaging Server 4.15 v1 Jul 11          2001 16:32:57) with ESMTP id GI83FU00.U08; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 10:33:30          -0700
X-Sender: forkbomb@mail.earthlink.net
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
References: <LPBBKJMJEOFKAMFJJNNHKEJFCGAA.landofgrey@gnc.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <5.1.0.14.0.20010817103252.02726040@mail.earthlink.net>
Date:         Fri, 17 Aug 2001 10:36:07 -0700
Reply-To: <forkbomb@EARTHLINK.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <forkbomb@EARTHLINK.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] ERPS successfully runs H2O2 engine
Comments: To: "Mark K. Spute" <mks@BIOMICRO.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <3B7C866B.9AED0636@biomicro.com>

At 08:50 PM 8/16/01 -0600, Mark K. Spute wrote:
>Interesting stuff.
>
>As you say though, this document was written by the Solid Propulsion
>Industry Action Group, a very pro-solids group.  As my mother's
>statistics professor used to say, "There are white lies, damn lies, and
>statistics."  AFAIK the only astronauts or cosmonauts to ever die as a
>direct result of a catastrophic failure of the main propulsion system
>did so atop a solid rocket booster.


         You're forgetting the N1 disaster, but that's still a pretty
obscure thing. The only American astronauts to die during a mission
accident (as opposed to a training accident) died because of a catastrophic
solid motor failure. They rather glossed that over. I noticed that the
quoted figures conveniently failed to mention manufacture and
transportation accidents with solid motors.

         -p

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 8108 invoked from network); 17 Aug 2001 17:39:12 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 17 Aug 2001 17:39:12 -0000
Received: (qmail 2219 invoked by uid 50005); 17 Aug 2001 17:37:49 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smpte.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.563973 secs); 17 Aug 2001 17:37:49 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 17 Aug 2001 17:37:48 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA18603; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 10:34:18 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 88209 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 17:34:17          +0000
Received: from mail.conpute.com ([207.164.87.145]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7)          with ESMTP id KAA18589 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 17 Aug 2001          10:34:16 -0700
Received: by MAIL with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) id <QSNHQFBF>; Fri,          17 Aug 2001 13:31:24 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19)
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Message-ID:  <814DCE01F6D7D311994D204C4F4F50201889B9@MAIL>
Date:         Fri, 17 Aug 2001 13:31:23 -0400
Reply-To: "Earl Pottinger" <earlcp@CONPUTE.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Earl Pottinger" <earlcp@CONPUTE.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] homogenous catalysis biprops
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Quick notes:

XL Space Systems is selling RGHP by the drum (55 gallons I believe) not by
the tanker.
That is how both space group we have been talking about got thier!

I spend time learn to enrich peroxide because:
        1) It's fun learning new things that don't have easy answers in the
local library.
        2) The costs of shipping HTP here in Canada is a single fixed value
that is the
           same for a drum or for a tanker.
        3) 35% is locally available and I can pick it up with no shipping
costs.
        4) By setting up a website showing others how to do it, they can
easily and
           cheaply do it in the future without having to relearn all the
things I did.

If it is so much cheaper and better, why is only the military studying/using
it at
present.  It does not have as many options of operation as using catalyst
packs.

             Earl Colby Pottinger

-----Original Message-----
From: John Dom [mailto:j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM]
Sent: Friday, August 17, 2001 5:06 AM
To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
Subject: Re: [AR] homogenous catalysis biprops


Quote Pottinger:

> >High purity 90 % or more is beyond the budget of most amateurs. Vacuum
> >distilling HP takes years to accomplish successfully for people without
> >chemistry background (and even with) and here I talk from experience. So
> >this blocks amateur progress in this field substantially.

>Well, that might be true for you, but in the USA amateurs just have to pick
>up the phone and supply a visa number to get it deliver to them.

Over here as well. If you buy tankerloads, show your lab and testing
facilities etc.. I know of no US company which sells 50 L batches of RGHP in
the US. 200 L batches from Degussa-Huls are not sold to amateurs only to
accredited institutions in the US. JC paid his RGHP very dearly!

If 90-98 % HP it is so easily obtainable then why did you spend time trying
to enrich it?

The reason is responsible care of those companies. They are well aware of
the dangers and (indirect) company involvement if RGHP falls into terrorist
or incompetent hands. That is why sales are restricted.

BTW: maybe homogenous HP catalysis is the future. Maybe it is not OK and
still needs many cures. It certainly is simpler and cheaper than proven
heterogenous catalysis as far as I can see at present.
This discussion 'll not change that.

The HP work going on at Stennis, China Lake, Pudue and Surrey (UK) might. I
prefer to focus on that for knowledge that is. As far as it is published.

After all, 50 years ago German pilots were flying by the hundreds in HP
propelled aeroplanes, both mono and biprop types. Albeit not supersonic.
Some say the Komet did break the SOS in a dive long before the X-1 did!

jd



_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 25590 invoked from network); 17 Aug 2001 17:43:21 -0000
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 17 Aug 2001 17:43:21 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 8156 invoked by uid 50005); 17 Aug 2001 17:41:58 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smpte.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.23135 secs); 17 Aug 2001 17:41:58 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 17 Aug 2001 17:41:58 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA18740; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 10:41:02 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 88189 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 17:41:00          +0000
Received: from gull.mail.pas.earthlink.net (gull.mail.pas.earthlink.net          [207.217.121.85]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA18520          for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 10:30:26 -0700
Received: from earthlink.net (dialup-209.245.141.82.Dial1.SanJose1.Level3.net          [209.245.141.82]) by gull.mail.pas.earthlink.net (EL-8_9_3_3/8.9.3)          with ESMTP id KAA05845; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 10:30:24 -0700 (PDT)
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.75 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.16-22 i686)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010817130614.11514D-100000@spsystems.net>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B7D54E8.24FEC4EF@earthlink.net>
Date:         Fri, 17 Aug 2001 10:31:20 -0700
Reply-To: "David Weinshenker" <daze39@EARTHLINK.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "David Weinshenker" <daze39@EARTHLINK.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Solid rocket boosters
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Henry Spencer wrote:
>
> On Fri, 17 Aug 2001, John Wickman wrote:
> > I think solids are generally safer than liquids and more reliable.   They
> > can be shut down during operation with thrust termination ports.  It is done
> > on all ICBMs since the 1950's.   Thrust termination ports were on the
> > Shuttle SRB initial designs, but some idiot took them out.
>
> They were taken out because thrust termination that way is a rather
> violent process, and preliminary investigation indicated that neither the
> ET nor the orbiter would survive it.  Works okay for Mil-Spec ICBMs, but
> for launch vehicles it has to be considered the equivalent of firing the
> destruct charges -- fine if the stuff you care about has already departed
> via an escape system, not so fine if you actually want to save the vehicle.

And I suppose that firing the release bolts and separation motors and
letting the SRB's simply fly away under power would have taken out
the ET with their exhaust plumes...

Suppose Challenger had detected the failure when the major leak
began... suppose it had had a breakwire system, like the burglar
alarm tape used on glass windows, wrapped around the joints,
and "joint integrity loss - RIGHT SRB" had lit up on the panel
at T+59 seconds. Is there anything that could have been done
in those 14 seconds before vehicle breakup at T+73 seconds?
What additional hardware would have been required? (It sounds
like this was fairly close to a "worst case max Q abort" scenario,
with the aerodynamic loads of nominal flight leaving little
structural margin for sudden moves in any case!)

-dave w

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 7509 invoked from network); 17 Aug 2001 17:46:09 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 17 Aug 2001 17:46:09 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 10453 invoked by uid 50005); 17 Aug 2001 17:45:16 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smptf.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 2.192122 secs); 17 Aug 2001 17:45:16 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 17 Aug 2001 17:45:12 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA18790; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 10:43:35 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 88262 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 17:43:34          +0000
Received: from adobe.com (smtp-relay-1.adobe.com [192.150.11.1]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA18776 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri,          17 Aug 2001 10:43:33 -0700
Received: from inner-relay-1.corp.adobe.com ([153.32.1.51]) by adobe.com          (1.0.0/8.11.4) with ESMTP id f7HHhUB06161 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>;          Fri, 17 Aug 2001 10:43:30 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mailsj-v1.corp.adobe.com (mailsj-dev.corp.adobe.com          [153.32.1.192]) by inner-relay-1.corp.adobe.com (8.11.4/8.11.4) with          ESMTP id f7HHgB221463 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 17 Aug 2001          10:42:11 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from sronald.earthlink.net ([153.32.63.111]) by          mailsj-v1.corp.adobe.com (Netscape Messaging Server 4.15 v1 Jul 11          2001 16:32:57) with ESMTP id GI83TW00.OX5 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>;          Fri, 17 Aug 2001 10:41:56 -0700
X-Sender: forkbomb@mail.earthlink.net
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
References: <200108170713.DAA00712@ares.idirect.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <5.1.0.14.0.20010817103716.00a5cca0@mail.earthlink.net>
Date:         Fri, 17 Aug 2001 10:44:33 -0700
Reply-To: <forkbomb@EARTHLINK.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <forkbomb@EARTHLINK.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Solid rocket boosters
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <4.3.1.2.20010817030701.02690e60@mail.idsoftware.com>

At 03:21 AM 8/17/01 -0500, John Carmack wrote:
>Since liquid vs solid and manned rockets have come up, let me pose this
>hypothetical situation:
>
>Say someone built an X-Prize vehicle, got it all tested, and found that it
>only went to 80 km instead of 100 km.  Strapping two big (50,000+ pound
>seconds) solids on the side is suggested.
>
>Is anyone here confident enough in their solids that they would ride in a
>vehicle that required two of them to perform safely and substantially
>identically?


         I wouldn't have that confidence in engines built by the experts in
the aerospace industry who have been doing it for forty plus years. Never
mind in those produced by an X-Prize team.


>What design and process steps would you take if you were tasked with
>providing the boosters?


         Hybrid or liquid. If I was time or money pressed, I'd have two
more main engines made and pair them with appropriate tankage and thrust
structure to build my boosters.


>If I was in that situation, I would almost certainly rebuild the vehicle,
>or add a pressurized drop tank or something, but I could easily see someone
>that is nearly out of funding, or in a real race with a competitor, going
>for the band-aid fix.


         A drop tank is probably easier to add than boosters of any kind.
The only loads on it are acceleration and drag loads, so the attachment
points don't need to be as beefy as those for a booster, which have to deal
with thrust loads as well. The problem is that they reduce takeoff
acceleration, which could be problematic depending on the situation.


>I have mixed feelings about solids.  They take one of my dearest principles
>to the logical extreme -- do all the complex stuff in preprocessing to make
>the runtime as simple as possible, but the variability and lack of
>individual testability, combined with the obvious throttle / shutdown /
>restart issues, are serious.


         That's why there are hybrids....

         -p

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 8885 invoked from network); 17 Aug 2001 18:01:26 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 17 Aug 2001 18:01:26 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 22478 invoked by uid 50005); 17 Aug 2001 18:01:16 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (. Clean. Processed in 0.194722 secs); 17 Aug 2001 18:01:16 -0000
X-Qmail-Scanner-Mail-From: owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU via smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net
X-Qmail-Scanner-Rcpt-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
X-Qmail-Scanner: 0.96 (No viruses found. Processed in 0.194722 secs)
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 17 Aug 2001 18:01:16 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA18965; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 10:58:58 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 88302 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 17:58:55          +0000
Received: from spsystems.net (spsystems.net [209.47.149.227]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA18951 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Fri,          17 Aug 2001 10:58:54 -0700
Received: (from henry@localhost) by spsystems.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id NAA12480;          Fri, 17 Aug 2001 13:58:22 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010817135141.12347A-100000@spsystems.net>
Date:         Fri, 17 Aug 2001 13:58:21 -0400
Reply-To: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Solid rocket boosters
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <LPBBKJMJEOFKAMFJJNNHGEKACGAA.landofgrey@gnc.net>

On Fri, 17 Aug 2001, Matthew Travis wrote:
> > Gary Hudson likes to show a slide, a photo of a two-page spread in
> > Aviation Week which has two stories, both running across the two pages.
> > The headline on the top story is "DC-X Makes Emergency Landing".  The one
> > on the bottom story is "First Pegasus XL Lost".
>
> Paper engineers like to come up with degrees of failure, but it really
> doesn't matter to the payload.

Payload owners care a whole lot about the difference between getting their
hardware back (so they can try again) and having it go into the ocean.

Only artillery designers think that failure to complete the mission means
you don't care what happens to the vehicle or payload.  Most everyone else
would like to get both of them back for another try.  The reason this
isn't common with rockets is that today's rockets are all derived from
artillery rockets (some less directly than others, but the philosophy
remains the same).

Consider yourself as the payload.  You will then find that it *does*
matter to the payload.  People who worked for Gary say that when you
expect to ride the thing yourself, this changes your opinion about many
design issues.

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 16476 invoked from network); 17 Aug 2001 18:03:24 -0000
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 17 Aug 2001 18:03:24 -0000
Received: (qmail 931 invoked by uid 50005); 17 Aug 2001 18:02:29 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smptf.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.359741 secs); 17 Aug 2001 18:02:29 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 17 Aug 2001 18:02:28 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA19013; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 11:00:32 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 88314 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 18:00:30          +0000
Received: from femail8.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail8.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.0.95.88]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA18999 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 11:00:30 -0700
Received: from cc334751a ([65.13.214.65]) by femail8.sdc1.sfba.home.com          (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20 201-229-121-120-20010223) with SMTP id          <20010817180028.QGEJ19015.femail8.sdc1.sfba.home.com@cc334751a>; Fri,          17 Aug 2001 11:00:28 -0700
References:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010817124204.11514A-100000@spsystems.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2462.0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <03bd01c12746$719ea1a0$6601a8c0@home.com>
Date:         Fri, 17 Aug 2001 12:00:04 -0600
Reply-To: "Brian Kosko" <bkosko1@HOME.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Brian Kosko" <bkosko1@HOME.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] reliability Now we're talking statistics...
Comments: To: Henry Spencer <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

All right, we're talking about statistics! Henry's quite right about the
false security we can derive from a little data. This seems to be even more
true in our software enhanced world. A number pops out of the computer with
seven decimal places and we accept that as the accuracy of the value. NOT. A
great thing to learn, if you only have one thing to learn about statistics,
is the concept of the 'confidence interval'.

Along with a data's mean, one always needs to evaluate that in relation to
the data's variability. It's the plus or minus band around our average. If
your average is 1000; with the confidence interval going from 999 to 1001;
that's one thing. If the interval is 100 to 1900; that'd probably not be a
good thing. And the smaller the number of samples, the wider the interval
tends to be. And the precise definition a what a confidence interval does is
frequently misunderstood. Let's say we take ten samples from a process we're
running. We get an average of 500 with a 95% confidence interval of 480 to
520. Our confidence interval tells us that in the long run (about 95% of the
time) our actual process average will fall within the interval 480 to 520.
Can our process average be outside the interval? Absolutely, not likely; but
certainly possible.

Bottom line. If you need to evaluate a sample of data, always be sure to
check the confidence interval associated with the parameter you're
interested in, not just the mean value.

Brian

P.S. I ran my own consulting practice the last ten years or so; doing
statistics, quality control, and such. I'm now a stay-at-home dad/rocketeer,
but I'd always be happy to help any of my arocket buds. If you have any
stats type questions I'd be happy to try and answer them.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 5552 invoked from network); 17 Aug 2001 18:07:58 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 17 Aug 2001 18:07:58 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 28679 invoked by uid 50005); 17 Aug 2001 18:07:47 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (. Clean. Processed in 0.191367 secs); 17 Aug 2001 18:07:47 -0000
X-Qmail-Scanner-Mail-From: owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU via smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net
X-Qmail-Scanner-Rcpt-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
X-Qmail-Scanner: 0.96 (No viruses found. Processed in 0.191367 secs)
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 17 Aug 2001 18:07:47 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA19087; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 11:05:47 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 88333 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 18:05:45          +0000
Received: from wrench.toolcity.net (root@wrench.toolcity.net [208.0.188.2]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA19073 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 11:05:45 -0700
Received: from [63.169.101.79]          (dap-63-169-101-79.meadville-tnt-1.pa.toolcity.net [63.169.101.79])          by wrench.toolcity.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id OAA06718; Fri, 17          Aug 2001 14:05:40 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <v01510100b7a31141aa8a@[63.169.102.173]>
Date:         Fri, 17 Aug 2001 14:08:01 -0500
Reply-To: "al bradley" <abradley@TOOLCITY.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "al bradley" <abradley@TOOLCITY.NET>
Subject:      [AR] 2Re: [AR] candy R&D
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

>On Fri, 17 Aug 2001, John Dom wrote:
>
>> To avoid the step of melting: has anyone ever tried to compress
>> KN/sugar/sorbitol mixtures?
------------------------
>Al does this, perhaps he'll be so kind as to describe his approach in
>detail.  It seems that grains made this way would be very brittle.
>
>Ray
---------------

Using a 6-ton hydraulic jack in a homemade press frame I press out Bates
grains from ball-mill mixed KNO3/sugar dampened with 50/50 alcohol-water
mix. They dry so hard you could file your fingernails with them. They seem
to fire well.

The pressing cylinder is a piece of modified PVC pipe with a steel mandrel
for the core. The pressing plunger is cast from polyester resin. No heat is
used at any time. The grains are about 1-1/8" in diameter at 65 grams.

So far, no CATO'S. They are not formed in a motor casing, rather they are
coated on the outside with a thin layer of furnace cement to inhibit
combusion there. As a result they are NOT case-bonded in any way, in fact
may be slightly loose in their PVC motor case tube.

Yeah, I know it violates certain unspoken premises of technique. But it
seems to work well so far. If I get around to constructing a test stand I
will look for flaws in the methodology then. In the meantime I'm able to
enjoy things that go straight up with a whoosh without having to find
exactly the elusive right mixture to cook! My doctrine is to not make
things any harder than they have to be!

best,
al bradley



------------------------------------------------------------------
Can you live Life with this?: "Unless there is a law, an agreement, or a
long-standing custom, No one `Deserves' Anything -- Either Good or Bad!"

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 3136 invoked from network); 17 Aug 2001 18:14:42 -0000
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 17 Aug 2001 18:14:42 -0000
Received: (qmail 17574 invoked by uid 50005); 17 Aug 2001 18:13:19 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smpte.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.304178 secs); 17 Aug 2001 18:13:19 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 17 Aug 2001 18:13:19 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA19164; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 11:12:07 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 88356 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 18:12:05          +0000
Received: from c002.snv.cp.net (c002-h007.c002.snv.cp.net [209.228.32.171]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id LAA19150 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 11:12:04 -0700
Received: (cpmta 2435 invoked from network); 17 Aug 2001 11:11:33 -0700
Received: from 1Cust77.tnt3.williamsburg.va.da.uu.net (HELO default)          (63.15.116.77) by smtp.peoplepc.com (209.228.32.171) with SMTP; 17          Aug 2001 11:11:33 -0700
X-Sent: 17 Aug 2001 18:11:33 GMT
References:  <v01510100b7a31141aa8a@[63.169.102.173]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <003201c12749$c57a3160$4d740f3f@default>
Date:         Fri, 17 Aug 2001 14:23:51 -0400
Reply-To: "David Muesing" <dmuesing@PEOPLEPC.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "David Muesing" <dmuesing@PEOPLEPC.COM>
Subject:      [AR] candy R&D---Alcohol/water?
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Why do you use a combination of water AND alcohol?
Why not one or the other?

Dave

----- Original Message -----
From: "al bradley" <abradley@TOOLCITY.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Friday, August 17, 2001 3:08 PM
Subject: [AR] 2Re: [AR] candy R&D


> >On Fri, 17 Aug 2001, John Dom wrote:
> >
> >> To avoid the step of melting: has anyone ever tried to compress
> >> KN/sugar/sorbitol mixtures?
> ------------------------
> >Al does this, perhaps he'll be so kind as to describe his approach in
> >detail.  It seems that grains made this way would be very brittle.
> >
> >Ray
> ---------------
>
> Using a 6-ton hydraulic jack in a homemade press frame I press out Bates
> grains from ball-mill mixed KNO3/sugar dampened with 50/50 alcohol-water
> mix. They dry so hard you could file your fingernails with them. They seem
> to fire well.
>
> The pressing cylinder is a piece of modified PVC pipe with a steel mandrel
> for the core. The pressing plunger is cast from polyester resin. No heat
is
> used at any time. The grains are about 1-1/8" in diameter at 65 grams.
>
> So far, no CATO'S. They are not formed in a motor casing, rather they are
> coated on the outside with a thin layer of furnace cement to inhibit
> combusion there. As a result they are NOT case-bonded in any way, in fact
> may be slightly loose in their PVC motor case tube.
>
> Yeah, I know it violates certain unspoken premises of technique. But it
> seems to work well so far. If I get around to constructing a test stand I
> will look for flaws in the methodology then. In the meantime I'm able to
> enjoy things that go straight up with a whoosh without having to find
> exactly the elusive right mixture to cook! My doctrine is to not make
> things any harder than they have to be!
>
> best,
> al bradley
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------
> Can you live Life with this?: "Unless there is a law, an agreement, or a
> long-standing custom, No one `Deserves' Anything -- Either Good or Bad!"
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 8522 invoked from network); 17 Aug 2001 18:38:12 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 17 Aug 2001 18:38:12 -0000
Received: (qmail 30915 invoked by uid 50005); 17 Aug 2001 18:38:01 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (. Clean. Processed in 0.510041 secs); 17 Aug 2001 18:38:01 -0000
X-Qmail-Scanner-Mail-From: owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU via smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net
X-Qmail-Scanner-Rcpt-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
X-Qmail-Scanner: 0.96 (No viruses found. Processed in 0.510041 secs)
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 17 Aug 2001 18:38:00 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA19378; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 11:35:52 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 88408 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 18:35:33          +0000
Received: from castor.ridgenet.net (IDENT:root@castor.ridgenet.net          [199.120.150.29]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA19363          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 11:35:32 -0700
Received: from kristinscomp (pm094.ridgenet.net [204.154.246.94]) by          castor.ridgenet.net (8.11.0/8.11.0) with SMTP id f7HIRuS04938; Fri,          17 Aug 2001 11:27:56 -0700
References:  <4.3.1.2.20010817030701.02690e60@mail.idsoftware.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <00bb01c1274c$99727f20$1b30fea9@kristinscomp>
Date:         Fri, 17 Aug 2001 11:44:07 -0700
Reply-To: "Kristin & David Hall" <thehalls@RIDGENET.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Kristin & David Hall" <thehalls@RIDGENET.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Solid rocket boosters
Comments: To: John Carmack <johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

> Say someone built an X-Prize vehicle, got it all tested, and found that it
> only went to 80 km instead of 100 km.  Strapping two big (50,000+ pound
> seconds) solids on the side is suggested.
> Is anyone here confident enough in their solids that they would ride in a
> vehicle that required two of them to perform safely and substantially
> identically?

That depends.  Would I trust "three guys in a garage" to build such motors?
No.  Would I trust somebody operating under good QC conditions (Geneology
tracking on all materials/components, X-ray every motor, etc.)?  Yes.

Consider this:  The MK-72 is a sufficiently large booster such that if one
ever CATO'ed, the USN would loose an entire AEGIS class cruiser/destroyer.
But they launch them all the time with supreme confidence.  Why?  Good
QC....


....However, I would question the use of a solid motor in somthing like an
X-prize candidate.  Why?  Well, by definition it must be reusable....

> If I was in that situation, I would almost certainly rebuild the vehicle,
> or add a pressurized drop tank or something, but I could easily see
someone
> that is nearly out of funding, or in a real race with a competitor, going
> for the band-aid fix.

Were it me, and I was married to the solids approach and on a very short
budget, I would simply lengthen my motor.  That would be a lot easier than
having to study all the aerodynamic issues associated with strapping two
motors on the side when you'd only planned for one.  Just stretch your motor
case by 10% and throw on a new nozzle.  OK, it's not quite *THAT* easy, but
that's the approach I would take.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 21367 invoked from network); 17 Aug 2001 18:41:28 -0000
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 17 Aug 2001 18:41:28 -0000
Received: (qmail 23019 invoked by uid 50005); 17 Aug 2001 18:40:34 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smptf.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.327144 secs); 17 Aug 2001 18:40:34 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 17 Aug 2001 18:40:33 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA19415; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 11:38:54 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 88415 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 18:38:48          +0000
Received: from castor.ridgenet.net (IDENT:root@castor.ridgenet.net          [199.120.150.29]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA19400          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 11:38:48 -0700
Received: from kristinscomp (pm094.ridgenet.net [204.154.246.94]) by          castor.ridgenet.net (8.11.0/8.11.0) with SMTP id f7HIVBS05260; Fri,          17 Aug 2001 11:31:11 -0700
References:  <LPBBKJMJEOFKAMFJJNNHMEJPCGAA.landofgrey@gnc.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <00d501c1274d$0dd4cee0$1b30fea9@kristinscomp>
Date:         Fri, 17 Aug 2001 11:47:23 -0700
Reply-To: "Kristin & David Hall" <thehalls@RIDGENET.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Kristin & David Hall" <thehalls@RIDGENET.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Solid rocket boosters
Comments: To: landofgrey@gnc.net
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

> Well, in fact, they have. Challenger changed everything. I am at every
> shuttle launch. And it doesn't matter if someone is a NASA or USA employee
> who puts it together or if someone is a tourist from Holland (I met one at
> the last launch). Everyone, *everyone*, cheers and breathes relief at SRB
> staging. That's because of Challenger. People didn't do that before
> Challenger.

*shrug*

I've only been to one shuttle launch.  But I neither cheered nor held my
breath wrt SRB staging.  Call me blase, but Challenger never entered my
mind.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 12406 invoked from network); 17 Aug 2001 18:46:32 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 17 Aug 2001 18:46:32 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 8063 invoked by uid 50005); 17 Aug 2001 18:46:53 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.447716 secs); 17 Aug 2001 18:46:53 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 17 Aug 2001 18:46:52 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA19469; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 11:43:47 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 88430 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 18:43:40          +0000
Received: from smtp008.mailsrvcs.net (smtp008pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.187])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA19455 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 11:43:39 -0700
Received: from [63.27.96.152] (1Cust76.tnt3.san-bernardino.ca.da.uu.net          [63.25.57.76]) by smtp008.mailsrvcs.net  with ESMTP for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; id f7HIh4C17357 Fri, 17 Aug 2001 13:43:04          -0500 (CDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: GTE/01rocket@mail.gte.net
References: <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010817130614.11514D-100000@spsystems.net>            <3B7D54E8.24FEC4EF@earthlink.net>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <a05100324b7a314c57bfc@[63.27.96.152]>
Date:         Fri, 17 Aug 2001 11:42:29 -0700
Reply-To: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Solid rocket boosters
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <3B7D54E8.24FEC4EF@earthlink.net>

>Henry Spencer wrote:
>>
>>  On Fri, 17 Aug 2001, John Wickman wrote:
>>  > I think solids are generally safer than liquids and more reliable.   They
>>  > can be shut down during operation with thrust termination ports.
>>It is done
>>  > on all ICBMs since the 1950's.   Thrust termination ports were on the
>>  > Shuttle SRB initial designs, but some idiot took them out.
>>
>>  They were taken out because thrust termination that way is a rather
>>  violent process, and preliminary investigation indicated that neither the
>>  ET nor the orbiter would survive it.  Works okay for Mil-Spec ICBMs, but
>>  for launch vehicles it has to be considered the equivalent of firing the
>>  destruct charges -- fine if the stuff you care about has already departed
>>  via an escape system, not so fine if you actually want to save the vehicle.
>
>And I suppose that firing the release bolts and separation motors and
>letting the SRB's simply fly away under power would have taken out
>the ET with their exhaust plumes...
>
>Suppose Challenger had detected the failure when the major leak
>began... suppose it had had a breakwire system, like the burglar
>alarm tape used on glass windows, wrapped around the joints,
>and "joint integrity loss - RIGHT SRB" had lit up on the panel
>at T+59 seconds. Is there anything that could have been done
>in those 14 seconds before vehicle breakup at T+73 seconds?
>What additional hardware would have been required? (It sounds
>like this was fairly close to a "worst case max Q abort" scenario,
>with the aerodynamic loads of nominal flight leaving little
>structural margin for sudden moves in any case!)
>
>-dave w


Actually this is one of the few practical abort scenarios not
implemented in Shuttle and might have actually worked.  Launching
within temperature margins would have been better of course.

By ejecting the SRB motors even under full thrust the sep would be
agressive but there would not be exhaust issues due to the hypersonic
slipstream and the eject motors shooting it to the side.  Normally
the SRB's flip on ejection but under thrust they would fly away as
the thrust plume provides induced drag stability.

Once separated IF the shuttle survived that it would be possible to
abort to orbit or one of the backup sites. In any case it would have
had a better chance than it did: zero.

Jerry

On the solid v liquid debate: statistically similar, they each have
their own best suited purpose (solid stages 1 and 2, liquid stages 3
and 4).  That's why there is no single answer.  Prove your hypothesis
by flying rockets to orbit.

--
Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
Opinion, the whole thing.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 5518 invoked from network); 17 Aug 2001 18:59:20 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 17 Aug 2001 18:59:20 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 18691 invoked by uid 50005); 17 Aug 2001 18:59:10 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (. Clean. Processed in 0.234318 secs); 17 Aug 2001 18:59:10 -0000
X-Qmail-Scanner-Mail-From: owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU via smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net
X-Qmail-Scanner-Rcpt-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
X-Qmail-Scanner: 0.96 (No viruses found. Processed in 0.234318 secs)
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 17 Aug 2001 18:59:09 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA19571; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 11:56:56 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 88454 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 18:56:48          +0000
Received: from spsystems.net (spsystems.net [209.47.149.227]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA19556 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Fri,          17 Aug 2001 11:56:47 -0700
Received: (from henry@localhost) by spsystems.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id OAA13002;          Fri, 17 Aug 2001 14:56:14 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010817144639.12900C-100000@spsystems.net>
Date:         Fri, 17 Aug 2001 14:56:13 -0400
Reply-To: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Solid rocket boosters
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <3B7D54E8.24FEC4EF@earthlink.net>

On Fri, 17 Aug 2001, David Weinshenker wrote:
> > > on all ICBMs since the 1950's.   Thrust termination ports were on the
> > > Shuttle SRB initial designs, but some idiot took them out.
> > They were taken out because thrust termination that way is a rather
> > violent process, and preliminary investigation indicated that neither the
> > ET nor the orbiter would survive it.
>
> And I suppose that firing the release bolts and separation motors and
> letting the SRB's simply fly away under power would have taken out
> the ET with their exhaust plumes...

Very likely, unfortunately.  Not certain, but pretty dicey.  Separation
would also be worrisome -- hypersonic aerodynamics can do strange things
(even at *subsonic* speeds it's quite possible for something dropped from
an airplane to come back up and hit the plane!), and the air doesn't thin
out until fairly late in the SRB burn.  The separation motors are designed
for use with the air pretty much gone and the SRBs burnt out; they have
nowhere near the thrust needed for positive separation during the burn.

> ... "joint integrity loss - RIGHT SRB" had lit up on the panel
> at T+59 seconds. Is there anything that could have been done
> in those 14 seconds before vehicle breakup at T+73 seconds?

Precious little.  If you knew how bad the situation was -- not just that
there was a problem -- you could try separating the SRBs; it's
near-certain death, but considering the alternative, worth trying.  If you
knew there was a problem but didn't know how serious, probably the best
bet would be to ride it out and pray.

> What additional hardware would have been required? (It sounds
> like this was fairly close to a "worst case max Q abort" scenario,
> with the aerodynamic loads of nominal flight leaving little
> structural margin for sudden moves in any case!)

Unfortunately true.  They were past max Q but not all that far past it.

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 11215 invoked from network); 17 Aug 2001 19:07:48 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 17 Aug 2001 19:07:49 -0000
Received: (qmail 24192 invoked by uid 50005); 17 Aug 2001 19:06:22 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smpte.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 2.37021 secs); 17 Aug 2001 19:06:22 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 17 Aug 2001 19:06:17 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA19645; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 12:05:20 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 88466 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 19:05:12          +0000
Received: from mail.conpute.com ([207.164.87.145]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7)          with ESMTP id MAA19629 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 17 Aug 2001          12:05:11 -0700
Received: by MAIL with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) id <QSNHQFBR>; Fri,          17 Aug 2001 15:02:19 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19)
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Message-ID:  <814DCE01F6D7D311994D204C4F4F50201889BB@MAIL>
Date:         Fri, 17 Aug 2001 15:02:18 -0400
Reply-To: "Earl Pottinger" <earlcp@CONPUTE.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Earl Pottinger" <earlcp@CONPUTE.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Solid rocket boosters
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

-----Original Message-----
>From: Bendel, Timothy B [mailto:timothy.b.bendel@LMCO.COM]
>Sent: Friday, August 17, 2001 12:49 PM
>To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
>Subject: Re: [AR] Solid rocket boosters

>John,

>We all have opinions on this subject, and I guess I am one of the people
who
>feel that solids have been given a "bad rap". I do not think that the
>ability to throttle and shut down is that big a deal for a booster
>(definitely a very big deal for attitude control thrusters!) In general, a
>launch vehicle that goes to orbit either makes it / doesn't make it. The
one
>example I can think of is the Space Shuttle which performed a single "abort
>to orbit" in the last twenty years (it turned out to be a sensor failure,
>IIRC).

Strangely to say, while I like liquid designs for a number of different
reasons,
I much more prefer solids for escape motors.  A good solid is basically an
inert mass with no moving parts to fail when you needed it most.  You just
need to get some power to the ignition and away you go.  When you want to
get
away quickly you don't care if you can control thrust for seven Gs or for
eight
Gs, you just want to get away fast.

                Earl Colby Pottinger

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 23484 invoked from network); 17 Aug 2001 19:25:13 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 17 Aug 2001 19:25:13 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: (qmail 23249 invoked by uid 50005); 17 Aug 2001 19:24:19 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smptf.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.504329 secs); 17 Aug 2001 19:24:19 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 17 Aug 2001 19:24:18 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA19818; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 12:22:40 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 88519 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 19:22:32          +0000
Received: from cisco.com (cypher.cisco.com [171.69.11.18]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA19804 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri,          17 Aug 2001 12:22:32 -0700
Received: (from billw@localhost) by cisco.com (8.8.8/2.6/Cisco List          Logging/8.8.8) id MAA24620; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 12:22:00 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID:  <CMM.0.90.4.998076120.billw@cypher>
Date:         Fri, 17 Aug 2001 12:22:00 PDT
Reply-To: "Bill Westfield" <billw@cisco.com>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "William Chops Westfield" <billw@cisco.com>
Subject:      Re: [AR] urethane fuel?
Comments: To: "Mark K. Spute" <mks@BIOMICRO.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  Your message of Fri, 17 Aug 2001 22:23:01 +1200

    The typical method in the plastics industry for quick and dirty
    identification of unknown materials is the flame test.  Simply, hold a
    part of the unknown material over a flame for a few seconds and see what
    the smoke smells like.  Each major thermoplastic material has a distinct
    smell.  I.e. urethanes smell different from ethelyenes, which smell
    different from nylons, which smell differeent from propylenes, etc.

Urethanes are the ones that smell like cyanide, right?

A urethane should be pretty resistant to solvents like MEK that will disolve
plastics like ABS, Styrene, etc - you might get down to the local hardware
store, buy some "pipe primer" for ABS and/or PVC and see if they have any
disolving action on your rod...

BillW


From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 24521 invoked from network); 17 Aug 2001 19:47:15 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 17 Aug 2001 19:47:15 -0000
Received: (qmail 1350 invoked by uid 50005); 17 Aug 2001 19:47:05 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (. Clean. Processed in 0.21243 secs); 17 Aug 2001 19:47:05 -0000
X-Qmail-Scanner-Mail-From: owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU via smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net
X-Qmail-Scanner-Rcpt-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
X-Qmail-Scanner: 0.96 (No viruses found. Processed in 0.21243 secs)
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 17 Aug 2001 19:47:05 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA19990; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 12:44:26 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 88563 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 19:44:17          +0000
Received: from dune.gnc.net (root@dune.gnc.net [207.203.72.4]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA19976 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri,          17 Aug 2001 12:44:17 -0700
Received: from beowulf (sw2-6.gnc.net [207.203.72.86]) by dune.gnc.net          (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id PAA19303 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri,          17 Aug 2001 15:44:17 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <LPBBKJMJEOFKAMFJJNNHEEKDCGAA.landofgrey@gnc.net>
Date:         Fri, 17 Aug 2001 15:44:00 -0400
Reply-To: <landofgrey@gnc.net>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Matthew Travis" <landofgrey@gnc.net>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Solid rocket boosters
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <00d501c1274d$0dd4cee0$1b30fea9@kristinscomp>

I don't cheer or breathe relief either. Partly blase, partly because I have
an idea of what actually goes on. I don't like cheering anyway. In fact, I'm
not crazy about tourists in general, not even when I'm one. I think that the
guys (and women) who put the thing together for flight do these things
because there's such a personal connection that they have (actually, I know
this to be true from my own experience and talking to them). And I think
your average non-technically minded tourist does the same because they know
two things: the shuttle looks cool going up and Challenger exploded. So that
too is a different perspective. And hey, I'd rather they cheer than boo :) I
don't feel relief until they're in orbit, but even then I don't "breathe a
sigh of relief". It's more like "good, that's done". The second launch I saw
in person was STS-51F. I mentioned this in another posting. It had an SSME
shutdown 5 and a half minutes into flight. It caused a lot of confusion and
near panic around here. While in the MCC they knew the shuttle would still
go into orbit, Abort-To-Orbit, a lot of people watching thought it was going
to do an RTLS or AOA. Anyway, since then I always feel better once it's in
orbit.In any case, there are still problems, though you don't hear about
them. One flight a few years ago experience an SRB nozzle cone that nearly
burned through. There have been other close calls as well. There is still
cause to be concerned (ask any of the USA or NASA employees at KSC - and not
just the managers but the blue collar assembly people as well), but it's
much better handled now. Criminal negligence is a thing of the past. For the
record I don't cheer or anything like that at amateur rocket launches
either.

-Matt

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Kristin & David Hall [mailto:thehalls@ridgenet.net]
> Sent: Friday, August 17, 2001 2:47 PM
> To: landofgrey@gnc.net; AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
> Subject: Re: Re: [AR] Solid rocket boosters
>

> *shrug*
>
> I've only been to one shuttle launch.  But I neither cheered nor held my
> breath wrt SRB staging.  Call me blase, but Challenger never entered my
> mind.
>
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 28189 invoked from network); 17 Aug 2001 19:48:08 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 17 Aug 2001 19:48:08 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 24118 invoked by uid 50005); 17 Aug 2001 19:48:29 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.779876 secs); 17 Aug 2001 19:48:29 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 17 Aug 2001 19:48:27 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA20023; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 12:45:51 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 88570 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 19:45:50          +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (f88.pav1.hotmail.com [64.4.31.88]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA19994 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri,          17 Aug 2001 12:44:47 -0700
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Fri,          17 Aug 2001 12:44:16 -0700
Received: from 63.87.137.253 by pv1fd.pav1.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Fri, 17          Aug 2001 19:44:16 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [63.87.137.253]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 17 Aug 2001 19:44:16.0675 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[FFE0E730:01C12754]
Message-ID:  <F88vwNeZsjSFUMCGlbZ0000acd7@hotmail.com>
Date:         Fri, 17 Aug 2001 12:44:16 -0700
Reply-To: "Brian Reddeman" <breddeman@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Brian Reddeman" <breddeman@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Solid rocket boosters (additonal seperate questions)
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

I think Mr. Carmack's original question aserts the want for a solid booster
solution that is cheap and reliable (somehow cheap and reliable doesn't come
to mind with rockets)without spelling DOOM for the original rocket design
(sorry couldn't let that pun slip).

Following his line of questions, I'd like to pose an addtional one:

Has anyone been successful and able to repeat some form of throttle control
as well as shutdown/restart with solids? I know that sounds like trying to
do a power dive with a glider, but someone obviously has tried to do work on
subject.


>From: John Carmack <johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM>
>Reply-To: John Carmack <johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM>
>To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
>Subject: [AR] Solid rocket boosters
>Date: Fri, 17 Aug 2001 03:21:17 -0500
>
>Since liquid vs solid and manned rockets have come up, let me pose this
>hypothetical situation:
>
>Say someone built an X-Prize vehicle, got it all tested, and found that it
>only went to 80 km instead of 100 km.  Strapping two big (50,000+ pound
>seconds) solids on the side is suggested.
>
>Is anyone here confident enough in their solids that they would ride in a
>vehicle that required two of them to perform safely and substantially
>identically?
>
>What design and process steps would you take if you were tasked with
>providing the boosters?
>
>If I was in that situation, I would almost certainly rebuild the vehicle,
>or add a pressurized drop tank or something, but I could easily see someone
>that is nearly out of funding, or in a real race with a competitor, going
>for the band-aid fix.
>
>I have mixed feelings about solids.  They take one of my dearest principles
>to the logical extreme -- do all the complex stuff in preprocessing to make
>the runtime as simple as possible, but the variability and lack of
>individual testability, combined with the obvious throttle / shutdown /
>restart issues, are serious.
>
>John Carmack
Brian Reddeman
"Don't run, you'll only die tired."

_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 2573 invoked from network); 17 Aug 2001 19:49:16 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 17 Aug 2001 19:49:16 -0000
Received: (qmail 26041 invoked by uid 50005); 17 Aug 2001 19:49:38 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.246476 secs); 17 Aug 2001 19:49:38 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 17 Aug 2001 19:49:37 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA20054; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 12:47:15 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 88577 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 19:47:14          +0000
Received: from mailhost0.trib.com (mailhost0.trib.com [63.229.150.3]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA20028 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 12:46:13 -0700
Received: from mail.trib.com (mail.trib.com [12.10.158.17]) by          mailhost0.trib.com (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f7HJjaT27806; Fri,          17 Aug 2001 13:45:36 -0600 (MDT) (envelope-from          jwckman@space-rockets.com)
Received: from [63.229.150.71] (HELO hppav) by mail.trib.com (CommuniGate Pro          SMTP 3.4.6) with SMTP id 42840835; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 13:45:35 -0600
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <NKEHJAOOKBPGIKOOPDEFKEFLCBAA.jwckman@space-rockets.com>
Date:         Fri, 17 Aug 2001 13:44:02 -0600
Reply-To: "John Wickman" <jwckman@SPACE-ROCKETS.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Wickman" <jwckman@SPACE-ROCKETS.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Solid rocket boosters
Comments: To: Henry Spencer <henry@spsystems.net>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010817130614.11514D-100000@spsystems.net>

Henry,

I have seen it done many times.  The propellant is extinguished in a few
milliseconds with a resultant loss of thrust.  A blink of an eye its over.
It is not a violent event.  I suppose if it occurred at Max Q, the sudden
loss of thrust would create a severe negative g.  I really find it hard to
believe that the ET and Orbiter would not survive.  After all, the normal
shut down of the SRBs is also a sudden loss of thrust.   Granted, at high
altitude where drag force is no longer an issue.  I would love to see the
flight mission point used to throw out the thrust termination system.  Are
there any NASA reports documenting the destruction of the ET and Orbiter
with the use of the proposed thrust termination system?  I was told by some
people in NASA they were taken out to save weight and cost.

John Wickman

-----Original Message-----
From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@itc.uci.edu]On
Behalf Of Henry Spencer
Sent: Friday, August 17, 2001 11:12 AM
To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
Subject: Re: [AR] Solid rocket boosters


On Fri, 17 Aug 2001, John Wickman wrote:
> I think solids are generally safer than liquids and more reliable.   They
> can be shut down during operation with thrust termination ports.  It is
done
> on all ICBMs since the 1950's.   Thrust termination ports were on the
> Shuttle SRB initial designs, but some idiot took them out.

They were taken out because thrust termination that way is a rather
violent process, and preliminary investigation indicated that neither the
ET nor the orbiter would survive it.  Works okay for Mil-Spec ICBMs, but
for launch vehicles it has to be considered the equivalent of firing the
destruct charges -- fine if the stuff you care about has already departed
via an escape system, not so fine if you actually want to save the vehicle.

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 8492 invoked from network); 17 Aug 2001 19:50:42 -0000
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 17 Aug 2001 19:50:42 -0000
Received: (qmail 25569 invoked by uid 50005); 17 Aug 2001 19:49:18 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smpte.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.217477 secs); 17 Aug 2001 19:49:18 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 17 Aug 2001 19:49:18 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA20090; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 12:48:39 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 88586 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 19:48:37          +0000
Received: from dune.gnc.net (root@dune.gnc.net [207.203.72.4]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA20002 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri,          17 Aug 2001 12:45:26 -0700
Received: from beowulf (sw2-6.gnc.net [207.203.72.86]) by dune.gnc.net          (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id PAA19341 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri,          17 Aug 2001 15:45:26 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <LPBBKJMJEOFKAMFJJNNHIEKDCGAA.landofgrey@gnc.net>
Date:         Fri, 17 Aug 2001 15:45:09 -0400
Reply-To: <landofgrey@gnc.net>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Matthew Travis" <landofgrey@gnc.net>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Solid rocket boosters
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010817130614.11514D-100000@spsystems.net>

Forgive me if I start spouting things obvious. During the design phase of
the shuttle (and in fact, all manned boosters and unmanned launchers) the
goal of the range safety people has never been concern for the safety ofthe
payload. The concern is for the safety of the range and civilian areas
nearby. The thrust trmination systems on the rockets are not intended to
protect the payload or even be survivable, regardless of the payload. They
are intended to protect everyone else. In this regard, blowing the whole
stack to bits suffices perfectly and actually involves less uncertainty than
more elegant termination means. Reliability in simplicity. Now, that's not
to say that the safety of the astronauts has not been a concern. Apollo,
Gemini, Mercury ahd escape rockets. However, those were not part of the
range safety or command destruct systems. The RSO neverhad the ability to
fire Apollo's escape rocket. In fact, the RSO was not required to wait for
the astronaut to fire the escape rocket before hitting the destruct plunger.
He'll hit it when it needs to. Astronaut escape means have never been a part
of range safety per se.

-Matt

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU]On
> Behalf Of Henry Spencer
> Sent: Friday, August 17, 2001 1:12 PM
> To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
> Subject: Re: [AR] Solid rocket boosters
>
>
> On Fri, 17 Aug 2001, John Wickman wrote:
> > I think solids are generally safer than liquids and more
> reliable.   They
> > can be shut down during operation with thrust termination
> ports.  It is done
> > on all ICBMs since the 1950's.   Thrust termination ports were on the
> > Shuttle SRB initial designs, but some idiot took them out.
>
> They were taken out because thrust termination that way is a rather
> violent process, and preliminary investigation indicated that neither the
> ET nor the orbiter would survive it.  Works okay for Mil-Spec ICBMs, but
> for launch vehicles it has to be considered the equivalent of firing the
> destruct charges -- fine if the stuff you care about has already departed
> via an escape system, not so fine if you actually want to save
> the vehicle.
>
>                                                           Henry Spencer
>                                                        henry@spsystems.net
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 16987 invoked from network); 17 Aug 2001 19:52:30 -0000
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 17 Aug 2001 19:52:30 -0000
Received: (qmail 28477 invoked by uid 50005); 17 Aug 2001 19:51:05 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smpte.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.207478 secs); 17 Aug 2001 19:51:05 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 17 Aug 2001 19:51:05 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA20128; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 12:50:04 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 88597 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 19:50:01          +0000
Received: from mailhost0.trib.com (mailhost0.trib.com [63.229.150.3]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA20006 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 12:45:41 -0700
Received: from mail.trib.com (mail.trib.com [12.10.158.17]) by          mailhost0.trib.com (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f7HJjdT27820; Fri,          17 Aug 2001 13:45:39 -0600 (MDT) (envelope-from          jwckman@space-rockets.com)
Received: from [63.229.150.71] (HELO hppav) by mail.trib.com (CommuniGate Pro          SMTP 3.4.6) with SMTP id 42840839; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 13:45:37 -0600
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <NKEHJAOOKBPGIKOOPDEFMEFLCBAA.jwckman@space-rockets.com>
Date:         Fri, 17 Aug 2001 13:44:04 -0600
Reply-To: "John Wickman" <jwckman@SPACE-ROCKETS.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Wickman" <jwckman@SPACE-ROCKETS.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Solid rocket boosters
Comments: To: landofgrey@gnc.net
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <LPBBKJMJEOFKAMFJJNNHCEKACGAA.landofgrey@gnc.net>

Matt,

I should have been more clear in my original post.   The thrust termination
ports operate by suddenly dropping the chamber pressure so that the
propellant is extinguished.   This is called P-dot extinguishment.  In a few
milliseconds, the chamber pressure and thrust goes to zero.  This is very
similar to a normal shutdown except it is a bit faster.  A normal solid may
go to zero thrust in a second rather than a few milliseconds.  Many of you
have probably seen P-dot extinguishment, if you suddenly blew a nozzle or
bulkhead and the propellant went out. It is not canceling out the forward
thrust.   The ports, usually four, are located in each quadrant of the
bulkhead.  The flash of flame out the front is also a few milliseconds so
the thermal damage is virtually zero.

The point of my first post was to point out that solids can be as safe in a
manned mission as liquids.   There would not be a need to completely
redesign the vehicle to boost the thrust of the liquids as was suggested in
the original post I responded to.

John Wickman

-----Original Message-----
From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@itc.uci.edu]On
Behalf Of Matthew Travis
Sent: Friday, August 17, 2001 11:29 AM
To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
Subject: Re: [AR] Solid rocket boosters


Good points. I agree that it's not necessarily true that solids can't be
stopped (without blowing them up) or throttled. I have to say that I think
you're flexibility (for throttling and startup/shutdown) is somewhat more
limited with solids, but that doesn't mean the options aren't there. And
with good engineering, they can be utilized.

One question I have concerns thrust termination ports on boosters for manned
vehicles. I would think (not being an expert in this area) that achieving
termination without sending the vehicle out of control would be difficult.
And it seems it would be more difficult on the shuttle since the ports would
have to located away from the ET and Orbiter. I would think you'd only be
able to locate them on one side of the stack, which would cause a
significant pitching impulse at termination.

-Matt

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU]On
> Behalf Of John Wickman
> Sent: Friday, August 17, 2001 12:55 PM
> To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
> Subject: Re: [AR] Solid rocket boosters
>
>
> I think solids are generally safer than liquids and more reliable.   They
> can be shut down during operation with thrust termination ports.
> It is done
> on all ICBMs since the 1950's.   Thrust termination ports were on the
> Shuttle SRB initial designs, but some idiot took them out.  Solids can
> actually the throttled by gas injection.  That was done in the 1980's at
> Edwards using hydrogen gas to increase thrust.   It can be decreased by
> injecting N2 or CO2.   At Aerojet, we developed a multiple
> stop-start solid
> rocket engine for tactical applications.   Boost and then coast and then
> boost again as you close in on the target.   Four thrust pulses were
> possible in that motor.
>
> John Wickman

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 3840 invoked from network); 17 Aug 2001 19:56:03 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 17 Aug 2001 19:56:03 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 5343 invoked by uid 50005); 17 Aug 2001 19:56:24 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 2.268408 secs); 17 Aug 2001 19:56:24 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 17 Aug 2001 19:56:19 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA20251; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 12:53:26 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 88646 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 19:53:25          +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (f18.pav1.hotmail.com [64.4.31.18]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA20237 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri,          17 Aug 2001 12:53:24 -0700
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Fri,          17 Aug 2001 12:52:54 -0700
Received: from 63.87.137.253 by pv1fd.pav1.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Fri, 17          Aug 2001 19:52:54 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [63.87.137.253]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 17 Aug 2001 19:52:54.0370 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[3472E420:01C12756]
Message-ID:  <F18kZIhTrBoe2U8QVjp0000ac08@hotmail.com>
Date:         Fri, 17 Aug 2001 12:52:54 -0700
Reply-To: "Brian Reddeman" <breddeman@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Brian Reddeman" <breddeman@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      [AR] I'm 60km up in atmosphere and falling...
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

I'm 60km and now falling (Assuming I'm not pieces of burning debris). Do I
really care that what kind of [liquid/solid/hybrid] rocket motor failed
[minor/major/violently]? Personally I wouldn't really worry about it. I'd be
more worried about going "splat." 8-)

-Brian
"I shoulda taken the blue pill"

_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 9831 invoked from network); 17 Aug 2001 19:57:22 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 17 Aug 2001 19:57:22 -0000
Received: (qmail 9256 invoked by uid 50005); 17 Aug 2001 19:57:11 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (. Clean. Processed in 0.275592 secs); 17 Aug 2001 19:57:11 -0000
X-Qmail-Scanner-Mail-From: owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU via smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net
X-Qmail-Scanner-Rcpt-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
X-Qmail-Scanner: 0.96 (No viruses found. Processed in 0.275592 secs)
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 17 Aug 2001 19:57:10 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA20173; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 12:51:30 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 88617 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 19:51:28          +0000
Received: from dune.gnc.net (root@dune.gnc.net [207.203.72.4]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA20100 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri,          17 Aug 2001 12:49:28 -0700
Received: from beowulf (sw2-6.gnc.net [207.203.72.86]) by dune.gnc.net          (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id PAA19434 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri,          17 Aug 2001 15:49:28 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <LPBBKJMJEOFKAMFJJNNHCEKECGAA.landofgrey@gnc.net>
Date:         Fri, 17 Aug 2001 15:49:11 -0400
Reply-To: <landofgrey@gnc.net>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Matthew Travis" <landofgrey@gnc.net>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Solid rocket boosters
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010817135141.12347A-100000@spsystems.net>

I worded it badly. That was actually what I was trying to say. whether it's
a catastrophic failure or not, if the payload doesn't get to the correct
orbit, the payload owner loses. Example: PAS-2B. The Ariane V did not fail
catastrophically. However, the spacecraft has been written off as a total
loss. Degree of the failure of the Ariane doesn't matter, though I've heard
some of the Arianespace people talk about how the booster performed well, it
still is reliable, blah blah marketing this and that blah. The fact is, it
failed and the spacecraft was lost. So anyway, I agree with you.

-Matt

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU]On
> Behalf Of Henry Spencer
> Sent: Friday, August 17, 2001 1:58 PM
> To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
> Subject: Re: [AR] Solid rocket boosters
>
>
> On Fri, 17 Aug 2001, Matthew Travis wrote:
> > > Gary Hudson likes to show a slide, a photo of a two-page spread in
> > > Aviation Week which has two stories, both running across the
> two pages.
> > > The headline on the top story is "DC-X Makes Emergency
> Landing".  The one
> > > on the bottom story is "First Pegasus XL Lost".
> >
> > Paper engineers like to come up with degrees of failure, but it really
> > doesn't matter to the payload.
>
> Payload owners care a whole lot about the difference between getting their
> hardware back (so they can try again) and having it go into the ocean.
>
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 8937 invoked from network); 17 Aug 2001 20:04:08 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 17 Aug 2001 20:04:08 -0000
Received: (qmail 17479 invoked by uid 50005); 17 Aug 2001 20:04:29 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.394522 secs); 17 Aug 2001 20:04:29 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 17 Aug 2001 20:04:29 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA20393; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 13:01:33 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 88683 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 20:01:30          +0000
Received: from dune.gnc.net (root@dune.gnc.net [207.203.72.4]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA20379 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri,          17 Aug 2001 13:01:30 -0700
Received: from beowulf (sw2-6.gnc.net [207.203.72.86]) by dune.gnc.net          (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id QAA19693 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri,          17 Aug 2001 16:01:30 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <LPBBKJMJEOFKAMFJJNNHEEKFCGAA.landofgrey@gnc.net>
Date:         Fri, 17 Aug 2001 16:01:12 -0400
Reply-To: <landofgrey@gnc.net>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Matthew Travis" <landofgrey@gnc.net>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Solid rocket boosters
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <3B7D54E8.24FEC4EF@earthlink.net>

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU]On
> Behalf Of David Weinshenker

> And I suppose that firing the release bolts and separation motors and
> letting the SRB's simply fly away under power would have taken out
> the ET with their exhaust plumes...
>

The SRB plumes would have destroyed the ET. The plumes would also have
caused turbulence to the rest of the stack that would have sheared off the
wings of the orbiter. Most importantly=, the SRB nozzles can only swivel 5
degrees (or is it 7?). They can not maintain sufficient stability in order
to be "flown away" safely.

> Suppose Challenger had detected the failure when the major leak
> began... suppose it had had a breakwire system, like the burglar
> alarm tape used on glass windows, wrapped around the joints,
> and "joint integrity loss - RIGHT SRB" had lit up on the panel
> at T+59 seconds. Is there anything that could have been done
> in those 14 seconds before vehicle breakup at T+73 seconds?
> What additional hardware would have been required? (It sounds
> like this was fairly close to a "worst case max Q abort" scenario,
> with the aerodynamic loads of nominal flight leaving little
> structural margin for sudden moves in any case!)

To escape at that altitude and velocity (several thousand miles per hour)
would require an escpae pod. Ejection seats would not suffice. The final
burn through occurred during the Max-Q transients, breakup about 12-15
seconds later. The aerodynamic loads were actually more benign at that
point.

Going further along the hypothetical, the joint failed, actually, at about
T+ 0.8-ish seconds, immediately after ignition when the pressure surge
expanded the casing. This was captured on camera and  could have been
detected immediately. If the shuttle had ejection seats, the astronauts
could have ejected basically just off the pad. In fact, on STS-2, there was
o-ring blow-by and a near burn through. Engle and Truly had ejection seats.
Looking back, the data showed the blow-by and burn-through. Unfortunately,
that was data that is normally recorded and then looked at post-flight and
not used for real-tiem analysis. Also, if the burn through had occurred 90
degrees around the SRB than the location it actually happened, we all would
have seen it develop all during the ascent. In fact, if the NASA PAO had
used a different camera during the launch coverage, we all would have
watched it unfold. Can you imagine the calls from the capcom to Challenger
during that? "Well, Dick, we see what looks like a giant flame...". Or how
about the PAO Steve Nesbitt? In hindsight, since nothing could be done about
it, it's kind of nice that nobody noticed it until after the disaster. Less
traumatic on the mind.

(This, by the way, is why some larger amateur motors fail. People forget
that when the motor diameter gets larger than 6 inches and length longer
than 3 or so feet, finite element analysis is required in order to make
surethat the dynamic flexing at ignition doesn't cause a failure)

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 25699 invoked from network); 17 Aug 2001 20:08:11 -0000
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 17 Aug 2001 20:08:11 -0000
Received: (qmail 20793 invoked by uid 50005); 17 Aug 2001 20:07:17 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smptf.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.23297 secs); 17 Aug 2001 20:07:17 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 17 Aug 2001 20:07:17 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA20446; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 13:05:38 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 88694 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 20:05:36          +0000
Received: from mailhost0.trib.com (mailhost0.trib.com [63.229.150.3]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA20432 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 13:05:35 -0700
Received: from mail.trib.com (mail.trib.com [12.10.158.17]) by          mailhost0.trib.com (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f7HK5XT34263; Fri,          17 Aug 2001 14:05:33 -0600 (MDT) (envelope-from          jwckman@space-rockets.com)
Received: from [63.229.150.75] (HELO hppav) by mail.trib.com (CommuniGate Pro          SMTP 3.4.6) with SMTP id 42842690; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 14:05:32 -0600
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <NKEHJAOOKBPGIKOOPDEFEEFNCBAA.jwckman@space-rockets.com>
Date:         Fri, 17 Aug 2001 14:04:00 -0600
Reply-To: "John Wickman" <jwckman@SPACE-ROCKETS.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Wickman" <jwckman@SPACE-ROCKETS.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] ERPS successfully runs H2O2 engine
Comments: To: landofgrey@gnc.net
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <LPBBKJMJEOFKAMFJJNNHAEJNCGAA.landofgrey@gnc.net>

Matt,

>>>>A good example is STS-51F. An SSME detected a redline at approx. 5 1/2
minutes into flight and shutdown. The shuttle still made it to orbit. While
there was a failure, it was "benign"; it didn't explode and the engine could
be turned off. <<<<<

In the Challenger accident, the SRB also did not explode and kept
functioning even with a leak out the side of the case.  It survived the
destruction and explosion of the Orbiter and ET and flew off by itself still
providing thrust. The failure of the entire vehicle was due to heating of
the support strut connecting the SRB to the ET causing it to break and over
pressurization of the ET due to heating.  Had an option been available to
turn off the solid rocket motor with a thrust termination system, I believe
the Challenger crew would be alive today.  Ironically, if the leak had
occurred on the opposite side of the SRB, the crew may also be alive today.

John Wickman

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 9427 invoked from network); 17 Aug 2001 20:11:35 -0000
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 17 Aug 2001 20:11:35 -0000
Received: (qmail 25587 invoked by uid 50005); 17 Aug 2001 20:10:12 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smpte.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.652883 secs); 17 Aug 2001 20:10:12 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 17 Aug 2001 20:10:11 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA20518; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 13:09:12 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 88713 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 20:09:10          +0000
Received: from dune.gnc.net (root@dune.gnc.net [207.203.72.4]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA20504 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri,          17 Aug 2001 13:09:09 -0700
Received: from beowulf (sw2-6.gnc.net [207.203.72.86]) by dune.gnc.net          (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id QAA19905 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri,          17 Aug 2001 16:09:10 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <LPBBKJMJEOFKAMFJJNNHOEKFCGAA.landofgrey@gnc.net>
Date:         Fri, 17 Aug 2001 16:08:52 -0400
Reply-To: <landofgrey@gnc.net>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Matthew Travis" <landofgrey@gnc.net>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Solid rocket boosters
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010817144639.12900C-100000@spsystems.net>

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU]On
> Behalf Of Henry Spencer
> Sent: Friday, August 17, 2001 2:56 PM
> To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
> Subject: Re: [AR] Solid rocket boosters

A point that hasn't been made yet. Once the vehicle is launched, nothing can
separate the SRB's until the PC < 50 condition is detected, and then, only
the onboard computer can sep them. The astronauts do not have the ability to
jettison them.. Missions control can not do it either. Range Safety also can
not. This is one situation where the computer (and chamber pressure monitor)
must work. If the SRB's don't separate, the only option is ditching in the
ocean. RTLS can't be tried and there's not enough energy for TAL. So,
anyway, the talk about separating the boosters early is rather moot (duh,
this whole thread is rather moot).

>
> near-certain death, but considering the alternative, worth trying.  If you
> knew there was a problem but didn't know how serious, probably the best
> bet would be to ride it out and pray.
>

Exactly. From the people I've talked to, with the lack of escape means (like
a rocket powered escape pod), they would have done just that: waited it out.
I even got disagreement as to whether or not they'd tell the crew.

> > What additional hardware would have been required? (It sounds
> > like this was fairly close to a "worst case max Q abort" scenario,
> > with the aerodynamic loads of nominal flight leaving little
> > structural margin for sudden moves in any case!)
>
> Unfortunately true.  They were past max Q but not all that far past it.

They were almost 15 seconds past the point of Max-Q, so the "bad" forces
(vibration, shoch waves and such) were significantly lower. However, the
stack was, by then, moving much faster (albeit in thinner air), so other
forces were still as great or greater. Essentially, ejection seats would not
likely have worked. A rocket powered pod maybe.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 19508 invoked from network); 17 Aug 2001 20:14:07 -0000
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 17 Aug 2001 20:14:07 -0000
Received: (qmail 29323 invoked by uid 50005); 17 Aug 2001 20:12:42 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smpte.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 1.845381 secs); 17 Aug 2001 20:12:42 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 17 Aug 2001 20:12:38 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA20573; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 13:10:58 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 88732 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 20:10:57          +0000
Received: from dune.gnc.net (root@dune.gnc.net [207.203.72.4]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA20559 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri,          17 Aug 2001 13:10:56 -0700
Received: from beowulf (sw2-6.gnc.net [207.203.72.86]) by dune.gnc.net          (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id QAA19959 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri,          17 Aug 2001 16:10:56 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <LPBBKJMJEOFKAMFJJNNHEEKGCGAA.landofgrey@gnc.net>
Date:         Fri, 17 Aug 2001 16:10:40 -0400
Reply-To: <landofgrey@gnc.net>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Matthew Travis" <landofgrey@gnc.net>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Solid rocket boosters
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <814DCE01F6D7D311994D204C4F4F50201889BB@MAIL>

Yeppers. No complex ignition system. No fuel feed system. Compact. High burn
rate and thrust. Quick action time. That's why they are used in ejection
seats, escape rockets, etc.

-Matt, master of the obvious

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU]On
> Behalf Of Earl Pottinger

> I much more prefer solids for escape motors.  A good solid is basically an
> inert mass with no moving parts to fail when you needed it most.  You just
> need to get some power to the ignition and away you go.  When you want to
> get
> away quickly you don't care if you can control thrust for seven Gs or for
> eight
> Gs, you just want to get away fast.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 25999 invoked from network); 17 Aug 2001 20:15:39 -0000
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 17 Aug 2001 20:15:39 -0000
Received: (qmail 31453 invoked by uid 50005); 17 Aug 2001 20:14:45 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smptf.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.252072 secs); 17 Aug 2001 20:14:45 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 17 Aug 2001 20:14:44 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA20624; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 13:13:23 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 88747 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 20:13:21          +0000
Received: from dune.gnc.net (root@dune.gnc.net [207.203.72.4]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA20610 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri,          17 Aug 2001 13:13:21 -0700
Received: from beowulf (sw2-6.gnc.net [207.203.72.86]) by dune.gnc.net          (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id QAA20012 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri,          17 Aug 2001 16:13:21 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <LPBBKJMJEOFKAMFJJNNHMEKGCGAA.landofgrey@gnc.net>
Date:         Fri, 17 Aug 2001 16:13:04 -0400
Reply-To: <landofgrey@gnc.net>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Matthew Travis" <landofgrey@gnc.net>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Solid rocket boosters
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <00bb01c1274c$99727f20$1b30fea9@kristinscomp>

It's interesting you mention this. One of the upgrades, and most likely one
right now, that is being considered for the shuttle is adding a 5th segment
to the SRB's.

-Matt

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU]On
> Behalf Of Kristin & David Hall
>
> Were it me, and I was married to the solids approach and on a very short
> budget, I would simply lengthen my motor.  That would be a lot easier than
> having to study all the aerodynamic issues associated with strapping two
> motors on the side when you'd only planned for one.  Just stretch
> your motor case by 10% and throw on a new nozzle.  OK, it's not quite
*THAT*
> easy, but that's the approach I would take.
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 2712 invoked from network); 17 Aug 2001 20:24:37 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 17 Aug 2001 20:24:37 -0000
Received: (qmail 11890 invoked by uid 50005); 17 Aug 2001 20:24:58 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.306352 secs); 17 Aug 2001 20:24:58 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 17 Aug 2001 20:24:57 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA20824; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 13:22:39 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 88808 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 20:22:36          +0000
Received: from dune.gnc.net (root@dune.gnc.net [207.203.72.4]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA20810 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri,          17 Aug 2001 13:22:36 -0700
Received: from beowulf (sw2-6.gnc.net [207.203.72.86]) by dune.gnc.net          (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id QAA20214 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri,          17 Aug 2001 16:22:36 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <LPBBKJMJEOFKAMFJJNNHGEKHCGAA.landofgrey@gnc.net>
Date:         Fri, 17 Aug 2001 16:22:19 -0400
Reply-To: <landofgrey@gnc.net>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Matthew Travis" <landofgrey@gnc.net>
Subject:      Re: [AR] reliability Now we're talking statistics...
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <03bd01c12746$719ea1a0$6601a8c0@home.com>

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU]On
> Behalf Of Brian Kosko

> Bottom line. If you need to evaluate a sample of data, always be sure to
> check the confidence interval associated with the parameter you're
> interested in, not just the mean value.

I absolutely agree. Otherwise, you're bascially taking samples that you
can't trust anyway. Uncertainty only compounds uncertainty. This was the
fallacy of Challenger. The managers (I loathe managers, btw) saw the SRB's
with a reliability of 'x'. With each flight they "gained confidence" in the
system. Basically, they were saying that, given a failure probability of 1
in 37 (which was the statistical probability of a catostrophic SRB failure),
each time they flew successfully, they gained confidence and the chance for
failure went down. In reality, statistically, if you have a probability of 1
in 37, then by the time you ge to the 25th flight, you're really pushing
your luck. A one in 37 chance became 1 in 12. They twisted it all around,
*and convinced people of it*, in order to save their own ass-ets. Numbers
don't lie, but evil people can learn math.

>
> Brian
>
> P.S. I ran my own consulting practice the last ten years or so; doing
> statistics, quality control, and such. I'm now a stay-at-home

I've been doing software Q&A and performance metrics analysis for several
years now (mainly to please managers who are trying to please marketing
people) and have become thoroughly convinced that, if the effort that is
spent on that was spent on creating quality software to being with, we'd all
be better off.

-Matt

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 18407 invoked from network); 17 Aug 2001 20:28:22 -0000
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 17 Aug 2001 20:28:22 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 18854 invoked by uid 50005); 17 Aug 2001 20:26:58 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smpte.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.826625 secs); 17 Aug 2001 20:26:58 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 17 Aug 2001 20:26:57 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA20862; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 13:24:04 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 88819 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 20:24:03          +0000
Received: from mail.aros.net (mail.aros.net [207.173.16.20]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA20848 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri,          17 Aug 2001 13:24:02 -0700
Received: from biomicro.com ([208.187.122.40]) by mail.aros.net (8.11.3/8.9.3)          with ESMTP id f7HKO1D23267 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 17 Aug          2001 14:24:01 -0600 (MDT)
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.77 [en] (Win98; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <CMM.0.90.4.998076120.billw@cypher>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B7CC661.63331DEA@biomicro.com>
Date:         Fri, 17 Aug 2001 01:23:13 -0600
Reply-To: "Mark K. Spute" <mks@BIOMICRO.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Mark K. Spute" <mks@BIOMICRO.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] urethane fuel?
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Dunno, Bill.

I've never intentionally smelled cyanide.  (Don't know anyone who has,
either.)  :)

William Chops Westfield wrote:
[Snip of previous post]

> Urethanes are the ones that smell like cyanide, right?

--
Mark K. Spute
Senior Research Engineer
BioMicro Systems Inc.

KD7IWE,  RRS

"It is difficult to say what is impossible, for the dream of yesterday
is the hope of today and the reality of tomorrow."
     Dr. Robert H. Goddard

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 29328 invoked from network); 17 Aug 2001 20:30:51 -0000
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 17 Aug 2001 20:30:51 -0000
Received: (qmail 22836 invoked by uid 50005); 17 Aug 2001 20:29:28 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smpte.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.10364 secs); 17 Aug 2001 20:29:28 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 17 Aug 2001 20:29:27 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA20945; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 13:28:54 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 88838 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 20:28:47          +0000
Received: from albatross.wgn.net (www.wgn.net [64.14.252.81] (may be forged))          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA20930 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 13:28:46 -0700
Received: from cronos (eli-208-187-16-244.wgn.net [208.187.16.244]) by          albatross.wgn.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id NAA18077 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 13:30:08 -0700
References:  <NKEHJAOOKBPGIKOOPDEFMEFLCBAA.jwckman@space-rockets.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <01db01c1275b$5c70fb60$c36122c0@cronos>
Date:         Fri, 17 Aug 2001 13:29:47 -0700
Reply-To: "Wedge Oldham" <wedge@WESTWORLD.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Wedge Oldham" <wedge@WESTWORLD.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Solid rocket boosters
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Could somebody explain to me why a sudden (and dramatic) drop in chamber
pressure would cause a solid motor to extinguish?

On the loss of a forward closure, I've seen flaming grains hurled through
the air. But on the other hand I've seen the loss of an aft closure do no
more than kick the rocket about 25' in the air...with no flaming grains
laying around.
Wedge

----- Original Message -----
From: "John Wickman" <jwckman@SPACE-ROCKETS.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Friday, August 17, 2001 12:44 PM
Subject: Re: [AR] Solid rocket boosters


> Matt,
>
> I should have been more clear in my original post.   The thrust
termination
> ports operate by suddenly dropping the chamber pressure so that the
> propellant is extinguished.   This is called P-dot extinguishment.  In a
few
> milliseconds, the chamber pressure and thrust goes to zero.  This is very
> similar to a normal shutdown except it is a bit faster.  A normal solid
may
> go to zero thrust in a second rather than a few milliseconds.  Many of you
> have probably seen P-dot extinguishment, if you suddenly blew a nozzle or
> bulkhead and the propellant went out. It is not canceling out the forward
> thrust.   The ports, usually four, are located in each quadrant of the
> bulkhead.  The flash of flame out the front is also a few milliseconds so
> the thermal damage is virtually zero.
>
> The point of my first post was to point out that solids can be as safe in
a
> manned mission as liquids.   There would not be a need to completely
> redesign the vehicle to boost the thrust of the liquids as was suggested
in
> the original post I responded to.
>
> John Wickman
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@itc.uci.edu]On
> Behalf Of Matthew Travis
> Sent: Friday, August 17, 2001 11:29 AM
> To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
> Subject: Re: [AR] Solid rocket boosters
>
>
> Good points. I agree that it's not necessarily true that solids can't be
> stopped (without blowing them up) or throttled. I have to say that I think
> you're flexibility (for throttling and startup/shutdown) is somewhat more
> limited with solids, but that doesn't mean the options aren't there. And
> with good engineering, they can be utilized.
>
> One question I have concerns thrust termination ports on boosters for
manned
> vehicles. I would think (not being an expert in this area) that achieving
> termination without sending the vehicle out of control would be difficult.
> And it seems it would be more difficult on the shuttle since the ports
would
> have to located away from the ET and Orbiter. I would think you'd only be
> able to locate them on one side of the stack, which would cause a
> significant pitching impulse at termination.
>
> -Matt
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU]On
> > Behalf Of John Wickman
> > Sent: Friday, August 17, 2001 12:55 PM
> > To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
> > Subject: Re: [AR] Solid rocket boosters
> >
> >
> > I think solids are generally safer than liquids and more reliable.
They
> > can be shut down during operation with thrust termination ports.
> > It is done
> > on all ICBMs since the 1950's.   Thrust termination ports were on the
> > Shuttle SRB initial designs, but some idiot took them out.  Solids can
> > actually the throttled by gas injection.  That was done in the 1980's at
> > Edwards using hydrogen gas to increase thrust.   It can be decreased by
> > injecting N2 or CO2.   At Aerojet, we developed a multiple
> > stop-start solid
> > rocket engine for tactical applications.   Boost and then coast and then
> > boost again as you close in on the target.   Four thrust pulses were
> > possible in that motor.
> >
> > John Wickman

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 27689 invoked from network); 17 Aug 2001 20:37:28 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 17 Aug 2001 20:37:28 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 28915 invoked by uid 50005); 17 Aug 2001 20:37:49 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.305299 secs); 17 Aug 2001 20:37:49 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 17 Aug 2001 20:37:49 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA21043; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 13:34:56 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 88869 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 20:34:54          +0000
Received: from idsoftware.com (predator.idsoftware.com [192.246.40.34]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA21029 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 13:34:53 -0700
Received: from [192.246.40.129] (account johnc HELO lightning.idsoftware.com)          by idsoftware.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 3.4.7) with ESMTP id 350765          for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 15:34:52 -0500
X-Sender: johnc@mail.idsoftware.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.1
References: <4.3.1.2.20010817030701.02690e60@mail.idsoftware.com>            <4.3.1.2.20010817030701.02690e60@mail.idsoftware.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <4.3.1.2.20010817151706.02641398@mail.idsoftware.com>
Date:         Fri, 17 Aug 2001 15:33:37 -0500
Reply-To: "John Carmack" <johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Carmack" <johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Solid rocket boosters
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <a0510031eb7a2d18b2bff@[63.27.96.152]>

At 06:56 AM 8/17/2001 -0700, Jerry Irvine wrote:
>>Is anyone here confident enough in their solids that they would ride in a
>>vehicle that required two of them to perform safely and substantially
>>identically?
>
>
>I would ride in a vehicle with solids I designed and tested.
>Apparantly so would Burt Rutan as he suggested doing just that before
>going the x-cor route for the "recurring operations experience".
>
>An x-prixe motor has already been built and tested as a single solid
>and it has no crew capsule to launch because 3 crew capsule partners
>have failed to perform and quit.

Are you at liberty to discuss that effort any farther?

How was it going to do guidance and control?

I could imagine adding SRB to a functional liquid vehicle, but an all-solid
X-Prize vehicle sounds like a huge gamble.  I'll grant that for production
vehicles, the performance and reliability may be similar, but for working
your way up through development, there is a lot to be said for being able
to load up a small amount of propellant, test something, load up a bit
more, test something else, etc.  We have ten minute turnaround between
tests of our VTVL, and it has been extremely valuable.

You mentioned in another post that you have a good supply of peroxide at
your shop.  Can you go into what you have used it for?

John Carmack

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 22503 invoked from network); 17 Aug 2001 20:43:31 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 17 Aug 2001 20:43:31 -0000
Received: (qmail 4549 invoked by uid 50005); 17 Aug 2001 20:43:52 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.183042 secs); 17 Aug 2001 20:43:52 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 17 Aug 2001 20:43:52 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA21143; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 13:40:26 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 88893 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 20:40:24          +0000
Received: from dune.gnc.net (root@dune.gnc.net [207.203.72.4]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA21129 for <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Fri,          17 Aug 2001 13:40:23 -0700
Received: from beowulf (sw2-6.gnc.net [207.203.72.86]) by dune.gnc.net          (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id QAA20600 for <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Fri,          17 Aug 2001 16:40:23 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <LPBBKJMJEOFKAMFJJNNHGEKICGAA.landofgrey@gnc.net>
Date:         Fri, 17 Aug 2001 16:40:05 -0400
Reply-To: <landofgrey@gnc.net>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Matthew Travis" <landofgrey@gnc.net>
Subject:      Re: [AR] ERPS successfully runs H2O2 engine
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <NKEHJAOOKBPGIKOOPDEFEEFNCBAA.jwckman@space-rockets.com>

> -----Original Message-----
> From: John Wickman [mailto:jwckman@space-rockets.com]
> In the Challenger accident, the SRB also did not explode and kept
> functioning even with a leak out the side of the case.  It survived the
> destruction and explosion of the Orbiter and ET and flew off by
> itself still

True. The SRB's did not explode until the RSO detonated them at about T+91
sec. The stack as a whole did not explode either. The SRB's burned through
the struts, then burned through the LH2 tank (whoese aft dome collapsed),
and then swiveled, breaking off an orbiter wing and puncturing the LO2 tank.
The free LO2 and LH2 then, in the presence of the SRB plume, ignited in a
fireball. But that was *not* an explosion. In fact, the forces created by it
(the shock wave) were very minimal.

> Had an option been available to
> turn off the solid rocket motor with a thrust termination system,
> I believe
> the Challenger crew would be alive today.  Ironically, if the leak had
> occurred on the opposite side of the SRB, the crew may also be
> alive today.

I won't disagree, but am not sure (who can be). If the thrust was terminated
in a way that didn't destroy the stability or control of the stack, then
there would still need to be a way to either get the astronauts out or get
the orbiter back to the runway (a water ditch is officially not considered
survivable). The problem is, even if they had no fuel in them, the SRB
weight would mean the shuttle (with 1.5 million lb's of thrust) would not
have the energy to do an RTLS, and, in fact, wouldn't be able to do the
turn-around maneuver. That maneuver is programmed into the computers. With
the SRB's still attached the GPC's wouldn't know what to do and would likely
crash the vehicle into the ocean. Since there's no way to sep the SRB's
prior to PC < 50 lb/sq. in. and since it is not possible to sep them
manually anyway, the options are limited. However, I do think that if the
SRB's could be turned off "gently" and separated manually, then you could
create a credible scenario where the Challenger surivived.

If the leak occurred on the other side, not only would we have all seen it
(boy would that have been a scary minute for all of us), but "possibly" the
shuttle would have survived. I've heard that, likely around 1:45, the burn
through would have worked its way around the whole booster anyway and the
bottom of the booster would have fallen off (how's that for thrust
termination). However, it is coimpletely plausible that it never would have
made it that far. Then the question is how much would the forward thrust
have decreased and could the other booster and SSME's compensate to keep it
stable (thrust misalignment between the boosters is not a good thing).
Additionally, the side thrust that was created also needed to be
compensated. The data showed that, localized as it was, the leak, by the
time of LOS, had forced the SSME's nearly hard over and the other SRB also
had to gimbal significantly. It is possible that, even if the leak didn't
work around the booster, it would have led to a loss of effective control.
But, this is all hypothetical and I really have no idea what would have
happened. Even the "experts" don't know.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 24164 invoked from network); 17 Aug 2001 20:43:58 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 17 Aug 2001 20:43:58 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: (qmail 7561 invoked by uid 50005); 17 Aug 2001 20:42:34 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smpte.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.808216 secs); 17 Aug 2001 20:42:34 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 17 Aug 2001 20:42:33 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA21174; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 13:41:49 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 88902 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 20:41:48          +0000
Received: from cisco.com (cypher.cisco.com [171.69.11.18]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA21155 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri,          17 Aug 2001 13:41:44 -0700
Received: (from billw@localhost) by cisco.com (8.8.8/2.6/Cisco List          Logging/8.8.8) id NAA17121; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 13:41:12 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID:  <CMM.0.90.4.998080872.billw@cypher>
Date:         Fri, 17 Aug 2001 13:41:12 PDT
Reply-To: "Bill Westfield" <billw@cisco.com>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "William Chops Westfield" <billw@cisco.com>
Subject:      Re: [AR] urethane fuel?
Comments: To: "Mark K. Spute" <mks@BIOMICRO.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  Your message of Fri, 17 Aug 2001 01:23:13 -0600

    > Urethanes are the ones that smell like cyanide, right?

    I've never intentionally smelled cyanide.  (Don't know anyone who has,
    either.)  :)


The comment was based on fire statistics (?) to the effect that sofa
cushions (PU foam) are particularly nasty things to drop a lit cigarette
into.  Aside from catching on fire and smoking profusely, they are said
to release assorted poison gasses.

Likewise, there are warnings about using hot-wire cutting on PU foams
because of the poisonous gasses released.

I thought someone had mentioned that the chief "poisonous gas" in these
cases was cyanide, but that may have been just a rumor...

Cyanide is supposed to have a smell like toasted almonds, a rather mild
smell likely to be overwhelmed by vaporized plasticizer smells in any case.

BillW


From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 25931 invoked from network); 17 Aug 2001 20:51:23 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 17 Aug 2001 20:51:23 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 17373 invoked by uid 50005); 17 Aug 2001 20:51:44 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 1.138668 secs); 17 Aug 2001 20:51:44 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 17 Aug 2001 20:51:42 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA21374; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 13:49:06 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 88959 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 20:49:05          +0000
Received: from idsoftware.com (predator.idsoftware.com [192.246.40.34]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA21360 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 13:49:04 -0700
Received: from [192.246.40.129] (account johnc HELO lightning.idsoftware.com)          by idsoftware.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 3.4.7) with ESMTP id 350784          for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 15:49:04 -0500
X-Sender: johnc@mail.idsoftware.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.1
References: <a0510031db7a239fb551e@[63.27.96.152]>            <011b01c126c8$45e5fe60$0100a8c0@mkbs>            <NEBBJIGOELOLIBCCPKDCIELKCBAA.geordi@c031.aone.net.au>            <OE54Vs1aLxGYiH1ZRJ60000d739@hotmail.com>            <a05100317b7a2079ba23d@[63.27.96.152]>            <011b01c126c8$45e5fe60$0100a8c0@mkbs>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <4.3.1.2.20010817153755.01299378@mail.idsoftware.com>
Date:         Fri, 17 Aug 2001 15:47:48 -0500
Reply-To: "John Carmack" <johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Carmack" <johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM>
Subject:      [AR] Accident reports
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <5.1.0.14.0.20010817062713.01ee1130@mail.murraystate.edu>

>
>Query for the entire list:  I (and many others, I'm sure) would be
>interested in details and specifics of accidents.  Not just with candy
>propellant but with all others as well.  Preferably accidents of the "I was
>there and saw this as it happened" type, with objective details such as
>propellant composition, temperature of processing, etc.  Such information
>would be enormously helpful to the list.

We have had two notable "wake up calls" with peroxide in the last year.

We had a burst disc rupture on our test stand tank.  Nobody was near enough
to get sprayed, but it was sobering to think about the consequences if
there hadn't been a burst disc.  When we took everything apart, we found a
couple zinc-plated steel fittings that were severely corroded, which had
probably blown crud into the tank.  We had previously used some not-ideal
fittings in places where there shouldn't be peroxide sitting for a long
time (in our fill cart plumbing), but after this, everything is now
aluminum or 303/316 SS with no exceptions.  We also pay a lot more
attention to which direction the burst disc diffuser is pointing now...

The first time we lost the computer on the lander while there was still
peroxide in the tank, we attempted to drain the peroxide through the fill
cart.  Russ tried to connect the fill line quick connect, and got a spray
of 90% peroxide in the face.  He had safety goggles on, and we always have
a spray hose and buckets of water nearby, so there wasn't any harm done
except that he had a white nose for a few hours (it was actually all gone
by the end of the night).  In theory, the quick connects are double seal
units that are never supposed to do that, but we now always vent through
the engines with a specially made switch box now instead of attempting to
reconnect to the pressurized tank.

John Carmack

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 29199 invoked from network); 17 Aug 2001 20:52:10 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 17 Aug 2001 20:52:10 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 30490 invoked by uid 50005); 17 Aug 2001 20:51:58 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (. Clean. Processed in 0.102085 secs); 17 Aug 2001 20:51:58 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
X-Qmail-Scanner-Mail-From: owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU via smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net
X-Qmail-Scanner-Rcpt-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
X-Qmail-Scanner: 0.96 (No viruses found. Processed in 0.102085 secs)
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 17 Aug 2001 20:51:58 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA21323; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 13:47:31 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 88942 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 20:47:29          +0000
Received: from ns.vanguard.com (ns.VANGUARD.COM [192.175.173.31]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA21302 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 13:46:11 -0700
Received: from eagle1.vanguard.com (eagle1.VANGUARD.COM [192.175.141.70]) by          ns.vanguard.com (Switch-2.1.3/Switch-2.1.0) with ESMTP id          f7HKj3B19340; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 16:45:03 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from vgi4mail.vanguard.com (vgi4mail.vanguard.com [10.254.65.16]) by          eagle1.vanguard.com (Switch-2.1.3/Switch-2.1.0) with SMTP id          f7HKj4a09346; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 16:45:04 -0400 (EDT)
Received: by vgi4mail.vanguard.com(Lotus SMTP MTA v4.6.6  (890.1 7-16-1999))           id 85256AAB.00721570 ; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 16:46:05 -0400
X-Lotus-FromDomain: VGINOTES
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Disposition: inline
Message-ID:  <85256AAB.00721498.00@vgi4mail.vanguard.com>
Date:         Fri, 17 Aug 2001 16:44:53 -0400
Reply-To: <Waysie_Atkins@VANGUARD.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <Waysie_Atkins@VANGUARD.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Solid rocket boosters
Comments: To: Jerry Irvine <01rocket@GTE.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

<An x-prixe motor has already been built and tested as a single solid
<and it has no crew capsule to launch because 3 crew capsule partners
<have failed to perform and quit.


If you're saying the team is in need of astronaut candidates I am quite
interested in hearing the specifics!!!


Regards,

Waysie W. Atkins

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 1670 invoked from network); 17 Aug 2001 20:52:41 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 17 Aug 2001 20:52:41 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 21096 invoked by uid 50005); 17 Aug 2001 20:51:17 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smpte.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.340117 secs); 17 Aug 2001 20:51:17 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 17 Aug 2001 20:51:17 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA21297; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 13:46:06 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 88935 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 20:45:57          +0000
Received: from smtp006.mailsrvcs.net (smtp006pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.185])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA21279 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 13:45:56 -0700
Received: from [63.27.96.152] (1Cust76.tnt3.san-bernardino.ca.da.uu.net          [63.25.57.76]) by smtp006.mailsrvcs.net  with ESMTP for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; id f7HKjOq00283 Fri, 17 Aug 2001 15:45:24          -0500 (CDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: GTE/01rocket@mail.gte.net
References: <NKEHJAOOKBPGIKOOPDEFEEFNCBAA.jwckman@space-rockets.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <a0510032ab7a332bc8660@[63.27.96.152]>
Date:         Fri, 17 Aug 2001 13:45:35 -0700
Reply-To: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] ERPS successfully runs H2O2 engine
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <NKEHJAOOKBPGIKOOPDEFEEFNCBAA.jwckman@space-rockets.com>

>pressurization of the ET due to heating.  Had an option been available to
>turn off the solid rocket motor with a thrust termination system, I believe
>the Challenger crew would be alive today.  Ironically, if the leak had
>occurred on the opposite side of the SRB, the crew may also be alive today.
>
>John Wickman


I fully agree.  Several previous flights had "leaks".  This one was
randomly optimum for destruction.

Jerry



--
Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
Opinion, the whole thing.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 29200 invoked from network); 18 Aug 2001 04:33:17 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 18 Aug 2001 04:33:17 -0000
Received: (qmail 10837 invoked by uid 50005); 18 Aug 2001 04:32:22 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smptf.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.121149 secs); 18 Aug 2001 04:32:22 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 18 Aug 2001 04:32:22 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA24685; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 21:29:59 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 88983 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 18 Aug 2001 04:29:19          +0000
Received: from wrench.toolcity.net (root@wrench.toolcity.net [208.0.188.2]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA21439 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 13:50:48 -0700
Received: from [208.11.233.154]          (dap-208-11-233-154.meadville-tnt-0.pa.toolcity.net [208.11.233.154])          by wrench.toolcity.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id QAA08869; Fri, 17          Aug 2001 16:50:41 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <v01510100b7a340fd70f7@[63.169.101.79]>
Date:         Fri, 17 Aug 2001 16:53:02 -0500
Reply-To: "al bradley" <abradley@TOOLCITY.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "al bradley" <abradley@TOOLCITY.NET>
Subject:      [AR] 4Re: [AR] candy R&D---Alcohol/water?
Comments: To: David Muesing <dmuesing@PEOPLEPC.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

'Twould probably work OK with plain water, taking longer to dry off.

For me plain alcohol runs the risk of "dieseling" in a
pressing-sleeve/plunger combo. A safety issue.  Besides I use plain vodka
which I keep on hand year round for other safety issues. <grin> --
Snakebite in the summer, frostbite in the winter __ <larger grin>.
-------------------------
>Why do you use a combination of water AND alcohol?
>Why not one or the other?
>
>Dave
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "al bradley" <abradley@TOOLCITY.NET>
>To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
>Sent: Friday, August 17, 2001 3:08 PM
>Subject: [AR] 2Re: [AR] candy R&D
>
>
>> >On Fri, 17 Aug 2001, John Dom wrote:
>> >
>> >> To avoid the step of melting: has anyone ever tried to compress
>> >> KN/sugar/sorbitol mixtures?
>> ------------------------
>> >Al does this, perhaps he'll be so kind as to describe his approach in
>> >detail.  It seems that grains made this way would be very brittle.
>> >
>> >Ray
>> ---------------
>>
>> Using a 6-ton hydraulic jack in a homemade press frame I press out Bates
>> grains from ball-mill mixed KNO3/sugar dampened with 50/50 alcohol-water
>> mix. They dry so hard you could file your fingernails with them. They seem
>> to fire well.
>>
>> The pressing cylinder is a piece of modified PVC pipe with a steel mandrel
>> for the core. The pressing plunger is cast from polyester resin. No heat
>is
>> used at any time. The grains are about 1-1/8" in diameter at 65 grams.
>>
>> So far, no CATO'S. They are not formed in a motor casing, rather they are
>> coated on the outside with a thin layer of furnace cement to inhibit
>> combusion there. As a result they are NOT case-bonded in any way, in fact
>> may be slightly loose in their PVC motor case tube.
>>
>> Yeah, I know it violates certain unspoken premises of technique. But it
>> seems to work well so far. If I get around to constructing a test stand I
>> will look for flaws in the methodology then. In the meantime I'm able to
>> enjoy things that go straight up with a whoosh without having to find
>> exactly the elusive right mixture to cook! My doctrine is to not make
>> things any harder than they have to be!
>>
>> best,
>> al bradley
>>
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------
>> Can you live Life with this?: "Unless there is a law, an agreement, or a
>> long-standing custom, No one `Deserves' Anything -- Either Good or Bad!"
>>

------------------------------------------------------------------
Can you live Life with this?: "Unless there is a law, an agreement, or a
long-standing custom, No one `Deserves' Anything -- Either Good or Bad!"

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 2085 invoked from network); 18 Aug 2001 04:34:22 -0000
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 18 Aug 2001 04:34:22 -0000
Received: (qmail 1070 invoked by uid 50005); 18 Aug 2001 04:32:56 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smpte.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.201411 secs); 18 Aug 2001 04:32:56 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 18 Aug 2001 04:32:56 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA24709; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 21:32:16 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 88994 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 18 Aug 2001 04:32:14          +0000
Received: from dune.gnc.net (root@dune.gnc.net [207.203.72.4]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA21473 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri,          17 Aug 2001 13:51:53 -0700
Received: from beowulf (sw2-22.gnc.net [207.203.72.102]) by dune.gnc.net          (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id QAA20825 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri,          17 Aug 2001 16:51:53 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <LPBBKJMJEOFKAMFJJNNHKEKJCGAA.landofgrey@gnc.net>
Date:         Fri, 17 Aug 2001 16:51:36 -0400
Reply-To: <landofgrey@gnc.net>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Matthew Travis" <landofgrey@gnc.net>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Solid rocket boosters
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <85256AAB.00721498.00@vgi4mail.vanguard.com>

> <An x-prixe motor has already been built and tested as a single solid
> <and it has no crew capsule to launch because 3 crew capsule partners
> <have failed to perform and quit.

Are they required to be more than Dennis Tito-esque passengers (please say
yes)? I suppose they would have to have actual responsibilities.

I'd be happy to go, but I lost my flying privileges because I can't see the
forest for the trees *literally* :(

-Matt

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 9797 invoked from network); 18 Aug 2001 04:37:19 -0000
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 18 Aug 2001 04:37:19 -0000
Received: (qmail 14349 invoked by uid 50005); 18 Aug 2001 04:36:24 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smptf.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.147163 secs); 18 Aug 2001 04:36:24 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 18 Aug 2001 04:36:24 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA24764; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 21:35:03 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 89004 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 18 Aug 2001 04:35:01          +0000
Received: from dune.gnc.net (root@dune.gnc.net [207.203.72.4]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA21528 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri,          17 Aug 2001 13:53:54 -0700
Received: from beowulf (sw2-22.gnc.net [207.203.72.102]) by dune.gnc.net          (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id QAA20875 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri,          17 Aug 2001 16:53:55 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <LPBBKJMJEOFKAMFJJNNHEEKKCGAA.landofgrey@gnc.net>
Date:         Fri, 17 Aug 2001 16:53:38 -0400
Reply-To: <landofgrey@gnc.net>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Matthew Travis" <landofgrey@gnc.net>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Solid rocket boosters
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <01db01c1275b$5c70fb60$c36122c0@cronos>

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU]On
> Behalf Of Wedge Oldham
>
> Could somebody explain to me why a sudden (and dramatic) drop in chamber
> pressure would cause a solid motor to extinguish?
>
> On the loss of a forward closure, I've seen flaming grains hurled through
> the air. But on the other hand I've seen the loss of an aft closure do no
> more than kick the rocket about 25' in the air...with no flaming grains
> laying around.
> Wedge

I've typed too much today (my day off) so I won't get technical, but I know
that some propellants require pressure as well as heat to burn. Otherwise,
they more or less smolder. In any case, if you look at the equation for
thrust, if you reduce chamber pressure to ambient conditions, you lose
thrust.

-Matt

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 16403 invoked from network); 18 Aug 2001 04:39:58 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 18 Aug 2001 04:39:58 -0000
Received: (qmail 20422 invoked by uid 50005); 18 Aug 2001 04:40:17 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.249285 secs); 18 Aug 2001 04:40:17 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 18 Aug 2001 04:40:17 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA24787; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 21:36:26 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 89006 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 18 Aug 2001 04:36:24          +0000
Received: from castor.ridgenet.net (IDENT:root@castor.ridgenet.net          [199.120.150.29]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA21537          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 13:54:46 -0700
Received: from kristinscomp (pm094.ridgenet.net [204.154.246.94]) by          castor.ridgenet.net (8.11.0/8.11.0) with SMTP id f7HKlES19593; Fri,          17 Aug 2001 13:47:14 -0700
References:  <LPBBKJMJEOFKAMFJJNNHIEKDCGAA.landofgrey@gnc.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <006101c12760$0f81e800$1b30fea9@kristinscomp>
Date:         Fri, 17 Aug 2001 14:03:03 -0700
Reply-To: "Kristin & David Hall" <thehalls@RIDGENET.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Kristin & David Hall" <thehalls@RIDGENET.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Solid rocket boosters
Comments: To: landofgrey@gnc.net
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

From: Matthew Travis <landofgrey@gnc.net>


> nearby. The thrust trmination systems on the rockets are not intended to
> protect the payload or even be survivable, regardless of the payload. They
> are intended to protect everyone else. In this regard, blowing the whole
> stack to bits suffices perfectly and actually involves less uncertainty
than
> more elegant termination means. Reliability in simplicity. Now, that's not

Not true.  You are confusing a thrust termination device with a range safety
device.  They are not the same thing.  A range safety device's job is to
(yes) terminate thrust AND break up the vehicle such that it does not
"coast" a significant distance.  A thrust termination device's ONLY goal is
to terminate thrust.  Not a lot, but some weapons include the activation of
such devices as a normal part of operation.  Such was the case with the
Pershing II.  It had thrust termination capability, but the purpose of the
capability was not range safety - it was to "bring in" the minimum range of
the missile.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 16478 invoked from network); 18 Aug 2001 04:40:00 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 18 Aug 2001 04:40:00 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 8938 invoked by uid 50005); 18 Aug 2001 04:39:47 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (. Clean. Processed in 1.23402 secs); 18 Aug 2001 04:39:47 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
X-Qmail-Scanner-Mail-From: owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU via smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net
X-Qmail-Scanner-Rcpt-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
X-Qmail-Scanner: 0.96 (No viruses found. Processed in 1.23402 secs)
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 18 Aug 2001 04:39:45 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA24809; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 21:37:49 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 89008 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 18 Aug 2001 04:37:48          +0000
Received: from smtp005.mailsrvcs.net (smtp005pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.184])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA21545 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 13:54:56 -0700
Received: from [63.27.96.152] (1Cust76.tnt3.san-bernardino.ca.da.uu.net          [63.25.57.76]) by smtp005.mailsrvcs.net  with ESMTP for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; id f7HKsO715257 Fri, 17 Aug 2001 15:54:24          -0500 (CDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: GTE/01rocket@mail.gte.net
References: <NKEHJAOOKBPGIKOOPDEFMEFLCBAA.jwckman@space-rockets.com>            <01db01c1275b$5c70fb60$c36122c0@cronos>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <a0510032bb7a33404d37f@[63.27.96.152]>
Date:         Fri, 17 Aug 2001 13:54:35 -0700
Reply-To: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Solid rocket boosters
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <01db01c1275b$5c70fb60$c36122c0@cronos>

>Could somebody explain to me why a sudden (and dramatic) drop in chamber
>pressure would cause a solid motor to extinguish?

Burning rate exponent is a double edged sword.  As pressure
increases, burning rate increases.  The slope of this varies with
propellant formula.

As pressure drops, burning rate drops.  If either is sufficiently
sudden the exponent (or trend) of burning rate also increases (and
2nd order effects also can introdiuce 3rd and 4th if suden enough)
giving effectively a "quamtum" change.

This "quantum" change is most apparant in explosions due to
overpressure where the increase and the decrease are both very
"slopy" or involving 2nd and 3rd and... effects.  Liner vs parabolic
vs asimitotic.

There is a threshold of pressure under which each formula will cease.
Also the momentum of the particles themselves can cause a surface
vacuum.

Jerry

Now we are in Hall's world.

--
Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
Opinion, the whole thing.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 17870 invoked from network); 18 Aug 2001 04:40:32 -0000
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 18 Aug 2001 04:40:32 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 17573 invoked by uid 50005); 18 Aug 2001 04:39:37 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smptf.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.617044 secs); 18 Aug 2001 04:39:37 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 18 Aug 2001 04:39:36 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA24733; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 21:33:40 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 89000 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 18 Aug 2001 04:33:39          +0000
Received: from localhost.localdomain (IDENT:root@lauren.pconline.com          [207.191.131.70]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA21507          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 13:53:00 -0700
Received: from artimex.com (dsl-206-145-54-162.pconline.com [206.145.54.162])          by localhost.localdomain (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f7HJpvQ08208;          Fri, 17 Aug 2001 14:51:57 -0500
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.77 [en] (Win98; U)
X-Accept-Language: en,pdf
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <CMM.0.90.4.998076120.billw@cypher> <3B7CC661.63331DEA@biomicro.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B7D83DF.BB12297@artimex.com>
Date:         Fri, 17 Aug 2001 15:51:43 -0500
Reply-To: "Bob Brashear" <rjb@ARTIMEX.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Bob Brashear" <rjb@ARTIMEX.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] urethane fuel?
Comments: To: "Mark K. Spute" <mks@BIOMICRO.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

"Mark K. Spute" wrote:

> Dunno, Bill.
>
> I've never intentionally smelled cyanide.  (Don't know anyone who has,
> either.)  :)
>
> William Chops Westfield wrote:
> [Snip of previous post]
>
> > Urethanes are the ones that smell like cyanide, right?
>
>

I have just been informed that Urethanes are the ones that smell like
someon pi**ed on a radiator.


--
Bob Brashear                        voice: 612-374-4643
The One-Off CD Shop Minneapolis     email: rjb@artimex.com

"The meek SHALL inherit the Earth. The rest of us are going to the stars!"

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 19408 invoked from network); 18 Aug 2001 04:41:07 -0000
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 18 Aug 2001 04:41:07 -0000
Received: (qmail 18202 invoked by uid 50005); 18 Aug 2001 04:40:12 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smptf.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.789293 secs); 18 Aug 2001 04:40:12 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 18 Aug 2001 04:40:11 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA24843; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 21:39:13 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 89022 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 18 Aug 2001 04:39:11          +0000
Received: from albatross.wgn.net (www.wgn.net [64.14.252.81] (may be forged))          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA21590 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 13:57:24 -0700
Received: from cronos (eli-208-187-16-244.wgn.net [208.187.16.244]) by          albatross.wgn.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id NAA20591 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 13:58:46 -0700
References:  <NKEHJAOOKBPGIKOOPDEFEEFNCBAA.jwckman@space-rockets.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <020601c1275f$5c7da8c0$c36122c0@cronos>
Date:         Fri, 17 Aug 2001 13:58:25 -0700
Reply-To: "Wedge Oldham" <wedge@WESTWORLD.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Wedge Oldham" <wedge@WESTWORLD.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] ERPS successfully runs H2O2 engine
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

If the leak had not occurred, there is a distinct possibility that the crew
would also be alive today.
Wedge

----- Original Message -----
From: "John Wickman" <jwckman@SPACE-ROCKETS.COM>
> Had an option been available to
> turn off the solid rocket motor with a thrust termination system, I
believe
> the Challenger crew would be alive today.  Ironically, if the leak had
> occurred on the opposite side of the SRB, the crew may also be alive
today.
>
> John Wickman

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 23418 invoked from network); 18 Aug 2001 04:42:37 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 18 Aug 2001 04:42:37 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 22968 invoked by uid 50005); 18 Aug 2001 04:42:56 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.783082 secs); 18 Aug 2001 04:42:56 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 18 Aug 2001 04:42:54 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA24869; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 21:40:37 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 89040 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 18 Aug 2001 04:40:35          +0000
Received: from smtp007.mailsrvcs.net (smtp007pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.186])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA21650 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 14:01:55 -0700
Received: from [63.27.96.152] (1Cust76.tnt3.san-bernardino.ca.da.uu.net          [63.25.57.76]) by smtp007.mailsrvcs.net  with ESMTP for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; id f7HL1LW19913 Fri, 17 Aug 2001 16:01:22          -0500 (CDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: GTE/01rocket@mail.gte.net
References: <4.3.1.2.20010817030701.02690e60@mail.idsoftware.com>            <4.3.1.2.20010817030701.02690e60@mail.idsoftware.com>            <4.3.1.2.20010817151706.02641398@mail.idsoftware.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <a0510032cb7a335251760@[63.27.96.152]>
Date:         Fri, 17 Aug 2001 14:01:32 -0700
Reply-To: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Solid rocket boosters
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <4.3.1.2.20010817151706.02641398@mail.idsoftware.com>

>John said:



>Are you at liberty to discuss that effort any farther?


Not that one but here's another:

http://www.v-serv.com/dpt/manned/

It takes about a ton of propellant to do x-prize and the motor is
same-day reloadable (same hour) and is single stage comfortably
beyond the altitude required.  Sadly I have the permits too now that
CATS is done so the only "prize" is X but it is unfunded.

You make the crew compartment and I will make the propulsion segment.


>
>How was it going to do guidance and control?


For 62 mi?
2 choices:
1. small wings and jets on crew compartment
2. Gimballed nozzle (stock unit)


>
>I could imagine adding SRB to a functional liquid vehicle, but an all-solid
>X-Prize vehicle sounds like a huge gamble.  I'll grant that for production
>vehicles, the performance and reliability may be similar, but for working
>your way up through development, there is a lot to be said for being able
>to load up a small amount of propellant, test something, load up a bit


There's alot to be said for all tests being a full-up propulsion
system that has been flight tested to altitude.


>more, test something else, etc.  We have ten minute turnaround between
>tests of our VTVL, and it has been extremely valuable.
>
>You mentioned in another post that you have a good supply of peroxide at
>your shop.  Can you go into what you have used it for?


Testing of ramjet prototypes.  So far it is not working, but we will see.
I am kind of an H2O2 fan for 3rd stages of big a$$ rockets with
multi-ton payloads.

Jerry

--
Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
Opinion, the whole thing.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 27275 invoked from network); 18 Aug 2001 04:44:02 -0000
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 18 Aug 2001 04:44:02 -0000
Received: (qmail 20766 invoked by uid 50005); 18 Aug 2001 04:43:07 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smptf.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.132457 secs); 18 Aug 2001 04:43:07 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 18 Aug 2001 04:43:07 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA24915; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 21:42:02 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 89109 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 18 Aug 2001 04:41:59          +0000
Received: from mailhost0.trib.com (mailhost0.trib.com [63.229.150.3]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA21952 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 14:16:32 -0700
Received: from mail.trib.com (mail.trib.com [12.10.158.17]) by          mailhost0.trib.com (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f7HLGVT56671; Fri,          17 Aug 2001 15:16:31 -0600 (MDT) (envelope-from          jwckman@space-rockets.com)
Received: from [63.229.150.95] (HELO hppav) by mail.trib.com (CommuniGate Pro          SMTP 3.4.6) with SMTP id 42849177; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 15:16:30 -0600
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <NKEHJAOOKBPGIKOOPDEFKEFPCBAA.jwckman@space-rockets.com>
Date:         Fri, 17 Aug 2001 15:14:57 -0600
Reply-To: "John Wickman" <jwckman@SPACE-ROCKETS.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Wickman" <jwckman@SPACE-ROCKETS.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] I'm 60km up in atmosphere and falling...
Comments: To: Brian Reddeman <breddeman@hotmail.com>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <F18kZIhTrBoe2U8QVjp0000ac08@hotmail.com>

As W.C. Fields said, "Its only the last foot that's dangerous."

John Wickman

-----Original Message-----
From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU]On
Behalf Of Brian Reddeman
Sent: Friday, August 17, 2001 1:53 PM
To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
Subject: [AR] I'm 60km up in atmosphere and falling...


I'm 60km and now falling (Assuming I'm not pieces of burning debris). Do I
really care that what kind of [liquid/solid/hybrid] rocket motor failed
[minor/major/violently]? Personally I wouldn't really worry about it. I'd be
more worried about going "splat." 8-)

-Brian
"I shoulda taken the blue pill"

_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 7063 invoked from network); 18 Aug 2001 04:47:52 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 18 Aug 2001 04:47:52 -0000
Received: (qmail 28786 invoked by uid 50005); 18 Aug 2001 04:48:11 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.355906 secs); 18 Aug 2001 04:48:11 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 18 Aug 2001 04:48:11 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA24972; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 21:43:30 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 89152 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 18 Aug 2001 04:43:24          +0000
Received: from dune.gnc.net (root@dune.gnc.net [207.203.72.4]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA22132 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri,          17 Aug 2001 14:41:12 -0700
Received: from beowulf (sw2-22.gnc.net [207.203.72.102]) by dune.gnc.net          (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id RAA22081 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri,          17 Aug 2001 17:41:12 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <LPBBKJMJEOFKAMFJJNNHCEKLCGAA.landofgrey@gnc.net>
Date:         Fri, 17 Aug 2001 17:40:53 -0400
Reply-To: <landofgrey@gnc.net>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Matthew Travis" <landofgrey@gnc.net>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Solid rocket boosters
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <006101c12760$0f81e800$1b30fea9@kristinscomp>

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Kristin & David Hall [mailto:thehalls@ridgenet.net]

> > nearby. The thrust trmination systems on the rockets are not intended to
> > protect the payload or even be survivable, regardless of the
> payload. They

I agree, I am aware of the difference. I apologize for the word choice. I
used the term "thrust termination" in a general and incorrect context, which
was bad. I should have said "the destruct systems on the rockets are not
intended to
protect the payload or even be survivable". My mistake.


> > are intended to protect everyone else. In this regard, blowing the whole
> > stack to bits suffices perfectly and actually involves less uncertainty
> than
> > more elegant termination means. Reliability in simplicity. Now,
> that's not
>
> Not true.  You are confusing a thrust termination device with a
> range safety
> device.

I think you are using the term "range safety device" to mean command
destruct device. Both thrust termination devices and command destruct
devices can, and have, been used as range safetey devices.


> They are not the same thing.  A range safety device's job is to
> (yes) terminate thrust AND break up the vehicle such that it does not
> "coast" a significant distance.  A thrust termination device's
> ONLY goal is
> to terminate thrust.

You have to ask the Air Force about the specific black and white
requirements for command destruct systems. It's not quite accurate to say
they blow it up to keep the rocket from coasting over populated areas. The
pieces would still do the same (altough perhaps at not as great a range),
and over an even wider CEP. Some range safety devices have the purpose of
blowing up the rocket, but that is not an operational requirement. They
terminate powered flight to keep the rocket or the pieces of it from
coasting onto populated areas. To meet this goal, either vehicle destruction
or thrust termination will suffice. IIRC the role of the RSO (at least here
on the Esatern Range) does not mandate that the vehicle be destroyed,
specifically. Two things are required: cessation of powered flight, and
assurance that the vehicle *or its pieces* will not impact a populated area
given even just seconds or less notice. A thrust termination device that
meets these goals does qualify as a range safety device at the Easter Range.
I know what you're thinking. What if they terminate thrust and the rocket
coasts onto a populated area? Well, if they blew it up, then the pieces
would. Besides, in order for that to happen, they would have to terminate
the thrust after the rocket was already turned around and flying toward
land. In fact, they blow it up while it is still pointing out overthe ocean.
If you terminate thrust under that condition, the rocket will still fly over
the ocean, and will, in fact, land inside the range. The point is, as soon
as the condition is neared where there is probability that either the whole
rocket or pieces of it could fall on populated areas, it is a range safety
violation and the flight terminated. If this condition isn't met, it's not a
violation. This is why the spent solid boosters of the shuttle, Delta,
Atlas, and Titan are allowed to fall without being blown up. There's no
danger to land. If you can stop a rocket from thrusting so that it will only
coast into the ocean, that is a valid means of maintaining ragne safety.

In the 1950's, and even today really, the most reliable and effective means
to achieve this was to simply blow the thing up. This is how it used to be
anyway. You have to remember that if you terminate the thrust on a rocket,
it will coast a certain distance that is predictable. If you blow it up the
*pieces* will coast a certain distance that is not predictable due to
verying sizes and shapes. In fact, the shuttle SRB charges, while designed
to destroy the SRB's have the primary purpose of ceassation of thrust and
*not* of destroying them (I heard this from the on-duty RSO officer shortly
after Challenger and, in fact, they refer to the charges as a thrust
termination system). Whether in pieces or not, once dead, it will coast.
This is also why the RSO doesn't wait until the rocket is turned around and
flying west before destroying it. He destroys it when it leaves a corridor
or goes out of control so that the coasting pieces don't fall on populated
areas. The RSO will destroy the vehicle if it nears a trajectory that would
cause it to fly over or fall on populated areas and will destroy it if it
approaches a trajectory where the pieces after destruction would land on
populated areas. So, it's not really the case that they blow them up in
order to keep the rocket from coasting onto populated areas since the pieces
would do the same. A good example of this is Challenger. All those pieces
coasted upward for a full minute before falling to the ocean, and fell
downrange much farther than the point of destruction. And the boosters were
destroyed while they were still flying outward over the ocean because they
were approaching the limits of a corridor where if they were blown up, the
pieces would likely coast back over populated areas. The only purpose of the
command destruct system is to terminate the flight in a manner that protects
the population. This may include thrust termination, vehicle destruction, or
both. And not all rockets launched from the Eastern Range have had CD
systems on them that would blow them up. Some had less "messy" but equally
effective means.

> Not a lot, but some weapons include the
> activation of such devices as a normal part of operation.  Such was the
case with the
> Pershing II.  It had thrust termination capability, but the purpose of the
> capability was not range safety - it was to "bring in" the  minimum range
of the missile.

This brings out my point. IIRC, the Pershing II was not fitted with a
destruct mechanism. For that matter, neither are the Trident II D-5 that fly
out of here. Believe it or not, military projects or not, operational
missiles or not, they fall under the same range safety requirements as
civilian/NASA launches (heck they are the reason range safety at the ETR was
created). For purposes of the RSO, if the aforementioned safety requirements
are met, thrust termination is as suitable as all-up destruct. It's a matter
of practicality. Simple destruct is easier (cheaper) to achieve and more
certain to achieve the necessary objective. Additionally, for unmanned
vehicles, thrust termination and destrcution have the same outcome: the
spacecraft or parts of it laying at the bottom of the ocean. So from that
perspective, there's not a preference. There's no reason *not* to blow it
up.

-Matt

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 7876 invoked from network); 18 Aug 2001 04:48:12 -0000
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 18 Aug 2001 04:48:12 -0000
Received: (qmail 24393 invoked by uid 50005); 18 Aug 2001 04:47:17 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smptf.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.102165 secs); 18 Aug 2001 04:47:17 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 18 Aug 2001 04:47:17 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA24990; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 21:44:54 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 89204 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 18 Aug 2001 04:44:52          +0000
Received: from mk-smarthost-2.mail.uk.worldonline.com          (mk-smarthost-2.mail.uk.worldonline.com [212.74.112.72]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA22356 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 15:20:28 -0700
Received: from host213-123-45-49.dialup.lineone.co.uk ([213.123.45.49]          helo=e0e4l0) by mk-smarthost-2.mail.uk.worldonline.com with smtp          (Exim 3.22 #3) id 15XryP-000DAK-00 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 17          Aug 2001 23:20:14 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0B79_01C56B69.4A3BFA70"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2314.1300
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <000a01c12769$dbbf9620$312d7bd5@e0e4l0>
Date:         Fri, 17 Aug 2001 23:12:51 +0100
Reply-To: "Steve Parker" <stevecjparker@LINEONE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Steve Parker" <stevecjparker@LINEONE.NET>
Subject:      [AR] stripped chutes
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0B79_01C56B69.4A3BFA70
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

I am looking for advice on how to avoid stripped chutes when doing dual =
deployment
(using a pressure sensed altimeter).
I have had no problems at low power (G/H) and repeatedly observe correct =
deployment of a=20
drogue and main chute. In these cases, the drogue deploys correctly =
AFTER apogee.=20
However, at higher powers, where the rocket is too high to be visible =
for the first deployment,=20
the drogue chute is stripped. This has happened in both still and windy =
conditions, therefore=20
possibly ruling out the effect of increased horizontal speed. I don't =
know whether a new=20
phenomena is occuring, or whether it is a combination of increased =
horizontal speed and
increased weight of the rocket. The altimeter has a timed Mach inhibit =
and the recorded
altitudes suggest that the rocket deploys well after maximum speed and =
definitely when
subsonic. Construction advice and related techniques on tolerating the =
forces of high speed
deployment would be great. Many thanks,

                                Steve Parker =20

------=_NextPart_000_0B79_01C56B69.4A3BFA70
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META content=3D"text/html; charset=3Diso-8859-1" =
http-equiv=3DContent-Type>
<META content=3D"MSHTML 5.00.2314.1000" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT size=3D2>I am looking for advice&nbsp;on how to avoid =
stripped chutes=20
when doing dual deployment</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=3D2>(using a pressure sensed altimeter).</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=3D2>I have had no problems at low power (G/H) and =
repeatedly=20
observe correct deployment of a </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=3D2>drogue</FONT><FONT size=3D2> and main chute. In =
these cases, the=20
drogue deploys correctly AFTER apogee. </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=3D2>However,</FONT><FONT size=3D2> at higher powers, =
where the=20
rocket is&nbsp;too high to be visible for the first</FONT><FONT =
size=3D2>=20
deployment, </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=3D2>the </FONT><FONT size=3D2>drogue chute is stripped. =
This has=20
happened in both still and windy </FONT><FONT size=3D2>conditions, =
therefore=20
</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=3D2>possibly ruling out the effect of increased =
horizontal speed.=20
I don't know whether a new&nbsp;</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=3D2>phenomena is occuring, or whether it is a =
combination of=20
increased horizontal speed and</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=3D2>increased weight of the rocket. The altimeter has a =
timed Mach=20
inhibit and the recorded</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=3D2>altitudes suggest that the rocket deploys well after =
maximum=20
speed and definitely when</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=3D2>subsonic. Construction advice and related techniques =

on&nbsp;tolerating the forces of high speed</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=3D2>deployment would be great. Many thanks,</FONT></DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=3D2>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; =
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;=20
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; =
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;=20
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Steve Parker</FONT>&nbsp;&nbsp;</DIV></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0B79_01C56B69.4A3BFA70--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 15672 invoked from network); 18 Aug 2001 04:51:13 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 18 Aug 2001 04:51:13 -0000
Received: (qmail 20869 invoked by uid 50005); 18 Aug 2001 04:51:00 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (. Clean. Processed in 0.239202 secs); 18 Aug 2001 04:51:00 -0000
X-Qmail-Scanner-Mail-From: owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU via smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net
X-Qmail-Scanner-Rcpt-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
X-Qmail-Scanner: 0.96 (No viruses found. Processed in 0.239202 secs)
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 18 Aug 2001 04:51:00 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA25113; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 21:49:06 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 89281 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 18 Aug 2001 04:49:03          +0000
Received: from femail7.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail7.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.0.95.87]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA22691 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 16:17:58 -0700
Received: from cc334751a ([65.13.214.65]) by femail7.sdc1.sfba.home.com          (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20 201-229-121-120-20010223) with SMTP id          <20010817231758.YXSI817.femail7.sdc1.sfba.home.com@cc334751a>; Fri,          17 Aug 2001 16:17:58 -0700
References: <CMM.0.90.4.998076120.billw@cypher>             <3B7CC661.63331DEA@biomicro.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2462.0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <044a01c12772$c6f3b560$6601a8c0@home.com>
Date:         Fri, 17 Aug 2001 17:17:25 -0600
Reply-To: "Brian Kosko" <bkosko1@HOME.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Brian Kosko" <bkosko1@HOME.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] urethane fuel?
Comments: To: "Mark K. Spute" <mks@BIOMICRO.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Cyanide, at least in HCN form, is supposed to have an almond like smell.
Can't personally attest to that though.

Brian
----- Original Message -----
From: "Mark K. Spute" <mks@BIOMICRO.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Friday, August 17, 2001 1:23 AM
Subject: Re: [AR] urethane fuel?


> Dunno, Bill.
>
> I've never intentionally smelled cyanide.  (Don't know anyone who has,
> either.)  :)
>
> William Chops Westfield wrote:
> [Snip of previous post]
>
> > Urethanes are the ones that smell like cyanide, right?
>
> --
> Mark K. Spute
> Senior Research Engineer
> BioMicro Systems Inc.
>
> KD7IWE,  RRS
>
> "It is difficult to say what is impossible, for the dream of yesterday
> is the hope of today and the reality of tomorrow."
>      Dr. Robert H. Goddard

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 16770 invoked from network); 18 Aug 2001 04:51:35 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 18 Aug 2001 04:51:35 -0000
Received: (qmail 21352 invoked by uid 50005); 18 Aug 2001 04:51:22 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (. Clean. Processed in 0.137225 secs); 18 Aug 2001 04:51:22 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
X-Qmail-Scanner-Mail-From: owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU via smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net
X-Qmail-Scanner-Rcpt-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
X-Qmail-Scanner: 0.96 (No viruses found. Processed in 0.137225 secs)
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 18 Aug 2001 04:51:22 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA25062; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 21:47:40 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 89788 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 18 Aug 2001 04:47:39          +0000
Received: from sys32.hou.wt.net (sys32.hou.wt.net [205.230.159.32]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA25042 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 21:46:45 -0700
Received: from localhost (216-119-130-191.ipset10.wt.net [216.119.130.191]) by          sys32.hou.wt.net (8.9.1/8.9.1) with ESMTP id XAA18635; Fri, 17 Aug          2001 23:46:51 -0500 (CDT)
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.388)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <200108180446.XAA18635@sys32.hou.wt.net>
Date:         Fri, 17 Aug 2001 23:47:06 -0500
Reply-To: "Donald McCorvey" <dlm3@NETAXS.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Donald McCorvey" <dlm3@NETAXS.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] reliability Now we're talking statistics...
Comments: To: landofgrey@gnc.net
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <LPBBKJMJEOFKAMFJJNNHGEKHCGAA.landofgrey@gnc.net>

The down side of reliability calculations is that they can lead you to
believe that something is so statistically unlikely that it really can't
happen. Sometimes it's even mostly true.

The problem is that it can, and it usually does when it's most
inconvenient.

So if you're a good designer, you use the reliability calculations as a
guide, but you design to take into account Murphy's Law so you can sleep
at night.

In a practical sense, that means that if there's *any* possibility that
a single failure will result in a catastrophic event, you either make
sure it *can't* happen, or if it does, you have another way out so you
don't go down with the ship.

The trouble is that in many organizations, if you attempt to correct a
design flaw which appears benign but may have catastrophic consequences,
you will find yourself up against a chorus of "If it ain't broke, don't
fix it!", often from people who ought to know better. The pointy-haired
types chime in with several stanzas of "We can't afford to change it",
and the whole endeavor ends up in a grand finale, "Don't worry about it.
It'll be all right."

And nothing is done.

Sound familiar ?

Don McCorvey
Houston, Tx

On Friday, August 17, 2001, at 03:22 PM, Matthew Travis wrote:

>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU]On
>> Behalf Of Brian Kosko
>
>> Bottom line. If you need to evaluate a sample of data, always be sure
>> to
>> check the confidence interval associated with the parameter you're
>> interested in, not just the mean value.
>
> I absolutely agree. Otherwise, you're bascially taking samples that you
> can't trust anyway. Uncertainty only compounds uncertainty. This was the
> fallacy of Challenger. The managers (I loathe managers, btw) saw the
> SRB's
> with a reliability of 'x'. With each flight they "gained confidence" in
> the
> system. Basically, they were saying that, given a failure probability
> of 1
> in 37 (which was the statistical probability of a catostrophic SRB
> failure),
> each time they flew successfully, they gained confidence and the chance
> for
> failure went down. In reality, statistically, if you have a probability
> of 1
> in 37, then by the time you ge to the 25th flight, you're really pushing
> your luck. A one in 37 chance became 1 in 12. They twisted it all
> around,
> *and convinced people of it*, in order to save their own ass-ets.
> Numbers
> don't lie, but evil people can learn math.
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 18767 invoked from network); 18 Aug 2001 04:52:26 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 18 Aug 2001 04:52:26 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 19369 invoked by uid 50005); 18 Aug 2001 04:51:00 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smpte.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 1.147218 secs); 18 Aug 2001 04:51:00 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 18 Aug 2001 04:50:57 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA25151; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 21:50:29 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 89335 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 18 Aug 2001 04:50:28          +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (f72.pav1.hotmail.com [64.4.31.72]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA22885 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri,          17 Aug 2001 16:51:07 -0700
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Fri,          17 Aug 2001 16:50:37 -0700
Received: from 63.87.136.71 by pv1fd.pav1.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Fri, 17          Aug 2001 23:50:36 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [63.87.136.71]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 17 Aug 2001 23:50:37.0138 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[69B89320:01C12777]
Message-ID:  <F72uNjVuMhvqgStMVhE0000988c@hotmail.com>
Date:         Fri, 17 Aug 2001 16:50:36 -0700
Reply-To: "Brian Reddeman" <breddeman@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Brian Reddeman" <breddeman@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      [AR] Concerns about micro turbopump wear
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

First, I'd like to thank everyone on the deluge of liquid fuel rocket design
sources.


In redesigning my micro turbopump, I think I'm going to run into a possible
problem of eventual wear of the shaft and blades (mainly the shaft). I'm
considering cooling it with the fuel (either Ethanol or Kerosene)but could I
get away with lubricating it with fuel as well(just a wild Idea I had if I
go with Kerosene)? or am I worried about nothing at all save making sure the
shaft is lubricated with something that won't react to to the oxidizer or
the fuel(I'm going with H2O2).

The pump is currently going to be only 1.5cm wide and 2cm long.


_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 22109 invoked from network); 18 Aug 2001 04:53:44 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 18 Aug 2001 04:53:44 -0000
Received: (qmail 1718 invoked by uid 50005); 18 Aug 2001 04:54:03 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.132071 secs); 18 Aug 2001 04:54:03 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 18 Aug 2001 04:54:02 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA25188; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 21:51:53 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 89366 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 18 Aug 2001 04:51:51          +0000
Received: from m1.jersey.juno.com (m1.jersey.juno.com [64.136.16.64]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA22979 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 16:57:01 -0700
Received: from cookie.juno.com by cookie.juno.com for          <"H3WK6e6N+bsCVJQMHM9sZIj9DLuIF8Oe9+Gp0u71Bmj24RPp1bazQw==">
Received: (from kc2csh@juno.com) by m1.jersey.juno.com (queuemail) id GC36BTMH;          Fri, 17 Aug 2001 19:56:25 EDT
X-Mailer: Juno 4.0.11
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Juno-Line-Breaks: 3-78
X-Juno-Att: 0
X-Juno-RefParts: 0
Message-ID:  <20010817.200122.-3920719.0.kc2csh@juno.com>
Date:         Fri, 17 Aug 2001 19:58:57 -0400
Reply-To: <kc2csh@JUNO.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <kc2csh@JUNO.COM>
Subject:      [AR] Cotton candy?
Comments: To: jyawn@SFCC.NET
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

  Thinking outloud, I am wondering if some of the brittleness of candy
could be addressed by blending in a reinforcing fiber?  Perhaps a fiber
that also provides a fuel source or a conductive pathway?  Fine AL wire?
Cotton?

          Jay





On Fri, 17 Aug 2001 00:41:20 -0400 James Yawn <jyawn@SFCC.NET> writes:
> > I am a candy dis-advocate.
>
> Possible headway on some of these issues:
>
> While playing with the problem of cohesion of recrystallized
> KN/sucrose that a
> couple of Arocket list members have reported, I made a few batches
> with more
> residual moisture and/or more corn syrup than the standard recipe.
> Some of these
> have been flexible/deformable at room temperature, while still
> maintaining a
> serviceable burn rate.
>
> Thus I submit for consideration the results of a few crude
> tensile-strength tests
> which illustrate this effect:
>
> http://members.fortunecity.com/jyawn/tensile/index.htm
>
> Bear in mind that I performed only two simple tests, not definitive
> in any way.
> But the results suggest to me a way in which the problem of
> brittleness can be
> minimized, possibly leading to a more reliable candy engine.
>
> Also, the recrystallization process exposes the fuel to a maximum of
> 300 degrees
> F, and could be finished at lower temperature, as Mr. Calkins
> reports.  In making
> several hundred batches, I have never experienced autoignition when
> following the
> normal procedure.  ( I have experienced unanticipated igniton during
> extended
> bouts of experimental stupidity, which I will describe upon request.
> :)
>
> Earnest question:  what is the autoignition temperature for
> KN/sucrose?  I would
> like to know how close this process comes to that level, in order to
> determine if
> there is an adequate safety margin or if I have just been lucky.
>
> Respectfully,
> Jimmy Yawn
>
> Jerry Irvine wrote:
>
> > >  > I am a candy dis-advocate.
> > >
> > >Tell us why (serious request)
> >
> > It is brittle.
> > It has a high burning rate exponent.
> > It has poor physical properties and is only suitable for small
> motors.
> > It has low delivered ISP
> > It is processed using a heat level dangerously close to
> autoignition
> >    This factor has caused more accidents than any propellant I
> > personally know of
> >
> > Is that enough?
> >
> > Jerry
> >
> > >

________________________________________________________________
GET INTERNET ACCESS FROM JUNO!
Juno offers FREE or PREMIUM Internet access for less!
Join Juno today!  For your FREE software, visit:
http://dl.www.juno.com/get/tagj.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 26087 invoked from network); 18 Aug 2001 04:55:21 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 18 Aug 2001 04:55:21 -0000
Received: (qmail 24922 invoked by uid 50005); 18 Aug 2001 04:55:08 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (. Clean. Processed in 0.732276 secs); 18 Aug 2001 04:55:08 -0000
X-Qmail-Scanner-Mail-From: owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU via smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net
X-Qmail-Scanner-Rcpt-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
X-Qmail-Scanner: 0.96 (No viruses found. Processed in 0.732276 secs)
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 18 Aug 2001 04:55:07 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA25234; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 21:53:18 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 89422 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 18 Aug 2001 04:53:15          +0000
Received: from mail2.nc.rr.com (fe2.southeast.rr.com [24.93.67.49]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA23165 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 17:12:43 -0700
Received: from freddy ([24.25.5.88]) by mail2.nc.rr.com  with Microsoft          SMTPSVC(5.5.1877.687.68); Fri, 17 Aug 2001 20:12:42 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <NBEJKDFBFOEFALBMBCDPIEOLCCAA.jtaylor@nc.rr.com>
Date:         Fri, 17 Aug 2001 20:15:26 -0400
Reply-To: "Jeff Taylor" <jtaylor@NC.RR.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jeff Taylor" <jtaylor@NC.RR.COM>
Subject:      [AR] Going to Black Rock?
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <LPBBKJMJEOFKAMFJJNNHCEKECGAA.landofgrey@gnc.net>

Hey -

Is anyone on the list planning to go to the BALLS launch at Black Rock in
September?  I'm going, and I'd like to take this chance to meet as many
people while I'm out there as I can.  I'll be bringing a small project with
me on the plane, and I need some help on the propellant end.

- Jeff Taylor

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 29502 invoked from network); 18 Aug 2001 04:56:46 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 18 Aug 2001 04:56:46 -0000
Received: (qmail 26327 invoked by uid 50005); 18 Aug 2001 04:56:34 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (. Clean. Processed in 0.171114 secs); 18 Aug 2001 04:56:34 -0000
X-Qmail-Scanner-Mail-From: owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU via smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net
X-Qmail-Scanner-Rcpt-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
X-Qmail-Scanner: 0.96 (No viruses found. Processed in 0.171114 secs)
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 18 Aug 2001 04:56:33 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA25294; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 21:54:43 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 89537 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 18 Aug 2001 04:54:41          +0000
Received: from femail11.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail11.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.0.95.107]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA23544          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 17:45:23 -0700
Received: from hal2001 ([24.77.53.16]) by femail11.sdc1.sfba.home.com          (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20 201-229-121-120-20010223) with SMTP id          <20010818004522.CSGZ17568.femail11.sdc1.sfba.home.com@hal2001> for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 17:45:22 -0700
References:  <v01510100b7a31141aa8a@[63.169.102.173]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <001a01c1277d$eeb63b80$0400a8c0@hatjs>
Date:         Fri, 17 Aug 2001 17:37:16 -0700
Reply-To: "Jamie Morken" <jmorken@HOME.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jamie Morken" <jmorken@HOME.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] candy R&D
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Hi All,


> Using a 6-ton hydraulic jack in a homemade press frame I press out Bates
> grains from ball-mill mixed KNO3/sugar dampened with 50/50 alcohol-water
> mix. They dry so hard you could file your fingernails with them. They seem
> to fire well.

Is the end product brittle?  If you drop it on the floor does it break?  For
comparison,
you can throw a fist sized chunk of cooked icing sugar rocket fuel at a rock
and it usually won't even break.

> The pressing cylinder is a piece of modified PVC pipe with a steel mandrel
> for the core. The pressing plunger is cast from polyester resin. No heat
is
> used at any time. The grains are about 1-1/8" in diameter at 65 grams.
>
> So far, no CATO'S. They are not formed in a motor casing, rather they are
> coated on the outside with a thin layer of furnace cement to inhibit
> combusion there. As a result they are NOT case-bonded in any way, in fact
> may be slightly loose in their PVC motor case tube.
>

Does the furnace cement bond well to the grain?  Perhaps epoxy resin would
be a potentially good method too?

I think you are using a great technique for candy propellants.  Not case
bonded but inhibited
on the outside.  We have always case bonded our candy propellants (usually
directly to a steel
casing with no liner) but now I am starting to wonder if they weren't
burning on the outside of the
grain as well as the inside.  I don't trust this type of propellant to make
its own casebond and I think
it is best to use a liner to form the case bond or do as you are doing.

> exactly the elusive right mixture to cook! My doctrine is to not make
> things any harder than they have to be!

You can cook a wide range of KNO3/icing sugar mixes.  The more icing sugar
there is the more easier it is to
stir (makes a difference when filling 20lbs of propellant and mixing by hand
for several hours :)

If you aren't having CATO's with your hydraulic press technique no need to
mix though!  It would be interesting to see how this method scales up.

best regards,
Jamie

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 2232 invoked from network); 18 Aug 2001 04:57:56 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 18 Aug 2001 04:57:56 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 5547 invoked by uid 50005); 18 Aug 2001 04:58:15 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.118604 secs); 18 Aug 2001 04:58:15 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 18 Aug 2001 04:58:15 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA25367; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 21:56:07 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 89606 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 18 Aug 2001 04:56:05          +0000
Received: from scaup.mail.pas.earthlink.net (scaup.mail.pas.earthlink.net          [207.217.121.49]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA23783          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 18:08:08 -0700
Received: from sprintmail.com (pool0600.cvx18-bradley.dialup.earthlink.net          [209.179.240.90]) by scaup.mail.pas.earthlink.net (EL-8_9_3_3/8.9.3)          with ESMTP id SAA25332 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 17 Aug 2001          18:08:06 -0700 (PDT)
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.74 [en] (Win98; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <NKEHJAOOKBPGIKOOPDEFMEFLCBAA.jwckman@space-rockets.com>            <01db01c1275b$5c70fb60$c36122c0@cronos>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B7D12C4.85FF73E8@sprintmail.com>
Date:         Fri, 17 Aug 2001 05:49:08 -0700
Reply-To: "Anthony Colette" <Rockitman@SPRINTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Anthony Colette" <Rockitman@SPRINTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Solid rocket boosters
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

> Could somebody explain to me why a sudden (and dramatic) drop in chamber
> pressure would cause a solid motor to extinguish?

Wedge,

I am not sure how the process happens but I have some ideas and believe
extinction is brought about by several processes that compound each other.

As a propellant is burning under nominal conditions, the propellant surface just
beneath the flame front is decomposing, melting, foaming and pyrolizing.  If the
process is disturbed by a rapid depressurization several things may happen.

1)  The dramatic drop of chamber pressure causes a "dramatic" drop of chamber
temperature by way of simple gas expansion.   If the chamber temperature is
running nominally at 4000' F @ 1000 psia and is rapidly depressurized to 14
psia, the combustion gas temperature will drop about 2100' F. The resulting Tch
will be about 1900 deg F.  This alone may not but could cause the propellant to
extinguish.

2)  The _vapor pressure_ of the hot foaming/pyrolizing rubber matrix becomes
higher than the surrounding environment.  The foam will flash boil,  rapidly
expanding it and pushing the flame front (of decreasing temp) away from the non
decomposed propellant.  This will greatly reduce heat flux into the propellant.

3)  Any boiling process is endothermic.  If the process happens instantaneously
and by way of rapid depressurization, it will lower the temperature of the foam
and propellant surface even further.

With all the above combined, the sudden jolt of cooling may be enough to
extinguish the reaction.

Tony

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 5876 invoked from network); 18 Aug 2001 04:59:26 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 18 Aug 2001 04:59:26 -0000
Received: (qmail 28695 invoked by uid 50005); 18 Aug 2001 04:59:13 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (. Clean. Processed in 0.276741 secs); 18 Aug 2001 04:59:13 -0000
X-Qmail-Scanner-Mail-From: owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU via smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net
X-Qmail-Scanner-Rcpt-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
X-Qmail-Scanner: 0.96 (No viruses found. Processed in 0.276741 secs)
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 18 Aug 2001 04:59:13 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA25412; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 21:57:31 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 89630 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 18 Aug 2001 04:57:29          +0000
Received: from femail22.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail22.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.0.95.147]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA23950          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 18:56:04 -0700
Received: from hal2001 ([24.77.53.16]) by femail22.sdc1.sfba.home.com          (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20 201-229-121-120-20010223) with SMTP id          <20010818015550.EHJ21132.femail22.sdc1.sfba.home.com@hal2001> for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 18:55:50 -0700
References:  <2DCA36C44BF3D211917F0008C7C9C9DD067ECF31@ntexchange06.micron.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <000701c12787$c6a11c00$0400a8c0@hatjs>
Date:         Fri, 17 Aug 2001 18:47:44 -0700
Reply-To: "Jamie Morken" <jmorken@HOME.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jamie Morken" <jmorken@HOME.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] optoisolators
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Hi all,



> I didn't pay attention the beginning of this conversation, but I noticed
the
> comment about PCB software.  I thought I might mention that I do PCB
layouts
> pretty often and have some fairly high-end layout and schematic tools at
> hand.  I am willing to do layouts on the cheap, typically free to way
below
> professional rates, or for a copy of the completed device if its something
> I'm interested in, depending upon the complexity, and effort involved.
> Things that go straight up get preference.


I would be happy to send you (or anyone else) the schematics and pcb's or
gerber files if you are interested
in helping me make these boards.  I don't have much experience with this but
my plan was to send out the Eagle
Cad files to a boardhouse and get back 2 or 3 boards and then assemble them
and verify their operation.  Then I would consider (based on demand) getting
a large batch of boards made - possibly getting them assembled to.  I have
received some quotes on assembly and it is competitive with paying myself
$10/hr doing the work.  As I say I dont have much experience in all this so
I look forward to hearing your thoughts.


>
> I design high-speed IC test equipment for a living, and have done boards
up
> to 20 layers, 6000 components, smt, just about everything except RF.
> Autorouting is available, but a good hand route will give a better layout
if
> time permits.
>

geez 20 layers - 6000 components (on one board!?) wow what the heck is that
board doing?! :)

best regards,
Jamie

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 9372 invoked from network); 18 Aug 2001 05:01:04 -0000
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 18 Aug 2001 05:01:04 -0000
Received: (qmail 28169 invoked by uid 50005); 18 Aug 2001 04:59:39 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smpte.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.174926 secs); 18 Aug 2001 04:59:39 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 18 Aug 2001 04:59:38 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA25447; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 21:58:54 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 89657 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 18 Aug 2001 04:58:52          +0000
Received: from fep3-orange.clear.net.nz (fep3-orange.clear.net.nz          [203.97.32.3]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA24375          for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 20:32:10 -0700
Received: from mkbs (203-167-159-126.dialup.clear.net.nz [203.167.159.126]) by          fep3-orange.clear.net.nz (1.5/1.8) with SMTP id PAA00374; Sat, 18 Aug          2001 15:32:05 +1200 (NZST)
References:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010817083502.8394A-100000@spsystems.net>                       <008a01c1271c$ebaf8240$0400a8c0@hatjs>                         <00af01c1272a$1b44fbe0$0100a8c0@mkbs>              <00ca01c12731$d7590220$0400a8c0@hatjs>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <000c01c12796$adfcfb60$0100a8c0@mkbs>
Date:         Sat, 18 Aug 2001 12:31:19 +1200
Reply-To: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Organization: Applied Technology
Subject:      Re: [AR] optoisolators
Comments: To: Jamie Morken <jmorken@HOME.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

> Russell, I don't think you hooked up the gate of the mosfet to the
> optoisolator output in your last email which is the part I am stuck at. :)
> Here is a link to the optoisolator circuit I have so far.  The 4 control
> wires leading out to the left are going to the microcontroller (to turn
the
> mosfets on and off)  I have some extra resistors in there that I'm not
sure
> if I should have included or not as well as a few unconnected wires that I
> can't figure out.  The mosfets would be used for ignitors and potentially
> motors for parasail control etc.
>
> Here is the link:
> www.rocketresearch.org/optoisolators.bmp


Looks good.

Whoops
The line "opto cathode to FET gate" should have read "opto emitter to FET
gate".
I see that you have added 2K resistors gate to ground which I think I
omitted in my "mental" picture. These are indeed required - they serve as
the FET turnoff resistors - without them the FETs would remain on in an ill
defined manner!.

What is the output supply voltage?
The circuit shown would be OK for say 12 to 24 volt main supply.
Below that you could optimise some component values.

Indirectly related:

On your diagram some lines cross but are not intended to connect (eg R22 top
to opto pin 11) while others cross where a join is intended (eg R30 bottom
to FET source). It is a VERY good idea to at least place a dot where a join
is intended but even better to "stagger" lines at a join so that lines that
cross over each other NEVER join. There is then never any doubt even after
reproduction.YOU know what the circuit intends to mean but it should be
clear to others now and you in 6 months time.

eg    a "crossroads"

            |
        --------
            |

is NEVER a join (even with a dot !!!!)

            |
       --- . -----
            |

ie the above is still NOT a join.


and a Tee (or 2 T's)

        |
   -----------
            |

show that joins are intended.
(with or without dots)


regards

                   Russell

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 12356 invoked from network); 18 Aug 2001 05:02:22 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 18 Aug 2001 05:02:22 -0000
Received: (qmail 30940 invoked by uid 50005); 18 Aug 2001 05:02:10 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (. Clean. Processed in 0.459831 secs); 18 Aug 2001 05:02:10 -0000
X-Qmail-Scanner-Mail-From: owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU via smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net
X-Qmail-Scanner-Rcpt-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
X-Qmail-Scanner: 0.96 (No viruses found. Processed in 0.459831 secs)
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 18 Aug 2001 05:02:09 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA25496; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 22:00:21 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 89659 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 18 Aug 2001 05:00:19          +0000
Received: from fep3-orange.clear.net.nz (fep3-orange.clear.net.nz          [203.97.32.3]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA24383          for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 20:32:14 -0700
Received: from mkbs (203-167-159-126.dialup.clear.net.nz [203.167.159.126]) by          fep3-orange.clear.net.nz (1.5/1.8) with SMTP id PAA00367; Sat, 18 Aug          2001 15:32:02 +1200 (NZST)
References:  <814DCE01F6D7D311994D204C4F4F50201889B6@MAIL>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <000b01c12796$ace8cc40$0100a8c0@mkbs>
Date:         Sat, 18 Aug 2001 12:11:38 +1200
Reply-To: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Organization: Applied Technology
Subject:      Re: [AR] Pistonless Piston Pumps with peroxide precat cycle
Comments: To: Earl Pottinger <earlcp@CONPUTE.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

> >I've been avoiding commenting but my* "Pistonless Piston Pump concept
> really
> >invites investigation here. I hope to get to a proof of concept
> demonstrator

>       I tried looking on the web to see if others have made such pumps
> before.  However, I mostly only found liquid ring pumps that are only good
> for pumping gases and Stirling engines which are not what you are talking
> about.  Looks like a new area to explore.
&
> What I don't understand is your timing control, if you run your cycles too
> short you waste power, if you run them too long gas get trapped in flow.
>
> How do you sense went to stop feeding in gas, and when to exhaust it?
> Timing?
>
> If you add a free floating piston with seals you prevent gas mixing into
> your liquid stream, and the possibility to use catalysed peroxide as your
> driving/working gas.
>

There will certainly be quite some difference between the theoretical
starting point and the "real thing".
I have thought of many variations and possible ways of implementing it.

A free floating "piston" could be used whose main purpose is to locate the
fluid surface. The position could be detected, preferably electronically
using eg optical, magnetic, inductive or capacitive sensors. Also mechanical
position detection may be appropriate.
This piston MAY need light spring loading to keep it on the fluid surface.
A free floating piston with "scraper" seals or similar could be used but
getting enough sealing to guarantee the use of eg warm to hot Oxygen with a
fuel , while obviously doable, increases the difficulty level and makes it
harder for an amateur.One aim is to make the system as "construction simple"
as possible but there will of course as always be tradeoffs between ease of
manufacture and efficacy (which is why we have the horrendously difficult
Space Shuttle turbo pumps).

Metered flow COULD be used for switching but this is risky. As delivery
pressure should be reasonably constant as long as gas pressure is constant
this may be possible but I would favour an active scheme. Short cycling by
switching pump chambers before the delivery chamber is empty reduces
efficiency by dumping pressurised gas before it is necessary to do so, so
should be avoided as much as where possible.  You will always have to swap
over at least a short period before empty (or else!)

A floating piston would also help minimise foam and swirl and .... .

A "flimsy" non compliant membrane could be used to separate the pressurant
gas and propellant. This membrane would ALWAY have essentially equal
pressure on both sides and its purpose would be mainly for foaming etc. It
could even have pressure relief passages around it to ensure that it is
NEVER pressurised destructively.

Gas switching valves could be mechanically driven by eg a rotary "pump
block" with passages in it or by eg solenoid valves. (Solenoid valves are
also of course ultimately mechanical). Solenoid valves could be used as
pilot valves to drive much larger pneumatic valving. My initial intention is
to use solenoid valves directly for the prototype.





regards

            Russell McMahon

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 15556 invoked from network); 18 Aug 2001 05:03:50 -0000
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 18 Aug 2001 05:03:50 -0000
Received: (qmail 6812 invoked by uid 50005); 18 Aug 2001 05:02:54 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smptf.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.793977 secs); 18 Aug 2001 05:02:54 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 18 Aug 2001 05:02:52 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA25543; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 22:01:44 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 89661 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 18 Aug 2001 05:01:43          +0000
Received: from fep3-orange.clear.net.nz (fep3-orange.clear.net.nz          [203.97.32.3]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA24391          for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 20:32:46 -0700
Received: from mkbs (203-167-159-126.dialup.clear.net.nz [203.167.159.126]) by          fep3-orange.clear.net.nz (1.5/1.8) with SMTP id PAA00382; Sat, 18 Aug          2001 15:32:07 +1200 (NZST)
References:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010817124204.11514A-100000@spsystems.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <000d01c12796$af977180$0100a8c0@mkbs>
Date:         Sat, 18 Aug 2001 13:00:48 +1200
Reply-To: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Organization: Applied Technology
Subject:      [AR] [OT]: Re:      [AR] reliability (was Re: [AR] ERPS              successfully              runs H2O2 engine)
Comments: To: Henry Spencer <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

> Actually, any real statistician would cringe at a lot of the fluff that
> gets put out about rocket reliability -- for example, quoting reliability
> numbers to three or four decimal places based on a few dozen trials!  This
> is not statistics, this is numerical bullshit, pure and simple.
>
> A good rule of thumb for evaluating such numbers is:  how much would the
> number change if *one launch* had gone differently?  That gives you some
> idea of how precise, or rather imprecise, most of those figures are.


A fun and sometimes useful layman's guide for "margin of error" in a sample
is to divide 100 by  the square root of the number of samples. ie

    Margin of error % = 100 / SQRT(N)   for N samples

For eg 30 launches this gives MOE = 18% !!!

This method gives a good but rough guide, has a real basis in statistics but
is always wrong in practice :-)
(Also can be roughly done in your head which impresses (some) people).

It also happens to be essentially how they calculate the margin or error in
opinion polls!
Have a look some time - for a 1000 sample poll this would give 100 /
sqrt(1000) = 3.2%
See how that compares to the next poll MOE result you see.
You can also work backwards and work out the poll size from the quoted MOE

            Sample size  = (100 / MOE)^2


regards,


            Russell "all models are wrong, some models are useful" McMahon

______________________________________________________________


Qualifier - the above is related to population distribution shapes and areas
under distribution tails and may (WILL) give dodgy results in some (many)
real life applications. For a normal population a slightly better formula is

    MOE % = 100  x 1.98 x SQRT( p *  (1-p) / N)  %

    N = sample size
    p = real occurrence of quantity being sampled for  (0..1).
    The worst case is for p = 0.5 which reduces to the simplification given
above.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 18450 invoked from network); 18 Aug 2001 05:05:05 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 18 Aug 2001 05:05:05 -0000
Received: (qmail 803 invoked by uid 50005); 18 Aug 2001 05:04:52 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (. Clean. Processed in 0.195498 secs); 18 Aug 2001 05:04:52 -0000
X-Qmail-Scanner-Mail-From: owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU via smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net
X-Qmail-Scanner-Rcpt-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
X-Qmail-Scanner: 0.96 (No viruses found. Processed in 0.195498 secs)
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 18 Aug 2001 05:04:52 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA25614; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 22:03:10 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 89663 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 18 Aug 2001 05:03:08          +0000
Received: from dune.gnc.net (root@dune.gnc.net [207.203.72.4]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA24416 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri,          17 Aug 2001 20:37:59 -0700
Received: from beowulf (sw2-45.gnc.net [207.203.72.125]) by dune.gnc.net          (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id XAA29164 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri,          17 Aug 2001 23:38:00 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
Importance: Normal
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <LPBBKJMJEOFKAMFJJNNHKEKMCGAA.landofgrey@gnc.net>
Date:         Fri, 17 Aug 2001 23:37:22 -0400
Reply-To: <landofgrey@gnc.net>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Matthew Travis" <landofgrey@gnc.net>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Solid rocket boosters
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <00d501c1274d$0dd4cee0$1b30fea9@kristinscomp>

But you don't live here or work to successfully launch the shuttle or ELV's.
For people, myself included,  who live near a test range, they do become a
matter of fact of life, but I wouldn't necessarily use the word blase
(though many people are blase about them). We definitely do not shrug at
them any more than an amateur rocketeer shrugs at his own creation. On page
29 of our Bellsouth phone books are the (admittedly short) emergency
procedures in case of an accident at the Cape or KSC. Emergency procedures
have had to be used twice inthe past 4 years. the Delta 2 that blew up at
T+10 seconds and a Titan IV. Both initially posed a toxic fume danger to
civilian areas. It may be in fashion to say "the shuttle, feh. big deal",
but people said the same about the Saturn V by 1972 and yet now we try to
immortalize it.

-Matt


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Kristin & David Hall [mailto:thehalls@ridgenet.net]

> *shrug*
>
> I've only been to one shuttle launch.  But I neither cheered nor held my
> breath wrt SRB staging.  Call me blase, but Challenger never entered my
> mind.
>
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 22019 invoked from network); 18 Aug 2001 05:06:41 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 18 Aug 2001 05:06:41 -0000
Received: (qmail 2237 invoked by uid 50005); 18 Aug 2001 05:06:28 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (. Clean. Processed in 0.186085 secs); 18 Aug 2001 05:06:28 -0000
X-Qmail-Scanner-Mail-From: owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU via smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net
X-Qmail-Scanner-Rcpt-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
X-Qmail-Scanner: 0.96 (No viruses found. Processed in 0.186085 secs)
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 18 Aug 2001 05:06:28 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA25650; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 22:04:33 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 88968 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 18 Aug 2001 05:04:31          +0000
Received: from dune.gnc.net (root@dune.gnc.net [207.203.72.4]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA21379 for <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Fri,          17 Aug 2001 13:49:14 -0700
Received: from beowulf (sw2-22.gnc.net [207.203.72.102]) by dune.gnc.net          (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id QAA20754 for <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Fri,          17 Aug 2001 16:49:14 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <LPBBKJMJEOFKAMFJJNNHGEKJCGAA.landofgrey@gnc.net>
Date:         Fri, 17 Aug 2001 16:48:57 -0400
Reply-To: <landofgrey@gnc.net>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Matthew Travis" <landofgrey@gnc.net>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Solid rocket boosters
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <NKEHJAOOKBPGIKOOPDEFMEFLCBAA.jwckman@space-rockets.com>

> -----Original Message-----
> From: John Wickman [mailto:jwckman@space-rockets.com]
> Sent: Friday, August 17, 2001 3:44 PM
> To: landofgrey@gnc.net; AROCKET@itc.uci.edu
> Subject: RE: [AR] Solid rocket boosters
>
> I should have been more clear in my original post.   The thrust
> termination
> ports operate by suddenly dropping the chamber pressure so that the
> propellant is extinguished.   This is called P-dot
> extinguishment.  In a few
> milliseconds, the chamber pressure and thrust goes to zero.  This is very
> similar to a normal shutdown except it is a bit faster.  A normal
> solid may
> go to zero thrust in a second rather than a few milliseconds.  Many of you
> have probably seen P-dot extinguishment, if you suddenly blew a nozzle or
> bulkhead and the propellant went out. It is not canceling out the forward
> thrust.   The ports, usually four, are located in each quadrant of the
> bulkhead.  The flash of flame out the front is also a few milliseconds so
> the thermal damage is virtually zero.

I see. I was aware there's a difference between "thrust termination" in
general and blowing up the rocket. The SRB's use the latter method. I was
just wondering if it really is possible to achieve termination in a gentle
enoough manner that it wouldn't detroy the rest of the shuttle stack. I can
see how it might work with a conventional rocket, but the shuttle is this
weird hybrid thing and you have to watch out for the tank and wings and
such. Even though the nozzles are below those components, can't you get
blowback of the plume and/or debris? I've never researched this topic, but
it would be an interesting study.

>
> The point of my first post was to point out that solids can be as
> safe in a manned mission as liquids.

I agree. And people who say "x number of astronauts died because of solids
and x because of liquids" are not using the correct, or even a valid,
metric. Besides, the Challenger 7 (that's the name of our local gradeschool)
died because of criminal negligence, not solid rocket failure. But that's
for another day and another list :)

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 25569 invoked from network); 18 Aug 2001 05:08:16 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 18 Aug 2001 05:08:16 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 3414 invoked by uid 50005); 18 Aug 2001 05:08:03 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (. Clean. Processed in 0.185401 secs); 18 Aug 2001 05:08:03 -0000
X-Qmail-Scanner-Mail-From: owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU via smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net
X-Qmail-Scanner-Rcpt-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
X-Qmail-Scanner: 0.96 (No viruses found. Processed in 0.185401 secs)
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 18 Aug 2001 05:08:03 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA25729; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 22:06:27 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 89986 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 18 Aug 2001 05:06:25          +0000
Received: from localhost (rcalkins@localhost) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with          ESMTP id WAA25715; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 22:06:24 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.LNX.4.10.10108172201510.24935-100000@itc.uci.edu>
Date:         Fri, 17 Aug 2001 22:06:24 -0700
Reply-To: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Fw: Virus warning and info
Comments: To: Robert <OlympusMons@MINDSPRING.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <004b01c1276e$8a475120$08a056d1@oemcomputer>

Yes robert, your machine did send out the sircam virus to nearly 500
rocketeers around the world.

The sircam virus runs it's own server (which is why you don't see them in
your sent mail), and grabs addresses from your Outlook folder and web
browser cache to send itself to.  It also randomly sends files from your
computer out.  Hope you didn't have anything of a sensitive nature on your
machine.  Have you removed the virus from your machine yet?  If you need
the innoculation to remove the virus, let me know off list, I'll send you
the web link.

Ray



On Fri, 17 Aug 2001, Robert wrote:

> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Robert
> To: Alcyone
> Sent: Friday, August 17, 2001 5:31 PM
> Subject: Virus
>
>
> I got an e-mail from your "mail administrator" saying I sent you a virus. What happened was, there was this interesting looking e-mail from a rocketry newsgroup I subscribe to. I opened it and then its attachment. Mistake. Friends are telling me I sent them e-mails with an attachment that I never, personally, sent. So the virus itseld did it. Sorry, it was my mistake to open an attachment, but I, personally, did NOT, intentionally send any viruses out.
>
> AND: I just checked my "Sent Items" and it contains no listing for things I have not knowingly sent. Therefore, the virus not only sends itself out, but erases all (?) traces of what it did, so you don't know who your machine sent it to.
>
> If you think you have the worm that got sent by my computer (or if you know you have the "SirCam-...[whatever it is called]"...worm from ANY source), tell me and I will send you a link to a website with instructions and a link for downloading and using a tool to remove the worm.
>
> Bob K.
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 12937 invoked from network); 18 Aug 2001 05:27:41 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 18 Aug 2001 05:27:41 -0000
Received: (qmail 30247 invoked by uid 50005); 18 Aug 2001 05:26:46 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smptf.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.158644 secs); 18 Aug 2001 05:26:46 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 18 Aug 2001 05:26:45 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA26118; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 22:25:47 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 90101 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 18 Aug 2001 05:25:45          +0000
Received: from localhost (rcalkins@localhost) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with          ESMTP id WAA26104; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 22:25:43 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.LNX.4.10.10108172207130.24935-100000@itc.uci.edu>
Date:         Fri, 17 Aug 2001 22:25:43 -0700
Reply-To: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Candy propellant (past accidents and future greatness)
Comments: To: John Wickman <jwckman@SPACE-ROCKETS.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <NKEHJAOOKBPGIKOOPDEFGEFGCBAA.jwckman@space-rockets.com>

On Fri, 17 Aug 2001, John Wickman wrote:

> I think the one ton propellant weight is way low.
Absolutely low.  It was just a simple Isp/DeltaV analysis, and didn't take
in account any vehicle or payload mass.  The real figure is probably less
than an order of magnitude higher, but not too much.  However, I think
either APCP or PSAN propellants should make up the upper stages.  Sugar
would make a great booster though, provided the physical improvements can
be made.  (Which don't look terribly difficult at this point).

> I took the launch vehicles that were all solids and plotted their
> payload weight to orbit(LEO) vs. propellant weight.  When you curve
> fit the data, you come up with about 12,000 lb of propellant for zero
> payload to LEO.  Essentially, the spend 3rd or 4th stage, depending on
> the vehicle, just makes it to orbit without a payload.  All of those
> vehicles were AP composite propellant.  As you mention, sugar
> propellants have an Isp of about half so their propellant weight would
> be on the order of 24,000 lb, not 2,000 lb based on the curve. That
> would make the cost $7,200 which is still a bargain.
A sensible approach, I did that same exercise once.

One thing to consider when talking about amateur projects is the labor
cost.  Essentially the cost is free, but if it is too large, the project
never gets completed.  Another thing is tooling.

Ray

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 21247 invoked from network); 18 Aug 2001 05:31:21 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 18 Aug 2001 05:31:21 -0000
Received: (qmail 10633 invoked by uid 50005); 18 Aug 2001 05:31:41 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.251004 secs); 18 Aug 2001 05:31:41 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 18 Aug 2001 05:31:40 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA26164; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 22:29:24 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 90114 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 18 Aug 2001 05:29:22          +0000
Received: from castor.ridgenet.net (IDENT:root@castor.ridgenet.net          [199.120.150.29]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA26150          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 22:29:22 -0700
Received: from kristinscomp (pm131.ridgenet.net [204.154.246.131]) by          castor.ridgenet.net (8.11.0/8.11.0) with SMTP id f7I5LeS31554; Fri,          17 Aug 2001 22:21:40 -0700
References:  <LPBBKJMJEOFKAMFJJNNHCEKLCGAA.landofgrey@gnc.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <004901c127a7$edc95160$1b30fea9@kristinscomp>
Date:         Fri, 17 Aug 2001 22:37:52 -0700
Reply-To: "Kristin & David Hall" <thehalls@RIDGENET.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Kristin & David Hall" <thehalls@RIDGENET.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Solid rocket boosters
Comments: To: landofgrey@gnc.net
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

> You have to ask the Air Force about the specific black and white
> requirements for command destruct systems. It's not quite accurate to say
> they blow it up to keep the rocket from coasting over populated areas. The
> pieces would still do the same (altough perhaps at not as great a range),
> and over an even wider CEP. Some range safety devices have the purpose of
> blowing up the rocket, but that is not an operational requirement. They
> terminate powered flight to keep the rocket or the pieces of it from
> coasting onto populated areas. To meet this goal, either vehicle
destruction
> or thrust termination will suffice. IIRC the role of the RSO (at least
here
> on the Esatern Range) does not mandate that the vehicle be destroyed,
> specifically. Two things are required: cessation of powered flight, and
> assurance that the vehicle *or its pieces* will not impact a populated
area

I suspect the key words here are "here on the Eastern Range".  You're not
landlocked and you aren't surrounded by civilian populated areas.  Out here
a range safety device is mandated to do the same two things BUT....To ensure
that the vehicle or pieces will not impact a populated area is not as simple
as just saying "blow it up before it gets a chance to head west!"  An AMRAAM
that is just "braindead" can go a *very* long way...longer than our ranges
are.  An AMRAAM that is tumbling end over end, on the other hand, won't make
it very far.  Thus, the only way to ensure that the vehicle or pieces
thereof do not make it off base is to do some sort of significant damage to
the vehicle that yields a vehicle that is aerodynamically unstable.
Usually, they just cut the aft end (ie, fins) off and the bird just begins
to tumble (tumbling chunks don't go very far!).  In the case of cruise
missiles and glide bombs, they generally just gut the wing off.  In any
event, simply stopping thrust is almost never acceptable.

> In the 1950's, and even today really, the most reliable and effective
means
> to achieve this was to simply blow the thing up. This is how it used to be
> anyway. You have to remember that if you terminate the thrust on a rocket,
> it will coast a certain distance that is predictable. If you blow it up
the
> *pieces* will coast a certain distance that is not predictable due to
> verying sizes and shapes. In fact, the shuttle SRB charges, while designed

True, but one thing can almost always (I wanted to say just plain "always"
but the second I say that there will be a counter example that I was unaware
of!) be said:  The pieces will not coast as far as the single chunk would
have.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 24020 invoked from network); 18 Aug 2001 05:44:21 -0000
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 18 Aug 2001 05:44:21 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 13047 invoked by uid 50005); 18 Aug 2001 05:43:25 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smptf.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.381364 secs); 18 Aug 2001 05:43:25 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 18 Aug 2001 05:43:24 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA26279; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 22:42:00 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 90127 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 18 Aug 2001 05:41:56          +0000
Received: from snipe.mail.pas.earthlink.net (snipe.mail.pas.earthlink.net          [207.217.120.62]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA26204          for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 22:31:56 -0700
Received: from earthlink.net (dialup-209.245.129.142.Dial1.SanJose1.Level3.net          [209.245.129.142]) by snipe.mail.pas.earthlink.net (EL-8_9_3_3/8.9.3)          with ESMTP id WAA21091; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 22:31:55 -0700 (PDT)
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.75 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.16-22 i686)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <F72uNjVuMhvqgStMVhE0000988c@hotmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B7DFE04.72041210@earthlink.net>
Date:         Fri, 17 Aug 2001 22:32:52 -0700
Reply-To: "David Weinshenker" <daze39@EARTHLINK.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "David Weinshenker" <daze39@EARTHLINK.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Concerns about micro turbopump wear
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Brian Reddeman wrote:
>
> First, I'd like to thank everyone on the deluge of liquid fuel rocket design
> sources.
>
> In redesigning my micro turbopump, I think I'm going to run into a possible
> problem of eventual wear of the shaft and blades (mainly the shaft). I'm
> considering cooling it with the fuel (either Ethanol or Kerosene)but could I
> get away with lubricating it with fuel as well(just a wild Idea I had if I
> go with Kerosene)? or am I worried about nothing at all save making sure the
> shaft is lubricated with something that won't react to to the oxidizer or
> the fuel(I'm going with H2O2).

Evidently RP-1 mixed with a fairly standard "extreme pressure" additive
makes a good light-viscosity gear oil - some turbopumps have flown
with "fuel additive blenders" instead of separate lubricating oil.

-dave w

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 5213 invoked from network); 18 Aug 2001 05:49:09 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 18 Aug 2001 05:49:09 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 8496 invoked by uid 50005); 18 Aug 2001 05:48:56 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (. Clean. Processed in 0.24583 secs); 18 Aug 2001 05:48:56 -0000
X-Qmail-Scanner-Mail-From: owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU via smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net
X-Qmail-Scanner-Rcpt-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
X-Qmail-Scanner: 0.96 (No viruses found. Processed in 0.24583 secs)
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 18 Aug 2001 05:48:56 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA26343; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 22:47:13 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 90158 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 18 Aug 2001 05:47:11          +0000
Received: from localhost (rcalkins@localhost) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with          ESMTP id WAA26329; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 22:47:10 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.LNX.4.10.10108172228000.24935-100000@itc.uci.edu>
Date:         Fri, 17 Aug 2001 22:47:09 -0700
Reply-To: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Solid rocket boosters
Comments: To: John Wickman <jwckman@SPACE-ROCKETS.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <NKEHJAOOKBPGIKOOPDEFIEFGCBAA.jwckman@space-rockets.com>

On Fri, 17 Aug 2001, John Wickman wrote:

> I think solids are generally safer than liquids and more reliable.
I dunno.  When I worked on the Scorpius pressure-fed LOx kero motor, I was
greatly impressed with it's simplicity and reliability.  Pumps?  Regen
cooling?  Uneeded.  Just a decent injector and the rest is a fairly simple
composite layup.  Just ask Eric at Aeronumerics about his Kimbo
experiences.  Once you get it to work, it's fairly trivial to repeat it.
Of course, that's the hardest thing for rocketry experimenters, stopping
the experimenting and going with "good enough".

As I see it, the big problem with solids is trajectory control, something
liquids excel at.  Also at orbital sizes, liquids and hybrids scale very
nicely.

Ray

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 8963 invoked from network); 18 Aug 2001 05:50:51 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 18 Aug 2001 05:50:51 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: (qmail 4489 invoked by uid 50005); 18 Aug 2001 05:51:10 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.569185 secs); 18 Aug 2001 05:51:10 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 18 Aug 2001 05:51:10 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA26384; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 22:49:03 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 90170 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 18 Aug 2001 05:49:02          +0000
Received: from cisco.com (cypher.cisco.com [171.69.11.18]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA26370 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri,          17 Aug 2001 22:49:01 -0700
Received: (from billw@localhost) by cisco.com (8.8.8/2.6/Cisco List          Logging/8.8.8) id WAA07990 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 17 Aug 2001          22:48:31 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID:  <CMM.0.90.4.998113711.billw@cypher>
Date:         Fri, 17 Aug 2001 22:48:31 PDT
Reply-To: "Bill Westfield" <billw@cisco.com>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "William Chops Westfield" <billw@cisco.com>
Subject:      Re: [AR] reliability Now we're talking statistics...
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  Your message of Fri, 17 Aug 2001 23:47:06 -0500

    Basically, they were saying that, given a failure probability of 1 in
    37 (which was the statistical probability of a catostrophic SRB
    failure), each time they flew successfully, they gained confidence and
    the chance for failure went down. In reality, statistically, if you
    have a probability of 1 in 37, then by the time you ge to the 25th
    flight, you're really pushing your luck. A one in 37 chance became 1
    in 12.

Um, NO.  If the probably of failure is 1 in 37, and you have 25 flights
with no failures, then the probability of failure on the 26th flight is
STILL 1 in 37.  Just because a coin turns up heads 10 times in a row,
doesn't mean that the 11th time isn't still a 50-50 chance.

Of course, there probably WAS data from those first 25 launches that would
have changed the probability statistics, had it been taken into account.
XYZ component didn't wear as much as expected, decrease failure
probability.  O-ring leak did occur, increase failure probability.

I'm not sure how you calculate a failure probability in a true statistical
sense, though.  Real world stuff tends to need measuring due to unexpected
interactions...

BillW


From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 9177 invoked from network); 18 Aug 2001 06:16:47 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 18 Aug 2001 06:16:47 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 1814 invoked by uid 50005); 18 Aug 2001 06:16:34 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (. Clean. Processed in 0.168871 secs); 18 Aug 2001 06:16:34 -0000
X-Qmail-Scanner-Mail-From: owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU via smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net
X-Qmail-Scanner-Rcpt-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
X-Qmail-Scanner: 0.96 (No viruses found. Processed in 0.168871 secs)
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 18 Aug 2001 06:16:34 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA26618; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 23:14:43 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 90230 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 18 Aug 2001 06:14:38          +0000
Received: from wrench.toolcity.net (root@wrench.toolcity.net [208.0.188.2]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA26604 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 23:14:37 -0700
Received: from [208.22.189.245]          (dap-208-22-189-245.meadville-tnt-0.pa.toolcity.net [208.22.189.245])          by wrench.toolcity.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id CAA16804; Sat, 18          Aug 2001 02:14:31 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <v01510100b7a3ba22cd8a@[208.11.233.154]>
Date:         Sat, 18 Aug 2001 02:16:51 -0500
Reply-To: "al bradley" <abradley@TOOLCITY.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "al bradley" <abradley@TOOLCITY.NET>
Subject:      [AR] 4Re: [AR] candy R&D
Comments: To: Jamie Morken <jmorken@HOME.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Hi Jamie:
>Is the end product brittle?  If you drop it on the floor does it break?  For
>comparison,
>you can throw a fist sized chunk of cooked icing sugar rocket fuel at a rock
>and it usually won't even break.

Even if it did break it might not prove that that would be a failure
factor. From what I see so far maybe shear strength and compressive
strength are what preserve the grain. A very hard grain such as I
experiment with may cover both those bases.
------------------
>Does the furnace cement bond well to the grain?  Perhaps epoxy resin would
>be a potentially good method too?
>
The questions I asked myself here was: If I could completely keep much of
the outer surface shielded from burning (until the last microsecond)
wouldn't a refractory material such as furnace cement be more predictable
than a semi-combustible material like epoxy resin?
------------------

>I think you are using a great technique for candy propellants.  Not case
>bonded but inhibited
>on the outside.  We have always case bonded our candy propellants (usually
>directly to a steel
>casing with no liner) but now I am starting to wonder if they weren't
>burning on the outside of the
>grain as well as the inside.  I don't trust this type of propellant to make
>its own casebond and I think
>it is best to use a liner to form the case bond or do as you are doing.

I think it is wise to question all that we do -- so often it is a spin-off
of others' mistakes and we are trapped in their errors, with no way to
distinguish them. Similar to what are known as the "errors of antiquity".
-------------------------

>> exactly the elusive right mixture to cook! My doctrine is to not make
>> things any harder than they have to be!
>
>You can cook a wide range of KNO3/icing sugar mixes.  The more icing sugar
>there is the more easier it is to
>stir (makes a difference when filling 20lbs of propellant and mixing by hand
>for several hours :)
>
>If you aren't having CATO's with your hydraulic press technique no need to
>mix though!  It would be interesting to see how this method scales up.
>
>best regards,
>Jamie
----------------------
Well I don't know what can yet evolve out of the press technique. I picked
up on it from an amateur pyrotechnician who had figured out how to make
better black powder. Of course I may ball-mill my pressing mix as long a
time as others cook their candy mixes. But I don't have to stand over a
"cooking". And worry about safety under heat. And, at about 6-ton pressure
in the pressing sleeve, I don't have to wonder if there are bubbles in it!
The gases would be expected to diffuse out of the slightly-moistened
pressing with no need for vacuum processing.

For now I like it very much. Maybe when I determine a good method of
scientific evaluation I will determine if I want to continue on with it or
modify it.

Experiment, alway experiment.
best regards,
al bradley

------------------------------------------------------------------
Can you live Life with this?: "Unless there is a law, an agreement, or a
long-standing custom, No one `Deserves' Anything -- Either Good or Bad!"

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 2835 invoked from network); 18 Aug 2001 06:53:42 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 18 Aug 2001 06:53:42 -0000
Received: (qmail 30840 invoked by uid 50005); 18 Aug 2001 06:53:29 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (. Clean. Processed in 0.178966 secs); 18 Aug 2001 06:53:29 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
X-Qmail-Scanner-Mail-From: owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU via smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net
X-Qmail-Scanner-Rcpt-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
X-Qmail-Scanner: 0.96 (No viruses found. Processed in 0.178966 secs)
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 18 Aug 2001 06:53:29 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA26868; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 23:51:37 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 90286 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 18 Aug 2001 06:51:30          +0000
Received: from smtp02.roc.gblx.net (smtp02.roc.gblx.net [209.130.222.197]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA26854 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 23:51:29 -0700
Received: (from daemon@localhost) by smtp02.roc.gblx.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id          CAA95378 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 18 Aug 2001 02:49:43 -0400
Received: from 64-208-224-101.nas2.TBR.gblx.net(64.208.224.101),          claiming to be "frontiernet.net" via SMTP by smtp02.roc.gblx.net,          id smtpdYW9DMa; Sat Aug 18 02:49:39 2001
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.74 [en] (Win98; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <NBEJKDFBFOEFALBMBCDPIEOLCCAA.jtaylor@nc.rr.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B7E1176.4149BD56@frontiernet.net>
Date:         Sat, 18 Aug 2001 02:55:50 -0400
Reply-To: <tbinford@frontiernet.net>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Tom Binford" <tbinford@frontiernet.net>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Going to Black Rock?
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Jeff Taylor wrote:
>
> Hey -
>
> Is anyone on the list planning to go to the BALLS launch at Black Rock in
> September?  I'm going, and I'd like to take this chance to meet as many
> people while I'm out there as I can.  I'll be bringing a small project with
> me on the plane, and I need some help on the propellant end.

I wish. All my >N motors will be static only this year. Maybe next
year...

Tom

>
> - Jeff Taylor

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 6415 invoked from network); 18 Aug 2001 06:55:23 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 18 Aug 2001 06:55:23 -0000
Received: (qmail 5766 invoked by uid 50005); 18 Aug 2001 06:55:42 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.145084 secs); 18 Aug 2001 06:55:42 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 18 Aug 2001 06:55:42 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA26897; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 23:53:35 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 90296 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 18 Aug 2001 06:53:34          +0000
Received: from localhost (rcalkins@localhost) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with          ESMTP id XAA26883; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 23:53:32 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.LNX.4.10.10108172346470.24935-100000@itc.uci.edu>
Date:         Fri, 17 Aug 2001 23:53:32 -0700
Reply-To: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Cotton candy?
Comments: To: kc2csh@JUNO.COM
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <20010817.200122.-3920719.0.kc2csh@juno.com>

On Fri, 17 Aug 2001 kc2csh@JUNO.COM wrote:

>   Thinking outloud, I am wondering if some of the brittleness of candy
> could be addressed by blending in a reinforcing fiber?  Perhaps a fiber
> that also provides a fuel source or a conductive pathway?  Fine AL wire?
> Cotton?
Exactly what I've been working on.  So far, it has been quite promising.
Some of the fibers I've explored: cellulose fibers (shredded paper in the
blender), cotton fiber, metamucil, tapioca starch (retained too much
water).


Lately, I'm been unable to get dry grains in the NM monsoon season, and
beginning to think of moving to hot melt (Nakka's process) or vacuum
dessication.

Ray

One interesting thing I've been considering is Compressed Cotton Candy.
Looks interested, but haven't found a cheap machine yet to explore.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 19544 invoked from network); 18 Aug 2001 07:42:47 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 18 Aug 2001 07:42:47 -0000
Received: (qmail 27646 invoked by uid 50005); 18 Aug 2001 07:43:06 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.155519 secs); 18 Aug 2001 07:43:06 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 18 Aug 2001 07:43:06 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA27174; Sat, 18 Aug 2001 00:40:30 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 90356 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 18 Aug 2001 07:40:27          +0000
Received: from localhost (rcalkins@localhost) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with          ESMTP id AAA27160; Sat, 18 Aug 2001 00:40:26 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.LNX.4.10.10108180029180.24935-100000@itc.uci.edu>
Date:         Sat, 18 Aug 2001 00:40:26 -0700
Reply-To: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
Subject:      Re: [AR] candy R&D
Comments: To: John Dom <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <F168N39x6HHGNZ4mF1I0000c29e@hotmail.com>

On Fri, 17 Aug 2001, John Dom wrote:

> >   Since all the materials are water soluable, what happens if you simply
> >make a saturated solution in distilled water, then let the water
> >evaporate off?
>
> After dissolving both, you'll have to evaporate the water (1).
> Next you end up with a crystal cake.
Interestingly enough, crystals don't seem to be formed untill it is too
dry to mold. Prior to that, it appears to be a glassy solid.  I've looked
at it under a 30 power microscope and no crystals were seen.  I'm going to
try a dye next, maybe I just missed them.

> Albeit probably more intimately mixed than attainable by fine powder
> mixing,
Very much more so, even better than the hot melt process with combined
ball milling.  It's mixed on the molecular level, pretty much.  The
kneading further blends it and breaks the crystals up, similar to cold
working steel.

> you'll have to mill the cake (2) and eventually screen this powder
> (3).
Where have you been John?  This isn't remotely true.  Suggest you read Mr.
Yawn's process for yourself - http://user.sfcc.net/jyawn/rcandy.htm

When the material is hot, and proper dryness, it is kneaded and molded,
about 200 degrees F, depending on dryness, recipie modification and pain
tolerance.  I'm beginning to think about a lobotomized bread machine for
this process.

Ray

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 18211 invoked from network); 18 Aug 2001 08:11:49 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 18 Aug 2001 08:11:49 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 26998 invoked by uid 50005); 18 Aug 2001 08:12:08 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.139741 secs); 18 Aug 2001 08:12:08 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 18 Aug 2001 08:12:08 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id BAA27290; Sat, 18 Aug 2001 01:08:16 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 90376 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 18 Aug 2001 08:08:11          +0000
Received: from idsoftware.com (predator.idsoftware.com [192.246.40.34]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id BAA27276 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Sat, 18 Aug 2001 01:08:10 -0700
Received: from [192.246.40.144] (account johnc HELO pluto.idsoftware.com) by          idsoftware.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 3.4.7) with ESMTP id 351344 for          AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 18 Aug 2001 03:08:09 -0500
X-Sender: johnc@mail.idsoftware.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.1
References: <4.3.1.2.20010817151706.02641398@mail.idsoftware.com>            <4.3.1.2.20010817030701.02690e60@mail.idsoftware.com>            <4.3.1.2.20010817030701.02690e60@mail.idsoftware.com>            <4.3.1.2.20010817151706.02641398@mail.idsoftware.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <4.3.1.2.20010818024400.03008af0@mail.idsoftware.com>
Date:         Sat, 18 Aug 2001 03:20:42 -0500
Reply-To: "John Carmack" <johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Carmack" <johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Solid rocket boosters
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <a0510032cb7a335251760@[63.27.96.152]>

Jerry Irvine wrote:


>>How was it going to do guidance and control?
>
>
>For 62 mi?
>2 choices:
>1. small wings and jets on crew compartment
>2. Gimballed nozzle (stock unit)

A single gimballed nozzle only gets you 2DOF.  Were you going to have
dedicated roll control jets in that case, or use some kind of jet vanes?

We are currently using four canted attitude control engines, but if our
access to peroxide dried up, I would strongly consider a single biprop or
hybrid engine with four jet vanes under the nozzle for main lift and 3DOF
attitude control, rather than trying to make four or more biprops or
hybrids work as attitude thrusters.



>>I could imagine adding SRB to a functional liquid vehicle, but an all-solid
>>X-Prize vehicle sounds like a huge gamble.  I'll grant that for production
>>vehicles, the performance and reliability may be similar, but for working
>>your way up through development, there is a lot to be said for being able
>>to load up a small amount of propellant, test something, load up a bit
>
>
>There's alot to be said for all tests being a full-up propulsion
>system that has been flight tested to altitude.

I would strongly disagree with this.

For example:  this Tuesday we had our first powered hop of a 145 pound
VTVL.  Using the same flight control software as our 45 pound vehicle, it
was pretty rapidly overcorrecting, and on the second test, we tipped it over.

After analyzing the data, I see that I need to cut the gain significantly,
which we will be testing tomorrow.

If this had been a flat-out run with a full load of propellant, we might
very well have lost the vehicle.

Requiring every tweak of the guidance system to run a full-up propulsion
system would be incredibly inefficient.  Getting a guidance system worked
out really well in all aspects is going to take at least a dozen flights.

I think that the implicit plan of a lot of the high end experimental
rocketry teams has been sort of backwards.  It seems to be "first we will
build a really big rocket and go really high, then we will add a guidance
system and head for orbit".

One has only to look at the first three or four hop attempts of our VTVL to
see why the idea of amateurs testing brand new guidance systems on big,
powerful rockets seems like a really bad idea.

The other side of highly incremental testing is that you can actually do a
whole lot more testing.  If you only do full-up tests, you basically have
to be out in the desert with all the paperwork done, which may only happen
a couple times a year.  Watching JPA and SORAC go about pursuing the CATS
prize was informative.  You learn something each time you attempt to
launch, but if you only get three attempts a year, it may take five years
to get all the bugs worked out.

We have tried to pick a plan of attack that lets us get learning cycles
almost every week.



>>more, test something else, etc.  We have ten minute turnaround between
>>tests of our VTVL, and it has been extremely valuable.
>>
>>You mentioned in another post that you have a good supply of peroxide at
>>your shop.  Can you go into what you have used it for?
>
>
>Testing of ramjet prototypes.  So far it is not working, but we will see.

Are you using a monoprop engine as a poor-man's supersonic wind tunnel?

John Carmack

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 24158 invoked from network); 18 Aug 2001 08:28:50 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 18 Aug 2001 08:28:50 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 5161 invoked by uid 50005); 18 Aug 2001 08:27:54 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smptf.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.103222 secs); 18 Aug 2001 08:27:54 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 18 Aug 2001 08:27:54 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id BAA27380; Sat, 18 Aug 2001 01:26:10 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 90393 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 18 Aug 2001 08:26:03          +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (f140.law15.hotmail.com [64.4.23.140]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id BAA27366 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Sat, 18 Aug 2001 01:26:02 -0700
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Sat,          18 Aug 2001 01:25:32 -0700
Received: from 213.224.83.110 by lw15fd.law15.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Sat,          18 Aug 2001 08:25:31 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [213.224.83.110]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 18 Aug 2001 08:25:32.0187 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[589AEEB0:01C127BF]
Message-ID:  <F140aWdMtr1m7YDopT50000ccb3@hotmail.com>
Date:         Sat, 18 Aug 2001 08:26:03 +0000
Reply-To: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Cotton candy?
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Quote RC:

Perhaps a fiber
> > that also provides a fuel source or a conductive pathway?  Fine AL wire?
> > Cotton?
>Exactly what I've been working on.  So far, it has been quite promising.
>Some of the fibers I've explored: cellulose fibers (shredded paper in the
>blender), cotton fiber, metamucil, tapioca starch (retained too much
>water).

Indeed starch is sort of a sugar polymer but a starch a fiber(?). So is
cellulose (wood, leaves) chemically speaking a polymerised sugar strands...

Talking binders in candy propellant is an entire new field to explore.
I wonder what the necessary (chemical) properties of such 'd have to obtain
better or equal combustion.

Any idea about the solids density increase obtainable by 6 ton compression
of KN/sucrose/sorbitol?

jd

_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 6064 invoked from network); 18 Aug 2001 08:34:36 -0000
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 18 Aug 2001 08:34:36 -0000
Received: (qmail 11058 invoked by uid 50005); 18 Aug 2001 08:33:40 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smptf.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.178116 secs); 18 Aug 2001 08:33:40 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 18 Aug 2001 08:33:39 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id BAA27473; Sat, 18 Aug 2001 01:32:32 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 90419 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 18 Aug 2001 08:32:19          +0000
Received: from femail4.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail4.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.0.95.84]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id BAA27453 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 18 Aug 2001 01:32:19 -0700
Received: from hal2001 ([24.77.53.16]) by femail4.sdc1.sfba.home.com (InterMail          vM.4.01.03.20 201-229-121-120-20010223) with SMTP id          <20010818083213.IUSW18847.femail4.sdc1.sfba.home.com@hal2001> for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 18 Aug 2001 01:32:13 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <006e01c127bf$2669f6c0$0400a8c0@hatjs>
Date:         Sat, 18 Aug 2001 01:24:07 -0700
Reply-To: "Jamie Morken" <jmorken@HOME.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jamie Morken" <jmorken@HOME.COM>
Subject:      [AR] earth magnetic field sensors
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Hi all,

What kind of attitude information can be obtained from a 3axis magnetic
sensor?  Is a compass just one sensor or is it two?

best regards,
Jamie

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 26696 invoked from network); 18 Aug 2001 08:44:13 -0000
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 18 Aug 2001 08:44:13 -0000
Received: (qmail 22568 invoked by uid 50005); 18 Aug 2001 08:43:14 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smptf.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 1.460862 secs); 18 Aug 2001 08:43:14 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 18 Aug 2001 08:43:10 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id BAA27666; Sat, 18 Aug 2001 01:42:07 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 90492 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 18 Aug 2001 08:42:00          +0000
Received: from femail4.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail4.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.0.95.84]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id BAA27652 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 18 Aug 2001 01:42:00 -0700
Received: from hal2001 ([24.77.53.16]) by femail4.sdc1.sfba.home.com (InterMail          vM.4.01.03.20 201-229-121-120-20010223) with SMTP id          <20010818084154.IWXZ18847.femail4.sdc1.sfba.home.com@hal2001> for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 18 Aug 2001 01:41:54 -0700
References: <4.3.1.2.20010817151706.02641398@mail.idsoftware.com>                      <4.3.1.2.20010817030701.02690e60@mail.idsoftware.com>                      <4.3.1.2.20010817030701.02690e60@mail.idsoftware.com>                      <4.3.1.2.20010817151706.02641398@mail.idsoftware.com>             <4.3.1.2.20010818024400.03008af0@mail.idsoftware.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <007501c127c0$80c85020$0400a8c0@hatjs>
Date:         Sat, 18 Aug 2001 01:33:48 -0700
Reply-To: "Jamie Morken" <jmorken@HOME.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jamie Morken" <jmorken@HOME.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Solid rocket boosters
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Hi all,

Could a single gimballed nozzle with 2DOF potentially get a rocket to orbit
reliably?

best regards,
Jamie


----- Original Message -----
From: John Carmack <johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Saturday, August 18, 2001 1:20 AM
Subject: Re: [AR] Solid rocket boosters


> Jerry Irvine wrote:
>
>
> >>How was it going to do guidance and control?
> >
> >
> >For 62 mi?
> >2 choices:
> >1. small wings and jets on crew compartment
> >2. Gimballed nozzle (stock unit)
>
> A single gimballed nozzle only gets you 2DOF.  Were you going to have
> dedicated roll control jets in that case, or use some kind of jet vanes?
>
> We are currently using four canted attitude control engines, but if our
> access to peroxide dried up, I would strongly consider a single biprop or
> hybrid engine with four jet vanes under the nozzle for main lift and 3DOF
> attitude control, rather than trying to make four or more biprops or
> hybrids work as attitude thrusters.
>
>
>
> >>I could imagine adding SRB to a functional liquid vehicle, but an
all-solid
> >>X-Prize vehicle sounds like a huge gamble.  I'll grant that for
production
> >>vehicles, the performance and reliability may be similar, but for
working
> >>your way up through development, there is a lot to be said for being
able
> >>to load up a small amount of propellant, test something, load up a bit
> >
> >
> >There's alot to be said for all tests being a full-up propulsion
> >system that has been flight tested to altitude.
>
> I would strongly disagree with this.
>
> For example:  this Tuesday we had our first powered hop of a 145 pound
> VTVL.  Using the same flight control software as our 45 pound vehicle, it
> was pretty rapidly overcorrecting, and on the second test, we tipped it
over.
>
> After analyzing the data, I see that I need to cut the gain significantly,
> which we will be testing tomorrow.
>
> If this had been a flat-out run with a full load of propellant, we might
> very well have lost the vehicle.
>
> Requiring every tweak of the guidance system to run a full-up propulsion
> system would be incredibly inefficient.  Getting a guidance system worked
> out really well in all aspects is going to take at least a dozen flights.
>
> I think that the implicit plan of a lot of the high end experimental
> rocketry teams has been sort of backwards.  It seems to be "first we will
> build a really big rocket and go really high, then we will add a guidance
> system and head for orbit".
>
> One has only to look at the first three or four hop attempts of our VTVL
to
> see why the idea of amateurs testing brand new guidance systems on big,
> powerful rockets seems like a really bad idea.
>
> The other side of highly incremental testing is that you can actually do a
> whole lot more testing.  If you only do full-up tests, you basically have
> to be out in the desert with all the paperwork done, which may only happen
> a couple times a year.  Watching JPA and SORAC go about pursuing the CATS
> prize was informative.  You learn something each time you attempt to
> launch, but if you only get three attempts a year, it may take five years
> to get all the bugs worked out.
>
> We have tried to pick a plan of attack that lets us get learning cycles
> almost every week.
>
>
>
> >>more, test something else, etc.  We have ten minute turnaround between
> >>tests of our VTVL, and it has been extremely valuable.
> >>
> >>You mentioned in another post that you have a good supply of peroxide at
> >>your shop.  Can you go into what you have used it for?
> >
> >
> >Testing of ramjet prototypes.  So far it is not working, but we will see.
>
> Are you using a monoprop engine as a poor-man's supersonic wind tunnel?
>
> John Carmack

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 9986 invoked from network); 18 Aug 2001 09:34:36 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 18 Aug 2001 09:34:36 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 31023 invoked by uid 50005); 18 Aug 2001 09:34:22 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (. Clean. Processed in 0.198724 secs); 18 Aug 2001 09:34:22 -0000
X-Qmail-Scanner-Mail-From: owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU via smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net
X-Qmail-Scanner-Rcpt-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
X-Qmail-Scanner: 0.96 (No viruses found. Processed in 0.198724 secs)
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 18 Aug 2001 09:34:22 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id CAA28214; Sat, 18 Aug 2001 02:32:22 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 90683 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 18 Aug 2001 09:32:11          +0000
Received: from localhost (rcalkins@localhost) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with          ESMTP id CAA28200; Sat, 18 Aug 2001 02:32:10 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.LNX.4.10.10108180155560.27888-100000@itc.uci.edu>
Date:         Sat, 18 Aug 2001 02:32:10 -0700
Reply-To: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Cotton candy?
Comments: To: John Dom <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <F140aWdMtr1m7YDopT50000ccb3@hotmail.com>

On Sat, 18 Aug 2001, John Dom wrote:

> Quote RC:
>
> Perhaps a fiber
> > > that also provides a fuel source or a conductive pathway?  Fine AL wire?
> > > Cotton?
> >Exactly what I've been working on.  So far, it has been quite promising.
> >Some of the fibers I've explored: cellulose fibers (shredded paper in the
> >blender), cotton fiber, metamucil, tapioca starch (retained too much
> >water).
>
> Indeed starch is sort of a sugar polymer but a starch a fiber(?).
Well, the package called it tapioca flour, and kneading some wetted powder
quickly produced the characteristic gluten structure, so yes, fibers.  I'm
not sure about starch polymerization, but they show someting quite similar
to cross-linking when heated in solution.

> Talking binders in candy propellant is an entire new field to explore.
> I wonder what the necessary (chemical) properties of such 'd have to obtain
> better or equal combustion.
I did a series of experiments, varying the amount of cellulose, eventually
replacing the entire sucrose content with celulose.  This burned quite
well with a slightly faster burn rate, Propep shows a slight Isp increase.
I didn't like it's physical characteristics, though.  The last few percent
of water removal produced very high shrinkages, totally unsuitable for a
large propellant grain.  It smelled interesting.

Some of the other things I've got on the shelf to try:  guar gum,
glycerine, corn starch, merangue(sp?) powder, xanthan gum, agar, gelatin,
oats, aluminum wool, flocked cotton fiber, pulped kevlar, chopped carbon
fiber and egg whites.  At some point, something will work, I'm totally
confident.  About 10% Honey seems to work fairly well, I think it impedes
sugar crystal formation, allowing a dryer product while still maintaining
good flexibility.  I've also been working with cream of tartar in an
attempt to modify KNO3 crystal sizes, results are inconclusive.

Right now, I'm wondering about the combustion characteristics of Elmer's
school glue or glue-all.  It's water soluble, flexible, non-toxic, easy
clean-up and inexpensive.  Might just work as a binder for AN/Sucrose too,
solve the problems I've been having there.

Note, first attempt at ascorbic acid buffering is inconclusive.  For most
of the drying process, there was no browning at low temps.  When I raised
the temp, near the end of the drying process, the sugar was attacked.  I
used approximately 10% by weight, but this was not a carefully measured
test, kind of "let's see if this works".  I have had limited success with
dextrose and AN, with light browning, but the stuff is highly hydroscopic
so I have never completely gotten a batch dry.


> Any idea about the solids density increase obtainable by 6 ton compression
> of KN/sucrose/sorbitol?
Not as high as the other processes, I'm sure.  It's basically a sintering
operation, leaving lots of tiny voids unless you heat it to very near
melting temps. This is why Al can file his fingernails on it.  I bet you
could blow air through it too.  He probably has an excellent burn rate
with it considering the increased burning surface area.  Are these
suppositions all true, Al?


Ray

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 120 invoked from network); 18 Aug 2001 09:44:25 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 18 Aug 2001 09:44:25 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 15395 invoked by uid 50005); 18 Aug 2001 09:44:44 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.256959 secs); 18 Aug 2001 09:44:44 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 18 Aug 2001 09:44:43 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id CAA28279; Sat, 18 Aug 2001 02:42:02 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 90696 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 18 Aug 2001 09:41:58          +0000
Received: from cicero0.cybercity.dk (cicero0.cybercity.dk [212.242.40.52]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id CAA28264 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 18 Aug 2001 02:41:57 -0700
Received: from usr00.cybercity.dk (usr00.cybercity.dk [212.242.40.34]) by          cicero0.cybercity.dk (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9FEF71029FB for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 18 Aug 2001 11:41:55 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from vip.cybercity.dk (port8.cvx1-noe.ppp.cybercity.dk          [217.157.69.201]) by usr00.cybercity.dk (8.11.2/8.11.0) with ESMTP id          f7I9fsx06985 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 18 Aug 2001 11:41:54          +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from hot@vip.cybercity.dk)
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.75 [en] (Win95; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <Pine.LNX.4.10.10108172346470.24935-100000@itc.uci.edu>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B7E3AB6.78891394@vip.cybercity.dk>
Date:         Sat, 18 Aug 2001 11:51:50 +0200
Reply-To: "Hans Olaf Toft" <hot@VIP.CYBERCITY.DK>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Hans Olaf Toft" <hot@VIP.CYBERCITY.DK>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Cotton candy?
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

How about paper pulp?
- My own very limited experiments adding cutton and carbon fibres to candy
were not very promising in terms of casting properties. I would guess however
that paper pulp could be suitable, and that it would have very little impact
on the combustion properties for the resulting propellant.

Hans Olaf Toft

Ray Calkins wrote:

> On Fri, 17 Aug 2001 kc2csh@JUNO.COM wrote:
>
> >   Thinking outloud, I am wondering if some of the brittleness of candy
> > could be addressed by blending in a reinforcing fiber?  Perhaps a fiber
> > that also provides a fuel source or a conductive pathway?  Fine AL wire?
> > Cotton?
> Exactly what I've been working on.  So far, it has been quite promising.
> Some of the fibers I've explored: cellulose fibers (shredded paper in the
> blender), cotton fiber, metamucil, tapioca starch (retained too much
> water).
>
> Lately, I'm been unable to get dry grains in the NM monsoon season, and
> beginning to think of moving to hot melt (Nakka's process) or vacuum
> dessication.
>
> Ray
>
> One interesting thing I've been considering is Compressed Cotton Candy.
> Looks interested, but haven't found a cheap machine yet to explore.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 29490 invoked from network); 18 Aug 2001 09:59:16 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 18 Aug 2001 09:59:16 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 27132 invoked by uid 50005); 18 Aug 2001 09:59:34 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.233181 secs); 18 Aug 2001 09:59:34 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 18 Aug 2001 09:59:33 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id CAA28440; Sat, 18 Aug 2001 02:56:56 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 90747 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 18 Aug 2001 09:56:53          +0000
Received: from cicero1.cybercity.dk (cicero1.cybercity.dk [212.242.40.4]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id CAA28426 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 18 Aug 2001 02:56:52 -0700
Received: from usr00.cybercity.dk (usr00.cybercity.dk [212.242.40.34]) by          cicero1.cybercity.dk (Postfix) with ESMTP id 09FE115FC93 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 18 Aug 2001 11:56:51 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from vip.cybercity.dk (port8.cvx1-noe.ppp.cybercity.dk          [217.157.69.201]) by usr00.cybercity.dk (8.11.2/8.11.0) with ESMTP id          f7I9unx11609 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 18 Aug 2001 11:56:49          +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from hot@vip.cybercity.dk)
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.75 [en] (Win95; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <006e01c127bf$2669f6c0$0400a8c0@hatjs>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B7E3E35.76B94E42@vip.cybercity.dk>
Date:         Sat, 18 Aug 2001 12:06:45 +0200
Reply-To: "Hans Olaf Toft" <hot@VIP.CYBERCITY.DK>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Hans Olaf Toft" <hot@VIP.CYBERCITY.DK>
Subject:      Re: [AR] earth magnetic field sensors
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Hi Jamie
The magnetic field vector is (at least for low altitude flights) to be
considered constant in terms of both magnitude and direction. Measuring and
recording the time history of the magnetic field  from a 3-axix
magnetometer will allow You to figure out the rocket pitches and rolls with
respect to the (fixed) earth magnetic field vector. Converting to a
coordinate system of Your own liking may be done either by measureing the
earth magnetic field vector in that particular coordinate system, or simply
by offsetting the initial conditions.

Net result is, that the output from a 3-axis magnetometer is almost like
the output from a 3-axis gyro - unless You are travelling along the
magnetic field vector where any roll will be undetected.

I have flown (flux gate) magnetometers on a couple of occations. The data
processing and results may be fouynd at:
http://inet.uni2.dk/~dark/TechNotes/HOT/Magnetometer1.html
- there *may* be other ways to process the data.

Hans Olaf Toft

Jamie Morken wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> What kind of attitude information can be obtained from a 3axis magnetic
> sensor?  Is a compass just one sensor or is it two?
>
> best regards,
> Jamie

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 2455 invoked from network); 18 Aug 2001 14:35:20 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 18 Aug 2001 14:35:20 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 17598 invoked by uid 50005); 18 Aug 2001 14:35:05 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (. Clean. Processed in 0.187055 secs); 18 Aug 2001 14:35:05 -0000
X-Qmail-Scanner-Mail-From: owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU via smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net
X-Qmail-Scanner-Rcpt-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
X-Qmail-Scanner: 0.96 (No viruses found. Processed in 0.187055 secs)
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 18 Aug 2001 14:35:05 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA29563; Sat, 18 Aug 2001 07:32:38 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 90921 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 18 Aug 2001 14:32:31          +0000
Received: from spsystems.net (spsystems.net [209.47.149.227]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA29549 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Sat,          18 Aug 2001 07:32:30 -0700
Received: (from henry@localhost) by spsystems.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id KAA26584;          Sat, 18 Aug 2001 10:31:51 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010818103011.26212A-100000@spsystems.net>
Date:         Sat, 18 Aug 2001 10:31:50 -0400
Reply-To: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] earth magnetic field sensors
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <006e01c127bf$2669f6c0$0400a8c0@hatjs>

On Sat, 18 Aug 2001, Jamie Morken wrote:
> What kind of attitude information can be obtained from a 3axis magnetic
> sensor?

It will give you two axes of attitude.  Not three, alas; it cannot detect
rotation around an axis lined up with the local magnetic field.

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 17800 invoked from network); 18 Aug 2001 14:50:46 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 18 Aug 2001 14:50:46 -0000
Received: (qmail 8150 invoked by uid 50005); 18 Aug 2001 14:49:48 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smptf.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 1.318139 secs); 18 Aug 2001 14:49:48 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 18 Aug 2001 14:49:45 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA29603; Sat, 18 Aug 2001 07:35:34 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 90932 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 18 Aug 2001 14:35:33          +0000
Received: from spsystems.net (spsystems.net [209.47.149.227]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA29589 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Sat,          18 Aug 2001 07:35:32 -0700
Received: (from henry@localhost) by spsystems.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id KAA26635;          Sat, 18 Aug 2001 10:34:53 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010818103254.26212B-100000@spsystems.net>
Date:         Sat, 18 Aug 2001 10:34:53 -0400
Reply-To: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Solid rocket boosters
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <007501c127c0$80c85020$0400a8c0@hatjs>

On Sat, 18 Aug 2001, Jamie Morken wrote:
> Could a single gimballed nozzle with 2DOF potentially get a rocket to orbit
> reliably?

Only if you either (a) had something else to do roll control or (b) were
very lucky and had minimal roll torques.

LockMart's Athena I goes most of the way to orbit with a single gimbaled
nozzle, and then finishes the job with another.  But it has a separate
thruster package for roll control.  (Doesn't need to be a *big* thruster
package, but it has to be there.)

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 29218 invoked from network); 18 Aug 2001 15:14:19 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 18 Aug 2001 15:14:19 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 24370 invoked by uid 50005); 18 Aug 2001 15:14:04 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (. Clean. Processed in 0.256041 secs); 18 Aug 2001 15:14:04 -0000
X-Qmail-Scanner-Mail-From: owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU via smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net
X-Qmail-Scanner-Rcpt-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
X-Qmail-Scanner: 0.96 (No viruses found. Processed in 0.256041 secs)
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 18 Aug 2001 15:14:04 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA29671; Sat, 18 Aug 2001 07:45:51 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 90945 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 18 Aug 2001 14:45:41          +0000
Received: from spsystems.net (spsystems.net [209.47.149.227]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA29657 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Sat,          18 Aug 2001 07:45:40 -0700
Received: (from henry@localhost) by spsystems.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id KAA26937;          Sat, 18 Aug 2001 10:45:01 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010818104022.26212C-100000@spsystems.net>
Date:         Sat, 18 Aug 2001 10:45:01 -0400
Reply-To: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Concerns about micro turbopump wear
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <3B7DFE04.72041210@earthlink.net>

On Fri, 17 Aug 2001, David Weinshenker wrote:
> > considering cooling it with the fuel (either Ethanol or Kerosene)but could I
> > get away with lubricating it with fuel as well(just a wild Idea I had if I
> > go with Kerosene)? ...
>
> Evidently RP-1 mixed with a fairly standard "extreme pressure" additive
> makes a good light-viscosity gear oil - some turbopumps have flown
> with "fuel additive blenders" instead of separate lubricating oil.

Actually, most big-rocket turbopumps are propellant-lubricated, and have
been for a long time.  No additives either, just straight propellant.
Many of the propellants are not particularly *good* lubricants, but given
the relatively short operating times involved, it's acceptable... and
often a lot less hassle than finding a propellant-compatible lubricant.

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 29088 invoked from network); 18 Aug 2001 15:25:19 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 18 Aug 2001 15:25:19 -0000
Received: (qmail 18777 invoked by uid 50005); 18 Aug 2001 15:24:21 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smptf.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.275084 secs); 18 Aug 2001 15:24:21 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 18 Aug 2001 15:24:21 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA29822; Sat, 18 Aug 2001 08:09:45 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 90977 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 18 Aug 2001 15:09:42          +0000
Received: from spsystems.net (spsystems.net [209.47.149.227]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA29808 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Sat,          18 Aug 2001 08:09:41 -0700
Received: (from henry@localhost) by spsystems.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id LAA27354;          Sat, 18 Aug 2001 11:09:02 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010818105321.26212D-100000@spsystems.net>
Date:         Sat, 18 Aug 2001 11:09:02 -0400
Reply-To: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] reliability Now we're talking statistics...
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <CMM.0.90.4.998113711.billw@cypher>

On Fri, 17 Aug 2001, William Chops Westfield wrote:
> Um, NO.  If the probably of failure is 1 in 37, and you have 25 flights
> with no failures, then the probability of failure on the 26th flight is
> STILL 1 in 37.  Just because a coin turns up heads 10 times in a row,
> doesn't mean that the 11th time isn't still a 50-50 chance.

Otherwise known as "the dice have no memory".

The probability of a run of 26 successes, and the probability of a success
on the 26th try *given that you have already succeeded on the first 25*,
are very different things.

> Of course, there probably WAS data from those first 25 launches that would
> have changed the probability statistics, had it been taken into account.
> XYZ component didn't wear as much as expected, decrease failure
> probability.  O-ring leak did occur, increase failure probability.

Not to mention changes that were made.  Most notably, they twice increased
the pressure used in the leak tests (pressurize the space between the two
O-rings and measure the leak rate... thus moving the inner O-ring inward,
so it has to move back before it can seal against pressure from inside),
and the rate of O-ring erosion incidents went up both times.  Bad sign,
but nobody noticed.

> I'm not sure how you calculate a failure probability in a true statistical
> sense, though.

It's distinctly tricky, even if you ignore data about the subsystems and
simply treat the rocket as a whole.  Just dividing successes by attempts
is not really right.  Clearly you have more confidence in a rocket that
failed four times in its first ten flights but has been reliable ever
since, than in one which has had four failures scattered through its
flight history.  Trying to account for this gets complicated; given the
fairly short available history for most rockets, simply dividing the
flights into a development period and an operational period is not very
realistic, since by any rational accounting most "operational" rockets are
still really in their development period (and many of them never get out
of it, because significant design changes get made first).

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 23615 invoked from network); 18 Aug 2001 15:34:04 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 18 Aug 2001 15:34:04 -0000
Received: (qmail 12448 invoked by uid 50005); 18 Aug 2001 15:33:49 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (. Clean. Processed in 0.172294 secs); 18 Aug 2001 15:33:49 -0000
X-Qmail-Scanner-Mail-From: owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU via smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net
X-Qmail-Scanner-Rcpt-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
X-Qmail-Scanner: 0.96 (No viruses found. Processed in 0.172294 secs)
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 18 Aug 2001 15:33:49 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA29898; Sat, 18 Aug 2001 08:18:53 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 90994 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 18 Aug 2001 15:18:51          +0000
Received: from femail21.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail21.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.0.95.146]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA29884          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 18 Aug 2001 08:18:50 -0700
Received: from hal2001 ([24.77.53.16]) by femail21.sdc1.sfba.home.com          (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20 201-229-121-120-20010223) with SMTP id          <20010818151844.OANZ24034.femail21.sdc1.sfba.home.com@hal2001> for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 18 Aug 2001 08:18:44 -0700
References:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010818103011.26212A-100000@spsystems.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <002601c127f7$efe2ad20$0400a8c0@hatjs>
Date:         Sat, 18 Aug 2001 08:10:37 -0700
Reply-To: "Jamie Morken" <jmorken@HOME.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jamie Morken" <jmorken@HOME.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] earth magnetic field sensors
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Hi all,

> > What kind of attitude information can be obtained from a 3axis magnetic
> > sensor?
>
> It will give you two axes of attitude.  Not three, alas; it cannot detect
> rotation around an axis lined up with the local magnetic field.

Would a potential solution to this "roll detection" problem be to have roll
control that actively keeps
one side of the rocket always pointed South with two of the magnetic sensors
active axis' then pointing East and West?
This would be assuming the local magnetic field is approximately flat with
the surface of the earth and that the rocket is travelling at an angle above
or below this plane.

best regards,
Jamie

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 24380 invoked from network); 20 Aug 2001 01:39:17 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 20 Aug 2001 01:39:17 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 9243 invoked by uid 50005); 20 Aug 2001 01:39:26 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.227166 secs); 20 Aug 2001 01:39:26 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 20 Aug 2001 01:39:26 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA05349; Sun, 19 Aug 2001 18:36:58 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 91045 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 20 Aug 2001 01:35:37          +0000
Received: from femail31.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail31.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.254.60.21]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA30183          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 18 Aug 2001 09:25:45 -0700
Received: from home.com ([24.22.71.82]) by femail31.sdc1.sfba.home.com          (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20 201-229-121-120-20010223) with ESMTP id          <20010818162540.ITZK4346.femail31.sdc1.sfba.home.com@home.com>; Sat,          18 Aug 2001 09:25:40 -0700
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.75 [en] (Win98; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <CMM.0.90.4.998076120.billw@cypher>            <3B7CC661.63331DEA@biomicro.com>            <044a01c12772$c6f3b560$6601a8c0@home.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <39DB5A5B.BC9383F4@home.com>
Date:         Wed, 4 Oct 2000 12:27:07 -0400
Reply-To: "Mark Simpson" <mark.simpson@HOME.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Mark Simpson" <mark.simpson@HOME.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] urethane fuel?
Comments: To: Brian Kosko <bkosko1@home.com>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Good thing that you haven't smelled HCN. If you get a big enough whiff, you
only get the opportunity once. ;-)
I'm not surprised that it is said to smell a little like almonds. Laetril
or B17, as it's also called (the illegal drug used to "cure" cancer) is made
from almonds and contains cyanide.  It is believed that the release of
cyanide  and benzaldehyde poisons the cancer cells.

Mark Simpson

Brian Kosko wrote:

> Cyanide, at least in HCN form, is supposed to have an almond like smell.
> Can't personally attest to that though.
>
> Brian
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Mark K. Spute" <mks@BIOMICRO.COM>
> To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
> Sent: Friday, August 17, 2001 1:23 AM
> Subject: Re: [AR] urethane fuel?
>
> > Dunno, Bill.
> >
> > I've never intentionally smelled cyanide.  (Don't know anyone who has,
> > either.)  :)
> >
> > William Chops Westfield wrote:
> > [Snip of previous post]
> >
> > > Urethanes are the ones that smell like cyanide, right?
> >
> > --
> > Mark K. Spute
> > Senior Research Engineer
> > BioMicro Systems Inc.
> >
> > KD7IWE,  RRS
> >
> > "It is difficult to say what is impossible, for the dream of yesterday
> > is the hope of today and the reality of tomorrow."
> >      Dr. Robert H. Goddard

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 26990 invoked from network); 20 Aug 2001 01:40:01 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 20 Aug 2001 01:40:01 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 19117 invoked by uid 50005); 20 Aug 2001 01:38:56 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smptf.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.210988 secs); 20 Aug 2001 01:38:56 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 20 Aug 2001 01:38:56 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA05323; Sun, 19 Aug 2001 18:34:37 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 91043 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 20 Aug 2001 01:34:05          +0000
Received: from ares.idirect.com (ares.idirect.com [207.136.80.180]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA30171 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 18 Aug 2001 09:24:54 -0700
Received: from .idirect.com (on-osh-ahp-01-40.look.ca [216.154.47.40]) by          ares.idirect.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id MAA14277; Sat, 18 Aug          2001 12:26:19 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="ISO-8859-1"
X-Mailer: BeOS Mail
Message-ID:  <200108181626.MAA14277@ares.idirect.com>
Date:         Sat, 18 Aug 2001 12:24:22 EDT
Reply-To: <earlcp@idirect.com>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Earl Colby Pottinger" <earlcp@idirect.com>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Solid rocket boosters
Comments: To: Jerry Irvine <01rocket@GTE.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

>>Is anyone here confident enough in their solids that they would ride in a
>>vehicle that required two of them to perform safely and substantially
>>identically?
>
>
>I would ride in a vehicle with solids I designed and tested.
>Apparantly so would Burt Rutan as he suggested doing just that before
>going the x-cor route for the "recurring operations experience".
>
>An x-prixe motor has already been built and tested as a single solid
>and it has no crew capsule to launch because 3 crew capsule partners
>have failed to perform and quit.
>
>I figure an x-prize flight WITH PERMITS is possible in under a year
>with this system.  The money has already been invested and the only
>shortage now is a replacement crew compartment.  Crew seem to be a
>dime a dozen for historical missions.
>
>But drifting back on topic, any supplier who has had 3 consecutive
>firings of a particular design is a candidate for this 2 strap-on
>mission so long as some additional dynamic testing also occurs.  It
>wouldn't hurt to select a supplier with a few years of strap-on
>experience.
>
>Jerry

What about hybrids?  Simpler than most liquid designs, no
regenerative cooling needed, thrust can be slowly turn off,
most of the dISP of a solid fuel rocket.  Seems to be a
good match for manned suborbital flight.

          Earl Colby Pottinger

PS.  I assume Nitric Oxide is lots of people already doing it.
PSS. Plus the fuel is cheap.
PSSS. Shoud that be dISP or dISP*  ?????

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 29194 invoked from network); 20 Aug 2001 01:40:39 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 20 Aug 2001 01:40:39 -0000
Received: (qmail 10410 invoked by uid 50005); 20 Aug 2001 01:40:49 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.232511 secs); 20 Aug 2001 01:40:49 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 20 Aug 2001 01:40:48 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA05368; Sun, 19 Aug 2001 18:38:20 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 91065 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 20 Aug 2001 01:36:59          +0000
Received: from smtp001.mailsrvcs.net (smtp001pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.180])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA30296 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 18 Aug 2001 09:51:03 -0700
Received: from [63.24.225.67] (1Cust67.tnt1.rancho-cucamonga.ca.da.uu.net          [63.24.225.67]) by smtp001.mailsrvcs.net  with SMTP for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; id f7IGo8719453 Sat, 18 Aug 2001 11:50:09          -0500 (CDT)
X-Sender: 01rocket@mail.gte.net
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <v01510100630b7a04fffd@[63.24.225.9]>
Date:         Sat, 18 Aug 2001 11:50:09 -0500
Reply-To: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Solid rocket boosters
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

>Jerry Irvine wrote:
>
>
>>>How was it going to do guidance and control?
>>
>>
>>For 62 mi?
>>2 choices:
>>1. small wings and jets on crew compartment
>>2. Gimballed nozzle (stock unit)
>

I see you are raising alot of issues to try to flesh out our strategies.
Let me be vague.

>A single gimballed nozzle only gets you 2DOF.  Were you going to have
>dedicated roll control jets in that case, or use some kind of jet vanes?

Storable hypergolic and 3DOF gimballed nozzle or

4 gimballed nozzles

These are stock units.

>
>We are currently using four canted attitude control engines, but if our
>access to peroxide dried up, I would strongly consider a single biprop or
>hybrid engine with four jet vanes under the nozzle for main lift and 3DOF
>attitude control, rather than trying to make four or more biprops or
>hybrids work as attitude thrusters.
>
>
>
>>>I could imagine adding SRB to a functional liquid vehicle, but an all-solid
>>>X-Prize vehicle sounds like a huge gamble.  I'll grant that for production
>>>vehicles, the performance and reliability may be similar, but for working
>>>your way up through development, there is a lot to be said for being able
>>>to load up a small amount of propellant, test something, load up a bit
>>
>>
>>There's alot to be said for all tests being a full-up propulsion
>>system that has been flight tested to altitude.
>
>I would strongly disagree with this.
>
>For example:  this Tuesday we had our first powered hop of a 145 pound
>VTVL.  Using the same flight control software as our 45 pound vehicle, it
>was pretty rapidly overcorrecting, and on the second test, we tipped it over.
>
>After analyzing the data, I see that I need to cut the gain significantly,
>which we will be testing tomorrow.

We consider "gain" issues to be sufficiently critical and variable our
guidance software adjusts for it in flight.  Our sub-scale flights on a
variety of rocket sizes have benefited from this approach as the system is
useable with minor mods on all rocket sizes so far.  We still have some
damping issues to solve but our software is very crude.

>
>If this had been a flat-out run with a full load of propellant, we might
>very well have lost the vehicle.
>
>Requiring every tweak of the guidance system to run a full-up propulsion
>system would be incredibly inefficient.  Getting a guidance system worked
>out really well in all aspects is going to take at least a dozen flights.
>
>I think that the implicit plan of a lot of the high end experimental
>rocketry teams has been sort of backwards.  It seems to be "first we will
>build a really big rocket and go really high, then we will add a guidance
>system and head for orbit".

I admit to that "failed strategy."  But our first flights are specified to
be unguided.  By doing "dry runs" of guidance routines on rockets which are
unguided we can compare data from software calls in high performance flight
to live guidance tests on low performance flights and gain some insight.
Not much I assume however.


>
>One has only to look at the first three or four hop attempts of our VTVL to
>see why the idea of amateurs testing brand new guidance systems on big,
>powerful rockets seems like a really bad idea.

You seem to have a "steerable" system in the true sense.  Our only required
guidance is roll sensing and 2DOF guidance.  Everything else is superflous
or gravey.

>
>The other side of highly incremental testing is that you can actually do a
>whole lot more testing.  If you only do full-up tests, you basically have

Our sub-scale systems do provide this.  We test weekley as well on something.

>to be out in the desert with all the paperwork done, which may only happen
>a couple times a year.  Watching JPA and SORAC go about pursuing the CATS
>prize was informative.  You learn something each time you attempt to

www.v-serv.com/-upload for some entertainment.

>launch, but if you only get three attempts a year, it may take five years
>to get all the bugs worked out.
>
>We have tried to pick a plan of attack that lets us get learning cycles
>almost every week.
>
>
>
>>>more, test something else, etc.  We have ten minute turnaround between
>>>tests of our VTVL, and it has been extremely valuable.
>>>
>>>You mentioned in another post that you have a good supply of peroxide at
>>>your shop.  Can you go into what you have used it for?
>>
>>
>>Testing of ramjet prototypes.  So far it is not working, but we will see.
>
>Are you using a monoprop engine as a poor-man's supersonic wind tunnel?

No.  OUr supersonic drag models were worked out experimentally using
software I wrote along time ago.  Some day I may post it but as I have
stated before it is available at dejanews.com or deja.com as a
rec.models.rockets post.  Search for my name and either alt.bas or
althyd.bas.  There is also a reentry program calles rentry.bas. These are
old fashioned BASIC programs which can be slightly debugged for modern
interpreters or rewritten as needed.  I ask rewritten versions be emailed
to me.  Thanks.

>
>John Carmack

--
Jerry Irvine <mailto:01rocket@gte.net>
Box 1242, Claremont, CA 91711 USA
Opinion, the whole thing.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 6717 invoked from network); 20 Aug 2001 01:42:58 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 20 Aug 2001 01:42:58 -0000
Received: (qmail 1591 invoked by uid 50005); 20 Aug 2001 01:42:36 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (. Clean. Processed in 0.193285 secs); 20 Aug 2001 01:42:36 -0000
X-Qmail-Scanner-Mail-From: owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU via smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net
X-Qmail-Scanner-Rcpt-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
X-Qmail-Scanner: 0.96 (No viruses found. Processed in 0.193285 secs)
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 20 Aug 2001 01:42:35 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA05426; Sun, 19 Aug 2001 18:41:04 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 91337 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 20 Aug 2001 01:39:43          +0000
Received: from smtprelay3.abs.adelphia.net (smtprelay.abs.adelphia.net          [64.8.20.11]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA31375 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 18 Aug 2001 10:38:29 -0700
Received: from jlgrady ([63.124.251.47]) by smtprelay3.abs.adelphia.net          (Netscape Messaging Server 4.15) with SMTP id GI9YB501.SFP for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 18 Aug 2001 13:37:53 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook CWS, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <000901c1280c$e1c7f0a0$0200a8c0@prestige.net>
Date:         Sat, 18 Aug 2001 13:40:32 -0400
Reply-To: "Jeff Grady" <jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jeff Grady" <jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] candy R&D
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <001a01c1277d$eeb63b80$0400a8c0@hatjs>

Has anyone tried this:

Casting a single section candy grain 1/8" smaller than the pvc tube, wait
for the grain to cool/shrink. Then center the grain inside the pvc tube and
inject Durham's putty (does not shrink much if at all) into the 1/8" gap. To
keep the grain itself from moving up or down inside the casing, horizontal
grooves could be cut or cast into the grain prior to injecting the water
putty, giving the grain/putty a bit of a physical structural bond. The
problem of air pockets may be addressed by pulling a vacuum on the assembly
just after injection of the water putty...This came to mind much too easily,
so please hack away!

Jeff


<snip>

>> The pressing cylinder is a piece of modified PVC pipe with a steel
mandrel
>> for the core. The pressing plunger is cast from polyester resin. No heat
is
>> used at any time. The grains are about 1-1/8" in diameter at 65 grams.
>>
>> So far, no CATO'S. They are not formed in a motor casing, rather they are
>> coated on the outside with a thin layer of furnace cement to inhibit
>> combusion there. As a result they are NOT case-bonded in any way, in fact
>> may be slightly loose in their PVC motor case tube.
>>

>>Does the furnace cement bond well to the grain?  Perhaps epoxy resin would
>>be a potentially good method too?

>>I think you are using a great technique for candy propellants.  Not case
>>bonded but inhibited
>>on the outside.  We have always case bonded our candy propellants (usually
>>directly to a steel
>>casing with no liner) but now I am starting to wonder if they weren't
>>burning on the outside of the
>>grain as well as the inside.  I don't trust this type of propellant to
make
>>its own casebond and I think
>>it is best to use a liner to form the case bond or do as you are doing.

<snip>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 6784 invoked from network); 20 Aug 2001 01:42:59 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 20 Aug 2001 01:42:59 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 1604 invoked by uid 50005); 20 Aug 2001 01:42:37 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (. Clean. Processed in 0.163205 secs); 20 Aug 2001 01:42:37 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
X-Qmail-Scanner-Mail-From: owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU via smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net
X-Qmail-Scanner-Rcpt-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
X-Qmail-Scanner: 0.96 (No viruses found. Processed in 0.163205 secs)
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 20 Aug 2001 01:42:36 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA05398; Sun, 19 Aug 2001 18:39:42 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 91020 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 20 Aug 2001 01:38:21          +0000
Received: from po3.glue.umd.edu (po3.glue.umd.edu [128.8.10.123]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA29995 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 18 Aug 2001 08:31:39 -0700
Received: from y.glue.umd.edu (IDENT:root@y.glue.umd.edu [128.8.10.68]) by          po3.glue.umd.edu (8.10.1/8.10.1) with ESMTP id f7IFVb729316 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 18 Aug 2001 11:31:37 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from y.glue.umd.edu (IDENT:sendmail@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by          y.glue.umd.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id LAA07171 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 18 Aug 2001 11:31:37 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from localhost (acase@localhost) by y.glue.umd.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with          ESMTP id LAA07167 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 18 Aug 2001          11:31:37 -0400 (EDT)
X-Authentication-Warning: y.glue.umd.edu: acase owned process doing -bs
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.GSO.4.21.0108181114500.6539-100000@y.glue.umd.edu>
Date:         Sat, 18 Aug 2001 11:31:36 -0400
Reply-To: "Andrew Case" <acase@GLUE.UMD.EDU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Andrew Case" <acase@GLUE.UMD.EDU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Pistonless Piston Pumps with peroxide precat cycle
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <000b01c12796$ace8cc40$0100a8c0@mkbs>

On Sat, 18 Aug 2001, Russell McMahon wrote:

> A free floating "piston" could be used whose main purpose is to locate the
> fluid surface.

The piston also lets you run inverted, provided you have good seals.
Obviously running inverted is not ideal, but it's handy to have the
capability just in case.

> Metered flow COULD be used for switching but this is risky. As delivery
> pressure should be reasonably constant as long as gas pressure is constant
> this may be possible but I would favour an active scheme. Short cycling by
> switching pump chambers before the delivery chamber is empty reduces
> efficiency by dumping pressurised gas before it is necessary to do so, so
> should be avoided as much as where possible.  You will always have to swap
> over at least a short period before empty (or else!)

I've always envisioned dumping the some of the pressurant into the main
tank to keep main tank pressure up as it empties. Obviously you don't
dump all the pressurant into the main tank, or you end up with the
main tank pressurized to the pump pressure, which kind of defeates the
point. This adds complexity and takes up additional time (one reason
for three chambers instead of two, but it can be done with two, as
Henry points out), but it keeps the main tank pressure relatively
steady, and might be lighter than a dedicated pressurizing system.

> A floating piston would also help minimise foam and swirl and .... .

It also helps you know where your CG is, which is nice.

> Gas switching valves could be mechanically driven by eg a rotary "pump
> block" with passages in it or by eg solenoid valves. (Solenoid valves are
> also of course ultimately mechanical). Solenoid valves could be used as
> pilot valves to drive much larger pneumatic valving. My initial intention is
> to use solenoid valves directly for the prototype.

I really like the idea - for the proof of concept you could use soda
bottles, simple solenoid valves (or even hand operated ones), and the
height of the water spout as a pressure sensor. The only real issue to
work out in the initial stage is how smoothly you can switch over. Later
you can worry about higher pressures, lighter weights, pistons and so on.

Good luck.

......Andrew

Andrew Case                             |
acase@plasma.umd.edu                    |
Institute for Plasma Research           |
University of Maryland, College Park    |

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 12666 invoked from network); 20 Aug 2001 01:44:28 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 20 Aug 2001 01:44:28 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 24655 invoked by uid 50005); 20 Aug 2001 01:43:23 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smptf.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.197787 secs); 20 Aug 2001 01:43:23 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 20 Aug 2001 01:43:23 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA05445; Sun, 19 Aug 2001 18:42:30 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 91457 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 20 Aug 2001 01:41:05          +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (f14.law15.hotmail.com [64.4.23.14]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA32037 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Sat,          18 Aug 2001 12:37:17 -0700
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Sat,          18 Aug 2001 12:36:47 -0700
Received: from 213.224.83.70 by lw15fd.law15.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Sat, 18          Aug 2001 19:36:46 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [213.224.83.70]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 18 Aug 2001 19:36:47.0033 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[1E48BA90:01C1281D]
Message-ID:  <F140nLPprIFwBMa6kbk0000d140@hotmail.com>
Date:         Mon, 20 Aug 2001 01:41:05 +0000
Reply-To: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      [AR] GUIPEP
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

In GUIPEP, I read -1924 for acetic acid. Units anybody?
                   -234 for SrNO3
Thanks,

jd




_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 17809 invoked from network); 20 Aug 2001 01:45:54 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 20 Aug 2001 01:45:54 -0000
Received: (qmail 17955 invoked by uid 50005); 20 Aug 2001 01:46:04 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.451252 secs); 20 Aug 2001 01:46:04 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 20 Aug 2001 01:46:04 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA05467; Sun, 19 Aug 2001 18:43:52 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 91462 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 20 Aug 2001 01:42:31          +0000
Received: from wrench.toolcity.net (root@wrench.toolcity.net [208.0.188.2]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA32167 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 18 Aug 2001 13:04:16 -0700
Received: from [208.22.189.15]          (dap-208-22-189-15.meadville-tnt-0.pa.toolcity.net [208.22.189.15])          by wrench.toolcity.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id QAA24163; Sat, 18          Aug 2001 16:04:11 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <v01510100b7a48545a00d@[208.22.189.245]>
Date:         Sat, 18 Aug 2001 16:06:32 -0500
Reply-To: "al bradley" <abradley@TOOLCITY.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "al bradley" <abradley@TOOLCITY.NET>
Subject:      [AR] 2b Re: [AR] Candy tests: Was -- Re: [AR] ERPS successfully              runs              H2O2
Comments: cc: wshamblin@ac.net
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

>Hi All,
>    A strictly amateur question: With the ends of each (assuming Bates)
>grain burning, wouldn't they be held apart by the generated gasses? Yes,
>the total "G" forces would be passed along, but would the "gas cushion"
>mitigate the effects? Intuitively, compressive strength does seem more
>important.
>Regs! Bill KU4QB TRA#07455 L2
>PKIM, my one KN/Sorbitol motor, to date, was three unequal length grains
>in a spent AT H-125 casing. Performance seemed equal to the original.
--------------------
Hi Bill:
I will give an intuitive answer to the intuitive question if I may. Bates
grains appear to burn on the ends and in the core which apparently gives
them a somewhat linear pressure rate. The grain might "space themselves" a
bit if the pressure at the nozzle end and at the forward bulkhead end are a
little lower than between the grain. But we cannot assume that without some
sophisticated method of measurement at these points. Of which I know know
nothing of such a measurement method.

However, this gives rise to another matter in priority -- that being how to
make sure that the flame front spreads rapidly and uniformly across those
ends of the grain at ignition. If the grain segments are pressed tightly
together this might not occur. Which may mean that some modified casting of
the grain mold may be needed. A bit later I  hope to experiment with my
grain "pressings" by modifying the tooling so that a small lump is on the
ends of each grain to hold them apart a bit during ignition.

best regards
al bradley


------------------------------------------------------------------
Can you live Life with this?: "Unless there is a law, an agreement, or a
long-standing custom, No one `Deserves' Anything -- Either Good or Bad!"

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 27236 invoked from network); 20 Aug 2001 01:48:54 -0000
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 20 Aug 2001 01:48:54 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 29459 invoked by uid 50005); 20 Aug 2001 01:47:48 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smptf.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.287655 secs); 20 Aug 2001 01:47:48 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 20 Aug 2001 01:47:47 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA05515; Sun, 19 Aug 2001 18:46:36 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 91493 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 20 Aug 2001 01:45:15          +0000
Received: from priv-edtnes09-hme0.telusplanet.net (mtaout.telus.net          [199.185.220.235]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id          PAA32540 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 18 Aug 2001 15:15:16 -0700
Received: from telus.net ([216.232.246.21]) by          priv-edtnes09-hme0.telusplanet.net (InterMail vM.4.01.03.10          201-229-121-110) with ESMTP id          <20010818221445.CBWE887.priv-edtnes09-hme0.telusplanet.net@telus.net>          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 18 Aug 2001 16:14:45 -0600
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (Win95; I)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B7EEA43.26D3C0C2@telus.net>
Date:         Sat, 18 Aug 2001 15:20:51 -0700
Reply-To: "David Wakarchuk" <dwakarchuk@TELUS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "David Wakarchuk" <dwakarchuk@TELUS.NET>
Subject:      [AR] Kosdon Hardware
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

I'm using some Kosdon 54mm hardware to house some home brewed AP based
grains.  Since I've not ever used Kosdon hardware, I'm a little unsure
as to what the tolerances are like for things like grain and phenolic
liner lengths.  Specifically I would like to know how long a length of
phenolic liner should one use in the 1050 and 1400 ns case? I assume the
liner must be snug against the nozzle and forward closure.  I am also
after the length of the grains and core diameters for the commercial
reloads in these motors.  Any arocket folks have some 54mm Kosdon
reloads sitting in their magazine that they could measure for me?
Thanks

David Wakarchuk

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 861 invoked from network); 20 Aug 2001 01:50:06 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 20 Aug 2001 01:50:06 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 8850 invoked by uid 50005); 20 Aug 2001 01:49:43 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (. Clean. Processed in 0.401619 secs); 20 Aug 2001 01:49:43 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
X-Qmail-Scanner-Mail-From: owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU via smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net
X-Qmail-Scanner-Rcpt-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
X-Qmail-Scanner: 0.96 (No viruses found. Processed in 0.401619 secs)
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 20 Aug 2001 01:49:42 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA05541; Sun, 19 Aug 2001 18:47:59 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 91495 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 20 Aug 2001 01:46:38          +0000
Received: from imo-m10.mx.aol.com (imo-m10.mx.aol.com [64.12.136.165]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA32566 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Sat, 18 Aug 2001 15:25:28 -0700
Received: from Sociald84@aol.com by imo-m10.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v31_r1.4.) id          v.66.1319ff79 (18251); Sat, 18 Aug 2001 18:24:51 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0B7C_01C56B69.4A8845B0"
X-Mailer: AOL 6.0 for Windows US sub 10532
Message-ID:  <66.1319ff79.28b04533@aol.com>
Date:         Sat, 18 Aug 2001 18:24:51 EDT
Reply-To: <Sociald84@AOL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <Sociald84@AOL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Solid rocket boosters
Comments: To: timothy.b.bendel@lmco.com
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0B7C_01C56B69.4A8845B0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

In a message dated 8/17/2001 10:50:16 AM Mountain Daylight Time,
timothy.b.bendel@LMCO.COM writes:


> We all have opinions on this subject, and I guess I am one of the people who
> feel that solids have been given a "bad rap". I do not think that the
> ability to throttle and shut down is that big a deal for a booster
> (definitely a very big deal for attitude control thrusters!) In general, a
> launch vehicle that goes to orbit either makes it / doesn't make it. The one
> example I can think of is the Space Shuttle which performed a single "abort
> to orbit" in the last twenty years (it turned out to be a sensor failure,
> IIRC).
>

Who says a solid motor can't  be throtled? Look at the SRBs on the shuttle
they aren't exactly throttled but through the use of some grain geometries
the engines actually cut back their thrust for a short period and then build
back up. This is built in to keep the shuttle in one piece when the vehicle
hits max q.

So what if you can't exactly throttle a solid motor if you design it right,
especially as a booster you don't need to.

(just playing the devils advocate here to make a point, I'm actually a
liquid/hybrid fan myself.)

Mark

------=_NextPart_000_0B7C_01C56B69.4A8845B0
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<HTML><FONT FACE=arial,helvetica><FONT  SIZE=3>In a message dated 8/17/2001 10:50:16 AM Mountain Daylight Time,
<BR>timothy.b.bendel@LMCO.COM writes:
<BR>
<BR></FONT><FONT  COLOR="#000000" SIZE=2 FAMILY="SANSSERIF" FACE="Arial" LANG="0">
<BR><BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE style="BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px">We all have opinions on this subject, and I guess I am one of the people who
<BR>feel that solids have been given a "bad rap". I do not think that the
<BR>ability to throttle and shut down is that big a deal for a booster
<BR>(definitely a very big deal for attitude control thrusters!) In general, a
<BR>launch vehicle that goes to orbit either makes it / doesn't make it. The one
<BR>example I can think of is the Space Shuttle which performed a single "abort
<BR>to orbit" in the last twenty years (it turned out to be a sensor failure,
<BR>IIRC).
<BR></BLOCKQUOTE>
<BR></FONT><FONT  COLOR="#000000" SIZE=3 FAMILY="SANSSERIF" FACE="Arial" LANG="0">
<BR>Who says a solid motor can't &nbsp;be throtled? Look at the SRBs on the shuttle
<BR>they aren't exactly throttled but through the use of some grain geometries
<BR>the engines actually cut back their thrust for a short period and then build
<BR>back up. This is built in to keep the shuttle in one piece when the vehicle
<BR>hits max q.
<BR>
<BR>So what if you can't exactly throttle a solid motor if you design it right,
<BR>especially as a booster you don't need to.
<BR>
<BR>(just playing the devils advocate here to make a point, I'm actually a
<BR>liquid/hybrid fan myself.)
<BR>
<BR>Mark</FONT></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0B7C_01C56B69.4A8845B0--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 6366 invoked from network); 20 Aug 2001 01:51:53 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 20 Aug 2001 01:51:53 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 10791 invoked by uid 50005); 20 Aug 2001 01:51:30 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (. Clean. Processed in 0.201629 secs); 20 Aug 2001 01:51:30 -0000
X-Qmail-Scanner-Mail-From: owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU via smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net
X-Qmail-Scanner-Rcpt-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
X-Qmail-Scanner: 0.96 (No viruses found. Processed in 0.201629 secs)
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 20 Aug 2001 01:51:29 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA05493; Sun, 19 Aug 2001 18:45:14 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 91466 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 20 Aug 2001 01:43:53          +0000
Received: from cisco.com (cypher.cisco.com [171.69.11.18]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA32344; Sat, 18 Aug 2001 14:24:01 -0700
Received: (from billw@localhost) by cisco.com (8.8.8/2.6/Cisco List          Logging/8.8.8) id OAA18836; Sat, 18 Aug 2001 14:23:26 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID:  <CMM.0.90.4.998169806.billw@cypher>
Date:         Sat, 18 Aug 2001 14:23:26 PDT
Reply-To: "Bill Westfield" <billw@cisco.com>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "William Chops Westfield" <billw@cisco.com>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Cotton candy?
Comments: To: Ray Calkins <rcalkins@ITC.UCI.EDU>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  Your message of Sat, 18 Aug 2001 02:32:10 -0700

    Right now, I'm wondering about the combustion characteristics of Elmer's
    school glue or glue-all.  It's water soluble, flexible, non-toxic, easy
    clean-up and inexpensive.  Might just work as a binder for AN/Sucrose too,
    solve the problems I've been having there.

Hardened elmers glue is not very flexible, and it shrinks a lot.

But, I've recently been doing experiments with "wallmart" ignitors, using a
(dipped, conductive) bridge element made with graphite and elmers, and a
pyrogen made from elmers and KClO4 (so much for wallmart) with and without a
bit of sulfer for lower ignition temperature (?)  They burn fine with
current running through them, but the elmers based pyrogen doesn't burn very
well by itself...

BillW


From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 9024 invoked from network); 20 Aug 2001 01:52:47 -0000
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 20 Aug 2001 01:52:47 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 21184 invoked by uid 50005); 20 Aug 2001 01:51:11 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smpte.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.189094 secs); 20 Aug 2001 01:51:11 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 20 Aug 2001 01:51:10 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA05572; Sun, 19 Aug 2001 18:49:20 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 91497 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 20 Aug 2001 01:47:59          +0000
Received: from smtp.snet.net (smtp.snet.net [204.60.6.55]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA32620 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat,          18 Aug 2001 15:50:09 -0700
Received: from snet.net (48.70.252.64.snet.net [64.252.70.48]) by smtp.snet.net          (8.12.0.Beta12/8.12.0.Beta12/SNET-mx-1.5/D-evisionO-evision$) with          ESMTP id f7IMo6la027797 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 18 Aug 2001          18:50:07 -0400 (EDT)
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.75 [en] (Win98; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <LPBBKJMJEOFKAMFJJNNHKEJFCGAA.landofgrey@gnc.net>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B7EF44C.79C05B5C@snet.net>
Date:         Sat, 18 Aug 2001 19:03:40 -0400
Reply-To: "Blake Mantel" <BMantel@SNET.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Blake Mantel" <BMantel@SNET.NET>
Organization: done through the use of very fuzzy logic!
Subject:      Re: [AR] ERPS successfully runs H2O2 engine
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Matthew Travis wrote:

> I've got the document laying around here somewhere... According to the Solid
> Propulsion Industry Action Group, it is quantifiable that liquids have a
> *lower* history of reliability than solids.

SNIP!!!

> The SSME's have 921 catastrophic failure modes. I
> admit the SSME's are the most complex liquid engines ever built, but they
> are also the most reliable.

And the only catastrophic, deadly shuttle event was caused by solids..
Blake
--
CUM CATAPULTAE PROSCRIPTAE ERUNT TUM SOLI PROSCRIPTI CATAPULTAS HABEBUNT.
(When catapults are outlawed, only outlaws will have catapults....)
Triumph Tiger Motorcycle page at: http://pages.cthome.net/bmantel/

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 9324 invoked from network); 20 Aug 2001 01:52:53 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 20 Aug 2001 01:52:53 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 21274 invoked by uid 50005); 20 Aug 2001 01:51:17 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smpte.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.304962 secs); 20 Aug 2001 01:51:17 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 20 Aug 2001 01:51:16 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA05600; Sun, 19 Aug 2001 18:50:43 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 91512 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 20 Aug 2001 01:49:21          +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (f69.law15.hotmail.com [64.4.23.69]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA32760 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Sat,          18 Aug 2001 16:21:46 -0700
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Sat,          18 Aug 2001 16:21:16 -0700
Received: from 213.224.83.102 by lw15fd.law15.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Sat,          18 Aug 2001 23:21:15 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [213.224.83.102]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 18 Aug 2001 23:21:16.0132 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[7A7E2240:01C1283C]
Message-ID:  <F69YC98Bi89QtpfTYSl0000d255@hotmail.com>
Date:         Mon, 20 Aug 2001 01:49:21 +0000
Reply-To: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] candy R&D
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Quote msg 8/18/2001 18:20:48 EDT from Sociald84@aol.com:

>hydraulic presses can be bought fairly cheaply from harbor freight. I think
>a
>6 ton press is only about eighty bucks.

I suppose ie 6 ton/sq inch?

jd

_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 12651 invoked from network); 20 Aug 2001 01:53:59 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 20 Aug 2001 01:53:59 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 27601 invoked by uid 50005); 20 Aug 2001 01:54:09 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.512089 secs); 20 Aug 2001 01:54:09 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 20 Aug 2001 01:54:08 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA05622; Sun, 19 Aug 2001 18:52:05 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 91522 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 20 Aug 2001 01:50:44          +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (f3.law15.hotmail.com [64.4.23.3]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA00458 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Sat,          18 Aug 2001 17:06:19 -0700
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Sat,          18 Aug 2001 17:05:48 -0700
Received: from 213.224.83.174 by lw15fd.law15.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Sun,          19 Aug 2001 00:05:48 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [213.224.83.174]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 19 Aug 2001 00:05:48.0675 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[B373D530:01C12842]
Message-ID:  <F3elTjKj9LtMqNsPWOO0000d39d@hotmail.com>
Date:         Mon, 20 Aug 2001 01:50:44 +0000
Reply-To: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      [AR] Green (rocket) power
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

I never heard of a 3rd HP conference until to-day and now I found out even
the 4th one is a thing of the past. Interesting tell-tale titles though.

jd


_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 17618 invoked from network); 20 Aug 2001 01:55:35 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 20 Aug 2001 01:55:35 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 13180 invoked by uid 50005); 20 Aug 2001 01:55:12 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (. Clean. Processed in 0.147235 secs); 20 Aug 2001 01:55:12 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
X-Qmail-Scanner-Mail-From: owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU via smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net
X-Qmail-Scanner-Rcpt-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
X-Qmail-Scanner: 0.96 (No viruses found. Processed in 0.147235 secs)
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 20 Aug 2001 01:55:12 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA05647; Sun, 19 Aug 2001 18:53:31 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 91524 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 20 Aug 2001 01:52:06          +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (f75.law15.hotmail.com [64.4.23.75]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA00467 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Sat,          18 Aug 2001 17:07:01 -0700
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Sat,          18 Aug 2001 17:06:31 -0700
Received: from 213.224.83.174 by lw15fd.law15.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Sun,          19 Aug 2001 00:06:30 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [213.224.83.174]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 19 Aug 2001 00:06:31.0066 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[CCB82FA0:01C12842]
Message-ID:  <F75DkdLnZlVDelzxx410000d408@hotmail.com>
Date:         Mon, 20 Aug 2001 01:52:06 +0000
Reply-To: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      [AR] Green (rocket) power oops
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

I never heard of a 3rd HP conference until to-day and now I found out even
the 4th one is a thing of the past. Interesting tell-tale titles though.

Oops:

http://www.estec.esa.nl/conferences/01a05/

jd


_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 21058 invoked from network); 20 Aug 2001 01:56:42 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 20 Aug 2001 01:56:42 -0000
Received: (qmail 14067 invoked by uid 50005); 20 Aug 2001 01:56:20 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (. Clean. Processed in 0.231674 secs); 20 Aug 2001 01:56:20 -0000
X-Qmail-Scanner-Mail-From: owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU via smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net
X-Qmail-Scanner-Rcpt-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
X-Qmail-Scanner: 0.96 (No viruses found. Processed in 0.231674 secs)
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 20 Aug 2001 01:56:19 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA05688; Sun, 19 Aug 2001 18:54:53 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 91350 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 20 Aug 2001 01:53:32          +0000
Received: from hall.mail.mindspring.net (hall.mail.mindspring.net          [207.69.200.60]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA31582          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 18 Aug 2001 11:53:58 -0700
Received: from oemcomputer (user-38ldc3q.dialup.mindspring.com          [209.86.176.122]) by hall.mail.mindspring.net (8.9.3/8.8.5) with SMTP          id OAA07335 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 18 Aug 2001 14:53:56          -0400 (EDT)
References: <Pine.LNX.4.10.10108172201510.24935-100000@itc.uci.edu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <008101c12816$67d83a20$7ab056d1@oemcomputer>
Date:         Sat, 18 Aug 2001 14:48:42 -0400
Reply-To: "Robert" <OlympusMons@MINDSPRING.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Robert" <OlympusMons@MINDSPRING.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Fw: Virus warning and info
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Ray and AROCKET:

I'm not so sure I sent the virus to this list; it was FROM this list I got
the virus in the FIRST place! Stupidly, I did not take the time to notice
another [AR] post which said "[the name of the virus email] -> Virus..." If
I had noticed that, or had remembered that one of the rules of the list is
"no attachments," I might have stopped myself before opening that email.

But here's my question(s): Some guy posts something to AR and says, say,
"Here's a neat spreadsheet for motor building calculations," or "Here's neat
pictures of my last launch." Aren't people going to just naturally open that
attachment?

Q # 2: Someone posts and says: "Here's a neat website with launch pictures
(or something) and puts the link. Now, with my fairly minimal knowledge of
PCs and the internet, I'm not sure you CAN'T get a virus by merely logging
on to a website that is designed to spread viruses. I know one should say
"NO" to "Do you want Active-X controls to run?" for any site you have no
solid reason to trust. But with the technology and the holes in security
that there are on the net these days, I don't know if you might not be sunk
merely following a link!

I have upgraded my anti-virus software after that worm. PS - The worm runs
its own server? Can't they track such things down and arrest the people
doing it?

Bob K.

----- Original Message -----
From: Ray Calkins <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
To: Robert <OlympusMons@MINDSPRING.COM>
Cc: <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
Sent: Saturday, August 18, 2001 1:06 AM
Subject: Re: [AR] Fw: Virus warning and info


> Yes robert, your machine did send out the sircam virus to nearly 500
> rocketeers around the world.
>
> The sircam virus runs it's own server (which is why you don't see them in
> your sent mail), and grabs addresses from your Outlook folder and web
> browser cache to send itself to.  It also randomly sends files from your
> computer out.  Hope you didn't have anything of a sensitive nature on your
> machine.  Have you removed the virus from your machine yet?  If you need
> the innoculation to remove the virus, let me know off list, I'll send you
> the web link.
>
> Ray
>
>
>
> On Fri, 17 Aug 2001, Robert wrote:
>
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: Robert
> > To: Alcyone
> > Sent: Friday, August 17, 2001 5:31 PM
> > Subject: Virus
> >
> >
> > I got an e-mail from your "mail administrator" saying I sent you a
virus. What happened was, there was this interesting looking e-mail from a
rocketry newsgroup I subscribe to. I opened it and then its attachment.
Mistake. Friends are telling me I sent them e-mails with an attachment that
I never, personally, sent. So the virus itseld did it. Sorry, it was my
mistake to open an attachment, but I, personally, did NOT, intentionally
send any viruses out.
> >
> > AND: I just checked my "Sent Items" and it contains no listing for
things I have not knowingly sent. Therefore, the virus not only sends itself
out, but erases all (?) traces of what it did, so you don't know who your
machine sent it to.
> >
> > If you think you have the worm that got sent by my computer (or if you
know you have the "SirCam-...[whatever it is called]"...worm from ANY
source), tell me and I will send you a link to a website with instructions
and a link for downloading and using a tool to remove the worm.
> >
> > Bob K.
> >
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 1861 invoked from network); 20 Aug 2001 01:59:56 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 20 Aug 2001 01:59:56 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 29658 invoked by uid 50005); 20 Aug 2001 01:58:19 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smpte.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.311514 secs); 20 Aug 2001 01:58:19 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 20 Aug 2001 01:58:19 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA05713; Sun, 19 Aug 2001 18:56:20 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 91865 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 20 Aug 2001 01:54:59          +0000
Received: from proxy4.ba.best.com (root@proxy4.ba.best.com [206.184.139.15]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA05681 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Sun, 19 Aug 2001 18:54:46 -0700
Received: from [10.0.0.2] (snvadslgw2poold155.snjs.uswestqwest.net          [168.103.213.155]) by proxy4.ba.best.com (8.9.3/8.9.2/best.out) with          ESMTP id SAA13949 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Sun, 19 Aug 2001          18:53:23 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Sender:  (Unverified)
References: <v01510100b7a48545a00d@[208.22.189.245]>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <v04210106b7a61d89ba3b@[10.0.0.2]>
Date:         Sun, 19 Aug 2001 18:52:51 -0700
Reply-To: "bob fortune" <bob@FORTUNEPAINT.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "bob fortune" <bob@FORTUNEPAINT.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] 2b Re: [AR] Candy tests
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <v01510100b7a48545a00d@[208.22.189.245]>

Bill Colburn asked me to forward this to the list regarding candy
motors.  I've been feeding him the interesting posts while he remains
off the list for the time being.

Bill C. wrote:

I ran a 40 gram sample of TF-1 (65-35 KNO3/Sucrose AR condition) at
10 KPSI in a 1.251 diameter mold. I got a density of .057 lb/lcubic
inch, or about 85% of theoretical. Yes there is a considerable void
volume when just pressing. Now this was without moistening. Years ago
did this same experiment with TF-1 with 2% moisture content. The
resulting plug sat in my office for 5 years, with several persons
handling it and remained hard, dry and with sharply defined edges
until I destroyed it (can't leave dangerous chemicals lying around!)I
have burning rate data on TF-1 at .058 lb/cubic inch and with 2%
moisture content, as a separate subject. rb = .0232 Pc^.42 from 100
to 750 psi.

Bill Colburn

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 5033 invoked from network); 20 Aug 2001 02:00:51 -0000
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 20 Aug 2001 02:00:51 -0000
Received: (qmail 11248 invoked by uid 50005); 20 Aug 2001 01:59:46 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smptf.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.545716 secs); 20 Aug 2001 01:59:46 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 20 Aug 2001 01:59:45 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA05739; Sun, 19 Aug 2001 18:57:43 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 91356 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 20 Aug 2001 01:56:21          +0000
Received: from m1.jersey.juno.com (m1.jersey.juno.com [64.136.16.64]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA31627; Sat, 18 Aug 2001          12:07:24 -0700
Received: from cookie.juno.com by cookie.juno.com for          <"H3WK6e6N+bsCVJQMHM9sZG98WiroejlGatSxScIC3ZusMGXN0FKQFA==">
Received: (from kc2csh@juno.com) by m1.jersey.juno.com (queuemail) id GC576HQ6;          Sat, 18 Aug 2001 15:06:57 EDT
X-Mailer: Juno 4.0.11
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Juno-Line-Breaks: 2,4,11,19-20,29,33,36-40,42-137
X-Juno-Att: 0
X-Juno-RefParts: 0
Message-ID:  <20010818.151124.-3827599.1.kc2csh@juno.com>
Date:         Sat, 18 Aug 2001 15:11:21 -0400
Reply-To: <kc2csh@JUNO.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <kc2csh@JUNO.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Cotton candy?
Comments: To: rcalkins@itc.uci.edu
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

  Since essentially all the comon simple sugers are isomers of each
other, I would think that in combustion all of them would burn with
essentially the same energy and byproduct combustion gases.
  All the complex sugars, starches, and etc. are merely some combination
of these simple sugars joined in one or more dehydration reactions.
  Consequently, you would think that that the "ideal fuel" for a
propellant would be either at one extreme or the other; i.e., either the
simplese simple sugars, or the longest chain complex carbohydrates.  From
what you said of your conclusions, it would seem that it would be the
longest chain complex carbohydrates.  This would seem to mean that
cellulose or something similar would be nearly ideal from a propellant
perspective.
  The question then becomes in what physical form and with what
"contaminants"  Most cellulose we get is plant cell wall, with some
elements of residual cell contents, extracellular material, and other
junk.  If the objective is also the longest possible fibers, thus the
greatest binding and reinforcing capability, several things come to mind.
 Beside cotton, corn silk seeks an obvious choice, with the likely
contamination being mostly sugar.  The crudest kinds of "digested" wood
pulp seems an obvious choice.  So does linen.
  Then comes the critical question of how to form a grain.
  What I am thinking about is forming a mold filled with some form of
fiber at the bottom of a long column.  Apply some gentle heat to the
bottom of the mold, like a slide warmer, and some vacume to the top, like
a faucet vacume device.  Then slowly stream in a high temperature (about
95C) saturated solution of KNO3 and enough sugar so that with the fiber
the F/O ratio is correct.  Using a fine tube, the vacume itself should
pull a slow steady flow.  The candy should precipitate out of the
solution fairly quickly as the upper layers of the solution cool and
evaporate off from the vacume.
  The problem with this is it will not get the fiber uniformly dispersed
through the slug.  I have no idea what will using this approach. Closest
I can come to is using a roll of corregated kraft cardboard standing on
end as the fibre core.
  I'm still lost on how to quantify the extent of the water remaining in
the residual slug in the mold, and on how to best measure density or
obtain optimal density in that slug.
  What are your thoughts.

            Jay

On Sat, 18 Aug 2001 02:32:10 -0700 Ray Calkins <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
writes:
> On Sat, 18 Aug 2001, John Dom wrote:
>
> > Quote RC:
> >
> > Perhaps a fiber
> > > > that also provides a fuel source or a conductive pathway?
> Fine AL wire?
> > > > Cotton?
> > >Exactly what I've been working on.  So far, it has been quite
> promising.
> > >Some of the fibers I've explored: cellulose fibers (shredded
> paper in the
> > >blender), cotton fiber, metamucil, tapioca starch (retained too
> much
> > >water).
> >
> > Indeed starch is sort of a sugar polymer but a starch a fiber(?).
> Well, the package called it tapioca flour, and kneading some wetted
> powder
> quickly produced the characteristic gluten structure, so yes,
> fibers.  I'm
> not sure about starch polymerization, but they show someting quite
> similar
> to cross-linking when heated in solution.
>
> > Talking binders in candy propellant is an entire new field to
> explore.
> > I wonder what the necessary (chemical) properties of such 'd have
> to obtain
> > better or equal combustion.
> I did a series of experiments, varying the amount of cellulose,
> eventually
> replacing the entire sucrose content with celulose.  This burned
> quite
> well with a slightly faster burn rate, Propep shows a slight Isp
> increase.
> I didn't like it's physical characteristics, though.  The last few
> percent
> of water removal produced very high shrinkages, totally unsuitable
> for a
> large propellant grain.  It smelled interesting.
>
> Some of the other things I've got on the shelf to try:  guar gum,
> glycerine, corn starch, merangue(sp?) powder, xanthan gum, agar,
> gelatin,
> oats, aluminum wool, flocked cotton fiber, pulped kevlar, chopped
> carbon
> fiber and egg whites.  At some point, something will work, I'm
> totally
> confident.  About 10% Honey seems to work fairly well, I think it
> impedes
> sugar crystal formation, allowing a dryer product while still
> maintaining
> good flexibility.  I've also been working with cream of tartar in an
> attempt to modify KNO3 crystal sizes, results are inconclusive.
>
> Right now, I'm wondering about the combustion characteristics of
> Elmer's
> school glue or glue-all.  It's water soluble, flexible, non-toxic,
> easy
> clean-up and inexpensive.  Might just work as a binder for
> AN/Sucrose too,
> solve the problems I've been having there.
>
> Note, first attempt at ascorbic acid buffering is inconclusive.  For
> most
> of the drying process, there was no browning at low temps.  When I
> raised
> the temp, near the end of the drying process, the sugar was
> attacked.  I
> used approximately 10% by weight, but this was not a carefully
> measured
> test, kind of "let's see if this works".  I have had limited success
> with
> dextrose and AN, with light browning, but the stuff is highly
> hydroscopic
> so I have never completely gotten a batch dry.
>
>
> > Any idea about the solids density increase obtainable by 6 ton
> compression
> > of KN/sucrose/sorbitol?
> Not as high as the other processes, I'm sure.  It's basically a
> sintering
> operation, leaving lots of tiny voids unless you heat it to very
> near
> melting temps. This is why Al can file his fingernails on it.  I bet
> you
> could blow air through it too.  He probably has an excellent burn
> rate
> with it considering the increased burning surface area.  Are these
> suppositions all true, Al?
>
>
> Ray

________________________________________________________________
GET INTERNET ACCESS FROM JUNO!
Juno offers FREE or PREMIUM Internet access for less!
Join Juno today!  For your FREE software, visit:
http://dl.www.juno.com/get/tagj.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 6498 invoked from network); 20 Aug 2001 02:01:16 -0000
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 20 Aug 2001 02:01:16 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 11862 invoked by uid 50005); 20 Aug 2001 02:00:11 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smptf.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.363168 secs); 20 Aug 2001 02:00:11 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 20 Aug 2001 02:00:10 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA05767; Sun, 19 Aug 2001 18:59:06 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 91878 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 20 Aug 2001 01:57:45          +0000
Received: from smtp003.mailsrvcs.net (smtp003pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.182])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA05726 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 19 Aug 2001 18:56:26 -0700
Received: from [63.10.189.24] (1Cust24.tnt2.hilo.hi.da.uu.net [63.10.189.24])          by smtp003.mailsrvcs.net  with ESMTP for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; id          f7K1tVg26149 Sun, 19 Aug 2001 20:55:32 -0500 (CDT)
X-Sender: ttocs@mail.gte.net (Unverified)
References: <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010818103011.26212A-100000@spsystems.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by itc.uci.edu id SAA05727
Message-ID:  <l03130303b7a61d373e02@[63.10.189.23]>
Date:         Sun, 19 Aug 2001 15:55:23 -1000
Reply-To: "Aaron Smith" <ttocs@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Aaron Smith" <ttocs@GTE.NET>
Subject:      [AR] Help with some calculations
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <002601c127f7$efe2ad20$0400a8c0@hatjs>

Hey everyone,

        I need some math guidance.  I would like to know how to calculate
the amount of propane needed to heat 8.66 liters of ammonia from 150 to
400, constant pressure of 1100 PSI.  The formula itself would be better
than just the answer.  I can't really give more information, as I can't
talk about my project.  Any help would be appreciated.

Thanks,
Aaron

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 10066 invoked from network); 20 Aug 2001 02:02:24 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 20 Aug 2001 02:02:24 -0000
Received: (qmail 19349 invoked by uid 50005); 20 Aug 2001 02:02:01 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (. Clean. Processed in 1.443859 secs); 20 Aug 2001 02:02:01 -0000
X-Qmail-Scanner-Mail-From: owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU via smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net
X-Qmail-Scanner-Rcpt-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
X-Qmail-Scanner: 0.96 (No viruses found. Processed in 1.443859 secs)
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 20 Aug 2001 02:01:58 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA05796; Sun, 19 Aug 2001 19:00:28 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 91575 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 20 Aug 2001 01:59:07          +0000
Received: from tisch.mail.mindspring.net (tisch.mail.mindspring.net          [207.69.200.157]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA01185          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 18 Aug 2001 19:57:58 -0700
Received: from oemcomputer (user-38lddu0.dialup.mindspring.com          [209.86.183.192]) by tisch.mail.mindspring.net (8.9.3/8.8.5) with          SMTP id WAA18417; Sat, 18 Aug 2001 22:57:04 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0B81_01C56B69.4AA73F60"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <001801c12859$f4337d20$c0b756d1@oemcomputer>
Date:         Sat, 18 Aug 2001 22:51:47 -0400
Reply-To: "Robert" <OlympusMons@MINDSPRING.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Robert" <OlympusMons@MINDSPRING.COM>
Subject:      [AR] List problems: Virus-related?
Comments: cc: "Rammelsberg, Kyle" <Kyle.Rammelsberg@pax.plan-sys.com>,          John Bishop <jbishop@nettally.com>, Dale Gillis <cogent52@aol.com>,          Barry Smith <bnsmith001@yahoo.com>,          Alan Cooper <CooperAB@navair.navy.mil>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0B81_01C56B69.4AA73F60
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

First, on my previous message, I realize I did a "Duh!" I said, in =
effect, if the SirCam worm runs it's own server, can't they find it and =
arrest the perpetrators? Later, I realized that "running its own server" =
doubtless refers to what it does in the victim's computer. Duh!   =20

Second, as you all must know, the list has been being held. Assuming it =
isn't just me (I was wondering, after I talked about the virus and if =
they wondered if I was responsible for it because I talked about it, =
which would be absurd), then no one has been getting messages all day; =
is this because of conerns over the virus or is it a coincidence?

Bob K.

------=_NextPart_000_0B81_01C56B69.4AA73F60
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META content=3D"text/html; charset=3Diso-8859-1" =
http-equiv=3DContent-Type>
<META content=3D"MSHTML 5.00.2614.3500" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>First, on my previous message, I =
realize I did a=20
"Duh!" I said, in effect, if the SirCam worm runs it's own server, can't =
they=20
find it and arrest the perpetrators? Later, I realized that "running its =
own=20
server" doubtless refers to what it does in the victim's computer.=20
Duh!&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; </FONT></DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Second, as you all must know, the list =
has been=20
being held. Assuming it isn't just me (I was wondering, after I talked =
about the=20
virus and if they wondered if I was responsible for it because I talked =
about=20
it, which would be absurd), then no one has been getting messages all =
day; is=20
this because of conerns over the virus or is it a =
coincidence?</FONT></DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Bob K.</FONT></DIV></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0B81_01C56B69.4AA73F60--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 14576 invoked from network); 20 Aug 2001 02:03:49 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 20 Aug 2001 02:03:49 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 14801 invoked by uid 50005); 20 Aug 2001 02:02:44 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smptf.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.206172 secs); 20 Aug 2001 02:02:44 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 20 Aug 2001 02:02:44 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA05820; Sun, 19 Aug 2001 19:01:52 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 91581 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 20 Aug 2001 02:00:30          +0000
Received: from idsoftware.com (predator.idsoftware.com [192.246.40.34]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA01318 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Sat, 18 Aug 2001 20:45:52 -0700
Received: from [192.246.40.144] (account johnc HELO pluto.idsoftware.com) by          idsoftware.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 3.4.7) with ESMTP id 351780 for          AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 18 Aug 2001 22:45:51 -0500
X-Sender: johnc@mail.idsoftware.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.1
References: <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010818103011.26212A-100000@spsystems.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <4.3.1.2.20010818224447.03108380@mail.idsoftware.com>
Date:         Sat, 18 Aug 2001 22:58:25 -0500
Reply-To: "John Carmack" <johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Carmack" <johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] earth magnetic field sensors
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <002601c127f7$efe2ad20$0400a8c0@hatjs>

At 08:10 AM 8/18/2001 -0700, you wrote:
>Hi all,
>
> > > What kind of attitude information can be obtained from a 3axis magnetic
> > > sensor?
> >
> > It will give you two axes of attitude.  Not three, alas; it cannot detect
> > rotation around an axis lined up with the local magnetic field.

A 3 axis magnetometer gives you a single vector of data.  It points along
the magnetic field.  By itself, that isn't good for much.

If you have a second vector that isn't colinear with the first, you can
define a full three axis coordinate system.

The ultra-cheap digital compasses assume you are holding them level, which
gives an implied gravity vector.  The more expensive ones use either a
fluid inclinometer or a 3 axis accelerometer to detect the gravity vector
when you are in contact with the earth (that won't work in the air).

A sun sensor could also provide the needed second vector, and would work
while airborne.

Some form of radio beacon direction finder could also provide another
vector.  Of course, if you were doing that, you would probably just choose
to place two radio beacons and have a homogenous system.

If you assumed that your rocket was flying straight up, that could be used
as an implied vector to let a magnetometer provide roll control.  Even if
you tipped off of vertical, it could still keep it from rolling, it just
wouldn't point at an absolutely correct angle.  This is probably the
easiest initial guidance project in the scope of fairly conventional
rocketry.  Put a down-facing camera in the rocket, and have the guidance
system keep it from rolling.  For that specific case, it might also be
reasonable to calculate optical flow from the camera, but that would
require fairly beefy CPU work.

Note that operating any electromechanical device (solenoids or motors)
within a few feet of the magnetometer causes very significant distortions.

A 3 axis rate gyro provides different data.  Starting with some initial
reference axis, the rate gyros allow you to rotate the axis.  They don't
provide any absolute data, but they are sufficient all by themselves for
all relative motion.  Note that just summing up rate gyro outputs to get an
accumulated roll / pitch / yaw is NOT correct.  You must rotate 3D axis by
the rate rotations, then derive roll / pitch / yaw if you need them.

John Carmack

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 19115 invoked from network); 20 Aug 2001 02:05:13 -0000
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 20 Aug 2001 02:05:13 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 2921 invoked by uid 50005); 20 Aug 2001 02:03:36 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smpte.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.165707 secs); 20 Aug 2001 02:03:36 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 20 Aug 2001 02:03:36 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA05844; Sun, 19 Aug 2001 19:03:14 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 91598 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 20 Aug 2001 02:01:53          +0000
Received: from grucom2.gru.net (grucom2.gru.net [209.251.129.7]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA01577 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat,          18 Aug 2001 22:34:54 -0700
Received: from [209.251.150.207] by grucom2.sfcc.net (NTMail          6.04.0010/NU4112.00.db1c8a4b) with ESMTP id cxvrhaaa for          AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 19 Aug 2001 01:34:52 -0400
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (Win95; I)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <Pine.LNX.4.10.10108180155560.27888-100000@itc.uci.edu>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Message-ID:  <3B7F505E.1664E96A@sfcc.net>
Date:         Sun, 19 Aug 2001 01:36:30 -0400
Reply-To: "James Yawn" <jyawn@SFCC.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "James Yawn" <jyawn@SFCC.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Cotton candy?
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Ray Calkins wrote:

> >Well, the package called it tapioca flour, and kneading some wetted powder
> >quickly produced the characteristic gluten structure, so yes, fibers.

> >Some of the other things I've got on the shelf to try:  guar gum,
> >glycerine, corn starch, merangue(sp?) powder, xanthan gum, agar, gelatin,
> >oats, aluminum wool, flocked cotton fiber, pulped kevlar, chopped carbon
> >fiber and egg whites.

Jimmy Yawn wrote:

>  I was pondering this note while washing the dishes this morning, and had a
> revelation when I came to the dough-bowl for last night's pizza*.  It was really
> a chore to clean off all the sticky dough-particles, consisting at this point of
> mostly...gluten!

It brang back memories of a vegetarian "feast" where fried wheat gluten was the
main entre.  Its texture was like what I heard a fisherman say about mudfish:
"doesn't taste too bad but the longer you chew it, the bigger it gets."  So I
would add wheat gluten to the list.  If I recall, it is sort of a protein polymer
(any chemists should feel free to correct me!)  I think the local health-food
store sells it in powdered form.  I will get some when I am there again and see
what it does - in the candy, that is.

*photo of this pizza at:  http://members.fortunecity.com/jyawn/food/

Jimmy Yawn


>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 24618 invoked from network); 20 Aug 2001 02:07:05 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 20 Aug 2001 02:07:05 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 4582 invoked by uid 50005); 20 Aug 2001 02:05:28 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smpte.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 3.151944 secs); 20 Aug 2001 02:05:28 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 20 Aug 2001 02:05:24 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA05863; Sun, 19 Aug 2001 19:04:36 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 91625 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 20 Aug 2001 02:03:15          +0000
Received: from femail36.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail36.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.254.60.26]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA03225          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 19 Aug 2001 08:20:14 -0700
Received: from c1649002-a.earthlink.net ([24.20.95.67]) by          femail36.sdc1.sfba.home.com (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20          201-229-121-120-20010223) with ESMTP id          <20010819152004.GQKJ29570.femail36.sdc1.sfba.home.com@c1649002-a.earthlink.net>; Sun, 19 Aug 2001 08:20:04          -0700
X-Sender: forkbomb@mail.earthlink.net
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.0.2
References: <a0510032cb7a335251760@[63.27.96.152]>            <4.3.1.2.20010817151706.02641398@mail.idsoftware.com>            <4.3.1.2.20010817030701.02690e60@mail.idsoftware.com>            <4.3.1.2.20010817030701.02690e60@mail.idsoftware.com>            <4.3.1.2.20010817151706.02641398@mail.idsoftware.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <5.0.2.1.0.20010819081409.02372f10@mail.earthlink.net>
Date:         Sun, 19 Aug 2001 08:20:01 -0700
Reply-To: "Pierce Nichols" <forkbomb@EARTHLINK.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Pierce Nichols" <forkbomb@EARTHLINK.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Solid rocket boosters
Comments: To: John Carmack <johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <4.3.1.2.20010818024400.03008af0@mail.idsoftware.com>

At 03:20 AM 8/18/2001 -0500, John Carmack wrote:
>Jerry Irvine wrote:
>
>
>>>How was it going to do guidance and control?
>>
>>
>>For 62 mi?
>>2 choices:
>>1. small wings and jets on crew compartment
>>2. Gimballed nozzle (stock unit)
>
>A single gimballed nozzle only gets you 2DOF.  Were you going to have
>dedicated roll control jets in that case, or use some kind of jet vanes?
>
>We are currently using four canted attitude control engines, but if our
>access to peroxide dried up, I would strongly consider a single biprop or
>hybrid engine with four jet vanes under the nozzle for main lift and 3DOF
>attitude control, rather than trying to make four or more biprops or
>hybrids work as attitude thrusters.

         If you were using a pump-fed bi-prop with a gas-generator cycle,
you could use the gas generator exhaust for attitude control. Of course,
that requires throttle valves for hot, high-pressure gas. I think, however,
that butterfly plates, similar to a throttle valve in a car, would do the
job and could be fabricated by an amateur group without too much trouble.

>One has only to look at the first three or four hop attempts of our VTVL to
>see why the idea of amateurs testing brand new guidance systems on big,
>powerful rockets seems like a really bad idea.


         It's a really bad idea for anyone, including our dear government.


>The other side of highly incremental testing is that you can actually do a
>whole lot more testing.  If you only do full-up tests, you basically have
>to be out in the desert with all the paperwork done, which may only happen
>a couple times a year.  Watching JPA and SORAC go about pursuing the CATS
>prize was informative.  You learn something each time you attempt to
>launch, but if you only get three attempts a year, it may take five years
>to get all the bugs worked out.
>
>We have tried to pick a plan of attack that lets us get learning cycles
>almost every week.
>
>
>
>>>more, test something else, etc.  We have ten minute turnaround between
>>>tests of our VTVL, and it has been extremely valuable.
>>>
>>>You mentioned in another post that you have a good supply of peroxide at
>>>your shop.  Can you go into what you have used it for?
>>
>>
>>Testing of ramjet prototypes.  So far it is not working, but we will see.
>
>Are you using a monoprop engine as a poor-man's supersonic wind tunnel?


         Well, a supersonic wind tunnel is essentially a test section down
stream of a supersonic nozzle. Peroxide decomposition is just as good a
method of providing the high-pressure gas for that nozzle as anything else,
and it's certainly a good deal cheaper than compressors capable of doing
the job.

         -p


Mars or Bust!
www.marssociety.com

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 6738 invoked from network); 20 Aug 2001 02:10:48 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 20 Aug 2001 02:10:48 -0000
Received: (qmail 15493 invoked by uid 50005); 20 Aug 2001 02:10:58 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 1.162458 secs); 20 Aug 2001 02:10:58 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 20 Aug 2001 02:10:55 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA05925; Sun, 19 Aug 2001 19:07:21 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 91025 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 20 Aug 2001 02:05:59          +0000
Received: from femail21.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail21.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.0.95.146]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA30018          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 18 Aug 2001 08:33:41 -0700
Received: from hal2001 ([24.77.53.16]) by femail21.sdc1.sfba.home.com          (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20 201-229-121-120-20010223) with SMTP id          <20010818153335.OGXG24034.femail21.sdc1.sfba.home.com@hal2001> for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 18 Aug 2001 08:33:35 -0700
References:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010818103254.26212B-100000@spsystems.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <002d01c127fa$02a29040$0400a8c0@hatjs>
Date:         Sat, 18 Aug 2001 08:25:27 -0700
Reply-To: "Jamie Morken" <jmorken@HOME.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jamie Morken" <jmorken@HOME.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Solid rocket boosters
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Hi all,

> > Could a single gimballed nozzle with 2DOF potentially get a rocket to
orbit
> > reliably?
>
> Only if you either (a) had something else to do roll control or (b) were
> very lucky and had minimal roll torques.

Ok so why can't a 2DOF system get to orbit? :)  Maybe I need to play more
flight sims but from what I recall it just takes longer to do certain
manouvering when you can't roll.

I guess if you get into a high speed barrel roll this would complicate the
2DOF control severely but fins could minimize it in the atmosphere perhaps
and once out of the atmosphere I don't think a roll would start unless the
plume was swirling?  I guess there would be some plume swirl but maybe it
would be only enough to spin the rocket up to a few hertz which a pneumatic
gimball should be able to accomodate perhaps.

Does plume swirl in a lathed out nozzle tend to cancel out over the burn
time is the big question maybe? :)

best regards,
Jamie

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 8228 invoked from network); 20 Aug 2001 02:11:18 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 20 Aug 2001 02:11:18 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 28758 invoked by uid 50005); 20 Aug 2001 02:10:55 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (. Clean. Processed in 0.332976 secs); 20 Aug 2001 02:10:55 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
X-Qmail-Scanner-Mail-From: owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU via smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net
X-Qmail-Scanner-Rcpt-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
X-Qmail-Scanner: 0.96 (No viruses found. Processed in 0.332976 secs)
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 20 Aug 2001 02:10:54 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA05890; Sun, 19 Aug 2001 19:05:58 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 91671 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 20 Aug 2001 02:04:37          +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (f29.law3.hotmail.com [209.185.241.29]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA04034 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 19 Aug 2001 13:24:57 -0700
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Sun,          19 Aug 2001 13:24:27 -0700
Received: from 65.192.115.131 by lw3fd.law3.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Sun, 19          Aug 2001 20:24:27 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [65.192.115.131]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 19 Aug 2001 20:24:27.0620 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[F1BD6A40:01C128EC]
Message-ID:  <F29olj8Jecd92bXCH5n0000f18e@hotmail.com>
Date:         Sun, 19 Aug 2001 16:24:27 -0400
Reply-To: "rocket Man" <varocketry@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "rocket Man" <varocketry@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      [AR] HBeen looking into MOTEL rooms    Re: [AR] Going to Black              Rock?
Comments: To: jtaylor@NC.RR.COM
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

<html><div style='background-color:'><DIV>
<P>Jeff:</P>
<P>I'm planning on Flying out too .. into Reno.</P>
<P>I've been looking for motel rooms and probably have to go almost all the way to RENO to stay each night.<BR><BR>Jim Sutton</P></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>&gt;From: Jeff Taylor <JTAYLOR@NC.RR.COM>
<DIV></DIV>&gt;Reply-To: Jeff Taylor <JTAYLOR@NC.RR.COM>
<DIV></DIV>&gt;To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
<DIV></DIV>&gt;Subject: [AR] Going to Black Rock?
<DIV></DIV>&gt;Date: Fri, 17 Aug 2001 20:15:26 -0400
<DIV></DIV>&gt;
<DIV></DIV>&gt;Hey -
<DIV></DIV>&gt;
<DIV></DIV>&gt;Is anyone on the list planning to go to the BALLS launch at Black Rock in
<DIV></DIV>&gt;September? I'm going, and I'd like to take this chance to meet as many
<DIV></DIV>&gt;people while I'm out there as I can. I'll be bringing a small project with
<DIV></DIV>&gt;me on the plane, and I need some help on the propellant end.
<DIV></DIV>&gt;
<DIV></DIV>&gt;- Jeff Taylor
<DIV></DIV></div><br clear=all><hr>Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at <a href='http://go.msn.com/bql/hmtag_itl_EN.asp'>http://explorer.msn.com</a><br></html>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 11315 invoked from network); 20 Aug 2001 02:12:21 -0000
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 20 Aug 2001 02:12:21 -0000
Received: (qmail 24170 invoked by uid 50005); 20 Aug 2001 02:11:16 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smptf.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.19483 secs); 20 Aug 2001 02:11:16 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 20 Aug 2001 02:11:16 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA05979; Sun, 19 Aug 2001 19:10:05 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 91029 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 20 Aug 2001 02:08:44          +0000
Received: from dune.gnc.net (root@dune.gnc.net [207.203.72.4]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA30041 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat,          18 Aug 2001 08:36:26 -0700
Received: from beowulf (sw2-6.gnc.net [207.203.72.86]) by dune.gnc.net          (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id LAA07178 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat,          18 Aug 2001 11:36:25 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <LPBBKJMJEOFKAMFJJNNHKELDCGAA.landofgrey@gnc.net>
Date:         Sat, 18 Aug 2001 11:34:59 -0400
Reply-To: <landofgrey@gnc.net>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Matthew Travis" <landofgrey@gnc.net>
Subject:      Re: [AR] reliability Now we're talking statistics...
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <LPBBKJMJEOFKAMFJJNNHGEKHCGAA.landofgrey@gnc.net>

Oops. You're right. I stand mathematically ashamed and corrected. I was
typing without thinking (a frequent habit of mine). I should have brought my
college stats knowledge back. You do have a 1 in 37 chance per flight, and
that doesn't change given equal conditions. It's only if you establish the
condition that you have a probability of 100% (impossible) of having a
failure in 37 flights that your odds would increase to 1 in 12. But then
you're not dealing with probability are you? If you do tricks with
considering the 37 flights as a single unit, then you can calculate
increasing odds as time goes on, but that, which I was doing, is really not
honest statistics (there's an oxymoron).

I will point out however, that while the trials were independent, the
condition were not identical. In fact, the probability of disaster on
STS-51L was much higher than other flights. It did, in fact, approach
statistical certainty. This, as well, points out just how invalid all those
percentages and what not are. Every launch is sufficiently different from
the others that there are things that cannot be modeled statistically. But
now I'm just trying to cover for my own stupid mistake :)

-Matt

PS - See why I don't gamble? Oh yeah, I learned in college that statistics
was invented by gamblers and bookmakers. Go figure :)


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Charles Barnett [mailto:cbarnett@texnet.net]
> Sent: Friday, August 17, 2001 5:23 PM
> To: landofgrey@gnc.net
> Subject: RE: [AR] reliability Now we're talking statistics...
>
> The law of indepentent trials applies to future events.  If you schedule
> 37 trials of an event with a probability of failure of 1 in 37, then, yes
> you are pushing your luck.  But even if you are on your 25th flight, the
> probability of failure is still 1 in 37 for the next flight.
>
> Hindsight is 20-20 but future events are quite another matter.
>
> Sorry, to nitpick but you might wish to re-read your explaination
> and phrase it a little differently so that folks won't mistakenly
> interprit what you were saying.
>
> You are right on target about the way statistics are mis-used.
> Invalid statistics, circular reasoning, etc. are unfortunately
> common in the media.
>
> Charles>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 14199 invoked from network); 20 Aug 2001 02:13:19 -0000
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 20 Aug 2001 02:13:19 -0000
Received: (qmail 11901 invoked by uid 50005); 20 Aug 2001 02:11:43 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smpte.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.317373 secs); 20 Aug 2001 02:11:43 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 20 Aug 2001 02:11:42 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA06003; Sun, 19 Aug 2001 19:11:27 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 91039 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 20 Aug 2001 02:10:06          +0000
Received: from femail21.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail21.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.0.95.146]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA30094          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 18 Aug 2001 08:50:16 -0700
Received: from hal2001 ([24.77.53.16]) by femail21.sdc1.sfba.home.com          (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20 201-229-121-120-20010223) with SMTP id          <20010818155010.OOOU24034.femail21.sdc1.sfba.home.com@hal2001> for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 18 Aug 2001 08:50:10 -0700
References:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010818103011.26212A-100000@spsystems.net>              <002601c127f7$efe2ad20$0400a8c0@hatjs>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <003601c127fc$53d9a960$0400a8c0@hatjs>
Date:         Sat, 18 Aug 2001 08:42:02 -0700
Reply-To: "Jamie Morken" <jmorken@HOME.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jamie Morken" <jmorken@HOME.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] earth magnetic field sensors
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

> active axis' then pointing East and West?

woops.

correction:  SouthEast and SouthWest. (90 degrees apart - not 180 doh! :)

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 14480 invoked from network); 20 Aug 2001 02:13:26 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 20 Aug 2001 02:13:26 -0000
Received: (qmail 12022 invoked by uid 50005); 20 Aug 2001 02:11:49 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smpte.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.185666 secs); 20 Aug 2001 02:11:49 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 20 Aug 2001 02:11:49 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA05947; Sun, 19 Aug 2001 19:08:43 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 91207 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 20 Aug 2001 02:07:22          +0000
Received: from localhost (rcalkins@localhost) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with          ESMTP id KAA30859; Sat, 18 Aug 2001 10:15:17 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.LNX.4.10.10108181012390.30327-100000@itc.uci.edu>
Date:         Sat, 18 Aug 2001 10:15:17 -0700
Reply-To: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Cotton candy?
Comments: To: Hans Olaf Toft <hot@VIP.CYBERCITY.DK>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <3B7E3AB6.78891394@vip.cybercity.dk>

On Sat, 18 Aug 2001, Hans Olaf Toft wrote:

> How about paper pulp?
I have used paper pulp with good success.

> - My own very limited experiments adding cutton and carbon fibres to candy
> were not very promising in terms of casting properties.
The propellants I have been making have not been pourable, but rather,
moldable.

> I would guess however that paper pulp could be suitable, and that it
> would have very little impact on the combustion properties for the
> resulting propellant.
I have seen minimial problems with it on small grains.

Ray

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 18413 invoked from network); 20 Aug 2001 02:14:40 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 20 Aug 2001 02:14:40 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 13505 invoked by uid 50005); 20 Aug 2001 02:13:04 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smpte.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.209408 secs); 20 Aug 2001 02:13:04 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 20 Aug 2001 02:13:03 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA06021; Sun, 19 Aug 2001 19:12:49 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 91041 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 20 Aug 2001 02:11:28          +0000
Received: from deimos.idirect.com (deimos.idirect.com [207.136.80.182]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA30150 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 18 Aug 2001 09:16:31 -0700
Received: from .idirect.com (on-osh-ahp-01-40.look.ca [216.154.47.40]) by          deimos.idirect.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id MAA57513; Sat, 18 Aug          2001 12:16:29 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="ISO-8859-1"
X-Mailer: BeOS Mail
Message-ID:  <200108181616.MAA57513@deimos.idirect.com>
Date:         Sat, 18 Aug 2001 12:15:58 EDT
Reply-To: <earlcp@idirect.com>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Earl Colby Pottinger" <earlcp@idirect.com>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Solid rocket boosters
Comments: To: Jerry Irvine <01rocket@GTE.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This probably the core of it all.  Talk is cheap, and only a
few people are doing the real work in solids, hybrids, and
liquids to find out the real answers.  And usally that correct
answer turns out to be diffirent than what anybody expected in
the first place.

               Earl Colby Pottinger

>On the solid v liquid debate: statistically similar, they each have
>their own best suited purpose (solid stages 1 and 2, liquid stages 3
>and 4).  That's why there is no single answer.  Prove your hypothesis
>by flying rockets to orbit.
>
>--
>Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
>Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
>Opinion, the whole thing.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 15868 invoked from network); 20 Aug 2001 02:23:18 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 20 Aug 2001 02:23:17 -0000
Received: (qmail 24405 invoked by uid 50005); 20 Aug 2001 02:21:41 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smpte.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 1.402642 secs); 20 Aug 2001 02:21:41 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 20 Aug 2001 02:21:38 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA06089; Sun, 19 Aug 2001 19:20:09 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 91955 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 20 Aug 2001 02:18:44          +0000
Received: from localhost (rcalkins@localhost) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with          ESMTP id TAA06068; Sun, 19 Aug 2001 19:18:43 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.LNX.4.10.10108191903070.5673-100000@itc.uci.edu>
Date:         Sun, 19 Aug 2001 19:18:43 -0700
Reply-To: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Fw: Virus warning and info
Comments: To: Robert <OlympusMons@MINDSPRING.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <008101c12816$67d83a20$7ab056d1@oemcomputer>

Hi Bob,

On Sat, 18 Aug 2001, Robert wrote:

> Ray and AROCKET:
>
> But here's my question(s): Some guy posts something to AR and says, say,
> "Here's a neat spreadsheet for motor building calculations," or "Here's neat
> pictures of my last launch." Aren't people going to just naturally open that
> attachment?
This is that the aRocket upload site is for.

99% of all viruses are spread by viruses, very unlikely you'll get one
from a real person.

> Q # 2: Someone posts and says: "Here's a neat website with launch pictures
> (or something) and puts the link. Now, with my fairly minimal knowledge of
> PCs and the internet, I'm not sure you CAN'T get a virus by merely logging
> on to a website that is designed to spread viruses. I know one should say
> "NO" to "Do you want Active-X controls to run?" for any site you have no
> solid reason to trust. But with the technology and the holes in security
> that there are on the net these days, I don't know if you might not be sunk
> merely following a link!
Highly unlikely.  I've seen it once, years ago.  And I surf a LOT!

Ray

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 16000 invoked from network); 20 Aug 2001 02:23:20 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 20 Aug 2001 02:23:20 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 27632 invoked by uid 50005); 20 Aug 2001 02:23:30 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.218748 secs); 20 Aug 2001 02:23:30 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 20 Aug 2001 02:23:29 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA06108; Sun, 19 Aug 2001 19:21:32 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 91925 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 20 Aug 2001 02:20:11          +0000
Received: from robin.mail.pas.earthlink.net (robin.mail.pas.earthlink.net          [207.217.120.65]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA05917          for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Sun, 19 Aug 2001 19:07:05 -0700
Received: from earthlink.net (dialup-209.245.130.58.Dial1.SanJose1.Level3.net          [209.245.130.58]) by robin.mail.pas.earthlink.net (EL-8_9_3_3/8.9.3)          with ESMTP id TAA14498; Sun, 19 Aug 2001 19:07:02 -0700 (PDT)
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.75 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.16-22 i686)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <v01510100630b7a04fffd@[63.24.225.9]>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B807102.89C9A5D9@earthlink.net>
Date:         Sun, 19 Aug 2001 19:08:02 -0700
Reply-To: "David Weinshenker" <daze39@EARTHLINK.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "David Weinshenker" <daze39@EARTHLINK.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Solid rocket boosters
Comments: To: Jerry Irvine <01rocket@GTE.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Jerry Irvine wrote:
> I see you are raising a lot of issues
> to try to flesh out our strategies.

Welcome to Arocket, sir! It's what we do here. :)

> Let me be vague.

If you wish. We'll respect that too.

-dave w

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 7275 invoked from network); 20 Aug 2001 02:30:27 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 20 Aug 2001 02:30:27 -0000
Received: (qmail 32113 invoked by uid 50005); 20 Aug 2001 02:28:49 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smpte.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 2.39922 secs); 20 Aug 2001 02:28:49 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 20 Aug 2001 02:28:44 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA06161; Sun, 19 Aug 2001 19:26:18 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 91972 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 20 Aug 2001 02:24:57          +0000
Received: from spsystems.net (spsystems.net [209.47.149.227]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA06137 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Sun,          19 Aug 2001 19:24:56 -0700
Received: (from henry@localhost) by spsystems.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id WAA20513;          Sun, 19 Aug 2001 22:24:06 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010819221424.19807B-100000@spsystems.net>
Date:         Sun, 19 Aug 2001 22:24:06 -0400
Reply-To: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Subject:      [AR] 2DOF (was Re: [AR] Solid rocket boosters)
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <002d01c127fa$02a29040$0400a8c0@hatjs>

On Sat, 18 Aug 2001, Jamie Morken wrote:
> > Only if you either (a) had something else to do roll control or (b) were
> > very lucky and had minimal roll torques.
>
> Ok so why can't a 2DOF system get to orbit? :)  Maybe I need to play more
> flight sims but from what I recall it just takes longer to do certain
> manouvering when you can't roll.

The problem is that you *will* have roll torques, and unless something
opposes them, the roll rate will build up steadily.  (As witness, for
example, the early main-engine cutoff of the second Ariane 5.)  With a
flexible guidance system, a *slow* roll won't do much harm.  But it won't
necessarily stay slow.  Your pitch and yaw controls will be slowly
changing places as the rocket rolls, but they have a limited speed of
response, and as the roll speeds up, you'll reach the point where they
can't respond quickly enough, and control will be lost.

> I guess if you get into a high speed barrel roll this would complicate the
> 2DOF control severely but fins could minimize it in the atmosphere perhaps
> and once out of the atmosphere I don't think a roll would start unless the
> plume was swirling?

Fins won't necessarily help that much without additional measures, such as
rollerons (whose whole purpose, on Sidewinder, is to limit roll rate to
the point where pitch and yaw controls can keep up with it).

And there probably will be a little bit of swirl in your plume, if only
(in an orthodox solid) due to minor asymmetries in nozzle ablation.  It
doesn't take very much if it's unopposed.  Especially in a long skinny
rocket, the moment of inertia on that axis is small and spin can build up
quickly.

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 9230 invoked from network); 20 Aug 2001 02:31:07 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 20 Aug 2001 02:31:07 -0000
Received: (qmail 4315 invoked by uid 50005); 20 Aug 2001 02:31:17 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.206345 secs); 20 Aug 2001 02:31:17 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 20 Aug 2001 02:31:16 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA06186; Sun, 19 Aug 2001 19:28:16 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 91979 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 20 Aug 2001 02:26:55          +0000
Received: from localhost (rcalkins@localhost) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with          ESMTP id TAA06169; Sun, 19 Aug 2001 19:26:54 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.LNX.4.10.10108191925080.5673-100000@itc.uci.edu>
Date:         Sun, 19 Aug 2001 19:26:54 -0700
Reply-To: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
Subject:      Re: [AR] List problems: Virus-related?
Comments: To: Robert <OlympusMons@MINDSPRING.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <001801c12859$f4337d20$c0b756d1@oemcomputer>

Just a cooincidence.  When the discussion gets heavy, it overloads the
list software and the system hangs.  I can't free it, and have to wait for
Dave to check his e-mail.

Ray

On Sat, 18 Aug 2001, Robert wrote:

> First, on my previous message, I realize I did a "Duh!" I said, in effect, if the SirCam worm runs it's own server, can't they find it and arrest the perpetrators? Later, I realized that "running its own server" doubtless refers to what it does in the victim's computer. Duh!
>
> Second, as you all must know, the list has been being held. Assuming it isn't just me (I was wondering, after I talked about the virus and if they wondered if I was responsible for it because I talked about it, which would be absurd), then no one has been getting messages all day; is this because of conerns over the virus or is it a coincidence?
>
> Bob K.
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 16565 invoked from network); 20 Aug 2001 02:43:58 -0000
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 20 Aug 2001 02:43:58 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 17606 invoked by uid 50005); 20 Aug 2001 02:42:21 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smpte.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.206803 secs); 20 Aug 2001 02:42:21 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 20 Aug 2001 02:42:21 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA06247; Sun, 19 Aug 2001 19:41:56 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 91986 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 20 Aug 2001 02:41:46          +0000
Received: from gull.mail.pas.earthlink.net (gull.mail.pas.earthlink.net          [207.217.121.85]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA06210          for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Sun, 19 Aug 2001 19:31:46 -0700
Received: from earthlink.net (dialup-209.245.130.58.Dial1.SanJose1.Level3.net          [209.245.130.58]) by gull.mail.pas.earthlink.net (EL-8_9_3_3/8.9.3)          with ESMTP id TAA01468; Sun, 19 Aug 2001 19:31:44 -0700 (PDT)
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.75 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.16-22 i686)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <v01510100630b7a04fffd@[63.24.225.9]>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B8076CC.E31D0628@earthlink.net>
Date:         Sun, 19 Aug 2001 19:32:44 -0700
Reply-To: "David Weinshenker" <daze39@EARTHLINK.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "David Weinshenker" <daze39@EARTHLINK.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Solid rocket boosters
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Jerry Irvine wrote:
> ... our first flights are specified to
> be unguided.  By doing "dry runs" of guidance routines on rockets which are
> unguided we can compare data from software calls in high performance flight
> to live guidance tests on low performance flights and gain some insight.
> Not much I assume however.

Well, that actually does seem to make sense... start by demonstrating
that you can correctly sense the path of a free-flight rocket, for
example... I know it's an approach that I've used on a smaller scale -
such as sending up an altimeter/"flight computer" in "along for the
ride" mode to make sure it's at least giving plausible readouts
before trusting it to deployment duties.

-dave w

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 20613 invoked from network); 20 Aug 2001 03:38:18 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 20 Aug 2001 03:38:18 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 13824 invoked by uid 50005); 20 Aug 2001 03:38:27 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 1.266515 secs); 20 Aug 2001 03:38:27 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 20 Aug 2001 03:38:24 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA06384; Sun, 19 Aug 2001 20:35:57 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 91997 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 20 Aug 2001 03:35:50          +0000
Received: from dns2.seanet.com (dns2.seanet.com [199.181.164.2]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA06370 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun,          19 Aug 2001 20:35:50 -0700
Received: from seanet.com (ssstolt.seanet.com [204.182.68.23]) by          dns2.seanet.com (8.11.5/8.11.5) with ESMTP id f7K3Zlj24154; Sun, 19          Aug 2001 20:35:47 -0700 (PDT)
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.73 [en] (Win98; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010818103011.26212A-100000@spsystems.net>            <l03130303b7a61d373e02@[63.10.189.23]>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Message-ID:  <3B8083D7.39908393@seanet.com>
Date:         Sun, 19 Aug 2001 20:28:23 -0700
Reply-To: "Sherwood Stolt" <ssstolt@SEANET.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Sherwood Stolt" <ssstolt@SEANET.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Help with some calculations
Comments: cc: Aaron Smith <ttocs@GTE.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Go to the following web site and choose ammonia, isobaric properties
and whatever units you like, choose the end points as your range and
look at the enthalpy graph.  That gives you the amount of heat needed.
I'm not sure how efficient you burner is.

http://webbook.nist.gov/chemistry/fluid/

Aaron Smith wrote:

> Hey everyone,
>
>         I need some math guidance.  I would like to know how to calculate
> the amount of propane needed to heat 8.66 liters of ammonia from 150 to
> 400, constant pressure of 1100 PSI.  The formula itself would be better
> than just the answer.  I can't really give more information, as I can't
> talk about my project.  Any help would be appreciated.
>
> Thanks,
> Aaron

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 5413 invoked from network); 20 Aug 2001 03:56:37 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 20 Aug 2001 03:56:37 -0000
Received: (qmail 31693 invoked by uid 50005); 20 Aug 2001 03:56:47 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.208107 secs); 20 Aug 2001 03:56:47 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 20 Aug 2001 03:56:47 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA06456; Sun, 19 Aug 2001 20:54:31 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 92004 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 20 Aug 2001 03:54:22          +0000
Received: from imo-d06.mx.aol.com (imo-d06.mx.aol.com [205.188.157.38]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA06442 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Sun, 19 Aug 2001 20:54:22 -0700
Received: from JMKrell@aol.com by imo-d06.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v31_r1.4.) id          w.8d.b2eb7ee (4206) for <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Sun, 19 Aug 2001          23:54:15 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0B84_01C56B69.4AB59740"
X-Mailer: AOL 6.0 for Windows US sub 10540
Message-ID:  <8d.b2eb7ee.28b1e3e6@aol.com>
Date:         Sun, 19 Aug 2001 23:54:14 EDT
Reply-To: <JMKrell@AOL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <JMKrell@AOL.COM>
Subject:      [AR] Help with some calculations
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0B84_01C56B69.4AB59740
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable


        I need some math guidance.  I would like to know how to calculate
the amount of propane needed to heat 8.66 liters of ammonia from 150=BA to
400=BA, constant pressure of 1100 PSI.  The formula itself would be better
than just the answer.  I can't really give more information, as I can't
talk about my project.  Any help would be appreciated.


Aaron,

What are your temperature units, =B0C, =B0F, =B0K?=20

Critical Point for ammonia  132.4=B0C (405.55=B0K), 1653 psi (114.8 bar)=20
pressure, density 235 kg.m-3.

How are you keeping the pressure constant over your temperature range?

John Krell




------=_NextPart_000_0B84_01C56B69.4AB59740
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<HTML><FONT FACE=3Darial,helvetica><FONT  SIZE=3D2>
<BR> &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;I need some math guidance. &n=
bsp;I would like to know how to calculate
<BR>the amount of propane needed to heat 8.66 liters of ammonia from 150=BA=20=
to
<BR>400=BA, constant pressure of 1100 PSI. &nbsp;The formula itself would be=
 better
<BR>than just the answer. &nbsp;I can't really give more information, as I c=
an't
<BR>talk about my project. &nbsp;Any help would be appreciated.
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>Aaron,
<BR></FONT><FONT  COLOR=3D"#0f0f0f" SIZE=3D2 FAMILY=3D"SANSSERIF" FACE=3D"Ar=
ial" LANG=3D"0">
<BR>What are your temperature units, =B0C, =B0F, =B0K?=20
<BR>
<BR>Critical Point for ammonia &nbsp;132.4=B0C (405.55=B0K), 1653 psi (114.8=
 bar)=20
<BR>pressure, density 235 kg.m-3.
<BR>
<BR>How are you keeping the pressure constant over your temperature range?
<BR>
<BR>John Krell
<BR>
<BR>
<BR></FONT></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0B84_01C56B69.4AB59740--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 24384 invoked from network); 20 Aug 2001 04:16:27 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 20 Aug 2001 04:16:27 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 22968 invoked by uid 50005); 20 Aug 2001 04:14:50 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smpte.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.314148 secs); 20 Aug 2001 04:14:50 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 20 Aug 2001 04:14:48 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA06603; Sun, 19 Aug 2001 21:14:15 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 92017 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 20 Aug 2001 04:14:13          +0000
Received: from smtp006.mailsrvcs.net (smtp006pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.185])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA06588 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 19 Aug 2001 21:14:13 -0700
Received: from [63.27.96.224] (1Cust224.tnt1.san-bernardino.ca.da.uu.net          [63.27.96.224]) by smtp006.mailsrvcs.net  with ESMTP for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; id f7K4Dfq26472 Sun, 19 Aug 2001 23:13:41          -0500 (CDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: GTE/01rocket@mail.gte.net
References: <200108181626.MAA14277@ares.idirect.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <a05100303b7a63e93eaf6@[63.27.96.224]>
Date:         Sun, 19 Aug 2001 21:13:38 -0700
Reply-To: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Solid rocket boosters
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <200108181626.MAA14277@ares.idirect.com>

>What about hybrids?  Simpler than most liquid designs, no
>regenerative cooling needed, thrust can be slowly turn off,
>most of the dISP of a solid fuel rocket.  Seems to be a
>good match for manned suborbital flight.
>
>           Earl Colby Pottinger


I agree if you limit the discussion to manned suborbital hybrids are
fine.  So are other things which scale to orbit.


>
>PS.  I assume Nitric Oxide is lots of people already doing it.
>PSS. Plus the fuel is cheap.
>PSSS. Shoud that be dISP or dISP*  ?????


DI(sub)sp



--
Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
Opinion, the whole thing.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 27888 invoked from network); 20 Aug 2001 04:42:45 -0000
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 20 Aug 2001 04:42:45 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 25055 invoked by uid 50005); 20 Aug 2001 04:41:08 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smpte.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.950222 secs); 20 Aug 2001 04:41:08 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 20 Aug 2001 04:41:06 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA06700; Sun, 19 Aug 2001 21:40:19 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 92031 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 20 Aug 2001 04:40:13          +0000
Received: from smtp008.mailsrvcs.net (smtp008pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.187])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA06685 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 19 Aug 2001 21:40:12 -0700
Received: from [63.10.201.235] (1Cust235.tnt3.hilo.hi.da.uu.net          [63.10.201.235]) by smtp008.mailsrvcs.net  with ESMTP ; id          f7K4ddC13349 Sun, 19 Aug 2001 23:39:40 -0500 (CDT)
X-Sender: ttocs@mail.gte.net
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by itc.uci.edu id VAA06686
Message-ID:  <l03130300b7a643eb55eb@[63.10.189.24]>
Date:         Sun, 19 Aug 2001 18:39:04 -1000
Reply-To: "Aaron Smith" <ttocs@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Aaron Smith" <ttocs@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Help with some calculations
Comments: To: JMKrell@AOL.COM
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <8d.b2eb7ee.28b1e3e6@aol.com>

At 11:54 PM -0400 8/19/01, JMKrell@AOL.COM wrote:
>
>        I need some math guidance.  I would like to know how to calculate
>the amount of propane needed to heat 8.66 liters of ammonia from 150 to
>400, constant pressure of 1100 PSI.  The formula itself would be better
>than just the answer.  I can't really give more information, as I can't
>talk about my project.  Any help would be appreciated.
>
>
>Aaron,
>
>What are your temperature units, C, F, K?

Sorry 'bout that, the temp. units are F.

>
>Critical Point for ammonia  132.4C (405.55K), 1653 psi (114.8 bar)
>pressure, density 235 kg.m-3.

I checked it all out with the NIST chemistry webbook, and it works out for
my application.

>
>How are you keeping the pressure constant over your temperature range?
>
>John Krell

Expansion at the same rate of heating.

Aaron

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 9540 invoked from network); 20 Aug 2001 05:46:05 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 20 Aug 2001 05:46:05 -0000
Received: (qmail 24447 invoked by uid 50005); 20 Aug 2001 05:44:59 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smptf.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.283131 secs); 20 Aug 2001 05:44:59 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 20 Aug 2001 05:44:58 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA06910; Sun, 19 Aug 2001 22:43:19 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 92059 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 20 Aug 2001 05:43:13          +0000
Received: from wrench.toolcity.net (root@wrench.toolcity.net [208.0.188.2]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA06895 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 19 Aug 2001 22:43:13 -0700
Received: from [63.169.101.251]          (dap-63-169-101-251.meadville-tnt-1.pa.toolcity.net [63.169.101.251])          by wrench.toolcity.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id BAA09402; Mon, 20          Aug 2001 01:43:06 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <v01510100b7a64299ed0b@[208.22.189.218]>
Date:         Mon, 20 Aug 2001 01:45:27 -0500
Reply-To: "al bradley" <abradley@TOOLCITY.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "al bradley" <abradley@TOOLCITY.NET>
Subject:      [AR] 1 testing, 2 desired qualities for candy-KNO3              propellant??????
Comments: To: James Yawn <jyawn@SFCC.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Jimmy: While the continued discussion of candy propellant is fascinating at
times I am concerned that there is not a common focus among its
correspondents, so this is posted to the general list too.

It would be nice to pin down the qualities our writers consider important
in their trials (and errors).

Would they PLEEZE (grinning) add to this beginning list of characteristics
they might seek and say why they seek them?? And if they are right on the
mark they might say how they hope to measure them, if possible, in the
future.

Tensile strength:

Hardness:

Ductility:

Shear strength:

Density:

Load-bearing (compressive strength):

Dollar cost per kilogram

Burn rate: Open air

           Under pressure: if such can be measured

Weight of solid combustion-remnants:

I am sure that there are other properties I have not listed, and I suppose
that the last entry may not be readily measurable, and I don't expect that
others might be equipped to measure anything like that. I only list it to
focus on the scientific aspects we could aspire to if we wish to be totally
objective in our view of what we hope for.

Let me add that I am just as susceptible to the sense of adventure and
excitement over the advancement of candy propellants as anyone else. But I
hope that there are among us those who are serious enough to recognize the
need to weigh, measure and record before we tout a particular approach as
being all-inclusive to doing the very best we can. Even that leaves the
field wide open for experimentation, but approached in uniform observation
so that we all can share in the development.

I would have to say that I am also at least as deficient as some others in
trying to devise all of the simple tests at this time that would enhance
our common goals. But I am sure our common ingenuities could be pooled to
do better to the benefit of all. Particularly in testing!

In the meantime I have little optimism as to how well individuals would
participate in objective co-operation. Suprise me!

in the interim:
respectfully to all of our "candy" makers
al bradley

------------------------------------------------------------------
Can you live Life with this?: "Unless there is a law, an agreement, or a
long-standing custom, No one `Deserves' Anything -- Either Good or Bad!"

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 20610 invoked from network); 20 Aug 2001 05:50:28 -0000
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 20 Aug 2001 05:50:28 -0000
Received: (qmail 29488 invoked by uid 50005); 20 Aug 2001 05:49:22 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smptf.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.161615 secs); 20 Aug 2001 05:49:22 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 20 Aug 2001 05:49:22 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA06943; Sun, 19 Aug 2001 22:47:16 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 92066 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 20 Aug 2001 05:47:15          +0000
Received: from castor.ridgenet.net (IDENT:root@castor.ridgenet.net          [199.120.150.29]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA06929          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 19 Aug 2001 22:47:14 -0700
Received: from kristinscomp (pm101.ridgenet.net [204.154.246.101]) by          castor.ridgenet.net (8.11.0/8.11.0) with SMTP id f7K5dQS30695; Sun,          19 Aug 2001 22:39:26 -0700
References:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010818103254.26212B-100000@spsystems.net>              <002d01c127fa$02a29040$0400a8c0@hatjs>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <00b001c1293c$c3eab500$1b30fea9@kristinscomp>
Date:         Sun, 19 Aug 2001 22:55:10 -0700
Reply-To: "Kristin & David Hall" <thehalls@RIDGENET.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Kristin & David Hall" <thehalls@RIDGENET.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Solid rocket boosters
Comments: To: Jamie Morken <jmorken@HOME.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

> Ok so why can't a 2DOF system get to orbit? :)  Maybe I need to play more
> flight sims but from what I recall it just takes longer to do certain
> manouvering when you can't roll.

As others have said, any slight torque induced unopposed by the system will
build...

> I guess if you get into a high speed barrel roll this would complicate the
> 2DOF control severely but fins could minimize it in the atmosphere perhaps
> and once out of the atmosphere I don't think a roll would start unless the

Actually, fins would be one of the most likely sources of a "stray" torque
on the system.  The odds are that your fins aren't going to be *exactly* on
straight.  Not being on *exactly* straight means that they'll induce a roll.
That's bad juju.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 25685 invoked from network); 20 Aug 2001 05:52:37 -0000
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 20 Aug 2001 05:52:37 -0000
Received: (qmail 3879 invoked by uid 50005); 20 Aug 2001 05:50:59 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smpte.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 1.145118 secs); 20 Aug 2001 05:50:59 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 20 Aug 2001 05:50:56 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA06966; Sun, 19 Aug 2001 22:48:51 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 92073 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 20 Aug 2001 05:48:50          +0000
Received: from castor.ridgenet.net (IDENT:root@castor.ridgenet.net          [199.120.150.29]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA06952          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 19 Aug 2001 22:48:50 -0700
Received: from kristinscomp (pm101.ridgenet.net [204.154.246.101]) by          castor.ridgenet.net (8.11.0/8.11.0) with SMTP id f7K5fCS30806; Sun,          19 Aug 2001 22:41:12 -0700
References:  <66.1319ff79.28b04533@aol.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0B87_01C56B69.4AC17E20"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <00b401c1293d$02f159c0$1b30fea9@kristinscomp>
Date:         Sun, 19 Aug 2001 22:57:34 -0700
Reply-To: "Kristin & David Hall" <thehalls@RIDGENET.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Kristin & David Hall" <thehalls@RIDGENET.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Solid rocket boosters
Comments: To: Sociald84@AOL.COM
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0B87_01C56B69.4AC17E20
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable



  Who says a solid motor can't  be throtled? Look at the SRBs on the =
shuttle=20
  they aren't exactly throttled but through the use of some grain =
geometries=20
  the engines actually cut back their thrust for a short period and then =
build=20
  back up. This is built in to keep the shuttle in one piece when the =
vehicle=20
  hits max q.=20

In addition, have you seen what Aerojet has been up to with pintle =
nozzles lately?  Suffice to say that they've *demonstrated* solid rocket =
throttling as effective as any liquid system I've ever heard of.  There =
are also some experimental systems out there that have full blown =
stop/restart capabilities.


------=_NextPart_000_0B87_01C56B69.4AC17E20
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META content=3D"text/html; charset=3Diso-8859-1" =
http-equiv=3DContent-Type>
<META content=3D"MSHTML 5.00.2614.3500" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#b8b8b8>
<BLOCKQUOTE=20
style=3D"BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: =
0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; PADDING-RIGHT: 0px">
  <DIV><FONT face=3Darial,helvetica><FONT color=3D#000000 face=3DArial =
lang=3D0 size=3D2=20
  FAMILY=3D"SANSSERIF"><BR></FONT><FONT color=3D#000000 face=3DArial =
lang=3D0 size=3D3=20
  FAMILY=3D"SANSSERIF"><BR>Who says a solid motor can't &nbsp;be =
throtled? Look at=20
  the SRBs on the shuttle <BR>they aren't exactly throttled but through =
the use=20
  of some grain geometries <BR>the engines actually cut back their =
thrust for a=20
  short period and then build <BR>back up. This is built in to keep the =
shuttle=20
  in one piece when the vehicle <BR>hits max q.=20
<BR></FONT></FONT></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE>
<DIV><FONT face=3Darial,helvetica><FONT color=3D#000000 face=3DArial =
lang=3D0 size=3D2=20
FAMILY=3D"SANSSERIF">In addition, have you seen what Aerojet has been up =
to with=20
pintle nozzles lately?&nbsp; Suffice to say that they've *demonstrated* =
solid=20
rocket throttling as effective as any liquid system I've ever heard =
of.&nbsp;=20
There are also some experimental systems out there that have full blown=20
stop/restart capabilities.</FONT></FONT></DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0B87_01C56B69.4AC17E20--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 17394 invoked from network); 20 Aug 2001 06:12:29 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 20 Aug 2001 06:12:29 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 28750 invoked by uid 50005); 20 Aug 2001 06:10:51 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smpte.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.216039 secs); 20 Aug 2001 06:10:51 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 20 Aug 2001 06:10:51 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA07069; Sun, 19 Aug 2001 23:10:22 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 92085 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 20 Aug 2001 06:10:16          +0000
Received: from femail47.sdc1.sfba.home.com (imail@femail47.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.254.60.41]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA07055          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 19 Aug 2001 23:10:16 -0700
Received: from c1649002-a.earthlink.net ([24.20.95.67]) by          femail47.sdc1.sfba.home.com (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20          201-229-121-120-20010223) with ESMTP id          <20010820061015.COY23302.femail47.sdc1.sfba.home.com@c1649002-a.earthlink.net> for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>;          Sun, 19 Aug 2001 23:10:15 -0700
X-Sender: forkbomb@mail.earthlink.net
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.0.2
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <5.0.2.1.0.20010819230313.02adf0b0@mail.earthlink.net>
Date:         Sun, 19 Aug 2001 23:10:13 -0700
Reply-To: "Pierce Nichols" <forkbomb@EARTHLINK.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Pierce Nichols" <forkbomb@EARTHLINK.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Solid rocket boosters
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <v01510100630b7a04fffd@[63.24.225.9]>

At 11:50 AM 8/18/2001 -0500, Jerry Irvine wrote:
> >A single gimballed nozzle only gets you 2DOF.  Were you going to have
> >dedicated roll control jets in that case, or use some kind of jet vanes?
>
>Storable hypergolic and 3DOF gimballed nozzle or


         How do you get 3DOF out of a single nozzle without jet vanes or
auxiliary nozzles? I want to hear about this...


>4 gimballed nozzles


         Two or more gimballed nozzles will get you 3DOF -- why especially
four? Does it simplify the gimballing on each nozzle?


>We consider "gain" issues to be sufficiently critical and variable our
>guidance software adjusts for it in flight.  Our sub-scale flights on a
>variety of rocket sizes have benefited from this approach as the system is
>useable with minor mods on all rocket sizes so far.  We still have some
>damping issues to solve but our software is very crude.


         In that case, how do you set the gain on the routines that set the
gain on the control routines? Is it explicitly set or implicit in some part
of the software/hardware design?

         -p


Mars or Bust!
www.marssociety.com

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 20390 invoked from network); 20 Aug 2001 07:04:30 -0000
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 20 Aug 2001 07:04:30 -0000
Received: (qmail 8836 invoked by uid 50005); 20 Aug 2001 07:03:24 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smptf.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.200235 secs); 20 Aug 2001 07:03:24 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 20 Aug 2001 07:03:23 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA07355; Mon, 20 Aug 2001 00:02:07 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 92121 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 20 Aug 2001 07:01:56          +0000
Received: from femail1.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail1.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.0.95.81]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA07341 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 20 Aug 2001 00:01:56 -0700
Received: from hal2001 ([24.77.53.16]) by femail1.sdc1.sfba.home.com (InterMail          vM.4.01.03.20 201-229-121-120-20010223) with SMTP id          <20010820070150.BAPB3782.femail1.sdc1.sfba.home.com@hal2001> for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 20 Aug 2001 00:01:50 -0700
References:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010818103254.26212B-100000@spsystems.net>              <002d01c127fa$02a29040$0400a8c0@hatjs>             <00b001c1293c$c3eab500$1b30fea9@kristinscomp>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <001501c12944$dae76fc0$0400a8c0@hatjs>
Date:         Sun, 19 Aug 2001 23:53:44 -0700
Reply-To: "Jamie Morken" <jmorken@HOME.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jamie Morken" <jmorken@HOME.COM>
Subject:      [AR] 2DOF control
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Hi all,

> Actually, fins would be one of the most likely sources of a "stray" torque
> on the system.  The odds are that your fins aren't going to be *exactly*
on
> straight.  Not being on *exactly* straight means that they'll induce a
roll.
> That's bad juju.

I think there are two important forces for rotation with fins:

#1. force that the fins exert rotationally due to misalignment

#2. force that the air exerts on the fins countering rotation

Primarily, #1 increases with airspeed and #2 increases with rotation.

I think the maximum spin-rate (intersection of the above two forces at a
given airspeed) would determine whether an amateur rocket using only a 2DOF
control system could guide itself while still in the atmosphere.  If it
could, then for a 2 stage rocket the first stage could be a less complex
2DOF controlled booster and the second stage could be 3DOF controlled
perhaps?

And for the first stage, if the spin gets to high it will have already lined
itself up "reasonably" well and then the control system could shut down and
spin stabilization could take over perhaps?  Not sure if it would be worth
doing this but it would be interesting to know if it is possible..

best regards,
Jamie

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 24604 invoked from network); 20 Aug 2001 07:06:04 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 20 Aug 2001 07:06:04 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 14795 invoked by uid 50005); 20 Aug 2001 07:04:26 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smpte.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.379003 secs); 20 Aug 2001 07:04:26 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 20 Aug 2001 07:04:26 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA07379; Mon, 20 Aug 2001 00:04:01 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 92128 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 20 Aug 2001 07:04:00          +0000
Received: from femail31.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail31.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.254.60.21]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA07365          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 20 Aug 2001 00:04:00 -0700
Received: from c1649002-a.earthlink.net ([24.20.95.67]) by          femail31.sdc1.sfba.home.com (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20          201-229-121-120-20010223) with ESMTP id          <20010820070354.BFQU27926.femail31.sdc1.sfba.home.com@c1649002-a.earthlink.net> for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>;          Mon, 20 Aug 2001 00:03:54 -0700
X-Sender: forkbomb@mail.earthlink.net
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.0.2
References: <66.1319ff79.28b04533@aol.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <5.0.2.1.0.20010820000224.00ab0430@mail.earthlink.net>
Date:         Mon, 20 Aug 2001 00:03:52 -0700
Reply-To: "Pierce Nichols" <forkbomb@EARTHLINK.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Pierce Nichols" <forkbomb@EARTHLINK.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Solid rocket boosters
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <00b401c1293d$02f159c0$1b30fea9@kristinscomp>

At 10:57 PM 8/19/2001 -0700, Kristin & David Hall wrote:


>>Who says a solid motor can't  be throtled? Look at the SRBs on the shuttle
>>they aren't exactly throttled but through the use of some grain geometries
>>the engines actually cut back their thrust for a short period and then build
>>back up. This is built in to keep the shuttle in one piece when the vehicle
>>hits max q.
>In addition, have you seen what Aerojet has been up to with pintle nozzles
>lately?  Suffice to say that they've *demonstrated* solid rocket
>throttling as effective as any liquid system I've ever heard of.  There
>are also some experimental systems out there that have full blown
>stop/restart capabilities.


         Are you talking about gelled propellants? Those are liquid
rockets, not solids. The fuel and oxidizer are stored as thixotropic
liquids. That is to say that under normal conditions they are gelatinous,
but when subjected to enough shear stress, they become liquid a flow easily.

         -p


Mars or Bust!
www.marssociety.com

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 26510 invoked from network); 20 Aug 2001 07:06:56 -0000
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 20 Aug 2001 07:06:56 -0000
Received: (qmail 10585 invoked by uid 50005); 20 Aug 2001 07:05:50 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smptf.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.126509 secs); 20 Aug 2001 07:05:50 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 20 Aug 2001 07:05:49 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA07400; Mon, 20 Aug 2001 00:04:13 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 92135 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 20 Aug 2001 07:04:12          +0000
Received: from castor.ridgenet.net (IDENT:root@castor.ridgenet.net          [199.120.150.29]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA07384          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 20 Aug 2001 00:04:04 -0700
Received: from kristinscomp (pm101.ridgenet.net [204.154.246.101]) by          castor.ridgenet.net (8.11.0/8.11.0) with SMTP id f7K6uQS02591; Sun,          19 Aug 2001 23:56:27 -0700
References:  <5.0.2.1.0.20010819230313.02adf0b0@mail.earthlink.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <000701c12947$862e90a0$1b30fea9@kristinscomp>
Date:         Mon, 20 Aug 2001 00:12:49 -0700
Reply-To: "Kristin & David Hall" <thehalls@RIDGENET.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Kristin & David Hall" <thehalls@RIDGENET.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Solid rocket boosters
Comments: To: Pierce Nichols <forkbomb@EARTHLINK.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

> >4 gimballed nozzles
>
>          Two or more gimballed nozzles will get you 3DOF -- why especially
> four? Does it simplify the gimballing on each nozzle?

Alas, I do not know if this is why Jerry wants 4 but.....

With a 2 nozzle system each nozzle must move in 2 axes in order to provide
3DOF control.

A 4 nozzle system, on the other hand, only requires that each nozzle gimble
in 1 axis.  This can simplify gimble design.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 22652 invoked from network); 20 Aug 2001 08:51:42 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 20 Aug 2001 08:51:42 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 11229 invoked by uid 50005); 20 Aug 2001 08:50:35 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smptf.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.210142 secs); 20 Aug 2001 08:50:35 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 20 Aug 2001 08:50:35 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id BAA07704; Mon, 20 Aug 2001 01:45:43 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 92160 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 20 Aug 2001 08:45:33          +0000
Received: from idsoftware.com (predator.idsoftware.com [192.246.40.34]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id BAA07690 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Mon, 20 Aug 2001 01:45:33 -0700
Received: from [192.246.40.144] (account johnc HELO pluto.idsoftware.com) by          idsoftware.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 3.4.7) with ESMTP id 352420 for          AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 20 Aug 2001 03:45:32 -0500
X-Sender: johnc@mail.idsoftware.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.1
References: <5.0.2.1.0.20010819230313.02adf0b0@mail.earthlink.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <4.3.1.2.20010820035613.02ca53f8@mail.idsoftware.com>
Date:         Mon, 20 Aug 2001 03:58:10 -0500
Reply-To: "John Carmack" <johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Carmack" <johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Solid rocket boosters
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <000701c12947$862e90a0$1b30fea9@kristinscomp>

At 12:12 AM 8/20/2001 -0700, you wrote:
> > >4 gimballed nozzles
> >
> >          Two or more gimballed nozzles will get you 3DOF -- why especially
> > four? Does it simplify the gimballing on each nozzle?
>
>Alas, I do not know if this is why Jerry wants 4 but.....
>
>With a 2 nozzle system each nozzle must move in 2 axes in order to provide
>3DOF control.
>
>A 4 nozzle system, on the other hand, only requires that each nozzle gimble
>in 1 axis.  This can simplify gimble design.

Three hinged (1D movement) nozzles can give 3DOF.

A B C

Engines A and C swing up and down, while B swings side to side.

A and C swing together for one axis, opposite directions for roll, and B
gives the other axis.

John Carmack

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 8466 invoked from network); 20 Aug 2001 11:53:16 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 20 Aug 2001 11:53:16 -0000
Received: (qmail 6126 invoked by uid 50005); 20 Aug 2001 11:53:24 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.136385 secs); 20 Aug 2001 11:53:24 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 20 Aug 2001 11:53:24 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id EAA08320; Mon, 20 Aug 2001 04:46:43 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 92213 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 20 Aug 2001 11:46:36          +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (oe14.law12.hotmail.com [64.4.18.118]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id EAA08306 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 20 Aug 2001 04:46:36 -0700
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Mon,          20 Aug 2001 04:46:05 -0700
X-Originating-IP: [24.29.188.254]
References:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010818103254.26212B-100000@spsystems.net>                      <002d01c127fa$02a29040$0400a8c0@hatjs>                         <00b001c1293c$c3eab500$1b30fea9@kristinscomp>              <001501c12944$dae76fc0$0400a8c0@hatjs>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 20 Aug 2001 11:46:05.0237 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[B1B02650:01C1296D]
Message-ID:  <OE14ZDgC81TbdkSmLAz0000135a@hotmail.com>
Date:         Mon, 20 Aug 2001 06:47:43 -0500
Reply-To: "Mark Kruep" <mkruep@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Mark Kruep" <mkruep@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] 2DOF control
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Wouldn't rotational forces that were high enough for unaided spin
stabilization also terribly confuse a gyro based control system? Also,
wouldn't that require that all cargo/payload have its CG on the center axis
of the rocket to a fair degree of accuracy? Since it isn't likely to spin
very fast initially, I would think anything out of balance would cause a
rapidly growing wobble, and then the control system would try to kick in to
stabilize and probably worsen the condition until it couldn't process the
info fast enough and then pull one of those really cool looking 90 degree
turns at several thousand miles an hour.

If it actually got past that problem, wouldn't centrifugal forces at the
rotational velocities needed to stabilize it also reek havoc on the usually
delicate cargos carried on a to orbit vehicle? I don't know if it would add
up to a significant loss in energy or not, but I would think you would also
waste some of your power inducing your spin, since you obviously want as
much vertical travel as possible. To induce the spin you would need either

1. fin induced spin--added mass and drag in the atmosphere, not to mention
added control nightmares
2. gimballed nozzles--probably require more DOFs to keep the attitude
correct before spin stabilization, wasted propellant
                     to induce spin
3. some type of thrusters along the rocket to induce the spin--extra weight,
complex, most likely pretty expensive, use
up payload space that could otherwise carry more useful equipment

Any one of these is a potential penalty in how high an orbit is acheived.
???????


Mark

P.S. Could you use non-symmetrical airfoil shaped fins to induce spin
without using any control surfaces or adjustable fin angle? A lift(force)
would be produced perpindicular to the direction of travel right?


----- Original Message -----
From: "Jamie Morken" <jmorken@HOME.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Monday, August 20, 2001 1:53 AM
Subject: [AR] 2DOF control



>
> And for the first stage, if the spin gets to high it will have already
lined
> itself up "reasonably" well and then the control system could shut down
and
> spin stabilization could take over perhaps?  Not sure if it would be worth
> doing this but it would be interesting to know if it is possible..
>
> best regards,
> Jamie
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 6070 invoked from network); 20 Aug 2001 12:02:14 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 20 Aug 2001 12:02:14 -0000
Received: (qmail 7339 invoked by uid 50005); 20 Aug 2001 12:01:49 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (. Clean. Processed in 1.018942 secs); 20 Aug 2001 12:01:49 -0000
X-Qmail-Scanner-Mail-From: owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU via smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net
X-Qmail-Scanner-Rcpt-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
X-Qmail-Scanner: 0.96 (No viruses found. Processed in 1.018942 secs)
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 20 Aug 2001 12:01:46 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id EAA08368; Mon, 20 Aug 2001 04:59:57 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 92220 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 20 Aug 2001 11:59:55          +0000
Received: from fep3-orange.clear.net.nz (fep3-orange.clear.net.nz          [203.97.32.3]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id EAA08354          for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Mon, 20 Aug 2001 04:59:54 -0700
Received: from mkbs (d2-u36.acld.clear.net.nz [203.97.48.100]) by          fep3-orange.clear.net.nz (1.5/1.8) with SMTP id XAA05662; Mon, 20 Aug          2001 23:59:42 +1200 (NZST)
References:  <Pine.GSO.4.21.0108181114500.6539-100000@y.glue.umd.edu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <033b01c1296f$f0b3abe0$0100a8c0@mkbs>
Date:         Mon, 20 Aug 2001 20:31:50 +1200
Reply-To: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Organization: Applied Technology
Subject:      Re: [AR] Pistonless Piston Pumps with peroxide precat cycle
Comments: To: Andrew Case <acase@GLUE.UMD.EDU>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

> > A free floating "piston" could be used whose main purpose is to locate
the
> > fluid surface.
>
> The piston also lets you run inverted, provided you have good seals.
> Obviously running inverted is not ideal, but it's handy to have the
> capability just in case.

Being able to run inverted is a nice bonus but is not necessary as long as
the rocket motor is providing more thrust than gravity and drag.
Drag at burnout or on throttle-back is liable to be more of a problem as the
net decelerative forces can be many g. In the event of a sudden motor
stoppage for whatever reason while within substantial atmosphere and
travelling at significant speed the pump in its simplest form may experience
a surge of fluid into the top of the pump chamber. Depending where in the
cycle that it happened this might result in venting propellant via the gas
discharge breather. This COUILD be catastrophic for a number of reasons
depending on overall design. For instance if both pumps of a biprop vented
simultaneously with the motor still firing things could get "touchy". Almost
certainlt a final design would prevent this happening whether by using
floats, diaphragms, valve shutdown or whatever.

Anothe potential problem under negative g's is having the pump "run dry" and
inject pressurising gas into the feed line to the chamber. Outcome would
vary with design.

> > Metered flow COULD be used for switching but this is risky. As delivery
> > pressure should be reasonably constant as long as gas pressure is
constant
> > this may be possible but I would favour an active scheme. Short cycling
by
> > switching pump chambers before the delivery chamber is empty reduces
> > efficiency by dumping pressurised gas before it is necessary to do so,
so
> > should be avoided as much as where possible.  You will always have to
swap
> > over at least a short period before empty (or else!)
>
> I've always envisioned dumping the some of the pressurant into the main
> tank to keep main tank pressure up as it empties.

This could be done but the pressure requirements of the main tanks are
liable to be very substantially lower than those for the pumps so that the
complexity of secondary gas reuse may not be justified. Providing direct low
pressure feed directly to the tanks may be preferred. Another possible use
of pump exhaust gas would be to run secondary systems such as eg pneumatic
actuators. The very enthusiastic could use it to drive a small hydraulic
pump to give the stiffness and locking advantages of hydraulics but the
added complexity probably makes this unattractive.

> Obviously you don't
> dump all the pressurant into the main tank, or you end up with the
> main tank pressurized to the pump pressure,

boom boom ! :-)

> which kind of defeates the
> point. This adds complexity and takes up additional time (one reason
> for three chambers instead of two, but it can be done with two, as
> Henry points out), but it keeps the main tank pressure relatively
> steady, and might be lighter than a dedicated pressurizing system.

I've always thought of it with two chambers. The rate of pump chamber
emptying is constrained by the motor feed requirements and takes substantial
energy due to the elevated pressures, whereas pump chamber filling is a
relatively low energy task and probably more constrained by how large you
can make the feed plumbing, gas exhaust path and exhaust valve passages, and
the pressure drop of the feed non-return valve. Filling the pump chamber at
a rate faster than it empties should be quite easy.

> > A floating piston would also help minimise foam and swirl and .... .

Yes - these are some of the major objectives of it apart from level sensing.

> It also helps you know where your CG is, which is nice.

C of G location change with pump action would (should) be small compared to
other factors. PCs are small compared to main tank and vehicle mass. One
chamber is filling while the other is emptying and if the offline chamber
fills only slightly faster than the feed chamber is emptying the CofG should
move only slightly. Main tank emptying will be a much more major factor
albeit unidirectional. Any imbalance in the pump chambers contents will
cause the cofg to pulsate slightly at twice pump mcycle frequency.

> > Gas switching valves could be mechanically driven by eg a rotary "pump
> > block" with passages in it or by eg solenoid valves. (Solenoid valves
are
> > also of course ultimately mechanical). Solenoid valves could be used as
> > pilot valves to drive much larger pneumatic valving. My initial
intention is
> > to use solenoid valves directly for the prototype.
>
> I really like the idea - for the proof of concept you could use soda
> bottles,

This is my current intention as it allows viewing of results and a cheaply
modifed system for experimenting.
I intend to run at 100 psi to start. Once / if  all works well it can be
migrated to more useful pressures and "real" construction materials.

> simple solenoid valves

my initial target is 12 v operated solenoid valves with no secondary piot
function. These can be easily scaled in due course.
Control initially by microprocessor to allow flexibility of operation. (As
an electrical engineer, for me that's the easy part).

> (or even hand operated ones), and the
> height of the water spout as a pressure sensor. The only real issue to
> work out in the initial stage is how smoothly you can switch over.

I am hopeful that switchover will be able to be made extremely seamless.
I feel that this will be more dependent on maintaining constant pressure in
the pump chamber during the whole delivery stroke than anything else. ie a
regulator will be needed to feed gas throughout the stroke to overcome the
blowdown pressure decrease which occurs during a  pump cycle. This may
require a (hopefully small) high pressure reservoir post regulator. This
increases the gross pressurised space and therefore the weight but adds
little to the complexity.

As the delivery pump chambr (PC) approaches the end of its delivery stroke
the full offline PC is brought up to pressure. As long as the offline PC is
at lower pressure there will be NO delivery from it. Once they are at equal
pressure they will share the output equally. Adding a second pump cylinder
is essentially the same as doubling the area of the high pressure feed
plumbing from pump to injector. If the pump is correctly designed then
doubling the area of the feed passages should have minor effect on the flow
as the vast majority of preesure drop is across the injector and chamber. If
necessary PC changeover could be accompanied by a graded application and
removal of pressure.

> Later you can worry about higher pressures, lighter weights, pistons and
so on.

Agree.



regards

                Russell McMahon

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 9750 invoked from network); 20 Aug 2001 12:03:24 -0000
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 20 Aug 2001 12:03:24 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 2750 invoked by uid 50005); 20 Aug 2001 12:02:09 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smptf.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 2.699082 secs); 20 Aug 2001 12:02:09 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 20 Aug 2001 12:02:03 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id FAA08401; Mon, 20 Aug 2001 05:00:52 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 92227 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 20 Aug 2001 12:00:51          +0000
Received: from grucom2.gru.net (grucom2.gru.net [209.251.129.7]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id FAA08387 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon,          20 Aug 2001 05:00:51 -0700
Received: from [209.251.151.197] by grucom2.sfcc.net (NTMail          6.04.0010/NU4112.00.db1c8a4b) with ESMTP id kibvhaaa for          AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 20 Aug 2001 08:00:50 -0400
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (Win95; I)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <v01510101b79fd5943cff@[208.22.189.128]>            <00da01c12568$aa2284e0$0100a8c0@mkbs>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B80FC55.6A573436@sfcc.net>
Date:         Mon, 20 Aug 2001 08:02:29 -0400
Reply-To: "James Yawn" <jyawn@SFCC.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "James Yawn" <jyawn@SFCC.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] AP/Dextrose propellant issues.
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Russell McMahon wrote:

> In a typical amateur core burning solid fuel rocket, ....

> the initial acceleration will be around 15g (   Isp* Mf / tburn /  [Mf+Mr  ]
> rising to around 25g (  Isp * Mf / tburn / Mr ) just before burnout ! The fuel grain
> then weighs that many times more than when at rest. Imagine placing a 25 kg
> weight on the top of a 1 kg Candy grain. Imagine doing the same thing with a
> 1kg AP + rubber grain. Practical aspects probably make the problems worse as
> size increases.

Jimmy Yawn wrote:

This struck my fancy.  Al Bradley reports making sturdy candy with
compression, I make it with recrystallization.  I don't know about the
strength of cast candy, but that is just a reflection of my own
ignorance.

So I submitted my candy to some compression-strength tests and obtained
promising results.

They are described in boring detail at:

http://members.fortunecity.com/jyawn/compression/index.htm

In short, a cylinder of recrystallized candy propellant (KN/sucrose) was
formed 1-1/2 inches in diameter and just under two inches long.  It was
repeatedly subjected to static weights of up to 165 pounds, and did not
fail.

After ten or so such tests, the cylinder was compressed by about 8
percent but otherwise intact.

25 kilograms is about 55 pounds, and the sample I tested held over three
times that.  I hope to test my sample to failure soon, and will report
any new info promptly, if not sooner.

Respectfully,
Jimmy Yawn

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 15548 invoked from network); 20 Aug 2001 12:05:08 -0000
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 20 Aug 2001 12:05:08 -0000
Received: (qmail 18809 invoked by uid 50005); 20 Aug 2001 12:03:28 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smpte.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 2.017624 secs); 20 Aug 2001 12:03:28 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 20 Aug 2001 12:03:24 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id FAA08426; Mon, 20 Aug 2001 05:02:08 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 92234 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 20 Aug 2001 12:02:07          +0000
Received: from fep3-orange.clear.net.nz (fep3-orange.clear.net.nz          [203.97.32.3]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id FAA08412          for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Mon, 20 Aug 2001 05:02:06 -0700
Received: from mkbs (d2-u36.acld.clear.net.nz [203.97.48.100]) by          fep3-orange.clear.net.nz (1.5/1.8) with SMTP id AAA05810; Tue, 21 Aug          2001 00:00:07 +1200 (NZST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="Windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <033f01c12970$060bd800$0100a8c0@mkbs>
Date:         Tue, 21 Aug 2001 00:01:32 +1200
Reply-To: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Organization: Applied Technology
Subject:      [AR] [EE]: Free! Delphi 6    (Windows & Linux capable)
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Bargain of the decade!
A capable Windows programming environment for free.
I've sent this to a wider range of people than normal given the subject,  as
it may be of interest to many people interested in Windows based computer
programming. You may wish to pass the information on to friends.



Borland Delphi 6 is downloadable FREE for personal non-commercial use from
Borland. 150 MB download!!

        http://www.borland.com/delphi/personal/index.html

For those who have not met Delphi  see brief description at end.
Read website for comments on Linux compatability.

Tell your friends .Each end user has to go through an individual
registration process and they will be asking questions subsequently but
presumably you can distribute CD copies to friends for them to register.

Get it quick before they change their minds !!!


___________________________________



 DELPHI 6 PERSONAL EDITION REGISTRATION AND DOWNLOAD
RAD for Windows - Learning made easy

Learning to develop Windows programs is fast and fun with Delphi 6.
Create high-performance, non-commercial Windows 98, Windows NT and 2000
applications using on-line help to get you programming in no time. Windows
development is easy with Delphi 6 drag-and-drop visual design environment,
step-by-step examples, and a Visual Component Library with over 85 reusable
components.


----------------------------------------------------------------------------
----

>From the faq

Q: What is Delphi 6?

Borland Delphi 6 is the first rapid application development (RAD)
environment for easily building and using industry-standard Web Services.
With Delphi 6, corporate and individual developers can create next
generation e-business applications quickly and easily. Major features
include BizSnap, WebSnap, and DataSnap, which enable developers to create
applications that simplify business-to-business integration with full
support for XML, SOAP, and WSDL. Delphi 6 industry-standard Web Services
support enables immediate and ongoing integration with emerging Web
Services-based vendor platforms such as .Net and
BizTalk from Microsoft, and ONE from Sun Microsystems.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 8027 invoked from network); 20 Aug 2001 12:36:05 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 20 Aug 2001 12:36:05 -0000
Received: (qmail 30134 invoked by uid 50005); 20 Aug 2001 12:36:12 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.168256 secs); 20 Aug 2001 12:36:12 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 20 Aug 2001 12:36:12 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id FAA08544; Mon, 20 Aug 2001 05:33:03 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 92251 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 20 Aug 2001 12:32:58          +0000
Received: from fep3-orange.clear.net.nz (fep3-orange.clear.net.nz          [203.97.32.3]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id FAA08530          for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Mon, 20 Aug 2001 05:32:57 -0700
Received: from mkbs (d2-u36.acld.clear.net.nz [203.97.48.100]) by          fep3-orange.clear.net.nz (1.5/1.8) with SMTP id AAA12597; Tue, 21 Aug          2001 00:32:54 +1200 (NZST)
References: <66.1319ff79.28b04533@aol.com>             <5.0.2.1.0.20010820000224.00ab0430@mail.earthlink.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <03b001c12974$9307ed80$0100a8c0@mkbs>
Date:         Tue, 21 Aug 2001 00:35:16 +1200
Reply-To: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Organization: Applied Technology
Subject:      Re: [AR] Solid rocket boosters
Comments: To: Pierce Nichols <forkbomb@EARTHLINK.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

> >>Who says a solid motor can't  be throtled? Look at the SRBs on the
shuttle
> >>they aren't exactly throttled but through the use of some grain
geometries
> >>the engines actually cut back their thrust for a short period and then
build
> >>back up. This is built in to keep the shuttle in one piece when the
vehicle
> >>hits max q.
> >In addition, have you seen what Aerojet has been up to with pintle
nozzles
> >lately?  Suffice to say that they've *demonstrated* solid rocket
> >throttling as effective as any liquid system I've ever heard of.  There
> >are also some experimental systems out there that have full blown
> >stop/restart capabilities.
>
>
>          Are you talking about gelled propellants? Those are liquid
> rockets, not solids. The fuel and oxidizer are stored as thixotropic
> liquids. That is to say that under normal conditions they are gelatinous,
> but when subjected to enough shear stress, they become liquid a flow
easily.


Goddard started out looking at pellet feeding  solids into a combustion
chamber. I think each pellet exploded rather than burned. Then turned to
liquids.

Orion fore-runner !

RM

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 12487 invoked from network); 20 Aug 2001 12:37:15 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 20 Aug 2001 12:37:15 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 1162 invoked by uid 50005); 20 Aug 2001 12:35:36 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smpte.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.167699 secs); 20 Aug 2001 12:35:36 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 20 Aug 2001 12:35:36 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id FAA08567; Mon, 20 Aug 2001 05:33:37 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 92258 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 20 Aug 2001 12:33:36          +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (f123.law15.hotmail.com [64.4.23.123]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id FAA08553 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Mon, 20 Aug 2001 05:33:36 -0700
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Mon,          20 Aug 2001 05:33:06 -0700
Received: from 193.121.251.246 by lw15fd.law15.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Mon,          20 Aug 2001 12:33:05 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [193.121.251.246]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 20 Aug 2001 12:33:06.0005 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[42FF3050:01C12974]
Message-ID:  <F123giJyTGRml5YVhs80000e43d@hotmail.com>
Date:         Mon, 20 Aug 2001 12:33:36 +0000
Reply-To: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Solid rocket boosters
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Pierce Nichols wrote:

>How do you get 3DOF out of a single nozzle without jet vanes or auxiliary
>nozzles? I want to hear about this...

Inject eg water in the exhaust cone. Four perpendicular orifice clusters.

Want photographs?

jd



_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 27373 invoked from network); 20 Aug 2001 12:41:12 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 20 Aug 2001 12:41:12 -0000
Received: (qmail 16020 invoked by uid 50005); 20 Aug 2001 12:40:47 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (. Clean. Processed in 0.252217 secs); 20 Aug 2001 12:40:47 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
X-Qmail-Scanner-Mail-From: owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU via smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net
X-Qmail-Scanner-Rcpt-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
X-Qmail-Scanner: 0.96 (No viruses found. Processed in 0.252217 secs)
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 20 Aug 2001 12:40:46 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id FAA08594; Mon, 20 Aug 2001 05:35:28 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 92265 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 20 Aug 2001 12:35:27          +0000
Received: from waltz.SoftHome.net ([204.144.231.8]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id FAA08580 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon,          20 Aug 2001 05:35:27 -0700
Received: (qmail 19459 invoked by uid 417); 20 Aug 2001 12:15:17 -0000
References: <F140nLPprIFwBMa6kbk0000d140@hotmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Sender: erohrbaugh@softhome.net
Message-ID:  <20010820121517.19458.qmail@softhome.net>
Date:         Mon, 20 Aug 2001 12:15:17 GMT
Reply-To: <erohrbaugh@SOFTHOME.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <erohrbaugh@SOFTHOME.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] GUIPEP
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <F140nLPprIFwBMa6kbk0000d140@hotmail.com>

The units in GUIPEP/PROPEP for heat (enthalpy) of formation are
calories/gram.

-Eric


John Dom writes:

> In GUIPEP, I read -1924 for acetic acid. Units anybody?
>                    -234 for SrNO3
> Thanks,
>
> jd
>
>
>
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 22940 invoked from network); 20 Aug 2001 13:17:39 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 20 Aug 2001 13:17:39 -0000
Received: (qmail 22666 invoked by uid 50005); 20 Aug 2001 13:17:46 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.112203 secs); 20 Aug 2001 13:17:46 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 20 Aug 2001 13:17:46 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA08721; Mon, 20 Aug 2001 06:08:17 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 92278 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 20 Aug 2001 13:08:12          +0000
Received: from spsystems.net (spsystems.net [209.47.149.227]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA08706 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Mon,          20 Aug 2001 06:08:12 -0700
Received: (from henry@localhost) by spsystems.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id JAA29308;          Mon, 20 Aug 2001 09:07:40 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010820090319.28957A-100000@spsystems.net>
Date:         Mon, 20 Aug 2001 09:07:40 -0400
Reply-To: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] 2DOF control
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <001501c12944$dae76fc0$0400a8c0@hatjs>

On Sun, 19 Aug 2001, Jamie Morken wrote:
> #1. force that the fins exert rotationally due to misalignment
> #2. force that the air exerts on the fins countering rotation
> Primarily, #1 increases with airspeed and #2 increases with rotation.
> I think the maximum spin-rate (intersection of the above two forces at a
> given airspeed) would determine whether an amateur rocket using only a 2DOF
> control system could guide itself while still in the atmosphere...

Note that the pros generally find it necessary to do something specific to
limit roll rate, which suggests that the results of not doing so typically
are unacceptable.  My guess is that if you don't go for a high spin rate
and deliberate spin stabilization (in which case you don't need a guidance
system at all), you need to do something about rate limiting.

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 16007 invoked from network); 20 Aug 2001 13:53:20 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 20 Aug 2001 13:53:20 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 18918 invoked by uid 50005); 20 Aug 2001 13:51:39 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smpte.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 2.450476 secs); 20 Aug 2001 13:51:39 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 20 Aug 2001 13:51:36 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA08857; Mon, 20 Aug 2001 06:50:50 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 92293 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 20 Aug 2001 13:50:42          +0000
Received: from mail1.murraystate.edu (mail1.murraystate.edu [216.249.159.50])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id GAA08843 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 20 Aug 2001 06:50:42 -0700
Received: from jjcomputer.murraystate.edu (216.249.150.117) by          mail1.murraystate.edu (NPlex 5.5.031) id 3B75A7FC00026809 for          AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 20 Aug 2001 08:48:39 -0500
X-Sender: terry.mccreary@mail.murraystate.edu (Unverified)
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
References: <5.1.0.14.0.20010817062713.01ee1130@mail.murraystate.edu>            <a0510031db7a239fb551e@[63.27.96.152]>            <011b01c126c8$45e5fe60$0100a8c0@mkbs>            <NEBBJIGOELOLIBCCPKDCIELKCBAA.geordi@c031.aone.net.au>            <OE54Vs1aLxGYiH1ZRJ60000d739@hotmail.com>            <a05100317b7a2079ba23d@[63.27.96.152]>            <011b01c126c8$45e5fe60$0100a8c0@mkbs>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <5.1.0.14.0.20010820061730.01dfc3e0@mail.murraystate.edu>
Date:         Mon, 20 Aug 2001 08:54:09 -0500
Reply-To: "Terry McCreary" <terry.mccreary@MURRAYSTATE.EDU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Terry McCreary" <terry.mccreary@MURRAYSTATE.EDU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Accident reports
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <4.3.1.2.20010817153755.01299378@mail.idsoftware.com>

At 03:47 PM 8/17/01 -0500, John Carmack wrote:

>>Query for the entire list:  I (and many others, I'm sure) would be
>>interested in details and specifics of accidents.  Not just with candy
>>propellant but with all others as well.  Preferably accidents of the "I was
>>there and saw this as it happened" type, with objective details such as
>>propellant composition, temperature of processing, etc.  Such information
>>would be enormously helpful to the list.
>
>We have had two notable "wake up calls" with peroxide in the last year.

[snip of detailed reports]

Thank you, John!  That is exactly the sort of report that is so hard to
write but so informative to the group involved.  It tells precisely what
happened, why, and how it was corrected.  That one goes in my permanent files.

Much appreciated,
P'rfesser

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 2384 invoked from network); 20 Aug 2001 14:34:27 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 20 Aug 2001 14:34:27 -0000
Received: (qmail 14197 invoked by uid 50005); 20 Aug 2001 14:32:47 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smpte.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.647916 secs); 20 Aug 2001 14:32:47 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 20 Aug 2001 14:32:46 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA09037; Mon, 20 Aug 2001 07:30:24 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 92310 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 20 Aug 2001 14:30:23          +0000
Received: from localhost (rcalkins@localhost) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with          ESMTP id HAA09023; Mon, 20 Aug 2001 07:30:22 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.LNX.4.10.10108200725130.8894-100000@itc.uci.edu>
Date:         Mon, 20 Aug 2001 07:30:22 -0700
Reply-To: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Solid rocket boosters
Comments: To: John Dom <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <F123giJyTGRml5YVhs80000e43d@hotmail.com>

On Mon, 20 Aug 2001, John Dom wrote:

> Pierce Nichols wrote:
>
> >How do you get 3DOF out of a single nozzle without jet vanes or auxiliary
> >nozzles? I want to hear about this...
>
> Inject eg water in the exhaust cone. Four perpendicular orifice clusters.

I don't think significant roll authority can be developed with a practical
LITVC system.  I could be wrong here, if so, please let me know.

But if you combine LITVC and a jetvane or two, you've got it.  Of course,
if you've got jetvanes, you don't need LITVC. (LITVC = Liquid Injection
Thrust Vector Control).

Ray

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 21701 invoked from network); 20 Aug 2001 14:39:18 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 20 Aug 2001 14:39:18 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 7225 invoked by uid 50005); 20 Aug 2001 14:39:25 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.208895 secs); 20 Aug 2001 14:39:25 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 20 Aug 2001 14:39:24 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA09081; Mon, 20 Aug 2001 07:37:12 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 92320 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 20 Aug 2001 14:37:07          +0000
Received: from smtp001.mailsrvcs.net (smtp001pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.180])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA09067 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 20 Aug 2001 07:37:06 -0700
Received: from [63.27.96.224] (1Cust73.tnt1.san-bernardino.ca.da.uu.net          [63.27.96.73]) by smtp001.mailsrvcs.net  with ESMTP for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; id f7KEaH725598 Mon, 20 Aug 2001 09:36:17          -0500 (CDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: GTE/01rocket@mail.gte.net
References: <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010818103254.26212B-100000@spsystems.net>            <002d01c127fa$02a29040$0400a8c0@hatjs>            <00b001c1293c$c3eab500$1b30fea9@kristinscomp>            <001501c12944$dae76fc0$0400a8c0@hatjs>            <OE14ZDgC81TbdkSmLAz0000135a@hotmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <a05100309b7a6cf31672e@[63.27.96.224]>
Date:         Mon, 20 Aug 2001 07:36:31 -0700
Reply-To: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] 2DOF control
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <OE14ZDgC81TbdkSmLAz0000135a@hotmail.com>

>Mark Kruep asked many questions:



>Wouldn't rotational forces that were high enough for unaided spin
>stabilization also terribly confuse a gyro based control system? Also,
>wouldn't that require that all cargo/payload have its CG on the center axis
>of the rocket to a fair degree of accuracy? Since it isn't likely to spin


Yes.


>very fast initially, I would think anything out of balance would cause a
>rapidly growing wobble, and then the control system would try to kick in to
>stabilize and probably worsen the condition until it couldn't process the


This is why smart dampening software is needed.  This effect can be
assumed to exist to some degree, hopefully a small degree.


>info fast enough and then pull one of those really cool looking 90 degree
>turns at several thousand miles an hour.
>
>If it actually got past that problem, wouldn't centrifugal forces at the
>rotational velocities needed to stabilize it also reek havoc on the usually
>delicate cargos carried on a to orbit vehicle? I don't know if it would add


Probably not.


>up to a significant loss in energy or not, but I would think you would also
>waste some of your power inducing your spin, since you obviously want as


The wobble effect would result in the rocket being at an angle of
attack to the wind during a significant part of the flight and that
SUBSTANTIALLY increased drag and stress.  It is a major energy
waster.  There is also the smaller effect that the thrust is almost
constantly off-axis.


>much vertical travel as possible. To induce the spin you would need either
>
>1. fin induced spin--added mass and drag in the atmosphere, not to mention
>added control nightmares
>2. gimballed nozzles--probably require more DOFs to keep the attitude
>correct before spin stabilization, wasted propellant


Rockets like to fly straight fortunately due to the induced drasg of
the thrust itself acting as a big fin.  Gravity turn on long (over 20
seconds) duration flights is the main reason for guidance and that is
a fairly low energy requirement since you actually want the rocket to
turn to some degree anyway for typical orbital insertion paths.

There has been alot of work on optimizing trajectories to orbit but I
have not seen it as a feature of STK toolkit and the software I have,
while fairly impressive does not do much to optimize trajectories.
It computes ballistic trajectories.  Also it does not factor in
gravity vs altitude or oblate earth or latitude of launch.


>                      to induce spin
>3. some type of thrusters along the rocket to induce the spin--extra weight,
>complex, most likely pretty expensive, use
>up payload space that could otherwise carry more useful equipment
>
>Any one of these is a potential penalty in how high an orbit is acheived.
>???????
>
>
>Mark
>
>P.S. Could you use non-symmetrical airfoil shaped fins to induce spin
>without using any control surfaces or adjustable fin angle? A lift(force)
>would be produced perpindicular to the direction of travel right?
>
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Jamie Morken" <jmorken@HOME.COM>
>To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
>Sent: Monday, August 20, 2001 1:53 AM
>Subject: [AR] 2DOF control
>
>
>
>>
>>  And for the first stage, if the spin gets to high it will have already
>lined
>>  itself up "reasonably" well and then the control system could shut down
>and
>>  spin stabilization could take over perhaps?  Not sure if it would be worth
>  > doing this but it would be interesting to know if it is possible..
>  >
>  > best regards,
>  > Jamie
>  >


--
Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
Opinion, the whole thing.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 22829 invoked from network); 20 Aug 2001 14:39:34 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 20 Aug 2001 14:39:34 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 667 invoked by uid 50005); 20 Aug 2001 14:39:09 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (. Clean. Processed in 0.172783 secs); 20 Aug 2001 14:39:09 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
X-Qmail-Scanner-Mail-From: owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU via smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net
X-Qmail-Scanner-Rcpt-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
X-Qmail-Scanner: 0.96 (No viruses found. Processed in 0.172783 secs)
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 20 Aug 2001 14:39:08 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA09007; Mon, 20 Aug 2001 07:28:15 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 92303 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 20 Aug 2001 14:28:09          +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (f140.law15.hotmail.com [64.4.23.140]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA08993 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Mon, 20 Aug 2001 07:28:09 -0700
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Mon,          20 Aug 2001 07:27:38 -0700
Received: from 193.121.251.246 by lw15fd.law15.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Mon,          20 Aug 2001 14:27:38 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [193.121.251.246]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 20 Aug 2001 14:27:38.0988 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[439D2AC0:01C12984]
Message-ID:  <F140ySsxVY60mJWEsBk0000e819@hotmail.com>
Date:         Mon, 20 Aug 2001 14:28:09 +0000
Reply-To: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] GUIPEP
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Eric wrote:

>The units in GUIPEP/PROPEP for heat (enthalpy) of formation are
>calories/gram.

Right. They often differ from other tables; eg those in a recent Handbook of
Chemistry & Physics (after molecular weight recalc I mean of course).
Perhaps because of differently defined temperature. Is it 0C or 25 C for
GUIPEP?

jd

_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 9037 invoked from network); 20 Aug 2001 15:11:50 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 20 Aug 2001 15:11:50 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 18486 invoked by uid 50005); 20 Aug 2001 15:11:57 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.238242 secs); 20 Aug 2001 15:11:57 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 20 Aug 2001 15:11:56 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA09197; Mon, 20 Aug 2001 08:08:22 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 92327 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 20 Aug 2001 15:08:12          +0000
Received: from po4.glue.umd.edu (po4.glue.umd.edu [128.8.10.124]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA09182 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 20 Aug 2001 08:08:11 -0700
Received: from z.glue.umd.edu (IDENT:root@z.glue.umd.edu [128.8.10.71]) by          po4.glue.umd.edu (8.10.1/8.10.1) with ESMTP id f7KF8AT22432 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 20 Aug 2001 11:08:10 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from z.glue.umd.edu (IDENT:sendmail@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by          z.glue.umd.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id LAA18909 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 20 Aug 2001 11:08:10 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from localhost (acase@localhost) by z.glue.umd.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with          ESMTP id LAA18905 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 20 Aug 2001          11:08:09 -0400 (EDT)
X-Authentication-Warning: z.glue.umd.edu: acase owned process doing -bs
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.GSO.4.21.0108201105560.14926-100000@z.glue.umd.edu>
Date:         Mon, 20 Aug 2001 11:08:09 -0400
Reply-To: "Andrew Case" <acase@GLUE.UMD.EDU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Andrew Case" <acase@GLUE.UMD.EDU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Pressure fed pump
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <a05100309b7a6cf31672e@[63.27.96.224]>

[subject line changed due to mail error on my part]

On Mon, 20 Aug 2001, Russell McMahon wrote:
[...]
> Another possible use
> of pump exhaust gas would be to run secondary systems such as eg pneumatic
> actuators.

Another good idea.

> C of G location change with pump action would (should) be small compared to
> other factors. PCs are small compared to main tank and vehicle mass.

Actually, PC size can vary over a fairly wide range, allowing additional
degrees of freedom when doing trades for performance, cost, or whatever.
The issue of CG motion complicates things a bit, but since you know
beforehand how the pump will affect cg, it can be compensated for in the
guidance software. Additional design degrees of freedom are good.

I'm looking forward to seeing how it goes.

......Andrew

Andrew Case                             |
acase@plasma.umd.edu                    |
Institute for Plasma Research           |
University of Maryland, College Park    |

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 351 invoked from network); 20 Aug 2001 17:56:41 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 20 Aug 2001 17:56:41 -0000
Received: (qmail 21028 invoked by uid 50005); 20 Aug 2001 17:55:00 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smpte.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.419564 secs); 20 Aug 2001 17:55:00 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 20 Aug 2001 17:54:59 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA09989; Mon, 20 Aug 2001 10:40:14 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 92420 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 20 Aug 2001 17:39:40          +0000
Received: from wrench.toolcity.net (root@wrench.toolcity.net [208.0.188.2]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA09970 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 20 Aug 2001 10:39:39 -0700
Received: from [63.169.102.33]          (dap-63-169-102-33.meadville-tnt-1.pa.toolcity.net [63.169.102.33])          by wrench.toolcity.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id NAA20364; Mon, 20          Aug 2001 13:39:34 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <v01510101b7a7077e6ed4@[63.169.102.33]>
Date:         Mon, 20 Aug 2001 13:41:55 -0500
Reply-To: "al bradley" <abradley@TOOLCITY.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "al bradley" <abradley@TOOLCITY.NET>
Subject:      [AR] 2Re: [AR] AP/Dextrose propellant issues.
Comments: To: James Yawn <jyawn@SFCC.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Good test Jimmy, my hat is off to you!

We can endlessly add experimental ingredients as a "binder" to candy, but
without the various tests, such as yours as an example, we will never know
the necessary properties of the grain.

best,
al bradley

--------------------
snip . . .

>So I submitted my candy to some compression-strength tests and obtained
>promising results.
>
>They are described in boring detail at:
>
>http://members.fortunecity.com/jyawn/compression/index.htm
>
>In short, a cylinder of recrystallized candy propellant (KN/sucrose) was
>formed 1-1/2 inches in diameter and just under two inches long.  It was
>repeatedly subjected to static weights of up to 165 pounds, and did not
>fail.
>
>After ten or so such tests, the cylinder was compressed by about 8
>percent but otherwise intact.
>
>25 kilograms is about 55 pounds, and the sample I tested held over three
>times that.  I hope to test my sample to failure soon, and will report
>any new info promptly, if not sooner.
>
>Respectfully,
>Jimmy Yawn

------------------------------------------------------------------
Can you live Life with this?: "Unless there is a law, an agreement, or a
long-standing custom, No one `Deserves' Anything -- Either Good or Bad!"

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 14647 invoked from network); 20 Aug 2001 18:00:10 -0000
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 20 Aug 2001 18:00:10 -0000
Received: (qmail 13542 invoked by uid 50005); 20 Aug 2001 17:59:02 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smptf.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.26343 secs); 20 Aug 2001 17:59:02 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 20 Aug 2001 17:59:01 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA10022; Mon, 20 Aug 2001 10:43:00 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 92427 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 20 Aug 2001 17:42:59          +0000
Received: from smtp10.atl.mindspring.net (smtp10.atl.mindspring.net          [207.69.200.246]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA10008          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 20 Aug 2001 10:42:58 -0700
Received: from oemcomputer (user-38ldebj.dialup.mindspring.com          [209.86.185.115]) by smtp10.atl.mindspring.net (8.9.3/8.8.5) with          SMTP id NAA28135 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 20 Aug 2001 13:42:57          -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0B8A_01C56B69.4AD94BE0"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <000801c1299e$ced93ec0$73b956d1@oemcomputer>
Date:         Mon, 20 Aug 2001 13:37:33 -0400
Reply-To: "Robert" <OlympusMons@MINDSPRING.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Robert" <OlympusMons@MINDSPRING.COM>
Subject:      [AR] CSXT: Minnesota rocketry group SpaceShot
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0B8A_01C56B69.4AD94BE0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Found this on the company site for Deneba Software, a CAD software =
producer.

http://deneba.com/COMMUNITY/industry/spaceexploration/default.html

------=_NextPart_000_0B8A_01C56B69.4AD94BE0
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META content=3D"text/html; charset=3Diso-8859-1" =
http-equiv=3DContent-Type>
<META content=3D"MSHTML 5.00.2614.3500" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Found this on the company site for =
Deneba Software,=20
a CAD software producer.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2><A=20
href=3D"http://deneba.com/COMMUNITY/industry/spaceexploration/default.htm=
l">http://deneba.com/COMMUNITY/industry/spaceexploration/default.html</A>=
</FONT></DIV></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0B8A_01C56B69.4AD94BE0--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 634 invoked from network); 20 Aug 2001 18:04:05 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 20 Aug 2001 18:04:05 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 25393 invoked by uid 50005); 20 Aug 2001 18:04:11 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.636381 secs); 20 Aug 2001 18:04:11 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 20 Aug 2001 18:04:10 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA10062; Mon, 20 Aug 2001 10:48:38 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 92434 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 20 Aug 2001 17:48:33          +0000
Received: from waltz.SoftHome.net ([204.144.231.8]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id KAA10048 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon,          20 Aug 2001 10:48:33 -0700
Received: (qmail 17253 invoked by uid 417); 20 Aug 2001 17:27:31 -0000
References: <F140ySsxVY60mJWEsBk0000e819@hotmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Sender: erohrbaugh@softhome.net
Message-ID:  <20010820172731.17252.qmail@softhome.net>
Date:         Mon, 20 Aug 2001 17:27:30 GMT
Reply-To: <erohrbaugh@SOFTHOME.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <erohrbaugh@SOFTHOME.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] GUIPEP
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <F140ySsxVY60mJWEsBk0000e819@hotmail.com>

For GUIPEP (and most other codes) the values are taken at 25 C (298.15K).

-Eric

John Dom writes:

> Eric wrote:
>
> >The units in GUIPEP/PROPEP for heat (enthalpy) of formation are
> >calories/gram.
>
> Right. They often differ from other tables; eg those in a recent Handbook of
> Chemistry & Physics (after molecular weight recalc I mean of course).
> Perhaps because of differently defined temperature. Is it 0C or 25 C for
> GUIPEP?
>
> jd
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 785 invoked from network); 20 Aug 2001 19:16:47 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 20 Aug 2001 19:16:47 -0000
Received: (qmail 25049 invoked by uid 50005); 20 Aug 2001 19:16:52 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.40433 secs); 20 Aug 2001 19:16:52 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 20 Aug 2001 19:16:51 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA10524; Mon, 20 Aug 2001 11:59:09 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 92485 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 20 Aug 2001 18:59:00          +0000
Received: from castor.ridgenet.net (IDENT:root@castor.ridgenet.net          [199.120.150.29]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA10510          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 20 Aug 2001 11:58:59 -0700
Received: from kristinscomp (pm098.ridgenet.net [204.154.246.98]) by          castor.ridgenet.net (8.11.0/8.11.0) with SMTP id f7KIoxS18120; Mon,          20 Aug 2001 11:50:59 -0700
References: <5.0.2.1.0.20010819230313.02adf0b0@mail.earthlink.net>             <4.3.1.2.20010820035613.02ca53f8@mail.idsoftware.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <006701c129ab$58c2ea80$1b30fea9@kristinscomp>
Date:         Mon, 20 Aug 2001 12:07:23 -0700
Reply-To: "Kristin & David Hall" <thehalls@RIDGENET.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Kristin & David Hall" <thehalls@RIDGENET.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Solid rocket boosters
Comments: To: John Carmack <johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

> Three hinged (1D movement) nozzles can give 3DOF.
>
> A B C
>
> Engines A and C swing up and down, while B swings side to side.
>
> A and C swing together for one axis, opposite directions for roll, and B
> gives the other axis.

True.  A word of caution to those who might chase this route, however.....

Once upon a time the VLA program office decided that a 3 jet vane system
would be cheaper to manufacture than a 4 jet vane system and thus endeavored
to design such a system.  After over a year and a few million dollars it was
decided to just stick with the 4 vane system.  Why?  Because the control
laws required for the 3 vane system turned out to be hellishly
unpredictable.  Alas, I don't know the details beyond that, I just know that
they spent a lot of money trying to get it to work *reliably* and failed.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 5448 invoked from network); 20 Aug 2001 19:17:51 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 20 Aug 2001 19:17:51 -0000
Received: (qmail 7763 invoked by uid 50005); 20 Aug 2001 19:16:09 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smpte.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 1.642585 secs); 20 Aug 2001 19:16:09 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 20 Aug 2001 19:16:06 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA10657; Mon, 20 Aug 2001 12:15:29 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 92507 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 20 Aug 2001 19:15:27          +0000
Received: from proxy4.ba.best.com (root@proxy4.ba.best.com [206.184.139.15]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA10643 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Mon, 20 Aug 2001 12:15:27 -0700
Received: from [10.0.0.2] (snvadslgw2poold155.snjs.uswestqwest.net          [168.103.213.155]) by proxy4.ba.best.com (8.9.3/8.9.2/best.out) with          ESMTP id MAA19139 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Mon, 20 Aug 2001          12:14:02 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Sender:  (Unverified)
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <v0421010ab7a702886d0d@[10.0.0.2]>
Date:         Mon, 20 Aug 2001 12:13:29 -0700
Reply-To: "bob fortune" <bob@FORTUNEPAINT.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "bob fortune" <bob@FORTUNEPAINT.COM>
Subject:      [AR] Conservation of momentum
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This involves a payload to be ejected from an airframe.  The payload
is a sliding coupler filled with electronics, little satellites
actually, which impinges upon the nosecone.  When the separation
charge is fired the payload coupler is forced forward which breaks a
couple of shear pins holding the nosecone in place.  This expels the
nosecone and, in turn, the payload coupler.

An ejection charge black powder calculator indicates that a charge of
.66 grams is all that's necessary to pressurize the chamber to 15
psi, break the shear pins, and expel both masses. However, in testing
it has been determined that 2 grams is required else only the
nosecone is expelled while the coupler stays in place. It seems that
this is a result of conservation of momentum, like the desktop toy in
which 4 metal balls swing back and forth trading momentum or a cue
ball interacting with the 8 ball on the pool table.

   Granted, tying the two units together so a collision is not
possible would be the easiest solution but difficult in practice to
integrate since the two components must separate once in the
airstream.  The payload and its recovery system weighs a bit more
than the nosecone and its recovery system.   Anyone have any ideas as
to an elegant solution besides more black powder? ("if a little bit
is good then a whole lot more must be a whole lot better" - Father
Stout, infamous Jesuit chemistry professor)

This is for a very interesting program instituted by Stanford
University.  Take a look here if you would like to know more:
http://ssdl.stanford.edu/arliss/

Thanks

Bob

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 356 invoked from network); 20 Aug 2001 19:23:46 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 20 Aug 2001 19:23:46 -0000
Received: (qmail 6031 invoked by uid 50005); 20 Aug 2001 19:23:20 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (. Clean. Processed in 0.197949 secs); 20 Aug 2001 19:23:20 -0000
X-Qmail-Scanner-Mail-From: owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU via smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net
X-Qmail-Scanner-Rcpt-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
X-Qmail-Scanner: 0.96 (No viruses found. Processed in 0.197949 secs)
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 20 Aug 2001 19:23:19 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA10558; Mon, 20 Aug 2001 12:00:57 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 92492 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 20 Aug 2001 19:00:56          +0000
Received: from castor.ridgenet.net (IDENT:root@castor.ridgenet.net          [199.120.150.29]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA10544          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 20 Aug 2001 12:00:56 -0700
Received: from kristinscomp (pm098.ridgenet.net [204.154.246.98]) by          castor.ridgenet.net (8.11.0/8.11.0) with SMTP id f7KIrGS18333; Mon,          20 Aug 2001 11:53:16 -0700
References: <66.1319ff79.28b04533@aol.com>             <5.0.2.1.0.20010820000224.00ab0430@mail.earthlink.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <006f01c129ab$aa919aa0$1b30fea9@kristinscomp>
Date:         Mon, 20 Aug 2001 12:09:41 -0700
Reply-To: "Kristin & David Hall" <thehalls@RIDGENET.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Kristin & David Hall" <thehalls@RIDGENET.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Solid rocket boosters
Comments: To: Pierce Nichols <forkbomb@EARTHLINK.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

> >In addition, have you seen what Aerojet has been up to with pintle
nozzles
> >lately?  Suffice to say that they've *demonstrated* solid rocket
> >throttling as effective as any liquid system I've ever heard of.  There

>          Are you talking about gelled propellants? Those are liquid
> rockets, not solids. The fuel and oxidizer are stored as thixotropic
> liquids. That is to say that under normal conditions they are gelatinous,
> but when subjected to enough shear stress, they become liquid a flow
easily.

No, I'm talking about HTPB based solid propellant rockets.  The
throttleability comes from the use of a variable geometry (ie, variable
throat) nozzle.  Note that with the active control, they've even had some
success dealing with propellants with burn rate coefs. *GREATER* than 1.
Cool stuff.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 23392 invoked from network); 20 Aug 2001 19:51:07 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 20 Aug 2001 19:51:07 -0000
Received: (qmail 11946 invoked by uid 50005); 20 Aug 2001 19:49:57 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smptf.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.368391 secs); 20 Aug 2001 19:49:57 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 20 Aug 2001 19:49:56 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA10804; Mon, 20 Aug 2001 12:44:24 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 92533 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 20 Aug 2001 19:44:22          +0000
Received: from wrench.toolcity.net (root@wrench.toolcity.net [208.0.188.2]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA10790 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 20 Aug 2001 12:44:21 -0700
Received: from [63.169.102.33]          (dap-63-169-101-10.meadville-tnt-1.pa.toolcity.net [63.169.101.10])          by wrench.toolcity.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id PAA06145; Mon, 20          Aug 2001 15:44:11 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <v01510103b7a71f2afea7@[63.169.102.33]>
Date:         Mon, 20 Aug 2001 15:46:32 -0500
Reply-To: "al bradley" <abradley@TOOLCITY.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "al bradley" <abradley@TOOLCITY.NET>
Subject:      [AR] 1compression tests on solids
Comments: To: jyawn@SFCC.NET
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Hi again Jimmy:

I checked your web page detailing your experiment with compression on your
"candy" propellant. I think it is a good start on detailed records for any
of  our propellants.

A few years back we had a brief but lively discussion on adapting bottle
jacks (usually Chinese cheapies) to show relative force applied to a
material. This came out of an idea by Ed Jones who had fitted a pressure
gauge to a little-noticed screw-out plug that is located just below the
hand-operated cylinder on the side of the jack. I never got around to
building one yet but the idea stuck in my mind.

The text below is reprinted so that you might decide if you (or any others
on the list) wanted to modify it to detail your experiments.

best regards,
al bradley

-------------------------------------------------------
At 11:22 PM 1/19/99 EST, you wrote:
>Ed,
>If you do not take the jack apart, how do you know what the diameter of
>the piston (or rather bore) is ? I am presuming you are using this for
>force measurement.

>Richard



Well, that's a good point. I have never found a need to press to a specific
pressure only once so my goal was to be able to press to the exact pressure
that I find that works for my needs and consistently duplicate what works
best.

I used the same logic as you and found that it's more of a hassle and more
stress on the jack trying to rip one apart, plus, you always have to factor
in the resistance of the return springs at different lengths + the weight
of the bed that your work is on. Too many variables to calculate for
different size projects. For me, it wasn't worth the hassle. I can
accurately duplicate the same pressure between the 12 and the 6 ton press
even though the gauges read different pressure between the two. I did this
by putting the 6 ton jack in the 12 ton press and pumped the 6 ton jack
then recorded the readings between the two for any given pressure. I can
exactly duplicate the pressure for any given project on either press.

I guess what I'm trying to say is that you will probably never get a gauge
to read the exact pressure that is being applied to the work area. You must
take the jack apart and measure then do the math. And after you go through
all that you will get sick of calculating for every project, I know I
would.

Also you will notice that the internal pressure is lower on the larger jack
to produce the same working force. The gauge on the 12 ton reads almost
half as much internal as the 6 ton for the same given force. Either way you
will be more than pleased when you have a gauge on the jack, it beats the
hell out of the torque wrench.


----------------------------
>>If you do not take the jack apart, how do you know what the diameter of
>>the piston (or rather bore) is ? I am presuming you are using this for
>>force measurement.

>I guess what I'm trying to say is that you will probably never get a gauge
>to read the exact pressure that is being applied to the work area. You
>must take the jack apart and measure then do the math. And after you go
>through all that you will get sick of calculating for every project, I
>know I would.
------------------------------
Come on, guys....

Stop thinking in terms of "Force = Pressure * Area" and start thinking in
terms of "Area = Force / Pressure". Apply a known force and you can back
out the area. But why bother with that? Apply several known forces and just
calibrate the system!

Oh, and as an aside, I'd use a 2-ton jack over any of the larger jacks (Are
any of use making motors with 4000+ lbs thrust?). It should give a more
accurate answer as it would produce larger pressure fluctuations (Yes, I
know the original system discussed was for a slightly different
application.).

-------------------------------
David Hall

>Come on, guys....

>Stop thinking in terms of "Force = Pressure * Area" and start thinking in
>terms of "Area = Force / Pressure". Apply a known force and you can back
>out the area. But why bother with that? Apply several known forces and
>just calibrate the system!


This is a great idea. I'm glad you pointed it out.

>Oh, and as an aside, I'd use a 2-ton jack over any of the larger jacks
>(Are any of use making motors with 4000+ lbs thrust?). It should give a
>more accurate answer as it would produce larger pressure fluctuations
>(Yes, I know the original system discussed was for a slightly different
>application.).


Agreed that the small 2 ton jack is the way to go for rockets, but I use
both my bearing press for doing other mechanical jobs on a regular basis,
the rocket application is just a great side benefit. Kind of neat to kill
two birds with one rocket.
------------------------------------
David, you wrote:

"Stop thinking in terms of "Force = Pressure * Area" and start thinking in
terms of "Area = Force / Pressure". Apply a known force and you can back
out the area. But why bother with that? Apply several known forces and just
calibrate the system!"

Good suggestion. Certainly an alternative to pulling the thing apart. Richard

------------------------------------

------------------------------------------------------------------
Can you live Life with this?: "Unless there is a law, an agreement, or a
long-standing custom, No one `Deserves' Anything -- Either Good or Bad!"

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 19675 invoked from network); 20 Aug 2001 20:19:08 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 20 Aug 2001 20:19:08 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 27875 invoked by uid 50005); 20 Aug 2001 20:18:36 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (. Clean. Processed in 0.230477 secs); 20 Aug 2001 20:18:36 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
X-Qmail-Scanner-Mail-From: owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU via smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net
X-Qmail-Scanner-Rcpt-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
X-Qmail-Scanner: 0.96 (No viruses found. Processed in 0.230477 secs)
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 20 Aug 2001 20:18:36 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA10983; Mon, 20 Aug 2001 13:12:29 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 92553 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 20 Aug 2001 20:12:21          +0000
Received: from gigi.excite.com (gigi.excite.com [199.172.152.110]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA10910 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 20 Aug 2001 13:02:21 -0700
Received: from seamore.excite.com ([199.172.148.163]) by gigi.excite.com          (InterMail vM.4.01.02.39 201-229-119-122) with ESMTP id          <20010820200150.PPA18869.gigi.excite.com@seamore.excite.com>; Mon, 20          Aug 2001 13:01:50 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Excite Inbox
X-Sender-Ip: 64.8.33.9
Message-ID:  <10670804.998337710722.JavaMail.imail@seamore.excite.com>
Date:         Mon, 20 Aug 2001 13:01:50 -0700
Reply-To: "bildo joseepie" <afiorettii@EXCITE.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "bildo joseepie" <afiorettii@EXCITE.COM>
Subject:      [AR] aluminum powder
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Given the hazmat fees to ship alumium, magnesium and so on, I thought to
breaking open an etch a sketch since I learned that they are made with very
fine powdered aluminum.  I recall doing this as a kid to "see how it worked"
and basically we got the powder everywhere.  To my knowledge there are
plastic beads mixed in but I beleive these can be screened out.  Has anyone
tried this?  I figure for the cost of the toy that it yields close to a
pound of aluminum and eliminates the hazmat cost.  I would like to try this
with APCP.

Anyone ever try this?

Andrew Fioretti





_______________________________________________________
Send a cool gift with your E-Card
http://www.bluemountain.com/giftcenter/

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 19863 invoked from network); 20 Aug 2001 20:32:54 -0000
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 20 Aug 2001 20:32:54 -0000
Received: (qmail 7345 invoked by uid 50005); 20 Aug 2001 20:31:45 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smptf.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.282371 secs); 20 Aug 2001 20:31:45 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 20 Aug 2001 20:31:45 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA11025; Mon, 20 Aug 2001 13:17:35 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 92574 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 20 Aug 2001 20:17:33          +0000
Received: from ll.mit.edu (LLMAIL.LL.MIT.EDU [129.55.12.40]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA11011 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon,          20 Aug 2001 13:17:33 -0700
Received: (from smtp@localhost) by ll.mit.edu (8.11.3/8.8.8) id f7KKHU813225;          Mon, 20 Aug 2001 16:17:30 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from UNKNOWN(            ),          claiming to be "ll.mit.edu" via SMTP by llmail,          id smtpdAAAWOaGgy; Mon Aug 20 16:17:20 2001
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.76 [en]C-CCK-MCD MITLL  (WinNT; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010818103011.26212A-100000@spsystems.net>            <002601c127f7$efe2ad20$0400a8c0@hatjs>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B8170B1.E2B38F11@ll.mit.edu>
Date:         Mon, 20 Aug 2001 16:18:57 -0400
Reply-To: "Robert Galejs" <galejs@LL.MIT.EDU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Robert Galejs" <galejs@LL.MIT.EDU>
Organization: MIT Lincoln Laboratory
Subject:      Re: [AR] earth magnetic field sensors
Comments: To: Jamie Morken <jmorken@HOME.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Jamie Morken wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> > > What kind of attitude information can be obtained from a 3axis magnetic
> > > sensor?
> >
> > It will give you two axes of attitude.  Not three, alas; it cannot detect
> > rotation around an axis lined up with the local magnetic field.
>
> Would a potential solution to this "roll detection" problem be to have roll
> control that actively keeps
> one side of the rocket always pointed South with two of the magnetic sensors
> active axis' then pointing East and West?
> This would be assuming the local magnetic field is approximately flat with
> the surface of the earth and that the rocket is travelling at an angle above
> or below this plane.
>
> best regards,
> Jamie

A single sensor (assuming it is aligned with the axis of
the rocket) will place the rocket on a cone at some angle
relative to the magnetic field, but with completely unknown
roll angle. A second sensor (for simplicity assumed to be
at a right angle wrt the first sensor) will give you 2 possible
roll angles for every position on the cone, but with no
information about where on the cone the rocket lies.  A third
sensor resolves the 2 roll angle ambiguity but, once again,
does not give you the rockets position on the cone.

With a series of measurements, you could make a good guess
about the rockets flight.  If all 3 sensors give constant
output, your rocket most likely went straight up with no
roll, but it could have also precessed about the magnetic
field lines with the rotation rate equalling the precession
rate.

- Robert Galejs

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 8484 invoked from network); 20 Aug 2001 20:37:23 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 20 Aug 2001 20:37:23 -0000
Received: (qmail 10147 invoked by uid 50005); 20 Aug 2001 20:37:28 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.24332 secs); 20 Aug 2001 20:37:28 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 20 Aug 2001 20:37:28 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA11048; Mon, 20 Aug 2001 13:18:20 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 92581 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 20 Aug 2001 20:18:19          +0000
Received: from wrench.toolcity.net (root@wrench.toolcity.net [208.0.188.2]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA11033 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 20 Aug 2001 13:18:19 -0700
Received: from [63.169.102.33]          (dap-63-169-101-10.meadville-tnt-1.pa.toolcity.net [63.169.101.10])          by wrench.toolcity.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id QAA19847; Mon, 20          Aug 2001 16:18:12 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <v01510104b7a7280412ea@[63.169.102.33]>
Date:         Mon, 20 Aug 2001 16:20:33 -0500
Reply-To: "al bradley" <abradley@TOOLCITY.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "al bradley" <abradley@TOOLCITY.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] 2[AR] AP/Dextrose propellant issues.
Comments: To: James Yawn <jyawn@SFCC.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

On the web page detailing your compression tests of your candy propellant
you state:

"But other factors may not be negligible. For instance, when fired, the
grains will be burning, thus getting hot and getting smaller. Will their
loss of strength be compensated by their reduced mass? Don't know. Is
the hollow cylinder of a Bates grain weaker than the solid cylinder I
used in these tests? Conventional wisdom suggests no, that the hollow
cylinder should be stronger, if anything, but I have not tested this. "

Actually if one stops and thinks about it it is likely that, even over the
microseconds we agonize about, that part of the "reduced mass" has been
accelerated already (in attempting to catch up). So some of the opposing
inner forces are likely falling off in their deleterious effect on the
grain even as it grows smaller!
-------------------
"And the way I put weight on, slow and gradual, is not exactly
rocket-like. A sudden shock can break an otherwise-strong component. I
think of glass, which can be incredibly strong when gradual weight is
applied, but which shatters when dropped a few feet."

Not the best analogy I think. Glass (a side-hobby of mine) is not a
crystalline material. Its compressive strength is extremely high. Even in
dropping a piece that breaks, the breakage is not due to any flaw of
compression but rather due to any number of tiny tensile strains
throughout.

Additionally in microseconds, the acceleration by propellants, if charted,
may be a bit "softer" than one might think. Of course that does not rule
out the need for appropriate structural integrity of the grain. And that is
why we need to experiment, appropriately test, and record mathematically.

Just some thoughts for consideration.

respectfully,
al bradley

------------------------------------------------------------------
Can you live Life with this?: "Unless there is a law, an agreement, or a
long-standing custom, No one `Deserves' Anything -- Either Good or Bad!"

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 18696 invoked from network); 20 Aug 2001 21:16:50 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 20 Aug 2001 21:16:50 -0000
Received: (qmail 21499 invoked by uid 50005); 20 Aug 2001 21:15:08 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smpte.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.355097 secs); 20 Aug 2001 21:15:08 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 20 Aug 2001 21:15:07 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA11286; Mon, 20 Aug 2001 14:12:28 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 92600 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 20 Aug 2001 21:12:14          +0000
Received: from wrench.toolcity.net (root@wrench.toolcity.net [208.0.188.2]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA11271 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 20 Aug 2001 14:12:13 -0700
Received: from [63.169.102.33]          (dap-63-169-101-10.meadville-tnt-1.pa.toolcity.net [63.169.101.10])          by wrench.toolcity.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id RAA09849; Mon, 20          Aug 2001 17:12:06 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <v01510105b7a733f8e1e0@[63.169.102.33]>
Date:         Mon, 20 Aug 2001 17:14:27 -0500
Reply-To: "al bradley" <abradley@TOOLCITY.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "al bradley" <abradley@TOOLCITY.NET>
Subject:      [AR] 2Re: [AR] Conservation of momentum
Comments: To: bob fortune <bob@FORTUNEPAINT.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

For the life of me, on this description  I can't see why this should be a
problem. How about simply "bulkhead-compartment" the nose cone and payload
together to receive the blowing-charge". I would expect that normal air
turbulence would let these two parts to readily separate. If not, maybe a
light spring could be used between the two.

Or maybe it would be better to see a cross-section diagram before looking
for a simple solution?

respectfully,
al bradley
----------------------
>This involves a payload to be ejected from an airframe.  The payload
>is a sliding coupler filled with electronics, little satellites
>actually, which impinges upon the nosecone.  When the separation
>charge is fired the payload coupler is forced forward which breaks a
>couple of shear pins holding the nosecone in place.  This expels the
>nosecone and, in turn, the payload coupler.
>
>An ejection charge black powder calculator indicates that a charge of
>.66 grams is all that's necessary to pressurize the chamber to 15
>psi, break the shear pins, and expel both masses. However, in testing
>it has been determined that 2 grams is required else only the
>nosecone is expelled while the coupler stays in place. It seems that
>this is a result of conservation of momentum, like the desktop toy in
>which 4 metal balls swing back and forth trading momentum or a cue
>ball interacting with the 8 ball on the pool table.
>
>   Granted, tying the two units together so a collision is not
>possible would be the easiest solution but difficult in practice to
>integrate since the two components must separate once in the
>airstream.  The payload and its recovery system weighs a bit more
>than the nosecone and its recovery system.   Anyone have any ideas as
>to an elegant solution besides more black powder? ("if a little bit
>is good then a whole lot more must be a whole lot better" - Father
>Stout, infamous Jesuit chemistry professor)
>
>This is for a very interesting program instituted by Stanford
>University.  Take a look here if you would like to know more:
>http://ssdl.stanford.edu/arliss/
>
>Thanks
>
>Bob

------------------------------------------------------------------
Can you live Life with this?: "Unless there is a law, an agreement, or a
long-standing custom, No one `Deserves' Anything -- Either Good or Bad!"

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 29887 invoked from network); 20 Aug 2001 21:43:12 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 20 Aug 2001 21:43:12 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 7519 invoked by uid 50005); 20 Aug 2001 21:43:17 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.900941 secs); 20 Aug 2001 21:43:17 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 20 Aug 2001 21:43:15 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA11339; Mon, 20 Aug 2001 14:27:56 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 92607 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 20 Aug 2001 21:27:54          +0000
Received: from adobe.com (smtp-relay-2.adobe.com [192.150.11.2]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA11325 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon,          20 Aug 2001 14:27:53 -0700
Received: from inner-relay-2.corp.adobe.com ([153.32.1.52]) by adobe.com          (1.0.0/8.11.4) with ESMTP id f7KLR0h08318 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>;          Mon, 20 Aug 2001 14:27:00 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mailsj-v1.corp.adobe.com (mailsj-dev.corp.adobe.com          [153.32.1.192]) by inner-relay-2.corp.adobe.com (8.11.4/8.11.4) with          ESMTP id f7KLQwb17020 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 20 Aug 2001          14:26:58 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from sronald.earthlink.net ([153.32.63.111]) by          mailsj-v1.corp.adobe.com (Netscape Messaging Server 4.15 v1 Jul 11          2001 16:32:57) with ESMTP id GIDY9B00.O63 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>;          Mon, 20 Aug 2001 14:27:11 -0700
X-Sender: forkbomb@mail.earthlink.net
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
References: <5.0.2.1.0.20010819230313.02adf0b0@mail.earthlink.net>            <4.3.1.2.20010820035613.02ca53f8@mail.idsoftware.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <5.1.0.14.0.20010820142751.0277fec0@mail.earthlink.net>
Date:         Mon, 20 Aug 2001 14:29:54 -0700
Reply-To: <forkbomb@EARTHLINK.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <forkbomb@EARTHLINK.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Solid rocket boosters
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <006701c129ab$58c2ea80$1b30fea9@kristinscomp>

At 12:07 PM 8/20/01 -0700, Kristin & David Hall wrote:
> > Three hinged (1D movement) nozzles can give 3DOF.
> >
> > A B C
> >
> > Engines A and C swing up and down, while B swings side to side.
> >
> > A and C swing together for one axis, opposite directions for roll, and B
> > gives the other axis.
>
>True.  A word of caution to those who might chase this route, however.....
>
>Once upon a time the VLA program office decided that a 3 jet vane system
>would be cheaper to manufacture than a 4 jet vane system and thus endeavored
>to design such a system.  After over a year and a few million dollars it was
>decided to just stick with the 4 vane system.  Why?  Because the control
>laws required for the 3 vane system turned out to be hellishly
>unpredictable.  Alas, I don't know the details beyond that, I just know that
>they spent a lot of money trying to get it to work *reliably* and failed.


         It seems to me that the three-nozzle system JC proposed is easier
to design than a three jet vane system, since it doesn't have coupling
between the axes that the jet vanes do. You get pitch from two nozzles, yaw
from one, and roll from all three together.

         -p

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 28044 invoked from network); 20 Aug 2001 21:50:15 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 20 Aug 2001 21:50:15 -0000
Received: (qmail 18035 invoked by uid 50005); 20 Aug 2001 21:49:47 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (. Clean. Processed in 0.140318 secs); 20 Aug 2001 21:49:47 -0000
X-Qmail-Scanner-Mail-From: owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU via smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
X-Qmail-Scanner-Rcpt-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
X-Qmail-Scanner: 0.96 (No viruses found. Processed in 0.140318 secs)
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 20 Aug 2001 21:49:47 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA11397; Mon, 20 Aug 2001 14:41:48 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 92614 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 20 Aug 2001 21:41:41          +0000
Received: from smtp004.mailsrvcs.net (smtp004pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.183])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA11383 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 20 Aug 2001 14:41:41 -0700
Received: from [63.10.189.150] (1Cust150.tnt2.hilo.hi.da.uu.net          [63.10.189.150]) by smtp004.mailsrvcs.net  with ESMTP ; id          f7KLf3L14746 Mon, 20 Aug 2001 16:41:04 -0500 (CDT)
X-Sender: ttocs@mail.gte.net (Unverified)
References: <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010818103011.26212A-100000@spsystems.net>            <l03130303b7a61d373e02@[63.10.189.23]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by itc.uci.edu id OAA11384
Message-ID:  <l03130300b7a734195c01@[63.10.201.92]>
Date:         Mon, 20 Aug 2001 11:41:13 -1000
Reply-To: "Aaron Smith" <ttocs@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Aaron Smith" <ttocs@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Help with some calculations
Comments: To: Sherwood Stolt <ssstolt@SEANET.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <3B8083D7.39908393@seanet.com>

This gives me the information, but I don't know how it all goes together.
More info/formulas or a place to learn them are needed.

Thanks
Aaron

At 8:28 PM -0700 8/19/01, Sherwood Stolt wrote:
>Go to the following web site and choose ammonia, isobaric properties
>and whatever units you like, choose the end points as your range and
>look at the enthalpy graph.  That gives you the amount of heat needed.
>I'm not sure how efficient you burner is.
>
>http://webbook.nist.gov/chemistry/fluid/
>
>Aaron Smith wrote:
>
>> Hey everyone,
>>
>>         I need some math guidance.  I would like to know how to calculate
>> the amount of propane needed to heat 8.66 liters of ammonia from 150 to
>> 400, constant pressure of 1100 PSI.  The formula itself would be better
>> than just the answer.  I can't really give more information, as I can't
>> talk about my project.  Any help would be appreciated.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Aaron

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 2907 invoked from network); 20 Aug 2001 21:51:24 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 20 Aug 2001 21:51:24 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 19133 invoked by uid 50005); 20 Aug 2001 21:50:54 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (. Clean. Processed in 0.164152 secs); 20 Aug 2001 21:50:54 -0000
X-Qmail-Scanner-Mail-From: owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU via smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net
X-Qmail-Scanner-Rcpt-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
X-Qmail-Scanner: 0.96 (No viruses found. Processed in 0.164152 secs)
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 20 Aug 2001 21:50:54 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA11473; Mon, 20 Aug 2001 14:47:33 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 92631 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 20 Aug 2001 21:46:32          +0000
Received: from cisco.com (cypher.cisco.com [171.69.11.18]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA11450 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon,          20 Aug 2001 14:46:32 -0700
Received: (from billw@localhost) by cisco.com (8.8.8/2.6/Cisco List          Logging/8.8.8) id OAA09909; Mon, 20 Aug 2001 14:45:52 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID:  <CMM.0.90.4.998343952.billw@cypher>
Date:         Mon, 20 Aug 2001 14:45:52 PDT
Reply-To: "Bill Westfield" <billw@cisco.com>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "William Chops Westfield" <billw@cisco.com>
Subject:      Re: [AR] aluminum powder
Comments: To: bildo joseepie <afiorettii@EXCITE.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  Your message of Mon, 20 Aug 2001 13:01:50 -0700

    I figure for the cost of the toy that it yields close to a
    pound of aluminum and eliminates the hazmat cost.

"Close to a pound?"  I'd be surprised if you get much more than an ounce of
aluminum out of an etch-a-sketch.  An ounce of "paint grade" flake aluminum
is pretty volumous, and the pound I once bought came in a gallon-sized can
(whereas I've got 10lb of atomized Al from firefox occupying about the same
volume.)

Moreover, this isn't the type of Al normally considered desirable in AP
propellants.  (Hmm.  Has anyone done experiments with the different pyro
grade aluminums that are available to see whether they behave differently?)

You might check out your local boating stores.  One of the West Systems
Epoxy system additives for UV resistance is supposed to be powdered Al.

BillW


From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 17021 invoked from network); 20 Aug 2001 22:18:11 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 20 Aug 2001 22:18:11 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 15446 invoked by uid 50005); 20 Aug 2001 22:17:43 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (. Clean. Processed in 0.49079 secs); 20 Aug 2001 22:17:43 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
X-Qmail-Scanner-Mail-From: owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU via smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net
X-Qmail-Scanner-Rcpt-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
X-Qmail-Scanner: 0.96 (No viruses found. Processed in 0.49079 secs)
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 20 Aug 2001 22:17:42 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA11627; Mon, 20 Aug 2001 15:13:45 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 92654 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 20 Aug 2001 22:13:36          +0000
Received: from smtp001.mailsrvcs.net (smtp001pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.180])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA11613 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 20 Aug 2001 15:13:35 -0700
Received: from [63.27.96.224] (1Cust46.tnt2.san-bernardino.ca.da.uu.net          [63.27.97.46]) by smtp001.mailsrvcs.net  with ESMTP for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; id f7KMCg716247 Mon, 20 Aug 2001 17:12:42          -0500 (CDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: GTE/01rocket@mail.gte.net
References: <10670804.998337710722.JavaMail.imail@seamore.excite.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <a05100312b7a73bb4f1e1@[63.27.96.224]>
Date:         Mon, 20 Aug 2001 15:12:47 -0700
Reply-To: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] aluminum powder
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <10670804.998337710722.JavaMail.imail@seamore.excite.com>

>Given the hazmat fees to ship alumium, magnesium and so on, I thought to
>breaking open an etch a sketch since I learned that they are made with very
>fine powdered aluminum.  I recall doing this as a kid to "see how it worked"
>and basically we got the powder everywhere.  To my knowledge there are
>plastic beads mixed in but I beleive these can be screened out.  Has anyone
>tried this?  I figure for the cost of the toy that it yields close to a
>pound of aluminum and eliminates the hazmat cost.  I would like to try this
>with APCP.
>
>Anyone ever try this?


Don't bother.  Someone will send you aluminum in small quantities if
you ask nicely.



--
Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
Opinion, the whole thing.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 29390 invoked from network); 20 Aug 2001 22:21:27 -0000
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 20 Aug 2001 22:21:27 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 10266 invoked by uid 50005); 20 Aug 2001 22:19:46 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smpte.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.402877 secs); 20 Aug 2001 22:19:46 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 20 Aug 2001 22:19:45 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA11687; Mon, 20 Aug 2001 15:17:38 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 92667 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 20 Aug 2001 22:17:37          +0000
Received: from avocet.mail.pas.earthlink.net (avocet.mail.pas.earthlink.net          [207.217.121.50]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA11673          for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Mon, 20 Aug 2001 15:17:37 -0700
Received: from [192.168.100.24] (user222.net118.lv.sprint-hsd.net          [208.13.137.222]) by avocet.mail.pas.earthlink.net (EL-8_9_3_3/8.9.3)          with ESMTP id PAA09744 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Mon, 20 Aug 2001          15:17:36 -0700 (PDT)
User-Agent: Microsoft-Outlook-Express-Macintosh-Edition/5.02.2022
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <B7A6DC55.FBE5%jblatzheim@aerotech-rocketry.com>
Date:         Mon, 20 Aug 2001 15:25:10 -0700
Reply-To: "Jason Blatzheim" <jblatzheim@AEROTECH-ROCKETRY.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jason Blatzheim" <jblatzheim@AEROTECH-ROCKETRY.COM>
Subject:      [AR] Aluminum powder
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Just to add to to this thread - I have heard that the boys over at ARM (John
and Rick) were using several different sizes of aluminum in their highly
aluminized propellants. This probably serves two purposes - to increase
combustion efficiency (of the Al) and to optimize density.

But I agree - Killing Etch-a-sketches is a poor way to get Al. I would
recommend Hawk Mountain....they have some very reasonably priced aluminnum
powder.
--


Jason Blatzheim

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 11328 invoked from network); 20 Aug 2001 22:24:42 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 20 Aug 2001 22:24:42 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 3187 invoked by uid 50005); 20 Aug 2001 22:24:47 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.170613 secs); 20 Aug 2001 22:24:47 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 20 Aug 2001 22:24:47 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA11732; Mon, 20 Aug 2001 15:22:21 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 92676 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 20 Aug 2001 22:22:20          +0000
Received: from smtp007.mailsrvcs.net (smtp007pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.186])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA11717 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 20 Aug 2001 15:22:19 -0700
Received: from [63.27.96.224] (1Cust46.tnt2.san-bernardino.ca.da.uu.net          [63.27.97.46]) by smtp007.mailsrvcs.net  with ESMTP for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; id f7KMLkW01683 Mon, 20 Aug 2001 17:21:47          -0500 (CDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: GTE/01rocket@mail.gte.net
References: <B7A6DC55.FBE5%jblatzheim@aerotech-rocketry.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <a05100313b7a73d825e76@[63.27.96.224]>
Date:         Mon, 20 Aug 2001 15:21:45 -0700
Reply-To: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Aluminum powder
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <B7A6DC55.FBE5%jblatzheim@aerotech-rocketry.com>

>Just to add to to this thread - I have heard that the boys over at ARM (John
>and Rick) were using several different sizes of aluminum in their highly
>aluminized propellants. This probably serves two purposes - to increase
>combustion efficiency (of the Al) and to optimize density.


I doubt it increases combustion efficiency to have the larger size Al.

But it increases density due to multi-modal fits.

For the size and pressure of motors they make they are grossly over-aluminized.


>
>But I agree - Killing Etch-a-sketches is a poor way to get Al. I would
>recommend Hawk Mountain....they have some very reasonably priced aluminnum
>powder.
>--
>
>
>Jason Blatzheim


--
Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
Opinion, the whole thing.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 10596 invoked from network); 20 Aug 2001 23:18:06 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 20 Aug 2001 23:18:06 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 27763 invoked by uid 50005); 20 Aug 2001 23:16:57 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smptf.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.422708 secs); 20 Aug 2001 23:16:57 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 20 Aug 2001 23:16:55 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA12019; Mon, 20 Aug 2001 16:13:18 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 92700 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 20 Aug 2001 23:12:31          +0000
Received: from adobe.com (smtp-relay-2.adobe.com [192.150.11.2]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA12005 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon,          20 Aug 2001 16:12:31 -0700
Received: from inner-relay-2.corp.adobe.com ([153.32.1.52]) by adobe.com          (1.0.0/8.11.4) with ESMTP id f7KNBZj06123 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>;          Mon, 20 Aug 2001 16:11:35 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mailsj-v1.corp.adobe.com (mailsj-dev.corp.adobe.com          [153.32.1.192]) by inner-relay-2.corp.adobe.com (8.11.4/8.11.4) with          ESMTP id f7KNBab02951 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 20 Aug 2001          16:11:36 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from sronald.earthlink.net ([153.32.63.111]) by          mailsj-v1.corp.adobe.com (Netscape Messaging Server 4.15 v1 Jul 11          2001 16:32:57) with ESMTP id GIE33N00.CO1; Mon, 20 Aug 2001 16:11:47          -0700
X-Sender: forkbomb@mail.earthlink.net
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <5.1.0.14.0.20010820161245.0273f7f0@mail.earthlink.net>
Date:         Mon, 20 Aug 2001 16:14:31 -0700
Reply-To: <forkbomb@EARTHLINK.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <forkbomb@EARTHLINK.NET>
Subject:      [AR] [OT] communication at black rock
Comments: To: erps-list@LunaCity.com
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

I'm planning to be out at Black Rock for the AeroPAC event this weekend,
and I need to know what communication facilities I can get my hands on.
This is because my dear boss has decided that I *MUST* be available by
phone this weekend. If I can't find a way to do this, I have to stay home.

        -p

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 11676 invoked from network); 20 Aug 2001 23:40:21 -0000
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 20 Aug 2001 23:40:21 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 29823 invoked by uid 50005); 20 Aug 2001 23:39:11 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smptf.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.149821 secs); 20 Aug 2001 23:39:11 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 20 Aug 2001 23:39:11 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA12103; Mon, 20 Aug 2001 16:33:55 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 92712 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 20 Aug 2001 23:33:46          +0000
Received: from adobe.com (smtp-relay-2.adobe.com [192.150.11.2]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA12089 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon,          20 Aug 2001 16:33:45 -0700
Received: from inner-relay-1.corp.adobe.com ([153.32.1.51]) by adobe.com          (1.0.0/8.11.4) with ESMTP id f7KNWpj11524 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>;          Mon, 20 Aug 2001 16:32:51 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mailsj-v1.corp.adobe.com (mailsj-dev.corp.adobe.com          [153.32.1.192]) by inner-relay-1.corp.adobe.com (8.11.4/8.11.4) with          ESMTP id f7KNXI228510 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 20 Aug 2001          16:33:18 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from sronald.earthlink.net ([153.32.63.111]) by          mailsj-v1.corp.adobe.com (Netscape Messaging Server 4.15 v1 Jul 11          2001 16:32:57) with ESMTP id GIE43300.NS8; Mon, 20 Aug 2001 16:33:03          -0700
X-Sender: forkbomb@mail.earthlink.net
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
References: <5.1.0.14.0.20010820161245.0273f7f0@mail.earthlink.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <5.1.0.14.0.20010820163450.0277dbf0@mail.earthlink.net>
Date:         Mon, 20 Aug 2001 16:35:47 -0700
Reply-To: <forkbomb@EARTHLINK.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <forkbomb@EARTHLINK.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] [OT] communication at black rock
Comments: To: Jason Blatzheim <jblatzheim@aerotech-rocketry.com>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <B7A6EB28.FC06%jblatzheim@aerotech-rocketry.com>

At 04:28 PM 8/20/01 -0700, Jason Blatzheim wrote:
>Good luck. Hand held cell phones are worthless at Black Rock. Maybe a car
>phone would work.
>
>Obviously, normal communication as available in Gerlach, 15 miles away.


         Will a pager work? I have a Verizon alpha-numeric. If that works,
then I can drive to Gerlach if I get paged.

         -p



>Jason
>
>on 8/20/01 4:14 PM, forkbomb@EARTHLINK.NET at forkbomb@EARTHLINK.NET wrote:
>
> > I'm planning to be out at Black Rock for the AeroPAC event this weekend,
> > and I need to know what communication facilities I can get my hands on.
> > This is because my dear boss has decided that I *MUST* be available by
> > phone this weekend. If I can't find a way to do this, I have to stay home.
> >
> > -p
> >
>
>--
>
>
>Jason Blatzheim
>AeroTech Inc. 1955 S. Palm St., Suite 15, Las Vegas, NV 89104
>(702) 641-2301 (PH) (702) 641-1883 (Fax)
>warranty@aerotech-warranty.com
>www.aerotech-rocketry.com

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 24815 invoked from network); 20 Aug 2001 23:43:35 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 20 Aug 2001 23:43:35 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 6209 invoked by uid 50005); 20 Aug 2001 23:43:06 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (. Clean. Processed in 1.342432 secs); 20 Aug 2001 23:43:06 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
X-Qmail-Scanner-Mail-From: owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU via smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net
X-Qmail-Scanner-Rcpt-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
X-Qmail-Scanner: 0.96 (No viruses found. Processed in 1.342432 secs)
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 20 Aug 2001 23:43:02 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA12188; Mon, 20 Aug 2001 16:41:07 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 92728 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 20 Aug 2001 23:41:06          +0000
Received: from proxy4.ba.best.com (root@proxy4.ba.best.com [206.184.139.15]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA12174 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Mon, 20 Aug 2001 16:41:06 -0700
Received: from [10.0.0.2] (snvadslgw2poold155.snjs.uswestqwest.net          [168.103.213.155]) by proxy4.ba.best.com (8.9.3/8.9.2/best.out) with          ESMTP id QAA05260 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Mon, 20 Aug 2001          16:39:44 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Sender:  (Unverified)
References: <5.1.0.14.0.20010820161245.0273f7f0@mail.earthlink.net>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <v04210110b7a74f5b85ce@[10.0.0.2]>
Date:         Mon, 20 Aug 2001 16:39:13 -0700
Reply-To: "bob fortune" <bob@FORTUNEPAINT.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "bob fortune" <bob@FORTUNEPAINT.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] [OT] communication at black rock
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <5.1.0.14.0.20010820161245.0273f7f0@mail.earthlink.net>

>I'm planning to be out at Black Rock for the AeroPAC event this weekend,
>and I need to know what communication facilities I can get my hands on.
>This is because my dear boss has decided that I *MUST* be available by
>phone this weekend. If I can't find a way to do this, I have to stay home.
>
>       -p

There will be a satellite phone at the site.  Look me up when you get
there for details as it's pretty much for emergency use only.  It
doesn't belong to me so I can't promise you anything.

Else there's Bruno's Country Club, if you are renting a room they
will take a message for you. A big tip might get them to take a
message if you're not staying at Chez Bruno.

Bob

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 8176 invoked from network); 20 Aug 2001 23:46:49 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 20 Aug 2001 23:46:49 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 30238 invoked by uid 50005); 20 Aug 2001 23:46:53 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 1.331887 secs); 20 Aug 2001 23:46:53 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 20 Aug 2001 23:46:50 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA12218; Mon, 20 Aug 2001 16:44:35 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 92735 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 20 Aug 2001 23:44:34          +0000
Received: from imo-m10.mx.aol.com (imo-m10.mx.aol.com [64.12.136.165]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA12204 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Mon, 20 Aug 2001 16:44:33 -0700
Received: from Ricanakk@aol.com by imo-m10.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v31_r1.4.) id          o.d8.ac148e6 (18253); Mon, 20 Aug 2001 19:43:52 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: AOL 5.0 for Windows sub 108
Message-ID:  <d8.ac148e6.28b2fab8@aol.com>
Date:         Mon, 20 Aug 2001 19:43:52 EDT
Reply-To: <Ricanakk@AOL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <Ricanakk@AOL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] aluminum powder
Comments: To: afiorettii@excite.com
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Andy
Curiously, I had planned to buy an etch-a-sketch to salvage the alum. powder,
but balked when I saw the price (they're expensive up here, even at Walmart).
And I doubt if there's more than a few ounces.

As it happens, today I received a 1 lb can of atomized West System aluminum,
$25 Cdn (about $17 USD). No hazmat fees.

Richard Nakka

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 12378 invoked from network); 20 Aug 2001 23:47:49 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 20 Aug 2001 23:47:49 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 8361 invoked by uid 50005); 20 Aug 2001 23:46:06 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smpte.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.32596 secs); 20 Aug 2001 23:46:06 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 20 Aug 2001 23:46:05 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA12244; Mon, 20 Aug 2001 16:45:41 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 92742 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 20 Aug 2001 23:45:40          +0000
Received: from proxy4.ba.best.com (root@proxy4.ba.best.com [206.184.139.15]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA12230 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Mon, 20 Aug 2001 16:45:40 -0700
Received: from [10.0.0.2] (snvadslgw2poold155.snjs.uswestqwest.net          [168.103.213.155]) by proxy4.ba.best.com (8.9.3/8.9.2/best.out) with          ESMTP id QAA07959; Mon, 20 Aug 2001 16:43:51 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Sender:  (Unverified)
References: <v01510105b7a733f8e1e0@[63.169.102.33]>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <v0421010fb7a74af67cdb@[10.0.0.2]>
Date:         Mon, 20 Aug 2001 16:43:19 -0700
Reply-To: "bob fortune" <bob@FORTUNEPAINT.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "bob fortune" <bob@FORTUNEPAINT.COM>
Subject:      [AR] 2Re: [AR] Conservation of momentum
Comments: cc: al bradley <abradley@toolcity.net>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <v01510105b7a733f8e1e0@[63.169.102.33]>

Hiya Al,

Connecting the two together would solve all the problems but they
have to come out as separate units.  Here's how it works:  The
airframe separates at apogee into motor section and payload (with
nosecone attached) section.  The airframe section containing the
avionics,  nosecone, and payload coupler descend for about 7 seconds
after apogee.  At that time a second event occurs, a black powder
charge aft of the payload coupler containing the satellites goes off.
The coupler, the cansat carrier really, is forced forward shearing
some pins and ejecting itself and the nosecone.  The nosecone falls
away and recovers on its own chute.  The payload coupler is tethered
to the airframe and when the carrier reaches the end of the tether
the 3 satellites are ejected when the carrier comes to a sudden stop.
It's a real simple system that has worked about 60 times so far.

Trouble is the g forces the individual cansats see can be kind of
high. They are all built by students, it's an international program
sponsored by Stanford, and sometimes those forces are unexpected and
ruin an experiment so we try to keep deployment as gentle as possible.

There is a schematic on the Arliss site, look under the menu marked
"rocket".  Additionally this launch there are 25 Lockheed engineers
who have built 12 satellites under a new program that Lockheed
instituted for newbie satellite engineering types.  The Lazy L wanted
their boys to get some soup to nuts experience in building itty
payloads, a cradle to grave approach, cause it seems there is so much
specialization that satellite folk don't often get the big picture.

Bob


>For the life of me, on this description  I can't see why this should be a
>problem. How about simply "bulkhead-compartment" the nose cone and payload
>together to receive the blowing-charge". I would expect that normal air
>turbulence would let these two parts to readily separate. If not, maybe a
>light spring could be used between the two.
>
>Or maybe it would be better to see a cross-section diagram before looking
>for a simple solution?
>
>respectfully,
>al bradley

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 6278 invoked from network); 21 Aug 2001 00:00:37 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 21 Aug 2001 00:00:37 -0000
Received: (qmail 27182 invoked by uid 50005); 20 Aug 2001 23:59:27 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smptf.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.96216 secs); 20 Aug 2001 23:59:27 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 20 Aug 2001 23:59:24 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA12318; Mon, 20 Aug 2001 16:57:38 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 92749 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 20 Aug 2001 23:57:38          +0000
Received: from imo-m02.mx.aol.com (imo-m02.mx.aol.com [64.12.136.5]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA12258 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Mon, 20 Aug 2001 16:47:37 -0700
Received: from ARS939@aol.com by imo-m02.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v31_r1.4.) id          w.8a.b4e952c (4186) for <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Mon, 20 Aug 2001          19:47:04 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0B8D_01C56B69.4B069D70"
X-Mailer: AOL 6.0 for Windows US sub 10528
Message-ID:  <8a.b4e952c.28b2fb78@aol.com>
Date:         Mon, 20 Aug 2001 19:47:04 EDT
Reply-To: <ARS939@AOL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "No Name Available" <ARS939@AOL.COM>
Subject:      [AR] Aluminum powder
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0B8D_01C56B69.4B069D70
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Ball Milling Aluminum:
http://fp.redhouse.f9.co.uk/pyro/misc/aluminiu.htm
AARS: #939

------=_NextPart_000_0B8D_01C56B69.4B069D70
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<HTML><FONT FACE=arial,helvetica><FONT  SIZE=2>Ball Milling Aluminum:
<BR>http://fp.redhouse.f9.co.uk/pyro/misc/aluminiu.htm
<BR>AARS: #939</FONT></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0B8D_01C56B69.4B069D70--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 10454 invoked from network); 21 Aug 2001 00:01:37 -0000
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 21 Aug 2001 00:01:37 -0000
Received: (qmail 28717 invoked by uid 50005); 21 Aug 2001 00:00:26 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smptf.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 3.40115 secs); 21 Aug 2001 00:00:26 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 21 Aug 2001 00:00:20 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA12298; Mon, 20 Aug 2001 16:56:04 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 92750 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 20 Aug 2001 23:56:02          +0000
Received: from mta02.mail.mel.aone.net.au (mta02.mail.au.uu.net [203.2.192.82])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA12284 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 20 Aug 2001 16:56:01 -0700
Received: from unknown ([63.34.214.94]) by mta02.mail.mel.aone.net.au with SMTP          id <20010820235558.ERNJ4158.mta02.mail.mel.aone.net.au@unknown> for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 21 Aug 2001 09:55:58 +1000
References: Conversation            <5.1.0.14.0.20010817062713.01ee1130@mail.murraystate.edu> with last            message <5.1.0.14.0.20010820061730.01dfc3e0@mail.murraystate.edu>
Priority: Normal
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Priority: 3
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	X-MAPIextension=.TXT;
	charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>
Date:         Mon, 20 Aug 2001 23:56:02 +0000
Reply-To: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Accident reports
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <5.1.0.14.0.20010820061730.01dfc3e0@mail.murraystate.edu>

I wasn't there for this one but have spoken directly to the person who was
(a fellow list member) and feel it's worth sharing.
 This fellow was mixing up a kitchen sized bowl of micrograin one day when
the stuff just ignited. He sustained some quite nasty burns to his arm
which required hospitalisation. He later suggested the problem may have
resulted from a reaction with some NH4N03 impurities on the mixing device
(from processing other propellants). Apparently a classic way of detecting
the "quality" of zinc powder in the pyrotechnics game is to mix in some AN
and time the delay before a noticeable exothermic reaction starts
happening. At the time I suggested he share this with the rest of the list
but he was too embarrassed. I'm no expert with these chemicals or
reactions, just passing on what I've been told.

Troy.

----------
> At 03:47 PM 8/17/01 -0500, John Carmack wrote:
>
> >>Query for the entire list:  I (and many others, I'm sure) would be
> >>interested in details and specifics of accidents.  Not just with candy
> >>propellant but with all others as well.  Preferably accidents of the "I
was
> >>there and saw this as it happened" type, with objective details such as
> >>propellant composition, temperature of processing, etc.  Such
information
> >>would be enormously helpful to the list.
> >
> >We have had two notable "wake up calls" with peroxide in the last year.
>
> [snip of detailed reports]
>
> Thank you, John!  That is exactly the sort of report that is so hard to
> write but so informative to the group involved.  It tells precisely what
> happened, why, and how it was corrected.  That one goes in my permanent
files.
>
> Much appreciated,
> P'rfesser

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 29653 invoked from network); 21 Aug 2001 00:06:03 -0000
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 21 Aug 2001 00:06:03 -0000
Received: (qmail 2928 invoked by uid 50005); 21 Aug 2001 00:04:53 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smptf.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.296535 secs); 21 Aug 2001 00:04:53 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 21 Aug 2001 00:04:53 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA12406; Mon, 20 Aug 2001 17:03:52 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 92775 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 21 Aug 2001 00:03:47          +0000
Received: from conint.consumersinterest.com (consumersinterest.com          [207.195.143.118] (may be forged)) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with          ESMTP id RAA12392 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 20 Aug 2001          17:03:47 -0700
Received: from greg [208.187.15.154] by conint.consumersinterest.com          (SMTPD32-6.04) id A8C9A6D013C; Mon, 20 Aug 2001 17:18:17 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <NDBBIBAMIMKJPANDCAHGMEPAFAAA.greg@blastzone.com>
Date:         Mon, 20 Aug 2001 17:17:57 -0700
Reply-To: <greg@blastzone.com>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Greg Deputy" <greg@blastzone.com>
Subject:      Re: [AR] [OT] communication at black rock
Comments: To: forkbomb@EARTHLINK.NET
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <5.1.0.14.0.20010820163450.0277dbf0@mail.earthlink.net>

I've seen pagers work there, never phones.  Dont know what kind of pagers,
though...

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@itc.uci.edu]On
> Behalf Of forkbomb@EARTHLINK.NET
> Sent: Monday, August 20, 2001 4:36 PM
> To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
> Subject: Re: [AR] [OT] communication at black rock
>
>
> At 04:28 PM 8/20/01 -0700, Jason Blatzheim wrote:
> >Good luck. Hand held cell phones are worthless at Black Rock. Maybe a car
> >phone would work.
> >
> >Obviously, normal communication as available in Gerlach, 15 miles away.
>
>
>          Will a pager work? I have a Verizon alpha-numeric. If that works,
> then I can drive to Gerlach if I get paged.
>
>          -p
>
>
>
> >Jason
> >
> >on 8/20/01 4:14 PM, forkbomb@EARTHLINK.NET at
> forkbomb@EARTHLINK.NET wrote:
> >
> > > I'm planning to be out at Black Rock for the AeroPAC event
> this weekend,
> > > and I need to know what communication facilities I can get my
> hands on.
> > > This is because my dear boss has decided that I *MUST* be available by
> > > phone this weekend. If I can't find a way to do this, I have
> to stay home.
> > >
> > > -p
> > >
> >
> >--
> >
> >
> >Jason Blatzheim
> >AeroTech Inc. 1955 S. Palm St., Suite 15, Las Vegas, NV 89104
> >(702) 641-2301 (PH) (702) 641-1883 (Fax)
> >warranty@aerotech-warranty.com
> >www.aerotech-rocketry.com
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 1043 invoked from network); 21 Aug 2001 00:42:00 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 21 Aug 2001 00:42:00 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 28706 invoked by uid 50005); 21 Aug 2001 00:40:17 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smpte.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.626763 secs); 21 Aug 2001 00:40:17 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 21 Aug 2001 00:40:15 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA12533; Mon, 20 Aug 2001 17:39:30 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 92793 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 21 Aug 2001 00:39:22          +0000
Received: from syzygy.harm.org (syzygy.harm.org [208.37.136.28]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA12519 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon,          20 Aug 2001 17:39:21 -0700
Received: from localhost (halbritt@localhost) by syzygy.harm.org          (8.11.2/8.11.2) with ESMTP id f7L0dKa00519; Mon, 20 Aug 2001 17:39:20          -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.GSO.4.31.0108201734300.460-100000@syzygy.harm.org>
Date:         Mon, 20 Aug 2001 17:39:19 -0700
Reply-To: "Heath Albritton" <halbritt@HARM.ORG>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Heath Albritton" <halbritt@HARM.ORG>
Subject:      Re: [AR] [OT] communication at black rock
Comments: To: erps-list@LunaCity.com
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <5.1.0.14.0.20010820161245.0273f7f0@mail.earthlink.net>

You have a very limited number of choices.  You could try a sat phone and
that's about it.  I was thinking that if you're a ham operator, you might
be able to do something funky with an auto-patch, but the fact that it's
related to your business would make it illegal.  That plus the fact that
you would have to use a portable HF rig as 2M and 70cm radios have a
limited range.  As I understand it, the nearest land line is in Gerlach
and cell-phone coverage doesn't even come close.


Heath

On Mon, 20 Aug 2001 forkbomb@earthlink.net wrote:
> I'm planning to be out at Black Rock for the AeroPAC event this weekend,
> and I need to know what communication facilities I can get my hands on.
> This is because my dear boss has decided that I *MUST* be available by
> phone this weekend. If I can't find a way to do this, I have to stay home.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 10096 invoked from network); 21 Aug 2001 01:44:33 -0000
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 21 Aug 2001 01:44:33 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 1420 invoked by uid 50005); 21 Aug 2001 01:42:48 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smpte.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 2.521895 secs); 21 Aug 2001 01:42:48 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 21 Aug 2001 01:42:43 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA12700; Mon, 20 Aug 2001 18:27:58 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 92808 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 21 Aug 2001 01:27:45          +0000
Received: from localhost.localdomain (IDENT:root@lauren.pconline.com          [207.191.131.70]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA12686          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 20 Aug 2001 18:27:45 -0700
Received: from artimex.com (m18-4-15.pconline.com [207.191.143.63]) by          localhost.localdomain (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f7L0QYQ10875 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 20 Aug 2001 19:26:34 -0500
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (Win98; I)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <NBEJKDFBFOEFALBMBCDPIEOLCCAA.jtaylor@nc.rr.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B81B978.355E74A7@artimex.com>
Date:         Mon, 20 Aug 2001 20:29:28 -0500
Reply-To: "Robert Brashear" <rjb@ARTIMEX.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Robert Brashear" <rjb@ARTIMEX.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Going to Black Rock?
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Jeff Taylor wrote:
>
> Hey -
>
> Is anyone on the list planning to go to the BALLS launch at Black Rock in
> September?  I'm going, and I'd like to take this chance to meet as many
> people while I'm out there as I can.  I'll be bringing a small project with
> me on the plane, and I need some help on the propellant end.
>
> - Jeff Taylor

Jeff,

Carl Blood and I plan to attend. All depends on the static test this
friday at Maple Island, MN. N-4000, 5 second burn. We're driving out
from Minnesota.

Bob Brashear

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 10382 invoked from network); 21 Aug 2001 02:36:41 -0000
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 21 Aug 2001 02:36:41 -0000
Received: (qmail 28914 invoked by uid 50005); 21 Aug 2001 02:34:57 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smpte.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.353097 secs); 21 Aug 2001 02:34:57 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 21 Aug 2001 02:34:57 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA12902; Mon, 20 Aug 2001 19:33:55 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 92824 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 21 Aug 2001 02:33:50          +0000
Received: from smtprelay1.abs.adelphia.net (smtprelay.abs.adelphia.net          [64.8.20.11]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA12888 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 20 Aug 2001 19:33:49 -0700
Received: from jlgrady ([63.124.251.47]) by smtprelay1.abs.adelphia.net          (Netscape Messaging Server 4.15) with SMTP id GIECEX02.QJZ for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 20 Aug 2001 22:32:57 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook CWS, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <000b01c129e9$e371f660$0200a8c0@prestige.net>
Date:         Mon, 20 Aug 2001 22:35:05 -0400
Reply-To: "Jeff Grady" <jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jeff Grady" <jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] [OT] communication at black rock
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <Pine.GSO.4.31.0108201734300.460-100000@syzygy.harm.org>

On Mon, 20 Aug 2001 forkbomb@earthlink.net wrote:
> I'm planning to be out at Black Rock for the AeroPAC event this weekend,
> and I need to know what communication facilities I can get my hands on.
> This is because my dear boss has decided that I *MUST* be available by
> phone this weekend. If I can't find a way to do this, I have to stay home.

I thought slavery was abolished...

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 7191 invoked from network); 21 Aug 2001 03:24:45 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 21 Aug 2001 03:24:45 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 21760 invoked by uid 50005); 21 Aug 2001 03:24:49 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.13035 secs); 21 Aug 2001 03:24:49 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 21 Aug 2001 03:24:49 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA13091; Mon, 20 Aug 2001 20:22:10 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 92846 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 21 Aug 2001 03:22:07          +0000
Received: from grucom2.gru.net (grucom2.gru.net [209.251.129.7]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA13077 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon,          20 Aug 2001 20:22:07 -0700
Received: from [209.251.150.203] by grucom2.sfcc.net (NTMail          6.04.0010/NU4112.00.db1c8a4b) with ESMTP id odcwhaaa for          AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 20 Aug 2001 23:22:07 -0400
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (Win95; I)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <v01510100b7a64299ed0b@[208.22.189.218]>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B81D442.EACE10F5@sfcc.net>
Date:         Mon, 20 Aug 2001 23:23:46 -0400
Reply-To: "James Yawn" <jyawn@SFCC.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "James Yawn" <jyawn@SFCC.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] 1 testing, 2 desired qualities for              candy-KNO3propellant??????
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Al:

I look forward to hearing reactions to your request.  I fear that my
contributions at present will be very incomplete and subjective, as I have made
only tiny rockets by Arocket standards, and so have not had to consider such
characteristics as shear strength, tensile strength, etc.  As long as the cases
didn't pop, I felt I was doing OK.

One of my joys is to hear comments from knowledgeable folks on the list who
stimulate my thinking and help me move from "rocket art" to "rocket science."
But I am just now toying with the science part, and since I wish to scale up my
operations, I welcome all such input.  I have even learned to like
static-testing, as I can already make engines larger than I dare launch around
here.

So I will look at your list carefully when I have more time and give it my best
shot.  Maybe the proposed "Candy" list would be a good thing to promote this
type of discussion, but again, I appreciate the incredible depth of knowledge
shared by the Arocket list as a whole.

Thanks for your continued interest and support.

Jimmy Yawn

al bradley wrote:

> Jimmy: While the continued discussion of candy propellant is fascinating at
> times I am concerned that there is not a common focus among its
> correspondents, so this is posted to the general list too.
>
> It would be nice to pin down the qualities our writers consider important
> in their trials (and errors).
>
> Tensile strength:
> Hardness:
> Ductility:
> Shear strength:
> Density:
> Load-bearing (compressive strength):
> Dollar cost per kilogram
> Burn rate: Open air
>            Under pressure: if such can be measured
> Weight of solid combustion-remnants:
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 2080 invoked from network); 21 Aug 2001 03:42:19 -0000
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 21 Aug 2001 03:42:19 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 23310 invoked by uid 50005); 21 Aug 2001 03:40:36 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smpte.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.355345 secs); 21 Aug 2001 03:40:36 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 21 Aug 2001 03:40:35 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA13169; Mon, 20 Aug 2001 20:40:21 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 92857 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 21 Aug 2001 03:40:16          +0000
Received: from grucom2.gru.net (grucom2.gru.net [209.251.129.7]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA13155 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon,          20 Aug 2001 20:40:16 -0700
Received: from [209.251.150.203] by grucom2.sfcc.net (NTMail          6.04.0010/NU4112.00.db1c8a4b) with ESMTP id nncwhaaa for          AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 20 Aug 2001 23:40:15 -0400
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (Win95; I)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B81D884.7B6CCF69@sfcc.net>
Date:         Mon, 20 Aug 2001 23:41:56 -0400
Reply-To: "James Yawn" <jyawn@SFCC.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "James Yawn" <jyawn@SFCC.NET>
Subject:      [AR] Continued Candy tests
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

I continued my comedy-act compression testing today with the purchase of
a sophisticated electronic measuring device, a bathroom scale.

Details are at:
http://members.fortunecity.com/jyawn/compression/tests8-20.htm

(Please excuse all the pictures - I bought a new camera and just can't
help myself.)

Short summary:  I managed to get a load weighing 338 pounds to rest on
my sample of recrystallized candy (KN/sucrose, 1.5 inch diameter x 1.75
inches long) for over a minute.  The sample was compressed about 12
percent of its length, but did not break, crack, or crumble.  I am
astonished by this result, and will continue to test.  But for the
moment suggest I will scratch "low compression strength" off my list of
limitations for this type of fuel, at least when made by this method.

I encourage comments, criticisms, or warm fuzzies on this topic.

Respectfully submitted,
Jimmy Yawn

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 2295 invoked from network); 21 Aug 2001 04:01:53 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 21 Aug 2001 04:01:53 -0000
Received: (qmail 6781 invoked by uid 50005); 21 Aug 2001 04:01:16 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (. Clean. Processed in 0.206739 secs); 21 Aug 2001 04:01:16 -0000
X-Qmail-Scanner-Mail-From: owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU via smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
X-Qmail-Scanner-Rcpt-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
X-Qmail-Scanner: 0.96 (No viruses found. Processed in 0.206739 secs)
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 21 Aug 2001 04:01:16 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA13254; Mon, 20 Aug 2001 20:58:58 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 92873 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 21 Aug 2001 03:58:56          +0000
Received: from mta04.mail.mel.aone.net.au (mta04.mail.au.uu.net [203.2.192.84])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA13240 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 20 Aug 2001 20:58:56 -0700
Received: from unknown ([63.34.214.49]) by mta04.mail.mel.aone.net.au with SMTP          id <20010821035851.FKSN3778.mta04.mail.mel.aone.net.au@unknown> for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 21 Aug 2001 13:58:51 +1000
References: Conversation <v01510100b7a64299ed0b@[208.22.189.218]> with last            message <3B81D442.EACE10F5@sfcc.net>
Priority: Normal
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Priority: 3
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	X-MAPIextension=.TXT;
	charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>
Date:         Tue, 21 Aug 2001 03:58:56 +0000
Reply-To: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] 1 testing, 2 desired qualities for              candy-KNO3propellant??????
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <3B81D442.EACE10F5@sfcc.net>

Let me be vague (to borrow a line from Jerry)
There maybe conflicting responses if any because different geometric motor
designs, sizes and operating environments often require different levels of
integrity for each of the properties listed. Propellant density is pretty
much a constant throughout, residue mass or ratio is another constant, cost
and Isp another but the importance of the mechanical properties can alter
somewhat and there may need to be compromises required (to say performance)
for specific applications.

Maybe a too generic question for people to answer confidently?

Troy.

----------
> Al:
>
> I look forward to hearing reactions to your request.  I fear that my
> contributions at present will be very incomplete and subjective, as I have
> made
> only tiny rockets by Arocket standards, and so have not had to consider
such
> characteristics as shear strength, tensile strength, etc.  As long as the
> cases
> didn't pop, I felt I was doing OK.
>
> One of my joys is to hear comments from knowledgeable folks on the list
who
> stimulate my thinking and help me move from "rocket art" to "rocket
science."
> But I am just now toying with the science part, and since I wish to scale
up
> my
> operations, I welcome all such input.  I have even learned to like
> static-testing, as I can already make engines larger than I dare launch
around
> here.
>
> So I will look at your list carefully when I have more time and give it my
> best
> shot.  Maybe the proposed "Candy" list would be a good thing to promote
this
> type of discussion, but again, I appreciate the incredible depth of
knowledge
> shared by the Arocket list as a whole.
>
> Thanks for your continued interest and support.
>
> Jimmy Yawn
>
> al bradley wrote:
>
> > Jimmy: While the continued discussion of candy propellant is
fascinating at
> > times I am concerned that there is not a common focus among its
> > correspondents, so this is posted to the general list too.
> >
> > It would be nice to pin down the qualities our writers consider
important
> > in their trials (and errors).
> >
> > Tensile strength:
> > Hardness:
> > Ductility:
> > Shear strength:
> > Density:
> > Load-bearing (compressive strength):
> > Dollar cost per kilogram
> > Burn rate: Open air
> >            Under pressure: if such can be measured
> > Weight of solid combustion-remnants:
> >

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 8255 invoked from network); 21 Aug 2001 04:21:31 -0000
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 21 Aug 2001 04:21:31 -0000
Received: (qmail 13729 invoked by uid 50005); 21 Aug 2001 04:19:48 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smpte.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.359407 secs); 21 Aug 2001 04:19:48 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 21 Aug 2001 04:19:48 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA13322; Mon, 20 Aug 2001 21:19:23 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 92880 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 21 Aug 2001 04:19:21          +0000
Received: from robin.mail.pas.earthlink.net (robin.mail.pas.earthlink.net          [207.217.120.65]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA13307          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 20 Aug 2001 21:19:21 -0700
Received: from scottje (1Cust243.tnt3.holman.wi.da.uu.net [63.42.154.243]) by          robin.mail.pas.earthlink.net (EL-8_9_3_3/8.9.3) with SMTP id VAA01585          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 20 Aug 2001 21:19:19 -0700 (PDT)
References:  <3B81D884.7B6CCF69@sfcc.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <000901c129f0$f6d923c0$f072fea9@scottje>
Date:         Mon, 20 Aug 2001 23:22:21 -0400
Reply-To: "Scott & Jeanette" <frazer2001@EARTHLINK.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Scott & Jeanette" <frazer2001@EARTHLINK.NET>
Subject:      [AR] Molding Phenolic/Graphite Nozzles
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

I have been looking for info on molding phenolic nozzles with a graphite
insert.  Does anyone have a good website or source of info on this?

Thanks

Scott Frazer

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 424 invoked from network); 21 Aug 2001 04:47:45 -0000
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 21 Aug 2001 04:47:45 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 15545 invoked by uid 50005); 21 Aug 2001 04:46:34 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smptf.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.238031 secs); 21 Aug 2001 04:46:34 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 21 Aug 2001 04:46:34 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA13465; Mon, 20 Aug 2001 21:45:15 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 92907 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 21 Aug 2001 04:45:07          +0000
Received: from dns2.seanet.com (dns2.seanet.com [199.181.164.2]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA13451 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon,          20 Aug 2001 21:45:06 -0700
Received: from seanet.com (ssstolt.seanet.com [204.182.68.23]) by          dns2.seanet.com (8.11.5/8.11.5) with ESMTP id f7L4j0j29897; Mon, 20          Aug 2001 21:45:01 -0700 (PDT)
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.73 [en] (Win98; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <Pine.GSO.4.21.0108181114500.6539-100000@y.glue.umd.edu>            <033b01c1296f$f0b3abe0$0100a8c0@mkbs>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B81E593.EA5C9D51@seanet.com>
Date:         Mon, 20 Aug 2001 21:37:39 -0700
Reply-To: "Sherwood Stolt" <ssstolt@SEANET.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Sherwood Stolt" <ssstolt@SEANET.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Pistonless Piston Pumps with peroxide precat cycle
Comments: cc: Russell McMahon <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Maybe an accumulator could be made by having a gas volume inside the
injector assembly.  This could also help separate out any gas bubbles in
the liquid flow.  Another advantage of an accumulator is that with a small
pump you might get by with just one cylinder.  For example maybe you
could get rid of the cylinder and just use the plumbing line and really
fast cycling valves.

Russell McMahon wrote:

> I am hopeful that switchover will be able to be made extremely seamless.
> I feel that this will be more dependent on maintaining constant pressure in
> the pump chamber during the whole delivery stroke than anything else. ie a
> regulator will be needed to feed gas throughout the stroke to overcome the
> blowdown pressure decrease which occurs during a  pump cycle. This may
> require a (hopefully small) high pressure reservoir post regulator. This
> increases the gross pressurised space and therefore the weight but adds
> little to the complexity.
>
> As the delivery pump chambr (PC) approaches the end of its delivery stroke
> the full offline PC is brought up to pressure. As long as the offline PC is
> at lower pressure there will be NO delivery from it. Once they are at equal
> pressure they will share the output equally. Adding a second pump cylinder
> is essentially the same as doubling the area of the high pressure feed
> plumbing from pump to injector. If the pump is correctly designed then
> doubling the area of the feed passages should have minor effect on the flow
> as the vast majority of preesure drop is across the injector and chamber. If
> necessary PC changeover could be accompanied by a graded application and
> removal of pressure.
>
> > Later you can worry about higher pressures, lighter weights, pistons and
> so on.
>
> Agree.
>
> regards
>
>                 Russell McMahon

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 9796 invoked from network); 21 Aug 2001 05:10:01 -0000
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 21 Aug 2001 05:10:01 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 7234 invoked by uid 50005); 21 Aug 2001 05:08:51 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smptf.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.69284 secs); 21 Aug 2001 05:08:51 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 21 Aug 2001 05:08:50 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA13545; Mon, 20 Aug 2001 22:03:35 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 92919 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 21 Aug 2001 05:03:33          +0000
Received: from gull.mail.pas.earthlink.net (gull.mail.pas.earthlink.net          [207.217.121.85]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA13531          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 20 Aug 2001 22:03:33 -0700
Received: from sprintmail.com (pool0679.cvx18-bradley.dialup.earthlink.net          [209.179.240.169]) by gull.mail.pas.earthlink.net (EL-8_9_3_3/8.9.3)          with ESMTP id WAA08904 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 20 Aug 2001          22:03:31 -0700 (PDT)
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.74 [en] (Win98; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <Pine.GSO.4.21.0108181114500.6539-100000@y.glue.umd.edu>            <033b01c1296f$f0b3abe0$0100a8c0@mkbs> <3B81E593.EA5C9D51@seanet.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B813E80.4050A580@sprintmail.com>
Date:         Mon, 20 Aug 2001 09:44:48 -0700
Reply-To: "Anthony Colette" <Rockitman@SPRINTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Anthony Colette" <Rockitman@SPRINTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      [AR] Pistonless Piston Pumps
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Stay away from any kind of accumulator in or near the injector.  Even a small
bubble trap in the injector will lead to flow oscillations and possible combustion
instabilities.  Combustion instabilities can burn up an engine really fast.

If you need to use a periodic pump, allow for sufficient ullage in your propellant
tanks and drop 5% of the tank pressure across your feed lines and at least 15%
across the final injector orifices.

Tony

> Maybe an accumulator could be made by having a gas volume inside the
> injector assembly.  This could also help separate out any gas bubbles in
> the liquid flow.  Another advantage of an accumulator is that with a small
> pump you might get by with just one cylinder.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 23524 invoked from network); 21 Aug 2001 05:15:18 -0000
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 21 Aug 2001 05:15:18 -0000
Received: (qmail 12579 invoked by uid 50005); 21 Aug 2001 05:13:33 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smpte.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 1.820662 secs); 21 Aug 2001 05:13:33 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 21 Aug 2001 05:13:28 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA13609; Mon, 20 Aug 2001 22:10:48 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 92931 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 21 Aug 2001 05:10:46          +0000
Received: from mta01.mail.mel.aone.net.au (mta01.mail.au.uu.net [203.2.192.81])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA13595 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 20 Aug 2001 22:10:45 -0700
Received: from unknown ([63.34.216.154]) by mta01.mail.mel.aone.net.au with          SMTP id <20010821051043.TNSJ3755.mta01.mail.mel.aone.net.au@unknown>          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 21 Aug 2001 15:10:43 +1000
References: Conversation <3B81D884.7B6CCF69@sfcc.net> with last message            <000901c129f0$f6d923c0$f072fea9@scottje>
Priority: Normal
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Priority: 3
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	X-MAPIextension=.TXT;
	charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>
Date:         Tue, 21 Aug 2001 05:10:46 +0000
Reply-To: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Molding Phenolic/Graphite Nozzles
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <000901c129f0$f6d923c0$f072fea9@scottje>

Nup, although I've done a fair bit of this myself with laminating phenolic
resin.

Troy.

----------
> I have been looking for info on molding phenolic nozzles with a graphite
> insert.  Does anyone have a good website or source of info on this?
>
> Thanks
>
> Scott Frazer

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 29661 invoked from network); 21 Aug 2001 06:52:16 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 21 Aug 2001 06:52:16 -0000
Received: (qmail 12328 invoked by uid 50005); 21 Aug 2001 06:52:20 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.348916 secs); 21 Aug 2001 06:52:20 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 21 Aug 2001 06:52:19 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA13944; Mon, 20 Aug 2001 23:49:21 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 92976 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 21 Aug 2001 06:49:15          +0000
Received: from fep3-orange.clear.net.nz (fep3-orange.clear.net.nz          [203.97.32.3]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA13930          for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Mon, 20 Aug 2001 23:49:14 -0700
Received: from mkbs (203-167-158-97.dialup.clear.net.nz [203.167.158.97]) by          fep3-orange.clear.net.nz (1.5/1.8) with SMTP id SAA22741; Tue, 21 Aug          2001 18:49:10 +1200 (NZST)
References: <5.1.0.14.0.20010820161245.0273f7f0@mail.earthlink.net>             <5.1.0.14.0.20010820163450.0277dbf0@mail.earthlink.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <05e301c12a0d$ba3bb0a0$0100a8c0@mkbs>
Date:         Tue, 21 Aug 2001 16:27:09 +1200
Reply-To: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Organization: Applied Technology
Subject:      Re: [AR] [OT] communication at black rock
Comments: To: forkbomb@EARTHLINK.NET
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

> At 04:28 PM 8/20/01 -0700, Jason Blatzheim wrote:
> >Good luck. Hand held cell phones are worthless at Black Rock. Maybe a car
> >phone would work.
> >
> >Obviously, normal communication as available in Gerlach, 15 miles away.


15 miles should be easily achievable with a Yagi IF there is a cell site 15
miles away.
I've had line of sight cell phone calls over greater distances than that to
a standard pocket phone although reliability varies.
If there is no cell site in Gerlach you may be less lucky.

Enterprising types have before today "improved" various communication links
with a passive system at both ends.
This can be useful for providing coverage in a valley out of direct site of
a distant transmitter.

- Point antenna at cell site tx/rx
- Feed antenna to a suitably tuned long Yagi aimed at distant site.
- Another long Yagi at distant site feeds another local antenna.

You now have a poor approximation to an RF wormhole between the two sites.

Possibly with a receive amplifier at the distant site.
This is quite possibly legal as you are not connecting anything active to
any system - just connecting some entirely passive pieces of metal together
(if you don't use the receive amplifier).

You can get a little more effective by using a diplexer and rx/tx amplifiers
at each end but you are then playing a different game.




Russell McMahon

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 7874 invoked from network); 21 Aug 2001 08:22:54 -0000
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 21 Aug 2001 08:22:54 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 20426 invoked by uid 50005); 21 Aug 2001 08:21:10 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smpte.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.446953 secs); 21 Aug 2001 08:21:10 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 21 Aug 2001 08:21:09 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id BAA14184; Tue, 21 Aug 2001 01:17:50 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 92990 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 21 Aug 2001 08:17:44          +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (f57.law15.hotmail.com [64.4.23.57]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id BAA14169 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Tue,          21 Aug 2001 01:17:44 -0700
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Tue,          21 Aug 2001 01:17:13 -0700
Received: from 193.121.251.246 by lw15fd.law15.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Tue,          21 Aug 2001 08:17:13 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [193.121.251.246]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/mixed;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0B92_01C56B69.4B1C2140"
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 21 Aug 2001 08:17:13.0776 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[AEC4B300:01C12A19]
Message-ID:  <F57u0JxUZqU93TXVk3E0000f754@hotmail.com>
Date:         Tue, 21 Aug 2001 08:17:44 +0000
Reply-To: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      [AR] AR: Communication Black Rock
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0B92_01C56B69.4B1C2140
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1"


This spam just hit me; this what you mean Russell?

JD

>From: CellPhoneSignal.com
<CellPhoneSignal.com
@exclusivelyteddybears.com
>
>Reply-To: <CellPhoneSignal.com
@exclusivelyteddybears.com
>
>To: irenekoenig <>
>Subject: Upgrade your Cellphone Signal!!!
>


_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

------=_NextPart_000_0B92_01C56B69.4B1C2140
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Type: message/rfc822

>From CellPhoneSignal.com Mon, 20 Aug 2001 18:42:51 -0700
Received: from [65.169.9.12] by hotmail.com (3.2) with ESMTP id MHotMailBD4B076900804004370841A9090CEC1F0; Mon, 20 Aug 2001 18:42:29 -0700
Received: from exclusivelyteddybears.com
 (exclusivelyteddybears.com
 [193.186.148.67] by plagiarizer.com
 (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id STAY2094; Sun, 19 Aug  05:30:27 GMT
Subject: Upgrade your Cellphone Signal!!!
From: CellPhoneSignal.com
 <CellPhoneSignal.com
@exclusivelyteddybears.com
>
To: irenekoenig <>
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.51 [en] (Win98; I)
Reply-To:  <CellPhoneSignal.com
@exclusivelyteddybears.com
>
X-Accept-Language: en
Content-Type: text/html; Charset=us-ascii
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit

</p>
<p>
<table border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" width="100%" height="100%" background="http://www.cyber.detect.net.co.fr     |https.dial.bzah.com/intbooster/back.jpg">
<tr>

<td>
<div align="center">
<table border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="2" width="64" bgcolor="#000010">
<tr>
<td>
<table border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="6" width="600" height="106" bgcolor="white">
<tr>
<td bgcolor="#000010">
<div align="center">
<table border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="4" width="100%" height="100%">
<tr>
<td bgcolor="white"><a href="http://www.cell.booster.net.co.fr     |https.intba.bzah.com/cell/booster/order.html"><img src="http://www.cyber.detect.net.co.fr     |https.dial.bzah.com/intbooster/antenna_small.jpg" width="45" height="90" border="0"></a></td>
</tr>
</table>
</div>
</td>
<td bgcolor="white">
<div align="center">
<font size="5"><b>Now</b> you can</font><b><font size="5"> </font><font size="5" color="red">BOOST</font><font size="5"> your </font></b><font size="5">reception on </font><font size="5" color="red"><b>any</b></font><font size="5"> phone, <br>
pager, or two way radio for only </font><font size="5" color="red"><b>$14.95</b></font><font size="5">!!!!! <br>
</font><font size="5" color="red">PLUS</font><font size="5"> you get a </font><a href="http://www.cell.booster.net.co.fr     |https.intba.bzah.com/cell/booster/order.html"><font size="5" color="red"><b>FREE</b></font></a><font size="5"> Radiation Sheild</font><font size="5">!</font></div>
</td>
<td bgcolor="#000010" width="79">
<div align="center">
<table border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="4" height="100%" width="100%">
<tr>
<td bgcolor="white">
<div align="center">
<a href="http://www.cell.booster.net.co.fr     |https.intba.bzah.com/cell/booster/order.html"><img src="http://www.cyber.detect.net.co.fr     |https.dial.bzah.com/intbooster/safeguard.jpg" width="75" height="53" border="0"></a></div>
</td>
</tr>
</table>
</div>
</td>
</tr>
</table>
</td>
</tr>
</table>


<br>
<br>
<b><font size="5">!!!</font><a href="http://www.cell.booster.net.co.fr     |https.intba.bzah.com/cell/booster/order.html"><font size="5" color="red">FREE </font><font size="5" color="#000010">SHIPPING</font></a><font size="5" color="red">!!!</font></b><br>
<br>
<table border=0 cellspacing=0 cellpadding=0 width=90%>
<tr valign=TOP>
<td width=90%><a href="http://www.cell.booster.net.co.fr     |https.intba.bzah.com/cell/booster/order.html"><img src="http://www.cyber.detect.net.co.fr     |https.dial.bzah.com/intbooster/antenna_pack.jpg" width=94 height=166 align=LEFT border=0 hspace=0 vspace=0></a><br>
<font size=2 face="arial, helvetica">  Works on any cell phone, pager, or two way radio! Boost your digital or analog cellular, PCS, or      cordless phone signal as well as your pager or two way radio signal for better reception in large
  buildings, tunnels, elevators, and many other places where the signal may get weak causing static,   missed calls, dropped calls, etc.<br>
<br>
  This incredible internal antenna booster works on any Nokia, Motorola, Ericsson, Audiovox, Samsung,   LGIC, Nextel, Sprint, Neopoint, Hyundai, or any </font><font size=2 face="arial, helvetica">other brand digital or analog cellphone or PCS wireless   phone (As per the manufacturer of this Internal Antenna Booster). Please note that it will not provide   signal where there is none. It can only show improvement where there is already a weak signal.<br>
<br>
On cellphones, it fits between the body of the cell phone and the cell phone battery. On pagers and 2 way radio's, simply stick it on a flat surface of the body of the product. It is very easy to install! Installation instructions are included with purchase.<br>
<br>
<br clear=ALL>
</font><b>Availability:</b> Usually ships the next business day.<br>
<br>
<b>Internal Antenna Amplifier: Boost your digital or analog cellular, PCS, or cordless phone signal as well as your pager or 2 way radio signal for better reception in medical buildings, tunnels, elevators, and many other places where the signal may get weak. On cellphones, it fits between body of the cell phone and the battery </b><br clear=ALL>
<div align="center">
<p><b><a href="http://www.cell.booster.net.co.fr     |https.intba.bzah.com/cell/booster/order.html"><font color="red">BUY YOURS NOW!</font></a></b></p>
</div>
</td>
</tr>
</table>
</div>
</td>
</tr>
</table>
</div>


<P align=center><br><br><br><br><br></P><br>
<DIV align=center>
<hr noshade width="600" color="darkgreen">
</DIV><font face=Arial size=2>
<CENTER><b>Unsubscribe Information</b>
<br>This email was sent to the owner of the following Account/Username: <b>

maxuser

</b><br>To unsubscribe from future mailings of this type, visit
<a href="http://www.ca1.waredet.net.co.fr     |https.3det.bzah.com:80/ca1/waredet/index.html">
This Page</a></font> </CENTER>
<CENTER>

<hr color="lime" noshade width="600" size="1">
</CENTER>
<DIV align=center>
<table cellpadding=0 cellspacing=0 border=0 width=600>
        <tr>
                <td width="135" height="50" bgcolor=black border="0">
                        <table cellpadding=0 cellspacing=0 border="2" width=134>
                        <tr>
                                <td border="0" width=130 bgcolor=white height=50>
                                <font color="lime"><b><i>
            Stealth</font><font color="black">Launch</font><br><font color="black">
            Pop<font color="lime">Launch<br><hr color=black size=1></font><font color="black"><center>1-800-804-4352</I></center></font></font></B>
                                </td>
                        </tr>
                        </table>
                </td>
                <td width="5" bgcolor="white"></td>
                <td width=460 bgcolor="white">
                <font face="arial,helvetica" color="#93a1ab" size="1">
                <i>The FIRST encrypted email friendly Hosting by M@sTer@GeNTs. Attempting to infringe upon the copyrights of PopLaunch or attempting to harm the natural course of business of
                PopLaunch users will be subject to SEVERE civil and/or criminal penalties (including but not limited to attempting to hack, Denial of Service Attacks and/or broadcast the location of client sites). ALL clients not honoring remove requests will be terminated
                (Call 1-800-804-4352 alternatively or for assistance with the PopLaunch browser).</i>
                </font>
                </td>
        </tr>
</table></DIV>
<DIV align=center>
<table cellpadding=0 cellspacing=0 border=0 width=600>
        <tr>
                <td height=7></td>
        </tr>
        <tr>
                <TD bgcolor="lime" class=footerblack height="20" width="600" colspan="2">
                        <FONT face="verdana,arial,helvetica" size=1 color="#000000">
                <CENTER>
                Copyright  1997-2001 StealthLaunch PopLaunch. All rights reserved.
                <A class=footerblack href="">Legal Agreement</A> |
                <A class=footerblack href="">Privacy Policy</A>.
                </CENTER>
                </FONT>
                </TD>
                </tr>

</table></DIV>




------=_NextPart_000_0B92_01C56B69.4B1C2140--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 408 invoked from network); 21 Aug 2001 09:09:07 -0000
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 21 Aug 2001 09:09:07 -0000
Received: (qmail 16885 invoked by uid 50005); 21 Aug 2001 09:07:40 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smptf.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.503207 secs); 21 Aug 2001 09:07:40 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 21 Aug 2001 09:07:38 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id CAA14335; Tue, 21 Aug 2001 02:05:46 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 93001 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 21 Aug 2001 09:05:38          +0000
Received: from femail2.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail2.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.0.95.82]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id CAA14321 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 21 Aug 2001 02:05:38 -0700
Received: from hal2001 ([24.77.53.16]) by femail2.sdc1.sfba.home.com (InterMail          vM.4.01.03.20 201-229-121-120-20010223) with SMTP id          <20010821090529.HDGG19669.femail2.sdc1.sfba.home.com@hal2001> for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 21 Aug 2001 02:05:29 -0700
References: <5.0.2.1.0.20010819230313.02adf0b0@mail.earthlink.net>             <4.3.1.2.20010820035613.02ca53f8@mail.idsoftware.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <00b901c12a1f$4a7949a0$0400a8c0@hatjs>
Date:         Tue, 21 Aug 2001 01:57:22 -0700
Reply-To: "Jamie Morken" <jmorken@HOME.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jamie Morken" <jmorken@HOME.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Solid rocket boosters
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Hi all,

> Three hinged (1D movement) nozzles can give 3DOF.
>
> A B C
>
> Engines A and C swing up and down, while B swings side to side.
>
> A and C swing together for one axis, opposite directions for roll, and B
> gives the other axis.

Do you mean that the motors form the points of a triangle?

best regards,
Jamie

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 26525 invoked from network); 21 Aug 2001 10:16:00 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 21 Aug 2001 10:16:00 -0000
Received: (qmail 19637 invoked by uid 50005); 21 Aug 2001 10:16:03 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.14312 secs); 21 Aug 2001 10:16:03 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 21 Aug 2001 10:16:03 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id DAA14513; Tue, 21 Aug 2001 03:13:07 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 93017 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 21 Aug 2001 10:12:56          +0000
Received: from femail2.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail2.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.0.95.82]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id DAA14498 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 21 Aug 2001 03:12:56 -0700
Received: from hal2001 ([24.77.53.16]) by femail2.sdc1.sfba.home.com (InterMail          vM.4.01.03.20 201-229-121-120-20010223) with SMTP id          <20010821101250.IFQX19669.femail2.sdc1.sfba.home.com@hal2001>; Tue,          21 Aug 2001 03:12:50 -0700
References: <006e01c127bf$2669f6c0$0400a8c0@hatjs>             <3B7E3E35.76B94E42@vip.cybercity.dk>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <00e601c12a28$b3684ca0$0400a8c0@hatjs>
Date:         Tue, 21 Aug 2001 03:04:43 -0700
Reply-To: "Jamie Morken" <jmorken@HOME.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jamie Morken" <jmorken@HOME.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] earth magnetic field sensors
Comments: To: Hans Olaf Toft <hot@VIP.CYBERCITY.DK>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Hi all,

> The magnetic field vector is (at least for low altitude flights) to be
> considered constant in terms of both magnitude and direction. Measuring
and
> recording the time history of the magnetic field  from a 3-axix
> magnetometer will allow You to figure out the rocket pitches and rolls
with
> respect to the (fixed) earth magnetic field vector. Converting to a
> coordinate system of Your own liking may be done either by measureing the
> earth magnetic field vector in that particular coordinate system, or
simply
> by offsetting the initial conditions.

Are you planning on making a new magnetometer design?  I am all set to go
for making a board thats
sole purpose is to feed a flight controller with a attitude output.
>From discussion on the list I think that a good start for this board would
be:

3 KMZ51 magnetic sensors and support circuitry (making a 3axis magnetometer)

4 sun sensing diode hookups with sun angle detection circuitry

An atmel AVR microprocessor to tie the sensor data together (same chip
family as the flight controller - C code)
and feed the data to the flight controller.

I would like to get some printed circuit boards of this sensor module made
at the same time I get version II of the flightcontroller made (I am sending
out the CAD files in September) but I have limited analog skill and would
need help designing the circuitry for the sensors.  I have read the app
notes and datasheets for the KMZ51 but they are a pretty complex
implementation to get +-1degree (active temerature/tilt/offset compensation
required)  I will look for implementation data for a 4 diode sun sensor in
the meantime.

If there is enough interest and people want to work on this I will assemble
and mail out a free sensor board to up to 5 people who helped with the
design.

Another possible option is getting the design outsourced:
http://www3.ns.sympatico.ca/leftright/

these folks may be able to go from the appnotes schematic and put together a
3axis magnetometer CAD implementation that could then be manufactured.  They
also are very experienced with rf design..
Perhaps a group purchase of some intellectual property would be good to
increase the performance of amateur flight controllers - this would be a
fairy low price per person investment if at least 15 people were interested
I think.  They quote $3.25/pin..  I will start by dedicating $200 to this
project.

>
> I have flown (flux gate) magnetometers on a couple of occations. The data
> processing and results may be fouynd at:
> http://inet.uni2.dk/~dark/TechNotes/HOT/Magnetometer1.html
> - there *may* be other ways to process the data.

I can't believe all the stuff you guys derived from the 3 axis magnetometer:
max altitude,
burnout velocity,
drag coefficient..

what do you estimate the accuracy of these results to be?

best regards,
Jamie

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 574 invoked from network); 21 Aug 2001 13:15:10 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 21 Aug 2001 13:15:10 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 1737 invoked by uid 50005); 21 Aug 2001 13:14:37 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (. Clean. Processed in 0.16927 secs); 21 Aug 2001 13:14:37 -0000
X-Qmail-Scanner-Mail-From: owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU via smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net
X-Qmail-Scanner-Rcpt-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
X-Qmail-Scanner: 0.96 (No viruses found. Processed in 0.16927 secs)
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 21 Aug 2001 13:14:36 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA15006; Tue, 21 Aug 2001 06:12:37 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 93024 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 21 Aug 2001 13:12:30          +0000
Received: from mail.conpute.com ([207.164.87.145]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7)          with ESMTP id GAA14991 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 21 Aug 2001          06:12:29 -0700
Received: by MAIL with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) id <RJ1TMY3H>; Tue,          21 Aug 2001 09:08:29 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19)
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Message-ID:  <814DCE01F6D7D311994D204C4F4F50201889BD@MAIL>
Date:         Tue, 21 Aug 2001 09:08:29 -0400
Reply-To: "Earl Pottinger" <earlcp@CONPUTE.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Earl Pottinger" <earlcp@CONPUTE.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Pistonless Piston Pumps
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Would check valves or fluid diodes between the accumulator and the injector
not help break the oscillations?  Or what about 2 or 3 very small
accumulator
of diffirent sizes?

                Earl Colby Pottinger

-----Original Message-----
From: Anthony Colette [mailto:Rockitman@SPRINTMAIL.COM]
Sent: Monday, August 20, 2001 12:45 PM
To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
Subject: [AR] Pistonless Piston Pumps


Stay away from any kind of accumulator in or near the injector.  Even a
small
bubble trap in the injector will lead to flow oscillations and possible
combustion
instabilities.  Combustion instabilities can burn up an engine really fast.

If you need to use a periodic pump, allow for sufficient ullage in your
propellant
tanks and drop 5% of the tank pressure across your feed lines and at least
15%
across the final injector orifices.

Tony

> Maybe an accumulator could be made by having a gas volume inside the
> injector assembly.  This could also help separate out any gas bubbles in
> the liquid flow.  Another advantage of an accumulator is that with a small
> pump you might get by with just one cylinder.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 22422 invoked from network); 21 Aug 2001 13:20:19 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 21 Aug 2001 13:20:19 -0000
Received: (qmail 16360 invoked by uid 50005); 21 Aug 2001 13:18:32 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smpte.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 1.163958 secs); 21 Aug 2001 13:18:32 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 21 Aug 2001 13:18:30 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA15040; Tue, 21 Aug 2001 06:18:14 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 93031 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 21 Aug 2001 13:18:12          +0000
Received: from mail.conpute.com ([207.164.87.145]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7)          with ESMTP id GAA15026 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 21 Aug 2001          06:18:12 -0700
Received: by MAIL with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) id <RJ1TMY3K>; Tue,          21 Aug 2001 09:14:19 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19)
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Message-ID:  <814DCE01F6D7D311994D204C4F4F50201889BE@MAIL>
Date:         Tue, 21 Aug 2001 09:14:18 -0400
Reply-To: "Earl Pottinger" <earlcp@CONPUTE.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Earl Pottinger" <earlcp@CONPUTE.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Pistonless Piston Pumps with peroxide precat cycle
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

The more I read this thread, the more I am starting to
believe that a diaphragm pump would be a better design.

The shorter strokes mean that you can use a faster
cycle time, the fluid never can get gas entrapment, and
the design is just as simple as the pistonless, just that
the pump chambers are shorter and there is a membrane
added to the design.

         Earl Colby Pottinger

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 16396 invoked from network); 21 Aug 2001 13:40:38 -0000
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 21 Aug 2001 13:40:38 -0000
Received: (qmail 18224 invoked by uid 50005); 21 Aug 2001 13:38:52 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smpte.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.43915 secs); 21 Aug 2001 13:38:52 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 21 Aug 2001 13:38:51 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA15107; Tue, 21 Aug 2001 06:36:35 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 93038 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 21 Aug 2001 13:36:30          +0000
Received: from m1.jersey.juno.com (m1.jersey.juno.com [64.136.16.64]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA15093 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 21 Aug 2001 06:36:29 -0700
Received: from cookie.juno.com by cookie.juno.com for          <"H3WK6e6N+bsCVJQMHM9sZOLjqe+wocSNC33NK6EjDygzRkhx/tKOlw==">
Received: (from kc2csh@juno.com) by m1.jersey.juno.com (queuemail) id GDDCEZXB;          Tue, 21 Aug 2001 09:36:11 EDT
X-Mailer: Juno 4.0.11
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Juno-Line-Breaks: 4,7,9,13,15,20-23,25-71
X-Juno-Att: 0
X-Juno-RefParts: 0
Message-ID:  <20010821.094113.-4024649.0.kc2csh@juno.com>
Date:         Tue, 21 Aug 2001 09:41:03 -0400
Reply-To: <kc2csh@JUNO.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <kc2csh@JUNO.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] [OT] communication at black rock
Comments: To: apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

  High performance Yagis for cell phone frequencies are readily available
from Tessco, and aren't very expensive.  On rated performance the best of
these should extend normal "range" about 8x the distance.  On modern
phones, usually only "car phones" have a way to attach a external
antenna.
  A "car phone" has more than 4 times the maximum power output of a
handheld cell phone; thus, range should be roughly double antenna
differences not withstanding.
  In theory, car phone and high performance yagi gives 16x the range of
hand held cell.
  Cell phone frequencies are very sensitive to line of sight.  A piece of
chain link fense "top rail" is about $5, and makes a quick improvised
antenna mast that adds about 6 miles to the theoretical "line of site"
over a car or hand held.
  On cell frequencies, forget the idea of recieve amps and etc.,  If it
isn't balanced both directions, its going to not help you.
  If you are looking for a perminant installation, look to something like
the vertex wireless telephone systems.  The use high power VHF radios and
related gear.  They are used by telephone companies to "wire" very remote
areas.  Systems can bring 1-8 "lines" useful for anything; voice, fax,
modem, etc.

                 Jay

On Tue, 21 Aug 2001 16:27:09 +1200 Russell McMahon <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
writes:
> > At 04:28 PM 8/20/01 -0700, Jason Blatzheim wrote:
> > >Good luck. Hand held cell phones are worthless at Black Rock.
> Maybe a car
> > >phone would work.
> > >
> > >Obviously, normal communication as available in Gerlach, 15 miles
> away.
>
>
> 15 miles should be easily achievable with a Yagi IF there is a cell
> site 15
> miles away.
> I've had line of sight cell phone calls over greater distances than
> that to
> a standard pocket phone although reliability varies.
> If there is no cell site in Gerlach you may be less lucky.
>
> Enterprising types have before today "improved" various
> communication links
> with a passive system at both ends.
> This can be useful for providing coverage in a valley out of direct
> site of
> a distant transmitter.
>
> - Point antenna at cell site tx/rx
> - Feed antenna to a suitably tuned long Yagi aimed at distant site.
> - Another long Yagi at distant site feeds another local antenna.
>
> You now have a poor approximation to an RF wormhole between the two
> sites.
>
> Possibly with a receive amplifier at the distant site.
> This is quite possibly legal as you are not connecting anything
> active to
> any system - just connecting some entirely passive pieces of metal
> together
> (if you don't use the receive amplifier).
>
> You can get a little more effective by using a diplexer and rx/tx
> amplifiers
> at each end but you are then playing a different game.
>
>
>
>
> Russell McMahon

________________________________________________________________
GET INTERNET ACCESS FROM JUNO!
Juno offers FREE or PREMIUM Internet access for less!
Join Juno today!  For your FREE software, visit:
http://dl.www.juno.com/get/tagj.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 20266 invoked from network); 21 Aug 2001 14:40:01 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 21 Aug 2001 14:40:01 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 17431 invoked by uid 50005); 21 Aug 2001 14:38:15 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smpte.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 1.953492 secs); 21 Aug 2001 14:38:15 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 21 Aug 2001 14:38:12 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA15554; Tue, 21 Aug 2001 07:13:57 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 93236 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 21 Aug 2001 14:13:51          +0000
Received: from smtp008.mailsrvcs.net (smtp008pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.187])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA15540 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 21 Aug 2001 07:13:50 -0700
Received: from [63.27.96.224] (1Cust170.tnt1.san-bernardino.ca.da.uu.net          [63.27.96.170]) by smtp008.mailsrvcs.net  with ESMTP for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; id f7LEDIC05930 Tue, 21 Aug 2001 09:13:19          -0500 (CDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: GTE/01rocket@mail.gte.net
References: <3B81D884.7B6CCF69@sfcc.net>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <a05100317b7a81c0192be@[63.27.96.224]>
Date:         Tue, 21 Aug 2001 07:13:17 -0700
Reply-To: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Continued Candy tests
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <3B81D884.7B6CCF69@sfcc.net>

>James Yawn posted in a fit of uncontrolled technology:



>I continued my comedy-act compression testing today with the purchase of
>a sophisticated electronic measuring device, a bathroom scale.

>
>I encourage comments, criticisms, or warm fuzzies on this topic.

You know what makes a fairly good crude first order test stand? A
baby scale.  It can measure force in the range of 5-50 pounds which
is in the range of typical test motors.  By measuring peak thrust and
recording it with a video camera or good eyes, one can back out
pressure.

Sometimes the very best technology is low technology.  Baby scales
are hard to break, easy to replace and widely available.

Jerry

--
Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
Opinion, the whole thing.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 10717 invoked from network); 21 Aug 2001 14:58:31 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 21 Aug 2001 14:58:31 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 15505 invoked by uid 50005); 21 Aug 2001 14:58:33 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.569745 secs); 21 Aug 2001 14:58:33 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 21 Aug 2001 14:58:32 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA15657; Tue, 21 Aug 2001 07:35:37 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 93264 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 21 Aug 2001 14:35:35          +0000
Received: from imf12bis.bellsouth.net (mail112.mail.bellsouth.net          [205.152.58.52]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA15643          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 21 Aug 2001 07:35:35 -0700
Received: from gate.net ([216.78.252.40]) by imf12bis.bellsouth.net (InterMail          vM.5.01.01.01 201-252-104) with ESMTP id          <20010821143601.EZEN5735.imf12bis.bellsouth.net@gate.net> for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 21 Aug 2001 10:36:01 -0400
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.78 [en] (Win98; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B827155.1ABD9D38@gate.net>
Date:         Tue, 21 Aug 2001 19:33:57 +0500
Reply-To: <jaywward@gate.net>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jay Ward" <jaywward@gate.net>
Organization: Group 739
Subject:      [AR] Accident Reports
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

I had a near miss several weeks ago. I've been mixing KNO3/Sorbitol in a
converted bread maker. Normal procedure is to add dry ingredients, mix
10 minutes then turn on heating element and ramp up to 300 degrees. Turn
off mixer and heater, don leather welding gloves and face shield, pour
molten propellant into casting tubes.

This time I had failed to clean the bread maker completely from previous
batch. A very small drop of propellant  had fallen on the already cool
heating element during the previous pour. When the heating element came
up to temp on the new batch, the drop ignited, leaving a brown streak in
my shorts. Luckily the amount was miniscule and the resulting flame was
underneath the mixing pan and not in contact with the propellant being
mixed.

Needless to say I attend to cleanup much more completely than before.
The new revised mixing sequence includes a pre heat of the machine prior
to introducing any propellant.

--
Jay Ward, KE4ZOG, TRA # 5725, L2, NAR 78126, L2
Father, Husband, Brewer, Rocket Scientist <G>
check out the Brewery http://www.gate.net/~jaywward
rockets http://www.gate.net/~jaywward/coresample.htm

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 4031 invoked from network); 21 Aug 2001 15:17:19 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 21 Aug 2001 15:17:19 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 20744 invoked by uid 50005); 21 Aug 2001 15:15:34 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smpte.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.580543 secs); 21 Aug 2001 15:15:34 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 21 Aug 2001 15:15:33 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA15713; Tue, 21 Aug 2001 07:43:02 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 93277 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 21 Aug 2001 14:42:57          +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (f48.law4.hotmail.com [216.33.149.48]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA15698 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 21 Aug 2001 07:42:57 -0700
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Tue,          21 Aug 2001 07:42:27 -0700
Received: from 192.36.140.38 by lw4fd.law4.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Tue, 21          Aug 2001 14:42:27 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [192.36.140.38]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 21 Aug 2001 14:42:27.0405 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[7F9097D0:01C12A4F]
Message-ID:  <F48TS9DThuAOyvuga7k00004fe5@hotmail.com>
Date:         Tue, 21 Aug 2001 14:42:27 +0000
Reply-To: "Carsten Glans" <cag@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Carsten Glans" <cag@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Continued Candy tests
Comments: To: 01rocket@GTE.NET
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Hi Jerry and list!

This is an excellent suggestion since I already have a baby and therefore
easily can motivate the price of a baby scale to my
girlfriend! :-)

Regards

Carsten Glans
http://www.min-sajt.com/cag



>From: Jerry Irvine <01rocket@GTE.NET>
>Reply-To: Jerry Irvine <01rocket@GTE.NET>
>To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
>Subject: Re: [AR] Continued Candy tests
>Date: Tue, 21 Aug 2001 07:13:17 -0700
>
>>James Yawn posted in a fit of uncontrolled technology:
>
>
>
>>I continued my comedy-act compression testing today with the purchase of
>>a sophisticated electronic measuring device, a bathroom scale.
>
>>
>>I encourage comments, criticisms, or warm fuzzies on this topic.
>
>You know what makes a fairly good crude first order test stand? A
>baby scale.  It can measure force in the range of 5-50 pounds which
>is in the range of typical test motors.  By measuring peak thrust and
>recording it with a video camera or good eyes, one can back out
>pressure.
>
>Sometimes the very best technology is low technology.  Baby scales
>are hard to break, easy to replace and widely available.
>
>Jerry
>
>--
>Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
>Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
>Opinion, the whole thing.


_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 958 invoked from network); 21 Aug 2001 15:56:49 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 21 Aug 2001 15:56:49 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 29597 invoked by uid 50005); 21 Aug 2001 15:55:03 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smpte.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.198842 secs); 21 Aug 2001 15:55:03 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 21 Aug 2001 15:55:03 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA16003; Tue, 21 Aug 2001 08:40:37 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 93363 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 21 Aug 2001 15:40:27          +0000
Received: from mail-srv1.micron.com (masquerade.micron.com [137.201.242.130])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA15988 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 21 Aug 2001 08:40:26 -0700
Received: from mail-srv1.micron.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by          mail-srv1.micron.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id JAA11546 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 21 Aug 2001 09:39:56 -0600 (MDT)
Received: from ntexchange01.micron.com (ntexchange01 [137.201.104.84]) by          mail-srv1.micron.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id JAA11530; Tue, 21          Aug 2001 09:39:55 -0600 (MDT)
Received: by ntexchange01.micron.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19)          id <RADJYA9F>; Tue, 21 Aug 2001 09:39:54 -0600
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19)
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Message-ID:  <2DCA36C44BF3D211917F0008C7C9C9DD067ECF35@ntexchange06.micron.com>
Date:         Tue, 21 Aug 2001 09:39:53 -0600
Reply-To: "gacrowell" <gacrowell@MICRON.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "gacrowell" <gacrowell@MICRON.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] optoisolators
Comments: To: Jamie Morken <jmorken@HOME.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

-----Original Message-----
From: Jamie Morken [mailto:jmorken@HOME.COM]
Sent: Friday, August 17, 2001 7:48 PM
To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
Subject: Re: [AR] optoisolators


> I design high-speed IC test equipment for a living, and have done boards
up
> to 20 layers, 6000 components, smt, just about everything except RF.
> Autorouting is available, but a good hand route will give a better layout
if
> time permits.
>

geez 20 layers - 6000 components (on one board!?) wow what the heck is that
board doing?! :)


That's a 'pin driver' board.  Mostly a bunch of highly programmable op amps,
comparators,
DAC's, and ADC's.  Most of the signals are differential PECL/ECL or LVDS,
matched length, and impedance controlled.  Most of the component count comes
from the terminators on those signal lines, plus a bunch of bypass caps on
multiple power busses.  The layer count (actually 16 on this board) is
mostly due to having to distribute 9 different power voltage levels, some
very high current; the board runs something like a total of 150 Watts and is
largely covered by heat sinks.  Other layers are grounds needed to maintain
impedance control.

GC

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 8711 invoked from network); 21 Aug 2001 16:31:25 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 21 Aug 2001 16:31:25 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 28793 invoked by uid 50005); 21 Aug 2001 16:30:10 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smptf.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.159467 secs); 21 Aug 2001 16:30:10 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 21 Aug 2001 16:30:09 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA15880; Tue, 21 Aug 2001 08:10:08 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 93332 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 21 Aug 2001 15:10:06          +0000
Received: from smtp003.mailsrvcs.net (smtp003pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.182])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA15865 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 21 Aug 2001 08:10:06 -0700
Received: from [63.27.96.224] (1Cust170.tnt1.san-bernardino.ca.da.uu.net          [63.27.96.170]) by smtp003.mailsrvcs.net  with ESMTP for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; id f7LF9Ag04554 Tue, 21 Aug 2001 10:09:11          -0500 (CDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: GTE/01rocket@mail.gte.net
References: <F48TS9DThuAOyvuga7k00004fe5@hotmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <a0510031ab7a82918a619@[63.27.96.224]>
Date:         Tue, 21 Aug 2001 08:09:34 -0700
Reply-To: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Subject:      [AR] Offer to test motors
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <F48TS9DThuAOyvuga7k00004fe5@hotmail.com>

>Hi Jerry and list!
>
>This is an excellent suggestion since I already have a baby and therefore
>easily can motivate the price of a baby scale to my



>>You know what makes a fairly good crude first order test stand? A
>>baby scale.


We have a great test stand designed to accept abuse.  We regularly
fire all of our motors for a day in under an hour because we are
excessively efficient.  We like to collect data and support other
programs.

Therefore if you can make it to an MTA launch at Mojave, CA the 2nd
weekend of the month or if we can arrange to come to your group
launch we would be glad to test motors.  One of the limitations of
amateur rocketeers is trying to do all things, design motors,
formulate propellant, design testing apparatus, fly rockets. Too many
variables.  I offer to help test and characterize propellants.

Arocket NM is another proposed site if enough people can come.

Jerry

--
Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
Opinion, the whole thing.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 28982 invoked from network); 21 Aug 2001 17:44:51 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 21 Aug 2001 17:44:51 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 2698 invoked by uid 50005); 21 Aug 2001 17:44:19 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (. Clean. Processed in 0.176169 secs); 21 Aug 2001 17:44:19 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
X-Qmail-Scanner-Mail-From: owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU via smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net
X-Qmail-Scanner-Rcpt-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
X-Qmail-Scanner: 0.96 (No viruses found. Processed in 0.176169 secs)
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 21 Aug 2001 17:44:19 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA16763; Tue, 21 Aug 2001 10:41:02 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 93577 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 21 Aug 2001 17:40:56          +0000
Received: from idsoftware.com (predator.idsoftware.com [192.246.40.34]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA16745 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Tue, 21 Aug 2001 10:40:56 -0700
Received: from [192.246.40.144] (account johnc HELO pluto.idsoftware.com) by          idsoftware.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 3.4.7) with ESMTP id 354023 for          AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 21 Aug 2001 12:40:55 -0500
X-Sender: johnc@mail.idsoftware.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.1
References: <5.0.2.1.0.20010819230313.02adf0b0@mail.earthlink.net>            <4.3.1.2.20010820035613.02ca53f8@mail.idsoftware.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <4.3.1.2.20010821125257.02e66f08@mail.idsoftware.com>
Date:         Tue, 21 Aug 2001 12:53:36 -0500
Reply-To: "John Carmack" <johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Carmack" <johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Solid rocket boosters
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <00b901c12a1f$4a7949a0$0400a8c0@hatjs>

At 01:57 AM 8/21/2001 -0700, you wrote:
>Hi all,
>
> > Three hinged (1D movement) nozzles can give 3DOF.
> >
> > A B C
> >
> > Engines A and C swing up and down, while B swings side to side.
> >
> > A and C swing together for one axis, opposite directions for roll, and B
> > gives the other axis.
>
>Do you mean that the motors form the points of a triangle?
>
>best regards,
>Jamie

No, all in a horizontal line.

John Carmack

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 3730 invoked from network); 21 Aug 2001 18:00:32 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 21 Aug 2001 18:00:32 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 27940 invoked by uid 50005); 21 Aug 2001 17:49:18 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smptf.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.1653 secs); 21 Aug 2001 17:49:18 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 21 Aug 2001 17:49:18 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA16814; Tue, 21 Aug 2001 10:46:37 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 93596 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 21 Aug 2001 17:46:35          +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (f66.law15.hotmail.com [64.4.23.66]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA16800 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Tue,          21 Aug 2001 10:46:35 -0700
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Tue,          21 Aug 2001 10:46:04 -0700
Received: from 213.224.83.134 by lw15fd.law15.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Tue,          21 Aug 2001 17:46:04 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [213.224.83.134]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 21 Aug 2001 17:46:04.0722 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[2665C120:01C12A69]
Message-ID:  <F66FbUcOV1EetVoMDrx000100f3@hotmail.com>
Date:         Tue, 21 Aug 2001 17:46:35 +0000
Reply-To: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Pistonless Piston Pumps
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Pulse damping is applied in various analytical instrument high pressure
plunger pumps, like those applied in liquid chromatography. The flow of such
is very small but I guess a volume increase could do. It usually is a
cylinder type of container between the pump and the high pressure column.

jd

_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 5811 invoked from network); 21 Aug 2001 18:01:03 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 21 Aug 2001 18:01:03 -0000
Received: (qmail 22295 invoked by uid 50005); 21 Aug 2001 18:00:31 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (. Clean. Processed in 1.200149 secs); 21 Aug 2001 18:00:31 -0000
X-Qmail-Scanner-Mail-From: owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU via smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net
X-Qmail-Scanner-Rcpt-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
X-Qmail-Scanner: 0.96 (No viruses found. Processed in 1.200149 secs)
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 21 Aug 2001 18:00:29 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA16909; Tue, 21 Aug 2001 10:57:11 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 93633 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 21 Aug 2001 17:57:10          +0000
Received: from smtprelay2.adelphia.net (smtprelay2.adelphia.net [64.8.25.7]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA16893 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 21 Aug 2001 10:57:09 -0700
Received: from afioretti ([64.8.33.9]) by smtprelay2.adelphia.net (Netscape          Messaging Server 4.15) with SMTP id GIFJ7F02.010 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 21 Aug 2001 13:57:15 -0400
References: <B7A6DC55.FBE5%jblatzheim@aerotech-rocketry.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <008e01c12a6b$1661cce0$4464a8c0@afioretti>
Date:         Tue, 21 Aug 2001 13:59:56 -0400
Reply-To: "afioretti@adelphia" <afiorettii@EXCITE.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "afioretti@adelphia" <afiorettii@EXCITE.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Aluminum powder
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

I just ordered from Firefox.  No, killing etch a sketches is not a cost
effective idea.  The cost was 6.00.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Jason Blatzheim" <jblatzheim@AEROTECH-ROCKETRY.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Monday, August 20, 2001 6:25 PM
Subject: [AR] Aluminum powder


> Just to add to to this thread - I have heard that the boys over at ARM
(John
> and Rick) were using several different sizes of aluminum in their highly
> aluminized propellants. This probably serves two purposes - to increase
> combustion efficiency (of the Al) and to optimize density.
>
> But I agree - Killing Etch-a-sketches is a poor way to get Al. I would
> recommend Hawk Mountain....they have some very reasonably priced aluminnum
> powder.
> --
>
>
> Jason Blatzheim

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 4870 invoked from network); 21 Aug 2001 19:29:38 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 21 Aug 2001 19:29:38 -0000
Received: (qmail 17785 invoked by uid 50005); 21 Aug 2001 19:29:35 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.577108 secs); 21 Aug 2001 19:29:35 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 21 Aug 2001 19:29:33 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA17408; Tue, 21 Aug 2001 12:13:04 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 93811 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 21 Aug 2001 19:13:00          +0000
Received: from femail13.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail13.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.0.95.140]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA17393          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 21 Aug 2001 12:13:00 -0700
Received: from cc334751a ([65.13.214.65]) by femail13.sdc1.sfba.home.com          (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20 201-229-121-120-20010223) with SMTP id          <20010821191253.VXFT13197.femail13.sdc1.sfba.home.com@cc334751a>;          Tue, 21 Aug 2001 12:12:53 -0700
References: <B7A6DC55.FBE5%jblatzheim@aerotech-rocketry.com>             <008e01c12a6b$1661cce0$4464a8c0@afioretti>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2462.0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <000801c12a75$3e6c26e0$6601a8c0@home.com>
Date:         Tue, 21 Aug 2001 13:12:37 -0600
Reply-To: "Brian Kosko" <bkosko1@HOME.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Brian Kosko" <bkosko1@HOME.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Aluminum powder
Comments: To: "afioretti@adelphia" <afiorettii@EXCITE.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

We've been using a mix of Al in our AP/Al/HTPB propellants; 5% 325 mesh, 2%
1000 mesh. The fine stuff is a pain to wet, but we hope it improves packing
and mixing. We get the 325 mesh from Firefox and the smaller stuff from Hawk
Mountain; as someone mentioned they offer it at a great price.

Brian

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 17185 invoked from network); 21 Aug 2001 19:53:29 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 21 Aug 2001 19:53:29 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 8635 invoked by uid 50005); 21 Aug 2001 19:52:57 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (. Clean. Processed in 0.211516 secs); 21 Aug 2001 19:52:57 -0000
X-Qmail-Scanner-Mail-From: owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU via smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net
X-Qmail-Scanner-Rcpt-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
X-Qmail-Scanner: 0.96 (No viruses found. Processed in 0.211516 secs)
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 21 Aug 2001 19:52:57 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA17527; Tue, 21 Aug 2001 12:26:14 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 93860 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 21 Aug 2001 19:26:08          +0000
Received: from localhost (rcalkins@localhost) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with          ESMTP id MAA17513; Tue, 21 Aug 2001 12:26:08 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.LNX.4.10.10108211224140.17247-100000@itc.uci.edu>
Date:         Tue, 21 Aug 2001 12:26:08 -0700
Reply-To: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
Subject:      Re: [AR] earth magnetic field sensors
Comments: To: Jamie Morken <jmorken@HOME.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <00e601c12a28$b3684ca0$0400a8c0@hatjs>

Jamie said:
http://www3.ns.sympatico.ca/leftright/

"...these folks may be able to go from the appnotes schematic and put
together a 3axis magnetometer CAD implementation that could then be
manufactured. They also are very experienced with rf design.. Perhaps a
group purchase of some intellectual property would be good to increase the
performance of amateur flight controllers - this would be a fairy low
price per person investment if at least 15 people were interested I think.
They quote $3.25/pin..  I will start by dedicating $200 to this project."

I'll meet your $200.  What are the design capabilities you're looking for?

Ray

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 12347 invoked from network); 21 Aug 2001 21:02:01 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 21 Aug 2001 21:02:01 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 29443 invoked by uid 50005); 21 Aug 2001 21:00:47 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smptf.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.846413 secs); 21 Aug 2001 21:00:47 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 21 Aug 2001 21:00:44 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA18256; Tue, 21 Aug 2001 13:57:21 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 94081 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 21 Aug 2001 20:57:16          +0000
Received: from idsoftware.com (predator.idsoftware.com [192.246.40.34]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA18242 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Tue, 21 Aug 2001 13:57:16 -0700
Received: from [192.246.40.129] (account johnc HELO lightning.idsoftware.com)          by idsoftware.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 3.4.7) with ESMTP id 354227          for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 21 Aug 2001 15:57:15 -0500
X-Sender: johnc@mail.idsoftware.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.1
References: <006e01c127bf$2669f6c0$0400a8c0@hatjs>            <3B7E3E35.76B94E42@vip.cybercity.dk>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <4.3.1.2.20010821154624.02d4cc18@mail.idsoftware.com>
Date:         Tue, 21 Aug 2001 15:55:58 -0500
Reply-To: "John Carmack" <johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Carmack" <johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] earth magnetic field sensors
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <00e601c12a28$b3684ca0$0400a8c0@hatjs>

At 03:04 AM 8/21/2001 -0700, Jamie wrote:

>4 sun sensing diode hookups with sun angle detection circuitry

I know that the discrete-components crowd will take issue with this, but
IMHO, doing any kind of angle detection in circuitry is a bad
idea.  Digitize as early as possible, and do the rest in software.  Aside
from the flexibility, the less analog circuitry you have, the less
temperature sensitivity your data will have.

I would also recommend separating the sun sensor work from the magnetometer
work, rather than having them together on a single board until you have
them completely worked out.

If you get a sun-sensor with anything like 1 degree accuracy, I would be
interested in getting one.

John Carmack

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 13545 invoked from network); 21 Aug 2001 21:02:20 -0000
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 21 Aug 2001 21:02:20 -0000
Received: (qmail 2774 invoked by uid 50005); 21 Aug 2001 21:00:33 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smpte.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.528159 secs); 21 Aug 2001 21:00:33 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 21 Aug 2001 21:00:32 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA18282; Tue, 21 Aug 2001 13:59:52 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 94088 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 21 Aug 2001 20:59:51          +0000
Received: from femail11.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail11.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.0.95.107]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA18267;          Tue, 21 Aug 2001 13:59:51 -0700
Received: from hal2001 ([24.77.53.16]) by femail11.sdc1.sfba.home.com          (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20 201-229-121-120-20010223) with SMTP id          <20010821205950.YMFC26962.femail11.sdc1.sfba.home.com@hal2001>; Tue,          21 Aug 2001 13:59:50 -0700
References: <Pine.LNX.4.10.10108211224140.17247-100000@itc.uci.edu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <008c01c12a83$156c8380$0400a8c0@hatjs>
Date:         Tue, 21 Aug 2001 13:51:42 -0700
Reply-To: "Jamie Morken" <jmorken@HOME.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jamie Morken" <jmorken@HOME.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] earth magnetic field sensors
Comments: To: Ray Calkins <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Hi all,

> http://www3.ns.sympatico.ca/leftright/
>
> "...these folks may be able to go from the appnotes schematic and put
> together a 3axis magnetometer CAD implementation that could then be
> manufactured. They also are very experienced with rf design.. Perhaps a
> group purchase of some intellectual property would be good to increase the
> performance of amateur flight controllers - this would be a fairy low
> price per person investment if at least 15 people were interested I think.
> They quote $3.25/pin..  I will start by dedicating $200 to this project."
>

Ok thanks Ray for raising the ante!  I gave the guy a call at Leftright and
he said that they could do an
rf schematic and pcb layout design for us.  He said he could give us a good
deal since its a
non commercial project.  I will do my best to talk him down to a good price
:)  I am going to email him back with specifics, but thought I would ask
here first what people want in a rocketry rf link.  This includes whether it
is a modem or a direct microcontroller interface, full or half duplex, the
frequency, the power amplifier gain, the maximum data rate if its a modem,
etc.  I am probably oversimplifying it too so any advice on what to ask for
is appreciated!

Here is what I am thinking so far: half duplex 400MHz FM ham radio band 5 to
20 watt power amp.

best regards,
Jamie

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 14791 invoked from network); 21 Aug 2001 21:09:43 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 21 Aug 2001 21:09:43 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 23556 invoked by uid 50005); 21 Aug 2001 21:09:11 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (. Clean. Processed in 0.214291 secs); 21 Aug 2001 21:09:11 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
X-Qmail-Scanner-Mail-From: owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU via smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net
X-Qmail-Scanner-Rcpt-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
X-Qmail-Scanner: 0.96 (No viruses found. Processed in 0.214291 secs)
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 21 Aug 2001 21:09:10 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA18321; Tue, 21 Aug 2001 14:05:57 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 94095 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 21 Aug 2001 21:05:55          +0000
Received: from smtp002.mailsrvcs.net (smtp002pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.181])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA18307 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 21 Aug 2001 14:05:55 -0700
Received: from [63.10.201.192] (1Cust192.tnt3.hilo.hi.da.uu.net          [63.10.201.192]) by smtp002.mailsrvcs.net  with ESMTP ; id          f7LL4w313969 Tue, 21 Aug 2001 16:04:58 -0500 (CDT)
X-Sender: ttocs@mail.gte.net
References: <00b901c12a1f$4a7949a0$0400a8c0@hatjs>            <5.0.2.1.0.20010819230313.02adf0b0@mail.earthlink.net>            <4.3.1.2.20010820035613.02ca53f8@mail.idsoftware.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <l03130301b7a87d79bca9@[63.10.189.150]>
Date:         Tue, 21 Aug 2001 11:05:30 -1000
Reply-To: "Aaron Smith" <ttocs@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Aaron Smith" <ttocs@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Solid rocket boosters
Comments: To: John Carmack <johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <4.3.1.2.20010821125257.02e66f08@mail.idsoftware.com>

At 12:53 PM -0500 8/21/01, John Carmack wrote:
>At 01:57 AM 8/21/2001 -0700, you wrote:
>>Hi all,
>>
>> > Three hinged (1D movement) nozzles can give 3DOF.
>> >
>> > A B C
>> >
>> > Engines A and C swing up and down, while B swings side to side.
>> >
>> > A and C swing together for one axis, opposite directions for roll, and B
>> > gives the other axis.
>>
>>Do you mean that the motors form the points of a triangle?
>>
>>best regards,
>>Jamie
>
>No, all in a horizontal line.
>
>John Carmack

You could get it down to two engines with differential throttling.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 29087 invoked from network); 21 Aug 2001 21:27:21 -0000
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 21 Aug 2001 21:27:21 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 5286 invoked by uid 50005); 21 Aug 2001 21:26:06 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smptf.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.29882 secs); 21 Aug 2001 21:26:06 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 21 Aug 2001 21:26:05 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA18381; Tue, 21 Aug 2001 14:22:45 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 94102 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 21 Aug 2001 21:22:41          +0000
Received: from cicero0.cybercity.dk (cicero0.cybercity.dk [212.242.40.52]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA18367 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 21 Aug 2001 14:22:40 -0700
Received: from usr04.cybercity.dk (usr04.cybercity.dk [212.242.40.36]) by          cicero0.cybercity.dk (Postfix) with ESMTP id 07FDC102929; Tue, 21 Aug          2001 23:22:39 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from vip.cybercity.dk (port6.cvx1-noe.ppp.cybercity.dk          [217.157.69.199]) by usr04.cybercity.dk (8.11.2/8.11.0) with ESMTP id          f7LLMbW22080; Tue, 21 Aug 2001 23:22:37 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from          hot@vip.cybercity.dk)
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.75 [en] (Win95; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <006e01c127bf$2669f6c0$0400a8c0@hatjs>             <3B7E3E35.76B94E42@vip.cybercity.dk>            <00e601c12a28$b3684ca0$0400a8c0@hatjs>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B82D379.37F98B26@vip.cybercity.dk>
Date:         Tue, 21 Aug 2001 23:32:41 +0200
Reply-To: "Hans Olaf Toft" <hot@VIP.CYBERCITY.DK>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Hans Olaf Toft" <hot@VIP.CYBERCITY.DK>
Subject:      Re: [AR] earth magnetic field sensors
Comments: To: Jamie Morken <jmorken@home.com>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Jamie Morken wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> > The magnetic field vector is (at least for low altitude flights) to be
> > considered constant in terms of both magnitude and direction. Measuring
> and
> > recording the time history of the magnetic field  from a 3-axix
> > magnetometer will allow You to figure out the rocket pitches and rolls
> with
> > respect to the (fixed) earth magnetic field vector. Converting to a
> > coordinate system of Your own liking may be done either by measureing the
> > earth magnetic field vector in that particular coordinate system, or
> simply
> > by offsetting the initial conditions.
>
> Are you planning on making a new magnetometer design?  I am all set to go
> for making a board thats
> sole purpose is to feed a flight controller with a attitude output.

We are definately going to fly more magnetometers although probably not fluxgate
types as we have no longer direct access to the rather special core material for
the sensor.

>
> >From discussion on the list I think that a good start for this board would
> be:
>
> 3 KMZ51 magnetic sensors and support circuitry (making a 3axis magnetometer)
>
> 4 sun sensing diode hookups with sun angle detection circuitry
>
> An atmel AVR microprocessor to tie the sensor data together (same chip
> family as the flight controller - C code)
> and feed the data to the flight controller.

I remember having seen - probably at the Scorpius web site (Ray??) - a
describtion of a navigation platform that combined GPS, accelerometer and gyro
inputs with a Kalman filter for real time on board 6-DOF trajectory calculation.
Magnetometer and sun sensors would plug in nicely in such a platform, but it
probably takes more than an AVR to perform the calculations (or maybe I am
underestimating the AVR?). Anyway, I like the idea preprocessing data at the
sensor and using the safety and convinience of programming it all in (ANSI) C
and the full Kalman filter implementation may be overkill for most amateur
purposes...

> I would like to get some printed circuit boards of this sensor module made
> at the same time I get version II of the flightcontroller made (I am sending
> out the CAD files in September) but I have limited analog skill and would
> need help designing the circuitry for the sensors.  I have read the app
> notes and datasheets for the KMZ51 but they are a pretty complex
> implementation to get +-1degree (active temerature/tilt/offset compensation
> required)  I will look for implementation data for a 4 diode sun sensor in
> the meantime.

I have only briefly seen the datasheet and I will be too busy to do anything
serious about it for months.

> If there is enough interest and people want to work on this I will assemble
> and mail out a free sensor board to up to 5 people who helped with the
> design.
>
> Another possible option is getting the design outsourced:
> http://www3.ns.sympatico.ca/leftright/
>
> these folks may be able to go from the appnotes schematic and put together a
> 3axis magnetometer CAD implementation that could then be manufactured.  They
> also are very experienced with rf design..
> Perhaps a group purchase of some intellectual property would be good to
> increase the performance of amateur flight controllers - this would be a
> fairy low price per person investment if at least 15 people were interested
> I think.  They quote $3.25/pin..  I will start by dedicating $200 to this
> project.
>
> >
> > I have flown (flux gate) magnetometers on a couple of occations. The data
> > processing and results may be fouynd at:
> > http://inet.uni2.dk/~dark/TechNotes/HOT/Magnetometer1.html
> > - there *may* be other ways to process the data.
>
> I can't believe all the stuff you guys derived from the 3 axis magnetometer:
> max altitude,
> burnout velocity,
> drag coefficient..
>
> what do you estimate the accuracy of these results to be?

I don't really remember this (it is almost 10 years since I did the original
work) but the parametric estimation showed a particular narrow interval for the
burnout velocity - like 1m/s IIRC.

Hans

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 25982 invoked from network); 21 Aug 2001 22:02:15 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 21 Aug 2001 22:02:15 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 21927 invoked by uid 50005); 21 Aug 2001 22:01:43 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (. Clean. Processed in 0.235628 secs); 21 Aug 2001 22:01:43 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
X-Qmail-Scanner-Mail-From: owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU via smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net
X-Qmail-Scanner-Rcpt-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
X-Qmail-Scanner: 0.96 (No viruses found. Processed in 0.235628 secs)
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 21 Aug 2001 22:01:42 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA18626; Tue, 21 Aug 2001 14:57:24 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 94153 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 21 Aug 2001 21:57:07          +0000
Received: from idsoftware.com (predator.idsoftware.com [192.246.40.34]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA18612 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Tue, 21 Aug 2001 14:57:07 -0700
Received: from [192.246.40.129] (account johnc HELO lightning.idsoftware.com)          by idsoftware.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 3.4.7) with ESMTP id 354309          for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 21 Aug 2001 16:57:06 -0500
X-Sender: johnc@mail.idsoftware.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.1
References: <4.3.1.2.20010821125257.02e66f08@mail.idsoftware.com>            <00b901c12a1f$4a7949a0$0400a8c0@hatjs>            <5.0.2.1.0.20010819230313.02adf0b0@mail.earthlink.net>            <4.3.1.2.20010820035613.02ca53f8@mail.idsoftware.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <4.3.1.2.20010821164622.02c404a8@mail.idsoftware.com>
Date:         Tue, 21 Aug 2001 16:55:49 -0500
Reply-To: "John Carmack" <johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Carmack" <johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Solid rocket boosters
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <l03130301b7a87d79bca9@[63.10.189.150]>

At 11:05 AM 8/21/2001 -1000, you wrote:
>At 12:53 PM -0500 8/21/01, John Carmack wrote:
> >At 01:57 AM 8/21/2001 -0700, you wrote:
> >>Hi all,
> >>
> >> > Three hinged (1D movement) nozzles can give 3DOF.
> >> >
> >> > A B C
> >> >
> >> > Engines A and C swing up and down, while B swings side to side.
> >> >
> >> > A and C swing together for one axis, opposite directions for roll, and B
> >> > gives the other axis.
> >>
> >>Do you mean that the motors form the points of a triangle?
> >>
> >>best regards,
> >>Jamie
> >
> >No, all in a horizontal line.
> >
> >John Carmack
>
>You could get it down to two engines with differential throttling.

Right, I hadn't considered that possibility.

I distrust moving parts, so all of the designs we are considering are fixed
positions engines, either differentially throttled or pulsed.

We are using four canted engines in our first three designs, but we may
move to eight attitude engines for subsequent vehicles so we can have pure
torques (instead of a fractional roll cant on top of pitch and yaw) and a
degree of redundancy.

John Carmack

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 1047 invoked from network); 21 Aug 2001 22:03:29 -0000
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 21 Aug 2001 22:03:29 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 10163 invoked by uid 50005); 21 Aug 2001 22:01:42 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smpte.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.195028 secs); 21 Aug 2001 22:01:42 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 21 Aug 2001 22:01:41 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA18690; Tue, 21 Aug 2001 15:01:10 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 94166 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 21 Aug 2001 22:01:08          +0000
Received: from adobe.com (smtp-relay-2.adobe.com [192.150.11.2]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA18676 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue,          21 Aug 2001 15:01:08 -0700
Received: from inner-relay-1.corp.adobe.com ([153.32.1.51]) by adobe.com          (1.0.0/8.11.4) with ESMTP id f7LM0Fj23657 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>;          Tue, 21 Aug 2001 15:00:15 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mailsj-v1.corp.adobe.com (mailsj-dev.corp.adobe.com          [153.32.1.192]) by inner-relay-1.corp.adobe.com (8.11.4/8.11.4) with          ESMTP id f7LM0f219472 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 21 Aug 2001          15:00:41 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from sronald.earthlink.net ([153.32.63.111]) by          mailsj-v1.corp.adobe.com (Netscape Messaging Server 4.15 v1 Jul 11          2001 16:32:57) with ESMTP id GIFUGP00.663; Tue, 21 Aug 2001 15:00:25          -0700
X-Sender: forkbomb@mail.earthlink.net
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
References: <Pine.LNX.4.10.10108211224140.17247-100000@itc.uci.edu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <5.1.0.14.0.20010821145721.02796c50@mail.earthlink.net>
Date:         Tue, 21 Aug 2001 15:03:11 -0700
Reply-To: <forkbomb@EARTHLINK.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <forkbomb@EARTHLINK.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] earth magnetic field sensors
Comments: To: Jamie Morken <jmorken@HOME.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <008c01c12a83$156c8380$0400a8c0@hatjs>

At 01:51 PM 8/21/01 -0700, Jamie Morken wrote:

>Ok thanks Ray for raising the ante!  I gave the guy a call at Leftright and
>he said that they could do an
>rf schematic and pcb layout design for us.  He said he could give us a good
>deal since its a
>non commercial project.  I will do my best to talk him down to a good price
>:)  I am going to email him back with specifics, but thought I would ask
>here first what people want in a rocketry rf link.  This includes whether it
>is a modem or a direct microcontroller interface,


         Modem -- it's more flexible and doesn't restrict my choice of
microcontroller.


>full or half duplex,


         Full duplex would be nice to have -- I have some ideas flitting
around in my head for a boost glider that would benefit enormously from
full duplex. It's definitely optional, tho -- the other side of the link
can be something like a traditional RC rig.


>the
>frequency,


         A common ham band.


>  the power amplifier gain,


         Adjustable. It should be pretty low power to keep battery weight
in check -- one watt or less will get you all the range you need for most
amateur rocketry flights, I think.  An option to attach an external
amplifier of greater power should be considered, in order to accommodate
those who need more.


>  the maximum data rate if its a modem,
>etc.


         Adjustable, with the minimum being around 2400 bps and the max
being as high as possible.

         -p

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 16676 invoked from network); 21 Aug 2001 22:28:38 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 21 Aug 2001 22:28:38 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 16064 invoked by uid 50005); 21 Aug 2001 22:28:05 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (. Clean. Processed in 0.227522 secs); 21 Aug 2001 22:28:05 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
X-Qmail-Scanner-Mail-From: owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU via smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net
X-Qmail-Scanner-Rcpt-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
X-Qmail-Scanner: 0.96 (No viruses found. Processed in 0.227522 secs)
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 21 Aug 2001 22:28:05 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA18835; Tue, 21 Aug 2001 15:22:45 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 94179 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 21 Aug 2001 22:22:43          +0000
Received: from smtp007.mailsrvcs.net (smtp007pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.186])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA18821 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 21 Aug 2001 15:22:43 -0700
Received: from [63.27.96.224] (1Cust80.tnt1.san-bernardino.ca.da.uu.net          [63.27.96.80]) by smtp007.mailsrvcs.net  with ESMTP for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; id f7LMM9W13838 Tue, 21 Aug 2001 17:22:09          -0500 (CDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: GTE/01rocket@mail.gte.net
References: <Pine.LNX.4.10.10108211224140.17247-100000@itc.uci.edu>            <008c01c12a83$156c8380$0400a8c0@hatjs>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <a0510031eb7a885d55a8d@[63.27.96.224]>
Date:         Tue, 21 Aug 2001 14:43:51 -0700
Reply-To: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] earth magnetic field sensors
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <008c01c12a83$156c8380$0400a8c0@hatjs>

>is a modem or a direct microcontroller interface, full or half duplex, the
>frequency, the power amplifier gain, the maximum data rate if its a modem,
>etc.  I am probably oversimplifying it too so any advice on what to ask for
>is appreciated!


1. Range!  200 miles line of site
2. Low impact from high wind and temperature changes and the fact the
rocket is a long skinny object flying vertically. Antenna issues.
3. Bandwidth capable of some sort of video signal will assure any
reasonable data rate will be supported.
4. Cost not primary driver, range and reliability and bandwidth is.



>
>Here is what I am thinking so far: half duplex 400MHz FM ham radio band 5 to
>20 watt power amp.
>
>best regards,
>Jamie


--
Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
Opinion, the whole thing.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 22032 invoked from network); 21 Aug 2001 23:44:47 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 21 Aug 2001 23:44:47 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 25038 invoked by uid 50005); 21 Aug 2001 23:44:47 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.213838 secs); 21 Aug 2001 23:44:47 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 21 Aug 2001 23:44:47 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA19091; Tue, 21 Aug 2001 16:41:38 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 94204 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 21 Aug 2001 23:41:11          +0000
Received: from sys32.hou.wt.net (sys32.hou.wt.net [205.230.159.32]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA19076 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 21 Aug 2001 16:41:10 -0700
Received: from localhost (216-119-130-169.ipset10.wt.net [216.119.130.169]) by          sys32.hou.wt.net (8.9.1/8.9.1) with ESMTP id SAA06735; Tue, 21 Aug          2001 18:41:15 -0500 (CDT)
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.388)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <200108212341.SAA06735@sys32.hou.wt.net>
Date:         Tue, 21 Aug 2001 18:41:33 -0500
Reply-To: "Donald McCorvey" <dlm3@NETAXS.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Donald McCorvey" <dlm3@NETAXS.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Solid rocket boosters
Comments: To: John Carmack <johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <4.3.1.2.20010821164622.02c404a8@mail.idsoftware.com>

Just wondering -

What kind of throttle response do you get with your valves, jets, et
al ?   I would think that the time required between when you command the
jet off and when it actually turns off in a pulsed application would
introduce a lot of phase lag into your system, making it rather
difficult to use for primary steering.

As an analogy, you don't control yaw on a twin-engine airplane with
differential engine power - though you can use it for yaw trim. OTOH,
tandem-rotor helicopters use differential collective between the forward
and aft rotors is used for pitch control. Most of the differential
torque is soaked up by the cross shaft and aft gearbox,  a relatively
high-bandwidth response - don't ask me how it does it, I just push
electrons for a living - and overall horsepower is preserved across the
two rotor heads.

My overall point is that thrust is usually a slow process, whereas
attitude control is necessarily a fast process, especially as you
increase velocity. As you scale up your design, I wonder if you're not
going to run into issues where your throttle response gets slower
because of the larger inertia of propellant and combustion forces and
that phase lag starts getting in the way.

Don McCorvey

On Tuesday, August 21, 2001, at 04:55 PM, John Carmack wrote:

> At 11:05 AM 8/21/2001 -1000, you wrote:
>
> Right, I hadn't considered that possibility.
>
> I distrust moving parts, so all of the designs we are considering are
> fixed
> positions engines, either differentially throttled or pulsed.
>
> We are using four canted engines in our first three designs, but we may
> move to eight attitude engines for subsequent vehicles so we can have
> pure
> torques (instead of a fractional roll cant on top of pitch and yaw)
> and a
> degree of redundancy.
>
> John Carmack
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 4194 invoked from network); 22 Aug 2001 02:07:52 -0000
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 22 Aug 2001 02:07:52 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 6433 invoked by uid 50005); 22 Aug 2001 02:06:03 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smpte.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.22912 secs); 22 Aug 2001 02:06:03 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 22 Aug 2001 02:06:03 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA19470; Tue, 21 Aug 2001 19:03:56 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 94233 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 02:03:52          +0000
Received: from harrier.mail.pas.earthlink.net (harrier.mail.pas.earthlink.net          [207.217.121.12]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA19456          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 21 Aug 2001 19:03:51 -0700
Received: from sprintmail.com (pool0713.cvx18-bradley.dialup.earthlink.net          [209.179.240.203]) by harrier.mail.pas.earthlink.net          (EL-8_9_3_3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id TAA10526; Tue, 21 Aug 2001 19:03:49          -0700 (PDT)
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.74 [en] (Win98; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <814DCE01F6D7D311994D204C4F4F50201889BD@MAIL>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B8265E1.2B36E595@sprintmail.com>
Date:         Tue, 21 Aug 2001 06:45:05 -0700
Reply-To: "Anthony Colette" <Rockitman@SPRINTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Anthony Colette" <Rockitman@SPRINTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Pistonless Piston Pumps
Comments: To: Earl Pottinger <earlcp@CONPUTE.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

> Would check valves or fluid diodes between the accumulator and the injector
> not help break the oscillations?

If you had either of these it would no longer be an accumulator.

> Or what about 2 or 3 very small
> accumulator
> of diffirent sizes?

They would only make your injector compliant and compliance is what you don't
want in an injector.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 11102 invoked from network); 22 Aug 2001 02:09:29 -0000
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 22 Aug 2001 02:09:29 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 28333 invoked by uid 50005); 22 Aug 2001 02:08:14 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smptf.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.361446 secs); 22 Aug 2001 02:08:14 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 22 Aug 2001 02:08:13 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA19498; Tue, 21 Aug 2001 19:07:01 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 94240 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 02:07:00          +0000
Received: from grucom2.gru.net (grucom2.gru.net [209.251.129.7]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA19484 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue,          21 Aug 2001 19:06:59 -0700
Received: from [209.251.150.189] by grucom2.sfcc.net (NTMail          6.04.0010/NU4112.00.db1c8a4b) with ESMTP id momxhaaa for          AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 21 Aug 2001 22:06:53 -0400
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (Win95; I)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <3B81D884.7B6CCF69@sfcc.net> <a05100317b7a81c0192be@[63.27.96.224]>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B831422.DC4C7BBA@sfcc.net>
Date:         Tue, 21 Aug 2001 22:08:34 -0400
Reply-To: "James Yawn" <jyawn@SFCC.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "James Yawn" <jyawn@SFCC.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Continued Candy tests
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Excellent suggestion - back to K-mart with the checkbook!  Or is this the
kind of thing I might have to go to a baby-specialty store?  Whatever, I will
find one.

Upon purchasing my el-cheapo yesterday ($25) I realized that it is already a
digital pressure sensor, and wondered how one might route its output  to a
computer.  I am not a hardware geek, but could develop the software...

Thanks for a great idea.

Jimmy Yawn

p.s.  And thanks for your participation in this list.  After the rough start,
I have found your input to be most interesting and stimulating.

Jerry Irvine wrote:

> >James Yawn posted in a fit of uncontrolled technology:
>
> >I continued my comedy-act compression testing today with the purchase of
> >a sophisticated electronic measuring device, a bathroom scale.
>
> >
> >I encourage comments, criticisms, or warm fuzzies on this topic.
>
> You know what makes a fairly good crude first order test stand? A
> baby scale.  It can measure force in the range of 5-50 pounds which
> is in the range of typical test motors.  By measuring peak thrust and
> recording it with a video camera or good eyes, one can back out
> pressure.
>
> Sometimes the very best technology is low technology.  Baby scales
> are hard to break, easy to replace and widely available.
>
> Jerry
>
> --
> Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
> Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
> Opinion, the whole thing.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 21969 invoked from network); 22 Aug 2001 02:33:52 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 22 Aug 2001 02:33:52 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 13403 invoked by uid 50005); 22 Aug 2001 02:29:52 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (. Clean. Processed in 0.351574 secs); 22 Aug 2001 02:29:52 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
X-Qmail-Scanner-Mail-From: owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU via smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net
X-Qmail-Scanner-Rcpt-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
X-Qmail-Scanner: 0.96 (No viruses found. Processed in 0.351574 secs)
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 22 Aug 2001 02:29:51 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA19587; Tue, 21 Aug 2001 19:28:09 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 94252 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 02:28:07          +0000
Received: from smtp007.mailsrvcs.net (smtp007pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.186])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA19573 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 21 Aug 2001 19:28:06 -0700
Received: from [63.27.96.224] (1Cust187.tnt3.san-bernardino.ca.da.uu.net          [63.25.57.187]) by smtp007.mailsrvcs.net  with ESMTP for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; id f7M2RXW00174 Tue, 21 Aug 2001 21:27:34          -0500 (CDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: GTE/01rocket@mail.gte.net
References: <3B81D884.7B6CCF69@sfcc.net> <a05100317b7a81c0192be@[63.27.96.224]>            <3B831422.DC4C7BBA@sfcc.net>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <a05100320b7a8c879bf0a@[63.27.96.224]>
Date:         Tue, 21 Aug 2001 19:27:34 -0700
Reply-To: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Continued Candy tests
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <3B831422.DC4C7BBA@sfcc.net>

>Excellent suggestion - back to K-mart with the checkbook!  Or is this the
>kind of thing I might have to go to a baby-specialty store?  Whatever, I will
>find one.
>
>Upon purchasing my el-cheapo yesterday ($25) I realized that it is already a
>digital pressure sensor, and wondered how one might route its output  to a
>computer.  I am not a hardware geek, but could develop the software...
>
>Thanks for a great idea.
>
>Jimmy Yawn
>
>p.s.  And thanks for your participation in this list.  After the rough start,
>I have found your input to be most interesting and stimulating.


Sometimes there is a wide difference between reality and
perception/rumour.  Especially around the most villified person in
rocketry despite going to perhaps 3 TRA launches in 11 years.  They
have a thing for me that leaks everywhere :)

Jerry



--
Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
Opinion, the whole thing.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 29991 invoked from network); 22 Aug 2001 02:50:21 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 22 Aug 2001 02:50:21 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 14082 invoked by uid 50005); 22 Aug 2001 02:48:12 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smpte.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.228373 secs); 22 Aug 2001 02:48:12 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 22 Aug 2001 02:48:12 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA19658; Tue, 21 Aug 2001 19:47:14 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 94259 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 02:47:08          +0000
Received: from idsoftware.com (predator.idsoftware.com [192.246.40.34]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA19644 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Tue, 21 Aug 2001 19:47:08 -0700
Received: from [192.246.40.129] (account johnc HELO lightning.idsoftware.com)          by idsoftware.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 3.4.7) with ESMTP id 354545          for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 21 Aug 2001 21:47:07 -0500
X-Sender: johnc@mail.idsoftware.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.1
References: <4.3.1.2.20010821164622.02c404a8@mail.idsoftware.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <4.3.1.2.20010821213752.02c8a8c0@mail.idsoftware.com>
Date:         Tue, 21 Aug 2001 21:45:50 -0500
Reply-To: "John Carmack" <johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Carmack" <johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM>
Subject:      [AR] valve speeds (was Re: [AR] Solid rocket boosters)
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <200108212341.SAA06735@sys32.hou.wt.net>

At 06:41 PM 8/21/2001 -0500, you wrote:
>Just wondering -
>
>What kind of throttle response do you get with your valves, jets, et al
>?   I would think that the time required between when you command the jet
>off and when it actually turns off in a pulsed application would introduce
>a lot of phase lag into your system, making it rather difficult to use for
>primary steering.

The solenoids we are using for the attitude engines can open and close in
less than 5 msec, and they are right on top of the engines.  Thrust
response is quite rapid, and it is working fine for us.

The main engine valve is a motorized ball valve, which takes 800 msec to go
from full open to full closed.  I suspect even this would be sufficient for
flight control, which generally only needs incremental changes, although
you wouldn't be making any jet-fighter like maneuvers with it.

John Carmack

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 18379 invoked from network); 22 Aug 2001 02:55:34 -0000
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 22 Aug 2001 02:55:34 -0000
Received: (qmail 6720 invoked by uid 50005); 22 Aug 2001 02:54:19 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smptf.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.18539 secs); 22 Aug 2001 02:54:19 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 22 Aug 2001 02:54:18 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA19699; Tue, 21 Aug 2001 19:51:39 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 94270 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 02:51:38          +0000
Received: from smtprelay1.abs.adelphia.net (smtprelay.abs.adelphia.net          [64.8.20.11]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA19685 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 21 Aug 2001 19:51:37 -0700
Received: from jlgrady ([63.124.251.47]) by smtprelay1.abs.adelphia.net          (Netscape Messaging Server 4.15) with SMTP id GIG7WP00.N7A for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 21 Aug 2001 22:50:49 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook CWS, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <000501c12ab5$ab1d0ee0$0200a8c0@prestige.net>
Date:         Tue, 21 Aug 2001 22:53:47 -0400
Reply-To: "Jeff Grady" <jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jeff Grady" <jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Continued Candy tests
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <3B831422.DC4C7BBA@sfcc.net>

Jimmy,

        We have Office Max and Office Depot stores around here (Atlanta), and I
remember seeing a digital scale that displays grams/pounds AND has a serial
port on it. I believe it will handle 50 or 75 lbs. Was around 99.99. A
little pricey, but using the serial port along w/video capture and you get
the makings of a real test/research rig. I plan to build a test stand (for
firing DOWN) and intend to capture not only digital video and thrust, but
pressure as well (and maybe even temp)...Omega (http://www.omega.com/) is an
excellent source for all kinds of neat (expensive) measuring "chit". Lots of
pressure/temp/stress/strain measuring apparatus there.

Jeff

-----Original Message-----
From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@itc.uci.edu]On
Behalf Of James Yawn
Sent: Tuesday, August 21, 2001 10:09 PM
To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
Subject: Re: [AR] Continued Candy tests


Excellent suggestion - back to K-mart with the checkbook!  Or is this the
kind of thing I might have to go to a baby-specialty store?  Whatever, I
will
find one.

Upon purchasing my el-cheapo yesterday ($25) I realized that it is already a
digital pressure sensor, and wondered how one might route its output  to a
computer.  I am not a hardware geek, but could develop the software...

Thanks for a great idea.

Jimmy Yawn

p.s.  And thanks for your participation in this list.  After the rough
start,
I have found your input to be most interesting and stimulating.

Jerry Irvine wrote:

> >James Yawn posted in a fit of uncontrolled technology:
>
> >I continued my comedy-act compression testing today with the purchase of
> >a sophisticated electronic measuring device, a bathroom scale.
>
> >
> >I encourage comments, criticisms, or warm fuzzies on this topic.
>
> You know what makes a fairly good crude first order test stand? A
> baby scale.  It can measure force in the range of 5-50 pounds which
> is in the range of typical test motors.  By measuring peak thrust and
> recording it with a video camera or good eyes, one can back out
> pressure.
>
> Sometimes the very best technology is low technology.  Baby scales
> are hard to break, easy to replace and widely available.
>
> Jerry
>
> --
> Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
> Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
> Opinion, the whole thing.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 11816 invoked from network); 22 Aug 2001 03:10:52 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 22 Aug 2001 03:10:52 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 10037 invoked by uid 50005); 22 Aug 2001 03:10:51 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.170904 secs); 22 Aug 2001 03:10:51 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 22 Aug 2001 03:10:51 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA19776; Tue, 21 Aug 2001 20:08:42 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 94281 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 03:08:37          +0000
Received: from smtp007.mailsrvcs.net (smtp007pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.186])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA19762 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 21 Aug 2001 20:08:37 -0700
Received: from [63.27.96.224] (1Cust5.tnt1.san-bernardino.ca.da.uu.net          [63.27.96.5]) by smtp007.mailsrvcs.net  with ESMTP for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; id f7M384W10559 Tue, 21 Aug 2001 22:08:04          -0500 (CDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: GTE/01rocket@mail.gte.net
References: <000501c12ab5$ab1d0ee0$0200a8c0@prestige.net>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <a05100321b7a8d225ba8d@[63.27.96.224]>
Date:         Tue, 21 Aug 2001 20:08:05 -0700
Reply-To: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Continued Candy tests
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <000501c12ab5$ab1d0ee0$0200a8c0@prestige.net>

>Jimmy,
>
>         We have Office Max and Office Depot stores around here
>(Atlanta), and I
>remember seeing a digital scale that displays grams/pounds AND has a serial
>port on it. I believe it will handle 50 or 75 lbs. Was around 99.99. A


Go to Goodwill or a thrift store for an old fashioned mechanical
scale.  It has a large dial guage.


>Excellent suggestion - back to K-mart with the checkbook!  Or is this the
>kind of thing I might have to go to a baby-specialty store?  Whatever, I
>will
>find one.



>Thanks for a great idea.
>
>Jimmy Yawn
>
>p.s.  And thanks for your participation in this list.  After the rough
>start,
>I have found your input to be most interesting and stimulating.
>
>Jerry Irvine wrote:
>
>  > You know what makes a fairly good crude first order test stand? A
>>  baby scale.  It can measure force in the range of 5-50 pounds which
>>  is in the range of typical test motors.  By measuring peak thrust and
>>  recording it with a video camera or good eyes, one can back out
>  > pressure.
>  >

--
Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
Opinion, the whole thing.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 27553 invoked from network); 22 Aug 2001 03:51:00 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 22 Aug 2001 03:51:00 -0000
Received: (qmail 2903 invoked by uid 50005); 22 Aug 2001 03:50:59 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.235402 secs); 22 Aug 2001 03:50:59 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 22 Aug 2001 03:50:59 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA19916; Tue, 21 Aug 2001 20:48:13 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 94288 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 03:48:10          +0000
Received: from mta01.mail.mel.aone.net.au (mta01.mail.au.uu.net [203.2.192.81])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA19902 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 21 Aug 2001 20:48:09 -0700
Received: from unknown ([63.60.220.218]) by mta01.mail.mel.aone.net.au with          SMTP id <20010822034807.NQQA3755.mta01.mail.mel.aone.net.au@unknown>          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 13:48:07 +1000
References: Conversation <000501c12ab5$ab1d0ee0$0200a8c0@prestige.net> with            last message <a05100321b7a8d225ba8d@[63.27.96.224]>
Priority: Normal
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Priority: 3
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	X-MAPIextension=.TXT;
	charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>
Date:         Wed, 22 Aug 2001 03:48:10 +0000
Reply-To: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Continued Candy tests
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <a05100321b7a8d225ba8d@[63.27.96.224]>

----------
> >Jimmy,
> >
> >         We have Office Max and Office Depot stores around here
> >(Atlanta), and I
> >remember seeing a digital scale that displays grams/pounds AND has a
serial
> >port on it. I believe it will handle 50 or 75 lbs. Was around 99.99. A
>
>
> Go to Goodwill or a thrift store for an old fashioned mechanical
> scale.  It has a large dial guage.

Oh, how the memories come flooding back:-)

Troy.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 8898 invoked from network); 22 Aug 2001 04:13:37 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 22 Aug 2001 04:13:37 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 18958 invoked by uid 50005); 22 Aug 2001 04:13:03 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (. Clean. Processed in 0.227161 secs); 22 Aug 2001 04:13:03 -0000
X-Qmail-Scanner-Mail-From: owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU via smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net
X-Qmail-Scanner-Rcpt-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
X-Qmail-Scanner: 0.96 (No viruses found. Processed in 0.227161 secs)
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 22 Aug 2001 04:13:03 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA19988; Tue, 21 Aug 2001 20:58:12 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 94295 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 03:58:11          +0000
Received: from spsystems.net (spsystems.net [209.47.149.227]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA19974 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Tue,          21 Aug 2001 20:58:10 -0700
Received: (from henry@localhost) by spsystems.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id XAA26562;          Tue, 21 Aug 2001 23:57:27 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010821234502.26173C-100000@spsystems.net>
Date:         Tue, 21 Aug 2001 23:57:26 -0400
Reply-To: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] reliability Now we're talking statistics...
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <03bd01c12746$719ea1a0$6601a8c0@home.com>

On Fri, 17 Aug 2001, Brian Kosko wrote:
> ...Let's say we take ten samples from a process we're
> running. We get an average of 500 with a 95% confidence interval of 480 to
> 520. Our confidence interval tells us that in the long run (about 95% of the
> time) our actual process average will fall within the interval 480 to 520.
> Can our process average be outside the interval? Absolutely, not likely; but
> certainly possible.

That last point needs emphasizing:  a 95% confidence interval fails to
contain about 1 in every 20 samples.  It's a pretty good representation of
the average behavior of the variable, but it doesn't tell you much about
worst cases.  A 5% chance of being outside the interval doesn't sound like
a lot, but if you're trying repeatedly, it's something that will actually
happen now and then.

(Remember this when you hear about a medical study announcing some new
evil effect of power lines, or chocolate, or what have you.  The usual
rule of thumb for publishable results is 95% probability that the effect
is real.  That means that roughly 1 in every 20 such results is total
happenstance, sheer experimental bad luck that doesn't imply anything.
This is why the inability to reproduce such results is so damning, and why
a single result contradicting the general pattern is not reliable evidence
of anything.)

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 17463 invoked from network); 22 Aug 2001 04:15:55 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 22 Aug 2001 04:15:55 -0000
Received: (qmail 8258 invoked by uid 50005); 22 Aug 2001 04:15:54 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.344704 secs); 22 Aug 2001 04:15:54 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 22 Aug 2001 04:15:53 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA20035; Tue, 21 Aug 2001 21:06:28 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 94302 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 04:06:26          +0000
Received: from spsystems.net (spsystems.net [209.47.149.227]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA20021 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Tue,          21 Aug 2001 21:06:26 -0700
Received: (from henry@localhost) by spsystems.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id AAA26638;          Wed, 22 Aug 2001 00:04:58 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010821235901.26173D-100000@spsystems.net>
Date:         Wed, 22 Aug 2001 00:04:57 -0400
Reply-To: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] [OT]: Re: [AR] reliability (was Re: [AR] ERPS              successfully              runs H2O2 engine)
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <000d01c12796$af977180$0100a8c0@mkbs>

On Sat, 18 Aug 2001, Russell McMahon wrote:
> > A good rule of thumb for evaluating such numbers is:  how much would the
> > number change if *one launch* had gone differently?  That gives you some
> > idea of how precise, or rather imprecise, most of those figures are.
>
> A fun and sometimes useful layman's guide for "margin of error" in a sample
> is to divide 100 by  the square root of the number of samples...

Knowing the numbers is indeed useful, but the "what if one launch had gone
differently?" rule is often better when trying to explain the issue to a
complete layman.  People are often suspicious of margins of error computed
by what seem like arbitrary rules, but they can easily understand the idea
that a good result shouldn't be changed much by one occurrence more or less.

(I can't claim credit for this -- I got it from David Andrews, former head
of U of T's Statistics department, one of Canada's top statisticians, and
a frequent expert witness on statistical issues.)

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 4404 invoked from network); 22 Aug 2001 05:00:22 -0000
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 22 Aug 2001 05:00:22 -0000
Received: (qmail 12399 invoked by uid 50005); 22 Aug 2001 04:59:06 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smptf.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.206047 secs); 22 Aug 2001 04:59:06 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 22 Aug 2001 04:59:06 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA20195; Tue, 21 Aug 2001 21:57:53 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 94314 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 04:57:44          +0000
Received: from pimout4-int.prodigy.net (pimout4-ext.prodigy.net          [207.115.63.103]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA20181          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 21 Aug 2001 21:57:44 -0700
Received: from k2 (A010-0379.DLL2.splitrock.net [209.254.213.125]) by          pimout4-int.prodigy.net (8.11.0/8.11.0) with SMTP id f7M4vgx27592 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 00:57:42 -0400
References:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010821234502.26173C-100000@spsystems.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.3018.1300
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <017a01c12ac6$35d3f8e0$7dd5fed1@k2>
Date:         Tue, 21 Aug 2001 23:52:12 -0500
Reply-To: "Ken" <HAWARDEN@PRODIGY.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Ken" <HAWARDEN@PRODIGY.NET>
Organization: Prodigy Internet
Subject:      Re: [AR] reliability Now we're talking statistics...
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

I believe in the uncertainty principle...

There will always be an uncertain, or unknown, factor in the equation that
will generally sneek up and bite you. Usually about 0.1 S after ignition...
;o)

Ken H.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 6915 invoked from network); 22 Aug 2001 06:49:22 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 22 Aug 2001 06:49:22 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 9967 invoked by uid 50005); 22 Aug 2001 06:48:47 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (. Clean. Processed in 0.295588 secs); 22 Aug 2001 06:48:47 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
X-Qmail-Scanner-Mail-From: owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU via smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net
X-Qmail-Scanner-Rcpt-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
X-Qmail-Scanner: 0.96 (No viruses found. Processed in 0.295588 secs)
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 22 Aug 2001 06:48:47 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA20613; Tue, 21 Aug 2001 23:46:23 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 94337 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 06:46:13          +0000
Received: from idsoftware.com (predator.idsoftware.com [192.246.40.34]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA20595 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Tue, 21 Aug 2001 23:46:13 -0700
Received: from [192.246.40.144] (account johnc HELO pluto.idsoftware.com) by          idsoftware.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 3.4.7) with ESMTP id 354649 for          AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 01:46:12 -0500
X-Sender: johnc@mail.idsoftware.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <4.3.1.2.20010822015255.02ea7008@mail.idsoftware.com>
Date:         Wed, 22 Aug 2001 01:58:54 -0500
Reply-To: "John Carmack" <johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Carmack" <johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM>
Subject:      [AR] short static test video
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

We have been using our little test stand for nearly a year now, graduating
from 15 pounds motors to 80 pound motors.  We just did a really quick
firing of our new 700 pound thrust motor, and got a little surprise...

http://media.armadilloaerospace.com/LiftingTestStand.mpg

Unfortunately, I found out that our new data collection hardware was
clamping at half scale, so I didn't get a peak thrust reading.

John Carmack

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 14010 invoked from network); 22 Aug 2001 11:34:27 -0000
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 22 Aug 2001 11:34:27 -0000
Received: (qmail 10642 invoked by uid 50005); 22 Aug 2001 11:32:37 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smpte.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.540231 secs); 22 Aug 2001 11:32:37 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 22 Aug 2001 11:32:36 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id EAA21380; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 04:31:50 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 94363 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 11:31:44          +0000
Received: from fep3-orange.clear.net.nz (fep3-orange.clear.net.nz          [203.97.32.3]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id EAA21365          for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 04:31:43 -0700
Received: from mkbs (d2-u52.acld.clear.net.nz [203.97.48.116]) by          fep3-orange.clear.net.nz (1.5/1.8) with SMTP id XAA07606; Wed, 22 Aug          2001 23:31:40 +1200 (NZST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <008801c12afe$5db3aa80$0100a8c0@mkbs>
Date:         Wed, 22 Aug 2001 19:58:03 +1200
Reply-To: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Organization: Applied Technology
Subject:      [AR] [EE]: Building a Satellite / Fw: [amsat-bb] Re: Simplesat              details
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

What it takes to build a "real" amateur satellite and have it accepted as a
NASA payload.


__________________________________________________


    On Tue, 21 Aug 2001, Robert Oler wrote about SIMPLESAT:

> is that some folks at Goddard spent about 1/4 of a million dollars
> (apparantly in real cash) and 5 man years to build a pretty trivial
> satellite.
>
> If anything the simplesat is a poster child for WASTE and NASA
> incompetence...for that probe to cost 250K is idiotic....

Well, I think I can offer some idea where the money goes... I sure was
surprised and learned a lot in just taking two TNC's and 2 Hamtronics
VHF xmtrs and 4 Hamtronics receivers and some nicads and building a
satellite.  SOunds simple.

Boy was I wrong.  NOrmally, I would say I could cable it all toghther in
an evening.  It took a month just do do the wiring harness.  It is
unbelievable how much time it takes when you start thinking "there is only
ONE way to build this thing... and it must be perfect."  Here is where the
time and manpower goes: (I would never have believed it)

Meetings, briefings, reviews.  (I can hook up a TNC, but I had to
PROVE it to everyone beyond the shadow of a doubt,  Every lead, every
wire, every solder joint had to be tested, re-tested.  Every mode, every
TNC command had to be tested under all conditions.  Every module had to
be tested at ALL voltages and at ALL temperatures and all combinations of
failiures.  Throw in a few dropped test leads and rebuilds...

One person had to work daily with NASA and the DOD and the launch people
for over a year.  Every screw had to be documented to its torque,
strength.  Every single piece had to be certified to be low outgassing
and space proven.  Everything had to be VIB tested, and Thermal vac
testing).  Everything had to be certified, approved, and inspected.
When you go onto someone elses ROcket with other million dollar paylods,
you MUST be squeeky clean.. and the chances that something will break or
fall off of yours must be ZERO.

Mass models had to be built, flown to the launch integreater, vib tested,
fit checked, and SEparation system tested, documentd and proved.  This had
to be done by your own people in schedule with everyone else.  COunt 4
days of travel across country 6 or more times for 2 or more people.
Yes, our dual packet system that everyone of us has in his shack, cost
only about $1500, but throw in 8 man years of effort, thousands
of $$$ of travel over 3 years, and the
DOD's $XXX for the launch and $250K sounds like a bargain to me...

Again, I figured I could build a satellite easily.  I thank the heavens
that a LTCOL took on the job of dealing with the "externals" as his full
time job...

Building the satellite is less than 5% of the job...

Just guessing here...

de WB4APR@amsat.org, Bob

----
Via the amsat-bb mailing list at AMSAT.ORG courtesy of AMSAT-NA.
To unsubscribe, send "unsubscribe amsat-bb" to Majordomo@amsat.org

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 9757 invoked from network); 22 Aug 2001 12:46:39 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 22 Aug 2001 12:46:39 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 29776 invoked by uid 50005); 22 Aug 2001 12:45:21 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smptf.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.366939 secs); 22 Aug 2001 12:45:21 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 22 Aug 2001 12:45:21 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id FAA21556; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 05:43:39 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 94375 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 12:43:33          +0000
Received: from bailey.dscga.com (bailey.dscga.com [198.78.9.11]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id FAA21522 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed,          22 Aug 2001 05:33:32 -0700
Received: (from michael@localhost) by bailey.dscga.com (8.9.1/) id IAA24556;          Wed, 22 Aug 2001 08:29:32 -0400 (EDT)
References: <008801c12afe$5db3aa80$0100a8c0@mkbs>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
User-Agent: Mutt/1.1.2i
Message-ID:  <20010822082932.A24546@bailey.dscga.com>
Date:         Wed, 22 Aug 2001 08:29:32 -0400
Reply-To: "Michael Mealling" <michael@NEONYM.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Michael Mealling" <michael@NEONYM.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] [EE]: Building a Satellite / Fw: [amsat-bb] Re: Simplesat              details
Comments: To: Russell McMahon <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <008801c12afe$5db3aa80$0100a8c0@mkbs>; from apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ              on Wed, Aug 22, 2001 at 07:58:03PM +1200

(First time posting to the list so flames can be sent to me personally ;-)

On Wed, Aug 22, 2001 at 07:58:03PM +1200, Russell McMahon wrote:
> What it takes to build a "real" amateur satellite and have it accepted as a
> NASA payload.

$1500 (plus labor) compared to $250,000. Can _we_ do better? I can think
of several ways to mitigate some of those costs. Sure, I'm not a
professional rocket scientists so I'm sure I'm off on some of it. But
I am pretty involved in business practices and I'm sure some of this
can be cut out. How much of it was NASA being overly cautious because
of the source of the satellite (i.e. they trust Hughs to not screw up
but they sure don't trust 'amatuers')?

I've heard a few people suggest that the 'goal' of many people here
is _not_ to launch satellites. Well, why not? I've seen what
open source style design and development do to software development
costs. Can we apply those same principles here and come up with
something that does a better job than NASA for satellites of this
class? NASA can't do 'faster, better, cheaper' but it seems that's
exactly what we all do every day.

Could we get the overhead down so that for the same $250,000 cost
we could make 25 launch attempts with a 50% success rate? We might litter
the desert with a more than a few failed attemps (and make some interesting
craters out of some ham radio equipment) but we'd certainly a) get better over
time b) through commoditization further reduce cost and c) get more
satellites in orbit for _much_ cheaper.

Am I completely off base here? Am I completely off topic, too?

-MM


> __________________________________________________
>     On Tue, 21 Aug 2001, Robert Oler wrote about SIMPLESAT:
>
> > is that some folks at Goddard spent about 1/4 of a million dollars
> > (apparantly in real cash) and 5 man years to build a pretty trivial
> > satellite.
> >
> > If anything the simplesat is a poster child for WASTE and NASA
> > incompetence...for that probe to cost 250K is idiotic....
>
> Well, I think I can offer some idea where the money goes... I sure was
> surprised and learned a lot in just taking two TNC's and 2 Hamtronics
> VHF xmtrs and 4 Hamtronics receivers and some nicads and building a
> satellite.  SOunds simple.
>
> Boy was I wrong.  NOrmally, I would say I could cable it all toghther in
> an evening.  It took a month just do do the wiring harness.  It is
> unbelievable how much time it takes when you start thinking "there is only
> ONE way to build this thing... and it must be perfect."  Here is where the
> time and manpower goes: (I would never have believed it)
>
> Meetings, briefings, reviews.  (I can hook up a TNC, but I had to
> PROVE it to everyone beyond the shadow of a doubt,  Every lead, every
> wire, every solder joint had to be tested, re-tested.  Every mode, every
> TNC command had to be tested under all conditions.  Every module had to
> be tested at ALL voltages and at ALL temperatures and all combinations of
> failiures.  Throw in a few dropped test leads and rebuilds...
>
> One person had to work daily with NASA and the DOD and the launch people
> for over a year.  Every screw had to be documented to its torque,
> strength.  Every single piece had to be certified to be low outgassing
> and space proven.  Everything had to be VIB tested, and Thermal vac
> testing).  Everything had to be certified, approved, and inspected.
> When you go onto someone elses ROcket with other million dollar paylods,
> you MUST be squeeky clean.. and the chances that something will break or
> fall off of yours must be ZERO.
>
> Mass models had to be built, flown to the launch integreater, vib tested,
> fit checked, and SEparation system tested, documentd and proved.  This had
> to be done by your own people in schedule with everyone else.  COunt 4
> days of travel across country 6 or more times for 2 or more people.
> Yes, our dual packet system that everyone of us has in his shack, cost
> only about $1500, but throw in 8 man years of effort, thousands
> of $$$ of travel over 3 years, and the
> DOD's $XXX for the launch and $250K sounds like a bargain to me...
>
> Again, I figured I could build a satellite easily.  I thank the heavens
> that a LTCOL took on the job of dealing with the "externals" as his full
> time job...
>
> Building the satellite is less than 5% of the job...
>
> Just guessing here...
>
> de WB4APR@amsat.org, Bob
>
> ----
> Via the amsat-bb mailing list at AMSAT.ORG courtesy of AMSAT-NA.
> To unsubscribe, send "unsubscribe amsat-bb" to Majordomo@amsat.org

--
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Michael Mealling        |      Vote Libertarian!       | urn:pin:1
michael@neonym.net      |                              | http://www.neonym.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 6415 invoked from network); 22 Aug 2001 14:13:48 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 22 Aug 2001 14:13:48 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 29280 invoked by uid 50005); 22 Aug 2001 14:13:44 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.184592 secs); 22 Aug 2001 14:13:44 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 22 Aug 2001 14:13:44 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA21910; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 07:08:57 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 94410 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 14:08:48          +0000
Received: from smtp002.mailsrvcs.net (smtp002pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.181])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA21896 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 07:08:48 -0700
Received: from [63.27.96.224] (1Cust114.tnt2.san-bernardino.ca.da.uu.net          [63.27.97.114]) by smtp002.mailsrvcs.net  with ESMTP for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; id f7ME7r300318 Wed, 22 Aug 2001 09:07:53          -0500 (CDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: GTE/01rocket@mail.gte.net
References: <008801c12afe$5db3aa80$0100a8c0@mkbs>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <a05100322b7a96c58c060@[63.27.96.224]>
Date:         Wed, 22 Aug 2001 07:08:17 -0700
Reply-To: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] [EE]: Building a Satellite / Fw: [amsat-bb] Re: Simplesat              details
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <008801c12afe$5db3aa80$0100a8c0@mkbs>

>Russell McMahon scribled:



>Well, I think I can offer some idea where the money goes... I sure was
>surprised and learned a lot in just taking two TNC's and 2 Hamtronics
>VHF xmtrs and 4 Hamtronics receivers and some nicads and building a
>satellite.  SOunds simple.
>
>Boy was I wrong.  NOrmally, I would say I could cable it all toghther in
>an evening.  It took a month just do do the wiring harness.  It is
>unbelievable how much time it takes when you start thinking "there is only
>ONE way to build this thing... and it must be perfect."  Here is where the
>time and manpower goes: (I would never have believed it)



>One person had to work daily with NASA and the DOD and the launch people
>for over a year.  Every screw had to be documented to its torque,
>strength.  Every single piece had to be certified to be low outgassing
>and space proven.  Everything had to be VIB tested, and Thermal vac
>testing).  Everything had to be certified, approved, and inspected.
>When you go onto someone elses ROcket with other million dollar paylods,
>you MUST be squeeky clean.. and the chances that something will break or
>fall off of yours must be ZERO.


I understand this is how it is.  Fine.

My question is how much of this was gross overkill in your opinion
having gone through it?  Just because something is done a certain way
does not mean it must continue being done that way.  Especially on
non-NASA systems from non-NASA sites.

I suggest you use this experience to isolate those procedures that
were justified and those that were not just in case a better space
program comes along.  Given the number of people trying to start one
I personally find the chance of one or more of them succeeding in the
next 5 years to be above average.

Jerry


--
Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
Opinion, the whole thing.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 29387 invoked from network); 22 Aug 2001 14:18:46 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 22 Aug 2001 14:18:46 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 29814 invoked by uid 50005); 22 Aug 2001 14:18:10 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (. Clean. Processed in 0.156364 secs); 22 Aug 2001 14:18:10 -0000
X-Qmail-Scanner-Mail-From: owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU via smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net
X-Qmail-Scanner-Rcpt-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
X-Qmail-Scanner: 0.96 (No viruses found. Processed in 0.156364 secs)
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 22 Aug 2001 14:18:09 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA21951; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 07:16:08 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 94417 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 14:16:07          +0000
Received: from spsystems.net (spsystems.net [209.47.149.227]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA21937 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Wed,          22 Aug 2001 07:16:06 -0700
Received: (from henry@localhost) by spsystems.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id KAA06933;          Wed, 22 Aug 2001 10:15:34 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010822101501.3865K-100000@spsystems.net>
Date:         Wed, 22 Aug 2001 10:15:34 -0400
Reply-To: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] [EE]: Building a Satellite / Fw: [amsat-bb] Re: Simplesat              details
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <a05100322b7a96c58c060@[63.27.96.224]>

On Wed, 22 Aug 2001, Jerry Irvine wrote:
> My question is how much of this was gross overkill in your opinion
> having gone through it?

Note that Russell is quoting Bob Oler's description -- he didn't go
through it himself.

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 26983 invoked from network); 22 Aug 2001 16:14:37 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 22 Aug 2001 16:14:37 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 22707 invoked by uid 50005); 22 Aug 2001 16:14:33 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.136329 secs); 22 Aug 2001 16:14:33 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 22 Aug 2001 16:14:32 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA22324; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 09:08:51 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 94454 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 16:08:37          +0000
Received: from mail.aros.net (mail.aros.net [207.173.16.20]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA22309 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Wed,          22 Aug 2001 09:08:36 -0700
Received: from biomicro.com ([208.187.122.40]) by mail.aros.net (8.11.3/8.9.3)          with ESMTP id f7MG8ZV06810 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Wed, 22 Aug          2001 10:08:35 -0600 (MDT)
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.77 [en] (Win98; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <008801c12afe$5db3aa80$0100a8c0@mkbs>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B83D977.C46C169F@biomicro.com>
Date:         Wed, 22 Aug 2001 10:10:31 -0600
Reply-To: "Mark K. Spute" <mks@BIOMICRO.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Mark K. Spute" <mks@BIOMICRO.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] [EE]: Building a Satellite / Fw: [amsat-bb] Re:              Simplesatdetails
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

I can personally attest from my experiences as systems integrator for a
get away special package, that this is completely true.  It took more
than ten years, thousands of man hours, hundreds of thousands of dollars
(above and beyond the cost of the telescope itself) and it still didn't
fly.

My favorite quotation from NASA during this time was ocassioned by the
rejection of our 300 page Safety Data Package that we sent to Johnson
Space Center.  When it came back, our engineers asked the NASA
functionary in charge what exactly it was that they wanted.  His reply?
"We don't know, but that isn't it."

This was pretty representative of our experience with almost everyone we
talked to at NASA.  I realize there are a lot of very bright, highly
competent people who work for NASA.  I've personally known several
really good scientist and engineers who have gone there to work. (And
several who left in disgust after a few years there.)  I just wish I
could have spoken to them, as my experience with NASA was that virtually
everyone we spoke with down there was a clueless wunx.

We had at least 3 major redesigns of our entire payload to make NASA
happy, only it didn't make them happy.  We provided tens of thousands of
pages of documentation.  (We eventually went to the English department
of the sponsoring university to get 30 (!) technical writers on the team
so that the engineers, and physicists could get back to engineering and
physics and stop filling out paperwork.)  It was not a happy
experience.

As far as Hughes, TRW and the other satellite mfr's go, they have
hundreds of people on staff that do nothing but satiate NASA's appetite
for paperwork.  It's all amortized into the cost of the sat.

Certainly NASA has a responsibility to keep their astronauts safe and
protect lives and property.  But so does any commercial airline.  NASA's
charter, however isn't to provide on demand launch services for any and
all comers.

My obsrvation is that if it takes more paperwork to put something on
NASA's "space truck" than it does on a 727, that something is seriously
wrong with either the system or the space truck.  I think there is
plenty of room for the amateur/experimental community to look at
launching amateur/experimental satellites.  Now if we can just get OCST
to agree.


Russell McMahon wrote:
>
> What it takes to build a "real" amateur satellite and have it accepted as a
> NASA payload.

--
Mark K. Spute
Senior Research Engineer
BioMicro Systems Inc.

KD7IWE,  RRS

"It is difficult to say what is impossible, for the dream of yesterday
is the hope of today and the reality of tomorrow."
     Dr. Robert H. Goddard

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 25526 invoked from network); 22 Aug 2001 17:08:24 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 22 Aug 2001 17:08:24 -0000
Received: (qmail 20365 invoked by uid 50005); 22 Aug 2001 17:07:47 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (. Clean. Processed in 0.226871 secs); 22 Aug 2001 17:07:47 -0000
X-Qmail-Scanner-Mail-From: owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU via smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net
X-Qmail-Scanner-Rcpt-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
X-Qmail-Scanner: 0.96 (No viruses found. Processed in 0.226871 secs)
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 22 Aug 2001 17:07:47 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA22549; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 10:04:21 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 94469 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 17:04:19          +0000
Received: from pimout2-int.prodigy.net (pimout2-ext.prodigy.net          [207.115.63.101]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA22535          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 10:04:18 -0700
Received: from k2 (A010-0093.DLL2.splitrock.net [209.254.212.93]) by          pimout2-int.prodigy.net (8.11.0/8.11.0) with SMTP id f7MH4G3127782          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 13:04:17 -0400
References: <008801c12afe$5db3aa80$0100a8c0@mkbs>             <3B83D977.C46C169F@biomicro.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.3018.1300
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <001501c12b2b$b56381b0$5dd4fed1@k2>
Date:         Wed, 22 Aug 2001 11:58:44 -0500
Reply-To: "Ken" <HAWARDEN@PRODIGY.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Ken" <HAWARDEN@PRODIGY.NET>
Organization: Prodigy Internet
Subject:      Re: [AR] [EE]: Building a Satellite
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

I say pack it in a basketball...that way if it gets loose in the payload bay
it'll bounce! LOL!

Remember NASA is a government sponsored entity...therefore it will operate
like the government. Anyone for a $1,500 hammer?

Ken Howerton

> My favorite quotation from NASA during this time was ocassioned by the
> rejection of our 300 page Safety Data Package that we sent to Johnson
> Space Center.  When it came back, our engineers asked the NASA
> functionary in charge what exactly it was that they wanted.  His reply?
> "We don't know, but that isn't it."

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 13047 invoked from network); 22 Aug 2001 17:12:19 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 22 Aug 2001 17:12:19 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 24838 invoked by uid 50005); 22 Aug 2001 17:11:42 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (. Clean. Processed in 0.119957 secs); 22 Aug 2001 17:11:42 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
X-Qmail-Scanner-Mail-From: owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU via smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net
X-Qmail-Scanner-Rcpt-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
X-Qmail-Scanner: 0.96 (No viruses found. Processed in 0.119957 secs)
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 22 Aug 2001 17:11:42 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA22573; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 10:04:59 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 94476 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 17:04:58          +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (f101.law15.hotmail.com [64.4.23.101]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA22559 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 10:04:58 -0700
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Wed,          22 Aug 2001 10:04:27 -0700
Received: from 213.224.83.150 by lw15fd.law15.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Wed,          22 Aug 2001 17:04:27 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [213.224.83.150]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 22 Aug 2001 17:04:27.0867 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[8091AAB0:01C12B2C]
Message-ID:  <F101vyo3DjFbUcOV1Ee000065f8@hotmail.com>
Date:         Wed, 22 Aug 2001 17:04:58 +0000
Reply-To: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] short static test video
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

About JC's monoprop clip:

Any idea why the startup exhaust plume contains water condensate (or
undecomposed HP)? Is it the time interval required for the cat pack to heat
up after which decomposition in it becomes complete?

jd

>From: John Carmack <johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM>
>Reply-To: John Carmack <johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM>
>To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
>Subject: [AR] short static test video
>Date: Wed, 22 Aug 2001 01:58:54 -0500
>
>We have been using our little test stand for nearly a year now, graduating
>from 15 pounds motors to 80 pound motors.  We just did a really quick
>firing of our new 700 pound thrust motor, and got a little surprise...
>
>http://media.armadilloaerospace.com/LiftingTestStand.mpg
>
>Unfortunately, I found out that our new data collection hardware was
>clamping at half scale, so I didn't get a peak thrust reading.
>
>John Carmack


_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 7312 invoked from network); 22 Aug 2001 18:26:12 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 22 Aug 2001 18:26:12 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 6024 invoked by uid 50005); 22 Aug 2001 18:24:19 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smpte.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 1.669843 secs); 22 Aug 2001 18:24:19 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 22 Aug 2001 18:24:16 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA22907; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 11:19:51 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 94492 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 18:19:38          +0000
Received: from mail.conpute.com ([207.164.87.145]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7)          with ESMTP id LAA22891 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 22 Aug 2001          11:19:37 -0700
Received: by MAIL with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) id <RJ1TMYYC>; Wed,          22 Aug 2001 14:15:45 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19)
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Message-ID:  <814DCE01F6D7D311994D204C4F4F50201889C7@MAIL>
Date:         Wed, 22 Aug 2001 14:15:41 -0400
Reply-To: "Earl Pottinger" <earlcp@CONPUTE.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Earl Pottinger" <earlcp@CONPUTE.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Pistonless Piston Pumps
Comments: To: Anthony Colette <Rockitman@SPRINTMAIL.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

I don't understand what you are saying here, but then I am a computer tech
not an engineer, could you explain the following?

If you have a PUMP => CHECK VALVE 1 => ACCUMULATOR => CHECK VALVE 2 =>
INJECTOR.

Why does the presence of check valve 2 make the accumulator not an
accumulator.  It will still store fluid from the pump if
the pump pushes fluid faster than it wants to leave the injector (IE during
the pump stoke) and will supply fluid to the injector went the pump pressure
drops (IE fill stoke).   ??????

What is a compliant injector?  I was suggesting a number of different sized
accumulators so that there is no single strong  resonating frequency that
the engine would ring at.

          Earl Colby Pottinger

-----Original Message-----
From: Anthony Colette [mailto:Rockitman@SPRINTMAIL.COM]
Sent: Tuesday, August 21, 2001 9:45 AM
To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
Subject: Re: [AR] Pistonless Piston Pumps


> Would check valves or fluid diodes between the accumulator and the
injector
> not help break the oscillations?

If you had either of these it would no longer be an accumulator.

> Or what about 2 or 3 very small
> accumulator
> of diffirent sizes?

They would only make your injector compliant and compliance is what you
don't
want in an injector.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 1860 invoked from network); 22 Aug 2001 23:20:30 -0000
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 22 Aug 2001 23:20:30 -0000
Received: (qmail 2222 invoked by uid 50005); 22 Aug 2001 23:19:10 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smptf.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 1.139918 secs); 22 Aug 2001 23:19:10 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 22 Aug 2001 23:19:08 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA24314; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 16:11:49 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 94675 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 23:11:15          +0000
Received: from mta05.mail.mel.aone.net.au (mta05.mail.au.uu.net [203.2.192.85])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA24295 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 16:11:14 -0700
Received: from unknown ([63.60.220.57]) by mta05.mail.mel.aone.net.au with SMTP          id <20010822231110.FBOJ19580.mta05.mail.mel.aone.net.au@unknown> for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 09:11:10 +1000
References: Conversation <008801c12afe$5db3aa80$0100a8c0@mkbs> with last            message <20010822082932.A24546@bailey.dscga.com>
Priority: Normal
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Priority: 3
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	X-MAPIextension=.TXT;
	charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>
Date:         Wed, 22 Aug 2001 23:11:15 +0000
Reply-To: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] [EE]: Building a Satellite / Fw: [amsat-bb] Re: Simplesat              details
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <20010822082932.A24546@bailey.dscga.com>

----------
> (First time posting to the list so flames can be sent to me personally ;-)
>
> On Wed, Aug 22, 2001 at 07:58:03PM +1200, Russell McMahon wrote:
> > What it takes to build a "real" amateur satellite and have it accepted
as a
> > NASA payload.
>
> $1500 (plus labor) compared to $250,000. Can _we_ do better? I can think
> of several ways to mitigate some of those costs. Sure, I'm not a
> professional rocket scientists so I'm sure I'm off on some of it. But
> I am pretty involved in business practices and I'm sure some of this
> can be cut out. How much of it was NASA being overly cautious because
> of the source of the satellite (i.e. they trust Hughs to not screw up
> but they sure don't trust 'amatuers')?

I feel you're correct, it does seem quite excessive but I suppose the
question is, "why did NASA allow an amateur payload atop one of their
vehicles"? Sending a payload into orbit requires a %$#& load of money as we
all know. More money generally means more accountability = more red tape &
restricting systems when it's Uncle Sam's (yeah?). My bet is it was to
educate the fine people involved the principles required to build space
craft ie. the QA involved, the attention to detail, the spotless
environment required etc. Sure they have the electronics & technical
expertise but do they know what's involved with building spacecraft?  In
the late 50's - early to mid 60's JPL learned its lesson the hard way with
the Ranger program. The failures of this program were a direct consequence
of the attention payed to above mentioned philosophies.
 So I suppose their (NASA) point is why just send another satellite up into
orbit for the sake of satisfying a small group of amateurs ambitions and
curiosities if it teaches them the wrong way of how to go about it?


>
> I've heard a few people suggest that the 'goal' of many people here
> is _not_ to launch satellites. Well, why not? I've seen what
> open source style design and development do to software development
> costs. Can we apply those same principles here and come up with
> something that does a better job than NASA for satellites of this
> class? NASA can't do 'faster, better, cheaper' but it seems that's
> exactly what we all do every day.

Wanna build cheaper satellites? Answer: build cheaper vehicles to get them
there.

Troy.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 15232 invoked from network); 22 Aug 2001 23:31:05 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 22 Aug 2001 23:31:05 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 11537 invoked by uid 50005); 22 Aug 2001 23:30:25 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (. Clean. Processed in 0.321057 secs); 22 Aug 2001 23:30:25 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
X-Qmail-Scanner-Mail-From: owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU via smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net
X-Qmail-Scanner-Rcpt-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
X-Qmail-Scanner: 0.96 (No viruses found. Processed in 0.321057 secs)
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 22 Aug 2001 23:30:25 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA24368; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 16:27:02 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 94685 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 23:27:00          +0000
Received: from bailey.dscga.com (bailey.dscga.com [198.78.9.11]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA24354 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed,          22 Aug 2001 16:26:58 -0700
Received: (from michael@localhost) by bailey.dscga.com (8.9.1/) id TAA26724;          Wed, 22 Aug 2001 19:22:58 -0400 (EDT)
References: <008801c12afe$5db3aa80$0100a8c0@mkbs>            <20010822082932.A24546@bailey.dscga.com>            <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
User-Agent: Mutt/1.1.2i
Message-ID:  <20010822192258.B24546@bailey.dscga.com>
Date:         Wed, 22 Aug 2001 19:22:58 -0400
Reply-To: "Michael Mealling" <michael@NEONYM.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Michael Mealling" <michael@NEONYM.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] [EE]: Building a Satellite / Fw: [amsat-bb] Re: Simplesat              details
Comments: To: Troy Prideaux <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>;              from GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU on Wed, Aug 22,              2001 at 11:11:15PM +0000

On Wed, Aug 22, 2001 at 11:11:15PM +0000, Troy Prideaux wrote:
> I feel you're correct, it does seem quite excessive but I suppose the
> question is, "why did NASA allow an amateur payload atop one of their
> vehicles"? Sending a payload into orbit requires a %$#& load of money as we
> all know. More money generally means more accountability = more red tape &
> restricting systems when it's Uncle Sam's (yeah?). My bet is it was to
> educate the fine people involved the principles required to build space
> craft ie. the QA involved, the attention to detail, the spotless
> environment required etc. Sure they have the electronics & technical
> expertise but do they know what's involved with building spacecraft?  In
> the late 50's - early to mid 60's JPL learned its lesson the hard way with
> the Ranger program. The failures of this program were a direct consequence
> of the attention payed to above mentioned philosophies.
>  So I suppose their (NASA) point is why just send another satellite up into
> orbit for the sake of satisfying a small group of amateurs ambitions and
> curiosities if it teaches them the wrong way of how to go about it?

Sure. I'm not suggesting we forego good engineering practices and
documentation. I am suggesting we get rid of the stuff that isn't.
Why not apply engineering trade off principles to the engineering
process itself. For any given bit of 'overhead' what is its risk
analysis if that bit of overhead is removed.

> > I've heard a few people suggest that the 'goal' of many people here
> > is _not_ to launch satellites. Well, why not? I've seen what
> > open source style design and development do to software development
> > costs. Can we apply those same principles here and come up with
> > something that does a better job than NASA for satellites of this
> > class? NASA can't do 'faster, better, cheaper' but it seems that's
> > exactly what we all do every day.
>
> Wanna build cheaper satellites? Answer: build cheaper vehicles to get them
> there.

That's my point. If we build our own using our collective
cost cutting and mass production [sic] techniques we could create
a small scale launch system that would allow the amatuer satellite
guys a way of getting out from under NASA's overhead...

And before you say it: I know its hard. So is building an industrial
grade operating system from the ground up. But 10 years ago a bunch of
volunteers/nut cases started working on it and now its the the fastest
growing server OS in the market....

-MM

--
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Michael Mealling        |      Vote Libertarian!       | urn:pin:1
michael@neonym.net      |                              | http://www.neonym.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 27466 invoked from network); 23 Aug 2001 00:24:51 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 23 Aug 2001 00:24:51 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 2203 invoked by uid 50005); 23 Aug 2001 00:24:46 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.32261 secs); 23 Aug 2001 00:24:46 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 23 Aug 2001 00:24:46 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA24625; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 17:21:06 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 94727 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 00:20:54          +0000
Received: from smtp007.mailsrvcs.net (smtp007pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.186])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA24611 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 17:20:54 -0700
Received: from [63.27.96.224] (1Cust71.tnt3.san-bernardino.ca.da.uu.net          [63.25.57.71]) by smtp007.mailsrvcs.net  with ESMTP for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; id f7N0KIW00459 Wed, 22 Aug 2001 19:20:19          -0500 (CDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: GTE/01rocket@mail.gte.net
References: Conversation <008801c12afe$5db3aa80$0100a8c0@mkbs> with last            message <20010822082932.A24546@bailey.dscga.com>            <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <a05100326b7a9fb9ee8d7@[63.27.96.224]>
Date:         Wed, 22 Aug 2001 17:20:22 -0700
Reply-To: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] [EE]: Building a Satellite / Fw: [amsat-bb] Re: Simplesat              details
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>

>Wanna build cheaper satellites? Answer: build cheaper vehicles to get them
>there.
>
>Troy.

The same over regulation that NASA imposes on payloads on its (the
people's) shuttle, it tries to impose on others space programs.  The
CATS prize is a perfect example.  A dozen or so teams built rockets
and zero flew to anywhere close to the required altitude exclusively
due to regulations and rules ADDED at the last minute to complicate
the event.

I personally think the government does not want people to send stuff
to space, even a cheater version of it suborbital, because they FEAR
the advance of technology by its citizens. I do not think I AM
overstating either.

Government; prove me wrong.  Let space rockets fly in remote sites
where there is ZERO possibility of damage.

Jerry

--
Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
Opinion, the whole thing.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 15265 invoked from network); 23 Aug 2001 01:19:20 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 23 Aug 2001 01:19:20 -0000
Received: (qmail 13776 invoked by uid 50005); 23 Aug 2001 01:19:13 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.907497 secs); 23 Aug 2001 01:19:13 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 23 Aug 2001 01:19:11 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA24870; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 18:10:54 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 94773 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 01:10:47          +0000
Received: from smtp-out.nrtc.net (host-216-163-120-25.nrtc.net [216.163.120.25]          (may be forged)) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA24856          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 18:10:47 -0700
Received: from foy (dial-12-21-155-154.wfeca.net [12.21.155.154]) by          smtp-out.nrtc.net (8.9.3/8.9.1) with SMTP id VAA15532 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 21:10:40 -0400
References:  <v01510103b7a71f2afea7@[63.169.102.33]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <005201c12b6f$96473da0$9a9b150c@foy>
Date:         Wed, 22 Aug 2001 20:04:38 -0500
Reply-To: "foy" <foy@WFECA.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "foy" <foy@WFECA.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] 1compression tests on solids
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

        You may want to try a spring rate tester like used for testing valve
springs for engines.
----- Original Message -----
From: "al bradley" <abradley@TOOLCITY.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Monday, August 20, 2001 3:46 PM
Subject: [AR] 1compression tests on solids


> Hi again Jimmy:
>
> I checked your web page detailing your experiment with compression on your
> "candy" propellant. I think it is a good start on detailed records for any
> of  our propellants.
>
> A few years back we had a brief but lively discussion on adapting bottle
> jacks (usually Chinese cheapies) to show relative force applied to a
> material. This came out of an idea by Ed Jones who had fitted a pressure
> gauge to a little-noticed screw-out plug that is located just below the
> hand-operated cylinder on the side of the jack. I never got around to
> building one yet but the idea stuck in my mind.
>
> The text below is reprinted so that you might decide if you (or any others
> on the list) wanted to modify it to detail your experiments.
>
> best regards,
> al bradley
>
> -------------------------------------------------------
> At 11:22 PM 1/19/99 EST, you wrote:
> >Ed,
> >If you do not take the jack apart, how do you know what the diameter of
> >the piston (or rather bore) is ? I am presuming you are using this for
> >force measurement.
>
> >Richard
>
>
>
> Well, that's a good point. I have never found a need to press to a
specific
> pressure only once so my goal was to be able to press to the exact
pressure
> that I find that works for my needs and consistently duplicate what works
> best.
>
> I used the same logic as you and found that it's more of a hassle and more
> stress on the jack trying to rip one apart, plus, you always have to
factor
> in the resistance of the return springs at different lengths + the weight
> of the bed that your work is on. Too many variables to calculate for
> different size projects. For me, it wasn't worth the hassle. I can
> accurately duplicate the same pressure between the 12 and the 6 ton press
> even though the gauges read different pressure between the two. I did this
> by putting the 6 ton jack in the 12 ton press and pumped the 6 ton jack
> then recorded the readings between the two for any given pressure. I can
> exactly duplicate the pressure for any given project on either press.
>
> I guess what I'm trying to say is that you will probably never get a gauge
> to read the exact pressure that is being applied to the work area. You
must
> take the jack apart and measure then do the math. And after you go through
> all that you will get sick of calculating for every project, I know I
> would.
>
> Also you will notice that the internal pressure is lower on the larger
jack
> to produce the same working force. The gauge on the 12 ton reads almost
> half as much internal as the 6 ton for the same given force. Either way
you
> will be more than pleased when you have a gauge on the jack, it beats the
> hell out of the torque wrench.
>
>
> ----------------------------
> >>If you do not take the jack apart, how do you know what the diameter of
> >>the piston (or rather bore) is ? I am presuming you are using this for
> >>force measurement.
>
> >I guess what I'm trying to say is that you will probably never get a
gauge
> >to read the exact pressure that is being applied to the work area. You
> >must take the jack apart and measure then do the math. And after you go
> >through all that you will get sick of calculating for every project, I
> >know I would.
> ------------------------------
> Come on, guys....
>
> Stop thinking in terms of "Force = Pressure * Area" and start thinking in
> terms of "Area = Force / Pressure". Apply a known force and you can back
> out the area. But why bother with that? Apply several known forces and
just
> calibrate the system!
>
> Oh, and as an aside, I'd use a 2-ton jack over any of the larger jacks
(Are
> any of use making motors with 4000+ lbs thrust?). It should give a more
> accurate answer as it would produce larger pressure fluctuations (Yes, I
> know the original system discussed was for a slightly different
> application.).
>
> -------------------------------
> David Hall
>
> >Come on, guys....
>
> >Stop thinking in terms of "Force = Pressure * Area" and start thinking in
> >terms of "Area = Force / Pressure". Apply a known force and you can back
> >out the area. But why bother with that? Apply several known forces and
> >just calibrate the system!
>
>
> This is a great idea. I'm glad you pointed it out.
>
> >Oh, and as an aside, I'd use a 2-ton jack over any of the larger jacks
> >(Are any of use making motors with 4000+ lbs thrust?). It should give a
> >more accurate answer as it would produce larger pressure fluctuations
> >(Yes, I know the original system discussed was for a slightly different
> >application.).
>
>
> Agreed that the small 2 ton jack is the way to go for rockets, but I use
> both my bearing press for doing other mechanical jobs on a regular basis,
> the rocket application is just a great side benefit. Kind of neat to kill
> two birds with one rocket.
> ------------------------------------
> David, you wrote:
>
> "Stop thinking in terms of "Force = Pressure * Area" and start thinking in
> terms of "Area = Force / Pressure". Apply a known force and you can back
> out the area. But why bother with that? Apply several known forces and
just
> calibrate the system!"
>
> Good suggestion. Certainly an alternative to pulling the thing apart.
Richard
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------
> Can you live Life with this?: "Unless there is a law, an agreement, or a
> long-standing custom, No one `Deserves' Anything -- Either Good or Bad!"
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 21907 invoked from network); 23 Aug 2001 01:20:53 -0000
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 23 Aug 2001 01:20:53 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 7762 invoked by uid 50005); 23 Aug 2001 01:17:52 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smptf.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 2.460318 secs); 23 Aug 2001 01:17:53 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 23 Aug 2001 01:17:48 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA24908; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 18:15:23 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 94768 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 01:15:22          +0000
Received: from robin.mail.pas.earthlink.net (robin.mail.pas.earthlink.net          [207.217.120.65]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA24829          for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 18:05:22 -0700
Received: from earthlink.net (dialup-209.244.107.84.Dial1.SanJose1.Level3.net          [209.244.107.84]) by robin.mail.pas.earthlink.net (8.11.5/8.9.3) with          ESMTP id f7N15Ld10480; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 18:05:21 -0700 (PDT)
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.75 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.16-22 i686)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: Conversation <008801c12afe$5db3aa80$0100a8c0@mkbs> with last            message <20010822082932.A24546@bailey.dscga.com>            <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>            <a05100326b7a9fb9ee8d7@[63.27.96.224]>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B84570B.B171B082@earthlink.net>
Date:         Wed, 22 Aug 2001 18:06:19 -0700
Reply-To: "David Weinshenker" <daze39@EARTHLINK.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "David Weinshenker" <daze39@EARTHLINK.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] [EE]: Building a Satellite / Fw: [amsat-bb] Re:              Simplesatdetails
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Jerry Irvine wrote:
> The same over regulation that NASA imposes on payloads on its (the
> people's) shuttle, it tries to impose on others space programs.
> ...
> I personally think the government does not want people to send stuff
> to space, even a cheater version of it suborbital, because they FEAR
> the advance of technology by its citizens. I do not think I AM
> overstating either.

William S. Burroughs used to say that "Earth is a prison planet - no one
is supposeded to escape." Has NASA appointed itself gate-keeper??

-dave w

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 18793 invoked from network); 23 Aug 2001 02:02:36 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 23 Aug 2001 02:02:36 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 16504 invoked by uid 50005); 23 Aug 2001 02:02:30 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 1.037151 secs); 23 Aug 2001 02:02:30 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 23 Aug 2001 02:02:28 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA25153; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 18:58:43 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 94831 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 01:58:39          +0000
Received: from sys27.hou.wt.net (sys27.hou.wt.net [205.230.159.27]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA25139 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 18:58:39 -0700
Received: from localhost (216-119-138-147.ipset18.wt.net [216.119.138.147]) by          sys27.hou.wt.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id UAA34695; Wed, 22 Aug          2001 20:58:31 -0500 (CDT)
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.388)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <200108230158.UAA34695@sys27.hou.wt.net>
Date:         Wed, 22 Aug 2001 20:59:03 -0500
Reply-To: "Donald McCorvey" <dlm3@NETAXS.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Donald McCorvey" <dlm3@NETAXS.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] [EE]: Building a Satellite / Fw: [amsat-bb] Re:              Simplesatdetails
Comments: To: David Weinshenker <daze39@EARTHLINK.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <3B84570B.B171B082@earthlink.net>

Anybody remember the conniption fit NASA had when a mere civilian bought
his way into orbit ?

Direct evidence of Jerry's point, I'd say.

Don McCorvey

On Wednesday, August 22, 2001, at 08:06 PM, David Weinshenker wrote:

> Jerry Irvine wrote:
>> The same over regulation that NASA imposes on payloads on its (the
>> people's) shuttle, it tries to impose on others space programs.
>> ...
>> I personally think the government does not want people to send stuff
>> to space, even a cheater version of it suborbital, because they FEAR
>> the advance of technology by its citizens. I do not think I AM
>> overstating either.
>
> William S. Burroughs used to say that "Earth is a prison planet - no one
> is supposeded to escape." Has NASA appointed itself gate-keeper??
>
> -dave w
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 27298 invoked from network); 23 Aug 2001 02:56:52 -0000
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 23 Aug 2001 02:56:52 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 26976 invoked by uid 50005); 23 Aug 2001 02:54:58 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smpte.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.156045 secs); 23 Aug 2001 02:54:58 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 23 Aug 2001 02:54:57 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA25302; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 19:41:41 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 94847 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 02:41:38          +0000
Received: from grucom2.gru.net (grucom2.gru.net [209.251.129.7]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA25287 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed,          22 Aug 2001 19:41:38 -0700
Received: from [198.190.223.99] by grucom2.sfcc.net (NTMail          6.04.0010/NU4112.00.db1c8a4b) with ESMTP id zfzyhaaa for          AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 22:41:36 -0400
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (Win95; I)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <000501c12ab5$ab1d0ee0$0200a8c0@prestige.net>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B846DC6.A88AAA9D@sfcc.net>
Date:         Wed, 22 Aug 2001 22:43:18 -0400
Reply-To: "James Yawn" <jyawn@SFCC.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "James Yawn" <jyawn@SFCC.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Continued Candy tests
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Jeff:  This is more good news.  We have both Office Max and Office Deep-Hole here
too.  I can handle serial-port output OK.  I looked at the Omega site awhile back,
and it blew my mind.  I will look again and may start asking the List questions
about these devices.

BTW, I did another "test" with the same candy sample I tortured over the last few
days.  The latest results are at:

http://members.fortunecity.com/jyawn/compression/tests8-20.htm#more8/22

Briefly, the sample of recrystallized KN/sucrose held a static compression load of
508 pounds for a full minute.  It deformed a bit, but did not break.  I will
continue testing, perhaps with different samples to make sure this one is not a
freak.

Thanks for your suggestion!

Jimmy Yawn

Jeff Grady wrote:

> Jimmy,
>
>         We have Office Max and Office Depot stores around here (Atlanta), and I
> remember seeing a digital scale that displays grams/pounds AND has a serial
> port on it. I believe it will handle 50 or 75 lbs. Was around 99.99. A
> little pricey, but using the serial port along w/video capture and you get
> the makings of a real test/research rig. I plan to build a test stand (for
> firing DOWN) and intend to capture not only digital video and thrust, but
> pressure as well (and maybe even temp)...Omega (http://www.omega.com/) is an
> excellent source for all kinds of neat (expensive) measuring "chit". Lots of
> pressure/temp/stress/strain measuring apparatus there.
>
> Jeff
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@itc.uci.edu]On
> Behalf Of James Yawn
> Sent: Tuesday, August 21, 2001 10:09 PM
> To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
> Subject: Re: [AR] Continued Candy tests
>
> Excellent suggestion - back to K-mart with the checkbook!  Or is this the
> kind of thing I might have to go to a baby-specialty store?  Whatever, I
> will
> find one.
>
> Upon purchasing my el-cheapo yesterday ($25) I realized that it is already a
> digital pressure sensor, and wondered how one might route its output  to a
> computer.  I am not a hardware geek, but could develop the software...
>
> Thanks for a great idea.
>
> Jimmy Yawn
>
> p.s.  And thanks for your participation in this list.  After the rough
> start,
> I have found your input to be most interesting and stimulating.
>
> Jerry Irvine wrote:
>
> > >James Yawn posted in a fit of uncontrolled technology:
> >
> > >I continued my comedy-act compression testing today with the purchase of
> > >a sophisticated electronic measuring device, a bathroom scale.
> >
> > >
> > >I encourage comments, criticisms, or warm fuzzies on this topic.
> >
> > You know what makes a fairly good crude first order test stand? A
> > baby scale.  It can measure force in the range of 5-50 pounds which
> > is in the range of typical test motors.  By measuring peak thrust and
> > recording it with a video camera or good eyes, one can back out
> > pressure.
> >
> > Sometimes the very best technology is low technology.  Baby scales
> > are hard to break, easy to replace and widely available.
> >
> > Jerry
> >
> > --
> > Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
> > Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
> > Opinion, the whole thing.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 2088 invoked from network); 23 Aug 2001 03:23:09 -0000
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 23 Aug 2001 03:23:09 -0000
Received: (qmail 4443 invoked by uid 50005); 23 Aug 2001 03:21:48 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smptf.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.206196 secs); 23 Aug 2001 03:21:48 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 23 Aug 2001 03:21:48 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA25380; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 20:06:34 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 94854 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 03:06:26          +0000
Received: from mta04.mail.mel.aone.net.au (mta04.mail.au.uu.net [203.2.192.84])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA25366 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 20:06:25 -0700
Received: from unknown ([63.60.247.36]) by mta04.mail.mel.aone.net.au with SMTP          id <20010823030621.VEXK3778.mta04.mail.mel.aone.net.au@unknown> for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 13:06:21 +1000
References: Conversation <008801c12afe$5db3aa80$0100a8c0@mkbs> with last            message <20010822192258.B24546@bailey.dscga.com>
Priority: Normal
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Priority: 3
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	X-MAPIextension=.TXT;
	charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>
Date:         Thu, 23 Aug 2001 03:06:26 +0000
Reply-To: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] [EE]: Building a Satellite / Fw: [amsat-bb] Re: Simplesat              details
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <20010822192258.B24546@bailey.dscga.com>

----------
> On Wed, Aug 22, 2001 at 11:11:15PM +0000, Troy Prideaux wrote:
> > I feel you're correct, it does seem quite excessive but I suppose the
> > question is, "why did NASA allow an amateur payload atop one of their
> > vehicles"? Sending a payload into orbit requires a %$#& load of money
as we
> > all know. More money generally means more accountability = more red
tape &
> > restricting systems when it's Uncle Sam's (yeah?). My bet is it was to
> > educate the fine people involved the principles required to build space
> > craft ie. the QA involved, the attention to detail, the spotless
> > environment required etc. Sure they have the electronics & technical
> > expertise but do they know what's involved with building spacecraft?  In
> > the late 50's - early to mid 60's JPL learned its lesson the hard way
with
> > the Ranger program. The failures of this program were a direct
consequence
> > of the attention payed to above mentioned philosophies.
> >  So I suppose their (NASA) point is why just send another satellite up
into
> > orbit for the sake of satisfying a small group of amateurs ambitions and
> > curiosities if it teaches them the wrong way of how to go about it?
>
> Sure. I'm not suggesting we forego good engineering practices and
> documentation. I am suggesting we get rid of the stuff that isn't.
> Why not apply engineering trade off principles to the engineering
> process itself. For any given bit of 'overhead' what is its risk
> analysis if that bit of overhead is removed.

What do you relate that "risk analysis" to though - an amateur satellite or
a multi hundred million dollar satellite? Thing is, how did that group
score the ticket? Did they just approach NASA and ask "we would like to
build a satellite, can you please stow it aboard one of ya birds"?.  If
they did, I'm sure the (my ass is on the line here) execs at NASA would be
asking a multitute of questions like why? How can we justify this? etc...
 Also don't forget how bumpy the ride generally is, take the Shuttle for
example: to quote Kathryn C. Thornton, US astronaut, a veteran of 4 shuttle
flights "Imagine lying on your back in a truck driving along the railroad
tracks with a bowling ball on your chest. Liftoff in the space shuttle
feels like that".
However, I agree with what you've said and I'm not trying to justify NASA's
approach, just each story has 2 sides and I like to always find both.

>
> > > I've heard a few people suggest that the 'goal' of many people here
> > > is _not_ to launch satellites. Well, why not? I've seen what
> > > open source style design and development do to software development
> > > costs. Can we apply those same principles here and come up with
> > > something that does a better job than NASA for satellites of this
> > > class? NASA can't do 'faster, better, cheaper' but it seems that's
> > > exactly what we all do every day.
> >
> > Wanna build cheaper satellites? Answer: build cheaper vehicles to get
them
> > there.
>
> That's my point. If we build our own using our collective
> cost cutting and mass production [sic] techniques we could create
> a small scale launch system that would allow the amatuer satellite
> guys a way of getting out from under NASA's overhead...
>
> And before you say it: I know its hard. So is building an industrial
> grade operating system from the ground up. But 10 years ago a bunch of
> volunteers/nut cases started working on it and now its the the fastest
> growing server OS in the market....

It's not hard, unfortunately it's next to impossible with conventional**
propulsion technology and non government assistance <sigh>

**conventional meaning anything you'll find in Sutton for example.

Troy.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 12358 invoked from network); 23 Aug 2001 03:35:09 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 23 Aug 2001 03:35:09 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 14131 invoked by uid 50005); 23 Aug 2001 03:35:03 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.453449 secs); 23 Aug 2001 03:35:03 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 23 Aug 2001 03:35:02 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA25490; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 20:21:38 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 94879 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 03:21:32          +0000
Received: from smtp005.mailsrvcs.net (smtp005pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.184])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA25476 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 20:21:32 -0700
Received: from [63.27.96.224] (1Cust71.tnt3.san-bernardino.ca.da.uu.net          [63.25.57.71]) by smtp005.mailsrvcs.net  with ESMTP for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; id f7N3L0725085 Wed, 22 Aug 2001 22:21:00          -0500 (CDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: GTE/01rocket@mail.gte.net
References: Conversation <008801c12afe$5db3aa80$0100a8c0@mkbs> with last            message <20010822192258.B24546@bailey.dscga.com>            <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <a0510032ab7aa260ae068@[63.27.96.224]>
Date:         Wed, 22 Aug 2001 20:21:01 -0700
Reply-To: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] [EE]: Building a Satellite / Fw: [amsat-bb] Re: Simplesat              details
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>

>----------
>  > On Wed, Aug 22, 2001 at 11:11:15PM +0000, Troy Prideaux wrote:



>  > Why not apply engineering trade off principles to the engineering
>>  process itself. For any given bit of 'overhead' what is its risk
>>  analysis if that bit of overhead is removed.


This is a practical suggestion as the criteria for safety is well
established and involves statistics.


>
>What do you relate that "risk analysis" to though - an amateur satellite or
>a multi hundred million dollar satellite?


It all is the same to NASA and OCST so it should be with us (by default).



>  > And before you say it: I know its hard. So is building an industrial
>>  grade operating system from the ground up. But 10 years ago a bunch of
>>  volunteers/nut cases started working on it and now its the the fastest
>>  growing server OS in the market....


That analogy holds.


>
>It's not hard, unfortunately it's next to impossible with conventional**
>propulsion technology and non government assistance <sigh>


The technology has been in the nahds of amateurs for over 10 years.
Why else would it be necessary to dramatically INCREASE the
regulations for something that has never been done yet?

Jerry

"Sometimes where there smoke there's a smoking gun."

>
>**conventional meaning anything you'll find in Sutton for example.
>
>Troy.


--
Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
Opinion, the whole thing.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 5076 invoked from network); 23 Aug 2001 03:42:08 -0000
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 23 Aug 2001 03:42:08 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 28704 invoked by uid 50005); 23 Aug 2001 03:40:14 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smpte.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.186101 secs); 23 Aug 2001 03:40:14 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 23 Aug 2001 03:40:14 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA25574; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 20:37:57 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 94894 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 03:37:54          +0000
Received: from grucom2.gru.net (grucom2.gru.net [209.251.129.7]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA25560 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed,          22 Aug 2001 20:37:54 -0700
Received: from [209.251.150.177] by grucom2.sfcc.net (NTMail          6.04.0010/NU4112.00.db1c8a4b) with ESMTP id lqazhaaa for          AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 23:37:48 -0400
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (Win95; I)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <v01510103b7a71f2afea7@[63.169.102.33]>            <005201c12b6f$96473da0$9a9b150c@foy>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B847AF1.6964D4E5@sfcc.net>
Date:         Wed, 22 Aug 2001 23:39:29 -0400
Reply-To: "James Yawn" <jyawn@SFCC.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "James Yawn" <jyawn@SFCC.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] 1compression tests on solids
Comments: To: foy <foy@WFECA.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Interesting suggestion - my school has an automotive technology program that is
considered to be pretty good.  I will check and see if they have such a thing.
Hmm... they probably have an arbor press too - wonder if they would let me put
my candy sample on it?  I might have to take in the MSDS for KNO3  ;)

Jimmy Yawn

foy wrote:

>         You may want to try a spring rate tester like used for testing valve
> springs for engines.
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "al bradley" <abradley@TOOLCITY.NET>
> To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
> Sent: Monday, August 20, 2001 3:46 PM
> Subject: [AR] 1compression tests on solids
>
> > Hi again Jimmy:
> >
> > I checked your web page detailing your experiment with compression on your
> > "candy" propellant. I think it is a good start on detailed records for any
> > of  our propellants.
> >
> > A few years back we had a brief but lively discussion on adapting bottle
> > jacks (usually Chinese cheapies) to show relative force applied to a
> > material. This came out of an idea by Ed Jones who had fitted a pressure
> > gauge to a little-noticed screw-out plug that is located just below the
> > hand-operated cylinder on the side of the jack. I never got around to
> > building one yet but the idea stuck in my mind.
> >
> > The text below is reprinted so that you might decide if you (or any others
> > on the list) wanted to modify it to detail your experiments.
> >
> > best regards,
> > al bradley
> >
> > -------------------------------------------------------
> > At 11:22 PM 1/19/99 EST, you wrote:
> > >Ed,
> > >If you do not take the jack apart, how do you know what the diameter of
> > >the piston (or rather bore) is ? I am presuming you are using this for
> > >force measurement.
> >
> > >Richard
> >
> >
> >
> > Well, that's a good point. I have never found a need to press to a
> specific
> > pressure only once so my goal was to be able to press to the exact
> pressure
> > that I find that works for my needs and consistently duplicate what works
> > best.
> >
> > I used the same logic as you and found that it's more of a hassle and more
> > stress on the jack trying to rip one apart, plus, you always have to
> factor
> > in the resistance of the return springs at different lengths + the weight
> > of the bed that your work is on. Too many variables to calculate for
> > different size projects. For me, it wasn't worth the hassle. I can
> > accurately duplicate the same pressure between the 12 and the 6 ton press
> > even though the gauges read different pressure between the two. I did this
> > by putting the 6 ton jack in the 12 ton press and pumped the 6 ton jack
> > then recorded the readings between the two for any given pressure. I can
> > exactly duplicate the pressure for any given project on either press.
> >
> > I guess what I'm trying to say is that you will probably never get a gauge
> > to read the exact pressure that is being applied to the work area. You
> must
> > take the jack apart and measure then do the math. And after you go through
> > all that you will get sick of calculating for every project, I know I
> > would.
> >
> > Also you will notice that the internal pressure is lower on the larger
> jack
> > to produce the same working force. The gauge on the 12 ton reads almost
> > half as much internal as the 6 ton for the same given force. Either way
> you
> > will be more than pleased when you have a gauge on the jack, it beats the
> > hell out of the torque wrench.
> >
> >
> > ----------------------------
> > >>If you do not take the jack apart, how do you know what the diameter of
> > >>the piston (or rather bore) is ? I am presuming you are using this for
> > >>force measurement.
> >
> > >I guess what I'm trying to say is that you will probably never get a
> gauge
> > >to read the exact pressure that is being applied to the work area. You
> > >must take the jack apart and measure then do the math. And after you go
> > >through all that you will get sick of calculating for every project, I
> > >know I would.
> > ------------------------------
> > Come on, guys....
> >
> > Stop thinking in terms of "Force = Pressure * Area" and start thinking in
> > terms of "Area = Force / Pressure". Apply a known force and you can back
> > out the area. But why bother with that? Apply several known forces and
> just
> > calibrate the system!
> >
> > Oh, and as an aside, I'd use a 2-ton jack over any of the larger jacks
> (Are
> > any of use making motors with 4000+ lbs thrust?). It should give a more
> > accurate answer as it would produce larger pressure fluctuations (Yes, I
> > know the original system discussed was for a slightly different
> > application.).
> >
> > -------------------------------
> > David Hall
> >
> > >Come on, guys....
> >
> > >Stop thinking in terms of "Force = Pressure * Area" and start thinking in
> > >terms of "Area = Force / Pressure". Apply a known force and you can back
> > >out the area. But why bother with that? Apply several known forces and
> > >just calibrate the system!
> >
> >
> > This is a great idea. I'm glad you pointed it out.
> >
> > >Oh, and as an aside, I'd use a 2-ton jack over any of the larger jacks
> > >(Are any of use making motors with 4000+ lbs thrust?). It should give a
> > >more accurate answer as it would produce larger pressure fluctuations
> > >(Yes, I know the original system discussed was for a slightly different
> > >application.).
> >
> >
> > Agreed that the small 2 ton jack is the way to go for rockets, but I use
> > both my bearing press for doing other mechanical jobs on a regular basis,
> > the rocket application is just a great side benefit. Kind of neat to kill
> > two birds with one rocket.
> > ------------------------------------
> > David, you wrote:
> >
> > "Stop thinking in terms of "Force = Pressure * Area" and start thinking in
> > terms of "Area = Force / Pressure". Apply a known force and you can back
> > out the area. But why bother with that? Apply several known forces and
> just
> > calibrate the system!"
> >
> > Good suggestion. Certainly an alternative to pulling the thing apart.
> Richard
> >
> > ------------------------------------
> >
> > ------------------------------------------------------------------
> > Can you live Life with this?: "Unless there is a law, an agreement, or a
> > long-standing custom, No one `Deserves' Anything -- Either Good or Bad!"
> >

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 1473 invoked from network); 23 Aug 2001 04:01:09 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 23 Aug 2001 04:01:09 -0000
Received: (qmail 22729 invoked by uid 50005); 23 Aug 2001 04:00:30 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (. Clean. Processed in 0.232608 secs); 23 Aug 2001 04:00:30 -0000
X-Qmail-Scanner-Mail-From: owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU via smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net
X-Qmail-Scanner-Rcpt-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
X-Qmail-Scanner: 0.96 (No viruses found. Processed in 0.232608 secs)
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 23 Aug 2001 04:00:29 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA25619; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 20:48:26 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 94901 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 03:48:20          +0000
Received: from castor.ridgenet.net (IDENT:root@castor.ridgenet.net          [199.120.150.29]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA25605          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 20:48:20 -0700
Received: from kristinscomp (pm158.ridgenet.net [204.154.246.158]) by          castor.ridgenet.net (8.11.0/8.11.0) with SMTP id f7N3eLS11888; Wed,          22 Aug 2001 20:40:21 -0700
References: Conversation <008801c12afe$5db3aa80$0100a8c0@mkbs> with last                   message <20010822192258.B24546@bailey.dscga.com>                      <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>             <a0510032ab7aa260ae068@[63.27.96.224]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <001a01c12b87$a7317460$1b30fea9@kristinscomp>
Date:         Wed, 22 Aug 2001 20:56:55 -0700
Reply-To: "Kristin & David Hall" <thehalls@RIDGENET.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Kristin & David Hall" <thehalls@RIDGENET.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] [EE]: Building a Satellite / Fw: [amsat-bb] Re: Simplesat              details
Comments: To: Jerry Irvine <01rocket@GTE.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

> >  > And before you say it: I know its hard. So is building an industrial
> >>  grade operating system from the ground up. But 10 years ago a bunch of
> >>  volunteers/nut cases started working on it and now its the the fastest
> >>  growing server OS in the market....

> That analogy holds.

I totally disagree.  While the organization and "know how" aspects may be
very similar, the actual construction issues are 180 degrees opposite.

Want to have a couple of guys developing pieces to an OS?  No problem.  Give
'em each a decent computer and compiler and they're well equipped.  Price?
Less than $2k a piece and they probably already have the computers.  Want to
have a couple of guys build parts to a rocket?  They're each going to need
access to a machine shop....a much rarer situation and/or more expensive to
create.

Want to test those two components of the OS together?  No problem.  Email
the code, compile, and voila!  Similar test required for rocket?  Not
necessarily cheap or easy.

Got the kernal built and want to test it?  Again, just email the code and
compile.  Got the whole (orbital class!) engine built and want to test it?
Well, I know of know facilities capable of such tests in the amateur world.
Maybe the RRS's new vertical stand if you don't mind clustering, but....

Got the whole thing done and want to "drive it"?  Email/compile.  For a
launch vehicle?  Shoot, you saw what the CATS guys went through - just try
to imagine an orbital attempt.  To be blunt:  No Fucking Way.

No, I don't think that analogy is even close to the mark.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 15634 invoked from network); 23 Aug 2001 04:05:46 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 23 Aug 2001 04:05:46 -0000
Received: (qmail 26413 invoked by uid 50005); 23 Aug 2001 04:05:07 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (. Clean. Processed in 0.100729 secs); 23 Aug 2001 04:05:07 -0000
X-Qmail-Scanner-Mail-From: owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU via smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
X-Qmail-Scanner-Rcpt-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
X-Qmail-Scanner: 0.96 (No viruses found. Processed in 0.100729 secs)
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 23 Aug 2001 04:05:06 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA25681; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 20:59:22 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 94913 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 03:59:20          +0000
Received: from mta04.mail.mel.aone.net.au (mta04.mail.au.uu.net [203.2.192.84])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA25667 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 20:59:19 -0700
Received: from unknown ([63.60.220.190]) by mta04.mail.mel.aone.net.au with          SMTP id <20010823035916.WFTF3778.mta04.mail.mel.aone.net.au@unknown>          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 13:59:16 +1000
References: Conversation <008801c12afe$5db3aa80$0100a8c0@mkbs> with last            message <a0510032ab7aa260ae068@[63.27.96.224]>
Priority: Normal
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Priority: 3
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	X-MAPIextension=.TXT;
	charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>
Date:         Thu, 23 Aug 2001 03:59:20 +0000
Reply-To: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] [EE]: Building a Satellite / Fw: [amsat-bb] Re: Simplesat              details
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <a0510032ab7aa260ae068@[63.27.96.224]>

> >
> >It's not hard, unfortunately it's next to impossible with conventional**
> >propulsion technology and non government assistance <sigh>
>
>
> The technology has been in the nahds of amateurs for over 10 years.
> Why else would it be necessary to dramatically INCREASE the
> regulations for something that has never been done yet?

Unfortunately Jerry, no amateur has come close to orbital technology.
Absolutely no where near it!!! Not on *ANY* scale.

Troy.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 615 invoked from network); 23 Aug 2001 05:22:10 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 23 Aug 2001 05:22:10 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 4687 invoked by uid 50005); 23 Aug 2001 05:22:03 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.200455 secs); 23 Aug 2001 05:22:03 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 23 Aug 2001 05:22:03 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA26077; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 22:18:51 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 94990 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 05:18:45          +0000
Received: from falcon.mail.pas.earthlink.net (falcon.mail.pas.earthlink.net          [207.217.120.74]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA26063          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 22:18:45 -0700
Received: from sprintmail.com (pool1002.cvx18-bradley.dialup.earthlink.net          [209.179.241.237]) by falcon.mail.pas.earthlink.net          (EL-8_9_3_3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id WAA04619; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 22:18:40          -0700 (PDT)
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.74 [en] (Win98; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <814DCE01F6D7D311994D204C4F4F50201889C7@MAIL>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B83E507.6734B873@sprintmail.com>
Date:         Wed, 22 Aug 2001 09:59:51 -0700
Reply-To: "Anthony Colette" <Rockitman@SPRINTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Anthony Colette" <Rockitman@SPRINTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Pistonless Piston Pumps
Comments: To: Earl Pottinger <earlcp@conpute.com>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Earl ,

The proposed arrangement would not reduce or prevent the occurrence of
acoustic/combustion instability.  If check valve 2 ever has the opportunity to
"check the flow" the engine will already be in a severe mode of instability or
roughness.
Combustion instabilities typically are between 1000 Hz to 50,000 Hz.  The mass
flow through the final injection orifice is rarely, if ever, reversed at these
frequencies.  The flow only needs to be DC oscillated +/- .1% from nominal to
create a full blown tangential shock wave from spinning up like a tornado in the
chamber.

Chugging is a system instability caused by low inlet pressures.  Accumulators
can't raise the inlet pressure so they cant solve the problem of chugging.

> If you have a PUMP => CHECK VALVE 1 => ACCUMULATOR => CHECK VALVE 2 =>
> INJECTOR.

> Why does the presence of check valve 2 make the accumulator not an
> accumulator.  It will still store fluid from the pump if
> the pump pushes fluid faster than it wants to leave the injector (IE during
> the pump stoke) and will supply fluid to the injector went the pump pressure
> drops (IE fill stoke).   ??????

> Would check valves or fluid diodes between the accumulator and the injector
> not help break the oscillations?

The above description can have any number of physical arrangements.

> What is a compliant injector?

A compliant injector is an injector who's mass flow is easily changed by the
environmental conditions it is exposed to.  Compliance is the symptom of
insufficient pressure drop across the final orifice.
A hard injector maintains a constant flow rate regardless of external
disturbances and is characterized by a high pressure drop.

> I was suggesting a number of different sized
> accumulators so that there is no single strong  resonating frequency that
> the engine would ring at.

There are 9 modes of oscillation in a rocket engine.  The frequency of these
modes are solely determined by the bulk gas properties and chamber geometry.
The are completely independent of the injector scheme. Any accumulator
immediately near the injector will make the injector more compliant and thus
more susceptible to mass flow changes caused by external pressure fluctuations.

A pulse jet has a check valve and an accumulator the size of the atmosphere.
It's anything but acoustically stable.

Tony

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 5256 invoked from network); 23 Aug 2001 05:23:48 -0000
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 23 Aug 2001 05:23:48 -0000
Received: (qmail 12864 invoked by uid 50005); 23 Aug 2001 05:22:28 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smptf.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.182783 secs); 23 Aug 2001 05:22:28 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 23 Aug 2001 05:22:27 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA25981; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 22:08:01 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 94967 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 05:07:51          +0000
Received: from hanford.psnw.com (hanford.psnw.com [209.107.130.9]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA25945 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 21:57:51 -0700
Received: from computer (ct2-38.fresno-dial.psnw.com [209.107.139.38]) by          hanford.psnw.com (Postfix) with SMTP id 99CF16226 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 21:57:10 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0B96_01C56B69.4B7DF050"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <003801c12b90$27c9b4e0$268b6bd1@computer>
Date:         Wed, 22 Aug 2001 21:57:46 -0700
Reply-To: "Scott Eakins" <eakins@PSNW.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Scott Eakins" <eakins@PSNW.COM>
Subject:      [AR] Bonding problem
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0B96_01C56B69.4B7DF050
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Just this evening I went out to test a newer formulation on a 3 grain =
54mm motor.  The aft closure let go .5 sec into the burn.  Upon =
inspection of the grains, I noticed that one of the 3 had less than 5 % =
of the casting tube material still attached to the grain in spots. =20

The other 2 also had inhibited areas that were burnt, and these became =
even more noticeable as I unpealed the tubes from the grains.

This is the first time that I have ever noticed this problem.  I am not =
using a different casting tube than I have in the past, so I've ruled =
that one out.

I did however mix and cast these grain on a very warm night, the R45 / =
MDI set up hard to the touch in less than 1 hour.  Obviously bonding was =
a problem,  how might I avoid this in the future.=20

Any thoughts and suggestions would be greatly appreciated.

Scott

------=_NextPart_000_0B96_01C56B69.4B7DF050
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Diso-8859-1">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 5.50.4134.600" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Just this evening I went out to test a =
newer=20
formulation on a 3 grain 54mm motor.&nbsp; The aft closure let go .5 sec =
into=20
the burn.&nbsp; Upon inspection of the grains, I noticed that one of the =
3 had=20
less than 5 % of the casting tube material still attached to the grain =
in=20
spots.&nbsp; </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>The other 2 also had inhibited areas =
that were=20
burnt, and these became even more noticeable as I unpealed the tubes =
from the=20
grains.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT><FONT face=3DArial =
size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>This is the first time that I have ever =
noticed=20
this problem.&nbsp; I am not using a different casting tube than I have =
in the=20
past, so I've ruled that one out.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>I did however mix and cast these grain =
on a very=20
warm night, the R45 / MDI set up hard to the touch in less than 1 =
hour.&nbsp;=20
Obviously bonding was a problem,&nbsp; how might I avoid this in the =
future.=20
</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Any thoughts and suggestions would be =
greatly=20
appreciated.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Scott</FONT></DIV></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0B96_01C56B69.4B7DF050--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 175 invoked from network); 23 Aug 2001 06:05:01 -0000
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 23 Aug 2001 06:05:01 -0000
Received: (qmail 9460 invoked by uid 50005); 23 Aug 2001 06:03:06 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smpte.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.142245 secs); 23 Aug 2001 06:03:06 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 23 Aug 2001 06:03:06 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA26233; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 23:01:26 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 95009 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 06:01:20          +0000
Received: from mta01.mail.mel.aone.net.au (mta01.mail.au.uu.net [203.2.192.81])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA26219 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 23:01:19 -0700
Received: from unknown ([63.34.218.20]) by mta01.mail.mel.aone.net.au with SMTP          id <20010823060114.KLTP3755.mta01.mail.mel.aone.net.au@unknown>; Thu,          23 Aug 2001 16:01:14 +1000
References: Conversation <003801c12b90$27c9b4e0$268b6bd1@computer> with last            message <003801c12b90$27c9b4e0$268b6bd1@computer>
Priority: Normal
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Priority: 3
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	X-MAPIextension=.TXT;
	charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>
Date:         Thu, 23 Aug 2001 06:01:20 +0000
Reply-To: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Bonding problem
Comments: To: Scott Eakins <eakins@PSNW.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <003801c12b90$27c9b4e0$268b6bd1@computer>

Use a bonding agent like Tepanol. Also it's often a good idea to give the
inside of your liners a coating of Resin/bonding agent and curative before
casting.

Troy.

----------
> Just this evening I went out to test a newer formulation on a 3 grain 54mm
> motor.  The aft closure let go .5 sec into the burn.  Upon inspection of
the
> grains, I noticed that one of the 3 had less than 5 % of the casting tube
> material still attached to the grain in spots.
>
> The other 2 also had inhibited areas that were burnt, and these became
even
> more noticeable as I unpealed the tubes from the grains.
>
> This is the first time that I have ever noticed this problem.  I am not
using
> a different casting tube than I have in the past, so I've ruled that one
out.
>
> I did however mix and cast these grain on a very warm night, the R45 /
MDI set
> up hard to the touch in less than 1 hour.  Obviously bonding was a
problem,
> how might I avoid this in the future.
>
> Any thoughts and suggestions would be greatly appreciated.
>
> Scott

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 20435 invoked from network); 23 Aug 2001 06:32:46 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 23 Aug 2001 06:32:46 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 23471 invoked by uid 50005); 23 Aug 2001 06:31:24 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smptf.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.650924 secs); 23 Aug 2001 06:31:24 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 23 Aug 2001 06:31:23 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA26297; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 23:18:26 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 95019 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 06:18:22          +0000
Received: from idsoftware.com (predator.idsoftware.com [192.246.40.34]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA26283 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 23:18:22 -0700
Received: from [192.246.40.144] (account johnc HELO pluto.idsoftware.com) by          idsoftware.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 3.4.7) with ESMTP id 355716 for          AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 01:18:20 -0500
X-Sender: johnc@mail.idsoftware.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.1
References: <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>            <008801c12afe$5db3aa80$0100a8c0@mkbs>            <20010822082932.A24546@bailey.dscga.com>            <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <4.3.1.2.20010823010204.02f70398@mail.idsoftware.com>
Date:         Thu, 23 Aug 2001 01:31:05 -0500
Reply-To: "John Carmack" <johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Carmack" <johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM>
Subject:      [AR] CATS prize ( was Re: [AR] [EE]: Building a Satellite )
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <a05100326b7a9fb9ee8d7@[63.27.96.224]>

At 05:20 PM 8/22/2001 -0700, you wrote:
>>Wanna build cheaper satellites? Answer: build cheaper vehicles to get them
>>there.
>>
>>Troy.
>
>The same over regulation that NASA imposes on payloads on its (the
>people's) shuttle, it tries to impose on others space programs.  The
>CATS prize is a perfect example.  A dozen or so teams built rockets
>and zero flew to anywhere close to the required altitude exclusively
>due to regulations and rules ADDED at the last minute to complicate
>the event.

There is an element of truth to that statement, but the implied message
isn't correct.

Yes, there were additional regulatory hassles added as what could be
considered anti-CATS-prize tactics, and that is indeed something to
complain to the government about.

However, saying the failure to reach altitude was "exclusively due to
regulations" is grossly overstating the capability of the contestants.

Nobody had a slam-dunk, sure-thing rocket.

I made an offer of development funding for CATS prize teams (announced on
the CATS board), and I talked to at least a dozen of the avowed
competitors.  For the most part, I was appalled at what I heard.  Basically
everyone's plan was to build a big rocket and win the CATS prize on the
first (only) launch.  When I questioned the probability of everything going
right the first time, one of the teams said that I had insulted them (they
never launched their rocket at all).

JPA and SORAC had an incremental development plan that looked believable to
me, and I went out and visited both of them.  I wound up funding both of
them for the last year's effort ($17k each).  Over the year, they both
worked at it and had their shares of failures, as expected.

As the deadline drew near, JPA did in fact have a rocket ready for flight,
and was expecting the same treatment from the FAA they had gotten on their
previous high altitude waivers, but they were sort of screwed over at the
last minute.

SORAC had a rocket that might have been able to come together (Bob Fortune,
want to talk in more detail?) in time, but they were dead in the water on
regulatory issues on two fronts.

Still, even if they had both launched, I was only figuring that they had
about a 25% chance each of actually making it (and that may have been
wishful thinking on my part).  Neither team had had a flawless high
altitude launch in the previous two years, and while things were still
being learned and improved, it would have been foolish to assume that
everything was all worked out.

In the years that the CATS prize was running, who made a test flight to
half the altitude?  A quarter the altitude?  Garboden's (sp?) rocket is the
only data point I know of with reasonable success, and I have heard of at
least a half dozen "space shot" attempts that failed miserably.

John Carmack

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 25362 invoked from network); 23 Aug 2001 07:36:49 -0000
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 23 Aug 2001 07:36:49 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 7976 invoked by uid 50005); 23 Aug 2001 07:30:35 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smptf.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.15227 secs); 23 Aug 2001 07:30:35 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 23 Aug 2001 07:30:35 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA26488; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 00:28:27 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 95038 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 07:28:17          +0000
Received: from imo-d01.mx.aol.com (imo-d01.mx.aol.com [205.188.157.33]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA26474 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 00:28:16 -0700
Received: from Sociald84@aol.com by imo-d01.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v31_r1.4.) id          h.4d.1054716d (4222); Thu, 23 Aug 2001 03:27:49 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0B99_01C56B69.4B980800"
X-Mailer: AOL 6.0 for Windows US sub 10536
Message-ID:  <4d.1054716d.28b60a75@aol.com>
Date:         Thu, 23 Aug 2001 03:27:49 EDT
Reply-To: <Sociald84@AOL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <Sociald84@AOL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Pistonless Piston Pumps with peroxide precat cycle
Comments: To: apptech@clear.net.nz
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0B99_01C56B69.4B980800
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

In a message dated 8/20/2001 6:02:15 AM Mountain Daylight Time,
apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ writes:


> This could be done but the pressure requirements of the main tanks are
> liable to be very substantially lower than those for the pumps so that the
> complexity of secondary gas reuse may not be justified. Providing direct low
> pressure feed directly to the tanks may be preferred. Another possible use
> of pump exhaust gas would be to run secondary systems such as eg pneumatic
> actuators. The very enthusiastic could use it to drive a small hydraulic
> pump to give the stiffness and locking advantages of hydraulics but the
>


You could use the exaust from the pump process to drive aerodynamic features
such as inflatable attitude controll surfaces, or use it to power hydraulics
to turn a fin.

Mark

------=_NextPart_000_0B99_01C56B69.4B980800
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<HTML><FONT FACE=arial,helvetica><FONT  SIZE=3>In a message dated 8/20/2001 6:02:15 AM Mountain Daylight Time,
<BR>apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ writes:
<BR>
<BR></FONT><FONT  COLOR="#000000" SIZE=2 FAMILY="SANSSERIF" FACE="Arial" LANG="0">
<BR><BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE style="BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px">This could be done but the pressure requirements of the main tanks are
<BR>liable to be very substantially lower than those for the pumps so that the
<BR>complexity of secondary gas reuse may not be justified. Providing direct low
<BR>pressure feed directly to the tanks may be preferred. Another possible use
<BR>of pump exhaust gas would be to run secondary systems such as eg pneumatic
<BR>actuators. The very enthusiastic could use it to drive a small hydraulic
<BR>pump to give the stiffness and locking advantages of hydraulics but the
<BR>added complexity probably makes this unattractive.</BLOCKQUOTE>
<BR></FONT><FONT  COLOR="#000000" SIZE=3 FAMILY="SANSSERIF" FACE="Arial" LANG="0">
<BR>
<BR>You could use the exaust from the pump process to drive aerodynamic features
<BR>such as inflatable attitude controll surfaces, or use it to power hydraulics
<BR>to turn a fin.
<BR>
<BR>Mark</FONT></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0B99_01C56B69.4B980800--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 18879 invoked from network); 23 Aug 2001 07:57:40 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 23 Aug 2001 07:57:40 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 22833 invoked by uid 50005); 23 Aug 2001 07:56:59 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (. Clean. Processed in 0.201565 secs); 23 Aug 2001 07:56:59 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
X-Qmail-Scanner-Mail-From: owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU via smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net
X-Qmail-Scanner-Rcpt-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
X-Qmail-Scanner: 0.96 (No viruses found. Processed in 0.201565 secs)
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 23 Aug 2001 07:56:59 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA26554; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 00:40:44 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 95049 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 07:40:42          +0000
Received: from imo-d09.mx.aol.com (imo-d09.mx.aol.com [205.188.157.41]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA26540 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 00:40:42 -0700
Received: from Sociald84@aol.com by imo-d09.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v31_r1.4.) id          l.74.f081b72 (4222); Thu, 23 Aug 2001 03:39:58 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0B9E_01C56B69.4B9CEA00"
X-Mailer: AOL 6.0 for Windows US sub 10536
Message-ID:  <74.f081b72.28b60d4e@aol.com>
Date:         Thu, 23 Aug 2001 03:39:58 EDT
Reply-To: <Sociald84@AOL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <Sociald84@AOL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Conservation of momentum
Comments: To: bob@fortunepaint.com
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0B9E_01C56B69.4B9CEA00
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

In a message dated 8/20/2001 1:17:25 PM Mountain Daylight Time,
bob@FORTUNEPAINT.COM writes:

Why not integrate the recovery systems of the nose and payload into one and
have the payload inside or attatched to the nose cone? If that is not an
option what about eliminating any distance between them that way they act as
one mass.

Mark

> This involves a payload to be ejected from an airframe.  The payload
> is a sliding coupler filled with electronics, little satellites
> actually, which impinges upon the nosecone.  When the separation
> charge is fired the payload coupler is forced forward which breaks a
> couple of shear pins holding the nosecone in place.  This expels the
> nosecone and, in turn, the payload coupler.
>
> An ejection charge black powder calculator indicates that a charge of
> .66 grams is all that's necessary to pressurize the chamber to 15
> psi, break the shear pins, and expel both masses. However, in testing
> it has been determined that 2 grams is required else only the
> nosecone is expelled while the coupler stays in place. It seems that
> this is a result of conservation of momentum, like the desktop toy in
> which 4 metal balls swing back and forth trading momentum or a cue
> ball interacting with the 8 ball on the pool table.
>
>    Granted, tying the two units together so a collision is not
> possible would be the easiest solution but difficult in practice to
> integrate since the two components must separate once in the
> airstream.  The payload and its recovery system weighs a bit more
> than the nosecone and its recovery system.   Anyone have any ideas as
> to an elegant solution besides more black powder? ("if a little bit
> is good then a whole lot more must be a whole lot better" - Father
> Stout, infamous Jesuit chemistry professor)
>
> This is for a very interesting program instituted by Stanford
> University.  Take a look here if you would like to know more:
> http://ssdl.stanford.edu/arliss/
>
> Thanks
>
>



------=_NextPart_000_0B9E_01C56B69.4B9CEA00
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<HTML><FONT FACE=arial,helvetica><FONT  SIZE=3>In a message dated 8/20/2001 1:17:25 PM Mountain Daylight Time,
<BR>bob@FORTUNEPAINT.COM writes:
<BR>
<BR>Why not integrate the recovery systems of the nose and payload into one and
<BR>have the payload inside or attatched to the nose cone? If that is not an
<BR>option what about eliminating any distance between them that way they act as
<BR>one mass.
<BR>
<BR>Mark
<BR></FONT><FONT  COLOR="#000000" SIZE=2 FAMILY="SANSSERIF" FACE="Arial" LANG="0">
<BR><BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE style="BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px">This involves a payload to be ejected from an airframe. &nbsp;The payload
<BR>is a sliding coupler filled with electronics, little satellites
<BR>actually, which impinges upon the nosecone. &nbsp;When the separation
<BR>charge is fired the payload coupler is forced forward which breaks a
<BR>couple of shear pins holding the nosecone in place. &nbsp;This expels the
<BR>nosecone and, in turn, the payload coupler.
<BR>
<BR>An ejection charge black powder calculator indicates that a charge of
<BR>.66 grams is all that's necessary to pressurize the chamber to 15
<BR>psi, break the shear pins, and expel both masses. However, in testing
<BR>it has been determined that 2 grams is required else only the
<BR>nosecone is expelled while the coupler stays in place. It seems that
<BR>this is a result of conservation of momentum, like the desktop toy in
<BR>which 4 metal balls swing back and forth trading momentum or a cue
<BR>ball interacting with the 8 ball on the pool table.
<BR>
<BR> &nbsp;&nbsp;Granted, tying the two units together so a collision is not
<BR>possible would be the easiest solution but difficult in practice to
<BR>integrate since the two components must separate once in the
<BR>airstream. &nbsp;The payload and its recovery system weighs a bit more
<BR>than the nosecone and its recovery system. &nbsp;&nbsp;Anyone have any ideas as
<BR>to an elegant solution besides more black powder? ("if a little bit
<BR>is good then a whole lot more must be a whole lot better" - Father
<BR>Stout, infamous Jesuit chemistry professor)
<BR>
<BR>This is for a very interesting program instituted by Stanford
<BR>University. &nbsp;Take a look here if you would like to know more:
<BR>http://ssdl.stanford.edu/arliss/
<BR>
<BR>Thanks
<BR>
<BR>Bob</BLOCKQUOTE>
<BR></FONT><FONT  COLOR="#000000" SIZE=3 FAMILY="SANSSERIF" FACE="Arial" LANG="0">
<BR></FONT></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0B9E_01C56B69.4B9CEA00--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 19758 invoked from network); 23 Aug 2001 07:58:01 -0000
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 23 Aug 2001 07:58:01 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 19406 invoked by uid 50005); 23 Aug 2001 07:56:06 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smpte.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.229307 secs); 23 Aug 2001 07:56:06 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 23 Aug 2001 07:56:06 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA26593; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 00:45:14 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 95062 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 07:45:13          +0000
Received: from imo-m03.mx.aol.com (imo-m03.mx.aol.com [64.12.136.6]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA26579 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 00:45:13 -0700
Received: from Sociald84@aol.com by imo-m03.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v31_r1.4.) id          s.91.f400080 (4222); Thu, 23 Aug 2001 03:45:05 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0BA3_01C56B69.4B9CEA00"
X-Mailer: AOL 6.0 for Windows US sub 10536
Message-ID:  <91.f400080.28b60e81@aol.com>
Date:         Thu, 23 Aug 2001 03:45:05 EDT
Reply-To: <Sociald84@AOL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <Sociald84@AOL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Aluminum powder
Comments: To: 01rocket@gte.net
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0BA3_01C56B69.4B9CEA00
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

In a message dated 8/20/2001 4:25:41 PM Mountain Daylight Time,
01rocket@GTE.NET writes:


> I doubt it increases combustion efficiency to have the larger size Al.
>
Wouldn't it increase heat radiation into the propellant. This wouldn't
exactly increase efficiency but it would increase performance.

Mark


> But it increases density due to multi-modal fits.
>
> For the size and pressure of motors they make they are grossly
> over-aluminized.
>



------=_NextPart_000_0BA3_01C56B69.4B9CEA00
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<HTML><FONT FACE=arial,helvetica><FONT  SIZE=3>In a message dated 8/20/2001 4:25:41 PM Mountain Daylight Time,
<BR>01rocket@GTE.NET writes:
<BR>
<BR></FONT><FONT  COLOR="#000000" SIZE=2 FAMILY="SANSSERIF" FACE="Arial" LANG="0">
<BR><BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE style="BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px">I doubt it increases combustion efficiency to have the larger size Al.
<BR></FONT><FONT  COLOR="#000000" SIZE=3 FAMILY="SANSSERIF" FACE="Arial" LANG="0"></BLOCKQUOTE>
<BR>Wouldn't it increase heat radiation into the propellant. This wouldn't
<BR>exactly increase efficiency but it would increase performance.
<BR>
<BR>Mark
<BR></FONT><FONT  COLOR="#000000" SIZE=2 FAMILY="SANSSERIF" FACE="Arial" LANG="0">
<BR></FONT><FONT  COLOR="#000000" SIZE=3 FAMILY="SANSSERIF" FACE="Arial" LANG="0">
<BR></FONT><FONT  COLOR="#000000" SIZE=2 FAMILY="SANSSERIF" FACE="Arial" LANG="0"><BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE style="BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px">But it increases density due to multi-modal fits.
<BR>
<BR>For the size and pressure of motors they make they are grossly
<BR>over-aluminized.
<BR></BLOCKQUOTE>
<BR></FONT><FONT  COLOR="#000000" SIZE=3 FAMILY="SANSSERIF" FACE="Arial" LANG="0">
<BR></FONT></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0BA3_01C56B69.4B9CEA00--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 7839 invoked from network); 23 Aug 2001 08:05:08 -0000
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 23 Aug 2001 08:05:08 -0000
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 10954 invoked by uid 50005); 23 Aug 2001 08:03:47 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smptf.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.249232 secs); 23 Aug 2001 08:03:47 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 23 Aug 2001 08:03:46 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA26644; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 00:51:55 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 95073 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 07:51:53          +0000
Received: from coastnet.com (IDENT:qmailr@frontpage.coastnet.com          [206.87.35.241]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id AAA26630          for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 00:51:52 -0700
Received: (qmail 10804 invoked from network); 23 Aug 2001 07:51:51 -0000
Received: from pinc226.pinc.com (HELO mike) (199.60.118.226) by          wave.coastnet.com with SMTP; 23 Aug 2001 07:51:51 -0000
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.01 [en] (Win95; I)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Priority: 3
References: Conversation <008801c12afe$5db3aa80$0100a8c0@mkbs> with last            message <20010822192258.B24546@bailey.dscga.com>            <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>            <a0510032ab7aa260ae068@[63.27.96.224]>            <001a01c12b87$a7317460$1b30fea9@kristinscomp>
X-Corel-MessageType: EMail
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B84B685.789899EC@coastnet.com>
Date:         Thu, 23 Aug 2001 00:53:41 -0700
Reply-To: "Ross Borden" <rborden@COASTNET.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Ross Borden" <rborden@COASTNET.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] [EE]: Building a Satellite
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Kristin & David Hall wrote:
>
> > >  > And before you say it: I know its hard. So is building an industrial
> > >>  grade operating system from the ground up. But 10 years ago a bunch of
> > >>  volunteers/nut cases started working on it and now its the the fastest
> > >>  growing server OS in the market....
>
> > That analogy holds.
>
> I totally disagree.  While the organization and "know how" aspects may be
> very similar, the actual construction issues are 180 degrees opposite.

Another problem is cost.  Writing software costs nothing but time, which
people are willing to donate.  Building rockets costs actual money,
which they aren't.
And then there is the size of the talent pool; there are far more
programmers than rocket scientists.
And then there are the regulations.
And then...

> No, I don't think that analogy is even close to the mark.

No, but what are the options?  Each person or small group working on
their own space shot?  That's the way it has always been and nobody is
remotely close to orbit.  Yes, progress is being made, but it's
painfully slow.

What's needed is an organization with A) a leadership core that will
standardize designs, delegate work, integrate & test the results, and,
most importantly, carry on through thick and thin, through defections,
disasters and disinterest; B) work groups with the tools and abilities
to produce the subsystems, and the will to get it done.

Looking back at that last paragraph, I am filled with immense pessimism
that it will ever happen.  I'm going to bed.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------
        Non Ignorami Carborundum:          |   rborden@coastnet.com
   "Don't Let The Morons Grind You Down"   |       Ross Borden
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 16079 invoked from network); 23 Aug 2001 08:30:07 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 23 Aug 2001 08:30:07 -0000
Received: (qmail 20650 invoked by uid 50005); 23 Aug 2001 08:29:27 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (. Clean. Processed in 0.257314 secs); 23 Aug 2001 08:29:27 -0000
X-Qmail-Scanner-Mail-From: owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU via smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net
X-Qmail-Scanner-Rcpt-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
X-Qmail-Scanner: 0.96 (No viruses found. Processed in 0.257314 secs)
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 23 Aug 2001 08:29:27 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id BAA26732; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 01:15:58 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 95084 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 08:15:51          +0000
Received: from fep4-orange.clear.net.nz (fep4-orange.clear.net.nz          [203.97.32.4]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id BAA26718          for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 01:15:50 -0700
Received: from mkbs (203-167-161-163.dialup.clear.net.nz [203.167.161.163]) by          fep4-orange.clear.net.nz (1.5/1.7) with SMTP id UAA02215; Thu, 23 Aug          2001 20:15:45 +1200 (NZST)
References: Conversation <008801c12afe$5db3aa80$0100a8c0@mkbs> with last                   message <20010822192258.B24546@bailey.dscga.com>                               <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>                 <a0510032ab7aa260ae068@[63.27.96.224]>             <001a01c12b87$a7317460$1b30fea9@kristinscomp>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <000901c12bac$2bb165a0$0100a8c0@mkbs>
Date:         Thu, 23 Aug 2001 18:48:39 +1200
Reply-To: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Organization: Applied Technology
Subject:      Re: [AR] [EE]: Building a Satellite / Fw: [amsat-bb] Re: Simplesat              details
Comments: To: Kristin & David Hall <thehalls@RIDGENET.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

> > >  > And before you say it: I know its hard. So is building an
industrial
> > >>  grade operating system from the ground up. But 10 years ago a bunch
of
> > >>  volunteers/nut cases started working on it and now its the the
fastest
> > >>  growing server OS in the market....
>
> > That analogy holds.
>
> I totally disagree.  While the organization and "know how" aspects may be
> very similar, the actual construction issues are 180 degrees opposite.
>
> Want to have a couple of guys developing pieces to an OS?  No problem.
Give
> 'em each a decent computer and compiler and they're well equipped.  Price?
> Less than $2k a piece and they probably already have the computers.  Want
to
> have a couple of guys build parts to a rocket?  They're each going to need
> access to a machine shop....a much rarer situation and/or more expensive
to
> create.


The original post (which I copied from another list, was about building a
SATELLITE literally, NOT a satellite launcher.
The person concerned was an expert in his field and was well experienced in
combining various existing commercial modules to meet the requirements in a
non-Space environment. His point was that, getting a technically functioning
device accepted by NASA involved far far far more work than the job involved
in actually building it. Building a launcher is another matter again.

RM

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 12405 invoked from network); 23 Aug 2001 09:02:30 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 23 Aug 2001 09:02:30 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 8184 invoked by uid 50005); 23 Aug 2001 09:01:08 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smptf.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.200815 secs); 23 Aug 2001 09:01:08 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 23 Aug 2001 09:01:08 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id BAA26837; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 01:47:51 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 95098 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 08:47:46          +0000
Received: from idsoftware.com (predator.idsoftware.com [192.246.40.34]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id BAA26823 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 01:47:46 -0700
Received: from [192.246.40.144] (account johnc HELO pluto.idsoftware.com) by          idsoftware.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 3.4.7) with ESMTP id 355790 for          AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 03:47:45 -0500
X-Sender: johnc@mail.idsoftware.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.1
References: <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>            <008801c12afe$5db3aa80$0100a8c0@mkbs>            <20010822082932.A24546@bailey.dscga.com>            <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <4.3.1.2.20010823035919.02f71758@mail.idsoftware.com>
Date:         Thu, 23 Aug 2001 04:00:29 -0500
Reply-To: "John Carmack" <johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Carmack" <johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] [EE]: Building a Satellite / Fw: [amsat-bb] Re: Simplesat              details
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <20010822192258.B24546@bailey.dscga.com>

>
>Sure. I'm not suggesting we forego good engineering practices and
>documentation. I am suggesting we get rid of the stuff that isn't.
>Why not apply engineering trade off principles to the engineering
>process itself.

That is an insightful way of putting it.

John Carmack

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 13065 invoked from network); 23 Aug 2001 09:02:43 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 23 Aug 2001 09:02:43 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 8524 invoked by uid 50005); 23 Aug 2001 09:01:22 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smptf.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.182561 secs); 23 Aug 2001 09:01:22 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 23 Aug 2001 09:01:21 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id BAA26798; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 01:39:19 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 95091 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 08:39:10          +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (f163.law15.hotmail.com [64.4.23.163]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id BAA26784 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 01:39:09 -0700
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Thu,          23 Aug 2001 01:38:39 -0700
Received: from 193.121.251.246 by lw15fd.law15.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Thu,          23 Aug 2001 08:38:31 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [193.121.251.246]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 23 Aug 2001 08:38:39.0648 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[0208B200:01C12BAF]
Message-ID:  <F163aYbXhTmYgbP1SGn0001226b@hotmail.com>
Date:         Thu, 23 Aug 2001 08:39:10 +0000
Reply-To: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] candy high pressure moulding
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

JY wrote:

>Hmm... they probably have an arbor press too - wonder if they would let me
>put my candy sample on it?


The 30-50 ton/cm2 press at work offers a glass like completely transparent
appearance when compressing most white anorganic salt crystals eg KBr. Such
routine practice, concerns cylinders used for X-ray analysis or IR.
Cylinders size 1/2"*dia 1" as thus pressed. I expect the same appearance
with KN. Even with KN/sucrose. If a 6 ton (/sq "?) compression offers
sandlike cylinder surfaces then I guess this pressure is way too low.

Caution here: as to the safety aspect of compressing larger KN/sugar blocks
at 30-50 tons/sq cm or higher: I have no info. While compressing I also
expect some heating effect.

High pressure sensitivity KN/sugar anyone? Did anyone try a blast capsule in
a KN/sugar block?

After all, it is a KN/fuel mix...I'm certainly not going to risk an
explosion of that magnitude in my employer's lab...

I also thought of explosive compression. One could bury such (simple?) setup
and work safely, even should the to be compressed mix explode as well.

List terminology question: what is a wunx?

jd

_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 10224 invoked from network); 23 Aug 2001 09:25:19 -0000
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 23 Aug 2001 09:25:19 -0000
Received: (qmail 28595 invoked by uid 50005); 23 Aug 2001 09:23:57 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smptf.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.224754 secs); 23 Aug 2001 09:23:57 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 23 Aug 2001 09:23:56 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id CAA26931; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 02:12:59 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 95109 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 09:12:57          +0000
Received: from femail13.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail13.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.0.95.140]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id CAA26917          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 02:12:56 -0700
Received: from hal2001 ([24.77.53.16]) by femail13.sdc1.sfba.home.com          (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20 201-229-121-120-20010223) with SMTP id          <20010823091251.EDKT3790.femail13.sdc1.sfba.home.com@hal2001> for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 02:12:51 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <009201c12bb2$a5770ba0$0400a8c0@hatjs>
Date:         Thu, 23 Aug 2001 02:04:41 -0700
Reply-To: "Jamie Morken" <jmorken@HOME.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jamie Morken" <jmorken@HOME.COM>
Subject:      [AR] 3 axis magnetometer schematic
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Hi all,

I took John Carmack's advice and used a schematic with as few analog
components as possible.

Preliminary schematic (Eagle -free version- CAD files):
www.rocketresearch.org/3axismag.zip

BMP format (970KB):
www.rocketresearch.org/3axismag.bmp

relevant datasheet:
http://www.philips.semiconductors.com/acrobat/various/SC17_GENERAL_MAG_98_1.
pdf
(page 26)

Anyone suggest a better method of interfacing to the magnet sensor chips to
get higher accuracy?

best regards,
Jamie

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 10400 invoked from network); 23 Aug 2001 12:32:29 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 23 Aug 2001 12:32:29 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 6023 invoked by uid 50005); 23 Aug 2001 12:31:06 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smptf.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.40577 secs); 23 Aug 2001 12:31:06 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 23 Aug 2001 12:31:05 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id FAA27478; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 05:16:27 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 95144 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 12:16:11          +0000
Received: from bailey.dscga.com (bailey.dscga.com [198.78.9.11]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id FAA27463 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu,          23 Aug 2001 05:16:10 -0700
Received: (from michael@localhost) by bailey.dscga.com (8.9.1/) id IAA27950;          Thu, 23 Aug 2001 08:11:55 -0400 (EDT)
References: <008801c12afe$5db3aa80$0100a8c0@mkbs>            <20010822192258.B24546@bailey.dscga.com>            <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>            <a0510032ab7aa260ae068@[63.27.96.224]>            <001a01c12b87$a7317460$1b30fea9@kristinscomp>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
User-Agent: Mutt/1.1.2i
Message-ID:  <20010823081155.E24546@bailey.dscga.com>
Date:         Thu, 23 Aug 2001 08:11:55 -0400
Reply-To: "Michael Mealling" <michael@NEONYM.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Michael Mealling" <michael@NEONYM.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] [EE]: Building a Satellite / Fw: [amsat-bb] Re: Simplesat              details
Comments: To: Kristin & David Hall <thehalls@RIDGENET.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <001a01c12b87$a7317460$1b30fea9@kristinscomp>; from              thehalls@RIDGENET.NET on Wed, Aug 22, 2001 at 08:56:55PM -0700

On Wed, Aug 22, 2001 at 08:56:55PM -0700, Kristin & David Hall wrote:
>>>>And before you say it: I know its hard. So is building an industrial
>>>> grade operating system from the ground up. But 10 years ago a bunch of
>>>> volunteers/nut cases started working on it and now its the the fastest
>>>> growing server OS in the market....
>
>>That analogy holds.
>
>I totally disagree.  While the organization and "know how" aspects may be
>very similar, the actual construction issues are 180 degrees opposite.

I completely agree....

>Want to have a couple of guys developing pieces to an OS?  No problem.  Give
>'em each a decent computer and compiler and they're well equipped.  Price?
>Less than $2k a piece and they probably already have the computers.  Want to
>have a couple of guys build parts to a rocket?  They're each going to need
>access to a machine shop....a much rarer situation and/or more expensive to
>create.
>
>Want to test those two components of the OS together?  No problem.  Email
>the code, compile, and voila!  Similar test required for rocket?  Not
>necessarily cheap or easy.
>
>Got the kernal built and want to test it?  Again, just email the code and
>compile.  Got the whole (orbital class!) engine built and want to test it?
>Well, I know of know facilities capable of such tests in the amateur world.
>Maybe the RRS's new vertical stand if you don't mind clustering, but....
>
>Got the whole thing done and want to "drive it"?  Email/compile.  For a
>launch vehicle?  Shoot, you saw what the CATS guys went through - just try
>to imagine an orbital attempt.  To be blunt:  No Fucking Way.
>
>No, I don't think that analogy is even close to the mark.

Its close for certain aspects of the problem. The Open Source model
is basically a gift economy/loss leader. It only works when one of two
things exist: 1) scarcity of raw materials is 0 or close to it or b)
the value gained from some after market items pays for the original
development cost.

In the case of Linux the things that the Open Source model couldn't
handle was the exact things that people like RedHat did: support,
shrink wrapping, integration, documentation, etc. While those things
don't come very close to being the complexity involved in launching
an something to LEO, the analogy might still hold here. The way
I envisioned it the people involved in the Open Source aspect
of the process are working on building/testing small components
in their own system with an eye to that component being used
elsewhere. That is, for the things that are essentiall 0 or very low
cost (standard engine designs, fuel grain mixtures and processes,
thrust bearing member designs, etc) make those available. Then small
companies can come along and, using standard economic reasons, actually
build and integrate the thing knowing that each component has been
built and tested by large numbers of 'volunteers'.

How many here would work for free on some component if you knew
that it would be going into LEO? I know I would...

-MM

--
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Michael Mealling        |      Vote Libertarian!       | urn:pin:1
michael@neonym.net      |                              | http://www.neonym.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 25594 invoked from network); 23 Aug 2001 12:35:56 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 23 Aug 2001 12:35:56 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 5087 invoked by uid 50005); 23 Aug 2001 12:35:48 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.51065 secs); 23 Aug 2001 12:35:48 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 23 Aug 2001 12:35:46 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id FAA27502; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 05:17:59 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 95151 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 12:17:57          +0000
Received: from bailey.dscga.com (bailey.dscga.com [198.78.9.11]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id FAA27488 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu,          23 Aug 2001 05:17:56 -0700
Received: (from michael@localhost) by bailey.dscga.com (8.9.1/) id IAA27962;          Thu, 23 Aug 2001 08:13:55 -0400 (EDT)
References: <008801c12afe$5db3aa80$0100a8c0@mkbs>            <a0510032ab7aa260ae068@[63.27.96.224]>            <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
User-Agent: Mutt/1.1.2i
Message-ID:  <20010823081355.F24546@bailey.dscga.com>
Date:         Thu, 23 Aug 2001 08:13:55 -0400
Reply-To: "Michael Mealling" <michael@NEONYM.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Michael Mealling" <michael@NEONYM.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] [EE]: Building a Satellite / Fw: [amsat-bb] Re: Simplesat              details
Comments: To: Troy Prideaux <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>;              from GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU on Thu, Aug 23,              2001 at 03:59:20AM +0000

On Thu, Aug 23, 2001 at 03:59:20AM +0000, Troy Prideaux wrote:
> > >It's not hard, unfortunately it's next to impossible with conventional**
> > >propulsion technology and non government assistance <sigh>
> >
> > The technology has been in the nahds of amateurs for over 10 years.
> > Why else would it be necessary to dramatically INCREASE the
> > regulations for something that has never been done yet?
>
> Unfortunately Jerry, no amateur has come close to orbital technology.
> Absolutely no where near it!!! Not on *ANY* scale.

I have to agree. If it could be done that easily it would have already
been done.  Is there someplace that points out the engineering problems to
be solved? (besides an aerospace degree ;-)

-MM

--
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Michael Mealling        |      Vote Libertarian!       | urn:pin:1
michael@neonym.net      |                              | http://www.neonym.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 1601 invoked from network); 23 Aug 2001 13:12:53 -0000
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 23 Aug 2001 13:12:53 -0000
Received: (qmail 24424 invoked by uid 50005); 23 Aug 2001 13:11:31 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smptf.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.205776 secs); 23 Aug 2001 13:11:31 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 23 Aug 2001 13:11:30 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id FAA27651; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 05:56:58 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 95166 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 12:56:55          +0000
Received: from fep4-orange.clear.net.nz (fep4-orange.clear.net.nz          [203.97.32.4]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id FAA27637          for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 05:56:54 -0700
Received: from mkbs (203-167-160-229.dialup.clear.net.nz [203.167.160.229]) by          fep4-orange.clear.net.nz (1.5/1.7) with SMTP id AAA01842; Fri, 24 Aug          2001 00:56:05 +1200 (NZST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="Windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <017a01c12bd3$554a21a0$0100a8c0@mkbs>
Date:         Fri, 24 Aug 2001 00:31:53 +1200
Reply-To: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Organization: Applied Technology
Subject:      [AR] [EE]: Excellent technical reference page  - especially good              on              sensors
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

An excellent technical reference page.
Superb section on sensors of every conceivable sort.
Brooke is a PICLister

Excellent for students of all ages

        http://www.pacificsites.com/~brooke/

This subject list does not do justice to the page -


Astronomy - Binocular -
CCD - Sundials
Rack and Stack Systems
Military Information
Cryptography
Photography
Electronics
Surveying
Demining
Learning
Weather
Sensors
Movies
Cars
Web  -
Simple Network -
PC Support

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 13864 invoked from network); 23 Aug 2001 13:57:36 -0000
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 23 Aug 2001 13:57:36 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 3635 invoked by uid 50005); 23 Aug 2001 13:56:13 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smptf.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 1.116825 secs); 23 Aug 2001 13:56:13 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 23 Aug 2001 13:56:11 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA27847; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 06:53:56 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 95181 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 13:53:34          +0000
Received: from lekstutis.com (emu.webminders.com [209.176.27.130]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA27832 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 06:53:33 -0700
Received: from Lekstutis.com [64.34.51.25] by lekstutis.com with ESMTP          (SMTPD32-5.05) id AF0C910D02C4; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 10:11:24 -0400
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.78 [en] (Win98; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <009201c12bb2$a5770ba0$0400a8c0@hatjs>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B850ACC.C2D4F183@Lekstutis.com>
Date:         Thu, 23 Aug 2001 09:53:29 -0400
Reply-To: "Arthur J. Lekstutis" <Artie@LEKSTUTIS.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Arthur J. Lekstutis" <Artie@LEKSTUTIS.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] 3 axis magnetometer schematic
Comments: To: Jamie Morken <jmorken@HOME.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Hi,

Looks good, but a few picky comments:

1- It is not necessary to have an onboard flip generator if you have a CPU
available to perform compensation arithmetically, and if you don't need
absolutely maximum compensation. In the Phillips example design they use this
feature for two effects: to 'reset' the device after exposure to strong magnetic
fields, and to eliminate various offsets.

You can reset the device with an external circuit, or even a simple push button
circuit onboard. I prefer the off board method as it requires fewer onboard
components, and isn't something you need to do more then once. Take a look at
the Honeywell HMC1001 documentation for some simple design ideas.

You can eliminate the offset by calibrating the unit on the ground before use
and storing the offsets. The only real down side to this is that some of the
offsets drift. You can either: compensate at ambient before flight, add a
temperature sensor and calibrate over temperature range, or not worry about it
:-) as the offsets will be small enough except for the most critical designs
(i.e. depends on your application).

In any case, your flip circuit does not have any current limiting resistors.
You'll need them on both the transistors base (well, perhaps not. Depends on the
CPU. I don't use the AVR), and certainly to limit current in the 'accidental'
case of activating both transistors simultaneously. This can happen during power
up, or transition glitch, or software bug, and will result in a large current
spike that could reset your CPU or worse. This is shown in the Phillips
application note, and is there for a reason.

2- The compensation coil is not needed at all if you have a CPU and don't have
large stray fields.

3- Your compensation circuit is mono polar, and can only compensate for fields
of one polarity.

4- You might consider adding a 2-wire EEPROM device (if your CPU doesn't have on
board data EEPROM). Very simple and inexpensive way to store compensation values
calculated during calibration routines.

5- I don't see any bypass capacitors for the various components. All will need
some bypassing (see the chip specifications).

5- The MAX4194 has a rated settling time of 7mS at x1000 gain. Just don't forget
that when you measure after flipping!!!

6- A couple of buttons to activate functions (calibrate, arm, etc...), some
status LEDS and you're set!


Later,
Artie Lekstutis

Jamie Morken wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> I took John Carmack's advice and used a schematic with as few analog
> components as possible.
>
> Preliminary schematic (Eagle -free version- CAD files):
> www.rocketresearch.org/3axismag.zip
>
> BMP format (970KB):
> www.rocketresearch.org/3axismag.bmp
>
> relevant datasheet:
> http://www.philips.semiconductors.com/acrobat/various/SC17_GENERAL_MAG_98_1.
> pdf
> (page 26)
>
> Anyone suggest a better method of interfacing to the magnet sensor chips to
> get higher accuracy?
>
> best regards,
> Jamie

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 8856 invoked from network); 23 Aug 2001 14:24:15 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 23 Aug 2001 14:24:15 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 6799 invoked by uid 50005); 23 Aug 2001 14:23:34 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (. Clean. Processed in 0.270158 secs); 23 Aug 2001 14:23:34 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
X-Qmail-Scanner-Mail-From: owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU via smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net
X-Qmail-Scanner-Rcpt-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
X-Qmail-Scanner: 0.96 (No viruses found. Processed in 0.270158 secs)
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 23 Aug 2001 14:23:33 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA27959; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 07:19:21 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 95199 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 14:19:17          +0000
Received: from smtp008.mailsrvcs.net (smtp008pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.187])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA27945 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 07:19:16 -0700
Received: from [63.27.96.224] (1Cust84.tnt1.san-bernardino.ca.da.uu.net          [63.27.96.84]) by smtp008.mailsrvcs.net  with ESMTP for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; id f7NEIgC06601 Thu, 23 Aug 2001 09:18:43          -0500 (CDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: GTE/01rocket@mail.gte.net
References: <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>            <008801c12afe$5db3aa80$0100a8c0@mkbs>            <20010822082932.A24546@bailey.dscga.com>            <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>            <4.3.1.2.20010823010204.02f70398@mail.idsoftware.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <a0510032db7aabf1fb8ad@[63.27.96.224]>
Date:         Thu, 23 Aug 2001 07:18:16 -0700
Reply-To: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] CATS prize ( was Re: [AR] [EE]: Building a Satellite )
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <4.3.1.2.20010823010204.02f70398@mail.idsoftware.com>

>>I said



>>The same over regulation that NASA imposes on payloads on its (the
>>people's) shuttle, it tries to impose on others space programs.  The
>>CATS prize is a perfect example.  A dozen or so teams built rockets
>>and zero flew to anywhere close to the required altitude exclusively
>>due to regulations and rules ADDED at the last minute to complicate
>>the event.

John Carmac said:


>There is an element of truth to that statement, but the implied message
>isn't correct.
>
>Yes, there were additional regulatory hassles added as what could be
>considered anti-CATS-prize tactics, and that is indeed something to
>complain to the government about.


These were terminating events because it more than 1000% increased
the application complexity and the deadline approached for CATS so it
became physically impossible to comply to fly rockets that were
SITTING THERE.


>
>However, saying the failure to reach altitude was "exclusively due to
>regulations" is grossly overstating the capability of the contestants.
>
>Nobody had a slam-dunk, sure-thing rocket.


I was on 3 teams that each had rockets, components of which were
fully tested.  But the risk of system failure while present, let's
assume 50% with tested components, was a much lower failure
probability than regulatory hurtles: 100%.


>
>I made an offer of development funding for CATS prize teams (announced on
>the CATS board), and I talked to at least a dozen of the avowed
>competitors.  For the most part, I was appalled at what I heard.  Basically
>everyone's plan was to build a big rocket and win the CATS prize on the
>first (only) launch.  When I questioned the probability of everything going
>right the first time, one of the teams said that I had insulted them (they
>never launched their rocket at all).


There were 20 teams at the peak.  Alot were "promoters".  About 6-7
actually built realistic hardware and most of those would have flown
and failed in some respect I agree.  I claim the problem is they were
not ALLOWED to try.  They were thus not allowed to LEARN and regroup
either.  Last I checked we have a constitution in this country.

>
>JPA and SORAC had an incremental development plan that looked believable to
>me, and I went out and visited both of them.  I wound up funding both of
>them for the last year's effort ($17k each).  Over the year, they both
>worked at it and had their shares of failures, as expected.


They both had an incremental approach which was good, but with
hardware and technology destined to fail IMHO.


>
>As the deadline drew near, JPA did in fact have a rocket ready for flight,
>and was expecting the same treatment from the FAA they had gotten on their
>previous high altitude waivers, but they were sort of screwed over at the
>last minute.


Supporting my claim.

>
>SORAC had a rocket that might have been able to come together (Bob Fortune,
>want to talk in more detail?) in time, but they were dead in the water on
>regulatory issues on two fronts.
>
>Still, even if they had both launched, I was only figuring that they had
>about a 25% chance each of actually making it (and that may have been
>wishful thinking on my part).  Neither team had had a flawless high
>altitude launch in the previous two years, and while things were still
>being learned and improved, it would have been foolish to assume that
>everything was all worked out.
>
>In the years that the CATS prize was running, who made a test flight to
>half the altitude?  A quarter the altitude?  Garboden's (sp?) rocket is the
>only data point I know of with reasonable success, and I have heard of at
>least a half dozen "space shot" attempts that failed miserably.
>
>John Carmack


--
Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
Opinion, the whole thing.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 12830 invoked from network); 23 Aug 2001 14:31:41 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 23 Aug 2001 14:31:41 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 7953 invoked by uid 50005); 23 Aug 2001 14:30:18 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smptf.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.443688 secs); 23 Aug 2001 14:30:18 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 23 Aug 2001 14:30:17 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA28003; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 07:25:20 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 95206 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 14:25:18          +0000
Received: from smtp004.mailsrvcs.net (smtp004pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.183])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA27989 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 07:25:18 -0700
Received: from [63.27.96.224] (1Cust84.tnt1.san-bernardino.ca.da.uu.net          [63.27.96.84]) by smtp004.mailsrvcs.net  with ESMTP for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; id f7NEOkL15951 Thu, 23 Aug 2001 09:24:46          -0500 (CDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: GTE/01rocket@mail.gte.net
References: Conversation <008801c12afe$5db3aa80$0100a8c0@mkbs> with last            message <20010822192258.B24546@bailey.dscga.com>            <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>            <a0510032ab7aa260ae068@[63.27.96.224]>            <001a01c12b87$a7317460$1b30fea9@kristinscomp>            <3B84B685.789899EC@coastnet.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <a0510032eb7aac2317187@[63.27.96.224]>
Date:         Thu, 23 Aug 2001 07:24:51 -0700
Reply-To: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] [EE]: Building a Satellite
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <3B84B685.789899EC@coastnet.com>

>Ross Borden wrote with unintended insight:



>What's needed is an organization with A) a leadership core that will
>standardize designs, delegate work, integrate & test the results, and,
>most importantly, carry on through thick and thin, through defections,
>disasters and disinterest; B) work groups with the tools and abilities
>to produce the subsystems, and the will to get it done.


Welcome to arocket.

And at least two companies associated with posters.

>
>Looking back at that last paragraph, I am filled with immense pessimism
>that it will ever happen.  I'm going to bed.
>         Non Ignorami Carborundum:          |
>    "Don't Let The Morons Grind You Down"   |


--
Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
Opinion, the whole thing.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 15589 invoked from network); 23 Aug 2001 14:38:49 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 23 Aug 2001 14:38:49 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 15434 invoked by uid 50005); 23 Aug 2001 14:37:26 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smptf.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.16418 secs); 23 Aug 2001 14:37:26 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 23 Aug 2001 14:37:26 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA28075; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 07:34:42 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 95224 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 14:34:40          +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (f25.law9.hotmail.com [64.4.9.25]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA28061 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu,          23 Aug 2001 07:34:40 -0700
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Thu,          23 Aug 2001 07:34:10 -0700
Received: from 164.54.85.209 by lw9fd.law9.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Thu, 23          Aug 2001 14:34:09 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [164.54.85.209]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 23 Aug 2001 14:34:10.0111 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[ABFB0CF0:01C12BE0]
Message-ID:  <F25yzu23LiC1h1jYhAO00012bd3@hotmail.com>
Date:         Thu, 23 Aug 2001 08:34:09 -0600
Reply-To: "Cletus Scharle" <cletusscharle@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Cletus Scharle" <cletusscharle@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] CATS prize ( was Re: [AR] [EE]: Building a Satellite )
Comments: To: 01rocket@GTE.NET
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

>From: Jerry Irvine <01rocket@GTE.NET>
>Reply-To: Jerry Irvine <01rocket@GTE.NET>
>To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
>Subject: Re: CATS prize ( was Re: [AR] [EE]: Building a Satellite )
>Date: Thu, 23 Aug 2001 07:18:16 -0700
>
>
>
>....
>
>There were 20 teams at the peak.  Alot were "promoters".  About 6-7
>actually built realistic hardware and most of those would have flown
>and failed in some respect I agree.  I claim the problem is they were
>not ALLOWED to try.  They were thus not allowed to LEARN and regroup
>either.  Last I checked we have a constitution in this country.
>
>
Check again.

_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 10404 invoked from network); 23 Aug 2001 15:46:51 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 23 Aug 2001 15:46:51 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: (qmail 4383 invoked by uid 50005); 23 Aug 2001 15:45:27 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smptf.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.320911 secs); 23 Aug 2001 15:45:27 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 23 Aug 2001 15:45:26 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA28281; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 08:34:48 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 95244 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 15:33:23          +0000
Received: from wrench.toolcity.net (root@wrench.toolcity.net [208.0.188.2]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA28264 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 08:33:22 -0700
Received: from [63.169.102.134]          (dap-63-169-102-134.meadville-tnt-1.pa.toolcity.net [63.169.102.134])          by wrench.toolcity.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id LAA09113; Thu, 23          Aug 2001 11:33:17 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <v01510100b7aadaaff563@[208.22.189.7]>
Date:         Thu, 23 Aug 2001 11:35:39 -0500
Reply-To: "al bradley" <abradley@TOOLCITY.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "al bradley" <abradley@TOOLCITY.NET>
Subject:      [AR] A non-ignition physical test for grain??
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Hello Listees:

Reviewing available tests for the amateur I notice we often are speculating
about what happens to the grain integrity during its acceleration at
launch. (G-forces).

I am starting to think that we can create equivalent measurable G-forces
during deceleration as a test. For example: a case-bonded grain in a guided
fall stopping against a hardwood block. We know the acceleration of
gravity, the hardwood block can be rigidly supported, so, knowing the
height of the drop gives us the speed at impact, -- seems we should be able
to develop high-G's in a very short height.

Now this may well be an oversimplification so I will count on
thoughts/ideas from our knowledgable folk on the list.

best regards,
al bradley


------------------------------------------------------------------
Can you live Life with this?: "Unless there is a law, an agreement, or a
long-standing custom, No one `Deserves' Anything -- Either Good or Bad!"

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 467 invoked from network); 23 Aug 2001 15:51:37 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 23 Aug 2001 15:51:37 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 30472 invoked by uid 50005); 23 Aug 2001 15:50:55 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (. Clean. Processed in 0.276244 secs); 23 Aug 2001 15:50:55 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
X-Qmail-Scanner-Mail-From: owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU via smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net
X-Qmail-Scanner-Rcpt-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
X-Qmail-Scanner: 0.96 (No viruses found. Processed in 0.276244 secs)
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 23 Aug 2001 15:50:55 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA28342; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 08:42:07 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 95255 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 15:41:04          +0000
Received: from falcon.mail.pas.earthlink.net (falcon.mail.pas.earthlink.net          [207.217.120.74]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA28327          for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 08:41:04 -0700
Received: from [192.168.100.24] (user58.net118.lv.sprint-hsd.net          [208.13.137.58]) by falcon.mail.pas.earthlink.net (EL-8_9_3_3/8.9.3)          with ESMTP id IAA27676 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Thu, 23 Aug 2001          08:41:03 -0700 (PDT)
User-Agent: Microsoft-Outlook-Express-Macintosh-Edition/5.02.2022
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <B7AA73F8.10084%jblatzheim@aerotech-rocketry.com>
Date:         Thu, 23 Aug 2001 08:48:57 -0700
Reply-To: "Jason Blatzheim" <jblatzheim@AEROTECH-ROCKETRY.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jason Blatzheim" <jblatzheim@AEROTECH-ROCKETRY.COM>
Subject:      [AR] Bonding Problems
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Scott-


A few things that might help with your bonding problems


1) Less aggressive curative (or less of it )
2) Lower solids loading - if you're running a real high solids propellant
and don't have the right consistency, you can get a "dry" mix that doesn't
bond well to paper or phenolic. In this case, a little more binder or binder
and plasticizer should cure your woes.
3) As mentioned, using .5% HX-878 Tepanol in your mix should help. But then
again, don't expect miracles. The main purpose of HX-878 and similar
additives is to help keep large AP crystals bonded into the propellant
matrix - not to increase liner/propellant bond strength.
4) Surface prep - if you're using paper, this isn't necessary. But if you
are using phenolic, sanding and degreasing are a minimum.

Holler back at me off line if you need to talk about the specific
formulation. Not that I'm an expert, just that I've blown up a few myself:)!
--


Jason Blatzheim
jblatzheim@aerotech-rocketry.com

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 1641 invoked from network); 23 Aug 2001 15:51:54 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 23 Aug 2001 15:51:54 -0000
Received: (qmail 22336 invoked by uid 50005); 23 Aug 2001 15:51:45 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.219207 secs); 23 Aug 2001 15:51:45 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 23 Aug 2001 15:51:45 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA28386; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 08:47:15 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 95266 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 15:47:14          +0000
Received: from mailgw1a.lmco.com (mailgw1a.lmco.com [192.31.106.7]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA28372 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 08:47:13 -0700
Received: from emss02g01.ems.lmco.com (relay2.ems.lmco.com [166.29.2.54]) by          mailgw1a.lmco.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id JAA10846; Thu, 23 Aug          2001 09:47:11 -0600 (MDT)
Received: from CONVERSION-DAEMON by lmco.com (PMDF V5.2-33 #38887) id          <0GIJ00A012I2U2@lmco.com>; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 09:47:08 -0600 (MDT)
Received: from emss02i00.ems.lmco.com ([166.29.2.48]) by lmco.com (PMDF V5.2-33          #38887) with ESMTP id <0GIJ00HNV2HM6V@lmco.com>; Thu, 23 Aug 2001          09:46:34 -0600 (MDT)
Received: by emss02i00.ems.lmco.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) id          <RMRKX95Q>; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 09:47:40 -0600
Content-return: allowed
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19)
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <EDB5E5136094D311BF1800508B12205E08D29102@emss02m07.ems.lmco.com>
Date:         Thu, 23 Aug 2001 09:47:38 -0600
Reply-To: "Bendel, Timothy B" <timothy.b.bendel@LMCO.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Bendel, Timothy B" <timothy.b.bendel@LMCO.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] [EE]: Building a Satellite / Fw: [amsat-bb] Re: Simplesa              t              details
Comments: To: Jerry Irvine <01rocket@GTE.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Jerry Irvine wrote:

>The same over regulation that NASA imposes on payloads on its (the
>people's) shuttle, it tries to impose on others space programs.  The
>CATS prize is a perfect example.  A dozen or so teams built rockets
>and zero flew to anywhere close to the required altitude exclusively
>due to regulations and rules ADDED at the last minute to complicate
>the event.

>I personally think the government does not want people to send stuff
>to space, even a cheater version of it suborbital, because they FEAR
>the advance of technology by its citizens. I do not think I AM
>overstating either.

Mega dittos. The Dennis Tito affair was a watershed for me. It put the last
nail in the coffin of hope that NASA was actually on "Our Side". Tito was
way, way, way more qualified than some of the political ninnies that NASA
*has* flown, and he didn't even go on the Shuttle! That whole event made me
re-assess NASA's intentions on everything else (sort of like finding condoms
in your wife's purse when you thought she was on the pill...)

Looking on the whole ISS story, it now becomes clear that *every* space
program of significance is in some way subject to NASA oversight. NASA did a
brilliant job of castrating the Russian program (pressuring them to de-orbit
Mir and now imposing criteria on who the Russians can launch on their own
vehicles). Just wait until someone gets close to actually launching for the
X-Prize; NASA will be there and somehow prevent them, even if it's a foreign
team.

In hindsight, I think the Government is trying to keep us stuck on this
planet like insects to flypaper. The CATS Prize further underscored that. I
know that some of you have expressed doubts as to whether any of the
potential launches might have even come close to winning the CATS Prize,
but that is just the point. Why would the Government step in and stop
launches that don't even have much of a chance of going 200K? Safety?
Hardly. I think they wanted to establish a precedent. One could only
conclude that if somebody did have a rocket that COULD go 200K the
Government would *definitely* squash it, or even confiscate it (Mark Goll).


I am optimistic about the amateur community achieving it's goals in the
coming years, but I don't think we'll do that by doing everything the
same-old-way with regards to the government.

Timothy Bendel

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jerry Irvine [SMTP:01rocket@GTE.NET]
> Sent: Wednesday, August 22, 2001 6:20 PM
> To:   AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
> Subject:      Re: [AR] [EE]: Building a Satellite / Fw: [amsat-bb] Re:
> Simplesat details
>
> >Wanna build cheaper satellites? Answer: build cheaper vehicles to get
> them
> >there.
> >
> >Troy.
>
> The same over regulation that NASA imposes on payloads on its (the
> people's) shuttle, it tries to impose on others space programs.  The
> CATS prize is a perfect example.  A dozen or so teams built rockets
> and zero flew to anywhere close to the required altitude exclusively
> due to regulations and rules ADDED at the last minute to complicate
> the event.
>
> I personally think the government does not want people to send stuff
> to space, even a cheater version of it suborbital, because they FEAR
> the advance of technology by its citizens. I do not think I AM
> overstating either.
>
> Government; prove me wrong.  Let space rockets fly in remote sites
> where there is ZERO possibility of damage.
>
> Jerry
>
> --
> Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
> Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
> Opinion, the whole thing.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 14385 invoked from network); 23 Aug 2001 16:02:02 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 23 Aug 2001 16:02:02 -0000
Received: (qmail 19334 invoked by uid 50005); 23 Aug 2001 16:00:38 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smptf.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.223102 secs); 23 Aug 2001 16:00:38 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 23 Aug 2001 16:00:38 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA28454; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 08:54:21 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 95279 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 15:54:16          +0000
Received: from spsystems.net (spsystems.net [209.47.149.227]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA28440 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Thu,          23 Aug 2001 08:54:15 -0700
Received: (from henry@localhost) by spsystems.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id LAA24961;          Thu, 23 Aug 2001 11:53:35 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010823114904.24089G-100000@spsystems.net>
Date:         Thu, 23 Aug 2001 11:53:35 -0400
Reply-To: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] [EE]: Building a Satellite / Fw: [amsat-bb] Re: Simplesa              t              details
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <EDB5E5136094D311BF1800508B12205E08D29102@emss02m07.ems.lmco.com>

On Thu, 23 Aug 2001, Bendel, Timothy B wrote:
> NASA did a
> brilliant job of castrating the Russian program (pressuring them to de-orbit
> Mir and now imposing criteria on who the Russians can launch on their own
> vehicles)...

One interesting and relevant fact:  the Russians said it was fine by them
for all the partners to get together and establish criteria for station
visitors, but that once the criteria were established, the decision as to
whether a particular person slated to fly on Soyuz *meets* the criteria
will be made by the Russians, not by NASA or the other partners.  That is,
the Russians don't object to establishing rules, but they do object to
giving NASA an arbitrary veto on visitors.

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 23203 invoked from network); 23 Aug 2001 16:32:51 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 23 Aug 2001 16:32:51 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 9521 invoked by uid 50005); 23 Aug 2001 16:32:41 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.251409 secs); 23 Aug 2001 16:32:41 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 23 Aug 2001 16:32:41 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA28560; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 09:15:12 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 95293 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 16:15:06          +0000
Received: from mailgw1a.lmco.com (mailgw1a.lmco.com [192.31.106.7]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA28546 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 09:15:06 -0700
Received: from emss02g01.ems.lmco.com (relay2.ems.lmco.com [166.29.2.54]) by          mailgw1a.lmco.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id KAA27892 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 10:15:05 -0600 (MDT)
Received: from CONVERSION-DAEMON by lmco.com (PMDF V5.2-33 #38887) id          <0GIJ00N013SX4V@lmco.com> for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 23 Aug 2001          10:15:04 -0600 (MDT)
Received: from emss02i00.ems.lmco.com ([166.29.2.48]) by lmco.com (PMDF V5.2-33          #38887) with ESMTP id <0GIJ00FGB3SWF2@lmco.com> for          AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 10:14:56 -0600 (MDT)
Received: by emss02i00.ems.lmco.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) id          <RMRKX07P>; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 10:16:02 -0600
Content-return: allowed
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19)
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <EDB5E5136094D311BF1800508B12205E08D29103@emss02m07.ems.lmco.com>
Date:         Thu, 23 Aug 2001 10:16:00 -0600
Reply-To: "Bendel, Timothy B" <timothy.b.bendel@LMCO.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Bendel, Timothy B" <timothy.b.bendel@LMCO.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] [EE]: Building a Satellite / Fw: [amsat-bb] Re: Simplesa              t              details
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Henry,

While that may sound good, the reality is that the Russians are very
dependant on NASA money to participate at all in ISS. Suppose the Russians
wanted to fly another "tourist", like this South African tycoon they've
mentioned. First, NASA has to agree to "criteria", which could take many
years of deliberations, especially by fostering dissent with the other
member nations. Then there is behind-the-scenes "negotiations"; i.e. NASA
threatens to give that money they promised to the Russians to the Italians
instead. Lastly, there is flat-out rejection of the Russian "tourist". Then
what- the Russians fly him anyway? I doubt it. I think the Russians will
then have to "agree" with NASA publicly that some minor element of "Safety"
has not been satisfied, and not fly the "tourist".
In hindsight, it was vry wise of Tito to press ahead and fly immediately
rather than wait 6 months, because that "6 months" would have turned into
years, and then turned into never.

Tim Bendel

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Henry Spencer [SMTP:henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET]
> Sent: Thursday, August 23, 2001 9:54 AM
> To:   AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
> Subject:      Re: [AR] [EE]: Building a Satellite / Fw: [amsat-bb] Re:
> Simplesa t details
>
> On Thu, 23 Aug 2001, Bendel, Timothy B wrote:
> > NASA did a
> > brilliant job of castrating the Russian program (pressuring them to
> de-orbit
> > Mir and now imposing criteria on who the Russians can launch on their
> own
> > vehicles)...
>
> One interesting and relevant fact:  the Russians said it was fine by them
> for all the partners to get together and establish criteria for station
> visitors, but that once the criteria were established, the decision as to
> whether a particular person slated to fly on Soyuz *meets* the criteria
> will be made by the Russians, not by NASA or the other partners.  That is,
> the Russians don't object to establishing rules, but they do object to
> giving NASA an arbitrary veto on visitors.
>
>                                                           Henry Spencer
>                                                        henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 10014 invoked from network); 23 Aug 2001 16:51:08 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 23 Aug 2001 16:51:08 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 19553 invoked by uid 50005); 23 Aug 2001 16:50:25 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (. Clean. Processed in 0.190206 secs); 23 Aug 2001 16:50:25 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
X-Qmail-Scanner-Mail-From: owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU via smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net
X-Qmail-Scanner-Rcpt-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
X-Qmail-Scanner: 0.96 (No viruses found. Processed in 0.190206 secs)
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 23 Aug 2001 16:50:24 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA28707; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 09:41:42 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 95313 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 16:41:33          +0000
Received: from mail.conpute.com ([207.164.87.145]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7)          with ESMTP id JAA28692 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 23 Aug 2001          09:41:32 -0700
Received: by MAIL with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) id <RJ1TMY9B>; Thu,          23 Aug 2001 12:37:41 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19)
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Message-ID:  <814DCE01F6D7D311994D204C4F4F50201889C8@MAIL>
Date:         Thu, 23 Aug 2001 12:37:40 -0400
Reply-To: "Earl Pottinger" <earlcp@CONPUTE.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Earl Pottinger" <earlcp@CONPUTE.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Pistonless Piston Pumps
Comments: To: Anthony Colette <Rockitman@sprintmail.com>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Thank you very much for the information, I think I understand what you are
saying now.  Back to the drawing board for me.

              Earl Colby Pottinger

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 20933 invoked from network); 23 Aug 2001 17:01:23 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 23 Aug 2001 17:01:23 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 16485 invoked by uid 50005); 23 Aug 2001 16:59:59 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smptf.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.224363 secs); 23 Aug 2001 16:59:59 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 23 Aug 2001 16:59:59 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA28860; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 09:54:10 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 95329 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 16:54:08          +0000
Received: from ns.vanguard.com (ns.VANGUARD.COM [192.175.173.31]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA28845 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 09:54:08 -0700
Received: from eagle1.vanguard.com (eagle1.VANGUARD.COM [192.175.141.70]) by          ns.vanguard.com (Switch-2.1.3/Switch-2.1.0) with ESMTP id          f7NGrxg28461 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 12:54:00          -0400 (EDT)
Received: from vgi4mail.vanguard.com (vgi4mail.vanguard.com [10.254.65.16]) by          eagle1.vanguard.com (Switch-2.1.3/Switch-2.1.0) with SMTP id          f7NGs5j05994 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 12:54:05          -0400 (EDT)
Received: by vgi4mail.vanguard.com(Lotus SMTP MTA v4.6.6  (890.1 7-16-1999))           id 85256AB1.005CEC75 ; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 12:54:58 -0400
X-Lotus-FromDomain: VGINOTES
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Disposition: inline
Message-ID:  <85256AB1.005CEA87.00@vgi4mail.vanguard.com>
Date:         Thu, 23 Aug 2001 12:53:58 -0400
Reply-To: <Waysie_Atkins@VANGUARD.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <Waysie_Atkins@VANGUARD.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] [EE]: Building a Satellite / Fw: [amsat-bb] Re:              Simplesatdetails
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

<Anybody remember the conniption fit NASA had when a mere civilian bought
<his way into orbit ?


It was quite an embarrassing moment for me as a proud American and not good
politics, IMHO, as we seem to be becoming more dependent on the Russians to help
supply the ISS and for emergency egress.


<That's my point. If we build our own using our collective
<cost cutting and mass production [sic] techniques we could create
<a small scale launch system that would allow the amateur satellite
<guys a way of getting out from under NASA's overhead...


Would not this allow a different criteria for launch readiness?  In other words
since your 1-10 kg amsat is not on the same launch vehicle as a multi-ton
multi-million dollar commercial (or military?) the down side is not as severe.
The launch vehicle cost much less, so greater risk to it is acceptable,  and is
much less massive thus lowering the destructive potential of a *non-nominal*
re-entry.  As another had posted earlier lots of attempts at a lower success
rate yields more experience, education and successful launches than a very small
number of expensive attempts, even with a 100% ratio.  If you never get up to
bat, you will NEVER get even a base hit, much less a home run.

Amateur rockets for amateur satellites seem like a perfect fit, and a win-win
situation.


Waysie Atkins

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 8682 invoked from network); 23 Aug 2001 18:24:01 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 23 Aug 2001 18:24:01 -0000
Received: (qmail 2663 invoked by uid 50005); 23 Aug 2001 18:22:37 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smptf.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.452232 secs); 23 Aug 2001 18:22:37 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 23 Aug 2001 18:22:36 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA29285; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 11:20:20 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 95369 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 18:20:15          +0000
Received: from spsystems.net (spsystems.net [209.47.149.227]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA29270 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Thu,          23 Aug 2001 11:20:14 -0700
Received: (from henry@localhost) by spsystems.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id OAA26266;          Thu, 23 Aug 2001 14:19:34 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010823141336.26086A-100000@spsystems.net>
Date:         Thu, 23 Aug 2001 14:19:34 -0400
Reply-To: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] [EE]: Building a Satellite / Fw: [amsat-bb] Re: Simplesa              t              details
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <EDB5E5136094D311BF1800508B12205E08D29103@emss02m07.ems.lmco.com>

On Thu, 23 Aug 2001, Bendel, Timothy B wrote:
> While that may sound good, the reality is that the Russians are very
> dependant on NASA money to participate at all in ISS.

Not necessarily -- they have another source of funding now!  Rumor hath it
that Tito's $20M paid the entire cost of that flight, not just the
incremental cost of adding him, and that is reasonably plausible.

And unless I've missed something, there is no ongoing flow of US money
into the Russian program -- all the US contributions were one-shot lump
sums, and it's most unlikely that there will be any more of those, since
it's gotten very unpopular in Congress.

> Suppose the Russians
> wanted to fly another "tourist", like this South African tycoon they've
> mentioned. First, NASA has to agree to "criteria", which could take many
> years of deliberations, especially by fostering dissent with the other
> member nations.

My understanding is that the criteria negotiations are pretty much done,
actually, although I haven't seen a report on the results.

> Then there is behind-the-scenes "negotiations"; i.e. NASA
> threatens to give that money they promised to the Russians to the Italians
> instead...

Again, as far as I know, there is no such money and so NASA doesn't have
that form of leverage.

> Lastly, there is flat-out rejection of the Russian "tourist". Then
> what- the Russians fly him anyway?

Why not?  That's what happened with Tito.

> In hindsight, it was vry wise of Tito to press ahead and fly immediately
> rather than wait 6 months, because that "6 months" would have turned into
> years, and then turned into never.

Now that, I'll agree with...

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 16334 invoked from network); 23 Aug 2001 18:47:05 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 23 Aug 2001 18:47:05 -0000
Received: (qmail 19766 invoked by uid 50005); 23 Aug 2001 18:46:22 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (. Clean. Processed in 0.195352 secs); 23 Aug 2001 18:46:22 -0000
X-Qmail-Scanner-Mail-From: owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU via smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
X-Qmail-Scanner-Rcpt-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
X-Qmail-Scanner: 0.96 (No viruses found. Processed in 0.195352 secs)
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 23 Aug 2001 18:46:21 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA29431; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 11:41:06 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 95384 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 18:41:00          +0000
Received: from mailgw1a.lmco.com (mailgw1a.lmco.com [192.31.106.7]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA29416 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 11:40:59 -0700
Received: from emss02g01.ems.lmco.com (relay2.ems.lmco.com [166.29.2.54]) by          mailgw1a.lmco.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id MAA20917 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 12:40:58 -0600 (MDT)
Received: from CONVERSION-DAEMON by lmco.com (PMDF V5.2-33 #38887) id          <0GIJ00201AK1C7@lmco.com> for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 23 Aug 2001          12:40:52 -0600 (MDT)
Received: from emss02i00.ems.lmco.com ([166.29.2.48]) by lmco.com (PMDF V5.2-33          #38887) with ESMTP id <0GIJ00G3KAJN0G@lmco.com> for          AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 12:40:35 -0600 (MDT)
Received: by emss02i00.ems.lmco.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) id          <RMRKY1WC>; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 12:41:41 -0600
Content-return: allowed
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19)
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <EDB5E5136094D311BF1800508B12205E08D29104@emss02m07.ems.lmco.com>
Date:         Thu, 23 Aug 2001 12:41:35 -0600
Reply-To: "Bendel, Timothy B" <timothy.b.bendel@LMCO.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Bendel, Timothy B" <timothy.b.bendel@LMCO.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] [EE]: Building a Satellite / Fw: [amsat-bb] Re: Simplesa              t              details
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Henry,

        >Not necessarily -- they have another source of funding now!  Rumor
hath it
        >that Tito's $20M paid the entire cost of that flight, not just the
        >incremental cost of adding him, and that is reasonably plausible.

        >And unless I've missed something, there is no ongoing flow of US
money
        >into the Russian program -- all the US contributions were one-shot
lump
        >sums, and it's most unlikely that there will be any more of those,
since
        >it's gotten very unpopular in Congress.

I did not know that there was no more cash flow to the Russians...that does
help matters (especially for the Russians!) Thanks for informing me. This,
and the $20 mil ticket fee paying the entire cost, does give some hope.
Still, I think that NASA has displayed an incredible amount of arrogance
recently, and the government as a whole seems to be trying to out law
private space projects (not the same thing as "commercial space" which is
tightly regulated)

Tim Bendel



> -----Original Message-----
> From: Henry Spencer [SMTP:henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET]
> Sent: Thursday, August 23, 2001 12:20 PM
> To:   AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
> Subject:      Re: [AR] [EE]: Building a Satellite / Fw: [amsat-bb] Re:
> Simplesa t details
>
> On Thu, 23 Aug 2001, Bendel, Timothy B wrote:
> > While that may sound good, the reality is that the Russians are very
> > dependant on NASA money to participate at all in ISS.
>
> Not necessarily -- they have another source of funding now!  Rumor hath it
> that Tito's $20M paid the entire cost of that flight, not just the
> incremental cost of adding him, and that is reasonably plausible.
>
> And unless I've missed something, there is no ongoing flow of US money
> into the Russian program -- all the US contributions were one-shot lump
> sums, and it's most unlikely that there will be any more of those, since
> it's gotten very unpopular in Congress.
>
> > Suppose the Russians
> > wanted to fly another "tourist", like this South African tycoon they've
> > mentioned. First, NASA has to agree to "criteria", which could take many
> > years of deliberations, especially by fostering dissent with the other
> > member nations.
>
> My understanding is that the criteria negotiations are pretty much done,
> actually, although I haven't seen a report on the results.
>
> > Then there is behind-the-scenes "negotiations"; i.e. NASA
> > threatens to give that money they promised to the Russians to the
> Italians
> > instead...
>
> Again, as far as I know, there is no such money and so NASA doesn't have
> that form of leverage.
>
> > Lastly, there is flat-out rejection of the Russian "tourist". Then
> > what- the Russians fly him anyway?
>
> Why not?  That's what happened with Tito.
>
> > In hindsight, it was vry wise of Tito to press ahead and fly immediately
> > rather than wait 6 months, because that "6 months" would have turned
> into
> > years, and then turned into never.
>
> Now that, I'll agree with...
>
>                                                           Henry Spencer
>                                                        henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 24146 invoked from network); 23 Aug 2001 20:33:08 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 23 Aug 2001 20:33:08 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 30784 invoked by uid 50005); 23 Aug 2001 20:32:58 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.285196 secs); 23 Aug 2001 20:32:58 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 23 Aug 2001 20:32:58 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA29858; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 13:17:51 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 95407 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 20:17:50          +0000
Received: from idsoftware.com (predator.idsoftware.com [192.246.40.34]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA29843 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 13:17:49 -0700
Received: from [192.246.40.129] (account johnc HELO lightning.idsoftware.com)          by idsoftware.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 3.4.7) with ESMTP id 356405          for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 15:17:49 -0500
X-Sender: johnc@mail.idsoftware.com (Unverified)
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.1
References: <4.3.1.2.20010823010204.02f70398@mail.idsoftware.com>            <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>            <008801c12afe$5db3aa80$0100a8c0@mkbs>            <20010822082932.A24546@bailey.dscga.com>            <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>            <4.3.1.2.20010823010204.02f70398@mail.idsoftware.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <4.3.1.2.20010823145959.02e29458@mail.idsoftware.com>
Date:         Thu, 23 Aug 2001 15:16:26 -0500
Reply-To: "John Carmack" <johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Carmack" <johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] CATS prize ( was Re: [AR] [EE]: Building a Satellite )
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <a0510032db7aabf1fb8ad@[63.27.96.224]>

>
>>
>>However, saying the failure to reach altitude was "exclusively due to
>>regulations" is grossly overstating the capability of the contestants.
>>
>>Nobody had a slam-dunk, sure-thing rocket.
>
>
>I was on 3 teams that each had rockets, components of which were
>fully tested.  But the risk of system failure while present, let's
>assume 50% with tested components, was a much lower failure
>probability than regulatory hurtles: 100%.

I harp on this point a bit, because I think it is damaging to the community
to overestimate our abilities.  A often hear "Amateurs would have made it
if not for the government", and sometimes "Amateurs would have EASILY made
it".  This implies that the technical issues are all resolved, which I
don't think there is any evidence for.

If someone has two flawless back to back launches to 100+km, I will
consider the technical issues well in hand.  Look back over the last five
years of high end experimental rocketry at how many big projects made their
claims, then either never flew or failed miserably.

I guess I am not as much of an optimist as many rocketeers, because I
assume that things won't work until the are forced to work, and that you
need to plan on trying multiple times.  I know that much of this optimism
is due to financial realities, but I would argue that if you don't have
enough money to make multiple tries at 100km, you should be aiming for 30km
with reliability.

Also note that the regulatory hurdles weren't 100%, as Ky and HARC did both
manage to launch for 100+km.


>>JPA and SORAC had an incremental development plan that looked believable to
>>me, and I went out and visited both of them.  I wound up funding both of
>>them for the last year's effort ($17k each).  Over the year, they both
>>worked at it and had their shares of failures, as expected.
>
>
>They both had an incremental approach which was good, but with
>hardware and technology destined to fail IMHO.

Sure, rockoon launch is a crap-shoot, but in JPA's favor, they hadn't had a
motor or recovery failure in years, which is a pretty good record for big
rockets.

What was your issue with the SORAC vehicle?  A 6" diameter, high mass
fraction nitrous hybrid seems like a very direct CATS prize vehicle. (be
nice, there are SORAC folks on the list...)

John Carmack

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 25646 invoked from network); 23 Aug 2001 20:33:29 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 23 Aug 2001 20:33:29 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 23214 invoked by uid 50005); 23 Aug 2001 20:32:46 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (. Clean. Processed in 0.20134 secs); 23 Aug 2001 20:32:46 -0000
X-Qmail-Scanner-Mail-From: owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU via smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net
X-Qmail-Scanner-Rcpt-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
X-Qmail-Scanner: 0.96 (No viruses found. Processed in 0.20134 secs)
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 23 Aug 2001 20:32:45 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA29831; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 13:15:11 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 95400 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 20:15:04          +0000
Received: from spsystems.net (spsystems.net [209.47.149.227]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA29816 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Thu,          23 Aug 2001 13:15:04 -0700
Received: (from henry@localhost) by spsystems.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id QAA27435;          Thu, 23 Aug 2001 16:14:23 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010823160455.26086G-100000@spsystems.net>
Date:         Thu, 23 Aug 2001 16:14:23 -0400
Reply-To: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] [EE]: Building a Satellite / Fw: [amsat-bb] Re: Simplesat              details
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>

On Wed, 22 Aug 2001, Troy Prideaux wrote:
> educate the fine people involved the principles required to build space
> craft ie. the QA involved, the attention to detail, the spotless
> environment required etc.

Yeah, all those things that Sputnik 1 didn't have...

> ...but do they know what's involved with building spacecraft?  In
> the late 50's - early to mid 60's JPL learned its lesson the hard way with
> the Ranger program. The failures of this program were a direct consequence
> of the attention payed to above mentioned philosophies.

Yes and no.  Beware of the "after this, therefore because of it" fallacy.
Just because the Ranger program got healthy after JPL made a whole bunch
of changes, doesn't mean that all those changes were necessary.

Remember, NASA has very little incentive to be efficient, and great
incentive to avoid embarrassing failures.  That's a recipe for piling up
masses of unnecessary -- even harmful -- precautions and procedures, just
because they look like they *might* occasionally prevent a failure.

>  So I suppose their (NASA) point is why just send another satellite up into
> orbit for the sake of satisfying a small group of amateurs ambitions and
> curiosities if it teaches them the wrong way of how to go about it?

Even with all the extra paperwork imposed when NASA is supplying the
launch, the radio amateurs still build their satellites far more cheaply
and efficiently than NASA does.  JPL's official position on this is that
the amateur successes are "an anomaly", i.e. they think the amateurs got
lucky... again and again and again.

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 11244 invoked from network); 23 Aug 2001 21:19:53 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 23 Aug 2001 21:19:53 -0000
Received: (qmail 5217 invoked by uid 50005); 23 Aug 2001 21:19:10 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (. Clean. Processed in 0.139662 secs); 23 Aug 2001 21:19:10 -0000
X-Qmail-Scanner-Mail-From: owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU via smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net
X-Qmail-Scanner-Rcpt-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
X-Qmail-Scanner: 0.96 (No viruses found. Processed in 0.139662 secs)
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 23 Aug 2001 21:19:10 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA30067; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 14:04:33 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 95429 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 21:04:26          +0000
Received: from femail1.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail1.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.0.95.81]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA30052 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 14:04:26 -0700
Received: from hal2001 ([24.77.53.16]) by femail1.sdc1.sfba.home.com (InterMail          vM.4.01.03.20 201-229-121-120-20010223) with SMTP id          <20010823210417.FRNH27977.femail1.sdc1.sfba.home.com@hal2001> for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 14:04:17 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <00b801c12c16$0870d700$0400a8c0@hatjs>
Date:         Thu, 23 Aug 2001 13:56:07 -0700
Reply-To: "Jamie Morken" <jmorken@HOME.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jamie Morken" <jmorken@HOME.COM>
Subject:      [AR] rf design
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Hi all,

I spoke again with the fellow from leftright circuit design and he has
offered to do an rf design for free!  This is damn nice of him and he says
he is doing it because it is non profit.

Ray your generous $200 is safe!

best regards,
Jamie

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 13307 invoked from network); 23 Aug 2001 21:20:25 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 23 Aug 2001 21:20:25 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 6276 invoked by uid 50005); 23 Aug 2001 21:18:26 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smpte.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.170567 secs); 23 Aug 2001 21:18:26 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 23 Aug 2001 21:18:26 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA30103; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 14:12:20 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 95428 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 21:12:15          +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (f173.law8.hotmail.com [216.33.241.173]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA30045 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 14:02:15 -0700
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Thu,          23 Aug 2001 14:01:45 -0700
Received: from 165.127.249.69 by lw8fd.law8.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Thu, 23          Aug 2001 21:01:44 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [165.127.249.69]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 23 Aug 2001 21:01:45.0161 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[D1121390:01C12C16]
Message-ID:  <F173nccYTjr8cU6xfPT00005b26@hotmail.com>
Date:         Thu, 23 Aug 2001 21:01:44 +0000
Reply-To: "Bryan Flynt" <b_flynt@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Bryan Flynt" <b_flynt@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      [AR] Gov. Regs (CATS Prize)
Comments: To: cletusscharle@hotmail.com
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

In my view people are slightly off aim on why NASA and the Gov. or putting
up all these regulations. By the way, I am a state government employee and a
former State Department employee so I have some insight into what goes on in
the Government.  It has been mentioned that the Gov/Nasa are afraid of the
public having technology.  While that is close, it is not to the root of the
problem.  Here is my theory, remember it is just my opinion.

Reason 1:
Imagine for a second that a citizen (you and me) put a rocket into space or
orbit.  It would make the news and probably be a big event.  With all the
attention it is sure to gather the attention of Senators and Congressman who
determine the funding for NASA.  They would think well if an average person
can do this, why are we giving NASA so many 100's of millions a year?

Reason 2:
How much money does NASA get from launching payload into space, $3000/lb?
I'm only guessing but either way it is very, very expensive.  That sure pays
for a bunch of big salaries.  Why let competition spring up if you can have
a monopoly?

Reason 3:
When the media gets a hold of a story like an amateur putting a rocket into
space, they are going to portray it as a bunch of guys in their garage
building it.  Which granted may be the case but they quit possibly might
leave out the fact that these people have spent lots of money, time and are
very intelligent people.  All this will just serve to make the engineers and
the upper management at NASA look less prestigious.  Which by the way, I'm
sure they would not appreciate.

Let's put it all together.  The workers and upper management at NASA know
these things can and probably would happen.  Therefore they go to their
lobbyist and friendly congressman/senators and convince them that it is very
dangerous for the public to undertake these projects and only they have the
knowledge to do it safely.  By doing this they are both protecting their
jobs/money and increasing their prestige.  The congressman/senators remember
have no clue about rockets, the only information they have to go on is what
NASA tells them.  Don't think of changing it any day soon, either.  Why
would a Senator/Congressman listen to "a bunch of guys in their garage" when
they have a Ph.D. in Aerospace Engineering and head of some NASA program
telling them that is the way it is?

One way to change the course that we are on (I definitely do not advocate
this) is for someone to just lunch their rocket, and forget all about the
permits.  If it made it to space it would forever change the way it is.  But
you can bet your ass you would be spending some time, maybe the rest of your
life, in Federal Prison.

Bryan F.


_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 4756 invoked from network); 23 Aug 2001 21:40:43 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 23 Aug 2001 21:40:43 -0000
Received: (qmail 6269 invoked by uid 50005); 23 Aug 2001 21:40:33 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.400477 secs); 23 Aug 2001 21:40:33 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 23 Aug 2001 21:40:32 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA30417; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 14:37:09 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 95450 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 21:36:58          +0000
Received: from albatross.wgn.net (www.wgn.net [64.14.252.81] (may be forged))          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA30402 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 14:36:58 -0700
Received: from cronos (eli-208-187-17-14.wgn.net [208.187.17.14]) by          albatross.wgn.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id OAA22833 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 14:38:11 -0700
References:  <F173nccYTjr8cU6xfPT00005b26@hotmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <041f01c12c1b$e1c7ee80$c36122c0@cronos>
Date:         Thu, 23 Aug 2001 14:37:58 -0700
Reply-To: "Wedge Oldham" <wedge@WESTWORLD.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Wedge Oldham" <wedge@WESTWORLD.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Gov. Regs (CATS Prize)
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

You know.... I was thinking the same thing, how about we (to coin a phrase)
"Just Do It"?

Last time I was at BALLS, I was talking to some rocketeers from the U.K.,
they explained that there was no way for them to get a wavier to the 35K
they were trying to reach, and had to come to Black Rock to do it. They also
explained that breaking the wavier that they could get (in the UK) would
incur a 5000 pound fine.

Now I'm not sure of all the logistics involved, but off the top of my head,
I'd have to figure that a 5000 pound fine would be cheaper than flying 12
people and a rocket from the UK to Nevada and renting an RV for a few days.

So what would happen if an individual went to Black Rock, and fired off a
rocket that went to 250 Kilometers?

Wedge Oldham
http://NikeProject.com


----- Original Message -----
From: "Bryan Flynt" <b_flynt@HOTMAIL.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Thursday, August 23, 2001 2:01 PM
Subject: [AR] Gov. Regs (CATS Prize)


> In my view people are slightly off aim on why NASA and the Gov. or putting
> up all these regulations. By the way, I am a state government employee and
a
> former State Department employee so I have some insight into what goes on
in
> the Government.  It has been mentioned that the Gov/Nasa are afraid of the
> public having technology.  While that is close, it is not to the root of
the
> problem.  Here is my theory, remember it is just my opinion.
>
> Reason 1:
> Imagine for a second that a citizen (you and me) put a rocket into space
or
> orbit.  It would make the news and probably be a big event.  With all the
> attention it is sure to gather the attention of Senators and Congressman
who
> determine the funding for NASA.  They would think well if an average
person
> can do this, why are we giving NASA so many 100's of millions a year?
>
> Reason 2:
> How much money does NASA get from launching payload into space, $3000/lb?
> I'm only guessing but either way it is very, very expensive.  That sure
pays
> for a bunch of big salaries.  Why let competition spring up if you can
have
> a monopoly?
>
> Reason 3:
> When the media gets a hold of a story like an amateur putting a rocket
into
> space, they are going to portray it as a bunch of guys in their garage
> building it.  Which granted may be the case but they quit possibly might
> leave out the fact that these people have spent lots of money, time and
are
> very intelligent people.  All this will just serve to make the engineers
and
> the upper management at NASA look less prestigious.  Which by the way, I'm
> sure they would not appreciate.
>
> Let's put it all together.  The workers and upper management at NASA know
> these things can and probably would happen.  Therefore they go to their
> lobbyist and friendly congressman/senators and convince them that it is
very
> dangerous for the public to undertake these projects and only they have
the
> knowledge to do it safely.  By doing this they are both protecting their
> jobs/money and increasing their prestige.  The congressman/senators
remember
> have no clue about rockets, the only information they have to go on is
what
> NASA tells them.  Don't think of changing it any day soon, either.  Why
> would a Senator/Congressman listen to "a bunch of guys in their garage"
when
> they have a Ph.D. in Aerospace Engineering and head of some NASA program
> telling them that is the way it is?
>
> One way to change the course that we are on (I definitely do not advocate
> this) is for someone to just lunch their rocket, and forget all about the
> permits.  If it made it to space it would forever change the way it is.
But
> you can bet your ass you would be spending some time, maybe the rest of
your
> life, in Federal Prison.
>
> Bryan F.
>
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 6150 invoked from network); 23 Aug 2001 22:02:42 -0000
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 23 Aug 2001 22:02:42 -0000
Received: (qmail 29259 invoked by uid 50005); 23 Aug 2001 21:58:13 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smptf.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.538102 secs); 23 Aug 2001 21:58:13 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 23 Aug 2001 21:58:10 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA30605; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 14:57:05 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 95461 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 21:57:03          +0000
Received: from fep4-orange.clear.net.nz (fep4-orange.clear.net.nz          [203.97.32.4]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA30590          for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 14:57:02 -0700
Received: from mkbs (203-167-162-223.dialup.clear.net.nz [203.167.162.223]) by          fep4-orange.clear.net.nz (1.5/1.7) with SMTP id JAA25305; Fri, 24 Aug          2001 09:56:58 +1200 (NZST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="Windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <000301c12c1e$e46d64a0$0100a8c0@mkbs>
Date:         Fri, 24 Aug 2001 01:00:14 +1200
Reply-To: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Organization: Applied Technology
Subject:      [AR] Fw:      Re: [EE]: Building a Satellite / Fw: [amsat-bb] Re:              Simplesat              details
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Someone else's take.




----- Original Message -----
From: "Alan B. Pearce" <A.B.Pearce@RL.AC.UK>
To: <PICLIST@MITVMA.MIT.EDU>
Sent: Friday, 24 August 2001 00:27
Subject: Re: [EE]: Building a Satellite / Fw: [amsat-bb] Re: Simplesat
details


> >Building the satellite is less than 5% of the job...
>
> >Just guessing here...
>
> You are not wrong!
>
> Alan (who works in the satellite industry)
>
> --
> http://www.piclist.com#nomail Going offline? Don't AutoReply us!
> email listserv@mitvma.mit.edu with SET PICList DIGEST in the body
>
>
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 12057 invoked from network); 23 Aug 2001 22:11:20 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 23 Aug 2001 22:11:20 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 21661 invoked by uid 50005); 23 Aug 2001 22:11:10 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.234025 secs); 23 Aug 2001 22:11:10 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 23 Aug 2001 22:11:10 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA30716; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 15:09:12 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 95479 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 22:09:11          +0000
Received: from 172.16.0.1 (hfrdesign.com [12.23.240.51]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id PAA30701 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Thu,          23 Aug 2001 15:09:11 -0700
Received: from HFR-Message_Server by 172.16.0.1 with Novell_GroupWise; Thu, 23          Aug 2001 17:05:59 -0500
X-Mailer: Novell GroupWise 5.5.3
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by itc.uci.edu id PAA30702
Message-ID:  <sb8537f7.099@172.16.0.1>
Date:         Thu, 23 Aug 2001 17:05:36 -0500
Reply-To: "Alan Pedigo" <APedigo@HFRDESIGN.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Alan Pedigo" <APedigo@HFRDESIGN.COM>
Subject:      [AR] Tomahawk cruise missile
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

I was watching a show on the Discovery Channel a couple of nights ago and they were airing a special regarding the use of cruise missiles.  They showed a familiar piece of video tape of a Tomahawk cruise missile launch from aboard a ship.  For the first 5 seconds of the flight or so, it seems that the missile is thrusting nearly vertically, but the missile seems to be moving almost sideways away from the ship.  Is this just an effect of camera angle or is it some kind of manipulation of the thrust until it can get above a certain altitude?

Alan Pedigo

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 4532 invoked from network); 23 Aug 2001 22:17:01 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 23 Aug 2001 22:17:01 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 14388 invoked by uid 50005); 23 Aug 2001 22:09:34 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smptf.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 1.611222 secs); 23 Aug 2001 22:09:34 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 23 Aug 2001 22:09:31 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA30690; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 15:07:19 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 95472 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 22:07:16          +0000
Received: from po3.glue.umd.edu (po3.glue.umd.edu [128.8.10.123]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA30675 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 15:07:15 -0700
Received: from y.glue.umd.edu (IDENT:root@y.glue.umd.edu [128.8.10.68]) by          po3.glue.umd.edu (8.10.1/8.10.1) with ESMTP id f7NM7EY01834 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 18:07:14 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from y.glue.umd.edu (IDENT:sendmail@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by          y.glue.umd.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id SAA21667 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 18:07:14 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from localhost (acase@localhost) by y.glue.umd.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with          ESMTP id SAA21652 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 23 Aug 2001          18:07:13 -0400 (EDT)
X-Authentication-Warning: y.glue.umd.edu: acase owned process doing -bs
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.GSO.4.21.0108231756210.19827-100000@y.glue.umd.edu>
Date:         Thu, 23 Aug 2001 18:07:12 -0400
Reply-To: "Andrew Case" <acase@GLUE.UMD.EDU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Andrew Case" <acase@GLUE.UMD.EDU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] CATS prize ( was Re: [AR] [EE]: Building a Satellite )
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <4.3.1.2.20010823145959.02e29458@mail.idsoftware.com>

On Thu, 23 Aug 2001, John Carmack wrote:

> I harp on this point a bit, because I think it is damaging to the community
> to overestimate our abilities.  A often hear "Amateurs would have made it
> if not for the government", and sometimes "Amateurs would have EASILY made
> it".  This implies that the technical issues are all resolved, which I
> don't think there is any evidence for.

I agree with the first part - that it's dangerous (or at least stupid)
to overestimate our abilities. OTOH, I think most of the technical
issues are resolved - the hard part is learning how to implement the
solutions - which I guess could be seen as saying they're not solved,
but I think the issues are distinct. In my own experience, implementing
(relatively) cutting edge technologies, even with extensive descriptions
in hand, and regular phone conversations with people who've done similar
things, is really difficult. The practical details are always trickier
than they seem, and there's a bunch of nitty-gritty stuff that cannot
be learned except by doing. For this reason, IMHO, any successful
amateur program will start out with trying to learn in small bite-size
chunks, building testbeds which are learning oriented rather than
performance oriented. In this regard I think both Armadillo and ERPS
are on the right track.

As always, YMMV,
......Andrew

Andrew Case                             |
acase@plasma.umd.edu                    |
Institute for Plasma Research           |
University of Maryland, College Park    |

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 11881 invoked from network); 23 Aug 2001 22:33:47 -0000
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 23 Aug 2001 22:33:47 -0000
Received: (qmail 21161 invoked by uid 50005); 23 Aug 2001 22:31:48 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smpte.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.258985 secs); 23 Aug 2001 22:31:48 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 23 Aug 2001 22:31:47 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA30818; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 15:31:14 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 95492 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 22:31:11          +0000
Received: from smtprelay1.abs.adelphia.net (smtprelay.abs.adelphia.net          [64.8.20.11]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA30803 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 15:31:11 -0700
Received: from jlgrady ([63.124.251.47]) by smtprelay1.abs.adelphia.net          (Netscape Messaging Server 4.15) with SMTP id GIJL6N01.KKW for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 18:30:23 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook CWS, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <000201c12c23$934b07d0$0200a8c0@prestige.net>
Date:         Thu, 23 Aug 2001 18:33:03 -0400
Reply-To: "Jeff Grady" <jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jeff Grady" <jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Gov. Regs (CATS Prize)
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <041f01c12c1b$e1c7ee80$c36122c0@cronos>

>>So what would happen if an individual went to Black Rock, and fired off a
>>rocket that went to 250 Kilometers?

That's one way to test our national defense readiness! If NORAD, NSA and FAA
see it on CNN and not early warning RADAR/Satellite then we'll know we're
not ready for a national missile defense system. NSA failed to see one of
India's (or was it Pakistan's) test launches via IR plume detection,
Buuuuuutt....On the other hand, that "individual" and any "witnesses" to
this just-do-it launch may join the ranks of "the disappeared" :)

-----Original Message-----
From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@itc.uci.edu]On
Behalf Of Wedge Oldham
Sent: Thursday, August 23, 2001 5:38 PM
To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
Subject: Re: [AR] Gov. Regs (CATS Prize)


You know.... I was thinking the same thing, how about we (to coin a phrase)
"Just Do It"?

Last time I was at BALLS, I was talking to some rocketeers from the U.K.,
they explained that there was no way for them to get a wavier to the 35K
they were trying to reach, and had to come to Black Rock to do it. They also
explained that breaking the wavier that they could get (in the UK) would
incur a 5000 pound fine.

Now I'm not sure of all the logistics involved, but off the top of my head,
I'd have to figure that a 5000 pound fine would be cheaper than flying 12
people and a rocket from the UK to Nevada and renting an RV for a few days.

So what would happen if an individual went to Black Rock, and fired off a
rocket that went to 250 Kilometers?

Wedge Oldham
http://NikeProject.com


----- Original Message -----
From: "Bryan Flynt" <b_flynt@HOTMAIL.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Thursday, August 23, 2001 2:01 PM
Subject: [AR] Gov. Regs (CATS Prize)


> In my view people are slightly off aim on why NASA and the Gov. or putting
> up all these regulations. By the way, I am a state government employee and
a
> former State Department employee so I have some insight into what goes on
in
> the Government.  It has been mentioned that the Gov/Nasa are afraid of the
> public having technology.  While that is close, it is not to the root of
the
> problem.  Here is my theory, remember it is just my opinion.
>
> Reason 1:
> Imagine for a second that a citizen (you and me) put a rocket into space
or
> orbit.  It would make the news and probably be a big event.  With all the
> attention it is sure to gather the attention of Senators and Congressman
who
> determine the funding for NASA.  They would think well if an average
person
> can do this, why are we giving NASA so many 100's of millions a year?
>
> Reason 2:
> How much money does NASA get from launching payload into space, $3000/lb?
> I'm only guessing but either way it is very, very expensive.  That sure
pays
> for a bunch of big salaries.  Why let competition spring up if you can
have
> a monopoly?
>
> Reason 3:
> When the media gets a hold of a story like an amateur putting a rocket
into
> space, they are going to portray it as a bunch of guys in their garage
> building it.  Which granted may be the case but they quit possibly might
> leave out the fact that these people have spent lots of money, time and
are
> very intelligent people.  All this will just serve to make the engineers
and
> the upper management at NASA look less prestigious.  Which by the way, I'm
> sure they would not appreciate.
>
> Let's put it all together.  The workers and upper management at NASA know
> these things can and probably would happen.  Therefore they go to their
> lobbyist and friendly congressman/senators and convince them that it is
very
> dangerous for the public to undertake these projects and only they have
the
> knowledge to do it safely.  By doing this they are both protecting their
> jobs/money and increasing their prestige.  The congressman/senators
remember
> have no clue about rockets, the only information they have to go on is
what
> NASA tells them.  Don't think of changing it any day soon, either.  Why
> would a Senator/Congressman listen to "a bunch of guys in their garage"
when
> they have a Ph.D. in Aerospace Engineering and head of some NASA program
> telling them that is the way it is?
>
> One way to change the course that we are on (I definitely do not advocate
> this) is for someone to just lunch their rocket, and forget all about the
> permits.  If it made it to space it would forever change the way it is.
But
> you can bet your ass you would be spending some time, maybe the rest of
your
> life, in Federal Prison.
>
> Bryan F.
>
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 21265 invoked from network); 23 Aug 2001 22:36:08 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 23 Aug 2001 22:36:07 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 11529 invoked by uid 50005); 23 Aug 2001 22:35:24 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (. Clean. Processed in 0.276655 secs); 23 Aug 2001 22:35:24 -0000
X-Qmail-Scanner-Mail-From: owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU via smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net
X-Qmail-Scanner-Rcpt-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
X-Qmail-Scanner: 0.96 (No viruses found. Processed in 0.276655 secs)
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 23 Aug 2001 22:35:24 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA30844; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 15:33:15 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 95499 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 22:33:09          +0000
Received: from cisco.com (cypher.cisco.com [171.69.11.18]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA30829 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu,          23 Aug 2001 15:33:09 -0700
Received: (from billw@localhost) by cisco.com (8.8.8/2.6/Cisco List          Logging/8.8.8) id PAA28587; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 15:32:31 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID:  <CMM.0.90.4.998605951.billw@cypher>
Date:         Thu, 23 Aug 2001 15:32:31 PDT
Reply-To: "Bill Westfield" <billw@cisco.com>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "William Chops Westfield" <billw@cisco.com>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Gov. Regs (CATS Prize)
Comments: To: Wedge Oldham <wedge@WESTWORLD.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  Your message of Thu, 23 Aug 2001 14:37:58 -0700

    So what would happen if an individual went to Black Rock, and fired
    off a rocket that went to 250 Kilometers?

Successfully and uneventfully??  Or does it land in reno on a
children's playground?

You've perhaps heard the expression "throw the book at them"?  A fine for
breaking the FAA WAIVER would be the least of your worries.  You'd have
easilly violated another half-dozen specific laws, and that's without
touching on all the non-specific laws you can be charged with whenever the
powers that be think you've done something unacceptably dangerous.
(...destructive device... ...terrorist... ...endangerment...)

BillW


From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 27895 invoked from network); 23 Aug 2001 22:52:20 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 23 Aug 2001 22:52:20 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 17431 invoked by uid 50005); 23 Aug 2001 22:51:37 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (. Clean. Processed in 0.163774 secs); 23 Aug 2001 22:51:37 -0000
X-Qmail-Scanner-Mail-From: owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU via smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net
X-Qmail-Scanner-Rcpt-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
X-Qmail-Scanner: 0.96 (No viruses found. Processed in 0.163774 secs)
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 23 Aug 2001 22:51:36 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA30937; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 15:46:50 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 95514 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 22:46:45          +0000
Received: from localhost (rcalkins@localhost) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with          ESMTP id PAA30919; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 15:46:44 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.LNX.4.10.10108231536030.29934-100000@itc.uci.edu>
Date:         Thu, 23 Aug 2001 15:46:44 -0700
Reply-To: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Tomahawk cruise missile
Comments: To: Alan Pedigo <APedigo@HFRDESIGN.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <sb8537f7.099@172.16.0.1>

Hi Alan, etc.

I ask that weapon systems design discussion take place on other forums.
You will notice this is constient with the list policies.  Sorry for the
draconian ruling.

sci.military.naval comes to mind in this case, check out
http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=en&safe=off&group=sci.military.naval to
join the open forum.

Thank you.

Ray Calkins,
aRocket Admin
On Thu, 23 Aug 2001, Alan Pedigo wrote:

> I was watching a show on the Discovery Channel a couple of nights ago
> and they were airing a special regarding the use of cruise missiles.
> They showed a familiar piece of video tape of a Tomahawk cruise
> missile launch from aboard a ship.  For the first 5 seconds of the
> flight or so, it seems that the missile is thrusting nearly
> vertically, but the missile seems to be moving almost sideways away
> from the ship.  Is this just an effect of camera angle or is it some
> kind of manipulation of the thrust until it can get above a certain
> altitude?
>
> Alan Pedigo
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 2104 invoked from network); 23 Aug 2001 23:08:00 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 23 Aug 2001 23:08:00 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 9276 invoked by uid 50005); 23 Aug 2001 23:07:50 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.429487 secs); 23 Aug 2001 23:07:50 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 23 Aug 2001 23:07:49 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA31075; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 16:05:25 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 95543 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 23:05:22          +0000
Received: from mail.aros.net (mail.aros.net [207.173.16.20]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA31060 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Thu,          23 Aug 2001 16:05:22 -0700
Received: from biomicro.com ([208.187.122.40]) by mail.aros.net (8.11.3/8.9.3)          with ESMTP id f7NN5Lj85556 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Thu, 23 Aug          2001 17:05:21 -0600 (MDT)
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.77 [en] (Win98; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010823160455.26086G-100000@spsystems.net>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B858C87.547AB5E2@biomicro.com>
Date:         Thu, 23 Aug 2001 17:06:47 -0600
Reply-To: "Mark K. Spute" <mks@BIOMICRO.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Mark K. Spute" <mks@BIOMICRO.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] [EE]: Building a Satellite / Fw: [amsat-bb] Re:              Simplesatdetails
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Henry Spencer wrote:

[snip of stuff about satellite building]

JPL's official position on this is that
> the amateur successes are "an anomaly", i.e. they think the amateurs got
> lucky... again and again and again.

Wish I could get that lucky again and again and again.  I'd have a new
career as a gambler in Vegas.  Then maybe I could bankroll all the
private space programs.

On a slightly more on topic topic, I have two questions.  Both for all
the "control room lawyers" out there.

First:  Does the regulations that have been promulgated by FAA and
others constitute a violation of our constitutionally guaranteed right
to "the persuit of happiness?" and if so, could it be grounds for a
federal civil rights lawsuit.  (ACLU anyone?)

Second:  What are the issues with buying rocket engines (liquid or
solid) from the Russians.  I suspect you would have to have permits from
BATF since it's probably regulated as a "munition."  But what else would
get in the way?


--
Mark K. Spute
Senior Research Engineer
BioMicro Systems Inc.

KD7IWE,  RRS

"It is difficult to say what is impossible, for the dream of yesterday
is the hope of today and the reality of tomorrow."
     Dr. Robert H. Goddard

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 26391 invoked from network); 23 Aug 2001 23:14:00 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 23 Aug 2001 23:14:00 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 17097 invoked by uid 50005); 23 Aug 2001 23:13:49 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.412229 secs); 23 Aug 2001 23:13:49 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 23 Aug 2001 23:13:49 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA31115; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 16:11:04 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 95550 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 23:11:03          +0000
Received: from smtp003.mailsrvcs.net (smtp003pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.182])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA31099; Thu, 23 Aug 2001          16:11:02 -0700
Received: from [63.10.189.141] (1Cust141.tnt2.hilo.hi.da.uu.net          [63.10.189.141]) by smtp003.mailsrvcs.net  with ESMTP ; id          f7NNATg00739 Thu, 23 Aug 2001 18:10:30 -0500 (CDT)
X-Sender: ttocs@mail.gte.net
References: <sb8537f7.099@172.16.0.1>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <l03130300b7ab3d0f30c3@[63.25.193.233]>
Date:         Thu, 23 Aug 2001 13:10:39 -1000
Reply-To: "Aaron Smith" <ttocs@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Aaron Smith" <ttocs@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Tomahawk cruise missile
Comments: To: Ray Calkins <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <Pine.LNX.4.10.10108231536030.29934-100000@itc.uci.edu>

Actually, this is a rocketry question as the Tomahawk launches with a solid
booster.  I think the answer is that until it gets up to speed, the wings
do not generate enough lift to keep it up.  In order to keep itself up and
accelerate sideways, it launches in this particular manner.

Anyone feel free to correct me.

Aaron

At 3:46 PM -0700 8/23/01, Ray Calkins wrote:
>Hi Alan, etc.
>
>I ask that weapon systems design discussion take place on other forums.
>You will notice this is constient with the list policies.  Sorry for the
>draconian ruling.
>
>sci.military.naval comes to mind in this case, check out
>http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=en&safe=off&group=sci.military.naval to
>join the open forum.
>
>Thank you.
>
>Ray Calkins,
>aRocket Admin
>On Thu, 23 Aug 2001, Alan Pedigo wrote:
>
>> I was watching a show on the Discovery Channel a couple of nights ago
>> and they were airing a special regarding the use of cruise missiles.
>> They showed a familiar piece of video tape of a Tomahawk cruise
>> missile launch from aboard a ship.  For the first 5 seconds of the
>> flight or so, it seems that the missile is thrusting nearly
>> vertically, but the missile seems to be moving almost sideways away
>> from the ship.  Is this just an effect of camera angle or is it some
>> kind of manipulation of the thrust until it can get above a certain
>> altitude?
>>
>> Alan Pedigo
>>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 18441 invoked from network); 23 Aug 2001 23:19:19 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 23 Aug 2001 23:19:19 -0000
Received: (qmail 24264 invoked by uid 50005); 23 Aug 2001 23:17:20 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smpte.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.100398 secs); 23 Aug 2001 23:17:20 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 23 Aug 2001 23:17:20 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA31161; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 16:16:20 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 95561 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 23:16:19          +0000
Received: from localhost (rcalkins@localhost) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with          ESMTP id QAA31146; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 16:16:18 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.LNX.4.10.10108231614100.29934-100000@itc.uci.edu>
Date:         Thu, 23 Aug 2001 16:16:18 -0700
Reply-To: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Tomahawk cruise missile
Comments: To: Aaron Smith <ttocs@GTE.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <l03130300b7ab3d0f30c3@[63.25.193.233]>

On Thu, 23 Aug 2001, Aaron Smith wrote:

> Actually, this is a rocketry question
Yes, many weapons are also rockets.  However, this isn't especially an
_amateur_ rocketry question, in my opinion.  Maybe somebody can convince
me it is applicable to boost gliders or something.

Ray

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 18711 invoked from network); 23 Aug 2001 23:41:50 -0000
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 23 Aug 2001 23:41:50 -0000
Received: (qmail 20491 invoked by uid 50005); 23 Aug 2001 23:40:26 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smptf.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.536555 secs); 23 Aug 2001 23:40:26 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 23 Aug 2001 23:40:25 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA31251; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 16:32:11 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 95578 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 23:32:08          +0000
Received: from albatross.wgn.net (www.wgn.net [64.14.252.81] (may be forged))          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA31236 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 16:32:07 -0700
Received: from cronos (eli-208-187-16-237.wgn.net [208.187.16.237]) by          albatross.wgn.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id QAA01677 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 16:33:18 -0700
References: <CMM.0.90.4.998605951.billw@cypher>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <001501c12c2b$f7207580$c36122c0@cronos>
Date:         Thu, 23 Aug 2001 16:33:06 -0700
Reply-To: "Wedge Oldham" <wedge@WESTWORLD.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Wedge Oldham" <wedge@WESTWORLD.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Gov. Regs (CATS Prize)
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Ok, so I gather from the general tone of the posts that launching a rocket
to 250 kilometers, unannounced would be bad Juju.
Wedge

----- Original Message -----
From: "William Chops Westfield" <billw@cisco.com>
To: "Wedge Oldham" <wedge@WESTWORLD.COM>
Cc: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Thursday, August 23, 2001 3:32 PM
Subject: Re: [AR] Gov. Regs (CATS Prize)


>     So what would happen if an individual went to Black Rock, and fired
>     off a rocket that went to 250 Kilometers?
>
> Successfully and uneventfully??  Or does it land in reno on a
> children's playground?
>
> You've perhaps heard the expression "throw the book at them"?  A fine for
> breaking the FAA WAIVER would be the least of your worries.  You'd have
> easilly violated another half-dozen specific laws, and that's without
> touching on all the non-specific laws you can be charged with whenever the
> powers that be think you've done something unacceptably dangerous.
> (...destructive device... ...terrorist... ...endangerment...)
>
> BillW
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 26760 invoked from network); 24 Aug 2001 00:10:57 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 24 Aug 2001 00:10:57 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 19038 invoked by uid 50005); 24 Aug 2001 00:08:57 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smpte.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.267092 secs); 24 Aug 2001 00:08:57 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 24 Aug 2001 00:08:56 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA31405; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 16:59:03 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 95604 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 23:58:58          +0000
Received: from smtp001.mailsrvcs.net (smtp001pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.180])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA31390 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 16:58:57 -0700
Received: from [63.27.96.224] (1Cust36.tnt3.san-bernardino.ca.da.uu.net          [63.25.57.36]) by smtp001.mailsrvcs.net  with ESMTP for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; id f7NNwP702358 Thu, 23 Aug 2001 18:58:26          -0500 (CDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: GTE/01rocket@mail.gte.net
References: <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010823160455.26086G-100000@spsystems.net>            <3B858C87.547AB5E2@biomicro.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <a05100337b7ab48219455@[63.27.96.224]>
Date:         Thu, 23 Aug 2001 16:58:30 -0700
Reply-To: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] [EE]: Building a Satellite / Fw: [amsat-bb] Re:              Simplesatdetails
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <3B858C87.547AB5E2@biomicro.com>

>Mark Spute wrote:


>First:  Does the regulations that have been promulgated by FAA and
>others constitute a violation of our constitutionally guaranteed right
>to "the persuit of happiness?" and if so, could it be grounds for a
>federal civil rights lawsuit.  (ACLU anyone?)


There are plenty of other liberties being violated on a much larger
scale they would persue first, but yes.  Maybe they need a "high
profile case" to waste a half million on?

>Second:  What are the issues with buying rocket engines (liquid or
>solid) from the Russians.  I suspect you would have to have permits from
>BATF since it's probably regulated as a "munition."  But what else would
>get in the way?


Liquids have no explosives permits so BATF is out of the loop.  You
have to get an export permit from Russia, an import permit from the
Commerce dept and a munitions permit from the state department.
These have all been done before.

Solids are more problematic but have also been done.

>Jerry



--
Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
Opinion, the whole thing.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 16230 invoked from network); 24 Aug 2001 00:15:45 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 24 Aug 2001 00:15:45 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 22170 invoked by uid 50005); 24 Aug 2001 00:15:34 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.352734 secs); 24 Aug 2001 00:15:34 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 24 Aug 2001 00:15:33 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA31487; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 17:11:40 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 95617 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 24 Aug 2001 00:09:33          +0000
Received: from hawk.mail.pas.earthlink.net (hawk.mail.pas.earthlink.net          [207.217.120.22]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA31461          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 17:09:32 -0700
Received: from earthlink.net (dialup-209.245.132.27.Dial1.SanJose1.Level3.net          [209.245.132.27]) by hawk.mail.pas.earthlink.net (EL-8_9_3_3/8.9.3)          with ESMTP id RAA22992; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 17:09:28 -0700 (PDT)
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (Win98; I)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <4.3.1.2.20010823010204.02f70398@mail.idsoftware.com>            <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>            <008801c12afe$5db3aa80$0100a8c0@mkbs>            <20010822082932.A24546@bailey.dscga.com>            <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>            <4.3.1.2.20010823010204.02f70398@mail.idsoftware.com>            <4.3.1.2.20010823145959.02e29458@mail.idsoftware.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B859E44.FBD4C5E4@earthlink.net>
Date:         Thu, 23 Aug 2001 17:22:28 -0700
Reply-To: <thomgaf@energyrs.com>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Thomas M. Mcgaffey" <energyrelease@EARTHLINK.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] CATS prize ( was Re: [AR] [EE]: Building a Satellite )
Comments: To: John Carmack <johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Hi Guys,

I find myself agreeing with both Jerry Irvine and
John Carmack.  Our government has become afraid of its own citizens
(this can be proved but is off topic).  The "New Rules" were in fact the
fatal blow to the U.S. CATS prize people.  However, as John has pointed
out, most, if not all, of the entries were doomed to failure by their
lack of basic engineering skills and their lack of a realistic
development plan.   No matter how often I hear the words "SPACE SHOT"
and "SUB ORBITAL FLIGHT" here on AROCKET I have yet to see a well
written development plan produced by anyone.  Nor have I seen or heard
of any development program that is even under way at present except John
Carmack's VTVL project.  I was involved with two of the "CATS" groups in
small sub projects and can tell you for a fact that these people, in
general, haven't a clue s to how to run an engineering project.  I make
this statement based on my 15 years of "Systems Engineering"
experience.  What I observed first hand was: to do lists and goals were
nonexistent, except perhaps in the leader(s) head(s), and seemed to
changed from day to day with no obvious rhyme or reason and with
seemingly no consideration for the impact on the overall project; daily
tasks were simply handed out to the first warm body that showed up even
when the individual had no experience or even aptitude for the task;
there were no written plans or specifications, either project oriented
or system oriented; systems were tossed aside on a whim because some
"NEW IDEA" had occurred to the leader(s) even after months of design,
development and test; no documentation of test plans and results so
lessons learned would not have to be learned again.

I can give specific examples of the "wrong stuff" being done but will
not do so to spare those involved any embarrassment.

As most of you know I am a big supporter of the "RRS" and am a "Life
Member" but they too often suffer from the lack of written plans and
real documentation.  I have asked other RRS members if I could have a
copy of a drawing or for "any documentation" of a project or device and,
if I am lucky,  have received file folders with hand written notes on
scraps of paper and very crude drawings.  This is not to say that ALL or
MOST  RRS members do things this way.

It is my belief that "most" of the experimental rocketry community are
locked into the "HOBBY" mindset and will never do the necessary "WORK"
to get to space in any form.  Yes there are exceptions here and there
but most people are all talk.  How many on the AROCKET list have sent a
rocket to 50,000 feet and recovered it (more than once) and have
the documentation to hand to me so I can duplicate their results?

I also believe that a group of amateurs CAN get to LEO but it will
take work, not chest beating.  The group will need a strong leader
with management skills, who will daily keep everyone pointed towards the
goal and who will see to it that standard engineering methods are
applied across the board and that a development plan is written and
followed.  This leader will have to make sure that log books are filled
out and experiments documented, that the proper documentation is done
before and after tests.  I could go on and on, but I think I have made
the points I wanted to.


Thom


Thomas M. McGaffey
Energy Release Systems
408-226-7502
thomgaf@energyrs.com
San Jose,  Kalifornia

"The world needs dreamers and the world needs doers.
But above all, the world needs dreamers who do.  Don't
just entrust your hopes and wishes to the stars. Today,
begin learning the craft that will enable you to reach
for them."  -- Sarah Ban Breathnach




John Carmack wrote:
> >
> >>
> >>However, saying the failure to reach altitude was "exclusively due to
> >>regulations" is grossly overstating the capability of the contestants.
> >>
> >>Nobody had a slam-dunk, sure-thing rocket.
> >
> >
> >I was on 3 teams that each had rockets, components of which were
> >fully tested.  But the risk of system failure while present, let's
> >assume 50% with tested components, was a much lower failure
> >probability than regulatory hurtles: 100%.
>
> I harp on this point a bit, because I think it is damaging to the community
> to overestimate our abilities.  A often hear "Amateurs would have made it
> if not for the government", and sometimes "Amateurs would have EASILY made
> it".  This implies that the technical issues are all resolved, which I
> don't think there is any evidence for.
>
> If someone has two flawless back to back launches to 100+km, I will
> consider the technical issues well in hand.  Look back over the last five
> years of high end experimental rocketry at how many big projects made their
> claims, then either never flew or failed miserably.
>
> I guess I am not as much of an optimist as many rocketeers, because I
> assume that things won't work until the are forced to work, and that you
> need to plan on trying multiple times.  I know that much of this optimism
> is due to financial realities, but I would argue that if you don't have
> enough money to make multiple tries at 100km, you should be aiming for 30km
> with reliability.
>
> Also note that the regulatory hurdles weren't 100%, as Ky and HARC did both
> manage to launch for 100+km.
>
> >>JPA and SORAC had an incremental development plan that looked believable to
> >>me, and I went out and visited both of them.  I wound up funding both of
> >>them for the last year's effort ($17k each).  Over the year, they both
> >>worked at it and had their shares of failures, as expected.
> >
> >
> >They both had an incremental approach which was good, but with
> >hardware and technology destined to fail IMHO.
>
> Sure, rockoon launch is a crap-shoot, but in JPA's favor, they hadn't had a
> motor or recovery failure in years, which is a pretty good record for big
> rockets.
>
> What was your issue with the SORAC vehicle?  A 6" diameter, high mass
> fraction nitrous hybrid seems like a very direct CATS prize vehicle. (be
> nice, there are SORAC folks on the list...)
>
> John Carmack

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 17066 invoked from network); 24 Aug 2001 00:15:56 -0000
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 24 Aug 2001 00:15:56 -0000
Received: (qmail 28857 invoked by uid 50005); 24 Aug 2001 00:13:56 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smpte.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 1.506925 secs); 24 Aug 2001 00:13:56 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 24 Aug 2001 00:13:54 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA31513; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 17:12:51 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 95624 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 24 Aug 2001 00:12:10          +0000
Received: from mta03.mail.mel.aone.net.au (mta03.mail.au.uu.net [203.2.192.83])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA31497 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 17:12:09 -0700
Received: from unknown ([63.34.210.94]) by mta03.mail.mel.aone.net.au with SMTP          id <20010824001202.FHGC23992.mta03.mail.mel.aone.net.au@unknown>;          Fri, 24 Aug 2001 10:12:02 +1000
Priority: Normal
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Priority: 3
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	X-MAPIextension=.TXT;
	charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>
Date:         Fri, 24 Aug 2001 00:12:10 +0000
Reply-To: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] [EE]: Building a Satellite / Fw: [amsat-bb] Re: Simplesat              details
Comments: To: Henry Spencer <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010823160455.26086G-100000@spsystems.net>

----------
> On Wed, 22 Aug 2001, Troy Prideaux wrote:
> > educate the fine people involved the principles required to build space
> > craft ie. the QA involved, the attention to detail, the spotless
> > environment required etc.
>
> Yeah, all those things that Sputnik 1 didn't have...

So all Russian spacecraft are built on the same practices and philosphies
as Sputnik 1? Let's compare apples with apples.

>
> > ...but do they know what's involved with building spacecraft?  In
> > the late 50's - early to mid 60's JPL learned its lesson the hard way
with
> > the Ranger program. The failures of this program were a direct
consequence
> > of the attention payed to above mentioned philosophies.
>
> Yes and no.  Beware of the "after this, therefore because of it" fallacy.
> Just because the Ranger program got healthy after JPL made a whole bunch
> of changes, doesn't mean that all those changes were necessary.

In this case there was clear objective evidence that the changes in the
before mentioned philosophies (NOT job replacements) helped rescue Ranger
and maybe JPL.

>
> Remember, NASA has very little incentive to be efficient, and great
> incentive to avoid embarrassing failures.  That's a recipe for piling up
> masses of unnecessary -- even harmful -- precautions and procedures,

And the *primary* reason for that would be launch costs.

 just
> because they look like they *might* occasionally prevent a failure.
>
> >  So I suppose their (NASA) point is why just send another satellite up
into
> > orbit for the sake of satisfying a small group of amateurs ambitions and
> > curiosities if it teaches them the wrong way of how to go about it?
>
> Even with all the extra paperwork imposed when NASA is supplying the
> launch, the radio amateurs still build their satellites far more cheaply
> and efficiently than NASA does.  JPL's official position on this is that
> the amateur successes are "an anomaly", i.e. they think the amateurs got
> lucky... again and again and again.

As Michael pointed out it's all about risk assessment. Sure there's an
element of luck with every success, hell, I've heard NASA admit that they
themselves have got lucky...again, again and again. These amateurs aren't
footing the bill to get their work up there. As already mentioned by myself
and others, NASA is inefficient but is there anyone on this list who knows
how inefficient they are ie. someone who has access to the risk assessment
analysis or read the reports that endorse such philosophies. What I do know
is that it's NASAs intension to achieve as much as they can with the
resources they have. Unfortunately the hard reality is the most feasible
philosophy for developing spacecraft is a "success oriented approach" ie.
must work the first time. Pure economics drive this and until launch costs
go down I can't see much changing.

Troy.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 21683 invoked from network); 24 Aug 2001 00:17:00 -0000
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 24 Aug 2001 00:17:00 -0000
Received: (qmail 31035 invoked by uid 50005); 24 Aug 2001 00:14:59 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smpte.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.47725 secs); 24 Aug 2001 00:14:59 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 24 Aug 2001 00:14:57 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA31537; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 17:13:44 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 95631 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 24 Aug 2001 00:13:43          +0000
Received: from mta03.mail.mel.aone.net.au (mta03.mail.au.uu.net [203.2.192.83])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA31522 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 17:13:42 -0700
Received: from unknown ([63.34.210.94]) by mta03.mail.mel.aone.net.au with SMTP          id <20010824001339.FIFE23992.mta03.mail.mel.aone.net.au@unknown>;          Fri, 24 Aug 2001 10:13:39 +1000
References: Conversation <003801c12b90$27c9b4e0$268b6bd1@computer> with last            message <3B853E2C.10ED8FF8@psnw.com>
Priority: Normal
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Priority: 3
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	X-MAPIextension=.TXT;
	charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>
Date:         Fri, 24 Aug 2001 00:13:43 +0000
Reply-To: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Bonding problem
Comments: To: Scott Eakins <eakins@psnw.com>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <3B853E2C.10ED8FF8@psnw.com>

Yep, this can help immensely both with liner bond and liner inertness to
thermal attack.

Troy.

----------
> Troy,
>
> Are you saying to coat the inside of the liner and allow this to cure,
come
> back
> later and cast into the liner?
>
> Scott
>
> Troy Prideaux wrote:
>
> > Use a bonding agent like Tepanol. Also it's often a good idea to give
the
> > inside of your liners a coating of Resin/bonding agent and curative
before
> > casting.
> >
> > Troy.
> >
> > ----------
> > > Just this evening I went out to test a newer formulation on a 3 grain
54mm
> > > motor.  The aft closure let go .5 sec into the burn.  Upon inspection
of
> > the
> > > grains, I noticed that one of the 3 had less than 5 % of the casting
tube
> > > material still attached to the grain in spots.
> > >
> > > The other 2 also had inhibited areas that were burnt, and these became
> > even
> > > more noticeable as I unpealed the tubes from the grains.
> > >
> > > This is the first time that I have ever noticed this problem.  I am
not
> > using
> > > a different casting tube than I have in the past, so I've ruled that
one
> > out.
> > >
> > > I did however mix and cast these grain on a very warm night, the R45 /
> > MDI set
> > > up hard to the touch in less than 1 hour.  Obviously bonding was a
> > problem,
> > > how might I avoid this in the future.
> > >
> > > Any thoughts and suggestions would be greatly appreciated.
> > >
> > > Scott
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 26581 invoked from network); 24 Aug 2001 00:18:06 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 24 Aug 2001 00:18:06 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA31350; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 16:52:59 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 95593 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 23:52:49          +0000
Received: from smtp002.mailsrvcs.net (smtp002pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.181])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA31335 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 16:52:49 -0700
Received: from [63.27.96.224] (1Cust36.tnt3.san-bernardino.ca.da.uu.net          [63.25.57.36]) by smtp002.mailsrvcs.net  with ESMTP for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; id f7NNqH325466 Thu, 23 Aug 2001 18:52:17          -0500 (CDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: GTE/01rocket@mail.gte.net
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <a05100336b7ab47ac78b5@[63.27.96.224]>
Date:         Thu, 23 Aug 2001 16:52:21 -0700
Reply-To: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Gov. Regs (CATS Prize)
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

>Bryan Flint uttered:



>determine the funding for NASA.  They would think well if an average person
>can do this, why are we giving NASA so many 100's of millions a year?

They should give the money to me and that's my final answer.


>
>Reason 2:
>How much money does NASA get from launching payload into space, $3000/lb?


10000 per pound if amortized out.


>I'm only guessing but either way it is very, very expensive.  That sure pays
>for a bunch of big salaries.  Why let competition spring up if you can have
>a monopoly?

Can't argue with this theory.

But the government hypocritically states (at some levels) they want
to encourage private space entrepeneurship.  I think a big part of it
is simply government is a big clumsey beaurucratic bohemeth (at the
same and other levels) that does not realize it is stepping on
hundreds of ants (us).



>
>Reason 3:
>When the media gets a hold of a story like an amateur putting a rocket into
>space, they are going to portray it as a bunch of guys in their garage
>building it.  Which granted may be the case but they quit possibly might
>leave out the fact that these people have spent lots of money, time and are
>very intelligent people.  All this will just serve to make the engineers and
>the upper management at NASA look less prestigious.  Which by the way, I'm
>sure they would not appreciate.


1. When the sidewinder was designed in a garage they finally were
able to adopt it, and it is now a staple of our armed forces.

2. I believe the companies doing high performance sub-orbital and low
performance orbital rockets are more in the range of small business
not true amateur or garage operations so they do not need to fear
that.


>
>Let's put it all together.  The workers and upper management at NASA know
>these things can and probably would happen.  Therefore they go to their
>lobbyist and friendly congressman/senators and convince them that it is very
>dangerous for the public to undertake these projects and only they have the
>knowledge to do it safely.  By doing this they are both protecting their
>jobs/money and increasing their prestige.  The congressman/senators remember
>have no clue about rockets, the only information they have to go on is what
>NASA tells them.  Don't think of changing it any day soon, either.  Why
>would a Senator/Congressman listen to "a bunch of guys in their garage" when
>they have a Ph.D. in Aerospace Engineering and head of some NASA program
>telling them that is the way it is?


Where the rubber hits the road it is simpler than that.  OCST is a
single, small agency headed essentially by an individual aware of
small rocket company issues.  The rules set by this small agency is
the driver.


>
>One way to change the course that we are on (I definitely do not advocate
>this) is for someone to just lunch their rocket, and forget all about the
>permits.  If it made it to space it would forever change the way it is.  But
>you can bet your ass you would be spending some time, maybe the rest of your
>life, in Federal Prison.


Ironically there is no enforcement of this.  Rocketeers simply have
good intentions at their own peril.  Those darn doctrines of "self
enforcement" and "substantial compliance" again :)


>
>Bryan F.

Jerry

--
Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
Opinion, the whole thing.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 26679 invoked from network); 24 Aug 2001 00:25:15 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 24 Aug 2001 00:25:15 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 3427 invoked by uid 50005); 24 Aug 2001 00:25:04 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.38453 secs); 24 Aug 2001 00:25:04 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 24 Aug 2001 00:25:03 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA31602; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 17:19:11 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 95646 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 24 Aug 2001 00:19:05          +0000
Received: from grucom2.gru.net (grucom2.gru.net [209.251.129.7]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA31587 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu,          23 Aug 2001 17:19:05 -0700
Received: from [198.190.223.78] by grucom2.sfcc.net (NTMail          6.04.0010/NU4112.00.db1c8a4b) with ESMTP id oegaiaaa for          AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 20:19:03 -0400
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (Win95; I)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <F22ZxOASWTgZu6WY9Iu00012420@hotmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B859DDC.88B4167@sfcc.net>
Date:         Thu, 23 Aug 2001 20:20:44 -0400
Reply-To: "James Yawn" <jyawn@SFCC.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "James Yawn" <jyawn@SFCC.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] 1compression tests on solids
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Dale:  You bring up a sobering thought, hinted at by John Dom - an on-campus explosion
would make me much less popular with my employer.  I can envision our safety officer
having a seizure with the very prospect, and security having a seizure of me.  So I
will not be taking any candy samples to work.  Instead, I will try making a smaller
sample and test it with my current "apparatus."

Which reminds me of a question that occurred during the thread on head-end ignitors,
especially the sub-thread about the prospects for detonation.

Seems it got pretty well sorted-out that an explosion, even a violent one, is not
necessarily a detonation.  Apparently some nitrates can detonate given proper
initiation.  AN being a newsworthy example.  But how about KN?  Sodium Nitrate?
Chlorates?  Perchlorates?  (No, I'm not going to use chlorates in my fuel, just
curious.)

I really have no clue except the little bit I know of explosives history.  It seems
like in the centuries of blasting with black powder someone might have noticed
detonation if it had occurred very often.  One might say that there were no proper
initiators until recently, but weren't some of the first percussion caps made with
mercury fulminate?  Perhaps KN needs special circumstances to detonate, but is that
what we create with a candy-type fuel?

Guess I have become a bit complacent with candy, having done so many torturous things
to it over the years with not a single ignition from friction, compression, or shock.
Only heat and the microwave oven have ignited my candy, as far as I have been able to
tell.  But there are ranges compression that I have not been able to apply.  Has anyone
done a "drop test" for KN/sucrose?  Actually, seems like I saw something about that on
Richard Nakka's site - I'll go have another look.

And your other suggestion:  the University of Florida, right here in town, has an
aeronautical/aerospace engineering program.  Perhaps I will touch base with them -
seems like there might be a few rocket enthusiasts or even experts there.  Maybe if I
donated to the Alumni Association they would let me play. :)

Thanks for the wake-up!

Jimmy Yawn
jyawn@sfcc.net



CalPoly RADES wrote:

> You also might want to check any college with a civil engineering program.
> They do these exact tests on samples of concrete (I have seen the 2.5"
> plastic containers they cast concrete into and then compress to the point of
> failure.)
>          The only trick is making sure that the grain dosent detonate.  I dont know
> how you could do this but I know KNO3/sucrose will actually detonate.
> (Pretty sure what we had was a detonation. We did a test at the RRS and
> there was to much ignitor and the whole thing went off like a shot.  No
> smoke or flying propellant like the when a closure fails or something like
> that.  Just one flash, a big hole, and motor parts all over the desert.)
> Good luck,
> Dale
>
> >From: James Yawn <jyawn@SFCC.NET>
> >Reply-To: James Yawn <jyawn@SFCC.NET>
> >To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
> >Subject: Re: [AR] 1compression tests on solids
> >Date: Wed, 22 Aug 2001 23:39:29 -0400
> >
> >Interesting suggestion - my school has an automotive technology program
> >that is
> >considered to be pretty good.  I will check and see if they have such a
> >thing.
> >Hmm... they probably have an arbor press too - wonder if they would let me
> >put
> >my candy sample on it?  I might have to take in the MSDS for KNO3  ;)
> >
> >Jimmy Yawn
> >
> >foy wrote:
> >
> > >         You may want to try a spring rate tester like used for testing
> >valve
> > > springs for engines.
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: "al bradley" <abradley@TOOLCITY.NET>
> > > To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
> > > Sent: Monday, August 20, 2001 3:46 PM
> > > Subject: [AR] 1compression tests on solids
> > >
> > > > Hi again Jimmy:
> > > >
> > > > I checked your web page detailing your experiment with compression on
> >your
> > > > "candy" propellant. I think it is a good start on detailed records for
> >any
> > > > of  our propellants.
> > > >
> > > > A few years back we had a brief but lively discussion on adapting
> >bottle
> > > > jacks (usually Chinese cheapies) to show relative force applied to a
> > > > material. This came out of an idea by Ed Jones who had fitted a
> >pressure
> > > > gauge to a little-noticed screw-out plug that is located just below
> >the
> > > > hand-operated cylinder on the side of the jack. I never got around to
> > > > building one yet but the idea stuck in my mind.
> > > >
> > > > The text below is reprinted so that you might decide if you (or any
> >others
> > > > on the list) wanted to modify it to detail your experiments.
> > > >
> > > > best regards,
> > > > al bradley
> > > >
> > > > -------------------------------------------------------
> > > > At 11:22 PM 1/19/99 EST, you wrote:
> > > > >Ed,
> > > > >If you do not take the jack apart, how do you know what the diameter
> >of
> > > > >the piston (or rather bore) is ? I am presuming you are using this
> >for
> > > > >force measurement.
> > > >
> > > > >Richard
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Well, that's a good point. I have never found a need to press to a
> > > specific
> > > > pressure only once so my goal was to be able to press to the exact
> > > pressure
> > > > that I find that works for my needs and consistently duplicate what
> >works
> > > > best.
> > > >
> > > > I used the same logic as you and found that it's more of a hassle and
> >more
> > > > stress on the jack trying to rip one apart, plus, you always have to
> > > factor
> > > > in the resistance of the return springs at different lengths + the
> >weight
> > > > of the bed that your work is on. Too many variables to calculate for
> > > > different size projects. For me, it wasn't worth the hassle. I can
> > > > accurately duplicate the same pressure between the 12 and the 6 ton
> >press
> > > > even though the gauges read different pressure between the two. I did
> >this
> > > > by putting the 6 ton jack in the 12 ton press and pumped the 6 ton
> >jack
> > > > then recorded the readings between the two for any given pressure. I
> >can
> > > > exactly duplicate the pressure for any given project on either press.
> > > >
> > > > I guess what I'm trying to say is that you will probably never get a
> >gauge
> > > > to read the exact pressure that is being applied to the work area. You
> > > must
> > > > take the jack apart and measure then do the math. And after you go
> >through
> > > > all that you will get sick of calculating for every project, I know I
> > > > would.
> > > >
> > > > Also you will notice that the internal pressure is lower on the larger
> > > jack
> > > > to produce the same working force. The gauge on the 12 ton reads
> >almost
> > > > half as much internal as the 6 ton for the same given force. Either
> >way
> > > you
> > > > will be more than pleased when you have a gauge on the jack, it beats
> >the
> > > > hell out of the torque wrench.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > ----------------------------
> > > > >>If you do not take the jack apart, how do you know what the diameter
> >of
> > > > >>the piston (or rather bore) is ? I am presuming you are using this
> >for
> > > > >>force measurement.
> > > >
> > > > >I guess what I'm trying to say is that you will probably never get a
> > > gauge
> > > > >to read the exact pressure that is being applied to the work area.
> >You
> > > > >must take the jack apart and measure then do the math. And after you
> >go
> > > > >through all that you will get sick of calculating for every project,
> >I
> > > > >know I would.
> > > > ------------------------------
> > > > Come on, guys....
> > > >
> > > > Stop thinking in terms of "Force = Pressure * Area" and start thinking
> >in
> > > > terms of "Area = Force / Pressure". Apply a known force and you can
> >back
> > > > out the area. But why bother with that? Apply several known forces and
> > > just
> > > > calibrate the system!
> > > >
> > > > Oh, and as an aside, I'd use a 2-ton jack over any of the larger jacks
> > > (Are
> > > > any of use making motors with 4000+ lbs thrust?). It should give a
> >more
> > > > accurate answer as it would produce larger pressure fluctuations (Yes,
> >I
> > > > know the original system discussed was for a slightly different
> > > > application.).
> > > >
> > > > -------------------------------
> > > > David Hall
> > > >
> > > > >Come on, guys....
> > > >
> > > > >Stop thinking in terms of "Force = Pressure * Area" and start
> >thinking in
> > > > >terms of "Area = Force / Pressure". Apply a known force and you can
> >back
> > > > >out the area. But why bother with that? Apply several known forces
> >and
> > > > >just calibrate the system!
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > This is a great idea. I'm glad you pointed it out.
> > > >
> > > > >Oh, and as an aside, I'd use a 2-ton jack over any of the larger
> >jacks
> > > > >(Are any of use making motors with 4000+ lbs thrust?). It should give
> >a
> > > > >more accurate answer as it would produce larger pressure fluctuations
> > > > >(Yes, I know the original system discussed was for a slightly
> >different
> > > > >application.).
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Agreed that the small 2 ton jack is the way to go for rockets, but I
> >use
> > > > both my bearing press for doing other mechanical jobs on a regular
> >basis,
> > > > the rocket application is just a great side benefit. Kind of neat to > >kill
> > > > two birds with one rocket.
> > > > ------------------------------------
> > > > David, you wrote:
> > > >
> > > > "Stop thinking in terms of "Force = Pressure * Area" and start
> >thinking in
> > > > terms of "Area = Force / Pressure". Apply a known force and you can
> >back
> > > > out the area. But why bother with that? Apply several known forces and
> > > just
> > > > calibrate the system!"
> > > >
> > > > Good suggestion. Certainly an alternative to pulling the thing apart.
> > > Richard
> > > >
> > > > ------------------------------------
> > > >
> > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > > Can you live Life with this?: "Unless there is a law, an agreement, or
> >a
> > > > long-standing custom, No one `Deserves' Anything -- Either Good or
> >Bad!"
> > > >
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 26818 invoked from network); 25 Aug 2001 01:21:25 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 25 Aug 2001 01:21:25 -0000
Received: (qmail 16981 invoked by uid 50005); 25 Aug 2001 01:21:09 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.171337 secs); 25 Aug 2001 01:21:09 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 25 Aug 2001 01:21:09 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA05519; Fri, 24 Aug 2001 18:16:23 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 95774 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 25 Aug 2001 01:15:51          +0000
Received: from mail.conpute.com ([207.164.87.145]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7)          with ESMTP id FAA01451 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 24 Aug 2001          05:59:13 -0700
Received: by MAIL with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) id <RJ1TMZDF>; Fri,          24 Aug 2001 09:00:13 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19)
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Message-ID:  <814DCE01F6D7D311994D204C4F4F50201889C9@MAIL>
Date:         Fri, 24 Aug 2001 09:00:12 -0400
Reply-To: "Earl Pottinger" <earlcp@CONPUTE.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Earl Pottinger" <earlcp@CONPUTE.COM>
Subject:      [AR] Lawyers the other headache
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Hello,
      While I agree most "Space Shot" individuals and groups
(including myself too) have a problem with changes plans on
the drop of a hat, not documentation, and poor assignment of
labor. There is one more problem.  If you publish detailed
plans of an unproven design you open yourself to lawsuits.

The more detailed the plans, the more vulnerable you become
if someone builds something to your instructions and then
have something go wrong.

That is one of the reasons for the lack of details on my
site.  Even in Canada I can easily be sued by someone in
the USA.

                Earl Colby Pottinger

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 6870 invoked from network); 25 Aug 2001 01:24:17 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 25 Aug 2001 01:24:17 -0000
Received: (qmail 20348 invoked by uid 50005); 25 Aug 2001 01:24:01 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.520511 secs); 25 Aug 2001 01:24:01 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 25 Aug 2001 01:23:59 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA05566; Fri, 24 Aug 2001 18:19:47 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 95718 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 25 Aug 2001 01:19:46          +0000
Received: from albqpop1.albq.uswest.net (albqpop1.albq.uswest.net          [207.108.240.1]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id TAA32096          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 19:05:20 -0700
Received: (qmail 42655 invoked by alias); 24 Aug 2001 02:04:45 -0000
Delivered-To: fixup-AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU@fixme
Received: (qmail 42584 invoked by uid 0); 24 Aug 2001 02:04:42 -0000
Received: from cc898542-a.prdise1.nm.home.com (HELO cc898542a) (65.7.151.152)          by albqpop1.albq.uswest.net with SMTP; 24 Aug 2001 02:04:42 -0000
References:  <Pine.LNX.4.10.10108231614100.29934-100000@itc.uci.edu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <008001c12c41$94c7c120$0100a8c0@prdise1.nm.home.com>
Date:         Thu, 23 Aug 2001 20:07:51 -0600
Reply-To: "Pax" <darkspunge@USWEST.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Pax" <darkspunge@USWEST.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Tomahawk cruise missile
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

I would be curious as to how it is done. Such as any thrust vectoring
methods that could be used in other designs and applications... That is how
the discussion would not be military related. That is like saying you cannot
talk about a V-2's liquid propulsion system because it is military and a
weapon.

Paxton

----- Original Message -----
From: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Thursday, August 23, 2001 5:16 PM
Subject: Re: [AR] Tomahawk cruise missile


> On Thu, 23 Aug 2001, Aaron Smith wrote:
>
> > Actually, this is a rocketry question
> Yes, many weapons are also rockets.  However, this isn't especially an
> _amateur_ rocketry question, in my opinion.  Maybe somebody can convince
> me it is applicable to boost gliders or something.
>
> Ray
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 8578 invoked from network); 25 Aug 2001 01:24:46 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 25 Aug 2001 01:24:46 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 20894 invoked by uid 50005); 25 Aug 2001 01:24:30 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 1.130062 secs); 25 Aug 2001 01:24:30 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 25 Aug 2001 01:24:28 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA05540; Fri, 24 Aug 2001 18:18:25 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 95657 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 25 Aug 2001 01:18:24          +0000
Received: from sys27.hou.wt.net ([205.230.159.27]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7)          with ESMTP id RAA31635 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 23 Aug 2001          17:24:24 -0700
Received: from localhost (216-119-138-148.ipset18.wt.net [216.119.138.148]) by          sys27.hou.wt.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id TAA10588; Thu, 23 Aug          2001 19:24:13 -0500 (CDT)
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0BA8_01C56B69.4BF2AB20"
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.388)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID:  <200108240024.TAA10588@sys27.hou.wt.net>
Date:         Thu, 23 Aug 2001 19:24:45 -0500
Reply-To: "Donald McCorvey" <dlm3@NETAXS.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Donald McCorvey" <dlm3@NETAXS.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Gov. Regs (CATS Prize)
Comments: To: Bryan Flynt <b_flynt@HOTMAIL.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <F173nccYTjr8cU6xfPT00005b26@hotmail.com>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0BA8_01C56B69.4BF2AB20
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"


On Thursday, August 23, 2001, at 04:01 PM, Bryan Flynt wrote:

> Reason 1:
> Imagine for a second that a citizen (you and me) put a rocket into
> space or
> orbit.  It would make the news and probably be a big event.  With all
> the
> attention it is sure to gather the attention of Senators and
> Congressman who
> determine the funding for NASA.  They would think well if an average
> person
> can do this, why are we giving NASA so many 100's of millions a year?

You can never ignore the political angle - NASA's survival has always
been tenuous because there are so many people who figure we should solve
world hunger before we try to escape the boundaries of this planet.
However, I don't get the impression that there is  anybody at NASA who
would deliberately stifle amateur 'competition' purely for its own
political survival. This does not mean that there aren't plenty of
people who would come up with a litany of reasons why amateurs shouldn't
have access to space for reasons having nothing to do with politics (but
are in fact entirely founded upon, however unintentionally, the
political equation - just watch any congressional committee hearing and
you'll be amazed how much is driven by Congressional fiat).

> Reason 2:
> How much money does NASA get from launching payload into space,
> $3000/lb?
> I'm only guessing but either way it is very, very expensive.  That sure
> pays
> for a bunch of big salaries.  Why let competition spring up if you can
> have
> a monopoly?

NASA isn't launching payloads itself lately. It provides launch
facilities, yes, but the vehicles are usually owned and operated by
other entities. The only launch vehicle NASA operates itself is the
Shuttle, and that is almost 100% dedicated to construction and servicing
of the ISS.

> Reason 3:
> When the media gets a hold of a story like an amateur putting a rocket
> into
> space, they are going to portray it as a bunch of guys in their garage
> building it.  Which granted may be the case but they quit possibly might
> leave out the fact that these people have spent lots of money, time and
> are
> very intelligent people.  All this will just serve to make the
> engineers and
> the upper management at NASA look less prestigious.  Which by the way,
> I'm
> sure they would not appreciate.

There may be a few like that, but by and large, the folks at NASA are
generally not that self-indulgent.

If there's a problem at NASA, it's that they don't know any way to do
business other than the one they have learned on the job, and can't
imagine any other way. The only example they have is the build-up to the
Apollo moon landings and the development of the Space Shuttle - not
shoestring budgets and surplus parts. Mistakes result in events like the
Apollo I fire and Challenger - near-death experiences for your entire
enterprise - rather than being the useful learning experiences they
should be.

For people with that mindset, it's easy to comprehend how the amateur
rocketry approach can never pass muster.

Lots of people forget that Robert Goddard (and for that matter, the
Wright Brothers) would have qualified as amateurs in their time and had
the same time-tested approach being used by John Carmack and others
today.

Don McCorvey
Houston, Tx

------=_NextPart_000_0BA8_01C56B69.4BF2AB20
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Type: text/enriched;
	charset="us-ascii"


On Thursday, August 23, 2001, at 04:01 PM, Bryan Flynt wrote:


<excerpt>Reason 1:

Imagine for a second that a citizen (you and me) put a rocket into
space or

orbit.  It would make the news and probably be a big event.  With all
the

attention it is sure to gather the attention of Senators and
Congressman who

determine the funding for NASA.  They would think well if an average
person

can do this, why are we giving NASA so many 100's of millions a year?

</excerpt>

You can never ignore the political angle - NASA's survival has always
been tenuous because there are so many people who figure we should
solve world hunger before we try to escape the boundaries of this
planet.  However, I don't get the impression that there is  anybody at
NASA who would deliberately stifle amateur 'competition' purely for
its own political survival. This does not mean that there aren't
plenty of people who would come up with a litany of reasons why
amateurs shouldn't have access to space for reasons having nothing to
do with politics (but are in fact entirely founded upon, however
unintentionally, the political equation - just watch any congressional
committee hearing and you'll be amazed how much is driven by
Congressional fiat).

<color><param>0000,0000,DEB7</param>

</color><excerpt>Reason 2:

How much money does NASA get from launching payload into space,
$3000/lb?

I'm only guessing but either way it is very, very expensive.  That
sure pays

for a bunch of big salaries.  Why let competition spring up if you can
have

a monopoly?

</excerpt>

NASA isn't launching payloads itself lately. It provides launch
facilities, yes, but the vehicles are usually owned and operated by
other entities. The only launch vehicle NASA operates itself is the
Shuttle, and that is almost 100% dedicated to construction and
servicing of the ISS.

<color><param>0000,0000,DEB7</param>

</color><excerpt>Reason 3:

When the media gets a hold of a story like an amateur putting a rocket
into

space, they are going to portray it as a bunch of guys in their garage

building it.  Which granted may be the case but they quit possibly
might

leave out the fact that these people have spent lots of money, time
and are

very intelligent people.  All this will just serve to make the
engineers and

the upper management at NASA look less prestigious.  Which by the way,
I'm

sure they would not appreciate.

</excerpt>

There may be a few like that, but by and large, the folks at NASA are
generally not that self-indulgent.


If there's a problem at NASA, it's that they don't know any way to do
business other than the one they have learned on the job, and can't
imagine any other way. The only example they have is the build-up to
the Apollo moon landings and the development of the Space Shuttle -
not shoestring budgets and surplus parts. Mistakes result in events
like the Apollo I fire and Challenger - near-death experiences for
your entire enterprise - rather than being the useful learning
experiences they should be.


For people with that mindset, it's easy to comprehend how the amateur
rocketry approach can never pass muster.


Lots of people forget that Robert Goddard (and for that matter, the
Wright Brothers) would have qualified as amateurs in their time and
had the same time-tested approach being used by John Carmack and
others today.


Don McCorvey

Houston, Tx


------=_NextPart_000_0BA8_01C56B69.4BF2AB20--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 9933 invoked from network); 25 Aug 2001 01:25:06 -0000
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 25 Aug 2001 01:25:06 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 12245 invoked by uid 50005); 25 Aug 2001 01:23:36 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.784507 secs); 25 Aug 2001 01:23:36 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 25 Aug 2001 01:23:34 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA05593; Fri, 24 Aug 2001 18:21:10 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 95803 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 25 Aug 2001 01:21:09          +0000
Received: from mail.aros.net (mail.aros.net [207.173.16.20]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA01906 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri,          24 Aug 2001 08:24:00 -0700
Received: from biomicro.com ([208.187.122.40]) by mail.aros.net (8.11.3/8.9.3)          with ESMTP id f7OFNx071317 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 24 Aug          2001 09:23:59 -0600 (MDT)
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.77 [en] (Win98; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010823160455.26086G-100000@spsystems.net>            <3B858C87.547AB5E2@biomicro.com>            <a05100337b7ab48219455@[63.27.96.224]>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B8671E6.FF493E0F@biomicro.com>
Date:         Fri, 24 Aug 2001 09:25:26 -0600
Reply-To: "Mark K. Spute" <mks@BIOMICRO.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Mark K. Spute" <mks@BIOMICRO.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] [EE]: Building a Satellite / Fw: [amsat-bb]              Re:Simplesatdetails
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Jerry Irvine wrote:

[snip of stuff about constitutional issues]

> >Second:  What are the issues with buying rocket engines (liquid or
> >solid) from the Russians.  I suspect you would have to have permits from
> >BATF since it's probably regulated as a "munition."  But what else would
> >get in the way?
>
> Liquids have no explosives permits so BATF is out of the loop.

Not necessarily.  2 years ago I wanted to buy a particular type of truck
made only in England.  I contacted DOT and all my state and local
authorities to make sure it was street legal.  I contacted U.S. Customs
to find out what I had to do to import a vehicle.  I contacted shipping
companies and made arrangement to have the vehicle shipped from England
to L.A.  Only when I was actually going through the paperwork for the
loan, and getting the plane tickets together to go get the thing did I
find out that I had to have a munitions import permit from BATF.  For a
TRUCK!

The reason?  It's amphibious and it had once belonged to the British
military.  Both of these items made it fall under BATF's and the State
Departments list of restricted imports.  Geez!  It's a big green
floating pickup truck.  I guess they are afraid I'm building my own navy
out in the west desert.  :)

(BTW  It took 6 months and the involvement of all my Senators and
Congress-critters to get BATF to finally issue the permit.  By then the
vehicle had been sold to someone else.)

> You
> have to get an export permit from Russia, an import permit from the
> Commerce dept and a munitions permit from the state department.
> These have all been done before.

--
Mark K. Spute
Senior Research Engineer
BioMicro Systems Inc.

KD7IWE,  RRS

"It is difficult to say what is impossible, for the dream of yesterday
is the hope of today and the reality of tomorrow."
     Dr. Robert H. Goddard

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 15560 invoked from network); 25 Aug 2001 01:26:34 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 25 Aug 2001 01:26:34 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 8091 invoked by uid 50005); 25 Aug 2001 01:25:45 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc with qmail-scanner-1.00 (. Clean. Processed in 0.185505 secs); 25 Aug 2001 01:25:45 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 25 Aug 2001 01:25:44 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA05614; Fri, 24 Aug 2001 18:22:32 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 95891 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 25 Aug 2001 01:22:31          +0000
Received: from ns.vanguard.com (ns.VANGUARD.COM [192.175.173.31]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA02768 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Fri, 24 Aug 2001 11:09:35 -0700
Received: from eagle1.vanguard.com (eagle1.VANGUARD.COM [192.175.141.70]) by          ns.vanguard.com (Switch-2.1.3/Switch-2.1.0) with ESMTP id          f7OI9Rg28891 for <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Fri, 24 Aug 2001 14:09:27          -0400 (EDT)
Received: from vgi4mail.vanguard.com (vgi4mail.vanguard.com [10.254.65.16]) by          eagle1.vanguard.com (Switch-2.1.3/Switch-2.1.0) with SMTP id          f7OI9Xj09042 for <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Fri, 24 Aug 2001 14:09:33          -0400 (EDT)
Received: by vgi4mail.vanguard.com(Lotus SMTP MTA v4.6.6  (890.1 7-16-1999))           id 85256AB2.0063C035 ; Fri, 24 Aug 2001 14:09:32 -0400
X-Lotus-FromDomain: VGINOTES
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Disposition: inline
Message-ID:  <85256AB2.0063BFB3.00@vgi4mail.vanguard.com>
Date:         Fri, 24 Aug 2001 14:09:30 -0400
Reply-To: <Waysie_Atkins@VANGUARD.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <Waysie_Atkins@VANGUARD.COM>
Subject:      [AR] article on NASA & Space Tourism
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

short article, somewhat insightful, disputed by NASA spokesperson (of course).

link is:

http://www.space.com/missionlaunches/tourism_cancel_010820.html

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 21375 invoked from network); 25 Aug 2001 01:28:13 -0000
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 25 Aug 2001 01:28:13 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 17804 invoked by uid 50005); 25 Aug 2001 01:26:42 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 3.292764 secs); 25 Aug 2001 01:26:42 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 25 Aug 2001 01:26:34 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA05648; Fri, 24 Aug 2001 18:23:55 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 95897 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 25 Aug 2001 01:23:54          +0000
Received: from robin.mail.pas.earthlink.net (robin.mail.pas.earthlink.net          [207.217.120.65]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA02899          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 24 Aug 2001 11:41:58 -0700
Received: from earthlink.net (dialup-209.245.131.136.Dial1.SanJose1.Level3.net          [209.245.131.136]) by robin.mail.pas.earthlink.net (8.11.5/8.9.3)          with ESMTP id f7OIfvf02723 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 24 Aug          2001 11:41:57 -0700 (PDT)
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (Win98; I)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B86A348.D21C9044@earthlink.net>
Date:         Fri, 24 Aug 2001 11:56:08 -0700
Reply-To: <thomgaf@energyrs.com>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Thomas M. Mcgaffey" <energyrelease@EARTHLINK.NET>
Subject:      [AR] TEST MESSAGE
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a test message to see if the list is operational.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 26662 invoked from network); 25 Aug 2001 01:29:49 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 25 Aug 2001 01:29:49 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 2704 invoked by uid 50005); 25 Aug 2001 01:30:48 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 1.823683 secs); 25 Aug 2001 01:30:48 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 25 Aug 2001 01:30:44 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA05692; Fri, 24 Aug 2001 18:25:18 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 95929 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 25 Aug 2001 01:25:17          +0000
Received: from fit.edu (fit.edu [163.118.5.1]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7)          with ESMTP id MAA03088 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 24 Aug 2001          12:10:50 -0700
Received: from localhost (dplatt@localhost) by fit.edu (8.9.3+Sun/8.9.1) with          ESMTP id PAA17474; Fri, 24 Aug 2001 15:12:08 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.GSO.4.10.10108241509050.15641-100000@fit.edu>
Date:         Fri, 24 Aug 2001 15:12:08 -0400
Reply-To: "Donald W Platt" <dplatt@FIT.EDU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Donald W Platt" <dplatt@FIT.EDU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] [EE]: Building a Satellite / Fw: [amsat-bb] Re: Simplesat              details
Comments: To: Troy Prideaux <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>

If you are really interested in building a satellite and launching it I
would not suggest that you deal with NASA.  I work for a NASA contractor
at Kennedy Space Center and we build mid-deck locker experimental payloads
that fly on the shuttle.  I know first hand about all the safety reviews
and paperwork required.

I am also building a nanosatellite for my PhD dissertation and have a
launch spot on a Russian booster through a US company called One Stop
Satellite Solutions (www.osss.com).  They can get you into space much
faster and with much less paperwork.

Don Platt

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 1226 invoked from network); 25 Aug 2001 01:31:07 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 25 Aug 2001 01:31:07 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 22524 invoked by uid 50005); 25 Aug 2001 01:29:36 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 2.398898 secs); 25 Aug 2001 01:29:36 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 25 Aug 2001 01:29:29 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA05722; Fri, 24 Aug 2001 18:26:41 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 95973 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 25 Aug 2001 01:26:39          +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (f159.pav1.hotmail.com [64.4.31.159]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA03334 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri,          24 Aug 2001 12:51:27 -0700
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Fri,          24 Aug 2001 12:50:56 -0700
Received: from 63.87.136.70 by pv1fd.pav1.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Fri, 24          Aug 2001 19:50:56 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [63.87.136.70]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 24 Aug 2001 19:50:56.0976 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[175E3D00:01C12CD6]
Message-ID:  <F159WrwuVjtQUGUzLhG0001180b@hotmail.com>
Date:         Fri, 24 Aug 2001 12:50:56 -0700
Reply-To: "Brian Reddeman" <breddeman@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Brian Reddeman" <breddeman@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      [AR] Resources for materials and engineer speak
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

In my humble process of building a very small liquid fuel rocket motor, I've
run into a problem of trying to find materials for building my little motor
(mainly very small quantities of metals and composites).

Also any good reference books for the budding engineer? I'm having trouble
translating engineer speak 8-)

Sorry about the vaguness about my question. I'm still a newbie to this realm
(aside from hobby rocketry--oh wait this is a hobby, but I'm an amatuer as
well. Egads, that makes me an amatuer hobbiest!).



_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 4517 invoked from network); 25 Aug 2001 01:32:05 -0000
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 25 Aug 2001 01:32:05 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 6362 invoked by uid 50005); 25 Aug 2001 01:33:05 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.282103 secs); 25 Aug 2001 01:33:05 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 25 Aug 2001 01:33:04 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA05749; Fri, 24 Aug 2001 18:28:03 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 95740 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 25 Aug 2001 01:28:02          +0000
Received: from m1.jersey.juno.com (m1.jersey.juno.com [64.136.16.64]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA32182 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 19:16:55 -0700
Received: from cookie.juno.com by cookie.juno.com for          <"H3WK6e6N+bsCVJQMHM9sZKsNjhIJk0J37UIcxQjHLB+PYxQ0dkoaSQ==">
Received: (from kc2csh@juno.com) by m1.jersey.juno.com (queuemail) id GDKUQNVR;          Thu, 23 Aug 2001 22:16:31 EDT
X-Mailer: Juno 4.0.11
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Juno-Line-Breaks: 1-3
X-Juno-Att: 0
X-Juno-RefParts: 0
Message-ID:  <20010823.222108.-4009847.0.kc2csh@juno.com>
Date:         Thu, 23 Aug 2001 22:18:20 -0400
Reply-To: <kc2csh@JUNO.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <kc2csh@JUNO.COM>
Subject:      [AR] OT - hobbies on resume
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

  What is the current thinking on including on a professional resume
hobbies which are somewhat related to the professional position?
  If it is done, how is it done properly?

     Jay

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 9745 invoked from network); 25 Aug 2001 01:33:34 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 25 Aug 2001 01:33:34 -0000
Received: (qmail 15470 invoked by uid 50005); 25 Aug 2001 01:32:45 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc with qmail-scanner-1.00 (. Clean. Processed in 0.17079 secs); 25 Aug 2001 01:32:45 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 25 Aug 2001 01:32:45 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA05780; Fri, 24 Aug 2001 18:29:26 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 95742 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 25 Aug 2001 01:29:25          +0000
Received: from spsystems.net (spsystems.net [209.47.149.227]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA32203 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Thu,          23 Aug 2001 19:20:19 -0700
Received: (from henry@localhost) by spsystems.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id WAA01310;          Thu, 23 Aug 2001 22:19:36 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010823215315.799A-100000@spsystems.net>
Date:         Thu, 23 Aug 2001 22:19:35 -0400
Reply-To: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] [EE]: Building a Satellite / Fw: [amsat-bb] Re: Simplesat              details
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>

Troy Prideaux wrote:
> > > craft ie. the QA involved, the attention to detail, the spotless
> > > environment required etc.
> > Yeah, all those things that Sputnik 1 didn't have...
>
> So all Russian spacecraft are built on the same practices and philosphies
> as Sputnik 1? Let's compare apples with apples.

Actually, you might be surprised.  While things have changed a little bit
in Russian spacecraft building since Sputnik 1, they haven't changed to
anything anywhere close to what the US does.  For example, clean rooms are
uncommon -- why would a satellite need to be spotlessly clean?  (Yes,
there are certain exceptions, but they *are* exceptions.)

> > Just because the Ranger program got healthy after JPL made a whole bunch
> > of changes, doesn't mean that all those changes were necessary.
>
> In this case there was clear objective evidence that the changes in the
> before mentioned philosophies (NOT job replacements) helped rescue Ranger
> and maybe JPL.

Note carefully what I said, especially the word "all".  *Some* of the
changes were important, yes.  Others appear to have been overreactions --
in a very hostile political environment that demanded drastic action --
which thereafter became sacred and could not be reversed.

> > Remember, NASA has very little incentive to be efficient, and great
> > incentive to avoid embarrassing failures.  That's a recipe for piling up
> > masses of unnecessary -- even harmful -- precautions and procedures,
>
> And the *primary* reason for that would be launch costs.

No, the primary reason for that is politics.  Launch costs contribute only
quite indirectly, by making NASA spacecraft relatively expensive.  But
note that today's NASA programs are generally a good deal cheaper than
those of only a decade ago, and it hasn't helped much.  The sensitivity to
embarrassing failure is almost unchanged, as is the overreaction that
ensues when one happens.  (The X-34 had *program* redundancy, through more
than one flight vehicle, which made internal redundancy in each flight
vehicle largely unnecessary... but in the wake of the Mars failures, NASA
still demanded expensive design changes to add internal redundancy, thus
blowing the budget and killing the project.)

> ...What I do know
> is that it's NASAs intension to achieve as much as they can with the
> resources they have...

While that may be the intention -- although I think even that is rather
debatable -- it isn't realized very well.  NASA spends far too much on
many things which contribute little or nothing to the results.

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 14254 invoked from network); 25 Aug 2001 01:34:47 -0000
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 25 Aug 2001 01:34:47 -0000
Received: (qmail 10257 invoked by uid 50005); 25 Aug 2001 01:35:47 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 1.143478 secs); 25 Aug 2001 01:35:47 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 25 Aug 2001 01:35:45 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA05817; Fri, 24 Aug 2001 18:30:49 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 95755 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 25 Aug 2001 01:30:47          +0000
Received: from smtp-out.nrtc.net (host-216-163-120-25.nrtc.net [216.163.120.25]          (may be forged)) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA32575          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 21:30:54 -0700
Received: from foy (dial-12-21-155-31.wfeca.net [12.21.155.31]) by          smtp-out.nrtc.net (8.9.3/8.9.1) with SMTP id AAA05686 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 24 Aug 2001 00:30:52 -0400
References: <F22ZxOASWTgZu6WY9Iu00012420@hotmail.com>             <3B859DDC.88B4167@sfcc.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <001401c12c54$b6015460$1f9b150c@foy>
Date:         Thu, 23 Aug 2001 23:24:46 -0500
Reply-To: "foy" <foy@WFECA.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "foy" <foy@WFECA.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] 1compression tests on solids
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

       The spring tester I spoke of is about 3" dia. hydrolic cylinder about
2" tall with a guage attached to it.You can use it in a vice ,press or
anything that will compress.  I don't believe they are very expencive about
$30.00. They may let you take it home a day or two.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 19090 invoked from network); 25 Aug 2001 03:29:34 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 25 Aug 2001 03:29:34 -0000
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 29281 invoked by uid 50005); 25 Aug 2001 03:29:18 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.184559 secs); 25 Aug 2001 03:29:18 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 25 Aug 2001 03:29:18 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA06286; Fri, 24 Aug 2001 20:25:05 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 96237 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 25 Aug 2001 03:24:56          +0000
Received: from c0mailgw02.prontomail.com (mailgw.prontomail.com          [216.163.180.10]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA06268          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 24 Aug 2001 20:24:55 -0700
Received: from c0web105 (216.163.180.10) by c0mailgw02.prontomail.com (NPlex          5.5.029) id 3B670E7400542A83 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 24 Aug          2001 20:17:25 -0700
X-Version: about 6.0.2393.0
X-Priority: 3
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-Mailer: Web Based Pronto
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <77A543B96D895D115A550005B88C07F2@nickz5715.about.com>
Date:         Fri, 24 Aug 2001 23:06:56 -0400
Reply-To: "nick z" <nickz5715@ABOUT.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "nick z" <nickz5715@ABOUT.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Tomahawk cruise missile
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

<html><head><meta Name='keywords' Content='commtouch, pronto, mail, free email, free, branded, web based, free web based email, communications, internet, software, advertising banners, e-mail, free software'></head><body   ><div align='left'><font   ><blockquote><blockquote><TT>Seems to be a rocketry question to me since it concerns the <BR>
propulsuion system, not the weapon system. &nbsp;<BR>
-Nick<BR>
</TT><br><br><br><br><br><br><font><p align=left><br><TT>Sign up for a free About Email account at http://About.com </TT></blockquote></blockquote></div></font></body></html>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 28197 invoked from network); 25 Aug 2001 03:54:11 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 25 Aug 2001 03:54:11 -0000
Received: (qmail 20566 invoked by uid 50005); 25 Aug 2001 03:53:55 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.427304 secs); 25 Aug 2001 03:53:55 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 25 Aug 2001 03:53:54 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA06398; Fri, 24 Aug 2001 20:50:11 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 96250 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 25 Aug 2001 03:50:08          +0000
Received: from barry.mail.mindspring.net (barry.mail.mindspring.net          [207.69.200.25]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA06383          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 24 Aug 2001 20:50:07 -0700
Received: from oemcomputer (user-38ldco6.dialup.mindspring.com [209.86.179.6])          by barry.mail.mindspring.net (8.9.3/8.8.5) with SMTP id XAA17803;          Fri, 24 Aug 2001 23:50:05 -0400 (EDT)
References:  <20010823.222108.-4009847.0.kc2csh@juno.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <001b01c12d18$41d30ce0$06b356d1@oemcomputer>
Date:         Fri, 24 Aug 2001 23:44:32 -0400
Reply-To: "Robert" <OlympusMons@MINDSPRING.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Robert" <OlympusMons@MINDSPRING.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] OT - hobbies on resume + list test
Comments: To: kc2csh@JUNO.COM
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Hi:

Mostly I'm responding to this post, but also testing the list because I have
recieved no mail from AROCKET for a day.

I'm no expert, but based on some things I've read (including "The Only Job
Hunting Guide You'll Ever Need") and heard, I have a section at the bottom
called "Miscellaneous." I list travel experience, basic working knowledge of
Spanish, and "Involvement in astronomy clubs and other science-related
organizations and activities." I do not remember right off the bat where I
got the advice from that this was OK or recommended, but I would not have
that section on my resume if I had not gotten advice about it.

----- Original Message -----
From: <kc2csh@JUNO.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Thursday, August 23, 2001 10:18 PM
Subject: [AR] OT - hobbies on resume


>   What is the current thinking on including on a professional resume
> hobbies which are somewhat related to the professional position?
>   If it is done, how is it done properly?
>
>      Jay

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 29606 invoked from network); 25 Aug 2001 04:06:32 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 25 Aug 2001 04:06:32 -0000
Received: (qmail 1367 invoked by uid 50005); 25 Aug 2001 04:06:15 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.189395 secs); 25 Aug 2001 04:06:15 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 25 Aug 2001 04:06:15 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA06453; Fri, 24 Aug 2001 21:02:30 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 96257 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 25 Aug 2001 04:02:21          +0000
Received: from robin.mail.pas.earthlink.net (robin.mail.pas.earthlink.net          [207.217.120.65]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA06438          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 24 Aug 2001 21:02:21 -0700
Received: from scottje (1Cust76.tnt2.holman.wi.da.uu.net [63.29.19.76]) by          robin.mail.pas.earthlink.net (8.11.5/8.9.3) with SMTP id f7P42Jo05962          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 24 Aug 2001 21:02:20 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0BAD_01C56B69.4BFE9200"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <002901c12d13$3f6819a0$f072fea9@scottje>
Date:         Fri, 24 Aug 2001 23:08:42 -0400
Reply-To: "Scott & Jeanette" <frazer2001@EARTHLINK.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Scott & Jeanette" <frazer2001@EARTHLINK.NET>
Subject:      [AR] Some PVC Motor Results and techniques
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0BAD_01C56B69.4BFE9200
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Tonight I tested 2 PVC AN/MG Motors.  Both motors were identical.  I =
used a  2" Diameter Motor of a segmented design using (3) 6" segments.  =
Each segment was cast into 6" sections of PVC pipe that were insulated =
with rubber sheeting, then the segments were glued back together using =
couplers.  All glue joints were insulated with RTV.  Standard methods =
were used for the bulkhead and the nozzle throat material was 2 phenolic =
discs epoxied together and then cast into hydraulic cement.  Core =
diameter was .75" and throat diam. was .375".
    I had a calculated  initial thrust of 48lbs with a max thrust of 85 =
lbs.  Calculated burn time was 6.2 seconds.  My actual burn time =
recorded from video was 5 seconds on the first motor and 5.4 seconds on =
the second.  The motors held together great and there was little throat =
erosion. =20
    I have no thrust or pressure measurement capabilities at the present =
time. Although I realize there are some variables that could effect =
actual performance,  is it  reasonable to assume that I at least met my =
calculated thrust, assuming all calcs. were performed correctly?  I used =
FPRED for my calculations.
    Comments, questions and maybe even mild abuse welcome. =20

Scott

------=_NextPart_000_0BAD_01C56B69.4BFE9200
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Diso-8859-1">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 5.50.4611.1300" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Tonight I tested 2 PVC AN/MG =
Motors.&nbsp; Both=20
motors were identical.&nbsp;&nbsp;I used a &nbsp;2" Diameter Motor of a=20
segmented design using (3) 6" segments.&nbsp; Each segment was cast into =
6"=20
sections of PVC pipe that were insulated with rubber sheeting, then the =
segments=20
were glued back together using couplers.&nbsp; All glue joints were =
insulated=20
with RTV.&nbsp; Standard methods were used for the bulkhead and the =
nozzle=20
throat material was 2 phenolic discs epoxied together and then cast into =

hydraulic cement.&nbsp; Core diameter was .75" and throat diam. was=20
.375".</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; I had a =
calculated&nbsp; initial=20
thrust of 48lbs with a max thrust of 85 lbs.&nbsp; Calculated burn time =
was 6.2=20
seconds.&nbsp; My actual burn time recorded from video was 5 seconds on =
the=20
first motor and 5.4 seconds on the second.&nbsp; The motors held =
together great=20
and there was little throat erosion.&nbsp;&nbsp;</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; I have no thrust or =
pressure=20
measurement capabilities at the present time. Although I realize there =
are some=20
variables that could effect actual performance,&nbsp;&nbsp;is it=20
&nbsp;reasonable to assume that I at least met my calculated thrust, =
assuming=20
all calcs. were performed correctly?&nbsp; I used FPRED for my=20
calculations.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Comments, questions =
and maybe=20
even mild abuse welcome.&nbsp; </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Scott</FONT></DIV></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0BAD_01C56B69.4BFE9200--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 7084 invoked from network); 25 Aug 2001 04:09:29 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 25 Aug 2001 04:09:29 -0000
Received: (qmail 8042 invoked by uid 50005); 25 Aug 2001 04:08:39 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc with qmail-scanner-1.00 (. Clean. Processed in 0.189931 secs); 25 Aug 2001 04:08:39 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 25 Aug 2001 04:08:38 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA06497; Fri, 24 Aug 2001 21:05:27 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 96268 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 25 Aug 2001 04:05:26          +0000
Received: from barry.mail.mindspring.net (barry.mail.mindspring.net          [207.69.200.25]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA06482          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 24 Aug 2001 21:05:26 -0700
Received: from oemcomputer (user-38ldco6.dialup.mindspring.com [209.86.179.6])          by barry.mail.mindspring.net (8.9.3/8.8.5) with SMTP id AAA21766 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 25 Aug 2001 00:05:25 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0BB0_01C56B69.4BFE9200"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <002601c12d1a$65f5ed20$06b356d1@oemcomputer>
Date:         Fri, 24 Aug 2001 23:59:51 -0400
Reply-To: "Robert" <OlympusMons@MINDSPRING.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Robert" <OlympusMons@MINDSPRING.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] list test
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0BB0_01C56B69.4BFE9200
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Sorry; date mixed up. I recieved a few messages today.

------=_NextPart_000_0BB0_01C56B69.4BFE9200
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META content=3D"text/html; charset=3Diso-8859-1" =
http-equiv=3DContent-Type>
<META content=3D"MSHTML 5.00.2614.3500" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Sorry; date mixed up. I recieved a few =
messages=20
today.</FONT></DIV></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0BB0_01C56B69.4BFE9200--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 28433 invoked from network); 25 Aug 2001 04:17:49 -0000
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 25 Aug 2001 04:17:49 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 16605 invoked by uid 50005); 25 Aug 2001 04:18:48 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.226124 secs); 25 Aug 2001 04:18:48 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 25 Aug 2001 04:18:48 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA06554; Fri, 24 Aug 2001 21:13:42 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 96277 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 25 Aug 2001 04:12:20          +0000
Received: from swan.mail.pas.earthlink.net (swan.mail.pas.earthlink.net          [207.217.120.123]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id          VAA06538 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 24 Aug 2001 21:12:20 -0700
Received: from earthlink.net (dialup-209.245.134.185.Dial1.SanJose1.Level3.net          [209.245.134.185]) by swan.mail.pas.earthlink.net (EL-8_9_3_3/8.9.3)          with ESMTP id VAA09504; Fri, 24 Aug 2001 21:12:15 -0700 (PDT)
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (Win98; I)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <814DCE01F6D7D311994D204C4F4F50201889C9@MAIL>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B8728F3.E4F21BD9@earthlink.net>
Date:         Fri, 24 Aug 2001 21:26:27 -0700
Reply-To: <thomgaf@energyrs.com>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Thomas M. Mcgaffey" <energyrelease@EARTHLINK.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Lawyers the other headache
Comments: To: Earl Pottinger <earlcp@CONPUTE.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Earl,

I was not talking about published work of unproved designs nor was I
talking about publishing any work.  I was talking about "Space Shot" and
"HPR" groups,  form the point of view of a person (me) in side the
group, task with developing some sub system, who can't get a design
specification or write one because nobody has a written plan and system
B is not documented and "jim" is working on it in his spare time 200
miles away.  This was just a made up version of the type of things I
have had to put up with  will working with some of the well known
rocketry people.  I believe that anyone who has an idea and can't commit
it to paper so others in the project group can understand it and use it,
is just wasting everybody's time and energy and should not be part of or
in charge of a group.  They should work by themselves.

Thom

Earl Pottinger wrote:
>
> Hello,
>       While I agree most "Space Shot" individuals and groups
> (including myself too) have a problem with changes plans on
> the drop of a hat, not documentation, and poor assignment of
> labor. There is one more problem.  If you publish detailed
> plans of an unproven design you open yourself to lawsuits.
>
> The more detailed the plans, the more vulnerable you become
> if someone builds something to your instructions and then
> have something go wrong.
>
> That is one of the reasons for the lack of details on my
> site.  Even in Canada I can easily be sued by someone in
> the USA.
>
>                 Earl Colby Pottinger

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 13393 invoked from network); 25 Aug 2001 06:37:03 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 25 Aug 2001 06:37:03 -0000
Received: (qmail 23084 invoked by uid 50005); 25 Aug 2001 06:36:13 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc with qmail-scanner-1.00 (. Clean. Processed in 0.189336 secs); 25 Aug 2001 06:36:13 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 25 Aug 2001 06:36:12 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA07076; Fri, 24 Aug 2001 23:31:34 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 96360 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 25 Aug 2001 06:31:26          +0000
Received: from corlabs (24-216-244-100.hsacorp.net [24.216.244.100]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA07061 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Fri, 24 Aug 2001 23:31:24 -0700
Received: from [24.216.244.164] by corlabs (ArGoSoft Mail Server Plus,          Version 1.3 (1.3.0.1)); Sat, 25 Aug 2001 01:58:51 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook CWS, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <003701c12d30$b2077d80$0200a8c0@charter.net>
Date:         Sat, 25 Aug 2001 01:39:30 -0500
Reply-To: "Carl A. Blood" <cablood@CORLABS.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Carl A. Blood" <cablood@CORLABS.COM>
Subject:      [AR] Motor tests
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Well we have yet to blow up a motor. Although today the forward end closure
decided to stay with the test stand and the rest of the motor tube had a
great urge to fly. This of course left 26 pounds of fuel laying on the
ground. It seems that the anchor screws for the closure were off by .050 and
did not grip the closure as designed. The motor casing achieved about 200
feet or so and landed closest to the pad intact. Only one grain had burned
and only a vary small part of it. So we will make some adjustments and try
again next week. After all we still have 6 unburned grains left. Next time
I'll us my glasses when assembling the engine.

Oh ya, the three inch L888 motor achieved it projected pressure about 4 feet
off the pad and blew out the graphite nozzle. Another error. The nozzle was
to thin. So I will redesign that one. Of course once the nozzle became to
big the rocket dropped onto the rail and burned for 22 seconds. And it had
to burn up the ejected cutes as well.

This all started when I forgot to bring the pressure sensor the test site
100 miles away.

I do have one question someone may be able to answer.

The load cell reported 3500 lbs peak thrust at the time the casing decided
to take flight. The motor was designed to only produce 1000 lbs of thrust.
Reviewing the nozzle give no evidence that it plugged. As the amount of
burned fuel was minuscule (less than 1/20th of a grain. And the igniter was
clearly ejected. Oh , this is a almost "O" 4 inch by 40 inch motor.

Well I'll be putting the videos on www.pad17.com sometime this weekend.

Thanks for the read.

Carl Blood

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 15110 invoked from network); 25 Aug 2001 08:01:41 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 25 Aug 2001 08:01:41 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 26200 invoked by uid 50005); 25 Aug 2001 08:02:39 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.180218 secs); 25 Aug 2001 08:02:39 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 25 Aug 2001 08:02:39 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA07345; Sat, 25 Aug 2001 00:50:05 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 96397 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 25 Aug 2001 07:49:59          +0000
Received: from idsoftware.com (predator.idsoftware.com [192.246.40.34]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA07325 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Sat, 25 Aug 2001 00:49:59 -0700
Received: from [192.246.40.144] (account johnc HELO pluto.idsoftware.com) by          idsoftware.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 3.4.7) with ESMTP id 357922 for          AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 25 Aug 2001 02:49:58 -0500
X-Sender: johnc@mail.idsoftware.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <4.3.1.2.20010825030044.02fcfe80@mail.idsoftware.com>
Date:         Sat, 25 Aug 2001 03:02:48 -0500
Reply-To: "John Carmack" <johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Carmack" <johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Motor tests
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <003701c12d30$b2077d80$0200a8c0@charter.net>

>
>I do have one question someone may be able to answer.
>
>The load cell reported 3500 lbs peak thrust at the time the casing decided
>to take flight. The motor was designed to only produce 1000 lbs of thrust.
>Reviewing the nozzle give no evidence that it plugged. As the amount of
>burned fuel was minuscule (less than 1/20th of a grain. And the igniter was
>clearly ejected. Oh , this is a almost "O" 4 inch by 40 inch motor.

The high thrust probably WAS the casing taking flight -- a very large delta
mass! (at a rather lower Isp...)

John Carmack

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 1915 invoked from network); 25 Aug 2001 08:39:44 -0000
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 25 Aug 2001 08:39:44 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 32492 invoked by uid 50005); 25 Aug 2001 08:38:11 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.80206 secs); 25 Aug 2001 08:38:11 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 25 Aug 2001 08:38:09 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id BAA07527; Sat, 25 Aug 2001 01:35:55 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 96429 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 25 Aug 2001 08:35:38          +0000
Received: from cyclone.comcen.com.au (cyclone.comcen.com.au [203.23.236.100])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id BAA07510 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 25 Aug 2001 01:35:37 -0700
Received: (from nobody@localhost) by cyclone.comcen.com.au (8.11.1/8.11.1) id          f7P8ZS449955; Sat, 25 Aug 2001 18:35:28 +1000 (EST) (envelope-from          pkelly@comcen.com.au)
References: <4.3.1.2.20010815152804.02e56f08@mail.idsoftware.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
User-Agent: IMP/PHP IMAP webmail program 2.2.3
X-Originating-IP: 210.50.105.23
Message-ID:  <998728528.3b87635076913@webmail.comcen.com.au>
Date:         Sat, 25 Aug 2001 18:35:28 +1000
Reply-To: "Paul Kelly" <pkelly@COMCEN.COM.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Paul Kelly" <pkelly@COMCEN.COM.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] ERPS successfully runs H2O2 engine
Comments: To: John Carmack <johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <4.3.1.2.20010815152804.02e56f08@mail.idsoftware.com>

Apologies for the late reply, just getting through my mail.

I sort of agree with John...
Troy and I have this long running argument, it goes something like this.
TP: Amateur rocketry is about propulsion as evidenced by the vast majority of
amateurs focussing on motor development.
PK: No, most amateurs make motors because it is easier (for them) than
developing payloads. A rocket is a thing that flies. Precursive work has
implicit value but is not rocketry.


Having said that, ERPS have truly achieved something. I'm confident that these
motors will see flight usage. Hat's off guys. Anyone turning metal into mess
earns my respect.
PK

Quoting John Carmack <johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM>:

> John Dom wrote:
>
>  > Monoprop HP? Isp 150 s. Big deal.
>
> ...
>
>  > Who needs cat packs? Who needs clean expensive inhibitor-free HP?
>  > go hypergolic using manganese acetate:alcohol/HP biprop. Isp
> 280-300!
>
> This is radically missing the point.
>
> Making a rocket engine is only a small part of being able to carry out
> operations in space.
>
> All of the other things, like telemetry, guidance and control, ground
> support, manufacturability, etc, are a whole lot easier to develop with
> a
> simple, reliable rocket engine than with a higher performance one.
>
> Sure, the long term solution will probably be a regeneratively cooled
> biprop engine, but developing that from the beginning will make many
> other
> lessons much more painful to learn.
>
> While it isn't an advancement to the state of the art by any means,
> building and reliably firing ANY liquid rocket engine is still an
> accomplishment to be proud of.
>
> By all means, please do show us a manganese acetate:alcohol/HP biprop
> with
> a 280 Isp.  My propulsion prize is still sitting here with $2000 for a
> similar accomplishment.
>
> Would you recommend hypergolic biprop over cat packs even for attitude
> thrusters?
>
> John Carmack
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 5795 invoked from network); 25 Aug 2001 08:41:53 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 25 Aug 2001 08:41:53 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 16219 invoked by uid 50005); 25 Aug 2001 08:41:02 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc with qmail-scanner-1.00 (. Clean. Processed in 0.231062 secs); 25 Aug 2001 08:41:02 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 25 Aug 2001 08:41:01 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id BAA07573; Sat, 25 Aug 2001 01:37:42 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 96440 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 25 Aug 2001 08:37:41          +0000
Received: from cyclone.comcen.com.au (cyclone.comcen.com.au [203.23.236.100])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id BAA07558 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 25 Aug 2001 01:37:40 -0700
Received: (from nobody@localhost) by cyclone.comcen.com.au (8.11.1/8.11.1) id          f7P8baw49959; Sat, 25 Aug 2001 18:37:36 +1000 (EST) (envelope-from          pkelly@comcen.com.au)
References: <F82NY30kkZIhTrBoe2U000094d4@hotmail.com>            <01a801c125f0$b93324c0$0100a8c0@mkbs>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
User-Agent: IMP/PHP IMAP webmail program 2.2.3
X-Originating-IP: 210.50.105.23
Message-ID:  <998728655.3b8763cfec3a8@webmail.comcen.com.au>
Date:         Sat, 25 Aug 2001 18:37:35 +1000
Reply-To: "Paul Kelly" <pkelly@COMCEN.COM.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Paul Kelly" <pkelly@COMCEN.COM.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Case bonding <- Re [AR] AP/Dextrose propellant issues.
Comments: To: Russell McMahon <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <01a801c125f0$b93324c0$0100a8c0@mkbs>

On my to do list is to try PU mould making rubber for this application.

PK
Quoting Russell McMahon <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>:

> > >My understanding of the issues is - If you want to case bond it...
> >
> >  ........ what do you mean by "case bond"?
>
> Case bonding is the mechanical joining / gluing / connection of the
> outside
> surface of the grain to the case. This may be achieved by pouring the
> grain
> into the case and allowing it to cure in place or by applying an outer
> sealer / binder / glue.
>
> Some advantages are - protection of the outside of the grain from
> burning
> (slower burn), protection of the case from combustion and imparting the
> stiffness and "location" of the casing to the grain so that it does not
> shift or slump during combustion. A case bound grain is held in place at
> all
> locations on its outer surface and tends to be stressed in shear by
> acceleration forces. It is also stressed by any flexure of the casing as
> it
> is tightly connected to it. Each grain's loading by acceleration forces
> is
> substantially independent of adjacent ones.
>
> An "unbound" grain tends to be supported from its lower end and adds
> its
> "weight" during acceleration to other grains below it.
> Case flexure has minimal affects on grain deformation. However, as the
> grains are not "supported" in place forces are compressive and the
> bottom-most grain will be most loaded. (A motor with N grains which
> burns
> for Y seconds will have a force in excess of Isp x N / Y  times the
> weight
> of one grain exerted on the base of the bottom grain. ( = Gmax x N).
> For a
> typical AP motor with say 4 grains and a 4 second burn this could be
> over
> 200 times the weight of a single grain.)
>
> I imagine that a candy type propellant MAY be able to gain some of the
> advantages of case bonding by using a grain-to-casing adhesive of a
> suitably
> plastic nature and adequate thickness to absorb case flexure without
> transferring it to the grain. It would need to be suitably
> noncombustible to
> resist attack at the grain ends during firing. A suitably thick layer
> of
> "RTV" silicon rubber comes to mind as a possible substance. As this
> forms a
> ring at the case diameter the volume it takes up would be large compared
> to
> its thickness.
>
>
>
>
>             Russell McMahon
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 10363 invoked from network); 25 Aug 2001 08:44:18 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 25 Aug 2001 08:44:18 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 26898 invoked by uid 50005); 25 Aug 2001 08:44:01 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.135176 secs); 25 Aug 2001 08:44:01 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 25 Aug 2001 08:44:00 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id BAA07619; Sat, 25 Aug 2001 01:40:19 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 96451 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 25 Aug 2001 08:40:18          +0000
Received: from cyclone.comcen.com.au (cyclone.comcen.com.au [203.23.236.100])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id BAA07604 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 25 Aug 2001 01:40:17 -0700
Received: (from nobody@localhost) by cyclone.comcen.com.au (8.11.1/8.11.1) id          f7P8eAD49977; Sat, 25 Aug 2001 18:40:10 +1000 (EST) (envelope-from          pkelly@comcen.com.au)
References: Conversation <20010816021743.20209.cpmta@c012.sfo.cp.net> with last            message <021101c1260e$78903980$14464a42@socal.rr.com>            <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
User-Agent: IMP/PHP IMAP webmail program 2.2.3
X-Originating-IP: 210.50.105.23
Message-ID:  <998728810.3b87646a7eedf@webmail.comcen.com.au>
Date:         Sat, 25 Aug 2001 18:40:10 +1000
Reply-To: "Paul Kelly" <pkelly@COMCEN.COM.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Paul Kelly" <pkelly@COMCEN.COM.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Cutting out a C-slot.
Comments: To: Troy Prideaux <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>

I've found that KN/sorbitol (once it hardens over a few days) is quite easy to
cut/machine, much more so than candy, and in spite of it's lower melting point.


PK
Quoting Troy Prideaux <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>:

> Cutting into candy is often a pain in the neck with any tool whether it
> would be a saw blade or drill piece. Things tend to clog up.
>
> Troy.
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 24650 invoked from network); 25 Aug 2001 08:51:48 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 25 Aug 2001 08:51:48 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 32012 invoked by uid 50005); 25 Aug 2001 08:51:30 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.154544 secs); 25 Aug 2001 08:51:30 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 25 Aug 2001 08:51:30 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id BAA07675; Sat, 25 Aug 2001 01:47:51 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 96462 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 25 Aug 2001 08:47:49          +0000
Received: from cyclone.comcen.com.au (cyclone.comcen.com.au [203.23.236.100])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id BAA07660 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 25 Aug 2001 01:47:48 -0700
Received: (from nobody@localhost) by cyclone.comcen.com.au (8.11.1/8.11.1) id          f7P8lhg49991; Sat, 25 Aug 2001 18:47:43 +1000 (EST) (envelope-from          pkelly@comcen.com.au)
References: <NEBBJIGOELOLIBCCPKDCIELKCBAA.geordi@c031.aone.net.au>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
User-Agent: IMP/PHP IMAP webmail program 2.2.3
X-Originating-IP: 210.50.105.23
Message-ID:  <998729263.3b87662f5bf9f@webmail.comcen.com.au>
Date:         Sat, 25 Aug 2001 18:47:43 +1000
Reply-To: "Paul Kelly" <pkelly@COMCEN.COM.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Paul Kelly" <pkelly@COMCEN.COM.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] ERPS successfully runs H2O2 engine
Comments: To: Troy Prideaux <geordi@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <NEBBJIGOELOLIBCCPKDCIELKCBAA.geordi@c031.aone.net.au>

Man, I gotta bite at this one.

When ya want delta V, NOTHIN' beats an AP solid.  When ya wan't delta H through
the air, they fall by the wayside. The examples are numerous.

PK

Quoting Troy Prideaux <geordi@C031.AONE.NET.AU>:

> >Furthermore, proving that ultra high purity HP isn't needed is a matter
> of
> >opinion. People on this list build candy, AN, & AP solid motors
> everyday
> >despite the fact that the technology is old and higher ISP propellants
> are
> >available.
>
> I build AP solids because they outperform anything that can be achieved
> by
> amateurs using any other propulsion system ,simple really. I have
> achieved a
> dIsp of over 400sec in motor sizes down as far as 29mm and higher in
> larger
> sized motors (and that's with a straight conical style nozzle).
>
> Please research your facts before making such statements.
>
>
> Troy.
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 4881 invoked from network); 25 Aug 2001 09:11:44 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 25 Aug 2001 09:11:44 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 18005 invoked by uid 50005); 25 Aug 2001 09:10:53 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc with qmail-scanner-1.00 (. Clean. Processed in 0.271203 secs); 25 Aug 2001 09:10:53 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 25 Aug 2001 09:10:52 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id CAA07757; Sat, 25 Aug 2001 02:07:11 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 96473 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 25 Aug 2001 09:07:01          +0000
Received: from cyclone.comcen.com.au (cyclone.comcen.com.au [203.23.236.100])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id CAA07741; Sat, 25 Aug 2001          02:07:00 -0700
Received: (from nobody@localhost) by cyclone.comcen.com.au (8.11.1/8.11.1) id          f7P96xL50047; Sat, 25 Aug 2001 19:06:59 +1000 (EST) (envelope-from          pkelly@comcen.com.au)
References: <Pine.LNX.4.10.10108170757240.16330-100000@itc.uci.edu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
User-Agent: IMP/PHP IMAP webmail program 2.2.3
X-Originating-IP: 210.50.105.23
Message-ID:  <998730419.3b876ab30a6e8@webmail.comcen.com.au>
Date:         Sat, 25 Aug 2001 19:06:59 +1000
Reply-To: "Paul Kelly" <pkelly@COMCEN.COM.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Paul Kelly" <pkelly@COMCEN.COM.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Candy propellant (past accidents and future greatness)
Comments: To: Ray Calkins <rcalkins@ITC.UCI.EDU>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <Pine.LNX.4.10.10108170757240.16330-100000@itc.uci.edu>

Must be hungry, need to bite here too :-)
Quoting Ray Calkins <rcalkins@ITC.UCI.EDU>:

IMNSHO Candy's biggest advantage is that you don't need to vac mix it. Anyone
can make candy. It takes no real experience or special skills.
Propellant cost is nothing!

PK


> INMHO, candy's greatest advantage is its cost/performance ratio, a
> major
> advantage when things begin to scale.
>
>
> Long ago, somebody here calculated minimium propellant to get a point
> mass
> to orbit using sugar.  The number came in right at a ton.  Prices for
> 1/8
> ton sugar propellant materials is just over $0.30 per pound.  Assuming
> no
> further price reduction, this equates to theoretical $600 to orbit.  I
> expect this number to drop by at least 33% with bulk purchacing.  I
> don't
> know how cheap APCP can be made, and look forward to BrianK's results
> in
> this area, but commercial "M" reloads are not much cheaper than $600,
> and
> they show high production.
>
> Sure, this number is unrealistic, there's a lot of structural mass
> unaccounted for, lots of development work to pay for, etc.  Let's
> compare
> apples and oranges:  What's the price per pound of APCP in large
> quantities?  It has a little less than twice the performance of sugar.
>
> Anybody have the price/lb figure of PSAN propellant?  I think this
> propellant is a sleeping giant as well, with an Isp comparable to APCP.
>
> Ray
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 4052 invoked from network); 25 Aug 2001 10:22:39 -0000
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 25 Aug 2001 10:22:39 -0000
Received: (qmail 25034 invoked by uid 50005); 25 Aug 2001 10:23:37 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.182445 secs); 25 Aug 2001 10:23:37 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 25 Aug 2001 10:23:36 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id DAA07965; Sat, 25 Aug 2001 03:16:59 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 96487 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 25 Aug 2001 10:16:53          +0000
Received: from mta02.mail.mel.aone.net.au (mta02.mail.au.uu.net [203.2.192.82])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id DAA07949 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 25 Aug 2001 03:16:52 -0700
Received: from unknown ([63.34.214.253]) by mta02.mail.mel.aone.net.au with          SMTP id <20010825101650.VOXY4158.mta02.mail.mel.aone.net.au@unknown>;          Sat, 25 Aug 2001 20:16:50 +1000
References: Conversation <NEBBJIGOELOLIBCCPKDCIELKCBAA.geordi@c031.aone.net.au>            with last message <998729263.3b87662f5bf9f@webmail.comcen.com.au>
Priority: Normal
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Priority: 3
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	X-MAPIextension=.TXT;
	charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>
Date:         Sat, 25 Aug 2001 10:16:53 +0000
Reply-To: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] ERPS successfully runs H2O2 engine
Comments: To: Paul Kelly <pkelly@comcen.com.au>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <998729263.3b87662f5bf9f@webmail.comcen.com.au>

----------
> Man, I gotta bite at this one.
>
> When ya want delta V, NOTHIN' beats an AP solid.  When ya wan't delta H
> through
> the air, they fall by the wayside. The examples are numerous.

What, like the super loki dart? Is that one of the examples:-)

Troy.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 23617 invoked from network); 25 Aug 2001 14:02:41 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 25 Aug 2001 14:02:41 -0000
Received: (qmail 15571 invoked by uid 50005); 25 Aug 2001 14:01:49 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc with qmail-scanner-1.00 (. Clean. Processed in 1.252817 secs); 25 Aug 2001 14:01:49 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 25 Aug 2001 14:01:47 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA08595; Sat, 25 Aug 2001 06:54:59 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 96528 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 25 Aug 2001 13:54:49          +0000
Received: from smtp001.mailsrvcs.net (smtp001pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.180])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA08579 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 25 Aug 2001 06:54:49 -0700
Received: from [63.27.96.122] (1Cust122.tnt1.san-bernardino.ca.da.uu.net          [63.27.96.122]) by smtp001.mailsrvcs.net  with ESMTP for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; id f7PDsH728444 Sat, 25 Aug 2001 08:54:17          -0500 (CDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: GTE/01rocket@mail.gte.net
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <a05100301b7ad5e76829d@[63.27.96.122]>
Date:         Sat, 25 Aug 2001 06:54:16 -0700
Reply-To: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Motor tests
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

>Carl Blood said:



>The load cell reported 3500 lbs peak thrust at the time the casing decided
>to take flight. The motor was designed to only produce 1000 lbs of thrust.
>Reviewing the nozzle give no evidence that it plugged. As the amount of
burned fuel was minuscule (less than 1/20th of a grain.

Clearly the throat was too small by a large margin. Not knowing the
ballistics I would start with a throat 3/16-1/8 larger.


--
Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
Opinion, the whole thing.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 1167 invoked from network); 25 Aug 2001 14:42:53 -0000
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 25 Aug 2001 14:42:53 -0000
Received: (qmail 24491 invoked by uid 50005); 25 Aug 2001 14:41:20 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.261167 secs); 25 Aug 2001 14:41:20 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 25 Aug 2001 14:41:19 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA08720; Sat, 25 Aug 2001 07:35:37 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 96543 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 25 Aug 2001 14:35:30          +0000
Received: from fep4-orange.clear.net.nz (fep4-orange.clear.net.nz          [203.97.32.4]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA08705          for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Sat, 25 Aug 2001 07:35:29 -0700
Received: from mkbs (203-167-160-170.dialup.clear.net.nz [203.167.160.170]) by          fep4-orange.clear.net.nz (1.5/1.7) with SMTP id CAA02510; Sun, 26 Aug          2001 02:35:25 +1200 (NZST)
References: Conversation <NEBBJIGOELOLIBCCPKDCIELKCBAA.geordi@c031.aone.net.au>            with last message <998729263.3b87662f5bf9f@webmail.comcen.com.au>             <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <04fd01c12d73$8efcb6a0$0100a8c0@mkbs>
Date:         Sun, 26 Aug 2001 02:37:21 +1200
Reply-To: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Organization: Applied Technology
Subject:      Re: [AR] ERPS successfully runs H2O2 engine
Comments: To: Troy Prideaux <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

> > When ya want delta V, NOTHIN' beats an AP solid.

Genuine question - I don't understand Paul's assertion here re delta V.
AP is not so terribly dense as to give it a vast advantage over anything
else.
Its best Isp.at Pc under 2000 psi say is probably around 260 (about 2600
m/s).
This is significantly inferior to most liquids in current commercial use.
How is AP better for delta V?


>> When ya wan't delta H
> > through
> > the air, they fall by the wayside. The examples are numerous.
>
> What, like the super loki dart? Is that one of the examples:-)


I LOVE the Super Loki.
What I can't work out is why there aren't many amateur designs which emulate
its performance.
It is beautifully built but now rather old and the technology does not look
at all special - only the implementation. Where are the amateur designs
based on it ???




Russell McMahon

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 12069 invoked from network); 25 Aug 2001 15:25:41 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 25 Aug 2001 15:25:41 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 23171 invoked by uid 50005); 25 Aug 2001 15:25:22 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.316708 secs); 25 Aug 2001 15:25:22 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 25 Aug 2001 15:25:22 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA08856; Sat, 25 Aug 2001 08:17:34 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 96554 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 25 Aug 2001 15:17:25          +0000
Received: from femail40.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail40.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.254.60.34]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA08841          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 25 Aug 2001 08:17:24 -0700
Received: from home.com ([24.22.71.82]) by femail40.sdc1.sfba.home.com          (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20 201-229-121-120-20010223) with ESMTP id          <20010825151714.WNOR4874.femail40.sdc1.sfba.home.com@home.com>; Sat,          25 Aug 2001 08:17:14 -0700
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.75 [en] (Win98; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20010823.222108.-4009847.0.kc2csh@juno.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B87C1C7.1DD2E63C@home.com>
Date:         Sat, 25 Aug 2001 11:18:31 -0400
Reply-To: "Mark Simpson" <mark.simpson@HOME.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Mark Simpson" <mark.simpson@HOME.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] OT - hobbies on resume
Comments: To: kc2csh@JUNO.COM
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

As a manager that occasionally hires technically-qualified individuals
as chemists, when I see two similar resumes, I look at what other skills
the person possesses.  I was hired as a chemist by my first boss because
I had written on my resume that I built and raced cars.  Even though it
wasn't a written requirement, he was looking for a chemist with a
mechanical aptitude because it was hydraulic fluids that were being
formulated and tested.  Part of the job was to assemble and disassemble
a hydraulic test stand and evaluate the experimental fluid's lubricating
ability. He told me later that it was my comment about building cars
that made the difference.
I wouldn't spend a lot of space on a description, but if it's of
interest to the perspective employer, he'll bring it up during the
interviewing process.

Good luck,
Mark Simpson

kc2csh@JUNO.COM wrote:

>   What is the current thinking on including on a professional resume
> hobbies which are somewhat related to the professional position?
>   If it is done, how is it done properly?
>
>      Jay

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 22185 invoked from network); 25 Aug 2001 16:01:12 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 25 Aug 2001 16:01:12 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 27438 invoked by uid 50005); 25 Aug 2001 16:00:53 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.202494 secs); 25 Aug 2001 16:00:53 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 25 Aug 2001 16:00:53 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA08960; Sat, 25 Aug 2001 08:54:03 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 96565 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 25 Aug 2001 15:54:00          +0000
Received: from smtp006.mailsrvcs.net (smtp006pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.185])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA08944 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 25 Aug 2001 08:53:59 -0700
Received: from [63.27.96.122] (1Cust68.tnt1.san-bernardino.ca.da.uu.net          [63.27.96.68]) by smtp006.mailsrvcs.net  with ESMTP for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; id f7PFrRq10564 Sat, 25 Aug 2001 10:53:28          -0500 (CDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: GTE/01rocket@mail.gte.net
References: Conversation <NEBBJIGOELOLIBCCPKDCIELKCBAA.geordi@c031.aone.net.au>            with last message <998729263.3b87662f5bf9f@webmail.comcen.com.au>            <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>            <04fd01c12d73$8efcb6a0$0100a8c0@mkbs>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <a05100303b7ad793a6506@[63.27.96.122]>
Date:         Sat, 25 Aug 2001 08:53:25 -0700
Reply-To: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] ERPS successfully runs H2O2 engine
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <04fd01c12d73$8efcb6a0$0100a8c0@mkbs>

Russell McMahon wrote:


>  > > When ya want delta V, NOTHIN' beats an AP solid.
>
>Genuine question - I don't understand Paul's assertion here re delta V.
>AP is not so terribly dense as to give it a vast advantage over anything
>else.
>Its best Isp.at Pc under 2000 psi say is probably around 260 (about 2600
>m/s).
>This is significantly inferior to most liquids in current commercial use.
>How is AP better for delta V?


AP motors have high density impulse and typically lower dead weight
at burnout (better mass fraction).  Sometimes system ISP is more
relevant than propellant ISP.


>
>
>>>  When ya wan't delta H
>>  > through
>>  > the air, they fall by the wayside. The examples are numerous.
>>
>>  What, like the super loki dart? Is that one of the examples:-)
>
>
>I LOVE the Super Loki.
>What I can't work out is why there aren't many amateur designs which emulate
>its performance.


The RRS/Garboden boosted dart emulates its performance.  Alot of the
efficiencies achieved by the super-loki are due to optimizing many
factors that have to be precisely duplicated or the performance is
far worse.  Also the airframe must be manufactured very precisely and
with a fairly high tooling cost and amateurs are not likely to
reproduce that unless they want a thousand of them.


>It is beautifully built but now rather old and the technology does not look
>at all special - only the implementation. Where are the amateur designs
>based on it ???

I published a tech report on Boosted Darts BTW.

Jerry

--
Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
Opinion, the whole thing.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 7173 invoked from network); 25 Aug 2001 18:40:53 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 25 Aug 2001 18:40:53 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 23921 invoked by uid 50005); 25 Aug 2001 18:40:00 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc with qmail-scanner-1.00 (. Clean. Processed in 0.204855 secs); 25 Aug 2001 18:40:00 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 25 Aug 2001 18:40:00 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA09874; Sat, 25 Aug 2001 11:33:40 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 96652 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 25 Aug 2001 18:33:30          +0000
Received: from po4.glue.umd.edu (po4.glue.umd.edu [128.8.10.124]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA09859 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 25 Aug 2001 11:33:30 -0700
Received: from y.glue.umd.edu (IDENT:root@y.glue.umd.edu [128.8.10.68]) by          po4.glue.umd.edu (8.10.1/8.10.1) with ESMTP id f7PIXRx04015; Sat, 25          Aug 2001 14:33:27 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from y.glue.umd.edu (IDENT:sendmail@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by          y.glue.umd.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id OAA12051; Sat, 25 Aug 2001          14:33:27 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from localhost (acase@localhost) by y.glue.umd.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with          ESMTP id OAA12047; Sat, 25 Aug 2001 14:33:27 -0400 (EDT)
X-Authentication-Warning: y.glue.umd.edu: acase owned process doing -bs
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.GSO.4.21.0108251431230.11888-100000@y.glue.umd.edu>
Date:         Sat, 25 Aug 2001 14:33:26 -0400
Reply-To: "Andrew Case" <acase@GLUE.UMD.EDU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Andrew Case" <acase@GLUE.UMD.EDU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Resources for materials and engineer speak
Comments: To: Brian Reddeman <breddeman@HOTMAIL.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <F159WrwuVjtQUGUzLhG0001180b@hotmail.com>

On Fri, 24 Aug 2001, Brian Reddeman wrote:

> In my humble process of building a very small liquid fuel rocket motor, I've
> run into a problem of trying to find materials for building my little motor
> (mainly very small quantities of metals and composites).

Small Parts Inc. - www.smallparts.com
They sell small quantities of handy stuff for prototyping and
experiments. I highly recommend them.

......Andrew

Andrew Case                             |
acase@plasma.umd.edu                    |
Institute for Plasma Research           |
University of Maryland, College Park    |

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 17524 invoked from network); 25 Aug 2001 19:06:13 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 25 Aug 2001 19:06:13 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 31580 invoked by uid 50005); 25 Aug 2001 19:07:08 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.560325 secs); 25 Aug 2001 19:07:08 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 25 Aug 2001 19:07:07 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA10001; Sat, 25 Aug 2001 11:53:57 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 96676 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 25 Aug 2001 18:53:52          +0000
Received: from po4.glue.umd.edu (po4.glue.umd.edu [128.8.10.124]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA09986 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 25 Aug 2001 11:53:51 -0700
Received: from y.glue.umd.edu (IDENT:root@y.glue.umd.edu [128.8.10.68]) by          po4.glue.umd.edu (8.10.1/8.10.1) with ESMTP id f7PIroM04722 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 25 Aug 2001 14:53:50 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from y.glue.umd.edu (IDENT:sendmail@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by          y.glue.umd.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id OAA12632 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 25 Aug 2001 14:53:50 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from localhost (acase@localhost) by y.glue.umd.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with          ESMTP id OAA12628 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 25 Aug 2001          14:53:49 -0400 (EDT)
X-Authentication-Warning: y.glue.umd.edu: acase owned process doing -bs
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.GSO.4.21.0108251444100.11888-100000@y.glue.umd.edu>
Date:         Sat, 25 Aug 2001 14:53:49 -0400
Reply-To: "Andrew Case" <acase@GLUE.UMD.EDU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Andrew Case" <acase@GLUE.UMD.EDU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Lawyers the other headache
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <3B8728F3.E4F21BD9@earthlink.net>

On Fri, 24 Aug 2001, Thomas M. Mcgaffey wrote:
> I was not talking about published work of unproved designs nor was I
> talking about publishing any work.  I was talking about "Space Shot" and
> "HPR" groups,  form the point of view of a person (me) in side the
> group, task with developing some sub system, who can't get a design
> specification or write one because nobody has a written plan and system
> B is not documented and "jim" is working on it in his spare time 200
> miles away.

It seems to me (as someone who hasn't got the level of experience you
have) that there are some fundamental organizational weaknesses in
any amateur rocketry scheme. First of all, the need for a single
vision to keep things moving in the right direction - In a company,
the boss (ideally) provides the vision, and the paycheck keeps people
on board even when their personal vision diverges from the boss's
vision. An amateur who decides he doesn't like the leadership's vision
(or haircut, for that matter) can just take his marbles and go home.
A related problem is the need for a disciplined and structured approach
to implementing the vision - documenting the interfaces between working
groups being one particularly tricky issue, as you point out. This doesn't
mean it can't be done, just that the downside needs to be addressed up
front, in the beginning, so that organizational issues don't become
an obstacle when everyone's attention needs to be on the tricky
technical issues.

I'd be really interested in hearing about organizational problems in
this sort of effort, and especially how they can be avoided.

......Andrew

Andrew Case                             |
acase@plasma.umd.edu                    |
Institute for Plasma Research           |
University of Maryland, College Park    |

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 3665 invoked from network); 25 Aug 2001 20:06:04 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 25 Aug 2001 20:06:04 -0000
Received: (qmail 22160 invoked by uid 50005); 25 Aug 2001 20:05:44 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.324191 secs); 25 Aug 2001 20:05:44 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 25 Aug 2001 20:05:44 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA10230; Sat, 25 Aug 2001 12:58:08 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 96707 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 25 Aug 2001 19:58:07          +0000
Received: from mailhost0.trib.com (mailhost0.trib.com [63.229.150.3]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA10207 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Sat, 25 Aug 2001 12:57:13 -0700
Received: from mail.trib.com (mail.trib.com [12.10.158.17]) by          mailhost0.trib.com (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f7PJv9p36502; Sat,          25 Aug 2001 13:57:09 -0600 (MDT) (envelope-from          jwckman@space-rockets.com)
Received: from [63.229.151.3] (HELO hppav) by mail.trib.com (CommuniGate Pro          SMTP 3.4.6) with SMTP id 43985914; Sat, 25 Aug 2001 13:57:08 -0600
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
Importance: Normal
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <NKEHJAOOKBPGIKOOPDEFGEJBCBAA.jwckman@space-rockets.com>
Date:         Sat, 25 Aug 2001 13:55:33 -0600
Reply-To: "John Wickman" <jwckman@SPACE-ROCKETS.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Wickman" <jwckman@SPACE-ROCKETS.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Motor tests
Comments: To: "Carl A. Blood" <cablood@corlabs.com>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <003701c12d30$b2077d80$0200a8c0@charter.net>

Carl,

It sounds like the thrust suddenly spiked as the casing let go from the
bulkhead.   At that moment, the thrust is equal to the chamber pressure
applied to the bulkhead cross-sectional area.

John Wickman


-----Original Message-----
From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@itc.uci.edu]On
Behalf Of Carl A. Blood
Sent: Saturday, August 25, 2001 12:40 AM
To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
Subject: [AR] Motor tests


Well we have yet to blow up a motor. Although today the forward end closure
decided to stay with the test stand and the rest of the motor tube had a
great urge to fly. This of course left 26 pounds of fuel laying on the
ground. It seems that the anchor screws for the closure were off by .050 and
did not grip the closure as designed. The motor casing achieved about 200
feet or so and landed closest to the pad intact. Only one grain had burned
and only a vary small part of it. So we will make some adjustments and try
again next week. After all we still have 6 unburned grains left. Next time
I'll us my glasses when assembling the engine.

Oh ya, the three inch L888 motor achieved it projected pressure about 4 feet
off the pad and blew out the graphite nozzle. Another error. The nozzle was
to thin. So I will redesign that one. Of course once the nozzle became to
big the rocket dropped onto the rail and burned for 22 seconds. And it had
to burn up the ejected cutes as well.

This all started when I forgot to bring the pressure sensor the test site
100 miles away.

I do have one question someone may be able to answer.

The load cell reported 3500 lbs peak thrust at the time the casing decided
to take flight. The motor was designed to only produce 1000 lbs of thrust.
Reviewing the nozzle give no evidence that it plugged. As the amount of
burned fuel was minuscule (less than 1/20th of a grain. And the igniter was
clearly ejected. Oh , this is a almost "O" 4 inch by 40 inch motor.

Well I'll be putting the videos on www.pad17.com sometime this weekend.

Thanks for the read.

Carl Blood

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 7998 invoked from network); 25 Aug 2001 20:07:35 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 25 Aug 2001 20:07:35 -0000
Received: (qmail 23952 invoked by uid 50005); 25 Aug 2001 20:07:15 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.260571 secs); 25 Aug 2001 20:07:15 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 25 Aug 2001 20:07:15 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA10204; Sat, 25 Aug 2001 12:56:40 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 96700 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 25 Aug 2001 19:56:34          +0000
Received: from mailhost0.trib.com (mailhost0.trib.com [63.229.150.3]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA10189 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Sat, 25 Aug 2001 12:56:33 -0700
Received: from mail.trib.com (mail.trib.com [12.10.158.17]) by          mailhost0.trib.com (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f7PJuVp36349; Sat,          25 Aug 2001 13:56:31 -0600 (MDT) (envelope-from          jwckman@space-rockets.com)
Received: from [63.229.151.3] (HELO hppav) by mail.trib.com (CommuniGate Pro          SMTP 3.4.6) with SMTP id 43985858; Sat, 25 Aug 2001 13:56:29 -0600
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0BB3_01C56B69.4C2728A0"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
Importance: Normal
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <NKEHJAOOKBPGIKOOPDEFAEJBCBAA.jwckman@space-rockets.com>
Date:         Sat, 25 Aug 2001 13:54:54 -0600
Reply-To: "John Wickman" <jwckman@SPACE-ROCKETS.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Wickman" <jwckman@SPACE-ROCKETS.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Some PVC Motor Results and techniques
Comments: To: Scott & Jeanette <frazer2001@earthlink.net>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <002901c12d13$3f6819a0$f072fea9@scottje>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0BB3_01C56B69.4C2728A0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Scott,

You should be in the ballpark if your input parameters are correct.   As a
check, you can estimate the average chamber pressure by dividing the
propellant weight by the burn time to get a propellant weight flowrate
(lbs/second).    Multiple the propellant weight flowrate by C-star (fps) and
divide that by the throat area (Inch**2) and 32.2.   That will give you the
average chamber pressure in psi.  For C-star, I would bracket it between 90%
and 80% of theoretical from CHEM-II.

The average thrust can be calculated by multiplying the average chamber
pressure by the average throat area and by the nozzle coefficient, Cf.

Incidentally, we have been making the 2" motor using 1.5" PVC pipe for
propellant cartridges.   Cast directly into the 1.5" pipe and slide them
into the 2" pipe.   You do not need to insulate the 2" pipe.   You can get
2.5" pipe for 3" PVC pipe motors, too.

I'm glad to hear you are having success.

John Wickman




 -----Original Message-----
From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@itc.uci.edu]On Behalf
Of Scott & Jeanette
Sent: Friday, August 24, 2001 9:09 PM
To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
Subject: [AR] Some PVC Motor Results and techniques


  Tonight I tested 2 PVC AN/MG Motors.  Both motors were identical.  I used
a  2" Diameter Motor of a segmented design using (3) 6" segments.  Each
segment was cast into 6" sections of PVC pipe that were insulated with
rubber sheeting, then the segments were glued back together using couplers.
All glue joints were insulated with RTV.  Standard methods were used for the
bulkhead and the nozzle throat material was 2 phenolic discs epoxied
together and then cast into hydraulic cement.  Core diameter was .75" and
throat diam. was .375".
      I had a calculated  initial thrust of 48lbs with a max thrust of 85
lbs.  Calculated burn time was 6.2 seconds.  My actual burn time recorded
from video was 5 seconds on the first motor and 5.4 seconds on the second.
The motors held together great and there was little throat erosion.
      I have no thrust or pressure measurement capabilities at the present
time. Although I realize there are some variables that could effect actual
performance,  is it  reasonable to assume that I at least met my calculated
thrust, assuming all calcs. were performed correctly?  I used FPRED for my
calculations.
      Comments, questions and maybe even mild abuse welcome.

  Scott

------=_NextPart_000_0BB3_01C56B69.4C2728A0
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Diso-8859-1">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 5.50.4611.1300" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><SPAN class=3D040502719-25082001><FONT face=3DArial color=3D#0000ff =

size=3D2>Scott,</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=3D040502719-25082001><FONT face=3DArial color=3D#0000ff =

size=3D2></FONT></SPAN>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=3D040502719-25082001><FONT face=3DArial color=3D#0000ff =
size=3D2>You=20
should be in the ballpark if your input parameters are =
correct.&nbsp;&nbsp; As a=20
check, you can estimate the average&nbsp;chamber pressure&nbsp;by =
dividing the=20
propellant weight by the burn time to get a propellant weight flowrate=20
(lbs/second).&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Multiple the propellant weight flowrate =
by=20
C-star (fps)&nbsp;and divide&nbsp;that by the throat area =
(Inch**2)&nbsp;and=20
32.2.&nbsp;&nbsp; That will give you the average chamber pressure in =
psi.&nbsp;=20
For C-star, I would bracket it between 90% and 80% of theoretical from=20
CHEM-II.</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=3D040502719-25082001><FONT face=3DArial color=3D#0000ff =

size=3D2></FONT></SPAN>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=3D040502719-25082001><FONT face=3DArial color=3D#0000ff =
size=3D2>The=20
average thrust can be calculated by multiplying the average chamber =
pressure by=20
the average throat area and by the nozzle coefficient, =
Cf.</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=3D040502719-25082001><FONT face=3DArial color=3D#0000ff =

size=3D2></FONT></SPAN>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=3D040502719-25082001><FONT face=3DArial color=3D#0000ff =

size=3D2>Incidentally, we have been making the 2" motor&nbsp;using 1.5" =
PVC pipe=20
for propellant cartridges.&nbsp;&nbsp; Cast directly into the 1.5" pipe =
and=20
slide them into the 2" pipe.&nbsp;&nbsp; You do not need to insulate the =
2"=20
pipe.&nbsp;&nbsp; You can get 2.5" pipe for 3" PVC pipe motors,=20
too.&nbsp;</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=3D040502719-25082001><FONT face=3DArial color=3D#0000ff =

size=3D2></FONT></SPAN>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=3D040502719-25082001><FONT face=3DArial color=3D#0000ff =
size=3D2>I'm=20
glad to hear you&nbsp;are having&nbsp;success.&nbsp; =
</FONT></SPAN></DIV><SPAN=20
class=3D040502719-25082001></SPAN><FONT face=3DTahoma>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial color=3D#0000ff size=3D2></FONT><FONT =
face=3DArial color=3D#0000ff=20
size=3D2></FONT><BR><FONT size=3D2><SPAN =
class=3D040502719-25082001><FONT face=3DArial=20
color=3D#0000ff>John Wickman</FONT></SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=3D2><SPAN =
class=3D040502719-25082001></SPAN></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=3D2><SPAN =
class=3D040502719-25082001></SPAN></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=3D2><SPAN =
class=3D040502719-25082001></SPAN></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=3D2><SPAN =
class=3D040502719-25082001></SPAN></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=3D2><SPAN =
class=3D040502719-25082001>&nbsp;</SPAN>-----Original=20
Message-----<BR><B>From:</B> Amateur Rocketry discussion list=20
[mailto:AROCKET@itc.uci.edu]<B>On Behalf Of </B>Scott &amp;=20
Jeanette<BR><B>Sent:</B> Friday, August 24, 2001 9:09 PM<BR><B>To:</B>=20
AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU<BR><B>Subject:</B> [AR] Some PVC Motor Results and=20
techniques<BR><BR></DIV></FONT></FONT>
<BLOCKQUOTE dir=3Dltr style=3D"MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
  <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Tonight I tested 2 PVC AN/MG =
Motors.&nbsp; Both=20
  motors were identical.&nbsp;&nbsp;I used a &nbsp;2" Diameter Motor of =
a=20
  segmented design using (3) 6" segments.&nbsp; Each segment was cast =
into 6"=20
  sections of PVC pipe that were insulated with rubber sheeting, then =
the=20
  segments were glued back together using couplers.&nbsp; All glue =
joints were=20
  insulated with RTV.&nbsp; Standard methods were used for the bulkhead =
and the=20
  nozzle throat material was 2 phenolic discs epoxied together and then =
cast=20
  into hydraulic cement.&nbsp; Core diameter was .75" and throat diam. =
was=20
  .375".</FONT></DIV>
  <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; I had a =
calculated&nbsp;=20
  initial thrust of 48lbs with a max thrust of 85 lbs.&nbsp; Calculated =
burn=20
  time was 6.2 seconds.&nbsp; My actual burn time recorded from video =
was 5=20
  seconds on the first motor and 5.4 seconds on the second.&nbsp; The =
motors=20
  held together great and there was little throat=20
  erosion.&nbsp;&nbsp;</FONT></DIV>
  <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; I have no thrust =
or pressure=20
  measurement capabilities at the present time. Although I realize there =
are=20
  some variables that could effect actual performance,&nbsp;&nbsp;is it=20
  &nbsp;reasonable to assume that I at least met my calculated thrust, =
assuming=20
  all calcs. were performed correctly?&nbsp; I used FPRED for my=20
  calculations.</FONT></DIV>
  <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Comments, =
questions and maybe=20
  even mild abuse welcome.&nbsp; </FONT></DIV>
  <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
  <DIV><FONT face=3DArial =
size=3D2>Scott</FONT></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0BB3_01C56B69.4C2728A0--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 6529 invoked from network); 25 Aug 2001 20:50:56 -0000
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 25 Aug 2001 20:50:56 -0000
Received: (qmail 26294 invoked by uid 50005); 25 Aug 2001 20:51:51 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.473385 secs); 25 Aug 2001 20:51:51 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 25 Aug 2001 20:51:50 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA10384; Sat, 25 Aug 2001 13:43:44 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 96726 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 25 Aug 2001 20:43:41          +0000
Received: from cablecom.laribay.net (cablecom.laribay.net [66.20.57.4] (may be          forged)) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA10342 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 25 Aug 2001 13:33:40 -0700
Received: from billbull (dial080.laribay.net [66.20.57.80] (may be forged)) by          cablecom.laribay.net (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id PAA24322 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 25 Aug 2001 15:12:41 -0500 (CDT)          (envelope-from bpbullock@laribay.net)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0BB7_01C56B69.4C2728A0"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <002d01c12da5$04f98640$50391442@billbull>
Date:         Sat, 25 Aug 2001 15:27:22 -0500
Reply-To: "Bill Bullock" <bpbullock@LARIBAY.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Bill Bullock" <bpbullock@LARIBAY.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Another W32 SirCam Worm Virus Alert
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0BB7_01C56B69.4C2728A0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Folks:
    I just got an e-mail which was from someone named "Patti Amato" =
mailto:pattia@eatel.net (who I never heard of) with a subject line of =
"RE: Chemical Report" and a message of "I sent this  file in order to =
have your advice. See you later. Thanks"
    Not knowing this person I saved to disk and scanned...and there it =
was. So we who are interested in such subjects are still in harm's way.
    If you ever get this thing you can go to the included site and have =
it removed and any damage repaired.=20
    Respectfully returning to "lurk" mode,
Bill
http://www.sarc.com/avcenter/venc/data/w32.sircam.worm@mm.html

------=_NextPart_000_0BB7_01C56B69.4C2728A0
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META content=3D"text/html; charset=3Diso-8859-1" =
http-equiv=3DContent-Type>
<META content=3D"MSHTML 5.00.2614.3500" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT color=3D#000000>Folks:</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=3D#000000>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; I just got an e-mail which =
was from=20
someone named "Patti Amato" <A=20
href=3D"mailto:pattia@eatel.net">mailto:pattia@eatel.net</A>&nbsp;(who I =
never=20
heard of) with a subject line of "RE: Chemical Report" and a message of =
"I sent=20
this&nbsp; file in order to have your advice. See you later.=20
Thanks"</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=3D#000000>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Not knowing this person I =
saved to=20
disk and scanned...and there it was.&nbsp;So we who are interested in =
such=20
subjects are still in harm's way.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; If you ever get this thing you can go to the =
included=20
site and have it removed and&nbsp;any damage repaired.&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Respectfully returning to "lurk" mode,</DIV>
<DIV>Bill</DIV>
<DIV><A=20
href=3D"mailto:&nbsp;&nbsp;http://www.sarc.com/avcenter/venc/data/w32.sir=
cam.worm@mm.html">http://www.sarc.com/avcenter/venc/data/w32.sircam.worm@=
mm.html</A></DIV></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0BB7_01C56B69.4C2728A0--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 14049 invoked from network); 25 Aug 2001 21:38:21 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 25 Aug 2001 21:38:21 -0000
Received: (qmail 15940 invoked by uid 50005); 25 Aug 2001 21:38:00 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.267408 secs); 25 Aug 2001 21:38:00 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 25 Aug 2001 21:38:00 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA10541; Sat, 25 Aug 2001 14:34:05 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 96739 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 25 Aug 2001 21:33:52          +0000
Received: from femail2.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail2.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.0.95.82]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA10524 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 25 Aug 2001 14:33:52 -0700
Received: from cc334751a ([65.13.214.65]) by femail2.sdc1.sfba.home.com          (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20 201-229-121-120-20010223) with SMTP id          <20010825213346.NOFZ3982.femail2.sdc1.sfba.home.com@cc334751a>; Sat,          25 Aug 2001 14:33:46 -0700
References:  <NKEHJAOOKBPGIKOOPDEFAEJBCBAA.jwckman@space-rockets.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0BBA_01C56B69.4C2728A0"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2462.0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <021001c12dad$6b7e0e60$6601a8c0@home.com>
Date:         Sat, 25 Aug 2001 15:32:19 -0600
Reply-To: "Brian Kosko" <bkosko1@HOME.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Brian Kosko" <bkosko1@HOME.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Some PVC Motor Results and techniques
Comments: To: John Wickman <jwckman@SPACE-ROCKETS.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0BBA_01C56B69.4C2728A0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Two things come to mind.

1. The nozzle throat sounds small. What was the initial Kn? For =
comparably sized AP motors with 3/4 in cores, we use 3/8 inch throat for =
only short (6 in or so) grain lengths. The 13 inch long grain gets a 1/2 =
inch throat; and we count on getting some serious nozzle erosion.

2. Things 'letting go' in a motor will certainly cause pressure spikes =
and unwanted higher burn rates. We tested a reload for a 75mm Ellis Mtn =
case. It pressured up and then 'spit' the nozzle shoulder. On the next =
video frame you can see the forward bulkhead coming out. Our best guess =
was that the nozzle spit caused a pressure spike that then caused the =
forward bulkhead to fail.

Good luck.

Brian

------=_NextPart_000_0BBA_01C56B69.4C2728A0
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Diso-8859-1">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 6.00.2462.0" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Two things come to mind.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>1. The nozzle throat sounds small. What =
was the=20
initial Kn? For comparably sized AP motors with 3/4 in cores, we use 3/8 =
inch=20
throat for only short (6 in or so) grain lengths. The 13 inch long grain =
gets a=20
1/2 inch throat; and we count on getting some serious nozzle=20
erosion.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>2. Things 'letting go' in a motor will =
certainly=20
cause pressure spikes and unwanted higher burn rates. We tested a reload =
for a=20
75mm Ellis Mtn case. It pressured up and then 'spit' the nozzle =
shoulder. On the=20
next video frame you can see the forward bulkhead coming out. Our best =
guess was=20
that the nozzle spit caused a pressure spike that then caused the =
forward=20
bulkhead to fail.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Good luck.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Brian</FONT></DIV></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0BBA_01C56B69.4C2728A0--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 9509 invoked from network); 25 Aug 2001 21:48:00 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 25 Aug 2001 21:48:00 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 23445 invoked by uid 50005); 25 Aug 2001 21:47:40 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.496131 secs); 25 Aug 2001 21:47:40 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 25 Aug 2001 21:47:39 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA10600; Sat, 25 Aug 2001 14:44:35 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 96753 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 25 Aug 2001 21:44:33          +0000
Received: from imo-r08.mx.aol.com (imo-r08.mx.aol.com [152.163.225.104]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA10585 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Sat, 25 Aug 2001 14:44:32 -0700
Received: from Ricanakk@aol.com by imo-r08.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v31_r1.4.) id          o.3b.193f035e (17228); Sat, 25 Aug 2001 17:44:27 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: AOL 5.0 for Windows sub 108
Message-ID:  <3b.193f035e.28b9763b@aol.com>
Date:         Sat, 25 Aug 2001 17:44:27 EDT
Reply-To: <Ricanakk@AOL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <Ricanakk@AOL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] OT - hobbies on resume
Comments: To: kc2csh@juno.com
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

In a message dated 01/08/24 21:33:57 Eastern Daylight Time, kc2csh@JUNO.COM
writes:

<<  What is the current thinking on including on a professional resume
 hobbies which are somewhat related to the professional position?
   If it is done, how is it done properly? >>

Jay,
I'd certainly recommend putting this on your resume. For example, simply list
"amateur rocketry" under a (brief ) section titled "Hobbies" or "Leisure
activities". This will likely catch the eye of the interviewer, and will
provide you with a good opportunity to discuss the hobby in detail. At least,
this was the case for me, and definitely helped me to land my first
engineering job out of school.
Good luck.
Richard Nakka

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 24959 invoked from network); 25 Aug 2001 23:44:35 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 25 Aug 2001 23:44:35 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 10718 invoked by uid 50005); 25 Aug 2001 23:43:41 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc with qmail-scanner-1.00 (. Clean. Processed in 0.205465 secs); 25 Aug 2001 23:43:41 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 25 Aug 2001 23:43:40 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA11101; Sat, 25 Aug 2001 16:40:32 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 96838 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 25 Aug 2001 23:40:25          +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (f226.law8.hotmail.com [216.33.241.226]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA11086 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 25 Aug 2001 16:40:24 -0700
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Sat,          25 Aug 2001 16:39:54 -0700
Received: from 63.50.170.1 by lw8fd.law8.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Sat, 25 Aug          2001 23:39:54 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [63.50.170.1]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 25 Aug 2001 23:39:54.0790 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[3E280C60:01C12DBF]
Message-ID:  <F22630kkZIhTrBoe2U800011be0@hotmail.com>
Date:         Sat, 25 Aug 2001 23:39:54 +0000
Reply-To: "Bryan Flynt" <b_flynt@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Bryan Flynt" <b_flynt@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] OT - hobbies on resume
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

<html><div style='background-color:'><DIV>
<P>I would also recommend it.&nbsp; Over the past year I have gone to several interviews and in every one the interviewer brings up my hobbies.&nbsp; Most times they bring it up first thing in the interview.&nbsp; I think it helps them get to know you better, in an informal way, and it&nbsp;makes it easier for you to talk about something like your hobbies.&nbsp; If nothing more it sets you appart from the other applicants who appear to have no life outside of work.</P>
<P>Bryan Flynt<BR><BR></P><BR><BR><BR></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>&gt;From: Ricanakk@AOL.COM
<DIV></DIV>&gt;Reply-To: Ricanakk@AOL.COM
<DIV></DIV>&gt;To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
<DIV></DIV>&gt;Subject: Re: [AR] OT - hobbies on resume
<DIV></DIV>&gt;Date: Sat, 25 Aug 2001 17:44:27 EDT
<DIV></DIV>&gt;
<DIV></DIV>&gt;In a message dated 01/08/24 21:33:57 Eastern Daylight Time, kc2csh@JUNO.COM
<DIV></DIV>&gt;writes:
<DIV></DIV>&gt;
<DIV></DIV>&gt;&lt;&lt; What is the current thinking on including on a professional resume
<DIV></DIV>&gt; hobbies which are somewhat related to the professional position?
<DIV></DIV>&gt; If it is done, how is it done properly? &gt;&gt;
<DIV></DIV>&gt;
<DIV></DIV>&gt;Jay,
<DIV></DIV>&gt;I'd certainly recommend putting this on your resume. For example, simply list
<DIV></DIV>&gt;"amateur rocketry" under a (brief ) section titled "Hobbies" or "Leisure
<DIV></DIV>&gt;activities". This will likely catch the eye of the interviewer, and will
<DIV></DIV>&gt;provide you with a good opportunity to discuss the hobby in detail. At least,
<DIV></DIV>&gt;this was the case for me, and definitely helped me to land my first
<DIV></DIV>&gt;engineering job out of school.
<DIV></DIV>&gt;Good luck.
<DIV></DIV>&gt;Richard Nakka
<DIV></DIV></div><br clear=all><hr>Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at <a href='http://go.msn.com/bql/hmtag_itl_EN.asp'>http://explorer.msn.com</a><br></html>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 4776 invoked from network); 26 Aug 2001 00:19:39 -0000
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 26 Aug 2001 00:19:39 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 25012 invoked by uid 50005); 26 Aug 2001 00:18:04 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.387284 secs); 26 Aug 2001 00:18:04 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 26 Aug 2001 00:18:03 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA11303; Sat, 25 Aug 2001 17:16:11 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 96878 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 26 Aug 2001 00:16:04          +0000
Received: from cyclone.comcen.com.au (cyclone.comcen.com.au [203.23.236.100])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA11288 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 25 Aug 2001 17:16:03 -0700
Received: (from nobody@localhost) by cyclone.comcen.com.au (8.11.1/8.11.1) id          f7Q0FvT52566; Sun, 26 Aug 2001 10:15:57 +1000 (EST) (envelope-from          pkelly@comcen.com.au)
References: Conversation <3B81D884.7B6CCF69@sfcc.net> with last message                    <000901c129f0$f6d923c0$f072fea9@scottje>            <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
User-Agent: IMP/PHP IMAP webmail program 2.2.3
X-Originating-IP: 210.50.25.55
Message-ID:  <998784957.3b883fbd83c4f@webmail.comcen.com.au>
Date:         Sun, 26 Aug 2001 10:15:57 +1000
Reply-To: "Paul Kelly" <pkelly@COMCEN.COM.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Paul Kelly" <pkelly@COMCEN.COM.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Molding Phenolic/Graphite Nozzles
Comments: To: Troy Prideaux <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>

I've made one of these. I fired one of Troy's phelolic cast nozzles in a hybrid
(15 sec burn) and it fairly toasted it. There was just so much erosion. On the
plus side, the motor case was cool enough to hold the instant the thing had
gone out. Amazing. I then fitted a graphite throat to a second nozzle and flew
it in the same motor. The result was another toasted nozzle with the throat
blown out. Nb these nozzles were simply cast from phenolic resin and post
cured. I'm sure that a layup of glass and phenolic with a graphite insert would
behave differently. Certainly the insulating properties of cast/layed up
nozzles make them attractive for larger motors.


PK
Quoting Troy Prideaux <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>:

> Nup, although I've done a fair bit of this myself with laminating
> phenolic
> resin.
>
> Troy.
>
> ----------
> > I have been looking for info on molding phenolic nozzles with a
> graphite
> > insert.  Does anyone have a good website or source of info on this?
> >
> > Thanks
> >
> > Scott Frazer
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 18971 invoked from network); 26 Aug 2001 00:24:23 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 26 Aug 2001 00:24:23 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 32133 invoked by uid 50005); 26 Aug 2001 00:24:02 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.124007 secs); 26 Aug 2001 00:24:02 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 26 Aug 2001 00:24:01 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA11346; Sat, 25 Aug 2001 17:20:48 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 96889 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 26 Aug 2001 00:20:47          +0000
Received: from cyclone.comcen.com.au (cyclone.comcen.com.au [203.23.236.100])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA11331 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 25 Aug 2001 17:20:46 -0700
Received: (from nobody@localhost) by cyclone.comcen.com.au (8.11.1/8.11.1) id          f7Q0Kgv52584; Sun, 26 Aug 2001 10:20:42 +1000 (EST) (envelope-from          pkelly@comcen.com.au)
References: <3B827155.1ABD9D38@gate.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
User-Agent: IMP/PHP IMAP webmail program 2.2.3
X-Originating-IP: 210.50.25.55
Message-ID:  <998785242.3b8840da58dfa@webmail.comcen.com.au>
Date:         Sun, 26 Aug 2001 10:20:42 +1000
Reply-To: "Paul Kelly" <pkelly@COMCEN.COM.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Paul Kelly" <pkelly@COMCEN.COM.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Accident Reports
Comments: To: jaywward@gate.net, Jay Ward <jaywward@gate.net>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <3B827155.1ABD9D38@gate.net>

Make a wooden lid for your candymatic, take two bits of ply cut one so that it
fits inside the bowl, cut the other so that it sits on top, glue them together
and you impove the safety of the unit a whole lot. Clean the mixer after use.

PK
Quoting Jay Ward <jaywward@gate.net>:

> I had a near miss several weeks ago. I've been mixing KNO3/Sorbitol in
> a
> converted bread maker. Normal procedure is to add dry ingredients, mix
> 10 minutes then turn on heating element and ramp up to 300 degrees.
> Turn
> off mixer and heater, don leather welding gloves and face shield, pour
> molten propellant into casting tubes.
>
> This time I had failed to clean the bread maker completely from
> previous
> batch. A very small drop of propellant  had fallen on the already cool
> heating element during the previous pour. When the heating element came
> up to temp on the new batch, the drop ignited, leaving a brown streak
> in
> my shorts. Luckily the amount was miniscule and the resulting flame was
> underneath the mixing pan and not in contact with the propellant being
> mixed.
>
> Needless to say I attend to cleanup much more completely than before.
> The new revised mixing sequence includes a pre heat of the machine
> prior
> to introducing any propellant.
>
> --
> Jay Ward, KE4ZOG, TRA # 5725, L2, NAR 78126, L2
> Father, Husband, Brewer, Rocket Scientist <G>
> check out the Brewery http://www.gate.net/~jaywward
> rockets http://www.gate.net/~jaywward/coresample.htm
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 13573 invoked from network); 26 Aug 2001 00:42:16 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 26 Aug 2001 00:42:16 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 21223 invoked by uid 50005); 26 Aug 2001 00:41:55 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.247697 secs); 26 Aug 2001 00:41:55 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 26 Aug 2001 00:41:54 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA11426; Sat, 25 Aug 2001 17:38:15 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 96900 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 26 Aug 2001 00:38:08          +0000
Received: from cyclone.comcen.com.au (cyclone.comcen.com.au [203.23.236.100])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA11411 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 25 Aug 2001 17:38:07 -0700
Received: (from nobody@localhost) by cyclone.comcen.com.au (8.11.1/8.11.1) id          f7Q0c1k52618; Sun, 26 Aug 2001 10:38:01 +1000 (EST) (envelope-from          pkelly@comcen.com.au)
References: Conversation <NEBBJIGOELOLIBCCPKDCIELKCBAA.geordi@c031.aone.net.au>            with last message <998729263.3b87662f5bf9f@webmail.comcen.com.au>            <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
User-Agent: IMP/PHP IMAP webmail program 2.2.3
X-Originating-IP: 210.50.25.55
Message-ID:  <998786281.3b8844e957d14@webmail.comcen.com.au>
Date:         Sun, 26 Aug 2001 10:38:01 +1000
Reply-To: "Paul Kelly" <pkelly@COMCEN.COM.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Paul Kelly" <pkelly@COMCEN.COM.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] ERPS successfully runs H2O2 engine
Comments: To: Troy Prideaux <GEORDI@c031.aone.net.au>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>

Yep, It's a good example. How many 2" diam satellites are there? The Loki was
used for such advanced aerospace projects as:
Ejecting chaff.
Measuring Temp/Pressure.

That's the trouble with solid motors/pundits. They make a lot of noise, but
cant maintain a flame!
:-)
PK

Quoting Troy Prideaux <GEORDI@c031.aone.net.au>:

>
>
> ----------
> > Man, I gotta bite at this one.
> >
> > When ya want delta V, NOTHIN' beats an AP solid.  When ya wan't delta
> H
> > through
> > the air, they fall by the wayside. The examples are numerous.
>
> What, like the super loki dart? Is that one of the examples:-)
>
> Troy.
>
>
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 21200 invoked from network); 26 Aug 2001 00:44:36 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 26 Aug 2001 00:44:36 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 23713 invoked by uid 50005); 26 Aug 2001 00:44:15 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.38656 secs); 26 Aug 2001 00:44:15 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 26 Aug 2001 00:44:14 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA11457; Sat, 25 Aug 2001 17:40:29 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 96907 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 26 Aug 2001 00:40:27          +0000
Received: from cyclone.comcen.com.au (cyclone.comcen.com.au [203.23.236.100])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA11442 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 25 Aug 2001 17:40:26 -0700
Received: (from nobody@localhost) by cyclone.comcen.com.au (8.11.1/8.11.1) id          f7Q0eMX52636; Sun, 26 Aug 2001 10:40:22 +1000 (EST) (envelope-from          pkelly@comcen.com.au)
References: Conversation <NEBBJIGOELOLIBCCPKDCIELKCBAA.geordi@c031.aone.net.au>            with last message <998729263.3b87662f5bf9f@webmail.comcen.com.au>              <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>            <04fd01c12d73$8efcb6a0$0100a8c0@mkbs>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
User-Agent: IMP/PHP IMAP webmail program 2.2.3
X-Originating-IP: 210.50.25.55
Message-ID:  <998786422.3b8845762ed4d@webmail.comcen.com.au>
Date:         Sun, 26 Aug 2001 10:40:22 +1000
Reply-To: "Paul Kelly" <pkelly@COMCEN.COM.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Paul Kelly" <pkelly@COMCEN.COM.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] ERPS successfully runs H2O2 engine
Comments: To: Russell McMahon <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <04fd01c12d73$8efcb6a0$0100a8c0@mkbs>

Density ISP counts for a lot when you have to get though the air. Solids are
good at this.
PK
Quoting Russell McMahon <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>:

> > > When ya want delta V, NOTHIN' beats an AP solid.
>
> Genuine question - I don't understand Paul's assertion here re delta V.
> AP is not so terribly dense as to give it a vast advantage over
> anything
> else.
> Its best Isp.at Pc under 2000 psi say is probably around 260 (about
> 2600
> m/s).
> This is significantly inferior to most liquids in current commercial
> use.
> How is AP better for delta V?
>
>
> >> When ya wan't delta H
> > > through
> > > the air, they fall by the wayside. The examples are numerous.
> >
> > What, like the super loki dart? Is that one of the examples:-)
>
>
> I LOVE the Super Loki.
> What I can't work out is why there aren't many amateur designs which
> emulate
> its performance.
> It is beautifully built but now rather old and the technology does not
> look
> at all special - only the implementation. Where are the amateur designs
> based on it ???
>
>
>
>
> Russell McMahon
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 12705 invoked from network); 26 Aug 2001 02:12:44 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 26 Aug 2001 02:12:44 -0000
Received: (qmail 10808 invoked by uid 50005); 26 Aug 2001 02:11:49 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc with qmail-scanner-1.00 (. Clean. Processed in 0.406624 secs); 26 Aug 2001 02:11:49 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 26 Aug 2001 02:11:48 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA11710; Sat, 25 Aug 2001 19:08:16 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 96934 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 26 Aug 2001 02:07:49          +0000
Received: from mta01.mail.mel.aone.net.au (mta01.mail.au.uu.net [203.2.192.81])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA11694 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 25 Aug 2001 19:07:48 -0700
Received: from unknown ([63.60.247.229]) by mta01.mail.mel.aone.net.au with          SMTP id <20010826020745.PQCC3755.mta01.mail.mel.aone.net.au@unknown>          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 26 Aug 2001 12:07:45 +1000
References: Conversation <NEBBJIGOELOLIBCCPKDCIELKCBAA.geordi@c031.aone.net.au>            with last message <998786281.3b8844e957d14@webmail.comcen.com.au>
Priority: Normal
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Priority: 3
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	X-MAPIextension=.TXT;
	charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>
Date:         Sun, 26 Aug 2001 02:07:49 +0000
Reply-To: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] ERPS successfully runs H2O2 engine
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <998786281.3b8844e957d14@webmail.comcen.com.au>

----------
> Yep, It's a good example. How many 2" diam satellites are there? The Loki
was
> used for such advanced aerospace projects as:

Ah, so now we've suddenly changed the subject on to satellites? A solid can
fly satellites.

> Ejecting chaff.
> Measuring Temp/Pressure.
>
> That's the trouble with solid motors/pundits. They make a lot of noise,
but
> cant maintain a flame!

Which is......how important? Besides a solid can be made just as long and
skinny and burn for just as long as hybrids or biprops. It hasn't been done
that often because those people we call "Rocket Scientists" after doing
some quick math ask the question WHY?


And for the other people on the list - not Paul, coz he's in a quirky mood
(must be that WA air:-)

I've never said that solids are the great one technology that does all.
Expect me to arc up when someone comes on the list and suggests they offer
inferior performance to other propulsion systems. All I ask is for people
to familiarise themselves with information like Sutton's chap 17 which
mentions the selection process for each propulsion system before making
statements on this subject unless ya name is Paul Kelly of course:-)

Troy.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 17688 invoked from network); 26 Aug 2001 03:20:57 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 26 Aug 2001 03:20:57 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 17062 invoked by uid 50005); 26 Aug 2001 03:20:02 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc with qmail-scanner-1.00 (. Clean. Processed in 0.184467 secs); 26 Aug 2001 03:20:02 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 26 Aug 2001 03:20:01 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA11937; Sat, 25 Aug 2001 20:17:18 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 96966 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 26 Aug 2001 03:17:10          +0000
Received: from smtp007.mailsrvcs.net (smtp007pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.186])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA11922 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 25 Aug 2001 20:17:09 -0700
Received: from [63.27.96.122] (1Cust191.tnt2.san-bernardino.ca.da.uu.net          [63.27.97.191]) by smtp007.mailsrvcs.net  with ESMTP for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; id f7Q34QW17508 Sat, 25 Aug 2001 22:04:27          -0500 (CDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: GTE/01rocket@mail.gte.net
References: Conversation <NEBBJIGOELOLIBCCPKDCIELKCBAA.geordi@c031.aone.net.au>            with last message <998729263.3b87662f5bf9f@webmail.comcen.com.au>            <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>            <998786281.3b8844e957d14@webmail.comcen.com.au>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <a05100307b7ae170a0289@[63.27.96.122]>
Date:         Sat, 25 Aug 2001 20:04:26 -0700
Reply-To: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] ERPS successfully runs H2O2 engine
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <998786281.3b8844e957d14@webmail.comcen.com.au>

>Paul Kelly posted in good cheer:



>Yep, It's a good example. How many 2" diam satellites are there? The Loki was
>used for such advanced aerospace projects as:
>Ejecting chaff.
>Measuring Temp/Pressure.
>
>That's the trouble with solid motors/pundits. They make a lot of noise, but
>cant maintain a flame!
>:-)


I agree boosted darts are essentially useless.

I agree solids have more difficulty achieving long burn times like liquids.

However I can design, build, and fly a solid from scratch in under 60
days and it will work.

Capital is time and money.

Jerry


>Quoting some lost soul:
>  > > When ya want delta V, NOTHIN' beats an AP solid.




--
Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
Opinion, the whole thing.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 27220 invoked from network); 26 Aug 2001 04:26:30 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 26 Aug 2001 04:26:30 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 20435 invoked by uid 50005); 26 Aug 2001 04:27:23 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.199289 secs); 26 Aug 2001 04:27:23 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 26 Aug 2001 04:27:23 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA12198; Sat, 25 Aug 2001 21:22:47 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 96993 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 26 Aug 2001 04:22:36          +0000
Received: from athol.localdomain (31.100.252.64.snet.net [64.252.100.31]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA12183 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Sat, 25 Aug 2001 21:22:34 -0700
Received: (from yarvin@localhost) by athol.localdomain (8.11.0/8.11.0) id          f7Q4OgA15921 for arocket@itc.uci.edu; Sun, 26 Aug 2001 00:24:42 -0400
References: <03bd01c12746$719ea1a0$6601a8c0@home.com>            <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010821234502.26173C-100000@spsystems.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Disposition: inline
User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i
Message-ID:  <20010826002442.A14968@athol.localdomain>
Date:         Sun, 26 Aug 2001 00:24:42 -0400
Reply-To: <yarvin@SNET.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Norman Yarvin" <yarvin_listbox@SNET.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] reliability Now we're talking statistics...
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010821234502.26173C-100000@spsystems.net>; from              henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET on Tue, Aug 21, 2001 at 11:57:26PM -0400

On Tue, Aug 21, 2001 at 11:57:26PM -0400, Henry Spencer wrote:

>(Remember this when you hear about a medical study announcing some new
>evil effect of power lines, or chocolate, or what have you.  The usual
>rule of thumb for publishable results is 95% probability that the effect
>is real.  That means that roughly 1 in every 20 such results is total
>happenstance, sheer experimental bad luck that doesn't imply anything.

Actually it's more complicated than that -- and probably even worse.  The
figure would be 1 in 20 if there were a 50% probability that when the
average researcher in the field chose a topic to investigate, he chose
one where there was a real correlation.  In general, if that probability
is P, then for every P real positives, there are (1-P)*(1/20) false
positives from pure happenstance.  To put this into numbers:

        P               (approximate) proportion of false positives

        50%             1 in 20
        10%             1 in 3
         1%             5 in 6
        90%             1 in 200

The actual value of P depends on the quality of the researchers in the
field, and on the number of real correlations that remain to be found.  I
don't know if anybody has ever tried to compute it for any field, even in
retrospect.  But it sure doesn't seem very high these days.

(I've simplified the analysis by assuming that either there is a
significant correlation or there is no correlation; in reality there is a
full spectrum of correlations.  And, of course, even if there is a
significant correlation, it's not necessarily a cause; but that's another
topic, and a large one.)


--
Norman Yarvin                                           yarvin@snet.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 6822 invoked from network); 26 Aug 2001 06:57:09 -0000
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 26 Aug 2001 06:57:09 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 9575 invoked by uid 50005); 26 Aug 2001 06:58:02 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.232434 secs); 26 Aug 2001 06:58:02 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 26 Aug 2001 06:58:01 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA14079; Sat, 25 Aug 2001 23:52:38 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 97056 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 26 Aug 2001 06:52:27          +0000
Received: from grucom2.gru.net (grucom2.gru.net [209.251.129.7]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA14064 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat,          25 Aug 2001 23:52:26 -0700
Received: from [209.251.150.232] by grucom2.sfcc.net (NTMail          6.04.0010/NU4112.00.db1c8a4b) with ESMTP id nhwciaaa for          AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 26 Aug 2001 02:52:21 -0400
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (Win95; I)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <Pine.LNX.4.10.10108170757240.16330-100000@itc.uci.edu>            <998730419.3b876ab30a6e8@webmail.comcen.com.au>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B889D0E.5341CC63@sfcc.net>
Date:         Sun, 26 Aug 2001 02:54:06 -0400
Reply-To: "James Yawn" <jyawn@SFCC.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "James Yawn" <jyawn@SFCC.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Candy propellant (past accidents and future greatness)
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

I finally got up the nerve to try putting recrystallized candy in a food
processor to knead it, and must say that it improves the process and the product
dramatically.

As usual, I have too many pictures and a few words on this topic at:

http://members.tripod.com/j_yawn/foodproc/index.htm

This could be a good thing for any who have tried the recrystallization method
and found it difficult to get the flakes to consolidate into the plastic form.
The food processor does a great job, and very quickly.  It also allows a wider
range of residual moisture levels, so cooking time and testing is not as
critical.

The mechanical mixing might allow one to cook all the water out, then add back a
measured amount at the time of mixing.  I will experiment with that soon.

Other news:  I have been testing compression-strength by making smaller and
smaller samples and subjecting them to substantial loads.  Today I made one 5/8
inch in diameter and 3/4 inch long, and pressed it with a 500 pound load for one
minute.  It did not crack, break, or fail in any way.  It deformed just a tiny
amount.  I might consider making furniture out of this stuff if it weren't such a
fire hazard.

Paul Kelly wrote:

> Must be hungry, need to bite here too :-)
> Quoting Ray Calkins <rcalkins@ITC.UCI.EDU>:
>
> IMNSHO Candy's biggest advantage is that you don't need to vac mix it. Anyone
> can make candy. It takes no real experience or special skills.
> Propellant cost is nothing!
>
> PK
>
> > INMHO, candy's greatest advantage is its cost/performance ratio, a
> > major
> > advantage when things begin to scale.
> >
> >

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 14591 invoked from network); 26 Aug 2001 07:00:34 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 26 Aug 2001 07:00:34 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 6939 invoked by uid 50005); 26 Aug 2001 06:59:38 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc with qmail-scanner-1.00 (. Clean. Processed in 0.463804 secs); 26 Aug 2001 06:59:38 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 26 Aug 2001 06:59:37 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA14167; Sat, 25 Aug 2001 23:57:11 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 97063 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 26 Aug 2001 06:57:10          +0000
Received: from grucom2.gru.net (grucom2.gru.net [209.251.129.7]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA14152 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat,          25 Aug 2001 23:57:10 -0700
Received: from [209.251.150.232] by grucom2.sfcc.net (NTMail          6.04.0010/NU4112.00.db1c8a4b) with ESMTP id bjwciaaa for          AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 26 Aug 2001 02:57:10 -0400
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (Win95; I)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B889E2F.9584BD1F@sfcc.net>
Date:         Sun, 26 Aug 2001 02:58:55 -0400
Reply-To: "James Yawn" <jyawn@SFCC.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "James Yawn" <jyawn@SFCC.NET>
Subject:      [AR] Oops!
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

I hit the Send button by mistake on my last message, without a polite
goodbye or signature or even proofreading it.  Please accept my
apologies for any errors to which you may have been exposed. :)

Jimmy Yawn

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 22950 invoked from network); 26 Aug 2001 15:48:36 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 26 Aug 2001 15:48:36 -0000
Received: (qmail 15738 invoked by uid 50005); 26 Aug 2001 15:47:38 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc with qmail-scanner-1.00 (. Clean. Processed in 0.247959 secs); 26 Aug 2001 15:47:38 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 26 Aug 2001 15:47:37 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA15731; Sun, 26 Aug 2001 08:44:30 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 97136 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 26 Aug 2001 15:44:22          +0000
Received: from castor.ridgenet.net (IDENT:root@castor.ridgenet.net          [199.120.150.29]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA15716          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 26 Aug 2001 08:44:22 -0700
Received: from kristinscomp (pm168.ridgenet.net [204.154.246.168]) by          castor.ridgenet.net (8.11.0/8.11.0) with SMTP id f7QFaKS06259; Sun,          26 Aug 2001 08:36:20 -0700
References:  <F22630kkZIhTrBoe2U800011be0@hotmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0BBD_01C56B69.4C416760"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <003301c12e47$351e04c0$1b30fea9@kristinscomp>
Date:         Sun, 26 Aug 2001 08:53:09 -0700
Reply-To: "Kristin & David Hall" <thehalls@RIDGENET.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Kristin & David Hall" <thehalls@RIDGENET.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] OT - hobbies on resume
Comments: To: Bryan Flynt <b_flynt@HOTMAIL.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0BBD_01C56B69.4C416760
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

I originally sent this privately to Jay, but since there seems to be a =
bit more interest on the resume thing that I'd have guessed I'll go =
ahead and send a copy to the list....
--
Dave and/or Kristin Hall

Jay,

  One of my collateral duties at work is to act as a recruiter for
engineers/scientists  (IE, it may be me sitting across from you at the
interview table).  Due to the fact that I'm one of the guys "in the =
trenches
making the decisions" about new hires I have been asked by one of the
teachers at the local JC to give lectures on resumes to his "work
experience" class.  Being a nice guy, I have done so the past 3 or 4
semesters.

Yada yada yada.... You asked about hobbies.

Hobbies:  Hobbies (to me) are often a make or break item.  Why?  Well, =
keep
in mind that your resume is supposed to tell two stories.  The first =
story
everybody gets - that you are qualified for the job.  But the second
story....that one most people miss.  What is the story?  That you *WANT*
this job.  That you were *BORN* for this job.  That you *EAT* *DRINK* =
and
*LIVE* this stuff ("stuff" as appropriate to the job opening, of =
course).
And the heart and soul of that second story is the hobbies.  Your =
hobbies
tell me what you would do if you were rich and never had to work again.
Suppose for an instant that I'm looking for an aerospace engineer.  I =
see
two resumes.  Each has a listing of hobbies:

#1)  Hiking.  Fishing.  Kayaking.

#2)  RC airplanes.  Webpage design.

Now, I can pretty much bet that when the clock strikes 5 pm on Friday, =
#1
will be out the door in a heartbeat - his mind already on that trip he =
has
planned for the weekend.  But #2....He lives for this stuff.  He's a =
geek.
He's the guy who actually found all those gawd awful thermo lectures
interesting.  He's the guy that won't whine if he has to put in =
overtime.
He's the guy who's going to ponder work problems at midnight while he's
lying in bed.  He's the guy I want.

Obviously, I've over simplified but if your hobbies demonstrate a love =
of
topics closely related to the job requirements you've just scored some =
major
points with me(*).  The flip side, of course, is that I couldn't care =
less
that you're the national champion in your weight class for Judo =
(actually
had one applicant going on and on about this.....).

So....  If they apply to the job, include the hobbies.  If they don't,
don't.

As for format, I couldn't care less.  If I can read it and make sense =
out of
it, it's good enough.

(*) Let me put it this way:  I'll take a 2.5 GPA City College guy who
subscribes to Arocket over a 4.0 "hiker" from MIT almost every time.

--
Dave and/or Kristin Hall



------=_NextPart_000_0BBD_01C56B69.4C416760
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META content=3D"text/html; charset=3Diso-8859-1" =
http-equiv=3DContent-Type>
<META content=3D"MSHTML 5.00.2614.3500" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#b8b8b8>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>I originally sent this privately to =
Jay, but since=20
there seems to be a bit more interest on the resume thing that I'd have =
guessed=20
I'll go ahead and send a copy to the list....</FONT></DIV>
<DIV>--<BR>Dave and/or Kristin Hall</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>Jay,<BR><BR>&nbsp; One of my collateral duties at work is to act as =
a=20
recruiter for<BR>engineers/scientists&nbsp; (IE, it may be me sitting =
across=20
from you at the<BR>interview table).&nbsp; Due to the fact that I'm one =
of the=20
guys "in the trenches<BR>making the decisions" about new hires I have =
been asked=20
by one of the<BR>teachers at the local JC to give lectures on resumes to =
his=20
"work<BR>experience" class.&nbsp; Being a nice guy, I have done so the =
past 3 or=20
4<BR>semesters.<BR><BR>Yada yada yada.... You asked about=20
hobbies.<BR><BR>Hobbies:&nbsp; Hobbies (to me) are often a make or break =

item.&nbsp; Why?&nbsp; Well, keep<BR>in mind that your resume is =
supposed to=20
tell two stories.&nbsp; The first story<BR>everybody gets - that you are =

qualified for the job.&nbsp; But the second<BR>story....that one most =
people=20
miss.&nbsp; What is the story?&nbsp; That you *WANT*<BR>this job.&nbsp; =
That you=20
were *BORN* for this job.&nbsp; That you *EAT* *DRINK* and<BR>*LIVE* =
this stuff=20
("stuff" as appropriate to the job opening, of course).<BR>And the heart =
and=20
soul of that second story is the hobbies.&nbsp; Your hobbies<BR>tell me =
what you=20
would do if you were rich and never had to work again.<BR>Suppose for an =
instant=20
that I'm looking for an aerospace engineer.&nbsp; I see<BR>two =
resumes.&nbsp;=20
Each has a listing of hobbies:<BR><BR>#1)&nbsp; Hiking.&nbsp; =
Fishing.&nbsp;=20
Kayaking.<BR><BR>#2)&nbsp; RC airplanes.&nbsp; Webpage =
design.<BR><BR>Now, I can=20
pretty much bet that when the clock strikes 5 pm on Friday, #1<BR>will =
be out=20
the door in a heartbeat - his mind already on that trip he =
has<BR>planned for=20
the weekend.&nbsp; But #2....He lives for this stuff.&nbsp; He's a =
geek.<BR>He's=20
the guy who actually found all those gawd awful thermo=20
lectures<BR>interesting.&nbsp; He's the guy that won't whine if he has =
to put in=20
overtime.<BR>He's the guy who's going to ponder work problems at =
midnight while=20
he's<BR>lying in bed.&nbsp; He's the guy I want.<BR><BR>Obviously, I've =
over=20
simplified but if your hobbies demonstrate a love of<BR>topics closely =
related=20
to the job requirements you've just scored some major<BR>points with=20
me(*).&nbsp; The flip side, of course, is that I couldn't care =
less<BR>that=20
you're the national champion in your weight class for Judo =
(actually<BR>had one=20
applicant going on and on about this.....).<BR><BR>So....&nbsp; If they =
apply to=20
the job, include the hobbies.&nbsp; If they don't,<BR>don't.<BR><BR>As =
for=20
format, I couldn't care less.&nbsp; If I can read it and make sense out=20
of<BR>it, it's good enough.<BR><BR>(*) Let me put it this way:&nbsp; =
I'll take a=20
2.5 GPA City College guy who<BR>subscribes to Arocket over a 4.0 "hiker" =
from=20
MIT almost every time.<BR><BR>--<BR>Dave and/or Kristin=20
Hall<BR><BR></DIV></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0BBD_01C56B69.4C416760--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 25259 invoked from network); 26 Aug 2001 16:50:47 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 26 Aug 2001 16:50:47 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 2973 invoked by uid 50005); 26 Aug 2001 16:49:49 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc with qmail-scanner-1.00 (. Clean. Processed in 0.21131 secs); 26 Aug 2001 16:49:49 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 26 Aug 2001 16:49:49 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA15888; Sun, 26 Aug 2001 09:46:04 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 97147 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 26 Aug 2001 16:45:59          +0000
Received: from mx2.snet.net (mx2.snet.net [204.60.203.164]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA15873 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun,          26 Aug 2001 09:45:58 -0700
Received: from snet.net (33.71.252.64.snet.net [64.252.71.33]) by mx2.snet.net          (8.12.0.Beta12/8.12.0.Beta12/SNET-mx-1.5/D-evisionO-evision$) with          ESMTP id f7QGk0LP014362 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 26 Aug 2001          12:46:01 -0400 (EDT)
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.75 [en] (Win98; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20010823.222108.-4009847.0.kc2csh@juno.com>            <3B87C1C7.1DD2E63C@home.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0BC0_01C56B69.4C416760"
Message-ID:  <3B892B01.22484DD8@snet.net>
Date:         Sun, 26 Aug 2001 12:59:45 -0400
Reply-To: "Blake Mantel" <BMantel@SNET.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Blake Mantel" <BMantel@SNET.NET>
Organization: done through the use of very fuzzy logic!
Subject:      Re: [AR] OT - hobbies on resume
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0BC0_01C56B69.4C416760
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

> kc2csh@JUNO.COM wrote:
> >   What is the current thinking on including on a professional resume
> > hobbies which are somewhat related to the professional position?
> >   If it is done, how is it done properly?
> >      Jay

I had applied to Pratt & Whitney earlier this year, and made the rounds of
available positions, had five interviews and three offers. I told all the people
making the offers that I would have a final decision by the last Friday of the
month (about 1 week off at that time).

Someone posted my resume on their internal posting service (I did not know about
this, actually, and didn't know they even did this for me!).

I received a call on Thursday afternoon of the last week asking me to come in
for an interview.... I said I would certainly come in but who are you? what
position is this for? ..... He responded that he had seen my resume on the
internal service and that he liked that I had a wide technical base, and that my
hobbies (CNC machining, composites, and flying) shows creativity and interests
beyond the average applicant. I arraigned for the interview to be for the next
morning and I liked the job offer so much that I took it on the spot.

My advise:
Keep it simple but put a little bit of a interesting "hook" in there. Like this
snippet from my resume.....

Other Activities and Hobbies:
Solar Electric Race Team
Final construction, troubleshooting, testing, and racing of an electric powered
motorcycle that won first place in the Tour De Sol competition in May, 2000.

Experimental Aircraft Association
Currently constructing a 4 place, 200+ MPH, fiberglass composite airplane (Cozy
Mk IV).

That's it. Short and sweet wins the day.

Good Luck,
Blake Mantel
Engineer, Machining Technology, Strategic Technology Pipeline, Pratt & Whitney
(What is all that verbiage mean? I get to work on ways to use new machining
technology and processes to make jet engine parts)

Wow IBM did it....single molecule circuit!
--
CUM CATAPULTAE PROSCRIPTAE ERUNT TUM SOLI PROSCRIPTI CATAPULTAS HABEBUNT.
(When catapults are outlawed, only outlaws will have catapults....)
Triumph Tiger Motorcycle page at: http://pages.cthome.net/bmantel/


------=_NextPart_000_0BC0_01C56B69.4C416760
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<!doctype html public "-//w3c//dtd html 4.0 transitional//en">
<html>

<blockquote TYPE=CITE>kc2csh@JUNO.COM wrote:
<br>>&nbsp;&nbsp; What is the current thinking on including on a professional
resume
<br>> hobbies which are somewhat related to the professional position?
<br>>&nbsp;&nbsp; If it is done, how is it done properly?
<br>>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Jay</blockquote>
I had applied to Pratt &amp; Whitney earlier this year, and made the rounds
of available positions, had five interviews and three offers. I told all
the people making the offers that I would have a final decision by the
last Friday of the month (about 1 week off at that time).
<p>Someone posted my resume on their internal posting service (I did not
know about this, actually, and didn't know they even did this for me!).
<p>I received a call on Thursday afternoon of the last week asking me to
come in for an interview.... I said I would certainly come in but who are
you? what position is this for? ..... He responded that he had seen my
resume on the internal service and that he liked that I had a wide technical
base, and that my hobbies (CNC machining, composites, and flying) shows
creativity and interests beyond the average applicant. I arraigned for
the interview to be for the next morning and I liked the job offer so much
that I took it on the spot.
<p>My advise:
<br>Keep it simple but put a little bit of a interesting "hook" in there.
Like this snippet from my resume.....
<p><b><u>Other Activities and Hobbies:</u></b>
<br><b>Solar Electric Race Team</b>
<br>Final construction, troubleshooting, testing, and racing of an electric
powered motorcycle that won first place in the Tour De Sol competition
in May, 2000.
<p><b>Experimental Aircraft Association</b>
<br>Currently constructing a 4 place, 200+ MPH, fiberglass composite airplane
(Cozy Mk IV).
<p>That's it. Short and sweet wins the day.
<p>Good Luck,
<br>Blake Mantel
<br>Engineer, Machining Technology, Strategic Technology Pipeline, Pratt
&amp; Whitney
<br>(What is all that verbiage mean? I get to work on ways to use new machining
technology and processes to make jet engine parts)
<p>Wow IBM did it....single molecule circuit!
<br>--
<br>CUM CATAPULTAE PROSCRIPTAE ERUNT TUM SOLI PROSCRIPTI CATAPULTAS HABEBUNT.
<br>(When catapults are outlawed, only outlaws will have catapults....)
<br>Triumph Tiger Motorcycle page at: <A HREF="http://pages.cthome.net/bmantel/">http://pages.cthome.net/bmantel/</A>
<br>&nbsp;</html>

------=_NextPart_000_0BC0_01C56B69.4C416760--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 10379 invoked from network); 26 Aug 2001 17:48:51 -0000
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 26 Aug 2001 17:48:51 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 21265 invoked by uid 50005); 26 Aug 2001 17:49:40 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.668057 secs); 26 Aug 2001 17:49:40 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 26 Aug 2001 17:49:39 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA16117; Sun, 26 Aug 2001 10:44:50 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 97178 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 26 Aug 2001 17:44:37          +0000
Received: from grucom2.gru.net (grucom2.gru.net [209.251.129.7]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA16102 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun,          26 Aug 2001 10:44:37 -0700
Received: from [209.251.150.208] by grucom2.sfcc.net (NTMail          6.04.0010/NU4112.00.db1c8a4b) with ESMTP id krfdiaaa for          AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 26 Aug 2001 13:44:32 -0400
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.75 [en] (Win95; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20010823.222108.-4009847.0.kc2csh@juno.com>            <3B87C1C7.1DD2E63C@home.com> <3B892B01.22484DD8@snet.net>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Message-ID:  <3B8937F3.937927AA@sfcc.net>
Date:         Sun, 26 Aug 2001 13:54:59 -0400
Reply-To: "James Yawn" <jyawn@SFCC.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "James Yawn" <jyawn@SFCC.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] OT - hobbies on resume
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Jay:

You probably guessed it from my name (Yawn):  I am a career counselor by
profession.  I get a lot of mileage out of my name when I do classes.

I have recently learned two bits of wisdom about resumes and the job
application process.

One is from a program called "Resums that Work" and relates to what you
put in and leave out.  The thought is that the resume should describe
you as you envision yourself working at your next job.  So any
activities, interests or experiences which suggest that you have skills,
qualities and characteristics relevant to that job should certainly go
in.  For instance, being on the Arocket list suggests interest in
technical things that go real fast, as well as a willingness to
participate in an electronic forum.  Being a member of Tripoli or some
similar group suggests that you are willing to work within the
constraints of an organization, perhaps to be a team player.  To have
successfully built and flown rockets suggests dedication, persistence in
the face of adversity, frustration tolerance, as well as good mechanical
and intellectual skills.  To have done so, have all your fingers and not
gone to jail suggests good judgement and social responsibility.

The second idea is from a fragment of a journal article that someone
left on my desk - I do not know the author or title, but can find that
out if it is of interest.  This is that every person needs three
careers.  The first is a "core career" which gives you a salary,
benefits, insurance, retirement, in short, a lifestyle.  The second is
an "entrepreneurial career" in which you make a spot for yourself in the
economy by providing goods or services.  This gives you a degree of
finanancial freedom, as well as experience in the world-at-large.  The
third is a "dream career."  This is the thing that you will do because
you must - that you will do because you have a passion for it.

Mentioning hobbies in your resume could suggest that this "core job"
contains elements of your "dream career" in that it will invoke your
passion.  I think most prospective employers will like that idea, and
consider you a highly-motivated employee for that type of position.
Especially if the position is one that will let you grow in the
direction of you passion.

So my suggestion is:  Consider if this position is one that will help
you become the person you want to be.  Every job we do changes us.  But
change can be good.  Change can be growth, and I am convinced that when
we stop growing, we start dying.  I do not want dying employees working
for me.  Bad for morale.  If a job helps you grow in a direction that
you like, that can be highly motivating.  If a job tries to turn you
into someone you don't like, it can be a big drag.  Hobbies, if they are
relevant to the job in some way, suggest that it will help you move
toward your passion.

Please keep me posted on your progress - I would like to know if these
wild ideas work in real life!

Jimmy Yawn

ps:  Don't get hung up on the format.  Yes, a resume must look good, be
nicely printed, normal font, well-organized, good-quality paper, etc,
but its what you say and how you say it that counts.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 21905 invoked from network); 26 Aug 2001 18:44:25 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 26 Aug 2001 18:44:25 -0000
Received: (qmail 29789 invoked by uid 50005); 26 Aug 2001 18:43:26 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc with qmail-scanner-1.00 (. Clean. Processed in 0.198361 secs); 26 Aug 2001 18:43:26 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 26 Aug 2001 18:43:26 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA16283; Sun, 26 Aug 2001 11:40:27 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 97194 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 26 Aug 2001 18:40:22          +0000
Received: from overnight.request.net (overnight.request.net [207.150.192.30])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA16268 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 26 Aug 2001 11:40:22 -0700
Received: from furina.request.net ([207.150.192.11]) by overnight.request.net          with ESMTP id <135195-8057>; Sun, 26 Aug 2001 13:38:55 -0400
Received: from JuleeD ([24.160.114.184]) by furina.request.net with SMTP id          <157768224-25819468>; Sun, 26 Aug 2001 14:34:44 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0BC5_01C56B69.4C43B150"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2314.1300
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <003601c12e5e$858e8d00$b872a018@petschoice.com>
Date:         Sun, 26 Aug 2001 13:40:03 -0500
Reply-To: "Phil Bellmore" <pfish@CATFISHDESIGNS.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Phil Bellmore" <pfish@CATFISHDESIGNS.COM>
Subject:      [AR] Ultrasonic welder
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0BC5_01C56B69.4C43B150
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Has anyone had any experience with ultrasonic welders?

------=_NextPart_000_0BC5_01C56B69.4C43B150
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Diso-8859-1">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 5.50.4522.1800" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Has anyone had any experience with =
ultrasonic=20
welders?</FONT></DIV></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0BC5_01C56B69.4C43B150--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 28199 invoked from network); 26 Aug 2001 18:46:41 -0000
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 26 Aug 2001 18:46:41 -0000
Received: (qmail 12889 invoked by uid 50005); 26 Aug 2001 18:47:31 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.303436 secs); 26 Aug 2001 18:47:31 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 26 Aug 2001 18:47:30 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA16309; Sun, 26 Aug 2001 11:42:36 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 97201 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 26 Aug 2001 18:42:34          +0000
Received: from femail18.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail18.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.0.95.145]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA16294          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 26 Aug 2001 11:42:34 -0700
Received: from cc334751a ([65.13.214.65]) by femail18.sdc1.sfba.home.com          (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20 201-229-121-120-20010223) with SMTP id          <20010826184214.DSZX5652.femail18.sdc1.sfba.home.com@cc334751a>; Sun,          26 Aug 2001 11:42:14 -0700
References: <20010823.222108.-4009847.0.kc2csh@juno.com>                       <3B87C1C7.1DD2E63C@home.com>  <3B892B01.22484DD8@snet.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0BC8_01C56B69.4C4D4E40"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2462.0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <02bb01c12e5e$7d057e00$6601a8c0@home.com>
Date:         Sun, 26 Aug 2001 12:39:49 -0600
Reply-To: "Brian Kosko" <bkosko1@HOME.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Brian Kosko" <bkosko1@HOME.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] OT - hobbies on resume
Comments: To: Blake Mantel <BMantel@SNET.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0BC8_01C56B69.4C4D4E40
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Things like hobby interests can help make that important 'connection'  =
in an interview. Interviews can easily be impersonal; you're interviewee =
8 of 14, she's interviewer four of six, etc. It's easy to get lost in =
the process. A memorabler discussion about a hobby can be the thing that =
leaves a positive memory of you.

Format is not too important; it's to get you an interview that's all. A =
lot of big company scan resumes into a database. Be sure to put in =
industry specific key words that relate to your background, education, =
and so on. That's how these databases get searched, make it easy for =
someone to find you. Use simple type and paper that provides good =
contrast; all the better to scan you with.

Another thing to remember, especially for you college age job seekers. =
There can be quite a generation gap between you and your interviewers, =
especially where fashion is concerned. My wife is only thirty six, but =
she is always telling me stories about the 'unusual' appearance of some =
job seeker. And for the record in these situations, 'unusual' is not a =
good thing. She's a pretty high up manager at a leading high tech =
company and has participated in hundreds of interviews over the past few =
years. You certainly have the right to wear what you wish, but remember; =
there's no reason to take a chance on stuff like this. It's hard to be =
over dressed for an interview. You can always surprise the boss at your =
first company party, AFTER you have the job.

Good luck and good hunting!

Brian
  ----- Original Message -----=20
  From: Blake Mantel=20
  To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU=20
  Sent: Sunday, August 26, 2001 10:59 AM
  Subject: Re: [AR] OT - hobbies on resume


    kc2csh@JUNO.COM wrote:=20
    >   What is the current thinking on including on a professional =
resume=20
    > hobbies which are somewhat related to the professional position?=20
    >   If it is done, how is it done properly?=20
    >      Jay
  I had applied to Pratt & Whitney earlier this year, and made the =
rounds of available positions, had five interviews and three offers. I =
told all the people making the offers that I would have a final decision =
by the last Friday of the month (about 1 week off at that time).=20
  Someone posted my resume on their internal posting service (I did not =
know about this, actually, and didn't know they even did this for me!).=20

  I received a call on Thursday afternoon of the last week asking me to =
come in for an interview.... I said I would certainly come in but who =
are you? what position is this for? ..... He responded that he had seen =
my resume on the internal service and that he liked that I had a wide =
technical base, and that my hobbies (CNC machining, composites, and =
flying) shows creativity and interests beyond the average applicant. I =
arraigned for the interview to be for the next morning and I liked the =
job offer so much that I took it on the spot.=20

  My advise:=20
  Keep it simple but put a little bit of a interesting "hook" in there. =
Like this snippet from my resume.....=20

  Other Activities and Hobbies:=20
  Solar Electric Race Team=20
  Final construction, troubleshooting, testing, and racing of an =
electric powered motorcycle that won first place in the Tour De Sol =
competition in May, 2000.=20

  Experimental Aircraft Association=20
  Currently constructing a 4 place, 200+ MPH, fiberglass composite =
airplane (Cozy Mk IV).=20

  That's it. Short and sweet wins the day.=20

  Good Luck,=20
  Blake Mantel=20
  Engineer, Machining Technology, Strategic Technology Pipeline, Pratt & =
Whitney=20
  (What is all that verbiage mean? I get to work on ways to use new =
machining technology and processes to make jet engine parts)=20

  Wow IBM did it....single molecule circuit!=20
  --=20
  CUM CATAPULTAE PROSCRIPTAE ERUNT TUM SOLI PROSCRIPTI CATAPULTAS =
HABEBUNT.=20
  (When catapults are outlawed, only outlaws will have catapults....)=20
  Triumph Tiger Motorcycle page at: http://pages.cthome.net/bmantel/=20
   =20


------=_NextPart_000_0BC8_01C56B69.4C4D4E40
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Diso-8859-1">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 6.00.2462.0" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Things like hobby interests can help =
make that=20
important 'connection'&nbsp; in an interview. Interviews can easily be=20
impersonal; you're interviewee 8 of 14, she's interviewer four of six, =
etc. It's=20
easy to get lost in the process. A memorabler discussion about a hobby =
can be=20
the thing that leaves a positive memory of you.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Format is not too important; it's to =
get you an=20
interview that's all. A lot of big company scan resumes into a database. =
Be sure=20
to put in industry specific key words that relate to your background, =
education,=20
and so on. That's how these databases get searched, make it easy for =
someone to=20
find you. Use simple type and paper that provides good contrast; all the =
better=20
to scan you with.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Another thing to remember, especially =
for you=20
college age job seekers. There can be quite a generation gap between you =
and=20
your interviewers, especially where fashion is concerned. My wife is =
only thirty=20
six, but she is always telling me stories about the 'unusual' appearance =
of some=20
job seeker. And for the record in these situations, 'unusual' is not a =
good=20
thing. She's a pretty high up manager at a leading high tech company and =
has=20
participated in hundreds of interviews over the past few years. You =
certainly=20
have the right to wear what you wish, but remember; there's no reason to =
take a=20
chance on stuff like this. It's hard to be over dressed for an =
interview. You=20
can always surprise the boss at your first company party, AFTER you have =
the=20
job.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Good luck and good =
hunting!</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Brian</FONT></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE dir=3Dltr=20
style=3D"PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; =
BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
  <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial">----- Original Message ----- </DIV>
  <DIV=20
  style=3D"BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; FONT: 10pt arial; font-color: =
black"><B>From:</B>=20
  <A title=3DBMantel@SNET.NET href=3D"mailto:BMantel@SNET.NET">Blake =
Mantel</A>=20
  </DIV>
  <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A =
title=3DAROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU=20
  href=3D"mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU">AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU</A> </DIV>
  <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> Sunday, August 26, 2001 =
10:59=20
  AM</DIV>
  <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> Re: [AR] OT - hobbies =
on=20
  resume</DIV>
  <DIV><BR></DIV>
  <BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=3D"CITE"><A =
href=3D"mailto:kc2csh@JUNO.COM">kc2csh@JUNO.COM</A>=20
    wrote: <BR>&gt;&nbsp;&nbsp; What is the current thinking on =
including on a=20
    professional resume <BR>&gt; hobbies which are somewhat related to =
the=20
    professional position? <BR>&gt;&nbsp;&nbsp; If it is done, how is it =
done=20
    properly? <BR>&gt;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Jay</BLOCKQUOTE>I =
had applied=20
  to Pratt &amp; Whitney earlier this year, and made the rounds of =
available=20
  positions, had five interviews and three offers. I told all the people =
making=20
  the offers that I would have a final decision by the last Friday of =
the month=20
  (about 1 week off at that time).=20
  <P>Someone posted my resume on their internal posting service (I did =
not know=20
  about this, actually, and didn't know they even did this for me!).=20
  <P>I received a call on Thursday afternoon of the last week asking me =
to come=20
  in for an interview.... I said I would certainly come in but who are =
you? what=20
  position is this for? ..... He responded that he had seen my resume on =
the=20
  internal service and that he liked that I had a wide technical base, =
and that=20
  my hobbies (CNC machining, composites, and flying) shows creativity =
and=20
  interests beyond the average applicant. I arraigned for the interview =
to be=20
  for the next morning and I liked the job offer so much that I took it =
on the=20
  spot.=20
  <P>My advise: <BR>Keep it simple but put a little bit of a interesting =
"hook"=20
  in there. Like this snippet from my resume.....=20
  <P><B><U>Other Activities and Hobbies:</U></B> <BR><B>Solar Electric =
Race=20
  Team</B> <BR>Final construction, troubleshooting, testing, and racing =
of an=20
  electric powered motorcycle that won first place in the Tour De Sol=20
  competition in May, 2000.=20
  <P><B>Experimental Aircraft Association</B> <BR>Currently constructing =
a 4=20
  place, 200+ MPH, fiberglass composite airplane (Cozy Mk IV).=20
  <P>That's it. Short and sweet wins the day.=20
  <P>Good Luck, <BR>Blake Mantel <BR>Engineer, Machining Technology, =
Strategic=20
  Technology Pipeline, Pratt &amp; Whitney <BR>(What is all that =
verbiage mean?=20
  I get to work on ways to use new machining technology and processes to =
make=20
  jet engine parts)=20
  <P>Wow IBM did it....single molecule circuit! <BR>-- <BR>CUM =
CATAPULTAE=20
  PROSCRIPTAE ERUNT TUM SOLI PROSCRIPTI CATAPULTAS HABEBUNT. <BR>(When =
catapults=20
  are outlawed, only outlaws will have catapults....) <BR>Triumph Tiger=20
  Motorcycle page at: <A=20
  =
href=3D"http://pages.cthome.net/bmantel/">http://pages.cthome.net/bmantel=
/</A>=20
  <BR>&nbsp; </P></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0BC8_01C56B69.4C4D4E40--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 21112 invoked from network); 26 Aug 2001 20:06:53 -0000
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 26 Aug 2001 20:06:53 -0000
Received: (qmail 32202 invoked by uid 50005); 26 Aug 2001 20:07:42 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.529494 secs); 26 Aug 2001 20:07:42 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 26 Aug 2001 20:07:41 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA16562; Sun, 26 Aug 2001 13:03:18 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 97231 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 26 Aug 2001 20:03:06          +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (oe44.law12.hotmail.com [64.4.18.16]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA16546 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun,          26 Aug 2001 13:03:06 -0700
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Sun,          26 Aug 2001 13:02:36 -0700
X-Originating-IP: [24.29.188.254]
References: <20010823.222108.-4009847.0.kc2csh@juno.com>                       <3B87C1C7.1DD2E63C@home.com>  <3B892B01.22484DD8@snet.net>             <02bb01c12e5e$7d057e00$6601a8c0@home.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0BCB_01C56B69.4C4D4E40"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 26 Aug 2001 20:02:36.0147 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[0CEEC430:01C12E6A]
Message-ID:  <OE44blZz02H67yRLVbN00004611@hotmail.com>
Date:         Sun, 26 Aug 2001 15:04:13 -0500
Reply-To: "Mark Kruep" <mkruep@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Mark Kruep" <mkruep@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] OT - hobbies on resume
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0BCB_01C56B69.4C4D4E40
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable


  Something else to keep in mind beyond the resume. The instructors at =
the university I attend suggest (more like harp on it) taking a small =
portfolio with you to an interview relating to major accomplishments. =
For example, my school participates in the yearly college mini-baja =
competition. There was a student who went in for an interview and took =
along some pictures and what not related to his participation in that =
competition in addition to other things. They interviewed ten people for =
the job before him and hired him on the spot. If you've done any big =
projects like a level 3 or a group project, take a little information =
and pictures about it with you. I wouldn't necessarily show all the =
stuff unless they ask or are interested, but you never know what might =
catch someone's eye. That works in my locality and I don't know about =
large corporations, but I can't imagine it hurts. If nothing else it =
shows you planned ahead and cared about the job enough to go through the =
effort. IMHO


  Mark

------=_NextPart_000_0BCB_01C56B69.4C4D4E40
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Diso-8859-1">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 5.50.4616.200" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE dir=3Dltr=20
style=3D"PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; =
BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
  <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Something else to keep in mind beyond =
the resume.=20
  The instructors at the university I attend suggest (more like harp on =
it)=20
  taking a small portfolio with you to an interview relating to major=20
  accomplishments. For example, my school participates in the yearly =
college=20
  mini-baja competition. There was a student who went in for an =
interview and=20
  took along some pictures and what not related to his participation in =
that=20
  competition in addition to other things. They interviewed ten people =
for the=20
  job before him and hired him on the spot. If you've done any big =
projects like=20
  a level 3 or a group project, take a little information and pictures =
about it=20
  with&nbsp;you. I wouldn't necessarily show all the stuff unless they =
ask or=20
  are interested, but you never know what might catch someone's eye. =
That works=20
  in my locality and I don't know about large corporations, but I can't =
imagine=20
  it hurts. If nothing else it shows you planned ahead and cared about =
the job=20
  enough to go through the effort. IMHO</FONT></DIV>
  <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
  <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
  <DIV><FONT face=3DArial =
size=3D2>Mark</FONT></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0BCB_01C56B69.4C4D4E40--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 2703 invoked from network); 26 Aug 2001 23:22:44 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 26 Aug 2001 23:22:44 -0000
Received: (qmail 18401 invoked by uid 50005); 26 Aug 2001 23:21:44 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc with qmail-scanner-1.00 (. Clean. Processed in 0.259295 secs); 26 Aug 2001 23:21:44 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 26 Aug 2001 23:21:44 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA17059; Sun, 26 Aug 2001 16:19:01 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 97273 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 26 Aug 2001 23:18:55          +0000
Received: from fep3-orange.clear.net.nz (fep3-orange.clear.net.nz          [203.97.32.3]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA17044          for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Sun, 26 Aug 2001 16:18:54 -0700
Received: from mkbs (b002-m008-p029.acld.clear.net.nz [203.167.199.221]) by          fep3-orange.clear.net.nz (1.5/1.8) with SMTP id LAA21515; Mon, 27 Aug          2001 11:18:48 +1200 (NZST)
References: Conversation <NEBBJIGOELOLIBCCPKDCIELKCBAA.geordi@c031.aone.net.au>            with last message <998729263.3b87662f5bf9f@webmail.comcen.com.au>              <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>             <998786281.3b8844e957d14@webmail.comcen.com.au>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <011101c12e85$d8063ca0$0100a8c0@mkbs>
Date:         Mon, 27 Aug 2001 11:20:31 +1200
Reply-To: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Organization: Applied Technology
Subject:      Re: [AR] ERPS successfully runs H2O2 engine
Comments: To: Paul Kelly <pkelly@COMCEN.COM.AU>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

> Yep, It's a good example. How many 2" diam satellites are there? The Loki
was
> used for such advanced aerospace projects as:
> Ejecting chaff.
> Measuring Temp/Pressure.

I'll have another bite at this.
Using a Super Loki with a super high mass ratio second stage the answer to
this question could be "one, so far".
What would the pundits say to that when it happened?
What affect would it have on the professional and amateur rocketry
communities.

Using the first stage mainly for altitude and getting most of your delta v
from the second stage a satellite (probably more like 1 inch diameter) with
a capability about the same as Sputnik 1 should be achievable. Useful? - Not
very.
But it would change the world's perception of satellite launching.

A Super Loki will deliver around a pound to 250,000 feet. Reliably.
Normally straight up but this of course is not how you would use it.
Given a one pound total mass budget could YOU put a transmitter into orbit
from a horizontal low velocity platform at 200,000 feet (40 miles / 60 km)



Russell McMahon




______________________

Super Loki

Launch Weight: 68 lb
Burnout Weight: 31 lb
Instrument Dart Weight: 18 lb
Booster Weight: 50 lb
(A 4.5 lb ballast weight is added to the booster for launches near populated
areas. The ballast gives the booster aerodynamic stability on descent)
Propellant: ammonium perchlorate based
Burn time: 2.1 seconds
Height, Total: 10.5 ft
Height, Booster: 6.5 ft
Height, Instrument Dart: 4 ft
Booster diameter: 4 inches (excluding fins)
Altitude for booster/dart separation: approx 30,000 ft
Maximum Altitude (instrument dart): approx 250,000 ft
(185,000 ft w/ballast)
Time to apogee: 110 to 120 seconds
Top speed: 1 mile/sec (approx. mach 5)
Spin rate during ascent: approx 16 rev/sec (1000 rpm)
Payload: (main portion) 1 11/16 inch dia. x 11.2" long
Payload descent time: to 20km: 30 - 45 min with 10ft starute
to ground: 1.5 + hours (weather dependent)
Max Payload Weight: 4 lb (but is typically about 1 lb)
Initial acceleration (vertical): 60 g's (up)
Initial coasting acceleration due to air resistance: approx 30 g's (down)
Maximum centripetal acceleration on payload: 20 g's (horizontal)
Acceleration upon ejection: 100 to 250 g's along trajectory (depending on
who you ask)

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 9470 invoked from network); 27 Aug 2001 01:48:15 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 27 Aug 2001 01:48:15 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 16273 invoked by uid 50005); 27 Aug 2001 01:46:34 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.232409 secs); 27 Aug 2001 01:46:34 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 27 Aug 2001 01:46:34 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA17541; Sun, 26 Aug 2001 18:44:07 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 97336 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 27 Aug 2001 01:43:54          +0000
Received: from smtp007.mailsrvcs.net (smtp007pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.186])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA17526 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 26 Aug 2001 18:43:54 -0700
Received: from [63.27.96.122] (1Cust81.tnt3.san-bernardino.ca.da.uu.net          [63.25.57.81]) by smtp007.mailsrvcs.net  with ESMTP for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; id f7R1hMW08111 Sun, 26 Aug 2001 20:43:22          -0500 (CDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: GTE/01rocket@mail.gte.net
References: Conversation <NEBBJIGOELOLIBCCPKDCIELKCBAA.geordi@c031.aone.net.au>            with last message <998729263.3b87662f5bf9f@webmail.comcen.com.au>            <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>            <998786281.3b8844e957d14@webmail.comcen.com.au>            <011101c12e85$d8063ca0$0100a8c0@mkbs>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <a0510030ab7af55ad8986@[63.27.96.122]>
Date:         Sun, 26 Aug 2001 18:43:23 -0700
Reply-To: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] ERPS successfully runs H2O2 engine
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <011101c12e85$d8063ca0$0100a8c0@mkbs>

>Russell McMahon :




>A Super Loki will deliver around a pound to 250,000 feet. Reliably.
>Normally straight up but this of course is not how you would use it.
>Given a one pound total mass budget could YOU put a transmitter into orbit
>from a horizontal low velocity platform at 200,000 feet (40 miles / 60 km)

Being a solid of course it is reliable and cheap per altitude achieved.

Jerry

--
Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
Opinion, the whole thing.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 18549 invoked from network); 27 Aug 2001 01:50:52 -0000
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 27 Aug 2001 01:50:52 -0000
Received: (qmail 19504 invoked by uid 50005); 27 Aug 2001 01:49:11 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.316973 secs); 27 Aug 2001 01:49:11 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 27 Aug 2001 01:49:10 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA17573; Sun, 26 Aug 2001 18:45:34 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 97344 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 27 Aug 2001 01:45:33          +0000
Received: from proxima.whro.net (proxima.whro.net [64.5.129.2]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA17552 for <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Sun,          26 Aug 2001 18:45:17 -0700
Received: from EDROWE (39.di.whro.net [64.5.132.39]) by proxima.whro.net          (Rockliffe SMTPRA 3.4.6) with SMTP id <B0007552248@proxima.whro.net>;          Sun, 26 Aug 2001 21:43:46 -0400
References:  <002d01c12da5$04f98640$50391442@billbull>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0BCE_01C56B69.4C4FBF40"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <010301c12e99$2c2cebe0$27840540@EDROWE>
Date:         Sun, 26 Aug 2001 21:39:44 -0400
Reply-To: "Ed Rowe" <edrowe@WHRO.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Ed Rowe" <edrowe@WHRO.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Another W32 SirCam Worm Virus Alert
Comments: To: Bill Bullock <bpbullock@LARIBAY.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0BCE_01C56B69.4C4FBF40
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

All I got was a mail-to link. What is the actual site?
Regs,
....Ed

----- Original Message -----=20
  From: Bill Bullock=20
  To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU=20
  Sent: Saturday, August 25, 2001 4:27 PM
  Subject: Re: [AR] Another W32 SirCam Worm Virus Alert


  Folks:
      I just got an e-mail which was from someone named "Patti Amato" =
mailto:pattia@eatel.net (who I never heard of) with a subject line of =
"RE: Chemical Report" and a message of "I sent this  file in order to =
have your advice. See you later. Thanks"
      Not knowing this person I saved to disk and scanned...and there it =
was. So we who are interested in such subjects are still in harm's way.
      If you ever get this thing you can go to the included site and =
have it removed and any damage repaired.=20
      Respectfully returning to "lurk" mode,
  Bill
  http://www.sarc.com/avcenter/venc/data/w32.sircam.worm@mm.html

------=_NextPart_000_0BCE_01C56B69.4C4FBF40
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META content=3D"text/html; charset=3Diso-8859-1" =
http-equiv=3DContent-Type>
<META content=3D"MSHTML 5.00.3105.105" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>All I got was a mail-to link. What is =
the actual=20
site?</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Regs,</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>....Ed</FONT></DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>----- Original Message ----- </DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE=20
style=3D"BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: =
0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; PADDING-RIGHT: 0px">
  <DIV=20
  style=3D"BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; FONT: 10pt arial; font-color: =
black"><B>From:</B>=20
  <A href=3D"mailto:bpbullock@LARIBAY.NET" =
title=3Dbpbullock@LARIBAY.NET>Bill=20
  Bullock</A> </DIV>
  <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A =
href=3D"mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU"=20
  title=3DAROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU</A> </DIV>
  <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> Saturday, August 25, 2001 =
4:27=20
  PM</DIV>
  <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> Re: [AR] Another W32 =
SirCam Worm=20
  Virus Alert</DIV>
  <DIV><BR></DIV>
  <DIV><FONT color=3D#000000>Folks:</FONT></DIV>
  <DIV><FONT color=3D#000000>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; I just got an e-mail =
which was=20
  from someone named "Patti Amato" <A=20
  href=3D"mailto:pattia@eatel.net">mailto:pattia@eatel.net</A>&nbsp;(who =
I never=20
  heard of) with a subject line of "RE: Chemical Report" and a message =
of "I=20
  sent this&nbsp; file in order to have your advice. See you later.=20
  Thanks"</FONT></DIV>
  <DIV><FONT color=3D#000000>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Not knowing this person =
I saved to=20
  disk and scanned...and there it was.&nbsp;So we who are interested in =
such=20
  subjects are still in harm's way.</FONT></DIV>
  <DIV>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; If you ever get this thing you can go to the =
included=20
  site and have it removed and&nbsp;any damage repaired.&nbsp;</DIV>
  <DIV>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Respectfully returning to "lurk" mode,</DIV>
  <DIV>Bill</DIV>
  <DIV><A=20
  =
href=3D"mailto:&nbsp;&nbsp;http://www.sarc.com/avcenter/venc/data/w32.sir=
cam.worm@mm.html">http://www.sarc.com/avcenter/venc/data/w32.sircam.worm@=
mm.html</A></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0BCE_01C56B69.4C4FBF40--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 18810 invoked from network); 27 Aug 2001 02:16:45 -0000
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 27 Aug 2001 02:16:45 -0000
Received: (qmail 20329 invoked by uid 50005); 27 Aug 2001 02:15:04 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.341355 secs); 27 Aug 2001 02:15:04 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 27 Aug 2001 02:15:04 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA17739; Sun, 26 Aug 2001 19:11:20 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 97379 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 27 Aug 2001 02:11:00          +0000
Received: from cablecom.laribay.net (cablecom.laribay.net [66.20.57.4]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA17723 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 26 Aug 2001 19:11:00 -0700
Received: from billbull (dial086.laribay.net [66.20.57.86]) by          cablecom.laribay.net (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id UAA03884 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 26 Aug 2001 20:52:51 -0500 (CDT)          (envelope-from bpbullock@laribay.net)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0BD1_01C56B69.4C4FBF40"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <001201c12e9d$b286b3c0$56391442@billbull>
Date:         Sun, 26 Aug 2001 21:11:54 -0500
Reply-To: "Bill Bullock" <bpbullock@LARIBAY.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Bill Bullock" <bpbullock@LARIBAY.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Another W32 SirCam Worm Virus Alert
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0BD1_01C56B69.4C4FBF40
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Ed Rowe wrote:
All I got was a mail-to link. What is the actual site?
Regs,
....Ed
**********************************
Sorry,I put it below my name instead of just above. It is:
http://www.sarc.com/avcenter/venc/data/w32.sircam.worm@mm.html
Respectfully,
Bill

------=_NextPart_000_0BD1_01C56B69.4C4FBF40
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META content=3D"text/html; charset=3Diso-8859-1" =
http-equiv=3DContent-Type>
<META content=3D"MSHTML 5.00.2614.3500" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV>
<DIV>Ed Rowe wrote:</DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>All I got was a mail-to link. What is =
the actual=20
site?</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Regs,</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>....Ed</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial =
size=3D2>**********************************</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Sorry,I put it below my name instead of =
just above.=20
It is:</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><A=20
href=3D"http://www.sarc.com/avcenter/venc/data/w32.sircam.worm@mm.html">h=
ttp://www.sarc.com/avcenter/venc/data/w32.sircam.worm@mm.html</A></DIV></=
DIV>
<DIV>Respectfully,</DIV>
<DIV>Bill</DIV></DIV></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0BD1_01C56B69.4C4FBF40--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 5082 invoked from network); 27 Aug 2001 02:30:38 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 27 Aug 2001 02:30:38 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 28095 invoked by uid 50005); 27 Aug 2001 02:30:11 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.685459 secs); 27 Aug 2001 02:30:11 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 27 Aug 2001 02:30:10 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA17802; Sun, 26 Aug 2001 19:25:34 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 97390 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 27 Aug 2001 02:25:31          +0000
Received: from cyclone.comcen.com.au (cyclone.comcen.com.au [203.23.236.100])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA17787 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 26 Aug 2001 19:25:30 -0700
Received: (from nobody@localhost) by cyclone.comcen.com.au (8.11.1/8.11.1) id          f7R2POe56904; Mon, 27 Aug 2001 12:25:24 +1000 (EST) (envelope-from          pkelly@comcen.com.au)
References: Conversation <NEBBJIGOELOLIBCCPKDCIELKCBAA.geordi@c031.aone.net.au>            with last message <998729263.3b87662f5bf9f@webmail.comcen.com.au>              <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>                 <998786281.3b8844e957d14@webmail.comcen.com.au>            <a05100307b7ae170a0289@[63.27.96.122]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
User-Agent: IMP/PHP IMAP webmail program 2.2.3
X-Originating-IP: 210.50.104.54
Message-ID:  <998879124.3b89af940ecac@webmail.comcen.com.au>
Date:         Mon, 27 Aug 2001 12:25:24 +1000
Reply-To: "Paul Kelly" <pkelly@COMCEN.COM.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Paul Kelly" <pkelly@COMCEN.COM.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] ERPS successfully runs H2O2 engine
Comments: To: Jerry Irvine <01rocket@GTE.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <a05100307b7ae170a0289@[63.27.96.122]>

Good point Jerry, this has cropped up before. IMHO Solids are simpler/cheaper
than hybrids are simpler/cheaper than biprops. If you didn't need long burns
then why use them? I guess this is a bit of an extrapolation of the big dumb
booster approach.

PK
Quoting Jerry Irvine <01rocket@GTE.NET>:

> >Paul Kelly posted in good cheer:
>
>
>
> >Yep, It's a good example. How many 2" diam satellites are there? The
> Loki was
> >used for such advanced aerospace projects as:
> >Ejecting chaff.
> >Measuring Temp/Pressure.
> >
> >That's the trouble with solid motors/pundits. They make a lot of noise,
> but
> >cant maintain a flame!
> >:-)
>
>
> I agree boosted darts are essentially useless.
>
> I agree solids have more difficulty achieving long burn times like
> liquids.
>
> However I can design, build, and fly a solid from scratch in under 60
> days and it will work.
>
> Capital is time and money.
>
> Jerry
>
>
> >Quoting some lost soul:
> >  > > When ya want delta V, NOTHIN' beats an AP solid.
>
>
>
>
> --
> Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
> Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
> Opinion, the whole thing.
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 17533 invoked from network); 27 Aug 2001 02:34:26 -0000
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 27 Aug 2001 02:34:26 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 16347 invoked by uid 50005); 27 Aug 2001 02:32:45 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 3.54894 secs); 27 Aug 2001 02:32:45 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 27 Aug 2001 02:32:38 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA17837; Sun, 26 Aug 2001 19:30:44 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 97397 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 27 Aug 2001 02:30:39          +0000
Received: from cyclone.comcen.com.au (cyclone.comcen.com.au [203.23.236.100])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA17822 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Sun, 26 Aug 2001 19:30:38 -0700
Received: (from nobody@localhost) by cyclone.comcen.com.au (8.11.1/8.11.1) id          f7R2UX956937; Mon, 27 Aug 2001 12:30:33 +1000 (EST) (envelope-from          pkelly@comcen.com.au)
References: Conversation <NEBBJIGOELOLIBCCPKDCIELKCBAA.geordi@c031.aone.net.au>            with last message <998729263.3b87662f5bf9f@webmail.comcen.com.au>              <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>             <998786281.3b8844e957d14@webmail.comcen.com.au>            <011101c12e85$d8063ca0$0100a8c0@mkbs>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
User-Agent: IMP/PHP IMAP webmail program 2.2.3
X-Originating-IP: 210.50.104.54
Message-ID:  <998879433.3b89b0c940c1d@webmail.comcen.com.au>
Date:         Mon, 27 Aug 2001 12:30:33 +1000
Reply-To: "Paul Kelly" <pkelly@COMCEN.COM.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Paul Kelly" <pkelly@COMCEN.COM.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] ERPS successfully runs H2O2 engine
Comments: To: Russell McMahon <apptech@clear.net.nz>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <011101c12e85$d8063ca0$0100a8c0@mkbs>

Yep, would be an interesting amateur project. Not saying ya can't do it. You
can do most engineering tasks with a good hammer...
PK
Quoting Russell McMahon <apptech@clear.net.nz>:

> > Yep, It's a good example. How many 2" diam satellites are there? The
> Loki
> was
> > used for such advanced aerospace projects as:
> > Ejecting chaff.
> > Measuring Temp/Pressure.
>
> I'll have another bite at this.
> Using a Super Loki with a super high mass ratio second stage the answer
> to
> this question could be "one, so far".
> What would the pundits say to that when it happened?
> What affect would it have on the professional and amateur rocketry
> communities.
>
> Using the first stage mainly for altitude and getting most of your delta
> v
> from the second stage a satellite (probably more like 1 inch diameter)
> with
> a capability about the same as Sputnik 1 should be achievable. Useful? -
> Not
> very.
> But it would change the world's perception of satellite launching.
>
> A Super Loki will deliver around a pound to 250,000 feet. Reliably.
> Normally straight up but this of course is not how you would use it.
> Given a one pound total mass budget could YOU put a transmitter into
> orbit
> from a horizontal low velocity platform at 200,000 feet (40 miles / 60
> km)
>
>
>
> Russell McMahon
>
>
>
>
> ______________________
>
> Super Loki
>
> Launch Weight: 68 lb
> Burnout Weight: 31 lb
> Instrument Dart Weight: 18 lb
> Booster Weight: 50 lb
> (A 4.5 lb ballast weight is added to the booster for launches near
> populated
> areas. The ballast gives the booster aerodynamic stability on descent)
> Propellant: ammonium perchlorate based
> Burn time: 2.1 seconds
> Height, Total: 10.5 ft
> Height, Booster: 6.5 ft
> Height, Instrument Dart: 4 ft
> Booster diameter: 4 inches (excluding fins)
> Altitude for booster/dart separation: approx 30,000 ft
> Maximum Altitude (instrument dart): approx 250,000 ft
> (185,000 ft w/ballast)
> Time to apogee: 110 to 120 seconds
> Top speed: 1 mile/sec (approx. mach 5)
> Spin rate during ascent: approx 16 rev/sec (1000 rpm)
> Payload: (main portion) 1 11/16 inch dia. x 11.2" long
> Payload descent time: to 20km: 30 - 45 min with 10ft starute
> to ground: 1.5 + hours (weather dependent)
> Max Payload Weight: 4 lb (but is typically about 1 lb)
> Initial acceleration (vertical): 60 g's (up)
> Initial coasting acceleration due to air resistance: approx 30 g's
> (down)
> Maximum centripetal acceleration on payload: 20 g's (horizontal)
> Acceleration upon ejection: 100 to 250 g's along trajectory (depending
> on
> who you ask)
>
>
>
>
>
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 6545 invoked from network); 27 Aug 2001 05:35:22 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 27 Aug 2001 05:35:22 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: (qmail 8055 invoked by uid 50005); 27 Aug 2001 05:36:09 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpe with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.119964 secs); 27 Aug 2001 05:36:09 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 27 Aug 2001 05:36:08 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA18419; Sun, 26 Aug 2001 22:30:54 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 97436 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 27 Aug 2001 05:30:47          +0000
Received: from cisco.com (cypher.cisco.com [171.69.11.18]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA18404 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun,          26 Aug 2001 22:30:47 -0700
Received: (from billw@localhost) by cisco.com (8.8.8/2.6/Cisco List          Logging/8.8.8) id WAA28277; Sun, 26 Aug 2001 22:30:15 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID:  <CMM.0.90.4.998890215.billw@cypher>
Date:         Sun, 26 Aug 2001 22:30:15 PDT
Reply-To: "Bill Westfield" <billw@cisco.com>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "William Chops Westfield" <billw@cisco.com>
Subject:      Re: [AR] OT - hobbies on resume
Comments: To: kc2csh@JUNO.COM
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  Your message of Thu, 23 Aug 2001 22:18:20 -0400

    What is the current thinking on including on a professional resume
    hobbies which are somewhat related to the professional position?
    If it is done, how is it done properly?

That depends a lot on the degree of involvement and acheivement in the
hobby.  In the computer industry, it might be a fine thing if your hobby
included writing open-source software for linux, for instance, but there's a
big difference between "I fiddle with linux software" and "I wrote the
entire SNMP dameon for linux", for instance.  The former goes in the
"hobbies and other interests" section that probably still goes after
everything else on the resume.  The latter I'd expect to see in with the
other "professional accomplishments" (job history) even if you didn't get
paid...

In rocketry, I wouldn't mind seeing a separate entry if you've done
something along the lines of designing and progamming the flight computer
for remote telemetry using yada yada yada, or if you won the CATS prize,
and otherwise it stays at the end waiting for the interviewer to notice
and comment/inquire... or not.

BillW

st

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 19842 invoked from network); 27 Aug 2001 05:40:29 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 27 Aug 2001 05:40:29 -0000
Received: (qmail 11728 invoked by uid 50005); 27 Aug 2001 05:41:16 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpe with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.203782 secs); 27 Aug 2001 05:41:16 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 27 Aug 2001 05:41:15 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA18459; Sun, 26 Aug 2001 22:35:53 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 97443 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 27 Aug 2001 05:35:52          +0000
Received: from wrench.toolcity.net (root@wrench.toolcity.net [208.0.188.2]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA18444 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 26 Aug 2001 22:35:52 -0700
Received: from [63.169.101.176]          (dap-63-169-101-176.meadville-tnt-1.pa.toolcity.net [63.169.101.176])          by wrench.toolcity.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id BAA23798; Mon, 27          Aug 2001 01:35:45 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <v01510100b7af875f62a9@[208.22.189.219]>
Date:         Mon, 27 Aug 2001 01:38:07 -0500
Reply-To: "al bradley" <abradley@TOOLCITY.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "al bradley" <abradley@TOOLCITY.NET>
Subject:      [AR] 2Re: [AR] Compressed AN/Sugar?
Comments: To: Seth Leigh <seth@PENGAR.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

>I read on this list one time that AN/sugar would deliver a much greater ISP
>than KN/sugar, something like up to 190 or so, but that people were having
>troubles trying to melt the candy together without the AN reacting too much
>with the sugar.

Hi Seth:
I don't know a lot about the chemistry of AN. Back when (years ago) I used
to do licensed small-job blasting I occasionally would put in a few
shovel-fulls of AN (around the dynamite) and moisten it with fuel oil. The
"big boys" claimed it had as much power as dynamite pound for pound and I
had no doubt of it.

Obviously AN is manufactured without too much hazard. As I remember, ANFO
when initiated, is capable of detonation, but this may not be consistent
with the current use of the word explosion. Anyhow, I don't come across
accidental explosions with plain KNO3. Or KNO3/candy.

Additionally, IIRC, when Tim McVey was fabricating his dastardly deed he
had a mortar and pestle in which he was pulverizing AN to a fine powder as
part of the initiator. Let me say here I would have no trouble ball-milling
AN to a fine powder to mix with sugar for rocketry. Or remotely ball
milling AN and sugar together, for rocketry, to be used in a day or so.

However, the deterioration-reaction under heat of AN and sugar when trying
to produce cooked-candy motors does worry me. I would be unsure if I
produced an uncooked-pressed AN/candy motor that even this type of motor
might, in a short time, deteriorate in ways that are not visible, but
unstable!

So, in this area, I would have to say: proceed with great caution. In the
interim you can have a lot of enjoyment with pressed candy, but you will
still need to mill your KNO3 to some degree of fineness. I do recall your
personal constraints (we all have some of these) that you have to observe
as you connect on to the enjoyment of amateur rocketry.

onward and upward,
best regards,
al bradley



------------------------------------------------------------------
Can you live Life with this?: "Unless there is a law, an agreement, or a
long-standing custom, No one `Deserves' Anything -- Either Good or Bad!"

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 19424 invoked from network); 27 Aug 2001 06:15:54 -0000
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 27 Aug 2001 06:15:54 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 27078 invoked by uid 50005); 27 Aug 2001 06:14:13 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.128921 secs); 27 Aug 2001 06:14:13 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 27 Aug 2001 06:14:13 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA18591; Sun, 26 Aug 2001 23:11:44 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 97462 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 27 Aug 2001 06:11:39          +0000
Received: from grucom2.gru.net (grucom2.gru.net [209.251.129.7]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA18576 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun,          26 Aug 2001 23:11:38 -0700
Received: from [209.251.150.156] by grucom2.sfcc.net (NTMail          6.04.0010/NU4112.00.db1c8a4b) with ESMTP id tpxdiaaa for          AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 27 Aug 2001 02:11:34 -0400
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (Win95; I)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/mixed;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0BD4_01C56B69.4C593520"
Message-ID:  <3B89E502.94192380@sfcc.net>
Date:         Mon, 27 Aug 2001 02:13:22 -0400
Reply-To: "James Yawn" <jyawn@SFCC.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "James Yawn" <jyawn@SFCC.NET>
Subject:      [AR] A non-ignition physical test for grain??]
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0BD4_01C56B69.4C593520
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit



------=_NextPart_000_0BD4_01C56B69.4C593520
Content-Type: message/rfc822
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline

X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Message-ID: <3B89E4B3.E66AE1C5@sfcc.net>
Date: Mon, 27 Aug 2001 02:12:03 -0400
From: James Yawn <jyawn@sfcc.net>
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (Win95; I)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: al bradley <abradley@TOOLCITY.NET>
Subject: Re: [AR] A non-ignition physical test for grain??
References: <v01510100b7aadaaff563@[208.22.189.7]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Al contends that his idea may be overly simplistic, but mine is even more so!
:)  Based on his idea I performed a drop-test of recrystallized KN/sucrose to
determine its resistance to shock loads.

As usual, I have a page of photos at:

http://members.tripod.com/j_yawn/droptest/

In short, a 106-gram sample of candy was formed into a roughly spherical ball
and allowed to cool.  It was wrapped with one layer of plastic food-wrap, and
dropped from measured heights onto a concrete slab.  Dropped from three feet,
it bounced with no apparent damage.  Dropped from five feet, it received a
small "spall" fracture.  Dropped from seven feet, it broke into several
pieces.  Perhaps I have observed some of the brittleness that Jerry Irvine
mentioned.

So now I guess I should get out my math books and figure out how much energy it
took to cause this structural failure, and what that means for a rocket
engine.  Unless, of course, some list members would like to fill in my gaps...

Respectfully,
Jimmy Yawn

al bradley wrote:

> Hello Listees:
>
> Reviewing available tests for the amateur I notice we often are speculating
> about what happens to the grain integrity during its acceleration at
> launch. (G-forces).
>
> I am starting to think that we can create equivalent measurable G-forces
> during deceleration as a test. For example: a case-bonded grain in a guided
> fall stopping against a hardwood block. We know the acceleration of
> gravity, the hardwood block can be rigidly supported, so, knowing the
> height of the drop gives us the speed at impact, -- seems we should be able
> to develop high-G's in a very short height.
>
> Now this may well be an oversimplification so I will count on
> thoughts/ideas from our knowledgable folk on the list.
>
> best regards,
> al bradley
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------
> Can you live Life with this?: "Unless there is a law, an agreement, or a
> long-standing custom, No one `Deserves' Anything -- Either Good or Bad!"


------=_NextPart_000_0BD4_01C56B69.4C593520--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 2049 invoked from network); 27 Aug 2001 06:32:53 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 27 Aug 2001 06:32:53 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: (qmail 23433 invoked by uid 50005); 27 Aug 2001 06:31:51 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc with qmail-scanner-1.00 (. Clean. Processed in 0.1756 secs); 27 Aug 2001 06:31:51 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 27 Aug 2001 06:31:51 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA18657; Sun, 26 Aug 2001 23:29:31 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 97473 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 27 Aug 2001 06:29:29          +0000
Received: from cisco.com (cypher.cisco.com [171.69.11.18]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA18642 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun,          26 Aug 2001 23:29:29 -0700
Received: (from billw@localhost) by cisco.com (8.8.8/2.6/Cisco List          Logging/8.8.8) id XAA03873; Sun, 26 Aug 2001 23:28:53 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID:  <CMM.0.90.4.998893733.billw@cypher>
Date:         Sun, 26 Aug 2001 23:28:53 PDT
Reply-To: "Bill Westfield" <billw@cisco.com>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "William Chops Westfield" <billw@cisco.com>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Lawyers the other headache
Comments: To: Andrew Case <acase@GLUE.UMD.EDU>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  Your message of Sat, 25 Aug 2001 14:53:49 -0400

    It seems to me (as someone who hasn't got the level of experience you
    have) that there are some fundamental organizational weaknesses in
    any amateur rocketry scheme.

Heh.  Organize the amateurs enough and you no longer have an amateur effort,
you just have an "under-funded" effort.

 :-)
BillW


From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 8955 invoked from network); 27 Aug 2001 06:49:40 -0000
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 27 Aug 2001 06:49:40 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 19347 invoked by uid 50005); 27 Aug 2001 06:50:27 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpe with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.300324 secs); 27 Aug 2001 06:50:27 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 27 Aug 2001 06:50:26 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA18736; Sun, 26 Aug 2001 23:44:40 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 97484 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 27 Aug 2001 06:44:30          +0000
Received: from omta03.mta.everyone.net (sitemail.everyone.net [216.200.145.35])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA18689 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 26 Aug 2001 23:34:30 -0700
Received: from sitemail.everyone.net (reports [216.200.145.62]) by          omta03.mta.everyone.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 846E04A41C for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 26 Aug 2001 23:34:30 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by sitemail.everyone.net (Postfix, from userid 99) id 682C42755; Sun,          26 Aug 2001 23:34:30 -0700 (PDT)
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: MIME-tools 5.41 (Entity 5.404)
X-Originating-IP: [202.67.98.179]
Message-ID:  <20010827063430.682C42755@sitemail.everyone.net>
Date:         Sun, 26 Aug 2001 23:34:29 -0700
Reply-To: <blast_tech@techemail.com>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Mark Broadfoot" <blast_tech@techemail.com>
Subject:      [AR] AN CAUTION 2Re: [AR] Compressed AN/Sugar?
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

As a certified explosive user in Australia i can tell you that ANFO is classed as an explosive(1.1D) and is capable of detonation.ANFO is primarily used in mining and agricultural blasting where a reasonably low shock wave(briscaunce) is required and a large amount of gas energy(heave)is needed.AN is still hygroscopic however from simple observation doesn't seem as bad as KNO3. If you do mix or mill this, make sure your unit is at a safe distance from sensitive objects, make sure the bearings on the motor are sealed, make sure NO OIL COMES ANYWHERE NEAR THE AN, make sure the unit you are using is earthed-static may ignite/detonate product.

   I can't stress enough the potential for disaster
   when using this. AN when used in ANFO is a
   high explosive. Take care.

If you feel the need to try this(it certainly is worthwhile researching) you may be safer disolving the AN and sugar in water and leaving to evaporate in the sun for a few days.After this if you can grind (mortar + pestle) the remaining product while there is still a high water content to form a paste or dough, this may then be moulded into motor. This should then be allowed to fully dry before firing.

  NOTE - tour choice of igniter may be the difference
  between detonation and ignition. Choose an ignitor/ignition system that minimises shock to propellant grain.

 GOOD LUCK, PLAY SAFE
 Comments welcome.

--- al bradley <abradley@TOOLCITY.NET>
> wrote:
>>I read on this list one time that AN/sugar would deliver a much greater ISP
>>than KN/sugar, something like up to 190 or so, but that people were having
>>troubles trying to melt the candy together without the AN reacting too much
>>with the sugar.
>
>Hi Seth:
>I don't know a lot about the chemistry of AN. Back when (years ago) I used
>to do licensed small-job blasting I occasionally would put in a few
>shovel-fulls of AN (around the dynamite) and moisten it with fuel oil. The
>"big boys" claimed it had as much power as dynamite pound for pound and I
>had no doubt of it.
>
>Obviously AN is manufactured without too much hazard. As I remember, ANFO
>when initiated, is capable of detonation, but this may not be consistent
>with the current use of the word explosion. Anyhow, I don't come across
>accidental explosions with plain KNO3. Or KNO3/candy.
>
>Additionally, IIRC, when Tim McVey was fabricating his dastardly deed he
>had a mortar and pestle in which he was pulverizing AN to a fine powder as
>part of the initiator. Let me say here I would have no trouble ball-milling
>AN to a fine powder to mix with sugar for rocketry. Or remotely ball
>milling AN and sugar together, for rocketry, to be used in a day or so.
>
>However, the deterioration-reaction under heat of AN and sugar when trying
>to produce cooked-candy motors does worry me. I would be unsure if I
>produced an uncooked-pressed AN/candy motor that even this type of motor
>might, in a short time, deteriorate in ways that are not visible, but
>unstable!
>
>So, in this area, I would have to say: proceed with great caution. In the
>interim you can have a lot of enjoyment with pressed candy, but you will
>still need to mill your KNO3 to some degree of fineness. I do recall your
>personal constraints (we all have some of these) that you have to observe
>as you connect on to the enjoyment of amateur rocketry.
>
>onward and upward,
>best regards,
>al bradley
>
>
>
>------------------------------------------------------------------
>Can you live Life with this?: "Unless there is a law, an agreement, or a
>long-standing custom, No one `Deserves' Anything -- Either Good or Bad!"

==
                  Thanks
                  Mark Broadfoot

_____________________________________________________________
Are you a Techie? Get Your Free Tech Email Address Now! Visit http://www.TechEmail.com

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 7648 invoked from network); 27 Aug 2001 07:14:43 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 27 Aug 2001 07:14:43 -0000
Received: (qmail 27429 invoked by uid 50005); 27 Aug 2001 07:13:41 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc with qmail-scanner-1.00 (. Clean. Processed in 0.213738 secs); 27 Aug 2001 07:13:41 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 27 Aug 2001 07:13:41 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA18846; Mon, 27 Aug 2001 00:09:30 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 97505 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 27 Aug 2001 07:08:04          +0000
Received: from imo-d04.mx.aol.com (imo-d04.mx.aol.com [205.188.157.36]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA18829 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Mon, 27 Aug 2001 00:08:03 -0700
Received: from Sociald84@aol.com by imo-d04.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v31_r1.4.) id          w.e0.19a9fb3f (4421) for <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Mon, 27 Aug 2001          03:07:29 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/mixed;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0BD8_01C56B69.4C62D210"
X-Mailer: AOL 6.0 for Windows US sub 10536
Message-ID:  <e0.19a9fb3f.28bb4bb1@aol.com>
Date:         Mon, 27 Aug 2001 03:07:29 EDT
Reply-To: <Sociald84@AOL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <Sociald84@AOL.COM>
Subject:      [AR] 2Re: [AR] Compressed AN/Sugar?
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0BD8_01C56B69.4C62D210
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_001_0BD9_01C56B69.4C62D210"


------=_NextPart_001_0BD9_01C56B69.4C62D210
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Sory,

Meant to send this to the list but hit "reply" instead of "reply all"

Mark

------=_NextPart_001_0BD9_01C56B69.4C62D210
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<HTML><FONT FACE=arial,helvetica><FONT  SIZE=3>Sory,
<BR>
<BR>Meant to send this to the list but hit "reply" instead of "reply all"
<BR>
<BR>Mark</FONT></HTML>

------=_NextPart_001_0BD9_01C56B69.4C62D210--

------=_NextPart_000_0BD8_01C56B69.4C62D210
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Type: message/rfc822
Content-Disposition: inline

Return-path: <Sociald84@aol.com>
From: Sociald84@aol.com
Full-name: Social d84
Message-ID: <b8.1a7b6b9f.28bb49d5@aol.com>
Date: Mon, 27 Aug 2001 02:59:33 EDT
Subject: Re: [AR] 2Re: [AR] Compressed AN/Sugar?
To: abradley@TOOLCITY.NET
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part2_e0.19a9fb3f.28bb49d5_boundary"
X-Mailer: AOL 6.0 for Windows US sub 10536


--part2_e0.19a9fb3f.28bb49d5_boundary
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

In a message dated 8/26/2001 11:36:44 PM Mountain Daylight Time,
abradley@TOOLCITY.NET writes:

Ammonium nitrate is a very stable oxidizer, which is one of the reasons it
sees little use in rocketry.


> Hi Seth:
> I don't know a lot about the chemistry of AN. Back when (years ago) I used
> to do licensed small-job blasting I occasionally would put in a few
> shovel-fulls of AN (around the dynamite) and moisten it with fuel oil. The
> "big boys" claimed it had as much power as dynamite pound for pound and I
> had no doubt of it.
>

ANFO doesn't have the same power pound for pound as Dynamite, the detonation
velocity and overall engergy content is lower. ANFO's one and only desirable
traight is cost and availability. I can go to the garden store and buy a 50
pound bag for under $15 (US) and some deisel fuel and oil for a couple more
bucks and have a lot of explosive. Problems with ANFO are it's stability
which makes it very very difficult to detonate. A standard #6 blasting cap
won't detonate it alone, niether will a military #8 cap. Most secondary or
booster explosives in traditional quantities also won't do the job. ANFO
requires large quantites of high order explosives to detonate. A stick of
Dynamite is usually what is used.


> Obviously AN is manufactured without too much hazard. As I remember, ANFO
> when initiated, is capable of detonation, but this may not be consistent
> with the current use of the word explosion. Anyhow, I don't come across
> accidental explosions with plain KNO3. Or KNO3/candy.
>

your correct in saying AN does detonate.

> Additionally, IIRC, when Tim McVey was fabricating his dastardly deed he
> had a mortar and pestle in which he was pulverizing AN to a fine powder as
> part of the initiator. Let me say here I would have no trouble ball-milling
> AN to a fine powder to mix with sugar for rocketry. Or remotely ball
> milling AN and sugar together, for rocketry, to be used in a day or so.
>

As I recall the initiator was prety big and contained a stick of dynamite
surrounded by ANNM. I'm not certain of that though.  I believe that ball
milling AN and sugar together would be safer than ball milling black powder,
a very common practice in the pyrotechnics hobby.


> However, the deterioration-reaction under heat of AN and sugar when trying
> to produce cooked-candy motors does worry me. I would be unsure if I
> produced an uncooked-pressed AN/candy motor that even this type of motor
> might, in a short time, deteriorate in ways that are not visible, but
> unstable!
>
It also worried the original poster which is why he proposed the idea of
compressing grains in a hydralic press. I wouldn't think that decomposition
over time of AN/Sugar grains would not be much of a concern as AN is very
hygroscopic and would absorb so much water over a period of time that it
would become a moot point. And once again AN is very stable even in a very
intimate mixture with a fuel. Which on the other hand makes it prety hard to
ignite.

Trying not to step on any toes here
Mark

> So, in this area, I would have to say: proceed with great caution. In the
> interim you can have a lot of enjoyment with pressed candy, but you will
> still need to mill your KNO3 to some degree of fineness. I do recall your
> personal constraints (we all have some of these) that you have to observe
> as you connect on to the enjoyment of amateur rocketry.
>
> onward and upward,
> best regards,
> al bradley
>



--part2_e0.19a9fb3f.28bb49d5_boundary
Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<HTML><FONT FACE=arial,helvetica><FONT  SIZE=3>In a message dated 8/26/2001 11:36:44 PM Mountain Daylight Time,
<BR>abradley@TOOLCITY.NET writes:
<BR>
<BR>Ammonium nitrate is a very stable oxidizer, which is one of the reasons it
<BR>sees little use in rocketry.
<BR>
<BR></FONT><FONT  COLOR="#000000" SIZE=2 FAMILY="SANSSERIF" FACE="Arial" LANG="0">
<BR><BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE style="BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px">Hi Seth:
<BR>I don't know a lot about the chemistry of AN. Back when (years ago) I used
<BR>to do licensed small-job blasting I occasionally would put in a few
<BR>shovel-fulls of AN (around the dynamite) and moisten it with fuel oil. The
<BR>"big boys" claimed it had as much power as dynamite pound for pound and I
<BR>had no doubt of it.
<BR></FONT><FONT  COLOR="#000000" SIZE=3 FAMILY="SANSSERIF" FACE="Arial" LANG="0"></BLOCKQUOTE>
<BR>
<BR></FONT><FONT  COLOR="#000000" SIZE=2 FAMILY="SANSSERIF" FACE="Arial" LANG="0">ANFO doesn't have the same power pound for pound as Dynamite, the detonation
<BR>velocity and overall engergy content is lower. ANFO's one and only desirable
<BR>traight is cost and availability. I can go to the garden store and buy a 50
<BR>pound bag for under $15 (US) and some deisel fuel and oil for a couple more
<BR>bucks and have a lot of explosive. Problems with ANFO are it's stability
<BR>which makes it very very difficult to detonate. A standard #6 blasting cap
<BR>won't detonate it alone, niether will a military #8 cap. Most secondary or
<BR>booster explosives in traditional quantities also won't do the job. ANFO
<BR>requires large quantites of high order explosives to detonate. A stick of
<BR>Dynamite is usually what is used.
<BR>
<BR></FONT><FONT  COLOR="#000000" SIZE=3 FAMILY="SANSSERIF" FACE="Arial" LANG="0">
<BR></FONT><FONT  COLOR="#000000" SIZE=2 FAMILY="SANSSERIF" FACE="Arial" LANG="0"><BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE style="BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px">Obviously AN is manufactured without too much hazard. As I remember, ANFO
<BR>when initiated, is capable of detonation, but this may not be consistent
<BR>with the current use of the word explosion. Anyhow, I don't come across
<BR>accidental explosions with plain KNO3. Or KNO3/candy.
<BR></FONT><FONT  COLOR="#000000" SIZE=3 FAMILY="SANSSERIF" FACE="Arial" LANG="0"></BLOCKQUOTE>
<BR>
<BR></FONT><FONT  COLOR="#000000" SIZE=2 FAMILY="SANSSERIF" FACE="Arial" LANG="0">your correct in saying AN does detonate.
<BR></FONT><FONT  COLOR="#000000" SIZE=3 FAMILY="SANSSERIF" FACE="Arial" LANG="0">
<BR></FONT><FONT  COLOR="#000000" SIZE=2 FAMILY="SANSSERIF" FACE="Arial" LANG="0"><BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE style="BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px">Additionally, IIRC, when Tim McVey was fabricating his dastardly deed he
<BR>had a mortar and pestle in which he was pulverizing AN to a fine powder as
<BR>part of the initiator. Let me say here I would have no trouble ball-milling
<BR>AN to a fine powder to mix with sugar for rocketry. Or remotely ball
<BR>milling AN and sugar together, for rocketry, to be used in a day or so.
<BR></FONT><FONT  COLOR="#000000" SIZE=3 FAMILY="SANSSERIF" FACE="Arial" LANG="0"></BLOCKQUOTE>
<BR>
<BR></FONT><FONT  COLOR="#000000" SIZE=2 FAMILY="SANSSERIF" FACE="Arial" LANG="0">As I recall the initiator was prety big and contained a stick of dynamite
<BR>surrounded by ANNM. I'm not certain of that though. &nbsp;I believe that ball
<BR>milling AN and sugar together would be safer than ball milling black powder,
<BR>a very common practice in the pyrotechnics hobby.
<BR>
<BR></FONT><FONT  COLOR="#000000" SIZE=3 FAMILY="SANSSERIF" FACE="Arial" LANG="0">
<BR></FONT><FONT  COLOR="#000000" SIZE=2 FAMILY="SANSSERIF" FACE="Arial" LANG="0"><BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE style="BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px">However, the deterioration-reaction under heat of AN and sugar when trying
<BR>to produce cooked-candy motors does worry me. I would be unsure if I
<BR>produced an uncooked-pressed AN/candy motor that even this type of motor
<BR>might, in a short time, deteriorate in ways that are not visible, but
<BR>unstable!
<BR></FONT><FONT  COLOR="#000000" SIZE=3 FAMILY="SANSSERIF" FACE="Arial" LANG="0"></BLOCKQUOTE>
<BR>It also worried the original poster which is why he proposed the idea of
<BR>compressing grains in a hydralic press. I wouldn't think that decomposition
<BR>over time of AN/Sugar grains would not be much of a concern as AN is very
<BR>hygroscopic and would absorb so much water over a period of time that it
<BR>would become a moot point. And once again AN is very stable even in a very
<BR>intimate mixture with a fuel. Which on the other hand makes it prety hard to
<BR>ignite.
<BR></FONT><FONT  COLOR="#000000" SIZE=2 FAMILY="SANSSERIF" FACE="Arial" LANG="0">
<BR>Trying not to step on any toes here
<BR>Mark
<BR></FONT><FONT  COLOR="#000000" SIZE=3 FAMILY="SANSSERIF" FACE="Arial" LANG="0">
<BR></FONT><FONT  COLOR="#000000" SIZE=2 FAMILY="SANSSERIF" FACE="Arial" LANG="0"><BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE style="BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px">So, in this area, I would have to say: proceed with great caution. In the
<BR>interim you can have a lot of enjoyment with pressed candy, but you will
<BR>still need to mill your KNO3 to some degree of fineness. I do recall your
<BR>personal constraints (we all have some of these) that you have to observe
<BR>as you connect on to the enjoyment of amateur rocketry.
<BR>
<BR>onward and upward,
<BR>best regards,
<BR>al bradley
<BR></BLOCKQUOTE>
<BR></FONT><FONT  COLOR="#000000" SIZE=3 FAMILY="SANSSERIF" FACE="Arial" LANG="0">
<BR></FONT></HTML>

--part2_e0.19a9fb3f.28bb49d5_boundary--

------=_NextPart_000_0BD8_01C56B69.4C62D210--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 25626 invoked from network); 27 Aug 2001 08:41:52 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 27 Aug 2001 08:41:52 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 931 invoked by uid 50005); 27 Aug 2001 08:42:38 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpe with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.345601 secs); 27 Aug 2001 08:42:38 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 27 Aug 2001 08:42:38 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id BAA19059; Mon, 27 Aug 2001 01:37:36 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 97515 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 27 Aug 2001 08:37:23          +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (f120.law15.hotmail.com [64.4.23.120]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id BAA19043 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Mon, 27 Aug 2001 01:37:23 -0700
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Mon,          27 Aug 2001 01:36:52 -0700
Received: from 193.121.251.246 by lw15fd.law15.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Mon,          27 Aug 2001 08:36:52 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [193.121.251.246]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 27 Aug 2001 08:36:52.0795 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[6BFF38B0:01C12ED3]
Message-ID:  <F120x0LDGdyoOxg2elK00015df7@hotmail.com>
Date:         Mon, 27 Aug 2001 08:37:23 +0000
Reply-To: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      [AR] AN stability
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

AN is very stable? think again:

http://www.chron.com/content/chronicle/metropolitan/txcity/main.html

jd


_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 8192 invoked from network); 27 Aug 2001 10:07:49 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 27 Aug 2001 10:07:49 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 19569 invoked by uid 50005); 27 Aug 2001 10:08:34 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpe with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 1.249281 secs); 27 Aug 2001 10:08:34 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 27 Aug 2001 10:08:31 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id DAA19290; Mon, 27 Aug 2001 03:03:30 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 97537 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 27 Aug 2001 10:03:29          +0000
Received: from smtp008.mailsrvcs.net (smtp008pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.187])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id DAA19275 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 27 Aug 2001 03:03:28 -0700
Received: from [63.10.189.62] (1Cust62.tnt2.hilo.hi.da.uu.net [63.10.189.62])          by smtp008.mailsrvcs.net  with ESMTP ; id f7RA2sC26916 Mon, 27 Aug          2001 05:02:54 -0500 (CDT)
X-Sender: ttocs@mail.gte.net
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <l03130300b7abd43f44f7@[63.10.201.90]>
Date:         Fri, 24 Aug 2001 00:02:30 -1000
Reply-To: "Aaron Smith" <ttocs@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Aaron Smith" <ttocs@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] AN stability
Comments: To: John Dom <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <F120x0LDGdyoOxg2elK00015df7@hotmail.com>

At 8:37 AM +0000 8/27/01, John Dom wrote:
>AN is very stable? think again:
>
>http://www.chron.com/content/chronicle/metropolitan/txcity/main.html
>
>jd

Well, it was sitting in a burning ship for an hour.  I believe there is
only one other instance of deflagration to detonation happening with AN,
and it was on another large ship, with a large amount of AN, after an hour
or two of burning.  But I'm not sure, and the Grandcamp could be the only
time this ever happened.

Not exactly mercury fulminate, is it?

Aaron

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 10148 invoked from network); 27 Aug 2001 10:21:34 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 27 Aug 2001 10:21:34 -0000
Received: (qmail 24300 invoked by uid 50005); 27 Aug 2001 10:20:32 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc with qmail-scanner-1.00 (. Clean. Processed in 0.185348 secs); 27 Aug 2001 10:20:32 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 27 Aug 2001 10:20:31 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id DAA19261; Mon, 27 Aug 2001 03:00:44 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 97530 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 27 Aug 2001 10:00:33          +0000
Received: from wrench.toolcity.net (root@wrench.toolcity.net [208.0.188.2]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id DAA19246 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 27 Aug 2001 03:00:33 -0700
Received: from [208.22.189.179]          (dap-208-22-189-179.meadville-tnt-0.pa.toolcity.net [208.22.189.179])          by wrench.toolcity.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id GAA03028; Mon, 27          Aug 2001 06:00:19 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <v01510100b7afd398a131@[63.169.101.176]>
Date:         Mon, 27 Aug 2001 06:02:47 -0500
Reply-To: "al bradley" <abradley@TOOLCITY.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "al bradley" <abradley@TOOLCITY.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] AN stability
Comments: To: John Dom <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

>AN is very stable? think again:
>
>http://www.chron.com/content/chronicle/metropolitan/txcity/main.html
>
>jd
>
--------------------------------------
John,
I am old enough to remember when the Texas City explosions occurred, and
over the years followed the various accounts.

The shipload of AN that went up followed a number of refinery fires and
explosions that surrounded it. The various news accounts were quick to
latch onto something that sounded sensational. FYI, I have read that
storage facilities that had AN caked in the bins often used small charges
of dynamite to break the material up so it could be loaded/offloaded. The
kicker is the danger after fuel oil or some other carbon-bearer has been
added.

After  years in the newspaper business I became aware that agencies such as
AP and UPI like stories that are written in a manner to get public
attention even if it is non-factual. Old axiom: don't believe every thing
you read just because it appears in print -- especially on the Internet.

If AN was unstable by itself it would have been discredited years ago. I
think you will find that every year some of America's farmers pour tons of
the stuff onto their fields at planting time. Ever hear of a farmer blowing
himself up this way? However, I am sure that there is a little Hazmat tag
on each bag/shipment as a matter of course.

There is no need to be an alarmist on this material -- at least not until
someone tries to modify it in some unusual way for rocket propellant.

best regards,
al bradley

------------------------------------------------------------------
Can you live Life with this?: "Unless there is a law, an agreement, or a
long-standing custom, No one `Deserves' Anything -- Either Good or Bad!"

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 6984 invoked from network); 27 Aug 2001 10:32:30 -0000
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 27 Aug 2001 10:32:30 -0000
Received: (qmail 10747 invoked by uid 50005); 27 Aug 2001 10:33:16 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpe with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.266679 secs); 27 Aug 2001 10:33:16 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 27 Aug 2001 10:33:15 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id DAA19380; Mon, 27 Aug 2001 03:24:29 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 97550 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 27 Aug 2001 10:24:21          +0000
Received: from fep3-orange.clear.net.nz (fep3-orange.clear.net.nz          [203.97.32.3]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id DAA19365          for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Mon, 27 Aug 2001 03:24:20 -0700
Received: from mkbs (203-167-163-48.dialup.clear.net.nz [203.167.163.48]) by          fep3-orange.clear.net.nz (1.5/1.8) with SMTP id WAA03314; Mon, 27 Aug          2001 22:24:17 +1200 (NZST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="Windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <000301c12ee2$cfe718c0$0100a8c0@mkbs>
Date:         Mon, 27 Aug 2001 19:52:52 +1200
Reply-To: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Organization: Applied Technology
Subject:      [AR] Fw: Jonathan's Space Report, No. 459
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

And here's the Simplesat which has been being maligned in this list recently
now in orbit and ready for action.
Alas, there are problems. Is the satellite faulty? Not as far as they know.
It's the "low cost" ground station that's having problems !!! :-)  :-(
In the circumstances I'm sure they would have to have made at least that
part of the system fully redundant so I assume it will be OK in no time!
Wouldn't they have?



________________________________________________



Jonathan's Space Report
No. 459                                       2001 Aug 26  Cambridge, MA
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
---


Shuttle and Station
--------------------

STS-105 was launched on Aug 10 at 2110 UTC. MECO (main engine cutoff)
was at 2218 UTC with separation of external tank ET-110 into a 58 x 234
km x 51.6 deg orbit. At 2248 UTC Discovery reached apogee and fired its
OMS engines to enter a 155 x 233 km x 51.6 deg orbit; another burn at
around 0100 UTC raised the orbit to 198 x 277 km. Meanwhile the External
Tank fell back towards the Pacific and reentered at its first perigee at
around 2340 UTC.

Discovery docked at the Station's PMA-2 port at 1842 UTC on Aug 12.
After some problems aligning the docking system, the docking
ring was retracted and latched at 1905 UTC and the hatch was opened
to ISS at 2042 UTC.

Expedition 3 began on Aug 13 at 1915 UTC when the new crew's seat liners
were installed on the Soyuz transport ship. The formal EX-2/EX-3
change-of-command ceremony was held on Aug 17 in Destiny.

Barry (EV1) and Forrester (EV2) made two spacewalks from the external
airlock on Discovery. EVA-1, on Aug 16,  transferred the Early Ammonia
Servicer (EAS) device from the ICC carrier in the payload bay to the P6
truss on the station. Then the astronauts took two MISSE materials
exposure experiment boxes from the ICC and attached them to the outside
of the  Quest airlock. The airlock was depressurized at about 1356 UTC
and the duration was 6h18m (depress/repress), 6h10m (hatch open/close), or
6h16m (NASA rule).

The second spacewalk on Aug 18 installed Orbit-Installed Handrails and
Launch-to-Activation Heater Cables on Destiny. The cables are needed for
the installation of the S0 truss to be launched in early 2002. The
airlock was depressurized at about 1339 UTC and spacewalk duration was
5h31m (depress/repress), 5h24m (hatch open/close), or 5h29m (NASA rule).

The Leonardo MPLM module was lifted out of Discovery's payload bay at 1326
UTC on Aug 13 and docked to Unity's nadir at 1554 UTC. 3300 kg of cargo
from it was loaded on to the Station and 1700 kg of cargo was returned
to it; it was unberthed from Unity at 1816 UTC on Aug 19 and berthed
back in the payload bay for the return to Earth at 1917 UTC the same
day. Discovery undocked at 1452 UTC on Aug 20 with the Expedition 2
crew aboard, leaving Expedition 3 on the Station.

At 1830 UTC on Aug 20 the Simplesat satellite was ejected from a GAS
canister in the cargo bay. Simplesat has a 0.3m optical telescope and a
GPS attitude control system. It is intended to test methods for building
cheap astronomical satellites and controlling them from a cheap ground
station. As of Aug 25 the ground station was still having teething
problems.

Discovery landed at Kennedy Space Center at 1822:58 UTC on Aug 22.
Landing was on runway 15, after a deorbit burn at 1715 UTC. The
Expedition Two crew of Usachyov, Voss and Helms had been in space for
167 days.

Discovery will now have some downtime for structural inspections. Its
last maintenance down period was in 1995-1996. Atlantis is being stored
in the VAB for a while since only three Orbiter parking spots are
available in the Orbiter Processing Facility. The VAB has been empty of
Shuttle stacks  for a while during refurbishments, and the stack for
STS-108 will start being built up this week on Mobile Launch Platform 1
in VAB High Bay 1; External Tank ET-111 is hanging in High Bay 2 and
Endeavour will roll to the VAB sometime in late October.

Recent Launches
---------------

A classified Russian satellite was launched on Aug 24 by Proton-K from
Baykonur. Launch time was 2034 UTC (although one wire report implied
2045 UTC, but that is less consistent with the orbital data). A Blok DM
class upper stage put the payload, code-named Kosmos-2379, in
geostationary transfer orbit after its first burn at 2152 UTC. A second
burn was expected at 0310 UTC to put the payload in GEO. The payload is
probably a Prognoz-class early warning satellite built by NPO Lavochkin,
the Russian equivalent of the DSP satellites.


Editorial: US - and others - Not Compliant With UN Resolution 1721B
-------------------------------------------------------------------

In JSR 453 I criticized the  US Government for its spotty compliance
with the 1975 Convention on Registration of Outer Space Objects, which
grew out of UN Resolution 1721B. This is not a new issue, Jim Oberg drew
attention to it years before I did, but it's worth re-airing the facts
in this time when strategic treaty regimes are under reconsideration.
However, the story is now being repeated by other news outlets,
sometimes in stronger terms than I would use. I have therefore put
together a more detailed statement at

http://hea-www.harvard.edu/~jcm/space/un/untxt.html

to clarify what I'm saying. My intent is to draw attention to
the importance of openness in the military use of space and to call on
all countries, not just the US, to be more careful about complying with
their obligations under UN Resolution 1721 and the 1975 Convention.

In the context of controversial developments in the military use of
space, it is perhaps worth mentioning that JSR is intended as a
non-partisan source of technical information, and if you spot my own
admittedly strong views creeping in to the newsletter you are encouraged
to give me a hard time about it.

Table of Recent Launches
-----------------------

Date UT       Name            Launch Vehicle  Site            Mission
INTL.

DES.

Jul 12 0904   Atlantis STS-104) Shuttle        Kennedy LC39B    Spaceship
28A
              Quest           )                                 Station
module
Jul 12 2158   Artemis   )       Ariane 5G      Kourou ELA3      Expt. comms
29A
              BSAT-2b   )                                       Ku video
29B
Jul 20 0017   Molniya-3         Molniya-M      Plesetsk LC43/4  Comms
30A
Jul 23 0723   GOES 12           Atlas IIA      Canaveral SLC36A Weather
31A
Jul 31 0800   Koronas-F         Tsiklon-3      Plesetsk LC32    Astronomy
32A
Aug  6 0728   DSP 21            Titan 4B/IUS   Canaveral SLC40  Early Warn
33A
Aug  8 1613   Genesis           Delta 7326     Canaveral SLC17A Space probe
34A
Aug 10 2110   Discovery  )      Shuttle        Kennedy LC39     Spaceship
35A
              Leonardo   )
Aug 20 1830   Simplesat         -              Discovery, LEO   Astronomy
35B
Aug 21 0924   Progress M-45     Soyuz-U        Baykonur LC1     Cargo
36A
Aug 24 2034   Kosmos-2379       Proton-K/DM2M? Baykonur LC200?  Early Warn?
37A

Current Shuttle Processing Status
_________________________________

Orbiters               Location   Mission    Launch Due

OV-102 Columbia        OPF Bay 3     STS-109 2002 Jan 17  HST SM-3B
OV-103 Discovery       OPF Bay 2     Maintenance
OV-104 Atlantis        VAB           STS-110 2002 Feb 28  ISS 8A
OV-105 Endeavour       OPF Bay 1     STS-108 2001 Nov 29  ISS UF-1

.-------------------------------------------------------------------------.
|  Jonathan McDowell                 |  phone : (617) 495-7176            |
|  Harvard-Smithsonian Center for    |                                    |
|   Astrophysics                     |                                    |
|  60 Garden St, MS6                 |                                    |
|  Cambridge MA 02138                |  inter : jcm@cfa.harvard.edu       |
|  USA                               |          jmcdowell@cfa.harvard.edu |
|                                                                         |
| JSR: http://hea-www.harvard.edu/~jcm/space/jsr/jsr.html                 |
| Back issues:  http://hea-www.harvard.edu/~jcm/space/jsr/back            |
| Subscribe/unsub: mail majordomo@head-cfa.harvard.edu, (un)subscribe jsr |
'-------------------------------------------------------------------------'

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 10755 invoked from network); 27 Aug 2001 10:46:16 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 27 Aug 2001 10:46:16 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 3397 invoked by uid 50005); 27 Aug 2001 10:45:48 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.235791 secs); 27 Aug 2001 10:45:48 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 27 Aug 2001 10:45:47 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id DAA19447; Mon, 27 Aug 2001 03:38:46 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 97564 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 27 Aug 2001 10:38:40          +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (f175.law15.hotmail.com [64.4.23.175]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id DAA19432 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Mon, 27 Aug 2001 03:38:40 -0700
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Mon,          27 Aug 2001 03:38:10 -0700
Received: from 193.121.251.246 by lw15fd.law15.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Mon,          27 Aug 2001 10:38:09 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [193.121.251.246]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 27 Aug 2001 10:38:10.0128 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[5DA01D00:01C12EE4]
Message-ID:  <F175efdAPMRU8s15fCW000160ef@hotmail.com>
Date:         Mon, 27 Aug 2001 10:38:40 +0000
Reply-To: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] AN stability
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

>...I have read that storage facilities that had AN caked in the bins often
>used small charges of dynamite to break the material up so it could be
>loaded/offloaded.

I also read that in an old textbook. It mentioned mountains of the stuff in
hangars were thus broken up. Nowadays people know better.

I work in a chemical plant part of which is a huge fertilizer unit where
amongst phosphates, AN is produced. There is a mountain of the (dry)
crystalline stuff stored...in the open, on a concrete floor. It is forbidden
to bunker large amounts of AN in silo's or closed hangars, even to build
walls around it. Yes if it rains, the mountain simply gets partly dissolved.
Dunno what happens with this solution; musk ask that. Safety labels for
smaller amounts say: keep away from heat.

Sure, AN isn't mercury fulminate yet mixing it with sugar makes me wary.

Also, KN has a non-volatile sodium part leaving a part that is non volatile
after combustion. AN completely turns to gasses after decomposition.

Historically, I wonder if in the past (apart from the fuel/AN/TNT mentioned
in the URL) AN has been used in ammo instead of KN.

jd

_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 13642 invoked from network); 27 Aug 2001 10:59:27 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 27 Aug 2001 10:59:27 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 26218 invoked by uid 50005); 27 Aug 2001 10:57:44 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.161435 secs); 27 Aug 2001 10:57:44 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 27 Aug 2001 10:57:44 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id DAA19501; Mon, 27 Aug 2001 03:47:51 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 97575 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 27 Aug 2001 10:47:45          +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (f123.law15.hotmail.com [64.4.23.123]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id DAA19486 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Mon, 27 Aug 2001 03:47:45 -0700
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Mon,          27 Aug 2001 03:47:15 -0700
Received: from 193.121.251.246 by lw15fd.law15.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Mon,          27 Aug 2001 10:47:14 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [193.121.251.246]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 27 Aug 2001 10:47:15.0259 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[A28C80B0:01C12EE5]
Message-ID:  <F12303oHMwVN7miR9Od00015c12@hotmail.com>
Date:         Mon, 27 Aug 2001 10:47:45 +0000
Reply-To: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Fw: Jonathan's Space Report, No. 459
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

>Table of Recent Launches
>-----------------------
>
>Date UT       Name            Launch Vehicle  Site            Mission
>Jul 12 0904   Atlantis STS-104) Shuttle        Kennedy LC39B    Spaceship
>Jul 23 0723   GOES 12           Atlas IIA      Canaveral SLC36A Weather


I though Cape Kennedy was renamed Cape Canaveral more than 20 years ago.
So is there still a space center called Kennedy?

Thanks,

jd

_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 19777 invoked from network); 27 Aug 2001 11:01:51 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 27 Aug 2001 11:01:51 -0000
Received: (qmail 28297 invoked by uid 50005); 27 Aug 2001 11:00:09 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.215027 secs); 27 Aug 2001 11:00:09 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 27 Aug 2001 11:00:09 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id DAA19541; Mon, 27 Aug 2001 03:54:44 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 97582 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 27 Aug 2001 10:54:42          +0000
Received: from wrench.toolcity.net (root@wrench.toolcity.net [208.0.188.2]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id DAA19526 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 27 Aug 2001 03:54:42 -0700
Received: from [208.22.189.179]          (dap-208-22-189-179.meadville-tnt-0.pa.toolcity.net [208.22.189.179])          by wrench.toolcity.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id GAA15049; Mon, 27          Aug 2001 06:54:36 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <v01510102b7afe0aab356@[208.22.189.179]>
Date:         Mon, 27 Aug 2001 06:56:58 -0500
Reply-To: "al bradley" <abradley@TOOLCITY.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "al bradley" <abradley@TOOLCITY.NET>
Subject:      [AR] 2Re: [AR] A non-ignition physical test for grain??]
Comments: To: James Yawn <jyawn@SFCC.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

>Al contends that his idea may be overly simplistic, but mine is even more so!
>:)  Based on his idea I performed a drop-test of recrystallized KN/sucrose to
>determine its resistance to shock loads.

snip . . .

>In short, a 106-gram sample of candy was formed into a roughly spherical ball
>and allowed to cool.  It was wrapped with one layer of plastic food-wrap, and
>dropped from measured heights onto a concrete slab.  Dropped from three feet,
>it bounced with no apparent damage.  Dropped from five feet, it received a
>small "spall" fracture.  Dropped from seven feet, it broke into several
>pieces.  Perhaps I have observed some of the brittleness that Jerry Irvine
>mentioned.
>
>So now I guess I should get out my math books and figure out how much energy it
>took to cause this structural failure, and what that means for a rocket
>engine.  Unless, of course, some list members would like to fill in my gaps...
------------------

Good thinking Jimmy:
Lets put a practical example out to our math-oriented people so it appears
in our framework for rocketry.

We are dropping an "any-size" sample of Jimmy's candy from about 10 feet.
At impact it seems to be falling at more than 10.6 feet-per-second. To be
charitable let's say the deceleration to zero occurs within 1/16" (.0625").
What is the magnitude of the G-force??????

'Twill be interesting to see how many folk want to answer this, and any
variation in their answers.

After all, the destructive G-force mentioned  here in deceleration will
also apply in acceleration. Right?

best regards,
al bradley

------------------------------------------------------------------
Can you live Life with this?: "Unless there is a law, an agreement, or a
long-standing custom, No one `Deserves' Anything -- Either Good or Bad!"

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 15976 invoked from network); 27 Aug 2001 11:11:43 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 27 Aug 2001 11:11:43 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 971 invoked by uid 50005); 27 Aug 2001 11:10:40 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc with qmail-scanner-1.00 (. Clean. Processed in 0.152172 secs); 27 Aug 2001 11:10:40 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 27 Aug 2001 11:10:40 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id EAA19700; Mon, 27 Aug 2001 04:06:16 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 97589 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 27 Aug 2001 11:06:11          +0000
Received: from stud.uni-goettingen.de (root@s2.stud.uni-goettingen.de          [134.76.60.22]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id EAA19684          for <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Mon, 27 Aug 2001 04:06:11 -0700
Received: from router.atw.stud.uni-goettingen.de ([134.76.62.65]          helo=stud.uni-goettingen.de) by stud.uni-goettingen.de with esmtp          (Exim 2.12 #8) id 15bKDX-0002rA-00 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 27          Aug 2001 13:06:07 +0200
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [de] (Win98; I)
X-Accept-Language: de
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Message-ID:  <3B8A2993.75EF049C@stud.uni-goettingen.de>
Date:         Mon, 27 Aug 2001 13:05:56 +0200
Reply-To: "Thomas Engelhardt" <tengelh@STUD.UNI-GOETTINGEN.DE>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Thomas Engelhardt" <tengelh@STUD.UNI-GOETTINGEN.DE>
Organization: =?iso-8859-1?Q?Rocket_Research_G=F6ttingen_=28RRG=29?=
Subject:      Re: [AR] AN stability
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Hi group,

in the early 1920's, the German company BASF had a large manufacturing
and storage facility of AN and AN fertilizer. It was stored in the open
for the reasons JD mentionend and caked considerably. In order to break
some of it loose for transport, workers used dynamite after backhoes
couldn't break off enough.
Result: a big bang, 56 workers plus the storage facility gone.
I'd say using dynamite around AN is not such a good idea.

Tom


-------- Original Message --------
Betreff: Re: [AR] AN stability
Datum: Mon, 27 Aug 2001 10:38:40 +0000
Von: John Dom <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Rckantwort: John Dom <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
An: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU

>...I have read that storage facilities that had AN caked in the bins often
>used small charges of dynamite to break the material up so it could be
>loaded/offloaded.

I also read that in an old textbook. It mentioned mountains of the stuff
in
hangars were thus broken up. Nowadays people know better.

I work in a chemical plant part of which is a huge fertilizer unit where
amongst phosphates, AN is produced. There is a mountain of the (dry)
crystalline stuff stored...in the open, on a concrete floor. It is
forbidden
to bunker large amounts of AN in silo's or closed hangars, even to build
walls around it. Yes if it rains, the mountain simply gets partly
dissolved.
Dunno what happens with this solution; musk ask that. Safety labels for
smaller amounts say: keep away from heat.

Sure, AN isn't mercury fulminate yet mixing it with sugar makes me wary.

Also, KN has a non-volatile sodium part leaving a part that is non
volatile
after combustion. AN completely turns to gasses after decomposition.

Historically, I wonder if in the past (apart from the fuel/AN/TNT
mentioned
in the URL) AN has been used in ammo instead of KN.

jd

_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at
http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 14978 invoked from network); 27 Aug 2001 11:22:02 -0000
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 27 Aug 2001 11:22:02 -0000
Received: (qmail 29423 invoked by uid 50005); 27 Aug 2001 11:22:48 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpe with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.497194 secs); 27 Aug 2001 11:22:48 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 27 Aug 2001 11:22:47 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id EAA19757; Mon, 27 Aug 2001 04:18:30 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 97600 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 27 Aug 2001 11:18:28          +0000
Received: from fep3-orange.clear.net.nz (fep3-orange.clear.net.nz          [203.97.32.3]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id EAA19742          for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Mon, 27 Aug 2001 04:18:28 -0700
Received: from mkbs (203-167-161-97.dialup.clear.net.nz [203.167.161.97]) by          fep3-orange.clear.net.nz (1.5/1.8) with SMTP id XAA15181; Mon, 27 Aug          2001 23:18:26 +1200 (NZST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <002f01c12eea$60b9d160$0100a8c0@mkbs>
Date:         Mon, 27 Aug 2001 22:36:00 +1200
Reply-To: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Organization: Applied Technology
Subject:      [AR] Fw:      Re: [EE]: "Tilt-o-meter" for RC plane Maynard Hill
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Food for thought.
(Ignoring the potentially pendulum fallacy that this thread was originally
about on the other list).

.
_______________________________


"Peter L. Peres" wrote:

> > It was a glow engine, I believe he could control power to the glow
> > plug. Maynard Hill was well known for his attention to detail
> > Walter Banks
>
> Running a glowplug engine above 6000 feet without a turbo compressor is
> not very likely.

> I will definitely do some backgrounding on this. I have never even heard
> of Mr. Hill until this thread started.

http://www.flightlines.com/aircrafts/worldrecords.htm

Altitude: A radio-controlled model airplane owned by Maynard Hill
    (USA) climbed to a record breaking altitude of 8,205m (26,919ft)
    on the 6 of September 1970.

A quick check shows he is still at it.

http://www.rcflyers.nfld.net/fly%20across%20atlantic.html
http://www.rcflyers.nfld.net/telegramjuly262001.htm

Walter Banks

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: The PICList is archived three different
ways.  See http://www.piclist.com/#archives for details.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 15104 invoked from network); 27 Aug 2001 11:51:40 -0000
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 27 Aug 2001 11:51:40 -0000
Received: (qmail 2279 invoked by uid 50005); 27 Aug 2001 11:49:57 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 1.775157 secs); 27 Aug 2001 11:49:57 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 27 Aug 2001 11:49:53 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id EAA19843; Mon, 27 Aug 2001 04:48:19 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 97607 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 27 Aug 2001 11:48:11          +0000
Received: from overnight.request.net (overnight.request.net [207.150.192.30])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id EAA19827 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 27 Aug 2001 04:48:11 -0700
Received: from furina.request.net ([207.150.192.11]) by overnight.request.net          with ESMTP id <135440-27227>; Mon, 27 Aug 2001 06:47:38 -0400
Received: from JuleeD ([24.160.114.184]) by furina.request.net with SMTP id          <157753812-26693283>; Mon, 27 Aug 2001 07:43:18 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2314.1300
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <005701c12eee$382aaea0$b872a018@petschoice.com>
Date:         Mon, 27 Aug 2001 06:48:40 -0500
Reply-To: "Phil Bellmore" <pfish@CATFISHDESIGNS.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Phil Bellmore" <pfish@CATFISHDESIGNS.COM>
Subject:      [AR] Fw: [AR] 2Re: [AR] A non-ignition physical test for grain??]
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

----- Original Message -----
From: Phil Bellmore <pfish@catfishdesigns.com>
To: al bradley <abradley@TOOLCITY.NET>
Sent: Monday, August 27, 2001 6:31 AM
Subject: Re: [AR] 2Re: [AR] A non-ignition physical test for grain??]


> v = v(0) + a t
>
> where,
>
> v(0) = 10.6 fps (approx 7 mph)
> v = 0 fps
> t = .0052 ft/10.6 fps = 4.9135 e-4 s
>
> a = (v - v(0))/t
> a = -10.6 f/s / 4.9135e-4 s
> a = 21,607 f/s2
> or
> a = 671 Gs
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: al bradley <abradley@TOOLCITY.NET>
> To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
> Sent: Monday, August 27, 2001 6:56 AM
> Subject: [AR] 2Re: [AR] A non-ignition physical test for grain??]
>
>
> > >Al contends that his idea may be overly simplistic, but mine is even
more
> so!
> > >:)  Based on his idea I performed a drop-test of recrystallized
> KN/sucrose to
> > >determine its resistance to shock loads.
> >
> > snip . . .
> >
> > >In short, a 106-gram sample of candy was formed into a roughly
spherical
> ball
> > >and allowed to cool.  It was wrapped with one layer of plastic
food-wrap,
> and
> > >dropped from measured heights onto a concrete slab.  Dropped from three
> feet,
> > >it bounced with no apparent damage.  Dropped from five feet, it
received
> a
> > >small "spall" fracture.  Dropped from seven feet, it broke into several
> > >pieces.  Perhaps I have observed some of the brittleness that Jerry
> Irvine
> > >mentioned.
> > >
> > >So now I guess I should get out my math books and figure out how much
> energy it
> > >took to cause this structural failure, and what that means for a rocket
> > >engine.  Unless, of course, some list members would like to fill in my
> gaps...
> > ------------------
> >
> > Good thinking Jimmy:
> > Lets put a practical example out to our math-oriented people so it
appears
> > in our framework for rocketry.
> >
> > We are dropping an "any-size" sample of Jimmy's candy from about 10
feet.
> > At impact it seems to be falling at more than 10.6 feet-per-second. To
be
> > charitable let's say the deceleration to zero occurs within 1/16"
> (.0625").
> > What is the magnitude of the G-force??????
> >
> > 'Twill be interesting to see how many folk want to answer this, and any
> > variation in their answers.
> >
> > After all, the destructive G-force mentioned  here in deceleration will
> > also apply in acceleration. Right?
> >
> > best regards,
> > al bradley
> >
> > ------------------------------------------------------------------
> > Can you live Life with this?: "Unless there is a law, an agreement, or a
> > long-standing custom, No one `Deserves' Anything -- Either Good or Bad!"
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 23735 invoked from network); 27 Aug 2001 12:11:38 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 27 Aug 2001 12:11:38 -0000
Received: (qmail 21874 invoked by uid 50005); 27 Aug 2001 12:11:10 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.215526 secs); 27 Aug 2001 12:11:10 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 27 Aug 2001 12:11:09 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id FAA19913; Mon, 27 Aug 2001 05:07:43 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 97614 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 27 Aug 2001 12:07:38          +0000
Received: from fep3-orange.clear.net.nz (fep3-orange.clear.net.nz          [203.97.32.3]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id FAA19898          for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Mon, 27 Aug 2001 05:07:37 -0700
Received: from mkbs (203-167-156-129.dialup.clear.net.nz [203.167.156.129]) by          fep3-orange.clear.net.nz (1.5/1.8) with SMTP id AAA24596; Tue, 28 Aug          2001 00:07:27 +1200 (NZST)
References:  <v01510102b7afe0aab356@[208.22.189.179]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <004c01c12ef1$3a931bc0$0100a8c0@mkbs>
Date:         Tue, 28 Aug 2001 00:09:27 +1200
Reply-To: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Organization: Applied Technology
Subject:      [AR] A non-ignition physical test for grain??]
Comments: To: al bradley <abradley@TOOLCITY.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

> >Al contends that his idea may be overly simplistic, but mine is even more
so!
> >:)  Based on his idea I performed a drop-test of recrystallized
KN/sucrose to
> >determine its resistance to shock loads.
>
> snip . . .
>
> >In short, a 106-gram sample of candy was formed into a roughly spherical
ball
> >and allowed to cool.  It was wrapped with one layer of plastic food-wrap,
and
> >dropped from measured heights onto a concrete slab.  Dropped from three
feet,
> >it bounced with no apparent damage.  Dropped from five feet, it received
a
> >small "spall" fracture.  Dropped from seven feet, it broke into several
> >pieces.  Perhaps I have observed some of the brittleness that Jerry
Irvine
> >mentioned.
> >
> >So now I guess I should get out my math books and figure out how much
energy it
> >took to cause this structural failure, and what that means for a rocket
> >engine.  Unless, of course, some list members would like to fill in my
gaps...

Prescript - comments at end re centrifuge are probably more useful than the
following "drop test" comments

A good indicative test but not possible to determine forces anywhere near
accurately from data given.
An unyielding mass dropped onto an unyielding surface will experience
infinite deceleration.
Here the concrete qualifies but the Candy doesn't, as it deforms. The
decelerations are still very high.
For  a mass dropped under 1g from a height of h units and decelerated in X
units the acceleration a is

        a = g * h /  X

or in g's        a = h / X         g's

eg suppose the "spall" from 7 feet constituted the stopping distance and was
equal to 0.5 inches.
nb - the smaller the spall = the greater the deceleration.

The stopping acceleration in g's =

    h/X = 7 feet / 0.5 inch = 168 g's

This is APPROXIMATELY the acceleration a rocket would need to have to
achieve the same result.
PROVIDED that the assumptions are correct - in particular the "real"
stopping distance.

A better result MIGHT be achieved by dropping from a greater height and
providing a greater stopping distance - eg perhaps dropping into a stiff
deformable foam or similar. Then deceleration would be non-linear so still
misleading.


___________________________________

CENTRIFUGE:


A better test MAY be a centrifuge.
For a velocity V and a radius r
V = 2 * Pi * r * RPM / 60

            Acceleration = V^2 / r

and acceleration in g's =

    Ag      =      V^2 / r / g

Substituting for V in terms of radius and RPM

    Ag = 4 * Pi^2 * r^2 * RPM^2 / 3600 / r * g

cancelling , assume Pi^2 = 10, g = 10

        Ag = r * RPM ^2 / 900
or
        RPM = Sqrt (900 * Ag / r)

            r in metres
            A in gravities.

Lets see if that sounds right.
How slowly can I whirl a bucket of water around in a vertical arc without
water spilling at top of arc?

    r = 0.7 m, Ag = 1
    RPM = sqrt(900 * 1/07) = 37 -

say 40 RPM or 0.66 seconds / rev
Seems close to what I find in practice (my jeans are now wet :-) )

3000 rpm, 0.1 metre radius
A = 1000g !!!

Put it in a circular container.
(can be open at one side to observe.
Balance with similar mass.
Stand clear !!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Spin in lathe
Observe

Remember that a 0.1 kg mass at 500 g's will "weigh" 50 kg radially !!

This is not a pure radial force so may not be a perfect test but may be
useful.

Comments anyone?

____________________


VERY ROUGHLY g forces on a rocket will be

Near burn out ~~ (Mfuel * Isp) / Mempty / Tburn
    (depends on drag, velocity etc)

Near liftoff    ~~ (Mfuel * Isp) / Mlaunch / Tburn

For eg a 50% mass fraction Rocket with a 3 second burn and 120 Isp fuel (eg
Candy) the peak g's will be APPROXIMATELY

        2 x 120 / 3 = 80 g's

A one second burn raises this to around 240 g's.

An AP rocket with the same burn time will have about twice the acceleration.


        Russell McMahon

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 26564 invoked from network); 27 Aug 2001 13:06:28 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 27 Aug 2001 13:06:28 -0000
Received: (qmail 2539 invoked by uid 50005); 27 Aug 2001 13:07:12 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpe with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.181372 secs); 27 Aug 2001 13:07:12 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 27 Aug 2001 13:07:12 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA20065; Mon, 27 Aug 2001 06:00:38 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 97625 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 27 Aug 2001 13:00:31          +0000
Received: from spsystems.net (spsystems.net [209.47.149.227]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA20050 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Mon,          27 Aug 2001 06:00:30 -0700
Received: (from henry@localhost) by spsystems.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id IAA29704;          Mon, 27 Aug 2001 08:59:59 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010827085827.29407B-100000@spsystems.net>
Date:         Mon, 27 Aug 2001 08:59:58 -0400
Reply-To: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Fw: Jonathan's Space Report, No. 459
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <F12303oHMwVN7miR9Od00015c12@hotmail.com>

On Mon, 27 Aug 2001, John Dom wrote:
> >Date UT       Name            Launch Vehicle  Site            Mission
> >Jul 12 0904   Atlantis STS-104) Shuttle        Kennedy LC39B    Spaceship
> >Jul 23 0723   GOES 12           Atlas IIA      Canaveral SLC36A Weather
>
> I though Cape Kennedy was renamed Cape Canaveral more than 20 years ago.
> So is there still a space center called Kennedy?

Kennedy Space Center continues to be Kennedy Space Center.  It's located
on Merritt Island, which is next to, but not a part of, Cape Canaveral.

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 11374 invoked from network); 27 Aug 2001 17:12:24 -0000
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 27 Aug 2001 17:12:24 -0000
Received: (qmail 377 invoked by uid 50005); 27 Aug 2001 17:13:08 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpe with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.347582 secs); 27 Aug 2001 17:13:08 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 27 Aug 2001 17:13:07 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA21217; Mon, 27 Aug 2001 10:01:07 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 97766 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 27 Aug 2001 17:01:06          +0000
Received: from mailhost0.trib.com (mailhost0.trib.com [63.229.150.3]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA21186 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Mon, 27 Aug 2001 09:59:44 -0700
Received: from mail.trib.com (mail.trib.com [12.10.158.17]) by          mailhost0.trib.com (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f7RGxf600882; Mon,          27 Aug 2001 10:59:41 -0600 (MDT) (envelope-from          jwckman@space-rockets.com)
Received: from [63.229.150.224] (HELO hppav) by mail.trib.com (CommuniGate Pro          SMTP 3.4.6) with SMTP id 44190750; Mon, 27 Aug 2001 10:59:40 -0600
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <NKEHJAOOKBPGIKOOPDEFCEKACBAA.jwckman@space-rockets.com>
Date:         Mon, 27 Aug 2001 10:58:05 -0600
Reply-To: "John Wickman" <jwckman@SPACE-ROCKETS.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Wickman" <jwckman@SPACE-ROCKETS.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] AN stability
Comments: To: John Dom <j_dom@hotmail.com>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <F120x0LDGdyoOxg2elK00015df7@hotmail.com>

John,

AN is VERY stable.   What happened here is that the AN was eventually heated
to its decomposition temperature, not detonation, decomposition.   As it
approaches decomposition, it gives off a smoke that is orange-brown in
color.   At decomposition, it converts from a liquid and goes to a gas, much
like black powder goes from a solid to a gas.   This is not detonation.   If
the AN is not heated to these temperatures, it does nothing.

My guess is in this incident, the AN became liquid during the initial fire
and then started to spontaneously react with metal in the ship, producing
more heat.  Liquid, molten AN is very reactive.   At that point, it was only
a matter of time before the liquid AN was heated to decomposition.

John Wickman

-----Original Message-----
From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@itc.uci.edu]On
Behalf Of John Dom
Sent: Monday, August 27, 2001 2:37 AM
To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
Subject: [AR] AN stability


AN is very stable? think again:

http://www.chron.com/content/chronicle/metropolitan/txcity/main.html

jd


_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 12171 invoked from network); 27 Aug 2001 17:12:34 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 27 Aug 2001 17:12:34 -0000
Received: (qmail 30408 invoked by uid 50005); 27 Aug 2001 17:11:29 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd with qmail-scanner-1.00 (. Clean. Processed in 0.174209 secs); 27 Aug 2001 17:11:29 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 27 Aug 2001 17:11:29 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA21243; Mon, 27 Aug 2001 10:02:30 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 97775 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 27 Aug 2001 17:02:29          +0000
Received: from mailhost0.trib.com (mailhost0.trib.com [63.229.150.3]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA21195 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Mon, 27 Aug 2001 10:00:16 -0700
Received: from mail.trib.com (mail.trib.com [12.10.158.17]) by          mailhost0.trib.com (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f7RGxh600897; Mon,          27 Aug 2001 10:59:43 -0600 (MDT) (envelope-from          jwckman@space-rockets.com)
Received: from [63.229.150.224] (HELO hppav) by mail.trib.com (CommuniGate Pro          SMTP 3.4.6) with SMTP id 44190751; Mon, 27 Aug 2001 10:59:42 -0600
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <NKEHJAOOKBPGIKOOPDEFEEKACBAA.jwckman@space-rockets.com>
Date:         Mon, 27 Aug 2001 10:58:07 -0600
Reply-To: "John Wickman" <jwckman@SPACE-ROCKETS.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Wickman" <jwckman@SPACE-ROCKETS.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] AN stability
Comments: To: al bradley <abradley@toolcity.net>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <v01510100b7afd398a131@[63.169.101.176]>

Al,

Actually, there was an incident in Germany where a huge mound, almost a
mountain, of AN was broken up with multiple dynamite sticks at various
locations.   The AN detonated without being mixed with any fuel.   AN
requires a solid mass of at least 8 inches to set up a detonation wave.
Unfortunately, they apparently had this condition.   To put in in
perspective, AP requires only a small fraction of an inch to detonate on it
own.   To  my knowledge, the incident in Germany is the only case where a
pure mound of AN has ever detonated.

Most AN is now coated with anti-caking agents and it does a pretty good job
of keeping it from caking and preventing large blocks of AN from forming.
You do not get the 8 inch or larger chunks, anymore.

John Wickman

-----Original Message-----
From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU]On
Behalf Of al bradley
Sent: Monday, August 27, 2001 5:03 AM
To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
Subject: Re: [AR] AN stability


>AN is very stable? think again:
>
>http://www.chron.com/content/chronicle/metropolitan/txcity/main.html
>
>jd
>
--------------------------------------
John,
I am old enough to remember when the Texas City explosions occurred, and
over the years followed the various accounts.

The shipload of AN that went up followed a number of refinery fires and
explosions that surrounded it. The various news accounts were quick to
latch onto something that sounded sensational. FYI, I have read that
storage facilities that had AN caked in the bins often used small charges
of dynamite to break the material up so it could be loaded/offloaded. The
kicker is the danger after fuel oil or some other carbon-bearer has been
added.

After  years in the newspaper business I became aware that agencies such as
AP and UPI like stories that are written in a manner to get public
attention even if it is non-factual. Old axiom: don't believe every thing
you read just because it appears in print -- especially on the Internet.

If AN was unstable by itself it would have been discredited years ago. I
think you will find that every year some of America's farmers pour tons of
the stuff onto their fields at planting time. Ever hear of a farmer blowing
himself up this way? However, I am sure that there is a little Hazmat tag
on each bag/shipment as a matter of course.

There is no need to be an alarmist on this material -- at least not until
someone tries to modify it in some unusual way for rocket propellant.

best regards,
al bradley

------------------------------------------------------------------
Can you live Life with this?: "Unless there is a law, an agreement, or a
long-standing custom, No one `Deserves' Anything -- Either Good or Bad!"

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 12643 invoked from network); 27 Aug 2001 17:12:40 -0000
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 27 Aug 2001 17:12:40 -0000
Received: (qmail 17312 invoked by uid 50005); 27 Aug 2001 17:10:56 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpf with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 3.075829 secs); 27 Aug 2001 17:10:56 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 27 Aug 2001 17:10:50 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA21185; Mon, 27 Aug 2001 09:59:44 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 97759 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 27 Aug 2001 16:59:43          +0000
Received: from mailhost0.trib.com (mailhost0.trib.com [63.229.150.3]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA21169 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Mon, 27 Aug 2001 09:59:43 -0700
Received: from mail.trib.com (mail.trib.com [12.10.158.17]) by          mailhost0.trib.com (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f7RGxe600875; Mon,          27 Aug 2001 10:59:40 -0600 (MDT) (envelope-from          jwckman@space-rockets.com)
Received: from [63.229.150.224] (HELO hppav) by mail.trib.com (CommuniGate Pro          SMTP 3.4.6) with SMTP id 44190747; Mon, 27 Aug 2001 10:59:38 -0600
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <NKEHJAOOKBPGIKOOPDEFAEKACBAA.jwckman@space-rockets.com>
Date:         Mon, 27 Aug 2001 10:58:03 -0600
Reply-To: "John Wickman" <jwckman@SPACE-ROCKETS.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Wickman" <jwckman@SPACE-ROCKETS.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] AN CAUTION 2Re: [AR] Compressed AN/Sugar?
Comments: To: blast_tech@techemail.com
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <20010827063430.682C42755@sitemail.everyone.net>

Actually, ANFO is a blasting agent, not a high explosive.   It takes another
explosive such as dynamite to set it up.  I have been in many AN factories
where AN dust is everywhere, piled up several inches deep on beams and
around bearings with leaking grease/oil.   In decades, there has never been
an incident.   AN is routinely ground up in hammer mills, again with no
problem.  What makes ANFO SAFE is that it requires a considerable shock to
set it up.  More than a hammer could provide.   AN requires a solid mass at
least 8 inches thick to set up a detonation wave.

John Wickman


-----Original Message-----
From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU]On
Behalf Of Mark Broadfoot
Sent: Monday, August 27, 2001 12:34 AM
To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
Subject: [AR] AN CAUTION 2Re: [AR] Compressed AN/Sugar?


As a certified explosive user in Australia i can tell you that ANFO is
classed as an explosive(1.1D) and is capable of detonation.ANFO is primarily
used in mining and agricultural blasting where a reasonably low shock
wave(briscaunce) is required and a large amount of gas energy(heave)is
needed.AN is still hygroscopic however from simple observation doesn't seem
as bad as KNO3. If you do mix or mill this, make sure your unit is at a safe
distance from sensitive objects, make sure the bearings on the motor are
sealed, make sure NO OIL COMES ANYWHERE NEAR THE AN, make sure the unit you
are using is earthed-static may ignite/detonate product.

   I can't stress enough the potential for disaster
   when using this. AN when used in ANFO is a
   high explosive. Take care.

If you feel the need to try this(it certainly is worthwhile researching) you
may be safer disolving the AN and sugar in water and leaving to evaporate in
the sun for a few days.After this if you can grind (mortar + pestle) the
remaining product while there is still a high water content to form a paste
or dough, this may then be moulded into motor. This should then be allowed
to fully dry before firing.

  NOTE - tour choice of igniter may be the difference
  between detonation and ignition. Choose an ignitor/ignition system that
minimises shock to propellant grain.

 GOOD LUCK, PLAY SAFE
 Comments welcome.

--- al bradley <abradley@TOOLCITY.NET>
> wrote:
>>I read on this list one time that AN/sugar would deliver a much greater
ISP
>>than KN/sugar, something like up to 190 or so, but that people were having
>>troubles trying to melt the candy together without the AN reacting too
much
>>with the sugar.
>
>Hi Seth:
>I don't know a lot about the chemistry of AN. Back when (years ago) I used
>to do licensed small-job blasting I occasionally would put in a few
>shovel-fulls of AN (around the dynamite) and moisten it with fuel oil. The
>"big boys" claimed it had as much power as dynamite pound for pound and I
>had no doubt of it.
>
>Obviously AN is manufactured without too much hazard. As I remember, ANFO
>when initiated, is capable of detonation, but this may not be consistent
>with the current use of the word explosion. Anyhow, I don't come across
>accidental explosions with plain KNO3. Or KNO3/candy.
>
>Additionally, IIRC, when Tim McVey was fabricating his dastardly deed he
>had a mortar and pestle in which he was pulverizing AN to a fine powder as
>part of the initiator. Let me say here I would have no trouble ball-milling
>AN to a fine powder to mix with sugar for rocketry. Or remotely ball
>milling AN and sugar together, for rocketry, to be used in a day or so.
>
>However, the deterioration-reaction under heat of AN and sugar when trying
>to produce cooked-candy motors does worry me. I would be unsure if I
>produced an uncooked-pressed AN/candy motor that even this type of motor
>might, in a short time, deteriorate in ways that are not visible, but
>unstable!
>
>So, in this area, I would have to say: proceed with great caution. In the
>interim you can have a lot of enjoyment with pressed candy, but you will
>still need to mill your KNO3 to some degree of fineness. I do recall your
>personal constraints (we all have some of these) that you have to observe
>as you connect on to the enjoyment of amateur rocketry.
>
>onward and upward,
>best regards,
>al bradley
>
>
>
>------------------------------------------------------------------
>Can you live Life with this?: "Unless there is a law, an agreement, or a
>long-standing custom, No one `Deserves' Anything -- Either Good or Bad!"

==
                  Thanks
                  Mark Broadfoot

_____________________________________________________________
Are you a Techie? Get Your Free Tech Email Address Now! Visit
http://www.TechEmail.com

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 16474 invoked from network); 27 Aug 2001 17:13:29 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 27 Aug 2001 17:13:29 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 2162 invoked by uid 50005); 27 Aug 2001 17:14:13 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpe with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.550106 secs); 27 Aug 2001 17:14:13 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 27 Aug 2001 17:14:12 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA21148; Mon, 27 Aug 2001 09:55:21 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 97752 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 27 Aug 2001 16:55:12          +0000
Received: from hobbiton.shire.net (frogmorton.shire.net [204.228.145.136]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA21132 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Mon, 27 Aug 2001 09:55:11 -0700
Received: from pool-64-223-145-225.man.east.verizon.net ([64.223.145.225]          helo=me-513q3sc0zun0.pengar.com) by hobbiton.shire.net with esmtp          (Exim 3.22 #6) id 15bPda-000GFe-00 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 27          Aug 2001 10:53:22 -0600
X-Sender: seth-pc@hobbiton.shire.net
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <5.1.0.14.0.20010827124856.01c3de50@hobbiton.shire.net>
Date:         Mon, 27 Aug 2001 13:00:11 -0400
Reply-To: "Seth Leigh" <seth@PENGAR.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Seth Leigh" <seth@PENGAR.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] AN stability
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <F120x0LDGdyoOxg2elK00015df7@hotmail.com>

OK, I get the hint.  I can see that I need to learn a lot more about AN
before even thinking of doing anything with it.

That being said, I read the story pointed to below.

There are three time points listed.  Shortly after 8 AM they opened the
hatch on the GrandCamp to resume loading stuff into it.  Sometime
thereafter a fire broke out on the ship.  By 8:45 AM the deck was so hot
that water sprayed onto the deck was vaporizing on contact.  We don't know
exactly how long the fire had been burning at that time.  Let's just guess
that the fire started at around 8:30, for the sake of argument.  The
explosion occurred at 9:12 AM.

That's would be just around 45 minutes after the fire started, and almost a
half hour after the ship was already so engulfed in flames internally that
the decks were hot enough to vaporize a torrent of water coming from fire
hoses.

I think we should see this in perspective.  The question is how stable is
AN, ie: how hard for it to detonate accidentally.  In this case the AN had
at least a good half hour of very high temperature baking before it finally
blew.  The case also mentions that the steam fire extinguishing system
contributed materially to the breakdown of the AN.

I'd say under the circumstances that the AN in question was awfully hard to
detonate.  It seems it took hellish conditions over dozens of minutes
before it finally went.

Doesn't John Wickman use AN-based propellant?  I'd imagine he has to
pulverize his AN, mix it with other chemicals including carbon-bearing
materials quite intimately, and so forth.  I wonder if he has ever mixed it
with sugar, or pressed it with pressures like the 6 ton presses achieve?

Seth



At 04:37 AM 8/27/2001, John Dom wrote:
>AN is very stable? think again:
>
>http://www.chron.com/content/chronicle/metropolitan/txcity/main.html
>
>jd

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 28089 invoked from network); 27 Aug 2001 17:43:56 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 27 Aug 2001 17:43:56 -0000
Received: (qmail 28095 invoked by uid 50005); 27 Aug 2001 17:42:51 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd with qmail-scanner-1.00 (. Clean. Processed in 0.130473 secs); 27 Aug 2001 17:42:51 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 27 Aug 2001 17:42:51 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA21419; Mon, 27 Aug 2001 10:38:04 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 97784 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 27 Aug 2001 17:38:01          +0000
Received: from Blastzone.com (consumersinterest.com [207.195.143.118] (may be          forged)) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA21404 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 27 Aug 2001 10:38:01 -0700
Received: from deputydog [131.107.3.79] by Blastzone.com with ESMTP          (SMTPD32-6.04) id A8F71907008A; Mon, 27 Aug 2001 10:52:55 -0700
References:  <NKEHJAOOKBPGIKOOPDEFEEKACBAA.jwckman@space-rockets.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2462.0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <002801c12f1f$1a8770a0$490fa8c0@redmond.corp.microsoft.com>
Date:         Mon, 27 Aug 2001 10:38:37 -0700
Reply-To: "Greg Deputy" <greg@BLASTZONE.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Greg Deputy" <greg@BLASTZONE.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] AN stability
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

I'm curious.  If AP detonates easier than AN, why is AN used so commonly as
a blasting agent?
Why not AP?

I read about the AP plant that blew up (in utah?) a while back, and tests
that were done following the explosion to determine cause.  I also remember
they were mostly unsuccessful at getting AP to detonate in their tests.

I guess the bottom line is I dont understand how something that is commonly
used as a blasting agent (AN) is inherantly 'more safe' than something that
is not used as a commercial explosive(AP).

----- Original Message -----
From: "John Wickman" <jwckman@SPACE-ROCKETS.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Monday, August 27, 2001 9:58 AM
Subject: Re: [AR] AN stability


> Al,
>
> Actually, there was an incident in Germany where a huge mound, almost a
> mountain, of AN was broken up with multiple dynamite sticks at various
> locations.   The AN detonated without being mixed with any fuel.   AN
> requires a solid mass of at least 8 inches to set up a detonation wave.
> Unfortunately, they apparently had this condition.   To put in in
> perspective, AP requires only a small fraction of an inch to detonate on
it
> own.   To  my knowledge, the incident in Germany is the only case where a
> pure mound of AN has ever detonated.
>
> Most AN is now coated with anti-caking agents and it does a pretty good
job
> of keeping it from caking and preventing large blocks of AN from forming.
> You do not get the 8 inch or larger chunks, anymore.
>
> John Wickman
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU]On
> Behalf Of al bradley
> Sent: Monday, August 27, 2001 5:03 AM
> To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
> Subject: Re: [AR] AN stability
>
>
> >AN is very stable? think again:
> >
> >http://www.chron.com/content/chronicle/metropolitan/txcity/main.html
> >
> >jd
> >
> --------------------------------------
> John,
> I am old enough to remember when the Texas City explosions occurred, and
> over the years followed the various accounts.
>
> The shipload of AN that went up followed a number of refinery fires and
> explosions that surrounded it. The various news accounts were quick to
> latch onto something that sounded sensational. FYI, I have read that
> storage facilities that had AN caked in the bins often used small charges
> of dynamite to break the material up so it could be loaded/offloaded. The
> kicker is the danger after fuel oil or some other carbon-bearer has been
> added.
>
> After  years in the newspaper business I became aware that agencies such
as
> AP and UPI like stories that are written in a manner to get public
> attention even if it is non-factual. Old axiom: don't believe every thing
> you read just because it appears in print -- especially on the Internet.
>
> If AN was unstable by itself it would have been discredited years ago. I
> think you will find that every year some of America's farmers pour tons of
> the stuff onto their fields at planting time. Ever hear of a farmer
blowing
> himself up this way? However, I am sure that there is a little Hazmat tag
> on each bag/shipment as a matter of course.
>
> There is no need to be an alarmist on this material -- at least not until
> someone tries to modify it in some unusual way for rocket propellant.
>
> best regards,
> al bradley
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------
> Can you live Life with this?: "Unless there is a law, an agreement, or a
> long-standing custom, No one `Deserves' Anything -- Either Good or Bad!"
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 13794 invoked from network); 27 Aug 2001 18:01:59 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 27 Aug 2001 18:01:59 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 13511 invoked by uid 50005); 27 Aug 2001 18:00:54 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd with qmail-scanner-1.00 (. Clean. Processed in 0.159186 secs); 27 Aug 2001 18:00:54 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 27 Aug 2001 18:00:54 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA21503; Mon, 27 Aug 2001 10:58:08 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 97791 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 27 Aug 2001 17:57:45          +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (f102.law15.hotmail.com [64.4.23.102]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA21488 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Mon, 27 Aug 2001 10:57:45 -0700
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Mon,          27 Aug 2001 10:57:15 -0700
Received: from 213.224.83.166 by lw15fd.law15.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Mon,          27 Aug 2001 17:57:15 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [213.224.83.166]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 27 Aug 2001 17:57:15.0111 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[B4757F70:01C12F21]
Message-ID:  <F102ZkxOjmfCHJr1Wty000166af@hotmail.com>
Date:         Mon, 27 Aug 2001 17:57:45 +0000
Reply-To: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] AN stability
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Here is a pro fact sheet on pure AN. It is clearly called a hazardous
material. On all such sheets. Very stabile chemical compounds are never
called hazardous.

http://www.jtbaker.com/msds/a6048.htm

But the topic before this nit picking on pure AN stability started was if
AN/sugar mixtures blocks are safe to have lying in the garage and if they do
not CATO immediately after ignition...and if AN is better than KN candy for
propellant purposes and why.

About part of the AN gone liquid in the ship smouldering : happens at 170C
already so that is not far fetched I gather.

jd

_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 3743 invoked from network); 27 Aug 2001 18:20:43 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 27 Aug 2001 18:20:43 -0000
Received: (qmail 396 invoked by uid 50005); 27 Aug 2001 18:19:38 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd with qmail-scanner-1.00 (. Clean. Processed in 0.464421 secs); 27 Aug 2001 18:19:38 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 27 Aug 2001 18:19:37 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA21572; Mon, 27 Aug 2001 11:16:06 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 97798 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 27 Aug 2001 18:16:04          +0000
Received: from cablecom.laribay.net (cablecom.laribay.net [66.20.57.4]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA21557 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 27 Aug 2001 11:16:04 -0700
Received: from billbull (dial065.laribay.net [66.20.57.65]) by          cablecom.laribay.net (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id MAA10190 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 27 Aug 2001 12:57:38 -0500 (CDT)          (envelope-from bpbullock@laribay.net)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0BDF_01C56B69.4C8B41A0"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <000f01c12f24$7d06a480$41391442@billbull>
Date:         Mon, 27 Aug 2001 13:15:58 -0500
Reply-To: "Bill Bullock" <bpbullock@LARIBAY.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Bill Bullock" <bpbullock@LARIBAY.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Ammonium Nitrate Stability
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0BDF_01C56B69.4C8B41A0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

    Being an expert by no means, I however do have some experience in =
this filed courtesy of the USMC. I also have blown up more than my share =
of motors over the years.
    Ammonium Perchlorate, Potassium Perchlorate and Ammonium Nitrate =
(AP/PP/AN) are all relatively acceptable explosive components.
     "Sensitized Ammonium Nitrate" (ANFO) is extremely stable and =
requires, in most instances, an "initiator" in order to propagate an =
explosive reaction. ANFO has a propagation speed on the order of =
approximately 2500 m/sec. placing it in the lower-power category. (60% =
dynamite is 5,800 m/sec., TNT 6700 m/sec., C-4 8200 m/sec., for =
comparison)This propagation speed can be increased by the inclusion of =
nitromethane and/or other chemicals, which is what Mr. McVey, et. al., =
did in Oklahoma City.
    ANFO is preferred in many cases due to its stability, economy and =
ease of manufacture. But the other two oxidizers we use daily are just =
as acceptable...and as dangerous. At elevated temperatures and/or =
pressures they to will detonate.
    Sutton, in his Rocket Propulsion Elements (chapter 10/page 282, =
1949...it's old like me) discusses that all solid propellants have an =
upper chamber pressure limit at which they will detonate. He =
states,"This pressure is very high for most [emphasis mine] propellants =
(above 6000 pounds per square inch)." Temperature and internal acoustic =
shock waves facilitate and promote this reaction. (The 6000 psi "limit" =
is one reason I work mostly at 1500-2500 psi chamber pressures.)
    As a point of interest I would point out that one of the "hasty =
expedient" plastiques taught to me was AP/KNO3/AN (whatever was =
available) + powdered aluminum + S.T.P Oil Treatment. It requires a #8 =
detonator cap to initiate the explosion. The Oxidizer/AL mixture sound =
familiar to anyone on list?
    Yes, experimental rocketry can be dangerous. No, I will not quit: =
the more you know and learn the more safely you can conduct yourself and =
your hobby.
    Respectfully,
Bill
   =20

------=_NextPart_000_0BDF_01C56B69.4C8B41A0
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META content=3D"text/html; charset=3Diso-8859-1" =
http-equiv=3DContent-Type>
<META content=3D"MSHTML 5.00.2614.3500" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Being an expert by no means, I however do have =
some=20
experience in this filed courtesy of the USMC. I also have blown up more =
than my=20
share of motors over the years.</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Ammonium Perchlorate, Potassium Perchlorate and =
Ammonium=20
Nitrate (AP/PP/AN) are all relatively acceptable explosive =
components.</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; "Sensitized Ammonium Nitrate" (ANFO) is =
extremely=20
stable and requires, in most instances, an "initiator" in order to =
propagate an=20
explosive reaction. ANFO&nbsp;has a propagation speed on the order of=20
approximately 2500 m/sec. placing it in the lower-power category. (60% =
dynamite=20
is 5,800 m/sec., TNT 6700 m/sec., C-4 8200 m/sec., for=20
comparison)This&nbsp;propagation speed can be increased by the inclusion =
of=20
nitromethane and/or other chemicals, which is what Mr. McVey, et. al., =
did in=20
Oklahoma City.</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; ANFO is preferred in many cases due to its =
stability,=20
economy and ease of manufacture. But the other two oxidizers we use =
daily are=20
just as acceptable...and as dangerous. At elevated temperatures and/or =
pressures=20
they to will detonate.</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Sutton, in his <U>Rocket Propulsion Elements</U> =

(chapter 10/page 282, 1949...it's old like me) discusses that all solid=20
propellants have an upper chamber pressure limit at which they will =
detonate. He=20
states,"This pressure is very high for <EM><U>most</U></EM> [emphasis =
mine]=20
propellants (above 6000 pounds per square inch)." Temperature and =
internal=20
acoustic shock waves facilitate and promote this reaction. (The 6000 psi =
"limit"=20
is&nbsp;one reason I work mostly at 1500-2500 psi chamber =
pressures.)</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; As a point of interest I would point out that =
one of the=20
"hasty expedient" plastiques taught to me was AP/KNO3/AN (whatever was=20
available) + powdered aluminum + S.T.P Oil Treatment. It requires a #8 =
detonator=20
cap to initiate the explosion. The Oxidizer/AL mixture sound familiar to =
anyone=20
on list?</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Yes, experimental rocketry can be dangerous. No, =
I will=20
not quit: the more you know and learn the more safely you can conduct =
yourself=20
and your hobby.</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Respectfully,</DIV>
<DIV>Bill</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; </DIV></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0BDF_01C56B69.4C8B41A0--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 1791 invoked from network); 27 Aug 2001 18:27:17 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 27 Aug 2001 18:27:17 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 23162 invoked by uid 50005); 27 Aug 2001 18:28:00 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpe with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.276676 secs); 27 Aug 2001 18:28:00 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 27 Aug 2001 18:28:00 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA21612; Mon, 27 Aug 2001 11:22:52 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 97805 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 27 Aug 2001 18:22:50          +0000
Received: from smtp006.mailsrvcs.net (smtp006pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.185])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA21597 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 27 Aug 2001 11:22:50 -0700
Received: from [63.27.97.83] (1Cust168.tnt3.san-bernardino.ca.da.uu.net          [63.25.57.168]) by smtp006.mailsrvcs.net  with ESMTP for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; id f7RIMEq16903 Mon, 27 Aug 2001 13:22:14          -0500 (CDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: GTE/01rocket@mail.gte.net
References: <NKEHJAOOKBPGIKOOPDEFEEKACBAA.jwckman@space-rockets.com>            <002801c12f1f$1a8770a0$490fa8c0@redmond.corp.microsoft.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <a05100302b7b03c68b03c@[63.27.97.83]>
Date:         Mon, 27 Aug 2001 11:21:22 -0700
Reply-To: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] AN stability
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <002801c12f1f$1a8770a0$490fa8c0@redmond.corp.microsoft.com>

>I'm curious.  If AP detonates easier than AN, why is AN used so commonly as
>a blasting agent?
>Why not AP?


AP as a powder is detonable if the average particle size is under 50
micron (u).

APCP is essentially non-detonable under all circumstances and very
sensitive APCP containing primarily sub-50u AP can be detonable over
a MDQ of 36 inches thick.

If you hit AP powder with a hammer (powder being under 40u) and
hammer substantially reducing that at moment of impact, one can get a
cap like pop.  But a hammer has a very high force per square inch.  I
do not know the range.

AN is "safer" in the sense it is lower energy per pound by perhaps
30% and I suspect the decomposition temperature is higher as well.  I
observed a barrel of AP in a fire involving a car, and when it
decomposed after about 30 minutes the top popped off the barrel, and
there was a "decomposition event" which could best be described as
"passing gas".  Since there was already a flame present from the
other source it was hard to tell if there was any complimentary flame.

There was a fire truck present at the time so there was additional
confusion of the science experiment by them trying to terminate it as
quickly as possible.


>
>I read about the AP plant that blew up (in utah?) a while back, and tests
>that were done following the explosion to determine cause.  I also remember
>they were mostly unsuccessful at getting AP to detonate in their tests.

Henderson, NV

I owned some of the AP destroyed in that event.  The fire was started
by a welding accident and the initial blast effectively airated the
powdered AP in the drying area which allowed a fuel-air event on
steroids since AP is an oxidizer.  The subsequent event passed to
bulk storage of AP for the Titan program involving millions of pounds.

As I have said before on other venues the solution for this problem
would be a change in government buying practices to allow AP dealers
to ship AP more on an as made basis instead of making a record
purchase and requiring it to all be shipped as a single lot.


>
>I guess the bottom line is I dont understand how something that is commonly
>used as a blasting agent (AN) is inherantly 'more safe' than something that
>is not used as a commercial explosive(AP).


Because when they do finally activate they have different
characteristics.  ANFO has a relatively low brisance and high heave
so it cannot break a safe very well but can move a mountain at a mine
well.  AP is differently placed on these continuums.

Now if you want to crack a safe use mercury fulminate or C4.

--
Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
Opinion, the whole thing.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 23562 invoked from network); 27 Aug 2001 18:32:27 -0000
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 27 Aug 2001 18:32:27 -0000
Received: (qmail 15463 invoked by uid 50005); 27 Aug 2001 18:30:43 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpf with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.597703 secs); 27 Aug 2001 18:30:43 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 27 Aug 2001 18:30:42 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA21652; Mon, 27 Aug 2001 11:27:59 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 97812 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 27 Aug 2001 18:27:57          +0000
Received: from cablecom.laribay.net (cablecom.laribay.net [66.20.57.4]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA21637 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 27 Aug 2001 11:27:57 -0700
Received: from billbull (dial065.laribay.net [66.20.57.65]) by          cablecom.laribay.net (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id NAA10285 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 27 Aug 2001 13:09:53 -0500 (CDT)          (envelope-from bpbullock@laribay.net)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0BE2_01C56B69.4C8B41A0"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <003101c12f26$333a3540$41391442@billbull>
Date:         Mon, 27 Aug 2001 13:29:04 -0500
Reply-To: "Bill Bullock" <bpbullock@LARIBAY.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Bill Bullock" <bpbullock@LARIBAY.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] AN Stability
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0BE2_01C56B69.4C8B41A0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Gregg Deputy asked:
I'm curious.  If AP detonates easier than AN, why is AN used so commonly =
as
a blasting agent?
Why not AP?
*******************************
    Last week I bought 5# of AN at a feed store two blocks from my home. =
It cost me $1.65 + 8% sales tax for a total of $1.78. I bought it during =
my daily walk so there was no delivery charges.With a slug of used motor =
oil or, at most, 3 pints of diesel I can have 7# of explosives. How much =
does 5# of AP cost delivered to your home including the haz-mat fees?
    'Nuf said?
Bill



------=_NextPart_000_0BE2_01C56B69.4C8B41A0
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META content=3D"text/html; charset=3Diso-8859-1" =
http-equiv=3DContent-Type>
<META content=3D"MSHTML 5.00.2614.3500" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV>Gregg Deputy asked:</DIV>
<DIV>I'm curious.&nbsp; If AP detonates easier than AN, why is AN used =
so=20
commonly as<BR>a blasting agent?<BR>Why not AP?</DIV>
<DIV>*******************************</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Last week I bought 5# of AN at a feed store two =
blocks=20
from my home. It cost me $1.65 + 8% sales tax for a total of $1.78. I =
bought it=20
during my daily walk so there was no delivery charges.With a slug of =
used motor=20
oil or, at most, 3 pints of diesel I can have 7# of explosives. How much =
does 5#=20
of AP cost delivered to your home including the haz-mat fees?</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; 'Nuf said?</DIV>
<DIV>Bill<BR><BR></DIV></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0BE2_01C56B69.4C8B41A0--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 22755 invoked from network); 27 Aug 2001 19:05:04 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 27 Aug 2001 19:05:04 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: (qmail 12654 invoked by uid 50005); 27 Aug 2001 19:05:47 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpe with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.377919 secs); 27 Aug 2001 19:05:47 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 27 Aug 2001 19:05:46 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA21825; Mon, 27 Aug 2001 12:00:58 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 97826 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 27 Aug 2001 19:00:55          +0000
Received: from cisco.com (cypher.cisco.com [171.69.11.18]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA21810 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon,          27 Aug 2001 12:00:55 -0700
Received: (from billw@localhost) by cisco.com (8.8.8/2.6/Cisco List          Logging/8.8.8) id MAA17523; Mon, 27 Aug 2001 12:00:15 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID:  <CMM.0.90.4.998938814.billw@cypher>
Date:         Mon, 27 Aug 2001 12:00:14 PDT
Reply-To: "Bill Westfield" <billw@cisco.com>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "William Chops Westfield" <billw@cisco.com>
Subject:      Re: [AR] AN stability
Comments: To: John Wickman <jwckman@SPACE-ROCKETS.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  Your message of Mon, 27 Aug 2001 10:58:07 -0600

    Actually, there was an incident in Germany where a huge mound, almost a
    mountain, of AN was broken up with multiple dynamite sticks at various
    locations.   The AN detonated without being mixed with any fuel.

I recall hearing about this one too.  No one has pointed out that they had
been ROUTINELY breaking up this pile of AN fertilizer (mixture, I think,
with some ammonium sulfate as well) for YEARS before they hit the unlucky
combination of circumstances that caused the pile to detonate.

My father was "somewhat near" the texas city disaster.  I don't think anyone
has doubts that this was a true detonation, or that AN can undergo a
"burning to detonation transition" if there is a "suitable large" amount of
"suitably contaminated" AN subjected to "suitable perverse" conditions.
That doesn't mean that AN isn't "stable" compared to other chemicals and/or
oxidizers.

BillW


From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 26100 invoked from network); 27 Aug 2001 19:06:05 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 27 Aug 2001 19:06:05 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 9873 invoked by uid 50005); 27 Aug 2001 19:05:00 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd with qmail-scanner-1.00 (. Clean. Processed in 0.229404 secs); 27 Aug 2001 19:05:00 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 27 Aug 2001 19:05:00 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA21780; Mon, 27 Aug 2001 11:57:46 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 97819 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 27 Aug 2001 18:57:43          +0000
Received: from smtp003.mailsrvcs.net (smtp003pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.182])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA21765 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 27 Aug 2001 11:57:43 -0700
Received: from [63.10.189.27] (1Cust27.tnt2.hilo.hi.da.uu.net [63.10.189.27])          by smtp003.mailsrvcs.net  with ESMTP ; id f7RIuTg08025 Mon, 27 Aug          2001 13:56:33 -0500 (CDT)
X-Sender: ttocs@mail.gte.net
References: <F120x0LDGdyoOxg2elK00015df7@hotmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <l03130300b7ac53478095@[63.10.189.62]>
Date:         Fri, 24 Aug 2001 08:55:57 -1000
Reply-To: "Aaron Smith" <ttocs@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Aaron Smith" <ttocs@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] AN stability
Comments: To: Seth Leigh <seth@PENGAR.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <5.1.0.14.0.20010827124856.01c3de50@hobbiton.shire.net>

I think the moral of the story is basically, don't let your oxidizer cook.
Remember PEPCON?

Aaron

At 1:00 PM -0400 8/27/01, Seth Leigh wrote:
>OK, I get the hint.  I can see that I need to learn a lot more about AN
>before even thinking of doing anything with it.
>
>That being said, I read the story pointed to below.
>
>There are three time points listed.  Shortly after 8 AM they opened the
>hatch on the GrandCamp to resume loading stuff into it.  Sometime
>thereafter a fire broke out on the ship.  By 8:45 AM the deck was so hot
>that water sprayed onto the deck was vaporizing on contact.  We don't know
>exactly how long the fire had been burning at that time.  Let's just guess
>that the fire started at around 8:30, for the sake of argument.  The
>explosion occurred at 9:12 AM.
>
>That's would be just around 45 minutes after the fire started, and almost a
>half hour after the ship was already so engulfed in flames internally that
>the decks were hot enough to vaporize a torrent of water coming from fire
>hoses.
>
>I think we should see this in perspective.  The question is how stable is
>AN, ie: how hard for it to detonate accidentally.  In this case the AN had
>at least a good half hour of very high temperature baking before it finally
>blew.  The case also mentions that the steam fire extinguishing system
>contributed materially to the breakdown of the AN.
>
>I'd say under the circumstances that the AN in question was awfully hard to
>detonate.  It seems it took hellish conditions over dozens of minutes
>before it finally went.
>
>Doesn't John Wickman use AN-based propellant?  I'd imagine he has to
>pulverize his AN, mix it with other chemicals including carbon-bearing
>materials quite intimately, and so forth.  I wonder if he has ever mixed it
>with sugar, or pressed it with pressures like the 6 ton presses achieve?
>
>Seth
>
>
>
>At 04:37 AM 8/27/2001, John Dom wrote:
>>AN is very stable? think again:
>>
>>http://www.chron.com/content/chronicle/metropolitan/txcity/main.html
>>
>>jd

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 607 invoked from network); 27 Aug 2001 20:03:05 -0000
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 27 Aug 2001 20:03:05 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 22827 invoked by uid 50005); 27 Aug 2001 20:01:20 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpf with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 4.600271 secs); 27 Aug 2001 20:01:20 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 27 Aug 2001 20:01:12 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA22042; Mon, 27 Aug 2001 12:53:38 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 97834 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 27 Aug 2001 19:53:36          +0000
Received: from mailhost0.trib.com (mailhost0.trib.com [63.229.150.3]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA22027 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Mon, 27 Aug 2001 12:53:35 -0700
Received: from mail.trib.com (mail.trib.com [12.10.158.17]) by          mailhost0.trib.com (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f7RJqg659883; Mon,          27 Aug 2001 13:52:42 -0600 (MDT) (envelope-from          jwckman@space-rockets.com)
Received: from [63.229.150.189] (HELO space-rockets.com) by mail.trib.com          (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 3.4.6) with ESMTP id 44208698; Mon, 27 Aug 2001          13:52:40 -0600
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.5 [en] (Win95; I)
X-Accept-Language: en,pdf
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <003101c12f26$333a3540$41391442@billbull>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B8AA43B.27872F2C@space-rockets.com>
Date:         Mon, 27 Aug 2001 13:49:16 -0600
Reply-To: <jwckman@space-rockets.com>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John H. Wickman" <jwckman@space-rockets.com>
Subject:      Re: [AR] AN Stability
Comments: To: Bill Bullock <bpbullock@laribay.net>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Bill,

This post and your other one are right on target.

John Wickman

Bill Bullock wrote:

> Gregg Deputy asked:I'm curious.  If AP detonates
> easier than AN, why is AN used so commonly as
> a blasting agent?
> Why not AP?*******************************    Last
> week I bought 5# of AN at a feed store two blocks
> from my home. It cost me $1.65 + 8% sales tax for a
> total of $1.78. I bought it during my daily walk so
> there was no delivery charges.With a slug of used
> motor oil or, at most, 3 pints of diesel I can have
> 7# of explosives. How much does 5# of AP cost
> delivered to your home including the haz-mat fees?
> 'Nuf said?Bill
>
r 

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 5401 invoked from network); 27 Aug 2001 20:11:21 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 27 Aug 2001 20:11:21 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 19855 invoked by uid 50005); 27 Aug 2001 20:10:51 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.286392 secs); 27 Aug 2001 20:10:51 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 27 Aug 2001 20:10:50 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA22124; Mon, 27 Aug 2001 13:06:46 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 97841 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 27 Aug 2001 20:06:37          +0000
Received: from mailhost0.trib.com (mailhost0.trib.com [63.229.150.3]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA22109 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Mon, 27 Aug 2001 13:06:36 -0700
Received: from mail.trib.com (mail.trib.com [12.10.158.17]) by          mailhost0.trib.com (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f7RK6R664611; Mon,          27 Aug 2001 14:06:27 -0600 (MDT) (envelope-from          jwckman@space-rockets.com)
Received: from [63.229.150.189] (HELO space-rockets.com) by mail.trib.com          (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 3.4.6) with ESMTP id 44210169; Mon, 27 Aug 2001          14:06:24 -0600
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.5 [en] (Win95; I)
X-Accept-Language: en,pdf
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <CMM.0.90.4.998938814.billw@cypher>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B8AA776.98F7786B@space-rockets.com>
Date:         Mon, 27 Aug 2001 14:03:03 -0600
Reply-To: <jwckman@space-rockets.com>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John H. Wickman" <jwckman@space-rockets.com>
Subject:      Re: [AR] AN stability
Comments: To: Bill Westfield <billw@cisco.com>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Bill,

You are right.   Breaking up AN piles was routinely done this way for many
years.

Regarding the Texas incident, I still feel it is more likely that it was
decomposition rather than detonation.  At the old Atlas Powder Plant in Joplin,
MO, they had an incident around 1990 where the AN reactor was overheated to the
point where the AN went through decomposition.   It was like an explosion taking
out thick concrete walls, buildings and etc. at the facility.

Early in our production of PSAN, we deliberately took a very small amount of AN
and heated it to decomposition in a small pot.   It was very impressive, like 4F
black powder going off.   In a confined area, this would have easily blown out
the windows of a building.   We melt AN to form PSAN so we wanted to get a feel
for the dangers and required safety measures.   You can be sure the temperature
of the AN melt is closely monitored and employees are told that if a pot does
start to runaway and cannot be turned off, to head for the exit and don't look
back.   You actually have about 12 seconds to get your ass out of there.   This
is not something you want to make in your garage, house or apartment.

John Wickman

William Chops Westfield wrote:

>     Actually, there was an incident in Germany where a huge mound, almost a
>     mountain, of AN was broken up with multiple dynamite sticks at various
>     locations.   The AN detonated without being mixed with any fuel.
>
> I recall hearing about this one too.  No one has pointed out that they had
> been ROUTINELY breaking up this pile of AN fertilizer (mixture, I think,
> with some ammonium sulfate as well) for YEARS before they hit the unlucky
> combination of circumstances that caused the pile to detonate.
>
> My father was "somewhat near" the texas city disaster.  I don't think anyone
> has doubts that this was a true detonation, or that AN can undergo a
> "burning to detonation transition" if there is a "suitable large" amount of
> "suitably contaminated" AN subjected to "suitable perverse" conditions.
> That doesn't mean that AN isn't "stable" compared to other chemicals and/or
> oxidizers.
>
> BillW

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 20243 invoked from network); 27 Aug 2001 20:21:47 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 27 Aug 2001 20:21:47 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 3254 invoked by uid 50005); 27 Aug 2001 20:21:16 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.643279 secs); 27 Aug 2001 20:21:16 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 27 Aug 2001 20:21:15 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA22186; Mon, 27 Aug 2001 13:16:07 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 97851 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 27 Aug 2001 20:16:02          +0000
Received: from mailhost0.trib.com (mailhost0.trib.com [63.229.150.3]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA22171 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Mon, 27 Aug 2001 13:16:01 -0700
Received: from mail.trib.com (mail.trib.com [12.10.158.17]) by          mailhost0.trib.com (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f7RKFS668049; Mon,          27 Aug 2001 14:15:29 -0600 (MDT) (envelope-from          jwckman@space-rockets.com)
Received: from [63.229.150.189] (HELO space-rockets.com) by mail.trib.com          (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 3.4.6) with ESMTP id 44211084; Mon, 27 Aug 2001          14:15:26 -0600
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.5 [en] (Win95; I)
X-Accept-Language: en,pdf
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <5.1.0.14.0.20010827124856.01c3de50@hobbiton.shire.net>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B8AA992.70DD5DD1@space-rockets.com>
Date:         Mon, 27 Aug 2001 14:12:03 -0600
Reply-To: <jwckman@space-rockets.com>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John H. Wickman" <jwckman@space-rockets.com>
Subject:      Re: [AR] AN stability
Comments: To: Seth Leigh <seth@pengar.com>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Seth,

We use AN-based propellants in our work.   To make our PSAN, we take tech.
grade AN and melt it down.   We work with the AN melt, adding zinc oxide and
other ingredients.   There are reactions taking place so it is critical to work
with it under control conditions, particularly temperature.   We do not expose
it to oil or carbon based materials.   The process is fairly labor intensive to
do it safely.   The AN melt is very reactive with metals, woods and plastic
resins so you have to really be careful.  It will autoignite with many
things.   There is also the danger of burns from AN melt splashing onto you so
protection must be worn.   It will actually stick to your skin and harden.

I have thought about sugar and AN for a couple of years.   I have never done
anything with it.

John Wickman


>
>
> Doesn't John Wickman use AN-based propellant?  I'd imagine he has to
> pulverize his AN, mix it with other chemicals including carbon-bearing
> materials quite intimately, and so forth.  I wonder if he has ever mixed it
> with sugar, or pressed it with pressures like the 6 ton presses achieve?
>
> Seth
>
> At 04:37 AM 8/27/2001, John Dom wrote:
> >AN is very stable? think again:
> >
> >http://www.chron.com/content/chronicle/metropolitan/txcity/main.html
> >
> >jd

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 21770 invoked from network); 27 Aug 2001 20:43:26 -0000
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 27 Aug 2001 20:43:26 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 1132 invoked by uid 50005); 27 Aug 2001 20:41:41 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpf with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.208936 secs); 27 Aug 2001 20:41:41 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 27 Aug 2001 20:41:41 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA22259; Mon, 27 Aug 2001 13:29:01 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 97858 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 27 Aug 2001 20:28:56          +0000
Received: from scaup.mail.pas.earthlink.net (scaup.mail.pas.earthlink.net          [207.217.121.49]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA22209          for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Mon, 27 Aug 2001 13:18:55 -0700
Received: from earthlink.net (dialup-209.245.134.238.Dial1.SanJose1.Level3.net          [209.245.134.238]) by scaup.mail.pas.earthlink.net (EL-8_9_3_3/8.9.3)          with ESMTP id NAA15754; Mon, 27 Aug 2001 13:18:54 -0700 (PDT)
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.75 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.16-22 i686)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <Pine.LNX.4.10.10108231614100.29934-100000@itc.uci.edu>            <008001c12c41$94c7c120$0100a8c0@prdise1.nm.home.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B8AAB79.381790A3@earthlink.net>
Date:         Mon, 27 Aug 2001 13:20:09 -0700
Reply-To: "David Weinshenker" <daze39@EARTHLINK.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "David Weinshenker" <daze39@EARTHLINK.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Tomahawk cruise missile
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Pax wrote:
> I would be curious as to how it is done. Such as any thrust vectoring
> methods that could be used in other designs and applications... That is how
> the discussion would not be military related. That is like saying you cannot
> talk about a V-2's liquid propulsion system because it is military and a
> weapon.

I definitely respect Ray's position on this... I completely understand his
concern that the list remain above suspicion with respect to certain issues.

On the other hand, I see Pax's point... researching and sharing what we can
about any previous rockets (gov't-space, military, commercial, or amateur)
for the purpose of our collective understanding of rocketry seems like it
might nevertheless be a licit topic. (We're not trying to design weapons here,
but to look at them and understand their techology... we're doing precisely
the _opposite_ of the sort of thing that regulatory and security agencies
would be concerned to prevent.)

I too am curious about "how do they make it fly like that, and why did
they make it do that?"... Ray, of course, has the final word here as to
whether this this is to be considered an appropriate topic, and I shall
respect his wishes if he wishes to bar it.

-dave w

>
> Paxton
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
> To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
> Sent: Thursday, August 23, 2001 5:16 PM
> Subject: Re: [AR] Tomahawk cruise missile
>
> > On Thu, 23 Aug 2001, Aaron Smith wrote:
> >
> > > Actually, this is a rocketry question
> > Yes, many weapons are also rockets.  However, this isn't especially an
> > _amateur_ rocketry question, in my opinion.  Maybe somebody can convince
> > me it is applicable to boost gliders or something.
> >
> > Ray
> >

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 10825 invoked from network); 27 Aug 2001 21:29:05 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 27 Aug 2001 21:29:05 -0000
Received: (qmail 11781 invoked by uid 50005); 27 Aug 2001 21:27:20 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpf with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 1.103518 secs); 27 Aug 2001 21:27:20 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 27 Aug 2001 21:27:18 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA22550; Mon, 27 Aug 2001 14:24:08 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 97903 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 27 Aug 2001 21:23:58          +0000
Received: from localhost (rcalkins@localhost) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with          ESMTP id OAA22535; Mon, 27 Aug 2001 14:23:56 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.LNX.4.10.10108271352450.22088-100000@itc.uci.edu>
Date:         Mon, 27 Aug 2001 14:23:56 -0700
Reply-To: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Tomahawk cruise missile
Comments: To: David Weinshenker <daze39@EARTHLINK.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <3B8AAB79.381790A3@earthlink.net>

David, other list members...

Thank you very much for the understanding.  It seems no sooner than I post
the "No Weapons" position on this thread, instructions for DIY AN booms
start popping up on the AN thread.

It's stuff like that which will get all of our fun shut down, at least in
the USA.

It never fails, when I bring up amateur rocketry in everyday conversation,
the first thing they ask me is about blowing stuff up.  If the Average Joe
cannot make the distinction, do you think Lawmakers will be able to
either?

This doesn't get into the grey area of classified material that surrounds
military systems.

Basically, when it comes to discussions on the list, remember everything
you write is being recorded.  And every word is being read by hundreds of
people you have never even heard of; maybe 10% of the list readers
actually post to the list.  Who knows how many of the messages are
forwarded to others outside the list.  About 3:1 based on web site server
logs this time last year.  When I posted a site update to the list, within
24 hours, I would see a spike in the server logs significantly greater
than the number of list subscribers.  Remember some of these readers will
be children and some will be adults with evil intent.  Please post
accordingly.

Sincerely,

Ray Calkins

> concern that the list remain above suspicion with respect to certain issues.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 16911 invoked from network); 27 Aug 2001 21:59:32 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 27 Aug 2001 21:59:32 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 31913 invoked by uid 50005); 27 Aug 2001 21:58:27 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd with qmail-scanner-1.00 (. Clean. Processed in 0.25716 secs); 27 Aug 2001 21:58:27 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 27 Aug 2001 21:58:27 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA22680; Mon, 27 Aug 2001 14:55:07 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 97918 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 27 Aug 2001 21:55:03          +0000
Received: from smtp004pub.verizon.net (smtp004pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.183])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA22665 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 27 Aug 2001 14:55:03 -0700
Received: from [63.27.97.83] (1Cust39.tnt2.san-bernardino.ca.da.uu.net          [63.27.97.39]) by smtp004pub.verizon.net  with ESMTP for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; id f7RLsRJ15238 Mon, 27 Aug 2001 16:54:28          -0500 (CDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: GTE/01rocket@mail.gte.net
References: <003101c12f26$333a3540$41391442@billbull>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <a05100305b7b071d42e5c@[63.27.97.83]>
Date:         Mon, 27 Aug 2001 14:54:26 -0700
Reply-To: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] AN Stability
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <003101c12f26$333a3540$41391442@billbull>

>Gregg Deputy asked:
>I'm curious.  If AP detonates easier than AN, why is AN used so commonly as
>a blasting agent?
>Why not AP?
>*******************************
>     Last week I bought 5# of AN at a feed store two blocks from my
>home. It cost me $1.65 + 8% sales tax for a total of $1.78. I bought
>it during my daily walk so there was no delivery charges.With a slug
>of used motor oil or, at most, 3 pints of diesel I can have 7# of
>explosives. How much does 5# of AP cost delivered to your home
>including the haz-mat fees?


About the lowest I can imagine is $55.


>     'Nuf said?
>Bill


--
Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
Opinion, the whole thing.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 5729 invoked from network); 27 Aug 2001 22:18:19 -0000
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 27 Aug 2001 22:18:19 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 9615 invoked by uid 50005); 27 Aug 2001 22:19:02 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpe with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 2.178101 secs); 27 Aug 2001 22:19:02 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 27 Aug 2001 22:18:58 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA22797; Mon, 27 Aug 2001 15:13:34 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 97936 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 27 Aug 2001 22:13:33          +0000
Received: from mailhost0.trib.com (mailhost0.trib.com [63.229.150.3]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA22781; Mon, 27 Aug 2001          15:13:32 -0700
Received: from mail.trib.com (mail.trib.com [12.10.158.17]) by          mailhost0.trib.com (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f7RMDV614247; Mon,          27 Aug 2001 16:13:31 -0600 (MDT) (envelope-from          jwckman@space-rockets.com)
Received: from [63.229.150.217] (HELO space-rockets.com) by mail.trib.com          (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 3.4.6) with ESMTP id 44225814; Mon, 27 Aug 2001          16:13:27 -0600
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.5 [en] (Win95; I)
X-Accept-Language: en,pdf
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <Pine.LNX.4.10.10108271352450.22088-100000@itc.uci.edu>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B8AC536.E7771F09@space-rockets.com>
Date:         Mon, 27 Aug 2001 16:10:01 -0600
Reply-To: <jwckman@space-rockets.com>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John H. Wickman" <jwckman@space-rockets.com>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Tomahawk cruise missile
Comments: To: Ray Calkins <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Ray,

Unless I'm missing something, the DIY AN explosive material posted is pretty much
common knowledge especially after the OK City bombing.   This information is
available from many public domain sources, even to school age children.

I totally disagree with you on that kind of thing will close down hobby.   What
will close down the hobby is hiding in a corner, totally afraid of the "fill in
the name of your choice" govt. agency and hoping they will not notice us and stay
away.   That approach was tried and failed miserably as noted by the excessive ATF
and FAA regulations.

John Wickman


Ray Calkins wrote:

> David, other list members...
>
> Thank you very much for the understanding.  It seems no sooner than I post
> the "No Weapons" position on this thread, instructions for DIY AN booms
> start popping up on the AN thread.
>
> It's stuff like that which will get all of our fun shut down, at least in
> the USA.
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 10416 invoked from network); 27 Aug 2001 22:19:26 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 27 Aug 2001 22:19:26 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 27081 invoked by uid 50005); 27 Aug 2001 22:18:53 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.149044 secs); 27 Aug 2001 22:18:53 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 27 Aug 2001 22:18:53 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA22750; Mon, 27 Aug 2001 15:08:30 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 97929 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 27 Aug 2001 22:08:24          +0000
Received: from omta05.mta.everyone.net (sitemail.everyone.net [216.200.145.35])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA22735 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 27 Aug 2001 15:08:24 -0700
Received: from sitemail.everyone.net (reports [216.200.145.62]) by          omta05.mta.everyone.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id AD4BC47FB4 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 27 Aug 2001 15:08:24 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by sitemail.everyone.net (Postfix, from userid 99) id 9EBE336F9; Mon,          27 Aug 2001 15:08:24 -0700 (PDT)
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: MIME-tools 5.41 (Entity 5.404)
X-Originating-IP: [202.67.125.199]
Message-ID:  <20010827220824.9EBE336F9@sitemail.everyone.net>
Date:         Mon, 27 Aug 2001 15:08:24 -0700
Reply-To: <blast_tech@techemail.com>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Mark Broadfoot" <blast_tech@techemail.com>
Subject:      [AR] AN debate
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

 What evertbody is missing here is that a booster/primer is used to RELIABLY detonate ANFO. This is of particular interest to mining/quarrying where the risk of a misfire means that there may be extremely expensive and time consuming - not to mention embarrassing - methods to clean this up.
 There was a recent case involving a teenager who recently packed a 25mm galvanised pipe with ANFO, sealed one end(perhaps a little too similar to a rocket?) and using a cigarette lighter(no detonator or booster/primer) ignited the open end. The 5 year old who was lost limbs in this incident probably isn't interested in hearing this community say that nothing should have happened.
 As has been mentioned BP has been milled in its mixed state reliably for many years.This does not present the same potential for damage that may occur if an experimental AN fuel were to explode. There is difficulty in saying what will detonate, how much heat or pressure is needed to detonate or what the potential explosive result may be.This is due to the simple fact that no one can know what each experimental fuel contains or how it is being used.This has to be done on a case by case basis.
 The other thing to look at is our terminology, expressing assurances as will or wont doesn't really do us justice.It can't be said that x propellant will not detonate but y propellant will - it should be said that x propellant has a 60% likelyhood of exploding and y a 5% likelyhood.
 What is important here is safety and knowing that it will only take one event where a life is lost or someone is badly injured may be all it takes for some of the more sensitive governments of our countries to shut amateur experimental rocketry down.
 This is only being posted so as to prevent injury not research.






==
                  Thanks
                  Mark Broadfoot

_____________________________________________________________
Are you a Techie? Get Your Free Tech Email Address Now! Visit http://www.TechEmail.com

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 12172 invoked from network); 27 Aug 2001 22:19:51 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 27 Aug 2001 22:19:51 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 32744 invoked by uid 50005); 27 Aug 2001 22:18:06 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpf with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.450305 secs); 27 Aug 2001 22:18:06 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 27 Aug 2001 22:18:05 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA22825; Mon, 27 Aug 2001 15:15:19 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 97943 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 27 Aug 2001 22:15:17          +0000
Received: from smtp007pub.verizon.net (smtp007pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.186])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA22810 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 27 Aug 2001 15:15:13 -0700
Received: from [63.27.97.83] (1Cust39.tnt2.san-bernardino.ca.da.uu.net          [63.27.97.39]) by smtp007pub.verizon.net  with ESMTP for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; id f7RMEb509734 Mon, 27 Aug 2001 17:14:41          -0500 (CDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: GTE/01rocket@mail.gte.net
References: <Pine.LNX.4.10.10108231614100.29934-100000@itc.uci.edu>            <008001c12c41$94c7c120$0100a8c0@prdise1.nm.home.com>            <3B8AAB79.381790A3@earthlink.net>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <a05100307b7b0756504bb@[63.27.97.83]>
Date:         Mon, 27 Aug 2001 15:14:35 -0700
Reply-To: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Tomahawk cruise missile
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <3B8AAB79.381790A3@earthlink.net>

>Pax wrote:
>>  I would be curious as to how it is done. Such as any thrust vectoring
>  > methods that could be used in other designs and applications...

Thrust vectoring can be done with off the shelf components such as
Tomahawk Cruise missile nozzles for about $25=35k each.  Above an
amateur's budget but within an orbital rocket budget where it is
required.

That system is designed for very steep angle manuvers so it can be
launched from a ship and the nozzle cants steeply so it initially
goes almost vertically despite a near horizontal angle of attack.
Once it reaches horizontal cruise speed the motor ejects off and the
jet takes over. Very complicated software algorithm to pull it off
but it works.  It is also the most energy efficient way to do it.

In the case of a vertical launch rocket the angles required to
maintain launch angle, even ballistic are 1/4 or less and even air
launched rockets such as Pegasus need only 1/2 the sweep angle at the
gimbaled nozzle.

Jerry

--
Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
Opinion, the whole thing.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 24516 invoked from network); 27 Aug 2001 22:30:24 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 27 Aug 2001 22:30:24 -0000
Received: (qmail 27584 invoked by uid 50005); 27 Aug 2001 22:29:19 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd with qmail-scanner-1.00 (. Clean. Processed in 0.114006 secs); 27 Aug 2001 22:29:19 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 27 Aug 2001 22:29:19 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA22936; Mon, 27 Aug 2001 15:25:43 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 97962 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 27 Aug 2001 22:25:11          +0000
Received: from localhost (rcalkins@localhost) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with          ESMTP id PAA22920; Mon, 27 Aug 2001 15:25:08 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.LNX.4.10.10108271521580.22865-100000@itc.uci.edu>
Date:         Mon, 27 Aug 2001 15:25:08 -0700
Reply-To: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Tomahawk cruise missile
Comments: To: "John H. Wickman" <jwckman@space-rockets.com>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <3B8AC536.E7771F09@space-rockets.com>

> Unless I'm missing something, the DIY AN explosive material posted is pretty much
> common knowledge especially after the OK City bombing.   This information is
> available from many public domain sources, even to school age children.
Then there is no need to repost it here.
It is NOT amateur rocketry.  Mechanics of AN detonation, with relevant
references are apropriate.  Stuff like "STP works best" isn't apropriate.

Respectfully,

Ray

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 10666 invoked from network); 27 Aug 2001 23:10:34 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 27 Aug 2001 23:10:34 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 3425 invoked by uid 50005); 27 Aug 2001 23:11:15 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpe with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.852487 secs); 27 Aug 2001 23:11:15 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 27 Aug 2001 23:11:14 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA23172; Mon, 27 Aug 2001 16:06:14 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 97986 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 27 Aug 2001 23:06:12          +0000
Received: from smtp004pub.verizon.net (smtp004pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.183])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA23157 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 27 Aug 2001 16:06:12 -0700
Received: from [63.27.97.83] (1Cust236.tnt2.san-bernardino.ca.da.uu.net          [63.27.97.236]) by smtp004pub.verizon.net  with ESMTP for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; id f7RN5eJ07319 Mon, 27 Aug 2001 18:05:40          -0500 (CDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: GTE/01rocket@mail.gte.net
References: <Pine.LNX.4.10.10108271352450.22088-100000@itc.uci.edu>            <3B8AC536.E7771F09@space-rockets.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <a05100308b7b080469333@[63.27.97.83]>
Date:         Mon, 27 Aug 2001 16:05:38 -0700
Reply-To: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Tomahawk cruise missile
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <3B8AC536.E7771F09@space-rockets.com>

>Wickman:



>will close down the hobby is hiding in a corner, totally afraid of
>the "fill in
>the name of your choice" govt. agency and hoping they will not
>notice us and stay
>away.   That approach was tried and failed miserably as noted by the
>excessive ATF
>and FAA regulations.

The issues we have with FAA and ATF and soon BLM are mostly caused by
Tripoli leadership calling them up, asking for rulings they are all
too eager to give conservatively, and by TRA taunting/sueing them
when they don't like the answers.

For 2 decades we (Jerry/USR/LTR) approached the authorities on a
cooperative basis and achieved widespread HPR access with NO state
regulations, no federal controls, full BLM support and only minor FAA
limitations, and almost NONE on super high performance rockets.

Life has changes and I can say without hesitation, thanks to Tripoli.

Ray is right, everything we say is saved, and that includes email
BTW, and even if it is encrypted, it is being sequentially decrypted
by NSA.  What we should do is KNOWING that, seek a public information
request for a copy of EVERYTHING, so we too can see who is getting
married, divorced, having babies, starting businesses and buying
fertilizer for purely civil and educational purposes.

And as for the military issue, unfortunately everything we discuss is
public and anything we post that was previously classified is public
now and nothing they can do about it due to 1st amendment rights.
That is one legit fear they (whoever they is) have.  The other is the
average arocket subscriber can do in his garage what Sadaam only
wishes he could do in his most advanced labs.

Stick that in your pipe and smoke it.  It is your right!

Jerry


--
Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
Opinion, the whole thing.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 26674 invoked from network); 27 Aug 2001 23:50:21 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 27 Aug 2001 23:50:21 -0000
Received: (qmail 7293 invoked by uid 50005); 27 Aug 2001 23:51:03 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpe with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 1.932381 secs); 27 Aug 2001 23:51:03 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 27 Aug 2001 23:50:58 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA23376; Mon, 27 Aug 2001 16:45:55 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 97996 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 27 Aug 2001 23:45:45          +0000
Received: from wrench.toolcity.net (root@wrench.toolcity.net [208.0.188.2]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA23361 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 27 Aug 2001 16:45:44 -0700
Received: from [208.11.233.241]          (dap-208-11-233-241.meadville-tnt-0.pa.toolcity.net [208.11.233.241])          by wrench.toolcity.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id TAA22911; Mon, 27          Aug 2001 19:45:38 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <v01510100b7b0986fb988@[208.22.189.179]>
Date:         Mon, 27 Aug 2001 19:48:00 -0500
Reply-To: "al bradley" <abradley@TOOLCITY.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "al bradley" <abradley@TOOLCITY.NET>
Subject:      [AR] 2Re: [AR] AN stability
Comments: To: John Dom <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

snip . . .

>Historically, I wonder if in the past (apart from the fuel/AN/TNT mentioned
>in the URL) AN has been used in ammo instead of KN.
>
>jd
_____

A short web search will give a number of references that show the military
uses of AN including -- Rocketry Propellant! I  have yet to go back and
study these. Soon.

Additionally, around WW1 I believe, that both the French and Germans had a
smokeless artillery propellant called "Ammonipulver"(sp?) which was largely
AN.

best regards,
al bradley

------------------------------------------------------------------
Can you live Life with this?: "Unless there is a law, an agreement, or a
long-standing custom, No one `Deserves' Anything -- Either Good or Bad!"

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 20313 invoked from network); 28 Aug 2001 00:38:03 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 28 Aug 2001 00:38:03 -0000
Received: (qmail 15298 invoked by uid 50005); 28 Aug 2001 00:36:17 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpf with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.399617 secs); 28 Aug 2001 00:36:17 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 28 Aug 2001 00:36:17 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA23575; Mon, 27 Aug 2001 17:31:36 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 98026 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 28 Aug 2001 00:30:31          +0000
Received: from wrench.toolcity.net (root@wrench.toolcity.net [208.0.188.2]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA23559 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 27 Aug 2001 17:30:30 -0700
Received: from [208.11.233.241]          (dap-208-11-233-241.meadville-tnt-0.pa.toolcity.net [208.11.233.241])          by wrench.toolcity.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id UAA10208; Mon, 27          Aug 2001 20:30:21 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <v01510101b7b09b6b6cf2@[208.11.233.241]>
Date:         Mon, 27 Aug 2001 20:32:43 -0500
Reply-To: "al bradley" <abradley@TOOLCITY.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "al bradley" <abradley@TOOLCITY.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] 4[AR] A non-ignition physical test for grain??]
Comments: To: James Yawn <jyawn@SFCC.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

>In short, a 106-gram sample of candy was formed into a roughly spherical ball
>and allowed to cool.  It was wrapped with one layer of plastic food-wrap, and
>dropped from measured heights onto a concrete slab.  Dropped from three feet,
>it bounced with no apparent damage.  Dropped from five feet, it received a
>small "spall" fracture.  Dropped from seven feet, it broke into several
>pieces.  Perhaps I have observed some of the brittleness that Jerry Irvine
>mentioned.
>
>So now I guess I should get out my math books and figure out how much energy it
>took to cause this structural failure, and what that means for a rocket
>engine.
--------------

>----- Original Message -----
>From: Phil Bellmore <pfish@catfishdesigns.com>
>To: al bradley <abradley@TOOLCITY.NET>
>Sent: Monday, August 27, 2001 6:31 AM
>Subject: Re: [AR] 2Re: [AR] A non-ignition physical test for grain??]
>
>
>> v = v(0) + a t
>>
>> where,
>>
>> v(0) = 10.6 fps (approx 7 mph)
>> v = 0 fps
>> t = .0052 ft/10.6 fps = 4.9135 e-4 s
>>
>> a = (v - v(0))/t
>> a = -10.6 f/s / 4.9135e-4 s
>> a = 21,607 f/s2
>> or
>> a = 671 Gs

Hi again Jimmy,
Were you as surprised as I (assuming Phil B. is right) that an item dropped
from 10 feet against a hard surface would have 671 G's???

I do have a small doubt around your drop test. If you used a spherical ball
of propellant for the test the breakage may have been exaggerated over than
if you had used a small cylinder of propellant that landed squarely on its
end. The latter might have less "freakish" internal stresses.

Anyhow, I doubt if a small rocket with a 1 or 2 second burn would come
anywhere near 671 G's of acceleration. Plus the grain would probably be
better supported in the rocket.

Modified test to get a better idea if a candy cylinder striking end first
would hold up better ?? -- First thing that comes to mind is to provide a
1/32" hole axially through the sample and drop it down  a taut, lightly
oiled or waxed wire held in a vertical plane.

I am glad that you are willing to take time to do the testing that you
have. Recorded tests tell us a lot more than any speculation. Are you
keeping track of the ambient and sample temperatures too?

best regards,
al bradley

------------------------------------------------------------------
Can you live Life with this?: "Unless there is a law, an agreement, or a
long-standing custom, No one `Deserves' Anything -- Either Good or Bad!"

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 11440 invoked from network); 28 Aug 2001 01:03:28 -0000
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 28 Aug 2001 01:03:28 -0000
Received: (qmail 28624 invoked by uid 50005); 28 Aug 2001 01:01:42 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpf with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 3.451454 secs); 28 Aug 2001 01:01:42 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 28 Aug 2001 01:01:35 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA23838; Mon, 27 Aug 2001 17:59:33 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 98050 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 28 Aug 2001 00:59:23          +0000
Received: from cablecom.laribay.net (cablecom.laribay.net [66.20.57.4]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA23823 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 27 Aug 2001 17:59:23 -0700
Received: from billbull (dial065.laribay.net [66.20.57.65]) by          cablecom.laribay.net (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id TAA13513 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 27 Aug 2001 19:41:18 -0500 (CDT)          (envelope-from bpbullock@laribay.net)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0BE5_01C56B69.4CA30F60"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <002f01c12f5c$e0499560$41391442@billbull>
Date:         Mon, 27 Aug 2001 20:00:22 -0500
Reply-To: "Bill Bullock" <bpbullock@LARIBAY.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Bill Bullock" <bpbullock@LARIBAY.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Tomahawk cruise missile
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0BE5_01C56B69.4CA30F60
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

. " Stuff like "STP works best" isn't apropriate.

Respectfully,

Ray"
*************************************
List-Mates:
    I am 62 years old so I am old, senile, fat, bald, ugly as sin and I =
no longer see too well. So will someone please look at the attached copy =
of what I wrote and tell me where I placed this quoted phrase? Also, who =
edited out the other ingredients, their proportions and the instructions =
for manufacturing this stuff?
    Respectfully returning to my cave,
Bill
**************************************  =20
    Being an expert by no means, I however do have some experience in =
this filed courtesy of the USMC. I also have blown up more than my share =
of motors over the years.
    Ammonium Perchlorate, Potassium Perchlorate and Ammonium Nitrate =
(AP/PP/AN) are all relatively acceptable explosive components.
     "Sensitized Ammonium Nitrate" (ANFO) is extremely stable and =
requires, in most instances, an "initiator" in order to propagate an =
explosive reaction. ANFO has a propagation speed on the order of =
approximately 2500 m/sec. placing it in the lower-power category. (60% =
dynamite is 5,800 m/sec., TNT 6700 m/sec., C-4 8200 m/sec., for =
comparison)This propagation speed can be increased by the inclusion of =
nitromethane and/or other chemicals, which is what Mr. McVey, et. al., =
did in Oklahoma City.
    ANFO is preferred in many cases due to its stability, economy and =
ease of manufacture. But the other two oxidizers we use daily are just =
as acceptable...and as dangerous. At elevated temperatures and/or =
pressures they to will detonate.
    Sutton, in his Rocket Propulsion Elements (chapter 10/page 282, =
1949...it's old like me) discusses that all solid propellants have an =
upper chamber pressure limit at which they will detonate. He =
states,"This pressure is very high for most [emphasis mine] propellants =
(above 6000 pounds per square inch)." Temperature and internal acoustic =
shock waves facilitate and promote this reaction. (The 6000 psi "limit" =
is one reason I work mostly at 1500-2500 psi chamber pressures.)
    As a point of interest I would point out that one of the "hasty =
expedient" plastiques taught to me was AP/KNO3/AN (whatever was =
available) + powdered aluminum + S.T.P Oil Treatment. It requires a #8 =
detonator cap to initiate the explosion. The Oxidizer/AL mixture sound =
familiar to anyone on list?
    Yes, experimental rocketry can be dangerous. No, I will not quit: =
the more you know and learn the more safely you can conduct yourself and =
your hobby.
    Respectfully,
Bill
   =20



------=_NextPart_000_0BE5_01C56B69.4CA30F60
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META content=3D"text/html; charset=3Diso-8859-1" =
http-equiv=3DContent-Type>
<META content=3D"MSHTML 5.00.2614.3500" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV>.&nbsp;" Stuff like "STP works best" isn't=20
apropriate.<BR><BR>Respectfully,<BR><BR>Ray"</DIV>
<DIV>*************************************</DIV>
<DIV>List-Mates:</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; I am 62 years old so I am old, senile, fat, =
bald, ugly=20
as sin and I no longer see too well. So will someone please look at the =
attached=20
copy of what I wrote and tell me where I placed this quoted phrase? =
Also, who=20
edited out the other ingredients, their proportions and the instructions =
for=20
manufacturing this stuff?</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Respectfully returning to my cave,</DIV>
<DIV>Bill</DIV>
<DIV>**************************************&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<BR>&nbsp;&n=
bsp;&nbsp;=20
Being an expert by no means, I however do have some experience in this =
filed=20
courtesy of the USMC. I also have blown up more than my share of motors =
over the=20
years.</DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Ammonium Perchlorate, Potassium Perchlorate and =
Ammonium=20
Nitrate (AP/PP/AN) are all relatively acceptable explosive =
components.</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; "Sensitized Ammonium Nitrate" (ANFO) is =
extremely=20
stable and requires, in most instances, an "initiator" in order to =
propagate an=20
explosive reaction. ANFO&nbsp;has a propagation speed on the order of=20
approximately 2500 m/sec. placing it in the lower-power category. (60% =
dynamite=20
is 5,800 m/sec., TNT 6700 m/sec., C-4 8200 m/sec., for=20
comparison)This&nbsp;propagation speed can be increased by the inclusion =
of=20
nitromethane and/or other chemicals, which is what Mr. McVey, et. al., =
did in=20
Oklahoma City.</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; ANFO is preferred in many cases due to its =
stability,=20
economy and ease of manufacture. But the other two oxidizers we use =
daily are=20
just as acceptable...and as dangerous. At elevated temperatures and/or =
pressures=20
they to will detonate.</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Sutton, in his <U>Rocket Propulsion Elements</U> =

(chapter 10/page 282, 1949...it's old like me) discusses that all solid=20
propellants have an upper chamber pressure limit at which they will =
detonate. He=20
states,"This pressure is very high for <EM><U>most</U></EM> [emphasis =
mine]=20
propellants (above 6000 pounds per square inch)." Temperature and =
internal=20
acoustic shock waves facilitate and promote this reaction. (The 6000 psi =
"limit"=20
is&nbsp;one reason I work mostly at 1500-2500 psi chamber =
pressures.)</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; As a point of interest I would point out that =
one of the=20
"hasty expedient" plastiques taught to me was AP/KNO3/AN (whatever was=20
available) + powdered aluminum + S.T.P Oil Treatment. It requires a #8 =
detonator=20
cap to initiate the explosion. The Oxidizer/AL mixture sound familiar to =
anyone=20
on list?</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Yes, experimental rocketry can be dangerous. No, =
I will=20
not quit: the more you know and learn the more safely you can conduct =
yourself=20
and your hobby.</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Respectfully,</DIV>
<DIV>Bill</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; </DIV><BR></DIV></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0BE5_01C56B69.4CA30F60--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 24192 invoked from network); 28 Aug 2001 03:09:09 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 28 Aug 2001 03:09:09 -0000
Received: (qmail 2926 invoked by uid 50005); 28 Aug 2001 03:08:37 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.123759 secs); 28 Aug 2001 03:08:37 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 28 Aug 2001 03:08:36 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA24250; Mon, 27 Aug 2001 19:55:58 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 98102 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 28 Aug 2001 02:55:47          +0000
Received: from swan.mail.pas.earthlink.net (swan.mail.pas.earthlink.net          [207.217.120.123]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id          TAA24235 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 27 Aug 2001 19:55:47 -0700
Received: from scottje (1Cust26.tnt1.holman.wi.da.uu.net [63.20.200.26]) by          swan.mail.pas.earthlink.net (EL-8_9_3_3/8.9.3) with SMTP id TAA15900          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 27 Aug 2001 19:55:46 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0BE8_01C56B69.4CA30F60"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <002001c12f65$7721f100$f072fea9@scottje>
Date:         Mon, 27 Aug 2001 22:02:16 -0400
Reply-To: "Scott & Jeanette" <frazer2001@EARTHLINK.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Scott & Jeanette" <frazer2001@EARTHLINK.NET>
Subject:      [AR] Rocket Construction Forum
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0BE8_01C56B69.4CA30F60
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Does anyone know of a good forum for rocket construction techniques?  I =
have some composite projects going on and need some assistance.

Thanks

Scott

------=_NextPart_000_0BE8_01C56B69.4CA30F60
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Diso-8859-1">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 5.50.4611.1300" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Does anyone know of a good forum for =
rocket=20
construction techniques?&nbsp; I have some composite projects going on =
and need=20
some assistance.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Thanks</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Scott</FONT></DIV></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0BE8_01C56B69.4CA30F60--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 28937 invoked from network); 28 Aug 2001 04:35:16 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 28 Aug 2001 04:35:16 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 26498 invoked by uid 50005); 28 Aug 2001 04:34:44 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 1.425014 secs); 28 Aug 2001 04:34:44 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 28 Aug 2001 04:34:41 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA24569; Mon, 27 Aug 2001 21:16:41 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 98143 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 28 Aug 2001 04:16:32          +0000
Received: from dns2.seanet.com (dns2.seanet.com [199.181.164.2]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA24550 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon,          27 Aug 2001 21:16:32 -0700
Received: from seanet.com (ssstolt.seanet.com [204.182.68.23]) by          dns2.seanet.com (8.11.6/8.11.5) with ESMTP id f7S4GTb22404; Mon, 27          Aug 2001 21:16:29 -0700 (PDT)
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.73 [en] (Win98; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <Pine.LNX.4.10.10108271352450.22088-100000@itc.uci.edu>            <3B8AC536.E7771F09@space-rockets.com>            <a05100308b7b080469333@[63.27.97.83]>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B8B197D.5BBDB5B3@seanet.com>
Date:         Mon, 27 Aug 2001 21:09:33 -0700
Reply-To: "Sherwood Stolt" <ssstolt@SEANET.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Sherwood Stolt" <ssstolt@SEANET.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Tomahawk cruise missile
Comments: cc: Jerry Irvine <01rocket@GTE.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Jerry Irvine wrote:
...

> And as for the military issue, unfortunately everything we discuss is
> public and anything we post that was previously classified is public
> now and nothing they can do about it due to 1st amendment rights.
> That is one legit fear they (whoever they is) have.

Nice theory and maybe you would eventually convince some court
you are right but that's not how the ITAR reads.  The ITAR specifically
lists types of public release (such as a book) but specifically leaves
out posting to an e-mail list and other on line distribution.
Repeating something that someone else posted inappropriately
leaves you in violation of the ITAR even if it is not classified
and even if the original 20 year old source material predates
the ITAR and is not marked as export restricted.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 3098 invoked from network); 28 Aug 2001 05:07:09 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 28 Aug 2001 05:07:09 -0000
Received: (qmail 3959 invoked by uid 50005); 28 Aug 2001 05:06:02 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd with qmail-scanner-1.00 (. Clean. Processed in 0.1279 secs); 28 Aug 2001 05:06:02 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 28 Aug 2001 05:06:02 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA24683; Mon, 27 Aug 2001 21:51:47 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 98154 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 28 Aug 2001 04:51:44          +0000
Received: from femail11.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail11.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.0.95.107]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA24668          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 27 Aug 2001 21:51:44 -0700
Received: from hal2001 ([24.77.53.16]) by femail11.sdc1.sfba.home.com          (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20 201-229-121-120-20010223) with SMTP id          <20010828045142.VNDD2471.femail11.sdc1.sfba.home.com@hal2001>; Mon,          27 Aug 2001 21:51:42 -0700
References:  <002001c12f65$7721f100$f072fea9@scottje>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <006101c12f7b$fc9e4c00$0400a8c0@hatjs>
Date:         Mon, 27 Aug 2001 21:43:30 -0700
Reply-To: "Jamie Morken" <jmorken@HOME.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jamie Morken" <jmorken@HOME.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Rocket Construction Forum
Comments: To: Scott & Jeanette <frazer2001@EARTHLINK.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Hi Scott,

>Does anyone know of a good forum for rocket construction techniques?  I
have some composite projects going on and need some assistance.

I don't remember the last time a question went unaswered on AROCKET, so this
is probably a good forum :)
Should be educational to hear about your project!

best regards,
Jamie

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 8958 invoked from network); 28 Aug 2001 06:26:05 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 28 Aug 2001 06:26:05 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 4995 invoked by uid 50005); 28 Aug 2001 06:24:58 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd with qmail-scanner-1.00 (. Clean. Processed in 0.198022 secs); 28 Aug 2001 06:24:58 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 28 Aug 2001 06:24:58 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA25047; Mon, 27 Aug 2001 23:21:06 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 98195 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 28 Aug 2001 06:21:01          +0000
Received: from imo-m04.mx.aol.com (imo-m04.mx.aol.com [64.12.136.7]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA25031 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Mon, 27 Aug 2001 23:21:00 -0700
Received: from Tjpoulton@aol.com by imo-m04.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v31_r1.4.) id          w.66.139a37f7 (16790) for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Tue, 28 Aug 2001          02:20:48 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: AOL 5.0 for Windows sub 138
Message-ID:  <66.139a37f7.28bc923f@aol.com>
Date:         Tue, 28 Aug 2001 02:20:47 EDT
Reply-To: <Tjpoulton@AOL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <Tjpoulton@AOL.COM>
Subject:      [AR] liquids question: alcohol/N2O propellant feeding
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

I'm considering switching from LOX to N2O in the liquid rocket design I'm
working on.  N2O has quite a number of advantages, especially for a
first-time liquids person such as myself.  One of these advantages, of
course, is self-pressurization.  The problem is that fuels don't self
pressurize.  So, the fuel tank must be actively pressurized using either a
separate inert gas system (way too complicated for a rocket this size) or the
nitrous oxide itself (much easier).  The problem is that, obviously, ethanol
and nitrous oxide react with each other.  That's the whole point of using
them.  The designs I've seen for similar engines use a piston with O-ring
seals in the alcohol tank.  The alcohol is on one side, gaseous N2O
pressurant on the other.  My question is this:  exactly how bad of an idea is
it to use N2O gas to directly pressurize an alcohol tank, without separating
the two chemicals?  Is the initial compression likely to cause ignition?  Has
this been done successfully (or unsuccessfully) before?  I will use a piston
if I have to, but it would be much simpler and lighter to avoid it.
Mike P.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 15996 invoked from network); 28 Aug 2001 06:53:29 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 28 Aug 2001 06:53:29 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 15269 invoked by uid 50005); 28 Aug 2001 06:51:43 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpf with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.128735 secs); 28 Aug 2001 06:51:43 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 28 Aug 2001 06:51:43 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA25204; Mon, 27 Aug 2001 23:44:58 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 98208 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 28 Aug 2001 06:44:56          +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (f5.law15.hotmail.com [64.4.23.5]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA25189 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Mon,          27 Aug 2001 23:44:56 -0700
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Mon,          27 Aug 2001 23:44:26 -0700
Received: from 193.121.251.246 by lw15fd.law15.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Tue,          28 Aug 2001 06:44:25 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [193.121.251.246]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 28 Aug 2001 06:44:26.0204 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[E120E1C0:01C12F8C]
Message-ID:  <F57jtrSByh133tYwlib00003cda@hotmail.com>
Date:         Tue, 28 Aug 2001 06:44:56 +0000
Reply-To: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] liquids question: alcohol/N2O propellant feeding
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

MP wrote:

>N2O has quite a number of advantages, especially for a
>first-time liquids person such as myself.  One of these advantages, of
>course, is self-pressurization.  The problem is that fuels don't self
>pressurize.

If you like self-pressurizing propellants why not chose a fuel type that is
also? Like, say, propane, butane? I do not know if both react hypergolically
with N2O. Er, I don't think so.

A disadvantage with self-pressurizing propellants is the required reservoir
wall thinkness & resulting system weight, no?

jd

_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 643 invoked from network); 28 Aug 2001 07:12:03 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 28 Aug 2001 07:12:03 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 21312 invoked by uid 50005); 28 Aug 2001 07:12:43 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpe with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.195753 secs); 28 Aug 2001 07:12:43 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 28 Aug 2001 07:12:43 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA25313; Tue, 28 Aug 2001 00:08:06 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 98228 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 28 Aug 2001 07:08:03          +0000
Received: from idsoftware.com (predator.idsoftware.com [192.246.40.34]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA25298 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Tue, 28 Aug 2001 00:08:03 -0700
Received: from [192.246.40.144] (account johnc HELO pluto.idsoftware.com) by          idsoftware.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 3.4.7) with ESMTP id 360103 for          AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 28 Aug 2001 02:08:02 -0500
X-Sender: johnc@mail.idsoftware.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <4.3.1.2.20010828021904.02fe1e50@mail.idsoftware.com>
Date:         Tue, 28 Aug 2001 02:20:59 -0500
Reply-To: "John Carmack" <johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Carmack" <johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] liquids question: alcohol/N2O propellant feeding
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <F57jtrSByh133tYwlib00003cda@hotmail.com>

At 06:44 AM 8/28/2001 +0000, you wrote:
>MP wrote:
>
>>N2O has quite a number of advantages, especially for a
>>first-time liquids person such as myself.  One of these advantages, of
>>course, is self-pressurization.  The problem is that fuels don't self
>>pressurize.
>
>If you like self-pressurizing propellants why not chose a fuel type that is
>also? Like, say, propane, butane? I do not know if both react hypergolically
>with N2O. Er, I don't think so.

Or ethane, which has a vapor pressure much closer to N2O.

>A disadvantage with self-pressurizing propellants is the required reservoir
>wall thinkness & resulting system weight, no?
>
>jd

I don't think any amateur has launched a rocket that is tank mass
dominated, so I don't think that is much of a concern yet.

John Carmack

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 2599 invoked from network); 28 Aug 2001 07:12:54 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 28 Aug 2001 07:12:54 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 327 invoked by uid 50005); 28 Aug 2001 07:11:08 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpf with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.164246 secs); 28 Aug 2001 07:11:08 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 28 Aug 2001 07:11:08 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA25338; Tue, 28 Aug 2001 00:09:30 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 98235 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 28 Aug 2001 07:09:29          +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (f173.law15.hotmail.com [64.4.23.173]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA25316 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Tue, 28 Aug 2001 00:09:20 -0700
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Tue,          28 Aug 2001 00:08:50 -0700
Received: from 193.121.251.246 by lw15fd.law15.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Tue,          28 Aug 2001 07:08:49 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [193.121.251.246]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 28 Aug 2001 07:08:50.0101 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[49ADD650:01C12F90]
Message-ID:  <F173dtdCV5dQ0hMqiaT00004bd0@hotmail.com>
Date:         Tue, 28 Aug 2001 07:09:29 +0000
Reply-To: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] AN melt
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Quote JW:

>The AN melt is very reactive with metals, woods and plastic
>resins so you have to really be careful.  It will autoignite with many
>things...   I have thought about sugar and AN for a couple of years

Concrete question, AN melts at 170C: does the melt auto-ignite (or
detonate) at, say 180 C after mixing it with, molten candy? Eventually
under a nitrogen blanket. Could be tested with gram amounts first.

That 'd offer a very homogenous block of propellant after solidification I
'd expect.

But: I fear very much such approach is too risky, at least for amateurs, no?

jd



_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 19859 invoked from network); 28 Aug 2001 07:18:31 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 28 Aug 2001 07:18:31 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 29510 invoked by uid 50005); 28 Aug 2001 07:16:27 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 2.645533 secs); 28 Aug 2001 07:16:27 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 28 Aug 2001 07:16:21 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA25371; Tue, 28 Aug 2001 00:13:21 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 98223 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 28 Aug 2001 07:13:19          +0000
Received: from albatross.prod.itd.earthlink.net          (albatross.mail.pas.earthlink.net [207.217.120.120]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA25276 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue,          28 Aug 2001 00:03:19 -0700
Received: from earthlink.net (dialup-209.245.134.238.Dial1.SanJose1.Level3.net          [209.245.134.238]) by albatross.prod.itd.earthlink.net          (EL-8_9_3_3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id AAA25688; Tue, 28 Aug 2001 00:03:18          -0700 (PDT)
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.75 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.16-22 i686)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <66.139a37f7.28bc923f@aol.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B8B4280.39EC3D7D@earthlink.net>
Date:         Tue, 28 Aug 2001 00:04:32 -0700
Reply-To: "David Weinshenker" <daze39@EARTHLINK.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "David Weinshenker" <daze39@EARTHLINK.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] liquids question: alcohol/N2O propellant feeding
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Tjpoulton@AOL.COM wrote:
> exactly how bad of an idea is
> it to use N2O gas to directly pressurize an alcohol tank, without separating
> the two chemicals?  Is the initial compression likely to cause ignition?  Has
> this been done successfully (or unsuccessfully) before?  I will use a piston
> if I have to, but it would be much simpler and lighter to avoid it.

Hmmm.... I've wondered this myself... on the one hand, it's probably safer than
using oxygen (Goddard's explosion rate went way down, so I hear, when he started
using nitrogen - instead of GOX vapor from the liquid oxygen - to pressurize the
gasoline fuel...) because it isn't a very active oxidizer until decomposed by heat.
On the other hand, the piston does not need to add much mass, since it sees equal
pressure on both sides... a thin diaphragm or flexible metal bellows might serve
as well as a solid piston.

-dave w

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 18711 invoked from network); 28 Aug 2001 07:29:46 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 28 Aug 2001 07:29:46 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 379 invoked by uid 50005); 28 Aug 2001 07:28:39 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd with qmail-scanner-1.00 (. Clean. Processed in 0.560705 secs); 28 Aug 2001 07:28:39 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 28 Aug 2001 07:28:38 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA25425; Tue, 28 Aug 2001 00:23:14 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 98248 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 28 Aug 2001 07:23:10          +0000
Received: from smtp002pub.verizon.net (smtp002pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.181])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA25410 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 28 Aug 2001 00:23:09 -0700
Received: from [63.10.189.152] (1Cust152.tnt2.hilo.hi.da.uu.net          [63.10.189.152]) by smtp002pub.verizon.net  with ESMTP for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; id f7S7MbI24720 Tue, 28 Aug 2001 02:22:37          -0500 (CDT)
X-Sender: ttocs@mail.gte.net
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <l03130300b7ad028e5e1b@[63.10.189.219]>
Date:         Fri, 24 Aug 2001 21:22:40 -1000
Reply-To: "Aaron Smith" <ttocs@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Aaron Smith" <ttocs@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] liquids question: alcohol/N2O propellant feeding
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <F57jtrSByh133tYwlib00003cda@hotmail.com>

At 6:44 AM +0000 8/28/01, John Dom wrote:
>MP wrote:
>
>>N2O has quite a number of advantages, especially for a
>>first-time liquids person such as myself.  One of these advantages, of
>>course, is self-pressurization.  The problem is that fuels don't self
>>pressurize.
>
>If you like self-pressurizing propellants why not chose a fuel type that is
>also? Like, say, propane, butane? I do not know if both react hypergolically
>with N2O. Er, I don't think so.
>
>A disadvantage with self-pressurizing propellants is the required reservoir
>wall thinkness & resulting system weight, no?

As it is with all pressurant systems...

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 29733 invoked from network); 28 Aug 2001 08:11:37 -0000
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 28 Aug 2001 08:11:37 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 17129 invoked by uid 50005); 28 Aug 2001 08:12:17 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpe with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.218291 secs); 28 Aug 2001 08:12:17 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 28 Aug 2001 08:12:17 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id BAA25555; Tue, 28 Aug 2001 01:06:39 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 98259 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 28 Aug 2001 08:06:36          +0000
Received: from imo-d06.mx.aol.com (imo-d06.mx.aol.com [205.188.157.38]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id BAA25540 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Tue, 28 Aug 2001 01:06:36 -0700
Received: from Tjpoulton@aol.com by imo-d06.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v31_r1.4.) id          w.61.12a1279f (3976) for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Tue, 28 Aug 2001          04:06:30 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: AOL 5.0 for Windows sub 138
Message-ID:  <61.12a1279f.28bcab06@aol.com>
Date:         Tue, 28 Aug 2001 04:06:30 EDT
Reply-To: <Tjpoulton@AOL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <Tjpoulton@AOL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] liquids question: alcohol/N2O propellant feeding
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

> If you like self-pressurizing propellants why not chose a fuel type that is
>  also? Like, say, propane, butane? I do not know if both react
hypergolically
>  with N2O. Er, I don't think so.
>

AFAIK, no normal fuels are hypergolic with N2O under normal conditions, i.e.
you can't rely on them to self-ignite in the chamber.  However, the adiabatic
compression of pressurization might change things a bit...  The problem with
propane and butane is that they have the disadvantages of self-pressurization
(non-atmospheric storage and transfer) without the main advantage
(self-feeding).  The vapor pressures are too low for reasonable chamber
pressures.  Self-pressurizing fuels aren't as safe to handle as N2O, either,
since venting to the atmosphere can create serious fire hazards.

>  A disadvantage with self-pressurizing propellants is the required reservoir
>  wall thinkness & resulting system weight, no?

It's probably lighter than an equivalent pressure-fed system using an inert
gas, since it eliminates the extra tank and associated equipment.  Weight
isn't too much of a concern here, though -- I'll be happy if I get this first
attempt at a liquid to fly at all.
Mike P.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 29716 invoked from network); 28 Aug 2001 08:34:22 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 28 Aug 2001 08:34:22 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 18783 invoked by uid 50005); 28 Aug 2001 08:33:49 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.341722 secs); 28 Aug 2001 08:33:49 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 28 Aug 2001 08:33:48 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id BAA25669; Tue, 28 Aug 2001 01:26:23 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 98284 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 28 Aug 2001 08:26:18          +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (f128.law15.hotmail.com [64.4.23.128]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id BAA25654 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Tue, 28 Aug 2001 01:26:18 -0700
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Tue,          28 Aug 2001 01:25:48 -0700
Received: from 193.121.251.246 by lw15fd.law15.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Tue,          28 Aug 2001 08:25:47 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [193.121.251.246]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 28 Aug 2001 08:25:48.0446 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[0A6D5BE0:01C12F9B]
Message-ID:  <F128DnY9vG4yBt9tmFb000089ba@hotmail.com>
Date:         Tue, 28 Aug 2001 08:26:18 +0000
Reply-To: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] liquids question: alcohol/N2O propellant feeding
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

> >A disadvantage with self-pressurizing propellants is the required
>reservoir
> >wall thinkness & resulting system weight, no?

AS wrote:

>As it is with all pressurant systems...

Yep, but need not be as high as N2O vapor pressures though. The dumb booster
OTRAG machines flew kerosine/NA with only 15 bar in their tanks. Which
proved sufficient. Their tanks were made of 0.3 mm (or was it 0.4 mm?)
thickness stainless welded tubing sections.

jd



_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 23077 invoked from network); 28 Aug 2001 08:43:58 -0000
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 28 Aug 2001 08:43:58 -0000
Received: (qmail 18124 invoked by uid 50005); 28 Aug 2001 08:44:39 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpe with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.254642 secs); 28 Aug 2001 08:44:39 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 28 Aug 2001 08:44:38 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id BAA25726; Tue, 28 Aug 2001 01:34:01 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 98295 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 28 Aug 2001 08:33:59          +0000
Received: from femail18.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail18.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.0.95.145]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id BAA25711          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 28 Aug 2001 01:33:59 -0700
Received: from hal2001 ([24.77.53.16]) by femail18.sdc1.sfba.home.com          (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20 201-229-121-120-20010223) with SMTP id          <20010828083353.XHVJ5652.femail18.sdc1.sfba.home.com@hal2001>; Tue,          28 Aug 2001 01:33:53 -0700
References:  <F173dtdCV5dQ0hMqiaT00004bd0@hotmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <001501c12f9b$07718100$0400a8c0@hatjs>
Date:         Tue, 28 Aug 2001 01:25:42 -0700
Reply-To: "Jamie Morken" <jmorken@HOME.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jamie Morken" <jmorken@HOME.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] AN melt
Comments: To: John Dom <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Hi all,

> Concrete question, AN melts at 170C: does the melt auto-ignite (or
> detonate) at, say 180 C after mixing it with, molten candy? Eventually
> under a nitrogen blanket. Could be tested with gram amounts first.

Molten icing sugar is at a higher temperature than 180C so would be a bad
idea to mix with molten AN I think.
Sorbitol melts below 180C so would be possible but would be a bit dangerous
I think.

As John Wickman said:
>We use AN-based propellants in our work.   To make our PSAN, we take tech.
grade AN and melt it down.   We work with the AN melt, adding zinc oxide and
other ingredients.   There are reactions taking place so it is critical to
work
with it under control conditions, particularly temperature.   We do not
expose
it to oil or carbon based materials.   The process is fairly labor intensive
to
do it safely.   The AN melt is very reactive with metals, woods and plastic
resins so you have to really be careful.  It will autoignite with many
things

In a rocket is the rapid decomposing danger minimal since typically only the
surface of the propellant is hot and it is on its way out the nozzle pretty
quick anyway?


Here is some experimenting we did with AN:

A while back we mixed powdered fertilizer grade AN with icing sugar and
packed it into one of our small steel rocket motor cases.  Even with a high
Kn ratio the stuff burned VERY slowly and left a lot of oily residue.  I was
a bit worried about the nozzle getting clogged up with all of the goo
(thought about that variable half way through the test :)

We also did tests with uncontained AN/icing sugar in various mix ratios and
never got a reasonable sustained burn.  With a bit of KNO3 added, or the
constant application of a blow torch flame, it did burn sustainably with
lots of residue though.  The molten mix looks pretty cool when it is burning
uncontained with icing sugar btw.

Has anyone got AN based propellant working well (without magnesium)?

Has anyone considered using liquid AN as an oxidizer for a hybrid or liquid
biprop engine?  If the decomposition/detonation hazards were reduced ~180C+
seems like a more reasonable temperature than liquid oxyen's -183C !

I think it is good to know as much as possible about the materials you are
working with to keep rocket design reasonably safe!  This includes the
detonation properties of different materials.  I would hate to know I tested
a motor that could have detonated without taking proper precautions (I guess
this is why the list experts know about detonation)

best regards,
Jamie

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 8874 invoked from network); 28 Aug 2001 09:23:19 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 28 Aug 2001 09:23:19 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 25578 invoked by uid 50005); 28 Aug 2001 09:23:59 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpe with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.139169 secs); 28 Aug 2001 09:23:59 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 28 Aug 2001 09:23:58 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id CAA25873; Tue, 28 Aug 2001 02:16:04 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 98318 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 28 Aug 2001 09:15:57          +0000
Received: from smtp007pub.verizon.net (smtp007pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.186])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id CAA25858 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 28 Aug 2001 02:15:57 -0700
Received: from [63.10.189.131] (1Cust68.tnt2.hilo.hi.da.uu.net [63.10.189.68])          by smtp007pub.verizon.net  with ESMTP ; id f7S9FN515125 Tue, 28 Aug          2001 04:15:24 -0500 (CDT)
X-Sender: ttocs@mail.gte.net
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <l03130300b7ad1b0c1f44@[63.10.189.131]>
Date:         Fri, 24 Aug 2001 23:15:01 -1000
Reply-To: "Aaron Smith" <ttocs@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Aaron Smith" <ttocs@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] liquids question: alcohol/N2O propellant feeding
Comments: To: John Dom <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <F128DnY9vG4yBt9tmFb000089ba@hotmail.com>

At 8:26 AM +0000 8/28/01, John Dom wrote:
>> >A disadvantage with self-pressurizing propellants is the required
>>reservoir
>> >wall thinkness & resulting system weight, no?
>
>AS wrote:
>
>>As it is with all pressurant systems...
>
>Yep, but need not be as high as N2O vapor pressures though. The dumb booster
>OTRAG machines flew kerosine/NA with only 15 bar in their tanks. Which
>proved sufficient. Their tanks were made of 0.3 mm (or was it 0.4 mm?)
>thickness stainless welded tubing sections.
>
>jd

I don't know if this has been tried yet, but you could have an N2O or CO2
reservoir feeding into the main tank with a regulator to bring the pressure
down.  This avoids the need to use high pressures in the main tank, or
needing to use a big/heavy helium tank.  Since this wouldn't work with LOX
and there is no point with just N2O, I think this might be a good system to
use with H2O2, if it would work at all.

Comments/criticisms?

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 8976 invoked from network); 28 Aug 2001 10:51:16 -0000
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 28 Aug 2001 10:51:16 -0000
Received: (qmail 20014 invoked by uid 50005); 28 Aug 2001 10:49:28 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpf with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.613161 secs); 28 Aug 2001 10:49:28 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 28 Aug 2001 10:49:27 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id DAA26023; Tue, 28 Aug 2001 03:05:38 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 98332 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 28 Aug 2001 10:05:26          +0000
Received: from mta01.mail.mel.aone.net.au (mta01.mail.au.uu.net [203.2.192.81])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id DAA26004 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 28 Aug 2001 03:05:26 -0700
Received: from unknown ([63.34.210.66]) by mta01.mail.mel.aone.net.au with SMTP          id <20010828100522.JPTV3755.mta01.mail.mel.aone.net.au@unknown> for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 28 Aug 2001 20:05:22 +1000
References: Conversation <F57jtrSByh133tYwlib00003cda@hotmail.com> with last            message <F57jtrSByh133tYwlib00003cda@hotmail.com>
Priority: Normal
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Priority: 3
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	X-MAPIextension=.TXT;
	charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>
Date:         Tue, 28 Aug 2001 10:05:26 +0000
Reply-To: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] liquids question: alcohol/N2O propellant feeding
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <F57jtrSByh133tYwlib00003cda@hotmail.com>

----------
> MP wrote:
>
> >N2O has quite a number of advantages, especially for a
> >first-time liquids person such as myself.  One of these advantages, of
> >course, is self-pressurization.  The problem is that fuels don't self
> >pressurize.
>
> If you like self-pressurizing propellants why not chose a fuel type that
is
> also? Like, say, propane, butane? I do not know if both react
hypergolically
> with N2O. Er, I don't think so.
>
> A disadvantage with self-pressurizing propellants is the required
reservoir
> wall thinkness & resulting system weight, no?

Yep, although sometimes that pressure & temp maybe used to stiffen the tank
walls (if alloy) assisting geometries like long thin monocoque designs that
might normally rely on a nice straight and smooth flight to stay intact.

Troy.

>
> jd
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 29371 invoked from network); 28 Aug 2001 10:58:35 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 28 Aug 2001 10:58:35 -0000
Received: (qmail 3113 invoked by uid 50005); 28 Aug 2001 10:57:27 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd with qmail-scanner-1.00 (. Clean. Processed in 0.188037 secs); 28 Aug 2001 10:57:27 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 28 Aug 2001 10:57:27 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id DAA26049; Tue, 28 Aug 2001 03:08:25 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 98339 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 28 Aug 2001 10:08:24          +0000
Received: from mta05.mail.mel.aone.net.au (mta05.mail.au.uu.net [203.2.192.85])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id DAA26018 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 28 Aug 2001 03:05:35 -0700
Received: from unknown ([63.34.210.66]) by mta05.mail.mel.aone.net.au with SMTP          id <20010828100532.NSFT19580.mta05.mail.mel.aone.net.au@unknown>;          Tue, 28 Aug 2001 20:05:32 +1000
References: Conversation <F173dtdCV5dQ0hMqiaT00004bd0@hotmail.com> with last            message <001501c12f9b$07718100$0400a8c0@hatjs>
Priority: Normal
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Priority: 3
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	X-MAPIextension=.TXT;
	charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Message-ID:  <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>
Date:         Tue, 28 Aug 2001 10:08:24 +0000
Reply-To: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] AN melt
Comments: To: Jamie Morken <jmorken@HOME.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <001501c12f9b$07718100$0400a8c0@hatjs>

----------
> Hi all,
>
> > Concrete question, AN melts at 170C: does the melt auto-ignite (or
> > detonate) at, say 180 C after mixing it with, molten candy? Eventually
> > under a nitrogen blanket. Could be tested with gram amounts first.
>
> Molten icing sugar is at a higher temperature than 180C so would be a bad
> idea to mix with molten AN I think.
> Sorbitol melts below 180C so would be possible but would be a bit
dangerous

I don't think it'll be too dangerous. IIRC Sorbitol melts <120C??? If so,
there'd be no reason to bump the temps up any higher than that. Granted if
>160C temps were required the process would be quite dangerous. Of course
you still have that nasty (what we suspect is the) Maillard reaction to
contend with or suppress if possible.

> Has anyone got AN based propellant working well (without magnesium)?

Yep, a fellow here seems to be kick'n goals at the moment with
nonmetallised AN composite propellants (very initial stages of
development). I'm not at liberty to elaborate coz it's not my work (sorry).

>
> Has anyone considered using liquid AN as an oxidizer for a hybrid or
liquid
> biprop engine?  If the decomposition/detonation hazards were reduced
~180C+
> seems like a more reasonable temperature than liquid oxyen's -183C !

IIRC Richard Nakka once proposed a similar idea as a monopropellant on this
list..twas a while ago now and I can't remember the details????

Troy.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 12579 invoked from network); 28 Aug 2001 11:03:00 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 28 Aug 2001 11:03:00 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 7181 invoked by uid 50005); 28 Aug 2001 11:01:52 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd with qmail-scanner-1.00 (. Clean. Processed in 0.19334 secs); 28 Aug 2001 11:01:52 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 28 Aug 2001 11:01:52 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id DAA26082; Tue, 28 Aug 2001 03:11:11 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 98348 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 28 Aug 2001 10:11:06          +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (f148.law15.hotmail.com [64.4.23.148]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id DAA26027 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Tue, 28 Aug 2001 03:07:32 -0700
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Tue,          28 Aug 2001 03:07:02 -0700
Received: from 193.121.251.246 by lw15fd.law15.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Tue,          28 Aug 2001 10:07:02 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [193.121.251.246]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 28 Aug 2001 10:07:02.0379 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[2EC5FBB0:01C12FA9]
Message-ID:  <F1481W2ufyWOxbCJnEM000120fa@hotmail.com>
Date:         Tue, 28 Aug 2001 10:11:06 +0000
Reply-To: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] liquids question: alcohol/N2O propellant feeding
Comments: To: ttocs@GTE.NET
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

>I think this might be a good system to use with H2O2, if it would work at
>all.

The Systeme Solaire amateur biprop (well, sort of a hybrid really) for sale
on the www uses CO2 to pressurize their tiny gasoline and HP tanks.

In ww2 even it was standard procedure; historical review at:

http://www.ee.surrey.ac.uk/SSC/H2O2CONF/PStokes.htm

jd

_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 146 invoked from network); 28 Aug 2001 11:53:18 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 28 Aug 2001 11:53:18 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 28563 invoked by uid 50005); 28 Aug 2001 11:52:10 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd with qmail-scanner-1.00 (. Clean. Processed in 0.482116 secs); 28 Aug 2001 11:52:10 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 28 Aug 2001 11:52:09 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id DAA26230; Tue, 28 Aug 2001 03:39:52 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 98380 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 28 Aug 2001 10:39:45          +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (f148.law15.hotmail.com [64.4.23.148]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id DAA26215 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Tue, 28 Aug 2001 03:39:45 -0700
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Tue,          28 Aug 2001 03:39:15 -0700
Received: from 193.121.251.246 by lw15fd.law15.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Tue,          28 Aug 2001 10:39:15 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [193.121.251.246]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 28 Aug 2001 10:39:15.0425 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[AEF56510:01C12FAD]
Message-ID:  <F148XF5x3MgPWk8RisB0001215c@hotmail.com>
Date:         Tue, 28 Aug 2001 10:39:45 +0000
Reply-To: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] AN melt
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Quote Troy:

> > > Concrete question, AN melts at 170C: does the melt auto-ignite (or
> > > detonate) at, say 180 C after mixing it with, molten candy?
>Eventually
> > > under a nitrogen blanket. Could be tested with gram amounts first.
> >
> > Molten icing sugar is at a higher temperature than 180C so would be a
>bad
> > idea to mix with molten AN I think.
> > Sorbitol melts below 180C so would be possible but would be a bit
>dangerous
>
>I don't think it'll be too dangerous. IIRC Sorbitol melts <120C??? If so,
>there'd be no reason to bump the temps up any higher than that.

Oh there is. If you add liquid sorbitol (while stirring) to liquid AN with a
temperature below the AN melting point, I expect your liquid AN 'll freeze.
Unless the sorbitol dissolves immediately resulting in a AN/sugar melt with
a solidification point far below that of AN. That'd surprize me considering
the dissolution 'll happen slowly due to viscosities.

Altogether risky business. Even gram amounts can harm...

jd



_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 4380 invoked from network); 28 Aug 2001 12:02:48 -0000
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 28 Aug 2001 12:02:48 -0000
Received: (qmail 16660 invoked by uid 50005); 28 Aug 2001 12:03:27 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpe with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 2.98686 secs); 28 Aug 2001 12:03:27 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 28 Aug 2001 12:03:21 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id EAA26472; Tue, 28 Aug 2001 04:09:19 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 98414 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 28 Aug 2001 11:09:10          +0000
Received: from fep4-orange.clear.net.nz (fep4-orange.clear.net.nz          [203.97.32.4]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id EAA26457          for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Tue, 28 Aug 2001 04:09:09 -0700
Received: from mkbs (203-167-164-27.dialup.clear.net.nz [203.167.164.27]) by          fep4-orange.clear.net.nz (1.5/1.7) with SMTP id XAA11485; Tue, 28 Aug          2001 23:08:21 +1200 (NZST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="Windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <02aa01c12fb2$26e96a40$0100a8c0@mkbs>
Date:         Tue, 28 Aug 2001 23:09:39 +1200
Reply-To: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Organization: Applied Technology
Subject:      [AR] [EE]: Free SPICE
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

SPICE - Arguably the world's best known circuit emulation program.

Links to zillions of free versions of SPICE - some are evaluation and demo
versions and others are less restricted.

Versions for many many platforms (DOS, Windoze, Linux, MAC, many more)

Note - this is only the first page of a multipage list. Click on "Next"
button at bottom of contents list for subsequent pages.


        http://www.repairfaq.org/ELE/F_Free_Spice1.html

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 9398 invoked from network); 28 Aug 2001 12:04:01 -0000
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 28 Aug 2001 12:04:01 -0000
Received: (qmail 19061 invoked by uid 50005); 28 Aug 2001 12:04:38 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpe with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.465405 secs); 28 Aug 2001 12:04:38 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 28 Aug 2001 12:04:36 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id EAA26703; Tue, 28 Aug 2001 04:58:48 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 98468 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 28 Aug 2001 11:58:45          +0000
Received: from mta02.mail.mel.aone.net.au (mta02.mail.au.uu.net [203.2.192.82])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id EAA26688 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 28 Aug 2001 04:58:44 -0700
Received: from unknown ([63.60.220.86]) by mta02.mail.mel.aone.net.au with SMTP          id <20010828115839.EKMP4158.mta02.mail.mel.aone.net.au@unknown> for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 28 Aug 2001 21:58:39 +1000
References: Conversation <F148XF5x3MgPWk8RisB0001215c@hotmail.com> with last            message <F148XF5x3MgPWk8RisB0001215c@hotmail.com>
Priority: Normal
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Priority: 3
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	X-MAPIextension=.TXT;
	charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Message-ID:  <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>
Date:         Tue, 28 Aug 2001 11:58:45 +0000
Reply-To: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] AN melt
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <F148XF5x3MgPWk8RisB0001215c@hotmail.com>

----------
> Quote Troy:
>
> > > > Concrete question, AN melts at 170C: does the melt auto-ignite (or
> > > > detonate) at, say 180 C after mixing it with, molten candy?
> >Eventually
> > > > under a nitrogen blanket. Could be tested with gram amounts first.
> > >
> > > Molten icing sugar is at a higher temperature than 180C so would be a
> >bad
> > > idea to mix with molten AN I think.
> > > Sorbitol melts below 180C so would be possible but would be a bit
> >dangerous
> >
> >I don't think it'll be too dangerous. IIRC Sorbitol melts <120C??? If so,
> >there'd be no reason to bump the temps up any higher than that.
>
> Oh there is. If you add liquid sorbitol (while stirring) to liquid AN
with a
> temperature below the AN melting point, I expect your liquid AN 'll
freeze.
> Unless the sorbitol dissolves immediately resulting in a AN/sugar melt
with
> a solidification point far below that of AN. That'd surprize me
considering
> the dissolution 'll happen slowly due to viscosities.

Sorry, I was actually referring to keeping the AN a solid throughout the
entire process ie. Composite propellant. I may have gone off on a tangent.
I can't see the advantage in this propellant combination being homogenous
although, that's a bit of an ignorant viewpoint for this propellant
combination from me.

Troy.

>
> Altogether risky business. Even gram amounts can harm...
>
> jd
>
>
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 22407 invoked from network); 28 Aug 2001 13:05:19 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 28 Aug 2001 13:05:19 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 4350 invoked by uid 50005); 28 Aug 2001 13:04:09 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd with qmail-scanner-1.00 (. Clean. Processed in 0.233099 secs); 28 Aug 2001 13:04:09 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 28 Aug 2001 13:04:09 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id FAA26912; Tue, 28 Aug 2001 05:58:44 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 98503 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 28 Aug 2001 12:58:34          +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (f151.law15.hotmail.com [64.4.23.151]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id FAA26897 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Tue, 28 Aug 2001 05:58:34 -0700
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Tue,          28 Aug 2001 05:58:03 -0700
Received: from 193.121.251.246 by lw15fd.law15.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Tue,          28 Aug 2001 12:58:03 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [193.121.251.246]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 28 Aug 2001 12:58:03.0765 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[13093A50:01C12FC1]
Message-ID:  <F151pWd7KKQpQq5pnee000175b4@hotmail.com>
Date:         Tue, 28 Aug 2001 12:58:34 +0000
Reply-To: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] AN melt
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

TP wrote:

>Sorry, I was actually referring to keeping the AN a solid throughout the
>entire process ie. Composite propellant. I may have gone off on a tangent.
>I can't see the advantage in this propellant combination being homogenous
>although, that's a bit of an ignorant viewpoint for this propellant
>combination from me.

Well so much has been said about the importance of KN/candy blocks being
homogenous... like that it was necessary to melt the candy (and not simply
mill the mix or mix the powders)... that it was next advantageous to first
dissolve both in water and evaporate the water (in order to avoid the sugar
melting step)...next (high) pressure moulding of the powder mix was
mentioned as an alternative to melting...  that I started getting convinced
block homogeneity was sort of crucial. Right or wrong.
If correct, I just thought the relatively low MP of AN (170C compared to
the impossible KN MP of 337C) offered the possibility of melting both
substances and dissolve one in the other. But maybe they do not dissolve in
each other and form liquid phases on top of each other...

Like I said, risky topic. Especially since some report AN/sugar powder mix
does not burn well.

jd

Besides,


_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 13969 invoked from network); 28 Aug 2001 13:53:19 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 28 Aug 2001 13:53:19 -0000
Received: (qmail 19843 invoked by uid 50005); 28 Aug 2001 13:51:30 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpf with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.550786 secs); 28 Aug 2001 13:51:30 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 28 Aug 2001 13:51:29 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA27101; Tue, 28 Aug 2001 06:43:48 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 98531 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 28 Aug 2001 13:43:40          +0000
Received: from spsystems.net (spsystems.net [209.47.149.227]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA27086 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Tue,          28 Aug 2001 06:43:39 -0700
Received: (from henry@localhost) by spsystems.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id JAA17657;          Tue, 28 Aug 2001 09:43:00 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010828093648.17207D-100000@spsystems.net>
Date:         Tue, 28 Aug 2001 09:42:58 -0400
Reply-To: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] liquids question: alcohol/N2O propellant feeding
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <66.139a37f7.28bc923f@aol.com>

On Tue, 28 Aug 2001 Tjpoulton@AOL.COM wrote:
> ...The problem is that, obviously, ethanol
> and nitrous oxide react with each other...

Well, not spontaneously, not under normal conditions.  N2O is really
pretty inert until it gets hot.

> ...My question is this:  exactly how bad of an idea is
> it to use N2O gas to directly pressurize an alcohol tank, without separating
> the two chemicals?  Is the initial compression likely to cause ignition?  Has
> this been done successfully (or unsuccessfully) before?

I don't think there is any established precedent.  It would make me nervous,
though.  As others have noted, Goddard stopped having mysterious in-flight
explosions when he stopped trying to pressurize his gasoline tank with GOX.
Granted, that's a more active combination, but even so...

Another question to consider is whether N2O will *dissolve* in alcohol,
especially given that the resulting mixture would probably be an explosive.

> I will use a piston
> if I have to, but it would be much simpler and lighter to avoid it.

I'd say use CO2 for pressurization, use a self-pressurizing fuel like
ethane, or bite the bullet and use the piston (or some equivalent like
putting the fuel in a plastic bag within the tank -- but check the plastic
for alcohol compatibility!).

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 1523 invoked from network); 28 Aug 2001 14:04:43 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 28 Aug 2001 14:04:43 -0000
Received: (qmail 4470 invoked by uid 50005); 28 Aug 2001 14:04:07 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 1.117963 secs); 28 Aug 2001 14:04:07 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 28 Aug 2001 14:04:05 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA27286; Tue, 28 Aug 2001 07:01:00 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 98577 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 28 Aug 2001 14:00:51          +0000
Received: from mta02.mail.mel.aone.net.au (mta02.mail.au.uu.net [203.2.192.82])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA27269 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 28 Aug 2001 07:00:51 -0700
Received: from win2pk ([63.60.247.146]) by mta02.mail.mel.aone.net.au with SMTP          id <20010828140048.GDSY4158.mta02.mail.mel.aone.net.au@win2pk> for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 29 Aug 2001 00:00:48 +1000
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <NEBBJIGOELOLIBCCPKDCMENKCBAA.geordi@c031.aone.net.au>
Date:         Wed, 29 Aug 2001 00:23:30 +1000
Reply-To: "Troy Prideaux" <geordi@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Troy Prideaux" <geordi@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] AN melt
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <F151pWd7KKQpQq5pnee000175b4@hotmail.com>

>-----Original Message-----
>From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@itc.uci.edu]On
>Behalf Of John Dom
>Sent: Tuesday, 28 August 2001 10:59 PM
>To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
>Subject: Re: [AR] AN melt
>
>
>TP wrote:
>
>>Sorry, I was actually referring to keeping the AN a solid throughout the
>>entire process ie. Composite propellant. I may have gone off on a tangent.
>>I can't see the advantage in this propellant combination being homogenous
>>although, that's a bit of an ignorant viewpoint for this propellant
>>combination from me.
>
>Well so much has been said about the importance of KN/candy blocks being
>homogenous... like that it was necessary to melt the candy (and not simply
>mill the mix or mix the powders)... that it was next advantageous to first
>dissolve both in water and evaporate the water (in order to avoid the sugar
>melting step)...next (high) pressure moulding of the powder mix was
>mentioned as an alternative to melting...  that I started getting convinced
>block homogeneity was sort of crucial. Right or wrong.
>If correct, I just thought the relatively low MP of AN (170C compared to
>the impossible KN MP of 337C) offered the possibility of melting both
>substances and dissolve one in the other. But maybe they do not dissolve in
>each other and form liquid phases on top of each other...
>
>Like I said, risky topic. Especially since some report AN/sugar powder mix
>does not burn well.

Yep, my suspicions suggest that problem may have something to do with these
special NH4+ reactions or (dual)decomposition processes. If the stuff can
actually be melted and cast with successful suppression of the before
mentioned reactions, the chances are an improvement in combustion maybe
realized. Of course there's a fair amount of speculation involved here...

Troy.

>
>jd
>
>Besides,
>
>
>_________________________________________________________________
>Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 13478 invoked from network); 28 Aug 2001 14:34:59 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 28 Aug 2001 14:34:59 -0000
Received: (qmail 24117 invoked by uid 50005); 28 Aug 2001 14:33:09 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpf with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 1.549248 secs); 28 Aug 2001 14:33:09 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 28 Aug 2001 14:33:05 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA27448; Tue, 28 Aug 2001 07:16:28 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 98614 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 28 Aug 2001 14:16:26          +0000
Received: from spsystems.net (spsystems.net [209.47.149.227]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA27433 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Tue,          28 Aug 2001 07:16:25 -0700
Received: (from henry@localhost) by spsystems.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id KAA18075;          Tue, 28 Aug 2001 10:15:46 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010828100326.17207G-100000@spsystems.net>
Date:         Tue, 28 Aug 2001 10:15:46 -0400
Reply-To: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Tomahawk cruise missile
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <3B8B197D.5BBDB5B3@seanet.com>

On Mon, 27 Aug 2001, Sherwood Stolt wrote:
> Nice theory and maybe you would eventually convince some court
> you are right but that's not how the ITAR reads.  The ITAR specifically
> lists types of public release (such as a book) but specifically leaves
> out posting to an e-mail list and other on line distribution.

Just what constitutes publication or speech is not something ITAR can
dictate.  Court decisions have consistently found that natural-language
postings to public electronic media (e.g. open mailing lists) *are* speech
and *are* protected.  It is vanishingly unlikely that an ITAR prosecution
would even be started on such a basis.  (This is the opinion of real live
paid-for-the-work lawyers, by the way, not just me.)

The government is currently fighting a desperate rearguard action against
electronic distribution of program source code being considered speech.
*That* can reasonably still be considered unsettled, but they conceded
defeat on natural-language material long ago.

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 29897 invoked from network); 28 Aug 2001 15:20:23 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 28 Aug 2001 15:20:23 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 22828 invoked by uid 50005); 28 Aug 2001 15:19:48 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.220858 secs); 28 Aug 2001 15:19:48 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 28 Aug 2001 15:19:48 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA27826; Tue, 28 Aug 2001 08:10:22 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 98669 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 28 Aug 2001 15:10:12          +0000
Received: from smtp008pub.verizon.net (smtp008pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.187])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA27811 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 28 Aug 2001 08:10:12 -0700
Received: from [63.27.97.83] (1Cust20.tnt2.san-bernardino.ca.da.uu.net          [63.27.97.20]) by smtp008pub.verizon.net  with ESMTP for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; id f7SF9eK16131 Tue, 28 Aug 2001 10:09:40          -0500 (CDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: GTE/01rocket@mail.gte.net
References: <002001c12f65$7721f100$f072fea9@scottje>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <a0510030bb7b164125865@[63.27.97.83]>
Date:         Tue, 28 Aug 2001 08:09:15 -0700
Reply-To: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Rocket Construction Forum
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <002001c12f65$7721f100$f072fea9@scottje>

>Does anyone know of a good forum for rocket construction techniques?
>I have some composite projects going on and need some assistance.
>
>Thanks
>
>Scott

www.rocketryonline.com

They have a library of construction tips.
http://www.info-central.org/infocentral.shtml

--
Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
Opinion, the whole thing.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 4047 invoked from network); 28 Aug 2001 15:52:18 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 28 Aug 2001 15:52:18 -0000
Received: (qmail 7317 invoked by uid 50005); 28 Aug 2001 15:43:58 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.207987 secs); 28 Aug 2001 15:43:58 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 28 Aug 2001 15:43:58 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA27913; Tue, 28 Aug 2001 08:29:52 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 98684 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 28 Aug 2001 15:29:50          +0000
Received: from smtp004pub.verizon.net (smtp004pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.183])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA27898 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 28 Aug 2001 08:29:45 -0700
Received: from [63.27.97.83] (1Cust20.tnt2.san-bernardino.ca.da.uu.net          [63.27.97.20]) by smtp004pub.verizon.net  with ESMTP for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; id f7SFTAJ21807 Tue, 28 Aug 2001 10:29:10          -0500 (CDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: GTE/01rocket@mail.gte.net
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <a0510030cb7b16721103f@[63.27.97.83]>
Date:         Tue, 28 Aug 2001 08:29:06 -0700
Reply-To: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Subject:      [AR] Liquid Rockets
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

I am not a particular liquid rocket advocate so do not get involved
in the minute details of the conversations nor do I often answer the
"I am a newbie and want to fly my first liquid" posts.

This is my exception.

If I were going to make a liquid for fun I would go right over to
Dave Griffith who actually builds and flies liquids of a wide variety
of types.  He has a machine shop and loves to make and sell these
liquids at amateur prices (essentially at lower cost than you can
even buy the parts for).  Please tell Dave I sent you.

I would strongly suggest you liquid advocates START there because
then you can choose your propellant type, get a working proven rocket
to practice with and go from there.

Then at least you could work on the issues you choose to, not what
you are forced to by your own bogus learning curve.

If you want to make a cheap nig liquid, OTRAG.  The guys at RRS did
one successfully and, gag, they share data!  Another perfect example
of using somebody elses learning curve to get started.  Maybe you
will learn why they only did one.

So there's my high tech liquid motor input!

http://www.rrs.org

http://www.montereymachine.com/

Oh and if you are like me and think liquids for amateurs are a waste of time:
www.v-serv.com/usr

Jerry

--
Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
Opinion, the whole thing.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 11641 invoked from network); 28 Aug 2001 16:34:21 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 28 Aug 2001 16:34:22 -0000
Received: (qmail 10507 invoked by uid 50005); 28 Aug 2001 16:33:10 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd with qmail-scanner-1.00 (. Clean. Processed in 0.122655 secs); 28 Aug 2001 16:33:10 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 28 Aug 2001 16:33:09 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA28756; Tue, 28 Aug 2001 09:29:48 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 98714 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 28 Aug 2001 16:29:39          +0000
Received: from mailhost0.trib.com (mailhost0.trib.com [63.229.150.3]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA28737 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Tue, 28 Aug 2001 09:29:38 -0700
Received: from mail.trib.com (mail.trib.com [12.10.158.17]) by          mailhost0.trib.com (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f7SGTa695990; Tue,          28 Aug 2001 10:29:36 -0600 (MDT) (envelope-from          jwckman@space-rockets.com)
Received: from [63.229.150.93] (HELO hppav) by mail.trib.com (CommuniGate Pro          SMTP 3.4.6) with SMTP id 44348842; Tue, 28 Aug 2001 10:28:55 -0600
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <NKEHJAOOKBPGIKOOPDEFGEKICBAA.jwckman@space-rockets.com>
Date:         Tue, 28 Aug 2001 10:27:19 -0600
Reply-To: "John Wickman" <jwckman@SPACE-ROCKETS.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Wickman" <jwckman@SPACE-ROCKETS.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] AN melt
Comments: To: John Dom <j_dom@hotmail.com>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <F173dtdCV5dQ0hMqiaT00004bd0@hotmail.com>

By molten candy, do you mean pure sugar or potassium nitrate/sugar mix?

John Wickman

-----Original Message-----
From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@itc.uci.edu]On
Behalf Of John Dom
Sent: Tuesday, August 28, 2001 1:09 AM
To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
Subject: Re: [AR] AN melt


Quote JW:

>The AN melt is very reactive with metals, woods and plastic
>resins so you have to really be careful.  It will autoignite with many
>things...   I have thought about sugar and AN for a couple of years

Concrete question, AN melts at 170C: does the melt auto-ignite (or
detonate) at, say 180 C after mixing it with, molten candy? Eventually
under a nitrogen blanket. Could be tested with gram amounts first.

That 'd offer a very homogenous block of propellant after solidification I
'd expect.

But: I fear very much such approach is too risky, at least for amateurs, no?

jd



_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 21183 invoked from network); 28 Aug 2001 16:36:39 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 28 Aug 2001 16:36:39 -0000
Received: (qmail 12490 invoked by uid 50005); 28 Aug 2001 16:35:30 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd with qmail-scanner-1.00 (. Clean. Processed in 0.212565 secs); 28 Aug 2001 16:35:30 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 28 Aug 2001 16:35:30 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA28783; Tue, 28 Aug 2001 09:31:18 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 98721 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 28 Aug 2001 16:31:17          +0000
Received: from mailhost0.trib.com (mailhost0.trib.com [63.229.150.3]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA28742 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Tue, 28 Aug 2001 09:29:39 -0700
Received: from mail.trib.com (mail.trib.com [12.10.158.17]) by          mailhost0.trib.com (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f7SGTb696007; Tue,          28 Aug 2001 10:29:37 -0600 (MDT) (envelope-from          jwckman@space-rockets.com)
Received: from [63.229.150.93] (HELO hppav) by mail.trib.com (CommuniGate Pro          SMTP 3.4.6) with SMTP id 44348851; Tue, 28 Aug 2001 10:28:58 -0600
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <NKEHJAOOKBPGIKOOPDEFKEKICBAA.jwckman@space-rockets.com>
Date:         Tue, 28 Aug 2001 10:27:23 -0600
Reply-To: "John Wickman" <jwckman@SPACE-ROCKETS.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Wickman" <jwckman@SPACE-ROCKETS.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Tomahawk cruise missile
Comments: To: Jerry Irvine <01rocket@gte.net>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <a05100308b7b080469333@[63.27.97.83]>

Jerry,

I don't agree with laying all of this on Tripoli's doorstep.   The FAA
waiver regulations were there when I was doing amateur rocketry in high
school (1963-1967).   Our instructor did the waivers.  The ATF explosives
list has also been around for ages.   While you may have had good relations
with the regulators, these regulations were like sleeping lions ready to
come and attack the hobby.  My point was that they should have been
eliminated a long time ago.   That job still remains to be done.

It makes no sense to me that the FAA thinks it is great that I can build an
experimental airplane with the very minimal checks by the FAA, fly with no
insurance (no company will insure you until after 10 hours of flight with
the plane) and fly anywhere I want as often as I want without any
notification to anyone, even over downtown Casper.  If I crash, no big deal
to them.  I can even crash into a house or a school.  No threat to the
experimental aircraft hobby.  But, if I take a plastic rocket 50 miles out
of town on to the plains of Wyoming (middle of nowhere) and fly it, I'm a
mortal danger to aviation unless I file all the waiver paperwork and keep in
constant contact with two Flight Control Centers by cell phone.   The
rockets only going no higher than 7000 ft.  Ironically, I can stand at the
launch site and fire a high power rifle into the air and that is perfectly
legal as long as I don't hit vehicles and certain living things.  With the
FAA, if it has wings its ok.  If it has fins, it is a threat to aviation.

The ATF stuff is just as absurd.   If some poor smuck has over 125 grams of
propellant in his house, he is major threat to his neighborhood and the
surrounding community.  But, it is ok to have propane tanks, cans of
gasoline and maybe 10 aerosol cans in his garage.  Oh, if you have 40 lbs of
black powder in your basement for black powder shooting that is also ok.
But, if it is for rockets, that is illegal.   I guess the powder knows not
to explode during a house fire if it end use was for guns.  I wonder how it
does that?

What amazes me, is that we put up with this nonsense.  I for one am sick of
it.

As for our posts being in the public domain, what else is new and who cares.
I assume everything I write regardless of format (electronic or paper) is
being filed somewhere.  As for disclosing classified information, I do not
believe that has happened here.

Ok, this is all probably off-topic for Arocket and Ray will be reminding me
of that soon.   Sorry, Ray.  Just blowing off some steam.  I'll stay with
the technical stuff.

John Wickman



-----Original Message-----
From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@itc.uci.edu]On
Behalf Of Jerry Irvine
Sent: Monday, August 27, 2001 5:06 PM
To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
Subject: Re: [AR] Tomahawk cruise missile


>Wickman:



>will close down the hobby is hiding in a corner, totally afraid of
>the "fill in
>the name of your choice" govt. agency and hoping they will not
>notice us and stay
>away.   That approach was tried and failed miserably as noted by the
>excessive ATF
>and FAA regulations.

The issues we have with FAA and ATF and soon BLM are mostly caused by
Tripoli leadership calling them up, asking for rulings they are all
too eager to give conservatively, and by TRA taunting/sueing them
when they don't like the answers.

For 2 decades we (Jerry/USR/LTR) approached the authorities on a
cooperative basis and achieved widespread HPR access with NO state
regulations, no federal controls, full BLM support and only minor FAA
limitations, and almost NONE on super high performance rockets.

Life has changes and I can say without hesitation, thanks to Tripoli.

Ray is right, everything we say is saved, and that includes email
BTW, and even if it is encrypted, it is being sequentially decrypted
by NSA.  What we should do is KNOWING that, seek a public information
request for a copy of EVERYTHING, so we too can see who is getting
married, divorced, having babies, starting businesses and buying
fertilizer for purely civil and educational purposes.

And as for the military issue, unfortunately everything we discuss is
public and anything we post that was previously classified is public
now and nothing they can do about it due to 1st amendment rights.
That is one legit fear they (whoever they is) have.  The other is the
average arocket subscriber can do in his garage what Sadaam only
wishes he could do in his most advanced labs.

Stick that in your pipe and smoke it.  It is your right!

Jerry


--
Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
Opinion, the whole thing.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 9757 invoked from network); 28 Aug 2001 16:41:15 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 28 Aug 2001 16:41:15 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 17060 invoked by uid 50005); 28 Aug 2001 16:40:06 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd with qmail-scanner-1.00 (. Clean. Processed in 0.247189 secs); 28 Aug 2001 16:40:06 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 28 Aug 2001 16:40:06 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA28875; Tue, 28 Aug 2001 09:37:23 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 98742 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 28 Aug 2001 16:37:02          +0000
Received: from imo-r04.mx.aol.com (imo-r04.mx.aol.com [152.163.225.100]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA28860 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Tue, 28 Aug 2001 09:37:02 -0700
Received: from Azt28@aol.com by imo-r04.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v31_r1.4.) id          w.71.11d681ba (4594) for <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Tue, 28 Aug 2001          12:36:57 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: AOL 5.0 for Windows sub 116
Message-ID:  <71.11d681ba.28bd22a9@aol.com>
Date:         Tue, 28 Aug 2001 12:36:57 EDT
Reply-To: <Azt28@AOL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <Azt28@AOL.COM>
Subject:      [AR] Ressources August 2001
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Ressource,  August

I think many amateurs here may have something to *market* to other amateurs.
For example if you have a lathe, and want to work on it some hours/month, you
could make many elements for amateur projects.

Well, you could sell elements difficult to find in the open market, but as I
understand it, money is scarce for many. The best option would then to start
on a swap basis. Each element would then be valued as Rocket $ (R$)
When your product has been used/tested by many here, you could shift to plain
$ value and true market, may be a way to make some money from a hobby.

Try to be innovative, for example amateur rockets work at low presure, why
not then a plastic valve?

Ressources:

    ***Unrestricted GPS produced by:

    www.trimble.com or:
    http://www.laipac.com/msg4.htm    ($79).


    ***Small parts, tools and products for hobby works:
    Small Parts Inc. - www.smallparts.com

GUIDANCE AND CONTROL

    I think that Armadillo will have most of
    the guidance and control issues in
    hand in a year or so.  Orbit isn't on my
    radar for several years yet, but
    if someone builds a mighty rocket in the
    meantime, we would be glad to help
    with G&C.

TEST FACILITY :

***Ray Calkins rcalkins@itc.uci.edu :

    Rocket static testing:
    aRocket rate R$.05 per lb-sec + expenses
    Solid/liquid/hybrid
    LOx, nitrous, H2O2
    horizontal to 10,000 lb thrust,
    vertical to 2,000 lb thrust
    Vertical to 10,000 lb thrust on advance notice

***01rocket@GTE.NET (Jerry Irvine)

    I offer to help test and characterize propellants.
    We have a great test stand designed to accept
    abuse.  We regularly fire all of our motors for a
    day in under an hour because we are
    excessively efficient.  We like to collect data
    and support other programs.


SMALL PRESSURE TANKS.

***Dave Griffith
    Contact: MONTMACH@aol.com


*** thehalls@RIDGENET.NET (Kristin & David Hall)

    The tanks are rated for 3000 psi.  They normally
    come with regulators on them, but the factory
    has no problems selling them to me
    sans regulator
    47 ci (aluminum): $85
    68 ci (fiber): $165
    91 ci (fiber): $180
    110 ci (fiber): $186
    Figure sans regulator but plus shipping, etc.
    Of course, if you *want* the regulators....that
    can be arranged to.  There are two types of
    regulators:  pre-set or adjustable.  The pre-sets
    are set to 850 psi.  The adjustables are adjustable
    from 200 psi to 850 psi.  The prices quoted above
    are for pre-set.  Adjustable would cost more,
    of course.

COMPOSITE TECHNOLOGY :

*** Yvan Bozzonetti azt28@aol.com :

    Oven to cure high performance carbon-epoxy.
    base surface: 1 x 1 m
    height: from  0.4 m to 2 m with movable elements.
    controled temperature from 50 deg. C to 650 deg. C
    Heating power : 4 kW
    Fan mixed air inside.
    swap price: R$ 30 + R$ 1/hour.
    suitable too for first cooking of ceramics
    ( nozzle throat...).

COMPOSITES  (PRODUCTS):

***Dave Muesing
    www.mrfiberglass.com


CERAMICS

***John Horton
    dickcoyote@earthlink.net
    Coyote Brothers Rocket Software and Vaporware
    http://home.earthlink.net/~dickcoyote/

    I have 3 kilns in storage, sitting next to my
    level 3 project, potters wheel, 1/4 ton of clay,
    propellant mixer, a least 15 never used 3"
    casings, big roll of carbon fiber, water skies,
    wetsuits, and lord knows what else.
    Point is that if someone wants to fire
    something in So.Cal, let me know.

TOOLS:

***NEAR, contact: Jan-Erik.Ronningen@raufoss.nammo.com

    we are interested in swap. We can machine
    quite triky metall pieces and mix and cast
    advanced solid propellant formulas. In
    addition we can help out with performing
    interal and external ballstic calculations
    and analysis. We also have good knowlege
    in different high temperature materials and
    their properities.


SOLID PROPELLANT:

***Jerry Irvine 01rocket@gte.net

    10 styles of solid propellant
    some include EX numbers for shipment
    some include export permits
    no minimum or maximum power or quantity
    Generally based on $0.50 per #-s
    Special casings extra
    Commercial, military, FX experienced
    "Get high.  And fast"
    Fun projects very welcome.

***R45T for composite propellants:
    http://www.sartomer.com/index.html.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 1877 invoked from network); 28 Aug 2001 17:00:18 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 28 Aug 2001 17:00:18 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 20119 invoked by uid 50005); 28 Aug 2001 16:59:42 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.170025 secs); 28 Aug 2001 16:59:42 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 28 Aug 2001 16:59:42 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA29021; Tue, 28 Aug 2001 09:54:01 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 98760 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 28 Aug 2001 16:53:59          +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (f112.law15.hotmail.com [64.4.23.112]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA29006 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Tue, 28 Aug 2001 09:53:58 -0700
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Tue,          28 Aug 2001 09:53:28 -0700
Received: from 213.224.83.134 by lw15fd.law15.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Tue,          28 Aug 2001 16:53:28 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [213.224.83.134]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 28 Aug 2001 16:53:28.0720 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[F62A5100:01C12FE1]
Message-ID:  <F112illnpVKvc5WOltC00017b1f@hotmail.com>
Date:         Tue, 28 Aug 2001 16:53:59 +0000
Reply-To: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] AN melt
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

John,

I meant mixing pure liquid sorbitol with pure liquid AN, eg both at 180C.

As I later added, even if they do not immediately er, react, both liquids do
not necessarily dissolve in each other completely making such risky try for
homogenisation pointless. In fact it'd surprize me if an organic non-polar
liquid 'd dissolve in the probably polar liquid AN.
My chemistry knowledge is zero here.

We use induction coils to dissolve inorganics in boric acid daily to
homogenize for X-ray fluorescence analysis. But there the molten magma is
radiating hot... I'd rather not apply induction coil heating on AN even
going for 170C only!

jd

>From: "John Wickman" <jwckman@space-rockets.com>
>To: "John Dom" <j_dom@hotmail.com>, <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
>Subject: RE: [AR] AN melt
>Date: Tue, 28 Aug 2001 10:27:19 -0600
>
>By molten candy, do you mean pure sugar or potassium nitrate/sugar mix?
>
>John Wickman
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@itc.uci.edu]On
>Behalf Of John Dom
>Sent: Tuesday, August 28, 2001 1:09 AM
>To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
>Subject: Re: [AR] AN melt
>
>
>Quote JW:
>
> >The AN melt is very reactive with metals, woods and plastic
> >resins so you have to really be careful.  It will autoignite with many
> >things...   I have thought about sugar and AN for a couple of years
>
>Concrete question, AN melts at 170C: does the melt auto-ignite (or
>detonate) at, say 180 C after mixing it with, molten candy? Eventually
>under a nitrogen blanket. Could be tested with gram amounts first.
>
>That 'd offer a very homogenous block of propellant after solidification I
>'d expect.
>
>But: I fear very much such approach is too risky, at least for amateurs,
>no?
>
>jd
>
>
>
>_________________________________________________________________
>Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp
>


_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 21691 invoked from network); 28 Aug 2001 17:04:48 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 28 Aug 2001 17:04:48 -0000
Received: (qmail 30868 invoked by uid 50005); 28 Aug 2001 17:02:55 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpf with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.223507 secs); 28 Aug 2001 17:02:55 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 28 Aug 2001 17:02:54 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA29094; Tue, 28 Aug 2001 10:00:23 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 98759 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 28 Aug 2001 17:00:20          +0000
Received: from server.diop.com ([63.236.129.170]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7)          with ESMTP id JAA28990 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 28 Aug 2001          09:50:19 -0700
Received: by SERVER with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.21) id <RN5TKL4B>;          Tue, 28 Aug 2001 12:50:21 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.21)
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Message-ID:  <815D02DF1A3ED31197C800104BCC5184388C69@SERVER>
Date:         Tue, 28 Aug 2001 12:50:12 -0400
Reply-To: "Villani, Tom" <tvillani@DIOP.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Villani, Tom" <tvillani@DIOP.COM>
Subject:      [AR]
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Snip:
John W wrote>>
The ATF stuff is just as absurd.   If some poor smuck has over 125 grams of
propellant in his house, he is major threat to his neighborhood and the
surrounding community.  But, it is ok to have propane tanks, cans of
gasoline and maybe 10 aerosol cans in his garage.  Oh, if you have 40 lbs of
black powder in your basement for black powder shooting that is also ok.
But, if it is for rockets, that is illegal.   I guess the powder knows not
to explode during a house fire if it end use was for guns.  I wonder how it
does that?

What amazes me, is that we put up with this nonsense.  I for one am sick of
it.

Well put John !!!
I'm with 'ya when it comes to the regulations about propellant, etc...
Tom V

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 16415 invoked from network); 28 Aug 2001 17:30:40 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 28 Aug 2001 17:30:40 -0000
Received: (qmail 27814 invoked by uid 50005); 28 Aug 2001 17:28:51 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpf with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.47151 secs); 28 Aug 2001 17:28:51 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 28 Aug 2001 17:28:50 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA29301; Tue, 28 Aug 2001 10:25:58 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 98810 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 28 Aug 2001 17:25:56          +0000
Received: from localhost (rcalkins@localhost) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with          ESMTP id KAA29286; Tue, 28 Aug 2001 10:25:54 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.LNX.4.10.10108281024420.27425-100000@itc.uci.edu>
Date:         Tue, 28 Aug 2001 10:25:54 -0700
Reply-To: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Rocket Construction Forum
Comments: To: Scott & Jeanette <frazer2001@EARTHLINK.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <002001c12f65$7721f100$f072fea9@scottje>

Hi Scott,

There are several on this list (including myself) with composite
construction experience.  What are your projects?

Ray

On Mon, 27 Aug 2001, Scott & Jeanette wrote:

> Does anyone know of a good forum for rocket construction techniques?
> I have some composite projects going on and need some assistance.
>
> Thanks
>
> Scott
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 1778 invoked from network); 28 Aug 2001 20:19:12 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 28 Aug 2001 20:19:12 -0000
Received: (qmail 25024 invoked by uid 50005); 28 Aug 2001 20:18:31 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.291456 secs); 28 Aug 2001 20:18:31 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 28 Aug 2001 20:18:30 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA30100; Tue, 28 Aug 2001 13:09:42 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 98899 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 28 Aug 2001 20:09:36          +0000
Received: from roll.akcecc.kiev.ua (roll.akcecc.kiev.ua [193.227.206.34]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA30075 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 28 Aug 2001 13:09:33 -0700
Received: from serge (pool-128.akcecc.kiev.ua [193.227.207.128] (may be          forged)) by roll.akcecc.kiev.ua (8.10.2/8.10.2) with SMTP id          f7SK9MM05716 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 28 Aug 2001 23:09:22          +0300
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="koi8-r"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2417.2000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <02cb01c12ff4$b71336e0$80cfe3c1@serge>
Date:         Tue, 28 Aug 2001 23:05:26 +0400
Reply-To: "Serge Pipko" <spas@AKCECC.KIEV.UA>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Serge Pipko" <spas@AKCECC.KIEV.UA>
Subject:      [AR] AN eutectics experiments
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Hello all,

I have posted this information two years ago, but I decide to re-post it
taking into account lively talk about AN melt.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

It seems to me, that the dream of each roketeer is a propellant containing
not 10-20 % liquid binder, but 50 or even 90%. As the propellant can not
contain so much of binder-fuel, it should be a binder-oxidizer. Practically
sole candidate for this role for the amateur can be AN. It has rather low
melting point (169 deg. C) and forms set of eutectic mixtures with a low
melting point. Among them are most interesting:
1. AN-KN (13.6 % KN), m.p. 156.5 deg. C.
At hardening of this eutectic phase-stabilized AN is formed.
2. AN-NaN (20.5 % NaN), m.p. 120.8 deg. C.
The large lack of this eutectic is that at its hardening a mixture of
crystals AN and NaN is formed, which has phase-transition points of both AN
and NaN. For example, at cooling under 84.2 deg. C crystals expand, thus a
test-tube, in which a fusion was made, frequently bursts.
3. AN-KN-NaN (66.5-12.5-21.0 %), m.p. 118.5 deg. C.
At hardening of this eutectic the phase-stabilized mix of crystals (AN + KN)
+ (NaN) is formed. The solid eutectic is rather strong to serve as a binder.

Certainly, fusible binder is not good binder, but taking into account
KN-sorbitol propellant experience, it can be successfully used by the
amateur. PROPEP gives Isp in the range of 201-203 for the mixtures of
triples eutectic with such fuels as carbon, sucrose or cellulose.

The purpose of my first experiments was to establish, what fuel can be
combined with a melt of an eutectic without decomposition and danger of
self-ignition. I began with triple eutectic as the most safe, the
experiments were carried out in a glass beaker submerged in an oil bath,
heated up to 130-135 deg. C. In all cases the stochiometric mixes was
prepared. Here are the basic results.

Activated charcoal.
I knew that the activated charcoal catalyzes decomposition of AN, but has
not found anywhere data, at what temperature it occurs. It has appeared,
that at 130 deg. C decomposition already is appreciable, the liquid mix
froths up, at cooling porous mass is formed.

Sorbitol (anhydrous).
The sorbitol easily dissolves in a melt, forming a stable colorless
solution. The solidified mixture easily crumbles, it is much less strong,
than eutectic alone.

Sucrose.
The sucrose quickly decomposes in a melt. After 1 minute the mixture becomes
brown and froths up.

Starch.
I supposed to use starch as insoluble fine-dispersed fuel. On my surprise
starch swelled and then completely dissolved in a melt. The stable yellow
solution was formed which is appreciable thicker, than eutectic. All this
very much reminded dissolution of starch in water. At cooling mass was
formed, which was more stiffer than pure eutectic. Within two days I have
not noticed attributes of a hygroscopicity. It is very unexpected and
encouraging result. BTW, maybe starch will be useful additive in Candy
propellant?

Cotton wool.
After experiment with starch I have thought: " maybe cellulose will be
dissolved in that super-solvent too ? " But the cotton wool was not
dissolved, and also was not moistened completely because of its
voluminosity. It appears, 80 % binder can be not enough too! ;)

Activated charcoal + starch.
It is known, that it is possible to find a poison for every catalyst. For
activated charcoal it can be substance adsorbed on its surface. It has
appeared, that starch can play this role and prevents AN decomposition in
the presence of activated charcoal. However analysis of the stiffened
mixture revealed, that the tiny bubbles of air have stuck to particles of
charcoal and mass has turned out porous. Next time I shall try vacuum
degassing.

Wheat flour swelled and the whole mass became dough-like and non-flowing.
The solidified mixture was very hard, but contained air bubbles, which had
not any chances to release from thick mass.

Gelatin did not swell, not dissolve, not decompose.

Polyvinyl alcohol slightly swelled and formed fluid suspension.

Carboxymethyl cellulose slightly swelled and, as cotton wool, was not
moistened completely because of its voluminosity.

All obtained compositions burn astably at atmospheric pressure.


After experiments with triple eutectic (AN-KN-NaN) I have decided to return
to a double eutectic (AN-KN), because fuels on its basis should have higher
ISP (theoretically about 210). I have found, that at temperature of 160-165
deg C the alloys with starch and wheat flour can be easily obtained. At that
starch dissolves completely, and flour dissolves partially and forms fluid
suspension. At cooling of both melts hard mass was formed, and the
composition with flour was more stiffer and more homogeneous. Both
compositions do not burn at atmospheric pressure, that makes fusion
procedure reasonably safe.

I have fired composition with a flour in a test motor.

Composition:
NH4NO3 72.5 %
KNO3 11.4 %
Flour 16.1 %

BATES Grain OD 34 mm
Core 13 mm
Length 58 mm
Mass 63.2 g
Density 1.41 g/cm^3
Nozzle 4.5 mm
Kn 246

Igniter: BP tablet (34 mm OD, 5 mm long), placed on top of the grain with
2-3 mm gap, initiated with blackmatch.

The results were partially successful. The fuel has fired and burned down
completely and stably. However burn time was very long: 117 seconds.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 17437 invoked from network); 28 Aug 2001 20:59:27 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 28 Aug 2001 20:59:27 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 28294 invoked by uid 50005); 28 Aug 2001 19:58:51 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpa with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.206278 secs); 28 Aug 2001 19:58:51 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 28 Aug 2001 19:58:51 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA30432; Tue, 28 Aug 2001 13:47:01 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 98935 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 28 Aug 2001 20:46:59          +0000
Received: from po3.glue.umd.edu (po3.glue.umd.edu [128.8.10.123]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA30417 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 28 Aug 2001 13:46:59 -0700
Received: from z.glue.umd.edu (IDENT:root@z.glue.umd.edu [128.8.10.71]) by          po3.glue.umd.edu (8.10.1/8.10.1) with ESMTP id f7SKkvq25368 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 28 Aug 2001 16:46:58 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from z.glue.umd.edu (IDENT:sendmail@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by          z.glue.umd.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id QAA25071 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 28 Aug 2001 16:46:57 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from localhost (acase@localhost) by z.glue.umd.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with          ESMTP id QAA25067 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 28 Aug 2001          16:46:57 -0400 (EDT)
X-Authentication-Warning: z.glue.umd.edu: acase owned process doing -bs
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.GSO.4.21.0108281633330.23659-100000@z.glue.umd.edu>
Date:         Tue, 28 Aug 2001 16:46:56 -0400
Reply-To: "Andrew Case" <acase@GLUE.UMD.EDU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Andrew Case" <acase@GLUE.UMD.EDU>
Subject:      [AR] Washington, DC area Arocketeers
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <71.11d681ba.28bd22a9@aol.com>

I'm looking for like minded people in the Washington DC
area - are there any on this list? I know there are
active groups in the area, and I'm planning to get in
touch with them, but I figured I might as well check on
the list. In the short term, I'm mostly just interested
in talking to people who don't think building rockets
in the garage is nuts :) In the long term, I'm interested
in the possibility collaborating on some mutually interesting
project.

......Andrew


Andrew Case                             |
acase@plasma.umd.edu                    |
Institute for Plasma Research           |
University of Maryland, College Park    |

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 11423 invoked from network); 28 Aug 2001 21:05:09 -0000
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 28 Aug 2001 21:05:09 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 2428 invoked by uid 50005); 28 Aug 2001 21:05:45 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpe with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 2.541862 secs); 28 Aug 2001 21:05:45 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 28 Aug 2001 21:05:41 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA30502; Tue, 28 Aug 2001 13:54:09 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 98944 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 28 Aug 2001 20:54:03          +0000
Received: from imo-d05.mx.aol.com (imo-d05.mx.aol.com [205.188.157.37]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA30486 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Tue, 28 Aug 2001 13:54:03 -0700
Received: from Sociald84@aol.com by imo-d05.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v31_r1.4.) id          c.7c.1aa45f1f (3870); Tue, 28 Aug 2001 16:53:24 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0BEB_01C56B69.4CEF5AA0"
X-Mailer: AOL 6.0 for Windows US sub 10536
Message-ID:  <7c.1aa45f1f.28bd5ec4@aol.com>
Date:         Tue, 28 Aug 2001 16:53:24 EDT
Reply-To: <Sociald84@AOL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <Sociald84@AOL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] AN eutectics experiments
Comments: To: spas@akcecc.kiev.ua
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0BEB_01C56B69.4CEF5AA0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Hi,

I just wanted to say that this was an awesome post. One thing I noticed
however was that the fuel content seemed a little bit low. I know that you
did this two years ago but have you tried again with a lower O/F ratio in the
region of maybee 70/30? This sounds like an awesome experiment that I might
try when I have some time. Have you tried adding starch to sucrose to see if
it suppresses the reaction there?

Mark

In a message dated 8/28/2001 2:37:47 PM Mountain Daylight Time,
spas@AKCECC.KIEV.UA writes:


>
> Hello all,
>
> I have posted this information two years ago, but I decide to re-post it
> taking into account lively talk about AN melt.
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> It seems to me, that the dream of each roketeer is a propellant containing
> not 10-20 % liquid binder, but 50 or even 90%. As the propellant can not
> contain so much of binder-fuel, it should be a binder-oxidizer. Practically
> sole candidate for this role for the amateur can be AN. It has rather low
> melting point (169 deg. C) and forms set of eutectic mixtures with a low
> melting point. Among them are most interesting:
> 1. AN-KN (13.6 % KN), m.p. 156.5 deg. C.
> At hardening of this eutectic phase-stabilized AN is formed.
> 2. AN-NaN (20.5 % NaN), m.p. 120.8 deg. C.
> The large lack of this eutectic is that at its hardening a mixture of
> crystals AN and NaN is formed, which has phase-transition points of both AN
> and NaN. For example, at cooling under 84.2 deg. C crystals expand, thus a
> test-tube, in which a fusion was made, frequently bursts.
> 3. AN-KN-NaN (66.5-12.5-21.0 %), m.p. 118.5 deg. C.
> At hardening of this eutectic the phase-stabilized mix of crystals (AN + KN)
> + (NaN) is formed. The solid eutectic is rather strong to serve as a binder.
>
> Certainly, fusible binder is not good binder, but taking into account
> KN-sorbitol propellant experience, it can be successfully used by the
> amateur. PROPEP gives Isp in the range of 201-203 for the mixtures of
> triples eutectic with such fuels as carbon, sucrose or cellulose.
>
> The purpose of my first experiments was to establish, what fuel can be
> combined with a melt of an eutectic without decomposition and danger of
> self-ignition. I began with triple eutectic as the most safe, the
> experiments were carried out in a glass beaker submerged in an oil bath,
> heated up to 130-135 deg. C. In all cases the stochiometric mixes was
> prepared. Here are the basic results.
>
> Activated charcoal.
> I knew that the activated charcoal catalyzes decomposition of AN, but has
> not found anywhere data, at what temperature it occurs. It has appeared,
> that at 130 deg. C decomposition already is appreciable, the liquid mix
> froths up, at cooling porous mass is formed.
>
> Sorbitol (anhydrous).
> The sorbitol easily dissolves in a melt, forming a stable colorless
> solution. The solidified mixture easily crumbles, it is much less strong,
> than eutectic alone.
>
> Sucrose.
> The sucrose quickly decomposes in a melt. After 1 minute the mixture becomes
> brown and froths up.
>
> Starch.
> I supposed to use starch as insoluble fine-dispersed fuel. On my surprise
> starch swelled and then completely dissolved in a melt. The stable yellow
> solution was formed which is appreciable thicker, than eutectic. All this
> very much reminded dissolution of starch in water. At cooling mass was
> formed, which was more stiffer than pure eutectic. Within two days I have
> not noticed attributes of a hygroscopicity. It is very unexpected and
> encouraging result. BTW, maybe starch will be useful additive in Candy
> propellant?
>
> Cotton wool.
> After experiment with starch I have thought: " maybe cellulose will be
> dissolved in that super-solvent too ? " But the cotton wool was not
> dissolved, and also was not moistened completely because of its
> voluminosity. It appears, 80 % binder can be not enough too! ;)
>
> Activated charcoal + starch.
> It is known, that it is possible to find a poison for every catalyst. For
> activated charcoal it can be substance adsorbed on its surface. It has
> appeared, that starch can play this role and prevents AN decomposition in
> the presence of activated charcoal. However analysis of the stiffened
> mixture revealed, that the tiny bubbles of air have stuck to particles of
> charcoal and mass has turned out porous. Next time I shall try vacuum
> degassing.
>
> Wheat flour swelled and the whole mass became dough-like and non-flowing.
> The solidified mixture was very hard, but contained air bubbles, which had
> not any chances to release from thick mass.
>
> Gelatin did not swell, not dissolve, not decompose.
>
> Polyvinyl alcohol slightly swelled and formed fluid suspension.
>
> Carboxymethyl cellulose slightly swelled and, as cotton wool, was not
> moistened completely because of its voluminosity.
>
> All obtained compositions burn astably at atmospheric pressure.
>
>
> After experiments with triple eutectic (AN-KN-NaN) I have decided to return
> to a double eutectic (AN-KN), because fuels on its basis should have higher
> ISP (theoretically about 210). I have found, that at temperature of 160-165
> deg C the alloys with starch and wheat flour can be easily obtained. At that
> starch dissolves completely, and flour dissolves partially and forms fluid
> suspension. At cooling of both melts hard mass was formed, and the
> composition with flour was more stiffer and more homogeneous. Both
> compositions do not burn at atmospheric pressure, that makes fusion
> procedure reasonably safe.
>
> I have fired composition with a flour in a test motor.
>
> Composition:
> NH4NO3 72.5 %
> KNO3 11.4 %
> Flour 16.1 %
>
> BATES Grain OD 34 mm
> Core 13 mm
> Length 58 mm
> Mass 63.2 g
> Density 1.41 g/cm^3
> Nozzle 4.5 mm
> Kn 246
>
> Igniter: BP tablet (34 mm OD, 5 mm long), placed on top of the grain with
> 2-3 mm gap, initiated with blackmatch.
>
> The results were partially successful. The fuel has fired and burned down
> completely and stably. However burn time was very long: 117 seconds.
>



------=_NextPart_000_0BEB_01C56B69.4CEF5AA0
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<HTML><FONT FACE=arial,helvetica><FONT  SIZE=3>Hi,
<BR>
<BR>I just wanted to say that this was an awesome post. One thing I noticed
<BR>however was that the fuel content seemed a little bit low. I know that you
<BR>did this two years ago but have you tried again with a lower O/F ratio in the
<BR>region of maybee 70/30? This sounds like an awesome experiment that I might
<BR>try when I have some time. Have you tried adding starch to sucrose to see if
<BR>it suppresses the reaction there?
<BR>
<BR>Mark
<BR>
<BR>In a message dated 8/28/2001 2:37:47 PM Mountain Daylight Time,
<BR>spas@AKCECC.KIEV.UA writes:
<BR>
<BR></FONT><FONT  COLOR="#000000" SIZE=2 FAMILY="SANSSERIF" FACE="Arial" LANG="0">
<BR><BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE style="BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px">
<BR>Hello all,
<BR>
<BR>I have posted this information two years ago, but I decide to re-post it
<BR>taking into account lively talk about AN melt.
<BR>
<BR>---------------------------------------------------------------------------
<BR>
<BR>It seems to me, that the dream of each roketeer is a propellant containing
<BR>not 10-20 % liquid binder, but 50 or even 90%. As the propellant can not
<BR>contain so much of binder-fuel, it should be a binder-oxidizer. Practically
<BR>sole candidate for this role for the amateur can be AN. It has rather low
<BR>melting point (169 deg. C) and forms set of eutectic mixtures with a low
<BR>melting point. Among them are most interesting:
<BR>1. AN-KN (13.6 % KN), m.p. 156.5 deg. C.
<BR>At hardening of this eutectic phase-stabilized AN is formed.
<BR>2. AN-NaN (20.5 % NaN), m.p. 120.8 deg. C.
<BR>The large lack of this eutectic is that at its hardening a mixture of
<BR>crystals AN and NaN is formed, which has phase-transition points of both AN
<BR>and NaN. For example, at cooling under 84.2 deg. C crystals expand, thus a
<BR>test-tube, in which a fusion was made, frequently bursts.
<BR>3. AN-KN-NaN (66.5-12.5-21.0 %), m.p. 118.5 deg. C.
<BR>At hardening of this eutectic the phase-stabilized mix of crystals (AN + KN)
<BR>+ (NaN) is formed. The solid eutectic is rather strong to serve as a binder.
<BR>
<BR>Certainly, fusible binder is not good binder, but taking into account
<BR>KN-sorbitol propellant experience, it can be successfully used by the
<BR>amateur. PROPEP gives Isp in the range of 201-203 for the mixtures of
<BR>triples eutectic with such fuels as carbon, sucrose or cellulose.
<BR>
<BR>The purpose of my first experiments was to establish, what fuel can be
<BR>combined with a melt of an eutectic without decomposition and danger of
<BR>self-ignition. I began with triple eutectic as the most safe, the
<BR>experiments were carried out in a glass beaker submerged in an oil bath,
<BR>heated up to 130-135 deg. C. In all cases the stochiometric mixes was
<BR>prepared. Here are the basic results.
<BR>
<BR>Activated charcoal.
<BR>I knew that the activated charcoal catalyzes decomposition of AN, but has
<BR>not found anywhere data, at what temperature it occurs. It has appeared,
<BR>that at 130 deg. C decomposition already is appreciable, the liquid mix
<BR>froths up, at cooling porous mass is formed.
<BR>
<BR>Sorbitol (anhydrous).
<BR>The sorbitol easily dissolves in a melt, forming a stable colorless
<BR>solution. The solidified mixture easily crumbles, it is much less strong,
<BR>than eutectic alone.
<BR>
<BR>Sucrose.
<BR>The sucrose quickly decomposes in a melt. After 1 minute the mixture becomes
<BR>brown and froths up.
<BR>
<BR>Starch.
<BR>I supposed to use starch as insoluble fine-dispersed fuel. On my surprise
<BR>starch swelled and then completely dissolved in a melt. The stable yellow
<BR>solution was formed which is appreciable thicker, than eutectic. All this
<BR>very much reminded dissolution of starch in water. At cooling mass was
<BR>formed, which was more stiffer than pure eutectic. Within two days I have
<BR>not noticed attributes of a hygroscopicity. It is very unexpected and
<BR>encouraging result. BTW, maybe starch will be useful additive in Candy
<BR>propellant?
<BR>
<BR>Cotton wool.
<BR>After experiment with starch I have thought: " maybe cellulose will be
<BR>dissolved in that super-solvent too ? " But the cotton wool was not
<BR>dissolved, and also was not moistened completely because of its
<BR>voluminosity. It appears, 80 % binder can be not enough too! ;)
<BR>
<BR>Activated charcoal + starch.
<BR>It is known, that it is possible to find a poison for every catalyst. For
<BR>activated charcoal it can be substance adsorbed on its surface. It has
<BR>appeared, that starch can play this role and prevents AN decomposition in
<BR>the presence of activated charcoal. However analysis of the stiffened
<BR>mixture revealed, that the tiny bubbles of air have stuck to particles of
<BR>charcoal and mass has turned out porous. Next time I shall try vacuum
<BR>degassing.
<BR>
<BR>Wheat flour swelled and the whole mass became dough-like and non-flowing.
<BR>The solidified mixture was very hard, but contained air bubbles, which had
<BR>not any chances to release from thick mass.
<BR>
<BR>Gelatin did not swell, not dissolve, not decompose.
<BR>
<BR>Polyvinyl alcohol slightly swelled and formed fluid suspension.
<BR>
<BR>Carboxymethyl cellulose slightly swelled and, as cotton wool, was not
<BR>moistened completely because of its voluminosity.
<BR>
<BR>All obtained compositions burn astably at atmospheric pressure.
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>After experiments with triple eutectic (AN-KN-NaN) I have decided to return
<BR>to a double eutectic (AN-KN), because fuels on its basis should have higher
<BR>ISP (theoretically about 210). I have found, that at temperature of 160-165
<BR>deg C the alloys with starch and wheat flour can be easily obtained. At that
<BR>starch dissolves completely, and flour dissolves partially and forms fluid
<BR>suspension. At cooling of both melts hard mass was formed, and the
<BR>composition with flour was more stiffer and more homogeneous. Both
<BR>compositions do not burn at atmospheric pressure, that makes fusion
<BR>procedure reasonably safe.
<BR>
<BR>I have fired composition with a flour in a test motor.
<BR>
<BR>Composition:
<BR>NH4NO3 72.5 %
<BR>KNO3 11.4 %
<BR>Flour 16.1 %
<BR>
<BR>BATES Grain OD 34 mm
<BR>Core 13 mm
<BR>Length 58 mm
<BR>Mass 63.2 g
<BR>Density 1.41 g/cm^3
<BR>Nozzle 4.5 mm
<BR>Kn 246
<BR>
<BR>Igniter: BP tablet (34 mm OD, 5 mm long), placed on top of the grain with
<BR>2-3 mm gap, initiated with blackmatch.
<BR>
<BR>The results were partially successful. The fuel has fired and burned down
<BR>completely and stably. However burn time was very long: 117 seconds.
<BR></BLOCKQUOTE>
<BR></FONT><FONT  COLOR="#000000" SIZE=3 FAMILY="SANSSERIF" FACE="Arial" LANG="0">
<BR></FONT></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0BEB_01C56B69.4CEF5AA0--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 28610 invoked from network); 28 Aug 2001 21:25:47 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 28 Aug 2001 21:25:47 -0000
Received: (qmail 19612 invoked by uid 50005); 28 Aug 2001 20:25:11 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpa with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.214149 secs); 28 Aug 2001 20:25:11 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 28 Aug 2001 20:25:11 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA30852; Tue, 28 Aug 2001 14:19:24 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 98984 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 28 Aug 2001 21:19:01          +0000
Received: from robin.mail.pas.earthlink.net (robin.mail.pas.earthlink.net          [207.217.120.65]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA30837          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 28 Aug 2001 14:19:01 -0700
Received: from scottje (1Cust167.tnt2.holman.wi.da.uu.net [63.29.19.167]) by          robin.mail.pas.earthlink.net (8.11.5/8.9.3) with SMTP id f7SLJ0o29994          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 28 Aug 2001 14:19:00 -0700 (PDT)
References:  <Pine.LNX.4.10.10108281024420.27425-100000@itc.uci.edu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <003101c12fff$9a9e0de0$f072fea9@scottje>
Date:         Tue, 28 Aug 2001 16:25:38 -0400
Reply-To: "Scott & Jeanette" <frazer2001@EARTHLINK.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Scott & Jeanette" <frazer2001@EARTHLINK.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Rocket Construction Forum
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

First off,  I didn't really want to ask specific questions on here to create
long threads on relatively simple questions/topics.
    I am making a 3.5" OD minimum diameter carbon fiber rocket.  I have the
body tubes already-they are actually driveshafts for experimental
vehicles( sorry but my access to them is very limited.)  I would like to lay
up a carbon fiber nose cone and fin can.  For the fins I was planning on
using a G-10 core and then laminating carbon cloth over in several layers.
Other than wrapping cardboard/phenolic tubes  with fiberglass and
reinforcing g-10 fins, I have very little experience with composites.
        I am using West Systems resins and hardeners if that makes much of a
difference.  I have been referencing John Cokers site as well as ROL but was
just looking for more info and other methods.  Thanks for the previous
suggestions.

Scott

----- Original Message -----
From: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Tuesday, August 28, 2001 1:25 PM
Subject: Re: [AR] Rocket Construction Forum


> Hi Scott,
>
> There are several on this list (including myself) with composite
> construction experience.  What are your projects?
>
> Ray
>
> On Mon, 27 Aug 2001, Scott & Jeanette wrote:
>
> > Does anyone know of a good forum for rocket construction techniques?
> > I have some composite projects going on and need some assistance.
> >
> > Thanks
> >
> > Scott
> >

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 12821 invoked from network); 28 Aug 2001 21:29:40 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 28 Aug 2001 21:29:40 -0000
Received: (qmail 22465 invoked by uid 50005); 28 Aug 2001 20:29:04 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpa with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.17176 secs); 28 Aug 2001 20:29:04 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 28 Aug 2001 20:29:03 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA30956; Tue, 28 Aug 2001 14:25:27 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 99010 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 28 Aug 2001 21:25:25          +0000
Received: from localhost (rcalkins@localhost) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with          ESMTP id OAA30941; Tue, 28 Aug 2001 14:25:14 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.LNX.4.10.10108281353310.30286-100000@itc.uci.edu>
Date:         Tue, 28 Aug 2001 14:25:14 -0700
Reply-To: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
Subject:      Re: [AR] liquids question: alcohol/N2O propellant feeding
Comments: To: Tjpoulton@AOL.COM
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <66.139a37f7.28bc923f@aol.com>

Hi Mike,

On Tue, 28 Aug 2001 Tjpoulton@AOL.COM wrote:

Lots of people have put forth many good ideas here, I have a few I've been
thinking on for a while.

First of all, I support your decision to change from LOx to N2O.  While I
have been vocal in my support of LOx, after using it on some small
designs, I have rethought some of my positions.  I am not sure of the
minimum design that can benefit from LOx, but it seems to me that LOx
doesn't become favorable untill you are approaching hundred thousands of
pound-seconds total impulse (I haven't run any numbers yet to support this
and hope to be proven wrong). This applies to blowdown systems requiring
an external pressurant tank.  Those with gas generators (gg), heat pipes,
mini-pumps and other novel methods should be able to bring this number
down at least an order of magnitude.

Probably the easiest biprop is a pressure-fed N2O/Propane (or butane, or
ethane, or solutions like propane/natural gas where you can tailor your
vaporization curve).

Something you might look at is the creation of a "gas generator" from
solid CO2, similar to a solid propellant grain.

Now, if you want to go the extra complexity and use N2O to pressurize your
fuel, it SHOULD be safe.  As others have noted, N2O is fairly non-reactive
untill it is heated.  The safest method would be to use something like a
waterbed liner to line your fuel tank.  There are several things to think
about in this case, each needs to be designed for and tested.

1. When the N2O pressurizes the tank, there will be some heating and
cooling due to gas expansion and contraction.  Be careful that the bladder
material can handle these temps.

2. Flexible bladders can be permeable, allowing nitrous oxide to get into
your fuel.  If this, you can have an explosive blend, at the least, rough
combustion.

However, I think in general, this is a good approach.  Go for it, and I
look forward to hearing more about this fascinating project!

Ray

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 26815 invoked from network); 28 Aug 2001 22:18:24 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 28 Aug 2001 22:18:24 -0000
Received: (qmail 13551 invoked by uid 50005); 28 Aug 2001 22:16:35 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpf with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.223528 secs); 28 Aug 2001 22:16:35 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 28 Aug 2001 22:16:34 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA31293; Tue, 28 Aug 2001 15:14:06 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 99050 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 28 Aug 2001 22:14:03          +0000
Received: from imo-m05.mx.aol.com (imo-m05.mx.aol.com [64.12.136.8]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA31278 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Tue, 28 Aug 2001 15:14:02 -0700
Received: from Sociald84@aol.com by imo-m05.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v31_r1.4.) id          w.14d.13de24 (3870) for <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Tue, 28 Aug 2001          18:13:29 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/mixed;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0BF0_01C56B69.4CF1CBA0"
X-Mailer: AOL 6.0 for Windows US sub 10536
Message-ID:  <14d.13de24.28bd7189@aol.com>
Date:         Tue, 28 Aug 2001 18:13:29 EDT
Reply-To: <Sociald84@AOL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <Sociald84@AOL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Rocket Construction Forum
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0BF0_01C56B69.4CF1CBA0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit



------=_NextPart_000_0BF0_01C56B69.4CF1CBA0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Type: message/rfc822
Content-Disposition: inline

Return-path: <Sociald84@aol.com>
From: Sociald84@aol.com
Full-name: Social d84
Message-ID: <130.c57764.28bd7166@aol.com>
Date: Tue, 28 Aug 2001 18:12:54 EDT
Subject: Re: [AR] Rocket Construction Forum
To: frazer2001@EARTHLINK.NET
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part2_14d.13de24.28bd7166_boundary"
X-Mailer: AOL 6.0 for Windows US sub 10536


--part2_14d.13de24.28bd7166_boundary
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

In a message dated 8/28/2001 3:45:36 PM Mountain Daylight Time,
frazer2001@EARTHLINK.NET writes:


> First off,  I didn't really want to ask specific questions on here to create
> long threads on relatively simple questions/topics.
>     I am making a 3.5" OD minimum diameter carbon fiber rocket.  I have the
> body tubes already-they are actually driveshafts for experimental
> vehicles( sorry but my access to them is very limited.)  I would like to lay
> up a carbon fiber nose cone and fin can.  For the fins I was planning on
> using a G-10 core and then laminating carbon cloth over in several layers.
> Other than wrapping cardboard/phenolic tubes  with fiberglass and
> reinforcing g-10 fins, I have very little experience with composites.
>         I am using West Systems resins and hardeners if that makes much of a
> difference.  I have been referencing John Cokers site as well as ROL but was
> just looking for more info and other methods.  Thanks for the previous
> suggestions.
>
>

For the nose cone the best method would be to make the exact shape in wood
and seal it with a waterproof sealant and make either a plastic (heat formed)
or plaster mold of it and lay up the nose cone that way.

With the mold you can do complex shapes like a shoulder or little finlets on
the cone.

Mark

--part2_14d.13de24.28bd7166_boundary
Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<HTML><FONT FACE=arial,helvetica><FONT  SIZE=3>In a message dated 8/28/2001 3:45:36 PM Mountain Daylight Time,
<BR>frazer2001@EARTHLINK.NET writes:
<BR>
<BR></FONT><FONT  COLOR="#000000" SIZE=2 FAMILY="SANSSERIF" FACE="Arial" LANG="0">
<BR><BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE style="BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px">First off, &nbsp;I didn't really want to ask specific questions on here to create
<BR>long threads on relatively simple questions/topics.
<BR> &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;I am making a 3.5" OD minimum diameter carbon fiber rocket. &nbsp;I have the
<BR>body tubes already-they are actually driveshafts for experimental
<BR>vehicles( sorry but my access to them is very limited.) &nbsp;I would like to lay
<BR>up a carbon fiber nose cone and fin can. &nbsp;For the fins I was planning on
<BR>using a G-10 core and then laminating carbon cloth over in several layers.
<BR>Other than wrapping cardboard/phenolic tubes &nbsp;with fiberglass and
<BR>reinforcing g-10 fins, I have very little experience with composites.
<BR> &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;I am using West Systems resins and hardeners if that makes much of a
<BR>difference. &nbsp;I have been referencing John Cokers site as well as ROL but was
<BR>just looking for more info and other methods. &nbsp;Thanks for the previous
<BR>suggestions.
<BR>
<BR>Scott</BLOCKQUOTE>
<BR></FONT><FONT  COLOR="#000000" SIZE=3 FAMILY="SANSSERIF" FACE="Arial" LANG="0">
<BR>For the nose cone the best method would be to make the exact shape in wood
<BR>and seal it with a waterproof sealant and make either a plastic (heat formed)
<BR>or plaster mold of it and lay up the nose cone that way.
<BR>
<BR>With the mold you can do complex shapes like a shoulder or little finlets on
<BR>the cone.
<BR>
<BR>Mark</FONT></HTML>

--part2_14d.13de24.28bd7166_boundary--

------=_NextPart_000_0BF0_01C56B69.4CF1CBA0--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 28516 invoked from network); 28 Aug 2001 22:34:02 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 28 Aug 2001 22:34:02 -0000
Received: (qmail 9030 invoked by uid 50005); 28 Aug 2001 21:33:26 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpa with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.589045 secs); 28 Aug 2001 21:33:26 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 28 Aug 2001 21:33:25 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA31431; Tue, 28 Aug 2001 15:28:52 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 99067 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 28 Aug 2001 22:28:45          +0000
Received: from localhost (rcalkins@localhost) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with          ESMTP id PAA31416; Tue, 28 Aug 2001 15:28:43 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.LNX.4.10.10108281433360.30286-100000@itc.uci.edu>
Date:         Tue, 28 Aug 2001 15:28:43 -0700
Reply-To: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Rocket Construction Forum LONG!
Comments: To: Scott & Jeanette <frazer2001@EARTHLINK.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <003101c12fff$9a9e0de0$f072fea9@scottje>

On Tue, 28 Aug 2001, Scott & Jeanette wrote:

>     I am making a 3.5" OD minimum diameter carbon fiber rocket.
> I would like to lay up a carbon fiber nose cone and fin can.
Okay, the easiest way to do the nose is what's called "composite moldless
construction".  Carve a piece of foam to shape and wrap it with
carbon/epoxy. Sand/fill high and low spots.  Take extra care with the
foam, it's much cheaper and easier to sand than carbon.  You can use
foam-in-a-can to fill low spots on most foam, it sands fairly easily when
fully cured.

To do a really nice, smooth nose, you want to make a female mold.  Since
it's tough to work on a concave surface, generally this requires the
creation of a male mold (called a plug) which is exactly like the part you
want to turn out.

A lathe, especially a wood lathe is great for this, although I generally
place a solid wood core through the foam body before I spin it fast.  A
drill press will work if you don't have access to a lathe, and I've even
made small parts by putting a hand drill in a vise and chucking the part
up in it.  It's important to get a good finish on your plug, I generally
wet sand my parts with 1600 or above grit sand paper, then buff it out
with several coats of wax.

Now the mold.  For something like this, I recommend a two piece mold. Take
two pieces of masonite cut to fit the curve of the nose, on the back side,
bondo (yes, the automotive body filler) them in place so they split the
nose lengthwise.  Make sure the fillet between masonite and nose is clear
of excess material so you have minimal cleanup on the finished part.  Add
some register pins on your masonite flange to locate against the other
half of the mold. These can be anything as long as it is tapered to allow
a good mold release.


If you are sure everything is as smooth as you can make it, it's time for
your release coat.  I like PVA, polyvinyl alcohol.  Spray a mist coat on
it, repeat untill you have full coverage, then one slightly wet coat to
flow everything together.  (Some people swear by brush coating with PVA, I
could never get it to work for me, with small parts and a good finish, you
might not need a mold release at all, or just a light coating of PAM.)
When the PVA is dry, spray with gelcoat or even regular epoxy.  Be careful
when brushing the PVA, it's fairly fragile.  After you have a fairly thick
cured layer of epoxy, cover it with a couple layers of cheap fiberglass
(even burlap is often used), and remember it's best to allow each layer to
cure independantly and it's better to overbuild a mold than underbuild
it.

When you are ready to pull the female mold from the plug, if you have
difficulty, the PVA is water soluble, just spray a jet into any availible
crevice.  Remove the masonite flange (usually a good smack with a hammer
will pop the bondo loose) and clean up any bondo residue.  Prep the
surface, including the flange.  Replace the plug and repeat the PVA and
molding process. Allow the other half of the mold to cure and remove the
plug.

Clean and wax the mold halves well. Repeat the PVA process, coat with a
thick layer of epoxy.  Make sure the separation lines are mostly filled.
After the epoxy is cured, it's time to fit the carbon into the mold.  You
probably want to use at least two pieces to keep from having an overlap on
one side.  Depending on the size of your nose, you may want to epoxy after
you have the carbon in place.

You're just about done, fill the core with foam and you're done.  You can
do without the foam, but it adds lots of strength for very little weight.
Pop everything loose from the molds, finish sand the mold lines and paint.

Fin cans I'll cover in another post, this one is already long enough!

Ray

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 1471 invoked from network); 28 Aug 2001 22:42:20 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 28 Aug 2001 22:42:20 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 20201 invoked by uid 50005); 28 Aug 2001 22:41:43 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.184848 secs); 28 Aug 2001 22:41:43 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 28 Aug 2001 22:41:43 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA31544; Tue, 28 Aug 2001 15:37:37 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 99084 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 28 Aug 2001 22:37:32          +0000
Received: from rasmus.uib.no (exim@rasmus.uib.no [129.177.12.30]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA31528 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Tue, 28 Aug 2001 15:37:31 -0700
Received: from tunnel-46-114.vpn.uib.no (emil.rasmus.uib.no) [129.177.46.114]          by rasmus.uib.no for arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU with esmtp (Exim 3.16) id          15brU5-0006eV-00; Wed, 29 Aug 2001 00:37:26 +0200
X-Sender: st07696@rasmus.uib.no
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <5.1.0.14.0.20010709020728.02578a48@lstud.ii.uib.no>
Date:         Wed, 29 Aug 2001 00:30:22 +0200
Reply-To: "Emil Johnsen" <Emil.Johnsen@STUDENT.UIB.NO>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Emil Johnsen" <Emil.Johnsen@STUDENT.UIB.NO>
Subject:      [AR] Exploding hybrid
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

During a static test in June, the third test of my motor, the motor
exploded. The motor was an N2O/Butyl hybrid with ~850g of propellant,
expected burn time ~10sec. I have a hypothesis as to what happened, but I
would very much appreciate any advice that might clear up what actually
happened, so that it can be avoided in the future.

Different from previous tests:
-High temperature, 28-30C air temperature (~15C for previous tests) and
both nitrous bottle and tank exposed to the sun.
-Injector diameter increased from 2.0 to 2.5mm  (Later tests with 2.5mm
injector were successful)
-Fuel grain possibly somewhat compressed at nozzle end. (But port diameter
probably larger than first test)

Observations:
-Motor exploded within a fraction of a second after activating the ignitor.
-Alu. motor casing broken open at nozzle end. Severely deformed.
-Top closure ejected.
-Fuel grain and PVC liner torn apart from the inside.
-Fill line looked like it had been cut off, rather than melted. Normally
there are several cm of completely melted plastic at the end. This time it
looked like it had bursted rather then melted.

My hypothesis:
The piece of KNO3/Sucrose used to ignite the motor  (13mm OD, 5mm ID, 15mm
long) was pushed down to the nozzle (7.8mm throat D.), blocking it. As N2O
flowed into the combustion chamber it was decomposed by the heat from the
igniter, with the nozzle still blocked, pressure increased rapidly
resulting in an explosion.

I have made a new motor and successfully fired it twice, it uses an igniter
which has much shorter burn time and which is thin enough be easily
ejected, preventing blockage of the nozzle. If my hypothesis is correct,
this should prevent further problems, but I'm not 100% sure if I am on the
right track about what caused the failure..

Comments? Suggestions?


Emil Johnsen

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 13232 invoked from network); 28 Aug 2001 23:14:30 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 28 Aug 2001 23:14:30 -0000
Received: (qmail 2520 invoked by uid 50005); 28 Aug 2001 23:15:06 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpe with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.139679 secs); 28 Aug 2001 23:15:06 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 28 Aug 2001 23:15:06 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA31724; Tue, 28 Aug 2001 16:10:01 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 99107 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 28 Aug 2001 23:09:58          +0000
Received: from spsystems.net (spsystems.net [209.47.149.227]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA31704 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Tue,          28 Aug 2001 16:09:57 -0700
Received: (from henry@localhost) by spsystems.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id TAA24652;          Tue, 28 Aug 2001 19:09:16 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010828185904.24467A-100000@spsystems.net>
Date:         Tue, 28 Aug 2001 19:09:15 -0400
Reply-To: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] liquids question: alcohol/N2O propellant feeding
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <Pine.LNX.4.10.10108281353310.30286-100000@itc.uci.edu>

On Tue, 28 Aug 2001, Ray Calkins wrote:
> ...This applies to blowdown systems requiring
> an external pressurant tank.

Dept of Nitpicking:

Blowdown systems, by definition, don't *have* external pressurant tanks.
You probably meant to say "pressure-fed systems".

Blowdown systems rely on an initial supply of gas in the ullage space to
expand and supply continued pressurization (albeit typically at a steadily
declining pressure).

It's even possible to have a pump-fed blowdown system (!).  The classical
Atlas uses blowdown for tank pressurization after booster-engine jettison,
relying on remaining gas in the tanks to maintain adequate pressurization.
Its pressurization system departs with the booster engines.

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 16740 invoked from network); 28 Aug 2001 23:58:33 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 28 Aug 2001 23:58:33 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 14376 invoked by uid 50005); 28 Aug 2001 22:57:56 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpa with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.254258 secs); 28 Aug 2001 22:57:56 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 28 Aug 2001 22:57:56 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA31903; Tue, 28 Aug 2001 16:50:11 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 99134 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 28 Aug 2001 23:49:43          +0000
Received: from imo-d10.mx.aol.com (imo-d10.mx.aol.com [205.188.157.42]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA31883 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Tue, 28 Aug 2001 16:49:42 -0700
Received: from Ricanakk@aol.com by imo-d10.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v31_r1.4.) id          t.139.bd9772 (4369); Tue, 28 Aug 2001 19:49:05 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: AOL 5.0 for Windows sub 108
Message-ID:  <139.bd9772.28bd87f1@aol.com>
Date:         Tue, 28 Aug 2001 19:49:05 EDT
Reply-To: <Ricanakk@AOL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <Ricanakk@AOL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] AN melt
Comments: To: jmorken@home.com
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

In a message dated 01/08/28 04:35:26 Eastern Daylight Time, jmorken@HOME.COM
writes:

<< Has anyone considered using liquid AN as an oxidizer for a hybrid or liquid
 biprop engine?  If the decomposition/detonation hazards were reduced ~180C+
 seems like a more reasonable temperature than liquid oxyen's -183C !>>

Yes, indeed, this is a project I will be investigating at a future date. LPAN
(liquid phase AN) has very interesting potential as an oxidizer.

<< I think it is good to know as much as possible about the materials you are
 working with to keep rocket design reasonably safe!  This includes the
 detonation properties of different materials.  >>

Absolutely! Especially with oft misunderstood materials like AN. This is why
I have so far collected and carefully read a  two inch stack (literally) of
research papers dealing with the properties of LPAN, particularly with regard
to decomposition and detonation. And I've discussed my project with an
industrial chemist who deals with tons of LPAN on a daily basis. Doing
background reseach is, in my opinion, one of the most interesting (and
ultimately rewarding) aspects of amateur rocketry...! And helps reduce risks.

Richard Nakka

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 16747 invoked from network); 29 Aug 2001 00:12:39 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 29 Aug 2001 00:12:39 -0000
Received: (qmail 29801 invoked by uid 50005); 29 Aug 2001 00:11:59 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.257992 secs); 29 Aug 2001 00:11:59 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 29 Aug 2001 00:11:58 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA32042; Tue, 28 Aug 2001 17:08:12 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 99167 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 29 Aug 2001 00:08:10          +0000
Received: from sire.mail.pas.earthlink.net (sire.mail.pas.earthlink.net          [207.217.120.182]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id          RAA32027 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 28 Aug 2001 17:08:10 -0700
Received: from jfiebelk (dialup-63.214.126.211.Dial1.Boston1.Level3.net          [63.214.126.211]) by sire.mail.pas.earthlink.net (EL-8_9_3_3/8.9.3)          with ESMTP id RAA25918 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 28 Aug 2001          17:08:07 -0700 (PDT)
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Priority: 3
X-Mailer: Microsoft Internet Mail 4.70.1155
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <200108290008.RAA25918@sire.mail.pas.earthlink.net>
Date:         Tue, 28 Aug 2001 17:16:30 -0400
Reply-To: "John Fiebelkorn" <fiebelko@CAPECOD.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Fiebelkorn" <fiebelko@CAPECOD.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Rocket Construction Forum
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Hi,

        Hope nobody minds if I jump in with a question here. Has anyone on the
list used SonoTubes or similar for large airframes (I'm looking at 12"
dia.)? The only ones I can find nearby are coated with wax on the outside,
not sure if they use a release (it's not wax if they do) on the inside. Any
suggestions for using, strengthing, or prepping/glassing?

Thanks,

John

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 212 invoked from network); 29 Aug 2001 00:22:54 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 29 Aug 2001 00:22:54 -0000
Received: (qmail 6691 invoked by uid 50005); 29 Aug 2001 00:21:42 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd with qmail-scanner-1.00 (. Clean. Processed in 0.610286 secs); 29 Aug 2001 00:21:42 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 29 Aug 2001 00:21:41 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA32162; Tue, 28 Aug 2001 17:15:27 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 99186 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 29 Aug 2001 00:15:22          +0000
Received: from albatross.wgn.net (www.wgn.net [64.14.252.81] (may be forged))          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA32147 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 28 Aug 2001 17:15:22 -0700
Received: from cronos (eli-208-187-17-75.wgn.net [208.187.17.75]) by          albatross.wgn.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id RAA25988; Tue, 28 Aug          2001 17:16:25 -0700
References:  <200108290008.RAA25918@sire.mail.pas.earthlink.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <017101c1301f$d5733060$c36122c0@cronos>
Date:         Tue, 28 Aug 2001 17:16:20 -0700
Reply-To: "Wedge Oldham" <wedge@WESTWORLD.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Wedge Oldham" <wedge@WESTWORLD.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Rocket Construction Forum
Comments: To: John Fiebelkorn <fiebelko@CAPECOD.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Just peal it off and fiberglass as normal.
Wedge Oldham
http://NikeProject.com
Only those who risk going too far,
will ever know how far they can go.



----- Original Message -----
From: "John Fiebelkorn" <fiebelko@CAPECOD.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Tuesday, August 28, 2001 2:16 PM
Subject: Re: [AR] Rocket Construction Forum


> Hi,
>
>         Hope nobody minds if I jump in with a question here. Has anyone on
the
> list used SonoTubes or similar for large airframes (I'm looking at 12"
> dia.)? The only ones I can find nearby are coated with wax on the outside,
> not sure if they use a release (it's not wax if they do) on the inside.
Any
> suggestions for using, strengthing, or prepping/glassing?
>
> Thanks,
>
> John

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 12410 invoked from network); 29 Aug 2001 01:50:08 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 29 Aug 2001 01:50:08 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 21511 invoked by uid 50005); 29 Aug 2001 00:49:30 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpa with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.632718 secs); 29 Aug 2001 00:49:30 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 29 Aug 2001 00:49:28 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA32556; Tue, 28 Aug 2001 18:31:41 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 99263 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 29 Aug 2001 01:31:28          +0000
Received: from izzy6.izzy.net (izzy6.izzy.net [207.158.132.178]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA32540 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue,          28 Aug 2001 18:31:28 -0700
Received: from izzy.net (annex-0-3-port11.dialup.coast.net [207.158.191.11]) by          izzy6.izzy.net (8.9.2/8.9.3) with ESMTP id VAA26078; Tue, 28 Aug 2001          21:29:27 -0400 (EDT)
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (Win95; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <200108290008.RAA25918@sire.mail.pas.earthlink.net>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B8C4545.BAE9BDC1@izzy.net>
Date:         Tue, 28 Aug 2001 21:28:37 -0400
Reply-To: <cscholl@IZZY.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Curtis Scholl" <cscholl@IZZY.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Rocket Construction Forum
Comments: To: John Fiebelkorn <fiebelko@CAPECOD.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Hi John:

   I have used sonotube in the 12" diameter for a rocket that was 11
feet tall. It was my level III flight for the TRA.

   The sonotube I purchased was not waxed on the outside but did have a
plastic coating on the inside that was easily peeled away. I had to do
some epoxy work on the inside. Once the inside layer is gone the epoxy
will penetrate and bond. The outside layer was a printed tape that
advertised the company I dealt with. I sanded the outside just to rough
it up for painting.

   Sonotube will fray easily at the cut ends. I used a coating of
Cyanoacrylate glue to seal those areas. Be very careful of the fumes
released by this. I had to go to the doc because I had a reaction to the
fumes. One week of a steadily decreasing dose of cortisone pills is not
what I want to repeat again. One could also use epoxy to seal as well,
it is not as fast but penetrates over time.

   Couplers can be made by determining the inside diameter of the tube
and performing a calculation of
pi*diameter to get the circumference. Take the difference of the
circumference of outside diameter and the inside diameter and that is
what you will have to cut out of the coupler piece to make it fit in the
body/fuselage tube. Use epoxy to seal the cut and epoxy/glass stripping
on the inside of the coupler overlaying the cut. (you probably already
knew how to do this...)

   Many will tell you to fiberglass the whole outside of the airframe. I
didn't. It takes a little more prep and paint without the glassing but
it is good enough and worked. If you want a fine finish (I didn't care)
go with the epoxy/glass.

   One thing I learned is that 1/2" plywood for all the support
structures is too much weight. 1/4"
ply for centering rings is enough. The support structure of the fins and
the fairings in combination with the plywood is strong enough if built
correctly and tied together well.

   My whole rocket fully loaded was 108 pounds. I overbuilt it to be
sure. Next time it will be an 8" sonotube  and less support structure.

Just my $.02

Curtis Scholl
cscholl@izzy.net
TRA 3976
NAR 72953
RRS


John Fiebelkorn wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
>         Hope nobody minds if I jump in with a question here. Has anyone on the
> list used SonoTubes or similar for large airframes (I'm looking at 12"
> dia.)? The only ones I can find nearby are coated with wax on the outside,
> not sure if they use a release (it's not wax if they do) on the inside. Any
> suggestions for using, strengthing, or prepping/glassing?
>
> Thanks,
>
> John

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 11236 invoked from network); 29 Aug 2001 02:33:11 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 29 Aug 2001 02:33:11 -0000
Received: (qmail 21720 invoked by uid 50005); 29 Aug 2001 02:32:34 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.696071 secs); 29 Aug 2001 02:32:34 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 29 Aug 2001 02:32:33 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA00375; Tue, 28 Aug 2001 19:27:32 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 99304 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 29 Aug 2001 02:27:25          +0000
Received: from proxima.whro.net (proxima.whro.net [64.5.129.2]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA00357 for <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Tue,          28 Aug 2001 19:27:24 -0700
Received: from EDROWE (37.di.whro.net [64.5.132.37]) by proxima.whro.net          (Rockliffe SMTPRA 3.4.6) with SMTP id <B0007559674@proxima.whro.net>;          Tue, 28 Aug 2001 22:25:50 -0400
References:  <Pine.GSO.4.21.0108281633330.23659-100000@z.glue.umd.edu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <00e001c13031$622afe00$25840540@EDROWE>
Date:         Tue, 28 Aug 2001 22:21:50 -0400
Reply-To: "Ed Rowe" <edrowe@WHRO.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Ed Rowe" <edrowe@WHRO.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Washington, DC area Arocketeers
Comments: To: Andrew Case <acase@GLUE.UMD.EDU>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

http://www.ColonialVirginiaHPR.org
Regs,
....Ed

----- Original Message -----
From: "Andrew Case" <acase@GLUE.UMD.EDU>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Tuesday, August 28, 2001 4:46 PM
Subject: [AR] Washington, DC area Arocketeers


> I'm looking for like minded people in the Washington DC
> area - are there any on this list? I know there are
> active groups in the area, and I'm planning to get in
> touch with them, but I figured I might as well check on
> the list. In the short term, I'm mostly just interested
> in talking to people who don't think building rockets
> in the garage is nuts :) In the long term, I'm interested
> in the possibility collaborating on some mutually interesting
> project.
>
> ......Andrew
>
>
> Andrew Case                             |
> acase@plasma.umd.edu                    |
> Institute for Plasma Research           |
> University of Maryland, College Park    |

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 7049 invoked from network); 29 Aug 2001 03:50:20 -0000
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 29 Aug 2001 03:50:20 -0000
Received: (qmail 25270 invoked by uid 50005); 29 Aug 2001 03:48:29 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpf with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.213 secs); 29 Aug 2001 03:48:29 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 29 Aug 2001 03:48:28 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA00678; Tue, 28 Aug 2001 20:45:08 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 99346 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 29 Aug 2001 03:45:02          +0000
Received: from pimout2-int.prodigy.net (pimout2-ext.prodigy.net          [207.115.63.101]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA00663          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 28 Aug 2001 20:45:01 -0700
Received: from k2 (A020-0542.DLL2.splitrock.net [209.254.218.34]) by          pimout2-int.prodigy.net (8.11.0/8.11.0) with SMTP id f7T3iu3150868;          Tue, 28 Aug 2001 23:44:56 -0400
References: <200108290008.RAA25918@sire.mail.pas.earthlink.net>             <3B8C4545.BAE9BDC1@izzy.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.3018.1300
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <002301c1303c$2c9974f0$22dafed1@k2>
Date:         Tue, 28 Aug 2001 22:39:12 -0500
Reply-To: "Ken" <HAWARDEN@PRODIGY.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Ken" <HAWARDEN@PRODIGY.NET>
Organization: Prodigy Internet
Subject:      Re: [AR] Rocket Construction Forum
Comments: To: cscholl@IZZY.NET
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Sonotube? Why would anyone want to use something so heavy? I've seen several
rockets made from sonotube (7' tall and up). Them puppies are HEAVY!

Sonotubes have wax on the outside to shed water when it rains. They are
mainly used for concrete forms, so there is no "release" agent on the
inside. They are only supposed to last until the concrete sets up.

Why not use styrofoam as a form, then carbon, kev, or fiberglass over the
form? That is how my next project will go. I can produce complex shapes,
then "carve" out e-bays, or whatever, where-ever I want with little concern
as to the structure as a whole. Just be sure to secure the motor mount to
the airframe to transfer the load properly.

Just my own opinion...

Ken Howerton

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 7204 invoked from network); 29 Aug 2001 04:00:43 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 29 Aug 2001 04:00:43 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 1938 invoked by uid 50005); 29 Aug 2001 03:58:52 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpf with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.207947 secs); 29 Aug 2001 03:58:52 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 29 Aug 2001 03:58:51 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA00809; Tue, 28 Aug 2001 20:57:21 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 99374 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 29 Aug 2001 03:57:19          +0000
Received: from smtp007pub.verizon.net (smtp007pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.186])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA00794 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 28 Aug 2001 20:57:19 -0700
Received: from [63.25.57.165] (1Cust165.tnt3.san-bernardino.ca.da.uu.net          [63.25.57.165]) by smtp007pub.verizon.net  with ESMTP for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; id f7T3ul502236 Tue, 28 Aug 2001 22:56:47          -0500 (CDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: GTE/01rocket@mail.gte.net
References: <200108290008.RAA25918@sire.mail.pas.earthlink.net>            <3B8C4545.BAE9BDC1@izzy.net> <002301c1303c$2c9974f0$22dafed1@k2>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <a05100308b7b218271216@[63.25.57.165]>
Date:         Tue, 28 Aug 2001 20:56:45 -0700
Reply-To: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Rocket Construction Forum
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <002301c1303c$2c9974f0$22dafed1@k2>

>Sonotube? Why would anyone want to use something so heavy? I've seen several
>rockets made from sonotube (7' tall and up). Them puppies are HEAVY!

[AD]

In case anyone cares about thew alternatives USR sells 12" tube
suitable for glassing.  www.v-serv.com/usr and I doubt the individual
tube and rings are on the web page.

[/AD]

--
Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
Opinion, the whole thing.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 10842 invoked from network); 29 Aug 2001 04:02:09 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 29 Aug 2001 04:02:09 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 11807 invoked by uid 50005); 29 Aug 2001 04:02:44 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpe with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.264451 secs); 29 Aug 2001 04:02:44 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 29 Aug 2001 04:02:44 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA00839; Tue, 28 Aug 2001 20:58:44 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 99381 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 29 Aug 2001 03:58:43          +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (f116.pav1.hotmail.com [64.4.31.116]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA00813 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue,          28 Aug 2001 20:58:09 -0700
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Tue,          28 Aug 2001 20:57:39 -0700
Received: from 63.93.66.69 by pv1fd.pav1.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Wed, 29 Aug          2001 03:57:39 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [63.93.66.69]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 29 Aug 2001 03:57:39.0295 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[BEF57EF0:01C1303E]
Message-ID:  <F116DvlNbBuX0yW2GJv000001b5@hotmail.com>
Date:         Tue, 28 Aug 2001 20:57:39 -0700
Reply-To: "Brian Reddeman" <breddeman@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Brian Reddeman" <breddeman@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] liquids question: alcohol/N2O propellant feeding
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Liquids a waste of time for amatuers? Well, I guess you could say Bicycles
are a waste of since the advent of motorized transportation as well. That's
just MY opinion 8-)

My little biprop project is meandering along just fine, most of the
components are have been designed and built. The micropump has been a major
engineering lesson for me. I'm still working on better designs--i.e it pumps
but it's too heavy, or it'll pump but not enough pressure or it'll pump but
it's too big or takes too much power or "I could build it, but wow is that
going to cost alot of money..."

That of course is what makes it so much fun.

Have I mentioned my ignition system nightmare?

8-)

-Brian
"Industrial Grade Hydrogen Peroxide for brighter, whiter teeth!"


_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 22048 invoked from network); 29 Aug 2001 04:35:42 -0000
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 29 Aug 2001 04:35:42 -0000
Received: (qmail 9497 invoked by uid 50005); 29 Aug 2001 04:36:18 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpe with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.136264 secs); 29 Aug 2001 04:36:18 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 29 Aug 2001 04:36:17 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA01070; Tue, 28 Aug 2001 21:32:17 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 99430 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 29 Aug 2001 04:32:14          +0000
Received: from femail12.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail12.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.0.95.108]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA01051          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 28 Aug 2001 21:32:14 -0700
Received: from hal2001 ([24.77.53.16]) by femail12.sdc1.sfba.home.com          (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20 201-229-121-120-20010223) with SMTP id          <20010829043200.CXBJ1414.femail12.sdc1.sfba.home.com@hal2001> for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 28 Aug 2001 21:32:00 -0700
References: <139.bd9772.28bd87f1@aol.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <00a501c13042$66706020$0400a8c0@hatjs>
Date:         Tue, 28 Aug 2001 21:23:48 -0700
Reply-To: "Jamie Morken" <jmorken@HOME.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jamie Morken" <jmorken@HOME.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] AN melt
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Hi all,

> Yes, indeed, this is a project I will be investigating at a future date.
LPAN
> (liquid phase AN) has very interesting potential as an oxidizer.

Could a big problem with liquid AN be getting it to burn with a liquid fuel?
Would injecting the (relatively stable?) liquid AN into a high temperature
chamber be enough to get stable combustion?  Would ammonium dichromate or
potassium dichromate, two burn rate catalysts for AN previously mentioned,
help molten AN to decompose or are they only useful as solid propellant
additives?

> Absolutely! Especially with oft misunderstood materials like AN. This is
why
> I have so far collected and carefully read a  two inch stack (literally)
of
> research papers dealing with the properties of LPAN, particularly with
regard
> to decomposition and detonation.

Sounds like an interesting collection!  Could you post a reference to one of
the reports?

best regards,
Jamie

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 20117 invoked from network); 29 Aug 2001 04:45:44 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 29 Aug 2001 04:45:44 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 23892 invoked by uid 50005); 29 Aug 2001 04:44:32 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd with qmail-scanner-1.00 (. Clean. Processed in 0.352782 secs); 29 Aug 2001 04:44:32 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 29 Aug 2001 04:44:31 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA01168; Tue, 28 Aug 2001 21:41:59 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 99451 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 29 Aug 2001 04:41:57          +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (f48.pav1.hotmail.com [64.4.31.48]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA01153 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue,          28 Aug 2001 21:41:57 -0700
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Tue,          28 Aug 2001 21:41:27 -0700
Received: from 63.93.66.69 by pv1fd.pav1.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Wed, 29 Aug          2001 04:41:26 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [63.93.66.69]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 29 Aug 2001 04:41:27.0006 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[DD325FE0:01C13044]
Message-ID:  <F48bB8qrkgCeR9eJjt80000180f@hotmail.com>
Date:         Tue, 28 Aug 2001 21:41:26 -0700
Reply-To: "Brian Reddeman" <breddeman@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Brian Reddeman" <breddeman@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] AN melt (slightly off subject)
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Personally after reading all these posts about AN melt I started thinking of
melting some cheese over some shredded chicken on toasted white bread. My
kinda melt.

It's safe, won't explode (except under the right conditions in a microwave)
and it tastes great.

-Brian
"What do you mean LOX is not smoked salmon?"


>From: Ricanakk@AOL.COM
>Reply-To: Ricanakk@AOL.COM
>To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
>Subject: Re: [AR] AN melt
>Date: Tue, 28 Aug 2001 19:49:05 EDT
>
>In a message dated 01/08/28 04:35:26 Eastern Daylight Time,
>jmorken@HOME.COM
>writes:
>
><< Has anyone considered using liquid AN as an oxidizer for a hybrid or
>liquid
>  biprop engine?  If the decomposition/detonation hazards were reduced
>~180C+
>  seems like a more reasonable temperature than liquid oxyen's -183C !>>
>
>Yes, indeed, this is a project I will be investigating at a future date.
>LPAN
>(liquid phase AN) has very interesting potential as an oxidizer.
>
><< I think it is good to know as much as possible about the materials you
>are
>  working with to keep rocket design reasonably safe!  This includes the
>  detonation properties of different materials.  >>
>
>Absolutely! Especially with oft misunderstood materials like AN. This is
>why
>I have so far collected and carefully read a  two inch stack (literally) of
>research papers dealing with the properties of LPAN, particularly with
>regard
>to decomposition and detonation. And I've discussed my project with an
>industrial chemist who deals with tons of LPAN on a daily basis. Doing
>background reseach is, in my opinion, one of the most interesting (and
>ultimately rewarding) aspects of amateur rocketry...! And helps reduce
>risks.
>
>Richard Nakka


_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 24418 invoked from network); 29 Aug 2001 06:17:30 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 29 Aug 2001 06:17:30 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 30186 invoked by uid 50005); 29 Aug 2001 06:18:05 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpe with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.153742 secs); 29 Aug 2001 06:18:05 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 29 Aug 2001 06:18:05 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA01482; Tue, 28 Aug 2001 23:13:52 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 99488 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 29 Aug 2001 06:13:47          +0000
Received: from idsoftware.com (predator.idsoftware.com [192.246.40.34]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA01467 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Tue, 28 Aug 2001 23:13:47 -0700
Received: from [192.246.40.144] (account johnc HELO pluto.idsoftware.com) by          idsoftware.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 3.4.7) with ESMTP id 361271 for          AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 29 Aug 2001 01:13:46 -0500
X-Sender: johnc@mail.idsoftware.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <4.3.1.2.20010829005732.02f63008@mail.idsoftware.com>
Date:         Wed, 29 Aug 2001 01:26:46 -0500
Reply-To: "John Carmack" <johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Carmack" <johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM>
Subject:      [AR] scary dragster folk
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

After our testing tonight (we lit our first peroxide hybrid), we were
discussing some propellant combinations.  Bob Norwood mentioned something
that is fairly terrifying -- some dragster folk were known to mix HYDRAZINE
into the NITROMETHANE fuel for an extra power boost!

While idling, dragsters spray a fairly copious amount of liquid fuel out
the headers.

John Carmack

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 11099 invoked from network); 29 Aug 2001 10:53:00 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 29 Aug 2001 10:53:00 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 31258 invoked by uid 50005); 29 Aug 2001 09:52:20 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpa with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.19688 secs); 29 Aug 2001 09:52:20 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 29 Aug 2001 09:52:20 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id DAA02085; Wed, 29 Aug 2001 03:01:41 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 99525 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 29 Aug 2001 10:01:36          +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (f218.law15.hotmail.com [64.4.23.218]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id DAA02069 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Wed, 29 Aug 2001 03:01:35 -0700
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Wed,          29 Aug 2001 03:01:05 -0700
Received: from 193.121.251.246 by lw15fd.law15.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Wed,          29 Aug 2001 10:01:05 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [193.121.251.246]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 29 Aug 2001 10:01:05.0530 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[847CE5A0:01C13071]
Message-ID:  <F218KhqzSPCHTEdTC6700015395@hotmail.com>
Date:         Wed, 29 Aug 2001 10:01:36 +0000
Reply-To: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] AN melt
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

So SP (must still study his text) proved sugar dissolves in molten AN  to
produce more homogenous propellant blocks than the candy frying pan can with
KN powder technique. In the latter the KN never really liquifies or
dissolves in the candy melt is what I heard.

Adding more or less sugar meaning working non-eutectically 'd still offer a
lower melting temperature. I guess very fast cooling could lead to
homogenous blocks, even if not of eutectic composition.

However the bottom line of all this work is: do such AN/candy propellant
blocks work as good as the KN ones or don't they? In the latter case all the
eutectics determination work are unfortunately not helpful. Were results so
disappointing research was stopped?

RN wrote:

>I have so far collected and carefully read a  two inch stack (literally) of
>research papers dealing with the properties of LPAN, particularly with
>regard
>to decomposition and detonation.

Are these data online? In particular, I'like to know the viscosity of liquid
AN at, say 180C. LPAN seems far fetched as a rocket oxidizer liquid at a
first glance; 90-100 % HP does not require heating to 170C...

Yes in the sixties they even dissolved AN in RGHP for some hybrid idea...

TIA

jd

_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 5052 invoked from network); 29 Aug 2001 13:57:18 -0000
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 29 Aug 2001 13:57:18 -0000
Received: (qmail 2795 invoked by uid 50005); 29 Aug 2001 13:55:24 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpf with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 3.240322 secs); 29 Aug 2001 13:55:24 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 29 Aug 2001 13:55:17 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA02761; Wed, 29 Aug 2001 06:48:58 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 99584 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 29 Aug 2001 13:48:51          +0000
Received: from cablecom.laribay.net (cablecom.laribay.net [66.20.57.4]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA02745 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 29 Aug 2001 06:48:51 -0700
Received: from billbull (dial088.laribay.net [66.20.57.88]) by          cablecom.laribay.net (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id IAA00725 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 29 Aug 2001 08:30:41 -0500 (CDT)          (envelope-from bpbullock@laribay.net)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0BF4_01C56B69.4D099960"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <002701c13091$8bd3f6c0$58391442@billbull>
Date:         Wed, 29 Aug 2001 08:50:00 -0500
Reply-To: "Bill Bullock" <bpbullock@LARIBAY.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Bill Bullock" <bpbullock@LARIBAY.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] New Question: Internal Shock Waves
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0BF4_01C56B69.4D099960
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

This is directed to anyone in this group who is willing to respond:
    In talking to engineers with the Rocketdyne Aerospike project as =
well as those working at Stennis I have broached this question; Sutton =
stated that most solid fuels will progress from steady-state combustion =
to detonation at certain pressures. Since this was written it has been =
determined that other variables influence this process, such as chamber =
temperature, pressure fluctuations and etc...
    Another problem common to internal conditions is the manifestation =
and propagation of shock waves. The Aerodyne engineers told me that the =
power of this phenomenon can be witnessed by the movement of the Main =
Shuttle Engines just after ignition. I had always assumed this to be =
some sort of programmed pre-launch cycling of the gimbal system but am =
told by the Aerospike systems engineers that it is an uncontrollable =
reaction to exhaust delamination in the bell nozzle due to atmospheric =
pressure at sea level, etc... They say that thusfar no one has been able =
to stop it, but of course the Linear Aerospike will eliminate the cause.
    I have also seen graphic programs of the propagation of shock waves =
within a combustion chamber due to various irregularities in the =
chamber.
    Now my hypothetical question (which invariably brings my discussions =
with said engineers to an abrupt halt): according to Sutton's statement =
lets assume that a certain propellant grain has an upper pressure limit =
of 4,300 psi chamber pressure and above that level a detonation is =
initiated. Now lets say that the operational chamber pressure is 1,500 =
psi and the propellant grain has a core temperature of say 85 deg F. and =
all is well.
    A shock wave is generated for whatever reason within the chamber and =
progresses into the lower end of the chamber where it is refracted back =
into the propellant grain and onto the combustion surface. This produces =
an instantaneous pressure on the burning surface of the grain of, say, =
6,850 psi...which is "only"  2,550 psi above the critical detonation =
pressure...what happens?
    Years ago I ran some tests with such shock wave generation by using =
a length of 2" I.D. steel pipe pressure tested to 4,000 psi. By starting =
a flow under 10# vacuum and instantly shutting a valve I was able to =
split the pipe. Sometimes it took 6-8 cycles but it split every test, so =
an assumption of a pressure increase of 2,500 psi resulting from a shock =
wave is not unreasonable.
    A supplemental question: anyone out there ever heard of anyone using =
shock wave diffusers in a solid fueled rocket motor?
    Just one of my stray musings...

------=_NextPart_000_0BF4_01C56B69.4D099960
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META content=3D"text/html; charset=3Diso-8859-1" =
http-equiv=3DContent-Type>
<META content=3D"MSHTML 5.00.2614.3500" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV>This is directed to anyone in this group who is willing to =
respond:</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; In talking to engineers with the Rocketdyne =
Aerospike=20
project as well as those working at Stennis I have broached this =
question;=20
Sutton stated that most solid fuels will progress from steady-state =
combustion=20
to detonation at certain pressures. Since this was written it has been=20
determined that other variables influence this process, such as chamber=20
temperature, pressure fluctuations and etc...</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Another problem common to internal conditions is =
the=20
manifestation and propagation of shock waves. The Aerodyne engineers =
told me=20
that the power of this phenomenon can be witnessed by the movement of =
the Main=20
Shuttle Engines just after ignition. I had always assumed this to be =
some sort=20
of programmed pre-launch cycling of the gimbal system but am told by the =

Aerospike systems engineers that it is an uncontrollable reaction to =
exhaust=20
delamination in the bell nozzle due to atmospheric pressure at sea =
level, etc...=20
They say that thusfar no one has been able to stop it, but of course the =
Linear=20
Aerospike will eliminate the cause.</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; I have also seen graphic programs of the =
propagation of=20
shock waves within a combustion chamber due to various irregularities in =
the=20
chamber.</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Now my hypothetical question (which invariably =
brings my=20
discussions with said engineers to an abrupt halt): according to =
Sutton's=20
statement lets assume that a certain propellant grain has an upper =
pressure=20
limit of 4,300 psi chamber pressure and above that level a detonation is =

initiated. Now lets say that the operational chamber pressure is 1,500 =
psi and=20
the propellant grain has a core temperature of say 85 deg F. and all is=20
well.</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; A shock wave is generated for whatever reason =
within the=20
chamber and progresses into the lower end of the chamber where it is =
refracted=20
back into the propellant grain and onto the combustion surface. This =
produces an=20
instantaneous pressure on the burning surface of the grain of, say, =
6,850=20
psi...which is "only"&nbsp; 2,550 psi above the critical detonation=20
pressure...what happens?</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Years ago I ran some tests with such shock wave=20
generation by using a length of 2" I.D. steel pipe pressure tested to =
4,000 psi.=20
By starting a flow under 10# vacuum and instantly shutting a valve I was =
able to=20
split the pipe. Sometimes it took 6-8 cycles but it split every test, so =
an=20
assumption of a pressure increase of 2,500 psi resulting from a shock =
wave is=20
not unreasonable.</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; A supplemental question: anyone out there ever =
heard of=20
anyone using shock wave diffusers in a solid fueled rocket motor?</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Just one of my stray =
musings...</DIV></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0BF4_01C56B69.4D099960--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 26199 invoked from network); 29 Aug 2001 15:17:25 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 29 Aug 2001 15:17:25 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 26565 invoked by uid 50005); 29 Aug 2001 15:18:30 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpa with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.180628 secs); 29 Aug 2001 15:18:30 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 29 Aug 2001 15:18:30 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA03079; Wed, 29 Aug 2001 08:09:51 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 99625 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 29 Aug 2001 15:09:46          +0000
Received: from f05n15.cac.psu.edu (f05s15.cac.psu.edu [128.118.141.58]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA03064 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 29 Aug 2001 08:09:45 -0700
Received: from KSOLDAVI-2K2.email.psu.edu (ip132163.nvl.army.mil          [140.183.132.163]) by f05n15.cac.psu.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id          LAA94384 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 29 Aug 2001 11:09:44 -0400
X-Sender: kas219@email.psu.edu
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <5.0.0.25.2.20010829110907.00ac6430@email.psu.edu>
Date:         Wed, 29 Aug 2001 11:09:27 -0400
Reply-To: "Keith Soldavin" <kas219@EMAIL.PSU.EDU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Keith Soldavin" <kas219@EMAIL.PSU.EDU>
Subject:      [AR] Cotronics ceramics
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Has anyone ever used any of the ceramic products from Cotronics?  I just
found their web page and some of their adhesives look pretty good.  Just
wondering if anyone has any positive or negative experience with them.  Thanks.

Keith

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 20609 invoked from network); 29 Aug 2001 15:50:15 -0000
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 29 Aug 2001 15:50:15 -0000
Received: (qmail 6804 invoked by uid 50005); 29 Aug 2001 15:50:47 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpe with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 2.749772 secs); 29 Aug 2001 15:50:47 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 29 Aug 2001 15:50:41 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA03235; Wed, 29 Aug 2001 08:41:50 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 99645 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 29 Aug 2001 15:41:01          +0000
Received: from cablecom.laribay.net (cablecom.laribay.net [66.20.57.4]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA03219 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 29 Aug 2001 08:41:01 -0700
Received: from billbull (dial073.laribay.net [66.20.57.73]) by          cablecom.laribay.net (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id KAA01746 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 29 Aug 2001 10:22:37 -0500 (CDT)          (envelope-from bpbullock@laribay.net)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0BF7_01C56B69.4D133650"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <001101c130a1$31a2b820$49391442@billbull>
Date:         Wed, 29 Aug 2001 10:41:06 -0500
Reply-To: "Bill Bullock" <bpbullock@LARIBAY.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Bill Bullock" <bpbullock@LARIBAY.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Cotronics
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0BF7_01C56B69.4D133650
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Keith:
    Hate to hog things this a.m., but yes. I am in the process of =
building a prototype of a machine and am using their #989 Ceramic =
Adhesive to bond Ceramic Fiberboard into the furnace Plenum. We started =
lay-up yesterday and it has worked well so far. Today we will finish =
that and start coating with Zircar, Inc., rigidizer coating.
    In this shipment I also bought a 100' roll of Cotronics Thermeeze =
Woven Ceramic Tape and 100' of 1/32" thick Ceramic Paper (which I have =
already shared with another person in this group) to try as a =
chamber-liner/casting-cylinder on a new fuel blend I am working on. I =
also got 10# of Cer-Cast Zirconium Oxide castable ceramic to try on both =
ceramic/ceramic composite and ceramic/metallic composite nozzles.
    This is my first time to use their products but I have been using =
ceramic materials much like theirs for 12-13 years now and theirs look =
pretty good according to their literature and reports from other users. =
(Of course nobody would ever "slant" their advertising, would they?)
    If anyone interested I will share whatever I learn. As for the =
adhesive, it stuck the white stuff to the steel suff real good. On my =
test plate I tried to pull the ceramic fiberboard off and it split down =
the middle and left half the test block adhered to the raw (un-prepared) =
test plate. When the furnace is fired off and the adhesive reaches =
approximately 350 deg. C. this adhesive is supposed to fuse into a =
ceramic/ceramic/steel bond which will stand 3,200 deg. F. Since the =
melting temperature of the steel backing is about 15-1600 deg. F. in =
this environment, I think that is sufficient for my purposes.
Bill=20

------=_NextPart_000_0BF7_01C56B69.4D133650
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META content=3D"text/html; charset=3Diso-8859-1" =
http-equiv=3DContent-Type>
<META content=3D"MSHTML 5.00.2614.3500" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV>Keith:</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Hate to hog things this a.m., but yes. I am in =
the=20
process of building a prototype of a machine and am using their #989 =
Ceramic=20
Adhesive to bond Ceramic Fiberboard into the furnace Plenum. We started =
lay-up=20
yesterday and it has worked well so far. Today we will finish that and =
start=20
coating with Zircar, Inc., rigidizer coating.</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; In this shipment I also bought a 100' roll of =
Cotronics=20
Thermeeze Woven Ceramic Tape and 100' of 1/32" thick Ceramic Paper =
(which I have=20
already shared with another person in this group) to try as a=20
chamber-liner/casting-cylinder on&nbsp;a new fuel blend I am working on. =
I also=20
got 10# of Cer-Cast Zirconium Oxide castable ceramic to try on both=20
ceramic/ceramic composite and ceramic/metallic composite nozzles.</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; This is my first time to use their products but =
I have=20
been using ceramic materials much like theirs for 12-13 years now and =
theirs=20
look pretty good according to their literature and reports from other =
users. (Of=20
course nobody would ever "slant" their advertising, would they?)</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; If anyone interested I will share whatever I=20
learn.&nbsp;As for the adhesive, it stuck the white stuff to the steel =
suff real=20
good. On my test plate I tried to pull the ceramic fiberboard off and it =
split=20
down the middle and left half the test block adhered to the&nbsp;raw=20
(un-prepared) test plate. When the furnace is fired off and the adhesive =
reaches=20
approximately 350 deg. C.&nbsp;this adhesive is supposed to fuse into a=20
ceramic/ceramic/steel bond which will stand 3,200 deg. F.&nbsp;Since the =
melting=20
temperature of the steel backing is about 15-1600 deg. F. in this =
environment, I=20
think that is sufficient for my purposes.</DIV>
<DIV>Bill&nbsp;</DIV></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0BF7_01C56B69.4D133650--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 21144 invoked from network); 29 Aug 2001 17:58:10 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 29 Aug 2001 17:58:10 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 27098 invoked by uid 50005); 29 Aug 2001 17:59:14 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpa with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.253502 secs); 29 Aug 2001 17:59:14 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 29 Aug 2001 17:59:14 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA04004; Wed, 29 Aug 2001 10:50:18 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 99714 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 29 Aug 2001 17:50:11          +0000
Received: from imo-m04.mx.aol.com (imo-m04.mx.aol.com [64.12.136.7]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA03988; Wed, 29 Aug 2001          10:50:10 -0700
Received: from Sociald84@aol.com by imo-m04.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v31_r1.4.) id          w.fb.191ed921 (3988); Wed, 29 Aug 2001 13:49:55 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0BFA_01C56B69.4D1CAC30"
X-Mailer: AOL 6.0 for Windows US sub 10536
Message-ID:  <fb.191ed921.28be8542@aol.com>
Date:         Wed, 29 Aug 2001 13:49:54 EDT
Reply-To: <Sociald84@AOL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <Sociald84@AOL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Rocket Construction Forum LONG!
Comments: To: rcalkins@itc.uci.edu
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0BFA_01C56B69.4D1CAC30
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

In a message dated 8/28/2001 4:30:19 PM Mountain Daylight Time,
rcalkins@itc.uci.edu writes:


> You're just about done, fill the core with foam and you're done.  You can
> do without the foam, but it adds lots of strength for very little weight.
> Pop everything loose from the molds, finish sand the mold lines and paint.
>
> Fin cans I'll cover in another post, this one is already long enough!
>
> Ray
>

If you make the mold right and add an other piece to it to seal it off, you
can use an expanding foam to press the carbon fiber and epoxy into the mold
and get a very good molding.

Mark

------=_NextPart_000_0BFA_01C56B69.4D1CAC30
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<HTML><FONT FACE=arial,helvetica><FONT  SIZE=3>In a message dated 8/28/2001 4:30:19 PM Mountain Daylight Time,
<BR>rcalkins@itc.uci.edu writes:
<BR>
<BR></FONT><FONT  COLOR="#000000" SIZE=2 FAMILY="SANSSERIF" FACE="Arial" LANG="0">
<BR><BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE style="BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px">You're just about done, fill the core with foam and you're done. &nbsp;You can
<BR>do without the foam, but it adds lots of strength for very little weight.
<BR>Pop everything loose from the molds, finish sand the mold lines and paint.
<BR>
<BR>Fin cans I'll cover in another post, this one is already long enough!
<BR>
<BR>Ray
<BR></BLOCKQUOTE>
<BR></FONT><FONT  COLOR="#000000" SIZE=3 FAMILY="SANSSERIF" FACE="Arial" LANG="0">
<BR>If you make the mold right and add an other piece to it to seal it off, you
<BR>can use an expanding foam to press the carbon fiber and epoxy into the mold
<BR>and get a very good molding.
<BR>
<BR>Mark</FONT></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0BFA_01C56B69.4D1CAC30--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 3491 invoked from network); 29 Aug 2001 18:00:53 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 29 Aug 2001 18:00:53 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 22476 invoked by uid 50005); 29 Aug 2001 17:59:38 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.286283 secs); 29 Aug 2001 17:59:38 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 29 Aug 2001 17:59:38 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA04066; Wed, 29 Aug 2001 10:54:34 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 99725 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 29 Aug 2001 17:54:33          +0000
Received: from mail.aros.net (mail.aros.net [207.173.16.20]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA04051 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Wed,          29 Aug 2001 10:54:33 -0700
Received: from biomicro.com ([208.187.122.40]) by mail.aros.net (8.11.6/8.9.3)          with ESMTP id f7THsWM41279 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Wed, 29 Aug          2001 11:54:32 -0600 (MDT)
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.77 [en] (Win98; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B8D2C4C.88D89883@biomicro.com>
Date:         Wed, 29 Aug 2001 11:54:20 -0600
Reply-To: "Mark K. Spute" <mks@BIOMICRO.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Mark K. Spute" <mks@BIOMICRO.COM>
Subject:      [AR] What we need is . . .
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

What we need is a good, freeware/shareware 6DOF trajectory modelling
program.


--
Mark K. Spute
Senior Research Engineer
BioMicro Systems Inc.

KD7IWE,  RRS

"It is difficult to say what is impossible, for the dream of yesterday
is the hope of today and the reality of tomorrow."
     Dr. Robert H. Goddard

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 21344 invoked from network); 29 Aug 2001 18:18:24 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 29 Aug 2001 18:18:24 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 28590 invoked by uid 50005); 29 Aug 2001 18:16:30 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpf with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 4.364545 secs); 29 Aug 2001 18:16:30 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 29 Aug 2001 18:16:22 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA04222; Wed, 29 Aug 2001 11:12:27 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 99740 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 29 Aug 2001 18:12:21          +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (f134.law15.hotmail.com [64.4.23.134]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA04207 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Wed, 29 Aug 2001 11:12:21 -0700
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Wed,          29 Aug 2001 11:11:51 -0700
Received: from 213.224.83.46 by lw15fd.law15.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Wed, 29          Aug 2001 18:11:51 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [213.224.83.46]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 29 Aug 2001 18:11:51.0429 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[139C8350:01C130B6]
Message-ID:  <F134arcR4ZDgC81Tbdk0001940a@hotmail.com>
Date:         Wed, 29 Aug 2001 18:12:21 +0000
Reply-To: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] New Question: Internal Shock Waves
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

BB wrote:

>Years ago I ran some tests with such shock wave generation by using a
>length of 2" I.D. steel pipe pressure tested to 4,000 psi. By starting a
>flow under 10# vacuum and instantly shutting a valve I was able to split
>the pipe.

You mean Joukowski pressure surge?

http://www.student.uwa.edu.au/~kchandra/kristina.html

jd

_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 13705 invoked from network); 29 Aug 2001 19:27:25 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 29 Aug 2001 19:27:25 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 27339 invoked by uid 50005); 29 Aug 2001 19:26:10 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.211791 secs); 29 Aug 2001 19:26:10 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 29 Aug 2001 19:26:09 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA04753; Wed, 29 Aug 2001 12:22:38 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 99824 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 29 Aug 2001 19:22:33          +0000
Received: from mail.aros.net (mail.aros.net [207.173.16.20]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA04737 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Wed,          29 Aug 2001 12:22:32 -0700
Received: from biomicro.com ([208.187.122.40]) by mail.aros.net (8.11.6/8.9.3)          with ESMTP id f7TJMW876640 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Wed, 29 Aug          2001 13:22:32 -0600 (MDT)
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.77 [en] (Win98; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <3B8D2C4C.88D89883@biomicro.com>            <a0510030cb7b2e13f50c2@[63.25.57.165]>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B8D40ED.13C88AEA@biomicro.com>
Date:         Wed, 29 Aug 2001 13:22:21 -0600
Reply-To: "Mark K. Spute" <mks@BIOMICRO.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Mark K. Spute" <mks@BIOMICRO.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] What we need is . . .
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Cool!

Thanks Jerry!

I assume you are referring to 6dof 20irvine.zip and 6dof.sea.

Thanks again.



Jerry Irvine wrote:
>
> >What we need is a good, freeware/shareware 6DOF trajectory modelling
> >program.
> >
>
> www.v-serv.com/-upload
>
> --
> Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
> Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
> Opinion, the whole thing.

--
Mark K. Spute
Senior Research Engineer
BioMicro Systems Inc.

KD7IWE,  RRS

"It is difficult to say what is impossible, for the dream of yesterday
is the hope of today and the reality of tomorrow."
     Dr. Robert H. Goddard

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 18493 invoked from network); 29 Aug 2001 22:23:11 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 29 Aug 2001 22:23:11 -0000
Received: (qmail 4428 invoked by uid 50005); 29 Aug 2001 22:21:56 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.219544 secs); 29 Aug 2001 22:21:56 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 29 Aug 2001 22:21:55 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA05519; Wed, 29 Aug 2001 15:02:06 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 99904 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 29 Aug 2001 22:01:57          +0000
Received: from cablecom.laribay.net (cablecom.laribay.net [66.20.57.4]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA05504 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 29 Aug 2001 15:01:56 -0700
Received: from billbull (dial076.laribay.net [66.20.57.76]) by          cablecom.laribay.net (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id QAA04810 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 29 Aug 2001 16:43:03 -0500 (CDT)          (envelope-from bpbullock@laribay.net)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0BFF_01C56B69.4D218E30"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <002401c130d6$54a94ac0$4c391442@billbull>
Date:         Wed, 29 Aug 2001 17:02:20 -0500
Reply-To: "Bill Bullock" <bpbullock@LARIBAY.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Bill Bullock" <bpbullock@LARIBAY.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Internal Shock Wave
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0BFF_01C56B69.4D218E30
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

John:
    The Joukowski  effect is quite a bit like what I produced. I ran a =
string of 2 3/8" EUE production tubing into a 4,200+ foot salt water =
disposal well which was taking the produced waste water on a 10# vacuum =
and played around with it until I could time the valve closure in order =
to produce the shock wave progressing down-hole and then being refracted =
back up the hole.
    Then I mounted my test chamber made of 4 1/2"  J-55 production =
casing on the wellhead so that the rebounding shock wave would produce =
an acoustic shock wave back into and through the trapped air in that =
assembly. Then I started testing by opening and closing the control =
valve and recording the rebound pressures by using a pulsation dampener =
(to keep from destroying the pressure sensors) and a spring-loaded back =
pressure check valve to "trap" the pressure reading. I then wrapped the =
test cell with several layers of heavy fiberglass woven mat and bound it =
with stainless steel Band-It Clamps.
    I got several readings of over  3,000 psi and a couple over 6,000 =
and one of 8,200 psi. These last three split all three test chambers =
each of which  I had hydrostatically tested to 4,000 psi for 60 minutes =
without leaks.=20
    I figured the shock waves produced in the air-filled chamber were =
comparable to the same conditions in a combustion chamber. As for the =
absence of heat, all three which split their respective chambers =
generated so much compressive heat that they all three "fried" =
well-cured industrial paint off the outside of the chambers in a =
fraction of a second either before or as they split. This paint was =
certified by Sherwin Williams Industrial Division as good to over 300 =
degrees F. That's a lot of heat when it is considered that the chamber =
walls were 0.25" thick.=20
    Of course this begs another question: what degree of localized =
temperature increase is generated when these refracted shock waves =
strike the fuel grain...?
Bill

------=_NextPart_000_0BFF_01C56B69.4D218E30
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META content=3D"text/html; charset=3Diso-8859-1" =
http-equiv=3DContent-Type>
<META content=3D"MSHTML 5.00.2614.3500" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV>John:</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; The Joukowski&nbsp; effect is quite a bit like =
what I=20
produced. I ran a string of 2 3/8" EUE production tubing into a 4,200+ =
foot salt=20
water disposal well which was taking the produced waste water on a 10# =
vacuum=20
and played around with it until I could time the valve closure in order =
to=20
produce the shock wave progressing down-hole and then being refracted =
back up=20
the hole.</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Then I mounted my test chamber made of 4 =
1/2"&nbsp; J-55=20
production casing on the wellhead so that the rebounding shock wave =
would=20
produce an acoustic shock wave back into and through the trapped air in =
that=20
assembly. Then I started testing by opening and closing the control =
valve and=20
recording the rebound pressures by using a pulsation dampener (to keep =
from=20
destroying the pressure sensors) and a spring-loaded&nbsp;back pressure =
check=20
valve to "trap" the pressure reading. I then wrapped the test cell with =
several=20
layers of heavy fiberglass woven mat and bound it with stainless steel =
Band-It=20
Clamps.</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; I got several readings of over &nbsp;3,000 psi =
and a=20
couple over 6,000 and one of 8,200 psi. These last three split&nbsp;all =
three=20
test chambers each of which&nbsp; I had hydrostatically tested to 4,000 =
psi for=20
60 minutes without leaks. </DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; I figured the shock waves produced in the =
air-filled=20
chamber were comparable to the same&nbsp;conditions in a combustion =
chamber. As=20
for the absence of heat, all three&nbsp;which split their respective =
chambers=20
generated so much compressive heat that they all three =
"fried"&nbsp;well-cured=20
industrial paint off the outside of the chambers in a fraction of a =
second=20
either before or as they split. This paint was certified by Sherwin =
Williams=20
Industrial Division as good to over 300 degrees F. That's a lot of heat =
when it=20
is considered that the chamber walls were 0.25" thick.&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Of course this begs another question: what =
degree of=20
localized temperature increase is generated when these refracted shock =
waves=20
strike the fuel grain...?</DIV>
<DIV>Bill</DIV></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0BFF_01C56B69.4D218E30--
ef

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 8464 invoked from network); 29 Aug 2001 22:28:07 -0000
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 29 Aug 2001 22:28:07 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 3364 invoked by uid 50005); 29 Aug 2001 22:28:32 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpe with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 1.063335 secs); 29 Aug 2001 22:28:32 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 29 Aug 2001 22:28:30 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA05558; Wed, 29 Aug 2001 15:04:51 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 99915 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 29 Aug 2001 22:04:50          +0000
Received: from cascara.uvic.ca (root@cascara.uvic.ca [142.104.5.28]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA05543 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 29 Aug 2001 15:04:50 -0700
Received: from wolfke.home.com (wolfke.cfs.me.UVic.CA [142.104.121.117]) by          cascara.uvic.ca (8.11.3/8.11.3) with ESMTP id f7TM4nZ84128 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 29 Aug 2001 15:04:49 -0700
X-Sender: jmorken@netmail.home.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by itc.uci.edu id PAA05544
Message-ID:  <5.1.0.14.1.20010829090835.00ae5a78@netmail.home.com>
Date:         Wed, 29 Aug 2001 15:04:46 -0700
Reply-To: "Jamie Morken" <jmorken@HOME.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jamie Morken" <jmorken@HOME.COM>
Subject:      [AR] offtopic - glide to fall ratio
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <001101c130a1$31a2b820$49391442@billbull>

Hi all,

"About 38 minutes after Pich noticed the fuel problem, the right engine
stopped. Ten minutes later, the second engine failed.
That left the jet at 33,000 feet over the Atlantic Ocean, at night, with no
engines."

"The Airbus A-330 made the landing after gliding more than 180 kilometres
without power to either of its two engines."

from:
http://cbc.ca/cgi-bin/templates/view.cgi?/news/2001/08/28/airtransat_pilot010828


Struck me as very amazing since I thought the glide to fall ratio for some
of the big airliners was as low as 1:1!  What a superb plane to be able to
travel at high speeds efficiently and still have an ~18:1 glide to fall ratio!

best regards,
Jamie

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 23174 invoked from network); 29 Aug 2001 23:01:02 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 29 Aug 2001 23:01:02 -0000
Received: (qmail 31632 invoked by uid 50005); 29 Aug 2001 22:59:46 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.233195 secs); 29 Aug 2001 22:59:46 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 29 Aug 2001 22:59:45 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA05826; Wed, 29 Aug 2001 15:56:05 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 99954 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 29 Aug 2001 22:55:55          +0000
Received: from femail15.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail15.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.0.95.142]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA05811          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 29 Aug 2001 15:55:54 -0700
Received: from cc334751a ([65.13.214.65]) by femail15.sdc1.sfba.home.com          (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20 201-229-121-120-20010223) with SMTP id          <20010829225549.WEVT23328.femail15.sdc1.sfba.home.com@cc334751a>;          Wed, 29 Aug 2001 15:55:49 -0700
References:  <5.1.0.14.1.20010829090835.00ae5a78@netmail.home.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2462.0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <007601c130dd$ae5387a0$6601a8c0@home.com>
Date:         Wed, 29 Aug 2001 16:55:20 -0600
Reply-To: "Brian Kosko" <bkosko1@HOME.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Brian Kosko" <bkosko1@HOME.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] offtopic - glide to fall ratio
Comments: To: Jamie Morken <jmorken@home.com>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

I heard the news account last night. That sucker glided for eighteen
minutes! Pretty amazing.

Brian
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jamie Morken" <jmorken@HOME.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Wednesday, August 29, 2001 4:04 PM
Subject: [AR] offtopic - glide to fall ratio


> Hi all,
>
> "About 38 minutes after Pich noticed the fuel problem, the right engine
> stopped. Ten minutes later, the second engine failed.
> That left the jet at 33,000 feet over the Atlantic Ocean, at night, with
no
> engines."
>
> "The Airbus A-330 made the landing after gliding more than 180 kilometres
> without power to either of its two engines."
>
> from:
>
http://cbc.ca/cgi-bin/templates/view.cgi?/news/2001/08/28/airtransat_pilot01
0828
>
>
> Struck me as very amazing since I thought the glide to fall ratio for some
> of the big airliners was as low as 1:1!  What a superb plane to be able to
> travel at high speeds efficiently and still have an ~18:1 glide to fall
ratio!
>
> best regards,
> Jamie

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 18551 invoked from network); 29 Aug 2001 23:06:43 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 29 Aug 2001 23:06:43 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 16392 invoked by uid 50005); 29 Aug 2001 23:07:13 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpe with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.181541 secs); 29 Aug 2001 23:07:13 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 29 Aug 2001 23:07:12 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA05913; Wed, 29 Aug 2001 16:01:41 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 99972 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 29 Aug 2001 23:01:40          +0000
Received: from cascara.uvic.ca (root@cascara.uvic.ca [142.104.5.28]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA05898 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 29 Aug 2001 16:01:40 -0700
Received: from wolfke.home.com (wolfke.cfs.me.UVic.CA [142.104.121.117]) by          cascara.uvic.ca (8.11.3/8.11.3) with ESMTP id f7TN1BZ120768; Wed, 29          Aug 2001 16:01:12 -0700
X-Sender: jmorken@netmail.home.com (Unverified)
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <5.1.0.14.1.20010829150620.00ad8328@netmail.home.com>
Date:         Wed, 29 Aug 2001 16:01:08 -0700
Reply-To: "Jamie Morken" <jmorken@HOME.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jamie Morken" <jmorken@HOME.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Cotronics
Comments: To: Bill Bullock <bpbullock@LARIBAY.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <001101c130a1$31a2b820$49391442@billbull>

Hi Bill,


>     If anyone interested I will share whatever I learn. As for the
> adhesive, it stuck the white stuff to the steel suff real good. On my
> test plate I tried to pull the ceramic fiberboard off and it split down
> the middle and left half the test block adhered to the raw (un-prepared)
> test plate. When the furnace is fired off and the adhesive reaches
> approximately 350 deg. C. this adhesive is supposed to fuse into a
> ceramic/ceramic/steel bond which will stand 3,200 deg. F. Since the
> melting temperature of the steel backing is about 15-1600 deg. F. in this
> environment, I think that is sufficient for my purposes.
>Bill

I would be really interested to hear about your work with this stuff!  I
think you will have success, and best of luck!

best regards,
Jamie

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 27468 invoked from network); 29 Aug 2001 23:16:12 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 29 Aug 2001 23:16:12 -0000
Received: (qmail 5130 invoked by uid 50005); 29 Aug 2001 23:15:31 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.144923 secs); 29 Aug 2001 23:15:31 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 29 Aug 2001 23:15:31 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA06035; Wed, 29 Aug 2001 16:11:20 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 100003 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 29 Aug 2001 23:11:11          +0000
Received: from smtprelay1.abs.adelphia.net (smtprelay.abs.adelphia.net          [64.8.20.11]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA06020 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 29 Aug 2001 16:11:10 -0700
Received: from jlgrady ([63.124.251.47]) by smtprelay1.abs.adelphia.net          (Netscape Messaging Server 4.15) with SMTP id GIUR1A00.WIO for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 29 Aug 2001 19:10:22 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook CWS, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <001101c130e0$39d962c0$0200a8c0@prestige.net>
Date:         Wed, 29 Aug 2001 19:13:33 -0400
Reply-To: "Jeff Grady" <jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jeff Grady" <jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Cotronics ceramics
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <5.0.0.25.2.20010829110907.00ac6430@email.psu.edu>

Here's another website with a few high temp ceramic/cement products...

http://www.thomasregister.com/olc/aremco/home.htm
http://www.thomasregister.com/olc/aremco/a2.htm


The zirconium oxide refractory paint is interesting...

http://www.thomasregister.com/olc/aremco/a5.htm

Jeff


-----Original Message-----
From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@itc.uci.edu]On
Behalf Of Keith Soldavin
Sent: Wednesday, August 29, 2001 11:09 AM
To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
Subject: [AR] Cotronics ceramics


Has anyone ever used any of the ceramic products from Cotronics?  I just
found their web page and some of their adhesives look pretty good.  Just
wondering if anyone has any positive or negative experience with them.
Thanks.

Keith

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 20931 invoked from network); 30 Aug 2001 00:06:50 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 30 Aug 2001 00:06:50 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 15329 invoked by uid 50005); 30 Aug 2001 00:05:34 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.217684 secs); 30 Aug 2001 00:05:34 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 30 Aug 2001 00:05:34 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA06452; Wed, 29 Aug 2001 17:00:14 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 100103 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 00:00:11          +0000
Received: from imo-d03.mx.aol.com (imo-d03.mx.aol.com [205.188.157.35]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA06425 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Wed, 29 Aug 2001 17:00:01 -0700
Received: from Ricanakk@aol.com by imo-d03.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v31_r1.4.) id          t.84.1a88464f (4006); Wed, 29 Aug 2001 19:59:23 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: AOL 5.0 for Windows sub 108
Message-ID:  <84.1a88464f.28bedbda@aol.com>
Date:         Wed, 29 Aug 2001 19:59:22 EDT
Reply-To: <Ricanakk@AOL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <Ricanakk@AOL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] AN melt
Comments: To: jmorken@home.com
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Hi Jamie

<< Could a big problem with liquid AN be getting it to burn with a liquid
fuel?
 Would injecting the (relatively stable?) liquid AN into a high temperature
 chamber be enough to get stable combustion?>>

Just speculating, but since the AN is at an elevated temperature, I would
think that the additional thermal energy would result in good ignition and
combustion characteristics with, say, alcohol or maybe kerosene as a fuel.


  <<Would ammonium dichromate or
 potassium dichromate, two burn rate catalysts for AN previously mentioned,
 help molten AN to decompose or are they only useful as solid propellant
 additives?>>

These two compounds are burn rate catalysts that increase the combustion rate
of solid propellants. Since the physical processes relating to combustion
rate are completely different for solids and liquids, I don't expect these
would be of any use.


 <<Sounds like an interesting collection!  Could you post a reference to one
of
 the reports? >>

The reports were all obtained as hard copies. I don't know if any are
available on-line, but I suppose it may be worth a try. I've uploaded the
list of references to:

http://members.aol.com/ricanakk/an/an_ref.html

Richard Nakka

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 21027 invoked from network); 30 Aug 2001 00:06:52 -0000
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 30 Aug 2001 00:06:52 -0000
Received: (qmail 25950 invoked by uid 50005); 30 Aug 2001 00:07:22 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpe with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 2.763403 secs); 30 Aug 2001 00:07:22 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 30 Aug 2001 00:07:17 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA06285; Wed, 29 Aug 2001 16:44:34 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 100066 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 29 Aug 2001 23:44:11          +0000
Received: from mail4.nc.rr.com (fe4.southeast.rr.com [24.93.67.51]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA06270 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Wed, 29 Aug 2001 16:44:10 -0700
Received: from freddy ([24.162.230.106]) by mail4.nc.rr.com  with Microsoft          SMTPSVC(5.5.1877.687.68); Wed, 29 Aug 2001 19:47:03 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <NBEJKDFBFOEFALBMBCDPIEEBCDAA.jtaylor@nc.rr.com>
Date:         Wed, 29 Aug 2001 19:47:05 -0400
Reply-To: "Jeff Taylor" <jtaylor@NC.RR.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jeff Taylor" <jtaylor@NC.RR.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Cotronics ceramics
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <5.0.0.25.2.20010829110907.00ac6430@email.psu.edu>

I bought some Rescor alumina oxide for casting nozzles a while back.  I had
moderate success with it.  I only tested with AP+metals type propellants and
there was always significant erosion.  I was still able to make useful
motors by using a progressive grain geometry.  The nozzles would probably
have done much better with AN based propellants, by I never tried these.  I
think that I posted some pictures of my nozzles a while back, I don't recall
if it was here or on ROL.  I'll dig them up again if anyone is interested.

If anyone wants to try Rescor, I'll sell you what I have left.  I'm not
going to use it anytime soon.

I also tried their ceramic paper in different thickness for motor liners.
It doesn't work too well in my hands.  The problem is that its mechanical
properties suck.  Unless backed with something substantial, it tends to fall
apart and get blown out the nozzle.  Gluing it to a paper tube works better,
but then paper tubes work pretty well all by themselves.

What I'd like to hear more about is EPDM (EDPM?) for motor liners.  I looked
around in the roofing section of Home Depot and all I could find was some
brownish-black oily paper in different thicknesses.  I don't think this is
what I was looking for.  Could someone post a link, a brand name, or other
details that would help me find this stuff?

Thanks,

Jeff Taylor


>-----Original Message-----
>From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU]On
>Behalf Of Keith Soldavin
>Sent: Wednesday, August 29, 2001 11:09 AM
>To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
>Subject: [AR] Cotronics ceramics
>
>
>Has anyone ever used any of the ceramic products from Cotronics?  I just
>found their web page and some of their adhesives look pretty good.  Just
>wondering if anyone has any positive or negative experience with
>them.  Thanks.
>
>Keith

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 23384 invoked from network); 30 Aug 2001 00:14:28 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 30 Aug 2001 00:14:28 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 9835 invoked by uid 50005); 30 Aug 2001 00:15:31 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpb with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.421106 secs); 30 Aug 2001 00:15:31 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 30 Aug 2001 00:15:31 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA06587; Wed, 29 Aug 2001 17:10:15 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 100137 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 00:10:13          +0000
Received: from cascara.uvic.ca (root@cascara.uvic.ca [142.104.5.28]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA06572 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 29 Aug 2001 17:10:13 -0700
Received: from wolfke.home.com (wolfke.cfs.me.UVic.CA [142.104.121.117]) by          cascara.uvic.ca (8.11.3/8.11.3) with ESMTP id f7U0ACZ30730 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 29 Aug 2001 17:10:12 -0700
X-Sender: jmorken@netmail.home.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
References: <5.1.0.14.1.20010829090835.00ae5a78@netmail.home.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by itc.uci.edu id RAA06573
Message-ID:  <5.1.0.14.1.20010829160540.00ad9180@netmail.home.com>
Date:         Wed, 29 Aug 2001 17:10:12 -0700
Reply-To: "Jamie Morken" <jmorken@HOME.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jamie Morken" <jmorken@HOME.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] offtopic - glide to fall ratio
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <007601c130dd$ae5387a0$6601a8c0@home.com>

Hi Brian,

>I heard the news account last night. That sucker glided for eighteen
>minutes! Pretty amazing.

If it did go 180 km in 18 minutes then that works out to 600km/hr (cruising
speed is around 850km/hr)
which would require quite the descent rate to maintain with no engines!

For a 20:1 glide to fall ratio (180km glide:30,000ft fall) that works out
to a descent angle of about 2.86 degrees.
tan(20/1)

best regards,
Jamie



>Brian
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Jamie Morken" <jmorken@HOME.COM>
>To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
>Sent: Wednesday, August 29, 2001 4:04 PM
>Subject: [AR] offtopic - glide to fall ratio
>
>
> > Hi all,
> >
> > "About 38 minutes after Pich noticed the fuel problem, the right engine
> > stopped. Ten minutes later, the second engine failed.
> > That left the jet at 33,000 feet over the Atlantic Ocean, at night, with
>no
> > engines."
> >
> > "The Airbus A-330 made the landing after gliding more than 180 kilometres
> > without power to either of its two engines."
> >
> > from:
> >
>http://cbc.ca/cgi-bin/templates/view.cgi?/news/2001/08/28/airtransat_pilot01
>0828
> >
> >
> > Struck me as very amazing since I thought the glide to fall ratio for some
> > of the big airliners was as low as 1:1!  What a superb plane to be able to
> > travel at high speeds efficiently and still have an ~18:1 glide to fall
>ratio!
> >
> > best regards,
> > Jamie

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 23242 invoked from network); 30 Aug 2001 00:21:35 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 30 Aug 2001 00:21:35 -0000
Received: (qmail 26349 invoked by uid 50005); 30 Aug 2001 00:20:19 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.221973 secs); 30 Aug 2001 00:20:19 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 30 Aug 2001 00:20:19 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA06674; Wed, 29 Aug 2001 17:15:37 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 100156 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 00:15:36          +0000
Received: from smtprelay1.adelphia.net (smtprelay1.adelphia.net [64.8.25.6]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA06658 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 29 Aug 2001 17:15:35 -0700
Received: from afioretti ([64.8.33.9]) by smtprelay1.adelphia.net (Netscape          Messaging Server 4.15) with SMTP id GIUTXJ01.3VO for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 29 Aug 2001 20:12:55 -0400
References: <Pine.LNX.4.10.10108271352450.22088-100000@itc.uci.edu>                       <3B8AC536.E7771F09@space-rockets.com>             <a05100308b7b080469333@[63.27.97.83]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <013b01c130e9$56cca550$4464a8c0@afioretti>
Date:         Wed, 29 Aug 2001 20:18:43 -0400
Reply-To: "afioretti@adelphia" <afiorettii@EXCITE.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "afioretti@adelphia" <afiorettii@EXCITE.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Tomahawk cruise missile
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

> And as for the military issue, unfortunately everything we discuss is
> public and anything we post that was previously classified is public
> now and nothing they can do about it due to 1st amendment rights.
> That is one legit fear they (whoever they is) have.  The other is the
> average arocket subscriber can do in his garage what Sadaam only
> wishes he could do in his most advanced labs.

I am flawed how anyone can compare government entities to garage operations.
I know the average person is capable of propelling things further than 10
years ago but as far as I can see that is about it.  The average person does
not have the backing, period.  When one considers how many entities design a
launch vehicle from guidance parts to power supply parts, how in God's name
can you campare it to what two or three guys in a garage can do?  I see
conversations on here that would have the public thinking that individuals
here can build a shuttle in their garage.  I would estimate that the average
joe might get somehting into sub space and will probably never get it back
because the average joe does not have the feedback systems, computuers and
telemetry circutiry on board  or on ground needed to control the vehicles
they send aloft.  I doubt very much that NASA is concerend with anything
that is being designed here except that of someone sending somehting out of
limits into another persons back yard, period.


----- Original Message -----
From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Monday, August 27, 2001 7:05 PM
Subject: Re: [AR] Tomahawk cruise missile


> >Wickman:
>
>
>
> >will close down the hobby is hiding in a corner, totally afraid of
> >the "fill in
> >the name of your choice" govt. agency and hoping they will not
> >notice us and stay
> >away.   That approach was tried and failed miserably as noted by the
> >excessive ATF
> >and FAA regulations.
>
> The issues we have with FAA and ATF and soon BLM are mostly caused by
> Tripoli leadership calling them up, asking for rulings they are all
> too eager to give conservatively, and by TRA taunting/sueing them
> when they don't like the answers.
>
> For 2 decades we (Jerry/USR/LTR) approached the authorities on a
> cooperative basis and achieved widespread HPR access with NO state
> regulations, no federal controls, full BLM support and only minor FAA
> limitations, and almost NONE on super high performance rockets.
>
> Life has changes and I can say without hesitation, thanks to Tripoli.
>
> Ray is right, everything we say is saved, and that includes email
> BTW, and even if it is encrypted, it is being sequentially decrypted
> by NSA.  What we should do is KNOWING that, seek a public information
> request for a copy of EVERYTHING, so we too can see who is getting
> married, divorced, having babies, starting businesses and buying
> fertilizer for purely civil and educational purposes.
>
> And as for the military issue, unfortunately everything we discuss is
> public and anything we post that was previously classified is public
> now and nothing they can do about it due to 1st amendment rights.
> That is one legit fear they (whoever they is) have.  The other is the
> average arocket subscriber can do in his garage what Sadaam only
> wishes he could do in his most advanced labs.
>
> Stick that in your pipe and smoke it.  It is your right!
>
> Jerry
>
>
> --
> Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
> Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
> Opinion, the whole thing.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 6953 invoked from network); 30 Aug 2001 01:13:33 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 30 Aug 2001 01:13:33 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 14689 invoked by uid 50005); 30 Aug 2001 01:12:51 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.172306 secs); 30 Aug 2001 01:12:51 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 30 Aug 2001 01:12:51 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA07004; Wed, 29 Aug 2001 18:02:46 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 100219 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 01:02:41          +0000
Received: from smtp008pub.verizon.net (smtp008pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.187])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA06989 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 29 Aug 2001 18:02:41 -0700
Received: from [63.25.57.165] (1Cust100.tnt2.san-bernardino.ca.da.uu.net          [63.27.97.100]) by smtp008pub.verizon.net  with ESMTP for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; id f7U129K09288 Wed, 29 Aug 2001 20:02:09          -0500 (CDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: GTE/01rocket@mail.gte.net
References: <Pine.LNX.4.10.10108271352450.22088-100000@itc.uci.edu>            <3B8AC536.E7771F09@space-rockets.com>            <a05100308b7b080469333@[63.27.97.83]>            <013b01c130e9$56cca550$4464a8c0@afioretti>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <a0510031ab7b340743bbb@[63.25.57.165]>
Date:         Wed, 29 Aug 2001 18:02:09 -0700
Reply-To: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Tomahawk cruise missile
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <013b01c130e9$56cca550$4464a8c0@afioretti>

>  > And as for the military issue, unfortunately everything we discuss is
>>  public and anything we post that was previously classified is public
>>  now and nothing they can do about it due to 1st amendment rights.
>>  That is one legit fear they (whoever they is) have.  The other is the
>>  average arocket subscriber can do in his garage what Sadaam only
>>  wishes he could do in his most advanced labs.
>
>I am flawed how anyone can compare government entities to garage operations.
>I know the average person is capable of propelling things further than 10
>years ago but as far as I can see that is about it.  The average person does
>not have the backing, period.  When one considers how many entities design a
>launch vehicle from guidance parts to power supply parts, how in God's name
>can you campare it to what two or three guys in a garage can do?  I see


Maybe you have not seen the garages I have or the surplus parts sales
and stores I have.  Scary cool.


>conversations on here that would have the public thinking that individuals
>here can build a shuttle in their garage.  I would estimate that the average
>joe might get somehting into sub space and will probably never get it back
>because the average joe does not have the feedback systems, computuers and
>telemetry circutiry on board  or on ground needed to control the vehicles


SCUD guidance was rudimentary.


>they send aloft.  I doubt very much that NASA is concerend with anything
>that is being designed here except that of someone sending somehting out of
>limits into another persons back yard, period.


Except they cannot even escape the typical back yard they are flown
from such as Black Rock Desert for example.



--
Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
Opinion, the whole thing.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 27130 invoked from network); 30 Aug 2001 01:25:09 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 30 Aug 2001 01:25:09 -0000
Received: (qmail 26889 invoked by uid 50005); 30 Aug 2001 01:24:26 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.214382 secs); 30 Aug 2001 01:24:26 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 30 Aug 2001 01:24:25 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA07075; Wed, 29 Aug 2001 18:07:05 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 100237 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 01:07:04          +0000
Received: from localhost (rcalkins@localhost) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with          ESMTP id SAA07060; Wed, 29 Aug 2001 18:07:03 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.LNX.4.10.10108291749570.6920-100000@itc.uci.edu>
Date:         Wed, 29 Aug 2001 18:07:03 -0700
Reply-To: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Tomahawk cruise missile
Comments: To: "afioretti@adelphia" <afiorettii@EXCITE.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <013b01c130e9$56cca550$4464a8c0@afioretti>

I think this is the issue that was being discussed there:

Releasing restricted military information (yes, many here have or have
had security clearances) to the list.

There is another issue involved, that of free releasing information that
can aid rogue nations carry out terrorism.  It's a small step from a
garage space shot to a near ICBM.

Ray

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 19988 invoked from network); 30 Aug 2001 02:18:54 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 30 Aug 2001 02:18:54 -0000
Received: (qmail 22463 invoked by uid 50005); 30 Aug 2001 02:17:37 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.199341 secs); 30 Aug 2001 02:17:37 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 30 Aug 2001 02:17:37 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA07542; Wed, 29 Aug 2001 19:06:00 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 100327 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 02:05:56          +0000
Received: from mta05.mail.mel.aone.net.au (mta05.mail.au.uu.net [203.2.192.85])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA07527 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 29 Aug 2001 19:05:56 -0700
Received: from unknown ([63.34.220.47]) by mta05.mail.mel.aone.net.au with SMTP          id <20010830020551.XNVY19580.mta05.mail.mel.aone.net.au@unknown> for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 12:05:51 +1000
References: Conversation <5.0.0.25.2.20010829110907.00ac6430@email.psu.edu>            with last message <NBEJKDFBFOEFALBMBCDPIEEBCDAA.jtaylor@nc.rr.com>
Priority: Normal
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Priority: 3
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	X-MAPIextension=.TXT;
	charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>
Date:         Thu, 30 Aug 2001 02:05:56 +0000
Reply-To: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Cotronics ceramics
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <NBEJKDFBFOEFALBMBCDPIEEBCDAA.jtaylor@nc.rr.com>

> What I'd like to hear more about is EPDM (EDPM?) for motor liners.

Yep, EPDM.

 I looked
> around in the roofing section of Home Depot and all I could find was some
> brownish-black oily paper in different thicknesses.  I don't think this is
> what I was looking for.  Could someone post a link, a brand name, or other
> details that would help me find this stuff?

Gasket suppliers. Expect to pay top price from these people though.

Troy.

>
> Thanks,
>
> Jeff Taylor
>
>
> >-----Original Message-----
> >From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU]On
> >Behalf Of Keith Soldavin
> >Sent: Wednesday, August 29, 2001 11:09 AM
> >To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
> >Subject: [AR] Cotronics ceramics
> >
> >
> >Has anyone ever used any of the ceramic products from Cotronics?  I just
> >found their web page and some of their adhesives look pretty good.  Just
> >wondering if anyone has any positive or negative experience with
> >them.  Thanks.
> >
> >Keith
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 5393 invoked from network); 30 Aug 2001 02:22:44 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 30 Aug 2001 02:22:44 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 25320 invoked by uid 50005); 30 Aug 2001 02:21:27 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.306428 secs); 30 Aug 2001 02:21:27 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 30 Aug 2001 02:21:27 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA07446; Wed, 29 Aug 2001 19:00:35 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 100301 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 02:00:28          +0000
Received: from smtp09.phx.gblx.net (smtp09.phx.gblx.net [64.211.219.58]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA07431 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 29 Aug 2001 19:00:28 -0700
Received: (from daemon@localhost) by smtp09.phx.gblx.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id          TAA20902 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 29 Aug 2001 19:00:25 -0700
Received: from 64-208-225-29.nas3.TBR.gblx.net(64.208.225.29),          claiming to be "frontiernet.net" via SMTP by smtp09.phx.gblx.net,          id smtpdK9Tc7a; Wed Aug 29 18:59:19 2001
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.74 [en] (Win98; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <001101c130a1$31a2b820$49391442@billbull>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B8D9F21.206F52F8@frontiernet.net>
Date:         Wed, 29 Aug 2001 22:04:17 -0400
Reply-To: <tbinford@frontiernet.net>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Tom Binford" <tbinford@frontiernet.net>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Cotronics
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

> Bill Bullock wrote:


I've used the Thermeeze Ceramic Putty to insulate a steel ring from AP
motor exhaust. Worked perfectly.

Tom

>
> Keith:
>     Hate to hog things this a.m., but yes. I am in the process of
> building a prototype of a machine and am using their #989 Ceramic
> Adhesive to bond Ceramic Fiberboard into the furnace Plenum. We
> started lay-up yesterday and it has worked well so far. Today we will
> finish that and start coating with Zircar, Inc., rigidizer coating.
>     In this shipment I also bought a 100' roll of Cotronics Thermeeze
> Woven Ceramic Tape and 100' of 1/32" thick Ceramic Paper (which I have
> already shared with another person in this group) to try as a
> chamber-liner/casting-cylinder on a new fuel blend I am working on. I
> also got 10# of Cer-Cast Zirconium Oxide castable ceramic to try on
> both ceramic/ceramic composite and ceramic/metallic composite nozzles.
>     This is my first time to use their products but I have been using
> ceramic materials much like theirs for 12-13 years now and theirs look
> pretty good according to their literature and reports from other
> users. (Of course nobody would ever "slant" their advertising, would
> they?)
>     If anyone interested I will share whatever I learn. As for the
> adhesive, it stuck the white stuff to the steel suff real good. On my
> test plate I tried to pull the ceramic fiberboard off and it split
> down the middle and left half the test block adhered to the raw
> (un-prepared) test plate. When the furnace is fired off and the
> adhesive reaches approximately 350 deg. C. this adhesive is supposed
> to fuse into a ceramic/ceramic/steel bond which will stand 3,200 deg.
> F. Since the melting temperature of the steel backing is about 15-1600
> deg. F. in this environment, I think that is sufficient for my
> purposes.
> Bill

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 6908 invoked from network); 30 Aug 2001 02:23:08 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 30 Aug 2001 02:23:08 -0000
Received: (qmail 24740 invoked by uid 50005); 30 Aug 2001 02:22:26 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.189367 secs); 30 Aug 2001 02:22:26 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 30 Aug 2001 02:22:26 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA07668; Wed, 29 Aug 2001 19:19:29 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 100355 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 02:19:27          +0000
Received: from cablecom.laribay.net (cablecom.laribay.net [66.20.57.4]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA07637 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 29 Aug 2001 19:19:17 -0700
Received: from billbull (dial089.laribay.net [66.20.57.89]) by          cablecom.laribay.net (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id VAA07167 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 29 Aug 2001 21:00:50 -0500 (CDT)          (envelope-from bpbullock@laribay.net)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0C02_01C56B69.4D395BF0"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <005201c130fa$57ca0860$59391442@billbull>
Date:         Wed, 29 Aug 2001 21:20:08 -0500
Reply-To: "Bill Bullock" <bpbullock@LARIBAY.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Bill Bullock" <bpbullock@LARIBAY.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Cotronics
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0C02_01C56B69.4D395BF0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Tom Binford wrote:

----- Original Message -----=20
From: Tom Binford <tbinford@frontiernet.net>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Wednesday, August 29, 2001 9:04 PM
Subject: Re: [AR] Cotronics


>=20
> I've used the Thermeeze Ceramic Putty to insulate a steel ring from AP
> motor exhaust. Worked perfectly.
>=20
> Tom
    Thanks for the info, Tom. I had never even considered that before. I =
appreciate the hint and will give that a try.
    Might you have time to post a description of how you did this? I =
find it especially interesting since it worked well for you in this =
application.
    Respectfully,
Bill


------=_NextPart_000_0C02_01C56B69.4D395BF0
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META content=3D"text/html; charset=3Diso-8859-1" =
http-equiv=3DContent-Type>
<META content=3D"MSHTML 5.00.2614.3500" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV>Tom Binford wrote:</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>----- Original Message -----=20
<DIV>From: Tom Binford &lt;<A=20
href=3D"mailto:tbinford@frontiernet.net">tbinford@frontiernet.net</A>&gt;=
</DIV>
<DIV>To: &lt;<A=20
href=3D"mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU">AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU</A>&gt;</DIV>
<DIV>Sent: Wednesday, August 29, 2001 9:04 PM</DIV>
<DIV>Subject: Re: [AR] Cotronics</DIV></DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV>&gt; <BR>&gt; I've used the Thermeeze Ceramic Putty to insulate a =
steel=20
ring from AP<BR>&gt; motor exhaust. Worked perfectly.<BR>&gt; <BR>&gt; =
Tom</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Thanks for the info, Tom. I had never even =
considered=20
that before. I appreciate the hint and will give that a try.</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Might you have time to post a description of how =
you did=20
this? I find it especially interesting since it worked well for you in =
this=20
application.</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Respectfully,</DIV>
<DIV>Bill<BR></DIV></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0C02_01C56B69.4D395BF0--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 27473 invoked from network); 30 Aug 2001 02:36:20 -0000
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 30 Aug 2001 02:36:20 -0000
Received: (qmail 26996 invoked by uid 50005); 30 Aug 2001 02:34:24 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpf with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 3.320249 secs); 30 Aug 2001 02:34:24 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 30 Aug 2001 02:34:16 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA07621; Wed, 29 Aug 2001 19:18:05 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 100344 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 02:17:59          +0000
Received: from smtprelay1.abs.adelphia.net (smtprelay.abs.adelphia.net          [64.8.20.11]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA07606 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 29 Aug 2001 19:17:58 -0700
Received: from jlgrady ([63.124.251.47]) by smtprelay1.abs.adelphia.net          (Netscape Messaging Server 4.15) with SMTP id GIUZOL01.TI3 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 29 Aug 2001 22:17:09 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook CWS, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <000001c130fa$4fbeb4e0$0200a8c0@prestige.net>
Date:         Wed, 29 Aug 2001 22:20:17 -0400
Reply-To: "Jeff Grady" <jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jeff Grady" <jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] offtopic - glide to fall ratio
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <5.1.0.14.1.20010829160540.00ad9180@netmail.home.com>

That story smells like a dead fish. I used to fly real sailplanes - this
conflicts with what I learned/experienced as a sailplane pilot. Most of the
sailplanes I flew were in the 1-32 to 1-36 range and weighed only a few
hundred pounds.

Pull out the sailplane's dive brakes only a little bit and there goes your
lift. Consider the engine pods on the airbus as dive brakes. The engine pods
(not to mention fan blades) would KILL any decent glide ratio that thing
would otherwise have.

Does anyone know if the flight recorder data has been released yet? If the
flight recorder says its true, I'll believe that.

JG

-----Original Message-----
From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@itc.uci.edu]On
Behalf Of Jamie Morken
Sent: Wednesday, August 29, 2001 8:10 PM
To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
Subject: Re: [AR] offtopic - glide to fall ratio


Hi Brian,

>I heard the news account last night. That sucker glided for eighteen
>minutes! Pretty amazing.

If it did go 180 km in 18 minutes then that works out to 600km/hr (cruising
speed is around 850km/hr)
which would require quite the descent rate to maintain with no engines!

For a 20:1 glide to fall ratio (180km glide:30,000ft fall) that works out
to a descent angle of about 2.86 degrees.
tan(20/1)

best regards,
Jamie



>Brian
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Jamie Morken" <jmorken@HOME.COM>
>To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
>Sent: Wednesday, August 29, 2001 4:04 PM
>Subject: [AR] offtopic - glide to fall ratio
>
>
> > Hi all,
> >
> > "About 38 minutes after Pich noticed the fuel problem, the right engine
> > stopped. Ten minutes later, the second engine failed.
> > That left the jet at 33,000 feet over the Atlantic Ocean, at night, with
>no
> > engines."
> >
> > "The Airbus A-330 made the landing after gliding more than 180
kilometres
> > without power to either of its two engines."
> >
> > from:
> >
>http://cbc.ca/cgi-bin/templates/view.cgi?/news/2001/08/28/airtransat_pilot0
1
>0828
> >
> >
> > Struck me as very amazing since I thought the glide to fall ratio for
some
> > of the big airliners was as low as 1:1!  What a superb plane to be able
to
> > travel at high speeds efficiently and still have an ~18:1 glide to fall
>ratio!
> >
> > best regards,
> > Jamie

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 21402 invoked from network); 30 Aug 2001 02:58:16 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 30 Aug 2001 02:58:16 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 607 invoked by uid 50005); 30 Aug 2001 02:59:18 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpa with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.166477 secs); 30 Aug 2001 02:59:18 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 30 Aug 2001 02:59:17 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA07877; Wed, 29 Aug 2001 19:54:12 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 100398 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 02:54:06          +0000
Received: from smtp004pub.verizon.net (smtp004pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.183])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA07862 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 29 Aug 2001 19:54:05 -0700
Received: from [63.25.57.165] (1Cust117.tnt1.san-bernardino.ca.da.uu.net          [63.27.96.117]) by smtp004pub.verizon.net  with ESMTP for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; id f7U2rXJ01304 Wed, 29 Aug 2001 21:53:33          -0500 (CDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: GTE/01rocket@mail.gte.net
References: <000001c130fa$4fbeb4e0$0200a8c0@prestige.net>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <a0510031db7b35a895c73@[63.25.57.165]>
Date:         Wed, 29 Aug 2001 19:53:33 -0700
Reply-To: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] offtopic - glide to fall ratio
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <000001c130fa$4fbeb4e0$0200a8c0@prestige.net>

>That story smells like a dead fish. I used to fly real sailplanes - this
>conflicts with what I learned/experienced as a sailplane pilot. Most of the
>sailplanes I flew were in the 1-32 to 1-36 range and weighed only a few
>hundred pounds.
>
>Pull out the sailplane's dive brakes only a little bit and there goes your
>lift. Consider the engine pods on the airbus as dive brakes. The engine pods
>(not to mention fan blades) would KILL any decent glide ratio that thing
>would otherwise have.


I heard 100km or less glide from operational altitude (37-42k)
I believe the engines are designed to autorotate specifically improve
glide ratio.
I heard the glide ratio was 18:1 to 15:1.

The people lived.  Details?  Avaition Leak and Technology Transfer web site.

Jerry

>
>Does anyone know if the flight recorder data has been released yet? If the
>flight recorder says its true, I'll believe that.


--
Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
Opinion, the whole thing.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 25750 invoked from network); 30 Aug 2001 03:08:29 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 30 Aug 2001 03:08:29 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 31320 invoked by uid 50005); 30 Aug 2001 03:06:33 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpf with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.528623 secs); 30 Aug 2001 03:06:33 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 30 Aug 2001 03:06:33 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA08033; Wed, 29 Aug 2001 20:03:57 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 100439 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 03:03:50          +0000
Received: from hobbiton.shire.net (frogmorton.shire.net [204.228.145.136]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA08018 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Wed, 29 Aug 2001 20:03:50 -0700
Received: from pool-64-223-145-225.man.east.verizon.net ([64.223.145.225]          helo=me-513q3sc0zun0.pengar.com) by hobbiton.shire.net with esmtp          (Exim 3.22 #6) id 15cI5k-0003Bq-00 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 29          Aug 2001 21:02:04 -0600
X-Sender: seth-pc@hobbiton.shire.net
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
References: <NBEJKDFBFOEFALBMBCDPIEEBCDAA.jtaylor@nc.rr.com>            <5.0.0.25.2.20010829110907.00ac6430@email.psu.edu>            <NBEJKDFBFOEFALBMBCDPIEEBCDAA.jtaylor@nc.rr.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <5.1.0.14.0.20010829230656.02aa3360@hobbiton.shire.net>
Date:         Wed, 29 Aug 2001 23:08:54 -0400
Reply-To: "Seth Leigh" <seth@PENGAR.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Seth Leigh" <seth@PENGAR.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Cotronics ceramics
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC8 22>

Go to the following page:

http://www.lowes.com/Lowes/howto/howToDocument.asp?ID=waterGarden

Do a find for EPDM on that page.  Yes, it's used for lining garden style
manmade ponds, and I'm betting that they actually have this by the large
sheet for sale at Lowes.  I don't think they have Lowes in my area, but I'd
bet if Lowes sells EPDM pond liners, that Home Depot probably does too, and
there's one 20 minutes away from me and another opening up tomorrow only 10
minutes away.  I'll have to go check.

Seth



At 10:05 PM 8/29/2001, Troy Prideaux wrote:
> > What I'd like to hear more about is EPDM (EDPM?) for motor liners.
>
>Yep, EPDM.
>
>  I looked
> > around in the roofing section of Home Depot and all I could find was some
> > brownish-black oily paper in different thicknesses.  I don't think this is
> > what I was looking for.  Could someone post a link, a brand name, or other
> > details that would help me find this stuff?
>
>Gasket suppliers. Expect to pay top price from these people though.
>
>Troy.
>
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Jeff Taylor
> >
> >
> > >-----Original Message-----
> > >From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU]On
> > >Behalf Of Keith Soldavin
> > >Sent: Wednesday, August 29, 2001 11:09 AM
> > >To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
> > >Subject: [AR] Cotronics ceramics
> > >
> > >
> > >Has anyone ever used any of the ceramic products from Cotronics?  I just
> > >found their web page and some of their adhesives look pretty good.  Just
> > >wondering if anyone has any positive or negative experience with
> > >them.  Thanks.
> > >
> > >Keith
> >

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 20037 invoked from network); 30 Aug 2001 03:16:06 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 30 Aug 2001 03:16:06 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 2592 invoked by uid 50005); 30 Aug 2001 03:17:09 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpb with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.164108 secs); 30 Aug 2001 03:17:09 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 30 Aug 2001 03:17:08 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA08141; Wed, 29 Aug 2001 20:10:29 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 100467 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 03:10:27          +0000
Received: from tisch.mail.mindspring.net (tisch.mail.mindspring.net          [207.69.200.157]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA08115          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 29 Aug 2001 20:10:25 -0700
Received: from mindspring.com (sdn-ar-007casfrMP148.dialsprint.net          [158.252.214.150]) by tisch.mail.mindspring.net (8.9.3/8.8.5) with          ESMTP id XAA16274; Wed, 29 Aug 2001 23:10:20 -0400 (EDT)
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 (Macintosh; U; PPC)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <F128XWzRPTNZStgLzhV0000e5d5@hotmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B6DB58E.D720EFBD@mindspring.com>
Date:         Sun, 5 Aug 2001 14:07:30 -0700
Reply-To: "Alan Shinn" <alshinn@MINDSPRING.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Alan Shinn" <alshinn@MINDSPRING.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Elite Sugar Propellant Group Forming.
Comments: To: Matt Faulkner <mattfaulkner9@HOTMAIL.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Sugar based propellents seem to me to be totaly  -on topic- for this
group. Why move the discussion away from here?? Unless all the other off
topic junk is getting you down?
--
Looking forward:
Alan Shinn


Experience the
beginnings of microscopy.
Make your own replica
of one of Antony van Leeuwenhoek's microscopes.
visit    http://www.mindspring.com/~alshinn/

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 21829 invoked from network); 30 Aug 2001 03:16:36 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 30 Aug 2001 03:16:36 -0000
Received: (qmail 14231 invoked by uid 50005); 30 Aug 2001 03:17:38 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpa with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.266672 secs); 30 Aug 2001 03:17:38 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 30 Aug 2001 03:17:37 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA08097; Wed, 29 Aug 2001 20:08:52 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 100454 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 03:08:50          +0000
Received: from femail24.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail24.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.0.95.149]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA08082          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 29 Aug 2001 20:08:49 -0700
Received: from hal2001 ([24.77.53.16]) by femail24.sdc1.sfba.home.com          (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20 201-229-121-120-20010223) with SMTP id          <20010830030838.DABE17854.femail24.sdc1.sfba.home.com@hal2001> for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 29 Aug 2001 20:08:38 -0700
References:  <002701c13091$8bd3f6c0$58391442@billbull>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <003d01c130ff$eab356e0$0400a8c0@hatjs>
Date:         Wed, 29 Aug 2001 20:00:25 -0700
Reply-To: "Jamie Morken" <jmorken@HOME.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jamie Morken" <jmorken@HOME.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] New Question: Internal Shock Waves
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Hi Bill,

>    Now my hypothetical question (which invariably brings my discussions
with said engineers to an abrupt halt): according to Sutton's statement lets
assume that a certain propellant grain has an upper pressure limit of 4,300
psi chamber pressure and above that level a detonation is initiated. Now
lets say that the operational chamber pressure is 1,500 psi and the
propellant grain has a core temperature of say 85 deg F. and all is well.
    A shock wave is generated for whatever reason within the chamber and
progresses into the lower end of the chamber where it is refracted back into
the propellant grain and onto the combustion surface. This produces an
instantaneous pressure on the burning surface of the grain of, say, 6,850
psi...which is "only"  2,550 psi above the critical detonation
pressure...what happens?

>From what you've said so far wouldn't it detonate since the pressure has
increased over the critical detonation pressure?  I think a shock causing an
"instantaneous" 6850psi would be more likely to cause a detonation than a
steady operation of 6850psi.  I can't really visualize why a steady high
pressure on the surface of burning propellant can lead to detonation.  Could
you explain this phenomenon more?  (I need to go to the library for Sutton's
book again I think :)

best regards,
Jamie

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 10964 invoked from network); 30 Aug 2001 03:22:14 -0000
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 30 Aug 2001 03:22:14 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 12729 invoked by uid 50005); 30 Aug 2001 03:20:18 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpf with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.2183 secs); 30 Aug 2001 03:20:18 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 30 Aug 2001 03:20:18 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA07946; Wed, 29 Aug 2001 19:56:53 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 100418 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 02:56:52          +0000
Received: from cyclone.comcen.com.au (cyclone.comcen.com.au [203.23.236.100])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA07931 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 29 Aug 2001 19:56:51 -0700
Received: (from nobody@localhost) by cyclone.comcen.com.au (8.11.1/8.11.1) id          f7U2u4i69824; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 12:56:04 +1000 (EST) (envelope-from          pkelly@comcen.com.au)
References: <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010828093648.17207D-100000@spsystems.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
User-Agent: IMP/PHP IMAP webmail program 2.2.3
X-Originating-IP: 203.59.160.14
Message-ID:  <999140164.3b8dab4423f6a@webmail.comcen.com.au>
Date:         Thu, 30 Aug 2001 12:56:04 +1000
Reply-To: "Paul Kelly" <pkelly@COMCEN.COM.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Paul Kelly" <pkelly@COMCEN.COM.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] liquids question: alcohol/N2O propellant feeding
Comments: To: Henry Spencer <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010828093648.17207D-100000@spsystems.net>

There really is a simple answer to pressuising non volatile fuels in simple NOX
biprops. Just add a piston to the tank, put your fuel on top of the piston and
the nox below, run a flexible hose (nylon line works) from the piston to the
combustion chamber with enough slack to let the piston slide up to the top of
the tank.

PK
Quoting Henry Spencer <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>:

> On Tue, 28 Aug 2001 Tjpoulton@AOL.COM wrote:
> > ...The problem is that, obviously, ethanol
> > and nitrous oxide react with each other...
>
> Well, not spontaneously, not under normal conditions.  N2O is really
> pretty inert until it gets hot.
>
> > ...My question is this:  exactly how bad of an idea is
> > it to use N2O gas to directly pressurize an alcohol tank, without
> separating
> > the two chemicals?  Is the initial compression likely to cause
> ignition?  Has
> > this been done successfully (or unsuccessfully) before?
>
> I don't think there is any established precedent.  It would make me
> nervous,
> though.  As others have noted, Goddard stopped having mysterious
> in-flight
> explosions when he stopped trying to pressurize his gasoline tank with
> GOX.
> Granted, that's a more active combination, but even so...
>
> Another question to consider is whether N2O will *dissolve* in alcohol,
> especially given that the resulting mixture would probably be an
> explosive.
>
> > I will use a piston
> > if I have to, but it would be much simpler and lighter to avoid it.
>
> I'd say use CO2 for pressurization, use a self-pressurizing fuel like
> ethane, or bite the bullet and use the piston (or some equivalent like
> putting the fuel in a plastic bag within the tank -- but check the
> plastic
> for alcohol compatibility!).
>
>                                                           Henry Spencer
>
> henry@spsystems.net
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 26122 invoked from network); 30 Aug 2001 03:26:38 -0000
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 30 Aug 2001 03:26:38 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 29250 invoked by uid 50005); 30 Aug 2001 03:27:07 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpe with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.182884 secs); 30 Aug 2001 03:27:07 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 30 Aug 2001 03:27:07 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA08185; Wed, 29 Aug 2001 20:13:12 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 100480 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 03:13:10          +0000
Received: from cyclone.comcen.com.au (cyclone.comcen.com.au [203.23.236.100])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA08152 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 29 Aug 2001 20:11:37 -0700
Received: (from nobody@localhost) by cyclone.comcen.com.au (8.11.1/8.11.1) id          f7U3BKP69916; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 13:11:20 +1000 (EST) (envelope-from          pkelly@comcen.com.au)
References: <5.1.0.14.0.20010709020728.02578a48@lstud.ii.uib.no>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
User-Agent: IMP/PHP IMAP webmail program 2.2.3
X-Originating-IP: 203.59.160.14
Message-ID:  <999141080.3b8daed8dffd4@webmail.comcen.com.au>
Date:         Thu, 30 Aug 2001 13:11:20 +1000
Reply-To: "Paul Kelly" <pkelly@COMCEN.COM.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Paul Kelly" <pkelly@COMCEN.COM.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Exploding hybrid
Comments: To: Emil Johnsen <Emil.Johnsen@STUDENT.UIB.NO>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <5.1.0.14.0.20010709020728.02578a48@lstud.ii.uib.no>

There are only three ways I've seen hybrids fail.
1. Occluded injector resulting in long burn and heat damage/casing burn
through. Don't see this much on U/C motors. This generally results in large
hole in the side of the combustion chamber. Avoid this by using energetic
pyrovalve material.

2. Overpressure at ignition. Either by nozzle occlusion or to much pyrogen.
Result is always tearing of the motor case and the failure of one or more
closures. Avoid this by making bigger motors, securing the igniter slug at the
forward end of the grain with a step. Not using catalysed igniter slugs in
motors with small throats.

3. Detonation. Typically a follow on effect from 2. Where the slug detonates
and the shock is transferred to the NOX which then detonates. If you're not
sure if you've had a motor detonate, then you haven't!  Typically the motor
tube looks like flat plate and bits of your test stand don't exist. Look for
fractures in the case rather than tears. Avoid this by following the
precautions for 2., making sure that your floating piston cannot possible twist
in the case, and that you have a good amount (10%+) of ullage space above your
nox level (this also helps with 2.)

PK

Quoting Emil Johnsen <Emil.Johnsen@STUDENT.UIB.NO>:

> During a static test in June, the third test of my motor, the motor
> exploded. The motor was an N2O/Butyl hybrid with ~850g of propellant,
> expected burn time ~10sec. I have a hypothesis as to what happened, but
> I
> would very much appreciate any advice that might clear up what actually
> happened, so that it can be avoided in the future.
>
> Different from previous tests:
> -High temperature, 28-30C air temperature (~15C for previous tests) and
> both nitrous bottle and tank exposed to the sun.
> -Injector diameter increased from 2.0 to 2.5mm  (Later tests with 2.5mm
> injector were successful)
> -Fuel grain possibly somewhat compressed at nozzle end. (But port
> diameter
> probably larger than first test)
>
> Observations:
> -Motor exploded within a fraction of a second after activating the
> ignitor.
> -Alu. motor casing broken open at nozzle end. Severely deformed.
> -Top closure ejected.
> -Fuel grain and PVC liner torn apart from the inside.
> -Fill line looked like it had been cut off, rather than melted.
> Normally
> there are several cm of completely melted plastic at the end. This time
> it
> looked like it had bursted rather then melted.
>
> My hypothesis:
> The piece of KNO3/Sucrose used to ignite the motor  (13mm OD, 5mm ID,
> 15mm
> long) was pushed down to the nozzle (7.8mm throat D.), blocking it. As
> N2O
> flowed into the combustion chamber it was decomposed by the heat from
> the
> igniter, with the nozzle still blocked, pressure increased rapidly
> resulting in an explosion.
>
> I have made a new motor and successfully fired it twice, it uses an
> igniter
> which has much shorter burn time and which is thin enough be easily
> ejected, preventing blockage of the nozzle. If my hypothesis is
> correct,
> this should prevent further problems, but I'm not 100% sure if I am on
> the
> right track about what caused the failure..
>
> Comments? Suggestions?
>
>
> Emil Johnsen
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 11702 invoked from network); 30 Aug 2001 03:41:48 -0000
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 30 Aug 2001 03:41:48 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 11584 invoked by uid 50005); 30 Aug 2001 03:42:18 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpe with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.504316 secs); 30 Aug 2001 03:42:18 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 30 Aug 2001 03:42:17 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA08298; Wed, 29 Aug 2001 20:19:28 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 100511 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 03:19:25          +0000
Received: from imo-m01.mx.aol.com (imo-m01.mx.aol.com [64.12.136.4]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA08283 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Wed, 29 Aug 2001 20:19:24 -0700
Received: from Tjpoulton@aol.com by imo-m01.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v31_r1.4.) id          w.f4.ebdc500 (25305) for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Wed, 29 Aug 2001          23:18:46 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: AOL 5.0 for Windows sub 138
Message-ID:  <f4.ebdc500.28bf0a95@aol.com>
Date:         Wed, 29 Aug 2001 23:18:45 EDT
Reply-To: <Tjpoulton@AOL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <Tjpoulton@AOL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] liquids question: alcohol/N2O propellant feeding
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

In a message dated 8/29/01 9:57:51 PM Central Daylight Time,
pkelly@COMCEN.COM.AU writes:

> There really is a simple answer to pressuising non volatile fuels in simple
> NOX
>  biprops. Just add a piston to the tank, put your fuel on top of the piston
> and
>  the nox below, run a flexible hose (nylon line works) from the piston to
the
>  combustion chamber with enough slack to let the piston slide up to the top
> of
>  the tank.

I was aware of that, but would like to avoid it in this design.  First off, I
can't do exactly that using the tanks I have -- they are DOT rated, fiber
wrapped cylinders.  I would have to completely re-do my propellant storage
design and I wouldn't get to take advantage of the neato composite tanks.  I
could use a cylindircal 316SS tube with a piston for the alcohol tank (I
already have the perfect tube for it), but that would be complicated -- much
more complicated than just using the tanks I have.
Mike P.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 22908 invoked from network); 30 Aug 2001 04:46:11 -0000
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 30 Aug 2001 04:46:11 -0000
Received: (qmail 9185 invoked by uid 50005); 30 Aug 2001 04:46:40 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpe with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.229182 secs); 30 Aug 2001 04:46:40 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 30 Aug 2001 04:46:40 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA08795; Wed, 29 Aug 2001 21:28:17 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 100613 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 04:28:06          +0000
Received: from cablecom.laribay.net (cablecom.laribay.net [66.20.57.4]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA08780 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 29 Aug 2001 21:28:06 -0700
Received: from billbull (dial075.laribay.net [66.20.57.75]) by          cablecom.laribay.net (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id XAA08385 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 29 Aug 2001 23:09:51 -0500 (CDT)          (envelope-from bpbullock@laribay.net)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0C05_01C56B69.4D4542D0"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <00cd01c1310c$5f2df320$59391442@billbull>
Date:         Wed, 29 Aug 2001 23:29:10 -0500
Reply-To: "Bill Bullock" <bpbullock@LARIBAY.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Bill Bullock" <bpbullock@LARIBAY.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] New Question: Internal Shock Wave
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0C05_01C56B69.4D4542D0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable


----- Original Message -----=20
From: Jamie Morken <jmorken@HOME.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Wednesday, August 29, 2001 10:00 PM
Subject: Re: [AR] New Question: Internal Shock Waves
> >From what you've said so far wouldn't it detonate since the pressure =
has
> increased over the critical detonation pressure?  I think a shock =
causing an
> "instantaneous" 6850psi would be more likely to cause a detonation =
than a
> steady operation of 6850psi.  I can't really visualize why a steady =
high
> pressure on the surface of burning propellant can lead to detonation.  =
Could
> you explain this phenomenon more?  (I need to go to the library for =
Sutton's
> book again I think :)
>=20
> best regards,
> Jamie
********************************
Jamie:
    My original information came from Rocket Propulsion Elements: An =
Introduction to the Engineering of Rockets, by George P. Sutton (1949): =
Chapter 10 ("Design Considerations"), page 282, where Mr. Sutton is =
discussing nozzle design in relation to chamber pressure. In the last =
paragraph of this topic he states:"Above a certain pressure limit, the =
burning rate will increase so rapidly that a detonation will occur, =
which usually shatters the chamber. This pressure is very high for most =
propellants(above 6000 pounds per square inch.)"
    It abundantly documented that so-called "acoustic shock waves" =
traveling at or near the speed of sound reverberate throughout the =
operating environment of solid fuel, liquid fuel and hybrid fueled =
rocket engines.
    My question is whether or not a motor operating well within its =
design limits, and within its "safe" pressure limits, can be induced to =
exhibit a catastrophic failure by means of an internal shock wave =
producing a localized over-pressurization condition upon the burning =
face of the propellant grain of a solid fueled rocket motor when it is =
refracted into that area. If so, it would appear to me that this might =
explain some of the apparently inexplicable failures which occur from =
time to time.
    You are certainly absolutely right that a shock wave would seemingly =
be more prone to cause such an occurrence, but by what means? And if =
this is a possibility, what are the remedies? Can and should we design =
acoustical diffusers into the interior of the motor casing? Can we =
control this condition by manipulation of the shock waves...say by =
refracting one shock wave back into another in order to produce a null =
effect? Does this phenomenon even warrant consideration?
    My beliefs have for several decades been that the way to properly =
address what one aquantence referred to as USD's (Unscheduled =
Spontaneous Disassemblies...he objected to my use of the term "...blew =
that sucker up!") is to first learn how these occurrences are produced =
and then "don't to that no more". It's just that I am not smart enough, =
educated enough  or well versed enough in this area to form a valid =
opinion. And as Dr. E.P. Johnson once told me,"Bill, the first step to =
education and wisdom is the realization of the extent of your =
ignorance." I plead guilty here.
Bill
   =20


------=_NextPart_000_0C05_01C56B69.4D4542D0
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META content=3D"text/html; charset=3Diso-8859-1" =
http-equiv=3DContent-Type>
<META content=3D"MSHTML 5.00.2614.3500" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>----- Original Message -----=20
<DIV>From: Jamie Morken &lt;<A=20
href=3D"mailto:jmorken@HOME.COM">jmorken@HOME.COM</A>&gt;</DIV>
<DIV>To: &lt;<A=20
href=3D"mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU">AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU</A>&gt;</DIV>
<DIV>Sent: Wednesday, August 29, 2001 10:00 PM</DIV>
<DIV>Subject: Re: [AR] New Question: Internal Shock Waves</DIV></DIV>
<DIV>&gt; &gt;From what you've said so far wouldn't it detonate since =
the=20
pressure has<BR>&gt; increased over the critical detonation =
pressure?&nbsp; I=20
think a shock causing an<BR>&gt; "instantaneous" 6850psi would be more =
likely to=20
cause a detonation than a<BR>&gt; steady operation of 6850psi.&nbsp; I =
can't=20
really visualize why a steady high<BR>&gt; pressure on the surface of =
burning=20
propellant can lead to detonation.&nbsp; Could<BR>&gt; you explain this=20
phenomenon more?&nbsp; (I need to go to the library for Sutton's<BR>&gt; =
book=20
again I think :)<BR>&gt; <BR>&gt; best regards,<BR>&gt;=20
Jamie<BR>********************************</DIV>
<DIV>Jamie:</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; My original information came from <U>Rocket =
Propulsion=20
Elements: An Introduction to the Engineering of Rockets</U>, by George =
P. Sutton=20
(1949): Chapter 10 ("Design Considerations"), page 282, where&nbsp;Mr. =
Sutton is=20
discussing nozzle design in&nbsp;relation&nbsp;to chamber pressure. In =
the last=20
paragraph of this topic he states:"Above a certain pressure limit, the =
burning=20
rate will increase so rapidly that a detonation will occur, which =
usually=20
shatters the chamber. This pressure is very high for most =
propellants(above 6000=20
pounds per square inch.)"</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; It abundantly documented that so-called =
"acoustic shock=20
waves" traveling at or near the speed of sound reverberate throughout =
the=20
operating environment of solid fuel, liquid fuel and hybrid fueled =
rocket=20
engines.</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; My question is whether or not a motor operating =
well=20
within its design limits, and within&nbsp;its "safe" pressure limits, =
can be=20
induced to exhibit a catastrophic failure by means of an internal shock =
wave=20
producing a localized over-pressurization condition upon the burning =
face of the=20
propellant grain of a solid fueled rocket motor when it is refracted =
into that=20
area. If so, it would appear to me that this might explain some of the=20
apparently inexplicable failures which occur from time to time.</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; You are certainly absolutely right that&nbsp;a =
shock=20
wave would seemingly be more prone to cause such an occurrence, but by =
what=20
means? And if this is a possibility, what are the remedies? Can and =
should we=20
design acoustical diffusers into the interior of the motor casing? Can =
we=20
control this condition by manipulation of the shock waves...say by =
refracting=20
one shock wave back into another in order to produce a null effect? Does =
this=20
phenomenon even warrant consideration?</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; My beliefs have for several decades been that =
the way to=20
properly address what one aquantence referred to as USD's (Unscheduled=20
Spontaneous Disassemblies...he objected to my use of the term "...blew =
that=20
sucker up!") is to first learn how these occurrences are produced and =
then=20
"don't to that no more". It's just that I am not smart enough, educated =
enough =20
or well versed enough in this area to form a valid opinion. And as Dr. =
E.P.=20
Johnson once told me,"Bill, the first step to education and wisdom is =
the=20
realization of the extent of your ignorance." I plead guilty here.</DIV>
<DIV>Bill</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; <BR></DIV></DIV></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0C05_01C56B69.4D4542D0--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 1257 invoked from network); 30 Aug 2001 04:59:02 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 30 Aug 2001 04:59:02 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 17694 invoked by uid 50005); 30 Aug 2001 04:57:44 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.147285 secs); 30 Aug 2001 04:57:44 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 30 Aug 2001 04:57:44 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA09021; Wed, 29 Aug 2001 21:54:06 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 100643 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 04:54:00          +0000
Received: from dns2.seanet.com (dns2.seanet.com [199.181.164.2]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA09007 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed,          29 Aug 2001 21:54:00 -0700
Received: from seanet.com (ssstolt.seanet.com [204.182.68.23]) by          dns2.seanet.com (8.11.6/8.11.5) with ESMTP id f7U4rMb00973; Wed, 29          Aug 2001 21:53:22 -0700 (PDT)
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.73 [en] (Win98; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010828185904.24467A-100000@spsystems.net>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B8DC4F8.8D8670FC@seanet.com>
Date:         Wed, 29 Aug 2001 21:45:44 -0700
Reply-To: "Sherwood Stolt" <ssstolt@SEANET.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Sherwood Stolt" <ssstolt@SEANET.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] liquids question: alcohol/N2O propellant feeding
Comments: cc: Henry Spencer <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Henry Spencer wrote:
...

> It's even possible to have a pump-fed blowdown system (!).  The classical
> Atlas uses blowdown for tank pressurization after booster-engine jettison,
> relying on remaining gas in the tanks to maintain adequate pressurization.
> Its pressurization system departs with the booster engines.

Now that is a scheme I hadn't thought of.  Use a high pressure tank and
regulator to pressurize the propellant tanks until say 2/3 of the burn (when
there is plenty of gas in the tanks to blow down without much pressure
loss) then dump the pressurization system overboard somehow to limit
its impact on the end weight.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 4851 invoked from network); 30 Aug 2001 05:00:30 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 30 Aug 2001 05:00:30 -0000
Received: (qmail 18906 invoked by uid 50005); 30 Aug 2001 04:59:12 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.31192 secs); 30 Aug 2001 04:59:12 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 30 Aug 2001 04:59:12 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA08975; Wed, 29 Aug 2001 21:42:50 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 100636 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 04:42:45          +0000
Received: from mta04.mail.mel.aone.net.au (mta04.mail.au.uu.net [203.2.192.84])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA08961 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 29 Aug 2001 21:42:44 -0700
Received: from unknown ([63.34.216.86]) by mta04.mail.mel.aone.net.au with SMTP          id <20010830044236.JRZB9592.mta04.mail.mel.aone.net.au@unknown> for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 14:42:36 +1000
References: Conversation <002701c13091$8bd3f6c0$58391442@billbull> with last            message <003d01c130ff$eab356e0$0400a8c0@hatjs>
Priority: Normal
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Priority: 3
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	X-MAPIextension=.TXT;
	charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>
Date:         Thu, 30 Aug 2001 04:42:45 +0000
Reply-To: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] New Question: Internal Shock Waves
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <003d01c130ff$eab356e0$0400a8c0@hatjs>

----------
> Hi Bill,
>
> >    Now my hypothetical question (which invariably brings my discussions
> with said engineers to an abrupt halt): according to Sutton's statement
lets
> assume that a certain propellant grain has an upper pressure limit of
4,300
> psi chamber pressure and above that level a detonation is initiated. Now
> lets say that the operational chamber pressure is 1,500 psi and the
> propellant grain has a core temperature of say 85 deg F. and all is well.
>     A shock wave is generated for whatever reason within the chamber and
> progresses into the lower end of the chamber where it is refracted back
into
> the propellant grain and onto the combustion surface. This produces an
> instantaneous pressure on the burning surface of the grain of, say, 6,850
> psi...which is "only"  2,550 psi above the critical detonation
> pressure...what happens?
>
> From what you've said so far wouldn't it detonate since the pressure has
> increased over the critical detonation pressure?  I think a shock causing
an
> "instantaneous" 6850psi would be more likely to cause a detonation than a
> steady operation of 6850psi.  I can't really visualize why a steady high
> pressure on the surface of burning propellant can lead to detonation.
Could
> you explain this phenomenon more?  (I need to go to the library for
Sutton's
> book again I think :)

Could be a number of reasons like maybe molecular critical pressures and so
on... My best guess of the mechanism however would be a surface layer
effect ie. reaction & maybe flame zones getting compressed to the surface
layer, throw in some turbulence and maybe some combustion instability and
anything's possible. I (and others) have also experienced (what appeared to
be) detonations with nozzleless motors, although using an epoxy not a PB
based binder. Granted the Mach number of the chamber gases can be >1 in
nozzleless motors (maybe) I can't see gas velocity alone initiating a det.
Apparently the same boundary layer assault exists for both scenarios** (in
theory) and assuming both scenarios can result in a detonation it makes
sense to me that the mechanism is related more to the surface layer than
anything else. Literally my 2c worth, I'm no expert with dets or shockwave
behaviour.

**Both scenarios being high Pc's or high gas velocities.

Troy.


>
> best regards,
> Jamie

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 12813 invoked from network); 30 Aug 2001 05:03:37 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 30 Aug 2001 05:03:37 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 21223 invoked by uid 50005); 30 Aug 2001 05:02:20 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.266606 secs); 30 Aug 2001 05:02:20 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 30 Aug 2001 05:02:20 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA09111; Wed, 29 Aug 2001 21:58:39 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 100667 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 04:58:37          +0000
Received: from cyclone.comcen.com.au (cyclone.comcen.com.au [203.23.236.100])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA09091 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 29 Aug 2001 21:58:29 -0700
Received: (from nobody@localhost) by cyclone.comcen.com.au (8.11.1/8.11.1) id          f7U4wNl70272; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 14:58:23 +1000 (EST) (envelope-from          pkelly@comcen.com.au)
References: <f4.ebdc500.28bf0a95@aol.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
User-Agent: IMP/PHP IMAP webmail program 2.2.3
X-Originating-IP: 203.59.204.96
Message-ID:  <999147503.3b8dc7ef74d4c@webmail.comcen.com.au>
Date:         Thu, 30 Aug 2001 14:58:23 +1000
Reply-To: "Paul Kelly" <pkelly@COMCEN.COM.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Paul Kelly" <pkelly@COMCEN.COM.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] liquids question: alcohol/N2O propellant feeding
Comments: To: Tjpoulton@AOL.COM
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <f4.ebdc500.28bf0a95@aol.com>

 So a monococque tank consisting of a tube, two closures and a piston is harder
than making a flightweight chassis to hold two DOT rated tanks?

PK

Quoting Tjpoulton@AOL.COM:

> In a message dated 8/29/01 9:57:51 PM Central Daylight Time,
> pkelly@COMCEN.COM.AU writes:
>
> > There really is a simple answer to pressuising non volatile fuels in
> simple
> > NOX
> >  biprops. Just add a piston to the tank, put your fuel on top of the
> piston
> > and
> >  the nox below, run a flexible hose (nylon line works) from the piston
> to
> the
> >  combustion chamber with enough slack to let the piston slide up to
> the top
> > of
> >  the tank.
>
> I was aware of that, but would like to avoid it in this design.  First
> off, I
> can't do exactly that using the tanks I have -- they are DOT rated,
> fiber
> wrapped cylinders.  I would have to completely re-do my propellant
> storage
> design and I wouldn't get to take advantage of the neato composite
> tanks.  I
> could use a cylindircal 316SS tube with a piston for the alcohol tank
> (I
> already have the perfect tube for it), but that would be complicated --
> much
> more complicated than just using the tanks I have.
> Mike P.
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 9958 invoked from network); 30 Aug 2001 05:14:16 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 30 Aug 2001 05:14:16 -0000
Received: (qmail 8637 invoked by uid 50005); 30 Aug 2001 05:15:17 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpa with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.213296 secs); 30 Aug 2001 05:15:17 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 30 Aug 2001 05:15:16 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA09084; Wed, 29 Aug 2001 21:57:16 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 100660 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 04:57:15          +0000
Received: from mta05.mail.mel.aone.net.au (mta05.mail.au.uu.net [203.2.192.85])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA09070 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 29 Aug 2001 21:57:14 -0700
Received: from unknown ([63.60.249.84]) by mta05.mail.mel.aone.net.au with SMTP          id <20010830045708.BBWW19580.mta05.mail.mel.aone.net.au@unknown> for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 14:57:08 +1000
References: Conversation <00cd01c1310c$5f2df320$59391442@billbull> with last            message <00cd01c1310c$5f2df320$59391442@billbull>
Priority: Normal
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Priority: 3
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	X-MAPIextension=.TXT;
	charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>
Date:         Thu, 30 Aug 2001 04:57:15 +0000
Reply-To: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] New Question: Internal Shock Wave
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <00cd01c1310c$5f2df320$59391442@billbull>

Many of the circumstances you refer to are based on combustion instability
phenomenon. More common in AP composites than KP motors and normally only a
problem experienced in large motors. "Fundamentals of Solid Propellant
Combustion" touch on the subject a bit deeper than Sutton and it (or the
references used) may provide many of the answers you're looking for. There
have been many papers and books published on combustion instability.

Troy.

----------
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Jamie Morken <jmorken@HOME.COM>
> To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
> Sent: Wednesday, August 29, 2001 10:00 PM
> Subject: Re: [AR] New Question: Internal Shock Waves
> > >From what you've said so far wouldn't it detonate since the pressure
has
> > increased over the critical detonation pressure?  I think a shock
causing an
> > "instantaneous" 6850psi would be more likely to cause a detonation than
a
> > steady operation of 6850psi.  I can't really visualize why a steady high
> > pressure on the surface of burning propellant can lead to detonation.
Could
> > you explain this phenomenon more?  (I need to go to the library for
Sutton's
> > book again I think :)
> >
> > best regards,
> > Jamie
> ********************************
> Jamie:
>     My original information came from Rocket Propulsion Elements: An
> Introduction to the Engineering of Rockets, by George P. Sutton (1949):
> Chapter 10 ("Design Considerations"), page 282, where Mr. Sutton is
discussing
> nozzle design in relation to chamber pressure. In the last paragraph of
this
> topic he states:"Above a certain pressure limit, the burning rate will
> increase so rapidly that a detonation will occur, which usually shatters
the
> chamber. This pressure is very high for most propellants(above 6000
pounds per
> square inch.)"
>     It abundantly documented that so-called "acoustic shock waves"
traveling
> at or near the speed of sound reverberate throughout the operating
environment
> of solid fuel, liquid fuel and hybrid fueled rocket engines.
>     My question is whether or not a motor operating well within its design
> limits, and within its "safe" pressure limits, can be induced to exhibit a
> catastrophic failure by means of an internal shock wave producing a
localized
> over-pressurization condition upon the burning face of the propellant
grain of
> a solid fueled rocket motor when it is refracted into that area. If so, it
> would appear to me that this might explain some of the apparently
inexplicable
> failures which occur from time to time.
>     You are certainly absolutely right that a shock wave would seemingly
be
> more prone to cause such an occurrence, but by what means? And if this is
a
> possibility, what are the remedies? Can and should we design acoustical
> diffusers into the interior of the motor casing? Can we control this
condition
> by manipulation of the shock waves...say by refracting one shock wave back
> into another in order to produce a null effect? Does this phenomenon even
> warrant consideration?
>     My beliefs have for several decades been that the way to properly
address
> what one aquantence referred to as USD's (Unscheduled Spontaneous
> Disassemblies...he objected to my use of the term "...blew that sucker
up!")
> is to first learn how these occurrences are produced and then "don't to
that
> no more". It's just that I am not smart enough, educated enough  or well
> versed enough in this area to form a valid opinion. And as Dr. E.P.
Johnson
> once told me,"Bill, the first step to education and wisdom is the
realization
> of the extent of your ignorance." I plead guilty here.
> Bill
>
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 19144 invoked from network); 30 Aug 2001 05:28:05 -0000
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 30 Aug 2001 05:28:05 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 15786 invoked by uid 50005); 30 Aug 2001 05:28:34 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpe with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.415259 secs); 30 Aug 2001 05:28:34 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 30 Aug 2001 05:28:33 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA09294; Wed, 29 Aug 2001 22:24:32 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 100711 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 05:24:30          +0000
Received: from localhost (dmccue@localhost) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with          ESMTP id WAA09280 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 29 Aug 2001          22:24:30 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from QUOTED-PRINTABLE to 8bit by itc.uci.edu id WAA09281
Message-ID:  <Pine.LNX.4.10.10108292203430.8977-100000@itc.uci.edu>
Date:         Wed, 29 Aug 2001 22:24:30 -0700
Reply-To: "David J. McCue" <dmccue@itc.uci.edu>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "David J. McCue" <dmccue@itc.uci.edu>
Subject:      Re: [AR] offtopic - glide to fall ratio
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <000001c130fa$4fbeb4e0$0200a8c0@prestige.net>

>From a wonderful site out of the University of Manchester, UK, the
following information on glide ratios:

Airbus 320       17:1
Boeing 747-100 17.7:1
Douglas DC-10  17.7:1
Boeing 767-200   19:1
Boeing 707-320 19.4:1 (a 40 year old design!)

-Dave McCue

On Wed, 29 Aug 2001, Jeff Grady wrote:

> That story smells like a dead fish. I used to fly real sailplanes - this
> conflicts with what I learned/experienced as a sailplane pilot. Most of the
> sailplanes I flew were in the 1-32 to 1-36 range and weighed only a few
> hundred pounds.
>
> Pull out the sailplane's dive brakes only a little bit and there goes your
> lift. Consider the engine pods on the airbus as dive brakes. The engine pods
> (not to mention fan blades) would KILL any decent glide ratio that thing
> would otherwise have.
>
> Does anyone know if the flight recorder data has been released yet? If the
> flight recorder says its true, I'll believe that.
>
> JG
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@itc.uci.edu]On
> Behalf Of Jamie Morken
> Sent: Wednesday, August 29, 2001 8:10 PM
> To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
> Subject: Re: [AR] offtopic - glide to fall ratio
>
>
> Hi Brian,
>
> >I heard the news account last night. That sucker glided for eighteen
> >minutes! Pretty amazing.
>
> If it did go 180 km in 18 minutes then that works out to 600km/hr (cruising
> speed is around 850km/hr)
> which would require quite the descent rate to maintain with no engines!
>
> For a 20:1 glide to fall ratio (180km glide:30,000ft fall) that works out
> to a descent angle of about 2.86 degrees.
> tan(20/1)
>
> best regards,
> Jamie
>
>
>
> >Brian
> >----- Original Message -----
> >From: "Jamie Morken" <jmorken@HOME.COM>
> >To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
> >Sent: Wednesday, August 29, 2001 4:04 PM
> >Subject: [AR] offtopic - glide to fall ratio
> >
> >
> > > Hi all,
> > >
> > > "About 38 minutes after Pich noticed the fuel problem, the right engine
> > > stopped. Ten minutes later, the second engine failed.
> > > That left the jet at 33,000 feet over the Atlantic Ocean, at night, with
> >no
> > > engines."
> > >
> > > "The Airbus A-330 made the landing after gliding more than 180
> kilometres
> > > without power to either of its two engines."
> > >
> > > from:
> > >
> >http://cbc.ca/cgi-bin/templates/view.cgi?/news/2001/08/28/airtransat_pilot0
> 1
> >0828
> > >
> > >
> > > Struck me as very amazing since I thought the glide to fall ratio for
> some
> > > of the big airliners was as low as 1:1!  What a superb plane to be able
> to
> > > travel at high speeds efficiently and still have an ~18:1 glide to fall
> >ratio!
> > >
> > > best regards,
> > > Jamie
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 3708 invoked from network); 30 Aug 2001 06:19:15 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 30 Aug 2001 06:19:15 -0000
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 21567 invoked by uid 50005); 30 Aug 2001 06:18:32 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.316581 secs); 30 Aug 2001 06:18:32 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 30 Aug 2001 06:18:32 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA09545; Wed, 29 Aug 2001 23:14:01 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 100757 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 06:13:52          +0000
Received: from coastnet.com (IDENT:qmailr@frontpage.coastnet.com          [206.87.35.241]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id XAA09531          for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Wed, 29 Aug 2001 23:13:52 -0700
Received: (qmail 7967 invoked from network); 30 Aug 2001 06:13:50 -0000
Received: from pinc247.pinc.com (HELO mike) (199.60.118.247) by          wave.coastnet.com with SMTP; 30 Aug 2001 06:13:50 -0000
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.01 [en] (Win95; I)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Priority: 3
X-Corel-MessageType: EMail
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B8DDA02.C47AF80D@coastnet.com>
Date:         Wed, 29 Aug 2001 23:15:30 -0700
Reply-To: "Ross Borden" <rborden@COASTNET.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Ross Borden" <rborden@COASTNET.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] [EE]: Building a Satellite
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Jerry Irvine wrote:

>Ross Borden wrote with unintended insight:
>>What's needed is an organization with A) a leadership core that will
>>standardize designs, delegate work, integrate & test the results, and,
>>most importantly, carry on through thick and thin, through defections,
>>disasters and disinterest; B) work groups with the tools and abilities
>>to produce the subsystems, and the will to get it done.
>
>
>Welcome to arocket.

Thanks.  It seems like a nice place.  Maybe I'll stick around ;)

>And at least two companies associated with posters.

I am aware of the work being done by various groups.  I'm particularly
impressed by what John and crew have accomplished at Armadillo.  He has
the motivation and deep pockets to get things done (a rare combination.)

But that doesn't change the fact that we are still splintered.  While we
all have the same ultimate goal of reaching orbit, with everybody
pursuing different paths, building largely incompatible hardware, and
gaining experience in isolation, that goal seems forever on the horizon.

An organization with even a few teams working on compatible subsystems
could achieve far more than all of us working independently.

At the very least, I think it would be beneficial if ARocket could
develop specifications for standard rocket platforms, so that down the
road, integrating projects would be feasible.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------
        Non Ignorami Carborundum:          |   rborden@coastnet.com
   "Don't Let The Morons Grind You Down"   |       Ross Borden
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 6665 invoked from network); 30 Aug 2001 06:20:22 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 30 Aug 2001 06:20:22 -0000
Received: (qmail 2701 invoked by uid 50005); 30 Aug 2001 06:19:05 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.197997 secs); 30 Aug 2001 06:19:05 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 30 Aug 2001 06:19:04 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA09570; Wed, 29 Aug 2001 23:15:39 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 100764 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 06:15:38          +0000
Received: from imo-m10.mx.aol.com (imo-m10.mx.aol.com [64.12.136.165]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA09547 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Wed, 29 Aug 2001 23:14:28 -0700
Received: from JMKrell@aol.com by imo-m10.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v31_r1.4.) id          w.33.1a29cb7c (18406) for <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Thu, 30 Aug 2001          02:14:00 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0C08_01C56B69.4D539AB0"
X-Mailer: AOL 6.0 for Windows US sub 10540
Message-ID:  <33.1a29cb7c.28bf33a8@aol.com>
Date:         Thu, 30 Aug 2001 02:14:00 EDT
Reply-To: <JMKrell@AOL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <JMKrell@AOL.COM>
Subject:      [AR] EPDM
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0C08_01C56B69.4D539AB0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Look for a sheet rubber supplier in your area. If they do not carry it, they
can direct you to a supplier. There are many different filler formulas. I
prefer silica filled EPDM, but carbon filled is usually a stock item.

No matter what the price, EPDM is the best thermal insulator I have tested.
It is superior to asbestos filled butyl rubber. A 0.15" layer of carbon
filled EPDM withstood 36 seconds of flame contact in a 6" diameter 18" long
moonburner test using a high solids 10% aluminum 70% AP HTPB propellant.


------=_NextPart_000_0C08_01C56B69.4D539AB0
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<HTML><FONT FACE=arial,helvetica><FONT  SIZE=2>Look for a sheet rubber supplier in your area. If they do not carry it, they
<BR>can direct you to a supplier. There are many different filler formulas. I
<BR>prefer silica filled EPDM, but carbon filled is usually a stock item.
<BR>
<BR>No matter what the price, EPDM is the best thermal insulator I have tested.
<BR>It is superior to asbestos filled butyl rubber. A 0.15" layer of carbon
<BR>filled EPDM withstood 36 seconds of flame contact in a 6" diameter 18" long
<BR>moonburner test using a high solids 10% aluminum 70% AP HTPB propellant. &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;
<BR></FONT></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0C08_01C56B69.4D539AB0--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 20438 invoked from network); 30 Aug 2001 07:15:31 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 30 Aug 2001 07:15:31 -0000
Received: (qmail 14565 invoked by uid 50005); 30 Aug 2001 07:13:35 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpf with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.189141 secs); 30 Aug 2001 07:13:35 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 30 Aug 2001 07:13:34 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA09828; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 00:11:20 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 100817 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 07:11:07          +0000
Received: from spsystems.net (spsystems.net [209.47.149.227]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA09814 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Thu,          30 Aug 2001 00:11:07 -0700
Received: (from henry@localhost) by spsystems.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id DAA18689;          Thu, 30 Aug 2001 03:10:30 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010830030917.17330F-100000@spsystems.net>
Date:         Thu, 30 Aug 2001 03:10:27 -0400
Reply-To: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] offtopic - glide to fall ratio
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <000001c130fa$4fbeb4e0$0200a8c0@prestige.net>

On Wed, 29 Aug 2001, Jeff Grady wrote:
> Pull out the sailplane's dive brakes only a little bit and there goes your
> lift. Consider the engine pods on the airbus as dive brakes. The engine pods
> (not to mention fan blades) would KILL any decent glide ratio that thing
> would otherwise have.

Note that the engines are not motionless flat plates -- the turbomachinery
will "windmill", approximately feathering itself.

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 22979 invoked from network); 30 Aug 2001 07:16:43 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 30 Aug 2001 07:16:43 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 27041 invoked by uid 50005); 30 Aug 2001 07:17:44 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpa with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.216058 secs); 30 Aug 2001 07:17:44 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 30 Aug 2001 07:17:44 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA09851; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 00:12:43 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 100804 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 07:12:42          +0000
Received: from harrier.mail.pas.earthlink.net (harrier.mail.pas.earthlink.net          [207.217.121.12]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA09765          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 00:02:31 -0700
Received: from earthlink.net (dialup-209.247.143.95.Dial1.SanJose1.Level3.net          [209.247.143.95]) by harrier.mail.pas.earthlink.net          (EL-8_9_3_3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id AAA23570; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 00:02:29          -0700 (PDT)
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.75 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.16-22 i686)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <3B8DDA02.C47AF80D@coastnet.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B8DE559.A17B8A3A@earthlink.net>
Date:         Thu, 30 Aug 2001 00:03:53 -0700
Reply-To: "David Weinshenker" <daze39@EARTHLINK.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "David Weinshenker" <daze39@EARTHLINK.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] [EE]: Building a Satellite
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Ross Borden wrote:
> But that doesn't change the fact that we are still splintered.  While we
> all have the same ultimate goal of reaching orbit, with everybody
> pursuing different paths, building largely incompatible hardware, and
> gaining experience in isolation, that goal seems forever on the horizon.
>
> An organization with even a few teams working on compatible subsystems
> could achieve far more than all of us working independently.
>
> At the very least, I think it would be beneficial if ARocket could
> develop specifications for standard rocket platforms, so that down the
> road, integrating projects would be feasible.

I dunno... I think the state of the amateur art is such that efforts at
generalised standardization might be somewhat premature...  there's too
large a "solution space" to explore before it will become meaningful to
promulgate hardware compatibility specifications.

The Cold War and the Moon Race have accustomed us to thinking of "aerospace
technology" in the image of the great corporate and government enterprises,
that built these programs' vehicles... perhaps it would be better to view
ourselves as working in the style of the classic airplane builders who
framed up their craft over "plans" chalked on a hanger floor.

We may be using carbon cloth, epoxy, and titanium instead of canvas, dope
and spruce; our engines may have injectors and nozzles instead of carburetors
and propellers... we may nevertheless find it valuable to understand how
the artisans of aviation's early age accomplished what they did without
the organizational overhead that would accompany the manufacture of even
such "primitive" craft by the present "Aerospace Industry".

It is my contention that a 4STO launcher for a kilogram-sized amsat could
be created using "hand-cast" solid motors, structural technology
with more resemblance to that of a homebuilt boat or aircraft than that
of a Lunar Module or an Atlas, GNC systems developed from carefully-
selected OTS electromechanical components... and that no more than 10%
of the project deliverables, by mass, need consist of documentation.

-dave w

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 8968 invoked from network); 30 Aug 2001 07:23:37 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 30 Aug 2001 07:23:37 -0000
Received: (qmail 31506 invoked by uid 50005); 30 Aug 2001 07:24:37 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpa with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.184379 secs); 30 Aug 2001 07:24:37 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 30 Aug 2001 07:24:37 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA09907; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 00:19:51 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 100838 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 07:19:47          +0000
Received: from spsystems.net (spsystems.net [209.47.149.227]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA09893 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Thu,          30 Aug 2001 00:19:46 -0700
Received: (from henry@localhost) by spsystems.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id DAA18861;          Thu, 30 Aug 2001 03:19:09 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010830031621.17330G-100000@spsystems.net>
Date:         Thu, 30 Aug 2001 03:19:07 -0400
Reply-To: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Exploding hybrid
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <999141080.3b8daed8dffd4@webmail.comcen.com.au>

On Thu, 30 Aug 2001, Paul Kelly wrote:
> There are only three ways I've seen hybrids fail...
> 1. Occluded injector resulting in long burn...
> 2. Overpressure at ignition. Either by nozzle occlusion or to much pyrogen.
> 3. Detonation. Typically a follow on effect from 2. Where the slug detonates
> and the shock is transferred to the NOX which then detonates...

The biggest hybrid failure of all time, the explosion of Amroc's first
250,000-lb hybrid, was none of the above.  A faulty insulation design let
hot gas reach the casing at the joint between cylinder and forward dome.
The casing failed and BOOM.

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 28486 invoked from network); 30 Aug 2001 07:43:06 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 30 Aug 2001 07:43:06 -0000
Received: (qmail 13604 invoked by uid 50005); 30 Aug 2001 07:44:07 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpa with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.506796 secs); 30 Aug 2001 07:44:07 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 30 Aug 2001 07:44:06 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA09946; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 00:23:33 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 100849 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 07:23:32          +0000
Received: from imo-r05.mx.aol.com (imo-r05.mx.aol.com [152.163.225.101]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA09932 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 00:23:31 -0700
Received: from JMKrell@aol.com by imo-r05.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v31_r1.4.) id          w.32.1a197f7b (18406) for <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Thu, 30 Aug 2001          03:23:28 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0C0D_01C56B69.4D6B6870"
X-Mailer: AOL 6.0 for Windows US sub 10540
Message-ID:  <32.1a197f7b.28bf43f0@aol.com>
Date:         Thu, 30 Aug 2001 03:23:28 EDT
Reply-To: <JMKrell@AOL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <JMKrell@AOL.COM>
Subject:      [AR] Internal Shock Wave
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0C0D_01C56B69.4D6B6870
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Standing wave resonance is a common failure mode for solid and liquid motors.
Internal acoustic waves produce areas of high and low pressure. Most of us do
not have the instrumentation on our motors to detect it. During development
of the PlasmaJet "H" motor we had a large number of failures shortly after
ignition. Visual analysis of the propellant burning surface showed a
scalloped pattern of high and low burn rate areas. Pressure instrumentation
also detected the resonating frequencies. A change in the grain design
reduced the acoustic wave pattern.

Acoustic problems do warrant attention. It could account for many USD's. Yes,
the problem can be corrected by changing the grain design if you first
understand the problem.  Bates grain motors normally do not exhibit
acoustical resonance problems.

JK


------=_NextPart_000_0C0D_01C56B69.4D6B6870
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<HTML><FONT FACE=arial,helvetica><FONT  SIZE=2>Standing wave resonance is a common failure mode for solid and liquid motors.
<BR>Internal acoustic waves produce areas of high and low pressure. Most of us do
<BR>not have the instrumentation on our motors to detect it. During development
<BR>of the PlasmaJet "H" motor we had a large number of failures shortly after
<BR>ignition. Visual analysis of the propellant burning surface showed a
<BR>scalloped pattern of high and low burn rate areas. Pressure instrumentation
<BR>also detected the resonating frequencies. A change in the grain design
<BR>reduced the acoustic wave pattern. &nbsp;
<BR>
<BR>Acoustic problems do warrant attention. It could account for many USD's. Yes,
<BR>the problem can be corrected by changing the grain design if you first
<BR>understand the problem. &nbsp;Bates grain motors normally do not exhibit
<BR>acoustical resonance problems. &nbsp;&nbsp;
<BR> &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;
<BR>JK
<BR></FONT></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0C0D_01C56B69.4D6B6870--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 15726 invoked from network); 30 Aug 2001 07:50:09 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 30 Aug 2001 07:50:09 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 30477 invoked by uid 50005); 30 Aug 2001 07:51:10 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpb with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.191915 secs); 30 Aug 2001 07:51:10 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 30 Aug 2001 07:51:10 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA10044; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 00:45:54 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 100864 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 07:45:52          +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (f80.law15.hotmail.com [64.4.23.80]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA10030 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Thu,          30 Aug 2001 00:45:52 -0700
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Thu,          30 Aug 2001 00:45:22 -0700
Received: from 193.121.251.246 by lw15fd.law15.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Thu,          30 Aug 2001 07:45:22 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [193.121.251.246]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 30 Aug 2001 07:45:22.0771 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[B9703A30:01C13127]
Message-ID:  <F80TxS1q0PHksOFhQhD00019dc2@hotmail.com>
Date:         Thu, 30 Aug 2001 07:45:52 +0000
Reply-To: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] liquids question: alcohol/N2O propellant feeding
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

PK wrote:

>There really is a simple answer to pressuising non volatile fuels in simple
>NOX
>biprops. Just add a piston to the tank, put your fuel on top of the piston
>and
>the nox below, run a flexible hose ...

I cannot think of a piston under 40 bars of vapor pressure which 'll not
leak after a while with catastrophic results...For starters, it 'd require a
heavy tank wall and piston to lift off.

Any realisation reported which used this principle?

jd

_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 11906 invoked from network); 30 Aug 2001 08:39:15 -0000
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 30 Aug 2001 08:39:15 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 1941 invoked by uid 50005); 30 Aug 2001 08:39:44 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpe with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.169389 secs); 30 Aug 2001 08:39:44 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 30 Aug 2001 08:39:43 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id BAA10190; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 01:19:38 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 100887 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 08:19:30          +0000
Received: from cyclone.comcen.com.au (cyclone.comcen.com.au [203.23.236.100])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id BAA10176 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 01:19:29 -0700
Received: (from nobody@localhost) by cyclone.comcen.com.au (8.11.1/8.11.1) id          f7U8IkW70810; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 18:18:46 +1000 (EST) (envelope-from          pkelly@comcen.com.au)
References: <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010830031621.17330G-100000@spsystems.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
User-Agent: IMP/PHP IMAP webmail program 2.2.3
X-Originating-IP: 203.59.172.169
Message-ID:  <999159526.3b8df6e606f67@webmail.comcen.com.au>
Date:         Thu, 30 Aug 2001 18:18:46 +1000
Reply-To: "Paul Kelly" <pkelly@COMCEN.COM.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Paul Kelly" <pkelly@COMCEN.COM.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Exploding hybrid
Comments: To: Henry Spencer <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010830031621.17330G-100000@spsystems.net>

A qualification: These modes are based on my observations and experience with
small amateur NOX hybrids.

PK

Quoting Henry Spencer <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>:

> On Thu, 30 Aug 2001, Paul Kelly wrote:
> > There are only three ways I've seen hybrids fail...
> > 1. Occluded injector resulting in long burn...
> > 2. Overpressure at ignition. Either by nozzle occlusion or to much
> pyrogen.
> > 3. Detonation. Typically a follow on effect from 2. Where the slug
> detonates
> > and the shock is transferred to the NOX which then detonates...
>
> The biggest hybrid failure of all time, the explosion of Amroc's first
> 250,000-lb hybrid, was none of the above.  A faulty insulation design
> let
> hot gas reach the casing at the joint between cylinder and forward
> dome.
> The casing failed and BOOM.
>
>                                                           Henry Spencer
>
> henry@spsystems.net
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 16104 invoked from network); 30 Aug 2001 08:41:15 -0000
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 30 Aug 2001 08:41:15 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 11063 invoked by uid 50005); 30 Aug 2001 08:39:18 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpf with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.247116 secs); 30 Aug 2001 08:39:18 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 30 Aug 2001 08:39:17 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id BAA10221; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 01:23:37 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 100894 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 08:23:30          +0000
Received: from cyclone.comcen.com.au (cyclone.comcen.com.au [203.23.236.100])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id BAA10207 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 01:23:29 -0700
Received: (from nobody@localhost) by cyclone.comcen.com.au (8.11.1/8.11.1) id          f7U8NNN70824; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 18:23:23 +1000 (EST) (envelope-from          pkelly@comcen.com.au)
References: <F80TxS1q0PHksOFhQhD00019dc2@hotmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
User-Agent: IMP/PHP IMAP webmail program 2.2.3
X-Originating-IP: 203.59.172.169
Message-ID:  <999159803.3b8df7fb78499@webmail.comcen.com.au>
Date:         Thu, 30 Aug 2001 18:23:23 +1000
Reply-To: "Paul Kelly" <pkelly@COMCEN.COM.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Paul Kelly" <pkelly@COMCEN.COM.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] liquids question: alcohol/N2O propellant feeding
Comments: To: John Dom <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <F80TxS1q0PHksOFhQhD00019dc2@hotmail.com>

Quoting John Dom <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>:
The piston seal is not subject to a pressure gradient. (apart from that caused
by friction). The piston slides up the bore of the tank and compresses the fuel
in the same way that having the fuel in a bladder inside the nox tank would
work. You need to make sure that you make the o'rings tight in the grooves or
use a different type of seal though.


PK

> PK wrote:
>
> >There really is a simple answer to pressuising non volatile fuels in
> simple
> >NOX
> >biprops. Just add a piston to the tank, put your fuel on top of the
> piston
> >and
> >the nox below, run a flexible hose ...
>
> I cannot think of a piston under 40 bars of vapor pressure which 'll
> not
> leak after a while with catastrophic results...For starters, it 'd
> require a
> heavy tank wall and piston to lift off.
>
> Any realisation reported which used this principle?
>
> jd
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at
> http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 22572 invoked from network); 30 Aug 2001 08:56:40 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 30 Aug 2001 08:56:40 -0000
Received: (qmail 25414 invoked by uid 50005); 30 Aug 2001 08:57:40 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpa with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.216983 secs); 30 Aug 2001 08:57:40 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 30 Aug 2001 08:57:39 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id BAA10342; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 01:38:57 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 100924 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 08:38:51          +0000
Received: from fep4-orange.clear.net.nz (fep4-orange.clear.net.nz          [203.97.32.4]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id BAA10321          for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 01:37:46 -0700
Received: from mkbs (203-167-162-3.dialup.clear.net.nz [203.167.162.3]) by          fep4-orange.clear.net.nz (1.5/1.7) with SMTP id UAA05115; Thu, 30 Aug          2001 20:37:39 +1200 (NZST)
References: <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010828185904.24467A-100000@spsystems.net>             <3B8DC4F8.8D8670FC@seanet.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <018001c1312f$701f2dc0$0100a8c0@mkbs>
Date:         Thu, 30 Aug 2001 19:44:45 +1200
Reply-To: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Organization: Applied Technology
Subject:      Re: [AR] liquids question: alcohol/N2O propellant feeding
Comments: To: Sherwood Stolt <ssstolt@SEANET.COM>
Comments: cc: Henry Spencer <henry@spsystems.net>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

> Henry Spencer wrote:
> > It's even possible to have a pump-fed blowdown system (!).  The
classical
> > Atlas uses blowdown for tank pressurization after booster-engine
jettison,
> > relying on remaining gas in the tanks to maintain adequate
pressurization.
> > Its pressurization system departs with the booster engines.
>
> Now that is a scheme I hadn't thought of.  Use a high pressure tank and
> regulator to pressurize the propellant tanks until say 2/3 of the burn
(when
> there is plenty of gas in the tanks to blow down without much pressure
> loss) then dump the pressurization system overboard somehow to limit
> its impact on the end weight.


Careful here.

Is Henry saying that the  Atlas tank was blowdown pressurised and this
supplied the remaining motor without a pump or that the blowdown was used
for tank pressurisation but that a pump was still used to feed the motor?

If the former it suggests either that the very thin Atlas tanks are able to
take a useful amount of pressure or that the post booster part of the burn
runs at extremely low pressure. I rather assumed that he meant that there
was still a pump present but maybe not.



                Russell McMahon

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 28505 invoked from network); 30 Aug 2001 08:59:18 -0000
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 30 Aug 2001 08:59:18 -0000
Received: (qmail 12352 invoked by uid 50005); 30 Aug 2001 08:59:46 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpe with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.196485 secs); 30 Aug 2001 08:59:46 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 30 Aug 2001 08:59:46 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id BAA10318; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 01:37:29 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 100917 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 08:37:18          +0000
Received: from fep4-orange.clear.net.nz (fep4-orange.clear.net.nz          [203.97.32.4]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id BAA10303;          Thu, 30 Aug 2001 01:37:17 -0700
Received: from mkbs (203-167-162-3.dialup.clear.net.nz [203.167.162.3]) by          fep4-orange.clear.net.nz (1.5/1.7) with SMTP id UAA04960; Thu, 30 Aug          2001 20:37:06 +1200 (NZST)
References:  <Pine.LNX.4.10.10108292203430.8977-100000@itc.uci.edu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="Windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <017e01c1312f$5d0028c0$0100a8c0@mkbs>
Date:         Thu, 30 Aug 2001 19:34:54 +1200
Reply-To: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Organization: Applied Technology
Subject:      Re: [AR] offtopic - glide to fall ratio
Comments: To: "David J. McCue" <dmccue@ITC.UCI.EDU>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Sounds like he about hit the outer limit.

I read long ago that the first civilian viewing of a U2 (when it was still
today's F117 / Aurora equivalent) occurred after one flamed out about 300
miles out to sea from the East of the lower US (I wonder where it was going
:-)) and made a safe landing at a civilian airport.

> >From a wonderful site out of the University of Manchester, UK, the

Got  a link to that website?

        Russell McMahon




> >From a wonderful site out of the University of Manchester, UK, the
> following information on glide ratios:
>
> Airbus 320       17:1
> Boeing 747-100 17.7:1
> Douglas DC-10  17.7:1
> Boeing 767-200   19:1
> Boeing 707-320 19.4:1 (a 40 year old design!)

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 8278 invoked from network); 30 Aug 2001 09:38:58 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 30 Aug 2001 09:38:58 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 25793 invoked by uid 50005); 30 Aug 2001 09:39:58 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpa with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.15013 secs); 30 Aug 2001 09:39:58 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 30 Aug 2001 09:39:58 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id CAA10620; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 02:33:39 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 100987 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 09:33:33          +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (f102.law15.hotmail.com [64.4.23.102]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id CAA10606 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 02:33:33 -0700
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Thu,          30 Aug 2001 02:33:02 -0700
Received: from 193.121.251.246 by lw15fd.law15.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Thu,          30 Aug 2001 09:33:02 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [193.121.251.246]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 30 Aug 2001 09:33:02.0226 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[C392D720:01C13136]
Message-ID:  <F102rfFz82buW5RNB6H00019ef9@hotmail.com>
Date:         Thu, 30 Aug 2001 09:33:33 +0000
Reply-To: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] liquids question: alcohol/N2O propellant feeding
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

PK wrote:

>The piston seal is not subject to a pressure gradient.

I see. But still, stick your life on the integrity of a series of O-rings?
That the propellants come together in the chamber the right way'd make me
nervous enough without having to worry they get leaked elsewhere.
If the fuel component 'd be in a bag with such a design: that 'd make me
more relaxed.

jd

_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 27515 invoked from network); 30 Aug 2001 09:46:23 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 30 Aug 2001 09:46:23 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 31168 invoked by uid 50005); 30 Aug 2001 09:47:23 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpa with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.15759 secs); 30 Aug 2001 09:47:23 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 30 Aug 2001 09:47:22 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id CAA10662; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 02:40:58 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 100994 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 09:40:56          +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (f80.law15.hotmail.com [64.4.23.80]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id CAA10648 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Thu,          30 Aug 2001 02:40:56 -0700
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Thu,          30 Aug 2001 02:40:26 -0700
Received: from 193.121.251.246 by lw15fd.law15.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Thu,          30 Aug 2001 09:40:25 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [193.121.251.246]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 30 Aug 2001 09:40:26.0154 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[CC2CE0A0:01C13137]
Message-ID:  <F80DQCvt9bGcETQtU6G00019eeb@hotmail.com>
Date:         Thu, 30 Aug 2001 09:40:56 +0000
Reply-To: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] liquids question: alcohol/N2O propellant feeding
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

At lift-off the Atlas tanks were pressurized only for rigidity of the
contraption (mentioned earlier on this list). I wonder about what really
went on after staging too here.

jd

_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 18291 invoked from network); 30 Aug 2001 11:01:30 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 30 Aug 2001 11:01:30 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 20432 invoked by uid 50005); 30 Aug 2001 11:00:11 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.217822 secs); 30 Aug 2001 11:00:11 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 30 Aug 2001 11:00:11 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id DAA10903; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 03:56:57 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 101029 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 10:56:43          +0000
Received: from rasmus.uib.no (exim@rasmus.uib.no [129.177.12.30]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id DAA10889 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 03:56:42 -0700
Received: from tunnel-46-179.vpn.uib.no (emil.rasmus.uib.no) [129.177.46.179]          by rasmus.uib.no  with esmtp (Exim 3.16) id 15cPUx-0002aK-00; Thu, 30          Aug 2001 12:56:35 +0200
X-Sender: st07696@rasmus.uib.no
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <5.1.0.14.0.20010830125103.0269fc68@rasmus.uib.no>
Date:         Thu, 30 Aug 2001 12:56:25 +0200
Reply-To: "Emil Johnsen" <Emil.Johnsen@STUDENT.UIB.NO>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Emil Johnsen" <Emil.Johnsen@STUDENT.UIB.NO>
Subject:      Re: [AR] liquids question: alcohol/N2O propellant feeding
Comments: To: John Dom <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <F102rfFz82buW5RNB6H00019ef9@hotmail.com>

>>The piston seal is not subject to a pressure gradient.
>I see. But still, stick your life on the integrity of a series of O-rings?

If you risk your life, you are too close to the rocket. Stay at a safe
distance and all you risk is the motor and test stand / rocket.


Emil

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 27308 invoked from network); 30 Aug 2001 13:47:49 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 30 Aug 2001 13:47:49 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: (qmail 22544 invoked by uid 50005); 30 Aug 2001 13:48:49 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpb with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.377407 secs); 30 Aug 2001 13:48:49 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 30 Aug 2001 13:48:48 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA11567; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 06:04:28 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 101125 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 13:04:08          +0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA11550; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 06:04:01 -0700
Message-ID:  <200108301304.GAA11550@itc.uci.edu>
Date:         Thu, 30 Aug 2001 13:04:01 +0000
Reply-To: "Bruno Berger" <bruno.berger@SPL.CH>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Bruno Berger" <bruno.berger@SPL.CH>
Subject:      [AR] Compositex
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Does somebody know what happend with Dan Moser's site
http://members.home.net/danmoser/ ? I know he had a presentation at JPC last
July.
A new conspirativity chapter? :-))

Bruno

Swiss Propulsion Laboratory
http://www.spl.ch


From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 2802 invoked from network); 30 Aug 2001 14:23:24 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 30 Aug 2001 14:23:24 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 16630 invoked by uid 50005); 30 Aug 2001 14:22:38 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.75955 secs); 30 Aug 2001 14:22:38 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 30 Aug 2001 14:22:36 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA11893; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 07:19:20 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 101152 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 14:19:15          +0000
Received: from mail9.wlv.netzero.net (mail9.wlv.netzero.net [209.247.163.66])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id HAA11795 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 07:09:15 -0700
Received: (qmail 6985 invoked from network); 30 Aug 2001 14:09:12 -0000
Received: from dialup-166.90.115.47.dial1.memphis1.level3.net (HELO          oemcomputer.cyberservices.com) (166.90.115.47) by          mail9.wlv.netzero.net with SMTP; 30 Aug 2001 14:09:12 -0000
X-Sender: mhavener@pop.netzero.net
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.2
References: <5.1.0.14.1.20010829160540.00ad9180@netmail.home.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <4.3.2.7.0.20010829213429.00aff700@pop.netzero.net>
Date:         Wed, 29 Aug 2001 21:44:42 -0500
Reply-To: "Mark G. Havener" <impact@CYBERSERVICES.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Mark G. Havener" <impact@CYBERSERVICES.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] offtopic - glide to fall ratio
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <000001c130fa$4fbeb4e0$0200a8c0@prestige.net>

At 10:20 PM 8/29/01 -0400, you wrote:
>That story smells like a dead fish. I used to fly real sailplanes - this
>conflicts with what I learned/experienced as a sailplane pilot. Most of the
>sailplanes I flew were in the 1-32 to 1-36 range and weighed only a few
>hundred pounds.
>
>Pull out the sailplane's dive brakes only a little bit and there goes your
>lift. Consider the engine pods on the airbus as dive brakes. The engine pods
>(not to mention fan blades) would KILL any decent glide ratio that thing
>would otherwise have.
>
>Does anyone know if the flight recorder data has been released yet? If the
>flight recorder says its true, I'll believe that.

You're 100% right. First of all, when was the last time a sailplane was at
33,000' AGL? Second, a big, fat, heavy airplane is going to glide only a
little better than an F-4 (the 'flying crowbar').

Second, no engines means no electricity, no hydraulic power, no control of
the aircraft.

This is right up there with the story that "747 pilots shut down 1 or 2
engines in flight."


----------------------------------------------------
NetZero Platinum
Sign Up Today - Only $9.95 per month!
http://my.netzero.net/s/signup?r=platinum&refcd=PT97

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 28683 invoked from network); 30 Aug 2001 14:56:14 -0000
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 30 Aug 2001 14:56:14 -0000
Received: (qmail 26387 invoked by uid 50005); 30 Aug 2001 14:54:16 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpf with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.143202 secs); 30 Aug 2001 14:54:16 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 30 Aug 2001 14:54:15 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA12114; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 07:50:48 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 101205 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 14:50:47          +0000
Received: from ar.ar.com.au (IDENT:root@ar.ar.com.au [203.18.148.1]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA12100 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 07:50:46 -0700
Received: from groovee (dialup-383.syd.ar.com.au [203.31.213.83]) by          ar.ar.com.au (8.11.0/8.9.3) with SMTP id f7UEpJx11119; Fri, 31 Aug          2001 00:51:19 +1000
References: <5.1.0.14.1.20010829160540.00ad9180@netmail.home.com>             <4.3.2.7.0.20010829213429.00aff700@pop.netzero.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <000901c13163$725b6480$53d51fcb@groovee>
Date:         Fri, 31 Aug 2001 00:52:51 +1000
Reply-To: "Jake Anderson" <groovee@TIG.COM.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jake Anderson" <groovee@TIG.COM.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] offtopic - glide to fall ratio
Comments: To: "Mark G. Havener" <impact@CYBERSERVICES.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

<snip>
> You're 100% right. First of all, when was the last time a sailplane was at
> 33,000' AGL? Second, a big, fat, heavy airplane is going to glide only a
> little better than an F-4 (the 'flying crowbar').

The published ratio is 17:1
The pilot achieved 20:1
fairly close in my book after you take out travel speed at the start ect

> Second, no engines means no electricity, no hydraulic power, no control of
> the aircraft.

I dont know about this paticular aircraft but in general desigining an
aircraft such that if the engines fail you basically commit it to crashing
because some trivial backup system hasnt been thaught of (like a battery
ect) seems pretty damn stupid and not likley to happen. Something I do know,
747's have a kind of a  "windmill" generator that can be deployed to provide
backup power. After verry long (20+minutes) durations with engine out
conditions the battery backup's (basically the batteries used for start-up
power) are drained and they deploy the device to provide power to control
the plane. And before you ask they have an electricly powered hydraulic pump
as a backup.

(forgive spelling , checker's broked)

> This is right up there with the story that "747 pilots shut down 1 or 2
> engines in flight."

Technically a 747 can maintain altitude with 1 engine

>
> ----------------------------------------------------
> NetZero Platinum
> Sign Up Today - Only $9.95 per month!
> http://my.netzero.net/s/signup?r=platinum&refcd=PT97
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 5490 invoked from network); 30 Aug 2001 14:57:45 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 30 Aug 2001 14:57:45 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 7001 invoked by uid 50005); 30 Aug 2001 14:58:44 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpb with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.217062 secs); 30 Aug 2001 14:58:44 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 30 Aug 2001 14:58:44 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA12061; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 07:48:28 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 101191 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 14:48:26          +0000
Received: from izzy6.izzy.net (izzy6.izzy.net [207.158.132.178]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA12047 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu,          30 Aug 2001 07:48:25 -0700
Received: from izzy.net (host-224.subnet-140.med.umich.edu [141.214.140.224])          by izzy6.izzy.net (8.9.2/8.9.3) with ESMTP id KAA16922; Thu, 30 Aug          2001 10:46:29 -0400 (EDT)
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.78 [en] (WinNT; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <5.1.0.14.1.20010829160540.00ad9180@netmail.home.com>            <4.3.2.7.0.20010829213429.00aff700@pop.netzero.net>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B8E51B3.203F761E@izzy.net>
Date:         Thu, 30 Aug 2001 10:46:11 -0400
Reply-To: <cscholl@IZZY.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Curtis Scholl" <cscholl@IZZY.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] offtopic - glide to fall ratio
Comments: To: "Mark G. Havener" <impact@CYBERSERVICES.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Mark:

   This is sarcasm, correct?

Curtis S.



>
> You're 100% right. First of all, when was the last time a sailplane was at
> 33,000' AGL? Second, a big, fat, heavy airplane is going to glide only a
> little better than an F-4 (the 'flying crowbar').
>
> Second, no engines means no electricity, no hydraulic power, no control of
> the aircraft.
>
> This is right up there with the story that "747 pilots shut down 1 or 2
> engines in flight."
>
> ----------------------------------------------------
> NetZero Platinum
> Sign Up Today - Only $9.95 per month!
> http://my.netzero.net/s/signup?r=platinum&refcd=PT97

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 24055 invoked from network); 30 Aug 2001 15:01:58 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 30 Aug 2001 15:01:58 -0000
Received: (qmail 15566 invoked by uid 50005); 30 Aug 2001 15:02:56 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpa with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.233356 secs); 30 Aug 2001 15:02:56 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 30 Aug 2001 15:02:56 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA12181; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 07:56:51 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 101217 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 14:56:50          +0000
Received: from albatross.wgn.net (www.wgn.net [64.14.252.81] (may be forged))          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA12167 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 07:56:50 -0700
Received: from cronos (eli-208-187-17-44.wgn.net [208.187.17.44]) by          albatross.wgn.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id HAA01657 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 07:57:55 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <00c101c13164$258d6a80$c36122c0@cronos>
Date:         Thu, 30 Aug 2001 07:57:52 -0700
Reply-To: "Wedge Oldham" <wedge@WESTWORLD.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Wedge Oldham" <wedge@WESTWORLD.COM>
Subject:      [AR] High Altitude Mach plus flights
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Guys I've just finished the simulations on a rocket if thinking of building.
The performance of this rocket far exceeds my expectations. Could/should hit
an altitude of 100K feet. It also raises a number of questions.

1. Does the CP of a rocket change with air density. I wouldn't think so, but
felt I better ask.

2. I have a formula for atmospheric heating which is (velocity (in
feet/second) / 110) squared = delta degrees F. I'd have to assume this
formula is for sea level.....would this heating be proportional to air
density i.e. 1/2 density yields 1/2 the heating?

3. The sim says a maximum velocity of Mach 2.9 @ 45K' MSL. I've built
rockets that hit Mach 1.6 at 3100' MSL.... is there a way I can compare
these two items? I'm sure that Mach 2 at sea level and Mach 2 at 50K present
different levels of stress on the fins & airframe...but how do I compare the
two? Is this again just a simple function of air density?

4. What high temperature epoxies are available on the market?

5. Anybody got the perfect Mach PLUS fin shape? I've got one I like based on
some basic guidelines....long root edge, short span, 30 degree leading edge,
60 degree trailing edge, and just looks cool. I'd like to replace the "just
looks cool" with something more scientific.

Wedge Oldham
http://NikeProject.com
Only those who risk going too far,
will ever know how far they can go.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 28824 invoked from network); 30 Aug 2001 15:31:09 -0000
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 30 Aug 2001 15:31:09 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 22112 invoked by uid 50005); 30 Aug 2001 15:31:36 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpe with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.271617 secs); 30 Aug 2001 15:31:36 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 30 Aug 2001 15:31:35 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA12538; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 08:24:37 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 101257 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 15:24:32          +0000
Received: from mailgw1a.lmco.com (mailgw1a.lmco.com [192.31.106.7]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA12524 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 08:24:31 -0700
Received: from emss02g01.ems.lmco.com (relay2.ems.lmco.com [166.29.2.54]) by          mailgw1a.lmco.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id JAA22394 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 09:24:31 -0600 (MDT)
Received: from CONVERSION-DAEMON by lmco.com (PMDF V5.2-33 #38887) id          <0GIW0060103HGZ@lmco.com> for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 30 Aug 2001          09:24:26 -0600 (MDT)
Received: from emss02i00.ems.lmco.com ([166.29.2.48]) by lmco.com (PMDF V5.2-33          #38887) with ESMTP id <0GIW00O9I035OJ@lmco.com> for          AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 09:23:29 -0600 (MDT)
Received: by emss02i00.ems.lmco.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) id          <R5949XJC>; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 09:24:41 -0600
Content-return: allowed
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19)
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <EDB5E5136094D311BF1800508B12205E08D2910C@emss02m07.ems.lmco.com>
Date:         Thu, 30 Aug 2001 09:24:40 -0600
Reply-To: "Bendel, Timothy B" <timothy.b.bendel@LMCO.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Bendel, Timothy B" <timothy.b.bendel@LMCO.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] offtopic - glide to fall ratio
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

        > >From a wonderful site out of the University of Manchester, UK,
the
        > following information on glide ratios:
        >
        > Airbus 320       17:1
        > Boeing 747-100 17.7:1
        > Douglas DC-10  17.7:1
        > Boeing 767-200   19:1
        > Boeing 707-320 19.4:1 (a 40 year old design!)

I can personally confirm the 747 glide ratio as 17:1 as I did a little
controls systems work on it about 7 years ago. I was surprised to learn it
was so high and it stuck in my mind!

Timothy Bendel

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Russell McMahon [SMTP:apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ]
> Sent: Thursday, August 30, 2001 1:35 AM
> To:   AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
> Subject:      Re: [AR] offtopic - glide to fall ratio
>
> Sounds like he about hit the outer limit.
>
> I read long ago that the first civilian viewing of a U2 (when it was still
> today's F117 / Aurora equivalent) occurred after one flamed out about 300
> miles out to sea from the East of the lower US (I wonder where it was
> going
> :-)) and made a safe landing at a civilian airport.
>
> > >From a wonderful site out of the University of Manchester, UK, the
>
> Got  a link to that website?
>
>         Russell McMahon
>
>
>
>
> > >From a wonderful site out of the University of Manchester, UK, the
> > following information on glide ratios:
> >
> > Airbus 320       17:1
> > Boeing 747-100 17.7:1
> > Douglas DC-10  17.7:1
> > Boeing 767-200   19:1
> > Boeing 707-320 19.4:1 (a 40 year old design!)

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 6871 invoked from network); 30 Aug 2001 15:33:07 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 30 Aug 2001 15:33:07 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 25887 invoked by uid 50005); 30 Aug 2001 15:31:48 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.179379 secs); 30 Aug 2001 15:31:48 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 30 Aug 2001 15:31:47 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA12564; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 08:26:05 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 101264 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 15:26:04          +0000
Received: from smtp001pub.verizon.net (smtp001pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.180])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA12545 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 08:25:49 -0700
Received: from [63.25.57.165] (1Cust30.tnt1.san-bernardino.ca.da.uu.net          [63.27.96.30]) by smtp001pub.verizon.net  with ESMTP for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; id f7UFPDA17704 Thu, 30 Aug 2001 10:25:14          -0500 (CDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: GTE/01rocket@mail.gte.net
References: <F128XWzRPTNZStgLzhV0000e5d5@hotmail.com>            <3B6DB58E.D720EFBD@mindspring.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <a05100321b7b40aa81d8d@[63.25.57.165]>
Date:         Thu, 30 Aug 2001 08:25:14 -0700
Reply-To: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Elite Sugar Propellant Group Forming.
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <3B6DB58E.D720EFBD@mindspring.com>

>Sugar based propellents seem to me to be totaly  -on topic- for this
>group. Why move the discussion away from here?? Unless all the other off
>topic junk is getting you down?


I agree.  The subject headings do all the necessary parsing and if
one cannot sort email automagically and read it fast enough, switch
to eudora.

The sugar/sucrose people should form a web site to hold all the
answers, intelligence and test results they have achieved so people
can fill in the holes more easily and make it a true collaborative
research project on an amateur's budget.

Remember all the accidents I have heard of are during the melt
process itself.  Don't melt it in your kitchen or your mommy's.

Jerry

>--
>Looking forward:
>Alan Shinn
>
>
>Experience the
>beginnings of microscopy.
>Make your own replica
>of one of Antony van Leeuwenhoek's microscopes.
>visit    http://www.mindspring.com/~alshinn/


--
Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
Opinion, the whole thing.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 19216 invoked from network); 30 Aug 2001 15:36:03 -0000
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 30 Aug 2001 15:36:03 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 9440 invoked by uid 50005); 30 Aug 2001 15:34:04 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpf with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.813347 secs); 30 Aug 2001 15:34:04 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 30 Aug 2001 15:34:03 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA12678; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 08:31:22 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 101255 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 15:31:21          +0000
Received: from smtp06.iafrica.com (smtp06.iafrica.com [196.2.51.5]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA12489 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 08:21:18 -0700
Received: from dictum ([196.7.202.37]) by smtp06.iafrica.com (Sun Internet Mail          Server sims.3.5.2000.03.23.18.03.p10) with SMTP id          <0GIV00D0HYWF8N@smtp06.iafrica.com> for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 30          Aug 2001 16:57:52 +0200 (SAT)
Received: by localhost with Microsoft MAPI; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 16:56:46 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Microsoft Internet E-mail/MAPI - 8.0.0.4211
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <01C13174.C0D16400.dictum@iafrica.com>
Date:         Thu, 30 Aug 2001 12:11:27 +0200
Reply-To: "Dictum" <dictum@IAFRICA.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Dictum" <dictum@IAFRICA.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] offtopic - glide to fall ratio
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Hi all,

This is ot, but seems to fall into the pendulum fallacy genre and
discussion of it MAY have a bearing readers' comprehension of more salient
rocket behaviour issues.

Jeff Grady wrote <I used to fly real sailplanes - this
conflicts with what I learned/experienced as a sailplane pilot. Most of the
sailplanes I flew were in the 1-32 to 1-36 range>

I don't see any conflicts with known performance/behaviour of standard
aerodynes. The sailplane is optimised for gliding, therefore a 1:30+ glide
ratio. The ubiquitous Cessna 150 delivers about 1:10. An AirBus should be
able to deliver about 1:20. It's wing is designed for low drag and the
automatic flying surface management and more accurate airspeed measurement
should ensure that optimal glide speed is maintained.

<and weighed only a few hundred pounds.>

Mass doesn't enter into it unless we're comparing 2 identical (in all other
respects) falling aerodynes.

<Pull out the sailplane's dive brakes only a little bit and there goes your
lift.>

The sailplanes "airbrakes" present very little frontal area drag but
actually kill the lift of the wings' upper surface. That's how they get
away with such innocuous little strips of "airbrakes" right at the location
of maximum lift.

<Consider the engine pods on the airbus as dive brakes. The engine pods
(not to mention fan blades) would KILL any decent glide ratio that thing
would otherwise have.>

The engine pods would have little more effect than increasing the fuselage
coefficient of drag. They are sufficiently far from the lifting surfaces as
to cause "virtually" no loss of dynamic lift. They present only drag
related to effective frontal area.

David Gibson

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 6021 invoked from network); 30 Aug 2001 15:39:52 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 30 Aug 2001 15:39:52 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 7895 invoked by uid 50005); 30 Aug 2001 15:40:51 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpb with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.225857 secs); 30 Aug 2001 15:40:51 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 30 Aug 2001 15:40:51 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA12605; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 08:28:25 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 101276 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 15:28:24          +0000
Received: from smtp005pub.verizon.net (smtp005pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.184])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA12591 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 08:28:24 -0700
Received: from [63.25.57.165] (1Cust30.tnt1.san-bernardino.ca.da.uu.net          [63.27.96.30]) by smtp005pub.verizon.net  with ESMTP for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; id f7UFRpT14471 Thu, 30 Aug 2001 10:27:52          -0500 (CDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: GTE/01rocket@mail.gte.net
References: <f4.ebdc500.28bf0a95@aol.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <a05100322b7b40b764ddd@[63.25.57.165]>
Date:         Thu, 30 Aug 2001 08:27:53 -0700
Reply-To: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] liquids question: alcohol/N2O propellant feeding
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <f4.ebdc500.28bf0a95@aol.com>

>In a message dated 8/29/01 9:57:51 PM Central Daylight Time,
>pkelly@COMCEN.COM.AU writes:
>
>>  There really is a simple answer to pressuising non volatile fuels in simple
>>  NOX
>>   biprops. Just add a piston to the tank, put your fuel on top of the piston
>>  and
>>   the nox below, run a flexible hose (nylon line works) from the piston to
>the
>>   combustion chamber with enough slack to let the piston slide up to the top
>>  of
>>   the tank.
>
>I was aware of that, but would like to avoid it in this design.  First off, I
>can't do exactly that using the tanks I have -- they are DOT rated, fiber
>wrapped cylinders.  I would have to completely re-do my propellant storage
>design and I wouldn't get to take advantage of the neato composite tanks.  I
>could use a cylindircal 316SS tube with a piston for the alcohol tank (I
>already have the perfect tube for it), but that would be complicated -- much
>more complicated than just using the tanks I have.
>Mike P.


The whole point of the piston arrangement is to be able to use cheap
commercial tube for tank and airframe. Aside from the piston
arrangement presented and the static arrangement seen on Rattworks
hybrids there is also a concentric tank arrangement which Dave
Griffith uses for bi-propellant liquids that has real promise for
tribrids as well.  www.montereymachine.com

Jerry



--
Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
Opinion, the whole thing.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 16515 invoked from network); 30 Aug 2001 15:42:27 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 30 Aug 2001 15:42:27 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 16971 invoked by uid 50005); 30 Aug 2001 15:40:29 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpf with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.436875 secs); 30 Aug 2001 15:40:29 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 30 Aug 2001 15:40:28 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA12798; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 08:38:34 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 101321 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 15:38:29          +0000
Received: from smtp008pub.verizon.net (smtp008pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.187])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA12784 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 08:38:24 -0700
Received: from [63.25.57.165] (1Cust30.tnt1.san-bernardino.ca.da.uu.net          [63.27.96.30]) by smtp008pub.verizon.net  with ESMTP for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; id f7UFbqK14734 Thu, 30 Aug 2001 10:37:52          -0500 (CDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: GTE/01rocket@mail.gte.net
References: <3B8DDA02.C47AF80D@coastnet.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <a05100323b7b40d29b415@[63.25.57.165]>
Date:         Thu, 30 Aug 2001 08:37:52 -0700
Reply-To: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] [EE]: Building a Satellite
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <3B8DDA02.C47AF80D@coastnet.com>

>Jerry Irvine wrote:
>
>>Ross Borden wrote with unintended insight:
>>>What's needed is an organization with A) a leadership core that will
>>>standardize designs, delegate work, integrate & test the results, and,
>>>most importantly, carry on through thick and thin, through defections,
>>>disasters and disinterest; B) work groups with the tools and abilities
>>>to produce the subsystems, and the will to get it done.
>>
>>
>>Welcome to arocket.
>
>Thanks.  It seems like a nice place.  Maybe I'll stick around ;)
>
>>And at least two companies associated with posters.
>
>I am aware of the work being done by various groups.  I'm particularly
>impressed by what John and crew have accomplished at Armadillo.  He has
>the motivation and deep pockets to get things done (a rare combination.)
>
>But that doesn't change the fact that we are still splintered.  While we
>all have the same ultimate goal of reaching orbit, with everybody
>pursuing different paths, building largely incompatible hardware, and
>gaining experience in isolation, that goal seems forever on the horizon.
>
>An organization with even a few teams working on compatible subsystems
>could achieve far more than all of us working independently.
>
>At the very least, I think it would be beneficial if ARocket could
>develop specifications for standard rocket platforms, so that down the
>road, integrating projects would be feasible.

A subset of that lofty goal could be simply to focus on 2-3 things
that would be needed and provide technical challenges for a basic
orbital rocket.  For example the software for the gimbaled motor
system that includes the damping coefficients that can be changed
real-time based on reported flight results so the same system can be
used for all 3 stages.

For example a telemetry uplink/downlink system that is robust enough
to handle solids, liquids or hybrids and broad enough to handle at
least one video channel and 12 data channels.

Range safety self destruct.

On-board orbital transfer capability.

I have a web site free for use for storing any and all results.

Jerry

--
Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
Opinion, the whole thing.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 19634 invoked from network); 30 Aug 2001 15:50:13 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 30 Aug 2001 15:50:13 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 9371 invoked by uid 50005); 30 Aug 2001 15:48:53 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.198368 secs); 30 Aug 2001 15:48:53 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 30 Aug 2001 15:48:52 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA12881; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 08:46:27 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 101339 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 15:46:26          +0000
Received: from smtp008pub.verizon.net (smtp008pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.187])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA12861 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 08:45:41 -0700
Received: from [63.25.57.165] (1Cust30.tnt1.san-bernardino.ca.da.uu.net          [63.27.96.30]) by smtp008pub.verizon.net  with ESMTP for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; id f7UFj9K22782 Thu, 30 Aug 2001 10:45:09          -0500 (CDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: GTE/01rocket@mail.gte.net
References: <3B8DDA02.C47AF80D@coastnet.com> <3B8DE559.A17B8A3A@earthlink.net>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <a05100324b7b40f463316@[63.25.57.165]>
Date:         Thu, 30 Aug 2001 08:45:10 -0700
Reply-To: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] [EE]: Building a Satellite
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <3B8DE559.A17B8A3A@earthlink.net>

>David W wrote in the vacuum of space free of beaurucrats:



>It is my contention that a 4STO launcher for a kilogram-sized amsat could
>be created using "hand-cast" solid motors, structural technology
>with more resemblance to that of a homebuilt boat or aircraft than that
>of a Lunar Module or an Atlas, GNC systems developed from carefully-
>selected OTS electromechanical components... and that no more than 10%
>of the project deliverables, by mass, need consist of documentation.
>
>-dave w


Approximately 15% is accounted for by ground support and safety
issues alone.  Bring a rocket to the site and it doubles again.

Now if we had a group devoted solely to rules streamlining and it had
the respect and authority to actually make a difference, that alone
would increase the number of amateur aerospace efforts of all types
one order of magnitude.

Jerry

"pay forward" :)



--
Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
Opinion, the whole thing.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 21501 invoked from network); 30 Aug 2001 15:50:47 -0000
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 30 Aug 2001 15:50:47 -0000
Received: (qmail 13281 invoked by uid 50005); 30 Aug 2001 15:50:50 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpe with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.381162 secs); 30 Aug 2001 15:50:50 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 30 Aug 2001 15:50:49 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA12859; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 08:45:04 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 101332 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 15:45:03          +0000
Received: from mailgw1a.lmco.com (mailgw1a.lmco.com [192.31.106.7]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA12845 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 08:45:02 -0700
Received: from emss02g01.ems.lmco.com (relay2.ems.lmco.com [166.29.2.54]) by          mailgw1a.lmco.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id JAA15937; Thu, 30 Aug          2001 09:45:01 -0600 (MDT)
Received: from CONVERSION-DAEMON by lmco.com (PMDF V5.2-33 #38887) id          <0GIW00B010P60T@lmco.com>; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 09:44:58 -0600 (MDT)
Received: from emss02i00.ems.lmco.com ([166.29.2.48]) by lmco.com (PMDF V5.2-33          #38887) with ESMTP id <0GIW00O660WCOJ@lmco.com>; Thu, 30 Aug 2001          09:41:00 -0600 (MDT)
Received: by emss02i00.ems.lmco.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) id          <R5949X91>; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 09:42:12 -0600
Content-return: allowed
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19)
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <EDB5E5136094D311BF1800508B12205E08D2910D@emss02m07.ems.lmco.com>
Date:         Thu, 30 Aug 2001 09:42:09 -0600
Reply-To: "Bendel, Timothy B" <timothy.b.bendel@LMCO.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Bendel, Timothy B" <timothy.b.bendel@LMCO.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] New Question: Internal Shock Waves
Comments: To: Bill Bullock <bpbullock@LARIBAY.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

>Another problem common to internal conditions is the manifestation and
propagation of shock waves. The Aerodyne engineers told me that the power of
this phenomenon can be witnessed by the movement of the Main Shuttle Engines
just after ignition. I had always assumed this to be some sort of programmed
pre-launch cycling of the gimbal system but am told by the Aerospike systems
engineers that it is an uncontrollable reaction to exhaust delamination in
the bell nozzle due to atmospheric pressure at sea level, etc... They say
that thusfar no one has been able to stop it, but of course the Linear
Aerospike will eliminate the cause.<

I guess I just don't really see this as a "problem"; after all, the Shuttle
works fine after the engines have fired for a couple of seconds. I truth, I
do not see the advantage of the Linear Aerospike; it has a host of intrinsic
losses in efficiency that conventional nozzles do not have.

>    A shock wave is generated for whatever reason within the chamber and
progresses into the lower end of the chamber where it is refracted back into
the propellant grain and onto the combustion surface. This produces an
instantaneous pressure on the burning surface of the grain of, say, 6,850
psi...which is "only"  2,550 psi above the critical detonation
pressure...what happens?<

Thankfully, solid rocket propellant is not as rigid as your steel tubing. It
has the consistency of pencil eraser. This allows it to absorb considerable
acoustic energies (for short amounts of time) like that you described.
However, combustion instabilities have been a problem for solid rocket motor
designers for a long time. It *can* (but not usually) lead to a local
increase in burn rate, and all the problems associated with that. I have
heard of several developmental programs that have had combustion instability
problems that just refused to be modeled properly. The designers resorted to
rather subtle case/grain geometry changes and the problems just go away.

        >A supplemental question: anyone out there ever heard of anyone
using shock wave diffusers in a solid fueled rocket motor?<


        Another thing to consider is that most modern solid rocket
propellants contain significant amounts of metals like aluminum. This leads
to an exhaust with a widely varying molecular weights (it has a single
average molecular weight, but individual molecules can be way off this
average). In fact, there is typically two-phase flow in a solid rocket's
exhaust at some point (gaseous exhaust and liquid droplets). This two-phase
flow can significantly dampen shock waves much like the water spray NASA
uses to protect launch pads.

        I have done a little work on this subject, and for the most part all
I can say is that it takes Big Bucks to try to model this phenomena
properly, and it is fairly rare. The solution is almost always a subtle
change in geometry. So, if you are having trouble with a particular an
amateur design that seems to blow up for no discernable reason and you
suspect this sort of combustion instability, try tweaking the design a
little (slightly bigger star-grain, maybe a slightly longer case, maybe a
concave thrust bulkhead, etc.)

        Timothy Bendel


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Bill Bullock [SMTP:bpbullock@LARIBAY.NET]
> Sent: Wednesday, August 29, 2001 7:50 AM
> To:   AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
> Subject:      Re: [AR] New Question: Internal Shock Waves
>
> This is directed to anyone in this group who is willing to respond:
>     In talking to engineers with the Rocketdyne Aerospike project as well
> as those working at Stennis I have broached this question; Sutton stated
> that most solid fuels will progress from steady-state combustion to
> detonation at certain pressures. Since this was written it has been
> determined that other variables influence this process, such as chamber
> temperature, pressure fluctuations and etc...
>     Another problem common to internal conditions is the manifestation and
> propagation of shock waves. The Aerodyne engineers told me that the power
> of this phenomenon can be witnessed by the movement of the Main Shuttle
> Engines just after ignition. I had always assumed this to be some sort of
> programmed pre-launch cycling of the gimbal system but am told by the
> Aerospike systems engineers that it is an uncontrollable reaction to
> exhaust delamination in the bell nozzle due to atmospheric pressure at sea
> level, etc... They say that thusfar no one has been able to stop it, but
> of course the Linear Aerospike will eliminate the cause.
>     I have also seen graphic programs of the propagation of shock waves
> within a combustion chamber due to various irregularities in the chamber.
>     Now my hypothetical question (which invariably brings my discussions
> with said engineers to an abrupt halt): according to Sutton's statement
> lets assume that a certain propellant grain has an upper pressure limit of
> 4,300 psi chamber pressure and above that level a detonation is initiated.
> Now lets say that the operational chamber pressure is 1,500 psi and the
> propellant grain has a core temperature of say 85 deg F. and all is well.
>     A shock wave is generated for whatever reason within the chamber and
> progresses into the lower end of the chamber where it is refracted back
> into the propellant grain and onto the combustion surface. This produces
> an instantaneous pressure on the burning surface of the grain of, say,
> 6,850 psi...which is "only"  2,550 psi above the critical detonation
> pressure...what happens?
>     Years ago I ran some tests with such shock wave generation by using a
> length of 2" I.D. steel pipe pressure tested to 4,000 psi. By starting a
> flow under 10# vacuum and instantly shutting a valve I was able to split
> the pipe. Sometimes it took 6-8 cycles but it split every test, so an
> assumption of a pressure increase of 2,500 psi resulting from a shock wave
> is not unreasonable.
>     A supplemental question: anyone out there ever heard of anyone using
> shock wave diffusers in a solid fueled rocket motor?
>     Just one of my stray musings...

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 1772 invoked from network); 30 Aug 2001 15:53:09 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 30 Aug 2001 15:53:09 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 11859 invoked by uid 50005); 30 Aug 2001 15:51:49 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.209766 secs); 30 Aug 2001 15:51:49 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 30 Aug 2001 15:51:49 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA12987; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 08:49:23 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 101360 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 15:49:22          +0000
Received: from smtp008pub.verizon.net (smtp008pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.187])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA12973 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 08:49:21 -0700
Received: from [63.25.57.165] (1Cust30.tnt1.san-bernardino.ca.da.uu.net          [63.27.96.30]) by smtp008pub.verizon.net  with ESMTP for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; id f7UFmnK27300 Thu, 30 Aug 2001 10:48:49          -0500 (CDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: GTE/01rocket@mail.gte.net
References: <F102rfFz82buW5RNB6H00019ef9@hotmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <a05100325b7b410af880a@[63.25.57.165]>
Date:         Thu, 30 Aug 2001 08:48:47 -0700
Reply-To: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] liquids question: alcohol/N2O propellant feeding
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <F102rfFz82buW5RNB6H00019ef9@hotmail.com>

>PK wrote:
>
>>The piston seal is not subject to a pressure gradient.
>
>I see. But still, stick your life on the integrity of a series of O-rings?


If you are that worried use 4 o-rings in parallel.  They are cheap.


>That the propellants come together in the chamber the right way'd make me
>nervous enough without having to worry they get leaked elsewhere.
>If the fuel component 'd be in a bag with such a design: that 'd make me
>more relaxed.
>
>jd

Rockets?  Don't relax.

--
Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
Opinion, the whole thing.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 26850 invoked from network); 30 Aug 2001 16:06:02 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 30 Aug 2001 16:06:02 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 9622 invoked by uid 50005); 30 Aug 2001 16:05:17 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.153494 secs); 30 Aug 2001 16:05:17 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 30 Aug 2001 16:05:17 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA13072; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 09:00:45 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 101375 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 16:00:43          +0000
Received: from smtp003pub.verizon.net (smtp003pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.182])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA13058 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 09:00:43 -0700
Received: from [63.25.57.165] (1Cust30.tnt1.san-bernardino.ca.da.uu.net          [63.27.96.30]) by smtp003pub.verizon.net  with ESMTP for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; id f7UG0AM16767 Thu, 30 Aug 2001 11:00:11          -0500 (CDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: GTE/01rocket@mail.gte.net
References: <00c101c13164$258d6a80$c36122c0@cronos>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <a05100327b7b4122ce18b@[63.25.57.165]>
Date:         Thu, 30 Aug 2001 09:00:11 -0700
Reply-To: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] High Altitude Mach plus flights
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <00c101c13164$258d6a80$c36122c0@cronos>

>wedge oldham wrote:



>Guys I've just finished the simulations on a rocket if thinking of building.
>The performance of this rocket far exceeds my expectations. Could/should hit
>an altitude of 100K feet. It also raises a number of questions.
>
>1. Does the CP of a rocket change with air density. I wouldn't think so, but
>felt I better ask.


It changes with speed.  Generally above 65,000 feet it is best to
slightly spin the rocket to maintain stability on an unguided rocket

>
>2. I have a formula for atmospheric heating which is (velocity (in
>feet/second) / 110) squared = delta degrees F. I'd have to assume this
>formula is for sea level.....would this heating be proportional to air
>density i.e. 1/2 density yields 1/2 the heating?


It is also highly speed dependent.  On 20 mile rockets with steel
fins and nose tips I have seen some slight ablating of the tips but
no structural issues.  The event time is too short.


>
>3. The sim says a maximum velocity of Mach 2.9 @ 45K' MSL. I've built
>rockets that hit Mach 1.6 at 3100' MSL.... is there a way I can compare


I posted a drag force calculator to rec.models.rockets and recently
printouts from runs of that program for several rocket diameters
giving a good relative comparison up to M2.5.

People who buy motors from me get this analysis free up to M10.


>these two items? I'm sure that Mach 2 at sea level and Mach 2 at 50K present
>different levels of stress on the fins & airframe...but how do I compare the
>two? Is this again just a simple function of air density?
>
>4. What high temperature epoxies are available on the market?
>
>5. Anybody got the perfect Mach PLUS fin shape? I've got one I like based on


Clipped delta with 30 degree leading edge and 4:1 ogive leading edge.
1:3 aspect ratio.


>some basic guidelines....long root edge, short span, 30 degree leading edge,
>60 degree trailing edge, and just looks cool. I'd like to replace the "just
>looks cool" with something more scientific.
>
>Wedge Oldham
>http://NikeProject.com
>Only those who risk going too far,
>will ever know how far they can go.


If it works don't break it.

Jerry



--
Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
Opinion, the whole thing.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 2169 invoked from network); 30 Aug 2001 16:07:13 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 30 Aug 2001 16:07:13 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 7009 invoked by uid 50005); 30 Aug 2001 16:08:10 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpa with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.569095 secs); 30 Aug 2001 16:08:10 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 30 Aug 2001 16:08:09 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA13117; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 09:02:10 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 101387 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 16:02:09          +0000
Received: from mail1.murraystate.edu (mail1.murraystate.edu [216.249.159.50])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id JAA13099 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 09:02:09 -0700
Received: from jjcomputer.murraystate.edu (216.249.150.117) by          mail1.murraystate.edu (NPlex 5.5.031) id 3B85968000022D1C for          AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 11:00:01 -0500
X-Sender: terry.mccreary@mail.murraystate.edu
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <5.1.0.14.0.20010830105629.00a10ec0@mail.murraystate.edu>
Date:         Thu, 30 Aug 2001 11:03:10 -0500
Reply-To: "Terry McCreary" <terry.mccreary@MURRAYSTATE.EDU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Terry McCreary" <terry.mccreary@MURRAYSTATE.EDU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Internal Shock Wave
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <32.1a197f7b.28bf43f0@aol.com>

At 03:23 AM 8/30/01 -0400, JK wrote:
>Standing wave resonance is a common failure mode for solid and liquid motors.
>Internal acoustic waves produce areas of high and low pressure. Most of us do
>not have the instrumentation on our motors to detect it. During development
>of the PlasmaJet "H" motor we had a large number of failures shortly after
>ignition. Visual analysis of the propellant burning surface showed a
>scalloped pattern of high and low burn rate areas. Pressure instrumentation
>also detected the resonating frequencies. A change in the grain design
>reduced the acoustic wave pattern.

Thank you!  I saw precisely this sort of pattern on a propellant grain and
wondered "what the #e//??".  The epoxy didn't hold and the partially burned
propellant grains ejected.  The scallops were about 2 mm wide, if memory
serves.  I should have recognized them for what they were but wasn't
thinking much at the time.  Incidentally this was a Bates motor and the
propellant contained 3% Al.  Interesting.

P'rfesser

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 7551 invoked from network); 30 Aug 2001 16:08:30 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 30 Aug 2001 16:08:30 -0000
Received: (qmail 5624 invoked by uid 50005); 30 Aug 2001 16:09:26 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpb with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 2.946634 secs); 30 Aug 2001 16:09:26 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 30 Aug 2001 16:09:21 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA13151; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 09:03:41 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 101398 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 16:03:40          +0000
Received: from castor.ridgenet.net (IDENT:root@castor.ridgenet.net          [199.120.150.29]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA13137          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 09:03:40 -0700
Received: from kristinscomp (pm013.ridgenet.net [204.154.246.13]) by          castor.ridgenet.net (8.11.0/8.11.0) with SMTP id f7UFtCS00725; Thu,          30 Aug 2001 08:55:12 -0700
References: <5.1.0.14.1.20010829160540.00ad9180@netmail.home.com>             <4.3.2.7.0.20010829213429.00aff700@pop.netzero.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <001f01c1316e$8b8690a0$1b30fea9@kristinscomp>
Date:         Thu, 30 Aug 2001 09:12:02 -0700
Reply-To: "Kristin & David Hall" <thehalls@RIDGENET.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Kristin & David Hall" <thehalls@RIDGENET.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] offtopic - glide to fall ratio
Comments: To: "Mark G. Havener" <impact@CYBERSERVICES.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

> You're 100% right. First of all, when was the last time a sailplane was at
> 33,000' AGL?

Gee, an old friend of mine has a photograph that he took from his sailplane
at 30,000 feet (Yes, his plane was equipped with O2).  Granted, I wasn't
there so I can't verify the exact altitude, but I can verify that the Sierra
Nevada mountains looked like they were "way the hell and gone down there".
And yes, you can tell it was taken from his plane because he didn't quite
get the dashboard out of the way when he snapped the picture.

> Second, a big, fat, heavy airplane is going to glide only a
> little better than an F-4 (the 'flying crowbar').

You misspelled "a hell of a lot better".  Cargo aircraft typically have much
lower wing loadings than do fighters.  Besides, somebody said the published
glide ratio for this plane is 17:1, that's believable.  The pilot managed
18:1 (somebody forgot the extra 3,000 feet when they made the calc earlier).
That's beyond the design spec, but then, he had zero fuel so I'm willing to
be the plane was lighter than the designers envisioned when they spec'ed
that number.

> Second, no engines means no electricity, no hydraulic power, no control of
> the aircraft.

Generators and hydraulic pumps only require that the engine shafts be
turning to work.  Normally, they are turning due to engine operation.  But
in this case, they would windmill given that there was nothing physically
wrong with the engines (out of gas, that's all).  Hydraulic pressure may be
reduced, but it should still function.  Ditto for electrical systems.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 18370 invoked from network); 30 Aug 2001 16:10:54 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 30 Aug 2001 16:10:54 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 27929 invoked by uid 50005); 30 Aug 2001 16:09:34 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.170894 secs); 30 Aug 2001 16:09:34 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 30 Aug 2001 16:09:34 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA13199; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 09:06:33 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 101409 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 16:06:30          +0000
Received: from femail32.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail32.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.254.60.22]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA13185          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 09:06:30 -0700
Received: from c1649002-a.earthlink.net ([24.20.95.67]) by          femail32.sdc1.sfba.home.com (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20          201-229-121-120-20010223) with ESMTP id          <20010830160620.GQNE10302.femail32.sdc1.sfba.home.com@c1649002-a.earthlink.net>; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 09:06:20          -0700
X-Sender: forkbomb@mail.earthlink.net
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.0.2
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <5.0.2.1.0.20010830085955.03046968@mail.earthlink.net>
Date:         Thu, 30 Aug 2001 09:06:16 -0700
Reply-To: "Pierce Nichols" <forkbomb@EARTHLINK.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Pierce Nichols" <forkbomb@EARTHLINK.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] New Question: Internal Shock Waves
Comments: To: "Bendel, Timothy B" <timothy.b.bendel@LMCO.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <EDB5E5136094D311BF1800508B12205E08D2910D@emss02m07.ems.lmc o.com>

At 09:42 AM 8/30/2001 -0600, Bendel, Timothy B wrote:
> >Another problem common to internal conditions is the manifestation and
>propagation of shock waves. The Aerodyne engineers told me that the power of
>this phenomenon can be witnessed by the movement of the Main Shuttle Engines
>just after ignition. I had always assumed this to be some sort of programmed
>pre-launch cycling of the gimbal system but am told by the Aerospike systems
>engineers that it is an uncontrollable reaction to exhaust delamination in
>the bell nozzle due to atmospheric pressure at sea level, etc... They say
>that thusfar no one has been able to stop it, but of course the Linear
>Aerospike will eliminate the cause.<
>
>I guess I just don't really see this as a "problem"; after all, the Shuttle
>works fine after the engines have fired for a couple of seconds. I truth, I
>do not see the advantage of the Linear Aerospike; it has a host of intrinsic
>losses in efficiency that conventional nozzles do not have.


         What losses would those be? Why do you think they are big enough
to outweigh the altitude compensation and the gains in Isp at high altitude
(where most of the acceleration occurs), not to mention the gains in thrust
to mass ratio?

         -p


Mars or Bust!
www.marssociety.com

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 19124 invoked from network); 30 Aug 2001 16:17:58 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 30 Aug 2001 16:17:58 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 18030 invoked by uid 50005); 30 Aug 2001 16:18:25 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpe with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.303908 secs); 30 Aug 2001 16:18:25 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 30 Aug 2001 16:18:24 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA13279; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 09:13:26 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 101421 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 16:13:24          +0000
Received: from femail29.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail29.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.254.60.19]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA13265          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 09:13:24 -0700
Received: from c1649002-a.earthlink.net ([24.20.95.67]) by          femail29.sdc1.sfba.home.com (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20          201-229-121-120-20010223) with ESMTP id          <20010830161318.FXEW15592.femail29.sdc1.sfba.home.com@c1649002-a.earthlink.net>; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 09:13:18          -0700
X-Sender: forkbomb@mail.earthlink.net
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.0.2
References: <F102rfFz82buW5RNB6H00019ef9@hotmail.com>            <F102rfFz82buW5RNB6H00019ef9@hotmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <5.0.2.1.0.20010830091037.00ad8008@mail.earthlink.net>
Date:         Thu, 30 Aug 2001 09:13:17 -0700
Reply-To: "Pierce Nichols" <forkbomb@EARTHLINK.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Pierce Nichols" <forkbomb@EARTHLINK.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] liquids question: alcohol/N2O propellant feeding
Comments: To: Jerry Irvine <01rocket@GTE.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <a05100325b7b410af880a@[63.25.57.165]>

At 08:48 AM 8/30/2001 -0700, Jerry Irvine wrote:
>>PK wrote:
>>
>>>The piston seal is not subject to a pressure gradient.
>>
>>I see. But still, stick your life on the integrity of a series of O-rings?
>
>
>If you are that worried use 4 o-rings in parallel.  They are cheap.


         IIRC, the accepted industry practice is to vent the gaps between
the o-rings in fuel/oxidizer seals like this. Not sure where you would vent
too, however -- maybe the interior of the piston?

         -p


Mars or Bust!
www.marssociety.com

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 28614 invoked from network); 30 Aug 2001 16:20:04 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 30 Aug 2001 16:20:04 -0000
Received: (qmail 18778 invoked by uid 50005); 30 Aug 2001 16:21:03 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpb with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.274954 secs); 30 Aug 2001 16:21:03 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 30 Aug 2001 16:21:02 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA13334; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 09:16:11 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 101435 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 16:16:09          +0000
Received: from spsystems.net (spsystems.net [209.47.149.227]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA13315 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Thu,          30 Aug 2001 09:16:00 -0700
Received: (from henry@localhost) by spsystems.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id MAA24298;          Thu, 30 Aug 2001 12:15:20 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010830121403.24191B-100000@spsystems.net>
Date:         Thu, 30 Aug 2001 12:15:20 -0400
Reply-To: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] liquids question: alcohol/N2O propellant feeding
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <F80DQCvt9bGcETQtU6G00019eeb@hotmail.com>

On Thu, 30 Aug 2001, John Dom wrote:
> At lift-off the Atlas tanks were pressurized only for rigidity of the
> contraption (mentioned earlier on this list)...

No, also for the usual reasons why pump-fed systems pressurize their tanks:
feeding propellants into the pumps and suppressing cavitation in the pumps.

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 1084 invoked from network); 30 Aug 2001 16:20:39 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 30 Aug 2001 16:20:39 -0000
Received: (qmail 31453 invoked by uid 50005); 30 Aug 2001 16:18:40 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpf with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.296423 secs); 30 Aug 2001 16:18:40 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 30 Aug 2001 16:18:40 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA13305; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 09:14:48 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 101428 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 16:14:47          +0000
Received: from spsystems.net (spsystems.net [209.47.149.227]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA13281 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Thu,          30 Aug 2001 09:13:52 -0700
Received: (from henry@localhost) by spsystems.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id MAA24236;          Thu, 30 Aug 2001 12:13:12 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010830120547.24191A-100000@spsystems.net>
Date:         Thu, 30 Aug 2001 12:13:12 -0400
Reply-To: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] liquids question: alcohol/N2O propellant feeding
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <018001c1312f$701f2dc0$0100a8c0@mkbs>

On Thu, 30 Aug 2001, Russell McMahon wrote:
> Is Henry saying that the  Atlas tank was blowdown pressurised and this
> supplied the remaining motor without a pump or that the blowdown was used
> for tank pressurisation but that a pump was still used to feed the motor?

The latter.  But the same approach has been used in pressure-fed systems
in spacecraft (albeit without actually dropping the pressurization system):
use regulated pressurization from a pressurant tank for the big burns, but
once the tanks are mostly empty and you're settling down to a quiet orbital
(or whatever) mission where burns are needed infrequently, change to
blowdown operation, firing pyrovalves to permanently close off the
pressurization system.  This avoids various failure modes associated with
propellant vapors diffusing upstream into the pressurization plumbing.

The bottom line is that once the tanks are mostly empty, blowdown is very
nearly as good as regulated pressurization, because the pressurant in the
tanks doesn't have much farther to expand and thus won't drop in pressure
very much.

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 15248 invoked from network); 30 Aug 2001 16:24:01 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 30 Aug 2001 16:24:01 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 21896 invoked by uid 50005); 30 Aug 2001 16:25:00 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpb with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.204376 secs); 30 Aug 2001 16:25:00 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 30 Aug 2001 16:24:59 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA13356; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 09:17:33 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 101442 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 16:17:32          +0000
Received: from imo-m02.mx.aol.com (imo-m02.mx.aol.com [64.12.136.5]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA13285 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 09:14:32 -0700
Received: from MONTMACH@aol.com by imo-m02.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v31_r1.4.) id          a.12f.3da8838 (18404); Thu, 30 Aug 2001 12:13:50 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0C12_01C56B69.4D8A6220"
X-Mailer: AOL 6.0 for Windows US sub 10532
Message-ID:  <12f.3da8838.28bfc03d@aol.com>
Date:         Thu, 30 Aug 2001 12:13:49 EDT
Reply-To: <MONTMACH@AOL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Dave Griffith" <MONTMACH@AOL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] liquids question: alcohol/N2O propellant feeding
Comments: To: pkelly@comcen.com.au
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0C12_01C56B69.4D8A6220
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Paul wrote:

> There really is a simple answer to pressuising non volatile fuels in simple
> NOX
> biprops. Just add a piston to the tank, put your fuel on top of the piston
> and
> the nox below, run a flexible hose (nylon line works) from the piston to the
> combustion chamber with enough slack to let the piston slide up to the top
> of
> the tank.
>
> PK
>

Patent number 3,043,221 (by F. H. Swanser dated July 10, 1962) describes a
remarkably similar design.
Dave

------=_NextPart_000_0C12_01C56B69.4D8A6220
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<HTML><FONT FACE=arial,helvetica><FONT  SIZE=2>Paul wrote:
<BR>
<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE style="BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px">There really is a simple answer to pressuising non volatile fuels in simple
<BR>NOX
<BR>biprops. Just add a piston to the tank, put your fuel on top of the piston
<BR>and
<BR>the nox below, run a flexible hose (nylon line works) from the piston to the
<BR>combustion chamber with enough slack to let the piston slide up to the top
<BR>of
<BR>the tank.
<BR>
<BR>PK
<BR></BLOCKQUOTE>
<BR>
<BR>Patent number 3,043,221 (by F. H. Swanser dated July 10, 1962) describes a
<BR>remarkably similar design.
<BR>Dave</FONT></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0C12_01C56B69.4D8A6220--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 18841 invoked from network); 30 Aug 2001 16:24:53 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 30 Aug 2001 16:24:53 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 24647 invoked by uid 50005); 30 Aug 2001 16:25:51 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpa with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.147369 secs); 30 Aug 2001 16:25:51 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 30 Aug 2001 16:25:51 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA13375; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 09:18:56 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 101416 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 16:18:54          +0000
Received: from robin.mail.pas.earthlink.net (robin.mail.pas.earthlink.net          [207.217.120.65]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA13219          for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 09:07:53 -0700
Received: from earthlink.net (dialup-209.247.140.238.Dial1.SanJose1.Level3.net          [209.247.140.238]) by robin.mail.pas.earthlink.net (8.11.5/8.9.3)          with ESMTP id f7UG7qX25968; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 09:07:52 -0700 (PDT)
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.75 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.16-22 i686)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010828185904.24467A-100000@spsystems.net>            <3B8DC4F8.8D8670FC@seanet.com> <018001c1312f$701f2dc0$0100a8c0@mkbs>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B8E6529.4D47ABED@earthlink.net>
Date:         Thu, 30 Aug 2001 09:09:13 -0700
Reply-To: "David Weinshenker" <daze39@EARTHLINK.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "David Weinshenker" <daze39@EARTHLINK.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] liquids question: alcohol/N2O propellant feeding
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Russell McMahon wrote:
> Is Henry saying that the  Atlas tank was blowdown pressurised and this
> supplied the remaining motor without a pump or that the blowdown was used
> for tank pressurisation but that a pump was still used to feed the motor?

Each of the motors had its own pump - once the boosters and pressurant
supply system were discarded at staging, the trapped gas in the tanks
was sufficient to maintain necessary inlet pressure (not much, but
enough to prevent cavitation at the pump inlet) at the pumps of the
remaining sustainer motor.

-dave w

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 1971 invoked from network); 30 Aug 2001 16:35:09 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 30 Aug 2001 16:35:09 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 8166 invoked by uid 50005); 30 Aug 2001 16:34:24 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.274088 secs); 30 Aug 2001 16:34:24 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 30 Aug 2001 16:34:23 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA13567; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 09:29:56 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 101497 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 16:29:55          +0000
Received: from mail.aros.net (mail.aros.net [207.173.16.20]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA13544 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu,          30 Aug 2001 09:28:30 -0700
Received: from biomicro.com ([208.187.122.40]) by mail.aros.net (8.11.6/8.9.3)          with ESMTP id f7UGST701349 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 30 Aug          2001 10:28:29 -0600 (MDT)
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.77 [en] (Win98; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <3B8DDA02.C47AF80D@coastnet.com> <3B8DE559.A17B8A3A@earthlink.net>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B8E69A3.FF9A2ABC@biomicro.com>
Date:         Thu, 30 Aug 2001 10:28:19 -0600
Reply-To: "Mark K. Spute" <mks@BIOMICRO.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Mark K. Spute" <mks@BIOMICRO.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] [EE]: Building a Satellite
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

I'd have to agree here.

I've always felt that Arocket was more like the Experimental Aircraft
Association than, say, the Cessna Owners Association.  i.e.  There are a
lot of people here who have no interest whatsoever in going orbital.
There is such a broad range of interests here, from solid/hybrid/liquid
propellant systems, to control systems, telemetry, recovery systems,
etc.  The list of interests is endless.  To sit down and say "This is
what Arocket will do" will only leave many people out in the cold, to
either go somewhere else or have nowhere at all to go.

Arocket could potentially be very useful as a political lobbying group,
trying to effect changes to the existing regulatory structure.  Home
cast 4STO is certainly possible, but not under the current rule
structure.  The danger here is someone somewhere is going to get their
feelings hurt and there'll be a big pissing contest like frequently
happens in other more "organized" groups.  TRA for example.

No, I think Arocket serves it's main purpose as an information
clearinghouse.

Ray, what is your vision for Arocket?



David Weinshenker wrote:
>
> Ross Borden wrote:
> > But that doesn't change the fact that we are still splintered.  While we
> > all have the same ultimate goal of reaching orbit, with everybody
> > pursuing different paths, building largely incompatible hardware, and
> > gaining experience in isolation, that goal seems forever on the horizon.
> >
> > An organization with even a few teams working on compatible subsystems
> > could achieve far more than all of us working independently.
> >
> > At the very least, I think it would be beneficial if ARocket could
> > develop specifications for standard rocket platforms, so that down the
> > road, integrating projects would be feasible.
>
> I dunno... I think the state of the amateur art is such that efforts at
> generalised standardization might be somewhat premature...  there's too
> large a "solution space" to explore before it will become meaningful to
> promulgate hardware compatibility specifications.
>
> The Cold War and the Moon Race have accustomed us to thinking of "aerospace
> technology" in the image of the great corporate and government enterprises,
> that built these programs' vehicles... perhaps it would be better to view
> ourselves as working in the style of the classic airplane builders who
> framed up their craft over "plans" chalked on a hanger floor.
>
> We may be using carbon cloth, epoxy, and titanium instead of canvas, dope
> and spruce; our engines may have injectors and nozzles instead of carburetors
> and propellers... we may nevertheless find it valuable to understand how
> the artisans of aviation's early age accomplished what they did without
> the organizational overhead that would accompany the manufacture of even
> such "primitive" craft by the present "Aerospace Industry".
>
> It is my contention that a 4STO launcher for a kilogram-sized amsat could
> be created using "hand-cast" solid motors, structural technology
> with more resemblance to that of a homebuilt boat or aircraft than that
> of a Lunar Module or an Atlas, GNC systems developed from carefully-
> selected OTS electromechanical components... and that no more than 10%
> of the project deliverables, by mass, need consist of documentation.
>
> -dave w

--
Mark K. Spute
Senior Research Engineer
BioMicro Systems Inc.

KD7IWE,  RRS

"It is difficult to say what is impossible, for the dream of yesterday
is the hope of today and the reality of tomorrow."
     Dr. Robert H. Goddard

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 5943 invoked from network); 30 Aug 2001 16:36:08 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 30 Aug 2001 16:36:08 -0000
Received: (qmail 1398 invoked by uid 50005); 30 Aug 2001 16:37:05 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpa with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.197395 secs); 30 Aug 2001 16:37:05 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 30 Aug 2001 16:37:05 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA13548; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 09:28:30 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 101490 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 16:28:25          +0000
Received: from spsystems.net (spsystems.net [209.47.149.227]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA13530 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Thu,          30 Aug 2001 09:28:25 -0700
Received: (from henry@localhost) by spsystems.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id MAA24374;          Thu, 30 Aug 2001 12:27:45 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010830122108.24191D-100000@spsystems.net>
Date:         Thu, 30 Aug 2001 12:27:45 -0400
Reply-To: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] offtopic - glide to fall ratio
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <001f01c1316e$8b8690a0$1b30fea9@kristinscomp>

On Thu, 30 Aug 2001, Kristin & David Hall wrote:
> > Second, no engines means no electricity, no hydraulic power, no control of
> > the aircraft.
>
> Generators and hydraulic pumps only require that the engine shafts be
> turning to work.  Normally, they are turning due to engine operation.  But
> in this case, they would windmill...

Also, the "big twin" aircraft like the A330 typically have emergency power
systems like an APU or a ram-air turbine, specifically to ensure hydraulic
and electrical power even after a double engine failure.  (This is deemed
somewhat less of a worry for aircraft with more engines.)  Of course, an
APU that runs from the main tanks is not going to be helpful if the problem
is fuel exhaustion.

On traditional aircraft like the 747, there is -- believe it or not --
manual backup as well.  Flying a 747 without hydraulics is very strenuous
and takes both pilots working hard, but apparently it's just possible.
However, I don't believe that is an option on the fly-by-wire A330.

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 12107 invoked from network); 30 Aug 2001 16:37:35 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 30 Aug 2001 16:37:35 -0000
Received: (qmail 922 invoked by uid 50005); 30 Aug 2001 16:38:33 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpb with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.185787 secs); 30 Aug 2001 16:38:33 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 30 Aug 2001 16:38:33 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA13629; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 09:34:03 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 101511 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 16:34:02          +0000
Received: from castor.ridgenet.net (IDENT:root@castor.ridgenet.net          [199.120.150.29]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA13615          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 09:34:02 -0700
Received: from kristinscomp (pm013.ridgenet.net [204.154.246.13]) by          castor.ridgenet.net (8.11.0/8.11.0) with SMTP id f7UGPcS04344; Thu,          30 Aug 2001 09:25:38 -0700
References:  <00c101c13164$258d6a80$c36122c0@cronos>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <00c501c13172$cbb42c60$1b30fea9@kristinscomp>
Date:         Thu, 30 Aug 2001 09:42:44 -0700
Reply-To: "Kristin & David Hall" <thehalls@RIDGENET.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Kristin & David Hall" <thehalls@RIDGENET.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] High Altitude Mach plus flights
Comments: To: Wedge Oldham <wedge@WESTWORLD.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

> 1. Does the CP of a rocket change with air density. I wouldn't think so,
but
> felt I better ask.

Not significantly.

> 2. I have a formula for atmospheric heating which is (velocity (in
> feet/second) / 110) squared = delta degrees F. I'd have to assume this
> formula is for sea level.....would this heating be proportional to air
> density i.e. 1/2 density yields 1/2 the heating?

Dunno where you got this equation, but it is very clearly wrong.  First off,
there is no inclusion of time in the equation.  My guess is that this is
some sort of rule of thumb for airplane (not to be confused with missile!)
design.  That being said,

Calculating atmospheric heating is not something you can do with one simple
equation.  For even a rough guesstimate you'll need to look at your flight
profile and calculate the enthalpy conditions at every point and run a
finite element thermal analysis sim.

If that doesn't tickle your fancy, why not just apply some ablative coating
to the leading edge and call it a day (what I would do!).

> 3. The sim says a maximum velocity of Mach 2.9 @ 45K' MSL. I've built
> rockets that hit Mach 1.6 at 3100' MSL.... is there a way I can compare
> these two items? I'm sure that Mach 2 at sea level and Mach 2 at 50K
present
> different levels of stress on the fins & airframe...but how do I compare
the
> two? Is this again just a simple function of air density?

Neglecting thermal issues, yes.

> 4. What high temperature epoxies are available on the market?

Couldn't tell ya.  But let me tell a story and drive home a point:  Once
upon a time myself and a couple other guys designed/built an experimental
re-entry vehicle for the USAF.  Top speed (IIRC) was approximately Mach 8.
We used an epoxy that was only rated to about 200 F.  How'd we do it?  Just
slap some ablative coating on it!  It's cheap.  It's easy.  Why would you do
it any other way?

> 5. Anybody got the perfect Mach PLUS fin shape? I've got one I like based
on

There's no such thing.  That's about like asking for the perfect thrust/time
curve - it's mission dependent.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 29154 invoked from network); 30 Aug 2001 16:41:36 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 30 Aug 2001 16:41:36 -0000
Received: (qmail 15064 invoked by uid 50005); 30 Aug 2001 16:40:51 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.294006 secs); 30 Aug 2001 16:40:51 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 30 Aug 2001 16:40:50 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA13597; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 09:32:35 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 101504 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 16:32:34          +0000
Received: from spock.alohanet.com (spock.alohanet.com [209.31.4.252]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA13583 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 09:32:32 -0700
Received: from NATE2 (NATE2.alohanet.com [192.168.233.104]) by          spock.alohanet.com (Post.Office MTA v3.5.2 release 221 ID#          0-55447U100L2S100V35) with SMTP id com for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>;          Thu, 30 Aug 2001 09:31:23 -0700
References:  <5.1.0.14.0.20010830105629.00a10ec0@mail.murraystate.edu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <014501c13171$eca6e2b0$68e9a8c0@NATE2>
Date:         Thu, 30 Aug 2001 09:36:31 -0700
Reply-To: "Nathan Hays" <nhays@ALOHANET.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Nathan Hays" <nhays@ALOHANET.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Internal Shock Wave
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

I imagine a star grain with an odd number of points would suppress
transverse waves but not logitudinal waves.  I can see how a BATES grain
could demonstrate transverse waves.

My concern is how I can avoid longitudinal waves in a star grain.  Perhaps
this is why grains are designed with flaring at the fore and aft ends.  I've
always assumed the aft flaring was to avoid erosive burning, but I couldn't
figure why the fore flare.

Any hints? Knowledge?

- Nate


At 03:23 AM 8/30/01 -0400, JK wrote:
>Standing wave resonance is a common failure mode for solid and liquid
motors.
>Internal acoustic waves produce areas of high and low pressure. Most of us
do
>not have the instrumentation on our motors to detect it. During development
>of the PlasmaJet "H" motor we had a large number of failures shortly after
>ignition. Visual analysis of the propellant burning surface showed a
>scalloped pattern of high and low burn rate areas. Pressure instrumentation
>also detected the resonating frequencies. A change in the grain design
>reduced the acoustic wave pattern.
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 2473 invoked from network); 30 Aug 2001 16:42:19 -0000
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 30 Aug 2001 16:42:19 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 27482 invoked by uid 50005); 30 Aug 2001 16:40:20 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpf with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.752027 secs); 30 Aug 2001 16:40:20 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 30 Aug 2001 16:40:19 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA13659; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 09:35:29 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 101518 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 16:35:27          +0000
Received: from mail.aros.net (mail.aros.net [207.173.16.20]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA13645 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu,          30 Aug 2001 09:35:27 -0700
Received: from biomicro.com ([208.187.122.40]) by mail.aros.net (8.11.6/8.9.3)          with ESMTP id f7UGZQ704830 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 30 Aug          2001 10:35:26 -0600 (MDT)
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.77 [en] (Win98; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <F102rfFz82buW5RNB6H00019ef9@hotmail.com>            <F102rfFz82buW5RNB6H00019ef9@hotmail.com>            <5.0.2.1.0.20010830091037.00ad8008@mail.earthlink.net>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B8E6B45.77D36F6E@biomicro.com>
Date:         Thu, 30 Aug 2001 10:35:17 -0600
Reply-To: "Mark K. Spute" <mks@BIOMICRO.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Mark K. Spute" <mks@BIOMICRO.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] liquids question: alcohol/N2O propellant feeding
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Pierce Nichols wrote:
>
> At 08:48 AM 8/30/2001 -0700, Jerry Irvine wrote:
> >>PK wrote:
> >>
> >>>The piston seal is not subject to a pressure gradient.
> >>
> >>I see. But still, stick your life on the integrity of a series of O-rings?
> >
> >
> >If you are that worried use 4 o-rings in parallel.  They are cheap.
>
>          IIRC, the accepted industry practice is to vent the gaps between
> the o-rings in fuel/oxidizer seals like this. Not sure where you would vent
> too, however -- maybe the interior of the piston?

Possibly a good idea there.  Vent the gaps to the interior of a hollow
piston.  Have another long flexible tube attached from the piston to an
overboard vent to prevent collection of mixed fumes inside the piston.


--
Mark K. Spute
Senior Research Engineer
BioMicro Systems Inc.

KD7IWE,  RRS

"It is difficult to say what is impossible, for the dream of yesterday
is the hope of today and the reality of tomorrow."
     Dr. Robert H. Goddard

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 10741 invoked from network); 30 Aug 2001 16:44:07 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 30 Aug 2001 16:44:07 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 20853 invoked by uid 50005); 30 Aug 2001 16:42:46 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.164936 secs); 30 Aug 2001 16:42:46 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 30 Aug 2001 16:42:46 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA13721; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 09:39:00 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 101533 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 16:38:59          +0000
Received: from femail38.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail38.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.254.60.32]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA13707          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 09:38:59 -0700
Received: from c1649002-a.earthlink.net ([24.20.95.67]) by          femail38.sdc1.sfba.home.com (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20          201-229-121-120-20010223) with ESMTP id          <20010830163853.FHQS24024.femail38.sdc1.sfba.home.com@c1649002-a.earthlink.net>; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 09:38:53          -0700
X-Sender: forkbomb@mail.earthlink.net
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.0.2
References: <F102rfFz82buW5RNB6H00019ef9@hotmail.com>            <F102rfFz82buW5RNB6H00019ef9@hotmail.com>            <5.0.2.1.0.20010830091037.00ad8008@mail.earthlink.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <5.0.2.1.0.20010830093747.03098dc0@mail.earthlink.net>
Date:         Thu, 30 Aug 2001 09:38:52 -0700
Reply-To: "Pierce Nichols" <forkbomb@EARTHLINK.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Pierce Nichols" <forkbomb@EARTHLINK.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] liquids question: alcohol/N2O propellant feeding
Comments: To: "Mark K. Spute" <mks@BIOMICRO.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <3B8E6B45.77D36F6E@biomicro.com>

At 10:35 AM 8/30/2001 -0600, Mark K. Spute wrote:
>Pierce Nichols wrote:
> >
> > At 08:48 AM 8/30/2001 -0700, Jerry Irvine wrote:
> > >>PK wrote:
> > >>
> > >>>The piston seal is not subject to a pressure gradient.
> > >>
> > >>I see. But still, stick your life on the integrity of a series of
> O-rings?
> > >
> > >
> > >If you are that worried use 4 o-rings in parallel.  They are cheap.
> >
> >          IIRC, the accepted industry practice is to vent the gaps between
> > the o-rings in fuel/oxidizer seals like this. Not sure where you would vent
> > too, however -- maybe the interior of the piston?
>
>Possibly a good idea there.  Vent the gaps to the interior of a hollow
>piston.  Have another long flexible tube attached from the piston to an
>overboard vent to prevent collection of mixed fumes inside the piston.


         I was thinking of having separate chambers insides the piston for
each level of vents... so only the middle level could possibly accumulate
mixed vapors...

         -p


Mars or Bust!
www.marssociety.com

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 14072 invoked from network); 30 Aug 2001 16:44:55 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 30 Aug 2001 16:44:55 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 18398 invoked by uid 50005); 30 Aug 2001 16:44:10 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.237542 secs); 30 Aug 2001 16:44:10 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 30 Aug 2001 16:44:09 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA13752; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 09:40:23 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 101540 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 16:40:21          +0000
Received: from mail.aros.net (mail.aros.net [207.173.16.20]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA13723 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu,          30 Aug 2001 09:39:30 -0700
Received: from biomicro.com ([208.187.122.40]) by mail.aros.net (8.11.6/8.9.3)          with ESMTP id f7UGdT706590 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 30 Aug          2001 10:39:29 -0600 (MDT)
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.77 [en] (Win98; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <5.1.0.14.0.20010830105629.00a10ec0@mail.murraystate.edu>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B8E6C38.4E8917F0@biomicro.com>
Date:         Thu, 30 Aug 2001 10:39:20 -0600
Reply-To: "Mark K. Spute" <mks@BIOMICRO.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Mark K. Spute" <mks@BIOMICRO.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Internal Shock Wave
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

2mm wide scallops?

Hmmm.  I'm just guessing here, but could you use that measurement to
calculate the wavelength and thus the frequency of the acoustic
instability?  That would give you a little better handle on what kind of
changes you'd need to make to damp it out.

Terry McCreary wrote:
>
> At 03:23 AM 8/30/01 -0400, JK wrote:
> >Standing wave resonance is a common failure mode for solid and liquid motors.
> >Internal acoustic waves produce areas of high and low pressure. Most of us do
> >not have the instrumentation on our motors to detect it. During development
> >of the PlasmaJet "H" motor we had a large number of failures shortly after
> >ignition. Visual analysis of the propellant burning surface showed a
> >scalloped pattern of high and low burn rate areas. Pressure instrumentation
> >also detected the resonating frequencies. A change in the grain design
> >reduced the acoustic wave pattern.
>
> Thank you!  I saw precisely this sort of pattern on a propellant grain and
> wondered "what the #e//??".  The epoxy didn't hold and the partially burned
> propellant grains ejected.  The scallops were about 2 mm wide, if memory
> serves.  I should have recognized them for what they were but wasn't
> thinking much at the time.  Incidentally this was a Bates motor and the
> propellant contained 3% Al.  Interesting.
>
> P'rfesser

--
Mark K. Spute
Senior Research Engineer
BioMicro Systems Inc.

KD7IWE,  RRS

"It is difficult to say what is impossible, for the dream of yesterday
is the hope of today and the reality of tomorrow."
     Dr. Robert H. Goddard

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 27327 invoked from network); 30 Aug 2001 16:47:52 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 30 Aug 2001 16:47:52 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 9928 invoked by uid 50005); 30 Aug 2001 16:48:51 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpb with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.222932 secs); 30 Aug 2001 16:48:51 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 30 Aug 2001 16:48:51 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA13790; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 09:43:30 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 101551 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 16:43:29          +0000
Received: from smtp007pub.verizon.net (smtp007pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.186])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA13776 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 09:43:29 -0700
Received: from [63.27.96.42] (1Cust42.tnt1.san-bernardino.ca.da.uu.net          [63.27.96.42]) by smtp007pub.verizon.net  with ESMTP for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; id f7UGgr509396 Thu, 30 Aug 2001 11:42:53          -0500 (CDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: GTE/01rocket@mail.gte.net
References: <5.1.0.14.0.20010830105629.00a10ec0@mail.murraystate.edu>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <a05100301b7b41d5f5402@[63.27.96.42]>
Date:         Thu, 30 Aug 2001 09:42:51 -0700
Reply-To: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Internal Shock Wave
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <5.1.0.14.0.20010830105629.00a10ec0@mail.murraystate.edu>

>At 03:23 AM 8/30/01 -0400, JK wrote:
>>Standing wave resonance is a common failure mode for solid and liquid motors.
>>Internal acoustic waves produce areas of high and low pressure. Most of us do
>>not have the instrumentation on our motors to detect it. During development
>>of the PlasmaJet "H" motor we had a large number of failures shortly after
>>ignition. Visual analysis of the propellant burning surface showed a
>>scalloped pattern of high and low burn rate areas. Pressure instrumentation
>>also detected the resonating frequencies. A change in the grain design
>>reduced the acoustic wave pattern.
>
>Thank you!  I saw precisely this sort of pattern on a propellant grain and
>wondered "what the #e//??".  The epoxy didn't hold and the partially burned
>propellant grains ejected.  The scallops were about 2 mm wide, if memory
>serves.  I should have recognized them for what they were but wasn't
>thinking much at the time.  Incidentally this was a Bates motor and the
>propellant contained 3% Al.  Interesting.

Key factor here is low aluminum.  I suspect your pressure was above
500psi as well.


>
>P'rfesser


--
Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
Opinion, the whole thing.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 27056 invoked from network); 30 Aug 2001 16:54:54 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 30 Aug 2001 16:54:54 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 28480 invoked by uid 50005); 30 Aug 2001 16:54:08 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 1.742972 secs); 30 Aug 2001 16:54:08 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 30 Aug 2001 16:54:05 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA13853; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 09:46:29 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 101570 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 16:46:27          +0000
Received: from smtp005pub.verizon.net (smtp005pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.184])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA13839 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 09:46:27 -0700
Received: from [63.27.96.42] (1Cust42.tnt1.san-bernardino.ca.da.uu.net          [63.27.96.42]) by smtp005pub.verizon.net  with ESMTP for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; id f7UGjsT13421 Thu, 30 Aug 2001 11:45:55          -0500 (CDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: GTE/01rocket@mail.gte.net
References: <5.1.0.14.1.20010829160540.00ad9180@netmail.home.com>            <4.3.2.7.0.20010829213429.00aff700@pop.netzero.net>            <001f01c1316e$8b8690a0$1b30fea9@kristinscomp>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <a05100302b7b41dd16e81@[63.27.96.42]>
Date:         Thu, 30 Aug 2001 09:45:50 -0700
Reply-To: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] offtopic - glide to fall ratio
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <001f01c1316e$8b8690a0$1b30fea9@kristinscomp>

>David Hall, inspired as usual:


>You misspelled "a hell of a lot better".  Cargo aircraft typically have much
>lower wing loadings than do fighters.  Besides, somebody said the published
>glide ratio for this plane is 17:1, that's believable.  The pilot managed
>18:1 (somebody forgot the extra 3,000 feet when they made the calc earlier).
>That's beyond the design spec, but then, he had zero fuel so I'm willing to
>be the plane was lighter than the designers envisioned when they spec'ed
>that number.


So in this case being out of gas was a feature and not a bug?  :)


>in this case, they would windmill given that there was nothing physically
>wrong with the engines (out of gas, that's all).  Hydraulic pressure may be
>reduced, but it should still function.  Ditto for electrical systems.

Feature again!

Lets all fly in big gliders.

Jerry

--
Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
Opinion, the whole thing.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 16212 invoked from network); 30 Aug 2001 17:06:11 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 30 Aug 2001 17:06:11 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 7803 invoked by uid 50005); 30 Aug 2001 17:05:26 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.304356 secs); 30 Aug 2001 17:05:26 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 30 Aug 2001 17:05:25 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA13982; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 09:57:49 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 101601 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 16:57:47          +0000
Received: from smtp001pub.verizon.net (smtp001pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.180])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA13968 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 09:57:46 -0700
Received: from [63.27.96.42] (1Cust42.tnt1.san-bernardino.ca.da.uu.net          [63.27.96.42]) by smtp001pub.verizon.net  with ESMTP for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; id f7UGvEA02542 Thu, 30 Aug 2001 11:57:14          -0500 (CDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: GTE/01rocket@mail.gte.net
References: <3B8DDA02.C47AF80D@coastnet.com> <3B8DE559.A17B8A3A@earthlink.net>            <3B8E69A3.FF9A2ABC@biomicro.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <a05100303b7b41fdde9b2@[63.27.96.42]>
Date:         Thu, 30 Aug 2001 09:57:13 -0700
Reply-To: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] [EE]: Building a Satellite
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <3B8E69A3.FF9A2ABC@biomicro.com>

>Mark Spute wrote:


>etc.  The list of interests is endless.  To sit down and say "This is
>what Arocket will do" will only leave many people out in the cold, to
>either go somewhere else or have nowhere at all to go.


But the nice thing is if you tell 500 people "do this", MAYBE 50 will.


>
>Arocket could potentially be very useful as a political lobbying group,


I agree.


>trying to effect changes to the existing regulatory structure.  Home
>cast 4STO is certainly possible, but not under the current rule
>structure.  The danger here is someone somewhere is going to get their
>feelings hurt and there'll be a big pissing contest like frequently
>happens in other more "organized" groups.  TRA for example.


I agree re TRA :)

>
>No, I think Arocket serves it's main purpose as an information
>clearinghouse.
>
>Ray, what is your vision for Arocket?


Amateur rocketry, duh.

But the same rules amateur rocketeers fly under, experimental
aircraft, rockets sometimes fly under, and lightsats as well.

Simplifying OCST rules to what RRI members George James and Chuck
Piper originally submitted and were approved before the 15 seconds
"typo" was introduced would be fine.  Revert to original.

Jerry

--
Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
Opinion, the whole thing.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 25600 invoked from network); 30 Aug 2001 17:08:19 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 30 Aug 2001 17:08:19 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 10087 invoked by uid 50005); 30 Aug 2001 17:07:34 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.761854 secs); 30 Aug 2001 17:07:34 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 30 Aug 2001 17:07:32 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA14013; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 10:01:30 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 101608 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 17:01:28          +0000
Received: from mailgw1a.lmco.com (mailgw1a.lmco.com [192.31.106.7]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA13991 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 10:00:30 -0700
Received: from emss02g01.ems.lmco.com (relay2.ems.lmco.com [166.29.2.54]) by          mailgw1a.lmco.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id LAA01955 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 11:00:29 -0600 (MDT)
Received: from CONVERSION-DAEMON by lmco.com (PMDF V5.2-33 #38887) id          <0GIW00G014KRFV@lmco.com> for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 30 Aug 2001          11:00:27 -0600 (MDT)
Received: from emss02i00.ems.lmco.com ([166.29.2.48]) by lmco.com (PMDF V5.2-33          #38887) with ESMTP id <0GIW00J8S4KEI1@lmco.com> for          AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 11:00:16 -0600 (MDT)
Received: by emss02i00.ems.lmco.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) id          <R59495X0>; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 11:01:26 -0600
Content-return: allowed
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19)
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <EDB5E5136094D311BF1800508B12205E08D2910E@emss02m07.ems.lmco.com>
Date:         Thu, 30 Aug 2001 11:01:23 -0600
Reply-To: "Bendel, Timothy B" <timothy.b.bendel@LMCO.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Bendel, Timothy B" <timothy.b.bendel@LMCO.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Aerospike; was Internal Shock Waves
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

>>I guess I just don't really see this as a "problem"; after all, the
Shuttle
>>works fine after the engines have fired for a couple of seconds. I truth,
I
>>do not see the advantage of the Linear Aerospike; it has a host of
intrinsic
>>losses in efficiency that conventional nozzles do not have.


  >       What losses would those be? Why do you think they are big enough
>to outweigh the altitude compensation and the gains in Isp at high altitude

>(where most of the acceleration occurs), not to mention the gains in thrust

>to mass ratio?


Ok, I knew I was opening up a can of worms with the Aerospike comment, but I
didn't think I'd get challenged on it in 30 seconds!

Basically, the Aerospike has several inherent losses that traditional
nozzles do not. First off, I do not think that they have higher thrust to
weight ratios- critical for a booster engine. This is due to the fact that
the structure of an Aerospike is under compressive forces from the exhaust,
whereas a traditional bell nozzle has tension (hoop) stresses. Thus, a bell
nozzle can be made of thin stock. In fact, there have been experimental
inflatable nozzles deployed in space that work fine.

Second, a Linear Aerospike has ends. The high-pressure exhaust can spill
over these edges much like the high-pressure air under a wing spills over
the tip of the wing and creates a wing-tip vortex. This induces a vortex
loss. Traditional bell nozzles do not have this. An Annular Aerospike
doesn't have this either, but a Linear Aerospike does.

Third; the idea that an Aerospike self compensates to optimum area ratio for
all altitudes is a myth. There are two effects that the supporters do not
tell you:
a) just like a conventional nozzle, an Aerospike must be designed for an
"optimum altitude" somewhere in the middle of the flight regime (say, for
example, 50k feet) For a conventional nozzle, the nozzle is said to be
over-expanded when it operates below this altitude and under-expanded when
it operates above this altitude. For an Aerospike, the spike is too long
when operated under the "optimum" altitude (thereby inducing drag losses)
and too short when operated above this altitude (incurring expansion wave
losses just like a conventional nozzle).
b) the "optimum expansion" myth revolves around the idea that the
slip-stream will adjust to compensate for the change in atmospheric pressure
as the vehicle flies. Thus, the "exit area" will expand as the rocket
ascends. This is true, but the rocket does it inefficiently. If you
visualize the Aerospike as a bell nozzle inside-out:
http://www.boeing.com/space/rdyne/x33/aerospik/basics/convert.htm
you get an idea of the aerospike's effective "exit area". Now, with this
analogy in mind, if you wanted to increase the area ratio of a conventional
nozzle, you would lengthen it so as to increase it's exit ratio. But the
Aerospike doesn't *lengthen*! It allows the slip-stream to get pushed out!
This is equivalent to a conventional nozzle that changes it's half-angle (if
a conical nozzle- easier to visualize) in flight to a larger value. This is
BAD. You cannot turn the flow beyond the Prantle-Meyer expansion limit
without inducing expansion shocks. This is equivalent to a short, fat
conventional nozzle that expands too quickly. It doesn't matter if the area
ratio is correct, it is way off optimal efficiency!

To back all this up, consider the "new high-performance" Linear Aerospike
that Boeing was to have made for Venture Star (not the little one based on
the J-2, the big high-pressure orbital-version):
http://www.boeing.com/defense-space/space/propul/XRS2200.html
Note the Isp:
Sea level: 339 sec
Vacuum: 436.5 sec

Now look up the SSME:
http://www.astronautix.com/engines/ssme.htm
Sea level: 363 sec
Vacuum: 453 sec

As stated before, the thrust to weight ratio also seems to favor
conventional nozzles. Conventional nozzles win with both efficiency and
thrust to weight.
QED.

Timothy Bendel




> -----Original Message-----
> From: Pierce Nichols [SMTP:forkbomb@earthlink.net]
> Sent: Thursday, August 30, 2001 10:06 AM
> To:   Bendel, Timothy B; AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
> Subject:      Re: [AR] New Question: Internal Shock Waves
>
> At 09:42 AM 8/30/2001 -0600, Bendel, Timothy B wrote:
> > >Another problem common to internal conditions is the manifestation and
> >propagation of shock waves. The Aerodyne engineers told me that the power
> of
> >this phenomenon can be witnessed by the movement of the Main Shuttle
> Engines
> >just after ignition. I had always assumed this to be some sort of
> programmed
> >pre-launch cycling of the gimbal system but am told by the Aerospike
> systems
> >engineers that it is an uncontrollable reaction to exhaust delamination
> in
> >the bell nozzle due to atmospheric pressure at sea level, etc... They say
> >that thusfar no one has been able to stop it, but of course the Linear
> >Aerospike will eliminate the cause.<
> >
> >I guess I just don't really see this as a "problem"; after all, the
> Shuttle
> >works fine after the engines have fired for a couple of seconds. I truth,
> I
> >do not see the advantage of the Linear Aerospike; it has a host of
> intrinsic
> >losses in efficiency that conventional nozzles do not have.
>
>
>          What losses would those be? Why do you think they are big enough
> to outweigh the altitude compensation and the gains in Isp at high
> altitude
> (where most of the acceleration occurs), not to mention the gains in
> thrust
> to mass ratio?
>
>          -p
>
>
> Mars or Bust!
> www.marssociety.com

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 16693 invoked from network); 30 Aug 2001 17:41:15 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 30 Aug 2001 17:41:15 -0000
Received: (qmail 18390 invoked by uid 50005); 30 Aug 2001 17:42:12 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpa with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.26875 secs); 30 Aug 2001 17:42:12 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 30 Aug 2001 17:42:11 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA14247; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 10:35:02 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 101656 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 17:34:56          +0000
Received: from Blastzone.com (consumersinterest.com [207.195.143.118] (may be          forged)) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA14229 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 10:34:55 -0700
Received: from deputydog [131.107.3.85] by Blastzone.com with ESMTP          (SMTPD32-6.04) id ACB42728008A; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 10:49:40 -0700
References:  <00c101c13164$258d6a80$c36122c0@cronos>              <00c501c13172$cbb42c60$1b30fea9@kristinscomp>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2462.0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <005201c1317a$25ad73a0$490fa8c0@redmond.corp.microsoft.com>
Date:         Thu, 30 Aug 2001 10:35:22 -0700
Reply-To: "Greg Deputy" <greg@BLASTZONE.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Greg Deputy" <greg@BLASTZONE.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] High Altitude Mach plus flights
Comments: To: Kristin & David Hall <thehalls@RIDGENET.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

> > 4. What high temperature epoxies are available on the market?
>
> Couldn't tell ya.  But let me tell a story and drive home a point:  Once
> upon a time myself and a couple other guys designed/built an experimental
> re-entry vehicle for the USAF.  Top speed (IIRC) was approximately Mach 8.
> We used an epoxy that was only rated to about 200 F.  How'd we do it?
Just
> slap some ablative coating on it!  It's cheap.  It's easy.  Why would you
do
> it any other way?
>

What constitutes an ablative coating?  Rubber?  Plaster? Epoxy?  Duct tape?

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 28093 invoked from network); 30 Aug 2001 17:43:50 -0000
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 30 Aug 2001 17:43:50 -0000
Received: (qmail 22564 invoked by uid 50005); 30 Aug 2001 17:44:16 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpe with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.28107 secs); 30 Aug 2001 17:44:16 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 30 Aug 2001 17:44:15 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA14283; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 10:39:20 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 101664 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 17:39:19          +0000
Received: from smtprelay3.abs.adelphia.net (smtprelay.abs.adelphia.net          [64.8.20.11]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA14269 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 10:39:18 -0700
Received: from jlgrady ([63.124.251.47]) by smtprelay3.abs.adelphia.net          (Netscape Messaging Server 4.15) with SMTP id GIW6CK03.T6Q for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 13:38:44 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook CWS, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <000801c1317b$0d6c62f0$0200a8c0@prestige.net>
Date:         Thu, 30 Aug 2001 13:41:51 -0400
Reply-To: "Jeff Grady" <jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jeff Grady" <jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] offtopic - glide to fall ratio
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010830030917.17330F-100000@spsystems.net>

I realize that. What makes them turn is wind being FORCED through them. The
same wing would be much more efficient for gliding if the engines were not
hanging out in the wind...I don't know if the engines disengage the
compressors during this event, but if not then that just adds to the drag. A
good layer of dirt and grime on the aircraft can affect fuel efficiency due
to the drag it can cause. Dead engines, feathered or not hanging out in the
wind does not help glide ratio.

JG

-----Original Message-----
From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@itc.uci.edu]On
Behalf Of Henry Spencer
Sent: Thursday, August 30, 2001 3:10 AM
To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
Subject: Re: [AR] offtopic - glide to fall ratio


On Wed, 29 Aug 2001, Jeff Grady wrote:
> Pull out the sailplane's dive brakes only a little bit and there goes your
> lift. Consider the engine pods on the airbus as dive brakes. The engine
pods
> (not to mention fan blades) would KILL any decent glide ratio that thing
> would otherwise have.

Note that the engines are not motionless flat plates -- the turbomachinery
will "windmill", approximately feathering itself.

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 3988 invoked from network); 30 Aug 2001 17:45:17 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 30 Aug 2001 17:45:17 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 32334 invoked by uid 50005); 30 Aug 2001 17:43:57 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.278527 secs); 30 Aug 2001 17:43:57 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 30 Aug 2001 17:43:56 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA14320; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 10:40:57 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 101671 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 17:40:55          +0000
Received: from smtp002pub.verizon.net (smtp002pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.181])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA14306 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 10:40:50 -0700
Received: from [63.27.96.42] (1Cust156.tnt2.san-bernardino.ca.da.uu.net          [63.27.97.156]) by smtp002pub.verizon.net  with ESMTP for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; id f7UHe5I24626 Thu, 30 Aug 2001 12:40:18          -0500 (CDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: GTE/01rocket@mail.gte.net
References: <EDB5E5136094D311BF1800508B12205E08D2910E@emss02m07.ems.lmco.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <a05100304b7b428ba8d2a@[63.27.96.42]>
Date:         Thu, 30 Aug 2001 10:40:02 -0700
Reply-To: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Aerospike; was Internal Shock Waves
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <EDB5E5136094D311BF1800508B12205E08D2910E@emss02m07.ems.lmco.com>

>Timothy Bendel wrote:


>Basically, the Aerospike has several inherent losses that traditional
>nozzles do not. First off, I do not think that they have higher thrust to
>weight ratios- critical for a booster engine. This is due to the fact that


First let me assume an aerospike is NOT used on a SSTO concept.
Aerospike advantage is from variable expansion ratio vs altitude.
Therefore it would be a perfect second stage.  I believe it has a
reasonable mass ratio if used in a fixed form factor.


>loss. Traditional bell nozzles do not have this. An Annular Aerospike
>doesn't have this either, but a Linear Aerospike does.


Use an annular aerospike to solve this AND reduce weight.


>
>Third; the idea that an Aerospike self compensates to optimum area ratio for
>all altitudes is a myth. There are two effects that the supporters do not
>tell you:
>a) just like a conventional nozzle, an Aerospike must be designed for an
>"optimum altitude" somewhere in the middle of the flight regime (say, for


Maybe so but it is optimum over a far wider range.


>As stated before, the thrust to weight ratio also seems to favor
>conventional nozzles. Conventional nozzles win with both efficiency and
>thrust to weight.
>QED.


I am a solids advocate for simplicity and for boosters one could even
use crappy hybrids or AN propellant rockets.  But 2nd stage rockets
have the largest changes in expansion ratio required.  A variable
exit nozzle on a solid or a non-linear aerospike or an aerospike like
liquid or solid nozzle might be a feature.

Jerry

--
Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
Opinion, the whole thing.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 2816 invoked from network); 30 Aug 2001 17:52:03 -0000
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 30 Aug 2001 17:52:03 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 11705 invoked by uid 50005); 30 Aug 2001 17:50:00 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpf with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 2.173235 secs); 30 Aug 2001 17:50:00 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 30 Aug 2001 17:49:57 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA14366; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 10:48:14 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 101663 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 17:48:13          +0000
Received: from snipe.mail.pas.earthlink.net (snipe.mail.pas.earthlink.net          [207.217.120.62]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA14259          for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 10:38:13 -0700
Received: from earthlink.net (dialup-209.247.140.238.Dial1.SanJose1.Level3.net          [209.247.140.238]) by snipe.mail.pas.earthlink.net (8.11.5/8.9.3)          with ESMTP id f7UHc7N28815; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 10:38:08 -0700 (PDT)
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.75 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.16-22 i686)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <EDB5E5136094D311BF1800508B12205E08D2910E@emss02m07.ems.lmco.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B8E7A50.17D1E4D6@earthlink.net>
Date:         Thu, 30 Aug 2001 10:39:28 -0700
Reply-To: "David Weinshenker" <daze39@EARTHLINK.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "David Weinshenker" <daze39@EARTHLINK.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Aerospike; was Internal Shock Waves
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

"Bendel, Timothy B" wrote:
> As stated before, the thrust to weight ratio also seems to favor
> conventional nozzles. Conventional nozzles win with both efficiency and
> thrust to weight.

So your suggestion for an engine to operate over a wide pressure range
(SSTO systems, for example) would be to simply follow the shuttle approach:
use a very high chamber pressure so that a single nozzle configuration
can operate effectively over the desired exit range?

-dave w

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 18192 invoked from network); 30 Aug 2001 18:09:58 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 30 Aug 2001 18:09:58 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: (qmail 14728 invoked by uid 50005); 30 Aug 2001 18:08:38 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.188089 secs); 30 Aug 2001 18:08:38 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 30 Aug 2001 18:08:37 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA14465; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 11:03:43 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 101696 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 18:03:42          +0000
Received: from VOLSB01.libertyville.com          (sdsl-216-36-100-106.dsl.chi.megapath.net [66.80.36.106] (may be          forged)) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA14450 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 11:03:41 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Message-ID:  <8241D5C473414F48B12A866EBBBF182A90F3@VOLSB01.libertyville.com>
Date:         Thu, 30 Aug 2001 13:02:24 -0500
Reply-To: "Ed Dewey" <edewey@LIBERTYVILLE.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Ed Dewey" <edewey@LIBERTYVILLE.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] High Altitude Mach plus flights
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

> > 4. What high temperature epoxies are available on the market?


This is the only one I am aware of.  You can find it at:
http://www.shadowaero.com/

 500 DEGREE STABLE EPOXY KIT

2 Fluid oz. high temp epoxy kit with pre-measured hardener. One time mix and
use only. 16.00/kit or 1oz. kit for 8.50     NOTE: NO INTERNATIONAL ORDERS,
THIS MATERIAL REQUIRES HAZMAT SHIPPING.

Ed

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 25291 invoked from network); 30 Aug 2001 18:11:39 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 30 Aug 2001 18:11:39 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 15867 invoked by uid 50005); 30 Aug 2001 18:10:19 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.194707 secs); 30 Aug 2001 18:10:19 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 30 Aug 2001 18:10:18 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA14491; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 11:06:28 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 101703 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 18:06:27          +0000
Received: from femail28.sdc1.sfba.home.com (imail@femail28.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.254.60.18]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA14467          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 11:03:52 -0700
Received: from c1649002-a.earthlink.net ([24.20.95.67]) by          femail28.sdc1.sfba.home.com (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20          201-229-121-120-20010223) with ESMTP id          <20010830180350.FYGB11524.femail28.sdc1.sfba.home.com@c1649002-a.earthlink.net>; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 11:03:50          -0700
X-Sender: forkbomb@mail.earthlink.net
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.0.2
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <5.0.2.1.0.20010830100558.00ae46e0@mail.earthlink.net>
Date:         Thu, 30 Aug 2001 11:03:49 -0700
Reply-To: "Pierce Nichols" <forkbomb@EARTHLINK.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Pierce Nichols" <forkbomb@EARTHLINK.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Aerospike; was Internal Shock Waves
Comments: To: "Bendel, Timothy B" <timothy.b.bendel@LMCO.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <EDB5E5136094D311BF1800508B12205E08D2910E@emss02m07.ems.lmc o.com>

At 11:01 AM 8/30/2001 -0600, Bendel, Timothy B wrote:
>Basically, the Aerospike has several inherent losses that traditional
>nozzles do not. First off, I do not think that they have higher thrust to
>weight ratios- critical for a booster engine. This is due to the fact that
>the structure of an Aerospike is under compressive forces from the exhaust,
>whereas a traditional bell nozzle has tension (hoop) stresses. Thus, a bell
>nozzle can be made of thin stock. In fact, there have been experimental
>inflatable nozzles deployed in space that work fine.


         A traditional bell nozzle *IS* under compressive stress -- it has
to be to transmit the propulsive forces to the spacecraft body. An
inflatable structure can take compressive stress if properly designed for
it -- think of the original Atlas, which was supported by its internal
pressure. An aerospike's nozzle also can be readily braced against the
pressure loads on it, in ways that a traditional nozzle simply cannot. In
any case, the aerospike is shorter for a given expansion ratio, and forms a
more compact package for integration, as the pumps and other operating
equipment can be mounted inside the spike. Aerospike also do not require
gimbal hardware, since they vector with differential thrust.


>Second, a Linear Aerospike has ends. The high-pressure exhaust can spill
>over these edges much like the high-pressure air under a wing spills over
>the tip of the wing and creates a wing-tip vortex. This induces a vortex
>loss. Traditional bell nozzles do not have this. An Annular Aerospike
>doesn't have this either, but a Linear Aerospike does.


         The vortexes off the tips of a wing are driven by the pressure
difference between air on the upper and lower surface of the wing. No
pressure difference, no vortex. There are end losses, but those can be
controlled.


>Third; the idea that an Aerospike self compensates to optimum area ratio for
>all altitudes is a myth. There are two effects that the supporters do not
>tell you:
>a) just like a conventional nozzle, an Aerospike must be designed for an
>"optimum altitude" somewhere in the middle of the flight regime (say, for
>example, 50k feet) For a conventional nozzle, the nozzle is said to be
>over-expanded when it operates below this altitude and under-expanded when
>it operates above this altitude. For an Aerospike, the spike is too long
>when operated under the "optimum" altitude (thereby inducing drag losses)
>and too short when operated above this altitude (incurring expansion wave
>losses just like a conventional nozzle).


         You can place that optimum altitude almost as high as you like in
an aerospike, because you don't have flow separation problems.


>b) the "optimum expansion" myth revolves around the idea that the
>slip-stream will adjust to compensate for the change in atmospheric pressure
>as the vehicle flies. Thus, the "exit area" will expand as the rocket
>ascends. This is true, but the rocket does it inefficiently. If you
>visualize the Aerospike as a bell nozzle inside-out:
>http://www.boeing.com/space/rdyne/x33/aerospik/basics/convert.htm
>you get an idea of the aerospike's effective "exit area". Now, with this
>analogy in mind, if you wanted to increase the area ratio of a conventional
>nozzle, you would lengthen it so as to increase it's exit ratio. But the
>Aerospike doesn't *lengthen*!


         You're forgetting about the re-circulation region under the base
of the spike. That does change shape and length with different external
atmospheric conditions, even in the closed condition. Bleeding a small
amount of gas, say turbine exhaust, into this region increases the
efficiency of the whole assemblage dramatically.


>To back all this up, consider the "new high-performance" Linear Aerospike
>that Boeing was to have made for Venture Star (not the little one based on
>the J-2, the big high-pressure orbital-version):
>http://www.boeing.com/defense-space/space/propul/XRS2200.html
>Note the Isp:
>Sea level: 339 sec
>Vacuum: 436.5 sec
>
>Now look up the SSME:
>http://www.astronautix.com/engines/ssme.htm
>Sea level: 363 sec
>Vacuum: 453 sec


         You are comparing apples and oranges -- the XRS-2200's lower Isp
has a full throttle chamber pressure is only 857 psia... as opposed for
3000 psia for the SSME. The mixture ratios are also different. I'm not
really up to calculating what the Isp of the SSME would be if you cut the
chamber pressure by a factor of three, but i suspect the answer is a
substantially less than 430 sec of vacuum Isp. And you couldn't safely run
the resulting engine at sea level.

         -p


Mars or Bust!
www.marssociety.com

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 5483 invoked from network); 30 Aug 2001 18:20:54 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 30 Aug 2001 18:20:54 -0000
Received: (qmail 9516 invoked by uid 50005); 30 Aug 2001 18:21:52 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpb with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.188733 secs); 30 Aug 2001 18:21:52 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 30 Aug 2001 18:21:52 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA15072; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 11:14:09 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 101862 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 18:14:07          +0000
Received: from spock.alohanet.com (spock.alohanet.com [209.31.4.252]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA15058 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 11:14:07 -0700
Received: from NATE2 (NATE2.alohanet.com [192.168.233.104]) by          spock.alohanet.com (Post.Office MTA v3.5.2 release 221 ID#          0-55447U100L2S100V35) with SMTP id com for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>;          Thu, 30 Aug 2001 11:12:54 -0700
References:  <8241D5C473414F48B12A866EBBBF182A90F3@VOLSB01.libertyville.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <018701c13180$1aff2bf0$68e9a8c0@NATE2>
Date:         Thu, 30 Aug 2001 11:18:02 -0700
Reply-To: "Nathan Hays" <nhays@ALOHANET.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Nathan Hays" <nhays@ALOHANET.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] High Altitude Mach plus flights
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

You can also try:

http://www.acp-composites.com/

They sell it by the quart/half gallon.  Works just like any other epoxy.

Note:  For maximum temperature performance, any epoxy needs to be cured at
an elevated temperature.  I found out the hard way when a rock hard 8 foot
by 6 inch honeycomb core tube I made got a dent in it from resting on a bar
in the blackrock sun.  I now have an oven to cure such a beast....

- Nate


----- Original Message -----
From: "Ed Dewey" <edewey@LIBERTYVILLE.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Thursday, August 30, 2001 11:02 AM
Subject: Re: [AR] High Altitude Mach plus flights


> > > 4. What high temperature epoxies are available on the market?
>
>
> This is the only one I am aware of.  You can find it at:
> http://www.shadowaero.com/
>
>  500 DEGREE STABLE EPOXY KIT
>
> 2 Fluid oz. high temp epoxy kit with pre-measured hardener. One time mix
and
> use only. 16.00/kit or 1oz. kit for 8.50     NOTE: NO INTERNATIONAL
ORDERS,
> THIS MATERIAL REQUIRES HAZMAT SHIPPING.
>
> Ed
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 9992 invoked from network); 30 Aug 2001 18:21:59 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 30 Aug 2001 18:21:59 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 10154 invoked by uid 50005); 30 Aug 2001 18:22:58 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpb with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.31849 secs); 30 Aug 2001 18:22:58 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 30 Aug 2001 18:22:58 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA15131; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 11:17:51 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 101710 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 18:17:50          +0000
Received: from swan.mail.pas.earthlink.net (swan.mail.pas.earthlink.net          [207.217.120.123]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id          LAA14494 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 11:07:38 -0700
Received: from earthlink.net (dialup-209.247.140.238.Dial1.SanJose1.Level3.net          [209.247.140.238]) by swan.mail.pas.earthlink.net (EL-8_9_3_3/8.9.3)          with ESMTP id LAA12326; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 11:07:36 -0700 (PDT)
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.75 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.16-22 i686)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <00c101c13164$258d6a80$c36122c0@cronos>            <00c501c13172$cbb42c60$1b30fea9@kristinscomp>            <005201c1317a$25ad73a0$490fa8c0@redmond.corp.microsoft.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B8E8139.2824E87F@earthlink.net>
Date:         Thu, 30 Aug 2001 11:08:57 -0700
Reply-To: "David Weinshenker" <daze39@EARTHLINK.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "David Weinshenker" <daze39@EARTHLINK.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] High Altitude Mach plus flights
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Greg Deputy wrote:
>
> > > 4. What high temperature epoxies are available on the market?

www.shadowaero.com has some black high-temp (500F rated IIRC) epoxy - it's
expensive ($16/2 oz.) and slow-curing, but seems to live up to its temperature
resistance claims... using it to make a layup of 0.5oz nonwoven fabric,
I've been able to make a facing laminate for wood and other surfaces that
seems to resist BP blast and exhaust backsplash without erosion.

> >
> > Couldn't tell ya.  But let me tell a story and drive home a point:  Once
> > upon a time myself and a couple other guys designed/built an experimental
> > re-entry vehicle for the USAF.  Top speed (IIRC) was approximately Mach 8.
> > We used an epoxy that was only rated to about 200 F.  How'd we do it?
> Just
> > slap some ablative coating on it!  It's cheap.  It's easy.  Why would you
> do
> > it any other way?
> >
>
> What constitutes an ablative coating?  Rubber?  Plaster? Epoxy?  Duct tape?

Phenolic/paper (like PML coupler tubing) might actually work... I caught some
exhaust plume heat damage on the tail of KISS-beta the first time I flew it on
a 75mm motor (nozzle recessed into overly deep tail shroud...) The shroud
construction was phenolic coupler tubing lined with glass cloth and epoxy...
the epoxy was gon, the cloth was flexible, and the surface of the phenolic
was charred and slightly blistered... but the damage to the phenolic turned
out to be perfectly superficial, and the heat effects did not appear to extend
past about 0.5mm into the surface.

Wasn't something similar used for Mercury heat shields, and the chamber linings
for the many small maneuvering engines on Gemini?

-dave w

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 21985 invoked from network); 30 Aug 2001 18:24:43 -0000
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 30 Aug 2001 18:24:43 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 2303 invoked by uid 50005); 30 Aug 2001 18:25:09 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpe with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.464033 secs); 30 Aug 2001 18:25:09 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 30 Aug 2001 18:25:07 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA15190; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 11:20:49 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 101711 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 18:20:47          +0000
Received: from swan.mail.pas.earthlink.net (swan.mail.pas.earthlink.net          [207.217.120.123]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id          LAA14530 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 11:10:46 -0700
Received: from earthlink.net (dialup-209.247.140.238.Dial1.SanJose1.Level3.net          [209.247.140.238]) by swan.mail.pas.earthlink.net (EL-8_9_3_3/8.9.3)          with ESMTP id LAA29470; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 11:10:45 -0700 (PDT)
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.75 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.16-22 i686)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <00c101c13164$258d6a80$c36122c0@cronos>            <00c501c13172$cbb42c60$1b30fea9@kristinscomp>            <005201c1317a$25ad73a0$490fa8c0@redmond.corp.microsoft.com>            <3B8E8139.2824E87F@earthlink.net>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B8E81F9.6B94ED7E@earthlink.net>
Date:         Thu, 30 Aug 2001 11:12:09 -0700
Reply-To: "David Weinshenker" <daze39@EARTHLINK.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "David Weinshenker" <daze39@EARTHLINK.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] High Altitude Mach plus flights
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

David Weinshenker wrote:
> layup of 0.5oz nonwoven fabric,

Oops, that was vague - nonwoven carbon fabric ('mat" or "tissue").

-dw

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 12617 invoked from network); 30 Aug 2001 19:05:08 -0000
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 30 Aug 2001 19:05:08 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 31536 invoked by uid 50005); 30 Aug 2001 19:03:09 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpf with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.287514 secs); 30 Aug 2001 19:03:09 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 30 Aug 2001 19:03:08 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA15731; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 12:00:59 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 101988 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 19:00:58          +0000
Received: from mailgw1a.lmco.com (mailgw1a.lmco.com [192.31.106.7]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA15717 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 12:00:57 -0700
Received: from emss02g01.ems.lmco.com (relay2.ems.lmco.com [166.29.2.54]) by          mailgw1a.lmco.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id NAA24985 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 13:00:56 -0600 (MDT)
Received: from CONVERSION-DAEMON by lmco.com (PMDF V5.2-33 #38887) id          <0GIW00A01A50CO@lmco.com> for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 30 Aug 2001          13:00:53 -0600 (MDT)
Received: from emss02i00.ems.lmco.com ([166.29.2.48]) by lmco.com (PMDF V5.2-33          #38887) with ESMTP id <0GIW009RWA4E8W@lmco.com> for          AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 13:00:18 -0600 (MDT)
Received: by emss02i00.ems.lmco.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) id          <R59499Y3>; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 13:01:26 -0600
Content-return: allowed
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19)
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <EDB5E5136094D311BF1800508B12205E08D29110@emss02m07.ems.lmco.com>
Date:         Thu, 30 Aug 2001 13:01:21 -0600
Reply-To: "Bendel, Timothy B" <timothy.b.bendel@LMCO.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Bendel, Timothy B" <timothy.b.bendel@LMCO.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Aerospike; was Internal Shock Waves
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

>Use an annular aerospike to solve this AND reduce weight.

I have yet to see a Aerospike of any variety that has a better thrust to
weight ratio than a conventional engine. Remember to compare apples to
apples: if the aeorspike does not include gimballing hydrauics due to
differential throttling, than you can't include this weight for a
conventional engine. The NK-33 used differential throttling; it's thrust to
weight is 125.

        >I am a solids advocate for simplicity and for boosters one could
even
        use crappy hybrids or AN propellant rockets.  But 2nd stage rockets
        have the largest changes in expansion ratio required.  A variable
        exit nozzle on a solid or a non-linear aerospike or an aerospike
like
        liquid or solid nozzle might be a feature.<

        I agree with solids being good boosters. I am still unconvinced that
an Aerospike of any variety offers any advantage over similar-technology
conventional nozzles.

        Timothy Bendel




> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jerry Irvine [SMTP:01rocket@GTE.NET]
> Sent: Thursday, August 30, 2001 11:40 AM
> To:   AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
> Subject:      Re: [AR] Aerospike; was Internal Shock Waves
>
> >Timothy Bendel wrote:
>
>
> >Basically, the Aerospike has several inherent losses that traditional
> >nozzles do not. First off, I do not think that they have higher thrust to
> >weight ratios- critical for a booster engine. This is due to the fact
> that
>
>
> First let me assume an aerospike is NOT used on a SSTO concept.
> Aerospike advantage is from variable expansion ratio vs altitude.
> Therefore it would be a perfect second stage.  I believe it has a
> reasonable mass ratio if used in a fixed form factor.
>
>
> >loss. Traditional bell nozzles do not have this. An Annular Aerospike
> >doesn't have this either, but a Linear Aerospike does.
>
>
> Use an annular aerospike to solve this AND reduce weight.
>
>
> >
> >Third; the idea that an Aerospike self compensates to optimum area ratio
> for
> >all altitudes is a myth. There are two effects that the supporters do not
> >tell you:
> >a) just like a conventional nozzle, an Aerospike must be designed for an
> >"optimum altitude" somewhere in the middle of the flight regime (say, for
>
>
> Maybe so but it is optimum over a far wider range.
>
>
> >As stated before, the thrust to weight ratio also seems to favor
> >conventional nozzles. Conventional nozzles win with both efficiency and
> >thrust to weight.
> >QED.
>
>
> I am a solids advocate for simplicity and for boosters one could even
> use crappy hybrids or AN propellant rockets.  But 2nd stage rockets
> have the largest changes in expansion ratio required.  A variable
> exit nozzle on a solid or a non-linear aerospike or an aerospike like
> liquid or solid nozzle might be a feature.
>
> Jerry
>
> --
> Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
> Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
> Opinion, the whole thing.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 16556 invoked from network); 30 Aug 2001 19:06:04 -0000
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 30 Aug 2001 19:06:04 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 360 invoked by uid 50005); 30 Aug 2001 19:04:05 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpf with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 3.174699 secs); 30 Aug 2001 19:04:05 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 30 Aug 2001 19:03:59 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA15673; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 11:57:35 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 101981 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 18:57:31          +0000
Received: from mailgw1a.lmco.com (mailgw1a.lmco.com [192.31.106.7]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA15659 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 11:57:30 -0700
Received: from emss02g01.ems.lmco.com (relay2.ems.lmco.com [166.29.2.54]) by          mailgw1a.lmco.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id MAA10927 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 12:57:29 -0600 (MDT)
Received: from CONVERSION-DAEMON by lmco.com (PMDF V5.2-33 #38887) id          <0GIW009019ZP7I@lmco.com> for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 30 Aug 2001          12:57:28 -0600 (MDT)
Received: from emss02i00.ems.lmco.com ([166.29.2.48]) by lmco.com (PMDF V5.2-33          #38887) with ESMTP id <0GIW00KVW9V1EK@lmco.com> for          AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 12:54:37 -0600 (MDT)
Received: by emss02i00.ems.lmco.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) id          <R59499S9>; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 12:55:49 -0600
Content-return: allowed
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19)
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <EDB5E5136094D311BF1800508B12205E08D2910F@emss02m07.ems.lmco.com>
Date:         Thu, 30 Aug 2001 12:55:42 -0600
Reply-To: "Bendel, Timothy B" <timothy.b.bendel@LMCO.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Bendel, Timothy B" <timothy.b.bendel@LMCO.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Aerospike; was Internal Shock Waves
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

        >So your suggestion for an engine to operate over a wide pressure
range
        >(SSTO systems, for example) would be to simply follow the shuttle
approach:
        >use a very high chamber pressure so that a single nozzle
configuration
        >can operate effectively over the desired exit range?

        Yes. With higher chamber pressures sea-level pressures look more and
more like a vacuum (14.7 psi is a small fraction of 3500 psi, wheras 14.7
psi is a more significant fraction of say, 850 psi). It is interesting to
note that this is the direction the Russians went in the late 60's;
significantly higher chamber pressures. Now we are buying engines from them.
Aside from being cheaper, they are simply better performers.

        Timothy Bendel


> -----Original Message-----
> From: David Weinshenker [SMTP:daze39@EARTHLINK.NET]
> Sent: Thursday, August 30, 2001 11:39 AM
> To:   AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
> Subject:      Re: [AR] Aerospike; was Internal Shock Waves
>
> "Bendel, Timothy B" wrote:
> > As stated before, the thrust to weight ratio also seems to favor
> > conventional nozzles. Conventional nozzles win with both efficiency and
> > thrust to weight.
>
>
> -dave w

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 23836 invoked from network); 30 Aug 2001 19:14:25 -0000
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 30 Aug 2001 19:14:25 -0000
Received: (qmail 29987 invoked by uid 50005); 30 Aug 2001 19:14:50 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpe with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.192004 secs); 30 Aug 2001 19:14:50 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 30 Aug 2001 19:14:50 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA15985; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 12:10:50 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 102013 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 19:10:49          +0000
Received: from roll.akcecc.kiev.ua (roll.akcecc.kiev.ua [193.227.206.34]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA15938 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 12:09:08 -0700
Received: from serge (pool-112.akcecc.kiev.ua [193.227.207.112] (may be          forged)) by roll.akcecc.kiev.ua (8.10.2/8.10.2) with SMTP id          f7UJ91608389 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 22:09:01          +0300
References:  <F218KhqzSPCHTEdTC6700015395@hotmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="koi8-r"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2417.2000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <013e01c1317e$a0066ae0$70cfe3c1@serge>
Date:         Thu, 30 Aug 2001 21:43:27 +0400
Reply-To: "Serge Pipko" <spas@AKCECC.KIEV.UA>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Serge Pipko" <spas@AKCECC.KIEV.UA>
Subject:      Re: [AR] AN melt
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

John Dom wrote:

> So SP (must still study his text) proved sugar dissolves in molten AN  to
> produce more homogenous propellant blocks than the candy frying pan can
with
> KN powder technique.

Sorry, John, but it is not sugar but sorbitol dissolves. Sugar decomposes
very quickly.

> However the bottom line of all this work is: do such AN/candy propellant
> blocks work as good as the KN ones or don't they? In the latter case all
the
> eutectics determination work are unfortunately not helpful. Were results
so
> disappointing research was stopped?

I don't stop research, but it proceeds very slowly because I am very busy at
work. I continue investigations of compartibilities of different fuels and
catalists with molten AN and its eutectics. Here are some new results.

- Fumed silica don't decompose molten AN but catalises propellant's
combustion.
- Some kinds of activated charcoal also don't decompose molten AN but
catalises propellant's combustion. My first experiments was with activated
charcoal from my chemlab store. But lately I have found that another kind of
activated charcoal, which I bought in drugstore, does not induce AN
decomposition at 160-170 deg C.
- Cu salts induce self-ignition of AN-sorbitol melt.
- Addition of NaCl or KCl don't noticeably change burn rate despite
literature data about chloride anion' catalisis.


> Are these data online? In particular, I'like to know the viscosity of
liquid
> AN at, say 180C. LPAN seems far fetched as a rocket oxidizer liquid at a
> first glance; 90-100 % HP does not require heating to 170C...

Molten AN and its eutectics are very runny liquids but obviously have high
surface tension.

Serge

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 28945 invoked from network); 30 Aug 2001 19:15:44 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 30 Aug 2001 19:15:44 -0000
Received: (qmail 27097 invoked by uid 50005); 30 Aug 2001 19:14:23 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.312123 secs); 30 Aug 2001 19:14:23 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 30 Aug 2001 19:14:23 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA15957; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 12:09:25 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 102006 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 19:09:12          +0000
Received: from roll.akcecc.kiev.ua (roll.akcecc.kiev.ua [193.227.206.34]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA15937 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 12:09:08 -0700
Received: from serge (pool-112.akcecc.kiev.ua [193.227.207.112] (may be          forged)) by roll.akcecc.kiev.ua (8.10.2/8.10.2) with SMTP id          f7UJ92608395 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 22:09:02          +0300
References:  <84.1a88464f.28bedbda@aol.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2417.2000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <013f01c1317e$a0b76b60$70cfe3c1@serge>
Date:         Thu, 30 Aug 2001 22:04:33 +0400
Reply-To: "Serge Pipko" <spas@AKCECC.KIEV.UA>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Serge Pipko" <spas@AKCECC.KIEV.UA>
Subject:      Re: [AR] AN melt
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Richard Nakka wrote:

>   <<Would ammonium dichromate or
>  potassium dichromate, two burn rate catalysts for AN previously
mentioned,
>  help molten AN to decompose or are they only useful as solid propellant
>  additives?>>
>
> These two compounds are burn rate catalysts that increase the combustion
rate
> of solid propellants. Since the physical processes relating to combustion
> rate are completely different for solids and liquids, I don't expect these
> would be of any use.

Dichromate anion specifically catalyses AN decomposition, therefore
combinations of molten AN and solution of dichromate in some fuels may be
even hypergolic. In my hands ( not exactly in hands, but behind
blastshield ) on addition of sorbitol to the solution of CuCl2 in molten AN
self-ignition happened.

Serge

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 6894 invoked from network); 30 Aug 2001 19:17:30 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 30 Aug 2001 19:17:30 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 28407 invoked by uid 50005); 30 Aug 2001 19:16:10 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.198284 secs); 30 Aug 2001 19:16:10 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 30 Aug 2001 19:16:09 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA16021; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 12:13:35 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 102027 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 19:13:33          +0000
Received: from femail37.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail37.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.254.60.31]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA15965          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 12:10:07 -0700
Received: from c1649002-a.earthlink.net ([24.20.95.67]) by          femail37.sdc1.sfba.home.com (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20          201-229-121-120-20010223) with ESMTP id          <20010830191000.JQSA593.femail37.sdc1.sfba.home.com@c1649002-a.earthlink.net>; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 12:10:00          -0700
X-Sender: forkbomb@mail.earthlink.net
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.0.2
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <5.0.2.1.0.20010830120850.03063c70@mail.earthlink.net>
Date:         Thu, 30 Aug 2001 12:09:59 -0700
Reply-To: "Pierce Nichols" <forkbomb@EARTHLINK.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Pierce Nichols" <forkbomb@EARTHLINK.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Aerospike; was Internal Shock Waves
Comments: To: "Bendel, Timothy B" <timothy.b.bendel@LMCO.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <EDB5E5136094D311BF1800508B12205E08D29110@emss02m07.ems.lmc o.com>

At 01:01 PM 8/30/2001 -0600, Bendel, Timothy B wrote:
> >Use an annular aerospike to solve this AND reduce weight.
>
>I have yet to see a Aerospike of any variety that has a better thrust to
>weight ratio than a conventional engine. Remember to compare apples to
>apples: if the aeorspike does not include gimballing hydrauics due to
>differential throttling, than you can't include this weight for a
>conventional engine.


         Bullshit -- the differential throttling is a *replacement* for the
gimballing hydraulics and mounting points.

         -p


Mars or Bust!
www.marssociety.com

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 6962 invoked from network); 30 Aug 2001 19:17:31 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 30 Aug 2001 19:17:31 -0000
Received: (qmail 28417 invoked by uid 50005); 30 Aug 2001 19:16:11 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.16763 secs); 30 Aug 2001 19:16:11 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 30 Aug 2001 19:16:10 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA16003; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 12:12:12 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 102020 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 19:12:11          +0000
Received: from roll.akcecc.kiev.ua (roll.akcecc.kiev.ua [193.227.206.34]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA15939 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 12:09:09 -0700
Received: from serge (pool-112.akcecc.kiev.ua [193.227.207.112] (may be          forged)) by roll.akcecc.kiev.ua (8.10.2/8.10.2) with SMTP id          f7UJ90608386 for <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 22:09:00          +0300
References: <7c.1aa45f1f.28bd5ec4@aol.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2417.2000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <013d01c1317e$9f56f100$70cfe3c1@serge>
Date:         Thu, 30 Aug 2001 20:42:13 +0400
Reply-To: "Serge Pipko" <spas@AKCECC.KIEV.UA>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Serge Pipko" <spas@AKCECC.KIEV.UA>
Subject:      Re: [AR] AN eutectics experiments
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Sociald84@aol.com   wrote:

> One thing I noticed
> however was that the fuel content seemed a little bit low. I know that you
> did this two years ago but have you tried again with a lower O/F ratio in
the
> region of maybee 70/30?

In all cases I have prepared stochiometric mixtures, as I suppose that sort
of O/F ratio should give maximum burn rate ( or even if some burn rate  ;^))
.

> Have you tried adding starch to sucrose to see if
> it suppresses the reaction there?

No, but I assume it'll not help, all the more starch is not completely
stable itself, it begin to decompose after 10-15 min at 160-165 deg C.

Serge

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 15536 invoked from network); 30 Aug 2001 19:19:31 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 30 Aug 2001 19:19:31 -0000
Received: (qmail 15225 invoked by uid 50005); 30 Aug 2001 19:18:46 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.17529 secs); 30 Aug 2001 19:18:46 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 30 Aug 2001 19:18:45 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA16090; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 12:15:25 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 102050 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 19:15:24          +0000
Received: from castor.ridgenet.net (IDENT:root@castor.ridgenet.net          [199.120.150.29]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA16076          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 12:15:24 -0700
Received: from kristinscomp (pm002.ridgenet.net [204.154.246.2]) by          castor.ridgenet.net (8.11.0/8.11.0) with SMTP id f7UJ78S22559; Thu,          30 Aug 2001 12:07:08 -0700
References:  <00c101c13164$258d6a80$c36122c0@cronos>                         <00c501c13172$cbb42c60$1b30fea9@kristinscomp>              <005201c1317a$25ad73a0$490fa8c0@redmond.corp.microsoft.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <004001c13189$5b98b6a0$1b30fea9@kristinscomp>
Date:         Thu, 30 Aug 2001 12:24:14 -0700
Reply-To: "Kristin & David Hall" <thehalls@RIDGENET.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Kristin & David Hall" <thehalls@RIDGENET.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] High Altitude Mach plus flights
Comments: To: Greg Deputy <greg@BLASTZONE.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

> > slap some ablative coating on it!  It's cheap.  It's easy.  Why would
you

> What constitutes an ablative coating?  Rubber?  Plaster? Epoxy?  Duct
tape?

Whatever works.  My personal experience is with Dow Corning 3-6077.
Absolutely marvelous stuff.  Easy to work with.  Reasonably cheap.  Nice
pretty white color (for those who are into asthetics).  Designed to protect
the Shuttle Launch Pad.

http://www.dowcorning.thomasregister.com/olc/dowcorning/aero.htm
 http://map3.msfc.nasa.gov/mapweb/tr/tr3_60384.html

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 29695 invoked from network); 30 Aug 2001 19:29:17 -0000
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 30 Aug 2001 19:29:17 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 24706 invoked by uid 50005); 30 Aug 2001 19:29:41 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpe with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 3.149115 secs); 30 Aug 2001 19:29:41 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 30 Aug 2001 19:29:36 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA16196; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 12:24:56 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 102077 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 19:24:53          +0000
Received: from mailgw1a.lmco.com (mailgw1a.lmco.com [192.31.106.7]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA16182 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 12:24:53 -0700
Received: from emss02g01.ems.lmco.com (relay2.ems.lmco.com [166.29.2.54]) by          mailgw1a.lmco.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id NAA23280 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 13:24:52 -0600 (MDT)
Received: from CONVERSION-DAEMON by lmco.com (PMDF V5.2-33 #38887) id          <0GIW00H01B30KJ@lmco.com> for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 30 Aug 2001          13:24:50 -0600 (MDT)
Received: from emss02i00.ems.lmco.com ([166.29.2.48]) by lmco.com (PMDF V5.2-33          #38887) with ESMTP id <0GIW00KNPB6XEK@lmco.com> for          AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 13:23:21 -0600 (MDT)
Received: by emss02i00.ems.lmco.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) id          <R59490RY>; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 13:24:33 -0600
Content-return: allowed
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19)
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <EDB5E5136094D311BF1800508B12205E08D29111@emss02m07.ems.lmco.com>
Date:         Thu, 30 Aug 2001 13:24:28 -0600
Reply-To: "Bendel, Timothy B" <timothy.b.bendel@LMCO.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Bendel, Timothy B" <timothy.b.bendel@LMCO.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Aerospike; was Internal Shock Waves
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

        Pierce Nichols wrote:

        >An inflatable structure can take compressive stress if properly
designed for
        >it -- think of the original Atlas, which was supported by its
internal
        >pressure. An aerospike's nozzle also can be readily braced against
the
   >pressure loads on it, in ways that a traditional nozzle simply cannot.

Are you advocating sealing and pressurizing the boattail section of an
Aerospike? With all the pumps and pipes running in and out? That I'd like to
see! Rocketdyne's Aerospike uses mechanical braces- not new, not light.



>Aerospike also do not require
>gimbal hardware, since they vector with differential thrust.

Conventionally nozzled engines do not require gimbals either. The Russian
NK-33 is a prime example. When comparing apples to apples (no gimbal
aerospike vs. no gimbal conventional engines) conventional engines still
win. The NK-33 has a thrust to weight of 125! I have yet to see _any_
aerospike close to that.

        >The vortexes off the tips of a wing are driven by the pressure
        >difference between air on the upper and lower surface of the wing.
No
        >pressure difference, no vortex. There are end losses, but those can
be
        >controlled.

But there is a pressure difference! The Aerospike exhaust is considerable
higher than atmospheric pressure (and a vacuum) along the "ramp", so it will
spill over the edges. This vortex cannot "be controlled" in the sense that
you cannot reduce it's drag. It is exactly analogous to a wing's lift,
vortex drag is directly associated with lift (pressure differential).


         >You're forgetting about the re-circulation region under the base
        >of the spike. That does change shape and length with different
external
        >atmospheric conditions, even in the closed condition. Bleeding a
small
        >amount of gas, say turbine exhaust, into this region increases the
        >efficiency of the whole assemblage dramatically.

If you pump gas generator exhaust into this region, then you are forced into
using a gas-generator cycle. This is inherently less efficient than a
pre-burner cycle, which suits conventional nozzles quite well.

        >You are comparing apples and oranges -- the XRS-2200's lower Isp
        >has a full throttle chamber pressure is only 857 psia... as opposed
for
        >3000 psia for the SSME. The mixture ratios are also different. I'm
not
        >really up to calculating what the Isp of the SSME would be if you
cut the
        >chamber pressure by a factor of three, but I suspect the answer is
a
        >substantially less than 430 sec of vacuum Isp. And you couldn't
safely run
        >the resulting engine at sea level.

Note that I WAS comparing apples to apples: I did not cite the XRS-2200, I
cited numbers from the RS-2200. (this is my fault, I put in the wrong link.
Here is the correct link:)
http://www.boeing.com/defense-space/space/propul/RS2200.html
 It does NOT have a chamber pressure of only 857 psi, it operates at 2250
psi. Two high-pressure engines: one an Aerospike, the other a conventional
nozzle. Aerospike loses on both thrust to weight and Isp.

Timothy Bendel

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Pierce Nichols [SMTP:forkbomb@EARTHLINK.NET]
> Sent: Thursday, August 30, 2001 12:04 PM
> To:   AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
> Subject:      Re: [AR] Aerospike; was Internal Shock Waves
>
> At 11:01 AM 8/30/2001 -0600, Bendel, Timothy B wrote:
> >Basically, the Aerospike has several inherent losses that traditional
> >nozzles do not. First off, I do not think that they have higher thrust to
> >weight ratios- critical for a booster engine. This is due to the fact
> that
> >the structure of an Aerospike is under compressive forces from the
> exhaust,
> >whereas a traditional bell nozzle has tension (hoop) stresses. Thus, a
> bell
> >nozzle can be made of thin stock. In fact, there have been experimental
> >inflatable nozzles deployed in space that work fine.
>
>
>          A traditional bell nozzle *IS* under compressive stress -- it has
> to be to transmit the propulsive forces to the spacecraft body. An
> inflatable structure can take compressive stress if properly designed for
> it -- think of the original Atlas, which was supported by its internal
> pressure. An aerospike's nozzle also can be readily braced against the
> pressure loads on it, in ways that a traditional nozzle simply cannot. In
> any case, the aerospike is shorter for a given expansion ratio, and forms
> a
> more compact package for integration, as the pumps and other operating
> equipment can be mounted inside the spike. Aerospike also do not require
> gimbal hardware, since they vector with differential thrust.
>
>
> >Second, a Linear Aerospike has ends. The high-pressure exhaust can spill
> >over these edges much like the high-pressure air under a wing spills over
> >the tip of the wing and creates a wing-tip vortex. This induces a vortex
> >loss. Traditional bell nozzles do not have this. An Annular Aerospike
> >doesn't have this either, but a Linear Aerospike does.
>
>
>          The vortexes off the tips of a wing are driven by the pressure
> difference between air on the upper and lower surface of the wing. No
> pressure difference, no vortex. There are end losses, but those can be
> controlled.
>
>
> >Third; the idea that an Aerospike self compensates to optimum area ratio
> for
> >all altitudes is a myth. There are two effects that the supporters do not
> >tell you:
> >a) just like a conventional nozzle, an Aerospike must be designed for an
> >"optimum altitude" somewhere in the middle of the flight regime (say, for
> >example, 50k feet) For a conventional nozzle, the nozzle is said to be
> >over-expanded when it operates below this altitude and under-expanded
> when
> >it operates above this altitude. For an Aerospike, the spike is too long
> >when operated under the "optimum" altitude (thereby inducing drag losses)
> >and too short when operated above this altitude (incurring expansion wave
> >losses just like a conventional nozzle).
>
>
>          You can place that optimum altitude almost as high as you like in
> an aerospike, because you don't have flow separation problems.
>
>
> >b) the "optimum expansion" myth revolves around the idea that the
> >slip-stream will adjust to compensate for the change in atmospheric
> pressure
> >as the vehicle flies. Thus, the "exit area" will expand as the rocket
> >ascends. This is true, but the rocket does it inefficiently. If you
> >visualize the Aerospike as a bell nozzle inside-out:
> >http://www.boeing.com/space/rdyne/x33/aerospik/basics/convert.htm
> >you get an idea of the aerospike's effective "exit area". Now, with this
> >analogy in mind, if you wanted to increase the area ratio of a
> conventional
> >nozzle, you would lengthen it so as to increase it's exit ratio. But the
> >Aerospike doesn't *lengthen*!
>
>
>          You're forgetting about the re-circulation region under the base
> of the spike. That does change shape and length with different external
> atmospheric conditions, even in the closed condition. Bleeding a small
> amount of gas, say turbine exhaust, into this region increases the
> efficiency of the whole assemblage dramatically.
>
>
> >To back all this up, consider the "new high-performance" Linear Aerospike
> >that Boeing was to have made for Venture Star (not the little one based
> on
> >the J-2, the big high-pressure orbital-version):
> >http://www.boeing.com/defense-space/space/propul/XRS2200.html
> >Note the Isp:
> >Sea level: 339 sec
> >Vacuum: 436.5 sec
> >
> >Now look up the SSME:
> >http://www.astronautix.com/engines/ssme.htm
> >Sea level: 363 sec
> >Vacuum: 453 sec
>
>
>          You are comparing apples and oranges -- the XRS-2200's lower Isp
> has a full throttle chamber pressure is only 857 psia... as opposed for
> 3000 psia for the SSME. The mixture ratios are also different. I'm not
> really up to calculating what the Isp of the SSME would be if you cut the
> chamber pressure by a factor of three, but i suspect the answer is a
> substantially less than 430 sec of vacuum Isp. And you couldn't safely run
> the resulting engine at sea level.
>
>          -p
>
>
> Mars or Bust!
> www.marssociety.com

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 21922 invoked from network); 30 Aug 2001 19:34:29 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 30 Aug 2001 19:34:29 -0000
Received: (qmail 6054 invoked by uid 50005); 30 Aug 2001 19:35:27 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpb with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.292039 secs); 30 Aug 2001 19:35:27 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 30 Aug 2001 19:35:27 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA16308; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 12:29:56 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 102100 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 19:29:55          +0000
Received: from localhost (rcalkins@localhost) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with          ESMTP id MAA16294; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 12:29:53 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.LNX.4.10.10108301203520.15700-100000@itc.uci.edu>
Date:         Thu, 30 Aug 2001 12:29:53 -0700
Reply-To: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
Subject:      Re: [AR] [EE]: Building a Satellite
Comments: To: "Mark K. Spute" <mks@BIOMICRO.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <3B8E69A3.FF9A2ABC@biomicro.com>

> Ray, what is your vision for Arocket?
My vision of aRocket is a place where individuals can come together.
Historically, the forum has seemed been best at stimulating creative
thought and reporting experiment results.

I would like to see things move a little out of cyberspace, with regular
get togethers to static test engines, and conduct test flights, along with
general bull sessions.

The one thing that impressed me most of all about the aRocket 1 event was
the vast amount more information you can cover face to face in real time,
rather than typing out a few paragraphs, waiting a few hours and getting a
reply.

I see people on the list meeting other people and getting involved in
projects, and think the standards for interfaces are starting to naturally
evolve.  How can we encourage it's further development?  I think a barter
system would be a good start.  A powerful tool in this would be a
barter/swap board on a web site.  I've got plenty of bandwith and server
space, but no CGI capability to make this happen.  Any assistance in this
area would be greatly appreciated.

I am mixed on the prospect of bringing politics to the group.  It seems
like it will polarize us.  But I think we should form a phone tree
network, maybe addresses too, in a web format.  The phone tree would be
very useful for active lobbying.

As always, I'm open to all discussion and creative thinking.

Ray

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 7278 invoked from network); 30 Aug 2001 19:52:44 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 30 Aug 2001 19:52:44 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 21745 invoked by uid 50005); 30 Aug 2001 19:53:42 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpb with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.250619 secs); 30 Aug 2001 19:53:42 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 30 Aug 2001 19:53:42 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA16535; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 12:49:06 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 102144 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 19:49:04          +0000
Received: from mailgw1a.lmco.com (mailgw1a.lmco.com [192.31.106.7]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA16521 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 12:49:03 -0700
Received: from emss02g01.ems.lmco.com (relay2.ems.lmco.com [166.29.2.54]) by          mailgw1a.lmco.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id NAA29574 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 13:49:02 -0600 (MDT)
Received: from CONVERSION-DAEMON by lmco.com (PMDF V5.2-33 #38887) id          <0GIW00101CC50L@lmco.com> for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 30 Aug 2001          13:49:01 -0600 (MDT)
Received: from emss02i00.ems.lmco.com ([166.29.2.48]) by lmco.com (PMDF V5.2-33          #38887) with ESMTP id <0GIW00K6CCB53X@lmco.com> for          AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 13:47:29 -0600 (MDT)
Received: by emss02i00.ems.lmco.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) id          <R5940AKW>; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 13:48:41 -0600
Content-return: allowed
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19)
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <EDB5E5136094D311BF1800508B12205E08D29112@emss02m07.ems.lmco.com>
Date:         Thu, 30 Aug 2001 13:48:35 -0600
Reply-To: "Bendel, Timothy B" <timothy.b.bendel@LMCO.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Bendel, Timothy B" <timothy.b.bendel@LMCO.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Aerospike; was Internal Shock Waves
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Correction:
I inadvertently posted the XRS-2200 Aerospike engine's numbers and link as
opposed to the full-up, "high performance" RS-2200 that was supposed to fly
on Venture Star as sole propulsion for SSTO. Even so, the SSME is higher
performing:

RS2200 Aerospike:
http://www.boeing.com/defense-space/space/propul/RS2200.html

Sea Level Isp: 347sec
Vacuum Isp: 455 sec

SSME:
http://www.astronautix.com/lvs/shuttle.htm
Sea Level Isp: 363 sec
Vacuum Isp: 455 sec

Note that the recent Block 2 modifications have lowered the SSME's vacuum
performance to 453 sec, in the name of safety. Even so, the sea level
performance is much better than the Aerospike's (isn't that what the
Aerospike was supposed to be good at- better performance within the
atmosphere?)
Even with the full-up high performance SSTO modern aerospike design, it
still doesn't have the performance of the 20-year old SSME.

Timothy Bendel

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 9105 invoked from network); 30 Aug 2001 19:53:12 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 30 Aug 2001 19:53:12 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 20616 invoked by uid 50005); 30 Aug 2001 19:53:38 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpe with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.197777 secs); 30 Aug 2001 19:53:38 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 30 Aug 2001 19:53:38 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA16483; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 12:46:09 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 102129 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 19:46:02          +0000
Received: from femail48.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail48.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.254.60.42]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA16464          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 12:46:02 -0700
Received: from c1649002-a.earthlink.net ([24.20.95.67]) by          femail48.sdc1.sfba.home.com (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20          201-229-121-120-20010223) with ESMTP id          <20010830194551.NDRS26637.femail48.sdc1.sfba.home.com@c1649002-a.earthlink.net>; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 12:45:51          -0700
X-Sender: forkbomb@mail.earthlink.net
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.0.2
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <5.0.2.1.0.20010830122921.00ad19d8@mail.earthlink.net>
Date:         Thu, 30 Aug 2001 12:45:50 -0700
Reply-To: "Pierce Nichols" <forkbomb@EARTHLINK.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Pierce Nichols" <forkbomb@EARTHLINK.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Aerospike; was Internal Shock Waves
Comments: To: "Bendel, Timothy B" <timothy.b.bendel@LMCO.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <EDB5E5136094D311BF1800508B12205E08D29111@emss02m07.ems.lmc o.com>

At 01:24 PM 8/30/2001 -0600, Bendel, Timothy B wrote:
>Are you advocating sealing and pressurizing the boattail section of an
>Aerospike? With all the pumps and pipes running in and out? That I'd like to
>see! Rocketdyne's Aerospike uses mechanical braces- not new, not light.


         No, mechanical bracing for this case is lighter than mechanical
bracing for a bell nozzle, because the two sides of the aerospike can be
braced against each other, putting the bracing members in pure compression.
Very strong, very light weight bracing against pure compression forces is
just about COTS these days.


>Conventionally nozzled engines do not require gimbals either. The Russian
>NK-33 is a prime example. When comparing apples to apples (no gimbal
>aerospike vs. no gimbal conventional engines) conventional engines still
>win. The NK-33 has a thrust to weight of 125! I have yet to see _any_
>aerospike close to that.


         The NK-33 is also a LOX-kerosene engine, while all of the major
aerospike work in the US has been with LOX-LH2 engines. Using LH2 instead
of kerosene fuel increases the engine mass b/c of the handling difficulties
(larger pumps, etc). It also has a much longer development and flight
heritage than any aerospike engine.


>But there is a pressure difference! The Aerospike exhaust is considerable
>higher than atmospheric pressure (and a vacuum) along the "ramp", so it will
>spill over the edges. This vortex cannot "be controlled" in the sense that
>you cannot reduce it's drag. It is exactly analogous to a wing's lift,
>vortex drag is directly associated with lift (pressure differential).


         Did you deliberately mis-understand what I said? The tip vortex on
a wing is driven by the pressure differential between the *upper* and
*lower* surfaces of the wing, not the pressure differential with the free
stream. The only pressure differential here is the differential between the
pressure of the exhaust and the pressure of the free stream, which isn't
going to drive a vortex. Why? The transverse flow coming off the ends of
the aerospike ramps are at similar pressure and speed, but travelling in
opposite directions. That will cancel out any nascent vortex formation.


>If you pump gas generator exhaust into this region, then you are forced into
>using a gas-generator cycle. This is inherently less efficient than a
>pre-burner cycle, which suits conventional nozzles quite well.


         Actually, once you factor in all the performance issues, this is
not an issue. Take a look at the real performance numbers of the RS-2200 --
vacuum Isp equivalent to the SSME with a substantially lower chamber pressure.


>Note that I WAS comparing apples to apples: I did not cite the XRS-2200, I
>cited numbers from the RS-2200. (this is my fault, I put in the wrong link.
>Here is the correct link:)
>http://www.boeing.com/defense-space/space/propul/RS2200.html
>  It does NOT have a chamber pressure of only 857 psi, it operates at 2250
>psi. Two high-pressure engines: one an Aerospike, the other a conventional
>nozzle. Aerospike loses on both thrust to weight and Isp.


         No, you weren't -- you quoted the Isp numbers for the XRS2200, not
the RS2200, so I quoted the chamber pressure. And as it turns out, the
RS2200 compares favorably to the SSME in terms of Isp -- 455 sec for the
RS2200 v. 453 sec for the SSME, and at a substantially lower chamber
pressure (2250 psi v. 3000 psi). That hurts it in sea-level Isp, but an
optimized ascent trajectory is mostly high altitude anyways. Oh, and the
RS2200 can throttle down to 18%, too :).

         -p


Mars or Bust!
www.marssociety.com

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 10678 invoked from network); 30 Aug 2001 20:07:36 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 30 Aug 2001 20:07:36 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 29374 invoked by uid 50005); 30 Aug 2001 20:08:32 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpa with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.206026 secs); 30 Aug 2001 20:08:32 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 30 Aug 2001 20:08:31 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA16662; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 13:03:27 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 102168 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 20:03:23          +0000
Received: from femail43.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail43.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.254.60.37]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA16648          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 13:03:23 -0700
Received: from c1649002-a.earthlink.net ([24.20.95.67]) by          femail43.sdc1.sfba.home.com (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20          201-229-121-120-20010223) with ESMTP id          <20010830200316.NIFF23054.femail43.sdc1.sfba.home.com@c1649002-a.earthlink.net>; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 13:03:16          -0700
X-Sender: forkbomb@mail.earthlink.net
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.0.2
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <5.0.2.1.0.20010830125924.024668c8@mail.earthlink.net>
Date:         Thu, 30 Aug 2001 13:03:15 -0700
Reply-To: "Pierce Nichols" <forkbomb@EARTHLINK.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Pierce Nichols" <forkbomb@EARTHLINK.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Aerospike; was Internal Shock Waves
Comments: To: "Bendel, Timothy B" <timothy.b.bendel@LMCO.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <EDB5E5136094D311BF1800508B12205E08D29112@emss02m07.ems.lmc o.com>

At 01:48 PM 8/30/2001 -0600, Bendel, Timothy B wrote:

>Note that the recent Block 2 modifications have lowered the SSME's vacuum
>performance to 453 sec, in the name of safety. Even so, the sea level
>performance is much better than the Aerospike's (isn't that what the
>Aerospike was supposed to be good at- better performance within the
>atmosphere?)
>Even with the full-up high performance SSTO modern aerospike design, it
>still doesn't have the performance of the 20-year old SSME.


         Both engines are very close to the theoretical maximum for LH2/LOX
engines in vacuum. That said, the RS-2200 gets a 455 sec vacuum Isp with a
gas generator cycle and a chamber pressure only 75% that of the SSME. Given
the engineering challenges implicit in high pressure designs and staged
combustion cycle engines, that's a worthwhile achievement in and of itself,
because it reduces the complexity (and therefore cost) of an engine of a
given size.

         -p


Mars or Bust!
www.marssociety.com

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 21312 invoked from network); 30 Aug 2001 20:10:02 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 30 Aug 2001 20:10:02 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 10082 invoked by uid 50005); 30 Aug 2001 20:10:27 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpe with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.209943 secs); 30 Aug 2001 20:10:27 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 30 Aug 2001 20:10:27 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA16686; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 13:04:53 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 102175 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 20:04:52          +0000
Received: from smtp007pub.verizon.net (smtp007pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.186])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA16665 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 13:04:38 -0700
Received: from [63.27.96.42] (1Cust251.tnt2.san-bernardino.ca.da.uu.net          [63.27.97.251]) by smtp007pub.verizon.net  with ESMTP for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; id f7UK46520257 Thu, 30 Aug 2001 15:04:06          -0500 (CDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: GTE/01rocket@mail.gte.net
References: <EDB5E5136094D311BF1800508B12205E08D29111@emss02m07.ems.lmco.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <a05100305b7b44c65ee4c@[63.27.96.42]>
Date:         Thu, 30 Aug 2001 13:04:04 -0700
Reply-To: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Aerospike; was Internal Shock Waves
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <EDB5E5136094D311BF1800508B12205E08D29111@emss02m07.ems.lmco.com>

>win. The NK-33 has a thrust to weight of 125! I have yet to see _any_
>aerospike close to that.


>Note that I WAS comparing apples to apples: I did not cite the XRS-2200, I
>cited numbers from the RS-2200. (this is my fault, I put in the wrong link.
>Here is the correct link:)
>http://www.boeing.com/defense-space/space/propul/RS2200.html
>  It does NOT have a chamber pressure of only 857 psi, it operates at 2250
>psi. Two high-pressure engines: one an Aerospike, the other a conventional
>nozzle. Aerospike loses on both thrust to weight and Isp.

As a strong advocate of looking ONLY at system ISP and not merely
propellant ISP you have me sold.

Jerry

--
Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
Opinion, the whole thing.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 15049 invoked from network); 30 Aug 2001 20:22:37 -0000
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 30 Aug 2001 20:22:37 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 24943 invoked by uid 50005); 30 Aug 2001 20:23:02 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpe with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.35233 secs); 30 Aug 2001 20:23:02 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 30 Aug 2001 20:23:01 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA16784; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 13:17:36 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 102199 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 20:17:30          +0000
Received: from mailgw1a.lmco.com (mailgw1a.lmco.com [192.31.106.7]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA16770 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 13:17:29 -0700
Received: from emss02g01.ems.lmco.com (relay2.ems.lmco.com [166.29.2.54]) by          mailgw1a.lmco.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id OAA06165 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 14:17:28 -0600 (MDT)
Received: from CONVERSION-DAEMON by lmco.com (PMDF V5.2-33 #38887) id          <0GIW00E01DOB1E@lmco.com> for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 30 Aug 2001          14:17:25 -0600 (MDT)
Received: from emss02i00.ems.lmco.com ([166.29.2.48]) by lmco.com (PMDF V5.2-33          #38887) with ESMTP id <0GIW003YADNY0R@lmco.com> for          AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 14:16:46 -0600 (MDT)
Received: by emss02i00.ems.lmco.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) id          <R5940BJ7>; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 14:17:58 -0600
Content-return: allowed
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19)
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <EDB5E5136094D311BF1800508B12205E08D29113@emss02m07.ems.lmco.com>
Date:         Thu, 30 Aug 2001 14:17:53 -0600
Reply-To: "Bendel, Timothy B" <timothy.b.bendel@LMCO.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Bendel, Timothy B" <timothy.b.bendel@LMCO.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Aerospike; was Internal Shock Waves
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

    >    Did you deliberately mis-understand what I said? The tip vortex on
a wing is driven by the pressure differential between the *upper* and
*lower* surfaces of the wing, not the pressure differential with the free
stream. The only pressure differential here is the differential between the
pressure of the exhaust and the pressure of the free stream, which isn't
going to drive a vortex. Why? The transverse flow coming off the ends of
the aerospike ramps are at similar pressure and speed, but travelling in
opposite directions. That will cancel out any nascent vortex formation.<


OK, assume a 2000 psi chamber pressure on the little combustors; at some
point mid-way along the ramp the exhaust will be at 1000psi. This gas will
want to expand in all directions to whatever the ambient pressure is (14.7
psi to 0 psi if in space) Along the edge of the "ramp" of the linear
aerospike, there is nothing that will prevent the exhaust from spilling over
the edge to expand. This will make a vortex. This vortex will contain
kinetic energy. It will take it from the kinetic energy of the exhaust. This
reduces thrust. You can *see* spill over the edge in the test footage ( I'd
attach it but I know Arocket doesn't like attachments. I'll try to find a
link.)

In summary:

1) Linear Aerospike nozzles have ends (Annular Aerospike and conventional
nozzles do not) so there will be vortex losses.

2) Linear Aerospikes turn the exhaust at greater angles than allowed for
expansion-wave-free flow, properly designed conventional engines do not.
(This is a big one- expansion waves can suck a lot of energy out of the
system)

3) Linear Aerospikes seem heavy in comparison to their thrust- I have yet to
see a competitive Aerospike thrust to weight ratio when compared to equally
expensive conventional engines (SSME) This may change, but I think the
structural design favors conventional engines because their nozzles can be
very thin. So when a new "unobtainium" is available for the Aerospike to
become competitive, that same "unobtainium" will further increase the
performance of the conventional nozzle.

These factors hurt the linear Aerospike's performance. Now, the Linear
Aerospike *MAY* have an advantage *IF* you must place it on a vehicle that
has a rectangular aft section. It *MAY* reduce base drag enough to
compensate for it's other inefficiencies. That would be a hard sell. The
devil's in the details.

Timothy Bendel


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Pierce Nichols [SMTP:forkbomb@EARTHLINK.NET]
> Sent: Thursday, August 30, 2001 1:46 PM
> To:   AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
> Subject:      Re: [AR] Aerospike; was Internal Shock Waves
>
> At 01:24 PM 8/30/2001 -0600, Bendel, Timothy B wrote:
> >Are you advocating sealing and pressurizing the boattail section of an
> >Aerospike? With all the pumps and pipes running in and out? That I'd like
> to
> >see! Rocketdyne's Aerospike uses mechanical braces- not new, not light.
>
>
>          No, mechanical bracing for this case is lighter than mechanical
> bracing for a bell nozzle, because the two sides of the aerospike can be
> braced against each other, putting the bracing members in pure
> compression.
> Very strong, very light weight bracing against pure compression forces is
> just about COTS these days.
>
>
> >Conventionally nozzled engines do not require gimbals either. The Russian
> >NK-33 is a prime example. When comparing apples to apples (no gimbal
> >aerospike vs. no gimbal conventional engines) conventional engines still
> >win. The NK-33 has a thrust to weight of 125! I have yet to see _any_
> >aerospike close to that.
>
>
>          The NK-33 is also a LOX-kerosene engine, while all of the major
> aerospike work in the US has been with LOX-LH2 engines. Using LH2 instead
> of kerosene fuel increases the engine mass b/c of the handling
> difficulties
> (larger pumps, etc). It also has a much longer development and flight
> heritage than any aerospike engine.
>
>
> >But there is a pressure difference! The Aerospike exhaust is considerable
> >higher than atmospheric pressure (and a vacuum) along the "ramp", so it
> will
> >spill over the edges. This vortex cannot "be controlled" in the sense
> that
> >you cannot reduce it's drag. It is exactly analogous to a wing's lift,
> >vortex drag is directly associated with lift (pressure differential).
>
>
>          Did you deliberately mis-understand what I said? The tip vortex
> on
> a wing is driven by the pressure differential between the *upper* and
> *lower* surfaces of the wing, not the pressure differential with the free
> stream. The only pressure differential here is the differential between
> the
> pressure of the exhaust and the pressure of the free stream, which isn't
> going to drive a vortex. Why? The transverse flow coming off the ends of
> the aerospike ramps are at similar pressure and speed, but travelling in
> opposite directions. That will cancel out any nascent vortex formation.
>
>
> >If you pump gas generator exhaust into this region, then you are forced
> into
> >using a gas-generator cycle. This is inherently less efficient than a
> >pre-burner cycle, which suits conventional nozzles quite well.
>
>
>          Actually, once you factor in all the performance issues, this is
> not an issue. Take a look at the real performance numbers of the RS-2200
> --
> vacuum Isp equivalent to the SSME with a substantially lower chamber
> pressure.
>
>
> >Note that I WAS comparing apples to apples: I did not cite the XRS-2200,
> I
> >cited numbers from the RS-2200. (this is my fault, I put in the wrong
> link.
> >Here is the correct link:)
> >http://www.boeing.com/defense-space/space/propul/RS2200.html
> >  It does NOT have a chamber pressure of only 857 psi, it operates at
> 2250
> >psi. Two high-pressure engines: one an Aerospike, the other a
> conventional
> >nozzle. Aerospike loses on both thrust to weight and Isp.
>
>
>          No, you weren't -- you quoted the Isp numbers for the XRS2200,
> not
> the RS2200, so I quoted the chamber pressure. And as it turns out, the
> RS2200 compares favorably to the SSME in terms of Isp -- 455 sec for the
> RS2200 v. 453 sec for the SSME, and at a substantially lower chamber
> pressure (2250 psi v. 3000 psi). That hurts it in sea-level Isp, but an
> optimized ascent trajectory is mostly high altitude anyways. Oh, and the
> RS2200 can throttle down to 18%, too :).
>
>          -p
>
>
> Mars or Bust!
> www.marssociety.com

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 8673 invoked from network); 30 Aug 2001 20:42:47 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 30 Aug 2001 20:42:47 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 505 invoked by uid 50005); 30 Aug 2001 20:43:44 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpb with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.173763 secs); 30 Aug 2001 20:43:44 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 30 Aug 2001 20:43:44 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA17030; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 13:38:26 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 102221 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 20:38:23          +0000
Received: from munch.biochem.duke.edu (munch.biochem.duke.edu [152.3.174.65])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA16906 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 13:28:23 -0700
Received: from nc.rr.com (IDENT:jeff@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by          munch.biochem.duke.edu (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f7UKTfg03204 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 16:29:46 -0400
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.76 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.4.3 i686)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <5.1.0.14.0.20010830105629.00a10ec0@mail.murraystate.edu>            <014501c13171$eca6e2b0$68e9a8c0@NATE2>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B8EA234.FF85A0A0@nc.rr.com>
Date:         Thu, 30 Aug 2001 16:29:40 -0400
Reply-To: "Jeff Taylor" <jtaylor@NC.RR.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jeff Taylor" <jtaylor@NC.RR.COM>
Organization: Loki Research
Subject:      Re: [AR] Internal Shock Wave
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Nathan Hays wrote:

> I imagine a star grain with an odd number of points would suppress
> transverse waves but not logitudinal waves.  I can see how a BATES grain
> could demonstrate transverse waves.
>
> My concern is how I can avoid longitudinal waves in a star grain.  Perhaps
> this is why grains are designed with flaring at the fore and aft ends.  I've
> always assumed the aft flaring was to avoid erosive burning, but I couldn't
> figure why the fore flare.
>
> Any hints? Knowledge?
>
> - Nate

No knowledge, but some intuition:

I imagine that the shape of the forward bulkhead would have an effect on the
build up of a shock wave.  Perhaps a sphereical or parabolic convex (or maybe
concave) shape would be better than flat.

- Jeff Taylor

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 14445 invoked from network); 30 Aug 2001 20:44:13 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 30 Aug 2001 20:44:13 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 19728 invoked by uid 50005); 30 Aug 2001 20:44:39 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpe with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.17896 secs); 30 Aug 2001 20:44:39 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 30 Aug 2001 20:44:38 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA17057; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 13:39:50 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 102252 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 20:39:49          +0000
Received: from ns.vanguard.com (ns.VANGUARD.COM [192.175.173.31]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA17034 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 13:39:06 -0700
Received: from eagle1.vanguard.com (eagle1.VANGUARD.COM [192.175.141.70]) by          ns.vanguard.com (Switch-2.1.3/Switch-2.1.0) with ESMTP id          f7UKcsg17230 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 16:38:54          -0400 (EDT)
Received: from vgi4mail.vanguard.com (vgi4mail.vanguard.com [10.254.65.16]) by          eagle1.vanguard.com (Switch-2.1.3/Switch-2.1.0) with SMTP id          f7UKd6j10582 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 16:39:06          -0400 (EDT)
Received: by vgi4mail.vanguard.com(Lotus SMTP MTA v4.6.6  (890.1 7-16-1999))           id 85256AB8.00716C52 ; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 16:38:52 -0400
X-Lotus-FromDomain: VGINOTES
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Disposition: inline
Message-ID:  <85256AB8.00716B2C.00@vgi4mail.vanguard.com>
Date:         Thu, 30 Aug 2001 16:38:57 -0400
Reply-To: <Waysie_Atkins@VANGUARD.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <Waysie_Atkins@VANGUARD.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] liquids question: alcohol/N2O propellant feeding
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

> the nox below, run a flexible hose (nylon line works) from the piston to the
> combustion chamber with enough slack to let the piston slide up to the top
> of
> the tank.


How do you route the hose to the piston, given that the piston will be sliding.
Through the top or bottom???


Waysie

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 8381 invoked from network); 30 Aug 2001 21:10:47 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 30 Aug 2001 21:10:47 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 29418 invoked by uid 50005); 30 Aug 2001 21:11:44 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpb with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 3.789628 secs); 30 Aug 2001 21:11:44 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 30 Aug 2001 21:11:36 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA17232; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 14:01:55 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 102292 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 21:01:52          +0000
Received: from mail.aros.net (mail.aros.net [207.173.16.20]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA17218 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu,          30 Aug 2001 14:01:52 -0700
Received: from biomicro.com ([208.187.122.40]) by mail.aros.net (8.11.6/8.9.3)          with ESMTP id f7UL1pc31217 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 30 Aug          2001 15:01:52 -0600 (MDT)
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.77 [en] (Win98; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <3B8DDA02.C47AF80D@coastnet.com> <3B8DE559.A17B8A3A@earthlink.net>            <3B8E69A3.FF9A2ABC@biomicro.com>            <a05100303b7b41fdde9b2@[63.27.96.42]>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B8EA9B6.88A4920D@biomicro.com>
Date:         Thu, 30 Aug 2001 15:01:42 -0600
Reply-To: "Mark K. Spute" <mks@BIOMICRO.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Mark K. Spute" <mks@BIOMICRO.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] [EE]: Building a Satellite
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

According to 14 CFR Chapter III Part 404.3(a) "Any person may petition
the Associate Administrator to issue, amend or repeal a regulation . .
."  yada yada yada.

What has the petition history been in this case?  Has anyone (I have to
belive that someone, somewhere has) petitioned to have this 15 second
typo changed back to it's original recommended value of 50 (as I have
heard the story.)  What have been the FAA's reasons for not changing the
value back to it's original recommended 50 seconds?

Jerry Irvine wrote:

[snip of me pontificating about Arockets "mission"]

> But the same rules amateur rocketeers fly under, experimental
> aircraft, rockets sometimes fly under, and lightsats as well.
>
> Simplifying OCST rules to what RRI members George James and Chuck
> Piper originally submitted and were approved before the 15 seconds
> "typo" was introduced would be fine.  Revert to original.

--
Mark K. Spute
Senior Research Engineer
BioMicro Systems Inc.

KD7IWE,  RRS

"It is difficult to say what is impossible, for the dream of yesterday
is the hope of today and the reality of tomorrow."
     Dr. Robert H. Goddard

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 24230 invoked from network); 30 Aug 2001 21:30:13 -0000
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 30 Aug 2001 21:30:13 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 9453 invoked by uid 50005); 30 Aug 2001 21:30:38 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpe with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.212588 secs); 30 Aug 2001 21:30:38 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 30 Aug 2001 21:30:38 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA17299; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 14:14:27 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 102307 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 21:13:58          +0000
Received: from imo-d09.mx.aol.com (imo-d09.mx.aol.com [205.188.157.41]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA17284 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 14:13:58 -0700
Received: from Tjpoulton@aol.com by imo-d09.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v31_r1.4.) id          w.120.3d94905 (30965) for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Thu, 30 Aug 2001          17:13:25 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: AOL 5.0 for Windows sub 138
Message-ID:  <120.3d94905.28c00674@aol.com>
Date:         Thu, 30 Aug 2001 17:13:24 EDT
Reply-To: <Tjpoulton@AOL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <Tjpoulton@AOL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] High Altitude Mach plus flights
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

In a message dated 8/30/01 12:37:01 PM Central Daylight Time,
greg@BLASTZONE.COM writes:

> What constitutes an ablative coating?  Rubber?  Plaster? Epoxy?  Duct tape?

Duct tape.  Always duct tape.

Seriously, though, there are tradeoffs in the selection of ablative
materials.  Rubbers are good, but cause high skin friction and may be blown
off if they aren't strong enough.  Epoxy would work, too, but vaporizes
cleanly instead of charring like rubbers do.  You want something that
requires lots of thermal energy to vaporize/destroy, and does so at fairly
low teperatures, with low thermal conductivity.  Preferably, it will remain a
low-conductivity solid after this destructive change (typically a crunchy,
graphite-like carbonaceous deposit).  Many rubbers are great for this.  In a
small rocket with a short flight, though, it's not very critical.  It's
pretty unlikely that anything capable of handling the aerodynamic loads with
a reasonable factor of safety would be significantly weakened by a bit of
ablation -- you just couldn't resuse the vehicle.  If you really want to
reuse it, then you might want to consider an epoxy-based coating.  It seems
that epoxy thickened (paste-like) with some kind of powdered material would
probably be good.  Maybe sawdust would be a good filler?
Mike P.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 25016 invoked from network); 30 Aug 2001 21:38:03 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 30 Aug 2001 21:38:03 -0000
Received: (qmail 6027 invoked by uid 50005); 30 Aug 2001 21:38:59 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpa with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.23992 secs); 30 Aug 2001 21:38:59 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 30 Aug 2001 21:38:58 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA17374; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 14:27:06 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 102319 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 21:26:53          +0000
Received: from m1.jersey.juno.com (m1.jersey.juno.com [64.136.16.64]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA17360 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 14:26:53 -0700
Received: from cookie.juno.com by cookie.juno.com for          <"H3WK6e6N+bsCVJQMHM9sZDlItZz33kNVoO9HeEq35HDqreJRxZjkTQ==">
Received: (from kc2csh@juno.com) by m1.jersey.juno.com (queuemail) id GD5CW32Y;          Thu, 30 Aug 2001 17:26:44 EDT
X-Mailer: Juno 4.0.11
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Juno-Line-Breaks: 3-9,11-12,14-15,17-25,27-29
X-Juno-Att: 0
X-Juno-RefParts: 0
Message-ID:  <20010830.172954.-3851575.0.kc2csh@juno.com>
Date:         Thu, 30 Aug 2001 17:26:46 -0400
Reply-To: <kc2csh@JUNO.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <kc2csh@JUNO.COM>
Subject:      [AR] Patents - was Re: [AR] liquids question: alcohol/N2O              propellant              feeding
Comments: To: MONTMACH@aol.com
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

  If my calculation is right, its time has passed, and that's now in the
public domain, right?  How much other perhaps interesting rocketry
patents are expired or expiring and coming into the public domain; after
all, the period of heavy R&D was a long time ago now.

                  Jay

On Thu, 30 Aug 2001 12:13:49 EDT Dave Griffith <MONTMACH@AOL.COM> writes:
> Paul wrote:
>
> > There really is a simple answer to pressuising non volatile fuels  in
simple
> > NOX
> > biprops. Just add a piston to the tank, put your fuel on top of  the
piston
> > and
> > the nox below, run a flexible hose (nylon line works) from the
piston to the
> > combustion chamber with enough slack to let the piston slide up to
> the top
> > of
> > the tank.
> >
> > PK
> >
>
> Patent number 3,043,221 (by F. H. Swanser dated July 10, 1962)
describes a
> remarkably similar design.
> Dave

________________________________________________________________
GET INTERNET ACCESS FROM JUNO!
Juno offers FREE or PREMIUM Internet access for less!
Join Juno today!  For your FREE software, visit:
http://dl.www.juno.com/get/tagj.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 28985 invoked from network); 30 Aug 2001 21:39:05 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 30 Aug 2001 21:39:05 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 7849 invoked by uid 50005); 30 Aug 2001 21:37:44 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.193559 secs); 30 Aug 2001 21:37:44 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 30 Aug 2001 21:37:44 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA17399; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 14:29:38 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 102326 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 21:29:36          +0000
Received: from imo-m03.mx.aol.com (imo-m03.mx.aol.com [64.12.136.6]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA17384 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 14:29:36 -0700
Received: from Tjpoulton@aol.com by imo-m03.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v31_r1.4.) id          w.a1.1a8d0389 (30965) for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Thu, 30 Aug 2001          17:28:59 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: AOL 5.0 for Windows sub 138
Message-ID:  <a1.1a8d0389.28c00a1b@aol.com>
Date:         Thu, 30 Aug 2001 17:28:59 EDT
Reply-To: <Tjpoulton@AOL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <Tjpoulton@AOL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] liquids question: alcohol/N2O propellant feeding
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

In a message dated 8/30/01 3:41:09 PM Central Daylight Time,
Waysie_Atkins@VANGUARD.COM writes:

> > the nox below, run a flexible hose (nylon line works) from the piston to
> the
>  > combustion chamber with enough slack to let the piston slide up to the
top
>  > of
>  > the tank.
>
>
>  How do you route the hose to the piston, given that the piston will be
> sliding.
>  Through the top or bottom???

The hose would go down through the nitrous tank, and out through the same
bulkhead the nitrous connections are on.
Mike P.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 20011 invoked from network); 30 Aug 2001 21:44:30 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 30 Aug 2001 21:44:30 -0000
Received: (qmail 19466 invoked by uid 50005); 30 Aug 2001 21:45:28 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpb with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.354076 secs); 30 Aug 2001 21:45:28 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 30 Aug 2001 21:45:27 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA17468; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 14:35:00 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 102340 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 21:34:44          +0000
Received: from smtp006pub.verizon.net (smtp006pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.185])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA17450 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 14:34:35 -0700
Received: from [63.10.201.28] (1Cust28.tnt3.hilo.hi.da.uu.net [63.10.201.28])          by smtp006pub.verizon.net  with ESMTP for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; id          f7ULY3323115 Thu, 30 Aug 2001 16:34:03 -0500 (CDT)
X-Sender: ttocs@mail.gte.net
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <l03130300b7b06926c8fb@[63.25.193.43]>
Date:         Mon, 27 Aug 2001 11:33:38 -1000
Reply-To: "Aaron Smith" <ttocs@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Aaron Smith" <ttocs@GTE.NET>
Subject:      [AR] gun launch
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

How useful would a gun launch system be to an amatuer?  Powder?  Pneumatic?
What would be the lowest useful muzzle velocity?

I ask because I have plans to build a super spud gun - 3" bore,  all
aluminum, should launch a 500 gram projectile near 225 m/s.  I can obtain
8" pipe (quite a pretty penny, though) which would be good for 3.5 Kg to
225 m/s, or 10 Kg to 190 m/s, if I did my maths right.  Acceleration would
be 456 gees @ 10 kg.  These numbers are with a 10 foot barrel, which is
pretty short.  I can see 20 feet being manageable.  Would such a system be
useful?

<evil grin>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 26878 invoked from network); 30 Aug 2001 22:23:17 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 30 Aug 2001 22:23:17 -0000
Received: (qmail 4938 invoked by uid 50005); 30 Aug 2001 22:23:42 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpe with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.409152 secs); 30 Aug 2001 22:23:42 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 30 Aug 2001 22:23:41 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA17821; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 15:19:00 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 102423 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 22:18:55          +0000
Received: from spsystems.net (spsystems.net [209.47.149.227]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA17807 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Thu,          30 Aug 2001 15:18:54 -0700
Received: (from henry@localhost) by spsystems.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id SAA28107;          Thu, 30 Aug 2001 18:18:13 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010830181626.27806C-100000@spsystems.net>
Date:         Thu, 30 Aug 2001 18:18:12 -0400
Reply-To: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Subject:      [AR] high-pressure engines (was Re: [AR] Aerospike)
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <EDB5E5136094D311BF1800508B12205E08D2910F@emss02m07.ems.lmco.com>

On Thu, 30 Aug 2001, Bendel, Timothy B wrote:
>         Yes. With higher chamber pressures sea-level pressures look more and
> more like a vacuum ... It is interesting to
> note that this is the direction the Russians went in the late 60's;
> significantly higher chamber pressures. Now we are buying engines from them.
> Aside from being cheaper, they are simply better performers.

This is largely because the US, mesmerized by liquid hydrogen, abandoned
LOX/kerosene engine technology work in the mid-1960s.

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 1662 invoked from network); 30 Aug 2001 22:40:24 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 30 Aug 2001 22:40:24 -0000
Received: (qmail 21777 invoked by uid 50005); 30 Aug 2001 22:39:02 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.206723 secs); 30 Aug 2001 22:39:02 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 30 Aug 2001 22:39:02 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA18021; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 15:36:10 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 102445 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 22:36:08          +0000
Received: from castor.ridgenet.net (IDENT:root@castor.ridgenet.net          [199.120.150.29]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA17897          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 15:25:21 -0700
Received: from kristinscomp (pm096.ridgenet.net [204.154.246.96]) by          castor.ridgenet.net (8.11.0/8.11.0) with SMTP id f7UMH3S09905; Thu,          30 Aug 2001 15:17:04 -0700
References:  <l03130300b7b06926c8fb@[63.25.193.43]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <000d01c131a3$e445e260$1b30fea9@kristinscomp>
Date:         Thu, 30 Aug 2001 15:34:10 -0700
Reply-To: "Kristin & David Hall" <thehalls@RIDGENET.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Kristin & David Hall" <thehalls@RIDGENET.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] gun launch
Comments: To: Aaron Smith <ttocs@GTE.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

> How useful would a gun launch system be to an amatuer?  Powder?
Pneumatic?
> What would be the lowest useful muzzle velocity?
>
> I ask because I have plans to build a super spud gun - 3" bore,  all
> aluminum, should launch a 500 gram projectile near 225 m/s.  I can obtain
> 8" pipe (quite a pretty penny, though) which would be good for 3.5 Kg to
> 225 m/s, or 10 Kg to 190 m/s, if I did my maths right.  Acceleration would
> be 456 gees @ 10 kg.  These numbers are with a 10 foot barrel, which is
> pretty short.  I can see 20 feet being manageable.  Would such a system be
> useful?

Let's face it:  99.9% of all amateur work is useless in the traditional
meaning of the word.  We do it (rocketry) because we think it's fun.  Yeah,
there are exceptions, but most of us are just in love with smoke and fire.

That being said, who cares if it's useful?  The question is:  Are you
interested in doing it?  Obviously, you are.  What more do you want?


OBLazy:  I need to post pictures of the gun I built last summer....

--
Dave and/or Kristin Hall

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 6385 invoked from network); 30 Aug 2001 22:41:40 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 30 Aug 2001 22:41:40 -0000
Received: (qmail 22536 invoked by uid 50005); 30 Aug 2001 22:40:19 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.322551 secs); 30 Aug 2001 22:40:19 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 30 Aug 2001 22:40:18 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA18043; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 15:37:34 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 102447 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 22:37:33          +0000
Received: from cablecom.laribay.net (cablecom.laribay.net [66.20.57.4]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA17907 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 15:26:52 -0700
Received: from billbull (dial073.laribay.net [66.20.57.73]) by          cablecom.laribay.net (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id RAA17045 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 17:08:40 -0500 (CDT)          (envelope-from bpbullock@laribay.net)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0C17_01C56B69.4DDB6850"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <001501c131a3$15611a00$49391442@billbull>
Date:         Thu, 30 Aug 2001 17:28:03 -0500
Reply-To: "Bill Bullock" <bpbullock@LARIBAY.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Bill Bullock" <bpbullock@LARIBAY.NET>
Subject:      [AR] : [AR] gun launch
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0C17_01C56B69.4DDB6850
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Aaron:
http://home.networkone.net/~oglenn/trimode/3m-arla.htm
    About a ton of information to be had here on this subject. Also a =
very nice man to correspond with about his work.
Bill

------=_NextPart_000_0C17_01C56B69.4DDB6850
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META content=3D"text/html; charset=3Diso-8859-1" =
http-equiv=3DContent-Type>
<META content=3D"MSHTML 5.00.2614.3500" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV>Aaron:</DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV><A=20
href=3D"http://home.networkone.net/~oglenn/trimode/3m-arla.htm">http://ho=
me.networkone.net/~oglenn/trimode/3m-arla.htm</A></DIV></DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; About a ton of information to be had here on =
this=20
subject. Also a very nice man to correspond with about his work.</DIV>
<DIV>Bill</DIV></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0C17_01C56B69.4DDB6850--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 11918 invoked from network); 30 Aug 2001 22:43:07 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 30 Aug 2001 22:43:07 -0000
Received: (qmail 2759 invoked by uid 50005); 30 Aug 2001 22:42:21 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.425744 secs); 30 Aug 2001 22:42:21 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 30 Aug 2001 22:42:20 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA18062; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 15:38:56 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 102449 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 22:38:55          +0000
Received: from spsystems.net (spsystems.net [209.47.149.227]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA17917 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Thu,          30 Aug 2001 15:28:53 -0700
Received: (from henry@localhost) by spsystems.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id SAA28182;          Thu, 30 Aug 2001 18:28:11 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010830182427.27806E-100000@spsystems.net>
Date:         Thu, 30 Aug 2001 18:28:11 -0400
Reply-To: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Aerospike; was Internal Shock Waves
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <EDB5E5136094D311BF1800508B12205E08D29111@emss02m07.ems.lmco.com>

On Thu, 30 Aug 2001, Bendel, Timothy B wrote:
> >Aerospike also do not require
> >gimbal hardware, since they vector with differential thrust.
>
> Conventionally nozzled engines do not require gimbals either. The Russian
> NK-33 is a prime example...

Uh, no, those engines *do* need gimbals, if their thrust is to be vectored.
One of the changes Kistler needed for the NK-33s they planned to use was
addition of a gimbaling system.

The NK-33 is not magic.  The original lacks a gimbaling system simply
because its original vehicle (the N-1) used them in such numbers, over
such a wide base, that vectoring by differential throttling was practical.
That's fine, if you're building really big rockets... but it doesn't work
so very well for more modest ones.

> ...The NK-33 has a thrust to weight of 125!

That's before you add the gimbaling system.

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 19861 invoked from network); 30 Aug 2001 22:45:13 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 30 Aug 2001 22:45:13 -0000
Received: (qmail 24478 invoked by uid 50005); 30 Aug 2001 22:43:51 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.15426 secs); 30 Aug 2001 22:43:51 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 30 Aug 2001 22:43:51 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA18085; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 15:40:18 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 102451 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 22:40:17          +0000
Received: from localhost (rcalkins@localhost) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with          ESMTP id PAA17936; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 15:30:26 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.LNX.4.10.10108301526020.15700-100000@itc.uci.edu>
Date:         Thu, 30 Aug 2001 15:30:26 -0700
Reply-To: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
Subject:      Re: [AR] AN melt
Comments: To: John Dom <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <F218KhqzSPCHTEdTC6700015395@hotmail.com>

On Wed, 29 Aug 2001, John Dom wrote:

> So SP (must still study his text) proved sugar dissolves in molten AN  to
> produce more homogenous propellant blocks than the candy frying pan can with
> KN powder technique. In the latter the KN never really liquifies or
> dissolves in the candy melt is what I heard.
Let me clarify this.  Yes, the KN really does dissolve.  KN is actually
soluable in water.  It comes out of solution if you remove all the water
although I have produced some samples, which after sitting in a
dehumidifier, are nearly water free, and still have no visible crystals
under a 30 power microscope.  They have an impressive burn rate, and are
highly energetic.  I did not measure shrinkage however, and this is a slow
process.

Ray

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 23764 invoked from network); 30 Aug 2001 22:46:17 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 30 Aug 2001 22:46:17 -0000
Received: (qmail 19001 invoked by uid 50005); 30 Aug 2001 22:47:13 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpa with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.252917 secs); 30 Aug 2001 22:47:13 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 30 Aug 2001 22:47:12 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA18111; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 15:41:44 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 102454 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 22:41:39          +0000
Received: from cablecom.laribay.net (cablecom.laribay.net [66.20.57.4]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA17950 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 15:32:26 -0700
Received: from billbull (dial073.laribay.net [66.20.57.73]) by          cablecom.laribay.net (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id RAA17104 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 17:14:14 -0500 (CDT)          (envelope-from bpbullock@laribay.net)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0C1A_01C56B69.4DDB6850"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <002501c131a3$dca7cfa0$49391442@billbull>
Date:         Thu, 30 Aug 2001 17:33:38 -0500
Reply-To: "Bill Bullock" <bpbullock@LARIBAY.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Bill Bullock" <bpbullock@LARIBAY.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Aerospike , etc...
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0C1A_01C56B69.4DDB6850
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Very interesting discussion and I have learned a lot by "listening" to =
everyone. But one more question: has an aerospike engine and/or nozzled =
engine ever actually flown as the main power source on a rocket of any =
type?
Bill

------=_NextPart_000_0C1A_01C56B69.4DDB6850
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META content=3D"text/html; charset=3Diso-8859-1" =
http-equiv=3DContent-Type>
<META content=3D"MSHTML 5.00.2614.3500" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV>Very interesting discussion and I have learned a lot by "listening" =
to=20
everyone. But one more question: has an aerospike engine and/or nozzled =
engine=20
ever actually flown as the main power source on a rocket of any =
type?</DIV>
<DIV>Bill</DIV></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0C1A_01C56B69.4DDB6850--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 34 invoked from network); 30 Aug 2001 22:47:54 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 30 Aug 2001 22:47:54 -0000
Received: (qmail 22627 invoked by uid 50005); 30 Aug 2001 22:45:54 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpf with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.185245 secs); 30 Aug 2001 22:45:54 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 30 Aug 2001 22:45:54 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA18134; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 15:43:08 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 102498 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 22:43:06          +0000
Received: from spsystems.net (spsystems.net [209.47.149.227]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA18104 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Thu,          30 Aug 2001 15:41:43 -0700
Received: (from henry@localhost) by spsystems.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id SAA28410;          Thu, 30 Aug 2001 18:41:02 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010830184011.27806H-100000@spsystems.net>
Date:         Thu, 30 Aug 2001 18:41:02 -0400
Reply-To: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Aerospike; was Internal Shock Waves
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <EDB5E5136094D311BF1800508B12205E08D29113@emss02m07.ems.lmco.com>

On Thu, 30 Aug 2001, Bendel, Timothy B wrote:
> ...Along the edge of the "ramp" of the linear
> aerospike, there is nothing that will prevent the exhaust from spilling over
> the edge to expand...

In most of the designs I've seen, there's a fence there to at least
somewhat discourage this.

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 11007 invoked from network); 30 Aug 2001 22:50:55 -0000
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 30 Aug 2001 22:50:55 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 6908 invoked by uid 50005); 30 Aug 2001 22:51:20 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpe with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.248167 secs); 30 Aug 2001 22:51:20 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 30 Aug 2001 22:51:20 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA18178; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 15:45:52 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 102464 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 22:45:51          +0000
Received: from mailgw1a.lmco.com (mailgw1a.lmco.com [192.31.106.7]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA17996 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 15:35:57 -0700
Received: from emss02g01.ems.lmco.com (relay2.ems.lmco.com [166.29.2.54]) by          mailgw1a.lmco.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id QAA16436 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 16:35:56 -0600 (MDT)
Received: from CONVERSION-DAEMON by lmco.com (PMDF V5.2-33 #38887) id          <0GIW00901K3UZ7@lmco.com> for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 30 Aug 2001          16:35:55 -0600 (MDT)
Received: from emss02i00.ems.lmco.com ([166.29.2.48]) by lmco.com (PMDF V5.2-33          #38887) with ESMTP id <0GIW00O85K3QSY@lmco.com> for          AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 16:35:50 -0600 (MDT)
Received: by emss02i00.ems.lmco.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) id          <R5940FJY>; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 16:37:02 -0600
Content-return: allowed
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19)
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <EDB5E5136094D311BF1800508B12205E08D29115@emss02m07.ems.lmco.com>
Date:         Thu, 30 Aug 2001 16:36:58 -0600
Reply-To: "Bendel, Timothy B" <timothy.b.bendel@LMCO.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Bendel, Timothy B" <timothy.b.bendel@LMCO.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] high-pressure engines (was Re: [AR] Aerospike)
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

        >This is largely because the US, mesmerized by liquid hydrogen,
abandoned
        LOX/kerosene engine technology work in the mid-1960s.

This was due in part to the development of large solid rockets as boosters-
something the Russians did not do. With high-perfoming solids for Titan,
Atlas, Delta and the Shuttle there was less reason to develop high pressure
kerosine engines.

Timothy Bendel


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Henry Spencer [SMTP:henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET]
> Sent: Thursday, August 30, 2001 4:18 PM
> To:   AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
> Subject:      [AR] high-pressure engines (was Re: [AR] Aerospike)
>
> On Thu, 30 Aug 2001, Bendel, Timothy B wrote:
> >         Yes. With higher chamber pressures sea-level pressures look more
> and
> > more like a vacuum ... It is interesting to
> > note that this is the direction the Russians went in the late 60's;
> > significantly higher chamber pressures. Now we are buying engines from
> them.
> > Aside from being cheaper, they are simply better performers.
>
> This is largely because the US, mesmerized by liquid hydrogen, abandoned
> LOX/kerosene engine technology work in the mid-1960s.
>
>                                                           Henry Spencer
>                                                        henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 17536 invoked from network); 30 Aug 2001 22:52:42 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 30 Aug 2001 22:52:42 -0000
Received: (qmail 28904 invoked by uid 50005); 30 Aug 2001 22:51:20 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.124039 secs); 30 Aug 2001 22:51:20 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 30 Aug 2001 22:51:20 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA18152; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 15:44:30 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 102460 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 22:44:29          +0000
Received: from spsystems.net (spsystems.net [209.47.149.227]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA17974 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Thu,          30 Aug 2001 15:33:43 -0700
Received: (from henry@localhost) by spsystems.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id SAA28237;          Thu, 30 Aug 2001 18:33:02 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010830183121.27806F-100000@spsystems.net>
Date:         Thu, 30 Aug 2001 18:33:01 -0400
Reply-To: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Aerospike; was Internal Shock Waves
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <a05100304b7b428ba8d2a@[63.27.96.42]>

On Thu, 30 Aug 2001, Jerry Irvine wrote:
> First let me assume an aerospike is NOT used on a SSTO concept.
> Aerospike advantage is from variable expansion ratio vs altitude.
> Therefore it would be a perfect second stage...

Depends on your vehicle configuration, and when your staging happens.
With conventional large multistage rockets, the first staging event is
essentially in vacuum, so only the first stage needs altitude
compensation.  (Witness vacuum-optimized engines on most upper stages.)

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 29015 invoked from network); 30 Aug 2001 22:55:36 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 30 Aug 2001 22:55:36 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 17160 invoked by uid 50005); 30 Aug 2001 22:54:49 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.391385 secs); 30 Aug 2001 22:54:49 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 30 Aug 2001 22:54:49 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA18251; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 15:50:51 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 102523 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 22:50:50          +0000
Received: from mailgw1a.lmco.com (mailgw1a.lmco.com [192.31.106.7]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA18237 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 15:50:49 -0700
Received: from emss02g01.ems.lmco.com (relay2.ems.lmco.com [166.29.2.54]) by          mailgw1a.lmco.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id QAA25632 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 16:50:48 -0600 (MDT)
Received: from CONVERSION-DAEMON by lmco.com (PMDF V5.2-33 #38887) id          <0GIW00E01KSKIP@lmco.com> for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 30 Aug 2001          16:50:48 -0600 (MDT)
Received: from emss02i00.ems.lmco.com ([166.29.2.48]) by lmco.com (PMDF V5.2-33          #38887) with ESMTP id <0GIW00O92KSIXX@lmco.com> for          AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 16:50:42 -0600 (MDT)
Received: by emss02i00.ems.lmco.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) id          <R5940FRZ>; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 16:51:54 -0600
Content-return: allowed
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19)
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <EDB5E5136094D311BF1800508B12205E08D29116@emss02m07.ems.lmco.com>
Date:         Thu, 30 Aug 2001 16:51:53 -0600
Reply-To: "Bendel, Timothy B" <timothy.b.bendel@LMCO.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Bendel, Timothy B" <timothy.b.bendel@LMCO.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Aerospike; was Internal Shock Waves
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

        >The original lacks a gimbaling system simply
        because its original vehicle (the N-1) used them in such numbers,
over
        such a wide base, that vectoring by differential throttling was
practical.<

This was the point I was trying to make- that you *can* use conventional
engines with differential throttling. Conventional engines do not *need*
gimbals. If an Aerospike can be designed for Vehicle X and use differential
throttling, a set of conventional engines could also be designed to fullfill
the same purpose- without gimbals.
the Russians used differential throttling on several vehicles much smaller
than the N-1.

Timothy Bendel

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Henry Spencer [SMTP:henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET]
> Sent: Thursday, August 30, 2001 4:28 PM
> To:   AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
> Subject:      Re: [AR] Aerospike; was Internal Shock Waves
>
> On Thu, 30 Aug 2001, Bendel, Timothy B wrote:
> > >Aerospike also do not require
> > >gimbal hardware, since they vector with differential thrust.
> >
> > Conventionally nozzled engines do not require gimbals either. The
> Russian
> > NK-33 is a prime example...
>
> Uh, no, those engines *do* need gimbals, if their thrust is to be
> vectored.
> One of the changes Kistler needed for the NK-33s they planned to use was
> addition of a gimbaling system.
>
> The NK-33 is not magic.  The original lacks a gimbaling system simply
> because its original vehicle (the N-1) used them in such numbers, over
> such a wide base, that vectoring by differential throttling was practical.
> That's fine, if you're building really big rockets... but it doesn't work
> so very well for more modest ones.
>
> > ...The NK-33 has a thrust to weight of 125!
>
> That's before you add the gimbaling system.
>
>                                                           Henry Spencer
>                                                        henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 15097 invoked from network); 30 Aug 2001 23:07:10 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 30 Aug 2001 23:07:10 -0000
Received: (qmail 2159 invoked by uid 50005); 30 Aug 2001 23:08:06 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpa with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.418714 secs); 30 Aug 2001 23:08:06 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 30 Aug 2001 23:08:05 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA18200; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 15:47:15 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 102440 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 22:47:13          +0000
Received: from spsystems.net (spsystems.net [209.47.149.227]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA17876 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Thu,          30 Aug 2001 15:24:11 -0700
Received: (from henry@localhost) by spsystems.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id SAA28164;          Thu, 30 Aug 2001 18:23:29 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010830182232.27806D-100000@spsystems.net>
Date:         Thu, 30 Aug 2001 18:23:29 -0400
Reply-To: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] High Altitude Mach plus flights
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <3B8E8139.2824E87F@earthlink.net>

On Thu, 30 Aug 2001, David Weinshenker wrote:
> Wasn't something similar used for Mercury heat shields, and the chamber linings
> for the many small maneuvering engines on Gemini?

Mercury and Gemini both used phenolic heatshields (although the Gemini one
was fancier), and Gemini did indeed use ablatively-cooled thrusters.

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 24603 invoked from network); 30 Aug 2001 23:09:42 -0000
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 30 Aug 2001 23:09:42 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 29089 invoked by uid 50005); 30 Aug 2001 23:10:07 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpe with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.19415 secs); 30 Aug 2001 23:10:07 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 30 Aug 2001 23:10:07 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA18318; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 15:56:24 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 102542 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 22:56:22          +0000
Received: from mailgw1a.lmco.com (mailgw1a.lmco.com [192.31.106.7]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA18304 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 15:56:21 -0700
Received: from emss02g01.ems.lmco.com (relay2.ems.lmco.com [166.29.2.54]) by          mailgw1a.lmco.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id QAA26521 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 16:56:21 -0600 (MDT)
Received: from CONVERSION-DAEMON by lmco.com (PMDF V5.2-33 #38887) id          <0GIW00F01L1WIV@lmco.com> for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 30 Aug 2001          16:56:20 -0600 (MDT)
Received: from emss02i00.ems.lmco.com ([166.29.2.48]) by lmco.com (PMDF V5.2-33          #38887) with ESMTP id <0GIW00OHYL1RXX@lmco.com> for          AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 16:56:15 -0600 (MDT)
Received: by emss02i00.ems.lmco.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) id          <R5940F4M>; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 16:57:27 -0600
Content-return: allowed
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19)
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <EDB5E5136094D311BF1800508B12205E08D29117@emss02m07.ems.lmco.com>
Date:         Thu, 30 Aug 2001 16:57:20 -0600
Reply-To: "Bendel, Timothy B" <timothy.b.bendel@LMCO.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Bendel, Timothy B" <timothy.b.bendel@LMCO.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Aerospike; was Internal Shock Waves
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

        >In most of the designs I've seen, there's a fence there to at least
        >somewhat discourage this.

Sounds like more weight/drag/thermal problems to me. If anyone out there
knows the mass of the RS-2200 I'd appreciate it (probably proprietary info,
but maybe not as NASA is paying for it). I just don't think that this
configuration could be as light as a conventional nozzle.

Timothy Bendel

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Henry Spencer [SMTP:henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET]
> Sent: Thursday, August 30, 2001 4:41 PM
> To:   AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
> Subject:      Re: [AR] Aerospike; was Internal Shock Waves
>
> On Thu, 30 Aug 2001, Bendel, Timothy B wrote:
> > ...Along the edge of the "ramp" of the linear
> > aerospike, there is nothing that will prevent the exhaust from spilling
> over
> > the edge to expand...
>
> In most of the designs I've seen, there's a fence there to at least
> somewhat discourage this.
>
>                                                           Henry Spencer
>                                                        henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 18248 invoked from network); 30 Aug 2001 23:15:47 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 30 Aug 2001 23:15:47 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 10346 invoked by uid 50005); 30 Aug 2001 23:15:00 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.186593 secs); 30 Aug 2001 23:15:00 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 30 Aug 2001 23:15:00 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA18414; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 16:06:27 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 102563 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 23:05:27          +0000
Received: from mailgw1a.lmco.com (mailgw1a.lmco.com [192.31.106.7]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA18399 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 16:05:27 -0700
Received: from emss02g01.ems.lmco.com (relay2.ems.lmco.com [166.29.2.54]) by          mailgw1a.lmco.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id RAA07798 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 17:05:25 -0600 (MDT)
Received: from CONVERSION-DAEMON by lmco.com (PMDF V5.2-33 #38887) id          <0GIW00F01LGX8T@lmco.com> for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 30 Aug 2001          17:05:25 -0600 (MDT)
Received: from emss02i00.ems.lmco.com ([166.29.2.48]) by lmco.com (PMDF V5.2-33          #38887) with ESMTP id <0GIW00OQDLGWSY@lmco.com> for          AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 17:05:20 -0600 (MDT)
Received: by emss02i00.ems.lmco.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) id          <R5940F77>; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 17:06:32 -0600
Content-return: allowed
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19)
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <EDB5E5136094D311BF1800508B12205E08D29118@emss02m07.ems.lmco.com>
Date:         Thu, 30 Aug 2001 17:06:31 -0600
Reply-To: "Bendel, Timothy B" <timothy.b.bendel@LMCO.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Bendel, Timothy B" <timothy.b.bendel@LMCO.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Aerospike , etc...
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

        Bill Bullock wrote:

        >Very interesting discussion and I have learned a lot by "listening"
to everyone. But one more question: has an aerospike engine and/or nozzled
engine ever actually flown as the main power source on a rocket of any
type?<

The only vehicle that I know of that *approximates* an aerospike was the
Russian N-1 "Moon Rocket". It had 24 NK-33s around the edge and 6 NK-33s in
the center. The aft end was sort of hemispherical such that the 6 central
engines were lower than the engines on the rim, forming a rudimentary
"spike". I don't know how much of a performance boost this may have
achieved, if any. It certainly did look cool when lifting off though!

Timothy Bendel

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 17360 invoked from network); 30 Aug 2001 23:30:27 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 30 Aug 2001 23:30:27 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 27281 invoked by uid 50005); 30 Aug 2001 23:29:40 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.492907 secs); 30 Aug 2001 23:29:40 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 30 Aug 2001 23:29:39 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA18598; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 16:26:02 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 102618 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 23:26:00          +0000
Received: from imo-r08.mx.aol.com (imo-r08.mx.aol.com [152.163.225.104]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA18584 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 16:25:59 -0700
Received: from Sociald84@aol.com by imo-r08.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v31_r1.4.) id          o.34.1a26e1c3 (3988); Thu, 30 Aug 2001 19:25:54 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0C1D_01C56B69.4DF0EC20"
X-Mailer: AOL 6.0 for Windows US sub 10536
Message-ID:  <34.1a26e1c3.28c02581@aol.com>
Date:         Thu, 30 Aug 2001 19:25:53 EDT
Reply-To: <Sociald84@AOL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <Sociald84@AOL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Tomahawk cruise missile
Comments: To: afiorettii@excite.com
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0C1D_01C56B69.4DF0EC20
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

In a message dated 8/29/2001 6:16:42 PM Mountain Daylight Time,
afiorettii@EXCITE.COM writes:


> I am flawed how anyone can compare government entities to garage operations.
> I know the average person is capable of propelling things further than 10
> years ago but as far as I can see that is about it.  The average person does
> not have the backing, period.  When one considers how many entities design a
> launch vehicle from guidance parts to power supply parts, how in God's name
> can you campare it to what two or three guys in a garage can do?

Ask John Carmak.

   > conversations on here that would have the public thinking that
> individuals
> here can build a shuttle in their garage.  I would estimate that the average
> joe might get somehting into sub space and will probably never get it back
> because the average joe does not have the feedback systems, computuers and
> telemetry circutiry on board  or on ground needed to control the vehicles
> they send aloft.  I doubt very much that NASA is concerend with anything
> that is being designed here except that of someone sending somehting out of
>

Mark

------=_NextPart_000_0C1D_01C56B69.4DF0EC20
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<HTML><FONT FACE=arial,helvetica><FONT  SIZE=3>In a message dated 8/29/2001 6:16:42 PM Mountain Daylight Time,
<BR>afiorettii@EXCITE.COM writes:
<BR>
<BR></FONT><FONT  COLOR="#000000" SIZE=2 FAMILY="SANSSERIF" FACE="Arial" LANG="0">
<BR><BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE style="BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px">I am flawed how anyone can compare government entities to garage operations.
<BR>I know the average person is capable of propelling things further than 10
<BR>years ago but as far as I can see that is about it. &nbsp;The average person does
<BR>not have the backing, period. &nbsp;When one considers how many entities design a
<BR>launch vehicle from guidance parts to power supply parts, how in God's name
<BR>can you campare it to what two or three guys in a garage can do? &nbsp;</FONT><FONT  COLOR="#000000" SIZE=3 FAMILY="SANSSERIF" FACE="Arial" LANG="0"></BLOCKQUOTE>
<BR>
<BR>Ask John Carmak.
<BR></FONT><FONT  COLOR="#000000" SIZE=2 FAMILY="SANSSERIF" FACE="Arial" LANG="0">
<BR> &nbsp;&nbsp;I see<BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE style="BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px">conversations on here that would have the public thinking that
<BR>individuals
<BR>here can build a shuttle in their garage. &nbsp;I would estimate that the average
<BR>joe might get somehting into sub space and will probably never get it back
<BR>because the average joe does not have the feedback systems, computuers and
<BR>telemetry circutiry on board &nbsp;or on ground needed to control the vehicles
<BR>they send aloft. &nbsp;I doubt very much that NASA is concerend with anything
<BR>that is being designed here except that of someone sending somehting out of
<BR>limits into another persons back yard, period.</BLOCKQUOTE>
<BR></FONT><FONT  COLOR="#000000" SIZE=3 FAMILY="SANSSERIF" FACE="Arial" LANG="0">
<BR>Mark</FONT></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0C1D_01C56B69.4DF0EC20--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 12397 invoked from network); 30 Aug 2001 23:44:20 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 30 Aug 2001 23:44:20 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 17222 invoked by uid 50005); 30 Aug 2001 23:45:17 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpb with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.193627 secs); 30 Aug 2001 23:45:17 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 30 Aug 2001 23:45:17 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA18720; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 16:37:15 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 102647 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 23:37:10          +0000
Received: from imo-r07.mx.aol.com (imo-r07.mx.aol.com [152.163.225.103]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA18696 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 16:35:17 -0700
Received: from Sociald84@aol.com by imo-r07.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v31_r1.4.) id          w.167.12682a (3988); Thu, 30 Aug 2001 19:35:11 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0C22_01C56B69.4DF35D20"
X-Mailer: AOL 6.0 for Windows US sub 10536
Message-ID:  <167.12682a.28c027ae@aol.com>
Date:         Thu, 30 Aug 2001 19:35:10 EDT
Reply-To: <Sociald84@AOL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <Sociald84@AOL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] liquids question: alcohol/N2O propellant feeding
Comments: To: Tjpoulton@aol.com
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0C22_01C56B69.4DF35D20
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

In a message dated 8/29/2001 9:25:29 PM Mountain Daylight Time,
Tjpoulton@AOL.COM writes:


> I was aware of that, but would like to avoid it in this design.  First off, I
> can't do exactly that using the tanks I have -- they are DOT rated, fiber
> wrapped cylinders.  I would have to completely re-do my propellant storage
> design and I wouldn't get to take advantage of the neato composite tanks.  I
> could use a cylindircal 316SS tube with a piston for the alcohol tank (I
> already have the perfect tube for it), but that would be complicated -- much
> more complicated than just using the tanks I have.
>

Well if your using DOT rated tanks why not use a very simple blowdown system.
Fill the fuel tank with the alcohol and then use helium to pressurize the
tank 15% -20% ullage should probably do. It seams like that would be a very
simple soloution.

Mark

------=_NextPart_000_0C22_01C56B69.4DF35D20
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<HTML><FONT FACE=arial,helvetica><FONT  SIZE=3>In a message dated 8/29/2001 9:25:29 PM Mountain Daylight Time,
<BR>Tjpoulton@AOL.COM writes:
<BR>
<BR></FONT><FONT  COLOR="#000000" SIZE=2 FAMILY="SANSSERIF" FACE="Arial" LANG="0">
<BR><BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE style="BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px">I was aware of that, but would like to avoid it in this design. &nbsp;First off, I
<BR>can't do exactly that using the tanks I have -- they are DOT rated, fiber
<BR>wrapped cylinders. &nbsp;I would have to completely re-do my propellant storage
<BR>design and I wouldn't get to take advantage of the neato composite tanks. &nbsp;I
<BR>could use a cylindircal 316SS tube with a piston for the alcohol tank (I
<BR>already have the perfect tube for it), but that would be complicated -- much
<BR>more complicated than just using the tanks I have.
<BR>Mike P.</BLOCKQUOTE>
<BR></FONT><FONT  COLOR="#000000" SIZE=3 FAMILY="SANSSERIF" FACE="Arial" LANG="0">
<BR></FONT><FONT  COLOR="#000000" SIZE=2 FAMILY="SANSSERIF" FACE="Arial" LANG="0">Well if your using DOT rated tanks why not use a very simple blowdown system.
<BR>Fill the fuel tank with the alcohol and then use helium to pressurize the
<BR>tank 15% -20% ullage should probably do. It seams like that would be a very
<BR>simple soloution.
<BR>
<BR>Mark</FONT></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0C22_01C56B69.4DF35D20--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 16038 invoked from network); 30 Aug 2001 23:45:15 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 30 Aug 2001 23:45:15 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 18245 invoked by uid 50005); 30 Aug 2001 23:46:12 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpb with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.271661 secs); 30 Aug 2001 23:46:12 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 30 Aug 2001 23:46:12 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA18690; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 16:34:28 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 102640 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 23:34:27          +0000
Received: from cyclone.comcen.com.au (cyclone.comcen.com.au [203.23.236.100])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA18676 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 16:34:25 -0700
Received: (from nobody@localhost) by cyclone.comcen.com.au (8.11.1/8.11.1) id          f7UNYKd72783; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 09:34:20 +1000 (EST) (envelope-from          pkelly@comcen.com.au)
References: <F102rfFz82buW5RNB6H00019ef9@hotmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
User-Agent: IMP/PHP IMAP webmail program 2.2.3
X-Originating-IP: 203.59.160.221
Message-ID:  <999214460.3b8ecd7c60e7f@webmail.comcen.com.au>
Date:         Fri, 31 Aug 2001 09:34:20 +1000
Reply-To: "Paul Kelly" <pkelly@COMCEN.COM.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Paul Kelly" <pkelly@COMCEN.COM.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] liquids question: alcohol/N2O propellant feeding
Comments: To: John Dom <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <F102rfFz82buW5RNB6H00019ef9@hotmail.com>

Quoting John Dom <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>:

> PK wrote:
>
> >The piston seal is not subject to a pressure gradient.
>
> I see. But still, stick your life on the integrity of a series of
> O-rings?

You do it every time you drive your car!

PK

> That the propellants come together in the chamber the right way'd make
> me
> nervous enough without having to worry they get leaked elsewhere.
> If the fuel component 'd be in a bag with such a design: that 'd make
> me
> more relaxed.
>
> jd
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at
> http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 19268 invoked from network); 30 Aug 2001 23:46:03 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 30 Aug 2001 23:46:03 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 26615 invoked by uid 50005); 30 Aug 2001 23:44:03 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpf with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.582729 secs); 30 Aug 2001 23:44:03 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 30 Aug 2001 23:44:01 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA18626; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 16:28:54 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 102625 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 23:28:53          +0000
Received: from smtp008pub.verizon.net (smtp008pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.187])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA18605 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 16:28:22 -0700
Received: from [63.27.96.42] (1Cust23.tnt1.san-bernardino.ca.da.uu.net          [63.27.96.23]) by smtp008pub.verizon.net  with ESMTP for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; id f7UNRmK11454 Thu, 30 Aug 2001 18:27:48          -0500 (CDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: GTE/01rocket@mail.gte.net
References: <3B8DDA02.C47AF80D@coastnet.com> <3B8DE559.A17B8A3A@earthlink.net>            <3B8E69A3.FF9A2ABC@biomicro.com>            <a05100303b7b41fdde9b2@[63.27.96.42]>            <3B8EA9B6.88A4920D@biomicro.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <a05100306b7b47abb0488@[63.27.96.42]>
Date:         Thu, 30 Aug 2001 16:27:45 -0700
Reply-To: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] [EE]: Building a Satellite
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <3B8EA9B6.88A4920D@biomicro.com>

>Mark Spute wrote:



>According to 14 CFR Chapter III Part 404.3(a) "Any person may petition
>the Associate Administrator to issue, amend or repeal a regulation . .
>."  yada yada yada.
>
>What has the petition history been in this case?  Has anyone (I have to
>belive that someone, somewhere has) petitioned to have this 15 second
>typo changed back to it's original recommended value of 50 (as I have
>heard the story.)  What have been the FAA's reasons for not changing the
>value back to it's original recommended 50 seconds?


The process is to "file" a request which closely resembles a lawsuit
because it makes the proposal, supports the proposal with legal and
technical argument, and provides estimates of various impacts,
financially, enforcement, and other issues.  Once the relatively
complicated filing is submitted, it is reviewed for form and filed in
the federal register for public comment.  The government has the
right to schedule hearings.  Last time it held a forum on the CATS
BBS and received mailed comments.  The final result was to ignore all
comments.

The key is to have all the replies and comments be supportive and
show a basis to have an opinion supportive.  It would help greatly to
get the endorsement of political leaders and technical leaders such
as AIAA, CalSpace, etc.

Once comments have been received it all goes into a black box for
result.  I would advise spending considerable resources on defining
the black box for a change.

Arocket is a perfect forum as is sci.space.tech and sci.space.policy

Just keep the least respected "amateur" rocketry organizations far
away because they tend to try their best to take over after somebody
else has done all the hard work.

Jerry

--
Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
Opinion, the whole thing.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 14539 invoked from network); 31 Aug 2001 00:19:29 -0000
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 31 Aug 2001 00:19:29 -0000
Received: (qmail 12583 invoked by uid 50005); 31 Aug 2001 00:17:28 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpf with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.695598 secs); 31 Aug 2001 00:17:28 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 31 Aug 2001 00:17:27 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA18940; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 17:11:11 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 102690 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 00:11:05          +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (oe45.law12.hotmail.com [64.4.18.17]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA18926 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu,          30 Aug 2001 17:11:05 -0700
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Thu,          30 Aug 2001 17:10:35 -0700
X-Originating-IP: [24.29.188.254]
References:  <00c101c13164$258d6a80$c36122c0@cronos>                         <00c501c13172$cbb42c60$1b30fea9@kristinscomp>              <005201c1317a$25ad73a0$490fa8c0@redmond.corp.microsoft.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 31 Aug 2001 00:10:35.0187 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[5B2F1830:01C131B1]
Message-ID:  <OE45p3sJWGYdRGy9tCx000008b3@hotmail.com>
Date:         Thu, 30 Aug 2001 19:11:17 -0500
Reply-To: "Mark Kruep" <mkruep@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Mark Kruep" <mkruep@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] High Altitude Mach plus flights
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Other factors that could cause problems are the ambient air conditions at
launch. High humidity and/or cool temperatures makes air more dense and thus
harder to move through. If you look at Tripoli altitude records you'll
notice that the majority of them (all but 1)were obtained in May thru
September (warmer less dense air), and I bet if you investigated them that
they took place in a desert launch locality more often than not.This mostly
applies to fairly low altitudes since the air thins as you go up
(obviously). Now, low altitude is not so low for most amateurs. I'd say at
least 98% of the flights done by amateurs are low enough to have problems
(I'm just guesstimating here so please don't flame me).

As for getting rid of heat, go to McMaster-Carr and check out their
ceramics. The start-up costs aren't real friendly, but getting to 100k isn't
exactly cheap anyway. They have some 2 part castable ceramics that I've
heard of people putting on leading edges and nosecones (cast your own
ceramic nose cone if it's small enough). Last time I looked it was like
$80-100 for 10 lbs.
http://www.mcmaster.com/param/asp/ss.asp?FAM=ceramic&FT_128=2258&desc=Castab
le+Ceramics

If you don't like that idea, adding graphite to your epoxy might help, or
using carbon fiber (which is basically graphite or graphite is
carbon...which ever way you like) on your leading edges. Formula 1 racing
cars use carbon fiber in their braking systems because it dissipates heat so
well. Last but not least, get some BBQ grill paint or engine block paint. It
isn't pretty but it should take the brunt of the heat since it will be
primarily surface heating causing you problems anyway. I think they also
make some spray on ceramic paints as well. Then again, if you read up on
some high speed projects like the British altitude attempt or the one Shadow
Composites flew last year, you'll find that they had little more than
cosmetic heat damage at speeds of Mach 3 and above. Hope my rambling helps.


Mark

---- Original Message -----
From: "Greg Deputy" <greg@BLASTZONE.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Thursday, August 30, 2001 12:35 PM
Subject: Re: [AR] High Altitude Mach plus flights


> > > 4. What high temperature epoxies are available on the market?
> >
> > Couldn't tell ya.  But let me tell a story and drive home a point:  Once
> > upon a time myself and a couple other guys designed/built an
experimental
> > re-entry vehicle for the USAF.  Top speed (IIRC) was approximately Mach
8.
> > We used an epoxy that was only rated to about 200 F.  How'd we do it?
> Just
> > slap some ablative coating on it!  It's cheap.  It's easy.  Why would
you
> do
> > it any other way?
> >
>
> What constitutes an ablative coating?  Rubber?  Plaster? Epoxy?  Duct
tape?
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 18145 invoked from network); 31 Aug 2001 00:20:19 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 31 Aug 2001 00:20:19 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 21947 invoked by uid 50005); 31 Aug 2001 00:19:32 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.240981 secs); 31 Aug 2001 00:19:32 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 31 Aug 2001 00:19:31 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA18962; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 17:12:37 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 102697 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 00:12:36          +0000
Received: from imo-m06.mx.aol.com (imo-m06.mx.aol.com [64.12.136.161]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA18942 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 17:11:16 -0700
Received: from Sociald84@aol.com by imo-m06.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v31_r1.4.) id          m.c3.1584b4b0 (3988); Thu, 30 Aug 2001 20:11:05 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0C27_01C56B69.4DF35D20"
X-Mailer: AOL 6.0 for Windows US sub 10536
Message-ID:  <c3.1584b4b0.28c03018@aol.com>
Date:         Thu, 30 Aug 2001 20:11:04 EDT
Reply-To: <Sociald84@AOL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <Sociald84@AOL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] High Altitude Mach plus flights
Comments: To: greg@blastzone.com
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0C27_01C56B69.4DF35D20
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

In a message dated 8/30/2001 11:37:01 AM Mountain Daylight Time,
greg@BLASTZONE.COM writes:


> What constitutes an ablative coating?  Rubber?  Plaster? Epoxy?  Duct tape?
>

In my designs I was thinking an Aluminum oxide/ Epoxy matrix.

Mark

------=_NextPart_000_0C27_01C56B69.4DF35D20
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<HTML><FONT FACE=arial,helvetica><FONT  SIZE=3>In a message dated 8/30/2001 11:37:01 AM Mountain Daylight Time,
<BR>greg@BLASTZONE.COM writes:
<BR>
<BR></FONT><FONT  COLOR="#000000" SIZE=2 FAMILY="SANSSERIF" FACE="Arial" LANG="0">
<BR><BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE style="BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px">What constitutes an ablative coating? &nbsp;Rubber? &nbsp;Plaster? Epoxy? &nbsp;Duct tape?
<BR></BLOCKQUOTE>
<BR></FONT><FONT  COLOR="#000000" SIZE=3 FAMILY="SANSSERIF" FACE="Arial" LANG="0">
<BR>In my designs I was thinking an Aluminum oxide/ Epoxy matrix.
<BR>
<BR>Mark</FONT></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0C27_01C56B69.4DF35D20--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 6851 invoked from network); 31 Aug 2001 00:24:32 -0000
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 31 Aug 2001 00:24:32 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 5691 invoked by uid 50005); 31 Aug 2001 00:24:56 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpe with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.211854 secs); 31 Aug 2001 00:24:56 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 31 Aug 2001 00:24:56 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA19089; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 17:18:29 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 102728 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 00:18:28          +0000
Received: from localhost.localdomain (IDENT:root@lauren.pconline.com          [207.191.131.70]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA19075          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 17:18:27 -0700
Received: from artimex.com (m18-3-5.pconline.com [207.191.143.37]) by          localhost.localdomain (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f7UNGaQ07056 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 18:16:36 -0500
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (Win98; I)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <3B8DDA02.C47AF80D@coastnet.com> <3B8DE559.A17B8A3A@earthlink.net>            <3B8E69A3.FF9A2ABC@biomicro.com>            <a05100303b7b41fdde9b2@[63.27.96.42]>            <3B8EA9B6.88A4920D@biomicro.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B8ED82C.C8C84182@artimex.com>
Date:         Thu, 30 Aug 2001 19:19:56 -0500
Reply-To: "Robert Brashear" <rjb@ARTIMEX.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Robert Brashear" <rjb@ARTIMEX.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] [EE]: Building a Satellite
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

"Mark K. Spute" wrote:

> What has the petition history been in this case?  Has anyone (I have to
> belive that someone, somewhere has) petitioned to have this 15 second
> typo changed back to it's original recommended value of 50 (as I have
> heard the story.)  What have been the FAA's reasons for not changing the
> value back to it's original recommended 50 seconds?
>

Another question about the above. On the AST webpage, it shows the
criteria for a launch license exemption. Number one is a total impulse
of 200,000 pound-seconds. I had always heard that it was 200,000
newton-seconds. Is this "another typo"?

Thanks.

Bob Brashear

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 16346 invoked from network); 31 Aug 2001 00:34:13 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 31 Aug 2001 00:34:13 -0000
Received: (qmail 21108 invoked by uid 50005); 31 Aug 2001 00:35:07 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpa with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.393696 secs); 31 Aug 2001 00:35:07 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 31 Aug 2001 00:35:07 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA19188; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 17:30:18 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 102747 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 00:30:09          +0000
Received: from dune.gnc.net (root@dune.gnc.net [207.203.72.4]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA19174 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu,          30 Aug 2001 17:30:08 -0700
Received: from beowulf (sw1-33.gnc.net [207.203.72.63]) by dune.gnc.net          (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id UAA17739 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu,          30 Aug 2001 20:30:09 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <LPBBKJMJEOFKAMFJJNNHOEAICHAA.landofgrey@gnc.net>
Date:         Thu, 30 Aug 2001 20:27:14 -0400
Reply-To: <landofgrey@gnc.net>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Matthew Travis" <landofgrey@gnc.net>
Subject:      Re: [AR] [EE]: Building a Satellite
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <3B8ED82C.C8C84182@artimex.com>

For some reason, normally excellent writers tend to forget all their skills
when they attampt to create content for web pages. Typos on websites is not
an uncommon thing. Fortunately, unless it is part of an explicitly
legally-binding contract (e.g. a credit card payment agreement form), it is
not legally binding. In this case, whether or not it is a typo, it is at
worst a simple typo and not a case of redefining the regulations as in the
case of the "15 second" typo. This would be a situation for emailing the
webmaster, not your lawyer.


> Another question about the above. On the AST webpage, it shows the
> criteria for a launch license exemption. Number one is a total impulse
> of 200,000 pound-seconds. I had always heard that it was 200,000
> newton-seconds. Is this "another typo"?
>
> Thanks.
>
> Bob Brashear
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 17029 invoked from network); 31 Aug 2001 00:41:20 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 31 Aug 2001 00:41:20 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 15372 invoked by uid 50005); 31 Aug 2001 00:39:59 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.241549 secs); 31 Aug 2001 00:39:59 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 31 Aug 2001 00:39:58 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA19247; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 17:37:11 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 102762 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 00:37:04          +0000
Received: from imo-m02.mx.aol.com (imo-m02.mx.aol.com [64.12.136.5]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA19233 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 17:37:03 -0700
Received: from Sociald84@aol.com by imo-m02.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v31_r1.4.) id          3.7b.1a4ff78e (3988); Thu, 30 Aug 2001 20:35:58 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0C2C_01C56B69.4DFF4400"
X-Mailer: AOL 6.0 for Windows US sub 10536
Message-ID:  <7b.1a4ff78e.28c035ed@aol.com>
Date:         Thu, 30 Aug 2001 20:35:57 EDT
Reply-To: <Sociald84@AOL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <Sociald84@AOL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] [EE]: Building a Satellite
Comments: To: landofgrey@gnc.net
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0C2C_01C56B69.4DFF4400
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

I don't think what was meant was that the 15 second number was a typo on the
website or in the real rules, but that wen it was drafted it was a typo that
became rule.

Mark

In a message dated 8/30/2001 6:31:32 PM Mountain Daylight Time,
landofgrey@gnc.net writes:


> For some reason, normally excellent writers tend to forget all their skills
> when they attampt to create content for web pages. Typos on websites is not
> an uncommon thing. Fortunately, unless it is part of an explicitly
> legally-binding contract (e.g. a credit card payment agreement form), it is
> not legally binding. In this case, whether or not it is a typo, it is at
> worst a simple typo and not a case of redefining the regulations as in the
> case of the "15 second" typo. This would be a situation for emailing the
>



------=_NextPart_000_0C2C_01C56B69.4DFF4400
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<HTML><FONT FACE=arial,helvetica><FONT  SIZE=2>I don't think what was meant was that the 15 second number was a typo on the
<BR>website or in the real rules, but that wen it was drafted it was a typo that
<BR>became rule.
<BR>
<BR>Mark
<BR></FONT><FONT  COLOR="#000000" SIZE=3 FAMILY="SANSSERIF" FACE="Arial" LANG="0">
<BR>In a message dated 8/30/2001 6:31:32 PM Mountain Daylight Time,
<BR>landofgrey@gnc.net writes:
<BR>
<BR></FONT><FONT  COLOR="#000000" SIZE=2 FAMILY="SANSSERIF" FACE="Arial" LANG="0">
<BR><BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE style="BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px">For some reason, normally excellent writers tend to forget all their skills
<BR>when they attampt to create content for web pages. Typos on websites is not
<BR>an uncommon thing. Fortunately, unless it is part of an explicitly
<BR>legally-binding contract (e.g. a credit card payment agreement form), it is
<BR>not legally binding. In this case, whether or not it is a typo, it is at
<BR>worst a simple typo and not a case of redefining the regulations as in the
<BR>case of the "15 second" typo. This would be a situation for emailing the
<BR>webmaster, not your lawyer.</BLOCKQUOTE>
<BR></FONT><FONT  COLOR="#000000" SIZE=3 FAMILY="SANSSERIF" FACE="Arial" LANG="0">
<BR></FONT></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0C2C_01C56B69.4DFF4400--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 5621 invoked from network); 31 Aug 2001 00:45:26 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 31 Aug 2001 00:45:26 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 6398 invoked by uid 50005); 31 Aug 2001 00:45:50 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpe with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 2.322394 secs); 31 Aug 2001 00:45:50 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 31 Aug 2001 00:45:46 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA19341; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 17:41:38 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 102793 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 00:41:36          +0000
Received: from smtp004pub.verizon.net (smtp004pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.183])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA19320 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 17:41:26 -0700
Received: from [63.27.96.42] (1Cust38.tnt1.san-bernardino.ca.da.uu.net          [63.27.96.38]) by smtp004pub.verizon.net  with ESMTP for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; id f7V0elJ11458 Thu, 30 Aug 2001 19:40:47          -0500 (CDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: GTE/01rocket@mail.gte.net
References: <3B8DDA02.C47AF80D@coastnet.com> <3B8DE559.A17B8A3A@earthlink.net>            <3B8E69A3.FF9A2ABC@biomicro.com>            <a05100303b7b41fdde9b2@[63.27.96.42]>            <3B8EA9B6.88A4920D@biomicro.com> <3B8ED82C.C8C84182@artimex.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <a05100307b7b48cd26407@[63.27.96.42]>
Date:         Thu, 30 Aug 2001 17:40:46 -0700
Reply-To: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] [EE]: Building a Satellite
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <3B8ED82C.C8C84182@artimex.com>

>Bob Brashear wrote:


>Another question about the above. On the AST webpage, it shows the
>criteria for a launch license exemption. Number one is a total impulse
>of 200,000 pound-seconds. I had always heard that it was 200,000
>newton-seconds. Is this "another typo"?


Nope.  200,000 lb-sec (890,000 n-s)
At 15 seconds that is 13,333 lb thrust average (59,333 N)

Assuming it also meets the other limitations.

Jerry

--
Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
Opinion, the whole thing.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 11772 invoked from network); 31 Aug 2001 00:54:05 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 31 Aug 2001 00:54:05 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 25684 invoked by uid 50005); 31 Aug 2001 00:52:43 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.172119 secs); 31 Aug 2001 00:52:43 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 31 Aug 2001 00:52:43 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA19385; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 17:44:25 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 102808 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 00:44:20          +0000
Received: from smtp002pub.verizon.net (smtp002pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.181])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA19371 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 17:44:20 -0700
Received: from [63.27.96.42] (1Cust38.tnt1.san-bernardino.ca.da.uu.net          [63.27.96.38]) by smtp002pub.verizon.net  with ESMTP for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; id f7V0hlI09057 Thu, 30 Aug 2001 19:43:48          -0500 (CDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: GTE/01rocket@mail.gte.net
References: <LPBBKJMJEOFKAMFJJNNHOEAICHAA.landofgrey@gnc.net>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <a05100308b7b48da0947b@[63.27.96.42]>
Date:         Thu, 30 Aug 2001 17:43:46 -0700
Reply-To: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] [EE]: Building a Satellite
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <LPBBKJMJEOFKAMFJJNNHOEAICHAA.landofgrey@gnc.net>

>Matthew Travis wrote:


>For some reason, normally excellent writers tend to forget all their skills
>when they attampt to create content for web pages. Typos on websites is not


are not

Apparantly your theory applies to email as well :)


>an uncommon thing. Fortunately, unless it is part of an explicitly
>legally-binding contract (e.g. a credit card payment agreement form), it is
>not legally binding. In this case, whether or not it is a typo, it is at
>worst a simple typo and not a case of redefining the regulations as in the
>case of the "15 second" typo. This would be a situation for emailing the
>webmaster, not your lawyer.

The typo was addressed in a public comment and even the properly
filed public comment was ignored.  Black box matters.

Jerry

--
Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
Opinion, the whole thing.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 77 invoked from network); 31 Aug 2001 01:19:43 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 31 Aug 2001 01:19:43 -0000
Received: (qmail 1629 invoked by uid 50005); 31 Aug 2001 01:20:37 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpa with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.19469 secs); 31 Aug 2001 01:20:37 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 31 Aug 2001 01:20:36 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA19529; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 18:14:16 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 102830 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 01:14:15          +0000
Received: from dune.gnc.net (root@dune.gnc.net [207.203.72.4]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA19512 for <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Thu,          30 Aug 2001 18:13:00 -0700
Received: from beowulf (sw2-42.gnc.net [207.203.72.122]) by dune.gnc.net          (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id VAA18747 for <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Thu,          30 Aug 2001 21:13:02 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <LPBBKJMJEOFKAMFJJNNHAEAKCHAA.landofgrey@gnc.net>
Date:         Thu, 30 Aug 2001 21:10:01 -0400
Reply-To: <landofgrey@gnc.net>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Matthew Travis" <landofgrey@gnc.net>
Subject:      Re: [AR] [EE]: Building a Satellite
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <LPBBKJMJEOFKAMFJJNNHMEAJCHAA.landofgrey@gnc.net>

Yes, that's right. I hope I didn't confuse people. My point was that a typo
on a website is just a typo and not something that can become a
legally-binding change in a regulation. I referenced the "15-second" typo
only because it was mentioned by someone else. That typo was not a typo on a
web page, but rather a typo in a draft document that went uncorrected and,
hence,  became the rule. The two situations are not equivalent at all  -
which was  my whole point to begin with.


-----Original Message-----
From: Sociald84@aol.com [mailto:Sociald84@aol.com]
Sent: Thursday, August 30, 2001 8:36 PM
To: landofgrey@gnc.net; AROCKET@itc.uci.edu
Subject: Re: [AR] [EE]: Building a Satellite


I don't think what was meant was that the 15 second number was a typo on the
website or in the real rules, but that wen it was drafted it was a typo that
became rule.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 21450 invoked from network); 31 Aug 2001 01:31:45 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 31 Aug 2001 01:31:45 -0000
Received: (qmail 25732 invoked by uid 50005); 31 Aug 2001 01:30:13 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.262131 secs); 31 Aug 2001 01:30:13 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 31 Aug 2001 01:30:13 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA19505; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 18:11:27 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 102823 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 01:11:16          +0000
Received: from dune.gnc.net (root@dune.gnc.net [207.203.72.4]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA19491 for <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Thu,          30 Aug 2001 18:11:15 -0700
Received: from beowulf (sw2-42.gnc.net [207.203.72.122]) by dune.gnc.net          (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id VAA18708 for <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Thu,          30 Aug 2001 21:11:15 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0C31_01C56B69.4DFF4400"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <LPBBKJMJEOFKAMFJJNNHMEAJCHAA.landofgrey@gnc.net>
Date:         Thu, 30 Aug 2001 21:08:15 -0400
Reply-To: <landofgrey@gnc.net>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Matthew Travis" <landofgrey@gnc.net>
Subject:      Re: [AR] [EE]: Building a Satellite
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <7b.1a4ff78e.28c035ed@aol.com>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0C31_01C56B69.4DFF4400
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Yes, that's right. I hope I didn't confuse people. My point was that a typo
on a website is just a typo and not something that can become a
legally-binding change in a regulation. I referenced the "15-second" typo
only because it was mentioned by someone else. That typo was not a typo on a
web page, but rather a typo in a draft document that went uncorrected and,
hence,  became the rule. The two situations are not equivalent at all.
  -----Original Message-----
  From: Sociald84@aol.com [mailto:Sociald84@aol.com]
  Sent: Thursday, August 30, 2001 8:36 PM
  To: landofgrey@gnc.net; AROCKET@itc.uci.edu
  Subject: Re: [AR] [EE]: Building a Satellite


  I don't think what was meant was that the 15 second number was a typo on
the
  website or in the real rules, but that wen it was drafted it was a typo
that
  became rule.



------=_NextPart_000_0C31_01C56B69.4DFF4400
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Dus-ascii">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 5.50.4208.1700" name=3DGENERATOR></HEAD>
<BODY>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial color=3D#0000ff size=3D2><SPAN =
class=3D390160401-31082001>Yes,=20
that's right. I hope I didn't confuse people. My point was that a typo =
on a=20
website is just a typo and not something that can become a =
legally-binding=20
change in a regulation. I referenced the "15-second" typo only because =
it was=20
mentioned by someone else. That typo was not a typo on a web page, but =
rather a=20
typo in a draft document that went uncorrected and, hence, &nbsp;became =
the=20
rule. The two situations are not equivalent at all. </SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE=20
style=3D"PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px =
solid">
  <DIV class=3DOutlookMessageHeader dir=3Dltr align=3Dleft><FONT =
face=3DTahoma=20
  size=3D2>-----Original Message-----<BR><B>From:</B> Sociald84@aol.com=20
  [mailto:Sociald84@aol.com]<BR><B>Sent:</B> Thursday, August 30, 2001 =
8:36=20
  PM<BR><B>To:</B> landofgrey@gnc.net; =
AROCKET@itc.uci.edu<BR><B>Subject:</B>=20
  Re: [AR] [EE]: Building a Satellite<BR><BR></FONT></DIV><FONT=20
  face=3Darial,helvetica><FONT size=3D2>I don't think what was meant was =
that the 15=20
  second number was a typo on the <BR>website or in the real rules, but =
that wen=20
  it was drafted it was a typo that <BR>became rule. =
<BR><BR></FONT><FONT lang=3D0=20
  face=3DArial color=3D#000000 size=3D3=20
FAMILY=3D"SANSSERIF"></BLOCKQUOTE></FONT></FONT></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0C31_01C56B69.4DFF4400--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 2802 invoked from network); 31 Aug 2001 02:48:33 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 31 Aug 2001 02:48:33 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 22693 invoked by uid 50005); 31 Aug 2001 02:47:11 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.285109 secs); 31 Aug 2001 02:47:11 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 31 Aug 2001 02:47:11 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA19925; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 19:44:13 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 102905 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 02:44:07          +0000
Received: from imo-m02.mx.aol.com (imo-m02.mx.aol.com [64.12.136.5]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA19902 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 19:44:06 -0700
Received: from Tjpoulton@aol.com by imo-m02.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v31_r1.4.) id          w.da.b811e4d (4238) for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Thu, 30 Aug 2001          22:43:33 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: AOL 5.0 for Windows sub 138
Message-ID:  <da.b811e4d.28c053d5@aol.com>
Date:         Thu, 30 Aug 2001 22:43:33 EDT
Reply-To: <Tjpoulton@AOL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <Tjpoulton@AOL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] liquids question: alcohol/N2O propellant feeding
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

In a message dated 8/30/01 6:35:10 PM Central Daylight Time, Social d84
writes:

> Well if your using DOT rated tanks why not use a very simple blowdown
system.
>  Fill the fuel tank with the alcohol and then use helium to pressurize the
> tank 15% -20% ullage should probably do. It seams like that would be a very
> simple soloution.

Umm... That would only work if I could tolerate a wide variation in O:F ratio
during the burn.  The nitrous pressure stays essentially constant (only drops
slightly) during the burn.  With a 20% ullage on the fuel, the fuel pressure
would vary by a factor of 5.  That corresponds to a variation in flow of
sqrt5.  I would have to start out unacceptably rich to make that work.
Mike P.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 76 invoked from network); 31 Aug 2001 03:04:42 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 31 Aug 2001 03:04:42 -0000
Received: (qmail 4558 invoked by uid 50005); 31 Aug 2001 03:03:55 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.356774 secs); 31 Aug 2001 03:03:55 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 31 Aug 2001 03:03:54 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA19978; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 19:47:51 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 102920 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 02:47:49          +0000
Received: from smtp-out.nrtc.net (host-216-163-120-25.nrtc.net [216.163.120.25]          (may be forged)) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA19964          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 19:47:49 -0700
Received: from foy (dial-12-21-155-151.wfeca.net [12.21.155.151]) by          smtp-out.nrtc.net (8.9.3/8.9.1) with SMTP id WAA28618 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 22:47:42 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0C35_01C56B69.4DFF4400"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <002001c131c6$725bf7c0$979b150c@foy>
Date:         Thu, 30 Aug 2001 21:41:31 -0500
Reply-To: "foy" <foy@WFECA.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "foy" <foy@WFECA.NET>
Subject:      [AR] questionable motor
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0C35_01C56B69.4DFF4400
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

        This will be the first motor I have designed any comments would =
help. I am using sch 40 black pipe 2.1 id . The grain is 65/35 =
Kn/sorbitol free standing uninhibited it measures 2.0 od .625 id X 8.8 =
long. The nozzle has 50 deg con. and 24 deg div. angles with .438 dia =
throat. If you think or know this will cato say it!                      =
      HMMMM                                                              =
                  Foy

------=_NextPart_000_0C35_01C56B69.4DFF4400
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Diso-8859-1">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 5.50.4134.600" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial =
size=3D2>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; This=20
will be the first motor I have designed any comments would help. I am =
using sch=20
40 black pipe 2.1 id . The grain is 65/35 Kn/sorbitol free standing=20
uninhibited&nbsp;it measures 2.0 od .625 id X 8.8 long. The nozzle has =
50 deg=20
con. and 24 deg div. angles with .438 dia throat. If you think or know =
this will=20
cato say=20
it!&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbs=
p;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp=
;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;HMMMM&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;=20
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; =
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;=20
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; =
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;=20
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; =
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;=20
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; =
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;=20
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;=20
Foy</FONT></DIV></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0C35_01C56B69.4DFF4400--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 17961 invoked from network); 31 Aug 2001 04:05:48 -0000
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 31 Aug 2001 04:05:48 -0000
Received: (qmail 16974 invoked by uid 50005); 31 Aug 2001 04:03:47 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpf with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.116386 secs); 31 Aug 2001 04:03:47 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 31 Aug 2001 04:03:47 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA20359; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 20:52:39 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 103008 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 03:52:30          +0000
Received: from femail21.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail21.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.0.95.146]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA20345          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 20:52:30 -0700
Received: from hal2001 ([24.77.53.16]) by femail21.sdc1.sfba.home.com          (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20 201-229-121-120-20010223) with SMTP id          <20010831035225.HSDU8562.femail21.sdc1.sfba.home.com@hal2001> for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 20:52:25 -0700
References:  <da.b811e4d.28c053d5@aol.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <001a01c131cf$3231cb80$0400a8c0@hatjs>
Date:         Thu, 30 Aug 2001 20:44:10 -0700
Reply-To: "Jamie Morken" <jmorken@HOME.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jamie Morken" <jmorken@HOME.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] liquids question: alcohol/N2O propellant feeding
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Hi all,

> > Well if your using DOT rated tanks why not use a very simple blowdown
> system.
> >  Fill the fuel tank with the alcohol and then use helium to pressurize
the
> > tank 15% -20% ullage should probably do. It seams like that would be a
very
> > simple soloution.
>
> Umm... That would only work if I could tolerate a wide variation in O:F
ratio
> during the burn.  The nitrous pressure stays essentially constant (only
drops
> slightly) during the burn.  With a 20% ullage on the fuel, the fuel
pressure
> would vary by a factor of 5.  That corresponds to a variation in flow of
> sqrt5.  I would have to start out unacceptably rich to make that work.
> Mike P.

You could put a liquid regulator in the fuel line set to the correct
pressure to give you the required
flow rate of fuel, then make sure your ullage pressure will always be a bit
greater than this.
Anyone know a good source for small liquid regulators, variable and/or
preset pressure?
Small Parts doesn't have anything but http://www.mcmaster.com/ has some but
the max inlet pressure
is 400psi and they are all heavy and oversized for small rockets I think.

best regards,
Jamie

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 27737 invoked from network); 31 Aug 2001 04:19:32 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 31 Aug 2001 04:19:32 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 23504 invoked by uid 50005); 31 Aug 2001 04:20:28 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpb with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.382084 secs); 31 Aug 2001 04:20:28 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 31 Aug 2001 04:20:27 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA20493; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 21:15:17 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 103035 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 04:15:16          +0000
Received: from imo-d09.mx.aol.com (imo-d09.mx.aol.com [205.188.157.41]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA20474 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 21:15:13 -0700
Received: from Tjpoulton@aol.com by imo-d09.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v31_r1.4.) id          w.16f.14dbb0 (4238) for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Fri, 31 Aug 2001          00:14:37 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: AOL 5.0 for Windows sub 138
Message-ID:  <16f.14dbb0.28c0692c@aol.com>
Date:         Fri, 31 Aug 2001 00:14:36 EDT
Reply-To: <Tjpoulton@AOL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <Tjpoulton@AOL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] High Altitude Mach plus flights
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

In a message dated 8/30/01 7:13:35 PM Central Daylight Time,
Sociald84@AOL.COM writes:

> In my designs I was thinking an Aluminum oxide/ Epoxy matrix.

You have to remember that the limiting factor in such a matrix is the
ablation temperature of the epoxy.  As soon as the epoxy melts or vaporizes,
the Al2O3 particles will be blown away.  AFAIK, the only way to get added
benefit from a ceramic in such a situation is to use a ceramic fiber which
will stay attached to the vehicle even when the epoxy gets left behind.
Mike P.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 656 invoked from network); 31 Aug 2001 04:20:33 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 31 Aug 2001 04:20:33 -0000
Received: (qmail 16164 invoked by uid 50005); 31 Aug 2001 04:20:57 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpe with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.21365 secs); 31 Aug 2001 04:20:57 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 31 Aug 2001 04:20:56 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA20467; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 21:13:54 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 103028 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 04:13:52          +0000
Received: from localhost (rcalkins@localhost) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with          ESMTP id VAA20453; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 21:13:51 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.LNX.4.10.10108302112260.15700-100000@itc.uci.edu>
Date:         Thu, 30 Aug 2001 21:13:51 -0700
Reply-To: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
Subject:      Re: [AR] liquids question: alcohol/N2O propellant feeding
Comments: To: Jamie Morken <jmorken@HOME.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <001a01c131cf$3231cb80$0400a8c0@hatjs>

On Thu, 30 Aug 2001, Jamie Morken wrote:
> > > Well if your using DOT rated tanks why not use a very simple blowdown
> > system.
> > >  Fill the fuel tank with the alcohol and then use helium to pressurize
> the
> > > tank 15% -20% ullage should probably do. It seams like that would be a
> very
> > > simple soloution.
> >
> > Umm... That would only work if I could tolerate a wide variation in O:F
> ratio
> > during the burn.  The nitrous pressure stays essentially constant (only
> drops
> > slightly) during the burn.  With a 20% ullage on the fuel, the fuel
> pressure
> > would vary by a factor of 5.  That corresponds to a variation in flow of
> > sqrt5.  I would have to start out unacceptably rich to make that work.
> > Mike P.
>
> You could put a liquid regulator in the fuel line set to the correct
> pressure to give you the required
> flow rate of fuel, then make sure your ullage pressure will always be a bit
> greater than this.
> Anyone know a good source for small liquid regulators, variable and/or
> preset pressure?
The traditional amateur method is to use a cavitating venturi.  Does
anybody have a "How To" on designing one?

Ray

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 5134 invoked from network); 31 Aug 2001 04:22:06 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 31 Aug 2001 04:22:06 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 27894 invoked by uid 50005); 31 Aug 2001 04:23:01 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpb with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.236353 secs); 31 Aug 2001 04:23:01 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 31 Aug 2001 04:23:01 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA20518; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 21:17:26 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 103042 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 04:17:25          +0000
Received: from cyclone.comcen.com.au (cyclone.comcen.com.au [203.23.236.100])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA20504 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 21:17:24 -0700
Received: (from nobody@localhost) by cyclone.comcen.com.au (8.11.1/8.11.1) id          f7V4HJD73593; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 14:17:19 +1000 (EST) (envelope-from          pkelly@comcen.com.au)
References: <da.b811e4d.28c053d5@aol.com> <001a01c131cf$3231cb80$0400a8c0@hatjs>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
User-Agent: IMP/PHP IMAP webmail program 2.2.3
X-Originating-IP: 203.59.24.134
Message-ID:  <999231439.3b8f0fcf8e2d8@webmail.comcen.com.au>
Date:         Fri, 31 Aug 2001 14:17:19 +1000
Reply-To: "Paul Kelly" <pkelly@COMCEN.COM.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Paul Kelly" <pkelly@COMCEN.COM.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] liquids question: alcohol/N2O propellant feeding
Comments: To: Jamie Morken <jmorken@HOME.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <001a01c131cf$3231cb80$0400a8c0@hatjs>

Or you could spend 5 minutes putting 2 snap ring grooves in a $10 bit of tube,
and another 10min  making three simple disks with a couple of o-ring grooves.
$20 and half an hour later you'd have a flight weight propellant tank that
adresses all of your needs.

PK

Quoting Jamie Morken <jmorken@HOME.COM>:

> Hi all,
>
> > > Well if your using DOT rated tanks why not use a very simple
> blowdown
> > system.
> > >  Fill the fuel tank with the alcohol and then use helium to
> pressurize
> the
> > > tank 15% -20% ullage should probably do. It seams like that would be
> a
> very
> > > simple soloution.
> >
> > Umm... That would only work if I could tolerate a wide variation in
> O:F
> ratio
> > during the burn.  The nitrous pressure stays essentially constant
> (only
> drops
> > slightly) during the burn.  With a 20% ullage on the fuel, the fuel
> pressure
> > would vary by a factor of 5.  That corresponds to a variation in flow
> of
> > sqrt5.  I would have to start out unacceptably rich to make that
> work.
> > Mike P.
>
> You could put a liquid regulator in the fuel line set to the correct
> pressure to give you the required
> flow rate of fuel, then make sure your ullage pressure will always be a
> bit
> greater than this.
> Anyone know a good source for small liquid regulators, variable and/or
> preset pressure?
> Small Parts doesn't have anything but http://www.mcmaster.com/ has some
> but
> the max inlet pressure
> is 400psi and they are all heavy and oversized for small rockets I
> think.
>
> best regards,
> Jamie
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 1601 invoked from network); 31 Aug 2001 04:31:59 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 31 Aug 2001 04:31:58 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 6616 invoked by uid 50005); 31 Aug 2001 04:31:11 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.1673 secs); 31 Aug 2001 04:31:11 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 31 Aug 2001 04:31:11 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA20627; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 21:28:06 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 103072 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 04:28:05          +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (f200.law15.hotmail.com [64.4.23.200]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA20613 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 21:28:04 -0700
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Thu,          30 Aug 2001 21:27:34 -0700
Received: from 213.224.83.174 by lw15fd.law15.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Fri,          31 Aug 2001 04:27:34 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [213.224.83.174]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 31 Aug 2001 04:27:34.0576 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[41DB2300:01C131D5]
Message-ID:  <F2008FNpyLAPDVXLuSb00000341@hotmail.com>
Date:         Fri, 31 Aug 2001 04:28:05 +0000
Reply-To: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] gun launch
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

You could test all sorts of things, first things that come to mind,
parachute systems, photographic modules, altitude sensors, magnetic
orientation sensors, air speed, mid-air ignition....

jd

>From: Aaron Smith <ttocs@GTE.NET>
>Reply-To: Aaron Smith <ttocs@GTE.NET>
>To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
>Subject: [AR] gun launch
>Date: Mon, 27 Aug 2001 11:33:38 -1000
>
>How useful would a gun launch system be to an amatuer?  Powder?  Pneumatic?
>What would be the lowest useful muzzle velocity?
>
>I ask because I have plans to build a super spud gun - 3" bore,  all
>aluminum, should launch a 500 gram projectile near 225 m/s.  I can obtain
>8" pipe (quite a pretty penny, though) which would be good for 3.5 Kg to
>225 m/s, or 10 Kg to 190 m/s, if I did my maths right.  Acceleration would
>be 456 gees @ 10 kg.  These numbers are with a 10 foot barrel, which is
>pretty short.  I can see 20 feet being manageable.  Would such a system be
>useful?
>
><evil grin>


_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 29086 invoked from network); 31 Aug 2001 04:51:29 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 31 Aug 2001 04:51:29 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 22664 invoked by uid 50005); 31 Aug 2001 04:52:22 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpa with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.431743 secs); 31 Aug 2001 04:52:22 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 31 Aug 2001 04:52:21 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA20742; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 21:46:53 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 103099 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 04:46:51          +0000
Received: from smtp008pub.verizon.net (smtp008pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.187])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA20728 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 21:46:51 -0700
Received: from [63.27.96.42] (1Cust202.tnt2.san-bernardino.ca.da.uu.net          [63.27.97.202]) by smtp008pub.verizon.net  with ESMTP for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; id f7V4kIK18201 Thu, 30 Aug 2001 23:46:19          -0500 (CDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: GTE/01rocket@mail.gte.net
References: <da.b811e4d.28c053d5@aol.com>            <001a01c131cf$3231cb80$0400a8c0@hatjs>            <999231439.3b8f0fcf8e2d8@webmail.comcen.com.au>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <a05100309b7b4c6cae878@[63.27.96.42]>
Date:         Thu, 30 Aug 2001 21:46:18 -0700
Reply-To: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] liquids question: alcohol/N2O propellant feeding
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <999231439.3b8f0fcf8e2d8@webmail.comcen.com.au>

>Or you could spend 5 minutes putting 2 snap ring grooves in a $10 bit of tube,
>and another 10min  making three simple disks with a couple of o-ring grooves.
>$20 and half an hour later you'd have a flight weight propellant tank that
>adresses all of your needs.
>
>PK

Never suggest the easy, quick, cheap, and proven method.  It annoys
the people who live for "consumer interaction".

I know from experience.

Jerry

--
Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
Opinion, the whole thing.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 13127 invoked from network); 31 Aug 2001 05:08:13 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 31 Aug 2001 05:08:13 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 29815 invoked by uid 50005); 31 Aug 2001 05:06:50 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.230894 secs); 31 Aug 2001 05:06:50 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 31 Aug 2001 05:06:50 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA20772; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 21:50:18 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 103106 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 04:50:17          +0000
Received: from smtp003pub.verizon.net (smtp003pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.182])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA20758 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 21:50:16 -0700
Received: from [63.10.189.112] (1Cust112.tnt2.hilo.hi.da.uu.net          [63.10.189.112]) by smtp003pub.verizon.net  with ESMTP for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; id f7V4niw27891 Thu, 30 Aug 2001 23:49:44          -0500 (CDT)
X-Sender: ttocs@mail.gte.net
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <l03130300b7b0d325b05d@[63.10.189.25]>
Date:         Mon, 27 Aug 2001 18:49:23 -1000
Reply-To: "Aaron Smith" <ttocs@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Aaron Smith" <ttocs@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] gun launch
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <F2008FNpyLAPDVXLuSb00000341@hotmail.com>

What do you suppose would be the smallest useful payload/muzzle velocity?

At 4:28 AM +0000 8/31/01, John Dom wrote:
>You could test all sorts of things, first things that come to mind,
>parachute systems, photographic modules, altitude sensors, magnetic
>orientation sensors, air speed, mid-air ignition....
>
>jd
>
>>From: Aaron Smith <ttocs@GTE.NET>
>>Reply-To: Aaron Smith <ttocs@GTE.NET>
>>To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
>>Subject: [AR] gun launch
>>Date: Mon, 27 Aug 2001 11:33:38 -1000
>>
>>How useful would a gun launch system be to an amatuer?  Powder?  Pneumatic?
>>What would be the lowest useful muzzle velocity?
>>
>>I ask because I have plans to build a super spud gun - 3" bore,  all
>>aluminum, should launch a 500 gram projectile near 225 m/s.  I can obtain
>>8" pipe (quite a pretty penny, though) which would be good for 3.5 Kg to
>>225 m/s, or 10 Kg to 190 m/s, if I did my maths right.  Acceleration would
>>be 456 gees @ 10 kg.  These numbers are with a 10 foot barrel, which is
>>pretty short.  I can see 20 feet being manageable.  Would such a system be
>>useful?
>>
>><evil grin>
>
>
>_________________________________________________________________
>Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 2757 invoked from network); 31 Aug 2001 05:15:23 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 31 Aug 2001 05:15:23 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 17961 invoked by uid 50005); 31 Aug 2001 05:14:35 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.446848 secs); 31 Aug 2001 05:14:35 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 31 Aug 2001 05:14:35 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA20835; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 21:55:13 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 103095 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 04:55:09          +0000
Received: from albatross.prod.itd.earthlink.net          (albatross.mail.pas.earthlink.net [207.217.120.120]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA20716 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Thu,          30 Aug 2001 21:45:09 -0700
Received: from earthlink.net (dialup-209.245.136.120.Dial1.SanJose1.Level3.net          [209.245.136.120]) by albatross.prod.itd.earthlink.net          (EL-8_9_3_3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id VAA27208; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 21:45:07          -0700 (PDT)
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.75 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.16-22 i686)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <F2008FNpyLAPDVXLuSb00000341@hotmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B8F16A4.6925733D@earthlink.net>
Date:         Thu, 30 Aug 2001 21:46:28 -0700
Reply-To: "David Weinshenker" <daze39@EARTHLINK.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "David Weinshenker" <daze39@EARTHLINK.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] gun launch
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

John Dom wrote:
>
> You could test all sorts of things, first things that come to mind,
> parachute systems, photographic modules, altitude sensors, magnetic
> orientation sensors, air speed, mid-air ignition....

Couldn't a booster stage using off-the-shelf HPR rocket motors
do the same thing? Sounds like a gun-launcher, though perhaps
interesting for its own sake, would be a bit elaborate by
comparison.

-dave w

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 2117 invoked from network); 31 Aug 2001 06:41:16 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 31 Aug 2001 06:41:16 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 4456 invoked by uid 50005); 31 Aug 2001 06:41:39 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpe with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.192127 secs); 31 Aug 2001 06:41:39 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 31 Aug 2001 06:41:39 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA21433; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 23:37:49 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 103135 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 06:37:48          +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (f143.law15.hotmail.com [64.4.23.143]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA20925 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 21:59:55 -0700
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Thu,          30 Aug 2001 21:59:25 -0700
Received: from 213.224.83.174 by lw15fd.law15.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Fri,          31 Aug 2001 04:59:24 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [213.224.83.174]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 31 Aug 2001 04:59:25.0194 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[B4AC4EA0:01C131D9]
Message-ID:  <F143Y1SWoBDyseVwrbl00000589@hotmail.com>
Date:         Fri, 31 Aug 2001 06:37:48 +0000
Reply-To: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] AN melt
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

I said I assume and still do that in molten anhydric conditions KN does not
dissolve in molten sugars or at least little whereas AN does.

Now if you add water you can of course dissolve both; after partly getting
rid of the water by evaporation you may reach "supersaturated" glass like
conditions where both remain dissolved like you seem to have described here.
Did I understand this state correctly? is it sticky or malleable? Any idea
of the water content of the glass like substance you describe?

jd


> > So SP (must still study his text) proved sugar dissolves in molten AN
>to
> > produce more homogenous propellant blocks than the candy frying pan can
>with
> > KN powder technique. In the latter the KN never really liquifies or
> > dissolves in the candy melt is what I heard.
>Let me clarify this.  Yes, the KN really does dissolve.  KN is actually
>soluable in water.  It comes out of solution if you remove all the water
>although I have produced some samples, which after sitting in a
>dehumidifier, are nearly water free, and still have no visible crystals
>under a 30 power microscope.  They have an impressive burn rate, and are
>highly energetic.  I did not measure shrinkage however, and this is a slow
>process.
>
>Ray


_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 6000 invoked from network); 31 Aug 2001 06:42:37 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 31 Aug 2001 06:42:37 -0000
Received: (qmail 21544 invoked by uid 50005); 31 Aug 2001 06:43:29 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpa with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.202984 secs); 31 Aug 2001 06:43:29 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 31 Aug 2001 06:43:29 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA21451; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 23:39:12 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 103155 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 06:39:10          +0000
Received: from femail21.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail21.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.0.95.146]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA21014          for <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 22:12:37 -0700
Received: from hal2001 ([24.77.53.16]) by femail21.sdc1.sfba.home.com          (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20 201-229-121-120-20010223) with SMTP id          <20010831051232.JJRW8562.femail21.sdc1.sfba.home.com@hal2001> for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 22:12:32 -0700
References: <Pine.LNX.4.10.10108302112260.15700-100000@itc.uci.edu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <004701c131da$63d4b340$0400a8c0@hatjs>
Date:         Thu, 30 Aug 2001 22:04:18 -0700
Reply-To: "Jamie Morken" <jmorken@HOME.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jamie Morken" <jmorken@HOME.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] liquids question: alcohol/N2O propellant feeding
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Hi all,

> > You could put a liquid regulator in the fuel line set to the correct
> > pressure to give you the required
> > flow rate of fuel, then make sure your ullage pressure will always be a
bit
> > greater than this.
> > Anyone know a good source for small liquid regulators, variable and/or
> > preset pressure?

> The traditional amateur method is to use a cavitating venturi.  Does
> anybody have a "How To" on designing one?

I found a site that gives a bit more info on cavitating venturi's but no
real explanation:
http://www.foxvalve.com/frameset-venturi.html

Could someone explain how these devices work?

Here is a page on a possible failure of a cavitating venturi in a rocket:
http://esapub.esrin.esa.it/rfs/rfs14/flight14.htm

"After detailed investigations, supported by mathematical modelling, the
Failure Enquiry Board* could clearly conclude that the LOx flow in the
turbopump gas generator had been inadequate. The defect originated from an
anomaly located in the portion of the circuit between the cavitating venturi
fitted inside the LOx injection block and the gas generator injectors. "

"Two possible causes for the anomaly have been retained by the Board after a
comprehensive failure mode analysis:

either a partial obstruction of the cavitating venturi (1.33 mm diam.) or
gas generator injectors (3x1.51 mm diam.) by a foreign particle or by ice;

or a leak in the LOx line downstream of the venturi due to a possibly
defective seal. "


It is interesting that the cross section area of the venturi throat is less
than that of the injectors.  The cavitating venturi will not regulate until
a certain flowrate and the full tank pressure will be on the injectors until
the flowrate increases to this.  If it is sized to regulate at a flowrate a
bit below what the injectors require would it work ok?

best regards,
Jamie

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 9972 invoked from network); 31 Aug 2001 06:44:15 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 31 Aug 2001 06:44:15 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 6033 invoked by uid 50005); 31 Aug 2001 06:44:38 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpe with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.117087 secs); 31 Aug 2001 06:44:38 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 31 Aug 2001 06:44:37 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA21481; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 23:40:34 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 103161 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 06:40:33          +0000
Received: from idsoftware.com (predator.idsoftware.com [192.246.40.34]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA21038 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 22:16:15 -0700
Received: from [192.246.40.144] (account johnc HELO pluto.idsoftware.com) by          idsoftware.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 3.4.7) with ESMTP id 363503 for          AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 00:16:15 -0500
X-Sender: johnc@mail.idsoftware.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.1
References: <001a01c131cf$3231cb80$0400a8c0@hatjs>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <4.3.1.2.20010831002026.03720ce0@mail.idsoftware.com>
Date:         Fri, 31 Aug 2001 00:29:18 -0500
Reply-To: "John Carmack" <johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Carmack" <johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] liquids question: alcohol/N2O propellant feeding
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <Pine.LNX.4.10.10108302112260.15700-100000@itc.uci.edu>

>
> > You could put a liquid regulator in the fuel line set to the correct
> > pressure to give you the required
> > flow rate of fuel, then make sure your ullage pressure will always be a bit
> > greater than this.
> > Anyone know a good source for small liquid regulators, variable and/or
> > preset pressure?
>The traditional amateur method is to use a cavitating venturi.  Does
>anybody have a "How To" on designing one?
>
>Ray

As I understand it, a cavitating venturi will take a constant tank pressure
and flow a fixed amount into a varying downstream pressure, which tends to
smooth out feed system variations.  I don't think it helps to even out flow
when upstream pressure is dropping.

Also, the pressure drop is higher than you would think based on just
dividing ullage space by propellent space, because pushing the propellent
out causes the pressurizing gas to cool, which lowers the pressure.  The
last armadillo update has some excel graphs with tank pressures of a six
liter tank expelling two liters of peroxide that shows the pressure
dropping lower than the 4/6 of the original pressure you would intuitively
suggest.  We need to do a test with the tank 2/3 full instead of 1/3 full
to get some more numbers.


John Carmack

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 15409 invoked from network); 31 Aug 2001 06:46:25 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 31 Aug 2001 06:46:25 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 21853 invoked by uid 50005); 31 Aug 2001 06:45:02 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.252956 secs); 31 Aug 2001 06:45:02 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 31 Aug 2001 06:45:01 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA21528; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 23:41:57 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 103163 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 06:41:56          +0000
Received: from smtp002pub.verizon.net (smtp002pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.181])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA21077 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 22:30:27 -0700
Received: from [63.25.193.103] (1Cust103.tnt1.hilo.hi.da.uu.net          [63.25.193.103]) by smtp002pub.verizon.net  with ESMTP ; id          f7V5TrI07865 Fri, 31 Aug 2001 00:29:54 -0500 (CDT)
X-Sender: ttocs@mail.gte.net
References: <F2008FNpyLAPDVXLuSb00000341@hotmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <l03130300b7b0d90611d6@[63.10.189.112]>
Date:         Mon, 27 Aug 2001 19:29:28 -1000
Reply-To: "Aaron Smith" <ttocs@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Aaron Smith" <ttocs@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] gun launch
Comments: To: David Weinshenker <daze39@EARTHLINK.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <3B8F16A4.6925733D@earthlink.net>

At 9:46 PM -0700 8/30/01, David Weinshenker wrote:
>John Dom wrote:
>>
>> You could test all sorts of things, first things that come to mind,
>> parachute systems, photographic modules, altitude sensors, magnetic
>> orientation sensors, air speed, mid-air ignition....
>
>Couldn't a booster stage using off-the-shelf HPR rocket motors
>do the same thing? Sounds like a gun-launcher, though perhaps
>interesting for its own sake, would be a bit elaborate by
>comparison.
>
>-dave w

A gun launcher is by no means elaborate - it's two pipes and a valve.  The
best advantage I can see is very high firing rates - I have gotten cycle
time on my VegetableWeapon 500 (tm) down to 5 minutes (with a bike pump!).
Compressed air is not exactly expensive, something that could be vital with
high flight rates, considering the cost of reload kits.

Aaron

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 3550 invoked from network); 31 Aug 2001 06:53:15 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 31 Aug 2001 06:53:15 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 6342 invoked by uid 50005); 31 Aug 2001 06:54:10 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpb with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.74198 secs); 31 Aug 2001 06:54:10 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 31 Aug 2001 06:54:09 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA21414; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 23:36:12 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 103170 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 06:36:02          +0000
Received: from smtp08.phx.gblx.net (smtp08.phx.gblx.net [64.211.219.57]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA21165 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 22:51:54 -0700
Received: (from daemon@localhost) by smtp08.phx.gblx.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id          WAA120190; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 22:51:49 -0700
Received: from 64-208-236-224.nas1.TBR.gblx.net(64.208.236.224),          claiming to be "frontiernet.net" via SMTP by smtp08.phx.gblx.net,          id smtpdFp4aEa; Thu Aug 30 22:50:30 2001
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.74 [en] (Win98; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <16f.14dbb0.28c0692c@aol.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B8F26C3.10978F9C@frontiernet.net>
Date:         Fri, 31 Aug 2001 01:55:15 -0400
Reply-To: <tbinford@frontiernet.net>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Tom Binford" <tbinford@frontiernet.net>
Subject:      Re: [AR] High Altitude Mach plus flights
Comments: To: Tjpoulton@AOL.COM
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Tjpoulton@AOL.COM wrote:
>
> In a message dated 8/30/01 7:13:35 PM Central Daylight Time,
> Sociald84@AOL.COM writes:
>
> > In my designs I was thinking an Aluminum oxide/ Epoxy matrix.
>
> You have to remember that the limiting factor in such a matrix is the
> ablation temperature of the epoxy.  As soon as the epoxy melts or vaporizes,
> the Al2O3 particles will be blown away.  AFAIK, the only way to get added
> benefit from a ceramic in such a situation is to use a ceramic fiber which
> will stay attached to the vehicle even when the epoxy gets left behind.
> Mike P.

Coat it with Thermeeze ceramic putty and sand smooth. Then you'll have
an aluminum oxide coating. I doubt the rocket will be supersonic long
enough to do serious damage to something like wood.

Tom

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 24795 invoked from network); 31 Aug 2001 07:54:54 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 31 Aug 2001 07:54:54 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 27465 invoked by uid 50005); 31 Aug 2001 07:52:51 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpf with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.19939 secs); 31 Aug 2001 07:52:51 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 31 Aug 2001 07:52:51 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA21800; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 00:51:00 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 103263 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 07:50:56          +0000
Received: from femail46.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail46.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.254.60.40]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA21786          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 00:50:55 -0700
Received: from c1649002-a.earthlink.net ([24.20.95.67]) by          femail46.sdc1.sfba.home.com (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20          201-229-121-120-20010223) with ESMTP id          <20010831075050.PHVE29437.femail46.sdc1.sfba.home.com@c1649002-a.earthlink.net>; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 00:50:50          -0700
X-Sender: forkbomb@mail.earthlink.net
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.0.2
References: <da.b811e4d.28c053d5@aol.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <5.0.2.1.0.20010831002537.025686d8@mail.earthlink.net>
Date:         Fri, 31 Aug 2001 00:50:48 -0700
Reply-To: "Pierce Nichols" <forkbomb@EARTHLINK.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Pierce Nichols" <forkbomb@EARTHLINK.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] liquids question: alcohol/N2O propellant feeding
Comments: To: Jamie Morken <jmorken@HOME.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <001a01c131cf$3231cb80$0400a8c0@hatjs>

At 08:44 PM 8/30/2001 -0700, Jamie Morken wrote:

>You could put a liquid regulator in the fuel line set to the correct
>pressure to give you the required
>flow rate of fuel, then make sure your ullage pressure will always be a bit
>greater than this.
>Anyone know a good source for small liquid regulators, variable and/or
>preset pressure?
>Small Parts doesn't have anything but http://www.mcmaster.com/ has some but
>the max inlet pressure
>is 400psi and they are all heavy and oversized for small rockets I think.


         McMaster-Carr also has a very broad selection of gas and
compressed-air regulators, including a number of sub-miniature styles. The
subminatures appear to be limited to ~100 psi outlet pressure, but that is
enough for a simple, pressure-fed biprop. They are also quite small. Search
under gas regulators and pressure regulators and you should find what you
need.
         Here's a possible design to consider, if you can stand to not use
those pretty composite tanks. It has the advantage of serving as your
airframe as well :). The basic concept is to use concentric tanks. N2O is
in the outer tank, and the inner tank holds fuel. The ullage space of the
two tanks is connected, so that the fuel tank is N2O pressurized. A piston
isolates the gaseous N2O from the fuel. This neatly solves the problem of
getting fuel from where it is stored to the engine, with minimal pressure
drop, since the tank outlet is right up against the engine. This tank is
probably the lightest sort of bipropellant tank, since only the outer wall
of the tank combination needs to take the full ullage pressure. The inner
wall can be very thin because it does not need to hold a pressure
differential. The lower bulkhead can be fastened into the outer tube with
one of those ubiquitous snap rings, and the inner wall seated into a groove
in it, with o-rings and all the fixings. The upper bulkhead would look much
the same, except for permitting gas to flow between the chambers.

         -p


Mars or Bust!
www.marssociety.com

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 19020 invoked from network); 31 Aug 2001 11:11:42 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 31 Aug 2001 11:11:42 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 28838 invoked by uid 50005); 31 Aug 2001 11:12:04 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpe with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.150432 secs); 31 Aug 2001 11:12:04 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 31 Aug 2001 11:12:04 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id EAA22483; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 04:07:34 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 103334 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 11:06:31          +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (f220.law15.hotmail.com [64.4.23.220]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id EAA22468 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 04:06:31 -0700
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Fri,          31 Aug 2001 04:06:01 -0700
Received: from 193.121.251.246 by lw15fd.law15.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Fri,          31 Aug 2001 11:06:00 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [193.121.251.246]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 31 Aug 2001 11:06:01.0154 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[EB497220:01C1320C]
Message-ID:  <F220wdUTaGmvSVMum03000005e2@hotmail.com>
Date:         Fri, 31 Aug 2001 11:06:31 +0000
Reply-To: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] gun launch
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

AS wrote:

>A gun launcher is by no means elaborate - it's two pipes and a valve.

Huh? Depends how high up you want to go. And what kind of gun. If you choose
a gas gun & go for a 10-30 kg projectile (in which you could stash away some
experimental packages) to be launched to say, 2 km up only... then a bike
pump won't do.

The valve may be simple but may and take a long time to design & realize.
Next you need high pressure gas cylinders, a compressor, and even a
generator if you want multiple launches_afield.

Check pumpkin launchers on trucks URLs. Those guys work for years on
their_very long_expensive_guns. The barrel tubings require a truck to
transport (up to 10 m long).

If you chose a powder gun eg a mortar, that 'd lead to smaller contraptions.
Heavy barrels. Any ideas on such?

jd

_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 11037 invoked from network); 31 Aug 2001 13:46:44 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 31 Aug 2001 13:46:44 -0000
Received: (qmail 24355 invoked by uid 50005); 31 Aug 2001 13:45:17 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.216347 secs); 31 Aug 2001 13:45:17 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 31 Aug 2001 13:45:17 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA23023; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 06:42:29 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 103400 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 13:42:28          +0000
Received: from cablecom.laribay.net (cablecom.laribay.net [66.20.57.4]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA23009 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 06:42:27 -0700
Received: from billbull (dial103.laribay.net [66.20.57.103]) by          cablecom.laribay.net (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id IAA24402 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 08:24:07 -0500 (CDT)          (envelope-from bpbullock@laribay.net)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0C38_01C56B69.4E1BCCB0"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <000401c13222$fa2cc740$67391442@billbull>
Date:         Fri, 31 Aug 2001 08:43:16 -0500
Reply-To: "Bill Bullock" <bpbullock@LARIBAY.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Bill Bullock" <bpbullock@LARIBAY.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Gun Launch
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0C38_01C56B69.4E1BCCB0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

    The site I referenced before ( =
www.ptw.com/~oglenn/trimode/arla-bp.htm )has a tremendous volume of data =
on "guns" for launching amateur/experimental rockets. (If this link does =
not get it go to Google and search for "Amateur Rocket Launch Assist".)  =
If I remember correctly he advocates the use of air/propane and an =
ignition system. I have seen "spudzookas" which use an air/hair spray =
propellant and an ignition system from a gas barbecue/grill and could =
get 250 yards with a 2# spud...terrible waste of a good baking potato, =
that!
    This man advocates the use of a form of follower-sabot upon which =
the rocket/ramjet vehicle rides. A look at "Gun Launchers" on =
www.astronautix.com gives a pretty good synopsis of the work of Mr. =
Bull, et. al. and their work in this field, which was using 16" naval =
guns as gun-launch boosters into orbit.=20
    My personal opinion is that if one is going to build a "gun =
launcher" then one should consider it as an effective means of assisting =
in the launch of some form of rocket...sort of a first stage that does =
not have to leave the ground.
    My idea of the epitome of this technology thusfar is the coupling of =
a Super Loki and a true rail gun...0-3000 mph in about nothing flat. =
Beats my Firebird something fierce!
Bill

------=_NextPart_000_0C38_01C56B69.4E1BCCB0
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META content=3D"text/html; charset=3Diso-8859-1" =
http-equiv=3DContent-Type>
<META content=3D"MSHTML 5.00.2614.3500" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; The site I referenced before ( <A=20
href=3D"http://www.ptw.com/~oglenn/trimode/arla-bp.htm">www.ptw.com/~ogle=
nn/trimode/arla-bp.htm</A>&nbsp;)has=20
a tremendous volume of data on "guns" for launching amateur/experimental =

rockets. (If this link does not get it go to Google and search for =
"Amateur=20
Rocket Launch Assist".)  If I remember correctly he advocates the use of =

air/propane and an ignition system. I have seen "spudzookas" which use =
an=20
air/hair spray propellant and an ignition system from a gas =
barbecue/grill and=20
could get 250 yards with a 2# spud...terrible waste of a good baking =
potato,=20
that!</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; This man advocates the use of a form of =
follower-sabot=20
upon which the rocket/ramjet vehicle rides. A look at "Gun Launchers" on =
<A=20
href=3D"http://www.astronautix.com">www.astronautix.com</A> gives a =
pretty good=20
synopsis of the work of Mr. Bull, et. al. and their work in this field, =
which=20
was using 16" naval guns as gun-launch boosters into orbit. </DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; My personal opinion is that if&nbsp;one&nbsp;is =
going to=20
build a "gun launcher" then&nbsp;one should consider it as an effective =
means of=20
assisting in the launch of some form of rocket...sort of a first stage =
that does=20
not have to leave the ground.</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; My idea of the epitome of this technology =
thusfar is the=20
coupling of a Super Loki and a true rail gun...0-3000 mph in about =
nothing flat.=20
Beats my Firebird something fierce!</DIV>
<DIV>Bill</DIV></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0C38_01C56B69.4E1BCCB0--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 11369 invoked from network); 31 Aug 2001 14:00:48 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 31 Aug 2001 14:00:48 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 5114 invoked by uid 50005); 31 Aug 2001 13:59:23 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.337755 secs); 31 Aug 2001 13:59:23 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 31 Aug 2001 13:59:22 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA22959; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 06:28:46 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 103389 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 13:28:28          +0000
Received: from imo-m01.mx.aol.com (imo-m01.mx.aol.com [64.12.136.4]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA22945 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 06:28:27 -0700
Received: from Azt28@aol.com by imo-m01.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v31_r1.4.) id          w.6f.19ee6d05 (3932) for <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Fri, 31 Aug 2001          09:28:22 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="ISO-8859-1"
X-Mailer: AOL 5.0 for Windows sub 116
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by itc.uci.edu id GAA22946
Message-ID:  <6f.19ee6d05.28c0eaf6@aol.com>
Date:         Fri, 31 Aug 2001 09:28:22 EDT
Reply-To: <Azt28@AOL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <Azt28@AOL.COM>
Subject:      [AR] ARocket-Projects August 2001 (long)
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

***************
*ARocket-Projects*
***************

I plan to send to ARocket nearly every month that list of projects or ideas.
Some authors have been informed, other no.
If you want to be removed from that list, tell me to: azt28@aol.com
If you want to change something, tell me too.
If you are not on that list and want to be here, tell me, best: send me a
resume of your project..

The purpose of that monthly message is to give to readers of ARocket a taste
of what is done here. It is a way to mount collaborative works.

To be in that list, you must have build something, hardware or software or
project to do so. If you are on topic on ARocket you are on this message.

I hope you'll find useful elements or components for you own project, may be
you'll find interesting to fuse it with another... If launching a project is
too much for your free time or free money, look at a similar idea and contact
the authors. You may find more practical to enter in a collaborative
undertaking.

Some hints:
- The most interesting projects are not to launch a satellite, this is too
much for the present state of art in amateur rocketry.
- Look at components, for example simple turbopump, nobody ask for the SSME
system! then trade them against other products made by ARocket members.
- Assume at least half of all projects will not be completed, so don't worry
if someone else has a project similar to your own.
- If there are three similar projects underway, look at something else, your
effort would be wasted here.
- Never think about making a single element, if you produce a pyrovalve a
anithing else, think about "mass producing" it.
- X-prize is not the way to make money from rocket activities: Look at an
element, for example ablative nozzles, test them, use them, swap some units
against other elements and when some tens will have flown, market your
product.

%%%%%%%%%%
August issue:

I try here to get a best formated message, simpler to read without using HTML.

%%%%%%%%%%%
There is the  projects batch:

FACILITIES:

    ***Ray Calkins, Terry Spath, Brian Kosko,
        Dave Johnson, Ken Goldstein,
        Rodney Earwood:

        Upgrades to the aRocket static test stand.
        Completed:  10,000 horizontal stand,

        High speed computer data collection and
        control systems, bunker, berm, initial testing

        Undone:  overhead protection for bunker,
        generator shelter, perimenter
        fencing, onsite secure storage and LEUP
        2,000 lb vertical stand. Estimated completion:
        14JUL2001.Materials acquired, initial design
        approved.

    ***Ray Calkins, Ken Goldstein:

        Filament winder
        Completed:  initial analysis
        Next step:  framework construction
        Undone:  adapt motors, linkages, power
        supplies, control systems, write
        computer control code.
        Status:  project on hold while I get a
        means to transport materials.

    ***Big winder:

        The objective is to produce large parts
        from carbon-epoxy composites, for example
        nozzles. There are 3 elements:
        1/ A rotating platform for element up to
        2.5 m in diameter and up to 3 m high.
        2/ An owen to cure element up to 1 m
        in dia. and 1 m high, help wanted for the
        thermal regulator. This system (1 and 2) is
        near complete.
        3/ A big winder for tanks up to 2.5 m in dia.
        and 35m long. This system will be near the
        sea with a channel nearby so that big elements
        can be moved without using roads.
        There is the field, but no more up to now.

    ***David Crisalli
        see: http://www.rrs.org
        Big Static test stand:
        Reaction Research Society, MTA, South California
        Test to up to 50 000 lbs
        Some hardware and hours of work wanted.

    ***Mike Cohan
        mdc@geosciencebook.com
        Construction of a small wind tunnel
        help wanted

MOTORS / LIQUID:

    ***Big CH4-LOX motor.

        Yvan Bozzonetti
        azt28@aol.com

        The "quantum jump" motor is a 15 000 + lbs
        thrust motor with ablative chamber cooling
        and pintle injector so it can readily be
        adapted to nearly any F/O. After some
        tests, the objective is to produce it in
        small batch and sell/swap the full motor
        or components world wide for amateur
        projects. You may enter the project and
        produce one element for example. You'll
        be then the source for that element, a way
        to start a rocket business.

    ***Arocket open source liquid motor
        Jay  kc2csh@JUNO.COM

         I would like to propose a joint development
        and production project for
        an Arocket open source liquid motor.
        In substance, what I really propose is a set
        of well documented parts,
        like an erector set, much like a commercial
        RMS case is for solids.

          I would propose that the jointly developed
        and produced motor be
        designed as a H2O2 bi-prop with enough
        design flexibility to permit both
        a wide range of experimentation and also
        so optomization as a  componant
        basis for more ambitious projects.  The
        objective is to get a somewhat
        optomized set of parts that can be
        implemented in such a way as to
        facilitate a wide range of configurations
        and propellants, including
        perhaps as peroxide monopropellant..

          I would suggest some basic parameters:

                1.  Somewhere between 6-8" airframe in size.
                2.  Designed to work with 70% peroxide or up.
                3.  A pre-cat chamber of some type.
                4.  prevision for an optional ignitor slug of some
                     sort, like a model rocket motor.
                5. Provision for optional liquid injection, fuel
                     or cat, in  both cat and combustion chambers
                 6. Provision for adequate cooling for sustained
                     operation of perhaps 60 seconds.
                7. Provision to operate as a hybrid by putting
                    a solid fuel in the combustion chamber.

          I would also propose that we attempt to push
        the envelope in terms of performance, and shoot
        to develop a set of componants useful for a more
        ambitious undertaking.

MOTORS / HYBRIDS:

    ***Ray Calkins, Terry Spath, Brian Kosko,
        Ken Goldstein, Rodney Earwood, Dave
        Johnson.:

        HPR N2O to LOx hybrid conversion
        Completed:  evaluation and planning,
        dewar conversion LN2->LO2, fill/vent/drain
        plumbing & valving, nitrogen pressurization
        adaptor

        Next step:  hydrostatic and water flow tests

        Undone:  fill system needs only lox cleaning
        and minor fitting, will be completed tonight,
        vertical test stand begun.


    ***FAR (germain group)

        http://www.optipoint.com/far/gbhome.htm

        working on hybrids, turbopump and X-Prize.


    ***s.innocenti@AGORA.STM.IT (Stefano Innocenti)
        http://members.xoom.it/laserist/hyb3.mpg
        http://www.razzimodellismo.it
        http://utenti.tripod.it/missilistica

        We are testing an Hybrid motor, 29mm
        diameter, with about
        360 Ns. It has 115 g. of N2O. Nozzle is an
        used aerotech phenolic. Grain is
        2 concentric PVC cilinders (for electrical use),
        and inside, again, a piece of gum tube.


MOTORS/SOLID.

    ***simple solid motor
        dakdude@geocities.com

http://www.geocities.com/SiliconValley/Network/7403/amateur.html#solids

    *** bkosko1@HOME.COM (Brian Kosko)
        O motor with 38 lbs propellant using: AP/Al/HTPB


MOTORS/ SOLID/SUGAR :

    ***Ray Calkins:
        Large Sugar

         I am experimenting with Jimmy Yawn's sugar
        propellant process for application to rocket
        motors of arbitrary large sizes.  My near-term
        goal is a 8.5" x 5' motor, but larger versions
        are envisioned and motor cases/nozzles have
        been sourced.

        Initial simulations are promising. Using
        AN they show comparable performance
        to AP/HTPB or AP/PSAN propellants, with a
        fraction the cost, handling, cleanup and
        environmental concerns. First
         (uninstrumented) test firings of 1" and 2"
        motors are expected in two weeks, doublings
        are expected every two weeks after that, culminating
         in testing of the large motor in two months.


    ***Sugar rockets

        Richard Nakkas
        http://members.aol.com/ricnakk/index.html

        Everything you want about sugar rockets.
        Cirrus rocket project, going up to 10 km.

    ***New recipes for sugar rockets

        Jimmy Yawn
        jyawn@sfcc.net
        http://user.sfcc.net/jyawn/rcandy.htm


    ***NEAR
        http://www.near.no/projects/sca_tm2/sca_tm2_Rocket_System.htm
        Phenix 300A TM/FM
        KN-Sorbitol 2 segments, 7.6 kg each class: O
        Total impulse: 20500 N.s diameter I/O: 140/160mm
        Statute: testing.

    ***NEAR
        Phenix 150A, same as above in desing, 5 segments

MOTOR-ROCKETS/SOLID/ZnS :

    ***Zinc-Sulfur

        http://users.cybercity.dk/~dko7904/Notes/znsbook.htm

ROCKETS/SOLID :

    ***CAR ( Cheap Access to Rocket)

        Solid rockets for aerial photography and more.
        Philippe REIGNER, France, reignier@high-sky.net
        http://www.high-sky.net
        Project:  Sky Eye, an "hand made" J/K class
        rocket for aerial photography.
        Cooperation : sharing information and components
        (pieces like nozzle, timers...).

        'High-Sky.net' is a new web site created
        by Philippe Reignier of France. The objective
        of the featured 'Sky Eye' project is to build
        from scratch a 2 meter rocket, powered by
        an amateur KN-Sucrose 1000 N.s solid
        propellant motor,embarking a camera & a
        tape recorder,and fly it to an altitude of over
        1000 meter, making a series of photos, and,
        of course, getting everything back safely.
        A lot of development work is presented on
        PVC rocket motors powered by KN-Sucrose
        propellant. A novel method of thermal
        shaping the PVC tubing for nozzle and
        bulkhead retention is described.English."

    ***skyward@gmx.ch (Raphal Jubin)

        Aerial photography in Switzerland
        I've made two camera-rockets, that have
        given good results. I obtained nice
        pictures of my region from an altitude
        of about 1500m (4900 feet).
        I plan to put a video camera (small digital
        camcorder or wireless) into a
        rocket, but I don't know if it will be the
        purpose of my level 2 rocket.
        1b. I'll also improve airframe quality
        (strength/weight ratio), using new
        materials like carbon fiber, to realize
        that goal.
        2. Another great goal of mines is to attain
        very high altitudes (>10 Km).
        I've to work with other people on that !

    ***NEAR
        http://www.near.no/

        Two stages solid AN-Mg-HTPB
        first stage, diameter 310 mm total impulse: 588 000 N.s
        Second stage: diam: 160mm total impulse 74 000 N.s

ROCKETS/HYBRID :

    ***Small hybrids

        CEC, France (in French)

http://www.multimania.fr/general/pub/popup/perso.phtml?category=/science/unive

rs/astronautik&search_query=

        Has build some rockets with Hypertek motors, look now at its own
hybrid motors.



ROCKETS/ ROCKOON :

    *** Rockoon (rocket launched from balloon)

        www.jpaerospace.com
        help wanted at:
        jpaerospace@jpaerospace.com
        Project: Launch at 100 000 feets from a
        balloon and get up to 50 mi.

    ***Rockoon:

        The da Vinci Project
         65 Carl Hall Road,Downsview Park,
        Toronto, Ontario, Canada, M3K 2B6
         tel: 416.631.6540
         bfeeney@davinciproject.com
         http://www.davinciproject.com

        The da Vinci Projects rocket will be air
        launched from a balloon from a
         minimum of 40,000 feet. A balloon is
        neither harder or easier than other
         forms of air launches. It is totally unique
         with it's own +'s and -'s. Our
         rocket is in the 6,000 lbs gross weight class.

ROCKETS/LIQUID.

    ***SPL
        http/www.spl.ch
        Send tourists into orbit at afordable price.
        SPL  has a step by step program to get its
        final objective.


    ***ASRI
        asri@asri.org.au
        http://www.asri.org.au/ASRI/index.xml
        Australian group, objective: to produce
        a small satellite launcher, the ausroc iv.
        Has produced a sounding rocket, the
        Ausroc ii, work now on the Ausroc iii,
        the elementary block of the Ausroc iv.
        Semi private-amateur group, work with
        AspireSpace from UK.

    ***AspireSpace
        user.charity.vfree.com/A/AspireSpace/

        U.K. group with many projects, up to orbit.

    ***Interorbital Systems
        cyberplex@aol.com
        http://www.interorbital.com/Sounding_Rockets.htm
        liquid biprop. WFNA/Furfuryl, presure feed.
        Done.
        In project: Neptune, RLV TSTO 7000lbs. payload.
        1st stage: WFNA/kerosene, 2nd. stage: LOX/CH4.

ROCKETS / STEAM.

    ***apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ (Russell McMahon)
        http://www.rrs.org/Projects/Launches/Steam_Rocket/steam_rocket.html
        Apogee 4400 feet
        Isp = 50 approximately
        Builder/owner:  William J. Inman
        "Team Steam": William J. Inman, Timothy C.
        Clifford, Jeanne Hoover, and Dale
        L. Talcott (not in attendance)
         Flight Vehicle:  "Scalded Cat"
         Length: 7.5 ft.
         Diameter: 4.5 in.
         Weight (loaded):  53.2 lbs.    (empty): 34.5 lbs.
         Type of propulsion:  hot water (or steam)
         Propellant capacity:  8.5 liters (2.25 gallons)
        or 18.7 lbs.
         Construction:  tank; welded stainless steel,
        payload section; phenolic,  fiberglass, and plastic
         Temp. and pressure of water at launch:  600 degrees F
        and 1500 psi
         Calculated thrust:  273 lbs. (peak)
         Duration of thrust:  slightly less than 5 seconds
         Altitude achieved:  4479 ft. (Adept ALTS-2),
        4400 ft. (Blacksky AltAcc2)
         Acceleration: 4 g's +/-
         Max. velocity: 506 ft. per second (from AltAcc2)
         Coast time: 15 seconds (from AltAcc2)


X-PRIZE TEAMS.

    ***Canyon Space Team
        http://canyonspaceteam.freeservers.com
        Looking for X-Prize
        SubScale Super Sonic Vehicle
        Rocket Engine Development

    ***Website : www.tgv-rockets.com
        Propulsion : Pressure fed kerosene-oxygen engines
        Ship Name : MICHELLE-B
        Team Leader :Kent Ewing
        Citizenship : USA, Bethesda, Maryland
        Launch : Vertical takeoff under primary propulsion
        Landing : Vertical/Soft with reduced engine power

        Propulsion : Turbofan and LOX/Kerosene Rockets
        Ship Name : Thunderbird
        Team Leader : Steven Bennett
        Citizenship : United Kingdom, Cheshire, England
        Launch : Jet Powered Veritcal Takeoff
        Landing : Vertical Landing
    ***Website : www.starchaser.co.uk

        Propulsion : Undisclosed Rocket Power
        Ship Name : Proteus
        Team Leader : Burt Rutan
        Citizenship : Mojave, California, USA
        Launch : Air Launch
        Landing : Undisclosed
    ***Website : www.scaled.com


        Propulsion : Rocket Power
        Ship Name : Pathfinder
        Team Leader : Mitchell Clap
        Citizenship : Ann Arbor, MI, USA
        Launch : Conventional Runway
        Landing : Conventional Runway
    ***Website : www.rocketplane.com

        Propulsion : Jet and Rocket Engines
        Ship Name : XVan2001
        Team Leader : Len Cormier
        Citizenship : Washington DC, USA
        Launch : Conventional runway
        Landing : Vertical landing
    ***Website : www.tour2space.com

        Propulsion : Rocket Powered, hybrid
        Ship Name : Gauchito (The Little Cowboy)
        Team Leader : Pablo DeLeon
        Citizenship : Buenos Aires, Argentina
        Launch : Vertical
        Landing : Parachute

        Propulsion : Jet and Rocket Engines
        Ship Name : Cosmos Mariner
        Team Leader : Dr. Norman LaFave
        Citizenship : Houston, Texas, USA
        Launch : Conventional Runway
        Landing : Conventional Runway
    ***Website : www.lonestarspace.com

        Propulsion : LOX / Kerosene Rocket Engines
        Ship Name : Eclipse Astroliner
        Team Leader : Michael Kelly
        Citizenship : San Bernadino, California, USA
        Launch : Air Towed launch from a 747
        Landing : Conventional Runway
    ***Website : www.kellyspace.com

        Propulsion : Throttlable Kerosene & Hydrogen
        Peroxide Rocket Engine
        Ship Name : Aurora
        Team Leader : Ray Nielsen
        Citizenship : Orlando, FL, USA
        Launch Site : Conventional Runway
        Landing : Conventional Runway
    ***Website : www.funtechsystems.com

        Propulsion : Liquid Oxygen/Kerosene System
        Ship Name : daVinci
        Team Leader : Brian Feeney
        Citizenship : Canada
        Launch Site : Air launch from hot air balloon
        Landing : Parachute
    ***Website : www.davinciproject.com


        Propulsion : Rocket Engines
        Ship Name : Cosmopolis XXI
        Team Leader : Sergey Kostenko
        Citizenship : Moscow, Russia
        Launch Site : Undecided
        Landing : Airplane style, or parachute
    ***Website : www.cosmopolis21.ru

        Propulsion : Methane & Liquid Oxygen
        Ship Name : Kitten
        Team Leader : James Hill
        Citizenship : Oroville, Washington, USA
        Launch : Conventional Runway
        Landing : Conventional Runway
    ***Website : www.thriftyspace.com

        Propulsion : : Liquid Fuel Rocket Engine
        Ship Name : Canadian Arrow
        Team Leader : Geoffrey Sheerin
        Citizenship : Ontario, Canada
        Launch Site : Coastal location
        Landing : Floatation in water
    ***Website : www.canadianarrow.com

        Propulsion : Jet and Rocket Engines
        Ship Name : Ascender
        Team Leader : David Ashford
        Citizenship : United Kingdom, Bristol, England
        Launch : Conventional Runway
        Landing : Conventional Runway
    ***Website : www.bristolspaceplanes.com

        Propulsion : Rocket Engines
        Ship Name : Lucky Seven
        Team Leader : Mickey Badgero
        Citizenship : USA
        Launch : Rocket Powered Verical Launch
        Landing : Parasail Landing

        Propulsion : PA-E LOX / Kerosene Rocket Engine
        Ship Name : PA-X2
        Team Leader : Dr. Rick Fleeter
        Citizenship : Herndon, Virginia, USA
        Launch : Rocket Powered Verical Launch
        Landing : Guided Deployable Parafoil Recovery
        Website : www.aeroastro.com

        Propulsion : Oxygen/Natural Gas Rocket
        Ship Name : Advent
        Team Leader : James Akkerman
        Citizenship : Houston, Texas, USA
        Launch Site : Water, Vertical
        Landing : Water, Horizontal
    ***Website : www.ghg.net/jimakkerman/



STUDIES :

    ***Studie of a modular mini launcher:

        ttocs@GTE.NET (Aaron Smith):

        t'll be heavy, ~1750 Kg for a 5 kg payload.
        I chose N2O/Kerosene, single tank,
        seperated by a piston because it's just
        so simple.  I did not choose solids
        because I want to have different thrust
        profiles for the different stages,
        and that would be hard to do with identical
        modules with solids (with
        N2O/Kerosene modules, you keep the
        same tanks and make different engines
        for each stage).

        The layout that is beginning to take
        shape is this: 7 modules, each with a
        mass of 250 Kg.  These modules are 44
        cm in diameter and around 220 cm
        long.  The dry mass of one of these
        modules is around 37 Kg.  The tanks are
        made from Al-Li alloy.

        The first stage consists of 5 modules,
        the second stage and the third stage
        each having 1 module.  On ignition, the
        engines on all 5 modules of the
        first stage ignite, but only 2 modules
        are feeding these engines.  when
        their fuel is exhausted, they are jettisoned,
        then the next 2 outboard
        modules start feeding the engines.
        When they are empty, they are
        jettisonned and the core module
        burns until empty.  The second and third
        stages continue and stage like a normal rocket.


    ***Hybrid project in Sweden.
        trinity@passagen.se
        Mattias

        hybrid. Semi done on paper, no hardware
        built yet. Have started an amaterur
        rocketry club in Sweden.

AIR USING SYSTEMS :

    ***Ramjet/Scramjet:

        rockitman@SPRINTMAIL.COM (Anthony Colette)

        6'' motor:
        The ramjet I am currently working on is
        a modification of my first design.  I
        initially started with a subsonic/transonic
        ramjet but the design evolved to
        supersonic as I learned more about
        shock dynamics and the ramjet cycle.  A
        subsonic design could work just fine,
        but given a cascade of  limitations that
        only an amateur would be confronted with,
        I found the margin of  thrust
        coefficient (reliability) would be significantly
        enhanced in the supersonic region.

    *** Ramjet sites:

        Information from:Andrew Ritchie
        apritchie@pacific.net.au

        http://www.primenet.com/~kaiser/ramjets.htm

    ***Glen Olson:

        "Garage Level Ramjet Construction":
        http://home.networkone.net/~oglenn/trimode/rj-const.htm
        http://home.networkone.net/~oglenn/trimode/3m-arla.htm

SUB-SCALE SYSTEMS :

    ***VTVL:
        John Carmack

        www.armadilloaerospace.com


X-PRIZE:

    ***Looking for X-prize

        http://www.canadianarrow.com/

        A V2-like rocket for suborbital trips.



COMPUTERS :

    ***dickcoyote@EARTHLINK.NET (John Horton)
        Kn2Nozzle has been partly rewritten and I am
        pretty sure this it until v2.0.
        Kn2Nozzle can be found at :
        http://home.earthlink.net/~dickcoyote/
        Please let me know what you think.


    ***BreadcrumbsXR software.
        dickcoyote@EARTHLINK.NET (John Horton)

        BreadcrumbsXR.  I do plan to store in the
        database any data that is vital and not easily
        recreated.  Breadcrumbs is a
        way to view, store, catalog and compare
        data and notes.

        The HUGE dream is a database that is
        accessible by all members of the
        community that holds all submitted
        non-proprietary formulations and
        characterizations. Imagine that you
        have a totally characterized
        formulation, with Breadcrumbs you
        could then go look for correlations with
        all if the other  formulations. I know
        and understand that we will never
        know how a formulation will work until
        we try it, but if we had dozens or
        hundreds of similar characterized
        formulations, don't you think that you
        could save some time on your own
        evelopment??? Now this phase of
        BreadcrumbsXR would be a huge
        undertaking, but has to be worth thinking
        about.
        Ok so I have a dream. Is the dream o
        f BreadcrumbsXR unrealistic for a
        weekend programmer? I do not know
        but I plan to find out. I do know that for
        "BreadcrumbsXR" to take shape in the
        way that I presently imagine it, I will
        need some help from this group.

    ***Hybrid rocket software
        Main features:
        - Fuel regression rate, ox/fuel ratio,
        oxidizer mass flux and port diameter
        etc. is calculated for the entire burn
        with user selectable time steps from
        1 ms to 1 second.
        - Calculates size of injector orifice(s).
        - Calculates throat diameter as well as
        other dimensions of the nozzle and
        estimates nozzle performance.
        - Estimates performance of motor.
        - Single or multiple fuel ports.
        - Graphical representation of burn parameters
        - Easy and efficient graphical user interface

        Many more features are planned and I am
        working on implementing the new
        features as soon as possible. Please try
        the program and send me
        suggestions, comments, criticism and
        bug reports.

        For more information and screen shots
        or for downloading the program:
        http://www.lstud.ii.uib.no/~s0646/hdp.htm

**************
Some ideas to be taken:

^^^MHD: Magneto-HydroDynamics is a
way to directly convert energy in a plume
rocket into electricity
MHD generators open up a new technological
domain, from high temperature plasma, to
powerful lasers to test on the ground of
plasma engines.

^^^Chemical lasers The hot temperature
and shock wave in a rocket exhaust may
be used to drive a laser, another use for
ground test motors. Such lasers would
be the basis element for laser launchers.

^^^Double, multi flux motors: High velocity
gas at the nozzle tip may be mixed with air,
this may increase thrust... May be tested
with marketed motors.

^^^Hoovercraft with rocket pumped air
support: this could the launching element
of an Horizontal Take-off system without
landing gears. Same remark as above.

^^^Liquid-gas or solid-gas motors : Thrust
to weight would be under one, that may be
OK for  aircraft-like first stage with H Take off.

^^^Rocket powered helicopter with motors
at blade tip "a la Roton" (first desing) .
Suitable for hybrid systems, including
gox oxidizer.

^^^Rotojet: liquid motor on a wheel, the
centrifugal force gives the pressurization
(Roton, second desing).

Kapton tank: Kapton a Du Pont product
may be used with a cryogenic liquid. A
bolted aluminium tank would give the rigidity.

More ideas suitable for amateur projects?
Let us know.

Yvan Bozzonetti.
azt28@aol.com

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 19894 invoked from network); 31 Aug 2001 14:02:47 -0000
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 31 Aug 2001 14:02:47 -0000
Received: (qmail 4528 invoked by uid 50005); 31 Aug 2001 14:03:08 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpe with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.944562 secs); 31 Aug 2001 14:03:08 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 31 Aug 2001 14:03:06 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA23104; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 06:58:26 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 103416 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 13:58:24          +0000
Received: from fep3-orange.clear.net.nz (fep3-orange.clear.net.nz          [203.97.32.3]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA23090          for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 06:58:23 -0700
Received: from mkbs (203-167-161-70.dialup.clear.net.nz [203.167.161.70]) by          fep3-orange.clear.net.nz (1.5/1.8) with SMTP id BAA09667; Sat, 1 Sep          2001 01:57:25 +1200 (NZST)
References:  <5.1.0.14.1.20010829090835.00ae5a78@netmail.home.com>              <007601c130dd$ae5387a0$6601a8c0@home.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <047d01c13225$5f789000$0100a8c0@mkbs>
Date:         Sat, 1 Sep 2001 01:58:39 +1200
Reply-To: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Organization: Applied Technology
Subject:      Re: [AR] offtopic - glide to fall ratio
Comments: To: Brian Kosko <bkosko1@HOME.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

 > "About 38 minutes after Pich noticed the fuel problem, the right engine
> > stopped. Ten minutes later, the second engine failed.
> > That left the jet at 33,000 feet over the Atlantic Ocean, at night, with
> no
> > engines."
> >
> > "The Airbus A-330 made the landing after gliding more than 180
kilometres
> > without power to either of its two engines."
> >
> > from:
> >
>
http://cbc.ca/cgi-bin/templates/view.cgi?/news/2001/08/28/airtransat_pilot01
> 0828


That link wa dead for me - here are two more.
Not a great amount of extra technical info.
Cause was apparently a pump problem rather than a leak as some report.



        http://ww2.pstripes.osd.mil/01/aug01/ed082901h.html



        http://www.theage.com.au/news/world/2001/08/30/FFXDO8LQYQC.html

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 19918 invoked from network); 31 Aug 2001 14:23:28 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 31 Aug 2001 14:23:28 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 30455 invoked by uid 50005); 31 Aug 2001 14:22:02 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.26098 secs); 31 Aug 2001 14:22:02 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 31 Aug 2001 14:22:01 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA23210; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 07:17:50 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 103431 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 14:17:44          +0000
Received: from femail39.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail39.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.254.60.33]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA23195          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 07:17:44 -0700
Received: from c1649002-a.earthlink.net ([24.20.95.67]) by          femail39.sdc1.sfba.home.com (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20          201-229-121-120-20010223) with ESMTP id          <20010831141735.RLTF29510.femail39.sdc1.sfba.home.com@c1649002-a.earthlink.net> for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>;          Fri, 31 Aug 2001 07:17:35 -0700
X-Sender: forkbomb@mail.earthlink.net
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.0.2
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <5.0.2.1.0.20010831071700.0254b8f0@mailsj-v1.corp.adobe.com>
Date:         Fri, 31 Aug 2001 07:17:33 -0700
Reply-To: "Pierce Nichols" <forkbomb@EARTHLINK.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Pierce Nichols" <forkbomb@EARTHLINK.NET>
Subject:      [AR] propellant musings
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Does anyone know the solubility of hydrogen in liquid propane at 100K and
various pressures? Also, what effect would dissolving hydrogen in propane
have on the density of the mixture? I was having a musing about boosting
the Isp of propane as a fuel and I'd like to know if I am completely off base.

         -p


Mars or Bust!
www.marssociety.com

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 16427 invoked from network); 31 Aug 2001 14:42:50 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 31 Aug 2001 14:42:50 -0000
Received: (qmail 2625 invoked by uid 50005); 31 Aug 2001 14:43:42 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpb with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.292614 secs); 31 Aug 2001 14:43:42 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 31 Aug 2001 14:43:42 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA23396; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 07:38:57 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 103470 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 14:38:43          +0000
Received: from imo-m05.mx.aol.com (imo-m05.mx.aol.com [64.12.136.8]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA23381 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 07:38:42 -0700
Received: from JMKrell@aol.com by imo-m05.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v31_r1.4.) id          w.9c.128ea604 (4218) for <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Fri, 31 Aug 2001          10:38:00 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0C3B_01C56B69.4E2EDF80"
X-Mailer: AOL 6.0 for Windows US sub 10540
Message-ID:  <9c.128ea604.28c0fb47@aol.com>
Date:         Fri, 31 Aug 2001 10:37:59 EDT
Reply-To: <JMKrell@AOL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <JMKrell@AOL.COM>
Subject:      [AR] High Altitude Mach plus flights
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0C3B_01C56B69.4E2EDF80
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Wedge

I've been flying temperature probes on rockets the past few months and my
data does not match this formula.  This formula could be for air delta T from
compression as an object passes through it. Good for aircraft in horizontal
continuos flight. My data shows only a few degrees F change at the nose cone
tip for subsonic and transonic flights. Heat transfer efficiency, response
time of sensors, and the short time of flights for rockets are reasons why
there could be differences between formula and data.  I'll check further into
it.

"2. I have a formula for atmospheric heating which is (velocity (in
feet/second) / 110) squared = delta degrees F. I'd have to assume this
formula is for sea level.....would this heating be proportional to air
density i.e. 1/2 density yields 1/2 the heating?"


JK


------=_NextPart_000_0C3B_01C56B69.4E2EDF80
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<HTML><FONT FACE=arial,helvetica><FONT  SIZE=2>Wedge
<BR>
<BR>I've been flying temperature probes on rockets the past few months and my
<BR>data does not match this formula. &nbsp;This formula could be for air delta T from
<BR>compression as an object passes through it. Good for aircraft in horizontal
<BR>continuos flight. My data shows only a few degrees F change at the nose cone
<BR>tip for subsonic and transonic flights. Heat transfer efficiency, response
<BR>time of sensors, and the short time of flights for rockets are reasons why
<BR>there could be differences between formula and data. &nbsp;I'll check further into
<BR>it. &nbsp;&nbsp;
<BR>
<BR>"2. I have a formula for atmospheric heating which is (velocity (in
<BR>feet/second) / 110) squared = delta degrees F. I'd have to assume this
<BR>formula is for sea level.....would this heating be proportional to air
<BR>density i.e. 1/2 density yields 1/2 the heating?"
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>JK
<BR></FONT></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0C3B_01C56B69.4E2EDF80--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 13251 invoked from network); 31 Aug 2001 14:48:50 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 31 Aug 2001 14:48:50 -0000
Received: (qmail 6874 invoked by uid 50005); 31 Aug 2001 14:49:41 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpb with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.351617 secs); 31 Aug 2001 14:49:41 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 31 Aug 2001 14:49:40 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA23432; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 07:44:10 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 103477 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 14:44:06          +0000
Received: from localhost (rcalkins@localhost) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with          ESMTP id HAA23418; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 07:44:05 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.LNX.4.10.10108310735590.23169-100000@itc.uci.edu>
Date:         Fri, 31 Aug 2001 07:44:05 -0700
Reply-To: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
Subject:      Re: [AR] AN melt
Comments: To: John Dom <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <F143Y1SWoBDyseVwrbl00000589@hotmail.com>

On Fri, 31 Aug 2001, John Dom wrote:

> I said I assume and still do that in molten anhydric conditions KN does not
> dissolve in molten sugars or at least little whereas AN does.
>
> Now if you add water you can of course dissolve both; after partly getting
> rid of the water by evaporation you may reach "supersaturated" glass like
> conditions where both remain dissolved like you seem to have described here.
> Did I understand this state correctly? is it sticky or malleable?
When it is hot, at temperatures above 150 degrees F, it is somewhat sticky
and malleable.  When cool, it is only sticky if your fingers are wet.

> Any idea of the water content of the glass like substance you describe?
Certainly less than 5% during oven processing, after dehydration, less
than 2% is a reasonable guess.

Ray

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 16015 invoked from network); 31 Aug 2001 14:55:56 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 31 Aug 2001 14:55:57 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 31601 invoked by uid 50005); 31 Aug 2001 14:54:31 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.259162 secs); 31 Aug 2001 14:54:31 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 31 Aug 2001 14:54:30 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA23478; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 07:47:51 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 103491 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 14:47:50          +0000
Received: from po4.glue.umd.edu (po4.glue.umd.edu [128.8.10.124]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA23463 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 07:47:49 -0700
Received: from y.glue.umd.edu (IDENT:root@y.glue.umd.edu [128.8.10.68]) by          po4.glue.umd.edu (8.10.1/8.10.1) with ESMTP id f7VElhD14627; Fri, 31          Aug 2001 10:47:43 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from y.glue.umd.edu (IDENT:sendmail@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by          y.glue.umd.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id KAA16807; Fri, 31 Aug 2001          10:47:43 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from localhost (acase@localhost) by y.glue.umd.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with          ESMTP id KAA16803; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 10:47:42 -0400 (EDT)
X-Authentication-Warning: y.glue.umd.edu: acase owned process doing -bs
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.GSO.4.21.0108311045330.16088-100000@y.glue.umd.edu>
Date:         Fri, 31 Aug 2001 10:47:42 -0400
Reply-To: "Andrew Case" <acase@GLUE.UMD.EDU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Andrew Case" <acase@GLUE.UMD.EDU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] ARocket-Projects August 2001 (long)
Comments: To: Azt28@AOL.COM
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <6f.19ee6d05.28c0eaf6@aol.com>

It would be really handy to have physical locations for all of these
projects. The net is nice but there's no substitute for being there.

......Andrew

Andrew Case                             |
acase@plasma.umd.edu                    |
Institute for Plasma Research           |
University of Maryland, College Park    |

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 5237 invoked from network); 31 Aug 2001 15:06:48 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 31 Aug 2001 15:06:48 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 10008 invoked by uid 50005); 31 Aug 2001 15:05:23 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.213119 secs); 31 Aug 2001 15:05:23 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 31 Aug 2001 15:05:22 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA23573; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 08:01:35 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 103515 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 15:01:33          +0000
Received: from ceres.triton.ch (ceres.triton.ch [212.254.218.98]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA23559 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 08:01:31 -0700
Received: from spl.ch (robot.triton.ch [212.254.218.101]) by ceres.triton.ch          (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id RAA03802; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 17:01:27 +0200
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.75 [en] (Win98; U)
X-Accept-Language: en,ja
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <6f.19ee6d05.28c0eaf6@aol.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B8FA6B2.CA01CA1D@spl.ch>
Date:         Fri, 31 Aug 2001 17:01:06 +0200
Reply-To: "Bruno Berger" <bruno.berger@SPL.CH>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Bruno Berger" <bruno.berger@SPL.CH>
Subject:      Re: [AR] ARocket-Projects August 2001 (long)
Comments: To: Azt28@AOL.COM
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Azt28@AOL.COM wrote:
<snip>
> ROCKETS/LIQUID.
>
>     ***SPL
>         http/www.spl.ch
>         Send tourists into orbit at afordable price.
>         SPL  has a step by step program to get its
>         final objective.
>

Hi Yvan

A slight correction. We are not into sending tourists into orbit :-)
May I suggest:

"SPL aims to develop, build and run reasonable priced systems to transport
small payloads into a low-earth orbit (LEO). The current main focus is
propulsion with all its components like valves, combustion chambers,
propellant feeding systems and auxiliary systems like test stands etc. SPL
has a step by step program to get its final objective."

BTW: the URL is http://www.spl.ch (not http/www.spl.ch )

Thanks for your effort Yvan!

regards
Bruno

--
Bruno Berger
Swiss Propulsion Laboratory
E-Mail: bruno.berger@spl.ch
WWW:    http://www.spl.ch

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 1993 invoked from network); 31 Aug 2001 15:47:35 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 31 Aug 2001 15:47:35 -0000
Received: (qmail 7092 invoked by uid 50005); 31 Aug 2001 15:46:10 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.332564 secs); 31 Aug 2001 15:46:10 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 31 Aug 2001 15:46:09 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA23856; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 08:42:18 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 103543 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 15:42:12          +0000
Received: from spsystems.net (spsystems.net [209.47.149.227]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA23842 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Fri,          31 Aug 2001 08:42:11 -0700
Received: (from henry@localhost) by spsystems.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id LAA10894;          Fri, 31 Aug 2001 11:41:39 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010831114021.10697A-100000@spsystems.net>
Date:         Fri, 31 Aug 2001 11:41:38 -0400
Reply-To: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] propellant musings
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <5.0.2.1.0.20010831071700.0254b8f0@mailsj-v1.corp.adobe.com>

On Fri, 31 Aug 2001, Pierce Nichols wrote:
> Does anyone know the solubility of hydrogen in liquid propane at 100K and
> various pressures?

I had the same idea a few years ago...  I'm told it's minimal, not enough
to be worth the trouble.  (I don't have actual numbers on hand.)  Pity.

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 10409 invoked from network); 31 Aug 2001 16:04:24 -0000
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 31 Aug 2001 16:04:24 -0000
Received: (qmail 31086 invoked by uid 50005); 31 Aug 2001 16:02:20 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpf with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.176522 secs); 31 Aug 2001 16:02:20 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 31 Aug 2001 16:02:20 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA23955; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 08:59:08 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 103562 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 15:59:05          +0000
Received: from m1.jersey.juno.com (m1.jersey.juno.com [64.136.16.64]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA23941 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 08:59:05 -0700
Received: from cookie.juno.com by cookie.juno.com for          <"H3WK6e6N+bsCVJQMHM9sZPzbAAbg/3qXE7S3CRQ9MuA=">
Received: (from kc2csh@juno.com) by m1.jersey.juno.com (queuemail) id GD7CGVVB;          Fri, 31 Aug 2001 11:57:28 EDT
X-Mailer: Juno 4.0.11
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Juno-Line-Breaks: 1,4,10,12-15,17-18,20-31
X-Juno-Att: 0
X-Juno-RefParts: 0
Message-ID:  <20010831.120210.-3955305.2.kc2csh@juno.com>
Date:         Fri, 31 Aug 2001 12:02:07 -0400
Reply-To: <kc2csh@JUNO.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <kc2csh@JUNO.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] propellant musings
Comments: To: henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

  In something of this same vane, has anyone explored tri-propellant or
quad-propellant type systems.
  If, for example, in high ISP LH/LOX engines half the LH is combusted
and half is just heated to exhaust as gas, given the low density of LH,
why not burn propane or kero or whatever, then add H2.
  The combinations of 3s and 4s that seem to have complementary
charastics, particularly from the perspective of density and
preasurization seems long.  For example, why not use N2O and peroxide
together.  The N20 could both chill and preasurize the peroxide.
Combustion started with N20 would largely eliminate issues of catalysts
for peroxide wouldn't it?
  I understand the issues of greatly increased complexity.  The question
I guess is do you get enough potential benefit to offset the complexity?

                     Jay

On Fri, 31 Aug 2001 11:41:38 -0400 Henry Spencer <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
writes:
> On Fri, 31 Aug 2001, Pierce Nichols wrote:
> > Does anyone know the solubility of hydrogen in liquid propane at
100K and
> > various pressures?
>
> I had the same idea a few years ago...  I'm told it's minimal, not
> enough
> to be worth the trouble.  (I don't have actual numbers on hand.)
> Pity.
>
>                                                           Henry
> Spencer
>
> henry@spsystems.net

________________________________________________________________
GET INTERNET ACCESS FROM JUNO!
Juno offers FREE or PREMIUM Internet access for less!
Join Juno today!  For your FREE software, visit:
http://dl.www.juno.com/get/tagj.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 10804 invoked from network); 31 Aug 2001 16:12:01 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 31 Aug 2001 16:12:01 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 25243 invoked by uid 50005); 31 Aug 2001 16:10:36 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.196658 secs); 31 Aug 2001 16:10:36 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 31 Aug 2001 16:10:35 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA24030; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 09:06:27 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 103577 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 16:06:25          +0000
Received: from mail.aros.net (mail.aros.net [207.173.16.20]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA24016 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri,          31 Aug 2001 09:06:24 -0700
Received: from biomicro.com ([208.187.122.40]) by mail.aros.net (8.11.6/8.9.3)          with ESMTP id f7VG6NI35457 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 31 Aug          2001 10:06:24 -0600 (MDT)
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.77 [en] (Win98; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <da.b811e4d.28c053d5@aol.com>            <5.0.2.1.0.20010831002537.025686d8@mail.earthlink.net>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B8FB5F7.7FA06724@biomicro.com>
Date:         Fri, 31 Aug 2001 10:06:15 -0600
Reply-To: "Mark K. Spute" <mks@BIOMICRO.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Mark K. Spute" <mks@BIOMICRO.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] liquids question: alcohol/N2O propellant feeding
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Nice design Pierce.  Simple & Elegant.  I don't know if it would be
lighter than a monocoque construction, or easier to make, but it would
be stiffer and the plumbing would potentially be easier.

Pierce Nichols wrote:
>
> At 08:44 PM 8/30/2001 -0700, Jamie Morken wrote:
>
> >You could put a liquid regulator in the fuel line set to the correct
> >pressure to give you the required
> >flow rate of fuel, then make sure your ullage pressure will always be a bit
> >greater than this.
> >Anyone know a good source for small liquid regulators, variable and/or
> >preset pressure?
> >Small Parts doesn't have anything but http://www.mcmaster.com/ has some but
> >the max inlet pressure
> >is 400psi and they are all heavy and oversized for small rockets I think.
>
>          McMaster-Carr also has a very broad selection of gas and
> compressed-air regulators, including a number of sub-miniature styles. The
> subminatures appear to be limited to ~100 psi outlet pressure, but that is
> enough for a simple, pressure-fed biprop. They are also quite small. Search
> under gas regulators and pressure regulators and you should find what you
> need.
>          Here's a possible design to consider, if you can stand to not use
> those pretty composite tanks. It has the advantage of serving as your
> airframe as well :). The basic concept is to use concentric tanks. N2O is
> in the outer tank, and the inner tank holds fuel. The ullage space of the
> two tanks is connected, so that the fuel tank is N2O pressurized. A piston
> isolates the gaseous N2O from the fuel. This neatly solves the problem of
> getting fuel from where it is stored to the engine, with minimal pressure
> drop, since the tank outlet is right up against the engine. This tank is
> probably the lightest sort of bipropellant tank, since only the outer wall
> of the tank combination needs to take the full ullage pressure. The inner
> wall can be very thin because it does not need to hold a pressure
> differential. The lower bulkhead can be fastened into the outer tube with
> one of those ubiquitous snap rings, and the inner wall seated into a groove
> in it, with o-rings and all the fixings. The upper bulkhead would look much
> the same, except for permitting gas to flow between the chambers.
>
>          -p
>
> Mars or Bust!
> www.marssociety.com

--
Mark K. Spute
Senior Research Engineer
BioMicro Systems Inc.

KD7IWE,  RRS

"It is difficult to say what is impossible, for the dream of yesterday
is the hope of today and the reality of tomorrow."
     Dr. Robert H. Goddard

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 16410 invoked from network); 31 Aug 2001 16:28:20 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 31 Aug 2001 16:28:20 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 9713 invoked by uid 50005); 31 Aug 2001 16:26:54 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.254127 secs); 31 Aug 2001 16:26:54 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 31 Aug 2001 16:26:53 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA24179; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 09:23:39 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 103595 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 16:23:34          +0000
Received: from femail32.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail32.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.254.60.22]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA24165          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 09:23:33 -0700
Received: from c1649002-a.earthlink.net ([24.20.95.67]) by          femail32.sdc1.sfba.home.com (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20          201-229-121-120-20010223) with ESMTP id          <20010831162326.WLUN10302.femail32.sdc1.sfba.home.com@c1649002-a.earthlink.net>; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 09:23:26          -0700
X-Sender: forkbomb@mail.earthlink.net
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.0.2
References: <da.b811e4d.28c053d5@aol.com>            <5.0.2.1.0.20010831002537.025686d8@mail.earthlink.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <5.0.2.1.0.20010831092200.02e6e9e0@mail.earthlink.net>
Date:         Fri, 31 Aug 2001 09:23:25 -0700
Reply-To: "Pierce Nichols" <forkbomb@EARTHLINK.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Pierce Nichols" <forkbomb@EARTHLINK.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] liquids question: alcohol/N2O propellant feeding
Comments: To: "Mark K. Spute" <mks@BIOMICRO.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <3B8FB5F7.7FA06724@biomicro.com>

At 10:06 AM 8/31/2001 -0600, Mark K. Spute wrote:
>Nice design Pierce.  Simple & Elegant.  I don't know if it would be
>lighter than a monocoque construction, or easier to make, but it would
>be stiffer and the plumbing would potentially be easier.


         I envision this tankage design as the center part of the airframe,
i.e. the outer tank wall has skirts extending beyond the tank section above
and below such that the fin can and the payload section can be attached
directly.

         -p



>Pierce Nichols wrote:
> >
> > At 08:44 PM 8/30/2001 -0700, Jamie Morken wrote:
> >
> > >You could put a liquid regulator in the fuel line set to the correct
> > >pressure to give you the required
> > >flow rate of fuel, then make sure your ullage pressure will always be
> a bit
> > >greater than this.
> > >Anyone know a good source for small liquid regulators, variable and/or
> > >preset pressure?
> > >Small Parts doesn't have anything but http://www.mcmaster.com/ has
> some but
> > >the max inlet pressure
> > >is 400psi and they are all heavy and oversized for small rockets I think.
> >
> >          McMaster-Carr also has a very broad selection of gas and
> > compressed-air regulators, including a number of sub-miniature styles. The
> > subminatures appear to be limited to ~100 psi outlet pressure, but that is
> > enough for a simple, pressure-fed biprop. They are also quite small. Search
> > under gas regulators and pressure regulators and you should find what you
> > need.
> >          Here's a possible design to consider, if you can stand to not use
> > those pretty composite tanks. It has the advantage of serving as your
> > airframe as well :). The basic concept is to use concentric tanks. N2O is
> > in the outer tank, and the inner tank holds fuel. The ullage space of the
> > two tanks is connected, so that the fuel tank is N2O pressurized. A piston
> > isolates the gaseous N2O from the fuel. This neatly solves the problem of
> > getting fuel from where it is stored to the engine, with minimal pressure
> > drop, since the tank outlet is right up against the engine. This tank is
> > probably the lightest sort of bipropellant tank, since only the outer wall
> > of the tank combination needs to take the full ullage pressure. The inner
> > wall can be very thin because it does not need to hold a pressure
> > differential. The lower bulkhead can be fastened into the outer tube with
> > one of those ubiquitous snap rings, and the inner wall seated into a groove
> > in it, with o-rings and all the fixings. The upper bulkhead would look much
> > the same, except for permitting gas to flow between the chambers.
> >
> >          -p
> >
> > Mars or Bust!
> > www.marssociety.com
>
>--
>Mark K. Spute
>Senior Research Engineer
>BioMicro Systems Inc.
>
>KD7IWE,  RRS
>
>"It is difficult to say what is impossible, for the dream of yesterday
>is the hope of today and the reality of tomorrow."
>      Dr. Robert H. Goddard

Mars or Bust!
www.marssociety.com

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 26652 invoked from network); 31 Aug 2001 17:07:58 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 31 Aug 2001 17:07:58 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 32228 invoked by uid 50005); 31 Aug 2001 17:07:08 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.20078 secs); 31 Aug 2001 17:07:08 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 31 Aug 2001 17:07:07 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA24354; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 10:03:11 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 103618 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 17:03:07          +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (f139.law15.hotmail.com [64.4.23.139]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA24340 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 10:03:07 -0700
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Fri,          31 Aug 2001 10:02:37 -0700
Received: from 213.224.83.150 by lw15fd.law15.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Fri,          31 Aug 2001 17:02:37 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [213.224.83.150]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 31 Aug 2001 17:02:37.0250 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[BC5A9A20:01C1323E]
Message-ID:  <F139jQxzmWecm9t0CI700000eb4@hotmail.com>
Date:         Fri, 31 Aug 2001 17:03:07 +0000
Reply-To: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] AN melt
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

RC wrote:

>When it is hot, at temperatures above 150 degrees F, it is somewhat sticky
>and malleable.

So it can be cast or pressed into a eg Bates mould? I mean like it can in
the classical fryer & solid KN mode

>When cool, it is only sticky if your fingers are wet.>

>(the glass-like compound has...)  Certainly less than 5% during oven
>processing, after dehydration, less than 2% is a reasonable guess.

I wonder if such is stable when stored. Maybe Bates cylinders  prepared by
pressing or moulding the glassy stuff could be protected from water loss
(evaporation) by spraying or dipping a film around it.
I guess otherwise, after awhile the water content 'll go that low that the
block may start to crystallize.

Just guesswork, maybe ill informed.

Still am at a loss if the AN process offers anything better. Must still read
a 100 postings. Argh. Excuse.

jd

_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 6560 invoked from network); 31 Aug 2001 17:10:21 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 31 Aug 2001 17:10:21 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: (qmail 3279 invoked by uid 50005); 31 Aug 2001 17:09:31 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.748598 secs); 31 Aug 2001 17:09:31 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 31 Aug 2001 17:09:29 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA24375; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 10:04:39 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 103625 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 17:04:38          +0000
Received: from cisco.com (cypher.cisco.com [171.69.11.18]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA24355 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Fri,          31 Aug 2001 10:03:27 -0700
Received: (from billw@localhost) by cisco.com (8.8.8/2.6/Cisco List          Logging/8.8.8) id KAA24383 for arocket@itc.uci.edu; Fri, 31 Aug 2001          10:02:56 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID:  <CMM.0.90.4.999277376.billw@cypher>
Date:         Fri, 31 Aug 2001 10:02:56 PDT
Reply-To: "Bill Westfield" <billw@cisco.com>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "William Chops Westfield" <billw@cisco.com>
Subject:      [AR] Ammonium Perchlorate rumor
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This appeared on the pyrotechnics mailing list recently:

        [lots snipped]
    Those that were hanging around after the ATF siminar at the [PGII]
    convention this year probably heard Eugene Baker (ATF Explosives
    Industry Analyst) reveal after accidents including Henderson NV. that
    although nothing is in the works at the moment, ATF is in the beginning
    of the talks/planning stages of seeing that ammonium perchlorate becomes
    a regulated item/explosive much like ammonium nitrate (his words not
    mine) I'm not really interested in high explosives and don't follow ANFO
    storage regulations, but isn't ammonium nitrate by it self prilled or
    not unregulated? Whatever, the point is ATF is starting to watch
    ammonium perchlorate closely. Making bombs and salutes with it will
    accelerate the possible above scenario.
        [lots more snipped]

 :-(
BillW


From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 15682 invoked from network); 31 Aug 2001 17:41:56 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 31 Aug 2001 17:41:56 -0000
Received: (qmail 16986 invoked by uid 50005); 31 Aug 2001 17:42:16 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpe with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.223294 secs); 31 Aug 2001 17:42:16 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 31 Aug 2001 17:42:16 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA24576; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 10:36:20 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 103659 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 17:36:11          +0000
Received: from localhost (rcalkins@localhost) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with          ESMTP id KAA24562; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 10:36:10 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.LNX.4.10.10108311019440.24164-100000@itc.uci.edu>
Date:         Fri, 31 Aug 2001 10:36:10 -0700
Reply-To: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
Subject:      Re: [AR] AN melt
Comments: To: John Dom <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <F139jQxzmWecm9t0CI700000eb4@hotmail.com>

On Fri, 31 Aug 2001, John Dom wrote:

> RC wrote:
>
> >When it is hot, at temperatures above 150 degrees F, it is somewhat sticky
> >and malleable.
>
> So it can be cast or pressed into a eg Bates mould? I mean like it can in
> the classical fryer & solid KN mode
It is very easily molded into complex geometries, especially if you work
with it at higher temperatures.

> I wonder if such is stable when stored. Maybe Bates cylinders  prepared by
> pressing or moulding the glassy stuff could be protected from water loss
> (evaporation) by spraying or dipping a film around it.
I haven't tried it yet, but am fairly certain it would be easy to seal
with various methods.  Wax, paint, whatever.  I did "seal" one by wiping
it with corn oil once, seemed to work fine for the short term, though I
wouldn't suggest this method for longer than a week.

> I guess otherwise, after awhile the water content 'll go that low that the
> block may start to crystallize.
Maybe, especially if heated.  I haven't noted any crystalization after a
week of storage at room temperatures.  In my experience, crystalization is
highly dependant on the water content when the propellant is initially
cooled, and the amount of kneading you do on it when hot.

> Still am at a loss if the AN process offers anything better.
I am collecting materials to explore freeze dried AN-Sucrose powder.
Potentially, this material can be used to press a grain.  The AN and sugar
will already be intimately mixed, and if cold-dried, the AN shouldn't
attack the sugar.  Since the material will be very fine crystals, it
should get around the phase change problems AN has.  I propose to ball
mill it with fibers and Mg/Al, pressing test pellets, scaling up to
grains after I develop a remote/automatic press.

Ray

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 23624 invoked from network); 31 Aug 2001 17:43:56 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 31 Aug 2001 17:43:56 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 8623 invoked by uid 50005); 31 Aug 2001 17:44:48 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpb with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.156205 secs); 31 Aug 2001 17:44:48 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 31 Aug 2001 17:44:48 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA24628; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 10:39:31 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 103674 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 17:39:30          +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (f224.law15.hotmail.com [64.4.23.224]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA24614 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 10:39:30 -0700
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Fri,          31 Aug 2001 10:39:00 -0700
Received: from 213.224.83.150 by lw15fd.law15.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Fri,          31 Aug 2001 17:38:59 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [213.224.83.150]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 31 Aug 2001 17:39:00.0164 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[D178D840:01C13243]
Message-ID:  <F224Odutox7nyeKzGZu00000110@hotmail.com>
Date:         Fri, 31 Aug 2001 17:39:30 +0000
Reply-To: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Gun Launch
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Response to bpbullock...

Well known URLs. No comment. Now down to affordable designs:

Projectile mass? Culmination? Propellant? Powder? Gas? Supersonic?
Projectile inside gun or outside using a dynamic spacer? (the latter allows
for "normal" fins).

I suggest using hydrogen. Next a 30 kg projectile, outside the barrel using
a dynamic spacer. Preferably supersonic exhaust vel..

JD

_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 10381 invoked from network); 31 Aug 2001 17:55:25 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 31 Aug 2001 17:55:25 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 18112 invoked by uid 50005); 31 Aug 2001 17:53:21 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpf with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.680695 secs); 31 Aug 2001 17:53:21 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 31 Aug 2001 17:53:19 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA24729; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 10:51:24 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 103698 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 17:51:17          +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (f102.law15.hotmail.com [64.4.23.102]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA24715 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 10:51:16 -0700
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Fri,          31 Aug 2001 10:50:46 -0700
Received: from 213.224.83.150 by lw15fd.law15.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Fri,          31 Aug 2001 17:50:46 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [213.224.83.150]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 31 Aug 2001 17:50:46.0409 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[766D4790:01C13245]
Message-ID:  <F102cew8k69RKLpgTFu0000125e@hotmail.com>
Date:         Fri, 31 Aug 2001 17:51:17 +0000
Reply-To: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] AN melt
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

>Still am at a loss if the AN process offers anything better.
>I am collecting materials to explore freeze dried AN-Sucrose powder.
>Potentially, this material can be used to press a grain.  The AN and sugar
>will already be intimately mixed, and if cold-dried, the AN shouldn't
>attack the sugar.  Since the material will be very fine crystals, it
>should get around the phase change problems AN has.  I propose to ball
>mill it with fibers and Mg/Al, pressing test pellets, scaling up to
>grains after I develop a remote/automatic press.

Confusing this response. You are an advocate of the water&evaporation
prosedure until an homogenous glass is obtained for KN/sugar.  Concerning
AN, you revert to the classical powder pressing mode. (BTW this is possible
using KN as well). However, the low melting point (Pipko's work on even
lower melting points possible because of eutectics) of AN is suddenly not
considered?

jd

_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 8669 invoked from network); 31 Aug 2001 18:25:18 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 31 Aug 2001 18:25:18 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 19678 invoked by uid 50005); 31 Aug 2001 18:26:07 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpa with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.171178 secs); 31 Aug 2001 18:26:07 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 31 Aug 2001 18:26:07 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA24897; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 11:19:23 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 103723 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 18:19:15          +0000
Received: from scaup.mail.pas.earthlink.net (scaup.mail.pas.earthlink.net          [207.217.121.49]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA24829          for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 11:09:15 -0700
Received: from earthlink.net (dialup-209.245.142.59.Dial1.SanJose1.Level3.net          [209.245.142.59]) by scaup.mail.pas.earthlink.net (EL-8_9_3_3/8.9.3)          with ESMTP id LAA23023; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 11:09:13 -0700 (PDT)
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.75 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.16-22 i686)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <Pine.LNX.4.10.10108311019440.24164-100000@itc.uci.edu>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B8FD320.D57980AD@earthlink.net>
Date:         Fri, 31 Aug 2001 11:10:40 -0700
Reply-To: "David Weinshenker" <daze39@EARTHLINK.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "David Weinshenker" <daze39@EARTHLINK.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] AN melt
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Ray Calkins wrote:
> I am collecting materials to explore freeze dried AN-Sucrose powder.
> Potentially, this material can be used to press a grain.  The AN and sugar
> will already be intimately mixed, and if cold-dried, the AN shouldn't
> attack the sugar.  Since the material will be very fine crystals, it
> should get around the phase change problems AN has.  I propose to ball
> mill it with fibers and Mg/Al, pressing test pellets, scaling up to
> grains after I develop a remote/automatic press.

This could be good. You're proposing to mix the AN/sugar in solution,
freeze the solution, vacuum-evaporate the water leaving the solutes
as finely divided solids, and then compact that powder into grains?

Wow. If that works, it a) eliminates my main nervousness about sugar
propellants (high temperature processing) completely, b) provides
a propellant that can be made out of domestic and agricultural
commodity ingredients, and c) might be adaptable to Estes-style
mass production processes.

Raw propellant could be stored in heat-sealed plastic bags, under
internal vacuum (as freeze-dried in place?), like camping food.
(Does anyone manufacture a home freeze-drying system for those
who want to put up their own travel food as opposed to buying it
prefab at R.E.I.? There might be a spinoff market right there...:)

-dave w
) 

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 17082 invoked from network); 31 Aug 2001 18:27:15 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 31 Aug 2001 18:27:15 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 5166 invoked by uid 50005); 31 Aug 2001 18:28:06 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpb with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.1565 secs); 31 Aug 2001 18:28:06 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 31 Aug 2001 18:28:06 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA24957; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 11:23:33 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 103748 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 18:23:32          +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (f215.law15.hotmail.com [64.4.23.215]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA24943 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 11:23:32 -0700
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Fri,          31 Aug 2001 11:23:02 -0700
Received: from 213.224.83.150 by lw15fd.law15.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Fri,          31 Aug 2001 18:23:02 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [213.224.83.150]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 31 Aug 2001 18:23:02.0522 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[F870ADA0:01C13249]
Message-ID:  <F2154D3MBhe3WYIgoFT00000d00@hotmail.com>
Date:         Fri, 31 Aug 2001 18:23:32 +0000
Reply-To: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Aerospike , etc...
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

BT wrote:

>The only vehicle that I know of that *approximates* an aerospike was the
>Russian N-1 "Moon Rocket". It had 24 NK-33s around the edge and 6 NK-33s in
>the center. The aft end was sort of hemispherical such that the 6 central
>engines were lower than the engines on the rim, forming a rudimentary
>"spike".

Must be missing the point here since motors in the N-1 stage 1 cluster were
all bell shaped. So the Saturn cluster was an aerospike(?)

jd

_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 6123 invoked from network); 31 Aug 2001 18:46:00 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 31 Aug 2001 18:46:00 -0000
Received: (qmail 16128 invoked by uid 50005); 31 Aug 2001 18:46:51 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpb with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.25443 secs); 31 Aug 2001 18:46:51 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 31 Aug 2001 18:46:51 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA25040; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 11:34:15 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 103764 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 18:34:13          +0000
Received: from corinth.bossig.com (corinth.bossig.com [208.26.239.66]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA25026 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 11:34:13 -0700
Received: from BruceE.Watson (unverified [208.26.232.55]) by corinth.bossig.com          (Rockliffe SMTPRA 4.5.4) with SMTP id          <B0070405427@corinth.bossig.com> for <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Fri, 31          Aug 2001 11:38:12 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0C40_01C56B69.4E4B8F40"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2314.1300
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <002b01c1324b$4fa601a0$37e81ad0@Watson>
Date:         Fri, 31 Aug 2001 11:32:35 -0700
Reply-To: "Bruce E. Watson" <bwatson@3-CITIES.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Bruce E. Watson" <bwatson@3-CITIES.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] ARocket-Projects August 2001 (long)
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0C40_01C56B69.4E4B8F40
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Yvan Bozzonetti wrote:

----- Original Message -----
From: <Azt28@AOL.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Friday, August 31, 2001 6:28 AM
Subject: [AR] ARocket-Projects August 2001 (long)
<sinp>
> X-PRIZE TEAMS.
>
>     ***Canyon Space Team
>         http://canyonspaceteam.freeservers.com
>         Looking for X-Prize
>         SubScale Super Sonic Vehicle
>         Rocket Engine Development
>


Dear Yvan:

A little more information on the Canyon Space Team that can be included =
in the ARocket-Projects listing.

Updated web Link:  http://www.canyonspaceteam.org/site/  Look for some =
updates and changes to the web site in the next few months.

"The primary goal of the Canyon Space Team is to support low cost, =
private, human access to space (sub-orbital, semi-ballistic flight) =
including research and development."  A secondary goal would be the =
eventual pursuit of the X-Prize.
=20
CST is a nonprofit corporation in the state of Washington.  Our members =
are all volunteers, with the most active members mostly from the Seattle =
area and within the state of Washington.  We do have some interested =
individuals outside the state also.

CST has recently established 4 classes of dues paying members that help =
to pay for overhead itmes like the Web page and a monthly, printed =
newsletter mailed out to all members.  Projects are funded mainly =
through donations and contrubutions.  Members have included engineers =
and professionals in aerospace, pilots, airplane homebuilders, and other =
rocket and space enthusiasts.

Regards,
Bruce E. Watson
Secretary/Newsletter Editor
Canyon Space Team


------=_NextPart_000_0C40_01C56B69.4E4B8F40
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META content=3D"text/html; charset=3Dwindows-1252" =
http-equiv=3DContent-Type>
<META content=3D"MSHTML 5.00.2314.1000" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Yvan Bozzonetti wrote:<BR><BR>----- =
Original=20
Message -----<BR>From: &lt;<A=20
href=3D"mailto:Azt28@AOL.COM">Azt28@AOL.COM</A>&gt;<BR>To: &lt;<A=20
href=3D"mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU">AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU</A>&gt;<BR>Sent: =
Friday,=20
August 31, 2001 6:28 AM<BR>Subject: [AR] ARocket-Projects August 2001=20
(long)<BR>&lt;sinp&gt;<BR>&gt; X-PRIZE=20
TEAMS.<BR>&gt;<BR>&gt;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; ***Canyon Space=20
Team<BR>&gt;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; <A=20
href=3D"http://canyonspaceteam.freeservers.com">http://canyonspaceteam.fr=
eeservers.com</A><BR>&gt;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;=
=20
Looking for =
X-Prize<BR>&gt;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;=20
SubScale Super Sonic=20
Vehicle<BR>&gt;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Rocket =
Engine=20
Development<BR>&gt;<BR></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2><BR>Dear Yvan:<BR><BR>A little more =
information on=20
the Canyon Space Team that can be included in the&nbsp;ARocket-Projects=20
listing.<BR><BR>Updated web Link:&nbsp; <A=20
href=3D"http://www.canyonspaceteam.org/site/">http://www.canyonspaceteam.=
org/site/</A>&nbsp;=20
Look for some updates and changes to the web site in the next few=20
months.<BR><BR>"The primary goal of the Canyon Space Team is to support =
low=20
cost, private, human access to space (sub-orbital, semi-ballistic =
flight)=20
including research and development."&nbsp; A secondary goal would be the =

eventual pursuit of the X-Prize.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>CST is a nonprofit corporation in the =
state of=20
Washington.&nbsp; Our members are all volunteers, with the most active =
members=20
mostly from the Seattle area and within the state of Washington.&nbsp; =
We do=20
have some interested individuals outside the state also.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>CST has recently established 4 classes =
of dues=20
paying members that help to pay for overhead itmes like the Web page and =
a=20
monthly, printed newsletter mailed out to all members.&nbsp; Projects =
are funded=20
mainly through donations and contrubutions.&nbsp; Members have included=20
engineers and professionals in aerospace, pilots, airplane homebuilders, =
and=20
other rocket and space enthusiasts.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Regards,</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Bruce E. Watson</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Secretary/Newsletter =
Editor</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Canyon Space Team</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>&nbsp;</DIV></FONT></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0C40_01C56B69.4E4B8F40--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 3083 invoked from network); 31 Aug 2001 18:52:15 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 31 Aug 2001 18:52:15 -0000
Received: (qmail 9573 invoked by uid 50005); 31 Aug 2001 18:51:22 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.370461 secs); 31 Aug 2001 18:51:22 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 31 Aug 2001 18:51:20 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA25128; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 11:48:26 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 103787 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 18:48:24          +0000
Received: from roll.akcecc.kiev.ua (roll.akcecc.kiev.ua [193.227.206.34]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA25114 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 11:48:20 -0700
Received: from serge (pool-112.akcecc.kiev.ua [193.227.207.112] (may be          forged)) by roll.akcecc.kiev.ua (8.10.2/8.10.2) with SMTP id          f7VImDn03896 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 21:48:13          +0300
References:  <F139jQxzmWecm9t0CI700000eb4@hotmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="koi8-r"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2417.2000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <00b901c13244$dfa6cca0$70cfe3c1@serge>
Date:         Fri, 31 Aug 2001 21:44:57 +0400
Reply-To: "Serge Pipko" <spas@AKCECC.KIEV.UA>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Serge Pipko" <spas@AKCECC.KIEV.UA>
Subject:      Re: [AR] AN melt
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

John Dom wrote:

> >When it is hot, at temperatures above 150 degrees F, it is somewhat
sticky
> >and malleable.
>
> So it can be cast or pressed into a eg Bates mould? I mean like it can in
> the classical fryer & solid KN mode
>
> >When cool, it is only sticky if your fingers are wet.>
>
> >(the glass-like compound has...)  Certainly less than 5% during oven
> >processing, after dehydration, less than 2% is a reasonable guess.
>
> I wonder if such is stable when stored. Maybe Bates cylinders  prepared by
> pressing or moulding the glassy stuff could be protected from water loss
> (evaporation) by spraying or dipping a film around it.
> I guess otherwise, after awhile the water content 'll go that low that the
> block may start to crystallize.
>
> Just guesswork, maybe ill informed.
>
> Still am at a loss if the AN process offers anything better. Must still
read
> a 100 postings. Argh. Excuse.

In all cases that I have studied upon cooling large portion of AN deposits
as a crystalline mass. Resulting propellant' block look like AP composite,
i.e. it is composite of AN crystals and glass-like solid solution of fuel in
AN. The size of AN crystals is controlled by melt' viscosity: the more
viscous melt the smaller crystals it deposits. For example, very runny
AN-sorbitol melt gives crumbly composite with AN crystals up to 3 mm long.
Viscous melts containing starch or wheat flour give uniform microcrystalline
composites with good mechanical properties.

Serge

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 13685 invoked from network); 31 Aug 2001 19:02:18 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 31 Aug 2001 19:02:18 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 15531 invoked by uid 50005); 31 Aug 2001 19:03:07 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpa with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.183684 secs); 31 Aug 2001 19:03:07 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 31 Aug 2001 19:03:07 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA25188; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 11:55:40 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 103802 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 18:55:39          +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (f192.law15.hotmail.com [64.4.23.192]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA25174 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 11:55:39 -0700
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Fri,          31 Aug 2001 11:55:05 -0700
Received: from 213.224.83.70 by lw15fd.law15.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Fri, 31          Aug 2001 18:55:05 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [213.224.83.70]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 31 Aug 2001 18:55:05.0568 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[72AA3600:01C1324E]
Message-ID:  <F1923Hho6rCsSLgPPMk00000e5c@hotmail.com>
Date:         Fri, 31 Aug 2001 18:55:39 +0000
Reply-To: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] liquids question: alcohol/N2O propellant feeding
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Still do not see the point in the piston. Canister one is contains N2O. No
piston. Canister two contains the fuel in a bag. A tube from the upper part
of the N2O tank connects the bag canister to pressurize it...

jd

>From: Waysie_Atkins@VANGUARD.COM
>Reply-To: Waysie_Atkins@VANGUARD.COM
>To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
>Subject: Re: [AR] liquids question: alcohol/N2O propellant feeding
>Date: Thu, 30 Aug 2001 16:38:57 -0400
>
> > the nox below, run a flexible hose (nylon line works) from the piston to
>the
> > combustion chamber with enough slack to let the piston slide up to the
>top
> > of
> > the tank.
>
>
>How do you route the hose to the piston, given that the piston will be
>sliding.
>Through the top or bottom???
>
>
>Waysie


_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 21813 invoked from network); 31 Aug 2001 19:11:34 -0000
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 31 Aug 2001 19:11:34 -0000
Received: (qmail 18019 invoked by uid 50005); 31 Aug 2001 19:11:53 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpe with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 1.042128 secs); 31 Aug 2001 19:11:53 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 31 Aug 2001 19:11:52 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA25292; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 12:07:49 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 103821 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 19:07:46          +0000
Received: from mailhost0.trib.com (mailhost0.trib.com [63.229.150.3]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA25278 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 12:07:46 -0700
Received: from mail.trib.com (mail.trib.com [12.10.158.17]) by          mailhost0.trib.com (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f7VJ7i648190; Fri,          31 Aug 2001 13:07:44 -0600 (MDT) (envelope-from          jwckman@space-rockets.com)
Received: from [63.229.151.22] (HELO default) by mail.trib.com (CommuniGate Pro          SMTP 3.4.6) with SMTP id 44888402; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 13:07:41 -0600
References:  <20010831.120210.-3955305.2.kc2csh@juno.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2314.1300
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <003501c1324f$b580b200$1697e53f@default>
Date:         Fri, 31 Aug 2001 13:01:49 -0600
Reply-To: "John Wickman" <jwckman@SPACE-ROCKETS.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Wickman" <jwckman@SPACE-ROCKETS.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] propellant musings
Comments: To: kc2csh@juno.com
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Jay,

A tripropellant rocket engine has been built by the US and Russia using
LOX/kerosene to start and switching over to LOX/hydrogen.   NASA has also
explored the option of using three propellants simultaneously as well.  I
believe there is some published work out of Glenn and MSFC.

John Wickman


----- Original Message -----
From: <kc2csh@JUNO.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Friday, August 31, 2001 10:02 AM
Subject: Re: [AR] propellant musings


>   In something of this same vane, has anyone explored tri-propellant or
> quad-propellant type systems.
>   If, for example, in high ISP LH/LOX engines half the LH is combusted
> and half is just heated to exhaust as gas, given the low density of LH,
> why not burn propane or kero or whatever, then add H2.
>   The combinations of 3s and 4s that seem to have complementary
> charastics, particularly from the perspective of density and
> preasurization seems long.  For example, why not use N2O and peroxide
> together.  The N20 could both chill and preasurize the peroxide.
> Combustion started with N20 would largely eliminate issues of catalysts
> for peroxide wouldn't it?
>   I understand the issues of greatly increased complexity.  The question
> I guess is do you get enough potential benefit to offset the complexity?
>
>                      Jay
>
> On Fri, 31 Aug 2001 11:41:38 -0400 Henry Spencer <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
> writes:
> > On Fri, 31 Aug 2001, Pierce Nichols wrote:
> > > Does anyone know the solubility of hydrogen in liquid propane at
> 100K and
> > > various pressures?
> >
> > I had the same idea a few years ago...  I'm told it's minimal, not
> > enough
> > to be worth the trouble.  (I don't have actual numbers on hand.)
> > Pity.
> >
> >                                                           Henry
> > Spencer
> >
> > henry@spsystems.net
>
> ________________________________________________________________
> GET INTERNET ACCESS FROM JUNO!
> Juno offers FREE or PREMIUM Internet access for less!
> Join Juno today!  For your FREE software, visit:
> http://dl.www.juno.com/get/tagj.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 24100 invoked from network); 31 Aug 2001 19:19:26 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 31 Aug 2001 19:19:26 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 28722 invoked by uid 50005); 31 Aug 2001 19:19:44 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpe with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.832702 secs); 31 Aug 2001 19:19:44 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 31 Aug 2001 19:19:42 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA25320; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 12:09:44 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 103828 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 19:09:43          +0000
Received: from smtp004pub.verizon.net (smtp004pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.183])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA25306 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 12:09:43 -0700
Received: from [63.10.189.118] (1Cust118.tnt2.hilo.hi.da.uu.net          [63.10.189.118]) by smtp004pub.verizon.net  with ESMTP for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; id f7VJ97r10423 Fri, 31 Aug 2001 14:09:08          -0500 (CDT)
X-Sender: ttocs@mail.gte.net
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <l03130302b7b197765e6b@[63.10.189.184]>
Date:         Tue, 28 Aug 2001 09:08:42 -1000
Reply-To: "Aaron Smith" <ttocs@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Aaron Smith" <ttocs@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] gun launch
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <F220wdUTaGmvSVMum03000005e2@hotmail.com>

The 10 Kg launcher I described WOULD get 2 km (well, without air
resistance...).  Bring that 10 foot system up to 20 feet, and you would get
7845 meters (again, no resistance...)  30 feet (which would probably be the
maximum useful size) and 17652 meters (almost 58,000 feet) - I think that
could be useful!  The last one would need a propellant with a SOS of higher
than 2000 ft/sec - which I think eliminates a pneumatic system, so a
propellant gun such as propane would be needed.  Unless we can find cheap
H2.  Any powder, and those humorless men in dark suits might show up.
Launching 10 Kg projectiles to 58,000 feet would attract some attention...
Just for the hell of it, let's see what a 40 foot system would do -
31,381m.  102,929 feet.  This number is probably close to the mark, because
of less air resistance.  I think some amatuer could find a use for THAT!

Gerald Bull was on the right track, until he started working for that other
dude.

Aaron

P.S.  --  Please note that this was typed up quickly and there could be
errors in the math.  Don't start drooling yet.


At 11:06 AM +0000 8/31/01, John Dom wrote:
>AS wrote:
>
>>A gun launcher is by no means elaborate - it's two pipes and a valve.
>
>Huh? Depends how high up you want to go. And what kind of gun. If you choose
>a gas gun & go for a 10-30 kg projectile (in which you could stash away some
>experimental packages) to be launched to say, 2 km up only... then a bike
>pump won't do.
>
>The valve may be simple but may and take a long time to design & realize.
>Next you need high pressure gas cylinders, a compressor, and even a
>generator if you want multiple launches_afield.
>
>Check pumpkin launchers on trucks URLs. Those guys work for years on
>their_very long_expensive_guns. The barrel tubings require a truck to
>transport (up to 10 m long).
>
>If you chose a powder gun eg a mortar, that 'd lead to smaller contraptions.
>Heavy barrels. Any ideas on such?
>
>jd

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 21981 invoked from network); 31 Aug 2001 19:33:24 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 31 Aug 2001 19:33:24 -0000
Received: (qmail 16446 invoked by uid 50005); 31 Aug 2001 19:33:43 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpe with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.859907 secs); 31 Aug 2001 19:33:43 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 31 Aug 2001 19:33:41 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA25399; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 12:21:22 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 103842 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 19:21:19          +0000
Received: from spsystems.net (spsystems.net [209.47.149.227]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA25385 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Fri,          31 Aug 2001 12:21:18 -0700
Received: (from henry@localhost) by spsystems.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id PAA13128;          Fri, 31 Aug 2001 15:20:45 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010831150450.12914A-100000@spsystems.net>
Date:         Fri, 31 Aug 2001 15:20:45 -0400
Reply-To: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] propellant musings
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <20010831.120210.-3955305.2.kc2csh@juno.com>

On Fri, 31 Aug 2001 kc2csh@JUNO.COM wrote:
>   In something of this same vane, has anyone explored tri-propellant or
> quad-propellant type systems.

Yes, such things have been proposed...

>   If, for example, in high ISP LH/LOX engines half the LH is combusted
> and half is just heated to exhaust as gas, given the low density of LH,
> why not burn propane or kero or whatever, then add H2.

It's been suggested, indeed studied quite seriously.  Boeing thought it
was a good idea, for a while -- you can use the LH2 for cooling a high-
pressure chamber (it's a wonderful coolant) and for pump drive (no
problems with coking), and the amounts aren't large enough to be a big
tank problem.  Indeed, they said that the three tanks ended up all about
the same size.

Looked at carefully, though, there are enough added penalties that in the
end it's not a win, at least not for large pro-built rockets.  Detailed
optimization of such tripropellant systems always seems to end up driving
you to eliminate one propellant or the other.

The highest measured Isp for any chemical rocket ever was with an F2/Li/H2
system, with the fluorine and lithium burning and the H2 just along as
reaction mass -- sort of a poor man's nuclear rocket.  With a low chamber
pressure but a high-expansion vacuum-optimized nozzle, they got 542s.
(And the chamber temperature was startlingly low.)  However... Jeff Greason
tells me that when you try to design a launcher around this combination,
even if you disregard the various nasty engineering problems, it turns out
that it never performs as well as simple LOX/LH2.  Despite the fantastic
Isp, the various dry-mass penalties absolutely kill performance.

> Combustion started with N20 would largely eliminate issues of catalysts
> for peroxide wouldn't it?

If you're going to use an igniter, you don't need catalysts or N2O;
peroxide works fine as a classical non-hypergolic oxidizer.  But there are
a number of advantages to catalyzing the peroxide (such as the advantages
of injecting fuel into a hot gas stream rather than trying to mix two
liquids), and those get lost.

>   I understand the issues of greatly increased complexity.  The question
> I guess is do you get enough potential benefit to offset the complexity?

So far, it hasn't turned out that way.

Mind you, clever and creative design can make a big difference in results.
(For example, orthodox wisdom puts HTHL landing-gear mass at 3% of gross
mass, but the B-58 landing gear -- tall and complicated -- was 1.5% in
1957.)  There may be a way, given serious ingenuity.

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 22110 invoked from network); 31 Aug 2001 19:33:26 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 31 Aug 2001 19:33:26 -0000
Received: (qmail 17678 invoked by uid 50005); 31 Aug 2001 19:34:14 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpa with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.266743 secs); 31 Aug 2001 19:34:14 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 31 Aug 2001 19:34:13 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA25484; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 12:26:32 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 103864 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 19:26:30          +0000
Received: from roll.akcecc.kiev.ua (roll.akcecc.kiev.ua [193.227.206.34]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA25470 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 12:26:27 -0700
Received: from serge (pool-112.akcecc.kiev.ua [193.227.207.112] (may be          forged)) by roll.akcecc.kiev.ua (8.10.2/8.10.2) with SMTP id          f7VJQMn12978 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 22:26:22          +0300
References:  <Pine.LNX.4.10.10108311019440.24164-100000@itc.uci.edu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2417.2000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <00dd01c1324a$3446abe0$70cfe3c1@serge>
Date:         Fri, 31 Aug 2001 22:23:41 +0400
Reply-To: "Serge Pipko" <spas@AKCECC.KIEV.UA>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Serge Pipko" <spas@AKCECC.KIEV.UA>
Subject:      Re: [AR] AN melt
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Ray Calkins wrote:

> I am collecting materials to explore freeze dried AN-Sucrose powder.
> Potentially, this material can be used to press a grain.  The AN and sugar
> will already be intimately mixed, and if cold-dried, the AN shouldn't
> attack the sugar.  Since the material will be very fine crystals, it
> should get around the phase change problems AN has.

I have done this. I have evaporated water solutions of AN with fuels
(sorbitol, sucrose, charcoal, ascorbic acid, starch, wheat flour, sulfur )
and catalysts ( fumed silica, Cu or Fe salts, KNO3, NaCl ) at 60-70 deg C
and hand pressed resulted semicrystalline mass in paper tubes 17 mm ID. Some
of them sustain combustion, but their mechanical properties was
unsatisfactory. It is possible that additional experiments and decent press
will greatly improve the grain's strength. I can post all my results in
detail if it will be interesting.

Serge

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 3924 invoked from network); 31 Aug 2001 19:36:13 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 31 Aug 2001 19:36:13 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 9754 invoked by uid 50005); 31 Aug 2001 19:34:09 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpf with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.242104 secs); 31 Aug 2001 19:34:09 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 31 Aug 2001 19:34:08 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA25367; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 12:18:43 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 103835 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 19:18:41          +0000
Received: from smtp004pub.verizon.net (smtp004pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.183])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA25353 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 12:18:40 -0700
Received: from [63.10.189.118] (1Cust80.tnt2.hilo.hi.da.uu.net [63.10.189.80])          by smtp004pub.verizon.net  with ESMTP ; id f7VJI7r19542 Fri, 31 Aug          2001 14:18:07 -0500 (CDT)
X-Sender: ttocs@mail.gte.net
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <l03130304b7b19e8907eb@[63.10.189.118]>
Date:         Tue, 28 Aug 2001 09:17:37 -1000
Reply-To: "Aaron Smith" <ttocs@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Aaron Smith" <ttocs@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Aerospike , etc...
Comments: To: John Dom <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <F2154D3MBhe3WYIgoFT00000d00@hotmail.com>

At 6:23 PM +0000 8/31/01, John Dom wrote:
>BT wrote:
>
>>The only vehicle that I know of that *approximates* an aerospike was the
>>Russian N-1 "Moon Rocket". It had 24 NK-33s around the edge and 6 NK-33s in
>>the center. The aft end was sort of hemispherical such that the 6 central
>>engines were lower than the engines on the rim, forming a rudimentary
>>"spike".
>
>Must be missing the point here since motors in the N-1 stage 1 cluster were
>all bell shaped. So the Saturn cluster was an aerospike(?)
>
>jd

They did all have bell nozzles, but were arranged around a dome that could
have acted as a spike.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 942 invoked from network); 31 Aug 2001 19:43:13 -0000
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 31 Aug 2001 19:43:13 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 28709 invoked by uid 50005); 31 Aug 2001 19:43:33 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpe with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.187734 secs); 31 Aug 2001 19:43:33 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 31 Aug 2001 19:43:33 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA25534; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 12:34:15 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 103855 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 19:34:06          +0000
Received: from fcexgw03.efi.com ([192.68.228.82]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7)          with SMTP id MAA25425 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Fri, 31 Aug 2001          12:23:53 -0700
Received: from 10.10.12.104 by fcexgw03.efi.com (InterScan E-Mail VirusWall          NT); Fri, 31 Aug 2001 12:23:42 -0700
Received: from earthlink.net (peroxide.efi.com [10.10.89.46]) by          EX-IMC3-CORP.efi.com with SMTP (Microsoft Exchange Internet Mail          Service Version 5.5.2653.13) id QNQGK41R; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 12:23:42          -0700
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.14-5.0 i686)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <F1923Hho6rCsSLgPPMk00000e5c@hotmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B8FE47C.F839D210@earthlink.net>
Date:         Fri, 31 Aug 2001 12:24:44 -0700
Reply-To: "David Weinshenker" <daze39@EARTHLINK.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "David Weinshenker" <daze39@EARTHLINK.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] liquids question: alcohol/N2O propellant feeding
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

John Dom wrote:
>
> Still do not see the point in the piston. Canister one is contains N2O. No
> piston. Canister two contains the fuel in a bag. A tube from the upper part
> of the N2O tank connects the bag canister to pressurize it...

Different construction, same concept as the piston. Depends on which method
gives greater confidence with your available fabrication techniques.

Some people have better access to fine machining and polishing than they
do to engineered elastomer films. They might have better luck with a piston.

For a possible bag system, the plastic bags of variable-volume containers
(as used for photographic developing-solutions and cheap wine, for example)
might have adequate chemical resistance to N2O and alcohol - they are intended
to be gas-impermeable, so that the contents do not deteriorate from contact
with oxygen in the atmosphere.

-dave w

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 24725 invoked from network); 31 Aug 2001 20:26:09 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 31 Aug 2001 20:26:09 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 25280 invoked by uid 50005); 31 Aug 2001 20:26:58 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpa with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.226993 secs); 31 Aug 2001 20:26:58 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 31 Aug 2001 20:26:58 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA25744; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 13:22:12 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 103910 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 20:22:03          +0000
Received: from mailgw1a.lmco.com (mailgw1a.lmco.com [192.31.106.7]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA25730 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 13:22:03 -0700
Received: from emss02g01.ems.lmco.com (relay2.ems.lmco.com [166.29.2.54]) by          mailgw1a.lmco.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id OAA31880 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 14:22:02 -0600 (MDT)
Received: from CONVERSION-DAEMON by lmco.com (PMDF V5.2-33 #38887) id          <0GIY00D018KNTL@lmco.com> for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 31 Aug 2001          14:22:00 -0600 (MDT)
Received: from emss02i01.ems.lmco.com ([166.29.2.35]) by lmco.com (PMDF V5.2-33          #38887) with ESMTP id <0GIY007XZ8KJW9@lmco.com> for          AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 14:21:55 -0600 (MDT)
Received: by emss02i01.ems.lmco.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) id          <R59V60D4>; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 14:23:00 -0600
Content-return: allowed
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19)
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <EDB5E5136094D311BF1800508B12205E08D29120@emss02m07.ems.lmco.com>
Date:         Fri, 31 Aug 2001 14:21:13 -0600
Reply-To: "Bendel, Timothy B" <timothy.b.bendel@LMCO.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Bendel, Timothy B" <timothy.b.bendel@LMCO.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Aerospike , etc...
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

        >>>The only vehicle that I know of that *approximates* an aerospike
was the
        >>>Russian N-1 "Moon Rocket". It had 24 NK-33s around the edge and 6
NK-33s in
        >>>the center. The aft end was sort of hemispherical such that the 6
central
        >>>engines were lower than the engines on the rim, forming a
rudimentary
        >>>"spike".
        >>
        >>Must be missing the point here since motors in the N-1 stage 1
cluster were
        >>all bell shaped. So the Saturn cluster was an aerospike(?)
        >>
        >>jd

        >They did all have bell nozzles, but were arranged around a dome
that could
        >have acted as a spike.

        Remember that I said *approximates*; the dome was intended to act as
a shallow "plug" nozzle. The original version of the N-1 actually only has
24 engines, until Korelev figured out that there was going to be too many
thermo problems with the big dome inside the ring of engines. He stuck 6
more engines in there partially to alleviate this problem (and for more
thrust). The engines could handle the high temperature environment due to
their regenerative cooling.

        Timothy Bendel

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 19774 invoked from network); 17 Aug 2001 02:34:57 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 17 Aug 2001 02:34:57 -0000
Received: (qmail 9616 invoked by uid 50005); 17 Aug 2001 02:35:22 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.202543 secs); 17 Aug 2001 02:35:22 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 17 Aug 2001 02:35:22 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA12753; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 19:31:37 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 86988 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 02:31:28          +0000
Received: from dune.gnc.net (root@dune.gnc.net [207.203.72.4]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA12739 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu,          16 Aug 2001 19:31:27 -0700
Received: from beowulf (sw2-1.gnc.net [207.203.72.81]) by dune.gnc.net          (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id WAA32285 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu,          16 Aug 2001 22:31:27 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
Importance: Normal
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <LPBBKJMJEOFKAMFJJNNHKEJFCGAA.landofgrey@gnc.net>
Date:         Thu, 16 Aug 2001 22:31:09 -0400
Reply-To: <landofgrey@gnc.net>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Matthew Travis" <landofgrey@gnc.net>
Subject:      Re: [AR] ERPS successfully runs H2O2 engine
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <4.3.1.2.20010816201429.02e80498@mail.idsoftware.com>

I've got the document laying around here somewhere... According to the Solid
Propulsion Industry Action Group, it is quantifiable that liquids have a
*lower* history of reliability than solids. In fact, since 1957, the space
launch history shows that 39% of failures were due to liquid propulsion, and
20% to solid propulsion (17% G&C, 8% staging, 5% fairing, 2% destruct system
failure, 1% lightning, and 7% unknown). Also, upper stage solid motors have
a 98.41% reliability (10 failures out of 627 attempts), monolithic boosters
99.76% reliability (6 failures out of 2464 attempts), and segmented boosters
99.25% reliability (3 failures out of 402 attempts). Totals: 19 failures in
3493 attempts for a reliability of 99.46%. These figures are for
satellite-carrying vehicles, BTW. comparing, liquid-fuel systems have a
reliability of 98.03% (37 failures out of 1880 attempts). Also, 70% of
failures of liquid propulsion systems occur outside of the engine. Solids
have failed at a rate of 1 per 179 boosters, while liquids have failed at a
rate of 1 per every 51 stages. As far a numbers of catastrophic failure
points (places where failure can occur), the space shuttle RSRM's have 91
single-point catastrophic failure modes and 50 failure modes with redundancy
(141 total failure modes). The SSME's have 921 catastrophic failure modes. I
admit the SSME's are the most complex liquid engines ever built, but they
are also the most reliable.

Out of 19 total failures, solids had 7 catastrophic failures, for a
catastrophic ratio of 37%. Out of 37 total failures, liquids also had seven
catastrophic failures, a rate of 19%. This is where solids get their bad
reputation. When they fail, they are more likely to be catastrophic than
when liquids fail. However... with a failure rate of 0.0054 and a
catastrophic ratio of 37%, solids have a catastrophic failure rate of
0.0020. Liquids, with a failure rate of 0.0197 and a catastrophic ratio of
19%, have a catastrophic failure rate of 0.0037. Liquids are more likely to
fail catastrophically than solids. Historically.

Since 1985, though, solids and liquids have about the same failure rate.
Solids have failed 6 out of 1423 times and liquids have failed 7 out of 505
times. The numeric failure rate for liquids is higher than solids, but since
solid boosters are usually used in multiples of 2, 4, 5, or 9, the failure
rate per stage (when considering, e.g. 2 solid strap-ons firing at the same
time to be one stage) is essesntially the same.

Anyhow, I got these figures from the SPIAG's Solid Rocket Motor Briefing
from June 1999. You can find it on their website at http://www.spiag.org/

Oh yeah, disclaimer: I am not expressing a personal opinion as to which is
safer. I am merely re-iterating the SPIAG's document (duh, they're biased
toward solids and not ashamed of it). My personal opinion is that all forms
of propulsion are equally valid and useful and neat and cool (and that
should pacify everyone).

-Matt


> >
> >To each his own opinion.  JMHO, I think that liquids are much safer than
> >solids.  Espescially in manned aplications.  Most readers on the list
> >are not working towards manned rockets, but I'd like to think that
> >someday, maybe, I could build one big enough.  Now all I need is a fat
> >bank to knock over and I'll get started on it.
> >

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 5534 invoked from network); 17 Aug 2001 02:47:13 -0000
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 17 Aug 2001 02:47:13 -0000
Received: (qmail 3695 invoked by uid 50005); 17 Aug 2001 02:45:54 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smpte.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.751438 secs); 17 Aug 2001 02:45:54 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 17 Aug 2001 02:45:53 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA12837; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 19:44:46 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 87011 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 02:44:44          +0000
Received: from castor.ridgenet.net (IDENT:root@castor.ridgenet.net          [199.120.150.29]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA12822          for <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 19:44:40 -0700
Received: from kristinscomp (pm134.ridgenet.net [204.154.246.134]) by          castor.ridgenet.net (8.11.0/8.11.0) with SMTP id f7H2b4S01540 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 19:37:04 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0B6B_01C56B69.4981F940"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <001801c126c7$c21b4900$1b30fea9@kristinscomp>
Date:         Thu, 16 Aug 2001 19:53:13 -0700
Reply-To: "Kristin & David Hall" <thehalls@RIDGENET.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Kristin & David Hall" <thehalls@RIDGENET.NET>
Subject:      [AR] Is there a chemist in the house?
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0B6B_01C56B69.4981F940
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable


Had a chemical spill at work yesterday.

Boron Triflouride.

Anybody know anything about this critter?

--
Dave and/or Kristin Hall

------=_NextPart_000_0B6B_01C56B69.4981F940
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META content=3D"text/html; charset=3Diso-8859-1" =
http-equiv=3DContent-Type>
<META content=3D"MSHTML 5.00.2614.3500" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#b8b8b8>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Had a chemical spill at work=20
yesterday.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Boron Triflouride.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Anybody know anything about this=20
critter?</FONT></DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>--<BR>Dave and/or Kristin=20
Hall</FONT></DIV></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0B6B_01C56B69.4981F940--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 14010 invoked from network); 17 Aug 2001 02:58:19 -0000
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 17 Aug 2001 02:58:19 -0000
Received: (qmail 20278 invoked by uid 50005); 17 Aug 2001 02:57:29 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smptf.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.342067 secs); 17 Aug 2001 02:57:29 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 17 Aug 2001 02:57:28 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA12914; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 19:54:47 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 87030 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 02:54:44          +0000
Received: from fep4-orange.clear.net.nz (fep4-orange.clear.net.nz          [203.97.32.4]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA12899          for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 19:54:43 -0700
Received: from mkbs (203-167-160-25.dialup.clear.net.nz [203.167.160.25]) by          fep4-orange.clear.net.nz (1.5/1.7) with SMTP id OAA25990; Fri, 17 Aug          2001 14:54:39 +1200 (NZST)
References: <NEBBJIGOELOLIBCCPKDCIELKCBAA.geordi@c031.aone.net.au>                       <OE54Vs1aLxGYiH1ZRJ60000d739@hotmail.com>             <a05100317b7a2079ba23d@[63.27.96.152]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <011b01c126c8$45e5fe60$0100a8c0@mkbs>
Date:         Fri, 17 Aug 2001 14:45:33 +1200
Reply-To: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Organization: Applied Technology
Subject:      Re: [AR] ERPS successfully runs H2O2 engine
Comments: To: Jerry Irvine <01rocket@GTE.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

> I am a candy dis-advocate.

Tell us why (serious request)

Candy is of course vastly inferior to AP propellants in performance but as a
beginners and experimenters propellant it surely has its place. Issues such
as availability, cost, combustion temperature & safety are probably
pertinent. Are you saying that you would not advise people to follow the
Candy path to become experienced motor builders?

regards


            Russell McMahon

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 17657 invoked from network); 17 Aug 2001 03:07:44 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 17 Aug 2001 03:07:44 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 21194 invoked by uid 50005); 17 Aug 2001 03:08:09 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.345718 secs); 17 Aug 2001 03:08:09 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 17 Aug 2001 03:08:08 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA13006; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 20:05:46 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 87049 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 03:05:43          +0000
Received: from smtp001.mailsrvcs.net (smtp001pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.180])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA12991 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 20:05:43 -0700
Received: from [63.27.96.152] (1Cust181.tnt3.san-bernardino.ca.da.uu.net          [63.25.57.181]) by smtp001.mailsrvcs.net  with ESMTP for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; id f7H34u704911 Thu, 16 Aug 2001 22:04:56          -0500 (CDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: GTE/01rocket@mail.gte.net
References: <NEBBJIGOELOLIBCCPKDCIELKCBAA.geordi@c031.aone.net.au>            <OE54Vs1aLxGYiH1ZRJ60000d739@hotmail.com>            <a05100317b7a2079ba23d@[63.27.96.152]>            <011b01c126c8$45e5fe60$0100a8c0@mkbs>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <a0510031db7a239fb551e@[63.27.96.152]>
Date:         Thu, 16 Aug 2001 20:05:22 -0700
Reply-To: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] ERPS successfully runs H2O2 engine
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <011b01c126c8$45e5fe60$0100a8c0@mkbs>

>  > I am a candy dis-advocate.
>
>Tell us why (serious request)


It is brittle.
It has a high burning rate exponent.
It has poor physical properties and is only suitable for small motors.
It has low delivered ISP
It is processed using a heat level dangerously close to autoignition
   This factor has caused more accidents than any propellant I
personally know of

Is that enough?

Jerry

>
>Candy is of course vastly inferior to AP propellants in performance but as a
>beginners and experimenters propellant it surely has its place. Issues such
>as availability, cost, combustion temperature & safety are probably
>pertinent. Are you saying that you would not advise people to follow the
>Candy path to become experienced motor builders?
>
>regards
>
>
>             Russell McMahon


--
Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
Opinion, the whole thing.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 6804 invoked from network); 17 Aug 2001 03:31:39 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 17 Aug 2001 03:31:39 -0000
Received: (qmail 18046 invoked by uid 50005); 17 Aug 2001 03:32:04 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.438341 secs); 17 Aug 2001 03:32:04 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 17 Aug 2001 03:32:03 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA13146; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 20:27:47 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 87084 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 03:27:44          +0000
Received: from femail11.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail11.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.0.95.107]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA13131          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 20:27:44 -0700
Received: from cc334751a ([65.13.214.65]) by femail11.sdc1.sfba.home.com          (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20 201-229-121-120-20010223) with SMTP id          <20010817032743.PZC17568.femail11.sdc1.sfba.home.com@cc334751a>; Thu,          16 Aug 2001 20:27:43 -0700
References:  <001801c126c7$c21b4900$1b30fea9@kristinscomp>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0B6E_01C56B69.498B9630"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2462.0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <02d401c126cc$8f4915c0$6601a8c0@home.com>
Date:         Thu, 16 Aug 2001 21:27:35 -0600
Reply-To: "Brian Kosko" <bkosko1@HOME.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Brian Kosko" <bkosko1@HOME.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Is there a chemist in the house?
Comments: To: Kristin & David Hall <thehalls@RIDGENET.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0B6E_01C56B69.498B9630
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Ugh Dave,

You did already clean it up didn't you?

My memories on it are vague; it's usually in ether so it's a pretty big =
fire hazard. Though I guess you would have noticed thast possibility by =
now.

Brian
  ----- Original Message -----=20
  From: Kristin & David Hall=20
  To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU=20
  Sent: Thursday, August 16, 2001 8:53 PM
  Subject: [AR] Is there a chemist in the house?



  Had a chemical spill at work yesterday.

  Boron Triflouride.

  Anybody know anything about this critter?

  --
  Dave and/or Kristin Hall

------=_NextPart_000_0B6E_01C56B69.498B9630
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Diso-8859-1">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 6.00.2462.0" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#b8b8b8>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Ugh Dave,</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>You did already clean it up didn't=20
you?</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>My memories on it are vague; it's =
usually in ether=20
so it's a pretty big fire hazard. Though I guess you would have noticed =
thast=20
possibility by now.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Brian</FONT></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE dir=3Dltr=20
style=3D"PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; =
BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
  <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial">----- Original Message ----- </DIV>
  <DIV=20
  style=3D"BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; FONT: 10pt arial; font-color: =
black"><B>From:</B>=20
  <A title=3Dthehalls@RIDGENET.NET =
href=3D"mailto:thehalls@RIDGENET.NET">Kristin=20
  &amp; David Hall</A> </DIV>
  <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A =
title=3DAROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU=20
  href=3D"mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU">AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU</A> </DIV>
  <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> Thursday, August 16, 2001 =
8:53=20
  PM</DIV>
  <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> [AR] Is there a =
chemist in the=20
  house?</DIV>
  <DIV><BR></DIV>
  <DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
  <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Had a chemical spill at work=20
  yesterday.</FONT></DIV>
  <DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
  <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Boron Triflouride.</FONT></DIV>
  <DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
  <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Anybody know anything about this=20
  critter?</FONT></DIV>
  <DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
  <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>--<BR>Dave and/or Kristin=20
Hall</FONT></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0B6E_01C56B69.498B9630--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 29160 invoked from network); 17 Aug 2001 04:17:34 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 17 Aug 2001 04:17:34 -0000
Received: (qmail 27121 invoked by uid 50005); 17 Aug 2001 04:17:27 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (. Clean. Processed in 0.393634 secs); 17 Aug 2001 04:17:27 -0000
X-Qmail-Scanner-Mail-From: owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU via smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net
X-Qmail-Scanner-Rcpt-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
X-Qmail-Scanner: 0.96 (No viruses found. Processed in 0.393634 secs)
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 17 Aug 2001 04:17:26 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA13415; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 21:13:11 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 87145 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 04:13:06          +0000
Received: from albqpop1.albq.uswest.net (albqpop1.albq.uswest.net          [207.108.240.1]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id VAA13401          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 21:13:05 -0700
Received: (qmail 98327 invoked by alias); 17 Aug 2001 04:11:48 -0000
Delivered-To: fixup-AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU@fixme
Received: (qmail 97596 invoked by uid 0); 17 Aug 2001 04:11:26 -0000
Received: from cc898542-a.prdise1.nm.home.com (HELO cc898542a) (65.7.151.152)          by albqpop1.albq.uswest.net with SMTP; 17 Aug 2001 04:11:26 -0000
References: <NEBBJIGOELOLIBCCPKDCIELKCBAA.geordi@c031.aone.net.au>                       <OE54Vs1aLxGYiH1ZRJ60000d739@hotmail.com>                       <a05100317b7a2079ba23d@[63.27.96.152]>                       <011b01c126c8$45e5fe60$0100a8c0@mkbs>             <a0510031db7a239fb551e@[63.27.96.152]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <004301c126d3$38bf4a60$0100a8c0@prdise1.nm.home.com>
Date:         Thu, 16 Aug 2001 22:15:16 -0600
Reply-To: "Pax" <darkspunge@USWEST.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Pax" <darkspunge@USWEST.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] ERPS successfully runs H2O2 engine
Comments: To: Jerry Irvine <01rocket@GTE.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

> It is processed using a heat level dangerously close to autoignition
>    This factor has caused more accidents than any propellant I
> personally know of

Give me some examples on this point. I have not heard of anybody having an
accidental ignition while casting. There have been tests run on this
propellant to try to get it to ignite in the melting process. Nakka's
documented research proves this. I can try with a small batch also. This
stuff is amazingly hard to ignite. It usually takes a few seconds of direct
flame to get it going. I am not saying care should not be taken, but it can
be worked with very safely. The components by themselves are about as inert
as your going to get which is a plus.


All of your other points are perfectly valid, but for beginners, the cost
cannot be beat.

And there is much research to be done with Candy. Ray has been working on
some as you may already know. There are way to increase the burn rate and
strength.


> Is that enough?
>
> Jerry

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 2498 invoked from network); 17 Aug 2001 04:18:40 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 17 Aug 2001 04:18:40 -0000
Received: (qmail 28376 invoked by uid 50005); 17 Aug 2001 04:18:33 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (. Clean. Processed in 0.172406 secs); 17 Aug 2001 04:18:33 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
X-Qmail-Scanner-Mail-From: owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU via smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net
X-Qmail-Scanner-Rcpt-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
X-Qmail-Scanner: 0.96 (No viruses found. Processed in 0.172406 secs)
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 17 Aug 2001 04:18:32 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA13474; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 21:16:45 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 87164 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 04:16:44          +0000
Received: from priv-edtnes09-hme0.telusplanet.net (mtaout.telus.net          [199.185.220.235]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id          VAA13459 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 21:16:43 -0700
Received: from telus.net ([216.232.246.21]) by          priv-edtnes09-hme0.telusplanet.net (InterMail vM.4.01.03.10          201-229-121-110) with ESMTP id          <20010817041613.MKKC887.priv-edtnes09-hme0.telusplanet.net@telus.net>          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 22:16:13 -0600
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (Win95; I)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <001801c126c7$c21b4900$1b30fea9@kristinscomp>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B7C9BF1.83B80B5A@telus.net>
Date:         Thu, 16 Aug 2001 21:22:10 -0700
Reply-To: "David Wakarchuk" <dwakarchuk@TELUS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "David Wakarchuk" <dwakarchuk@TELUS.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Is there a chemist in the house?
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Kristin & David Hall wrote:

>  Had a chemical spill at work yesterday. Boron Triflouride. Anybody
> know anything about this critter? --
> Dave and/or Kristin Hall

Dave,

We occasionaly use BF3 in ether in the lab.  BF3 itself is a nasty
corrosive gas that fumes great in moist air.  One of its breakdown
products is fluoboric acid which is also poisonous and quite reactive
too.  Since the gas is tough to handle many applications use BF3
complexed to diethylether or other solvent.

I had column break one time while vaccum distilling some BF3 etherate.
Once all fuming was over the pyrex glassware was severely etched.
Strong stuff that!  I'm awful glad this happened in fume hood with
excellent draw.

David Wakarchuk

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 15868 invoked from network); 17 Aug 2001 04:43:00 -0000
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 17 Aug 2001 04:43:00 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 30277 invoked by uid 50005); 17 Aug 2001 04:42:10 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smptf.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.206274 secs); 17 Aug 2001 04:42:10 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 17 Aug 2001 04:42:09 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA13622; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 21:39:50 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 87188 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 04:39:47          +0000
Received: from grucom2.gru.net (grucom2.gru.net [209.251.129.7]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA13608 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu,          16 Aug 2001 21:39:46 -0700
Received: from [209.251.150.216] by grucom2.sfcc.net (NTMail          6.04.0010/NU4112.00.db1c8a4b) with ESMTP id ddtphaaa for          AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 00:39:43 -0400
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (Win95; I)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <NEBBJIGOELOLIBCCPKDCIELKCBAA.geordi@c031.aone.net.au>            <OE54Vs1aLxGYiH1ZRJ60000d739@hotmail.com>            <a05100317b7a2079ba23d@[63.27.96.152]>            <011b01c126c8$45e5fe60$0100a8c0@mkbs>            <a0510031db7a239fb551e@[63.27.96.152]>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B7CA070.EAEF6163@sfcc.net>
Date:         Fri, 17 Aug 2001 00:41:20 -0400
Reply-To: "James Yawn" <jyawn@SFCC.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "James Yawn" <jyawn@SFCC.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] ERPS successfully runs H2O2 engine
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

> I am a candy dis-advocate.

Possible headway on some of these issues:

While playing with the problem of cohesion of recrystallized KN/sucrose that a
couple of Arocket list members have reported, I made a few batches with more
residual moisture and/or more corn syrup than the standard recipe.  Some of these
have been flexible/deformable at room temperature, while still maintaining a
serviceable burn rate.

Thus I submit for consideration the results of a few crude tensile-strength tests
which illustrate this effect:

http://members.fortunecity.com/jyawn/tensile/index.htm

Bear in mind that I performed only two simple tests, not definitive in any way.
But the results suggest to me a way in which the problem of brittleness can be
minimized, possibly leading to a more reliable candy engine.

Also, the recrystallization process exposes the fuel to a maximum of 300 degrees
F, and could be finished at lower temperature, as Mr. Calkins reports.  In making
several hundred batches, I have never experienced autoignition when following the
normal procedure.  ( I have experienced unanticipated igniton during extended
bouts of experimental stupidity, which I will describe upon request. :)

Earnest question:  what is the autoignition temperature for KN/sucrose?  I would
like to know how close this process comes to that level, in order to determine if
there is an adequate safety margin or if I have just been lucky.

Respectfully,
Jimmy Yawn

Jerry Irvine wrote:

> >  > I am a candy dis-advocate.
> >
> >Tell us why (serious request)
>
> It is brittle.
> It has a high burning rate exponent.
> It has poor physical properties and is only suitable for small motors.
> It has low delivered ISP
> It is processed using a heat level dangerously close to autoignition
>    This factor has caused more accidents than any propellant I
> personally know of
>
> Is that enough?
>
> Jerry
>
> >

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 4272 invoked from network); 17 Aug 2001 04:58:41 -0000
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 17 Aug 2001 04:58:41 -0000
Received: (qmail 30100 invoked by uid 50005); 17 Aug 2001 04:57:22 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smpte.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.195242 secs); 17 Aug 2001 04:57:22 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 17 Aug 2001 04:57:22 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA13751; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 21:56:34 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 87220 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 04:56:31          +0000
Received: from castor.ridgenet.net (IDENT:root@castor.ridgenet.net          [199.120.150.29]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA13737          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 21:56:31 -0700
Received: from kristinscomp (pm134.ridgenet.net [204.154.246.134]) by          castor.ridgenet.net (8.11.0/8.11.0) with SMTP id f7H4n1S14137; Thu,          16 Aug 2001 21:49:02 -0700
References:  <001801c126c7$c21b4900$1b30fea9@kristinscomp>             <02d401c126cc$8f4915c0$6601a8c0@home.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0B71_01C56B69.498B9630"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <002701c126da$31bd4c60$1b30fea9@kristinscomp>
Date:         Thu, 16 Aug 2001 22:04:43 -0700
Reply-To: "Kristin & David Hall" <thehalls@RIDGENET.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Kristin & David Hall" <thehalls@RIDGENET.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Is there a chemist in the house?
Comments: To: Brian Kosko <bkosko1@home.com>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0B71_01C56B69.498B9630
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable


Thanks to those who've replied.

No, I didn't clean it up... I wasn't in the room :).  I was just one of =
the saps who got evacuated.  Based on what I was able to find out I =
wasn't *THAT* concerned, but it wouldn't have been the first time I was =
near a chemical spill and didn't hear "the rest of the story" until I =
went to an outside source.  Thus, I just thought I'd pop in here and see =
what you folks had to say.

BTW:  The actual spill lasted two days.  They had a bottle of it who's =
valve apparently failed in some manner.  They let it bleed to empty over =
the course of about 30 hours and then started the cleanup.  The part =
that concerned me was the fact that they didn't evacuate us (Hell, =
didn't even tell us!) until about the 24 hour mark.

But based on what I've read, etc. it sounds like it has no long term =
effects (based on a single exposure) and is the kind of thing that you =
would "know it if you were explosed" (IE, suffer all sorts of nasty =
symptoms immediately).

Thanks again.

--
Dave and/or Kristin Hall
  ----- Original Message -----=20
  From: Brian Kosko=20
  To: Kristin & David Hall ; AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU=20
  Sent: Thursday, August 16, 2001 8:27 PM
  Subject: Re: [AR] Is there a chemist in the house?


  Ugh Dave,
  =20
  You did already clean it up didn't you?
  =20
  My memories on it are vague; it's usually in ether so it's a pretty =
big fire hazard. Though I guess you would have noticed thast possibility =
by now.
  =20
  Brian
    ----- Original Message -----=20
    From: Kristin & David Hall=20
    To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU=20
    Sent: Thursday, August 16, 2001 8:53 PM
    Subject: [AR] Is there a chemist in the house?



    Had a chemical spill at work yesterday.

    Boron Triflouride.

    Anybody know anything about this critter?

    --
    Dave and/or Kristin Hall

------=_NextPart_000_0B71_01C56B69.498B9630
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META content=3D"text/html; charset=3Diso-8859-1" =
http-equiv=3DContent-Type>
<META content=3D"MSHTML 5.00.2614.3500" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#b8b8b8>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Thanks to those who've =
replied.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>No, I didn't clean it up... I wasn't in =
the room=20
:).&nbsp; I was just one of the saps who got evacuated.&nbsp; Based on =
what I=20
was able to find out I wasn't *THAT* concerned, but it wouldn't have =
been the=20
first time I was near a chemical spill and didn't hear "the rest of the =
story"=20
until I went to an outside source.&nbsp; Thus, I just thought I'd pop in =
here=20
and see what you folks had to say.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>BTW:&nbsp; The actual spill lasted two =
days.&nbsp;=20
They had a bottle of it who's valve apparently failed in some =
manner.&nbsp; They=20
let it bleed to empty over the course of about 30 hours and then started =
the=20
cleanup.&nbsp; The part that concerned me was the fact that they didn't =
evacuate=20
us (Hell, didn't even tell us!) until about the 24 hour =
mark.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>But based on what I've read, etc. it =
sounds like it=20
has no long term effects (based on a single exposure) and is the kind of =
thing=20
that you would "know it if you were explosed" (IE, suffer all sorts of =
nasty=20
symptoms immediately).</FONT></DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Thanks again.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>--<BR>Dave and/or Kristin Hall</DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE dir=3Dltr=20
style=3D"BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: =
0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; PADDING-RIGHT: 0px">
  <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial">----- Original Message ----- </DIV>
  <DIV=20
  style=3D"BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; FONT: 10pt arial; font-color: =
black"><B>From:</B>=20
  <A href=3D"mailto:bkosko1@home.com" title=3Dbkosko1@home.com>Brian =
Kosko</A>=20
</DIV>
  <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A=20
  href=3D"mailto:thehalls@RIDGENET.NET" =
title=3Dthehalls@RIDGENET.NET>Kristin &amp;=20
  David Hall</A> ; <A href=3D"mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU"=20
  title=3DAROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU</A> </DIV>
  <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> Thursday, August 16, 2001 =
8:27=20
  PM</DIV>
  <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> Re: [AR] Is there a =
chemist in=20
  the house?</DIV>
  <DIV><BR></DIV>
  <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Ugh Dave,</FONT></DIV>
  <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
  <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>You did already clean it up didn't=20
  you?</FONT></DIV>
  <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
  <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>My memories on it are vague; it's =
usually in=20
  ether so it's a pretty big fire hazard. Though I guess you would have =
noticed=20
  thast possibility by now.</FONT></DIV>
  <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
  <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Brian</FONT></DIV>
  <BLOCKQUOTE dir=3Dltr=20
  style=3D"BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; =
MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; PADDING-RIGHT: 0px">
    <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial">----- Original Message ----- </DIV>
    <DIV=20
    style=3D"BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; FONT: 10pt arial; font-color: =
black"><B>From:</B>=20
    <A href=3D"mailto:thehalls@RIDGENET.NET" =
title=3Dthehalls@RIDGENET.NET>Kristin=20
    &amp; David Hall</A> </DIV>
    <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A=20
    href=3D"mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU"=20
    title=3DAROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU</A> </DIV>
    <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> Thursday, August 16, =
2001 8:53=20
    PM</DIV>
    <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> [AR] Is there a =
chemist in the=20
    house?</DIV>
    <DIV><BR></DIV>
    <DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
    <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Had a chemical spill at work=20
    yesterday.</FONT></DIV>
    <DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
    <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Boron Triflouride.</FONT></DIV>
    <DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
    <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Anybody know anything about this=20
    critter?</FONT></DIV>
    <DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
    <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>--<BR>Dave and/or Kristin=20
  Hall</FONT></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0B71_01C56B69.498B9630--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 912 invoked from network); 17 Aug 2001 05:07:52 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 17 Aug 2001 05:07:52 -0000
Received: (qmail 17530 invoked by uid 50005); 17 Aug 2001 05:07:45 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (. Clean. Processed in 0.161209 secs); 17 Aug 2001 05:07:45 -0000
X-Qmail-Scanner-Mail-From: owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU via smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
X-Qmail-Scanner-Rcpt-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
X-Qmail-Scanner: 0.96 (No viruses found. Processed in 0.161209 secs)
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 17 Aug 2001 05:07:45 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA13839; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 22:05:58 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 87240 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 05:05:56          +0000
Received: from smtp09.phx.gblx.net (smtp09.phx.gblx.net [64.211.219.58]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA13825 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 22:05:56 -0700
Received: (from daemon@localhost) by smtp09.phx.gblx.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id          WAA138202; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 22:05:38 -0700
Received: from 64-208-224-28.nas2.TBR.gblx.net(64.208.224.28),          claiming to be "frontiernet.net" via SMTP by smtp09.phx.gblx.net,          id smtpdfd0REa; Thu Aug 16 22:05:34 2001
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.74 [en] (Win98; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <007201c126b6$d7ae1ce0$b872a018@petschoice.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B7CA715.C033CE26@frontiernet.net>
Date:         Fri, 17 Aug 2001 01:09:41 -0400
Reply-To: <tbinford@frontiernet.net>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Tom Binford" <tbinford@frontiernet.net>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Help with recovery
Comments: To: Phil Bellmore <pfish@CATFISHDESIGNS.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

> Phil Bellmore wrote:
>
> I need some assistance in altimeter based recovery.  Specifically,
> details regarding altimeter recommendations, ejection charges,
> airframe construction to support drogue and main, etc.  Any help will
> be appreciated.

Http://www.rocketryonline.com in the InfoCentral section has several
articles on building altimeter based recovery systems. There is also a
lot on airframe construction.

Tom

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 10103 invoked from network); 17 Aug 2001 06:03:19 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 17 Aug 2001 06:03:19 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 14154 invoked by uid 50005); 17 Aug 2001 06:03:11 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (. Clean. Processed in 0.281777 secs); 17 Aug 2001 06:03:11 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
X-Qmail-Scanner-Mail-From: owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU via smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net
X-Qmail-Scanner-Rcpt-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
X-Qmail-Scanner: 0.96 (No viruses found. Processed in 0.281777 secs)
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 17 Aug 2001 06:03:11 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA14050; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 23:01:05 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 87271 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 06:01:00          +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (f20.law15.hotmail.com [64.4.23.20]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA14036 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Thu,          16 Aug 2001 23:00:59 -0700
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Thu,          16 Aug 2001 23:00:29 -0700
Received: from 193.121.251.246 by lw15fd.law15.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Fri,          17 Aug 2001 06:00:28 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [193.121.251.246]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 17 Aug 2001 06:00:29.0250 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[EAD66220:01C126E1]
Message-ID:  <F20ujsclWXSZ3Zs3Mpw0000bb36@hotmail.com>
Date:         Fri, 17 Aug 2001 06:01:00 +0000
Reply-To: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Is there a chemist in the house?
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

BF3 toxicology

MG : 1 ppm = 2,8   mg/m3
Lethal Dose 50 (oral) : 320 mg/kg (rat)
Lethal Conc. 50 : 1,2 mg/l/4 uur (rat)

Poisonous irritating stuff...

jd



>From: Kristin & David Hall <thehalls@RIDGENET.NET>
>Reply-To: Kristin & David Hall <thehalls@RIDGENET.NET>
>To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
>Subject: Re: [AR] Is there a chemist in the house?
>Date: Thu, 16 Aug 2001 22:04:43 -0700
>
>
>Thanks to those who've replied.
>
>No, I didn't clean it up... I wasn't in the room :).  I was just one of the
>saps who got evacuated.  Based on what I was able to find out I wasn't
>*THAT* concerned, but it wouldn't have been the first time I was near a
>chemical spill and didn't hear "the rest of the story" until I went to an
>outside source.  Thus, I just thought I'd pop in here and see what you
>folks had to say.
>
>BTW:  The actual spill lasted two days.  They had a bottle of it who's
>valve apparently failed in some manner.  They let it bleed to empty over
>the course of about 30 hours and then started the cleanup.  The part that
>concerned me was the fact that they didn't evacuate us (Hell, didn't even
>tell us!) until about the 24 hour mark.
>
>But based on what I've read, etc. it sounds like it has no long term
>effects (based on a single exposure) and is the kind of thing that you
>would "know it if you were explosed" (IE, suffer all sorts of nasty
>symptoms immediately).
>
>Thanks again.
>
>--
>Dave and/or Kristin Hall
>   ----- Original Message -----
>   From: Brian Kosko
>   To: Kristin & David Hall ; AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
>   Sent: Thursday, August 16, 2001 8:27 PM
>   Subject: Re: [AR] Is there a chemist in the house?
>
>
>   Ugh Dave,
>
>   You did already clean it up didn't you?
>
>   My memories on it are vague; it's usually in ether so it's a pretty big
>fire hazard. Though I guess you would have noticed thast possibility by
>now.
>
>   Brian
>     ----- Original Message -----
>     From: Kristin & David Hall
>     To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
>     Sent: Thursday, August 16, 2001 8:53 PM
>     Subject: [AR] Is there a chemist in the house?
>
>
>
>     Had a chemical spill at work yesterday.
>
>     Boron Triflouride.
>
>     Anybody know anything about this critter?
>
>     --
>     Dave and/or Kristin Hall


_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 19170 invoked from network); 17 Aug 2001 06:17:23 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 17 Aug 2001 06:17:23 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 23295 invoked by uid 50005); 17 Aug 2001 06:17:47 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.420567 secs); 17 Aug 2001 06:17:47 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 17 Aug 2001 06:17:46 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA14113; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 23:15:25 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 87282 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 06:15:23          +0000
Received: from ares.idirect.com (ares.idirect.com [207.136.80.180]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA14099 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 23:15:22 -0700
Received: from .idirect.com (on-osh-ahp-01-46.look.ca [216.154.47.46]) by          ares.idirect.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id CAA79517; Fri, 17 Aug          2001 02:16:39 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="ISO-8859-1"
X-Mailer: BeOS Mail
Message-ID:  <200108170616.CAA79517@ares.idirect.com>
Date:         Fri, 17 Aug 2001 02:14:47 EDT
Reply-To: <earlcp@idirect.com>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Earl Colby Pottinger" <earlcp@idirect.com>
Subject:      Re: [AR] ERPS successfully runs H2O2 engine
Comments: To: John Dom <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Pardon!  What is this!!!!  Am I to understand that you have been putting
down the work of ERPS, talking about them wasting their time and you have
not even done any equal design work yourself!  What an ego you have.  The
work that ERPS does represents a lot of *PRIVATE* effort to study Hydrogen
Peroxide systems built privately with any government funds.

John Rusek's work is good, interesting and even very useful for certain
purposes, but he has had backing from his university and most of his test
work and firings using his fuel/catalyst were done under contract to the
US military, on military grounds with military built rockets and military
monitoring equipment.  In other words he has had lots of government
backing.

Why not just complain that ERPS has not built a working space shuttle then,
after all NASA and the USSR both have flown them!

               Earl Colby Pottinger

>EP wrote:
>
>>First, any websites on your work?  I would like to see the results myself -
>>IE live and learn.
>
>Websites? work? For the n-th time it is not *my* work but former USN John
>Rusek's and described in his patent in great detail. All I did was a micro
>flowtest to check hypergolicity and the ease of it. Proving one does not
>really need cat packs nor super pure HP *at all* when chosing this option.
>Bad advice?
>
>No I never constructed a big motor nor do I intend to in the forseeable
>future. In my country one is not allowed to launch rockets. Only fireworks.
>Which does not diminish my fascination for the theme.
>
>jd
>
>_________________________________________________________________
>Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 5937 invoked from network); 17 Aug 2001 06:36:29 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 17 Aug 2001 06:36:29 -0000
Received: (qmail 9872 invoked by uid 50005); 17 Aug 2001 06:36:53 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.306476 secs); 17 Aug 2001 06:36:53 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 17 Aug 2001 06:36:52 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA14214; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 23:33:04 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 87304 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 06:32:58          +0000
Received: from wrench.toolcity.net (root@wrench.toolcity.net [208.0.188.2]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA14200 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 23:32:57 -0700
Received: from [63.169.101.154]          (dap-63-169-101-154.meadville-tnt-1.pa.toolcity.net [63.169.101.154])          by wrench.toolcity.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id CAA23950; Fri, 17          Aug 2001 02:32:52 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <v01510101b7a2718e7561@[63.169.101.154]>
Date:         Fri, 17 Aug 2001 02:35:12 -0500
Reply-To: "al bradley" <abradley@TOOLCITY.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "al bradley" <abradley@TOOLCITY.NET>
Subject:      [AR] Candy tests: Was -- Re: [AR] ERPS successfully runs H2O2              engine
Comments: To: James Yawn <jyawn@SFCC.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Jimmy Yawn writes:

>Thus I submit for consideration the results of a few crude
>tensile-strength tests
>which illustrate this effect:
>
>http://members.fortunecity.com/jyawn/tensile/index.htm
>------------------

Based on what I recently read on arocket list, tensile strength is
relatively unimportant compared to compressive strength and shear strength
in the grains!

What are our priorities in evaluating mechanical qualities in grain? Why?

respectfully,
al bradley

------------------------------------------------------------------
Can you live Life with this?: "Unless there is a law, an agreement, or a
long-standing custom, No one `Deserves' Anything -- Either Good or Bad!"

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 19336 invoked from network); 17 Aug 2001 06:41:27 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 17 Aug 2001 06:41:27 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 26793 invoked by uid 50005); 17 Aug 2001 06:41:19 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (. Clean. Processed in 0.188228 secs); 17 Aug 2001 06:41:19 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
X-Qmail-Scanner-Mail-From: owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU via smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net
X-Qmail-Scanner-Rcpt-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
X-Qmail-Scanner: 0.96 (No viruses found. Processed in 0.188228 secs)
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 17 Aug 2001 06:41:19 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA14259; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 23:37:35 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 87315 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 06:37:34          +0000
Received: from phobos.idirect.com (phobos.idirect.com [207.136.80.181]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA14245 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 23:37:33 -0700
Received: from .idirect.com (on-osh-ahp-01-46.look.ca [216.154.47.46]) by          phobos.idirect.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id CAA24781; Fri, 17 Aug          2001 02:40:54 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="ISO-8859-1"
X-Mailer: BeOS Mail
Message-ID:  <200108170640.CAA24781@phobos.idirect.com>
Date:         Fri, 17 Aug 2001 02:37:00 EDT
Reply-To: <earlcp@idirect.com>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Earl Colby Pottinger" <earlcp@idirect.com>
Subject:      Re: [AR] ERPS successfully runs H2O2 engine
Comments: To: John Dom <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

>>Furthermore, proving that ultra high purity HP isn't needed is a matter of
>>opinion.
>
>High purity 90 % or more is beyond the budget of most amateurs. Vacuum
>distilling HP takes years to accomplish successfully for people without
>chemistry background (and even with) and here I talk from experience. So
>this blocks amateur progress in this field substantially.

Well, that might be true for you, but in the USA amateurs just have to pick
up the phone and supply a visa number to get it deliver to them.

>Atmospheric evaporative enrichment of HP in beakers is realizable without
>much equipment and the bottom still (rich in inhibitors possibly) *can be
>used if one deletes the necessity of delicate poisonable metallic catpacks*.
>I am only saying what is possible. I am not telling anyone what to do. I am
>offering easier options which cost me years of study and discussions. I
>believe one should consider the options before starting anything.

Seems to me you spend a lot of time telling people to go the fuel/catalsyt
route.  Second, people learn from the past.  It took me two and half years
to learn how to concentrate peroxide.  If I had my website as a reference
when I started it would have taken me threee to six months.  My site is
open to all and so are a number of other sites.  Just because you did not
do well back then, says little on what a person starting now can do.

If that is not true how do you account for the fact that both ERPS and
Armadillo AeroSpace both have done so well lately.  And since them have
only been test firing thier engines I don't see what they are doing that
you can't do where you are now.

>>Also, wouldn't having hypergolic fuels present be orders of
>>magnitude more dangerous and complicated than a monoprop even if it's >pure
>>HP?
>
>Sure. But then rockets are dangerous stuff always. I'd not promote
>hypergolic strap-on motors for bikes or rocketmen drives. But I guess we're
>talking launching rockets, not daredevils. And *for rockets* spending time
>and energy on a 150 s Isp system is IMHO pure waste. My 2 cents.

There you go again.  Well Armadillo AeroSpace craft is flying off the
ground, what have you built and flown with your prefered mixed
fuel/catalyst system.  Remember you can still bunnyhop where ever you are.

>jd

             Earl Colby Pottinger

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 27130 invoked from network); 17 Aug 2001 06:44:55 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 17 Aug 2001 06:44:55 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 10751 invoked by uid 50005); 17 Aug 2001 06:43:35 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smpte.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.22255 secs); 17 Aug 2001 06:43:35 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 17 Aug 2001 06:43:34 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA14307; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 23:42:46 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 87326 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 06:42:43          +0000
Received: from ares.idirect.com (ares.idirect.com [207.136.80.180]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA14293 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 23:42:40 -0700
Received: from .idirect.com (on-osh-ahp-01-46.look.ca [216.154.47.46]) by          ares.idirect.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id CAA88498; Fri, 17 Aug          2001 02:44:00 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="ISO-8859-1"
X-Mailer: BeOS Mail
Message-ID:  <200108170644.CAA88498@ares.idirect.com>
Date:         Fri, 17 Aug 2001 02:42:08 EDT
Reply-To: <earlcp@idirect.com>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Earl Colby Pottinger" <earlcp@idirect.com>
Subject:      Re: [AR] ERPS successfully runs H2O2 engine
Comments: To: John Carmack <johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

>>
>>To each his own opinion.  JMHO, I think that liquids are much safer than
>>solids.  Espescially in manned aplications.  Most readers on the list
>>are not working towards manned rockets, but I'd like to think that
>>someday, maybe, I could build one big enough.  Now all I need is a fat
>>bank to knock over and I'll get started on it.
>>
>>--
>>Mark K. Spute
>>Senior Research Engineer
>>BioMicro Systems Inc.
>
>We will have a man off the ground in one of our vehicles within two months.
>
>It will still be a "parking lot VTVL", but I am damn proud of the progress
>we have made in our first year, and I am willing to go on the record saying
>that we will have a supersonic manned rocket ship in 2002.
>
>John Carmack
>www.armadilloaerospace.com

You have reason to be proud, you have done more in the last year than I
and many others have in the last three years.  I also think you have put
a little fire in ERPS's belly and the push from competition has also aided
thier progress.  I know it makes me want to do more in the future.

               Earl Colby Pottinger

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 5329 invoked from network); 17 Aug 2001 07:11:07 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 17 Aug 2001 07:11:07 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 23636 invoked by uid 50005); 17 Aug 2001 07:11:31 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.309174 secs); 17 Aug 2001 07:11:31 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 17 Aug 2001 07:11:30 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA14447; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 00:08:51 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 87357 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 07:08:45          +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (f41.law14.hotmail.com [64.4.21.41]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA14432 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri,          17 Aug 2001 00:08:45 -0700
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Fri,          17 Aug 2001 00:08:15 -0700
Received: from 206.216.229.248 by lw14fd.law14.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Fri,          17 Aug 2001 07:08:14 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [206.216.229.248]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 17 Aug 2001 07:08:15.0242 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[625B86A0:01C126EB]
Message-ID:  <F41sFFsAitVGeSJIEoP000037d2@hotmail.com>
Date:         Fri, 17 Aug 2001 07:08:14 +0000
Reply-To: "Matt Faulkner" <mattfaulkner9@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Matt Faulkner" <mattfaulkner9@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      [AR] urethane fuel?
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Hi list,
  today I re-discovered two cylindrical rods of what I suspect are urethane.
They are from an old printer I junked, are black, about 10.5" long by about
1.5" outer diameter with a 3/8" hole down the center. My questions are: 1.
can anyone help me determine their material?, and 2. as a ballpark figure,
how much nitrous should I need to burn them (assuming they're urethane)? Any
idea of the performance?
                                    Thanks,
                                        Matt Faulkner

_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 14219 invoked from network); 17 Aug 2001 07:14:33 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 17 Aug 2001 07:14:33 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 22266 invoked by uid 50005); 17 Aug 2001 07:13:42 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smptf.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.171 secs); 17 Aug 2001 07:13:42 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 17 Aug 2001 07:13:42 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA14512; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 00:12:31 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 87377 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 07:12:30          +0000
Received: from ares.idirect.com (ares.idirect.com [207.136.80.180]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA14498 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 00:12:29 -0700
Received: from .idirect.com (on-osh-ahp-01-46.look.ca [216.154.47.46]) by          ares.idirect.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id DAA00712; Fri, 17 Aug          2001 03:13:49 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="ISO-8859-1"
X-Mailer: BeOS Mail
Message-ID:  <200108170713.DAA00712@ares.idirect.com>
Date:         Fri, 17 Aug 2001 03:11:56 EDT
Reply-To: <earlcp@idirect.com>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Earl Colby Pottinger" <earlcp@idirect.com>
Subject:      Re: [AR] ERPS successfully runs H2O2 engine
Comments: To: forkbomb@EARTHLINK.NET
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

>         I would be interested to hear about simple, off-the-shelf liquid
>rocket motors of any kind. Where can I get them?
>
>         -p

I have found sites offering simple, off the shelf rockets, even hydrogen
peroxide motors.  Only one problem, there are for military or AeroSpace
uses and have price tags to cause heart attacks, and enough paper work
to have you fingers fall off filling them out.  Or that may be because
I am in Canada.
                    Earl Colby Pottinger

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 8628 invoked from network); 17 Aug 2001 08:12:16 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 17 Aug 2001 08:12:16 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 19516 invoked by uid 50005); 17 Aug 2001 08:11:25 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smptf.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.154634 secs); 17 Aug 2001 08:11:25 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 17 Aug 2001 08:11:24 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id BAA14722; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 01:08:54 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 87408 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 08:08:49          +0000
Received: from idsoftware.com (predator.idsoftware.com [192.246.40.34]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id BAA14708 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 01:08:48 -0700
Received: from [192.246.40.144] (account johnc HELO pluto.idsoftware.com) by          idsoftware.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 3.4.7) with ESMTP id 350095 for          AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 03:08:47 -0500
X-Sender: johnc@mail.idsoftware.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <4.3.1.2.20010817030701.02690e60@mail.idsoftware.com>
Date:         Fri, 17 Aug 2001 03:21:17 -0500
Reply-To: "John Carmack" <johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Carmack" <johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM>
Subject:      [AR] Solid rocket boosters
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <200108170713.DAA00712@ares.idirect.com>

Since liquid vs solid and manned rockets have come up, let me pose this
hypothetical situation:

Say someone built an X-Prize vehicle, got it all tested, and found that it
only went to 80 km instead of 100 km.  Strapping two big (50,000+ pound
seconds) solids on the side is suggested.

Is anyone here confident enough in their solids that they would ride in a
vehicle that required two of them to perform safely and substantially
identically?

What design and process steps would you take if you were tasked with
providing the boosters?

If I was in that situation, I would almost certainly rebuild the vehicle,
or add a pressurized drop tank or something, but I could easily see someone
that is nearly out of funding, or in a real race with a competitor, going
for the band-aid fix.

I have mixed feelings about solids.  They take one of my dearest principles
to the logical extreme -- do all the complex stuff in preprocessing to make
the runtime as simple as possible, but the variability and lack of
individual testability, combined with the obvious throttle / shutdown /
restart issues, are serious.

John Carmack

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 16884 invoked from network); 17 Aug 2001 09:11:10 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 17 Aug 2001 09:11:10 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 4362 invoked by uid 50005); 17 Aug 2001 09:09:50 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smpte.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.161699 secs); 17 Aug 2001 09:09:50 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 17 Aug 2001 09:09:50 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id CAA14945; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 02:06:32 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 87446 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 09:06:24          +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (f48.law15.hotmail.com [64.4.23.48]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id CAA14931 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Fri,          17 Aug 2001 02:06:23 -0700
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Fri,          17 Aug 2001 02:05:53 -0700
Received: from 193.121.251.246 by lw15fd.law15.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Fri,          17 Aug 2001 09:05:53 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [193.121.251.246]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 17 Aug 2001 09:05:53.0668 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[D181DC40:01C126FB]
Message-ID:  <F48mhIjVMJw5VJoROwT00000c02@hotmail.com>
Date:         Fri, 17 Aug 2001 09:06:24 +0000
Reply-To: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] homogenous catalysis biprops
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Quote Pottinger:

> >High purity 90 % or more is beyond the budget of most amateurs. Vacuum
> >distilling HP takes years to accomplish successfully for people without
> >chemistry background (and even with) and here I talk from experience. So
> >this blocks amateur progress in this field substantially.

>Well, that might be true for you, but in the USA amateurs just have to pick
>up the phone and supply a visa number to get it deliver to them.

Over here as well. If you buy tankerloads, show your lab and testing
facilities etc.. I know of no US company which sells 50 L batches of RGHP in
the US. 200 L batches from Degussa-Huls are not sold to amateurs only to
accredited institutions in the US. JC paid his RGHP very dearly!

If 90-98 % HP it is so easily obtainable then why did you spend time trying
to enrich it?

The reason is responsible care of those companies. They are well aware of
the dangers and (indirect) company involvement if RGHP falls into terrorist
or incompetent hands. That is why sales are restricted.

BTW: maybe homogenous HP catalysis is the future. Maybe it is not OK and
still needs many cures. It certainly is simpler and cheaper than proven
heterogenous catalysis as far as I can see at present.
This discussion 'll not change that.

The HP work going on at Stennis, China Lake, Pudue and Surrey (UK) might. I
prefer to focus on that for knowledge that is. As far as it is published.

After all, 50 years ago German pilots were flying by the hundreds in HP
propelled aeroplanes, both mono and biprop types. Albeit not supersonic.
Some say the Komet did break the SOS in a dive long before the X-1 did!

jd



_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 25919 invoked from network); 17 Aug 2001 09:14:29 -0000
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 17 Aug 2001 09:14:29 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 7765 invoked by uid 50005); 17 Aug 2001 09:13:09 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smpte.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.212075 secs); 17 Aug 2001 09:13:09 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 17 Aug 2001 09:13:08 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id CAA15010; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 02:11:59 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 87465 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 09:11:55          +0000
Received: from imo-m04.mx.aol.com (imo-m04.mx.aol.com [64.12.136.7]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id CAA14996 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 02:11:54 -0700
Received: from Sociald84@aol.com by imo-m04.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v31_r1.3.) id          y.92.1929d4bd (4006); Fri, 17 Aug 2001 05:11:18 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0B74_01C56B69.49AF4AD0"
X-Mailer: AOL 6.0 for Windows US sub 10532
Message-ID:  <92.1929d4bd.28ae39b5@aol.com>
Date:         Fri, 17 Aug 2001 05:11:17 EDT
Reply-To: <Sociald84@AOL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <Sociald84@AOL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] ERPS successfully runs H2O2 engine
Comments: To: geordi@c031.aone.net.au
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0B74_01C56B69.49AF4AD0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

In a message dated 8/16/2001 4:34:02 PM Mountain Daylight Time,
geordi@C031.AONE.NET.AU writes:


> I build AP solids because they outperform anything that can be achieved by
> amateurs using any other propulsion system ,simple really. I have achieved a
> dIsp of over 400sec in motor sizes down as far as 29mm and higher in larger
> sized motors (and that's with a straight conical style nozzle).
>


wow 400 sec thats impressive what is the formula you use?

Mark

------=_NextPart_000_0B74_01C56B69.49AF4AD0
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<HTML><FONT FACE=arial,helvetica><FONT  SIZE=3>In a message dated 8/16/2001 4:34:02 PM Mountain Daylight Time,
<BR>geordi@C031.AONE.NET.AU writes:
<BR>
<BR></FONT><FONT  COLOR="#000000" SIZE=2 FAMILY="SANSSERIF" FACE="Arial" LANG="0">
<BR><BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE style="BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px">I build AP solids because they outperform anything that can be achieved by
<BR>amateurs using any other propulsion system ,simple really. I have achieved a
<BR>dIsp of over 400sec in motor sizes down as far as 29mm and higher in larger
<BR>sized motors (and that's with a straight conical style nozzle).
<BR></BLOCKQUOTE>
<BR></FONT><FONT  COLOR="#000000" SIZE=3 FAMILY="SANSSERIF" FACE="Arial" LANG="0">
<BR>
<BR>wow 400 sec thats impressive what is the formula you use?
<BR>
<BR>Mark</FONT></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0B74_01C56B69.49AF4AD0--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 25742 invoked from network); 17 Aug 2001 10:14:22 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 17 Aug 2001 10:14:22 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 12280 invoked by uid 50005); 17 Aug 2001 10:14:46 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.143744 secs); 17 Aug 2001 10:14:46 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 17 Aug 2001 10:14:45 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id DAA15213; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 03:12:28 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 87492 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 10:12:23          +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (f205.law15.hotmail.com [64.4.23.205]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id DAA15199 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 03:12:23 -0700
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Fri,          17 Aug 2001 03:11:52 -0700
Received: from 193.121.251.246 by lw15fd.law15.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Fri,          17 Aug 2001 10:11:52 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [193.121.251.246]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 17 Aug 2001 10:11:52.0965 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[096EA350:01C12705]
Message-ID:  <F20559IcDA2XuL9zsNq0000bc04@hotmail.com>
Date:         Fri, 17 Aug 2001 10:12:23 +0000
Reply-To: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      [AR] chute alternatives
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Full story about thumbleweed idea at:

http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2001/ast17aug_1.htm?list68961

jd




_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 23545 invoked from network); 17 Aug 2001 10:37:16 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 17 Aug 2001 10:37:16 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 22179 invoked by uid 50005); 17 Aug 2001 10:37:07 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (. Clean. Processed in 0.123195 secs); 17 Aug 2001 10:37:07 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
X-Qmail-Scanner-Mail-From: owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU via smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net
X-Qmail-Scanner-Rcpt-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
X-Qmail-Scanner: 0.96 (No viruses found. Processed in 0.123195 secs)
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 17 Aug 2001 10:37:07 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id DAA15302; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 03:33:24 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 87507 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 10:33:17          +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (f79.law15.hotmail.com [64.4.23.79]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id DAA15285 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Fri,          17 Aug 2001 03:33:16 -0700
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Fri,          17 Aug 2001 03:32:46 -0700
Received: from 193.121.251.246 by lw15fd.law15.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Fri,          17 Aug 2001 10:32:46 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [193.121.251.246]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 17 Aug 2001 10:32:46.0496 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[F4984A00:01C12707]
Message-ID:  <F79REKyQARlWMceIDE00000bcf9@hotmail.com>
Date:         Fri, 17 Aug 2001 10:33:17 +0000
Reply-To: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] candy R&D
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

To avoid the step of melting: has anyone ever tried to compress
KN/sugar/sorbitol mixtures it into, say, a Bates burner type cylindrical
mould? Or heard of such method? Richard?

jd

_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 300 invoked from network); 17 Aug 2001 10:51:03 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 17 Aug 2001 10:51:03 -0000
Received: (qmail 21002 invoked by uid 50005); 17 Aug 2001 10:51:26 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.207606 secs); 17 Aug 2001 10:51:26 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 17 Aug 2001 10:51:26 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id DAA15412; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 03:49:06 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 87538 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 10:49:00          +0000
Received: from fep3-orange.clear.net.nz (fep3-orange.clear.net.nz          [203.97.32.3]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id DAA15398          for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 03:48:59 -0700
Received: from mkbs (d2-u14.acld.clear.net.nz [203.97.48.78]) by          fep3-orange.clear.net.nz (1.5/1.8) with SMTP id WAA01672; Fri, 17 Aug          2001 22:48:49 +1200 (NZST)
References:  <v01510101b7a2718e7561@[63.169.101.154]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <009701c1270a$830ce0a0$0100a8c0@mkbs>
Date:         Fri, 17 Aug 2001 22:23:01 +1200
Reply-To: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Organization: Applied Technology
Subject:      Re: [AR] Candy tests: Was -- Re: [AR] ERPS successfully runs H2O2              engine
Comments: To: al bradley <abradley@TOOLCITY.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

> >Thus I submit for consideration the results of a few crude
> >tensile-strength tests
> >which illustrate this effect:
> >
> >  http://members.fortunecity.com/jyawn/tensile/index.htm

> Based on what I recently read on arocket list, tensile strength is
> relatively unimportant compared to compressive strength and shear strength
> in the grains!
>
> What are our priorities in evaluating mechanical qualities in grain? Why?

It's actually "modulus of elasticity" that we are liable to be concerned
with although tensile strength becomes important if too low.
ie what is wanted is something which is somewhat "stretchy" without failing
mechanically..
I think the corn syrup approach is liable to improve this quality.



      Russell McMahon

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 20288 invoked from network); 17 Aug 2001 10:59:02 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 17 Aug 2001 10:59:02 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 23572 invoked by uid 50005); 17 Aug 2001 10:57:41 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smpte.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.696707 secs); 17 Aug 2001 10:57:41 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 17 Aug 2001 10:57:40 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id DAA15470; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 03:56:59 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 87549 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 10:56:57          +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (f103.law15.hotmail.com [64.4.23.103]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id DAA15456 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 03:56:57 -0700
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Fri,          17 Aug 2001 03:56:27 -0700
Received: from 193.121.251.246 by lw15fd.law15.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Fri,          17 Aug 2001 10:56:26 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [193.121.251.246]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 17 Aug 2001 10:56:27.0114 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[435964A0:01C1270B]
Message-ID:  <F103COWHJVkl4AU1O6Y0000bc7f@hotmail.com>
Date:         Fri, 17 Aug 2001 10:56:57 +0000
Reply-To: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] liq vs solid
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

MT wrote:

>                     ...BTW. comparing, liquid-fuel systems have a
>reliability of 98.03% (37 failures out of 1880 attempts). Also, 70% of
>failures of liquid propulsion systems occur outside of the engine.

"outside of the engine": Meaning?

JD

_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 28934 invoked from network); 17 Aug 2001 12:36:18 -0000
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 17 Aug 2001 12:36:18 -0000
Received: (qmail 20174 invoked by uid 50005); 17 Aug 2001 12:35:25 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smptf.ha-net.ptd.net with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.465 secs); 17 Aug 2001 12:35:25 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 17 Aug 2001 12:35:24 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id FAA15859; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 05:31:44 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 87588 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 12:31:37          +0000
Received: from femail15.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail15.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.0.95.142]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id FAA15845          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 05:31:36 -0700
Received: from hal2001 ([24.77.53.16]) by femail15.sdc1.sfba.home.com          (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20 201-229-121-120-20010223) with SMTP id          <20010817123131.JENF8323.femail15.sdc1.sfba.home.com@hal2001> for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 05:31:31 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <007801c12717$6a56f7a0$0400a8c0@hatjs>
Date:         Fri, 17 Aug 2001 05:23:25 -0700
Reply-To: "Jamie Morken" <jmorken@HOME.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jamie Morken" <jmorken@HOME.COM>
Subject:      [AR] optoisolators
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Hi all,

I am in the process of designing a circuit board for rocketry and am trying
to find a 4 channel 16pin surfacemount optoisolator (preferebly in a SO16
package - or smaller)  I can only find nonstandard surface mount packages in
Digikey so far (maybe they can't fit the LED's on a small chip?)

Does the input of the optoisolator require a resistor?  Or can I hook one
pin to the microcontroller and the other to ground?

I am using the optoisolators to isolate the microcontroller power supply
from the four power mosfets I am using.

If anyone here uses Eagle CAD I would be happy to send the (opensource! :)
schematic and pcb files.

Eagle cad is free and a great tool for designing PCB's:
http://www.cadsoftusa.com/

best regards,
Jamie

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 28102 invoked from network); 31 Aug 2001 20:34:42 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 31 Aug 2001 20:34:42 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 24013 invoked by uid 50005); 31 Aug 2001 20:33:51 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 1.341872 secs); 31 Aug 2001 20:33:51 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 31 Aug 2001 20:33:46 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA25794; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 13:29:55 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 103921 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 20:29:50          +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (f40.law15.hotmail.com [64.4.23.40]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA25779 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Fri,          31 Aug 2001 13:29:50 -0700
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Fri,          31 Aug 2001 13:29:19 -0700
Received: from 213.224.83.70 by lw15fd.law15.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Fri, 31          Aug 2001 20:29:19 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [213.224.83.70]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 31 Aug 2001 20:29:19.0793 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[9CD87A10:01C1325B]
Message-ID:  <F4060mJWEsBk31TZ14e000023b6@hotmail.com>
Date:         Fri, 31 Aug 2001 20:29:50 +0000
Reply-To: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] propellant musings
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

HS wrote:
>The highest measured Isp for any chemical rocket ever was with an F2/Li/H2
>system, with the fluorine and lithium burning and the H2 just along as
>reaction mass -- sort of a poor man's nuclear rocket.  With a low chamber
>pressure but a high-expansion vacuum-optimized nozzle, they got 542s.

Isp 542??? Lately, I saw Spielberg's "Deep Impact" once more. Remembering
pre-Apollo proposals, I was somewhat hit by the name of the drive used to
counter the incoming comet: ORION. Does humanity need a comet to chose the
right drive? Even Spielberg realized such system could only be used once in
orbit...

( definitely do not want this comment to start a thread)

>Peroxide works fine as a classical non-hypergolic oxidizer.

Non-hypergolic? Argh! Please the titles of the 4th HP International
Conference contributions. Very hypergolic HP bipropellant results without HP
pre-decomposition catalyst pack nonsence.

Not for amateurs? I say: exactly fot amateurs; very easy.

jd

_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 15284 invoked from network); 1 Sep 2001 09:46:20 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 1 Sep 2001 09:46:20 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 25941 invoked by uid 50005); 1 Sep 2001 09:44:51 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.316221 secs); 01 Sep 2001 09:44:51 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 1 Sep 2001 09:44:50 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id CAA29419; Sat, 1 Sep 2001 02:43:50 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 104525 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 1 Sep 2001 09:43:45          +0000
Received: from imo-r04.mx.aol.com (imo-r04.mx.aol.com [152.163.225.100]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id CAA29401 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Sat, 1 Sep 2001 02:43:44 -0700
Received: from Sociald84@aol.com by imo-r04.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v31_r1.4.) id          3.16.11af65ba (3844); Sat, 1 Sep 2001 05:43:39 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0C49_01C56B69.4E90AE90"
X-Mailer: AOL 6.0 for Windows US sub 10536
Message-ID:  <16.11af65ba.28c207cb@aol.com>
Date:         Sat, 1 Sep 2001 05:43:39 EDT
Reply-To: <Sociald84@AOL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <Sociald84@AOL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] High Altitude Mach plus flights
Comments: To: tbinford@frontiernet.net
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0C49_01C56B69.4E90AE90
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

What I was thinking was coating the nose in the matrix and dusting the top of
that with the alumina.
Mark

In a message dated 8/31/2001 12:37:43 AM Mountain Daylight Time,
tbinford@frontiernet.net writes:


> > You have to remember that the limiting factor in such a matrix is the
> > ablation temperature of the epoxy.  As soon as the epoxy melts or
> vaporizes,
> > the Al2O3 particles will be blown away.  AFAIK, the only way to get added
> > benefit from a ceramic in such a situation is to use a ceramic fiber which
> > will stay attached to the vehicle even when the epoxy gets left behind.
> > Mike P.
>
> Coat it with Thermeeze ceramic putty and sand smooth. Then you'll have
> an aluminum oxide coating. I doubt the rocket will be supersonic long
> enough to do serious damage to something like wood.
>
> Tom
>



------=_NextPart_000_0C49_01C56B69.4E90AE90
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<HTML><FONT FACE=arial,helvetica><FONT  SIZE=2>What I was thinking was coating the nose in the matrix and dusting the top of
<BR>that with the alumina.
<BR>Mark
<BR>
<BR>In a message dated 8/31/2001 12:37:43 AM Mountain Daylight Time,
<BR>tbinford@frontiernet.net writes:
<BR></FONT><FONT  COLOR="#000000" SIZE=3 FAMILY="SANSSERIF" FACE="Arial" LANG="0">
<BR></FONT><FONT  COLOR="#000000" SIZE=2 FAMILY="SANSSERIF" FACE="Arial" LANG="0">
<BR><BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE style="BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px">&gt; You have to remember that the limiting factor in such a matrix is the
<BR>&gt; ablation temperature of the epoxy. &nbsp;As soon as the epoxy melts or
<BR>vaporizes,
<BR>&gt; the Al2O3 particles will be blown away. &nbsp;AFAIK, the only way to get added
<BR>&gt; benefit from a ceramic in such a situation is to use a ceramic fiber which
<BR>&gt; will stay attached to the vehicle even when the epoxy gets left behind.
<BR>&gt; Mike P.
<BR>
<BR>Coat it with Thermeeze ceramic putty and sand smooth. Then you'll have
<BR>an aluminum oxide coating. I doubt the rocket will be supersonic long
<BR>enough to do serious damage to something like wood.
<BR>
<BR>Tom
<BR></BLOCKQUOTE>
<BR></FONT><FONT  COLOR="#000000" SIZE=3 FAMILY="SANSSERIF" FACE="Arial" LANG="0">
<BR></FONT></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0C49_01C56B69.4E90AE90--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 19831 invoked from network); 1 Sep 2001 09:48:47 -0000
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 1 Sep 2001 09:48:47 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 32458 invoked by uid 50005); 1 Sep 2001 09:46:40 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpf with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.192242 secs); 01 Sep 2001 09:46:40 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 1 Sep 2001 09:46:40 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id CAA29441; Sat, 1 Sep 2001 02:45:28 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 104532 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 1 Sep 2001 09:45:27          +0000
Received: from imo-r04.mx.aol.com (imo-r04.mx.aol.com [152.163.225.100]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id CAA29412 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Sat, 1 Sep 2001 02:43:47 -0700
Received: from Sociald84@aol.com by imo-r04.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v31_r1.4.) id          f.88.bcac608 (3844); Sat, 1 Sep 2001 05:43:41 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0C4E_01C56B69.4E92F880"
X-Mailer: AOL 6.0 for Windows US sub 10536
Message-ID:  <88.bcac608.28c207cc@aol.com>
Date:         Sat, 1 Sep 2001 05:43:40 EDT
Reply-To: <Sociald84@AOL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <Sociald84@AOL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] liquids question: alcohol/N2O propellant feeding
Comments: To: forkbomb@earthlink.net
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0C4E_01C56B69.4E92F880
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

In a message dated 8/31/2001 1:52:47 AM Mountain Daylight Time,
forkbomb@EARTHLINK.NET writes:


>  Here's a possible design to consider, if you can stand to not use
> those pretty composite tanks. It has the advantage of serving as your
> airframe as well :). The basic concept is to use concentric tanks. N2O is
> in the outer tank, and the inner tank holds fuel. The ullage space of the
> two tanks is connected, so that the fuel tank is N2O pressurized. A piston
> isolates the gaseous N2O from the fuel. This neatly solves the problem of
> getting fuel from where it is stored to the engine, with minimal pressure
> drop, since the tank outlet is right up against the engine. This tank is
> probably the lightest sort of bipropellant tank, since only the outer wall
> of the tank combination needs to take the full ullage pressure. The inner
> wall can be very thin because it does not need to hold a pressure
> differential. The lower bulkhead can be fastened into the outer tube with
> one of those ubiquitous snap rings, and the inner wall seated into a groove
> in it, with o-rings and all the fixings. The upper bulkhead would look much
> the same, except for permitting gas to flow between the chambers.
>

This is basically Dave Griffiths design. One point though, the pressure drop
is not minimal as the nitrous is expanding and the ullage is increasing do to
it pressurizing not only itself but also the fuel. However the pressure drop
is the same for the fuel and the nitrous.

Mark

------=_NextPart_000_0C4E_01C56B69.4E92F880
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<HTML><FONT FACE=arial,helvetica><FONT  SIZE=2>In a message dated 8/31/2001 1:52:47 AM Mountain Daylight Time,
<BR>forkbomb@EARTHLINK.NET writes:
<BR>
<BR>
<BR><BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE style="BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px"> Here's a possible design to consider, if you can stand to not use
<BR>those pretty composite tanks. It has the advantage of serving as your
<BR>airframe as well :). The basic concept is to use concentric tanks. N2O is
<BR>in the outer tank, and the inner tank holds fuel. The ullage space of the
<BR>two tanks is connected, so that the fuel tank is N2O pressurized. A piston
<BR>isolates the gaseous N2O from the fuel. This neatly solves the problem of
<BR>getting fuel from where it is stored to the engine, with minimal pressure
<BR>drop, since the tank outlet is right up against the engine. This tank is
<BR>probably the lightest sort of bipropellant tank, since only the outer wall
<BR>of the tank combination needs to take the full ullage pressure. The inner
<BR>wall can be very thin because it does not need to hold a pressure
<BR>differential. The lower bulkhead can be fastened into the outer tube with
<BR>one of those ubiquitous snap rings, and the inner wall seated into a groove
<BR>in it, with o-rings and all the fixings. The upper bulkhead would look much
<BR>the same, except for permitting gas to flow between the chambers.
<BR></BLOCKQUOTE>
<BR>
<BR>This is basically Dave Griffiths design. One point though, the pressure drop
<BR>is not minimal as the nitrous is expanding and the ullage is increasing do to
<BR>it pressurizing not only itself but also the fuel. However the pressure drop
<BR>is the same for the fuel and the nitrous.
<BR>
<BR>Mark</FONT></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0C4E_01C56B69.4E92F880--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 23451 invoked from network); 1 Sep 2001 11:33:39 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 1 Sep 2001 11:33:39 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 8774 invoked by uid 50005); 1 Sep 2001 11:32:45 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.389289 secs); 01 Sep 2001 11:32:45 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 1 Sep 2001 11:32:44 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id EAA29936; Sat, 1 Sep 2001 04:30:56 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 104613 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 1 Sep 2001 11:30:52          +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (f173.law15.hotmail.com [64.4.23.173]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id EAA29922 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Sat, 1 Sep 2001 04:30:51 -0700
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Sat,          1 Sep 2001 04:30:21 -0700
Received: from 213.224.83.110 by lw15fd.law15.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Sat,          01 Sep 2001 11:30:21 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [213.224.83.110]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 01 Sep 2001 11:30:21.0617 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[7C342A10:01C132D9]
Message-ID:  <F173aJbqJGNzscE8Npq000017bc@hotmail.com>
Date:         Sat, 1 Sep 2001 11:30:52 +0000
Reply-To: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] liquids question: alcohol/N2O propellant feeding
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Your design resembles the OTRAG blowdown tubular reservoir arrays to some
extend. Their unit was 4; 2 tubes for kerosene (hypergol slug below for
ignition) and 2 for nitric acid. All 4 were interconnected at the top and
each had 3 perforated plates inside. 1/3 was empty for the propellant gas.
No N2O means no pistons. No bags. If toppled: BOOOM I guess.

Forgot what those plates were for.

jd


> >  Here's a possible design to consider, if you can stand to not use
> > those pretty composite tanks. It has the advantage of serving as your
> > airframe as well :). The basic concept is to use concentric tanks. N2O
>is
> > in the outer tank, and the inner tank holds fuel. The ullage space of
>the
> > two tanks is connected, so that the fuel tank is N2O pressurized. A
>piston
> > isolates the gaseous N2O from the fuel. This neatly solves the problem
>of
> > getting fuel from where it is stored to the engine, with minimal
>pressure
> > drop, since the tank outlet is right up against the engine. This tank is
> > probably the lightest sort of bipropellant tank, since only the outer
>wall
> > of the tank combination needs to take the full ullage pressure. The
>inner
> > wall can be very thin because it does not need to hold a pressure
> > differential. The lower bulkhead can be fastened into the outer tube
>with
> > one of those ubiquitous snap rings, and the inner wall seated into a
>groove
> > in it, with o-rings and all the fixings. The upper bulkhead would look
>much
> > the same, except for permitting gas to flow between the chambers.
> >
>
>This is basically Dave Griffiths design. One point though, the pressure
>drop
>is not minimal as the nitrous is expanding and the ullage is increasing do
>to
>it pressurizing not only itself but also the fuel. However the pressure
>drop
>is the same for the fuel and the nitrous.
>
>Mark


_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 19156 invoked from network); 1 Sep 2001 15:32:09 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 1 Sep 2001 15:32:09 -0000
Received: (qmail 15642 invoked by uid 50005); 1 Sep 2001 15:32:51 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpa with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.538832 secs); 01 Sep 2001 15:32:51 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 1 Sep 2001 15:32:50 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA30555; Sat, 1 Sep 2001 08:29:16 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 104654 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 1 Sep 2001 15:29:06          +0000
Received: from spsystems.net (spsystems.net [209.47.149.227]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA30541 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Sat,          1 Sep 2001 08:29:05 -0700
Received: (from henry@localhost) by spsystems.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id LAA27515;          Sat, 1 Sep 2001 11:28:26 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010901112614.27460C-100000@spsystems.net>
Date:         Sat, 1 Sep 2001 11:28:26 -0400
Reply-To: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] gun launch
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <F204kGhAj5p1Fjxe0ym00001556@hotmail.com>

On Sat, 1 Sep 2001, John Dom wrote:
> >I forgot that velocity only increases by 1.414 when you double the length
> >of the gun
>
> Not familiar with this number. You mean this compensates for air resistance
> in the barrel?

At constant acceleration -- itself a doubtful assumption, given continued
pressure drop as the gas expands -- velocity scales with the square root
of the acceleration distance.  So double the distance gets you sqrt(2) of
the velocity.

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 47 invoked from network); 1 Sep 2001 15:57:23 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 1 Sep 2001 15:57:23 -0000
Received: (qmail 26527 invoked by uid 50005); 1 Sep 2001 15:55:52 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.193432 secs); 01 Sep 2001 15:55:52 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 1 Sep 2001 15:55:52 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA30659; Sat, 1 Sep 2001 08:54:19 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 104672 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 1 Sep 2001 15:54:17          +0000
Received: from spsystems.net (spsystems.net [209.47.149.227]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA30645 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Sat,          1 Sep 2001 08:54:17 -0700
Received: (from henry@localhost) by spsystems.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id LAA27856;          Sat, 1 Sep 2001 11:53:37 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010901114840.27460F-100000@spsystems.net>
Date:         Sat, 1 Sep 2001 11:53:37 -0400
Reply-To: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] liquids question: alcohol/N2O propellant feeding
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <3B8FB5F7.7FA06724@biomicro.com>

Pierce Nichols wrote:
> The basic concept is to use concentric tanks. N2O is
> in the outer tank, and the inner tank holds fuel. The ullage space of the
> two tanks is connected, so that the fuel tank is N2O pressurized. A piston
> isolates the gaseous N2O from the fuel...
> ...The lower bulkhead can be fastened into the outer tube with
> one of those ubiquitous snap rings, and the inner wall seated into a groove
> in it, with o-rings and all the fixings...

One disadvantage:  this is a "common bulkhead" design, with only one wall
between the two propellants.  If there's any leakage at joints etc., you
get a liquid explosive.  The pros do use common bulkheads sometimes --
it's lighter than completely separate tanks -- but they consider it a bit
worrisome, and will avoid it on designs that are meant to be cheap to
build and operate (e.g. the new Delta IV).

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 1324 invoked from network); 1 Sep 2001 15:57:49 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 1 Sep 2001 15:57:49 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 26591 invoked by uid 50005); 1 Sep 2001 15:58:32 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpa with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.304851 secs); 01 Sep 2001 15:58:32 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 1 Sep 2001 15:58:31 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA30686; Sat, 1 Sep 2001 08:55:56 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 104679 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 1 Sep 2001 15:55:55          +0000
Received: from femail38.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail38.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.254.60.32]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA30672          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 1 Sep 2001 08:55:55 -0700
Received: from c1649002-a.earthlink.net ([24.20.95.67]) by          femail38.sdc1.sfba.home.com (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20          201-229-121-120-20010223) with ESMTP id          <20010901155549.CPPA24024.femail38.sdc1.sfba.home.com@c1649002-a.earthlink.net>; Sat, 1 Sep 2001 08:55:49          -0700
X-Sender: forkbomb@mail.earthlink.net
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.0.2
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <5.0.2.1.0.20010901085457.02da9650@mail.earthlink.net>
Date:         Sat, 1 Sep 2001 08:55:42 -0700
Reply-To: "Pierce Nichols" <forkbomb@EARTHLINK.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Pierce Nichols" <forkbomb@EARTHLINK.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] gun launch
Comments: To: John Dom <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <F204kGhAj5p1Fjxe0ym00001556@hotmail.com>

At 06:45 AM 9/1/2001 +0000, John Dom wrote:
>AS wrote:
>
>>I forgot that velocity only increases by 1.414 when you double the length
>>of the gun
>
>Not familiar with this number. You mean this compensates for air resistance
>in the barrel?

         That number looks an awful lot like the square root of two...
implying that final velocity is proportional to the square root of barrel
length. Am I in the right ballpark?

         -p


Mars or Bust!
www.marssociety.com

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 3413 invoked from network); 1 Sep 2001 16:08:47 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 1 Sep 2001 16:08:47 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 508 invoked by uid 50005); 1 Sep 2001 16:09:30 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpa with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.337273 secs); 01 Sep 2001 16:09:30 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 1 Sep 2001 16:09:29 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA30753; Sat, 1 Sep 2001 09:05:31 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 104690 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 1 Sep 2001 16:05:27          +0000
Received: from femail30.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail30.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.254.60.20]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA30739          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 1 Sep 2001 09:05:26 -0700
Received: from c1649002-a.earthlink.net ([24.20.95.67]) by          femail30.sdc1.sfba.home.com (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20          201-229-121-120-20010223) with ESMTP id          <20010901160521.GAM18117.femail30.sdc1.sfba.home.com@c1649002-a.earthlink.net>; Sat, 1 Sep 2001 09:05:21          -0700
X-Sender: forkbomb@mail.earthlink.net
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.0.2
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <5.0.2.1.0.20010901090331.02f06e40@mail.earthlink.net>
Date:         Sat, 1 Sep 2001 09:05:13 -0700
Reply-To: "Pierce Nichols" <forkbomb@EARTHLINK.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Pierce Nichols" <forkbomb@EARTHLINK.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] liquids question: alcohol/N2O propellant feeding
Comments: To: Sociald84@AOL.COM
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <88.bcac608.28c207cc@aol.com>

At 05:43 AM 9/1/2001 -0400, Sociald84@AOL.COM wrote:

>This is basically Dave Griffiths design. One point though, the pressure drop
>is not minimal as the nitrous is expanding and the ullage is increasing do to
>it pressurizing not only itself but also the fuel. However the pressure drop
>is the same for the fuel and the nitrous.


         I figured as much -- it's the problem with any unregulated
pressurization system. Keeping the mix ratio constant is probably more
important for the application described than keeping the pressure constant.

         -p


Mars or Bust!
www.marssociety.com

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 15347 invoked from network); 1 Sep 2001 16:23:48 -0000
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 1 Sep 2001 16:23:48 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 30356 invoked by uid 50005); 1 Sep 2001 16:24:03 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpe with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.264308 secs); 01 Sep 2001 16:24:03 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 1 Sep 2001 16:24:02 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA30830; Sat, 1 Sep 2001 09:21:47 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 104705 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 1 Sep 2001 16:21:45          +0000
Received: from femail3.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail3.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.0.95.83]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA30816 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Sat, 1 Sep 2001 09:21:45 -0700
Received: from coastnet.com ([24.77.48.219]) by femail3.sdc1.sfba.home.com          (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20 201-229-121-120-20010223) with ESMTP id          <20010901162139.GZFF13643.femail3.sdc1.sfba.home.com@coastnet.com>          for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Sat, 1 Sep 2001 09:21:39 -0700
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.61 [en]C-AtHome0407  (Win95; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <F204kGhAj5p1Fjxe0ym00001556@hotmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B90FCBE.1268E9F8@coastnet.com>
Date:         Sat, 1 Sep 2001 08:20:30 -0700
Reply-To: "Ross Borden" <rborden@COASTNET.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Ross Borden" <rborden@COASTNET.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] gun launch
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

John Dom wrote:
>
> AS wrote:
>
> >I forgot that velocity only increases by 1.414 when you double the length
> >of the gun
>
> Not familiar with this number. You mean this compensates for air resistance
> in the barrel?

As Henry pointed out, velocity is proportional to the square root of the
length of the barrel.  As for air resistance in the barrel, guns of
significant length are evacuated to eliminate it.

Ross

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 16087 invoked from network); 1 Sep 2001 16:34:28 -0000
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 1 Sep 2001 16:34:28 -0000
Received: (qmail 15595 invoked by uid 50005); 1 Sep 2001 16:32:19 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpf with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.958295 secs); 01 Sep 2001 16:32:19 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 1 Sep 2001 16:32:17 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA30875; Sat, 1 Sep 2001 09:32:13 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 104712 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 1 Sep 2001 16:32:05          +0000
Received: from mailhost0.trib.com (mailhost0.trib.com [63.229.150.3]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA30861 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Sat, 1 Sep 2001 09:32:04 -0700
Received: from mail.trib.com (mail.trib.com [12.10.158.17]) by          mailhost0.trib.com (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f81GW0629493; Sat, 1          Sep 2001 10:32:01 -0600 (MDT) (envelope-from          jwckman@space-rockets.com)
Received: from [63.229.150.93] (HELO hppav) by mail.trib.com (CommuniGate Pro          SMTP 3.4.6) with SMTP id 45013731; Sat, 01 Sep 2001 10:31:59 -0600
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <NKEHJAOOKBPGIKOOPDEFEEMDCBAA.jwckman@space-rockets.com>
Date:         Sat, 1 Sep 2001 10:30:22 -0600
Reply-To: "John Wickman" <jwckman@SPACE-ROCKETS.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Wickman" <jwckman@SPACE-ROCKETS.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] [EE]: Building a Satellite
Comments: To: Robert Brashear <rjb@artimex.com>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <3B8ED82C.C8C84182@artimex.com>

Bob,

No, it is 200,000 lb-second.   That is what it is supposed to be.  Also, it
is possible to get the 15 second rule extended.  Tripoli has the time
extended to something like 50 or 60 seconds for its launches.   Someone from
that organization worked out a deal with the FAA.

John Wickman


-----Original Message-----
From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@itc.uci.edu]On
Behalf Of Robert Brashear
Sent: Thursday, August 30, 2001 6:20 PM
To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
Subject: Re: [AR] [EE]: Building a Satellite


"Mark K. Spute" wrote:

> What has the petition history been in this case?  Has anyone (I have to
> belive that someone, somewhere has) petitioned to have this 15 second
> typo changed back to it's original recommended value of 50 (as I have
> heard the story.)  What have been the FAA's reasons for not changing the
> value back to it's original recommended 50 seconds?
>

Another question about the above. On the AST webpage, it shows the
criteria for a launch license exemption. Number one is a total impulse
of 200,000 pound-seconds. I had always heard that it was 200,000
newton-seconds. Is this "another typo"?

Thanks.

Bob Brashear

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 26541 invoked from network); 1 Sep 2001 17:52:56 -0000
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 1 Sep 2001 17:52:56 -0000
Received: (qmail 13217 invoked by uid 50005); 1 Sep 2001 17:53:10 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpe with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 1.985302 secs); 01 Sep 2001 17:53:10 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 1 Sep 2001 17:53:07 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA31139; Sat, 1 Sep 2001 10:50:33 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 104751 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 1 Sep 2001 17:50:23          +0000
Received: from prover.com (IDENT:root@chaos.sthlm.prover.com [192.71.47.101])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA31106 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 1 Sep 2001 10:40:22 -0700
Received: from duncan (sdsl-64-139-0-245.dsl.sca.megapath.net [64.139.0.245])          by prover.com (8.11.3/8.11.3) with SMTP id f81Hded10786 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 1 Sep 2001 19:39:40 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <NEBBLECGKLLOLFCCBNPEAEGIDJAA.duncan.mcdonald@prover.com>
Date:         Sat, 1 Sep 2001 10:39:58 -0700
Reply-To: "Duncan McDonald" <duncan.mcdonald@PROVER.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Duncan McDonald" <duncan.mcdonald@PROVER.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] High Altitude Mach plus flights
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <3B907621.39F647FC@seanet.com>

Aerolab is produced by Dark and is at least partly based on Digital Datcom.
Aerolab also assumes zero angle of attack. You can download it at
http://www.inet.uni2.dk/~dark/Download/Download.html.

Duncan

-----Original Message-----
From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU]On
Behalf Of Sherwood Stolt
Sent: Friday, August 31, 2001 10:46 PM
To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
Subject: Re: [AR] High Altitude Mach plus flights


I was hoping someone with a formal education in hypersonic heat transfer
would provide a more specific answer but since they haven't I will try.

Wedge Oldham wrote:

> Guys I've just finished the simulations on a rocket if thinking of
building.
> The performance of this rocket far exceeds my expectations. Could/should
hit
> an altitude of 100K feet. It also raises a number of questions.
>
> 1. Does the CP of a rocket change with air density. I wouldn't think so,
but
> felt I better ask.

Download a copy of Aerolab and find out your Cp at any mach and altitude.

> 2. I have a formula for atmospheric heating which is (velocity (in
> feet/second) / 110) squared = delta degrees F. I'd have to assume this
> formula is for sea level.....would this heating be proportional to air
> density i.e. 1/2 density yields 1/2 the heating?

The crude simple formula is the adiabatic stagnation temperature:

Ttotal = (1 + 0.2 x M x M) x Ta
M is mach number
Ta is the local ambient absolute air temperature (use the one for
the correct altitude from a standard atmosphere table)

This is the temperature a bit of air would reach if it was brought to
a stop relative your rocket without any heat transfer. There are
several reasons why this is conservatively high.  First it only applies
off the tip of the nose because the air elsewhere is moving with
respect to the rocket.  Second there is a film around the rocket that
effects the equilibrium temperature.  There are formulas in
aerodynamics texts that involve such things as surface roughness
that estimate what is called the recovery temperature.  There is
also the problem of conduction that causes the surface temperature
to be between the recovery temp and whatever heat sink is below.
There is also radiation that keeps the temp below about 1000F for
all but leading edges where heat transfer rates are the highest.
This doesn't help much at amateur rocket mach numbers.
And finally there is the fact that the peak temp is just a point
in time and somewhat lower temps last only a few seconds
and so there is the thermal inertia of the material to figure in.

If you have a metal or ceramic surface then don't worry the
problem.  If you have a less thermally conductive material like
an epoxy composite then I think you could assume the surface
would follow the recovery temp and so calculate how much heat
penetrates into the structure by conduction.  I don't remember
the recovery temperature formula off hand but I think I was
at one point trying to use the outputs from Aerolab to estimate
a skin friction coefficient to plug into one when I was trying
to do these calculations once before.  Using the formula above
would definitely be conservative at all but orbital type
velocities where the air gets red hot and radiates into the structure.

> 3. The sim says a maximum velocity of Mach 2.9 @ 45K' MSL. I've built
> rockets that hit Mach 1.6 at 3100' MSL.... is there a way I can compare
> these two items? I'm sure that Mach 2 at sea level and Mach 2 at 50K
present
> different levels of stress on the fins & airframe...but how do I compare
the
> two? Is this again just a simple function of air density?

Use Aerolab to calculate drag and lift of various body/fin parts and
make some crude estimates based on that.  Remember, however, that
for steeply swept fins vortex lift and flow separation increase loads
at high angles of attack and so I like to assume full static plus
dynamic pressure on one side of the fin and absolute zero pressure
on the other with zero margin of safety if that does not cause too
severe a structural weight penalty.

But don't forget about fin flutter.  Someone produced a spreadsheet
a while back to estimate that.

> 4. What high temperature epoxies are available on the market?

Seems like the 500F stuff out to do it for the bulk of the structure.  If
necessary a thin coat of some  less thermally conductive material
like others have suggested.

> 5. Anybody got the perfect Mach PLUS fin shape? I've got one I like based
on
> some basic guidelines....long root edge, short span, 30 degree leading
edge,
> 60 degree trailing edge, and just looks cool. I'd like to replace the
"just
> looks cool" with something more scientific.

Find the maximum velocity your rocket reaches inside enough air
to produce significant drag and figure out the mach angle.  Make
both leading and trailing edges sweep more than that.  Same thing
with the nose cone.  If you really have thermal problems you may
need to figure the mach angle for the reentry to keep shock
waves from creating hot spots.  I am not sure that is a problem
for rockets but some X planes had holes melted in some surfaces.
Plug it into Aerolab to see if you have low enough drag and
enough lift for the right Cp.

Guess what is my favorite rocket design program.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 3444 invoked from network); 1 Sep 2001 20:36:47 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 1 Sep 2001 20:36:47 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 26923 invoked by uid 50005); 1 Sep 2001 20:37:30 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpb with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.267547 secs); 01 Sep 2001 20:37:30 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 1 Sep 2001 20:37:29 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA31996; Sat, 1 Sep 2001 13:34:09 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 104860 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 1 Sep 2001 20:34:04          +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (f88.law15.hotmail.com [64.4.23.88]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA31982 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Sat,          1 Sep 2001 13:34:03 -0700
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Sat,          1 Sep 2001 13:33:33 -0700
Received: from 213.224.83.134 by lw15fd.law15.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Sat,          01 Sep 2001 20:33:33 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [213.224.83.134]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 01 Sep 2001 20:33:33.0686 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[5E973960:01C13325]
Message-ID:  <F88WNaBJjvmZp0mmhQZ000021ec@hotmail.com>
Date:         Sat, 1 Sep 2001 20:34:04 +0000
Reply-To: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] gun launch
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

>At constant acceleration...velocity scales with the square root
>of the acceleration distance.  So double the distance gets you sqrt(2) of
>the velocity.

Never noticed such since I calculate (gas gun) muzzle velocity from
pressurant tank and barrel volumes (from literature on analytical isentropic
internal ballistics formula) and ...:

V = ((((1000000*p1*V1)/(1-g))*(((V2/V1)^(1-g))-1))/(0,5*w))^0,5

w= projectile mass
V = muzzle velocity
p1=absolute reservoir pressure
V1=reservoir volume
V2=barrel volume
g = gamma = isentropic constant propellant gas (1,4 for air, 1,7 for He,
dimensionless)

jd

_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 9657 invoked from network); 1 Sep 2001 20:50:14 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 1 Sep 2001 20:50:14 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 27846 invoked by uid 50005); 1 Sep 2001 20:50:27 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpe with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.650606 secs); 01 Sep 2001 20:50:27 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 1 Sep 2001 20:50:26 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA32060; Sat, 1 Sep 2001 13:47:27 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 104874 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 1 Sep 2001 20:47:26          +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (f170.law15.hotmail.com [64.4.23.170]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA32046 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Sat, 1 Sep 2001 13:47:25 -0700
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Sat,          1 Sep 2001 13:46:55 -0700
Received: from 213.224.83.134 by lw15fd.law15.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Sat,          01 Sep 2001 20:46:55 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [213.224.83.134]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 01 Sep 2001 20:46:55.0604 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[3C923340:01C13327]
Message-ID:  <F170l9FopYC98Bi89Qt00001ce8@hotmail.com>
Date:         Sat, 1 Sep 2001 20:47:26 +0000
Reply-To: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      [AR] gun launch
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

V2 is not the barrel volume...it is the sum (barrel volume plus  reservoir
volume). Oops.

jd




_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 6631 invoked from network); 1 Sep 2001 21:00:38 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 1 Sep 2001 21:00:38 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 5072 invoked by uid 50005); 1 Sep 2001 21:01:21 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpb with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.224957 secs); 01 Sep 2001 21:01:21 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 1 Sep 2001 21:01:20 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA32133; Sat, 1 Sep 2001 13:58:30 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 104890 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 1 Sep 2001 20:58:29          +0000
Received: from imo-r07.mx.aol.com (imo-r07.mx.aol.com [152.163.225.103]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA32119 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Sat, 1 Sep 2001 13:58:28 -0700
Received: from Azt28@aol.com by imo-r07.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v31_r1.4.) id          w.1e.1a79616b (4255) for <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Sat, 1 Sep 2001          16:58:23 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: AOL 5.0 for Windows sub 116
Message-ID:  <1e.1a79616b.28c2a5ef@aol.com>
Date:         Sat, 1 Sep 2001 16:58:23 EDT
Reply-To: <Azt28@AOL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <Azt28@AOL.COM>
Subject:      [AR] Beware: Your project in ARocket Projects
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Hi,

I am making the Project list for September. I had made an error in SPL
projects, sorry Bruno, Hans. One positive thing I have learned here, is that
this error has sent in my e-mail basket a nice definition of the works and
objectives at SPL. ( Thanks Bruno).

In the comming months, I could well do some more errors on projects I include
myself. My favorite could well be:
 objective: To send all politicians on Mars :-)
If that is not really your dream, no problem, send me a short text on what
you do/want/think. More we will have a good project listing, more
collaborative actions will be created.

Yvan Bozzonetti
azt28@aol.com

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 9617 invoked from network); 1 Sep 2001 21:01:48 -0000
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 1 Sep 2001 21:01:48 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 8297 invoked by uid 50005); 1 Sep 2001 20:59:38 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpf with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.398634 secs); 01 Sep 2001 20:59:38 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 1 Sep 2001 20:59:38 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA32158; Sat, 1 Sep 2001 13:59:53 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 104897 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 1 Sep 2001 20:59:52          +0000
Received: from imo-r07.mx.aol.com (imo-r07.mx.aol.com [152.163.225.103]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA32135 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Sat, 1 Sep 2001 13:58:32 -0700
Received: from Azt28@aol.com by imo-r07.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v31_r1.4.) id          o.136.ff6483 (4255); Sat, 1 Sep 2001 16:58:30 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: AOL 5.0 for Windows sub 116
Message-ID:  <136.ff6483.28c2a5f5@aol.com>
Date:         Sat, 1 Sep 2001 16:58:29 EDT
Reply-To: <Azt28@AOL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <Azt28@AOL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] propellant musings
Comments: To: kc2csh@juno.com
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

From: kc2csh@JUNO.COM

<<   The combinations of 3s and 4s that seem to have complementary
 charastics, particularly from the perspective of density and
 preasurization seems long.  For example, why not use N2O and peroxide
 together.  The N20 could both chill and preasurize the peroxide.
 Combustion started with N20 would largely eliminate issues of catalysts
 for peroxide wouldn't it?
   I understand the issues of greatly increased complexity.  The question
 I guess is do you get enough potential benefit to offset the complexity?

                      Jay
  >>
Sorry Jay, at first my reaction was: That's a crackpot idea. Then I used my
brain and found it far more interesting. (very far indeed).

Recall for example that the V2/A4 combustion chamber : It was feed by 19
smaller pre-chambers derived from a 19 times smaller rocket. Why not do the
same? Then why not feed the pre-chambers with different F/O? Some products
could be injected in prechambers and another directly in the main chamber for
example...

Now, about complexity: Assume, as in the V2 case, that the pre-chambers come
from a smaller motor. We would have to test it with different F/O, this is a
problem for an integrated maker. For amateurs, it may be a blessing:
Different amateurs have different pet F/O, it is difficult to ask them to
work on a single monolithic project. Here, we have the unique opportunity to
mount a collaborative work between people with different objectives and
ideas. Each idea and solution would be useful for the common final aim
without having to beat any other concept.

The ball is bouncing, please bring to it more thrust with your ideas.

Yvan Bozzonetti.
azt28@aol.com

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 15897 invoked from network); 1 Sep 2001 21:04:16 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 1 Sep 2001 21:04:16 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 26670 invoked by uid 50005); 1 Sep 2001 21:04:57 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpa with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.745449 secs); 01 Sep 2001 21:04:57 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 1 Sep 2001 21:04:55 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA32198; Sat, 1 Sep 2001 14:02:17 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 104908 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 1 Sep 2001 21:02:16          +0000
Received: from imo-r06.mx.aol.com (imo-r06.mx.aol.com [152.163.225.102]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA32184 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Sat, 1 Sep 2001 14:02:16 -0700
Received: from Azt28@aol.com by imo-r06.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v31_r1.4.) id          f.16a.2d200a (4255); Sat, 1 Sep 2001 16:58:20 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: AOL 5.0 for Windows sub 116
Message-ID:  <16a.2d200a.28c2a5ec@aol.com>
Date:         Sat, 1 Sep 2001 16:58:20 EDT
Reply-To: <Azt28@AOL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <Azt28@AOL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] propellant musings
Comments: To: forkbomb@earthlink.net
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Hi,

I have not the answer, but a simple way to get more hydrogen in the fuel is
to go to CH4. If even more hydrogen is wanted the question becomes: what is
the solubility of H2 in CH4...

Yvan Bozzonetti.

From: forkbomb@EARTHLINK.NET

<< Does anyone know the solubility of hydrogen in liquid propane at 100K and
 various pressures? Also, what effect would dissolving hydrogen in propane
 have on the density of the mixture? I was having a musing about boosting
 the Isp of propane as a fuel and I'd like to know if I am completely off
base.

          -p


 Mars or Bust! >>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 22506 invoked from network); 1 Sep 2001 21:18:22 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 1 Sep 2001 21:18:22 -0000
Received: (qmail 15308 invoked by uid 50005); 1 Sep 2001 21:19:05 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpb with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.280102 secs); 01 Sep 2001 21:19:05 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 1 Sep 2001 21:19:05 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA32297; Sat, 1 Sep 2001 14:16:19 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 104929 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 1 Sep 2001 21:16:14          +0000
Received: from cablecom.laribay.net (cablecom.laribay.net [66.20.57.4]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA32279 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 1 Sep 2001 14:16:14 -0700
Received: from billbull (dial081.laribay.net [66.20.57.81]) by          cablecom.laribay.net (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id PAA08355 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 1 Sep 2001 15:57:48 -0500 (CDT)          (envelope-from bpbullock@laribay.net)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0C53_01C56B69.4EAAED50"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <000e01c1332b$88dbc8c0$51391442@billbull>
Date:         Sat, 1 Sep 2001 16:17:20 -0500
Reply-To: "Bill Bullock" <bpbullock@LARIBAY.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Bill Bullock" <bpbullock@LARIBAY.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Propellent Musings
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0C53_01C56B69.4EAAED50
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

    Pardon me for revealing my ignorance of liquid-fueled motor =
requirements, but would something that is hydrocarbon-based, runs 38-42 =
API Gravity, is stable at atmospheric pressures and yields 22,500 BTU's =
per pound be any good as a fuel?
Bill

------=_NextPart_000_0C53_01C56B69.4EAAED50
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META content=3D"text/html; charset=3Diso-8859-1" =
http-equiv=3DContent-Type>
<META content=3D"MSHTML 5.00.2614.3500" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Pardon me for revealing my ignorance of =
liquid-fueled=20
motor requirements, but would something that is hydrocarbon-based, runs =
38-42=20
API Gravity, is stable at atmospheric pressures and yields 22,500 BTU's =
per=20
pound be any good as a fuel?</DIV>
<DIV>Bill</DIV></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0C53_01C56B69.4EAAED50--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 26019 invoked from network); 1 Sep 2001 21:19:46 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 1 Sep 2001 21:19:46 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 29450 invoked by uid 50005); 1 Sep 2001 21:18:13 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.277104 secs); 01 Sep 2001 21:18:13 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 1 Sep 2001 21:18:13 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA32315; Sat, 1 Sep 2001 14:17:43 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 104936 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 1 Sep 2001 21:17:42          +0000
Received: from po3.glue.umd.edu (po3.glue.umd.edu [128.8.10.123]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA32290 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 1 Sep 2001 14:16:16 -0700
Received: from z.glue.umd.edu (IDENT:root@z.glue.umd.edu [128.8.10.71]) by          po3.glue.umd.edu (8.10.1/8.10.1) with ESMTP id f81LGDm19445; Sat, 1          Sep 2001 17:16:13 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from z.glue.umd.edu (IDENT:sendmail@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by          z.glue.umd.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id RAA17858; Sat, 1 Sep 2001          17:16:13 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from localhost (acase@localhost) by z.glue.umd.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with          ESMTP id RAA17854; Sat, 1 Sep 2001 17:16:13 -0400 (EDT)
X-Authentication-Warning: z.glue.umd.edu: acase owned process doing -bs
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.GSO.4.21.0109011714340.17455-100000@z.glue.umd.edu>
Date:         Sat, 1 Sep 2001 17:16:13 -0400
Reply-To: "Andrew Case" <acase@GLUE.UMD.EDU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Andrew Case" <acase@GLUE.UMD.EDU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] propellant musings
Comments: To: John Dom <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <F225MWuLn5U9T3TGJ2T00000925@hotmail.com>

On Sat, 1 Sep 2001, John Dom wrote:

> Here are some very recent advances on the "broken record" topic:
[...]
> As stated earlier, ordering these papers can be a problem.

Where were they published? Are they conference presentations?
Inquiring minds...

......Andrew

Andrew Case                             |
acase@plasma.umd.edu                    |
Institute for Plasma Research           |
University of Maryland, College Park    |

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 24820 invoked from network); 1 Sep 2001 22:06:26 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 1 Sep 2001 22:06:26 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 18485 invoked by uid 50005); 1 Sep 2001 22:06:40 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpe with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.308624 secs); 01 Sep 2001 22:06:40 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 1 Sep 2001 22:06:39 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA32515; Sat, 1 Sep 2001 15:04:17 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 104974 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 1 Sep 2001 22:04:12          +0000
Received: from smtp004pub.verizon.net (smtp004pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.183])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA32501 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 1 Sep 2001 15:04:12 -0700
Received: from [63.10.201.171] (1Cust45.tnt1.hilo.hi.da.uu.net [63.25.193.45])          by smtp004pub.verizon.net  with ESMTP ; id f81M3dr14041 Sat, 1 Sep          2001 17:03:39 -0500 (CDT)
X-Sender: ttocs@mail.gte.net
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <l03130301b7b3169c6221@[63.10.201.171]>
Date:         Wed, 29 Aug 2001 12:03:17 -1000
Reply-To: "Aaron Smith" <ttocs@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Aaron Smith" <ttocs@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] propellant musings
Comments: To: Azt28@AOL.COM
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <136.ff6483.28c2a5f5@aol.com>

<snip>

For some reason the next paragraph got me thinking:  How about running two
chambers, one fuel rich and one oxidizer rich, and then swirling the
exhausts together in a main chamber?  Might make a pretty efficient burner.

>Recall for example that the V2/A4 combustion chamber : It was feed by 19
>smaller pre-chambers derived from a 19 times smaller rocket. Why not do the
>same? Then why not feed the pre-chambers with different F/O? Some products
>could be injected in prechambers and another directly in the main chamber for
>example...
>
>Now, about complexity: Assume, as in the V2 case, that the pre-chambers come
>from a smaller motor. We would have to test it with different F/O, this is a
>problem for an integrated maker. For amateurs, it may be a blessing:
>Different amateurs have different pet F/O, it is difficult to ask them to
>work on a single monolithic project. Here, we have the unique opportunity to
>mount a collaborative work between people with different objectives and
>ideas. Each idea and solution would be useful for the common final aim
>without having to beat any other concept.
>
>The ball is bouncing, please bring to it more thrust with your ideas.
>
>Yvan Bozzonetti.
>azt28@aol.com

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 12672 invoked from network); 1 Sep 2001 22:25:40 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 1 Sep 2001 22:25:40 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 32716 invoked by uid 50005); 1 Sep 2001 22:24:43 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.252948 secs); 01 Sep 2001 22:24:43 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 1 Sep 2001 22:24:43 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA32653; Sat, 1 Sep 2001 15:23:35 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 104997 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 1 Sep 2001 22:23:34          +0000
Received: from po3.glue.umd.edu (po3.glue.umd.edu [128.8.10.123]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA32639 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 1 Sep 2001 15:23:33 -0700
Received: from z.glue.umd.edu (IDENT:root@z.glue.umd.edu [128.8.10.71]) by          po3.glue.umd.edu (8.10.1/8.10.1) with ESMTP id f81MNWu21269 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 1 Sep 2001 18:23:32 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from z.glue.umd.edu (IDENT:sendmail@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by          z.glue.umd.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id SAA19377 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 1 Sep 2001 18:23:32 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from localhost (acase@localhost) by z.glue.umd.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with          ESMTP id SAA19373 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 1 Sep 2001 18:23:32          -0400 (EDT)
X-Authentication-Warning: z.glue.umd.edu: acase owned process doing -bs
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.GSO.4.21.0109011815030.18797-100000@z.glue.umd.edu>
Date:         Sat, 1 Sep 2001 18:23:31 -0400
Reply-To: "Andrew Case" <acase@GLUE.UMD.EDU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Andrew Case" <acase@GLUE.UMD.EDU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] propellant musings
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <l03130301b7b3169c6221@[63.10.201.171]>

On Wed, 29 Aug 2001, Aaron Smith wrote:

> For some reason the next paragraph got me thinking:  How about running two
> chambers, one fuel rich and one oxidizer rich, and then swirling the
> exhausts together in a main chamber?  Might make a pretty efficient burner.

One of the avantages cited for a pintle engine is that the propellants
form a highly sheared flow structure within the combustion chamber, which
is alleged to reduce instabilities. This seems quite reasonable to me,
since sheared flows are known to reduce instabilities in plasmas and
in liquids. (Rayleigh-Taylor instability, which isn't relevant to rocket
engines, has been studied extensively in this regard.) I believe that
there are other plasma instabilities that are stabilized by shear flow,
though. It makes sense that a highly sheared flow would give good mixing,
and also that it would reduce the occurence of sharp gradients in
temperature. I need to study combustion instabilities a bit more to
get a sense of whether the mechanisms might be sensitive to shear, but
it wouldn't surprise me at all if they were.

......Andrew

Andrew Case                             |
acase@plasma.umd.edu                    |
Institute for Plasma Research           |
University of Maryland, College Park    |

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 8463 invoked from network); 2 Sep 2001 00:29:15 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 2 Sep 2001 00:29:15 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 26155 invoked by uid 50005); 2 Sep 2001 00:27:42 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.171684 secs); 02 Sep 2001 00:27:42 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 2 Sep 2001 00:27:42 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA00574; Sat, 1 Sep 2001 17:21:25 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 105037 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 2 Sep 2001 00:21:06          +0000
Received: from smtp002pub.verizon.net (smtp002pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.181])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA00559 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 1 Sep 2001 17:21:05 -0700
Received: from [63.24.225.30] (1Cust30.tnt1.rancho-cucamonga.ca.da.uu.net          [63.24.225.30]) by smtp002pub.verizon.net  with ESMTP for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; id f820KV308013 Sat, 1 Sep 2001 19:20:32 -0500          (CDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: GTE/01rocket@mail.gte.net
References: <1e.1a79616b.28c2a5ef@aol.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <a05100300b7b72a908e47@[63.24.225.157]>
Date:         Sat, 1 Sep 2001 17:20:26 -0700
Reply-To: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Subject:      [AR] Project list (was Re: [AR] Beware: Your project in ARocket              Projects
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <1e.1a79616b.28c2a5ef@aol.com>

Yvan muttered causing me to read carefully:

>If that is not really your dream, no problem, send me a short text on what
>you do/want/think. More we will have a good project listing, more
>collaborative actions will be created.

It was very interesting to me to read my very first arocket project
list.  I found myself saying, "that will work, that will not".  But I
also found myself saying on several occasions, "that project needs a
mission tailored solid".  If I am talking about your project, contact
me.

Somewhat off-topic, I very much appreciate when someone posts
equations suitable for inserting into a computer program (text
version).  It allows me to whip up a quickie and see what if anything
is of merit for real rockets.

arocket rules.

Jerry

--
Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
Opinion, the whole thing.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 6149 invoked from network); 2 Sep 2001 04:56:34 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 2 Sep 2001 04:56:34 -0000
Received: (qmail 31871 invoked by uid 50005); 2 Sep 2001 04:57:14 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpb with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.290837 secs); 02 Sep 2001 04:57:14 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 2 Sep 2001 04:57:14 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA02035; Sat, 1 Sep 2001 21:53:50 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 105221 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 2 Sep 2001 04:53:32          +0000
Received: from femail8.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail8.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.0.95.88]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA02018 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 1 Sep 2001 21:53:32 -0700
Received: from hal2001 ([24.77.53.16]) by femail8.sdc1.sfba.home.com (InterMail          vM.4.01.03.20 201-229-121-120-20010223) with SMTP id          <20010902045331.LSEH10796.femail8.sdc1.sfba.home.com@hal2001> for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 1 Sep 2001 21:53:31 -0700
References:  <84.1a88464f.28bedbda@aol.com>              <013f01c1317e$a0b76b60$70cfe3c1@serge>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <007201c1336a$100fb7a0$0400a8c0@hatjs>
Date:         Sat, 1 Sep 2001 21:45:16 -0700
Reply-To: "Jamie Morken" <jmorken@HOME.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jamie Morken" <jmorken@HOME.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] AN melt
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Hi all,

> Dichromate anion specifically catalyses AN decomposition, therefore
> combinations of molten AN and solution of dichromate in some fuels may be
> even hypergolic. In my hands ( not exactly in hands, but behind
> blastshield ) on addition of sorbitol to the solution of CuCl2 in molten
AN
> self-ignition happened.

Would CuSO4 work as well as CuCl2 for self-ignition?  Regarding the
self-ignition
you observed, did it sustain as a flame, and would you expect it to be
similar with liquid fuels
such as alcohol or propane (gas and liquid?) or gasoline?

Does the liquid triple eutectic (AN/KN/NaN) burn easier than AN or (AN/KN)
batches?
Also since the triple alloy has the highest safety margin for temperature,
is it also the safest for decomposing
and detonation?  What would potentially happen to these mixes if they were
overheated?

Would it be likely that if the solid fuel version of AN based propellants
have troubles
burning without metal additives, the liquid version may also be difficult to
get burning properly?

best regards,
Jamie

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 313 invoked from network); 2 Sep 2001 07:43:49 -0000
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 2 Sep 2001 07:43:49 -0000
Received: (qmail 26157 invoked by uid 50005); 2 Sep 2001 07:44:00 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpe with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.189274 secs); 02 Sep 2001 07:44:00 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 2 Sep 2001 07:43:59 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA02676; Sun, 2 Sep 2001 00:41:14 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 105305 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 2 Sep 2001 07:41:09          +0000
Received: from roll.akcecc.kiev.ua (roll.akcecc.kiev.ua [193.227.206.34]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA02662 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 2 Sep 2001 00:41:06 -0700
Received: from serge (pool-112.akcecc.kiev.ua [193.227.207.112] (may be          forged)) by roll.akcecc.kiev.ua (8.10.2/8.10.2) with SMTP id          f827ewY10210 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 2 Sep 2001 10:40:59 +0300
References:  <84.1a88464f.28bedbda@aol.com>                         <013f01c1317e$a0b76b60$70cfe3c1@serge>              <007201c1336a$100fb7a0$0400a8c0@hatjs>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2417.2000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <003701c13379$fe5dbce0$70cfe3c1@serge>
Date:         Sun, 2 Sep 2001 10:36:14 +0400
Reply-To: "Serge Pipko" <spas@AKCECC.KIEV.UA>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Serge Pipko" <spas@AKCECC.KIEV.UA>
Subject:      Re: [AR] AN melt
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Jamie Morken wrote:

> > Dichromate anion specifically catalyses AN decomposition, therefore
> > combinations of molten AN and solution of dichromate in some fuels may
be
> > even hypergolic. In my hands ( not exactly in hands, but behind
> > blastshield ) on addition of sorbitol to the solution of CuCl2 in molten
> > AN self-ignition happened.
>
> Would CuSO4 work as well as CuCl2 for self-ignition?

I don't know for sure, it depends whether only Cu(2+) kation is responsible
for self-ignition or Cl(-) anion (which is well-known catalist for AN
decomposition) play its role too. If it will appeared that Cl(-) role is
neglible, CuCl2 still has additional advantages, being soluble in polar
organics, for example, alcohols, especially anhydrous CuCl2.

> Regarding the self-ignition you observed, did it sustain as a flame

Yes.

> and would you expect it to be similar with liquid fuels
> such as alcohol or propane (gas and liquid?) or gasoline?

It seems to me that the most suitable fuels would be alcohols or similar
compounds, which completely or even if partially dissolve AN. With
high-boiling ones ( glicerol, ethyleneglicol, propyleneglicol,
polyethyleneglicol ) you can pre-mix them just before injection in
combustion chamber, it may improve combustion stability. With sorbitol you
can even have monopropellant mode, having only one fuel tank with
AN-sorbitol melt. But in may be dangerous, because now you have some kind of
ANFO in your fuel tank.

> Does the liquid triple eutectic (AN/KN/NaN) burn easier than AN or (AN/KN)
> batches?

No, because it has lowest melting point and so burning liquid layer is more
thick. This lead to fast draining of burning layer from the solid surface.
But in liquid mode combustion chamber this may not be a problem.

> Also since the triple alloy has the highest safety margin for temperature,
> is it also the safest for decomposing and detonation?

I don't know.

>  What would potentially happen to these mixes if they were overheated?

I don't know, it must be tested.

> Would it be likely that if the solid fuel version of AN based propellants
> have troubles burning without metal additives, the liquid version may
> also be difficult to get burning properly?

It seems to me that liquid version has more chances.
But the most promising version may be hybrid with molten AN as oxydisier and
wooden fuel grain. Glowing chip begin to burn violently being inserted in
molten AN.

Serge

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 2287 invoked from network); 2 Sep 2001 07:58:06 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 2 Sep 2001 07:58:06 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 1464 invoked by uid 50005); 2 Sep 2001 07:58:43 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpa with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.361687 secs); 02 Sep 2001 07:58:43 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 2 Sep 2001 07:58:42 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA02727; Sun, 2 Sep 2001 00:55:19 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 105312 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 2 Sep 2001 07:55:17          +0000
Received: from cyclone.comcen.com.au (cyclone.comcen.com.au [203.23.236.100])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA02713 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 2 Sep 2001 00:55:16 -0700
Received: (from nobody@localhost) by cyclone.comcen.com.au (8.11.1/8.11.1) id          f827t6o81616; Sun, 2 Sep 2001 17:55:06 +1000 (EST) (envelope-from          pkelly@comcen.com.au)
References: <F1923Hho6rCsSLgPPMk00000e5c@hotmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
User-Agent: IMP/PHP IMAP webmail program 2.2.3
X-Originating-IP: 202.135.74.37
Message-ID:  <999417306.3b91e5da8ff89@webmail.comcen.com.au>
Date:         Sun, 2 Sep 2001 17:55:06 +1000
Reply-To: "Paul Kelly" <pkelly@COMCEN.COM.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Paul Kelly" <pkelly@COMCEN.COM.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] liquids question: alcohol/N2O propellant feeding
Comments: To: John Dom <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <F1923Hho6rCsSLgPPMk00000e5c@hotmail.com>

One "canister" nox below piston, fuel above. 1 moving part, 6 parts all up
(including snap rings. not including lines.)
PK
Quoting John Dom <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>:

> Still do not see the point in the piston. Canister one is contains N2O.
> No
> piston. Canister two contains the fuel in a bag. A tube from the upper
> part
> of the N2O tank connects the bag canister to pressurize it...
>
> jd
>
> >From: Waysie_Atkins@VANGUARD.COM
> >Reply-To: Waysie_Atkins@VANGUARD.COM
> >To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
> >Subject: Re: [AR] liquids question: alcohol/N2O propellant feeding
> >Date: Thu, 30 Aug 2001 16:38:57 -0400
> >
> > > the nox below, run a flexible hose (nylon line works) from the
> piston to
> >the
> > > combustion chamber with enough slack to let the piston slide up to
> the
> >top
> > > of
> > > the tank.
> >
> >
> >How do you route the hose to the piston, given that the piston will be
> >sliding.
> >Through the top or bottom???
> >
> >
> >Waysie
>
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at
> http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 25844 invoked from network); 2 Sep 2001 16:33:15 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 2 Sep 2001 16:33:15 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 10807 invoked by uid 50005); 2 Sep 2001 16:32:14 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.141784 secs); 02 Sep 2001 16:32:14 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 2 Sep 2001 16:32:14 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA04295; Sun, 2 Sep 2001 09:29:51 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 105452 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 2 Sep 2001 16:29:44          +0000
Received: from imo-d10.mx.aol.com (imo-d10.mx.aol.com [205.188.157.42]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA04281 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Sun, 2 Sep 2001 09:29:44 -0700
Received: from Azt28@aol.com by imo-d10.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v31_r1.4.) id          s.34.1a444bd7 (16633); Sun, 2 Sep 2001 12:29:09 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: AOL 5.0 for Windows sub 116
Message-ID:  <34.1a444bd7.28c3b855@aol.com>
Date:         Sun, 2 Sep 2001 12:29:09 EDT
Reply-To: <Azt28@AOL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <Azt28@AOL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] propellant musings
Comments: To: ttocs@gte.net
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

From:   ttocs@GTE.NET , Aaron Smith

<<
 For some reason the next paragraph got me thinking:  How about running two
 chambers, one fuel rich and one oxidizer rich, and then swirling the
 exhausts together in a main chamber?  Might make a pretty efficient burner.
  >>

This is indeed a solution. The near wall pre-chambers could be fuel rich, may
be with some hydrogen, more central ones would be alternatively fuel and
oxidizer rich.
Another solution yet: More peroxide could be injected directly in the main
chamber and all pre-chambers could be fuel rich and work with N2O.

Yvan Bozzonetti
azt28@aol.com

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 22687 invoked from network); 2 Sep 2001 18:19:52 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 2 Sep 2001 18:19:52 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: (qmail 7885 invoked by uid 50005); 2 Sep 2001 18:20:00 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpe with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.342763 secs); 02 Sep 2001 18:20:00 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 2 Sep 2001 18:19:59 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA04870; Sun, 2 Sep 2001 11:16:20 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 105585 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 2 Sep 2001 18:16:16          +0000
Received: from wrench.toolcity.net (root@wrench.toolcity.net [208.0.188.2]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA04856 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 2 Sep 2001 11:16:15 -0700
Received: from [208.22.189.219]          (dap-208-22-189-219.meadville-tnt-0.pa.toolcity.net [208.22.189.219])          by wrench.toolcity.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id OAA02797; Sun, 2          Sep 2001 14:16:11 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <v01510100b7b8310e5977@[63.169.101.108]>
Date:         Sun, 2 Sep 2001 14:18:34 -0500
Reply-To: "al bradley" <abradley@TOOLCITY.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "al bradley" <abradley@TOOLCITY.NET>
Subject:      [AR] A rocket-philosophy for the amateur?
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

The quotation below was excerpted from a view as posted on a rather
academic web page on space exploration. I consider the second sentence as
significant in that it seems to justify the amateur effort in rocketry for
the variety of approaches they use in their experimentation!

In a way it justifies the existence of this list which is significant for
the exchange of information among us. And finally, it gives all of us here
thought for appreciation of those among us, better informed, who pass on
ideas and information to those of us less informed and still learning.
Kudos for Arocket, its members, and its founder!

respectfully,
al bradley
-----------
"The rocket, as evolved through science, has given us an invaluable
understanding of ourselves, as well as the "ocean" that envelopes
us. *Where rockets will take us tomorrow is unfathomable, as their
development is dependant on the random discoveries of science.* And to
this, one might step so far as to say that "rockets are the measure of
all things"--but we will have to wait for time to unfold to ascertain
this."

^^Taken from a web site named "Space Exploration". (Sorry, I didn't note
the URL.)

------------------------------------------------------------------
Can you live Life with this?: "Unless there is a law, an agreement, or a
long-standing custom, No one `Deserves' Anything -- Either Good or Bad!"

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 8409 invoked from network); 2 Sep 2001 20:28:54 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 2 Sep 2001 20:28:54 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 12903 invoked by uid 50005); 2 Sep 2001 20:27:13 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.308805 secs); 02 Sep 2001 20:27:13 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 2 Sep 2001 20:27:13 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA05202; Sun, 2 Sep 2001 13:25:04 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 105604 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 2 Sep 2001 20:24:55          +0000
Received: from stud.uni-goettingen.de (root@s2.stud.uni-goettingen.de          [134.76.60.22]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA05185          for <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Sun, 2 Sep 2001 13:24:54 -0700
Received: from router.atw.stud.uni-goettingen.de ([134.76.62.65]          helo=stud.uni-goettingen.de) by stud.uni-goettingen.de with esmtp          (Exim 2.12 #8) id 15ddnW-0002Tx-00 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 2          Sep 2001 22:24:50 +0200
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [de] (Win98; I)
X-Accept-Language: de
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Message-ID:  <3B92957B.57E2E8BB@stud.uni-goettingen.de>
Date:         Sun, 2 Sep 2001 22:24:27 +0200
Reply-To: "Thomas Engelhardt" <tengelh@STUD.UNI-GOETTINGEN.DE>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Thomas Engelhardt" <tengelh@STUD.UNI-GOETTINGEN.DE>
Organization: =?iso-8859-1?Q?Rocket_Research_G=F6ttingen_=28RRG=29?=
Subject:      Re: [AR] Online source here (was: [AR] Sources of liquid fuel              rocketmotordesign]
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Hi Dave,

it doesn't work for me either, it seems that the website is down at the
moment. I have two suggestions: you might want to contact Ray, it is
possible the document is somewhere in the Arocket library. If it isn't
you can contact me again (via list or mail) and I can send a bunch of
HTML files to you (about ten files and twenty GIFs approx. 15k each).
I'm right in the middle of my final exams right now (and will be until
September 12th), so don't expect a lightning fast response :-).

Cheers,

Tom

-------- Original Message --------
Betreff: Re: [AR] Online source here (was: [AR] Sources of liquid fuel
rocketmotordesign])
Datum: Sat, 01 Sep 2001 12:31:17 -0700
Von: David Bradley <bdavid106@qwest.net>
An: Thomas Engelhardt <tengelh@STUD.UNI-GOETTINGEN.DE>
Referenzen: <3B7A2B78.DEA1C939@stud.uni-goettingen.de>

Hi Tom,

I've tried this link several times; doesn't seem to work.  Also as Matt
suggested, a Yahoo search finds a link but that link didn't work.  Do
you
know where this paper might be found?

Dave Bradley

Thomas Engelhardt wrote:

> -------- Original Message --------
> Betreff: Re: [AR] Sources of liquid fuel rocket motor design
> Datum: Wed, 15 Aug 2001 04:44:53 +0000
> Von: Matt Faulkner <mattfaulkner9@HOTMAIL.COM>
> Rckantwort: Matt Faulkner <mattfaulkner9@HOTMAIL.COM>
> An: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
>
>   A paper was written a while back and is downloadable called "How to
> design, build, and test small liquid fuel rockets". I forget the
> author's
> name, but if you search the name (e.g. yahoo) you'll find it. If you
> can't
> find it, I have it somewhere in my computer and will dig it up for you.
> There's no mention of pumps though.
>                 Good Luck
>                              -Matt Faulkner
>
> Hi group,
>
> the paper mentioned can be downloaded here
> http://www.im.lcs.mit.edu/rocket/
>
> It is a good starting point, but I can wholeheartedly recommend the
> Huzel/Huang book mentioned in an earlier post. It is my favorite book, I
> think the library man already knows me as he asked me if I already know
> everything off by heart....I wish :-).
> I should drop more hints around Christmas time...
>
> Tom

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 7396 invoked from network); 2 Sep 2001 21:59:33 -0000
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 2 Sep 2001 21:59:33 -0000
Received: (qmail 6970 invoked by uid 50005); 2 Sep 2001 21:59:39 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpe with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.204967 secs); 02 Sep 2001 21:59:39 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 2 Sep 2001 21:59:39 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA05684; Sun, 2 Sep 2001 14:54:42 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 105657 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 2 Sep 2001 21:54:38          +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (oe76.law4.hotmail.com [216.33.148.172]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA05670 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 2 Sep 2001 14:54:38 -0700
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Sun,          2 Sep 2001 14:54:08 -0700
X-Originating-IP: [130.235.245.94]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0C56_01C56B69.4EB91E20"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 02 Sep 2001 21:54:08.0140 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[CA901CC0:01C133F9]
Message-ID:  <OE76HwltsKTs65IYN1F000026e8@hotmail.com>
Date:         Sun, 2 Sep 2001 23:43:11 +0100
Reply-To: "Carsten Glans" <cag@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Carsten Glans" <cag@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      [AR] Electric matches
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0C56_01C56B69.4EB91E20
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Hi list!

Any simple process/recipie for making electric matches for ejection =
charges? I have read about glue for plastic and black powder blended and =
with the use of nicrome wire. Anyone tried it? Otherwise i guess i have =
some field study to do... :-) I will use it in conjunction with the RDAS =
compact flight computer. Diameter for nicrome wire, 0,5 mm? Battery =
voltage is approximatly 9 volt, for 100ms.


Best rocket regards


Carsten Glans
http://www.min-sajt.com/cag


------=_NextPart_000_0C56_01C56B69.4EB91E20
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Diso-8859-1">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 6.00.2600.0" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Hi list!</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Any simple process/recipie for making =
electric=20
matches for ejection charges? I have read about glue for plastic and =
black=20
powder blended and with the use of nicrome wire. Anyone tried it? =
Otherwise i=20
guess i have some field study to do... :-) </FONT><FONT face=3DArial =
size=3D2>I will=20
use it in conjunction with the RDAS compact flight computer. Diameter =
for=20
nicrome wire, 0,5 mm? Battery voltage is approximatly 9 volt, for=20
100ms.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Best rocket regards</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Carsten Glans</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2><A=20
href=3D"http://www.min-sajt.com/cag">http://www.min-sajt.com/cag</A></FON=
T></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0C56_01C56B69.4EB91E20--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 12787 invoked from network); 2 Sep 2001 22:01:35 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 2 Sep 2001 22:01:35 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 8578 invoked by uid 50005); 2 Sep 2001 22:02:07 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpa with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.618747 secs); 02 Sep 2001 22:02:07 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 2 Sep 2001 22:02:06 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA05713; Sun, 2 Sep 2001 14:58:39 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 105664 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 2 Sep 2001 21:58:38          +0000
Received: from grucom2.gru.net (grucom2.gru.net [209.251.129.7]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA05699 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun,          2 Sep 2001 14:58:37 -0700
Received: from [209.251.151.232] by grucom2.sfcc.net (NTMail          6.04.0010/NU4112.00.db1c8a4b) with ESMTP id wvwtiaaa for          AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 2 Sep 2001 17:58:31 -0400
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (Win95; I)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <3B92446A.E4105FDC@sfcc.net>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B92ABF8.3BB758FD@sfcc.net>
Date:         Sun, 2 Sep 2001 18:00:24 -0400
Reply-To: "James Yawn" <jyawn@SFCC.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "James Yawn" <jyawn@SFCC.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] questionable motor]
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Foy (et.al):  Following your lead, I attempted to create a motor similar to
yours, but with an outside-inhibited grain and using 500 grams recrystallized
KN/sucrose.  Your design will be hotter, but this one worked pretty well,
suggesting that you are in the ballpark.

Lots of pictures and details, including a brief video of the burn at:

http://members.tripod.com/j_yawn/engine9-1a/index.htm

My grain was 1-1/2 inch diameter by 12 inches long with 1/2 inch core.  Casing
is 1-1/2 inch sch40 PVC with a clay nozzle, 1/2 inch throat.  It burned for 1.6
seconds, creating quite a jet.  I have no instrumentation at present and so have
no hard data except what the camera was able to capture.  But I have no doubt
this motor would have propelled itself and a suitable airframe to some
altitude.  What altitude?  I am not well-informed enough at the moment to even
hazard a guess, but it did not cato so testing will continue.

I hope you have had good success with yours, and look forward to hearing about
it.

Jimmy Yawn
jyawn@sfcc.net


> Subject: Re: [AR] questionable motor
> Date: Fri, 31 Aug 2001 22:19:38 -0700
> From: Jamie Morken <jmorken@HOME.COM>
> To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
> References: <20010901001428.14480.qmail@web5101.mail.yahoo.com>
>      <3B905E9C.C11F26A0@sfcc.net> <001001c132a4$7f6f23e0$7d9b150c@foy>
>
> Hi all,
>
> >           All the motors I have fired so far are in a stand of very stout
> > construction (overkill). The nozzle and case are restrianed. My main worry
> > is the guages being rapidly scatered due to motor failure. A short .5 sec
> > 400# is my goal for now.
>
> Is your casing is steel pipe?  What type of nozzle are you using and how is
> it held in the casing?
> If the answers are steel, steel, snap ring or bolts then I think it should
> work fine!
>
> best regards,
> Jamie Morken

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 9910 invoked from network); 2 Sep 2001 22:12:21 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 2 Sep 2001 22:12:21 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 15970 invoked by uid 50005); 2 Sep 2001 22:12:18 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpa with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.277345 secs); 02 Sep 2001 22:12:18 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 2 Sep 2001 22:12:17 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA05775; Sun, 2 Sep 2001 15:08:35 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 105671 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 2 Sep 2001 22:08:33          +0000
Received: from lekstutis.com (emu.webminders.com [209.176.27.130]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA05761 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 2 Sep 2001 15:08:33 -0700
Received: from Lekstutis.com [64.34.51.25] by lekstutis.com with ESMTP          (SMTPD32-5.05) id A1F14D03AE; Sun, 02 Sep 2001 18:25:53 -0400
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.78 [en] (Win98; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <3B92957B.57E2E8BB@stud.uni-goettingen.de>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B92ADDA.D8CCB855@Lekstutis.com>
Date:         Sun, 2 Sep 2001 18:08:26 -0400
Reply-To: "Arthur J. Lekstutis" <Artie@LEKSTUTIS.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Arthur J. Lekstutis" <Artie@LEKSTUTIS.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Online source here (was: [AR] Sources of liquid              fuelrocketmotordesign]
Comments: To: Thomas Engelhardt <tengelh@STUD.UNI-GOETTINGEN.DE>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Hi,

Yes, the link appears to be down. Hopefully not permanently.

I have a copy in my Internet archives. I have place a copy here for a few
days:
    <http://Lekstutis.com/Artie/RocketLab/book.html>

Later,
Artie Lekstutis

Thomas Engelhardt wrote:

> Hi Dave,
>
> it doesn't work for me either, it seems that the website is down at the
> moment. I have two suggestions: you might want to contact Ray, it is
> > Hi group,
> >
> > the paper mentioned can be downloaded here
> > http://www.im.lcs.mit.edu/rocket/
> >
> > It is a good starting point, but I can wholeheartedly recommend the
> > Huzel/Huang book mentioned in an earlier post. It is my favorite book, I
> > think the library man already knows me as he asked me if I already know
> > everything off by heart....I wish :-).
> > I should drop more hints around Christmas time...
> >
> > Tom

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 23414 invoked from network); 2 Sep 2001 22:40:38 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 2 Sep 2001 22:40:38 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 662 invoked by uid 50005); 2 Sep 2001 22:41:10 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpa with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.411623 secs); 02 Sep 2001 22:41:10 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 2 Sep 2001 22:41:10 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA06043; Sun, 2 Sep 2001 15:37:26 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 105717 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 2 Sep 2001 22:37:23          +0000
Received: from rasmus.uib.no (exim@rasmus.uib.no [129.177.12.30]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA06027 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Sun, 2 Sep 2001 15:37:22 -0700
Received: from tunnel-46-84.vpn.uib.no (emil.rasmus.uib.no) [129.177.46.84] by          rasmus.uib.no  with esmtp (Exim 3.16) id 15dfrf-0001CR-00; Mon, 03          Sep 2001 00:37:16 +0200
X-Sender: st07696@rasmus.uib.no
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <5.1.0.14.0.20010903000926.00b3d668@rasmus.uib.no>
Date:         Mon, 3 Sep 2001 00:36:42 +0200
Reply-To: "Emil Johnsen" <Emil.Johnsen@STUDENT.UIB.NO>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Emil Johnsen" <Emil.Johnsen@STUDENT.UIB.NO>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Electric matches
Comments: To: Carsten Glans <cag@HOTMAIL.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <OE76HwltsKTs65IYN1F000026e8@hotmail.com>

>  Any simple process/recipie for making electric matches for ejection
> charges? I have read about glue for plastic and black powder blended and
> with the use of nicrome wire. Anyone tried it? Otherwise i guess i have
> some field study to do... :-) I will use it in conjunction with the RDAS
> compact flight

This page shows a good way to make electric matches:
http://www.info-central.org/support_igniters.shtml

I use black powder and glue for ignitors, but it's not needed to ignite an
ejection charge, and it is definelty not a good thing inside an airframe.
The nicrome alone will ignite the ejection charge.

>  computer. Diameter for nicrome wire, 0,5 mm? Battery voltage is
> approximatly 9 volt, for 100ms.

To thick. I use 0.2mm nichrome to make ignitors, when using a short wire
and keeping the nichrome as short as possible they will usualy fire on a
new 9v battery. I use 12v car battery when using theese to start rockets,
much less and they won't fire reliably.

I don't know what the ideal diameter for low current igniters would be,
0.05-0.1mm seems like a good palce to start. Unfortuenatly I'v not been
able to find a source for nichrome wire this thin. Anyone know a source?


Emil

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 27369 invoked from network); 2 Sep 2001 23:04:19 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 2 Sep 2001 23:04:19 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 10193 invoked by uid 50005); 2 Sep 2001 23:02:41 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.352951 secs); 02 Sep 2001 23:02:41 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 2 Sep 2001 23:02:40 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA06247; Sun, 2 Sep 2001 16:00:18 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 105747 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 2 Sep 2001 23:00:13          +0000
Received: from inet03.citec.qld.gov.au (firewall-user@inet03.citec.qld.gov.au          [203.5.10.10]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA06233          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 2 Sep 2001 16:00:12 -0700
Received: by inet03.citec.qld.gov.au; id JAA10871; Mon, 3 Sep 2001 09:00:08          +1000 (EST)
Received: from citec.com.au(pcux.citec.qld.gov.au 147.132.17.12) by          inet03.citec.qld.gov.au via smap (V2.0) id xma010800; Mon, 3 Sep 01          09:00:07 +1000
Received: from CITEC-Message_Server by citec.com.au with Novell_GroupWise; Mon,          03 Sep 2001 08:59:34 +1000
X-Mailer: Novell GroupWise 5.5.4
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by itc.uci.edu id QAA06234
Message-ID:  <sb934676.062@citec.com.au>
Date:         Mon, 3 Sep 2001 08:59:13 +1000
Reply-To: "Des Bromilow" <Des.Bromilow@CITEC.COM.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Des Bromilow" <Des.Bromilow@CITEC.COM.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Electric matches
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

I use one of the two solutions.
#1, 38g Nichrome wire, I get it for $22 AUD (that's around $11 USD) for 20m (66 feet), Bob Fortune sells it in US for a good price.
#2 fairy lights (these are ONLY suitable for ejection charges. I got the idea from perfectflite.
Basically you use a Xmas light bulb (or fairy light bulb) (they operate at 1.8V) and you break the glass at the tip, then place some 4Fg BP in contact with the element. They'll light off 3V I started susing a little bit of Nitrocelluose to seal the BP dipped element.. didn't enhance or detract from the ignition at all.

Hardest part is providing connections for the broken bulb, (you can either use the bulb holder off the xmas lights, or solder wires to the connections.)

Des

>>> Emil Johnsen <Emil.Johnsen@STUDENT.UIB.NO> 3/09/01 8:36:42 am >>>
>  Any simple process/recipie for making electric matches for ejection
> charges? I have read about glue for plastic and black powder blended and
> with the use of nicrome wire. Anyone tried it? Otherwise i guess i have
> some field study to do... :-) I will use it in conjunction with the RDAS
> compact flight

This page shows a good way to make electric matches:
http://www.info-central.org/support_igniters.shtml

I use black powder and glue for ignitors, but it's not needed to ignite an
ejection charge, and it is definelty not a good thing inside an airframe.
The nicrome alone will ignite the ejection charge.

>  computer. Diameter for nicrome wire, 0,5 mm? Battery voltage is
> approximatly 9 volt, for 100ms.

To thick. I use 0.2mm nichrome to make ignitors, when using a short wire
and keeping the nichrome as short as possible they will usualy fire on a
new 9v battery. I use 12v car battery when using theese to start rockets,
much less and they won't fire reliably.

I don't know what the ideal diameter for low current igniters would be,
0.05-0.1mm seems like a good palce to start. Unfortuenatly I'v not been
able to find a source for nichrome wire this thin. Anyone know a source?


Emil

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 17087 invoked from network); 2 Sep 2001 23:45:05 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 2 Sep 2001 23:45:05 -0000
Received: (qmail 23057 invoked by uid 50005); 2 Sep 2001 23:44:03 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.276816 secs); 02 Sep 2001 23:44:03 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 2 Sep 2001 23:44:02 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA06451; Sun, 2 Sep 2001 16:41:56 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 105788 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 2 Sep 2001 23:41:54          +0000
Received: from mta04.mail.mel.aone.net.au (mta04.mail.au.uu.net [203.2.192.84])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA06437 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 2 Sep 2001 16:41:53 -0700
Received: from unknown ([63.60.220.67]) by mta04.mail.mel.aone.net.au with SMTP          id <20010902234150.GYCM12702.mta04.mail.mel.aone.net.au@unknown> for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 3 Sep 2001 09:41:50 +1000
References: Conversation <16a.2d200a.28c2a5ec@aol.com> with last message            <16a.2d200a.28c2a5ec@aol.com>
Priority: Normal
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Priority: 3
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	X-MAPIextension=.TXT;
	charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>
Date:         Sun, 2 Sep 2001 23:41:54 +0000
Reply-To: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] propellant musings
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <16a.2d200a.28c2a5ec@aol.com>

----------
> Hi,
>
> I have not the answer, but a simple way to get more hydrogen in the fuel
is
> to go to CH4. If even more hydrogen is wanted the question becomes: what
is
> the solubility of H2 in CH4...

Dunno, CH4 possesses some of the same undesirable properties as H2 ie. Low
densities (as you'd expect) and low temps required.

Troy.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 19472 invoked from network); 2 Sep 2001 23:46:01 -0000
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 2 Sep 2001 23:46:01 -0000
Received: (qmail 10206 invoked by uid 50005); 2 Sep 2001 23:43:45 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpf with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.400631 secs); 02 Sep 2001 23:43:45 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 2 Sep 2001 23:43:45 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA06382; Sun, 2 Sep 2001 16:28:24 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 105774 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 2 Sep 2001 23:28:21          +0000
Received: from albatross.wgn.net (www.wgn.net [64.14.252.81] (may be forged))          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA06368 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 2 Sep 2001 16:28:21 -0700
Received: from hogwild (sc-66-74-70-20.socal.rr.com [66.74.70.20]) by          albatross.wgn.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id QAA04832 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 2 Sep 2001 16:29:17 -0700
References:  <OE76HwltsKTs65IYN1F000026e8@hotmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0C59_01C56B69.4EC52C10"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <001f01c13407$3cb82100$14464a42@socal.rr.com>
Date:         Sun, 2 Sep 2001 16:30:21 -0700
Reply-To: "Wedge Oldham" <wedge@WESTWORLD.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Wedge Oldham" <wedge@WESTWORLD.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Electric matches
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0C59_01C56B69.4EC52C10
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

The recipe I choose to go to Performance Hobbies =
http://performancehobbies.com/ and order some 28B Daveyfire electric =
matches. This formula has never disappointed me, especially when used =
for ejection charges.=20

Yes, there could be cheaper ways to ignite BP, but considering all the =
time & money I've invested in an individual rocket, it seems to be worth =
$1.00 to ensure the chute comes out.

Wedge Oldham
http://NikeProject.com
  ----- Original Message -----=20
  From: Carsten Glans=20
  To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU=20
  Sent: Sunday, September 02, 2001 3:43 PM
  Subject: [AR] Electric matches


  Hi list!

  Any simple process/recipie for making electric matches for ejection =
charges? I have read about glue for plastic and black powder blended and =
with the use of nicrome wire. Anyone tried it? Otherwise i guess i have =
some field study to do... :-) I will use it in conjunction with the RDAS =
compact flight computer. Diameter for nicrome wire, 0,5 mm? Battery =
voltage is approximatly 9 volt, for 100ms.


  Best rocket regards


  Carsten Glans
  http://www.min-sajt.com/cag


------=_NextPart_000_0C59_01C56B69.4EC52C10
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Diso-8859-1">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 6.00.2600.0" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>The recipe I choose to go to =
Performance Hobbies <A=20
href=3D"http://performancehobbies.com/">http://performancehobbies.com/</A=
>&nbsp;and=20
order some 28B&nbsp;Daveyfire electric matches. This formula has never=20
disappointed me, especially when used for ejection charges. =
</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Yes, there could be cheaper ways to =
ignite BP, but=20
considering all the time &amp; money I've invested in an individual =
rocket, it=20
seems to be worth $1.00 to ensure the chute comes out.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>Wedge Oldham<BR><A=20
href=3D"http://NikeProject.com">http://NikeProject.com</A></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE dir=3Dltr=20
style=3D"PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; =
BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
  <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial">----- Original Message ----- </DIV>
  <DIV=20
  style=3D"BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; FONT: 10pt arial; font-color: =
black"><B>From:</B>=20
  <A title=3Dcag@HOTMAIL.COM href=3D"mailto:cag@HOTMAIL.COM">Carsten =
Glans</A>=20
</DIV>
  <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A =
title=3DAROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU=20
  href=3D"mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU">AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU</A> </DIV>
  <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> Sunday, September 02, =
2001 3:43=20
  PM</DIV>
  <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> [AR] Electric =
matches</DIV>
  <DIV><BR></DIV>
  <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Hi list!</FONT></DIV>
  <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
  <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Any simple process/recipie for making =
electric=20
  matches for ejection charges? I have read about glue for plastic and =
black=20
  powder blended and with the use of nicrome wire. Anyone tried it? =
Otherwise i=20
  guess i have some field study to do... :-) </FONT><FONT face=3DArial =
size=3D2>I=20
  will use it in conjunction with the RDAS compact flight computer. =
Diameter for=20
  nicrome wire, 0,5 mm? Battery voltage is approximatly 9 volt, for=20
  100ms.</FONT></DIV>
  <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
  <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
  <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Best rocket regards</FONT></DIV>
  <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
  <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
  <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Carsten Glans</FONT></DIV>
  <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2><A=20
  =
href=3D"http://www.min-sajt.com/cag">http://www.min-sajt.com/cag</A></FON=
T></DIV>
  <DIV><FONT face=3DArial =
size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0C59_01C56B69.4EC52C10--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 15359 invoked from network); 3 Sep 2001 01:43:55 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 3 Sep 2001 01:43:55 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 8186 invoked by uid 50005); 3 Sep 2001 01:44:26 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpa with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.988282 secs); 03 Sep 2001 01:44:26 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 3 Sep 2001 01:44:24 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA06879; Sun, 2 Sep 2001 18:41:06 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 105846 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 3 Sep 2001 01:39:31          +0000
Received: from hobbiton.shire.net (frogmorton.shire.net [204.228.145.136]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA06859 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Sun, 2 Sep 2001 18:39:30 -0700
Received: from pool-64-223-146-33.man.east.verizon.net ([64.223.146.33]          helo=me-513q3sc0zun0.pengar.com) by hobbiton.shire.net with esmtp          (Exim 3.22 #6) id 15digP-000MyV-00 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 02          Sep 2001 19:37:49 -0600
X-Sender: seth-pc@hobbiton.shire.net
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
References: <OE76HwltsKTs65IYN1F000026e8@hotmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <5.1.0.14.0.20010902213514.01c0b008@hobbiton.shire.net>
Date:         Sun, 2 Sep 2001 21:44:44 -0400
Reply-To: "Seth Leigh" <seth@PENGAR.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Seth Leigh" <seth@PENGAR.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Electric matches
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <5.1.0.14.0.20010903000926.00b3d668@rasmus.uib.no>

I am experimenting with both nichrome and with igniters that don't have any
nichrome, just a conductive pyrogen mix.  I don't know the formula, I
bought the kit from Firefox (www.firefox-fx.com).  I've been wanting to do
my experiments with igniters a few weeks back but wasn't able to get around
to it, but today I mixed up the materials from Firefox with acetone in the
small glass jar the provide (1 or 2 fluid ounces) and made my first igniter.

The first igniter was just two pieces of whire about 6" long with both ends
stripped about 1/3".  I put the ends together on one side with the wire
ends separated by roughly .5 mm.  I dipped this once into the black pyrogen
formula from Firefox, let it dry for a minute or so, and then dipped it
into the nitrocellulose laquer that you make in the very small plastic
bottle from Firefox.  It dried for 10 minutes or so (given that the only
wetness is from acetone, I am sure it was completely dried in a minute or
two).  I then touched both ends to a 9 volt battery and it instantly went
off.  It created an instant small flash with a few sparks.  I liked
it.  ;-)  The 9 volt battery was by no means new, as I had already used it
to heat up two or three nichrome wire-wrap "igniters" to red-hot which I
had made a couple weeks ago with no pyrogen on them.

Tomorrow I will make a bunch more igniters with the Firefox formula.  I
intend to make some with nichrome and without, and I intend to test them
with batteries down to the size of a single 1.5 v AA, and see if they will
ignite reliably.  I also wish to test them with fairly small capacitors to
see if a full-on discharge of the capacitor across the igniter will set it
off reliably.  That's what I'd like to use for my onboard ejection charge
ignition if possible, avoiding a full battery's weight.

I will also (at long last) be able to perform my experiment with smokeless
powder contained in my modified berdan-primed aluminum .44 magnum
casing.  I've been wanting to try this experiment for weeks now, but I
hadn't made the igniters and so I didn't have what I needed for the test.

I'll take pictures with my video camera and put some stills up on a web page.

Seth


At 06:36 PM 9/2/2001, Emil Johnsen wrote:
>>  Any simple process/recipie for making electric matches for ejection
>>charges? I have read about glue for plastic and black powder blended and
>>with the use of nicrome wire. Anyone tried it? Otherwise i guess i have
>>some field study to do... :-) I will use it in conjunction with the RDAS
>>compact flight
>
>This page shows a good way to make electric matches:
>http://www.info-central.org/support_igniters.shtml
>
>I use black powder and glue for ignitors, but it's not needed to ignite an
>ejection charge, and it is definelty not a good thing inside an airframe.
>The nicrome alone will ignite the ejection charge.
>
>>  computer. Diameter for nicrome wire, 0,5 mm? Battery voltage is
>>approximatly 9 volt, for 100ms.
>
>To thick. I use 0.2mm nichrome to make ignitors, when using a short wire
>and keeping the nichrome as short as possible they will usualy fire on a
>new 9v battery. I use 12v car battery when using theese to start rockets,
>much less and they won't fire reliably.
>
>I don't know what the ideal diameter for low current igniters would be,
>0.05-0.1mm seems like a good palce to start. Unfortuenatly I'v not been
>able to find a source for nichrome wire this thin. Anyone know a source?
>
>
>Emil

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 1391 invoked from network); 3 Sep 2001 01:48:01 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 3 Sep 2001 01:48:01 -0000
Received: (qmail 9853 invoked by uid 50005); 3 Sep 2001 01:48:32 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpa with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.438922 secs); 03 Sep 2001 01:48:32 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 3 Sep 2001 01:48:31 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA06915; Sun, 2 Sep 2001 18:45:46 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 105855 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 3 Sep 2001 01:44:25          +0000
Received: from mail2.nc.rr.com (fe2.southeast.rr.com [24.93.67.49]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA06890 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Sun, 2 Sep 2001 18:43:21 -0700
Received: from freddy ([24.162.230.106]) by mail2.nc.rr.com  with Microsoft          SMTPSVC(5.5.1877.687.68); Sun, 2 Sep 2001 21:43:20 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0C5C_01C56B69.4ECEA1F0"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0)
Importance: Normal
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <NBEJKDFBFOEFALBMBCDPEEGECDAA.jtaylor@nc.rr.com>
Date:         Sun, 2 Sep 2001 21:46:15 -0400
Reply-To: "Jeff Taylor" <jtaylor@NC.RR.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jeff Taylor" <jtaylor@NC.RR.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Electric matches
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <001f01c13407$3cb82100$14464a42@socal.rr.com>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0C5C_01C56B69.4ECEA1F0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

I'm with Wedge here.  Unless there is some reason you can't legally buy a
Daveyfire, it's false economy making your own.  Sure, you can make matches
that will work, but they are unlikely to be as reliable in the long run.  It
would only take one crash due to a misfire to lose all of the savings.

I likewise discourage the use of flash bulbs for critical systems.

- Jeff Taylor

  -----Original Message-----
  From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU]On
Behalf Of Wedge Oldham
  Sent: Sunday, September 02, 2001 7:30 PM
  To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
  Subject: Re: [AR] Electric matches


  The recipe I choose to go to Performance Hobbies
http://performancehobbies.com/ and order some 28B Daveyfire electric
matches. This formula has never disappointed me, especially when used for
ejection charges.

  Yes, there could be cheaper ways to ignite BP, but considering all the
time & money I've invested in an individual rocket, it seems to be worth
$1.00 to ensure the chute comes out.

  Wedge Oldham
  http://NikeProject.com
    ----- Original Message -----
    From: Carsten Glans
    To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
    Sent: Sunday, September 02, 2001 3:43 PM
    Subject: [AR] Electric matches


    Hi list!

    Any simple process/recipie for making electric matches for ejection
charges? I have read about glue for plastic and black powder blended and
with the use of nicrome wire. Anyone tried it? Otherwise i guess i have some
field study to do... :-) I will use it in conjunction with the RDAS compact
flight computer. Diameter for nicrome wire, 0,5 mm? Battery voltage is
approximatly 9 volt, for 100ms.


    Best rocket regards


    Carsten Glans
    http://www.min-sajt.com/cag


------=_NextPart_000_0C5C_01C56B69.4ECEA1F0
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Diso-8859-1">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 5.50.4611.1300" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial color=3D#0000ff size=3D2><SPAN =
class=3D580483701-03092001>I'm=20
with Wedge here.&nbsp; Unless there is some reason you can't legally buy =
a=20
Daveyfire, it's false economy making your own.&nbsp; Sure, you can make =
matches=20
that will work, but they are unlikely to be as reliable in the long =
run.&nbsp;=20
It would only take one crash due to a misfire to lose all of the=20
savings.</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial color=3D#0000ff size=3D2><SPAN=20
class=3D580483701-03092001></SPAN></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial color=3D#0000ff size=3D2><SPAN =
class=3D580483701-03092001>I=20
likewise discourage the use of flash bulbs for critical=20
systems.</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial color=3D#0000ff size=3D2><SPAN=20
class=3D580483701-03092001></SPAN></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial color=3D#0000ff size=3D2><SPAN =
class=3D580483701-03092001>- Jeff=20
Taylor</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial color=3D#0000ff size=3D2><SPAN=20
class=3D580483701-03092001></SPAN></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE dir=3Dltr=20
style=3D"PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px =
solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
  <DIV class=3DOutlookMessageHeader dir=3Dltr align=3Dleft><FONT =
face=3DTahoma=20
  size=3D2>-----Original Message-----<BR><B>From:</B> Amateur Rocketry =
discussion=20
  list [mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU]<B>On Behalf Of </B>Wedge=20
  Oldham<BR><B>Sent:</B> Sunday, September 02, 2001 7:30 =
PM<BR><B>To:</B>=20
  AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU<BR><B>Subject:</B> Re: [AR] Electric=20
  matches<BR><BR></FONT></DIV>
  <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>The recipe I choose to go to =
Performance Hobbies=20
  <A=20
  =
href=3D"http://performancehobbies.com/">http://performancehobbies.com/</A=
>&nbsp;and=20
  order some 28B&nbsp;Daveyfire electric matches. This formula has never =

  disappointed me, especially when used for ejection charges. =
</FONT></DIV>
  <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
  <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Yes, there could be cheaper ways to =
ignite BP,=20
  but considering all the time &amp; money I've invested in an =
individual=20
  rocket, it seems to be worth $1.00 to ensure the chute comes =
out.</FONT></DIV>
  <DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
  <DIV>Wedge Oldham<BR><A=20
  href=3D"http://NikeProject.com">http://NikeProject.com</A></DIV>
  <BLOCKQUOTE dir=3Dltr=20
  style=3D"PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; =
BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
    <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial">----- Original Message ----- </DIV>
    <DIV=20
    style=3D"BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; FONT: 10pt arial; font-color: =
black"><B>From:</B>=20
    <A title=3Dcag@HOTMAIL.COM href=3D"mailto:cag@HOTMAIL.COM">Carsten =
Glans</A>=20
    </DIV>
    <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A =
title=3DAROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU=20
    href=3D"mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU">AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU</A> </DIV>
    <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> Sunday, September 02, =
2001 3:43=20
    PM</DIV>
    <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> [AR] Electric =
matches</DIV>
    <DIV><BR></DIV>
    <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Hi list!</FONT></DIV>
    <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
    <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Any simple process/recipie for =
making electric=20
    matches for ejection charges? I have read about glue for plastic and =
black=20
    powder blended and with the use of nicrome wire. Anyone tried it? =
Otherwise=20
    i guess i have some field study to do... :-) </FONT><FONT =
face=3DArial=20
    size=3D2>I will use it in conjunction with the RDAS compact flight =
computer.=20
    Diameter for nicrome wire, 0,5 mm? Battery voltage is approximatly 9 =
volt,=20
    for 100ms.</FONT></DIV>
    <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
    <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
    <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Best rocket regards</FONT></DIV>
    <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
    <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
    <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Carsten Glans</FONT></DIV>
    <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2><A=20
    =
href=3D"http://www.min-sajt.com/cag">http://www.min-sajt.com/cag</A></FON=
T></DIV>
    <DIV><FONT face=3DArial=20
size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV></BLOCKQUOTE></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0C5C_01C56B69.4ECEA1F0--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 17697 invoked from network); 3 Sep 2001 01:52:22 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 3 Sep 2001 01:52:22 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 12325 invoked by uid 50005); 3 Sep 2001 01:52:28 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpe with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.276584 secs); 03 Sep 2001 01:52:28 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 3 Sep 2001 01:52:26 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA06973; Sun, 2 Sep 2001 18:50:25 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 105872 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 3 Sep 2001 01:49:04          +0000
Received: from hobbiton.shire.net (frogmorton.shire.net [204.228.145.136]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA06953 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Sun, 2 Sep 2001 18:49:04 -0700
Received: from pool-64-223-146-33.man.east.verizon.net ([64.223.146.33]          helo=me-513q3sc0zun0.pengar.com) by hobbiton.shire.net with esmtp          (Exim 3.22 #6) id 15dipf-000N0N-00 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 02          Sep 2001 19:47:23 -0600
X-Sender: seth-pc@hobbiton.shire.net
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
References: <OE76HwltsKTs65IYN1F000026e8@hotmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <5.1.0.14.0.20010902214651.02afc6d8@hobbiton.shire.net>
Date:         Sun, 2 Sep 2001 21:54:17 -0400
Reply-To: "Seth Leigh" <seth@PENGAR.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Seth Leigh" <seth@PENGAR.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Electric matches
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <001f01c13407$3cb82100$14464a42@socal.rr.com>

Wedge, what you say makes perfect, logical sense.  However, in my case I
just want to make my own igniters.  I guess I really want to make my own
just about everything.  I think it's that "do it yourself" desire that has
me getting into rocketry at all.  I've wanted to build my own rocket motors
since I was a teenager and read a book from a neighbor about it.  I haven't
even launched a single high-power rocket yet, but I will in a couple months
or so.  I've just sent money to Robert Galejs for a magnetic apogee
detector kit.  I intend for my first high-power rocket to be launched using
a commercial engine (since I haven't made my own yet and have no good place
to launch the ones I will eventually build, a problem I have yet to solve),
using a magnetic apogee detector to fire off igniters and blackpowder
charges I will have made myself for ejection.  Eventually I want to make my
own igniters without even using the kit from Firefox, just to have my own
recipe that works, use electronics I either built from a kit or have
designed myself as modifications to a design I bought from a kit before,
using self-made rocket motors, the whole works.  That's my draw into the
amateur realm.  It's not that I want to get to orbit cheaper than NASA,
though I do enjoy reading the posts of those who do have this desire.

I guess amateur rocketry means something different to each of us.  To me
it's largely still just a dream I am building a foundation for.  For now,
with igniters not being a solved problem yet, I'll have fun tomorrow
dinking around with little pieces of wire that flash and spark.  I hope to
build a 6 ton press in the next few weeks, so who knows, I may be able to
make some compressed KN/sugar propellant within the next couple
months.  That will be fun.

Seth

At 07:30 PM 9/2/2001, Wedge Oldham wrote:
>The recipe I choose to go to Performance Hobbies
><http://performancehobbies.com/>http://performancehobbies.com/ and order
>some 28B Daveyfire electric matches. This formula has never disappointed
>me, especially when used for ejection charges.
>
>Yes, there could be cheaper ways to ignite BP, but considering all the
>time & money I've invested in an individual rocket, it seems to be worth
>$1.00 to ensure the chute comes out.
>
>Wedge Oldham
><http://NikeProject.com>http://NikeProject.com

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 22928 invoked from network); 3 Sep 2001 02:00:55 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 3 Sep 2001 02:00:55 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 6040 invoked by uid 50005); 3 Sep 2001 01:58:37 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpf with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 1.015909 secs); 03 Sep 2001 01:58:37 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 3 Sep 2001 01:58:35 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA07060; Sun, 2 Sep 2001 18:58:31 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 105898 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 3 Sep 2001 01:57:09          +0000
Received: from rasmus.uib.no (exim@rasmus.uib.no [129.177.12.30]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA07040 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Sun, 2 Sep 2001 18:57:08 -0700
Received: from tunnel-46-84.vpn.uib.no (emil.rasmus.uib.no) [129.177.46.84] by          rasmus.uib.no for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU with esmtp (Exim 3.16) id          15diyz-0004MH-00; Mon, 03 Sep 2001 03:57:02 +0200
X-Sender: st07696@rasmus.uib.no
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
References: <OE76HwltsKTs65IYN1F000026e8@hotmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <5.1.0.14.0.20010903033351.02bd58d0@rasmus.uib.no>
Date:         Mon, 3 Sep 2001 03:52:35 +0200
Reply-To: "Emil Johnsen" <Emil.Johnsen@STUDENT.UIB.NO>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Emil Johnsen" <Emil.Johnsen@STUDENT.UIB.NO>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Electric matches
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <5.1.0.14.0.20010903000926.00b3d668@rasmus.uib.no>

>To thick. I use 0.2mm nichrome to make ignitors, when using a short wire
>and keeping the nichrome as short as possible they will usualy fire on a
>new 9v battery. I use 12v car battery when using theese to start rockets,
>much less and they won't fire reliably.

Ignore everything I said about the thickness of nichrome wire. Apparently
the wire I have been using is not nichrome.


Emil

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 4092 invoked from network); 3 Sep 2001 02:19:05 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 3 Sep 2001 02:19:05 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 5624 invoked by uid 50005); 3 Sep 2001 02:18:01 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.330797 secs); 03 Sep 2001 02:18:01 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 3 Sep 2001 02:18:01 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA07202; Sun, 2 Sep 2001 19:17:02 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 105937 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 3 Sep 2001 02:15:40          +0000
Received: from cyclone.comcen.com.au (cyclone.comcen.com.au [203.23.236.100])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA07187 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 2 Sep 2001 19:15:39 -0700
Received: (from nobody@localhost) by cyclone.comcen.com.au (8.11.1/8.11.1) id          f832FZ983941; Mon, 3 Sep 2001 12:15:35 +1000 (EST) (envelope-from          pkelly@comcen.com.au)
References: <F1923Hho6rCsSLgPPMk00000e5c@hotmail.com>            <3B8FE47C.F839D210@earthlink.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
User-Agent: IMP/PHP IMAP webmail program 2.2.3
X-Originating-IP: 144.137.65.118
Message-ID:  <999483335.3b92e7c71319f@webmail.comcen.com.au>
Date:         Mon, 3 Sep 2001 12:15:35 +1000
Reply-To: "Paul Kelly" <pkelly@COMCEN.COM.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Paul Kelly" <pkelly@COMCEN.COM.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] liquids question: alcohol/N2O propellant feeding
Comments: To: David Weinshenker <daze39@EARTHLINK.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <3B8FE47C.F839D210@earthlink.net>

> Different construction, same concept as the piston. Depends on which
> method
> gives greater confidence with your available fabrication techniques.
>
> Some people have better access to fine machining and polishing than
> they
> do to engineered elastomer films. They might have better luck with a
> piston.

Have to giggle at "fine machining and polishing", you should see some of the
stuff we throw together for tests.

PK
>
> For a possible bag system, the plastic bags of variable-volume
> containers
> (as used for photographic developing-solutions and cheap wine, for
> example)
> might have adequate chemical resistance to N2O and alcohol - they are
> intended
> to be gas-impermeable, so that the contents do not deteriorate from
> contact
> with oxygen in the atmosphere.
>
> -dave w
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 13206 invoked from network); 3 Sep 2001 02:37:57 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 3 Sep 2001 02:37:57 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 5145 invoked by uid 50005); 3 Sep 2001 02:35:40 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpf with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.351515 secs); 03 Sep 2001 02:35:40 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 3 Sep 2001 02:35:40 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA07286; Sun, 2 Sep 2001 19:34:56 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 105952 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 3 Sep 2001 02:33:27          +0000
Received: from femail35.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail35.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.254.60.25]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA07271          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 2 Sep 2001 19:33:26 -0700
Received: from c1649002-a.earthlink.net ([24.20.95.67]) by          femail35.sdc1.sfba.home.com (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20          201-229-121-120-20010223) with ESMTP id          <20010903023317.KCSU19181.femail35.sdc1.sfba.home.com@c1649002-a.earthlink.net>; Sun, 2 Sep 2001 19:33:17          -0700
X-Sender: forkbomb@mail.earthlink.net
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.0.2
References: <3B8FB5F7.7FA06724@biomicro.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <5.0.2.1.0.20010902193143.02595be0@mail.earthlink.net>
Date:         Sun, 2 Sep 2001 19:33:15 -0700
Reply-To: "Pierce Nichols" <forkbomb@EARTHLINK.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Pierce Nichols" <forkbomb@EARTHLINK.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] liquids question: alcohol/N2O propellant feeding
Comments: To: Henry Spencer <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010901114840.27460F-100000@spsystems.net>

At 11:53 AM 9/1/2001 -0400, Henry Spencer wrote:
>Pierce Nichols wrote:
> > The basic concept is to use concentric tanks. N2O is
> > in the outer tank, and the inner tank holds fuel. The ullage space of the
> > two tanks is connected, so that the fuel tank is N2O pressurized. A piston
> > isolates the gaseous N2O from the fuel...
> > ...The lower bulkhead can be fastened into the outer tube with
> > one of those ubiquitous snap rings, and the inner wall seated into a groove
> > in it, with o-rings and all the fixings...
>
>One disadvantage:  this is a "common bulkhead" design, with only one wall
>between the two propellants.  If there's any leakage at joints etc., you
>get a liquid explosive.  The pros do use common bulkheads sometimes --
>it's lighter than completely separate tanks -- but they consider it a bit
>worrisome, and will avoid it on designs that are meant to be cheap to
>build and operate (e.g. the new Delta IV).

         See my earlier comment about venting the piston -- I think it's
not necessarily a show stopper. Also, we're talking about a relatively
small, amateur biprop -- the rules are a bit different. The extra danger of
a common bulkhead is probably acceptable if one of the propellants is
loaded by remoted control (as with nitrous).

         -p


Mars or Bust!
www.marssociety.com

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 3549 invoked from network); 3 Sep 2001 02:43:57 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 3 Sep 2001 02:43:57 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 441 invoked by uid 50005); 3 Sep 2001 02:44:28 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpa with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.360293 secs); 03 Sep 2001 02:44:28 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 3 Sep 2001 02:44:27 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA07355; Sun, 2 Sep 2001 19:41:51 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 105971 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 3 Sep 2001 02:40:27          +0000
Received: from femail45.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail45.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.254.60.39]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA07340          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 2 Sep 2001 19:40:27 -0700
Received: from c1649002-a.earthlink.net ([24.20.95.67]) by          femail45.sdc1.sfba.home.com (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20          201-229-121-120-20010223) with ESMTP id          <20010903024020.RXXA25401.femail45.sdc1.sfba.home.com@c1649002-a.earthlink.net>; Sun, 2 Sep 2001 19:40:20          -0700
X-Sender: forkbomb@mail.earthlink.net
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.0.2
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <5.0.2.1.0.20010902193413.025985e0@mail.earthlink.net>
Date:         Sun, 2 Sep 2001 19:40:18 -0700
Reply-To: "Pierce Nichols" <forkbomb@EARTHLINK.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Pierce Nichols" <forkbomb@EARTHLINK.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] propellant musings
Comments: To: Azt28@AOL.COM
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <16a.2d200a.28c2a5ec@aol.com>

At 04:58 PM 9/1/2001 -0400, Azt28@AOL.COM wrote:
>Hi,
>
>I have not the answer, but a simple way to get more hydrogen in the fuel is
>to go to CH4. If even more hydrogen is wanted the question becomes: what is
>the solubility of H2 in CH4...


         The reason I asked about propane is because it is much denser than
methane. It's also much easier and cheaper to acquire in industrial
quantities, at least here in the US. I can call up any one of a dozen or so
companies within fifty miles of my current location (Livermore, CA), and
get a quote for 100 tons of liquid propane including delivery for a
relatively small amount of money. I was wondering about ways to boost the
hydrogen content without lowering the density unacceptably.

         -p



>Yvan Bozzonetti.
>
>From: forkbomb@EARTHLINK.NET
>
><< Does anyone know the solubility of hydrogen in liquid propane at 100K and
>  various pressures? Also, what effect would dissolving hydrogen in propane
>  have on the density of the mixture? I was having a musing about boosting
>  the Isp of propane as a fuel and I'd like to know if I am completely off
>base.
>
>           -p
>
>
>  Mars or Bust! >>

Mars or Bust!
www.marssociety.com

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 16737 invoked from network); 3 Sep 2001 02:47:54 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 3 Sep 2001 02:47:54 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 28804 invoked by uid 50005); 3 Sep 2001 02:46:15 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.284829 secs); 03 Sep 2001 02:46:15 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 3 Sep 2001 02:46:14 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA07393; Sun, 2 Sep 2001 19:46:00 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 105980 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 3 Sep 2001 02:44:35          +0000
Received: from femail43.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail43.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.254.60.37]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA07365          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 2 Sep 2001 19:42:40 -0700
Received: from c1649002-a.earthlink.net ([24.20.95.67]) by          femail43.sdc1.sfba.home.com (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20          201-229-121-120-20010223) with ESMTP id          <20010903024234.RHZO23054.femail43.sdc1.sfba.home.com@c1649002-a.earthlink.net>; Sun, 2 Sep 2001 19:42:34          -0700
X-Sender: forkbomb@mail.earthlink.net
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.0.2
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <5.0.2.1.0.20010902194141.03271008@mail.earthlink.net>
Date:         Sun, 2 Sep 2001 19:42:32 -0700
Reply-To: "Pierce Nichols" <forkbomb@EARTHLINK.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Pierce Nichols" <forkbomb@EARTHLINK.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Propellent Musings
Comments: To: Bill Bullock <bpbullock@LARIBAY.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <000e01c1332b$88dbc8c0$51391442@billbull>

At 04:17 PM 9/1/2001 -0500, Bill Bullock wrote:
>     Pardon me for revealing my ignorance of liquid-fueled motor
> requirements, but would something that is hydrocarbon-based, runs 38-42
> API Gravity, is stable at atmospheric pressures and yields 22,500 BTU's
> per pound be any good as a fuel?


         Sounds like it might be, but plain old jet fuel (kerosene) gives
you about 30K btu/lb.

         -p


Mars or Bust!
www.marssociety.com

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 11167 invoked from network); 3 Sep 2001 02:55:53 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 3 Sep 2001 02:55:53 -0000
Received: (qmail 9348 invoked by uid 50005); 3 Sep 2001 02:56:27 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpb with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.320178 secs); 03 Sep 2001 02:56:27 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 3 Sep 2001 02:56:26 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA07473; Sun, 2 Sep 2001 19:53:51 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 106001 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 3 Sep 2001 02:52:29          +0000
Received: from mta04.mail.mel.aone.net.au (mta04.mail.au.uu.net [203.2.192.84])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA07454 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 2 Sep 2001 19:52:29 -0700
Received: from unknown ([63.34.220.75]) by mta04.mail.mel.aone.net.au with SMTP          id <20010903025223.LCCM12702.mta04.mail.mel.aone.net.au@unknown> for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 3 Sep 2001 12:52:23 +1000
References: Conversation <OE76HwltsKTs65IYN1F000026e8@hotmail.com> with last            message <5.1.0.14.0.20010902214651.02afc6d8@hobbiton.shire.net>
Priority: Normal
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Priority: 3
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	X-MAPIextension=.TXT;
	charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>
Date:         Mon, 3 Sep 2001 02:52:29 +0000
Reply-To: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Electric matches
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <5.1.0.14.0.20010902214651.02afc6d8@hobbiton.shire.net>

I'm a bit like that too, I've either made my own or still make my own
everything (propellant, nozzles, motor casings, airframes, nose cones,
parachutes, timers, fins, igniters, etc) but *NOT* Ematches. It's just not
worth it IMHO when the rockets start becoming expensive. You'll either
learn this the easy way or hard way when you start flying a few rockets.

Troy.

----------
> Wedge, what you say makes perfect, logical sense.  However, in my case I
> just want to make my own igniters.  I guess I really want to make my own
> just about everything.  I think it's that "do it yourself" desire that has
> me getting into rocketry at all.  I've wanted to build my own rocket
motors
> since I was a teenager and read a book from a neighbor about it.  I
haven't
> even launched a single high-power rocket yet, but I will in a couple
months
> or so.  I've just sent money to Robert Galejs for a magnetic apogee
> detector kit.  I intend for my first high-power rocket to be launched
using
> a commercial engine (since I haven't made my own yet and have no good
place
> to launch the ones I will eventually build, a problem I have yet to
solve),
> using a magnetic apogee detector to fire off igniters and blackpowder
> charges I will have made myself for ejection.  Eventually I want to make
my
> own igniters without even using the kit from Firefox, just to have my own
> recipe that works, use electronics I either built from a kit or have
> designed myself as modifications to a design I bought from a kit before,
> using self-made rocket motors, the whole works.  That's my draw into the
> amateur realm.  It's not that I want to get to orbit cheaper than NASA,
> though I do enjoy reading the posts of those who do have this desire.
>
> I guess amateur rocketry means something different to each of us.  To me
> it's largely still just a dream I am building a foundation for.  For now,
> with igniters not being a solved problem yet, I'll have fun tomorrow
> dinking around with little pieces of wire that flash and spark.  I hope to
> build a 6 ton press in the next few weeks, so who knows, I may be able to
> make some compressed KN/sugar propellant within the next couple
> months.  That will be fun.
>
> Seth
>
> At 07:30 PM 9/2/2001, Wedge Oldham wrote:
> >The recipe I choose to go to Performance Hobbies
> ><http://performancehobbies.com/>http://performancehobbies.com/ and order
> >some 28B Daveyfire electric matches. This formula has never disappointed
> >me, especially when used for ejection charges.
> >
> >Yes, there could be cheaper ways to ignite BP, but considering all the
> >time & money I've invested in an individual rocket, it seems to be worth
> >$1.00 to ensure the chute comes out.
> >
> >Wedge Oldham
> ><http://NikeProject.com>http://NikeProject.com

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 12965 invoked from network); 3 Sep 2001 03:15:43 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 3 Sep 2001 03:15:43 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 801 invoked by uid 50005); 3 Sep 2001 03:14:39 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.29633 secs); 03 Sep 2001 03:14:39 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 3 Sep 2001 03:14:39 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA07588; Sun, 2 Sep 2001 20:12:24 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 106031 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 3 Sep 2001 03:11:02          +0000
Received: from imo-r08.mx.aol.com (imo-r08.mx.aol.com [152.163.225.104]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA07573 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Sun, 2 Sep 2001 20:11:01 -0700
Received: from Tjpoulton@aol.com by imo-r08.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v31_r1.4.) id          w.15a.5a8590 (4329) for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Sun, 2 Sep 2001          23:10:54 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: AOL 5.0 for Windows sub 138
Message-ID:  <15a.5a8590.28c44ebe@aol.com>
Date:         Sun, 2 Sep 2001 23:10:54 EDT
Reply-To: <Tjpoulton@AOL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <Tjpoulton@AOL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] liquids question: alcohol/N2O propellant feeding
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

In a message dated 9/2/01 10:01:16 PM Central Daylight Time,
forkbomb@EARTHLINK.NET writes:

> >One disadvantage:  this is a "common bulkhead" design, with only one wall
>  >between the two propellants.  If there's any leakage at joints etc., you
>  >get a liquid explosive.  The pros do use common bulkheads sometimes --
>  >it's lighter than completely separate tanks -- but they consider it a bit
>  >worrisome, and will avoid it on designs that are meant to be cheap to
>  >build and operate (e.g. the new Delta IV).
>
>           See my earlier comment about venting the piston -- I think it's
>  not necessarily a show stopper. Also, we're talking about a relatively
>  small, amateur biprop -- the rules are a bit different. The extra danger of
>  a common bulkhead is probably acceptable if one of the propellants is
>  loaded by remoted control (as with nitrous).
>

It's also notable that slight leakage from one tank into the other is not
really likely to be a problem.  Nitrous oxide and alcohol aren't hypergolic.
Slight mixing of the two would not produce a dangerous mixture in either
tank, and thus would not be an issue.  With hypergolic propellants, however,
this would be an instant disaster.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 13142 invoked from network); 3 Sep 2001 03:26:04 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 3 Sep 2001 03:26:04 -0000
Received: (qmail 17191 invoked by uid 50005); 3 Sep 2001 03:26:35 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpa with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.391751 secs); 03 Sep 2001 03:26:35 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 3 Sep 2001 03:26:34 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA07635; Sun, 2 Sep 2001 20:23:40 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 106038 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 3 Sep 2001 03:22:19          +0000
Received: from spsystems.net (spsystems.net [209.47.149.227]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA07619 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Sun,          2 Sep 2001 20:22:18 -0700
Received: (from henry@localhost) by spsystems.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id XAA19677;          Sun, 2 Sep 2001 23:21:28 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010902231919.19570C-100000@spsystems.net>
Date:         Sun, 2 Sep 2001 23:21:28 -0400
Reply-To: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] propellant musings
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>

On Sun, 2 Sep 2001, Troy Prideaux wrote:
> ...CH4 possesses some of the same undesirable properties as H2 ie. Low
> densities (as you'd expect) and low temps required.

And despite the higher hydrogen content, it has only the most marginal
performance advantage -- if any -- over better-behaved hydrocarbons like
propane.  (Most carefully-done comparisons, in fact, show propane or
ethane being slightly better... but "the curve is quite flat", you'd
almost certainly make the choice based on secondary considerations, where
methane tends to lose.)

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 22286 invoked from network); 3 Sep 2001 03:41:40 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 3 Sep 2001 03:41:40 -0000
Received: (qmail 24482 invoked by uid 50005); 3 Sep 2001 03:42:13 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpb with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.121689 secs); 03 Sep 2001 03:42:13 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 3 Sep 2001 03:42:13 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA07732; Sun, 2 Sep 2001 20:39:26 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 106061 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 3 Sep 2001 03:38:04          +0000
Received: from spsystems.net (spsystems.net [209.47.149.227]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA07714 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Sun,          2 Sep 2001 20:38:03 -0700
Received: (from henry@localhost) by spsystems.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id XAA19873;          Sun, 2 Sep 2001 23:37:13 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010902233310.19570F-100000@spsystems.net>
Date:         Sun, 2 Sep 2001 23:37:13 -0400
Reply-To: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] liquids question: alcohol/N2O propellant feeding
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <15a.5a8590.28c44ebe@aol.com>

On Sun, 2 Sep 2001 Tjpoulton@AOL.COM wrote:
> It's also notable that slight leakage from one tank into the other is not
> really likely to be a problem.  Nitrous oxide and alcohol aren't hypergolic.
> Slight mixing of the two would not produce a dangerous mixture in either
> tank, and thus would not be an issue.  With hypergolic propellants, however,
> this would be an instant disaster.

Actually, in the pro world, the relative hazard is the other way around
(neglecting toxicity issues, which are not trivial for the hypergolics).

A *minor* leak between non-hypergolic propellants may be okay, yes, but a
bigger one is extremely dangerous.  The fact that hypergolics ignite on
contact is an important safety advantage, because it means they *cannot*
form explosive mixtures, which is all too easy with non-hypergolics.  An
immediate fire is much preferable to a delayed explosion.

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 6298 invoked from network); 3 Sep 2001 04:40:02 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 3 Sep 2001 04:40:02 -0000
Received: (qmail 9538 invoked by uid 50005); 3 Sep 2001 04:38:58 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.259234 secs); 03 Sep 2001 04:38:58 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 3 Sep 2001 04:38:58 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA07989; Sun, 2 Sep 2001 21:37:35 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 106115 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 3 Sep 2001 04:36:11          +0000
Received: from corlabs (24-216-244-100.hsacorp.net [24.216.244.100]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA07973 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Sun, 2 Sep 2001 21:36:10 -0700
Received: from [24.216.244.164] by corlabs (ArGoSoft Mail Server Plus,          Version 1.3 (1.3.0.1)); Mon, 3 Sep 2001 00:05:21 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook CWS, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <001301c13433$2dfbd5e0$0200a8c0@charter.net>
Date:         Sun, 2 Sep 2001 23:44:54 -0500
Reply-To: "Carl A. Blood" <cablood@CORLABS.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Carl A. Blood" <cablood@CORLABS.COM>
Subject:      [AR] Movies and pictures
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Well as embarrassing as it may be the "BLOOD BLOOPERS" are now out on
pad17.com at the link :http://www.pad17.com/ProjectsMovie.htm
The three inch blew out a nozzle that was not made to take the pressure
"BLOOP"
The four inch set screws for the forward closure were #10 screws the closure
was made by me for #6 screws "BLOOP"

Damage Report:

One Rocket -- Trashed...broken body tube from hitting the rail.
Three Para cutes -- burned up.
One $700 2000lb sensor -- could not take the 12,000 lb lift off of the
casing.
One self esteem, pride etc.

BUT.. nothing is a failure unless you quit.

The 4" motor will be retested on the 9th

I also put 6 photos of the boost as it exploded off the test stand.

Thanks for looking.

Carl

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 26088 invoked from network); 3 Sep 2001 05:12:13 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 3 Sep 2001 05:12:13 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 23102 invoked by uid 50005); 3 Sep 2001 05:12:43 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpa with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.331401 secs); 03 Sep 2001 05:12:43 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 3 Sep 2001 05:12:43 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA08155; Sun, 2 Sep 2001 22:09:58 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 106134 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 3 Sep 2001 05:08:35          +0000
Received: from smtp006pub.verizon.net (smtp006pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.185])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA08140 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 2 Sep 2001 22:08:35 -0700
Received: from [63.25.193.97] (1Cust97.tnt1.hilo.hi.da.uu.net [63.25.193.97])          by smtp006pub.verizon.net  with ESMTP ; id f83580A03072 Mon, 3 Sep          2001 00:08:01 -0500 (CDT)
X-Sender: ttocs@mail.gte.net
References: <3B92446A.E4105FDC@sfcc.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <l03130300b7b4cb73951a@[63.10.201.206]>
Date:         Thu, 30 Aug 2001 19:07:40 -1000
Reply-To: "Melissa Smith" <ttocs@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Melissa Smith" <ttocs@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] questionable motor]
Comments: To: James Yawn <jyawn@SFCC.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <3B92ABF8.3BB758FD@sfcc.net>

He was planning on using ABS, which is weaker.  Foy, I would use PVC.

Aaron

At 6:00 PM -0400 9/2/01, James Yawn wrote:
>Foy (et.al):  Following your lead, I attempted to create a motor similar to
>yours, but with an outside-inhibited grain and using 500 grams recrystallized
>KN/sucrose.  Your design will be hotter, but this one worked pretty well,
>suggesting that you are in the ballpark.
>
>Lots of pictures and details, including a brief video of the burn at:
>
>http://members.tripod.com/j_yawn/engine9-1a/index.htm
>
>My grain was 1-1/2 inch diameter by 12 inches long with 1/2 inch core.  Casing
>is 1-1/2 inch sch40 PVC with a clay nozzle, 1/2 inch throat.  It burned
>for 1.6
>seconds, creating quite a jet.  I have no instrumentation at present and
>so have
>no hard data except what the camera was able to capture.  But I have no doubt
>this motor would have propelled itself and a suitable airframe to some
>altitude.  What altitude?  I am not well-informed enough at the moment to even
>hazard a guess, but it did not cato so testing will continue.
>
>I hope you have had good success with yours, and look forward to hearing about
>it.
>
>Jimmy Yawn
>jyawn@sfcc.net
>
>
>> Subject: Re: [AR] questionable motor
>> Date: Fri, 31 Aug 2001 22:19:38 -0700
>> From: Jamie Morken <jmorken@HOME.COM>
>> To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
>> References: <20010901001428.14480.qmail@web5101.mail.yahoo.com>
>>      <3B905E9C.C11F26A0@sfcc.net> <001001c132a4$7f6f23e0$7d9b150c@foy>
>>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> >           All the motors I have fired so far are in a stand of very stout
>> > construction (overkill). The nozzle and case are restrianed. My main worry
>> > is the guages being rapidly scatered due to motor failure. A short .5 sec
>> > 400# is my goal for now.
>>
>> Is your casing is steel pipe?  What type of nozzle are you using and how is
>> it held in the casing?
>> If the answers are steel, steel, snap ring or bolts then I think it should
>> work fine!
>>
>> best regards,
>> Jamie Morken

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 16335 invoked from network); 3 Sep 2001 05:20:21 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 3 Sep 2001 05:20:21 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 25559 invoked by uid 50005); 3 Sep 2001 05:20:55 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpb with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.23187 secs); 03 Sep 2001 05:20:55 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 3 Sep 2001 05:20:54 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA08224; Sun, 2 Sep 2001 22:16:39 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 106149 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 3 Sep 2001 05:15:18          +0000
Received: from hobbiton.shire.net (frogmorton.shire.net [204.228.145.136]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA08208 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Sun, 2 Sep 2001 22:15:17 -0700
Received: from pool-64-223-146-33.man.east.verizon.net ([64.223.146.33]          helo=me-513q3sc0zun0.pengar.com) by hobbiton.shire.net with esmtp          (Exim 3.22 #6) id 15dm3F-000NYH-00 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 02          Sep 2001 23:13:37 -0600
X-Sender: seth-pc@hobbiton.shire.net
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <5.1.0.14.0.20010903011842.02bf1528@hobbiton.shire.net>
Date:         Mon, 3 Sep 2001 01:20:31 -0400
Reply-To: "Seth Leigh" <seth@PENGAR.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Seth Leigh" <seth@PENGAR.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Movies and pictures
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <001301c13433$2dfbd5e0$0200a8c0@charter.net>

Oh man, those are cool videos.  Well, not cool that you destroyed your
gear, but nevertheless it's cool that if it had to happen, you got it all
on video.  ;-)  What a helpless feeling it must have been when your rocket
started liftoff, then fell back down and the propellant took what, 10 to 20
more seconds to burn out, totally incinerating your chutes and possibly
more? Wow.

Seth


At 12:44 AM 9/3/2001, you wrote:
>Well as embarrassing as it may be the "BLOOD BLOOPERS" are now out on
>pad17.com at the link :http://www.pad17.com/ProjectsMovie.htm
>The three inch blew out a nozzle that was not made to take the pressure
>"BLOOP"
>The four inch set screws for the forward closure were #10 screws the closure
>was made by me for #6 screws "BLOOP"
>
>Damage Report:
>
>One Rocket -- Trashed...broken body tube from hitting the rail.
>Three Para cutes -- burned up.
>One $700 2000lb sensor -- could not take the 12,000 lb lift off of the
>casing.
>One self esteem, pride etc.
>
>BUT.. nothing is a failure unless you quit.
>
>The 4" motor will be retested on the 9th
>
>I also put 6 photos of the boost as it exploded off the test stand.
>
>Thanks for looking.
>
>Carl

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 4761 invoked from network); 3 Sep 2001 05:38:20 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 3 Sep 2001 05:38:20 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 769 invoked by uid 50005); 3 Sep 2001 05:38:53 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpb with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.216891 secs); 03 Sep 2001 05:38:53 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 3 Sep 2001 05:38:53 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA08327; Sun, 2 Sep 2001 22:35:39 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 106170 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 3 Sep 2001 05:34:16          +0000
Received: from hobbiton.shire.net (frogmorton.shire.net [204.228.145.136]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA08308 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Sun, 2 Sep 2001 22:34:16 -0700
Received: from pool-64-223-146-33.man.east.verizon.net ([64.223.146.33]          helo=me-513q3sc0zun0.pengar.com) by hobbiton.shire.net with esmtp          (Exim 3.22 #6) id 15dmLb-000Naz-00 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 02          Sep 2001 23:32:35 -0600
X-Sender: seth-pc@hobbiton.shire.net
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
References: <3B92446A.E4105FDC@sfcc.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <5.1.0.14.0.20010903012327.01c21238@hobbiton.shire.net>
Date:         Mon, 3 Sep 2001 01:39:30 -0400
Reply-To: "Seth Leigh" <seth@PENGAR.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Seth Leigh" <seth@PENGAR.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] questionable motor]
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <3B92ABF8.3BB758FD@sfcc.net>

Jimmy, I think your test is pretty cool!

I do have some comments though.  ;-)

I may be wrong about the terminology, but doesn't a Bates grain
configuration require multiple propellant segments?  Ie: if it doesn't have
multiple propellant segments, rather than being a Bates motor it's just a
long, outside inhibited core-burner?  The segmentation of the Bates design,
as far as I've read, is supposed to keep the burn rate curve fairly flat,
because having, say, 6 ends rather than two results in the propellant
cylinder becoming shorter in length faster even as the surface area of the
core increases.  The shorter length is supposed to counteract the increase
in surface area that would occur in the core with just a single grain.

Also, while watching your video I noticed a frame right after it ignited
where you can see a couple of white streaks flying out of the motor.  It
might be a good idea to figure out what it might have been, because from
what I've read stuff lodging briefly in the nozzle throat will often CATO
the motor, even if it would seem to us that it could only stick there for
an instant before being blown out.

I'm not sure what the others on the list will think about your idea of
filling the core with blackpowder, even if it is slow
burning.  ;-)  Putting a light dusting of bp dust in the core is one thing,
but loose bp chunks would be entirely something else.  The last think you
want to do is fracture your propellant grain, because fractures can cause
drastic increases in burning surface area.  Also, your fuse burning into
the nozzle end and then igniting black powder might well be a recipe for
disaster.  From what I've read people say it's far better to have your
igniter up at the opposite end of the propellant from the nozzle.

I'm not sure how well inhibited your grain would be with propellant just
pushed into a cardboard tube.  I think the thing that might save you is the
fact that it *is* just one long grain, so even if burning begins at the
ends and works its way up the outside between the propellant and the
cardboard tube, it might take long enough for enough of the outside surface
to start burning that by the time it does it's already over.  I recall
reading on one guy's website about his attempts to glue some cloth around
the outside of his grains to inhibit them, and it was harder to get true
inhibition than he'd thought.

Keep in mind that I haven't done anymore yet than mix some KN/sugar powder
up and burn it outside in a little aluminum foil bowl.  When I get my
hydraulic press built and set up for pressing fuel grains under several
tons of pressure, my current plan is to put a thin layer of epoxy onto the
outside of the fuel grain and vacuum-bag a cardboard tube, or else some
EPDM (if I find some, and if epoxy will stick to it) to the outside of it.

Jimmy, I've actually also given serious thought to rolling a paper liner
around a fuel grain in more or less exactly the same way you described on
one of your pages rolling paper tubes for rocket motor bodies.  Except I
might use finishing resin instead of wood glue, or not, it all depends how
it works out.  It all requires me to get my press built.

Seth


At 06:00 PM 9/2/2001, James Yawn wrote:
>Foy (et.al):  Following your lead, I attempted to create a motor similar to
>yours, but with an outside-inhibited grain and using 500 grams recrystallized
>KN/sucrose.  Your design will be hotter, but this one worked pretty well,
>suggesting that you are in the ballpark.
>
>Lots of pictures and details, including a brief video of the burn at:
>
>http://members.tripod.com/j_yawn/engine9-1a/index.htm
>
>My grain was 1-1/2 inch diameter by 12 inches long with 1/2 inch core.  Casing
>is 1-1/2 inch sch40 PVC with a clay nozzle, 1/2 inch throat.  It burned
>for 1.6
>seconds, creating quite a jet.  I have no instrumentation at present and
>so have
>no hard data except what the camera was able to capture.  But I have no doubt
>this motor would have propelled itself and a suitable airframe to some
>altitude.  What altitude?  I am not well-informed enough at the moment to even
>hazard a guess, but it did not cato so testing will continue.
>
>I hope you have had good success with yours, and look forward to hearing about
>it.
>
>Jimmy Yawn
>jyawn@sfcc.net
>
>
> > Subject: Re: [AR] questionable motor
> > Date: Fri, 31 Aug 2001 22:19:38 -0700
> > From: Jamie Morken <jmorken@HOME.COM>
> > To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
> > References: <20010901001428.14480.qmail@web5101.mail.yahoo.com>
> >      <3B905E9C.C11F26A0@sfcc.net> <001001c132a4$7f6f23e0$7d9b150c@foy>
> >
> > Hi all,
> >
> > >           All the motors I have fired so far are in a stand of very stout
> > > construction (overkill). The nozzle and case are restrianed. My main
> worry
> > > is the guages being rapidly scatered due to motor failure. A short .5 sec
> > > 400# is my goal for now.
> >
> > Is your casing is steel pipe?  What type of nozzle are you using and how is
> > it held in the casing?
> > If the answers are steel, steel, snap ring or bolts then I think it should
> > work fine!
> >
> > best regards,
> > Jamie Morken

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 7251 invoked from network); 3 Sep 2001 06:01:06 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 3 Sep 2001 06:01:06 -0000
Received: (qmail 29664 invoked by uid 50005); 3 Sep 2001 06:00:03 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.239491 secs); 03 Sep 2001 06:00:03 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 3 Sep 2001 06:00:02 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA08490; Sun, 2 Sep 2001 22:58:23 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 106214 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 3 Sep 2001 05:56:34          +0000
Received: from cablecom.laribay.net (cablecom.laribay.net [66.20.57.4]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA08470 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 2 Sep 2001 22:56:34 -0700
Received: from billbull (dial076.laribay.net [66.20.57.76]) by          cablecom.laribay.net (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id AAA18598 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 3 Sep 2001 00:38:12 -0500 (CDT)          (envelope-from bpbullock@laribay.net)
References:  <5.0.2.1.0.20010902194141.03271008@mail.earthlink.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <004801c1343d$69c126c0$4c391442@billbull>
Date:         Mon, 3 Sep 2001 00:57:49 -0500
Reply-To: "Bill Bullock" <bpbullock@LARIBAY.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Bill Bullock" <bpbullock@LARIBAY.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Propellent Musings
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Pierce:
    That's probably where I got confused. The Physics book I have been using
(which is quite old like myself) quotes:
gasoline =11,400 cal/g or 20,500 btu.lb; kerosene =11,200 cal/g or    20,000
btu/lb; Diesel fuel =10,500 cal/g or 9,000 btu/lb; and alcohol = 6,400 cal/g
or 11,500 btu/lb and I thought I had read somewhere that 6 oil was only
about 21,500 or maybe it was 22...memory is about as long as my hair anymore
(I'm mostly bald).
    The reason I was asking is this is some stuff I make from waste tire
rubber and have been looking for something it is good for except a
plasticizer for solid fuel grains. I guess my search is not over yet...
    Thanks for the help...appreciate it a lot.
Respectfully,
Bill
----- Original Message -----
From: Pierce Nichols <forkbomb@EARTHLINK.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Sunday, September 02, 2001 9:42 PM
Subject: Re: [AR] Propellent Musings


> At 04:17 PM 9/1/2001 -0500, Bill Bullock wrote:
> >     Pardon me for revealing my ignorance of liquid-fueled motor
> > requirements, but would something that is hydrocarbon-based, runs 38-42
> > API Gravity, is stable at atmospheric pressures and yields 22,500 BTU's
> > per pound be any good as a fuel?
>
>
>          Sounds like it might be, but plain old jet fuel (kerosene) gives
> you about 30K btu/lb.
>
>          -p
>
>
> Mars or Bust!
> www.marssociety.com
>
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 28744 invoked from network); 3 Sep 2001 06:18:41 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 3 Sep 2001 06:18:41 -0000
Received: (qmail 12034 invoked by uid 50005); 3 Sep 2001 06:17:01 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.599204 secs); 03 Sep 2001 06:17:01 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 3 Sep 2001 06:17:00 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA08621; Sun, 2 Sep 2001 23:15:40 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 106250 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 3 Sep 2001 06:14:18          +0000
Received: from cablecom.laribay.net (cablecom.laribay.net [66.20.57.4]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA08602 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 2 Sep 2001 23:14:18 -0700
Received: from billbull (dial076.laribay.net [66.20.57.76]) by          cablecom.laribay.net (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id AAA18772 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 3 Sep 2001 00:55:56 -0500 (CDT)          (envelope-from bpbullock@laribay.net)
References: <3B92446A.E4105FDC@sfcc.net>             <5.1.0.14.0.20010903012327.01c21238@hobbiton.shire.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <009701c1343f$e3771220$4c391442@billbull>
Date:         Mon, 3 Sep 2001 01:15:33 -0500
Reply-To: "Bill Bullock" <bpbullock@LARIBAY.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Bill Bullock" <bpbullock@LARIBAY.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] questionable motor]
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Jimmy:
    I also noticed what appeared to be sparks flying just after ignition .
But being an old muzzleloader shooter I just took it to be a couple of
grains of that cannon-grade corned powder you loaded it with. What's your
idea on it?
    If you are trying to get a faster ignition you might try making up some
flash powder and coating the surfaces you want to burn with that. Seems to
me it burns pretty fast.Just don't use too much.
Bill
----- Original Message -----
From: Seth Leigh <seth@PENGAR.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Monday, September 03, 2001 12:39 AM
Subject: Re: [AR] questionable motor]


> Jimmy, I think your test is pretty cool!
>
> I do have some comments though.  ;-)
>
> I may be wrong about the terminology, but doesn't a Bates grain
> configuration require multiple propellant segments?  Ie: if it doesn't
have
> multiple propellant segments, rather than being a Bates motor it's just a
> long, outside inhibited core-burner?  The segmentation of the Bates
design,
> as far as I've read, is supposed to keep the burn rate curve fairly flat,
> because having, say, 6 ends rather than two results in the propellant
> cylinder becoming shorter in length faster even as the surface area of the
> core increases.  The shorter length is supposed to counteract the increase
> in surface area that would occur in the core with just a single grain.
>
> Also, while watching your video I noticed a frame right after it ignited
> where you can see a couple of white streaks flying out of the motor.  It
> might be a good idea to figure out what it might have been, because from
> what I've read stuff lodging briefly in the nozzle throat will often CATO
> the motor, even if it would seem to us that it could only stick there for
> an instant before being blown out.
>
> I'm not sure what the others on the list will think about your idea of
> filling the core with blackpowder, even if it is slow
> burning.  ;-)  Putting a light dusting of bp dust in the core is one
thing,
> but loose bp chunks would be entirely something else.  The last think you
> want to do is fracture your propellant grain, because fractures can cause
> drastic increases in burning surface area.  Also, your fuse burning into
> the nozzle end and then igniting black powder might well be a recipe for
> disaster.  From what I've read people say it's far better to have your
> igniter up at the opposite end of the propellant from the nozzle.
>
> I'm not sure how well inhibited your grain would be with propellant just
> pushed into a cardboard tube.  I think the thing that might save you is
the
> fact that it *is* just one long grain, so even if burning begins at the
> ends and works its way up the outside between the propellant and the
> cardboard tube, it might take long enough for enough of the outside
surface
> to start burning that by the time it does it's already over.  I recall
> reading on one guy's website about his attempts to glue some cloth around
> the outside of his grains to inhibit them, and it was harder to get true
> inhibition than he'd thought.
>
> Keep in mind that I haven't done anymore yet than mix some KN/sugar powder
> up and burn it outside in a little aluminum foil bowl.  When I get my
> hydraulic press built and set up for pressing fuel grains under several
> tons of pressure, my current plan is to put a thin layer of epoxy onto the
> outside of the fuel grain and vacuum-bag a cardboard tube, or else some
> EPDM (if I find some, and if epoxy will stick to it) to the outside of it.
>
> Jimmy, I've actually also given serious thought to rolling a paper liner
> around a fuel grain in more or less exactly the same way you described on
> one of your pages rolling paper tubes for rocket motor bodies.  Except I
> might use finishing resin instead of wood glue, or not, it all depends how
> it works out.  It all requires me to get my press built.
>
> Seth
>
>
> At 06:00 PM 9/2/2001, James Yawn wrote:
> >Foy (et.al):  Following your lead, I attempted to create a motor similar
to
> >yours, but with an outside-inhibited grain and using 500 grams
recrystallized
> >KN/sucrose.  Your design will be hotter, but this one worked pretty well,
> >suggesting that you are in the ballpark.
> >
> >Lots of pictures and details, including a brief video of the burn at:
> >
> >http://members.tripod.com/j_yawn/engine9-1a/index.htm
> >
> >My grain was 1-1/2 inch diameter by 12 inches long with 1/2 inch core.
Casing
> >is 1-1/2 inch sch40 PVC with a clay nozzle, 1/2 inch throat.  It burned
> >for 1.6
> >seconds, creating quite a jet.  I have no instrumentation at present and
> >so have
> >no hard data except what the camera was able to capture.  But I have no
doubt
> >this motor would have propelled itself and a suitable airframe to some
> >altitude.  What altitude?  I am not well-informed enough at the moment to
even
> >hazard a guess, but it did not cato so testing will continue.
> >
> >I hope you have had good success with yours, and look forward to hearing
about
> >it.
> >
> >Jimmy Yawn
> >jyawn@sfcc.net
> >
> >
> > > Subject: Re: [AR] questionable motor
> > > Date: Fri, 31 Aug 2001 22:19:38 -0700
> > > From: Jamie Morken <jmorken@HOME.COM>
> > > To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
> > > References: <20010901001428.14480.qmail@web5101.mail.yahoo.com>
> > >      <3B905E9C.C11F26A0@sfcc.net> <001001c132a4$7f6f23e0$7d9b150c@foy>
> > >
> > > Hi all,
> > >
> > > >           All the motors I have fired so far are in a stand of very
stout
> > > > construction (overkill). The nozzle and case are restrianed. My main
> > worry
> > > > is the guages being rapidly scatered due to motor failure. A short
.5 sec
> > > > 400# is my goal for now.
> > >
> > > Is your casing is steel pipe?  What type of nozzle are you using and
how is
> > > it held in the casing?
> > > If the answers are steel, steel, snap ring or bolts then I think it
should
> > > work fine!
> > >
> > > best regards,
> > > Jamie Morken
>
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 14218 invoked from network); 3 Sep 2001 06:33:40 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 3 Sep 2001 06:33:40 -0000
Received: (qmail 7378 invoked by uid 50005); 3 Sep 2001 06:34:09 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpa with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.514108 secs); 03 Sep 2001 06:34:09 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 3 Sep 2001 06:34:08 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA08714; Sun, 2 Sep 2001 23:31:39 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 106273 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 3 Sep 2001 06:30:17          +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (oe52.law12.hotmail.com [64.4.18.41]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA08695 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun,          2 Sep 2001 23:30:16 -0700
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Sun,          2 Sep 2001 23:29:46 -0700
X-Originating-IP: [24.29.188.254]
References: <OE76HwltsKTs65IYN1F000026e8@hotmail.com>             <5.1.0.14.0.20010902213514.01c0b008@hobbiton.shire.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 03 Sep 2001 06:29:46.0730 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[D3664CA0:01C13441]
Message-ID:  <OE52FCHOzyfyz5b6KZm00001cd7@hotmail.com>
Date:         Mon, 3 Sep 2001 01:28:51 -0500
Reply-To: "Mark Kruep" <mkruep@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Mark Kruep" <mkruep@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Electric matches
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

The conductive primer you speak of is quite easily made at home and is much
cheaper as a do it yourself deal. Disclaimer, this is a second hand recipe I
received. I have used it without problem, but want it to be known I make no
guarantees and accept no responsibility for someone else's mistakes/injuries
as a result of this information. That said, get some graphite powder (like
that used to lubricate locks), some nitrocellulose laquer (nitrate dope
available at most hobby stores that carry RC Planes) and mix a small
quantity to a honey like consistency. I can't remember the exact ratio of
graphite to laquer but it isn't real hard to guesstimate buy look and
consistency. Voila, conductive primer. Now all you need is a small lightning
bolt to fire it :-). I have used acetone to thin it down, but this was my
own little twist I added and I don't know if this can cause any long term
issues with the mix although, if memory serves, there's already acetone in
the laquer....I think.??


Mark



----- Original Message -----
From: "Seth Leigh" <seth@PENGAR.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Sunday, September 02, 2001 8:44 PM
Subject: Re: [AR] Electric matches


> I am experimenting with both nichrome and with igniters that don't have
any
> nichrome, just a conductive pyrogen mix.  I don't know the formula, I
> bought the kit from Firefox (www.firefox-fx.com).  I've been wanting to do
> my experiments with igniters a few weeks back but wasn't able to get
around
> to it, but today I mixed up the materials from Firefox with acetone in the
> small glass jar the provide (1 or 2 fluid ounces) and made my first
igniter.
>
> The first igniter was just two pieces of whire about 6" long with both
ends
> stripped about 1/3".  I put the ends together on one side with the wire
> ends separated by roughly .5 mm.  I dipped this once into the black
pyrogen
> formula from Firefox, let it dry for a minute or so, and then dipped it
> into the nitrocellulose laquer that you make in the very small plastic
> bottle from Firefox.  It dried for 10 minutes or so (given that the only
> wetness is from acetone, I am sure it was completely dried in a minute or
> two).  I then touched both ends to a 9 volt battery and it instantly went
> off.  It created an instant small flash with a few sparks.  I liked
> it.  ;-)  The 9 volt battery was by no means new, as I had already used it
> to heat up two or three nichrome wire-wrap "igniters" to red-hot which I
> had made a couple weeks ago with no pyrogen on them.
>
> Tomorrow I will make a bunch more igniters with the Firefox formula.  I
> intend to make some with nichrome and without, and I intend to test them
> with batteries down to the size of a single 1.5 v AA, and see if they will
> ignite reliably.  I also wish to test them with fairly small capacitors to
> see if a full-on discharge of the capacitor across the igniter will set it
> off reliably.  That's what I'd like to use for my onboard ejection charge
> ignition if possible, avoiding a full battery's weight.
>
> I will also (at long last) be able to perform my experiment with smokeless
> powder contained in my modified berdan-primed aluminum .44 magnum
> casing.  I've been wanting to try this experiment for weeks now, but I
> hadn't made the igniters and so I didn't have what I needed for the test.
>
> I'll take pictures with my video camera and put some stills up on a web
page.
>
> Seth
>
>
> At 06:36 PM 9/2/2001, Emil Johnsen wrote:
> >>  Any simple process/recipie for making electric matches for ejection
> >>charges? I have read about glue for plastic and black powder blended and
> >>with the use of nicrome wire. Anyone tried it? Otherwise i guess i have
> >>some field study to do... :-) I will use it in conjunction with the RDAS
> >>compact flight
> >
> >This page shows a good way to make electric matches:
> >http://www.info-central.org/support_igniters.shtml
> >
> >I use black powder and glue for ignitors, but it's not needed to ignite
an
> >ejection charge, and it is definelty not a good thing inside an airframe.
> >The nicrome alone will ignite the ejection charge.
> >
> >>  computer. Diameter for nicrome wire, 0,5 mm? Battery voltage is
> >>approximatly 9 volt, for 100ms.
> >
> >To thick. I use 0.2mm nichrome to make ignitors, when using a short wire
> >and keeping the nichrome as short as possible they will usualy fire on a
> >new 9v battery. I use 12v car battery when using theese to start rockets,
> >much less and they won't fire reliably.
> >
> >I don't know what the ideal diameter for low current igniters would be,
> >0.05-0.1mm seems like a good palce to start. Unfortuenatly I'v not been
> >able to find a source for nichrome wire this thin. Anyone know a source?
> >
> >
> >Emil
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 1089 invoked from network); 3 Sep 2001 06:40:26 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 3 Sep 2001 06:40:26 -0000
Received: (qmail 18554 invoked by uid 50005); 3 Sep 2001 06:38:46 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.446602 secs); 03 Sep 2001 06:38:46 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 3 Sep 2001 06:38:45 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA08788; Sun, 2 Sep 2001 23:37:48 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 106297 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 3 Sep 2001 06:36:26          +0000
Received: from femail11.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail11.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.0.95.107]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA08772          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 2 Sep 2001 23:36:26 -0700
Received: from hal2001 ([24.77.53.16]) by femail11.sdc1.sfba.home.com          (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20 201-229-121-120-20010223) with SMTP id          <20010903063625.SQLJ2471.femail11.sdc1.sfba.home.com@hal2001> for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 2 Sep 2001 23:36:25 -0700
References:  <5.0.2.1.0.20010902194141.03271008@mail.earthlink.net>              <004801c1343d$69c126c0$4c391442@billbull>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <003301c13441$96e82780$0400a8c0@hatjs>
Date:         Sun, 2 Sep 2001 23:28:04 -0700
Reply-To: "Jamie Morken" <jmorken@HOME.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jamie Morken" <jmorken@HOME.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Propellent Musings
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Hi all,

>     The reason I was asking is this is some stuff I make from waste tire
> rubber and have been looking for something it is good for except a
> plasticizer for solid fuel grains. I guess my search is not over yet...

Could you give a bit more detail on how you use the tires for plasticizer?

best regards,
Jamie

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 21344 invoked from network); 3 Sep 2001 07:02:38 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 3 Sep 2001 07:02:38 -0000
Received: (qmail 13758 invoked by uid 50005); 3 Sep 2001 07:03:11 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpb with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.189799 secs); 03 Sep 2001 07:03:11 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 3 Sep 2001 07:03:10 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA08931; Sun, 2 Sep 2001 23:55:01 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 106336 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 3 Sep 2001 06:53:34          +0000
Received: from wrench.toolcity.net (root@wrench.toolcity.net [208.0.188.2]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA08912 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 2 Sep 2001 23:53:34 -0700
Received: from [208.22.189.87]          (dap-208-22-189-87.meadville-tnt-0.pa.toolcity.net [208.22.189.87])          by wrench.toolcity.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id CAA17435; Mon, 3          Sep 2001 02:53:27 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <v01510101b7b8e5022a84@[208.22.189.87]>
Date:         Mon, 3 Sep 2001 02:55:50 -0500
Reply-To: "al bradley" <abradley@TOOLCITY.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "al bradley" <abradley@TOOLCITY.NET>
Subject:      [AR] 2bates grain -- was -- Re: [AR] questionable motor]
Comments: To: Seth Leigh <seth@PENGAR.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

>Jimmy, I think your test is pretty cool!
>
>I do have some comments though.  ;-)
>
>I may be wrong about the terminology, but doesn't a Bates grain
>configuration require multiple propellant segments?  Ie: if it doesn't have
>multiple propellant segments, rather than being a Bates motor it's just a
>long, outside inhibited core-burner?

Well correct me if I am wrong -- past postings on the list have referred to
the Bates grain as having a specific length to diameter ratio, and are
hollow cored. Whether you have 1 or more of these in your rocket does not
make them more or less Bates grains. They are constructed so that they burn
in the core and on the ends simultaneously and produce a generally linear
burn. The outside of the grain never burns until last due to one or another
methods of inhibition.

Please someone, catch me up here.

best
al bradley

------------------------------------------------------------------
Can you live Life with this?: "Unless there is a law, an agreement, or a
long-standing custom, No one `Deserves' Anything -- Either Good or Bad!"

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 10280 invoked from network); 3 Sep 2001 07:11:40 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 3 Sep 2001 07:11:40 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 28058 invoked by uid 50005); 3 Sep 2001 07:10:00 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.491925 secs); 03 Sep 2001 07:10:00 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 3 Sep 2001 07:09:59 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA09022; Mon, 3 Sep 2001 00:08:54 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 106356 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 3 Sep 2001 07:07:31          +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (f199.law15.hotmail.com [64.4.23.199]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA09007 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Mon, 3 Sep 2001 00:07:31 -0700
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Mon,          3 Sep 2001 00:07:00 -0700
Received: from 193.121.251.246 by lw15fd.law15.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Mon,          03 Sep 2001 07:07:00 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [193.121.251.246]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 03 Sep 2001 07:07:00.0755 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[06FB7630:01C13447]
Message-ID:  <F199uk8cobC32qU4Z5f00002b5d@hotmail.com>
Date:         Mon, 3 Sep 2001 07:07:31 +0000
Reply-To: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] liquids question: alcohol/N2O propellant feeding
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

HS wrote:

>The fact that hypergolics ignite on
>contact is an important safety advantage, because it means they *cannot*
>form explosive mixtures, which is all too easy with non-hypergolics.  An
>immediate fire is much preferable to a delayed explosion.

Reminds me of insidious alcohol/H2O2 mixtures...

JD

_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 23621 invoked from network); 3 Sep 2001 07:17:19 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 3 Sep 2001 07:17:19 -0000
Received: (qmail 31060 invoked by uid 50005); 3 Sep 2001 07:15:38 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.466228 secs); 03 Sep 2001 07:15:38 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 3 Sep 2001 07:15:37 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA09071; Mon, 3 Sep 2001 00:13:01 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 106367 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 3 Sep 2001 07:11:39          +0000
Received: from albqpop1.albq.uswest.net (albqpop1.albq.uswest.net          [207.108.240.1]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id AAA09040          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 3 Sep 2001 00:10:19 -0700
Received: (qmail 44568 invoked by alias); 3 Sep 2001 07:09:47 -0000
Delivered-To: fixup-AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU@fixme
Received: (qmail 44563 invoked by uid 0); 3 Sep 2001 07:09:47 -0000
Received: from cc898542-a.prdise1.nm.home.com (HELO cc898542a) (65.7.151.152)          by albqpop1.albq.uswest.net with SMTP; 3 Sep 2001 07:09:47 -0000
References: <3B92446A.E4105FDC@sfcc.net>                        <5.1.0.14.0.20010903012327.01c21238@hobbiton.shire.net>             <009701c1343f$e3771220$4c391442@billbull>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <011201c13447$ef9f4740$0100a8c0@prdise1.nm.home.com>
Date:         Mon, 3 Sep 2001 01:13:30 -0600
Reply-To: "Pax" <darkspunge@USWEST.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Pax" <darkspunge@USWEST.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] questionable motor]
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

I don't see flash helping at all. It will burn too quickie to do much good
with ignition. Plus, the stuff is not the safest thing in the world to make.
Depending on how hot your KP and Al is just a single gram unconfined will do
a number on any limbs that happen to be close in the event of an accidental
ignition. Just burns too fast to be of any help. Unless you try using larger
Al particle size and bind it with plenty of Nc laquor or some such.

Paxton

----- Original Message -----
From: "Bill Bullock" <bpbullock@LARIBAY.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Monday, September 03, 2001 12:15 AM
Subject: Re: [AR] questionable motor]


> Jimmy:
>     I also noticed what appeared to be sparks flying just after ignition .
> But being an old muzzleloader shooter I just took it to be a couple of
> grains of that cannon-grade corned powder you loaded it with. What's your
> idea on it?
>     If you are trying to get a faster ignition you might try making up
some
> flash powder and coating the surfaces you want to burn with that. Seems to
> me it burns pretty fast.Just don't use too much.
> Bill
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Seth Leigh <seth@PENGAR.COM>
> To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
> Sent: Monday, September 03, 2001 12:39 AM
> Subject: Re: [AR] questionable motor]
>
>
> > Jimmy, I think your test is pretty cool!
> >
> > I do have some comments though.  ;-)
> >
> > I may be wrong about the terminology, but doesn't a Bates grain
> > configuration require multiple propellant segments?  Ie: if it doesn't
> have
> > multiple propellant segments, rather than being a Bates motor it's just
a
> > long, outside inhibited core-burner?  The segmentation of the Bates
> design,
> > as far as I've read, is supposed to keep the burn rate curve fairly
flat,
> > because having, say, 6 ends rather than two results in the propellant
> > cylinder becoming shorter in length faster even as the surface area of
the
> > core increases.  The shorter length is supposed to counteract the
increase
> > in surface area that would occur in the core with just a single grain.
> >
> > Also, while watching your video I noticed a frame right after it ignited
> > where you can see a couple of white streaks flying out of the motor.  It
> > might be a good idea to figure out what it might have been, because from
> > what I've read stuff lodging briefly in the nozzle throat will often
CATO
> > the motor, even if it would seem to us that it could only stick there
for
> > an instant before being blown out.
> >
> > I'm not sure what the others on the list will think about your idea of
> > filling the core with blackpowder, even if it is slow
> > burning.  ;-)  Putting a light dusting of bp dust in the core is one
> thing,
> > but loose bp chunks would be entirely something else.  The last think
you
> > want to do is fracture your propellant grain, because fractures can
cause
> > drastic increases in burning surface area.  Also, your fuse burning into
> > the nozzle end and then igniting black powder might well be a recipe for
> > disaster.  From what I've read people say it's far better to have your
> > igniter up at the opposite end of the propellant from the nozzle.
> >
> > I'm not sure how well inhibited your grain would be with propellant just
> > pushed into a cardboard tube.  I think the thing that might save you is
> the
> > fact that it *is* just one long grain, so even if burning begins at the
> > ends and works its way up the outside between the propellant and the
> > cardboard tube, it might take long enough for enough of the outside
> surface
> > to start burning that by the time it does it's already over.  I recall
> > reading on one guy's website about his attempts to glue some cloth
around
> > the outside of his grains to inhibit them, and it was harder to get true
> > inhibition than he'd thought.
> >
> > Keep in mind that I haven't done anymore yet than mix some KN/sugar
powder
> > up and burn it outside in a little aluminum foil bowl.  When I get my
> > hydraulic press built and set up for pressing fuel grains under several
> > tons of pressure, my current plan is to put a thin layer of epoxy onto
the
> > outside of the fuel grain and vacuum-bag a cardboard tube, or else some
> > EPDM (if I find some, and if epoxy will stick to it) to the outside of
it.
> >
> > Jimmy, I've actually also given serious thought to rolling a paper liner
> > around a fuel grain in more or less exactly the same way you described
on
> > one of your pages rolling paper tubes for rocket motor bodies.  Except I
> > might use finishing resin instead of wood glue, or not, it all depends
how
> > it works out.  It all requires me to get my press built.
> >
> > Seth
> >
> >
> > At 06:00 PM 9/2/2001, James Yawn wrote:
> > >Foy (et.al):  Following your lead, I attempted to create a motor
similar
> to
> > >yours, but with an outside-inhibited grain and using 500 grams
> recrystallized
> > >KN/sucrose.  Your design will be hotter, but this one worked pretty
well,
> > >suggesting that you are in the ballpark.
> > >
> > >Lots of pictures and details, including a brief video of the burn at:
> > >
> > >http://members.tripod.com/j_yawn/engine9-1a/index.htm
> > >
> > >My grain was 1-1/2 inch diameter by 12 inches long with 1/2 inch core.
> Casing
> > >is 1-1/2 inch sch40 PVC with a clay nozzle, 1/2 inch throat.  It burned
> > >for 1.6
> > >seconds, creating quite a jet.  I have no instrumentation at present
and
> > >so have
> > >no hard data except what the camera was able to capture.  But I have no
> doubt
> > >this motor would have propelled itself and a suitable airframe to some
> > >altitude.  What altitude?  I am not well-informed enough at the moment
to
> even
> > >hazard a guess, but it did not cato so testing will continue.
> > >
> > >I hope you have had good success with yours, and look forward to
hearing
> about
> > >it.
> > >
> > >Jimmy Yawn
> > >jyawn@sfcc.net
> > >
> > >
> > > > Subject: Re: [AR] questionable motor
> > > > Date: Fri, 31 Aug 2001 22:19:38 -0700
> > > > From: Jamie Morken <jmorken@HOME.COM>
> > > > To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
> > > > References: <20010901001428.14480.qmail@web5101.mail.yahoo.com>
> > > >      <3B905E9C.C11F26A0@sfcc.net>
<001001c132a4$7f6f23e0$7d9b150c@foy>
> > > >
> > > > Hi all,
> > > >
> > > > >           All the motors I have fired so far are in a stand of
very
> stout
> > > > > construction (overkill). The nozzle and case are restrianed. My
main
> > > worry
> > > > > is the guages being rapidly scatered due to motor failure. A short
> .5 sec
> > > > > 400# is my goal for now.
> > > >
> > > > Is your casing is steel pipe?  What type of nozzle are you using and
> how is
> > > > it held in the casing?
> > > > If the answers are steel, steel, snap ring or bolts then I think it
> should
> > > > work fine!
> > > >
> > > > best regards,
> > > > Jamie Morken
> >
> >
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 28028 invoked from network); 3 Sep 2001 07:19:11 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 3 Sep 2001 07:19:11 -0000
Received: (qmail 3655 invoked by uid 50005); 3 Sep 2001 07:18:07 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.18021 secs); 03 Sep 2001 07:18:07 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 3 Sep 2001 07:18:06 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA09109; Mon, 3 Sep 2001 00:17:04 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 106378 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 3 Sep 2001 07:15:43          +0000
Received: from cablecom.laribay.net (cablecom.laribay.net [66.20.57.4]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA09065 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 3 Sep 2001 00:12:18 -0700
Received: from billbull (dial076.laribay.net [66.20.57.76]) by          cablecom.laribay.net (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id BAA19095 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 3 Sep 2001 01:53:57 -0500 (CDT)          (envelope-from bpbullock@laribay.net)
References:  <5.0.2.1.0.20010902194141.03271008@mail.earthlink.net>                         <004801c1343d$69c126c0$4c391442@billbull>              <003301c13441$96e82780$0400a8c0@hatjs>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <001b01c13447$fe5fd420$4c391442@billbull>
Date:         Mon, 3 Sep 2001 02:13:34 -0500
Reply-To: "Bill Bullock" <bpbullock@LARIBAY.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Bill Bullock" <bpbullock@LARIBAY.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Propellent Musings
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

    Well, I either work with "crumb rubber" on sample-size lots or I dip
whole tires in liquid nitrogen and crush them into something that looks like
black corn meal. Then I put them through my machine and subject them to a
whole slew of catalysts and heat and etc... which breaks them down into
their molecular components and then re-arranges these components into some
rather but very stable short-chain hydrocarbon molecules which I the
fractionally condense and recover. Works great but smells somewhat. Most
peculiar is that the lab reports say that this stuff has about the same btu
values as #6 Fuel Oil but the consistency of a gasoline/Diesel blend and
burns like crazy. Also burns very clean. A major by-product is a gas that
has butane and propane isomers and about 50-80% hydrogen. The BTU value of
this stuff is about 1800-2200 btu/cubic foot. Methane is about 900 I think,
but don't quote me on that.
    I have a patent pending now, or so the patent attorney tells me. Am
building the first production machine but am still looking for advantageous
markets.
Bill
----- Original Message -----
From: Jamie Morken <jmorken@HOME.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Monday, September 03, 2001 1:28 AM
Subject: Re: [AR] Propellent Musings


> Hi all,
>
> >     The reason I was asking is this is some stuff I make from waste tire
> > rubber and have been looking for something it is good for except a
> > plasticizer for solid fuel grains. I guess my search is not over yet...
>
> Could you give a bit more detail on how you use the tires for plasticizer?
>
> best regards,
> Jamie
>
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 17470 invoked from network); 3 Sep 2001 07:42:49 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 3 Sep 2001 07:42:49 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 8668 invoked by uid 50005); 3 Sep 2001 07:43:19 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpa with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.259987 secs); 03 Sep 2001 07:43:19 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 3 Sep 2001 07:43:18 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA09259; Mon, 3 Sep 2001 00:36:57 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 106421 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 3 Sep 2001 07:35:35          +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (f141.law15.hotmail.com [64.4.23.141]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA09240 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Mon, 3 Sep 2001 00:35:35 -0700
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Mon,          3 Sep 2001 00:35:04 -0700
Received: from 193.121.251.246 by lw15fd.law15.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Mon,          03 Sep 2001 07:35:04 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [193.121.251.246]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 03 Sep 2001 07:35:04.0995 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[F2DE1730:01C1344A]
Message-ID:  <F141omRXf2LTrpwACkW00002e54@hotmail.com>
Date:         Mon, 3 Sep 2001 07:35:35 +0000
Reply-To: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Propellent Musings
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Quote BB:

>The Physics book I have been using quotes:
>gasoline =11,400 cal/g; kerosene =11,200 cal/g; Diesel fuel =10,500 cal/g
>and alcohol = 6,400 cal/g...

Question; is there a mathematical relationship between heat of combustion
(kJ/kg) and Isp?

Concerning the wisdom of using molten AN as a oxidizer, 60 % O in it
compares poorly with 90 % H2O2 which contains 84.7 % O or WFNA which has
76.2 % O in it...The latter do not require heating and cannot solidify.
Well, ie chemically speaking. Did I overlook something here?

jd

_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 15350 invoked from network); 3 Sep 2001 08:10:52 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 3 Sep 2001 08:10:52 -0000
Received: (qmail 3105 invoked by uid 50005); 3 Sep 2001 08:09:47 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.41485 secs); 03 Sep 2001 08:09:47 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 3 Sep 2001 08:09:46 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA09291; Mon, 3 Sep 2001 00:41:00 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 106428 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 3 Sep 2001 07:39:39          +0000
Received: from cablecom.laribay.net (cablecom.laribay.net [66.20.57.4]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA09255 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 3 Sep 2001 00:36:38 -0700
Received: from billbull (dial105.laribay.net [66.20.57.105]) by          cablecom.laribay.net (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id CAA19341 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 3 Sep 2001 02:18:15 -0500 (CDT)          (envelope-from bpbullock@laribay.net)
References: <3B92446A.E4105FDC@sfcc.net>                                  <5.1.0.14.0.20010903012327.01c21238@hobbiton.shire.net>                       <009701c1343f$e3771220$4c391442@billbull>             <011201c13447$ef9f4740$0100a8c0@prdise1.nm.home.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <002401c1344b$63de7740$69391442@billbull>
Date:         Mon, 3 Sep 2001 02:36:06 -0500
Reply-To: "Bill Bullock" <bpbullock@LARIBAY.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Bill Bullock" <bpbullock@LARIBAY.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] questionable motor]
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Pax:
    I usually blend about 1.5-3.0% household borax into the flash powder to
suppress the burn rate and then suspend the blend in bulls-eye powder
dissolved in acetone and paint it onto whatever surface I want to burn. The
suppressed "flash" in a heavy coating of nitro. glue seems to me to ignite
pretty well in most cases.  Most of the time instead of using an igniter I
imbed the nicad wire onto the surface I want ignited and punch her off from
there. See what happens when you are isolated from the rest of the
fraternity for about 35 years...you develop different ways to do things.
Bill
----- Original Message -----
From: Pax <darkspunge@USWEST.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Monday, September 03, 2001 2:13 AM
Subject: Re: [AR] questionable motor]


> I don't see flash helping at all. It will burn too quickie to do much good
> with ignition. Plus, the stuff is not the safest thing in the world to
make.
> Depending on how hot your KP and Al is just a single gram unconfined will
do
> a number on any limbs that happen to be close in the event of an
accidental
> ignition. Just burns too fast to be of any help. Unless you try using
larger
> Al particle size and bind it with plenty of Nc laquor or some such.
>
> Paxton
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Bill Bullock" <bpbullock@LARIBAY.NET>
> To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
> Sent: Monday, September 03, 2001 12:15 AM
> Subject: Re: [AR] questionable motor]
>
>
> > Jimmy:
> >     I also noticed what appeared to be sparks flying just after ignition
.
> > But being an old muzzleloader shooter I just took it to be a couple of
> > grains of that cannon-grade corned powder you loaded it with. What's
your
> > idea on it?
> >     If you are trying to get a faster ignition you might try making up
> some
> > flash powder and coating the surfaces you want to burn with that. Seems
to
> > me it burns pretty fast.Just don't use too much.
> > Bill

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 15668 invoked from network); 3 Sep 2001 08:11:01 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 3 Sep 2001 08:11:01 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 3250 invoked by uid 50005); 3 Sep 2001 08:09:56 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.22741 secs); 03 Sep 2001 08:09:57 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 3 Sep 2001 08:09:56 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA09372; Mon, 3 Sep 2001 00:53:31 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 106447 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 3 Sep 2001 07:51:59          +0000
Received: from grucom2.gru.net (grucom2.gru.net [209.251.129.7]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA09352 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon,          3 Sep 2001 00:51:58 -0700
Received: from [209.251.150.189] by grucom2.sfcc.net (NTMail          6.04.0010/NU4112.00.db1c8a4b) with ESMTP id jhluiaaa for          AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 3 Sep 2001 03:51:51 -0400
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (Win95; I)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <3B92446A.E4105FDC@sfcc.net>            <5.1.0.14.0.20010903012327.01c21238@hobbiton.shire.net>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B933708.F357CA6B@sfcc.net>
Date:         Mon, 3 Sep 2001 03:53:45 -0400
Reply-To: "James Yawn" <jyawn@SFCC.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "James Yawn" <jyawn@SFCC.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] questionable motor]
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Seth:  Thanks for looking at my stuff, and especially for the correction:

Seth Leigh wrote:

>I may be wrong about the terminology, but doesn't a Bates grain
>configuration require multiple propellant segments?  Ie: if it doesn't have
>multiple propellant segments, rather than being a Bates motor it's just a
>long, outside inhibited core-burner?

Jimmy Yawn wrote:

I think you are right.  I was wondering if I were using the term "Bates grain"
correctly, and believe I have been using it too generally.  Who was/is Bates,
anyway?  I would like to see some of this person's work - such a clever idea!

>I'm not sure what the others on the list will think about your idea of
>filling the core with blackpowder, even if it is slow
>burning.  ;-)

I guess I am innured.  Having spent much of my adolescence making bottle rockets
from scratch, most of my rockets have contained only black powder, and the majority
of them did not blow up :)  BP conveys flame better than anything else I have
tried, and since I have had difficulty getting quick, consistent ignition without
it, BP is a godsend.  Irregular ignition can also be dangerous - I have had rockets
cough themselves free of their launchers, start to fall, then ignite properly,
flying in an unplanned direction like a... well, like a rocket.  Often with a
pyrotechnic charge on top.  Life gets too interesting when these things happen.
Thus I consider sufficient BP priming to be a safety feature.

But I did have qualms about loading the whole core of this one with BP, and so used
only about a gram, which is not enough IMHO to damage a stout PVC case or a sturdy
candy grain, but enough to fill the case with a hot, oxygen-rich flame to ensure
that the whole grain ignites.

A compromise which I have tried a couple of times in the past with good results, is
to use quickmatch to convey the flame from the nozzle to the head-end.  Since
quickmatch burns at over 100 feet per second, one could place an electric ignitor
at the nozzle and still achieve effective head-end ignition.  It would leave a thin
cotton string and a paper sleeve to be blown out the nozzle, and I don't know how
significant that would be.  Or, since the match is constricted by the core, perhaps
the paper sleeve would be unnecessary.  Soon as I find my gravy separator, I will
make some more match and try it again.

>Also, while watching your video I noticed a frame right after it ignited
>where you can see a couple of white streaks flying out of the motor.

You have good eyes!  I noticed that too, but only after editing the video for the
umpteenth time.  Since it was at the beginning of the burn, I assumed them to be
bits of fuse, chunks of burning black powder, or perhaps pieces of the aluminum
nozzle-seal which would have been opening at about that time.

>my current plan is to put a thin layer of epoxy onto the
>outside of the fuel grain and vacuum-bag a cardboard tube, or else some
>EPDM (if I find some, and if epoxy will stick to it) to the outside of it.

Sounds like a good plan.  I don't know about EPDM, but epoxy will stick to
KN/sucrose, provided that you get the glue on while the candy is dry.  Once it gets
damp and sticky, I don't think it will bond well.  I have used it to case-bond
grains and it worked well, but I made a point of keeping the candy warm until
everything was ready and the epoxy mixed.

>I'm not sure how well inhibited your grain would be with propellant just
>pushed into a cardboard tube.

I wondered about this too, and this engine was, in part, a test of raw paper
bonding.  Previously, I had bonded my core-burning grains with epoxy - it worked
fine, but was a lot of trouble.  Recently, I noticed that recrystallized KN/sucrose
sticks very well to many things, especially paper.  Found this out when I was
wanting to make some 3/4 inch diameter cylinders, so I dropped warm candy into a
paper tube, pressed it lightly with a dowel, and tried to push it out.  It wouldn't
budge.  Tried it again with PVC.  Again it wouldn't budge.  A week later I finally
broke the PVC-cased slug loose by pressing on it with all my strength (several
pounds! :)  Apparently it does not shrink a lot upon cooling.  So I wanted to see
if warm-pressing in paper would do the trick, and in this case (and in several
smaller engines) it seems to have worked.  True, in this test the paper tube is
burned away near the nozzle, but I think that is from other causes.  I agree that
paper bonding is risky - if I were making a large, important, or expensive rocket,
I would want some  insurance and would use epoxy, silicone, furnace cement or some
other reliable inhibitor.

Thanks again for your interest - I will take your cautions to heart, and perhaps be
more conservative with my next test.  Or maybe more radical, you never know. :)

I look forward to hearing the progress of your work - I would like to try the press
approach myself.

Jimmy Yawn
jyawn@sfcc.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 6025 invoked from network); 3 Sep 2001 09:52:29 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 3 Sep 2001 09:52:29 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 5818 invoked by uid 50005); 3 Sep 2001 09:53:00 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpb with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.146113 secs); 03 Sep 2001 09:53:00 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 3 Sep 2001 09:53:00 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id CAA09634; Mon, 3 Sep 2001 02:16:09 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 106486 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 3 Sep 2001 09:14:44          +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (f99.law15.hotmail.com [64.4.23.99]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id CAA09611 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Mon,          3 Sep 2001 02:13:58 -0700
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Mon,          3 Sep 2001 02:13:27 -0700
Received: from 193.121.251.246 by lw15fd.law15.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Mon,          03 Sep 2001 09:13:27 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [193.121.251.246]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 03 Sep 2001 09:13:27.0885 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[B1439FD0:01C13458]
Message-ID:  <F99kH2i8OARrIHu1ZuS00003265@hotmail.com>
Date:         Mon, 3 Sep 2001 09:14:44 +0000
Reply-To: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      [AR] explosion diagrams
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Browsing for data if N2O can be safely used as a propellant gas for H2O2(in
a recent thread; not that I particularly fancy this idea but for the heck of
it) I came across this URL with many beautiful graphs...amongst which H2O2
and N2O. Can they be of any use in rocketry?

http://www.galcit.caltech.edu/~jeshep/asci/www/muller/hedm/nm/

For starters, I do not understand the density number in the initial
condition, namely 45.59 g/cc which seems unlikely high if it is  specific
gravity.

jd




_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 19211 invoked from network); 3 Sep 2001 10:47:41 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 3 Sep 2001 10:47:41 -0000
Received: (qmail 27804 invoked by uid 50005); 3 Sep 2001 10:46:00 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.509021 secs); 03 Sep 2001 10:46:00 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 3 Sep 2001 10:45:59 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id DAA09911; Mon, 3 Sep 2001 03:27:15 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 106537 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 3 Sep 2001 10:25:35          +0000
Received: from mta05.mail.mel.aone.net.au (mta05.mail.au.uu.net [203.2.192.85])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id DAA09896 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 3 Sep 2001 03:25:34 -0700
Received: from unknown ([63.34.213.4]) by mta05.mail.mel.aone.net.au with SMTP          id <20010903102530.VGXH7694.mta05.mail.mel.aone.net.au@unknown> for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 3 Sep 2001 20:25:30 +1000
References: Conversation <F141omRXf2LTrpwACkW00002e54@hotmail.com> with last            message <F141omRXf2LTrpwACkW00002e54@hotmail.com>
Priority: Normal
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Priority: 3
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	X-MAPIextension=.TXT;
	charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>
Date:         Mon, 3 Sep 2001 10:25:35 +0000
Reply-To: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Propellent Musings
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <F141omRXf2LTrpwACkW00002e54@hotmail.com>

----------
> Quote BB:
>
> >The Physics book I have been using quotes:
> >gasoline =11,400 cal/g; kerosene =11,200 cal/g; Diesel fuel =10,500 cal/g
> >and alcohol = 6,400 cal/g...
>
> Question; is there a mathematical relationship between heat of combustion
> (kJ/kg) and Isp?

Ah, memories of a long running debate resurface:-(

There can be a correlation but it's by no means law especially when metals
are involved. Isp relies on both temp and MW differential - or to use a
more correct term: "Density differential" as its main controlling factors
with the later being the most important. It's basically a measure of the
*kinetic* energy the propellant produces per given weight, not the thermal
output. Propellants rich in H or other low MW elements or compounds will
generally produce higher Isps per unit heat released. Propellants with a
high difference in electronegativity (between O&F) will produce lots of
heat which *MAY* be converted into kinetic energy (ala propellants based on
gaseous elements H,N,O,Cl,F,He etc and C if oxidised to CO or CO2) and also
may not (eg. Metals). The conversion from heat into kinetic energy is
always an endothermic one (energy has to come from somewhere) and in this
case (rocket propellant) we're basically trying to liberate our internal
chemical heat energy into mechanical work. Fuels and oxidisers with low
differences in EN within their own bonds will generally yield lower
densities for each given state (phase), BUT the EN differences within these
bonds must be less than that of the primary reactant or they simply won't
react.

Troy.


>
> Concerning the wisdom of using molten AN as a oxidizer, 60 % O in it
> compares poorly with 90 % H2O2 which contains 84.7 % O or WFNA which has
> 76.2 % O in it...The latter do not require heating and cannot solidify.
> Well, ie chemically speaking. Did I overlook something here?

Ah, those figures can be a bit misleading. What you require is the
"available O" for each oxidizer and that will change depending on the
reactivity of the fuel. Won't change much for all the hydrocarbons but will
if metals are to be introduced. This is not coming from a pure Isp or
performance perspective through, let me make that quite clear. As mentioned
above, other factors require consideration.

Troy.

>
> jd
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 2105 invoked from network); 3 Sep 2001 13:14:03 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 3 Sep 2001 13:14:03 -0000
Received: (qmail 11734 invoked by uid 50005); 3 Sep 2001 13:12:20 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.77774 secs); 03 Sep 2001 13:12:20 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 3 Sep 2001 13:12:18 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA10574; Mon, 3 Sep 2001 06:10:24 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 106634 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 3 Sep 2001 13:08:49          +0000
Received: from mta02.mail.mel.aone.net.au (mta02.mail.au.uu.net [203.2.192.82])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA10553 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 3 Sep 2001 06:08:48 -0700
Received: from unknown ([63.34.220.31]) by mta02.mail.mel.aone.net.au with SMTP          id <20010903130845.YLBG22650.mta02.mail.mel.aone.net.au@unknown> for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 3 Sep 2001 23:08:45 +1000
References: Conversation <3B92446A.E4105FDC@sfcc.net> with last message            <3B933708.F357CA6B@sfcc.net>
Priority: Normal
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Priority: 3
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	X-MAPIextension=.TXT;
	charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>
Date:         Mon, 3 Sep 2001 13:08:49 +0000
Reply-To: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] questionable motor]
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <3B933708.F357CA6B@sfcc.net>

----------
> Seth:  Thanks for looking at my stuff, and especially for the correction:
>
> Seth Leigh wrote:
>
> >I may be wrong about the terminology, but doesn't a Bates grain
> >configuration require multiple propellant segments?  Ie: if it doesn't
have
> >multiple propellant segments, rather than being a Bates motor it's just a
> >long, outside inhibited core-burner?
>
> Jimmy Yawn wrote:
>
> I think you are right.  I was wondering if I were using the term "Bates
grain"
> correctly, and believe I have been using it too generally.  Who was/is
Bates,
> anyway?  I would like to see some of this person's work - such a clever
idea!

Umm, I could go on about what a genius yet somewhat of a recluse he
was....ah..faget it...




Abbreviation for BAllistic TESt motor or Ballistic evaluation motors.

Troy.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 2828 invoked from network); 3 Sep 2001 13:23:59 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 3 Sep 2001 13:23:59 -0000
Received: (qmail 18787 invoked by uid 50005); 3 Sep 2001 13:22:54 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.265566 secs); 03 Sep 2001 13:22:54 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 3 Sep 2001 13:22:53 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA10643; Mon, 3 Sep 2001 06:21:52 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 106653 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 3 Sep 2001 13:20:30          +0000
Received: from sire.mail.pas.earthlink.net (sire.mail.pas.earthlink.net          [207.217.120.182]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id          GAA10627 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 3 Sep 2001 06:20:30 -0700
Received: from jfiebelk (dialup-63.214.94.69.Dial1.Boston1.Level3.net          [63.214.94.69]) by sire.mail.pas.earthlink.net (EL-8_9_3_3/8.9.3)          with ESMTP id GAA09506 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 3 Sep 2001          06:20:21 -0700 (PDT)
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Priority: 3
X-Mailer: Microsoft Internet Mail 4.70.1155
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <200109031320.GAA09506@sire.mail.pas.earthlink.net>
Date:         Mon, 3 Sep 2001 09:17:14 -0400
Reply-To: "John Fiebelkorn" <fiebelko@CAPECOD.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Fiebelkorn" <fiebelko@CAPECOD.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Electric matches
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

ODA Enterprises (don't know if they are still in business) sold a Davey and
Atlas clone chip for making e-matches. These are small wedge shaped pieces
of PC board with a fine nichrome bridgewire soldered across the end. Were
$7.00 / 100 pieces. I made up a hundred to try in different applications.
They will ignite on specs similar to Daveyfires. They are not 100% reliable
(with me making them anyway). I trimmed the chips down (to fit smaller dia.
nozzles) and overcoated the first sensitive prime with something more
thermic for igniting composite motors (single stage rockets only).
Reliablity is not as important in this case. For ejection charges, I have
used them singly with motor backup. For electronics only, two in parallel
will light off of a 1000 uF cap and small 12 v lighter battery. Most of my
rockets are small and inexpensive. I have to admit, without "alot" of
redundancy; I would be reluctant to use them in a large expensive project.
Commercial e-matches are very cheap (insurance) in this application.

John

> I'm a bit like that too, I've either made my own or still make my own
> everything (propellant, nozzles, motor casings, airframes, nose cones,
> parachutes, timers, fins, igniters, etc) but *NOT* Ematches. It's just
not
> worth it IMHO when the rockets start becoming expensive. You'll either
> learn this the easy way or hard way when you start flying a few rockets.
>
> Troy.
>
> ----------
> > Wedge, what you say makes perfect, logical sense.  However, in my case
I
> > just want to make my own igniters.  I guess I really want to make my
own
> > just about everything.  I think it's that "do it yourself" desire that
has
> > me getting into rocketry at all.  I've wanted to build my own rocket
> motors
> > since I was a teenager and read a book from a neighbor about it.  I
> haven't
> > even launched a single high-power rocket yet, but I will in a couple
> months
> > or so.  I've just sent money to Robert Galejs for a magnetic apogee
> > detector kit.  I intend for my first high-power rocket to be launched
> using
> > a commercial engine (since I haven't made my own yet and have no good
> place
> > to launch the ones I will eventually build, a problem I have yet to
> solve),
> > using a magnetic apogee detector to fire off igniters and blackpowder
> > charges I will have made myself for ejection.  Eventually I want to
make
> my
> > own igniters without even using the kit from Firefox, just to have my
own
> > recipe that works, use electronics I either built from a kit or have
> > designed myself as modifications to a design I bought from a kit
before,
> > using self-made rocket motors, the whole works.  That's my draw into
the
> > amateur realm.  It's not that I want to get to orbit cheaper than NASA,
> > though I do enjoy reading the posts of those who do have this desire.
> >
> > I guess amateur rocketry means something different to each of us.  To
me
> > it's largely still just a dream I am building a foundation for.  For
now,
> > with igniters not being a solved problem yet, I'll have fun tomorrow
> > dinking around with little pieces of wire that flash and spark.  I hope
to
> > build a 6 ton press in the next few weeks, so who knows, I may be able
to
> > make some compressed KN/sugar propellant within the next couple
> > months.  That will be fun.
> >
> > Seth
> >
> > At 07:30 PM 9/2/2001, Wedge Oldham wrote:
> > >The recipe I choose to go to Performance Hobbies
> > ><http://performancehobbies.com/>http://performancehobbies.com/ and
order
> > >some 28B Daveyfire electric matches. This formula has never
disappointed
> > >me, especially when used for ejection charges.
> > >
> > >Yes, there could be cheaper ways to ignite BP, but considering all the
> > >time & money I've invested in an individual rocket, it seems to be
worth
> > >$1.00 to ensure the chute comes out.
> > >
> > >Wedge Oldham
> > ><http://NikeProject.com>http://NikeProject.com

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 2863 invoked from network); 3 Sep 2001 13:33:05 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 3 Sep 2001 13:33:05 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 27381 invoked by uid 50005); 3 Sep 2001 13:32:00 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.128159 secs); 03 Sep 2001 13:32:00 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 3 Sep 2001 13:31:59 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA10693; Mon, 3 Sep 2001 06:31:04 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 106660 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 3 Sep 2001 13:29:42          +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (f97.law4.hotmail.com [216.33.149.97]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA10670 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 3 Sep 2001 06:29:42 -0700
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Mon,          3 Sep 2001 06:29:12 -0700
Received: from 192.36.140.38 by lw4fd.law4.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Mon, 03          Sep 2001 13:29:11 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [192.36.140.38]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 03 Sep 2001 13:29:12.0093 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[6B1FF4D0:01C1347C]
Message-ID:  <F9783VAVtLO2OeaRy3X0000864b@hotmail.com>
Date:         Mon, 3 Sep 2001 13:29:11 +0000
Reply-To: "Carsten Glans" <cag@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Carsten Glans" <cag@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Electric matches, the second generation...
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Hi List!

The reason why i want to make electric matches by myself is because they are
restricted where i live (Sweden) and even those that I can buy after
receiving permission, are not suitable for ejection charges (high current).

I can not import explosives without permission and most companies in the USA
will not export explosives because of the problem with international
transportation of explosives.

So, this is the background, and now I'm into some R&D of reliable electric
matches based on nicrome, glue and blackpowder or any other combination i
might come up with. I sure liked the idea with christmas bulbs though! :-)


Regards

Carsten Glans
http://www.min-sajt.com/cag



>From: Carsten Glans <cag@HOTMAIL.COM>
>Reply-To: Carsten Glans <cag@HOTMAIL.COM>
>To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
>Subject: [AR] Electric matches
>Date: Sun, 2 Sep 2001 23:43:11 +0100
>
>Hi list!
>
>Any simple process/recipie for making electric matches for ejection
>charges? I have read about glue for plastic and black powder blended and
>with the use of nicrome wire. Anyone tried it? Otherwise i guess i have
>some field study to do... :-) I will use it in conjunction with the RDAS
>compact flight computer. Diameter for nicrome wire, 0,5 mm? Battery voltage
>is approximatly 9 volt, for 100ms.
>
>
>Best rocket regards
>
>
>Carsten Glans
>http://www.min-sajt.com/cag
>


_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 27851 invoked from network); 3 Sep 2001 14:08:55 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 3 Sep 2001 14:08:55 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 3995 invoked by uid 50005); 3 Sep 2001 14:07:13 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.273809 secs); 03 Sep 2001 14:07:13 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 3 Sep 2001 14:07:13 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA10827; Mon, 3 Sep 2001 07:06:45 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 106684 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 3 Sep 2001 14:05:23          +0000
Received: from smtp005pub.verizon.net (smtp005pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.184])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA10811 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 3 Sep 2001 07:05:23 -0700
Received: from [63.24.225.117] (1Cust23.tnt1.rancho-cucamonga.ca.da.uu.net          [63.24.225.23]) by smtp005pub.verizon.net  with ESMTP for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; id f83E4og15146 Mon, 3 Sep 2001 09:04:51 -0500          (CDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: GTE/01rocket@mail.gte.net
References: <3B92446A.E4105FDC@sfcc.net>            <5.1.0.14.0.20010903012327.01c21238@hobbiton.shire.net>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <a05100303b7b93d1841be@[63.24.225.117]>
Date:         Mon, 3 Sep 2001 07:04:51 -0700
Reply-To: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] questionable motor]
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <5.1.0.14.0.20010903012327.01c21238@hobbiton.shire.net>

>Serh wrote:


>I'm not sure what the others on the list will think about your idea of
>filling the core with blackpowder, even if it is slow
>burning.  ;-)  Putting a light dusting of bp dust in the core is one thing,
>but loose bp chunks would be entirely something else.  The last think you
>want to do is fracture your propellant grain, because fractures can cause
>drastic increases in burning surface area.  Also, your fuse burning into
>the nozzle end and then igniting black powder might well be a recipe for
>disaster.  From what I've read people say it's far better to have your
>igniter up at the opposite end of the propellant from the nozzle.


Ignition 101

You want to ignite the grain at the head end as flame may not travel
upstream well if ignited at the center or tail.

Ignition should be done with as little pressure and as much heat as
possible.  Mil igniters use BKNO3 or aluminum/KP mixtures to ignite.

The commercial igniter kits from igniterman or magnalite use these.

Jerry

--
Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
Opinion, the whole thing.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 12510 invoked from network); 3 Sep 2001 14:22:53 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 3 Sep 2001 14:22:53 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 13385 invoked by uid 50005); 3 Sep 2001 14:23:24 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpb with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.232236 secs); 03 Sep 2001 14:23:24 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 3 Sep 2001 14:23:23 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA10886; Mon, 3 Sep 2001 07:20:28 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 106691 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 3 Sep 2001 14:18:53          +0000
Received: from smtp006pub.verizon.net (smtp006pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.185])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA10863 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 3 Sep 2001 07:18:52 -0700
Received: from [63.24.225.117] (1Cust23.tnt1.rancho-cucamonga.ca.da.uu.net          [63.24.225.23]) by smtp006pub.verizon.net  with ESMTP for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; id f83EIKA13509 Mon, 3 Sep 2001 09:18:20 -0500          (CDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: GTE/01rocket@mail.gte.net
References: <F9783VAVtLO2OeaRy3X0000864b@hotmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <a05100304b7b9416d46b3@[63.24.225.117]>
Date:         Mon, 3 Sep 2001 07:18:20 -0700
Reply-To: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Electric matches, the second generation...
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <F9783VAVtLO2OeaRy3X0000864b@hotmail.com>

>The reason why i want to make electric matches by myself is because they are
>restricted where i live (Sweden) and even those that I can buy after
>receiving permission, are not suitable for ejection charges (high current).


Buy them from your local fireworks display firm.  Everyone worldwide uses them.

Jerry

--
Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
Opinion, the whole thing.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 6847 invoked from network); 3 Sep 2001 15:26:42 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 3 Sep 2001 15:26:42 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 26001 invoked by uid 50005); 3 Sep 2001 15:27:08 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpa with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.229322 secs); 03 Sep 2001 15:27:08 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 3 Sep 2001 15:27:08 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA11121; Mon, 3 Sep 2001 08:24:25 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 106732 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 3 Sep 2001 15:22:56          +0000
Received: from hobbiton.shire.net (frogmorton.shire.net [204.228.145.136]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA11106 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Mon, 3 Sep 2001 08:22:55 -0700
Received: from pool-64-223-146-33.man.east.verizon.net ([64.223.146.33]          helo=me-513q3sc0zun0.pengar.com) by hobbiton.shire.net with esmtp          (Exim 3.22 #6) id 15dvXH-000PG4-00 for AROCKET@itc.uci.edu; Mon, 03          Sep 2001 09:21:15 -0600
X-Sender: seth-pc@hobbiton.shire.net
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <5.1.0.14.0.20010903112629.01c2ceb0@hobbiton.shire.net>
Date:         Mon, 3 Sep 2001 11:28:10 -0400
Reply-To: "Seth Leigh" <seth@PENGAR.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Seth Leigh" <seth@PENGAR.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Propellent Musings
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <F141omRXf2LTrpwACkW00002e54@hotmail.com>

H2O2 may have 90% O in it, but doesn't it decompose into 2xH2O + 1
O2?  Don't you "lose" half the O to water vapor, which makes it unusable
for oxidizing other stuff?

Seth

At 03:35 AM 9/3/2001, you wrote:
>Quote BB:
>
>>The Physics book I have been using quotes:
>>gasoline =11,400 cal/g; kerosene =11,200 cal/g; Diesel fuel =10,500 cal/g
>>and alcohol = 6,400 cal/g...
>
>Question; is there a mathematical relationship between heat of combustion
>(kJ/kg) and Isp?
>
>Concerning the wisdom of using molten AN as a oxidizer, 60 % O in it
>compares poorly with 90 % H2O2 which contains 84.7 % O or WFNA which has
>76.2 % O in it...The latter do not require heating and cannot solidify.
>Well, ie chemically speaking. Did I overlook something here?
>
>jd
>
>_________________________________________________________________
>Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 22787 invoked from network); 3 Sep 2001 15:41:50 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 3 Sep 2001 15:41:50 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 20694 invoked by uid 50005); 3 Sep 2001 15:40:07 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.375985 secs); 03 Sep 2001 15:40:07 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 3 Sep 2001 15:40:07 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA11190; Mon, 3 Sep 2001 08:33:18 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 106744 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 3 Sep 2001 15:31:56          +0000
Received: from hobbiton.shire.net (frogmorton.shire.net [204.228.145.136]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA11175 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Mon, 3 Sep 2001 08:31:56 -0700
Received: from pool-64-223-146-33.man.east.verizon.net ([64.223.146.33]          helo=me-513q3sc0zun0.pengar.com) by hobbiton.shire.net with esmtp          (Exim 3.22 #6) id 15dvg0-000PI0-00 for AROCKET@itc.uci.edu; Mon, 03          Sep 2001 09:30:16 -0600
X-Sender: seth-pc@hobbiton.shire.net
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <5.1.0.14.0.20010903113352.02ac97e8@hobbiton.shire.net>
Date:         Mon, 3 Sep 2001 11:37:10 -0400
Reply-To: "Seth Leigh" <seth@PENGAR.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Seth Leigh" <seth@PENGAR.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] 2bates grain -- was -- Re: [AR] questionable motor]
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <v01510101b7b8e5022a84@[208.22.189.87]>

At 03:55 AM 9/3/2001, you wrote:
>Well correct me if I am wrong -- past postings on the list have referred to
>the Bates grain as having a specific length to diameter ratio, and are
>hollow cored. Whether you have 1 or more of these in your rocket does not
>make them more or less Bates grains. They are constructed so that they burn
>in the core and on the ends simultaneously and produce a generally linear
>burn. The outside of the grain never burns until last due to one or another
>methods of inhibition.

OK, I know also only what I've read from people's comments on ARocket, and
on some webpages I've looked at where people are doing motor
development.  I would guess you are right about the diameter/length
ratio.  Since it is the particular diameter/length ratio that is
responsible for creating the ~linear burn rate, I suppose you can have a
single-grain Bates configuration, though I'd expect it would be a rather
short engine.  I wish I knew the proper ratio, but from the examples I'd
seen on other sites I would have assumed that a Bates configuration with a
total length of around 12" would have needed around three segments.

Can anyone explain this more fully?

Seth

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 5887 invoked from network); 3 Sep 2001 15:46:02 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 3 Sep 2001 15:46:02 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 22908 invoked by uid 50005); 3 Sep 2001 15:44:20 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.45931 secs); 03 Sep 2001 15:44:20 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 3 Sep 2001 15:44:19 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA11234; Mon, 3 Sep 2001 08:40:08 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 106751 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 3 Sep 2001 15:38:43          +0000
Received: from hobbiton.shire.net (frogmorton.shire.net [204.228.145.136]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA11211 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Mon, 3 Sep 2001 08:38:42 -0700
Received: from pool-64-223-146-33.man.east.verizon.net ([64.223.146.33]          helo=me-513q3sc0zun0.pengar.com) by hobbiton.shire.net with esmtp          (Exim 3.22 #6) id 15dvmY-000PJf-00 for AROCKET@itc.uci.edu; Mon, 03          Sep 2001 09:37:03 -0600
X-Sender: seth-pc@hobbiton.shire.net
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
References: <3B933708.F357CA6B@sfcc.net> <3B92446A.E4105FDC@sfcc.net>            <3B933708.F357CA6B@sfcc.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <5.1.0.14.0.20010903114225.02c35d50@hobbiton.shire.net>
Date:         Mon, 3 Sep 2001 11:43:57 -0400
Reply-To: "Seth Leigh" <seth@PENGAR.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Seth Leigh" <seth@PENGAR.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] questionable motor]
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC8 22>

So the term bates has nothing to do with achieving a more or less linear
burn rate by specially choosing a length/diameter ratio for each propellant
grain such that the shorten length counteracts the increasing surface area
of the core?

Seth


At 09:08 AM 9/3/2001, you wrote:
>----------
> > Seth:  Thanks for looking at my stuff, and especially for the correction:
> >
> > Seth Leigh wrote:
> >
> > >I may be wrong about the terminology, but doesn't a Bates grain
> > >configuration require multiple propellant segments?  Ie: if it doesn't
>have
> > >multiple propellant segments, rather than being a Bates motor it's just a
> > >long, outside inhibited core-burner?
> >
> > Jimmy Yawn wrote:
> >
> > I think you are right.  I was wondering if I were using the term "Bates
>grain"
> > correctly, and believe I have been using it too generally.  Who was/is
>Bates,
> > anyway?  I would like to see some of this person's work - such a clever
>idea!
>
>Umm, I could go on about what a genius yet somewhat of a recluse he
>was....ah..faget it...
>
>
>
>
>Abbreviation for BAllistic TESt motor or Ballistic evaluation motors.
>
>Troy.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 28345 invoked from network); 3 Sep 2001 16:21:55 -0000
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 3 Sep 2001 16:21:55 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 5568 invoked by uid 50005); 3 Sep 2001 16:19:36 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpf with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.590475 secs); 03 Sep 2001 16:19:36 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 3 Sep 2001 16:19:35 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA11434; Mon, 3 Sep 2001 09:19:23 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 106789 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 3 Sep 2001 16:18:02          +0000
Received: from grucom2.gru.net (grucom2.gru.net [209.251.129.7]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA11419 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon,          3 Sep 2001 09:18:01 -0700
Received: from [209.251.151.189] by grucom2.sfcc.net (NTMail          6.04.0010/NU4112.00.db1c8a4b) with ESMTP id tlwuiaaa for          AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 3 Sep 2001 12:18:01 -0400
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (Win95; I)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: Conversation <3B92446A.E4105FDC@sfcc.net> with last message            <3B933708.F357CA6B@sfcc.net>            <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B93ADAB.2809900D@sfcc.net>
Date:         Mon, 3 Sep 2001 12:19:55 -0400
Reply-To: "James Yawn" <jyawn@SFCC.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "James Yawn" <jyawn@SFCC.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] questionable motor]
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Troy:  You could have led me on and on with this, I being such an idiot-savant
in this field (and less savant than idiot, as many have observed!)  My academics
are deficient - I think I went straight from "Green Eggs and Ham" to "All About
Rockets and Jets" and have not moved much past that level.  But I am willing to
work on it.

Sounds like the Bates grain was developed by a military/government agency...I
would still like to know more, assuming it is not classified :)  Any recommended
readings?

Respectfully,
Jimmy Yawn



until I encountered Arocket.

Troy Prideaux wrote:

> ----------
> > Seth:  Thanks for looking at my stuff, and especially for the correction:
> >
> > Seth Leigh wrote:
> >
> > >I may be wrong about the terminology, but doesn't a Bates grain
> > >configuration require multiple propellant segments?  Ie: if it doesn't
> have
> > >multiple propellant segments, rather than being a Bates motor it's just a
> > >long, outside inhibited core-burner?
> >
> > Jimmy Yawn wrote:
> >
> > I think you are right.  I was wondering if I were using the term "Bates
> grain"
> > correctly, and believe I have been using it too generally.  Who was/is
> Bates,
> > anyway?  I would like to see some of this person's work - such a clever
> idea!
>
> Umm, I could go on about what a genius yet somewhat of a recluse he
> was....ah..faget it...
>
> Abbreviation for BAllistic TESt motor or Ballistic evaluation motors.
>
> Troy.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 28428 invoked from network); 3 Sep 2001 16:21:57 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 3 Sep 2001 16:21:57 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 5611 invoked by uid 50005); 3 Sep 2001 16:19:37 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpf with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.404634 secs); 03 Sep 2001 16:19:37 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 3 Sep 2001 16:19:36 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA11397; Mon, 3 Sep 2001 09:13:14 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 106782 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 3 Sep 2001 16:11:52          +0000
Received: from smtp004pub.verizon.net (smtp004pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.183])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA11382 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 3 Sep 2001 09:11:52 -0700
Received: from [63.24.225.117] (1Cust227.tnt1.rancho-cucamonga.ca.da.uu.net          [63.24.225.227]) by smtp004pub.verizon.net  with ESMTP for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; id f83GBJr17792 Mon, 3 Sep 2001 11:11:19 -0500          (CDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: GTE/01rocket@mail.gte.net
References: <5.1.0.14.0.20010903113352.02ac97e8@hobbiton.shire.net>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <a05100305b7b95a814df6@[63.24.225.117]>
Date:         Mon, 3 Sep 2001 09:11:19 -0700
Reply-To: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Subject:      [AR] BATES numbers 38mm
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <5.1.0.14.0.20010903113352.02ac97e8@hobbiton.shire.net>

>Can anyone explain this more fully?
>
>Seth

A 1.7:1 aspect ratio with about a 40% diameter core gives a near
neutral burn.  Longer lengths more progressive, shorter, more
regressive.

Chipmunk BASIC v3.5.0
>run "surface.bas"

Copyright 1998 Jerry Irvine - Surface.bas
SINGLE GRAIN BATES SURFACE VS DISTANCE
Grain OD inches =             1.25
Core Dia inches =             .375
Total Grain Length  =         3.5
INCREMENT WEB POINT SURFACE
========= ========= ========
    1.00    0.02    6.36
    2.00    0.04    6.73
    3.00    0.07    7.08
    4.00    0.09    7.41
    5.00    0.11    7.72
    6.00    0.13    8.02
    7.00    0.15    8.30
    8.00    0.17    8.56
    9.00    0.20    8.80
   10.00    0.22    9.03
   11.00    0.24    9.23
   12.00    0.26    9.42
   13.00    0.28    9.59
   14.00    0.31    9.75
   15.00    0.33    9.88
   16.00    0.35   10.00
   17.00    0.37   10.10
   18.00    0.39   10.18
   19.00    0.42   10.24
   20.00    0.44   10.28
Progresivity % =         61.7
>run

Copyright 1998 Jerry Irvine - Surface.bas
SINGLE GRAIN BATES SURFACE VS DISTANCE
Grain OD inches =             1.25
Core Dia inches =             .375
Total Grain Length  =         2
INCREMENT WEB POINT SURFACE
========= ========= ========
    1.00    0.02    4.59
    2.00    0.04    4.75
    3.00    0.07    4.90
    4.00    0.09    5.02
    5.00    0.11    5.13
    6.00    0.13    5.22
    7.00    0.15    5.30
    8.00    0.17    5.35
    9.00    0.20    5.39
   10.00    0.22    5.41
   11.00    0.24    5.41
   12.00    0.26    5.39
   13.00    0.28    5.35
   14.00    0.31    5.30
   15.00    0.33    5.23
   16.00    0.35    5.14
   17.00    0.37    5.03
   18.00    0.39    4.90
   19.00    0.42    4.76
   20.00    0.44    4.60
Progresivity % =          0.2
>run

Copyright 1998 Jerry Irvine - Surface.bas
SINGLE GRAIN BATES SURFACE VS DISTANCE
Grain OD inches =             1.25
Core Dia inches =             .375
Total Grain Length  =         1.25
INCREMENT WEB POINT SURFACE
========= ========= ========
    1.00    0.02    3.71
    2.00    0.04    3.77
    3.00    0.07    3.81
    4.00    0.09    3.83
    5.00    0.11    3.84
    6.00    0.13    3.82
    7.00    0.15    3.79
    8.00    0.17    3.75
    9.00    0.20    3.68
   10.00    0.22    3.59
   11.00    0.24    3.49
   12.00    0.26    3.37
   13.00    0.28    3.23
   14.00    0.31    3.08
   15.00    0.33    2.90
   16.00    0.35    2.71
   17.00    0.37    2.50
   18.00    0.39    2.27
   19.00    0.42    2.02
   20.00    0.44    1.76
Progresivity % =        -52.6
>

--
Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
Opinion, the whole thing.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 27466 invoked from network); 3 Sep 2001 16:50:34 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 3 Sep 2001 16:50:33 -0000
Received: (qmail 6244 invoked by uid 50005); 3 Sep 2001 16:51:00 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpa with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.234977 secs); 03 Sep 2001 16:51:00 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 3 Sep 2001 16:50:59 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA11538; Mon, 3 Sep 2001 09:41:38 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 106808 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 3 Sep 2001 16:40:13          +0000
Received: from fep4-orange.clear.net.nz (fep4-orange.clear.net.nz          [203.97.32.4]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA11522          for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Mon, 3 Sep 2001 09:40:12 -0700
Received: from mkbs (203-167-160-40.dialup.clear.net.nz [203.167.160.40]) by          fep4-orange.clear.net.nz (1.5/1.7) with SMTP id EAA14275; Tue, 4 Sep          2001 04:40:06 +1200 (NZST)
References: <3B92446A.E4105FDC@sfcc.net>             <5.1.0.14.0.20010903012327.01c21238@hobbiton.shire.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <00fe01c13497$8739c220$0100a8c0@mkbs>
Date:         Tue, 4 Sep 2001 01:15:25 +1200
Reply-To: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Organization: Applied Technology
Subject:      Re: [AR] questionable motor]
Comments: To: Seth Leigh <seth@PENGAR.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

> I may be wrong about the terminology, but doesn't a Bates grain
> configuration require multiple propellant segments?  Ie: if it doesn't
have
> multiple propellant segments, rather than being a Bates motor it's just a
> long, outside inhibited core-burner?  The segmentation of the Bates
design,
> as far as I've read, is supposed to keep the burn rate curve fairly flat,
> because having, say, 6 ends rather than two results in the propellant
> cylinder becoming shorter in length faster even as the surface area of the
> core increases.  The shorter length is supposed to counteract the increase
> in surface area that would occur in the core with just a single grain.


(always IMU) A Bates grain is a bates grain whether it has 1 segment or many
although the results will vary somewhat for secondary (but important)
reasons. The idea of the Bates grain is that the two ends plus the core are
ignited and the length adjusted so that the burning surface area remains
RELATIVELY constant throughout. If each core is considered separately, if
each core has a neutral  burn then the combination of cores together will
too.
See end for dimensions.

Some second order affects occur because

- If the grains are tightly packed the end face burning MAY take somewhat
longer to establish than core burning. this would (presumably) lead to a
spike as the ends commence full burning.

- The bottom grain will be subject to greater erosion due to the increased
passage of hot gas. I understand that if throat size is close to core size
then you MAY get an adjusted Kn ratio, especially with a large number of
grains, because of the bottom core having to pass a greater gas volume. If
you cire size is smaller than nozzle throat size then your mileage almost
certainly will vary and if so will be low :-)

I understand bates grain motors are usually restricted to 3 or 4 grains for
the above reason but I also believe that up to 6 grains have been run. It is
possible to cast the bottom grain with a slightly larger core to better
handle erosion.


NB - all the above is written by someone who has never cast or fired a Bates
grain in their life so may be total rubbish (but is not believed to be.
Expert correction can be expected to arrive promptly if required.  :-)).



        Russell McMahon



Bates Grain dimensions.


Burning surface at very end of burn is the cylinder at OD of grain.
Area = Pi * OD * L
(cylinder area = end circumference x length)

Burning area ta start of burn is surface of core plus surface of
unpassivated ends =
Area = Pi * ID * L + 2 * Pi * (OD^2 - ID^2)/4
(end area = Pi x R^2 of outer less core end area x 2 for two ends)

Equate these two areas so that start and finish are the same

Pi * OD * L  = Pi * ID * L + 2 * Pi * (OD^2/4 - ID^2/4)

L * (OD-ID) = (OD^2-ID^2)/2

L * (OD-ID) = (OD-ID)(OD+ID) / 2

                L = (OD + ID) / 2

Is that the standard result? - guess so  - seems nice and simple doesn't it
??? !


OD = core outer diameter = casing inside diameter.
ID = core inside diameter = core diameter.
L = length of grain.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 23449 invoked from network); 3 Sep 2001 17:25:08 -0000
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 3 Sep 2001 17:25:08 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 4796 invoked by uid 50005); 3 Sep 2001 17:25:10 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpe with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.103211 secs); 03 Sep 2001 17:25:10 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 3 Sep 2001 17:25:09 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA11757; Mon, 3 Sep 2001 10:22:54 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 106842 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 3 Sep 2001 17:21:26          +0000
Received: from grucom2.gru.net (grucom2.gru.net [209.251.129.7]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA11740 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon,          3 Sep 2001 10:21:25 -0700
Received: from [209.251.151.135] by grucom2.sfcc.net (NTMail          6.04.0010/NU4112.00.db1c8a4b) with ESMTP id isyuiaaa for          AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 3 Sep 2001 13:21:25 -0400
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (Win95; I)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <5.1.0.14.0.20010903113352.02ac97e8@hobbiton.shire.net>            <a05100305b7b95a814df6@[63.24.225.117]>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B93BC87.43869146@sfcc.net>
Date:         Mon, 3 Sep 2001 13:23:19 -0400
Reply-To: "James Yawn" <jyawn@SFCC.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "James Yawn" <jyawn@SFCC.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] BATES numbers 38mm
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Jerry:  This is excellent.  Now I can work towards a true Bates grain.

I gather from your formula that if I had enlarged the core of my grain
(1.5 inch OD x 12 inches long) to .6 inches (40% of 1.5) and cut it into
5 equal segments (1.5 x 1.7 = 2.55, 12 / 2.55 = 4.77 sections) it should
have generated a relatively neutral burn profile.  Do I have this right?

Thanks!
Jimmy Yawn



Jerry Irvine wrote:

> >Can anyone explain this more fully?
> >
> >Seth
>
> A 1.7:1 aspect ratio with about a 40% diameter core gives a near
> neutral burn.  Longer lengths more progressive, shorter, more
> regressive.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 21672 invoked from network); 3 Sep 2001 17:40:22 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 3 Sep 2001 17:40:22 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 15298 invoked by uid 50005); 3 Sep 2001 17:38:40 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.529433 secs); 03 Sep 2001 17:38:40 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 3 Sep 2001 17:38:39 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA11955; Mon, 3 Sep 2001 10:38:12 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 106883 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 3 Sep 2001 17:36:47          +0000
Received: from dns2.seanet.com (dns2.seanet.com [199.181.164.2]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA11937 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon,          3 Sep 2001 10:36:46 -0700
Received: from seanet.com (ssstolt.seanet.com [204.182.68.23]) by          dns2.seanet.com (8.11.6/8.11.5) with ESMTP id f83Haib10167; Mon, 3          Sep 2001 10:36:44 -0700 (PDT)
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.73 [en] (Win98; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <F102rfFz82buW5RNB6H00019ef9@hotmail.com>            <a05100325b7b410af880a@[63.25.57.165]>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B93BDFE.B536D9A9@seanet.com>
Date:         Mon, 3 Sep 2001 10:29:34 -0700
Reply-To: "Sherwood Stolt" <ssstolt@SEANET.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Sherwood Stolt" <ssstolt@SEANET.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] liquids question: alcohol/N2O propellant feeding
Comments: cc: Jerry Irvine <01rocket@GTE.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

I thought the usual seal for propellant pistons were T seals.  O-rings
can't handle a lot of change in the gap size.

Jerry Irvine wrote:

> >PK wrote:
> >
> >>The piston seal is not subject to a pressure gradient.
> >
> >I see. But still, stick your life on the integrity of a series of O-rings?
>
> If you are that worried use 4 o-rings in parallel.  They are cheap.
>
> >

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 14087 invoked from network); 3 Sep 2001 17:54:43 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 3 Sep 2001 17:54:43 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 14279 invoked by uid 50005); 3 Sep 2001 17:53:36 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.499066 secs); 03 Sep 2001 17:53:36 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 3 Sep 2001 17:53:36 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA12053; Mon, 3 Sep 2001 10:52:23 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 106894 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 3 Sep 2001 17:50:59          +0000
Received: from robin.mail.pas.earthlink.net (robin.mail.pas.earthlink.net          [207.217.120.65]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA11980          for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Mon, 3 Sep 2001 10:40:41 -0700
Received: from earthlink.net (dialup-209.247.139.4.Dial1.SanJose1.Level3.net          [209.247.139.4]) by robin.mail.pas.earthlink.net (8.11.5/8.9.3) with          ESMTP id f83HedH14359; Mon, 3 Sep 2001 10:40:40 -0700 (PDT)
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.75 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.16-22 i686)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <3B92446A.E4105FDC@sfcc.net>            <5.1.0.14.0.20010903012327.01c21238@hobbiton.shire.net>            <00fe01c13497$8739c220$0100a8c0@mkbs>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B93C0F4.703C9A2C@earthlink.net>
Date:         Mon, 3 Sep 2001 10:42:12 -0700
Reply-To: "David Weinshenker" <daze39@EARTHLINK.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "David Weinshenker" <daze39@EARTHLINK.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] questionable motor]
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Russell McMahon wrote:
> I understand bates grain motors are usually restricted to 3 or 4 grains for
> the above reason but I also believe that up to 6 grains have been run. It is
> possible to cast the bottom grain with a slightly larger core to better
> handle erosion.

Most of the Aerotech reloadable HPR-motors use a BATES-style grain (although
I would not be surprised to find that there was some deviation from exact
most-neutral-burn proportions for manufacturing convenience etc.)
Some of the longer case sizes accept 5 (38/600, 75/6400), 6 (29/360,
38/720, 54/2560, 98/15360), or even 9 (38/1080) grains. (The Aerotech
case size designation in parentheses gives outside diameter in millimeters
and nominal total impulse in newton-seconds.)

The thrust curves for these longer motors tend to show a definite startup
spike, suggesting that they do experience some erosively accelerated
burning in what starts out as a rather long thin core in the grain stack.
(The initial core area on these motors is fairly small relative to the nozzle
area, so there is likely to be some fast gas moving over the propellant
surface at first.)

-dave w

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 29573 invoked from network); 3 Sep 2001 17:58:51 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 3 Sep 2001 17:58:51 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: (qmail 32541 invoked by uid 50005); 3 Sep 2001 17:58:53 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpe with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.320032 secs); 03 Sep 2001 17:58:53 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 3 Sep 2001 17:58:53 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA12104; Mon, 3 Sep 2001 10:56:33 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 106913 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 3 Sep 2001 17:55:12          +0000
Received: from localhost (rcalkins@localhost) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with          ESMTP id KAA12067 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Mon, 3 Sep 2001 10:54:09          -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.LNX.4.10.10109031051150.12050-100000@itc.uci.edu>
Date:         Mon, 3 Sep 2001 10:54:09 -0700
Reply-To: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
Subject:      [AR] Strangest Biprop Ever?
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Well, I've seen a couple that would give it a run for it's money, but it's
still interesting.

Somebody wrote me asking about flying this piece of hardware, can you help
ID it?
http://arocket.itc.uci.edu/tmp2.jpg
http://arocket.itc.uci.edu/tmp1.jpg

It looks to have a staged combustion chamber and regenerative cooling.  I
don't know anything else about it.

Ray

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 8740 invoked from network); 3 Sep 2001 18:35:27 -0000
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 3 Sep 2001 18:35:27 -0000
Received: (qmail 26631 invoked by uid 50005); 3 Sep 2001 18:33:07 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpf with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.291503 secs); 03 Sep 2001 18:33:07 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 3 Sep 2001 18:33:07 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA12290; Mon, 3 Sep 2001 11:32:56 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 106956 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 3 Sep 2001 18:31:28          +0000
Received: from roll.akcecc.kiev.ua (roll.akcecc.kiev.ua [193.227.206.34]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA12274 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 3 Sep 2001 11:31:25 -0700
Received: from serge (pool-96.akcecc.kiev.ua [193.227.207.96] (may be forged))          by roll.akcecc.kiev.ua (8.10.2/8.10.2) with SMTP id f83IVIU25098 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 3 Sep 2001 21:31:18 +0300
References: <3B92446A.E4105FDC@sfcc.net>                       <5.1.0.14.0.20010903012327.01c21238@hobbiton.shire.net>             <00fe01c13497$8739c220$0100a8c0@mkbs>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2417.2000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <006701c1349e$022f0e80$60cfe3c1@serge>
Date:         Mon, 3 Sep 2001 21:28:39 +0400
Reply-To: "Serge Pipko" <spas@AKCECC.KIEV.UA>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Serge Pipko" <spas@AKCECC.KIEV.UA>
Subject:      Re: [AR] questionable motor]
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Russell McMahon wrote:

> Bates Grain dimensions.
>
>
> Burning surface at very end of burn is the cylinder at OD of grain.
> Area = Pi * OD * L

At very end of burn the grain length is shorter then initial L :

L(end) = L(start) - ( OD - ID )

Therefore resulting formula for the most neutrally burning BATES grain is :

LENGTH = ( 3 * OD + CORE ) / 2

Serge

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 4573 invoked from network); 3 Sep 2001 19:18:59 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 3 Sep 2001 19:18:59 -0000
Received: (qmail 32334 invoked by uid 50005); 3 Sep 2001 19:19:24 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpa with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.267444 secs); 03 Sep 2001 19:19:24 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 3 Sep 2001 19:19:24 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA12451; Mon, 3 Sep 2001 12:14:19 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 106978 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 3 Sep 2001 19:12:55          +0000
Received: from cablecom.laribay.net (cablecom.laribay.net [66.20.57.4]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA12436 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 3 Sep 2001 12:12:54 -0700
Received: from billbull (dial098.laribay.net [66.20.57.98]) by          cablecom.laribay.net (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id NAA23300 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 3 Sep 2001 13:53:40 -0500 (CDT)          (envelope-from bpbullock@laribay.net)
References:  <F141omRXf2LTrpwACkW00002e54@hotmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <004401c134ac$8b873dc0$62391442@billbull>
Date:         Mon, 3 Sep 2001 14:13:16 -0500
Reply-To: "Bill Bullock" <bpbullock@LARIBAY.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Bill Bullock" <bpbullock@LARIBAY.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Propellent Musings
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

John:
    The pre-answer to that is whether or not you want to get tarred,
feathered and/or "flamed" by the proponents of Hydrogen et. al. I have had a
"running verbal gun battle" with an uncle who really is a Rocket Scientist
(of some renown) who is a proponent of liquid hydrogen to the exclusion of
all other alternatives. (His response has always been,"WHAT alternatives?")
    I can really get him jacked out of joint whenever I remind him that he
(and we) are working with a technology which has remained basically
unchanged for about 800 years now. The game plan is to accelerate and eject
out the back of a closed chamber with a hole in it as much material as
possible at the fastest mass flow rate and velocity attainable...all else is
detail.
    The way we do this is to make us what amounts to a big steam
jet..."steam" denoting any gaseous material or any solid material suspended
in a stream of gas. We do this by generating a lot of pressure within the
chamber. We generate pressure like any "steam" generator...we heat it as hot
as we can get it.
    Nowhere have I ever seen. heard or read about the laws of physics being
revoked on our behalf...nobody can change the rules. They remain constant
for everyone.
    Since the end result is supposed to be something that leaves the ground,
weight is important. The "coin of the realm" is heat...or BTU's or however
you want to measure it. The more thermal energy you can get per pound of
weight the better. The more REACTANT oxidizer you can get per pound of
oxidizing material likewise the better. The important thing IS NOT the ratio
of vehicle mass to fuel mass.. it is vehicle mass to total thrust attainable
within a reasonable time frame, a lot of other variables being equal. All
this is what was behind our engineers on tha Atlas attempting to increase
the burn profile by adding powdered aluminum to the kerocene we used for
fuel. It worked fine, except for what the itssy-bitssy aluminum particles
did to the impelersto the fuel pump turbine blades...
    All of this brings on more problems, but those are only details.
Problems are made to be solved.
Bill
PS: Own personal opinion, so please don't shoot/lynch/flame me just yet.

----- Original Message -----
From: John Dom <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Monday, September 03, 2001 2:35 AM
Subject: Re: [AR] Propellent Musings


> Quote BB:
>
> >The Physics book I have been using quotes:
> >gasoline =11,400 cal/g; kerosene =11,200 cal/g; Diesel fuel =10,500 cal/g
> >and alcohol = 6,400 cal/g...
>
> Question; is there a mathematical relationship between heat of combustion
> (kJ/kg) and Isp?
>
> Concerning the wisdom of using molten AN as a oxidizer, 60 % O in it
> compares poorly with 90 % H2O2 which contains 84.7 % O or WFNA which has
> 76.2 % O in it...The latter do not require heating and cannot solidify.
> Well, ie chemically speaking. Did I overlook something here?
>
> jd
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp
>
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 3890 invoked from network); 3 Sep 2001 19:35:33 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 3 Sep 2001 19:35:33 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 6999 invoked by uid 50005); 3 Sep 2001 19:33:50 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.342308 secs); 03 Sep 2001 19:33:50 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 3 Sep 2001 19:33:49 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA12581; Mon, 3 Sep 2001 12:33:14 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 107005 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 3 Sep 2001 19:31:47          +0000
Received: from idsoftware.com (predator.idsoftware.com [192.246.40.34]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA12564 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Mon, 3 Sep 2001 12:31:47 -0700
Received: from [192.246.40.144] (account johnc HELO pluto.idsoftware.com) by          idsoftware.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 3.4.7) with ESMTP id 367979 for          AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 03 Sep 2001 14:31:46 -0500
X-Sender: johnc@mail.idsoftware.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <4.3.1.2.20010903143405.03e94f08@mail.idsoftware.com>
Date:         Mon, 3 Sep 2001 14:44:12 -0500
Reply-To: "John Carmack" <johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Carmack" <johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] liquids question: alcohol/N2O propellant feeding
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <F199uk8cobC32qU4Z5f00002b5d@hotmail.com>

At 07:07 AM 9/3/2001 +0000, you wrote:
>HS wrote:
>
>>The fact that hypergolics ignite on
>>contact is an important safety advantage, because it means they *cannot*
>>form explosive mixtures, which is all too easy with non-hypergolics.  An
>>immediate fire is much preferable to a delayed explosion.
>
>Reminds me of insidious alcohol/H2O2 mixtures...
>
>JD

A couple days ago, Phil told me about an experiment that he and Russ had
done before they met me.  They had mixed some 50% peroxide and some
alcohol, and detonated it with a blasting cap.  A couple ounces made a
TREMENDOUS explosion, and was enough to convince them that they never
wanted to do that again.

I occasionally vacillate back and forth on hybrid vs biprop for our high
performance designs, but the descriptions of the damage caused by that
small amount of mixture is probably enough to keep me from thinking about
biprops for another year.  I can imagine circumstances where a loaded
vehicle falls over, or has some failure during launch, and you wind up with
hundreds of pounds of mixed explosives pooling on the ground.

In contrast, we can stir peroxide with our hybrid grains without a problem.

John Carmack

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 14070 invoked from network); 3 Sep 2001 19:38:17 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 3 Sep 2001 19:38:17 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 13920 invoked by uid 50005); 3 Sep 2001 19:35:57 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpf with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.327383 secs); 03 Sep 2001 19:35:57 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 3 Sep 2001 19:35:56 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA12622; Mon, 3 Sep 2001 12:36:00 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 107016 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 3 Sep 2001 19:34:39          +0000
Received: from smtp002pub.verizon.net (smtp002pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.181])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA12590 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 3 Sep 2001 12:33:49 -0700
Received: from [63.24.225.117] (1Cust77.tnt1.rancho-cucamonga.ca.da.uu.net          [63.24.225.77]) by smtp002pub.verizon.net  with ESMTP for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; id f83JXG329896 Mon, 3 Sep 2001 14:33:17 -0500          (CDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: GTE/01rocket@mail.gte.net
References: <5.1.0.14.0.20010903113352.02ac97e8@hobbiton.shire.net>            <a05100305b7b95a814df6@[63.24.225.117]> <3B93BC87.43869146@sfcc.net>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <a05100307b7b98b4338e1@[63.24.225.117]>
Date:         Mon, 3 Sep 2001 12:33:17 -0700
Reply-To: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] BATES numbers 38mm
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <3B93BC87.43869146@sfcc.net>

>Jerry:  This is excellent.  Now I can work towards a true Bates grain.
>
>I gather from your formula that if I had enlarged the core of my grain
>(1.5 inch OD x 12 inches long) to .6 inches (40% of 1.5) and cut it into
>5 equal segments (1.5 x 1.7 = 2.55, 12 / 2.55 = 4.77 sections) it should
>have generated a relatively neutral burn profile.  Do I have this right?

Russell's post is excellent and James, yes.

Jerry



--
Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
Opinion, the whole thing.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 26044 invoked from network); 3 Sep 2001 19:41:41 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 3 Sep 2001 19:41:41 -0000
Received: (qmail 11242 invoked by uid 50005); 3 Sep 2001 19:42:06 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpa with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.432168 secs); 03 Sep 2001 19:42:06 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 3 Sep 2001 19:42:06 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA12679; Mon, 3 Sep 2001 12:39:26 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 107035 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 3 Sep 2001 19:38:04          +0000
Received: from smtp004pub.verizon.net (smtp004pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.183])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA12660 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 3 Sep 2001 12:38:04 -0700
Received: from [63.24.225.117] (1Cust77.tnt1.rancho-cucamonga.ca.da.uu.net          [63.24.225.77]) by smtp004pub.verizon.net  with ESMTP for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; id f83JbWr22876 Mon, 3 Sep 2001 14:37:32 -0500          (CDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: GTE/01rocket@mail.gte.net
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <a05100308b7b98c4c771c@[63.24.225.117]>
Date:         Mon, 3 Sep 2001 12:37:33 -0700
Reply-To: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Subject:      [AR] Turbopump and microjet geeks arise!
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

http://www.m-dot.com

Just Jerry

--
Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
Opinion, the whole thing.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 20108 invoked from network); 3 Sep 2001 20:23:34 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 3 Sep 2001 20:23:34 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 31489 invoked by uid 50005); 3 Sep 2001 20:24:02 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpb with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.312421 secs); 03 Sep 2001 20:24:02 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 3 Sep 2001 20:24:02 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA12888; Mon, 3 Sep 2001 13:18:57 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 107066 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 3 Sep 2001 20:17:33          +0000
Received: from robin.mail.pas.earthlink.net (robin.mail.pas.earthlink.net          [207.217.120.65]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA12823          for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Mon, 3 Sep 2001 13:07:33 -0700
Received: from earthlink.net (dialup-209.247.139.4.Dial1.SanJose1.Level3.net          [209.247.139.4]) by robin.mail.pas.earthlink.net (8.11.5/8.9.3) with          ESMTP id f83K7WH13918; Mon, 3 Sep 2001 13:07:32 -0700 (PDT)
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.75 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.16-22 i686)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <a05100308b7b98c4c771c@[63.24.225.117]>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B93E35F.E214D83B@earthlink.net>
Date:         Mon, 3 Sep 2001 13:09:03 -0700
Reply-To: "David Weinshenker" <daze39@EARTHLINK.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "David Weinshenker" <daze39@EARTHLINK.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Turbopump and microjet geeks arise!
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Jerry Irvine wrote:
>
> http://www.m-dot.com

Wow. I bet they're pricey though...

-dave w

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 21186 invoked from network); 3 Sep 2001 20:23:53 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 3 Sep 2001 20:23:53 -0000
Received: (qmail 24884 invoked by uid 50005); 3 Sep 2001 20:22:10 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.395226 secs); 03 Sep 2001 20:22:10 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 3 Sep 2001 20:22:09 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA12923; Mon, 3 Sep 2001 13:21:48 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 107081 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 3 Sep 2001 20:20:28          +0000
Received: from smtp02.mrf.mail.rcn.net (smtp02.mrf.mail.rcn.net [207.172.4.61])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA12882 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Mon, 3 Sep 2001 13:17:39 -0700
Received: from 207-172-129-134.s134.tnt2.col.md.dialup.rcn.com          ([207.172.129.134] helo=brunyate) by smtp02.mrf.mail.rcn.net with          smtp (Exim 3.33 #10) id 15e0A5-0002dd-00; Mon, 03 Sep 2001 16:17:38          -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <MBBBKKNFKBOLONOKKFHLMEBICBAA.adrianby@erols.com>
Date:         Mon, 3 Sep 2001 16:13:37 -0400
Reply-To: "Adrian Brunyate" <adrianby@EROLS.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Adrian Brunyate" <adrianby@EROLS.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Propellent Musings
Comments: To: John Dom <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <F141omRXf2LTrpwACkW00002e54@hotmail.com>

>Question; is there a mathematical relationship between heat of
>combustion
>(kJ/kg) and Isp?

        Sort of. There was a very comprehensive thread on this a while back, but
I'll summarize (perhaps incorrectly?).
        The kinetic energy of the jet depends on two things: the amount of energy
generated by the reaction, and the nozzle efficiency. For a perfect nozzle,
the efficiency is governed by how much of the gas's energy is trapped in
unavailable modes (rotation, etc.). Methinks that since the product of the
above is in energy units, ISP (momentum transfer/mass of propellant) should
be proportional to the square root of said product.
        Note that the MW of the products is not relevant per se, although things
usually work out such that low MW components are favorable.
        Adrian Brunyate.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 1134 invoked from network); 3 Sep 2001 20:26:54 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 3 Sep 2001 20:26:54 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 32606 invoked by uid 50005); 3 Sep 2001 20:27:22 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpb with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.320365 secs); 03 Sep 2001 20:27:22 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 3 Sep 2001 20:27:22 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA12994; Mon, 3 Sep 2001 13:24:35 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 107104 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 3 Sep 2001 20:23:10          +0000
Received: from femail35.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail35.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.254.60.25]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA12905          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 3 Sep 2001 13:20:25 -0700
Received: from c1649002-a.earthlink.net ([24.20.95.67]) by          femail35.sdc1.sfba.home.com (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20          201-229-121-120-20010223) with ESMTP id          <20010903202020.EFFT19181.femail35.sdc1.sfba.home.com@c1649002-a.earthlink.net>; Mon, 3 Sep 2001 13:20:20          -0700
X-Sender: forkbomb@mail.earthlink.net
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.0.2
References: <F102rfFz82buW5RNB6H00019ef9@hotmail.com>            <a05100325b7b410af880a@[63.25.57.165]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <5.0.2.1.0.20010903131405.024afe48@mail.earthlink.net>
Date:         Mon, 3 Sep 2001 13:20:18 -0700
Reply-To: "Pierce Nichols" <forkbomb@EARTHLINK.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Pierce Nichols" <forkbomb@EARTHLINK.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] liquids question: alcohol/N2O propellant feeding
Comments: To: Sherwood Stolt <ssstolt@SEANET.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <3B93BDFE.B536D9A9@seanet.com>

At 10:29 AM 9/3/2001 -0700, Sherwood Stolt wrote:
>I thought the usual seal for propellant pistons were T seals.  O-rings
>can't handle a lot of change in the gap size.


         With a straight cylindrical tank, the gap size shouldn't change
enough to cause a problem with O-rings. The inner tank, at least as I
envision the design, has equal pressure on both sides, so stretching
shouldn't be a problem. Since the outer tank is also the airframe, it pays
to make it out of something like carbon fiber tubing or the like.
         That reminds me -- how much do you want for just the tubes on
those fiberglass rockets you're selling, Jerry? the tubes aren't listed
individually on the site :(.

         -p



>Jerry Irvine wrote:
>
> > >PK wrote:
> > >
> > >>The piston seal is not subject to a pressure gradient.
> > >
> > >I see. But still, stick your life on the integrity of a series of O-rings?
> >
> > If you are that worried use 4 o-rings in parallel.  They are cheap.
> >
> > >

Mars or Bust!
www.marssociety.com

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 6 invoked from network); 3 Sep 2001 20:35:40 -0000
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 3 Sep 2001 20:35:40 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 26588 invoked by uid 50005); 3 Sep 2001 20:35:41 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpe with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.392543 secs); 03 Sep 2001 20:35:41 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 3 Sep 2001 20:35:40 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA13063; Mon, 3 Sep 2001 13:33:20 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 107119 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 3 Sep 2001 20:31:53          +0000
Received: from femail47.sdc1.sfba.home.com (imail@femail47.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.254.60.41]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA13048          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 3 Sep 2001 13:31:53 -0700
Received: from home.com ([24.22.71.82]) by femail47.sdc1.sfba.home.com          (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20 201-229-121-120-20010223) with ESMTP id          <20010903203152.PTBE20210.femail47.sdc1.sfba.home.com@home.com> for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 3 Sep 2001 13:31:52 -0700
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.75 [en] (Win98; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <a05100308b7b98c4c771c@[63.24.225.117]>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B93E912.4A0A1128@home.com>
Date:         Mon, 3 Sep 2001 16:33:22 -0400
Reply-To: "Mark Simpson" <mark.simpson@HOME.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Mark Simpson" <mark.simpson@HOME.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Turbopump and microjet geeks arise!
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Interesting company.  Thanks for the link.

Mark Simpson

Jerry Irvine wrote:

> http://www.m-dot.com
>
> Just Jerry
>
> --
> Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
> Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
> Opinion, the whole thing.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 19925 invoked from network); 3 Sep 2001 20:50:46 -0000
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 3 Sep 2001 20:50:46 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 576 invoked by uid 50005); 3 Sep 2001 20:48:26 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpf with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.372984 secs); 03 Sep 2001 20:48:26 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 3 Sep 2001 20:48:25 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA13181; Mon, 3 Sep 2001 13:48:05 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 107146 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 3 Sep 2001 20:46:43          +0000
Received: from imo-d03.mx.aol.com (imo-d03.mx.aol.com [205.188.157.35]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA13166 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Mon, 3 Sep 2001 13:46:43 -0700
Received: from Sociald84@aol.com by imo-d03.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v31_r1.4.) id          m.137.1177e46 (16336); Mon, 3 Sep 2001 16:45:41 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0C60_01C56B69.4F2B8F00"
X-Mailer: AOL 6.0 for Windows US sub 10536
Message-ID:  <137.1177e46.28c545f4@aol.com>
Date:         Mon, 3 Sep 2001 16:45:40 EDT
Reply-To: <Sociald84@AOL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <Sociald84@AOL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Propellent Musings
Comments: To: bpbullock@laribay.net
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0C60_01C56B69.4F2B8F00
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

In a message dated 9/3/2001 12:12:05 AM Mountain Daylight Time,
bpbullock@LARIBAY.NET writes:


> Pierce:
>     That's probably where I got confused. The Physics book I have been using
> (which is quite old like myself) quotes:
> gasoline =11,400 cal/g or 20,500 btu.lb; kerosene =11,200 cal/g or    20,000
> btu/lb; Diesel fuel =10,500 cal/g or 9,000 btu/lb; and alcohol = 6,400 cal/g
> or 11,500 btu/lb and I thought I had read somewhere that 6 oil was only
> about 21,500 or maybe it was 22...memory is about as long as my hair anymore
> (I'm mostly bald).
>

What kind of alcohol is that? Does the number of btu/lb make any difference
in Isp? From the Cpropep runs that I've done Isopropyl alcohol with nitrous
has a higher Isp uder the same conditions than either kerosine or gasoline.

Mark

------=_NextPart_000_0C60_01C56B69.4F2B8F00
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<HTML><FONT FACE=arial,helvetica><FONT  SIZE=2>In a message dated 9/3/2001 12:12:05 AM Mountain Daylight Time,
<BR>bpbullock@LARIBAY.NET writes:
<BR>
<BR>
<BR><BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE style="BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px">Pierce:
<BR> &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;That's probably where I got confused. The Physics book I have been using
<BR>(which is quite old like myself) quotes:
<BR>gasoline =11,400 cal/g or 20,500 btu.lb; kerosene =11,200 cal/g or &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;20,000
<BR>btu/lb; Diesel fuel =10,500 cal/g or 9,000 btu/lb; and alcohol = 6,400 cal/g
<BR>or 11,500 btu/lb and I thought I had read somewhere that 6 oil was only
<BR>about 21,500 or maybe it was 22...memory is about as long as my hair anymore
<BR>(I'm mostly bald).
<BR></BLOCKQUOTE>
<BR>
<BR>What kind of alcohol is that? Does the number of btu/lb make any difference
<BR>in Isp? From the Cpropep runs that I've done Isopropyl alcohol with nitrous
<BR>has a higher Isp uder the same conditions than either kerosine or gasoline.
<BR>
<BR>Mark</FONT></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0C60_01C56B69.4F2B8F00--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 17078 invoked from network); 3 Sep 2001 20:59:08 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 3 Sep 2001 20:59:08 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 12757 invoked by uid 50005); 3 Sep 2001 20:59:36 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpb with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.25817 secs); 03 Sep 2001 20:59:37 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 3 Sep 2001 20:59:36 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA13248; Mon, 3 Sep 2001 13:56:50 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 107163 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 3 Sep 2001 20:55:28          +0000
Received: from smtp005pub.verizon.net (smtp005pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.184])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA13232 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 3 Sep 2001 13:55:28 -0700
Received: from [63.25.193.159] (1Cust159.tnt1.hilo.hi.da.uu.net          [63.25.193.159]) by smtp005pub.verizon.net  with ESMTP for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; id f83Kstg14742 Mon, 3 Sep 2001 15:54:56 -0500          (CDT)
X-Sender: ttocs@mail.gte.net
References: <F141omRXf2LTrpwACkW00002e54@hotmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <l03130300b7b5a958d1e2@[63.25.193.97]>
Date:         Fri, 31 Aug 2001 10:54:34 -1000
Reply-To: "Aaron Smith" <ttocs@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Aaron Smith" <ttocs@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Propellent Musings
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <004401c134ac$8b873dc0$62391442@billbull>

I posted this a while back, but here it is again.

1) Nitric acid / Kerosene : 1.223 g/cc, 245 seconds - 3532 m/s
2) LOX / Kerosene : .968 g/cc, 270 seconds - 3437 m/s
3) 90% H2O2 / Kerosene : 1.236 g/cc, 224 seconds - 3252 m/s
4) LOX / LCH4 : .769 g/cc, 285 seconds - 3168 m/s
5) LOX / LH2 : .365 g/cc, 306 seconds - 2080 m/s

This is assuming we use the same tank, with the same expansion ratio, Pc,
and weight for each combination.

Let the numbers do the talking...

At 2:13 PM -0500 9/3/01, Bill Bullock wrote:
>John:
>    The pre-answer to that is whether or not you want to get tarred,
>feathered and/or "flamed" by the proponents of Hydrogen et. al. I have had a
>"running verbal gun battle" with an uncle who really is a Rocket Scientist
>(of some renown) who is a proponent of liquid hydrogen to the exclusion of
>all other alternatives. (His response has always been,"WHAT alternatives?")
>    I can really get him jacked out of joint whenever I remind him that he
>(and we) are working with a technology which has remained basically
>unchanged for about 800 years now. The game plan is to accelerate and eject
>out the back of a closed chamber with a hole in it as much material as
>possible at the fastest mass flow rate and velocity attainable...all else is
>detail.
>    The way we do this is to make us what amounts to a big steam
>jet..."steam" denoting any gaseous material or any solid material suspended
>in a stream of gas. We do this by generating a lot of pressure within the
>chamber. We generate pressure like any "steam" generator...we heat it as hot
>as we can get it.
>    Nowhere have I ever seen. heard or read about the laws of physics being
>revoked on our behalf...nobody can change the rules. They remain constant
>for everyone.
>    Since the end result is supposed to be something that leaves the ground,
>weight is important. The "coin of the realm" is heat...or BTU's or however
>you want to measure it. The more thermal energy you can get per pound of
>weight the better. The more REACTANT oxidizer you can get per pound of
>oxidizing material likewise the better. The important thing IS NOT the ratio
>of vehicle mass to fuel mass.. it is vehicle mass to total thrust attainable
>within a reasonable time frame, a lot of other variables being equal. All
>this is what was behind our engineers on tha Atlas attempting to increase
>the burn profile by adding powdered aluminum to the kerocene we used for
>fuel. It worked fine, except for what the itssy-bitssy aluminum particles
>did to the impelersto the fuel pump turbine blades...
>    All of this brings on more problems, but those are only details.
>Problems are made to be solved.
>Bill
>PS: Own personal opinion, so please don't shoot/lynch/flame me just yet.
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: John Dom <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
>To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
>Sent: Monday, September 03, 2001 2:35 AM
>Subject: Re: [AR] Propellent Musings
>
>
>> Quote BB:
>>
>> >The Physics book I have been using quotes:
>> >gasoline =11,400 cal/g; kerosene =11,200 cal/g; Diesel fuel =10,500 cal/g
>> >and alcohol = 6,400 cal/g...
>>
>> Question; is there a mathematical relationship between heat of combustion
>> (kJ/kg) and Isp?
>>
>> Concerning the wisdom of using molten AN as a oxidizer, 60 % O in it
>> compares poorly with 90 % H2O2 which contains 84.7 % O or WFNA which has
>> 76.2 % O in it...The latter do not require heating and cannot solidify.
>> Well, ie chemically speaking. Did I overlook something here?
>>
>> jd
>>
>> _________________________________________________________________
>> Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp
>>
>>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 25927 invoked from network); 3 Sep 2001 21:20:15 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 3 Sep 2001 21:20:15 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 19858 invoked by uid 50005); 3 Sep 2001 21:20:43 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpb with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.463764 secs); 03 Sep 2001 21:20:43 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 3 Sep 2001 21:20:42 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA13366; Mon, 3 Sep 2001 14:17:58 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 107183 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 3 Sep 2001 21:16:36          +0000
Received: from imo-m02.mx.aol.com (imo-m02.mx.aol.com [64.12.136.5]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA13349; Mon, 3 Sep 2001          14:16:36 -0700
Received: from Sociald84@aol.com by imo-m02.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v31_r1.4.) id          w.11b.3e5fcc5 (16336); Mon, 3 Sep 2001 17:15:59 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0C65_01C56B69.4F2B8F00"
X-Mailer: AOL 6.0 for Windows US sub 10536
Message-ID:  <11b.3e5fcc5.28c54d0e@aol.com>
Date:         Mon, 3 Sep 2001 17:15:58 EDT
Reply-To: <Sociald84@AOL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <Sociald84@AOL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Strangest Biprop Ever?
Comments: To: rcalkins@itc.uci.edu
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0C65_01C56B69.4F2B8F00
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

In a message dated 9/3/2001 11:57:02 AM Mountain Daylight Time,
rcalkins@itc.uci.edu writes:


> Well, I've seen a couple that would give it a run for it's money, but it's
> still interesting.
>
> Somebody wrote me asking about flying this piece of hardware, can you help
> ID it?
> http://arocket.itc.uci.edu/tmp2.jpg
> http://arocket.itc.uci.edu/tmp1.jpg
>
> It looks to have a staged combustion chamber and regenerative cooling.  I
> don't know anything else about it.
>
> Ray
>

The plaque on it's stand says "Jetline" I would do a websearch on the word
and see what it comes up with. I may be an H2O2 biprop with the upper chamber
being a catylist chamber. Or possibly an integrated gas gennerator for
running a turbo pump.
If so that's an awesome idea.

Mark

------=_NextPart_000_0C65_01C56B69.4F2B8F00
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<HTML><FONT FACE=arial,helvetica><FONT  SIZE=2>In a message dated 9/3/2001 11:57:02 AM Mountain Daylight Time,
<BR>rcalkins@itc.uci.edu writes:
<BR>
<BR>
<BR><BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE style="BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px">Well, I've seen a couple that would give it a run for it's money, but it's
<BR>still interesting.
<BR>
<BR>Somebody wrote me asking about flying this piece of hardware, can you help
<BR>ID it?
<BR>http://arocket.itc.uci.edu/tmp2.jpg
<BR>http://arocket.itc.uci.edu/tmp1.jpg
<BR>
<BR>It looks to have a staged combustion chamber and regenerative cooling. &nbsp;I
<BR>don't know anything else about it.
<BR>
<BR>Ray
<BR></BLOCKQUOTE>
<BR>
<BR>The plaque on it's stand says "Jetline" I would do a websearch on the word
<BR>and see what it comes up with. I may be an H2O2 biprop with the upper chamber
<BR>being a catylist chamber. Or possibly an integrated gas gennerator for
<BR>running a turbo pump.
<BR>If so that's an awesome idea.
<BR>
<BR>Mark</FONT></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0C65_01C56B69.4F2B8F00--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 14098 invoked from network); 3 Sep 2001 21:25:57 -0000
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 3 Sep 2001 21:25:57 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 26632 invoked by uid 50005); 3 Sep 2001 21:25:58 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpe with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.415855 secs); 03 Sep 2001 21:25:58 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 3 Sep 2001 21:25:57 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA13405; Mon, 3 Sep 2001 14:23:29 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 107178 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 3 Sep 2001 21:22:06          +0000
Received: from snipe.mail.pas.earthlink.net (snipe.mail.pas.earthlink.net          [207.217.120.62]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA13324          for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Mon, 3 Sep 2001 14:12:05 -0700
Received: from earthlink.net (dialup-209.247.139.4.Dial1.SanJose1.Level3.net          [209.247.139.4]) by snipe.mail.pas.earthlink.net (8.11.5/8.9.3) with          ESMTP id f83LC3T16174; Mon, 3 Sep 2001 14:12:04 -0700 (PDT)
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.75 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.16-22 i686)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <4.3.1.2.20010903143405.03e94f08@mail.idsoftware.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B93F27F.8EDD5373@earthlink.net>
Date:         Mon, 3 Sep 2001 14:13:35 -0700
Reply-To: "David Weinshenker" <daze39@EARTHLINK.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "David Weinshenker" <daze39@EARTHLINK.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] liquids question: alcohol/N2O propellant feeding
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

John Carmack wrote:
> A couple days ago, Phil told me about an experiment that he and Russ had
> done before they met me.  They had mixed some 50% peroxide and some
> alcohol, and detonated it with a blasting cap.  A couple ounces made a
> TREMENDOUS explosion, and was enough to convince them that they never
> wanted to do that again.
>
> I occasionally vacillate back and forth on hybrid vs biprop for our high
> performance designs, but the descriptions of the damage caused by that
> small amount of mixture is probably enough to keep me from thinking about
> biprops for another year.  I can imagine circumstances where a loaded
> vehicle falls over, or has some failure during launch, and you wind up with
> hundreds of pounds of mixed explosives pooling on the ground.

On the other hand, the mixture can be "safed" by diluting it with water...

-dave w

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 29278 invoked from network); 3 Sep 2001 21:30:35 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 3 Sep 2001 21:30:35 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 29947 invoked by uid 50005); 3 Sep 2001 21:30:36 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpe with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.200041 secs); 03 Sep 2001 21:30:36 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 3 Sep 2001 21:30:36 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA13470; Mon, 3 Sep 2001 14:28:25 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 107212 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 3 Sep 2001 21:27:04          +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (f127.law15.hotmail.com [64.4.23.127]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA13454 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Mon, 3 Sep 2001 14:27:02 -0700
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Mon,          3 Sep 2001 14:25:05 -0700
Received: from 213.224.83.46 by lw15fd.law15.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Mon, 03          Sep 2001 21:25:05 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [213.224.83.46]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 03 Sep 2001 21:25:05.0614 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[E6597EE0:01C134BE]
Message-ID:  <F127knLIqFRXchQyNfZ00003878@hotmail.com>
Date:         Mon, 3 Sep 2001 21:27:04 +0000
Reply-To: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Propellent Musings
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Ooops. Seems I'll have to reconsider my calc. Tomorrow ie.

jd

>From: Seth Leigh <seth@PENGAR.COM>
>Reply-To: Seth Leigh <seth@PENGAR.COM>
>To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
>Subject: Re: [AR] Propellent Musings
>Date: Mon, 3 Sep 2001 11:28:10 -0400
>
>H2O2 may have 90% O in it, but doesn't it decompose into 2xH2O + 1
>O2?  Don't you "lose" half the O to water vapor, which makes it unusable
>for oxidizing other stuff?
>
>Seth
>
>At 03:35 AM 9/3/2001, you wrote:
>>Quote BB:
>>
>>>The Physics book I have been using quotes:
>>>gasoline =11,400 cal/g; kerosene =11,200 cal/g; Diesel fuel =10,500 cal/g
>>>and alcohol = 6,400 cal/g...
>>
>>Question; is there a mathematical relationship between heat of combustion
>>(kJ/kg) and Isp?
>>
>>Concerning the wisdom of using molten AN as a oxidizer, 60 % O in it
>>compares poorly with 90 % H2O2 which contains 84.7 % O or WFNA which has
>>76.2 % O in it...The latter do not require heating and cannot solidify.
>>Well, ie chemically speaking. Did I overlook something here?
>>
>>jd
>>
>>_________________________________________________________________
>>Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp


_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 10268 invoked from network); 3 Sep 2001 21:33:50 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 3 Sep 2001 21:33:50 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 16073 invoked by uid 50005); 3 Sep 2001 21:32:06 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.512209 secs); 03 Sep 2001 21:32:06 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 3 Sep 2001 21:32:05 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA13512; Mon, 3 Sep 2001 14:31:52 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 107223 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 3 Sep 2001 21:30:27          +0000
Received: from dns2.seanet.com (dns2.seanet.com [199.181.164.2]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA13496 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Mon,          3 Sep 2001 14:30:27 -0700
Received: from seanet.com (ssstolt.seanet.com [204.182.68.23]) by          dns2.seanet.com (8.11.6/8.11.5) with ESMTP id f83LUKb29415; Mon, 3          Sep 2001 14:30:20 -0700 (PDT)
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.73 [en] (Win98; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010828185904.24467A-100000@spsystems.net>             <3B8DC4F8.8D8670FC@seanet.com> <018001c1312f$701f2dc0$0100a8c0@mkbs>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B93F4BE.A131449E@seanet.com>
Date:         Mon, 3 Sep 2001 14:23:10 -0700
Reply-To: "Sherwood Stolt" <ssstolt@SEANET.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Sherwood Stolt" <ssstolt@SEANET.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] liquids question: alcohol/N2O propellant feeding
Comments: cc: Russell McMahon <apptech@clear.net.nz>,          Henry Spencer <henry@spsystems.net>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Either way I still like dumping a pressurization system overboard as
part of some sort of parallel staging scheme.

Russell McMahon wrote:

> > Now that is a scheme I hadn't thought of.  Use a high pressure tank and
> > regulator to pressurize the propellant tanks until say 2/3 of the burn
> (when
> > there is plenty of gas in the tanks to blow down without much pressure
> > loss) then dump the pressurization system overboard somehow to limit
> > its impact on the end weight.
>
> Careful here.
>
> Is Henry saying that the  Atlas tank was blowdown pressurised and this
> supplied the remaining motor without a pump or that the blowdown was used
> for tank pressurisation but that a pump was still used to feed the motor?
>
> If the former it suggests either that the very thin Atlas tanks are able to
> take a useful amount of pressure or that the post booster part of the burn
> runs at extremely low pressure. I rather assumed that he meant that there
> was still a pump present but maybe not.
>
>                 Russell McMahon

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 1091 invoked from network); 3 Sep 2001 22:15:42 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 3 Sep 2001 22:15:42 -0000
Received: (qmail 30116 invoked by uid 50005); 3 Sep 2001 22:13:58 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.381428 secs); 03 Sep 2001 22:13:58 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 3 Sep 2001 22:13:57 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA13752; Mon, 3 Sep 2001 15:13:36 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 107282 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 3 Sep 2001 22:12:09          +0000
Received: from mta04.mail.mel.aone.net.au (mta04.mail.au.uu.net [203.2.192.84])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA13736 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 3 Sep 2001 15:12:08 -0700
Received: from unknown ([63.60.220.133]) by mta04.mail.mel.aone.net.au with          SMTP id <20010903221206.DGNR12702.mta04.mail.mel.aone.net.au@unknown>          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 4 Sep 2001 08:12:06 +1000
References: Conversation <F141omRXf2LTrpwACkW00002e54@hotmail.com> with last            message <MBBBKKNFKBOLONOKKFHLMEBICBAA.adrianby@erols.com>
Priority: Normal
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Priority: 3
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	X-MAPIextension=.TXT;
	charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>
Date:         Mon, 3 Sep 2001 22:12:09 +0000
Reply-To: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Propellent Musings
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <MBBBKKNFKBOLONOKKFHLMEBICBAA.adrianby@erols.com>

----------
> >Question; is there a mathematical relationship between heat of
> >combustion
> >(kJ/kg) and Isp?
>
>         Sort of. There was a very comprehensive thread on this a while
back,
> but
> I'll summarize (perhaps incorrectly?).
>         The kinetic energy of the jet depends on two things: the amount of
> energy
> generated by the reaction,

Wrong!

 and the nozzle efficiency.

Right.

 For a perfect nozzle,
> the efficiency is governed by how much of the gas's energy is trapped in
> unavailable modes (rotation, etc.).

Huh?

 Methinks that since the product of the
> above is in energy units, ISP (momentum transfer/mass of propellant)
should
> be proportional to the square root of said product.
>         Note that the MW of the products is not relevant per se, although
> things
> usually work out such that low MW components are favorable.

As I said, MW is most relevant. Look at any Isp equation.

Troy.

>         Adrian Brunyate.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 12814 invoked from network); 3 Sep 2001 22:36:48 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 3 Sep 2001 22:36:48 -0000
Received: (qmail 5167 invoked by uid 50005); 3 Sep 2001 22:35:04 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.313643 secs); 03 Sep 2001 22:35:04 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 3 Sep 2001 22:35:04 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA13924; Mon, 3 Sep 2001 15:34:25 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 107308 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 3 Sep 2001 22:32:55          +0000
Received: from mta01.mail.mel.aone.net.au (mta01.mail.au.uu.net [203.2.192.81])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA13907 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 3 Sep 2001 15:32:54 -0700
Received: from unknown ([63.34.214.250]) by mta01.mail.mel.aone.net.au with          SMTP id <20010903223252.RCMD3755.mta01.mail.mel.aone.net.au@unknown>          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 4 Sep 2001 08:32:52 +1000
References: Conversation <F141omRXf2LTrpwACkW00002e54@hotmail.com> with last            message <004401c134ac$8b873dc0$62391442@billbull>
Priority: Normal
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Priority: 3
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	X-MAPIextension=.TXT;
	charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>
Date:         Mon, 3 Sep 2001 22:32:55 +0000
Reply-To: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Propellent Musings
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <004401c134ac$8b873dc0$62391442@billbull>

>     Since the end result is supposed to be something that leaves the
ground,
> weight is important. The "coin of the realm" is heat...or BTU's or however
> you want to measure it. The more thermal energy you can get per pound of
> weight the better.

Nup, or we'd all be flying thermite rockets, simple as that!!!

Troy.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 25412 invoked from network); 3 Sep 2001 22:57:28 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 3 Sep 2001 22:57:28 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 23585 invoked by uid 50005); 3 Sep 2001 22:57:52 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpa with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.383223 secs); 03 Sep 2001 22:57:52 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 3 Sep 2001 22:57:51 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA14084; Mon, 3 Sep 2001 15:55:25 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 107325 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 3 Sep 2001 22:53:58          +0000
Received: from swan.mail.pas.earthlink.net (swan.mail.pas.earthlink.net          [207.217.120.123]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id          PAA14028 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 3 Sep 2001 15:43:58 -0700
Received: from earthlink.net (dialup-209.247.139.4.Dial1.SanJose1.Level3.net          [209.247.139.4]) by swan.mail.pas.earthlink.net (EL-8_9_3_3/8.9.3)          with ESMTP id PAA12725; Mon, 3 Sep 2001 15:43:56 -0700 (PDT)
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.75 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.16-22 i686)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: Conversation <F141omRXf2LTrpwACkW00002e54@hotmail.com> with last            message <004401c134ac$8b873dc0$62391442@billbull>            <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B940807.CD90D53E@earthlink.net>
Date:         Mon, 3 Sep 2001 15:45:27 -0700
Reply-To: "David Weinshenker" <daze39@EARTHLINK.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "David Weinshenker" <daze39@EARTHLINK.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Propellent Musings
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Troy Prideaux wrote:
>
> >     Since the end result is supposed to be something that leaves the
> ground,
> > weight is important. The "coin of the realm" is heat...or BTU's or however
> > you want to measure it. The more thermal energy you can get per pound of
> > weight the better.
>
> Nup, or we'd all be flying thermite rockets, simple as that!!!
>
> Troy.

Yep, another key parameter is volume of hot gas per pound of weight...
which is why a lower-molecular-weight exhaust, if it can be had at
otherwise similar conditions, will give better thrust. (Many H2/O2
engines run hydrogen-rich because of this - energy per propellant
mass input is reduced, but the lower MW of the exhaust gives better
effective performance even so.)

-dave w

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 5209 invoked from network); 3 Sep 2001 23:00:18 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 3 Sep 2001 23:00:18 -0000
Received: (qmail 2238 invoked by uid 50005); 3 Sep 2001 22:59:11 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.339664 secs); 03 Sep 2001 22:59:11 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 3 Sep 2001 22:59:10 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA14128; Mon, 3 Sep 2001 15:58:11 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 107344 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 3 Sep 2001 22:56:51          +0000
Received: from mta05.mail.mel.aone.net.au (mta05.mail.au.uu.net [203.2.192.85])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA14113 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 3 Sep 2001 15:56:50 -0700
Received: from unknown ([63.60.220.76]) by mta05.mail.mel.aone.net.au with SMTP          id <20010903225646.ETTE7694.mta05.mail.mel.aone.net.au@unknown> for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 4 Sep 2001 08:56:46 +1000
References: Conversation <F141omRXf2LTrpwACkW00002e54@hotmail.com> with last            message <l03130300b7b5a958d1e2@[63.25.193.97]>
Priority: Normal
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Priority: 3
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	X-MAPIextension=.TXT;
	charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>
Date:         Mon, 3 Sep 2001 22:56:51 +0000
Reply-To: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Propellent Musings
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <l03130300b7b5a958d1e2@[63.25.193.97]>

Must admit Aaron, those are GOOD numbers. They will probably change around
a bit with certain clever designs but really point out how important DIsp
can be for most tasks and are VERY relevant to amateur capabilities.

----------
> I posted this a while back, but here it is again.
>
> 1) Nitric acid / Kerosene : 1.223 g/cc, 245 seconds - 3532 m/s
> 2) LOX / Kerosene : .968 g/cc, 270 seconds - 3437 m/s
> 3) 90% H2O2 / Kerosene : 1.236 g/cc, 224 seconds - 3252 m/s
> 4) LOX / LCH4 : .769 g/cc, 285 seconds - 3168 m/s
> 5) LOX / LH2 : .365 g/cc, 306 seconds - 2080 m/s
>
> This is assuming we use the same tank, with the same expansion ratio, Pc,
> and weight for each combination.
>
> Let the numbers do the talking...
>
> At 2:13 PM -0500 9/3/01, Bill Bullock wrote:
> >John:
> >    The pre-answer to that is whether or not you want to get tarred,
> >feathered and/or "flamed" by the proponents of Hydrogen et. al. I have
had a
> >"running verbal gun battle" with an uncle who really is a Rocket
Scientist
> >(of some renown) who is a proponent of liquid hydrogen to the exclusion
of
> >all other alternatives. (His response has always been,"WHAT
alternatives?")
> >    I can really get him jacked out of joint whenever I remind him that
he
> >(and we) are working with a technology which has remained basically
> >unchanged for about 800 years now. The game plan is to accelerate and
eject
> >out the back of a closed chamber with a hole in it as much material as
> >possible at the fastest mass flow rate and velocity attainable...all
else is
> >detail.
> >    The way we do this is to make us what amounts to a big steam
> >jet..."steam" denoting any gaseous material or any solid material
suspended
> >in a stream of gas. We do this by generating a lot of pressure within the
> >chamber. We generate pressure like any "steam" generator...we heat it as
hot
> >as we can get it.
> >    Nowhere have I ever seen. heard or read about the laws of physics
being
> >revoked on our behalf...nobody can change the rules. They remain constant
> >for everyone.
> >    Since the end result is supposed to be something that leaves the
ground,
> >weight is important. The "coin of the realm" is heat...or BTU's or
however
> >you want to measure it. The more thermal energy you can get per pound of
> >weight the better. The more REACTANT oxidizer you can get per pound of
> >oxidizing material likewise the better. The important thing IS NOT the
ratio
> >of vehicle mass to fuel mass.. it is vehicle mass to total thrust
attainable
> >within a reasonable time frame, a lot of other variables being equal. All
> >this is what was behind our engineers on tha Atlas attempting to increase
> >the burn profile by adding powdered aluminum to the kerocene we used for
> >fuel. It worked fine, except for what the itssy-bitssy aluminum particles
> >did to the impelersto the fuel pump turbine blades...
> >    All of this brings on more problems, but those are only details.
> >Problems are made to be solved.
> >Bill
> >PS: Own personal opinion, so please don't shoot/lynch/flame me just yet.
> >
> >----- Original Message -----
> >From: John Dom <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
> >To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
> >Sent: Monday, September 03, 2001 2:35 AM
> >Subject: Re: [AR] Propellent Musings
> >
> >
> >> Quote BB:
> >>
> >> >The Physics book I have been using quotes:
> >> >gasoline =11,400 cal/g; kerosene =11,200 cal/g; Diesel fuel =10,500
cal/g
> >> >and alcohol = 6,400 cal/g...
> >>
> >> Question; is there a mathematical relationship between heat of
combustion
> >> (kJ/kg) and Isp?
> >>
> >> Concerning the wisdom of using molten AN as a oxidizer, 60 % O in it
> >> compares poorly with 90 % H2O2 which contains 84.7 % O or WFNA which
has
> >> 76.2 % O in it...The latter do not require heating and cannot solidify.
> >> Well, ie chemically speaking. Did I overlook something here?
> >>
> >> jd
> >>
> >> _________________________________________________________________
> >> Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at
http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp
> >>
> >>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 17897 invoked from network); 3 Sep 2001 23:03:53 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 3 Sep 2001 23:03:53 -0000
Received: (qmail 4229 invoked by uid 50005); 3 Sep 2001 23:02:45 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.103463 secs); 03 Sep 2001 23:02:45 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 3 Sep 2001 23:02:45 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA14189; Mon, 3 Sep 2001 16:01:42 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 107357 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 3 Sep 2001 23:00:16          +0000
Received: from cablecom.laribay.net (cablecom.laribay.net [66.20.57.4]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA14166 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 3 Sep 2001 16:00:15 -0700
Received: from billbull (dial069.laribay.net [66.20.57.69]) by          cablecom.laribay.net (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id RAA24949 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 3 Sep 2001 17:41:52 -0500 (CDT)          (envelope-from bpbullock@laribay.net)
References: Conversation <F141omRXf2LTrpwACkW00002e54@hotmail.com> with last               message <004401c134ac$8b873dc0$62391442@billbull>             <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <001f01c134cc$6cc1d6a0$45391442@billbull>
Date:         Mon, 3 Sep 2001 18:01:33 -0500
Reply-To: "Bill Bullock" <bpbullock@LARIBAY.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Bill Bullock" <bpbullock@LARIBAY.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Propellent Musings
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Troy:
    True in a lot of ways, and not wanting to contest with my betters, but
may I quote myself:
"...within a reasonable time frame, a lot of other variables being equal."
Please note the last seven words. Simple as that!!!
Bill
PS: If I could get a thermite off the ground I would fly one of those to...

----- Original Message -----
From: Troy Prideaux <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Monday, September 03, 2001 5:32 PM
Subject: Re: [AR] Propellent Musings


> >     Since the end result is supposed to be something that leaves the
> ground,
> > weight is important. The "coin of the realm" is heat...or BTU's or
however
> > you want to measure it. The more thermal energy you can get per pound of
> > weight the better.
>
> Nup, or we'd all be flying thermite rockets, simple as that!!!
>
> Troy.
>
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 10717 invoked from network); 3 Sep 2001 23:19:55 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 3 Sep 2001 23:19:55 -0000
Received: (qmail 12216 invoked by uid 50005); 3 Sep 2001 23:18:47 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.437032 secs); 03 Sep 2001 23:18:47 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 3 Sep 2001 23:18:47 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA14287; Mon, 3 Sep 2001 16:14:46 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 107384 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 3 Sep 2001 23:13:25          +0000
Received: from mailhost0.trib.com (mailhost0.trib.com [63.229.150.3]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA14271 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Mon, 3 Sep 2001 16:13:24 -0700
Received: from mail.trib.com (mail.trib.com [12.10.158.17]) by          mailhost0.trib.com (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f83NDM617300; Mon, 3          Sep 2001 17:13:22 -0600 (MDT) (envelope-from          jwckman@space-rockets.com)
Received: from [63.229.150.88] (HELO hppav) by mail.trib.com (CommuniGate Pro          SMTP 3.4.6) with SMTP id 45289671; Mon, 03 Sep 2001 17:13:21 -0600
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <NKEHJAOOKBPGIKOOPDEFOENECBAA.jwckman@space-rockets.com>
Date:         Mon, 3 Sep 2001 17:11:42 -0600
Reply-To: "John Wickman" <jwckman@SPACE-ROCKETS.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Wickman" <jwckman@SPACE-ROCKETS.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] questionable motor]
Comments: To: James Yawn <jyawn@sfcc.net>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <3B93ADAB.2809900D@sfcc.net>

The Bates motor series was developed to evaluate the performance of
different propellant formulations.   The smallest BATES motor was about a 50
pounder.  There are long BATES and SUPER BATES motors used by the Govt. and
industry.  These motors were often used to evaluate exit cones and other
things as they were very handy motors.  You could take empty propellant
cartridges out to a casting station and ask them to fill them with excess
propellant.  Put together the BATES motor with the cartridges and you had a
nice little motor for in-house R&D.

I do not know how HPR and amateur rocketry started calling segmented grains
by the name BATES grains.   BATES stands for a long acronym which I do not
remember.

Its not classified as I have a set of drawings for a 50 lb BATES motor in my
file.  It is standard hardware.

John Wickman

-----Original Message-----
From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU]On
Behalf Of James Yawn
Sent: Monday, September 03, 2001 10:20 AM
To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
Subject: Re: [AR] questionable motor]


Troy:  You could have led me on and on with this, I being such an
idiot-savant
in this field (and less savant than idiot, as many have observed!)  My
academics
are deficient - I think I went straight from "Green Eggs and Ham" to "All
About
Rockets and Jets" and have not moved much past that level.  But I am willing
to
work on it.

Sounds like the Bates grain was developed by a military/government
agency...I
would still like to know more, assuming it is not classified :)  Any
recommended
readings?

Respectfully,
Jimmy Yawn



until I encountered Arocket.

Troy Prideaux wrote:

> ----------
> > Seth:  Thanks for looking at my stuff, and especially for the
correction:
> >
> > Seth Leigh wrote:
> >
> > >I may be wrong about the terminology, but doesn't a Bates grain
> > >configuration require multiple propellant segments?  Ie: if it doesn't
> have
> > >multiple propellant segments, rather than being a Bates motor it's just
a
> > >long, outside inhibited core-burner?
> >
> > Jimmy Yawn wrote:
> >
> > I think you are right.  I was wondering if I were using the term "Bates
> grain"
> > correctly, and believe I have been using it too generally.  Who was/is
> Bates,
> > anyway?  I would like to see some of this person's work - such a clever
> idea!
>
> Umm, I could go on about what a genius yet somewhat of a recluse he
> was....ah..faget it...
>
> Abbreviation for BAllistic TESt motor or Ballistic evaluation motors.
>
> Troy.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 23108 invoked from network); 3 Sep 2001 23:51:31 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 3 Sep 2001 23:51:31 -0000
Received: (qmail 12748 invoked by uid 50005); 3 Sep 2001 23:51:58 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpb with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.758072 secs); 03 Sep 2001 23:51:58 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 3 Sep 2001 23:51:56 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA14410; Mon, 3 Sep 2001 16:35:35 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 107415 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 3 Sep 2001 23:34:00          +0000
Received: from fep4-orange.clear.net.nz (fep4-orange.clear.net.nz          [203.97.32.4]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA14391          for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Mon, 3 Sep 2001 16:33:59 -0700
Received: from mkbs (203-167-162-14.dialup.clear.net.nz [203.167.162.14]) by          fep4-orange.clear.net.nz (1.5/1.7) with SMTP id LAA06606; Tue, 4 Sep          2001 11:33:35 +1200 (NZST)
References: <3B92446A.E4105FDC@sfcc.net>                                  <5.1.0.14.0.20010903012327.01c21238@hobbiton.shire.net>                        <00fe01c13497$8739c220$0100a8c0@mkbs>             <006701c1349e$022f0e80$60cfe3c1@serge>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <028601c134d1$4b913020$0100a8c0@mkbs>
Date:         Tue, 4 Sep 2001 11:31:34 +1200
Reply-To: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Organization: Applied Technology
Subject:      Re: [AR] questionable motor]
Comments: To: Serge Pipko <spas@AKCECC.KIEV.UA>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Serge wrote
> At very end of burn the grain length is shorter then initial L :
> L(end) = L(start) - ( OD - ID )
> Therefore resulting formula for the most neutrally burning BATES grain is
:
> LENGTH = ( 3 * OD + CORE ) / 2

Doh!  you're right - I thought the cores sounded rather stubby!
I stupidly overlooked the reduction in grain length during burn
Try that again -

End burn area                =  Start burn area
case circ x end length    = Start core area    + 2 ends (less core end area)
Pi x OD x (L - (OD-ID) ) = Pi x ID x L             + 2 x Pi x (OD^2/4 -
ID^2/4)
Cancel Pi's all round. Shuffle (OD-ID) terms
(OD-ID)L - (OD-ID)OD = (OD-ID)(OD+ID)/2
L = (OD-ID)/2 + OD = (3OD + ID)/2

In words

        length = 3 x casing radius + core radius.



        Russell McMahon

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 6101 invoked from network); 4 Sep 2001 00:21:17 -0000
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 4 Sep 2001 00:21:17 -0000
Received: (qmail 26045 invoked by uid 50005); 4 Sep 2001 00:21:16 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpe with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.227098 secs); 04 Sep 2001 00:21:16 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 4 Sep 2001 00:21:16 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA14580; Mon, 3 Sep 2001 17:05:41 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 107457 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 4 Sep 2001 00:04:13          +0000
Received: from mta01.mail.mel.aone.net.au (mta01.mail.au.uu.net [203.2.192.81])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA14561 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 3 Sep 2001 17:04:13 -0700
Received: from unknown ([63.34.212.152]) by mta01.mail.mel.aone.net.au with          SMTP id <20010904000407.SRBN3755.mta01.mail.mel.aone.net.au@unknown>          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 4 Sep 2001 10:04:07 +1000
References: Conversation <3B92446A.E4105FDC@sfcc.net> with last message            <028601c134d1$4b913020$0100a8c0@mkbs>
Priority: Normal
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Priority: 3
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	X-MAPIextension=.TXT;
	charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>
Date:         Tue, 4 Sep 2001 00:04:13 +0000
Reply-To: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] questionable motor]
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <028601c134d1$4b913020$0100a8c0@mkbs>

Another note regarding BATES grains: BATES grains produce a hump in their
profile ie. the ideal neutral BATES grain doesn't produce a perfectly
neutral or linear profile. The smaller you make the core (as a ratio to the
OD) the more pronounced this hump will be. This can be an issue with
propellants possessing high "n" values. It's possible to reduce this hump a
tiny bit by tapering the ends by a given angle. This will compromise
volumetric loadings to a small extent but help the exposure the ends to
ignition.

Odd note: Grains 2K calculates complex grain geometries such as Star,
Finocyl, C-Slot, Slot Star etc but which geometry requires the most complex
geometric formulae?
Answer: The BATES grain! Only because it allows both the core and either
end to be tapered at any given angle as well as the option to inhibit
either end. All equates to about 40+ geometric possibilities which include
mid burn possibilities:-)

Troy.

----------
> Serge wrote
> > At very end of burn the grain length is shorter then initial L :
> > L(end) = L(start) - ( OD - ID )
> > Therefore resulting formula for the most neutrally burning BATES grain
is
> :
> > LENGTH = ( 3 * OD + CORE ) / 2
>
> Doh!  you're right - I thought the cores sounded rather stubby!
> I stupidly overlooked the reduction in grain length during burn
> Try that again -
>
> End burn area                =  Start burn area
> case circ x end length    = Start core area    + 2 ends (less core end
area)
> Pi x OD x (L - (OD-ID) ) = Pi x ID x L             + 2 x Pi x (OD^2/4 -
> ID^2/4)
> Cancel Pi's all round. Shuffle (OD-ID) terms
> (OD-ID)L - (OD-ID)OD = (OD-ID)(OD+ID)/2
> L = (OD-ID)/2 + OD = (3OD + ID)/2
>
> In words
>
>         length = 3 x casing radius + core radius.
>
>
>
>         Russell McMahon

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 18980 invoked from network); 4 Sep 2001 00:24:58 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 4 Sep 2001 00:24:58 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 18209 invoked by uid 50005); 4 Sep 2001 00:23:14 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.403349 secs); 04 Sep 2001 00:23:14 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 4 Sep 2001 00:23:13 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA14610; Mon, 3 Sep 2001 17:09:39 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 107464 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 4 Sep 2001 00:08:18          +0000
Received: from smtp006pub.verizon.net (smtp006pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.185])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA14590 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 3 Sep 2001 17:08:18 -0700
Received: from [63.24.225.117] (1Cust213.tnt1.rancho-cucamonga.ca.da.uu.net          [63.24.225.213]) by smtp006pub.verizon.net  with ESMTP for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; id f8407kA06104 Mon, 3 Sep 2001 19:07:46 -0500          (CDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: GTE/01rocket@mail.gte.net
References: <F102rfFz82buW5RNB6H00019ef9@hotmail.com>            <a05100325b7b410af880a@[63.25.57.165]>            <5.0.2.1.0.20010903131405.024afe48@mail.earthlink.net>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <a05100309b7b9cb7af0f3@[63.24.225.117]>
Date:         Mon, 3 Sep 2001 17:07:46 -0700
Reply-To: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] liquids question: alcohol/N2O propellant feeding
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <5.0.2.1.0.20010903131405.024afe48@mail.earthlink.net>

Pierce Nichols:

>         That reminds me -- how much do you want for just the tubes on
>those fiberglass rockets you're selling, Jerry? the tubes aren't listed
>individually on the site :(.

The fiberglass kits are priced so you are buying tubes and all the
other parts are essentially free.  So same price.

Jerry

--
Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
Opinion, the whole thing.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 5427 invoked from network); 4 Sep 2001 00:29:24 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 4 Sep 2001 00:29:24 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 21042 invoked by uid 50005); 4 Sep 2001 00:27:39 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.330501 secs); 04 Sep 2001 00:27:39 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 4 Sep 2001 00:27:38 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA14659; Mon, 3 Sep 2001 17:14:06 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 107475 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 4 Sep 2001 00:12:44          +0000
Received: from smtp008pub.verizon.net (smtp008pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.187])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA14643 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 3 Sep 2001 17:12:44 -0700
Received: from [63.24.225.117] (1Cust213.tnt1.rancho-cucamonga.ca.da.uu.net          [63.24.225.213]) by smtp008pub.verizon.net  with ESMTP for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; id f840CBq06884 Mon, 3 Sep 2001 19:12:11 -0500          (CDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: GTE/01rocket@mail.gte.net
References: <F141omRXf2LTrpwACkW00002e54@hotmail.com>            <l03130300b7b5a958d1e2@[63.25.193.97]>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <a0510030ab7b9cc321c15@[63.24.225.117]>
Date:         Mon, 3 Sep 2001 17:12:12 -0700
Reply-To: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Propellent Musings
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <l03130300b7b5a958d1e2@[63.25.193.97]>

>Aaron Smith:


>I posted this a while back, but here it is again.
>
>1) Nitric acid / Kerosene : 1.223 g/cc, 245 seconds - 3532 m/s
>2) LOX / Kerosene : .968 g/cc, 270 seconds - 3437 m/s
>3) 90% H2O2 / Kerosene : 1.236 g/cc, 224 seconds - 3252 m/s
>4) LOX / LCH4 : .769 g/cc, 285 seconds - 3168 m/s
>5) LOX / LH2 : .365 g/cc, 306 seconds - 2080 m/s
>
>This is assuming we use the same tank, with the same expansion ratio, Pc,
>and weight for each combination.


The first item on the list not only has a high ISP but a VERY high
density impulse.  To me #1 is #1, #3 is #2 and #2 is #3.

#1 is easier to handle too.

Jerry

--
Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
Opinion, the whole thing.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 28566 invoked from network); 4 Sep 2001 00:35:28 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 4 Sep 2001 00:35:28 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 6173 invoked by uid 50005); 4 Sep 2001 00:33:07 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpf with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 1.088121 secs); 04 Sep 2001 00:33:07 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 4 Sep 2001 00:33:04 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA14718; Mon, 3 Sep 2001 17:20:09 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 107490 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 4 Sep 2001 00:18:43          +0000
Received: from smtp008pub.verizon.net (smtp008pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.187])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA14697 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 3 Sep 2001 17:18:43 -0700
Received: from [63.24.225.117] (1Cust213.tnt1.rancho-cucamonga.ca.da.uu.net          [63.24.225.213]) by smtp008pub.verizon.net  with ESMTP for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; id f840IAq11768 Mon, 3 Sep 2001 19:18:11 -0500          (CDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: GTE/01rocket@mail.gte.net
References: <NKEHJAOOKBPGIKOOPDEFOENECBAA.jwckman@space-rockets.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <a0510030bb7b9cdc67b21@[63.24.225.117]>
Date:         Mon, 3 Sep 2001 17:18:11 -0700
Reply-To: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] questionable motor]
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <NKEHJAOOKBPGIKOOPDEFOENECBAA.jwckman@space-rockets.com>

>Wickman:


>I do not know how HPR and amateur rocketry started calling segmented grains
>by the name BATES grains.   BATES stands for a long acronym which I do not
>remember.
>
>Its not classified as I have a set of drawings for a 50 lb BATES motor in my
>file.  It is standard hardware.

Chuck Rogers and I brought the term to HPR at least to the popular
language of it.

Having that drawing on the web would be a good historical thing and
certainly has the proper name on it.

If you scan it or provide it for scanning I will web it.

Jerry

--
Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
Opinion, the whole thing.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 8747 invoked from network); 4 Sep 2001 00:38:08 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 4 Sep 2001 00:38:08 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 10464 invoked by uid 50005); 4 Sep 2001 00:38:07 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpe with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 1.858267 secs); 04 Sep 2001 00:38:07 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 4 Sep 2001 00:38:03 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA14782; Mon, 3 Sep 2001 17:22:44 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 107509 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 4 Sep 2001 00:21:23          +0000
Received: from smtp006pub.verizon.net (smtp006pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.185])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA14757 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 3 Sep 2001 17:21:22 -0700
Received: from [63.24.225.117] (1Cust213.tnt1.rancho-cucamonga.ca.da.uu.net          [63.24.225.213]) by smtp006pub.verizon.net  with ESMTP for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; id f840KoA16498 Mon, 3 Sep 2001 19:20:51 -0500          (CDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: GTE/01rocket@mail.gte.net
References: Conversation <3B92446A.E4105FDC@sfcc.net> with last message            <028601c134d1$4b913020$0100a8c0@mkbs>            <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <a0510030cb7b9cebcb4de@[63.24.225.117]>
Date:         Mon, 3 Sep 2001 17:20:52 -0700
Reply-To: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] questionable motor]
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>

>Odd note: Grains 2K calculates complex grain geometries such as Star,

So where is grains 2K?

Jerry

--
Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
Opinion, the whole thing.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 23300 invoked from network); 4 Sep 2001 00:41:39 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 4 Sep 2001 00:41:39 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 12684 invoked by uid 50005); 4 Sep 2001 00:39:17 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpf with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 1.345075 secs); 04 Sep 2001 00:39:17 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 4 Sep 2001 00:39:15 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA14862; Mon, 3 Sep 2001 17:26:21 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 107536 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 4 Sep 2001 00:24:55          +0000
Received: from smtp005pub.verizon.net (smtp005pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.184])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA14834 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 3 Sep 2001 17:24:55 -0700
Received: from [63.25.193.161] (1Cust161.tnt1.hilo.hi.da.uu.net          [63.25.193.161]) by smtp005pub.verizon.net  with ESMTP ; id          f840OLg26886 Mon, 3 Sep 2001 19:24:22 -0500 (CDT)
X-Sender: ttocs@mail.gte.net
References: <l03130300b7b5a958d1e2@[63.25.193.97]>            <F141omRXf2LTrpwACkW00002e54@hotmail.com>            <l03130300b7b5a958d1e2@[63.25.193.97]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <l03130300b7b5da214575@[63.25.193.159]>
Date:         Fri, 31 Aug 2001 14:24:00 -1000
Reply-To: "Aaron Smith" <ttocs@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Aaron Smith" <ttocs@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Propellent Musings
Comments: To: Jerry Irvine <01rocket@gte.net>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <a0510030ab7b9cc321c15@[63.24.225.117]>

At 5:12 PM -0700 9/3/01, Jerry Irvine wrote:
>>Aaron Smith:
>
>
>>I posted this a while back, but here it is again.
>>
>>1) Nitric acid / Kerosene : 1.223 g/cc, 245 seconds - 3532 m/s
>>2) LOX / Kerosene : .968 g/cc, 270 seconds - 3437 m/s
>>3) 90% H2O2 / Kerosene : 1.236 g/cc, 224 seconds - 3252 m/s
>>4) LOX / LCH4 : .769 g/cc, 285 seconds - 3168 m/s
>>5) LOX / LH2 : .365 g/cc, 306 seconds - 2080 m/s
>>
>>This is assuming we use the same tank, with the same expansion ratio, Pc,
>>and weight for each combination.
>
>
>The first item on the list not only has a high ISP but a VERY high
>density impulse.  To me #1 is #1, #3 is #2 and #2 is #3.
>
>#1 is easier to handle too.
>
>Jerry

I think Nitric/Kerosene has big problems with combustion instability only
solved by large amounts of hydrazine.  Not fun.  I just need to think about
which is better in terms of handling, H2O2 or LOX.  For all practical
purposes, they rate the same on the above chart.

Anything anyone wants to throw in?

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 5507 invoked from network); 4 Sep 2001 00:44:50 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 4 Sep 2001 00:44:50 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 27074 invoked by uid 50005); 4 Sep 2001 00:43:41 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.310965 secs); 04 Sep 2001 00:43:41 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 4 Sep 2001 00:43:41 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA14917; Mon, 3 Sep 2001 17:29:34 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 107551 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 4 Sep 2001 00:28:13          +0000
Received: from femail44.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail44.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.254.60.38]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA14893          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 3 Sep 2001 17:28:13 -0700
Received: from c1649002-a.earthlink.net ([24.20.95.67]) by          femail44.sdc1.sfba.home.com (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20          201-229-121-120-20010223) with ESMTP id          <20010904002807.OUQD13169.femail44.sdc1.sfba.home.com@c1649002-a.earthlink.net>; Mon, 3 Sep 2001 17:28:07          -0700
X-Sender: forkbomb@mail.earthlink.net
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.0.2
References: <l03130300b7b5a958d1e2@[63.25.193.97]>            <F141omRXf2LTrpwACkW00002e54@hotmail.com>            <l03130300b7b5a958d1e2@[63.25.193.97]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <5.0.2.1.0.20010903172510.024b6bd8@mail.earthlink.net>
Date:         Mon, 3 Sep 2001 17:28:06 -0700
Reply-To: "Pierce Nichols" <forkbomb@EARTHLINK.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Pierce Nichols" <forkbomb@EARTHLINK.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Propellent Musings
Comments: To: Jerry Irvine <01rocket@GTE.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <a0510030ab7b9cc321c15@[63.24.225.117]>

At 05:12 PM 9/3/2001 -0700, Jerry Irvine wrote:
>>Aaron Smith:
>
>
>>I posted this a while back, but here it is again.
>>
>>1) Nitric acid / Kerosene : 1.223 g/cc, 245 seconds - 3532 m/s
>>2) LOX / Kerosene : .968 g/cc, 270 seconds - 3437 m/s
>>3) 90% H2O2 / Kerosene : 1.236 g/cc, 224 seconds - 3252 m/s
>>4) LOX / LCH4 : .769 g/cc, 285 seconds - 3168 m/s
>>5) LOX / LH2 : .365 g/cc, 306 seconds - 2080 m/s
>>
>>This is assuming we use the same tank, with the same expansion ratio, Pc,
>>and weight for each combination.
>
>
>The first item on the list not only has a high ISP but a VERY high
>density impulse.  To me #1 is #1, #3 is #2 and #2 is #3.
>
>#1 is easier to handle too.


         A pity the combustion instabilities are so bad that it's not
practical. If it was, we'd all be talking about those wonderful Russian
IRFNA/kero engines <g>...

         -p


Mars or Bust!
www.marssociety.com

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 23373 invoked from network); 4 Sep 2001 01:21:55 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 4 Sep 2001 01:21:55 -0000
Received: (qmail 21452 invoked by uid 50005); 4 Sep 2001 01:20:46 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.353479 secs); 04 Sep 2001 01:20:46 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 4 Sep 2001 01:20:46 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA15262; Mon, 3 Sep 2001 18:14:36 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 107658 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 4 Sep 2001 01:13:15          +0000
Received: from spsystems.net (spsystems.net [209.47.149.227]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA15242 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Mon,          3 Sep 2001 18:13:14 -0700
Received: (from henry@localhost) by spsystems.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id VAA04630;          Mon, 3 Sep 2001 21:12:39 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010903210832.4267B-100000@spsystems.net>
Date:         Mon, 3 Sep 2001 21:12:39 -0400
Reply-To: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Propellent Musings
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>

On Mon, 3 Sep 2001, Troy Prideaux wrote:
> > you want to measure it. The more thermal energy you can get per pound of
> > weight the better.
>
> Nup, or we'd all be flying thermite rockets, simple as that!!!

We do fly something very close to thermite rockets.  Thermite is, at
heart, just a convenient way of packaging oxygen and aluminum in
concentrated solid form.  Aluminized solid-fuel rockets do the packaging a
little bit differently but use nearly the same reaction.

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 23396 invoked from network); 4 Sep 2001 01:21:55 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 4 Sep 2001 01:21:55 -0000
Received: (qmail 23834 invoked by uid 50005); 4 Sep 2001 01:22:18 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpa with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.276617 secs); 04 Sep 2001 01:22:18 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 4 Sep 2001 01:22:18 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA15194; Mon, 3 Sep 2001 18:10:25 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 107623 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 4 Sep 2001 01:09:01          +0000
Received: from spsystems.net (spsystems.net [209.47.149.227]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA15162 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Mon,          3 Sep 2001 18:09:01 -0700
Received: (from henry@localhost) by spsystems.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id VAA04606;          Mon, 3 Sep 2001 21:08:26 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010903205454.4267A-100000@spsystems.net>
Date:         Mon, 3 Sep 2001 21:08:25 -0400
Reply-To: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Propellent Musings
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>

On Mon, 3 Sep 2001, Troy Prideaux wrote:
> As I said, MW is most relevant. Look at any Isp equation.

But when you look at it, *think* about it too.  Disregarding nozzle
efficiency and some other details, Isp is proportional to sqrt(T/M), where
T is flame temperature and M is molecular weight.  But those two numbers
are not independent!  A very simple transformation, plus a simplifying
assumption or two -- see, for example, Hill&Peterson 2nd ed -- reveals
that T/M is simply the energy released per unit mass of reactants, in
funny units.  (H&P2, annoyingly, goes through exactly the right derivation
but then fails to notice this fact.)  T is basically energy per molecule,
while M is the conversion factor between molecules and mass.

For fairly fundamental reasons, low MW is correlated with high energy
release, but MW itself is *not* directly relevant.

Clark's "Ignition!" is the only major reference which actually gets this
right, probably because Clark was a propellant chemist who had to actually
understand the tradeoffs, rather than an engine designer who simply used
the results.

The three things that matter to Isp are (a) energy release per unit mass,
(b) nozzle efficiency (which is a strong function of gas properties except
at very high expansion ratios), and (c) various violations of simplifying
assumptions (sometimes significant, especially for hydrogen).

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 3243 invoked from network); 4 Sep 2001 01:40:19 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 4 Sep 2001 01:40:19 -0000
Received: (qmail 15571 invoked by uid 50005); 4 Sep 2001 01:40:18 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpe with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.352774 secs); 04 Sep 2001 01:40:18 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 4 Sep 2001 01:40:18 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA15430; Mon, 3 Sep 2001 18:38:02 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 107701 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 4 Sep 2001 01:36:33          +0000
Received: from spsystems.net (spsystems.net [209.47.149.227]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA15414 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Mon,          3 Sep 2001 18:36:33 -0700
Received: (from henry@localhost) by spsystems.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id VAA05009;          Mon, 3 Sep 2001 21:35:58 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010903213047.4267D-100000@spsystems.net>
Date:         Mon, 3 Sep 2001 21:35:57 -0400
Reply-To: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] liquids question: alcohol/N2O propellant feeding
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <4.3.1.2.20010903143405.03e94f08@mail.idsoftware.com>

On Mon, 3 Sep 2001, John Carmack wrote:
> ...They had mixed some 50% peroxide and some
> alcohol, and detonated it with a blasting cap.  A couple ounces made a
> TREMENDOUS explosion, and was enough to convince them that they never
> wanted to do that again.

A military hand grenade typically contains less than 100 grams of
explosive... and most rocket oxidizer/fuel mixtures are considerably more
energetic than the usual grenade fillings.

> ...I can imagine circumstances where a loaded
> vehicle falls over, or has some failure during launch, and you wind up with
> hundreds of pounds of mixed explosives pooling on the ground.

There is some advantage to having fuel and oxidizer which *cannot* mix
much, for one reason or another.  For example, peroxide and kerosene are
not miscible -- an attempt at a mixture will separate out into a peroxide
layer and a kerosene layer.  Unfortunately, alcohols are an intermediate
case and won't separate so cleanly.

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 6041 invoked from network); 4 Sep 2001 01:48:54 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 4 Sep 2001 01:48:54 -0000
Received: (qmail 10916 invoked by uid 50005); 4 Sep 2001 01:49:20 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpb with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.380927 secs); 04 Sep 2001 01:49:20 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 4 Sep 2001 01:49:20 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA15490; Mon, 3 Sep 2001 18:44:58 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 107712 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 4 Sep 2001 01:43:23          +0000
Received: from smtp02.mrf.mail.rcn.net (smtp02.mrf.mail.rcn.net [207.172.4.61])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA15466 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Mon, 3 Sep 2001 18:43:22 -0700
Received: from 207-172-132-19.s19.tnt5.col.md.dialup.rcn.com ([207.172.132.19]          helo=brunyate) by smtp02.mrf.mail.rcn.net with smtp (Exim 3.33 #10)          id 15e5FI-00016D-00; Mon, 03 Sep 2001 21:43:21 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <MBBBKKNFKBOLONOKKFHLKEBMCBAA.adrianby@erols.com>
Date:         Mon, 3 Sep 2001 21:39:19 -0400
Reply-To: "Adrian Brunyate" <adrianby@EROLS.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Adrian Brunyate" <adrianby@EROLS.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Propellent Musings
Comments: To: Troy Prideaux <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>

        Note that an ideal nozzle expands gas in an isoentropic manner. Note, too,
that the gas can be expanded to the point where it is quite cold (and the
model stops working because the stuff condenses). It follows that the work
done can be calculated from the initial entropy and energy present, and the
final (negligible at maximum expansion) energy. This, of course, relies on
simplifying assumptions, such as ignoring equilibrium shifts.
        Adrian Brunyate.

-----Original Message-----
From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@itc.uci.edu]On
Behalf Of Troy Prideaux
Sent: Monday, September 03, 2001 6:12 PM
To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
Subject: Re: [AR] Propellent Musings


----------
> >Question; is there a mathematical relationship between heat of
> >combustion
> >(kJ/kg) and Isp?
>
>         Sort of. There was a very comprehensive thread on this a while
back,
> but
> I'll summarize (perhaps incorrectly?).
>         The kinetic energy of the jet depends on two things: the amount of
> energy
> generated by the reaction,

Wrong!

 and the nozzle efficiency.

Right.

 For a perfect nozzle,
> the efficiency is governed by how much of the gas's energy is trapped in
> unavailable modes (rotation, etc.).

Huh?

 Methinks that since the product of the
> above is in energy units, ISP (momentum transfer/mass of propellant)
should
> be proportional to the square root of said product.
>         Note that the MW of the products is not relevant per se, although
> things
> usually work out such that low MW components are favorable.

As I said, MW is most relevant. Look at any Isp equation.

Troy.

>         Adrian Brunyate.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 9793 invoked from network); 4 Sep 2001 01:49:53 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 4 Sep 2001 01:49:53 -0000
Received: (qmail 12169 invoked by uid 50005); 4 Sep 2001 01:48:44 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.296965 secs); 04 Sep 2001 01:48:44 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 4 Sep 2001 01:48:44 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA15517; Mon, 3 Sep 2001 18:47:02 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 107719 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 4 Sep 2001 01:45:41          +0000
Received: from mta05.mail.mel.aone.net.au (mta05.mail.au.uu.net [203.2.192.85])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA15481 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 3 Sep 2001 18:43:42 -0700
Received: from unknown ([63.60.220.167]) by mta05.mail.mel.aone.net.au with          SMTP id <20010904014340.HWDL7694.mta05.mail.mel.aone.net.au@unknown>          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 4 Sep 2001 11:43:40 +1000
Priority: Normal
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Priority: 3
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	X-MAPIextension=.TXT;
	charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>
Date:         Tue, 4 Sep 2001 01:45:41 +0000
Reply-To: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Propellent Musings
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010903210832.4267B-100000@spsystems.net>

No, thermite uses all (almost all) its energy as heat release and not to
generate kinetic energy. Add a third party gaseous component and all of a
sudden that changes. As I've mentioned before, adding Al to an AP composite
propellant may increase the heat produced but may not increase the Isp of
the propellant.

----------
> On Mon, 3 Sep 2001, Troy Prideaux wrote:
> > > you want to measure it. The more thermal energy you can get per pound
of
> > > weight the better.
> >
> > Nup, or we'd all be flying thermite rockets, simple as that!!!
>
> We do fly something very close to thermite rockets.  Thermite is, at
> heart, just a convenient way of packaging oxygen and aluminum in
> concentrated solid form.  Aluminized solid-fuel rockets do the packaging a
> little bit differently but use nearly the same reaction.
>
>                                                           Henry Spencer
>                                                        henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 13782 invoked from network); 4 Sep 2001 01:50:59 -0000
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 4 Sep 2001 01:50:59 -0000
Received: (qmail 28717 invoked by uid 50005); 4 Sep 2001 01:50:58 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpe with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.761497 secs); 04 Sep 2001 01:50:58 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 4 Sep 2001 01:50:57 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA15543; Mon, 3 Sep 2001 18:48:30 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 107726 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 4 Sep 2001 01:47:08          +0000
Received: from mta02.mail.mel.aone.net.au (mta02.mail.au.uu.net [203.2.192.82])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA15485 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 3 Sep 2001 18:44:01 -0700
Received: from unknown ([63.60.220.167]) by mta02.mail.mel.aone.net.au with          SMTP id <20010904014357.IFOI22650.mta02.mail.mel.aone.net.au@unknown>          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 4 Sep 2001 11:43:57 +1000
Priority: Normal
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Priority: 3
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	X-MAPIextension=.TXT;
	charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>
Date:         Tue, 4 Sep 2001 01:47:08 +0000
Reply-To: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Propellent Musings
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010903205454.4267A-100000@spsystems.net>

READ MY ORIGINAL POST!!! True for ideal gases!!! NOT TRUE for non gaseous
products!!!

Troy.

----------
> On Mon, 3 Sep 2001, Troy Prideaux wrote:
> > As I said, MW is most relevant. Look at any Isp equation.
>
> But when you look at it, *think* about it too.  Disregarding nozzle
> efficiency and some other details, Isp is proportional to sqrt(T/M), where
> T is flame temperature and M is molecular weight.  But those two numbers
> are not independent!  A very simple transformation, plus a simplifying
> assumption or two -- see, for example, Hill&Peterson 2nd ed -- reveals
> that T/M is simply the energy released per unit mass of reactants, in
> funny units.  (H&P2, annoyingly, goes through exactly the right derivation
> but then fails to notice this fact.)  T is basically energy per molecule,
> while M is the conversion factor between molecules and mass.
>
> For fairly fundamental reasons, low MW is correlated with high energy
> release, but MW itself is *not* directly relevant.
>
> Clark's "Ignition!" is the only major reference which actually gets this
> right, probably because Clark was a propellant chemist who had to actually
> understand the tradeoffs, rather than an engine designer who simply used
> the results.
>
> The three things that matter to Isp are (a) energy release per unit mass,
> (b) nozzle efficiency (which is a strong function of gas properties except
> at very high expansion ratios), and (c) various violations of simplifying
> assumptions (sometimes significant, especially for hydrogen).
>
>                                                           Henry Spencer
>                                                        henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 9283 invoked from network); 4 Sep 2001 02:05:24 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 4 Sep 2001 02:05:24 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 23927 invoked by uid 50005); 4 Sep 2001 02:04:15 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.214286 secs); 04 Sep 2001 02:04:15 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 4 Sep 2001 02:04:15 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA15660; Mon, 3 Sep 2001 19:02:40 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 107753 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 4 Sep 2001 02:01:17          +0000
Received: from albatross.prod.itd.earthlink.net          (albatross.mail.pas.earthlink.net [207.217.120.120]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA15637 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon,          3 Sep 2001 19:01:17 -0700
Received: from sprintmail.com (pool0466.cvx18-bradley.dialup.earthlink.net          [209.179.239.211]) by albatross.prod.itd.earthlink.net          (EL-8_9_3_3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id TAA03399; Mon, 3 Sep 2001 19:01:14          -0700 (PDT)
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.74 [en] (Win98; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <5.1.0.14.0.20010903011842.02bf1528@hobbiton.shire.net>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B9388AC.6586BEAF@sprintmail.com>
Date:         Mon, 3 Sep 2001 06:42:04 -0700
Reply-To: "Anthony Colette" <Rockitman@SPRINTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Anthony Colette" <Rockitman@SPRINTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Movies and pictures
Comments: To: Seth Leigh <seth@PENGAR.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Well, at least the parachute deployed at apogee.

Seth Leigh wrote:

> Oh man, those are cool videos.  Well, not cool that you destroyed your
> gear, but nevertheless it's cool that if it had to happen, you got it all
> on video.  ;-)  What a helpless feeling it must have been when your rocket
> started liftoff, then fell back down and the propellant took what, 10 to 20
> more seconds to burn out, totally incinerating your chutes and possibly
> more? Wow.
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 15269 invoked from network); 4 Sep 2001 02:06:57 -0000
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 4 Sep 2001 02:06:57 -0000
Received: (qmail 13229 invoked by uid 50005); 4 Sep 2001 02:06:56 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpe with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.698914 secs); 04 Sep 2001 02:06:56 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 4 Sep 2001 02:06:55 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA15694; Mon, 3 Sep 2001 19:04:08 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 107766 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 4 Sep 2001 02:02:47          +0000
Received: from zcars0m9.ca.nortel.com (h157s242a129n47.user.nortelnetworks.com          [47.129.242.157]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA15655          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 3 Sep 2001 19:01:38 -0700
Received: from zcars04f.ca.nortel.com (zcars04f.ca.nortel.com [47.129.242.57])          by zcars0m9.ca.nortel.com (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f8420Vp16281          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 3 Sep 2001 22:00:31 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from rftzy232.ca.nortel.com by zcars04f.ca.nortel.com; Mon, 3 Sep          2001 22:00:40 -0400
Received: from nortelnetworks.com (acart17u.ca.nortel.com [47.129.9.123]) by          rftzy232.ca.nortel.com with SMTP (Microsoft Exchange Internet Mail          Service Version 5.5.2653.13) id SHASA863; Mon, 3 Sep 2001 21:59:54          -0400
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.77 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.19 i686)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010828093648.17207D-100000@spsystems.net>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Orig: <mleech@nortelnetworks.com>
Message-ID:  <3B9436E5.7AF9165C@nortelnetworks.com>
Date:         Mon, 3 Sep 2001 22:05:25 -0400
Reply-To: "Marcus Leech" <mleech@NORTELNETWORKS.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Marcus Leech" <mleech@NORTELNETWORKS.COM>
Organization: Nortel Networks: Information Systems
Subject:      Re: [AR] liquids question: alcohol/N2O propellant feeding
Comments: To: Henry Spencer <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Henry Spencer wrote:

> I'd say use CO2 for pressurization, use a self-pressurizing fuel like
> ethane, or bite the bullet and use the piston (or some equivalent like
> putting the fuel in a plastic bag within the tank -- but check the plastic
> for alcohol compatibility!).
>
>                                                           Henry Spencer
>                                                        henry@spsystems.net
My friend and cohort in things rocket-related, has had success using
both
  PTFE and HDPE pistons in his Methanol/N2O bipropellant motors.  For
purposes
  of initial experiment, a piston is reasonably easy to make, quite
reliable, and
  adds only a small amount of dead mass.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 20227 invoked from network); 4 Sep 2001 02:08:19 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 4 Sep 2001 02:08:19 -0000
Received: (qmail 22238 invoked by uid 50005); 4 Sep 2001 02:08:46 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpb with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.400285 secs); 04 Sep 2001 02:08:46 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 4 Sep 2001 02:08:45 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA15748; Mon, 3 Sep 2001 19:05:43 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 107783 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 4 Sep 2001 02:04:22          +0000
Received: from cablecom.laribay.net (cablecom.laribay.net [66.20.57.4]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA15721 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 3 Sep 2001 19:04:21 -0700
Received: from billbull (dial067.laribay.net [66.20.57.67]) by          cablecom.laribay.net (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id UAA26067 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 3 Sep 2001 20:45:34 -0500 (CDT)          (envelope-from bpbullock@laribay.net)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0C6A_01C56B69.4F51B4A0"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <002f01c134e6$170af100$48391442@billbull>
Date:         Mon, 3 Sep 2001 21:04:24 -0500
Reply-To: "Bill Bullock" <bpbullock@LARIBAY.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Bill Bullock" <bpbullock@LARIBAY.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Propellent Musings
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0C6A_01C56B69.4F51B4A0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

.
I believe that my original assertion was:=20
   "Since the end result is supposed to be something that leaves the =
ground, weight is important. The "coin of the realm" is heat...or BTU's =
or however you want to measure it. The more thermal energy you can get =
per pound of weight the better.....etc."
    I stand by that statement.
Bill
PS: Did I neglect to include the fact that the heat of combustion of =
Hydrogen is 61,022.0 B.T.U.'s/Lb...or almost three time that of any of =
the other fuels I listed or any of you have discussed. Sorry about that. =
In 40 years of arguments/discussions Uncle Ray never caught on either...


------=_NextPart_000_0C6A_01C56B69.4F51B4A0
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META content=3D"text/html; charset=3Diso-8859-1" =
http-equiv=3DContent-Type>
<META content=3D"MSHTML 5.00.2614.3500" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV>.<BR>I believe that my original assertion was:&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;&nbsp; "Since the end result is supposed to be something that =
leaves=20
the ground, weight is important. The "coin of the realm" is heat...or =
BTU's or=20
however you want to measure it. The more thermal energy you can get per =
pound of=20
weight the better<EM>.....</EM>etc.<EM>"</EM></DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; I stand by that statement.</DIV>
<DIV>Bill</DIV>
<DIV>PS: Did I neglect to include the fact that the heat of combustion =
of=20
Hydrogen is 61,022.0 B.T.U.'s/Lb...or almost three time that of any of =
the other=20
fuels I listed or any of you have discussed. Sorry about that. In 40 =
years of=20
arguments/discussions Uncle Ray never caught on=20
either...<BR></DIV></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0C6A_01C56B69.4F51B4A0--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 26191 invoked from network); 4 Sep 2001 02:17:53 -0000
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 4 Sep 2001 02:17:53 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 25066 invoked by uid 50005); 4 Sep 2001 02:17:52 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpe with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.572806 secs); 04 Sep 2001 02:17:52 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 4 Sep 2001 02:17:51 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA15839; Mon, 3 Sep 2001 19:14:43 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 107806 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 4 Sep 2001 02:13:20          +0000
Received: from albatross.prod.itd.earthlink.net          (albatross.mail.pas.earthlink.net [207.217.120.120]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA15822 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon,          3 Sep 2001 19:13:20 -0700
Received: from sprintmail.com (pool0466.cvx18-bradley.dialup.earthlink.net          [209.179.239.211]) by albatross.prod.itd.earthlink.net          (EL-8_9_3_3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id TAA19573; Mon, 3 Sep 2001 19:12:41          -0700 (PDT)
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.74 [en] (Win98; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010903213047.4267D-100000@spsystems.net>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B938B5B.439B998F@sprintmail.com>
Date:         Mon, 3 Sep 2001 06:53:31 -0700
Reply-To: "Anthony Colette" <Rockitman@SPRINTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Anthony Colette" <Rockitman@SPRINTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] liquids question: alcohol/N2O propellant feeding
Comments: To: Henry Spencer <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Immissibility won't make it any less detonable.  Kerosene is not miscible with
either Lox or Peroxide but they are detonable combinations when pooled together.


Henry Spencer wrote:

> On Mon, 3 Sep 2001, John Carmack wrote:
> > ...They had mixed some 50% peroxide and some
> > alcohol, and detonated it with a blasting cap.  A couple ounces made a
> > TREMENDOUS explosion, and was enough to convince them that they never
> > wanted to do that again.
>
> A military hand grenade typically contains less than 100 grams of
> explosive... and most rocket oxidizer/fuel mixtures are considerably more
> energetic than the usual grenade fillings.
>
> > ...I can imagine circumstances where a loaded
> > vehicle falls over, or has some failure during launch, and you wind up with
> > hundreds of pounds of mixed explosives pooling on the ground.
>
> There is some advantage to having fuel and oxidizer which *cannot* mix
> much, for one reason or another.  For example, peroxide and kerosene are
> not miscible -- an attempt at a mixture will separate out into a peroxide
> layer and a kerosene layer.  Unfortunately, alcohols are an intermediate
> case and won't separate so cleanly.
>
>                                                           Henry Spencer
>                                                        henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 14107 invoked from network); 4 Sep 2001 02:30:51 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 4 Sep 2001 02:30:51 -0000
Received: (qmail 29620 invoked by uid 50005); 4 Sep 2001 02:31:14 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpa with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.191084 secs); 04 Sep 2001 02:31:14 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 4 Sep 2001 02:31:14 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA15951; Mon, 3 Sep 2001 19:28:17 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 107837 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 4 Sep 2001 02:26:51          +0000
Received: from spsystems.net (spsystems.net [209.47.149.227]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA15936 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Mon,          3 Sep 2001 19:26:50 -0700
Received: (from henry@localhost) by spsystems.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id WAA05767;          Mon, 3 Sep 2001 22:26:15 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010903221635.5581A-100000@spsystems.net>
Date:         Mon, 3 Sep 2001 22:26:15 -0400
Reply-To: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Propellent Musings
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>

On Tue, 4 Sep 2001, Troy Prideaux wrote:
> READ MY ORIGINAL POST!!! True for ideal gases!!! NOT TRUE for non gaseous
> products!!!

Quite true for non-gaseous products, except that you have to understand
that such products affect the nozzle efficiency.  (Again, see the Clark
book if you don't believe me.)

The crucial number for nozzle efficiency is R/Cp, which for gases is
roughly inversely proportional to number of atoms per molecule -- the more
atoms, the worse it gets -- and for liquids or solids is *zero*.  They
can't expand to accelerate the gas, and they don't release heat to the gas
quickly enough to make it available that way.

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 3510 invoked from network); 4 Sep 2001 02:36:12 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 4 Sep 2001 02:36:12 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 10616 invoked by uid 50005); 4 Sep 2001 02:36:11 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpe with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.590375 secs); 04 Sep 2001 02:36:11 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 4 Sep 2001 02:36:10 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA15998; Mon, 3 Sep 2001 19:32:47 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 107848 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 4 Sep 2001 02:31:26          +0000
Received: from smtp008pub.verizon.net (smtp008pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.187])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA15982 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 3 Sep 2001 19:31:25 -0700
Received: from [63.10.189.208] (1Cust208.tnt2.hilo.hi.da.uu.net          [63.10.189.208]) by smtp008pub.verizon.net  with ESMTP for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; id f842Uqq27112 Mon, 3 Sep 2001 21:30:53 -0500          (CDT)
X-Sender: ttocs@mail.gte.net
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <l03130300b7b5f71b1457@[63.25.193.161]>
Date:         Fri, 31 Aug 2001 16:30:27 -1000
Reply-To: "Aaron Smith" <ttocs@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Aaron Smith" <ttocs@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Propellent Musings
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <002f01c134e6$170af100$48391442@billbull>

I don't want to get into a shouting match over this, but if you need a
structure 4 times as heavy for double the ISP, it obviously doesn't pay.
That's what my post was about.  Rocketry is not all about ISP, it is about
*velocity*.

BTW, in a pressure fed system, when the combustion chamber pressure halves,
hence halving the required tank pressure, the ISP far less than halves.  My
personal rocket rule of thumb: use the lowest chamber pressure you can,
with the densest fuel.  That will go *far* higher and faster than a high
pressure, low fuel density rocket.

Aaron

At 9:04 PM -0500 9/3/01, Bill Bullock wrote:
>    .
>I believe that my original assertion was:     "Since the end result is
>supposed to be something that leaves  the ground, weight is important. The
>"coin of the realm" is heat...or BTU's or  however you want to measure it.
>The more thermal energy you can get per pound of  weight the
>better.....etc."     I stand by that statement. Bill PS: Did I neglect to
>include the fact that the heat of combustion of  Hydrogen is 61,022.0
>B.T.U.'s/Lb...or almost three time that of any of the other  fuels I
>listed or any of you have discussed. Sorry about that. In 40 years of
>arguments/discussions Uncle Ray never caught on  either...

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 19613 invoked from network); 4 Sep 2001 02:40:33 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 4 Sep 2001 02:40:33 -0000
Received: (qmail 14016 invoked by uid 50005); 4 Sep 2001 02:40:32 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpe with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.282875 secs); 04 Sep 2001 02:40:32 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 4 Sep 2001 02:40:32 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA16049; Mon, 3 Sep 2001 19:36:30 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 107863 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 4 Sep 2001 02:35:05          +0000
Received: from spsystems.net (spsystems.net [209.47.149.227]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA16029 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Mon,          3 Sep 2001 19:35:05 -0700
Received: (from henry@localhost) by spsystems.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id WAA05820;          Mon, 3 Sep 2001 22:34:29 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010903222620.5581B-100000@spsystems.net>
Date:         Mon, 3 Sep 2001 22:34:29 -0400
Reply-To: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Propellent Musings
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>

On Tue, 4 Sep 2001, Troy Prideaux wrote:
> No, thermite uses all (almost all) its energy as heat release and not to
> generate kinetic energy.

In the region of combustion within a rocket engine, the released energy
*is* heat, not kinetic energy -- the gas is moving so slowly that its
kinetic energy is almost negligible compared to the heat.  It's expansion
through the nozzle which changes that.

The problem with building a thermite rocket in the literal sense -- as
opposed to merely using a very similar reaction, as the aluminized solids
do -- is that the nozzle efficiency of solid combustion products is zero.

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 20353 invoked from network); 4 Sep 2001 02:48:43 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 4 Sep 2001 02:48:43 -0000
Received: (qmail 13339 invoked by uid 50005); 4 Sep 2001 02:49:09 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpb with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.621874 secs); 04 Sep 2001 02:49:09 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 4 Sep 2001 02:49:08 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA16126; Mon, 3 Sep 2001 19:45:34 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 107882 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 4 Sep 2001 02:44:09          +0000
Received: from mta01.mail.mel.aone.net.au (mta01.mail.au.uu.net [203.2.192.81])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA16108 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 3 Sep 2001 19:44:09 -0700
Received: from unknown ([63.34.220.130]) by mta01.mail.mel.aone.net.au with          SMTP id <20010904024406.VONG3755.mta01.mail.mel.aone.net.au@unknown>          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 4 Sep 2001 12:44:06 +1000
Priority: Normal
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Priority: 3
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	X-MAPIextension=.TXT;
	charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>
Date:         Tue, 4 Sep 2001 02:44:09 +0000
Reply-To: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Propellent Musings
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010903221635.5581A-100000@spsystems.net>

----------
> On Tue, 4 Sep 2001, Troy Prideaux wrote:
> > READ MY ORIGINAL POST!!! True for ideal gases!!! NOT TRUE for non
gaseous
> > products!!!
>
> Quite true for non-gaseous products, except that you have to understand
> that such products affect the nozzle efficiency.  (Again, see the Clark
> book if you don't believe me.)

Oh come on Henry, we are talking Isp here which is affected by Gas
generation + Nozzle effiency.

c* is basically a measure of gas generation. cf is a measure of nozzle
effiecency.
c = c* x cf.
Isp = c/g (g being a constant)

What gets affected by solid & liquid products? Both c* & cf.

Don't try and twist things around please.

>
> The crucial number for nozzle efficiency is R/Cp, which for gases is
> roughly inversely proportional to number of atoms per molecule -- the more
> atoms, the worse it gets -- and for liquids or solids is *zero*.  They
> can't expand to accelerate the gas, and they don't release heat to the gas
> quickly enough to make it available that way.

Which is basically my whole point.

Thank.......you.

Troy.

>
>                                                           Henry Spencer
>                                                        henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 669 invoked from network); 4 Sep 2001 03:55:07 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 4 Sep 2001 03:55:07 -0000
Received: (qmail 3865 invoked by uid 50005); 4 Sep 2001 03:55:29 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpa with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.251447 secs); 04 Sep 2001 03:55:29 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 4 Sep 2001 03:55:29 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA16458; Mon, 3 Sep 2001 20:39:51 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 107976 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 4 Sep 2001 03:38:22          +0000
Received: from mta01.mail.mel.aone.net.au (mta01.mail.au.uu.net [203.2.192.81])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA16442 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 3 Sep 2001 20:38:21 -0700
Received: from unknown ([63.60.220.120]) by mta01.mail.mel.aone.net.au with          SMTP id <20010904033819.WMLV3755.mta01.mail.mel.aone.net.au@unknown>          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 4 Sep 2001 13:38:19 +1000
Priority: Normal
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Priority: 3
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	X-MAPIextension=.TXT;
	charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>
Date:         Tue, 4 Sep 2001 03:38:22 +0000
Reply-To: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Propellent Musings
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010903222620.5581B-100000@spsystems.net>

----------
> On Tue, 4 Sep 2001, Troy Prideaux wrote:
> > No, thermite uses all (almost all) its energy as heat release and not to
> > generate kinetic energy.
>
> In the region of combustion within a rocket engine, the released energy
> *is* heat, not kinetic energy -- the gas is moving so slowly that its
> kinetic energy is almost negligible compared to the heat.  It's expansion
> through the nozzle which changes that.

In the case of thermite it basically is yes (to the first bit), in the case
of a more conventional propellant the gas pressure being generated (gas
particle velocities & densities) is the kinetic energy being generated.
Read chapter 1 of Sutton or Hill & Peterson to find out fundamentally how a
rocket motor & nozzle works, I have on many occasions

>
> The problem with building a thermite rocket in the literal sense -- as
> opposed to merely using a very similar reaction, as the aluminized solids
> do -- is that the nozzle efficiency of solid combustion products is zero.

Because there's no gas to expand, no pressure = no thrust and no cf. Quite
simple.

Troy.

>
>                                                           Henry Spencer
>                                                        henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 13087 invoked from network); 4 Sep 2001 04:29:32 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 4 Sep 2001 04:29:32 -0000
Received: (qmail 20785 invoked by uid 50005); 4 Sep 2001 04:29:54 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpa with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.210991 secs); 04 Sep 2001 04:29:54 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 4 Sep 2001 04:29:54 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA16776; Mon, 3 Sep 2001 21:24:41 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 108033 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 4 Sep 2001 04:23:15          +0000
Received: from femail11.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail11.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.0.95.107]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA16760          for <arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 3 Sep 2001 21:23:15 -0700
Received: from cc334751a ([65.13.214.65]) by femail11.sdc1.sfba.home.com          (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20 201-229-121-120-20010223) with SMTP id          <20010904042315.OKOK2471.femail11.sdc1.sfba.home.com@cc334751a> for          <arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 3 Sep 2001 21:23:15 -0700
References: <3B92446A.E4105FDC@sfcc.net>                       <5.1.0.14.0.20010903012327.01c21238@hobbiton.shire.net>             <a05100303b7b93d1841be@[63.24.225.117]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2462.0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <00eb01c134f9$3d8df8a0$6601a8c0@home.com>
Date:         Mon, 3 Sep 2001 22:22:42 -0600
Reply-To: "Brian Kosko" <bkosko1@HOME.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Brian Kosko" <bkosko1@HOME.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] questionable motor]
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

A quick comment about fuses to ignite motors. We occasionally tried it early
on, but gave up because the motors kept cato'ing. But the remains were
instructive. They exhibited a very 'wavy' structure coning towards the
forward end of the grain. Our best guess was the fuse casing was hot enough
to light the propellant wherever it touched it so you got dueling burns
areas.

 We don't do Bates grains for smaller motors (54mm and down). Our progrssive
grains do OK in these smaller, relatively fast burning motors. They're also
simpler to make, one mandrel, pull it out, and you're done. Bates grains
aren't good for truly high performance needs, the main problem is they have
moderately low volumetric loading. My rough calcs show a more complex
geometry (eg. finocyl) will allow 15% - 20% more propellant. A big deal for
military stuff, not that important to most of us.

On the igniter issue, almost all of us use Daveyfires. It's an important
detail and we like the reliability and simplicity that they bring.

Brian

Brian

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 19833 invoked from network); 4 Sep 2001 05:02:05 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 4 Sep 2001 05:02:05 -0000
Received: (qmail 7930 invoked by uid 50005); 4 Sep 2001 05:00:56 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.167074 secs); 04 Sep 2001 05:00:56 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 4 Sep 2001 05:00:56 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA16944; Mon, 3 Sep 2001 21:59:32 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 108072 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 4 Sep 2001 04:58:08          +0000
Received: from femail15.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail15.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.0.95.142]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA16928          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 3 Sep 2001 21:58:08 -0700
Received: from hal2001 ([24.77.53.16]) by femail15.sdc1.sfba.home.com          (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20 201-229-121-120-20010223) with SMTP id          <20010904045802.FRSB23328.femail15.sdc1.sfba.home.com@hal2001> for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 3 Sep 2001 21:58:02 -0700
References:  <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <008b01c134fd$05bb0f40$0400a8c0@hatjs>
Date:         Mon, 3 Sep 2001 21:49:45 -0700
Reply-To: "Jamie Morken" <jmorken@HOME.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jamie Morken" <jmorken@HOME.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Propellent Musings
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Hi all,

If the combustion products are gaseous and the nozzle efficiency is 100% :

factors that affect ISP:
1. energy release per unit mass  (BTU/lb or kJ/kg)
2. mass of gas particles

I think #1 is true since the more heat generated, the higher the pressure
will be and the nozzle/expansion cone can then produce thrust by changing
the pressure into increased velocity.

For two H2O2 monopropellants (one at 500psi and one at 1000psi) the only way
that the 1000psi motor can have a higher ISP is if #2 is true, since if mass
had no effect the pressure/ISP graph would be linear I think...

Looking forward to hearing about my mistakes Henry and Troy!   :)

best regards,
Jamie


----- Original Message -----
From: Troy Prideaux <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Monday, September 03, 2001 8:38 PM
Subject: Re: [AR] Propellent Musings


> ----------
> > On Tue, 4 Sep 2001, Troy Prideaux wrote:
> > > No, thermite uses all (almost all) its energy as heat release and not
to
> > > generate kinetic energy.
> >
> > In the region of combustion within a rocket engine, the released energy
> > *is* heat, not kinetic energy -- the gas is moving so slowly that its
> > kinetic energy is almost negligible compared to the heat.  It's
expansion
> > through the nozzle which changes that.
>
> In the case of thermite it basically is yes (to the first bit), in the
case
> of a more conventional propellant the gas pressure being generated (gas
> particle velocities & densities) is the kinetic energy being generated.
> Read chapter 1 of Sutton or Hill & Peterson to find out fundamentally how
a
> rocket motor & nozzle works, I have on many occasions
>
> >
> > The problem with building a thermite rocket in the literal sense -- as
> > opposed to merely using a very similar reaction, as the aluminized
solids
> > do -- is that the nozzle efficiency of solid combustion products is
zero.
>
> Because there's no gas to expand, no pressure = no thrust and no cf. Quite
> simple.
>
> Troy.
>
> >
> >                                                           Henry Spencer
> >
henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 4032 invoked from network); 4 Sep 2001 05:06:50 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 4 Sep 2001 05:06:50 -0000
Received: (qmail 10730 invoked by uid 50005); 4 Sep 2001 05:05:41 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.16014 secs); 04 Sep 2001 05:05:41 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 4 Sep 2001 05:05:41 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA17021; Mon, 3 Sep 2001 22:04:23 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 108091 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 4 Sep 2001 05:03:02          +0000
Received: from femail15.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail15.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.0.95.142]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA17006          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 3 Sep 2001 22:03:01 -0700
Received: from hal2001 ([24.77.53.16]) by femail15.sdc1.sfba.home.com          (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20 201-229-121-120-20010223) with SMTP id          <20010904050256.FUGN23328.femail15.sdc1.sfba.home.com@hal2001> for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 3 Sep 2001 22:02:56 -0700
References: <3B92446A.E4105FDC@sfcc.net>                                 <5.1.0.14.0.20010903012327.01c21238@hobbiton.shire.net>                       <00fe01c13497$8739c220$0100a8c0@mkbs>             <006701c1349e$022f0e80$60cfe3c1@serge>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <009501c134fd$b534ef40$0400a8c0@hatjs>
Date:         Mon, 3 Sep 2001 21:54:40 -0700
Reply-To: "Jamie Morken" <jmorken@HOME.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jamie Morken" <jmorken@HOME.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] questionable motor]
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Hi all,

> Therefore resulting formula for the most neutrally burning BATES grain is
:
>
> LENGTH = ( 3 * OD + CORE ) / 2


Is there any worry about multiple bates grain motors "lengthening" during
burn since there may be higher
pressure between the grains?  If the grains are packed tightly between the
nozzle and the forward bulkhead could
this lengthening could possibly cause a casing failure?

I think Troy's idea of angling the ends of the grains would be good for
solving this if it is a problem..

best regards,
Jamie

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 25130 invoked from network); 4 Sep 2001 05:13:36 -0000
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 4 Sep 2001 05:13:36 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 25939 invoked by uid 50005); 4 Sep 2001 05:13:34 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpe with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.254469 secs); 04 Sep 2001 05:13:35 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 4 Sep 2001 05:13:34 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA17080; Mon, 3 Sep 2001 22:11:04 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 108102 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 4 Sep 2001 05:09:43          +0000
Received: from m5.boston.juno.com (m5.boston.juno.com [64.136.24.68]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA17054 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Mon, 3 Sep 2001 22:09:42 -0700
Received: from cookie.juno.com by cookie.juno.com for          <"r2Fo8hpwT0kn33UwylHELD2Yps13IPiwXS93ELJCnD4+Dyvh7ZTpkw==">
Received: (from icantdecide@juno.com) by m5.boston.juno.com (queuemail) id          GEGGY67V; Tue, 04 Sep 2001 01:09:26 EDT
X-Mailer: Juno 4.0.9
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Juno-Line-Breaks: 4-7,9-37
X-Juno-Att: 0
X-Juno-RefParts: 0
Message-ID:  <20010904.000902.-568065.0.icantdecide@juno.com>
Date:         Tue, 4 Sep 2001 00:09:02 -0700
Reply-To: "James G Selin" <icantdecide@JUNO.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "James G Selin" <icantdecide@JUNO.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] liquids question: alcohol/N2O propellant feeding
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

I've often wondered if mylar would make a suitable material for a fuel
bag. Its inpermeable to gas thanks to the aluminum. Will it become
brittle if cooled too much by N2O evaporation? I think you could seem it
together with a hot tool. I've been meaning to pick up a "space blanket"
so I could play with the idea. Any experience?

Jim Selin

On Fri, 31 Aug 2001 12:24:44 -0700 David Weinshenker
<daze39@EARTHLINK.NET> writes:
> John Dom wrote:
> >
> > Still do not see the point in the piston. Canister one is contains
> N2O. No
> > piston. Canister two contains the fuel in a bag. A tube from the
> upper part
> > of the N2O tank connects the bag canister to pressurize it...
>
> Different construction, same concept as the piston. Depends on which
> method
> gives greater confidence with your available fabrication techniques.
>
> Some people have better access to fine machining and polishing than
> they
> do to engineered elastomer films. They might have better luck with a
> piston.
>
> For a possible bag system, the plastic bags of variable-volume
> containers
> (as used for photographic developing-solutions and cheap wine, for
> example)
> might have adequate chemical resistance to N2O and alcohol - they
> are intended
> to be gas-impermeable, so that the contents do not deteriorate from
> contact
> with oxygen in the atmosphere.
>
> -dave w

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 2441 invoked from network); 4 Sep 2001 05:15:57 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 4 Sep 2001 05:15:57 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: (qmail 27342 invoked by uid 50005); 4 Sep 2001 05:15:56 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpe with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.383186 secs); 04 Sep 2001 05:15:56 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 4 Sep 2001 05:15:55 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA17126; Mon, 3 Sep 2001 22:13:40 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 108117 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 4 Sep 2001 05:12:19          +0000
Received: from cisco.com (cypher.cisco.com [171.69.11.18]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA17108 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon,          3 Sep 2001 22:12:19 -0700
Received: (from billw@localhost) by cisco.com (8.8.8/2.6/Cisco List          Logging/8.8.8) id WAA17160; Mon, 3 Sep 2001 22:11:46 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID:  <CMM.0.90.4.999580306.billw@cypher>
Date:         Mon, 3 Sep 2001 22:11:46 PDT
Reply-To: "Bill Westfield" <billw@cisco.com>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "William Chops Westfield" <billw@cisco.com>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Propellent Musings
Comments: To: Troy Prideaux <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  Your message of Tue, 4 Sep 2001 01:45:41 +0000

    No, thermite uses all (almost all) its energy as heat release and not to
    generate kinetic energy.

PGII and/or AFN had "part one" of an article on pyrotechnic rockets using a
mixture of MnO2 and Al as fuel, even though this is theoretically a
"gasless" combustion.  IIRC, "part two" was never published - i don't
know what happened...

BillW


From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 6329 invoked from network); 4 Sep 2001 05:37:24 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 4 Sep 2001 05:37:24 -0000
Received: (qmail 30017 invoked by uid 50005); 4 Sep 2001 05:36:14 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.107132 secs); 04 Sep 2001 05:36:14 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 4 Sep 2001 05:36:14 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA17249; Mon, 3 Sep 2001 22:30:14 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 108144 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 4 Sep 2001 05:28:52          +0000
Received: from imo-d01.mx.aol.com (imo-d01.mx.aol.com [205.188.157.33]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA17226 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Mon, 3 Sep 2001 22:28:52 -0700
Received: from Tjpoulton@aol.com by imo-d01.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v31_r1.4.) id          w.108.4f06bc5 (25306) for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Tue, 4 Sep 2001          01:28:36 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/mixed;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0C6D_01C56B69.4F64C770"
X-Mailer: AOL 5.0 for Windows sub 138
Message-ID:  <108.4f06bc5.28c5c084@aol.com>
Date:         Tue, 4 Sep 2001 01:28:36 EDT
Reply-To: <Tjpoulton@AOL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <Tjpoulton@AOL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] liquids question: alcohol/N2O propellant feeding
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0C6D_01C56B69.4F64C770
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit



------=_NextPart_000_0C6D_01C56B69.4F64C770
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Type: message/rfc822
Content-Disposition: inline

Return-path: <Tjpoulton@aol.com>
From: Tjpoulton@aol.com
Full-name: Tjpoulton
Message-ID: <16f.4b02c3.28c5c069@aol.com>
Date: Tue, 4 Sep 2001 01:28:09 EDT
Subject: Re: [AR] liquids question: alcohol/N2O propellant feeding
To: mleech@NORTELNETWORKS.COM
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: AOL 5.0 for Windows sub 138

In a message dated 9/3/01 9:04:07 PM Central Daylight Time,
mleech@NORTELNETWORKS.COM writes:

> My friend and cohort in things rocket-related, has had success using
>  both
>    PTFE and HDPE pistons in his Methanol/N2O bipropellant motors.  For
>  purposes
>    of initial experiment, a piston is reasonably easy to make, quite
>  reliable, and
>    adds only a small amount of dead mass.

I've got an aluminum tube and some delrin piston material on order -- I
ditched the DOT tanks (or, more accurately, put them lovingly back on the
shelf).  I'd be interested in hearing what injector designs and L* he used,
since I have essentially no information specific to this propellant
combination.
Mike P.

------=_NextPart_000_0C6D_01C56B69.4F64C770--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 2070 invoked from network); 4 Sep 2001 06:26:54 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 4 Sep 2001 06:26:54 -0000
Received: (qmail 6295 invoked by uid 50005); 4 Sep 2001 06:25:09 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.154188 secs); 04 Sep 2001 06:25:09 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 4 Sep 2001 06:25:08 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA17551; Mon, 3 Sep 2001 23:24:23 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 108227 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 4 Sep 2001 06:22:55          +0000
Received: from mta04.mail.mel.aone.net.au (mta04.mail.au.uu.net [203.2.192.84])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA17536 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 3 Sep 2001 23:22:54 -0700
Received: from unknown ([63.34.212.135]) by mta04.mail.mel.aone.net.au with          SMTP id <20010904062250.LWZM12702.mta04.mail.mel.aone.net.au@unknown>          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 4 Sep 2001 16:22:50 +1000
Priority: Normal
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Priority: 3
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	X-MAPIextension=.TXT;
	charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>
Date:         Tue, 4 Sep 2001 06:22:55 +0000
Reply-To: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Propellent Musings
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <008b01c134fd$05bb0f40$0400a8c0@hatjs>

----------
> Hi all,
>
> If the combustion products are gaseous and the nozzle efficiency is 100% :
>
> factors that affect ISP:
> 1. energy release per unit mass  (BTU/lb or kJ/kg)
> 2. mass of gas particles
>

1 is definitely true given the circumstances. 2. well, it's not really a
function of Isp. It's a function of thrust but not really Isp unless I'm
getting confused which is.....yep, I'm cunfused.

> I think #1 is true since the more heat generated, the higher the pressure
> will be and the nozzle/expansion cone can then produce thrust by changing
> the pressure into increased velocity.
>
> For two H2O2 monopropellants (one at 500psi and one at 1000psi) the only
way
> that the 1000psi motor can have a higher ISP is if #2 is true, since if
mass
> had no effect the pressure/ISP graph would be linear I think...

No, the 1000Psi has a higher Isp because it has a higher Cf. It has a
higher Cf because the second part of the Cf equation (bit that isn't being
sqrt'd) deals with pressure differentials and expansion ratios.

I'm a little confused at where you're coming from here but there are 2 ways
of looking at why (with tailored expansion ratios):

Using pressure differentials:
 Gases exit from throat at "x" pressure. The pressure in the 1000Psi motor
is basically twice as high as in the 500. Gases in the 1K motor take say
twice the expansion ratio of the 500 to come to surrounding pressure. So
the gas particles of the 1K nozzle smash into the walls of the expansion
cone twice as hard as in the 500 motor and they have more exit cone surface
to smash into. You have to look at it from a 1 dimensional perspective
using vectors to roughly gauge how much performance you actually gain using
this approach. The pressure differential between exhaust gases and the
surroundings will obviously reduce the further down the exit cone you go,
to the point where the Pe = Pa.

Using particle acceleration:
 Pressure differential = fluid flow. As the pressure of the gases reduces
with the opening nozzle expansion, the velocity increases proportionally.
More pressure differential = higher effective exhaust velocities assuming a
single phase flow. So, if these gas particles can be pointed in the right
direction the efficiency of the propellant will be increased almost
proportionally to the Pc:Pa differential.

Maybe you're right I've missed your point.

Troy.


>
> Looking forward to hearing about my mistakes Henry and Troy!   :)
>
> best regards,
> Jamie
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Troy Prideaux <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
> To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
> Sent: Monday, September 03, 2001 8:38 PM
> Subject: Re: [AR] Propellent Musings
>
>
> > ----------
> > > On Tue, 4 Sep 2001, Troy Prideaux wrote:
> > > > No, thermite uses all (almost all) its energy as heat release and
not
> to
> > > > generate kinetic energy.
> > >
> > > In the region of combustion within a rocket engine, the released
energy
> > > *is* heat, not kinetic energy -- the gas is moving so slowly that its
> > > kinetic energy is almost negligible compared to the heat.  It's
> expansion
> > > through the nozzle which changes that.
> >
> > In the case of thermite it basically is yes (to the first bit), in the
> case
> > of a more conventional propellant the gas pressure being generated (gas
> > particle velocities & densities) is the kinetic energy being generated.
> > Read chapter 1 of Sutton or Hill & Peterson to find out fundamentally
how
> a
> > rocket motor & nozzle works, I have on many occasions
> >
> > >
> > > The problem with building a thermite rocket in the literal sense -- as
> > > opposed to merely using a very similar reaction, as the aluminized
> solids
> > > do -- is that the nozzle efficiency of solid combustion products is
> zero.
> >
> > Because there's no gas to expand, no pressure = no thrust and no cf.
Quite
> > simple.
> >
> > Troy.
> >
> > >
> > >                                                           Henry
Spencer
> > >
> henry@spsystems.net
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 276 invoked from network); 4 Sep 2001 07:17:53 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 4 Sep 2001 07:17:53 -0000
Received: (qmail 9972 invoked by uid 50005); 4 Sep 2001 07:15:30 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpf with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.435666 secs); 04 Sep 2001 07:15:30 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 4 Sep 2001 07:15:29 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA17759; Tue, 4 Sep 2001 00:11:36 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 108268 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 4 Sep 2001 07:10:12          +0000
Received: from imo-r06.mx.aol.com (imo-r06.mx.aol.com [152.163.225.102]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA17743 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Tue, 4 Sep 2001 00:10:12 -0700
Received: from JMKrell@aol.com by imo-r06.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v31_r1.4.) id          w.161.4d6f89 (4391) for <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Tue, 4 Sep 2001          03:10:06 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0C71_01C56B69.4F6E6460"
X-Mailer: AOL 6.0 for Windows US sub 10540
Message-ID:  <161.4d6f89.28c5d84d@aol.com>
Date:         Tue, 4 Sep 2001 03:10:05 EDT
Reply-To: <JMKrell@AOL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <JMKrell@AOL.COM>
Subject:      [AR] Strangest Biprop Ever?
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0C71_01C56B69.4F6E6460
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Ray,

It looks like a Jetline welding demo. Jetline Engineering, www.jetline.com,
does aerospace welding and weld fixtures. They are located in Irvine, Ca. I
don't think the device was intended to function.

JK

------=_NextPart_000_0C71_01C56B69.4F6E6460
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<HTML><FONT FACE=arial,helvetica><FONT  SIZE=2>Ray,
<BR>
<BR>It looks like a Jetline welding demo. Jetline Engineering, www.jetline.com,
<BR>does aerospace welding and weld fixtures. They are located in Irvine, Ca. I
<BR>don't think the device was intended to function. &nbsp;
<BR>
<BR>JK</FONT></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0C71_01C56B69.4F6E6460--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 12718 invoked from network); 4 Sep 2001 07:53:39 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 4 Sep 2001 07:53:39 -0000
Received: (qmail 12643 invoked by uid 50005); 4 Sep 2001 07:53:37 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpe with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.193482 secs); 04 Sep 2001 07:53:37 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 4 Sep 2001 07:53:37 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA17944; Tue, 4 Sep 2001 00:44:28 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 108303 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 4 Sep 2001 07:43:05          +0000
Received: from smtp008pub.verizon.net (smtp008pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.187])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA17929 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Tue, 4 Sep 2001 00:43:04 -0700
Received: from [63.25.193.130] (1Cust130.tnt1.hilo.hi.da.uu.net          [63.25.193.130]) by smtp008pub.verizon.net  with ESMTP for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; id f847gWq01259 Tue, 4 Sep 2001 02:42:32 -0500          (CDT)
X-Sender: ttocs@mail.gte.net (Unverified)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <l03130300b7b63d21e5f4@[63.10.189.208]>
Date:         Fri, 31 Aug 2001 21:42:11 -1000
Reply-To: "Aaron Smith" <ttocs@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Aaron Smith" <ttocs@GTE.NET>
Subject:      [AR] Gun launch - part deux
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

I'm seriously thinking of starting a gun launch project.  What I would like
to do is to poll the List to see what the best payload size, muzzle
velocity / altitude, and acceleleration is.  Try to keep it reasonable, no
250 Kg to 2.7 km/sec at 3G or somesuch.  I'm thinking of something like 10
Kg to 750 m/s @ ~4000G max.

I'm also looking into the use of experimental aircraft to air-launch small
rockets.  Minimum payload at 14,000 feet to be useful?  I'm thinking along
the lines of 100 Kg.  Flaming hoops to jump through with the FAA?  Finding
a suitable aircraft isn't an issue.

Aaron

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 8911 invoked from network); 4 Sep 2001 08:02:38 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 4 Sep 2001 08:02:38 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 17727 invoked by uid 50005); 4 Sep 2001 08:02:36 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpe with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.203374 secs); 04 Sep 2001 08:02:36 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 4 Sep 2001 08:02:36 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id BAA18013; Tue, 4 Sep 2001 01:00:00 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 108317 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 4 Sep 2001 07:58:31          +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (f71.law15.hotmail.com [64.4.23.71]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA17995 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Tue,          4 Sep 2001 00:58:30 -0700
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Tue,          4 Sep 2001 00:58:00 -0700
Received: from 193.121.251.246 by lw15fd.law15.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Tue,          04 Sep 2001 07:57:59 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [193.121.251.246]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 04 Sep 2001 07:58:00.0647 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[513BAD70:01C13517]
Message-ID:  <F71T38eeI3Z0zm1i84r0000435c@hotmail.com>
Date:         Tue, 4 Sep 2001 07:58:31 +0000
Reply-To: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Gun launch - part deux
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Concerning propane as a propellant gas: what temperature? At ambient
temperatures the vapor pressure is only 10 atm.

He and H2 pressure reservoirs are IMHO preferable but here are some other
gasses (Tc critical temperature, C ie above which there is no liquid phase
possible in the reservoir Pc pressure, atm at the critical temperature)

Gas type     Pc     Tc
CO2          75.5   31
C2H6 ethane  48     32
C3H8 propane 42     97
C4H10 butane 37    152

At ambient temp vapor pressures (atm) are

CO2    60
C2H6   40
C3H8   10
C4H10   2

Reservoir and barrel geometry please?

jd




>From: Aaron Smith <ttocs@GTE.NET>
>Reply-To: Aaron Smith <ttocs@GTE.NET>
>To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
>Subject: [AR] Gun launch - part deux
>Date: Fri, 31 Aug 2001 21:42:11 -1000
>
>I'm seriously thinking of starting a gun launch project.  What I would like
>to do is to poll the List to see what the best payload size, muzzle
>velocity / altitude, and acceleleration is.  Try to keep it reasonable, no
>250 Kg to 2.7 km/sec at 3G or somesuch.  I'm thinking of something like 10
>Kg to 750 m/s @ ~4000G max.
>
>I'm also looking into the use of experimental aircraft to air-launch small
>rockets.  Minimum payload at 14,000 feet to be useful?  I'm thinking along
>the lines of 100 Kg.  Flaming hoops to jump through with the FAA?  Finding
>a suitable aircraft isn't an issue.
>
>Aaron


_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 9300 invoked from network); 4 Sep 2001 08:23:00 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 4 Sep 2001 08:23:00 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 20559 invoked by uid 50005); 4 Sep 2001 08:21:13 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.328468 secs); 04 Sep 2001 08:21:13 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 4 Sep 2001 08:21:13 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id BAA18102; Tue, 4 Sep 2001 01:18:54 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 108329 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 4 Sep 2001 08:17:32          +0000
Received: from smtp003pub.verizon.net (smtp003pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.182])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id BAA18084 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 4 Sep 2001 01:17:32 -0700
Received: from [63.10.189.23] (1Cust23.tnt2.hilo.hi.da.uu.net [63.10.189.23])          by smtp003pub.verizon.net  with ESMTP for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; id          f848Gw918475 Tue, 4 Sep 2001 03:16:59 -0500 (CDT)
X-Sender: ttocs@mail.gte.net
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by itc.uci.edu id BAA18085
Message-ID:  <l03130300b7b646a321da@[63.25.193.130]>
Date:         Fri, 31 Aug 2001 22:16:34 -1000
Reply-To: "Aaron Smith" <ttocs@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Aaron Smith" <ttocs@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Gun launch - part deux
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <F71T38eeI3Z0zm1i84r0000435c@hotmail.com>

A small system, <300 m/s, will be powered by compressed air.  Larger muzzle
velocities will be with combustion of some sort, probably propane
(inexpensive, suppliers everywhere) because of speed of sound restrictions,
and lack of suitable valves.

Reservoir geometry is determined by barrel geometry, acceleration
(pressure), and a whole slew of other variables.  Barrel geometry is the
same.  Maximum barrel diameter is 6-8 inches, with 8 inch being 3 times as
expensive.  I would say, because of this, the maximum practical (at least
for a test system) is 6 inches.  4 inch would be even better, as I have a
source for that only 30 miles away.  But, as I said, the barrel size is
determined by velocity, acceleration, maximum pressure, etc.

Gerald Bull used 5 inchers early on in HARP, IIRC.

At 7:58 AM +0000 9/4/01, John Dom wrote:
>Concerning propane as a propellant gas: what temperature? At ambient
>temperatures the vapor pressure is only 10 atm.
>
>He and H2 pressure reservoirs are IMHO preferable but here are some other
>gasses (Tc critical temperature, C ie above which there is no liquid phase
>possible in the reservoir Pc pressure, atm at the critical temperature)
>
>Gas type     Pc     Tc
>CO2          75.5   31
>C2H6 ethane  48     32
>C3H8 propane 42     97
>C4H10 butane 37    152
>
>At ambient temp vapor pressures (atm) are
>
>CO2    60
>C2H6   40
>C3H8   10
>C4H10   2
>
>Reservoir and barrel geometry please?
>
>jd
>
>
>
>
>>From: Aaron Smith <ttocs@GTE.NET>
>>Reply-To: Aaron Smith <ttocs@GTE.NET>
>>To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
>>Subject: [AR] Gun launch - part deux
>>Date: Fri, 31 Aug 2001 21:42:11 -1000
>>
>>I'm seriously thinking of starting a gun launch project.  What I would like
>>to do is to poll the List to see what the best payload size, muzzle
>>velocity / altitude, and acceleleration is.  Try to keep it reasonable, no
>>250 Kg to 2.7 km/sec at 3G or somesuch.  I'm thinking of something like 10
>>Kg to 750 m/s @ ~4000G max.
>>
>>I'm also looking into the use of experimental aircraft to air-launch small
>>rockets.  Minimum payload at 14,000 feet to be useful?  I'm thinking along
>>the lines of 100 Kg.  Flaming hoops to jump through with the FAA?  Finding
>>a suitable aircraft isn't an issue.
>>
>>Aaron
>
>
>_________________________________________________________________
>Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 27893 invoked from network); 4 Sep 2001 08:40:03 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 4 Sep 2001 08:40:03 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 27085 invoked by uid 50005); 4 Sep 2001 08:40:28 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpb with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.351664 secs); 04 Sep 2001 08:40:28 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 4 Sep 2001 08:40:27 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id BAA18217; Tue, 4 Sep 2001 01:37:08 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 108359 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 4 Sep 2001 08:35:42          +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (f115.law15.hotmail.com [64.4.23.115]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id BAA18202 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Tue, 4 Sep 2001 01:35:42 -0700
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Tue,          4 Sep 2001 01:35:11 -0700
Received: from 193.121.251.246 by lw15fd.law15.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Tue,          04 Sep 2001 08:35:11 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [193.121.251.246]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 04 Sep 2001 08:35:11.0858 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[83237520:01C1351C]
Message-ID:  <F1153zA6F0vsqM0c7ib00004162@hotmail.com>
Date:         Tue, 4 Sep 2001 08:35:42 +0000
Reply-To: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Gun launch - part deux
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

OK. Please give concrete projected data:

Compressed air reservoir volume?
Reservoir pressure?
Barrel ID * length?
Projectile weight?

jd

_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 20440 invoked from network); 4 Sep 2001 08:48:33 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 4 Sep 2001 08:48:33 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 12026 invoked by uid 50005); 4 Sep 2001 08:47:23 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.224275 secs); 04 Sep 2001 08:47:23 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 4 Sep 2001 08:47:23 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id BAA18290; Tue, 4 Sep 2001 01:44:29 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 108378 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 4 Sep 2001 08:43:07          +0000
Received: from idsoftware.com (predator.idsoftware.com [192.246.40.34]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id BAA18271 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Tue, 4 Sep 2001 01:43:06 -0700
Received: from [192.246.40.144] (account johnc HELO pluto.idsoftware.com) by          idsoftware.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 3.4.7) with ESMTP id 368600 for          AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 04 Sep 2001 03:43:06 -0500
X-Sender: johnc@mail.idsoftware.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <4.3.1.2.20010904035321.077b4310@mail.idsoftware.com>
Date:         Tue, 4 Sep 2001 03:55:33 -0500
Reply-To: "John Carmack" <johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Carmack" <johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM>
Subject:      [AR] Electronics Box document
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

I have put up a document about our second electronics box, with many
lessons learned, at:

http://www.armadilloaerospace.com/ElectronicsBox2.htm

John Carmack

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 6957 invoked from network); 4 Sep 2001 09:37:26 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 4 Sep 2001 09:37:26 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 15187 invoked by uid 50005); 4 Sep 2001 09:35:03 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpf with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.530111 secs); 04 Sep 2001 09:35:03 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 4 Sep 2001 09:35:02 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id CAA18548; Tue, 4 Sep 2001 02:34:39 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 108429 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 4 Sep 2001 09:33:13          +0000
Received: from smtp005pub.verizon.net (smtp005pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.184])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id CAA18530 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 4 Sep 2001 02:33:12 -0700
Received: from [63.10.189.137] (1Cust137.tnt2.hilo.hi.da.uu.net          [63.10.189.137]) by smtp005pub.verizon.net  with ESMTP for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; id f849Weg09572 Tue, 4 Sep 2001 04:32:40 -0500          (CDT)
X-Sender: ttocs@mail.gte.net
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <l03130300b7b659bc9e71@[63.10.189.23]>
Date:         Fri, 31 Aug 2001 23:32:58 -1000
Reply-To: "Aaron Smith" <ttocs@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Aaron Smith" <ttocs@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Gun launch - part deux
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <F1153zA6F0vsqM0c7ib00004162@hotmail.com>

First of all, I need to know what size projectile I will be launching, with
the maximum acceleration and final exit velocity.  I won't have "concrete
projected data" until I know those variables.

For a small compressed air gun, I just assume that the reservoir volume is
equal to the barrel volume.

At 8:35 AM +0000 9/4/01, John Dom wrote:
>OK. Please give concrete projected data:
>
>Compressed air reservoir volume?
>Reservoir pressure?
>Barrel ID * length?
>Projectile weight?
>
>jd

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 25312 invoked from network); 4 Sep 2001 10:04:47 -0000
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 4 Sep 2001 10:04:47 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 17717 invoked by uid 50005); 4 Sep 2001 10:04:45 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpe with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.177385 secs); 04 Sep 2001 10:04:45 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 4 Sep 2001 10:04:45 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id DAA18681; Tue, 4 Sep 2001 03:01:53 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 108454 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 4 Sep 2001 10:00:29          +0000
Received: from imo-m04.mx.aol.com (imo-m04.mx.aol.com [64.12.136.7]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id DAA18663 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Tue, 4 Sep 2001 03:00:29 -0700
Received: from Tjpoulton@aol.com by imo-m04.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v31_r1.4.) id          w.12d.41cfff4 (4240) for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Tue, 4 Sep 2001          06:00:20 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: AOL 5.0 for Windows sub 138
Message-ID:  <12d.41cfff4.28c60034@aol.com>
Date:         Tue, 4 Sep 2001 06:00:20 EDT
Reply-To: <Tjpoulton@AOL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <Tjpoulton@AOL.COM>
Subject:      [AR] triethylaluminum
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Hmmm... Sure would be nice not to have to bother with an ignition system in
my bipropellant rocket.  Sure would be nice just to fire the pyrovalves and
know that the propellants would light up quickly and smoothly.  The design
I'm using provides a significant length of fuel tubing between the alcohol
tank and the fuel valve.  If I were to fill this tube with triethylaluminum
(or, say a 25% solution in toluene), would I be assured ignition as soon as
it hit N2O in the chamber?  Will Aldrich really sell me 100ml of TEA, without
asking too many questions?  And finally, is it worth dealing with the
difficulties involved in handling a pyrophoric material in order to eliminate
the need for pyrotechnic ignition?
Mike P.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 617 invoked from network); 4 Sep 2001 12:48:14 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 4 Sep 2001 12:48:14 -0000
Received: (qmail 32274 invoked by uid 50005); 4 Sep 2001 12:48:34 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpa with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.304429 secs); 04 Sep 2001 12:48:34 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 4 Sep 2001 12:48:33 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id FAA19297; Tue, 4 Sep 2001 05:43:19 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 108524 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 4 Sep 2001 12:41:54          +0000
Received: from smtp1.ihug.co.nz (smtp1.ihug.co.nz [203.109.252.7]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id FAA19239 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 4 Sep 2001 05:31:52 -0700
Received: from tm22g (p57-max1.wlg.ihug.co.nz [203.173.230.57]) by          smtp1.ihug.co.nz (8.9.3/8.9.3/Debian 8.9.3-21) with SMTP id AAA30014;          Wed, 5 Sep 2001 00:31:43 +1200
X-Authentication-Warning: smtp1.ihug.co.nz: Host p57-max1.wlg.ihug.co.nz                         [203.173.230.57] claimed to be tm22g
References:  <l03130300b7b659bc9e71@[63.10.189.23]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <00dc01c1353d$4de03120$39e6adcb@tm22g>
Date:         Wed, 5 Sep 2001 00:29:53 +1200
Reply-To: "Pingu!" <hooon@IHUG.CO.NZ>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Pingu!" <hooon@IHUG.CO.NZ>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Gun launch - part deux
Comments: To: Aaron Smith <ttocs@GTE.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Hi

Check out mine and my friends website
www.spudgunsnz.com

Its a site about spudguns and you maybe thinking this is stupid but for
proppelling objects with compressed air
my friend has created a differential equation program which has all the
variables you need to worry about with launching one of these things.

Its in the physics section.

Andy
----- Original Message -----
From: "Aaron Smith" <ttocs@GTE.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Saturday, September 01, 2001 9:32 PM
Subject: Re: [AR] Gun launch - part deux


> First of all, I need to know what size projectile I will be launching,
with
> the maximum acceleration and final exit velocity.  I won't have "concrete
> projected data" until I know those variables.
>
> For a small compressed air gun, I just assume that the reservoir volume is
> equal to the barrel volume.
>
> At 8:35 AM +0000 9/4/01, John Dom wrote:
> >OK. Please give concrete projected data:
> >
> >Compressed air reservoir volume?
> >Reservoir pressure?
> >Barrel ID * length?
> >Projectile weight?
> >
> >jd
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 28974 invoked from network); 4 Sep 2001 12:54:52 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 4 Sep 2001 12:54:52 -0000
Received: (qmail 3030 invoked by uid 50005); 4 Sep 2001 12:55:12 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpa with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.601439 secs); 04 Sep 2001 12:55:12 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 4 Sep 2001 12:55:11 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id FAA19353; Tue, 4 Sep 2001 05:51:31 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 108533 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 4 Sep 2001 12:50:09          +0000
Received: from smtp1.ihug.co.nz (smtp1.ihug.co.nz [203.109.252.7]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id FAA19279 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 4 Sep 2001 05:40:07 -0700
Received: from tm22g (p57-max1.wlg.ihug.co.nz [203.173.230.57]) by          smtp1.ihug.co.nz (8.9.3/8.9.3/Debian 8.9.3-21) with SMTP id AAA30270;          Wed, 5 Sep 2001 00:39:58 +1200
X-Authentication-Warning: smtp1.ihug.co.nz: Host p57-max1.wlg.ihug.co.nz                         [203.173.230.57] claimed to be tm22g
References:  <l03130300b7b646a321da@[63.25.193.130]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <00f301c1353e$75252e60$39e6adcb@tm22g>
Date:         Wed, 5 Sep 2001 00:38:09 +1200
Reply-To: "Pingu!" <hooon@IHUG.CO.NZ>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Pingu!" <hooon@IHUG.CO.NZ>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Gun launch - part deux
Comments: To: Aaron Smith <ttocs@GTE.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Hi

Have you recieved the message about the usefull calculation program at
www.spudgunsnz.com ?

It might help you with your decisions with your compressed air cannon and
may also save you time doing calculations manually, as it does 100,000
calcuations using a numerical method for solving a 2nd order differential.

Good Luck!


----- Original Message -----
From: "Aaron Smith" <ttocs@GTE.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Saturday, September 01, 2001 8:16 PM
Subject: Re: [AR] Gun launch - part deux


A small system, <300 m/s, will be powered by compressed air.  Larger muzzle
velocities will be with combustion of some sort, probably propane
(inexpensive, suppliers everywhere) because of speed of sound restrictions,
and lack of suitable valves.

Reservoir geometry is determined by barrel geometry, acceleration
(pressure), and a whole slew of other variables.  Barrel geometry is the
same.  Maximum barrel diameter is 6-8 inches, with 8 inch being 3 times as
expensive.  I would say, because of this, the maximum practical (at least
for a test system) is 6 inches.  4 inch would be even better, as I have a
source for that only 30 miles away.  But, as I said, the barrel size is
determined by velocity, acceleration, maximum pressure, etc.

Gerald Bull used 5 inchers early on in HARP, IIRC.

At 7:58 AM +0000 9/4/01, John Dom wrote:
>Concerning propane as a propellant gas: what temperature? At ambient
>temperatures the vapor pressure is only 10 atm.
>
>He and H2 pressure reservoirs are IMHO preferable but here are some other
>gasses (Tc critical temperature, fC ie above which there is no liquid phase
>possible in the reservoir Pc pressure, atm at the critical temperature)
>
>Gas type     Pc     Tc
>CO2          75.5   31
>C2H6 ethane  48     32
>C3H8 propane 42     97
>C4H10 butane 37    152
>
>At ambient temp vapor pressures (atm) are
>
>CO2    60
>C2H6   40
>C3H8   10
>C4H10   2
>
>Reservoir and barrel geometry please?
>
>jd
>
>
>
>
>>From: Aaron Smith <ttocs@GTE.NET>
>>Reply-To: Aaron Smith <ttocs@GTE.NET>
>>To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
>>Subject: [AR] Gun launch - part deux
>>Date: Fri, 31 Aug 2001 21:42:11 -1000
>>
>>I'm seriously thinking of starting a gun launch project.  What I would
like
>>to do is to poll the List to see what the best payload size, muzzle
>>velocity / altitude, and acceleleration is.  Try to keep it reasonable, no
>>250 Kg to 2.7 km/sec at 3G or somesuch.  I'm thinking of something like 10
>>Kg to 750 m/s @ ~4000G max.
>>
>>I'm also looking into the use of experimental aircraft to air-launch small
>>rockets.  Minimum payload at 14,000 feet to be useful?  I'm thinking along
>>the lines of 100 Kg.  Flaming hoops to jump through with the FAA?  Finding
>>a suitable aircraft isn't an issue.
>>
>>Aaron
>
>
>_________________________________________________________________
>Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 7354 invoked from network); 4 Sep 2001 13:17:07 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 4 Sep 2001 13:17:07 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 16729 invoked by uid 50005); 4 Sep 2001 13:17:26 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpa with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.271318 secs); 04 Sep 2001 13:17:26 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 4 Sep 2001 13:17:26 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA19418; Tue, 4 Sep 2001 06:02:14 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 108554 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 4 Sep 2001 13:00:49          +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (f186.law15.hotmail.com [64.4.23.186]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA19397 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Tue, 4 Sep 2001 06:00:49 -0700
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Tue,          4 Sep 2001 06:00:19 -0700
Received: from 193.121.251.246 by lw15fd.law15.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Tue,          04 Sep 2001 13:00:18 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [193.121.251.246]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 04 Sep 2001 13:00:19.0039 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[8C8EA6F0:01C13541]
Message-ID:  <F186MEjx3y3wdlhczDq0000410d@hotmail.com>
Date:         Tue, 4 Sep 2001 13:00:49 +0000
Reply-To: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Propellent Musings
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

>>>Concerning the wisdom of using molten AN as a oxidizer, 60 % O in it
>>>compares poorly with 90 % H2O2 which contains 84.7 % O or WFNA which has
>>>76.2 % O in it...The latter do not require heating and cannot solidify.
>>>Well, ie chemically speaking. Did I overlook something here?


SL wrote:

>>H2O2 may have 90% O in it, but doesn't it decompose into 2xH2O + 1
>>O2?  Don't you "lose" half the O to water vapor, which makes it unusable
>>for oxidizing other stuff?

In that case there is only a 42 % oxygen potentioal (liberated by
decomposition) in 90 % HP. Which is less than the O content in NH4NO3. But
the logic of only considering the available oxygen for combustion in the
oxydizer also applies for nitrates. Probably nitrogen oxides which are duds
are in part formed. I do not know the nitrate decomposition stoichiometry.
Probably also fuel, time and temperature dependent. For propellant chemist
pros I guess.

jd

_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 23867 invoked from network); 4 Sep 2001 13:46:52 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 4 Sep 2001 13:46:52 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: (qmail 16736 invoked by uid 50005); 4 Sep 2001 13:46:49 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpe with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.148987 secs); 04 Sep 2001 13:46:49 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 4 Sep 2001 13:46:49 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA19581; Tue, 4 Sep 2001 06:42:26 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 108577 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 4 Sep 2001 13:41:02          +0000
Received: from wrench.toolcity.net (root@wrench.toolcity.net [208.0.188.2]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA19566 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 4 Sep 2001 06:41:01 -0700
Received: from [63.169.101.248]          (dap-63-169-101-248.meadville-tnt-1.pa.toolcity.net [63.169.101.248])          by wrench.toolcity.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id JAA25463 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 4 Sep 2001 09:40:56 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <v01510100b7ba988a04d2@[63.169.102.225]>
Date:         Tue, 4 Sep 2001 09:43:19 -0500
Reply-To: "al bradley" <abradley@TOOLCITY.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "al bradley" <abradley@TOOLCITY.NET>
Subject:      [AR] time out for a smile!
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

> Five cannibals got jobs at a large defense contractor.  During the
> welcoming ceremony, the boss said, "You're all part of our team now.  You
> can earn good money here, and you can go to the cafeteria for lunch.  So,
> please don't eat your fellow employees."
>
> The cannibals promised not to eat the other employees.
>
> Four weeks later, the boss returned and said, "You're all working very
> hard, and I'm very satisfied with all of you.  However, one of our
> janitors has disappeared.  Do any of you know what happened to her?"
>
> The cannibals disavowed all knowledge of the missing janitor.
>
> After the boss left, the leader of the cannibals said to the others,
> "Which one of you idiots ate the janitor?"
>
> A hand went up, hesitantly.  The leader of the cannibals said angrily,
> "You idiot!  For four weeks we've been eating line managers, project
> managers, task leaders, and team leaders so nobody would notice anything,
> and you had to go and eat the janitor!"

------------------------------------------------------------------
Can you live Life with this?: "Unless there is a law, an agreement, or a
long-standing custom, No one `Deserves' Anything -- Either Good or Bad!"

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 3220 invoked from network); 4 Sep 2001 14:08:27 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 4 Sep 2001 14:08:27 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 12235 invoked by uid 50005); 4 Sep 2001 14:06:01 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpf with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 1.328786 secs); 04 Sep 2001 14:06:01 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 4 Sep 2001 14:05:59 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA19678; Tue, 4 Sep 2001 07:02:39 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 108592 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 4 Sep 2001 14:01:11          +0000
Received: from smtp002pub.verizon.net (smtp002pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.181])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA19658 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 4 Sep 2001 07:01:10 -0700
Received: from [63.24.225.117] (1Cust65.tnt1.rancho-cucamonga.ca.da.uu.net          [63.24.225.65]) by smtp002pub.verizon.net  with ESMTP for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; id f84E0Z318616 Tue, 4 Sep 2001 09:00:35 -0500          (CDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: GTE/01rocket@mail.gte.net
References: <l03130300b7b63d21e5f4@[63.10.189.208]>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <a05100311b7ba8e72a283@[63.24.225.117]>
Date:         Tue, 4 Sep 2001 07:00:38 -0700
Reply-To: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Gun launch - part deux
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <l03130300b7b63d21e5f4@[63.10.189.208]>

>Aaron Smith wrote:


>I'm seriously thinking of starting a gun launch project.  What I would like
>to do is to poll the List to see what the best payload size, muzzle
>velocity / altitude, and acceleleration is.  Try to keep it reasonable, no
>250 Kg to 2.7 km/sec at 3G or somesuch.  I'm thinking of something like 10
>Kg to 750 m/s @ ~4000G max.


I suggest you start out with the longest gun barrell you can
reasonably transport to a site, say 16-20 feet, the highest G's your
projectile can handle, and the rest is worked out for you.


>
>I'm also looking into the use of experimental aircraft to air-launch small
>rockets.  Minimum payload at 14,000 feet to be useful?  I'm thinking along
>the lines of 100 Kg.  Flaming hoops to jump through with the FAA?  Finding
>a suitable aircraft isn't an issue.


I have about 10 rockets now that would like to be air-launched off an
aircraft and I can get the FAA waviers to launch them.  I do not have
an aircraft or access to one.


>
>Aaron


--
Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
Opinion, the whole thing.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 3618 invoked from network); 4 Sep 2001 14:08:32 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 4 Sep 2001 14:08:32 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 18144 invoked by uid 50005); 4 Sep 2001 14:08:51 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpa with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.686357 secs); 04 Sep 2001 14:08:51 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 4 Sep 2001 14:08:50 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA19705; Tue, 4 Sep 2001 07:05:03 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 108599 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 4 Sep 2001 14:03:42          +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (f173.law15.hotmail.com [64.4.23.173]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA19687 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Tue, 4 Sep 2001 07:03:42 -0700
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Tue,          4 Sep 2001 07:03:12 -0700
Received: from 193.121.251.246 by lw15fd.law15.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Tue,          04 Sep 2001 14:03:11 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [193.121.251.246]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 04 Sep 2001 14:03:12.0125 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[557DE2D0:01C1354A]
Message-ID:  <F173NZSPGNkY5TetpIu000041cc@hotmail.com>
Date:         Tue, 4 Sep 2001 14:03:42 +0000
Reply-To: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Gun launch - part deux
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Quote NZ spud site:

>my friend has created a differential equation program which has all the
>variables you need to worry about with launching one of these things.
>
>Its in the physics section.


The analytical algebraic formula I sent earlier to this list is the result
of the differential calculus in your site I guess. Terms look familiar.

Do you have an algorithm for the effect of air resistance in the barrel and
on trajectory? For a bigger cannon this 'd be worthwhile.

I wonder what the flame thrower is about. It is not a explosive gas gun is
it?

jd




>From: Pingu! <hooon@IHUG.CO.NZ>
>Reply-To: Pingu! <hooon@IHUG.CO.NZ>
>To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
>Subject: Re: [AR] Gun launch - part deux
>Date: Wed, 5 Sep 2001 00:29:53 +1200
>
>Hi
>
>Check out mine and my friends website
>www.spudgunsnz.com
>
>Its a site about spudguns and you maybe thinking this is stupid but for
>proppelling objects with compressed air

>
>Andy
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Aaron Smith" <ttocs@GTE.NET>
>To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
>Sent: Saturday, September 01, 2001 9:32 PM
>Subject: Re: [AR] Gun launch - part deux
>
>
> > First of all, I need to know what size projectile I will be launching,
>with
> > the maximum acceleration and final exit velocity.  I won't have
>"concrete
> > projected data" until I know those variables.
> >
> > For a small compressed air gun, I just assume that the reservoir volume
>is
> > equal to the barrel volume.
> >
> > At 8:35 AM +0000 9/4/01, John Dom wrote:
> > >OK. Please give concrete projected data:
> > >
> > >Compressed air reservoir volume?
> > >Reservoir pressure?
> > >Barrel ID * length?
> > >Projectile weight?
> > >
> > >jd
> >


_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 8698 invoked from network); 4 Sep 2001 16:03:25 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 4 Sep 2001 16:03:25 -0000
Received: (qmail 5681 invoked by uid 50005); 4 Sep 2001 16:03:46 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpb with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.430894 secs); 04 Sep 2001 16:03:46 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 4 Sep 2001 16:03:45 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA20242; Tue, 4 Sep 2001 08:55:15 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 108676 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 4 Sep 2001 15:53:46          +0000
Received: from imo-r08.mx.aol.com (imo-r08.mx.aol.com [152.163.225.104]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA20224 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Tue, 4 Sep 2001 08:53:46 -0700
Received: from JMKrell@aol.com by imo-r08.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v31_r1.4.) id          w.bf.134a1635 (3311) for <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Tue, 4 Sep 2001          11:53:32 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0C76_01C56B69.4F83E830"
X-Mailer: AOL 6.0 for Windows US sub 10540
Message-ID:  <bf.134a1635.28c652fc@aol.com>
Date:         Tue, 4 Sep 2001 11:53:32 EDT
Reply-To: <JMKrell@AOL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <JMKrell@AOL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Propellent Musings
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0C76_01C56B69.4F83E830
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

In a message dated 9/4/01 6:02:25 AM Pacific Daylight Time, j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM
writes:


> SL wrote:
>
> >>H2O2 may have 90% O in it, but doesn't it decompose into 2xH2O + 1
> >>O2?  Don't you "lose" half the O to water vapor, which makes it unusable
> >>for oxidizing other stuff?
>
> In that case there is only a 42 % oxygen potentioal (liberated by
> decomposition) in 90 % HP. Which is less than the O content in NH4NO3. But
> the logic of only considering the available oxygen for combustion in the
> oxydizer also applies for nitrates. Probably nitrogen oxides which are duds
> are in part formed. I do not know the nitrate decomposition stoichiometry.
> Probably also fuel, time and temperature dependent. For propellant chemist
> pros I guess.
>
>

The same problem of available oxygen applies to AN. The decomposition of AN
at low temperatures is:  2 NH4NO3 = 4 H2O + 2 N2 + 1 O2. Most of the oxygen
is tied up in water vapor.

JK

------=_NextPart_000_0C76_01C56B69.4F83E830
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<HTML><FONT FACE=arial,helvetica><FONT  SIZE=2>In a message dated 9/4/01 6:02:25 AM Pacific Daylight Time, j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM
<BR>writes:
<BR>
<BR>
<BR><BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE style="BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px">SL wrote:
<BR>
<BR>&gt;&gt;H2O2 may have 90% O in it, but doesn't it decompose into 2xH2O + 1
<BR>&gt;&gt;O2? &nbsp;Don't you "lose" half the O to water vapor, which makes it unusable
<BR>&gt;&gt;for oxidizing other stuff?
<BR>
<BR>In that case there is only a 42 % oxygen potentioal (liberated by
<BR>decomposition) in 90 % HP. Which is less than the O content in NH4NO3. But
<BR>the logic of only considering the available oxygen for combustion in the
<BR>oxydizer also applies for nitrates. Probably nitrogen oxides which are duds
<BR>are in part formed. I do not know the nitrate decomposition stoichiometry.
<BR>Probably also fuel, time and temperature dependent. For propellant chemist
<BR>pros I guess.
<BR>
<BR></FONT><FONT  COLOR="#000000" SIZE=3 FAMILY="SANSSERIF" FACE="Arial" LANG="0"></BLOCKQUOTE>
<BR></FONT><FONT  COLOR="#000000" SIZE=2 FAMILY="SANSSERIF" FACE="Arial" LANG="0">
<BR>The same problem of available oxygen applies to AN. The decomposition of AN
<BR>at low temperatures is: &nbsp;2 NH4NO3 = 4 H2O + 2 N2 + 1 O2. Most of the oxygen
<BR>is tied up in water vapor. &nbsp;
<BR>
<BR>JK &nbsp;</FONT></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0C76_01C56B69.4F83E830--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 13368 invoked from network); 4 Sep 2001 16:19:07 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 4 Sep 2001 16:19:07 -0000
Received: (qmail 32071 invoked by uid 50005); 4 Sep 2001 16:19:03 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpe with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.242017 secs); 04 Sep 2001 16:19:03 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 4 Sep 2001 16:19:03 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA20168; Tue, 4 Sep 2001 08:44:58 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 108661 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 4 Sep 2001 15:43:33          +0000
Received: from localhost (dmccue@localhost) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with          ESMTP id IAA20152; Tue, 4 Sep 2001 08:43:27 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.LNX.4.10.10109040840390.20118-100000@itc.uci.edu>
Date:         Tue, 4 Sep 2001 08:43:27 -0700
Reply-To: "David J. McCue" <dmccue@itc.uci.edu>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "David J. McCue" <dmccue@itc.uci.edu>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Gun launch - part deux
Comments: To: Aaron Smith <ttocs@GTE.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <l03130300b7b659bc9e71@[63.10.189.23]>

I have to ask: how is discussion of aircraft cannon design appropriate for
a list on amateur rocketry? This seems better suited to some "kewl bomz"
intersest group. I am very uncomfortable with this.

-Dave McCue

On Fri, 31 Aug 2001, Aaron Smith wrote:

> First of all, I need to know what size projectile I will be launching, with
> the maximum acceleration and final exit velocity.  I won't have "concrete
> projected data" until I know those variables.
>
> For a small compressed air gun, I just assume that the reservoir volume is
> equal to the barrel volume.
>
> At 8:35 AM +0000 9/4/01, John Dom wrote:
> >OK. Please give concrete projected data:
> >
> >Compressed air reservoir volume?
> >Reservoir pressure?
> >Barrel ID * length?
> >Projectile weight?
> >
> >jd
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 24053 invoked from network); 4 Sep 2001 16:28:57 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 4 Sep 2001 16:28:57 -0000
Received: (qmail 9168 invoked by uid 50005); 4 Sep 2001 16:29:15 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpa with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.310936 secs); 04 Sep 2001 16:29:15 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 4 Sep 2001 16:29:15 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA20362; Tue, 4 Sep 2001 09:15:12 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 108700 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 4 Sep 2001 16:13:50          +0000
Received: from mailhost0.trib.com (mailhost0.trib.com [63.229.150.3]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA20344 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Tue, 4 Sep 2001 09:13:49 -0700
Received: from mail.trib.com (mail.trib.com [12.10.158.17]) by          mailhost0.trib.com (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f84GDj617547; Tue, 4          Sep 2001 10:13:45 -0600 (MDT) (envelope-from          jwckman@space-rockets.com)
Received: from [63.229.150.189] (HELO hppav) by mail.trib.com (CommuniGate Pro          SMTP 3.4.6) with SMTP id 45387109; Tue, 04 Sep 2001 10:13:44 -0600
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <NKEHJAOOKBPGIKOOPDEFCENNCBAA.jwckman@space-rockets.com>
Date:         Tue, 4 Sep 2001 10:12:07 -0600
Reply-To: "John Wickman" <jwckman@SPACE-ROCKETS.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Wickman" <jwckman@SPACE-ROCKETS.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] questionable motor]
Comments: To: Jerry Irvine <01rocket@gte.net>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <a0510030bb7b9cdc67b21@[63.24.225.117]>

Jerry,

I will see what I can do about scanning it.

John Wickman


-----Original Message-----
From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@itc.uci.edu]On
Behalf Of Jerry Irvine
Sent: Monday, September 03, 2001 6:18 PM
To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
Subject: Re: [AR] questionable motor]


>Wickman:


>I do not know how HPR and amateur rocketry started calling segmented grains
>by the name BATES grains.   BATES stands for a long acronym which I do not
>remember.
>
>Its not classified as I have a set of drawings for a 50 lb BATES motor in
my
>file.  It is standard hardware.

Chuck Rogers and I brought the term to HPR at least to the popular
language of it.

Having that drawing on the web would be a good historical thing and
certainly has the proper name on it.

If you scan it or provide it for scanning I will web it.

Jerry

--
Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
Opinion, the whole thing.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 18682 invoked from network); 4 Sep 2001 16:42:22 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 4 Sep 2001 16:42:22 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: (qmail 31236 invoked by uid 50005); 4 Sep 2001 16:40:34 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.17242 secs); 04 Sep 2001 16:40:34 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 4 Sep 2001 16:40:33 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA20510; Tue, 4 Sep 2001 09:31:08 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 108724 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 4 Sep 2001 16:29:46          +0000
Received: from cisco.com (cypher.cisco.com [171.69.11.18]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA20489 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue,          4 Sep 2001 09:29:46 -0700
Received: (from billw@localhost) by cisco.com (8.8.8/2.6/Cisco List          Logging/8.8.8) id JAA12071 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 4 Sep 2001          09:29:15 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID:  <CMM.0.90.4.999620955.billw@cypher>
Date:         Tue, 4 Sep 2001 09:29:15 PDT
Reply-To: "Bill Westfield" <billw@cisco.com>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "William Chops Westfield" <billw@cisco.com>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Gun launch - part deux
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  Your message of Fri, 31 Aug 2001 22:16:34 -1000

    A small system, <300 m/s, will be powered by compressed air.  Larger
    muzzle velocities will be with combustion of some sort, probably
    propane (inexpensive, suppliers everywhere) because of speed of sound
    restrictions, and lack of suitable valves.

Keep in mind that cannon are not particularly safer to fire than
rockets, especially if they're homemade.  They're less likely to fail,
but the consequences tend to be more serious (more and thicker
pieces.)

BillW


From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 16864 invoked from network); 4 Sep 2001 17:04:07 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 4 Sep 2001 17:04:07 -0000
Received: (qmail 29988 invoked by uid 50005); 4 Sep 2001 17:04:26 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpa with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.477707 secs); 04 Sep 2001 17:04:26 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 4 Sep 2001 17:04:24 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA20685; Tue, 4 Sep 2001 09:56:27 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 108771 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 4 Sep 2001 16:54:55          +0000
Received: from fep3-orange.clear.net.nz (fep3-orange.clear.net.nz          [203.97.32.3]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA20667          for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Tue, 4 Sep 2001 09:54:54 -0700
Received: from mkbs (203-167-156-105.dialup.clear.net.nz [203.167.156.105]) by          fep3-orange.clear.net.nz (1.5/1.8) with SMTP id EAA11725; Wed, 5 Sep          2001 04:54:51 +1200 (NZST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="Windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <017b01c13562$c3a19be0$0100a8c0@mkbs>
Date:         Wed, 5 Sep 2001 00:29:04 +1200
Reply-To: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Organization: Applied Technology
Subject:      [AR] Fw: Jonathan's Space Report, No. 460
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

I see still nobody has told the Japanese that LH is not a good upper stage
fuel :-)
Truax probably won't live to see the day but he will probably get the last
laugh sooner or later.

What does Shuttle main tank re-entry look like?
Do they have ships staitoned in the area?
Is it a controlled area?
Does anything solid survive to sealevel ?
(I would have thought so)

_______________________________________________________________



_______________________________________________________

Jonathan's Space Report
No. 460                                           2001 Sep 3  Cambridge, MA
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
---
Sender: owner-jsr@head-cfa.harvard.edu
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: jmcdowell@head-cfa.harvard.edu


Shuttle and Station
--------------------

Erratum: the description of the launch phase of STS-105 was
off by one hour in most of the quoted times. Here is the corrected
paragraph.

STS-105 was launched on Aug 10 at 2110 UTC. MECO (main engine cutoff)
was at 2118 UTC with separation of external tank ET-110 into a 58 x 234
km x 51.6 deg orbit. At 2148 UTC Discovery reached apogee and fired its
OMS engines to enter a 155 x 233 km x 51.6 deg orbit; another burn at
around 0100 UTC raised the orbit to 198 x 277 km. Meanwhile the External
Tank fell back towards the Pacific and reentered at its first perigee at
around 2240 UTC.

The Progress M1-6 tanker was undocked from the aft Zvezda port at 0601 UTC
on Aug 22 and deorbited sometime around 0900 UTC the same day.
Progress M-45, 7K-TGM No. 245 (the older generation type of Progress)
was launched on Aug 21 at 0924 UTC from Baykonur and docked at 0951 UTC
on Aug 23 at the newly vacant port.

Recent Launches
---------------

Japan's NASDA space agency launched the first H-2A rocket from
Tanegashima on Aug 29. The Vehicle Evaluation Payload is a conical
ballast payload with monitoring instrumentation attached to the second
stage. It includes a doppler ranging experiment for orbit determination.
The LRE Laser Ranging Experiment satellite carries 126 laser
retroreflectors for geodesy and separatedn from the second stage at 0739
UTC into a 271 x 36214 km x 28 deg orbit. It has a mass of 86 kg and is
0.5 meters across.

The H-2A 202 version has two strap-on SRB-A solid boosters, shorter and
fatter than the SRBs used on the old H-2 rocket. The core stages are
uprated versions of the H-2 core, with the same 4.0 meter diameter and a
larger propellant load. Both stages use uprated Mitsubishi liquid
hydrogen/ liquid oxygen engines; the LE-7A on the first stage is roughly
comparable with the Ariane 5 main engine  while the LE-5A on the second
stage is comparable with the RL-10 engine used on Centaur and Delta 3.

An Arianespace Ariane 44L was launched from Kourou on Aug 30. It carried
the Intelsat 902 communications satellite. The Intelsat international
telecoms organization is currently being privatized. To harp on my
current hobbyhorse (er... sorry about the mixed metaphor there) it will
be interesting to see whether it starts registering its satellites with
the UN, something Intelsat has been forgetting to do for 20 years. The
902 satellite has both C-band and Ku-band transponders and will be
stationed initially over the Indian Ocean giving coverage to Europe,
Africa, Asia and Australasia. The Loral FS-1300 satellite has a dry mass
of 1978 kg and carries a further 2745 kg of propellant at launch.



Table of Recent Launches
-----------------------

Date UT       Name            Launch Vehicle  Site            Mission
INTL.

DES.

Jul 12 0904   Atlantis STS-104) Shuttle        Kennedy LC39B    Spaceship
28A
              Quest           )                                 Station
module
Jul 12 2158   Artemis   )       Ariane 5G      Kourou ELA3      Expt. comms
29A
              BSAT-2b   )                                       Ku video
29B
Jul 20 0017   Molniya-3         Molniya-M      Plesetsk LC43/4  Comms
30A
Jul 23 0723   GOES 12           Atlas IIA      Canaveral SLC36A Weather
31A
Jul 31 0800   Koronas-F         Tsiklon-3      Plesetsk LC32    Astronomy
32A
Aug  6 0728   DSP 21            Titan 4B/IUS   Canaveral SLC40  Early Warn
33A
Aug  8 1613   Genesis           Delta 7326     Canaveral SLC17A Space probe
34A
Aug 10 2110   Discovery  )      Shuttle        Kennedy LC39     Spaceship
35A
              Leonardo   )
Aug 20 1830   Simplesat         -              Discovery, LEO   Astronomy
35B
Aug 21 0924   Progress M-45     Soyuz-U        Baykonur LC1     Cargo
36A
Aug 24 2034   Kosmos-2379       Proton-K/DM2M? Baykonur LC81R   Early Warn?
37A
Aug 29 0700   VEP-2   )         H-2A           Tanegashima      Technology
38B
              LRE     )                                         Geodesy
38A
Aug 30 0646   Intelsat 902      Ariane 44L     Kourou ELA2      C/Ku telecom
39A

Current Shuttle Processing Status
_________________________________

Orbiters               Location   Mission    Launch Due

OV-102 Columbia        OPF Bay 3     STS-109 2002 Jan 17  HST SM-3B
OV-103 Discovery       OPF Bay 2     Maintenance
OV-104 Atlantis        VAB           STS-110 2002 Feb 28  ISS 8A
OV-105 Endeavour       OPF Bay 1     STS-108 2001 Nov 29  ISS UF-1

.-------------------------------------------------------------------------.
|  Jonathan McDowell                 |  phone : (617) 495-7176            |
|  Harvard-Smithsonian Center for    |                                    |
|   Astrophysics                     |                                    |
|  60 Garden St, MS6                 |                                    |
|  Cambridge MA 02138                |  inter : jcm@cfa.harvard.edu       |
|  USA                               |          jmcdowell@cfa.harvard.edu |
|                                                                         |
| JSR: http://hea-www.harvard.edu/~jcm/space/jsr/jsr.html                 |
| Back issues:  http://hea-www.harvard.edu/~jcm/space/jsr/back            |
| Subscribe/unsub: mail majordomo@head-cfa.harvard.edu, (un)subscribe jsr |
'-------------------------------------------------------------------------'

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 9206 invoked from network); 4 Sep 2001 17:24:04 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 4 Sep 2001 17:24:04 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 9582 invoked by uid 50005); 4 Sep 2001 17:24:23 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpa with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.621487 secs); 04 Sep 2001 17:24:23 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 4 Sep 2001 17:24:22 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA20841; Tue, 4 Sep 2001 10:19:16 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 108804 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 4 Sep 2001 17:17:53          +0000
Received: from smtp006pub.verizon.net (smtp006pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.185])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA20826 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 4 Sep 2001 10:17:53 -0700
Received: from [63.24.225.117] (1Cust227.tnt1.rancho-cucamonga.ca.da.uu.net          [63.24.225.227]) by smtp006pub.verizon.net  with ESMTP for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; id f84HHHA24209 Tue, 4 Sep 2001 12:17:18 -0500          (CDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: GTE/01rocket@mail.gte.net
References: <017b01c13562$c3a19be0$0100a8c0@mkbs>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <a05100316b7babcdf946e@[63.24.225.117]>
Date:         Tue, 4 Sep 2001 10:17:20 -0700
Reply-To: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Fw: Jonathan's Space Report, No. 460
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <017b01c13562$c3a19be0$0100a8c0@mkbs>

>Russell McMahon:


>I see still nobody has told the Japanese that LH is not a good upper stage
>fuel :-)
>Truax probably won't live to see the day but he will probably get the last
>laugh sooner or later.


Probably sooner IMHO.

Jerry

--
Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
Opinion, the whole thing.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 14783 invoked from network); 4 Sep 2001 19:14:55 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 4 Sep 2001 19:14:55 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 25321 invoked by uid 50005); 4 Sep 2001 19:12:58 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.213807 secs); 04 Sep 2001 19:12:58 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 4 Sep 2001 19:12:58 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA21402; Tue, 4 Sep 2001 12:07:58 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 108898 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 4 Sep 2001 19:06:26          +0000
Received: from smtp007pub.verizon.net (smtp007pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.186])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA21382 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 4 Sep 2001 12:06:26 -0700
Received: from [63.10.189.117] (1Cust117.tnt2.hilo.hi.da.uu.net          [63.10.189.117]) by smtp007pub.verizon.net  with ESMTP for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; id f84J5sH13090 Tue, 4 Sep 2001 14:05:54 -0500          (CDT)
X-Sender: ttocs@mail.gte.net
References: <l03130300b7b63d21e5f4@[63.10.189.208]>            <l03130300b7b63d21e5f4@[63.10.189.208]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <l03130301b7b6dd39f48d@[63.10.189.137]>
Date:         Sat, 1 Sep 2001 09:05:31 -1000
Reply-To: "Aaron Smith" <ttocs@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Aaron Smith" <ttocs@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Gun launch - part deux
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <a05100311b7ba8e72a283@[63.24.225.117]>

OK, sounds good.  But what would you say is the highest usable
acceleration?  I am having a hard time just guessing a good number.  Also,
your air launch rockets, how much do they weigh?  Dimentions?

Just out of cusiosity, how much would a dedicated air-launch aircraft for
small rockets be worth?  Say, 100 Kg to 14,000 ft.  200 kg?


At 7:00 AM -0700 9/4/01, Jerry Irvine wrote:
>>Aaron Smith wrote:
>
>
>>I'm seriously thinking of starting a gun launch project.  What I would like
>>to do is to poll the List to see what the best payload size, muzzle
>>velocity / altitude, and acceleleration is.  Try to keep it reasonable, no
>>250 Kg to 2.7 km/sec at 3G or somesuch.  I'm thinking of something like 10
>>Kg to 750 m/s @ ~4000G max.
>
>
>I suggest you start out with the longest gun barrell you can
>reasonably transport to a site, say 16-20 feet, the highest G's your
>projectile can handle, and the rest is worked out for you.
>
>
>>
>>I'm also looking into the use of experimental aircraft to air-launch small
>>rockets.  Minimum payload at 14,000 feet to be useful?  I'm thinking along
>>the lines of 100 Kg.  Flaming hoops to jump through with the FAA?  Finding
>>a suitable aircraft isn't an issue.
>
>
>I have about 10 rockets now that would like to be air-launched off an
>aircraft and I can get the FAA waviers to launch them.  I do not have
>an aircraft or access to one.
>
>
>>
>>Aaron
>
>
>--
>Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
>Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
>Opinion, the whole thing.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 29264 invoked from network); 4 Sep 2001 19:17:58 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 4 Sep 2001 19:17:58 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 12203 invoked by uid 50005); 4 Sep 2001 19:16:45 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.437747 secs); 04 Sep 2001 19:16:45 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 4 Sep 2001 19:16:45 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA21481; Tue, 4 Sep 2001 12:14:23 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 108917 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 4 Sep 2001 19:13:01          +0000
Received: from smtp003pub.verizon.net (smtp003pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.182])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA21458; Tue, 4 Sep 2001          12:13:00 -0700
Received: from [63.10.189.117] (1Cust227.tnt2.hilo.hi.da.uu.net          [63.10.189.227]) by smtp003pub.verizon.net  with ESMTP ; id          f84JCSw10691 Tue, 4 Sep 2001 14:12:28 -0500 (CDT)
X-Sender: ttocs@mail.gte.net
References: <l03130300b7b659bc9e71@[63.10.189.23]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <l03130302b7b6e2b63e74@[63.10.189.117]>
Date:         Sat, 1 Sep 2001 09:12:04 -1000
Reply-To: "Aaron Smith" <ttocs@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Aaron Smith" <ttocs@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Gun launch - part deux
Comments: To: "David J. McCue" <dmccue@itc.uci.edu>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <Pine.LNX.4.10.10109040840390.20118-100000@itc.uci.edu>

I am talking about fixed, gun launch systems for amatuer rockets.  Hardly
an aircraft cannon.

At 8:43 AM -0700 9/4/01, David J. McCue wrote:
>I have to ask: how is discussion of aircraft cannon design appropriate for
>a list on amateur rocketry? This seems better suited to some "kewl bomz"
>intersest group. I am very uncomfortable with this.
>
>-Dave McCue
>
>On Fri, 31 Aug 2001, Aaron Smith wrote:
>
>> First of all, I need to know what size projectile I will be launching, with
>> the maximum acceleration and final exit velocity.  I won't have "concrete
>> projected data" until I know those variables.
>>
>> For a small compressed air gun, I just assume that the reservoir volume is
>> equal to the barrel volume.
>>
>> At 8:35 AM +0000 9/4/01, John Dom wrote:
>> >OK. Please give concrete projected data:
>> >
>> >Compressed air reservoir volume?
>> >Reservoir pressure?
>> >Barrel ID * length?
>> >Projectile weight?
>> >
>> >jd
>>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 12806 invoked from network); 4 Sep 2001 19:21:11 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 4 Sep 2001 19:21:11 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 29772 invoked by uid 50005); 4 Sep 2001 19:19:22 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.173216 secs); 04 Sep 2001 19:19:22 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 4 Sep 2001 19:19:21 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA21565; Tue, 4 Sep 2001 12:17:45 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 108940 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 4 Sep 2001 19:16:24          +0000
Received: from smtp001pub.verizon.net (smtp001pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.180])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA21543 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 4 Sep 2001 12:16:24 -0700
Received: from [63.10.189.117] (1Cust202.tnt1.hilo.hi.da.uu.net          [63.25.193.202]) by smtp001pub.verizon.net  with ESMTP ; id          f84JFfn24803 Tue, 4 Sep 2001 14:15:42 -0500 (CDT)
X-Sender: ttocs@mail.gte.net
References: Your message of Fri, 31 Aug 2001 22:16:34 -1000
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <l03130303b7b6e3e78644@[63.10.189.117]>
Date:         Sat, 1 Sep 2001 09:15:21 -1000
Reply-To: "Aaron Smith" <ttocs@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Aaron Smith" <ttocs@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Gun launch - part deux
Comments: To: Bill Westfield <billw@cisco.com>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <CMM.0.90.4.999620955.billw@cypher>

Not if you bury it.  The cool thing with gun launchers is that since they
don't fly themselves, they can be built as strong as you please.

At 9:29 AM -0700 9/4/01, William Chops Westfield wrote:
>    A small system, <300 m/s, will be powered by compressed air.  Larger
>    muzzle velocities will be with combustion of some sort, probably
>    propane (inexpensive, suppliers everywhere) because of speed of sound
>    restrictions, and lack of suitable valves.
>
>Keep in mind that cannon are not particularly safer to fire than
>rockets, especially if they're homemade.  They're less likely to fail,
>but the consequences tend to be more serious (more and thicker
>pieces.)
>
>BillW

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 24410 invoked from network); 4 Sep 2001 19:54:08 -0000
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 4 Sep 2001 19:54:08 -0000
Received: (qmail 29915 invoked by uid 50005); 4 Sep 2001 19:51:42 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpf with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.348701 secs); 04 Sep 2001 19:51:42 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 4 Sep 2001 19:51:41 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA21737; Tue, 4 Sep 2001 12:37:43 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 108966 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 4 Sep 2001 19:36:22          +0000
Received: from smtp1.ihug.co.nz (smtp1.ihug.co.nz [203.109.252.7]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA21717 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 4 Sep 2001 12:36:20 -0700
Received: from tm22g (p57-max1.wlg.ihug.co.nz [203.173.230.57]) by          smtp1.ihug.co.nz (8.9.3/8.9.3/Debian 8.9.3-21) with SMTP id HAA09680;          Wed, 5 Sep 2001 07:36:13 +1200
X-Authentication-Warning: smtp1.ihug.co.nz: Host p57-max1.wlg.ihug.co.nz                         [203.173.230.57] claimed to be tm22g
References:  <F173NZSPGNkY5TetpIu000041cc@hotmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <016e01c13578$97ac8ca0$39e6adcb@tm22g>
Date:         Wed, 5 Sep 2001 07:34:18 +1200
Reply-To: "Pingu!" <hooon@IHUG.CO.NZ>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Pingu!" <hooon@IHUG.CO.NZ>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Gun launch - part deux
Comments: To: John Dom <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Hey

heehehe

The flamethrower is just a small aluminium 1" bore pneumatic rifle , the
barrel is filled with petrol with 60 psi in the chamber and a burning rag in
the end!

We dont have any calcs yet for trajectory but we have found some over the
internet which may or may not be useful to you , are you allowed to send
files over this?
----- Original Message -----
From: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Wednesday, September 05, 2001 2:03 AM
Subject: Re: [AR] Gun launch - part deux


> Quote NZ spud site:
>
> >my friend has created a differential equation program which has all the
> >variables you need to worry about with launching one of these things.
> >
> >Its in the physics section.
>
>
> The analytical algebraic formula I sent earlier to this list is the result
> of the differential calculus in your site I guess. Terms look familiar.
>
> Do you have an algorithm for the effect of air resistance in the barrel
and
> on trajectory? For a bigger cannon this 'd be worthwhile.
>
> I wonder what the flame thrower is about. It is not a explosive gas gun is
> it?
>
> jd
>
>
>
>
> >From: Pingu! <hooon@IHUG.CO.NZ>
> >Reply-To: Pingu! <hooon@IHUG.CO.NZ>
> >To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
> >Subject: Re: [AR] Gun launch - part deux
> >Date: Wed, 5 Sep 2001 00:29:53 +1200
> >
> >Hi
> >
> >Check out mine and my friends website
> >www.spudgunsnz.com
> >
> >Its a site about spudguns and you maybe thinking this is stupid but for
> >proppelling objects with compressed air
>
> >
> >Andy
> >----- Original Message -----
> >From: "Aaron Smith" <ttocs@GTE.NET>
> >To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
> >Sent: Saturday, September 01, 2001 9:32 PM
> >Subject: Re: [AR] Gun launch - part deux
> >
> >
> > > First of all, I need to know what size projectile I will be launching,
> >with
> > > the maximum acceleration and final exit velocity.  I won't have
> >"concrete
> > > projected data" until I know those variables.
> > >
> > > For a small compressed air gun, I just assume that the reservoir
volume
> >is
> > > equal to the barrel volume.
> > >
> > > At 8:35 AM +0000 9/4/01, John Dom wrote:
> > > >OK. Please give concrete projected data:
> > > >
> > > >Compressed air reservoir volume?
> > > >Reservoir pressure?
> > > >Barrel ID * length?
> > > >Projectile weight?
> > > >
> > > >jd
> > >
>
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 22318 invoked from network); 4 Sep 2001 20:38:10 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 4 Sep 2001 20:38:10 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 21273 invoked by uid 50005); 4 Sep 2001 20:36:50 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 1.986218 secs); 04 Sep 2001 20:36:50 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 4 Sep 2001 20:36:45 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA21975; Tue, 4 Sep 2001 13:31:47 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 109009 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 4 Sep 2001 20:30:20          +0000
Received: from imo-r02.mx.aol.com (imo-r02.mx.aol.com [152.163.225.98]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA21957 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Tue, 4 Sep 2001 13:30:19 -0700
Received: from Sociald84@aol.com by imo-r02.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v31_r1.4.) id          o.72.f6af602 (16336); Tue, 4 Sep 2001 16:30:13 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0C7B_01C56B69.4F9DFFE0"
X-Mailer: AOL 6.0 for Windows US sub 10536
Message-ID:  <72.f6af602.28c693d5@aol.com>
Date:         Tue, 4 Sep 2001 16:30:13 EDT
Reply-To: <Sociald84@AOL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <Sociald84@AOL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] liquids question: alcohol/N2O propellant feeding
Comments: To: icantdecide@juno.com
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0C7B_01C56B69.4F9DFFE0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

In a message dated 9/3/2001 11:10:57 PM Mountain Daylight Time,
icantdecide@JUNO.COM writes:


> I've often wondered if mylar would make a suitable material for a fuel
> bag. Its inpermeable to gas thanks to the aluminum. Will it become
> brittle if cooled too much by N2O evaporation? I think you could seem it
> together with a hot tool. I've been meaning to pick up a "space blanket"
> so I could play with the idea. Any experience?
>
>

Why not pick up one of those funny silver ballons at the grocery store?
They're mylar.

Mark

------=_NextPart_000_0C7B_01C56B69.4F9DFFE0
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<HTML><FONT FACE=arial,helvetica><FONT  SIZE=2>In a message dated 9/3/2001 11:10:57 PM Mountain Daylight Time,
<BR>icantdecide@JUNO.COM writes:
<BR>
<BR>
<BR><BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE style="BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px">I've often wondered if mylar would make a suitable material for a fuel
<BR>bag. Its inpermeable to gas thanks to the aluminum. Will it become
<BR>brittle if cooled too much by N2O evaporation? I think you could seem it
<BR>together with a hot tool. I've been meaning to pick up a "space blanket"
<BR>so I could play with the idea. Any experience?
<BR>
<BR>Jim Selin</BLOCKQUOTE>
<BR>
<BR>Why not pick up one of those funny silver ballons at the grocery store?
<BR>They're mylar.
<BR>
<BR>Mark</FONT></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0C7B_01C56B69.4F9DFFE0--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 3730 invoked from network); 4 Sep 2001 21:10:16 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 4 Sep 2001 21:10:16 -0000
Received: (qmail 27925 invoked by uid 50005); 4 Sep 2001 21:10:33 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpa with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.611094 secs); 04 Sep 2001 21:10:33 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 4 Sep 2001 21:10:32 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA22076; Tue, 4 Sep 2001 13:46:58 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 109028 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 4 Sep 2001 20:45:35          +0000
Received: from imo-m07.mx.aol.com (imo-m07.mx.aol.com [64.12.136.162]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA22060 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Tue, 4 Sep 2001 13:45:35 -0700
Received: from Sociald84@aol.com by imo-m07.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v31_r1.4.) id          w.14.1a0b2829 (16336) for <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Tue, 4 Sep 2001          16:44:56 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/mixed;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0C80_01C56B69.4FA79CD0"
X-Mailer: AOL 6.0 for Windows US sub 10536
Message-ID:  <14.1a0b2829.28c69748@aol.com>
Date:         Tue, 4 Sep 2001 16:44:56 EDT
Reply-To: <Sociald84@AOL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <Sociald84@AOL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] triethylaluminum
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0C80_01C56B69.4FA79CD0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit



------=_NextPart_000_0C80_01C56B69.4FA79CD0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Type: message/rfc822
Content-Disposition: inline

Return-path: <Sociald84@aol.com>
From: Sociald84@aol.com
Full-name: Social d84
Message-ID: <ba.19147c76.28c6972f@aol.com>
Date: Tue, 4 Sep 2001 16:44:31 EDT
Subject: Re: [AR] triethylaluminum
To: Tjpoulton@aol.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part2_14.1a0b2829.28c6972f_boundary"
X-Mailer: AOL 6.0 for Windows US sub 10536


--part2_14.1a0b2829.28c6972f_boundary
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

In a message dated 9/4/2001 4:03:37 AM Mountain Daylight Time,
Tjpoulton@AOL.COM writes:


> Hmmm... Sure would be nice not to have to bother with an ignition system in
> my bipropellant rocket.  Sure would be nice just to fire the pyrovalves and
> know that the propellants would light up quickly and smoothly.  The design
> I'm using provides a significant length of fuel tubing between the alcohol
> tank and the fuel valve.  If I were to fill this tube with triethylaluminum
> (or, say a 25% solution in toluene), would I be assured ignition as soon as
> it hit N2O in the chamber?  Will Aldrich really sell me 100ml of TEA,
> without
> asking too many questions?  And finally, is it worth dealing with the
> difficulties involved in handling a pyrophoric material in order to
> eliminate
> the need for pyrotechnic ignition?
> Mike P.
>

Mike,

Theres a couple of things I've though of that could remedy this.

1:assuming the alcohol line is a good deal enough longer than the Nitrous
line to affect things, you could start out with something very similar to
Dave Grifiths tri-prop. Have a very small Hybrid grain in the combustion
chamber and use a slug of solid propellant to set things off. Ignition of the
solid fuel grain burns through a wire and breaks a circuit keeping the
pyrovalve from going off. The pyrovalve fires theres already a flame in the
chamber and the nitrous hits the chamber and basically the whole thing
operates in hybrid mode until the fuel gets there.

2: do the same as above only eliminating the hybrid grain.

3: Put the pyrovalves in the head of the motor.

Mark

--part2_14.1a0b2829.28c6972f_boundary
Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<HTML><FONT FACE=arial,helvetica><FONT  SIZE=2>In a message dated 9/4/2001 4:03:37 AM Mountain Daylight Time,
<BR>Tjpoulton@AOL.COM writes:
<BR>
<BR>
<BR><BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE style="BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px">Hmmm... Sure would be nice not to have to bother with an ignition system in
<BR>my bipropellant rocket. &nbsp;Sure would be nice just to fire the pyrovalves and
<BR>know that the propellants would light up quickly and smoothly. &nbsp;The design
<BR>I'm using provides a significant length of fuel tubing between the alcohol
<BR>tank and the fuel valve. &nbsp;If I were to fill this tube with triethylaluminum
<BR>(or, say a 25% solution in toluene), would I be assured ignition as soon as
<BR>it hit N2O in the chamber? &nbsp;Will Aldrich really sell me 100ml of TEA,
<BR>without
<BR>asking too many questions? &nbsp;And finally, is it worth dealing with the
<BR>difficulties involved in handling a pyrophoric material in order to
<BR>eliminate
<BR>the need for pyrotechnic ignition?
<BR>Mike P.
<BR></BLOCKQUOTE>
<BR>
<BR>Mike,
<BR>
<BR>Theres a couple of things I've though of that could remedy this.
<BR>
<BR>1:assuming the alcohol line is a good deal enough longer than the Nitrous
<BR>line to affect things, you could start out with something very similar to
<BR>Dave Grifiths tri-prop. Have a very small Hybrid grain in the combustion
<BR>chamber and use a slug of solid propellant to set things off. Ignition of the
<BR>solid fuel grain burns through a wire and breaks a circuit keeping the
<BR>pyrovalve from going off. The pyrovalve fires theres already a flame in the
<BR>chamber and the nitrous hits the chamber and basically the whole thing
<BR>operates in hybrid mode until the fuel gets there.
<BR>
<BR>2: do the same as above only eliminating the hybrid grain.
<BR>
<BR>3: Put the pyrovalves in the head of the motor.
<BR>
<BR>Mark</FONT></HTML>

--part2_14.1a0b2829.28c6972f_boundary--

------=_NextPart_000_0C80_01C56B69.4FA79CD0--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 13148 invoked from network); 4 Sep 2001 21:12:37 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 4 Sep 2001 21:12:37 -0000
Received: (qmail 23573 invoked by uid 50005); 4 Sep 2001 21:12:31 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpe with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 1.237415 secs); 04 Sep 2001 21:12:31 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 4 Sep 2001 21:12:27 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA22200; Tue, 4 Sep 2001 14:07:49 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 109047 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 4 Sep 2001 21:06:27          +0000
Received: from imo-m09.mx.aol.com (imo-m09.mx.aol.com [64.12.136.164]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA22183 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Tue, 4 Sep 2001 14:06:26 -0700
Received: from Sociald84@aol.com by imo-m09.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v31_r1.4.) id          w.14e.7134d5 (16336) for <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Tue, 4 Sep 2001          17:05:50 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0C84_01C56B69.4FA79CD0"
X-Mailer: AOL 6.0 for Windows US sub 10536
Message-ID:  <14e.7134d5.28c69c2d@aol.com>
Date:         Tue, 4 Sep 2001 17:05:49 EDT
Reply-To: <Sociald84@AOL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <Sociald84@AOL.COM>
Subject:      [AR] fiberglass kits
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0C84_01C56B69.4FA79CD0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Jery,

Which kits of yours use the fiberglass tubes? URL?

Mark

------=_NextPart_000_0C84_01C56B69.4FA79CD0
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<HTML><FONT FACE=arial,helvetica><FONT  SIZE=2>Jery,
<BR>
<BR>Which kits of yours use the fiberglass tubes? URL?
<BR>
<BR>Mark</FONT></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0C84_01C56B69.4FA79CD0--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 10550 invoked from network); 4 Sep 2001 21:50:28 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 4 Sep 2001 21:50:28 -0000
Received: (qmail 28656 invoked by uid 50005); 4 Sep 2001 21:50:48 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpb with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 1.031059 secs); 04 Sep 2001 21:50:48 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 4 Sep 2001 21:50:46 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA22447; Tue, 4 Sep 2001 14:40:20 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 109091 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 4 Sep 2001 21:38:54          +0000
Received: from femail8.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail8.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.0.95.88]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA22426 for          <arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 4 Sep 2001 14:38:54 -0700
Received: from cc334751a ([65.13.214.65]) by femail8.sdc1.sfba.home.com          (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20 201-229-121-120-20010223) with SMTP id          <20010904213853.YEPV10796.femail8.sdc1.sfba.home.com@cc334751a> for          <arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 4 Sep 2001 14:38:53 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0C89_01C56B69.4FA79CD0"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2462.0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <029b01c13589$ea595800$6601a8c0@home.com>
Date:         Tue, 4 Sep 2001 15:38:19 -0600
Reply-To: "Brian Kosko" <bkosko1@HOME.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Brian Kosko" <bkosko1@HOME.COM>
Subject:      [AR] Hybrids vs Solids, a datapoint
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0C89_01C56B69.4FA79CD0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Our club's local hybrid guru did his Level 3 this weekend. Not only is =
he a big proponent of hybrids, he has a company (Freqken) that is an HP =
hybrid vendor. So for this very important flight he of course chose a =
hybrid?

Not! He certified on an Aerotech 75mm; that is, the one with AP and =
HTPB. When you've got to have that simple, reliable propulsion =
system.....

Brian =20

------=_NextPart_000_0C89_01C56B69.4FA79CD0
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Diso-8859-1">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 6.00.2462.0" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Our club's local hybrid guru did his =
Level 3 this=20
weekend. Not only is he a big proponent of hybrids, he has a company =
(Freqken)=20
that is an HP hybrid vendor. So for this very important flight he of =
course=20
chose a hybrid?</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Not! He certified on an Aerotech 75mm; =
that is, the=20
one with AP and HTPB. When you've got to have that simple, reliable =
propulsion=20
system.....</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial =
size=3D2>Brian&nbsp;&nbsp;</FONT></DIV></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0C89_01C56B69.4FA79CD0--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 29136 invoked from network); 4 Sep 2001 22:01:58 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 4 Sep 2001 22:01:58 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: (qmail 15935 invoked by uid 50005); 4 Sep 2001 22:01:52 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpe with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.2197 secs); 04 Sep 2001 22:01:52 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 4 Sep 2001 22:01:52 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA22478; Tue, 4 Sep 2001 14:42:14 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 109098 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 4 Sep 2001 21:40:53          +0000
Received: from cisco.com (cypher.cisco.com [171.69.11.18]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA22457 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue,          4 Sep 2001 14:40:53 -0700
Received: (from billw@localhost) by cisco.com (8.8.8/2.6/Cisco List          Logging/8.8.8) id OAA17625; Tue, 4 Sep 2001 14:40:22 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID:  <CMM.0.90.4.999639622.billw@cypher>
Date:         Tue, 4 Sep 2001 14:40:22 PDT
Reply-To: "Bill Westfield" <billw@cisco.com>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "William Chops Westfield" <billw@cisco.com>
Subject:      Re: [AR] liquids question: alcohol/N2O propellant feeding
Comments: To: Sociald84@aol.com
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  Your message of Tue, 4 Sep 2001 16:30:13 EDT

    Why not pick up one of those funny silver ballons at the grocery store?
    They're mylar.

Actually, they're NOT mylar, but they probably would work better than
plain mylar.  IIRC last time I tracked this down, Balloon "mylar" is
actually some sort of double layer nylon/PE film (plus the Al).  (This
has the useful property of being "weldable."  I've seen large rolls of
this stuff on the plastics surplus markets.  Once, anyway...

BillW


From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 17189 invoked from network); 4 Sep 2001 22:35:00 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 4 Sep 2001 22:35:00 -0000
Received: (qmail 31494 invoked by uid 50005); 4 Sep 2001 22:35:19 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpb with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.469883 secs); 04 Sep 2001 22:35:19 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 4 Sep 2001 22:35:18 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA22720; Tue, 4 Sep 2001 15:17:10 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 109118 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 4 Sep 2001 22:15:47          +0000
Received: from imo-r03.mx.aol.com (imo-r03.mx.aol.com [152.163.225.99]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA22704 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Tue, 4 Sep 2001 15:15:46 -0700
Received: from JMKrell@aol.com by imo-r03.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v31_r1.4.) id          w.68.13b75a0d (4206) for <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Tue, 4 Sep 2001          18:15:35 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0C8C_01C56B69.4FA79CD0"
X-Mailer: AOL 6.0 for Windows US sub 10540
Message-ID:  <68.13b75a0d.28c6ac8b@aol.com>
Date:         Tue, 4 Sep 2001 18:15:39 EDT
Reply-To: <JMKrell@AOL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <JMKrell@AOL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] triethylaluminum
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0C8C_01C56B69.4FA79CD0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

In a message dated 9/4/01 3:03:37 AM Pacific Daylight Time, Tjpoulton@AOL.COM
writes:


> Hmmm... Sure would be nice not to have to bother with an ignition system in
> my bipropellant rocket.  Sure would be nice just to fire the pyrovalves and
> know that the propellants would light up quickly and smoothly.  The design
> I'm using provides a significant length of fuel tubing between the alcohol
> tank and the fuel valve.  If I were to fill this tube with triethylaluminum
> (or, say a 25% solution in toluene), would I be assured ignition as soon as
> it hit N2O in the chamber?  Will Aldrich really sell me 100ml of TEA,
> without
> asking too many questions?  And finally, is it worth dealing with the
> difficulties involved in handling a pyrophoric material in order to
> eliminate
> the need for pyrotechnic ignition?
>

The added complexity and hazard of handling a pyrophoric material out weigh
any benefit. You must transfer the TEA with an N2 or Ar gas blanket. You must
evacuate the fuel and transfer lines then fill with N2 or Ar.

I work in the semiconductor industry with several pyrophoric chemicals. It
can take several hours to pump down lines and prepare a tool before turning
on a pyrophoric gas line. Try doing this out in a remote area and pyrotechnic
ignition looks very attractive.

JK


------=_NextPart_000_0C8C_01C56B69.4FA79CD0
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<HTML><FONT FACE=arial,helvetica><FONT  SIZE=2>In a message dated 9/4/01 3:03:37 AM Pacific Daylight Time, Tjpoulton@AOL.COM
<BR>writes:
<BR>
<BR>
<BR><BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE style="BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px">Hmmm... Sure would be nice not to have to bother with an ignition system in
<BR>my bipropellant rocket. &nbsp;Sure would be nice just to fire the pyrovalves and
<BR>know that the propellants would light up quickly and smoothly. &nbsp;The design
<BR>I'm using provides a significant length of fuel tubing between the alcohol
<BR>tank and the fuel valve. &nbsp;If I were to fill this tube with triethylaluminum
<BR>(or, say a 25% solution in toluene), would I be assured ignition as soon as
<BR>it hit N2O in the chamber? &nbsp;Will Aldrich really sell me 100ml of TEA,
<BR>without
<BR>asking too many questions? &nbsp;And finally, is it worth dealing with the
<BR>difficulties involved in handling a pyrophoric material in order to
<BR>eliminate
<BR>the need for pyrotechnic ignition?
<BR></FONT><FONT  COLOR="#000000" SIZE=3 FAMILY="SANSSERIF" FACE="Arial" LANG="0"></BLOCKQUOTE>
<BR></FONT><FONT  COLOR="#000000" SIZE=2 FAMILY="SANSSERIF" FACE="Arial" LANG="0">
<BR>The added complexity and hazard of handling a pyrophoric material out weigh
<BR>any benefit. You must transfer the TEA with an N2 or Ar gas blanket. You must
<BR>evacuate the fuel and transfer lines then fill with N2 or Ar.
<BR>
<BR>I work in the semiconductor industry with several pyrophoric chemicals. It
<BR>can take several hours to pump down lines and prepare a tool before turning
<BR>on a pyrophoric gas line. Try doing this out in a remote area and pyrotechnic
<BR>ignition looks very attractive.
<BR>
<BR>JK
<BR> &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;</FONT></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0C8C_01C56B69.4FA79CD0--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 27396 invoked from network); 4 Sep 2001 22:37:29 -0000
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 4 Sep 2001 22:37:29 -0000
Received: (qmail 24025 invoked by uid 50005); 4 Sep 2001 22:37:24 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpe with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.234955 secs); 04 Sep 2001 22:37:24 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 4 Sep 2001 22:37:23 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA22775; Tue, 4 Sep 2001 15:20:38 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 109129 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 4 Sep 2001 22:19:17          +0000
Received: from femail9.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail9.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.0.95.89]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAB22744 for          <arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 4 Sep 2001 15:19:17 -0700
Received: from cc334751a ([65.13.214.65]) by femail9.sdc1.sfba.home.com          (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20 201-229-121-120-20010223) with SMTP id          <20010904221910.WXLG26252.femail9.sdc1.sfba.home.com@cc334751a> for          <arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 4 Sep 2001 15:19:10 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0C91_01C56B69.4FAA0DD0"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2462.0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <02a401c1358f$8abb2300$6601a8c0@home.com>
Date:         Tue, 4 Sep 2001 16:18:36 -0600
Reply-To: "Brian Kosko" <bkosko1@HOME.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Brian Kosko" <bkosko1@HOME.COM>
Subject:      [AR] Erosive burning and complex geometries...
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0C91_01C56B69.4FAA0DD0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

One of those random propellant questions has been bothering me and I =
thought I'd share it with you.

What about geometries like a finocyl? It makes sense that with a =
cylindrical core erosive burning will occur when the throat diameter is =
larger than the core. How do you evaluate geometries like stars and =
finocyls?

Thanks,
Brian

------=_NextPart_000_0C91_01C56B69.4FAA0DD0
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Diso-8859-1">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 6.00.2462.0" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>One of those random propellant =
questions has=20
been&nbsp;bothering me and I thought I'd share it with you.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>What about geometries like a finocyl? =
It makes=20
sense that with a cylindrical core erosive burning will occur when the =
throat=20
diameter is larger than the core. How do you evaluate geometries like =
stars and=20
finocyls?</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Thanks,</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Brian</FONT></DIV></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0C91_01C56B69.4FAA0DD0--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 9154 invoked from network); 4 Sep 2001 22:47:12 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 4 Sep 2001 22:47:12 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 7937 invoked by uid 50005); 4 Sep 2001 22:47:32 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpb with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.303367 secs); 04 Sep 2001 22:47:32 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 4 Sep 2001 22:47:32 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA22877; Tue, 4 Sep 2001 15:30:06 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 109149 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 4 Sep 2001 22:28:40          +0000
Received: from cascara.uvic.ca (root@cascara.uvic.ca [142.104.5.28]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA22855 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 4 Sep 2001 15:28:40 -0700
Received: from home.com (tsunami.cfs.me.UVic.CA [142.104.121.74]) by          cascara.uvic.ca (8.11.3/8.11.3) with ESMTP id f84MSdZ122796 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 4 Sep 2001 15:28:39 -0700
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.6 (Macintosh; I; PPC)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <CMM.0.90.4.999639622.billw@cypher>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	x-mac-type=54455854;
	x-mac-creator=4D4F5353;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B954861.BB0CE436@home.com>
Date:         Tue, 4 Sep 2001 14:32:18 -0700
Reply-To: "Jamie Morken" <jmorken@HOME.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jamie Morken" <jmorken@HOME.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] liquids question: alcohol/N2O propellant feeding
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Hi all,


>     Why not pick up one of those funny silver ballons at the grocery store?
>     They're mylar.
>
> Actually, they're NOT mylar, but they probably would work better than
> plain mylar.  IIRC last time I tracked this down, Balloon "mylar" is
> actually some sort of double layer nylon/PE film (plus the Al).  (This
> has the useful property of being "weldable."  I've seen large rolls of
> this stuff on the plastics surplus markets.  Once, anyway...
>
> BillW

With rough combustion, could this rupture the thin mylar?

best regards,
Jamie

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 1362 invoked from network); 4 Sep 2001 23:00:03 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 4 Sep 2001 23:00:03 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 16031 invoked by uid 50005); 4 Sep 2001 23:00:23 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpb with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.326318 secs); 04 Sep 2001 23:00:23 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 4 Sep 2001 23:00:23 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA23102; Tue, 4 Sep 2001 15:55:19 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 109179 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 4 Sep 2001 22:52:37          +0000
Received: from fcexgw03.efi.com ([192.68.228.82]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7)          with SMTP id PAA22988 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 4 Sep 2001          15:42:36 -0700
Received: from 10.10.12.104 by fcexgw03.efi.com (InterScan E-Mail VirusWall          NT); Tue, 04 Sep 2001 15:42:35 -0700
Received: from earthlink.net (peroxide.efi.com [10.10.89.46]) by          EX-IMC3-CORP.efi.com with SMTP (Microsoft Exchange Internet Mail          Service Version 5.5.2653.13) id QNQGL1JJ; Tue, 4 Sep 2001 15:42:35          -0700
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.14-5.0 i686)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <68.13b75a0d.28c6ac8b@aol.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B955920.66CD4B49@earthlink.net>
Date:         Tue, 4 Sep 2001 15:43:44 -0700
Reply-To: "David Weinshenker" <daze39@EARTHLINK.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "David Weinshenker" <daze39@EARTHLINK.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] triethylaluminum
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

JMKrell@aol.com writes:

> In a message dated 9/4/01 3:03:37 AM Pacific Daylight Time, Tjpoulton@AOL.COM
> writes:

> > And finally, is it worth dealing with the difficulties involved in
> > handling a pyrophoric material in order to eliminate the need for
> > pyrotechnic ignition?

> The added complexity and hazard of handling a pyrophoric material out weigh
> any benefit. You must transfer the TEA with an N2 or Ar gas blanket. You must
> evacuate the fuel and transfer lines then fill with N2 or Ar.

> I work in the semiconductor industry with several pyrophoric chemicals. It
> can take several hours to pump down lines and prepare a tool before turning
> on a pyrophoric gas line. Try doing this out in a remote area and pyrotechnic
> ignition looks very attractive.

Soem large rockets have used pyrophoric ignition - the F-1 1st stage engines on
the Saturn 5, for example. In the case of the F-1, the pyrophoric mixture
(triethyl-aluminum/triethyl-boron IIRC) was packaged in sealed cartridges with
burst diaphragms, which were inserted into compartments in line with the fuel
feed lines, between the pumps and the engines' injectors. At engine startup,
the fuel pressure would pop the diaphragms and force the "starting fuel" into
the chamber ahead of the kerosene.

TEA will react spontaneously with oxygen at any temperature, but I don't know
if it will react with cold undecomposed N2O...

-dave w

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 24360 invoked from network); 4 Sep 2001 23:33:37 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 4 Sep 2001 23:33:37 -0000
Received: (qmail 5199 invoked by uid 50005); 4 Sep 2001 23:32:22 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 1.230486 secs); 04 Sep 2001 23:32:22 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 4 Sep 2001 23:32:20 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA23543; Tue, 4 Sep 2001 16:28:58 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 109253 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 4 Sep 2001 23:27:37          +0000
Received: from spsystems.net (spsystems.net [209.47.149.227]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA23518 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Tue,          4 Sep 2001 16:27:37 -0700
Received: (from henry@localhost) by spsystems.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id TAA20063;          Tue, 4 Sep 2001 19:26:55 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010904192355.19803C-100000@spsystems.net>
Date:         Tue, 4 Sep 2001 19:26:55 -0400
Reply-To: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Subject:      [AR] available oxygen (was Re: [AR] Propellent Musings)
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <F186MEjx3y3wdlhczDq0000410d@hotmail.com>

On Tue, 4 Sep 2001, John Dom wrote:
> the logic of only considering the available oxygen for combustion in the
> oxydizer also applies for nitrates. Probably nitrogen oxides which are duds
> are in part formed. I do not know the nitrate decomposition stoichiometry.

None of the nitrogen oxides is going to be stable enough, in combustion-
chamber conditions, to hold onto significant amounts of oxygen.  They're
not very stable compounds in general; N2O is quite unusual for its
stability (perhaps it has energetically-favored nitrogen-nitrogen bonds?)
and even it comes apart easily when it gets hot.

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 7567 invoked from network); 4 Sep 2001 23:43:59 -0000
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 4 Sep 2001 23:43:59 -0000
Received: (qmail 7334 invoked by uid 50005); 4 Sep 2001 23:43:53 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpe with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 1.305751 secs); 04 Sep 2001 23:43:53 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 4 Sep 2001 23:43:49 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA23441; Tue, 4 Sep 2001 16:26:07 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 109232 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 4 Sep 2001 23:24:41          +0000
Received: from corinth.bossig.com (corinth.bossig.com [208.26.239.66]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA23415 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Tue, 4 Sep 2001 16:24:41 -0700
Received: from BruceE.Watson (unverified [208.26.232.74]) by corinth.bossig.com          (Rockliffe SMTPRA 4.5.4) with SMTP id          <B0070847885@corinth.bossig.com> for <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Tue, 4          Sep 2001 16:28:46 -0700
References: <3B92957B.57E2E8BB@stud.uni-goettingen.de>             <3B92ADDA.D8CCB855@Lekstutis.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2314.1300
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <003701c13598$80683a60$4ae81ad0@Watson>
Date:         Tue, 4 Sep 2001 16:22:42 -0700
Reply-To: "Bruce E. Watson" <bwatson@3-CITIES.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Bruce E. Watson" <bwatson@3-CITIES.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Online source here (was: [AR] Sources of Liquid Fuel              Rocket              Motor Design]
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

I just noticed today that the MIT link (http://www.im.lcs.mit.edu/rocket/)
is back up.  I took the opportunity to down load the tar file of the entire
book even though I have an original copy I bought new back in the early 70's
from RocketLab.

Regards;
Bruce E. Watson

----- Original Message -----
From: Arthur J. Lekstutis <Artie@LEKSTUTIS.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Sunday, September 02, 2001 3:08 PM
Subject: Re: [AR] Online source here (was: [AR] Sources of liquid
fuelrocketmotordesign]


> Hi,
>
> Yes, the link appears to be down. Hopefully not permanently.
>
> I have a copy in my Internet archives. I have place a copy here for a few
> days:
>     <http://Lekstutis.com/Artie/RocketLab/book.html>
>
> Later,
> Artie Lekstutis
>
> Thomas Engelhardt wrote:
>
> > Hi Dave,
> >
> > it doesn't work for me either, it seems that the website is down at the
> > moment. I have two suggestions: you might want to contact Ray, it is
> > > Hi group,
> > >
> > > the paper mentioned can be downloaded here
> > > http://www.im.lcs.mit.edu/rocket/
> > >
> > > It is a good starting point, but I can wholeheartedly recommend the
> > > Huzel/Huang book mentioned in an earlier post. It is my favorite book,
I
> > > think the library man already knows me as he asked me if I already
know
> > > everything off by heart....I wish :-).
> > > I should drop more hints around Christmas time...
> > >
> > > Tom

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 23673 invoked from network); 4 Sep 2001 23:47:52 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 4 Sep 2001 23:47:52 -0000
Received: (qmail 17427 invoked by uid 50005); 4 Sep 2001 23:48:12 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpb with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.268504 secs); 04 Sep 2001 23:48:12 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 4 Sep 2001 23:48:12 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA23572; Tue, 4 Sep 2001 16:30:21 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 109260 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 4 Sep 2001 23:29:00          +0000
Received: from mta01.mail.mel.aone.net.au (mta01.mail.au.uu.net [203.2.192.81])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA23533 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 4 Sep 2001 16:27:58 -0700
Received: from unknown ([63.60.220.102]) by mta01.mail.mel.aone.net.au with          SMTP id <20010904232751.NNNG3755.mta01.mail.mel.aone.net.au@unknown>;          Wed, 5 Sep 2001 09:27:51 +1000
References: Conversation <02a401c1358f$8abb2300$6601a8c0@home.com> with last            message <02a401c1358f$8abb2300$6601a8c0@home.com>
Priority: Normal
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Priority: 3
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	X-MAPIextension=.TXT;
	charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>
Date:         Tue, 4 Sep 2001 23:29:00 +0000
Reply-To: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Erosive burning and complex geometries...
Comments: To: Brian Kosko <bkosko1@HOME.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <02a401c1358f$8abb2300$6601a8c0@home.com>

----------
> One of those random propellant questions has been bothering me and I
thought I'd
> share it with you.
>
> What about geometries like a finocyl? It makes sense that with a
cylindrical
> core erosive burning will occur when the throat diameter is larger than
the
> core. How do you evaluate geometries like stars and finocyls?

It can be worse, depending on the dimensions and number of points. A lot of
it comes down to exposed propellant surface area above the core area that's
most at risk. Kinda like Kn ratio but with the core as the denominator not
the throat. If there's erosive burning experienced, it would normally be
more pronounced with these complex geometries because of their increased
cross-sectional perimeter compared to a round core which obviously offers
the smallest available cross-sectional perimeter per cross-sectional port
area.

Troy.

>
> Thanks,
> Brian

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 22618 invoked from network); 5 Sep 2001 17:51:54 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 5 Sep 2001 17:51:54 -0000
Received: (qmail 18105 invoked by uid 50005); 5 Sep 2001 17:50:00 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.1082 secs); 05 Sep 2001 17:50:00 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 5 Sep 2001 17:50:00 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA26603; Wed, 5 Sep 2001 10:48:06 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 80435 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 5 Sep 2001 17:48:04 +0000
Received: from c002.snv.cp.net (c002-h002.c002.snv.cp.net [209.228.32.166]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id QAA23649 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 4 Sep 2001 16:39:56 -0700
Received: (cpmta 3247 invoked from network); 4 Sep 2001 16:39:25 -0700
Received: from 1Cust81.tnt1.williamsburg.va.da.uu.net (HELO default)          (63.21.80.81) by smtp.peoplepc.com (209.228.32.166) with SMTP; 4 Sep          2001 16:39:25 -0700
X-Sent: 4 Sep 2001 23:39:25 GMT
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0C94_01C56B69.4FB383B0"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4807.1700
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <001901c1359c$a8e477c0$5150153f@default>
Date:         Tue, 4 Sep 2001 19:52:28 -0400
Reply-To: "David Muesing" <dmuesing@PEOPLEPC.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "David Muesing" <dmuesing@PEOPLEPC.COM>
Subject:      [AR] Sugar Propellant Group
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0C94_01C56B69.4FB383B0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

If anyone else would like to be in the SugPro group, please email me =
directly at:   dmuesing@peoplepc.com

Thanks!

Dave Muesing



------=_NextPart_000_0C94_01C56B69.4FB383B0
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Diso-8859-1">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 5.50.4807.2300" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=3DOCRA color=3D#0000ff>If anyone else would like to be =
in the SugPro=20
group, please email me directly at:&nbsp;&nbsp; <A=20
href=3D"mailto:dmuesing@peoplepc.com"><FONT=20
color=3D#ff0000>dmuesing@peoplepc.com</FONT></A></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DOCRA color=3D#0000ff></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DOCRA color=3D#0000ff>Thanks!</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DOCRA color=3D#0000ff></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DOCRA color=3D#0000ff>Dave Muesing</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DOCRA color=3D#0000ff></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DOCRA color=3D#0000ff></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0C94_01C56B69.4FB383B0--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 26528 invoked from network); 5 Sep 2001 17:52:47 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 5 Sep 2001 17:52:47 -0000
Received: (qmail 18798 invoked by uid 50005); 5 Sep 2001 17:50:53 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.10771 secs); 05 Sep 2001 17:50:53 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 5 Sep 2001 17:50:52 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA26703; Wed, 5 Sep 2001 10:48:25 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 80492 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 5 Sep 2001 17:48:24 +0000
Received: from castor.ridgenet.net (IDENT:root@castor.ridgenet.net          [199.120.150.29]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA23846          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 4 Sep 2001 17:50:42 -0700
Received: from kristinscomp (pm202.ridgenet.net [204.154.246.202]) by          castor.ridgenet.net (8.11.0/8.11.0) with SMTP id f850fuS20849; Tue, 4          Sep 2001 17:41:56 -0700
References: <l03130300b7b63d21e5f4@[63.10.189.208]>                      <l03130300b7b63d21e5f4@[63.10.189.208]>             <l03130301b7b6dd39f48d@[63.10.189.137]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <009801c135a6$018f5b20$1b30fea9@kristinscomp>
Date:         Tue, 4 Sep 2001 17:59:23 -0700
Reply-To: "Kristin & David Hall" <thehalls@RIDGENET.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Kristin & David Hall" <thehalls@RIDGENET.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Gun launch - part deux
Comments: To: Aaron Smith <ttocs@GTE.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

> OK, sounds good.  But what would you say is the highest usable
> acceleration?  I am having a hard time just guessing a good number.  Also,

I've personally launched small uninstrumented rockets at up to 2000 G's.
The military has done full blown instrumented systems at up to 5000, but
reliability is troublesome.  Certain military components (don't ask) that
have been operational for decades are designed to function under 500 G
loads.  All that being said, I would guess that 1000 G's would be a nice
round number that is both useful and doable without too much headache.

> Just out of cusiosity, how much would a dedicated air-launch aircraft for
> small rockets be worth?  Say, 100 Kg to 14,000 ft.  200 kg?

It's your skin, but I wouldn't touch this with a ten foot pole.  Think of
all the CATOs you've ever seen.  Now imagine them under your wing.  Even
worse, consider that even rockets that perform nominally can still take out
an airplane.  Case in point:   The first fatality at China Lake was a guy by
the name of John Armatage (sp?).  He was a test pilot in the Tiny Tim
program.  He launched a rocket and promptly died.  The rocket performed
beautifully.  What happened?  Later analysis showed that the igniter in the
rocket was a bit more robust than required.  Result?  A fat shockwave coming
out of the nozzle that damaged his control surfaces....

....Seriously, of all the ideas I've seen thrown around on Arocket, I would
consider an amateur rocket launched from a manned aircraft to be by far the
dumbest (Where dumb is defined as "situation likely to get somebody
killed".).

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 28186 invoked from network); 5 Sep 2001 17:53:09 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 5 Sep 2001 17:53:09 -0000
Received: (qmail 11493 invoked by uid 50005); 5 Sep 2001 17:51:52 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.173948 secs); 05 Sep 2001 17:51:52 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 5 Sep 2001 17:51:52 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA27147; Wed, 5 Sep 2001 10:49:34 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 80730 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 5 Sep 2001 17:49:33 +0000
Received: from femail12.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail12.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.0.95.108]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA24622          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 4 Sep 2001 23:09:41 -0700
Received: from hal2001 ([24.77.53.16]) by femail12.sdc1.sfba.home.com          (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20 201-229-121-120-20010223) with SMTP id          <20010905060935.VJLY1414.femail12.sdc1.sfba.home.com@hal2001> for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 4 Sep 2001 23:09:35 -0700
References:  <4.3.1.2.20010904035321.077b4310@mail.idsoftware.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <000701c135d0$2ef59280$0400a8c0@hatjs>
Date:         Tue, 4 Sep 2001 23:01:19 -0700
Reply-To: "Jamie Morken" <jmorken@HOME.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jamie Morken" <jmorken@HOME.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Electronics Box document
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Hi all,

> I have put up a document about our second electronics box, with many
> lessons learned, at:
>
> http://www.armadilloaerospace.com/ElectronicsBox2.htm

To measure the solenoid battery voltage I think you could make a
instrumentation amplifier
(powered by the PC104 stack battery) and then feed the + and - side of the
solenoid battery into the amplifiers + and - inputs.  This would then allow
you to measure the solenoid battery while keeping the two different circuit
ground's isolated.

The max4194 : http://dbserv.maxim-ic.com/quick_view2.cfm?qv_pk=2006
or the INA125 :
http://www.digikey.com/scripts/us/dksus.dll?Detail?Ref=78501&Row=118073
instrumentation amps would work well for this I think.

I don't know much about this and I am sure there would be more problems with
the implementation! :)

best regards,
Jamie

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 28487 invoked from network); 5 Sep 2001 17:53:13 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 5 Sep 2001 17:53:13 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 11516 invoked by uid 50005); 5 Sep 2001 17:51:55 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.220605 secs); 05 Sep 2001 17:51:55 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 5 Sep 2001 17:51:54 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA27242; Wed, 5 Sep 2001 10:49:56 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 80774 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 5 Sep 2001 17:49:54 +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (f201.law15.hotmail.com [64.4.23.201]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA24825 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Wed, 5 Sep 2001 00:40:36 -0700
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Wed,          5 Sep 2001 00:40:06 -0700
Received: from 193.121.251.246 by lw15fd.law15.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Wed,          05 Sep 2001 07:40:06 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [193.121.251.246]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 05 Sep 2001 07:40:06.0496 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[FB66FE00:01C135DD]
Message-ID:  <F201RohyMMGz0tWqhUY000051f4@hotmail.com>
Date:         Wed, 5 Sep 2001 17:49:54 +0000
Reply-To: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Gun launch - part deux
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

AS wrote:

>But what would you say is the highest usable acceleration?

I see no limits on acceleration. G. Bull's old embedded electronics worked
well leaving an elongated Navy (powder) gun. The projectile airframe may go
to smithereens hitting the air (or the expandig He or H2 from behind) if not
very strong at a few thousand gees...

A 100-200 kg projectile launch with a gas gun to a hight of, say, 2 km only
is way beyond amateur budgets!

jd

_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 2372 invoked from network); 5 Sep 2001 17:54:03 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 5 Sep 2001 17:54:03 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 26218 invoked by uid 50005); 5 Sep 2001 17:54:17 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpb with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.26035 secs); 05 Sep 2001 17:54:17 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 5 Sep 2001 17:54:17 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA27267; Wed, 5 Sep 2001 10:50:00 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 80783 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 5 Sep 2001 17:49:58 +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (f83.law15.hotmail.com [64.4.23.83]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id BAA24948 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Wed,          5 Sep 2001 01:36:36 -0700
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Wed,          5 Sep 2001 01:36:05 -0700
Received: from 193.121.251.246 by lw15fd.law15.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Wed,          05 Sep 2001 08:36:05 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [193.121.251.246]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 05 Sep 2001 08:36:05.0684 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[CDA26740:01C135E5]
Message-ID:  <F83zO6ca67MXvyVKSfi00005828@hotmail.com>
Date:         Wed, 5 Sep 2001 17:49:58 +0000
Reply-To: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Gun launch - part deux
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

JI wrote:

>Bigger barrels need to be evacuated prior to firing

Talking gas guns: a few meters of barrel won't hurt if you expect the air
launch to reach a few km of altitude; Navy guns are not evacuated before
firing either, are they?

jd

_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 2493 invoked from network); 5 Sep 2001 17:54:05 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 5 Sep 2001 17:54:05 -0000
X-Priority: 3
Received: (qmail 26234 invoked by uid 50005); 5 Sep 2001 17:54:19 -0000
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpb with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.481844 secs); 05 Sep 2001 17:54:19 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 5 Sep 2001 17:54:18 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA27385; Wed, 5 Sep 2001 10:50:31 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 80838 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 5 Sep 2001 17:50:29 +0000
Received: from m1.jersey.juno.com (m1.jersey.juno.com [64.136.16.64]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA25747 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 5 Sep 2001 07:16:56 -0700
Received: from cookie.juno.com by cookie.juno.com for          <"H3WK6e6N+bsCVJQMHM9sZIbyWBhOyaF8s27/lMe/1ec1IrmHJdSSaw==">
Received: (from kc2csh@juno.com) by m1.jersey.juno.com (queuemail) id GEK2PRHS;          Wed, 05 Sep 2001 10:16:34 EDT
X-Mailer: Juno 4.0.11
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Juno-Line-Breaks: 1,3,5-9,11-13,15-20
X-Juno-Att: 0
X-Juno-RefParts: 0
Message-ID:  <20010905.102146.-4099573.1.kc2csh@juno.com>
Date:         Wed, 5 Sep 2001 10:21:39 -0400
Reply-To: <kc2csh@JUNO.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <kc2csh@JUNO.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Online source here (was: [AR] Sources of Liquid Fuel              Rocket              Motor Design]
Comments: To: bwatson@3-CITIES.COM
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

  This is certainly a classic, but in at least a few places its either
dated or pretty skimpy.
  I wonder if a useful Arocket project would be to acquire permission to
update and reprint it?
  Do we have the ability to do so and make it simple and informative; a
first step before H&H and etc?
  Do we have the technical authors and editors?

         Jay

On Tue, 4 Sep 2001 16:22:42 -0700 "Bruce E. Watson"
<bwatson@3-CITIES.COM> writes:
> I just noticed today that the MIT link
> (http://www.im.lcs.mit.edu/rocket/)
> is back up.  I took the opportunity to down load the tar file of the
entire
> book even though I have an original copy I bought new back in the
> early 70's from RocketLab.
>
> Regards;
> Bruce E. Watson

________________________________________________________________
GET INTERNET ACCESS FROM JUNO!
Juno offers FREE or PREMIUM Internet access for less!
Join Juno today!  For your FREE software, visit:
http://dl.www.juno.com/get/tagj.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 3690 invoked from network); 5 Sep 2001 17:54:20 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 5 Sep 2001 17:54:20 -0000
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 24478 invoked by uid 50005); 5 Sep 2001 17:51:49 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpf with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.170207 secs); 05 Sep 2001 17:51:49 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 5 Sep 2001 17:51:49 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA26998; Wed, 5 Sep 2001 10:49:04 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 80653 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 5 Sep 2001 17:49:02 +0000
Received: from hobbiton.shire.net (frogmorton.shire.net [204.228.145.136]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA24352 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Tue, 4 Sep 2001 21:11:32 -0700
Received: from pool-64-223-146-33.man.east.verizon.net ([64.223.146.33]          helo=me-513q3sc0zun0.pengar.com) by hobbiton.shire.net with esmtp          (Exim 3.22 #6) id 15eU0g-000AGi-00 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 04          Sep 2001 22:09:54 -0600
X-Sender: seth-pc@hobbiton.shire.net
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <5.1.0.14.0.20010904234530.03343268@hobbiton.shire.net>
Date:         Wed, 5 Sep 2001 00:16:49 -0400
Reply-To: "Seth Leigh" <seth@PENGAR.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Seth Leigh" <seth@PENGAR.COM>
Subject:      [AR] My progress so far with ignitors.
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

I promised I'd be doing ignitors on Labor Day.  Well, I did do one ignitor
on Labor Day, but I was so busy I had to put off until last night and
tonight any further work.

I got some thin heat-shrink tubing (goes from 1/8" down to 1/16") from Home
Depot yesterday, and last night I used some of it.  I had taken some scrap
CAT-5 network wire which contains four twisted pairs of wire, and cut some
of the twisted pairs into 8" or so lengths.  I left the pairs twisted
together.  At each end I stripped the wires by about 1/3", and on one end I
put a ~1/4" piece of the heat-shrink tubing and heated it up.  It shrunk
down around the wires, and I pinched it together while it was hot to make
it really stick well.  When it cooled it was very hard.  Basically, these
little heat-shrink collars, which I put on right at the point where both
wires are stripped, will guarantee that the wire ends are in a fixed
relationship with each other, and that the ignitors can't be pulled
apart.  So far the business end of my ignitors seems very secure due to
these heat-shrink collars.

Tonight I made sure the stripped ends at the heat-shrink collars were
fairly close to each other and roughly parallel, and dipped them in my
black pyrogen mix from Firefox.  After I did them all I dipped them in my
nitrocellulose laquer, from the same kit as the pyrogen (of course now I've
been told by listmembers it's as simple as dissolving some smokeless
powder, which I have, in acetone).

I tested each one with an ohmmeter.  Most of them (probably 75-80%) fall in
the 3 to 4 ohm range.  The rest are 4 to 8 or so.  I took the one with the
highest resistance, almost 9 ohms, and put it across these two 9v batteries
which I put in series.  I did this with the batteries because they have
been used a lot now, and I was worried they wouldn't have enough juice
left.  With these two veteran 9v batteries in series, the almost 9 ohm
ignitor went up beautifully.  I had one ignitor that came in at almost
exactly 1 ohm.  I was kinda suspicious.  If I take a length of the same
wire, put the ohmmeter probes on one end, and pinch together the other ends
with my finger, it registers around .3 to .5 ohms or so.  I decided to test
this ignitor to see if an abnormally low resistance like this indicated a
short which would render the ignitor useless.  Sure enough, it would not go
up with the well-used 18v battery pack.  I tested it by holding a match
underneath it just to make sure the pyrogen wasn't goofy for some odd
reason, and it went up.

I also had an ignitor that registered only 2 ohms or so, so I decided to
repeat my test on the batteries to see if 2 ohms was also a warning
sign.  Nope.  It went up beautifully, perhaps the best ignitor I've burned
yet (around 10 or so).  I almost hated to see it go.  ;-)

I also made one ignitor tonight using a short piece of very thin nichrome
wire wire-wrapped around the two ends of wire, one end cut a half inch or
so shorter than the other.  I dipped this ignitor in the same black pyrogen
and nc laquer.  I tested it with my 18v battery pack, and it went up just
fine, though it took a quarter second or so after I touched the wires to
the battery before it went up.  I am not sure what this means.  In
practice, if this technique proves more reliable or easier to ignite (less
juice required), I would use the heat-shrink tubing under the ends of these
ones too.

Can anyone confirm that my 3 - 4 ohm resistance range for my ignitors
implying good ignitors makes sense?  Has anyone else experimented with
home-made ignitors who has also done tests on resistance, and has any
comments to offer?

Tomorrow I hope to pick up a couple of capacitors at Radio Shack, and I
intend to test my ignitors both with a capacitor, as well as with batteries
of much lower voltage than the 18v I was using tonight.  I want to start at
1.5 volts and work up to see what it takes to fire these.

I liked the comment I read from someone in an earlier thread on this list
who uses home-made ignitors, but uses two of them in parallel, fired with a
single 1000 uf capacitor.  These ignitors are cheap to make, and if I am
worried about their reliability (which, according to comments on this list,
I probably should be...) using two in parallel should offer a pretty good
safety margin.  Once I've burned several dozen of my ignitors I should know
pretty well how they work.  I may decide to test each igniter after they
are made, and discard (or burn up) any ignitor that is outside the range of
3-4 ohms, just to keep the only measurable quantity I have for testing
these, under control.  Most of them are 3.4 or 3.5 ohms anyhow, so I would
only be wasting a quarter or a fifth of what I made.  And I would imagine
eventually I'd get better at making them more the same, so that my wastage
rate would fall even further.

I have no experience with transistors capable of sinking the current that
can come from a capacitor like a 1000uf cap, through something with, say, 3
ohms resistance.  Can anyone offer any suggestions?

When I have done some more characterization of my home-made ignitors, I
will do my originally planned test of smokeless ejection charges.  I may
get impatient and just go fire some smokeless powder with one of my
ignitors anyhow, even without a formal test.  ;-)

Seth

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 5019 invoked from network); 5 Sep 2001 17:54:37 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 5 Sep 2001 17:54:37 -0000
Received: (qmail 12817 invoked by uid 50005); 5 Sep 2001 17:53:19 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.234323 secs); 05 Sep 2001 17:53:19 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 5 Sep 2001 17:53:19 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA27456; Wed, 5 Sep 2001 10:50:47 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 80879 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 5 Sep 2001 17:50:45 +0000
Received: from localhost (rcalkins@localhost) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with          ESMTP id IAA25998; Wed, 5 Sep 2001 08:56:48 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.LNX.4.10.10109050839221.25895-100000@itc.uci.edu>
Date:         Wed, 5 Sep 2001 08:56:48 -0700
Reply-To: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
Subject:      Re: [AR] AN melt
Comments: To: John Dom <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <F102cew8k69RKLpgTFu0000125e@hotmail.com>

On Fri, 31 Aug 2001, John Dom wrote:

> >I am collecting materials to explore freeze dried AN-Sucrose powder.
> >Potentially, this material can be used to press a grain.  The AN and sugar
> >will already be intimately mixed, and if cold-dried, the AN shouldn't
> >attack the sugar.  Since the material will be very fine crystals, it
> >should get around the phase change problems AN has.  I propose to ball
> >mill it with fibers and Mg/Al, pressing test pellets, scaling up to
> >grains after I develop a remote/automatic press.
>
> Confusing, this response. You are an advocate of the water&evaporation
> procedure until an homogenous glass is obtained for KN/sugar.
> Concerning AN, you revert to the classical powder pressing mode. (BTW
> this is possible using KN as well). However, the low melting point
> (Pipko's work on even lower melting points possible because of
> eutectics) of AN is suddenly not considered?

This was posted several time previously, perhaps I wasn't clear.  During
the baking/drying process, AN attacks the sugar as the water content
drops.  My thinking is to lower the temperature and thus lower the
reaction rate.  I doubt I can get a usable grain this way, so I'll have to
use powder processing to form it.

I think it may be possible to buffer the AN solution, but my initial
experiment in this are was not promising.  I may research this process
further in the future.

The AN melt processes sound very exciting and I look forward to reading
futher developments.  Presently, I am not equipped to work with the AN
melt process.

Ray

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 9317 invoked from network); 5 Sep 2001 17:55:34 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 5 Sep 2001 17:55:34 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 25755 invoked by uid 50005); 5 Sep 2001 17:55:23 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpe with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.797885 secs); 05 Sep 2001 17:55:23 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 5 Sep 2001 17:55:21 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA27315; Wed, 5 Sep 2001 10:50:14 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 80805 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 5 Sep 2001 17:50:11 +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (f94.law15.hotmail.com [64.4.23.94]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA25591 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Wed,          5 Sep 2001 06:07:58 -0700
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Wed,          5 Sep 2001 06:07:28 -0700
Received: from 193.121.251.246 by lw15fd.law15.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Wed,          05 Sep 2001 13:07:28 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [193.121.251.246]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 05 Sep 2001 13:07:28.0392 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[B6E27880:01C1360B]
Message-ID:  <F94Beqb5FAEzkTGXxPk00005b86@hotmail.com>
Date:         Wed, 5 Sep 2001 17:50:11 +0000
Reply-To: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] liquids question: alcohol/N2O propellant feeding
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

>Immissibility won't make it any less detonable.  Kerosene is not miscible
>with
>either Lox or Peroxide but they are detonable combinations when pooled
>together

Absolutely.

But I thought the point here was *immediate explosion upon contact*. Like
the deadly threat story caused by the spanner which hit the NTO tank of a
Titan in a silo...

jd

_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 10204 invoked from network); 5 Sep 2001 17:55:45 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 5 Sep 2001 17:55:45 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 29679 invoked by uid 50005); 5 Sep 2001 17:55:55 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpa with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.829413 secs); 05 Sep 2001 17:55:55 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 5 Sep 2001 17:55:53 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA26854; Wed, 5 Sep 2001 10:48:48 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 80571 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 5 Sep 2001 17:48:46 +0000
Received: from smtp007pub.verizon.net (smtp007pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.186])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA24124 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 4 Sep 2001 19:46:59 -0700
Received: from [63.25.193.69] (1Cust69.tnt1.hilo.hi.da.uu.net [63.25.193.69])          by smtp007pub.verizon.net  with ESMTP for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; id          f852kNH15480 Tue, 4 Sep 2001 21:46:23 -0500 (CDT)
X-Sender: ttocs@mail.gte.net
References: <l03130300b7b63d21e5f4@[63.10.189.208]>            <l03130300b7b63d21e5f4@[63.10.189.208]>            <l03130301b7b6dd39f48d@[63.10.189.137]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <l03130300b7b74d7c89ed@[63.10.189.82]>
Date:         Sat, 1 Sep 2001 16:45:50 -1000
Reply-To: "Aaron Smith" <ttocs@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Aaron Smith" <ttocs@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Gun launch - part deux
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <009801c135a6$018f5b20$1b30fea9@kristinscomp>

At 5:59 PM -0700 9/4/01, Kristin & David Hall wrote:
>> OK, sounds good.  But what would you say is the highest usable
>> acceleration?  I am having a hard time just guessing a good number.  Also,
>
>I've personally launched small uninstrumented rockets at up to 2000 G's.
>The military has done full blown instrumented systems at up to 5000, but
>reliability is troublesome.  Certain military components (don't ask) that
>have been operational for decades are designed to function under 500 G
>loads.  All that being said, I would guess that 1000 G's would be a nice
>round number that is both useful and doable without too much headache.
>
>> Just out of cusiosity, how much would a dedicated air-launch aircraft for
>> small rockets be worth?  Say, 100 Kg to 14,000 ft.  200 kg?
>
>It's your skin, but I wouldn't touch this with a ten foot pole.  Think of
>all the CATOs you've ever seen.  Now imagine them under your wing.  Even
>worse, consider that even rockets that perform nominally can still take out
>an airplane.  Case in point:   The first fatality at China Lake was a guy by
>the name of John Armatage (sp?).  He was a test pilot in the Tiny Tim
>program.  He launched a rocket and promptly died.  The rocket performed
>beautifully.  What happened?  Later analysis showed that the igniter in the
>rocket was a bit more robust than required.  Result?  A fat shockwave coming
>out of the nozzle that damaged his control surfaces....
>
>....Seriously, of all the ideas I've seen thrown around on Arocket, I would
>consider an amateur rocket launched from a manned aircraft to be by far the
>dumbest (Where dumb is defined as "situation likely to get somebody
>killed".).

I wasn't even considering launching it from under the wing - I meant
releasing it under a parachute, letting it aim upward, and then releasing
the chute and firing it.

Give me credit, I'm not THAT stupid!

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 11168 invoked from network); 5 Sep 2001 17:55:57 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 5 Sep 2001 17:55:57 -0000
Received: (qmail 29862 invoked by uid 50005); 5 Sep 2001 17:56:07 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpa with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 1.506271 secs); 05 Sep 2001 17:56:07 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 5 Sep 2001 17:56:04 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA27164; Wed, 5 Sep 2001 10:49:39 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 80737 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 5 Sep 2001 17:49:37 +0000
Received: from imo-r03.mx.aol.com (imo-r03.mx.aol.com [152.163.225.99]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA24632 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Tue, 4 Sep 2001 23:10:38 -0700
Received: from Sociald84@aol.com by imo-r03.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v31_r1.4.) id          w.156.772cbf (4222) for <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Wed, 5 Sep 2001          02:10:24 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0C97_01C56B69.4FC90780"
X-Mailer: AOL 6.0 for Windows US sub 10536
Message-ID:  <156.772cbf.28c71bd4@aol.com>
Date:         Wed, 5 Sep 2001 02:10:28 EDT
Reply-To: <Sociald84@AOL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <Sociald84@AOL.COM>
Subject:      [AR] injector question
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0C97_01C56B69.4FC90780
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Hey list,

I have a question about an injector design I thought up. But first a little
design explanation. http://hometown.aol.com/sociald84/disk.html     The link
shows a picure of the design. The motor is a 1 piece graphite motor inside a
liner in a 4" aluminum tube. I didn't include any propellant lines or valves
in the drawing but the dark blue in the pic is the fuel and the light blue
the oxidizer. The original design uses parallel injector orifices (parallel
to the chamber walls and to each other.) But that doesn't produce a very fine
mixture of the two propellants.

My question is this: Would a disk in front of the injectors be an adequate
means of producing a better mixture and finer particle size?

The injector would rest in on a shoulder cut into the graphite comustion
chamber and the disk would be spaced about 1/32" from the orifices of the
injectors. The disk would be just a thin piece of aluminum with a series of
holes around a raidus. (look at the website if that doesn't make sense.)

Mark

------=_NextPart_000_0C97_01C56B69.4FC90780
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<HTML><FONT FACE=arial,helvetica><FONT  SIZE=2>Hey list,
<BR>
<BR>I have a question about an injector design I thought up. But first a little
<BR>design explanation. http://hometown.aol.com/sociald84/disk.html &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;The link
<BR>shows a picure of the design. The motor is a 1 piece graphite motor inside a
<BR>liner in a 4" aluminum tube. I didn't include any propellant lines or valves
<BR>in the drawing but the dark blue in the pic is the fuel and the light blue
<BR>the oxidizer. The original design uses parallel injector orifices (parallel
<BR>to the chamber walls and to each other.) But that doesn't produce a very fine
<BR>mixture of the two propellants.
<BR>
<BR>My question is this: Would a disk in front of the injectors be an adequate
<BR>means of producing a better mixture and finer particle size?
<BR>
<BR>The injector would rest in on a shoulder cut into the graphite comustion
<BR>chamber and the disk would be spaced about 1/32" from the orifices of the
<BR>injectors. The disk would be just a thin piece of aluminum with a series of
<BR>holes around a raidus. (look at the website if that doesn't make sense.)
<BR>
<BR>Mark</FONT></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0C97_01C56B69.4FC90780--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 15682 invoked from network); 5 Sep 2001 17:56:57 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 5 Sep 2001 17:56:57 -0000
Received: (qmail 15114 invoked by uid 50005); 5 Sep 2001 17:55:39 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.33194 secs); 05 Sep 2001 17:55:39 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 5 Sep 2001 17:55:38 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA27102; Wed, 5 Sep 2001 10:49:22 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 80708 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 5 Sep 2001 17:49:20 +0000
Received: from femail12.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail12.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.0.95.108]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA24490          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 4 Sep 2001 22:07:47 -0700
Received: from hal2001 ([24.77.53.16]) by femail12.sdc1.sfba.home.com          (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20 201-229-121-120-20010223) with SMTP id          <20010905050736.UBGZ1414.femail12.sdc1.sfba.home.com@hal2001>; Tue, 4          Sep 2001 22:07:36 -0700
References:  <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <001901c135c7$85edc200$0400a8c0@hatjs>
Date:         Tue, 4 Sep 2001 21:59:19 -0700
Reply-To: "Jamie Morken" <jmorken@HOME.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jamie Morken" <jmorken@HOME.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Propellent Musings
Comments: To: Troy Prideaux <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Hi all,

> Using pressure differentials:
>  Gases exit from throat at "x" pressure. The pressure in the 1000Psi motor
> is basically twice as high as in the 500. Gases in the 1K motor take say
> twice the expansion ratio of the 500 to come to surrounding pressure. So
> the gas particles of the 1K nozzle smash into the walls of the expansion
> cone twice as hard as in the 500 motor and they have more exit cone
surface
> to smash into. You have to look at it from a 1 dimensional perspective
> using vectors to roughly gauge how much performance you actually gain
using
> this approach. The pressure differential between exhaust gases and the
> surroundings will obviously reduce the further down the exit cone you go,
> to the point where the Pe = Pa.
>
> Using particle acceleration:
>  Pressure differential = fluid flow. As the pressure of the gases reduces
> with the opening nozzle expansion, the velocity increases proportionally.
> More pressure differential = higher effective exhaust velocities assuming
a
> single phase flow. So, if these gas particles can be pointed in the right
> direction the efficiency of the propellant will be increased almost
> proportionally to the Pc:Pa differential.
>
> Maybe you're right I've missed your point.
>
> Troy.

This is interesting but my knowledge of solid fuel formulas is bad, can you
suggest the best book/place to learn all the formulas/variables for solid
fuel propellants?  Maybe Sutton's book is the place to get this info?

best regards,
Jamie

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 17340 invoked from network); 5 Sep 2001 17:57:18 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 5 Sep 2001 17:57:18 -0000
Received: (qmail 22386 invoked by uid 50005); 5 Sep 2001 17:55:24 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.176687 secs); 05 Sep 2001 17:55:24 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 5 Sep 2001 17:55:24 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA27181; Wed, 5 Sep 2001 10:49:44 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 80744 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 5 Sep 2001 17:49:42 +0000
Received: from mta05.mail.mel.aone.net.au (mta05.mail.au.uu.net [203.2.192.85])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA24644 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 4 Sep 2001 23:15:06 -0700
Received: from unknown ([63.60.247.151]) by mta05.mail.mel.aone.net.au with          SMTP id <20010905061502.HMDA7694.mta05.mail.mel.aone.net.au@unknown>;          Wed, 5 Sep 2001 16:15:02 +1000
Priority: Normal
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Priority: 3
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	X-MAPIextension=.TXT;
	charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>
Date:         Wed, 5 Sep 2001 17:49:42 +0000
Reply-To: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Propellent Musings
Comments: To: Jamie Morken <jmorken@HOME.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <001901c135c7$85edc200$0400a8c0@hatjs>

>
> This is interesting but my knowledge of solid fuel formulas is bad, can
you
> suggest the best book/place to learn all the formulas/variables for solid
> fuel propellants?  Maybe Sutton's book is the place to get this info?

Assuming you're referring to mathematical formulas for *solids* and not
chemical compositions:

(1st choice): James Laniers "Designing Rocket Motors" (this one's for you)
(2) Sutton's Propulsion Elements (just a great reference with good
explanations)

Others worth a mention:
 Solid Propellant Technology (old but easy to read and has everything you
require)
 Solid Propellant Rockets (Alfred J. Zaehringer) (Old but has all the
general stuff, easy to read)
 Hill & Peterson's "Mechanics & Thermodynamics of Propulsion" (Lots of math
but with little explanation in many instances)
 "Fundamentals of Solid propellant combustion" (only for certain detailed
mechanisms, not so much for the big picture stuff)
 Rocketdyne's "Rocket Missile Propulsion". (much like 4 although also
includes stuff on other propulsion systems)
 NASA's SP8064 (Easy reading)
 Terry's Experimental Composite Propellant (a must have for APCP geeks but
based more on the practical theory (bit of an oxymoron) than the
mathematical theory)

There's others I've missed. A good chemistry & physics text or 2 can be
pretty useful.

Hope this helps,

Troy.



>
> best regards,
> Jamie
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 22072 invoked from network); 5 Sep 2001 17:58:22 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 5 Sep 2001 17:58:22 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: (qmail 29128 invoked by uid 50005); 5 Sep 2001 17:55:51 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpf with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.236618 secs); 05 Sep 2001 17:55:51 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 5 Sep 2001 17:55:51 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA27355; Wed, 5 Sep 2001 10:50:25 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 80823 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 5 Sep 2001 17:50:23 +0000
Received: from localhost (rcalkins@localhost) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with          ESMTP id GAA25665 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Wed, 5 Sep 2001 06:42:25          -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.LNX.4.10.10109041753170.21328-100000@itc.uci.edu>
Date:         Wed, 5 Sep 2001 06:42:25 -0700
Reply-To: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
Subject:      [AR] Cheap, Easy test stand for small motors
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

http://www.missileworks.com/test_stand.htm

$15, up to 50 lb thrust.  Requires a camcorder.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 22180 invoked from network); 5 Sep 2001 17:58:23 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 5 Sep 2001 17:58:23 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 23173 invoked by uid 50005); 5 Sep 2001 17:56:29 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.218239 secs); 05 Sep 2001 17:56:29 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 5 Sep 2001 17:56:29 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA26734; Wed, 5 Sep 2001 10:48:30 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 80506 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 5 Sep 2001 17:48:28 +0000
Received: from hobbiton.shire.net (frogmorton.shire.net [204.228.145.136]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA23879; Tue, 4 Sep 2001          18:01:29 -0700
Received: from pool-64-223-146-33.man.east.verizon.net ([64.223.146.33]          helo=me-513q3sc0zun0.pengar.com) by hobbiton.shire.net with esmtp          (Exim 3.22 #6) id 15eR2l-0008mp-00; Tue, 04 Sep 2001 18:59:51 -0600
X-Sender: seth-pc@hobbiton.shire.net
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
References: <l03130300b7b659bc9e71@[63.10.189.23]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <5.1.0.14.0.20010904210228.01be7ef8@hobbiton.shire.net>
Date:         Tue, 4 Sep 2001 21:06:19 -0400
Reply-To: "Seth Leigh" <seth@PENGAR.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Seth Leigh" <seth@PENGAR.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Gun launch - part deux
Comments: To: "David J. McCue" <dmccue@itc.uci.edu>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <Pine.LNX.4.10.10109040840390.20118-100000@itc.uci.edu>

At 11:43 AM 9/4/2001, David J. McCue wrote:
>I have to ask: how is discussion of aircraft cannon design appropriate for
>a list on amateur rocketry? This seems better suited to some "kewl bomz"
>intersest group. I am very uncomfortable with this.
>
>-Dave McCue

The topic is being addressed as a direct result of, and as part of, a
discussion about using a "gun" of some sort being used to launch a
rocket.  Specifically, a url was posted to a site where a gentleman
proposes to use a "gun" to launch a rocket whose first stage is a
ramjet.  The gun is merely to get the rocket going fast enough for the
ramjet to work.  The ramjet would then propel the rocket upwards till its
fuel is exhausted, whereupon a more conventional rocket more would be
staged on, propelling the rocket even higher.

I know the topic seemed a tad juvenile, and indeed spudgunz and the like
were discussed, but the context is certainly amateur rocketry
oriented.  Specifically, the "technology" of spudgunz is probably very
applicable to being adapted to launch a ramjet-rocket combo.

Seth

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 22200 invoked from network); 5 Sep 2001 17:58:23 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 5 Sep 2001 17:58:23 -0000
Received: (qmail 16129 invoked by uid 50005); 5 Sep 2001 17:57:06 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.169402 secs); 05 Sep 2001 17:57:06 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 5 Sep 2001 17:57:05 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA27549; Wed, 5 Sep 2001 10:51:12 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 80912 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 5 Sep 2001 17:51:08 +0000
Received: from localhost (rcalkins@localhost) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with          ESMTP id JAA26082; Wed, 5 Sep 2001 09:22:21 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.LNX.4.10.10109050918370.25895-100000@itc.uci.edu>
Date:         Wed, 5 Sep 2001 09:22:21 -0700
Reply-To: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Strangest Biprop Ever?
Comments: To: JMKrell@AOL.COM
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <161.4d6f89.28c5d84d@aol.com>

The guy with the motor tells me the Jetline logo is only attached to the
table and not associated with the rocket motor.

I think it may be one of three things:

1: H2O2 biprop, with the forward spherical section for decomposition
2: Experimental staged combustion motor
3: Experimental triprop (or more) motor.

He reports a soot layer inside, which strongly suggests it has been fired
before, likely with kerosene.  Anybody know of other common propellants
that leave soot?

Ray

On Tue, 4 Sep 2001 JMKrell@AOL.COM wrote:

> Ray,
>
> It looks like a Jetline welding demo. Jetline Engineering, www.jetline.com,
> does aerospace welding and weld fixtures. They are located in Irvine, Ca. I
> don't think the device was intended to function.
>
> JK
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 24545 invoked from network); 5 Sep 2001 17:58:53 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 5 Sep 2001 17:58:53 -0000
Received: (qmail 29698 invoked by uid 50005); 5 Sep 2001 17:56:23 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpf with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.600433 secs); 05 Sep 2001 17:56:23 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 5 Sep 2001 17:56:22 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA27130; Wed, 5 Sep 2001 10:49:29 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 80723 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 5 Sep 2001 17:49:26 +0000
Received: from imo-r01.mx.aol.com (imo-r01.mx.aol.com [152.163.225.97]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA24608 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Tue, 4 Sep 2001 23:02:05 -0700
Received: from Sociald84@aol.com by imo-r01.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v31_r1.4.) id          w.163.5a949c (4222) for <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Wed, 5 Sep 2001          02:01:57 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0C9C_01C56B69.4FD4EE60"
X-Mailer: AOL 6.0 for Windows US sub 10536
Message-ID:  <163.5a949c.28c719d4@aol.com>
Date:         Wed, 5 Sep 2001 02:01:56 EDT
Reply-To: <Sociald84@AOL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <Sociald84@AOL.COM>
Subject:      [AR] aRocket project
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0C9C_01C56B69.4FD4EE60
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Hey list,

In the past few months there has been a lot of talk about an open source
aRocket project. Well I for one think its about time to quit the bullshit and
actually start the project. For the last year or two I have been designing
several different rockets on my computer that to date have only flown in
simulation programs. The only reasons that my rockets are yet to be built are
because I don't have enough money or access to tools and resources. The money
problem however is only a minor concern as most of the costs are up front
costs associated with buying equipment such as Nitrous Oxide filling systems
and tanks, and a lathe. These are costs that others have already dealt with.
However if this were to be done by myself the costs of buying these would be
prohibitive to accomplishing anything.

Do to several paranoid US government agencies I think it would be a good idea
if all this were carried out by US citizens only. Maybe the Ausies could
build one also and we could have a race. The work would be divided up and the
finished pieces would be sent to someone with the abilities to test them
(such as hydrostatic testing equipment and Nitrous equipment to test filler
fittings, etc.) Then all of the completed and tested components could be sent
to someone who would be able to assemble and test the entire system (like Ray
maybe) or maybe we could all get together for the static test sessions.

My proposal is that we take the design which I have on my website:
http://hometown.aol.com/sociald84/project.html

and suggest changes that will make it easier and cheaper to make, finalize it
and build it. Hopefully the first couple stages can be finished in just a few
days or weeks.

The design parameters so far are as follows:

Diameter: 4"
Construction: Aluminum tubing with aluminum bulkheads used to join multiple
sections of tubing. Graphite motor. (combustion chamber and nozzle in one
piece)
Propellant: Nitrous Oxide and 99% Isopropyl Alcohol. (4:1 O/F)
Burn time: 12-15s to comply with FAA rules.
Delivery system: Nitrous Oxide will be self pressurized and the Alcohol will
use a helium blowdown system.

Ideally there would be one person doing each part.
1:    Tubing work. (I could possibly do this) which would include acquiring
materials, cutting to proper length and drilling for fasteners) Who ever did
the tubing could probably also do the nose cone which would likely be a
molded composite with an ablative coating.

2:    One person making the injector plate. With my design it would include
acquiring materials,    turning the piece on a lathe -- with some facing work
required -- and drilling the injector orifices.

3:  One person making the combustion chamber, which would include acquiring
materials (graphite bar stock) doing a little turning on the outside, and
boring the inside of the chamber out. Other materials needed would be a liner
material, but maybe someone else could be in charge of that.

4:  I was thinking that a slug of APCP in the combustion chamber would be
used to ignite the motor. The pyrovalves would have a string break ignition
circuit and the flame from the solid slug would break the string to start the
motor. Some one would be in charge of making the APCP.

5:  One person to be in charge of building the string break ignition circuit.
(Who ever chose this one could work on another component as well.)

6:  Someone in charge of making the bulkheads, this would include acquiring
materials, machining the bulkheads, drilling and tapping for fasteners,
drilling and tapping for fittings, and drilling and tapping for the check
valves. Proper check valves may be hard to find though.

7:  One person would handle building the fillers for the Nitrous and for the
Helium, that would take     machining inside and outside of a piece of small
(.25"-.75") diameter barstock and tapping for fittings.

8:  One person or a small group of people would be in charge of building the
electronics package, which would hopefully include video.

9:  One person could do the fins, which would include acquiring material,
cutting, drilling and   bending sheet aluminum or devising some other fin
assembly.

Many of these tasks could be undertaken by just one person but this spreads
out the responsibilities and costs. I figure at first we each make enough of
our part to produce 3 full rockets. And if and when we get everything worked
out to an acceptably reliable level we could produce enough parts for every
person to get their own if so desired. If not we could tally up all the cost
of the 3 initial rockets and divide it up evenly by the number of people
involved. The added benefit of it's modular design is that depending on the
length of the tubes and the size of the injectors you could make very
different performing rockets. Maybe if we got this thing working well enough
we could start a small company and make and sell them in the fashion of the
$1000 System Solaire HP biprop. Doesn't seem like it would cost all that much
to make them after we got our parts down.

I'd like everyone to please tell me what they think of this so far and if
they'd be interested. If there's enough interest I could set up a web site
with all the people and their top 3 desired activities and we could determine
who deserves each part the most by tools, material availability, time
ability, and skill. But that doesn't mean we can't find a job for everyone
that wants to help.

By the way, there will be more detailed pictures of each part up on my
website in a few days, hopefully including some 3D drawings to give a good
look at the part.

Mark


------=_NextPart_000_0C9C_01C56B69.4FD4EE60
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<HTML><FONT FACE=arial,helvetica><FONT  SIZE=2>Hey list,
<BR>
<BR>In the past few months there has been a lot of talk about an open source
<BR>aRocket project. Well I for one think its about time to quit the bullshit and
<BR>actually start the project. For the last year or two I have been designing
<BR>several different rockets on my computer that to date have only flown in
<BR>simulation programs. The only reasons that my rockets are yet to be built are
<BR>because I don't have enough money or access to tools and resources. The money
<BR>problem however is only a minor concern as most of the costs are up front
<BR>costs associated with buying equipment such as Nitrous Oxide filling systems
<BR>and tanks, and a lathe. These are costs that others have already dealt with.
<BR>However if this were to be done by myself the costs of buying these would be
<BR>prohibitive to accomplishing anything.
<BR>
<BR>Do to several paranoid US government agencies I think it would be a good idea
<BR>if all this were carried out by US citizens only. Maybe the Ausies could
<BR>build one also and we could have a race. The work would be divided up and the
<BR>finished pieces would be sent to someone with the abilities to test them
<BR>(such as hydrostatic testing equipment and Nitrous equipment to test filler
<BR>fittings, etc.) Then all of the completed and tested components could be sent
<BR>to someone who would be able to assemble and test the entire system (like Ray
<BR>maybe) or maybe we could all get together for the static test sessions.
<BR>
<BR>My proposal is that we take the design which I have on my website:
<BR>http://hometown.aol.com/sociald84/project.html
<BR>
<BR>and suggest changes that will make it easier and cheaper to make, finalize it
<BR>and build it. Hopefully the first couple stages can be finished in just a few
<BR>days or weeks.
<BR>
<BR>The design parameters so far are as follows:
<BR>
<BR><B>Diameter</B>: 4"
<BR><B>Construction</B>: Aluminum tubing with aluminum bulkheads used to join multiple
<BR>sections of tubing. Graphite motor. (combustion chamber and nozzle in one
<BR>piece)
<BR><B>Propellant</B>: Nitrous Oxide and 99% Isopropyl Alcohol. (4:1 O/F)
<BR><B>Burn time</B>: 12-15s to comply with FAA rules.
<BR><B>Delivery system</B>: Nitrous Oxide will be self pressurized and the Alcohol will
<BR>use a helium blowdown system.
<BR>
<BR>Ideally there would be one person doing each part.
<BR><B>1</B>: &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Tubing work. (I could possibly do this) which would include acquiring
<BR>materials, cutting to proper length and drilling for fasteners) Who ever did
<BR>the tubing could probably also do the nose cone which would likely be a
<BR>molded composite with an ablative coating.
<BR>
<BR><B>2</B>: &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;One person making the injector plate. With my design it would include
<BR>acquiring materials,    turning the piece on a lathe -- with some facing work
<BR>required -- and drilling the injector orifices.
<BR>
<BR><B>3</B>:  One person making the combustion chamber, which would include acquiring
<BR>materials (graphite bar stock) doing a little turning on the outside, and
<BR>boring the inside of the chamber out. Other materials needed would be a liner
<BR>material, but maybe someone else could be in charge of that.
<BR>
<BR><B>4</B>:  I was thinking that a slug of APCP in the combustion chamber would be
<BR>used to ignite the motor. The pyrovalves would have a string break ignition
<BR>circuit and the flame from the solid slug would break the string to start the
<BR>motor. Some one would be in charge of making the APCP.
<BR>
<BR><B>5</B>:  One person to be in charge of building the string break ignition circuit.
<BR>(Who ever chose this one could work on another component as well.)
<BR>
<BR><B>6</B>:  Someone in charge of making the bulkheads, this would include acquiring
<BR>materials, machining the bulkheads, drilling and tapping for fasteners,
<BR>drilling and tapping for fittings, and drilling and tapping for the check
<BR>valves. Proper check valves may be hard to find though.
<BR>
<BR><B>7</B>:  One person would handle building the fillers for the Nitrous and for the
<BR>Helium, that would take     machining inside and outside of a piece of small
<BR>(.25"-.75") diameter barstock and tapping for fittings.
<BR>
<BR><B>8</B>:  One person or a small group of people would be in charge of building the
<BR>electronics package, which would hopefully include video.
<BR>
<BR><B>9</B>:  One person could do the fins, which would include acquiring material,
<BR>cutting, drilling and   bending sheet aluminum or devising some other fin
<BR>assembly.
<BR>
<BR>Many of these tasks could be undertaken by just one person but this spreads
<BR>out the responsibilities and costs. I figure at first we each make enough of
<BR>our part to produce 3 full rockets. And if and when we get everything worked
<BR>out to an acceptably reliable level we could produce enough parts for every
<BR>person to get their own if so desired. If not we could tally up all the cost
<BR>of the 3 initial rockets and divide it up evenly by the number of people
<BR>involved. The added benefit of it's modular design is that depending on the
<BR>length of the tubes and the size of the injectors you could make very
<BR>different performing rockets. Maybe if we got this thing working well enough
<BR>we could start a small company and make and sell them in the fashion of the
<BR>$1000 System Solaire HP biprop. Doesn't seem like it would cost all that much
<BR>to make them after we got our parts down.
<BR>
<BR>I'd like everyone to please tell me what they think of this so far and if
<BR>they'd be interested. If there's enough interest I could set up a web site
<BR>with all the people and their top 3 desired activities and we could determine
<BR>who deserves each part the most by tools, material availability, time
<BR>ability, and skill. But that doesn't mean we can't find a job for everyone
<BR>that wants to help.
<BR>
<BR>By the way, there will be more detailed pictures of each part up on my
<BR>website in a few days, hopefully including some 3D drawings to give a good
<BR>look at the part.
<BR>
<BR>Mark
<BR></FONT></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0C9C_01C56B69.4FD4EE60--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 25391 invoked from network); 5 Sep 2001 17:59:04 -0000
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 5 Sep 2001 17:59:04 -0000
Received: (qmail 29368 invoked by uid 50005); 5 Sep 2001 17:58:53 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpe with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.798762 secs); 05 Sep 2001 17:58:53 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 5 Sep 2001 17:58:51 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA28006; Wed, 5 Sep 2001 10:53:50 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 81045 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 5 Sep 2001 17:53:46 +0000
Received: from mail.icehouse.net (mail.icehouse.net [204.203.53.8]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id KAA27975 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 5 Sep 2001 10:53:45 -0700
Received: (qmail 78587 invoked by uid 10000); 5 Sep 2001 17:53:41 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO zip) ([204.203.54.58]) (envelope-sender          <airdale@icehouse.net>) by mail.icehouse.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with          SMTP for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; 5 Sep 2001 17:53:41 -0000
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook CWS, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0)
Importance: Normal
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <000001c13633$ae52ab90$3a36cbcc@zip>
Date:         Wed, 5 Sep 2001 10:53:32 -0700
Reply-To: <airdale@icehouse.net>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jay Smith" <airdale@icehouse.net>
Subject:      [AR] Compression molded Urethane Foam
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Does anyone have any knowledge on the subject or would someone direct me a
good resource.
I want to buy a block of it to machine into Tailcones & interstage couplers
for a two stage L 3 rocket I am building
I am not sure what density I need? Any help is appreciated

Jay Smith
NAR 78687 -SR  L1
S.P.A.R.C. -Spokane Area Rocket Club
The Spokane Area's NAR Section # 626
Until then may your Sky's be clear and LAUNCHING
in  5,  4,  3,  2,  1,  Liftoff !
A+ Cert.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 28578 invoked from network); 5 Sep 2001 17:59:45 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 5 Sep 2001 17:59:45 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 23896 invoked by uid 50005); 5 Sep 2001 17:57:50 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.277217 secs); 05 Sep 2001 17:57:50 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 5 Sep 2001 17:57:50 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA27335; Wed, 5 Sep 2001 10:50:19 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 80814 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 5 Sep 2001 17:50:17 +0000
Received: from ns.vanguard.com (ns.VANGUARD.COM [192.175.173.31]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA25630 for          <ARocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 5 Sep 2001 06:25:07 -0700
Received: from eagle1.vanguard.com (eagle1.VANGUARD.COM [192.175.141.70]) by          ns.vanguard.com (Switch-2.1.3/Switch-2.1.0) with ESMTP id          f85DOog00219 for <ARocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 5 Sep 2001 09:24:50          -0400 (EDT)
Received: from vgi4mail.vanguard.com (vgi4mail.vanguard.com [10.254.65.16]) by          eagle1.vanguard.com (Switch-2.1.3/Switch-2.1.0) with SMTP id          f85DP6j04046 for <ARocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 5 Sep 2001 09:25:06          -0400 (EDT)
Received: by vgi4mail.vanguard.com(Lotus SMTP MTA v4.6.6  (890.1 7-16-1999))           id 85256ABE.0049AE68 ; Wed, 5 Sep 2001 09:24:47 -0400
X-Lotus-FromDomain: VGINOTES
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Disposition: inline
Message-ID:  <85256ABE.0049ADB9.00@vgi4mail.vanguard.com>
Date:         Wed, 5 Sep 2001 09:25:02 -0400
Reply-To: <Waysie_Atkins@VANGUARD.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <Waysie_Atkins@VANGUARD.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] liquids question: alcohol/N2O propellant feeding
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

>>The fact that hypergolics ignite on
>>contact is an important safety advantage, because it means they *cannot*
>>form explosive mixtures, which is all too easy with non-hypergolics.  An
>>immediate fire is much preferable to a delayed explosion.

But what happens if the "small fire" occurs inside of the fuel tank, or oxidizer
tank.  The specific engine this point was brought against was the tank within a
tank bi-prop design.  Wouldn't that small fire result in rupturing the tanks
leading to "explosive like"  rapid burning of the F/O mixture.

Additionally, is N2O and alcohol hypergolic?  How about with kerosene?
(assuming one did not add any catalyst to cause hypergolicity{sp?}

Respectfully,

Waysie

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 11108 invoked from network); 5 Sep 2001 18:02:30 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 5 Sep 2001 18:02:30 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 1594 invoked by uid 50005); 5 Sep 2001 17:59:55 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpf with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.202357 secs); 05 Sep 2001 17:59:55 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 5 Sep 2001 17:59:54 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA27610; Wed, 5 Sep 2001 10:51:39 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 80930 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 5 Sep 2001 17:51:30 +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (f42.law15.hotmail.com [64.4.23.42]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA26187 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Wed,          5 Sep 2001 09:52:33 -0700
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Wed,          5 Sep 2001 09:52:03 -0700
Received: from 213.224.83.38 by lw15fd.law15.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Wed, 05          Sep 2001 16:52:03 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [213.224.83.38]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 05 Sep 2001 16:52:03.0596 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[16BB6CC0:01C1362B]
Message-ID:  <F42FmwWrfzjhwUee2DO00006db8@hotmail.com>
Date:         Wed, 5 Sep 2001 17:51:30 +0000
Reply-To: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] AN melt
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

RC wrote:

>The AN melt processes sound very exciting and I look forward to reading
>futher developments.  Presently, I am not equipped to work with the AN
>melt process.

Just theorizing & guessing: as far as I understand it, a mix of sugar(s)
crystals and AN crystals is to be heated with a silicone oil bath
preferably, until they become a liquid anhydric solution. Next pour it in
BATES forms next freeze very rapidly for homogeneity and to obtain fine
crystals.

Or is the result a glass, like a candy lolly???

Interesting point here is one needs not bother about the initial crystal
size distribution since it should form a homogenous recrystallized block or
er, lolly. Size ditribution is important using KN I was told.

Thus the mix 'll melt at a lower temperature than the AN melting point. It
need not have the eutectic composition if such 'd prove to have poor burning
characteristics.
It is disadvantageous probably to first melt AN and next try to dissolve
sugar crystals in the AN melt. Initial high contact temperature may
decompose the sugar.

I kept it simple and did not add KN to the AN...

jd



_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 12316 invoked from network); 5 Sep 2001 18:02:48 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 5 Sep 2001 18:02:48 -0000
Received: (qmail 4360 invoked by uid 50005); 5 Sep 2001 18:02:53 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpa with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 2.577365 secs); 05 Sep 2001 18:02:53 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 5 Sep 2001 18:02:49 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA27511; Wed, 5 Sep 2001 10:51:02 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 80901 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 5 Sep 2001 17:50:57 +0000
Received: from albqpop1.albq.uswest.net (albqpop1.albq.uswest.net          [207.108.240.1]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id JAA26038          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 5 Sep 2001 09:05:55 -0700
Received: (qmail 29682 invoked by alias); 5 Sep 2001 16:01:08 -0000
Delivered-To: fixup-AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU@fixme
Received: (qmail 17756 invoked by uid 0); 5 Sep 2001 15:56:34 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO INVENTORY) (207.66.52.27) by          albqpop1.albq.uswest.net with SMTP; 5 Sep 2001 15:56:34 -0000
References:  <029b01c13589$ea595800$6601a8c0@home.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0CA1_01C56B69.4FD73850"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2919.6700
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <001101c13624$064d5b20$4000a8c0@INVENTORY>
Date:         Wed, 5 Sep 2001 10:01:27 -0600
Reply-To: "pax" <darkspunge@USWEST.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "pax" <darkspunge@USWEST.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Hybrids vs Solids, a datapoint
Comments: To: Brian Kosko <bkosko1@HOME.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0CA1_01C56B69.4FD73850
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Haha, Brian shows its bias again :-) Just to be an ass, I will cert on a =
RATT I90, a Hypertek J330 and a Hypertek M1000 in the same day! So blah! =
:-)
Then go fly solid experimental the next day of course *wink*

Paxton
  ----- Original Message -----=20
  From: Brian Kosko=20
  To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU=20
  Sent: Tuesday, September 04, 2001 3:38 PM
  Subject: [AR] Hybrids vs Solids, a datapoint


  Our club's local hybrid guru did his Level 3 this weekend. Not only is =
he a big proponent of hybrids, he has a company (Freqken) that is an HP =
hybrid vendor. So for this very important flight he of course chose a =
hybrid?
  =20
  Not! He certified on an Aerotech 75mm; that is, the one with AP and =
HTPB. When you've got to have that simple, reliable propulsion =
system.....
  =20
  Brian =20

------=_NextPart_000_0CA1_01C56B69.4FD73850
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META content=3D"text/html; charset=3Diso-8859-1" =
http-equiv=3DContent-Type>
<META content=3D"MSHTML 5.00.2920.0" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Haha, Brian shows its bias again :-) =
Just to be an=20
ass, I will cert on a RATT I90, a Hypertek J330 and a Hypertek M1000 in =
the same=20
day! So blah! :-)</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Then go fly solid experimental the next =
day of=20
course *wink*</FONT></DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Paxton</FONT></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE=20
style=3D"BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: =
0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; PADDING-RIGHT: 0px">
  <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial">----- Original Message ----- </DIV>
  <DIV=20
  style=3D"BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; FONT: 10pt arial; font-color: =
black"><B>From:</B>=20
  <A href=3D"mailto:bkosko1@HOME.COM" title=3Dbkosko1@HOME.COM>Brian =
Kosko</A>=20
</DIV>
  <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A =
href=3D"mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU"=20
  title=3DAROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU</A> </DIV>
  <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> Tuesday, September 04, =
2001 3:38=20
  PM</DIV>
  <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> [AR] Hybrids vs =
Solids, a=20
  datapoint</DIV>
  <DIV><BR></DIV>
  <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Our club's local hybrid guru did his =
Level 3 this=20
  weekend. Not only is he a big proponent of hybrids, he has a company =
(Freqken)=20
  that is an HP hybrid vendor. So for this very important flight he of =
course=20
  chose a hybrid?</FONT></DIV>
  <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
  <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Not! He certified on an Aerotech =
75mm; that is,=20
  the one with AP and HTPB. When you've got to have that simple, =
reliable=20
  propulsion system.....</FONT></DIV>
  <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
  <DIV><FONT face=3DArial=20
size=3D2>Brian&nbsp;&nbsp;</FONT></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0CA1_01C56B69.4FD73850--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 24432 invoked from network); 5 Sep 2001 18:05:30 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 5 Sep 2001 18:05:30 -0000
Received: (qmail 27197 invoked by uid 50005); 5 Sep 2001 18:03:25 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.1711 secs); 05 Sep 2001 18:03:25 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 5 Sep 2001 18:03:25 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA26580; Wed, 5 Sep 2001 10:48:02 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 80424 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 5 Sep 2001 17:48:01 +0000
Received: from spsystems.net (spsystems.net [209.47.149.227]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA23646 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Tue,          4 Sep 2001 16:39:43 -0700
Received: (from henry@localhost) by spsystems.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id TAA20320;          Tue, 4 Sep 2001 19:39:02 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010904193622.19803E-100000@spsystems.net>
Date:         Tue, 4 Sep 2001 19:39:01 -0400
Reply-To: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Gun launch - part deux
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <a0510030300006c4d8aac@[63.24.225.195]>

On Fri, 1 Jan 1904, Jerry Irvine wrote:
> >OK, sounds good.  But what would you say is the highest usable
> >acceleration?
>
> Start at 1200g's and go down from there for instrumented systems.

Depends on what you mean by "instrumented".  Laser-guided shells take up
to 10,000G, and they don't even do anything very special to protect their
electronics.  (Small circuit boards, with components well anchored to the
boards and the boards well supported by surrounding structure... but
that's about it.  No, they don't embed them in solid plastic.)

The real answer to the original question is "usable for what?".  You have
to ask a more precise question.

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 25879 invoked from network); 5 Sep 2001 18:05:49 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 5 Sep 2001 18:05:49 -0000
Received: (qmail 2264 invoked by uid 50005); 5 Sep 2001 18:05:58 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpb with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.428856 secs); 05 Sep 2001 18:05:58 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 5 Sep 2001 18:05:57 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA26828; Wed, 5 Sep 2001 10:48:44 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 80555 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 5 Sep 2001 17:48:42 +0000
Received: from mta03.mail.mel.aone.net.au (mta03.mail.au.uu.net [203.2.192.83])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA24069 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 4 Sep 2001 19:24:16 -0700
Received: from unknown ([63.60.249.96]) by mta03.mail.mel.aone.net.au with SMTP          id <20010905022413.EKJL288.mta03.mail.mel.aone.net.au@unknown> for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 5 Sep 2001 12:24:13 +1000
References: Conversation <F186MEjx3y3wdlhczDq0000410d@hotmail.com> with last            message <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010904192355.19803C-100000@spsystems.net>
Priority: Normal
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Priority: 3
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	X-MAPIextension=.TXT;
	charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>
Date:         Wed, 5 Sep 2001 17:48:42 +0000
Reply-To: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] available oxygen (was Re: [AR] Propellent Musings)
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010904192355.19803C-100000@spsystems.net>

The Electronegativity of N is 3 IIRC and for O its 3.5 IIRC (don't have my
references in front of me). Anything that has an EN less than N and is
bonded to an element that has an EN less than O will react and steal the O
from the N, given a high temperature environment.

Troy.

----------
> On Tue, 4 Sep 2001, John Dom wrote:
> > the logic of only considering the available oxygen for combustion in the
> > oxydizer also applies for nitrates. Probably nitrogen oxides which are
duds
> > are in part formed. I do not know the nitrate decomposition
stoichiometry.
>
> None of the nitrogen oxides is going to be stable enough, in combustion-
> chamber conditions, to hold onto significant amounts of oxygen.  They're
> not very stable compounds in general; N2O is quite unusual for its
> stability (perhaps it has energetically-favored nitrogen-nitrogen bonds?)
> and even it comes apart easily when it gets hot.
>
>                                                           Henry Spencer
>                                                        henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 26261 invoked from network); 5 Sep 2001 18:05:54 -0000
X-Priority: 3
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 5 Sep 2001 18:05:54 -0000
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 2361 invoked by uid 50005); 5 Sep 2001 18:06:05 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpb with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.430639 secs); 05 Sep 2001 18:06:05 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 5 Sep 2001 18:06:04 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA26770; Wed, 5 Sep 2001 10:48:35 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 80525 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 5 Sep 2001 17:48:34 +0000
Received: from imo-m03.mx.aol.com (imo-m03.mx.aol.com [64.12.136.6]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA23915 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Tue, 4 Sep 2001 18:14:32 -0700
Received: from Tjpoulton@aol.com by imo-m03.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v31_r1.4.) id          w.75.1a9fd1ce (16784) for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Tue, 4 Sep 2001          21:13:56 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: AOL 5.0 for Windows sub 138
Message-ID:  <75.1a9fd1ce.28c6d653@aol.com>
Date:         Tue, 4 Sep 2001 21:13:55 EDT
Reply-To: <Tjpoulton@AOL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <Tjpoulton@AOL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] triethylaluminum
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

In a message dated 9/4/01 5:17:53 PM Central Daylight Time, JMKrell@AOL.COM
writes:

> The added complexity and hazard of handling a pyrophoric material out weigh
>  any benefit. You must transfer the TEA with an N2 or Ar gas blanket. You
> must
>  evacuate the fuel and transfer lines then fill with N2 or Ar.
>
>  I work in the semiconductor industry with several pyrophoric chemicals. It
>  can take several hours to pump down lines and prepare a tool before turning
>  on a pyrophoric gas line. Try doing this out in a remote area and
> pyrotechnic
>  ignition looks very attractive.

Seems like the TEA could be sealed in sections of tubing (perhaps 1/8" pipe
nipples) with thin burst discs at either end.  This has been suggested in
literature, and IIRC it was used in a number of LOX-oxidized designs.  These
units could be assembled in a glove box under nitrogen (not too difficult),
and stored in a fireproof, sealed container (preferably nitrogen purged).
Only a few ml would be needed in each unit, and only a few units would be
needed.  They would then be inserted in series with the fuel line after
alcohol loading.  Still to difficult?
Mike P.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 26503 invoked from network); 5 Sep 2001 18:05:57 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 5 Sep 2001 18:05:57 -0000
Received: (qmail 27550 invoked by uid 50005); 5 Sep 2001 18:04:00 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.52262 secs); 05 Sep 2001 18:04:00 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 5 Sep 2001 18:03:59 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA27430; Wed, 5 Sep 2001 10:50:41 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 80866 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 5 Sep 2001 17:50:36 +0000
Received: from localhost (rcalkins@localhost) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with          ESMTP id IAA25915; Wed, 5 Sep 2001 08:24:01 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.LNX.4.10.10109050817220.25895-100000@itc.uci.edu>
Date:         Wed, 5 Sep 2001 08:24:01 -0700
Reply-To: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Hybrids vs Solids, a datapoint
Comments: To: Brian Kosko <bkosko1@HOME.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <029b01c13589$ea595800$6601a8c0@home.com>

On Tue, 4 Sep 2001, Brian Kosko wrote:

> Our club's local hybrid guru did his Level 3 this weekend. He
> certified on an Aerotech 75mm; that is, the one with AP and HTPB. When
> you've got to have that simple, reliable propulsion system.....

I'm certainly a proponent of whatever works cheaply and reliably,  but
there is a little more information to be had here.  I helped Ken a little
on this project and asked him specifically about his choice of solid vs.
hybrid.  Simplicity and reliability _was_ a factor in his choice, but not
the only one.

Price was also an issue.  The club sponsored the level III attempt reload.
Can't beat free, even if you're a dealer/distributor for the competition.

Ray

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 1960 invoked from network); 5 Sep 2001 18:07:10 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 5 Sep 2001 18:07:10 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 6878 invoked by uid 50005); 5 Sep 2001 18:04:39 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpf with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.127521 secs); 05 Sep 2001 18:04:39 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 5 Sep 2001 18:04:38 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA27291; Wed, 5 Sep 2001 10:50:07 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 80794 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 5 Sep 2001 17:50:04 +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (f35.law15.hotmail.com [64.4.23.35]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id CAA25020 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Wed,          5 Sep 2001 02:06:27 -0700
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Wed,          5 Sep 2001 02:05:57 -0700
Received: from 193.121.251.246 by lw15fd.law15.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Wed,          05 Sep 2001 09:05:56 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [193.121.251.246]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 05 Sep 2001 09:05:57.0013 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[F9598450:01C135E9]
Message-ID:  <F35ZnIYMHY2GzNqQ5g30000672f@hotmail.com>
Date:         Wed, 5 Sep 2001 17:50:04 +0000
Reply-To: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] triethylaluminum
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Quote DW:

>TEA will react spontaneously with oxygen at any temperature, but I don't
>know
>if it will react with cold undecomposed N2O...

I'd think so.

Remains interesting, this slug ignition approach.

Which other fuel is a hypergol with N2O? wild guess: propargyl alcohol?
(reported to be hypergolic with HP of the right %).

Or alcohol doped with a catalyst like is used with 90 % HP?

Aniline or furfuryl alcohol? both are hypergolic with NTO and IIRC with WFNA
(Nike Ajax stage 2).

jd

_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 3224 invoked from network); 5 Sep 2001 18:07:26 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 5 Sep 2001 18:07:26 -0000
Received: (qmail 9629 invoked by uid 50005); 5 Sep 2001 18:07:36 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpa with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 1.01429 secs); 05 Sep 2001 18:07:36 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 5 Sep 2001 18:07:34 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA26547; Wed, 5 Sep 2001 10:47:35 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 80407 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 5 Sep 2001 17:47:24 +0000
Received: from spsystems.net (spsystems.net [209.47.149.227]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA23634 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Tue,          4 Sep 2001 16:35:41 -0700
Received: (from henry@localhost) by spsystems.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id TAA20164;          Tue, 4 Sep 2001 19:34:59 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010904193034.19803D-100000@spsystems.net>
Date:         Tue, 4 Sep 2001 19:34:59 -0400
Reply-To: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Fw: Jonathan's Space Report, No. 460
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <017b01c13562$c3a19be0$0100a8c0@mkbs>

On Wed, 5 Sep 2001, Russell McMahon wrote:
> I see still nobody has told the Japanese that LH is not a good upper stage
> fuel :-)

Upper stages are the one place where LH2 is half-defensible.  But in the
case of the H-IIA, bear in mind that it's an evolutionary update of the
H-II, which was designed quite a while back.

> What does Shuttle main tank re-entry look like?

Fireworks display. :-)  AW&ST has published pictures occasionally.

> Do they have ships staitoned in the area?
> Is it a controlled area?

As far as I know, there are no routine observations of the area, and while
aircraft and ships are warned about it, there is no attempt to enforce
emptiness.  The chances of being hit are quite small even if you're in
the debris footprint (which is deliberately kept away from traveled areas).

> Does anything solid survive to sealevel ?

Probably some of the bits of heavier structure do.

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 4734 invoked from network); 5 Sep 2001 18:07:46 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 5 Sep 2001 18:07:46 -0000
Received: (qmail 3767 invoked by uid 50005); 5 Sep 2001 18:07:59 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpb with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.386142 secs); 05 Sep 2001 18:07:59 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 5 Sep 2001 18:07:58 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA26796; Wed, 5 Sep 2001 10:48:39 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 80538 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 5 Sep 2001 17:48:38 +0000
Received: from mail.cac.net (mail.cac.net [209.44.14.13]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA24043 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue,          4 Sep 2001 19:14:21 -0700
Received: from jfackert.cac.net (tc1-002.cac.net [209.44.14.71]) by          mail.cac.net (8.11.3/8.11.3) with SMTP id f852EQY22950 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 4 Sep 2001 22:14:26 -0400 (EDT)          (envelope-from jfackert@cac.net)
References:  <72.f6af602.28c693d5@aol.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0CA4_01C56B69.4FE34640"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2314.1300
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <016e01c135b1$a3b64700$8e335ad8@cac.net>
Date:         Tue, 4 Sep 2001 22:22:40 -0400
Reply-To: "Jim Fackert" <jfackert@CAC.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jim Fackert" <jfackert@CAC.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] liquids question: alcohol/N2O propellant feeding
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0CA4_01C56B69.4FE34640
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

actually, I think the silver shaped balloons at the store are metalized =
nylon film, which heat seals a lot better than polyester (Mylar) which =
isn't easily melted.=20
  ----- Original Message -----=20
  From: Sociald84@AOL.COM=20
  To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU=20
  Sent: Tuesday, September 04, 2001 4:30 PM
  Subject: Re: [AR] liquids question: alcohol/N2O propellant feeding


  In a message dated 9/3/2001 11:10:57 PM Mountain Daylight Time,=20
  icantdecide@JUNO.COM writes:=20



    I've often wondered if mylar would make a suitable material for a =
fuel=20
    bag. Its inpermeable to gas thanks to the aluminum. Will it become=20
    brittle if cooled too much by N2O evaporation? I think you could =
seem it=20
    together with a hot tool. I've been meaning to pick up a "space =
blanket"=20
    so I could play with the idea. Any experience?=20

    Jim Selin


  Why not pick up one of those funny silver ballons at the grocery =
store?=20
  They're mylar.=20

  Mark=20

------=_NextPart_000_0CA4_01C56B69.4FE34640
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META content=3D"text/html; charset=3Diso-8859-1" =
http-equiv=3DContent-Type>
<META content=3D"MSHTML 5.00.2314.1000" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT size=3D2>actually, I think the silver shaped balloons at the =
store are=20
metalized nylon film, which heat seals a lot better than polyester =
(Mylar) which=20
isn't easily melted. </FONT></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE=20
style=3D"BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: =
0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; PADDING-RIGHT: 0px">
  <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial">----- Original Message ----- </DIV>
  <DIV=20
  style=3D"BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; FONT: 10pt arial; font-color: =
black"><B>From:</B>=20
  <A href=3D"mailto:Sociald84@AOL.COM"=20
  title=3DSociald84@AOL.COM>Sociald84@AOL.COM</A> </DIV>
  <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A =
href=3D"mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU"=20
  title=3DAROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU</A> </DIV>
  <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> Tuesday, September 04, =
2001 4:30=20
  PM</DIV>
  <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> Re: [AR] liquids =
question:=20
  alcohol/N2O propellant feeding</DIV>
  <DIV><BR></DIV><FONT face=3Darial,helvetica><FONT size=3D2>In a =
message dated=20
  9/3/2001 11:10:57 PM Mountain Daylight Time, <BR><A=20
  href=3D"mailto:icantdecide@JUNO.COM">icantdecide@JUNO.COM</A> writes:=20
  <BR><BR><BR>
  <BLOCKQUOTE=20
  style=3D"BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; =
MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px"=20
  TYPE=3D"CITE">I've often wondered if mylar would make a suitable =
material for=20
    a fuel <BR>bag. Its inpermeable to gas thanks to the aluminum. Will =
it=20
    become <BR>brittle if cooled too much by N2O evaporation? I think =
you could=20
    seem it <BR>together with a hot tool. I've been meaning to pick up a =
"space=20
    blanket" <BR>so I could play with the idea. Any experience? =
<BR><BR>Jim=20
  Selin</BLOCKQUOTE><BR><BR>Why not pick up one of those funny silver =
ballons at=20
  the grocery store? <BR>They're mylar. <BR><BR>Mark</FONT>=20
</FONT></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0CA4_01C56B69.4FE34640--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 6350 invoked from network); 5 Sep 2001 18:15:05 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 5 Sep 2001 18:15:05 -0000
Received: (qmail 32122 invoked by uid 50005); 5 Sep 2001 18:12:53 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.184833 secs); 05 Sep 2001 18:12:53 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 5 Sep 2001 18:12:53 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA27224; Wed, 5 Sep 2001 10:49:50 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 80767 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 5 Sep 2001 17:49:48 +0000
Received: from smtp007pub.verizon.net (smtp007pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.186])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA24814 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Wed, 5 Sep 2001 00:38:29 -0700
Received: from [63.10.201.222] (1Cust222.tnt3.hilo.hi.da.uu.net          [63.10.201.222]) by smtp007pub.verizon.net  with ESMTP for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; id f857bvH26895 Wed, 5 Sep 2001 02:37:57 -0500          (CDT)
X-Sender: ttocs@mail.gte.net
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <l03130300b7b792309a1b@[63.25.193.58]>
Date:         Sat, 1 Sep 2001 21:38:16 -1000
Reply-To: "Aaron Smith" <ttocs@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Aaron Smith" <ttocs@GTE.NET>
Subject:      [AR] Test - please ignore
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

test

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 23883 invoked from network); 5 Sep 2001 18:19:01 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 5 Sep 2001 18:19:01 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 1919 invoked by uid 50005); 5 Sep 2001 18:16:59 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.556194 secs); 05 Sep 2001 18:16:59 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 5 Sep 2001 18:16:58 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA27079; Wed, 5 Sep 2001 10:49:19 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 80697 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 5 Sep 2001 17:49:17 +0000
Received: from dns2.seanet.com (dns2.seanet.com [199.181.164.2]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA24476 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue,          4 Sep 2001 22:01:12 -0700
Received: from seanet.com (ssstolt.seanet.com [204.182.68.23]) by          dns2.seanet.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id f85515W27491; Tue, 4          Sep 2001 22:01:06 -0700 (PDT)
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.73 [en] (Win98; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <Pine.LNX.4.10.10108302112260.15700-100000@itc.uci.edu>            <004701c131da$63d4b340$0400a8c0@hatjs>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B95AFB9.3A02DE09@seanet.com>
Date:         Tue, 4 Sep 2001 21:53:14 -0700
Reply-To: "Sherwood Stolt" <ssstolt@SEANET.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Sherwood Stolt" <ssstolt@SEANET.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] liquids question: alcohol/N2O propellant feeding
Comments: cc: Jamie Morken <jmorken@HOME.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

I don't understand what the cavitating venturi accomplishes.
The flow through it is only as constant as the up stream pressure.
It just makes the flow rate resistant to down stream pressure
variations.  But a stable rocket motor is not a varying process
and the upstream pressure is the regulation problem.  So I
don't see any steady state benefit.  It might reduce
instabilities some but I wonder if the cavitation makes the
down stream circuit more compliant.  One exception would
be if you could make the injectors be cavitating venturis
themselves.  That might fix the source of some instabilities.

Jamie Morken wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> > > You could put a liquid regulator in the fuel line set to the correct
> > > pressure to give you the required
> > > flow rate of fuel, then make sure your ullage pressure will always be a
> bit
> > > greater than this.
> > > Anyone know a good source for small liquid regulators, variable and/or
> > > preset pressure?
>
> > The traditional amateur method is to use a cavitating venturi.  Does
> > anybody have a "How To" on designing one?
>
> I found a site that gives a bit more info on cavitating venturi's but no
> real explanation:
> http://www.foxvalve.com/frameset-venturi.html
>
> Could someone explain how these devices work?
>
> It is interesting that the cross section area of the venturi throat is less
> than that of the injectors.  The cavitating venturi will not regulate until
> a certain flowrate and the full tank pressure will be on the injectors until
> the flowrate increases to this.  If it is sized to regulate at a flowrate a
> bit below what the injectors require would it work ok?

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 24931 invoked from network); 5 Sep 2001 18:19:14 -0000
X-Priority: 3
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 5 Sep 2001 18:19:14 -0000
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA28412; Wed, 5 Sep 2001 11:09:50 -0700
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 81132 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 5 Sep 2001 18:09:49 +0000
Received: from mail.aros.net (mail.aros.net [207.173.16.20]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA28396; Wed, 5 Sep 2001 11:09:48 -0700
Received: from biomicro.com ([208.187.122.40]) by mail.aros.net (8.11.6/8.9.3)          with ESMTP id f85I9mA56805; Wed, 5 Sep 2001 12:09:48 -0600 (MDT)
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.77 [en] (Win98; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <Pine.LNX.4.10.10109050918370.25895-100000@itc.uci.edu>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B966A6C.E78F670A@biomicro.com>
Date:         Wed, 5 Sep 2001 12:09:48 -0600
Reply-To: "Mark K. Spute" <mks@BIOMICRO.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Mark K. Spute" <mks@BIOMICRO.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Strangest Biprop Ever?
Comments: To: Ray Calkins <rcalkins@ITC.UCI.EDU>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Coal?

Sorry Ray, couldn't resist.


Ray Calkins wrote:

[snip of stuff about the unidentified rocket motor - or whatever it is]

> He reports a soot layer inside, which strongly suggests it has been fired
> before, likely with kerosene.  Anybody know of other common propellants
> that leave soot?


--
Mark K. Spute
Senior Research Engineer
BioMicro Systems Inc.

KD7IWE,  RRS

"It is difficult to say what is impossible, for the dream of yesterday
is the hope of today and the reality of tomorrow."
     Dr. Robert H. Goddard

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 519 invoked from network); 5 Sep 2001 18:20:26 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 5 Sep 2001 18:20:26 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA27056; Wed, 5 Sep 2001 10:49:13 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 80685 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 5 Sep 2001 17:49:11 +0000
Received: from hobbiton.shire.net (frogmorton.shire.net [204.228.145.136]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA24427 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Tue, 4 Sep 2001 21:40:34 -0700
Received: from pool-64-223-146-33.man.east.verizon.net ([64.223.146.33]          helo=me-513q3sc0zun0.pengar.com) by hobbiton.shire.net with esmtp          (Exim 3.22 #6) id 15eUSm-000ATk-00 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 04          Sep 2001 22:38:57 -0600
X-Sender: seth-pc@hobbiton.shire.net
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <5.1.0.14.0.20010905003542.02aa3008@hobbiton.shire.net>
Date:         Wed, 5 Sep 2001 00:45:52 -0400
Reply-To: "Seth Leigh" <seth@PENGAR.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Seth Leigh" <seth@PENGAR.COM>
Subject:      [AR] More info on my ignitors.
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

I've done some more testing using AA batteries.  I got no response at all
until I got to 4.5 volts, where after several seconds I got a whiff of
smoke, and disconnected lest I cook off the ignitor.  With 6 volts (four
brand new Costco store-brand AA batteries in series) I fired two ignitors,
and it took 1-2 whole seconds each, where after a second smoke would appear
and then finally it would burst into it's typical quick flash.  I haven't
tried 7.5v yet.  I'm not sure it's worth it to try 7.5v.  I am fairly
confident, as an operational matter, that these ignitors will simply
require 9v to fire reliably and quickly.  I burned several ignitors with an
already-used 9v battery when I first mixed up the pyrogen three or four
days ago.

Now I'm very interested to see what sort of capacitor will reliably and
quickly fire these ignitors.

Also, for you electronics gurus out there, it's been a while since I had a
class in college for basic electronics, so please remind me.  I want to
charge up a capacitor, so I was thinking I'd put an LED and a 10k resistor
in series with one of the leads of the cap.  The 10k resistor would be to
limit the current so I don't fry the LED, and the LED would be there so I
can visually verify that current is flowing into the capacitor, charging
it.  From what I recall, an LED takes 6/10 of a volt to turn on, so if I
used a 9v battery and this LED/resistor setup, shouldn't that mean the cap
was charged to 8.4 volts when the LED goes out?  And is 10k high enough to
prevent burning out your average LED?  I suppose I'll buy several LEDs just
in case it isn't.  ;-)

Seth

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 9948 invoked from network); 5 Sep 2001 18:22:26 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 5 Sep 2001 18:22:26 -0000
Received: (qmail 17114 invoked by uid 50005); 5 Sep 2001 18:21:29 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpb with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.451642 secs); 05 Sep 2001 18:21:29 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 5 Sep 2001 18:21:28 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA28384; Wed, 5 Sep 2001 11:09:34 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 81125 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 5 Sep 2001 18:09:32 +0000
Received: from spsystems.net (spsystems.net [209.47.149.227]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA28370 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Wed,          5 Sep 2001 11:09:31 -0700
Received: (from henry@localhost) by spsystems.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id OAA05006;          Wed, 5 Sep 2001 14:08:58 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010905140530.4000A-100000@spsystems.net>
Date:         Wed, 5 Sep 2001 14:08:58 -0400
Reply-To: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] triethylaluminum
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <F35ZnIYMHY2GzNqQ5g30000672f@hotmail.com>

On Wed, 5 Sep 2001, John Dom wrote:
> Which other fuel is a hypergol with N2O? wild guess: propargyl alcohol?
> (reported to be hypergolic with HP of the right %).

It would have to be something pretty aggressive, given how stable N2O is
at room temperature.  I'm not sure propargyl alcohol would do, although I
have no actual data on that.

> Or alcohol doped with a catalyst like is used with 90 % HP?

Unlike for HP, nobody's ever found a room-temperature catalyst for N2O.
(Mind you, work on it has been limited.)

> Aniline or furfuryl alcohol? both are hypergolic with NTO and IIRC with WFNA
> (Nike Ajax stage 2).

Unlikely to work; they're fairly stable substances, and are hypergolic
with WFNA only because WFNA is quite aggressive... which N2O isn't.

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 15577 invoked from network); 5 Sep 2001 18:23:37 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 5 Sep 2001 18:23:37 -0000
Received: (qmail 25222 invoked by uid 50005); 5 Sep 2001 18:20:33 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpa with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 1.79543 secs); 05 Sep 2001 18:20:33 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 5 Sep 2001 18:20:31 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA27480; Wed, 5 Sep 2001 10:50:54 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 80890 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 5 Sep 2001 17:50:51 +0000
Received: from localhost (rcalkins@localhost) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with          ESMTP id JAA26018; Wed, 5 Sep 2001 09:01:31 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.LNX.4.10.10109050900580.25895-100000@itc.uci.edu>
Date:         Wed, 5 Sep 2001 09:01:31 -0700
Reply-To: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Online source here (was: [AR] Sources of Liquid Fuel              Rocket              Motor Design]
Comments: To: "Bruce E. Watson" <bwatson@3-CITIES.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <003701c13598$80683a60$4ae81ad0@Watson>

By prior agreement, aRocket has mirrored this for quite some time.

Ray

On Tue, 4 Sep 2001, Bruce E. Watson wrote:

> I just noticed today that the MIT link (http://www.im.lcs.mit.edu/rocket/)
> is back up.  I took the opportunity to down load the tar file of the entire
> book even though I have an original copy I bought new back in the early 70's
> from RocketLab.
>
> Regards;
> Bruce E. Watson
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Arthur J. Lekstutis <Artie@LEKSTUTIS.COM>
> To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
> Sent: Sunday, September 02, 2001 3:08 PM
> Subject: Re: [AR] Online source here (was: [AR] Sources of liquid
> fuelrocketmotordesign]
>
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > Yes, the link appears to be down. Hopefully not permanently.
> >
> > I have a copy in my Internet archives. I have place a copy here for a few
> > days:
> >     <http://Lekstutis.com/Artie/RocketLab/book.html>
> >
> > Later,
> > Artie Lekstutis
> >
> > Thomas Engelhardt wrote:
> >
> > > Hi Dave,
> > >
> > > it doesn't work for me either, it seems that the website is down at the
> > > moment. I have two suggestions: you might want to contact Ray, it is
> > > > Hi group,
> > > >
> > > > the paper mentioned can be downloaded here
> > > > http://www.im.lcs.mit.edu/rocket/
> > > >
> > > > It is a good starting point, but I can wholeheartedly recommend the
> > > > Huzel/Huang book mentioned in an earlier post. It is my favorite book,
> I
> > > > think the library man already knows me as he asked me if I already
> know
> > > > everything off by heart....I wish :-).
> > > > I should drop more hints around Christmas time...
> > > >
> > > > Tom
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 21098 invoked from network); 5 Sep 2001 18:24:52 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 5 Sep 2001 18:24:52 -0000
Received: (qmail 31510 invoked by uid 50005); 5 Sep 2001 18:22:20 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpf with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.15665 secs); 05 Sep 2001 18:22:20 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 5 Sep 2001 18:22:20 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA28865; Wed, 5 Sep 2001 11:20:20 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 81203 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 5 Sep 2001 18:20:15 +0000
Received: from spsystems.net (spsystems.net [209.47.149.227]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA28851 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Wed,          5 Sep 2001 11:20:14 -0700
Received: (from henry@localhost) by spsystems.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id OAA05083;          Wed, 5 Sep 2001 14:19:42 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010905141736.4000D-100000@spsystems.net>
Date:         Wed, 5 Sep 2001 14:19:41 -0400
Reply-To: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Strangest Biprop Ever?
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <Pine.LNX.4.10.10109031051150.12050-100000@itc.uci.edu>

On Mon, 3 Sep 2001, Ray Calkins wrote:
> http://arocket.itc.uci.edu/tmp2.jpg
> http://arocket.itc.uci.edu/tmp1.jpg
> It looks to have a staged combustion chamber and regenerative cooling...

Hmm, very odd.  The small chamber on top *might* be just an igniter,
rather than something fancy like staged combustion (although people have
played with dual-chamber schemes for that).  Although it's interesting
that there seems to be a hole all the way through, which suggests that
something's missing from on top.

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 26756 invoked from network); 5 Sep 2001 18:26:08 -0000
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 5 Sep 2001 18:26:08 -0000
Received: (qmail 496 invoked by uid 50005); 5 Sep 2001 18:23:36 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpf with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.309065 secs); 05 Sep 2001 18:23:36 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 5 Sep 2001 18:23:36 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA28893; Wed, 5 Sep 2001 11:21:21 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 81210 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 5 Sep 2001 18:21:20 +0000
Received: from smtp02.mrf.mail.rcn.net (smtp02.mrf.mail.rcn.net [207.172.4.61])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA28879 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Wed, 5 Sep 2001 11:21:19 -0700
Received: from 208-58-202-114.s114.tnt1.bltm.md.dialup.rcn.com          ([208.58.202.114] helo=brunyate) by smtp02.mrf.mail.rcn.net with smtp          (Exim 3.33 #10) id 15ehIc-00058o-00 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 05          Sep 2001 14:21:18 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <MBBBKKNFKBOLONOKKFHLAECKCBAA.adrianby@erols.com>
Date:         Wed, 5 Sep 2001 14:17:13 -0400
Reply-To: "Adrian Brunyate" <adrianby@EROLS.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Adrian Brunyate" <adrianby@EROLS.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] triethylaluminum
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <75.1a9fd1ce.28c6d653@aol.com>

        You might be able to do this rather straightforwardly using canula
techniques, assuming a good septum material could be found. This is a
routine method of handling air sensitive materials for chemists, so I've
heard, and inert gas filled canulas can be had from any number of suppliers.
        Adrian Brunyate.

-----Original Message-----
From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@itc.uci.edu]On
Behalf Of Tjpoulton@AOL.COM
Sent: Tuesday, September 04, 2001 9:14 PM
To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
Subject: Re: [AR] triethylaluminum


In a message dated 9/4/01 5:17:53 PM Central Daylight Time, JMKrell@AOL.COM
writes:

> The added complexity and hazard of handling a pyrophoric material out
weigh
>  any benefit. You must transfer the TEA with an N2 or Ar gas blanket. You
> must
>  evacuate the fuel and transfer lines then fill with N2 or Ar.
>
>  I work in the semiconductor industry with several pyrophoric chemicals.
It
>  can take several hours to pump down lines and prepare a tool before
turning
>  on a pyrophoric gas line. Try doing this out in a remote area and
> pyrotechnic
>  ignition looks very attractive.

Seems like the TEA could be sealed in sections of tubing (perhaps 1/8" pipe
nipples) with thin burst discs at either end.  This has been suggested in
literature, and IIRC it was used in a number of LOX-oxidized designs.  These
units could be assembled in a glove box under nitrogen (not too difficult),
and stored in a fireproof, sealed container (preferably nitrogen purged).
Only a few ml would be needed in each unit, and only a few units would be
needed.  They would then be inserted in series with the fuel line after
alcohol loading.  Still to difficult?
Mike P.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 5135 invoked from network); 5 Sep 2001 18:28:00 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 5 Sep 2001 18:28:00 -0000
Received: (qmail 9625 invoked by uid 50005); 5 Sep 2001 18:26:04 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.466581 secs); 05 Sep 2001 18:26:04 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 5 Sep 2001 18:26:03 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA28495; Wed, 5 Sep 2001 11:11:01 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 81155 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 5 Sep 2001 18:11:00 +0000
Received: from spsystems.net (spsystems.net [209.47.149.227]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA28481 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Wed,          5 Sep 2001 11:11:00 -0700
Received: (from henry@localhost) by spsystems.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id OAA05023;          Wed, 5 Sep 2001 14:10:27 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010905140903.4000B-100000@spsystems.net>
Date:         Wed, 5 Sep 2001 14:10:27 -0400
Reply-To: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] liquids question: alcohol/N2O propellant feeding
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <F94Beqb5FAEzkTGXxPk00005b86@hotmail.com>

On Wed, 5 Sep 2001, John Dom wrote:
> But I thought the point here was *immediate explosion upon contact*. Like
> the deadly threat story caused by the spanner which hit the NTO tank of a
> Titan in a silo...

The immediate threat there was fire, not explosion (although a fire in
the presence of a liquid-fueled missile in a confined space can get worse
real fast).

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 23220 invoked from network); 5 Sep 2001 18:31:55 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 5 Sep 2001 18:31:55 -0000
Received: (qmail 12199 invoked by uid 50005); 5 Sep 2001 18:29:59 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.285041 secs); 05 Sep 2001 18:29:59 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 5 Sep 2001 18:29:59 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA28717; Wed, 5 Sep 2001 11:14:39 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 81187 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 5 Sep 2001 18:14:38 +0000
Received: from spsystems.net (spsystems.net [209.47.149.227]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA28703 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Wed,          5 Sep 2001 11:14:37 -0700
Received: (from henry@localhost) by spsystems.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id OAA05042;          Wed, 5 Sep 2001 14:14:04 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010905141043.4000C-100000@spsystems.net>
Date:         Wed, 5 Sep 2001 14:14:02 -0400
Reply-To: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] liquids question: alcohol/N2O propellant feeding
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <85256ABE.0049ADB9.00@vgi4mail.vanguard.com>

On Wed, 5 Sep 2001 Waysie_Atkins@VANGUARD.COM wrote:
> >>immediate fire is much preferable to a delayed explosion.
>
> But what happens if the "small fire" occurs inside of the fuel tank, or oxidizer
> tank.  The specific engine this point was brought against was the tank within a
> tank bi-prop design.  Wouldn't that small fire result in rupturing the tanks
> leading to "explosive like"  rapid burning of the F/O mixture.

Yep, distinctly possible... but even that is preferable to forming a
detonable mixture and then having it touched off.  (It's the difference
between, for example, damaging your test stand and obliterating it.)
Moreover, the fact that the problem is *immediately obvious* is important;
detonable mixtures of non-hypergolics can sneak up on you.

> Additionally, is N2O and alcohol hypergolic?  How about with kerosene?
> (assuming one did not add any catalyst to cause hypergolicity{sp?}

At room temperature, essentially nothing is hypergolic with N2O.  Well,
okay, a few really aggressive things like triethyl aluminum probably are,
but not ordinary fuels.

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 654 invoked from network); 5 Sep 2001 18:33:39 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 5 Sep 2001 18:33:39 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 13615 invoked by uid 50005); 5 Sep 2001 18:31:43 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.277894 secs); 05 Sep 2001 18:31:43 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 5 Sep 2001 18:31:42 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA29044; Wed, 5 Sep 2001 11:27:17 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 81198 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 5 Sep 2001 18:27:15 +0000
Received: from scaup.mail.pas.earthlink.net (scaup.mail.pas.earthlink.net          [207.217.121.49]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA28816          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 5 Sep 2001 11:17:15 -0700
Received: from earthlink.net (dialup-209.245.143.234.Dial1.SanJose1.Level3.net          [209.245.143.234]) by scaup.mail.pas.earthlink.net (EL-8_9_3_3/8.9.3)          with ESMTP id LAA01181; Wed, 5 Sep 2001 11:17:13 -0700 (PDT)
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.75 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.16-22 i686)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <Pine.LNX.4.10.10109050817220.25895-100000@itc.uci.edu>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B966C86.52589186@earthlink.net>
Date:         Wed, 5 Sep 2001 11:18:46 -0700
Reply-To: "David Weinshenker" <daze39@EARTHLINK.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "David Weinshenker" <daze39@EARTHLINK.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Hybrids vs Solids, a datapoint
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Ray Calkins wrote:
>
> On Tue, 4 Sep 2001, Brian Kosko wrote:
>
> > Our club's local hybrid guru did his Level 3 this weekend. He
> > certified on an Aerotech 75mm; that is, the one with AP and HTPB. When
> > you've got to have that simple, reliable propulsion system.....
>
> I'm certainly a proponent of whatever works cheaply and reliably,  but
> there is a little more information to be had here.  I helped Ken a little
> on this project and asked him specifically about his choice of solid vs.
> hybrid.  Simplicity and reliability _was_ a factor in his choice, but not
> the only one.

I suspect a lot of it would be the availability of a motor with the
appropriate mechanical and thrust curve characteristics for this
specific application. (Compared to typical HPR solids of similar total
impulse, the HPR production hybrids available tend to be relatively
low-thrust, long-burn units with long overall length. They're good
choices for some applications but not for others.)

-dave w

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 6379 invoked from network); 5 Sep 2001 18:34:52 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 5 Sep 2001 18:34:52 -0000
Received: (qmail 13191 invoked by uid 50005); 5 Sep 2001 18:32:20 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpf with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.251688 secs); 05 Sep 2001 18:32:20 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 5 Sep 2001 18:32:19 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA28914; Wed, 5 Sep 2001 11:21:30 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 81217 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 5 Sep 2001 18:21:29 +0000
Received: from spsystems.net (spsystems.net [209.47.149.227]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA28900 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Wed,          5 Sep 2001 11:21:28 -0700
Received: (from henry@localhost) by spsystems.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id OAA05094;          Wed, 5 Sep 2001 14:20:55 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010905142012.4000E-100000@spsystems.net>
Date:         Wed, 5 Sep 2001 14:20:55 -0400
Reply-To: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Strangest Biprop Ever?
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <Pine.LNX.4.10.10109050918370.25895-100000@itc.uci.edu>

On Wed, 5 Sep 2001, Ray Calkins wrote:
> He reports a soot layer inside, which strongly suggests it has been fired
> before, likely with kerosene.  Anybody know of other common propellants
> that leave soot?

Kerosene is much the most likely.  You can get sooting with most any
hydrocarbon injected as a liquid, although it depends a bit on conditions.

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 29198 invoked from network); 5 Sep 2001 19:06:14 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 5 Sep 2001 19:06:14 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 1504 invoked by uid 50005); 5 Sep 2001 19:04:56 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.273839 secs); 05 Sep 2001 19:04:56 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 5 Sep 2001 19:04:55 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA29306; Wed, 5 Sep 2001 11:58:04 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 81295 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 5 Sep 2001 18:58:00 +0000
Received: from idsoftware.com (predator.idsoftware.com [192.246.40.34]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA29292 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Wed, 5 Sep 2001 11:58:00 -0700
Received: from [192.246.40.144] (account johnc HELO pluto.idsoftware.com) by          idsoftware.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 3.4.7) with ESMTP id 370802 for          AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 05 Sep 2001 13:52:20 -0500
X-Sender: johnc@mail.idsoftware.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <4.3.1.2.20010905140219.02de0f08@mail.idsoftware.com>
Date:         Wed, 5 Sep 2001 14:04:50 -0500
Reply-To: "John Carmack" <johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Carmack" <johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] liquids question: alcohol/N2O propellant feeding
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <85256ABE.0049ADB9.00@vgi4mail.vanguard.com>

At 09:25 AM 9/5/2001 -0400, you wrote:
> >>The fact that hypergolics ignite on
> >>contact is an important safety advantage, because it means they *cannot*
> >>form explosive mixtures, which is all too easy with non-hypergolics.  An
> >>immediate fire is much preferable to a delayed explosion.
>
>But what happens if the "small fire" occurs inside of the fuel tank, or
>oxidizer
>tank.  The specific engine this point was brought against was the tank
>within a
>tank bi-prop design.  Wouldn't that small fire result in rupturing the tanks
>leading to "explosive like"  rapid burning of the F/O mixture.

You would get an "explosion" when the tank ruptured, and probably a lot of
fire, but it wouldn't be a "detonation", which is a lot more damaging and
dangerous.

John Carmack

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 4471 invoked from network); 5 Sep 2001 20:10:18 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 5 Sep 2001 20:10:18 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 6770 invoked by uid 50005); 5 Sep 2001 20:10:09 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpb with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.504465 secs); 05 Sep 2001 20:10:09 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 5 Sep 2001 20:10:07 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA00821; Wed, 5 Sep 2001 12:56:38 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 80401 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 5 Sep 2001 19:56:29 +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (f77.law15.hotmail.com [64.4.23.77]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA00807 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Wed,          5 Sep 2001 12:56:29 -0700
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Wed,          5 Sep 2001 12:55:58 -0700
Received: from 213.224.83.46 by lw15fd.law15.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Wed, 05          Sep 2001 19:55:58 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [213.224.83.46]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 05 Sep 2001 19:55:58.0846 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[C840F1E0:01C13644]
Message-ID:  <F774OPXok84FTA7OIkU0000653d@hotmail.com>
Date:         Wed, 5 Sep 2001 19:56:29 +0000
Reply-To: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Strangest Biprop Ever?
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

A non-hypergol in the bigger V2 type chamber ignited by a hypergolic
combination in the top volume?

jd

_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 16525 invoked from network); 5 Sep 2001 20:12:58 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 5 Sep 2001 20:12:58 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 14043 invoked by uid 50005); 5 Sep 2001 20:07:15 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.211268 secs); 05 Sep 2001 20:07:15 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 5 Sep 2001 20:07:14 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA00703; Wed, 5 Sep 2001 12:48:34 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 80390 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 5 Sep 2001 19:48:26 +0000
Received: from waltz.SoftHome.net ([204.144.231.8]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id MAA00687 for <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Wed, 5          Sep 2001 12:48:26 -0700
Received: (qmail 2472 invoked by uid 417); 5 Sep 2001 19:08:15 -0000
References: <4.3.1.2.20010905140219.02de0f08@mail.idsoftware.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Sender: erohrbaugh@softhome.net
Message-ID:  <20010905190815.2471.qmail@softhome.net>
Date:         Wed, 5 Sep 2001 19:08:15 GMT
Reply-To: <erohrbaugh@SOFTHOME.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <erohrbaugh@SOFTHOME.NET>
Subject:      [AR] AN Grinding
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <4.3.1.2.20010905140219.02de0f08@mail.idsoftware.com>

Is it possible to grind AN in a coffee grinder type of mechanism, or is it
best to use a ball mill arrangement?

Thanks,

-Eric

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 12235 invoked from network); 5 Sep 2001 20:32:18 -0000
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 5 Sep 2001 20:32:18 -0000
Received: (qmail 29636 invoked by uid 50005); 5 Sep 2001 20:29:40 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpf with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.184897 secs); 05 Sep 2001 20:29:40 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 5 Sep 2001 20:29:40 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA01033; Wed, 5 Sep 2001 13:16:48 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 80421 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 5 Sep 2001 20:16:47 +0000
Received: from c002.snv.cp.net (c002-h003.c002.snv.cp.net [209.228.32.167]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id NAA01019 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 5 Sep 2001 13:16:46 -0700
Received: (cpmta 24747 invoked from network); 5 Sep 2001 13:16:15 -0700
Received: from 1Cust87.tnt2.williamsburg.va.da.uu.net (HELO default)          (63.21.81.87) by smtp.peoplepc.com (209.228.32.167) with SMTP; 5 Sep          2001 13:16:15 -0700
X-Sent: 5 Sep 2001 20:16:15 GMT
References: <4.3.1.2.20010905140219.02de0f08@mail.idsoftware.com>             <20010905190815.2471.qmail@softhome.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4807.1700
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <008401c13649$70627de0$5751153f@default>
Date:         Wed, 5 Sep 2001 16:29:16 -0400
Reply-To: "David Muesing" <dmuesing@PEOPLEPC.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "David Muesing" <dmuesing@PEOPLEPC.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] AN Grinding
Comments: To: erohrbaugh@SOFTHOME.NET
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

I have ground NaNO3, KNO3 & NH3O4 (?) prill with a two compartment coffee
grinder with good results. I do not load it heavily though.  The grinder I
recently got came from Lowe's  and cost $30.

Dave Muesing


----- Original Message -----
From: <erohrbaugh@SOFTHOME.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Wednesday, September 05, 2001 3:08 PM
Subject: [AR] AN Grinding


> Is it possible to grind AN in a coffee grinder type of mechanism, or is it
> best to use a ball mill arrangement?
>
> Thanks,
>
> -Eric
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 28399 invoked from network); 5 Sep 2001 20:50:14 -0000
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 5 Sep 2001 20:50:14 -0000
Received: (qmail 14905 invoked by uid 50005); 5 Sep 2001 20:50:00 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpe with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.872367 secs); 05 Sep 2001 20:50:00 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 5 Sep 2001 20:49:58 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA01304; Wed, 5 Sep 2001 13:41:40 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 80458 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 5 Sep 2001 20:41:37 +0000
Received: from roll.akcecc.kiev.ua (roll.akcecc.kiev.ua [193.227.206.34]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA01290 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 5 Sep 2001 13:41:34 -0700
Received: from serge (pool-137.akcecc.kiev.ua [193.227.207.137] (may be          forged)) by roll.akcecc.kiev.ua (8.10.2/8.10.2) with SMTP id          f85KfML14629 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 5 Sep 2001 23:41:22 +0300
References:  <F42FmwWrfzjhwUee2DO00006db8@hotmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="koi8-r"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2417.2000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <01ba01c13642$83b05f40$89cfe3c1@serge>
Date:         Wed, 5 Sep 2001 23:37:25 +0400
Reply-To: "Serge Pipko" <spas@AKCECC.KIEV.UA>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Serge Pipko" <spas@AKCECC.KIEV.UA>
Subject:      Re: [AR] AN melt
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

John Dom wrote:

> Just theorizing & guessing: as far as I understand it, a mix of sugar(s)
> crystals and AN crystals is to be heated with a silicone oil bath
> preferably, until they become a liquid anhydric solution. Next pour it in
> BATES forms next freeze very rapidly for homogeneity and to obtain fine
> crystals.
>
> Or is the result a glass, like a candy lolly???

No, it is AN crystals dispersed in glass-like solid solution of fuel in AN.

> Thus the mix 'll melt at a lower temperature than the AN melting point. It
> need not have the eutectic composition if such 'd prove to have poor
burning
> characteristics.
> It is disadvantageous probably to first melt AN and next try to dissolve
> sugar crystals in the AN melt. Initial high contact temperature may
> decompose the sugar.

I add fuel to alredy molten AN because my initial goal was ( and is ) to
study compartibilities of different fuels with AN. Therefore I add small
portions of fuel and watch.

Serge

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 670 invoked from network); 5 Sep 2001 20:50:49 -0000
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 5 Sep 2001 20:50:49 -0000
X-Priority: 3
Received: (qmail 19173 invoked by uid 50005); 5 Sep 2001 20:48:15 -0000
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpf with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.587516 secs); 05 Sep 2001 20:48:15 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 5 Sep 2001 20:48:14 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA01127; Wed, 5 Sep 2001 13:32:04 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 80436 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 5 Sep 2001 20:32:02 +0000
Received: from m1.jersey.juno.com (m1.jersey.juno.com [64.136.16.64]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA01113 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 5 Sep 2001 13:32:01 -0700
Received: from cookie.juno.com by cookie.juno.com for          <"H3WK6e6N+bsCVJQMHM9sZJTNac7vSGOCKHb3mpj5wrVwTTgIc+E5XA==">
Received: (from kc2csh@juno.com) by m1.jersey.juno.com (queuemail) id GELP6NGW;          Wed, 05 Sep 2001 16:31:43 EDT
X-Mailer: Juno 4.0.11
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Juno-Line-Breaks: 0-1,3,5,15,18,21-24,26-27,29-32,34,36-38
X-Juno-Att: 0
X-Juno-RefParts: 0
Message-ID:  <20010905.163614.-4116691.0.kc2csh@juno.com>
Date:         Wed, 5 Sep 2001 16:24:01 -0400
Reply-To: <kc2csh@JUNO.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <kc2csh@JUNO.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Gun launch - part deux
Comments: To: thehalls@RIDGENET.NET
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Dave:
  I don't think he said manned.
  100kg to 14k altitude and 80 knots is well within the possibilities of
modest ultralite kit modified for R/C
  200kg to 25k altitude and 250 knots is well within the possibilities of
commonly attainable  kitplanes modified for R/C
  The biggest flaw with something like this is that the useful launch
angle is so much different than the best attainable apparent wind during
a launch portion of flight, that you are effectively launching either at
a poor angle, or at a poor velocity, or at a poor altitude,  or into a
hurricane velocity wind sheer.  Some aerobatics can get you something
useful, but far from optimal.  The kind of performance required at
altitude is of a totally different class; and with that goes a totally
different price range.  The timing and dynamics are so complex and
precise, you'd probably need a sensor aray and electronic launch control
to be at all within acceptable safety ranges.
  Getting the acceptable performance characteristics would probably
require high performance engines and an aircraft design created from
scratch for the purpose.
  Not to say it can't be done, or shouldn't be done, just that its much
more complicated, more expensive, and more involved than it looks on
first glance.

               Jay

On Tue, 4 Sep 2001 17:59:23 -0700 Kristin & David Hall
<thehalls@RIDGENET.NET> writes:

> > Just out of cusiosity, how much would a dedicated air-launch
aircraft for
> > small rockets be worth?  Say, 100 Kg to 14,000 ft.  200 kg?
>
>
> ....Seriously, of all the ideas I've seen thrown around on Arocket,  I
would
> consider an amateur rocket launched from a manned aircraft to be by
far the
> dumbest (Where dumb is defined as "situation likely to get somebody
> killed".).

________________________________________________________________
GET INTERNET ACCESS FROM JUNO!
Juno offers FREE or PREMIUM Internet access for less!
Join Juno today!  For your FREE software, visit:
http://dl.www.juno.com/get/tagj.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 15203 invoked from network); 5 Sep 2001 20:54:25 -0000
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 5 Sep 2001 20:54:25 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 19287 invoked by uid 50005); 5 Sep 2001 20:54:02 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpe with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.46666 secs); 05 Sep 2001 20:54:02 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 5 Sep 2001 20:54:00 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA01327; Wed, 5 Sep 2001 13:42:47 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 80465 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 5 Sep 2001 20:42:42 +0000
Received: from mail.aros.net (mail.aros.net [207.173.16.20]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA01313 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed,          5 Sep 2001 13:42:42 -0700
Received: from biomicro.com ([208.187.122.40]) by mail.aros.net (8.11.6/8.9.3)          with ESMTP id f85KgdS22982 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 5 Sep 2001          14:42:39 -0600 (MDT)
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.77 [en] (Win98; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20010905.163614.-4116691.0.kc2csh@juno.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B968E3F.6508F64E@biomicro.com>
Date:         Wed, 5 Sep 2001 14:42:39 -0600
Reply-To: "Mark K. Spute" <mks@BIOMICRO.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Mark K. Spute" <mks@BIOMICRO.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Gun launch - part deux
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Just out of curiosity, and for comparison to rocketry related
regulations, just how big of a R/C aircraft can you leagally build and
fly?  I've seen some amazingly big planes, but still fairly lightweight
(balsa & tissue construction.)  Could you legally put an R/C control in
something like a VariEze, or a Cessna?  Or a Learjet?


kc2csh@JUNO.COM wrote:

> 100kg to 14k altitude and 80 knots is well within the possibilities of
> modest ultralite kit modified for R/C
> 200kg to 25k altitude and 250 knots is well within the possibilities of
> commonly attainable  kitplanes modified for R/C

[snip of stuff about launching from aircraft]

--
Mark K. Spute
Senior Research Engineer
BioMicro Systems Inc.

KD7IWE,  RRS

"It is difficult to say what is impossible, for the dream of yesterday
is the hope of today and the reality of tomorrow."
     Dr. Robert H. Goddard

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 15592 invoked from network); 5 Sep 2001 20:54:30 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 5 Sep 2001 20:54:30 -0000
Received: (qmail 10744 invoked by uid 50005); 5 Sep 2001 20:54:31 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpb with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.661268 secs); 05 Sep 2001 20:54:31 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 5 Sep 2001 20:54:30 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA01156; Wed, 5 Sep 2001 13:33:10 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 80443 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 5 Sep 2001 20:33:09 +0000
Received: from spsystems.net (spsystems.net [209.47.149.227]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA01142 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Wed,          5 Sep 2001 13:33:09 -0700
Received: (from henry@localhost) by spsystems.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id QAA06782;          Wed, 5 Sep 2001 16:32:35 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010905163057.6759A-100000@spsystems.net>
Date:         Wed, 5 Sep 2001 16:32:35 -0400
Reply-To: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] available oxygen (was Re: [AR] Propellent Musings)
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <F79PbwYvsGkUsqFXHjg00006607@hotmail.com>

On Wed, 5 Sep 2001, John Dom wrote:
> >The Electronegativity of N is 3 IIRC and for O its 3.5 IIRC (don't have my
> >references in front of me).
>
> Are you talking valence states?

No, electronegativity is not how many electrons the thing is willing to
accept, but how strongly it wants to accept them.  It bears on whether
reactions will occur spontaneously.

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 6395 invoked from network); 5 Sep 2001 20:59:18 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 5 Sep 2001 20:59:18 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 7178 invoked by uid 50005); 5 Sep 2001 20:57:46 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 1.186774 secs); 05 Sep 2001 20:57:46 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 5 Sep 2001 20:57:45 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA01012; Wed, 5 Sep 2001 13:16:31 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 80414 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 5 Sep 2001 20:16:24 +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (f79.law15.hotmail.com [64.4.23.79]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA00997 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Wed,          5 Sep 2001 13:16:23 -0700
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Wed,          5 Sep 2001 13:15:53 -0700
Received: from 213.224.83.46 by lw15fd.law15.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Wed, 05          Sep 2001 20:15:49 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [213.224.83.46]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 05 Sep 2001 20:15:53.0666 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[906C0220:01C13647]
Message-ID:  <F79PbwYvsGkUsqFXHjg00006607@hotmail.com>
Date:         Wed, 5 Sep 2001 20:16:24 +0000
Reply-To: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] available oxygen (was Re: [AR] Propellent Musings)
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Are you talking valence states? O is 2 and N is 3. The lower temp
stoichiometry for KN posted to-day looks OK. Some other ionic or plasma
species may be formed furtively but if the water part in the products part
of the eq is correct...water 'll never deliver O for combustion. Bottom
line: AN may not be much more or perhaps less of a combustive O donor than
90 % HP..

Just guessing really.

jd




>From: Troy Prideaux <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
>Reply-To: Troy Prideaux <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
>To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
>Subject: Re: [AR] available oxygen (was Re: [AR] Propellent Musings)
>Date: Wed, 5 Sep 2001 17:48:42 +0000
>
>The Electronegativity of N is 3 IIRC and for O its 3.5 IIRC (don't have my
>references in front of me). Anything that has an EN less than N and is
>bonded to an element that has an EN less than O will react and steal the O
>from the N, given a high temperature environment.
>
>Troy.
>
>----------
> > On Tue, 4 Sep 2001, John Dom wrote:
> > > the logic of only considering the available oxygen for combustion in
>the
> > > oxydizer also applies for nitrates. Probably nitrogen oxides which are
>duds
> > > are in part formed. I do not know the nitrate decomposition
>stoichiometry.
> >
> > None of the nitrogen oxides is going to be stable enough, in combustion-
> > chamber conditions, to hold onto significant amounts of oxygen.  They're
> > not very stable compounds in general; N2O is quite unusual for its
> > stability (perhaps it has energetically-favored nitrogen-nitrogen
>bonds?)
> > and even it comes apart easily when it gets hot.
> >
> >                                                           Henry Spencer
> >
>henry@spsystems.net


_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 19288 invoked from network); 5 Sep 2001 21:23:24 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 5 Sep 2001 21:23:24 -0000
Received: (qmail 1239 invoked by uid 50005); 5 Sep 2001 21:23:24 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpb with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.427364 secs); 05 Sep 2001 21:23:24 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 5 Sep 2001 21:23:23 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA01512; Wed, 5 Sep 2001 14:18:09 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 80481 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 5 Sep 2001 21:18:05 +0000
Received: from localhost (rcalkins@localhost) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with          ESMTP id OAA01498; Wed, 5 Sep 2001 14:18:04 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.LNX.4.10.10109051412010.1461-100000@itc.uci.edu>
Date:         Wed, 5 Sep 2001 14:18:04 -0700
Reply-To: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Propellent Musings
Comments: To: Aaron Smith <ttocs@GTE.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <l03130300b7b5da214575@[63.25.193.159]>

> solved by large amounts of hydrazine.  Not fun.  I just need to think about
> which is better in terms of handling, H2O2 or LOX.  For all practical
> purposes, they rate the same on the above chart.
>
> Anything anyone wants to throw in?
Sure, while we're comparing apples and oranges, we should include
price/quantity.

Oxidizers ($US):
1. LOX  $1/l
2. Nitric Acid $5/l (Haven't heard any solid numbers, but this seems
likely)
3. HTP  $10/l

Please correct me if these numbers are incorrect, and include quantity of
purchace.

Cost figures heavily into development figures for seriously underfunded
projects like our own.

Ray

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 21316 invoked from network); 5 Sep 2001 21:45:41 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 5 Sep 2001 21:45:41 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 25917 invoked by uid 50005); 5 Sep 2001 21:45:37 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpa with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 2.498225 secs); 05 Sep 2001 21:45:38 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 5 Sep 2001 21:45:34 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA01571; Wed, 5 Sep 2001 14:24:14 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 80492 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 5 Sep 2001 21:24:12 +0000
Received: from idsoftware.com (predator.idsoftware.com [192.246.40.34]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA01557 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Wed, 5 Sep 2001 14:24:12 -0700
Received: from [192.246.40.129] (account johnc HELO lightning.idsoftware.com)          by idsoftware.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 3.4.7) with ESMTP id 371221          for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 05 Sep 2001 15:36:37 -0500
X-Sender: johnc@mail.idsoftware.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0CA7_01C56B69.4FFFCEF0"
Message-ID:  <4.3.1.2.20010905150252.02b0b008@mail.idsoftware.com>
Date:         Wed, 5 Sep 2001 15:34:32 -0500
Reply-To: "John Carmack" <johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Carmack" <johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] aRocket project
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <163.5a949c.28c719d4@aol.com>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0CA7_01C56B69.4FFFCEF0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"

At 02:01 AM 9/5/2001 -0400, you wrote:
>Hey list,
>
>In the past few months there has been a lot of talk about an open source
>aRocket project. Well I for one think its about time to quit the bullshit and
>actually start the project. For the last year or two I have been designing
>several different rockets on my computer that to date have only flown in
>simulation programs. The only reasons that my rockets are yet to be built are
>because I don't have enough money or access to tools and resources. The money
>problem however is only a minor concern as most of the costs are up front
>costs associated with buying equipment such as Nitrous Oxide filling systems
>and tanks, and a lathe. These are costs that others have already dealt with.
>However if this were to be done by myself the costs of buying these would be
>prohibitive to accomplishing anything.

An open source project doesn't help things get started, and is almost never
a way to get over personal resource limitations.  This is a common
misconception, with "start an open source project" often being offered as a
way to undertake a difficult task.  None of the poster child cases for open
source were started that way, they were all started by a single individual
or a cohesive team, and brought to a reasonable level of functionality
before they were opened to the world for input.

Distributed rocket construction is likely to be especially difficult.

I would also strongly urge you to pursue two earlier stages in your
development plan:

Build an instrumented test stand and develop the engine completely
separately from any vehicle considerations.  You can use convenient and
safe DOT tanks, and just getting the engine to work reliably is going to be
a significant task.

Build a fairly standard HPR vehicle that can be fully tested on normal
reloads, then have your engine integrated later.  This is ERPS' KISS
vehicle plan, and I think it is very sensible.

If you can't afford to do this, you can't afford your project, and open
source isn't going to help.  Paying list price for good components to do
all that would cost a couple thousand dollars, but enterprising people that
know where to scrounge and borrow resources could probably get it done for
a few hundred dollars.


John Carmack

------=_NextPart_000_0CA7_01C56B69.4FFFCEF0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="us-ascii"

<html>
At 02:01 AM 9/5/2001 -0400, you wrote:<br>
<blockquote type=cite cite><font face="arial" size=2>Hey list, <br>
<br>
In the past few months there has been a lot of talk about an open source
<br>
aRocket project. Well I for one think its about time to quit the bullshit
and <br>
actually start the project. For the last year or two I have been
designing <br>
several different rockets on my computer that to date have only flown in
<br>
simulation programs. The only reasons that my rockets are yet to be built
are <br>
because I don't have enough money or access to tools and resources. The
money <br>
problem however is only a minor concern as most of the costs are up front
<br>
costs associated with buying equipment such as Nitrous Oxide filling
systems <br>
and tanks, and a lathe. These are costs that others have already dealt
with. <br>
However if this were to be done by myself the costs of buying these would
be <br>
prohibitive to accomplishing anything. <br>
</font></blockquote><br>
An open source project doesn't help things get started, and is almost
never a way to get over personal resource limitations.&nbsp; This is a
common misconception, with &quot;start an open source project&quot; often
being offered as a way to undertake a difficult task.&nbsp; None of the
poster child cases for open source were started that way, they were all
started by a single individual or a cohesive team, and brought to a
reasonable level of functionality before they were opened to the world
for input.<br>
<br>
Distributed rocket construction is likely to be especially
difficult.<br>
<br>
I would also strongly urge you to pursue two earlier stages in your
development plan:<br>
<br>
Build an instrumented test stand and develop the engine completely
separately from any vehicle considerations.&nbsp; You can use convenient
and safe DOT tanks, and just getting the engine to work reliably is going
to be a significant task.<br>
<br>
Build a fairly standard HPR vehicle that can be fully tested on normal
reloads, then have your engine integrated later.&nbsp; This is ERPS' KISS
vehicle plan, and I think it is very sensible.<br>
<br>
If you can't afford to do this, you can't afford your project, and open
source isn't going to help.&nbsp; Paying list price for good components
to do all that would cost a couple thousand dollars, but enterprising
people that know where to scrounge and borrow resources could probably
get it done for a few hundred dollars.<br>
<br>
<br>
John Carmack<br>
</html>

------=_NextPart_000_0CA7_01C56B69.4FFFCEF0--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 1833 invoked from network); 5 Sep 2001 21:48:03 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 5 Sep 2001 21:48:03 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 19748 invoked by uid 50005); 5 Sep 2001 21:45:56 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpe with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.650647 secs); 05 Sep 2001 21:45:56 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 5 Sep 2001 21:45:55 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA01698; Wed, 5 Sep 2001 14:40:24 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 80509 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 5 Sep 2001 21:40:21 +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (f139.law15.hotmail.com [64.4.23.139]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA01684 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Wed, 5 Sep 2001 14:40:21 -0700
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Wed,          5 Sep 2001 14:39:50 -0700
Received: from 213.224.83.174 by lw15fd.law15.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Wed,          05 Sep 2001 21:39:50 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [213.224.83.174]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 05 Sep 2001 21:39:50.0912 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[4ADAC000:01C13653]
Message-ID:  <F139JNwPmxd22RQY3Wh0000628a@hotmail.com>
Date:         Wed, 5 Sep 2001 21:40:21 +0000
Reply-To: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] available oxygen (was Re: [AR] Propellent Musings)
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

The Electronegativity of N is 3 IIRC and for O its 3.5 IIRC (don't have my
references in front of me). Anything that has an EN less than N and is
bonded to an element that has an EN less than O will react and steal the O
from the N, given a high temperature environment.

and

>... electronegativity is not how many electrons the thing is willing to
>accept, but how strongly it wants to accept them.  It bears on whether
>reactions will occur spontaneously.

OK OK electron affinity; bond type etc.. So? is this leading to a
conclusion regarding combustible oxygen % available in HP vs liquid AN?
Or it is better to stick with stoichiometries mentioned below, say 1000C
for starters? Then calc is possible & simple: what is turned into water
there 'll remain so and is lost for combustion.

jd

_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 17908 invoked from network); 5 Sep 2001 21:58:47 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 5 Sep 2001 21:58:47 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 15849 invoked by uid 50005); 5 Sep 2001 21:55:44 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 1.480144 secs); 05 Sep 2001 21:55:44 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 5 Sep 2001 21:55:42 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA01721; Wed, 5 Sep 2001 14:41:06 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 80516 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 5 Sep 2001 21:41:05 +0000
Received: from smtp008pub.verizon.net (smtp008pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.187])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA01707 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 5 Sep 2001 14:41:05 -0700
Received: from [63.10.189.249] (1Cust249.tnt2.hilo.hi.da.uu.net          [63.10.189.249]) by smtp008pub.verizon.net  with ESMTP ; id          f85LeRp12005 Wed, 5 Sep 2001 16:40:28 -0500 (CDT)
X-Sender: ttocs@mail.gte.net
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <l03130300b7b856c75ba5@[63.10.201.222]>
Date:         Sun, 2 Sep 2001 11:40:01 -1000
Reply-To: "Aaron Smith" <ttocs@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Aaron Smith" <ttocs@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Gun launch - part deux  THE END
Comments: To: kc2csh@JUNO.COM
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <20010905.163614.-4116691.0.kc2csh@juno.com>

Eh, you're talking about still launching from under the wing.  No.  That
would require that you point the plane straight up.  I was talking about
realeasing the rocket under a parachute, letting it stabilize and point
upward.  THEN you launch it, when your aircraft is miles away.

Let's stop this thread.  It has already slightly pissed off some people.  I
just had to clarify so that i don't seem like a complete idiot to those who
don't listen.

Aaron

At 4:24 PM -0400 9/5/01, kc2csh@JUNO.COM wrote:
>Dave:
>  I don't think he said manned.
>  100kg to 14k altitude and 80 knots is well within the possibilities of
>modest ultralite kit modified for R/C
>  200kg to 25k altitude and 250 knots is well within the possibilities of
>commonly attainable  kitplanes modified for R/C
>  The biggest flaw with something like this is that the useful launch
>angle is so much different than the best attainable apparent wind during
>a launch portion of flight, that you are effectively launching either at
>a poor angle, or at a poor velocity, or at a poor altitude,  or into a
>hurricane velocity wind sheer.  Some aerobatics can get you something
>useful, but far from optimal.  The kind of performance required at
>altitude is of a totally different class; and with that goes a totally
>different price range.  The timing and dynamics are so complex and
>precise, you'd probably need a sensor aray and electronic launch control
>to be at all within acceptable safety ranges.
>  Getting the acceptable performance characteristics would probably
>require high performance engines and an aircraft design created from
>scratch for the purpose.
>  Not to say it can't be done, or shouldn't be done, just that its much
>more complicated, more expensive, and more involved than it looks on
>first glance.
>
>               Jay
>
>On Tue, 4 Sep 2001 17:59:23 -0700 Kristin & David Hall
><thehalls@RIDGENET.NET> writes:
>
>> > Just out of cusiosity, how much would a dedicated air-launch
>aircraft for
>> > small rockets be worth?  Say, 100 Kg to 14,000 ft.  200 kg?
>>
>>
>> ....Seriously, of all the ideas I've seen thrown around on Arocket,  I
>would
>> consider an amateur rocket launched from a manned aircraft to be by
>far the
>> dumbest (Where dumb is defined as "situation likely to get somebody
>> killed".).
>
>________________________________________________________________
>GET INTERNET ACCESS FROM JUNO!
>Juno offers FREE or PREMIUM Internet access for less!
>Join Juno today!  For your FREE software, visit:
>http://dl.www.juno.com/get/tagj.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 24291 invoked from network); 5 Sep 2001 22:00:09 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 5 Sep 2001 22:00:09 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 8412 invoked by uid 50005); 5 Sep 2001 21:59:49 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpe with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 1.010582 secs); 05 Sep 2001 21:59:49 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 5 Sep 2001 21:59:47 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA01824; Wed, 5 Sep 2001 14:49:25 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 80535 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 5 Sep 2001 21:49:23 +0000
Received: from bailey.dscga.com (bailey.dscga.com [198.78.9.11]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA01810 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed,          5 Sep 2001 14:49:21 -0700
Received: (from michael@localhost) by bailey.dscga.com (8.9.1/) id RAA05782;          Wed, 5 Sep 2001 17:45:22 -0400 (EDT)
References: <163.5a949c.28c719d4@aol.com>            <4.3.1.2.20010905150252.02b0b008@mail.idsoftware.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
User-Agent: Mutt/1.1.2i
Message-ID:  <20010905174522.I1518@bailey.dscga.com>
Date:         Wed, 5 Sep 2001 17:45:22 -0400
Reply-To: "Michael Mealling" <michael@NEONYM.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Michael Mealling" <michael@NEONYM.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] aRocket project
Comments: To: John Carmack <johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <4.3.1.2.20010905150252.02b0b008@mail.idsoftware.com>; from              johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM on Wed, Sep 05, 2001 at 03:34:32PM -0500

On Wed, Sep 05, 2001 at 03:34:32PM -0500, John Carmack wrote:
> At 02:01 AM 9/5/2001 -0400, you wrote:
> >In the past few months there has been a lot of talk about an open source
> >aRocket project. Well I for one think its about time to quit the bullshit and
> >actually start the project. For the last year or two I have been designing
> >several different rockets on my computer that to date have only flown in
> >simulation programs. The only reasons that my rockets are yet to be built are
> >because I don't have enough money or access to tools and resources. The money
> >problem however is only a minor concern as most of the costs are up front
> >costs associated with buying equipment such as Nitrous Oxide filling systems
> >and tanks, and a lathe. These are costs that others have already dealt with.
> >However if this were to be done by myself the costs of buying these would be
> >prohibitive to accomplishing anything.
>
> An open source project doesn't help things get started, and is almost never
> a way to get over personal resource limitations.  This is a common
> misconception, with "start an open source project" often being offered as a
> way to undertake a difficult task.  None of the poster child cases for open
> source were started that way, they were all started by a single individual
> or a cohesive team, and brought to a reasonable level of functionality
> before they were opened to the world for input.

For the most part, yes. But the one thing that open source techniques
enable is the spending of 'resources' by those who have them. Mark might
not have the money to buy some of the materials but he may have time and
expertise that I don't have, whereas I've got the money and a much
smaller amount of time. So its not a way of overcoming a complete lack
of resources but it is a way of allocating tasks to those with the
right resources to accomplish them.

> Distributed rocket construction is likely to be especially difficult.

The jury is still out on whether or not 'open source' techniques
work when all materials costs are not zero. But IMHO, its worth a try.
>From what I've seen many in this hobby have been working with open
source techniques for years. They just never got around to giving it a
name or formalizing it.

-MM

--
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Michael Mealling        |      Vote Libertarian!       | urn:pin:1
michael@neonym.net      |                              | http://www.neonym.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 22811 invoked from network); 5 Sep 2001 22:13:57 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 5 Sep 2001 22:13:57 -0000
Received: (qmail 10181 invoked by uid 50005); 5 Sep 2001 22:14:02 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpb with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 1.150243 secs); 05 Sep 2001 22:14:02 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 5 Sep 2001 22:14:00 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA01921; Wed, 5 Sep 2001 14:58:36 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 80548 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 5 Sep 2001 21:58:34 +0000
Received: from fep3-orange.clear.net.nz (fep3-orange.clear.net.nz          [203.97.32.3]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA01907          for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Wed, 5 Sep 2001 14:58:33 -0700
Received: from mkbs (203-167-157-183.dialup.clear.net.nz [203.167.157.183]) by          fep3-orange.clear.net.nz (1.5/1.8) with SMTP id JAA08560; Thu, 6 Sep          2001 09:57:47 +1200 (NZST)
References:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010904193034.19803D-100000@spsystems.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <057b01c13656$43e8c460$0100a8c0@mkbs>
Date:         Thu, 6 Sep 2001 09:15:34 +1200
Reply-To: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Organization: Applied Technology
Subject:      Re: [AR] Fw: Jonathan's Space Report, No. 460
Comments: To: Henry Spencer <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

> > What does Shuttle main tank re-entry look like?
>
> Fireworks display. :-)  AW&ST has published pictures occasionally.
>
> > Do they have ships staitoned in the area?
> > Is it a controlled area?
>
> As far as I know, there are no routine observations of the area, and while
> aircraft and ships are warned about it, there is no attempt to enforce
> emptiness.  The chances of being hit are quite small even if you're in
> the debris footprint (which is deliberately kept away from traveled
areas).
>
> > Does anything solid survive to sealevel ?
>
> Probably some of the bits of heavier structure do.


People would probably pay to see this.
Used pieces of even a used Shuttle tank would probably be saleable.
("this has been in Space - depending on where you define Space as being
...." ).

Trying to obtain any pieces may be an interesting exercise :-)



        Russell McMahon

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 28762 invoked from network); 5 Sep 2001 22:15:20 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 5 Sep 2001 22:15:20 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 16617 invoked by uid 50005); 5 Sep 2001 22:15:24 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpa with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 1.363383 secs); 05 Sep 2001 22:15:24 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 5 Sep 2001 22:15:21 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA01759; Wed, 5 Sep 2001 14:44:25 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 80523 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 5 Sep 2001 21:44:24 +0000
Received: from smtp005pub.verizon.net (smtp005pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.184])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA01744; Wed, 5 Sep 2001          14:44:24 -0700
Received: from [63.10.189.249] (1Cust55.tnt2.hilo.hi.da.uu.net [63.10.189.55])          by smtp005pub.verizon.net  with ESMTP ; id f85LhiW01143 Wed, 5 Sep          2001 16:43:48 -0500 (CDT)
X-Sender: ttocs@mail.gte.net
References: <l03130300b7b5da214575@[63.25.193.159]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <l03130301b7b85819aaf6@[63.10.189.249]>
Date:         Sun, 2 Sep 2001 11:44:03 -1000
Reply-To: "Aaron Smith" <ttocs@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Aaron Smith" <ttocs@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Propellent Musings
Comments: To: Ray Calkins <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <Pine.LNX.4.10.10109051412010.1461-100000@itc.uci.edu>

I got a quote from FMC a while back, and 1500 to 2799 lb lots of 70% are
$1.11/kg.  Not too much at all.

Aaron

At 2:18 PM -0700 9/5/01, Ray Calkins wrote:
>> solved by large amounts of hydrazine.  Not fun.  I just need to think about
>> which is better in terms of handling, H2O2 or LOX.  For all practical
>> purposes, they rate the same on the above chart.
>>
>> Anything anyone wants to throw in?
>Sure, while we're comparing apples and oranges, we should include
>price/quantity.
>
>Oxidizers ($US):
>1. LOX  $1/l
>2. Nitric Acid $5/l (Haven't heard any solid numbers, but this seems
>likely)
>3. HTP  $10/l
>
>Please correct me if these numbers are incorrect, and include quantity of
>purchace.
>
>Cost figures heavily into development figures for seriously underfunded
>projects like our own.
>
>Ray

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 10970 invoked from network); 5 Sep 2001 22:55:55 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 5 Sep 2001 22:55:55 -0000
Received: (qmail 16516 invoked by uid 50005); 5 Sep 2001 22:54:36 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.622288 secs); 05 Sep 2001 22:54:36 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 5 Sep 2001 22:54:35 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA02070; Wed, 5 Sep 2001 15:16:57 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 80575 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 5 Sep 2001 22:16:52 +0000
Received: from localhost (rcalkins@localhost) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with          ESMTP id PAA02056; Wed, 5 Sep 2001 15:16:47 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.LNX.4.10.10109051514010.1461-100000@itc.uci.edu>
Date:         Wed, 5 Sep 2001 15:16:47 -0700
Reply-To: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Propellent Musings
Comments: To: Aaron Smith <ttocs@GTE.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <l03130301b7b85819aaf6@[63.10.189.249]>

That's a pretty good price, in quantities sized for experimentation.
What percentage were the original numbers for, and how badly does the
dilution affect performance?

Ray

On Sun, 2 Sep 2001, Aaron Smith wrote:

> I got a quote from FMC a while back, and 1500 to 2799 lb lots of 70% are
> $1.11/kg.  Not too much at all.
>
> Aaron
>
> At 2:18 PM -0700 9/5/01, Ray Calkins wrote:
> >> solved by large amounts of hydrazine.  Not fun.  I just need to think about
> >> which is better in terms of handling, H2O2 or LOX.  For all practical
> >> purposes, they rate the same on the above chart.
> >>
> >> Anything anyone wants to throw in?
> >Sure, while we're comparing apples and oranges, we should include
> >price/quantity.
> >
> >Oxidizers ($US):
> >1. LOX  $1/l
> >2. Nitric Acid $5/l (Haven't heard any solid numbers, but this seems
> >likely)
> >3. HTP  $10/l
> >
> >Please correct me if these numbers are incorrect, and include quantity of
> >purchace.
> >
> >Cost figures heavily into development figures for seriously underfunded
> >projects like our own.
> >
> >Ray
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 6543 invoked from network); 5 Sep 2001 23:18:09 -0000
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 5 Sep 2001 23:18:09 -0000
Received: (qmail 8999 invoked by uid 50005); 5 Sep 2001 23:15:36 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpf with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 1.440109 secs); 05 Sep 2001 23:15:36 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 5 Sep 2001 23:15:33 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA02413; Wed, 5 Sep 2001 15:49:57 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 80647 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 5 Sep 2001 22:49:24 +0000
Received: from angel.comcen.com.au (angel.comcen.com.au [203.23.236.69]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA02394 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 5 Sep 2001 15:49:23 -0700
Received: from win2pk2 (modem043.sydney.spin.net.au [202.172.110.43] (may be          forged)) by angel.comcen.com.au (8.11.4/8.10.1) with SMTP id          f85MnhK36507; Thu, 6 Sep 2001 08:49:43 +1000 (EST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0CAC_01C56B69.500BB5D0"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <JJEFLLHFFAHHMBBIHFAEMEMBCFAA.pkelly@comcen.com.au>
Date:         Thu, 6 Sep 2001 09:05:29 +1000
Reply-To: "Paul Kelly" <pkelly@COMCEN.COM.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Paul Kelly" <pkelly@COMCEN.COM.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Hybrids vs Solids, a datapoint
Comments: To: pax <darkspunge@USWEST.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <001101c13624$064d5b20$4000a8c0@INVENTORY>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0CAC_01C56B69.500BB5D0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

I've said this before. Solids are simpler than hybrids are simpler than
biprops. All my certifications were done on solids for that reason. In our
club, the rules forbid a L1 cert on a hybrid.
This is from a man who firmly believes that the best thing AP solids do is
light NOX hybrids :-)

PK
  -----Original Message-----
  From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU]On
Behalf Of pax
  Sent: Thursday, 6 September 2001 2:01 AM
  To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
  Subject: Re: [AR] Hybrids vs Solids, a datapoint


  Haha, Brian shows its bias again :-) Just to be an ass, I will cert on a
RATT I90, a Hypertek J330 and a Hypertek M1000 in the same day! So blah! :-)
  Then go fly solid experimental the next day of course *wink*

  Paxton
    ----- Original Message -----
    From: Brian Kosko
    To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
    Sent: Tuesday, September 04, 2001 3:38 PM
    Subject: [AR] Hybrids vs Solids, a datapoint


    Our club's local hybrid guru did his Level 3 this weekend. Not only is
he a big proponent of hybrids, he has a company (Freqken) that is an HP
hybrid vendor. So for this very important flight he of course chose a
hybrid?

    Not! He certified on an Aerotech 75mm; that is, the one with AP and
HTPB. When you've got to have that simple, reliable propulsion system.....

    Brian

------=_NextPart_000_0CAC_01C56B69.500BB5D0
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META content=3D"text/html; charset=3Diso-8859-1" =
http-equiv=3DContent-Type>
<META content=3D"MSHTML 5.00.2722.2800" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT color=3D#0000ff face=3DArial size=3D2><SPAN =
class=3D860255522-05092001>I've=20
said this before. Solids are simpler than hybrids are simpler than =
biprops. All=20
my certifications were done on solids for that reason. In our club, the =
rules=20
forbid a L1 cert on a hybrid.</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=3D#0000ff face=3DArial size=3D2><SPAN =
class=3D860255522-05092001>This=20
is from a man who firmly believes that the best thing AP solids do is =
light NOX=20
hybrids :-)</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=3D#0000ff face=3DArial size=3D2><SPAN=20
class=3D860255522-05092001></SPAN></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=3D#0000ff face=3DArial size=3D2><SPAN=20
class=3D860255522-05092001>PK</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE style=3D"MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
  <DIV align=3Dleft class=3DOutlookMessageHeader dir=3Dltr><FONT =
face=3DTahoma=20
  size=3D2>-----Original Message-----<BR><B>From:</B> Amateur Rocketry =
discussion=20
  list [mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU]<B>On Behalf Of =
</B>pax<BR><B>Sent:</B>=20
  Thursday, 6 September 2001 2:01 AM<BR><B>To:</B>=20
  AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU<BR><B>Subject:</B> Re: [AR] Hybrids vs Solids, a=20
  datapoint<BR><BR></DIV></FONT>
  <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Haha, Brian shows its bias again :-) =
Just to be=20
  an ass, I will cert on a RATT I90, a Hypertek J330 and a Hypertek =
M1000 in the=20
  same day! So blah! :-)</FONT></DIV>
  <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Then go fly solid experimental the =
next day of=20
  course *wink*</FONT></DIV>
  <DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
  <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Paxton</FONT></DIV>
  <BLOCKQUOTE=20
  style=3D"BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; =
MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; PADDING-RIGHT: 0px">
    <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial">----- Original Message ----- </DIV>
    <DIV=20
    style=3D"BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; FONT: 10pt arial; font-color: =
black"><B>From:</B>=20
    <A href=3D"mailto:bkosko1@HOME.COM" title=3Dbkosko1@HOME.COM>Brian =
Kosko</A>=20
    </DIV>
    <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A=20
    href=3D"mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU"=20
    title=3DAROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU</A> </DIV>
    <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> Tuesday, September 04, =
2001 3:38=20
    PM</DIV>
    <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> [AR] Hybrids vs =
Solids, a=20
    datapoint</DIV>
    <DIV><BR></DIV>
    <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Our club's local hybrid guru did =
his Level 3=20
    this weekend. Not only is he a big proponent of hybrids, he has a =
company=20
    (Freqken) that is an HP hybrid vendor. So for this very important =
flight he=20
    of course chose a hybrid?</FONT></DIV>
    <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
    <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Not! He certified on an Aerotech =
75mm; that is,=20
    the one with AP and HTPB. When you've got to have that simple, =
reliable=20
    propulsion system.....</FONT></DIV>
    <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
    <DIV><FONT face=3DArial=20
size=3D2>Brian&nbsp;&nbsp;</FONT></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY><=
/HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0CAC_01C56B69.500BB5D0--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 13637 invoked from network); 5 Sep 2001 23:34:35 -0000
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 5 Sep 2001 23:34:35 -0000
Received: (qmail 29657 invoked by uid 50005); 5 Sep 2001 23:34:21 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpe with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 3.50079 secs); 05 Sep 2001 23:34:21 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 5 Sep 2001 23:34:15 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA02613; Wed, 5 Sep 2001 16:25:20 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 80670 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 5 Sep 2001 23:25:17 +0000
Received: from blount.mail.mindspring.net (blount.mail.mindspring.net          [207.69.200.226]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA02599          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 5 Sep 2001 16:25:17 -0700
Received: from oemcomputer (user-38ld803.dialup.mindspring.com [209.86.160.3])          by blount.mail.mindspring.net (8.9.3/8.8.5) with SMTP id TAA26882 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 5 Sep 2001 19:25:15 -0400 (EDT)
References: <l03130300b7b63d21e5f4@[63.10.189.208]>                      <l03130300b7b63d21e5f4@[63.10.189.208]>                      <l03130301b7b6dd39f48d@[63.10.189.137]>             <l03130300b7b74d7c89ed@[63.10.189.82]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <001e01c13661$2c1fe560$03a056d1@oemcomputer>
Date:         Wed, 5 Sep 2001 19:19:07 -0400
Reply-To: "Robert" <OlympusMons@MINDSPRING.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Robert" <OlympusMons@MINDSPRING.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Gun launch - part deux
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Isn't a discussion of things like G-forces relevant to amateur rocketry?

I swear I read somewhere that they had materials that could take a 100,000G
launch. I don't know if that includes electronics or anything mechanical.
(Yeah, but you know me, I'm the guy who said he read that Russia's first
ICBM was made of wood. Well, I DID read that. But it wasn't in Buzz Aldrin's
"Men From Earth." I checked. Anyway, this post isn't about that, but about
the 100,000G thing.)

----- Original Message -----
From: Aaron Smith <ttocs@GTE.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Saturday, September 01, 2001 10:45 PM
Subject: Re: [AR] Gun launch - part deux


> At 5:59 PM -0700 9/4/01, Kristin & David Hall wrote:
> >> OK, sounds good.  But what would you say is the highest usable
> >> acceleration?  I am having a hard time just guessing a good number.
Also,
> >
> >I've personally launched small uninstrumented rockets at up to 2000 G's.
> >The military has done full blown instrumented systems at up to 5000, but
> >reliability is troublesome

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 25069 invoked from network); 5 Sep 2001 23:44:27 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 5 Sep 2001 23:44:27 -0000
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 9754 invoked by uid 50005); 5 Sep 2001 23:41:54 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpf with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.293906 secs); 05 Sep 2001 23:41:54 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 5 Sep 2001 23:41:53 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA02710; Wed, 5 Sep 2001 16:32:27 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 80692 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 5 Sep 2001 23:32:26 +0000
Received: from idsoftware.com (predator.idsoftware.com [192.246.40.34]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA02696 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Wed, 5 Sep 2001 16:32:25 -0700
Received: from [192.246.40.129] (account johnc HELO lightning.idsoftware.com)          by idsoftware.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 3.4.7) with ESMTP id 371489          for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 05 Sep 2001 18:32:25 -0500
X-Sender: johnc@mail.idsoftware.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <4.3.1.2.20010905183035.02f47378@mail.idsoftware.com>
Date:         Wed, 5 Sep 2001 18:31:02 -0500
Reply-To: "John Carmack" <johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Carmack" <johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Propellent Musings
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

 >At 03:16 PM 9/5/2001 -0700, you wrote:
 >That's a pretty good price, in quantities sized for experimentation.
 >What percentage were the original numbers for, and how badly does the
 >dilution affect performance?
 >
 >Ray

70% peroxide will only barely boil the water content, so it makes for a
poor monoprop, but there were some significant hybrid test fires done with
70% peroxide.

The stabilizers will also poison catalyst packs, so you need a conventional
igniter.  I don't think any of the dissolved fuel catalysts will be
hypergolic with the lower concentration.

Commercial 70% should be a so-so biprop or hybrid oxidizer, but it may not
hold much performance advantage over NOX, and will have all the same
ignition hassles.

John Carmack

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 14317 invoked from network); 5 Sep 2001 23:48:50 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 5 Sep 2001 23:48:50 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 31435 invoked by uid 50005); 5 Sep 2001 23:46:35 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.257475 secs); 05 Sep 2001 23:46:35 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 5 Sep 2001 23:46:34 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA02666; Wed, 5 Sep 2001 16:31:04 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 80669 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 5 Sep 2001 23:31:02 +0000
Received: from fcexgw03.efi.com ([192.68.228.82]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7)          with SMTP id QAA02583 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 5 Sep 2001          16:21:02 -0700
Received: from 10.10.12.104 by fcexgw03.efi.com (InterScan E-Mail VirusWall          NT); Wed, 05 Sep 2001 16:20:51 -0700
Received: from earthlink.net (peroxide.efi.com [10.10.89.46]) by          EX-IMC3-CORP.efi.com with SMTP (Microsoft Exchange Internet Mail          Service Version 5.5.2653.13) id QNQGL3KR; Wed, 5 Sep 2001 16:20:51          -0700
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.14-5.0 i686)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <l03130300b7b856c75ba5@[63.10.201.222]>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B96B39A.E362C0E4@earthlink.net>
Date:         Wed, 5 Sep 2001 16:22:02 -0700
Reply-To: "David Weinshenker" <daze39@EARTHLINK.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "David Weinshenker" <daze39@EARTHLINK.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Gun launch - part deux  THE END
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Aaron Smith wrote:
> Eh, you're talking about still launching from under the wing.  No.  That
> would require that you point the plane straight up.  I was talking about
> realeasing the rocket under a parachute, letting it stabilize and point
> upward.  THEN you launch it, when your aircraft is miles away.

JPA is developing something similar (and it's not a previously-unknown
technique for that matter) - the big difference is that they are lifting
the rocket in its launch tower from ground level suspended from a balloon
instead of taking it up in a powered aircraft and releasing it to hang from a
parachute during launch.

The balloon launch may avoid potential risks to the aircraft; however, it
gives less control of the actual launch position than an aircraft which could
be flown to a pre-planned release point.

-dave w

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 26152 invoked from network); 5 Sep 2001 23:58:16 -0000
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 5 Sep 2001 23:58:16 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 28740 invoked by uid 50005); 5 Sep 2001 23:58:03 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpe with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 1.544223 secs); 05 Sep 2001 23:58:03 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 5 Sep 2001 23:58:01 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA02840; Wed, 5 Sep 2001 16:45:09 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 80712 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 5 Sep 2001 23:45:05 +0000
Received: from cascara.uvic.ca (root@cascara.uvic.ca [142.104.5.28]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA02826 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 5 Sep 2001 16:45:05 -0700
Received: from home.com (tsunami.cfs.me.UVic.CA [142.104.121.74]) by          cascara.uvic.ca (8.11.3/8.11.3) with ESMTP id f85Nj0Z64258; Wed, 5          Sep 2001 16:45:00 -0700
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.6 (Macintosh; I; PPC)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <l03130300b7b856c75ba5@[63.10.201.222]>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	x-mac-type=54455854;
	x-mac-creator=4D4F5353;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B96ABC7.5EDE5FFF@home.com>
Date:         Wed, 5 Sep 2001 15:48:43 -0700
Reply-To: "Jamie Morken" <jmorken@HOME.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jamie Morken" <jmorken@HOME.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Gun launch - part deux  THE END
Comments: To: Aaron Smith <ttocs@GTE.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

http://www.newscientist.com/news/news.jsp?id=ns99991241



Aaron Smith wrote:

> Eh, you're talking about still launching from under the wing.  No.  That
> would require that you point the plane straight up.  I was talking about
> realeasing the rocket under a parachute, letting it stabilize and point
> upward.  THEN you launch it, when your aircraft is miles away.
>
> Let's stop this thread.  It has already slightly pissed off some people.  I
> just had to clarify so that i don't seem like a complete idiot to those who
> don't listen.
>
> Aaron
>
> At 4:24 PM -0400 9/5/01, kc2csh@JUNO.COM wrote:
> >Dave:
> >  I don't think he said manned.
> >  100kg to 14k altitude and 80 knots is well within the possibilities of
> >modest ultralite kit modified for R/C
> >  200kg to 25k altitude and 250 knots is well within the possibilities of
> >commonly attainable  kitplanes modified for R/C
> >  The biggest flaw with something like this is that the useful launch
> >angle is so much different than the best attainable apparent wind during
> >a launch portion of flight, that you are effectively launching either at
> >a poor angle, or at a poor velocity, or at a poor altitude,  or into a
> >hurricane velocity wind sheer.  Some aerobatics can get you something
> >useful, but far from optimal.  The kind of performance required at
> >altitude is of a totally different class; and with that goes a totally
> >different price range.  The timing and dynamics are so complex and
> >precise, you'd probably need a sensor aray and electronic launch control
> >to be at all within acceptable safety ranges.
> >  Getting the acceptable performance characteristics would probably
> >require high performance engines and an aircraft design created from
> >scratch for the purpose.
> >  Not to say it can't be done, or shouldn't be done, just that its much
> >more complicated, more expensive, and more involved than it looks on
> >first glance.
> >
> >               Jay
> >
> >On Tue, 4 Sep 2001 17:59:23 -0700 Kristin & David Hall
> ><thehalls@RIDGENET.NET> writes:
> >
> >> > Just out of cusiosity, how much would a dedicated air-launch
> >aircraft for
> >> > small rockets be worth?  Say, 100 Kg to 14,000 ft.  200 kg?
> >>
> >>
> >> ....Seriously, of all the ideas I've seen thrown around on Arocket,  I
> >would
> >> consider an amateur rocket launched from a manned aircraft to be by
> >far the
> >> dumbest (Where dumb is defined as "situation likely to get somebody
> >> killed".).
> >
> >________________________________________________________________
> >GET INTERNET ACCESS FROM JUNO!
> >Juno offers FREE or PREMIUM Internet access for less!
> >Join Juno today!  For your FREE software, visit:
> >http://dl.www.juno.com/get/tagj.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 15712 invoked from network); 6 Sep 2001 17:28:21 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 6 Sep 2001 17:28:21 -0000
Received: (qmail 27156 invoked by uid 50005); 6 Sep 2001 17:28:22 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpa with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 1.454169 secs); 06 Sep 2001 17:28:22 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 6 Sep 2001 17:28:19 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA06806; Thu, 6 Sep 2001 10:05:02 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 80895 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 6 Sep 2001 17:05:00 +0000
Received: from smtp1.ihug.co.nz (smtp1.ihug.co.nz [203.109.252.7]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA04260 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 5 Sep 2001 23:10:17 -0700
Received: from tm22g (p57-max1.wlg.ihug.co.nz [203.173.230.57]) by          smtp1.ihug.co.nz (8.9.3/8.9.3/Debian 8.9.3-21) with SMTP id SAA12130;          Thu, 6 Sep 2001 18:10:06 +1200
X-Authentication-Warning: smtp1.ihug.co.nz: Host p57-max1.wlg.ihug.co.nz                         [203.173.230.57] claimed to be tm22g
References: <l03130300b7b659bc9e71@[63.10.189.23]>             <5.1.0.14.0.20010904210228.01be7ef8@hobbiton.shire.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <02c201c1369a$0fbea3a0$39e6adcb@tm22g>
Date:         Thu, 6 Sep 2001 18:06:23 +1200
Reply-To: "Pingu!" <hooon@IHUG.CO.NZ>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Pingu!" <hooon@IHUG.CO.NZ>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Gun launch - part deux
Comments: To: Seth Leigh <seth@PENGAR.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

That is very insulting hearing that.

What Dave McCue may not realise is some of the cannons we build take alot of
effort and time to design and build.

I think that the "technology" used in many of the cannons we build was quite
amazing for our ages (Mike 19 and Andrew 17) , (reffering to the piston
exhaust design of the aluminium 2.3 meter cannon). I also thought that our
understanding of some calculus and applying it to our cannons would make our
site "appear" less juvennile.

I only mentioned the website because it contained our velocity calc program
(differential equation solved numerically by a basic program , use SI units)

www.spudgunsnz.com

contains the program.

And Dave McCue  i dont want to hear any further childish interpretations of
our website.


----- Original Message -----
From: "Seth Leigh" <seth@PENGAR.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Wednesday, September 05, 2001 1:06 PM
Subject: Re: [AR] Gun launch - part deux


> At 11:43 AM 9/4/2001, David J. McCue wrote:
> >I have to ask: how is discussion of aircraft cannon design appropriate
for
> >a list on amateur rocketry? This seems better suited to some "kewl bomz"
> >intersest group. I am very uncomfortable with this.
> >
> >-Dave McCue
>
> The topic is being addressed as a direct result of, and as part of, a
> discussion about using a "gun" of some sort being used to launch a
> rocket.  Specifically, a url was posted to a site where a gentleman
> proposes to use a "gun" to launch a rocket whose first stage is a
> ramjet.  The gun is merely to get the rocket going fast enough for the
> ramjet to work.  The ramjet would then propel the rocket upwards till its
> fuel is exhausted, whereupon a more conventional rocket more would be
> staged on, propelling the rocket even higher.
>
> I know the topic seemed a tad juvenile, and indeed spudgunz and the like
> were discussed, but the context is certainly amateur rocketry
> oriented.  Specifically, the "technology" of spudgunz is probably very
> applicable to being adapted to launch a ramjet-rocket combo.
>
> Seth
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 17797 invoked from network); 6 Sep 2001 17:28:49 -0000
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 6 Sep 2001 17:28:49 -0000
Received: (qmail 18209 invoked by uid 50005); 6 Sep 2001 17:28:32 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpe with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 1.088679 secs); 06 Sep 2001 17:28:32 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 6 Sep 2001 17:28:30 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA06942; Thu, 6 Sep 2001 10:05:23 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 80926 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 6 Sep 2001 17:05:21 +0000
Received: from fep3-orange.clear.net.nz (fep3-orange.clear.net.nz          [203.97.32.3]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA05356          for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Thu, 6 Sep 2001 06:18:01 -0700
Received: from mkbs (203-167-156-53.dialup.clear.net.nz [203.167.156.53]) by          fep3-orange.clear.net.nz (1.5/1.8) with SMTP id BAA24527; Fri, 7 Sep          2001 01:17:56 +1200 (NZST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <01c901c136d6$cfce7580$0100a8c0@mkbs>
Date:         Fri, 7 Sep 2001 01:16:59 +1200
Reply-To: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Organization: Applied Technology
Subject:      [AR] Fw: REMOTELY PILOTED AIRCRAFT TO PROVIDE IMAGES ON INTERNET              FOR              FIREFIGHTERS
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Well - talk about timely.
This tells you that NASA, if nobody else, can get permission to operate RC
aircraft of up to 200 + pounds at up to at least 15000 feet

John or Cyndi can no doubt tell you what's involved (although I suspect
Cyndi may be the less happy for you to find out). .



RM

_____________________________________________________________


John Bluck
Sept. 5, 2001
NASA Ames Research Center, Moffett Field, Calif.
Phone: 650/604-5026 or 604-9000
E-mail: jbluck@mail.arc.nasa.gov

Cyndi Wegerbauer
General Atomics Aeronautical Systems, Inc.
San Diego, Calif.  92127-1713
Phone: 858/455-2294
E-mail: wegerb@gat.com

RELEASE:  01-64AR
NOTE TO EDITORS AND NEWS DIRECTORS:  Reporters and local, state and federal
disaster managers are invited to view a remotely piloted aircraft taking
aerial pictures of a "controlled fire" near an airport to simulate a
wildfire. The aircraft will send data via satellites and the Internet to
firefighters and observers on the ground. The demonstration will be held at
the General Atomics Aeronautical Systems, Inc. Flight Test Facility near
Victorville, Calif., on Thursday,  Sept. 6 starting at 8:30 a.m. PDT.
Registration for the exercise will begin at 7 a.m. PDT. A briefing and a
tour of the aircraft will follow. Media representatives must present valid
press credentials or photo ID to enter the demonstration area. To travel to
the event, go north on Interstate 15 to Highway 138, and then turn right on
Sheep Creek Road. Turn left on El Mirage Road, and turn right on El Mirage
Airport Road after the fire station. Stay to the right after going through
the facility's gate.

REMOTELY PILOTED AIRCRAFT TO PROVIDE IMAGES ON INTERNET FOR FIREFIGHTERS

A remotely piloted aircraft will demonstrate how to provide life-saving
images of wildfires to firefighters in near real-time via the Internet on
Thursday, Sept. 6.

Called Altus II, the experimental "uninhabited aerial vehicle"(UAV),
carrying 200 pounds (90 kg) of camera and  communications gear, will fly at
10,000 to 15,000 feet (3,000 to 4,500 m) altitude over a small, controlled
fire near an airfield in Southern California. The airplane can fly high
enough for a wide view and carries a TV camera as well as a digital
multi-spectral scanner that can spot flames through smoke.

"The focus of the UAV disaster monitoring program is getting the right
information to the right people at the right time," said Steve Wegener, a
scientist at NASA's Ames Research Center, in California's Silicon Valley.
Wegener is leading the sensors and science portion of the project. "In the
case of fires, we are providing wide-view aerial fire images that disaster
managers have never had before and that they can overlay on maps that show
exact locations of assets such as fire engines. The firemen can react more
quickly to emergencies, and send assets to trouble spots," Wegener
explained.

The research team includes NASA's Environmental Research Aircraft and
Sensor Technology project (ERAST), the California Resources Agency, the
U.S. Forest Service, Los Angeles County and the National Interagency Fire
Center, Boise, Idaho. The team is cooperating in the First Response
Experiment that combines unpiloted aircraft, remote sensors and advanced
information technology to send over-the-horizon pictures and data to the
Internet in near real time.

During the flight demonstration, Altus will take off from a small dry
lakebed located south of NASA Dryden Flight Research Center, Edwards,
Calif.
-more-
-2-

The remotely piloted plane sends images and other data to the InMarsat
satellite. Communications systems in Australia and other locations around
the world receive the satellite's signals. This digital information is
transferred to NASA Ames for real-time image processing. Ames scientists
then overlay the fire information on maps and post them on the Internet.
The entire process takes 10 to 15 minutes.

Although fire management agencies currently use piloted planes to observe
fires, these planes usually fly lower, view a smaller area, and often must
land to provide images for interpretation and delivery to command posts,
according to Wegener. "The delay can be significant when getting images on
a timely basis is crucial," he said.

"We hope the combination of sensors, UAV technology and Internet delivery
will mature so that it can help firefighters view and combat large fires
that exceed local capabilities," Wegener said. "We are developing this
technology to enable people to better manage many kinds of disasters
including fires, floods and earthquakes. During the next three years we
expect to conduct three UAV disaster demonstrations," he added.

The research team is proposing another project that may use a bigger UAV,
the Altair, that has a 64-ft. (19.2 m) wingspan, and can fly as high as
52,000 ft. (15,600 m).  That aircraft can fly more fire-monitoring
instruments further and for a longer time than the smaller Altus that has a
55-ft. (16.5 m) wingspan and can fly up to 45,000 ft. (13,500 m) in one
configuration. Altair has a 4,200-mi. (6,720 km) range, and can stay aloft
as long as 32 hours. Altair can carry a thermal imager capable of seeing
through smoke, and may also fly a small synthetic-aperture radar (SAR) that
can see through water vapor, clouds and smoke. SAR can provide very
detailed images of flooding, damaged buildings and other infrastructures
difficult to detect, especially in bad weather.

Near real-time delivery of aerial images and data via the Internet can
enable anyone to pinpoint key disaster locations, including roads, schools,
homes and flood plains, Wegener said.  Scientists also foresee using the
emerging UAV technology to monitor other conditions on Earth such as
climate change, air quality and crop conditions.

Real-time imagery of the controlled burn experiment can be seen on the
Internet at:

http://geo.arc.nasa.gov/sge/UAVFiRE

-end-

Note to Broadcasters: A video file related to this news release is
scheduled for distribution via satellite on NASA Television on Sept. 5,
2001 at noon, 3:00 p.m., 6:00 p.m., 9:00 p.m. and midnight EDT. This video
file may also run on Sept. 6; please check the website listed below, or
telephone 202/358-0713 to confirm a feed on Sept. 6. Because feed times and
the schedule are subject to change, please check the NASA TV video file
line-up on the web at ftp://ftp.hq.nasa.gov/pub/pao/tv-advisory/nasa-tv.txt
NASA TV is available on GE-2, transponder 9C at 85 degrees west longitude,
with vertical polarization; frequency is on 3880.0 megahertz, with audio on
6.8 megahertz. For general questions about the video file, call NASA
Headquarters, Washington, DC: Fred Brown at 202/358-0713.

To receive Ames news releases via email, send an email with the word
"subscribe" in the subject line to:
ames-releases-request@lists.arc.nasa.gov.  To unsubscribe, send an email to
the same address with "unsubscribe" in the subject line.  Also, the NASA
Ames News Home Page at URL, http://amesnews.arc.nasa.gov includes news
releases and JPEG images in AP Leaf Desk format minus embedded captions.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 20683 invoked from network); 6 Sep 2001 17:29:30 -0000
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 6 Sep 2001 17:29:30 -0000
X-Priority: 3
Received: (qmail 18883 invoked by uid 50005); 6 Sep 2001 17:29:11 -0000
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpe with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.374685 secs); 06 Sep 2001 17:29:11 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 6 Sep 2001 17:29:11 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA07081; Thu, 6 Sep 2001 10:05:46 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 80748 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 6 Sep 2001 17:05:44 +0000
Received: from m1.jersey.juno.com (m1.jersey.juno.com [64.136.16.64]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA03041 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 5 Sep 2001 17:26:21 -0700
Received: from cookie.juno.com by cookie.juno.com for          <"H3WK6e6N+bsCVJQMHM9sZLX2Qb0wNH9YhYyIdQLXP7cRwuKHuTfMlA==">
Received: (from kc2csh@juno.com) by m1.jersey.juno.com (queuemail) id GEL5JBBQ;          Wed, 05 Sep 2001 20:25:16 EDT
X-Mailer: Juno 4.0.11
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Juno-Line-Breaks: 4,6,8,12,25,28,32,37,41,47-51,53-55,57,59-84
X-Juno-Att: 0
X-Juno-RefParts: 0
Message-ID:  <20010905.202957.-4116691.2.kc2csh@juno.com>
Date:         Wed, 5 Sep 2001 20:29:52 -0400
Reply-To: <kc2csh@JUNO.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <kc2csh@JUNO.COM>
Subject:      [AR] R/C aircraft; was Re: [AR] Gun launch - part deux
Comments: To: mks@BIOMICRO.COM
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

  When you start with a certificated aircraft, and start to ask these
questions, you get fairly clearcut intrepretations (although not all that
certain in terms of legal basis) that you need licensed mechanic,
licensed pilot, etc.    Those answers are, however, driven in large part
by the potential for it to revert to a manned and certificated aircraft.
  When you start with something that isn't certificated and is never
intended to be, i.e., a kit or an ultralight, it gets much fuzzier.
  "Experimental" rules give you a great deal of flexibility not found
many other places.  So does "amateur" and "noncommercial."
  When nobody will actually be on it, when its purely R/C, it gets
fuzzier still.  I've heard of absolute size limits for R/C "models" but I
have never seen a legal basis for these.  I suspect its similar to the
HPR "laws" which aren't really laws.
  Almost all such activity in the past has occurred under military or
similar sanction.  That gives flashbacks to an experience I had once when
a bunch of people, all dressed in BDUs and etc., were about to act in
total controvention of a bunch of  laws with clear public safety impact
and the potential for the violations to create immediate and substantial
public harm, and with a signifigant number of law enforcement types
present charged with enforcing those specific laws and well aware of what
was going on.  The orders were "Don't worry about it (the laws we were
breaking) we're in uniform."   The law enforcement types actually
facilitated the violations, and chased away any civilians who merely
wanted to watch, as well as personnel from other law enforcement
agencies..  My point being that you can draw no inference or guidance
about what is really proper from what the milatary does.
  To some extent this is like the X-prize issues - some of the questions
have never been addressed because to a large extent the questions have
never been asked.
  What research I have done makes me think the answers are clear as mud.
I gave up going into a great deal of detail because I kept running into
dead ends with questions to which there were no answers of any kind or
with any weight of authority.
  Certainly pieces of it are clear.  You are, for example, an "aircraft"
but that doesn't get you far, because the rockets flown by those on this
list are also aircraft.  As such, you need permission to be in controlled
airspace, etc.  There is very little to distinguish the 100 lb rocket and
the 100 lb unmanned aircraft in terms of legal regulation.
  I think the reality is that to fly such a thing in controlled airspace
you would need to seek a fairly broad waiver, and its anyone's guess how
the application would be received and what kind of conditions would be
attached.
  To fly such a thing in international airspace, that however is a
totally different issue.  The laws that so heavily burden US citizens in
"space" endevors don't apply to simple flight.  It appears for example,
that off shore, in international airspace, the limits on your ability to
fly such a thing as a home designed and built unmanned R/C learjet copy
are fairly minimal.

                      Jay


On Wed, 5 Sep 2001 14:42:39 -0600 "Mark K. Spute" <mks@BIOMICRO.COM>
writes:
> Just out of curiosity, and for comparison to rocketry related
> regulations, just how big of a R/C aircraft can you leagally build  and
> fly?  I've seen some amazingly big planes, but still fairly
lightweight
> (balsa & tissue construction.)  Could you legally put an R/C control
in
> something like a VariEze, or a Cessna?  Or a Learjet?
>
>
> kc2csh@JUNO.COM wrote:
>
> > 100kg to 14k altitude and 80 knots is well within the
> possibilities of
> > modest ultralite kit modified for R/C
> > 200kg to 25k altitude and 250 knots is well within the
> possibilities of
> > commonly attainable  kitplanes modified for R/C
>
> [snip of stuff about launching from aircraft]
>
> --
> Mark K. Spute
> Senior Research Engineer
> BioMicro Systems Inc.
>
> KD7IWE,  RRS
>
> "It is difficult to say what is impossible, for the dream of
> yesterday
> is the hope of today and the reality of tomorrow."
>      Dr. Robert H. Goddard

________________________________________________________________
GET INTERNET ACCESS FROM JUNO!
Juno offers FREE or PREMIUM Internet access for less!
Join Juno today!  For your FREE software, visit:
http://dl.www.juno.com/get/tagj.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 22745 invoked from network); 6 Sep 2001 17:29:58 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 6 Sep 2001 17:29:58 -0000
Received: (qmail 23783 invoked by uid 50005); 6 Sep 2001 17:27:22 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpf with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.206104 secs); 06 Sep 2001 17:27:22 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 6 Sep 2001 17:27:21 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA06716; Thu, 6 Sep 2001 10:04:32 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 80787 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 6 Sep 2001 17:04:26 +0000
Received: from spsystems.net (spsystems.net [209.47.149.227]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA03269 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Wed,          5 Sep 2001 18:11:30 -0700
Received: (from henry@localhost) by spsystems.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id VAA09588;          Wed, 5 Sep 2001 21:10:55 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010905210952.9251B-100000@spsystems.net>
Date:         Wed, 5 Sep 2001 21:10:55 -0400
Reply-To: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Propellent Musings
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <Pine.LNX.4.10.10109051412010.1461-100000@itc.uci.edu>

On Wed, 5 Sep 2001, Ray Calkins wrote:
> Cost figures heavily into development figures for seriously underfunded
> projects like our own.

Also, if tests are expensive -- defined as "you really notice how much
they cost" -- you will inevitably face all sorts of conscious and
unconscious pressures to limit testing, and that's a Very Bad Thing.

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 24686 invoked from network); 6 Sep 2001 17:30:23 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 6 Sep 2001 17:30:23 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 6742 invoked by uid 50005); 6 Sep 2001 17:30:28 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpb with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.807344 secs); 06 Sep 2001 17:30:28 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 6 Sep 2001 17:30:26 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA07166; Thu, 6 Sep 2001 10:06:01 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 80785 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 6 Sep 2001 17:05:59 +0000
Received: from smtp002pub.verizon.net (smtp002pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.181])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA03259 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 5 Sep 2001 18:10:28 -0700
Received: from [63.10.189.89] (1Cust89.tnt2.hilo.hi.da.uu.net [63.10.189.89])          by smtp002pub.verizon.net  with ESMTP ; id f8619rY24557 Wed, 5 Sep          2001 20:09:54 -0500 (CDT)
X-Sender: ttocs@mail.gte.net
References: <l03130300b7b856c75ba5@[63.10.201.222]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <l03130300b7b8888a0ca9@[63.10.189.249]>
Date:         Sun, 2 Sep 2001 15:10:10 -1000
Reply-To: "Aaron Smith" <ttocs@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Aaron Smith" <ttocs@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Gun launch - part deux  THE END
Comments: To: David Weinshenker <daze39@EARTHLINK.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <3B96B39A.E362C0E4@earthlink.net>

At 4:22 PM -0700 9/5/01, David Weinshenker wrote:
>Aaron Smith wrote:
>> Eh, you're talking about still launching from under the wing.  No.  That
>> would require that you point the plane straight up.  I was talking about
>> realeasing the rocket under a parachute, letting it stabilize and point
>> upward.  THEN you launch it, when your aircraft is miles away.
>
>JPA is developing something similar (and it's not a previously-unknown
>technique for that matter) - the big difference is that they are lifting
>the rocket in its launch tower from ground level suspended from a balloon
>instead of taking it up in a powered aircraft and releasing it to hang from a
>parachute during launch.
>
>The balloon launch may avoid potential risks to the aircraft; however, it
>gives less control of the actual launch position than an aircraft which could
>be flown to a pre-planned release point.
>
>-dave w

AKA, rockoon.  You have no control over the balloon itself, and it can
drift quite far.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 28047 invoked from network); 6 Sep 2001 17:31:05 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 6 Sep 2001 17:31:05 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: (qmail 8136 invoked by uid 50005); 6 Sep 2001 17:29:42 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.466918 secs); 06 Sep 2001 17:29:42 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 6 Sep 2001 17:29:41 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA06874; Thu, 6 Sep 2001 10:05:12 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 80908 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 6 Sep 2001 17:05:10 +0000
Received: from wrench.toolcity.net (root@wrench.toolcity.net [208.0.188.2]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id DAA04795 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 6 Sep 2001 03:01:09 -0700
Received: from [63.169.101.189]          (dap-63-169-101-189.meadville-tnt-1.pa.toolcity.net [63.169.101.189])          by wrench.toolcity.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id GAA19431; Thu, 6          Sep 2001 06:01:04 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <v01510100b7bd04cc8e42@[208.22.189.33]>
Date:         Thu, 6 Sep 2001 06:03:28 -0500
Reply-To: "al bradley" <abradley@TOOLCITY.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "al bradley" <abradley@TOOLCITY.NET>
Subject:      [AR] 1,naive question?
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Hi Listees:
Although I am aware of the possible diverse answers that are in waiting to
respond to this theoretical question I really would like to see how well it
is answered by our group:

A liquid propellant engine has internal combusion chamber pressure when
operating properly  of 1,000 PSI (pounds per square inch). How much
pressure is needed at the injectors to introduce fuel and oxidizer to
maintain the combustion at this pressure?

If you want to present this as equations please designate each factor not
only by its letter, but by the respresentative word for each letter
(something that is too often lacking lately in posts).

respectfully,
al bradley




------------------------------------------------------------------
Can you live Life with this?: "Unless there is a law, an agreement, or a
long-standing custom, No one `Deserves' Anything -- Either Good or Bad!"

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 3921 invoked from network); 6 Sep 2001 17:32:19 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 6 Sep 2001 17:32:19 -0000
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 22312 invoked by uid 50005); 6 Sep 2001 17:31:58 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpe with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 1.268828 secs); 06 Sep 2001 17:31:58 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 6 Sep 2001 17:31:56 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA06735; Thu, 6 Sep 2001 10:04:50 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 80789 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 6 Sep 2001 17:04:49 +0000
Received: from smtp002pub.verizon.net (smtp002pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.181])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA03277 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 5 Sep 2001 18:11:41 -0700
Received: from [63.10.189.89] (1Cust89.tnt2.hilo.hi.da.uu.net [63.10.189.89])          by smtp002pub.verizon.net  with ESMTP for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; id          f861B8Y25692 Wed, 5 Sep 2001 20:11:09 -0500 (CDT)
X-Sender: ttocs@mail.gte.net
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <l03130301b7b889102c2e@[63.10.189.89]>
Date:         Sun, 2 Sep 2001 15:11:28 -1000
Reply-To: "Aaron Smith" <ttocs@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Aaron Smith" <ttocs@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Propellent Musings
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <4.3.1.2.20010905183035.02f47378@mail.idsoftware.com>

At 6:31 PM -0500 9/5/01, John Carmack wrote:
> >At 03:16 PM 9/5/2001 -0700, you wrote:
> >That's a pretty good price, in quantities sized for experimentation.
> >What percentage were the original numbers for, and how badly does the
> >dilution affect performance?
> >
> >Ray
>
>70% peroxide will only barely boil the water content, so it makes for a
>poor monoprop, but there were some significant hybrid test fires done with
>70% peroxide.
>
>The stabilizers will also poison catalyst packs, so you need a conventional
>igniter.  I don't think any of the dissolved fuel catalysts will be
>hypergolic with the lower concentration.
>
>Commercial 70% should be a so-so biprop or hybrid oxidizer, but it may not
>hold much performance advantage over NOX, and will have all the same
>ignition hassles.
>
>John Carmack

But it is almost twice as dense.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 8287 invoked from network); 6 Sep 2001 17:39:41 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 6 Sep 2001 17:39:41 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 13993 invoked by uid 50005); 6 Sep 2001 17:39:46 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpb with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.860076 secs); 06 Sep 2001 17:39:47 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 6 Sep 2001 17:39:45 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA06840; Thu, 6 Sep 2001 10:05:07 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 80901 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 6 Sep 2001 17:05:06 +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (f130.law15.hotmail.com [64.4.23.130]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id BAA04640 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Thu, 6 Sep 2001 01:53:41 -0700
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Thu,          6 Sep 2001 01:53:11 -0700
Received: from 193.121.251.246 by lw15fd.law15.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Thu,          06 Sep 2001 08:53:11 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [193.121.251.246]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 06 Sep 2001 08:53:11.0616 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[5B8CF400:01C136B1]
Message-ID:  <F130oFOxoaCb2mP5z8M0000693f@hotmail.com>
Date:         Thu, 6 Sep 2001 17:05:06 +0000
Reply-To: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      [AR] N2H4/kero
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

A recent posting mentioned combustion instability of RFNA (or was it the HF
containing IRFNA?) with kerosine in Russian rocket motors.

Since when?

Next mention was made of N2H4. What was meant? That the Russians changed
from RFNA/kero to RFNA/diamines or to RFNA/kero with diamines added
(dissolves?)?

jd



_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 9398 invoked from network); 6 Sep 2001 17:39:54 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 6 Sep 2001 17:39:54 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 1899 invoked by uid 50005); 6 Sep 2001 17:37:16 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpf with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.193483 secs); 06 Sep 2001 17:37:16 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 6 Sep 2001 17:37:16 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA06995; Thu, 6 Sep 2001 10:05:32 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 80935 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 6 Sep 2001 17:05:30 +0000
Received: from hobbiton.shire.net (frogmorton.shire.net [204.228.145.136]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA05498 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Thu, 6 Sep 2001 07:12:18 -0700
Received: from pool-64-223-146-33.man.east.verizon.net ([64.223.146.33]          helo=me-513q3sc0zun0.pengar.com) by hobbiton.shire.net with esmtp          (Exim 3.22 #6) id 15ezre-000Ov8-00 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 06          Sep 2001 08:10:42 -0600
X-Sender: seth-pc@hobbiton.shire.net
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
References: <l03130300b7b659bc9e71@[63.10.189.23]>            <5.1.0.14.0.20010904210228.01be7ef8@hobbiton.shire.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <5.1.0.14.0.20010906101411.0258c130@hobbiton.shire.net>
Date:         Thu, 6 Sep 2001 10:17:35 -0400
Reply-To: "Seth Leigh" <seth@PENGAR.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Seth Leigh" <seth@PENGAR.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Gun launch - part deux
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <02c201c1369a$0fbea3a0$39e6adcb@tm22g>

At 02:06 AM 9/6/2001, Pingu! wrote:
>That is very insulting hearing that.
>[snip]
>And Dave McCue  i dont want to hear any further childish interpretations of
>our website.

Hey, this degraded far below the level of civility that was intended.  I
don't believe Dave McCue intended to insult anybody, and your remarks back
like this *do* stoop to the level of childishness.  I believe Dave didn't
read the whole thread, and simply missed the point that this thread was in
fact based on a discussion of how to launch a ramjet-assisted rocket.  I
think it's entirely appropriate for the list participants to guard against
flippant or otherwise unwise or irresponsible discussion, and Dave was
trying politely to steer the conversation away from an area he felt
uncomfortable about.  That's OK.

Seth

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 13938 invoked from network); 6 Sep 2001 17:40:53 -0000
X-Priority: 3
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 6 Sep 2001 17:40:53 -0000
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 30528 invoked by uid 50005); 6 Sep 2001 17:40:36 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpe with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.61408 secs); 06 Sep 2001 17:40:36 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 6 Sep 2001 17:40:35 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA06786; Thu, 6 Sep 2001 10:04:59 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 80893 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 6 Sep 2001 17:04:57 +0000
Received: from imo-d04.mx.aol.com (imo-d04.mx.aol.com [205.188.157.36]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA04206 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Wed, 5 Sep 2001 22:49:04 -0700
Received: from Sociald84@aol.com by imo-d04.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v31_r1.4.) id          o.40.10e4041b (3844); Thu, 6 Sep 2001 01:48:33 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0CB0_01C56B69.502D2080"
X-Mailer: AOL 6.0 for Windows US sub 10536
Message-ID:  <40.10e4041b.28c86831@aol.com>
Date:         Thu, 6 Sep 2001 01:48:33 EDT
Reply-To: <Sociald84@AOL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <Sociald84@AOL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] aRocket project
Comments: To: michael@neonym.net
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0CB0_01C56B69.502D2080
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

It's also not exactly like I'm saying I don't have any money to spend on
anything. I'm saying I don't have the money to spend on tools and the project
at the same time.

Mark

In a message dated 9/5/2001 4:17:04 PM Mountain Daylight Time,
michael@neonym.net writes:


> > >In the past few months there has been a lot of talk about an open source
> > >aRocket project. Well I for one think its about time to quit the
> bullshit and
> > >actually start the project. For the last year or two I have been
> designing
> > >several different rockets on my computer that to date have only flown in
> > >simulation programs. The only reasons that my rockets are yet to be
> built are
> > >because I don't have enough money or access to tools and resources. The
> money
> > >problem however is only a minor concern as most of the costs are up front
> > >costs associated with buying equipment such as Nitrous Oxide filling
> systems
> > >and tanks, and a lathe. These are costs that others have already dealt
> with.
> > >However if this were to be done by myself the costs of buying these
> would be
> > >prohibitive to accomplishing anything.
> >
> > An open source project doesn't help things get started, and is almost
> never
> > a way to get over personal resource limitations.  This is a common
> > misconception, with "start an open source project" often being offered as
> a
> > way to undertake a difficult task.  None of the poster child cases for
> open
> > source were started that way, they were all started by a single individual
> > or a cohesive team, and brought to a reasonable level of functionality
> > before they were opened to the world for input.
>
> For the most part, yes. But the one thing that open source techniques
> enable is the spending of 'resources' by those who have them. Mark might
> not have the money to buy some of the materials but he may have time and
> expertise that I don't have, whereas I've got the money and a much
> smaller amount of time. So its not a way of overcoming a complete lack
> of resources but it is a way of allocating tasks to those with the
> right resources to accomplish them.
>



------=_NextPart_000_0CB0_01C56B69.502D2080
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<HTML><FONT FACE=arial,helvetica><FONT  SIZE=2>It's also not exactly like I'm saying I don't have any money to spend on
<BR>anything. I'm saying I don't have the money to spend on tools and the project
<BR>at the same time.
<BR>
<BR>Mark
<BR>
<BR>In a message dated 9/5/2001 4:17:04 PM Mountain Daylight Time,
<BR>michael@neonym.net writes:
<BR>
<BR>
<BR><BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE style="BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px">&gt; &gt;In the past few months there has been a lot of talk about an open source
<BR>&gt; &gt;aRocket project. Well I for one think its about time to quit the
<BR>bullshit and
<BR>&gt; &gt;actually start the project. For the last year or two I have been
<BR>designing
<BR>&gt; &gt;several different rockets on my computer that to date have only flown in
<BR>&gt; &gt;simulation programs. The only reasons that my rockets are yet to be
<BR>built are
<BR>&gt; &gt;because I don't have enough money or access to tools and resources. The
<BR>money
<BR>&gt; &gt;problem however is only a minor concern as most of the costs are up front
<BR>&gt; &gt;costs associated with buying equipment such as Nitrous Oxide filling
<BR>systems
<BR>&gt; &gt;and tanks, and a lathe. These are costs that others have already dealt
<BR>with.
<BR>&gt; &gt;However if this were to be done by myself the costs of buying these
<BR>would be
<BR>&gt; &gt;prohibitive to accomplishing anything.
<BR>&gt;
<BR>&gt; An open source project doesn't help things get started, and is almost
<BR>never
<BR>&gt; a way to get over personal resource limitations. &nbsp;This is a common
<BR>&gt; misconception, with "start an open source project" often being offered as
<BR>a
<BR>&gt; way to undertake a difficult task. &nbsp;None of the poster child cases for
<BR>open
<BR>&gt; source were started that way, they were all started by a single individual
<BR>&gt; or a cohesive team, and brought to a reasonable level of functionality
<BR>&gt; before they were opened to the world for input.
<BR>
<BR>For the most part, yes. But the one thing that open source techniques
<BR>enable is the spending of 'resources' by those who have them. Mark might
<BR>not have the money to buy some of the materials but he may have time and
<BR>expertise that I don't have, whereas I've got the money and a much
<BR>smaller amount of time. So its not a way of overcoming a complete lack
<BR>of resources but it is a way of allocating tasks to those with the
<BR>right resources to accomplish them.
<BR></BLOCKQUOTE>
<BR>
<BR></FONT></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0CB0_01C56B69.502D2080--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 26161 invoked from network); 6 Sep 2001 17:43:39 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 6 Sep 2001 17:43:39 -0000
Received: (qmail 17135 invoked by uid 50005); 6 Sep 2001 17:43:43 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpb with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.921668 secs); 06 Sep 2001 17:43:43 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 6 Sep 2001 17:43:42 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA07149; Thu, 6 Sep 2001 10:05:58 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 81074 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 6 Sep 2001 17:05:56 +0000
Received: from localhost (dmccue@localhost) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with          ESMTP id JAA06571; Thu, 6 Sep 2001 09:37:01 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.LNX.4.10.10109060919370.6208-100000@itc.uci.edu>
Date:         Thu, 6 Sep 2001 09:37:01 -0700
Reply-To: "David J. McCue" <dmccue@itc.uci.edu>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "David J. McCue" <dmccue@itc.uci.edu>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Gun launch - part deux  THE END
Comments: To: Aaron Smith <ttocs@GTE.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <l03130300b7b856c75ba5@[63.10.201.222]>

I'm sorry, but I cannot sit still for this nonsense-

On Sun, 2 Sep 2001, Aaron Smith wrote:

> Eh, you're talking about still launching from under the wing.  No.  That
> would require that you point the plane straight up.  I was talking about
> realeasing the rocket under a parachute, letting it stabilize and point
> upward.  THEN you launch it, when your aircraft is miles away.
>
> Let's stop this thread.  It has already slightly pissed off some people.  I
> just had to clarify so that i don't seem like a complete idiot to those who
> don't listen.
>
> Aaron
>
Aaron:

In your original message, you did not specify the manner in which you
planned on launching a rocket from an aircraft, just that you were
considering doing it. I, and several others, concluded that you were
talking about firing a rocket from the aircraft and took issue with the
wisdom of doing this, and with the appropriateness of this topic as a
subject for discussion on aRocket.

In the course of private communication about this, you did not amplify on
what you supposedly really meant, but you did state that you understood my
and Ray's concerns, and would drop the topic. Now you attempt to
characterize us as unable to understand something you never adaquately
explained until after the fact! I see no reason for accepting this kind of
rudeness from someone using a resource Ray and I go to considerable
trouble to provide.

For the benefit of the group: Ray and I have agreed that discussion of
aircraft-launched rockets is not a subject appropriate to this forum.
There are too many risks associated with this approach, not only for the
experimentor, but for the general public as well. I hope this is clear.

-Dave McCue

> At 4:24 PM -0400 9/5/01, kc2csh@JUNO.COM wrote:
> >Dave:
> >  I don't think he said manned.
> >  100kg to 14k altitude and 80 knots is well within the possibilities of
> >modest ultralite kit modified for R/C
> >  200kg to 25k altitude and 250 knots is well within the possibilities of
> >commonly attainable  kitplanes modified for R/C
> >  The biggest flaw with something like this is that the useful launch
> >angle is so much different than the best attainable apparent wind during
> >a launch portion of flight, that you are effectively launching either at
> >a poor angle, or at a poor velocity, or at a poor altitude,  or into a
> >hurricane velocity wind sheer.  Some aerobatics can get you something
> >useful, but far from optimal.  The kind of performance required at
> >altitude is of a totally different class; and with that goes a totally
> >different price range.  The timing and dynamics are so complex and
> >precise, you'd probably need a sensor aray and electronic launch control
> >to be at all within acceptable safety ranges.
> >  Getting the acceptable performance characteristics would probably
> >require high performance engines and an aircraft design created from
> >scratch for the purpose.
> >  Not to say it can't be done, or shouldn't be done, just that its much
> >more complicated, more expensive, and more involved than it looks on
> >first glance.
> >
> >               Jay
> >
> >On Tue, 4 Sep 2001 17:59:23 -0700 Kristin & David Hall
> ><thehalls@RIDGENET.NET> writes:
> >
> >> > Just out of cusiosity, how much would a dedicated air-launch
> >aircraft for
> >> > small rockets be worth?  Say, 100 Kg to 14,000 ft.  200 kg?
> >>
> >>
> >> ....Seriously, of all the ideas I've seen thrown around on Arocket,  I
> >would
> >> consider an amateur rocket launched from a manned aircraft to be by
> >far the
> >> dumbest (Where dumb is defined as "situation likely to get somebody
> >> killed".).
> >
> >________________________________________________________________
> >GET INTERNET ACCESS FROM JUNO!
> >Juno offers FREE or PREMIUM Internet access for less!
> >Join Juno today!  For your FREE software, visit:
> >http://dl.www.juno.com/get/tagj.
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 27201 invoked from network); 6 Sep 2001 17:43:52 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 6 Sep 2001 17:43:52 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 17311 invoked by uid 50005); 6 Sep 2001 17:43:57 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpb with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 1.259606 secs); 06 Sep 2001 17:43:57 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 6 Sep 2001 17:43:55 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA06752; Thu, 6 Sep 2001 10:04:52 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 80796 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 6 Sep 2001 17:04:51 +0000
Received: from snipe.mail.pas.earthlink.net (snipe.mail.pas.earthlink.net          [207.217.120.62]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA03305          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 5 Sep 2001 18:14:44 -0700
Received: from earthlink.net (dialup-209.247.143.28.Dial1.SanJose1.Level3.net          [209.247.143.28]) by snipe.mail.pas.earthlink.net (8.11.5/8.9.3) with          ESMTP id f861Ed516176; Wed, 5 Sep 2001 18:14:40 -0700 (PDT)
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (Win98; I)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <4.3.1.2.20010905150252.02b0b008@mail.idsoftware.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B96D16B.F88F027D@earthlink.net>
Date:         Wed, 5 Sep 2001 18:29:15 -0700
Reply-To: <thomgaf@energyrs.com>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Thomas M. Mcgaffey" <energyrelease@EARTHLINK.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] aRocket project
Comments: To: John Carmack <johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

John Carmack is right,  just look how he has structured his group.
There is ONE leader, John Carmack, and he pays the way. (Murphy's Golden
Rule: He who has the gold makes the rules.)  There can only be one
"BOSS" on a project.

Michael Mealling makes good points about sharing resources ( Money,
Equipment, Time and Skill ).

> For the most part, yes. But the one thing that open source techniques
> enable is the spending of 'resources' by those who have them. Mark might
> not have the money to buy some of the materials but he may have time and
> expertise that I don't have, whereas I've got the money and a much
> smaller amount of time. So its not a way of overcoming a complete lack
> of resources but it is a way of allocating tasks to those with the
> right resources to accomplish them.

Those with money but no time should consider funding a project or
part of a project but do so only if they can keep from trying to
run the project.

Those with equipment and time should consider donating machining time
to a project but again they must keep from trying to run project.

The same goes for others with different skills; donate time to a project
and keep your hands off the day to day running of the project.

One "BOSS" and only one "BOSS".  A committee barely gets anything
done when they are sitting around a single table, let alone spread out
over the "NET".  Remember, "a camel is a horse designed by committee",
is a truism, not just a witticism.

> > Distributed rocket construction is likely to be especially difficult.

Again I agree with John Carmack.  Who is going to pay the shipping costs
for parts shipped between the workers in different states?

Who is going to do the "QC" of the parts and who has the right to reject
unacceptable work and finally, who decides what is acceptable in the
first place?  Specs are important but not a panacea.  Even the most
simplistic project always needs minor tweaks and massaging at nearly
every stage of design, development, test, etc.  Who has the final say
when everyone involved has a different opinion on every single issue,
even when said issue is not their area of expertise?

How is the "BOSS" going to force people to do what they commit to do?
Yes, I said "force" not motivate and for a good reason.  Some people
have the best intentions but always seem to fall behind (maybe due to
"honey do's") or just flat fall on their faces.  When will the "BOSS"
pull the plug on someone who is not carrying his end of the log and then
how does the "BOSS" get parts back from him that he was sent 2 months
before?  These problems should be expected!!  Unfortunately, human
nature and life being what they are ("shit happens"), there WILL be
those who cannot deliver what they commit to for one reason or another.
And these otherwise good intentioned individuals often fall back in
defensiveness with remarks about our endeavors being "just a hobby
anyway, so get off my back".

This attitude, which I find pervasive in all rocketry forums, condemns
any project to utter failure.  Therefore, the "BOSS" must have a thick
skin as well as the complete support of the entire team when he finally
says "enough is enough" to an unproductive slacker.


>
> The jury is still out on whether or not 'open source' techniques
> work when all materials costs are not zero. But IMHO, its worth a try.
> -MM
>

Yes it might work if ............................@#$%^&*&  :-(


I have been on a few group projects, some of which were rocketry
projects and I currently have a major project of my own under way and I
can tell you that a very strong willed leader is needed.  In a business
situation this works only most of the time, but in a volunteer group
with people spending their own money it rarely does work.  Everybody
thinks they are equal and should have a role in the design and
implementation of the each and every component.  After all it's their
money!  Also, volunteer projects I have been part of have always had at
least one or two people trying to run the project even after the leader
had been picked.  They just couldn't stop believing that they should be
in charge.

I would love to see a "NET" based rocketry project actually work and all
the IP placed on a web site so others can learn from the project.  I
don't have any idea how this could be done, though.  You can hardly get
volunteer workers to show up let alone to follow the game plan without
either trying to take over or turn every decision into a debate. It is
the "ME" generation.

Thom

Thomas McGaffey
Energy Release Systems
thomgaf@energyrs.com
408-226-7502
San Jose, Kalifornia




John Carmack wrote:
>
> At 02:01 AM 9/5/2001 -0400, you wrote:
>
> > Hey list,
> >
> > In the past few months there has been a lot of talk about an open
> > source
> > aRocket project. Well I for one think its about time to quit the
> > bullshit and
> > actually start the project. For the last year or two I have been
> > designing
> > several different rockets on my computer that to date have only
> > flown in
> > simulation programs. The only reasons that my rockets are yet to be
> > built are
> > because I don't have enough money or access to tools and resources.
> > The money
> > problem however is only a minor concern as most of the costs are up
> > front
> > costs associated with buying equipment such as Nitrous Oxide filling
> > systems
> > and tanks, and a lathe. These are costs that others have already
> > dealt with.
> > However if this were to be done by myself the costs of buying these
> > would be
> > prohibitive to accomplishing anything.
> >
>
> An open source project doesn't help things get started, and is almost
> never a way to get over personal resource limitations.  This is a
> common misconception, with "start an open source project" often being
> offered as a way to undertake a difficult task.  None of the poster
> child cases for open source were started that way, they were all
> started by a single individual or a cohesive team, and brought to a
> reasonable level of functionality before they were opened to the world
> for input.
>
> Distributed rocket construction is likely to be especially difficult.
>
> I would also strongly urge you to pursue two earlier stages in your
> development plan:
>
> Build an instrumented test stand and develop the engine completely
> separately from any vehicle considerations.  You can use convenient
> and safe DOT tanks, and just getting the engine to work reliably is
> going to be a significant task.
>
> Build a fairly standard HPR vehicle that can be fully tested on normal
> reloads, then have your engine integrated later.  This is ERPS' KISS
> vehicle plan, and I think it is very sensible.
>
> If you can't afford to do this, you can't afford your project, and
> open source isn't going to help.  Paying list price for good
> components to do all that would cost a couple thousand dollars, but
> enterprising people that know where to scrounge and borrow resources
> could probably get it done for a few hundred dollars.
>
> John Carmack

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 27565 invoked from network); 6 Sep 2001 17:43:57 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 6 Sep 2001 17:43:57 -0000
Received: (qmail 8750 invoked by uid 50005); 6 Sep 2001 17:41:56 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.191427 secs); 06 Sep 2001 17:41:56 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 6 Sep 2001 17:41:55 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA06769; Thu, 6 Sep 2001 10:04:56 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 80836 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 6 Sep 2001 17:04:54 +0000
Received: from albqpop1.albq.uswest.net (albqpop1.albq.uswest.net          [207.108.240.1]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id TAA03552          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 5 Sep 2001 19:16:48 -0700
Received: (qmail 16272 invoked by alias); 6 Sep 2001 01:49:02 -0000
Delivered-To: fixup-AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU@fixme
Received: (qmail 14580 invoked by uid 0); 6 Sep 2001 01:48:34 -0000
Received: from cc898542-a.prdise1.nm.home.com (HELO cc898542a) (65.7.151.152)          by albqpop1.albq.uswest.net with SMTP; 6 Sep 2001 01:48:34 -0000
References:  <JJEFLLHFFAHHMBBIHFAEMEMBCFAA.pkelly@comcen.com.au>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0CB5_01C56B69.50344C70"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <002701c13676$94625e40$0100a8c0@prdise1.nm.home.com>
Date:         Wed, 5 Sep 2001 19:52:25 -0600
Reply-To: "Pax" <darkspunge@USWEST.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Pax" <darkspunge@USWEST.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Hybrids vs Solids, a datapoint
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0CB5_01C56B69.50344C70
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Then it certainly IS a noble goal huh? :-) What is the worst that could =
happen, a failure? A deployment problem? That could happen with any =
rocket at any level. I will either make it into extreme rocketry or just =
be laughed at by everyone. About the level 1 part though, if it is a NAR =
or TRA thing I might be screwed(or issues with doing L2 and L3 in the =
same day). Just have to do it on a I211 or something. Or H125 depending =
on if I am being a cheap bastard or not. Ill get plenty of practice =
flying electronics with EX solids before the hybrid certs anyway. Even =
though I could beg Brian enough to "sponsor" a L3 cert on a solid, I =
think it would be worth doing at least L2 and L3 in the same day on =
hybrids Not to mention I could afford it. The fame of being the first is =
also a plus. Most of us are not in this hobby because it is easy right? =
And, nobody really fly's something like a N2000 for himself, it's to =
show off your skill and pocket book. haha.

If only they would let me cert on PVC sugar motors *tisk tisk*

Pax
  ----- Original Message -----=20
  From: Paul Kelly=20
  To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU=20
  Sent: Wednesday, September 05, 2001 5:05 PM
  Subject: Re: [AR] Hybrids vs Solids, a datapoint


  I've said this before. Solids are simpler than hybrids are simpler =
than biprops. All my certifications were done on solids for that reason. =
In our club, the rules forbid a L1 cert on a hybrid.
  This is from a man who firmly believes that the best thing AP solids =
do is light NOX hybrids :-)

  PK
    -----Original Message-----
    From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list =
[mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU]On Behalf Of pax
    Sent: Thursday, 6 September 2001 2:01 AM
    To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
    Subject: Re: [AR] Hybrids vs Solids, a datapoint


    Haha, Brian shows its bias again :-) Just to be an ass, I will cert =
on a RATT I90, a Hypertek J330 and a Hypertek M1000 in the same day! So =
blah! :-)
    Then go fly solid experimental the next day of course *wink*

    Paxton
      ----- Original Message -----=20
      From: Brian Kosko=20
      To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU=20
      Sent: Tuesday, September 04, 2001 3:38 PM
      Subject: [AR] Hybrids vs Solids, a datapoint


      Our club's local hybrid guru did his Level 3 this weekend. Not =
only is he a big proponent of hybrids, he has a company (Freqken) that =
is an HP hybrid vendor. So for this very important flight he of course =
chose a hybrid?

      Not! He certified on an Aerotech 75mm; that is, the one with AP =
and HTPB. When you've got to have that simple, reliable propulsion =
system.....

      Brian =20

------=_NextPart_000_0CB5_01C56B69.50344C70
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Diso-8859-1">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 5.50.4522.1800" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Then it certainly IS a noble goal huh? =
:-) What is=20
the worst that could happen, a failure? A deployment problem? That could =
happen=20
with any rocket at any level. I will either make it into extreme =
rocketry or=20
just be laughed at by everyone. About the level 1 part though, if it is =
a NAR or=20
TRA thing I might be screwed(or issues with doing L2 and L3 in the same =
day).=20
Just have to do it on a I211 or something. Or H125 depending on if I am =
being a=20
cheap bastard or not. Ill get plenty of practice flying electronics with =
EX=20
solids before&nbsp;the hybrid certs anyway. Even though I could beg =
Brian enough=20
to "sponsor" a L3 cert on a solid, I think it would be worth doing at =
least L2=20
and L3 in the same day on hybrids Not to mention I could afford it. The =
fame of=20
being the first is also a plus. Most of us are not in this hobby because =
it is=20
easy right? And, nobody really fly's something like a N2000 for himself, =
it's to=20
show off your skill and pocket book. haha.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>If only they would let&nbsp;me cert on =
PVC sugar=20
motors *tisk tisk*</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Pax</FONT></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE dir=3Dltr=20
style=3D"PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; =
BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
  <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial">----- Original Message ----- </DIV>
  <DIV=20
  style=3D"BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; FONT: 10pt arial; font-color: =
black"><B>From:</B>=20
  <A title=3Dpkelly@COMCEN.COM.AU =
href=3D"mailto:pkelly@COMCEN.COM.AU">Paul=20
  Kelly</A> </DIV>
  <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A =
title=3DAROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU=20
  href=3D"mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU">AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU</A> </DIV>
  <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> Wednesday, September 05, =
2001 5:05=20
  PM</DIV>
  <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> Re: [AR] Hybrids vs =
Solids, a=20
  datapoint</DIV>
  <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT><FONT face=3DArial =
size=3D2></FONT><BR></DIV>
  <DIV><FONT face=3DArial color=3D#0000ff size=3D2><SPAN =
class=3D860255522-05092001>I've=20
  said this before. Solids are simpler than hybrids are simpler than =
biprops.=20
  All my certifications were done on solids for that reason. In our =
club, the=20
  rules forbid a L1 cert on a hybrid.</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
  <DIV><FONT face=3DArial color=3D#0000ff size=3D2><SPAN =
class=3D860255522-05092001>This=20
  is from a man who firmly believes that the best thing AP solids do is =
light=20
  NOX hybrids :-)</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
  <DIV><FONT face=3DArial color=3D#0000ff size=3D2><SPAN=20
  class=3D860255522-05092001></SPAN></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
  <DIV><FONT face=3DArial color=3D#0000ff size=3D2><SPAN=20
  class=3D860255522-05092001>PK</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
  <BLOCKQUOTE style=3D"MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
    <DIV class=3DOutlookMessageHeader dir=3Dltr align=3Dleft><FONT =
face=3DTahoma=20
    size=3D2>-----Original Message-----<BR><B>From:</B> Amateur Rocketry =

    discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU]<B>On Behalf Of=20
    </B>pax<BR><B>Sent:</B> Thursday, 6 September 2001 2:01 =
AM<BR><B>To:</B>=20
    AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU<BR><B>Subject:</B> Re: [AR] Hybrids vs Solids, a =

    datapoint<BR><BR></DIV></FONT>
    <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Haha, Brian shows its bias again =
:-) Just to be=20
    an ass, I will cert on a RATT I90, a Hypertek J330 and a Hypertek =
M1000 in=20
    the same day! So blah! :-)</FONT></DIV>
    <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Then go fly solid experimental the =
next day of=20
    course *wink*</FONT></DIV>
    <DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
    <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Paxton</FONT></DIV>
    <BLOCKQUOTE=20
    style=3D"PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; =
BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
      <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial">----- Original Message ----- =
</DIV>
      <DIV=20
      style=3D"BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; FONT: 10pt arial; font-color: =
black"><B>From:</B>=20
      <A title=3Dbkosko1@HOME.COM href=3D"mailto:bkosko1@HOME.COM">Brian =
Kosko</A>=20
      </DIV>
      <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A =
title=3DAROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU=20
      href=3D"mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU">AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU</A> </DIV>
      <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> Tuesday, September =
04, 2001=20
      3:38 PM</DIV>
      <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> [AR] Hybrids vs =
Solids, a=20
      datapoint</DIV>
      <DIV><BR></DIV>
      <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Our club's local hybrid guru did =
his Level 3=20
      this weekend. Not only is he a big proponent of hybrids, he has a =
company=20
      (Freqken) that is an HP hybrid vendor. So for this very important =
flight=20
      he of course chose a hybrid?</FONT></DIV>
      <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
      <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Not! He certified on an Aerotech =
75mm; that=20
      is, the one with AP and HTPB. When you've got to have that simple, =

      reliable propulsion system.....</FONT></DIV>
      <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
      <DIV><FONT face=3DArial=20
  =
size=3D2>Brian&nbsp;&nbsp;</FONT></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE></BLOCKQUOTE></BLOCKQ=
UOTE></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0CB5_01C56B69.50344C70--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 19101 invoked from network); 6 Sep 2001 17:48:38 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 6 Sep 2001 17:48:38 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 20170 invoked by uid 50005); 6 Sep 2001 17:48:39 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpb with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.462287 secs); 06 Sep 2001 17:48:39 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 6 Sep 2001 17:48:38 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA06908; Thu, 6 Sep 2001 10:05:17 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 80912 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 6 Sep 2001 17:05:16 +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (f8.law7.hotmail.com [216.33.237.8]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id DAA04844 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu,          6 Sep 2001 03:19:23 -0700
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Thu,          6 Sep 2001 03:18:53 -0700
Received: from 212.29.216.97 by lw7fd.law7.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Thu, 06          Sep 2001 10:18:52 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [212.29.216.97]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 06 Sep 2001 10:18:53.0309 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[543D0AD0:01C136BD]
Message-ID:  <F81fnDrRRCIS1wKY7f30000a4c5@hotmail.com>
Date:         Thu, 6 Sep 2001 17:05:16 +0000
Reply-To: "flint hapirat" <flinthapirat@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "flint hapirat" <flinthapirat@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Electric matches, the second generation...
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Hi Guys,

I've been reading all the material you guys wrote on E-matches.

I too can't buy E-matches from a firework company (illegal) - nor import
explosives. That is also one of the reasons I can't make composite motors
here - I make BP motors. I can't also find here (israel) any Nichrome wire.

Recently I got interested in E-matches and found some simple solutions:

1. you do not need to break light bulbs - steel whole is much better.
(If you insist on Nichrome wire it can be taken from hair driers...) Take a
strong one (pull sum apart and the strong ones will stick out, they will
also be a bit thicker) and wrap around the leads - as seen in the site
mentioned in the forum -  or just stick it into the wires with a pin. Both
work fine. Just with the wire attached to the current it will turn red and
ignite on their own (burning steel) - instantly.
When you wrap the wire around the leads make sure you have only one
wire connecting the leads!

2. make NC liquor. To do so you need two things:
2.1 - Acetone
2.2 - Nitro-cellulose -  either from gun powder or from ping-pong balls (99%
NC - and if you don't believe me you can light one up from a SAFE distance
!!!)
Make it about 10% (I make it in soup consistency and then dilute it 1:2 with
acetone).
NC-liquor is used a lot in pyrotechnics - to solidify/harden stars and
rocket engines (BP mainly) etc. It's safe and can be stored forever. If the
acetone evaporated - just add some more.

3. Dip the edge of the wires in the liquor and the dip (fast - the acetone
dries very fast) in BP - grains or powder both work fine.

If you wish to make a small "bulb" of BP dip in powder and re-dip as many
times as you want. When finished re-dip once more to make an outer lair of
NC - which will make it water-resistant (not for long though). Two or three
dips will make a crust arround and the igniter blow up rather than just
going into flames.

I used 10m long 4mm copper wire with a 12v converter. Worked fine. I suspect
it should work too with 9v or even less... you must try this out on your won
though.

Many other compositions are used for E-matches (I know about 5 or so).
Most use chlorates (very dangerous material) so I won't recommend them.
Nevertheless - if you guys want - I will post them here and you can try.
However, I will not be held responsible for the results! I'm a
pyrotechnician by hobby and I have seen these things self ignite!!! Chlorate
compositions are shock/friction sensitive, with a very low ignition temp,
and a hypregolic capability with acids/sulfur and sulfur derivatives. BP is
the safest thing to use with these things.  With BP I had 100% success once
I got things right - good wiring is crucial.

If you want sparks - add some zink powder (green colored sparks) or Mg
flitters (white). Al is also good but only in flakes. All the materials
could be bought in the US from skylighter.com.

Hope I helped you guys.
Good luck & work safe!
Flint


_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 20515 invoked from network); 6 Sep 2001 17:48:57 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 6 Sep 2001 17:48:57 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 30329 invoked by uid 50005); 6 Sep 2001 17:47:28 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.111388 secs); 06 Sep 2001 17:47:28 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 6 Sep 2001 17:47:27 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA07115; Thu, 6 Sep 2001 10:05:52 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 80768 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 6 Sep 2001 17:05:50 +0000
Received: from iron.carolina.net (iron.carolina.net [208.170.147.84]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA03139 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Wed, 5 Sep 2001 17:41:58 -0700
Received: from ac.net (ip198-as5300-1-7lakes-nc.carolina.net [206.100.51.198])          by iron.carolina.net (Vircom SMTPRS 5.0.194) with ESMTP id          <B0003449549@iron.carolina.net> for <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Wed, 5 Sep          2001 20:58:11 -0400
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.75 [en] (Win95; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <4.3.1.2.20010905140219.02de0f08@mail.idsoftware.com>            <20010905190815.2471.qmail@softhome.net>            <008401c13649$70627de0$5751153f@default>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B96C83E.A9A45C0E@ac.net>
Date:         Wed, 5 Sep 2001 20:50:07 -0400
Reply-To: "Bill Shamblin" <wshamblin@AC.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Bill Shamblin" <wshamblin@AC.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] AN Grinding
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Or, what about an old fashioned, hand cranked flour mill (looks like galvanized
iron)...
Bill KU4QB

David Muesing wrote:

> I have ground NaNO3, KNO3 & NH3O4 (?) prill with a two compartment coffee
> grinder with good results. I do not load it heavily though.  The grinder I
> recently got came from Lowe's  and cost $30.
>
> Dave Muesing
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: <erohrbaugh@SOFTHOME.NET>
> To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
> Sent: Wednesday, September 05, 2001 3:08 PM
> Subject: [AR] AN Grinding
>
> > Is it possible to grind AN in a coffee grinder type of mechanism, or is it
> > best to use a ball mill arrangement?
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > -Eric
> >

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 10218 invoked from network); 6 Sep 2001 17:53:11 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 6 Sep 2001 17:53:11 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 16616 invoked by uid 50005); 6 Sep 2001 17:50:26 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpf with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.34549 secs); 06 Sep 2001 17:50:26 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 6 Sep 2001 17:50:24 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA07012; Thu, 6 Sep 2001 10:05:35 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 80938 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 6 Sep 2001 17:05:33 +0000
Received: from ns.vanguard.com (ns.VANGUARD.COM [192.175.173.31]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA05573 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 6 Sep 2001 07:20:24 -0700
Received: from eagle1.vanguard.com (eagle1.VANGUARD.COM [192.175.141.70]) by          ns.vanguard.com (Switch-2.1.3/Switch-2.1.0) with ESMTP id          f86EK7g07625 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 6 Sep 2001 10:20:07          -0400 (EDT)
Received: from vgi4mail.vanguard.com (vgi4mail.vanguard.com [10.254.65.16]) by          eagle1.vanguard.com (Switch-2.1.3/Switch-2.1.0) with SMTP id          f86EKLj01138 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 6 Sep 2001 10:20:21          -0400 (EDT)
Received: by vgi4mail.vanguard.com(Lotus SMTP MTA v4.6.6  (890.1 7-16-1999))           id 85256ABF.004EBAEE ; Thu, 6 Sep 2001 10:19:56 -0400
X-Lotus-FromDomain: VGINOTES
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Disposition: inline
Message-ID:  <85256ABF.004EB99E.00@vgi4mail.vanguard.com>
Date:         Thu, 6 Sep 2001 10:20:11 -0400
Reply-To: <Waysie_Atkins@VANGUARD.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <Waysie_Atkins@VANGUARD.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Fw: Jonathan's Space Report, No. 460
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

<People would probably pay to see this.
<Used pieces of even a used Shuttle tank would probably be saleable.
<("this has been in Space - depending on where you define Space as being
<...." ).
<
<Trying to obtain any pieces may be an interesting exercise :-)



I wonder about salvage rights, ie would NASA throw a hissy fit some enterprising
person, goup or company recovered such pieces?  And seperately what if they were
then sold for profit (might be a different answer than simply keeping and
finding).  Any precedent that anyone knows of?   Perhaps a funding mechanism-
albiet a bit far fetched- for rocket projects.  Or just for fun.

Waysie

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 25343 invoked from network); 6 Sep 2001 17:56:38 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 6 Sep 2001 17:56:38 -0000
Received: (qmail 5275 invoked by uid 50005); 6 Sep 2001 17:55:14 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.165534 secs); 06 Sep 2001 17:55:14 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 6 Sep 2001 17:55:14 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA07047; Thu, 6 Sep 2001 10:05:40 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 80949 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 6 Sep 2001 17:05:39 +0000
Received: from tsmtp3.ldap.isp (mailhost.teleline.es [195.235.113.141] (may be          forged)) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA05677 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 6 Sep 2001 07:34:33 -0700
Received: from central ([213.99.81.80]) by tsmtp3.ldap.isp (Netscape Messaging          Server 4.15 tsmtp3 Jul 26 2001 13:10:38) with ESMTP id GJ8WGJ00.KGG          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 6 Sep 2001 16:33:55 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0CB8_01C56B69.50403350"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2314.1300
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <003001c136e1$349b0280$505163d5@central>
Date:         Thu, 6 Sep 2001 16:35:09 +0200
Reply-To: "javier.d" <javier.d@teleline.es>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "javier.d" <javier.d@teleline.es>
Subject:      [AR] What is the  altitude record ?
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0CB8_01C56B69.50403350
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="Windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

=20
Anybody know witch is the altitude record for amateur rocket?

thanks


------=_NextPart_000_0CB8_01C56B69.50403350
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="Windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META content=3D"text/html; charset=3Dwindows-1252" =
http-equiv=3DContent-Type>
<META content=3D"MSHTML 5.00.2314.1000" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV>&nbsp;
<P class=3DMsoNormal><SPAN lang=3DEN-GB style=3D"mso-ansi-language: =
EN-GB">Anybody=20
know witch is the altitude record for amateur rocket?</SPAN></P>
<P class=3DMsoNormal><SPAN lang=3DEN-GB=20
style=3D"mso-ansi-language: EN-GB">thanks<?xml:namespace prefix =3D o ns =
=3D=20
"urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office"=20
/><o:p></o:p></SPAN></P></DIV></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0CB8_01C56B69.50403350--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 12196 invoked from network); 6 Sep 2001 18:00:38 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 6 Sep 2001 18:00:38 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 9225 invoked by uid 50005); 6 Sep 2001 17:59:14 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.136939 secs); 06 Sep 2001 17:59:14 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 6 Sep 2001 17:59:14 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA07935; Thu, 6 Sep 2001 10:38:47 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 81390 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 6 Sep 2001 17:38:46 +0000
Received: from snipe.mail.pas.earthlink.net (snipe.mail.pas.earthlink.net          [207.217.120.62]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA07844          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 6 Sep 2001 10:28:46 -0700
Received: from earthlink.net (dialup-209.245.140.155.Dial1.SanJose1.Level3.net          [209.245.140.155]) by snipe.mail.pas.earthlink.net (8.11.5/8.9.3)          with ESMTP id f86HSj503208; Thu, 6 Sep 2001 10:28:45 -0700 (PDT)
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.75 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.16-22 i686)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <01c201c136d6$cc134240$0100a8c0@mkbs>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B97B2B0.50F6179E@earthlink.net>
Date:         Thu, 6 Sep 2001 10:30:24 -0700
Reply-To: "David Weinshenker" <daze39@EARTHLINK.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "David Weinshenker" <daze39@EARTHLINK.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Indigo?
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Russell McMahon wrote:
> Should be less ideal than a pure hydrocarbon but it might be interesting to
> see if there were any other physical properties that made it advantageous as
> a fuel.
>
> Any thoughts?

Does it react spontaneously with any useful oxidizers?

-dave w

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 15034 invoked from network); 6 Sep 2001 18:08:16 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 6 Sep 2001 18:08:16 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 17704 invoked by uid 50005); 6 Sep 2001 18:06:47 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.256201 secs); 06 Sep 2001 18:06:47 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 6 Sep 2001 18:06:47 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA06857; Thu, 6 Sep 2001 10:05:09 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 80906 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 6 Sep 2001 17:05:08 +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (f109.law15.hotmail.com [64.4.23.109]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id CAA04701 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Thu, 6 Sep 2001 02:18:44 -0700
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Thu,          6 Sep 2001 02:18:14 -0700
Received: from 193.121.251.246 by lw15fd.law15.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Thu,          06 Sep 2001 09:18:13 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [193.121.251.246]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 06 Sep 2001 09:18:14.0189 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[DB2765D0:01C136B4]
Message-ID:  <F109ZmAvxDm35x0j1Ts00006ccc@hotmail.com>
Date:         Thu, 6 Sep 2001 17:05:08 +0000
Reply-To: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] AN melt: homogeneity
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

>> > ...as I understand it, a mix of sugar(s)
> > crystals and AN crystals is to be heated...until they become a liquid
>anhydric solution. Next pour it in BATES forms, next freeze very rapidly
>for homogeneity and to obtain fine crystals.
> >
> > Or is the result a glass, like a candy lolly???

S. Pipko wrote:

>No, it is AN crystals dispersed in glass-like solid solution of fuel in AN.

Odd. Very fine (small) AN crystals distributed homogenously in the AN/sugar
glass solid? Coloration? Opacity?

You did start from a homogenous crystal-free melt; how come AN crystals had
time to form during cooling? Because cooling was too slow?

I do not know about the effect of crystal size in BATES grains *thus*
produced on burn characteristics of it. Should it have an effect, then I
expect manufacture reproducibility problems as I guess crystal size is hard
to reproduce by slow (air) cooling. (ie my industrial experience concerning
caprolactam and ammonium sulfate). So maybe in such case super fast cooling
in methanol/dry ice could produce a crystal-free smooth glass grain.

jd

_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 16338 invoked from network); 6 Sep 2001 18:08:34 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 6 Sep 2001 18:08:34 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 18059 invoked by uid 50005); 6 Sep 2001 18:07:07 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.145683 secs); 06 Sep 2001 18:07:07 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 6 Sep 2001 18:07:07 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA07064; Thu, 6 Sep 2001 10:05:43 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 80981 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 6 Sep 2001 17:05:42 +0000
Received: from mail.conpute.com ([207.164.87.145]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7)          with ESMTP id IAA05967 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 6 Sep 2001          08:33:59 -0700
Received: by MAIL with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) id <SMFHAPC1>; Thu,          6 Sep 2001 11:33:46 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19)
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by itc.uci.edu id IAA05968
Message-ID:  <814DCE01F6D7D311994D204C4F4F50201889D9@MAIL>
Date:         Thu, 6 Sep 2001 11:33:46 -0400
Reply-To: "Earl Pottinger" <earlcp@CONPUTE.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Earl Pottinger" <earlcp@CONPUTE.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] propellant musings
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

But can you get copies of the papers???  It is no use talking
about reports that no-one can order.  I have sent emails to
the addresses on the HTP conference pages but I have never
received a reply on how to order the papers.

            Earl Colby Pottinger

-----Original Message-----
From: Jerry Irvine [mailto:01rocket@GTE.NET]
Sent: Saturday, September 01, 2001 2:06 AM
To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
Subject: Re: [AR] propellant musings


>Here are some very recent advances on the "broken record" topic:
>
> Investigation of Hypergolic Fuels with Hydrogen Peroxide
>  Melof, B.; Grubelich, M., Sandia National Laboratories, USA

I happen to know Grubelich and he knows most of the others. . . .

Jerry

--
Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
Opinion, the whole thing.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 16894 invoked from network); 6 Sep 2001 18:08:43 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 6 Sep 2001 18:08:43 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA06925; Thu, 6 Sep 2001 10:05:20 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 80924 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 6 Sep 2001 17:05:19 +0000
Received: from fep3-orange.clear.net.nz (fep3-orange.clear.net.nz          [203.97.32.3]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA05344          for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Thu, 6 Sep 2001 06:17:54 -0700
Received: from mkbs (203-167-156-53.dialup.clear.net.nz [203.167.156.53]) by          fep3-orange.clear.net.nz (1.5/1.8) with SMTP id BAA24503; Fri, 7 Sep          2001 01:17:51 +1200 (NZST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="Windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <01c201c136d6$cc134240$0100a8c0@mkbs>
Date:         Thu, 6 Sep 2001 23:12:52 +1200
Reply-To: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Organization: Applied Technology
Subject:      [AR] Indigo?
Comments: To: Chemical Propulsion Research <CHEMROC@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Just happened on formula and structure of Indigo Blue.

        C16H10N2O2

Lots of double bonds and an interesting CO and NH bond per half.
ASCII art isn't really up to drawing it usefully.

Should be less ideal than a pure hydrocarbon but it might be interesting to
see if there were any other physical properties that made it advantageous as
a fuel.

Any thoughts?


        RM

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 27097 invoked from network); 6 Sep 2001 18:17:19 -0000
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 6 Sep 2001 18:17:19 -0000
Received: (qmail 12160 invoked by uid 50005); 6 Sep 2001 18:14:43 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpf with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.136444 secs); 06 Sep 2001 18:14:43 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 6 Sep 2001 18:14:43 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA06978; Thu, 6 Sep 2001 10:05:29 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 80930 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 6 Sep 2001 17:05:28 +0000
Received: from cablecom.laribay.net (cablecom.laribay.net [66.20.57.4]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA05390 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 6 Sep 2001 06:27:39 -0700
Received: from billbull (dial074.laribay.net [66.20.57.74]) by          cablecom.laribay.net (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id IAA23950 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 6 Sep 2001 08:09:04 -0500 (CDT)          (envelope-from bpbullock@laribay.net)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0CBB_01C56B69.5042A450"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <000c01c136d7$ee05a360$4a391442@billbull>
Date:         Thu, 6 Sep 2001 08:28:56 -0500
Reply-To: "Bill Bullock" <bpbullock@LARIBAY.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Bill Bullock" <bpbullock@LARIBAY.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Exhaust Temperature
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0CBB_01C56B69.5042A450
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

    I need some idea of what exhaust temperatures you folks are =
generating...a computation would do fine.
Bill

------=_NextPart_000_0CBB_01C56B69.5042A450
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META content=3D"text/html; charset=3Diso-8859-1" =
http-equiv=3DContent-Type>
<META content=3D"MSHTML 5.00.2614.3500" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; I need some idea of what exhaust temperatures =
you folks=20
are generating...a computation would do fine.</DIV>
<DIV>Bill</DIV></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0CBB_01C56B69.5042A450--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 5806 invoked from network); 6 Sep 2001 18:19:06 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 6 Sep 2001 18:19:06 -0000
Received: (qmail 3740 invoked by uid 50005); 6 Sep 2001 18:19:07 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpa with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.640386 secs); 06 Sep 2001 18:19:07 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 6 Sep 2001 18:19:04 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA07132; Thu, 6 Sep 2001 10:05:55 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 80778 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 6 Sep 2001 17:05:53 +0000
Received: from smtp03.mrf.mail.rcn.net (smtp03.mrf.mail.rcn.net [207.172.4.62])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA03200 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Wed, 5 Sep 2001 17:54:50 -0700
Received: from 208-58-202-7.s7.tnt1.bltm.md.dialup.rcn.com ([208.58.202.7]          helo=brunyate) by smtp03.mrf.mail.rcn.net with smtp (Exim 3.33 #10)          id 15enRR-0006Ti-00 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 05 Sep 2001          20:54:49 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <MBBBKKNFKBOLONOKKFHLMECNCBAA.adrianby@erols.com>
Date:         Wed, 5 Sep 2001 20:50:43 -0400
Reply-To: "Adrian Brunyate" <adrianby@EROLS.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Adrian Brunyate" <adrianby@EROLS.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Propellent Musings
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <l03130300b7b5da214575@[63.25.193.159]>

        On the subject of NA/kerosene, I was reading today; apparently, BMW
proposed modifying its engine developed for the Me-262 (yes 262, as a rocket
assist; called "109-718" or something), which originally burned 97%
NA/"Tonka" (a gasoline-like mix), to burn J-2 instead (the ME-262 burned
both). Does anyone know if they tried this? Failed due to instability?
        Adrian Brunyate.

-----Original Message-----
From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@itc.uci.edu]On
Behalf Of Aaron Smith
Sent: Friday, August 31, 2001 8:24 PM
To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
Subject: Re: [AR] Propellent Musings


At 5:12 PM -0700 9/3/01, Jerry Irvine wrote:
>>Aaron Smith:
>
>
>>I posted this a while back, but here it is again.
>>
>>1) Nitric acid / Kerosene : 1.223 g/cc, 245 seconds - 3532 m/s
>>2) LOX / Kerosene : .968 g/cc, 270 seconds - 3437 m/s
>>3) 90% H2O2 / Kerosene : 1.236 g/cc, 224 seconds - 3252 m/s
>>4) LOX / LCH4 : .769 g/cc, 285 seconds - 3168 m/s
>>5) LOX / LH2 : .365 g/cc, 306 seconds - 2080 m/s
>>
>>This is assuming we use the same tank, with the same expansion ratio, Pc,
>>and weight for each combination.
>
>
>The first item on the list not only has a high ISP but a VERY high
>density impulse.  To me #1 is #1, #3 is #2 and #2 is #3.
>
>#1 is easier to handle too.
>
>Jerry

I think Nitric/Kerosene has big problems with combustion instability only
solved by large amounts of hydrazine.  Not fun.  I just need to think about
which is better in terms of handling, H2O2 or LOX.  For all practical
purposes, they rate the same on the above chart.

Anything anyone wants to throw in?

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 16496 invoked from network); 6 Sep 2001 18:21:26 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 6 Sep 2001 18:21:26 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 17201 invoked by uid 50005); 6 Sep 2001 18:18:50 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpf with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.13601 secs); 06 Sep 2001 18:18:50 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 6 Sep 2001 18:18:50 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA08237; Thu, 6 Sep 2001 11:05:18 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 81485 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 6 Sep 2001 18:05:15 +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (f191.law15.hotmail.com [64.4.23.191]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA08223 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Thu, 6 Sep 2001 11:05:14 -0700
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Thu,          6 Sep 2001 11:04:44 -0700
Received: from 213.224.83.174 by lw15fd.law15.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Thu,          06 Sep 2001 18:04:44 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [213.224.83.174]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 06 Sep 2001 18:04:44.0442 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[686977A0:01C136FE]
Message-ID:  <F191iZAIxpmV2kER6BN000071d9@hotmail.com>
Date:         Thu, 6 Sep 2001 18:05:15 +0000
Reply-To: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Propellent Musings
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

AB wrote:


>         On the subject of NA/kerosene, I was reading today; apparently,
>BMW
>proposed modifying its engine developed for the Me-262 (yes 262, as a
>rocket
>assist; called "109-718" or something),

correct

>which originally burned 97% >NA/"Tonka"

eg Tonka 250  = 1:1 v/v xylidine/triehylamine, later only used as an
ignition agent (hypergol) in typical pre-combustion chambers, incl.
throttling

>(a gasoline-like mix)

BMW Tonkas were not gasoline-like

>to burn J-2 instead (the ME-262 burned both).

after 'visole' were used, recipes containing vinyl-ether. What is J-2?
(The only J-2 I know was in Saturn V)

>Does anyone know if they tried this? Failed due to instability?

Tried what?

jd




_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 17769 invoked from network); 6 Sep 2001 18:21:45 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 6 Sep 2001 18:21:45 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 9275 invoked by uid 50005); 6 Sep 2001 18:19:42 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.19756 secs); 06 Sep 2001 18:19:42 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 6 Sep 2001 18:19:42 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA07098; Thu, 6 Sep 2001 10:05:49 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 80766 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 6 Sep 2001 17:05:47 +0000
Received: from sys27.hou.wt.net (sys27.hou.wt.net [205.230.159.27]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA03130 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 5 Sep 2001 17:40:33 -0700
Received: from localhost (216-119-138-193.ipset18.wt.net [216.119.138.193]) by          sys27.hou.wt.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id TAA65679; Wed, 5 Sep          2001 19:40:25 -0500 (CDT)
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.388)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <200109060040.TAA65679@sys27.hou.wt.net>
Date:         Wed, 5 Sep 2001 19:40:38 -0500
Reply-To: "Donald McCorvey" <dlm3@NETAXS.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Donald McCorvey" <dlm3@NETAXS.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Electronics Box document
Comments: To: Jamie Morken <jmorken@HOME.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <000701c135d0$2ef59280$0400a8c0@hatjs>

You can use an instrumentation amplifier, as you suggest, but it may not
solve the problem John is concerned about - for that purpose, it might
be better to use an isolation amplifier - same idea, but includes an
optical or transformer stage to ensure that ground noise from one side
of the amp doesn't traverse the circuit.

The only trouble with them is that they're pricey - if you can work
around it another way, you'll be better off.

A simple solution might be to build an optically isolated sending unit
which puts out a pulse proportional to the voltage (a voltage to
frequency converter) and transmits it via an optoisolator. It's the same
idea as the isolation amp, but leaves out the frequency-to-voltage
conversion step.

On the other end, a simple discrete input and a timer can be used to
measure the pulse rate and figure out the voltage.

Don McCorvey

On Wednesday, September 5, 2001, at 01:01 AM, Jamie Morken wrote:

> Hi all,
>
>> I have put up a document about our second electronics box, with many
>> lessons learned, at:
>>
>> http://www.armadilloaerospace.com/ElectronicsBox2.htm
>
> To measure the solenoid battery voltage I think you could make a
> instrumentation amplifier
> (powered by the PC104 stack battery) and then feed the + and - side of
> the
> solenoid battery into the amplifiers + and - inputs.  This would then
> allow
> you to measure the solenoid battery while keeping the two different
> circuit
> ground's isolated.
>
> The max4194 : http://dbserv.maxim-ic.com/quick_view2.cfm?qv_pk=2006
> or the INA125 :
> http://www.digikey.com/scripts/us/dksus.dll?Detail?Ref=78501&Row=118073
> instrumentation amps would work well for this I think.
>
> I don't know much about this and I am sure there would be more problems
> with
> the implementation! :)
>
> best regards,
> Jamie
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 19437 invoked from network); 6 Sep 2001 18:22:08 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 6 Sep 2001 18:22:08 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 17599 invoked by uid 50005); 6 Sep 2001 18:21:49 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpe with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.513088 secs); 06 Sep 2001 18:21:49 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 6 Sep 2001 18:21:47 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA06961; Thu, 6 Sep 2001 10:05:27 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 80928 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 6 Sep 2001 17:05:25 +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (f206.law15.hotmail.com [64.4.23.206]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA05373 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Thu, 6 Sep 2001 06:22:16 -0700
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Thu,          6 Sep 2001 06:21:45 -0700
Received: from 193.121.251.246 by lw15fd.law15.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Thu,          06 Sep 2001 13:21:45 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [193.121.251.246]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 06 Sep 2001 13:21:45.0709 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[E04C69D0:01C136D6]
Message-ID:  <F2063V5EUHzEjn6so3s00006a8a@hotmail.com>
Date:         Thu, 6 Sep 2001 17:05:25 +0000
Reply-To: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      [AR] paper clip hypergols
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

http://www.fortunepaint.com/aerocon_interim/advinfo.htm

The above URL is probably old hat to most. It came up once more when I was
browsing to find a hypergolic fluid slug to ignite a, say, N2O/methane
biprop (Isp 230 s) with a slug.

But looking at this ww2 hypergols list once more, I found something was
missing: what are these compositions (most of the the fuel half, yet not
all) hypergolic with?

With the C-Stoff, well, that's easy: 80-85 % HP. But the others?

Note the 7 fuels mentioned which are hypergolic with nitric acid! What is
pyrodyne? Furfuryl alcohol is missing. There must be many more.

jd



_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 19522 invoked from network); 6 Sep 2001 18:22:09 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 6 Sep 2001 18:22:09 -0000
Received: (qmail 9620 invoked by uid 50005); 6 Sep 2001 18:20:08 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.121434 secs); 06 Sep 2001 18:20:08 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 6 Sep 2001 18:20:08 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA07030; Thu, 6 Sep 2001 10:05:37 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 80947 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 6 Sep 2001 17:05:36 +0000
Received: from tsmtp3.ldap.isp (mailhost.teleline.es [195.235.113.141] (may be          forged)) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA05676 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 6 Sep 2001 07:34:32 -0700
Received: from central ([213.99.81.80]) by tsmtp3.ldap.isp (Netscape Messaging          Server 4.15 tsmtp3 Jul 26 2001 13:10:38) with ESMTP id GJ8WGI00.DEZ          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 6 Sep 2001 16:33:54 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0CBE_01C56B69.504C1A30"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2314.1300
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <002f01c136e1$33c255c0$505163d5@central>
Date:         Thu, 6 Sep 2001 16:33:03 +0200
Reply-To: "javier.d" <javier.d@teleline.es>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "javier.d" <javier.d@teleline.es>
Subject:      [AR] AN  and  NH3 odour
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0CBE_01C56B69.504C1A30
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="Windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

=20
We are working in low cost solid fuel, we have try with different =
mixtures, normally we used KN witch base for propellant. Of course the =
cheapest fuel is KN-sugars, we are mixing the KN with AN and epoxy. This =
mixture has a high ISP near of 200s without metallic fuel, when we mix =
the Epoxy with the AN-KN we smell to NH3, we have changed the curative =
with aromatic amines by  a polyamide curative, the odor is lowest than =
the amines.

Questions:

 Is normal the odor to NH3 in all cases?=20

How much time needs the mixture to be stable and not generate bubbles to =
put into the mould?

Thanks,

Javier D.




------=_NextPart_000_0CBE_01C56B69.504C1A30
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="Windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META content=3D"text/html; charset=3Dwindows-1252" =
http-equiv=3DContent-Type>
<META content=3D"MSHTML 5.00.2314.1000" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV>&nbsp;
<P class=3DMsoNormal><SPAN lang=3DEN-GB style=3D"mso-ansi-language: =
EN-GB">We are=20
working in low cost solid fuel, we have try with different mixtures, =
normally we=20
used KN witch base for propellant. Of course the cheapest fuel is =
KN-sugars, we=20
are mixing the KN with AN and epoxy. This mixture has a high ISP near of =
200s=20
without metallic fuel, when we mix the Epoxy with the AN-KN we smell to =
NH3, we=20
have changed the curative with aromatic amines by  a polyamide curative, =
the=20
odor is lowest than the amines.<?xml:namespace prefix =3D o ns =3D=20
"urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" /><o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P class=3DMsoNormal><SPAN lang=3DEN-GB=20
style=3D"mso-ansi-language: EN-GB">Questions:<o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P class=3DMsoNormal><SPAN lang=3DEN-GB=20
style=3D"mso-ansi-language: EN-GB">&nbsp;</SPAN><SPAN lang=3DEN-GB=20
style=3D"mso-ansi-language: EN-GB">Is normal the odor to NH3 in all=20
cases?</SPAN><SPAN lang=3DEN-GB=20
style=3D"mso-ansi-language: EN-GB">&nbsp;<o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P class=3DMsoNormal><SPAN lang=3DEN-GB style=3D"mso-ansi-language: =
EN-GB">How much=20
time needs the mixture to be stable and not generate bubbles to put into =
the=20
mould?</SPAN></P>
<P class=3DMsoNormal><SPAN lang=3DEN-GB=20
style=3D"mso-ansi-language: EN-GB">Thanks,</SPAN></P>
<P class=3DMsoNormal><SPAN lang=3DEN-GB style=3D"mso-ansi-language: =
EN-GB">Javier=20
D.</SPAN></P>
<P class=3DMsoNormal><SPAN lang=3DEN-GB=20
style=3D"mso-ansi-language: =
EN-GB"><o:p></o:p></SPAN>&nbsp;</P></DIV></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0CBE_01C56B69.504C1A30--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 23658 invoked from network); 6 Sep 2001 18:23:09 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 6 Sep 2001 18:23:09 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 992 invoked by uid 50005); 6 Sep 2001 18:21:45 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 1.655239 secs); 06 Sep 2001 18:21:45 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 6 Sep 2001 18:21:43 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA06823; Thu, 6 Sep 2001 10:05:04 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 80899 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 6 Sep 2001 17:05:03 +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (f176.law15.hotmail.com [64.4.23.176]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA04456 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Thu, 6 Sep 2001 00:29:06 -0700
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Thu,          6 Sep 2001 00:28:35 -0700
Received: from 193.121.251.246 by lw15fd.law15.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Thu,          06 Sep 2001 07:28:35 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [193.121.251.246]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 06 Sep 2001 07:28:35.0900 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[8A3027C0:01C136A5]
Message-ID:  <F176Hiu3fQtYdVzDpub0000223b@hotmail.com>
Date:         Thu, 6 Sep 2001 17:05:03 +0000
Reply-To: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Propellent Musings
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

JC wrote:

>70% peroxide will only barely boil the water content, so it makes for a
>poor monoprop

OK for torps not rockets I read

>The stabilizers will also poison catalyst packs, so you need a conventional
>igniter.  I don't think any of the dissolved fuel catalysts will be
>hypergolic with the lower concentration.

Do not know of any

>Commercial 70% should be a so-so biprop or hybrid oxidizer, but it may not
>hold much performance advantage over NOX, and will have all the same
>ignition hassles.

NOx is NO, N2O4, N3O.... is NTO (eg in car exhaust) meant here? N2O is not
an NOx IMHO. Good grief, imagine dentists using NOx...

jd


_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 22922 invoked from network); 6 Sep 2001 18:29:51 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 6 Sep 2001 18:29:51 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 9158 invoked by uid 50005); 6 Sep 2001 18:28:27 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.19853 secs); 06 Sep 2001 18:28:27 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 6 Sep 2001 18:28:27 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA07911; Thu, 6 Sep 2001 10:36:50 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 81389 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 6 Sep 2001 17:36:45 +0000
Received: from snipe.mail.pas.earthlink.net (snipe.mail.pas.earthlink.net          [207.217.120.62]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA07824          for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Thu, 6 Sep 2001 10:26:44 -0700
Received: from earthlink.net (dialup-209.245.140.155.Dial1.SanJose1.Level3.net          [209.245.140.155]) by snipe.mail.pas.earthlink.net (8.11.5/8.9.3)          with ESMTP id f86HQh521577; Thu, 6 Sep 2001 10:26:43 -0700 (PDT)
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.75 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.16-22 i686)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <v01510100b7bd04cc8e42@[208.22.189.33]>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B97B231.801268B2@earthlink.net>
Date:         Thu, 6 Sep 2001 10:28:17 -0700
Reply-To: "David Weinshenker" <daze39@EARTHLINK.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "David Weinshenker" <daze39@EARTHLINK.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] 1,naive question?
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

al bradley wrote:
>
> Hi Listees:
> Although I am aware of the possible diverse answers that are in waiting to
> respond to this theoretical question I really would like to see how well it
> is answered by our group:
>
> A liquid propellant engine has internal combusion chamber pressure when
> operating properly  of 1,000 PSI (pounds per square inch). How much
> pressure is needed at the injectors to introduce fuel and oxidizer to
> maintain the combustion at this pressure?
>
> If you want to present this as equations please designate each factor not
> only by its letter, but by the respresentative word for each letter
> (something that is too often lacking lately in posts).

Injector pressure drops amounting to 10-50% of chamber pressure are
typical (trying to make it too low makes it hard to maintain steady
combustion, as there is more feedback from fluctuations of chamber
pressure) - so an engine with 1000 psi chamber pressure might receive
propellants from its feed system (pump or pressurized tank) at something
like 1100-1500 psi. (The specific "injector pressure drop" is one of those
design parameters that is subject to trade-offs: increasing it makes it
easier for the engine to run smoothly, but requires heavier tanks and more
pressurant gas (or heavier, more powerful pumps) to feed propellant at a
higher pressure).

-dave w

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 590 invoked from network); 6 Sep 2001 18:38:31 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 6 Sep 2001 18:38:31 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 18663 invoked by uid 50005); 6 Sep 2001 18:38:33 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpa with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.86599 secs); 06 Sep 2001 18:38:33 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 6 Sep 2001 18:38:32 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA08347; Thu, 6 Sep 2001 11:19:09 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 81517 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 6 Sep 2001 18:19:07 +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (f169.law15.hotmail.com [64.4.23.169]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA08332 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Thu, 6 Sep 2001 11:19:07 -0700
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Thu,          6 Sep 2001 11:18:37 -0700
Received: from 213.224.83.174 by lw15fd.law15.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Thu,          06 Sep 2001 18:18:36 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [213.224.83.174]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 06 Sep 2001 18:18:37.0166 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[58C110E0:01C13700]
Message-ID:  <F169nlNFf82rPe4n4WZ0000721f@hotmail.com>
Date:         Thu, 6 Sep 2001 18:19:07 +0000
Reply-To: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Propellent Musings
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Propep? Could you please try to input nonsense like 30 % HP: does it still
turn out a result? Yes, incl. Isp?

Not really familiar with Propep but most such programs are based on
thermodynamic data and the presupposition the mix will ignite, so always
turns out Isp's, even if it is not ignitable. The specialists 'll correct me
if they please.

jd

_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 6014 invoked from network); 6 Sep 2001 18:39:46 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 6 Sep 2001 18:39:46 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 6089 invoked by uid 50005); 6 Sep 2001 18:39:27 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpe with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.614687 secs); 06 Sep 2001 18:39:27 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 6 Sep 2001 18:39:26 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA08017; Thu, 6 Sep 2001 10:42:19 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 81430 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 6 Sep 2001 17:42:16 +0000
Received: from bailey.dscga.com (bailey.dscga.com [198.78.9.11]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA08003 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu,          6 Sep 2001 10:42:14 -0700
Received: (from michael@localhost) by bailey.dscga.com (8.9.1/) id NAA08343;          Thu, 6 Sep 2001 13:38:11 -0400 (EDT)
References: <4.3.1.2.20010905150252.02b0b008@mail.idsoftware.com>            <3B96D16B.F88F027D@earthlink.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
User-Agent: Mutt/1.1.2i
Message-ID:  <20010906133811.U1518@bailey.dscga.com>
Date:         Thu, 6 Sep 2001 13:38:11 -0400
Reply-To: "Michael Mealling" <michael@NEONYM.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Michael Mealling" <michael@NEONYM.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] aRocket project
Comments: To: thomgaf@energyrs.com
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <3B96D16B.F88F027D@earthlink.net>; from              energyrelease@EARTHLINK.NET on Wed, Sep 05,              2001 at 06:29:15PM -0700

On Wed, Sep 05, 2001 at 06:29:15PM -0700, Thomas M. Mcgaffey wrote:
> John Carmack is right,  just look how he has structured his group.
> There is ONE leader, John Carmack, and he pays the way. (Murphy's Golden
> Rule: He who has the gold makes the rules.)  There can only be one
> "BOSS" on a project.

Sort of true (BOSS is to strong of a word for me). Most open source
projects have a central core of one to three people who provide the
glue that holds the group together. They're the ones who rally the
troups, provide core direction and technical guidance, and who provide
the stability when participants come and go...

> Michael Mealling makes good points about sharing resources ( Money,
> Equipment, Time and Skill ).
>
> > For the most part, yes. But the one thing that open source techniques
> > enable is the spending of 'resources' by those who have them. Mark might
> > not have the money to buy some of the materials but he may have time and
> > expertise that I don't have, whereas I've got the money and a much
> > smaller amount of time. So its not a way of overcoming a complete lack
> > of resources but it is a way of allocating tasks to those with the
> > right resources to accomplish them.
>
> Those with money but no time should consider funding a project or
> part of a project but do so only if they can keep from trying to
> run the project.

It really depends on the projects and tasks. I might not have the time
to do the QA process but I've got enough hours in the day to do some
of the electronics components.

> Those with equipment and time should consider donating machining time
> to a project but again they must keep from trying to run project.
>
> The same goes for others with different skills; donate time to a project
> and keep your hands off the day to day running of the project.

Yep. This is typically how things are done. But in many cases people
will just pick up a task because its interesting or they've already
done it for another project. Its hard to say how things like this
will work....

> One "BOSS" and only one "BOSS".  A committee barely gets anything
> done when they are sitting around a single table, let alone spread out
> over the "NET".  Remember, "a camel is a horse designed by committee",
> is a truism, not just a witticism.

IMHO, 'BOSS' is to strong of a word here. Linus Torvalds doesn't boss
anyone around directly. He leads. And its up to the individuals to follow
or not....

> > > Distributed rocket construction is likely to be especially difficult.
>
> Again I agree with John Carmack.  Who is going to pay the shipping costs
> for parts shipped between the workers in different states?

Those who built them. Or else you can have someone else pay for the
shipping. Be creative. Maybe a big barbeque in someone's backyard
where everyone drives to some central location twice a quarter for
beer and pizza....

We're doing that here in Atlanta with an all carbon fiber project...

> Who is going to do the "QC" of the parts and who has the right to reject
> unacceptable work and finally, who decides what is acceptable in the
> first place?  Specs are important but not a panacea.  Even the most
> simplistic project always needs minor tweaks and massaging at nearly
> every stage of design, development, test, etc.  Who has the final say
> when everyone involved has a different opinion on every single issue,
> even when said issue is not their area of expertise?

Someone has to step up to that task when its needed. In software
projects certain people get to do code reviews and are the 'keepers
of the tree'. They get to decide who has write permissions and how
has to get their code reviewed. Again... be creative...

> How is the "BOSS" going to force people to do what they commit to do?

He doesn't... no force is involved. If you don't build your stuff
then your stuff doesn't fly....

> Yes, I said "force" not motivate and for a good reason.  Some people
> have the best intentions but always seem to fall behind (maybe due to
> "honey do's") or just flat fall on their faces.  When will the "BOSS"
> pull the plug on someone who is not carrying his end of the log and then
> how does the "BOSS" get parts back from him that he was sent 2 months
> before?  These problems should be expected!!  Unfortunately, human
> nature and life being what they are ("shit happens"), there WILL be
> those who cannot deliver what they commit to for one reason or another.
> And these otherwise good intentioned individuals often fall back in
> defensiveness with remarks about our endeavors being "just a hobby
> anyway, so get off my back".
>
> This attitude, which I find pervasive in all rocketry forums, condemns
> any project to utter failure.  Therefore, the "BOSS" must have a thick
> skin as well as the complete support of the entire team when he finally
> says "enough is enough" to an unproductive slacker.

this happens in any open source project and techniques for dealing
with it have been developed in that community. I'm willing to at least
attempt them here...


> > The jury is still out on whether or not 'open source' techniques
> > work when all materials costs are not zero. But IMHO, its worth a try.
> > -MM
> >
>
> Yes it might work if ............................@#$%^&*&  :-(
>
>
> I have been on a few group projects, some of which were rocketry
> projects and I currently have a major project of my own under way and I
> can tell you that a very strong willed leader is needed.  In a business
> situation this works only most of the time, but in a volunteer group
> with people spending their own money it rarely does work.  Everybody
> thinks they are equal and should have a role in the design and
> implementation of the each and every component.  After all it's their
> money!  Also, volunteer projects I have been part of have always had at
> least one or two people trying to run the project even after the leader
> had been picked.  They just couldn't stop believing that they should be
> in charge.
>
> I would love to see a "NET" based rocketry project actually work and all
> the IP placed on a web site so others can learn from the project.  I
> don't have any idea how this could be done, though.  You can hardly get
> volunteer workers to show up let alone to follow the game plan without
> either trying to take over or turn every decision into a debate. It is
> the "ME" generation.

We'll let you know how it goes. I think you're going to be suprised...

-MM

> John Carmack wrote:
> >
> > At 02:01 AM 9/5/2001 -0400, you wrote:
> >
> > > Hey list,
> > >
> > > In the past few months there has been a lot of talk about an open
> > > source
> > > aRocket project. Well I for one think its about time to quit the
> > > bullshit and
> > > actually start the project. For the last year or two I have been
> > > designing
> > > several different rockets on my computer that to date have only
> > > flown in
> > > simulation programs. The only reasons that my rockets are yet to be
> > > built are
> > > because I don't have enough money or access to tools and resources.
> > > The money
> > > problem however is only a minor concern as most of the costs are up
> > > front
> > > costs associated with buying equipment such as Nitrous Oxide filling
> > > systems
> > > and tanks, and a lathe. These are costs that others have already
> > > dealt with.
> > > However if this were to be done by myself the costs of buying these
> > > would be
> > > prohibitive to accomplishing anything.
> > >
> >
> > An open source project doesn't help things get started, and is almost
> > never a way to get over personal resource limitations.  This is a
> > common misconception, with "start an open source project" often being
> > offered as a way to undertake a difficult task.  None of the poster
> > child cases for open source were started that way, they were all
> > started by a single individual or a cohesive team, and brought to a
> > reasonable level of functionality before they were opened to the world
> > for input.
> >
> > Distributed rocket construction is likely to be especially difficult.
> >
> > I would also strongly urge you to pursue two earlier stages in your
> > development plan:
> >
> > Build an instrumented test stand and develop the engine completely
> > separately from any vehicle considerations.  You can use convenient
> > and safe DOT tanks, and just getting the engine to work reliably is
> > going to be a significant task.
> >
> > Build a fairly standard HPR vehicle that can be fully tested on normal
> > reloads, then have your engine integrated later.  This is ERPS' KISS
> > vehicle plan, and I think it is very sensible.
> >
> > If you can't afford to do this, you can't afford your project, and
> > open source isn't going to help.  Paying list price for good
> > components to do all that would cost a couple thousand dollars, but
> > enterprising people that know where to scrounge and borrow resources
> > could probably get it done for a few hundred dollars.
> >
> > John Carmack

--
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Michael Mealling        |      Vote Libertarian!       | urn:pin:1
michael@neonym.net      |                              | http://www.neonym.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 7712 invoked from network); 6 Sep 2001 18:40:09 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 6 Sep 2001 18:40:09 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 19858 invoked by uid 50005); 6 Sep 2001 18:40:09 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpa with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 1.156548 secs); 06 Sep 2001 18:40:09 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 6 Sep 2001 18:40:07 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA06891; Thu, 6 Sep 2001 10:05:15 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 80910 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 6 Sep 2001 17:05:13 +0000
Received: from rasmus.uib.no (exim@rasmus.uib.no [129.177.12.30]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id DAA04828 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Thu, 6 Sep 2001 03:14:01 -0700
Received: from tunnel-46-86.vpn.uib.no (emil.rasmus.uib.no) [129.177.46.86] by          rasmus.uib.no for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU with esmtp (Exim 3.16) id          15ewAQ-0006T4-00; Thu, 06 Sep 2001 12:13:50 +0200
X-Sender: st07696@rasmus.uib.no
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <5.1.0.14.0.20010906120943.026638c8@rasmus.uib.no>
Date:         Thu, 6 Sep 2001 12:14:00 +0200
Reply-To: "Emil Johnsen" <Emil.Johnsen@STUDENT.UIB.NO>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Emil Johnsen" <Emil.Johnsen@STUDENT.UIB.NO>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Propellent Musings
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <4.3.1.2.20010905183035.02f47378@mail.idsoftware.com>

>Commercial 70% should be a so-so biprop or hybrid oxidizer, but it may not
>hold much performance advantage over NOX, and will have all the same
>ignition hassles.

                         Isp     DIsp
N2O/PE          246.7   193.0
90%H2O2/PE              247.1   322.5
70%H2O2/PE              219.3   271.1
(At 3.1Mpa(450psi), calculated by Propep)


Emil

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 9256 invoked from network); 6 Sep 2001 18:54:09 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 6 Sep 2001 18:54:09 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 29181 invoked by uid 50005); 6 Sep 2001 18:54:11 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpa with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 1.346522 secs); 06 Sep 2001 18:54:11 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 6 Sep 2001 18:54:08 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA08607; Thu, 6 Sep 2001 11:42:38 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 81562 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 6 Sep 2001 18:42:30 +0000
Received: from pintail.mail.pas.earthlink.net (pintail.mail.pas.earthlink.net          [207.217.120.122]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id          LAA08514 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Thu, 6 Sep 2001 11:32:30 -0700
Received: from earthlink.net (dialup-209.245.140.155.Dial1.SanJose1.Level3.net          [209.245.140.155]) by pintail.mail.pas.earthlink.net          (EL-8_9_3_3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id LAA02968; Thu, 6 Sep 2001 11:32:28          -0700 (PDT)
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.75 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.16-22 i686)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <F169nlNFf82rPe4n4WZ0000721f@hotmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B97C19F.DA70FD12@earthlink.net>
Date:         Thu, 6 Sep 2001 11:34:07 -0700
Reply-To: "David Weinshenker" <daze39@EARTHLINK.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "David Weinshenker" <daze39@EARTHLINK.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Propellent Musings
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

John Dom wrote:
> Not really familiar with Propep but most such programs are based on
> thermodynamic data and the presupposition the mix will ignite, so always
> turns out Isp's, even if it is not ignitable. The specialists 'll correct me
> if they please.

I believe you're right about such programs - they calculate the chemical
energy release, even for "propellants" that could not be ignited in
actual practice.

-dave w

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 3013 invoked from network); 6 Sep 2001 18:59:54 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 6 Sep 2001 18:59:54 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 3360 invoked by uid 50005); 6 Sep 2001 19:00:01 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpb with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 1.081815 secs); 06 Sep 2001 19:00:01 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 6 Sep 2001 18:59:59 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA08834; Thu, 6 Sep 2001 11:54:42 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 81616 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 6 Sep 2001 18:54:31 +0000
Received: from smtp005pub.verizon.net (smtp005pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.184])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA08819 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 6 Sep 2001 11:54:31 -0700
Received: from [63.24.225.125] (1Cust4.tnt1.rancho-cucamonga.ca.da.uu.net          [63.24.225.4]) by smtp005pub.verizon.net  with ESMTP for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; id f86IrwW23082 Thu, 6 Sep 2001 13:53:58 -0500          (CDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: GTE/01rocket@mail.gte.net
References: <4.3.1.2.20010905150252.02b0b008@mail.idsoftware.com>            <3B96D16B.F88F027D@earthlink.net>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <a05100308b7bd753d326b@[63.24.225.125]>
Date:         Thu, 6 Sep 2001 11:53:56 -0700
Reply-To: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] aRocket project (solid)
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <3B96D16B.F88F027D@earthlink.net>

>Thomas McGaffey wrote so many things I agree with I kept it all in.


I hereby designate myself BOSS of a solid motor based effort or an
effort solid boosting some other rocket I am only an executive boss
of.

As part of my proposed "BOSS" duties I offer to donate the casings,
propellant, test equipment, nozzles and bulkheads, igniters and
ground computers.  I would ask some financial assistance and alot of
technical assistance for all other aspects including telemetry,
payload, and launch process issues. I also will provide an insured,
approved launch site.

I invite others to be BOSS of liquid, bi-prop, hybrid projects, but
as one might surmise I find myself in a position to launch something
solid as immediately as the other non-propulsion people can handle.

Jerry

>John Carmack is right,  just look how he has structured his group.
>There is ONE leader, John Carmack, and he pays the way. (Murphy's Golden
>Rule: He who has the gold makes the rules.)  There can only be one
>"BOSS" on a project.
>
>Michael Mealling makes good points about sharing resources ( Money,
>Equipment, Time and Skill ).
>
>>  For the most part, yes. But the one thing that open source techniques
>>  enable is the spending of 'resources' by those who have them. Mark might
>>  not have the money to buy some of the materials but he may have time and
>>  expertise that I don't have, whereas I've got the money and a much
>>  smaller amount of time. So its not a way of overcoming a complete lack
>>  of resources but it is a way of allocating tasks to those with the
>>  right resources to accomplish them.
>
>Those with money but no time should consider funding a project or
>part of a project but do so only if they can keep from trying to
>run the project.
>
>Those with equipment and time should consider donating machining time
>to a project but again they must keep from trying to run project.
>
>The same goes for others with different skills; donate time to a project
>and keep your hands off the day to day running of the project.
>
>One "BOSS" and only one "BOSS".  A committee barely gets anything
>done when they are sitting around a single table, let alone spread out
>over the "NET".  Remember, "a camel is a horse designed by committee",
>is a truism, not just a witticism.
>
>>  > Distributed rocket construction is likely to be especially difficult.
>
>Again I agree with John Carmack.  Who is going to pay the shipping costs
>for parts shipped between the workers in different states?
>
>Who is going to do the "QC" of the parts and who has the right to reject
>unacceptable work and finally, who decides what is acceptable in the
>first place?  Specs are important but not a panacea.  Even the most
>simplistic project always needs minor tweaks and massaging at nearly
>every stage of design, development, test, etc.  Who has the final say
>when everyone involved has a different opinion on every single issue,
>even when said issue is not their area of expertise?
>
>How is the "BOSS" going to force people to do what they commit to do?
>Yes, I said "force" not motivate and for a good reason.  Some people
>have the best intentions but always seem to fall behind (maybe due to
>"honey do's") or just flat fall on their faces.  When will the "BOSS"
>pull the plug on someone who is not carrying his end of the log and then
>how does the "BOSS" get parts back from him that he was sent 2 months
>before?  These problems should be expected!!  Unfortunately, human
>nature and life being what they are ("shit happens"), there WILL be
>those who cannot deliver what they commit to for one reason or another.
>And these otherwise good intentioned individuals often fall back in
>defensiveness with remarks about our endeavors being "just a hobby
>anyway, so get off my back".
>
>This attitude, which I find pervasive in all rocketry forums, condemns
>any project to utter failure.  Therefore, the "BOSS" must have a thick
>skin as well as the complete support of the entire team when he finally
>says "enough is enough" to an unproductive slacker.
>
>
>>
>>  The jury is still out on whether or not 'open source' techniques
>>  work when all materials costs are not zero. But IMHO, its worth a try.
>>  -MM
>>
>
>Yes it might work if ............................@#$%^&*&  :-(
>
>
>I have been on a few group projects, some of which were rocketry
>projects and I currently have a major project of my own under way and I
>can tell you that a very strong willed leader is needed.  In a business
>situation this works only most of the time, but in a volunteer group
>with people spending their own money it rarely does work.  Everybody
>thinks they are equal and should have a role in the design and
>implementation of the each and every component.  After all it's their
>money!  Also, volunteer projects I have been part of have always had at
>least one or two people trying to run the project even after the leader
>had been picked.  They just couldn't stop believing that they should be
>in charge.
>
>I would love to see a "NET" based rocketry project actually work and all
>the IP placed on a web site so others can learn from the project.  I
>don't have any idea how this could be done, though.  You can hardly get
>volunteer workers to show up let alone to follow the game plan without
>either trying to take over or turn every decision into a debate. It is
>the "ME" generation.
>
>Thom
>
>Thomas McGaffey
>Energy Release Systems
>thomgaf@energyrs.com
>408-226-7502
>San Jose, Kalifornia
>


--
Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
Opinion, the whole thing.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 10763 invoked from network); 6 Sep 2001 19:01:40 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 6 Sep 2001 19:01:40 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 5581 invoked by uid 50005); 6 Sep 2001 18:59:37 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.216431 secs); 06 Sep 2001 18:59:37 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 6 Sep 2001 18:59:37 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA08373; Thu, 6 Sep 2001 11:19:39 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 81524 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 6 Sep 2001 18:19:38 +0000
Received: from adobe.com (smtp-relay-2.adobe.com [192.150.11.2]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA08359 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu,          6 Sep 2001 11:19:37 -0700
Received: from inner-relay-1.corp.adobe.com ([153.32.1.51]) by adobe.com          (1.0.0/8.11.4) with ESMTP id f86IIcx28670 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>;          Thu, 6 Sep 2001 11:18:38 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mailsj-v1.corp.adobe.com (mailsj-dev.corp.adobe.com          [153.32.1.192]) by inner-relay-1.corp.adobe.com (8.11.4/8.11.4) with          ESMTP id f86IJCA20103 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 6 Sep 2001          11:19:12 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from sronald.earthlink.net ([153.32.63.111]) by          mailsj-v1.corp.adobe.com (Netscape Messaging Server 4.15 v1 Jul 11          2001 16:32:57) with ESMTP id GJ96VH00.G2S; Thu, 6 Sep 2001 11:18:53          -0700
X-Sender: forkbomb@mail.earthlink.net
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <5.1.0.14.0.20010906112142.027da030@mail.earthlink.net>
Date:         Thu, 6 Sep 2001 11:22:07 -0700
Reply-To: <forkbomb@EARTHLINK.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <forkbomb@EARTHLINK.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Gun launch - part deux THE END
Comments: To: John Dom <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <F144G1WZXPoiWPis2Sj0000712b@hotmail.com>

At 05:31 PM 9/6/01 +0000, John Dom wrote:
>>AKA, rockoon.  You have no control over the balloon itself, and it can
>>drift quite far.
>
>Unless you control it like a kite! Next question: adequate light, strong
>(non-combustible) string material?


         Make most of the line spectra, with a kevlar leader near the kite.

         -p

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 5704 invoked from network); 6 Sep 2001 19:14:57 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 6 Sep 2001 19:14:57 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 12048 invoked by uid 50005); 6 Sep 2001 19:14:58 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpa with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.521447 secs); 06 Sep 2001 19:14:58 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 6 Sep 2001 19:14:56 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA07870; Thu, 6 Sep 2001 10:31:24 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 81391 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 6 Sep 2001 17:31:22 +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (f144.law15.hotmail.com [64.4.23.144]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA07856 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Thu, 6 Sep 2001 10:31:22 -0700
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Thu,          6 Sep 2001 10:30:52 -0700
Received: from 213.224.83.174 by lw15fd.law15.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Thu,          06 Sep 2001 17:30:51 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [213.224.83.174]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 06 Sep 2001 17:30:52.0250 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[AD2193A0:01C136F9]
Message-ID:  <F144G1WZXPoiWPis2Sj0000712b@hotmail.com>
Date:         Thu, 6 Sep 2001 17:31:22 +0000
Reply-To: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Gun launch - part deux THE END
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

>AKA, rockoon.  You have no control over the balloon itself, and it can
>drift quite far.

Unless you control it like a kite! Next question: adequate light, strong
(non-combustible) string material?

jd


_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 20567 invoked from network); 6 Sep 2001 19:32:57 -0000
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 6 Sep 2001 19:32:57 -0000
Received: (qmail 29656 invoked by uid 50005); 6 Sep 2001 19:30:20 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpf with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.164936 secs); 06 Sep 2001 19:30:20 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 6 Sep 2001 19:30:20 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA09695; Thu, 6 Sep 2001 12:25:59 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 81687 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 6 Sep 2001 19:25:57 +0000
Received: from spock.alohanet.com (spock.alohanet.com [209.31.4.252]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA09681 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Thu, 6 Sep 2001 12:25:56 -0700
Received: from NATE2 (spock.alohanet.com [209.31.4.252]) by spock.alohanet.com          (Post.Office MTA v3.5.2 release 221 ID# 0-55447U100L2S100V35) with          SMTP id com for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Thu, 6 Sep 2001 12:24:57 -0700
References: <4.3.1.2.20010905150252.02b0b008@mail.idsoftware.com>                       <3B96D16B.F88F027D@earthlink.net>             <a05100308b7bd753d326b@[63.24.225.125]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <007501c1370a$4b1da840$68e9a8c0@NATE2>
Date:         Thu, 6 Sep 2001 12:29:49 -0700
Reply-To: "Nathan Hays" <nhays@ALOHANET.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Nathan Hays" <nhays@ALOHANET.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] aRocket project (solid)
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Jerry -

Where are your facilities?

- Nate


----- Original Message -----
From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Thursday, September 06, 2001 11:53 AM
Subject: Re: [AR] aRocket project (solid)


> >Thomas McGaffey wrote so many things I agree with I kept it all in.
>
>
> I hereby designate myself BOSS of a solid motor based effort or an
> effort solid boosting some other rocket I am only an executive boss
> of.
>
> As part of my proposed "BOSS" duties I offer to donate the casings,
> propellant, test equipment, nozzles and bulkheads, igniters and
> ground computers.  I would ask some financial assistance and alot of
> technical assistance for all other aspects including telemetry,
> payload, and launch process issues. I also will provide an insured,
> approved launch site.
>
> I invite others to be BOSS of liquid, bi-prop, hybrid projects, but
> as one might surmise I find myself in a position to launch something
> solid as immediately as the other non-propulsion people can handle.
>
> Jerry
>
> >John Carmack is right,  just look how he has structured his group.
> >There is ONE leader, John Carmack, and he pays the way. (Murphy's Golden
> >Rule: He who has the gold makes the rules.)  There can only be one
> >"BOSS" on a project.
> >
> >Michael Mealling makes good points about sharing resources ( Money,
> >Equipment, Time and Skill ).
> >
> >>  For the most part, yes. But the one thing that open source techniques
> >>  enable is the spending of 'resources' by those who have them. Mark
might
> >>  not have the money to buy some of the materials but he may have time
and
> >>  expertise that I don't have, whereas I've got the money and a much
> >>  smaller amount of time. So its not a way of overcoming a complete lack
> >>  of resources but it is a way of allocating tasks to those with the
> >>  right resources to accomplish them.
> >
> >Those with money but no time should consider funding a project or
> >part of a project but do so only if they can keep from trying to
> >run the project.
> >
> >Those with equipment and time should consider donating machining time
> >to a project but again they must keep from trying to run project.
> >
> >The same goes for others with different skills; donate time to a project
> >and keep your hands off the day to day running of the project.
> >
> >One "BOSS" and only one "BOSS".  A committee barely gets anything
> >done when they are sitting around a single table, let alone spread out
> >over the "NET".  Remember, "a camel is a horse designed by committee",
> >is a truism, not just a witticism.
> >
> >>  > Distributed rocket construction is likely to be especially
difficult.
> >
> >Again I agree with John Carmack.  Who is going to pay the shipping costs
> >for parts shipped between the workers in different states?
> >
> >Who is going to do the "QC" of the parts and who has the right to reject
> >unacceptable work and finally, who decides what is acceptable in the
> >first place?  Specs are important but not a panacea.  Even the most
> >simplistic project always needs minor tweaks and massaging at nearly
> >every stage of design, development, test, etc.  Who has the final say
> >when everyone involved has a different opinion on every single issue,
> >even when said issue is not their area of expertise?
> >
> >How is the "BOSS" going to force people to do what they commit to do?
> >Yes, I said "force" not motivate and for a good reason.  Some people
> >have the best intentions but always seem to fall behind (maybe due to
> >"honey do's") or just flat fall on their faces.  When will the "BOSS"
> >pull the plug on someone who is not carrying his end of the log and then
> >how does the "BOSS" get parts back from him that he was sent 2 months
> >before?  These problems should be expected!!  Unfortunately, human
> >nature and life being what they are ("shit happens"), there WILL be
> >those who cannot deliver what they commit to for one reason or another.
> >And these otherwise good intentioned individuals often fall back in
> >defensiveness with remarks about our endeavors being "just a hobby
> >anyway, so get off my back".
> >
> >This attitude, which I find pervasive in all rocketry forums, condemns
> >any project to utter failure.  Therefore, the "BOSS" must have a thick
> >skin as well as the complete support of the entire team when he finally
> >says "enough is enough" to an unproductive slacker.
> >
> >
> >>
> >>  The jury is still out on whether or not 'open source' techniques
> >>  work when all materials costs are not zero. But IMHO, its worth a try.
> >>  -MM
> >>
> >
> >Yes it might work if ............................@#$%^&*&  :-(
> >
> >
> >I have been on a few group projects, some of which were rocketry
> >projects and I currently have a major project of my own under way and I
> >can tell you that a very strong willed leader is needed.  In a business
> >situation this works only most of the time, but in a volunteer group
> >with people spending their own money it rarely does work.  Everybody
> >thinks they are equal and should have a role in the design and
> >implementation of the each and every component.  After all it's their
> >money!  Also, volunteer projects I have been part of have always had at
> >least one or two people trying to run the project even after the leader
> >had been picked.  They just couldn't stop believing that they should be
> >in charge.
> >
> >I would love to see a "NET" based rocketry project actually work and all
> >the IP placed on a web site so others can learn from the project.  I
> >don't have any idea how this could be done, though.  You can hardly get
> >volunteer workers to show up let alone to follow the game plan without
> >either trying to take over or turn every decision into a debate. It is
> >the "ME" generation.
> >
> >Thom
> >
> >Thomas McGaffey
> >Energy Release Systems
> >thomgaf@energyrs.com
> >408-226-7502
> >San Jose, Kalifornia
> >
>
>
> --
> Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
> Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
> Opinion, the whole thing.
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 14126 invoked from network); 6 Sep 2001 20:00:04 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 6 Sep 2001 20:00:04 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 11929 invoked by uid 50005); 6 Sep 2001 19:58:40 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.22594 secs); 06 Sep 2001 19:58:40 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 6 Sep 2001 19:58:40 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA10055; Thu, 6 Sep 2001 12:33:21 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 81718 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 6 Sep 2001 19:33:19 +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (f150.law15.hotmail.com [64.4.23.150]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA10041 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Thu, 6 Sep 2001 12:33:19 -0700
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Thu,          6 Sep 2001 12:32:49 -0700
Received: from 213.224.83.38 by lw15fd.law15.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Thu, 06          Sep 2001 19:32:48 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [213.224.83.38]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 06 Sep 2001 19:32:49.0240 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[B665A580:01C1370A]
Message-ID:  <F150G5n6tzOLfnzlluT0000744f@hotmail.com>
Date:         Thu, 6 Sep 2001 19:33:19 +0000
Reply-To: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Gun launch - part trois
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Quote hooon@IHUG.CO.NZ:

>....I only mentioned the website because it contained our velocity calc
>program...
>
>http://www.spudgunsnz.com
>
>contains the program.

Right. Do you have a program listing? I'd love an Excel version. Or
Excel/Visual Basic if you got to re-iterate. DOS is long ago for me. Your
program runs under DOS doesn't it?

jd

_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 18850 invoked from network); 6 Sep 2001 20:08:01 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 6 Sep 2001 20:08:01 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 18738 invoked by uid 50005); 6 Sep 2001 20:07:59 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpa with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 1.321839 secs); 06 Sep 2001 20:07:59 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 6 Sep 2001 20:07:56 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA09392; Thu, 6 Sep 2001 12:19:14 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 81661 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 6 Sep 2001 19:19:13 +0000
Received: from ns.vanguard.com (ns.VANGUARD.COM [192.175.173.31]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA09367 for          <ARocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 6 Sep 2001 12:19:01 -0700
Received: from eagle1.vanguard.com (eagle1.VANGUARD.COM [192.175.141.70]) by          ns.vanguard.com (Switch-2.1.3/Switch-2.1.0) with ESMTP id          f86JIhg24250 for <ARocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 6 Sep 2001 15:18:43          -0400 (EDT)
Received: from vgi4mail.vanguard.com (vgi4mail.vanguard.com [10.254.65.16]) by          eagle1.vanguard.com (Switch-2.1.3/Switch-2.1.0) with SMTP id          f86JIvj20116 for <ARocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 6 Sep 2001 15:18:57          -0400 (EDT)
Received: by vgi4mail.vanguard.com(Lotus SMTP MTA v4.6.6  (890.1 7-16-1999))           id 85256ABF.006A1024 ; Thu, 6 Sep 2001 15:18:29 -0400
X-Lotus-FromDomain: VGINOTES
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Disposition: inline
Message-ID:  <85256ABF.006A0E4B.00@vgi4mail.vanguard.com>
Date:         Thu, 6 Sep 2001 15:18:43 -0400
Reply-To: <Waysie_Atkins@VANGUARD.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <Waysie_Atkins@VANGUARD.COM>
Subject:      [AR] Article on Magnetorheological Materials
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Link is below, material is possible replacement for pzieoelectric materials,
hydraulics and magnetorestrictive materials.
Primary advantage is low cost and " "that they can be used to regulate hundreds
of Watts of mechanical power with
just a few Watts of electrical power," Gaven wrote "


http://www.space.com/businesstechnology/technology/mr_materials_010905-1.html

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 817 invoked from network); 6 Sep 2001 20:10:37 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 6 Sep 2001 20:10:37 -0000
Received: (qmail 23094 invoked by uid 50005); 6 Sep 2001 20:09:13 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.160461 secs); 06 Sep 2001 20:09:13 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 6 Sep 2001 20:09:13 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA10628; Thu, 6 Sep 2001 12:48:27 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 81763 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 6 Sep 2001 19:48:26 +0000
Received: from roll.akcecc.kiev.ua (roll.akcecc.kiev.ua [193.227.206.34]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA10614 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 6 Sep 2001 12:48:23 -0700
Received: from serge (pool-104.akcecc.kiev.ua [193.227.207.104] (may be          forged)) by roll.akcecc.kiev.ua (8.10.2/8.10.2) with SMTP id          f86JmFf22740 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 6 Sep 2001 22:48:16 +0300
References:  <F109ZmAvxDm35x0j1Ts00006ccc@hotmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="koi8-r"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2417.2000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <009101c13704$42c3a740$68cfe3c1@serge>
Date:         Thu, 6 Sep 2001 22:45:25 +0400
Reply-To: "Serge Pipko" <spas@AKCECC.KIEV.UA>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Serge Pipko" <spas@AKCECC.KIEV.UA>
Subject:      Re: [AR] AN melt: homogeneity
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

John Dom wrote:

> S. Pipko wrote:
>
> >No, it is AN crystals dispersed in glass-like solid solution of fuel in
AN.
>
> Odd. Very fine (small) AN crystals distributed homogenously in the
AN/sugar
> glass solid? Coloration? Opacity?

I must clarify ones more: sugar (table sugar, sucrose) decomposes very
quicly not only in AN melt, but also in AN-KN and even in low-melting
AN-KN-NaN melt.

Regarding crystal size I'll site myself:
In all cases that I have studied upon cooling large portion of AN deposits
as a crystalline mass. Resulting propellant block look like AP composite,
i.e. it is composite of AN crystals and glass-like solid solution of fuel in
AN. The size of AN crystals is controlled by melt viscosity: the more
viscous melt the smaller crystals it deposits. For example, very runny
AN-sorbitol melt gives crumbly composite with AN crystals up to 3 mm long.
Viscous melts containing starch or wheat flour give uniform microcrystalline
composites with good mechanical properties.

Coloration: AN-sorbitol, AN-KN-NaN-starch, AN-KN-NaN-wheat flour : white
AN-KN-starch, AN-KN-wheat flour : light brown

Opacity: all solid products are non-transparent, but glass-like part is
transpared.

> You did start from a homogenous crystal-free melt; how come AN crystals
had
> time to form during cooling? Because cooling was too slow?

I didn't yet make efforts to minimize crystal size, this task will be
somewhere after suitable composition will be founded.

> I do not know about the effect of crystal size in BATES grains *thus*
> produced on burn characteristics of it. Should it have an effect, then I
> expect manufacture reproducibility problems as I guess crystal size is
hard
> to reproduce by slow (air) cooling. (ie my industrial experience
concerning
> caprolactam and ammonium sulfate).

It is very likely that the effect of crystal size will be negligible,
because upon burning surface layer of propellant become homogeneous liquid
again.

> So maybe in such case super fast cooling
> in methanol/dry ice could produce a crystal-free smooth glass grain.

I can try ( and definitely will try ) even liquid nitrogen in my chemlab,
but the main goal is to find composition, which can be prepared from
widespread components.

Serge

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 14035 invoked from network); 6 Sep 2001 20:20:43 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 6 Sep 2001 20:20:43 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 27461 invoked by uid 50005); 6 Sep 2001 20:20:44 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpa with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.958344 secs); 06 Sep 2001 20:20:44 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 6 Sep 2001 20:20:42 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA09375; Thu, 6 Sep 2001 12:19:04 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 81654 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 6 Sep 2001 19:19:00 +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (f32.law15.hotmail.com [64.4.23.32]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA09356 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Thu,          6 Sep 2001 12:19:00 -0700
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Thu,          6 Sep 2001 12:18:26 -0700
Received: from 213.224.83.38 by lw15fd.law15.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Thu, 06          Sep 2001 19:18:26 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [213.224.83.38]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 06 Sep 2001 19:18:26.0462 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[B4242BE0:01C13708]
Message-ID:  <F32D8wbVGkJmiWGxbDD0000302e@hotmail.com>
Date:         Thu, 6 Sep 2001 19:19:00 +0000
Reply-To: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] 1,naive question?
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This came to mind: what about opening the valves gradually after low
pressure ignition, (blowdown mode) next boost flow to the nominal
conditions? Not unlike starting a brazing torch. Opening time speed; how
slow can one go?

jd


>From: David Weinshenker <daze39@EARTHLINK.NET>
>Reply-To: David Weinshenker <daze39@EARTHLINK.NET>
>To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
>Subject: Re: [AR] 1,naive question?
>Date: Thu, 6 Sep 2001 10:28:17 -0700
>
>al bradley wrote:
> >
> > Hi Listees:
> > Although I am aware of the possible diverse answers that are in waiting
>to
> > respond to this theoretical question I really would like to see how well
>it
> > is answered by our group:
> >
> > A liquid propellant engine has internal combusion chamber pressure when
> > operating properly  of 1,000 PSI (pounds per square inch). How much
> > pressure is needed at the injectors to introduce fuel and oxidizer to
> > maintain the combustion at this pressure?
> >
> > If you want to present this as equations please designate each factor
>not
> > only by its letter, but by the respresentative word for each letter
> > (something that is too often lacking lately in posts).
>
>Injector pressure drops amounting to 10-50% of chamber pressure are
>typical (trying to make it too low makes it hard to maintain steady
>combustion, as there is more feedback from fluctuations of chamber
>pressure) - so an engine with 1000 psi chamber pressure might receive
>propellants from its feed system (pump or pressurized tank) at something
>like 1100-1500 psi. (The specific "injector pressure drop" is one of those
>design parameters that is subject to trade-offs: increasing it makes it
>easier for the engine to run smoothly, but requires heavier tanks and more
>pressurant gas (or heavier, more powerful pumps) to feed propellant at a
>higher pressure).
>
>-dave w


_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 22424 invoked from network); 6 Sep 2001 20:22:42 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 6 Sep 2001 20:22:42 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 20900 invoked by uid 50005); 6 Sep 2001 20:20:42 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.193469 secs); 06 Sep 2001 20:20:42 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 6 Sep 2001 20:20:41 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA10084; Thu, 6 Sep 2001 12:33:41 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 81725 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 6 Sep 2001 19:33:40 +0000
Received: from smtp006pub.verizon.net (smtp006pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.185])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA10069; Thu, 6 Sep 2001          12:33:40 -0700
Received: from [63.10.189.47] (1Cust47.tnt2.hilo.hi.da.uu.net [63.10.189.47])          by smtp006pub.verizon.net  with ESMTP ; id f86JX2319175 Thu, 6 Sep          2001 14:33:02 -0500 (CDT)
X-Sender: ttocs@mail.gte.net
References: <l03130300b7b856c75ba5@[63.10.201.222]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <l03130300b7b98acb3c9d@[63.10.189.89]>
Date:         Mon, 3 Sep 2001 09:32:39 -1000
Reply-To: "Aaron Smith" <ttocs@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Aaron Smith" <ttocs@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Gun launch - part deux  THE END
Comments: To: "David J. McCue" <dmccue@itc.uci.edu>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <Pine.LNX.4.10.10109060919370.6208-100000@itc.uci.edu>

Sorry, I thought I had.  I was not characterizing you as unable to
understand, but I had posted a message earlier, after our e-mail, as to
what I had meant, and someone still thought I meant something else.

I meant absolutely no disrespect toward you.

At 9:37 AM -0700 9/6/01, David J. McCue wrote:
>I'm sorry, but I cannot sit still for this nonsense-
>
>On Sun, 2 Sep 2001, Aaron Smith wrote:
>
>> Eh, you're talking about still launching from under the wing.  No.  That
>> would require that you point the plane straight up.  I was talking about
>> realeasing the rocket under a parachute, letting it stabilize and point
>> upward.  THEN you launch it, when your aircraft is miles away.
>>
>> Let's stop this thread.  It has already slightly pissed off some people.  I
>> just had to clarify so that i don't seem like a complete idiot to those who
>> don't listen.
>>
>> Aaron
>>
>Aaron:
>
>In your original message, you did not specify the manner in which you
>planned on launching a rocket from an aircraft, just that you were
>considering doing it. I, and several others, concluded that you were
>talking about firing a rocket from the aircraft and took issue with the
>wisdom of doing this, and with the appropriateness of this topic as a
>subject for discussion on aRocket.
>
>In the course of private communication about this, you did not amplify on
>what you supposedly really meant, but you did state that you understood my
>and Ray's concerns, and would drop the topic. Now you attempt to
>characterize us as unable to understand something you never adaquately
>explained until after the fact! I see no reason for accepting this kind of
>rudeness from someone using a resource Ray and I go to considerable
>trouble to provide.
>
>For the benefit of the group: Ray and I have agreed that discussion of
>aircraft-launched rockets is not a subject appropriate to this forum.
>There are too many risks associated with this approach, not only for the
>experimentor, but for the general public as well. I hope this is clear.
>
>-Dave McCue
>
>> At 4:24 PM -0400 9/5/01, kc2csh@JUNO.COM wrote:
>> >Dave:
>> >  I don't think he said manned.
>> >  100kg to 14k altitude and 80 knots is well within the possibilities of
>> >modest ultralite kit modified for R/C
>> >  200kg to 25k altitude and 250 knots is well within the possibilities of
>> >commonly attainable  kitplanes modified for R/C
>> >  The biggest flaw with something like this is that the useful launch
>> >angle is so much different than the best attainable apparent wind during
>> >a launch portion of flight, that you are effectively launching either at
>> >a poor angle, or at a poor velocity, or at a poor altitude,  or into a
>> >hurricane velocity wind sheer.  Some aerobatics can get you something
>> >useful, but far from optimal.  The kind of performance required at
>> >altitude is of a totally different class; and with that goes a totally
>> >different price range.  The timing and dynamics are so complex and
>> >precise, you'd probably need a sensor aray and electronic launch control
>> >to be at all within acceptable safety ranges.
>> >  Getting the acceptable performance characteristics would probably
>> >require high performance engines and an aircraft design created from
>> >scratch for the purpose.
>> >  Not to say it can't be done, or shouldn't be done, just that its much
>> >more complicated, more expensive, and more involved than it looks on
>> >first glance.
>> >
>> >               Jay
>> >
>> >On Tue, 4 Sep 2001 17:59:23 -0700 Kristin & David Hall
>> ><thehalls@RIDGENET.NET> writes:
>> >
>> >> > Just out of cusiosity, how much would a dedicated air-launch
>> >aircraft for
>> >> > small rockets be worth?  Say, 100 Kg to 14,000 ft.  200 kg?
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> ....Seriously, of all the ideas I've seen thrown around on Arocket,  I
>> >would
>> >> consider an amateur rocket launched from a manned aircraft to be by
>> >far the
>> >> dumbest (Where dumb is defined as "situation likely to get somebody
>> >> killed".).
>> >
>> >________________________________________________________________
>> >GET INTERNET ACCESS FROM JUNO!
>> >Juno offers FREE or PREMIUM Internet access for less!
>> >Join Juno today!  For your FREE software, visit:
>> >http://dl.www.juno.com/get/tagj.
>>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 3039 invoked from network); 6 Sep 2001 20:25:24 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 6 Sep 2001 20:25:24 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 25807 invoked by uid 50005); 6 Sep 2001 20:22:38 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpf with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.220047 secs); 06 Sep 2001 20:22:38 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 6 Sep 2001 20:22:38 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA10443; Thu, 6 Sep 2001 12:40:55 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 81741 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 6 Sep 2001 19:40:53 +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (f159.law15.hotmail.com [64.4.23.159]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA10423 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Thu, 6 Sep 2001 12:40:53 -0700
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Thu,          6 Sep 2001 12:40:22 -0700
Received: from 213.224.83.38 by lw15fd.law15.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Thu, 06          Sep 2001 19:40:22 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [213.224.83.38]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 06 Sep 2001 19:40:22.0960 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[C4D5D300:01C1370B]
Message-ID:  <F1590Stamg6dfEm58zJ000072e8@hotmail.com>
Date:         Thu, 6 Sep 2001 19:40:53 +0000
Reply-To: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Indigo?
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Is that a titration indicator or a paint ingredient? Anything particular
about it apart from a zillion other similar organic molecule structures?

jd

>From: Russell McMahon <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
>Reply-To: Russell McMahon <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
>To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
>Subject: [AR] Indigo?
>Date: Thu, 6 Sep 2001 23:12:52 +1200
>
>Just happened on formula and structure of Indigo Blue.
>
>         C16H10N2O2
>
>Lots of double bonds and an interesting CO and NH bond per half.
>ASCII art isn't really up to drawing it usefully.
>
>Should be less ideal than a pure hydrocarbon but it might be interesting to
>see if there were any other physical properties that made it advantageous
>as
>a fuel.
>
>Any thoughts?
>
>
>         RM


_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 16649 invoked from network); 6 Sep 2001 20:49:29 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 6 Sep 2001 20:49:29 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 7828 invoked by uid 50005); 6 Sep 2001 20:47:20 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.114302 secs); 06 Sep 2001 20:47:20 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 6 Sep 2001 20:47:20 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA11210; Thu, 6 Sep 2001 13:32:11 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 81819 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 6 Sep 2001 20:32:10 +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (f38.pav1.hotmail.com [64.4.31.38]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA11196 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu,          6 Sep 2001 13:32:10 -0700
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Thu,          6 Sep 2001 13:31:39 -0700
Received: from 63.87.137.27 by pv1fd.pav1.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Thu, 06          Sep 2001 20:31:37 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [63.87.137.27]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 06 Sep 2001 20:31:39.0500 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[EE9892C0:01C13712]
Message-ID:  <F385LUGyVsKzRVPxw670000a3f3@hotmail.com>
Date:         Thu, 6 Sep 2001 13:31:37 -0700
Reply-To: "Brian Reddeman" <breddeman@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Brian Reddeman" <breddeman@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      [AR] Method to measure the amount of pressure?
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

You know, it's just one of those days. I was about to post a question on how
to measure pressure output from my micropump when looked to my left an
noticed a pressure gauge. It's a little big but it should work. Since I'm
already typing. Is there a more efficient method (Inexpensive and safe are
key points to be considered) to test pressurization (and get an accurate
reading)?

_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 19645 invoked from network); 6 Sep 2001 20:50:07 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 6 Sep 2001 20:50:07 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 8532 invoked by uid 50005); 6 Sep 2001 20:48:01 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.527494 secs); 06 Sep 2001 20:48:01 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 6 Sep 2001 20:48:00 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA11176; Thu, 6 Sep 2001 13:30:38 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 81808 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 6 Sep 2001 20:30:33 +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (f228.law15.hotmail.com [64.4.23.228]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA11161 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Thu, 6 Sep 2001 13:30:33 -0700
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Thu,          6 Sep 2001 13:30:02 -0700
Received: from 213.224.83.38 by lw15fd.law15.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Thu, 06          Sep 2001 20:30:02 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [213.224.83.38]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 06 Sep 2001 20:30:02.0933 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[B5099E50:01C13712]
Message-ID:  <F228VzDpubxcbz37cfJ000066b5@hotmail.com>
Date:         Thu, 6 Sep 2001 20:30:33 +0000
Reply-To: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] AN melt: homogeneity
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Quote S. Pipko:

>I must clarify ones more: sugar (table sugar, sucrose) decomposes very
>quicly not only in AN melt, but also in AN-KN and even in low-melting
>AN-KN-NaN melt.

I was thinking of sorbitol with it's lower melting point and *and*
the taking advantage of the eutectic(or near-eutectic) lower melting point
by melting the mix and not the AN first.

>The size of AN crystals is controlled by melt viscosity: the more
>viscous melt the smaller crystals it deposits.

I experienced that with caprolactam. The viscosity is determined by the
impurity level in that case; the more impure the more difficult it got to
separate the crystals from their mother liquor in the centrifuge. Using a
strobe light we saw the viscous liquor could not diffuse through that sort
of fine crystal cake in time...

>It is very likely that the effect of crystal size will be negligible,
>because upon burning surface layer of propellant become homogeneous liquid
>again.

Most postings mention AN or KN grinding (the addition of the salt to the
sugar melt procedure ie) is essential_meaning it may have an important
influence. If not a red herring. A group which did launch big candy rockets
mentioned the possibility of crystal size distribution being responsible for
that one manufacturor's KN produced dud grains while the other was doing the
right stuff.

I 'd vote for microcrystalline or total glass grain hollow cylinders.

> > So maybe in such case super fast cooling
> > in methanol/dry ice could produce a crystal-free smooth glass grain.
>
>I can try ( and definitely will try ) even liquid nitrogen in my chemlab,
>but the main goal is to find composition, which can be prepared from
>widespread components.

Wish I had a lab (of my own).

jd

_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 21209 invoked from network); 6 Sep 2001 21:18:56 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 6 Sep 2001 21:18:56 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 28583 invoked by uid 50005); 6 Sep 2001 21:16:51 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.184813 secs); 06 Sep 2001 21:16:51 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 6 Sep 2001 21:16:51 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA09480; Thu, 6 Sep 2001 12:20:25 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 81668 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 6 Sep 2001 19:20:24 +0000
Received: from idsoftware.com (predator.idsoftware.com [192.246.40.34]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA09466 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Thu, 6 Sep 2001 12:20:24 -0700
Received: from [192.246.40.144] (account johnc HELO pluto.idsoftware.com) by          idsoftware.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 3.4.7) with ESMTP id 372595 for          AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 06 Sep 2001 13:40:37 -0500
X-Sender: johnc@mail.idsoftware.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.1
References: <3B96D16B.F88F027D@earthlink.net>            <4.3.1.2.20010905150252.02b0b008@mail.idsoftware.com>            <3B96D16B.F88F027D@earthlink.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <4.3.1.2.20010906135021.03ae54a8@mail.idsoftware.com>
Date:         Thu, 6 Sep 2001 13:53:10 -0500
Reply-To: "John Carmack" <johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Carmack" <johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] aRocket project
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <20010906133811.U1518@bailey.dscga.com>

>
>We'll let you know how it goes. I think you're going to be suprised...
>
>-MM

Can you give us some details on the project goals, team, and time line?

John Carmack

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 15492 invoked from network); 6 Sep 2001 21:24:27 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 6 Sep 2001 21:24:27 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 29312 invoked by uid 50005); 6 Sep 2001 21:24:09 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpe with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.272664 secs); 06 Sep 2001 21:24:09 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 6 Sep 2001 21:24:08 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA11363; Thu, 6 Sep 2001 13:46:45 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 81853 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 6 Sep 2001 20:46:42 +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (f205.law15.hotmail.com [64.4.23.205]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA11349 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Thu, 6 Sep 2001 13:46:42 -0700
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Thu,          6 Sep 2001 13:46:12 -0700
Received: from 213.224.83.142 by lw15fd.law15.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Thu,          06 Sep 2001 20:46:12 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [213.224.83.142]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 06 Sep 2001 20:46:12.0417 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[F6E52310:01C13714]
Message-ID:  <F205ifWoqFXfyY0QUUB00007358@hotmail.com>
Date:         Thu, 6 Sep 2001 20:46:42 +0000
Reply-To: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Propellent Musings
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

EJ wrote:

>I did not intend to use the output from Propep as
>proof as to the practicality of using 70% hydrogen peroxide as an oxidizer,
>just to indicate the performance that could be expected if it is made to
>work, and the post I replied to seems to indicate that it has been.

Here is an interesting paper on offorts to use PE/decomposed *85 %* HP: look
what difficulties these chaps ran into, even guided (hope this term is OK)
by a specialist...

http://www.ee.surrey.ac.uk/SSC/H2O2CONF/mbettner.htm

jd

_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 16858 invoked from network); 6 Sep 2001 21:24:54 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 6 Sep 2001 21:24:54 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 7099 invoked by uid 50005); 6 Sep 2001 21:23:23 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.776355 secs); 06 Sep 2001 21:23:23 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 6 Sep 2001 21:23:22 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA11273; Thu, 6 Sep 2001 13:38:52 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 81834 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 6 Sep 2001 20:38:47 +0000
Received: from mail.aros.net (mail.aros.net [207.173.16.20]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA11259 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu,          6 Sep 2001 13:38:46 -0700
Received: from biomicro.com ([208.187.122.40]) by mail.aros.net (8.11.6/8.9.3)          with ESMTP id f86Kcjm01734 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 6 Sep 2001          14:38:45 -0600 (MDT)
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.77 [en] (Win98; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <5.1.0.14.0.20010906212900.026638c8@lstud.ii.uib.no>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B97DED2.3C1DF9E8@biomicro.com>
Date:         Thu, 6 Sep 2001 14:38:42 -0600
Reply-To: "Mark K. Spute" <mks@BIOMICRO.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Mark K. Spute" <mks@BIOMICRO.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Propellent Musings
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Hmmm.  What would it give with 3% HP?  Just Curious.

Emil Johnsen wrote:
>
> >Propep? Could you please try to input nonsense like 30 % HP: does it still
> >turn out a result? Yes, incl. Isp?
>
> It does not have a entry for 30% HP, but when I used seperate entries for
> 100%HP and water it claimed an Isp of 114 (with PE fuel).
>
> >Not really familiar with Propep but most such programs are based on
> >thermodynamic data and the presupposition the mix will ignite, so always
> >turns out Isp's, even if it is not ignitable. The specialists 'll correct me
> >if they please.
>
> That is correct. One can not assume based on the program's output that a
> propellant will actually burn, but it does provide reasonably accurate
> results in most cases. I did not intend to use the output from Propep as
> proof as to the practicality of using 70% hydrogen peroxide as an oxidizer,
> just to indicate the performance that could be expected if it is made to
> work, and the post I replied to seems to indicate that it has been.
>
> Emil

--
Mark K. Spute
Senior Research Engineer
BioMicro Systems Inc.

KD7IWE,  RRS

"It is difficult to say what is impossible, for the dream of yesterday
is the hope of today and the reality of tomorrow."
     Dr. Robert H. Goddard

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 22605 invoked from network); 6 Sep 2001 21:33:21 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 6 Sep 2001 21:33:21 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 7662 invoked by uid 50005); 6 Sep 2001 21:30:43 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpf with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 2.140658 secs); 06 Sep 2001 21:30:43 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 6 Sep 2001 21:30:39 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA11089; Thu, 6 Sep 2001 13:19:45 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 81784 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 6 Sep 2001 20:19:37 +0000
Received: from rasmus.uib.no (exim@rasmus.uib.no [129.177.12.30]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA11074 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Thu, 6 Sep 2001 13:19:36 -0700
Received: from tunnel-46-86.vpn.uib.no (emil.rasmus.uib.no) [129.177.46.86] by          rasmus.uib.no  with esmtp (Exim 3.16) id 15f5cW-0003aI-00; Thu, 06          Sep 2001 22:19:29 +0200
X-Sender: st07696@rasmus.uib.no
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <5.1.0.14.0.20010906212900.026638c8@lstud.ii.uib.no>
Date:         Thu, 6 Sep 2001 22:17:18 +0200
Reply-To: "Emil Johnsen" <Emil.Johnsen@STUDENT.UIB.NO>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Emil Johnsen" <Emil.Johnsen@STUDENT.UIB.NO>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Propellent Musings
Comments: To: John Dom <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <F169nlNFf82rPe4n4WZ0000721f@hotmail.com>

>Propep? Could you please try to input nonsense like 30 % HP: does it still
>turn out a result? Yes, incl. Isp?

It does not have a entry for 30% HP, but when I used seperate entries for
100%HP and water it claimed an Isp of 114 (with PE fuel).

>Not really familiar with Propep but most such programs are based on
>thermodynamic data and the presupposition the mix will ignite, so always
>turns out Isp's, even if it is not ignitable. The specialists 'll correct me
>if they please.

That is correct. One can not assume based on the program's output that a
propellant will actually burn, but it does provide reasonably accurate
results in most cases. I did not intend to use the output from Propep as
proof as to the practicality of using 70% hydrogen peroxide as an oxidizer,
just to indicate the performance that could be expected if it is made to
work, and the post I replied to seems to indicate that it has been.


Emil

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 22985 invoked from network); 6 Sep 2001 21:40:33 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 6 Sep 2001 21:40:33 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 16136 invoked by uid 50005); 6 Sep 2001 21:40:15 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpe with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 2.527012 secs); 06 Sep 2001 21:40:15 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 6 Sep 2001 21:40:09 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA11538; Thu, 6 Sep 2001 14:20:53 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 81878 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 6 Sep 2001 21:19:56 +0000
Received: from smtppop3pub.verizon.net (smtppop3pub.gte.net [206.46.170.22]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA11517 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 6 Sep 2001 14:19:56 -0700
Received: from [63.24.225.125] (1Cust5.tnt1.rancho-cucamonga.ca.da.uu.net          [63.24.225.5]) by smtppop3pub.verizon.net  with ESMTP for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; id QAA19967 Thu, 6 Sep 2001 16:19:22 -0500          (CDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: GTE/01rocket@mail.gte.net
References: <4.3.1.2.20010905150252.02b0b008@mail.idsoftware.com>            <3B96D16B.F88F027D@earthlink.net>            <a05100308b7bd753d326b@[63.24.225.125]>            <007501c1370a$4b1da840$68e9a8c0@NATE2>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <a05100309b7bd987ae09a@[63.24.225.125]>
Date:         Thu, 6 Sep 2001 14:19:23 -0700
Reply-To: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] aRocket project (solid)
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <007501c1370a$4b1da840$68e9a8c0@NATE2>

>Jerry -
>
>Where are your facilities?
>
>- Nate


Southern CA.  But I would see the needed parts as being made locally
and suitably so.  Once tested and working they can be integrated to a
launch vehicle.  Since I have several scheduled they can be tested in
passive mode as necessary.

Jerry



--
Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
Opinion, the whole thing.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 8358 invoked from network); 6 Sep 2001 21:51:36 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 6 Sep 2001 21:51:36 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 3157 invoked by uid 50005); 6 Sep 2001 21:50:12 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.121574 secs); 06 Sep 2001 21:50:12 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 6 Sep 2001 21:50:11 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA11608; Thu, 6 Sep 2001 14:33:37 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 81889 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 6 Sep 2001 21:33:33 +0000
Received: from femail48.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail48.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.254.60.42]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA11594          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 6 Sep 2001 14:33:32 -0700
Received: from c396957-b.home.net ([24.17.249.10]) by          femail48.sdc1.sfba.home.com (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20          201-229-121-120-20010223) with ESMTP id          <20010906213327.FOZT26637.femail48.sdc1.sfba.home.com@c396957-b.home.net> for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 6          Sep 2001 14:33:27 -0700
X-Sender: spiegl@mail
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <5.1.0.14.2.20010906163230.00b3c958@mail>
Date:         Thu, 6 Sep 2001 16:33:37 -0500
Reply-To: "Mark C Spiegl" <spiegl@HOME.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Mark C Spiegl" <spiegl@HOME.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Electric matches, the second generation...
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <F81fnDrRRCIS1wKY7f30000a4c5@hotmail.com>

> I can't also find here (israel) any Nichrome wire.

I have found steel picture frame wire a very reasonable alternative
to Nichrome.  (the braided junk behind a picture frame)

I get a single strand of 1" picture frame wire to glow red
with a 9V battery. Never failed to ignite a pyrogen.


--MCS

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 25260 invoked from network); 6 Sep 2001 21:55:45 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 6 Sep 2001 21:55:45 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 22850 invoked by uid 50005); 6 Sep 2001 21:55:50 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpb with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.596272 secs); 06 Sep 2001 21:55:50 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 6 Sep 2001 21:55:49 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA10600; Thu, 6 Sep 2001 12:47:42 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 81756 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 6 Sep 2001 19:47:40 +0000
Received: from bailey.dscga.com (bailey.dscga.com [198.78.9.11]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA10586 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu,          6 Sep 2001 12:47:39 -0700
Received: (from michael@localhost) by bailey.dscga.com (8.9.1/) id PAA08752;          Thu, 6 Sep 2001 15:43:34 -0400 (EDT)
References: <3B96D16B.F88F027D@earthlink.net>            <4.3.1.2.20010905150252.02b0b008@mail.idsoftware.com>            <3B96D16B.F88F027D@earthlink.net>            <20010906133811.U1518@bailey.dscga.com>            <4.3.1.2.20010906135021.03ae54a8@mail.idsoftware.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
User-Agent: Mutt/1.1.2i
Message-ID:  <20010906154333.B1518@bailey.dscga.com>
Date:         Thu, 6 Sep 2001 15:43:34 -0400
Reply-To: "Michael Mealling" <michael@NEONYM.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Michael Mealling" <michael@NEONYM.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] aRocket project
Comments: To: John Carmack <johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <4.3.1.2.20010906135021.03ae54a8@mail.idsoftware.com>; from              johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM on Thu, Sep 06, 2001 at 01:53:10PM -0500

On Thu, Sep 06, 2001 at 01:53:10PM -0500, John Carmack wrote:
> >We'll let you know how it goes. I think you're going to be suprised...
> >
> >-MM
>
> Can you give us some details on the project goals, team, and time line?

Not yet because we (I) don't know what they are. When I said 'you're
going to be surpised' I was referring to open source techniques being
applied to a number of projects. Not to a particular project
I was working on...

Sorry if it was confusing...

-MM

--
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Michael Mealling        |      Vote Libertarian!       | urn:pin:1
michael@neonym.net      |                              | http://www.neonym.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 14763 invoked from network); 6 Sep 2001 22:43:29 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 6 Sep 2001 22:43:29 -0000
Received: (qmail 8416 invoked by uid 50005); 6 Sep 2001 22:43:07 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpa with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 1.669007 secs); 06 Sep 2001 22:43:07 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 6 Sep 2001 22:43:04 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA12054; Thu, 6 Sep 2001 15:27:46 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 81937 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 6 Sep 2001 22:27:38 +0000
Received: from mailhost0.trib.com (mailhost0.trib.com [63.229.150.3]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA12039 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Thu, 6 Sep 2001 15:27:37 -0700
Received: from mail.trib.com (mail.trib.com [12.10.158.17]) by          mailhost0.trib.com (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f86MRV680856; Thu, 6          Sep 2001 16:27:31 -0600 (MDT) (envelope-from          jwckman@space-rockets.com)
Received: from [63.229.150.224] (HELO default) by mail.trib.com (CommuniGate          Pro SMTP 3.4.6) with SMTP id 45761506; Thu, 06 Sep 2001 16:26:56 -0600
References: <4.3.1.2.20010905140219.02de0f08@mail.idsoftware.com>             <20010905190815.2471.qmail@softhome.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2314.1300
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <001b01c13722$830d7ec0$e096e53f@default>
Date:         Thu, 6 Sep 2001 16:23:05 -0600
Reply-To: "John Wickman" <jwckman@SPACE-ROCKETS.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Wickman" <jwckman@SPACE-ROCKETS.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] AN Grinding
Comments: To: erohrbaugh@softhome.net
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

I found that grinding wheel types do not work as the AN gums up the works.
The other types seem to work ok.

John Wickman

----- Original Message -----
From: <erohrbaugh@SOFTHOME.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Wednesday, September 05, 2001 1:08 PM
Subject: [AR] AN Grinding


> Is it possible to grind AN in a coffee grinder type of mechanism, or is it
> best to use a ball mill arrangement?
>
> Thanks,
>
> -Eric

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 9390 invoked from network); 6 Sep 2001 22:48:58 -0000
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 6 Sep 2001 22:48:58 -0000
Received: (qmail 1184 invoked by uid 50005); 6 Sep 2001 22:46:20 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpf with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.974973 secs); 06 Sep 2001 22:46:20 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 6 Sep 2001 22:46:18 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA12117; Thu, 6 Sep 2001 15:38:16 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 81944 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 6 Sep 2001 22:38:14 +0000
Received: from albqpop1.albq.uswest.net (albqpop1.albq.uswest.net          [207.108.240.1]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id PAA12101          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 6 Sep 2001 15:38:13 -0700
Received: (qmail 49337 invoked by alias); 6 Sep 2001 22:36:36 -0000
Delivered-To: fixup-AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU@fixme
Received: (qmail 49036 invoked by uid 0); 6 Sep 2001 22:36:30 -0000
Received: from cc898542-a.prdise1.nm.home.com (HELO cc898542a) (65.7.151.152)          by albqpop1.albq.uswest.net with SMTP; 6 Sep 2001 22:36:30 -0000
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0CC1_01C56B69.50723FD0"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <001c01c13724$eb8b2680$0100a8c0@prdise1.nm.home.com>
Date:         Thu, 6 Sep 2001 16:40:23 -0600
Reply-To: "Pax" <darkspunge@USWEST.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Pax" <darkspunge@USWEST.NET>
Subject:      [AR] Sourcing Al Tubing
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0CC1_01C56B69.50723FD0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Where do my fellow rocketeeres source nice 6" and 8" Al tubing suitable =
for motor casings?
I am actually looking for anything from 2" to 12" with 12" not being so =
important quite yet.
I really would like to know how much the hardware would be to scale up =
to those sizes in the future.
For now I would like 2", 3", 4" and 6" tubing. Or 54, 75, 98mm if those =
are sourcable as well.

Looking for companies and or people where the above can be found. I know =
Jerry makes motors in the 6" size range often. Any resources you guys =
can point me to?

Thanks

Paxton

------=_NextPart_000_0CC1_01C56B69.50723FD0
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Diso-8859-1">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 5.50.4522.1800" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Where do my fellow rocketeeres source =
nice 6" and=20
8" Al tubing suitable for motor casings?</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>I am actually looking for anything from =
2" to 12"=20
with 12" not being so important quite yet.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>I really would like to know how much =
the hardware=20
would be to scale up to those sizes in the future.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>For now I would like 2", 3", 4" and 6" =
tubing. Or=20
54, 75, 98mm if those are sourcable as well.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Looking for companies and or people =
where the above=20
can be found. I know Jerry makes motors in&nbsp;the 6"&nbsp;size range =
often.=20
Any resources&nbsp;you guys can point me to?</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Thanks</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Paxton</FONT></DIV></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0CC1_01C56B69.50723FD0--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 26944 invoked from network); 6 Sep 2001 23:58:20 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 6 Sep 2001 23:58:20 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 5698 invoked by uid 50005); 6 Sep 2001 23:56:18 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.240624 secs); 06 Sep 2001 23:56:18 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 6 Sep 2001 23:56:18 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA12367; Thu, 6 Sep 2001 16:40:02 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 81978 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 6 Sep 2001 23:39:55 +0000
Received: from smtp004pub.verizon.net (smtp004pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.183])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA12348 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 6 Sep 2001 16:39:54 -0700
Received: from [63.24.225.125] (1Cust85.tnt2.rancho-cucamonga.ca.da.uu.net          [63.15.225.85]) by smtp004pub.verizon.net  with ESMTP for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; id f86NdMq02416 Thu, 6 Sep 2001 18:39:22 -0500          (CDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: GTE/01rocket@mail.gte.net
References: <001c01c13724$eb8b2680$0100a8c0@prdise1.nm.home.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <a0510030bb7bdb9709f00@[63.24.225.125]>
Date:         Thu, 6 Sep 2001 16:39:20 -0700
Reply-To: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Sourcing Al Tubing
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <001c01c13724$eb8b2680$0100a8c0@prdise1.nm.home.com>

>Where do my fellow rocketeeres source nice 6" and 8" Al tubing
>suitable for motor casings?
>I am actually looking for anything from 2" to 12" with 12" not being
>so important quite yet.
>I really would like to know how much the hardware would be to scale
>up to those sizes in the future.
>For now I would like 2", 3", 4" and 6" tubing. Or 54, 75, 98mm if
>those are sourcable as well.
>
>Looking for companies and or people where the above can be found. I
>know Jerry makes motors in the 6" size range often. Any
>resources you guys can point me to?
>
>Thanks
>
>Paxton

I have 2.125", 3.00", 3.875" and 6" in stock (54mm, 75mm, 98mm, 152mm).



--
Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
Opinion, the whole thing.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 17698 invoked from network); 7 Sep 2001 00:29:24 -0000
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 7 Sep 2001 00:29:24 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 23349 invoked by uid 50005); 7 Sep 2001 00:29:05 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpe with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.331808 secs); 07 Sep 2001 00:29:05 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 7 Sep 2001 00:29:04 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA12497; Thu, 6 Sep 2001 17:09:18 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 81991 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 7 Sep 2001 00:09:15 +0000
Received: from mclean.mail.mindspring.net (mclean.mail.mindspring.net          [207.69.200.57]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA12483          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 6 Sep 2001 17:09:15 -0700
Received: from mindspring.com (sdn-ar-014casfrMP002.dialsprint.net          [158.252.218.4]) by mclean.mail.mindspring.net (8.9.3/8.8.5) with          ESMTP id UAA04167; Thu, 6 Sep 2001 20:09:09 -0400 (EDT)
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 (Macintosh; U; PPC)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <5.1.0.14.0.20010905003542.02aa3008@hobbiton.shire.net>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B96B223.995F743B@mindspring.com>
Date:         Wed, 5 Sep 2001 16:15:51 -0700
Reply-To: "Alan Shinn" <alshinn@MINDSPRING.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Alan Shinn" <alshinn@MINDSPRING.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] More info on my ignitors.
Comments: To: Seth Leigh <seth@PENGAR.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Red LEDs like 30mA. I=E/R,  R=E/I    8.4 V/.03 A = 280 Ohm,  RC time =
280 Ohm * 1000 micFd = .28 seconds

Seth Leigh wrote:
>
> I've done some more testing using AA batteries.  I got no response at all
> until I got to 4.5 volts, where after several seconds I got a whiff of
> smoke, and disconnected lest I cook off the ignitor.  With 6 volts (four
> brand new Costco store-brand AA batteries in series) I fired two ignitors,
> and it took 1-2 whole seconds each, where after a second smoke would appear
> and then finally it would burst into it's typical quick flash.  I haven't
> tried 7.5v yet.  I'm not sure it's worth it to try 7.5v.  I am fairly
> confident, as an operational matter, that these ignitors will simply
> require 9v to fire reliably and quickly.  I burned several ignitors with an
> already-used 9v battery when I first mixed up the pyrogen three or four
> days ago.
>
> Now I'm very interested to see what sort of capacitor will reliably and
> quickly fire these ignitors.
>
> Also, for you electronics gurus out there, it's been a while since I had a
> class in college for basic electronics, so please remind me.  I want to
> charge up a capacitor, so I was thinking I'd put an LED and a 10k resistor
> in series with one of the leads of the cap.  The 10k resistor would be to
> limit the current so I don't fry the LED, and the LED would be there so I
> can visually verify that current is flowing into the capacitor, charging
> it.  From what I recall, an LED takes 6/10 of a volt to turn on, so if I
> used a 9v battery and this LED/resistor setup, shouldn't that mean the cap
> was charged to 8.4 volts when the LED goes out?  And is 10k high enough to
> prevent burning out your average LED?  I suppose I'll buy several LEDs just
> in case it isn't.  ;-)
>
> Seth

--
Looking forward:
Alan Shinn


Experience the
beginnings of microscopy.
Make your own replica
of one of Antony van Leeuwenhoek's microscopes.
visit    http://www.mindspring.com/~alshinn/

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 18792 invoked from network); 7 Sep 2001 00:29:38 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 7 Sep 2001 00:29:38 -0000
Received: (qmail 29277 invoked by uid 50005); 7 Sep 2001 00:29:41 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpb with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.896506 secs); 07 Sep 2001 00:29:41 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 7 Sep 2001 00:29:40 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA12570; Thu, 6 Sep 2001 17:15:36 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 82005 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 7 Sep 2001 00:15:31 +0000
Received: from albatross.wgn.net (www.wgn.net [64.14.252.81] (may be forged))          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA12556 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 6 Sep 2001 17:15:31 -0700
Received: from cronos (eli-208-187-17-57.wgn.net [208.187.17.57]) by          albatross.wgn.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id RAA01260 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 6 Sep 2001 17:16:26 -0700
References: <5.1.0.14.0.20010905003542.02aa3008@hobbiton.shire.net>             <3B96B223.995F743B@mindspring.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <019301c13732$5b279de0$c36122c0@cronos>
Date:         Thu, 6 Sep 2001 17:16:34 -0700
Reply-To: "Wedge Oldham" <wedge@WESTWORLD.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Wedge Oldham" <wedge@WESTWORLD.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] More info on my ignitors.
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

It will take 5 time constants for the cap to fully charge...therefore charge
time would be closer to 1.4 seconds.
Wedge Oldham
http://NikeProject.com
Only those who risk going too far,
will ever know how far they can go.



----- Original Message -----
From: "Alan Shinn" <alshinn@MINDSPRING.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Wednesday, September 05, 2001 4:15 PM
Subject: Re: [AR] More info on my ignitors.


> Red LEDs like 30mA. I=E/R,  R=E/I    8.4 V/.03 A = 280 Ohm,  RC time =
> 280 Ohm * 1000 micFd = .28 seconds
>
> Seth Leigh wrote:
> >
> > I've done some more testing using AA batteries.  I got no response at
all
> > until I got to 4.5 volts, where after several seconds I got a whiff of
> > smoke, and disconnected lest I cook off the ignitor.  With 6 volts (four
> > brand new Costco store-brand AA batteries in series) I fired two
ignitors,
> > and it took 1-2 whole seconds each, where after a second smoke would
appear
> > and then finally it would burst into it's typical quick flash.  I
haven't
> > tried 7.5v yet.  I'm not sure it's worth it to try 7.5v.  I am fairly
> > confident, as an operational matter, that these ignitors will simply
> > require 9v to fire reliably and quickly.  I burned several ignitors with
an
> > already-used 9v battery when I first mixed up the pyrogen three or four
> > days ago.
> >
> > Now I'm very interested to see what sort of capacitor will reliably and
> > quickly fire these ignitors.
> >
> > Also, for you electronics gurus out there, it's been a while since I had
a
> > class in college for basic electronics, so please remind me.  I want to
> > charge up a capacitor, so I was thinking I'd put an LED and a 10k
resistor
> > in series with one of the leads of the cap.  The 10k resistor would be
to
> > limit the current so I don't fry the LED, and the LED would be there so
I
> > can visually verify that current is flowing into the capacitor, charging
> > it.  From what I recall, an LED takes 6/10 of a volt to turn on, so if I
> > used a 9v battery and this LED/resistor setup, shouldn't that mean the
cap
> > was charged to 8.4 volts when the LED goes out?  And is 10k high enough
to
> > prevent burning out your average LED?  I suppose I'll buy several LEDs
just
> > in case it isn't.  ;-)
> >
> > Seth
>
> --
> Looking forward:
> Alan Shinn
>
>
> Experience the
> beginnings of microscopy.
> Make your own replica
> of one of Antony van Leeuwenhoek's microscopes.
> visit    http://www.mindspring.com/~alshinn/

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 16708 invoked from network); 7 Sep 2001 01:07:52 -0000
X-Priority: 3
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 7 Sep 2001 01:07:52 -0000
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 10880 invoked by uid 50005); 7 Sep 2001 01:07:33 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpe with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.504808 secs); 07 Sep 2001 01:07:33 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 7 Sep 2001 01:07:32 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA12711; Thu, 6 Sep 2001 17:57:34 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 82024 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 7 Sep 2001 00:57:30 +0000
Received: from imo-r08.mx.aol.com (imo-r08.mx.aol.com [152.163.225.104]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA12697 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Thu, 6 Sep 2001 17:57:29 -0700
Received: from Sociald84@aol.com by imo-r08.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v31_r1.4.) id          f.a6.1963eb15 (3850); Thu, 6 Sep 2001 20:57:21 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0CC4_01C56B69.507E26B0"
X-Mailer: AOL 6.0 for Windows US sub 10536
Message-ID:  <a6.1963eb15.28c97571@aol.com>
Date:         Thu, 6 Sep 2001 20:57:21 EDT
Reply-To: <Sociald84@AOL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <Sociald84@AOL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] aRocket project
Comments: To: thomgaf@energyrs.com
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0CC4_01C56B69.507E26B0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

In a message dated 9/6/2001 11:08:17 AM Mountain Daylight Time,
energyrelease@EARTHLINK.NET writes:


> I would love to see a "NET" based rocketry project actually work and all
> the IP placed on a web site so others can learn from the project.

Then lend a hand and help me try to get this project running instead of
criticizing what has happened before and pontificating about what you think
will happen. If I get even two other people to help me who have machining
skills and tools and people with nitrous equipment and helium equipment, this
rocket could be flying in a matter of weeks or months, instead of the year to
two years it would take me to get tools equipment and make and test
everything.



> I don't have any idea how this could be done, though.  You can hardly get
> volunteer workers to show up let alone to follow the game plan without
> either trying to take over or turn every decision into a debate. It is
> the "ME" generation.
>

Thats why you let everyone have their say in the beginning stages. Once the
design is finalized it get built to spec. If a part doesn't work as it
should, phase 1 all over again but with that part alone.

Mark

> Thom
>
> Thomas McGaffey
> Energy Release Systems
> thomgaf@energyrs.com
> 408-226-7502
> San Jose, Kalifornia
>



------=_NextPart_000_0CC4_01C56B69.507E26B0
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<HTML><FONT FACE=arial,helvetica><FONT  SIZE=2>In a message dated 9/6/2001 11:08:17 AM Mountain Daylight Time,
<BR>energyrelease@EARTHLINK.NET writes:
<BR>
<BR>
<BR><BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE style="BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px">I would love to see a "NET" based rocketry project actually work and all
<BR>the IP placed on a web site so others can learn from the project. &nbsp;</FONT><FONT  COLOR="#000000" SIZE=3 FAMILY="SANSSERIF" FACE="Arial" LANG="0"></BLOCKQUOTE>
<BR>
<BR></FONT><FONT  COLOR="#000000" SIZE=2 FAMILY="SANSSERIF" FACE="Arial" LANG="0">Then lend a hand and help me try to get this project running instead of
<BR>criticizing what has happened before and pontificating about what you think
<BR>will happen. If I get even two other people to help me who have machining
<BR>skills and tools and people with nitrous equipment and helium equipment, this
<BR>rocket could be flying in a matter of weeks or months, instead of the year to
<BR>two years it would take me to get tools equipment and make and test
<BR>everything.
<BR>
<BR>
<BR></FONT><FONT  COLOR="#000000" SIZE=3 FAMILY="SANSSERIF" FACE="Arial" LANG="0">
<BR></FONT><FONT  COLOR="#000000" SIZE=2 FAMILY="SANSSERIF" FACE="Arial" LANG="0"><BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE style="BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px">I don't have any idea how this could be done, though. &nbsp;You can hardly get
<BR>volunteer workers to show up let alone to follow the game plan without
<BR>either trying to take over or turn every decision into a debate. It is
<BR>the "ME" generation.
<BR></FONT><FONT  COLOR="#000000" SIZE=3 FAMILY="SANSSERIF" FACE="Arial" LANG="0"></BLOCKQUOTE>
<BR>
<BR></FONT><FONT  COLOR="#000000" SIZE=2 FAMILY="SANSSERIF" FACE="Arial" LANG="0">Thats why you let everyone have their say in the beginning stages. Once the
<BR>design is finalized it get built to spec. If a part doesn't work as it
<BR>should, phase 1 all over again but with that part alone.
<BR>
<BR>Mark
<BR></FONT><FONT  COLOR="#000000" SIZE=3 FAMILY="SANSSERIF" FACE="Arial" LANG="0">
<BR></FONT><FONT  COLOR="#000000" SIZE=2 FAMILY="SANSSERIF" FACE="Arial" LANG="0"><BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE style="BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px">Thom
<BR>
<BR>Thomas McGaffey
<BR>Energy Release Systems
<BR>thomgaf@energyrs.com
<BR>408-226-7502
<BR>San Jose, Kalifornia
<BR></BLOCKQUOTE>
<BR>
<BR></FONT></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0CC4_01C56B69.507E26B0--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 3869 invoked from network); 7 Sep 2001 01:31:50 -0000
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 7 Sep 2001 01:31:50 -0000
Received: (qmail 10269 invoked by uid 50005); 7 Sep 2001 01:30:30 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpe with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.707276 secs); 07 Sep 2001 01:30:30 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 7 Sep 2001 01:30:29 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA12835; Thu, 6 Sep 2001 18:24:08 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 82044 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 7 Sep 2001 01:24:05 +0000
Received: from albatross.wgn.net (www.wgn.net [64.14.252.81] (may be forged))          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA12821 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 6 Sep 2001 18:24:05 -0700
Received: from cronos (eli-208-187-17-99.wgn.net [208.187.17.99]) by          albatross.wgn.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id SAA12477; Thu, 6 Sep          2001 18:24:59 -0700
References:  <003001c136e1$349b0280$505163d5@central>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0CC9_01C56B69.507E26B0"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <01d001c1373b$ef3dfde0$c36122c0@cronos>
Date:         Thu, 6 Sep 2001 18:25:08 -0700
Reply-To: "Wedge Oldham" <wedge@WESTWORLD.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Wedge Oldham" <wedge@WESTWORLD.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] What is the  altitude record ?
Comments: To: "javier.d" <javier.d@TELELINE.ES>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0CC9_01C56B69.507E26B0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="Windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

I think this is the current record. Somebody please correct me if I'm =
wrong.
http://rrs.org/Projects/Launches/Space_Shot/space_shot.html
Wedge Oldham
http://NikeProject.com
Only those who risk going too far,=20
will ever know how far they can go.



  ----- Original Message -----=20
  From: javier.d=20
  To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU=20
  Sent: Thursday, September 06, 2001 7:35 AM
  Subject: [AR] What is the altitude record ?


   =20
  Anybody know witch is the altitude record for amateur rocket?

  thanks


------=_NextPart_000_0CC9_01C56B69.507E26B0
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="Windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML xmlns:o =3D "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office"><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Dwindows-1252">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 5.50.4134.100" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>I think this is the current record. =
Somebody please=20
correct me if I'm wrong.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2><A=20
href=3D"http://rrs.org/Projects/Launches/Space_Shot/space_shot.html">http=
://rrs.org/Projects/Launches/Space_Shot/space_shot.html</A></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Wedge Oldham<BR><A=20
href=3D"http://NikeProject.com">http://NikeProject.com</A><BR>Only those =
who risk=20
going too far, <BR>will ever know how far they can go.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2><BR></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE dir=3Dltr=20
style=3D"PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; =
BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
  <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial">----- Original Message ----- </DIV>
  <DIV=20
  style=3D"BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; FONT: 10pt arial; font-color: =
black"><B>From:</B>=20
  <A title=3Djavier.d@TELELINE.ES =
href=3D"mailto:javier.d@TELELINE.ES">javier.d</A>=20
  </DIV>
  <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A =
title=3DAROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU=20
  href=3D"mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU">AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU</A> </DIV>
  <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> Thursday, September 06, =
2001 7:35=20
  AM</DIV>
  <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> [AR] What is the =
altitude record=20
  ?</DIV>
  <DIV><BR></DIV>
  <DIV>&nbsp;=20
  <P class=3DMsoNormal><SPAN lang=3DEN-GB style=3D"mso-ansi-language: =
EN-GB">Anybody=20
  know witch is the altitude record for amateur rocket?</SPAN></P>
  <P class=3DMsoNormal><SPAN lang=3DEN-GB=20
  style=3D"mso-ansi-language: =
EN-GB">thanks<o:p></o:p></SPAN></P></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0CC9_01C56B69.507E26B0--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 29033 invoked from network); 7 Sep 2001 01:44:04 -0000
X-Priority: 3
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 7 Sep 2001 01:44:04 -0000
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 18721 invoked by uid 50005); 7 Sep 2001 01:44:02 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpa with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.936104 secs); 07 Sep 2001 01:44:02 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 7 Sep 2001 01:44:00 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA12877; Thu, 6 Sep 2001 18:32:35 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 82051 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 7 Sep 2001 01:32:33 +0000
Received: from imo-r07.mx.aol.com (imo-r07.mx.aol.com [152.163.225.103]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA12863 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Thu, 6 Sep 2001 18:32:33 -0700
Received: from Sociald84@aol.com by imo-r07.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v31_r1.4.) id          r.87.f95650f (3850); Thu, 6 Sep 2001 21:32:29 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0CCC_01C56B69.5082E1A0"
X-Mailer: AOL 6.0 for Windows US sub 10536
Message-ID:  <87.f95650f.28c97dad@aol.com>
Date:         Thu, 6 Sep 2001 21:32:29 EDT
Reply-To: <Sociald84@AOL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <Sociald84@AOL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] aRocket project
Comments: To: johnc@idsoftware.com
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0CCC_01C56B69.5082E1A0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

In a message dated 9/6/2001 1:23:03 PM Mountain Daylight Time,
johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM writes:


> Can you give us some details on the project goals, team, and time line?
>
> John Carmack
>

The project goals as I see them are simply to build a rocket that will fly.
The time line and progression itenerary will be set when the design is
finalized, and when everyone is on the same page about the project.

Mark

------=_NextPart_000_0CCC_01C56B69.5082E1A0
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<HTML><FONT FACE=arial,helvetica><FONT  SIZE=2>In a message dated 9/6/2001 1:23:03 PM Mountain Daylight Time,
<BR>johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM writes:
<BR>
<BR>
<BR><BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE style="BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px">Can you give us some details on the project goals, team, and time line?
<BR>
<BR>John Carmack
<BR></BLOCKQUOTE>
<BR>
<BR>The project goals as I see them are simply to build a rocket that will fly.
<BR>The time line and progression itenerary will be set when the design is
<BR>finalized, and when everyone is on the same page about the project.
<BR>
<BR>Mark</FONT></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0CCC_01C56B69.5082E1A0--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 14937 invoked from network); 7 Sep 2001 02:08:49 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 7 Sep 2001 02:08:49 -0000
Received: (qmail 16406 invoked by uid 50005); 7 Sep 2001 02:07:23 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.333137 secs); 07 Sep 2001 02:07:23 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 7 Sep 2001 02:07:23 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA13018; Thu, 6 Sep 2001 19:03:24 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 82070 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 7 Sep 2001 02:03:15 +0000
Received: from smtprelay1.abs.adelphia.net (smtprelay.abs.adelphia.net          [64.8.20.11]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA13001 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 6 Sep 2001 19:03:14 -0700
Received: from jlgrady ([63.124.251.47]) by smtprelay1.abs.adelphia.net          (Netscape Messaging Server 4.15) with SMTP id GJ9SC102.WON for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 6 Sep 2001 22:02:25 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook CWS, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <001401c13741$9b9c7ad0$0200a8c0@prestige.net>
Date:         Thu, 6 Sep 2001 22:05:45 -0400
Reply-To: "Jeff Grady" <jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jeff Grady" <jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] My progress so far with ignitors.
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <5.1.0.14.0.20010904234530.03343268@hobbiton.shire.net>

Hello Seth,

        Great to read some real experiment results on this list. Glad to see you
are giving the caps a try. I may go that route if your work pays off using
them.

        I began experimenting with my own igniters a couple day ago and have found
a combination that seems to work well. I got the idea off another website
(can't remember the URL). Basically, I cut regular phone wire into 6"
lengths and strip 1" off one end and about a 1/4" off the other. I then
solder a strand of copper wire from 24ga stranded wire - about 1.5" in
length to one lead (on the 1/4" end) after wire-wrapping the strand to it. I
then do the same for the other end of the strand using the other 6" lead.

        I snip off excess solder/wire from the 1/4" ends, then wrap the bare strand
around one of the leads. What I end up with is one soldered end about .5"
below the other. I take care not to have one winding turn touch another,
causing a short. I then twist the insulated portion of the leads together
for about 1" below the lowest solder joint.

        My pyrogen is homemade from 75/15/10 mix of KN03/Charcoal/Sulphur finely
powdered. I used this because I had it available. I didn't think to dissolve
smokeless powder (which I have plenty of) in acetone. I'll try that next. I
mix the BP with 5 minute epoxy, as thick as asphalt. Then just push the
naked end of the igniter into the goop up to and covering the lowest solder
joint. Let dry 10 minutes (takes longer with the BP mixed in).

        I use a battery charger as a test supply, a DMM and a DV camcorder to
record the test. The charger is a 12 volt job with 2/10/50 amp settings.
Nothing happens at 2 amps. The igniters work great at 10 (INSTANT! NO DELAY
AT ALL). The 50 amp setting is not needed/used. While most of my flights
will be ground started, I intend to do some air-starting. I intend to use a
Futaba R/C battery pack (7.2v) as the on-board supply, but have not tried
that battery yet (is still in the SIG KT-40). It's very light, and can pump
some juice short-term.

Waiting to hear more of your results!

Later,
Jeff

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 7532 invoked from network); 7 Sep 2001 02:14:05 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 7 Sep 2001 02:14:05 -0000
Received: (qmail 21501 invoked by uid 50005); 7 Sep 2001 02:12:40 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.234524 secs); 07 Sep 2001 02:12:40 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 7 Sep 2001 02:12:40 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA13101; Thu, 6 Sep 2001 19:10:46 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 82084 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 7 Sep 2001 02:10:45 +0000
Received: from spsystems.net (spsystems.net [209.47.149.227]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA13087 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Thu,          6 Sep 2001 19:10:44 -0700
Received: (from henry@localhost) by spsystems.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id WAA26439;          Thu, 6 Sep 2001 22:10:02 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010906220850.25945D-100000@spsystems.net>
Date:         Thu, 6 Sep 2001 22:10:02 -0400
Reply-To: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Fw: REMOTELY PILOTED AIRCRAFT TO PROVIDE IMAGES ON              INTERNET              FOR FIREFIGHTERS
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <01c901c136d6$cfce7580$0100a8c0@mkbs>

On Fri, 7 Sep 2001, Russell McMahon wrote:
> This tells you that NASA, if nobody else, can get permission to operate RC
> aircraft of up to 200 + pounds at up to at least 15000 feet

NASA, being part of the government, doesn't *ask* for permission.  (It has
some internal review procedures, but it is exempt from FAA regulation.)

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 20533 invoked from network); 7 Sep 2001 02:17:21 -0000
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 7 Sep 2001 02:17:21 -0000
Received: (qmail 6574 invoked by uid 50005); 7 Sep 2001 02:14:42 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpf with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.658166 secs); 07 Sep 2001 02:14:42 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 7 Sep 2001 02:14:41 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA13158; Thu, 6 Sep 2001 19:14:41 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 82099 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 7 Sep 2001 02:14:35 +0000
Received: from spock.alohanet.com (spock.alohanet.com [209.31.4.252]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA13143 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Thu, 6 Sep 2001 19:14:34 -0700
Received: from NATE2 (spock.alohanet.com [209.31.4.252]) by spock.alohanet.com          (Post.Office MTA v3.5.2 release 221 ID# 0-55447U100L2S100V35) with          SMTP id com for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Thu, 6 Sep 2001 19:13:37 -0700
References:  <001401c13741$9b9c7ad0$0200a8c0@prestige.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <00c301c13743$618a61c0$68e9a8c0@NATE2>
Date:         Thu, 6 Sep 2001 19:18:28 -0700
Reply-To: "Nathan Hays" <nhays@ALOHANET.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Nathan Hays" <nhays@ALOHANET.COM>
Subject:      [AR] Smokeless powder
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

I keep hearing about smokeless powder dissolved in acetone.  Is this
Pyrodex?  I made a fuse by adding a few drops of water to some Pyrodex and
pulling a cotton string through it.  Does any brand contain NC/NG?

- Nate

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 6117 invoked from network); 7 Sep 2001 02:21:58 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 7 Sep 2001 02:21:58 -0000
Received: (qmail 8663 invoked by uid 50005); 7 Sep 2001 02:19:47 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.212411 secs); 07 Sep 2001 02:19:47 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 7 Sep 2001 02:19:47 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA13197; Thu, 6 Sep 2001 19:16:49 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 82110 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 7 Sep 2001 02:16:48 +0000
Received: from spsystems.net (spsystems.net [209.47.149.227]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA13183 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Thu,          6 Sep 2001 19:16:47 -0700
Received: (from henry@localhost) by spsystems.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id WAA26499;          Thu, 6 Sep 2001 22:16:05 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010906221028.25945E-100000@spsystems.net>
Date:         Thu, 6 Sep 2001 22:16:04 -0400
Reply-To: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Fw: Jonathan's Space Report, No. 460
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <85256ABF.004EB99E.00@vgi4mail.vanguard.com>

On Thu, 6 Sep 2001 Waysie_Atkins@VANGUARD.COM wrote:
> <Used pieces of even a used Shuttle tank would probably be saleable...
> <Trying to obtain any pieces may be an interesting exercise :-)
>
> I wonder about salvage rights, ie would NASA throw a hissy fit some
> enterprising person, goup or company recovered such pieces?

Note that the pieces would still be NASA property.

Contrary to popular misconception, the basic principle of salvage law is
*NOT* "finders keepers".  Material of identifiable origin continues to
belong to the original owner unless he explicitly declares it abandoned.
Worse, normal salvage law does not apply *at all* to government property,
which is simply off limits to commercial salvage unless the government in
question specifically authorizes it.

Whether NASA would choose to make a stink about it is a hard question.
Might depend on which way the political winds were blowing.

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 16320 invoked from network); 7 Sep 2001 02:39:08 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 7 Sep 2001 02:39:08 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 20381 invoked by uid 50005); 7 Sep 2001 02:37:07 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.226994 secs); 07 Sep 2001 02:37:07 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 7 Sep 2001 02:37:07 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA13382; Thu, 6 Sep 2001 19:34:14 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 82132 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 7 Sep 2001 02:34:13 +0000
Received: from robin.mail.pas.earthlink.net (robin.mail.pas.earthlink.net          [207.217.120.65]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA13368          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 6 Sep 2001 19:34:13 -0700
Received: from earthlink.net (dialup-209.244.107.138.Dial1.SanJose1.Level3.net          [209.244.107.138]) by robin.mail.pas.earthlink.net (8.11.5/8.9.3)          with ESMTP id f872YBb18749 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 6 Sep 2001          19:34:11 -0700 (PDT)
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (Win98; I)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <a6.1963eb15.28c97571@aol.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B983590.FCAAC81C@earthlink.net>
Date:         Thu, 6 Sep 2001 19:48:48 -0700
Reply-To: <thomgaf@energyrs.com>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Thomas M. Mcgaffey" <energyrelease@EARTHLINK.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] aRocket project
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Mark,

I hear what you are saying.

> Then lend a hand and help me try to get this project running instead of
> criticizing what has happened before and pontificating about what you think
> will happen. If I get even two other people to help me who have machining
> skills and tools and people with nitrous equipment and helium equipment, this
> rocket could be flying in a matter of weeks or months, instead of the year to
> two years it would take me to get tools equipment and make and test
> everything.

The fact still remains that I have been involved with others and have
given
time, money and have  developed subsystems at my own expense for
others' projects and have seen the very things happen that you wish to
overlook.  The people in some of these projects are well known to list
members, and they said the same things that you are now saying.  And
they didn't even
have the disadvantage of working over the net.

Sure, your project may indeed be " THE ONE" that will "WORK" the way you
say,  but you will have to show some sort of verifiable track record
with projects before you ask me or others to donate TIME, MONEY or
MACHINING  to yet another feel good ("We are the world - can't we all
get
along") project.

There have been several group projects started on this list
(Arocket) which have generated thousands of postings and NONE of these
"PROJECTS" has been finished.  I have donated software packages (bought
by me @~$650.00) and nothing came of it nor did I get the software
back.

I have done, with others, what you say I should now do to help you.
Why? Because you say you're "THE ONE" who will make it happen?  How?
Why
should I spend my resources on YOUR project?  A 4" hybrid is nothing new
to experimental rocketry; it has been done by many others, Bill Colburn
comes to mind.  What is so novel about YOUR project that I should take a
risk on you, or in the words of the younger generation "What's in it for
ME or experimental rocketry"?

   Thom

   Thomas McGaffey
   Energy Release Systems
   thomgaf@energyrs.com
   408-226-7502
   San Jose, Kalifornia


> In a message dated 9/6/2001 11:08:17 AM Mountain Daylight Time,
> energyrelease@EARTHLINK.NET writes:
>
>
>   I would love to see a "NET" based rocketry project actually work and all
>   the IP placed on a web site so others can learn from the project.
>
>
>

>
>
>
>   I don't have any idea how this could be done, though.  You can hardly get
>   volunteer workers to show up let alone to follow the game plan without
>   either trying to take over or turn every decision into a debate. It is
>   the "ME" generation.
>
>
>
> Thats why you let everyone have their say in the beginning stages. Once the
> design is finalized it get built to spec. If a part doesn't work as it
> should, phase 1 all over again but with that part alone.
>
> Mark
>
>   Thom
>
>   Thomas McGaffey
>   Energy Release Systems
>   thomgaf@energyrs.com
>   408-226-7502
>   San Jose, Kalifornia

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 473 invoked from network); 7 Sep 2001 02:50:29 -0000
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 7 Sep 2001 02:50:29 -0000
Received: (qmail 13538 invoked by uid 50005); 7 Sep 2001 02:50:10 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpe with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.257601 secs); 07 Sep 2001 02:50:10 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 7 Sep 2001 02:50:09 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA13359; Thu, 6 Sep 2001 19:33:26 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 82125 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 7 Sep 2001 02:33:24 +0000
Received: from cablecom.laribay.net (cablecom.laribay.net [66.20.57.4]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA13345 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 6 Sep 2001 19:33:24 -0700
Received: from billbull (dial095.laribay.net [66.20.57.95]) by          cablecom.laribay.net (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id VAA00715 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 6 Sep 2001 21:14:32 -0500 (CDT)          (envelope-from bpbullock@laribay.net)
References:  <001401c13741$9b9c7ad0$0200a8c0@prestige.net>              <00c301c13743$618a61c0$68e9a8c0@NATE2>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <002601c13745$a530e280$5f391442@billbull>
Date:         Thu, 6 Sep 2001 21:34:18 -0500
Reply-To: "Bill Bullock" <bpbullock@LARIBAY.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Bill Bullock" <bpbullock@LARIBAY.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Smokeless powder
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Nate:
    Neither Pyrodex nor the Goex product is considered as "smokeless" but
rather a black powder substitute.
    If you want to make your own pyrogen with smokeless/acetone go to a
sporting goods store and there to the reloading section. There will be world
of diversity in powders according to use and/or burning rate.
    Might I suggest a fast-burn pistol powder named Bullseye or some Red Dot
or Green Dot. I would not suggest something like 4831 or such like because
it is designed/inhibited to burn slower and generally in large-bore rifles.
    From experience I might also suggest that no one consider dissolving
smokeless in acetone and casting a fuel grain with it...extremely prone to
detonation...
Bill
----- Original Message -----
From: Nathan Hays <nhays@ALOHANET.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Thursday, September 06, 2001 9:18 PM
Subject: [AR] Smokeless powder


> I keep hearing about smokeless powder dissolved in acetone.  Is this
> Pyrodex?  I made a fuse by adding a few drops of water to some Pyrodex and
> pulling a cotton string through it.  Does any brand contain NC/NG?
>
> - Nate
>
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 26782 invoked from network); 7 Sep 2001 03:16:38 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 7 Sep 2001 03:16:38 -0000
Received: (qmail 23497 invoked by uid 50005); 7 Sep 2001 03:16:41 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpb with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.621539 secs); 07 Sep 2001 03:16:41 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 7 Sep 2001 03:16:40 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA13067; Thu, 6 Sep 2001 19:09:01 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 82077 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 7 Sep 2001 02:09:00 +0000
Received: from spsystems.net (spsystems.net [209.47.149.227]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA13053 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Thu,          6 Sep 2001 19:08:59 -0700
Received: (from henry@localhost) by spsystems.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id WAA26412;          Thu, 6 Sep 2001 22:08:17 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010906220305.25945C-100000@spsystems.net>
Date:         Thu, 6 Sep 2001 22:08:16 -0400
Reply-To: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] 1,naive question?
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <F32D8wbVGkJmiWGxbDD0000302e@hotmail.com>

On Thu, 6 Sep 2001, John Dom wrote:
> This came to mind: what about opening the valves gradually after low
> pressure ignition, (blowdown mode) next boost flow to the nominal
> conditions? Not unlike starting a brazing torch. Opening time speed; how
> slow can one go?

There's one big problem:  injector pressure drop and chamber pressure
scale differently with flow rate.  Lower flows generally mean a lower
injector pressure drop, as a percentage of chamber pressure, i.e. more
chance of low-frequency combustion instability.  This is the big reason
why orthodox throttlable engines have a lower limit on throttling, e.g.
the SSME only goes down to about 65% -- it's too hard to keep them stable
at lower settings, unless you resort to tricks like the LMDE's variable-
geometry injector.

Other tricks are sometimes used to give a slow start, e.g. the F-1's
cooling jacket was prefilled with glycol, so the engine briefly started
out burning a rather less energetic fuel than RP-1.

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 22540 invoked from network); 7 Sep 2001 03:24:17 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 7 Sep 2001 03:24:17 -0000
Received: (qmail 28697 invoked by uid 50005); 7 Sep 2001 03:24:21 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpb with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.70128 secs); 07 Sep 2001 03:24:21 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 7 Sep 2001 03:24:20 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA13580; Thu, 6 Sep 2001 20:12:59 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 82166 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 7 Sep 2001 03:12:56 +0000
Received: from smtprelay1.abs.adelphia.net (smtprelay.abs.adelphia.net          [64.8.20.11]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA13566 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 6 Sep 2001 20:12:55 -0700
Received: from jlgrady ([63.124.251.47]) by smtprelay1.abs.adelphia.net          (Netscape Messaging Server 4.15) with SMTP id GJ9VK600.YMI for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 6 Sep 2001 23:12:06 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook CWS, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <001d01c1374b$59902ba0$0200a8c0@prestige.net>
Date:         Thu, 6 Sep 2001 23:15:29 -0400
Reply-To: "Jeff Grady" <jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jeff Grady" <jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Smokeless powder
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <002601c13745$a530e280$5f391442@billbull>

Ever tried mixing epoxy with a homemade BP composition to cast as a grain?
After making some igniters, I scraped up the remaining mix onto a pop sickle
stick and let harden. Then took it outside and lit it with a match. Burned
briskly for several seconds (about 30), but left a chunk of blackened "rock"
behind. The "rock" stuck solidly to the stick, so it may not be a problem
with nozzle blockage...Assuming the burn rate would increase if pressurized,
I may give it a go. I'm sure someone has thought of/done this before. As
another poster suggested, adding more KNO3 to the mix may oxidize the resin
and burn as a fuel additive(?)...

JG

-----Original Message-----
From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@itc.uci.edu]On
Behalf Of Bill Bullock
Sent: Thursday, September 06, 2001 10:34 PM
To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
Subject: Re: [AR] Smokeless powder


Nate:
    Neither Pyrodex nor the Goex product is considered as "smokeless" but
rather a black powder substitute.
    If you want to make your own pyrogen with smokeless/acetone go to a
sporting goods store and there to the reloading section. There will be world
of diversity in powders according to use and/or burning rate.
    Might I suggest a fast-burn pistol powder named Bullseye or some Red Dot
or Green Dot. I would not suggest something like 4831 or such like because
it is designed/inhibited to burn slower and generally in large-bore rifles.
    From experience I might also suggest that no one consider dissolving
smokeless in acetone and casting a fuel grain with it...extremely prone to
detonation...
Bill
----- Original Message -----
From: Nathan Hays <nhays@ALOHANET.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Thursday, September 06, 2001 9:18 PM
Subject: [AR] Smokeless powder


> I keep hearing about smokeless powder dissolved in acetone.  Is this
> Pyrodex?  I made a fuse by adding a few drops of water to some Pyrodex and
> pulling a cotton string through it.  Does any brand contain NC/NG?
>
> - Nate
>
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 2573 invoked from network); 7 Sep 2001 03:27:27 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 7 Sep 2001 03:27:27 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 30684 invoked by uid 50005); 7 Sep 2001 03:27:32 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpb with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.316282 secs); 07 Sep 2001 03:27:32 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 7 Sep 2001 03:27:31 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA13667; Thu, 6 Sep 2001 20:23:53 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 82184 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 7 Sep 2001 03:23:52 +0000
Received: from hobbiton.shire.net (frogmorton.shire.net [204.228.145.136]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA13653 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Thu, 6 Sep 2001 20:23:51 -0700
Received: from pool-64-223-146-33.man.east.verizon.net ([64.223.146.33]          helo=me-513q3sc0zun0.pengar.com) by hobbiton.shire.net with esmtp          (Exim 3.22 #6) id 15fCDg-0005h4-00 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 06          Sep 2001 21:22:16 -0600
X-Sender: seth-pc@hobbiton.shire.net
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
References: <001401c13741$9b9c7ad0$0200a8c0@prestige.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <5.1.0.14.0.20010906232433.02d957e0@hobbiton.shire.net>
Date:         Thu, 6 Sep 2001 23:29:11 -0400
Reply-To: "Seth Leigh" <seth@PENGAR.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Seth Leigh" <seth@PENGAR.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Smokeless powder
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <00c301c13743$618a61c0$68e9a8c0@NATE2>

As far as I recall reading, Pyrodex is simply a diluted smokeless powder,
diluted so that it matches up volume-wise (though not weight wise) with
black powder.

The smokeless powder to which several of us keep referring is normal
smokeless propellant for reloading ammo.  You can use rifle powders, pistol
powders, shotgun powders, whatever you have on hand (since once it's
dissolved in the acetone it's probably mostly the same anyhow).  Some
powders contain some nitroglycerin, and I don't know what (if any)
difference that makes.  One guy has posted using Bullseye.  I am going to
be using Universal Clays (a Hodgdon brand pistol/shotgun powder).  So far
the NC laquer I've been using was made by dissolving some white powder
(surely powdered nitrocellulose) that I got in a pyrogen kit from Firefox
(www.firefox-fx.com) with acetone.   When that runs out I will mix up some
Universal Clays and acetone.  The laquer I've been using is clear, and
leaves a shiny, hard coating on the items after it dries (and it dries FAST).

Seth

At 10:18 PM 9/6/2001, Nathan Hays wrote:
>I keep hearing about smokeless powder dissolved in acetone.  Is this
>Pyrodex?  I made a fuse by adding a few drops of water to some Pyrodex and
>pulling a cotton string through it.  Does any brand contain NC/NG?
>
>- Nate

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 12553 invoked from network); 7 Sep 2001 03:40:51 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 7 Sep 2001 03:40:51 -0000
Received: (qmail 31445 invoked by uid 50005); 7 Sep 2001 03:39:26 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.228417 secs); 07 Sep 2001 03:39:26 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 7 Sep 2001 03:39:25 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA13690; Thu, 6 Sep 2001 20:24:21 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 82191 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 7 Sep 2001 03:24:20 +0000
Received: from localhost (dmccue@localhost) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with          ESMTP id UAA13676; Thu, 6 Sep 2001 20:24:13 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.LNX.4.10.10109061943450.13052-100000@itc.uci.edu>
Date:         Thu, 6 Sep 2001 20:24:13 -0700
Reply-To: "David J. McCue" <dmccue@itc.uci.edu>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "David J. McCue" <dmccue@itc.uci.edu>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Gun launch - part deux
Comments: To: Pingu! <hooon@IHUG.CO.NZ>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <02c201c1369a$0fbea3a0$39e6adcb@tm22g>

Dave McCue replies:

I did not intend to offend, but, instead, warn. I have no real issue with
cannons or mortars, but with aircraft-mounted launch systems of any type.
The risks to third parties from a project aboard an aircraft is more than
I want to facilitate by allowing development to be discussed on this list.

You also inadvertantly add weight to my concerns. One of you is a minor
under US law. As such, you are not legally accountable for what you do
because the law (where I am) assumes diminished ability to make good
decisions because of your (presumed) immaturity.

I am 48 years old and I live in California, USA, and I provide the
computer and list software on which aRocket runs. Ray Calkins owns the
list, but I give it a home. That fact makes me liable for what goes on
here, because, as a list member, I can't claim ignorance, and under civil
and criminal law here, I can be entangled in the consequences of someone
else's poor judgement. All the arm waiving in the world won't change that.

The trouble with a list like this is that people are quite capable of
developing technical competency before having gained sufficient judgement
to make good decisions. Many never develop the sensability that keeps
them out of trouble. I share the roads with them every day. ;-)
Nevertheless, I wince my way though some of what goes on here in silence,
hoping that my fears will not be grounded in ugly reality. Aaron's
message, about cannons and rockets and aircraft, went beyond what I am
willing to tolerate.

Ray has agreed with me that if either of our comfort levels is exceeded,
we may set a limit. If you can't accept that, I ask that you find another
venue.

-Dave McCue

On Thu, 6 Sep 2001, Pingu! wrote:

> That is very insulting hearing that.
>
> What Dave McCue may not realise is some of the cannons we build take alot of
> effort and time to design and build.
>
> I think that the "technology" used in many of the cannons we build was quite
> amazing for our ages (Mike 19 and Andrew 17) , (reffering to the piston
> exhaust design of the aluminium 2.3 meter cannon). I also thought that our
> understanding of some calculus and applying it to our cannons would make our
> site "appear" less juvennile.
>
> I only mentioned the website because it contained our velocity calc program
> (differential equation solved numerically by a basic program , use SI units)
>
> www.spudgunsnz.com
>
> contains the program.
>
> And Dave McCue  i dont want to hear any further childish interpretations of
> our website.
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Seth Leigh" <seth@PENGAR.COM>
> To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
> Sent: Wednesday, September 05, 2001 1:06 PM
> Subject: Re: [AR] Gun launch - part deux
>
>
> > At 11:43 AM 9/4/2001, David J. McCue wrote:
> > >I have to ask: how is discussion of aircraft cannon design appropriate
> for
> > >a list on amateur rocketry? This seems better suited to some "kewl bomz"
> > >intersest group. I am very uncomfortable with this.
> > >
> > >-Dave McCue
> >
> > The topic is being addressed as a direct result of, and as part of, a
> > discussion about using a "gun" of some sort being used to launch a
> > rocket.  Specifically, a url was posted to a site where a gentleman
> > proposes to use a "gun" to launch a rocket whose first stage is a
> > ramjet.  The gun is merely to get the rocket going fast enough for the
> > ramjet to work.  The ramjet would then propel the rocket upwards till its
> > fuel is exhausted, whereupon a more conventional rocket more would be
> > staged on, propelling the rocket even higher.
> >
> > I know the topic seemed a tad juvenile, and indeed spudgunz and the like
> > were discussed, but the context is certainly amateur rocketry
> > oriented.  Specifically, the "technology" of spudgunz is probably very
> > applicable to being adapted to launch a ramjet-rocket combo.
> >
> > Seth
> >
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 20392 invoked from network); 7 Sep 2001 03:54:49 -0000
X-Priority: 3
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 7 Sep 2001 03:54:49 -0000
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 29019 invoked by uid 50005); 7 Sep 2001 03:52:47 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.22274 secs); 07 Sep 2001 03:52:47 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 7 Sep 2001 03:52:46 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA13643; Thu, 6 Sep 2001 20:22:38 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 82177 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 7 Sep 2001 03:22:35 +0000
Received: from imo-m04.mx.aol.com (imo-m04.mx.aol.com [64.12.136.7]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA13629 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Thu, 6 Sep 2001 20:22:35 -0700
Received: from Sociald84@aol.com by imo-m04.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v31_r1.4.) id          f.99.1a411c2a (3850); Thu, 6 Sep 2001 23:21:56 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0CD1_01C56B69.509AD670"
X-Mailer: AOL 6.0 for Windows US sub 10536
Message-ID:  <99.1a411c2a.28c99754@aol.com>
Date:         Thu, 6 Sep 2001 23:21:56 EDT
Reply-To: <Sociald84@AOL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <Sociald84@AOL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] aRocket project
Comments: To: thomgaf@energyrs.com
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0CD1_01C56B69.509AD670
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Mark,

I hear what you are saying.


And I hear what your saying, but I'm not saying that mine WILL be the one
that succeeds I am saying that if the project is cleared of all the bullshit
that complicates things and gets down to the very foundations of amateur
rocketry that it has a very big chance of succeeding. I'm also not asking you
to specifically help with the actual building of the project or "donate TIME,
MONEY or MACHINING to yet another feel good ("We are the world - can't we all
get along") project." What I am asking you is: if your willing to take your
time to type out well thought out arguments about how and why this wont work
-- take the time to look at the talking that's going on and give a little
advise and direction, or take the same time to think out and write something
that will help streamline and make this project more accomplishable.  I was
just thinking that with all of the talk in the last few months about the
people of the lovely aRocket group working together in areas of their own
experience in their own locals to collaborate to lift a piece of metal off
the ground. I'm just advocating that we finally get off of our asses, and
walk the talk. I've taken the first step of producing the original rough
design of the rocket, now theres a lot more to a walk than one step but you
never know where your gonna end up if you don't go.

You said you've developed sub systems for another projcet, I'm sure you've
gained at least some experience and insight because of their developement,
simply technically speaking, share that experiece and insight with us. I'm
not asking you to build it yourself, I'm asking for HELP in very genneral
terms.

You talk about a track record: I don't have one YET, but if your not willing
to help without a display of something thats already been done, how about
helping with static testing? Once the project gets that far you'll have a
track record in front of you. If it doesn't get to that point your not out
any time, work, or money. Or maybe wait a little longer 'till we've done the
static tests that will give a much more impressive track record. Then help us
get it in the air: help with something as simple as asking someone with a
nice launch rail if we can borrow it, or something like getting an FAA
waiver.

I am saying though, if your not at all willing to help don't bring down
people who are slightly skeptical but enthusiastic.



> > Then lend a hand and help me try to get this project running instead of
> > criticizing what has happened before and pontificating about what you
> think
> > will happen. If I get even two other people to help me who have machining
> > skills and tools and people with nitrous equipment and helium equipment,
> this
> > rocket could be flying in a matter of weeks or months, instead of the
> year to
> > two years it would take me to get tools equipment and make and test
> > everything.
>
> The fact still remains that I have been involved with others and have
> given
> time, money and have  developed subsystems at my own expense for
> others' projects and have seen the very things happen that you wish to
> overlook.  The people in some of these projects are well known to list
> members, and they said the same things that you are now saying.  And
> they didn't even
> have the disadvantage of working over the net.
>
> Sure, your project may indeed be " THE ONE" that will "WORK" the way you
> say,  but you will have to show some sort of verifiable track record
> with projects before you ask me or others to donate TIME, MONEY or
> MACHINING  to yet another feel good ("We are the world - can't we all
> get
> along") project.
>
> There have been several group projects started on this list
> (Arocket) which have generated thousands of postings and NONE of these
> "PROJECTS" has been finished.  I have donated software packages (bought
> by me @~$650.00) and nothing came of it nor did I get the software
> back.
>
> I have done, with others, what you say I should now do to help you.
> Why? Because you say you're "THE ONE" who will make it happen?  How?
>

Why should you help, thats a question you have to evaluate for yourself, for
me and two other people so far that have agreed to help with machining, its
because they have never done anything like this before, or have never flown
anything like this, or have never even built a rocket of this caliber. And
for others its because they love rocketry, or because they want to.  For you
it could be something like breaking your bad track record with other open
source project. And like I said earlier you can join the project at any point
along the road, and stay for any amount of time.  Hell you could even help
because it would give you a chance to pass on some of the experience you have
gained on your own.


> Why should I spend my resources on YOUR project?  A 4" hybrid is nothing new
> to experimental rocketry; it has been done by many others, Bill Colburn
> comes to mind.  What is so novel about YOUR project that I should take a
> risk on you, or in the words of the younger generation "What's in it for
> ME or experimental rocketry"?
>

Just because an amateur is currently working on a project that has been done
before by other amateurs simply to gain experience or have fun or for any
reason doesn't mean that that amateur won't be doing something in the future
that others haven't. In fact it gives them a greater chance of doing
something bigger, better, or newer somewhere down the line. What have you
pioneered?

The project isn't a hybrid either. It's a liquid, but with a design that
should make bi-prop rocketry easy enough for people who are only at the level
of U/C hybrids. Anything that has the potential to make any aspect of
rocketry more accesible to more people is worth helping. Take an other look
at the drawing at http://hometown.aol.com/sociald84/project.html

This rocket is designed to be as simple to opperate as a hypertech motor.
You've got a Helium tank and a Nitrous tank, the very capable RTLS system
from Pratt hobbies could be used for bothe bottles, add a few tubes fittings
a couple igniters and and some black powder to your Ground Support Equipment
and at the press of a few buttons from several hundred to thousand feet away
your flying a bi-prop.

What ever your reasons for helping HELP! If not don't try to drag us down.

Mark Shamburg-Donohue


>    Thom
>
>    Thomas McGaffey
>    Energy Release Systems
>    thomgaf@energyrs.com
>    408-226-7502
>



------=_NextPart_000_0CD1_01C56B69.509AD670
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<HTML><FONT FACE=arial,helvetica><FONT  SIZE=2>Mark,
<BR>
<BR>I hear what you are saying.
<BR></FONT><FONT  COLOR="#000000" SIZE=3 FAMILY="SANSSERIF" FACE="Arial" LANG="0"></BLOCKQUOTE>
<BR>
<BR></FONT><FONT  COLOR="#000000" SIZE=2 FAMILY="SANSSERIF" FACE="Arial" LANG="0">And I hear what your saying, but I'm not saying that mine WILL be the one
<BR>that succeeds I am saying that if the project is cleared of all the bullshit
<BR>that complicates things and gets down to the very foundations of amateur
<BR>rocketry that it has a very big chance of succeeding. I'm also not asking you
<BR>to specifically help with the actual building of the project or "donate TIME,
<BR>MONEY or MACHINING to yet another feel good ("We are the world - can't we all
<BR>get along") project." What I am asking you is: if your willing to take your
<BR>time to type out well thought out arguments about how and why this wont work
<BR>-- take the time to look at the talking that's going on and give a little
<BR>advise and direction, or take the same time to think out and write something
<BR>that will help streamline and make this project more accomplishable. &nbsp;I was
<BR>just thinking that with all of the talk in the last few months about the
<BR>people of the lovely aRocket group working together in areas of their own
<BR>experience in their own locals to collaborate to lift a piece of metal off
<BR>the ground. I'm just advocating that we finally get off of our asses, and
<BR>walk the talk. I've taken the first step of producing the original rough
<BR>design of the rocket, now theres a lot more to a walk than one step but you
<BR>never know where your gonna end up if you don't go.
<BR>
<BR>You said you've developed sub systems for another projcet, I'm sure you've
<BR>gained at least some experience and insight because of their developement,
<BR>simply technically speaking, share that experiece and insight with us. I'm
<BR>not asking you to build it yourself, I'm asking for HELP in very genneral
<BR>terms.
<BR>
<BR>You talk about a track record: I don't have one YET, but if your not willing
<BR>to help without a display of something thats already been done, how about
<BR>helping with static testing? Once the project gets that far you'll have a
<BR>track record in front of you. If it doesn't get to that point your not out
<BR>any time, work, or money. Or maybe wait a little longer 'till we've done the
<BR>static tests that will give a much more impressive track record. Then help us
<BR>get it in the air: help with something as simple as asking someone with a
<BR>nice launch rail if we can borrow it, or something like getting an FAA
<BR>waiver.
<BR>
<BR>I am saying though, if your not at all willing to help don't bring down
<BR>people who are slightly skeptical but enthusiastic.
<BR>
<BR>
<BR></FONT><FONT  COLOR="#000000" SIZE=3 FAMILY="SANSSERIF" FACE="Arial" LANG="0">
<BR></FONT><FONT  COLOR="#000000" SIZE=2 FAMILY="SANSSERIF" FACE="Arial" LANG="0"><BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE style="BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px">&gt; Then lend a hand and help me try to get this project running instead of
<BR>&gt; criticizing what has happened before and pontificating about what you
<BR>think
<BR>&gt; will happen. If I get even two other people to help me who have machining
<BR>&gt; skills and tools and people with nitrous equipment and helium equipment,
<BR>this
<BR>&gt; rocket could be flying in a matter of weeks or months, instead of the
<BR>year to
<BR>&gt; two years it would take me to get tools equipment and make and test
<BR>&gt; everything.
<BR>
<BR>The fact still remains that I have been involved with others and have
<BR>given
<BR>time, money and have &nbsp;developed subsystems at my own expense for
<BR>others' projects and have seen the very things happen that you wish to
<BR>overlook. &nbsp;The people in some of these projects are well known to list
<BR>members, and they said the same things that you are now saying. &nbsp;And
<BR>they didn't even
<BR>have the disadvantage of working over the net.
<BR>
<BR>Sure, your project may indeed be " THE ONE" that will "WORK" the way you
<BR>say, &nbsp;but you will have to show some sort of verifiable track record
<BR>with projects before you ask me or others to donate TIME, MONEY or
<BR>MACHINING &nbsp;to yet another feel good ("We are the world - can't we all
<BR>get
<BR>along") project.
<BR>
<BR>There have been several group projects started on this list
<BR>(Arocket) which have generated thousands of postings and NONE of these
<BR>"PROJECTS" has been finished. &nbsp;I have donated software packages (bought
<BR>by me @~$650.00) and nothing came of it nor did I get the software
<BR>back.
<BR>
<BR>I have done, with others, what you say I should now do to help you.
<BR>Why? Because you say you're "THE ONE" who will make it happen? &nbsp;How?
<BR></FONT><FONT  COLOR="#000000" SIZE=3 FAMILY="SANSSERIF" FACE="Arial" LANG="0"></BLOCKQUOTE>
<BR>
<BR></FONT><FONT  COLOR="#000000" SIZE=2 FAMILY="SANSSERIF" FACE="Arial" LANG="0">Why should you help, thats a question you have to evaluate for yourself, for
<BR>me and two other people so far that have agreed to help with machining, its
<BR>because they have never done anything like this before, or have never flown
<BR>anything like this, or have never even built a rocket of this caliber. And
<BR>for others its because they love rocketry, or because they want to. &nbsp;For you
<BR>it could be something like breaking your bad track record with other open
<BR>source project. And like I said earlier you can join the project at any point
<BR>along the road, and stay for any amount of time. &nbsp;Hell you could even help
<BR>because it would give you a chance to pass on some of the experience you have
<BR>gained on your own.
<BR>
<BR></FONT><FONT  COLOR="#000000" SIZE=3 FAMILY="SANSSERIF" FACE="Arial" LANG="0">
<BR></FONT><FONT  COLOR="#000000" SIZE=2 FAMILY="SANSSERIF" FACE="Arial" LANG="0"><BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE style="BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px">Why should I spend my resources on YOUR project? &nbsp;A 4" hybrid is nothing new
<BR>to experimental rocketry; it has been done by many others, Bill Colburn
<BR>comes to mind. &nbsp;What is so novel about YOUR project that I should take a
<BR>risk on you, or in the words of the younger generation "What's in it for
<BR>ME or experimental rocketry"?
<BR></FONT><FONT  COLOR="#000000" SIZE=3 FAMILY="SANSSERIF" FACE="Arial" LANG="0"></BLOCKQUOTE>
<BR>
<BR></FONT><FONT  COLOR="#000000" SIZE=2 FAMILY="SANSSERIF" FACE="Arial" LANG="0">Just because an amateur is currently working on a project that has been done
<BR>before by other amateurs simply to gain experience or have fun or for any
<BR>reason doesn't mean that that amateur won't be doing something in the future
<BR>that others haven't. In fact it gives them a greater chance of doing
<BR>something bigger, better, or newer somewhere down the line. What have you
<BR>pioneered?
<BR>
<BR>The project isn't a hybrid either. It's a liquid, but with a design that
<BR>should make bi-prop rocketry easy enough for people who are only at the level
<BR>of U/C hybrids. Anything that has the potential to make any aspect of
<BR>rocketry more accesible to more people is worth helping. Take an other look
<BR>at the drawing at http://hometown.aol.com/sociald84/project.html
<BR>
<BR>This rocket is designed to be as simple to opperate as a hypertech motor.
<BR>You've got a Helium tank and a Nitrous tank, the very capable RTLS system
<BR>from Pratt hobbies could be used for bothe bottles, add a few tubes fittings
<BR>a couple igniters and and some black powder to your Ground Support Equipment
<BR>and at the press of a few buttons from several hundred to thousand feet away
<BR>your flying a bi-prop.
<BR>
<BR>What ever your reasons for helping HELP! If not don't try to drag us down.
<BR></FONT><FONT  COLOR="#000000" SIZE=3 FAMILY="SANSSERIF" FACE="Arial" LANG="0">
<BR>Mark Shamburg-Donohue
<BR>
<BR>
<BR></FONT><FONT  COLOR="#000000" SIZE=2 FAMILY="SANSSERIF" FACE="Arial" LANG="0"><BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE style="BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px"> &nbsp;&nbsp;Thom
<BR>
<BR> &nbsp;&nbsp;Thomas McGaffey
<BR> &nbsp;&nbsp;Energy Release Systems
<BR> &nbsp;&nbsp;thomgaf@energyrs.com
<BR> &nbsp;&nbsp;408-226-7502
<BR> &nbsp;&nbsp;San Jose, Kalifornia</BLOCKQUOTE>
<BR>
<BR></FONT></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0CD1_01C56B69.509AD670--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 26268 invoked from network); 7 Sep 2001 03:57:04 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 7 Sep 2001 03:57:04 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 9066 invoked by uid 50005); 7 Sep 2001 03:57:03 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpa with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.589431 secs); 07 Sep 2001 03:57:03 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 7 Sep 2001 03:57:02 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA13825; Thu, 6 Sep 2001 20:40:01 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 82218 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 7 Sep 2001 03:39:59 +0000
Received: from cascara.uvic.ca (root@cascara.uvic.ca [142.104.5.28]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA13806 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 6 Sep 2001 20:39:58 -0700
Received: from kopernik.home.com (kopernik.cfs.me.UVic.CA [142.104.121.125]) by          cascara.uvic.ca (8.11.3/8.11.3) with ESMTP id f873duZ135028; Thu, 6          Sep 2001 20:39:56 -0700
X-Sender: jmorken@netmail.home.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <5.1.0.14.1.20010906202958.00ad12d8@netmail.home.com>
Date:         Thu, 6 Sep 2001 20:39:52 -0700
Reply-To: "Jamie Morken" <jmorken@HOME.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jamie Morken" <jmorken@HOME.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] aRocket project
Comments: To: Sociald84@AOL.COM
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <99.1a411c2a.28c99754@aol.com>

Hi all,


 >This rocket is designed to be as simple to opperate as a hypertech motor.
You've got a Helium tank and a Nitrous tank, the very capable RTLS system
from Pratt hobbies could be used for bothe bottles, add a few tubes fittings
a couple igniters and and some black powder to your Ground Support Equipment
and at the press of a few buttons from several hundred to thousand feet away
your flying a bi-prop.

Mark I think it is very cool what you are doing, and I think you should
take that drawing and turn it into
CAD files (or well drafted drawings) and put them up on the web for people
to see.  If you
have a problem designing a subsystem, showing a drawing will help others
understand the problem so that it can be fixed.

Having a simple rocket with modular/scalable construction drafted out for
everyone to use parts of or the whole bird would be great!

I don't know if there are any good and free to use CAD programs that would
be good for this, so that people could share the files, and branch off
their designs.

best regards,
Jamie

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 29963 invoked from network); 7 Sep 2001 03:58:29 -0000
X-Priority: 3
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 7 Sep 2001 03:58:29 -0000
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 13066 invoked by uid 50005); 7 Sep 2001 03:57:04 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.196725 secs); 07 Sep 2001 03:57:04 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 7 Sep 2001 03:57:03 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA13874; Thu, 6 Sep 2001 20:48:17 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 82229 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 7 Sep 2001 03:48:15 +0000
Received: from imo-r01.mx.aol.com (imo-r01.mx.aol.com [152.163.225.97]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA13860 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Thu, 6 Sep 2001 20:48:15 -0700
Received: from Sociald84@aol.com by imo-r01.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v31_r1.4.) id          t.4b.10c0b333 (3850); Thu, 6 Sep 2001 23:48:07 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0CD6_01C56B69.509AD670"
X-Mailer: AOL 6.0 for Windows US sub 10536
Message-ID:  <4b.10c0b333.28c99d77@aol.com>
Date:         Thu, 6 Sep 2001 23:48:07 EDT
Reply-To: <Sociald84@AOL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <Sociald84@AOL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] aRocket project
Comments: To: jmorken@home.com
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0CD6_01C56B69.509AD670
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Jamie,

The drawing on my webpage so far is just a basic over view. I'm currently
working on more drawings. Detailed and dimensioned drawings along with some
3D drawings will soon be up. I'll soon have a CAD program on my computer but
for the time beeing *.bmp files converted to *.gif will more than suffice.


> Hi all,
>
>
> >This rocket is designed to be as simple to opperate as a hypertech motor.
> You've got a Helium tank and a Nitrous tank, the very capable RTLS system
> from Pratt hobbies could be used for bothe bottles, add a few tubes fittings
> a couple igniters and and some black powder to your Ground Support Equipment
> and at the press of a few buttons from several hundred to thousand feet away
> your flying a bi-prop.
>
> Mark I think it is very cool what you are doing, and I think you should
> take that drawing and turn it into
> CAD files (or well drafted drawings) and put them up on the web for people
> to see.  If you
> have a problem designing a subsystem, showing a drawing will help others
> understand the problem so that it can be fixed.
>
> Having a simple rocket with modular/scalable construction drafted out for
> everyone to use parts of or the whole bird would be great!
>

Which is the entire concept. I evision everyone on the aRocket group who
wants one of the rockets flying one.


> I don't know if there are any good and free to use CAD programs that would
> be good for this, so that people could share the files, and branch off
> their designs.
>
> best regards,
> Jamie
>
People can just download the gif files convert them to an art program or just
import the dimensions, and start their own rocket design.

Mark



------=_NextPart_000_0CD6_01C56B69.509AD670
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<HTML><FONT FACE=arial,helvetica><FONT  SIZE=2>Jamie,
<BR>
<BR>The drawing on my webpage so far is just a basic over view. I'm currently
<BR>working on more drawings. Detailed and dimensioned drawings along with some
<BR>3D drawings will soon be up. I'll soon have a CAD program on my computer but
<BR>for the time beeing *.bmp files converted to *.gif will more than suffice.
<BR>
<BR>
<BR><BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE style="BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px">Hi all,
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>&gt;This rocket is designed to be as simple to opperate as a hypertech motor.
<BR>You've got a Helium tank and a Nitrous tank, the very capable RTLS system
<BR>from Pratt hobbies could be used for bothe bottles, add a few tubes fittings
<BR>a couple igniters and and some black powder to your Ground Support Equipment
<BR>and at the press of a few buttons from several hundred to thousand feet away
<BR>your flying a bi-prop.
<BR>
<BR>Mark I think it is very cool what you are doing, and I think you should
<BR>take that drawing and turn it into
<BR>CAD files (or well drafted drawings) and put them up on the web for people
<BR>to see. &nbsp;If you
<BR>have a problem designing a subsystem, showing a drawing will help others
<BR>understand the problem so that it can be fixed.
<BR>
<BR>Having a simple rocket with modular/scalable construction drafted out for
<BR>everyone to use parts of or the whole bird would be great!
<BR></FONT><FONT  COLOR="#000000" SIZE=3 FAMILY="SANSSERIF" FACE="Arial" LANG="0"></BLOCKQUOTE>
<BR>
<BR></FONT><FONT  COLOR="#000000" SIZE=2 FAMILY="SANSSERIF" FACE="Arial" LANG="0">Which is the entire concept. I evision everyone on the aRocket group who
<BR>wants one of the rockets flying one.
<BR>
<BR></FONT><FONT  COLOR="#000000" SIZE=3 FAMILY="SANSSERIF" FACE="Arial" LANG="0">
<BR></FONT><FONT  COLOR="#000000" SIZE=2 FAMILY="SANSSERIF" FACE="Arial" LANG="0"><BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE style="BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px">I don't know if there are any good and free to use CAD programs that would
<BR>be good for this, so that people could share the files, and branch off
<BR>their designs.
<BR>
<BR>best regards,
<BR>Jamie
<BR></BLOCKQUOTE></FONT><FONT  COLOR="#000000" SIZE=3 FAMILY="SANSSERIF" FACE="Arial" LANG="0">
<BR>People can just download the gif files convert them to an art program or just
<BR>import the dimensions, and start their own rocket design.
<BR>
<BR>Mark
<BR>
<BR></FONT></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0CD6_01C56B69.509AD670--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 12156 invoked from network); 7 Sep 2001 04:02:54 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 7 Sep 2001 04:02:54 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 10153 invoked by uid 50005); 7 Sep 2001 04:02:35 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpe with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.190426 secs); 07 Sep 2001 04:02:35 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 7 Sep 2001 04:02:35 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA13957; Thu, 6 Sep 2001 20:59:28 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 82248 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 7 Sep 2001 03:59:23 +0000
Received: from bailey.dscga.com (bailey.dscga.com [198.78.9.11]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA13943 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu,          6 Sep 2001 20:59:22 -0700
Received: (from michael@localhost) by bailey.dscga.com (8.9.1/) id XAA09876;          Thu, 6 Sep 2001 23:55:22 -0400 (EDT)
References: <99.1a411c2a.28c99754@aol.com>            <5.1.0.14.1.20010906202958.00ad12d8@netmail.home.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
User-Agent: Mutt/1.1.2i
Message-ID:  <20010906235522.H1518@bailey.dscga.com>
Date:         Thu, 6 Sep 2001 23:55:22 -0400
Reply-To: "Michael Mealling" <michael@NEONYM.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Michael Mealling" <michael@NEONYM.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] aRocket project
Comments: To: Jamie Morken <jmorken@HOME.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <5.1.0.14.1.20010906202958.00ad12d8@netmail.home.com>; from              jmorken@HOME.COM on Thu, Sep 06, 2001 at 08:39:52PM -0700

On Thu, Sep 06, 2001 at 08:39:52PM -0700, Jamie Morken wrote:
> I don't know if there are any good and free to use CAD programs that would
> be good for this, so that people could share the files, and branch off
> their designs.

There are free ones and then there are good ones. Then there are cheap
good ones. I did this search a few months ago and found that Turbo Cad
was by far the best for the price. You can get the standard package
for $99. There are a few things it won't do that the professional
version does but this mostly in the realm of some advanced 3D modelling.

A local machine shop was able to convert my drawings to CNC instructions
fairly easily and the parts where exactly what I drew. That was
my first attempt at any of that so its not to hard to learn.

http://www.turbocad.com/

Has anyone seen any better alternatives?

-MM

--
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Michael Mealling        |      Vote Libertarian!       | urn:pin:1
michael@neonym.net      |                              | http://www.neonym.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 28388 invoked from network); 7 Sep 2001 04:48:54 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 7 Sep 2001 04:48:54 -0000
Received: (qmail 30790 invoked by uid 50005); 7 Sep 2001 04:46:51 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.117997 secs); 07 Sep 2001 04:46:51 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 7 Sep 2001 04:46:51 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA14155; Thu, 6 Sep 2001 21:39:49 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 82280 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 7 Sep 2001 04:39:33 +0000
Received: from overnight.request.net (overnight.request.net [207.150.192.30])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA14137 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 6 Sep 2001 21:39:33 -0700
Received: from furina.request.net ([207.150.192.11]) by overnight.request.net          with ESMTP id <135481-22299>; Thu, 6 Sep 2001 23:38:53 -0400
Received: from JuleeD ([24.160.114.184]) by furina.request.net with SMTP id          <157774310-41084717>; Fri, 7 Sep 2001 00:34:47 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0CDB_01C56B69.50A44C50"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2314.1300
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <002801c13757$16f01600$b872a018@petschoice.com>
Date:         Thu, 6 Sep 2001 23:39:31 -0500
Reply-To: "Phil Bellmore" <pfish@CATFISHDESIGNS.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Phil Bellmore" <pfish@CATFISHDESIGNS.COM>
Subject:      [AR] Price of thrust
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0CDB_01C56B69.50A44C50
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

I'm an H2O2 guy myself, but how much would it cost to build, for =
instance, a candy rocket that delivers 20 lbf for 20 secs?  What about =
any other kind of motor?  For H2O2, I can generate 20 lbf for 20 sec for =
about $4.

------=_NextPart_000_0CDB_01C56B69.50A44C50
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Diso-8859-1">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 5.50.4522.1800" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>I'm an H2O2 guy myself, but how much =
would it cost=20
to build, for instance,&nbsp;a candy rocket that delivers 20 lbf for 20=20
secs?&nbsp; What about any other kind of motor?&nbsp; For H2O2, I can =
generate=20
20 lbf for 20 sec for about $4.</FONT></DIV></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0CDB_01C56B69.50A44C50--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 21035 invoked from network); 7 Sep 2001 05:18:40 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 7 Sep 2001 05:18:40 -0000
Received: (qmail 3916 invoked by uid 50005); 7 Sep 2001 05:18:44 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpb with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.617638 secs); 07 Sep 2001 05:18:44 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 7 Sep 2001 05:18:43 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA14273; Thu, 6 Sep 2001 22:14:30 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 82296 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 7 Sep 2001 05:14:21 +0000
Received: from albatross.wgn.net (www.wgn.net [64.14.252.81] (may be forged))          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA14259 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 6 Sep 2001 22:14:21 -0700
Received: from hogwild (sc-66-74-70-20.socal.rr.com [66.74.70.20]) by          albatross.wgn.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id WAA01278 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 6 Sep 2001 22:15:13 -0700
References:  <002801c13757$16f01600$b872a018@petschoice.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0CDE_01C56B69.50A6BD50"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <002501c1375b$fe09eee0$14464a42@socal.rr.com>
Date:         Thu, 6 Sep 2001 22:14:37 -0700
Reply-To: "Wedge Oldham" <wedge@WESTWORLD.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Wedge Oldham" <wedge@WESTWORLD.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Price of thrust
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0CDE_01C56B69.50A6BD50
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

A peroxide motor that generates 20# for 20 seconds...that's 1780 NS =
total. For only $4.00..... I'll take two please.
Wedge Oldham
http://NikeProject.com
  ----- Original Message -----=20
  From: Phil Bellmore=20
  To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU=20
  Sent: Thursday, September 06, 2001 9:39 PM
  Subject: [AR] Price of thrust


  I'm an H2O2 guy myself, but how much would it cost to build, for =
instance, a candy rocket that delivers 20 lbf for 20 secs?  What about =
any other kind of motor?  For H2O2, I can generate 20 lbf for 20 sec for =
about $4.

------=_NextPart_000_0CDE_01C56B69.50A6BD50
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Diso-8859-1">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 6.00.2600.0" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>A peroxide motor that generates 20# for =
20=20
seconds...that's 1780 NS total. For only $4.00..... I'll take two=20
please.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV>Wedge Oldham<BR><A=20
href=3D"http://NikeProject.com">http://NikeProject.com</A></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE dir=3Dltr=20
style=3D"PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; =
BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
  <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial">----- Original Message ----- </DIV>
  <DIV=20
  style=3D"BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; FONT: 10pt arial; font-color: =
black"><B>From:</B>=20
  <A title=3Dpfish@CATFISHDESIGNS.COM =
href=3D"mailto:pfish@CATFISHDESIGNS.COM">Phil=20
  Bellmore</A> </DIV>
  <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A =
title=3DAROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU=20
  href=3D"mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU">AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU</A> </DIV>
  <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> Thursday, September 06, =
2001 9:39=20
  PM</DIV>
  <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> [AR] Price of =
thrust</DIV>
  <DIV><BR></DIV>
  <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>I'm an H2O2 guy myself, but how much =
would it=20
  cost to build, for instance,&nbsp;a candy rocket that delivers 20 lbf =
for 20=20
  secs?&nbsp; What about any other kind of motor?&nbsp; For H2O2, I can =
generate=20
  20 lbf for 20 sec for about =
$4.</FONT></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0CDE_01C56B69.50A6BD50--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 13559 invoked from network); 7 Sep 2001 05:26:01 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 7 Sep 2001 05:26:01 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 12675 invoked by uid 50005); 7 Sep 2001 05:26:02 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpb with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.210597 secs); 07 Sep 2001 05:26:02 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 7 Sep 2001 05:26:02 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA14361; Thu, 6 Sep 2001 22:21:57 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 82317 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 7 Sep 2001 05:21:55 +0000
Received: from mail.aros.net (mail.aros.net [207.173.16.20]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA14347 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu,          6 Sep 2001 22:21:54 -0700
Received: from biomicro.com (dm3-119.slc.aros.net [207.173.25.119]) by          mail.aros.net (8.11.6/8.9.3) with ESMTP id f875Lrg85607 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 6 Sep 2001 23:21:53 -0600 (MDT)
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.77 [en] (Win98; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <001c01c13724$eb8b2680$0100a8c0@prdise1.nm.home.com>            <a0510030bb7bdb9709f00@[63.24.225.125]>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B98596C.2353D41F@biomicro.com>
Date:         Thu, 6 Sep 2001 23:21:48 -0600
Reply-To: "Mark K. Spute" <mks@BIOMICRO.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Mark K. Spute" <mks@BIOMICRO.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Sourcing Al Tubing
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Aluminum?

I knew you had composite tubes, but I didn't know you had aluminum.

Jerry Irvine wrote:
>
> >Where do my fellow rocketeeres source nice 6" and 8" Al tubing
> >suitable for motor casings?
> >I am actually looking for anything from 2" to 12" with 12" not being
> >so important quite yet.
> >I really would like to know how much the hardware would be to scale
> >up to those sizes in the future.
> >For now I would like 2", 3", 4" and 6" tubing. Or 54, 75, 98mm if
> >those are sourcable as well.
> >
> >Looking for companies and or people where the above can be found. I
> >know Jerry makes motors in the 6" size range often. Any
> >resources you guys can point me to?
> >
> >Thanks
> >
> >Paxton
>
> I have 2.125", 3.00", 3.875" and 6" in stock (54mm, 75mm, 98mm, 152mm).
>
> --
> Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
> Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
> Opinion, the whole thing.

--
Mark K. Spute
Senior Research Engineer
BioMicro Systems Inc.

KD7IWE,  RRS

"It is difficult to say what is impossible, for the dream of yesterday
is the hope of today and the reality of tomorrow."
     Dr. Robert H. Goddard

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 8671 invoked from network); 7 Sep 2001 05:32:58 -0000
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 7 Sep 2001 05:32:58 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 20803 invoked by uid 50005); 7 Sep 2001 05:30:20 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpf with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.19647 secs); 07 Sep 2001 05:30:20 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 7 Sep 2001 05:30:20 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA14411; Thu, 6 Sep 2001 22:28:44 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 82328 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 7 Sep 2001 05:28:38 +0000
Received: from idsoftware.com (predator.idsoftware.com [192.246.40.34]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA14396 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Thu, 6 Sep 2001 22:28:38 -0700
Received: from [192.246.40.129] (account johnc HELO lightning.idsoftware.com)          by idsoftware.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 3.4.7) with ESMTP id 373112          for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 07 Sep 2001 00:28:38 -0500
X-Sender: johnc@mail.idsoftware.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0CE1_01C56B69.50A6BD50"
Message-ID:  <4.3.1.2.20010907002342.03bd6ec8@mail.idsoftware.com>
Date:         Fri, 7 Sep 2001 00:27:12 -0500
Reply-To: "John Carmack" <johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Carmack" <johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Price of thrust
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <002801c13757$16f01600$b872a018@petschoice.com>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0CE1_01C56B69.50A6BD50
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"

At 11:39 PM 9/6/2001 -0500, you wrote:
>I'm an H2O2 guy myself, but how much would it cost to build, for instance,
>a candy rocket that delivers 20 lbf for 20 secs?  What about any other
>kind of motor?  For H2O2, I can generate 20 lbf for 20 sec for about $4.

Where do you get your peroxide?  With an Isp of 120, which is a bit better
than we got last time I calculated it for a small, moderate pressure
engine, that would take over three pounds of peroxide to make 400
pound-seconds of thrust, which would run $12 from FMC for 90%.

John Carmack

------=_NextPart_000_0CE1_01C56B69.50A6BD50
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="us-ascii"

<html>
At 11:39 PM 9/6/2001 -0500, you wrote:<br>
<blockquote type=cite cite><font face="arial" size=2>I'm an H2O2 guy
myself, but how much would it cost to build, for instance, a candy rocket
that delivers 20 lbf for 20 secs?&nbsp; What about any other kind of
motor?&nbsp; For H2O2, I can generate 20 lbf for 20 sec for about
$4.</font></blockquote><br>
Where do you get your peroxide?&nbsp; With an Isp of 120, which is a bit
better than we got last time I calculated it for a small, moderate
pressure engine, that would take over three pounds of peroxide to make
400 pound-seconds of thrust, which would run $12 from FMC for 90%.<br>
<br>
John Carmack<br>
</html>

------=_NextPart_000_0CE1_01C56B69.50A6BD50--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 5152 invoked from network); 7 Sep 2001 06:02:44 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 7 Sep 2001 06:02:44 -0000
Received: (qmail 3820 invoked by uid 50005); 7 Sep 2001 06:02:42 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpa with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.613246 secs); 07 Sep 2001 06:02:42 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 7 Sep 2001 06:02:41 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA14457; Thu, 6 Sep 2001 22:32:37 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 82339 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 7 Sep 2001 05:32:35 +0000
Received: from angel.comcen.com.au (angel.comcen.com.au [203.23.236.69]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA14443 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Thu, 6 Sep 2001 22:32:34 -0700
Received: from win2pk2 (dialup23.ares.dragon.net.au [203.56.245.143]) by          angel.comcen.com.au (8.11.4/8.10.1) with SMTP id f875WeK02748; Fri, 7          Sep 2001 15:32:41 +1000 (EST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0CE6_01C56B69.50A6BD50"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <JJEFLLHFFAHHMBBIHFAEEENFCFAA.pkelly@comcen.com.au>
Date:         Fri, 7 Sep 2001 15:32:28 +1000
Reply-To: "Paul Kelly" <pkelly@COMCEN.COM.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Paul Kelly" <pkelly@COMCEN.COM.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Price of thrust
Comments: To: Phil Bellmore <pfish@CATFISHDESIGNS.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <002801c13757$16f01600$b872a018@petschoice.com>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0CE6_01C56B69.50A6BD50
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

I wont go into the physics or debate whether you COULD do it for that price.
The fact that you feel propellant costs are significant tells me you HAVEN'T
done it.

A friend was telling me about a recent club (ie commercial AP motor) launch
we ran.
Total cost for him was $380 of which $90 went on propellant. The rest went
on travel, roof, food, and beer (chronological order).

PK
  -----Original Message-----
  From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU]On
Behalf Of Phil Bellmore
  Sent: Friday, 7 September 2001 2:40 PM
  To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
  Subject: [AR] Price of thrust


  I'm an H2O2 guy myself, but how much would it cost to build, for instance,
a candy rocket that delivers 20 lbf for 20 secs?  What about any other kind
of motor?  For H2O2, I can generate 20 lbf for 20 sec for about $4.

------=_NextPart_000_0CE6_01C56B69.50A6BD50
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META content=3D"text/html; charset=3Diso-8859-1" =
http-equiv=3DContent-Type>
<META content=3D"MSHTML 5.00.2722.2800" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT color=3D#0000ff face=3DArial size=3D2><SPAN =
class=3D450272605-07092001>I wont=20
go into the physics or debate whether you COULD do it for that=20
price.</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=3D#0000ff face=3DArial size=3D2><SPAN =
class=3D450272605-07092001>The=20
fact that you feel&nbsp;propellant costs are significant tells me you =
HAVEN'T=20
done it.</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=3D#0000ff face=3DArial size=3D2><SPAN=20
class=3D450272605-07092001></SPAN></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=3D#0000ff face=3DArial size=3D2><SPAN =
class=3D450272605-07092001>A=20
friend was telling me about a recent club (ie commercial AP motor) =
launch we=20
ran.</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=3D#0000ff face=3DArial size=3D2><SPAN =
class=3D450272605-07092001>Total=20
cost for him was $380 of which $90 went on propellant. The rest went on =
travel,=20
roof, food, and beer (chronological order).</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=3D#0000ff face=3DArial size=3D2><SPAN=20
class=3D450272605-07092001></SPAN></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=3D#0000ff face=3DArial size=3D2><SPAN=20
class=3D450272605-07092001>PK</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE style=3D"MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
  <DIV align=3Dleft class=3DOutlookMessageHeader dir=3Dltr><FONT =
face=3DTahoma=20
  size=3D2>-----Original Message-----<BR><B>From:</B> Amateur Rocketry =
discussion=20
  list [mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU]<B>On Behalf Of </B>Phil=20
  Bellmore<BR><B>Sent:</B> Friday, 7 September 2001 2:40 =
PM<BR><B>To:</B>=20
  AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU<BR><B>Subject:</B> [AR] Price of=20
  thrust<BR><BR></DIV></FONT>
  <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>I'm an H2O2 guy myself, but how much =
would it=20
  cost to build, for instance,&nbsp;a candy rocket that delivers 20 lbf =
for 20=20
  secs?&nbsp; What about any other kind of motor?&nbsp; For H2O2, I can =
generate=20
  20 lbf for 20 sec for about =
$4.</FONT></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0CE6_01C56B69.50A6BD50--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 16109 invoked from network); 7 Sep 2001 06:16:40 -0000
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 7 Sep 2001 06:16:40 -0000
Received: (qmail 25372 invoked by uid 50005); 7 Sep 2001 06:16:20 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpe with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.168105 secs); 07 Sep 2001 06:16:20 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 7 Sep 2001 06:16:20 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA14613; Thu, 6 Sep 2001 23:13:33 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 82362 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 7 Sep 2001 06:13:18 +0000
Received: from albqpop1.albq.uswest.net (albqpop1.albq.uswest.net          [207.108.240.1]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id XAA14599          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 6 Sep 2001 23:13:17 -0700
Received: (qmail 42917 invoked by alias); 7 Sep 2001 06:12:45 -0000
Delivered-To: fixup-AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU@fixme
Received: (qmail 42898 invoked by uid 0); 7 Sep 2001 06:12:44 -0000
Received: from cc898542-a.prdise1.nm.home.com (HELO cc898542a) (65.7.151.152)          by albqpop1.albq.uswest.net with SMTP; 7 Sep 2001 06:12:44 -0000
References:  <002801c13757$16f01600$b872a018@petschoice.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0CEA_01C56B69.50A6BD50"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <002701c13764$a75afd60$0100a8c0@prdise1.nm.home.com>
Date:         Fri, 7 Sep 2001 00:16:16 -0600
Reply-To: "Pax" <darkspunge@USWEST.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Pax" <darkspunge@USWEST.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Price of thrust
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0CEA_01C56B69.50A6BD50
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Well, at about 30 cents per pound, and a ISP of 120-140, you can do =
1780NS for about 1 dollar. Plus the hardware is much easier and simpler =
to make, and costs a fraction of a liquid fuel motor. If you really =
wanted to get cheap, the costs would be for PVC pipe, some closures, =
couplers, EPDM insulation, water putty and or a SU aerotech phenolic =
nozzle. All in all the motor would run you about 5-10 bucks.

Paxton
  ----- Original Message -----=20
  From: Phil Bellmore=20
  To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU=20
  Sent: Thursday, September 06, 2001 10:39 PM
  Subject: [AR] Price of thrust


  I'm an H2O2 guy myself, but how much would it cost to build, for =
instance, a candy rocket that delivers 20 lbf for 20 secs?  What about =
any other kind of motor?  For H2O2, I can generate 20 lbf for 20 sec for =
about $4.

------=_NextPart_000_0CEA_01C56B69.50A6BD50
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Diso-8859-1">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 5.50.4522.1800" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Well, at about 30 cents per pound, and =
a ISP of=20
120-140, you can do 1780NS for about 1 dollar. Plus the hardware is much =
easier=20
and simpler to make, and costs a fraction of a liquid fuel motor. If you =
really=20
wanted to get cheap, the costs would be for PVC pipe, some closures, =
couplers,=20
EPDM insulation, water putty and or a SU aerotech phenolic nozzle. All =
in all=20
the motor would run you about 5-10 bucks.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Paxton</FONT></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE dir=3Dltr=20
style=3D"PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; =
BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
  <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial">----- Original Message ----- </DIV>
  <DIV=20
  style=3D"BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; FONT: 10pt arial; font-color: =
black"><B>From:</B>=20
  <A title=3Dpfish@CATFISHDESIGNS.COM =
href=3D"mailto:pfish@CATFISHDESIGNS.COM">Phil=20
  Bellmore</A> </DIV>
  <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A =
title=3DAROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU=20
  href=3D"mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU">AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU</A> </DIV>
  <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> Thursday, September 06, =
2001 10:39=20
  PM</DIV>
  <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> [AR] Price of =
thrust</DIV>
  <DIV><BR></DIV>
  <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>I'm an H2O2 guy myself, but how much =
would it=20
  cost to build, for instance,&nbsp;a candy rocket that delivers 20 lbf =
for 20=20
  secs?&nbsp; What about any other kind of motor?&nbsp; For H2O2, I can =
generate=20
  20 lbf for 20 sec for about =
$4.</FONT></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0CEA_01C56B69.50A6BD50--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 14130 invoked from network); 7 Sep 2001 09:11:58 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 7 Sep 2001 09:11:58 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 26065 invoked by uid 50005); 7 Sep 2001 09:09:54 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.19386 secs); 07 Sep 2001 09:09:54 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 7 Sep 2001 09:09:54 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id BAA15134; Fri, 7 Sep 2001 01:59:29 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 82442 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 7 Sep 2001 08:59:23 +0000
Received: from harrier.mail.pas.earthlink.net (harrier.mail.pas.earthlink.net          [207.217.121.12]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id BAA15119          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 7 Sep 2001 01:59:23 -0700
Received: from earthlink.net (dialup-209.247.139.56.Dial1.SanJose1.Level3.net          [209.247.139.56]) by harrier.mail.pas.earthlink.net          (EL-8_9_3_3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id BAA08438; Fri, 7 Sep 2001 01:59:21          -0700 (PDT)
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (Win98; I)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <99.1a411c2a.28c99754@aol.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B988FD7.408E17C@earthlink.net>
Date:         Fri, 7 Sep 2001 02:13:59 -0700
Reply-To: <thomgaf@energyrs.com>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Thomas M. Mcgaffey" <energyrelease@EARTHLINK.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] aRocket project
Comments: To: Sociald84@aol.com
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Mark Shamburg-Donohue,

Thank you for your reply,  you show an amazing grasp for project
management and the way to convince others.

You did ask others to help with materials and or time.

Not all of us were sitting on our asses waiting for you to come along.
I have 4 major projects I am currently working on.  I have my own
company now and I am able to spend my time as I see fit.  I often help
others with rocketry related problems and  subsystems.

Let me tell you a little about my background.
I am 54 years old and have spent the last 20+ years as a senior systems
engineer.
I have worked for Watkins Johnson,  Litton Ind.,  Perkin Elmer, and a
number of subcontractors.  I have successfully work on and finished over
40 projects. I have been a engineering manager and have had 25 people
work for me.

This does not mean I am better then you.  All it means is that I have
some knowledge of the subjects I speak about.  I know what makes a
project work and what does not.  To talk of possible problems is
necessary to insure that they are not repeated.

I only ask you the same questions that anyone with funding or time to
help others would ask.

1. Who you are?

2. How are you different then all the rest of those asking for funding
and help?

3. What is your track record with rocketry projects, have you done any?

4. Why should I invest in YOU?

5. What is so special / different about your project?

6. What benefits will your project produce for experimental rocketry?

7. How do I know that my TIME, MONEY,  MACHINING TIME will not be wasted
on your project?


Mark;  In my early days when I had more hormones then brains or money I
had to ask for help. I was ask the same type questions I ask you.  The
mentors I had were not easy men they expected you to be able answer
questions without giving them "MOUTH".  They judged you by how you
talked to them, not just by your current level of knowledge.

I hope you get the help you need!


Thom

Thomas McGaffey
Energy Release Systems
thomgaf@energyrs.com
408-226-7502
San Jose, Kalifornia

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 26375 invoked from network); 7 Sep 2001 11:43:20 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 7 Sep 2001 11:43:20 -0000
Received: (qmail 20730 invoked by uid 50005); 7 Sep 2001 11:43:17 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpa with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.176204 secs); 07 Sep 2001 11:43:17 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 7 Sep 2001 11:43:17 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id EAA15608; Fri, 7 Sep 2001 04:38:55 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 82465 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 7 Sep 2001 11:38:46 +0000
Received: from overnight.request.net (overnight.request.net [207.150.192.30])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id EAA15592 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 7 Sep 2001 04:38:42 -0700
Received: from furina.request.net ([207.150.192.11]) by overnight.request.net          with ESMTP id <135206-23559>; Fri, 7 Sep 2001 06:37:40 -0400
Received: from JuleeD ([24.160.114.184]) by furina.request.net with SMTP id          <157750164-41192149>; Fri, 7 Sep 2001 07:33:43 -0400
References:  <002801c13757$16f01600$b872a018@petschoice.com>             <002501c1375b$fe09eee0$14464a42@socal.rr.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0CED_01C56B69.50B51530"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2314.1300
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <002b01c13791$a2437500$b872a018@petschoice.com>
Date:         Fri, 7 Sep 2001 06:38:35 -0500
Reply-To: "Phil Bellmore" <pfish@CATFISHDESIGNS.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Phil Bellmore" <pfish@CATFISHDESIGNS.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Price of thrust
Comments: To: Wedge Oldham <wedge@WESTWORLD.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0CED_01C56B69.50B51530
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Peroxide costs for me are about $11/gallon @ 50% concentration ($170/15 =
gallon drum).  I built my own still (approx $150) that can distill 1000 =
ml of 50% to 550 ml of 85% in about 12 hours using less than $1.00 of =
electricity.  One gallon is 3.75 liters.  3.75 liters distills down to =
around 2 liters of 85%.  For a 20 lbf/20 sec run, we use about 1000 ml.  =
Actually works out to be around $6.00 per run, so I didn't do my math =
right in the original posting.  I'm just curious if there is something =
cheaper out there.
  ----- Original Message -----=20
  From: Wedge Oldham=20
  To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU=20
  Sent: Friday, September 07, 2001 12:14 AM
  Subject: Re: [AR] Price of thrust


  A peroxide motor that generates 20# for 20 seconds...that's 1780 NS =
total. For only $4.00..... I'll take two please.
  Wedge Oldham
  http://NikeProject.com
    ----- Original Message -----=20
    From: Phil Bellmore=20
    To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU=20
    Sent: Thursday, September 06, 2001 9:39 PM
    Subject: [AR] Price of thrust


    I'm an H2O2 guy myself, but how much would it cost to build, for =
instance, a candy rocket that delivers 20 lbf for 20 secs?  What about =
any other kind of motor?  For H2O2, I can generate 20 lbf for 20 sec for =
about $4.

------=_NextPart_000_0CED_01C56B69.50B51530
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Diso-8859-1">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 5.50.4522.1800" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Peroxide costs for me are about =
$11/gallon @ 50%=20
concentration ($170/15 gallon drum).&nbsp; I built my own still (approx =
$150)=20
that can distill 1000 ml of 50% to 550 ml of 85% in about 12 hours using =
less=20
than $1.00 of electricity.&nbsp; One gallon is 3.75 liters.&nbsp; 3.75 =
liters=20
distills down to around 2 liters of 85%. &nbsp;For a 20 lbf/20 sec run, =
we use=20
about 1000 ml.&nbsp; Actually works out to be around $6.00 per run, so I =
didn't=20
do my math right in the original posting.&nbsp; I'm just curious if =
there is=20
something cheaper out there.</FONT></DIV></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE dir=3Dltr=20
style=3D"PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; =
BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
  <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial">----- Original Message ----- </DIV>
  <DIV=20
  style=3D"BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; FONT: 10pt arial; font-color: =
black"><B>From:</B>=20
  <A title=3Dwedge@WESTWORLD.COM =
href=3D"mailto:wedge@WESTWORLD.COM">Wedge=20
  Oldham</A> </DIV>
  <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A =
title=3DAROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU=20
  href=3D"mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU">AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU</A> </DIV>
  <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> Friday, September 07, =
2001 12:14=20
  AM</DIV>
  <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> Re: [AR] Price of =
thrust</DIV>
  <DIV><BR></DIV>
  <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>A peroxide motor that generates 20# =
for 20=20
  seconds...that's 1780 NS total. For only $4.00..... I'll take two=20
  please.</FONT></DIV>
  <DIV>Wedge Oldham<BR><A=20
  href=3D"http://NikeProject.com">http://NikeProject.com</A></DIV>
  <BLOCKQUOTE dir=3Dltr=20
  style=3D"PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; =
BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
    <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial">----- Original Message ----- </DIV>
    <DIV=20
    style=3D"BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; FONT: 10pt arial; font-color: =
black"><B>From:</B>=20
    <A title=3Dpfish@CATFISHDESIGNS.COM=20
    href=3D"mailto:pfish@CATFISHDESIGNS.COM">Phil Bellmore</A> </DIV>
    <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A =
title=3DAROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU=20
    href=3D"mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU">AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU</A> </DIV>
    <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> Thursday, September 06, =
2001 9:39=20
    PM</DIV>
    <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> [AR] Price of =
thrust</DIV>
    <DIV><BR></DIV>
    <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>I'm an H2O2 guy myself, but how =
much would it=20
    cost to build, for instance,&nbsp;a candy rocket that delivers 20 =
lbf for 20=20
    secs?&nbsp; What about any other kind of motor?&nbsp; For H2O2, I =
can=20
    generate 20 lbf for 20 sec for about=20
$4.</FONT></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0CED_01C56B69.50B51530--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 19005 invoked from network); 7 Sep 2001 13:54:49 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 7 Sep 2001 13:54:49 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 3564 invoked by uid 50005); 7 Sep 2001 13:52:44 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.146523 secs); 07 Sep 2001 13:52:44 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 7 Sep 2001 13:52:44 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA15920; Fri, 7 Sep 2001 06:24:45 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 82492 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 7 Sep 2001 13:24:40 +0000
Received: from po4.glue.umd.edu (po4.glue.umd.edu [128.8.10.124]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA15905 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 7 Sep 2001 06:24:40 -0700
Received: from z.glue.umd.edu (IDENT:root@z.glue.umd.edu [128.8.10.71]) by          po4.glue.umd.edu (8.10.1/8.10.1) with ESMTP id f87DO7021131; Fri, 7          Sep 2001 09:24:07 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from z.glue.umd.edu (IDENT:sendmail@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by          z.glue.umd.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id JAA08181; Fri, 7 Sep 2001          09:24:07 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from localhost (acase@localhost) by z.glue.umd.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with          ESMTP id JAA08177; Fri, 7 Sep 2001 09:24:06 -0400 (EDT)
X-Authentication-Warning: z.glue.umd.edu: acase owned process doing -bs
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.GSO.4.21.0109070913110.6889-100000@z.glue.umd.edu>
Date:         Fri, 7 Sep 2001 09:24:06 -0400
Reply-To: "Andrew Case" <acase@GLUE.UMD.EDU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Andrew Case" <acase@GLUE.UMD.EDU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Fw: Jonathan's Space Report, No. 460
Comments: To: Henry Spencer <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010906221028.25945E-100000@spsystems.net>

On Thu, 6 Sep 2001, Henry Spencer wrote:

> Contrary to popular misconception, the basic principle of salvage law is
> *NOT* "finders keepers".  Material of identifiable origin continues to
> belong to the original owner unless he explicitly declares it abandoned.

But the salvor is entitled to have their costs covered by the owner, along
with a reasonable fee, IIRC. What happens if the owner refuses to pay the
costs, I don't know, but I think the salvor may have the right to sell
the salvage item to recoup costs - In the UK IIRC the item is turned over
to a government agent who sells it and splits the money between salvor
and owner.

> Whether NASA would choose to make a stink about it is a hard question.
> Might depend on which way the political winds were blowing.

I'd bet they wouldn't care. Raising a big stink would be politically
counterproductive, since ET chunks are obviously useless. The backlash
from having NASA be jerks about somebody else lifting their trash off
the seafloor would be substantial, both from space enthusiasts and
environmentalists. Talk radio would eat it up.

......Andrew

Andrew Case                             |
acase@plasma.umd.edu                    |
Institute for Plasma Research           |
University of Maryland, College Park    |

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 4149 invoked from network); 7 Sep 2001 14:11:46 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 7 Sep 2001 14:11:46 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 17038 invoked by uid 50005); 7 Sep 2001 14:11:24 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpe with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 1.649588 secs); 07 Sep 2001 14:11:24 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 7 Sep 2001 14:11:22 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA16097; Fri, 7 Sep 2001 06:52:00 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 82528 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 7 Sep 2001 13:51:58 +0000
Received: from smtp006pub.verizon.net (smtp006pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.185])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA16083 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 7 Sep 2001 06:51:58 -0700
Received: from [63.24.225.125] (1Cust219.tnt1.rancho-cucamonga.ca.da.uu.net          [63.24.225.219]) by smtp006pub.verizon.net  with ESMTP for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; id f87DpQ328246 Fri, 7 Sep 2001 08:51:26 -0500          (CDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: GTE/01rocket@mail.gte.net
References: <a6.1963eb15.28c97571@aol.com> <3B983590.FCAAC81C@earthlink.net>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <a05100314b7be80c05be4@[63.24.225.125]>
Date:         Fri, 7 Sep 2001 06:51:26 -0700
Reply-To: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] aRocket project
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <3B983590.FCAAC81C@earthlink.net>

>undeniably excellent points:


>say,  but you will have to show some sort of verifiable track record
>with projects before you ask me or others to donate TIME, MONEY or
>MACHINING  to yet another feel good ("We are the world - can't we all
>get
>along") project.
>
>There have been several group projects started on this list
>(Arocket) which have generated thousands of postings and NONE of these
>"PROJECTS" has been finished.  I have donated software packages (bought
>by me @~$650.00) and nothing came of it nor did I get the software
>back.
>
>    Thom
>
>    Thomas McGaffey
>    Energy Release Systems
>    thomgaf@energyrs.com
>    408-226-7502
>    San Jose, Kalifornia

www.v-serv.com/-upload
quicktime videos
5KS5000
5KS2000
9test4
or something like that.

Who wants to play?

I do

--
Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
Opinion, the whole thing.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 9940 invoked from network); 7 Sep 2001 14:46:11 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 7 Sep 2001 14:46:11 -0000
Received: (qmail 24944 invoked by uid 50005); 7 Sep 2001 14:43:31 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpf with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.170835 secs); 07 Sep 2001 14:43:31 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 7 Sep 2001 14:43:30 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA16013; Fri, 7 Sep 2001 06:38:56 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 82511 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 7 Sep 2001 13:38:50 +0000
Received: from localhost (rcalkins@localhost) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with          ESMTP id GAA15999; Fri, 7 Sep 2001 06:38:49 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.LNX.4.10.10109070627520.15857-100000@itc.uci.edu>
Date:         Fri, 7 Sep 2001 06:38:49 -0700
Reply-To: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
Subject:      Re: [AR] aRocket project
Comments: To: Sociald84@AOL.COM
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <99.1a411c2a.28c99754@aol.com>

"How about helping with static testing?"

I've been silent on this thread until now.  Guess I've been disappointed
too many times before by previous group projects.

However, I'll support static testing, no problem.  Right now, capabilities
are 1,000 lb thrust vertical and 10,000 lb horizontal.  Conditions of
support:  I'll cover $750 of damage deposit and all IP goes on the web.
I'll even provide server space for it, but feel it is important enough
work that it deserves it's own site if possible.

One other catch for providing static tesing support:  no toxic
propellants.  You know, stuff like beryllium, hydrazine, etc.  Nitric is
OK, if somebody figures out how to get small quantities for a reasonable
price.

Ray

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 19680 invoked from network); 7 Sep 2001 15:22:54 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 7 Sep 2001 15:22:54 -0000
Received: (qmail 18739 invoked by uid 50005); 7 Sep 2001 15:22:54 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpb with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.270358 secs); 07 Sep 2001 15:22:54 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 7 Sep 2001 15:22:54 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA16460; Fri, 7 Sep 2001 08:12:18 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 82586 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 7 Sep 2001 15:12:18 +0000
Received: from prover.com (IDENT:root@chaos.sthlm.prover.com [192.71.47.101])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA16446 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 7 Sep 2001 08:12:16 -0700
Received: from duncan (sdsl-64-139-0-245.dsl.sca.megapath.net [64.139.0.245])          by prover.com (8.11.3/8.11.3) with SMTP id f87FBOe19688 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 7 Sep 2001 17:11:25 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0CF0_01C56B69.50B51530"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <NEBBLECGKLLOLFCCBNPEKELEDJAA.duncan.mcdonald@prover.com>
Date:         Fri, 7 Sep 2001 08:11:54 -0700
Reply-To: "Duncan McDonald" <duncan.mcdonald@PROVER.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Duncan McDonald" <duncan.mcdonald@PROVER.COM>
Subject:      [AR] Smokeless powder ignitor enhancement
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0CF0_01C56B69.50B51530
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

So let's see if I have this right. I can use smokeless powder to make a
pyrodex-like dipping compound for say ignitors by dissolving some smokeless
powder like Bullseye pistol powder with a small amount of acetone. I can then
mix this paste with epoxy and use it to dip ignitors and it will produce the
same effect upon ignition as the various ignitor dipping kits that are on the
market. Correct?

Duncan

------=_NextPart_000_0CF0_01C56B69.50B51530
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META content=3D"text/html; charset=3Diso-8859-1" =
http-equiv=3DContent-Type>
<META content=3D"MSHTML 5.00.2919.6307" name=3DGENERATOR></HEAD>
<BODY>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial><SPAN class=3D030510315-07092001>So let's see if =
I have this=20
right. I can use smokeless powder to make a pyrodex-like dipping =
compound for=20
say ignitors by dissolving some smokeless powder like Bullseye pistol =
powder=20
with a small amount of acetone. I can then mix this paste with epoxy and =
use it=20
to dip ignitors and it will produce the same effect upon ignition as the =
various=20
ignitor dipping kits that are on the market. =
Correct?</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial><SPAN =
class=3D030510315-07092001></SPAN></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial><SPAN=20
class=3D030510315-07092001>Duncan</SPAN></FONT></DIV></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0CF0_01C56B69.50B51530--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 14644 invoked from network); 7 Sep 2001 15:28:39 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 7 Sep 2001 15:28:39 -0000
Received: (qmail 32602 invoked by uid 50005); 7 Sep 2001 15:26:34 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.140958 secs); 07 Sep 2001 15:26:34 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 7 Sep 2001 15:26:33 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA16342; Fri, 7 Sep 2001 07:53:37 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 82562 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 7 Sep 2001 14:53:31 +0000
Received: from mailhost0.trib.com (mailhost0.trib.com [63.229.150.3]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA16328 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Fri, 7 Sep 2001 07:53:31 -0700
Received: from mail.trib.com (mail.trib.com [12.10.158.17]) by          mailhost0.trib.com (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f87ErR636720; Fri, 7          Sep 2001 08:53:28 -0600 (MDT) (envelope-from          jwckman@space-rockets.com)
Received: from [63.229.150.64] (HELO hppav) by mail.trib.com (CommuniGate Pro          SMTP 3.4.6) with SMTP id 45884485; Fri, 07 Sep 2001 08:53:26 -0600
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0CF4_01C56B69.50B51530"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <NKEHJAOOKBPGIKOOPDEFGEOOCBAA.jwckman@space-rockets.com>
Date:         Fri, 7 Sep 2001 08:51:48 -0600
Reply-To: "John Wickman" <jwckman@SPACE-ROCKETS.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Wickman" <jwckman@SPACE-ROCKETS.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Sourcing Al Tubing
Comments: To: Pax <darkspunge@uswest.net>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <001c01c13724$eb8b2680$0100a8c0@prdise1.nm.home.com>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0CF4_01C56B69.50B51530
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

I buy from Tube Service.   They are on the internet.

John Wickman

  -----Original Message-----
  From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@itc.uci.edu]On
Behalf Of Pax
  Sent: Thursday, September 06, 2001 4:40 PM
  To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
  Subject: [AR] Sourcing Al Tubing


  Where do my fellow rocketeeres source nice 6" and 8" Al tubing suitable
for motor casings?
  I am actually looking for anything from 2" to 12" with 12" not being so
important quite yet.
  I really would like to know how much the hardware would be to scale up to
those sizes in the future.
  For now I would like 2", 3", 4" and 6" tubing. Or 54, 75, 98mm if those
are sourcable as well.

  Looking for companies and or people where the above can be found. I know
Jerry makes motors in the 6" size range often. Any resources you guys can
point me to?

  Thanks

  Paxton

------=_NextPart_000_0CF4_01C56B69.50B51530
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Diso-8859-1">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 5.50.4611.1300" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><SPAN class=3D860233814-07092001><FONT face=3DArial color=3D#0000ff =
size=3D2>I buy=20
from Tube Service.&nbsp;&nbsp; They are on the =
internet.</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=3D860233814-07092001><FONT face=3DArial color=3D#0000ff =

size=3D2></FONT></SPAN>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=3D860233814-07092001><FONT face=3DArial color=3D#0000ff =
size=3D2>John=20
Wickman</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=3D860233814-07092001></SPAN>&nbsp;</DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE dir=3Dltr style=3D"MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
  <DIV class=3DOutlookMessageHeader dir=3Dltr align=3Dleft><FONT =
face=3DTahoma=20
  size=3D2>-----Original Message-----<BR><B>From:</B> Amateur Rocketry =
discussion=20
  list [mailto:AROCKET@itc.uci.edu]<B>On Behalf Of =
</B>Pax<BR><B>Sent:</B>=20
  Thursday, September 06, 2001 4:40 PM<BR><B>To:</B>=20
  AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU<BR><B>Subject:</B> [AR] Sourcing Al=20
  Tubing<BR><BR></FONT></DIV>
  <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Where do my fellow rocketeeres source =
nice 6" and=20
  8" Al tubing suitable for motor casings?</FONT></DIV>
  <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>I am actually looking for anything =
from 2" to 12"=20
  with 12" not being so important quite yet.</FONT></DIV>
  <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>I really would like to know how much =
the hardware=20
  would be to scale up to those sizes in the future.</FONT></DIV>
  <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>For now I would like 2", 3", 4" and =
6" tubing. Or=20
  54, 75, 98mm if those are sourcable as well.</FONT></DIV>
  <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
  <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Looking for companies and or people =
where the=20
  above can be found. I know Jerry makes motors in&nbsp;the 6"&nbsp;size =
range=20
  often. Any resources&nbsp;you guys can point me to?</FONT></DIV>
  <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
  <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Thanks</FONT></DIV>
  <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
  <DIV><FONT face=3DArial =
size=3D2>Paxton</FONT></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0CF4_01C56B69.50B51530--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 29364 invoked from network); 7 Sep 2001 16:14:00 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 7 Sep 2001 16:14:00 -0000
Received: (qmail 22646 invoked by uid 50005); 7 Sep 2001 16:14:00 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpb with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.323536 secs); 07 Sep 2001 16:14:00 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 7 Sep 2001 16:13:59 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA16418; Fri, 7 Sep 2001 08:09:24 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 82575 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 7 Sep 2001 15:09:15 +0000
Received: from spsystems.net (spsystems.net [209.47.149.227]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA16404 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Fri,          7 Sep 2001 08:09:14 -0700
Received: (from henry@localhost) by spsystems.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id LAA06416;          Fri, 7 Sep 2001 11:08:42 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010907105550.6270A-100000@spsystems.net>
Date:         Fri, 7 Sep 2001 11:08:42 -0400
Reply-To: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Fw: Jonathan's Space Report, No. 460
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <Pine.GSO.4.21.0109070913110.6889-100000@z.glue.umd.edu>

On Fri, 7 Sep 2001, Andrew Case wrote:
> > ...Material of identifiable origin continues to
> > belong to the original owner unless he explicitly declares it abandoned.
>
> But the salvor is entitled to have their costs covered by the owner, along
> with a reasonable fee, IIRC. What happens if the owner refuses to pay the
> costs, I don't know...

The salvor is entitled to a salvage fee (including costs), yes, and
typically (the courts willing) can hold the salvaged stuff hostage against
its payment, to the point of typically being allowed to auction it off if
the owner refuses to pay.  This process is sufficiently uncertain that
would-be salvors typically prefer to reach an agreement with the owner in
advance.

However, again, remember:  *none of this applies to government property*.
If the stuff belongs to the government, the would-be salvor has no legal
right to touch it without the government's prior consent, period.

> > Whether NASA would choose to make a stink about it is a hard question.
> > Might depend on which way the political winds were blowing.
>
> I'd bet they wouldn't care. Raising a big stink would be politically
> counterproductive, since ET chunks are obviously useless...

Unfortunately, such precedents as we have go the other way.  NASA has in
fact chosen to be difficult about miniscule amounts of lunar dust acquired
in improper ways (a strip of tape used in cleaning one of the suits, with
some dust on it, which a guy saved rather than throwing out as he was
supposed to).  And the US government in general is notoriously difficult
to deal with, and prone to making trouble, about salvage of wrecks of
historic military aircraft.

Perhaps NASA would be reasonable about it, but I wouldn't bet money on that.

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 28092 invoked from network); 7 Sep 2001 16:56:43 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 7 Sep 2001 16:56:43 -0000
Received: (qmail 21490 invoked by uid 50005); 7 Sep 2001 16:56:39 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpb with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.141902 secs); 07 Sep 2001 16:56:39 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 7 Sep 2001 16:56:39 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA16768; Fri, 7 Sep 2001 09:28:23 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 82619 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 7 Sep 2001 16:28:17 +0000
Received: from localhost (rcalkins@localhost) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with          ESMTP id JAA16754; Fri, 7 Sep 2001 09:28:16 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.LNX.4.10.10109070909340.15857-100000@itc.uci.edu>
Date:         Fri, 7 Sep 2001 09:28:16 -0700
Reply-To: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
Subject:      Re: [AR] What is the  altitude record ?
Comments: To: Wedge Oldham <wedge@WESTWORLD.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <01d001c1373b$ef3dfde0$c36122c0@cronos>

On Thu, 6 Sep 2001, Wedge Oldham wrote:

> I think this is the current record. Somebody please correct me if I'm wrong.
> http://rrs.org/Projects/Launches/Space_Shot/space_shot.html

If not, it should be.  Guinness World Records lists the HAL5 HALO
rockoon launch as the highest amateur launch, and Mr. Kline's Hyperion 1
as the highest ground launch altitude of 36 kilometers.  But my record
book might be out of date.  Hopefully they have revised it since then.

Searches on the FAI and IAC web sites were fruitless.  Who is responsible
for keeping these records anyway?

Ray

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 3834 invoked from network); 7 Sep 2001 17:12:26 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 7 Sep 2001 17:12:26 -0000
Received: (qmail 20898 invoked by uid 50005); 7 Sep 2001 17:10:57 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.218469 secs); 07 Sep 2001 17:10:57 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 7 Sep 2001 17:10:57 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA16895; Fri, 7 Sep 2001 09:56:38 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 82642 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 7 Sep 2001 16:56:33 +0000
Received: from smtprelay1.abs.adelphia.net (smtprelay.abs.adelphia.net          [64.8.20.11]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA16881 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 7 Sep 2001 09:56:32 -0700
Received: from jlgrady ([63.124.251.47]) by smtprelay1.abs.adelphia.net          (Netscape Messaging Server 4.15) with SMTP id GJAXOW01.MUS for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 7 Sep 2001 12:55:44 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0CF8_01C56B69.50C82800"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook CWS, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <001301c137be$65ef9ac0$0200a8c0@prestige.net>
Date:         Fri, 7 Sep 2001 12:59:01 -0400
Reply-To: "Jeff Grady" <jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jeff Grady" <jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Sourcing Al Tubing
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <NKEHJAOOKBPGIKOOPDEFGEOOCBAA.jwckman@space-rockets.com>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0CF8_01C56B69.50C82800
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

http://www.midlandxpressmetals.com/
    -----Original Message-----
    From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@itc.uci.edu]On
Behalf Of Pax
    Sent: Thursday, September 06, 2001 4:40 PM
    To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
    Subject: [AR] Sourcing Al Tubing


    Where do my fellow rocketeeres source nice 6" and 8" Al tubing suitable
for motor casings?
    I am actually looking for anything from 2" to 12" with 12" not being so
important quite yet.
    I really would like to know how much the hardware would be to scale up
to those sizes in the future.
    For now I would like 2", 3", 4" and 6" tubing. Or 54, 75, 98mm if those
are sourcable as well.

    Looking for companies and or people where the above can be found. I know
Jerry makes motors in the 6" size range often. Any resources you guys can
point me to?

    Thanks

    Paxton

------=_NextPart_000_0CF8_01C56B69.50C82800
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META HTTP-EQUIV=3D"Content-Type" CONTENT=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Diso-8859-1">


<META content=3D"MSHTML 5.50.4522.1800" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=3D860233814-07092001><FONT face=3DArial color=3D#0000ff =

size=3D2></FONT></SPAN></DIV><SPAN class=3D860233814-07092001><FONT =
face=3DArial=20
color=3D#0000ff size=3D2><A=20
href=3D"http://www.midlandxpressmetals.com/">http://www.midlandxpressmeta=
ls.com/</A></FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE dir=3Dltr style=3D"MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
  <BLOCKQUOTE dir=3Dltr style=3D"MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
    <DIV class=3DOutlookMessageHeader dir=3Dltr align=3Dleft><FONT =
face=3DTahoma=20
    size=3D2>-----Original Message-----<BR><B>From:</B> Amateur Rocketry =

    discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@itc.uci.edu]<B>On Behalf Of=20
    </B>Pax<BR><B>Sent:</B> Thursday, September 06, 2001 4:40 =
PM<BR><B>To:</B>=20
    AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU<BR><B>Subject:</B> [AR] Sourcing Al=20
    Tubing<BR><BR></FONT></DIV>
    <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Where do my fellow rocketeeres =
source nice 6"=20
    and 8" Al tubing suitable for motor casings?</FONT></DIV>
    <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>I am actually looking for anything =
from 2" to=20
    12" with 12" not being so important quite yet.</FONT></DIV>
    <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>I really would like to know how =
much the=20
    hardware would be to scale up to those sizes in the =
future.</FONT></DIV>
    <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>For now I would like 2", 3", 4" and =
6" tubing.=20
    Or 54, 75, 98mm if those are sourcable as well.</FONT></DIV>
    <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
    <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Looking for companies and or people =
where the=20
    above can be found. I know Jerry makes motors in&nbsp;the =
6"&nbsp;size range=20
    often. Any resources&nbsp;you guys can point me to?</FONT></DIV>
    <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
    <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Thanks</FONT></DIV>
    <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
    <DIV><FONT face=3DArial=20
size=3D2>Paxton</FONT></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0CF8_01C56B69.50C82800--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 21083 invoked from network); 7 Sep 2001 17:37:31 -0000
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 7 Sep 2001 17:37:31 -0000
X-Priority: 3
Received: (qmail 31116 invoked by uid 50005); 7 Sep 2001 17:34:49 -0000
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpf with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.242921 secs); 07 Sep 2001 17:34:49 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 7 Sep 2001 17:34:49 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA16957; Fri, 7 Sep 2001 10:07:50 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 82656 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 7 Sep 2001 17:07:48 +0000
Received: from intrigue.willinet.net (intrigue.willinet.net [198.49.30.38]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id KAA16943 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 7 Sep 2001 10:07:47 -0700
Received: (qmail 9500 invoked from network); 7 Sep 2001 12:07:45 -0500
Received: from ps122bnwq.willinet.net (HELO willinet.net) (65.114.216.107) by          intrigue.willinet.net with SMTP; 7 Sep 2001 12:07:45 -0500
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.61 [en] (Win95; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <NKEHJAOOKBPGIKOOPDEFGEOOCBAA.jwckman@space-rockets.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Spam-Rating: intrigue.willinet.net 1.6.2 0/0/N
Message-ID:  <3B98FFED.B1A4A45F@willinet.net>
Date:         Fri, 7 Sep 2001 12:12:13 -0500
Reply-To: "Dan" <digitmet@WILLINET.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Dan" <digitmet@WILLINET.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Sourcing Al Tubing
Comments: To: John Wickman <jwckman@SPACE-ROCKETS.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Got an URL for them?

John Wickman wrote:

> I buy from Tube Service.   They are on the internet.John Wickman
>
>      -----Original Message-----
>      From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list
>      [mailto:AROCKET@itc.uci.edu]On Behalf Of Pax
>      Sent: Thursday, September 06, 2001 4:40 PM
>      To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
>      Subject: [AR] Sourcing Al Tubing
>
>      Where do my fellow rocketeeres source nice 6" and 8" Al
>      tubing suitable for motor casings?I am actually looking for
>      anything from 2" to 12" with 12" not being so important
>      quite yet.I really would like to know how much the hardware
>      would be to scale up to those sizes in the future.For now I
>      would like 2", 3", 4" and 6" tubing. Or 54, 75, 98mm if
>      those are sourcable as well. Looking for companies and or
>      people where the above can be found. I know Jerry makes
>      motors in the 6" size range often. Any resources you guys
>      can point me to? Thanks Paxton
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 9368 invoked from network); 7 Sep 2001 17:41:55 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 7 Sep 2001 17:41:55 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 22968 invoked by uid 50005); 7 Sep 2001 17:41:49 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpa with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.177435 secs); 07 Sep 2001 17:41:49 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 7 Sep 2001 17:41:49 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA17044; Fri, 7 Sep 2001 10:24:03 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 82667 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 7 Sep 2001 17:23:57 +0000
Received: from femail39.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail39.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.254.60.33]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA17030          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 7 Sep 2001 10:23:57 -0700
Received: from c396957-b.home.net ([24.17.249.10]) by          femail39.sdc1.sfba.home.com (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20          201-229-121-120-20010223) with ESMTP id          <20010907172352.MDDB29510.femail39.sdc1.sfba.home.com@c396957-b.home.net> for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 7          Sep 2001 10:23:52 -0700
X-Sender: spiegl@mail
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
References: <NKEHJAOOKBPGIKOOPDEFGEOOCBAA.jwckman@space-rockets.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <5.1.0.14.2.20010907122152.00b3ac68@mail>
Date:         Fri, 7 Sep 2001 12:24:02 -0500
Reply-To: "Mark C Spiegl" <spiegl@HOME.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Mark C Spiegl" <spiegl@HOME.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Sourcing Al Tubing
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <3B98FFED.B1A4A45F@willinet.net>

> > I buy from Tube Service.   They are on the internet.John Wickman

> Got an URL for them?


http://www.tubeservice.com


I have a dumb question in return... what is the difference
between tube and pipe??


--MCS

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 9549 invoked from network); 7 Sep 2001 18:32:30 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 7 Sep 2001 18:32:30 -0000
Received: (qmail 11706 invoked by uid 50005); 7 Sep 2001 18:31:02 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.338344 secs); 07 Sep 2001 18:31:02 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 7 Sep 2001 18:31:01 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA17238; Fri, 7 Sep 2001 10:58:33 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 82690 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 7 Sep 2001 17:58:24 +0000
Received: from localhost (rcalkins@localhost) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with          ESMTP id KAA17224; Fri, 7 Sep 2001 10:58:03 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.LNX.4.10.10109071056360.15857-100000@itc.uci.edu>
Date:         Fri, 7 Sep 2001 10:58:03 -0700
Reply-To: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Exhaust Temperature
Comments: To: Bill Bullock <bpbullock@LARIBAY.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <000c01c136d7$ee05a360$4a391442@billbull>

Roughly 1500F for sugar propellants, going up to 5000F for highly
metallized solids or LOx motors.

Propep calculates chamber temps too.

Ray

On Thu, 6 Sep 2001, Bill Bullock wrote:

>     I need some idea of what exhaust temperatures you folks are generating...a computation would do fine.
> Bill
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 3511 invoked from network); 7 Sep 2001 18:45:49 -0000
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 7 Sep 2001 18:45:49 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 19835 invoked by uid 50005); 7 Sep 2001 18:45:26 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpe with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.18115 secs); 07 Sep 2001 18:45:26 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 7 Sep 2001 18:45:26 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA17262; Fri, 7 Sep 2001 11:00:00 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 82682 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 7 Sep 2001 17:59:58 +0000
Received: from albatross.prod.itd.earthlink.net          (albatross.mail.pas.earthlink.net [207.217.120.120]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA17166 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Fri,          7 Sep 2001 10:49:29 -0700
Received: from earthlink.net (dialup-209.247.137.199.Dial1.SanJose1.Level3.net          [209.247.137.199]) by albatross.prod.itd.earthlink.net          (EL-8_9_3_3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id KAA04852; Fri, 7 Sep 2001 10:49:28          -0700 (PDT)
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.75 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.16-22 i686)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <NKEHJAOOKBPGIKOOPDEFGEOOCBAA.jwckman@space-rockets.com>            <5.1.0.14.2.20010907122152.00b3ac68@mail>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B990904.E6A8F33B@earthlink.net>
Date:         Fri, 7 Sep 2001 10:51:00 -0700
Reply-To: "David Weinshenker" <daze39@EARTHLINK.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "David Weinshenker" <daze39@EARTHLINK.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Sourcing Al Tubing
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Mark C Spiegl wrote:
> I have a dumb question in return... what is the difference
> between tube and pipe??

Short answer: "Pipe" is tubing with weird size designations,
for historical reasons.

The standard pipe threads were originally specified for the
earliest standard cast iron pipe, which had relatively thick
walls, and was sold (like rocket airframe tubing...) by _inside_
diameter - so "3/4 inch pipe" was actually a bit over an inch OD.

When ways were found to make thinner-walled piping, it was
manufactured in sizes corresponding to the outside diameter
of the original thick-walled stuff, and the original "nominal ID"
size designations were retained, so that "3/4 inch" pipe
of either construction could be used with the same threads
and fitting sizes. The sizing system has carried over into
electrical conduit and PVC pipe as well - one may see
terms such as "trade size" or the abbreviations "IPS" and
"NPT" for "iron pipe size" and "national pipe thread"...

Metal "tubing" is ordinarily sold by actual outside diameter.

-dave w

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 8861 invoked from network); 7 Sep 2001 19:09:32 -0000
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 7 Sep 2001 19:09:32 -0000
Received: (qmail 12430 invoked by uid 50005); 7 Sep 2001 19:09:09 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpe with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.163438 secs); 07 Sep 2001 19:09:09 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 7 Sep 2001 19:09:09 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA17390; Fri, 7 Sep 2001 11:25:05 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 82719 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 7 Sep 2001 18:25:02 +0000
Received: from zcars0m9.ca.nortel.com (h157s242a129n47.user.nortelnetworks.com          [47.129.242.157]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA17376          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 7 Sep 2001 11:25:02 -0700
Received: from zcars04e.ca.nortel.com (zcars04e.ca.nortel.com [47.129.242.56])          by zcars0m9.ca.nortel.com (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f87INpp00312          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 7 Sep 2001 14:23:51 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from rftzy232.ca.nortel.com by zcars04e.ca.nortel.com; Fri, 7 Sep          2001 14:23:57 -0400
Received: from NORTELNETWORKS.COM (wftzh00e.ca.nortel.com [47.130.116.9]) by          rftzy232.ca.nortel.com with SMTP (Microsoft Exchange Internet Mail          Service Version 5.5.2653.13) id SHASBF7A; Fri, 7 Sep 2001 14:23:07          -0400
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.73C-CCK-MCD [en] (X11; U; HP-UX B.10.20 9000/785)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <NKEHJAOOKBPGIKOOPDEFGEOOCBAA.jwckman@space-rockets.com>            <5.1.0.14.2.20010907122152.00b3ac68@mail>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Orig: <mleech@NORTELNETWORKS.COM>
Message-ID:  <3B9910C9.D0C19728@NORTELNETWORKS.COM>
Date:         Fri, 7 Sep 2001 14:24:09 -0400
Reply-To: "Marcus Leech" <mleech@NORTELNETWORKS.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Marcus Leech" <mleech@NORTELNETWORKS.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Sourcing Al Tubing
Comments: To: Mark C Spiegl <spiegl@HOME.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Mark C Spiegl wrote:
>
> I have a dumb question in return... what is the difference
> between tube and pipe??
>
> --MCS
Here in North America, PIPE is manufactured to match (typically) the Iron Pipe
  Size standard.  It is available in various schedules (40 and 80 are typical)
  that define both OD and wall thickness for any given nominal size.  So
  1" SCH 80 PIPE is 1.315" OD, and about 0.940 ID, while 1" SCH 40 is 1.315" OD,
  and about 1.050" ID.

Tubing, on the other hand, is designed to have an exact OD.  1" OD tubing is
  (+/- ASTM allowable slop) 1.00", and available in a number of standard wall
  thickesses--0.039", 0.058", 0.065", 0.125", and 0.250" are common tube wall
  thicknesses.

It is *generally*, but not always, the case that we make our casings from
  TUBE, rather than pipe, since the common wall thicknesses are thinner than
  corresponding pipe, and hence lighter.  PIPE is often made by butt-welding
  rolled sheets if it's steel, but in other materials (6061 Aluminum, and
  various plastics) it's extruded.  It's generally considered to be bad to use
  welded PIPE in applications like rocket motor casings.

--
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Marcus Leech                             Mail:   Dept 8M70, MS 012, FITZ
Advisor                                  Phone: (ESN) 393-9145  +1 613 763 9145
Security Architecture and Planning       Fax:   (ESN) 393-9435  +1 613 763 9435
Nortel Networks                          mleech@nortelnetworks.com
-----------------Expressed opinions are my own, not my employer's------

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 863 invoked from network); 7 Sep 2001 19:29:10 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 7 Sep 2001 19:29:10 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 28716 invoked by uid 50005); 7 Sep 2001 19:26:28 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpf with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.167224 secs); 07 Sep 2001 19:26:28 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 7 Sep 2001 19:26:28 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA17413; Fri, 7 Sep 2001 11:26:27 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 82726 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 7 Sep 2001 18:26:26 +0000
Received: from ns.vanguard.com (ns.VANGUARD.COM [192.175.173.31]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA17399 for          <Arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 7 Sep 2001 11:26:25 -0700
Received: from eagle1.vanguard.com (eagle1.VANGUARD.COM [192.175.141.70]) by          ns.vanguard.com (Switch-2.1.3/Switch-2.1.0) with ESMTP id          f87IQ5g02048 for <Arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 7 Sep 2001 14:26:05          -0400 (EDT)
Received: from vgi4mail.vanguard.com (vgi4mail.vanguard.com [10.254.65.16]) by          eagle1.vanguard.com (Switch-2.1.3/Switch-2.1.0) with SMTP id          f87IQLj21100 for <Arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 7 Sep 2001 14:26:21          -0400 (EDT)
Received: by vgi4mail.vanguard.com(Lotus SMTP MTA v4.6.6  (890.1 7-16-1999))           id 85256AC0.0065404B ; Fri, 7 Sep 2001 14:25:55 -0400
X-Lotus-FromDomain: VGINOTES
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Disposition: inline
Message-ID:  <85256AC0.00653F9F.00@vgi4mail.vanguard.com>
Date:         Fri, 7 Sep 2001 14:26:14 -0400
Reply-To: <Waysie_Atkins@VANGUARD.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <Waysie_Atkins@VANGUARD.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] aRocket project
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

<"a camel is a horse designed by committee",




But wouldn't we all choose a camel over a horse in a desert environment.
Financially speaking amateur rocketry is a desert with very few oasis.  Might
not look pretty, but it gets the job done.


I'd love to help out to the best of my abilities.  Fin construction comes to
mind, or teaming with a few other locals on another parts of the project.


Respectfully,

Waysie

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 18263 invoked from network); 7 Sep 2001 20:15:05 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 7 Sep 2001 20:15:05 -0000
Received: (qmail 2619 invoked by uid 50005); 7 Sep 2001 20:14:59 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpa with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.2059 secs); 07 Sep 2001 20:14:59 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 7 Sep 2001 20:14:58 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA17644; Fri, 7 Sep 2001 12:27:52 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 82747 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 7 Sep 2001 19:27:15 +0000
Received: from mailhost0.trib.com (mailhost0.trib.com [63.229.150.3]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA17629 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Fri, 7 Sep 2001 12:27:15 -0700
Received: from mail.trib.com (mail.trib.com [12.10.158.17]) by          mailhost0.trib.com (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f87JRC648087; Fri, 7          Sep 2001 13:27:12 -0600 (MDT) (envelope-from          jwckman@space-rockets.com)
Received: from [63.229.151.11] (HELO default) by mail.trib.com (CommuniGate Pro          SMTP 3.4.6) with SMTP id 45927550; Fri, 07 Sep 2001 13:27:10 -0600
References: <NKEHJAOOKBPGIKOOPDEFGEOOCBAA.jwckman@space-rockets.com>             <5.1.0.14.2.20010907122152.00b3ac68@mail>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2314.1300
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <001101c137d2$8f01bc40$0b97e53f@default>
Date:         Fri, 7 Sep 2001 13:23:12 -0600
Reply-To: "John Wickman" <jwckman@SPACE-ROCKETS.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Wickman" <jwckman@SPACE-ROCKETS.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Sourcing Al Tubing
Comments: To: Mark C Spiegl <spiegl@home.net>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

The reference diameter number stands of outer diameter in the case of tube
and stands for inside diameter in the case of pipe.

John Wickman

----- Original Message -----
From: Mark C Spiegl <spiegl@HOME.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Friday, September 07, 2001 11:24 AM
Subject: Re: [AR] Sourcing Al Tubing


> > > I buy from Tube Service.   They are on the internet.John Wickman
>
> > Got an URL for them?
>
>
> http://www.tubeservice.com
>
>
> I have a dumb question in return... what is the difference
> between tube and pipe??
>
>
> --MCS

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 524 invoked from network); 7 Sep 2001 21:16:20 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 7 Sep 2001 21:16:20 -0000
Received: (qmail 17122 invoked by uid 50005); 7 Sep 2001 21:16:13 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpa with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.426774 secs); 07 Sep 2001 21:16:13 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 7 Sep 2001 21:16:13 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA17844; Fri, 7 Sep 2001 13:28:50 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 82767 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 7 Sep 2001 20:28:46 +0000
Received: from cablecom.laribay.net (cablecom.laribay.net [66.20.57.4]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA17829 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 7 Sep 2001 13:28:45 -0700
Received: from billbull (dial105.laribay.net [66.20.57.105]) by          cablecom.laribay.net (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id PAA08799 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 7 Sep 2001 15:09:56 -0500 (CDT)          (envelope-from bpbullock@laribay.net)
References:  <NEBBLECGKLLOLFCCBNPEKELEDJAA.duncan.mcdonald@prover.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0CFC_01C56B69.50D19DE0"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <000601c137db$e755a600$69391442@billbull>
Date:         Fri, 7 Sep 2001 15:29:36 -0500
Reply-To: "Bill Bullock" <bpbullock@LARIBAY.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Bill Bullock" <bpbullock@LARIBAY.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Smokeless powder ignitor enhancement
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0CFC_01C56B69.50D19DE0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Duncan:
    I have never tried using epoxy with the dissolved smokeless =
powder...just dip, let it dry and re-dip if you want a larger "charge" =
to start things. Most of the time if I use an igniter I have dipped the =
bare wires into the "glue" and then into FFFFG black powder. I let this =
dry and then re-dip in both or just in the glue and let that dry...sort =
of a protective covering.
    If you want to make them water-proof, after they have dried a couple =
of days dip them into clear fingernail polish and let this dry. Be sure =
to dip this time about 1/4 inch more than the base of the primer nodule.
    I know there are a lot of different ways to do this, so maybe =
someone else will share their procedures with us.
    I use Bullseye because it is fast burning and I have about 12 pounds =
of it on hand for my pistol reloading. But you can use any type =
smokeless powder to make the glue. I have used just about every =
smokeless variant ever made including some salvaged from .50 cal. MG =
shells and 105mm Howitzer charges which I acquired from Hogden years =
ago. For the black powder you can use any grade of black powder, Pyrodex =
or the new Goex Clear Shot.( Their site is at http://www.goexpowder.com/ =
.)
    This costs more (and takes up a lot more time) than purchasing =
"ready-rolls", but I could buy a truckload of Estes motors for what I =
spend each year making these things. DIY is a lot more fun...
Bill
  ----- Original Message -----=20
  From: Duncan McDonald=20
  To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU=20
  Sent: Friday, September 07, 2001 10:11 AM
  Subject: [AR] Smokeless powder ignitor enhancement


  So let's see if I have this right. I can use smokeless powder to make =
a pyrodex-like dipping compound for say ignitors by dissolving some =
smokeless powder like Bullseye pistol powder with a small amount of =
acetone. I can then mix this paste with epoxy and use it to dip ignitors =
and it will produce the same effect upon ignition as the various ignitor =
dipping kits that are on the market. Correct?
  =20
  Duncan

------=_NextPart_000_0CFC_01C56B69.50D19DE0
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META content=3D"text/html; charset=3Diso-8859-1" =
http-equiv=3DContent-Type>
<META content=3D"MSHTML 5.00.2614.3500" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV>Duncan:</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; I have never tried using epoxy with the =
dissolved=20
smokeless powder...just dip, let it dry and re-dip if you want a larger =
"charge"=20
to start things. Most of the time if I use an igniter I have dipped the =
bare=20
wires into the "glue" and then into FFFFG black powder. I let this dry =
and then=20
re-dip in both or just in the glue and let that dry...sort of a =
protective=20
covering.</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; If you want to make them water-proof, after they =
have=20
dried a couple of days dip them into clear fingernail polish and let =
this dry.=20
Be sure to dip this time about 1/4 inch more than the base of the primer =

nodule.</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; I know there are a lot of different ways to do =
this, so=20
maybe someone else will share their procedures with us.</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; I use Bullseye because it is fast burning and I =
have=20
about 12 pounds of it on hand for my pistol reloading.&nbsp;But you can =
use any=20
type smokeless powder&nbsp;to make the glue. I have used just about =
every=20
smokeless variant ever made including some salvaged from .50 cal. MG =
shells and=20
105mm Howitzer&nbsp;charges which I acquired from Hogden years =
ago.&nbsp;For the=20
black powder you can use any grade of black powder, Pyrodex or the new =
Goex=20
Clear Shot.( Their site is at <A=20
href=3D"http://www.goexpowder.com/">http://www.goexpowder.com/</A>&nbsp;.=
)</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; This costs more (and takes up a lot more time) =
than=20
purchasing "ready-rolls", but I could buy a truckload of Estes motors =
for what I=20
spend each year making these things. DIY is a lot more fun...</DIV>
<DIV>Bill</DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE=20
style=3D"BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: =
0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; PADDING-RIGHT: 0px">
  <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial">----- Original Message ----- </DIV>
  <DIV=20
  style=3D"BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; FONT: 10pt arial; font-color: =
black"><B>From:</B>=20
  <A href=3D"mailto:duncan.mcdonald@PROVER.COM"=20
  title=3Dduncan.mcdonald@PROVER.COM>Duncan McDonald</A> </DIV>
  <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A =
href=3D"mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU"=20
  title=3DAROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU</A> </DIV>
  <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> Friday, September 07, =
2001 10:11=20
  AM</DIV>
  <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> [AR] Smokeless powder =
ignitor=20
  enhancement</DIV>
  <DIV><BR></DIV>
  <DIV><FONT face=3DArial><SPAN class=3D030510315-07092001>So let's see =
if I have=20
  this right. I can use smokeless powder to make a pyrodex-like dipping =
compound=20
  for say ignitors by dissolving some smokeless powder like Bullseye =
pistol=20
  powder with a small amount of acetone. I can then mix this paste with =
epoxy=20
  and use it to dip ignitors and it will produce the same effect upon =
ignition=20
  as the various ignitor dipping kits that are on the market.=20
  Correct?</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
  <DIV><FONT face=3DArial><SPAN=20
class=3D030510315-07092001></SPAN></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
  <DIV><FONT face=3DArial><SPAN=20
class=3D030510315-07092001>Duncan</SPAN></FONT></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY>=
</HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0CFC_01C56B69.50D19DE0--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 22194 invoked from network); 7 Sep 2001 21:29:30 -0000
X-Priority: 3
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 7 Sep 2001 21:29:30 -0000
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 29092 invoked by uid 50005); 7 Sep 2001 21:27:23 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.171619 secs); 07 Sep 2001 21:27:23 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 7 Sep 2001 21:27:23 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA17971; Fri, 7 Sep 2001 13:47:28 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 82790 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 7 Sep 2001 20:47:27 +0000
Received: from imo-r03.mx.aol.com (imo-r03.mx.aol.com [152.163.225.99]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA17957 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Fri, 7 Sep 2001 13:47:26 -0700
Received: from Sociald84@aol.com by imo-r03.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v31_r1.4.) id          o.a7.138474b6 (4222); Fri, 7 Sep 2001 16:47:08 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0CFF_01C56B69.50D19DE0"
X-Mailer: AOL 6.0 for Windows US sub 10536
Message-ID:  <a7.138474b6.28ca8c50@aol.com>
Date:         Fri, 7 Sep 2001 16:47:12 EDT
Reply-To: <Sociald84@AOL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <Sociald84@AOL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] aRocket project
Comments: To: michael@neonym.net
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0CFF_01C56B69.50D19DE0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

In a message dated 9/6/2001 10:00:24 PM Mountain Daylight Time,
michael@neonym.net writes:


> On Thu, Sep 06, 2001 at 08:39:52PM -0700, Jamie Morken wrote:
> > I don't know if there are any good and free to use CAD programs that would
> > be good for this, so that people could share the files, and branch off
> > their designs.
>
> There are free ones and then there are good ones. Then there are cheap
> good ones. I did this search a few months ago and found that Turbo Cad
> was by far the best for the price. You can get the standard package
> for $99. There are a few things it won't do that the professional
> version does but this mostly in the realm of some advanced 3D modelling.
>
> A local machine shop was able to convert my drawings to CNC instructions
> fairly easily and the parts where exactly what I drew. That was
> my first attempt at any of that so its not to hard to learn.
>
> http://www.turbocad.com/
>
> Has anyone seen any better alternatives?
>
> -MM
>

I will actually be getting AutoCad in the next few days. And my friend is
quite versed in the program so I'll be learning prety soon how to use it.

Mark

------=_NextPart_000_0CFF_01C56B69.50D19DE0
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<HTML><FONT FACE=arial,helvetica><FONT  SIZE=2>In a message dated 9/6/2001 10:00:24 PM Mountain Daylight Time,
<BR>michael@neonym.net writes:
<BR>
<BR>
<BR><BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE style="BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px">On Thu, Sep 06, 2001 at 08:39:52PM -0700, Jamie Morken wrote:
<BR>&gt; I don't know if there are any good and free to use CAD programs that would
<BR>&gt; be good for this, so that people could share the files, and branch off
<BR>&gt; their designs.
<BR>
<BR>There are free ones and then there are good ones. Then there are cheap
<BR>good ones. I did this search a few months ago and found that Turbo Cad
<BR>was by far the best for the price. You can get the standard package
<BR>for $99. There are a few things it won't do that the professional
<BR>version does but this mostly in the realm of some advanced 3D modelling.
<BR>
<BR>A local machine shop was able to convert my drawings to CNC instructions
<BR>fairly easily and the parts where exactly what I drew. That was
<BR>my first attempt at any of that so its not to hard to learn.
<BR>
<BR>http://www.turbocad.com/
<BR>
<BR>Has anyone seen any better alternatives?
<BR>
<BR>-MM
<BR></BLOCKQUOTE>
<BR>
<BR>I will actually be getting AutoCad in the next few days. And my friend is
<BR>quite versed in the program so I'll be learning prety soon how to use it.
<BR>
<BR>Mark</FONT></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0CFF_01C56B69.50D19DE0--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 21934 invoked from network); 7 Sep 2001 23:02:18 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 7 Sep 2001 23:02:18 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 8260 invoked by uid 50005); 7 Sep 2001 23:02:16 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpb with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.29371 secs); 07 Sep 2001 23:02:16 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 7 Sep 2001 23:02:16 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA18495; Fri, 7 Sep 2001 15:41:15 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 82868 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 7 Sep 2001 22:41:10 +0000
Received: from falcon.mail.pas.earthlink.net (falcon.mail.pas.earthlink.net          [207.217.120.74]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA18481          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 7 Sep 2001 15:41:10 -0700
Received: from earthlink.net (dialup-209.247.143.22.Dial1.SanJose1.Level3.net          [209.247.143.22]) by falcon.mail.pas.earthlink.net (8.11.5/8.9.3)          with ESMTP id f87Mf7J07493; Fri, 7 Sep 2001 15:41:07 -0700 (PDT)
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (Win98; I)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <150.9d5d33.28ca9b5d@aol.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B995072.8B0CEB8B@earthlink.net>
Date:         Fri, 7 Sep 2001 15:55:46 -0700
Reply-To: <thomgaf@energyrs.com>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Thomas M. Mcgaffey" <energyrelease@EARTHLINK.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] aRocket project
Comments: To: Sociald84@aol.com
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Mark Shamburg-Donohue,

Again Thank you for your reply.

Mark;  By asking who you are I was not putting you down or dissing (sp?)
you.  I had and still have a valid reason for asking.  I do not think of
you as a "PUNK KID" and until you said your age I had no idea how old
you were.

Like it or not,  because of the laws we live under I must protect myself
from crossing many fine lines when it comes to helping people in rocket
related areas.  If that person turns out to be under age (21 in
Kalifornia) I could find my self in a world of hurt if I supplied
information or gave money to someone who got hurt using my information
or was enabled by my help or money to do something that got them kill or
injured. Parents do not easily forgive someone who has helped their son
to injure or kill themselves nor do the courts or the families lawyers.

When Dr. Terry McCreary (of this list) self published his book
"EXPERIMENTAL COMPOSITE PROPELLANT" and sold copies to fellow list
members he had to require a photocopy of the purchaser's driver license
to determine his / her age for the same reasons I spoke of above. This
is not stamp collecting we are dealing with on this list.

> 1. Who you are?
>
>
> I'm just a punk kid with two parents who never let public schools suffice for my education and
> tought me more at home than I ever learned in school until I got into chemistry in highschool.
> Even then I learned more at home on my computer than even the great John Leamon could
> teach me. I'm just an 18 year old punk ass kid from Denver who outgrew estes the day after
> he flew his first D motor in 8th grade. I'm just a kid who convinced my highschool physics
> teacher to let me do a static test of a PVC candy motor in the courtyard of our semi-ghetto
> highschool. I'm a kid who spent a month of my summer when I was 16 at Colorado School of
> Mines in an engineering summer camp. I'm just a kid who got a D in physics because I
> embarrased the teacher by calling her on a point that she was absoloutly wrong about, and
> showing a higher level of knowledge of the subject. I'm just a kid who found a mentor in an
> Astronomy teacher who asked me the right questions when I came to him with a problem to
> make me think in different ways so I could solve the problem myself. I'm just some kid who
> sat down for a day with a systems engineer at Lockheed Martin with a design of mine and
> tought him a few things about rockets. I'm just a punk kid who visited an Aerospace engineer
> at Honeywell to find someone who I could talk about my project with that could give me any
> feedback that would help get this rocket off the ground. But most importantly I'm a kid that
> can't not have a problem in his head to work through. And last but not least I'm a kid who
> loves rockets.



I have valid reasons for my other questions as well.  The tone of your
reply tells me that you are upset by my questions.  For that I am
sorry.  I see that I have wasted my time, and the time of others on this
list.  For that I apologize to the Arocket list members.


Thom

Thomas McGaffey
Energy Release Systems
thomgaf@energyrs.com
408-226-7502
San Jose, Kalifornia

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 26756 invoked from network); 8 Sep 2001 00:01:47 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 8 Sep 2001 00:01:47 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 24337 invoked by uid 50005); 8 Sep 2001 00:00:18 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.214364 secs); 08 Sep 2001 00:00:18 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 8 Sep 2001 00:00:18 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA18816; Fri, 7 Sep 2001 16:43:12 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 82905 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 7 Sep 2001 23:43:09 +0000
Received: from femail44.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail44.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.254.60.38]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA18802          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 7 Sep 2001 16:43:09 -0700
Received: from c1649002-a.earthlink.net ([24.20.95.67]) by          femail44.sdc1.sfba.home.com (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20          201-229-121-120-20010223) with ESMTP id          <20010907234303.ZSHZ13169.femail44.sdc1.sfba.home.com@c1649002-a.earthlink.net>; Fri, 7 Sep 2001 16:43:03          -0700
X-Sender: forkbomb@mail.earthlink.net
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.0.2
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <5.0.2.1.0.20010907164228.03124370@mail.earthlink.net>
Date:         Fri, 7 Sep 2001 16:43:02 -0700
Reply-To: "Pierce Nichols" <forkbomb@EARTHLINK.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Pierce Nichols" <forkbomb@EARTHLINK.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Interesting (scary?) Monopropellant....
Comments: To: Kristin & David Hall <thehalls@RIDGENET.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <004b01c137f6$c1e0c420$1b30fea9@kristinscomp>

At 04:42 PM 9/7/2001 -0700, Kristin & David Hall wrote:
>Suffice to say there are some folks out there playing around with a slurry.
>The application is not propellant, but still, I couldn't help but think of
>it as a potential "monopropellant" (if you can call a slurry a mono).
>
>Nitro-methane.
>AP.
>Al.


         An earth-shattering KABOOM!

         -p


Mars or Bust!
www.marssociety.com

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 26774 invoked from network); 8 Sep 2001 00:01:48 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 8 Sep 2001 00:01:48 -0000
Received: (qmail 11606 invoked by uid 50005); 8 Sep 2001 00:01:45 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpb with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.190101 secs); 08 Sep 2001 00:01:45 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 8 Sep 2001 00:01:45 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA18755; Fri, 7 Sep 2001 16:33:45 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 82893 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 7 Sep 2001 23:33:43 +0000
Received: from castor.ridgenet.net (IDENT:root@castor.ridgenet.net          [199.120.150.29]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA18741          for <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Fri, 7 Sep 2001 16:33:42 -0700
Received: from kristinscomp (pm173.ridgenet.net [204.154.246.173]) by          castor.ridgenet.net (8.11.0/8.11.0) with SMTP id f87NOmS26961 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Fri, 7 Sep 2001 16:24:49 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <004b01c137f6$c1e0c420$1b30fea9@kristinscomp>
Date:         Fri, 7 Sep 2001 16:42:27 -0700
Reply-To: "Kristin & David Hall" <thehalls@RIDGENET.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Kristin & David Hall" <thehalls@RIDGENET.NET>
Subject:      [AR] Interesting (scary?) Monopropellant....
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Suffice to say there are some folks out there playing around with a slurry.
The application is not propellant, but still, I couldn't help but think of
it as a potential "monopropellant" (if you can call a slurry a mono).

Nitro-methane.
AP.
Al.

Thoughts?

--
Dave and/or Kristin Hall

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 24267 invoked from network); 8 Sep 2001 00:09:15 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 8 Sep 2001 00:09:15 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 1982 invoked by uid 50005); 8 Sep 2001 00:09:08 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpa with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.294156 secs); 08 Sep 2001 00:09:08 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 8 Sep 2001 00:09:07 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA18881; Fri, 7 Sep 2001 16:52:03 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 82904 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 7 Sep 2001 23:52:02 +0000
Received: from fcexgw03.efi.com ([192.68.228.82]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7)          with SMTP id QAA18796 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 7 Sep 2001          16:42:02 -0700
Received: from 10.10.12.104 by fcexgw03.efi.com (InterScan E-Mail VirusWall          NT); Fri, 07 Sep 2001 16:41:56 -0700
Received: from earthlink.net (peroxide.efi.com [10.10.89.46]) by          EX-IMC3-CORP.efi.com with SMTP (Microsoft Exchange Internet Mail          Service Version 5.5.2653.13) id SMPFN7X1; Fri, 7 Sep 2001 16:41:56          -0700
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.14-5.0 i686)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <004b01c137f6$c1e0c420$1b30fea9@kristinscomp>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B995B8E.177A1F6@earthlink.net>
Date:         Fri, 7 Sep 2001 16:43:10 -0700
Reply-To: "David Weinshenker" <daze39@EARTHLINK.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "David Weinshenker" <daze39@EARTHLINK.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Interesting (scary?) Monopropellant....
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Kristin & David Hall wrote:
> Suffice to say there are some folks out there playing around with a slurry.
> The application is not propellant, but still, I couldn't help but think of
> it as a potential "monopropellant" (if you can call a slurry a mono).
>
> Nitro-methane.
> AP.
> Al.
>
> Thoughts?

Eeek! A mixture like that, I'd treat as "potentially
detonable unless proven otherwise"... maybe I'm too nervous?

-dave w

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 18568 invoked from network); 8 Sep 2001 00:31:51 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 8 Sep 2001 00:31:51 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 17728 invoked by uid 50005); 8 Sep 2001 00:30:21 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.402087 secs); 08 Sep 2001 00:30:21 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 8 Sep 2001 00:30:20 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA19057; Fri, 7 Sep 2001 17:16:15 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 82933 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 8 Sep 2001 00:16:14 +0000
Received: from fcexgw03.efi.com ([192.68.228.82]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7)          with SMTP id RAA18965 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Fri, 7 Sep 2001          17:06:14 -0700
Received: from 10.10.12.104 by fcexgw03.efi.com (InterScan E-Mail VirusWall          NT); Fri, 07 Sep 2001 17:06:13 -0700
Received: from earthlink.net (peroxide.efi.com [10.10.89.46]) by          EX-IMC3-CORP.efi.com with SMTP (Microsoft Exchange Internet Mail          Service Version 5.5.2653.13) id SMPFN768; Fri, 7 Sep 2001 17:06:13          -0700
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.14-5.0 i686)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <150.9d5d33.28ca9b5d@aol.com> <3B995072.8B0CEB8B@earthlink.net>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B99613F.A0468362@earthlink.net>
Date:         Fri, 7 Sep 2001 17:07:27 -0700
Reply-To: "David Weinshenker" <daze39@EARTHLINK.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "David Weinshenker" <daze39@EARTHLINK.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] aRocket project
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

"Thomas M. Mcgaffey" wrote:
> Like it or not,  because of the laws we live under I must protect myself
> from crossing many fine lines when it comes to helping people in rocket
> related areas.  If that person turns out to be under age (21 in
> Kalifornia) I could find my self in a world of hurt if I supplied
> information or gave money to someone who got hurt using my information
> or was enabled by my help or money to do something that got them kill or
> injured. Parents do not easily forgive someone who has helped their son
> to injure or kill themselves nor do the courts or the families lawyers.

General question - is there any standard in the law for deciding whether
one was specifically "enabled by certain information" to do something
dangerous? For example, if I publish a book on "how to fix motorcycles"
and some 14-year-old checks it out of the library and reads it, and then
goes and drags his dad's old dirt bike out of the back of the garage, gets
it running, tries to go for a ride without knowing the first thing about
the technique of controlling the vehicle, and crashes through a neighbor's
plate-glass living-room window (damaging both himself and the window),
what would be the standard for determining whether I (or the library or
the publisher for that matter) was somehow culpably negligent in "enabling"
him to do that? Are there any relevant statutes or is it strictly a "case
law precedent" type of thing?

-dave w

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 13259 invoked from network); 8 Sep 2001 00:46:08 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 8 Sep 2001 00:46:08 -0000
Received: (qmail 15309 invoked by uid 50005); 8 Sep 2001 00:45:42 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpe with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 1.85892 secs); 08 Sep 2001 00:45:42 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 8 Sep 2001 00:45:38 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA18995; Fri, 7 Sep 2001 17:10:34 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 82934 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 8 Sep 2001 00:10:28 +0000
Received: from spsystems.net (spsystems.net [209.47.149.227]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA18981 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Fri,          7 Sep 2001 17:10:27 -0700
Received: (from henry@localhost) by spsystems.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id UAA12723;          Fri, 7 Sep 2001 20:09:52 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010907200649.12558B-100000@spsystems.net>
Date:         Fri, 7 Sep 2001 20:09:52 -0400
Reply-To: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Interesting (scary?) Monopropellant....
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <004b01c137f6$c1e0c420$1b30fea9@kristinscomp>

On Fri, 7 Sep 2001, Kristin & David Hall wrote:
> ...a potential "monopropellant" (if you can call a slurry a mono).
> Nitro-methane.
> AP.
> Al.
> Thoughts?

Ranks right up there with LOX/methane mixtures as the sort of monopropellant
people should work on very far away from me. :-)

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 18504 invoked from network); 8 Sep 2001 01:29:52 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 8 Sep 2001 01:29:52 -0000
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 5952 invoked by uid 50005); 8 Sep 2001 01:29:26 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpe with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 2.293046 secs); 08 Sep 2001 01:29:26 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 8 Sep 2001 01:29:21 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA19413; Fri, 7 Sep 2001 18:13:39 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 82993 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 8 Sep 2001 01:13:38 +0000
Received: from smtp008pub.verizon.net (smtp008pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.187])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA19393 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 7 Sep 2001 18:13:29 -0700
Received: from [63.10.201.217] (1Cust217.tnt3.hilo.hi.da.uu.net          [63.10.201.217]) by smtp008pub.verizon.net  with ESMTP for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; id f881Cvp17385 Fri, 7 Sep 2001 20:12:57 -0500          (CDT)
X-Sender: ttocs@mail.gte.net
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <l03130300b7bb27de2c95@[63.10.189.226]>
Date:         Tue, 4 Sep 2001 15:12:36 -1000
Reply-To: "Aaron Smith" <ttocs@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Aaron Smith" <ttocs@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Interesting (scary?) Monopropellant....
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <004b01c137f6$c1e0c420$1b30fea9@kristinscomp>

Zen and the art of rocketry:

        The rocket ignites
        burning a new propellant
        Shockwaves, fireball

Be careful, grasshopper :-).

At 4:42 PM -0700 9/7/01, Kristin & David Hall wrote:
>Suffice to say there are some folks out there playing around with a slurry.
>The application is not propellant, but still, I couldn't help but think of
>it as a potential "monopropellant" (if you can call a slurry a mono).
>
>Nitro-methane.
>AP.
>Al.
>
>Thoughts?
>
>--
>Dave and/or Kristin Hall

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 20083 invoked from network); 8 Sep 2001 01:36:13 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 8 Sep 2001 01:36:13 -0000
Received: (qmail 28069 invoked by uid 50005); 8 Sep 2001 01:29:41 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpb with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.439954 secs); 08 Sep 2001 01:29:41 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 8 Sep 2001 01:29:40 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA19392; Fri, 7 Sep 2001 18:13:26 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 82986 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 8 Sep 2001 01:13:21 +0000
Received: from smtprelay1.abs.adelphia.net (smtprelay.abs.adelphia.net          [64.8.20.11]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA19378 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 7 Sep 2001 18:13:20 -0700
Received: from jlgrady ([63.124.251.47]) by smtprelay1.abs.adelphia.net          (Netscape Messaging Server 4.15) with SMTP id GJBKOW01.EZD for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 7 Sep 2001 21:12:32 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook CWS, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <000001c13803$ca30fcf0$0200a8c0@prestige.net>
Date:         Fri, 7 Sep 2001 21:15:46 -0400
Reply-To: "Jeff Grady" <jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jeff Grady" <jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET>
Subject:      [AR] Epoxy/KNO3 motors?
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010907200649.12558B-100000@spsystems.net>

        After making some igniters using a home-brew BP composition and some epoxy,
and reading another poster's suggestion about adding more KNO3 to my mix to
oxidize the epoxy, I thought I'd try making an epoxy/KNO3 composition to
test. I mixed 200 grains (using a reloader's powder scale) of KNO3 and 200gr
of epoxy and let dry. I wanted to start fuel-rich to avoid a bad burn (got
burned pretty bad once in 11th grade chem class). I noticed a good deal of
heat coming from the mixing cup several minutes after mixing - which I
kind-of expected. It was left to harden out on the driveway.

        I lit the results with a propane torch and away it went. It burned with a
bright blue flame near the fuel and had yellow tips. It burned pretty
vigorously for 30-40 seconds. One thing I noticed was a tendency to crack
apart - presumably from heat fracturing the solid or because of residual
moisture still in the mix. Next I'll try a 60/40 KNO3/Epoxy blend to see how
that goes. I have never used resins of the sort mentioned on this list, but
will assume, until told differently, that the resins most of you are using
are more rubber like when cured? Has anyone else had good/bad luck trying
this? All comments pro and con would be appreciated.

JG

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 2713 invoked from network); 8 Sep 2001 01:39:09 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 8 Sep 2001 01:39:09 -0000
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 5135 invoked by uid 50005); 8 Sep 2001 01:39:07 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpb with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.306987 secs); 08 Sep 2001 01:39:07 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 8 Sep 2001 01:39:06 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA19632; Fri, 7 Sep 2001 18:22:14 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 83030 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 8 Sep 2001 01:22:12 +0000
Received: from idsoftware.com (predator.idsoftware.com [192.246.40.34]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA19618 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Fri, 7 Sep 2001 18:22:12 -0700
Received: from [192.246.40.129] (account johnc HELO lightning.idsoftware.com)          by idsoftware.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 3.4.7) with ESMTP id 374470          for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 07 Sep 2001 20:22:11 -0500
X-Sender: johnc@mail.idsoftware.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <4.3.1.2.20010907201512.02816790@mail.idsoftware.com>
Date:         Fri, 7 Sep 2001 20:20:47 -0500
Reply-To: "John Carmack" <johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Carmack" <johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM>
Subject:      [AR] R/C rocketplane
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Has anyone ever done an R/C rocketplane?  I'm sure there have been lots of
boosted gliders, but I mean something with a restartable and/or throttled
liquid rocket engine, the R/C equivalent of XCOR's Rocket-EZ.

That seems like it would be a project with a really good coolness to effort
payoff.  It would be pretty straightforward with peroxide, but the visual
flair of mach diamonds behind an R/C plane would be sorely missed.

John Carmack

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 5711 invoked from network); 8 Sep 2001 01:48:31 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 8 Sep 2001 01:48:31 -0000
Received: (qmail 25277 invoked by uid 50005); 8 Sep 2001 01:47:01 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.191093 secs); 08 Sep 2001 01:47:01 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 8 Sep 2001 01:47:01 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA19717; Fri, 7 Sep 2001 18:33:03 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 83051 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 8 Sep 2001 01:33:01 +0000
Received: from cablecom.laribay.net (cablecom.laribay.net [66.20.57.4]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA19703 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 7 Sep 2001 18:33:00 -0700
Received: from billbull (dial080.laribay.net [66.20.57.80]) by          cablecom.laribay.net (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id UAA11292 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 7 Sep 2001 20:14:25 -0500 (CDT)          (envelope-from bpbullock@laribay.net)
References:  <000001c13803$ca30fcf0$0200a8c0@prestige.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <001101c13806$702c5f80$50391442@billbull>
Date:         Fri, 7 Sep 2001 20:34:23 -0500
Reply-To: "Bill Bullock" <bpbullock@LARIBAY.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Bill Bullock" <bpbullock@LARIBAY.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Epoxy/KNO3 motors?
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Jeff:
    In the early-1970's I was working with a product called Escoweld Epoxy
Grout (made by Exxon/Enjay Chemical Company). I used the liquid product
(Series 5200 I believe it was) and Potassium Perchlorate to make and fire
some fuel grains for a 1.5" motor. It worked quite well. One problem I had
was a hard, black residue , much like a "clinker" from an oil-fired furnace,
which the Lab Boys in Houston told me was from non-combustible stabilizers
included in the formulation to control cure time. The other was in attempts
to pour a 3" motor...the exothermic cure set the fuel off. The solution was
to use a cold-water bath around the casing during the cure. Using a
retardant to slow the curing process down on hot days helped but added to
the residue problem.
Bill

----- Original Message -----
From: Jeff Grady <jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Friday, September 07, 2001 8:15 PM
Subject: [AR] Epoxy/KNO3 motors?


>         After making some igniters using a home-brew BP composition and
some epoxy,
> and reading another poster's suggestion about adding more KNO3 to my mix
to
> oxidize the epoxy, I thought I'd try making an epoxy/KNO3 composition to
> test. I mixed 200 grains (using a reloader's powder scale) of KNO3 and
200gr
> of epoxy and let dry. I wanted to start fuel-rich to avoid a bad burn (got
> burned pretty bad once in 11th grade chem class). I noticed a good deal of
> heat coming from the mixing cup several minutes after mixing - which I
> kind-of expected. It was left to harden out on the driveway.
>
>         I lit the results with a propane torch and away it went. It burned
with a
> bright blue flame near the fuel and had yellow tips. It burned pretty
> vigorously for 30-40 seconds. One thing I noticed was a tendency to crack
> apart - presumably from heat fracturing the solid or because of residual
> moisture still in the mix. Next I'll try a 60/40 KNO3/Epoxy blend to see
how
> that goes. I have never used resins of the sort mentioned on this list,
but
> will assume, until told differently, that the resins most of you are using
> are more rubber like when cured? Has anyone else had good/bad luck trying
> this? All comments pro and con would be appreciated.
>
> JG
>
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 15058 invoked from network); 8 Sep 2001 02:00:06 -0000
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 8 Sep 2001 02:00:06 -0000
Received: (qmail 29668 invoked by uid 50005); 8 Sep 2001 01:57:23 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpf with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.276246 secs); 08 Sep 2001 01:57:23 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 8 Sep 2001 01:57:22 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA19794; Fri, 7 Sep 2001 18:41:36 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 83069 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 8 Sep 2001 01:41:30 +0000
Received: from angel.comcen.com.au (angel.comcen.com.au [203.23.236.69]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA19780 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 7 Sep 2001 18:41:29 -0700
Received: from win2pk2 (modem102.sydney.spin.net.au [202.172.110.106] (may be          forged)) by angel.comcen.com.au (8.11.4/8.10.1) with SMTP id          f881foK89900; Sat, 8 Sep 2001 11:41:50 +1000 (EST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <JJEFLLHFFAHHMBBIHFAEIENMCFAA.pkelly@comcen.com.au>
Date:         Sat, 8 Sep 2001 11:41:35 +1000
Reply-To: "Paul Kelly" <pkelly@COMCEN.COM.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Paul Kelly" <pkelly@COMCEN.COM.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] R/C rocketplane
Comments: To: John Carmack <johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <4.3.1.2.20010907201512.02816790@mail.idsoftware.com>

I did a design for a throttleable hybrid for some blokes who were making a
6' wingspan Me163. Don't think they ever got it off the ground though.


PK

-----Original Message-----
From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU]On
Behalf Of John Carmack
Sent: Saturday, 8 September 2001 11:21 AM
To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
Subject: [AR] R/C rocketplane


Has anyone ever done an R/C rocketplane?  I'm sure there have been lots of
boosted gliders, but I mean something with a restartable and/or throttled
liquid rocket engine, the R/C equivalent of XCOR's Rocket-EZ.

That seems like it would be a project with a really good coolness to effort
payoff.  It would be pretty straightforward with peroxide, but the visual
flair of mach diamonds behind an R/C plane would be sorely missed.

John Carmack

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 18363 invoked from network); 8 Sep 2001 02:09:38 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 8 Sep 2001 02:09:38 -0000
Received: (qmail 14624 invoked by uid 50005); 8 Sep 2001 02:09:30 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpa with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.202125 secs); 08 Sep 2001 02:09:30 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 8 Sep 2001 02:09:29 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA19869; Fri, 7 Sep 2001 18:53:10 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 83085 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 8 Sep 2001 01:53:07 +0000
Received: from zcars0m9.ca.nortel.com (h157s242a129n47.user.nortelnetworks.com          [47.129.242.157]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA19855          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 7 Sep 2001 18:53:07 -0700
Received: from zcars04f.ca.nortel.com (zcars04f.ca.nortel.com [47.129.242.57])          by zcars0m9.ca.nortel.com (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f881pxp24229          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 7 Sep 2001 21:51:59 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from rftzy232.ca.nortel.com by zcars04f.ca.nortel.com; Fri, 7 Sep          2001 21:52:20 -0400
Received: from nortelnetworks.com (acart130.ca.nortel.com [47.129.8.143]) by          rftzy232.ca.nortel.com with SMTP (Microsoft Exchange Internet Mail          Service Version 5.5.2653.13) id SHASBGSM; Fri, 7 Sep 2001 21:51:30          -0400
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.77 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.19 i686)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <000001c13803$ca30fcf0$0200a8c0@prestige.net>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Orig: <mleech@nortelnetworks.com>
Message-ID:  <3B997A9B.83DD0CA1@nortelnetworks.com>
Date:         Fri, 7 Sep 2001 21:55:39 -0400
Reply-To: "Marcus Leech" <mleech@NORTELNETWORKS.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Marcus Leech" <mleech@NORTELNETWORKS.COM>
Organization: Nortel Networks: Information Systems
Subject:      Re: [AR] Epoxy/KNO3 motors?
Comments: To: Jeff Grady <jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Jeff Grady wrote:
>
>         After making some igniters using a home-brew BP composition and some epoxy,
> and reading another poster's suggestion about adding more KNO3 to my mix to
> oxidize the epoxy, I thought I'd try making an epoxy/KNO3 composition to
> test. I mixed 200 grains (using a reloader's powder scale) of KNO3 and 200gr
> of epoxy and let dry. I wanted to start fuel-rich to avoid a bad burn (got
> burned pretty bad once in 11th grade chem class). I noticed a good deal of
> heat coming from the mixing cup several minutes after mixing - which I
> kind-of expected. It was left to harden out on the driveway.
>
>         I lit the results with a propane torch and away it went. It burned with a
> bright blue flame near the fuel and had yellow tips. It burned pretty
> vigorously for 30-40 seconds. One thing I noticed was a tendency to crack
> apart - presumably from heat fracturing the solid or because of residual
> moisture still in the mix. Next I'll try a 60/40 KNO3/Epoxy blend to see how
> that goes. I have never used resins of the sort mentioned on this list, but
> will assume, until told differently, that the resins most of you are using
> are more rubber like when cured? Has anyone else had good/bad luck trying
> this? All comments pro and con would be appreciated.
>
> JG
Richard Nakka tested a mixture I sent him a while ago, that was about
70% KNO3, and
  about 30% Epoxy.  It had a very low burn rate exponent, would have
required a quite
  high Kn to make work in a motor.

When I next have the inclination/energy, I'll try a higher solids/KNO3
mixture, along with
  some finely-divided charcoal to try to improve surface heat
absorption.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 26262 invoked from network); 8 Sep 2001 02:12:02 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 8 Sep 2001 02:12:02 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 16200 invoked by uid 50005); 8 Sep 2001 02:11:54 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpa with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.277101 secs); 08 Sep 2001 02:11:54 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 8 Sep 2001 02:11:53 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA19927; Fri, 7 Sep 2001 18:56:32 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 83100 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 8 Sep 2001 01:56:30 +0000
Received: from idsoftware.com (predator.idsoftware.com [192.246.40.34]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA19913 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Fri, 7 Sep 2001 18:56:30 -0700
Received: from [192.246.40.129] (account johnc HELO lightning.idsoftware.com)          by idsoftware.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 3.4.7) with ESMTP id 374490          for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 07 Sep 2001 20:56:30 -0500
X-Sender: johnc@mail.idsoftware.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.1
References: <4.3.1.2.20010907201512.02816790@mail.idsoftware.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <4.3.1.2.20010907205341.02872ee0@mail.idsoftware.com>
Date:         Fri, 7 Sep 2001 20:55:05 -0500
Reply-To: "John Carmack" <johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Carmack" <johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] R/C rocketplane
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <JJEFLLHFFAHHMBBIHFAEIENMCFAA.pkelly@comcen.com.au>

At 11:41 AM 9/8/2001 +1000, you wrote:
>I did a design for a throttleable hybrid for some blokes who were making a
>6' wingspan Me163. Don't think they ever got it off the ground though.
>
>
>PK

Have you (or anyone else here) reliably fired a throttleable hybrid on the
test stand?

John Carmack

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 997 invoked from network); 8 Sep 2001 02:13:25 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 8 Sep 2001 02:13:25 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 17224 invoked by uid 50005); 8 Sep 2001 02:13:17 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpa with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.259449 secs); 08 Sep 2001 02:13:17 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 8 Sep 2001 02:13:16 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA19958; Fri, 7 Sep 2001 18:57:38 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 83084 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 8 Sep 2001 01:57:38 +0000
Received: from vmmr1.verisignmail.com (vmmr1.verisignmail.com          [216.168.230.137]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id          SAA19839 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Fri, 7 Sep 2001 18:47:37 -0700
Received: from vmms1.verisignmail.com (vmms1.verisignmail.com [10.166.0.138])          by vmmr1.verisignmail.com (Mirapoint) with ESMTP id AAS28440; Fri, 7          Sep 2001 21:47:06 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from vmms1.verisignmail.com (localhost.verisignmail.com [127.0.0.1])          by vmms1.verisignmail.com (Mirapoint) with SMTP id ACV03892 (AUTH          mpoulton@mtptech.com); Fri, 7 Sep 2001 21:47:05 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from 129.93.206.94 by vmms1.verisignmail.com with HTTP/1.1; Fri, 7          Sep 2001 21:47:14 -0400
X-Mailer: Mirapoint Webmail Direct 2.9.1.1
Message-ID:  <200109080147.ACV03892@vmms1.verisignmail.com>
Date:         Fri, 7 Sep 2001 21:47:14 -0400
Reply-To: <mpoulton@MTPTECH.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Mike Poulton" <mpoulton@MTPTECH.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] list admin liability,              L* for alcohol/N2O (was: aRocket project)
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Disseminating information is not illegal, unless the person giving the information knows it is to be used for
terrorist purposes.  AFAIK, the courts have yet to use that relatively new provision to convict anyone (not
surprising, since intent and knowledge have very high standards of proof).  So, telling someone how to do
something potentially dangerous (but non-terrorist) does not make you liable for their actions, regardless of
whether they are a minor or not.  Allowing them to discuss such matters on a list you run is even less of a
risk.  If they are a minor, then their *parents* become responsible for allowing them to do something
dangerous -- not the person who let them talk about it.  California law (which is notoriously screwy) may be
different, but this is an interstate issue and thus they don't really apply too well.  If a topic is truly
inappropriate for the list, then the discussion should be ended for that reason -- but I wouldn't stress out
about some extremely remote and questionable possible assumption of liability.  This is, of course, only my
take on things.  I don't run the list, so it's not my choice and it really doesn't make much difference
anyways.

ObRoc:  Any idea what a good starting value for L* would be for an ethanol/N2O biprop running at 300PSI,
with a good injector?  I figure I'll start out at 30 and work down from there by shortenting the chamber,
unless someone with some experience can give me a better starting place
Mike Poulton


From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 7494 invoked from network); 8 Sep 2001 02:23:54 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 8 Sep 2001 02:23:54 -0000
Received: (qmail 31497 invoked by uid 50005); 8 Sep 2001 02:21:47 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.291531 secs); 08 Sep 2001 02:21:47 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 8 Sep 2001 02:21:46 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA20057; Fri, 7 Sep 2001 19:07:06 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 83132 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 8 Sep 2001 02:07:04 +0000
Received: from cablecom.laribay.net (cablecom.laribay.net [66.20.57.4]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA20043 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 7 Sep 2001 19:07:03 -0700
Received: from billbull (dial109.laribay.net [66.20.57.109]) by          cablecom.laribay.net (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id UAA11639 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 7 Sep 2001 20:48:05 -0500 (CDT)          (envelope-from bpbullock@laribay.net)
References:  <004b01c137f6$c1e0c420$1b30fea9@kristinscomp>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <001201c1380b$238fb1e0$6d391442@billbull>
Date:         Fri, 7 Sep 2001 21:04:33 -0500
Reply-To: "Bill Bullock" <bpbullock@LARIBAY.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Bill Bullock" <bpbullock@LARIBAY.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Interesting (scary?) Monopropellant....
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Kristin & David Hall:
    I used to use nitro in hybrids before I could get peroxide and nitrous
and the first impression I got was,"Another great ISR" (Instant Stump
Remover)! But before I injected my opinion I went to my trusty PROPEP
program (and before someone starts to flame me on this I will offer to
debate that under a different heading) to see what this stuff would do.
    After optimizing the ingredients I came up with 150 units of Ap; 150
units of Al; and 425 units of Nitro yielding a THEORETICAL Isp of 266.7 with
a combustion temperature of 6089 deg. F. at 1000 psi chamber pressure. Not
too shabby at all.
    But look at the Ap/Al ratio: 50:50. That's a very good sensitizing ratio
(and please do not start another string about explosives and get me kicked
out of this group...just issuing a warning!!!). So, this is an extremely
dangerous mixture.
    But let's modify it a bit to make it a bit more stable:150 units of Al
and 560 units of nitro...even as a blend but preferably in a hybrid. This
gives a THEORETICAL Isp of 269.4 at 1000 psi. and 5635 deg. F combustion
temperature. If you boost the chamber pressure to 2500 psi. like I run the
Isp. goes up to 289.9 (again THEORETICAL) with a combustion temperature of
5736 deg. F. and you don't blow yourself up using it.
    Sorry to be so "picky" but an opinion should be based on more than gut
feelings.
Bill

----- Original Message -----
From: Kristin & David Hall <thehalls@RIDGENET.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Friday, September 07, 2001 6:42 PM
Subject: [AR] Interesting (scary?) Monopropellant....


> Suffice to say there are some folks out there playing around with a
slurry.
> The application is not propellant, but still, I couldn't help but think of
> it as a potential "monopropellant" (if you can call a slurry a mono).
>
> Nitro-methane.
> AP.
> Al.
>
> Thoughts?
>
> --
> Dave and/or Kristin Hall
>
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 21149 invoked from network); 8 Sep 2001 02:28:01 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 8 Sep 2001 02:28:01 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 2384 invoked by uid 50005); 8 Sep 2001 02:27:58 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpb with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.21993 secs); 08 Sep 2001 02:27:58 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 8 Sep 2001 02:27:58 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA20092; Fri, 7 Sep 2001 19:08:01 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 83143 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 8 Sep 2001 02:08:01 +0000
Received: from sunny.pacific.net.au (sunny-legacy.pacific.net.au          [210.23.129.40]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA20078          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 7 Sep 2001 19:07:59 -0700
Received: from wisma.pacific.net.au (wisma.pacific.net.au [210.23.129.72]) by          sunny.pacific.net.au with ESMTP id MAA00754 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 8 Sep 2001 12:07:58 +1000 (EST)
Received: from pacific.net.au (ppp97.dyn248.pacific.net.au [203.143.248.97]) by          wisma.pacific.net.au with ESMTP id MAA27610 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 8 Sep 2001 12:07:56 +1000 (EST)
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:0.9.3) Gecko/20010808
X-Accept-Language: en-us
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0D04_01C56B69.50E96BA0"
Message-ID:  <3B997D78.2050301@pacific.net.au>
Date:         Sat, 8 Sep 2001 12:07:52 +1000
Reply-To: "michael" <mokeeffe@PACIFIC.NET.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "michael" <mokeeffe@PACIFIC.NET.AU>
Subject:      [AR] Another KNO3 Question
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0D04_01C56B69.50E96BA0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

G'day List,

I'm sure this question has been asked here before but I must have
blinked to long probably missed it.

I have a purchased a bag of KNO3, it is fertlizer grade and it has the
numbers 13-0-46 on the bag. My current knowledge of chemistry is fairly
poor but I'm guessing this has something to do with the purity levels of
the compound.

Any assistance would be greatfully appriciated.

Cheers
Michael


--



"It is difficult to say what is impossible, for the dream of yesterday
is the hope of today and the reality of tomorrow."
     Dr. Robert H. Goddard





------=_NextPart_000_0D04_01C56B69.50E96BA0
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<html>
<head>
</head>
<body>
<div class="moz-text-flowed" style="font-family: courier; font-size: 12px; ">
G'day List, <br>
<br>
I'm sure this question has been asked here before but I must have blinked
to long probably missed it.<br>
<br>
I have a purchased a bag of KNO3, it is fertlizer grade and it has the numbers
13-0-46 on the bag. My current knowledge of chemistry is fairly <br>
poor but I'm guessing this has something to do with the purity levels of
the compound. <br>
<br>
Any assistance would be greatfully appriciated. <br>
<br>
Cheers <br>
Michael </div>
<pre class="moz-signature" cols="$mailwrapcol"><br>--



"It is difficult to say what is impossible, for the dream of yesterday
is the hope of today and the reality of tomorrow."
     Dr. Robert H. Goddard



</pre>
</body>
</html>

------=_NextPart_000_0D04_01C56B69.50E96BA0--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 19965 invoked from network); 8 Sep 2001 02:36:41 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 8 Sep 2001 02:36:41 -0000
Received: (qmail 7352 invoked by uid 50005); 8 Sep 2001 02:36:38 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpb with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.119555 secs); 08 Sep 2001 02:36:38 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 8 Sep 2001 02:36:38 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA20198; Fri, 7 Sep 2001 19:19:05 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 83167 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 8 Sep 2001 02:19:01 +0000
Received: from angel.comcen.com.au (angel.comcen.com.au [203.23.236.69]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA20184 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 7 Sep 2001 19:19:00 -0700
Received: from win2pk2 (modem102.sydney.spin.net.au [202.172.110.106] (may be          forged)) by angel.comcen.com.au (8.11.4/8.10.1) with SMTP id          f882I6K95346; Sat, 8 Sep 2001 12:18:07 +1000 (EST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <JJEFLLHFFAHHMBBIHFAEIENNCFAA.pkelly@comcen.com.au>
Date:         Sat, 8 Sep 2001 12:17:51 +1000
Reply-To: "Paul Kelly" <pkelly@COMCEN.COM.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Paul Kelly" <pkelly@COMCEN.COM.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Epoxy/KNO3 motors?
Comments: To: Marcus Leech <mleech@NORTELNETWORKS.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <3B997A9B.83DD0CA1@nortelnetworks.com>

I did a fair few tests of KNO3/Epoxy. I was working in 40mm and ended up
with Kn > 1200. So my first bit of advice is to start with something larger
than 40mm!
I used 70/30 KNO3/West System epoxy(slow curative)
as I found it easier to light than 80/20, but for some reason I was sure
that ferric oxide was gonna speed things up, so I added 2%.. I'm now fairly
sure that, at pressure, iron ixide is a burn rate inhibitor.

I still use this comp for smoke in candy motors, r at ambient is around
1mm/sec.


PK

-----Original Message-----
From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU]On
Behalf Of Marcus Leech
Sent: Saturday, 8 September 2001 11:56 AM
To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
Subject: Re: [AR] Epoxy/KNO3 motors?


Jeff Grady wrote:
>
>         After making some igniters using a home-brew BP composition and
some epoxy,
> and reading another poster's suggestion about adding more KNO3 to my mix
to
> oxidize the epoxy, I thought I'd try making an epoxy/KNO3 composition to
> test. I mixed 200 grains (using a reloader's powder scale) of KNO3 and
200gr
> of epoxy and let dry. I wanted to start fuel-rich to avoid a bad burn (got
> burned pretty bad once in 11th grade chem class). I noticed a good deal of
> heat coming from the mixing cup several minutes after mixing - which I
> kind-of expected. It was left to harden out on the driveway.
>
>         I lit the results with a propane torch and away it went. It burned
with a
> bright blue flame near the fuel and had yellow tips. It burned pretty
> vigorously for 30-40 seconds. One thing I noticed was a tendency to crack
> apart - presumably from heat fracturing the solid or because of residual
> moisture still in the mix. Next I'll try a 60/40 KNO3/Epoxy blend to see
how
> that goes. I have never used resins of the sort mentioned on this list,
but
> will assume, until told differently, that the resins most of you are using
> are more rubber like when cured? Has anyone else had good/bad luck trying
> this? All comments pro and con would be appreciated.
>
> JG
Richard Nakka tested a mixture I sent him a while ago, that was about
70% KNO3, and
  about 30% Epoxy.  It had a very low burn rate exponent, would have
required a quite
  high Kn to make work in a motor.

When I next have the inclination/energy, I'll try a higher solids/KNO3
mixture, along with
  some finely-divided charcoal to try to improve surface heat
absorption.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 19244 invoked from network); 8 Sep 2001 02:45:59 -0000
X-Priority: 3
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 8 Sep 2001 02:45:59 -0000
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 16614 invoked by uid 50005); 8 Sep 2001 02:45:34 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpe with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.271723 secs); 08 Sep 2001 02:45:34 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 8 Sep 2001 02:45:34 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA20317; Fri, 7 Sep 2001 19:25:22 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 83197 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 8 Sep 2001 02:25:19 +0000
Received: from imo-m04.mx.aol.com (imo-m04.mx.aol.com [64.12.136.7]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA20303 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Fri, 7 Sep 2001 19:25:19 -0700
Received: from Sociald84@aol.com by imo-m04.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v31_r1.4.) id          f.14f.9ebbc8 (4572); Fri, 7 Sep 2001 22:24:45 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0D09_01C56B69.50F30890"
X-Mailer: AOL 6.0 for Windows US sub 10536
Message-ID:  <14f.9ebbc8.28cadb6c@aol.com>
Date:         Fri, 7 Sep 2001 22:24:44 EDT
Reply-To: <Sociald84@AOL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <Sociald84@AOL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] aRocket project
Comments: To: thomgaf@energyrs.com
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0D09_01C56B69.50F30890
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

I said "Punk Kid" because I am a punk kid. Litterally I listen to a kind of
music called punk rock sterotypically represented by kids with big mohawks,
chains and black leather. I'm not that kind of punk but I'm still a punk none
the less. I was just trying to point out that with out taking a chance on
something you don't know about are haven't yet been exposed to doesn't mean
its not worthy. The other point I'm trying to make is that, although you've
read my words and seen some drawings you and everyone else knows nothing
about me, and that was a good oportunity to change that.

In a message dated 9/7/2001 4:41:35 PM Mountain Daylight Time,
energyrelease@earthlink.net writes:


> Mark Shamburg-Donohue,
>
> Again Thank you for your reply.
>
> Mark;  By asking who you are I was not putting you down or dissing (sp?)
> you.  I had and still have a valid reason for asking.  I do not think of
> you as a "PUNK KID" and until you said your age I had no idea how old
> you were.
>
Even by looking at me and talking with me face to face people don't generally
realize that I'm as young as I am. Perhaps that's exactly what we need around
here is someone who's young and still has the tanacity to stir things up.

> Like it or not,  because of the laws we live under I must protect myself
> from crossing many fine lines when it comes to helping people in rocket
> related areas.  If that person turns out to be under age (21 in
> Kalifornia) I could find my self in a world of hurt if I supplied
> information or gave money to someone who got hurt using my information
> or was enabled by my help or money to do something that got them kill or
> injured. Parents do not easily forgive someone who has helped their son
> to injure or kill themselves nor do the courts or the families lawyers.
>
> When Dr. Terry McCreary (of this list) self published his book
> "EXPERIMENTAL COMPOSITE PROPELLANT" and sold copies to fellow list
> members he had to require a photocopy of the purchaser's driver license
> to determine his / her age for the same reasons I spoke of above. This
> is not stamp collecting we are dealing with on this list.
>
The fact that we are dealing with a hobby which is potentially a life hazzard
is one more very important reason that we should share our experiences and
lessons that we've learned with everyone that will hear it.


> > 1. Who you are?
> >
>
To answer that less antagonistically I'm Mark, I'm an 18 year old highschool
graduate who is taking a year off from school to work and afford college, and
to concetrate on a project that I set out a year ago to complete before I
start college. (To launch a rocket into space --50 miles). I've spent the
last several years flying model rockets and high power rockets. I've also
spent the last three years compiling as much information about rocketry as I
could possibly find. I was interested in pyrotechnics and explosives before I
got into rocketry, and much of that knowledge has transferred to this hobby.
I'm a kid who takes the the KISS (keep it simple stupid) to heart and breaks
things down to the main goals and eliminating any unnessicary road blocks
that I can before I start. I urge you to look very closely at the design on
my website to see how many functions each component performs.
http://hometown.aol.com/sociald84/project.html  I'm the kind of guy that
people come to to fix the refridgerator or the person that people in
highschool asked to cheat off on chemistry tests.


> > I'm just a punk kid with two parents who never let public schools suffice
> for my education and
> > tought me more at home than I ever learned in school until I got into
> chemistry in highschool.
> > Even then I learned more at home on my computer than even the great John
> Leamon could
> > teach me. I'm just an 18 year old punk ass kid from Denver who outgrew
> estes the day after
> > he flew his first D motor in 8th grade. I'm just a kid who convinced my
> highschool physics
> > teacher to let me do a static test of a PVC candy motor in the courtyard
> of our semi-ghetto
> > highschool. I'm a kid who spent a month of my summer when I was 16 at
> Colorado School of
> > Mines in an engineering summer camp. I'm just a kid who got a D in
> physics because I
> > embarrased the teacher by calling her on a point that she was absoloutly
> wrong about, and
> > showing a higher level of knowledge of the subject. I'm just a kid who
> found a mentor in an
> > Astronomy teacher who asked me the right questions when I came to him
> with a problem to
> > make me think in different ways so I could solve the problem myself. I'm
> just some kid who
> > sat down for a day with a systems engineer at Lockheed Martin with a
> design of mine and
> > tought him a few things about rockets. I'm just a punk kid who visited an
> Aerospace engineer
> > at Honeywell to find someone who I could talk about my project with that
> could give me any
> > feedback that would help get this rocket off the ground. But most
> importantly I'm a kid that
> > can't not have a problem in his head to work through. And last but not
> least I'm a kid who
> > loves rockets.
>
>
>
> I have valid reasons for my other questions as well.  The tone of your
> reply tells me that you are upset by my questions.  For that I am
> sorry.  I see that I have wasted my time, and the time of others on this
> list.  For that I apologize to the Arocket list members.
>
>
>

I'm not upset just carried away. No your questions are not a waiste of time,
they're very similar to the types of questions Jim Moravec the Astronomy
teacher used to ask me. The kind of questions that make me think up other
more appropriate questions to ask and the kinds of questions that when one
genuinely asks them self answers an entirely different and seemingly
unrelated question.

Thom, I'm not trying to fight you and I think weather you do or don't help
with OUR project that I've already learned alot.

Thank you
Mark

------=_NextPart_000_0D09_01C56B69.50F30890
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<HTML><FONT FACE=arial,helvetica><FONT  SIZE=2>I said "Punk Kid" because I am a punk kid. Litterally I listen to a kind of
<BR>music called punk rock sterotypically represented by kids with big mohawks,
<BR>chains and black leather. I'm not that kind of punk but I'm still a punk none
<BR>the less. I was just trying to point out that with out taking a chance on
<BR>something you don't know about are haven't yet been exposed to doesn't mean
<BR>its not worthy. The other point I'm trying to make is that, although you've
<BR>read my words and seen some drawings you and everyone else knows nothing
<BR>about me, and that was a good oportunity to change that.
<BR>
<BR>In a message dated 9/7/2001 4:41:35 PM Mountain Daylight Time,
<BR>energyrelease@earthlink.net writes:
<BR>
<BR>
<BR><BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE style="BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px">Mark Shamburg-Donohue,
<BR>
<BR>Again Thank you for your reply.
<BR>
<BR>Mark; &nbsp;By asking who you are I was not putting you down or dissing (sp?)
<BR>you. &nbsp;I had and still have a valid reason for asking. &nbsp;I do not think of
<BR>you as a "PUNK KID" and until you said your age I had no idea how old
<BR>you were.
<BR></FONT><FONT  COLOR="#000000" SIZE=3 FAMILY="SANSSERIF" FACE="Arial" LANG="0"></BLOCKQUOTE>
<BR>Even by looking at me and talking with me face to face people don't generally
<BR>realize that I'm as young as I am. Perhaps that's exactly what we need around
<BR>here is someone who's young and still has the tanacity to stir things up.
<BR>
<BR></FONT><FONT  COLOR="#000000" SIZE=2 FAMILY="SANSSERIF" FACE="Arial" LANG="0"><BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE style="BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px">Like it or not, &nbsp;because of the laws we live under I must protect myself
<BR>from crossing many fine lines when it comes to helping people in rocket
<BR>related areas. &nbsp;If that person turns out to be under age (21 in
<BR>Kalifornia) I could find my self in a world of hurt if I supplied
<BR>information or gave money to someone who got hurt using my information
<BR>or was enabled by my help or money to do something that got them kill or
<BR>injured. Parents do not easily forgive someone who has helped their son
<BR>to injure or kill themselves nor do the courts or the families lawyers.
<BR></FONT><FONT  COLOR="#000000" SIZE=3 FAMILY="SANSSERIF" FACE="Arial" LANG="0"></BLOCKQUOTE>
<BR></FONT><FONT  COLOR="#000000" SIZE=2 FAMILY="SANSSERIF" FACE="Arial" LANG="0"><BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE style="BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px">When Dr. Terry McCreary (of this list) self published his book
<BR>"EXPERIMENTAL COMPOSITE PROPELLANT" and sold copies to fellow list
<BR>members he had to require a photocopy of the purchaser's driver license
<BR>to determine his / her age for the same reasons I spoke of above. This
<BR>is not stamp collecting we are dealing with on this list.
<BR></FONT><FONT  COLOR="#000000" SIZE=3 FAMILY="SANSSERIF" FACE="Arial" LANG="0"></BLOCKQUOTE>
<BR>The fact that we are dealing with a hobby which is potentially a life hazzard
<BR>is one more very important reason that we should share our experiences and
<BR>lessons that we've learned with everyone that will hear it.
<BR></FONT><FONT  COLOR="#000000" SIZE=2 FAMILY="SANSSERIF" FACE="Arial" LANG="0">
<BR></FONT><FONT  COLOR="#000000" SIZE=3 FAMILY="SANSSERIF" FACE="Arial" LANG="0">
<BR></FONT><FONT  COLOR="#000000" SIZE=2 FAMILY="SANSSERIF" FACE="Arial" LANG="0"><BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE style="BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px">&gt; 1. Who you are?
<BR>&gt;
<BR></FONT><FONT  COLOR="#000000" SIZE=3 FAMILY="SANSSERIF" FACE="Arial" LANG="0"></BLOCKQUOTE>
<BR>To answer that less antagonistically I'm Mark, I'm an 18 year old highschool
<BR>graduate who is taking a year off from school to work and afford college, and
<BR>to concetrate on a project that I set out a year ago to complete before I
<BR>start college. (To launch a rocket into space --50 miles). I've spent the
<BR>last several years flying model rockets and high power rockets. I've also
<BR>spent the last three years compiling as much information about rocketry as I
<BR>could possibly find. I was interested in pyrotechnics and explosives before I
<BR>got into rocketry, and much of that knowledge has transferred to this hobby.
<BR>I'm a kid who takes the the KISS (keep it simple stupid) to heart and breaks
<BR>things down to the main goals and eliminating any unnessicary road blocks
<BR>that I can before I start. I urge you to look very closely at the design on
<BR>my website to see how many functions each component performs.
<BR>http://hometown.aol.com/sociald84/project.html &nbsp;I'm the kind of guy that
<BR>people come to to fix the refridgerator or the person that people in
<BR>highschool asked to cheat off on chemistry tests.
<BR></FONT><FONT  COLOR="#000000" SIZE=2 FAMILY="SANSSERIF" FACE="Arial" LANG="0">
<BR></FONT><FONT  COLOR="#000000" SIZE=3 FAMILY="SANSSERIF" FACE="Arial" LANG="0">
<BR></FONT><FONT  COLOR="#000000" SIZE=2 FAMILY="SANSSERIF" FACE="Arial" LANG="0"><BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE style="BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px">&gt; I'm just a punk kid with two parents who never let public schools suffice
<BR>for my education and
<BR>&gt; tought me more at home than I ever learned in school until I got into
<BR>chemistry in highschool.
<BR>&gt; Even then I learned more at home on my computer than even the great John
<BR>Leamon could
<BR>&gt; teach me. I'm just an 18 year old punk ass kid from Denver who outgrew
<BR>estes the day after
<BR>&gt; he flew his first D motor in 8th grade. I'm just a kid who convinced my
<BR>highschool physics
<BR>&gt; teacher to let me do a static test of a PVC candy motor in the courtyard
<BR>of our semi-ghetto
<BR>&gt; highschool. I'm a kid who spent a month of my summer when I was 16 at
<BR>Colorado School of
<BR>&gt; Mines in an engineering summer camp. I'm just a kid who got a D in
<BR>physics because I
<BR>&gt; embarrased the teacher by calling her on a point that she was absoloutly
<BR>wrong about, and
<BR>&gt; showing a higher level of knowledge of the subject. I'm just a kid who
<BR>found a mentor in an
<BR>&gt; Astronomy teacher who asked me the right questions when I came to him
<BR>with a problem to
<BR>&gt; make me think in different ways so I could solve the problem myself. I'm
<BR>just some kid who
<BR>&gt; sat down for a day with a systems engineer at Lockheed Martin with a
<BR>design of mine and
<BR>&gt; tought him a few things about rockets. I'm just a punk kid who visited an
<BR>Aerospace engineer
<BR>&gt; at Honeywell to find someone who I could talk about my project with that
<BR>could give me any
<BR>&gt; feedback that would help get this rocket off the ground. But most
<BR>importantly I'm a kid that
<BR>&gt; can't not have a problem in his head to work through. And last but not
<BR>least I'm a kid who
<BR>&gt; loves rockets.
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>I have valid reasons for my other questions as well. &nbsp;The tone of your
<BR>reply tells me that you are upset by my questions. &nbsp;For that I am
<BR>sorry. &nbsp;I see that I have wasted my time, and the time of others on this
<BR>list. &nbsp;For that I apologize to the Arocket list members.
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>Thom </BLOCKQUOTE>
<BR>
<BR>I'm not upset just carried away. No your questions are not a waiste of time,
<BR>they're very similar to the types of questions Jim Moravec the Astronomy
<BR>teacher used to ask me. The kind of questions that make me think up other
<BR>more appropriate questions to ask and the kinds of questions that when one
<BR>genuinely asks them self answers an entirely different and seemingly
<BR>unrelated question.
<BR>
<BR>Thom, I'm not trying to fight you and I think weather you do or don't help
<BR>with OUR project that I've already learned alot.
<BR>
<BR>Thank you
<BR>Mark</FONT></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0D09_01C56B69.50F30890--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 25014 invoked from network); 8 Sep 2001 02:47:48 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 8 Sep 2001 02:47:48 -0000
Received: (qmail 13500 invoked by uid 50005); 8 Sep 2001 02:47:45 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpb with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.132254 secs); 08 Sep 2001 02:47:45 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 8 Sep 2001 02:47:45 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA20374; Fri, 7 Sep 2001 19:28:14 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 83212 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 8 Sep 2001 02:28:04 +0000
Received: from prover.com (IDENT:root@chaos.sthlm.prover.com [192.71.47.101])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA20360 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 7 Sep 2001 19:28:03 -0700
Received: from duncan (sdsl-64-139-0-245.dsl.sca.megapath.net [64.139.0.245])          by prover.com (8.11.3/8.11.3) with SMTP id f882QKe27289; Sat, 8 Sep          2001 04:26:20 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0D0E_01C56B69.50F30890"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <NEBBLECGKLLOLFCCBNPEAEMJDJAA.duncan.mcdonald@prover.com>
Date:         Fri, 7 Sep 2001 19:26:53 -0700
Reply-To: "Duncan McDonald" <duncan.mcdonald@PROVER.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Duncan McDonald" <duncan.mcdonald@PROVER.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Smokeless powder ignitor enhancement
Comments: To: Bill Bullock <bpbullock@LARIBAY.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <000601c137db$e755a600$69391442@billbull>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0D0E_01C56B69.50F30890
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Bill,

Thanks for the explanation. Why do you dip the matches in smokeless powder
"glue" and also BP? What's the advantage there? Or is it a "belts and
suspenders" kind of thing?

Duncan
  -----Original Message-----
  From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU]On Behalf
Of Bill Bullock
  Sent: Friday, September 07, 2001 1:30 PM
  To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
  Subject: Re: [AR] Smokeless powder ignitor enhancement


  Duncan:
      I have never tried using epoxy with the dissolved smokeless powder...just
dip, let it dry and re-dip if you want a larger "charge" to start things. Most
of the time if I use an igniter I have dipped the bare wires into the "glue" and
then into FFFFG black powder. I let this dry and then re-dip in both or just in
the glue and let that dry...sort of a protective covering.
      If you want to make them water-proof, after they have dried a couple of
days dip them into clear fingernail polish and let this dry. Be sure to dip this
time about 1/4 inch more than the base of the primer nodule.
      I know there are a lot of different ways to do this, so maybe someone else
will share their procedures with us.
      I use Bullseye because it is fast burning and I have about 12 pounds of it
on hand for my pistol reloading. But you can use any type smokeless powder to
make the glue. I have used just about every smokeless variant ever made
including some salvaged from .50 cal. MG shells and 105mm Howitzer charges which
I acquired from Hogden years ago. For the black powder you can use any grade of
black powder, Pyrodex or the new Goex Clear Shot.( Their site is at
http://www.goexpowder.com/ .)
      This costs more (and takes up a lot more time) than purchasing
"ready-rolls", but I could buy a truckload of Estes motors for what I spend each
year making these things. DIY is a lot more fun...
  Bill
    ----- Original Message -----
    From: Duncan McDonald
    To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
    Sent: Friday, September 07, 2001 10:11 AM
    Subject: [AR] Smokeless powder ignitor enhancement


    So let's see if I have this right. I can use smokeless powder to make a
pyrodex-like dipping compound for say ignitors by dissolving some smokeless
powder like Bullseye pistol powder with a small amount of acetone. I can then
mix this paste with epoxy and use it to dip ignitors and it will produce the
same effect upon ignition as the various ignitor dipping kits that are on the
market. Correct?

    Duncan

------=_NextPart_000_0D0E_01C56B69.50F30890
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META content=3D"text/html; charset=3Diso-8859-1" =
http-equiv=3DContent-Type>
<META content=3D"MSHTML 5.00.2919.6307" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial><SPAN =
class=3D060172302-08092001>Bill,</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial><SPAN =
class=3D060172302-08092001></SPAN></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial><SPAN class=3D060172302-08092001>Thanks for the =
explanation.=20
Why do you dip the matches in smokeless powder "glue" and also BP? =
What's the=20
advantage there? Or is it a "belts and suspenders" kind of=20
thing?</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial><SPAN =
class=3D060172302-08092001></SPAN></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial><SPAN =
class=3D060172302-08092001>Duncan</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE style=3D"MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
  <DIV align=3Dleft class=3DOutlookMessageHeader dir=3Dltr><FONT =
face=3DTahoma=20
  size=3D2>-----Original Message-----<BR><B>From:</B> Amateur Rocketry =
discussion=20
  list [mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU]<B>On Behalf Of </B>Bill=20
  Bullock<BR><B>Sent:</B> Friday, September 07, 2001 1:30 =
PM<BR><B>To:</B>=20
  AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU<BR><B>Subject:</B> Re: [AR] Smokeless powder =
ignitor=20
  enhancement<BR><BR></DIV></FONT>
  <DIV>Duncan:</DIV>
  <DIV>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; I have never tried using epoxy with the =
dissolved=20
  smokeless powder...just dip, let it dry and re-dip if you want a =
larger=20
  "charge" to start things. Most of the time if I use an igniter I have =
dipped=20
  the bare wires into the "glue" and then into FFFFG black powder. I let =
this=20
  dry and then re-dip in both or just in the glue and let that =
dry...sort of a=20
  protective covering.</DIV>
  <DIV>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; If you want to make them water-proof, after =
they have=20
  dried a couple of days dip them into clear fingernail polish and let =
this dry.=20
  Be sure to dip this time about 1/4 inch more than the base of the =
primer=20
  nodule.</DIV>
  <DIV>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; I know there are a lot of different ways to do =
this,=20
  so maybe someone else will share their procedures with us.</DIV>
  <DIV>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; I use Bullseye because it is fast burning and =
I have=20
  about 12 pounds of it on hand for my pistol reloading.&nbsp;But you =
can use=20
  any type smokeless powder&nbsp;to make the glue. I have used just =
about every=20
  smokeless variant ever made including some salvaged from .50 cal. MG =
shells=20
  and 105mm Howitzer&nbsp;charges which I acquired from Hogden years=20
  ago.&nbsp;For the black powder you can use any grade of black powder, =
Pyrodex=20
  or the new Goex Clear Shot.( Their site is at <A=20
  =
href=3D"http://www.goexpowder.com/">http://www.goexpowder.com/</A>&nbsp;.=
)</DIV>
  <DIV>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; This costs more (and takes up a lot more time) =
than=20
  purchasing "ready-rolls", but I could buy a truckload of Estes motors =
for what=20
  I spend each year making these things. DIY is a lot more fun...</DIV>
  <DIV>Bill</DIV>
  <BLOCKQUOTE=20
  style=3D"BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; =
MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; PADDING-RIGHT: 0px">
    <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial">----- Original Message ----- </DIV>
    <DIV=20
    style=3D"BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; FONT: 10pt arial; font-color: =
black"><B>From:</B>=20
    <A href=3D"mailto:duncan.mcdonald@PROVER.COM"=20
    title=3Dduncan.mcdonald@PROVER.COM>Duncan McDonald</A> </DIV>
    <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A=20
    href=3D"mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU"=20
    title=3DAROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU</A> </DIV>
    <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> Friday, September 07, =
2001 10:11=20
    AM</DIV>
    <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> [AR] Smokeless =
powder ignitor=20
    enhancement</DIV>
    <DIV><BR></DIV>
    <DIV><FONT face=3DArial><SPAN class=3D030510315-07092001>So let's =
see if I have=20
    this right. I can use smokeless powder to make a pyrodex-like =
dipping=20
    compound for say ignitors by dissolving some smokeless powder like =
Bullseye=20
    pistol powder with a small amount of acetone. I can then mix this =
paste with=20
    epoxy and use it to dip ignitors and it will produce the same effect =
upon=20
    ignition as the various ignitor dipping kits that are on the market. =

    Correct?</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
    <DIV><FONT face=3DArial><SPAN=20
    class=3D030510315-07092001></SPAN></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
    <DIV><FONT face=3DArial><SPAN=20
    =
class=3D030510315-07092001>Duncan</SPAN></FONT></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE></BLOCK=
QUOTE></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0D0E_01C56B69.50F30890--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 5187 invoked from network); 8 Sep 2001 02:51:06 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 8 Sep 2001 02:51:06 -0000
Received: (qmail 6625 invoked by uid 50005); 8 Sep 2001 02:50:57 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpa with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.197895 secs); 08 Sep 2001 02:50:57 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 8 Sep 2001 02:50:57 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA20255; Fri, 7 Sep 2001 19:21:46 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 83182 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 8 Sep 2001 02:21:45 +0000
Received: from smtprelay1.abs.adelphia.net (smtprelay.abs.adelphia.net          [64.8.20.11]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA20241 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 7 Sep 2001 19:21:44 -0700
Received: from jlgrady ([63.124.251.47]) by smtprelay1.abs.adelphia.net          (Netscape Messaging Server 4.15) with SMTP id GJBNUW03.32U for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 7 Sep 2001 22:20:56 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook CWS, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <000301c1380d$579a60f0$0200a8c0@prestige.net>
Date:         Fri, 7 Sep 2001 22:24:08 -0400
Reply-To: "Jeff Grady" <jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jeff Grady" <jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Epoxy/KNO3 motors?
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <001101c13806$702c5f80$50391442@billbull>

Bill wrote:

>>It worked quite well. One problem I had
>>was a hard, black residue , much like a "clinker" from an oil-fired
furnace,
>>which the Lab Boys in Houston told me was from non-combustible stabilizers
>>included in the formulation to control cure time.

Yep, that's what I see left over. I launched an Aerotech Mustang on an
Econojet F20 the other day and cut the expended motor open to see the nozzle
profile. Inside was a "clinker" much like what I see after the epoxy fuel
burns. I also noticed a few pieces of insulating "paper" (I guess its just
cardboard - and was almost gone...). I'm wondering if varying the mixture
(upward on KNO3 from 60/40) and adding some aluminum powder may improve the
rate before trying it in the confines of a motor casing. I'm burning this
stuff on concrete right now with no confinement.

The amount of heat during cure was concerning me, and thought it might be a
problem if scaled up, due to the amount of heat. So I was thinking, since
this is epoxy based, maybe smaller grains "welded" together using epoxy
would cut down on the amount of heat. I could also epoxy an insulator to the
grain in the same way could I not?

It sounds as though you abandoned the epoxy idea based on the time-line you
gave. In your opinion, is it worth my experimenting with?

JG

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 11949 invoked from network); 8 Sep 2001 03:03:13 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 8 Sep 2001 03:03:13 -0000
Received: (qmail 13034 invoked by uid 50005); 8 Sep 2001 03:03:05 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpa with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.198495 secs); 08 Sep 2001 03:03:05 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 8 Sep 2001 03:03:04 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA20563; Fri, 7 Sep 2001 19:45:49 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 83228 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 8 Sep 2001 02:45:42 +0000
Received: from cablecom.laribay.net (cablecom.laribay.net [66.20.57.4]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA20547 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 7 Sep 2001 19:45:42 -0700
Received: from billbull (dial089.laribay.net [66.20.57.89]) by          cablecom.laribay.net (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id VAA12050 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 7 Sep 2001 21:26:59 -0500 (CDT)          (envelope-from bpbullock@laribay.net)
References: <NEBBLECGKLLOLFCCBNPEAEMJDJAA.duncan.mcdonald@prover.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0D12_01C56B69.50FC7E70"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <000f01c13810$92ee2f80$59391442@billbull>
Date:         Fri, 7 Sep 2001 21:46:51 -0500
Reply-To: "Bill Bullock" <bpbullock@LARIBAY.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Bill Bullock" <bpbullock@LARIBAY.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Smokeless powder ignitor enhancement
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0D12_01C56B69.50FC7E70
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Duncan:
    I have no idea what the mechanics are. I do know that when I was =
trying to develop a reliable igniter the smokeless/BP method appeared to =
me to work better so that is what I settled on. There also was the =
problem I think someone else mentioned with just the dissolved/dried =
smokeless on igniters...sometimes the built-up heads exploded with a =
small "pop" instead of burning.
    Mostly now I use squibb charges built into the forward bulkhead =
instead if igniters if I am using a core-burner (which is not too =
often). On end-burners (or "restricted" burning grains as some refer to =
them these days) I paint the exposed surface with one of several =
mixtures of the smokeless glue and then imbed the resistance wires in =
that layer. I usually get an instantaneous ignition without any =
"pop-fizzle" business. There are probably a half-dozen wires and another =
half-dozen mixtures I use to do this.
    I often test new fuel blends, nozzles and etc...with an 18mm or 29mm =
Aerotech RMS casing with a solid forward closure I made. If I am testing =
nozzles I use "store-bought" slotted reloads and commercial igniters. =
That way there is a "standard test" which is repeatable for comparison. =
Everywhere else I use "roll-your-owns"
Bill
----- Original Message -----=20
  From: Duncan McDonald=20
  To: Bill Bullock ; AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU=20
  Sent: Friday, September 07, 2001 9:26 PM
  Subject: RE: [AR] Smokeless powder ignitor enhancement


  Bill,
  =20
  Thanks for the explanation. Why do you dip the matches in smokeless =
powder "glue" and also BP? What's the advantage there? Or is it a "belts =
and suspenders" kind of thing?
  =20
  Duncan
    -----Original Message-----
    From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list =
[mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU]On Behalf Of Bill Bullock
    Sent: Friday, September 07, 2001 1:30 PM
    To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
    Subject: Re: [AR] Smokeless powder ignitor enhancement


    Duncan:
        I have never tried using epoxy with the dissolved smokeless =
powder...just dip, let it dry and re-dip if you want a larger "charge" =
to start things. Most of the time if I use an igniter I have dipped the =
bare wires into the "glue" and then into FFFFG black powder. I let this =
dry and then re-dip in both or just in the glue and let that dry...sort =
of a protective covering.
        If you want to make them water-proof, after they have dried a =
couple of days dip them into clear fingernail polish and let this dry. =
Be sure to dip this time about 1/4 inch more than the base of the primer =
nodule.
        I know there are a lot of different ways to do this, so maybe =
someone else will share their procedures with us.
        I use Bullseye because it is fast burning and I have about 12 =
pounds of it on hand for my pistol reloading. But you can use any type =
smokeless powder to make the glue. I have used just about every =
smokeless variant ever made including some salvaged from .50 cal. MG =
shells and 105mm Howitzer charges which I acquired from Hogden years =
ago. For the black powder you can use any grade of black powder, Pyrodex =
or the new Goex Clear Shot.( Their site is at http://www.goexpowder.com/ =
.)
        This costs more (and takes up a lot more time) than purchasing =
"ready-rolls", but I could buy a truckload of Estes motors for what I =
spend each year making these things. DIY is a lot more fun...
    Bill
      ----- Original Message -----=20
      From: Duncan McDonald=20
      To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU=20
      Sent: Friday, September 07, 2001 10:11 AM
      Subject: [AR] Smokeless powder ignitor enhancement


      So let's see if I have this right. I can use smokeless powder to =
make a pyrodex-like dipping compound for say ignitors by dissolving some =
smokeless powder like Bullseye pistol powder with a small amount of =
acetone. I can then mix this paste with epoxy and use it to dip ignitors =
and it will produce the same effect upon ignition as the various ignitor =
dipping kits that are on the market. Correct?
      =20
      Duncan

------=_NextPart_000_0D12_01C56B69.50FC7E70
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META content=3D"text/html; charset=3Diso-8859-1" =
http-equiv=3DContent-Type>
<META content=3D"MSHTML 5.00.2614.3500" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV>Duncan:</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; I have no idea what the mechanics are. I do know =
that=20
when I was trying to develop a reliable igniter the smokeless/BP method =
appeared=20
to me to work better so that is what I settled on. There also was the =
problem I=20
think someone else mentioned with just the dissolved/dried smokeless on=20
igniters...sometimes the built-up heads exploded with a small "pop" =
instead of=20
burning.</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Mostly now I use squibb charges built into the =
forward=20
bulkhead instead if igniters if I am using a core-burner (which is not =
too=20
often). On end-burners (or "restricted" burning grains as some refer to =
them=20
these days) I paint the exposed surface with one of several mixtures of =
the=20
smokeless glue and then imbed the resistance wires in that layer. I =
usually get=20
an instantaneous ignition without any "pop-fizzle" business. There are =
probably=20
a half-dozen wires and another half-dozen mixtures I use to do =
this.</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; I often test new fuel blends, nozzles and =
etc...with an=20
18mm or 29mm Aerotech RMS casing with a solid forward closure I made. If =
I am=20
testing nozzles I use "store-bought" slotted reloads and commercial =
igniters.=20
That way there is a "standard test" which is repeatable for comparison.=20
Everywhere else I use "roll-your-<FONT face=3DArial =
size=3D2>owns"</FONT></DIV>
<DIV>Bill</DIV>
<DIV>----- Original Message ----- </DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE=20
style=3D"BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: =
0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; PADDING-RIGHT: 0px">
  <DIV=20
  style=3D"BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; FONT: 10pt arial; font-color: =
black"><B>From:</B>=20
  <A href=3D"mailto:duncan.mcdonald@prover.com"=20
  title=3Dduncan.mcdonald@prover.com>Duncan McDonald</A> </DIV>
  <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A=20
  href=3D"mailto:bpbullock@LARIBAY.NET" =
title=3Dbpbullock@LARIBAY.NET>Bill=20
  Bullock</A> ; <A href=3D"mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU"=20
  title=3DAROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU</A> </DIV>
  <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> Friday, September 07, =
2001 9:26=20
  PM</DIV>
  <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> RE: [AR] Smokeless =
powder=20
  ignitor enhancement</DIV>
  <DIV><BR></DIV>
  <DIV><FONT face=3DArial><SPAN =
class=3D060172302-08092001>Bill,</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
  <DIV><FONT face=3DArial><SPAN=20
class=3D060172302-08092001></SPAN></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
  <DIV><FONT face=3DArial><SPAN class=3D060172302-08092001>Thanks for =
the=20
  explanation. Why do you dip the matches in smokeless powder "glue" and =
also=20
  BP? What's the advantage there? Or is it a "belts and suspenders" kind =
of=20
  thing?</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
  <DIV><FONT face=3DArial><SPAN=20
class=3D060172302-08092001></SPAN></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
  <DIV><FONT face=3DArial><SPAN=20
class=3D060172302-08092001>Duncan</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
  <BLOCKQUOTE style=3D"MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
    <DIV align=3Dleft class=3DOutlookMessageHeader dir=3Dltr><FONT =
face=3DTahoma=20
    size=3D2>-----Original Message-----<BR><B>From:</B> Amateur Rocketry =

    discussion list [<A=20
    =
href=3D"mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU">mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU</A>]<B>On =

    Behalf Of </B>Bill Bullock<BR><B>Sent:</B> Friday, September 07, =
2001 1:30=20
    PM<BR><B>To:</B> <A=20
    =
href=3D"mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU">AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU</A><BR><B>Subject=
:</B>=20
    Re: [AR] Smokeless powder ignitor enhancement<BR><BR></DIV></FONT>
    <DIV>Duncan:</DIV>
    <DIV>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; I have never tried using epoxy with the =
dissolved=20
    smokeless powder...just dip, let it dry and re-dip if you want a =
larger=20
    "charge" to start things. Most of the time if I use an igniter I =
have dipped=20
    the bare wires into the "glue" and then into FFFFG black powder. I =
let this=20
    dry and then re-dip in both or just in the glue and let that =
dry...sort of a=20
    protective covering.</DIV>
    <DIV>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; If you want to make them water-proof, after =
they=20
    have dried a couple of days dip them into clear fingernail polish =
and let=20
    this dry. Be sure to dip this time about 1/4 inch more than the base =
of the=20
    primer nodule.</DIV>
    <DIV>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; I know there are a lot of different ways to =
do this,=20
    so maybe someone else will share their procedures with us.</DIV>
    <DIV>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; I use Bullseye because it is fast burning =
and I have=20
    about 12 pounds of it on hand for my pistol reloading.&nbsp;But you =
can use=20
    any type smokeless powder&nbsp;to make the glue. I have used just =
about=20
    every smokeless variant ever made including some salvaged from .50 =
cal. MG=20
    shells and 105mm Howitzer&nbsp;charges which I acquired from Hogden =
years=20
    ago.&nbsp;For the black powder you can use any grade of black =
powder,=20
    Pyrodex or the new Goex Clear Shot.( Their site is at <A=20
    =
href=3D"http://www.goexpowder.com/">http://www.goexpowder.com/</A>&nbsp;.=
)</DIV>
    <DIV>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; This costs more (and takes up a lot more =
time) than=20
    purchasing "ready-rolls", but I could buy a truckload of Estes =
motors for=20
    what I spend each year making these things. DIY is a lot more =
fun...</DIV>
    <DIV>Bill</DIV>
    <BLOCKQUOTE=20
    style=3D"BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; =
MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; PADDING-RIGHT: 0px">
      <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial">----- Original Message ----- =
</DIV>
      <DIV=20
      style=3D"BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; FONT: 10pt arial; font-color: =
black"><B>From:</B>=20
      <A href=3D"mailto:duncan.mcdonald@PROVER.COM"=20
      title=3Dduncan.mcdonald@PROVER.COM>Duncan McDonald</A> </DIV>
      <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A=20
      href=3D"mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU"=20
      title=3DAROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU</A> </DIV>
      <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> Friday, September 07, =
2001=20
      10:11 AM</DIV>
      <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> [AR] Smokeless =
powder=20
      ignitor enhancement</DIV>
      <DIV><BR></DIV>
      <DIV><FONT face=3DArial><SPAN class=3D030510315-07092001>So let's =
see if I=20
      have this right. I can use smokeless powder to make a pyrodex-like =
dipping=20
      compound for say ignitors by dissolving some smokeless powder like =

      Bullseye pistol powder with a small amount of acetone. I can then =
mix this=20
      paste with epoxy and use it to dip ignitors and it will produce =
the same=20
      effect upon ignition as the various ignitor dipping kits that are =
on the=20
      market. Correct?</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
      <DIV><FONT face=3DArial><SPAN=20
      class=3D030510315-07092001></SPAN></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
      <DIV><FONT face=3DArial><SPAN=20
      =
class=3D030510315-07092001>Duncan</SPAN></FONT></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE></BLOCK=
QUOTE></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0D12_01C56B69.50FC7E70--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 22611 invoked from network); 8 Sep 2001 03:16:51 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 8 Sep 2001 03:16:51 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: (qmail 25843 invoked by uid 50005); 8 Sep 2001 03:15:21 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.175808 secs); 08 Sep 2001 03:15:21 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 8 Sep 2001 03:15:21 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA20696; Fri, 7 Sep 2001 20:01:09 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 83240 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 8 Sep 2001 03:01:06 +0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA20679; Fri, 7 Sep 2001 20:01:05 -0700
Message-ID:  <200109080301.UAA20679@itc.uci.edu>
Date:         Sat, 8 Sep 2001 03:01:05 +0000
Reply-To: "Joe Perez" <rocketman6965@AOL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Joe Perez" <rocketman6965@AOL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] My progress so far with ignitors.
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

I also use the stuff from Firefox.  It works great with any wire.  I have
used scrap wire from my e-matches.  I have used speaker wires from 26-
16gauge for E-K motors.  I made a neat ignitor for my successful Level3
attempt.  I ignited my M1845 with an ignitor made out of scrap coaxial
cable.  I take 1/2" off the outer wrap and cut 1/4 inch of the inner wrap.
Pinch them as close together as you can and dip a bunch of pyrogen and then
seal.  There was no need for the customary dowel up the core.  The coax
provided a stiff enough cable to go up 35" to the top of the M motor.  It
lit instantaneously.
With a lot of pyrogen you need to wait a while for it to dry to check
continuity.

Joe


From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 27616 invoked from network); 8 Sep 2001 03:40:10 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 8 Sep 2001 03:40:10 -0000
Received: (qmail 3374 invoked by uid 50005); 8 Sep 2001 03:38:02 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.19551 secs); 08 Sep 2001 03:38:02 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 8 Sep 2001 03:38:02 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA20783; Fri, 7 Sep 2001 20:18:21 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 83251 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 8 Sep 2001 03:18:08 +0000
Received: from cablecom.laribay.net (cablecom.laribay.net [66.20.57.4]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA20769 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 7 Sep 2001 20:18:08 -0700
Received: from billbull (dial089.laribay.net [66.20.57.89]) by          cablecom.laribay.net (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id VAA12332 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 7 Sep 2001 21:59:32 -0500 (CDT)          (envelope-from bpbullock@laribay.net)
References:  <000301c1380d$579a60f0$0200a8c0@prestige.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <001901c13815$1e72e740$59391442@billbull>
Date:         Fri, 7 Sep 2001 22:19:28 -0500
Reply-To: "Bill Bullock" <bpbullock@LARIBAY.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Bill Bullock" <bpbullock@LARIBAY.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Epoxy/KNO3 motors?
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Jeff:
    When you start adding the aluminum powder you are taking the direction I
took...a really good epoxy/metallic-based composite. It works really well
and will burn much cleaner. My suggestion would be to use as little epoxy as
possible to bond with but not so little as to yield a "starved" grain.
(That's when you have so little binder that during curing you produce voids
and/or channels in the grain through which combustion can migrate. This
allows the flame to travel up these channels until it either "finds" a
slightly larger void or produces one which then becomes an occluded pressure
chamber with catastrophic results...SUD[Spontaneous Unscheduled
Disassembly].) A relatively reliable way to preclude this is to use a
multi-sized Al particle distribution, which requirements can be calculated
with quite reliable accuracy,  and as little epoxy as possible within these
parameters.
    You assume rightly about using multiple casting to construct a grain.
But a better way to "glue" these segments together is to mix up another
small batch of fuel mixture and use it to "butter" the ends much like a
mason lays bricks or stone. That way you do not have to worry about how
thick your joint material is...it's all fuel.
    As to securing an insulator to the grain, this is a very reliable
suggestion using these epoxy-based fuels. I learned about this technique in
1963 when our Amateur Rocket Society at Louisiana Tech was invited on
several occasions to witness test firings of 5" rocket motors by Thiokol at
their Karnack, Texas facility. We adapted this by making a "dummy" motor
casing, placing our usual insulative liner in it, and coating the inside
with a rubber-based cement they "donated" to our club. Then we poured the
grain, let it cure, trimmed it to length and fired it. Later I did the same
with the epoxy mixtures. Now I make a ceramic liner and pour into that the
same way. Back then we used GALCIT II as a fuel mixture.
    "...is it worth my experimenting with?" you ask? In my opinion, a
resounding,"YES!!" First you stand the chance of developing a really
versatile formulation of your own, and the worst that can happen is that you
will learn something from your efforts. I for one would be extremely
interested in what you develop. Just post your results, good or bad, so we
might learn along with you. And good luck...
Bill

----- Original Message -----
From: Jeff Grady <jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Friday, September 07, 2001 9:24 PM
Subject: Re: [AR] Epoxy/KNO3 motors?


> Yep, that's what I see left over. I launched an Aerotech Mustang on an
> Econojet F20 the other day and cut the expended motor open to see the
nozzle
> profile. Inside was a "clinker" much like what I see after the epoxy fuel
> burns. I also noticed a few pieces of insulating "paper" (I guess its just
> cardboard - and was almost gone...). I'm wondering if varying the mixture
> (upward on KNO3 from 60/40) and adding some aluminum powder may improve
the
> rate before trying it in the confines of a motor casing. I'm burning this
> stuff on concrete right now with no confinement.
>
> The amount of heat during cure was concerning me, and thought it might be
a
> problem if scaled up, due to the amount of heat. So I was thinking, since
> this is epoxy based, maybe smaller grains "welded" together using epoxy
> would cut down on the amount of heat. I could also epoxy an insulator to
the
> grain in the same way could I not?
>
> It sounds as though you abandoned the epoxy idea based on the time-line
you
> gave. In your opinion, is it worth my experimenting with?
>
> JG
>
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 15026 invoked from network); 8 Sep 2001 04:09:33 -0000
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 8 Sep 2001 04:09:33 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 12380 invoked by uid 50005); 8 Sep 2001 04:06:49 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpf with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.601014 secs); 08 Sep 2001 04:06:49 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 8 Sep 2001 04:06:47 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA20935; Fri, 7 Sep 2001 20:50:36 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 83280 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 8 Sep 2001 03:50:29 +0000
Received: from imo-m03.mx.aol.com (imo-m03.mx.aol.com [64.12.136.6]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA20921 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Fri, 7 Sep 2001 20:50:28 -0700
Received: from Ricanakk@aol.com by imo-m03.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v31_r1.4.) id          t.159.a10543 (3990); Fri, 7 Sep 2001 23:44:58 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: AOL 5.0 for Windows sub 108
Message-ID:  <159.a10543.28caee39@aol.com>
Date:         Fri, 7 Sep 2001 23:44:57 EDT
Reply-To: <Ricanakk@AOL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <Ricanakk@AOL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Epoxy/KNO3 motors?
Comments: To: jgrady@ga.prestige.net
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

In a message dated 01/09/07 21:14:48 Eastern Daylight Time,
jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET writes:

<< Has anyone else had good/bad luck trying
 this? All comments pro and con would be appreciated. >>

I am currently doing some pretty extensive testing of KN/epoxy formulations,
with additives such as aluminum and iron oxide, and with different brands of
epoxies. So far my approach has been to measure the cee-star of various
formulations, and compare the results to PROPEP. The correlation has been
surprisingly close.
The highest practical solids loading I have been able to get is about 77%. So
far, the aluminum content has been up to 4%, which has given the highest
cee-star to date. Tomorrow, I'll be testing a couple of samples with 6% and
with 8% aluminum.
Once I come up with some promising formulations, I will begin measuring burn
rates. I figure this may weed out most (all?!) contenders...!

Richard Nakka

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 20132 invoked from network); 8 Sep 2001 04:23:07 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 8 Sep 2001 04:23:07 -0000
Received: (qmail 21358 invoked by uid 50005); 8 Sep 2001 04:22:57 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpa with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.204923 secs); 08 Sep 2001 04:22:57 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 8 Sep 2001 04:22:57 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA21069; Fri, 7 Sep 2001 21:03:55 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 83313 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 8 Sep 2001 04:03:54 +0000
Received: from smtprelay1.abs.adelphia.net (smtprelay.abs.adelphia.net          [64.8.20.11]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA21055 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 7 Sep 2001 21:03:54 -0700
Received: from jlgrady ([63.124.251.47]) by smtprelay1.abs.adelphia.net          (Netscape Messaging Server 4.15) with SMTP id GJBSL603.G40 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 8 Sep 2001 00:03:06 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook CWS, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <000c01c1381b$9dc09140$0200a8c0@prestige.net>
Date:         Sat, 8 Sep 2001 00:06:19 -0400
Reply-To: "Jeff Grady" <jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jeff Grady" <jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Epoxy/KNO3 motors?
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <001901c13815$1e72e740$59391442@billbull>

Bill:

>>    When you start adding the aluminum powder you are taking the direction
I
>>took...a really good epoxy/metallic-based composite.

        What size (micron) AL did you use? I work for a global mfg of
coatings/chemicals and I believe I can get either 200 or 400 micron AL. I
have seen 40 micron somewhere on the web. For the sake of argument, you do
mean use something LIKE a 100 micron + 40 micron AL mixture right? I may be
off on the particle size, but mixing something like a 100 + a 40 would fill
in gaps left by the 100???

>>SUD[Spontaneous Unscheduled Disassembly]

10-4

>> Now I make a ceramic liner and pour into that the
>> same way.

I posted here once, an idea I had, but got zero response so I thought maybe
I presented the idea wrong or it was simply dismissed as a bad idea. The
plan would be to cast a grain that could be removed from the mold - no
insulator. Then place the grain (very accurately) into the center of yet
another mold having a gap of maybe .125" between the mold and the grain.
Inject into this .125" gap, either a high-temp ceramic adhesive or Durham's
water putty. Pull a vacuum on the mold to remove any air bubbles, and let
dry. Since the epoxy would not shrink any more after cooling down, and
durham's is advertised to to shrink, sounds like it may make a cheap and
simple liner. Paper would be easier, but paper does burn.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 20581 invoked from network); 8 Sep 2001 04:23:18 -0000
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 8 Sep 2001 04:23:18 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 24206 invoked by uid 50005); 8 Sep 2001 04:20:35 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpf with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.334277 secs); 08 Sep 2001 04:20:35 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 8 Sep 2001 04:20:34 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA21046; Fri, 7 Sep 2001 21:03:29 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 83291 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 8 Sep 2001 04:03:28 +0000
Received: from harrier.mail.pas.earthlink.net (harrier.mail.pas.earthlink.net          [207.217.121.12]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA20962          for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Fri, 7 Sep 2001 20:53:27 -0700
Received: from earthlink.net (dialup-209.245.130.45.Dial1.SanJose1.Level3.net          [209.245.130.45]) by harrier.mail.pas.earthlink.net          (EL-8_9_3_3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id UAA04679; Fri, 7 Sep 2001 20:53:26          -0700 (PDT)
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.75 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.16-22 i686)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <3B997D78.2050301@pacific.net.au>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B99969D.8E17C7B9@earthlink.net>
Date:         Fri, 7 Sep 2001 20:55:09 -0700
Reply-To: "David Weinshenker" <daze39@EARTHLINK.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "David Weinshenker" <daze39@EARTHLINK.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Another KNO3 Question
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Michael wrote:
> I have a purchased a bag of KNO3, it is
> fertlizer grade and it has the numbers 13-0-46

The numbers are the percentage content of nitrogen,
phosphorus, and potassium, respectively - this is a
common marking system for fertilizers of various sorts.

-dave w

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 1751 invoked from network); 8 Sep 2001 04:27:50 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 8 Sep 2001 04:27:50 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 23455 invoked by uid 50005); 8 Sep 2001 04:27:41 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpa with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.178171 secs); 08 Sep 2001 04:27:41 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 8 Sep 2001 04:27:41 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA20999; Fri, 7 Sep 2001 20:59:01 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 83296 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 8 Sep 2001 03:59:00 +0000
Received: from f05n15.cac.psu.edu (f05s15.cac.psu.edu [128.118.141.58]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA20985 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 7 Sep 2001 20:58:59 -0700
Received: from aragorn.psu.edu (PPPa6-ResaleFredericksburg1-2R7137.dialinx.net          [4.54.18.131]) by f05n15.cac.psu.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id          XAA155970 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 7 Sep 2001 23:58:58 -0400
X-Sender: kas219@email.psu.edu
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <5.1.0.14.2.20010907235520.0279e588@email.psu.edu>
Date:         Sat, 8 Sep 2001 00:00:11 -0400
Reply-To: "Keith Soldavin" <kas219@EMAIL.PSU.EDU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Keith Soldavin" <kas219@EMAIL.PSU.EDU>
Subject:      [AR] East coast test area
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <159.a10543.28caee39@aol.com>

One of the major hurdles holding me back from starting my motor is I have
no place to test it.  I have the capability to build a test stand but I'd
like to avoid the cost in the beginning if I can.  Aside from that I have
no land available to fire the motor.  Is there anywhere in the North
Carolina to New Jersey area that has a test stand that is available?  I'm
not interested in flying the motor, I just want to static test it and
collect data.  Thanks for your help.

Keith

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 14320 invoked from network); 8 Sep 2001 04:44:22 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 8 Sep 2001 04:44:22 -0000
Received: (qmail 31078 invoked by uid 50005); 8 Sep 2001 04:44:13 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpa with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.362489 secs); 08 Sep 2001 04:44:13 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 8 Sep 2001 04:44:12 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA21195; Fri, 7 Sep 2001 21:21:46 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 83340 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 8 Sep 2001 04:21:44 +0000
Received: from smtprelay1.abs.adelphia.net (smtprelay.abs.adelphia.net          [64.8.20.11]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA21181 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 7 Sep 2001 21:21:43 -0700
Received: from jlgrady ([63.124.251.47]) by smtprelay1.abs.adelphia.net          (Netscape Messaging Server 4.15) with SMTP id GJBTEU00.725 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 8 Sep 2001 00:20:54 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook CWS, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <000d01c1381e$1a600800$0200a8c0@prestige.net>
Date:         Sat, 8 Sep 2001 00:24:07 -0400
Reply-To: "Jeff Grady" <jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jeff Grady" <jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Epoxy/KNO3 motors?
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <159.a10543.28caee39@aol.com>

Richard,

        It's good to hear that you are giving this a try. I believe I have seen
most if not all of your work (website) and refer to it often - great stuff!
With you, Bill and a few others giving what I view as positive indications,
I feel this will be a great learning experience for me.

        I've got a lot to learn about the terminology you are using. If you have
the time, could you explain in layman's terms, "cee-star" & "solids
loading"?

        The epoxies I have used so far are a 5 minute and a 30 minute hobby shack
epoxy. The 5 minute seems to be more rubber like (flexible) than the 30
minute stuff. The 5-min sample will almost bounce when thrown to the floor.
The 30-min sample broke like rock candy. It occurred to me a while ago that
I had some "Castin' Craft" clear plastic casting resin in the basement, but
was disappointed to find the resin (which I had never opened) had solidified
in the top half of its can. I'll try to find an MSDS on this particular
brand to see what other names it may go by. The catalyst for this clear
stuff is MEKP...Could this stuff be butadiene-acrylic acid?

Thanks for the info

Jeff Grady

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 4297 invoked from network); 8 Sep 2001 05:14:12 -0000
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 8 Sep 2001 05:14:12 -0000
Received: (qmail 25096 invoked by uid 50005); 8 Sep 2001 05:11:29 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpf with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.209932 secs); 08 Sep 2001 05:11:29 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 8 Sep 2001 05:11:28 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA21519; Fri, 7 Sep 2001 21:58:17 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 83363 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 8 Sep 2001 04:58:12 +0000
Received: from albqpop1.albq.uswest.net (albqpop1.albq.uswest.net          [207.108.240.1]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id VAA21505          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 7 Sep 2001 21:58:12 -0700
Received: (qmail 82357 invoked by alias); 8 Sep 2001 04:51:47 -0000
Delivered-To: fixup-AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU@fixme
Received: (qmail 75957 invoked by uid 0); 8 Sep 2001 04:47:40 -0000
Received: from cc898542-a.prdise1.nm.home.com (HELO cc898542a) (65.7.151.152)          by albqpop1.albq.uswest.net with SMTP; 8 Sep 2001 04:47:40 -0000
References:  <4.3.1.2.20010907201512.02816790@mail.idsoftware.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <002001c13821$f2a59a60$0100a8c0@prdise1.nm.home.com>
Date:         Fri, 7 Sep 2001 22:51:37 -0600
Reply-To: "Pax" <darkspunge@USWEST.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Pax" <darkspunge@USWEST.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] R/C rocketplane
Comments: To: John Carmack <johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

If it means anything to you I have been dreaming of a low space shot on a
advanced shuttle mock up for at least a year now. I was thinking of a very
sleek and aerodynamically sound glider boosted with either SRBs or
HRB(hybrid rocket boosters) and a outboard fuel take with inboard Biprop
motors. Imagining at least 100K feet altitude. Envisioning a fiber or carbon
composite shell with an aluminum internal structure. I imagine it to have at
least 4 cameras and a moderately advanced flight control system. It would
have an onboard gyro, altitude, attitude, yaw, GPS, and direction of flight
sensors etc etc. Have the cameras point in the directions you would likely
need to see with HUDs connected to the computer systems. Basically enough
equipment to be able to fly it blind remotely and land it on a airstrip.
High speed capably parachute recovery system in the even that it cannot land
under glide. Many other details that I thought of, and many many more that I
could not fathom I would need to address.
One day I will do it, even if it is a scaled down version, but not quite
yet.

I never wanted to mention it on here because it is pretty much fantasy with
my knowledge skill and resources but you asked :-) No use in getting
information on a project that will likely never come to completion at this
point.

Paxton

----- Original Message -----
From: "John Carmack" <johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Friday, September 07, 2001 7:20 PM
Subject: [AR] R/C rocketplane


> Has anyone ever done an R/C rocketplane?  I'm sure there have been lots of
> boosted gliders, but I mean something with a restartable and/or throttled
> liquid rocket engine, the R/C equivalent of XCOR's Rocket-EZ.
>
> That seems like it would be a project with a really good coolness to
effort
> payoff.  It would be pretty straightforward with peroxide, but the visual
> flair of mach diamonds behind an R/C plane would be sorely missed.
>
> John Carmack
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 24888 invoked from network); 8 Sep 2001 05:22:03 -0000
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 8 Sep 2001 05:22:03 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 29342 invoked by uid 50005); 8 Sep 2001 05:21:38 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpe with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.18441 secs); 08 Sep 2001 05:21:38 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 8 Sep 2001 05:21:37 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA21572; Fri, 7 Sep 2001 22:06:02 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 83362 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 8 Sep 2001 05:06:00 +0000
Received: from falcon.mail.pas.earthlink.net (falcon.mail.pas.earthlink.net          [207.217.120.74]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA21498          for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Fri, 7 Sep 2001 21:56:00 -0700
Received: from earthlink.net (dialup-209.245.130.45.Dial1.SanJose1.Level3.net          [209.245.130.45]) by falcon.mail.pas.earthlink.net (8.11.5/8.9.3)          with ESMTP id f884tw310114; Fri, 7 Sep 2001 21:55:59 -0700 (PDT)
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.75 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.16-22 i686)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <000d01c1381e$1a600800$0200a8c0@prestige.net>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B99A545.F5CB4340@earthlink.net>
Date:         Fri, 7 Sep 2001 21:57:41 -0700
Reply-To: "David Weinshenker" <daze39@EARTHLINK.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "David Weinshenker" <daze39@EARTHLINK.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Epoxy/KNO3 motors?
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Jeff Grady wrote:
> I had some "Castin' Craft" clear plastic casting resin in the basement, but
> was disappointed to find the resin (which I had never opened) had solidified
> in the top half of its can. I'll try to find an MSDS on this particular
> brand to see what other names it may go by. The catalyst for this clear
> stuff is MEKP...Could this stuff be butadiene-acrylic acid?

MEKP is "methyl ethyl ketone peroxide"... it's the standard catalyst
for polyester resins. The spontaneous cure during storage is also
typical of polyester resins in my experience - it's best to buy 'em
fresh for prompt use.

-dave w

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 12519 invoked from network); 8 Sep 2001 05:28:42 -0000
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 8 Sep 2001 05:28:42 -0000
Received: (qmail 1602 invoked by uid 50005); 8 Sep 2001 05:28:16 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpe with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.194083 secs); 08 Sep 2001 05:28:16 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 8 Sep 2001 05:28:16 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA21632; Fri, 7 Sep 2001 22:11:47 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 83388 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 8 Sep 2001 05:11:45 +0000
Received: from cablecom.laribay.net (cablecom.laribay.net [66.20.57.4]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA21618 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 7 Sep 2001 22:11:44 -0700
Received: from billbull (dial066.laribay.net [66.20.57.66]) by          cablecom.laribay.net (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id XAA13040 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 7 Sep 2001 23:52:41 -0500 (CDT)          (envelope-from bpbullock@laribay.net)
References:  <000c01c1381b$9dc09140$0200a8c0@prestige.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <001d01c13824$ec84f880$42391442@billbull>
Date:         Sat, 8 Sep 2001 00:12:36 -0500
Reply-To: "Bill Bullock" <bpbullock@LARIBAY.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Bill Bullock" <bpbullock@LARIBAY.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Epoxy/KNO3 motors?
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Jeff:
    First, a bit of history: I learned more about "solids loading" while
doing commercial sandblasting and painting than anywhere else. I learned
even more by corresponding with a research officer with 3M about using their
microspheres in formulating insulating coatings:
    First off, the "solids" particles, if all the same size, usually occupy
approximately 60% of the volume of the material. This leaves approximately
40% to be filled with other solids, cured paint film, etc... (You can
demonstrate this by filling a quart jar with marbles and then determining
how much water it takes to finish filling the jar to cover the marbles.) The
last thing you want in a coatings film or a fuel grain is the "starved"
consistency.
    If you decide to use a variety of particle sizes then the smaller
particles will be drawn into these inter-granular voids along with the fluid
phase by capillary action. If you have an even smaller particle size
available then these will likewise pack into these even-smaller voids. (This
is the real reason that the "Tri-Mode" Al mentioned here before is more
efficient that mono-sized.) This can be demonstrated by dumping the water
from around the marbles and covering them with fine sand and re-filling with
this water so the sand is washed down around and covering the marbles...then
measure the volume of water remaining...the volume now occupied by the sand.
But you still have a quart of materials.
    The limiting factor is the requirement for an oxidizer. But the same
applies with that material as well...the more "packed" the fuel the more
dense and the better/more stable burn you get.
    Size? I use a mixture that runs from about 350-400 screen down to a 2-4
micron. I figure my proportions based on the 60-40 relationship shown above.
(It may not be right, but so far it works for me.) That is: 60% of the base
(largest) grains and 40% of the next-smallest...then 40% of that...then 40%
of that...etc... Please note that in this case the proportions I use are
measured by volume because it is easier. Also note that I usually work in
the test size weights in "grains" like reloaders: 1 pound = 7000 grains.
    As for the question of liners, my personal philosophy is,"Anything that
works works!" I have used cast ceramic liners, rubber liners, of course
paper (try soaking this in a saturated solution of borax and drying them out
and they will not usually burn) and etc... Right now I am working with a
ceramic paper which I have about decided needs to be coated with ceramic
rigidizer and fired before use...no tear-out. I have a ceramic adhesive
which I can glue it to metal or to the grain. I am also working with a
ceramic/ceramic composite castable liner that looks better than I had ever
imagined. In fact, I am doing a lot of work right now with ceramic/ceramic
and ceramic/metallic composites for rocket motor parts.
    One more bit of free advice, which I always guarantee to be worth
exactly what I charge for it: when squeezing an epoxy/whatever into a small
place, make a holder and use a grease gun to pump it. I have used this
technique to "glue" the shattered foundation block under a 1,000 hp.
Worthington gas compressor back together and it lasted over 20 years. Wash
up with acetone..
----- Original Message -----
From: Jeff Grady <jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Friday, September 07, 2001 11:06 PM
Subject: Re: [AR] Epoxy/KNO3 motors?


> Bill:
>
> >>    When you start adding the aluminum powder you are taking the
direction
> I
> >>took...a really good epoxy/metallic-based composite.
>
>         What size (micron) AL did you use? I work for a global mfg of
> coatings/chemicals and I believe I can get either 200 or 400 micron AL. I
> have seen 40 micron somewhere on the web. For the sake of argument, you do
> mean use something LIKE a 100 micron + 40 micron AL mixture right? I may
be
> off on the particle size, but mixing something like a 100 + a 40 would
fill
> in gaps left by the 100???
>
> >>SUD[Spontaneous Unscheduled Disassembly]
>
> 10-4
>
> >> Now I make a ceramic liner and pour into that the
> >> same way.
>
> I posted here once, an idea I had, but got zero response so I thought
maybe
> I presented the idea wrong or it was simply dismissed as a bad idea. The
> plan would be to cast a grain that could be removed from the mold - no
> insulator. Then place the grain (very accurately) into the center of yet
> another mold having a gap of maybe .125" between the mold and the grain.
> Inject into this .125" gap, either a high-temp ceramic adhesive or
Durham's
> water putty. Pull a vacuum on the mold to remove any air bubbles, and let
> dry. Since the epoxy would not shrink any more after cooling down, and
> durham's is advertised to to shrink, sounds like it may make a cheap and
> simple liner. Paper would be easier, but paper does burn.
>
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 26799 invoked from network); 8 Sep 2001 05:34:39 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 8 Sep 2001 05:34:39 -0000
Received: (qmail 24536 invoked by uid 50005); 8 Sep 2001 05:32:31 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.183383 secs); 08 Sep 2001 05:32:31 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 8 Sep 2001 05:32:31 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA21735; Fri, 7 Sep 2001 22:17:40 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 83415 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 8 Sep 2001 05:17:28 +0000
Received: from smtprelay3.abs.adelphia.net (smtprelay.abs.adelphia.net          [64.8.20.11]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA21721 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 7 Sep 2001 22:17:28 -0700
Received: from jlgrady ([63.124.251.47]) by smtprelay3.abs.adelphia.net          (Netscape Messaging Server 4.15) with SMTP id GJBW0503.MXA for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 8 Sep 2001 01:16:53 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook CWS, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <000e01c13825$eee38c80$0200a8c0@prestige.net>
Date:         Sat, 8 Sep 2001 01:20:10 -0400
Reply-To: "Jeff Grady" <jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jeff Grady" <jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Epoxy/KNO3 motors?
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <3B99A545.F5CB4340@earthlink.net>

Thanks Dave,

        Actually I was referring to the resin itself. I've used MEK for various
projects unrelated to rocketry. I wasn't sure what the resin actually is.
There is nothing on the label that gives a good clue if it was HTPB,
polyethylene or what...

JG

-----Original Message-----
From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@itc.uci.edu]On
Behalf Of David Weinshenker
Sent: Saturday, September 08, 2001 12:58 AM
To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
Subject: Re: [AR] Epoxy/KNO3 motors?


Jeff Grady wrote:
> I had some "Castin' Craft" clear plastic casting resin in the basement,
but
> was disappointed to find the resin (which I had never opened) had
solidified
> in the top half of its can. I'll try to find an MSDS on this particular
> brand to see what other names it may go by. The catalyst for this clear
> stuff is MEKP...Could this stuff be butadiene-acrylic acid?

MEKP is "methyl ethyl ketone peroxide"... it's the standard catalyst
for polyester resins. The spontaneous cure during storage is also
typical of polyester resins in my experience - it's best to buy 'em
fresh for prompt use.

-dave w

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 29383 invoked from network); 8 Sep 2001 05:35:41 -0000
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 8 Sep 2001 05:35:41 -0000
Received: (qmail 5342 invoked by uid 50005); 8 Sep 2001 05:35:16 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpe with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.186188 secs); 08 Sep 2001 05:35:16 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 8 Sep 2001 05:35:15 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA21804; Fri, 7 Sep 2001 22:20:33 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 83434 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 8 Sep 2001 05:20:32 +0000
Received: from cablecom.laribay.net (cablecom.laribay.net [66.20.57.4]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA21790 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 7 Sep 2001 22:20:31 -0700
Received: from billbull (dial066.laribay.net [66.20.57.66]) by          cablecom.laribay.net (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id AAA13113 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 8 Sep 2001 00:01:55 -0500 (CDT)          (envelope-from bpbullock@laribay.net)
References:  <159.a10543.28caee39@aol.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <002b01c13826$36e255c0$42391442@billbull>
Date:         Sat, 8 Sep 2001 00:21:51 -0500
Reply-To: "Bill Bullock" <bpbullock@LARIBAY.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Bill Bullock" <bpbullock@LARIBAY.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Epoxy/KNO3 motors?
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Richard:
    Sorry to take up so much of everyone's time tonight, but I would value
your opinion of the use of the PROPEP programs in finding a "starting point"
in fuel/propellant formulations. I personally almost laugh with glee every
time I use it because I remember when I first got a slide rule to speed up
my motor profile calculations...cut my computation time down to only 3-4
days instead of a week. Now in seconds... GOOD GRIEF!!!
Bill
----- Original Message -----
From: <Ricanakk@AOL.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Friday, September 07, 2001 10:44 PM
Subject: Re: [AR] Epoxy/KNO3 motors?


> In a message dated 01/09/07 21:14:48 Eastern Daylight Time,
> jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET writes:
>
> << Has anyone else had good/bad luck trying
>  this? All comments pro and con would be appreciated. >>
>
> I am currently doing some pretty extensive testing of KN/epoxy
formulations,
> with additives such as aluminum and iron oxide, and with different brands
of
> epoxies. So far my approach has been to measure the cee-star of various
> formulations, and compare the results to PROPEP. The correlation has been
> surprisingly close.
> The highest practical solids loading I have been able to get is about 77%.
So
> far, the aluminum content has been up to 4%, which has given the highest
> cee-star to date. Tomorrow, I'll be testing a couple of samples with 6%
and
> with 8% aluminum.
> Once I come up with some promising formulations, I will begin measuring
burn
> rates. I figure this may weed out most (all?!) contenders...!
>
> Richard Nakka
>
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 15705 invoked from network); 8 Sep 2001 06:35:29 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 8 Sep 2001 06:35:29 -0000
Received: (qmail 19342 invoked by uid 50005); 8 Sep 2001 06:33:58 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.193119 secs); 08 Sep 2001 06:33:58 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 8 Sep 2001 06:33:58 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA22078; Fri, 7 Sep 2001 23:05:13 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 83496 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 8 Sep 2001 06:05:07 +0000
Received: from localhost (dmccue@localhost) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with          ESMTP id XAA22064; Fri, 7 Sep 2001 23:05:06 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.LNX.4.10.10109072247360.21667-100000@itc.uci.edu>
Date:         Fri, 7 Sep 2001 23:05:06 -0700
Reply-To: "David J. McCue" <dmccue@itc.uci.edu>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "David J. McCue" <dmccue@itc.uci.edu>
Subject:      Re: [AR] list admin liability,              L* for alcohol/N2O (was: aRocket project)
Comments: To: Mike Poulton <mpoulton@mtptech.com>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <200109080147.ACV03892@vmms1.verisignmail.com>

Sadly, a successful defense against a meritless lawsuit, or a headline
seeking D.A. who files criminal charges despite the fact that they will
not win, is not much consolation. There is also the risk to one's job, or
possible future employment as another possible consequence. Finally,
facilitating someone's attempt at something that looks to be dangerous to
others is not my idea of good citizenship.

-Dave Mc

On the other hand, I am intrigued by Dave Hall's Nitro compound, but I
would try it as a hybrid. From the safety of the blockhouse. With
earplugs. ;-)

By the way, the legal opinion below does contain some material errors, so
don't take it as something to stake your risks on.

On Fri, 7 Sep 2001, Mike Poulton wrote:

> Disseminating information is not illegal, unless the person giving the information knows it is to be used for
> terrorist purposes.  AFAIK, the courts have yet to use that relatively new provision to convict anyone (not
> surprising, since intent and knowledge have very high standards of proof).  So, telling someone how to do
> something potentially dangerous (but non-terrorist) does not make you liable for their actions, regardless of
> whether they are a minor or not.  Allowing them to discuss such matters on a list you run is even less of a
> risk.  If they are a minor, then their *parents* become responsible for allowing them to do something
> dangerous -- not the person who let them talk about it.  California law (which is notoriously screwy) may be
> different, but this is an interstate issue and thus they don't really apply too well.  If a topic is truly
> inappropriate for the list, then the discussion should be ended for that reason -- but I wouldn't stress out
> about some extremely remote and questionable possible assumption of liability.  This is, of course, only my
> take on things.  I don't run the list, so it's not my choice and it really doesn't make much difference
> anyways.
>
> ObRoc:  Any idea what a good starting value for L* would be for an ethanol/N2O biprop running at 300PSI,
> with a good injector?  I figure I'll start out at 30 and work down from there by shortenting the chamber,
> unless someone with some experience can give me a better starting place
> Mike Poulton
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 22775 invoked from network); 8 Sep 2001 06:38:05 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 8 Sep 2001 06:38:05 -0000
Received: (qmail 21838 invoked by uid 50005); 8 Sep 2001 06:36:34 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.167202 secs); 08 Sep 2001 06:36:34 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 8 Sep 2001 06:36:34 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA22233; Fri, 7 Sep 2001 23:22:43 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 83532 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 8 Sep 2001 06:22:36 +0000
Received: from femail7.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail7.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.0.95.87]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA22219 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 7 Sep 2001 23:22:36 -0700
Received: from hal2001 ([24.77.57.136]) by femail7.sdc1.sfba.home.com          (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20 201-229-121-120-20010223) with SMTP id          <20010908062235.JMGL798.femail7.sdc1.sfba.home.com@hal2001> for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 7 Sep 2001 23:22:35 -0700
References: <5.1.0.14.1.20010906204153.00b04628@netmail.home.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <00eb01c1382d$7e53f600$0400a8c0@hatjs>
Date:         Fri, 7 Sep 2001 23:14:18 -0700
Reply-To: "Jamie Morken" <jmorken@HOME.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jamie Morken" <jmorken@HOME.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Electronics Box document
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Hi All,

> >You can use an instrumentation amplifier, as you suggest, but it may not
> >solve the problem John is concerned about - for that purpose, it might be
> >better to use an isolation amplifier - same idea, but includes an optical
> >or transformer stage to ensure that ground noise from one side of the amp
> >doesn't traverse the circuit.

Don, why wouldn't the instrumentation amplifier isolate the two circuits by
itself? (assuming that it is powered from the
microprocessor and the only link to the high current circuit is on the very
high impedence differential +/- inputs)

best regards,
Jamie

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 6056 invoked from network); 8 Sep 2001 06:42:30 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 8 Sep 2001 06:42:30 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 27356 invoked by uid 50005); 8 Sep 2001 06:40:22 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.173881 secs); 08 Sep 2001 06:40:22 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 8 Sep 2001 06:40:22 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA22317; Fri, 7 Sep 2001 23:26:49 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 83559 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 8 Sep 2001 06:26:48 +0000
Received: from vmmr1.verisignmail.com (vmmr1.verisignmail.com          [216.168.230.137]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id          XAA22303 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Fri, 7 Sep 2001 23:26:47 -0700
Received: from vmms1.verisignmail.com (vmms1.verisignmail.com [10.166.0.138])          by vmmr1.verisignmail.com (Mirapoint) with ESMTP id AAS28980; Sat, 8          Sep 2001 02:26:17 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from vmms1.verisignmail.com (localhost.verisignmail.com [127.0.0.1])          by vmms1.verisignmail.com (Mirapoint) with SMTP id ACV06261 (AUTH          mpoulton@mtptech.com); Sat, 8 Sep 2001 02:26:16 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from 129.93.206.94 by vmms1.verisignmail.com with HTTP/1.1; Sat, 8          Sep 2001 02:26:27 -0400
X-Mailer: Mirapoint Webmail Direct 2.9.1.1
Message-ID:  <200109080626.ACV06261@vmms1.verisignmail.com>
Date:         Sat, 8 Sep 2001 02:26:27 -0400
Reply-To: <mpoulton@MTPTECH.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Mike Poulton" <mpoulton@MTPTECH.COM>
Subject:      [AR] Fwd: Re: [AR] Epoxy/KNO3 motors?
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

The use of MEKP as a curing agent and the spontaneous hardening indicate that it is a polyester resin,
most likely.
Mike Poulton

---- Original message ----
>Date: Sat, 8 Sep 2001 01:20:10 -0400
>From: Jeff Grady <jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET>
>Subject: Re: [AR] Epoxy/KNO3 motors?
>To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
>
>Thanks Dave,
>
>        Actually I was referring to the resin itself. I've used MEK for various
>projects unrelated to rocketry. I wasn't sure what the resin actually is.
>There is nothing on the label that gives a good clue if it was HTPB,
>polyethylene or what...
>
>JG
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@itc.uci.edu]On
>Behalf Of David Weinshenker
>Sent: Saturday, September 08, 2001 12:58 AM
>To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
>Subject: Re: [AR] Epoxy/KNO3 motors?
>
>
>Jeff Grady wrote:
>> I had some "Castin' Craft" clear plastic casting resin in the basement,
>but
>> was disappointed to find the resin (which I had never opened) had
>solidified
>> in the top half of its can. I'll try to find an MSDS on this particular
>> brand to see what other names it may go by. The catalyst for this clear
>> stuff is MEKP...Could this stuff be butadiene-acrylic acid?
>
>MEKP is "methyl ethyl ketone peroxide"... it's the standard catalyst
>for polyester resins. The spontaneous cure during storage is also
>typical of polyester resins in my experience - it's best to buy 'em
>fresh for prompt use.
>
>-dave w


From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 27082 invoked from network); 8 Sep 2001 08:15:23 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 8 Sep 2001 08:15:23 -0000
Received: (qmail 27890 invoked by uid 50005); 8 Sep 2001 08:15:18 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpb with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.158641 secs); 08 Sep 2001 08:15:18 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 8 Sep 2001 08:15:18 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA22596; Sat, 8 Sep 2001 00:45:18 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 83609 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 8 Sep 2001 07:45:13 +0000
Received: from fep4-orange.clear.net.nz (fep4-orange.clear.net.nz          [203.97.32.4]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA22582          for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Sat, 8 Sep 2001 00:45:12 -0700
Received: from mkbs (203-167-162-177.dialup.clear.net.nz [203.167.162.177]) by          fep4-orange.clear.net.nz (1.5/1.7) with SMTP id TAA17127; Sat, 8 Sep          2001 19:45:07 +1200 (NZST)
References: <5.1.0.14.1.20010906204153.00b04628@netmail.home.com>             <00eb01c1382d$7e53f600$0400a8c0@hatjs>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <070001c1383a$a7db24a0$0100a8c0@mkbs>
Date:         Sat, 8 Sep 2001 19:45:39 +1200
Reply-To: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Organization: Applied Technology
Subject:      Re: [AR] Electronics Box document
Comments: To: Jamie Morken <jmorken@HOME.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

> > >You can use an instrumentation amplifier, as you suggest, but it may
not
> > >solve the problem John is concerned about - for that purpose, it might
be
> > >better to use an isolation amplifier - same idea, but includes an
optical
> > >or transformer stage to ensure that ground noise from one side of the
amp
> > >doesn't traverse the circuit.
>
> Don, why wouldn't the instrumentation amplifier isolate the two circuits
by
> itself? (assuming that it is powered from the
> microprocessor and the only link to the high current circuit is on the
very
> high impedence differential +/- inputs)


An IA (instrumentation amplifer) can do a good job of measuring a signal
which is referenced to a remote ground which floats relative to the ground
of the target output . There are limitations. All IA's will have a limit on
the "common mode voltage" which can be measured - here this is effectively
the difference between the remote and local grounds. (The maximum tolerable
common mode voltage can be made very large with careful design). In a system
with totally isolated grounds the remote system can float to a very
considerable value due to electrostatic voltages etc and this may exceed the
common mode range of many designs. .

Also, large common mode voltages place extra demands on circuit design - a
component of variations in common mode voltage will appear in the output and
for high accuracy applications with large common mode voltages this makes
life interesting.

While adding a degree of coupling between the two systems to reuce
accidental common mode voltages, so that eg electrostatic voltages can
"leak" between the two systems, John is trying to completely isolate the two
systems and a truly isolated signal transfer system may be easier to
implement.

One such 'fully isolated" system building block is the Infineon IL300
optocoupler. (Similar products are available from other manufacturers).
(Anyone who would like a datasheet and application notes for the IL300
please enquire OFFLIST. About 1 MB all up.). The IL300 has a single
transmitting LED but two closely matched receiving photodiodes. One
photodiode is used to form a feedback loop on the sending side and an
effectively equivalent cicruit on the receiving side using the other
photodiode allows the input and output circuits to track closely. With care
results up to about 12 bits equivalent are achievable with this device. A
simple circuit can require as little as an IL300 and 3 transistors and a few
resistors.

Note that even optocouple dsystems such as this one are still not FULLY
isolated. Capacitive coupling across the optocoupler place a limit on the
dV/dT (slew rates of applied voltage) which can be handled.





    Russell McMahon

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 6476 invoked from network); 8 Sep 2001 11:24:11 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 8 Sep 2001 11:24:11 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 12085 invoked by uid 50005); 8 Sep 2001 11:22:02 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.217158 secs); 08 Sep 2001 11:22:02 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 8 Sep 2001 11:22:01 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id DAA23235; Sat, 8 Sep 2001 03:55:42 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 83719 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 8 Sep 2001 10:55:37 +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (f213.law15.hotmail.com [64.4.23.213]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id DAA23221 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Sat, 8 Sep 2001 03:55:37 -0700
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Sat,          8 Sep 2001 03:55:06 -0700
Received: from 213.224.83.134 by lw15fd.law15.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Sat,          08 Sep 2001 10:55:06 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [213.224.83.134]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 08 Sep 2001 10:55:06.0813 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[B892EED0:01C13854]
Message-ID:  <F213SWTsgdwsZ2L68eR00004c30@hotmail.com>
Date:         Sat, 8 Sep 2001 10:55:37 +0000
Reply-To: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      [AR] Fwd: Bizarre Boiling
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Weird stuff ("NASA Science News"<snglist@snglist.msfc.nasa.gov>)
Perhaps something to consider with regenerative cooling?

>NASA Science News for September 7, 202001 2:00:00 PM
>
>Watching liquids boil in low gravity is an out-of-this-world experience
>(in this story you can see for yourself). The strangely turbulent liquids
>have plenty of entertainment value, and they're teaching scientists some
>important physics lessons, too.
>
>FULL STORY at

http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2001/ast07sep_2.htm?list68961

_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 29855 invoked from network); 8 Sep 2001 14:45:59 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 8 Sep 2001 14:45:59 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 27057 invoked by uid 50005); 8 Sep 2001 14:45:30 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpe with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 2.196181 secs); 08 Sep 2001 14:45:30 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 8 Sep 2001 14:45:26 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA23883; Sat, 8 Sep 2001 07:16:14 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 83746 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 8 Sep 2001 14:16:07 +0000
Received: from mail1.murraystate.edu (mail1.murraystate.edu [216.249.159.50])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id HAA23868 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 8 Sep 2001 07:16:07 -0700
Received: from jjcomputer.murraystate.edu (216.249.158.66) by          mail1.murraystate.edu (NPlex 5.5.031) id 3B85968000052167 for          AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 8 Sep 2001 09:13:55 -0500
X-Sender: terry.mccreary@mail.murraystate.edu
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
References: <159.a10543.28caee39@aol.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <5.1.0.14.0.20010908085717.01fd1210@mail.murraystate.edu>
Date:         Sat, 8 Sep 2001 09:18:06 -0500
Reply-To: "Terry McCreary" <terry.mccreary@MURRAYSTATE.EDU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Terry McCreary" <terry.mccreary@MURRAYSTATE.EDU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Epoxy/KNO3 motors?
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <002b01c13826$36e255c0$42391442@billbull>

At 12:21 AM 9/8/01 -0500, you wrote:
>Richard:
>     Sorry to take up so much of everyone's time tonight, but I would value
>your opinion of the use of the PROPEP programs in finding a "starting point"
>in fuel/propellant formulations. I personally almost laugh with glee every
>time I use it because I remember when I first got a slide rule to speed up
>my motor profile calculations...cut my computation time down to only 3-4
>days instead of a week. Now in seconds... GOOD GRIEF!!!
>Bill

...and the time can be cut even more by using the "Multiple Run"
feature.  Give a range for one variable and it holds the others
constant.  Makes it very easy to pinpoint the maximum Isp.

Incidentally, the "R45 HTPB (UTC)" entry, just above the "R45M" entry,
gives propellant densities that are a little more in line with
reality.  Unless someone out there is using R45 with a density of 1.2 g/mL
rather than 0.9 g/mL...

Just fer fun, do a run of zinc and sulfur.  Surprisingly, an
aluminum-manganese dioxide mixture (mentioned here a while back) gives more
respectable results.  Though neither mixture's results are likely to have
much to do with reality...

P'rfesser

Dr. Terry McCreary
Associate Professor
Department of Chemistry
Murray State University
Murray, KY  42071
270-762-6499

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 19137 invoked from network); 8 Sep 2001 15:02:11 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 8 Sep 2001 15:02:11 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 11792 invoked by uid 50005); 8 Sep 2001 15:01:59 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpa with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.287146 secs); 08 Sep 2001 15:01:59 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 8 Sep 2001 15:01:59 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA24000; Sat, 8 Sep 2001 07:46:57 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 83757 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 8 Sep 2001 14:46:54 +0000
Received: from hobbiton.shire.net (frogmorton.shire.net [204.228.145.136]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA23986 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Sat, 8 Sep 2001 07:46:53 -0700
Received: from pool-64-223-146-33.man.east.verizon.net ([64.223.146.33]          helo=me-513q3sc0zun0.pengar.com) by hobbiton.shire.net with esmtp          (Exim 3.22 #6) id 15fjMF-000Kcf-00 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 08          Sep 2001 08:45:19 -0600
X-Sender: seth-pc@hobbiton.shire.net
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
References: <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010907200649.12558B-100000@spsystems.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <5.1.0.14.0.20010908105134.02d8eeb0@hobbiton.shire.net>
Date:         Sat, 8 Sep 2001 10:52:14 -0400
Reply-To: "Seth Leigh" <seth@PENGAR.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Seth Leigh" <seth@PENGAR.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Epoxy/KNO3 motors?
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <000001c13803$ca30fcf0$0200a8c0@prestige.net>

I believe Carsten Glans has mentioned doing experiments using
KNO3/epoxy.  I don't recall much more detail than that he mentioned doing it.

Seth



At 09:15 PM 9/7/2001, Jeff Grady wrote:
>         After making some igniters using a home-brew BP composition and
> some epoxy,
>and reading another poster's suggestion about adding more KNO3 to my mix to
>oxidize the epoxy, I thought I'd try making an epoxy/KNO3 composition to
>test. I mixed 200 grains (using a reloader's powder scale) of KNO3 and 200gr
>of epoxy and let dry. I wanted to start fuel-rich to avoid a bad burn (got
>burned pretty bad once in 11th grade chem class). I noticed a good deal of
>heat coming from the mixing cup several minutes after mixing - which I
>kind-of expected. It was left to harden out on the driveway.
>
>         I lit the results with a propane torch and away it went. It
> burned with a
>bright blue flame near the fuel and had yellow tips. It burned pretty
>vigorously for 30-40 seconds. One thing I noticed was a tendency to crack
>apart - presumably from heat fracturing the solid or because of residual
>moisture still in the mix. Next I'll try a 60/40 KNO3/Epoxy blend to see how
>that goes. I have never used resins of the sort mentioned on this list, but
>will assume, until told differently, that the resins most of you are using
>are more rubber like when cured? Has anyone else had good/bad luck trying
>this? All comments pro and con would be appreciated.
>
>JG

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 14428 invoked from network); 8 Sep 2001 15:10:05 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 8 Sep 2001 15:10:05 -0000
Received: (qmail 15895 invoked by uid 50005); 8 Sep 2001 15:09:53 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpa with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.335178 secs); 08 Sep 2001 15:09:53 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 8 Sep 2001 15:09:52 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA24051; Sat, 8 Sep 2001 07:54:55 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 83768 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 8 Sep 2001 14:54:49 +0000
Received: from cablecom.laribay.net (cablecom.laribay.net [66.20.57.4]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA24036 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 8 Sep 2001 07:54:48 -0700
Received: from billbull (dial092.laribay.net [66.20.57.92]) by          cablecom.laribay.net (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id JAA17804 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 8 Sep 2001 09:36:12 -0500 (CDT)          (envelope-from bpbullock@laribay.net)
References: <159.a10543.28caee39@aol.com>             <5.1.0.14.0.20010908085717.01fd1210@mail.murraystate.edu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <001401c13876$73e88840$5c391442@billbull>
Date:         Sat, 8 Sep 2001 09:56:12 -0500
Reply-To: "Bill Bullock" <bpbullock@LARIBAY.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Bill Bullock" <bpbullock@LARIBAY.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Epoxy/KNO3 motors?
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Terry:
    Thanks for the response. I always look forward to your posts. And, while
I absolutely revel in the programs that everyone has developed to facilitate
the theoretical side, I still believe that the ONLY results that is
believable without reservation comes from a well-instrumented test stand or
sticking a motor up the back end of a well-constructed vehicle and touching
it off.
    And of course you are right about some results being wrong or
inappropriate for use. I have run some that I know without a doubt would
either detonate or produce by-products which I guarantee would kill a
granite rock much less humans. Some ingredients would be great but are
restricted to us regular folks. But it sure beats the old ways...
Bill
----- Original Message -----
From: Terry McCreary <terry.mccreary@MURRAYSTATE.EDU>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Saturday, September 08, 2001 9:18 AM
Subject: Re: [AR] Epoxy/KNO3 motors?


> ...and the time can be cut even more by using the "Multiple Run"
> feature.  Give a range for one variable and it holds the others
> constant.  Makes it very easy to pinpoint the maximum Isp.
>
> Incidentally, the "R45 HTPB (UTC)" entry, just above the "R45M" entry,
> gives propellant densities that are a little more in line with
> reality.  Unless someone out there is using R45 with a density of 1.2 g/mL
> rather than 0.9 g/mL...
>
> Just fer fun, do a run of zinc and sulfur.  Surprisingly, an
> aluminum-manganese dioxide mixture (mentioned here a while back) gives
more
> respectable results.  Though neither mixture's results are likely to have
> much to do with reality...
>
> P'rfesser
>
> Dr. Terry McCreary
> Associate Professor
> Department of Chemistry
> Murray State University
> Murray, KY  42071
> 270-762-6499
>
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 13939 invoked from network); 8 Sep 2001 15:19:15 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 8 Sep 2001 15:19:15 -0000
Received: (qmail 3778 invoked by uid 50005); 8 Sep 2001 15:19:08 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpb with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.206637 secs); 08 Sep 2001 15:19:08 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 8 Sep 2001 15:19:08 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA24130; Sat, 8 Sep 2001 08:03:58 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 83788 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 8 Sep 2001 15:03:55 +0000
Received: from zcars0m9.ca.nortel.com (h157s242a129n47.user.nortelnetworks.com          [47.129.242.157]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA24116          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 8 Sep 2001 08:03:54 -0700
Received: from zcars04f.ca.nortel.com (zcars04f.ca.nortel.com [47.129.242.57])          by zcars0m9.ca.nortel.com (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f88F2vp01321          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 8 Sep 2001 11:02:57 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from rftzy232.ca.nortel.com by zcars04f.ca.nortel.com; Sat, 8 Sep          2001 11:03:18 -0400
Received: from nortelnetworks.com (acart139.ca.nortel.com [47.129.8.152]) by          rftzy232.ca.nortel.com with SMTP (Microsoft Exchange Internet Mail          Service Version 5.5.2653.13) id SHASBHD5; Sat, 8 Sep 2001 11:02:28          -0400
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.77 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.19 i686)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <159.a10543.28caee39@aol.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Orig: <mleech@nortelnetworks.com>
Message-ID:  <3B9A33F2.F8EC8FB4@nortelnetworks.com>
Date:         Sat, 8 Sep 2001 11:06:26 -0400
Reply-To: "Marcus Leech" <mleech@NORTELNETWORKS.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Marcus Leech" <mleech@NORTELNETWORKS.COM>
Organization: Nortel Networks: Information Systems
Subject:      Re: [AR] Epoxy/KNO3 motors?
Comments: To: Ricanakk@AOL.COM
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Ricanakk@AOL.COM wrote:
>
> In a message dated 01/09/07 21:14:48 Eastern Daylight Time,
> jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET writes:
>
> << Has anyone else had good/bad luck trying
>  this? All comments pro and con would be appreciated. >>
>
> I am currently doing some pretty extensive testing of KN/epoxy formulations,
> with additives such as aluminum and iron oxide, and with different brands of
> epoxies. So far my approach has been to measure the cee-star of various
> formulations, and compare the results to PROPEP. The correlation has been
> surprisingly close.
> The highest practical solids loading I have been able to get is about 77%. So
> far, the aluminum content has been up to 4%, which has given the highest
> cee-star to date. Tomorrow, I'll be testing a couple of samples with 6% and
> with 8% aluminum.
> Once I come up with some promising formulations, I will begin measuring burn
> rates. I figure this may weed out most (all?!) contenders...!
>
> Richard Nakka
Cool, so that means the pressure is off of me to make KNO3/Epoxy
formulations for
  you to test.  I'll "leech" (har har har) off your results when you
have something
  positive...

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 17527 invoked from network); 8 Sep 2001 15:30:22 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 8 Sep 2001 15:30:22 -0000
Received: (qmail 7814 invoked by uid 50005); 8 Sep 2001 15:30:15 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpb with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.225767 secs); 08 Sep 2001 15:30:15 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 8 Sep 2001 15:30:14 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA24189; Sat, 8 Sep 2001 08:14:59 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 83799 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 8 Sep 2001 15:14:56 +0000
Received: from c002.snv.cp.net (c002-h000.c002.snv.cp.net [209.228.32.164]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id IAA24175 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 8 Sep 2001 08:14:56 -0700
Received: (cpmta 29099 invoked from network); 8 Sep 2001 08:14:24 -0700
Received: from 1Cust175.tnt2.williamsburg.va.da.uu.net (HELO default)          (63.21.81.175) by smtp.peoplepc.com (209.228.32.164) with SMTP; 8 Sep          2001 08:14:24 -0700
X-Sent: 8 Sep 2001 15:14:24 GMT
References: <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010907200649.12558B-100000@spsystems.net>             <5.1.0.14.0.20010908105134.02d8eeb0@hobbiton.shire.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4807.1700
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <00fd01c1387a$c48c9e40$af51153f@default>
Date:         Sat, 8 Sep 2001 11:27:25 -0400
Reply-To: "David Muesing" <dmuesing@PEOPLEPC.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "David Muesing" <dmuesing@PEOPLEPC.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Epoxy/KNO3 motors?
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

A group member suggested Epoxy/KN/S/AL. I tried a mixture of:

20 % West System epoxy
73 % K-Power KN ground prills
5 % S
2 % AL

It was a little dry mixing and packing. It did burn in the open well enough
to be encouraging. Cost about $1.50/#.

Dave Muesing


----- Original Message -----
From: "Seth Leigh" <seth@PENGAR.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Saturday, September 08, 2001 10:52 AM
Subject: Re: [AR] Epoxy/KNO3 motors?


> I believe Carsten Glans has mentioned doing experiments using
> KNO3/epoxy.  I don't recall much more detail than that he mentioned doing
it.
>
> Seth
>
>
>
> At 09:15 PM 9/7/2001, Jeff Grady wrote:
> >         After making some igniters using a home-brew BP composition and
> > some epoxy,
> >and reading another poster's suggestion about adding more KNO3 to my mix
to
> >oxidize the epoxy, I thought I'd try making an epoxy/KNO3 composition to
> >test. I mixed 200 grains (using a reloader's powder scale) of KNO3 and
200gr
> >of epoxy and let dry. I wanted to start fuel-rich to avoid a bad burn
(got
> >burned pretty bad once in 11th grade chem class). I noticed a good deal
of
> >heat coming from the mixing cup several minutes after mixing - which I
> >kind-of expected. It was left to harden out on the driveway.
> >
> >         I lit the results with a propane torch and away it went. It
> > burned with a
> >bright blue flame near the fuel and had yellow tips. It burned pretty
> >vigorously for 30-40 seconds. One thing I noticed was a tendency to crack
> >apart - presumably from heat fracturing the solid or because of residual
> >moisture still in the mix. Next I'll try a 60/40 KNO3/Epoxy blend to see
how
> >that goes. I have never used resins of the sort mentioned on this list,
but
> >will assume, until told differently, that the resins most of you are
using
> >are more rubber like when cured? Has anyone else had good/bad luck trying
> >this? All comments pro and con would be appreciated.
> >
> >JG
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 29810 invoked from network); 8 Sep 2001 16:38:02 -0000
X-Priority: 3
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 8 Sep 2001 16:38:02 -0000
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 22557 invoked by uid 50005); 8 Sep 2001 16:37:49 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpa with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.127152 secs); 08 Sep 2001 16:37:49 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 8 Sep 2001 16:37:48 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA24563; Sat, 8 Sep 2001 09:22:47 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 83836 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 8 Sep 2001 16:22:37 +0000
Received: from imo-m02.mx.aol.com (imo-m02.mx.aol.com [64.12.136.5]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA24549 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Sat, 8 Sep 2001 09:22:37 -0700
Received: from Ricanakk@aol.com by imo-m02.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v31_r1.4.) id          w.2d.10a84bda (3843) for <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Sat, 8 Sep 2001          12:22:01 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: AOL 5.0 for Windows sub 108
Message-ID:  <2d.10a84bda.28cb9fa8@aol.com>
Date:         Sat, 8 Sep 2001 12:22:00 EDT
Reply-To: <Ricanakk@AOL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <Ricanakk@AOL.COM>
Subject:      [AR] (no subject)
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

> I have a purchased a bag of KNO3, it is
> fertlizer grade and it has the numbers 13-0-46

The three numbers, X-Y-Z, are agricultural specifications for fertilizers.
X=percent of available nitrogen, Y=percent of available Phosphate, and
Z=percent of available Potash (K20), where "available" means available for
plant food. Chemically, this representation does not tell a person what the
compound actually is. However, potassium nitrate is usually designated by
14-0-46 and ammonium nitrate is 35-0-0.

The designation for pure potassium nitrate  and ammonium. nitrate can easily
be calculated as follows:
Atomic weights for the elements are: K 39.1, N 14.0, O 16.0

Potassium Nitrate:
Molecular weight, MW, of K2O (potash) is 2*39.1 + 16 = 94.2
MW of KNO3 is 39.1 + 14 + 3*(16) = 101.1

Available nitrogen is therefore 14/101.1 =  .138 or 13.8 %
Available phosphate is zero
Available potash is therefore 94.2/2/101.1 = .465 or 46.5%
Giving 13.8-0-46.5 as the designation for pure potassium nitrate

Now, Ammonium Nitrate:
MW of NH4NO3 is 14 + 4* (1) + 14 + 3* (16) = 80.0

Available nitrogen is therefore 2*14/80 =  .35 or 35.0 %
Available phosphate is zero
Available potash is zero

Giving 35.0-0-0 as the designation for pure AN.

cheers,
Richard Nakka

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 27244 invoked from network); 8 Sep 2001 16:58:24 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 8 Sep 2001 16:58:24 -0000
Received: (qmail 31900 invoked by uid 50005); 8 Sep 2001 16:58:11 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpa with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.239311 secs); 08 Sep 2001 16:58:11 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 8 Sep 2001 16:58:11 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA24741; Sat, 8 Sep 2001 09:43:00 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 83865 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 8 Sep 2001 16:42:59 +0000
Received: from roll.akcecc.kiev.ua (roll.akcecc.kiev.ua [193.227.206.34]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA24704 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 8 Sep 2001 09:42:51 -0700
Received: from serge (pool-40.akcecc.kiev.ua [193.227.207.40] (may be forged))          by roll.akcecc.kiev.ua (8.10.2/8.10.2) with SMTP id f88GgjA05615 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 8 Sep 2001 19:42:45 +0300
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="koi8-r"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2417.2000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <012f01c1387c$b01ee740$28cfe3c1@serge>
Date:         Sat, 8 Sep 2001 19:39:40 +0400
Reply-To: "Serge Pipko" <spas@AKCECC.KIEV.UA>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Serge Pipko" <spas@AKCECC.KIEV.UA>
Subject:      [AR] AN propellants: evaporation technique
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

All components were dissolved in water and allowed to evaporate to dryness
at 60-70 deg C.

1) 1 g ascorbic acid + 4.54 g AN  : B0
2) 1 g ascorbic acid + 4.54 g AN + 0.05 g fumed silica : B1
3) 1 g ascorbic acid + 4.54 g AN + 0.05 g charcoal : B2
4) 1 g ascorbic acid + 4.54 g AN + 0.05 g K3Fe(CN)6 : B3
5) 1 g ascorbic acid + 4.54 g AN + 0.05 g Cu(CH3COO)2.H2O (copper acetate) :
upon heating solution became cloudy and dispersion of very small metallic
copper particles was formed (ascorbic acid reduced Cu(+2) to Cu(0) ). After
evaporation semicrystalline mass with subtle bronze shade was formed : B3.
6) 1 g ascorbic acid + 4.54 g AN + 0.11 g Cu(CH3COO)2.H2O (copper acetate) :
in this case copper particles dispersion was less stable and somewhat
agglomerated and so burn rate was slightly less : B3, R=0.11 mm/sec
7) 1 g ascorbic acid + 3.99 g AN + 0.44 g KN + 0.05 g charcoal : B3
8) 1 g sugar + 5.61 g AN + 0.13 g Cu(CH3COO)2.H2O (copper acetate) : B2
9) 1 g sugar + 4.60 g AN + 0.51 g KN : B2
10) 1 g sugar + 4.60 g AN + 0.51 g KN + 0.12 g S (colloidal sulfur): B2,
R=0.07 mm/sec
11) 1 g sugar + 4.60 g AN + 0.51 g KN + 0.12 g Cu(CH3COO)2.H2O (copper
acetate) : B3,  R=0.17 mm/sec
12) 1 g sugar + 4.60 g AN + 0.51 g KN + 0.12 g CuCl2.2H2O : B3,  R=0.12
mm/sec

This technique has some advantages, for example, it is less dangerous then
melting and it allows the use of virtually any burn rate catalyst. But
unsatisfactory mechanical properties of resulting propellant force me to
start experimenting with AN melt.

Serge

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 28724 invoked from network); 8 Sep 2001 16:58:55 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 8 Sep 2001 16:58:55 -0000
Received: (qmail 32070 invoked by uid 50005); 8 Sep 2001 16:58:42 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpa with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.191963 secs); 08 Sep 2001 16:58:42 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 8 Sep 2001 16:58:41 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA24759; Sat, 8 Sep 2001 09:43:03 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 83872 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 8 Sep 2001 16:43:01 +0000
Received: from roll.akcecc.kiev.ua (roll.akcecc.kiev.ua [193.227.206.34]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA24705 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 8 Sep 2001 09:42:52 -0700
Received: from serge (pool-40.akcecc.kiev.ua [193.227.207.40] (may be forged))          by roll.akcecc.kiev.ua (8.10.2/8.10.2) with SMTP id f88GgkA05620 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 8 Sep 2001 19:42:46 +0300
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="koi8-r"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2417.2000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <013001c1387c$b0d788e0$28cfe3c1@serge>
Date:         Sat, 8 Sep 2001 19:40:04 +0400
Reply-To: "Serge Pipko" <spas@AKCECC.KIEV.UA>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Serge Pipko" <spas@AKCECC.KIEV.UA>
Subject:      [AR] AN propellants: melting process
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

The experiments were carried out in a glass beaker submerged in an oil bath,
heated up to 165-170 deg. C. Fuels was gradually added to molten AN-KN
eutectic (13.6 % KN, m.p. 156.5 deg. C) with stirring. After homogeneous
solution or suspension was obtained, it was poured in paper tubes 17 mm ID.

1) 1.20 AN-KN + 0.16 C6H5COONa (sodium benzoate) : they didn't mixed at all,
after 1 minute benzoic acid begun to sublimate.
2) 1.58 AN-KN + 0.36 ascorbic acid : B1
3) 2.79 AN-KN + 0.35 NH2-C6H4-COOH (antranilic acid) : B0
4) 4.16 AN-KN + 0.57 HO-CH2-CC-CH2-OH (butindiol) : B2, R=0.10 mm/sec
5) 3.83 AN-KN + 0.73 wheat flour : B3, R=0.09 mm/sec
6) 8.35 AN-KN + 1.59 wheat flour + 0.10 fumed silica : B3, R=0.09 mm/sec
7) 8.52 AN-KN + 1.19 wheat flour + 0.20 charcoal : B3, R=0.12 mm/sec
8) 8.25 AN-KN + 0.49 wheat flour + 0.49 charcoal : B3, R=0.20 mm/sec
9) 8.49 AN-KN + 0.50 wheat flour + 0.50 charcoal + 0.10 fumed silica : B3,
R=0.20 mm/sec

The last composition is the most promising. It forms strong propellant block
and burns cleanly. Addition of fumed silica to (wheat flour + charcoal)
mixture prevents formation of lumps during its mixing with AN-KN melt. It is
possible that variations of component ratio and reduction of charcoal
particle size will further increase burn rate.

Serge

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 29057 invoked from network); 8 Sep 2001 16:59:02 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 8 Sep 2001 16:59:01 -0000
Received: (qmail 32120 invoked by uid 50005); 8 Sep 2001 16:58:49 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpa with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.182269 secs); 08 Sep 2001 16:58:49 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 8 Sep 2001 16:58:48 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA24724; Sat, 8 Sep 2001 09:42:57 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 83858 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 8 Sep 2001 16:42:54 +0000
Received: from roll.akcecc.kiev.ua (roll.akcecc.kiev.ua [193.227.206.34]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA24703 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 8 Sep 2001 09:42:50 -0700
Received: from serge (pool-40.akcecc.kiev.ua [193.227.207.40] (may be forged))          by roll.akcecc.kiev.ua (8.10.2/8.10.2) with SMTP id f88GghA05610 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 8 Sep 2001 19:42:44 +0300
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="koi8-r"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2417.2000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <012e01c1387c$af770e80$28cfe3c1@serge>
Date:         Sat, 8 Sep 2001 19:38:39 +0400
Reply-To: "Serge Pipko" <spas@AKCECC.KIEV.UA>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Serge Pipko" <spas@AKCECC.KIEV.UA>
Subject:      [AR] AN propellants
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Hello All,

Since there is some interest on the list to the results of my experiments
with AN propellants, I decide to post brief summary. The following two
letters contain experiments with evaporation technique and melting process.
In all cases I prepared  stochiometric mixtures, resulting propellants were
packed or poured in paper tubes 17 mm ID. I mark burn test results as
following:

B0  don't burn
B1  burn, but quickly go out
B2  very slowly burn, with foaming
B3  stable burn, little or no foaming, deserve attention

Some burn rates were measured, but these data aren't sufficiently precise,
because reproducibility was not as good as it must be. Nevertheless the
general trends are clear, for example, catalytic role of KN, charcoal, Cu
and Fe salts. Fumed silica improves mixing of fuels with AN-KN melt and
gives more sturdy propellant block. It has some catalytic effect also.

Serge

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 12483 invoked from network); 8 Sep 2001 18:18:33 -0000
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 8 Sep 2001 18:18:33 -0000
Received: (qmail 25951 invoked by uid 50005); 8 Sep 2001 18:18:04 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpe with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.248081 secs); 08 Sep 2001 18:18:04 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 8 Sep 2001 18:18:04 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA25034; Sat, 8 Sep 2001 10:48:39 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 83908 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 8 Sep 2001 17:48:34 +0000
Received: from prover.com (IDENT:root@chaos.sthlm.prover.com [192.71.47.101])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA25020 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 8 Sep 2001 10:48:33 -0700
Received: from duncan (sdsl-64-139-0-245.dsl.sca.megapath.net [64.139.0.245])          by prover.com (8.11.3/8.11.3) with SMTP id f88HlTe03800; Sat, 8 Sep          2001 19:47:30 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <NEBBLECGKLLOLFCCBNPEAENADJAA.duncan.mcdonald@prover.com>
Date:         Sat, 8 Sep 2001 10:47:58 -0700
Reply-To: "Duncan McDonald" <duncan.mcdonald@PROVER.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Duncan McDonald" <duncan.mcdonald@PROVER.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Electronics Box document
Comments: To: Jamie Morken <jmorken@HOME.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <00eb01c1382d$7e53f600$0400a8c0@hatjs>

Jamie,

Preventing noise coupling between analog and digital circuits can be a very
challenging problem. There are a lot of things to consider, and no easy
wins. You can try to isolate the grounds, meaning there is no DC path
between the analog section and the digital section. But you will still have
AC coupling between the sections due to stray capacitance and inductance. It
takes even more careful work to eliminate those stray paths, especially
because the noise produced by the digital signals is so high frequency.
Remember, even if the digital stuff is running at a low clock rate, the edge
rate (dv/dt) is still quite high and that produces high frequency noise.

Instrumentation amps are good for isolating DC or low frequency common mode
signals (signals that appear on both the positive and negative inputs) but
their common mode frequeny reponse is not that great. A typical IA amp has
90db or so of common mode rejection at DC, but only 60db or so at 1Mhz. The
IL300 that Russell mentions has a low frequency common mode rejection of
120db at DC to about 50 hz, but that degrades to only 60db at 100khz. You
would think that an optically isolated device would be much higher but
opto's are very non-linear which compromises the design. Ideally you would
like two matched LED's driving two matched optotransistors. But it is almost
impossible (they tell me) to match the LED's so they put two
phototransistors very close to a single LED. That drives up the capacitance
and reduces the CMRR frequency response.

Power supplies have really pathetic CMRR response: something like 20db at
1Mhz. Don't share power between analog and digital.

Bottom line: no silver bullets, just lots of careful design, testing, and
attention to construction. I am working with a manufacturer of high speed
instrumentation systems that have lots of digital right now and they get 12
bits of accuracy (0.5mv in +/-10v) without using IA's, just good grounding
design and mechanical signal isolation. Not to say you shouldn't use IA's,
it's just that they will not in themselves eliminate the problem.

Duncan




-----Original Message-----
From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU]On
Behalf Of Jamie Morken
Sent: Friday, September 07, 2001 11:14 PM
To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
Subject: Re: [AR] Electronics Box document


Hi All,

> >You can use an instrumentation amplifier, as you suggest, but it may not
> >solve the problem John is concerned about - for that purpose, it might be
> >better to use an isolation amplifier - same idea, but includes an optical
> >or transformer stage to ensure that ground noise from one side of the amp
> >doesn't traverse the circuit.

Don, why wouldn't the instrumentation amplifier isolate the two circuits by
itself? (assuming that it is powered from the
microprocessor and the only link to the high current circuit is on the very
high impedence differential +/- inputs)

best regards,
Jamie

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 21796 invoked from network); 8 Sep 2001 18:54:51 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 8 Sep 2001 18:54:51 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: (qmail 6484 invoked by uid 50005); 8 Sep 2001 18:52:04 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpf with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.210623 secs); 08 Sep 2001 18:52:04 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 8 Sep 2001 18:52:04 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA25366; Sat, 8 Sep 2001 11:39:35 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 83963 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 8 Sep 2001 18:39:33 +0000
Received: from cisco.com (cypher.cisco.com [171.69.11.18]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA25352 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat,          8 Sep 2001 11:39:33 -0700
Received: (from billw@localhost) by cisco.com (8.8.8/2.6/Cisco List          Logging/8.8.8) id LAA10892; Sat, 8 Sep 2001 11:38:43 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID:  <CMM.0.90.4.999974323.billw@cypher>
Date:         Sat, 8 Sep 2001 11:38:43 PDT
Reply-To: "Bill Westfield" <billw@cisco.com>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "William Chops Westfield" <billw@cisco.com>
Subject:      Re: [AR] AN propellants: evaporation technique
Comments: To: Serge Pipko <spas@AKCECC.KIEV.UA>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  Your message of Sat, 8 Sep 2001 19:39:40 +0400

Is there a danger of forming one of those cu-based primary explosives
when using copper-based catalysts with AN ?

BillW


From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 10237 invoked from network); 8 Sep 2001 19:01:46 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 8 Sep 2001 19:01:46 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: (qmail 936 invoked by uid 50005); 8 Sep 2001 18:59:35 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.153175 secs); 08 Sep 2001 18:59:35 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 8 Sep 2001 18:59:35 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA25296; Sat, 8 Sep 2001 11:32:09 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 83946 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 8 Sep 2001 18:32:05 +0000
Received: from cisco.com (cypher.cisco.com [171.69.11.18]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA25282 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat,          8 Sep 2001 11:32:05 -0700
Received: (from billw@localhost) by cisco.com (8.8.8/2.6/Cisco List          Logging/8.8.8) id LAA10296; Sat, 8 Sep 2001 11:30:55 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID:  <CMM.0.90.4.999973855.billw@cypher>
Date:         Sat, 8 Sep 2001 11:30:55 PDT
Reply-To: "Bill Westfield" <billw@cisco.com>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "William Chops Westfield" <billw@cisco.com>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Epoxy/KNO3 motors?
Comments: To: Seth Leigh <seth@PENGAR.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  Your message of Sat, 8 Sep 2001 10:52:14 -0400

In my very minor experiments with KNO3 composite propellants, I
noticed that adding some sulfer had a very pronounced effect on
improving the "burnability"...

BillW


From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 23716 invoked from network); 8 Sep 2001 19:15:51 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 8 Sep 2001 19:15:51 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 19153 invoked by uid 50005); 8 Sep 2001 19:13:39 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.754934 secs); 08 Sep 2001 19:13:39 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 8 Sep 2001 19:13:38 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA25491; Sat, 8 Sep 2001 11:46:04 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 83990 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 8 Sep 2001 18:46:02 +0000
Received: from cicero2.cybercity.dk (cicero2.cybercity.dk [212.242.40.53]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA25477 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 8 Sep 2001 11:46:01 -0700
Received: from usr00.cybercity.dk (usr00.cybercity.dk [212.242.40.34]) by          cicero2.cybercity.dk (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4C76910000C for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat,  8 Sep 2001 20:46:00 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from vip.cybercity.dk (port35.cvx1-noe.ppp.cybercity.dk          [217.157.69.228]) by usr00.cybercity.dk (8.11.2/8.11.0) with ESMTP id          f88IjvG13144 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 8 Sep 2001 20:45:59          +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from hot@vip.cybercity.dk)
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.75 [en] (Win95; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010907200649.12558B-100000@spsystems.net>            <5.1.0.14.0.20010908105134.02d8eeb0@hobbiton.shire.net>            <00fd01c1387a$c48c9e40$af51153f@default>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B9A69EF.EEC8387@vip.cybercity.dk>
Date:         Sat, 8 Sep 2001 20:56:47 +0200
Reply-To: "Hans Olaf Toft" <hot@VIP.CYBERCITY.DK>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Hans Olaf Toft" <hot@VIP.CYBERCITY.DK>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Epoxy/KNO3 motors?
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Being the group member in question I will have to elaborate a little of this.

I have been doing some work on different KN/epoxy compositions mainly during
1999 and 2000. The experiments led to testing of motors with up to 4kg of
propellant with epoxy/KN/Al/S. Burn rates of 4-6mm/s has been achived at kn's of
1100-1300.  See
http://inet.uni2.dk/~dark/Exhibition/Static/FullScaleKNO3/FullScaleKNO3.html
Although this may be considered quite successfull, there are pitfalls:

Al makes the big difference in terms of burn rate, but too much Al creates large
amounts of residue - so much that it actually inhibits the burn - some 2% seems
adequate. However, epoxy/KN/Al itself seems to be *unignitable*, so the sulfur
is needed just to make the mix burn - ammoniumdichromate also works, but is more
expensive (and toxic).

The Al seems to work primarely as a heat conductor. The burn rate exponent is
fairly high (approx 0.75), wich may be a direct result of the heat conduction
mechanism of the Al.

I will be doing more tests during the autumn, but until further I will stick to
the following composition:
Epoxy 27%
Aluminium: 2%
Sulfur: 5%
KNO3: 66%

There is room for a lot more experimentation, especially since KN propellants
seems not to have been investigated by the millitary - PK mentions good results
with iron oxide wich I have never tried (hint hint...)

Hans Olaf Toft

David Muesing wrote:

> A group member suggested Epoxy/KN/S/AL. I tried a mixture of:
>
> 20 % West System epoxy
> 73 % K-Power KN ground prills
> 5 % S
> 2 % AL
>
> It was a little dry mixing and packing. It did burn in the open well enough
> to be encouraging. Cost about $1.50/#.
>
> Dave Muesing
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Seth Leigh" <seth@PENGAR.COM>
> To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
> Sent: Saturday, September 08, 2001 10:52 AM
> Subject: Re: [AR] Epoxy/KNO3 motors?
>
> > I believe Carsten Glans has mentioned doing experiments using
> > KNO3/epoxy.  I don't recall much more detail than that he mentioned doing
> it.
> >
> > Seth
> >
> >
> >
> > At 09:15 PM 9/7/2001, Jeff Grady wrote:
> > >         After making some igniters using a home-brew BP composition and
> > > some epoxy,
> > >and reading another poster's suggestion about adding more KNO3 to my mix
> to
> > >oxidize the epoxy, I thought I'd try making an epoxy/KNO3 composition to
> > >test. I mixed 200 grains (using a reloader's powder scale) of KNO3 and
> 200gr
> > >of epoxy and let dry. I wanted to start fuel-rich to avoid a bad burn
> (got
> > >burned pretty bad once in 11th grade chem class). I noticed a good deal
> of
> > >heat coming from the mixing cup several minutes after mixing - which I
> > >kind-of expected. It was left to harden out on the driveway.
> > >
> > >         I lit the results with a propane torch and away it went. It
> > > burned with a
> > >bright blue flame near the fuel and had yellow tips. It burned pretty
> > >vigorously for 30-40 seconds. One thing I noticed was a tendency to crack
> > >apart - presumably from heat fracturing the solid or because of residual
> > >moisture still in the mix. Next I'll try a 60/40 KNO3/Epoxy blend to see
> how
> > >that goes. I have never used resins of the sort mentioned on this list,
> but
> > >will assume, until told differently, that the resins most of you are
> using
> > >are more rubber like when cured? Has anyone else had good/bad luck trying
> > >this? All comments pro and con would be appreciated.
> > >
> > >JG
> >

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 2065 invoked from network); 8 Sep 2001 19:59:30 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 8 Sep 2001 19:59:30 -0000
Received: (qmail 17373 invoked by uid 50005); 8 Sep 2001 19:59:22 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpb with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.202319 secs); 08 Sep 2001 19:59:22 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 8 Sep 2001 19:59:21 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA25796; Sat, 8 Sep 2001 12:43:05 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 84043 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 8 Sep 2001 19:42:45 +0000
Received: from roll.akcecc.kiev.ua (roll.akcecc.kiev.ua [193.227.206.34]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA25781 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 8 Sep 2001 12:42:40 -0700
Received: from serge (pool-40.akcecc.kiev.ua [193.227.207.40] (may be forged))          by roll.akcecc.kiev.ua (8.10.2/8.10.2) with SMTP id f88JgaA26520 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 8 Sep 2001 22:42:36 +0300
References:  <CMM.0.90.4.999974323.billw@cypher>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="koi8-r"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2417.2000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <019401c13895$d17569a0$28cfe3c1@serge>
Date:         Sat, 8 Sep 2001 22:39:57 +0400
Reply-To: "Serge Pipko" <spas@AKCECC.KIEV.UA>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Serge Pipko" <spas@AKCECC.KIEV.UA>
Subject:      Re: [AR] AN propellants: evaporation technique
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

William Chops Westfield wrote:

> Is there a danger of forming one of those cu-based primary explosives
> when using copper-based catalysts with AN ?

Cu-based primary explosives have ammonia or other amin-based ligands
attached to Cu(2+) cation and NO3(-) or ClO4(-) anion, such as
Cu(NH3)4(NO3)2. They have fuel, oxidizer and high level of burn rate
catalyst intimately mixed in one molecule. All this contributes to the
explosive properties. These compounds have no chance to be generated in
evaporation conditions, because there is no free ammonia in the mixture.
However it should be considered that addition of Cu (and other heavy metal
compounds) to the propellant will somewhat increase propellant sensitivity.
I believe this increasing don't transmute AN-sugar mixture into primary
explosive.

Serge

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 23484 invoked from network); 8 Sep 2001 20:40:25 -0000
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 8 Sep 2001 20:40:25 -0000
Received: (qmail 20794 invoked by uid 50005); 8 Sep 2001 20:39:56 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpe with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.340019 secs); 08 Sep 2001 20:39:56 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 8 Sep 2001 20:39:55 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA25923; Sat, 8 Sep 2001 13:23:25 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 84058 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 8 Sep 2001 20:23:13 +0000
Received: from smtprelay2.abs.adelphia.net (smtprelay.abs.adelphia.net          [64.8.20.11]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA25904 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 8 Sep 2001 13:23:12 -0700
Received: from jlgrady ([63.124.251.47]) by smtprelay2.abs.adelphia.net          (Netscape Messaging Server 4.15) with SMTP id GJD1WY00.QNB for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 8 Sep 2001 16:22:10 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook CWS, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <000001c138a4$5eb7cb60$0200a8c0@prestige.net>
Date:         Sat, 8 Sep 2001 16:25:14 -0400
Reply-To: "Jeff Grady" <jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jeff Grady" <jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Epoxy/KNO3 motors?
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <3B9A69EF.EEC8387@vip.cybercity.dk>

Hans,

        Great info! Could you describe the brand name epoxy and particle size for
the aluminum??

Thanks,
Jeff Grady

-----Original Message-----
From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@itc.uci.edu]On
Behalf Of Hans Olaf Toft
Sent: Saturday, September 08, 2001 2:57 PM
To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
Subject: Re: [AR] Epoxy/KNO3 motors?


Being the group member in question I will have to elaborate a little of
this.

I have been doing some work on different KN/epoxy compositions mainly during
1999 and 2000. The experiments led to testing of motors with up to 4kg of
propellant with epoxy/KN/Al/S. Burn rates of 4-6mm/s has been achived at
kn's of
1100-1300.  See
http://inet.uni2.dk/~dark/Exhibition/Static/FullScaleKNO3/FullScaleKNO3.html
Although this may be considered quite successfull, there are pitfalls:

Al makes the big difference in terms of burn rate, but too much Al creates
large
amounts of residue - so much that it actually inhibits the burn - some 2%
seems
adequate. However, epoxy/KN/Al itself seems to be *unignitable*, so the
sulfur
is needed just to make the mix burn - ammoniumdichromate also works, but is
more
expensive (and toxic).

The Al seems to work primarely as a heat conductor. The burn rate exponent
is
fairly high (approx 0.75), wich may be a direct result of the heat
conduction
mechanism of the Al.

I will be doing more tests during the autumn, but until further I will stick
to
the following composition:
Epoxy 27%
Aluminium: 2%
Sulfur: 5%
KNO3: 66%

There is room for a lot more experimentation, especially since KN
propellants
seems not to have been investigated by the millitary - PK mentions good
results
with iron oxide wich I have never tried (hint hint...)

Hans Olaf Toft

David Muesing wrote:

> A group member suggested Epoxy/KN/S/AL. I tried a mixture of:
>
> 20 % West System epoxy
> 73 % K-Power KN ground prills
> 5 % S
> 2 % AL
>
> It was a little dry mixing and packing. It did burn in the open well
enough
> to be encouraging. Cost about $1.50/#.
>
> Dave Muesing
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Seth Leigh" <seth@PENGAR.COM>
> To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
> Sent: Saturday, September 08, 2001 10:52 AM
> Subject: Re: [AR] Epoxy/KNO3 motors?
>
> > I believe Carsten Glans has mentioned doing experiments using
> > KNO3/epoxy.  I don't recall much more detail than that he mentioned
doing
> it.
> >
> > Seth
> >
> >
> >
> > At 09:15 PM 9/7/2001, Jeff Grady wrote:
> > >         After making some igniters using a home-brew BP composition
and
> > > some epoxy,
> > >and reading another poster's suggestion about adding more KNO3 to my
mix
> to
> > >oxidize the epoxy, I thought I'd try making an epoxy/KNO3 composition
to
> > >test. I mixed 200 grains (using a reloader's powder scale) of KNO3 and
> 200gr
> > >of epoxy and let dry. I wanted to start fuel-rich to avoid a bad burn
> (got
> > >burned pretty bad once in 11th grade chem class). I noticed a good deal
> of
> > >heat coming from the mixing cup several minutes after mixing - which I
> > >kind-of expected. It was left to harden out on the driveway.
> > >
> > >         I lit the results with a propane torch and away it went. It
> > > burned with a
> > >bright blue flame near the fuel and had yellow tips. It burned pretty
> > >vigorously for 30-40 seconds. One thing I noticed was a tendency to
crack
> > >apart - presumably from heat fracturing the solid or because of
residual
> > >moisture still in the mix. Next I'll try a 60/40 KNO3/Epoxy blend to
see
> how
> > >that goes. I have never used resins of the sort mentioned on this list,
> but
> > >will assume, until told differently, that the resins most of you are
> using
> > >are more rubber like when cured? Has anyone else had good/bad luck
trying
> > >this? All comments pro and con would be appreciated.
> > >
> > >JG
> >

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 14540 invoked from network); 8 Sep 2001 22:23:26 -0000
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 8 Sep 2001 22:23:26 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 26777 invoked by uid 50005); 8 Sep 2001 22:20:39 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpf with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.259992 secs); 08 Sep 2001 22:20:39 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 8 Sep 2001 22:20:38 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA26285; Sat, 8 Sep 2001 15:05:26 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 84118 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 8 Sep 2001 22:05:19 +0000
Received: from m5.boston.juno.com (m5.boston.juno.com [64.136.24.68]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA26271 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Sat, 8 Sep 2001 15:05:18 -0700
Received: from cookie.juno.com by cookie.juno.com for          <"r2Fo8hpwT0kn33UwylHELD2Yps13IPiwAq2J9doY74drR3BlVQN05w==">
Received: (from icantdecide@juno.com) by m5.boston.juno.com (queuemail) id          GEULM28X; Sat, 08 Sep 2001 18:04:09 EDT
X-Mailer: Juno 4.0.9
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Juno-Line-Breaks: 6-9,11-35
X-Juno-Att: 0
X-Juno-RefParts: 0
Message-ID:  <20010908.170404.-453595.0.icantdecide@juno.com>
Date:         Sat, 8 Sep 2001 17:04:03 -0500
Reply-To: "James G Selin" <icantdecide@JUNO.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "James G Selin" <icantdecide@JUNO.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] AN propellants: evaporation technique
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

A solution of ammonium nitrate will corrode copper metal and form copper
II nitrate in addition to oxidizing it to CuO. I don't know the rxn
mechanism but upon crystallization the characteristic blue diamonds
(shape not the cut) were formed. I don't know if that could form the
tetraamine complex from there but I did not see the dark blue associated
with it. Just food for thought considering NH4NO3's attraction of
moisture. This might raise mild stability concerns for AN composites.

Jim Selin

On Sat, 8 Sep 2001 22:39:57 +0400 Serge Pipko <spas@AKCECC.KIEV.UA>
writes:
> William Chops Westfield wrote:
>
> > Is there a danger of forming one of those cu-based primary
> explosives
> > when using copper-based catalysts with AN ?
>
> Cu-based primary explosives have ammonia or other amin-based ligands
> attached to Cu(2+) cation and NO3(-) or ClO4(-) anion, such as
> Cu(NH3)4(NO3)2. They have fuel, oxidizer and high level of burn rate
> catalyst intimately mixed in one molecule. All this contributes to
> the
> explosive properties. These compounds have no chance to be generated
> in
> evaporation conditions, because there is no free ammonia in the
> mixture.
> However it should be considered that addition of Cu (and other heavy
> metal
> compounds) to the propellant will somewhat increase propellant
> sensitivity.
> I believe this increasing don't transmute AN-sugar mixture into
> primary
> explosive.
>
> Serge

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 28781 invoked from network); 9 Sep 2001 00:13:14 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 9 Sep 2001 00:13:14 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 11274 invoked by uid 50005); 9 Sep 2001 00:13:04 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpb with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.182224 secs); 09 Sep 2001 00:13:04 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 9 Sep 2001 00:13:04 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA26696; Sat, 8 Sep 2001 16:57:06 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 84187 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 8 Sep 2001 23:57:01 +0000
Received: from smtp03.roc.frontiernet.net (66-133-130-238.frontiernet.net          [66.133.130.238] (may be forged)) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with          SMTP id QAA26682 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 8 Sep 2001 16:57:00          -0700
Received: (qmail 8250 invoked from network); 8 Sep 2001 23:56:29 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO frontiernet.net) ([64.208.224.214])          (envelope-sender <tbinford@frontiernet.net>) by 0 (qmail-ldap-1.03)          with SMTP for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; 8 Sep 2001 23:56:29 -0000
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.74 [en] (Win98; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <5.1.0.14.2.20010907235520.0279e588@email.psu.edu>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B9AB167.C2CFA884@frontiernet.net>
Date:         Sat, 8 Sep 2001 20:01:43 -0400
Reply-To: <tbinford@frontiernet.net>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Tom Binford" <tbinford@frontiernet.net>
Subject:      Re: [AR] East coast test area
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Keith Soldavin wrote:
>
> One of the major hurdles holding me back from starting my motor is I have
> no place to test it.  I have the capability to build a test stand but I'd
> like to avoid the cost in the beginning if I can.  Aside from that I have
> no land available to fire the motor.  Is there anywhere in the North
> Carolina to New Jersey area that has a test stand that is available?  I'm
> not interested in flying the motor, I just want to static test it and
> collect data.  Thanks for your help.
>
> Keith

I have a test stand capable of up to 5000 lb. thrust. It's designed for
solids and I fire the motor horizontally. It's portable and I intend to
use it next at Orangeburg, SC.

Tom

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 26624 invoked from network); 9 Sep 2001 00:43:31 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 9 Sep 2001 00:43:31 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 31608 invoked by uid 50005); 9 Sep 2001 00:43:15 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpa with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.238911 secs); 09 Sep 2001 00:43:15 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 9 Sep 2001 00:43:15 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA26927; Sat, 8 Sep 2001 17:26:47 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 84213 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 9 Sep 2001 00:26:42 +0000
Received: from imo-m09.mx.aol.com (imo-m09.mx.aol.com [64.12.136.164]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA26913 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Sat, 8 Sep 2001 17:26:41 -0700
Received: from Ricanakk@aol.com by imo-m09.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v31_r1.4.) id          w.c1.138bc476 (18252); Sat, 8 Sep 2001 20:26:09 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: AOL 5.0 for Windows sub 108
Message-ID:  <c1.138bc476.28cc1120@aol.com>
Date:         Sat, 8 Sep 2001 20:26:08 EDT
Reply-To: <Ricanakk@AOL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <Ricanakk@AOL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Epoxy/KNO3 motors?
Comments: cc: jgrady@ga.prestige.net
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

In a message dated 01/09/08 00:23:29 Eastern Daylight Time,
jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET writes:

<<   I've got a lot to learn about the terminology you are using. If you have
 the time, could you explain in layman's terms, "cee-star" & "solids
 loading"? >>

Jeff,
Cee-star is the "Characteristic Velocity" of a rocket propellant. This can be
considered to be a measure of the thermochemical merit of a particular
propellant, similar to the way Specific Impulse (Isp) is a measure of the
performance potential.  In fact, cee-star is directly related to Isp by the
expression Isp=cee-star * Cf/g, where Cf is the motor thrust coefficient and
g is the acceleration of gravity.

The nice thing about cee-star is that it is only a function of the combustion
temperature, ratio of specific heats (k), and molecular weight of the
products, and does not depend upon the motor characteristics at all, unlike
Isp. As such, cee-star can be measured by simply burning a small sample of
propellant in a closed pressure tank, a so-called "ballistic bomb", and
measuring the maxium pressure achieved. This is the method I have been using
to evaluate the KN/epoxy formulations that I have been investigating. From
the max. pressure, it is straightforward to calculate the delivered cee-star.

Today, I tested two more formulations, one with 6% aluminum, and the other
with 8% aluminum. Both burned well, delivering cee-star values 97% and 95% of
the predicted values (GUIPEP). Several earlier formulations scored similarly,
generally being within 95-98% of predicted. I find this pretty amazing.
Earlier measurements of the sugar propellants also showed cee-star values
being 98% of predicted. This gives me a lot of confidence in GUIPEP and also
in the experimental method. By the way, examination of the burned residue
showed a nice grey ash, presumably aluminum oxide, and no signs of unburned
aluminum.

The epoxies I have been using are West System, East Systems, and MAS (extra
low viscocity). The aluminum is atomized, from West.

Anyway, next on the agenda is 10% aluminum, although  it appears that there
are diminishing returns with increased aluminum content. And then I'll take a
page from Han's recipe book and try some sulphur as an additive.

Richard Nakka.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 15843 invoked from network); 9 Sep 2001 02:17:56 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 9 Sep 2001 02:17:56 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 8706 invoked by uid 50005); 9 Sep 2001 02:16:21 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.176526 secs); 09 Sep 2001 02:16:21 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 9 Sep 2001 02:16:21 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA27160; Sat, 8 Sep 2001 18:47:43 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 84236 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 9 Sep 2001 01:47:37 +0000
Received: from m1.jersey.juno.com (m1.jersey.juno.com [64.136.16.64]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA27146 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 8 Sep 2001 18:47:36 -0700
Received: from cookie.juno.com by cookie.juno.com for          <"H3WK6e6N+bsCVJQMHM9sZI4B6/B7hMk4YMNfhbU48hIR7wHRxV9xQg==">
Received: (from kc2csh@juno.com) by m1.jersey.juno.com (queuemail) id GEUZEJZE;          Sat, 08 Sep 2001 21:47:14 EDT
X-Mailer: Juno 4.0.11
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Juno-Line-Breaks: 3,5
X-Juno-Att: 0
X-Juno-RefParts: 0
Message-ID:  <20010908.215227.-4001469.1.kc2csh@juno.com>
Date:         Sat, 8 Sep 2001 21:52:23 -0400
Reply-To: <kc2csh@JUNO.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <kc2csh@JUNO.COM>
Subject:      [AR] Commercial HPR hybrids?
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

  I'm thinking of acquiring a commercial HPR type hybrid to use for a
school demonstration.  Must be somewhere in the J-K-L range, preferably
variable in total thrust, simple set up in 20 minutes or less, and cheap
enough to be able to afford about 90 flights a year out of my own pocket.
  Must also be able to give administrators the warm fuzzies about safety
with 20-25 students standing nearby when it fires.
  I know I'm asking a lot.  Is there anything like this out there yet?

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 12361 invoked from network); 9 Sep 2001 02:27:06 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 9 Sep 2001 02:27:06 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 31251 invoked by uid 50005); 9 Sep 2001 02:24:18 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpf with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.340218 secs); 09 Sep 2001 02:24:18 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 9 Sep 2001 02:24:17 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA27349; Sat, 8 Sep 2001 19:10:41 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 84273 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 9 Sep 2001 02:10:39 +0000
Received: from smtp002pub.verizon.net (smtp002pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.181])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA27335 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 8 Sep 2001 19:10:38 -0700
Received: from [63.25.193.167] (1Cust167.tnt1.hilo.hi.da.uu.net          [63.25.193.167]) by smtp002pub.verizon.net  with ESMTP ; id          f892A5Y26541 Sat, 8 Sep 2001 21:10:05 -0500 (CDT)
X-Sender: ttocs@mail.gte.net
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <l03130300b7bc8b32a7fc@[63.10.189.57]>
Date:         Wed, 5 Sep 2001 16:09:43 -1000
Reply-To: "Aaron Smith" <ttocs@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Aaron Smith" <ttocs@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Commercial HPR hybrids?
Comments: To: kc2csh@JUNO.COM
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <20010908.215227.-4001469.1.kc2csh@juno.com>

At 9:52 PM -0400 9/8/01, kc2csh@JUNO.COM wrote:
>  I'm thinking of acquiring a commercial HPR type hybrid to use for a
>school demonstration.  Must be somewhere in the J-K-L range, preferably
>variable in total thrust, simple set up in 20 minutes or less, and cheap
>enough to be able to afford about 90 flights a year out of my own pocket.
>  Must also be able to give administrators the warm fuzzies about safety
>with 20-25 students standing nearby when it fires.
>  I know I'm asking a lot.  Is there anything like this out there yet?

Define "nearby".

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 15855 invoked from network); 9 Sep 2001 02:28:24 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 9 Sep 2001 02:28:24 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 4014 invoked by uid 50005); 9 Sep 2001 02:27:53 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpe with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.194361 secs); 09 Sep 2001 02:27:53 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 9 Sep 2001 02:27:53 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA27227; Sat, 8 Sep 2001 18:59:19 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 84247 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 9 Sep 2001 01:59:17 +0000
Received: from smtp001pub.verizon.net (smtp001pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.180])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA27213 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 8 Sep 2001 18:59:17 -0700
Received: from [4.40.140.71] (lsanca1-ar10-140-071.lsanca1.dsl.gtei.net          [4.40.140.71]) by smtp001pub.verizon.net  with ESMTP for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; id f891wjB15836 Sat, 8 Sep 2001 20:58:45 -0500          (CDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: GTE/01rocket@mail.gte.net
References: <004b01c137f6$c1e0c420$1b30fea9@kristinscomp>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <a05100301b7c07d168ff4@[4.40.140.71]>
Date:         Sat, 8 Sep 2001 18:58:43 -0700
Reply-To: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Interesting (scary?) Monopropellant....
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <004b01c137f6$c1e0c420$1b30fea9@kristinscomp>

>Suffice to say there are some folks out there playing around with a slurry.
>The application is not propellant, but still, I couldn't help but think of
>it as a potential "monopropellant" (if you can call a slurry a mono).
>
>Nitro-methane.
>AP.
>Al.


Having tried it, it works.

I figured Dave Griffith could make a rocket around it fairly easily.

Jerry

>
>Thoughts?
>
>--
>Dave and/or Kristin Hall


--
Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
Opinion, the whole thing.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 17724 invoked from network); 9 Sep 2001 02:29:05 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 9 Sep 2001 02:29:05 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 13734 invoked by uid 50005); 9 Sep 2001 02:28:49 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpa with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.267592 secs); 09 Sep 2001 02:28:49 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 9 Sep 2001 02:28:49 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA27374; Sat, 8 Sep 2001 19:13:26 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 84280 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 9 Sep 2001 02:13:25 +0000
Received: from smtp001pub.verizon.net (smtp001pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.180])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA27360 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 8 Sep 2001 19:13:25 -0700
Received: from [4.40.140.71] (lsanca1-ar10-140-071.lsanca1.dsl.gtei.net          [4.40.140.71]) by smtp001pub.verizon.net  with ESMTP for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; id f892CoB23546 Sat, 8 Sep 2001 21:12:51 -0500          (CDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: GTE/01rocket@mail.gte.net
References: <20010908.215227.-4001469.1.kc2csh@juno.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <a05100302b7c08061565c@[4.40.140.71]>
Date:         Sat, 8 Sep 2001 19:12:48 -0700
Reply-To: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Commercial HPR hybrids?
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <20010908.215227.-4001469.1.kc2csh@juno.com>

>   I'm thinking of acquiring a commercial HPR type hybrid to use for a
>school demonstration.  Must be somewhere in the J-K-L range, preferably
>variable in total thrust, simple set up in 20 minutes or less, and cheap
>enough to be able to afford about 90 flights a year out of my own pocket.
>   Must also be able to give administrators the warm fuzzies about safety
>with 20-25 students standing nearby when it fires.
>   I know I'm asking a lot.  Is there anything like this out there yet?

I would use cesaroni/hypertek hybrids with a custom GSE with
throttling remotely.  Not hard to do and a more unlimited oxidizer
source that way.

Jerry

--
Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
Opinion, the whole thing.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 25010 invoked from network); 9 Sep 2001 03:14:28 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 9 Sep 2001 03:14:28 -0000
Received: (qmail 9369 invoked by uid 50005); 9 Sep 2001 03:12:52 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.197404 secs); 09 Sep 2001 03:12:52 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 9 Sep 2001 03:12:52 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA27598; Sat, 8 Sep 2001 19:57:53 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 84318 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 9 Sep 2001 02:57:44 +0000
Received: from cablecom.laribay.net (cablecom.laribay.net [66.20.57.4]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA27584 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 8 Sep 2001 19:57:43 -0700
Received: from billbull (dial080.laribay.net [66.20.57.80]) by          cablecom.laribay.net (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id VAA21698 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 8 Sep 2001 21:39:05 -0500 (CDT)          (envelope-from bpbullock@laribay.net)
References: <004b01c137f6$c1e0c420$1b30fea9@kristinscomp>             <a05100301b7c07d168ff4@[4.40.140.71]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <000d01c138db$70e47c20$50391442@billbull>
Date:         Sat, 8 Sep 2001 21:59:07 -0500
Reply-To: "Bill Bullock" <bpbullock@LARIBAY.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Bill Bullock" <bpbullock@LARIBAY.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Interesting (scary?) Monopropellant....
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Jerry:
    Care to share just a bit more information here? Would appreciate it.
Bill
----- Original Message -----
From: Jerry Irvine <01rocket@GTE.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Saturday, September 08, 2001 8:58 PM
Subject: Re: [AR] Interesting (scary?) Monopropellant....


> >Suffice to say there are some folks out there playing around with a
slurry.
> >The application is not propellant, but still, I couldn't help but think
of
> >it as a potential "monopropellant" (if you can call a slurry a mono).
> >
> >Nitro-methane.
> >AP.
> >Al.
>
>
> Having tried it, it works.
>
> I figured Dave Griffith could make a rocket around it fairly easily.
>
> Jerry
>
> >
> >Thoughts?
> >
> >--
> >Dave and/or Kristin Hall
>
>
> --
> Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
> Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
> Opinion, the whole thing.
>
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 28019 invoked from network); 9 Sep 2001 03:27:38 -0000
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 9 Sep 2001 03:27:38 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 13648 invoked by uid 50005); 9 Sep 2001 03:27:07 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpe with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.249742 secs); 09 Sep 2001 03:27:07 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 9 Sep 2001 03:27:06 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA27619; Sat, 8 Sep 2001 19:58:09 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 84325 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 9 Sep 2001 02:58:08 +0000
Received: from vmmr1.verisignmail.com (vmmr1.verisignmail.com          [216.168.230.137]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id          TAA27603 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Sat, 8 Sep 2001 19:58:06 -0700
Received: from vmms1.verisignmail.com (vmms1.verisignmail.com [10.166.0.138])          by vmmr1.verisignmail.com (Mirapoint) with ESMTP id AAS31301; Sat, 8          Sep 2001 22:57:35 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from vmms1.verisignmail.com (localhost.verisignmail.com [127.0.0.1])          by vmms1.verisignmail.com (Mirapoint) with SMTP id ACV19791 (AUTH          mpoulton@mtptech.com); Sat, 8 Sep 2001 22:57:34 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from 129.93.206.94 by vmms1.verisignmail.com with HTTP/1.1; Sat, 8          Sep 2001 22:57:42 -0400
X-Mailer: Mirapoint Webmail Direct 2.9.1.1
Message-ID:  <200109090257.ACV19791@vmms1.verisignmail.com>
Date:         Sat, 8 Sep 2001 22:57:42 -0400
Reply-To: <mpoulton@MTPTECH.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Mike Poulton" <mpoulton@MTPTECH.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Commercial HPR hybrids?
Comments: To: kc2csh@JUNO.COM
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

---- Original message ----
>Date: Sat, 8 Sep 2001 21:52:23 -0400
>From: kc2csh@JUNO.COM
>Subject: [AR] Commercial HPR hybrids?
>To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
>
>  I'm thinking of acquiring a commercial HPR type hybrid to
use for a
>school demonstration.  Must be somewhere in the J-K-L range,
preferably
>variable in total thrust, simple set up in 20 minutes or
less, and cheap
>enough to be able to afford about 90 flights a year out of
my own pocket.
>  Must also be able to give administrators the warm fuzzies
about safety
>with 20-25 students standing nearby when it fires.
>  I know I'm asking a lot.  Is there anything like this out
there yet?


You could use any of the commercial HPR hybrids, although
some would be easier than others.  What do you mean when you
say "variable in total thrust"?  Do you mean for it to have
throttling capability, variable total impulse, or variable
average thrust?  These are all different things.  Variable
total impulse is easy -- just vary the oxidizer load.  All
hybrids can do this, but most aren't made to.  Varying the
position of the vent tube within the oxidizer tank on hybrids
so equipped will make this easier.  Variable average thrust
requires changing the injector size and (preferably) the
nozzle size.  Many HPR hybrids can do this off the shelf, all
can do it with some work.  Throttling is hard, requiring a
variable oxidizer valve, and no HPR hybrids have that
capability.  If you have the know-how (and there isn't too
much know-how involved), I would recommend building a boiler-
plate hybrid yourself.  You can use regular plumbing parts
throughout, and burn PVC pipe and/or rubber hose for fuel.
This also gives you the advantage of being able to run
directly from a bulk nitrous tank, instead of having to fill
a flight tank for each run.  Using a pneumatically-controlled
valve, the burn time (and therefore total impulse) can be as
long or as short as you want.  Whether 90 firings a year is
affordable or not depends on how much you have to spend.
Nitrous will be the biggest per-firing cost, but the cost of
the ground support equipment and parts to make the motor is
not trivial.
Mike Poulton


From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 22004 invoked from network); 9 Sep 2001 03:37:38 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 9 Sep 2001 03:37:38 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 31891 invoked by uid 50005); 9 Sep 2001 03:35:25 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.199538 secs); 09 Sep 2001 03:35:25 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 9 Sep 2001 03:35:25 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA27741; Sat, 8 Sep 2001 20:19:00 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 84348 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 9 Sep 2001 03:18:58 +0000
Received: from priv-edtnes12-hme0.telusplanet.net (fepout4.telus.net          [199.185.220.239]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id          UAA27727 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 8 Sep 2001 20:18:57 -0700
Received: from telus.net ([142.179.74.150]) by          priv-edtnes12-hme0.telusplanet.net (InterMail vM.4.01.03.10          201-229-121-110) with ESMTP id          <20010909031801.EGKJ1975.priv-edtnes12-hme0.telusplanet.net@telus.net>; Sat, 8 Sep 2001 21:18:01          -0600
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (Win95; I)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20010908.215227.-4001469.1.kc2csh@juno.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B9AE1A3.4F6FB8B2@telus.net>
Date:         Sat, 8 Sep 2001 20:27:32 -0700
Reply-To: "David Wakarchuk" <dwakarchuk@TELUS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "David Wakarchuk" <dwakarchuk@TELUS.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Commercial HPR hybrids?
Comments: To: kc2csh@JUNO.COM
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Why don't you send Marcus Leech at Propulsion polymers a shout.  He's an
Arocket regular who may have already seen your question.  The 38 mm
system  may be a little on the small size for your impulse request but
there is no question that for ~90 firings the propulsion polymers hybrid
system will be much more economical than the Cesaroni product. The
reason for this is that the Propulsion polymers system uses off the
shelf tubing which you can buy at your local building supply store for
the fuel grains.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 14280 invoked from network); 9 Sep 2001 04:41:19 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 9 Sep 2001 04:41:19 -0000
Received: (qmail 17558 invoked by uid 50005); 9 Sep 2001 04:41:08 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpb with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.595704 secs); 09 Sep 2001 04:41:08 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 9 Sep 2001 04:41:08 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA28047; Sat, 8 Sep 2001 21:25:06 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 84386 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 9 Sep 2001 04:24:58 +0000
Received: from corlabs (24-216-244-100.hsacorp.net [24.216.244.100]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA28028 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Sat, 8 Sep 2001 21:24:57 -0700
Received: from [24.216.244.164] by corlabs (ArGoSoft Mail Server Plus,          Version 1.3 (1.3.0.1)); Sat, 8 Sep 2001 23:54:15 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook CWS, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <001f01c138e8$983cbcd0$0200a8c0@charter.net>
Date:         Sat, 8 Sep 2001 23:33:37 -0500
Reply-To: "Carl A. Blood" <cablood@CORLABS.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Carl A. Blood" <cablood@CORLABS.COM>
Subject:      [AR] New Movie
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Well this is a short one. Out on www.pad17.com is the latest 4 inch blooper.
Just got back from the site 60 min. ago.
Yep just another motor casing that what's to fly. Just remember set screws
will twist if placed in a "V" slot or any slot. SO I will be bolting the end
closures to the case from now on.

Carl

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 15585 invoked from network); 9 Sep 2001 05:09:10 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 9 Sep 2001 05:09:10 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: (qmail 31485 invoked by uid 50005); 9 Sep 2001 05:08:38 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpe with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.19076 secs); 09 Sep 2001 05:08:38 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 9 Sep 2001 05:08:38 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA28193; Sat, 8 Sep 2001 21:53:31 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 84413 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 9 Sep 2001 04:53:29 +0000
Received: from localhost (dmccue@localhost) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with          ESMTP id VAA28179 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 8 Sep 2001 21:53:28          -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.LNX.4.10.10109082137370.27916-100000@itc.uci.edu>
Date:         Sat, 8 Sep 2001 21:53:28 -0700
Reply-To: "David J. McCue" <dmccue@itc.uci.edu>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "David J. McCue" <dmccue@itc.uci.edu>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Commercial HPR hybrids?
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <20010908.215227.-4001469.1.kc2csh@juno.com>

On Sat, 8 Sep 2001 kc2csh@JUNO.COM wrote:

>   I'm thinking of acquiring a commercial HPR type hybrid to use for a
> school demonstration.  Must be somewhere in the J-K-L range, preferably
> variable in total thrust, simple set up in 20 minutes or less, and cheap
> enough to be able to afford about 90 flights a year out of my own pocket.
>   Must also be able to give administrators the warm fuzzies about safety
> with 20-25 students standing nearby when it fires.
>   I know I'm asking a lot.  Is there anything like this out there yet?
>
I would recommend the RATTWorks motors by Dave Griffith. The K240 is fun
to fly and makes for a really impressive static test motor because of its
distinctive scream. A better subject for close up demos would be the 29mm
H or I impulse motors. In between these in impulse are the 38mm Propulsion
Polymers motors from Marcus Leech.

Total impulse can be adjusted on any hybrid by stopping the fill before
the tank is full. Experience with a particular fill system will enable you
to time the fill to the amount you want.

While I am also a fan of HyperTEK, I would not recommend using one for
static demonstrations. The ABS fuel grain/combustion chamber can shatter
explosively if chilled by leaking N2O during the fill. Monocoque aluminum
motors will fail much more gracefully by blowing an end cap or tearing
open. The cost of the more complex HyperTEK ground support system is also
a consideration. Of course, all of these options are cheaper to fly than
AP motors, so you can't go wrong on that score.

Sounds like fun!

-Dave McCue

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 12680 invoked from network); 9 Sep 2001 07:14:19 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 9 Sep 2001 07:14:19 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 9175 invoked by uid 50005); 9 Sep 2001 07:12:05 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.189033 secs); 09 Sep 2001 07:12:05 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 9 Sep 2001 07:12:05 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA28713; Sat, 8 Sep 2001 23:57:00 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 84483 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 9 Sep 2001 06:56:55 +0000
Received: from smtppop2pub.verizon.net (smtppop2pub.gte.net [206.46.170.21]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA28698 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 8 Sep 2001 23:56:54 -0700
Received: from [63.15.225.153] (1Cust153.tnt2.rancho-cucamonga.ca.da.uu.net          [63.15.225.153]) by smtppop2pub.verizon.net  with ESMTP for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; id BAA1023371 Sun, 9 Sep 2001 01:57:20 -0500          (CDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: GTE/01rocket@mail.gte.net
References: <004b01c137f6$c1e0c420$1b30fea9@kristinscomp>            <a05100301b7c07d168ff4@[4.40.140.71]>            <000d01c138db$70e47c20$50391442@billbull>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <a05100300b7c0c1abbac5@[4.40.140.71]>
Date:         Sat, 8 Sep 2001 23:56:19 -0700
Reply-To: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Interesting (scary?) Monopropellant....
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <000d01c138db$70e47c20$50391442@billbull>

>Jerry:
>     Care to share just a bit more information here? Would appreciate it.
>Bill



>  > >Nitro-methane.
>>  >AP.
>  >Al.

I tried MN as a plasticizer in APCP and KPCP as well as a standalone
component to a NM/Al/AP mixture during det tests.  NM is indeed
detonable under some rare generally non-propellant conditions.

The theory of a slurry propellant of NM/Al/AP (with a decelerant
added to further reduce det risk) is a good one.  As with any slurry
feed is the main issue.  A piston as has been suggested for some
hybrids but with a substantially higher pressure is needed as well as
a pressure regulator to assure steady flow.

Some form of positive displacement pump would provide needed back
pressure back flame assurance.  There are pumps that pass slurries
through a tube with a rotating rotor.

Naturally I am still a solids advocate.

Jerry

--
Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
Opinion, the whole thing.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 14086 invoked from network); 9 Sep 2001 07:15:01 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 9 Sep 2001 07:15:01 -0000
Received: (qmail 5892 invoked by uid 50005); 9 Sep 2001 07:13:24 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.186717 secs); 09 Sep 2001 07:13:24 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 9 Sep 2001 07:13:24 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA28736; Sat, 8 Sep 2001 23:57:27 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 84490 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 9 Sep 2001 06:57:26 +0000
Received: from angel.comcen.com.au (angel.comcen.com.au [203.23.236.69]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA28721; Sat, 8 Sep 2001          23:57:24 -0700
Received: from win2pk2 (modem091.sydney.spin.net.au [202.172.110.95] (may be          forged)) by angel.comcen.com.au (8.11.4/8.10.1) with SMTP id          f896viK66948; Sun, 9 Sep 2001 16:57:47 +1000 (EST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <JJEFLLHFFAHHMBBIHFAEGEOGCFAA.pkelly@comcen.com.au>
Date:         Sun, 9 Sep 2001 16:57:30 +1000
Reply-To: "Paul Kelly" <pkelly@COMCEN.COM.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Paul Kelly" <pkelly@COMCEN.COM.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Commercial HPR hybrids?
Comments: To: "David J. McCue" <dmccue@ITC.UCI.EDU>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <Pine.LNX.4.10.10109082137370.27916-100000@itc.uci.edu>

You could do the GOX/Acrylic thing. Probably the most spectacular small
rocket demonstration you can do. Keep Pc low and you'll have a ver safe
motor.

PK

-----Original Message-----
From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU]On
Behalf Of David J. McCue
Sent: Sunday, 9 September 2001 2:53 PM
To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
Subject: Re: [AR] Commercial HPR hybrids?


On Sat, 8 Sep 2001 kc2csh@JUNO.COM wrote:

>   I'm thinking of acquiring a commercial HPR type hybrid to use for a
> school demonstration.  Must be somewhere in the J-K-L range, preferably
> variable in total thrust, simple set up in 20 minutes or less, and cheap
> enough to be able to afford about 90 flights a year out of my own pocket.
>   Must also be able to give administrators the warm fuzzies about safety
> with 20-25 students standing nearby when it fires.
>   I know I'm asking a lot.  Is there anything like this out there yet?
>
I would recommend the RATTWorks motors by Dave Griffith. The K240 is fun
to fly and makes for a really impressive static test motor because of its
distinctive scream. A better subject for close up demos would be the 29mm
H or I impulse motors. In between these in impulse are the 38mm Propulsion
Polymers motors from Marcus Leech.

Total impulse can be adjusted on any hybrid by stopping the fill before
the tank is full. Experience with a particular fill system will enable you
to time the fill to the amount you want.

While I am also a fan of HyperTEK, I would not recommend using one for
static demonstrations. The ABS fuel grain/combustion chamber can shatter
explosively if chilled by leaking N2O during the fill. Monocoque aluminum
motors will fail much more gracefully by blowing an end cap or tearing
open. The cost of the more complex HyperTEK ground support system is also
a consideration. Of course, all of these options are cheaper to fly than
AP motors, so you can't go wrong on that score.

Sounds like fun!

-Dave McCue

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 20522 invoked from network); 9 Sep 2001 07:18:35 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 9 Sep 2001 07:18:35 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 7559 invoked by uid 50005); 9 Sep 2001 07:16:58 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.211337 secs); 09 Sep 2001 07:16:58 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 9 Sep 2001 07:16:58 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA28812; Sun, 9 Sep 2001 00:00:14 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 84513 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 9 Sep 2001 07:00:12 +0000
Received: from smtppop2pub.verizon.net (smtppop2pub.gte.net [206.46.170.21]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA28795 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 9 Sep 2001 00:00:12 -0700
Received: from [63.15.225.153] (1Cust153.tnt2.rancho-cucamonga.ca.da.uu.net          [63.15.225.153]) by smtppop2pub.verizon.net  with ESMTP for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; id CAA1038919 Sun, 9 Sep 2001 02:00:38 -0500          (CDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: GTE/01rocket@mail.gte.net
References: <Pine.LNX.4.10.10109082137370.27916-100000@itc.uci.edu>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <a05100301b7c0c36a2376@[63.15.225.153]>
Date:         Sat, 8 Sep 2001 23:59:37 -0700
Reply-To: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Commercial HPR hybrids?
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <Pine.LNX.4.10.10109082137370.27916-100000@itc.uci.edu>

>I would recommend the RATTWorks motors by Dave Griffith. The K240 is fun
>to fly and makes for a really impressive static test motor because of its
>distinctive scream. A better subject for close up demos would be the 29mm
>H or I impulse motors. In between these in impulse are the 38mm Propulsion
>Polymers motors from Marcus Leech.
>
>Total impulse can be adjusted on any hybrid by stopping the fill before
>the tank is full. Experience with a particular fill system will enable you
>to time the fill to the amount you want.
>
>While I am also a fan of HyperTEK, I would not recommend using one for
>static demonstrations. The ABS fuel grain/combustion chamber can shatter
>explosively if chilled by leaking N2O during the fill. Monocoque aluminum
>motors will fail much more gracefully by blowing an end cap or tearing
>open. The cost of the more complex HyperTEK ground support system is also
>a consideration. Of course, all of these options are cheaper to fly than
>AP motors, so you can't go wrong on that score.
>
>Sounds like fun!
>
>-Dave McCue

I agree with that logic and Dave is one of the good guys in rocketry.
If you need professional support I can still suggest CTI/HT, but I
have been firing Daves hybrids longer than anyone and even modified
some for LOX and other strange propellants.

Jerry

--
Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
Opinion, the whole thing.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 1582 invoked from network); 9 Sep 2001 07:40:16 -0000
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 9 Sep 2001 07:40:16 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 14434 invoked by uid 50005); 9 Sep 2001 07:37:26 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpf with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.194914 secs); 09 Sep 2001 07:37:26 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 9 Sep 2001 07:37:26 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA28956; Sun, 9 Sep 2001 00:24:32 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 84532 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 9 Sep 2001 07:24:30 +0000
Received: from avocet.mail.pas.earthlink.net (avocet.mail.pas.earthlink.net          [207.217.121.50]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA28887          for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Sun, 9 Sep 2001 00:14:29 -0700
Received: from dialup-209.244.106.65.dial1.sanjose1.level3.net          ([209.244.106.65] helo=earthlink.net ident=dave) by          avocet.mail.pas.earthlink.net with esmtp (Exim 3.32 #2) id          15fynU-0005L9-00; Sun, 09 Sep 2001 00:14:29 -0700
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.75 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.16-22 i686)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <004b01c137f6$c1e0c420$1b30fea9@kristinscomp>            <a05100301b7c07d168ff4@[4.40.140.71]>            <000d01c138db$70e47c20$50391442@billbull>            <a05100300b7c0c1abbac5@[4.40.140.71]>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B9B1735.53AB714C@earthlink.net>
Date:         Sun, 9 Sep 2001 00:16:05 -0700
Reply-To: "David Weinshenker" <daze39@EARTHLINK.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "David Weinshenker" <daze39@EARTHLINK.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Interesting (scary?) Monopropellant....
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Jerry Irvine wrote:
> I tried MN as a plasticizer in APCP and KPCP as well as a standalone
> component to a NM/Al/AP mixture during det tests.  NM is indeed
> detonable under some rare generally non-propellant conditions.

Would it be feasible to use a nitromethane/alcohol mix as the fuel
in a nitrous/liquid fuel motor? Is there some concentration below
which nitromethane in methanol (for example) is completely non-detonable?

> The theory of a slurry propellant of NM/Al/AP (with a decelerant
> added to further reduce det risk)

What makes a good decelerant?

> is a good one.  As with any slurry feed is the main issue.  A
> piston as has been suggested for some hybrids but with a
> substantially higher pressure is needed as well as
> a pressure regulator to assure steady flow.

I've seen a TRW paper on pintle engines that describes their
use with gelled hypergolic bipropellants - MMH with Al or
carbon powder, with IRFNA oxidizer. (They didn't say what
additives were used to gel the oxidizer...)

An engine for an ejection seat was described - it used a
face-shutoff-only pintle injector to provide the seal
in stored conditions and to meter the propellant while
running - the claimed advantage was that there was no
passage downstream of the valve to clog with propellant solide.

A gelled "monopropellant premix" could be a little tricky...
how do you establish reliable ignition while maintaining
a definite "combustion boundary" between engine and feed
system?

-dave w

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 12952 invoked from network); 9 Sep 2001 08:02:27 -0000
X-Priority: 3
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 9 Sep 2001 08:02:27 -0000
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 18573 invoked by uid 50005); 9 Sep 2001 08:02:15 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpb with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.20628 secs); 09 Sep 2001 08:02:15 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 9 Sep 2001 08:02:15 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA29081; Sun, 9 Sep 2001 00:40:16 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 84573 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 9 Sep 2001 07:40:11 +0000
Received: from imo-r04.mx.aol.com (imo-r04.mx.aol.com [152.163.225.100]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA29067 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Sun, 9 Sep 2001 00:40:10 -0700
Received: from Sociald84@aol.com by imo-r04.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v31_r1.4.) id          s.de.1a222e5e (4363); Sun, 9 Sep 2001 03:40:03 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0D15_01C56B69.514FF5A0"
X-Mailer: AOL 6.0 for Windows US sub 10536
Message-ID:  <de.1a222e5e.28cc76d2@aol.com>
Date:         Sun, 9 Sep 2001 03:40:02 EDT
Reply-To: <Sociald84@AOL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <Sociald84@AOL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Smokeless powder ignitor enhancement
Comments: To: duncan.mcdonald@prover.com
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0D15_01C56B69.514FF5A0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

In a message dated 9/7/2001 9:41:46 AM Mountain Daylight Time,
duncan.mcdonald@PROVER.COM writes:


> So let's see if I have this right. I can use smokeless powder to make a
> pyrodex-like dipping compound for say ignitors by dissolving some smokeless
> powder like Bullseye pistol powder with a small amount of acetone. I can
> then mix this paste with epoxy and use it to dip ignitors and it will
> produce the same effect upon ignition as the various ignitor dipping kits
> that are on the market. Correct?
>
> Duncan
>

Nope. Your probably confused. Yes you can use smokeless powders such as
Bullseye disolved in acetone as a pyrogen. No smokeless is nothing at all
like pyrodex.

To make the igniters such as the kits on the market you need to mix Graphite
powder with expoxy. Dip the igniter leads in that. Then after that has cured
dip that into the smokeless laquer. At that point you can let it dry and use
as is or make it a bigger igniter by adding more layers of laquer. Or you can
make it a hotter igniter by dusting the wet igniter with magnesium powder.
Let the laquer dry, and dip it in laquer one more time.

Hope that clears things up for you.

Mark

------=_NextPart_000_0D15_01C56B69.514FF5A0
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<HTML><FONT FACE=arial,helvetica><FONT  SIZE=2>In a message dated 9/7/2001 9:41:46 AM Mountain Daylight Time,
<BR>duncan.mcdonald@PROVER.COM writes:
<BR>
<BR>
<BR><BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE style="BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px">So let's see if I have this right. I can use smokeless powder to make a
<BR>pyrodex-like dipping compound for say ignitors by dissolving some smokeless
<BR>powder like Bullseye pistol powder with a small amount of acetone. I can
<BR>then mix this paste with epoxy and use it to dip ignitors and it will
<BR>produce the same effect upon ignition as the various ignitor dipping kits
<BR>that are on the market. Correct?
<BR>
<BR>Duncan
<BR></BLOCKQUOTE>
<BR>
<BR>Nope. Your probably confused. Yes you can use smokeless powders such as
<BR>Bullseye disolved in acetone as a pyrogen. No smokeless is nothing at all
<BR>like pyrodex.
<BR>
<BR>To make the igniters such as the kits on the market you need to mix Graphite
<BR>powder with expoxy. Dip the igniter leads in that. Then after that has cured
<BR>dip that into the smokeless laquer. At that point you can let it dry and use
<BR>as is or make it a bigger igniter by adding more layers of laquer. Or you can
<BR>make it a hotter igniter by dusting the wet igniter with magnesium powder.
<BR>Let the laquer dry, and dip it in laquer one more time.
<BR>
<BR>Hope that clears things up for you.
<BR>
<BR>Mark</FONT></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0D15_01C56B69.514FF5A0--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 13655 invoked from network); 9 Sep 2001 08:02:50 -0000
X-Priority: 3
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 9 Sep 2001 08:02:50 -0000
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 10150 invoked by uid 50005); 9 Sep 2001 08:02:32 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpa with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.226017 secs); 09 Sep 2001 08:02:32 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 9 Sep 2001 08:02:32 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA29015; Sun, 9 Sep 2001 00:31:24 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 84558 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 9 Sep 2001 07:31:22 +0000
Received: from idsoftware.com (predator.idsoftware.com [192.246.40.34]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA29001 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Sun, 9 Sep 2001 00:31:22 -0700
Received: from [192.246.40.144] (account johnc HELO pluto.idsoftware.com) by          idsoftware.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 3.4.7) with ESMTP id 376157 for          AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 09 Sep 2001 02:31:21 -0500
X-Sender: johnc@mail.idsoftware.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0D1A_01C56B69.514FF5A0"
Message-ID:  <4.3.1.2.20010909024014.02c9d758@mail.idsoftware.com>
Date:         Sun, 9 Sep 2001 02:43:59 -0500
Reply-To: "John Carmack" <johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Carmack" <johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM>
Subject:      [AR] Big lander flight video
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0D1A_01C56B69.514FF5A0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"


We flew the big vehicle with the full size central engine and ballast equal
to the pilot today:

http://media.armadilloaerospace.com/Everlast.mpg

I kept it very low to the ground, because I wasn't sure how long the load
of peroxide was going to last in this configuration, but the handling is
great (even with a hugely offset CG because of the pilot ballast).

The full update with details and lots of other stuff is at:

http://www.armadilloaerospace.com/Updates/sep8_01.htm

If everything goes well, we are going to lift off with a person next weekend.

John Carmack

------=_NextPart_000_0D1A_01C56B69.514FF5A0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="us-ascii"

<html>
<br>
We flew the big vehicle with the full size central engine and ballast
equal to the pilot today:<br>
<br>
<font color="#0000FF"><u><a href="http://media.armadilloaerospace.com/Everlast.mpg" eudora="autourl">http://media.armadilloaerospace.com/Everlast.mpg<br>
<br>
</a></u></font>I kept it very low to the ground, because I wasn't sure
how long the load of peroxide was going to last in this configuration,
but the handling is great (even with a hugely offset CG because of the
pilot ballast).<br>
<br>
The full update with details and lots of other stuff is at:<br>
<br>
<a href="http://www.armadilloaerospace.com/Updates/sep8_01.htm" eudora="autourl">http://www.armadilloaerospace.com/Updates/sep8_01.htm</a><br>
<br>
If everything goes well, we are going to lift off with a person next
weekend.<br>
<br>
John Carmack<br>
</html>

------=_NextPart_000_0D1A_01C56B69.514FF5A0--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 29693 invoked from network); 9 Sep 2001 08:10:51 -0000
X-Priority: 3
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 9 Sep 2001 08:10:51 -0000
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 26552 invoked by uid 50005); 9 Sep 2001 08:08:01 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpf with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.188978 secs); 09 Sep 2001 08:08:01 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 9 Sep 2001 08:08:01 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA29178; Sun, 9 Sep 2001 00:55:07 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 84593 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 9 Sep 2001 07:55:01 +0000
Received: from imo-m01.mx.aol.com (imo-m01.mx.aol.com [64.12.136.4]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA29162 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Sun, 9 Sep 2001 00:55:00 -0700
Received: from Sociald84@aol.com by imo-m01.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v31_r1.7.) id          d.96.19d1cba5 (4363); Sun, 9 Sep 2001 03:54:49 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0D1F_01C56B69.514FF5A0"
X-Mailer: AOL 6.0 for Windows US sub 10536
Message-ID:  <96.19d1cba5.28cc7a49@aol.com>
Date:         Sun, 9 Sep 2001 03:54:49 EDT
Reply-To: <Sociald84@AOL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <Sociald84@AOL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Epoxy/KNO3 motors?
Comments: To: mleech@nortelnetworks.com
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0D1F_01C56B69.514FF5A0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

In a message dated 9/7/2001 7:53:56 PM Mountain Daylight Time,
mleech@NORTELNETWORKS.COM writes:


> Richard Nakka tested a mixture I sent him a while ago, that was about
> 70% KNO3, and
>   about 30% Epoxy.  It had a very low burn rate exponent, would have
> required a quite
>   high Kn to make work in a motor.
>
> When I next have the inclination/energy, I'll try a higher solids/KNO3
> mixture, along with
>   some finely-divided charcoal to try to improve surface heat
>

what about adding a small amount of sulfur. Sulfur in KNO3 compositions
usually sensitizes the KNO3 it may have enough of an effect to increase the
burn rate exponent.

Mark

------=_NextPart_000_0D1F_01C56B69.514FF5A0
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<HTML><FONT FACE=arial,helvetica><FONT  SIZE=2>In a message dated 9/7/2001 7:53:56 PM Mountain Daylight Time, mleech@NORTELNETWORKS.COM writes:
<BR>
<BR>
<BR><BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE style="BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px">Richard Nakka tested a mixture I sent him a while ago, that was about
<BR>70% KNO3, and
<BR> &nbsp;about 30% Epoxy. &nbsp;It had a very low burn rate exponent, would have
<BR>required a quite
<BR> &nbsp;high Kn to make work in a motor.
<BR>
<BR>When I next have the inclination/energy, I'll try a higher solids/KNO3
<BR>mixture, along with
<BR> &nbsp;some finely-divided charcoal to try to improve surface heat
<BR>absorption.</BLOCKQUOTE>
<BR>
<BR>what about adding a small amount of sulfur. Sulfur in KNO3 compositions usually sensitizes the KNO3 it may have enough of an effect to increase the burn rate exponent.
<BR>
<BR>Mark</FONT></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0D1F_01C56B69.514FF5A0--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 4840 invoked from network); 9 Sep 2001 08:13:35 -0000
X-Priority: 3
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 9 Sep 2001 08:13:35 -0000
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 12653 invoked by uid 50005); 9 Sep 2001 08:13:02 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpe with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.19144 secs); 09 Sep 2001 08:13:02 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 9 Sep 2001 08:13:02 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA29213; Sun, 9 Sep 2001 00:56:48 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 84604 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 9 Sep 2001 07:56:47 +0000
Received: from imo-r10.mx.aol.com (imo-r10.mx.aol.com [152.163.225.106]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA29199 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Sun, 9 Sep 2001 00:56:46 -0700
Received: from Sociald84@aol.com by imo-r10.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v31_r1.4.) id          t.5b.1b6160e6 (4363); Sun, 9 Sep 2001 03:51:40 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0D24_01C56B69.51599290"
X-Mailer: AOL 6.0 for Windows US sub 10536
Message-ID:  <5b.1b6160e6.28cc798b@aol.com>
Date:         Sun, 9 Sep 2001 03:51:39 EDT
Reply-To: <Sociald84@AOL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <Sociald84@AOL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Epoxy/KNO3 motors?
Comments: To: jgrady@ga.prestige.net
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0D24_01C56B69.51599290
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

I would guess that the grain chunk cracked because it was too brittle. Does
anyone know of anything that can be added to regular epoxy that one could
find at the hardware store to act as a plasticizer?

Mark


In a message dated 9/7/2001 7:14:48 PM Mountain Daylight Time,
jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET writes:


>         After making some igniters using a home-brew BP composition and some
> epoxy,
> and reading another poster's suggestion about adding more KNO3 to my mix to
> oxidize the epoxy, I thought I'd try making an epoxy/KNO3 composition to
> test. I mixed 200 grains (using a reloader's powder scale) of KNO3 and 200gr
> of epoxy and let dry. I wanted to start fuel-rich to avoid a bad burn (got
> burned pretty bad once in 11th grade chem class). I noticed a good deal of
> heat coming from the mixing cup several minutes after mixing - which I
> kind-of expected. It was left to harden out on the driveway.
>
>         I lit the results with a propane torch and away it went. It burned
> with a
> bright blue flame near the fuel and had yellow tips. It burned pretty
> vigorously for 30-40 seconds. One thing I noticed was a tendency to crack
> apart - presumably from heat fracturing the solid or because of residual
> moisture still in the mix. Next I'll try a 60/40 KNO3/Epoxy blend to see how
> that goes. I have never used resins of the sort mentioned on this list, but
> will assume, until told differently, that the resins most of you are using
> are more rubber like when cured? Has anyone else had good/bad luck trying
> this? All comments pro and con would be appreciated.
>
>



------=_NextPart_000_0D24_01C56B69.51599290
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<HTML><FONT FACE=arial,helvetica><FONT  SIZE=2>I would guess that the grain chunk cracked because it was too brittle. Does
<BR>anyone know of anything that can be added to regular epoxy that one could
<BR>find at the hardware store to act as a plasticizer?
<BR>
<BR>Mark
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>In a message dated 9/7/2001 7:14:48 PM Mountain Daylight Time,
<BR>jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET writes:
<BR>
<BR>
<BR><BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE style="BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px"> &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;After making some igniters using a home-brew BP composition and some
<BR>epoxy,
<BR>and reading another poster's suggestion about adding more KNO3 to my mix to
<BR>oxidize the epoxy, I thought I'd try making an epoxy/KNO3 composition to
<BR>test. I mixed 200 grains (using a reloader's powder scale) of KNO3 and 200gr
<BR>of epoxy and let dry. I wanted to start fuel-rich to avoid a bad burn (got
<BR>burned pretty bad once in 11th grade chem class). I noticed a good deal of
<BR>heat coming from the mixing cup several minutes after mixing - which I
<BR>kind-of expected. It was left to harden out on the driveway.
<BR>
<BR> &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;I lit the results with a propane torch and away it went. It burned
<BR>with a
<BR>bright blue flame near the fuel and had yellow tips. It burned pretty
<BR>vigorously for 30-40 seconds. One thing I noticed was a tendency to crack
<BR>apart - presumably from heat fracturing the solid or because of residual
<BR>moisture still in the mix. Next I'll try a 60/40 KNO3/Epoxy blend to see how
<BR>that goes. I have never used resins of the sort mentioned on this list, but
<BR>will assume, until told differently, that the resins most of you are using
<BR>are more rubber like when cured? Has anyone else had good/bad luck trying
<BR>this? All comments pro and con would be appreciated.
<BR>
<BR>JG</BLOCKQUOTE>
<BR>
<BR></FONT></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0D24_01C56B69.51599290--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 11522 invoked from network); 9 Sep 2001 08:47:54 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 9 Sep 2001 08:47:54 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 4937 invoked by uid 50005); 9 Sep 2001 08:47:41 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpb with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.286839 secs); 09 Sep 2001 08:47:41 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 9 Sep 2001 08:47:41 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id BAA29334; Sun, 9 Sep 2001 01:15:32 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 84626 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 9 Sep 2001 08:15:22 +0000
Received: from cicero0.cybercity.dk (cicero0.cybercity.dk [212.242.40.52]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id BAA29320 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 9 Sep 2001 01:15:20 -0700
Received: from usr00.cybercity.dk (usr00.cybercity.dk [212.242.40.34]) by          cicero0.cybercity.dk (Postfix) with ESMTP id B33FE102912 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun,  9 Sep 2001 10:15:19 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from vip.cybercity.dk (port38.cvx1-noe.ppp.cybercity.dk          [217.157.69.231]) by usr00.cybercity.dk (8.11.2/8.11.0) with ESMTP id          f898FIj91702 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 9 Sep 2001 10:15:18          +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from hot@vip.cybercity.dk)
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.75 [en] (Win95; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <000001c138a4$5eb7cb60$0200a8c0@prestige.net>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B9B27A1.7E99270E@vip.cybercity.dk>
Date:         Sun, 9 Sep 2001 10:26:09 +0200
Reply-To: "Hans Olaf Toft" <hot@VIP.CYBERCITY.DK>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Hans Olaf Toft" <hot@VIP.CYBERCITY.DK>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Epoxy/KNO3 motors?
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

OK - but it will probably not make You happy:

The epoxy in question is a local brand (LKR) of aircraft grade epoxy. I doubt that
You will find it on the American market. Anyway, other epoxy types will probably do
fine.

Unfortuneatly I have no specific data for the Al powder. It is not extremely fine.

Hans

Jeff Grady wrote:

> Hans,
>
>         Great info! Could you describe the brand name epoxy and particle size for
> the aluminum??
>
> Thanks,
> Jeff Grady
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@itc.uci.edu]On
> Behalf Of Hans Olaf Toft
> Sent: Saturday, September 08, 2001 2:57 PM
> To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
> Subject: Re: [AR] Epoxy/KNO3 motors?
>
> Being the group member in question I will have to elaborate a little of
> this.
>
> I have been doing some work on different KN/epoxy compositions mainly during
> 1999 and 2000. The experiments led to testing of motors with up to 4kg of
> propellant with epoxy/KN/Al/S. Burn rates of 4-6mm/s has been achived at
> kn's of
> 1100-1300.  See
> http://inet.uni2.dk/~dark/Exhibition/Static/FullScaleKNO3/FullScaleKNO3.html
> Although this may be considered quite successfull, there are pitfalls:
>
> Al makes the big difference in terms of burn rate, but too much Al creates
> large
> amounts of residue - so much that it actually inhibits the burn - some 2%
> seems
> adequate. However, epoxy/KN/Al itself seems to be *unignitable*, so the
> sulfur
> is needed just to make the mix burn - ammoniumdichromate also works, but is
> more
> expensive (and toxic).
>
> The Al seems to work primarely as a heat conductor. The burn rate exponent
> is
> fairly high (approx 0.75), wich may be a direct result of the heat
> conduction
> mechanism of the Al.
>
> I will be doing more tests during the autumn, but until further I will stick
> to
> the following composition:
> Epoxy 27%
> Aluminium: 2%
> Sulfur: 5%
> KNO3: 66%
>
> There is room for a lot more experimentation, especially since KN
> propellants
> seems not to have been investigated by the millitary - PK mentions good
> results
> with iron oxide wich I have never tried (hint hint...)
>
> Hans Olaf Toft
>
> David Muesing wrote:
>
> > A group member suggested Epoxy/KN/S/AL. I tried a mixture of:
> >
> > 20 % West System epoxy
> > 73 % K-Power KN ground prills
> > 5 % S
> > 2 % AL
> >
> > It was a little dry mixing and packing. It did burn in the open well
> enough
> > to be encouraging. Cost about $1.50/#.
> >
> > Dave Muesing
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Seth Leigh" <seth@PENGAR.COM>
> > To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
> > Sent: Saturday, September 08, 2001 10:52 AM
> > Subject: Re: [AR] Epoxy/KNO3 motors?
> >
> > > I believe Carsten Glans has mentioned doing experiments using
> > > KNO3/epoxy.  I don't recall much more detail than that he mentioned
> doing
> > it.
> > >
> > > Seth
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > At 09:15 PM 9/7/2001, Jeff Grady wrote:
> > > >         After making some igniters using a home-brew BP composition
> and
> > > > some epoxy,
> > > >and reading another poster's suggestion about adding more KNO3 to my
> mix
> > to
> > > >oxidize the epoxy, I thought I'd try making an epoxy/KNO3 composition
> to
> > > >test. I mixed 200 grains (using a reloader's powder scale) of KNO3 and
> > 200gr
> > > >of epoxy and let dry. I wanted to start fuel-rich to avoid a bad burn
> > (got
> > > >burned pretty bad once in 11th grade chem class). I noticed a good deal
> > of
> > > >heat coming from the mixing cup several minutes after mixing - which I
> > > >kind-of expected. It was left to harden out on the driveway.
> > > >
> > > >         I lit the results with a propane torch and away it went. It
> > > > burned with a
> > > >bright blue flame near the fuel and had yellow tips. It burned pretty
> > > >vigorously for 30-40 seconds. One thing I noticed was a tendency to
> crack
> > > >apart - presumably from heat fracturing the solid or because of
> residual
> > > >moisture still in the mix. Next I'll try a 60/40 KNO3/Epoxy blend to
> see
> > how
> > > >that goes. I have never used resins of the sort mentioned on this list,
> > but
> > > >will assume, until told differently, that the resins most of you are
> > using
> > > >are more rubber like when cured? Has anyone else had good/bad luck
> trying
> > > >this? All comments pro and con would be appreciated.
> > > >
> > > >JG
> > >

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 12619 invoked from network); 9 Sep 2001 09:05:05 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 9 Sep 2001 09:05:05 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 17162 invoked by uid 50005); 9 Sep 2001 09:02:15 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpf with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.163761 secs); 09 Sep 2001 09:02:15 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 9 Sep 2001 09:02:15 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id BAA29488; Sun, 9 Sep 2001 01:49:00 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 84651 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 9 Sep 2001 08:48:57 +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (f214.law15.hotmail.com [64.4.23.214]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id BAA29473 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Sun, 9 Sep 2001 01:48:56 -0700
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Sun,          9 Sep 2001 01:48:26 -0700
Received: from 213.224.83.70 by lw15fd.law15.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Sun, 09          Sep 2001 08:48:26 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [213.224.83.70]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 09 Sep 2001 08:48:26.0450 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[30D15320:01C1390C]
Message-ID:  <F214C3hMAet402xGEYQ0000978d@hotmail.com>
Date:         Sun, 9 Sep 2001 08:48:57 +0000
Reply-To: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Big lander flight video
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Quote John Carmack:

>We flew the big vehicle with the full size central engine and ballast equal
>to the pilot today:

>http://media.armadilloaerospace.com/Everlast.mpg

Sorry if I may not have monitored all your previous postings ,in which the
following questions may have been explained:

Just to have an idea: how many kg of your 90 (?) % HP was spent during this
particular video clip? Let me guess: 2-3 kg?

Are you using an off-the-shelf aluminum scuba bottle in what is apparently
download mode? Which pressurant? N2? Which pressure? % ullage at start?

Remarkable this wide surface sintered metal cat bed. Seems to be only half
an inch thick! Juan's?

jd

_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 23644 invoked from network); 9 Sep 2001 09:42:40 -0000
X-Priority: 3
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 9 Sep 2001 09:42:40 -0000
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 16166 invoked by uid 50005); 9 Sep 2001 09:42:07 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpe with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.136246 secs); 09 Sep 2001 09:42:07 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 9 Sep 2001 09:42:07 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id CAA29639; Sun, 9 Sep 2001 02:24:24 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 84679 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 9 Sep 2001 09:24:19 +0000
Received: from imo-d02.mx.aol.com (imo-d02.mx.aol.com [205.188.157.34]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id CAA29625 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Sun, 9 Sep 2001 02:24:18 -0700
Received: from Sociald84@aol.com by imo-d02.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v31_r1.4.) id          t.e5.bdece1a (4363); Sun, 9 Sep 2001 05:23:44 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0D29_01C56B69.51657970"
X-Mailer: AOL 6.0 for Windows US sub 10536
Message-ID:  <e5.bdece1a.28cc8f1f@aol.com>
Date:         Sun, 9 Sep 2001 05:23:43 EDT
Reply-To: <Sociald84@AOL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <Sociald84@AOL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Epoxy/KNO3 motors?
Comments: To: jgrady@ga.prestige.net
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0D29_01C56B69.51657970
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

In a message dated 9/7/2001 10:04:57 PM Mountain Daylight Time,
jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET writes:


> I posted here once, an idea I had, but got zero response so I thought maybe
> I presented the idea wrong or it was simply dismissed as a bad idea. The
> plan would be to cast a grain that could be removed from the mold - no
> insulator. Then place the grain (very accurately) into the center of yet
> another mold having a gap of maybe .125" between the mold and the grain.
> Inject into this .125" gap, either a high-temp ceramic adhesive or Durham's
> water putty. Pull a vacuum on the mold to remove any air bubbles, and let
> dry. Since the epoxy would not shrink any more after cooling down, and
> durham's is advertised to to shrink, sounds like it may make a cheap and
> simple liner. Paper would be easier, but paper does burn.
>

seems like one way to make using a double base smokeless powder as a
propellant a possible solution.

Mark

------=_NextPart_000_0D29_01C56B69.51657970
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<HTML><FONT FACE=arial,helvetica><FONT  SIZE=2>In a message dated 9/7/2001 10:04:57 PM Mountain Daylight Time,
<BR>jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET writes:
<BR>
<BR>
<BR><BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE style="BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px">I posted here once, an idea I had, but got zero response so I thought maybe
<BR>I presented the idea wrong or it was simply dismissed as a bad idea. The
<BR>plan would be to cast a grain that could be removed from the mold - no
<BR>insulator. Then place the grain (very accurately) into the center of yet
<BR>another mold having a gap of maybe .125" between the mold and the grain.
<BR>Inject into this .125" gap, either a high-temp ceramic adhesive or Durham's
<BR>water putty. Pull a vacuum on the mold to remove any air bubbles, and let
<BR>dry. Since the epoxy would not shrink any more after cooling down, and
<BR>durham's is advertised to to shrink, sounds like it may make a cheap and
<BR>simple liner. Paper would be easier, but paper does burn.
<BR></BLOCKQUOTE>
<BR>
<BR>seems like one way to make using a double base smokeless powder as a
<BR>propellant a possible solution.
<BR>
<BR>Mark</FONT></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0D29_01C56B69.51657970--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 21852 invoked from network); 9 Sep 2001 09:58:21 -0000
X-Priority: 3
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 9 Sep 2001 09:58:21 -0000
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 31140 invoked by uid 50005); 9 Sep 2001 09:56:06 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.182081 secs); 09 Sep 2001 09:56:06 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 9 Sep 2001 09:56:06 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id CAA29720; Sun, 9 Sep 2001 02:42:13 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 84690 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 9 Sep 2001 09:42:11 +0000
Received: from imo-r01.mx.aol.com (imo-r01.mx.aol.com [152.163.225.97]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id CAA29706 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Sun, 9 Sep 2001 02:42:10 -0700
Received: from Sociald84@aol.com by imo-r01.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v31_r1.7.) id          c.cb.15c88afe (4363); Sun, 9 Sep 2001 05:41:56 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0D2E_01C56B69.51657970"
X-Mailer: AOL 6.0 for Windows US sub 10536
Message-ID:  <cb.15c88afe.28cc9363@aol.com>
Date:         Sun, 9 Sep 2001 05:41:55 EDT
Reply-To: <Sociald84@AOL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <Sociald84@AOL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] AN propellants: evaporation technique
Comments: To: spas@akcecc.kiev.ua
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0D2E_01C56B69.51657970
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

What is meant by "B0, B1, B2, and B3?"

Mark

In a message dated 9/8/2001 10:43:52 AM Mountain Daylight Time,
spas@AKCECC.KIEV.UA writes:


> 1) 1 g ascorbic acid + 4.54 g AN  : B0
> 2) 1 g ascorbic acid + 4.54 g AN + 0.05 g fumed silica : B1
> 3) 1 g ascorbic acid + 4.54 g AN + 0.05 g charcoal : B2
> 4) 1 g ascorbic acid + 4.54 g AN + 0.05 g K3Fe(CN)6 : B3
>



------=_NextPart_000_0D2E_01C56B69.51657970
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<HTML><FONT FACE=arial,helvetica><FONT  SIZE=2>What is meant by "B0, B1, B2, and B3?"
<BR>
<BR>Mark
<BR>
<BR>In a message dated 9/8/2001 10:43:52 AM Mountain Daylight Time, spas@AKCECC.KIEV.UA writes:
<BR>
<BR>
<BR><BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE style="BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px">1) 1 g ascorbic acid + 4.54 g AN &nbsp;: B0
<BR>2) 1 g ascorbic acid + 4.54 g AN + 0.05 g fumed silica : B1
<BR>3) 1 g ascorbic acid + 4.54 g AN + 0.05 g charcoal : B2
<BR>4) 1 g ascorbic acid + 4.54 g AN + 0.05 g K3Fe(CN)6 : B3
<BR></BLOCKQUOTE>
<BR>
<BR></FONT></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0D2E_01C56B69.51657970--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 29653 invoked from network); 9 Sep 2001 10:02:39 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 9 Sep 2001 10:02:39 -0000
Received: (qmail 32187 invoked by uid 50005); 9 Sep 2001 10:00:25 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.176043 secs); 09 Sep 2001 10:00:25 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 9 Sep 2001 10:00:24 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id CAA29749; Sun, 9 Sep 2001 02:46:57 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 84697 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 9 Sep 2001 09:46:56 +0000
Received: from roll.akcecc.kiev.ua (roll.akcecc.kiev.ua [193.227.206.34]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id CAA29735 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 9 Sep 2001 02:46:52 -0700
Received: from serge (pool-40.akcecc.kiev.ua [193.227.207.40] (may be forged))          by roll.akcecc.kiev.ua (8.10.2/8.10.2) with SMTP id f899kl812658 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 9 Sep 2001 12:46:47 +0300
References:  <cb.15c88afe.28cc9363@aol.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2417.2000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <006001c1390b$bc751de0$28cfe3c1@serge>
Date:         Sun, 9 Sep 2001 12:44:19 +0400
Reply-To: "Serge Pipko" <spas@AKCECC.KIEV.UA>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Serge Pipko" <spas@AKCECC.KIEV.UA>
Subject:      Re: [AR] AN propellants: evaporation technique
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

I mark burn test results as
following:

B0  don't burn
B1  burn, but quickly go out
B2  very slowly burn, with foaming
B3  stable burn, little or no foaming, deserve attention


Sociald84@AOL.COM  wrote :

> What is meant by "B0, B1, B2, and B3?"
>
> Mark
>
> In a message dated 9/8/2001 10:43:52 AM Mountain Daylight Time,
> spas@AKCECC.KIEV.UA writes:
>
>
> > 1) 1 g ascorbic acid + 4.54 g AN  : B0
> > 2) 1 g ascorbic acid + 4.54 g AN + 0.05 g fumed silica : B1
> > 3) 1 g ascorbic acid + 4.54 g AN + 0.05 g charcoal : B2
> > 4) 1 g ascorbic acid + 4.54 g AN + 0.05 g K3Fe(CN)6 : B3

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 26147 invoked from network); 10 Sep 2001 00:44:55 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 10 Sep 2001 00:44:55 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 17336 invoked by uid 50005); 10 Sep 2001 00:44:38 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpb with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.219029 secs); 10 Sep 2001 00:44:38 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 10 Sep 2001 00:44:37 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA00859; Sun, 9 Sep 2001 17:28:01 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 84715 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 10 Sep 2001 00:28:00          +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (f94.law15.hotmail.com [64.4.23.94]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id CAA29825 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Sun,          9 Sep 2001 02:56:29 -0700
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Sun,          9 Sep 2001 02:55:59 -0700
Received: from 213.224.83.70 by lw15fd.law15.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Sun, 09          Sep 2001 09:55:59 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [213.224.83.70]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 09 Sep 2001 09:55:59.0645 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[A0B5CCD0:01C13915]
Message-ID:  <F94njUoisAY5i3dDw8c00009f44@hotmail.com>
Date:         Mon, 10 Sep 2001 00:28:00 +0000
Reply-To: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Epoxy/KNO3 motors?
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

....Since the epoxy would not shrink any more after cooling down, and
> > durham's is advertised to to shrink, sounds like it may make a cheap and
> > simple liner. Paper would be easier, but paper does burn.

USE ALUMINUM FOIL LINER AND PEEL IT OFF AFTER REMOVAL FROM THE MOLD IF YOU
NEED TO: IT WORKS PERFECTLY.

jd

_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 26153 invoked from network); 10 Sep 2001 00:44:55 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 10 Sep 2001 00:44:55 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 22310 invoked by uid 50005); 10 Sep 2001 00:42:37 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.216343 secs); 10 Sep 2001 00:42:37 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 10 Sep 2001 00:42:37 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA01024; Sun, 9 Sep 2001 17:28:58 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 84948 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 10 Sep 2001 00:28:57          +0000
Received: from idsoftware.com (predator.idsoftware.com [192.246.40.34]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA32010 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Sun, 9 Sep 2001 12:01:23 -0700
Received: from [192.246.40.144] (account johnc HELO pluto.idsoftware.com) by          idsoftware.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 3.4.7) with ESMTP id 376419 for          AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 09 Sep 2001 14:01:22 -0500
X-Sender: johnc@mail.idsoftware.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <4.3.1.2.20010909140320.03d03e88@mail.idsoftware.com>
Date:         Sun, 9 Sep 2001 14:14:03 -0500
Reply-To: "John Carmack" <johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Carmack" <johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Big lander flight video
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <F214C3hMAet402xGEYQ0000978d@hotmail.com>

>
>Just to have an idea: how many kg of your 90 (?) % HP was spent during this
>particular video clip? Let me guess: 2-3 kg?

That was 10 liters.  The vehicle as shown weighs over 300 pounds, so it
takes quite a bit to move it around, and it goes fast.

We are using a bit under 90% concentration, just for ease of measuring
right now.  We mix four parts 98% with one part distilled water.  Our next
set of drums will be plain 90%, so we won't need to add any water.

>Are you using an off-the-shelf aluminum scuba bottle in what is apparently
>download mode? Which pressurant? N2? Which pressure? % ullage at start?

It is a carbon fiber natural gas vehicle tank with a total capacity of 40
liters.  We have only loaded 10 liters at most so far, so it is at least
3/4 ullage.  We pressurize with nitrogen, to somewhere between 400 and 600
psi, depending on various things.

>Remarkable this wide surface sintered metal cat bed. Seems to be only half
>an inch thick! Juan's?

This is our silver plated nickle foam.  The pack is a bit over an inch
thick, but it is the same thickness (changing only in diameter) for all the
motor sizes.  Juan uses a more conventional screen based approach, which is
thicker, heavier, and slower to warm up.

John Carmack

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 26157 invoked from network); 10 Sep 2001 00:44:55 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 10 Sep 2001 00:44:55 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 9876 invoked by uid 50005); 10 Sep 2001 00:42:02 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpf with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.180977 secs); 10 Sep 2001 00:42:02 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 10 Sep 2001 00:42:02 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA00973; Sun, 9 Sep 2001 17:28:43 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 84899 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 10 Sep 2001 00:28:42          +0000
Received: from femail27.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail27.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.254.60.17]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA31430          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 9 Sep 2001 09:20:21 -0700
Received: from c1649002-a.earthlink.net ([24.20.95.67]) by          femail27.sdc1.sfba.home.com (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20          201-229-121-120-20010223) with ESMTP id          <20010909162015.INPP559.femail27.sdc1.sfba.home.com@c1649002-a.earthlink.net>; Sun, 9 Sep 2001 09:20:15          -0700
X-Sender: forkbomb@mail.earthlink.net
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.0.2
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <5.0.2.1.0.20010909091725.0244ee78@mail.earthlink.net>
Date:         Sun, 9 Sep 2001 09:20:14 -0700
Reply-To: "Pierce Nichols" <forkbomb@EARTHLINK.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Pierce Nichols" <forkbomb@EARTHLINK.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Epoxy/KNO3 motors?
Comments: To: Sociald84@AOL.COM
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <5b.1b6160e6.28cc798b@aol.com>

At 03:51 AM 9/9/2001 -0400, Sociald84@AOL.COM wrote:
>I would guess that the grain chunk cracked because it was too brittle. Does
>anyone know of anything that can be added to regular epoxy that one could
>find at the hardware store to act as a plasticizer?


         Probably the best solution is to choose your epoxy carefully
rather than try to mess with the formulation once you have it. The figures
of merit are Young's Modulus and the tensile strength. Young's modulus is a
measure of how "stretchy" a material is -- the lower the better for this
application. You also want it to be strong so it won't come apart under
combustion pressure.

         -p



>Mark
>
>
>In a message dated 9/7/2001 7:14:48 PM Mountain Daylight Time,
>jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET writes:
>
>
>>        After making some igniters using a home-brew BP composition and some
>>epoxy,
>>and reading another poster's suggestion about adding more KNO3 to my mix to
>>oxidize the epoxy, I thought I'd try making an epoxy/KNO3 composition to
>>test. I mixed 200 grains (using a reloader's powder scale) of KNO3 and 200gr
>>of epoxy and let dry. I wanted to start fuel-rich to avoid a bad burn (got
>>burned pretty bad once in 11th grade chem class). I noticed a good deal of
>>heat coming from the mixing cup several minutes after mixing - which I
>>kind-of expected. It was left to harden out on the driveway.
>>
>>        I lit the results with a propane torch and away it went. It burned
>>with a
>>bright blue flame near the fuel and had yellow tips. It burned pretty
>>vigorously for 30-40 seconds. One thing I noticed was a tendency to crack
>>apart - presumably from heat fracturing the solid or because of residual
>>moisture still in the mix. Next I'll try a 60/40 KNO3/Epoxy blend to see how
>>that goes. I have never used resins of the sort mentioned on this list, but
>>will assume, until told differently, that the resins most of you are using
>>are more rubber like when cured? Has anyone else had good/bad luck trying
>>this? All comments pro and con would be appreciated.
>>
>>JG
>

Mars or Bust!
www.marssociety.com

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 26180 invoked from network); 10 Sep 2001 00:44:55 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 10 Sep 2001 00:44:55 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 22320 invoked by uid 50005); 10 Sep 2001 00:42:37 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.177341 secs); 10 Sep 2001 00:42:37 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 10 Sep 2001 00:42:37 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA00931; Sun, 9 Sep 2001 17:28:29 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 84865 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 10 Sep 2001 00:28:28          +0000
Received: from hobbiton.shire.net (frogmorton.shire.net [204.228.145.136]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA30978 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Sun, 9 Sep 2001 07:24:41 -0700
Received: from pool-64-223-146-33.man.east.verizon.net ([64.223.146.33]          helo=me-513q3sc0zun0.pengar.com) by hobbiton.shire.net with esmtp          (Exim 3.22 #6) id 15g5UK-0002P7-00 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 09          Sep 2001 08:23:09 -0600
X-Sender: seth-pc@hobbiton.shire.net
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <5.1.0.14.0.20010909102928.029da128@hobbiton.shire.net>
Date:         Sun, 9 Sep 2001 10:30:03 -0400
Reply-To: "Seth Leigh" <seth@PENGAR.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Seth Leigh" <seth@PENGAR.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] New Movie
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <001f01c138e8$983cbcd0$0200a8c0@charter.net>

Is it just me or did that engine make a sound remarkably like "Doh!" as it
let go?

Seth

At 12:33 AM 9/9/2001, Carl A. Blood wrote:
>Well this is a short one. Out on www.pad17.com is the latest 4 inch blooper.
>Just got back from the site 60 min. ago.
>Yep just another motor casing that what's to fly. Just remember set screws
>will twist if placed in a "V" slot or any slot. SO I will be bolting the end
>closures to the case from now on.
>
>Carl

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 26244 invoked from network); 10 Sep 2001 00:44:56 -0000
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 10 Sep 2001 00:44:56 -0000
Received: (qmail 9897 invoked by uid 50005); 10 Sep 2001 00:42:03 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpf with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.504134 secs); 10 Sep 2001 00:42:03 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 10 Sep 2001 00:42:02 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA00997; Sun, 9 Sep 2001 17:28:51 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 84936 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 10 Sep 2001 00:28:49          +0000
Received: from cablecom.laribay.net (cablecom.laribay.net [66.20.57.4]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA31925 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 9 Sep 2001 11:39:28 -0700
Received: from billbull (dial082.laribay.net [66.20.57.82]) by          cablecom.laribay.net (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id NAA26205 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 9 Sep 2001 13:20:34 -0500 (CDT)          (envelope-from bpbullock@laribay.net)
References:  <5b.1b6160e6.28cc798b@aol.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0D33_01C56B69.5167C360"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <001101c1395e$fa2c4980$52391442@billbull>
Date:         Sun, 9 Sep 2001 13:40:41 -0500
Reply-To: "Bill Bullock" <bpbullock@LARIBAY.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Bill Bullock" <bpbullock@LARIBAY.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Epoxy/KNO3 motors?
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0D33_01C56B69.5167C360
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Mark:
    Use either WD-40, Marvel Mystery Oil or 10-W motor oil mixed 50:50 =
with acetone...all available in the automotive section of Wal-Mart. Mix =
this at 1-5% by weight with the epoxy after the two components are well =
mixed. Remember that unlike men all epoxies are not created equal so you =
might experiment before using up the other ingredients. This also makes =
a pretty good parting agent if you don't mind sticky outside surfaces.
Bill
  ----- Original Message -----=20
  From: Sociald84@AOL.COM=20
  To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU=20
  Sent: Sunday, September 09, 2001 2:51 AM
  Subject: Re: [AR] Epoxy/KNO3 motors?


  I would guess that the grain chunk cracked because it was too brittle. =
Does=20
  anyone know of anything that can be added to regular epoxy that one =
could=20
  find at the hardware store to act as a plasticizer?=20

  Mark=20




------=_NextPart_000_0D33_01C56B69.5167C360
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META content=3D"text/html; charset=3Diso-8859-1" =
http-equiv=3DContent-Type>
<META content=3D"MSHTML 5.00.2614.3500" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV>Mark:</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Use either WD-40, Marvel Mystery Oil or 10-W =
motor oil=20
mixed 50:50 with acetone...all available in the automotive section of =
Wal-Mart.=20
Mix this at 1-5% by weight with the epoxy after the two components are =
well=20
mixed. Remember that unlike men all epoxies are not created equal so you =
might=20
experiment before using up the other ingredients. This also makes a =
pretty good=20
parting agent if you don't mind sticky outside surfaces.</DIV>
<DIV>Bill</DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE=20
style=3D"BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: =
0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; PADDING-RIGHT: 0px">
  <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial">----- Original Message ----- </DIV>
  <DIV=20
  style=3D"BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; FONT: 10pt arial; font-color: =
black"><B>From:</B>=20
  <A href=3D"mailto:Sociald84@AOL.COM"=20
  title=3DSociald84@AOL.COM>Sociald84@AOL.COM</A> </DIV>
  <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A =
href=3D"mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU"=20
  title=3DAROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU</A> </DIV>
  <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> Sunday, September 09, =
2001 2:51=20
  AM</DIV>
  <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> Re: [AR] Epoxy/KNO3=20
motors?</DIV>
  <DIV><BR></DIV><FONT face=3Darial,helvetica><FONT size=3D2>I would =
guess that the=20
  grain chunk cracked because it was too brittle. Does <BR>anyone know =
of=20
  anything that can be added to regular epoxy that one could <BR>find at =
the=20
  hardware store to act as a plasticizer? <BR><BR>Mark=20
<BR><BR><BR></BLOCKQUOTE></FONT></FONT></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0D33_01C56B69.5167C360--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 26642 invoked from network); 10 Sep 2001 00:45:01 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 10 Sep 2001 00:45:01 -0000
Received: (qmail 10472 invoked by uid 50005); 10 Sep 2001 00:43:20 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 2.156575 secs); 10 Sep 2001 00:43:20 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 10 Sep 2001 00:43:15 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA00895; Sun, 9 Sep 2001 17:28:15 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 84759 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 10 Sep 2001 00:28:14          +0000
Received: from wrench.toolcity.net (root@wrench.toolcity.net [208.0.188.2]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id EAA30362 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 9 Sep 2001 04:25:24 -0700
Received: from [208.22.189.103]          (dap-208-22-189-103.meadville-tnt-0.pa.toolcity.net [208.22.189.103])          by wrench.toolcity.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id HAA27483; Sun, 9          Sep 2001 07:25:19 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <v01510100b7c10f5653bb@[208.22.189.101]>
Date:         Sun, 9 Sep 2001 07:27:43 -0500
Reply-To: "al bradley" <abradley@TOOLCITY.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "al bradley" <abradley@TOOLCITY.NET>
Subject:      [AR] 2A characteristic of Durham's W. Putty
Comments: To: jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

>In a message dated 9/7/2001 10:04:57 PM Mountain Daylight Time,
>jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET writes:
>
>
>>Since the epoxy would not shrink any more after cooling down, and
>> durham's is advertised to to shrink, sounds like it may make a cheap and
>> simple liner. Paper would be easier, but paper does burn.
>>

Read the Durham label more closely. It "expands slightly upon drying".

if anyone doubts this, cast a bit inside a piece of clean pipe and see how
much effort it takes to get it out.

respectfully,
al bradley

------------------------------------------------------------------
Can you live Life with this?: "Unless there is a law, an agreement, or a
long-standing custom, No one `Deserves' Anything -- Either Good or Bad!"

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 28962 invoked from network); 10 Sep 2001 00:45:34 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 10 Sep 2001 00:45:34 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 17595 invoked by uid 50005); 10 Sep 2001 00:45:17 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpb with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.142179 secs); 10 Sep 2001 00:45:17 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 10 Sep 2001 00:45:17 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA01058; Sun, 9 Sep 2001 17:29:06 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 85002 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 10 Sep 2001 00:29:04          +0000
Received: from vmmr1.verisignmail.com (vmmr1.verisignmail.com          [216.168.230.137]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id          PAA32659 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Sun, 9 Sep 2001 15:02:45 -0700
Received: from vmms1.verisignmail.com (vmms1.verisignmail.com [10.166.0.138])          by vmmr1.verisignmail.com (Mirapoint) with ESMTP id AAS33418; Sun, 9          Sep 2001 18:02:14 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from vmms1.verisignmail.com (localhost.verisignmail.com [127.0.0.1])          by vmms1.verisignmail.com (Mirapoint) with SMTP id ACV40319 (AUTH          mpoulton@mtptech.com); Sun, 9 Sep 2001 18:02:13 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from 129.93.206.94 by vmms1.verisignmail.com with HTTP/1.1; Sun, 9          Sep 2001 18:02:29 -0400
X-Mailer: Mirapoint Webmail Direct 2.9.1.1
Message-ID:  <200109092202.ACV40319@vmms1.verisignmail.com>
Date:         Sun, 9 Sep 2001 18:02:29 -0400
Reply-To: <mpoulton@MTPTECH.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Mike Poulton" <mpoulton@MTPTECH.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Commercial HPR hybrids?
Comments: To: kc2csh@juno.com
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Ah -- okay.  I thought you wanted to static test a motor for
demonstration purposes.  So you want to vary total impulse.
AFAIK, none of the commercial HPR hybrids are made to vary
total impulse, but you can do it by partially filling the
oxidizer tank.  Considering those requirements, I would
probably go with the RATTworks K hybrid because it's simple
and cheap, but just about any of them will work.  Recovery
might be tough with a flight that low -- many altimiters
would fail to arm, and it may not flip over in time to use
magnetic apogee detection.  A timer may be the best bet.
Another issue is acceleration and burn time.  Hybrids tend to
be long-burn, low-thrust motors, and that' exactly what you
don't want for low flights with big rockets.  Considering
your flight profile, an Aerotech Blue Thunder solid may be
better.

---- Original message ----
>Date: Sun, 9 Sep 2001 16:53:12 -0400
>From: <kc2csh@juno.com>
>Subject: Re: [AR] Commercial HPR hybrids?
>To: mpoulton@mtptech.com
>
>  Let me try to be a little clearer.
>  I want to launch a very large (perhaps 18 inches by 12
feet), although
>not particularly heavy (as light as practical), rocket to a
few (2-5)
>hundred feet and parachute recovery with enough force to be
stable off a
>21 ft rail as a demonstration.  Rocket will be mostly high-X
foam over
>plastic.    I want to be able to vary the total thrust to
constrain the
>height when the field is particularly small or extend it if
the field is
>particularly large.
>  Audience is mostly 9th grade physical science classes.
>
>        Jay
>
>
>On Sat, 8 Sep 2001 22:57:42 -0400 Mike Poulton
<mpoulton@mtptech.com>
>writes:
>>
>>
>> ---- Original message ----
>> >Date: Sat, 8 Sep 2001 21:52:23 -0400
>> >From: kc2csh@JUNO.COM
>> >Subject: [AR] Commercial HPR hybrids?
>> >To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
>> >
>> >  I'm thinking of acquiring a commercial HPR type hybrid
to
>> use for a
>> >school demonstration.  Must be somewhere in the J-K-L
range,
>> preferably
>> >variable in total thrust, simple set up in 20 minutes or
>> less, and cheap
>> >enough to be able to afford about 90 flights a year out
of
>> my own pocket.
>> >  Must also be able to give administrators the warm
fuzzies
>> about safety
>> >with 20-25 students standing nearby when it fires.
>> >  I know I'm asking a lot.  Is there anything like this
out
>> there yet?
>>
>>
>> You could use any of the commercial HPR hybrids, although
>> some would be easier than others.  What do you mean when
you
>> say "variable in total thrust"?  Do you mean for it to
have
>> throttling capability, variable total impulse, or variable
>> average thrust?  These are all different things.  Variable
>> total impulse is easy -- just vary the oxidizer load.  All
>> hybrids can do this, but most aren't made to.  Varying the
>> position of the vent tube within the oxidizer tank on
hybrids
>> so equipped will make this easier.  Variable average
thrust
>> requires changing the injector size and (preferably) the
>> nozzle size.  Many HPR hybrids can do this off the shelf,
all
>> can do it with some work.  Throttling is hard, requiring a
>> variable oxidizer valve, and no HPR hybrids have that
>> capability.  If you have the know-how (and there isn't too
>> much know-how involved), I would recommend building a
boiler-
>> plate hybrid yourself.  You can use regular plumbing parts
>> throughout, and burn PVC pipe and/or rubber hose for
fuel.
>> This also gives you the advantage of being able to run
>> directly from a bulk nitrous tank, instead of having to
fill
>> a flight tank for each run.  Using a pneumatically-
controlled
>> valve, the burn time (and therefore total impulse) can be
as
>> long or as short as you want.  Whether 90 firings a year
is
>> affordable or not depends on how much you have to spend.
>> Nitrous will be the biggest per-firing cost, but the cost
of
>> the ground support equipment and parts to make the motor
is
>> not trivial.
>> Mike Poulton
>
>_____________________________________________________________
___
>GET INTERNET ACCESS FROM JUNO!
>Juno offers FREE or PREMIUM Internet access for less!
>Join Juno today!  For your FREE software, visit:
>http://dl.www.juno.com/get/tagj.
Mike Poulton


From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 17809 invoked from network); 10 Sep 2001 00:58:04 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 10 Sep 2001 00:58:04 -0000
Received: (qmail 27295 invoked by uid 50005); 10 Sep 2001 00:56:24 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.19483 secs); 10 Sep 2001 00:56:24 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 10 Sep 2001 00:56:23 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA00913; Sun, 9 Sep 2001 17:28:22 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 84839 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 10 Sep 2001 00:28:21          +0000
Received: from smtprelay1.abs.adelphia.net (smtprelay.abs.adelphia.net          [64.8.20.11]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA30806 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 9 Sep 2001 06:40:45 -0700
Received: from jlgrady ([63.124.251.47]) by smtprelay1.abs.adelphia.net          (Netscape Messaging Server 4.15) with SMTP id GJEDYL03.QPX for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 9 Sep 2001 09:39:57 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook CWS, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <001001c13935$56492a50$0200a8c0@prestige.net>
Date:         Sun, 9 Sep 2001 09:42:58 -0400
Reply-To: "Jeff Grady" <jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jeff Grady" <jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] 2A characteristic of Durham's W. Putty
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <v01510100b7c10f5653bb@[208.22.189.101]>

>>It "expands slightly upon drying".

You are correct. But this may in fact be even better than no shrinkage in
this case. If the liner mold is strong enough not to bulge, the putty may
then compress the grain giving an even better "seal". The grain could also
be cast in a two part mold having small horizontal grooves that the putty
could hold onto.

JG

-----Original Message-----
From: al bradley [mailto:abradley@toolcity.net]
Sent: Sunday, September 09, 2001 8:28 AM
To: jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET
Cc: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
Subject: 2A characteristic of Durham's W. Putty


>In a message dated 9/7/2001 10:04:57 PM Mountain Daylight Time,
>jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET writes:
>
>
>>Since the epoxy would not shrink any more after cooling down, and
>> durham's is advertised to to shrink, sounds like it may make a cheap and
>> simple liner. Paper would be easier, but paper does burn.
>>

Read the Durham label more closely. It "expands slightly upon drying".

if anyone doubts this, cast a bit inside a piece of clean pipe and see how
much effort it takes to get it out.

respectfully,
al bradley

------------------------------------------------------------------
Can you live Life with this?: "Unless there is a law, an agreement, or a
long-standing custom, No one `Deserves' Anything -- Either Good or Bad!"

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 17802 invoked from network); 10 Sep 2001 00:58:04 -0000
X-Priority: 3
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 10 Sep 2001 00:58:04 -0000
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 27960 invoked by uid 50005); 10 Sep 2001 00:55:46 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.212978 secs); 10 Sep 2001 00:55:46 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 10 Sep 2001 00:55:46 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA00837; Sun, 9 Sep 2001 17:26:52 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 84713 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 10 Sep 2001 00:26:18          +0000
Received: from imo-m01.mx.aol.com (imo-m01.mx.aol.com [64.12.136.4]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id CAA29810 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Sun, 9 Sep 2001 02:52:11 -0700
Received: from Sociald84@aol.com by imo-m01.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v31_r1.7.) id          o.108.5348f61 (4363); Sun, 9 Sep 2001 05:52:09 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0D36_01C56B69.516EEF50"
X-Mailer: AOL 6.0 for Windows US sub 10536
Message-ID:  <108.5348f61.28cc95c8@aol.com>
Date:         Sun, 9 Sep 2001 05:52:08 EDT
Reply-To: <Sociald84@AOL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <Sociald84@AOL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Commercial HPR hybrids?
Comments: To: kc2csh@juno.com
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0D36_01C56B69.516EEF50
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

In a message dated 9/8/2001 7:49:22 PM Mountain Daylight Time,
kc2csh@JUNO.COM writes:


>   I'm thinking of acquiring a commercial HPR type hybrid to use for a
> school demonstration.  Must be somewhere in the J-K-L range, preferably
> variable in total thrust, simple set up in 20 minutes or less, and cheap
> enough to be able to afford about 90 flights a year out of my own pocket.
>   Must also be able to give administrators the warm fuzzies about safety
> with 20-25 students standing nearby when it fires.
>   I know I'm asking a lot.  Is there anything like this out there yet?
>

Dave Griffith's Rattworks K motor would probably fit the bill. If reloads
seem to pricey could make them yourself.

Mark

------=_NextPart_000_0D36_01C56B69.516EEF50
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<HTML><FONT FACE=arial,helvetica><FONT  SIZE=2>In a message dated 9/8/2001 7:49:22 PM Mountain Daylight Time, kc2csh@JUNO.COM writes:
<BR>
<BR>
<BR><BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE style="BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px"> &nbsp;I'm thinking of acquiring a commercial HPR type hybrid to use for a
<BR>school demonstration. &nbsp;Must be somewhere in the J-K-L range, preferably
<BR>variable in total thrust, simple set up in 20 minutes or less, and cheap
<BR>enough to be able to afford about 90 flights a year out of my own pocket.
<BR> &nbsp;Must also be able to give administrators the warm fuzzies about safety
<BR>with 20-25 students standing nearby when it fires.
<BR> &nbsp;I know I'm asking a lot. &nbsp;Is there anything like this out there yet?
<BR></BLOCKQUOTE>
<BR>
<BR>Dave Griffith's Rattworks K motor would probably fit the bill. If reloads seem to pricey could make them yourself.
<BR>
<BR>Mark</FONT></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0D36_01C56B69.516EEF50--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 20043 invoked from network); 10 Sep 2001 00:58:40 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 10 Sep 2001 00:58:40 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 29267 invoked by uid 50005); 10 Sep 2001 00:58:02 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpe with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 1.132625 secs); 10 Sep 2001 00:58:02 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 10 Sep 2001 00:58:00 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA00949; Sun, 9 Sep 2001 17:28:36 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 84873 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 10 Sep 2001 00:28:35          +0000
Received: from hobbiton.shire.net (frogmorton.shire.net [204.228.145.136]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA31050 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Sun, 9 Sep 2001 07:29:25 -0700
Received: from pool-64-223-146-33.man.east.verizon.net ([64.223.146.33]          helo=me-513q3sc0zun0.pengar.com) by hobbiton.shire.net with esmtp          (Exim 3.22 #6) id 15g5Yv-0002Qy-00; Sun, 09 Sep 2001 08:27:53 -0600
X-Sender: seth-pc@hobbiton.shire.net
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <5.1.0.14.0.20010909103256.01c2a6e0@hobbiton.shire.net>
Date:         Sun, 9 Sep 2001 10:34:48 -0400
Reply-To: "Seth Leigh" <seth@PENGAR.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Seth Leigh" <seth@PENGAR.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Smokeless powder ignitor enhancement
Comments: To: Sociald84@AOL.COM
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <de.1a222e5e.28cc76d2@aol.com>

At 03:40 AM 9/9/2001, Sociald84@AOL.COM wrote:
Nope. Your probably confused. Yes you can use smokeless powders such as
>Bullseye disolved in acetone as a pyrogen. No smokeless is nothing at all
>like pyrodex.

OK, I've been thinking all along that Pyrodex was a form of smokeless
powder, and I swore I'd read that someplace.  So I went and looked at the
source (Hodgdon Power Company).  Pyrodex does not have any nitrocellulose
in it, but is classified as "smokeless" powder rather than explosive as
blackpowder is.  Here's the URL and the quote from their Pyrodex FAQ.
http://www.pyrodex.com/faq/index.htm

"Q. Why does my can of Pyrodex say smokeless powder? The directions for my
rifle say I should not use smokeless powder. Is Pyrodex safe in my gun.
A. Pyrodex is not a true, smokeless powder. Pyrodex does not contain
nitrocellulose in any quantity. Pyrodex is considered to require the same
handling and precautions while in transit as smokeless powder. The United
States Department of Transportation has assigned the classification of
"smokeless" to Pyrodex rather than the classification "Explosive" that is
given to blackpowder. Pyrodex is safe in any firearm designed for the use
of blackpowder."

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 20116 invoked from network); 10 Sep 2001 00:58:41 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 10 Sep 2001 00:58:41 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 29309 invoked by uid 50005); 10 Sep 2001 00:58:04 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpe with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.164377 secs); 10 Sep 2001 00:58:04 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 10 Sep 2001 00:58:04 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA01083; Sun, 9 Sep 2001 17:29:13 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 84708 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 10 Sep 2001 00:29:12          +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (f115.law15.hotmail.com [64.4.23.115]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id CAA29787 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Sun, 9 Sep 2001 02:50:40 -0700
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Sun,          9 Sep 2001 02:50:10 -0700
Received: from 213.224.83.70 by lw15fd.law15.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Sun, 09          Sep 2001 09:50:10 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [213.224.83.70]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 09 Sep 2001 09:50:10.0322 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[D07F5720:01C13914]
Message-ID:  <F115jaagwaBrVjx9wUX00009d23@hotmail.com>
Date:         Mon, 10 Sep 2001 00:29:12 +0000
Reply-To: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      [AR] AN melt
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Looking at SP's compositions test tables I was wondering if higher alcohols
could be used as fuel. If they'd have good burning characteristics, they
could offer interesting low melting points. A possible necessity for
homogeneity after solidification is that such alcohols dissolve in the AN-KN
of which I know nothing.

Why alcohols? Why not test waxes, aldehydes or any organics with a suitable
MP? Indeed, one should probably. I just chose alcohols because the lower MP
ones are known to be OK as fuel. And because sugars are polyols of course.

n-Alcohols start to solidify at ambient temps around C13. So I was thinking
C19-21 n-alcohols. n-Nonadecanol has a melting point of around 60C. They
should offer combustion enthalpies exceeding those of kerosine (C12?).

jd




_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 20636 invoked from network); 10 Sep 2001 00:58:51 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 10 Sep 2001 00:58:51 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 28255 invoked by uid 50005); 10 Sep 2001 00:56:32 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.186711 secs); 10 Sep 2001 00:56:32 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 10 Sep 2001 00:56:32 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA00878; Sun, 9 Sep 2001 17:28:08 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 84717 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 10 Sep 2001 00:28:07          +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (f31.law15.hotmail.com [64.4.23.31]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id DAA29859 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Sun,          9 Sep 2001 03:06:34 -0700
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Sun,          9 Sep 2001 03:06:00 -0700
Received: from 213.224.83.142 by lw15fd.law15.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Sun,          09 Sep 2001 10:06:00 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [213.224.83.142]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 09 Sep 2001 10:06:00.0621 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[06EB75D0:01C13917]
Message-ID:  <F31VhEUsebmspH2q6Dq0000ae2f@hotmail.com>
Date:         Mon, 10 Sep 2001 00:28:07 +0000
Reply-To: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Cheap, Easy test stand for small motors
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

RC wrote:

>Subject: [AR] Cheap, Easy test stand for small motors
>Date: Wed, 5 Sep 2001 06:42:25 -0700
>http://www.missileworks.com/test_stand.htm

>$15, up to 50 lb thrust.  Requires a camcorder.

I wish I could buy a (strain gauge plus connections to laptop plus software)
module. Suggestions?

...since I do not own a camcorder.

jd

_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 29319 invoked from network); 10 Sep 2001 01:01:12 -0000
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 10 Sep 2001 01:01:12 -0000
Received: (qmail 31444 invoked by uid 50005); 10 Sep 2001 01:00:35 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpe with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.17955 secs); 10 Sep 2001 01:00:35 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 10 Sep 2001 01:00:35 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA01341; Sun, 9 Sep 2001 17:45:32 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 85200 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 10 Sep 2001 00:45:30          +0000
Received: from smtprelay1.abs.adelphia.net (smtprelay.abs.adelphia.net          [64.8.20.11]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA01327 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 9 Sep 2001 17:45:30 -0700
Received: from jlgrady ([63.124.251.47]) by smtprelay1.abs.adelphia.net          (Netscape Messaging Server 4.15) with SMTP id GJF8QH01.7RO for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 9 Sep 2001 20:44:41 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook CWS, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
Importance: Normal
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <000901c13992$53796e40$0200a8c0@prestige.net>
Date:         Sun, 9 Sep 2001 20:48:36 -0400
Reply-To: "Jeff Grady" <jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jeff Grady" <jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Epoxy/KNO3 motors?
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <F94njUoisAY5i3dDw8c00009f44@hotmail.com>

Thanks,

        I'll give that a try...working on a mold now...

JG

-----Original Message-----
From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@itc.uci.edu]On
Behalf Of John Dom
Sent: Sunday, September 09, 2001 8:28 PM
To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
Subject: Re: [AR] Epoxy/KNO3 motors?


....Since the epoxy would not shrink any more after cooling down, and
> > durham's is advertised to to shrink, sounds like it may make a cheap and
> > simple liner. Paper would be easier, but paper does burn.

USE ALUMINUM FOIL LINER AND PEEL IT OFF AFTER REMOVAL FROM THE MOLD IF YOU
NEED TO: IT WORKS PERFECTLY.

jd

_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 9369 invoked from network); 10 Sep 2001 01:11:55 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 10 Sep 2001 01:11:55 -0000
Received: (qmail 29347 invoked by uid 50005); 10 Sep 2001 01:11:37 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpb with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.22827 secs); 10 Sep 2001 01:11:37 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 10 Sep 2001 01:11:37 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA01479; Sun, 9 Sep 2001 17:56:07 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 85231 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 10 Sep 2001 00:56:05          +0000
Received: from smtp4.ihug.co.nz (smtp4.ihug.co.nz [203.109.252.5]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA01464 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 9 Sep 2001 17:56:03 -0700
Received: from tm22g (p21-max5.wlg.ihug.co.nz [203.173.231.21]) by          smtp4.ihug.co.nz (8.9.3/8.9.3/Debian 8.9.3-21) with SMTP id MAA08946;          Mon, 10 Sep 2001 12:55:55 +1200
X-Authentication-Warning: smtp4.ihug.co.nz: Host p21-max5.wlg.ihug.co.nz                         [203.173.231.21] claimed to be tm22g
References:  <F150G5n6tzOLfnzlluT0000744f@hotmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <00ef01c13992$a06708c0$15e7adcb@tm22g>
Date:         Mon, 10 Sep 2001 12:50:44 +1200
Reply-To: "Pingu!" <hooon@IHUG.CO.NZ>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Pingu!" <hooon@IHUG.CO.NZ>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Gun launch - part trois
Comments: To: John Dom <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Hey

Unfortunatly it runs in DOS!
(also that MS-DOS Prompt in WinX)

It was not me that programmed the equation, but Mike who did can program in
basic but the reason why he did it in a simple dos based program is that it
only took about 30 minutes to compile so we could release it on the
internet.

We are supposed to get around to creating an excel version as you can change
the variables MUCH faster and easyer and see the change in result! rather
than the cumbersome DOS version! Currently i settle with re-typing them all
in again usually with only one variable changed!

You may see an update soon...


----- Original Message -----
From: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Friday, September 07, 2001 7:33 AM
Subject: Re: [AR] Gun launch - part trois


> Quote hooon@IHUG.CO.NZ:
>
> >....I only mentioned the website because it contained our velocity calc
> >program...
> >
> >http://www.spudgunsnz.com
> >
> >contains the program.
>
> Right. Do you have a program listing? I'd love an Excel version. Or
> Excel/Visual Basic if you got to re-iterate. DOS is long ago for me. Your
> program runs under DOS doesn't it?
>
> jd
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 22031 invoked from network); 10 Sep 2001 01:23:28 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 10 Sep 2001 01:23:28 -0000
Received: (qmail 24989 invoked by uid 50005); 10 Sep 2001 01:23:05 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpa with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.361982 secs); 10 Sep 2001 01:23:05 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 10 Sep 2001 01:23:04 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA01557; Sun, 9 Sep 2001 18:06:51 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 85246 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 10 Sep 2001 01:06:49          +0000
Received: from smtp4.ihug.co.nz (smtp4.ihug.co.nz [203.109.252.5]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA01542; Sun, 9 Sep 2001          18:06:47 -0700
Received: from tm22g (p21-max5.wlg.ihug.co.nz [203.173.231.21]) by          smtp4.ihug.co.nz (8.9.3/8.9.3/Debian 8.9.3-21) with SMTP id NAA10392;          Mon, 10 Sep 2001 13:06:43 +1200
X-Authentication-Warning: smtp4.ihug.co.nz: Host p21-max5.wlg.ihug.co.nz                         [203.173.231.21] claimed to be tm22g
References: <Pine.LNX.4.10.10109061943450.13052-100000@itc.uci.edu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <013e01c13994$21e3ba00$15e7adcb@tm22g>
Date:         Mon, 10 Sep 2001 13:01:30 +1200
Reply-To: "Pingu!" <hooon@IHUG.CO.NZ>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Pingu!" <hooon@IHUG.CO.NZ>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Gun launch - part deux
Comments: To: "David J. McCue" <dmccue@itc.uci.edu>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

QUOTE:

You also inadvertantly add weight to my concerns. One of you is a minor
under US law. As such, you are not legally accountable for what you do
because the law (where I am) assumes diminished ability to make good
decisions because of your (presumed) immaturity.

.........

I would have thought it was obvious that im not a US Citizen.
Why would my website be named Spudguns New Zealand?

QUOTE:

The trouble with a list like this is that people are quite capable of
> developing technical competency before having gained sufficient judgement
> to make good decisions. Many never develop the sensability that keeps
> them out of trouble. I share the roads with them every day. ;-)
> Nevertheless, I wince my way though some of what goes on here in silence,
> hoping that my fears will not be grounded in ugly reality. Aaron's
> message, about cannons and rockets and aircraft, went beyond what I am
> willing to tolerate.

.........


I agree, there are 13 year old's listening to this post building plastic
rockets filled with blackpowder they got from their fathers gun cuboard.

ARocketry and Pneumatic Cannons are not for the people who do not understand
the dangers.

..........

Launching a rocket from underneath a remote controlled Cessna Aircraft is
the most dangerous thing i have ever heard of being discussed.

----- Original Message -----
From: "David J. McCue" <dmccue@itc.uci.edu>
To: "Pingu!" <hooon@IHUG.CO.NZ>
Cc: <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
Sent: Friday, September 07, 2001 3:24 PM
Subject: Re: [AR] Gun launch - part deux


> Dave McCue replies:
>
> I did not intend to offend, but, instead, warn. I have no real issue with
> cannons or mortars, but with aircraft-mounted launch systems of any type.
> The risks to third parties from a project aboard an aircraft is more than
> I want to facilitate by allowing development to be discussed on this list.
>
> You also inadvertantly add weight to my concerns. One of you is a minor
> under US law. As such, you are not legally accountable for what you do
> because the law (where I am) assumes diminished ability to make good
> decisions because of your (presumed) immaturity.
>
> I am 48 years old and I live in California, USA, and I provide the
> computer and list software on which aRocket runs. Ray Calkins owns the
> list, but I give it a home. That fact makes me liable for what goes on
> here, because, as a list member, I can't claim ignorance, and under civil
> and criminal law here, I can be entangled in the consequences of someone
> else's poor judgement. All the arm waiving in the world won't change that.
>
> The trouble with a list like this is that people are quite capable of
> developing technical competency before having gained sufficient judgement
> to make good decisions. Many never develop the sensability that keeps
> them out of trouble. I share the roads with them every day. ;-)
> Nevertheless, I wince my way though some of what goes on here in silence,
> hoping that my fears will not be grounded in ugly reality. Aaron's
> message, about cannons and rockets and aircraft, went beyond what I am
> willing to tolerate.
>
> Ray has agreed with me that if either of our comfort levels is exceeded,
> we may set a limit. If you can't accept that, I ask that you find another
> venue.
>
> -Dave McCue
>
> On Thu, 6 Sep 2001, Pingu! wrote:
>
> > That is very insulting hearing that.
> >
> > What Dave McCue may not realise is some of the cannons we build take
alot of
> > effort and time to design and build.
> >
> > I think that the "technology" used in many of the cannons we build was
quite
> > amazing for our ages (Mike 19 and Andrew 17) , (reffering to the piston
> > exhaust design of the aluminium 2.3 meter cannon). I also thought that
our
> > understanding of some calculus and applying it to our cannons would make
our
> > site "appear" less juvennile.
> >
> > I only mentioned the website because it contained our velocity calc
program
> > (differential equation solved numerically by a basic program , use SI
units)
> >
> > www.spudgunsnz.com
> >
> > contains the program.
> >
> > And Dave McCue  i dont want to hear any further childish interpretations
of
> > our website.
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Seth Leigh" <seth@PENGAR.COM>
> > To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
> > Sent: Wednesday, September 05, 2001 1:06 PM
> > Subject: Re: [AR] Gun launch - part deux
> >
> >
> > > At 11:43 AM 9/4/2001, David J. McCue wrote:
> > > >I have to ask: how is discussion of aircraft cannon design
appropriate
> > for
> > > >a list on amateur rocketry? This seems better suited to some "kewl
bomz"
> > > >intersest group. I am very uncomfortable with this.
> > > >
> > > >-Dave McCue
> > >
> > > The topic is being addressed as a direct result of, and as part of, a
> > > discussion about using a "gun" of some sort being used to launch a
> > > rocket.  Specifically, a url was posted to a site where a gentleman
> > > proposes to use a "gun" to launch a rocket whose first stage is a
> > > ramjet.  The gun is merely to get the rocket going fast enough for the
> > > ramjet to work.  The ramjet would then propel the rocket upwards till
its
> > > fuel is exhausted, whereupon a more conventional rocket more would be
> > > staged on, propelling the rocket even higher.
> > >
> > > I know the topic seemed a tad juvenile, and indeed spudgunz and the
like
> > > were discussed, but the context is certainly amateur rocketry
> > > oriented.  Specifically, the "technology" of spudgunz is probably very
> > > applicable to being adapted to launch a ramjet-rocket combo.
> > >
> > > Seth
> > >
> >
>
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 6491 invoked from network); 10 Sep 2001 02:25:45 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 10 Sep 2001 02:25:45 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 31903 invoked by uid 50005); 10 Sep 2001 02:25:27 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpb with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.187707 secs); 10 Sep 2001 02:25:27 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 10 Sep 2001 02:25:27 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA01851; Sun, 9 Sep 2001 19:09:44 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 85293 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 10 Sep 2001 02:09:39          +0000
Received: from femail36.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail36.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.254.60.26]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA01837          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 9 Sep 2001 19:09:39 -0700
Received: from c396957-b.home.net ([24.17.249.10]) by          femail36.sdc1.sfba.home.com (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20          201-229-121-120-20010223) with ESMTP id          <20010910020933.QEKJ29231.femail36.sdc1.sfba.home.com@c396957-b.home.net> for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 9          Sep 2001 19:09:33 -0700
X-Sender: spiegl@mail
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <5.1.0.14.2.20010909203733.00b3bde8@mail>
Date:         Sun, 9 Sep 2001 21:09:38 -0500
Reply-To: "Mark C Spiegl" <spiegl@HOME.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Mark C Spiegl" <spiegl@HOME.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Cheap, Easy test stand for small motors
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <F31VhEUsebmspH2q6Dq0000ae2f@hotmail.com>

> I wish I could buy a (strain gauge plus connections to laptop plus software)
> module. Suggestions?

Dataq (www.dataq.com) will give you a 4 channel A/D, which connects to
a PC via the serial port for free if you qualify. The eval package
includes some pretty nice acquisition software as well.

I think you just need to be an engineer to qualify. (dunno for sure)
If you do not qualify the part + software is only $13 USD.

The strain gauge is a little more involved. The sensor is what cost
me the $$$.

**

Another possibility is to hack-up a recording altimeter, which gets
you a battery operated, standalone, acquisition system. Data analysis
is done offline at a later time. Basically all you need to do is
swap-out the sensor.


--MCS

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 14357 invoked from network); 10 Sep 2001 03:32:45 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 10 Sep 2001 03:32:45 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: (qmail 8406 invoked by uid 50005); 10 Sep 2001 03:32:08 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpe with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.187147 secs); 10 Sep 2001 03:32:08 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 10 Sep 2001 03:32:07 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA02165; Sun, 9 Sep 2001 20:15:49 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 85343 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 10 Sep 2001 03:15:43          +0000
Received: from cisco.com (cypher.cisco.com [171.69.11.18]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA02151 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun,          9 Sep 2001 20:15:43 -0700
Received: (from billw@localhost) by cisco.com (8.8.8/2.6/Cisco List          Logging/8.8.8) id UAA28382; Sun, 9 Sep 2001 20:15:12 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID:  <CMM.0.90.4.1000091712.billw@cypher>
Date:         Sun, 9 Sep 2001 20:15:12 PDT
Reply-To: "Bill Westfield" <billw@cisco.com>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "William Chops Westfield" <billw@cisco.com>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Smokeless powder ignitor enhancement
Comments: To: Sociald84@AOL.COM
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  Your message of Sun, 9 Sep 2001 03:40:02 EDT

    To make the igniters such as the kits on the market you need to mix
    Graphite powder with expoxy. Dip the igniter leads in that.

I would think that for this application, a solvent-based glue is actually
an advantage.  The shrinkage that happens ought to help bind the conductor
powder to the wires.  I've made conductive "walmart ematchs" using graphite
(lubricant) in elmers glue, and they work "ok" - I don't think they get
down near the 2ohm range that people are reporting for the commercial
ignitors, and consequently seem to take a somewhat higher voltage to
ignite.  I suspect that the commercial formulations have some extra
ingredients (at least one formula I've seen suggests adding some copper
powder.)

BillW


From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 6671 invoked from network); 10 Sep 2001 03:41:32 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 10 Sep 2001 03:41:32 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 29622 invoked by uid 50005); 10 Sep 2001 03:41:14 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpb with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.171261 secs); 10 Sep 2001 03:41:14 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 10 Sep 2001 03:41:14 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA02221; Sun, 9 Sep 2001 20:25:37 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 85354 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 10 Sep 2001 03:25:32          +0000
Received: from inet03.citec.qld.gov.au (firewall-user@inet03.citec.qld.gov.au          [203.5.10.10]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA02207          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 9 Sep 2001 20:25:31 -0700
Received: by inet03.citec.qld.gov.au; id NAA02547; Mon, 10 Sep 2001 13:25:27          +1000 (EST)
Received: from citec.com.au(pcux.citec.qld.gov.au 147.132.17.12) by          inet03.citec.qld.gov.au via smap (V2.0) id xma002257; Mon, 10 Sep 01          13:25:20 +1000
Received: from CITEC-Message_Server by citec.com.au with Novell_GroupWise; Mon,          10 Sep 2001 13:24:58 +1000
X-Mailer: Novell GroupWise 5.5.4
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by itc.uci.edu id UAA02208
Message-ID:  <sb9cbf2a.012@citec.com.au>
Date:         Mon, 10 Sep 2001 13:24:36 +1000
Reply-To: "Des Bromilow" <Des.Bromilow@CITEC.COM.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Des Bromilow" <Des.Bromilow@CITEC.COM.AU>
Subject:      [AR] is there a digest setting for the list?
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Hi,

I'm going to be going off on holidays for 2 weeks soon, and I know how the company will react with my mail volume..

Is there a digest setting for the list?

Failing that, I'll unsubscribe, and them resubsscribe on return (and try and catch up from the archives)

thanks,
Des

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 8339 invoked from network); 10 Sep 2001 03:54:36 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 10 Sep 2001 03:54:36 -0000
Received: (qmail 5547 invoked by uid 50005); 10 Sep 2001 03:54:12 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpa with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.220582 secs); 10 Sep 2001 03:54:12 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 10 Sep 2001 03:54:12 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA02318; Sun, 9 Sep 2001 20:38:46 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 85373 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 10 Sep 2001 03:38:44          +0000
Received: from mta04.mail.mel.aone.net.au (mta04.mail.au.uu.net [203.2.192.84])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA02304 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 9 Sep 2001 20:38:43 -0700
Received: from unknown ([63.60.220.28]) by mta04.mail.mel.aone.net.au with SMTP          id <20010910033839.MRZO12702.mta04.mail.mel.aone.net.au@unknown> for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 10 Sep 2001 13:38:39 +1000
References: Conversation <CMM.0.90.4.1000091712.billw@cypher> with last message            <CMM.0.90.4.1000091712.billw@cypher>
Priority: Normal
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Priority: 3
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	X-MAPIextension=.TXT;
	charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>
Date:         Mon, 10 Sep 2001 03:38:44 +0000
Reply-To: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Smokeless powder ignitor enhancement
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <CMM.0.90.4.1000091712.billw@cypher>

Yep, I get between 2-5ohms for my conductive pyrogen comps although they'll
work fine on 100ohms and even 200 if a 12V battery is used. Note: the type
of NC you use can have a major influence on the quality of the igniters
both from oxidizer donation and electrical conductivity.


----------
>
>     To make the igniters such as the kits on the market you need to mix
>     Graphite powder with expoxy. Dip the igniter leads in that.
>
> I would think that for this application, a solvent-based glue is actually
> an advantage.  The shrinkage that happens ought to help bind the conductor
> powder to the wires.

Also, it's preferable to have porosity in igniter pyrogens too, from my
experience.

Troy.

  I've made conductive "walmart ematchs" using graphite
> (lubricant) in elmers glue, and they work "ok" - I don't think they get
> down near the 2ohm range that people are reporting for the commercial
> ignitors, and consequently seem to take a somewhat higher voltage to
> ignite.  I suspect that the commercial formulations have some extra
> ingredients (at least one formula I've seen suggests adding some copper
> powder.)
>
> BillW

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 16849 invoked from network); 10 Sep 2001 05:47:49 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 10 Sep 2001 05:47:49 -0000
Received: (qmail 18960 invoked by uid 50005); 10 Sep 2001 05:46:08 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.104138 secs); 10 Sep 2001 05:46:08 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 10 Sep 2001 05:46:07 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA03309; Sun, 9 Sep 2001 22:30:22 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 85562 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 10 Sep 2001 05:30:14          +0000
Received: from roll.akcecc.kiev.ua (roll.akcecc.kiev.ua [193.227.206.34]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA03295 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 9 Sep 2001 22:30:10 -0700
Received: from serge (pool-40.akcecc.kiev.ua [193.227.207.40] (may be forged))          by roll.akcecc.kiev.ua (8.10.2/8.10.2) with SMTP id f8A5U3c26698 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 10 Sep 2001 08:30:03 +0300
References:  <F115jaagwaBrVjx9wUX00009d23@hotmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="koi8-r"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2417.2000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <003d01c139b1$083e9bc0$28cfe3c1@serge>
Date:         Mon, 10 Sep 2001 08:27:18 +0400
Reply-To: "Serge Pipko" <spas@AKCECC.KIEV.UA>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Serge Pipko" <spas@AKCECC.KIEV.UA>
Subject:      Re: [AR] AN melt
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

John Dom wrote:

> Looking at SP's compositions test tables I was wondering if higher
alcohols
> could be used as fuel. If they'd have good burning characteristics, they
> could offer interesting low melting points. A possible necessity for
> homogeneity after solidification is that such alcohols dissolve in the
AN-KN
> of which I know nothing.

Some of my previuos experiments allow me to conclude higher alcohols have no
chance to dissolve in AN melt due to their low polarity.

> Why alcohols? Why not test waxes, aldehydes or any organics with a
suitable
> MP? Indeed, one should probably.

I have hundreds of potential fuels in my chemlab and I did test some of them
with AP, but as far as AN is concerned I limit myself to test mostly
widespread components.

Serge

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 28339 invoked from network); 10 Sep 2001 06:03:24 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 10 Sep 2001 06:03:24 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: (qmail 21695 invoked by uid 50005); 10 Sep 2001 06:03:05 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpb with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.25208 secs); 10 Sep 2001 06:03:05 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 10 Sep 2001 06:03:04 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA03396; Sun, 9 Sep 2001 22:47:04 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 85579 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 10 Sep 2001 05:47:02          +0000
Received: from wrench.toolcity.net (root@wrench.toolcity.net [208.0.188.2]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA03382 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 9 Sep 2001 22:47:01 -0700
Received: from [208.22.189.120]          (dap-208-22-189-120.meadville-tnt-0.pa.toolcity.net [208.22.189.120])          by wrench.toolcity.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id BAA12455 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 10 Sep 2001 01:46:58 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <v01510101b7c21208fd1a@[208.22.189.120]>
Date:         Mon, 10 Sep 2001 01:49:21 -0500
Reply-To: "al bradley" <abradley@TOOLCITY.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "al bradley" <abradley@TOOLCITY.NET>
Subject:      [AR] To the wives and girlfriends of rocket chemists
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

A new additions to the periodic table of chemical elements


 Element Name: MAN
 Symbol: XY
 Atomic Weight: 180+

 Physical properties: Solid at room temperature but gets bent
 out of shape easily. Fairly dense and sometimes flaky.
 Difficult to find a pure sample. Due to rust, aging samples
 are unable to conduct electricity as easily as young samples.

 Chemical properties: Attempts to bond with WO any chance it
 can get. Also tends to form strong bonds with itself. Becomes
 explosive when mixed with KID (Element: Child) for prolonged
 periods of time. Neutralizes by saturating with alcohol.

 Usage: None known. Possibly good methane source. Good
 specimens are able to produce large quantities on command.

 Caution: In the absence of WO, this element rapidly
 decomposes and begins to smell.
---------------------
====================================

It was all so different before everything changed.

------------------------------------------------------------------
Can you live Life with this?: "Unless there is a law, an agreement, or a
long-standing custom, No one `Deserves' Anything -- Either Good or Bad!"

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 19330 invoked from network); 10 Sep 2001 06:53:11 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 10 Sep 2001 06:53:11 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 18809 invoked by uid 50005); 10 Sep 2001 06:52:33 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpe with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.168456 secs); 10 Sep 2001 06:52:33 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 10 Sep 2001 06:52:32 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA03646; Sun, 9 Sep 2001 23:33:19 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 85634 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 10 Sep 2001 06:33:12          +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (f50.law15.hotmail.com [64.4.23.50]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA03632 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Sun,          9 Sep 2001 23:33:12 -0700
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Sun,          9 Sep 2001 23:32:41 -0700
Received: from 193.121.251.246 by lw15fd.law15.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Mon,          10 Sep 2001 06:32:41 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [193.121.251.246]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 10 Sep 2001 06:32:41.0882 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[64B09FA0:01C139C2]
Message-ID:  <F505CUD8tBG8lEIR9sJ0000b8fb@hotmail.com>
Date:         Mon, 10 Sep 2001 06:33:12 +0000
Reply-To: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Big lander flight video
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

JC wrote:

>...It is a carbon fiber natural gas vehicle tank with a total capacity of
>40 liters...

Yikes. Carbon can act as a slow type cat (try activated carbon for test)
with HP and certainly as a fuel. I suppose it has a PTFE liner or something?
But then I wonder if, like PE, PTFE is not fuel for a hybrid. Lots of carbon
in PTFE too, should Murphy cause it to get hot I mean.

jd

_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 21785 invoked from network); 10 Sep 2001 06:54:16 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 10 Sep 2001 06:54:16 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 23865 invoked by uid 50005); 10 Sep 2001 06:53:51 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpa with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.175147 secs); 10 Sep 2001 06:53:51 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 10 Sep 2001 06:53:50 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA03586; Sun, 9 Sep 2001 23:24:28 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 85620 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 10 Sep 2001 06:24:25          +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (f111.law15.hotmail.com [64.4.23.111]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA03572 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Sun, 9 Sep 2001 23:24:25 -0700
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Sun,          9 Sep 2001 23:23:55 -0700
Received: from 193.121.251.246 by lw15fd.law15.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Mon,          10 Sep 2001 06:23:54 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [193.121.251.246]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 10 Sep 2001 06:23:55.0061 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[2AAE1E50:01C139C1]
Message-ID:  <F111FqZqT5TJKXWlA710000a966@hotmail.com>
Date:         Mon, 10 Sep 2001 06:24:25 +0000
Reply-To: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] AN melt
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

>Some of my previuos experiments allow me to conclude higher alcohols have
>no
>chance to dissolve in AN melt due to their low polarity.

Could be. As to polarity being the cause, sugars are not polar compounds are
they?

Then maybe their fatty acids (detergents), they certainly are polar. But
oddly, they also dissolve in kerosine.

jd

_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 15137 invoked from network); 10 Sep 2001 07:45:50 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 10 Sep 2001 07:45:50 -0000
Received: (qmail 13740 invoked by uid 50005); 10 Sep 2001 07:45:25 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpa with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.157067 secs); 10 Sep 2001 07:45:25 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 10 Sep 2001 07:45:24 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA03937; Mon, 10 Sep 2001 00:29:53 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 85687 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 10 Sep 2001 07:29:50          +0000
Received: from spsystems.net (spsystems.net [209.47.149.227]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA03923 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Mon,          10 Sep 2001 00:29:49 -0700
Received: (from henry@localhost) by spsystems.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id DAA24424;          Mon, 10 Sep 2001 03:28:57 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010910031737.22771A-100000@spsystems.net>
Date:         Mon, 10 Sep 2001 03:28:57 -0400
Reply-To: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Big lander flight video
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <F505CUD8tBG8lEIR9sJ0000b8fb@hotmail.com>

On Mon, 10 Sep 2001, John Dom wrote:
> >...It is a carbon fiber natural gas vehicle tank...
>
> Yikes. Carbon can act as a slow type cat (try activated carbon for test)
> with HP and certainly as a fuel...

Aluminum can act as a fuel with LOX, too, but almost all launchers which
use LOX put it in aluminum tanks.  The issue is how readily things ignite,
not whether it's possible in principle.  And activated carbon and
carbon-fiber composites are *very* different materials.

> But then I wonder if, like PE, PTFE is not fuel for a hybrid. Lots of carbon
> in PTFE too, should Murphy cause it to get hot I mean.

Lots of carbon, yes, but the fluorine has a deathgrip on it.  It'll break
down it if gets hot, but it won't oxidize.  (There are a few things it
will react with, but oxygen isn't among them, except in really extreme
conditions.)

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 17313 invoked from network); 10 Sep 2001 08:23:54 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 10 Sep 2001 08:23:54 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 1204 invoked by uid 50005); 10 Sep 2001 08:23:28 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpa with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.212105 secs); 10 Sep 2001 08:23:28 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 10 Sep 2001 08:23:28 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id BAA04132; Mon, 10 Sep 2001 01:07:47 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 85722 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 10 Sep 2001 08:07:38          +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (f89.law15.hotmail.com [64.4.23.89]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id BAA04118 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Mon,          10 Sep 2001 01:07:37 -0700
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Mon,          10 Sep 2001 01:07:07 -0700
Received: from 193.121.251.246 by lw15fd.law15.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Mon,          10 Sep 2001 08:07:06 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [193.121.251.246]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 10 Sep 2001 08:07:07.0510 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[95AAD960:01C139CF]
Message-ID:  <F89DJnLq630zyE8Gape0000abb7@hotmail.com>
Date:         Mon, 10 Sep 2001 08:07:38 +0000
Reply-To: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Big lander flight video
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

HS wrote:

> > But then I wonder if, like PE, PTFE is not fuel for a hybrid. Lots of
>carbon
> > in PTFE too, should Murphy cause it to get hot I mean.
>
>Lots of carbon, yes, but the fluorine has a deathgrip on it.  It'll break
>down it if gets hot, but it won't oxidize.

Correct. Just checked on that at work presently. A PTFE liner 'd be safe.

Vinyl plastics burn well in oxygen; unsafe; chlorine has no deathgrip like
fluorine.

In my materials lists on safety using oxygen, the only organics that are
considered safe are Viton rubbers and PTFE.

The still online 1st HP workshop (IUSAT, Surrey) has a paper on adequate
containers for HTP. IIRC only certain aluminum alloys and certain stainless
steels are OK.

jd

_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 8038 invoked from network); 10 Sep 2001 08:31:07 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 10 Sep 2001 08:31:07 -0000
Received: (qmail 5004 invoked by uid 50005); 10 Sep 2001 08:30:41 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpa with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.271683 secs); 10 Sep 2001 08:30:41 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 10 Sep 2001 08:30:41 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id BAA04199; Mon, 10 Sep 2001 01:15:30 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 85737 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 10 Sep 2001 08:15:26          +0000
Received: from femail18.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail18.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.0.95.145]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id BAA04185          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 10 Sep 2001 01:15:25 -0700
Received: from hal2001 ([24.77.53.245]) by femail18.sdc1.sfba.home.com          (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20 201-229-121-120-20010223) with SMTP id          <20010910081519.BTWI15108.femail18.sdc1.sfba.home.com@hal2001> for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 10 Sep 2001 01:15:19 -0700
References:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010910031737.22771A-100000@spsystems.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <002101c139d0$da44b040$4a00a8c0@hatjs>
Date:         Mon, 10 Sep 2001 01:16:11 -0700
Reply-To: "Jamie Morken" <jmorken@HOME.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jamie Morken" <jmorken@HOME.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Big lander flight video
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Hi all,


> > Yikes. Carbon can act as a slow type cat (try activated carbon for test)
> > with HP and certainly as a fuel...
>
> Aluminum can act as a fuel with LOX, too, but almost all launchers which
> use LOX put it in aluminum tanks.  The issue is how readily things ignite,
> not whether it's possible in principle.  And activated carbon and
> carbon-fiber composites are *very* different materials.
>
> > But then I wonder if, like PE, PTFE is not fuel for a hybrid. Lots of
carbon
> > in PTFE too, should Murphy cause it to get hot I mean.
>
> Lots of carbon, yes, but the fluorine has a deathgrip on it.  It'll break
> down it if gets hot, but it won't oxidize.  (There are a few things it
> will react with, but oxygen isn't among them, except in really extreme
> conditions.)

things like liquid sodium will react with PTFE  (CF4).  Don't try this
unless you are outside, but
when PTFE is heated up enough it will become clear!  emits toxic fumes
though so don't do it! :)

John, why did you drill the vent hole in the upstream side of the ball valve
instead of the downstream side?
I would have thought it would be safer to let any gases vent into the cat
pack/engine rather than the into the propellant tank?

best regards,
Jamie

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 28014 invoked from network); 10 Sep 2001 08:53:41 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 10 Sep 2001 08:53:41 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 3333 invoked by uid 50005); 10 Sep 2001 08:53:21 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpb with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.163342 secs); 10 Sep 2001 08:53:21 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 10 Sep 2001 08:53:21 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id BAA04326; Mon, 10 Sep 2001 01:38:11 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 85762 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 10 Sep 2001 08:38:08          +0000
Received: from idsoftware.com (predator.idsoftware.com [192.246.40.34]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id BAA04312 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Mon, 10 Sep 2001 01:38:07 -0700
Received: from [192.246.40.144] (account johnc HELO pluto.idsoftware.com) by          idsoftware.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 3.4.7) with ESMTP id 376812 for          AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 10 Sep 2001 03:38:07 -0500
X-Sender: johnc@mail.idsoftware.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.1
References: <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010910031737.22771A-100000@spsystems.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <4.3.1.2.20010910034532.061b1c60@mail.idsoftware.com>
Date:         Mon, 10 Sep 2001 03:50:48 -0500
Reply-To: "John Carmack" <johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Carmack" <johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Big lander flight video
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <002101c139d0$da44b040$4a00a8c0@hatjs>

>
>John, why did you drill the vent hole in the upstream side of the ball valve
>instead of the downstream side?
>I would have thought it would be safer to let any gases vent into the cat
>pack/engine rather than the into the propellant tank?
>
>best regards,
>Jamie

There shouldn't be anything but pressurized peroxide in the valve when it
closes, and venting either way would prevent peroxide from being trapped in
the ball cavity, but downstream would cause a dribble of peroxide onto the
cat pack until the ball was drained, which would be disconcerting.

John Carmack

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 14280 invoked from network); 10 Sep 2001 10:05:42 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 10 Sep 2001 10:05:42 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 10602 invoked by uid 50005); 10 Sep 2001 10:05:16 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpa with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.352991 secs); 10 Sep 2001 10:05:16 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 10 Sep 2001 10:05:15 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id CAA04572; Mon, 10 Sep 2001 02:44:36 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 85804 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 10 Sep 2001 09:44:06          +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (f134.law15.hotmail.com [64.4.23.134]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id CAA04557 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Mon, 10 Sep 2001 02:44:05 -0700
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Mon,          10 Sep 2001 02:43:35 -0700
Received: from 193.121.251.246 by lw15fd.law15.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Mon,          10 Sep 2001 09:43:34 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [193.121.251.246]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 10 Sep 2001 09:43:35.0617 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[0FA5E310:01C139DD]
Message-ID:  <F134mlQ080Gxw8Zw5V60000a992@hotmail.com>
Date:         Mon, 10 Sep 2001 09:44:06 +0000
Reply-To: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      [AR] carbon fibre and HTP
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

> >...Carbon can act as a slow type cat (try activated carbon for test)

HS wrote:

>And activated carbon and carbon-fiber composites are *very* different
>materials.

True; I tested AC myself and this came to mind as an example. But the fat
Gmelin book on HP catalysis not only mentions active carbon but simple
graphite having catalytic activities on HP decomposition... Now think what
it could do, not to HP but to HTP...

I'd observe a C fibre chunk for a few days in HTP to make sure if I was to
sit on JC's contraption.

Do you have compatibility confirmation literature handy about C fibre and
HTP?

Last word: I doubt very much if you'd get an HTP load on an airplane in a
carbon fibre tank lined with vinyl plastic!

JD



_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 9218 invoked from network); 10 Sep 2001 10:16:20 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 10 Sep 2001 10:16:20 -0000
Received: (qmail 3275 invoked by uid 50005); 10 Sep 2001 10:16:00 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpb with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.098174 secs); 10 Sep 2001 10:16:00 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 10 Sep 2001 10:16:00 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id CAA04659; Mon, 10 Sep 2001 02:55:39 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 85823 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 10 Sep 2001 09:55:28          +0000
Received: from mta05.mail.mel.aone.net.au (mta05.mail.au.uu.net [203.2.192.85])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id CAA04645 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 10 Sep 2001 02:55:26 -0700
Received: from unknown ([63.34.220.28]) by mta05.mail.mel.aone.net.au with SMTP          id <20010910095518.VFYY7694.mta05.mail.mel.aone.net.au@unknown> for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 10 Sep 2001 19:55:18 +1000
References: Conversation <F505CUD8tBG8lEIR9sJ0000b8fb@hotmail.com> with last            message <F505CUD8tBG8lEIR9sJ0000b8fb@hotmail.com>
Priority: Normal
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Priority: 3
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	X-MAPIextension=.TXT;
	charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>
Date:         Mon, 10 Sep 2001 09:55:28 +0000
Reply-To: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Big lander flight video
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <F505CUD8tBG8lEIR9sJ0000b8fb@hotmail.com>

----------
> JC wrote:
>
> >...It is a carbon fiber natural gas vehicle tank with a total capacity of
> >40 liters...
>
> Yikes. Carbon can act as a slow type cat (try activated carbon for test)
> with HP and certainly as a fuel. I suppose it has a PTFE liner or
something?
> But then I wonder if, like PE, PTFE is not fuel for a hybrid. Lots of
carbon
> in PTFE too, should Murphy cause it to get hot I mean.

PTFE should theoretically react with any *FUEL* more reactive than carbon
(or at least more reactive than H, say with an EN or <2) given the right
environment. If it was to be used in a hybrid the most suitable
configuration may well be a solid PTFE (oxidizer) grain requiring liquid
fuel injection to react with ie.(the reverse config to conventional or
common hybrids). The liquid fuel may have to be something quite reactive
though like TEA or something containing Mg. As you mentioned it's not
really a propellant combination for the greenies:-)

Troy.




>
> jd
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 10805 invoked from network); 10 Sep 2001 10:42:24 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 10 Sep 2001 10:42:24 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 745 invoked by uid 50005); 10 Sep 2001 10:40:41 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.277695 secs); 10 Sep 2001 10:40:41 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 10 Sep 2001 10:40:41 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id DAA04804; Mon, 10 Sep 2001 03:21:56 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 85850 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 10 Sep 2001 10:21:33          +0000
Received: from idsoftware.com (predator.idsoftware.com [192.246.40.34]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id DAA04790 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Mon, 10 Sep 2001 03:21:30 -0700
Received: from [192.246.40.144] (account johnc HELO pluto.idsoftware.com) by          idsoftware.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 3.4.7) with ESMTP id 376838 for          AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 10 Sep 2001 05:21:26 -0500
X-Sender: johnc@mail.idsoftware.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <4.3.1.2.20010910053133.062e3ee8@mail.idsoftware.com>
Date:         Mon, 10 Sep 2001 05:34:08 -0500
Reply-To: "John Carmack" <johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Carmack" <johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] carbon fibre and HTP
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <F134mlQ080Gxw8Zw5V60000a992@hotmail.com>

>John Dom wrote:



>I'd observe a C fibre chunk for a few days in HTP to make sure if I was to
>sit on JC's contraption.
>
>Do you have compatibility confirmation literature handy about C fibre and
>HTP?
>
>Last word: I doubt very much if you'd get an HTP load on an airplane in a
>carbon fibre tank lined with vinyl plastic!
>
>JD

Do note that the peroxide is loaded immediately prior to flight, so it
doesn't sit there very long, and that even if there was a decomposition
problem, there is a half inch burst disc, and the tank is rated for over
15,000 psi burst pressure.

John Carmack

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 28871 invoked from network); 10 Sep 2001 11:41:03 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 10 Sep 2001 11:41:03 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 1830 invoked by uid 50005); 10 Sep 2001 11:38:42 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.240218 secs); 10 Sep 2001 11:38:42 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 10 Sep 2001 11:38:42 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id EAA05126; Mon, 10 Sep 2001 04:15:04 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 85893 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 10 Sep 2001 11:14:46          +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (f175.law15.hotmail.com [64.4.23.175]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id EAA05109 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Mon, 10 Sep 2001 04:14:45 -0700
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Mon,          10 Sep 2001 04:14:14 -0700
Received: from 193.121.251.246 by lw15fd.law15.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Mon,          10 Sep 2001 11:14:14 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [193.121.251.246]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 10 Sep 2001 11:14:14.0987 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[B9C3E1B0:01C139E9]
Message-ID:  <F175IzcS0SkDcsQFQ4O0000a937@hotmail.com>
Date:         Mon, 10 Sep 2001 11:14:46 +0000
Reply-To: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] carbon fibre and HTP
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

JC wrote:

>Do note that the peroxide is loaded immediately prior to flight, so it
>doesn't sit there very long...burst disk safety valve...

I realized such. I just tried to contribute saying what I suspect being
unsafe.

jd

_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 17597 invoked from network); 10 Sep 2001 12:28:06 -0000
X-Priority: 3
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 10 Sep 2001 12:28:06 -0000
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 12460 invoked by uid 50005); 10 Sep 2001 12:27:38 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpa with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.295926 secs); 10 Sep 2001 12:27:38 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 10 Sep 2001 12:27:37 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id FAA05309; Mon, 10 Sep 2001 05:07:52 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 85923 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 10 Sep 2001 12:07:19          +0000
Received: from imo-d08.mx.aol.com (imo-d08.mx.aol.com [205.188.157.40]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id EAA05273 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Mon, 10 Sep 2001 04:57:19 -0700
Received: from XR750RACE@aol.com by imo-d08.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v31_r1.4.) id          w.20.1bae95c6 (3975) for <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Mon, 10 Sep 2001          07:57:06 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: AOL 4.0 for Windows 95 sub 114
Message-ID:  <20.1bae95c6.28ce0492@aol.com>
Date:         Mon, 10 Sep 2001 07:57:06 EDT
Reply-To: <XR750RACE@AOL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <XR750RACE@AOL.COM>
Subject:      [AR] Clubs
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

    Does anyone know if there is such a club that allows the use of rocket
candy motors ? Also, isn't there an Amateur Rocket Society club out there
somewhere?

doyle

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 5530 invoked from network); 10 Sep 2001 13:44:01 -0000
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 10 Sep 2001 13:44:01 -0000
Received: (qmail 393 invoked by uid 50005); 10 Sep 2001 13:43:21 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpe with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4157. . Clean. Processed in 0.731055 secs); 10 Sep 2001 13:43:21 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 10 Sep 2001 13:43:20 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA05629; Mon, 10 Sep 2001 06:24:09 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 85968 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 10 Sep 2001 13:23:20          +0000
Received: from prover.com (IDENT:root@chaos.sthlm.prover.com [192.71.47.101])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA05614 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 10 Sep 2001 06:23:17 -0700
Received: from duncan (sdsl-64-139-0-245.dsl.sca.megapath.net [64.139.0.245])          by prover.com (8.11.3/8.11.3) with SMTP id f8ADLse03049; Mon, 10 Sep          2001 15:21:54 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0D3B_01C56B69.51A0FBD0"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <NEBBLECGKLLOLFCCBNPEAENPDJAA.duncan.mcdonald@prover.com>
Date:         Mon, 10 Sep 2001 06:22:28 -0700
Reply-To: "Duncan McDonald" <duncan.mcdonald@PROVER.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Duncan McDonald" <duncan.mcdonald@PROVER.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Smokeless powder ignitor enhancement
Comments: To: Sociald84@AOL.COM
Comments: cc: Des.Bromilow@citec.com.au
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <de.1a222e5e.28cc76d2@aol.com>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0D3B_01C56B69.51A0FBD0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

I'm actually not confused about pyrodex versus pyrogen. I'm just not reading
what I'm typing. I meant to say "pyrogen-like dipping compound". By dip ignitors
I meant dip e-matches (Oxral, etc), not raw wire. Thanks for the graphite tip
though, I didn't know that was the "bridge-wireless" conductive material.
Another question though: does the type of SP used to make the acetone/SP slurry
have a direct bearing on the ignitor popping effect? Would using a slower SP
reduce the tendency of the ignitor to "pop" instead of burn. Or is the
additional magnesium dip the best solution (no pun intended).

Duncan
  -----Original Message-----
  From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU]On Behalf
Of Sociald84@AOL.COM
  Sent: Sunday, September 09, 2001 12:40 AM
  To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
  Subject: Re: [AR] Smokeless powder ignitor enhancement


  In a message dated 9/7/2001 9:41:46 AM Mountain Daylight Time,
  duncan.mcdonald@PROVER.COM writes:



    So let's see if I have this right. I can use smokeless powder to make a
    pyrodex-like dipping compound for say ignitors by dissolving some smokeless
    powder like Bullseye pistol powder with a small amount of acetone. I can
    then mix this paste with epoxy and use it to dip ignitors and it will
    produce the same effect upon ignition as the various ignitor dipping kits
    that are on the market. Correct?

    Duncan



  Nope. Your probably confused. Yes you can use smokeless powders such as
  Bullseye disolved in acetone as a pyrogen. No smokeless is nothing at all
  like pyrodex.

  To make the igniters such as the kits on the market you need to mix Graphite
  powder with expoxy. Dip the igniter leads in that. Then after that has cured
  dip that into the smokeless laquer. At that point you can let it dry and use
  as is or make it a bigger igniter by adding more layers of laquer. Or you can
  make it a hotter igniter by dusting the wet igniter with magnesium powder.
  Let the laquer dry, and dip it in laquer one more time.

  Hope that clears things up for you.

  Mark

------=_NextPart_000_0D3B_01C56B69.51A0FBD0
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META content=3D"text/html; charset=3Diso-8859-1" =
http-equiv=3DContent-Type>
<META content=3D"MSHTML 5.00.2919.6307" name=3DGENERATOR></HEAD>
<BODY>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial><SPAN class=3D090362202-10092001>I'm actually =
not confused=20
about pyrodex versus pyrogen. I'm just not reading what I'm typing. I =
meant to=20
say "pyrogen-like dipping compound". By dip ignitors I meant dip =
e-matches=20
(Oxral, etc), not raw wire. Thanks for the graphite tip though, I didn't =
know=20
that was the "bridge-wireless" conductive material. Another question =
though:=20
does the type of SP used to make the acetone/SP slurry have a direct =
bearing on=20
the ignitor popping effect? Would using a slower SP reduce the tendency =
of the=20
ignitor to "pop" instead of burn. Or is the additional magnesium dip the =
best=20
solution (no pun intended).</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial><SPAN =
class=3D090362202-10092001></SPAN></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial><SPAN =
class=3D090362202-10092001>Duncan</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE>
  <DIV align=3Dleft class=3DOutlookMessageHeader dir=3Dltr><FONT =
face=3DTahoma=20
  size=3D2>-----Original Message-----<BR><B>From:</B> Amateur Rocketry =
discussion=20
  list [mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU]<B>On Behalf Of=20
  </B>Sociald84@AOL.COM<BR><B>Sent:</B> Sunday, September 09, 2001 12:40 =

  AM<BR><B>To:</B> AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU<BR><B>Subject:</B> Re: [AR] =
Smokeless=20
  powder ignitor enhancement<BR><BR></DIV></FONT><FONT=20
  face=3Darial,helvetica><FONT size=3D2>In a message dated 9/7/2001 =
9:41:46 AM=20
  Mountain Daylight Time, <BR>duncan.mcdonald@PROVER.COM writes: =
<BR><BR><BR>
  <BLOCKQUOTE=20
  style=3D"BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; =
MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px"=20
  TYPE=3D"CITE">So let's see if I have this right. I can use smokeless =
powder to=20
    make a <BR>pyrodex-like dipping compound for say ignitors by =
dissolving some=20
    smokeless <BR>powder like Bullseye pistol powder with a small amount =
of=20
    acetone. I can <BR>then mix this paste with epoxy and use it to dip =
ignitors=20
    and it will <BR>produce the same effect upon ignition as the various =
ignitor=20
    dipping kits <BR>that are on the market. Correct? <BR><BR>Duncan=20
  <BR></BLOCKQUOTE><BR><BR>Nope. Your probably confused. Yes you can use =

  smokeless powders such as <BR>Bullseye disolved in acetone as a =
pyrogen. No=20
  smokeless is nothing at all <BR>like pyrodex. <BR><BR>To make the =
igniters=20
  such as the kits on the market you need to mix Graphite <BR>powder =
with=20
  expoxy. Dip the igniter leads in that. Then after that has cured =
<BR>dip that=20
  into the smokeless laquer. At that point you can let it dry and use =
<BR>as is=20
  or make it a bigger igniter by adding more layers of laquer. Or you =
can=20
  <BR>make it a hotter igniter by dusting the wet igniter with magnesium =
powder.=20
  <BR>Let the laquer dry, and dip it in laquer one more time. =
<BR><BR>Hope that=20
  clears things up for you. <BR><BR>Mark</FONT> =
</FONT></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0D3B_01C56B69.51A0FBD0--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 7275 invoked from network); 10 Sep 2001 14:12:49 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 10 Sep 2001 14:12:49 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 31317 invoked by uid 50005); 10 Sep 2001 14:12:27 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpb with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.347867 secs); 10 Sep 2001 14:12:27 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 10 Sep 2001 14:12:26 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA05786; Mon, 10 Sep 2001 06:56:20 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 85987 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 10 Sep 2001 13:56:11          +0000
Received: from smtp006pub.verizon.net (smtp006pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.185])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA05772 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 10 Sep 2001 06:56:11 -0700
Received: from [63.15.225.153] (1Cust114.tnt1.rancho-cucamonga.ca.da.uu.net          [63.24.225.114]) by smtp006pub.verizon.net  with ESMTP for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; id f8ADtd312284 Mon, 10 Sep 2001 08:55:39          -0500 (CDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: GTE/01rocket@mail.gte.net
References: <20.1bae95c6.28ce0492@aol.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <a05100304b7c2766b9a9a@[63.15.225.153]>
Date:         Mon, 10 Sep 2001 06:55:37 -0700
Reply-To: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Clubs
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <20.1bae95c6.28ce0492@aol.com>

>     Does anyone know if there is such a club that allows the use of rocket
>candy motors ? Also, isn't there an Amateur Rocket Society club out there
>somewhere?
>
>doyle

I guess technically arocket is a club with no membership fee as it
has members, meetings, launches and a newsletter.

Other more traditional clubs that already do alot of sugar stuff are
RRS and PRS both in CA.  www.rrs.org and search for PRS.

Jerry


--
Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
Opinion, the whole thing.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 5345 invoked from network); 10 Sep 2001 14:33:40 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 10 Sep 2001 14:33:40 -0000
Received: (qmail 25279 invoked by uid 50005); 10 Sep 2001 14:30:43 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpf with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4157. . Clean. Processed in 0.17065 secs); 10 Sep 2001 14:30:43 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 10 Sep 2001 14:30:43 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA05934; Mon, 10 Sep 2001 07:17:42 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 86016 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 10 Sep 2001 14:17:28          +0000
Received: from spsystems.net (spsystems.net [209.47.149.227]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA05920 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Mon,          10 Sep 2001 07:17:27 -0700
Received: (from henry@localhost) by spsystems.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id KAA28420;          Mon, 10 Sep 2001 10:16:56 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010910100828.28268A-100000@spsystems.net>
Date:         Mon, 10 Sep 2001 10:16:55 -0400
Reply-To: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Big lander flight video
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <F89DJnLq630zyE8Gape0000abb7@hotmail.com>

On Mon, 10 Sep 2001, John Dom wrote:
> Vinyl plastics burn well in oxygen; unsafe...

Again, the first doesn't automatically imply the second.  Both aluminum
and steel burn very well indeed in oxygen... once ignited.

> In my materials lists on safety using oxygen, the only organics that are
> considered safe are Viton rubbers and PTFE.

Correct, but (a) that doesn't automatically read over to peroxide (note
the common use of PE for peroxide), and (b) those results are based on
very conservative tests (the alloys used in the shuttle ET LOX tank tend
to flunk those tests).

Rotary Rocket tested carbon-fiber LOX tanks quite extensively and found
them safe in practice.  They would burn if they were ignited, yes, but
they don't ignite easily.  And that's with LOX, rather more reactive than
peroxide.

> The still online 1st HP workshop (IUSAT, Surrey) has a paper on adequate
> containers for HTP. IIRC only certain aluminum alloys and certain stainless
> steels are OK.

Note that there are different degrees of "adequate".  One has to
distinguish materials which are workable for long-term storage from those
acceptable for brief use.  Long-term storage is rather demanding, yes, but
the engines of the British peroxide rockets successfully used a number of
materials which would not be usable for long-term storage.

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 7306 invoked from network); 10 Sep 2001 15:01:44 -0000
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 10 Sep 2001 15:01:44 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 29228 invoked by uid 50005); 10 Sep 2001 15:01:02 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpe with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4157. . Clean. Processed in 0.212188 secs); 10 Sep 2001 15:01:02 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 10 Sep 2001 15:01:02 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA06018; Mon, 10 Sep 2001 07:30:45 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 86027 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 10 Sep 2001 14:30:29          +0000
Received: from munch.biochem.duke.edu (munch.biochem.duke.edu [152.3.174.65])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA05962 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 10 Sep 2001 07:20:28 -0700
Received: from nc.rr.com (IDENT:jeff@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by          munch.biochem.duke.edu (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f8AEWVT01156 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 10 Sep 2001 10:32:31 -0400
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.76 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.4.3 i686)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <F111FqZqT5TJKXWlA710000a966@hotmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B9CCEFF.A5C0529A@nc.rr.com>
Date:         Mon, 10 Sep 2001 10:32:31 -0400
Reply-To: "Jeff Taylor" <jtaylor@NC.RR.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jeff Taylor" <jtaylor@NC.RR.COM>
Organization: Loki Research
Subject:      Re: [AR] AN melt
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

John Dom wrote:

> >Some of my previuos experiments allow me to conclude higher alcohols have
> >no
> >chance to dissolve in AN melt due to their low polarity.
>
> Could be. As to polarity being the cause, sugars are not polar compounds are
> they?

While sugars themselves are not very polar, they contain many polar hydroxyl
groups, so they are soluble in polar solvents (like water).

- Jeff Taylor

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 6464 invoked from network); 10 Sep 2001 15:36:05 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 10 Sep 2001 15:36:05 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 25023 invoked by uid 50005); 10 Sep 2001 15:34:21 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4157. . Clean. Processed in 0.293146 secs); 10 Sep 2001 15:34:21 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 10 Sep 2001 15:34:20 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA06227; Mon, 10 Sep 2001 08:03:32 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 86065 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 10 Sep 2001 15:03:29          +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (f139.law15.hotmail.com [64.4.23.139]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA06213 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Mon, 10 Sep 2001 08:03:29 -0700
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Mon,          10 Sep 2001 08:02:58 -0700
Received: from 193.121.251.246 by lw15fd.law15.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Mon,          10 Sep 2001 15:02:58 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [193.121.251.246]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 10 Sep 2001 15:02:58.0986 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[ADE7F0A0:01C13A09]
Message-ID:  <F139sr1QQrUV5deQDbX0000aebe@hotmail.com>
Date:         Mon, 10 Sep 2001 15:03:29 +0000
Reply-To: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Big lander flight video
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Quote HS:

>Long-term storage is rather demanding, yes, but
>the engines of the British peroxide rockets successfully used a number of
>materials which would not be usable for long-term storage.

Like?

What I meant was that if you can chose between materials that are safe and
not-so-safe, you chose the ones that are safe. Unless they are unaffordable
or too hard to obtain.
I'd prefer a thin walled stainless tank for HTP. Preferably spherical. I
have seen them in the Le Bourget halls. Forgot about the manufacturor.

jd

jd

_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 291 invoked from network); 10 Sep 2001 15:48:07 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 10 Sep 2001 15:48:07 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 5523 invoked by uid 50005); 10 Sep 2001 15:45:11 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpa with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4157. . Clean. Processed in 1.2866 secs); 10 Sep 2001 15:45:11 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 10 Sep 2001 15:45:08 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA06538; Mon, 10 Sep 2001 08:28:32 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 86114 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 10 Sep 2001 15:28:29          +0000
Received: from smtp007pub.verizon.net (smtp007pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.186])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA06523 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 10 Sep 2001 08:28:28 -0700
Received: from [63.15.225.153] (1Cust128.tnt2.rancho-cucamonga.ca.da.uu.net          [63.15.225.128]) by smtp007pub.verizon.net  with ESMTP for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; id f8AFRPj16743 Mon, 10 Sep 2001 10:27:56          -0500 (CDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: GTE/01rocket@mail.gte.net
References: <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010910100828.28268A-100000@spsystems.net>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <a05100305b7c28beaa762@[63.15.225.153]>
Date:         Mon, 10 Sep 2001 08:27:25 -0700
Reply-To: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Big lander flight video
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010910100828.28268A-100000@spsystems.net>

>Spencer wrote:


>Rotary Rocket tested carbon-fiber LOX tanks quite extensively and found
them safe in practice.

Any special grade or style of resin?

With the large number of people envisioning some sort of LOX systems
this would be a good area for study by several people.

Jerry


--
Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
Opinion, the whole thing.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 4589 invoked from network); 10 Sep 2001 15:49:05 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 10 Sep 2001 15:49:05 -0000
Received: (qmail 27283 invoked by uid 50005); 10 Sep 2001 15:46:32 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4157. . Clean. Processed in 0.189616 secs); 10 Sep 2001 15:46:32 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 10 Sep 2001 15:46:32 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA06311; Mon, 10 Sep 2001 08:19:54 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 86084 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 10 Sep 2001 15:19:52          +0000
Received: from spsystems.net (spsystems.net [209.47.149.227]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA06297 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Mon,          10 Sep 2001 08:19:51 -0700
Received: (from henry@localhost) by spsystems.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id LAA29183;          Mon, 10 Sep 2001 11:19:19 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010910111009.28651D-100000@spsystems.net>
Date:         Mon, 10 Sep 2001 11:19:19 -0400
Reply-To: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Big lander flight video
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <F139sr1QQrUV5deQDbX0000aebe@hotmail.com>

On Mon, 10 Sep 2001, John Dom wrote:
> >Long-term storage is rather demanding, yes, but
> >the engines of the British peroxide rockets successfully used a number of
> >materials which would not be usable for long-term storage.
>
> Like?

Most notably, nickel-plated steel.  They did avoid copper-containing
alloys.

> What I meant was that if you can chose between materials that are safe and
> not-so-safe, you chose the ones that are safe. Unless they are unaffordable
> or too hard to obtain.

Yes, but we're not primarily talking about safety here, not with HTP.  The
main materials issue with HTP is not safety, but decomposition rates.
(Which is why PE is considered acceptable.)  That does not turn into a
safety issue unless you've been careless and failed to provide adequate
venting.

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 17427 invoked from network); 10 Sep 2001 15:51:55 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 10 Sep 2001 15:51:55 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 27154 invoked by uid 50005); 10 Sep 2001 15:48:50 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpf with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4157. . Clean. Processed in 0.809567 secs); 10 Sep 2001 15:48:50 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 10 Sep 2001 15:48:47 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA06418; Mon, 10 Sep 2001 08:23:12 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 86099 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 10 Sep 2001 15:23:11          +0000
Received: from mail.edstud.chalmers.se          (IDENT:B1CV2ua1tTcW9g7EjG9aov/UR1NUUvzV@osiris.edstud.chalmers.se          [129.16.30.197]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA06404          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 10 Sep 2001 08:23:10 -0700
Received: from licia.dtek.chalmers.se (licia.dtek.chalmers.se [129.16.30.88])          by mail.edstud.chalmers.se (Postfix) with ESMTP id 74BC13B217; Mon,          10 Sep 2001 17:23:03 +0200 (MEST)
Received: (from d3august@localhost) by licia.dtek.chalmers.se (8.9.3/8.9.3) id          RAA29167; Mon, 10 Sep 2001 17:23:03 +0200 (MEST)
References: <F89DJnLq630zyE8Gape0000abb7@hotmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Disposition: inline
User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i
Message-ID:  <20010910172303.A28199@licia.dtek.chalmers.se>
Date:         Mon, 10 Sep 2001 17:23:03 +0200
Reply-To: "Bj|rn Augustsson" <d3august@DTEK.CHALMERS.SE>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Bj|rn Augustsson" <d3august@DTEK.CHALMERS.SE>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Big lander flight video
Comments: To: John Dom <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <F89DJnLq630zyE8Gape0000abb7@hotmail.com>; from j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM              on Mon, Sep 10, 2001 at 08:07:38AM +0000

Quoting John Dom <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>:
>
> Correct. Just checked on that at work presently. A PTFE liner 'd be safe.
>
> Vinyl plastics burn well in oxygen; unsafe; chlorine has no deathgrip like
> fluorine.
>
> In my materials lists on safety using oxygen, the only organics that are
> considered safe are Viton rubbers and PTFE.

I might remember it wrong, but wasn't it burning PTFE insulation in an
oxygen tank that caused the while apollo 13 mess?

/August.
--
Wrong on most accounts.  const Foo *foo; and Foo const *foo; mean the same: foo
being a pointer to const Foo.  const Foo const *foo; would mean the same but is
illegal (double const).  You are confusing this with Foo * const foo; and const
Foo * const foo; respectively. -David Kastrup, comp.os.linux.development.system

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 6246 invoked from network); 10 Sep 2001 15:56:27 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 10 Sep 2001 15:56:27 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA06644; Mon, 10 Sep 2001 08:35:19 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 86137 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 10 Sep 2001 15:35:18          +0000
Received: from spsystems.net (spsystems.net [209.47.149.227]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA06629 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Mon,          10 Sep 2001 08:35:17 -0700
Received: (from henry@localhost) by spsystems.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id LAA29326;          Mon, 10 Sep 2001 11:34:45 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010910113416.28651E-100000@spsystems.net>
Date:         Mon, 10 Sep 2001 11:34:45 -0400
Reply-To: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Big lander flight video
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <a05100305b7c28beaa762@[63.15.225.153]>

On Mon, 10 Sep 2001, Jerry Irvine wrote:
> >Rotary Rocket tested carbon-fiber LOX tanks quite extensively and found
> >them safe in practice.
>
> Any special grade or style of resin?

"Details proprietary."  Or so I understood at the time.  Sigh.

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 15733 invoked from network); 10 Sep 2001 16:05:26 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 10 Sep 2001 16:05:26 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 18940 invoked by uid 50005); 10 Sep 2001 16:05:03 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpb with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 1.072035 secs); 10 Sep 2001 16:05:03 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 10 Sep 2001 16:05:02 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA06612; Mon, 10 Sep 2001 08:34:43 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 86129 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 10 Sep 2001 15:34:39          +0000
Received: from smtppop2pub.verizon.net (smtppop2pub.gte.net [206.46.170.21]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA06598 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 10 Sep 2001 08:34:39 -0700
Received: from [63.15.225.153] (1Cust128.tnt2.rancho-cucamonga.ca.da.uu.net          [63.15.225.128]) by smtppop2pub.verizon.net  with ESMTP for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; id KAA1975292 Mon, 10 Sep 2001 10:35:05 -0500          (CDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: GTE/01rocket@mail.gte.net
References: <000301c13a07$306f7f00$6634cbcc@zip>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <a05100306b7c28c7ac93c@[63.15.225.153]>
Date:         Mon, 10 Sep 2001 08:34:06 -0700
Reply-To: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Clubs
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <000301c13a07$306f7f00$6634cbcc@zip>

>Jerry,
>
>Could expand on what PRS stands for?


Pacific Rocket Society
they also fly at MTA where RRS does.

Let's see if I can find a link . . . . no

Pacific Rocket Society
Box 662
Mojave, CA 93502
Los Angeles Office: (323) 463-6529
Email: Cyberplex@aol.com

Tell them Jerry sent you.

--
Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
Opinion, the whole thing.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 24631 invoked from network); 10 Sep 2001 16:14:42 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 10 Sep 2001 16:14:42 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 1527 invoked by uid 50005); 10 Sep 2001 16:12:57 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4157. . Clean. Processed in 0.113288 secs); 10 Sep 2001 16:12:57 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 10 Sep 2001 16:12:57 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA06723; Mon, 10 Sep 2001 08:42:18 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 86156 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 10 Sep 2001 15:42:16          +0000
Received: from femail25.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail25.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.254.60.15]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA06709          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 10 Sep 2001 08:42:16 -0700
Received: from c1649002-a.earthlink.net ([24.20.95.67]) by          femail25.sdc1.sfba.home.com (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20          201-229-121-120-20010223) with ESMTP id          <20010910154209.KLCG18062.femail25.sdc1.sfba.home.com@c1649002-a.earthlink.net>; Mon, 10 Sep 2001 08:42:09          -0700
X-Sender: forkbomb@mail.earthlink.net
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.0.2
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <5.0.2.1.0.20010910083537.024b8c18@mail.earthlink.net>
Date:         Mon, 10 Sep 2001 08:42:06 -0700
Reply-To: "Pierce Nichols" <forkbomb@EARTHLINK.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Pierce Nichols" <forkbomb@EARTHLINK.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Big lander flight video
Comments: To: John Dom <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <F139sr1QQrUV5deQDbX0000aebe@hotmail.com>

At 03:03 PM 9/10/2001 +0000, John Dom wrote:
>Quote HS:
>
>>Long-term storage is rather demanding, yes, but
>>the engines of the British peroxide rockets successfully used a number of
>>materials which would not be usable for long-term storage.
>
>Like?
>
>What I meant was that if you can chose between materials that are safe and
>not-so-safe, you chose the ones that are safe. Unless they are unaffordable
>or too hard to obtain.
>I'd prefer a thin walled stainless tank for HTP. Preferably spherical. I
>have seen them in the Le Bourget halls. Forgot about the manufacturor.


         There are serious weight and cost issues with steel tanks.
Filament wound carbon fibre tanks are very light for their burst pressure
(very important for pressure-fed flight vehicles), and are relatively
cheap. You can't store peroxide in them for weeks, but you can store
peroxide in them long enough for a short flight.

         -p


Mars or Bust!
www.marssociety.com

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 25348 invoked from network); 10 Sep 2001 16:14:54 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 10 Sep 2001 16:14:54 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 11012 invoked by uid 50005); 10 Sep 2001 16:12:31 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4157. . Clean. Processed in 0.16483 secs); 10 Sep 2001 16:12:31 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 10 Sep 2001 16:12:31 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA06782; Mon, 10 Sep 2001 08:45:19 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 86136 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 10 Sep 2001 15:45:18          +0000
Received: from scaup.mail.pas.earthlink.net (scaup.mail.pas.earthlink.net          [207.217.121.49]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA06626          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 10 Sep 2001 08:35:17 -0700
Received: from earthlink.net (dialup-209.245.131.241.Dial1.SanJose1.Level3.net          [209.245.131.241]) by scaup.mail.pas.earthlink.net (EL-8_9_3_3/8.9.3)          with ESMTP id IAA11536; Mon, 10 Sep 2001 08:35:16 -0700 (PDT)
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.75 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.16-22 i686)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <F89DJnLq630zyE8Gape0000abb7@hotmail.com>            <20010910172303.A28199@licia.dtek.chalmers.se>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B9CDE20.6A4EAD3B@earthlink.net>
Date:         Mon, 10 Sep 2001 08:37:04 -0700
Reply-To: "David Weinshenker" <daze39@EARTHLINK.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "David Weinshenker" <daze39@EARTHLINK.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Big lander flight video
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Bj|rn Augustsson wrote:
> I might remember it wrong, but wasn't it burning PTFE insulation in an
> oxygen tank that caused the while apollo 13 mess?

Yes, but it took exposure to concentrated oxygen at high pressure
and temperature (due to a malfunctioning heater thermostat and an
improvised tank-emptying procedure) to degrade the PTFE to where
the hazardous situation occurred...

-dave w

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 6581 invoked from network); 10 Sep 2001 16:50:15 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 10 Sep 2001 16:50:15 -0000
Received: (qmail 7302 invoked by uid 50005); 10 Sep 2001 16:49:46 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpa with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4157. . Clean. Processed in 0.332832 secs); 10 Sep 2001 16:49:46 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 10 Sep 2001 16:49:45 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA07087; Mon, 10 Sep 2001 09:16:37 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 86227 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 10 Sep 2001 16:16:34          +0000
Received: from femail7.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail7.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.0.95.87]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA07073 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 10 Sep 2001 09:16:34 -0700
Received: from hal2001 ([24.77.53.245]) by femail7.sdc1.sfba.home.com          (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20 201-229-121-120-20010223) with SMTP id          <20010910161633.IMCZ6388.femail7.sdc1.sfba.home.com@hal2001> for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 10 Sep 2001 09:16:33 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <003301c13a14$149d61e0$4a00a8c0@hatjs>
Date:         Mon, 10 Sep 2001 09:17:25 -0700
Reply-To: "Jamie Morken" <jmorken@HOME.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jamie Morken" <jmorken@HOME.COM>
Subject:      [AR] sun sensors
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Hi all,

I have been working on a schematic for a simple sunsensor, it uses 4
photoresistors and 4 instrumentation amplifiers.  The instrumentation
amplifiers are fed into a microcontrollers ADC, so taking advice from this
list there are very few analog components.

I tested the photoresistors outside on a sunny day and found the range of
resistances for pointed at the sun, ~90degrees away from the sun (blue sky)
and pointed at pavement and at grass.  They all seem to output pretty good
resistance variances and there is a very noticeable decrease in resistance
as the sensor moves towards the sun.  The average resistance of the sensors
when pointed at the sun was about 100ohms (largest 177ohms, smallest 83
ohms)  After looking at all the data I think that a measurement range of 50
to 500 ohms will be plenty for the sensors I've tested on sunny day flights.
The circuit uses the photoresistors to set the gain of the instrumentation
amplifiers (one photoresistor per amp) and uses a 5mV supply fed into the
(+) input of each instrumentation amp.  This 5mV signal is amplified to 5V
if the photoresistor has 50ohms resistance (bright), and 500mV if the
photoresistor has 500ohms resistance (dark).

I was thinking about using a constant current power supply to pass through
all the sensors in series and then feeding the instrumentation amps with the
high and low side of each resistor but am not sure if this would be better
or not?  Is it ok to use a variable resistor to set the gain of the
instrumentation amps?

Any ideas on the best way to calibrate this?  I was thinking about having a
built in calibration routine with the calibration data stored in eeprom and
interpolated in software and calibrating using accelerometers.  Any ideas on
the best method of calibration?

best regards,
Jamie

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 13119 invoked from network); 10 Sep 2001 17:36:13 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 10 Sep 2001 17:36:13 -0000
Received: (qmail 11345 invoked by uid 50005); 10 Sep 2001 17:35:44 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpa with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4157. . Clean. Processed in 0.174882 secs); 10 Sep 2001 17:35:44 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 10 Sep 2001 17:35:44 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA07264; Mon, 10 Sep 2001 09:49:45 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 86260 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 10 Sep 2001 16:48:59          +0000
Received: from zcars0m9.ca.nortel.com (h157s242a129n47.user.nortelnetworks.com          [47.129.242.157]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA07249          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 10 Sep 2001 09:48:58 -0700
Received: from zcars04f.ca.nortel.com (zcars04f.ca.nortel.com [47.129.242.57])          by zcars0m9.ca.nortel.com (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f8AGltp23538          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 10 Sep 2001 12:47:55 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from rftzy232.ca.nortel.com by zcars04f.ca.nortel.com; Mon, 10 Sep          2001 12:47:58 -0400
Received: from NORTELNETWORKS.COM (wftzh00e.ca.nortel.com [47.130.116.9]) by          rftzy232.ca.nortel.com with SMTP (Microsoft Exchange Internet Mail          Service Version 5.5.2653.13) id SHASBJVC; Mon, 10 Sep 2001 12:47:07          -0400
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.73C-CCK-MCD [en] (X11; U; HP-UX B.10.20 9000/785)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <5.1.0.14.2.20010909203733.00b3bde8@mail>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Orig: <mleech@NORTELNETWORKS.COM>
Message-ID:  <3B9CEECC.F6D3DA8E@NORTELNETWORKS.COM>
Date:         Mon, 10 Sep 2001 12:48:12 -0400
Reply-To: "Marcus Leech" <mleech@NORTELNETWORKS.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Marcus Leech" <mleech@NORTELNETWORKS.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Cheap, Easy test stand for small motors
Comments: To: Mark C Spiegl <spiegl@HOME.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Mark C Spiegl wrote:
>
> > I wish I could buy a (strain gauge plus connections to laptop plus software)
> > module. Suggestions?
>
> Dataq (www.dataq.com) will give you a 4 channel A/D, which connects to
> a PC via the serial port for free if you qualify. The eval package
> includes some pretty nice acquisition software as well.
>
> I think you just need to be an engineer to qualify. (dunno for sure)
> If you do not qualify the part + software is only $13 USD.
>
> The strain gauge is a little more involved. The sensor is what cost
> me the $$$.
You can get naked strain gages from Omega (www.omega.com)--buy the ones with
  leads already soldered!  Richard Nakka has a spreadsheet on his site that
  allows you to design a load cell based on Omega strain gages. If you have
  access to a machine shop, or are willing to spend a few $$$ to have a shop
  make up these (very simple) load cells, you can't do much better.  In fact, the
  Nakka load cell design could be done using only a drill press and hacksaw, now
  that I think of it, but it won't be quite as pretty!

--
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Marcus Leech                             Mail:   Dept 8M70, MS 012, FITZ
Advisor                                  Phone: (ESN) 393-9145  +1 613 763 9145
Security Architecture and Planning       Fax:   (ESN) 393-9435  +1 613 763 9435
Nortel Networks                          mleech@nortelnetworks.com
-----------------Expressed opinions are my own, not my employer's------

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 18479 invoked from network); 10 Sep 2001 17:37:33 -0000
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 10 Sep 2001 17:37:33 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 2055 invoked by uid 50005); 10 Sep 2001 17:34:34 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpf with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4157. . Clean. Processed in 3.360519 secs); 10 Sep 2001 17:34:34 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 10 Sep 2001 17:34:28 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA07320; Mon, 10 Sep 2001 09:54:36 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 86271 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 10 Sep 2001 16:54:34          +0000
Received: from grucom2.gru.net (grucom2.gru.net [209.251.129.7]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA07306 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon,          10 Sep 2001 09:54:34 -0700
Received: from [209.251.151.7] by grucom2.sfcc.net (NTMail          6.04.0010/NU4112.00.db1c8a4b) with ESMTP id rgbjjaaa for          AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 10 Sep 2001 12:54:29 -0400
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (Win95; I)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <5.1.0.14.0.20010909103256.01c2a6e0@hobbiton.shire.net>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B9CF0BE.14EB2EFD@sfcc.net>
Date:         Mon, 10 Sep 2001 12:56:30 -0400
Reply-To: "James Yawn" <jyawn@SFCC.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "James Yawn" <jyawn@SFCC.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Smokeless powder ignitor enhancement
Comments: To: Seth Leigh <seth@PENGAR.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

If Pyrodex is not black powder and does not contain nitrocellulose, then what
is it?

I looked at the website (thanks, Seth) and found no statement, just a few
clues:

- Pyrodex does produce a "corrosive residue" which is "softer than the fouling
produced by black powder."
- Hodgdon recommends cleaning this residue from cartridge cases with a vinegar
solution, suggesting that the residue is alkaline.
- The site quotes NFPA guidelines for "smokeless propellants" even though it
is "not a smokeless powder."

Sounds suspiciously to me like an oxidizer/fuel mixture that has been tailored
in some way to be "non-explosive."

Anyone know what Pyrodex is, or want to venture a guess?

Jimmy Yawn



Seth Leigh wrote:

> At 03:40 AM 9/9/2001, Sociald84@AOL.COM wrote:
> Nope. Your probably confused. Yes you can use smokeless powders such as
> >Bullseye disolved in acetone as a pyrogen. No smokeless is nothing at all
> >like pyrodex.
>
> OK, I've been thinking all along that Pyrodex was a form of smokeless
> powder, and I swore I'd read that someplace.  So I went and looked at the
> source (Hodgdon Power Company).  Pyrodex does not have any nitrocellulose
> in it, but is classified as "smokeless" powder rather than explosive as
> blackpowder is.  Here's the URL and the quote from their Pyrodex FAQ.
> http://www.pyrodex.com/faq/index.htm
>
> "Q. Why does my can of Pyrodex say smokeless powder? The directions for my
> rifle say I should not use smokeless powder. Is Pyrodex safe in my gun.
> A. Pyrodex is not a true, smokeless powder. Pyrodex does not contain
> nitrocellulose in any quantity. Pyrodex is considered to require the same
> handling and precautions while in transit as smokeless powder. The United
> States Department of Transportation has assigned the classification of
> "smokeless" to Pyrodex rather than the classification "Explosive" that is
> given to blackpowder. Pyrodex is safe in any firearm designed for the use
> of blackpowder."

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 22283 invoked from network); 10 Sep 2001 17:38:30 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 10 Sep 2001 17:38:30 -0000
Received: (qmail 26457 invoked by uid 50005); 10 Sep 2001 17:38:06 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpb with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.332144 secs); 10 Sep 2001 17:38:06 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 10 Sep 2001 17:38:06 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA07358; Mon, 10 Sep 2001 09:55:31 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 86282 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 10 Sep 2001 16:55:25          +0000
Received: from roll.akcecc.kiev.ua (roll.akcecc.kiev.ua [193.227.206.34]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA07344 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 10 Sep 2001 09:55:21 -0700
Received: from serge (pool-93.akcecc.kiev.ua [193.227.207.93] (may be forged))          by roll.akcecc.kiev.ua (8.10.2/8.10.2) with SMTP id f8AGtEc16228 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 10 Sep 2001 19:55:14 +0300
References:  <F111FqZqT5TJKXWlA710000a966@hotmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="koi8-r"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2417.2000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <003301c13a10$c084c920$5dcfe3c1@serge>
Date:         Mon, 10 Sep 2001 19:52:39 +0400
Reply-To: "Serge Pipko" <spas@AKCECC.KIEV.UA>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Serge Pipko" <spas@AKCECC.KIEV.UA>
Subject:      Re: [AR] AN melt
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

John Dom wrote:

> >Some of my previuos experiments allow me to conclude higher alcohols have
> >no chance to dissolve in AN melt due to their low polarity.
>
> Could be. As to polarity being the cause, sugars are not polar compounds
are
> they?

Yes, they are. They contain one hydroxyl group per carbon atom. It is
comparable to methanol.

> Then maybe their fatty acids (detergents), they certainly are polar. But
> oddly, they also dissolve in kerosine.

Fatty acids and their salts (detergents) are non-polar compounds. They
contain one polar group ( carboxyl ) per very long carbon chain ( typically
15-20 atoms ). I have tried to dissolve small quantity of soap in AN melt on
purpose to inhibit AN decomposition by activated carbon. Soap didn't
dissolve.

Serge

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 5798 invoked from network); 10 Sep 2001 17:56:14 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 10 Sep 2001 17:56:14 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 30632 invoked by uid 50005); 10 Sep 2001 17:55:33 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpe with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4157. . Clean. Processed in 0.237593 secs); 10 Sep 2001 17:55:33 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 10 Sep 2001 17:55:32 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA07545; Mon, 10 Sep 2001 10:14:03 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 86321 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 10 Sep 2001 17:13:59          +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (f46.law15.hotmail.com [64.4.23.46]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA07531 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Mon,          10 Sep 2001 10:13:59 -0700
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Mon,          10 Sep 2001 10:13:28 -0700
Received: from 213.224.83.150 by lw15fd.law15.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Mon,          10 Sep 2001 17:13:28 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [213.224.83.150]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 10 Sep 2001 17:13:28.0997 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[E8F4CD50:01C13A1B]
Message-ID:  <F46EShbByluRyExvi3T0000c323@hotmail.com>
Date:         Mon, 10 Sep 2001 17:13:59 +0000
Reply-To: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Big lander flight video
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

>The main materials issue with HTP is not safety, but decomposition
>rates.(Which is why PE is considered acceptable.)

Acceptable for what? PE is not attacked by HTP. At ambient temps it is safe.
But (Murphy) when there's a fire, it becomes a hybrid fuel...and hell
raiser. That is why PE is not (or at least no longer) allowed as storage
material for HTP, because of the fire hazard when bunkered.

Interesting is the safety comparison between LOX and HTP mentioned. The main
difference is that LOX reacts with different fuel types whereas HTP does the
same but equally is vulnerable to catalyzed decomposition. Meaning some
salts and metals (eg imagine the presence of silver solder) can cause
catastrophes.

It has even been reported the freezing of HTP (sudden release of heat of
crystallisation) can cause it to decompose and rupture tanks: C-Stoff
literature by Hellmuth Walter, paperclip docs.

jd



_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 156 invoked from network); 10 Sep 2001 18:09:35 -0000
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 10 Sep 2001 18:09:35 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 13191 invoked by uid 50005); 10 Sep 2001 18:06:37 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpf with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4157. . Clean. Processed in 0.206681 secs); 10 Sep 2001 18:06:37 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 10 Sep 2001 18:06:37 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA07616; Mon, 10 Sep 2001 10:22:54 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 86336 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 10 Sep 2001 17:22:52          +0000
Received: from mail.aros.net (mail.aros.net [207.173.16.20]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA07602 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon,          10 Sep 2001 10:22:52 -0700
Received: from biomicro.com ([208.187.122.40]) by mail.aros.net (8.11.6/8.9.3)          with ESMTP id f8AHMoD52203 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 10 Sep          2001 11:22:50 -0600 (MDT)
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.77 [en] (Win98; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20010908.215227.-4001469.1.kc2csh@juno.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B9CF6EE.3C0AD63F@biomicro.com>
Date:         Mon, 10 Sep 2001 11:22:54 -0600
Reply-To: "Mark K. Spute" <mks@BIOMICRO.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Mark K. Spute" <mks@BIOMICRO.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Commercial HPR hybrids?
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

The RRS Journal had an article a while back about a GOx/Acrylic hybrid
they used for school demonstrations.  They could set it up in the
classroom (!) and run it indoors.  It wasn't J-K-L range, but could
probably be scaled up, switch GOx for NO2 or LOx and you could get more
oomph.

The cool thing about this engine was it was transparent.  i.e. no engine
casing.  The fuel grain doubled as the containment vessel.  Gave off a
beautiful, bright yellow/white light while running.  Safety was provided
by the plastic nature of the fuel grain.  When the chamber walls
regressed so far that the walls became too thin, they simply bulged out
(being softend from the heat of combustion) from the combustion chamber
pressure and the flame went out.  It was pretty cool.

The engine consisted of two flat metal plates, aluminum or stainless I
believe, one with a nozzle machined into it, one with the injector
machined into it.  A hand operated (!) ball valve controlled the oxygen
flow.  The two plates were clamped on the ends of a piece of clear
acrylic rod (O-rings may have been used to help acomplish a seal) and
held in place with 4 lengths of all-thread.

It was pretty simple.



kc2csh@JUNO.COM wrote:
>
>   I'm thinking of acquiring a commercial HPR type hybrid to use for a
> school demonstration.  Must be somewhere in the J-K-L range, preferably
> variable in total thrust, simple set up in 20 minutes or less, and cheap
> enough to be able to afford about 90 flights a year out of my own pocket.
>   Must also be able to give administrators the warm fuzzies about safety
> with 20-25 students standing nearby when it fires.
>   I know I'm asking a lot.  Is there anything like this out there yet?

--
Mark K. Spute
Senior Research Engineer
BioMicro Systems Inc.

KD7IWE,  RRS

"It is difficult to say what is impossible, for the dream of yesterday
is the hope of today and the reality of tomorrow."
     Dr. Robert H. Goddard

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 18674 invoked from network); 10 Sep 2001 18:21:38 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 10 Sep 2001 18:21:38 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 3088 invoked by uid 50005); 10 Sep 2001 18:19:54 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4157. . Clean. Processed in 0.460588 secs); 10 Sep 2001 18:19:54 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 10 Sep 2001 18:19:53 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA08162; Mon, 10 Sep 2001 10:51:56 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 86406 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 10 Sep 2001 17:51:49          +0000
Received: from snipe.mail.pas.earthlink.net (snipe.mail.pas.earthlink.net          [207.217.120.62]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA07989          for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Mon, 10 Sep 2001 10:41:49 -0700
Received: from earthlink.net (dialup-209.245.131.241.Dial1.SanJose1.Level3.net          [209.245.131.241]) by snipe.mail.pas.earthlink.net (8.11.5/8.9.3)          with ESMTP id f8AHflt02907; Mon, 10 Sep 2001 10:41:47 -0700 (PDT)
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.75 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.16-22 i686)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <F46EShbByluRyExvi3T0000c323@hotmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B9CFBC7.24E6813A@earthlink.net>
Date:         Mon, 10 Sep 2001 10:43:35 -0700
Reply-To: "David Weinshenker" <daze39@EARTHLINK.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "David Weinshenker" <daze39@EARTHLINK.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Big lander flight video
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

John Dom wrote:
> It has even been reported the freezing of HTP (sudden release of heat of
> crystallisation) can cause it to decompose and rupture tanks: C-Stoff
> literature by Hellmuth Walter, paperclip docs.

Some articles in the Journal of the British Interplanetary
Society (July 1990 special issue on the Black Knight rockets)
note that the peroxide the Germans had in WW2 was rather
impure, and, despite being heavily "stabilized", it had a
tendency to decompose spontaneously that is not characteristic
of high-purity H2O2.

-dave w

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 2616 invoked from network); 10 Sep 2001 18:25:05 -0000
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 10 Sep 2001 18:25:05 -0000
Received: (qmail 3962 invoked by uid 50005); 10 Sep 2001 18:24:24 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpe with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4157. . Clean. Processed in 0.195026 secs); 10 Sep 2001 18:24:24 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 10 Sep 2001 18:24:24 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA07968; Mon, 10 Sep 2001 10:40:58 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 86395 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 10 Sep 2001 17:40:51          +0000
Received: from prover.com (IDENT:root@chaos.sthlm.prover.com [192.71.47.101])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA07954 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 10 Sep 2001 10:40:50 -0700
Received: from PROVEIT (ip-216-73-155-114.vantas.net [216.73.155.114]) by          prover.com (8.11.3/8.11.3) with ESMTP id f8AHdqe08638; Mon, 10 Sep          2001 19:39:52 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook, Build 10.0.2627
Importance: Normal
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <000b01c13a1f$6924c860$729b49d8@PROVEIT>
Date:         Mon, 10 Sep 2001 10:38:30 -0700
Reply-To: "Duncan McDonald" <duncan.mcdonald@PROVER.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Duncan McDonald" <duncan.mcdonald@PROVER.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] sun sensors
Comments: To: Jamie Morken <jmorken@HOME.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <003301c13a14$149d61e0$4a00a8c0@hatjs>

Hi Jamie,

>I was thinking about using a constant current power supply to pass
through all the sensors in series and then feeding the instrumentation
amps with the high and low side of each resistor but am not sure if this
would be better or not?  Is it ok to use a variable resistor to set the
gain of the instrumentation amps?

If the gain of the IA as set by the variable resistors is unbounded you
might make the IA oscillate. Also the bandwidth and noise of the circuit
are going to vary as the gain varies. Personally, I'd set the IA for a
fixed gain (say X1 or X2) and feed it with a voltage set by a constant
current through the photoresistor. With 10mA and a resistance range of
50-500 ohms you only need a unity (or maybe X2) gain amp. But the
variable gain idea is probably workable. The constant current source
(CCS) is a good idea. You can make a very clean, simple, and cheap CCS
by selecting a JFET with an IDSS (drain-source-saturation current) that
matches your constant current requirement; something like 10mA- maybe a
2N6451. Connect the gate and source of the JFET directly together
(making it a two terminal device). As long as the voltage across the
JFET is greater than the specified voltage for IDSS (10V in the case of
the 2N6451) you have a constant current source!

Duncan

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 15245 invoked from network); 10 Sep 2001 18:28:06 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 10 Sep 2001 18:28:06 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 9387 invoked by uid 50005); 10 Sep 2001 18:26:21 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4157. . Clean. Processed in 0.318033 secs); 10 Sep 2001 18:26:21 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 10 Sep 2001 18:26:21 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA08456; Mon, 10 Sep 2001 11:11:12 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 86469 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 10 Sep 2001 18:11:07          +0000
Received: from vmmr1.verisignmail.com (vmmr1.verisignmail.com          [216.168.230.137]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id          LAA08441 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Mon, 10 Sep 2001 11:11:06 -0700
Received: from vmms1.verisignmail.com (vmms1.verisignmail.com [10.166.0.138])          by vmmr1.verisignmail.com (Mirapoint) with ESMTP id AAS37965; Mon, 10          Sep 2001 14:10:35 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from vmms1.verisignmail.com (localhost.verisignmail.com [127.0.0.1])          by vmms1.verisignmail.com (Mirapoint) with SMTP id ACW09703 (AUTH          mpoulton@mtptech.com); Mon, 10 Sep 2001 14:10:34 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from 129.93.206.94 by vmms1.verisignmail.com with HTTP/1.1; Mon, 10          Sep 2001 14:10:34 -0400
X-Mailer: Mirapoint Webmail Direct 2.9.1.1
Message-ID:  <200109101810.ACW09703@vmms1.verisignmail.com>
Date:         Mon, 10 Sep 2001 14:10:34 -0400
Reply-To: <mpoulton@MTPTECH.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Mike Poulton" <mpoulton@MTPTECH.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Smokeless powder ignitor enhancement
Comments: To: James Yawn <jyawn@SFCC.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

My understanding is that it is very much like black powder,
but with some organic binders and possibly a perchlorate
oxidizer.  AFAIK, it's proprietary.

---- Original message ----
>Date: Mon, 10 Sep 2001 12:56:30 -0400
>From: James Yawn <jyawn@SFCC.NET>
>Subject: Re: [AR] Smokeless powder ignitor enhancement
>To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
>
>If Pyrodex is not black powder and does not contain
nitrocellulose, then what
>is it?
>
>I looked at the website (thanks, Seth) and found no
statement, just a few
>clues:
>
>- Pyrodex does produce a "corrosive residue" which
is "softer than the fouling
>produced by black powder."
>- Hodgdon recommends cleaning this residue from cartridge
cases with a vinegar
>solution, suggesting that the residue is alkaline.
>- The site quotes NFPA guidelines for "smokeless
propellants" even though it
>is "not a smokeless powder."
>
>Sounds suspiciously to me like an oxidizer/fuel mixture that
has been tailored
>in some way to be "non-explosive."
>
>Anyone know what Pyrodex is, or want to venture a guess?
>
>Jimmy Yawn
>
>
>
>Seth Leigh wrote:
>
>> At 03:40 AM 9/9/2001, Sociald84@AOL.COM wrote:
>> Nope. Your probably confused. Yes you can use smokeless
powders such as
>> >Bullseye disolved in acetone as a pyrogen. No smokeless
is nothing at all
>> >like pyrodex.
>>
>> OK, I've been thinking all along that Pyrodex was a form
of smokeless
>> powder, and I swore I'd read that someplace.  So I went
and looked at the
>> source (Hodgdon Power Company).  Pyrodex does not have any
nitrocellulose
>> in it, but is classified as "smokeless" powder rather than
explosive as
>> blackpowder is.  Here's the URL and the quote from their
Pyrodex FAQ.
>> http://www.pyrodex.com/faq/index.htm
>>
>> "Q. Why does my can of Pyrodex say smokeless powder? The
directions for my
>> rifle say I should not use smokeless powder. Is Pyrodex
safe in my gun.
>> A. Pyrodex is not a true, smokeless powder. Pyrodex does
not contain
>> nitrocellulose in any quantity. Pyrodex is considered to
require the same
>> handling and precautions while in transit as smokeless
powder. The United
>> States Department of Transportation has assigned the
classification of
>> "smokeless" to Pyrodex rather than the
classification "Explosive" that is
>> given to blackpowder. Pyrodex is safe in any firearm
designed for the use
>> of blackpowder."
Mike Poulton


From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 7202 invoked from network); 10 Sep 2001 20:07:54 -0000
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 10 Sep 2001 20:07:54 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 12201 invoked by uid 50005); 10 Sep 2001 20:05:17 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpe with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4157. . Clean. Processed in 3.672763 secs); 10 Sep 2001 20:05:17 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 10 Sep 2001 20:05:09 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA08862; Mon, 10 Sep 2001 12:31:20 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 86545 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 10 Sep 2001 19:31:08          +0000
Received: from m5.boston.juno.com (m5.boston.juno.com [64.136.24.68]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA08847 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Mon, 10 Sep 2001 12:31:07 -0700
Received: from cookie.juno.com by cookie.juno.com for          <"r2Fo8hpwT0kn33UwylHELMN/WOTpJvUcTUpfFPzc6XPZTpyansQIww==">
Received: (from icantdecide@juno.com) by m5.boston.juno.com (queuemail) id          GEZGMHPF; Mon, 10 Sep 2001 15:30:08 EDT
X-Mailer: Juno 4.0.9
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Juno-Line-Breaks: 2-5,7-17
X-Juno-Att: 0
X-Juno-RefParts: 0
Message-ID:  <20010910.142959.-461957.0.icantdecide@juno.com>
Date:         Mon, 10 Sep 2001 14:29:59 -0500
Reply-To: "James G Selin" <icantdecide@JUNO.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "James G Selin" <icantdecide@JUNO.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Big lander flight video
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

I remember my uncle telling me they used to clear out furnace blockage at
the foundry he worked at with a steel pipe/oxygen hybrid torch. Like they
say, anything can be hybrid fuel but this one always amazed me.

Jim

On Mon, 10 Sep 2001 10:16:55 -0400 Henry Spencer <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
writes:
> On Mon, 10 Sep 2001, John Dom wrote:
> > Vinyl plastics burn well in oxygen; unsafe...
>
> Again, the first doesn't automatically imply the second.  Both
> aluminum
> and steel burn very well indeed in oxygen... once ignited.
>
> Henry Spencer
>
> henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 15539 invoked from network); 10 Sep 2001 20:10:05 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 10 Sep 2001 20:10:05 -0000
Received: (qmail 29618 invoked by uid 50005); 10 Sep 2001 20:07:36 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4157. . Clean. Processed in 0.130486 secs); 10 Sep 2001 20:07:36 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 10 Sep 2001 20:07:36 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA09020; Mon, 10 Sep 2001 12:52:38 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 86585 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 10 Sep 2001 19:52:35          +0000
Received: from cablecom.laribay.net (cablecom.laribay.net [66.20.57.4]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA08999 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 10 Sep 2001 12:52:34 -0700
Received: from billbull (dial077.laribay.net [66.20.57.77]) by          cablecom.laribay.net (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id OAA06568 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 10 Sep 2001 14:33:24 -0500 (CDT)          (envelope-from bpbullock@laribay.net)
References:  <20.1bae95c6.28ce0492@aol.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <000b01c13a32$53aff1e0$4d391442@billbull>
Date:         Mon, 10 Sep 2001 14:53:32 -0500
Reply-To: "Bill Bullock" <bpbullock@LARIBAY.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Bill Bullock" <bpbullock@LARIBAY.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Clubs
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Doyle:
    As far as I know the last active chapter of the American Amateur Rocket
Society was disbanded in May of 1964. The Amateur Rocketry Association
ceased to exist as such in early-1963. I believe they were the last of the
national organizations which  promoted the building and launching of
Experimental Class amateur-built rockets in the U.S.
    Over the years I have attempted to get both NAR and Tripoli to accept me
and allow me to fly my rockets at their meets and launches. The local/state
organizations are sometimes willing but are prevented by the national
organizations.
    There was a Joint NAR/Tripoli launch here in Louisiana early this year
and a few Experimentals were flown. (See http://solar.itgo.com/pics.html )
At that meet they launched everything from Estes Ready-To-Fly finger with
1/4A's to M-Class HP rockets. The Experimentals were flown after the
official launch was over so it was not a "sanctioned" thing, but I was told
just two weeks ago that this would not be the case in November...
    Now my question: why not form an organization to hold local/state
Experimental-Class launches? Not to replace the existing facilities, but to
give us out here a place to  fly legally? Set up a certification program but
allow anything safe to fly...
    I have discussed this off-list with a couple of members and the constant
refrain is,"But after I build it I have no place to launch..."  My personal
opinion is that if such were to transpire that if someone showed up with a
safely-built 1/4A-powered plastic he should be allowed to launch...or as
large as was safely possible. As far as I am concerned if someone builds
something that is safe to fly and fire comes out the back if it he is my
brother and I want to see his bird fly. That way a man could bring his
children/grandchildren and both could launch. It would grow both a family
and new members for when all us old heads are gone.
    Just my own personal unsolicited opinion...Comments, anyone?
Bill

----- Original Message -----
From: <XR750RACE@AOL.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Monday, September 10, 2001 6:57 AM
Subject: [AR] Clubs


>     Does anyone know if there is such a club that allows the use of rocket
> candy motors ? Also, isn't there an Amateur Rocket Society club out there
> somewhere?
>
> doyle
>
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 5020 invoked from network); 10 Sep 2001 20:29:45 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 10 Sep 2001 20:29:45 -0000
Received: (qmail 32622 invoked by uid 50005); 10 Sep 2001 20:29:14 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpa with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4157. . Clean. Processed in 0.173582 secs); 10 Sep 2001 20:29:14 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 10 Sep 2001 20:29:13 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA09077; Mon, 10 Sep 2001 13:00:32 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 86596 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 10 Sep 2001 20:00:26          +0000
Received: from cablecom.laribay.net (cablecom.laribay.net [66.20.57.4]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA09063 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 10 Sep 2001 13:00:26 -0700
Received: from billbull (dial077.laribay.net [66.20.57.77]) by          cablecom.laribay.net (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id OAA06637 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 10 Sep 2001 14:41:41 -0500 (CDT)          (envelope-from bpbullock@laribay.net)
References: <000301c13a07$306f7f00$6634cbcc@zip>             <a05100306b7c28c7ac93c@[63.15.225.153]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <000e01c13a33$7cc03940$4d391442@billbull>
Date:         Mon, 10 Sep 2001 15:01:52 -0500
Reply-To: "Bill Bullock" <bpbullock@LARIBAY.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Bill Bullock" <bpbullock@LARIBAY.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Clubs
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Jerry:
    Pacific Rocket Society: http://www.translunar.org/prs/  membership
application page: http://www.translunar.org/prs/prsform.htm
Bill
----- Original Message -----
From: Jerry Irvine <01rocket@GTE.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Monday, September 10, 2001 10:34 AM
Subject: Re: [AR] Clubs


> >Jerry,
> >
> >Could expand on what PRS stands for?
>
>
> Pacific Rocket Society
> they also fly at MTA where RRS does.
>
> Let's see if I can find a link . . . . no
>
> Pacific Rocket Society
> Box 662
> Mojave, CA 93502
> Los Angeles Office: (323) 463-6529
> Email: Cyberplex@aol.com
>
> Tell them Jerry sent you.
>
> --
> Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
> Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
> Opinion, the whole thing.
>
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 17966 invoked from network); 10 Sep 2001 20:47:43 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 10 Sep 2001 20:47:43 -0000
Received: (qmail 20536 invoked by uid 50005); 10 Sep 2001 20:45:20 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4157. . Clean. Processed in 0.332573 secs); 10 Sep 2001 20:45:20 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 10 Sep 2001 20:45:20 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA09204; Mon, 10 Sep 2001 13:13:10 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 86613 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 10 Sep 2001 20:13:04          +0000
Received: from zcars0m9.ca.nortel.com (h157s242a129n47.user.nortelnetworks.com          [47.129.242.157]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA09190          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 10 Sep 2001 13:13:03 -0700
Received: from zcars04f.ca.nortel.com (zcars04f.ca.nortel.com [47.129.242.57])          by zcars0m9.ca.nortel.com (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f8AKBwp14080          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 10 Sep 2001 16:11:58 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from rftzy232.ca.nortel.com by zcars04f.ca.nortel.com; Mon, 10 Sep          2001 16:11:36 -0400
Received: from NORTELNETWORKS.COM (wftzh00e.ca.nortel.com [47.130.116.9]) by          rftzy232.ca.nortel.com with SMTP (Microsoft Exchange Internet Mail          Service Version 5.5.2653.13) id SHASBKNV; Mon, 10 Sep 2001 16:10:45          -0400
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.73C-CCK-MCD [en] (X11; U; HP-UX B.10.20 9000/785)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <5.1.0.14.0.20010909103256.01c2a6e0@hobbiton.shire.net>            <3B9CF0BE.14EB2EFD@sfcc.net>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Orig: <mleech@NORTELNETWORKS.COM>
Message-ID:  <3B9D1E85.F4BD8528@NORTELNETWORKS.COM>
Date:         Mon, 10 Sep 2001 16:11:49 -0400
Reply-To: "Marcus Leech" <mleech@NORTELNETWORKS.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Marcus Leech" <mleech@NORTELNETWORKS.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Smokeless powder ignitor enhancement
Comments: To: James Yawn <jyawn@SFCC.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

James Yawn wrote:
>
> If Pyrodex is not black powder and does not contain nitrocellulose, then what
> is it?
>
> I looked at the website (thanks, Seth) and found no statement, just a few
> clues:
>
> - Pyrodex does produce a "corrosive residue" which is "softer than the fouling
> produced by black powder."
> - Hodgdon recommends cleaning this residue from cartridge cases with a vinegar
> solution, suggesting that the residue is alkaline.
> - The site quotes NFPA guidelines for "smokeless propellants" even though it
> is "not a smokeless powder."
>
> Sounds suspiciously to me like an oxidizer/fuel mixture that has been tailored
> in some way to be "non-explosive."
>
> Anyone know what Pyrodex is, or want to venture a guess?
>
> Jimmy Yawn
>
Pyrodex is a mixture of Potassium Perchlorate, Charcoal, Potassium Benzoate,
  and possibly other odds and ends.  In essence, it's a slightly-tamed
  "whistle mix".  You can get some idea of formulation from looking at their
  patent for pyrodex, whose number isn't at my fingertips at the moment.

--
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Marcus Leech                             Mail:   Dept 8M70, MS 012, FITZ
Advisor                                  Phone: (ESN) 393-9145  +1 613 763 9145
Security Architecture and Planning       Fax:   (ESN) 393-9435  +1 613 763 9435
Nortel Networks                          mleech@nortelnetworks.com
-----------------Expressed opinions are my own, not my employer's------

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 25165 invoked from network); 10 Sep 2001 21:12:24 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 10 Sep 2001 21:12:24 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 2953 invoked by uid 50005); 10 Sep 2001 21:10:01 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4157. . Clean. Processed in 0.243854 secs); 10 Sep 2001 21:10:01 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 10 Sep 2001 21:10:01 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA09466; Mon, 10 Sep 2001 13:39:11 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 86663 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 10 Sep 2001 20:39:04          +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (f119.law15.hotmail.com [64.4.23.119]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA09452 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Mon, 10 Sep 2001 13:39:04 -0700
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Mon,          10 Sep 2001 13:38:33 -0700
Received: from 213.224.83.150 by lw15fd.law15.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Mon,          10 Sep 2001 20:38:33 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [213.224.83.150]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 10 Sep 2001 20:38:33.0637 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[8F17DD50:01C13A38]
Message-ID:  <F119HgIu3q1vblaLJPv0000b75f@hotmail.com>
Date:         Mon, 10 Sep 2001 20:39:04 +0000
Reply-To: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Big lander flight video
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

>Some articles in the Journal of the British Interplanetary
>Society (July 1990 special issue on the Black Knight rockets)
>note that the peroxide the Germans had in WW2 was rather
>impure, and, despite being heavily "stabilized", it had a
>tendency to decompose spontaneously that is not characteristic
>of high-purity H2O2.

It did not decompose "spontaneously" but possibly was more touchy?? So the
heat of crystallisation of HP and its effect are negligible because of
to-day, we have RGHP? Could be, could not be. Thruth is, we do not know.

BTW: RGHP is *not* stabilised, contains 10-18 % more H2O2 than C-Stoff and
therefore is also super sensitive...

jd

_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 13664 invoked from network); 10 Sep 2001 21:16:33 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 10 Sep 2001 21:16:33 -0000
Received: (qmail 14940 invoked by uid 50005); 10 Sep 2001 21:16:09 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpb with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.217611 secs); 10 Sep 2001 21:16:09 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 10 Sep 2001 21:16:09 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA09558; Mon, 10 Sep 2001 13:45:38 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 86678 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 10 Sep 2001 20:45:36          +0000
Received: from albqpop1.albq.uswest.net (albqpop1.albq.uswest.net          [207.108.240.1]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id NAA09544          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 10 Sep 2001 13:45:36 -0700
Received: (qmail 27343 invoked by alias); 10 Sep 2001 20:41:19 -0000
Delivered-To: fixup-AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU@fixme
Received: (qmail 21434 invoked by uid 0); 10 Sep 2001 20:38:32 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO Inventory) (207.66.52.27) by          albqpop1.albq.uswest.net with SMTP; 10 Sep 2001 20:38:32 -0000
References:  <20.1bae95c6.28ce0492@aol.com>              <000b01c13a32$53aff1e0$4d391442@billbull>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2919.6700
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <000901c13a39$4074d530$4000a8c0@Inventory>
Date:         Mon, 10 Sep 2001 14:43:28 -0600
Reply-To: "pax" <darkspunge@USWEST.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "pax" <darkspunge@USWEST.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Clubs
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

There are no federal laws preventing you from flying your own motors period.
If you built it, you can fly it within the same state with no LEUP required.
You must still abide by all FAA regs, which means you have to get a waiver
to fly full G + etc etc. All you do is secure a launch site with land owner
permission, then get a waiver and fly till you have no more motors... Of
course there are state and local laws to deal with, and securing a site with
land owner permission is not always a trivial task, but typically, anybody
who wants to take the time to do these things can fly at their own leisure
with a group or by yourself. There are plenty of groups that do that and
some of them have already been mentioned. They have nothing to do with
NAR/TRA and they fly motors they built, and commercial.
The only other issue, which is a non issue to some is insurance.

Paxton



----- Original Message -----
From: "Bill Bullock" <bpbullock@LARIBAY.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Monday, September 10, 2001 1:53 PM
Subject: Re: [AR] Clubs


> Doyle:
>     As far as I know the last active chapter of the American Amateur
Rocket
> Society was disbanded in May of 1964. The Amateur Rocketry Association
> ceased to exist as such in early-1963. I believe they were the last of the
> national organizations which  promoted the building and launching of
> Experimental Class amateur-built rockets in the U.S.
>     Over the years I have attempted to get both NAR and Tripoli to accept
me
> and allow me to fly my rockets at their meets and launches. The
local/state
> organizations are sometimes willing but are prevented by the national
> organizations.
>     There was a Joint NAR/Tripoli launch here in Louisiana early this year
> and a few Experimentals were flown. (See http://solar.itgo.com/pics.html )
> At that meet they launched everything from Estes Ready-To-Fly finger with
> 1/4A's to M-Class HP rockets. The Experimentals were flown after the
> official launch was over so it was not a "sanctioned" thing, but I was
told
> just two weeks ago that this would not be the case in November...
>     Now my question: why not form an organization to hold local/state
> Experimental-Class launches? Not to replace the existing facilities, but
to
> give us out here a place to  fly legally? Set up a certification program
but
> allow anything safe to fly...
>     I have discussed this off-list with a couple of members and the
constant
> refrain is,"But after I build it I have no place to launch..."  My
personal
> opinion is that if such were to transpire that if someone showed up with a
> safely-built 1/4A-powered plastic he should be allowed to launch...or as
> large as was safely possible. As far as I am concerned if someone builds
> something that is safe to fly and fire comes out the back if it he is my
> brother and I want to see his bird fly. That way a man could bring his
> children/grandchildren and both could launch. It would grow both a family
> and new members for when all us old heads are gone.
>     Just my own personal unsolicited opinion...Comments, anyone?
> Bill
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: <XR750RACE@AOL.COM>
> To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
> Sent: Monday, September 10, 2001 6:57 AM
> Subject: [AR] Clubs
>
>
> >     Does anyone know if there is such a club that allows the use of
rocket
> > candy motors ? Also, isn't there an Amateur Rocket Society club out
there
> > somewhere?
> >
> > doyle
> >
> >
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 2191 invoked from network); 10 Sep 2001 21:20:36 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 10 Sep 2001 21:20:36 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 408 invoked by uid 50005); 10 Sep 2001 21:20:05 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpa with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4157. . Clean. Processed in 0.197813 secs); 10 Sep 2001 21:20:05 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 10 Sep 2001 21:20:05 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA09598; Mon, 10 Sep 2001 13:48:05 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 86689 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 10 Sep 2001 20:48:04          +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (f154.law15.hotmail.com [64.4.23.154]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA09584 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Mon, 10 Sep 2001 13:48:03 -0700
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Mon,          10 Sep 2001 13:47:33 -0700
Received: from 213.224.83.150 by lw15fd.law15.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Mon,          10 Sep 2001 20:47:33 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [213.224.83.150]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 10 Sep 2001 20:47:33.0407 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[D0D23AF0:01C13A39]
Message-ID:  <F154WYeG956FQ46Cxph0000978a@hotmail.com>
Date:         Mon, 10 Sep 2001 20:48:04 +0000
Reply-To: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Big lander flight video
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

>There are serious weight and cost issues with steel tanks.
>Filament wound carbon fibre tanks are very light for their burst pressure
>(very important for pressure-fed flight vehicles), and are relatively
>cheap. You can't store peroxide in them for weeks, but you can store
>peroxide in them long enough for a short flight.

Depends on pressure value. I was referring to wall thickness 0.4 mm for 20
bars blowdown. They are lighter than any filament wound tank. Remember OTRAG
and N-1 tubular or spherical tanks.

jd

_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 26554 invoked from network); 10 Sep 2001 21:26:23 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 10 Sep 2001 21:26:23 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 10804 invoked by uid 50005); 10 Sep 2001 21:25:41 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpe with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4157. . Clean. Processed in 0.284514 secs); 10 Sep 2001 21:25:41 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 10 Sep 2001 21:25:40 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA09708; Mon, 10 Sep 2001 13:55:34 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 86700 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 10 Sep 2001 20:55:31          +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (f46.law15.hotmail.com [64.4.23.46]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA09694 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Mon,          10 Sep 2001 13:55:31 -0700
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Mon,          10 Sep 2001 13:55:00 -0700
Received: from 213.224.83.150 by lw15fd.law15.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Mon,          10 Sep 2001 20:55:00 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [213.224.83.150]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 10 Sep 2001 20:55:00.0722 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[DB711520:01C13A3A]
Message-ID:  <F46FRAjlqN7ED3YoMVu0000c7bf@hotmail.com>
Date:         Mon, 10 Sep 2001 20:55:31 +0000
Reply-To: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Big lander flight video
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

BA wrote:

>I might remember it wrong, but wasn't it burning PTFE insulation in an
>oxygen tank that caused the while apollo 13 mess?

Wasn't it the wrong voltage on an off spec valve in Apollo 13? Did that
heating next have an effect on PTFE insulation...?? Forgot.

Or are you referring to the O2 atmosphere in the Apollo 1 disaster?

jd

_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 3531 invoked from network); 10 Sep 2001 21:28:03 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 10 Sep 2001 21:28:03 -0000
Received: (qmail 5340 invoked by uid 50005); 10 Sep 2001 21:27:33 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpa with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4157. . Clean. Processed in 0.251082 secs); 10 Sep 2001 21:27:33 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 10 Sep 2001 21:27:33 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA09811; Mon, 10 Sep 2001 13:58:44 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 86719 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 10 Sep 2001 20:58:43          +0000
Received: from prover.com (IDENT:root@chaos.sthlm.prover.com [192.71.47.101])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA09793 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 10 Sep 2001 13:58:42 -0700
Received: from PROVEIT (ip-216-73-155-114.vantas.net [216.73.155.114]) by          prover.com (8.11.3/8.11.3) with ESMTP id f8AKvie11754; Mon, 10 Sep          2001 22:57:45 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook, Build 10.0.2627
Importance: Normal
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <001101c13a3b$0d454710$729b49d8@PROVEIT>
Date:         Mon, 10 Sep 2001 13:56:22 -0700
Reply-To: "Duncan McDonald" <duncan.mcdonald@PROVER.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Duncan McDonald" <duncan.mcdonald@PROVER.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Smokeless powder ignitor enhancement
Comments: To: Marcus Leech <mleech@NORTELNETWORKS.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <3B9D1E85.F4BD8528@NORTELNETWORKS.COM>

Good memory Marcus!

US Patent 4,128,443    Deflagrating propellant compositions


http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO1&Sect2=HITOFF&d=PALL
&p=1&u=/netahtml/srchnum.htm&r=1&f=G&l=50&s1='4,128,443'.WKU.&OS=PN/4,12
8,443&RS=PN/4,128,443

We claim:

1. In a deflagrating gas generating composition for producing controlled
gas pressure which imparts high velocity to projectiles at relatively
low peak pressure, the improvement which comprises employing, as the
essential gas-producing elements, approximately 82.5-30 parts by weight
of an oxidizing agent selected from the group consisting of ammonium,
alkali metal, and alkaline earth nitrates, chlorates and perchlorates;
approximately 14.5-45 parts by weight of an oxidizable derivative of an
organic carboxylic acid selected from the group consisting of ammonium
and alkali metal salts of aromatic carboxylic acids; and approximately
25-1.0 parts by weight of water.

2. A composition according to claim 1, wherein the oxidizing agent is an
alkali metal or ammonium perchlorate.

3. A composition according to claim 1, wherein the oxidizing agent is
potassium perchlorate and the organic carboxylic acid derivative is
sodium benzoate.

4. A composition according to claim 1, consisting of approximately 50-80
parts of potassium perchlorate, approximately 14.5-45 parts of sodium
benzoate and approximately 1-25 parts of water.

5. A composition according to claim 1 which consists of 75 parts of
potassium nitrate, 15 parts of sodium benzoate, 10 parts of sulfur and 3
parts of water.

6. A composition according to claim 1 which consists of from 20 to 50
percent of the composition claimed therein admixed with from 80 to 50
percent of the components of black powder.

7. A composition according to claim 6 which consists of 45 parts of
potassium nitrate, 9 parts of charcoal, 6 parts of sulfur, 19 parts of
potassium perchlorate, 11 parts of sodium benzoate, 6 parts of
dicyanamide and from 1 to 4 parts of water.

8. The process for preparing a composition according to claim 1 which
comprises intimately mixing an oxidizing component selected from the
group consisting of ammonium, alkali metal, and alkaline earth nitrates,
chlorates and perchlorates with an organic reducing or fuel component
selected from the group consisting of ammonium and alkali metal salts of
aromatic carboxylic acids in the presence of excess water, reducing the
water to a range of 1.0 to 25.0 percent by weight, and recovering the
resulting composition.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 14027 invoked from network); 10 Sep 2001 21:30:33 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 10 Sep 2001 21:30:33 -0000
Received: (qmail 7052 invoked by uid 50005); 10 Sep 2001 21:30:03 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpa with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4157. . Clean. Processed in 0.123059 secs); 10 Sep 2001 21:30:03 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 10 Sep 2001 21:30:03 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA09894; Mon, 10 Sep 2001 14:01:36 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 86730 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 10 Sep 2001 21:01:34          +0000
Received: from cablecom.laribay.net (cablecom.laribay.net [66.20.57.4]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA09880 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 10 Sep 2001 14:01:34 -0700
Received: from billbull (dial095.laribay.net [66.20.57.95]) by          cablecom.laribay.net (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id PAA07048 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 10 Sep 2001 15:42:25 -0500 (CDT)          (envelope-from bpbullock@laribay.net)
References:  <20.1bae95c6.28ce0492@aol.com>                         <000b01c13a32$53aff1e0$4d391442@billbull>              <000901c13a39$4074d530$4000a8c0@Inventory>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <002901c13a3b$f74bb560$5f391442@billbull>
Date:         Mon, 10 Sep 2001 16:02:35 -0500
Reply-To: "Bill Bullock" <bpbullock@LARIBAY.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Bill Bullock" <bpbullock@LARIBAY.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Clubs
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Pax:
    I already have access to a 118,000 acre farm I can launch from only 20
minutes away eventhiugh I cannot bring guests. I was just thinking of people
who do not have access...It was probably a stupid idea anyway...
Bill
----- Original Message -----
From: pax <darkspunge@USWEST.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Monday, September 10, 2001 3:43 PM
Subject: Re: [AR] Clubs


> There are no federal laws preventing you from flying your own motors
period.
> If you built it, you can fly it within the same state with no LEUP
required.
> You must still abide by all FAA regs, which means you have to get a waiver
> to fly full G + etc etc. All you do is secure a launch site with land
owner
> permission, then get a waiver and fly till you have no more motors... Of
> course there are state and local laws to deal with, and securing a site
with
> land owner permission is not always a trivial task, but typically, anybody
> who wants to take the time to do these things can fly at their own leisure
> with a group or by yourself. There are plenty of groups that do that and
> some of them have already been mentioned. They have nothing to do with
> NAR/TRA and they fly motors they built, and commercial.
> The only other issue, which is a non issue to some is insurance.
>
> Paxton

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 18139 invoked from network); 10 Sep 2001 21:45:24 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 10 Sep 2001 21:45:24 -0000
Received: (qmail 395 invoked by uid 50005); 10 Sep 2001 21:44:42 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpe with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4157. . Clean. Processed in 0.733752 secs); 10 Sep 2001 21:44:42 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 10 Sep 2001 21:44:41 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA10244; Mon, 10 Sep 2001 14:27:22 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 86793 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 10 Sep 2001 21:27:20          +0000
Received: from localhost (rcalkins@localhost) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with          ESMTP id OAA10230; Mon, 10 Sep 2001 14:27:17 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.LNX.4.10.10109101402200.5757-100000@itc.uci.edu>
Date:         Mon, 10 Sep 2001 14:27:17 -0700
Reply-To: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
Subject:      Re: [AR] is there a digest setting for the list?
Comments: To: Des Bromilow <Des.Bromilow@CITEC.COM.AU>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <sb9cbf2a.012@citec.com.au>

No digest setting, but instead of unsubbing, send the command

                set arocket nomail

to listserv@itc.uci.edu

This allows you to turn your mail delivery off without requiring Dave or
myself to approve your subscription request.

Ray

On Mon, 10 Sep 2001, Des Bromilow wrote:

> Hi,
>
> I'm going to be going off on holidays for 2 weeks soon, and I know how the company will react with my mail volume..
>
> Is there a digest setting for the list?
>
> Failing that, I'll unsubscribe, and them resubsscribe on return (and try and catch up from the archives)
>
> thanks,
> Des
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 7031 invoked from network); 10 Sep 2001 22:10:53 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 10 Sep 2001 22:10:53 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 1886 invoked by uid 50005); 10 Sep 2001 22:10:23 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpa with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4157. . Clean. Processed in 0.101003 secs); 10 Sep 2001 22:10:23 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 10 Sep 2001 22:10:23 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA10349; Mon, 10 Sep 2001 14:41:56 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 86816 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 10 Sep 2001 21:40:32          +0000
Received: from rasmus.uib.no (exim@rasmus.uib.no [129.177.12.30]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA10332 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Mon, 10 Sep 2001 14:40:32 -0700
Received: from tunnel-44-150.vpn.uib.no (emil.rasmus.uib.no) [129.177.44.150]          by rasmus.uib.no  with esmtp (Exim 3.16) id 15gYmz-00014v-00; Mon, 10          Sep 2001 23:40:21 +0200
X-Sender: st07696@rasmus.uib.no
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <5.1.0.14.0.20010910231417.0203ddd0@rasmus.uib.no>
Date:         Mon, 10 Sep 2001 23:34:39 +0200
Reply-To: "Emil Johnsen" <Emil.Johnsen@STUDENT.UIB.NO>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Emil Johnsen" <Emil.Johnsen@STUDENT.UIB.NO>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Big lander flight video
Comments: To: John Dom <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <F154WYeG956FQ46Cxph0000978a@hotmail.com>

>Depends on pressure value. I was referring to wall thickness 0.4 mm for 20
>bars blowdown. They are lighter than any filament wound tank. Remember OTRAG
>and N-1 tubular or spherical tanks.

I don't remember the exact diameter of the OTRAG tanks, 300-400mm? Assuming
300mm OD, 0.4mm wall and design pressure of 20bar + a 50% safety factor,
the wall material needs to have a yield strenght of more than 1100Mpa.
Steel this strong does exist, but I don't think any "normal" alloy comes close.

Seems that either they were using maraging steel or wall thickness was
greater than 0.4mm?


Emil

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 13754 invoked from network); 10 Sep 2001 22:49:17 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 10 Sep 2001 22:49:17 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 25917 invoked by uid 50005); 10 Sep 2001 22:47:31 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4157. . Clean. Processed in 0.754087 secs); 10 Sep 2001 22:47:31 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 10 Sep 2001 22:47:29 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA10620; Mon, 10 Sep 2001 15:30:24 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 86863 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 10 Sep 2001 22:29:17          +0000
Received: from smtp004pub.verizon.net (smtp004pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.183])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA10588 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 10 Sep 2001 15:29:16 -0700
Received: from [63.15.225.153] (1Cust139.tnt2.rancho-cucamonga.ca.da.uu.net          [63.15.225.139]) by smtp004pub.verizon.net  with ESMTP for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; id f8AMSdq03410 Mon, 10 Sep 2001 17:28:39          -0500 (CDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: GTE/01rocket@mail.gte.net
References: <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010910113416.28651E-100000@spsystems.net>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <a05100307b7c2ddadb6d1@[63.15.225.153]>
Date:         Mon, 10 Sep 2001 14:14:56 -0700
Reply-To: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Big lander flight video
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010910113416.28651E-100000@spsystems.net>

>On Mon, 10 Sep 2001, Jerry Irvine wrote:
>>  >Rotary Rocket tested carbon-fiber LOX tanks quite extensively and found
>>  >them safe in practice.
>>
>>  Any special grade or style of resin?
>
>"Details proprietary."  Or so I understood at the time.  Sigh.


Thanks for confirming I am asking the right questions :)

Jerry

>
>                                                           Henry Spencer
>                                                        henry@spsystems.net


--
Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
Opinion, the whole thing.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 23262 invoked from network); 10 Sep 2001 23:12:27 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 10 Sep 2001 23:12:27 -0000
Received: (qmail 16321 invoked by uid 50005); 10 Sep 2001 23:10:41 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4157. . Clean. Processed in 0.233617 secs); 10 Sep 2001 23:10:41 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 10 Sep 2001 23:10:40 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA10884; Mon, 10 Sep 2001 16:09:34 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 86918 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 10 Sep 2001 23:09:29          +0000
Received: from smtprelay3.abs.adelphia.net (smtprelay.abs.adelphia.net          [64.8.20.11]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA10870 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 10 Sep 2001 16:09:28 -0700
Received: from jlgrady ([63.124.251.47]) by smtprelay3.abs.adelphia.net          (Netscape Messaging Server 4.15) with SMTP id GJGYYV02.2T9 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 10 Sep 2001 19:08:55 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook CWS, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <000401c13a4e$18d8dc50$0200a8c0@prestige.net>
Date:         Mon, 10 Sep 2001 19:12:42 -0400
Reply-To: "Jeff Grady" <jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jeff Grady" <jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET>
Subject:      [AR] Epoxy/KNO3 motor results
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <a05100307b7c2ddadb6d1@[63.15.225.153]>

Lacking an immediate source for Al, I mixed up a batch of 75/25/5
(KNO3/Epoxy/Sulfur) last night and was hopeful after seeing a small lump of
this hardened fuel burn. It burned steadily and quite hot (based on the heat
I felt a few feet away). My idea of "vigorously" may not fit the definition
most of you folks hold. The mixture resembles yellow play dough in both look
and feel, until it sets up. Figuring it may burn a bit faster under
pressure, I made another batch, same as the first. Pressed the fuel into a
spent Estes A10 casing that seemed solid enough to use and closed off the
big end w/pure epoxy. I used the A10 because I can get away with a small
CATO in the back yard. Any bigger and I'd have to go a few miles down the
road.

Later today, I fired the motor and was really disappointed. The burn rate
was not impressive at all. I'm sure one problem was burn surface. The epoxy
"dough" was setting up fast while I was packing the dough into the casing.
When I tried to push a small skewer stick in through the nozzle to make a
core, it only went about a 1/4" deep. So, basically I had an end burner. It
burned for nearly 1.5 minutes before the casing burned through - definitely
not a "vigorous" burn. After the casing cooled, I walked over to take a
closer look. The nozzle had a "spout" rising up (motor was fired nozzle up)
about 1" from the nozzle. Seems the resin was not fully consumed(???).

Next I'll try some other epoxies I have and try to find some Al powder. Any
less epoxy or any more KNO3 makes mixing a TOUGH job. Any suggestions?

Jeff

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 3480 invoked from network); 10 Sep 2001 23:14:53 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 10 Sep 2001 23:14:53 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 7405 invoked by uid 50005); 10 Sep 2001 23:14:11 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpe with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4157. . Clean. Processed in 0.225044 secs); 10 Sep 2001 23:14:11 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 10 Sep 2001 23:14:10 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA10746; Mon, 10 Sep 2001 15:59:14 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 86883 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 10 Sep 2001 22:59:12          +0000
Received: from smtp002pub.verizon.net (smtp002pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.181])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA10731 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 10 Sep 2001 15:59:11 -0700
Received: from [63.15.225.153] (1Cust214.tnt2.rancho-cucamonga.ca.da.uu.net          [63.15.225.214]) by smtp002pub.verizon.net  with ESMTP for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; id f8AMwdY15333 Mon, 10 Sep 2001 17:58:39          -0500 (CDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: GTE/01rocket@mail.gte.net
References: <20.1bae95c6.28ce0492@aol.com>            <000b01c13a32$53aff1e0$4d391442@billbull>            <000901c13a39$4074d530$4000a8c0@Inventory>            <002901c13a3b$f74bb560$5f391442@billbull>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <a05100309b7c2f5c7604e@[63.15.225.153]>
Date:         Mon, 10 Sep 2001 15:57:44 -0700
Reply-To: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Clubs
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <002901c13a3b$f74bb560$5f391442@billbull>

>Pax:
>     I already have access to a 118,000 acre farm I can launch from only 20
>minutes away eventhiugh I cannot bring guests. I was just thinking of people
>who do not have access...It was probably a stupid idea anyway...
Bill

Maybe an invitation only launch.


--
Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
Opinion, the whole thing.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 12033 invoked from network); 10 Sep 2001 23:16:49 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 10 Sep 2001 23:16:49 -0000
Received: (qmail 12284 invoked by uid 50005); 10 Sep 2001 23:16:17 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpa with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4157. . Clean. Processed in 0.129962 secs); 10 Sep 2001 23:16:17 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 10 Sep 2001 23:16:17 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA10784; Mon, 10 Sep 2001 16:00:48 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 86893 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 10 Sep 2001 23:00:47          +0000
Received: from mta01.mail.mel.aone.net.au (mta01.mail.au.uu.net [203.2.192.81])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA10770 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 10 Sep 2001 16:00:46 -0700
Received: from unknown ([63.34.218.111]) by mta01.mail.mel.aone.net.au with          SMTP id <20010910230040.QGZS3755.mta01.mail.mel.aone.net.au@unknown>          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 11 Sep 2001 09:00:40 +1000
References: Conversation <F89DJnLq630zyE8Gape0000abb7@hotmail.com> with last            message <3B9CDE20.6A4EAD3B@earthlink.net>
Priority: Normal
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Priority: 3
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	X-MAPIextension=.TXT;
	charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>
Date:         Mon, 10 Sep 2001 23:00:47 +0000
Reply-To: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Big lander flight video
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <3B9CDE20.6A4EAD3B@earthlink.net>

It should be theoretically impossible for PTFE to be oxidized by the less
reactive O from my viewpoint. What may have happened is under very hot
conditions the PTFE may have decomposed, F reacts with a nearby metal or
some other type of fuel, left over C reacts with the LOX or GOX given the
heats that must have been involved.

Troy.

----------
> Bj|rn Augustsson wrote:
> > I might remember it wrong, but wasn't it burning PTFE insulation in an
> > oxygen tank that caused the while apollo 13 mess?
>
> Yes, but it took exposure to concentrated oxygen at high pressure
> and temperature (due to a malfunctioning heater thermostat and an
> improvised tank-emptying procedure) to degrade the PTFE to where
> the hazardous situation occurred...
>
> -dave w

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 26497 invoked from network); 11 Sep 2001 00:16:06 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 11 Sep 2001 00:16:06 -0000
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 24216 invoked by uid 50005); 11 Sep 2001 00:13:42 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4157. . Clean. Processed in 0.277918 secs); 11 Sep 2001 00:13:42 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 11 Sep 2001 00:13:42 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA11104; Mon, 10 Sep 2001 16:41:30 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 86952 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 10 Sep 2001 23:41:19          +0000
Received: from www.rocketry.org          (root@phnx3UBR5-4-hfc-0251-d17d1591.rdc1.az.coxatwork.com          [209.125.21.145]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA11057          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 10 Sep 2001 16:31:19 -0700
Received: from localhost (tim@localhost) by www.rocketry.org (8.11.4/8.11.4)          with ESMTP id f8ANTYC06474; Mon, 10 Sep 2001 16:29:34 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.LNX.4.33.0109101629280.6466-100000@www.rocketry.org>
Date:         Mon, 10 Sep 2001 16:29:34 -0700
Reply-To: "T.J." <tim@ROCKETRY.ORG>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "T.J." <tim@ROCKETRY.ORG>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Clubs
Comments: To: Jerry Irvine <01rocket@GTE.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <a05100306b7c28c7ac93c@[63.15.225.153]>

http://www.translunar.org/prs/

On Mon, 10 Sep 2001, Jerry Irvine wrote:

> >Jerry,
> >
> >Could expand on what PRS stands for?
>
>
> Pacific Rocket Society
> they also fly at MTA where RRS does.
>
> Let's see if I can find a link . . . . no
>
> Pacific Rocket Society
> Box 662
> Mojave, CA 93502
> Los Angeles Office: (323) 463-6529
> Email: Cyberplex@aol.com
>
> Tell them Jerry sent you.
>
> --
> Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
> Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
> Opinion, the whole thing.
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 29674 invoked from network); 11 Sep 2001 01:40:08 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 11 Sep 2001 01:40:08 -0000
Received: (qmail 2586 invoked by uid 50005); 11 Sep 2001 01:38:21 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4157. . Clean. Processed in 0.235988 secs); 11 Sep 2001 01:38:21 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 11 Sep 2001 01:38:21 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA11577; Mon, 10 Sep 2001 18:22:18 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 87012 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 11 Sep 2001 01:22:09          +0000
Received: from mta03.mail.mel.aone.net.au (mta03.mail.au.uu.net [203.2.192.83])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA11562 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 10 Sep 2001 18:22:08 -0700
Received: from unknown ([63.60.220.204]) by mta03.mail.mel.aone.net.au with          SMTP id <20010911012203.HSZK288.mta03.mail.mel.aone.net.au@unknown>          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 11 Sep 2001 11:22:03 +1000
References: Conversation <a05100307b7c2ddadb6d1@[63.15.225.153]> with last            message <000401c13a4e$18d8dc50$0200a8c0@prestige.net>
Priority: Normal
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Priority: 3
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	X-MAPIextension=.TXT;
	charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>
Date:         Tue, 11 Sep 2001 01:22:09 +0000
Reply-To: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Epoxy/KNO3 motor results
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <000401c13a4e$18d8dc50$0200a8c0@prestige.net>

Making KNO3 propellants more rich in KNO3 doesn't necessarily equate to
faster burn rates like APCP propellants. Try playing around with ratios and
increasing the pressures as high as you can. If possible use a complex core
geometry like a star or finocyl (*I did say if possible*). Dodgy suggestion
for the month: Maybe try adding a bit of oil based silver paint to the mix
- I have absolutely no idea if this will help things but many silver paints
use Al powder as their pigment/colorant (yeah?). That's only if you don't
have Al powder and do have the paint sitting around the house.

Troy.



----------
> Lacking an immediate source for Al, I mixed up a batch of 75/25/5
> (KNO3/Epoxy/Sulfur) last night and was hopeful after seeing a small lump
of
> this hardened fuel burn. It burned steadily and quite hot (based on the
heat
> I felt a few feet away). My idea of "vigorously" may not fit the
definition
> most of you folks hold. The mixture resembles yellow play dough in both
look
> and feel, until it sets up. Figuring it may burn a bit faster under
> pressure, I made another batch, same as the first. Pressed the fuel into a
> spent Estes A10 casing that seemed solid enough to use and closed off the
> big end w/pure epoxy. I used the A10 because I can get away with a small
> CATO in the back yard. Any bigger and I'd have to go a few miles down the
> road.
>
> Later today, I fired the motor and was really disappointed. The burn rate
> was not impressive at all. I'm sure one problem was burn surface. The
epoxy
> "dough" was setting up fast while I was packing the dough into the casing.
> When I tried to push a small skewer stick in through the nozzle to make a
> core, it only went about a 1/4" deep. So, basically I had an end burner.
It
> burned for nearly 1.5 minutes before the casing burned through -
definitely
> not a "vigorous" burn. After the casing cooled, I walked over to take a
> closer look. The nozzle had a "spout" rising up (motor was fired nozzle
up)
> about 1" from the nozzle. Seems the resin was not fully consumed(???).
>
> Next I'll try some other epoxies I have and try to find some Al powder.
Any
> less epoxy or any more KNO3 makes mixing a TOUGH job. Any suggestions?
>
> Jeff

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 3988 invoked from network); 11 Sep 2001 02:07:59 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 11 Sep 2001 02:07:59 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 27833 invoked by uid 50005); 11 Sep 2001 02:07:15 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpe with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4157. . Clean. Processed in 0.486327 secs); 11 Sep 2001 02:07:15 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 11 Sep 2001 02:07:12 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA11846; Mon, 10 Sep 2001 19:03:54 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 87054 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 11 Sep 2001 02:03:47          +0000
Received: from hobbiton.shire.net (frogmorton.shire.net [204.228.145.136]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA11832 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Mon, 10 Sep 2001 19:03:47 -0700
Received: from pool-64-223-146-33.man.east.verizon.net ([64.223.146.33]          helo=me-513q3sc0zun0.pengar.com) by hobbiton.shire.net with esmtp          (Exim 3.22 #6) id 15gcsP-000HHK-00; Mon, 10 Sep 2001 20:02:14 -0600
X-Sender: seth-pc@hobbiton.shire.net
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
References: <a05100307b7c2ddadb6d1@[63.15.225.153]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <5.1.0.14.0.20010910220804.029eacd8@hobbiton.shire.net>
Date:         Mon, 10 Sep 2001 22:09:02 -0400
Reply-To: "Seth Leigh" <seth@PENGAR.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Seth Leigh" <seth@PENGAR.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Epoxy/KNO3 motor results
Comments: To: Jeff Grady <jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <000401c13a4e$18d8dc50$0200a8c0@prestige.net>

>Next I'll try some other epoxies I have and try to find some Al powder. Any
>less epoxy or any more KNO3 makes mixing a TOUGH job. Any suggestions?

Have you tried finishing resin?  It's a much more water-like consistency,
rather than the gluey consistency we all expect from epoxy used as an
adhesive.  Finishing resin ought to be a lot easier to mix with the KN and
sulfur.

Seth

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 2857 invoked from network); 11 Sep 2001 02:43:06 -0000
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 11 Sep 2001 02:43:06 -0000
Received: (qmail 17295 invoked by uid 50005); 11 Sep 2001 02:40:06 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpf with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4157. . Clean. Processed in 0.183208 secs); 11 Sep 2001 02:40:07 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 11 Sep 2001 02:40:06 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA12011; Mon, 10 Sep 2001 19:37:07 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 87083 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 11 Sep 2001 02:36:44          +0000
Received: from smtprelay3.abs.adelphia.net (smtprelay.abs.adelphia.net          [64.8.20.11]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA11997 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 10 Sep 2001 19:36:43 -0700
Received: from jlgrady ([63.124.251.47]) by smtprelay3.abs.adelphia.net          (Netscape Messaging Server 4.15) with SMTP id GJH8K703.UUS for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 10 Sep 2001 22:36:07 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook CWS, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
Importance: Normal
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <000001c13a6b$111ab840$0200a8c0@prestige.net>
Date:         Mon, 10 Sep 2001 22:40:06 -0400
Reply-To: "Jeff Grady" <jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jeff Grady" <jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Epoxy/KNO3 motor results
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <5.1.0.14.0.20010910220804.029eacd8@hobbiton.shire.net>

I intend to try two other types (because I have them on hand). Both are
finishing type resins. I had a third resin used to cast clear plastic items,
but apparently it has a short shelf life and hardened in its can before I
ever opened it.

-----Original Message-----
From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@itc.uci.edu]On
Behalf Of Seth Leigh
Sent: Monday, September 10, 2001 10:09 PM
To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
Subject: Re: [AR] Epoxy/KNO3 motor results


>Next I'll try some other epoxies I have and try to find some Al powder. Any
>less epoxy or any more KNO3 makes mixing a TOUGH job. Any suggestions?

Have you tried finishing resin?  It's a much more water-like consistency,
rather than the gluey consistency we all expect from epoxy used as an
adhesive.  Finishing resin ought to be a lot easier to mix with the KN and
sulfur.

Seth

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 29472 invoked from network); 11 Sep 2001 04:00:07 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 11 Sep 2001 04:00:07 -0000
Received: (qmail 3018 invoked by uid 50005); 11 Sep 2001 03:59:41 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpb with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.22901 secs); 11 Sep 2001 03:59:41 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 11 Sep 2001 03:59:41 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA12439; Mon, 10 Sep 2001 20:56:31 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 87149 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 11 Sep 2001 03:56:13          +0000
Received: from cablecom.laribay.net (cablecom.laribay.net [66.20.57.4]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA12424 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 10 Sep 2001 20:56:13 -0700
Received: from billbull (dial101.laribay.net [66.20.57.101]) by          cablecom.laribay.net (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id WAA10442 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 10 Sep 2001 22:37:29 -0500 (CDT)          (envelope-from bpbullock@laribay.net)
References: <20.1bae95c6.28ce0492@aol.com>                      <000b01c13a32$53aff1e0$4d391442@billbull>                      <000901c13a39$4074d530$4000a8c0@Inventory>                      <002901c13a3b$f74bb560$5f391442@billbull>             <a05100309b7c2f5c7604e@[63.15.225.153]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <004401c13a75$f47864c0$65391442@billbull>
Date:         Mon, 10 Sep 2001 22:57:41 -0500
Reply-To: "Bill Bullock" <bpbullock@LARIBAY.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Bill Bullock" <bpbullock@LARIBAY.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Clubs
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Jerry:
    You bring up a good idea. Let me see if I can do some local convincing
here. Thanks a lot.
Bill
----- Original Message -----
From: Jerry Irvine <01rocket@GTE.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Monday, September 10, 2001 5:57 PM
Subject: Re: [AR] Clubs


> >Pax:
> >     I already have access to a 118,000 acre farm I can launch from only
20
> >minutes away eventhiugh I cannot bring guests. I was just thinking of
people
> >who do not have access...It was probably a stupid idea anyway...
> Bill
>
> Maybe an invitation only launch.
>
>
> --
> Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
> Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
> Opinion, the whole thing.
>
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 723 invoked from network); 11 Sep 2001 04:10:13 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 11 Sep 2001 04:10:13 -0000
Received: (qmail 32114 invoked by uid 50005); 11 Sep 2001 04:08:26 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4157. . Clean. Processed in 0.809629 secs); 11 Sep 2001 04:08:26 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 11 Sep 2001 04:08:24 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA12502; Mon, 10 Sep 2001 21:07:28 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 87160 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 11 Sep 2001 04:07:22          +0000
Received: from spsystems.net (spsystems.net [209.47.149.227]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA12488 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Mon,          10 Sep 2001 21:07:22 -0700
Received: (from henry@localhost) by spsystems.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id AAA06673;          Tue, 11 Sep 2001 00:06:45 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010911000410.6544A-100000@spsystems.net>
Date:         Tue, 11 Sep 2001 00:06:45 -0400
Reply-To: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Subject:      [AR] PTFE (was Re: [AR] Big lander flight video)
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>

On Mon, 10 Sep 2001, Troy Prideaux wrote:
> It should be theoretically impossible for PTFE to be oxidized by the less
> reactive O from my viewpoint.

Reactivity is relative.  The chances of a fluorine atom being displaced by
an oxygen atom may be very low, but they are not quite zero, especially if
the oxygen atom is energetic.  You can force the issue with lots and lots
of oxygen at high pressure and temperature.

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 9921 invoked from network); 11 Sep 2001 04:12:21 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 11 Sep 2001 04:12:21 -0000
Received: (qmail 31449 invoked by uid 50005); 11 Sep 2001 04:09:56 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4157. . Clean. Processed in 0.3628 secs); 11 Sep 2001 04:09:56 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 11 Sep 2001 04:09:55 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA12526; Mon, 10 Sep 2001 21:09:40 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 87167 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 11 Sep 2001 04:09:39          +0000
Received: from spsystems.net (spsystems.net [209.47.149.227]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA12512 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Mon,          10 Sep 2001 21:09:38 -0700
Received: (from henry@localhost) by spsystems.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id AAA06697;          Tue, 11 Sep 2001 00:09:02 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010911000706.6544B-100000@spsystems.net>
Date:         Tue, 11 Sep 2001 00:09:02 -0400
Reply-To: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Big lander flight video
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>

On Mon, 10 Sep 2001, Troy Prideaux wrote:
> PTFE should theoretically react with any *FUEL* more reactive than carbon
> (or at least more reactive than H, say with an EN or <2) given the right
> environment...

Indeed, you can make quite impressive igniters with PTFE and Mg combined
as a solid fuel.  "Things it won't ignite, won't burn at all."  (Caution,
this is fairly hot stuff, not for beginners.)

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 13891 invoked from network); 11 Sep 2001 04:23:53 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 11 Sep 2001 04:23:53 -0000
Received: (qmail 19528 invoked by uid 50005); 11 Sep 2001 04:23:27 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpb with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.376204 secs); 11 Sep 2001 04:23:27 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 11 Sep 2001 04:23:26 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA12654; Mon, 10 Sep 2001 21:21:41 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 87195 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 11 Sep 2001 04:21:34          +0000
Received: from spsystems.net (spsystems.net [209.47.149.227]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA12640 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Mon,          10 Sep 2001 21:21:33 -0700
Received: (from henry@localhost) by spsystems.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id AAA06747;          Tue, 11 Sep 2001 00:20:57 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010911000932.6544C-100000@spsystems.net>
Date:         Tue, 11 Sep 2001 00:20:57 -0400
Reply-To: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Big lander flight video
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <F46EShbByluRyExvi3T0000c323@hotmail.com>

On Mon, 10 Sep 2001, John Dom wrote:
> >The main materials issue with HTP is not safety, but decomposition
> >rates.(Which is why PE is considered acceptable.)
>
> Acceptable for what? PE is not attacked by HTP. At ambient temps it is safe.
> But (Murphy) when there's a fire, it becomes a hybrid fuel...and hell
> raiser.

Correct, just like aluminum or steel in LOX.  Which, I would remind folks,
are considered acceptable combinations for just about any rocket purpose.

The preferred general procedure for a fire involving strong oxidizers is
to shut off any flows that can be shut off, and then take cover at a safe
distance until it burns out.  Conventional firefighting is virtually
impossible (although water sprays may be useful to keep nearby tanks etc.
from being heated excessively by the fire).

> That is why PE is not (or at least no longer) allowed as storage
> material for HTP, because of the fire hazard when bunkered.

Note the word "storage".  Long-term bulk storage and use in a rocket are
very different requirements.

> Interesting is the safety comparison between LOX and HTP mentioned. The main
> difference is that LOX reacts with different fuel types whereas HTP does the
> same but equally is vulnerable to catalyzed decomposition.

HTP does the same, *but generally much less enthusiastically*.  LOX plus
PE is a disaster waiting to happen; HTP plus PE is a non-problem unless
you already have a disaster in progress from other causes.

> It has even been reported the freezing of HTP (sudden release of heat of
> crystallisation) can cause it to decompose and rupture tanks: C-Stoff
> literature by Hellmuth Walter, paperclip docs.

"The literature makes much of the fact that HTP decomposes in storage with
release of heat.  Horror stories, almost certainly based on the problems
encountered by the Allied forces in dealing with captured German rail
tankers that contained 80% hydrogen peroxide...  In fact, sensitivity to
shock and tendency to auto-decomposition are the consequence of minute
contamination by inpurities -- in particular, by metallic ions.  It was
found... that the standards of purity needed for acceptability in these
respects were very much higher than those prevailing generally in the
chemical industry at the time.  In consequence, it is fair to say that
[wartime] German reports, on which many US studies rely, are irrelevant
for the evaluation of the oxidant used in British rocket engines.  HTP
was virtually a different fluid."  -- David Andrews, JBIS July 1990.

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 5598 invoked from network); 11 Sep 2001 04:31:15 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 11 Sep 2001 04:31:15 -0000
Received: (qmail 21673 invoked by uid 50005); 11 Sep 2001 04:30:31 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpe with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4157. . Clean. Processed in 0.250801 secs); 11 Sep 2001 04:30:31 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 11 Sep 2001 04:30:31 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA12736; Mon, 10 Sep 2001 21:28:55 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 87218 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 11 Sep 2001 04:28:50          +0000
Received: from spsystems.net (spsystems.net [209.47.149.227]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA12722 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Mon,          10 Sep 2001 21:28:49 -0700
Received: (from henry@localhost) by spsystems.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id AAA06763;          Tue, 11 Sep 2001 00:28:13 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010911002104.6544D-100000@spsystems.net>
Date:         Tue, 11 Sep 2001 00:28:13 -0400
Reply-To: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Subject:      [AR] PTFE and Apollo 13 (was Re: [AR] Big lander flight video)
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <F46FRAjlqN7ED3YoMVu0000c7bf@hotmail.com>

On Mon, 10 Sep 2001, John Dom wrote:
> >I might remember it wrong, but wasn't it burning PTFE insulation in an
> >oxygen tank that caused the while apollo 13 mess?
>
> Wasn't it the wrong voltage on an off spec valve in Apollo 13? Did that
> heating next have an effect on PTFE insulation...?? Forgot.

Apollo 13 was a combination of problems.

One oxygen tank had been damaged, probably by being dropped, so it became
difficult to empty.  When this became a problem in pad tests, a procedure
was improvised to use the in-tank heaters to boil the oxygen out.

However, the thermostats on those heaters were not rated for the voltage
used (due to a change in voltage during development), and the contacts
welded shut when they tried to open.  Worse, the tank temperature gauge
was not built to register temperatures much above room temperature, so
nothing was visibly wrong even as temperatures in the tank soared.  This
roasted the PTFE insulation on the internal wiring; later tests showed
that the result of roasting PTFE in hot high-pressure oxygen was a crumbly
and highly flammable material.

When the ground asked the crew to do a tank stir (to ensure that the
contents were homogeneous, for accurate quantity measurement), arcing
between the wires for the in-tank fans ignited the remains of the
insulation, bursting the tank.

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 17479 invoked from network); 11 Sep 2001 05:04:19 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 11 Sep 2001 05:04:19 -0000
Received: (qmail 15863 invoked by uid 50005); 11 Sep 2001 05:02:32 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4157. . Clean. Processed in 0.124547 secs); 11 Sep 2001 05:02:32 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 11 Sep 2001 05:02:31 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA12948; Mon, 10 Sep 2001 22:00:12 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 87263 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 11 Sep 2001 05:00:08          +0000
Received: from mta02.mail.mel.aone.net.au (mta02.mail.au.uu.net [203.2.192.82])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA12934 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 10 Sep 2001 22:00:07 -0700
Received: from unknown ([63.60.249.131]) by mta02.mail.mel.aone.net.au with          SMTP id <20010911050002.MWSL22650.mta02.mail.mel.aone.net.au@unknown>          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 11 Sep 2001 15:00:02 +1000
Priority: Normal
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Priority: 3
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	X-MAPIextension=.TXT;
	charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>
Date:         Tue, 11 Sep 2001 05:00:08 +0000
Reply-To: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] PTFE was Big lander flight video
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010911000706.6544B-100000@spsystems.net>

----------
> On Mon, 10 Sep 2001, Troy Prideaux wrote:
> > PTFE should theoretically react with any *FUEL* more reactive than
carbon
> > (or at least more reactive than H, say with an EN or <2) given the right
> > environment...
>
> Indeed, you can make quite impressive igniters with PTFE and Mg combined
> as a solid fuel.  "Things it won't ignite, won't burn at all."  (Caution,
> this is fairly hot stuff, not for beginners.)

And would probably be only useful for a "poor mans nuclear engine"
application, or however you put it. Wonder if it's possible to react say
Mg0 with it? Doubt it, but if you could, the carbon might just finish up
being oxidised (with O or O2) into a gas:-)
 No, I'm not interested in going down that road...

Troy.


>
>                                                           Henry Spencer
>                                                        henry@spsystems.net
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 27033 invoked from network); 11 Sep 2001 05:07:51 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 11 Sep 2001 05:07:51 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 17680 invoked by uid 50005); 11 Sep 2001 05:04:51 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpf with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4157. . Clean. Processed in 0.200851 secs); 11 Sep 2001 05:04:51 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 11 Sep 2001 05:04:51 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA13014; Mon, 10 Sep 2001 22:05:37 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 87274 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 11 Sep 2001 05:05:35          +0000
Received: from femail30.sdc1.sfba.home.com ([24.254.60.20]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA12999 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon,          10 Sep 2001 22:05:34 -0700
Received: from c396957-b.home.net ([24.17.249.10]) by          femail30.sdc1.sfba.home.com (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20          201-229-121-120-20010223) with ESMTP id          <20010911050528.NGOQ9391.femail30.sdc1.sfba.home.com@c396957-b.home.net> for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 10          Sep 2001 22:05:28 -0700
X-Sender: spiegl@mail (Unverified)
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
References: <3B9D1E85.F4BD8528@NORTELNETWORKS.COM>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <5.1.0.14.2.20010911000304.00b2e750@mail>
Date:         Tue, 11 Sep 2001 00:05:35 -0500
Reply-To: "Mark C Spiegl" <spiegl@HOME.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Mark C Spiegl" <spiegl@HOME.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Smokeless powder ignitor enhancement <- Good igniters
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <001101c13a3b$0d454710$729b49d8@PROVEIT>

Okay class, what makes a good solid fuel igniter?

(yeh I know it starts the motor... duh :)

What Im asking is a more general question about the properties of a good
igniter. Does the "ideal" igniter burn fast? burn slow? burn hot? generate
a lot of gas? a little gas? Begin a pressure ramp up for the main grain?
Etc.

I have tried Aerotech 29mm/38mm grain segments at the forward end of the
motor. And conversely I have used toe-nail sized shaving loosely packed
throughout the core. Once (only once) I loosely packed the core with flash
powder which didn't work at all. Each method has its good points and bad,
but none seem ideal.

There certainly is more than meets the eye when designing a good igniter.

My experience says that materials which release a LOT of energy, stay put,
and burn slowly appear to work the best. If any of these criteria are
missing, it seems that the fire doesn't transfer to the main propellant
grain. Just IMHO.

Somewhere is this rubbish pile resembling Fibber-Magee's closet I have a
professional paper claiming that a non-trivial percentage of the total
impulse can be lost due to sloppy ignition transients.

Opinions? Thoughts?


--MCS

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 28379 invoked from network); 11 Sep 2001 05:45:02 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 11 Sep 2001 05:45:02 -0000
Received: (qmail 19304 invoked by uid 50005); 11 Sep 2001 05:42:37 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4157. . Clean. Processed in 0.146447 secs); 11 Sep 2001 05:42:37 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 11 Sep 2001 05:42:37 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA13205; Mon, 10 Sep 2001 22:39:37 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 87306 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 11 Sep 2001 05:39:32          +0000
Received: from spsystems.net (spsystems.net [209.47.149.227]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA13191 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Mon,          10 Sep 2001 22:39:31 -0700
Received: (from henry@localhost) by spsystems.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id BAA09281;          Tue, 11 Sep 2001 01:38:55 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010911013811.6941A-100000@spsystems.net>
Date:         Tue, 11 Sep 2001 01:38:54 -0400
Reply-To: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] PTFE was Big lander flight video
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>

On Tue, 11 Sep 2001, Troy Prideaux wrote:
> > Indeed, you can make quite impressive igniters with PTFE and Mg combined
> > as a solid fuel.  "Things it won't ignite, won't burn at all."  (Caution,
> > this is fairly hot stuff, not for beginners.)
>
> And would probably be only useful for a "poor mans nuclear engine"
> application, or however you put it.

It's not a very good choice as a *propellant*, but as an *igniter* for
something like a stubborn solid fuel it's reportedly quite something.

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 18509 invoked from network); 11 Sep 2001 06:15:41 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 11 Sep 2001 06:15:41 -0000
Received: (qmail 17142 invoked by uid 50005); 11 Sep 2001 06:15:15 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpb with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.164255 secs); 11 Sep 2001 06:15:15 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 11 Sep 2001 06:15:15 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA13333; Mon, 10 Sep 2001 23:13:26 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 87325 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 11 Sep 2001 06:13:21          +0000
Received: from mta05.mail.mel.aone.net.au (mta05.mail.au.uu.net [203.2.192.85])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA13319 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 10 Sep 2001 23:13:20 -0700
Received: from unknown ([63.34.220.73]) by mta05.mail.mel.aone.net.au with SMTP          id <20010911061312.MUKQ7694.mta05.mail.mel.aone.net.au@unknown> for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 11 Sep 2001 16:13:12 +1000
References: Conversation <3B9D1E85.F4BD8528@NORTELNETWORKS.COM> with last            message <5.1.0.14.2.20010911000304.00b2e750@mail>
Priority: Normal
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Priority: 3
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	X-MAPIextension=.TXT;
	charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>
Date:         Tue, 11 Sep 2001 06:13:21 +0000
Reply-To: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Smokeless powder ignitor enhancement <- Good igniters
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <5.1.0.14.2.20010911000304.00b2e750@mail>

As much heat release as possible with as little gas generation as possible
(to a reasonable degree) in a reasonably quick time frame, depending on the
application.


Troy.

> Opinions? Thoughts?
>
>
> --MCS

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 17764 invoked from network); 11 Sep 2001 07:24:51 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 11 Sep 2001 07:24:51 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 9409 invoked by uid 50005); 11 Sep 2001 07:21:51 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpf with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4157. . Clean. Processed in 0.235125 secs); 11 Sep 2001 07:21:51 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 11 Sep 2001 07:21:51 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA13544; Tue, 11 Sep 2001 00:22:04 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 87348 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 11 Sep 2001 07:21:59          +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (f141.law15.hotmail.com [64.4.23.141]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA13530 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Tue, 11 Sep 2001 00:21:59 -0700
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Tue,          11 Sep 2001 00:21:29 -0700
Received: from 193.121.251.246 by lw15fd.law15.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Tue,          11 Sep 2001 07:21:28 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [193.121.251.246]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 11 Sep 2001 07:21:29.0188 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[5FE9D240:01C13A92]
Message-ID:  <F141dhlHs46tfUDbbkA0000be0f@hotmail.com>
Date:         Tue, 11 Sep 2001 07:21:59 +0000
Reply-To: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Big lander flight video
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

>From all the postings I conclude that if PTFE, PE and carbon can be avoided
around HP tanks and motors, you end up safer. Period.

The question remains whether RGHP can cause trouble when freezing...on the
pad or in space for instance. This 'd require a heating system.

The fact that C-Stoff and recent RGHP are "quite difficult chemicals" will
not change their (identical) heat of crystallisation value, nor  freezing
point...

BTW: besides, C-Stoff was not that sensitive to autodecomposition; remember
the .50 caliber tests on C-Stoff canisters: nothing happened. A lot of
interesting stuff was omitted in those JBIS papers,
"re-inventing German HP motors".
Even NTO was a German idea: U-Stoff.

jd

_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 4359 invoked from network); 11 Sep 2001 08:29:35 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 11 Sep 2001 08:29:35 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 892 invoked by uid 50005); 11 Sep 2001 08:28:51 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpe with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4157. . Clean. Processed in 0.277367 secs); 11 Sep 2001 08:28:51 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 11 Sep 2001 08:28:50 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id BAA13845; Tue, 11 Sep 2001 01:26:55 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 87409 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 11 Sep 2001 08:26:48          +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (f101.law15.hotmail.com [64.4.23.101]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id BAA13831 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Tue, 11 Sep 2001 01:26:48 -0700
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Tue,          11 Sep 2001 01:26:18 -0700
Received: from 193.121.251.246 by lw15fd.law15.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Tue,          11 Sep 2001 08:26:17 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [193.121.251.246]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 11 Sep 2001 08:26:18.0177 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[6DEE7310:01C13A9B]
Message-ID:  <F101RSDk8tjRV5mkwn90000c11b@hotmail.com>
Date:         Tue, 11 Sep 2001 08:26:48 +0000
Reply-To: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Big lander flight video
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

EJ wrote:

>I don't remember the exact diameter of the OTRAG tanks, 300-400mm? Assuming
>300mm OD, 0.4mm wall and design pressure of 20bar + a 50% safety factor,
>the wall material needs to have a yield strenght of more than 1100Mpa.
>Steel this strong does exist, but I don't think any "normal" alloy comes
>close

It was that thin. The subject was discussed to some detail a few years ago
on this list. For OTRAG 300 mm tubes the pressure was only about
10-15 bars (lower pressure combustion). Marginal safety. Very cheap compared
to filament C.

I have no data on N-1 spherical blowdown tank's wall thickness, only it was
thin walled stainless. On a video, long ago...

jd

_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 13173 invoked from network); 11 Sep 2001 10:15:43 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 11 Sep 2001 10:15:43 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 2193 invoked by uid 50005); 11 Sep 2001 10:15:15 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpb with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.163381 secs); 11 Sep 2001 10:15:15 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 11 Sep 2001 10:15:15 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id DAA14239; Tue, 11 Sep 2001 03:13:42 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 87470 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 11 Sep 2001 10:13:36          +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (f53.law15.hotmail.com [64.4.23.53]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id DAA14225 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Tue,          11 Sep 2001 03:13:36 -0700
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Tue,          11 Sep 2001 03:13:06 -0700
Received: from 193.121.251.246 by lw15fd.law15.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Tue,          11 Sep 2001 10:13:06 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [193.121.251.246]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 11 Sep 2001 10:13:06.0309 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[5979CB50:01C13AAA]
Message-ID:  <F53fLTTJzkmrNq6pcgv000098ae@hotmail.com>
Date:         Tue, 11 Sep 2001 10:13:36 +0000
Reply-To: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] AN melt
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

> > Could be. As to polarity being the cause, sugars are not polar compounds
>are they?
>
>Yes, they are. They contain one hydroxyl group per carbon atom. It is
>comparable to methanol.

Maybe the polarity concept I have in mind does not correspond with what you
mention. It indeed covers a wide array of phenomena depending on...
I try not to lecture here but to find a common ground:

I call an apolar (non-polar) compound one which does not dissolve nor
dissociate (ionise) in water or another protonic solvent. Typical
benzene-like compounds, aliphatics (kerosine, gasoline), aliphatic chlorine
compounds eg dichloromethane, chloroform. They do or do not dissolve in each
other but when they do, they do not ionise.

Polar compounds or solvents are ones that dissolve well in water and usually
dissociate in anions and cations doing so. Table salt, sodium acetate are
polar compound which does such. Inorganic acids are protonic solvents, like
H2SO4. Like acetic acid.
But why does methanol dissolve in water? Why do polyols like glycols,
glycerine, sucrose, sorbitol dissolve in water? They do not dissociate, nor
protonate (pH does not change much if at all). I do not have a clue at this
instant. Does (molecular) polarity cause each sugar molecule to let go of
its crystal lattice and diffuse homogenously in water?

> > >Some of my previuos experiments allow me to conclude higher alcohols
>have no chance to dissolve in AN melt due to their low polarity.

The more carbon atoms, the less the alcohol dissolves in water. So if the
ease of dissociation seems to concur with you polarity concept.

> > Then maybe their fatty acids (detergents), they certainly are polar. But
> > oddly, they also dissolve in kerosine.
>
>Fatty acids and their salts (detergents) are non-polar compounds.

Huh? The detergent action of detergent compounds is due to their polarity.
They catch the dirt particle with their ionized (carboxyl?) termination,
next spike it with their long aliphatic tails, next the removal action of
such a polar blob of tails.

>They contain one polar group ( carboxyl ) per very long carbon chain (
>typically 15-20 atoms ). I have tried to dissolve small quantity of soap in
>AN melt on purpose to inhibit AN decomposition by activated carbon. Soap
>didn't dissolve.

Yep, sodium palmitate dissociates readily in water: apolar?

I wonder how to define a liquid salt like AN. Could it be a protonic
solvent?

Caprolactam (monomer) dissolves readily in water and has an interesting
melting point: 69C_A candidate for salt mix?

All for now

JD

_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 4366 invoked from network); 11 Sep 2001 10:23:44 -0000
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 11 Sep 2001 10:23:44 -0000
Received: (qmail 20602 invoked by uid 50005); 11 Sep 2001 10:22:59 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpe with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4157. . Clean. Processed in 4.293324 secs); 11 Sep 2001 10:22:59 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 11 Sep 2001 10:22:53 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id DAA14189; Tue, 11 Sep 2001 03:07:05 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 87459 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 11 Sep 2001 10:07:01          +0000
Received: from mta02.mail.mel.aone.net.au (mta02.mail.au.uu.net [203.2.192.82])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id DAA14175 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 11 Sep 2001 03:06:59 -0700
Received: from unknown ([63.34.214.127]) by mta02.mail.mel.aone.net.au with          SMTP id <20010911100657.SMAM22650.mta02.mail.mel.aone.net.au@unknown>          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 11 Sep 2001 20:06:57 +1000
References: Conversation <F141dhlHs46tfUDbbkA0000be0f@hotmail.com> with last            message <F141dhlHs46tfUDbbkA0000be0f@hotmail.com>
Priority: Normal
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Priority: 3
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	X-MAPIextension=.TXT;
	charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>
Date:         Tue, 11 Sep 2001 10:07:01 +0000
Reply-To: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Big lander flight video
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <F141dhlHs46tfUDbbkA0000be0f@hotmail.com>

----------
> From all the postings I conclude that if PTFE, PE and carbon can be
avoided
> around HP tanks and motors, you end up safer. Period.

Well, maybe true for PE & carbon (depends how paranoid you are). If PTFE
can catalyse the decomposition of HP or HTP and you have ovjective evidence
of that, then fair'nuff, otherwise I see no evidence to suggest PTFE would
be hazardous for HP storage.

Troy.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 27364 invoked from network); 11 Sep 2001 10:32:15 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 11 Sep 2001 10:32:15 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 16468 invoked by uid 50005); 11 Sep 2001 10:30:27 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4157. . Clean. Processed in 0.194323 secs); 11 Sep 2001 10:30:27 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 11 Sep 2001 10:30:27 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id DAA14369; Tue, 11 Sep 2001 03:30:08 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 87500 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 11 Sep 2001 10:30:01          +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (f214.law15.hotmail.com [64.4.23.214]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id DAA14355 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Tue, 11 Sep 2001 03:30:01 -0700
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Tue,          11 Sep 2001 03:29:31 -0700
Received: from 193.121.251.246 by lw15fd.law15.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Tue,          11 Sep 2001 10:29:30 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [193.121.251.246]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 11 Sep 2001 10:29:31.0098 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[A474ABA0:01C13AAC]
Message-ID:  <F214m7p1KOzAD1LWAMD0000bca1@hotmail.com>
Date:         Tue, 11 Sep 2001 10:30:01 +0000
Reply-To: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Cheap, Easy test stand for small motors
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Quote ML:

>You can get naked strain gages from Omega (www.omega.com)--buy the ones
>with
>   leads already soldered!  Richard Nakka has a spreadsheet ...

Could (cannibalising a) digital kitchen balance be used as a strain gauge? I
dread such 'd require thorough electronics know-how...

jd

_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 29567 invoked from network); 11 Sep 2001 11:04:06 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 11 Sep 2001 11:04:06 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 20536 invoked by uid 50005); 11 Sep 2001 11:01:39 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4157. . Clean. Processed in 0.309214 secs); 11 Sep 2001 11:01:39 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 11 Sep 2001 11:01:39 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id EAA14499; Tue, 11 Sep 2001 04:00:43 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 87523 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 11 Sep 2001 11:00:40          +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (f100.law15.hotmail.com [64.4.23.100]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id EAA14485 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Tue, 11 Sep 2001 04:00:40 -0700
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Tue,          11 Sep 2001 04:00:10 -0700
Received: from 193.121.251.246 by lw15fd.law15.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Tue,          11 Sep 2001 11:00:09 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [193.121.251.246]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 11 Sep 2001 11:00:10.0125 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[EC99EBD0:01C13AB0]
Message-ID:  <F100cxxarrGn1c4Lmaq0000c36f@hotmail.com>
Date:         Tue, 11 Sep 2001 11:00:40 +0000
Reply-To: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Big lander flight video
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Quote TP:

>...If PTFE can catalyse the decomposition of HP or HTP...

No (see below). But I was considering the Apollo XIII incident, the hot O2,
high pressure environment, not uncommon with Murphy like decompositions, to
be expected with HP. Very unlikely to occur.
But possible.

Our present (chemical) company policy is zero tolerance in safety issues.
And they are spending huge amounts of money to get such thinking across.
This spills over to Arocket somewhat maybe.

Quoting from:

http://www.ee.surrey.ac.uk/SSC/H2O2CONF/jwhitehead.htm

...Materials Compatibility and (HP) Decay in Storage

Compatibility between HTP and materials of construction includes two
separate problems to be avoided. HTP exposure can cause material
degradation, as occurs with many polymers. Secondly, the rate of HTP decay
varies widely with exposure to different surfaces. In both cases,
detrimental effects require significant periods of time. Therefore,
compatibility must be quantified and considered in context, rather than
being treated as a yes or no question. For example, a thrust chamber may be
constructed of a metal which would be considered incompatible for tankage.

Historical work includes compatibility tests with material samples in glass
containers of HTP.9 In support of present efforts, small sealed containers
have been constructed of materials to be tested. Monitoring pressure and
total mass indicates decay and the amount of leakage or permeation. In
addition, effects such as swelling or weakening become readily apparent
since the container wall material is stressed by pressure.

Fluoropolymers such as PTFE (polytetrafluoroethylene), PCTFE
(polychlorotrifluoroethylene), and PVDF (polyvinylidene fluoride) do not
degrade in HTP. They also result in slow decay of the propellant, so these
materials make sense for tank coatings, liners, or bladders, if months to
years of storage are required. Similarly, fluoroelastomer o-ring seals
(standard "Viton") and fluorinated greases are suitable for long term HTP
exposure. Polycarbonate plastic is surprisingly unaffected by HTP. This
non-brittle material has been used where its transparency is an asset. This
includes prototype parts which are internally complex, and tanks where the
liquid level must be visible (see Figure 4).


Decay in contact with Al-6061-T6 is only a few times faster than with the
most compatible aluminum alloys. The former is strong and readily available,
whereas the latter have little useful strength. Bare aluminum (e.g.
Al-6061-T6) surfaces are preserved for many months in contact with HTP. This
is in contrast to water, which oxidizes aluminum.


Contrary to historically recommended practice, complex and hazardous
cleaning operations do not appear to be essential for most purposes. Most
parts used with HTP in the present work were merely washed with mild
detergent and water at 110 F. Preliminary results indicate that this can be
nearly as good as recommended cleaning procedures. In particular, 35% nitric
acid overnight only decreased the decay rate in a PVDF sample by 20% over a
6-month period.

It is readily calculated that 1% decay of HTP raises the pressure of a
sealed 10% ullage volume to nearly 600 psi. Considering these numbers, the
loss of performance through reduced HTP concentration is far less a concern
than pressure safety.

Planning space missions with HTP requires careful consideration of the
possible need for venting. If operation of the propulsion system begins
within days to weeks after launch, the ullage volume may immediately
increase by several fold. Bare metal tanks would make sense for such
satellites. Obviously, the sealed storage period includes time during
prelaunch operations.


It is unfortunate that regulations which have evolved along with the use of
highly toxic propellants tend to prohibit automatic vent valves on flight
hardware. Costly active pressure monitoring is often used. The notion of
increasing safety by prohibiting safety valves is contrary to normal
terrestrial practice with pressurized fluid systems. Depending on which
launch vehicle is used, this issue may need to be addressed.

If necessary, decay can be kept to 1% per year or lower. In addition to
material choice, decay rates are strongly dependent on temperature. It may
even be possible to store HTP indefinitely if it is permitted to freeze on
long space missions. It does not expand and rupture hardware upon freezing
as water does.

Since HTP decays on surfaces, higher volume-to-surface ratios can increase
storage life. Comparative tests with 5 cc samples and 300 cc vessels have
confirmed this. One test with distilled 85% HTP in a 300 cc PVDF vessel had
a decay rate at 70 F of .05% per week, or 2.5% per year. Extrapolating to 10
liter tanks is consistent with decay below 1% per year at 20 C.

In other comparative tests in PVDF and with PVDF coatings on aluminum, HTP
having 80 ppm of concentrated stabilizers decayed only 30% slower than the
distilled propellant. It isn't bad news that stabilizers wouldn't greatly
improve long term storage in flight tanks. As discussed in the next section,
these impurities are quite detrimental to thruster operation...

jd

_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 6195 invoked from network); 11 Sep 2001 12:51:27 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 11 Sep 2001 12:51:27 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 7589 invoked by uid 50005); 11 Sep 2001 12:49:00 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4157. . Clean. Processed in 0.18846 secs); 11 Sep 2001 12:49:00 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 11 Sep 2001 12:49:00 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id FAA14917; Tue, 11 Sep 2001 05:48:36 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 87564 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 11 Sep 2001 12:48:30          +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (f195.law15.hotmail.com [64.4.23.195]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id FAA14903 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Tue, 11 Sep 2001 05:48:30 -0700
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Tue,          11 Sep 2001 05:47:59 -0700
Received: from 193.121.251.246 by lw15fd.law15.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Tue,          11 Sep 2001 12:47:59 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [193.121.251.246]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 11 Sep 2001 12:47:59.0927 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[FCE75C70:01C13ABF]
Message-ID:  <F195cBHt1lUQb9pvuu70000bf64@hotmail.com>
Date:         Tue, 11 Sep 2001 12:48:30 +0000
Reply-To: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] AN melt
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

jt wrote:

>While sugars themselves are not very polar, they contain many polar
>hydroxyl
>groups, so they are soluble in polar solvents (like water).

Yep, but sugar also dissolves well in gasoline (apolar solvent). Mysterious,
to me at least.

jd

_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 26002 invoked from network); 11 Sep 2001 14:34:15 -0000
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 11 Sep 2001 14:34:15 -0000
Received: (qmail 328 invoked by uid 50005); 11 Sep 2001 14:33:28 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpe with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4157. . Clean. Processed in 0.728979 secs); 11 Sep 2001 14:33:28 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 11 Sep 2001 14:33:27 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA15346; Tue, 11 Sep 2001 07:28:58 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 87628 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 11 Sep 2001 14:28:53          +0000
Received: from zcars0m9.ca.nortel.com (h157s242a129n47.user.nortelnetworks.com          [47.129.242.157]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA15332          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 11 Sep 2001 07:28:53 -0700
Received: from zcars04f.ca.nortel.com (zcars04f.ca.nortel.com [47.129.242.57])          by zcars0m9.ca.nortel.com (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f8BERop02669          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 11 Sep 2001 10:27:50 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from rftzy232.ca.nortel.com by zcars04f.ca.nortel.com; Tue, 11 Sep          2001 10:27:56 -0400
Received: from NORTELNETWORKS.COM (wftzh00e.ca.nortel.com [47.130.116.9]) by          rftzy232.ca.nortel.com with SMTP (Microsoft Exchange Internet Mail          Service Version 5.5.2653.13) id SHASBMB9; Tue, 11 Sep 2001 10:27:04          -0400
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.73C-CCK-MCD [en] (X11; U; HP-UX B.10.20 9000/785)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <F214m7p1KOzAD1LWAMD0000bca1@hotmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Orig: <mleech@NORTELNETWORKS.COM>
Message-ID:  <3B9E1F79.A395DEC@NORTELNETWORKS.COM>
Date:         Tue, 11 Sep 2001 10:28:09 -0400
Reply-To: "Marcus Leech" <mleech@NORTELNETWORKS.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Marcus Leech" <mleech@NORTELNETWORKS.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Cheap, Easy test stand for small motors
Comments: To: John Dom <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

The "Health-O-Meter" brand of digital bathroom scales uses a pair of straight-beam
  load cells, and some matching electronics.  It's probably cheaper and more
  straightforward to just buy some strain gages from Omega, and make up the
  very simple load cell on Nakkas site.

--
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Marcus Leech                             Mail:   Dept 8M70, MS 012, FITZ
Advisor                                  Phone: (ESN) 393-9145  +1 613 763 9145
Security Architecture and Planning       Fax:   (ESN) 393-9435  +1 613 763 9435
Nortel Networks                          mleech@nortelnetworks.com
-----------------Expressed opinions are my own, not my employer's------

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 17856 invoked from network); 11 Sep 2001 15:14:02 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 11 Sep 2001 15:14:02 -0000
Received: (qmail 13156 invoked by uid 50005); 11 Sep 2001 15:11:00 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpf with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4157. . Clean. Processed in 0.287075 secs); 11 Sep 2001 15:11:00 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 11 Sep 2001 15:11:00 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA15577; Tue, 11 Sep 2001 08:10:17 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 87670 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 11 Sep 2001 15:10:08          +0000
Received: from spsystems.net (spsystems.net [209.47.149.227]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA15563 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Tue,          11 Sep 2001 08:10:08 -0700
Received: (from henry@localhost) by spsystems.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id LAA15375;          Tue, 11 Sep 2001 11:09:28 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010911104020.14979A-100000@spsystems.net>
Date:         Tue, 11 Sep 2001 11:09:28 -0400
Reply-To: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Big lander flight video
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <F141dhlHs46tfUDbbkA0000be0f@hotmail.com>

On Tue, 11 Sep 2001, John Dom wrote:
> From all the postings I conclude that if PTFE, PE and carbon can be avoided
> around HP tanks and motors, you end up safer. Period.

No one argues that; the question is, *how much* safer?  It is necessary to
quantify these things, at least vaguely, to make intelligent tradeoffs.
There is no limit to how much money you can spend and how much hassle you
can incur in achieving negligible safety improvements.  If nothing else,
often the same investment of resources will yield greater safety returns
elsewhere (e.g., written procedures and checklists).

Fearing bogeymen under the bed is not harmless; it diverts attention and
effort from real dangers.

> The question remains whether RGHP can cause trouble when freezing...on the
> pad or in space for instance. This 'd require a heating system.

Be it in space or on the pad, it's generally considered a bad idea to let
your propellants freeze, even if the results are chemically innocuous.
For one thing, it can damage plumbing.  (That's regardless of whether the
propellant expands or shrinks on freezing; propellants that shrink on
freezing will expand on re-melting, and the damage can be done then.)

> The fact that C-Stoff and recent RGHP are "quite difficult chemicals" will
> not change their (identical) heat of crystallisation value, nor  freezing
> point...

True, but it will change whether there are any practical implications
(beyond those noted above).

> ...A lot of interesting stuff was omitted in those JBIS papers...

No doubt, but when someone with twenty years' professional experience with
developing peroxide rocket engines tells you that the earlier reports on
safety should be considered irrelevant, it seems strange to put more faith
in the earlier reports.

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 27081 invoked from network); 11 Sep 2001 15:59:48 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 11 Sep 2001 15:59:48 -0000
Received: (qmail 5850 invoked by uid 50005); 11 Sep 2001 15:59:18 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpb with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.190142 secs); 11 Sep 2001 15:59:18 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 11 Sep 2001 15:59:18 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA15840; Tue, 11 Sep 2001 08:56:50 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 87719 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 11 Sep 2001 15:56:46          +0000
Received: from spsystems.net (spsystems.net [209.47.149.227]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA15826 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Tue,          11 Sep 2001 08:56:45 -0700
Received: (from henry@localhost) by spsystems.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id LAA15810;          Tue, 11 Sep 2001 11:56:06 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010911112756.14979D-100000@spsystems.net>
Date:         Tue, 11 Sep 2001 11:56:05 -0400
Reply-To: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Subject:      [AR] polar/nonpolar (was Re: [AR] AN melt)
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <F53fLTTJzkmrNq6pcgv000098ae@hotmail.com>

On Tue, 11 Sep 2001, John Dom wrote:
> Maybe the polarity concept I have in mind does not correspond with what you
> mention. It indeed covers a wide array of phenomena depending on...

John, rather than making up your own definitions, you might find it
advisable to consult a technical dictionary to determine what the usual
definition is.  That would ease communication.

In the normal chemical sense of the word, a non-polar compound is one that
has no significant electric dipole.  Period.

(When it comes to solubility, there are some small complications.  What
matters is exposed local dipoles, not the overall dipole moment of the
molecule.  The three isomers of dinitrobenzene have similar solubility
properties despite quite different overall dipole moments, because the
*local* dipoles of the individual nitro groups are the same.  And there
are molecules which have an internal dipole, but have it so deeply buried
within their structure that it's not very visible from the outside, and
they act non-polar for solubility purposes.)

> Polar compounds or solvents are ones that dissolve well in water and usually
> dissociate in anions and cations doing so.

You are confusing two largely-separate issues here.  Dissolving in a polar
solvent does not require ionizing; many substances do not ionize when they
dissolve in water.

> But why does methanol dissolve in water? Why do polyols like glycols,
> glycerine, sucrose, sorbitol dissolve in water? They do not dissociate...

Correct, but this should not surprise you.  It's not necessary that they
dissociate to dissolve.  It suffices that they are polar enough that the
highly-polar water molecules will cling to them (loosely speaking).

> The more carbon atoms, the less the alcohol dissolves in water. So if the
> ease of dissociation seems to concur with you polarity concept.

Again, dissociation has nothing to do with it.  The problem with the
higher alcohols is that they've got a long non-polar backbone, and the
little alcohol group on the end isn't polar enough to overcome that and
let them associate well with water molecules.

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 25784 invoked from network); 11 Sep 2001 16:14:20 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 11 Sep 2001 16:14:20 -0000
Received: (qmail 15102 invoked by uid 50005); 11 Sep 2001 16:13:51 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpb with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.133364 secs); 11 Sep 2001 16:13:51 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 11 Sep 2001 16:13:50 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA15936; Tue, 11 Sep 2001 09:12:12 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 87734 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 11 Sep 2001 16:12:11          +0000
Received: from spsystems.net (spsystems.net [209.47.149.227]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA15922 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Tue,          11 Sep 2001 09:12:10 -0700
Received: (from henry@localhost) by spsystems.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id MAA15952;          Tue, 11 Sep 2001 12:11:30 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010911115814.14979E-100000@spsystems.net>
Date:         Tue, 11 Sep 2001 12:11:30 -0400
Reply-To: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Subject:      [AR] safety (was Re: [AR] Big lander flight video)
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <F100cxxarrGn1c4Lmaq0000c36f@hotmail.com>

On Tue, 11 Sep 2001, John Dom wrote:
> >...If PTFE can catalyse the decomposition of HP or HTP...
>
> No (see below). But I was considering the Apollo XIII incident, the hot O2,
> high pressure environment, not uncommon with Murphy like decompositions, to
> be expected with HP. Very unlikely to occur. But possible.

Would you put LOX in an aluminum tank?  Aluminum burns very nicely.

Remember, there were two separate steps in the Apollo 13 accident:  first
the Teflon got roasted for a prolonged period, then it got ignited in a
high-pressure oxygen environment (much worse than a peroxide environment).

You're awfully scared of those bogeymen under the bed.

> Our present (chemical) company policy is zero tolerance in safety issues.

What that really means, of course, is zero rational thought about safety
issues.  BAD IDEA.  An unwillingness to talk about safety tradeoffs does
not mean that they will not be made -- they are inevitable if anything is
to actually get done -- but it does ensure that they will not be analyzed,
quantified, or discussed.  When it is necessary to accept a slight risk
for the sake of results, the safety issue will be swept under the rug...
without systematically determining whether it will actually fit under there.

The only way to achieve perfect safety is to close the company and fire
everyone.

"...if you are looking for perfect safety, you will do well to sit on a
fence and watch the birds; but if you really wish to learn, you must mount
a machine and become acquainted with its tricks by actual trial."
        -- Wilbur Wright, "Some Aeronautical Experiments", lecture to
        the Western Society of Engineers, Chicago, 18 Sept 1901.

> And they are spending huge amounts of money to get such thinking across.

If you own stock, beat the rush -- sell now.  Company management is being
irrational, and this attitude (and the resulting expenses) may extend to
other areas of thought as well.

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 26078 invoked from network); 11 Sep 2001 16:52:16 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 11 Sep 2001 16:52:16 -0000
Received: (qmail 26197 invoked by uid 50005); 11 Sep 2001 16:51:40 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpa with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4157. . Clean. Processed in 0.177714 secs); 11 Sep 2001 16:51:40 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 11 Sep 2001 16:51:39 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA16179; Tue, 11 Sep 2001 09:50:07 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 87780 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 11 Sep 2001 16:49:56          +0000
Received: from spsystems.net (spsystems.net [209.47.149.227]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA16160 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Tue,          11 Sep 2001 09:49:56 -0700
Received: (from henry@localhost) by spsystems.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id MAA16265;          Tue, 11 Sep 2001 12:49:16 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010911123539.14979J-100000@spsystems.net>
Date:         Tue, 11 Sep 2001 12:49:15 -0400
Reply-To: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] explosion diagrams
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <F99kH2i8OARrIHu1ZuS00003265@hotmail.com>

On Mon, 3 Sep 2001, John Dom wrote:
> http://www.galcit.caltech.edu/~jeshep/asci/www/muller/hedm/nm/
> For starters, I do not understand the density number in the initial
> condition, namely 45.59 g/cc which seems unlikely high if it is  specific
> gravity.

All the more so since it's supposed to be at 1atm and 1500K (!).  And note
that it remains exactly unchanged as he raises the initial pressure to
100,000atm (!!) farther down on the page.  Weird; I can't make any sense
of that number...

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 2277 invoked from network); 11 Sep 2001 16:53:49 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 11 Sep 2001 16:53:49 -0000
Received: (qmail 11031 invoked by uid 50005); 11 Sep 2001 16:53:19 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpb with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.209194 secs); 11 Sep 2001 16:53:19 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 11 Sep 2001 16:53:19 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA16223; Tue, 11 Sep 2001 09:51:01 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 87795 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 11 Sep 2001 16:51:00          +0000
Received: from izzy6.izzy.net (izzy6.izzy.net [207.158.132.178]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA16209 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Tue,          11 Sep 2001 09:50:59 -0700
Received: from TCB1179DS1NT (host-69.subnet-249.med.umich.edu [141.214.249.69])          by izzy6.izzy.net (8.9.2/8.9.3) with SMTP id MAA10285 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Tue, 11 Sep 2001 12:50:58 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.3018.1300
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <000e01c13ae2$15f98ae0$45f9d68d@TCB1179DS1NT>
Date:         Tue, 11 Sep 2001 12:52:03 -0400
Reply-To: "curtis scholl" <cscholl@IZZY.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "curtis scholl" <cscholl@IZZY.NET>
Subject:      [AR] OT - Say a prayer for the victims of the events of this day
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Gentlemen and Ladies:

   I wrtte to express my shock and dismay at the events of this day. It
reminds me that there are those
who think we are the enemy. Whoever tried it the first time had to regroup
but was finally successful
in bringing the WTC Towers down.

   I am praying for the victims and their families and for the state of the
entire world. This is not the end
of it.

God be with all of you and keep you in the palm of his hand.

Curtis Scholl
cscholl@izzy.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 7230 invoked from network); 11 Sep 2001 17:25:07 -0000
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 11 Sep 2001 17:25:07 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 31167 invoked by uid 50005); 11 Sep 2001 17:22:04 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpf with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4157. . Clean. Processed in 0.158647 secs); 11 Sep 2001 17:22:04 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 11 Sep 2001 17:22:04 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA16635; Tue, 11 Sep 2001 10:21:27 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 87850 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 11 Sep 2001 17:21:18          +0000
Received: from femail35.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail35.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.254.60.25]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA16620          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 11 Sep 2001 10:21:18 -0700
Received: from home.com ([24.22.71.82]) by femail35.sdc1.sfba.home.com          (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20 201-229-121-120-20010223) with ESMTP id          <20010911172107.DYKZ12461.femail35.sdc1.sfba.home.com@home.com>; Tue,          11 Sep 2001 10:21:07 -0700
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.75 [en] (Win98; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <000e01c13ae2$15f98ae0$45f9d68d@TCB1179DS1NT>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B9E4868.F2923FDA@home.com>
Date:         Tue, 11 Sep 2001 13:22:48 -0400
Reply-To: "Mark Simpson" <mark.simpson@HOME.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Mark Simpson" <mark.simpson@HOME.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] OT - Say a prayer for the victims of the events of this              day
Comments: To: curtis scholl <cscholl@IZZY.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Very nicely stated Curtis.  My prayers are for the dead and the survivors and
for the good eyesight of those charged with avenging them.

Mark Simpson

curtis scholl wrote:

> Gentlemen and Ladies:
>
>    I wrtte to express my shock and dismay at the events of this day. It
> reminds me that there are those
> who think we are the enemy. Whoever tried it the first time had to regroup
> but was finally successful
> in bringing the WTC Towers down.
>
>    I am praying for the victims and their families and for the state of the
> entire world. This is not the end
> of it.
>
> God be with all of you and keep you in the palm of his hand.
>
> Curtis Scholl
> cscholl@izzy.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 18259 invoked from network); 11 Sep 2001 17:49:33 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 11 Sep 2001 17:49:33 -0000
X-Priority: 3
Received: (qmail 5034 invoked by uid 50005); 11 Sep 2001 17:47:05 -0000
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4157. . Clean. Processed in 0.107892 secs); 11 Sep 2001 17:47:05 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 11 Sep 2001 17:47:05 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA16910; Tue, 11 Sep 2001 10:39:21 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 87871 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 11 Sep 2001 17:39:19          +0000
Received: from mail.cnnxn.com ([204.144.134.227]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7)          with ESMTP id KAA16760 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 11 Sep 2001          10:29:18 -0700
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
content-class: urn:content-classes:message
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-MS-Has-Attach: 
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: 
Thread-Topic:      [AR] PTFE and Apollo 13 (was Re: [AR] Big lander flight                   video)
Thread-Index: AcE6etsv73YvCEKVSKiqYqg5Zya8nwAanBCA
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by itc.uci.edu id KAA16761
Message-ID:  <F6C9206C2C2F9E4BBD5610E94B13F2CA0CD2CA@beast.ossconnexn.com>
Date:         Tue, 11 Sep 2001 11:28:47 -0600
Reply-To: "Jeff Maslo" <jmaslo@CNNXN.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jeff Maslo" <jmaslo@CNNXN.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] PTFE and Apollo 13 (was Re: [AR] Big lander flight video)
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

I remember reading somewhere a long time ago, that the oxygen tanks in
the service module used 'supercritical' oxygen, not liquid.

What are the advantages of this ? I doubt you'd increase capacity. The
only thing I can imagine is that it might have been easier to handle in
low gravity.

Jeff

>Henry Spencer wrote
>
>Apollo 13 was a combination of problems.
>
>One oxygen tank had been damaged, probably by being dropped, so it
became
>difficult to empty.  When this became a problem in pad tests, a
procedure
>was improvised to use the in-tank heaters to boil the oxygen out.
>
>However, the thermostats on those heaters were not rated for the
voltage
>used (due to a change in voltage during development), and the contacts
>welded shut when they tried to open.  Worse, the tank temperature gauge
>was not built to register temperatures much above room temperature, so
>nothing was visibly wrong even as temperatures in the tank soared.
This
>roasted the PTFE insulation on the internal wiring; later tests showed
>that the result of roasting PTFE in hot high-pressure oxygen was a
crumbly
>and highly flammable material.
>
>When the ground asked the crew to do a tank stir (to ensure that the
>contents were homogeneous, for accurate quantity measurement), arcing
>between the wires for the in-tank fans ignited the remains of the
>insulation, bursting the tank.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 12081 invoked from network); 11 Sep 2001 17:55:23 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 11 Sep 2001 17:55:23 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 8128 invoked by uid 50005); 11 Sep 2001 17:54:36 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpe with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4157. . Clean. Processed in 0.289625 secs); 11 Sep 2001 17:54:36 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 11 Sep 2001 17:54:35 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA16995; Tue, 11 Sep 2001 10:51:12 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 87905 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 11 Sep 2001 17:51:10          +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (f44.law15.hotmail.com [64.4.23.44]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA16981 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Tue,          11 Sep 2001 10:51:09 -0700
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Tue,          11 Sep 2001 10:50:39 -0700
Received: from 213.224.83.110 by lw15fd.law15.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Tue,          11 Sep 2001 17:50:39 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [213.224.83.110]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 11 Sep 2001 17:50:39.0516 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[44DCBDC0:01C13AEA]
Message-ID:  <F44BV0q7S8jSbf1YwFH0000d931@hotmail.com>
Date:         Tue, 11 Sep 2001 17:51:10 +0000
Reply-To: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] safety (was Re: [AR] Big lander flight video)
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is in fact somewhat OT
Quote HS

Wow. So OK we keep PTFE.

> > Our present (chemical) company policy is zero tolerance in safety
>issues.

>What that really means, of course, is zero rational thought about safety
>issues.  BAD IDEA.

Talk to Du Pont who started all this... No, the contrary, it has precisely
to do with that you must reach more safety by always thinking and always
feel responsible.

Slogans like "my knowledge and my awareness is your safety and vice
versa"...on large posters amidst the buildings!

Can't harm really.

If it'll work: wait & see the statistics. It worked for Du Pont. We are
told.

jd





>From: Henry Spencer <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
>Reply-To: Henry Spencer <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
>To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
>Subject: [AR] safety (was Re: [AR] Big lander flight video)
>Date: Tue, 11 Sep 2001 12:11:30 -0400
>
>On Tue, 11 Sep 2001, John Dom wrote:
> > >...If PTFE can catalyse the decomposition of HP or HTP...
> >
> > No (see below). But I was considering the Apollo XIII incident, the hot
>O2,
> > high pressure environment, not uncommon with Murphy like decompositions,
>to
> > be expected with HP. Very unlikely to occur. But possible.
>
>Would you put LOX in an aluminum tank?  Aluminum burns very nicely.
>
>Remember, there were two separate steps in the Apollo 13 accident:  first
>the Teflon got roasted for a prolonged period, then it got ignited in a
>high-pressure oxygen environment (much worse than a peroxide environment).
>
>You're awfully scared of those bogeymen under the bed.
>
> > Our present (chemical) company policy is zero tolerance in safety
>issues.
>
>What that really means, of course, is zero rational thought about safety
>issues.  BAD IDEA.  An unwillingness to talk about safety tradeoffs does
>not mean that they will not be made -- they are inevitable if anything is
>to actually get done -- but it does ensure that they will not be analyzed,
>quantified, or discussed.  When it is necessary to accept a slight risk
>for the sake of results, the safety issue will be swept under the rug...
>without systematically determining whether it will actually fit under
>there.
>
>The only way to achieve perfect safety is to close the company and fire
>everyone.
>
>"...if you are looking for perfect safety, you will do well to sit on a
>fence and watch the birds; but if you really wish to learn, you must mount
>a machine and become acquainted with its tricks by actual trial."
>         -- Wilbur Wright, "Some Aeronautical Experiments", lecture to
>         the Western Society of Engineers, Chicago, 18 Sept 1901.
>
> > And they are spending huge amounts of money to get such thinking across.
>
>If you own stock, beat the rush -- sell now.  Company management is being
>irrational, and this attitude (and the resulting expenses) may extend to
>other areas of thought as well.
>
>                                                           Henry Spencer
>                                                        henry@spsystems.net


_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 6369 invoked from network); 11 Sep 2001 18:36:25 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 11 Sep 2001 18:36:25 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 25616 invoked by uid 50005); 11 Sep 2001 18:35:38 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpe with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4157. . Clean. Processed in 0.193155 secs); 11 Sep 2001 18:35:38 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 11 Sep 2001 18:35:37 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA17425; Tue, 11 Sep 2001 11:32:42 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 87978 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 11 Sep 2001 18:32:31          +0000
Received: from smtp002pub.verizon.net (smtp002pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.181])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA17411 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 11 Sep 2001 11:32:31 -0700
Received: from [63.15.225.153] (1Cust57.tnt1.rancho-cucamonga.ca.da.uu.net          [63.24.225.57]) by smtp002pub.verizon.net  with ESMTP for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; id f8BIVxY20817 Tue, 11 Sep 2001 13:31:59          -0500 (CDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: GTE/01rocket@mail.gte.net
References: <F44BV0q7S8jSbf1YwFH0000d931@hotmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <a0510030db7c4088cc7d6@[63.15.225.153]>
Date:         Tue, 11 Sep 2001 11:32:01 -0700
Reply-To: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Subject:      [AR] U.S. at War
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <F44BV0q7S8jSbf1YwFH0000d931@hotmail.com>

May god bless the injured, dead, and the emergency workers.

U.S. Rockets stands ready to support DOD in expedient, custom, solid
rocket motors as needed to respond, or to replentish supplies.

www.v-serv.com/usr

Jerry

--
Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
Opinion, the whole thing.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 17027 invoked from network); 11 Sep 2001 18:38:57 -0000
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 11 Sep 2001 18:38:57 -0000
Received: (qmail 25727 invoked by uid 50005); 11 Sep 2001 18:35:54 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpf with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4157. . Clean. Processed in 0.145384 secs); 11 Sep 2001 18:35:54 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 11 Sep 2001 18:35:54 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA17503; Tue, 11 Sep 2001 11:36:30 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 87989 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 11 Sep 2001 18:36:23          +0000
Received: from smtprelay1.abs.adelphia.net (smtprelay.abs.adelphia.net          [64.8.20.11]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA17486 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 11 Sep 2001 11:36:23 -0700
Received: from jlgrady ([63.124.251.47]) by smtprelay1.abs.adelphia.net          (Netscape Messaging Server 4.15) with SMTP id GJIGZB00.YKU for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 11 Sep 2001 14:35:35 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook CWS, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <000001c13af1$16d34b40$0200a8c0@prestige.net>
Date:         Tue, 11 Sep 2001 14:39:28 -0400
Reply-To: "Jeff Grady" <jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jeff Grady" <jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET>
Subject:      [AR] Way OT - Regarding today's National Emergency (Georgians)
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <F44BV0q7S8jSbf1YwFH0000d931@hotmail.com>

Very little local (State level) information is being reported - perhaps
because there is nothing to report.

Has anyone living close to Dobbins AFB, Warner-Robbins AFB, Ft. Benning or
Ft. Stewart noticed any mobilization?

Major corporations are shutting down in metro Atlanta. The University system
has shut down. Center for Disease Control has been evac'd. 30,000 travelers
are stranded at Hartsfield Int'l Airport.

I live beneath one outbound jet way from Hartsfield... I must say I have
never seen the skies so abandoned.

Jeff
Northern GA.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 1937 invoked from network); 11 Sep 2001 18:54:47 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 11 Sep 2001 18:54:47 -0000
Received: (qmail 26966 invoked by uid 50005); 11 Sep 2001 18:54:09 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpa with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4157. . Clean. Processed in 0.226352 secs); 11 Sep 2001 18:54:09 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 11 Sep 2001 18:54:08 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA17773; Tue, 11 Sep 2001 11:52:34 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 88046 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 11 Sep 2001 18:52:29          +0000
Received: from spsystems.net (spsystems.net [209.47.149.227]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA17759 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Tue,          11 Sep 2001 11:52:28 -0700
Received: (from henry@localhost) by spsystems.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id OAA18263;          Tue, 11 Sep 2001 14:51:48 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010911144707.18064B-100000@spsystems.net>
Date:         Tue, 11 Sep 2001 14:51:47 -0400
Reply-To: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] safety (was Re: [AR] Big lander flight video)
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <F44BV0q7S8jSbf1YwFH0000d931@hotmail.com>

On Tue, 11 Sep 2001, John Dom wrote:
> > > Our present (chemical) company policy is zero tolerance in safety...
> >What that really means, of course, is zero rational thought about safety
> >issues.  BAD IDEA.
>
> Talk to Du Pont who started all this... No, the contrary, it has precisely
> to do with that you must reach more safety by always thinking and always
> feel responsible...
> Can't harm really.

Can easily harm, if people take that "zero tolerance" slogan literally, as
people are tempted to do.  Consequences, as I described:  discussion of
safety tradeoffs becomes taboo.  Safety is only allowed to increase, never
decrease, however infinitesimally.  Since doing anything new inevitably
involves new risks, safety becomes a sham.

Greater *attention* to safety is a good thing.  But when slogans replace
thought, look out.  As with so many things, quality of management matters
much more than how catchy the slogan du jour is.

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 2872 invoked from network); 11 Sep 2001 18:54:58 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 11 Sep 2001 18:54:58 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 12427 invoked by uid 50005); 11 Sep 2001 18:51:52 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpf with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4157. . Clean. Processed in 1.186712 secs); 11 Sep 2001 18:51:52 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 11 Sep 2001 18:51:50 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA17795; Tue, 11 Sep 2001 11:52:43 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 88053 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 11 Sep 2001 18:52:39          +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (f112.law15.hotmail.com [64.4.23.112]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA17780 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Tue, 11 Sep 2001 11:52:38 -0700
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Tue,          11 Sep 2001 11:52:08 -0700
Received: from 213.224.83.110 by lw15fd.law15.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Tue,          11 Sep 2001 18:52:08 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [213.224.83.110]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 11 Sep 2001 18:52:08.0586 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[DBB826A0:01C13AF2]
Message-ID:  <F112qU0hBeQlMf1Wp040000cba3@hotmail.com>
Date:         Tue, 11 Sep 2001 18:52:39 +0000
Reply-To: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] polar/nonpolar (was Re: [AR] AN melt)
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Scope: understanding about (molecular polarity) here has the practical
purpose of finding the characteristics of organic compounds of interest
which can be cast more or less eutectically with ammonium and alkali metal
nitrate mixes.

As an easier & safer alternative to high temperature candy melting
procedures. Something SP is researching: he mentioned the importance of the
fuel component to be polar.
^^^^^^^^
As far as I looked at the subject Serge (& my amateur self) mentioned
following necessary compound Z characteristics:

1. Organic so it can combust with the nitrates
2. Polar so it can homogenously dissolve thereby causing eutectic(s) (lower
mix melting points)and after quick-freeze grains with "homogenous"
combustion characteristics
3. Solid melting point between 60-150C so it can cause a "negative"
eutectic zone in the temp/comp diagram but also does not melt too easily
4. Does not react/decompose during melting
5. Good burning characteristics
....
...

Meanwhile on TV the result of the kamikaze attack on NY. I really worry
about the next 20 years if you know what I mean. Just to date this
posting...

>In the normal chemical sense of the word, a non-polar compound is one that
>has no significant electric dipole.  Period.

right

I suppose this part is your reply about sugar polar nature:

>...there are molecules which have an internal dipole, but have it so deeply
>buried within their structure that it's not very visible from the outside,
>and they act non-polar for solubility purposes.

> > Polar compounds or solvents are ones that dissolve well in water and
>usually dissociate in anions and cations doing so.

>You are confusing two largely-separate issues here.  Dissolving in a polar
>solvent does not require ionizing; many substances do not ionize when they
>dissolve in water.

perhaps not ionized but zipped from their crystal lattice or liquid matrix;
I still do not understand how this works or rather why it does in certain
cases not work. Definitely not found in dictionaries!

> > But why does methanol dissolve in water? Why do polyols like glycols,
>glycerine, sucrose, sorbitol dissolve in water? They do not dissociate...

>Correct, but this should not surprise you.  It's not necessary that they
>dissociate to dissolve. It suffices that they are polar enough that the
>highly-polar water molecules will cling to them (loosely speaking).

loosely speaking indeed because non-polar dodecane molecules can do such as
well, dissolve sugars I mean. So it seems solvatation has to do with solvent
molecules hitting the to dissolve liquid blob or crystal lattice so its
molecules (or ions) get homogenously diffused in the solvent. Polar or
apolar.
So this brings the answer perhaps: the *intermolecular* attraction caused by
the polarity of solvent and substance to be dissolved determins if the
solvent can dissolve it or not.

So this polarity of organics; this dipole strenght, where are tables to be
found of such? What units? How can I predict eg caprolactam
tetra-azepino-benzimidazole 'll dissolve or not in liquid AN?

I do not know of any such tables. Do you? As a gas/liquid chromatography lab
rat, I never heard mention of such altough that could be handy to choose the
best separating column film offhand...That's a science all about polar and
apolar separation films.

Maybe coat a gas chromatographic column with the KN/AN salt mix film, as was
done in early GC, next heat it under He carrier gas to liquid state, next
inject organics on it. See elutes and when and look at peak symmetry.
eg the longer retention times the better the compound dissolves in the salt
mix (stays longer in the film if it dissolves better). If decomposition
occurs, one'd observe several peaks emerging...Well something like that.
Good for a doctorate thesis for many a year...

Or maybe this work was done 20 years ago. Have not searched the argument
yet.

jd

jd



_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 1085 invoked from network); 11 Sep 2001 19:01:27 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 11 Sep 2001 19:01:27 -0000
Received: (qmail 22426 invoked by uid 50005); 11 Sep 2001 19:00:40 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpe with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4157. . Clean. Processed in 0.20873 secs); 11 Sep 2001 19:00:40 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 11 Sep 2001 19:00:39 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA17606; Tue, 11 Sep 2001 11:45:57 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 88012 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 11 Sep 2001 18:45:55          +0000
Received: from spsystems.net (spsystems.net [209.47.149.227]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA17592 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Tue,          11 Sep 2001 11:45:55 -0700
Received: (from henry@localhost) by spsystems.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id OAA18150;          Tue, 11 Sep 2001 14:45:14 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010911144220.18064A-100000@spsystems.net>
Date:         Tue, 11 Sep 2001 14:45:14 -0400
Reply-To: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] PTFE and Apollo 13 (was Re: [AR] Big lander flight video)
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <F6C9206C2C2F9E4BBD5610E94B13F2CA0CD2CA@beast.ossconnexn.com>

On Tue, 11 Sep 2001, Jeff Maslo wrote:
> I remember reading somewhere a long time ago, that the oxygen tanks in
> the service module used 'supercritical' oxygen, not liquid.
> What are the advantages of this ? I doubt you'd increase capacity. The
> only thing I can imagine is that it might have been easier to handle in
> low gravity.

Supercritical oxygen is oxygen stored above its critical point, where
there is no distinction between gas and liquid.  It makes no real
difference in capacity, and the tanks are rather heavier, but means that
the stuff in the tank is (more or less) a homogeneous fluid, and you do
not have to deal with the possibility of getting gas out when you wanted
liquid, or vice versa.

The tanks for the shuttle fuel cells likewise store LH2 and LOX as
supercritical fluids.

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 13466 invoked from network); 11 Sep 2001 19:11:02 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 11 Sep 2001 19:11:02 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 7845 invoked by uid 50005); 11 Sep 2001 19:10:25 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpa with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4157. . Clean. Processed in 0.15272 secs); 11 Sep 2001 19:10:25 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 11 Sep 2001 19:10:25 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA17999; Tue, 11 Sep 2001 12:08:34 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 88088 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 11 Sep 2001 19:08:31          +0000
Received: from email.uah.edu (email.uah.edu [146.229.1.200]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA17985 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue,          11 Sep 2001 12:08:31 -0700
Received: from netwurx.net (root@[146.229.184.28]) by email.uah.edu          (8.11.2/8.11.2) with ESMTP id f8BJ8cU15333; Tue, 11 Sep 2001 14:08:38          -0500 (CDT)
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:0.9.3) Gecko/20010801
X-Accept-Language: en-us
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <000001c13af1$16d34b40$0200a8c0@prestige.net>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B9DF0F6.1010009@netwurx.net>
Date:         Tue, 11 Sep 2001 06:09:42 -0500
Reply-To: "Philski" <phil@NETWURX.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Philski" <phil@NETWURX.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Way OT - Regarding today's National Emergency (Georgians)
Comments: To: Jeff Grady <jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Jeff Grady wrote:

>Very little local (State level) information is being reported - perhaps
>because there is nothing to report.
>
>Has anyone living close to Dobbins AFB, Warner-Robbins AFB, Ft. Benning or
>Ft. Stewart noticed any mobilization?
>
>Major corporations are shutting down in metro Atlanta. The University system
>has shut down. Center for Disease Control has been evac'd. 30,000 travelers
>are stranded at Hartsfield Int'l Airport.
>
>I live beneath one outbound jet way from Hartsfield... I must say I have
>never seen the skies so abandoned.
>
>Jeff
>Northern GA.
>

I'm in Huntsville, AL...
Redstone Arsenal is locked down very tight, no one gets in or out. :-)
Most schools are closed (Except the one I attend, UAH), most businesses,
anything government, etc.

Philski
Huntsville, AL

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 29897 invoked from network); 11 Sep 2001 19:14:56 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 11 Sep 2001 19:14:56 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 4751 invoked by uid 50005); 11 Sep 2001 19:11:54 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpf with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4157. . Clean. Processed in 0.216674 secs); 11 Sep 2001 19:11:54 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 11 Sep 2001 19:11:54 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA18094; Tue, 11 Sep 2001 12:11:11 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 88119 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 11 Sep 2001 19:11:09          +0000
Received: from smtp005pub.verizon.net (smtp005pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.184])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA18080 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 11 Sep 2001 12:11:09 -0700
Received: from [63.15.225.153] (1Cust57.tnt1.rancho-cucamonga.ca.da.uu.net          [63.24.225.57]) by smtp005pub.verizon.net  with ESMTP for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; id f8BJAXW22304 Tue, 11 Sep 2001 14:10:34          -0500 (CDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: GTE/01rocket@mail.gte.net
References: <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010911144707.18064B-100000@spsystems.net>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <a0510030eb7c411ddf80b@[63.15.225.153]>
Date:         Tue, 11 Sep 2001 12:10:36 -0700
Reply-To: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] safety (was Re: [AR] Big lander flight video)
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010911144707.18064B-100000@spsystems.net>

>On Tue, 11 Sep 2001, John Dom wrote:
>>  > > Our present (chemical) company policy is zero tolerance in safety...
>>  >What that really means, of course, is zero rational thought about safety
>>  >issues.  BAD IDEA.
>>
>>  Talk to Du Pont who started all this... No, the contrary, it has precisely
>>  to do with that you must reach more safety by always thinking and always
>>  feel responsible...
>>  Can't harm really.
>
>Can easily harm, if people take that "zero tolerance" slogan literally, as
>people are tempted to do.  Consequences, as I described:  discussion of
>safety tradeoffs becomes taboo.  Safety is only allowed to increase, never
>decrease, however infinitesimally.  Since doing anything new inevitably
>involves new risks, safety becomes a sham.
>
>Greater *attention* to safety is a good thing.  But when slogans replace
>thought, look out.  As with so many things, quality of management matters
>much more than how catchy the slogan du jour is.
>
>                                                           Henry Spencer
>                                                        henry@spsystems.net

Due to the gravity of todays events it will be easy to loose sight of
our rights to life and liberty during peacetime.  This post makes a
point so very powerful it should not be lost to the readers of
arocket.

Jerry

--
Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
Opinion, the whole thing.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 29216 invoked from network); 11 Sep 2001 20:12:24 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 11 Sep 2001 20:12:24 -0000
Received: (qmail 5677 invoked by uid 50005); 11 Sep 2001 20:09:56 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4157. . Clean. Processed in 0.207251 secs); 11 Sep 2001 20:09:56 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 11 Sep 2001 20:09:56 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA18320; Tue, 11 Sep 2001 12:40:02 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 88163 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 11 Sep 2001 19:39:58          +0000
Received: from spsystems.net (spsystems.net [209.47.149.227]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA18301 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Tue,          11 Sep 2001 12:39:57 -0700
Received: (from henry@localhost) by spsystems.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id PAA18607;          Tue, 11 Sep 2001 15:39:16 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010911150933.18272A-100000@spsystems.net>
Date:         Tue, 11 Sep 2001 15:39:16 -0400
Reply-To: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] polar/nonpolar (was Re: [AR] AN melt)
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <F112qU0hBeQlMf1Wp040000cba3@hotmail.com>

On Tue, 11 Sep 2001, John Dom wrote:
> >You are confusing two largely-separate issues here.  Dissolving in a polar
> >solvent does not require ionizing; many substances do not ionize when they
> >dissolve in water.
>
> perhaps not ionized but zipped from their crystal lattice or liquid matrix...

Right.  The molecules separate from each other, but don't themselves
dissociate into smaller parts.

(In the case of an ionic solid, which typically *will* dissociate when
dissolving in water, it's actually debatable whether there are any true
molecules present in the solid, so it's not surprising that it goes into
solution as ions rather than molecules.  In an NaCl crystal, for example,
a particular Na atom is not associated with any single specific Cl atom.)

> I still do not understand how this works or rather why it does in certain
> cases not work.

It's certainly complicated.  But it has at least something to do with how
well solvent molecules snuggle up to the solute molecules.  The solute
molecules typically don't just wander around independently; they have an
escort of solvent molecules, and it's the formation of that escort which
helps pry the solute molecule loose from the original solid.  For example,
although we talk about the H+ ion in solution, it's really more like an
H9O4+ ion -- there are four water molecules pretty permanently associated
with it.

> >...It suffices that they are polar enough that the
> >highly-polar water molecules will cling to them (loosely speaking).
>
> loosely speaking indeed because non-polar dodecane molecules can do such as
> well, dissolve sugars I mean.

It's a matter of degree rather than absolutes.  There's no inherent
contradiction between being polar enough (in some areas) for water
molecules to snuggle up, and being non-polar enough (in others) for
dodecane molecules to do likewise.

> So this brings the answer perhaps: the *intermolecular* attraction caused by
> the polarity of solvent and substance to be dissolved determins if the
> solvent can dissolve it or not.

Yep, that's at least a large part of it.  Note that intermolecular
attraction can arise for reasons other than polarity, and those need
to be allowed for.

> So this polarity of organics; this dipole strenght, where are tables to be
> found of such? What units?

This is getting to the limits of my knowledge, which is also perhaps a bit
dated...  What you want, if I recall correctly, is a table of Kirkwood's g
factor, which is dipole moment adjusted for complications like how
accessible the dipole is to solvent molecules.  I don't know where you'd
find one, though.

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 5370 invoked from network); 11 Sep 2001 20:21:27 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 11 Sep 2001 20:21:27 -0000
Received: (qmail 1262 invoked by uid 50005); 11 Sep 2001 20:19:36 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4157. . Clean. Processed in 0.143685 secs); 11 Sep 2001 20:19:36 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 11 Sep 2001 20:19:36 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA18670; Tue, 11 Sep 2001 13:19:10 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 88250 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 11 Sep 2001 20:19:08          +0000
Received: from smtprelay1.abs.adelphia.net (smtprelay.abs.adelphia.net          [64.8.20.11]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA18656 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 11 Sep 2001 13:19:08 -0700
Received: from jlgrady ([63.124.251.47]) by smtprelay1.abs.adelphia.net          (Netscape Messaging Server 4.15) with SMTP id GJILQK01.ON8 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 11 Sep 2001 16:18:20 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook CWS, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <000001c13aff$7096d850$0200a8c0@prestige.net>
Date:         Tue, 11 Sep 2001 16:22:11 -0400
Reply-To: "Jeff Grady" <jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jeff Grady" <jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Epoxy/KNO3 motor results
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <3B9E7160.E1507CF2@vip.cybercity.dk>

Hans,

        I'm one of those Americans who have not adjusted to the metric system.
Could you convert bar to psi (or provide a conversion formula)? The Al
certainly made a difference!

Jeff Grady
Atlanta, Georgia
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA



-----Original Message-----
From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@itc.uci.edu]On
Behalf Of Hans Olaf Toft
Sent: Tuesday, September 11, 2001 4:18 PM
To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
Subject: Re: [AR] Epoxy/KNO3 motor results


The tests I made with the Epoxy 27% Aluminium: 2% Sulfur: 5% KNO3: 66%
composition had a chamber pressure of 55 bar at kn = 1200. I made a test for
comparison, removing the 2% Al and ended up with 14 bar chamber pressure at
same
kn. Sulfur alone apparently has very limited influence on the burn rate - Al
has. The main function of the S is to improve ignition characteristics.

Hans Olaf Toft


Jeff Grady wrote:

> Lacking an immediate source for Al, I mixed up a batch of 75/25/5
> (KNO3/Epoxy/Sulfur) last night and was hopeful after seeing a small lump
of
> this hardened fuel burn. It burned steadily and quite hot (based on the
heat
> I felt a few feet away). My idea of "vigorously" may not fit the
definition
> most of you folks hold. The mixture resembles yellow play dough in both
look
> and feel, until it sets up. Figuring it may burn a bit faster under
> pressure, I made another batch, same as the first. Pressed the fuel into a
> spent Estes A10 casing that seemed solid enough to use and closed off the
> big end w/pure epoxy. I used the A10 because I can get away with a small
> CATO in the back yard. Any bigger and I'd have to go a few miles down the
> road.
>
> Later today, I fired the motor and was really disappointed. The burn rate
> was not impressive at all. I'm sure one problem was burn surface. The
epoxy
> "dough" was setting up fast while I was packing the dough into the casing.
> When I tried to push a small skewer stick in through the nozzle to make a
> core, it only went about a 1/4" deep. So, basically I had an end burner.
It
> burned for nearly 1.5 minutes before the casing burned through -
definitely
> not a "vigorous" burn. After the casing cooled, I walked over to take a
> closer look. The nozzle had a "spout" rising up (motor was fired nozzle
up)
> about 1" from the nozzle. Seems the resin was not fully consumed(???).
>
> Next I'll try some other epoxies I have and try to find some Al powder.
Any
> less epoxy or any more KNO3 makes mixing a TOUGH job. Any suggestions?
>
> Jeff

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 26535 invoked from network); 11 Sep 2001 20:26:44 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 11 Sep 2001 20:26:44 -0000
Received: (qmail 29467 invoked by uid 50005); 11 Sep 2001 20:26:07 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpa with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4157. . Clean. Processed in 0.122722 secs); 11 Sep 2001 20:26:07 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 11 Sep 2001 20:26:06 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA18614; Tue, 11 Sep 2001 13:16:29 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 88235 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 11 Sep 2001 20:16:23          +0000
Received: from fep4-orange.clear.net.nz (fep4-orange.clear.net.nz          [203.97.32.4]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA18600          for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Tue, 11 Sep 2001 13:16:23 -0700
Received: from mkbs (203-167-161-44.dialup.clear.net.nz [203.167.161.44]) by          fep4-orange.clear.net.nz (1.5/1.7) with SMTP id IAA12880; Wed, 12 Sep          2001 08:16:16 +1200 (NZST)
References:  <F214m7p1KOzAD1LWAMD0000bca1@hotmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="Windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <000201c13aff$1f40daa0$0100a8c0@mkbs>
Date:         Wed, 12 Sep 2001 01:17:19 +1200
Reply-To: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Organization: Applied Technology
Subject:      Re: [AR] Cheap, Easy test stand for small motors
Comments: To: John Dom <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

> >You can get naked strain gages from Omega (www.omega.com)--buy the ones
> >with
> >   leads already soldered!  Richard Nakka has a spreadsheet ...
>
> Could (cannibalising a) digital kitchen balance be used as a strain gauge?
I
> dread such 'd require thorough electronics know-how...


SOME very cheap digital kitchen scales have a true strain gauge based load
cell within. This could be used as the basis of a very cheap thrust
measuring rig if you were prepared to make a load sharing cantilever
arrangement that shared the load unequally between the load cell and a
support post.

  Load
    |
   \ /
BBBBBBBBBBBBB
S                               L
S                               L

|X|-------Y---------------|


BBBBBB = beam
S = support
L = load cell.

By making X much smaller than Y the range of the load cell can be greatly
multiplied. This is essentially the principle of the "Steelyards" weighing
machines used in ages past for weighing sacks of grain etc and using a much
smaller balance weight.



        Russell McMahon
.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 17770 invoked from network); 11 Sep 2001 20:32:19 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 11 Sep 2001 20:32:19 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 32501 invoked by uid 50005); 11 Sep 2001 20:31:42 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpa with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4157. . Clean. Processed in 0.219645 secs); 11 Sep 2001 20:31:42 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 11 Sep 2001 20:31:41 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA18788; Tue, 11 Sep 2001 13:24:23 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 88279 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 11 Sep 2001 20:24:17          +0000
Received: from imo-m10.mx.aol.com (imo-m10.mx.aol.com [64.12.136.165]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA18773 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Tue, 11 Sep 2001 13:24:17 -0700
Received: from MilburnMNK@aol.com by imo-m10.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v31_r1.4.) id          w.c.1afa1d41 (15702) for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Tue, 11 Sep 2001          16:23:32 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from  web25.aolmail.aol.com (web25.aolmail.aol.com [205.188.222.1])          by air-id05.mx.aol.com (v80.17) with ESMTP id MAILINID53-0911162332;          Tue, 11 Sep 2001 16:23:32 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Unknown (No Version)
Message-ID:  <c.1afa1d41.28cfccc4@aol.com>
Date:         Tue, 11 Sep 2001 16:23:32 EDT
Reply-To: <MilburnMNK@AOL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <MilburnMNK@AOL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] U.S. at War
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Should take up a collection for "A nuke for Arafat"  NM

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 1416 invoked from network); 11 Sep 2001 20:35:42 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 11 Sep 2001 20:35:42 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 32196 invoked by uid 50005); 11 Sep 2001 20:35:11 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpb with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.206147 secs); 11 Sep 2001 20:35:11 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 11 Sep 2001 20:35:11 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA18483; Tue, 11 Sep 2001 13:06:59 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 88200 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 11 Sep 2001 20:06:44          +0000
Received: from cicero0.cybercity.dk (cicero0.cybercity.dk [212.242.40.52]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA18469 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 11 Sep 2001 13:06:43 -0700
Received: from usr03.cybercity.dk (usr03.cybercity.dk [212.242.40.83]) by          cicero0.cybercity.dk (Postfix) with ESMTP id A3961102943 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 11 Sep 2001 22:06:41 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from vip.cybercity.dk (port17.cvx1-noe.ppp.cybercity.dk          [217.157.69.210]) by usr03.cybercity.dk (8.11.2/8.11.0) with ESMTP id          f8BK6el43493 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 11 Sep 2001 22:06:40          +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from hot@vip.cybercity.dk)
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.75 [en] (Win95; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <000401c13a4e$18d8dc50$0200a8c0@prestige.net>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B9E7160.E1507CF2@vip.cybercity.dk>
Date:         Tue, 11 Sep 2001 22:17:36 +0200
Reply-To: "Hans Olaf Toft" <hot@VIP.CYBERCITY.DK>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Hans Olaf Toft" <hot@VIP.CYBERCITY.DK>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Epoxy/KNO3 motor results
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

The tests I made with the Epoxy 27% Aluminium: 2% Sulfur: 5% KNO3: 66%
composition had a chamber pressure of 55 bar at kn = 1200. I made a test for
comparison, removing the 2% Al and ended up with 14 bar chamber pressure at same
kn. Sulfur alone apparently has very limited influence on the burn rate - Al
has. The main function of the S is to improve ignition characteristics.

Hans Olaf Toft


Jeff Grady wrote:

> Lacking an immediate source for Al, I mixed up a batch of 75/25/5
> (KNO3/Epoxy/Sulfur) last night and was hopeful after seeing a small lump of
> this hardened fuel burn. It burned steadily and quite hot (based on the heat
> I felt a few feet away). My idea of "vigorously" may not fit the definition
> most of you folks hold. The mixture resembles yellow play dough in both look
> and feel, until it sets up. Figuring it may burn a bit faster under
> pressure, I made another batch, same as the first. Pressed the fuel into a
> spent Estes A10 casing that seemed solid enough to use and closed off the
> big end w/pure epoxy. I used the A10 because I can get away with a small
> CATO in the back yard. Any bigger and I'd have to go a few miles down the
> road.
>
> Later today, I fired the motor and was really disappointed. The burn rate
> was not impressive at all. I'm sure one problem was burn surface. The epoxy
> "dough" was setting up fast while I was packing the dough into the casing.
> When I tried to push a small skewer stick in through the nozzle to make a
> core, it only went about a 1/4" deep. So, basically I had an end burner. It
> burned for nearly 1.5 minutes before the casing burned through - definitely
> not a "vigorous" burn. After the casing cooled, I walked over to take a
> closer look. The nozzle had a "spout" rising up (motor was fired nozzle up)
> about 1" from the nozzle. Seems the resin was not fully consumed(???).
>
> Next I'll try some other epoxies I have and try to find some Al powder. Any
> less epoxy or any more KNO3 makes mixing a TOUGH job. Any suggestions?
>
> Jeff

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 11834 invoked from network); 11 Sep 2001 20:38:25 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 11 Sep 2001 20:38:25 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 3047 invoked by uid 50005); 11 Sep 2001 20:35:23 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpf with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4157. . Clean. Processed in 0.33849 secs); 11 Sep 2001 20:35:23 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 11 Sep 2001 20:35:22 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA18825; Tue, 11 Sep 2001 13:25:18 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 88290 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 11 Sep 2001 20:25:17          +0000
Received: from mail1.murraystate.edu (mail1.murraystate.edu [216.249.159.50])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id NAA18811 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 11 Sep 2001 13:25:16 -0700
Received: from jjcomputer.murraystate.edu (216.249.150.117) by          mail1.murraystate.edu (NPlex 5.5.031) id 3B85968000061A5E for          AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 11 Sep 2001 15:22:58 -0500
X-Sender: terry.mccreary@mail.murraystate.edu
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
References: <F112qU0hBeQlMf1Wp040000cba3@hotmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <5.1.0.14.0.20010911151508.0245de20@mail.murraystate.edu>
Date:         Tue, 11 Sep 2001 15:27:38 -0500
Reply-To: "Terry McCreary" <terry.mccreary@MURRAYSTATE.EDU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Terry McCreary" <terry.mccreary@MURRAYSTATE.EDU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] polar/nonpolar (was Re: [AR] AN melt)
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010911150933.18272A-100000@spsystems.net>

At 03:39 PM 9/11/01 -0400, you wrote:

> > So this brings the answer perhaps: the *intermolecular* attraction
> caused by
> > the polarity of solvent and substance to be dissolved determins if the
> > solvent can dissolve it or not.
>
>Yep, that's at least a large part of it.  Note that intermolecular
>attraction can arise for reasons other than polarity, and those need
>to be allowed for.

For many organic compounds, polarity is a minor player.  The so-called
dispersion forces often predominate, especially in large molecules.

For a basic explanation of the nature of intermolecular forces, polarity,
and solubility, try a good general chemistry text.  Somewhere around the
middle of the text is usually a chapter on "Intermolecular forces".

A good text is Hill & Petrucci's "General Chemistry" 2nd edition... The 3rd
edition in November will be a lot better... <vbg>


> > So this polarity of organics; this dipole strenght, where are tables to be
> > found of such? What units?
>
>This is getting to the limits of my knowledge, which is also perhaps a bit
>dated...  What you want, if I recall correctly, is a table of Kirkwood's g
>factor, which is dipole moment adjusted for complications like how
>accessible the dipole is to solvent molecules.  I don't know where you'd
>find one, though.

Limits of my knowledge as well.  Dipole moment is measured in units of
debyes, charge times distance between the charge centers.  I don't know
whether the Kirkwood's factors that Henry mentions take dispersion forces
into account, since they are unrelated to polarity though they're quite
related to attraction of molecules for one another.

P'rfesser

Dr. Terry McCreary
Associate Professor
Department of Chemistry
Murray State University
Murray, KY  42071
270-762-6499

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 21795 invoked from network); 11 Sep 2001 20:40:57 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 11 Sep 2001 20:40:57 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 18017 invoked by uid 50005); 11 Sep 2001 20:39:06 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4157. . Clean. Processed in 0.180238 secs); 11 Sep 2001 20:39:06 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 11 Sep 2001 20:39:06 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA19164; Tue, 11 Sep 2001 13:38:19 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 88365 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 11 Sep 2001 20:38:17          +0000
Received: from localhost.localdomain (IDENT:root@lauren.pconline.com          [207.191.131.70]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA19150          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 11 Sep 2001 13:38:17 -0700
Received: from artimex.com (m18-5-11.pconline.com [207.191.143.75]) by          localhost.localdomain (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f8BJZa802629 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 11 Sep 2001 14:35:36 -0500
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (Win98; I)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <000001c13af1$16d34b40$0200a8c0@prestige.net>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B9E76AA.8025133F@artimex.com>
Date:         Tue, 11 Sep 2001 15:40:10 -0500
Reply-To: "Robert Brashear" <rjb@ARTIMEX.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Robert Brashear" <rjb@ARTIMEX.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Way OT - Regarding today's National Emergency (Georgians)
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Jeff Grady wrote:
>
> Very little local (State level) information is being reported - perhaps
> because there is nothing to report.

In the Minneapolis area, the VA Medical Center was evacuated because of
"a creditable bomb threat". Most prominant buildings/complexes are shut
down including the Mall of America.

I also live near the airport and have been screaming about noise for the
past five years. This is a hell of a way to get relief.

Bob Brashear

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 11907 invoked from network); 11 Sep 2001 20:45:41 -0000
X-Priority: 3
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 11 Sep 2001 20:45:41 -0000
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 23296 invoked by uid 50005); 11 Sep 2001 20:43:51 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4157. . Clean. Processed in 0.226772 secs); 11 Sep 2001 20:43:51 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 11 Sep 2001 20:43:50 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA18981; Tue, 11 Sep 2001 13:30:05 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 88320 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 11 Sep 2001 20:30:03          +0000
Received: from imo-r03.mx.aol.com (imo-r03.mx.aol.com [152.163.225.99]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA18967 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Tue, 11 Sep 2001 13:30:02 -0700
Received: from Sociald84@aol.com by imo-r03.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v31_r1.4.) id          i.10.124850c0 (7776); Tue, 11 Sep 2001 16:29:50 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0D3F_01C56B69.5221C490"
X-Mailer: AOL 6.0 for Windows US sub 10536
Message-ID:  <10.124850c0.28cfce42@aol.com>
Date:         Tue, 11 Sep 2001 16:29:54 EDT
Reply-To: <Sociald84@AOL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <Sociald84@AOL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Smokeless powder ignitor enhancement
Comments: To: jyawn@sfcc.net
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0D3F_01C56B69.5221C490
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

In a message dated 9/10/2001 10:56:04 AM Mountain Daylight Time,
jyawn@SFCC.NET writes:


> Sounds suspiciously to me like an oxidizer/fuel mixture that has been
> tailored
> in some way to be "non-explosive."
>
> Anyone know what Pyrodex is, or want to venture a guess?
>
> Jimmy Yawn
>

Pyrodex is an Oxidizer/fuel mixture which has been developed to replace black
powder for blackpowder firearms. The residue from pyrodex is far less
corrosive than the residue from black powder and the smoke isn't as nasty for
your lungs.

Mark

------=_NextPart_000_0D3F_01C56B69.5221C490
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<HTML><FONT FACE=arial,helvetica><FONT  SIZE=2>In a message dated 9/10/2001 10:56:04 AM Mountain Daylight Time,
<BR>jyawn@SFCC.NET writes:
<BR>
<BR>
<BR><BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE style="BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px">Sounds suspiciously to me like an oxidizer/fuel mixture that has been
<BR>tailored
<BR>in some way to be "non-explosive."
<BR>
<BR>Anyone know what Pyrodex is, or want to venture a guess?
<BR>
<BR>Jimmy Yawn
<BR></BLOCKQUOTE>
<BR>
<BR>Pyrodex is an Oxidizer/fuel mixture which has been developed to replace black
<BR>powder for blackpowder firearms. The residue from pyrodex is far less
<BR>corrosive than the residue from black powder and the smoke isn't as nasty for
<BR>your lungs.
<BR>
<BR>Mark</FONT></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0D3F_01C56B69.5221C490--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 23778 invoked from network); 11 Sep 2001 20:48:21 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 11 Sep 2001 20:48:22 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 27514 invoked by uid 50005); 11 Sep 2001 20:45:52 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4157. . Clean. Processed in 0.098623 secs); 11 Sep 2001 20:45:52 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 11 Sep 2001 20:45:52 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA19277; Tue, 11 Sep 2001 13:44:16 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 88351 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 11 Sep 2001 20:44:08          +0000
Received: from fcexgw03.efi.com ([192.68.228.82]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7)          with SMTP id NAA19082 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Tue, 11 Sep 2001          13:32:53 -0700
Received: from 10.10.12.104 by fcexgw03.efi.com (InterScan E-Mail VirusWall          NT); Tue, 11 Sep 2001 13:32:52 -0700
Received: from earthlink.net (peroxide.efi.com [10.10.89.46]) by          EX-IMC3-CORP.efi.com with SMTP (Microsoft Exchange Internet Mail          Service Version 5.5.2653.13) id SMPF3M99; Tue, 11 Sep 2001 13:32:51          -0700
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.14-5.0 i686)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <000001c13aff$7096d850$0200a8c0@prestige.net>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B9E7544.C459B64@earthlink.net>
Date:         Tue, 11 Sep 2001 13:34:12 -0700
Reply-To: "David Weinshenker" <daze39@EARTHLINK.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "David Weinshenker" <daze39@EARTHLINK.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Epoxy/KNO3 motor results
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Jeff Grady wrote:
>
> Hans,
>
>         I'm one of those Americans who have not adjusted to the metric system.
> Could you convert bar to psi (or provide a conversion formula)? The Al
> certainly made a difference!

A bar is 100 kN/m^2 or about 14.5 psi (in other words, approx. 1 atm.)

-dave w

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 9159 invoked from network); 11 Sep 2001 20:59:08 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 11 Sep 2001 20:59:08 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 21773 invoked by uid 50005); 11 Sep 2001 20:58:36 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpb with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.492644 secs); 11 Sep 2001 20:58:36 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 11 Sep 2001 20:58:35 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA19470; Tue, 11 Sep 2001 13:56:33 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 88449 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 11 Sep 2001 20:56:31          +0000
Received: from cicero0.cybercity.dk (cicero0.cybercity.dk [212.242.40.52]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA19456 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 11 Sep 2001 13:56:30 -0700
Received: from usr00.cybercity.dk (usr00.cybercity.dk [212.242.40.34]) by          cicero0.cybercity.dk (Postfix) with ESMTP id F2998102A6F for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 11 Sep 2001 22:56:29 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from vip.cybercity.dk (port10.cvx1-noe.ppp.cybercity.dk          [217.157.69.203]) by usr00.cybercity.dk (8.11.2/8.11.0) with ESMTP id          f8BKuSU96659 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 11 Sep 2001 22:56:28          +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from hot@vip.cybercity.dk)
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.75 [en] (Win95; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <000001c13aff$7096d850$0200a8c0@prestige.net>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B9E7D0C.6888C0C@vip.cybercity.dk>
Date:         Tue, 11 Sep 2001 23:07:24 +0200
Reply-To: "Hans Olaf Toft" <hot@VIP.CYBERCITY.DK>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Hans Olaf Toft" <hot@VIP.CYBERCITY.DK>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Epoxy/KNO3 motor results
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Jeff,
I am not sure that "bar" is actually a legal unit of measure within the metric
system - it should have been in Pascal (or rather mega Pascal) to be correct.
However 55 bar converts into 797psi.

Hint: Joshua F. Madison has made a very nice application for converting units of
measure. Its free and easy to use and quite comprehensive and may be found at
http://www.joshmadison.com/software/convert/

OT: My greates sympthy to all americans after todays horrifying events!

Hans

Jeff Grady wrote:

> Hans,
>
>         I'm one of those Americans who have not adjusted to the metric system.
> Could you convert bar to psi (or provide a conversion formula)? The Al
> certainly made a difference!
>
> Jeff Grady
> Atlanta, Georgia
> UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@itc.uci.edu]On
> Behalf Of Hans Olaf Toft
> Sent: Tuesday, September 11, 2001 4:18 PM
> To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
> Subject: Re: [AR] Epoxy/KNO3 motor results
>
> The tests I made with the Epoxy 27% Aluminium: 2% Sulfur: 5% KNO3: 66%
> composition had a chamber pressure of 55 bar at kn = 1200. I made a test for
> comparison, removing the 2% Al and ended up with 14 bar chamber pressure at
> same
> kn. Sulfur alone apparently has very limited influence on the burn rate - Al
> has. The main function of the S is to improve ignition characteristics.
>
> Hans Olaf Toft
>
> Jeff Grady wrote:
>
> > Lacking an immediate source for Al, I mixed up a batch of 75/25/5
> > (KNO3/Epoxy/Sulfur) last night and was hopeful after seeing a small lump
> of
> > this hardened fuel burn. It burned steadily and quite hot (based on the
> heat
> > I felt a few feet away). My idea of "vigorously" may not fit the
> definition
> > most of you folks hold. The mixture resembles yellow play dough in both
> look
> > and feel, until it sets up. Figuring it may burn a bit faster under
> > pressure, I made another batch, same as the first. Pressed the fuel into a
> > spent Estes A10 casing that seemed solid enough to use and closed off the
> > big end w/pure epoxy. I used the A10 because I can get away with a small
> > CATO in the back yard. Any bigger and I'd have to go a few miles down the
> > road.
> >
> > Later today, I fired the motor and was really disappointed. The burn rate
> > was not impressive at all. I'm sure one problem was burn surface. The
> epoxy
> > "dough" was setting up fast while I was packing the dough into the casing.
> > When I tried to push a small skewer stick in through the nozzle to make a
> > core, it only went about a 1/4" deep. So, basically I had an end burner.
> It
> > burned for nearly 1.5 minutes before the casing burned through -
> definitely
> > not a "vigorous" burn. After the casing cooled, I walked over to take a
> > closer look. The nozzle had a "spout" rising up (motor was fired nozzle
> up)
> > about 1" from the nozzle. Seems the resin was not fully consumed(???).
> >
> > Next I'll try some other epoxies I have and try to find some Al powder.
> Any
> > less epoxy or any more KNO3 makes mixing a TOUGH job. Any suggestions?
> >
> > Jeff

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 9753 invoked from network); 11 Sep 2001 20:59:18 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 11 Sep 2001 20:59:18 -0000
Received: (qmail 2631 invoked by uid 50005); 11 Sep 2001 20:58:31 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpe with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4157. . Clean. Processed in 0.243732 secs); 11 Sep 2001 20:58:31 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 11 Sep 2001 20:58:30 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA19493; Tue, 11 Sep 2001 13:56:48 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 88456 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 11 Sep 2001 20:56:47          +0000
Received: from wrench.toolcity.net (root@wrench.toolcity.net [208.0.188.2]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA19476 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 11 Sep 2001 13:56:46 -0700
Received: from [63.169.102.65]          (dap-63-169-102-65.meadville-tnt-1.pa.toolcity.net [63.169.102.65])          by wrench.toolcity.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id QAA23242; Tue, 11          Sep 2001 16:56:41 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <v01510100b7c4368a453c@[208.22.189.250]>
Date:         Tue, 11 Sep 2001 16:59:05 -0500
Reply-To: "al bradley" <abradley@TOOLCITY.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "al bradley" <abradley@TOOLCITY.NET>
Subject:      [AR] Well, partly off-topic-- but . . . Re: [AR] U.S. at War
Comments: To: MilburnMNK@AOL.COM
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

>Should take up a collection for "A nuke for Arafat"  NM

Uh, just remember the massive and fanatical demonstrations at the recent
World Trade meetings. We don't want to jump to conclusions do we?

We might conclude though, that heightened national security can impact
amateur rocketry for some time!

respectfully,
al bradley

------------------------------------------------------------------
Can you live Life with this?: "Unless there is a law, an agreement, or a
long-standing custom, No one `Deserves' Anything -- Either Good or Bad!"

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 3857 invoked from network); 11 Sep 2001 21:13:27 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 11 Sep 2001 21:13:27 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 32749 invoked by uid 50005); 11 Sep 2001 21:12:56 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpb with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.248118 secs); 11 Sep 2001 21:12:56 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 11 Sep 2001 21:12:55 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA19626; Tue, 11 Sep 2001 14:09:38 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 88488 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 11 Sep 2001 21:09:27          +0000
Received: from femail38.sdc1.sfba.home.com ([24.254.60.32]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA19612 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue,          11 Sep 2001 14:09:27 -0700
Received: from c1649002-a.earthlink.net ([24.20.95.67]) by          femail38.sdc1.sfba.home.com (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20          201-229-121-120-20010223) with ESMTP id          <20010911210921.JXAC5658.femail38.sdc1.sfba.home.com@c1649002-a.earthlink.net>; Tue, 11 Sep 2001 14:09:21          -0700
X-Sender: forkbomb@mail.earthlink.net
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.0.2
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <5.0.2.1.0.20010911140811.025a4a98@mail.earthlink.net>
Date:         Tue, 11 Sep 2001 14:09:12 -0700
Reply-To: "Pierce Nichols" <forkbomb@EARTHLINK.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Pierce Nichols" <forkbomb@EARTHLINK.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Well, partly off-topic-- but . . . Re: [AR] U.S. at War
Comments: To: al bradley <abradley@TOOLCITY.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <v01510100b7c4368a453c@[208.22.189.250]>

At 04:59 PM 9/11/2001 -0500, al bradley wrote:
> >Should take up a collection for "A nuke for Arafat"  NM
>
>Uh, just remember the massive and fanatical demonstrations at the recent
>World Trade meetings. We don't want to jump to conclusions do we?


         Yeah, but none of those putzes are well enough organized to pull
something like this off.


>We might conclude though, that heightened national security can impact
>amateur rocketry for some time!


         Yes, which is unfortunate. It may also be affected by its
practitioners being called off to war. How many ppl here are of military age?

         -p


Mars or Bust!
www.marssociety.com

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 3572 invoked from network); 11 Sep 2001 21:37:52 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 11 Sep 2001 21:37:52 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 16732 invoked by uid 50005); 11 Sep 2001 21:37:14 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpa with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4157. . Clean. Processed in 0.213387 secs); 11 Sep 2001 21:37:14 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 11 Sep 2001 21:37:14 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA19831; Tue, 11 Sep 2001 14:32:35 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 88540 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 11 Sep 2001 21:32:33          +0000
Received: from hobbiton.shire.net (frogmorton.shire.net [204.228.145.136]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA19817 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Tue, 11 Sep 2001 14:32:33 -0700
Received: from pool-64-223-146-33.man.east.verizon.net ([64.223.146.33]          helo=me-513q3sc0zun0.pengar.com) by hobbiton.shire.net with esmtp          (Exim 3.22 #6) id 15gv7Y-0000Am-00 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 11          Sep 2001 15:31:04 -0600
X-Sender: seth-pc@hobbiton.shire.net
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <5.1.0.14.0.20010911173318.029f28d0@hobbiton.shire.net>
Date:         Tue, 11 Sep 2001 17:37:59 -0400
Reply-To: "Seth Leigh" <seth@PENGAR.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Seth Leigh" <seth@PENGAR.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] U.S. at War
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <c.1afa1d41.28cfccc4@aol.com>

There are reports of many palestinians firing guns in the air in
celebration at the news of today's attack.  No doubt many of them felt a
kinship with their brothers who carried it out.

I would like to know now how all those NGO members feel now who just got
finished their meeting, in parallel with the UN conference on racism, where
they all jumped on the hate-filled bandwagon denouncing Israel of crimes
against humanity, genocide, etc.  Will these people even realize, will they
experience that flash of insight that tells them they've been used?

I shudder how this will all work out.  The possibilities are endless.

But I'll tell you one thing, there's not gonna be a surgical airstrike
here, a cruise missile launch there, etc.  This time they will go for the
gusto.  And the rest of the free world will be there too.  They have to be,
they know now, even if they've been too stupid to realize before now, that
it's not the US against the radicals, it's the radicals against everyone in
the free world.  If you watched Tony Blair's speech today, you know he gets it.

Seth


At 04:23 PM 9/11/2001, MilburnMNK@AOL.COM wrote:
>Should take up a collection for "A nuke for Arafat"  NM

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 9552 invoked from network); 11 Sep 2001 21:56:01 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 11 Sep 2001 21:56:01 -0000
Received: (qmail 10437 invoked by uid 50005); 11 Sep 2001 21:53:32 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4157. . Clean. Processed in 0.258751 secs); 11 Sep 2001 21:53:32 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 11 Sep 2001 21:53:31 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA19995; Tue, 11 Sep 2001 14:39:12 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 88579 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 11 Sep 2001 21:39:11          +0000
Received: from localhost (rcalkins@localhost) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with          ESMTP id OAA19981; Tue, 11 Sep 2001 14:39:09 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.LNX.4.10.10109111438360.15119-100000@itc.uci.edu>
Date:         Tue, 11 Sep 2001 14:39:09 -0700
Reply-To: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
Subject:      Re: [AR] U.S. at War
Comments: To: Seth Leigh <seth@PENGAR.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <5.1.0.14.0.20010911173318.029f28d0@hobbiton.shire.net>

Okay, this thread is inappropriate and off topic.  Please take it to a
different forum.

Ray

On Tue, 11 Sep 2001, Seth Leigh wrote:

> There are reports of many palestinians firing guns in the air in
> celebration at the news of today's attack.  No doubt many of them felt a
> kinship with their brothers who carried it out.
>
> I would like to know now how all those NGO members feel now who just got
> finished their meeting, in parallel with the UN conference on racism, where
> they all jumped on the hate-filled bandwagon denouncing Israel of crimes
> against humanity, genocide, etc.  Will these people even realize, will they
> experience that flash of insight that tells them they've been used?
>
> I shudder how this will all work out.  The possibilities are endless.
>
> But I'll tell you one thing, there's not gonna be a surgical airstrike
> here, a cruise missile launch there, etc.  This time they will go for the
> gusto.  And the rest of the free world will be there too.  They have to be,
> they know now, even if they've been too stupid to realize before now, that
> it's not the US against the radicals, it's the radicals against everyone in
> the free world.  If you watched Tony Blair's speech today, you know he gets it.
>
> Seth
>
>
> At 04:23 PM 9/11/2001, MilburnMNK@AOL.COM wrote:
> >Should take up a collection for "A nuke for Arafat"  NM
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 10945 invoked from network); 11 Sep 2001 21:56:24 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 11 Sep 2001 21:56:24 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 30851 invoked by uid 50005); 11 Sep 2001 21:53:21 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpf with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4157. . Clean. Processed in 0.213049 secs); 11 Sep 2001 21:53:21 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 11 Sep 2001 21:53:21 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA19943; Tue, 11 Sep 2001 14:36:42 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 88564 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 11 Sep 2001 21:36:41          +0000
Received: from hobbiton.shire.net (frogmorton.shire.net [204.228.145.136]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA19929 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Tue, 11 Sep 2001 14:36:41 -0700
Received: from pool-64-223-146-33.man.east.verizon.net ([64.223.146.33]          helo=me-513q3sc0zun0.pengar.com) by hobbiton.shire.net with esmtp          (Exim 3.22 #6) id 15gvBY-0000D3-00 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 11          Sep 2001 15:35:12 -0600
X-Sender: seth-pc@hobbiton.shire.net
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
References: <v01510100b7c4368a453c@[208.22.189.250]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <5.1.0.14.0.20010911173953.02abd8d0@hobbiton.shire.net>
Date:         Tue, 11 Sep 2001 17:42:07 -0400
Reply-To: "Seth Leigh" <seth@PENGAR.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Seth Leigh" <seth@PENGAR.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Well, partly off-topic-- but . . . Re: [AR] U.S. at War
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <5.0.2.1.0.20010911140811.025a4a98@mail.earthlink.net>

At 05:09 PM 9/11/2001, Pierce Nichols wrote:
         Yes, which is unfortunate. It may also be affected by its
>practitioners being called off to war. How many ppl here are of military age?

I feel like a shit.  I was in the National Guard for 12 years, and got out
in 1997.  My best friend is still in that unit, and he just went to Saudi
Arabia for six months.  Ironically he had a choice between six weeks in
Saudi and six weeks in Bosnia, and chose Saudi, because at the time he
chose some shootings had occurred in Bosnia.

Damn.  I wish I were back in my unit, with my friend Jon.  You can't
imagine how it makes me feel that he's right there in Saudi and I'm sitting
on my ass talking about building rockets.

Seth

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 19439 invoked from network); 11 Sep 2001 22:14:57 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 11 Sep 2001 22:14:57 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 22599 invoked by uid 50005); 11 Sep 2001 22:12:28 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4157. . Clean. Processed in 0.193211 secs); 11 Sep 2001 22:12:28 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 11 Sep 2001 22:12:28 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA20234; Tue, 11 Sep 2001 14:58:47 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 88640 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 11 Sep 2001 21:58:42          +0000
Received: from hobbiton.shire.net (frogmorton.shire.net [204.228.145.136]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA20220 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Tue, 11 Sep 2001 14:58:41 -0700
Received: from pool-64-223-146-33.man.east.verizon.net ([64.223.146.33]          helo=me-513q3sc0zun0.pengar.com) by hobbiton.shire.net with esmtp          (Exim 3.22 #6) id 15gvWq-0000Q3-00 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 11          Sep 2001 15:57:12 -0600
X-Sender: seth-pc@hobbiton.shire.net
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
References: <5.0.2.1.0.20010911140811.025a4a98@mail.earthlink.net>            <v01510100b7c4368a453c@[208.22.189.250]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <5.1.0.14.0.20010911180331.01ccb990@hobbiton.shire.net>
Date:         Tue, 11 Sep 2001 18:04:07 -0400
Reply-To: "Seth Leigh" <seth@PENGAR.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Seth Leigh" <seth@PENGAR.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Well, partly off-topic-- but . . . Re: [AR] U.S. at War
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <5.1.0.14.0.20010911173953.02abd8d0@hobbiton.shire.net>

At 05:42 PM 9/11/2001, Seth Leigh wrote:
>At 05:09 PM 9/11/2001, Pierce Nichols wrote:
>         Yes, which is unfortunate. It may also be affected by its
>>practitioners being called off to war. How many ppl here are of military age?
>
>I feel like a shit.  I was in the National Guard for 12 years, and got out
>in 1997.  My best friend is still in that unit, and he just went to Saudi
>Arabia for six months.  Ironically he had a choice between six weeks in
>Saudi and six weeks in Bosnia, and chose Saudi, because at the time he

Oops.  I meant six months in Bosnia or six months in Saudi.  I'm sure you
got that.

Seth
Ich bin ein New Yorker.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 1160 invoked from network); 11 Sep 2001 23:39:15 -0000
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 11 Sep 2001 23:39:15 -0000
Received: (qmail 28976 invoked by uid 50005); 11 Sep 2001 23:38:27 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpe with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4157. . Clean. Processed in 0.623825 secs); 11 Sep 2001 23:38:27 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 11 Sep 2001 23:38:25 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA21571; Tue, 11 Sep 2001 16:22:43 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 89119 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 11 Sep 2001 23:22:18          +0000
Received: from fep4-orange.clear.net.nz (fep4-orange.clear.net.nz          [203.97.32.4]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA21552          for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Tue, 11 Sep 2001 16:22:17 -0700
Received: from mkbs (203-167-161-125.dialup.clear.net.nz [203.167.161.125]) by          fep4-orange.clear.net.nz (1.5/1.7) with SMTP id LAA09626; Wed, 12 Sep          2001 11:22:03 +1200 (NZST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="Windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <015a01c13b19$1236ffa0$0100a8c0@mkbs>
Date:         Wed, 12 Sep 2001 11:24:51 +1200
Reply-To: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Organization: Applied Technology
Subject:      [AR] Tragedy
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

I'm extremely sorry to hear of the cowardly attack on the people of the US.

It's hard to say anything more profound than that at a time like this


    God bless,


               Russell McMahon

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 13394 invoked from network); 12 Sep 2001 01:59:59 -0000
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 12 Sep 2001 01:59:59 -0000
Received: (qmail 27584 invoked by uid 50005); 12 Sep 2001 01:56:55 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpf with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4157. . Clean. Processed in 0.133188 secs); 12 Sep 2001 01:56:55 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 12 Sep 2001 01:56:55 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA22252; Tue, 11 Sep 2001 18:56:03 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 89249 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 12 Sep 2001 01:56:01          +0000
Received: from cablecom.laribay.net (cablecom.laribay.net [66.20.57.4]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA22227 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 11 Sep 2001 18:55:56 -0700
Received: from billbull (dial036.laribay.net [66.20.57.36]) by          cablecom.laribay.net (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id UAA19511 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 11 Sep 2001 20:37:09 -0500 (CDT)          (envelope-from bpbullock@laribay.net)
References:  <10.124850c0.28cfce42@aol.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0D44_01C56B69.5234D760"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <001701c13b2e$51ae5b00$24391442@billbull>
Date:         Tue, 11 Sep 2001 20:57:25 -0500
Reply-To: "Bill Bullock" <bpbullock@LARIBAY.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Bill Bullock" <bpbullock@LARIBAY.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Smokeless powder ignitor enhancement
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0D44_01C56B69.5234D760
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

    Yes, but I still miss that "brimstone" smell...
  ----- Original Message -----=20
  From: Sociald84@AOL.COM=20
  To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU=20
  Sent: Tuesday, September 11, 2001 3:29 PM
  Subject: Re: [AR] Smokeless powder ignitor enhancement


  In a message dated 9/10/2001 10:56:04 AM Mountain Daylight Time,=20
  jyawn@SFCC.NET writes:=20



    Sounds suspiciously to me like an oxidizer/fuel mixture that has =
been=20
    tailored=20
    in some way to be "non-explosive."=20

    Anyone know what Pyrodex is, or want to venture a guess?=20

    Jimmy Yawn=20



  Pyrodex is an Oxidizer/fuel mixture which has been developed to =
replace black=20
  powder for blackpowder firearms. The residue from pyrodex is far less=20
  corrosive than the residue from black powder and the smoke isn't as =
nasty for=20
  your lungs.=20

  Mark=20

------=_NextPart_000_0D44_01C56B69.5234D760
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META content=3D"text/html; charset=3Diso-8859-1" =
http-equiv=3DContent-Type>
<META content=3D"MSHTML 5.00.2614.3500" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Yes, but I still miss that "brimstone" =
smell...</DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE=20
style=3D"BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: =
0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; PADDING-RIGHT: 0px">
  <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial">----- Original Message ----- </DIV>
  <DIV=20
  style=3D"BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; FONT: 10pt arial; font-color: =
black"><B>From:</B>=20
  <A href=3D"mailto:Sociald84@AOL.COM"=20
  title=3DSociald84@AOL.COM>Sociald84@AOL.COM</A> </DIV>
  <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A =
href=3D"mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU"=20
  title=3DAROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU</A> </DIV>
  <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> Tuesday, September 11, =
2001 3:29=20
  PM</DIV>
  <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> Re: [AR] Smokeless =
powder=20
  ignitor enhancement</DIV>
  <DIV><BR></DIV><FONT face=3Darial,helvetica><FONT size=3D2>In a =
message dated=20
  9/10/2001 10:56:04 AM Mountain Daylight Time, <BR><A=20
  href=3D"mailto:jyawn@SFCC.NET">jyawn@SFCC.NET</A> writes: <BR><BR><BR>
  <BLOCKQUOTE=20
  style=3D"BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; =
MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px"=20
  TYPE=3D"CITE">Sounds suspiciously to me like an oxidizer/fuel mixture =
that has=20
    been <BR>tailored <BR>in some way to be "non-explosive." =
<BR><BR>Anyone know=20
    what Pyrodex is, or want to venture a guess? <BR><BR>Jimmy Yawn=20
  <BR></BLOCKQUOTE><BR><BR>Pyrodex is an Oxidizer/fuel mixture which has =
been=20
  developed to replace black <BR>powder for blackpowder firearms. The =
residue=20
  from pyrodex is far less <BR>corrosive than the residue from black =
powder and=20
  the smoke isn't as nasty for <BR>your lungs. <BR><BR>Mark</FONT>=20
</FONT></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0D44_01C56B69.5234D760--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 14831 invoked from network); 12 Sep 2001 02:00:25 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 12 Sep 2001 02:00:25 -0000
Received: (qmail 32413 invoked by uid 50005); 12 Sep 2001 01:59:52 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpb with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.116689 secs); 12 Sep 2001 01:59:52 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 12 Sep 2001 01:59:52 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA22214; Tue, 11 Sep 2001 18:54:44 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 89236 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 12 Sep 2001 01:54:20          +0000
Received: from cablecom.laribay.net (cablecom.laribay.net [66.20.57.4]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA22197 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 11 Sep 2001 18:54:19 -0700
Received: from billbull (dial036.laribay.net [66.20.57.36]) by          cablecom.laribay.net (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id UAA19505 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 11 Sep 2001 20:35:22 -0500 (CDT)          (envelope-from bpbullock@laribay.net)
References:  <000001c13aff$7096d850$0200a8c0@prestige.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <000901c13b2e$124487a0$24391442@billbull>
Date:         Tue, 11 Sep 2001 20:55:38 -0500
Reply-To: "Bill Bullock" <bpbullock@LARIBAY.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Bill Bullock" <bpbullock@LARIBAY.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Epoxy/KNO3 motor results
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Jeff:
    For those of us "metrically challenged":
http://microimg.com/science/
    I have a program installed and if I can remember where I got it I will
send that along...
Bill
----- Original Message -----
From: Jeff Grady <jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Tuesday, September 11, 2001 3:22 PM
Subject: Re: [AR] Epoxy/KNO3 motor results


> Hans,
>
>         I'm one of those Americans who have not adjusted to the metric
system.
> Could you convert bar to psi (or provide a conversion formula)? The Al
> certainly made a difference!
>
> Jeff Grady
> Atlanta, Georgia
> UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@itc.uci.edu]On
> Behalf Of Hans Olaf Toft
> Sent: Tuesday, September 11, 2001 4:18 PM
> To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
> Subject: Re: [AR] Epoxy/KNO3 motor results
>
>
> The tests I made with the Epoxy 27% Aluminium: 2% Sulfur: 5% KNO3: 66%
> composition had a chamber pressure of 55 bar at kn = 1200. I made a test
for
> comparison, removing the 2% Al and ended up with 14 bar chamber pressure
at
> same
> kn. Sulfur alone apparently has very limited influence on the burn rate -
Al
> has. The main function of the S is to improve ignition characteristics.
>
> Hans Olaf Toft
>
>
> Jeff Grady wrote:
>
> > Lacking an immediate source for Al, I mixed up a batch of 75/25/5
> > (KNO3/Epoxy/Sulfur) last night and was hopeful after seeing a small lump
> of
> > this hardened fuel burn. It burned steadily and quite hot (based on the
> heat
> > I felt a few feet away). My idea of "vigorously" may not fit the
> definition
> > most of you folks hold. The mixture resembles yellow play dough in both
> look
> > and feel, until it sets up. Figuring it may burn a bit faster under
> > pressure, I made another batch, same as the first. Pressed the fuel into
a
> > spent Estes A10 casing that seemed solid enough to use and closed off
the
> > big end w/pure epoxy. I used the A10 because I can get away with a small
> > CATO in the back yard. Any bigger and I'd have to go a few miles down
the
> > road.
> >
> > Later today, I fired the motor and was really disappointed. The burn
rate
> > was not impressive at all. I'm sure one problem was burn surface. The
> epoxy
> > "dough" was setting up fast while I was packing the dough into the
casing.
> > When I tried to push a small skewer stick in through the nozzle to make
a
> > core, it only went about a 1/4" deep. So, basically I had an end burner.
> It
> > burned for nearly 1.5 minutes before the casing burned through -
> definitely
> > not a "vigorous" burn. After the casing cooled, I walked over to take a
> > closer look. The nozzle had a "spout" rising up (motor was fired nozzle
> up)
> > about 1" from the nozzle. Seems the resin was not fully consumed(???).
> >
> > Next I'll try some other epoxies I have and try to find some Al powder.
> Any
> > less epoxy or any more KNO3 makes mixing a TOUGH job. Any suggestions?
> >
> > Jeff
>
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 14365 invoked from network); 12 Sep 2001 02:08:46 -0000
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 12 Sep 2001 02:08:46 -0000
Received: (qmail 4784 invoked by uid 50005); 12 Sep 2001 02:05:42 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpf with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4157. . Clean. Processed in 0.185856 secs); 12 Sep 2001 02:05:42 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 12 Sep 2001 02:05:41 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA22373; Tue, 11 Sep 2001 19:06:33 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 89278 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 12 Sep 2001 02:06:23          +0000
Received: from fep4-orange.clear.net.nz (fep4-orange.clear.net.nz          [203.97.32.4]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA22356          for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Tue, 11 Sep 2001 19:06:21 -0700
Received: from mkbs (203-167-156-177.dialup.clear.net.nz [203.167.156.177]) by          fep4-orange.clear.net.nz (1.5/1.7) with SMTP id OAA02869; Wed, 12 Sep          2001 14:06:09 +1200 (NZST)
References:  <000001c13aff$7096d850$0200a8c0@prestige.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <01c501c13b2f$ff7146c0$0100a8c0@mkbs>
Date:         Wed, 12 Sep 2001 13:16:28 +1200
Reply-To: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Organization: Applied Technology
Subject:      Re: [AR] Epoxy/KNO3 motor results
Comments: To: Jeff Grady <jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

>  I'm one of those Americans who have not adjusted to the metric system.
> Could you convert bar to psi (or provide a conversion formula)? The Al
> certainly made a difference!

1 bar = 100,000 Newtons / M^2 = 100,000 Pascal = 100 kPa

It so happens that   bar ~= 1 atmosphere pressure (more or less)
(Actually 1 standard atmosphere = 1.013 bar but who's counting ;-)

Mean atmospheric pressure = 14.7 psi

So, close enough for most purposes -

     1 bar ~= 14.7 psi ~= 100 kilopascal

      1 MPa ~= 10 bar ~= 147 psi



                    RM

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 24253 invoked from network); 12 Sep 2001 02:11:33 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 12 Sep 2001 02:11:33 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 13325 invoked by uid 50005); 12 Sep 2001 02:10:54 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpa with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4157. . Clean. Processed in 0.227481 secs); 12 Sep 2001 02:10:54 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 12 Sep 2001 02:10:53 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA22417; Tue, 11 Sep 2001 19:08:05 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 89293 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 12 Sep 2001 02:08:03          +0000
Received: from smtp.snet.net (smtp-j.snet.net [204.60.6.55]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA22403 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue,          11 Sep 2001 19:08:02 -0700
Received: from snet.net (161.67.252.64.snet.net [64.252.67.161] (may be          forged)) by smtp.snet.net          (8.12.0.Beta12/8.12.0.Beta12/SNET-mx-1.5/D-evisionO-evision$) with          ESMTP id f8C280t7012843 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 11 Sep 2001          22:08:01 -0400 (EDT)
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.75 [en] (Win98; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <015a01c13b19$1236ffa0$0100a8c0@mkbs>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Message-ID:  <3B9EC4F9.50AE0EB5@snet.net>
Date:         Tue, 11 Sep 2001 22:14:17 -0400
Reply-To: "Blake Mantel" <BMantel@SNET.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Blake Mantel" <BMantel@SNET.NET>
Organization: done through the use of very fuzzy logic!
Subject:      Re: [AR] Tragedy
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Russell McMahon wrote:

> I'm extremely sorry to hear of the cowardly attack on the people of the US.
> It's hard to say anything more profound than that at a time like this
>     God bless,
>                Russell McMahon

My prayers to all, and to thoes who lost friends and/or family.
Blake Mantel

On our localnet:
>  -----Original Message-----
> From:         Group Communications
> Sent: Tuesday, September 11, 2001 15:47
> Subject:      A message from Pratt & Whitney President Louis Chnevert
>
> September 11, 2001
>
> All of us at Pratt & Whitney feel a deep sense of shock and loss over
> today's apparent terrorist attacks on our nation.  Our thoughts and
> prayers go out to all the victims and their families.
>
SNIP
>
> The days ahead surely will be difficult ones for us as a nation and as
> individuals.  I know that each of you must find your own way to cope with
> and overcome this devastating tragedy.  At Pratt & Whitney we will pull
> together to do what is right for our fellow employees, our customers and
> our country.
>  Louis Chnevert
> President

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 29233 invoked from network); 12 Sep 2001 02:30:28 -0000
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 12 Sep 2001 02:30:28 -0000
Received: (qmail 4493 invoked by uid 50005); 12 Sep 2001 02:29:39 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpe with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4157. . Clean. Processed in 0.213842 secs); 12 Sep 2001 02:29:39 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 12 Sep 2001 02:29:38 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA22543; Tue, 11 Sep 2001 19:14:29 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 89328 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 12 Sep 2001 02:14:27          +0000
Received: from cablecom.laribay.net (cablecom.laribay.net [66.20.57.4]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA22529 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 11 Sep 2001 19:14:26 -0700
Received: from billbull (dial036.laribay.net [66.20.57.36]) by          cablecom.laribay.net (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id UAA19617 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 11 Sep 2001 20:55:15 -0500 (CDT)          (envelope-from bpbullock@laribay.net)
References:  <5.1.0.14.0.20010911173318.029f28d0@hobbiton.shire.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <002901c13b30$d93e6ae0$24391442@billbull>
Date:         Tue, 11 Sep 2001 21:15:31 -0500
Reply-To: "Bill Bullock" <bpbullock@LARIBAY.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Bill Bullock" <bpbullock@LARIBAY.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] U.S. at War
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Seth:
    I lived with some Arabs for 5 years while attending Louisiana Tech. I
attended the Arab Nationalist Student Union conferences every year. So, with
a bit of experience under my belt might I make two points:
    1) The Arabic/Islamic people I knew and know are some of the finest
people I have ever met. The extreme radical movements are the ones who make
all the problems; and
    2)  The Arabic people have a guiding saying," Me and my brother against
my cousin, but me and my cousin against the world."
    It is about time the radicals learned that the Americans have likewise
had a guiding slogan for quite some time:" Don't tread on me!"
Bill
----- Original Message -----
From: Seth Leigh <seth@PENGAR.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Tuesday, September 11, 2001 4:37 PM
Subject: Re: [AR] U.S. at War


> There are reports of many palestinians firing guns in the air in
> celebration at the news of today's attack.  No doubt many of them felt a
> kinship with their brothers who carried it out.
>
> I would like to know now how all those NGO members feel now who just got
> finished their meeting, in parallel with the UN conference on racism,
where
> they all jumped on the hate-filled bandwagon denouncing Israel of crimes
> against humanity, genocide, etc.  Will these people even realize, will
they
> experience that flash of insight that tells them they've been used?
>
> I shudder how this will all work out.  The possibilities are endless.
>
> But I'll tell you one thing, there's not gonna be a surgical airstrike
> here, a cruise missile launch there, etc.  This time they will go for the
> gusto.  And the rest of the free world will be there too.  They have to
be,
> they know now, even if they've been too stupid to realize before now, that
> it's not the US against the radicals, it's the radicals against everyone
in
> the free world.  If you watched Tony Blair's speech today, you know he
gets it.
>
> Seth
>
>
> At 04:23 PM 9/11/2001, MilburnMNK@AOL.COM wrote:
> >Should take up a collection for "A nuke for Arafat"  NM
>
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 2881 invoked from network); 12 Sep 2001 02:31:37 -0000
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 12 Sep 2001 02:31:37 -0000
Received: (qmail 394 invoked by uid 50005); 12 Sep 2001 02:28:33 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpf with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4157. . Clean. Processed in 0.721986 secs); 12 Sep 2001 02:28:33 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 12 Sep 2001 02:28:31 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA22601; Tue, 11 Sep 2001 19:15:42 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 89347 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 12 Sep 2001 02:15:41          +0000
Received: from cablecom.laribay.net (cablecom.laribay.net [66.20.57.4]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA22587 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 11 Sep 2001 19:15:41 -0700
Received: from billbull (dial036.laribay.net [66.20.57.36]) by          cablecom.laribay.net (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id UAA19634 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 11 Sep 2001 20:56:54 -0500 (CDT)          (envelope-from bpbullock@laribay.net)
References:  <Pine.LNX.4.10.10109111438360.15119-100000@itc.uci.edu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <003101c13b31$143c0a80$24391442@billbull>
Date:         Tue, 11 Sep 2001 21:17:10 -0500
Reply-To: "Bill Bullock" <bpbullock@LARIBAY.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Bill Bullock" <bpbullock@LARIBAY.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] U.S. at War
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

    Sorry, Ray: I posted before I read this. For me the subject is changed.

----- Original Message -----
From: Ray Calkins <rcalkins@ITC.UCI.EDU>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Tuesday, September 11, 2001 4:39 PM
Subject: Re: [AR] U.S. at War


> Okay, this thread is inappropriate and off topic.  Please take it to a
> different forum.
>
> Ray
>
> On Tue, 11 Sep 2001, Seth Leigh wrote:
>
> > There are reports of many palestinians firing guns in the air in
> > celebration at the news of today's attack.  No doubt many of them felt a
> > kinship with their brothers who carried it out.
> >
> > I would like to know now how all those NGO members feel now who just got
> > finished their meeting, in parallel with the UN conference on racism,
where
> > they all jumped on the hate-filled bandwagon denouncing Israel of crimes
> > against humanity, genocide, etc.  Will these people even realize, will
they
> > experience that flash of insight that tells them they've been used?
> >
> > I shudder how this will all work out.  The possibilities are endless.
> >
> > But I'll tell you one thing, there's not gonna be a surgical airstrike
> > here, a cruise missile launch there, etc.  This time they will go for
the
> > gusto.  And the rest of the free world will be there too.  They have to
be,
> > they know now, even if they've been too stupid to realize before now,
that
> > it's not the US against the radicals, it's the radicals against everyone
in
> > the free world.  If you watched Tony Blair's speech today, you know he
gets it.
> >
> > Seth
> >
> >
> > At 04:23 PM 9/11/2001, MilburnMNK@AOL.COM wrote:
> > >Should take up a collection for "A nuke for Arafat"  NM
> >
>
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 7997 invoked from network); 12 Sep 2001 02:33:09 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 12 Sep 2001 02:33:09 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: (qmail 27315 invoked by uid 50005); 12 Sep 2001 02:30:40 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4157. . Clean. Processed in 0.152323 secs); 12 Sep 2001 02:30:40 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 12 Sep 2001 02:30:39 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA22792; Tue, 11 Sep 2001 19:31:13 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 89375 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 12 Sep 2001 02:31:11          +0000
Received: from bleys.tpgi.com.au (bleys.tpgi.com.au [203.12.160.38]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA22683 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 11 Sep 2001 19:21:10 -0700
Received: (from smtpd@localhost) by bleys.tpgi.com.au (8.11.2/8.11.2) id          f8C2L9814539 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 12 Sep 2001 12:21:09          +1000
Received: from vweb5.tpgi.com.au(203.26.24.210),          claiming to be "209.36.247.3" via SMTP by bleys.tpgi.com.au,          id smtpdVdcqgL; Wed Sep 12 12:21:07 2001
X-Mailer: Endymion MailMan Standard Edition v3.0.24
Message-ID:  <200109120221.f8C2L9814539@bleys.tpgi.com.au>
Date:         Wed, 12 Sep 2001 02:21:07 GMT
Reply-To: <cstrudwi@TPG.COM.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <cstrudwi@TPG.COM.AU>
Subject:      [AR] Estimated ISP for Epoxy/KN/AL propellant
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

I've been reading a lot of very interesting stuff
from the list over the last 6 months but this is
my first post.
Forgive me if this has already been discussed but
has anyone measured or have a theoretical ISP
value for the Epoxy/KN/Al etc propellant ?
If this has a half decent value then it is of
great interest to me due to the ease of obtaining
the component chemicals and simple processing.

Craig Strudwicke
Sydney
Australia


From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 19927 invoked from network); 12 Sep 2001 03:05:06 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 12 Sep 2001 03:05:06 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: (qmail 8284 invoked by uid 50005); 12 Sep 2001 03:04:33 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpb with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.095163 secs); 12 Sep 2001 03:04:33 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 12 Sep 2001 03:04:32 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA22961; Tue, 11 Sep 2001 20:01:33 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 89434 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 12 Sep 2001 03:01:25          +0000
Received: from cisco.com (cypher.cisco.com [171.69.11.18]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA22945 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue,          11 Sep 2001 20:01:25 -0700
Received: (from billw@localhost) by cisco.com (8.8.8/2.6/Cisco List          Logging/8.8.8) id TAA15679; Tue, 11 Sep 2001 19:59:52 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID:  <CMM.0.90.4.1000263592.billw@cypher>
Date:         Tue, 11 Sep 2001 19:59:52 PDT
Reply-To: "Bill Westfield" <billw@cisco.com>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "William Chops Westfield" <billw@cisco.com>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Epoxy/KNO3 motor results
Comments: To: Bill Bullock <bpbullock@LARIBAY.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  Your message of Tue, 11 Sep 2001 20:55:38 -0500

        For those of us "metrically challenged":
    http://microimg.com/science/

A technically accurate conversion program is worse than the formula,
and a formula isn't nearly as useful as the estimate "one bar approx equals
1 Atm" that someone provided...

BillW


From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 22569 invoked from network); 12 Sep 2001 03:16:53 -0000
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 12 Sep 2001 03:16:53 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 24696 invoked by uid 50005); 12 Sep 2001 03:16:03 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpe with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4157. . Clean. Processed in 0.514582 secs); 12 Sep 2001 03:16:03 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 12 Sep 2001 03:16:03 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA23112; Tue, 11 Sep 2001 20:14:29 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 89459 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 12 Sep 2001 03:14:24          +0000
Received: from imo-m02.mx.aol.com (imo-m02.mx.aol.com [64.12.136.5]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA23098 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Tue, 11 Sep 2001 20:14:24 -0700
Received: from Ricanakk@aol.com by imo-m02.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v31_r1.4.) id          r.7d.1ac61a53 (3854); Tue, 11 Sep 2001 23:13:46 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: AOL 5.0 for Windows sub 108
Message-ID:  <7d.1ac61a53.28d02cea@aol.com>
Date:         Tue, 11 Sep 2001 23:13:46 EDT
Reply-To: <Ricanakk@AOL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <Ricanakk@AOL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Estimated ISP for Epoxy/KN/AL propellant
Comments: To: cstrudwi@tpg.com.au
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Craig,

<< Forgive me if this has already been discussed but
 has anyone measured or have a theoretical ISP
 value for the Epoxy/KN/Al etc propellant ?
 If this has a half decent value then it is of
 great interest to me due to the ease of obtaining
 the component chemicals and simple processing. >>

The best mixture that I have tested so far with my cee-star measurement
method has the following percentages
KN 66
Epoxy 23
Aluminum 10
Iron Oxide 1

which delivered a cee-star value of 3184 fps. (970 m/s). This would
approximately give an ideal Isp of 165 sec. I would *guesstimate* delivered
Isp to be about 10% less for a well designed nozzle.
Burn rate measurements, however, have not yet been conducted, except at
ambient pressure, with this burn rate being 1 mm/sec.

Richard Nakka

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 12636 invoked from network); 12 Sep 2001 03:24:33 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 12 Sep 2001 03:24:33 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 28456 invoked by uid 50005); 12 Sep 2001 03:21:29 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpf with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4157. . Clean. Processed in 0.201681 secs); 12 Sep 2001 03:21:29 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 12 Sep 2001 03:21:28 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA23208; Tue, 11 Sep 2001 20:22:31 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 89486 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 12 Sep 2001 03:22:29          +0000
Received: from hobbiton.shire.net (frogmorton.shire.net [204.228.145.136]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA23194 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Tue, 11 Sep 2001 20:22:28 -0700
Received: from pool-64-223-146-33.man.east.verizon.net ([64.223.146.33]          helo=me-513q3sc0zun0.pengar.com) by hobbiton.shire.net with esmtp          (Exim 3.22 #6) id 15h0a6-000392-00; Tue, 11 Sep 2001 21:20:55 -0600
X-Sender: seth-pc@hobbiton.shire.net
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
References: <5.1.0.14.0.20010911173318.029f28d0@hobbiton.shire.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <5.1.0.14.0.20010911232329.03504830@hobbiton.shire.net>
Date:         Tue, 11 Sep 2001 23:27:29 -0400
Reply-To: "Seth Leigh" <seth@PENGAR.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Seth Leigh" <seth@PENGAR.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] U.S. at War
Comments: To: Bill Bullock <bpbullock@LARIBAY.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <002901c13b30$d93e6ae0$24391442@billbull>

I know several muslims at work.  I happen to like (most) of them very much
(the one I don't like because she's a bitch, not because she's a
muslim).  I have no problems with Arabs or muslims in general.  I am
talking specifically about the particular Palestinians I saw in video clips
over and over today celebrating in the streets.  This old women with
several children was dancing around with a shit-eating grin on her
face.  Guys were laughing and shooting guns in the air, as if their side
had done something heroic.  I have to say, the palestinians looked like
they were finally winning the PR war over Israel, and they even convinced
most of the attendeeds at the stupid Racism conference to be sympathetic to
the "plight of the palestinian people".

Dancing around the streets in joy, burning American flags, in front of a
video camera, on Sept. 11, 2001 was a Bad Idea(TM).

Seth


At 10:15 PM 9/11/2001, Bill Bullock wrote:
>Seth:
>     I lived with some Arabs for 5 years while attending Louisiana Tech. I
>attended the Arab Nationalist Student Union conferences every year. So, with
>a bit of experience under my belt might I make two points:
>     1) The Arabic/Islamic people I knew and know are some of the finest
>people I have ever met. The extreme radical movements are the ones who make
>all the problems; and
>     2)  The Arabic people have a guiding saying," Me and my brother against
>my cousin, but me and my cousin against the world."
>     It is about time the radicals learned that the Americans have likewise
>had a guiding slogan for quite some time:" Don't tread on me!"
>Bill
>----- Original Message -----
>From: Seth Leigh <seth@PENGAR.COM>
>To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
>Sent: Tuesday, September 11, 2001 4:37 PM
>Subject: Re: [AR] U.S. at War
>
>
> > There are reports of many palestinians firing guns in the air in
> > celebration at the news of today's attack.  No doubt many of them felt a
> > kinship with their brothers who carried it out.
> >
> > I would like to know now how all those NGO members feel now who just got
> > finished their meeting, in parallel with the UN conference on racism,
>where
> > they all jumped on the hate-filled bandwagon denouncing Israel of crimes
> > against humanity, genocide, etc.  Will these people even realize, will
>they
> > experience that flash of insight that tells them they've been used?
> >
> > I shudder how this will all work out.  The possibilities are endless.
> >
> > But I'll tell you one thing, there's not gonna be a surgical airstrike
> > here, a cruise missile launch there, etc.  This time they will go for the
> > gusto.  And the rest of the free world will be there too.  They have to
>be,
> > they know now, even if they've been too stupid to realize before now, that
> > it's not the US against the radicals, it's the radicals against everyone
>in
> > the free world.  If you watched Tony Blair's speech today, you know he
>gets it.
> >
> > Seth
> >
> >
> > At 04:23 PM 9/11/2001, MilburnMNK@AOL.COM wrote:
> > >Should take up a collection for "A nuke for Arafat"  NM
> >
> >

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 20208 invoked from network); 12 Sep 2001 03:27:31 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 12 Sep 2001 03:27:31 -0000
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 13480 invoked by uid 50005); 12 Sep 2001 03:25:39 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4157. . Clean. Processed in 0.200119 secs); 12 Sep 2001 03:25:39 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 12 Sep 2001 03:25:39 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA23269; Tue, 11 Sep 2001 20:24:51 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 89505 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 12 Sep 2001 03:24:50          +0000
Received: from hobbiton.shire.net (frogmorton.shire.net [204.228.145.136]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA23255 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Tue, 11 Sep 2001 20:24:49 -0700
Received: from pool-64-223-146-33.man.east.verizon.net ([64.223.146.33]          helo=me-513q3sc0zun0.pengar.com) by hobbiton.shire.net with esmtp          (Exim 3.22 #6) id 15h0cS-0003BN-00 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 11          Sep 2001 21:23:21 -0600
X-Sender: seth-pc@hobbiton.shire.net
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <5.1.0.14.0.20010911232946.01ccd428@hobbiton.shire.net>
Date:         Tue, 11 Sep 2001 23:30:16 -0400
Reply-To: "Seth Leigh" <seth@PENGAR.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Seth Leigh" <seth@PENGAR.COM>
Subject:      [AR] I apologize
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

For the continued off-topic remarks reguarding the attack on the US.  I
will stop.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 4972 invoked from network); 12 Sep 2001 03:46:13 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 12 Sep 2001 03:46:13 -0000
Received: (qmail 10936 invoked by uid 50005); 12 Sep 2001 03:45:32 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpa with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4157. . Clean. Processed in 0.272489 secs); 12 Sep 2001 03:45:32 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 12 Sep 2001 03:45:32 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA23486; Tue, 11 Sep 2001 20:42:55 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 89551 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 12 Sep 2001 03:42:49          +0000
Received: from bleys.tpgi.com.au (bleys.tpgi.com.au [203.12.160.38]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA23472 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 11 Sep 2001 20:42:47 -0700
Received: (from smtpd@localhost) by bleys.tpgi.com.au (8.11.2/8.11.2) id          f8C3gid26339; Wed, 12 Sep 2001 13:42:44 +1000
Received: from vweb5.tpgi.com.au(203.26.24.210),          claiming to be "209.36.247.3" via SMTP by bleys.tpgi.com.au,          id smtpdbCg33H; Wed Sep 12 13:42:37 2001
X-Mailer: Endymion MailMan Standard Edition v3.0.24
Message-ID:  <200109120342.f8C3gid26339@bleys.tpgi.com.au>
Date:         Wed, 12 Sep 2001 03:42:37 GMT
Reply-To: <cstrudwi@TPG.COM.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <cstrudwi@TPG.COM.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Estimated ISP for Epoxy/KN/AL propellant
Comments: To: Ricanakk@AOL.COM
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Richard,

What epoxy(s) are you using ? Any idea of their
density ?

I guess if the density is significantly higher
than that of Sorbitol (1.51 g/cc) there could be
some benefit.

Craig

> Craig,
>
> << Forgive me if this has already been
discussed but
>  has anyone measured or have a theoretical ISP
>  value for the Epoxy/KN/Al etc propellant ?
>  If this has a half decent value then it is of
>  great interest to me due to the ease of
obtaining
>  the component chemicals and simple processing.
>>
>
> The best mixture that I have tested so far with
my cee-star measurement
> method has the following percentages
> KN 66
> Epoxy 23
> Aluminum 10
> Iron Oxide 1
>
> which delivered a cee-star value of 3184 fps.
(970 m/s). This would
> approximately give an ideal Isp of 165 sec. I
would *guesstimate* delivered
> Isp to be about 10% less for a well designed
nozzle.
> Burn rate measurements, however, have not yet
been conducted, except at
> ambient pressure, with this burn rate being 1
mm/sec.
>
> Richard Nakka
>


From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 12199 invoked from network); 12 Sep 2001 05:04:26 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 12 Sep 2001 05:04:26 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 20374 invoked by uid 50005); 12 Sep 2001 05:03:37 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpe with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4157. . Clean. Processed in 0.173151 secs); 12 Sep 2001 05:03:37 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 12 Sep 2001 05:03:36 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA24038; Tue, 11 Sep 2001 21:48:11 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 89612 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 12 Sep 2001 04:48:06          +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (f220.law9.hotmail.com [64.4.9.220]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA24024 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue,          11 Sep 2001 21:48:06 -0700
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Tue,          11 Sep 2001 21:47:36 -0700
Received: from 4.48.31.122 by lw9fd.law9.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Wed, 12 Sep          2001 04:47:36 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [4.48.31.122]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 12 Sep 2001 04:47:36.0282 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[0B15EBA0:01C13B46]
Message-ID:  <F220XWr6cgr0K2luTl30000f180@hotmail.com>
Date:         Tue, 11 Sep 2001 23:47:36 -0500
Reply-To: "ben romashko" <pleaselaunchme@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "ben romashko" <pleaselaunchme@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Well, partly off-topic-- but . . . Re: [AR] U.S. at War
Comments: To: forkbomb@EARTHLINK.NET
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

--------------------
Ben Romashko
pleaslaunchme@hotmail.com
AIM- Attican123
--------------------



>From: Pierce Nichols <forkbomb@EARTHLINK.NET>
>Reply-To: Pierce Nichols <forkbomb@EARTHLINK.NET>
>To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
>Subject: Re: [AR] Well, partly off-topic-- but . . . Re: [AR] U.S. at War
>Date: Tue, 11 Sep 2001 14:09:12 -0700
>
>At 04:59 PM 9/11/2001 -0500, al bradley wrote:
>> >Should take up a collection for "A nuke for Arafat"  NM
>>
>>Uh, just remember the massive and fanatical demonstrations at the recent
>>World Trade meetings. We don't want to jump to conclusions do we?
>
>
>         Yeah, but none of those putzes are well enough organized to pull
>something like this off.
>
>
>>We might conclude though, that heightened national security can impact
>>amateur rocketry for some time!
>
>
>         Yes, which is unfortunate. It may also be affected by its
>practitioners being called off to war. How many ppl here are of military
>age?
>
>         -p
>
>
>Mars or Bust!
>www.marssociety.com


_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 5638 invoked from network); 12 Sep 2001 05:37:29 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 12 Sep 2001 05:37:29 -0000
Received: (qmail 3673 invoked by uid 50005); 12 Sep 2001 05:35:36 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4157. . Clean. Processed in 0.193367 secs); 12 Sep 2001 05:35:36 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 12 Sep 2001 05:35:36 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA24237; Tue, 11 Sep 2001 22:32:41 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 89643 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 12 Sep 2001 05:32:37          +0000
Received: from mta04.mail.mel.aone.net.au (mta04.mail.au.uu.net [203.2.192.84])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA24223 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 11 Sep 2001 22:32:36 -0700
Received: from unknown ([63.34.212.184]) by mta04.mail.mel.aone.net.au with          SMTP id <20010912053233.ERSL12702.mta04.mail.mel.aone.net.au@unknown>          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 12 Sep 2001 15:32:33 +1000
References: Conversation <200109120342.f8C3gid26339@bleys.tpgi.com.au> with            last message <200109120342.f8C3gid26339@bleys.tpgi.com.au>
Priority: Normal
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Priority: 3
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	X-MAPIextension=.TXT;
	charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>
Date:         Wed, 12 Sep 2001 05:32:37 +0000
Reply-To: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Estimated ISP for Epoxy/KN/AL propellant
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <200109120342.f8C3gid26339@bleys.tpgi.com.au>

The benefits from using epoxy would be more related to processing,
mechanical properties, hygroscopicity, and misc ingredient loading
potential. That's comparing it to a thermosetting sorbitol binder.

Troy.


> I guess if the density is significantly higher
> than that of Sorbitol (1.51 g/cc) there could be
> some benefit.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 18853 invoked from network); 12 Sep 2001 08:34:18 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 12 Sep 2001 08:34:18 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 8164 invoked by uid 50005); 12 Sep 2001 08:31:13 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpf with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4157. . Clean. Processed in 0.166614 secs); 12 Sep 2001 08:31:13 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 12 Sep 2001 08:31:13 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id BAA24822; Wed, 12 Sep 2001 01:14:35 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 89741 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 12 Sep 2001 08:14:25          +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (f177.law15.hotmail.com [64.4.23.177]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id BAA24808 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Wed, 12 Sep 2001 01:14:25 -0700
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Wed,          12 Sep 2001 01:13:55 -0700
Received: from 193.121.251.246 by lw15fd.law15.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Wed,          12 Sep 2001 08:13:54 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [193.121.251.246]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 12 Sep 2001 08:13:55.0011 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[DD621130:01C13B62]
Message-ID:  <F177KlNAOM8ZO2Yyp170000d0ae@hotmail.com>
Date:         Wed, 12 Sep 2001 08:14:25 +0000
Reply-To: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      [AR] safety
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Yeah, off topic, yet not political:

Has physical cabin separation of the pilot section in civil aircraft not
become a must now? Opinions?

jd




_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 20808 invoked from network); 12 Sep 2001 13:17:50 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 12 Sep 2001 13:17:50 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 25131 invoked by uid 50005); 12 Sep 2001 13:14:44 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpf with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4157. . Clean. Processed in 0.244308 secs); 12 Sep 2001 13:14:44 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 12 Sep 2001 13:14:43 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA25689; Wed, 12 Sep 2001 06:14:07 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 89810 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 12 Sep 2001 13:13:52          +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (f152.law15.hotmail.com [64.4.23.152]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA25675 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Wed, 12 Sep 2001 06:13:52 -0700
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Wed,          12 Sep 2001 06:13:22 -0700
Received: from 193.121.251.246 by lw15fd.law15.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Wed,          12 Sep 2001 13:13:21 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [193.121.251.246]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 12 Sep 2001 13:13:22.0058 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[B293DEA0:01C13B8C]
Message-ID:  <F1521lErjCrU1YImWd10000d536@hotmail.com>
Date:         Wed, 12 Sep 2001 13:13:52 +0000
Reply-To: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] safety
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Thanks, now I remember. I was in York at the time.

"Where were you at the time the WTC..." is also goin' to be remembered here.

Hope it's not a McVeigh sort of gang who did this.

On the other hand, still better than having a another worldwide crusade!

Heck, not something I'd dare to mention on the Aroc list...

JD

>From: Seth Leigh <seth@pengar.com>
>To: "John Dom" <j_dom@hotmail.com>
>Subject: Re: [AR] safety
>Date: Wed, 12 Sep 2001 09:04:42 -0400
>
>
>http://www.avasp.com/news/feb01.shtml
>
>
>
>At 08:46 AM 9/12/2001, you wrote:
>>New to me. Forgot about the 747 bloke, if I ever read about it ie...
>>
>>jd
>>
>>>From: Seth Leigh <seth@pengar.com>
>>>To: John Dom <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
>>>Subject: Re: [AR] safety
>>>Date: Wed, 12 Sep 2001 08:24:29 -0400
>>>
>>>I've read that it is in in the US.  Ironically it's the Europeans who
>>>insist on keeping their flight cabins open during the flight.  Remember a
>>>couple years back where that Nigerian dude ran up and dived onto the
>>>controls in the 747, almost sending it into a smoking whole in Africa
>>>before crew and passengers wrestled the guy off the controls and outta
>>>the
>>>cockpit?
>>>
>>>Seth
>>>
>>>
>>>At 04:14 AM 9/12/2001, you wrote:
>>>>Yeah, off topic, yet not political:
>>>>
>>>>Has physical cabin separation of the pilot section in civil aircraft not
>>>>become a must now? Opinions?
>>>>
>>>>jd
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>_________________________________________________________________
>>>>Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at
>>>>http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp
>>>
>>
>>
>>_________________________________________________________________
>>Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp
>>
>
>


_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 21678 invoked from network); 12 Sep 2001 14:20:45 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 12 Sep 2001 14:20:45 -0000
Received: (qmail 7546 invoked by uid 50005); 12 Sep 2001 14:17:38 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpf with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4157. . Clean. Processed in 0.237836 secs); 12 Sep 2001 14:17:38 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 12 Sep 2001 14:17:37 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA25977; Wed, 12 Sep 2001 07:14:06 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 89849 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 12 Sep 2001 14:13:50          +0000
Received: from localhost (rcalkins@localhost) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with          ESMTP id HAA25963; Wed, 12 Sep 2001 07:13:48 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.LNX.4.10.10109120705180.25831-100000@itc.uci.edu>
Date:         Wed, 12 Sep 2001 07:13:48 -0700
Reply-To: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
Subject:      [AR] TRAGEDY: PLEASE READ
Comments: To: Russell McMahon <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <015a01c13b19$1236ffa0$0100a8c0@mkbs>

I'd like to post an apology to the list about my request to keep the
NYC/DC tragedy discussion off of aRocket.  I was in a great deal of
anguish and shock, just as you were.  I just wanted it to stop, and when
it came to aRocket, I finally saw something I could do to stop it just a
little and acted on it.

I though long and hard about that post last night, and I retract what I
said.

We are a community.  We need to share our grief to move beyond it
and grow as a community.

Just as you, I need to talk about it so I can move on.

Please accept my profound apologies,

Ray Calkins

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 10142 invoked from network); 12 Sep 2001 14:31:31 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 12 Sep 2001 14:31:31 -0000
Received: (qmail 31082 invoked by uid 50005); 12 Sep 2001 14:30:38 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpe with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4157. . Clean. Processed in 0.712225 secs); 12 Sep 2001 14:30:38 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 12 Sep 2001 14:30:36 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA26060; Wed, 12 Sep 2001 07:27:52 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 89864 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 12 Sep 2001 14:27:40          +0000
Received: from localhost (rcalkins@localhost) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with          ESMTP id HAA26046; Wed, 12 Sep 2001 07:27:38 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.LNX.4.10.10109120719030.25831-100000@itc.uci.edu>
Date:         Wed, 12 Sep 2001 07:27:38 -0700
Reply-To: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
Subject:      Re: [AR] U.S. at War
Comments: To: ben romashko <pleaselaunchme@HOTMAIL.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <F220XWr6cgr0K2luTl30000f180@hotmail.com>

Al Bradley wrote:

>We might conclude though, that heightened national security can impact
>amateur rocketry for some time!

I think this is a given.  Not just solid propellants, either.  It was tons
of burning liquid fuel that brought the towers down, not the impact. I got
a call last night that Ky's space shot has been postponed by the FAA.
Presumably they are a little busy right now and had to set priorities.

Now, more than ever, we need to come together as amateur rocketeers.
Doubtless, we will be under a lot of pressure and scrutiny over the next
weeks and months.  Our actions will have reflect the highest
professionalism if we wish to continue our way of life.

Ray

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 22164 invoked from network); 12 Sep 2001 15:36:14 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 12 Sep 2001 15:36:14 -0000
Received: (qmail 29609 invoked by uid 50005); 12 Sep 2001 15:34:19 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4157. . Clean. Processed in 0.376667 secs); 12 Sep 2001 15:34:19 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 12 Sep 2001 15:34:18 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA26351; Wed, 12 Sep 2001 08:32:42 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 89900 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 12 Sep 2001 15:32:37          +0000
Received: from cablecom.laribay.net (cablecom.laribay.net [66.20.57.4]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA26337 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 12 Sep 2001 08:32:36 -0700
Received: from billbull (dial073.laribay.net [66.20.57.73]) by          cablecom.laribay.net (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id KAA24540 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 12 Sep 2001 10:13:48 -0500 (CDT)          (envelope-from bpbullock@laribay.net)
References:  <Pine.LNX.4.10.10109120705180.25831-100000@itc.uci.edu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <001c01c13ba0$68b0ade0$54391442@billbull>
Date:         Wed, 12 Sep 2001 10:33:04 -0500
Reply-To: "Bill Bullock" <bpbullock@LARIBAY.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Bill Bullock" <bpbullock@LARIBAY.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] TRAGEDY: PLEASE READ
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Ray and Al:
    You two are right. And Ray was and is right to be concerned at a time
like this. These situations are often seized upon by some to further their
personal agendas. In a time like this those of us who are not so disposed
must listen to cooler heads as we go through alternating periods of moral
outrage and grief.
    I personally am steadily growing in my admiration of these two as well
as the other members of this list. That's saying a lot because my admiration
is rather grudgingly given...more earned than gifted.
    So, while I will have my own personal thoughts, I will be guided by
others as to how I express them. And may God bless our country, our leaders
and us one and all.
Bill
PS: Before anyone starts talking about all the "foreigners" over here
remember that to us Indians all you folks are just visiting foreigners. But
we are used to you now so I guess we will let you stay as long as you mind
your manners real good.


----- Original Message -----
From: Ray Calkins <rcalkins@ITC.UCI.EDU>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Wednesday, September 12, 2001 9:13 AM
Subject: [AR] TRAGEDY: PLEASE READ


> I'd like to post an apology to the list about my request to keep the
> NYC/DC tragedy discussion off of aRocket.  I was in a great deal of
> anguish and shock, just as you were.  I just wanted it to stop, and when
> it came to aRocket, I finally saw something I could do to stop it just a
> little and acted on it.
>
> I though long and hard about that post last night, and I retract what I
> said.
>
> We are a community.  We need to share our grief to move beyond it
> and grow as a community.
>
> Just as you, I need to talk about it so I can move on.
>
> Please accept my profound apologies,
>
> Ray Calkins
Al Bradley wrote:

>We might conclude though, that heightened national security can impact
>amateur rocketry for some time!

I think this is a given.  Not just solid propellants, either.  It was tons
of burning liquid fuel that brought the towers down, not the impact. I got
a call last night that Ky's space shot has been postponed by the FAA.
Presumably they are a little busy right now and had to set priorities.

Now, more than ever, we need to come together as amateur rocketeers.
Doubtless, we will be under a lot of pressure and scrutiny over the next
weeks and months.  Our actions will have reflect the highest
professionalism if we wish to continue our way of life.

Ray


>
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 17642 invoked from network); 12 Sep 2001 16:17:13 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 12 Sep 2001 16:17:13 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 15299 invoked by uid 50005); 12 Sep 2001 16:15:18 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4157. . Clean. Processed in 0.236637 secs); 12 Sep 2001 16:15:18 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 12 Sep 2001 16:15:18 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA26478; Wed, 12 Sep 2001 08:58:30 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 89919 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 12 Sep 2001 15:58:25          +0000
Received: from femail33.sdc1.sfba.home.com ([24.254.60.23]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA26463 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed,          12 Sep 2001 08:58:25 -0700
Received: from c1649002-a.earthlink.net ([24.20.95.67]) by          femail33.sdc1.sfba.home.com (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20          201-229-121-120-20010223) with ESMTP id          <20010912155815.IDCS3869.femail33.sdc1.sfba.home.com@c1649002-a.earthlink.net>; Wed, 12 Sep 2001 08:58:15          -0700
X-Sender: forkbomb@mail.earthlink.net
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.0.2
References: <Pine.LNX.4.10.10109120705180.25831-100000@itc.uci.edu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <5.0.2.1.0.20010912085549.030ed880@mail.earthlink.net>
Date:         Wed, 12 Sep 2001 08:58:13 -0700
Reply-To: "Pierce Nichols" <forkbomb@EARTHLINK.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Pierce Nichols" <forkbomb@EARTHLINK.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] TRAGEDY: PLEASE READ
Comments: To: Bill Bullock <bpbullock@LARIBAY.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <001c01c13ba0$68b0ade0$54391442@billbull>

At 10:33 AM 9/12/2001 -0500, Bill Bullock wrote:

>PS: Before anyone starts talking about all the "foreigners" over here
>remember that to us Indians all you folks are just visiting foreigners. But
>we are used to you now so I guess we will let you stay as long as you mind
>your manners real good.


         Most of the Arabs in this country are here because either they or
their ancestors fled the kind of sons of bitches who committed yesterday's
attacks. I know most Americans realize this, at least instinctually... and
I am ashamed of those who do not.

         -p


Mars or Bust!
www.marssociety.com

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 24347 invoked from network); 12 Sep 2001 16:26:10 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 12 Sep 2001 16:26:10 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 31285 invoked by uid 50005); 12 Sep 2001 16:25:33 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpb with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.176561 secs); 12 Sep 2001 16:25:33 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 12 Sep 2001 16:25:32 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA26624; Wed, 12 Sep 2001 09:21:49 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 89948 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 12 Sep 2001 16:21:42          +0000
Received: from localhost.localdomain (IDENT:root@lauren.pconline.com          [207.191.131.70]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA26610          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 12 Sep 2001 09:21:42 -0700
Received: from artimex.com (dsl-206-145-54-162.pconline.com [206.145.54.162])          by localhost.localdomain (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f8CFIw812653          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 12 Sep 2001 10:18:58 -0500
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.77 [en] (Win98; U)
X-Accept-Language: en,pdf
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <Pine.LNX.4.10.10109120705180.25831-100000@itc.uci.edu>            <5.0.2.1.0.20010912085549.030ed880@mail.earthlink.net>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B9F8B4A.F367A9A4@artimex.com>
Date:         Wed, 12 Sep 2001 11:20:27 -0500
Reply-To: "Bob Brashear" <rjb@ARTIMEX.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Bob Brashear" <rjb@ARTIMEX.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] TRAGEDY: PLEASE READ
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Pierce Nichols wrote:

>
>
>          Most of the Arabs in this country are here because either they or
> their ancestors fled the kind of sons of bitches who committed yesterday's
> attacks. I know most Americans realize this, at least instinctually... and
> I am ashamed of those who do not.
>
>

How about not thinking at all of ethnic origin. Think of these animals as just
that. Rabid, mad animals that must be put down hard and fast. Quit buying into
the idea that ethnic origin matters at all. We are all bilaterally symmetric. We
all have a mass of jelly between our ears and what really matters is how we use
it.

Maybe if people thought more along those lines ...

--
Bob Brashear                        voice: 612-374-4643
The One-Off CD Shop Minneapolis     email: rjb@artimex.com

"The meek SHALL inherit the Earth. The rest of us are going to the stars!"

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 23846 invoked from network); 12 Sep 2001 16:55:00 -0000
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 12 Sep 2001 16:55:00 -0000
Received: (qmail 23184 invoked by uid 50005); 12 Sep 2001 16:54:07 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpe with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4157. . Clean. Processed in 0.374951 secs); 12 Sep 2001 16:54:07 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 12 Sep 2001 16:54:07 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA26711; Wed, 12 Sep 2001 09:34:50 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 89965 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 12 Sep 2001 16:33:26          +0000
Received: from smtprelay2.adelphia.net (smtprelay2.adelphia.net [64.8.25.7]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA26691 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 12 Sep 2001 09:33:25 -0700
Received: from afioretti ([64.8.33.9]) by smtprelay2.adelphia.net (Netscape          Messaging Server 4.15) with SMTP id GJK60202.GV1; Wed, 12 Sep 2001          12:33:38 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <005b01c13ba9$2e334bb0$4464a8c0@afioretti>
Date:         Wed, 12 Sep 2001 12:37:14 -0400
Reply-To: "afioretti@adelphia" <afiorettii@EXCITE.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "afioretti@adelphia" <afiorettii@EXCITE.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] TRAGEDY: PLEASE READ
Comments: To: Andrew Fioretti <afioretti@classifiedsplus.net>,          Bob Brashear <rjb@ARTIMEX.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

For every patent that has been ripped up or bought up and buried which
offers a Real alternative to oil and fossil fuels, There ya go...!!!!! Keep
alligator shoes on oil tycoons, ehhhh?  If we did what we had to do 30 years
ago when we had the BS so called oil crisis then to find a real alternative,
the mid east would be nothing more than a sand trap for golf.  Certainly not
the military or financial threat that the region represents today.


----- Original Message -----
From: "Andrew Fioretti" <afioretti@classifiedsplus.net>
To: "Bob Brashear" <rjb@ARTIMEX.COM>; <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Wednesday, September 12, 2001 12:34 PM
Subject: Re: Re: [AR] TRAGEDY: PLEASE READ


> For every patent that has been ripped up or bought up and buried which
> offers a Real alternative to oil and fossil fuels, There ya go...!!!!!
Keep
> alligator shoes on oil tycoons, ehhhh?  If we did what we had to do 30
years
> ago when we had the BS so called oil crisis then to find a real
alternative,
> the mid east would be nothing more than a sand trap for golf.  Certainly
not
> the military or financial threat that the region represents today.
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Bob Brashear" <rjb@ARTIMEX.COM>
> To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
> Sent: Wednesday, September 12, 2001 12:20 PM
> Subject: Re: [AR] TRAGEDY: PLEASE READ
>
>
> > Pierce Nichols wrote:
> >
> > >
> > >
> > >          Most of the Arabs in this country are here because either
they
> or
> > > their ancestors fled the kind of sons of bitches who committed
> yesterday's
> > > attacks. I know most Americans realize this, at least instinctually...
> and
> > > I am ashamed of those who do not.
> > >
> > >
> >
> > How about not thinking at all of ethnic origin. Think of these animals
as
> just
> > that. Rabid, mad animals that must be put down hard and fast. Quit
buying
> into
> > the idea that ethnic origin matters at all. We are all bilaterally
> symmetric. We
> > all have a mass of jelly between our ears and what really matters is how
> we use
> > it.
> >
> > Maybe if people thought more along those lines ...
> >
> > --
> > Bob Brashear                        voice: 612-374-4643
> > The One-Off CD Shop Minneapolis     email: rjb@artimex.com
> >
> > "The meek SHALL inherit the Earth. The rest of us are going to the
stars!"
> >
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 1060 invoked from network); 12 Sep 2001 17:10:45 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 12 Sep 2001 17:10:45 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 25274 invoked by uid 50005); 12 Sep 2001 17:10:00 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpa with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4157. . Clean. Processed in 0.204677 secs); 12 Sep 2001 17:10:00 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 12 Sep 2001 17:10:00 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA26850; Wed, 12 Sep 2001 09:50:06 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 89993 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 12 Sep 2001 16:48:44          +0000
Received: from mail.aros.net (mail.aros.net [207.173.16.20]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA26821 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed,          12 Sep 2001 09:48:44 -0700
Received: from biomicro.com ([208.187.122.40]) by mail.aros.net (8.11.6/8.9.3)          with ESMTP id f8CGmdr91566 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 12 Sep          2001 10:48:41 -0600 (MDT)
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.77 [en] (Win98; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <Pine.LNX.4.10.10109120705180.25831-100000@itc.uci.edu>            <5.0.2.1.0.20010912085549.030ed880@mail.earthlink.net>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B9F91EF.49C93145@biomicro.com>
Date:         Wed, 12 Sep 2001 10:48:47 -0600
Reply-To: "Mark K. Spute" <mks@BIOMICRO.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Mark K. Spute" <mks@BIOMICRO.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] TRAGEDY: PLEASE READ
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Seeking some kind solace, I was pleased to read on several Arab-American
and Muslim-American websites a universal condemnation of these awful
events and a declaration of solidarity with all Americans.  Arab and
Muslim Americans are working in operating rooms, hospitals, rescue
crews, and donating blood, time and money to help the victims.  I cannot
donate blood due to a rare illness I contracted many years ago while
volunteering in the Philippines.  These people are doing more than I can
do.  I can't even donate blood.

At the same time I was distressed to read the hate mail that some of
these organizations have recieved.  It is obvious that the hateful
invective is from some of the less intelligent members of our society.
Their spelling and grammar was atrocious, and they were so stupid that
they sent e-mail with their return adresses plainly displayed.  I hope
that it is forwarded to the authorities and the morons are tracked down
and given some serious fines and jail time.  There is little if any
difference between their mentality, and the mentality of the monsters
that perpetrated this horrible act.



Pierce Nichols wrote:
>
> At 10:33 AM 9/12/2001 -0500, Bill Bullock wrote:
>
> >PS: Before anyone starts talking about all the "foreigners" over here
> >remember that to us Indians all you folks are just visiting foreigners. But
> >we are used to you now so I guess we will let you stay as long as you mind
> >your manners real good.
>
>          Most of the Arabs in this country are here because either they or
> their ancestors fled the kind of sons of bitches who committed yesterday's
> attacks. I know most Americans realize this, at least instinctually... and
> I am ashamed of those who do not.
>
>          -p
>
> Mars or Bust!
> www.marssociety.com

--
Mark K. Spute
Senior Research Engineer
BioMicro Systems Inc.

KD7IWE,  RRS

"It is difficult to say what is impossible, for the dream of yesterday
is the hope of today and the reality of tomorrow."
     Dr. Robert H. Goddard

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 18871 invoked from network); 12 Sep 2001 17:14:58 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 12 Sep 2001 17:14:58 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 1370 invoked by uid 50005); 12 Sep 2001 17:14:21 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpb with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.19144 secs); 12 Sep 2001 17:14:21 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 12 Sep 2001 17:14:20 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA26927; Wed, 12 Sep 2001 09:57:41 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 90016 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 12 Sep 2001 16:57:39          +0000
Received: from mail.aros.net (mail.aros.net [207.173.16.20]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA26913 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Wed,          12 Sep 2001 09:57:38 -0700
Received: from biomicro.com ([208.187.122.40]) by mail.aros.net (8.11.6/8.9.3)          with ESMTP id f8CGvcr96973 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Wed, 12 Sep          2001 10:57:38 -0600 (MDT)
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.77 [en] (Win98; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <Pine.LNX.4.10.10109120705180.25831-100000@itc.uci.edu>            <5.0.2.1.0.20010912085549.030ed880@mail.earthlink.net>            <3B9F8B4A.F367A9A4@artimex.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B9F9409.3D89BDC3@biomicro.com>
Date:         Wed, 12 Sep 2001 10:57:45 -0600
Reply-To: "Mark K. Spute" <mks@BIOMICRO.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Mark K. Spute" <mks@BIOMICRO.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] TRAGEDY: PLEASE READ
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

I only hope that we capture these animals alive.  If we kill them
outright, it will only make them martyrs before their misguided
followers.  They must be captured, tried, and publicly discredited and
humiliated before their followers and supporters.  Their followers and
supporters must turn their backs on them in disgust.  Then they can be
shot, hung, or locked up for 20,000 consecutive sentences of life in
prison without parole.

Bob Brashear wrote:

> How about not thinking at all of ethnic origin. Think of these animals as just
> that. Rabid, mad animals that must be put down hard and fast.

I've said enough about this today.  It just makes me heart sick.
Somebody say something about rocketry.


--
Mark K. Spute
Senior Research Engineer
BioMicro Systems Inc.

KD7IWE,  RRS

"It is difficult to say what is impossible, for the dream of yesterday
is the hope of today and the reality of tomorrow."
     Dr. Robert H. Goddard

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 736 invoked from network); 12 Sep 2001 17:24:57 -0000
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 12 Sep 2001 17:24:57 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 16474 invoked by uid 50005); 12 Sep 2001 17:21:49 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpf with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4157. . Clean. Processed in 2.062579 secs); 12 Sep 2001 17:21:49 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 12 Sep 2001 17:21:45 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA27112; Wed, 12 Sep 2001 10:19:24 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 90054 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 12 Sep 2001 17:19:17          +0000
Received: from cicero0.cybercity.dk (cicero0.cybercity.dk [212.242.40.52]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA27098 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 12 Sep 2001 10:19:16 -0700
Received: from usr04.cybercity.dk (usr04.cybercity.dk [212.242.40.36]) by          cicero0.cybercity.dk (Postfix) with ESMTP id C4C3C102A25 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 12 Sep 2001 19:19:13 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from vip.cybercity.dk (port20.cvx1-noe.ppp.cybercity.dk          [217.157.69.213]) by usr04.cybercity.dk (8.11.2/8.11.0) with ESMTP id          f8CHJCj50533 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 12 Sep 2001 19:19:13          +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from hot@vip.cybercity.dk)
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.75 [en] (Win95; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <7d.1ac61a53.28d02cea@aol.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B9F9BA3.8F5FA7B8@vip.cybercity.dk>
Date:         Wed, 12 Sep 2001 19:30:11 +0200
Reply-To: "Hans Olaf Toft" <hot@VIP.CYBERCITY.DK>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Hans Olaf Toft" <hot@VIP.CYBERCITY.DK>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Estimated ISP for Epoxy/KN/AL propellant
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

As a brief result from the DARK tests:
c* measured (at static tests) in the range of 800m/s to 970m/s. Propellant
density ranging from 1.4g/cm^3 to 1.8g/cm^3.

Unfortuneatly, the compositions with highest c* had modest burn rates :-(

Hans Olaf Toft

Ricanakk@AOL.COM wrote:

> Craig,
>
> << Forgive me if this has already been discussed but
>  has anyone measured or have a theoretical ISP
>  value for the Epoxy/KN/Al etc propellant ?
>  If this has a half decent value then it is of
>  great interest to me due to the ease of obtaining
>  the component chemicals and simple processing. >>
>
> The best mixture that I have tested so far with my cee-star measurement
> method has the following percentages
> KN 66
> Epoxy 23
> Aluminum 10
> Iron Oxide 1
>
> which delivered a cee-star value of 3184 fps. (970 m/s). This would
> approximately give an ideal Isp of 165 sec. I would *guesstimate* delivered
> Isp to be about 10% less for a well designed nozzle.
> Burn rate measurements, however, have not yet been conducted, except at
> ambient pressure, with this burn rate being 1 mm/sec.
>
> Richard Nakka

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 5134 invoked from network); 12 Sep 2001 17:53:12 -0000
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 12 Sep 2001 17:53:12 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 2787 invoked by uid 50005); 12 Sep 2001 17:52:19 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpe with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4157. . Clean. Processed in 1.208638 secs); 12 Sep 2001 17:52:19 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 12 Sep 2001 17:52:16 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA27198; Wed, 12 Sep 2001 10:31:09 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 90073 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 12 Sep 2001 17:31:07          +0000
Received: from ewey.excite.com (ewey-rwcmta.excite.com [198.3.99.191]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA27184 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 12 Sep 2001 10:31:06 -0700
Received: from seamore.excite.com ([199.172.148.163]) by ewey.excite.com          (InterMail vM.4.01.02.39 201-229-119-122) with ESMTP id          <20010912173035.HXRB25356.ewey.excite.com@seamore.excite.com>; Wed,          12 Sep 2001 10:30:35 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Excite Inbox
X-Sender-Ip: 198.59.189.110
Message-ID:  <1644331.1000315835880.JavaMail.imail@seamore.excite.com>
Date:         Wed, 12 Sep 2001 10:30:35 -0700
Reply-To: "bill moyer" <bmoyer007@EXCITE.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "bill moyer" <bmoyer007@EXCITE.COM>
Subject:      [AR] Portales Air Show Up Date
Comments: To: daniel.barnett@cannon.af.mil, dburnam@zianet.com,          Jchandler@yucca.net, daveclary@dfn.com, rockettech@OrbitalDynamics.com
Comments: cc: stokesjosh@Hotmail.com, r.davis@yucca.net, unicorttoo@yucca.net,          Tekkenmaster3@Hotmail.com
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

To All:

     In light of the unfolding NYC/DC tragedy, and the National Responce,
this is the hardest E-mail I have ever written. Please forgive me if I seem
to be posting a message that is inappropriate in the anguish and shock, we
all are feeling as a Nation and our rocket hobby community.
      I spoke with Bobby Meeks the airport manager for the Portales
Municipal Airport. It has been decided not to cancel the airshow as a show
of support, and not to allow what has happened to disrupt our daily lives.
This decision is subject to Federal authority, and unfolding events and
could change at any time, However, for now the Show is still scheduled for
Sept. 22. There is going to be a meeting tomorrow night, and as soon as I
receve more information,I'll pass it on to all of you.
       I have been asked for the location of the Airport. It is located 4.3
miles west of Portales on Highway 70. There is a big yellow sign on the
highway, at Airport road, and the Airport borders on the highway.
        If you have any questions, comments, or criticism please e-mail me
at my private address at: Bmoyer007@rocketryonline.com

Please keep what has happened in your thoughts and prayers and lets pull
together as a community.

Bill








_______________________________________________________
Send a cool gift with your E-Card
http://www.bluemountain.com/giftcenter/

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 198 invoked from network); 12 Sep 2001 18:05:07 -0000
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 12 Sep 2001 18:05:07 -0000
Received: (qmail 4863 invoked by uid 50005); 12 Sep 2001 18:01:59 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpf with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4157. . Clean. Processed in 0.798622 secs); 12 Sep 2001 18:01:59 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 12 Sep 2001 18:01:58 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA27348; Wed, 12 Sep 2001 10:44:19 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 90108 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 12 Sep 2001 17:44:10          +0000
Received: from femail21.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail21.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.0.95.146]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA27333;          Wed, 12 Sep 2001 10:44:09 -0700
Received: from cc334751a ([65.13.214.65]) by femail21.sdc1.sfba.home.com          (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20 201-229-121-120-20010223) with SMTP id          <20010912174404.XMLK14240.femail21.sdc1.sfba.home.com@cc334751a>;          Wed, 12 Sep 2001 10:44:04 -0700
References:  <Pine.LNX.4.10.10109120719030.25831-100000@itc.uci.edu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2462.0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <004a01c13bb2$677ac0c0$6601a8c0@home.com>
Date:         Wed, 12 Sep 2001 11:43:16 -0600
Reply-To: "Brian Kosko" <bkosko1@HOME.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Brian Kosko" <bkosko1@HOME.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] U.S. at War
Comments: To: Ray Calkins <rcalkins@ITC.UCI.EDU>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Yup,

My wife just made me promise not to do any motor tests for a while.

Brian

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 14030 invoked from network); 12 Sep 2001 18:27:21 -0000
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 12 Sep 2001 18:27:21 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 7746 invoked by uid 50005); 12 Sep 2001 18:24:13 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpf with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4157. . Clean. Processed in 2.247171 secs); 12 Sep 2001 18:24:13 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 12 Sep 2001 18:24:08 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA27436; Wed, 12 Sep 2001 10:53:39 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 90128 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 12 Sep 2001 17:53:37          +0000
Received: from ewey.excite.com (ewey-rwcmta.excite.com [198.3.99.191]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA27422 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 12 Sep 2001 10:53:37 -0700
Received: from zero.excite.com ([199.172.152.241]) by ewey.excite.com          (InterMail vM.4.01.02.39 201-229-119-122) with ESMTP id          <20010912175306.ICPK25356.ewey.excite.com@zero.excite.com> for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 12 Sep 2001 10:53:06 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Excite Inbox
X-Sender-Ip: 198.59.189.110
Message-ID:  <32644776.1000317186772.JavaMail.imail@zero.excite.com>
Date:         Wed, 12 Sep 2001 10:53:06 -0700
Reply-To: "bill moyer" <bmoyer007@EXCITE.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "bill moyer" <bmoyer007@EXCITE.COM>
Subject:      [AR] Portales Airshow / mistakenly posted to list
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

 Sorry, I never intended for this message to get to the list.
 Please accept my apologies.

 Bill





_______________________________________________________
Send a cool gift with your E-Card
http://www.bluemountain.com/giftcenter/

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 6530 invoked from network); 12 Sep 2001 18:58:21 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 12 Sep 2001 18:58:21 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 29090 invoked by uid 50005); 12 Sep 2001 18:56:26 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4157. . Clean. Processed in 0.185346 secs); 12 Sep 2001 18:56:26 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 12 Sep 2001 18:56:26 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA27781; Wed, 12 Sep 2001 11:36:59 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 90176 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 12 Sep 2001 18:35:34          +0000
Received: from beckmann.eng.umd.edu (IDENT:root@beckmann.eng.umd.edu          [129.2.102.4]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA27766          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 12 Sep 2001 11:35:34 -0700
Received: from analog.eng.umd.edu (IDENT:root@analog.eng.umd.edu          [129.2.98.133]) by beckmann.eng.umd.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id          OAA29648; Wed, 12 Sep 2001 14:34:50 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from analog.eng.umd.edu (IDENT:sendmail@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by          analog.eng.umd.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id OAA02706; Wed, 12 Sep          2001 14:35:11 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from localhost (acase@localhost) by analog.eng.umd.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3)          with ESMTP id OAA02702; Wed, 12 Sep 2001 14:35:11 -0400 (EDT)
X-Authentication-Warning: analog.eng.umd.edu: acase owned process doing -bs
X-Sender: acase@analog.eng.umd.edu
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.GSO.4.21.0109121433020.2690-100000@analog.eng.umd.edu>
Date:         Wed, 12 Sep 2001 14:35:10 -0400
Reply-To: "Andrew Case" <acase@GLUE.UMD.EDU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Andrew Case" <acase@GLUE.UMD.EDU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Portales Air Show Up Date
Comments: To: bill moyer <bmoyer007@EXCITE.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <1644331.1000315835880.JavaMail.imail@seamore.excite.com>

On Wed, 12 Sep 2001, bill moyer wrote:
>       I spoke with Bobby Meeks the airport manager for the Portales
> Municipal Airport. It has been decided not to cancel the airshow as a show
> of support, and not to allow what has happened to disrupt our daily lives.

Going on as before is an act of resistance against the thugs who would
have us cower in terror. I'm in full support of this decision.

......Andrew

Andrew Case                             |
acase@plasma.umd.edu                    |
Institute for Plasma Research           |
University of Maryland, College Park    |

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 1543 invoked from network); 12 Sep 2001 19:16:46 -0000
X-Priority: 3
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 12 Sep 2001 19:16:46 -0000
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 9727 invoked by uid 50005); 12 Sep 2001 19:13:38 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpf with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4157. . Clean. Processed in 0.233658 secs); 12 Sep 2001 19:13:38 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 12 Sep 2001 19:13:37 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA27928; Wed, 12 Sep 2001 11:45:20 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 90196 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 12 Sep 2001 18:45:10          +0000
Received: from imo-m01.mx.aol.com (imo-m01.mx.aol.com [64.12.136.4]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA27911; Wed, 12 Sep 2001          11:45:09 -0700
Received: from Bbobrocket@aol.com by imo-m01.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v31_r1.7.) id          3.15f.be7ef0 (3984); Wed, 12 Sep 2001 14:44:33 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0D47_01C56B69.525FB7F0"
X-Mailer: AOL 6.0 for Windows US sub 10536
Message-ID:  <15f.be7ef0.28d10710@aol.com>
Date:         Wed, 12 Sep 2001 14:44:32 EDT
Reply-To: <Bbobrocket@AOL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <Bbobrocket@AOL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] [SUGPRO] Sorbitol group purchase
Comments: To: jaywward@gate.net, SUGPRO@itc.uci.edu
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0D47_01C56B69.525FB7F0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit


Hi Jay,
   I don't know what you consider a reasonable price but the best price I
have seen on Sorbitol is $2.50/LB  at http://www.ssaerospace.com/ for a 10
pound order.  They might give you a deal for a 100 LB order.

 Bob P.

------=_NextPart_000_0D47_01C56B69.525FB7F0
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<HTML><FONT FACE=arial,helvetica><FONT  SIZE=2>
<BR>Hi Jay,
<BR> &nbsp;&nbsp;I don't know what you consider a reasonable price but the best price I have seen on Sorbitol is $2.50/LB &nbsp;at http://www.ssaerospace.com/ for a 10 pound order. &nbsp;They might give you a deal for a 100 LB order.
<BR>
<BR> Bob P.</FONT></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0D47_01C56B69.525FB7F0--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 10382 invoked from network); 12 Sep 2001 19:38:04 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 12 Sep 2001 19:38:04 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: (qmail 16989 invoked by uid 50005); 12 Sep 2001 19:37:18 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpa with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4157. . Clean. Processed in 0.257137 secs); 12 Sep 2001 19:37:18 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 12 Sep 2001 19:37:18 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA28134; Wed, 12 Sep 2001 12:02:04 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 90220 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 12 Sep 2001 19:02:02          +0000
Received: from localhost (rcalkins@localhost) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with          ESMTP id MAA28120 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Wed, 12 Sep 2001          12:02:02 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.LNX.4.10.10109121144020.25831-100000@itc.uci.edu>
Date:         Wed, 12 Sep 2001 12:02:02 -0700
Reply-To: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
Subject:      [AR] DataQ MSDOS software
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Hello all,

I just picked up a Dataq serial card.  I'd like to find some qbasic code
to run it on the older systems I have collected as  I'd rather not put a
W'9X system in harms way if I can do a similar job with an old 286.

Does anybody out there have anything like this?

Thanks in advance,

Ray

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 12815 invoked from network); 12 Sep 2001 20:11:39 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 12 Sep 2001 20:11:39 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 24946 invoked by uid 50005); 12 Sep 2001 20:09:43 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4157. . Clean. Processed in 0.330051 secs); 12 Sep 2001 20:09:43 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 12 Sep 2001 20:09:43 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA28369; Wed, 12 Sep 2001 12:36:59 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 90277 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 12 Sep 2001 19:36:55          +0000
Received: from idsoftware.com (predator.idsoftware.com [192.246.40.34]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA28355 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Wed, 12 Sep 2001 12:36:54 -0700
Received: from [192.246.40.129] (account johnc HELO lightning.idsoftware.com)          by idsoftware.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 3.4.7) with ESMTP id 378776          for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 12 Sep 2001 14:36:54 -0500
X-Sender: johnc@mail.idsoftware.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <4.3.1.2.20010912142911.0381cef8@mail.idsoftware.com>
Date:         Wed, 12 Sep 2001 14:35:28 -0500
Reply-To: "John Carmack" <johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Carmack" <johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] DataQ MSDOS software
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <Pine.LNX.4.10.10109121144020.25831-100000@itc.uci.edu>

At 12:02 PM 9/12/2001 -0700, you wrote:
>Hello all,
>
>I just picked up a Dataq serial card.  I'd like to find some qbasic code
>to run it on the older systems I have collected as  I'd rather not put a
>W'9X system in harms way if I can do a similar job with an old 286.
>
>Does anybody out there have anything like this?
>
>Thanks in advance,
>
>Ray

Here is the code for my teststand program that communicates directly with
the two channel dataq devices (151 and 195).  You can convert to opening
and reading protocol to basic if you want.

One neat thing that I did with this was make an adapter at the serial
device so I could use serial DTR to run my solenoids or motor valves so I
didn't need to run a second cable out to the test stand.



#include <windows.h>
#include <stdio.h>
#include <conio.h>
#include <math.h>

/*

This program drives a solenoid control over DTR and
reads two channels of data from a dataq DI-195B instrument for
load cell and chamber pressure readings.

The solenoid can be driven in a pulse width modulation fashion to
test throttling.

All solenoid durations are rounded up to multiples of the serial
sample rate, which is 120 samples a second.

The output is written to a filename and copied to the clipboard so
it can be immediately pasted into excel.

The filename will append a number to make it unique.  The filename
will default to the base of the control script if not specified.

The serial FIFO control in the windows driver options should be set
to interrupt every character for accurate timings.


   pressure transucer:
         defaults to 0x8ca
         100 psi = 0x914

   74 units = 100 psi
*/

#define DATA_REGISTER   0x378
#define STATUS_REGISTER (DATA_REGISTER+1)
#define CONTROL_REGISTER        (DATA_REGISTER+2)

typedef struct {
         int             solenoid;       // 0 or 1
         int             analog1;
         int             analog2;
         int             timeDelta;
} sample_t;


#define MAX_SAMPLES             (120*60*10)     // 10 minutes...

sample_t        samples[MAX_SAMPLES];
int                     numSamples;

HANDLE  hDataq;

// psi = ( analog + PRESSURE_BIAS ) * PRESSURE_SCALE
// get these two numbers to calibrate
#define PRESSURE_0              2457
#define PRESSURE_400    3111

#define PRESSURE_BIAS   (-PRESSURE_0)
#define PRESSURE_SCALE  ((PRESSURE_400-PRESSURE_0)/400.0)


// pounds = ( analog + FORCE_BIAS ) * FORCE_SCALE
double  FORCE_BIAS, FORCE_SCALE;

typedef enum {
         CAP_FORCE,
         CAP_PRESSURE,
         CAP_BOTH
} capture_t;

capture_t       capture;

DCB                     dcb;

/*
===========
SetDTR
===========
*/
void SetDTR( int on ) {
         if ( !hDataq ) {
                 return;
         }
         if ( on ) {
                 dcb.fDtrControl = DTR_CONTROL_ENABLE;
         } else {
                 dcb.fDtrControl = DTR_CONTROL_DISABLE;
         }
         SetCommState(hDataq, &dcb);
}


/*
================
Sys_Milliseconds

This returns msec, but subtracts off an initial value
so we don't have to worry about the wrap around case.
================
*/
int Sys_Milliseconds( void ) {
         int             sys_curtime;
         static  int initialized;
         static  int     sys_timeBase;

         if (!initialized) {
                 sys_timeBase = timeGetTime() - 1;
                 initialized = 1;
         }
         sys_curtime = timeGetTime() - sys_timeBase;

         return sys_curtime;
}



/*
==============
WaitForSample

Wait until we get a valid sample, then store it off.

If solenoid is -1, it won't be stored
==============
*/
void    WaitForDoubleSample( int solenoid ) {
         unsigned char   c;
         int             msg[4];
         int             count;
         int             startTime;
         int             currentTime;
         int             timeDelta;
         int             a1, a2;
         int             digital;
         static int lastFinishTime;
         int             numRead;

         startTime = Sys_Milliseconds();

         count = 0;
         while( count != 4 ) {
                 currentTime = Sys_Milliseconds();
                 // allow it to go for a long time for debugging
                 if ( currentTime - startTime > 2000 ) {
                         SetDTR( 0 );
                         printf( "\nSerial timed out, exiting.\n" );
                         exit( 0 );
                 }

                 if ( _kbhit() ) {
                         SetDTR( 0 );
                         printf( "\nkey pressed, exiting.\n" );
                         exit( 0 );
                 }

                 // try to read something from the serial port
                 if ( !ReadFile( hDataq, &c, 1, &numRead, NULL ) ) {
                         continue;
                 }

                 if ( numRead == 0 ) {
                         continue;
                 }

                 // the first character will have the low bit set
                 if ( count == 0 && ( c & 1 ) ) {
                         // this should only happen when we first start up
                         continue;
                 }

                 msg[count&3] = c;
                 count++;
         }

         if ( solenoid == -1 ) {
                 return;
         }

         // timeDetla should always be the same +/- one
         currentTime = Sys_Milliseconds();
         timeDelta = currentTime - lastFinishTime;
         lastFinishTime = currentTime;

         // this should be a valid sample
         if ( !( msg[1] & 1 ) | !( msg[2] & 1 ) | !( msg[3] & 1 ) ) {
                 printf("bad sequence: %2x %2x %2x %2x\n", msg[0], msg[1],
msg[2], msg[3] );
         }


         a1 = ( msg[0] >> 3 ) | ( ( msg[1] & ~1 ) << 4 );
         a2 = ( msg[2] >> 3 ) | ( ( msg[3] & ~1 ) << 4 );

         // we don't use the digital input bits for anything
         digital = ( ( msg[0] & 2 ) >> 1 ) | ( msg[2] & 2 );

         if ( numSamples == MAX_SAMPLES ) {
                 return;
         }
         samples[numSamples].analog1 = a1;
         samples[numSamples].analog2 = a2;
         samples[numSamples].solenoid = solenoid;
         samples[numSamples].timeDelta = timeDelta;
         numSamples++;
}


/*
=================
WaitForSample
=================
*/
void    WaitForSample( int solenoid ) {
         unsigned char   c;
         int             msg[4];
         int             count;
         int             startTime;
         int             currentTime;
         int             timeDelta;
         int             a1;
         int             digital;
         static int lastFinishTime;
         int             numRead;

         if ( capture == CAP_BOTH ) {
                 WaitForDoubleSample( solenoid );
                 return;
         }

         startTime = Sys_Milliseconds();

         count = 0;
         while( count != 2 ) {
                 currentTime = Sys_Milliseconds();
                 // allow it to go for a long time for debugging
                 if ( currentTime - startTime > 20000 ) {
                         SetDTR( 0 );
                         printf( "\nSerial timed out, exiting.\n" );
                         exit( 0 );
                 }

                 if ( _kbhit() ) {
                         SetDTR( 0 );
                         printf( "\nkey pressed, exiting.\n" );
                         exit( 0 );
                 }

                 // try to read something from the serial port
                 if ( !ReadFile( hDataq, &c, 1, &numRead, NULL ) ) {
                         continue;
                 }

                 // the first character will have the low bit set
                 if ( count == 0 && ( c & 1 ) ) {
                         // this should only happen when we first start up
                         continue;
                 }

                 msg[count&1] = c;
                 count++;
         }

         if ( solenoid == -1 ) {
                 return;
         }

         // timeDetla should always be the same +/- one
         currentTime = Sys_Milliseconds();
         timeDelta = currentTime - lastFinishTime;
         lastFinishTime = currentTime;

         // this should be a valid sample
         if ( !( msg[1] & 1 ) ) {
                 printf("bad sequence: %2x %2x %2x %2x\n", msg[0], msg[1],
msg[2], msg[3] );
         }


         a1 = ( msg[0] >> 3 ) | ( ( msg[1] & ~1 ) << 4 );

         // we don't use the digital input bits for anything
         digital = ( ( msg[0] & 2 ) >> 1 ) | ( msg[2] & 2 );

         if ( numSamples == MAX_SAMPLES ) {
                 return;
         }
         samples[numSamples].analog1 = a1;
         samples[numSamples].analog2 = 0;
         samples[numSamples].solenoid = solenoid;
         samples[numSamples].timeDelta = timeDelta;
         numSamples++;
}


/*
==============
Drive
==============
*/
int Drive( int on, int off, int repeat ) {
         int             i;
         int             samplesPerSecond;

         if ( capture == CAP_BOTH ) {
                 samplesPerSecond = 120;
         } else {
                 samplesPerSecond = 240;
         }

         // convert on and off from msec into serial counts
         on = (int)ceil( on * samplesPerSecond / 1000.0 );
         off = (int)ceil( off * samplesPerSecond / 1000.0 );

         printf( "%i on, %i off, %i repeat: ", on, off, repeat );

         while( repeat-- ) {
                 // print a pacifier
                 printf( "." );

                 if ( on > 0 ) {
                         SetDTR( 1 );
                         for ( i = 0 ; i < on ; i++ ) {
                                 WaitForSample( 1 );
                         }
                 }

                 if ( off > 0 ) {
                         SetDTR( 0 );
                         for ( i = 0 ; i < off ; i++ ) {
                                 WaitForSample( 0 );
                         }
                 }
         }

         printf( "\n" );

         SetDTR( 0 );

         return 1;
}


/*
===============
InitDataq
===============
*/
void InitDataq( void ) {
         COMMTIMEOUTS    timeouts;
         int             numWritten;
         char    cmd[32];


         // timeout to check for aborting
         memset( &timeouts, 0, sizeof( timeouts ) );
         timeouts.ReadTotalTimeoutConstant = 50;
         SetCommTimeouts( hDataq, &timeouts );

         // send a break signal
         EscapeCommFunction( hDataq, SETBREAK );
         Sleep( 250 );
         EscapeCommFunction( hDataq, CLRBREAK );

         // send the reset command
         cmd[0] = 'R';
         WriteFile( hDataq, cmd, 1, &numWritten, NULL );
         Sleep( 100 );

         // send a break signal
         EscapeCommFunction( hDataq, SETBREAK );
         Sleep( 250 );
         EscapeCommFunction( hDataq, CLRBREAK );


         // send the command to enable the channel(s) we want
         cmd[0] = 'C';
         WriteFile( hDataq, cmd, 1, &numWritten, NULL );
         Sleep( 100 );

         switch( capture ) {
         case CAP_FORCE:
                 cmd[0] = '0';
                 break;
         case CAP_PRESSURE:
                 cmd[0] = '1';
                 break;
         case CAP_BOTH:
                 cmd[0] = '2';
                 break;
         }

         WriteFile( hDataq, cmd, 1, &numWritten, NULL );
         Sleep( 100 );

#if 0
         // send a break signal
         EscapeCommFunction( hDataq, SETBREAK );
         Sleep( 250 );
         EscapeCommFunction( hDataq, CLRBREAK );

         // set the speed counter
         cmd[0] = 'L';
         WriteFile( hDataq, cmd, 1, &numWritten, NULL );
         Sleep( 100 );

         cmd[0] = 20;
         WriteFile( hDataq, cmd, 1, &numWritten, NULL );
         Sleep( 100 );
#endif

         // send a break signal
         EscapeCommFunction( hDataq, SETBREAK );
         Sleep( 250 );
         EscapeCommFunction( hDataq, CLRBREAK );

         // send the command to start ADC
         cmd[0] = 'S';
         WriteFile( hDataq, cmd, 1, &numWritten, NULL );
         Sleep( 100 );

         cmd[0] = '1';
         WriteFile( hDataq, cmd, 1, &numWritten, NULL );
}



/*
==============
CopyFileToClipboard
==============
*/
void CopyFileToClipboard( const char *filename ) {
         FILE    *f;
         int             len;
     HGLOBAL hglbCopy;
     LPTSTR  lptstrCopy;

         f = fopen( filename, "r" );
         if ( !f ) {
                 printf( "CopyFileToClipboard: couldn't open %s\n", filename );
                 return;
         }
         fseek( f, 0, SEEK_END );
         len = ftell( f );
         fseek( f, 0, SEEK_SET );

     hglbCopy = GlobalAlloc( GMEM_DDESHARE, len + 1 );
     if ( hglbCopy == NULL ) {
                 printf( "CopyFileToClipboard: couldn't allocate clipboard
memory\n" );
         return;
     }
     lptstrCopy = GlobalLock( hglbCopy );

         // zero the entire thing in case fread reads less
         memset( lptstrCopy, 0, len+1 );

         fread( lptstrCopy, len, 1, f );

         fclose( f );

         // now paste it to the windows clipboard
         if ( !OpenClipboard( NULL ) ) {
                 printf( "CopyFileToClipboard: OpenClipboard failed.\n" );
                 return;
         }

         EmptyClipboard();

     // Place the handle on the clipboard.
     SetClipboardData( CF_TEXT, hglbCopy );

         CloseClipboard();

     GlobalUnlock( hglbCopy );

         GlobalFree( hglbCopy );
}

/*
==============
WriteLogFile
==============
*/
void WriteLogFile( const char *baseName ) {
         int             i;
         FILE    *out;
         char    filename[1024];

         // open output filename
         for ( i = 0 ; i < 9999 ; i++ ) {
                 sprintf( filename, "%s%i.adc", baseName, i+1 );
                 out = fopen( filename, "r" );
                 if ( !out ) {
                         break;
                 }
         }

         printf( "Writing to %s\n", filename );
         if ( out ) {
                 printf( "Couldn't open file\n" );
                 return;
         }
         out = fopen( filename, "w" );
         if ( !out ) {
                 printf( "Couldn't open file for writing\n" );
                 return;
         }

         // print tab separated columns for excel
         for ( i = 0 ; i < numSamples ; i++ ) {
                 double  pounds;
                 double  psi;

                 switch( capture ) {
                 case CAP_FORCE:
                         pounds = ( samples[i].analog1 + FORCE_BIAS ) *
FORCE_SCALE;
                         fprintf( out, "%i\t%f\n", samples[i].solenoid * 100,
                                 pounds );
                         break;
                 case CAP_PRESSURE:
                         psi = ( samples[i].analog1 + PRESSURE_BIAS ) *
PRESSURE_SCALE;
                         fprintf( out, "%i\t%f\n", samples[i].solenoid * 100,
                                 psi );
                         break;
                 case CAP_BOTH:
                         psi = ( samples[i].analog1 + PRESSURE_BIAS ) *
PRESSURE_SCALE;
                         pounds = ( samples[i].analog2 + FORCE_BIAS ) *
FORCE_SCALE;
                         if ( psi < 0 ) {
                                 psi = 0;        // in case the load cell
wasn't connected
                         }
                         fprintf( out, "%i\t%f\t%f\n", samples[i].solenoid
* 100,
                                 pounds, psi );
                         break;
                 }
         }

         fclose( out );

         // also copy it to the clipboard
         CopyFileToClipboard( filename );
}

/*
================
ScriptFile

The file should contain lines with:

<on msec> <off msec> <repeat>
'close' will stop all future logging
all other text is skipped
================
*/
void ScriptFile( const char *filename, const char *logFileName ) {
         FILE    *f;
         char    cmd[1024];
         int             r;
         int             on, off, repeat;
         int             i;

         f = fopen( filename, "r" );
         if ( !f ) {
                 printf( "Couldn't open '%s'\n", filename );
                 return;
         }

         // read the file, so the disk IO happens before timing
         setvbuf( f, NULL, _IOFBF, 16384 );
         r = fgetc( f );
         ungetc( r, f );


         // make sure we are getting samples properly
         PurgeComm( hDataq, PURGE_RXCLEAR );

         for ( i = 0 ; i < 10 ; i++ ) {
                 WaitForSample( -1 );
         }

         while( 1 ) {
                 // read the next command
                 if ( !fgets( cmd, sizeof( cmd ), f ) ) {
                         break;
                 }

                 // check for halt
                 if ( !stricmp( cmd, "vent\n" ) ) {
                         fclose( f );

                         // write the data out
                         WriteLogFile( logFileName );
                         printf( "\nventing.\n" );

                         SetDTR( 1 );
                         for ( i = 0 ; i < 20 ; i++ ) {
                                 if ( _kbhit() ) {
                                         break;
                                 }
                                 Sleep( 1000 );
                         }
                         SetDTR( 0 );
                         return;
                 }

                 // skip comments
                 if ( cmd[0] < '0' || cmd[0] > '9' ) {
                         continue;
                 }

                 // get the numbers
                 r = sscanf( cmd, "%i %i %i", &on, &off, &repeat );
                 if ( r != 3 ) {
                         printf( "BAD SCRIPT LINE: %s\n", cmd );
                         continue;
                 }

                 if ( !Drive( on, off, repeat ) ) {
                         break;
                 }
         }

         fclose( f );
         SetDTR( 0 );


         // write the data out
         WriteLogFile( logFileName );
}


/*
==============
PrintMode

Just print the sensor output to the console
==============
*/
void PrintMode( void ) {
         int             i;
         double  pounds;
         double  psi;

         // make sure we are getting samples properly
         PurgeComm( hDataq, PURGE_RXCLEAR );

         for ( i = 0 ; i < 10 ; i++ ) {
                 WaitForSample( -1 );
         }

         while( 1 ) {
                 WaitForSample( 0 );

                 switch( capture ) {
                 case CAP_FORCE:
                         pounds = ( samples[0].analog1 + FORCE_BIAS ) *
FORCE_SCALE;
                         printf( "%8.1f pounds\n", pounds );
                         break;
                 case CAP_PRESSURE:
                         psi = ( samples[0].analog1 + PRESSURE_BIAS ) *
PRESSURE_SCALE;
                         printf( "%6.1f psi\n", psi );
                         break;
                 case CAP_BOTH:
                         psi = ( samples[0].analog1 + PRESSURE_BIAS ) *
PRESSURE_SCALE;
                         pounds = ( samples[0].analog2 + FORCE_BIAS ) *
FORCE_SCALE;
                         printf( "%8.1f pounds\t%6.1f psi\n", pounds, psi );
                         break;
                 }

                 numSamples = 0; // allow it to run forever
         }
}

/*
==============
Usage
==============
*/
void Usage( void ) {
         printf( "pwm2 [-print] [-log logfile] [-100 | -500 | -3000 |
-10000] [-pressure] [-force] <control file>\n" );
         printf( "or: pwm2 -pulse <msec>\n" );
         printf( "Pressing a key during a run will abort it.\n" );
}

/*
==============
main


==============
*/
int main( int argc, char **argv ) {
         OSVERSIONINFO   osversion;
         int             ret;
         int             arg;
         const char      *logFile;
         int             printMode;

         // if we are running on NT, we can't actually write the port
         osversion.dwOSVersionInfoSize = sizeof( osversion );
         GetVersionEx( &osversion );
         if ( osversion.dwPlatformId == VER_PLATFORM_WIN32_NT ) {
                 printf( "Can't hit parallel port on NT\n" );
                 return -1;
         }

         // crank our scheduling priorities all the way up
         ret = SetPriorityClass( GetCurrentProcess(),
REALTIME_PRIORITY_CLASS );
         if ( !ret ) {
                 printf( "SetPriorityClass failed\n" );
                 return -1;
         }

         ret = SetThreadPriority( GetCurrentThread(),
THREAD_PRIORITY_TIME_CRITICAL );
         if ( !ret ) {
                 printf( "SetThreadPriority failed\n" );
                 return -1;
         }

         // check for options
         if ( argc < 2 ) {
                 Usage();
                 return -1;
         }

         // open the serial A/D device
         printf( "opening dataq DI-195B on COM1.\n" );

         // open serial port
         hDataq = CreateFile( "COM1",
                                                 GENERIC_READ | GENERIC_WRITE,
                                                 0,
                                                 0,
                                                 OPEN_EXISTING,
                                                 0,
                                                 0);
         if ( hDataq == INVALID_HANDLE_VALUE ) {
                 char    *lpMsgBuf;

                 FormatMessage(
                         FORMAT_MESSAGE_ALLOCATE_BUFFER |
                         FORMAT_MESSAGE_FROM_SYSTEM |
                         FORMAT_MESSAGE_IGNORE_INSERTS,
                         NULL,
                         GetLastError(),
                         MAKELANGID(LANG_NEUTRAL, SUBLANG_DEFAULT), //
Default language
                         (LPTSTR) &lpMsgBuf,
                         0,
                         NULL
                 );
                 printf( "CreateFile failed for COM1: %s\n ", (const char
*)lpMsgBuf );
                 exit( 1 );
         }
         // fill in our parameters
         FillMemory(&dcb, sizeof(dcb), 0);
         dcb.DCBlength = sizeof(dcb);

         // dataq settings
         dcb.BaudRate = CBR_4800;
         dcb.fBinary = TRUE;
         dcb.Parity = NOPARITY;
         dcb.StopBits = ONESTOPBIT;
         dcb.ByteSize = 8;
         // power to the dataq DI-151RS is provided over both DTR and RTS
         // but we are doing it with wiring and using DTR for the solenoid
//      dcb.fDtrControl = DTR_CONTROL_ENABLE;
         dcb.fDtrControl = DTR_CONTROL_DISABLE;
         dcb.fRtsControl = RTS_CONTROL_ENABLE;

         // set them
         if ( !SetCommState(hDataq, &dcb) ) {
                 // Error in SetCommState. Possibly a problem with the
communications
         // DCB is ready for use.
                 printf( "SetCommState failed\n" );
                 exit( 1 );
         }



         logFile = "unnamed";
         printMode = 0;
         capture = CAP_BOTH;

         // default to 500 lb load cell calibration
         FORCE_BIAS              = -2051;
         FORCE_SCALE             = 0.2086;

         for ( arg = 1 ; arg < argc ; arg++ ) {
                 if ( argv[arg][0] != '-' ) {
                         break;
                 }
                 if ( !strcmp( argv[arg], "-100" ) ) {
                         FORCE_BIAS              = -2014;
                         FORCE_SCALE             = 0.105;
                         continue;
                 }
                 if ( !strcmp( argv[arg], "-500" ) ) {
                         // default already set
                         continue;
                 }
                 if ( !strcmp( argv[arg], "-3000" ) ) {
                         FORCE_BIAS              = -2057;
                         FORCE_SCALE             = 1.112;
                         continue;
                 }
                 if ( !strcmp( argv[arg], "-10000" ) ) {
                         FORCE_BIAS              = -2018;
                         FORCE_SCALE             = 11.681;
                         continue;
                 }


                 if ( !strcmp( argv[arg], "-log" ) ) {
                         if ( argc <= arg + 1 ) {
                                 Usage();
                                 return -1;
                         }
                         logFile = argv[ arg+1 ];
                         arg++;
                         continue;
                 }
                 if ( !strcmp( argv[arg], "-both" ) ) {
                         capture = CAP_BOTH;
                         continue;
                 }
                 if ( !strcmp( argv[arg], "-force" ) ) {
                         capture = CAP_FORCE;
                         continue;
                 }
                 if ( !strcmp( argv[arg], "-pressure" ) ) {
                         capture = CAP_PRESSURE;
                         continue;
                 }
                 if ( !strcmp( argv[arg], "-print" ) ) {
                         printMode = 1;
                         continue;
                 }
                 if ( !strcmp( argv[arg], "-pulse" ) ) {
                         int             on;


                         // just pulse on briefly
                         if ( arg == argc - 1 ) {
                                 on = 100;
                         } else {
                                 on = atoi( argv[arg+1] );
                         }
                         printf( "activating for %i msec\n", on );
                         SetDTR( 1 );
                         Sleep( on );
                         SetDTR( 0 );
                         return 0;
                 }

                 Usage();
                 return -1;
         }

         if ( arg != argc-1 && !printMode ) {
                 Usage();
                 return -1;
         }

         // start the data sampling
         InitDataq();

         if ( printMode ) {
                 PrintMode();
         } else {
                 // execute the script file
                 ScriptFile( argv[arg], logFile );
         }

         return 0;
}

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 16892 invoked from network); 12 Sep 2001 20:12:35 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 12 Sep 2001 20:12:35 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 29647 invoked by uid 50005); 12 Sep 2001 20:09:28 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpf with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4157. . Clean. Processed in 0.215461 secs); 12 Sep 2001 20:09:28 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 12 Sep 2001 20:09:27 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA28484; Wed, 12 Sep 2001 12:54:30 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 90304 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 12 Sep 2001 19:54:21          +0000
Received: from femail29.sdc1.sfba.home.com ([24.254.60.19]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA28469 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed,          12 Sep 2001 12:54:21 -0700
Received: from c1649002-a.earthlink.net ([24.20.95.67]) by          femail29.sdc1.sfba.home.com (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20          201-229-121-120-20010223) with ESMTP id          <20010912195413.SKMR9916.femail29.sdc1.sfba.home.com@c1649002-a.earthlink.net>; Wed, 12 Sep 2001 12:54:13          -0700
X-Sender: forkbomb@mail.earthlink.net
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.0.2
References: <3B9E7160.E1507CF2@vip.cybercity.dk>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <5.0.2.1.0.20010912125354.025adde0@mail.earthlink.net>
Date:         Wed, 12 Sep 2001 12:54:12 -0700
Reply-To: "Pierce Nichols" <forkbomb@EARTHLINK.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Pierce Nichols" <forkbomb@EARTHLINK.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Epoxy/KNO3 motor results
Comments: To: Jeff Grady <jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <000001c13aff$7096d850$0200a8c0@prestige.net>

At 04:22 PM 9/11/2001 -0400, Jeff Grady wrote:
>Hans,
>
>         I'm one of those Americans who have not adjusted to the metric
> system.
>Could you convert bar to psi (or provide a conversion formula)? The Al
>certainly made a difference!


         1 bar = 1 atmosphere = 14.7 psi

         -p



>Jeff Grady
>Atlanta, Georgia
>UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
>
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@itc.uci.edu]On
>Behalf Of Hans Olaf Toft
>Sent: Tuesday, September 11, 2001 4:18 PM
>To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
>Subject: Re: [AR] Epoxy/KNO3 motor results
>
>
>The tests I made with the Epoxy 27% Aluminium: 2% Sulfur: 5% KNO3: 66%
>composition had a chamber pressure of 55 bar at kn = 1200. I made a test for
>comparison, removing the 2% Al and ended up with 14 bar chamber pressure at
>same
>kn. Sulfur alone apparently has very limited influence on the burn rate - Al
>has. The main function of the S is to improve ignition characteristics.
>
>Hans Olaf Toft
>
>
>Jeff Grady wrote:
>
> > Lacking an immediate source for Al, I mixed up a batch of 75/25/5
> > (KNO3/Epoxy/Sulfur) last night and was hopeful after seeing a small lump
>of
> > this hardened fuel burn. It burned steadily and quite hot (based on the
>heat
> > I felt a few feet away). My idea of "vigorously" may not fit the
>definition
> > most of you folks hold. The mixture resembles yellow play dough in both
>look
> > and feel, until it sets up. Figuring it may burn a bit faster under
> > pressure, I made another batch, same as the first. Pressed the fuel into a
> > spent Estes A10 casing that seemed solid enough to use and closed off the
> > big end w/pure epoxy. I used the A10 because I can get away with a small
> > CATO in the back yard. Any bigger and I'd have to go a few miles down the
> > road.
> >
> > Later today, I fired the motor and was really disappointed. The burn rate
> > was not impressive at all. I'm sure one problem was burn surface. The
>epoxy
> > "dough" was setting up fast while I was packing the dough into the casing.
> > When I tried to push a small skewer stick in through the nozzle to make a
> > core, it only went about a 1/4" deep. So, basically I had an end burner.
>It
> > burned for nearly 1.5 minutes before the casing burned through -
>definitely
> > not a "vigorous" burn. After the casing cooled, I walked over to take a
> > closer look. The nozzle had a "spout" rising up (motor was fired nozzle
>up)
> > about 1" from the nozzle. Seems the resin was not fully consumed(???).
> >
> > Next I'll try some other epoxies I have and try to find some Al powder.
>Any
> > less epoxy or any more KNO3 makes mixing a TOUGH job. Any suggestions?
> >
> > Jeff

Mars or Bust!
www.marssociety.com

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 28005 invoked from network); 12 Sep 2001 20:35:32 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 12 Sep 2001 20:35:32 -0000
Received: (qmail 7014 invoked by uid 50005); 12 Sep 2001 20:32:58 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4157. . Clean. Processed in 0.250509 secs); 12 Sep 2001 20:32:58 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 12 Sep 2001 20:32:58 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA28621; Wed, 12 Sep 2001 13:16:41 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 90331 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 12 Sep 2001 20:16:35          +0000
Received: from c002.snv.cp.net (c002-h003.c002.snv.cp.net [209.228.32.167]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id NAA28607 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 12 Sep 2001 13:16:35 -0700
Received: (cpmta 3746 invoked from network); 12 Sep 2001 13:16:03 -0700
Received: from 1Cust56.tnt4.williamsburg.va.da.uu.net (HELO default)          (63.39.121.56) by smtp.peoplepc.com (209.228.32.167) with SMTP; 12          Sep 2001 13:16:03 -0700
X-Sent: 12 Sep 2001 20:16:03 GMT
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0D4C_01C56B69.526954E0"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4807.1700
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <00a101c13bc9$8c3603e0$3f50153f@default>
Date:         Wed, 12 Sep 2001 16:28:48 -0400
Reply-To: "David Muesing" <dmuesing@PEOPLEPC.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "David Muesing" <dmuesing@PEOPLEPC.COM>
Subject:      [AR] Polyester Resin/KN/??
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0D4C_01C56B69.526954E0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Any comments on the use of Polyester resin instead of Epoxy? It is quite =
a bit cheaper and the cure rate is adjustable with the percentage of =
MEKP.

Dave Muesing

------=_NextPart_000_0D4C_01C56B69.526954E0
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Diso-8859-1">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 5.50.4807.2300" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=3DOCRA color=3D#0000ff>Any comments on the use of =
Polyester resin=20
instead of Epoxy? It is quite a bit cheaper and the cure rate is =
adjustable with=20
the percentage of MEKP.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DOCRA color=3D#0000ff></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DOCRA color=3D#0000ff>Dave =
Muesing</FONT></DIV></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0D4C_01C56B69.526954E0--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 23312 invoked from network); 12 Sep 2001 21:41:02 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 12 Sep 2001 21:41:02 -0000
Received: (qmail 10233 invoked by uid 50005); 12 Sep 2001 21:40:23 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpb with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.286997 secs); 12 Sep 2001 21:40:23 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 12 Sep 2001 21:40:23 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA29025; Wed, 12 Sep 2001 14:21:04 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 90400 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 12 Sep 2001 21:20:49          +0000
Received: from castor.ridgenet.net (IDENT:root@castor.ridgenet.net          [199.120.150.29]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA29011          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 12 Sep 2001 14:20:49 -0700
Received: from kristinscomp (pm240.ridgenet.net [204.154.246.240]) by          castor.ridgenet.net (8.11.0/8.11.0) with SMTP id f8CLBKS22736; Wed,          12 Sep 2001 14:11:20 -0700
References: <Pine.LNX.4.10.10109120705180.25831-100000@itc.uci.edu>                      <5.0.2.1.0.20010912085549.030ed880@mail.earthlink.net>                      <3B9F8B4A.F367A9A4@artimex.com>  <3B9F9409.3D89BDC3@biomicro.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <002f01c13bd1$fd752100$1b30fea9@kristinscomp>
Date:         Wed, 12 Sep 2001 14:29:21 -0700
Reply-To: "Kristin & David Hall" <thehalls@RIDGENET.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Kristin & David Hall" <thehalls@RIDGENET.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] TRAGEDY: PLEASE READ
Comments: To: "Mark K. Spute" <mks@BIOMICRO.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

I would disagree.  Kill them AND their followers AND their supporters.

--
Dave and/or Kristin Hall
----- Original Message -----
From: Mark K. Spute <mks@BIOMICRO.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Wednesday, September 12, 2001 9:57 AM
Subject: Re: [AR] TRAGEDY: PLEASE READ


> I only hope that we capture these animals alive.  If we kill them
> outright, it will only make them martyrs before their misguided
> followers.  They must be captured, tried, and publicly discredited and
> humiliated before their followers and supporters.  Their followers and
> supporters must turn their backs on them in disgust.  Then they can be
> shot, hung, or locked up for 20,000 consecutive sentences of life in
> prison without parole.
>
> Bob Brashear wrote:
>
> > How about not thinking at all of ethnic origin. Think of these animals
as just
> > that. Rabid, mad animals that must be put down hard and fast.
>
> I've said enough about this today.  It just makes me heart sick.
> Somebody say something about rocketry.
>
>
> --
> Mark K. Spute
> Senior Research Engineer
> BioMicro Systems Inc.
>
> KD7IWE,  RRS
>
> "It is difficult to say what is impossible, for the dream of yesterday
> is the hope of today and the reality of tomorrow."
>      Dr. Robert H. Goddard
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 23870 invoked from network); 12 Sep 2001 21:55:32 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 12 Sep 2001 21:55:32 -0000
Received: (qmail 2761 invoked by uid 50005); 12 Sep 2001 21:52:56 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4157. . Clean. Processed in 0.293252 secs); 12 Sep 2001 21:52:56 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 12 Sep 2001 21:52:55 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA29082; Wed, 12 Sep 2001 14:24:36 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 90416 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 12 Sep 2001 21:24:35          +0000
Received: from castor.ridgenet.net (IDENT:root@castor.ridgenet.net          [199.120.150.29]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA29068          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 12 Sep 2001 14:24:34 -0700
Received: from kristinscomp (pm240.ridgenet.net [204.154.246.240]) by          castor.ridgenet.net (8.11.0/8.11.0) with SMTP id f8CLFVS23284; Wed,          12 Sep 2001 14:15:31 -0700
References:  <F177KlNAOM8ZO2Yyp170000d0ae@hotmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <003d01c13bd2$92f0a560$1b30fea9@kristinscomp>
Date:         Wed, 12 Sep 2001 14:33:32 -0700
Reply-To: "Kristin & David Hall" <thehalls@RIDGENET.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Kristin & David Hall" <thehalls@RIDGENET.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] safety
Comments: To: John Dom <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

> Has physical cabin separation of the pilot section in civil aircraft not
> become a must now? Opinions?

One would hope.  I have often wondered why it was even possible to get to
the cockpit from the passenger compartment.  I have often advocated that
there should be a significant (read: armored) bulkhead between the
passengers and the cockpit with NO door.  IE, the only way to get from the
passenger compartment to the cockpit involves leaving the plane and coming
back in another door.  In addition, I've felt that the pressurization of the
passenger compartment and the cockpit should be separate.  That is to say
that in the event of a highjacking attempt, standard proceedure should be
for the pilots (who are safely in the "next room") to depressurize the
passenger compartment.  After all, how effective do you think you could be
as a highjacker when you're passed out on the floor.....

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 13344 invoked from network); 12 Sep 2001 22:00:07 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 12 Sep 2001 22:00:07 -0000
Received: (qmail 3906 invoked by uid 50005); 12 Sep 2001 21:58:10 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4157. . Clean. Processed in 1.199504 secs); 12 Sep 2001 21:58:10 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 12 Sep 2001 21:58:08 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA29270; Wed, 12 Sep 2001 14:41:02 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 90464 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 12 Sep 2001 21:41:00          +0000
Received: from femail11.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail11.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.0.95.107]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA29256          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 12 Sep 2001 14:41:00 -0700
Received: from cc334751a ([65.13.214.65]) by femail11.sdc1.sfba.home.com          (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20 201-229-121-120-20010223) with SMTP id          <20010912214059.HMGQ4107.femail11.sdc1.sfba.home.com@cc334751a>; Wed,          12 Sep 2001 14:40:59 -0700
References: <Pine.LNX.4.10.10109120705180.25831-100000@itc.uci.edu>                        <5.0.2.1.0.20010912085549.030ed880@mail.earthlink.net>                         <3B9F8B4A.F367A9A4@artimex.com>  <3B9F9409.3D89BDC3@biomicro.com>             <002f01c13bd1$fd752100$1b30fea9@kristinscomp>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2462.0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <004e01c13bd3$8070d120$6601a8c0@home.com>
Date:         Wed, 12 Sep 2001 15:40:11 -0600
Reply-To: "Brian Kosko" <bkosko1@HOME.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Brian Kosko" <bkosko1@HOME.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] TRAGEDY: PLEASE READ
Comments: To: Kristin & David Hall <thehalls@RIDGENET.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Roger that Dave! As we used to say in the artillery; kill them all and let
God sort'em out.

We really need a strategy to take out the 'leaders'. Look at our problems:
Saddam, Slobadon, Bin Ladin, Ghadaffi, etc. These are one man countries, or
organization in Bin Ladin's case. Get rid of them and a large part of the
problem is solved. Naysayers like to say another will just take their place,
but I'd contend that's not too likely. These sorts tend to not have anyone
around that has anywhere near their grasp on power. Certainly assassination
is possible, but it would take fairly massive efforts to penetrate their
security. In the case of yesterday's attack; I certainly hope we go through
with the massive approach. But in the future how about pursuing a parallel
path: a more aggressive reward policy. What if the U.S. put a $500,000,000
price on their head? How much sleep would they get after that? How long till
one of their comrades decided to go for the brass ring? And given the costs
we've run up dealing with these animals, the reward cost would be a bargain.

Brian

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 25263 invoked from network); 12 Sep 2001 22:02:47 -0000
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 12 Sep 2001 22:02:47 -0000
Received: (qmail 19547 invoked by uid 50005); 12 Sep 2001 22:01:51 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpe with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4157. . Clean. Processed in 2.0322 secs); 12 Sep 2001 22:01:51 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 12 Sep 2001 22:01:47 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA29354; Wed, 12 Sep 2001 14:45:51 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 90487 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 12 Sep 2001 21:45:49          +0000
Received: from cablecom.laribay.net (cablecom.laribay.net [66.20.57.4]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA29340 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 12 Sep 2001 14:45:49 -0700
Received: from billbull (dial071.laribay.net [66.20.57.71]) by          cablecom.laribay.net (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id QAA27498 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 12 Sep 2001 16:27:00 -0500 (CDT)          (envelope-from bpbullock@laribay.net)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0D4F_01C56B69.52753BC0"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <000e01c13bd4$8b150280$47391442@billbull>
Date:         Wed, 12 Sep 2001 16:47:12 -0500
Reply-To: "Bill Bullock" <bpbullock@LARIBAY.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Bill Bullock" <bpbullock@LARIBAY.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] TRAGEDY: PLEASE READ
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0D4F_01C56B69.52753BC0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

    I would suspect that some list-mates have never had to kill another =
human.
Bill

------=_NextPart_000_0D4F_01C56B69.52753BC0
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META content=3D"text/html; charset=3Diso-8859-1" =
http-equiv=3DContent-Type>
<META content=3D"MSHTML 5.00.2614.3500" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; I would suspect that some list-mates have never =
had to=20
kill another human.</DIV>
<DIV>Bill</DIV></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0D4F_01C56B69.52753BC0--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 25986 invoked from network); 12 Sep 2001 22:09:55 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 12 Sep 2001 22:09:54 -0000
Received: (qmail 13365 invoked by uid 50005); 12 Sep 2001 22:07:20 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4157. . Clean. Processed in 0.276879 secs); 12 Sep 2001 22:07:20 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 12 Sep 2001 22:07:20 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA29221; Wed, 12 Sep 2001 14:38:16 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 90449 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 12 Sep 2001 21:36:53          +0000
Received: from smtprelay1.adelphia.net (smtprelay1.adelphia.net [64.8.25.6]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA29204 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 12 Sep 2001 14:36:52 -0700
Received: from afioretti ([64.8.33.9]) by smtprelay1.adelphia.net (Netscape          Messaging Server 4.15) with SMTP id GJKJWO02.QVV for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 12 Sep 2001 17:34:00 -0400
References: <Pine.LNX.4.10.10109120705180.25831-100000@itc.uci.edu>                        <5.0.2.1.0.20010912085549.030ed880@mail.earthlink.net>                         <3B9F8B4A.F367A9A4@artimex.com>  <3B9F9409.3D89BDC3@biomicro.com>             <002f01c13bd1$fd752100$1b30fea9@kristinscomp>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <001f01c13bd3$92ccfb50$4464a8c0@afioretti>
Date:         Wed, 12 Sep 2001 17:40:42 -0400
Reply-To: "afioretti@adelphia" <afiorettii@EXCITE.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "afioretti@adelphia" <afiorettii@EXCITE.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] TRAGEDY: PLEASE READ
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

In all fairness, the only punishment that fits the crime is perhaps to tie
each of them between two trucks and drive away from each other ever so
gradually, perhaps an inch per minute, not that it would ever happen.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Kristin & David Hall" <thehalls@RIDGENET.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Wednesday, September 12, 2001 5:29 PM
Subject: Re: [AR] TRAGEDY: PLEASE READ


> I would disagree.  Kill them AND their followers AND their supporters.
>
> --
> Dave and/or Kristin Hall
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Mark K. Spute <mks@BIOMICRO.COM>
> To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
> Sent: Wednesday, September 12, 2001 9:57 AM
> Subject: Re: [AR] TRAGEDY: PLEASE READ
>
>
> > I only hope that we capture these animals alive.  If we kill them
> > outright, it will only make them martyrs before their misguided
> > followers.  They must be captured, tried, and publicly discredited and
> > humiliated before their followers and supporters.  Their followers and
> > supporters must turn their backs on them in disgust.  Then they can be
> > shot, hung, or locked up for 20,000 consecutive sentences of life in
> > prison without parole.
> >
> > Bob Brashear wrote:
> >
> > > How about not thinking at all of ethnic origin. Think of these animals
> as just
> > > that. Rabid, mad animals that must be put down hard and fast.
> >
> > I've said enough about this today.  It just makes me heart sick.
> > Somebody say something about rocketry.
> >
> >
> > --
> > Mark K. Spute
> > Senior Research Engineer
> > BioMicro Systems Inc.
> >
> > KD7IWE,  RRS
> >
> > "It is difficult to say what is impossible, for the dream of yesterday
> > is the hope of today and the reality of tomorrow."
> >      Dr. Robert H. Goddard
> >
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 11775 invoked from network); 12 Sep 2001 22:20:21 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 12 Sep 2001 22:20:21 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 17839 invoked by uid 50005); 12 Sep 2001 22:19:35 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpa with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4157. . Clean. Processed in 0.150562 secs); 12 Sep 2001 22:19:35 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 12 Sep 2001 22:19:34 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA29439; Wed, 12 Sep 2001 14:50:19 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 90510 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 12 Sep 2001 21:50:14          +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (f50.law15.hotmail.com [64.4.23.50]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA29425 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Wed,          12 Sep 2001 14:50:14 -0700
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Wed,          12 Sep 2001 14:49:44 -0700
Received: from 213.224.83.150 by lw15fd.law15.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Wed,          12 Sep 2001 21:49:43 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [213.224.83.150]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 12 Sep 2001 21:49:44.0114 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[D5527120:01C13BD4]
Message-ID:  <F50fg7lPeaBTSMVK4IZ0000f36d@hotmail.com>
Date:         Wed, 12 Sep 2001 21:50:14 +0000
Reply-To: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] safety
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Saw this thread treated to-night on TV (Brussels). They said it was a bad
idea & talked about blackmail to eg open the door, or else...

So: no door only a armored wall(?)
No intercom
An undercover security person aboard?

Most 'll not like to hear this radical one: a remote, coded, auto-destruct
device aboard...like in big rockets.

Kristin & David Hall wrote:

In addition, I've felt that the pressurization of the
>passenger compartment and the cockpit should be separate.  That is to say
>that in the event of a highjacking attempt, standard proceedure should be
>for the pilots (who are safely in the "next room") to depressurize the
>passenger compartment.

Yep.

Problem with all such safety procs is they can so easily be countered. Could
also blast their way through for instance. Tough problem.

jd

_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 1582 invoked from network); 12 Sep 2001 22:31:34 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 12 Sep 2001 22:31:34 -0000
Received: (qmail 29834 invoked by uid 50005); 12 Sep 2001 22:30:48 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpa with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4157. . Clean. Processed in 0.18844 secs); 12 Sep 2001 22:30:48 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 12 Sep 2001 22:30:47 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA29567; Wed, 12 Sep 2001 14:59:47 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 90546 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 12 Sep 2001 21:59:45          +0000
Received: from nsx-a.snet.net ([204.60.203.54]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7)          with ESMTP id OAA29553 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 12 Sep 2001          14:59:44 -0700
Received: from pop.snet.net (pop.snet.net [204.60.6.9]) by nsx-a.snet.net          (8.11.1/8.11.1/SNET-mx-1.4/D-1.10/O-1.7) with ESMTP id f8CLxsD22376          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 12 Sep 2001 17:59:54 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from CORJULO (230.8.252.64.snet.net [64.252.8.230]) by pop.snet.net          (8.11.1/8.11.1/SNET-pop-1.5/D-1.8/O-1.6) with ESMTP id f8CLxoX26186          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 12 Sep 2001 17:59:50 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0D52_01C56B69.527ED8B0"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook, Build 10.0.2627
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <001401c13bd6$95c9b930$ab47fea9@CORJULO>
Date:         Wed, 12 Sep 2001 18:02:16 -0400
Reply-To: "Peter Corjulo" <corjulop@JAVANET.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Peter Corjulo" <corjulop@JAVANET.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] TRAGEDY: PLEASE READ
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <000e01c13bd4$8b150280$47391442@billbull>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0D52_01C56B69.527ED8B0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

No, but in this case, I'm willing to learn.

-----Original Message-----
From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU] On
Behalf Of Bill Bullock
Sent: Wednesday, September 12, 2001 5:47 PM
To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
Subject: Re: [AR] TRAGEDY: PLEASE READ

    I would suspect that some list-mates have never had to kill another
human.
Bill

------=_NextPart_000_0D52_01C56B69.527ED8B0
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<html xmlns:v=3D"urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" =
xmlns:o=3D"urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" =
xmlns:w=3D"urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" =
xmlns=3D"http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40">

<head>
<META HTTP-EQUIV=3D"Content-Type" CONTENT=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Dus-ascii">


<meta name=3DProgId content=3DWord.Document>
<meta name=3DGenerator content=3D"Microsoft Word 10">
<meta name=3DOriginator content=3D"Microsoft Word 10">
<link rel=3DFile-List href=3D"cid:filelist.xml@01C13BB5.0E8151C0">
<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
 <o:OfficeDocumentSettings>
  <o:DoNotRelyOnCSS/>
 </o:OfficeDocumentSettings>
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
 <w:WordDocument>
  <w:SpellingState>Clean</w:SpellingState>
  <w:GrammarState>Clean</w:GrammarState>
  <w:DocumentKind>DocumentEmail</w:DocumentKind>
  <w:EnvelopeVis/>
  <w:BrowserLevel>MicrosoftInternetExplorer4</w:BrowserLevel>
 </w:WordDocument>
</xml><![endif]-->
<style>
<!--
 /* Font Definitions */
 @font-face
        {font-family:Tahoma;
        panose-1:2 11 6 4 3 5 4 4 2 4;
        mso-font-charset:0;
        mso-generic-font-family:swiss;
        mso-font-pitch:variable;
        mso-font-signature:553679495 -2147483648 8 0 66047 0;}
 /* Style Definitions */
 p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
        {mso-style-parent:"";
        margin:0in;
        margin-bottom:.0001pt;
        mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
        font-size:12.0pt;
        font-family:"Times New Roman";
        mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman";}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
        {color:blue;
        text-decoration:underline;
        text-underline:single;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
        {color:purple;
        text-decoration:underline;
        text-underline:single;}
span.EmailStyle17
        {mso-style-type:personal-reply;
        mso-style-noshow:yes;
        mso-ansi-font-size:10.0pt;
        mso-bidi-font-size:10.0pt;
        font-family:Arial;
        mso-ascii-font-family:Arial;
        mso-hansi-font-family:Arial;
        mso-bidi-font-family:Arial;
        color:navy;}
@page Section1
        {size:8.5in 11.0in;
        margin:1.0in 1.25in 1.0in 1.25in;
        mso-header-margin:.5in;
        mso-footer-margin:.5in;
        mso-paper-source:0;}
div.Section1
        {page:Section1;}
-->
</style>
<!--[if gte mso 10]>
<style>
 /* Style Definitions */=20
 table.MsoNormalTable
        {mso-style-name:"Table Normal";
        mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0;
        mso-tstyle-colband-size:0;
        mso-style-noshow:yes;
        mso-style-parent:"";
        mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt;
        mso-para-margin:0in;
        mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt;
        mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
        font-size:10.0pt;
        font-family:"Times New Roman";}
</style>
<![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
 <o:shapedefaults v:ext=3D"edit" spidmax=3D"1026" />
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
 <o:shapelayout v:ext=3D"edit">
  <o:idmap v:ext=3D"edit" data=3D"1" />
 </o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]-->
</head>

<body bgcolor=3Dwhite lang=3DEN-US link=3Dblue vlink=3Dpurple =
style=3D'tab-interval:.5in'>

<div class=3DSection1>

<p class=3DMsoNormal><font size=3D2 color=3Dnavy face=3DArial><span =
style=3D'font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'>No, but in this case, I&#8217;m =
willing to
learn.<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>

<p class=3DMsoNormal><font size=3D2 color=3Dnavy face=3DArial><span =
style=3D'font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p></span></font></p>

<p class=3DMsoNormal style=3D'margin-left:.5in'><font size=3D2 =
face=3DTahoma><span
style=3D'font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Tahoma'>-----Original =
Message-----<br>
<b><span style=3D'font-weight:bold'>From:</span></b> Amateur Rocketry =
discussion
list [mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU] <b><span style=3D'font-weight:bold'>On =
Behalf
Of </span></b>Bill Bullock<br>
<b><span style=3D'font-weight:bold'>Sent:</span></b> Wednesday, =
September 12,
2001 5:47 PM<br>
<b><span style=3D'font-weight:bold'>To:</span></b> =
AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU<br>
<b><span style=3D'font-weight:bold'>Subject:</span></b> Re: [AR] =
TRAGEDY: PLEASE
READ</span></font></p>

<p class=3DMsoNormal style=3D'margin-left:.5in'><font size=3D3 =
face=3D"Times New Roman"><span
style=3D'font-size:12.0pt'><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p></span></font></p>

<div>

<p class=3DMsoNormal style=3D'margin-left:.5in'><font size=3D3 =
face=3D"Times New Roman"><span
style=3D'font-size:12.0pt'>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; I would suspect that some
list-mates have never had to kill another =
human.<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>

</div>

<div>

<p class=3DMsoNormal style=3D'margin-left:.5in'><font size=3D3 =
face=3D"Times New Roman"><span
style=3D'font-size:12.0pt'>Bill<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>

</div>

</div>

</body>

</html>

------=_NextPart_000_0D52_01C56B69.527ED8B0--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 5388 invoked from network); 12 Sep 2001 23:02:09 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 12 Sep 2001 23:02:09 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 22054 invoked by uid 50005); 12 Sep 2001 22:59:18 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpa with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4157. . Clean. Processed in 0.410856 secs); 12 Sep 2001 22:59:18 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 12 Sep 2001 22:59:17 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA29782; Wed, 12 Sep 2001 15:18:07 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 90577 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 12 Sep 2001 22:18:04          +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (f222.law15.hotmail.com [64.4.23.222]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA29768 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Wed, 12 Sep 2001 15:18:03 -0700
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Wed,          12 Sep 2001 15:17:33 -0700
Received: from 213.224.83.150 by lw15fd.law15.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Wed,          12 Sep 2001 22:17:33 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [213.224.83.150]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 12 Sep 2001 22:17:33.0500 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[B85A87C0:01C13BD8]
Message-ID:  <F222CwN6TL3VVe6wYSG0000d391@hotmail.com>
Date:         Wed, 12 Sep 2001 22:18:04 +0000
Reply-To: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      [AR] some time later
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Things to come:

got to get this off my chest since this is haunting me for many a year:
Clancy-like nightmare.

How to punish (with a mighty army & air force) only 20 pissed eg religious
maniac club members that detonate a stray nuke in, say, Brussels (NATO HQ)
and achieve not kilo but megadeath?

Requires re-thinking defences. Are we ostriches disbelieving serious SF
reality?

jd

_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 21570 invoked from network); 12 Sep 2001 23:26:43 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 12 Sep 2001 23:26:43 -0000
Received: (qmail 30605 invoked by uid 50005); 12 Sep 2001 23:24:45 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4157. . Clean. Processed in 0.220421 secs); 12 Sep 2001 23:24:45 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 12 Sep 2001 23:24:45 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA30337; Wed, 12 Sep 2001 16:09:30 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 90705 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 12 Sep 2001 23:09:24          +0000
Received: from smtprelay3.abs.adelphia.net (smtprelay.abs.adelphia.net          [64.8.20.11]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA30323 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 12 Sep 2001 16:09:23 -0700
Received: from jlgrady ([63.124.251.47]) by smtprelay3.abs.adelphia.net          (Netscape Messaging Server 4.15) with SMTP id GJKOAQ00.AL0 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 12 Sep 2001 19:08:50 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook CWS, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
Importance: Normal
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <001501c13be0$70c36050$0200a8c0@prestige.net>
Date:         Wed, 12 Sep 2001 19:12:48 -0400
Reply-To: "Jeff Grady" <jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jeff Grady" <jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] TRAGEDY: PLEASE READ
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <004e01c13bd3$8070d120$6601a8c0@home.com>

Now would be a VERY good time for President Bush to rescind a prior
executive order (Pres. Ford's E.O.?) that prevents our gov't from
assassinating heads of state. Just go on TV and have ONLY that to say, then
leave the podium... Just the act of signing the rescinding Exec order should
cause lots of brown streaks in the baggy assed drawers of a few...

Jeff

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 22590 invoked from network); 12 Sep 2001 23:33:35 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 12 Sep 2001 23:33:35 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 5641 invoked by uid 50005); 12 Sep 2001 23:31:39 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4157. . Clean. Processed in 0.247606 secs); 12 Sep 2001 23:31:39 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 12 Sep 2001 23:31:38 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA30057; Wed, 12 Sep 2001 15:49:37 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 90641 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 12 Sep 2001 22:49:30          +0000
Received: from imo-r05.mx.aol.com (imo-r05.mx.aol.com [152.163.225.101]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA30042 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Wed, 12 Sep 2001 15:49:29 -0700
Received: from Ricanakk@aol.com by imo-r05.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v31_r1.4.) id          r.3d.1144c08b (17230); Wed, 12 Sep 2001 18:48:55 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: AOL 5.0 for Windows sub 108
Message-ID:  <3d.1144c08b.28d14057@aol.com>
Date:         Wed, 12 Sep 2001 18:48:55 EDT
Reply-To: <Ricanakk@AOL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <Ricanakk@AOL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Estimated ISP for Epoxy/KN/AL propellant
Comments: To: cstrudwi@tpg.com.au
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

In a message dated 01/09/11 23:42:55 Eastern Daylight Time,
cstrudwi@tpg.com.au writes:

<<
 What epoxy(s) are you using ? Any idea of their
 density ?

 I guess if the density is significantly higher
 than that of Sorbitol (1.51 g/cc) there could be
 some benefit.
  >>

West System, East Systems, and MAS. All have a density of about 1.18 g/cc
cured.

Richard Nakka

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 16018 invoked from network); 12 Sep 2001 23:45:27 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 12 Sep 2001 23:45:27 -0000
Received: (qmail 4082 invoked by uid 50005); 12 Sep 2001 23:44:32 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpe with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4157. . Clean. Processed in 3.502286 secs); 12 Sep 2001 23:44:32 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 12 Sep 2001 23:44:26 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA30120; Wed, 12 Sep 2001 15:53:53 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 90656 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 12 Sep 2001 22:53:52          +0000
Received: from spsystems.net (spsystems.net [209.47.149.227]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA30106 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Wed,          12 Sep 2001 15:53:51 -0700
Received: (from henry@localhost) by spsystems.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id SAA08706;          Wed, 12 Sep 2001 18:53:17 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010912184501.8414A-100000@spsystems.net>
Date:         Wed, 12 Sep 2001 18:53:14 -0400
Reply-To: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] safety
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <F50fg7lPeaBTSMVK4IZ0000f36d@hotmail.com>

On Wed, 12 Sep 2001, John Dom wrote:
> So: no door only a armored wall(?)

Possible, but heavy and hard to make foolproof.  Also, it would interfere
with procedures for some other types of emergencies, arguably more likely
ones.  There *is* such a thing as spending too much on attempts at a
technical solution to this problem.

> No intercom

How does the cabin crew tell the pilot that a passenger has had a heart
attack and needs a hospital ASAP?  Again, a more likely emergency.

> An undercover security person aboard?

Probably a better bet.

> Most 'll not like to hear this radical one: a remote, coded, auto-destruct
> device aboard...like in big rockets.

There's a reason why NASA fights the USAF safety people tooth and nail to
keep those things off manned spacecraft.  They're dangerous just to have
around... and you have to worry about terrorists discovering the code.
(For the big rockets, security for those codes is very tight, and there
are a number of other measures which would make it difficult to use such a
code even if you knew it.  None of that is practical if you're trying to
put them on thousands of airliners.)

If you want to destroy an airliner, sending up a fighter is likely to be
just as quick as working through the safety procedures that would have to
surround such a destruct system, and has many fewer hazards when there
*isn't* a hijacking in progress.

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 19145 invoked from network); 12 Sep 2001 23:46:07 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 12 Sep 2001 23:46:07 -0000
Received: (qmail 29361 invoked by uid 50005); 12 Sep 2001 23:45:20 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpa with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4157. . Clean. Processed in 0.179409 secs); 12 Sep 2001 23:45:20 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 12 Sep 2001 23:45:20 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA30260; Wed, 12 Sep 2001 16:01:57 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 90686 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 12 Sep 2001 23:01:52          +0000
Received: from smtprelay1.abs.adelphia.net (smtprelay.abs.adelphia.net          [64.8.20.11]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA30246 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 12 Sep 2001 16:01:51 -0700
Received: from jlgrady ([63.124.251.47]) by smtprelay1.abs.adelphia.net          (Netscape Messaging Server 4.15) with SMTP id GJKNXR02.27Z; Wed, 12          Sep 2001 19:01:03 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0D56_01C56B69.52884E90"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook CWS, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
Importance: Normal
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <001001c13bdf$588bd770$0200a8c0@prestige.net>
Date:         Wed, 12 Sep 2001 19:04:57 -0400
Reply-To: "Jeff Grady" <jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jeff Grady" <jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Polyester Resin/KN/??
Comments: To: David Muesing <dmuesing@PEOPLEPC.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <00a101c13bc9$8c3603e0$3f50153f@default>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0D56_01C56B69.52884E90
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

I'll be making a batch using poly this weekend. Not much in the mood
yesterday or today...I live 45 miles north of one of the busiest airports on
the planet - the only thing in the sky all day today was a Red Tailed Hawk.
Not even a traffic copter.

Jeff Grady



  -----Original Message-----
  From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@itc.uci.edu]On
Behalf Of David Muesing
  Sent: Wednesday, September 12, 2001 4:29 PM
  To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
  Subject: [AR] Polyester Resin/KN/??


  Any comments on the use of Polyester resin instead of Epoxy? It is quite a
bit cheaper and the cure rate is adjustable with the percentage of MEKP.

  Dave Muesing

------=_NextPart_000_0D56_01C56B69.52884E90
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META HTTP-EQUIV=3D"Content-Type" CONTENT=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Diso-8859-1">


<META content=3D"MSHTML 5.50.4522.1800" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><SPAN class=3D099035322-12092001><FONT face=3DArial color=3D#0000ff =
size=3D2>I'll=20
be making a batch using poly this weekend. Not much in the mood =
yesterday or=20
today...I live 45 miles north of one of the busiest airports on the =
planet - the=20
only thing in the sky all day today was a Red Tailed Hawk. Not even a =
traffic=20
copter.</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=3D099035322-12092001><FONT face=3DArial color=3D#0000ff =

size=3D2></FONT></SPAN>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=3D099035322-12092001><FONT face=3DArial color=3D#0000ff =
size=3D2>Jeff=20
Grady</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=3D099035322-12092001><FONT face=3DArial color=3D#0000ff =

size=3D2></FONT></SPAN>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=3D099035322-12092001><FONT face=3DArial color=3D#0000ff =

size=3D2></FONT></SPAN>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=3D099035322-12092001><FONT face=3DArial color=3D#0000ff =

size=3D2></FONT></SPAN>&nbsp;</DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE dir=3Dltr style=3D"MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
  <DIV class=3DOutlookMessageHeader dir=3Dltr align=3Dleft><FONT =
face=3DTahoma=20
  size=3D2>-----Original Message-----<BR><B>From:</B> Amateur Rocketry =
discussion=20
  list [mailto:AROCKET@itc.uci.edu]<B>On Behalf Of </B>David=20
  Muesing<BR><B>Sent:</B> Wednesday, September 12, 2001 4:29 =
PM<BR><B>To:</B>=20
  AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU<BR><B>Subject:</B> [AR] Polyester=20
  Resin/KN/??<BR><BR></FONT></DIV>
  <DIV><FONT face=3DOCRA color=3D#0000ff>Any comments on the use of =
Polyester resin=20
  instead of Epoxy? It is quite a bit cheaper and the cure rate is =
adjustable=20
  with the percentage of MEKP.</FONT></DIV>
  <DIV><FONT face=3DOCRA color=3D#0000ff></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
  <DIV><FONT face=3DOCRA color=3D#0000ff>Dave=20
Muesing</FONT></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0D56_01C56B69.52884E90--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 20192 invoked from network); 13 Sep 2001 00:12:10 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 13 Sep 2001 00:12:10 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 14509 invoked by uid 50005); 13 Sep 2001 00:11:23 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpa with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4157. . Clean. Processed in 0.171649 secs); 13 Sep 2001 00:11:23 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 13 Sep 2001 00:11:23 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA30619; Wed, 12 Sep 2001 16:49:44 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 90765 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 12 Sep 2001 23:49:37          +0000
Received: from localhost.localdomain (IDENT:root@lauren.pconline.com          [207.191.131.70]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA30605          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 12 Sep 2001 16:49:36 -0700
Received: from artimex.com (m18-4-8.pconline.com [207.191.143.56]) by          localhost.localdomain (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f8CMkI820845;          Wed, 12 Sep 2001 17:46:18 -0500
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (Win98; I)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <000e01c13bd4$8b150280$47391442@billbull>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B9FF4F2.C6F8EB20@artimex.com>
Date:         Wed, 12 Sep 2001 18:51:14 -0500
Reply-To: "Robert Brashear" <rjb@ARTIMEX.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Robert Brashear" <rjb@ARTIMEX.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] TRAGEDY: PLEASE READ
Comments: To: Bill Bullock <bpbullock@LARIBAY.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

> Bill Bullock wrote:
>
>     I would suspect that some list-mates have never had to kill
> another human.
> Bill

And some of our list mates have had to and understand what it means to
take more than one human life. I hope never to do so again. HOWEVER! I
do not consider terrorists to BE human. They flaunt the rule of law and
civilization. They do not care for life. They deserve none of the
attributes civilization affords humans when it comes to a legal system.
Terrorists of ANY kind, must be exterminated.

Bob Brashear

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 14534 invoked from network); 13 Sep 2001 00:30:46 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 13 Sep 2001 00:30:46 -0000
Received: (qmail 6517 invoked by uid 50005); 13 Sep 2001 00:30:05 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpb with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.197691 secs); 13 Sep 2001 00:30:05 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 13 Sep 2001 00:30:05 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA30759; Wed, 12 Sep 2001 17:00:19 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 90797 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 13 Sep 2001 00:00:13          +0000
Received: from localhost (rcalkins@localhost) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with          ESMTP id RAA30733; Wed, 12 Sep 2001 17:00:02 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.LNX.4.10.10109121642090.25831-100000@itc.uci.edu>
Date:         Wed, 12 Sep 2001 17:00:02 -0700
Reply-To: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
Subject:      Re: [AR] TRAGEDY: PLEASE READ
Comments: To: "afioretti@adelphia" <afiorettii@EXCITE.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <005b01c13ba9$2e334bb0$4464a8c0@afioretti>

I hope we've all had a chance to vent our anger about recent events.  Now,
we need to think about how this event will effect our hobby.

First thing is FAA will probably be pretty busy for the next week or so
and will probably not grant waivers.

Next, I figure large purchaces of solid oxidizers and metal fines will be
more closely monitored.

Beyond this, it's only speculation.

What are the likely things that can be done?

Ray

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 15262 invoked from network); 13 Sep 2001 00:37:58 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 13 Sep 2001 00:37:58 -0000
Received: (qmail 9639 invoked by uid 50005); 13 Sep 2001 00:36:00 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4157. . Clean. Processed in 0.210056 secs); 13 Sep 2001 00:36:00 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 13 Sep 2001 00:36:00 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA30881; Wed, 12 Sep 2001 17:21:04 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 90818 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 13 Sep 2001 00:20:58          +0000
Received: from smtprelay3.abs.adelphia.net (smtprelay.abs.adelphia.net          [64.8.20.11]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA30867 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 12 Sep 2001 17:20:57 -0700
Received: from jlgrady ([63.124.251.47]) by smtprelay3.abs.adelphia.net          (Netscape Messaging Server 4.15) with SMTP id GJKRM000.HNX for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 12 Sep 2001 20:20:24 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook CWS, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
Importance: Normal
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <001a01c13bea$6fe10b10$0200a8c0@prestige.net>
Date:         Wed, 12 Sep 2001 20:24:21 -0400
Reply-To: "Jeff Grady" <jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jeff Grady" <jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET>
Subject:      [AR] Data Acquisition website
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <001501c13be0$70c36050$0200a8c0@prestige.net>

Most of you may already have this link, but here tis' anyway:

http://www.mccdaq.com/

JG

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 17402 invoked from network); 13 Sep 2001 00:59:36 -0000
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 13 Sep 2001 00:59:36 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 3450 invoked by uid 50005); 13 Sep 2001 00:56:26 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpf with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4157. . Clean. Processed in 3.264286 secs); 13 Sep 2001 00:56:26 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 13 Sep 2001 00:56:20 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA31015; Wed, 12 Sep 2001 17:29:25 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 90856 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 13 Sep 2001 00:29:23          +0000
Received: from localhost.localdomain (IDENT:root@lauren.pconline.com          [207.191.131.70]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA31001          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 12 Sep 2001 17:29:23 -0700
Received: from artimex.com (m18-4-16.pconline.com [207.191.143.64]) by          localhost.localdomain (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f8CNQb821262 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 12 Sep 2001 18:26:37 -0500
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (Win98; I)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <Pine.LNX.4.10.10109121642090.25831-100000@itc.uci.edu>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B9FFE66.DD82FEB0@artimex.com>
Date:         Wed, 12 Sep 2001 19:31:34 -0500
Reply-To: "Robert Brashear" <rjb@ARTIMEX.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Robert Brashear" <rjb@ARTIMEX.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] TRAGEDY: PLEASE READ
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Ray Calkins wrote:
>
>
> What are the likely things that can be done?
>
> Ray

Not much for now. I can't even contact my reps or senators. There will
be the typical hysterical rush for new laws. As these were not bombs, we
may "get away" with increased monitoring, but no new laws.

Bob Brashear

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 15597 invoked from network); 13 Sep 2001 01:12:34 -0000
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 13 Sep 2001 01:12:34 -0000
Received: (qmail 26486 invoked by uid 50005); 13 Sep 2001 01:09:24 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpf with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4157. . Clean. Processed in 3.856106 secs); 13 Sep 2001 01:09:24 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 13 Sep 2001 01:09:16 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA31201; Wed, 12 Sep 2001 17:41:37 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 90904 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 13 Sep 2001 00:41:36          +0000
Received: from mta03.mail.mel.aone.net.au (mta03.mail.au.uu.net [203.2.192.83])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA31187 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 12 Sep 2001 17:41:35 -0700
Received: from unknown ([63.34.212.153]) by mta03.mail.mel.aone.net.au with          SMTP id <20010913004133.XACY288.mta03.mail.mel.aone.net.au@unknown>          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 13 Sep 2001 10:41:33 +1000
References: Conversation <00a101c13bc9$8c3603e0$3f50153f@default> with last            message <001001c13bdf$588bd770$0200a8c0@prestige.net>
Priority: Normal
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Priority: 3
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	X-MAPIextension=.TXT;
	charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>
Date:         Thu, 13 Sep 2001 00:41:36 +0000
Reply-To: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Polyester Resin/KN/??
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <001001c13bdf$588bd770$0200a8c0@prestige.net>

KNO3 historically has struggled with polyester resins. Generally more
success has been had with Epoxy. There was talk about included flame
retardants being the problem.

Troy.

----------
> I'll be making a batch using poly this weekend. Not much in the mood
> yesterday or today...I live 45 miles north of one of the busiest airports
on
> the planet - the only thing in the sky all day today was a Red Tailed
Hawk.
> Not even a traffic copter.
>
> Jeff Grady
>
>
>
>   -----Original Message-----
>   From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@itc.uci.edu]On
> Behalf Of David Muesing
>   Sent: Wednesday, September 12, 2001 4:29 PM
>   To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
>   Subject: [AR] Polyester Resin/KN/??
>
>
>   Any comments on the use of Polyester resin instead of Epoxy? It is
quite a
> bit cheaper and the cure rate is adjustable with the percentage of MEKP.
>
>   Dave Muesing

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 16945 invoked from network); 13 Sep 2001 01:12:52 -0000
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 13 Sep 2001 01:12:52 -0000
Received: (qmail 27047 invoked by uid 50005); 13 Sep 2001 01:09:41 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpf with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4157. . Clean. Processed in 1.87531 secs); 13 Sep 2001 01:09:41 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 13 Sep 2001 01:09:37 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA31134; Wed, 12 Sep 2001 17:37:36 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 90887 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 13 Sep 2001 00:37:34          +0000
Received: from fep3-orange.clear.net.nz (fep3-orange.clear.net.nz          [203.97.32.3]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA31120          for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Wed, 12 Sep 2001 17:37:33 -0700
Received: from mkbs (203-167-160-131.dialup.clear.net.nz [203.167.160.131]) by          fep3-orange.clear.net.nz (1.5/1.8) with SMTP id MAA18275; Thu, 13 Sep          2001 12:37:27 +1200 (NZST)
References:  <NFBBIHDFILDMBPKDOIICIEJECFAA.ronant@optonline.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <023901c13bec$c65a1e80$0100a8c0@mkbs>
Date:         Thu, 13 Sep 2001 11:51:58 +1200
Reply-To: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Organization: Applied Technology
Subject:      Re: [AR] [OT] RE: Tragedy
Comments: To: pic microcontroller discussion list <PICLIST@MITVMA.MIT.EDU>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

BRUSSELS, Belgium (CNN) -- NATO has unanimously declared the
hijack attacks on the U.S. to be an assault against all member
states. Secretary-General George Robertson said the U.S. would
receive support for military action from its 18 NATO partners
if it is found the assaults were committed by foreign
nationals.

For complete coverage of this story visit:
http://www.CNN.com or AOL Keyword: CNN

CNN Headline News has changed everything but its name.
Visit us online at http://cnn.com/headlinenews
========================================================
To UNSUBSCRIBE or SUBSCRIBE to any CNN E-MAIL service visit:
http://www.CNN.com/EMAIL

(c) 2001 Cable News Network, Inc.
CNN Interactive email id:6899161402260969

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 17300 invoked from network); 13 Sep 2001 01:19:52 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 13 Sep 2001 01:19:52 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 20070 invoked by uid 50005); 13 Sep 2001 01:17:15 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4157. . Clean. Processed in 0.24895 secs); 13 Sep 2001 01:17:15 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 13 Sep 2001 01:17:14 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA31296; Wed, 12 Sep 2001 17:49:54 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 90931 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 13 Sep 2001 00:49:46          +0000
Received: from smtp.snet.net (smtp-j.snet.net [204.60.6.55]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA31282 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed,          12 Sep 2001 17:49:45 -0700
Received: from snet.net (108.72.252.64.snet.net [64.252.72.108] (may be          forged)) by smtp.snet.net          (8.12.0.Beta12/8.12.0.Beta12/SNET-mx-1.5/D-evisionO-evision$) with          ESMTP id f8D0nht7013511 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 12 Sep 2001          20:49:43 -0400 (EDT)
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.75 [en] (Win98; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <Pine.LNX.4.10.10108051127040.32582-100000@itc.uci.edu>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3BA00420.7B975E5F@snet.net>
Date:         Wed, 12 Sep 2001 20:56:00 -0400
Reply-To: "Blake Mantel" <BMantel@SNET.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Blake Mantel" <BMantel@SNET.NET>
Organization: done through the use of very fuzzy logic!
Subject:      [AR] RTV Removal?
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Greetings All,

I have a large area of fully cured RTV rubber (the good, FAA/Mil-Spec stuff....
;-(  that is applied on a stainless steel heat barrier blanket.

This RTV needs to be removed w/o the destruction of the fragile S.S. heat
barrier.

Any ideas? Methylene Chloride?

Help!
Blake Mantel
--
CUM CATAPULTAE PROSCRIPTAE ERUNT TUM SOLI PROSCRIPTI CATAPULTAS HABEBUNT.
(When catapults are outlawed, only outlaws will have catapults....)
Triumph Tiger Motorcycle page at: http://pages.cthome.net/bmantel/

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 29008 invoked from network); 13 Sep 2001 01:22:44 -0000
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 13 Sep 2001 01:22:44 -0000
Received: (qmail 10666 invoked by uid 50005); 13 Sep 2001 01:19:33 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpf with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4157. . Clean. Processed in 4.284915 secs); 13 Sep 2001 01:19:33 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 13 Sep 2001 01:19:25 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA31438; Wed, 12 Sep 2001 18:05:28 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 90962 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 13 Sep 2001 01:05:25          +0000
Received: from castor.ridgenet.net (IDENT:root@castor.ridgenet.net          [199.120.150.29]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA31424          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 12 Sep 2001 18:05:25 -0700
Received: from kristinscomp (pm164.ridgenet.net [204.154.246.164]) by          castor.ridgenet.net (8.11.0/8.11.0) with SMTP id f8D0uBS17984; Wed,          12 Sep 2001 17:56:11 -0700
References:  <F50fg7lPeaBTSMVK4IZ0000f36d@hotmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <006801c13bf1$67402a20$1b30fea9@kristinscomp>
Date:         Wed, 12 Sep 2001 18:14:13 -0700
Reply-To: "Kristin & David Hall" <thehalls@RIDGENET.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Kristin & David Hall" <thehalls@RIDGENET.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] safety
Comments: To: John Dom <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

> So: no door only a armored wall(?)

Yup, that way the only way to get into the cockpit in flight involves
absolute removal of the wall - something that would likely damage the
cockpit to an extent that the plane is going down anyways.

> No intercom

Yup, if you can't communicate, you can't blackmail/threaten/etc.

> An undercover security person aboard?

Sure, why not?  It worked for the highjacking attempt in Yemen a few months
back.

> Most 'll not like to hear this radical one: a remote, coded, auto-destruct
> device aboard...like in big rockets.

I don't see it as necessary.

> Problem with all such safety procs is they can so easily be countered.
Could
> also blast their way through for instance. Tough problem.

True, but that takes time or extreme force.  In the first case the pilots
have *PLENTY* of time to do something like say....dump all fuel and start
for the nearest airport (IE, flying to Cuba/wherever is not an option by the
time the bad guys make it into the cockpit).  And I believe I convered the
extreme force case.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 5025 invoked from network); 13 Sep 2001 01:31:35 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 13 Sep 2001 01:31:35 -0000
Received: (qmail 28610 invoked by uid 50005); 13 Sep 2001 01:29:00 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4157. . Clean. Processed in 0.21165 secs); 13 Sep 2001 01:29:00 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 13 Sep 2001 01:28:59 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA31536; Wed, 12 Sep 2001 18:14:04 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 90986 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 13 Sep 2001 01:14:03          +0000
Received: from castor.ridgenet.net (IDENT:root@castor.ridgenet.net          [199.120.150.29]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA31510          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 12 Sep 2001 18:13:12 -0700
Received: from kristinscomp (pm164.ridgenet.net [204.154.246.164]) by          castor.ridgenet.net (8.11.0/8.11.0) with SMTP id f8D13SS18988; Wed,          12 Sep 2001 18:03:28 -0700
References:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010912184501.8414A-100000@spsystems.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <007001c13bf2$6be9e6a0$1b30fea9@kristinscomp>
Date:         Wed, 12 Sep 2001 18:21:30 -0700
Reply-To: "Kristin & David Hall" <thehalls@RIDGENET.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Kristin & David Hall" <thehalls@RIDGENET.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] safety
Comments: To: Henry Spencer <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

> Possible, but heavy and hard to make foolproof.

It need not be particularly heavy.  A 1/4" sheet of alumina backed by a 1/8"
sheet of aluminum backed by 20-40 layers of Spectra is remarkably light and
can stop some absolutely amazing things.  And the cost is surprisingly
small.  (Note:  I speak from experience on this matter).

> > No intercom

> How does the cabin crew tell the pilot that a passenger has had a heart
> attack and needs a hospital ASAP?  Again, a more likely emergency.

Simple, have a "panic button" in the cabin.  That is to say, make it such
that the only way for the passenger compartment to communicate with the crew
is to push a button that turns on a light/buzzer/whatever.  If the crew sees
this light up, they land at the nearest airport.  They don't need to know
that somebody has gone apeshit or is having a heart attack - they just land.
That way, medical emergencies can be reasonably dealt with but at the same
time it does not allow for the level of communication required for a
highjacker to blackmail/threaten/negotiate/etc. with the flight crew.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 7604 invoked from network); 13 Sep 2001 01:32:16 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 13 Sep 2001 01:32:16 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 29167 invoked by uid 50005); 13 Sep 2001 01:29:40 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4157. . Clean. Processed in 0.174025 secs); 13 Sep 2001 01:29:40 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 13 Sep 2001 01:29:40 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA31579; Wed, 12 Sep 2001 18:15:27 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 90999 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 13 Sep 2001 01:15:26          +0000
Received: from hobbiton.shire.net (frogmorton.shire.net [204.228.145.136]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA31544 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Wed, 12 Sep 2001 18:14:46 -0700
Received: from pool-64-223-146-33.man.east.verizon.net ([64.223.146.33]          helo=me-513q3sc0zun0.pengar.com) by hobbiton.shire.net with esmtp          (Exim 3.22 #6) id 15hL4A-000F0p-00 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 12          Sep 2001 19:13:18 -0600
X-Sender: seth-pc@hobbiton.shire.net
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
References: <Pine.LNX.4.10.10109120705180.25831-100000@itc.uci.edu>            <5.0.2.1.0.20010912085549.030ed880@mail.earthlink.net>            <3B9F8B4A.F367A9A4@artimex.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <5.1.0.14.0.20010912211519.02ac76f8@hobbiton.shire.net>
Date:         Wed, 12 Sep 2001 21:20:13 -0400
Reply-To: "Seth Leigh" <seth@PENGAR.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Seth Leigh" <seth@PENGAR.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] TRAGEDY: PLEASE READ
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <3B9F9409.3D89BDC3@biomicro.com>

At 12:57 PM 9/12/2001, Mark K. Spute wrote:
>I only hope that we capture these animals alive.  If we kill them
>outright, it will only make them martyrs before their misguided
>followers.  They must be captured, tried, and publicly discredited and

Funny thing about all martyrs.  They are all dead.  I'm glad the Allies
weren't paralyzed in fear of making Hitler a martyr 50 years ago.  I think
that's one of the worst excuses for not going after somebody that needs
going after.  We need to go in an root out the terrorists and destroy
them.  Then we need to go into the Middle East and help build those
countries up and help them build jobs and institutions of learning, and
help them become modern, civilized societies.

>I've said enough about this today.  It just makes me heart sick.
>Somebody say something about rocketry.

I bought a Magnetic Apogee Detector kit from Robert Galejs this past
week.  I just finished building it (a damn bitch to solder all those very
fine surface-mount components for the first time in my life), and I'm glad
to say it works.  No, I haven't launched a rocket with it yet, but just
holding it and tipping it from side to side with an LED testing the circuit
that would ingnite an ejection charge, you can see it lighting when you tip
the MAD over to its side in any orientation.  Very nifty little device.  My
hat's off to Robert Galejs for designing it, and for putting the
kits  together.

Seth
Ich bin ein New Yorker.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 18595 invoked from network); 13 Sep 2001 02:17:32 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 13 Sep 2001 02:17:32 -0000
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 10751 invoked by uid 50005); 13 Sep 2001 02:16:45 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpa with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4157. . Clean. Processed in 0.175696 secs); 13 Sep 2001 02:16:45 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 13 Sep 2001 02:16:44 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA31956; Wed, 12 Sep 2001 19:00:31 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 91104 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 13 Sep 2001 02:00:14          +0000
Received: from idsoftware.com (predator.idsoftware.com [192.246.40.34]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA31942 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Wed, 12 Sep 2001 19:00:14 -0700
Received: from [192.246.40.129] (account johnc HELO lightning.idsoftware.com)          by idsoftware.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 3.4.7) with ESMTP id 379083          for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 12 Sep 2001 21:00:13 -0500
X-Sender: johnc@mail.idsoftware.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <4.3.1.2.20010912201111.03729408@mail.idsoftware.com>
Date:         Wed, 12 Sep 2001 20:58:07 -0500
Reply-To: "John Carmack" <johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Carmack" <johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM>
Subject:      [AR] large vehicle propellant purge
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

I am debating the necessity of having propellant purge valves on our second
generation manned vehicle.

Dumping remaining propellant before landing on an abort seems a sensible
thing, but I worry about dumping hundreds of pounds of 90% peroxide out
into the air.  There will certainly be a burst disc, which, if ruptured,
would spray the raw peroxide out, but the likelihood of that happening
during the minute or less of powered flight with no warning signs during
the pad time is probably remote.  There will also be a way to drain the
entire system for an on-pad abort.  The question is if there should be a
separate, voluntary purge system that should be used during an in-flight abort.

During some aborts, it might be desirable to just throttle back the main
engines and fire the attitude engines in opposition to consume the
remaining propellant without attaining the normal flight altitude, but in
others situations you might want to avoid prolonging the flight at all.

One option I am considering is having some way to blow the main nozzle, so
you could dump propellant though the main engine several times faster,
without generating as much thrust.

I think I am leaning towards not purging at all, and coming down with the
tanks still loaded.  If the vehicle is designed with a main parachute and a
backup parachute that are individually supposed to provide a moderate
descent rate, in the event of an early termination, you deploy both of
them.  If it was terminated very early in the flight with a significant
propellant load, the descent rate might still be faster than normal, but
not fatally so.  This would not be practical for an orbital launch vehicle,
but for something in the mass ratio range of two to four, it seems reasonable.

John Carmack

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 25440 invoked from network); 13 Sep 2001 02:19:02 -0000
X-Priority: 3
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 13 Sep 2001 02:19:02 -0000
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 15935 invoked by uid 50005); 13 Sep 2001 02:17:05 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4157. . Clean. Processed in 0.201757 secs); 13 Sep 2001 02:17:05 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 13 Sep 2001 02:17:05 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA31989; Wed, 12 Sep 2001 19:02:08 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 91111 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 13 Sep 2001 02:02:07          +0000
Received: from imo-d03.mx.aol.com (imo-d03.mx.aol.com [205.188.157.35]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA31958 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Wed, 12 Sep 2001 19:00:42 -0700
Received: from Sociald84@aol.com by imo-d03.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v31_r1.4.) id          o.138.17b4e92 (16339); Wed, 12 Sep 2001 22:00:00 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0D5A_01C56B69.5296A670"
X-Mailer: AOL 6.0 for Windows US sub 10536
Message-ID:  <138.17b4e92.28d16d1f@aol.com>
Date:         Wed, 12 Sep 2001 21:59:59 EDT
Reply-To: <Sociald84@AOL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <Sociald84@AOL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] TRAGEDY: PLEASE READ
Comments: To: afiorettii@excite.com
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0D5A_01C56B69.5296A670
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

I was thinking somewhere along the lines of a 30min road flare shoved up
their ass. Give them a little of the feeling of the poor people in those
buildings who were not spared the misery of being burned to death by the tons
of jet fuel that was spilled about.

Mark

In a message dated 9/12/2001 3:45:30 PM Mountain Daylight Time,
afiorettii@EXCITE.COM writes:


> In all fairness, the only punishment that fits the crime is perhaps to tie
> each of them between two trucks and drive away from each other ever so
> gradually, perhaps an inch per minute, not that it would ever happen.
>



------=_NextPart_000_0D5A_01C56B69.5296A670
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<HTML><FONT FACE=arial,helvetica><FONT  SIZE=2>I was thinking somewhere along the lines of a 30min road flare shoved up
<BR>their ass. Give them a little of the feeling of the poor people in those
<BR>buildings who were not spared the misery of being burned to death by the tons
<BR>of jet fuel that was spilled about.
<BR>
<BR>Mark
<BR>
<BR>In a message dated 9/12/2001 3:45:30 PM Mountain Daylight Time,
<BR>afiorettii@EXCITE.COM writes:
<BR>
<BR>
<BR><BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE style="BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px">In all fairness, the only punishment that fits the crime is perhaps to tie
<BR>each of them between two trucks and drive away from each other ever so
<BR>gradually, perhaps an inch per minute, not that it would ever happen.
<BR></BLOCKQUOTE>
<BR>
<BR></FONT></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0D5A_01C56B69.5296A670--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 29583 invoked from network); 13 Sep 2001 02:27:22 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 13 Sep 2001 02:27:22 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 14196 invoked by uid 50005); 13 Sep 2001 02:24:12 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpf with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4157. . Clean. Processed in 0.295884 secs); 13 Sep 2001 02:24:12 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 13 Sep 2001 02:24:12 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA32131; Wed, 12 Sep 2001 19:10:17 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 91154 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 13 Sep 2001 02:10:15          +0000
Received: from femail30.sdc1.sfba.home.com ([24.254.60.20]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA32117 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed,          12 Sep 2001 19:10:14 -0700
Received: from c1649002-a.earthlink.net ([24.20.95.67]) by          femail30.sdc1.sfba.home.com (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20          201-229-121-120-20010223) with ESMTP id          <20010913021009.FCBJ9391.femail30.sdc1.sfba.home.com@c1649002-a.earthlink.net>; Wed, 12 Sep 2001 19:10:09          -0700
X-Sender: forkbomb@mail.earthlink.net
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.0.2
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <5.0.2.1.0.20010912190934.025181d8@mail.earthlink.net>
Date:         Wed, 12 Sep 2001 19:10:08 -0700
Reply-To: "Pierce Nichols" <forkbomb@EARTHLINK.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Pierce Nichols" <forkbomb@EARTHLINK.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] TRAGEDY: PLEASE READ
Comments: To: Sociald84@AOL.COM
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <138.17b4e92.28d16d1f@aol.com>

At 09:59 PM 9/12/2001 -0400, Sociald84@AOL.COM wrote:
>I was thinking somewhere along the lines of a 30min road flare shoved up
>their ass. Give them a little of the feeling of the poor people in those
>buildings who were not spared the misery of being burned to death by the tons
>of jet fuel that was spilled about.


         Fly them up in a chopper to where the top of the towers used to
be... and drop them.

         -p



>Mark
>
>In a message dated 9/12/2001 3:45:30 PM Mountain Daylight Time,
>afiorettii@EXCITE.COM writes:
>
>
>>In all fairness, the only punishment that fits the crime is perhaps to tie
>>each of them between two trucks and drive away from each other ever so
>>gradually, perhaps an inch per minute, not that it would ever happen.
>

Mars or Bust!
www.marssociety.com

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 1616 invoked from network); 13 Sep 2001 02:35:45 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 13 Sep 2001 02:35:45 -0000
Received: (qmail 9111 invoked by uid 50005); 13 Sep 2001 02:33:10 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4157. . Clean. Processed in 0.139504 secs); 13 Sep 2001 02:33:10 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 13 Sep 2001 02:33:09 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA32202; Wed, 12 Sep 2001 19:18:06 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 91173 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 13 Sep 2001 02:18:03          +0000
Received: from smtprelay1.abs.adelphia.net (smtprelay.abs.adelphia.net          [64.8.20.11]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA32188 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 12 Sep 2001 19:18:02 -0700
Received: from jlgrady ([63.124.251.47]) by smtprelay1.abs.adelphia.net          (Netscape Messaging Server 4.15) with SMTP id GJKX0Q01.BDJ for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 12 Sep 2001 22:17:14 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook CWS, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
Importance: Normal
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <002101c13bfa$bf3a5b20$0200a8c0@prestige.net>
Date:         Wed, 12 Sep 2001 22:21:06 -0400
Reply-To: "Jeff Grady" <jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jeff Grady" <jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] airline safety
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <006801c13bf1$67402a20$1b30fea9@kristinscomp>

It's really quite simple. When handing the airline worker your boarding
pass, he/she gives you a 6" Cold Steel Tanto in return. When you get off the
plane, you simply turn in your knife to be used by the next flight. Kind of
like picking out 3-D glasses for the Terminator 3-D show at Universal
Studios. When you exit the show, you drop your glasses into a bin for use in
the next show.

I doubt anyone, even someone who succeeds in getting a firearm on board
would show their ass when 50, 100, or 300 other passengers who DON'T WANT TO
DIE are capable of making sushi outta them without even getting out of their
seats. Given the idea that you will all die if the highjacker goes unimpeded
versus one or two people being shot if he/they are stabbed by every knife in
arm's reach, I'd take a chance with the knife idea.

Better yet, have the knives secured overhead (in sheaths of course) and
release buttons in strategic areas for the flight crew to hit. The knives,
one for each passenger seat falls like oxygen masks and tada! Fillet of
terrorists.

Just MHO, now pass the ammo.

JG

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 24354 invoked from network); 13 Sep 2001 02:50:33 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 13 Sep 2001 02:50:33 -0000
Received: (qmail 12360 invoked by uid 50005); 13 Sep 2001 02:48:36 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4157. . Clean. Processed in 0.224691 secs); 13 Sep 2001 02:48:36 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 13 Sep 2001 02:48:35 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA32310; Wed, 12 Sep 2001 19:30:08 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 91198 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 13 Sep 2001 02:30:03          +0000
Received: from www.rocketry.org          (root@phnx3UBR5-4-hfc-0251-d17d1591.rdc1.az.coxatwork.com          [209.125.21.145]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA32296          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 12 Sep 2001 19:30:02 -0700
Received: from localhost (tim@localhost) by www.rocketry.org (8.11.4/8.11.4)          with ESMTP id f8D2SQg09311 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 12 Sep          2001 19:28:26 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.LNX.4.33.0109121926280.9250-100000@www.rocketry.org>
Date:         Wed, 12 Sep 2001 19:28:26 -0700
Reply-To: "T.J." <tim@ROCKETRY.ORG>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "T.J." <tim@ROCKETRY.ORG>
Subject:      Re: [AR] TRAGEDY: PLEASE READ
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <138.17b4e92.28d16d1f@aol.com>

One thing we can do to help is by making a donation to the Red Cross
Disaster Relief Fund. I've provided a couple of links on the front page of
Rocketry.Org for both PayPal's and Amazon.com's donation sites. Amazon.com
has waived any normal fees they'd charge for transactions and PayPal is
not taking anything for their trouble as well. You can get the links here:

http://www.rocketry.org

TIM

On Wed, 12 Sep 2001 Sociald84@AOL.COM wrote:

> I was thinking somewhere along the lines of a 30min road flare shoved up
> their ass. Give them a little of the feeling of the poor people in those
> buildings who were not spared the misery of being burned to death by the tons
> of jet fuel that was spilled about.
>
> Mark
>
> In a message dated 9/12/2001 3:45:30 PM Mountain Daylight Time,
> afiorettii@EXCITE.COM writes:
>
>
> > In all fairness, the only punishment that fits the crime is perhaps to tie
> > each of them between two trucks and drive away from each other ever so
> > gradually, perhaps an inch per minute, not that it would ever happen.
> >
>
>
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 27279 invoked from network); 13 Sep 2001 02:51:23 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 13 Sep 2001 02:51:23 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 10142 invoked by uid 50005); 13 Sep 2001 02:50:42 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpb with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.240761 secs); 13 Sep 2001 02:50:42 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 13 Sep 2001 02:50:42 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA32377; Wed, 12 Sep 2001 19:32:17 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 91221 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 13 Sep 2001 02:32:16          +0000
Received: from smtp005pub.verizon.net (smtp005pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.184])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA32360 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 12 Sep 2001 19:32:15 -0700
Received: from [63.24.225.206] (1Cust69.tnt2.rancho-cucamonga.ca.da.uu.net          [63.15.225.69]) by smtp005pub.verizon.net  with ESMTP for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; id f8D2VgW26659 Wed, 12 Sep 2001 21:31:42          -0500 (CDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: GTE/01rocket@mail.gte.net
References: <Pine.LNX.4.10.10109120705180.25831-100000@itc.uci.edu>            <001c01c13ba0$68b0ade0$54391442@billbull>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <a05100307b7c5c9a32f1d@[63.24.225.206]>
Date:         Wed, 12 Sep 2001 19:31:43 -0700
Reply-To: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] TRAGEDY: PLEASE READ
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <001c01c13ba0$68b0ade0$54391442@billbull>

>Ray and Al:
>     You two are right. And Ray was and is right to be concerned at a time
>like this. These situations are often seized upon by some to further their
>personal agendas. In a time like this those of us who are not so disposed


I think this is true.  After the incident in NY (east coast) the
police here asked for additional funds for security.  I thought they
already had some funds, were already providing security, and this was
an issue with airplanes and cockpit control, not ground issues far
away from airports?

The airplanes were all asked to land so rogue aircraft could be shot
down.  Reasonable.  Why are the airports STILL fully shut down?  Why
are other things shut down when so far it is clear the
incident/disaster/attack was localized, limited in MO and obviously
times to be a discreet event with a simultaneous attack.

Safety is fine.  Right now a big part of our economy is fully shut
down.  Let's take NY Mayor Guliani's good avvise.  Take revenge by
getting right back to your business, do more, make big money and in
case you hesitate to do that realize this:  Bin-Laden is hateful of
our financial success.  His fellow afganis have a  percapita GDP of
$800.  They hate us to the tune of over $30,000 each.

Listen to the mayor of the attacked city.  Go back to business as
usual with only situation specific increased security.  Checking ID's
and baggage will not improve security over what we had or what caused
the event.

Jerry


>must listen to cooler heads as we go through alternating periods of moral
>outrage and grief.
>     I personally am steadily growing in my admiration of these two as well
>as the other members of this list. That's saying a lot because my admiration
>is rather grudgingly given...more earned than gifted.
>     So, while I will have my own personal thoughts, I will be guided by
>others as to how I express them. And may God bless our country, our leaders
>and us one and all.
>Bill
>PS: Before anyone starts talking about all the "foreigners" over here
>remember that to us Indians all you folks are just visiting foreigners. But
>we are used to you now so I guess we will let you stay as long as you mind
>your manners real good.
>
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: Ray Calkins <rcalkins@ITC.UCI.EDU>
>To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
>Sent: Wednesday, September 12, 2001 9:13 AM
>Subject: [AR] TRAGEDY: PLEASE READ
>
>
>>  I'd like to post an apology to the list about my request to keep the
>>  NYC/DC tragedy discussion off of aRocket.  I was in a great deal of
>>  anguish and shock, just as you were.  I just wanted it to stop, and when
>>  it came to aRocket, I finally saw something I could do to stop it just a
>>  little and acted on it.
>>
>>  I though long and hard about that post last night, and I retract what I
>>  said.
>>
>>  We are a community.  We need to share our grief to move beyond it
>>  and grow as a community.
>>
>>  Just as you, I need to talk about it so I can move on.
>>
>>  Please accept my profound apologies,
>>
>>  Ray Calkins
>Al Bradley wrote:
>
>>We might conclude though, that heightened national security can impact
>>amateur rocketry for some time!
>
>I think this is a given.  Not just solid propellants, either.  It was tons
>of burning liquid fuel that brought the towers down, not the impact. I got
>a call last night that Ky's space shot has been postponed by the FAA.
>Presumably they are a little busy right now and had to set priorities.
>
>Now, more than ever, we need to come together as amateur rocketeers.
>Doubtless, we will be under a lot of pressure and scrutiny over the next
>weeks and months.  Our actions will have reflect the highest
>professionalism if we wish to continue our way of life.
>
>Ray
>
>
>  >
>  >


--
Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
Opinion, the whole thing.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 28989 invoked from network); 13 Sep 2001 02:51:53 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 13 Sep 2001 02:51:53 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 13647 invoked by uid 50005); 13 Sep 2001 02:49:56 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4157. . Clean. Processed in 0.345495 secs); 13 Sep 2001 02:49:56 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 13 Sep 2001 02:49:56 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA32434; Wed, 12 Sep 2001 19:34:34 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 91240 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 13 Sep 2001 02:34:33          +0000
Received: from smtp008pub.verizon.net (smtp008pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.187])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA32420 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 12 Sep 2001 19:34:32 -0700
Received: from [63.24.225.206] (1Cust69.tnt2.rancho-cucamonga.ca.da.uu.net          [63.15.225.69]) by smtp008pub.verizon.net  with ESMTP for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; id f8D2Y0p21977 Wed, 12 Sep 2001 21:34:00          -0500 (CDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: GTE/01rocket@mail.gte.net
References: <005b01c13ba9$2e334bb0$4464a8c0@afioretti>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <a05100308b7c5cb429086@[63.24.225.206]>
Date:         Wed, 12 Sep 2001 19:34:01 -0700
Reply-To: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] TRAGEDY: PLEASE READ
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <005b01c13ba9$2e334bb0$4464a8c0@afioretti>

>For every patent that has been ripped up or bought up and buried which
>offers a Real alternative to oil and fossil fuels, There ya go...!!!!! Keep


ALL of those alleged patents are public info and not recognized in
SOME countries, and expire 12 years after they are patented.  Produce
and market them.

Or shut up.

Jerry

>alligator shoes on oil tycoons, ehhhh?  If we did what we had to do 30 years
>ago when we had the BS so called oil crisis then to find a real alternative,
>the mid east would be nothing more than a sand trap for golf.  Certainly not
>the military or financial threat that the region represents today.
>


--
Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
Opinion, the whole thing.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 19225 invoked from network); 13 Sep 2001 02:57:05 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 13 Sep 2001 02:57:05 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 22537 invoked by uid 50005); 13 Sep 2001 02:54:30 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4157. . Clean. Processed in 0.381376 secs); 13 Sep 2001 02:54:30 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 13 Sep 2001 02:54:29 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA32549; Wed, 12 Sep 2001 19:40:03 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 91269 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 13 Sep 2001 02:40:01          +0000
Received: from smtppop2pub.verizon.net (smtppop2pub.gte.net [206.46.170.21]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA32535 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 12 Sep 2001 19:40:01 -0700
Received: from [63.24.225.206] (1Cust69.tnt2.rancho-cucamonga.ca.da.uu.net          [63.15.225.69]) by smtppop2pub.verizon.net  with ESMTP for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; id VAA4282228 Wed, 12 Sep 2001 21:40:31 -0500          (CDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: GTE/01rocket@mail.gte.net
References: <F177KlNAOM8ZO2Yyp170000d0ae@hotmail.com>            <003d01c13bd2$92f0a560$1b30fea9@kristinscomp>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <a05100309b7c5cc6fd779@[63.24.225.206]>
Date:         Wed, 12 Sep 2001 19:39:24 -0700
Reply-To: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] safety
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <003d01c13bd2$92f0a560$1b30fea9@kristinscomp>

>  > Has physical cabin separation of the pilot section in civil aircraft not
>>  become a must now? Opinions?
>
>One would hope.  I have often wondered why it was even possible to get to
>the cockpit from the passenger compartment.  I have often advocated that
>there should be a significant (read: armored) bulkhead between the
>passengers and the cockpit with NO door.  IE, the only way to get from the
>passenger compartment to the cockpit involves leaving the plane and coming
>back in another door.  In addition, I've felt that the pressurization of the
>passenger compartment and the cockpit should be separate.  That is to say
>that in the event of a highjacking attempt, standard proceedure should be
>for the pilots (who are safely in the "next room") to depressurize the
>passenger compartment.  After all, how effective do you think you could be
>as a highjacker when you're passed out on the floor.....

1000% agreement.  In the short term the dual pressure zones could be
implemented as well as a tank of knock-out gas.  Cheaper than armed
guards on every flight and if activated by ANY flight attendant,.
more effective too.

One pilot resorted to crashing his plane intentionally rather than
crashing into the white house knowing the whole planeload was
probably already dead.

Hero.

Jerry

--
Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
Opinion, the whole thing.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 26004 invoked from network); 13 Sep 2001 02:58:48 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 13 Sep 2001 02:58:48 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 14989 invoked by uid 50005); 13 Sep 2001 02:58:07 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpb with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.210176 secs); 13 Sep 2001 02:58:07 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 13 Sep 2001 02:58:07 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA32610; Wed, 12 Sep 2001 19:42:17 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 91288 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 13 Sep 2001 02:42:16          +0000
Received: from smtp005pub.verizon.net (smtp005pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.184])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA32596 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 12 Sep 2001 19:42:15 -0700
Received: from [63.24.225.206] (1Cust69.tnt2.rancho-cucamonga.ca.da.uu.net          [63.15.225.69]) by smtp005pub.verizon.net  with ESMTP for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; id f8D2fhW01956 Wed, 12 Sep 2001 21:41:44          -0500 (CDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: GTE/01rocket@mail.gte.net
References: <Pine.LNX.4.10.10109120705180.25831-100000@itc.uci.edu>            <5.0.2.1.0.20010912085549.030ed880@mail.earthlink.net>            <3B9F8B4A.F367A9A4@artimex.com> <3B9F9409.3D89BDC3@biomicro.com>            <002f01c13bd1$fd752100$1b30fea9@kristinscomp>            <004e01c13bd3$8070d120$6601a8c0@home.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <a0510030ab7c5cd0cfbd3@[63.24.225.206]>
Date:         Wed, 12 Sep 2001 19:41:43 -0700
Reply-To: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] TRAGEDY: PLEASE READ
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <004e01c13bd3$8070d120$6601a8c0@home.com>

>Roger that Dave! As we used to say in the artillery; kill them all and let
>God sort'em out.
>
>We really need a strategy to take out the 'leaders'. Look at our problems:
>Saddam, Slobadon, Bin Ladin, Ghadaffi, etc. These are one man countries, or


Invade the countries with a WORLD force and make them the 51st, 52nd
and 53rd states.  Then all the citizens who have been living in the
USA as refugees will return and build wal-marts.

This is not an exaggeration either.

We SHOULD do that.

Jerry

>organization in Bin Ladin's case. Get rid of them and a large part of the
>problem is solved. Naysayers like to say another will just take their place,
>but I'd contend that's not too likely. These sorts tend to not have anyone
>around that has anywhere near their grasp on power. Certainly assassination
>is possible, but it would take fairly massive efforts to penetrate their
>security. In the case of yesterday's attack; I certainly hope we go through
>with the massive approach. But in the future how about pursuing a parallel
>path: a more aggressive reward policy. What if the U.S. put a $500,000,000
>price on their head? How much sleep would they get after that? How long till
>one of their comrades decided to go for the brass ring? And given the costs
>we've run up dealing with these animals, the reward cost would be a bargain.
>
>Brian


--
Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
Opinion, the whole thing.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 12786 invoked from network); 13 Sep 2001 03:02:56 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 13 Sep 2001 03:02:56 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 29009 invoked by uid 50005); 13 Sep 2001 02:59:46 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpf with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4157. . Clean. Processed in 1.983535 secs); 13 Sep 2001 02:59:46 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 13 Sep 2001 02:59:43 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA32701; Wed, 12 Sep 2001 19:46:10 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 91307 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 13 Sep 2001 02:46:07          +0000
Received: from smtp010pub.verizon.net ([206.46.170.189]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA32687 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed,          12 Sep 2001 19:46:06 -0700
Received: from [63.24.225.206] (1Cust69.tnt2.rancho-cucamonga.ca.da.uu.net          [63.15.225.69]) by smtp010pub.verizon.net  with ESMTP for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; id f8D2khr10186 Wed, 12 Sep 2001 21:46:43          -0500 (CDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: GTE/01rocket@mail.gte.net
References: <001501c13be0$70c36050$0200a8c0@prestige.net>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <a0510030bb7c5ce1d3c18@[63.24.225.206]>
Date:         Wed, 12 Sep 2001 19:45:36 -0700
Reply-To: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] TRAGEDY: PLEASE READ
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <001501c13be0$70c36050$0200a8c0@prestige.net>

>Now would be a VERY good time for President Bush to rescind a prior
>executive order (Pres. Ford's E.O.?) that prevents our gov't from
>assassinating heads of state. Just go on TV and have ONLY that to say, then


That applies to Sadaam but not to Bin-Laden.  He is a rich kid
groupie from another country, not a head of state.


>leave the podium... Just the act of signing the rescinding Exec order should
>cause lots of brown streaks in the baggy assed drawers of a few...
>
>Jeff


--
Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
Opinion, the whole thing.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 7299 invoked from network); 13 Sep 2001 03:09:53 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 13 Sep 2001 03:09:53 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 8227 invoked by uid 50005); 13 Sep 2001 03:07:56 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4157. . Clean. Processed in 0.56105 secs); 13 Sep 2001 03:07:56 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 13 Sep 2001 03:07:55 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA00403; Wed, 12 Sep 2001 19:53:14 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 91353 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 13 Sep 2001 02:53:12          +0000
Received: from smtp003pub.verizon.net (smtp003pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.182])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA00388 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 12 Sep 2001 19:53:11 -0700
Received: from [63.24.225.206] (1Cust69.tnt2.rancho-cucamonga.ca.da.uu.net          [63.15.225.69]) by smtp003pub.verizon.net  with ESMTP for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; id f8D2qd101486 Wed, 12 Sep 2001 21:52:39          -0500 (CDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: GTE/01rocket@mail.gte.net
References: <4.3.1.2.20010912201111.03729408@mail.idsoftware.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <a0510030db7c5cfae9a5c@[63.24.225.206]>
Date:         Wed, 12 Sep 2001 19:52:39 -0700
Reply-To: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] large vehicle propellant purge
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <4.3.1.2.20010912201111.03729408@mail.idsoftware.com>

>I am debating the necessity of having propellant purge valves on our second
>generation manned vehicle.
>
>Dumping remaining propellant before landing on an abort seems a sensible
>thing, but I worry about dumping hundreds of pounds of 90% peroxide out


Couldn't you have a passive purge system that reacts it but produces
no or minimal thrust?


>into the air.  There will certainly be a burst disc, which, if ruptured,
>would spray the raw peroxide out, but the likelihood of that happening
>during the minute or less of powered flight with no warning signs during
>the pad time is probably remote.  There will also be a way to drain the
>entire system for an on-pad abort.  The question is if there should be a
>separate, voluntary purge system that should be used during an
>in-flight abort.



>tio range of two to four, it seems reasonable.
>
>John Carmack


--
Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
Opinion, the whole thing.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 6141 invoked from network); 13 Sep 2001 03:18:53 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 13 Sep 2001 03:18:53 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 16871 invoked by uid 50005); 13 Sep 2001 03:16:55 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4157. . Clean. Processed in 0.141383 secs); 13 Sep 2001 03:16:55 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 13 Sep 2001 03:16:55 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA00301; Wed, 12 Sep 2001 19:48:24 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 91326 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 13 Sep 2001 02:48:23          +0000
Received: from smtp003pub.verizon.net (smtp003pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.182])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA32755 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 12 Sep 2001 19:48:23 -0700
Received: from [63.24.225.206] (1Cust69.tnt2.rancho-cucamonga.ca.da.uu.net          [63.15.225.69]) by smtp003pub.verizon.net  with ESMTP for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; id f8D2lP128806 Wed, 12 Sep 2001 21:47:25          -0500 (CDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: GTE/01rocket@mail.gte.net
References: <Pine.LNX.4.10.10109121642090.25831-100000@itc.uci.edu>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <a0510030cb7c5ce7550d6@[63.24.225.206]>
Date:         Wed, 12 Sep 2001 19:47:25 -0700
Reply-To: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] TRAGEDY: PLEASE READ
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <Pine.LNX.4.10.10109121642090.25831-100000@itc.uci.edu>

>I hope we've all had a chance to vent our anger about recent events.  Now,
>we need to think about how this event will effect our hobby.
>
>First thing is FAA will probably be pretty busy for the next week or so
>and will probably not grant waivers.
>
>Next, I figure large purchaces of solid oxidizers and metal fines will be
>more closely monitored.


But none of these are reasonable or in any way related to the events
or the solution of them.  It is knee-jerk over-reaction.

Typical government closing the barn door after the horse escapes, and
every barn door nationwide whether there is a horse or not.

Jerry


>
>Beyond this, it's only speculation.
>
>What are the likely things that can be done?
>
>Ray


--
Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
Opinion, the whole thing.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 16565 invoked from network); 13 Sep 2001 03:22:07 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 13 Sep 2001 03:22:07 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 18145 invoked by uid 50005); 13 Sep 2001 03:18:57 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpf with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4157. . Clean. Processed in 0.948216 secs); 13 Sep 2001 03:18:57 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 13 Sep 2001 03:18:54 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA00653; Wed, 12 Sep 2001 20:05:09 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 91403 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 13 Sep 2001 03:05:05          +0000
Received: from po4.glue.umd.edu (po4.glue.umd.edu [128.8.10.124]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA00638 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 12 Sep 2001 20:05:05 -0700
Received: from y.glue.umd.edu (IDENT:root@y.glue.umd.edu [128.8.10.68]) by          po4.glue.umd.edu (8.10.1/8.10.1) with ESMTP id f8D354f02215 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 12 Sep 2001 23:05:04 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from y.glue.umd.edu (IDENT:sendmail@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by          y.glue.umd.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id XAA16521 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 12 Sep 2001 23:05:03 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from localhost (acase@localhost) by y.glue.umd.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with          ESMTP id XAA16517 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 12 Sep 2001          23:05:03 -0400 (EDT)
X-Authentication-Warning: y.glue.umd.edu: acase owned process doing -bs
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.GSO.4.21.0109122303330.16357-100000@y.glue.umd.edu>
Date:         Wed, 12 Sep 2001 23:05:03 -0400
Reply-To: "Andrew Case" <acase@GLUE.UMD.EDU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Andrew Case" <acase@GLUE.UMD.EDU>
Subject:      [AR] Some news from the front lines
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

A friend of mine is serving her residency in NYC. I finally managed to get
in touch with her. Here's an excerpt of what she wrote:

> Hi Andrew - so glad that you wrote and that you and Daphne are safe.
> I am catching up on messages in
> the quiet before the storm - the hospital was busy earlier (lots of trauma)
> and now there is a lull - we are all preparing to work hard for the next few
> days as the rescue workers hopefully find more patients that are alive in
> the rubble.  The only fear we all feel in the pits of our stomachs is that
> second and third wave of survivors will never come because it is too late.
> The first hours were filled with patients suffering from dust inhalation,
> carbon monoxide poisoning and smoke inhalation injury, severe trauma (many
> of those didn't make it).  We have been caring for several injured firemen
> in the past few hours, such heros.  One of my patients is a 66 year old
> retired fireman - he made me promise not to tell anyone that he was actually
> retired - he worked for 12 hours in the face of constant smoke and heat and
> dust before collapsing.
> The hospital
> has mobilized all the extra staff, our ER teams are down at St. Vincents,
> and we intially cleared out all the intensive care units to receive new
> patients - the team work is admirable and makes me proud to have such
> dedicated colleagues and co-workers.  Everyone is stepping up, yesterday
> there were so many people in the streets donating blood...
> I am exhausted and a second wave of residents came in to relieve us this
> morning - by now we are all pacing and waiting and waiting for the rescue
> teams to find more patients.

The worst in some people is bringing out the best in others.
......Andrew

Andrew Case                             |
acase@plasma.umd.edu                    |
Institute for Plasma Research           |
University of Maryland, College Park    |

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 27317 invoked from network); 13 Sep 2001 03:35:22 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 13 Sep 2001 03:35:22 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 1861 invoked by uid 50005); 13 Sep 2001 03:33:25 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4157. . Clean. Processed in 0.283795 secs); 13 Sep 2001 03:33:25 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 13 Sep 2001 03:33:25 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA00866; Wed, 12 Sep 2001 20:18:41 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 91454 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 13 Sep 2001 03:18:38          +0000
Received: from pintail.mail.pas.earthlink.net (pintail.mail.pas.earthlink.net          [207.217.120.122]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id          UAA00852 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 12 Sep 2001 20:18:37 -0700
Received: from earthlink.net (dialup-209.245.142.217.Dial1.SanJose1.Level3.net          [209.245.142.217]) by pintail.mail.pas.earthlink.net          (EL-8_9_3_3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id UAA17295 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>;          Wed, 12 Sep 2001 20:18:36 -0700 (PDT)
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (Win98; I)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <000e01c13bd4$8b150280$47391442@billbull>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3BA02905.83406AA2@earthlink.net>
Date:         Wed, 12 Sep 2001 20:33:25 -0700
Reply-To: <thomgaf@energyrs.com>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Thomas M. Mcgaffey" <energyrelease@EARTHLINK.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] TRAGEDY: PLEASE READ
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Bill,

I my case your wrong.  Bad as it was, IT had to be done and I had
nightmares for weeks, but I would do it again if it was necessary.  Some
of these "people" only respond to deadly force.

The use of deadly force is not a "fun" thing,  the dead don't get up
after the "movie" is over.  But some times deadly force is the only
"real" option.  I believe this is one of those times.

My GOD, 20,000 plus dead and no end in sight!

Thom

Thomas M. McGaffey
Energy Release Systems
thomgaf@energyrs.com
San Jose, Kalifornia
USA


> Bill Bullock wrote:
>
>     I would suspect that some list-mates have never had to kill
> another human.
> Bill

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 23463 invoked from network); 13 Sep 2001 03:44:41 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 13 Sep 2001 03:44:41 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 3246 invoked by uid 50005); 13 Sep 2001 03:43:54 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpa with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4157. . Clean. Processed in 0.249833 secs); 13 Sep 2001 03:43:54 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 13 Sep 2001 03:43:53 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA01090; Wed, 12 Sep 2001 20:28:08 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 91488 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 13 Sep 2001 03:28:06          +0000
Received: from rly-ip01.mx.aol.com (rly-ip01.mx.aol.com [205.188.156.49]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA01060 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 12 Sep 2001 20:26:57 -0700
Received: from logs-mtc-tf.proxy.aol.com (logs-mtc-tf.proxy.aol.com          [64.12.103.5]) by rly-ip01.mx.aol.com (8.8.8/8.8.8/AOL-5.0.0) with          ESMTP id XAA23727 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 12 Sep 2001          23:26:10 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from oemcomputer.cyberservices.com (ACAB7DDF.ipt.aol.com          [172.171.125.223]) by logs-mtc-tf.proxy.aol.com (8.10.0/8.10.0) with          ESMTP id f8D3PRS349728 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 12 Sep 2001          23:25:28 -0400 (EDT)
X-Sender: mhavener@pop.netzero.net
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
References: <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010912184501.8414A-100000@spsystems.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
X-Apparently-From: MemphisRocketDad@cs.com
Message-ID:  <5.1.0.14.0.20010912221018.00a5dce0@pop.netzero.net>
Date:         Wed, 12 Sep 2001 22:15:58 -0500
Reply-To: "Mark G. Havener" <impact@CYBERSERVICES.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Mark G. Havener" <impact@CYBERSERVICES.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] safety
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <007001c13bf2$6be9e6a0$1b30fea9@kristinscomp>

At 06:21 PM 9/12/01 -0700, you wrote:
> > Possible, but heavy and hard to make foolproof.
>
>It need not be particularly heavy.  A 1/4" sheet of alumina backed by a 1/8"
>sheet of aluminum backed by 20-40 layers of Spectra is remarkably light and
>can stop some absolutely amazing things.  And the cost is surprisingly
>small.  (Note:  I speak from experience on this matter).
>
> > > No intercom
>
> > How does the cabin crew tell the pilot that a passenger has had a heart
> > attack and needs a hospital ASAP?  Again, a more likely emergency.
>
>Simple, have a "panic button" in the cabin.  That is to say, make it such
>that the only way for the passenger compartment to communicate with the crew
>is to push a button that turns on a light/buzzer/whatever.  If the crew sees
>this light up, they land at the nearest airport.  They don't need to know
>that somebody has gone apeshit or is having a heart attack - they just land.
>That way, medical emergencies can be reasonably dealt with but at the same
>time it does not allow for the level of communication required for a
>highjacker to blackmail/threaten/negotiate/etc. with the flight crew.

This is such a great idea, I'm surprised that somebody didn't think of this
before. Submit it to the FAA. Hopefully they will do this or some variation
that will accomplish the same thing.

It sure beats a strip search w/anal probe to get on a plane. Personally, I
think citizens who possess a Handgun Carry Permit should be allowed to
board armed. Have a group of 5-6 hijackers some up against 10-15 armed
citizens. The bad guys won't have a chance.

I have also just learned that concerning the PA crash, people w/cell phones
got news about the WTC, and the men took a vote and went to attack the
hijackers. Those men are all heros.

Mark G. Havener

PRAY HARD. GIVE BLOOD. GIVE WHAT YOU CAN. AVENGE.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 28664 invoked from network); 13 Sep 2001 03:46:29 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 13 Sep 2001 03:46:29 -0000
Received: (qmail 3943 invoked by uid 50005); 13 Sep 2001 03:45:41 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpa with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4157. . Clean. Processed in 0.215704 secs); 13 Sep 2001 03:45:41 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 13 Sep 2001 03:45:41 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA01057; Wed, 12 Sep 2001 20:26:45 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 91481 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 13 Sep 2001 03:26:43          +0000
Received: from www.rocketry.org          (root@phnx3UBR5-4-hfc-0251-d17d1591.rdc1.az.coxatwork.com          [209.125.21.145]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA01043          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 12 Sep 2001 20:26:42 -0700
Received: from localhost (tim@localhost) by www.rocketry.org (8.11.4/8.11.4)          with ESMTP id f8D3P6p09518 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 12 Sep          2001 20:25:06 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.LNX.4.33.0109122019020.9316-100000@www.rocketry.org>
Date:         Wed, 12 Sep 2001 20:25:06 -0700
Reply-To: "T.J." <tim@ROCKETRY.ORG>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "T.J." <tim@ROCKETRY.ORG>
Subject:      Re: [AR] safety
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <a05100309b7c5cc6fd779@[63.24.225.206]>

> 1000% agreement.  In the short term the dual pressure zones could be
> implemented as well as a tank of knock-out gas.  Cheaper than armed
> guards on every flight and if activated by ANY flight attendant,.
> more effective too.

Actually, if the cockpit and cabin were entirely separate the pilots would
need only depressurize the cabin to knock everyone out at a
normal flight altitude.

> One pilot resorted to crashing his plane intentionally rather than
> crashing into the white house knowing the whole planeload was
> probably already dead.
>
> Hero.

I agree. A friend of mine emailed me saying he heard that a couple guys on
the Pittsburgh flight spoke to their relatives on the phone and told them
of their intent to try to take back the aircraft before the plane
crashed. Does my heart good to hear that rather than to have a plane load
of Americans sit back in their seats while a few skinny bastards with
utility knives take over and fly them into a building there were some
actual men on the flight that decided to say NO and fight..

<RANT>
We're always taught to give the mugger your wallet, hand the criminal
holding up the store the cash drawer, etc.. Our founding fathers weren't
into that, and we shouldn't be either I think. We need to stop being
victims and start fighting back once in a while..
</RANT>

Hit the web site and make a donation to the Red Cross if you're so
inclined..

TIM

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 5182 invoked from network); 13 Sep 2001 03:59:35 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 13 Sep 2001 03:59:35 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 11334 invoked by uid 50005); 13 Sep 2001 03:58:48 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpa with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4157. . Clean. Processed in 0.223659 secs); 13 Sep 2001 03:58:48 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 13 Sep 2001 03:58:47 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA01125; Wed, 12 Sep 2001 20:29:31 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 91499 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 13 Sep 2001 03:29:29          +0000
Received: from rly-ip01.mx.aol.com (rly-ip01.mx.aol.com [205.188.156.49]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA01070 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 12 Sep 2001 20:27:50 -0700
Received: from logs-mtc-tf.proxy.aol.com (logs-mtc-tf.proxy.aol.com          [64.12.103.5]) by rly-ip01.mx.aol.com (8.8.8/8.8.8/AOL-5.0.0) with          ESMTP id XAA23815 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 12 Sep 2001          23:26:13 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from oemcomputer.cyberservices.com (ACAB7DDF.ipt.aol.com          [172.171.125.223]) by logs-mtc-tf.proxy.aol.com (8.10.0/8.10.0) with          ESMTP id f8D3PWS315622 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 12 Sep 2001          23:25:32 -0400 (EDT)
X-Sender: mhavener@pop.netzero.net
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0D5F_01C56B69.52AE7430"
X-Apparently-From: MemphisRocketDad@cs.com
Message-ID:  <5.1.0.14.0.20010912221717.00a26b30@pop.netzero.net>
Date:         Wed, 12 Sep 2001 22:23:07 -0500
Reply-To: "Mark G. Havener" <impact@CYBERSERVICES.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Mark G. Havener" <impact@CYBERSERVICES.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] TRAGEDY: PLEASE READ
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <138.17b4e92.28d16d1f@aol.com>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0D5F_01C56B69.52AE7430
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"

At 09:59 PM 9/12/01 -0400, you wrote:
>I was thinking somewhere along the lines of a 30min road flare shoved up
>their ass. Give them a little of the feeling of the poor people in those
>buildings who were not spared the misery of being burned to death by the tons
>of jet fuel that was spilled about.
>
>Mark
>
>In a message dated 9/12/2001 3:45:30 PM Mountain Daylight Time,
>afiorettii@EXCITE.COM writes:
>
>
>>In all fairness, the only punishment that fits the crime is perhaps to tie
>>each of them between two trucks and drive away from each other ever so
>>gradually, perhaps an inch per minute, not that it would ever happen.

Guys,

I bet I can get these guys to scream for several hours a day, every day,
for at least a year before I start doing permanent damage. I will get them
to look forward to the 7th Level of Hell (the opposite of which they
believe they were going to, 7th Heaven) after the first 5 minutes.

Mark G. Havener

PRAY HARD. GIVE BLOOD. GIVE WHAT YOU CAN. AVENGE.

------=_NextPart_000_0D5F_01C56B69.52AE7430
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="us-ascii"

<html>
At 09:59 PM 9/12/01 -0400, you wrote:<br>
<blockquote type=cite class=cite cite><font face="arial" size=2>I was
thinking somewhere along the lines of a 30min road flare shoved up <br>
their ass. Give them a little of the feeling of the poor people in those
<br>
buildings who were not spared the misery of being burned to death by the
tons <br>
of jet fuel that was spilled about. <br><br>
Mark <br><br>
In a message dated 9/12/2001 3:45:30 PM Mountain Daylight Time, <br>
afiorettii@EXCITE.COM writes: <br><br>
<br>
<blockquote type=cite class=cite cite>In all fairness, the only
punishment that fits the crime is perhaps to tie <br>
each of them between two trucks and drive away from each other ever so
<br>
gradually, perhaps an inch per minute, not that it would ever happen.
</blockquote></blockquote><br>
Guys,<br><br>
I bet I can get these guys to scream for several hours a day, every day,
for at least a year before I start doing permanent damage. I will get
them to look forward to the 7th Level of Hell (the opposite of which they
believe they were going to, 7th Heaven) after the first 5 minutes.<br>
<x-sigsep><p></x-sigsep>
Mark G. Havener<br><br>
PRAY HARD. GIVE BLOOD. GIVE WHAT YOU CAN. AVENGE.<br>
</font></html>

------=_NextPart_000_0D5F_01C56B69.52AE7430--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 2831 invoked from network); 22 Oct 2001 17:47:53 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 22 Oct 2001 17:47:53 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: (qmail 10582 invoked by uid 50005); 22 Oct 2001 17:47:49 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4166. . Clean. Processed in 0.151408 secs); 22 Oct 2001 17:47:49 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 22 Oct 2001 17:47:49 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA06469; Mon, 22 Oct 2001 10:30:51 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 120744 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 22 Oct 2001 17:30:43          +0000
Received: from copland.udel.edu (copland.udel.edu [128.175.13.92]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA06455 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 22 Oct 2001 10:30:42 -0700
Received: from localhost (tproseus@localhost) by copland.udel.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3)          with ESMTP id NAA02348 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 22 Oct 2001          13:30:18 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.SOL.4.31.0110221327030.16359-100000@copland.udel.edu>
Date:         Mon, 22 Oct 2001 13:30:18 -0400
Reply-To: "Timothy E Proseus" <tproseus@UDEL.EDU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Timothy E Proseus" <tproseus@UDEL.EDU>
Subject:      [AR] Medusa nozzle question
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Somebody was discussing this before but I can't recall who it was.  They
gave a formula for distributing the total throat area among the multiple
openings of a medusa nozzle.  Seems like it was 60% of the total in the
center and 40% distrubuted among the others, but I never wrote it down.

Could someone kindly post this again?

Ted Proseus

http://copland.udel.edu/~tproseus
http://www.dreamwater.net/biz/rocketchutes/parachutes.html


+'^'+.,.+'^'+.,.+'^'+.,.+'^'+.,.+'^'+.,.+'^'+.,.+'^'+.,.+'^'+.,.+'^'+.,.+

                                Ted Proseus

                             Research Associate
                 Plant Biochemistry/Biophysics Laboratory
              University of Delaware, College of Marine Studies
                           Lab/Office: 302-645-4022

+'^'+.,.+'^'+.,.+'^'+.,.+'^'+.,.+'^'+.,.+'^'+.,.+'^'+.,.+'^'+.,.+'^'+.,.+

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 10725 invoked from network); 22 Oct 2001 18:06:50 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 22 Oct 2001 18:06:50 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 5130 invoked by uid 50005); 22 Oct 2001 16:53:31 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4165. . Clean. Processed in 0.304212 secs); 22 Oct 2001 16:53:31 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 22 Oct 2001 16:53:31 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA06502; Mon, 22 Oct 2001 10:34:22 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 120751 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 22 Oct 2001 17:34:20          +0000
Received: from fw1-bv.tek.com (fw1-bv.tek.com [192.65.40.16]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA06485 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon,          22 Oct 2001 10:34:20 -0700
Received: from fw1-bv.tek.com (root@localhost) by fw1-bv.tek.com with ESMTP id          f9MHXns28425 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 22 Oct 2001 10:33:49          -0700 (PDT)
Received: from tektronix.tek.com (tektronix.tek.com [128.181.6.43]) by          fw1-bv.tek.com with ESMTP id f9MHXn528421 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>;          Mon, 22 Oct 2001 10:33:49 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from us-bv-u07.bv.tek.com (webshield.tek.com [128.181.2.130]) by          tektronix.tek.com (8.10.2+Sun/8.10.2) with SMTP id f9MHXnO22338 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 22 Oct 2001 10:33:49 -0700 (PDT)
Received: FROM us-bv-m01.bv.tek.com BY us-bv-u07.bv.tek.com ; Mon Oct 22          10:33:48 2001 -0700
Received: by us-bv-m01.bv.tek.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) id          <VLDHSHGM>; Mon, 22 Oct 2001 10:33:48 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19)
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Message-ID:  <5832AFF5FC75D411844300508BC216B70302AAFC@us-bv-m07.bv.tek.com>
Date:         Mon, 22 Oct 2001 10:33:47 -0700
Reply-To: <john.w.lyngdal@EXGATE.TEK.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <john.w.lyngdal@EXGATE.TEK.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] 60 qt Hobart
Comments: To: rcalkins@ITC.UCI.EDU
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Ray,

        I use a 20 qt. and a 40 qt. mixer for our propellant activities.
7-12 kg. is a reasonable batch size for the 20 qt. and 15-22 kg. can be
mixed in the 40 qt. The 20 quart has been our workhorse, and the 40 qt. is
only used when we're casting really big grains. I'd pass on the 60 qt.
unless you have some really big big projects in the works.

        It's really tough to properly evaluate the mixers without putting a
load on them, but you can check the planetary bushings for slop by
installing the paddle and stressing it from side to side. We got a good deal
on our 20 qt. because the bushings were shot, but I pressed out the worn
bushings and pressed in a replacement pair for $2.00

        John




-----Original Message-----
From: Ray Calkins [mailto:rcalkins@ITC.UCI.EDU]
Sent: Monday, October 22, 2001 9:45 AM
To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
Subject: [AR] 60 qt Hobart


Hello All,

I've recently found a small cache of Hobart mixers, three are present:
20 qt, 30 qt and 60 qt.

The 20 and 30 qt units appear to be in decent shape, and are about 10-20
years old.  The 60 qt unit is a 1936 model and a little rougher but seems
to be in good mechanical condition with no geartrain knock.

How do I know if the gear train is good, how much "play" shoud be present,
etc.  What else should I look for?

What are reasonable prices to pay for these units?  All are 115v units and
come with paddle, dough hook and a bowl.  The 60 qt unit has a tin plated
bowl (needs replated, steel shows in spots) the other two come with
stainless bowls.

Sincerely,

Ray

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 21451 invoked from network); 22 Oct 2001 23:32:26 -0000
Received: from smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.105]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 22 Oct 2001 23:32:26 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 13013 invoked by uid 50005); 22 Oct 2001 23:31:13 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpy with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.252052 secs); 22 Oct 2001 23:31:13 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 22 Oct 2001 23:31:13 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA07979; Mon, 22 Oct 2001 16:23:27 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 120872 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 22 Oct 2001 23:23:25          +0000
Received: from smtp01.roc.frontiernet.net (alteon01.roc.frontiernet.net          [66.133.130.232] (may be forged)) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with          SMTP id QAA07965 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 22 Oct 2001 16:23:25          -0700
Received: (qmail 20363 invoked from network); 22 Oct 2001 23:22:54 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO frontiernet.net) ([64.211.177.35])          (envelope-sender <tbinford@frontiernet.net>) by 0 (qmail-ldap-1.03)          with SMTP for <tproseus@UDEL.EDU>; 22 Oct 2001 23:22:54 -0000
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.74 [en] (Win98; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <Pine.SOL.4.31.0110221327030.16359-100000@copland.udel.edu>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3BD4ABDA.F9A8B536@frontiernet.net>
Date:         Mon, 22 Oct 2001 19:29:30 -0400
Reply-To: <tbinford@frontiernet.net>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Tom Binford" <tbinford@frontiernet.net>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Medusa nozzle question
Comments: To: Timothy E Proseus <tproseus@UDEL.EDU>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Timothy E Proseus wrote:
>
> Somebody was discussing this before but I can't recall who it was.  They
> gave a formula for distributing the total throat area among the multiple
> openings of a medusa nozzle.  Seems like it was 60% of the total in the
> center and 40% distrubuted among the others, but I never wrote it down.

I use 1/3 in the center, rest distributed among the remaining 6.
1/2 in the center, rest distributed among the remaining 3 (for smaller
total area motors, the smallest throats I just use the center. Don't let
the center get above 3/8" diameter. If it does, use a single throat
style nozzle.

Tom

>
> Could someone kindly post this again?
>
> Ted Proseus
>
> http://copland.udel.edu/~tproseus
> http://www.dreamwater.net/biz/rocketchutes/parachutes.html
>
> +'^'+.,.+'^'+.,.+'^'+.,.+'^'+.,.+'^'+.,.+'^'+.,.+'^'+.,.+'^'+.,.+'^'+.,.+
>
>                                 Ted Proseus
>
>                              Research Associate
>                  Plant Biochemistry/Biophysics Laboratory
>               University of Delaware, College of Marine Studies
>                            Lab/Office: 302-645-4022
>
> +'^'+.,.+'^'+.,.+'^'+.,.+'^'+.,.+'^'+.,.+'^'+.,.+'^'+.,.+'^'+.,.+'^'+.,.+

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 28799 invoked from network); 22 Oct 2001 23:34:20 -0000
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 22 Oct 2001 23:34:20 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 32530 invoked by uid 50005); 22 Oct 2001 22:21:31 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4166. . Clean. Processed in 0.544105 secs); 22 Oct 2001 22:21:31 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 22 Oct 2001 22:21:30 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA07930; Mon, 22 Oct 2001 16:17:07 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 120862 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 22 Oct 2001 23:16:59          +0000
Received: from smtp01.roc.frontiernet.net (alteon01.roc.frontiernet.net          [66.133.130.232] (may be forged)) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with          SMTP id QAA07916 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 22 Oct 2001 16:16:58          -0700
Received: (qmail 767 invoked from network); 22 Oct 2001 23:16:27 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO frontiernet.net) ([64.211.177.35])          (envelope-sender <tbinford@frontiernet.net>) by 0 (qmail-ldap-1.03)          with SMTP for <dwright@D2-TECH.COM>; 22 Oct 2001 23:16:27 -0000
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.74 [en] (Win98; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <C0F7BF4DCEC1D2479A01031347184DCD02FE1A@nt2000s2.dgmicro.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3BD4AA58.568221B6@frontiernet.net>
Date:         Mon, 22 Oct 2001 19:23:04 -0400
Reply-To: <tbinford@frontiernet.net>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Tom Binford" <tbinford@frontiernet.net>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Source for Aerotech sized 54mm casting tubes
Comments: To: Darren Wright <dwright@D2-TECH.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Darren Wright wrote:
>
> Anyone have a source for Aerotech sized casting tubes?  They would be
> the ones with the 1.870 outside diameter.
>
> -Darren

I roll my own from paper box sealing tape. 1.835 ID, 2 layers of tape to
fit 1.875 ID liners.

Tom

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 24947 invoked from network); 23 Oct 2001 00:02:43 -0000
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 23 Oct 2001 00:02:43 -0000
X-Priority: 3
Received: (qmail 5577 invoked by uid 50005); 22 Oct 2001 22:49:22 -0000
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4165. . Clean. Processed in 0.398749 secs); 22 Oct 2001 22:49:22 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 22 Oct 2001 22:49:21 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA08139; Mon, 22 Oct 2001 16:59:53 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 120900 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 22 Oct 2001 23:59:52          +0000
Received: from nt2000s2.dgmicro.com (cn815472-c.newcas1.de.home.com          [24.40.74.93]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA08125          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 22 Oct 2001 16:59:51 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
content-class: urn:content-classes:message
X-MS-Has-Attach: 
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: 
Thread-Topic: 54mm SU motors...Epoxy?
Thread-Index: AcFbUbQwRH5ZSdvVTcaf5h3slaP00AAApYjw
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by itc.uci.edu id QAA08126
Message-ID:  <C0F7BF4DCEC1D2479A01031347184DCD3850@nt2000s2.dgmicro.com>
Date:         Mon, 22 Oct 2001 19:59:17 -0400
Reply-To: "Darren Wright" <dwright@D2-TECH.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Darren Wright" <dwright@D2-TECH.COM>
Subject:      [AR] 54mm SU motors...Epoxy?
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Has anyone sucessfully run long 54mm or 3" motors with epoxy capping the
ends?

I sucessfully fired a 14" long 54mm with West Systems plus fiberglass
filler.

I'm afraid however that with the longer motors / higher pressures I wil
be running that the epoxy will not hold.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 18751 invoked from network); 23 Oct 2001 00:08:25 -0000
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 23 Oct 2001 00:08:25 -0000
Received: (qmail 21421 invoked by uid 50005); 23 Oct 2001 00:08:21 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4166. . Clean. Processed in 0.256806 secs); 23 Oct 2001 00:08:21 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 23 Oct 2001 00:08:20 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA08087; Mon, 22 Oct 2001 16:48:48 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 120890 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 22 Oct 2001 23:48:46          +0000
Received: from femail23.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail23.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.0.95.148]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA08073          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 22 Oct 2001 16:48:46 -0700
Received: from cc334751a ([65.13.214.65]) by femail23.sdc1.sfba.home.com          (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20 201-229-121-120-20010223) with SMTP id          <20011022234838.WKTI5178.femail23.sdc1.sfba.home.com@cc334751a> for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 22 Oct 2001 16:48:38 -0700
References: <Pine.SOL.4.31.0110221327030.16359-100000@copland.udel.edu>             <3BD4ABDA.F9A8B536@frontiernet.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2462.0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <009a01c15b53$94720c80$6601a8c0@home.com>
Date:         Mon, 22 Oct 2001 17:45:06 -0600
Reply-To: "Brian Kosko" <bkosko1@HOME.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Brian Kosko" <bkosko1@HOME.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Medusa nozzle question
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Ted,

The main limit is not making the center hole too big. We drilled one to 3/8
inch and it fractured when we fired it.

Brian

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 6745 invoked from network); 23 Oct 2001 00:58:46 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 23 Oct 2001 00:58:46 -0000
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 13635 invoked by uid 50005); 23 Oct 2001 00:57:50 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4164. . Clean. Processed in 0.187795 secs); 23 Oct 2001 00:57:50 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 23 Oct 2001 00:57:50 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA08312; Mon, 22 Oct 2001 17:28:46 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 120934 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 23 Oct 2001 00:28:28          +0000
Received: from femail33.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail33.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.254.60.23]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA08297          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 22 Oct 2001 17:28:28 -0700
Received: from c1649002-a.earthlink.net ([24.20.95.67]) by          femail33.sdc1.sfba.home.com (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20          201-229-121-120-20010223) with ESMTP id          <20011023002821.IJVC26106.femail33.sdc1.sfba.home.com@c1649002-a.earthlink.net> for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>;          Mon, 22 Oct 2001 17:28:21 -0700
X-Sender: forkbomb@mail.earthlink.net
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.0.2
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <5.0.2.1.0.20011022172737.0287f118@mailsj-v1.corp.adobe.com>
Date:         Mon, 22 Oct 2001 17:28:22 -0700
Reply-To: "Pierce Nichols" <forkbomb@EARTHLINK.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Pierce Nichols" <forkbomb@EARTHLINK.NET>
Subject:      [AR] commercial HPR altitude record?
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Does anyone here know the absolute altitude record for HPR rockets on
commercial motors?

         -p


Mars or Bust!
www.marssociety.com

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 11509 invoked from network); 23 Oct 2001 01:06:23 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 23 Oct 2001 01:06:23 -0000
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 30888 invoked by uid 50005); 23 Oct 2001 01:05:27 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4164. . Clean. Processed in 0.231739 secs); 23 Oct 2001 01:05:27 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 23 Oct 2001 01:05:27 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA08446; Mon, 22 Oct 2001 18:03:48 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 120948 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 23 Oct 2001 01:03:41          +0000
Received: from copland.udel.edu (copland.udel.edu [128.175.13.92]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA08432 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 22 Oct 2001 18:03:41 -0700
Received: from localhost (tproseus@localhost) by copland.udel.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3)          with ESMTP id VAA16873; Mon, 22 Oct 2001 21:03:28 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.SOL.4.31.0110222102110.13702-100000@copland.udel.edu>
Date:         Mon, 22 Oct 2001 21:03:28 -0400
Reply-To: "Timothy E Proseus" <tproseus@UDEL.EDU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Timothy E Proseus" <tproseus@UDEL.EDU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Medusa nozzle question
Comments: To: Tom Binford <tbinford@frontiernet.net>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <3BD4ABDA.F9A8B536@frontiernet.net>

Thanks a lot.  I would expect somebody CATO'd a bunch of motors figuring
that out sometime in the past.

Ted Proseus

http://copland.udel.edu/~tproseus
http://www.dreamwater.net/biz/rocketchutes/parachutes.html


+'^'+.,.+'^'+.,.+'^'+.,.+'^'+.,.+'^'+.,.+'^'+.,.+'^'+.,.+'^'+.,.+'^'+.,.+

                                Ted Proseus

                             Research Associate
                 Plant Biochemistry/Biophysics Laboratory
              University of Delaware, College of Marine Studies
                           Lab/Office: 302-645-4022

+'^'+.,.+'^'+.,.+'^'+.,.+'^'+.,.+'^'+.,.+'^'+.,.+'^'+.,.+'^'+.,.+'^'+.,.+

On Mon, 22 Oct 2001, Tom Binford wrote:

> Timothy E Proseus wrote:
> >
> > Somebody was discussing this before but I can't recall who it was.  They
> > gave a formula for distributing the total throat area among the multiple
> > openings of a medusa nozzle.  Seems like it was 60% of the total in the
> > center and 40% distrubuted among the others, but I never wrote it down.
>
> I use 1/3 in the center, rest distributed among the remaining 6.
> 1/2 in the center, rest distributed among the remaining 3 (for smaller
> total area motors, the smallest throats I just use the center. Don't let
> the center get above 3/8" diameter. If it does, use a single throat
> style nozzle.
>
> Tom
>
> >
> > Could someone kindly post this again?
> >
> > Ted Proseus
> >
> > http://copland.udel.edu/~tproseus
> > http://www.dreamwater.net/biz/rocketchutes/parachutes.html
> >
> > +'^'+.,.+'^'+.,.+'^'+.,.+'^'+.,.+'^'+.,.+'^'+.,.+'^'+.,.+'^'+.,.+'^'+.,.+
> >
> >                                 Ted Proseus
> >
> >                              Research Associate
> >                  Plant Biochemistry/Biophysics Laboratory
> >               University of Delaware, College of Marine Studies
> >                            Lab/Office: 302-645-4022
> >
> > +'^'+.,.+'^'+.,.+'^'+.,.+'^'+.,.+'^'+.,.+'^'+.,.+'^'+.,.+'^'+.,.+'^'+.,.+
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 5144 invoked from network); 23 Oct 2001 01:12:24 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.105]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 23 Oct 2001 01:12:24 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 5594 invoked by uid 50005); 23 Oct 2001 01:11:11 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpy with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.215009 secs); 23 Oct 2001 01:11:11 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 23 Oct 2001 01:11:11 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA08501; Mon, 22 Oct 2001 18:09:28 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 120960 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 23 Oct 2001 01:09:26          +0000
Received: from smtp002pub.verizon.net (smtp002pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.181])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA08487 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 22 Oct 2001 18:09:26 -0700
Received: from [65.229.52.47] (1Cust155.tnt1.rancho-cucamonga.ca.da.uu.net          [63.24.225.155]) by smtp002pub.verizon.net  with ESMTP for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; id f9N18WS25828 Mon, 22 Oct 2001 20:08:32          -0500 (CDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: GTE/01rocket@mail.gte.net
References: <5.0.2.1.0.20011022172737.0287f118@mailsj-v1.corp.adobe.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <a05100333b7fa73604f5e@[65.229.52.47]>
Date:         Mon, 22 Oct 2001 18:08:55 -0700
Reply-To: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] commercial HPR altitude record?
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <5.0.2.1.0.20011022172737.0287f118@mailsj-v1.corp.adobe.com>

>Does anyone here know the absolute altitude record for HPR rockets on
>commercial motors?


Kline 92k feet?

But if you mean motors that are commercial
25k USR L1000 1990 ish
and others since higher, but commercial?


>
>         -p
>
>
>Mars or Bust!
>www.marssociety.com


--
Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
Opinion, the whole thing.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 210 invoked from network); 23 Oct 2001 01:25:55 -0000
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 23 Oct 2001 01:25:55 -0000
Received: (qmail 2991 invoked by uid 50005); 23 Oct 2001 01:25:43 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4166. . Clean. Processed in 0.284346 secs); 23 Oct 2001 01:25:43 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 23 Oct 2001 01:25:43 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA08564; Mon, 22 Oct 2001 18:22:37 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 120967 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 23 Oct 2001 01:22:31          +0000
Received: from mta04.mail.mel.aone.net.au (mta04.mail.au.uu.net [203.2.192.84])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA08549 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 22 Oct 2001 18:22:30 -0700
Received: from unknown ([63.34.214.244]) by mta04.mail.mel.aone.net.au with          SMTP id <20011023012218.ZRAN6258.mta04.mail.mel.aone.net.au@unknown>          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 23 Oct 2001 11:22:18 +1000
References: Conversation            <C0F7BF4DCEC1D2479A01031347184DCD3850@nt2000s2.dgmicro.com> with            last message            <C0F7BF4DCEC1D2479A01031347184DCD3850@nt2000s2.dgmicro.com>
Priority: Normal
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Priority: 3
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	X-MAPIextension=.TXT;
	charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>
Date:         Tue, 23 Oct 2001 01:22:31 +0000
Reply-To: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] 54mm SU motors...Epoxy?
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <C0F7BF4DCEC1D2479A01031347184DCD3850@nt2000s2.dgmicro.com>

I have successfully fired 54mm & 3" motors and know of others that have run
8+ grain motors using epoxied ends using both composite and Al casings. If
your ends are failing look at: your prep technique, landing area,
clearances & quality or suitability of the epoxy. Epoxied ends will handle
virtually any chamber pressure if designed for it. Why do you run your
longer motors at higher chamber pressures? I assume to try and reduce
erosive burning?

Troy.

----------
> Has anyone sucessfully run long 54mm or 3" motors with epoxy capping the
> ends?
>
> I sucessfully fired a 14" long 54mm with West Systems plus fiberglass
> filler.
>
> I'm afraid however that with the longer motors / higher pressures I wil
> be running that the epoxy will not hold.
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 28125 invoked from network); 23 Oct 2001 01:56:11 -0000
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 23 Oct 2001 01:56:11 -0000
Received: (qmail 14254 invoked by uid 50005); 23 Oct 2001 01:56:07 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4166. . Clean. Processed in 0.155682 secs); 23 Oct 2001 01:56:07 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 23 Oct 2001 01:56:06 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA08763; Mon, 22 Oct 2001 18:52:35 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 120990 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 23 Oct 2001 01:52:34          +0000
Received: from albqpop1.albq.uswest.net (albqpop1.albq.uswest.net          [207.108.240.1]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id SAA08749          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 22 Oct 2001 18:52:33 -0700
Received: (qmail 96551 invoked by alias); 23 Oct 2001 01:49:05 -0000
Delivered-To: fixup-AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU@fixme
Received: (qmail 92517 invoked by uid 0); 23 Oct 2001 01:46:47 -0000
Received: from cc898542-a.prdise1.nm.home.com (HELO cc898542a) (65.7.151.152)          by albqpop1.albq.uswest.net with SMTP; 23 Oct 2001 01:46:47 -0000
References: <5.0.2.1.0.20011022172737.0287f118@mailsj-v1.corp.adobe.com>             <a05100333b7fa73604f5e@[65.229.52.47]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <001001c15b64$cda14500$0100a8c0@cc898542a>
Date:         Mon, 22 Oct 2001 19:48:23 -0600
Reply-To: "Paxton" <darkspunge@USWEST.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Paxton" <darkspunge@USWEST.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] commercial HPR altitude record?
Comments: To: Jerry Irvine <01rocket@GTE.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Something on the order of 32000 feet on a aerotech N2000.

Pax


----- Original Message -----
From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Monday, October 22, 2001 7:08 PM
Subject: Re: [AR] commercial HPR altitude record?


> >Does anyone here know the absolute altitude record for HPR rockets on
> >commercial motors?
>
>
> Kline 92k feet?
>
> But if you mean motors that are commercial
> 25k USR L1000 1990 ish
> and others since higher, but commercial?
>
>
> >
> >         -p
> >
> >
> >Mars or Bust!
> >www.marssociety.com
>
>
> --
> Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
> Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
> Opinion, the whole thing.
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 1469 invoked from network); 23 Oct 2001 02:05:00 -0000
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 23 Oct 2001 02:05:00 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 28212 invoked by uid 50005); 23 Oct 2001 02:04:55 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4166. . Clean. Processed in 0.236067 secs); 23 Oct 2001 02:04:55 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 23 Oct 2001 02:04:54 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA08712; Mon, 22 Oct 2001 18:46:39 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 120978 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 23 Oct 2001 01:46:26          +0000
Received: from fcexgw03.efi.com ([192.68.228.82]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7)          with SMTP id SAA08625 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 22 Oct 2001          18:36:26 -0700
Received: from 10.10.12.104 by fcexgw03.efi.com (InterScan E-Mail VirusWall          NT); Mon, 22 Oct 2001 18:36:05 -0700
Received: from earthlink.net (peroxide.efi.com [10.10.89.46]) by          EX-IMC3-CORP.efi.com with SMTP (Microsoft Exchange Internet Mail          Service Version 5.5.2653.13) id 4W788CZJ; Mon, 22 Oct 2001 18:36:24          -0700
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.14-5.0 i686)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <5.0.2.1.0.20011022172737.0287f118@mailsj-v1.corp.adobe.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3BD4C998.FBA7DBC8@earthlink.net>
Date:         Mon, 22 Oct 2001 18:36:24 -0700
Reply-To: "David Weinshenker" <daze39@EARTHLINK.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "David Weinshenker" <daze39@EARTHLINK.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] commercial HPR altitude record?
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Pierce Nichols wrote:
>
> Does anyone here know the absolute altitude record for HPR rockets on
> commercial motors?

See http://www.tripoli.org/altrecord.html - the highest claimed altitude record
is R1chard King's "N" mark at just over 32000 ft.

An article in Tripoli Central California newsletter described the rocket as a
minimum diameter (4") fiberglass airframe with an Aerotech N2000 motor - all-up
weight was given as 44 lb. and propellant weight was 17 lb.

-dave w

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 23981 invoked from network); 23 Oct 2001 02:10:24 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 23 Oct 2001 02:10:24 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 29544 invoked by uid 50005); 23 Oct 2001 02:09:28 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4164. . Clean. Processed in 0.153495 secs); 23 Oct 2001 02:09:28 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 23 Oct 2001 02:09:28 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA08904; Mon, 22 Oct 2001 19:07:14 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 121013 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 23 Oct 2001 02:07:13          +0000
Received: from proxy2.ba.best.com (root@proxy2.ba.best.com [206.184.139.14]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA08889 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Mon, 22 Oct 2001 19:07:13 -0700
Received: from [10.0.0.2] (snvadslgw2poold155.snjs.uswestqwest.net          [168.103.213.155]) by proxy2.ba.best.com (8.9.3/8.9.2/best.out) with          ESMTP id TAA28436 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Mon, 22 Oct 2001          19:06:57 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Sender:  (Unverified)
References: <5.0.2.1.0.20011022172737.0287f118@mailsj-v1.corp.adobe.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <v0421010db7fa7f51da8b@[10.0.0.2]>
Date:         Mon, 22 Oct 2001 19:06:24 -0700
Reply-To: "bob fortune" <bob@FORTUNEPAINT.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "bob fortune" <bob@FORTUNEPAINT.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] commercial HPR altitude record?
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <5.0.2.1.0.20011022172737.0287f118@mailsj-v1.corp.adobe.com>

We're talking commercially available high power alphabet motors, right?

Craig Snyder
Oct 5, 2001 Black Rock Nevada
34,988 feet - M to K two stager


>Does anyone here know the absolute altitude record for HPR rockets on
>commercial motors?
>
>        -p
>
>
>Mars or Bust!
>www.marssociety.com

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 21578 invoked from network); 23 Oct 2001 02:18:13 -0000
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 23 Oct 2001 02:18:13 -0000
Received: (qmail 18464 invoked by uid 50005); 23 Oct 2001 02:18:09 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4166. . Clean. Processed in 0.371596 secs); 23 Oct 2001 02:18:09 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 23 Oct 2001 02:18:08 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA08965; Mon, 22 Oct 2001 19:13:42 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 121023 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 23 Oct 2001 02:13:38          +0000
Received: from mta02.mail.mel.aone.net.au (mta02.mail.au.uu.net [203.2.192.82])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA08951 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 22 Oct 2001 19:13:37 -0700
Received: from unknown ([63.34.212.21]) by mta02.mail.mel.aone.net.au with SMTP          id <20011023021329.XIAF10115.mta02.mail.mel.aone.net.au@unknown> for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 23 Oct 2001 12:13:29 +1000
References: Conversation            <C0F7BF4DCEC1D2479A01031347184DCD02FE28@nt2000s2.dgmicro.com> with            last message            <C0F7BF4DCEC1D2479A01031347184DCD02FE28@nt2000s2.dgmicro.com>
Priority: Normal
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Priority: 3
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	X-MAPIextension=.TXT;
	charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>
Date:         Tue, 23 Oct 2001 02:13:38 +0000
Reply-To: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] 54mm SU motors...Epoxy?
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <C0F7BF4DCEC1D2479A01031347184DCD02FE28@nt2000s2.dgmicro.com>

----------
> This is more of a research question.  I am eventually going to go for a
> super long 54mm....40in of propellant.  With that length, the Kn is
> naturally going to go up,

errrr....am I correct in assuming you're stuck with fixed nozzle dimensions
and are just increasing the amount of propellant until something fails?

Troy.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 858 invoked from network); 23 Oct 2001 02:20:56 -0000
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 23 Oct 2001 02:20:56 -0000
Received: (qmail 10429 invoked by uid 50005); 23 Oct 2001 02:19:59 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4164. . Clean. Processed in 0.163322 secs); 23 Oct 2001 02:19:59 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 23 Oct 2001 02:19:59 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA08847; Mon, 22 Oct 2001 19:04:10 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 121006 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 23 Oct 2001 02:04:09          +0000
Received: from nt2000s2.dgmicro.com (cn815472-c.newcas1.de.home.com          [24.40.74.93]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA08833          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 22 Oct 2001 19:04:08 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
content-class: urn:content-classes:message
X-MS-Has-Attach: 
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: 
Thread-Topic:      Re: [AR] 54mm SU motors...Epoxy?
Thread-Index: AcFbZMBf8REWJGYlSuivIgnLFGKX2AAAdXvg
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by itc.uci.edu id TAA08834
Message-ID:  <C0F7BF4DCEC1D2479A01031347184DCD02FE28@nt2000s2.dgmicro.com>
Date:         Mon, 22 Oct 2001 22:03:37 -0400
Reply-To: "Darren Wright" <dwright@D2-TECH.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Darren Wright" <dwright@D2-TECH.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] 54mm SU motors...Epoxy?
Comments: To: Troy Prideaux <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is more of a research question.  I am eventually going to go for a
super long 54mm....40in of propellant.  With that length, the Kn is
naturally going to go up, and I don't particularly want to slow the
propellant down.  I got some info from Gougeon Bros.  Looks like I am
WAY under the shear strength of the Epoxy.

-Darren


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Troy Prideaux [mailto:GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU]
> Sent: Monday, October 22, 2001 9:23 PM
> To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
> Subject: Re: [AR] 54mm SU motors...Epoxy?
>
>
> I have successfully fired 54mm & 3" motors and know of others
> that have run
> 8+ grain motors using epoxied ends using both composite and
> Al casings.
> 8+ If
> your ends are failing look at: your prep technique, landing
> area, clearances & quality or suitability of the epoxy.
> Epoxied ends will handle virtually any chamber pressure if
> designed for it. Why do you run your longer motors at higher
> chamber pressures? I assume to try and reduce erosive burning?
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 19107 invoked from network); 23 Oct 2001 02:51:55 -0000
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 23 Oct 2001 02:51:55 -0000
Received: (qmail 10949 invoked by uid 50005); 23 Oct 2001 01:39:05 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4166. . Clean. Processed in 0.311257 secs); 23 Oct 2001 01:39:05 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 23 Oct 2001 01:39:04 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA09120; Mon, 22 Oct 2001 19:48:06 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 121048 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 23 Oct 2001 02:48:03          +0000
Received: from nt2000s2.dgmicro.com (cn815472-c.newcas1.de.home.com          [24.40.74.93]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA09106          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 22 Oct 2001 19:48:02 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
content-class: urn:content-classes:message
X-MS-Has-Attach: 
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: 
Thread-Topic:      Re: [AR] 54mm SU motors...Epoxy?
Thread-Index: AcFbaY5rd1L/1+pJSNed4wmGV0XWrwAAVKlQ
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by itc.uci.edu id TAA09107
Message-ID:  <C0F7BF4DCEC1D2479A01031347184DCD3852@nt2000s2.dgmicro.com>
Date:         Mon, 22 Oct 2001 22:47:31 -0400
Reply-To: "Darren Wright" <dwright@D2-TECH.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Darren Wright" <dwright@D2-TECH.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] 54mm SU motors...Epoxy?
Comments: To: Troy Prideaux <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Not stuck really, but there is a max size nozzle that you can go and
still have an effective nozzle, and a decent amount of propellant.  A 1"
Nozzle in a 54mm does not leave a whole lot of propellant left.  Maybe
Jerry knows it off the top of his head.

I know that 40+ inches is getting pretty hairy.

Jerry?


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Troy Prideaux [mailto:GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU]
> Sent: Monday, October 22, 2001 10:14 PM
> To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
> Subject: Re: [AR] 54mm SU motors...Epoxy?
>
>
> ----------
> > This is more of a research question.  I am eventually going
> to go for
> > a super long 54mm....40in of propellant.  With that length,
> the Kn is
> > naturally going to go up,
>
> errrr....am I correct in assuming you're stuck with fixed
> nozzle dimensions and are just increasing the amount of
> propellant until something fails?
>
> Troy.
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 3014 invoked from network); 23 Oct 2001 02:56:01 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 23 Oct 2001 02:56:01 -0000
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 655 invoked by uid 50005); 23 Oct 2001 02:55:57 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4166. . Clean. Processed in 1.281848 secs); 23 Oct 2001 02:55:57 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 23 Oct 2001 02:55:55 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA09073; Mon, 22 Oct 2001 19:39:49 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 121040 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 23 Oct 2001 02:39:46          +0000
Received: from rasmus.uib.no (exim@rasmus.uib.no [129.177.12.30]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA09059 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Mon, 22 Oct 2001 19:39:45 -0700
Received: from tunnel-46-90.vpn.uib.no (emil.rasmus.uib.no) [129.177.46.90] by          rasmus.uib.no for arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU with esmtp (Exim 3.16) id          15vrTb-0005JK-00; Tue, 23 Oct 2001 04:39:36 +0200
X-Sender: st07696@rasmus.uib.no
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <5.1.0.14.0.20011023042856.026ec358@lstud.ii.uib.no>
Date:         Tue, 23 Oct 2001 04:40:13 +0200
Reply-To: "Emil Johnsen" <Emil.Johnsen@STUDENT.UIB.NO>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Emil Johnsen" <Emil.Johnsen@STUDENT.UIB.NO>
Subject:      [AR] T6 and high temperatures
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

At what temperature does 6000-series T6 aluminium become damaged? Is it
instant or must it stay at this temp for some time? How much is the yield
strength of T6 aluminium reduced when this happens?

--
Emil Johnsen

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 29517 invoked from network); 23 Oct 2001 03:23:07 -0000
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 23 Oct 2001 03:23:07 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 21059 invoked by uid 50005); 23 Oct 2001 02:10:17 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4166. . Clean. Processed in 0.55939 secs); 23 Oct 2001 02:10:17 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 23 Oct 2001 02:10:16 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA09239; Mon, 22 Oct 2001 20:20:45 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 121058 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 23 Oct 2001 03:20:36          +0000
Received: from mail011.syd.optusnet.com.au (mail011.syd.optusnet.com.au          [203.2.75.173]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA09225          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 22 Oct 2001 20:20:34 -0700
Received: from webmail03.syd.optusnet.com.au (webmail03.syd.optusnet.com.au          [203.2.75.236]) by mail011.syd.optusnet.com.au (8.11.1/8.11.1) with          ESMTP id f9N3EcB09226; Tue, 23 Oct 2001 13:14:38 +1000
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: MIME-tools 5.411 (Entity 5.404)
Received: from  [209.36.247.3] as user strudwicke@optusnet.com.au by          webmail.optusnet.com.au with HTTP;
Message-ID:  <200110230314.f9N3EcB09226@mail011.syd.optusnet.com.au>
Date:         Tue, 23 Oct 2001 13:14:38 +1000
Reply-To: "Craig Strudwicke" <strudwicke@OPTUSNET.COM.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Craig Strudwicke" <strudwicke@OPTUSNET.COM.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] T6 and high temperatures
Comments: To: Emil Johnsen <Emil.Johnsen@STUDENT.UIB.NO>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

>From what I remember, RK's site contains a lot of info on this subject.

Also check out the matweb site,  www.matweb.com

Craig

> Emil Johnsen <Emil.Johnsen@STUDENT.UIB.NO> wrote:
>
> At what temperature does 6000-series T6 aluminium become damaged? Is
> it
> instant or must it stay at this temp for some time? How much is the
> yield
> strength of T6 aluminium reduced when this happens?
>
> --
> Emil Johnsen

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 2156 invoked from network); 23 Oct 2001 03:24:07 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 23 Oct 2001 03:24:07 -0000
Received: (qmail 22556 invoked by uid 50005); 23 Oct 2001 02:11:17 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4166. . Clean. Processed in 0.964965 secs); 23 Oct 2001 02:11:17 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 23 Oct 2001 02:11:15 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA09262; Mon, 22 Oct 2001 20:22:02 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 121065 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 23 Oct 2001 03:22:00          +0000
Received: from localhost (rcalkins@localhost) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with          ESMTP id UAA09248; Mon, 22 Oct 2001 20:21:58 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.LNX.4.10.10110222015560.5316-100000@itc.uci.edu>
Date:         Mon, 22 Oct 2001 20:21:58 -0700
Reply-To: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
Subject:      Re: [AR] T6 and high temperatures
Comments: To: Emil Johnsen <Emil.Johnsen@STUDENT.UIB.NO>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <5.1.0.14.0.20011023042856.026ec358@lstud.ii.uib.no>

Found this on
http://www.suppliersonline.com/research/property/metals/555.asp

6061 Aluminum:

"The aging precipitation heat treatment is done at 350 F for 8 hours
followed by air cooling. This produces the T6 temper."

"Shear strength for O temper is 12 ksi and for T6 temper it is 30 ksi"


Presumably, anything above 350 F and you will begin to loose your
tempering, but it will presumably take hours to loose significant strength
at that temp.  I've been told that 400 F is the maximum temperature you
want to see on a reusable engine case.

Ray


On Tue, 23 Oct 2001, Emil Johnsen wrote:

> At what temperature does 6000-series T6 aluminium become damaged? Is it
> instant or must it stay at this temp for some time? How much is the yield
> strength of T6 aluminium reduced when this happens?
>
> --
> Emil Johnsen
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 5741 invoked from network); 23 Oct 2001 03:25:24 -0000
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 23 Oct 2001 03:25:24 -0000
Received: (qmail 24263 invoked by uid 50005); 23 Oct 2001 02:12:28 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4166. . Clean. Processed in 0.187898 secs); 23 Oct 2001 02:12:28 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 23 Oct 2001 02:12:28 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA09285; Mon, 22 Oct 2001 20:22:51 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 121072 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 23 Oct 2001 03:22:50          +0000
Received: from mta05.mail.mel.aone.net.au (mta05.mail.au.uu.net [203.2.192.85])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA09271 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 22 Oct 2001 20:22:49 -0700
Received: from unknown ([63.34.216.181]) by mta05.mail.mel.aone.net.au with          SMTP id <20011023032243.LXEN2135.mta05.mail.mel.aone.net.au@unknown>          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 23 Oct 2001 13:22:43 +1000
References: Conversation            <C0F7BF4DCEC1D2479A01031347184DCD3852@nt2000s2.dgmicro.com> with            last message            <C0F7BF4DCEC1D2479A01031347184DCD3852@nt2000s2.dgmicro.com>
Priority: Normal
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Priority: 3
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	X-MAPIextension=.TXT;
	charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>
Date:         Tue, 23 Oct 2001 03:22:50 +0000
Reply-To: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] 54mm SU motors...Epoxy?
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <C0F7BF4DCEC1D2479A01031347184DCD3852@nt2000s2.dgmicro.com>

Yes, True (re: expansion cone).

Troy.

----------
> Not stuck really, but there is a max size nozzle that you can go and
> still have an effective nozzle, and a decent amount of propellant.  A 1"
> Nozzle in a 54mm does not leave a whole lot of propellant left.  Maybe
> Jerry knows it off the top of his head.
>
> I know that 40+ inches is getting pretty hairy.
>
> Jerry?
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Troy Prideaux [mailto:GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU]
> > Sent: Monday, October 22, 2001 10:14 PM
> > To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
> > Subject: Re: [AR] 54mm SU motors...Epoxy?
> >
> >
> > ----------
> > > This is more of a research question.  I am eventually going
> > to go for
> > > a super long 54mm....40in of propellant.  With that length,
> > the Kn is
> > > naturally going to go up,
> >
> > errrr....am I correct in assuming you're stuck with fixed
> > nozzle dimensions and are just increasing the amount of
> > propellant until something fails?
> >
> > Troy.
> >

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 257 invoked from network); 23 Oct 2001 03:34:06 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 23 Oct 2001 03:34:06 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 2673 invoked by uid 50005); 23 Oct 2001 02:21:15 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4166. . Clean. Processed in 0.316215 secs); 23 Oct 2001 02:21:15 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 23 Oct 2001 02:21:15 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA09333; Mon, 22 Oct 2001 20:31:46 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 121079 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 23 Oct 2001 03:31:45          +0000
Received: from femail48.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail48.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.254.60.42]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA09319          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 22 Oct 2001 20:31:45 -0700
Received: from c1649002-a.earthlink.net ([24.20.95.67]) by          femail48.sdc1.sfba.home.com (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20          201-229-121-120-20010223) with ESMTP id          <20011023033139.OAQT5793.femail48.sdc1.sfba.home.com@c1649002-a.earthlink.net>; Mon, 22 Oct 2001 20:31:39          -0700
X-Sender: forkbomb@mail.earthlink.net
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.0.2
References: <5.0.2.1.0.20011022172737.0287f118@mailsj-v1.corp.adobe.com>            <5.0.2.1.0.20011022172737.0287f118@mailsj-v1.corp.adobe.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <5.0.2.1.0.20011022203053.01bc2c70@mail.earthlink.net>
Date:         Mon, 22 Oct 2001 20:31:40 -0700
Reply-To: "Pierce Nichols" <forkbomb@EARTHLINK.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Pierce Nichols" <forkbomb@EARTHLINK.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] commercial HPR altitude record?
Comments: To: bob fortune <bob@FORTUNEPAINT.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <v0421010db7fa7f51da8b@[10.0.0.2]>

At 07:06 PM 10/22/2001 -0700, bob fortune wrote:
>We're talking commercially available high power alphabet motors, right?


         That's the general idea.


>Craig Snyder
>Oct 5, 2001 Black Rock Nevada
>34,988 feet - M to K two stager


         Quite a mark to meet...

         -p


Mars or Bust!
www.marssociety.com

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 12813 invoked from network); 23 Oct 2001 03:59:20 -0000
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 23 Oct 2001 03:59:20 -0000
Received: (qmail 6317 invoked by uid 50005); 23 Oct 2001 02:45:57 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4165. . Clean. Processed in 0.186962 secs); 23 Oct 2001 02:45:57 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 23 Oct 2001 02:45:57 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA09416; Mon, 22 Oct 2001 20:52:52 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 121088 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 23 Oct 2001 03:52:48          +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (oe38.law12.hotmail.com [64.4.18.95]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA09402 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon,          22 Oct 2001 20:52:47 -0700
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Mon,          22 Oct 2001 20:52:17 -0700
X-Originating-IP: [24.92.128.69]
References:  <Pine.LNX.4.10.10110222015560.5316-100000@itc.uci.edu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 23 Oct 2001 03:52:17.0455 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[1BD8DBF0:01C15B76]
Message-ID:  <OE38LqJ2j6GaxK3LM7z0001474c@hotmail.com>
Date:         Mon, 22 Oct 2001 22:50:20 -0500
Reply-To: "Mark Kruep" <mkruep@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Mark Kruep" <mkruep@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] T6 and high temperatures
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Actually to totally anneal it ( T0 ), you need to bake it around 900 degrees
F for 8-9 hours and then slowly reduce the temperature (no more than 50
degrees every 30 minutes) until the temperature in the oven reaches 500
degrees. Then it can cool in the air, which will very slightly retemper it,
but not appreciably (values given are approximate).

The 350 degrees for 8 hours is how the metal is artificially aged after
being heat treated at around 900 degrees for 30 minutes, then quenched
rapidly, then reheated to 350 degrees. It takes approximately (varies
greatly) 100+ hours once after this cycle to reach full hardness. The
problem with motor casings getting heated is that they are allowed to cool
very gradually and if hot enough, the aluminum grains start to
"recrystallize" which kills strength quickly. This is due to the numerous
"phases" that aluminum alloys have. Ideally, you need to rapidly cool the
metal as fast as possible (instantly) to freeze the grains in their desired
phase. Allowing the metal to air cool lets it return to less desirable/more
relaxed phases.

Mark


----- Original Message -----
From: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Monday, October 22, 2001 10:21 PM
Subject: Re: [AR] T6 and high temperatures


> Found this on
> http://www.suppliersonline.com/research/property/metals/555.asp
>
> 6061 Aluminum:
>
> "The aging precipitation heat treatment is done at 350 F for 8 hours
> followed by air cooling. This produces the T6 temper."
>
> "Shear strength for O temper is 12 ksi and for T6 temper it is 30 ksi"
>
>
> Presumably, anything above 350 F and you will begin to loose your
> tempering, but it will presumably take hours to loose significant strength
> at that temp.  I've been told that 400 F is the maximum temperature you
> want to see on a reusable engine case.
>
> Ray
>
>
> On Tue, 23 Oct 2001, Emil Johnsen wrote:
>
> > At what temperature does 6000-series T6 aluminium become damaged? Is it
> > instant or must it stay at this temp for some time? How much is the
yield
> > strength of T6 aluminium reduced when this happens?
> >
> > --
> > Emil Johnsen
> >
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 18052 invoked from network); 23 Oct 2001 04:01:07 -0000
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 23 Oct 2001 04:01:07 -0000
Received: (qmail 2601 invoked by uid 50005); 23 Oct 2001 02:48:16 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4166. . Clean. Processed in 0.180308 secs); 23 Oct 2001 02:48:16 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 23 Oct 2001 02:48:16 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA09453; Mon, 22 Oct 2001 20:55:43 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 121095 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 23 Oct 2001 03:55:42          +0000
Received: from mta04.mail.mel.aone.net.au (mta04.mail.au.uu.net [203.2.192.84])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA09438 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 22 Oct 2001 20:55:41 -0700
Received: from unknown ([63.34.214.52]) by mta04.mail.mel.aone.net.au with SMTP          id <20011023035536.DCQM6258.mta04.mail.mel.aone.net.au@unknown> for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 23 Oct 2001 13:55:36 +1000
References: Conversation            <C0F7BF4DCEC1D2479A01031347184DCD3852@nt2000s2.dgmicro.com> with            last message            <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>
Priority: Normal
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Priority: 3
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	X-MAPIextension=.TXT;
	charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>
Date:         Tue, 23 Oct 2001 03:55:42 +0000
Reply-To: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] 54mm SU motors...Epoxy?
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

oops, I get it now:-) You were referring to core areas, yeah?

2 points to keep in mind anyway:

(1) your expansion ratio won't be very efficient for a motor that long
unless your burn rate was quite slow or the expansion cone exceeded the
diameter of the motor. Unfortunately there's no getting around that (that I
know of anyhow).

(2) Higher propellant/volumetric loadings are possible in long motors with
clever grain design.

Troy.

----------
> Yes, True (re: expansion cone).
>
> Troy.
>
> ----------
> > Not stuck really, but there is a max size nozzle that you can go and
> > still have an effective nozzle, and a decent amount of propellant.  A 1"
> > Nozzle in a 54mm does not leave a whole lot of propellant left.  Maybe
> > Jerry knows it off the top of his head.
> >
> > I know that 40+ inches is getting pretty hairy.
> >
> > Jerry?
> >
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Troy Prideaux [mailto:GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU]
> > > Sent: Monday, October 22, 2001 10:14 PM
> > > To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
> > > Subject: Re: [AR] 54mm SU motors...Epoxy?
> > >
> > >
> > > ----------
> > > > This is more of a research question.  I am eventually going
> > > to go for
> > > > a super long 54mm....40in of propellant.  With that length,
> > > the Kn is
> > > > naturally going to go up,
> > >
> > > errrr....am I correct in assuming you're stuck with fixed
> > > nozzle dimensions and are just increasing the amount of
> > > propellant until something fails?
> > >
> > > Troy.
> > >
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 18219 invoked from network); 23 Oct 2001 04:30:05 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 23 Oct 2001 04:30:05 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 10918 invoked by uid 50005); 23 Oct 2001 04:29:09 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4164. . Clean. Processed in 0.184553 secs); 23 Oct 2001 04:29:09 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 23 Oct 2001 04:29:09 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA09580; Mon, 22 Oct 2001 21:27:34 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 121112 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 23 Oct 2001 04:27:13          +0000
Received: from smtp010pub.verizon.net ([206.46.170.189]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA09565 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon,          22 Oct 2001 21:27:13 -0700
Received: from [65.229.52.47] (1Cust17.tnt3.rancho-cucamonga.ca.da.uu.net          [65.229.52.17]) by smtp010pub.verizon.net  with ESMTP for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; id f9N4RY804199 Mon, 22 Oct 2001 23:27:34          -0500 (CDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: GTE/01rocket@mail.gte.net
References: <5.0.2.1.0.20011022172737.0287f118@mailsj-v1.corp.adobe.com>            <v0421010db7fa7f51da8b@[10.0.0.2]>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <a05100335b7faa1e2db2c@[65.229.52.47]>
Date:         Mon, 22 Oct 2001 21:26:50 -0700
Reply-To: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] commercial HPR altitude record?
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <v0421010db7fa7f51da8b@[10.0.0.2]>

>We're talking commercially available high power alphabet motors, right?
>
>Craig Snyder
>Oct 5, 2001 Black Rock Nevada
>34,988 feet - M to K two stager


That's impressive.

Altimiter track?

>
>
>>Does anyone here know the absolute altitude record for HPR rockets on
>>commercial motors?
>>
>>        -p
>>
>>
>>Mars or Bust!
>>www.marssociety.com


--
Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
Opinion, the whole thing.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 1517 invoked from network); 23 Oct 2001 04:34:17 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 23 Oct 2001 04:34:17 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 15887 invoked by uid 50005); 23 Oct 2001 04:33:21 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4164. . Clean. Processed in 0.235323 secs); 23 Oct 2001 04:33:21 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 23 Oct 2001 04:33:21 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA09627; Mon, 22 Oct 2001 21:31:52 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 121124 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 23 Oct 2001 04:31:51          +0000
Received: from smtp008pub.verizon.net (smtp008pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.187])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA09613 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 22 Oct 2001 21:31:50 -0700
Received: from [65.229.52.47] (1Cust17.tnt3.rancho-cucamonga.ca.da.uu.net          [65.229.52.17]) by smtp008pub.verizon.net  with ESMTP for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; id f9N4VHk11479 Mon, 22 Oct 2001 23:31:18          -0500 (CDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: GTE/01rocket@mail.gte.net
References: <C0F7BF4DCEC1D2479A01031347184DCD3852@nt2000s2.dgmicro.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <a05100336b7faa236eeb9@[65.229.52.47]>
Date:         Mon, 22 Oct 2001 21:31:07 -0700
Reply-To: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] 54mm SU motors...Epoxy?
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <C0F7BF4DCEC1D2479A01031347184DCD3852@nt2000s2.dgmicro.com>

>Not stuck really, but there is a max size nozzle that you can go and
>still have an effective nozzle, and a decent amount of propellant.  A 1"
>Nozzle in a 54mm does not leave a whole lot of propellant left.  Maybe
>Jerry knows it off the top of his head.


A 4:1 expansion on a 1.875" ID fiberglass tube would be a 0,93" throat.

But this question misses the point.

For a given grain geometry and throat, the pressure can only be
adjusted by burning rate.

For a fixed nozzle and throat, the pressure increases with length.

But most importantly for a fixed long length, erosivity increases
with burning rate.

Jerry


>
>I know that 40+ inches is getting pretty hairy.
>
>Jerry?
>
>
>>  -----Original Message-----
>>  From: Troy Prideaux [mailto:GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU]
>>  Sent: Monday, October 22, 2001 10:14 PM
>>  To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
>>  Subject: Re: [AR] 54mm SU motors...Epoxy?
>>
>>
>>  ----------
>>  > This is more of a research question.  I am eventually going
>>  to go for
>>  > a super long 54mm....40in of propellant.  With that length,
>>  the Kn is
>>  > naturally going to go up,
>>
>>  errrr....am I correct in assuming you're stuck with fixed
>>  nozzle dimensions and are just increasing the amount of
>  > propellant until something fails?
>  >
>  > Troy.
>  >


--
Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
Opinion, the whole thing.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 5998 invoked from network); 23 Oct 2001 04:35:49 -0000
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 23 Oct 2001 04:35:49 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 26098 invoked by uid 50005); 23 Oct 2001 04:35:45 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4166. . Clean. Processed in 0.369612 secs); 23 Oct 2001 04:35:45 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 23 Oct 2001 04:35:44 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA09647; Mon, 22 Oct 2001 21:33:34 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 121111 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 23 Oct 2001 04:33:33          +0000
Received: from inet03.citec.qld.gov.au (firewall-user@inet03.citec.qld.gov.au          [203.5.10.10]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA09553          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 22 Oct 2001 21:23:32 -0700
Received: by inet03.citec.qld.gov.au; id OAA22502; Tue, 23 Oct 2001 14:23:27          +1000 (EST)
Received: from citec.com.au(pcux.citec.qld.gov.au 147.132.17.12) by          inet03.citec.qld.gov.au via smap (V2.0) id xma013121; Tue, 23 Oct 01          14:17:51 +1000
Received: from CITEC-Message_Server by citec.com.au with Novell_GroupWise; Tue,          23 Oct 2001 14:18:16 +1000
X-Mailer: Novell GroupWise 5.5.4
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by itc.uci.edu id VAA09555
Message-ID:  <sbd57c28.075@citec.com.au>
Date:         Tue, 23 Oct 2001 14:18:03 +1000
Reply-To: "Des Bromilow" <Des.Bromilow@CITEC.COM.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Des Bromilow" <Des.Bromilow@CITEC.COM.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] T6 and high temperatures
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This brings up a question... since 400F is the hottest we ever want to see in a casing, is there a paint, or finish we can use which visibly changes at 400F

It'd be nice to know your case is safe if it's blue, unsafe if red. or similar.

Thinking out loud,
Des

>>> Ray Calkins <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu> 23/10/01 1:21:58 pm >>>
Found this on
http://www.suppliersonline.com/research/property/metals/555.asp

6061 Aluminum:

"The aging precipitation heat treatment is done at 350 F for 8 hours
followed by air cooling. This produces the T6 temper."

"Shear strength for O temper is 12 ksi and for T6 temper it is 30 ksi"


Presumably, anything above 350 F and you will begin to loose your
tempering, but it will presumably take hours to loose significant strength
at that temp.  I've been told that 400 F is the maximum temperature you
want to see on a reusable engine case.

Ray


On Tue, 23 Oct 2001, Emil Johnsen wrote:

> At what temperature does 6000-series T6 aluminium become damaged? Is it
> instant or must it stay at this temp for some time? How much is the yield
> strength of T6 aluminium reduced when this happens?
>
> --
> Emil Johnsen
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 18606 invoked from network); 23 Oct 2001 04:59:54 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.105]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 23 Oct 2001 04:59:54 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 17032 invoked by uid 50005); 23 Oct 2001 04:58:42 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpy with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.170652 secs); 23 Oct 2001 04:58:42 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 23 Oct 2001 04:58:42 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA09792; Mon, 22 Oct 2001 21:57:37 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 121159 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 23 Oct 2001 04:57:36          +0000
Received: from idsoftware.com (predator.idsoftware.com [192.246.40.34]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA09768 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Mon, 22 Oct 2001 21:57:20 -0700
Received: from [192.246.40.129] (account johnc HELO lightning.idsoftware.com)          by idsoftware.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 3.4.7) with ESMTP id 439126          for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 22 Oct 2001 23:57:20 -0500
X-Sender: johnc@mail.idsoftware.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <4.3.1.2.20011022235411.06fe09c0@mail.idsoftware.com>
Date:         Mon, 22 Oct 2001 23:55:40 -0500
Reply-To: "John Carmack" <johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Carmack" <johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] T6 and high temperatures
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <sbd57c28.075@citec.com.au>

At 02:18 PM 10/23/2001 +1000, you wrote:
>This brings up a question... since 400F is the hottest we ever want to see
>in a casing, is there a paint, or finish we can use which visibly changes
>at 400F
>
>It'd be nice to know your case is safe if it's blue, unsafe if red. or
>similar.
>
>Thinking out loud,
>Des

Search for "temperature indicating crayons" at McMaster-Carr.

I grabbed a couple of these, but I haven't used them yet, so I don't know
how easily they rub off (probably varies with temperature).

John Carmack

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 18889 invoked from network); 23 Oct 2001 05:00:00 -0000
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 23 Oct 2001 05:00:00 -0000
Received: (qmail 13810 invoked by uid 50005); 23 Oct 2001 03:46:37 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4165. . Clean. Processed in 0.165703 secs); 23 Oct 2001 03:46:37 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 23 Oct 2001 03:46:37 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA09766; Mon, 22 Oct 2001 21:57:04 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 121152 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 23 Oct 2001 04:57:01          +0000
Received: from smtprelay3.abs.adelphia.net (smtprelay.abs.adelphia.net          [64.8.20.11]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA09752 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 22 Oct 2001 21:57:01 -0700
Received: from jlgrady ([24.53.101.238]) by smtprelay3.abs.adelphia.net          (Netscape Messaging Server 4.15) with SMTP id GLN72900.GHY for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 23 Oct 2001 00:56:33 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook CWS, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <000001c15b7f$de20f2c0$0200a8c0@24.53.64.18>
Date:         Tue, 23 Oct 2001 01:02:08 -0400
Reply-To: "Jeff Grady" <jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jeff Grady" <jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET>
Subject:      [AR] High temp question
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <JJEFLLHFFAHHMBBIHFAECEIMCHAA.pkelly@comcen.com.au>

Could someone explain the definition of "solidus" as it pertains on this
page (near the bottom):

http://www.matweb.com/SpecificMaterial.asp?bassnum=NCMW00&group=General&refe
rer=http://www.matweb.com/search.htm

I can't find a definition anywhere I've looked.

Thanks,

Jeff

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 26842 invoked from network); 23 Oct 2001 05:02:46 -0000
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 23 Oct 2001 05:02:46 -0000
Received: (qmail 21522 invoked by uid 50005); 23 Oct 2001 05:02:42 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4166. . Clean. Processed in 0.22351 secs); 23 Oct 2001 05:02:42 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 23 Oct 2001 05:02:41 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA09710; Mon, 22 Oct 2001 21:47:36 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 121139 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 23 Oct 2001 04:47:34          +0000
Received: from angel.comcen.com.au (angel.comcen.com.au [203.23.236.69]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA09695 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 22 Oct 2001 21:47:32 -0700
Received: from win2pk2 (modem010.sydney.spin.net.au [202.172.124.10] (may be          forged)) by angel.comcen.com.au (8.11.4/8.10.1) with SMTP id          f9N4lG555118; Tue, 23 Oct 2001 14:47:16 +1000 (EST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <JJEFLLHFFAHHMBBIHFAECEIMCHAA.pkelly@comcen.com.au>
Date:         Tue, 23 Oct 2001 14:48:26 +1000
Reply-To: "Paul Kelly" <pkelly@COMCEN.COM.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Paul Kelly" <pkelly@COMCEN.COM.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] T6 and high temperatures
Comments: To: Des Bromilow <Des.Bromilow@CITEC.COM.AU>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <sbd57c28.075@citec.com.au>

Once you've got a design you're happy with, measure the case temp and stick
with that design.

PK

-----Original Message-----
From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU]On
Behalf Of Des Bromilow
Sent: Tuesday, 23 October 2001 2:18 PM
To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
Subject: Re: [AR] T6 and high temperatures


This brings up a question... since 400F is the hottest we ever want to see
in a casing, is there a paint, or finish we can use which visibly changes at
400F

It'd be nice to know your case is safe if it's blue, unsafe if red. or
similar.

Thinking out loud,
Des

>>> Ray Calkins <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu> 23/10/01 1:21:58 pm >>>
Found this on
http://www.suppliersonline.com/research/property/metals/555.asp

6061 Aluminum:

"The aging precipitation heat treatment is done at 350 F for 8 hours
followed by air cooling. This produces the T6 temper."

"Shear strength for O temper is 12 ksi and for T6 temper it is 30 ksi"


Presumably, anything above 350 F and you will begin to loose your
tempering, but it will presumably take hours to loose significant strength
at that temp.  I've been told that 400 F is the maximum temperature you
want to see on a reusable engine case.

Ray


On Tue, 23 Oct 2001, Emil Johnsen wrote:

> At what temperature does 6000-series T6 aluminium become damaged? Is it
> instant or must it stay at this temp for some time? How much is the yield
> strength of T6 aluminium reduced when this happens?
>
> --
> Emil Johnsen
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 482 invoked from network); 23 Oct 2001 05:14:54 -0000
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 23 Oct 2001 05:14:54 -0000
Received: (qmail 30055 invoked by uid 50005); 23 Oct 2001 04:01:31 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4165. . Clean. Processed in 0.157071 secs); 23 Oct 2001 04:01:31 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 23 Oct 2001 04:01:31 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA09931; Mon, 22 Oct 2001 22:12:21 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 121188 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 23 Oct 2001 05:12:20          +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (oe37.law12.hotmail.com [64.4.18.94]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA09917 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon,          22 Oct 2001 22:12:20 -0700
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Mon,          22 Oct 2001 22:11:46 -0700
X-Originating-IP: [24.92.128.69]
References:  <000001c15b7f$de20f2c0$0200a8c0@24.53.64.18>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 23 Oct 2001 05:11:46.0258 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[36467320:01C15B81]
Message-ID:  <OE37bDBRArVc4Iu1B6g0001471c@hotmail.com>
Date:         Tue, 23 Oct 2001 00:09:51 -0500
Reply-To: "Mark Kruep" <mkruep@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Mark Kruep" <mkruep@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] High temp question
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

The solidus line is a line on the phase diagram of a metal. It is the point
(heat) at which the entire solution becomes solid from liquid. The liquidus
is the liquid state of course, and then there can be many different phases
between (part solid/part liquid) these 2 lines depending on temperature and
composition. If you want to learn more, consult a metallurgy text.

Mark
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jeff Grady" <jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Tuesday, October 23, 2001 12:02 AM
Subject: [AR] High temp question


> Could someone explain the definition of "solidus" as it pertains on this
> page (near the bottom):
>
>
http://www.matweb.com/SpecificMaterial.asp?bassnum=NCMW00&group=General&refe
> rer=http://www.matweb.com/search.htm
>
> I can't find a definition anywhere I've looked.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Jeff
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 10249 invoked from network); 23 Oct 2001 05:18:08 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.105]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 23 Oct 2001 05:18:08 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 6817 invoked by uid 50005); 23 Oct 2001 05:16:55 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpy with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.179487 secs); 23 Oct 2001 05:16:55 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 23 Oct 2001 05:16:55 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA09967; Mon, 22 Oct 2001 22:15:17 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 121195 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 23 Oct 2001 05:15:16          +0000
Received: from proxy2.ba.best.com (root@proxy2.ba.best.com [206.184.139.14]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA09953 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Mon, 22 Oct 2001 22:15:15 -0700
Received: from [10.0.0.2] (snvadslgw2poold155.snjs.uswestqwest.net          [168.103.213.155]) by proxy2.ba.best.com (8.9.3/8.9.2/best.out) with          ESMTP id WAA22366 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Mon, 22 Oct 2001          22:13:35 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Sender:  (Unverified)
References: <5.0.2.1.0.20011022172737.0287f118@mailsj-v1.corp.adobe.com>            <v0421010db7fa7f51da8b@[10.0.0.2]>            <a05100335b7faa1e2db2c@[65.229.52.47]>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <v04210113b7faac777e80@[10.0.0.2]>
Date:         Mon, 22 Oct 2001 22:13:02 -0700
Reply-To: "bob fortune" <bob@FORTUNEPAINT.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "bob fortune" <bob@FORTUNEPAINT.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] commercial HPR altitude record?
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <a05100335b7faa1e2db2c@[65.229.52.47]>

>>We're talking commercially available high power alphabet motors, right?
>>
>>Craig Snyder
>>Oct 5, 2001 Black Rock Nevada
>>34,988 feet - M to K two stager
>
>
>That's impressive.
>
>Altimiter track?

R-DAS, but of course.

http://www.aeroconsystems.com/electronics/rdas.htm

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 18764 invoked from network); 23 Oct 2001 05:31:53 -0000
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 23 Oct 2001 05:31:53 -0000
Received: (qmail 17929 invoked by uid 50005); 23 Oct 2001 04:18:31 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4165. . Clean. Processed in 0.150552 secs); 23 Oct 2001 04:18:31 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 23 Oct 2001 04:18:30 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA09862; Mon, 22 Oct 2001 22:03:03 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 121175 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 23 Oct 2001 05:03:01          +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (oe74.law12.hotmail.com [64.4.18.209]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA09848 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 22 Oct 2001 22:03:01 -0700
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Mon,          22 Oct 2001 22:02:31 -0700
X-Originating-IP: [24.92.128.69]
References:  <sbd57c28.075@citec.com.au>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 23 Oct 2001 05:02:31.0081 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[EB5D2990:01C15B7F]
Message-ID:  <OE741O0aAGgWtpe1OWh0000231b@hotmail.com>
Date:         Tue, 23 Oct 2001 00:00:35 -0500
Reply-To: "Mark Kruep" <mkruep@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Mark Kruep" <mkruep@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] T6 and high temperatures
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Actually, yes...kinda. I don't know if they go that low, but the welding
industry has some special markers (crayon like from what I've seen) that are
designed to melt at specific temperatures. It allows them to put sufficient
heat into a part without going too far and causing residual stresses in the
part. But again, the heat is not nearly as important as the duration it is
at temp. and how it's cooled.

Mark
----- Original Message -----
From: "Des Bromilow" <Des.Bromilow@CITEC.COM.AU>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Monday, October 22, 2001 11:18 PM
Subject: Re: [AR] T6 and high temperatures


> This brings up a question... since 400F is the hottest we ever want to see
in a casing, is there a paint, or finish we can use which visibly changes at
400F
>
> It'd be nice to know your case is safe if it's blue, unsafe if red. or
similar.
>
> Thinking out loud,
> Des
>
> >>> Ray Calkins <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu> 23/10/01 1:21:58 pm >>>
> Found this on
> http://www.suppliersonline.com/research/property/metals/555.asp
>
> 6061 Aluminum:
>
> "The aging precipitation heat treatment is done at 350 F for 8 hours
> followed by air cooling. This produces the T6 temper."
>
> "Shear strength for O temper is 12 ksi and for T6 temper it is 30 ksi"
>
>
> Presumably, anything above 350 F and you will begin to loose your
> tempering, but it will presumably take hours to loose significant strength
> at that temp.  I've been told that 400 F is the maximum temperature you
> want to see on a reusable engine case.
>
> Ray
>
>
> On Tue, 23 Oct 2001, Emil Johnsen wrote:
>
> > At what temperature does 6000-series T6 aluminium become damaged? Is it
> > instant or must it stay at this temp for some time? How much is the
yield
> > strength of T6 aluminium reduced when this happens?
> >
> > --
> > Emil Johnsen
> >
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 4831 invoked from network); 23 Oct 2001 06:00:05 -0000
Received: from smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.105]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 23 Oct 2001 06:00:05 -0000
Received: (qmail 18923 invoked by uid 50005); 23 Oct 2001 05:58:52 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpy with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.148819 secs); 23 Oct 2001 05:58:52 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 23 Oct 2001 05:58:52 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA10135; Mon, 22 Oct 2001 22:57:16 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 121218 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 23 Oct 2001 05:57:12          +0000
Received: from mta01.mail.mel.aone.net.au (mta01.mail.au.uu.net [203.2.192.81])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA10121 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 22 Oct 2001 22:57:11 -0700
Received: from unknown ([63.34.215.151]) by mta01.mail.mel.aone.net.au with          SMTP id <20011023055708.CEWN363.mta01.mail.mel.aone.net.au@unknown>          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 23 Oct 2001 15:57:08 +1000
References: Conversation            <C0F7BF4DCEC1D2479A01031347184DCD3852@nt2000s2.dgmicro.com> with            last message            <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>
Priority: Normal
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Priority: 3
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	X-MAPIextension=.TXT;
	charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>
Date:         Tue, 23 Oct 2001 05:57:12 +0000
Reply-To: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] 54mm SU motors...Epoxy?
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

another whoops, I naturally assumed that everyone ran their motors @1000Psi
in my last post. As Jerry mentioned, a 4:1 expansion ratio may well be
achievable.

Troy.

>
> (1) your expansion ratio won't be very efficient for a motor that long
> unless your burn rate was quite slow or the expansion cone exceeded the
> diameter of the motor. Unfortunately there's no getting around that (that
I
> know of anyhow).
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 19494 invoked from network); 23 Oct 2001 06:17:07 -0000
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 23 Oct 2001 06:17:07 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 7531 invoked by uid 50005); 23 Oct 2001 06:17:03 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4166. . Clean. Processed in 0.185218 secs); 23 Oct 2001 06:17:03 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 23 Oct 2001 06:17:02 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA10096; Mon, 22 Oct 2001 22:48:01 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 121211 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 23 Oct 2001 05:47:58          +0000
Received: from imo-r03.mx.aol.com (imo-r03.mx.aol.com [152.163.225.99]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA10082 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Mon, 22 Oct 2001 22:47:57 -0700
Received: from Ricanakk@aol.com by imo-r03.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v31_r1.8.) id          n.110.7377137 (4363); Tue, 23 Oct 2001 01:47:26 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: AOL 5.0 for Windows sub 108
Message-ID:  <110.7377137.29065e73@aol.com>
Date:         Tue, 23 Oct 2001 01:47:31 EDT
Reply-To: <Ricanakk@AOL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <Ricanakk@AOL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] T6 and high temperatures
Comments: To: Emil.Johnsen@student.uib.no
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

In a message dated 01/10/22 22:40:45 Eastern Daylight Time,
Emil.Johnsen@STUDENT.UIB.NO writes:

<< At what temperature does 6000-series T6 aluminium become damaged? Is it
 instant or must it stay at this temp for some time? How much is the yield
 strength of T6 aluminium reduced when this happens? >>

Emil,
Check out my site at:
http://members.aol.com/ricbnakk/therm.html#Elevated strength
which shows charts of strength reduction at elevated temperature, for both
long term and rapid heating.
I target 150C as the max. allowable casing temperature during motor operation
(it'll get much hotter after firing due to thermal soaking, but this is not
detrimental). So if you use a thermal indicator on the casing (such as temp.
indicating tape or crayon), videotape it to determine the max. temperature
achieved during motor operation).

Richard Nakka

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 3128 invoked from network); 23 Oct 2001 12:05:22 -0000
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 23 Oct 2001 12:05:22 -0000
Received: (qmail 28873 invoked by uid 50005); 23 Oct 2001 10:52:30 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4166. . Clean. Processed in 0.296353 secs); 23 Oct 2001 10:52:30 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 23 Oct 2001 10:52:29 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id EAA11098; Tue, 23 Oct 2001 04:35:20 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 121261 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 23 Oct 2001 11:35:14          +0000
Received: from femail21.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail21.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.0.95.146]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id EAA11084          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 23 Oct 2001 04:35:13 -0700
Received: from cx814151a ([24.14.55.118]) by femail21.sdc1.sfba.home.com          (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20 201-229-121-120-20010223) with SMTP id          <20011023113508.MFUO29124.femail21.sdc1.sfba.home.com@cx814151a> for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 23 Oct 2001 04:35:08 -0700
References:  <Pine.LNX.4.10.10110222015560.5316-100000@itc.uci.edu>              <OE38LqJ2j6GaxK3LM7z0001474c@hotmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.3018.1300
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <005401c15bb6$8b2de1e0$0a01a8c0@cx814151a>
Date:         Tue, 23 Oct 2001 06:33:31 -0500
Reply-To: "John Bolene" <jbolene@HOME.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Bolene" <jbolene@HOME.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] T6 and high temperatures
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

6061 at 212 degrees has 90% of original strength and 50% of original at 350
degrees.

I can look up more values if needed for any type of aluminum.

John Bolene
Tripoli Oklahoma Prefect and webmaster
Tripoli Oklahoma Web page -> http://members.home.com/tripoli-oklahoma/


> > On Tue, 23 Oct 2001, Emil Johnsen wrote:
> >
> > > At what temperature does 6000-series T6 aluminium become damaged? Is
it
> > > instant or must it stay at this temp for some time? How much is the
> yield
> > > strength of T6 aluminium reduced when this happens?
> > >
> > > --
> > > Emil Johnsen
> > >
> >

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 3048 invoked from network); 23 Oct 2001 12:56:14 -0000
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 23 Oct 2001 12:56:14 -0000
X-Priority: 3
Received: (qmail 968 invoked by uid 50005); 23 Oct 2001 12:55:19 -0000
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4164. . Clean. Processed in 0.26166 secs); 23 Oct 2001 12:55:19 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 23 Oct 2001 12:55:19 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id FAA11266; Tue, 23 Oct 2001 05:40:31 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 121268 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 23 Oct 2001 12:40:25          +0000
Received: from m1.jersey.juno.com (m1.jersey.juno.com [64.136.16.64]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id FAA11251 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 23 Oct 2001 05:40:24 -0700
Received: from cookie.juno.com by cookie.juno.com for          <"H3WK6e6N+bsCVJQMHM9sZHizunC5bs5xSzqTOgM//TdiQm8ysP6cbw==">
Received: (from kc2csh@juno.com) by m1.jersey.juno.com (queuemail) id GJFF9V3B;          Tue, 23 Oct 2001 08:40:15 EDT
X-Mailer: Juno 4.0.11
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Juno-Line-Breaks: 0-3,5-37
X-Juno-Att: 0
X-Juno-RefParts: 0
Message-ID:  <20011023.084515.-3975269.0.kc2csh@juno.com>
Date:         Tue, 23 Oct 2001 08:42:33 -0400
Reply-To: <kc2csh@JUNO.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <kc2csh@JUNO.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] T6 and high temperatures
Comments: To: mkruep@HOTMAIL.COM
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

  Is there any better material available today than T6?

                   Jay

On Mon, 22 Oct 2001 22:50:20 -0500 Mark Kruep <mkruep@HOTMAIL.COM>
writes:
> Actually to totally anneal it ( T0 ), you need to bake it around 900
> degrees
> F for 8-9 hours and then slowly reduce the temperature (no more than
> 50
> degrees every 30 minutes) until the temperature in the oven reaches
> 500
> degrees. Then it can cool in the air, which will very slightly
> retemper it,
> but not appreciably (values given are approximate).
>
> The 350 degrees for 8 hours is how the metal is artificially aged
> after
> being heat treated at around 900 degrees for 30 minutes, then
> quenched
> rapidly, then reheated to 350 degrees. It takes approximately
> (varies
> greatly) 100+ hours once after this cycle to reach full hardness.
> The
> problem with motor casings getting heated is that they are allowed
> to cool
> very gradually and if hot enough, the aluminum grains start to
> "recrystallize" which kills strength quickly. This is due to the
> numerous
> "phases" that aluminum alloys have. Ideally, you need to rapidly
> cool the
> metal as fast as possible (instantly) to freeze the grains in their
> desired
> phase. Allowing the metal to air cool lets it return to less
> desirable/more
> relaxed phases.
>
> Mark

________________________________________________________________
GET INTERNET ACCESS FROM JUNO!
Juno offers FREE or PREMIUM Internet access for less!
Join Juno today!  For your FREE software, visit:
http://dl.www.juno.com/get/web/.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 1963 invoked from network); 23 Oct 2001 13:47:09 -0000
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 23 Oct 2001 13:47:09 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 16056 invoked by uid 50005); 23 Oct 2001 12:33:43 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4165. . Clean. Processed in 0.114319 secs); 23 Oct 2001 12:33:43 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 23 Oct 2001 12:33:43 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA11519; Tue, 23 Oct 2001 06:31:09 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 121341 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 23 Oct 2001 13:31:03          +0000
Received: from m1.jersey.juno.com (m1.jersey.juno.com [64.136.16.64]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA11505 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Tue, 23 Oct 2001 06:31:02 -0700
Received: from cookie.juno.com by cookie.juno.com for          <"H3WK6e6N+bsCVJQMHM9sZBgT0Djg1+8zwgmrYtKKLNDrLll+tPraJA==">
Received: (from kc2csh@juno.com) by m1.jersey.juno.com (queuemail) id GJFJ6TNN;          Tue, 23 Oct 2001 09:31:00 EDT
X-Mailer: Juno 4.0.11
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Juno-Line-Breaks: 2,4,7-8,11-12
X-Juno-Att: 0
X-Juno-RefParts: 0
Message-ID:  <20011023.093557.-3975269.2.kc2csh@juno.com>
Date:         Tue, 23 Oct 2001 09:35:46 -0400
Reply-To: <kc2csh@JUNO.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <kc2csh@JUNO.COM>
Subject:      [AR] Requests for comments - NFPA codes
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

  NFPA is now seeking comments and proposals relating to the 2002 review
cycle of the NFPA 1122, 1125, & 1127; the code proposals relating to
model rocket motors, HPR, and motor manufacture.
  For those interested; procedures, text of codes, and etc. seems to be
all available on the website now.
  As an aside, normally you must purchase copies of the codes at VERY
high prices, but copies of the codes in this revision cycle seem to be
available for free PDF download.

  I am preparing comments for submission.  If anyone has any ideas, but
doesn't want to take the time to make a submission, feel free to send it
and I'll see if its consistant with what I plan to submit.

  Site is www.nfpa.org
________________________________________________________________
GET INTERNET ACCESS FROM JUNO!
Juno offers FREE or PREMIUM Internet access for less!
Join Juno today!  For your FREE software, visit:
http://dl.www.juno.com/get/web/.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 23945 invoked from network); 23 Oct 2001 14:50:59 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.105]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 23 Oct 2001 14:50:59 -0000
Received: (qmail 32506 invoked by uid 50005); 23 Oct 2001 14:49:48 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpy with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.19624 secs); 23 Oct 2001 14:49:48 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 23 Oct 2001 14:49:47 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA11726; Tue, 23 Oct 2001 07:10:42 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 121395 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 23 Oct 2001 14:10:37          +0000
Received: from spsystems.net (spsystems.net [209.47.149.227]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA11712 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Tue,          23 Oct 2001 07:10:37 -0700
Received: (from henry@localhost) by spsystems.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id KAA18258;          Tue, 23 Oct 2001 10:09:58 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1011023100850.18050A-100000@spsystems.net>
Date:         Tue, 23 Oct 2001 10:09:58 -0400
Reply-To: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] T6 and high temperatures
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <20011023.084515.-3975269.0.kc2csh@juno.com>

On Tue, 23 Oct 2001 kc2csh@JUNO.COM wrote:
>   Is there any better material available today than T6?

First you need to define "better".  There certainly are materials which
improve on just about any of its properties you care to name, although
when you include cost and ease of use in the list, finding one that
improves on *all* of them may be difficult.

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 11432 invoked from network); 23 Oct 2001 15:10:54 -0000
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 23 Oct 2001 15:10:54 -0000
Received: (qmail 12474 invoked by uid 50005); 23 Oct 2001 13:58:00 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4166. . Clean. Processed in 0.225937 secs); 23 Oct 2001 13:58:00 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 23 Oct 2001 13:58:00 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA11943; Tue, 23 Oct 2001 08:07:22 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 121419 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 23 Oct 2001 15:07:17          +0000
Received: from syntheon.inicom.com          (IDENT:root@66.mueb.miam.philapaaz.dsl.att.net [63.242.216.66]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA11929 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 23 Oct 2001 08:07:16 -0700
Received: from koreynew (adsl-81-1-135.mia.bellsouth.net [65.81.1.135]) by          syntheon.inicom.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id NAA19234 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 23 Oct 2001 13:17:56 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 8.5, Build 4.71.2173.0
Importance: Normal
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <001601c15bd4$65c099c0$6601a8c0@koreynew>
Date:         Tue, 23 Oct 2001 11:07:14 -0400
Reply-To: "Korey Kline" <k2@HYBRIDS.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Korey Kline" <k2@HYBRIDS.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] commercial HPR altitude record?
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <a05100333b7fa73604f5e@[65.229.52.47]>

Just for the record,
That's Kline 119780 Ft......not a certified HPR motor, but commercially
available.
K2

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU]On
> Behalf Of Jerry Irvine
> Sent: Monday, October 22, 2001 9:09 PM
> To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
> Subject: Re: [AR] commercial HPR altitude record?
>
>
> >Does anyone here know the absolute altitude record for HPR rockets on
> >commercial motors?
>
>
> Kline 92k feet?
>
> But if you mean motors that are commercial
> 25k USR L1000 1990 ish
> and others since higher, but commercial?
>
>
> >
> >         -p
> >
> >
> >Mars or Bust!
> >www.marssociety.com
>
>
> --
> Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
> Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
> Opinion, the whole thing.
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 990 invoked from network); 23 Oct 2001 15:47:21 -0000
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 23 Oct 2001 15:47:21 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 17215 invoked by uid 50005); 23 Oct 2001 14:34:28 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4166. . Clean. Processed in 0.264659 secs); 23 Oct 2001 14:34:28 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 23 Oct 2001 14:34:27 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA11905; Tue, 23 Oct 2001 08:00:23 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 121412 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 23 Oct 2001 15:00:20          +0000
Received: from rftzy05y.ca.nortel.com (h161s130a130n47.user.nortelnetworks.com          [47.130.130.161]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA11835          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 23 Oct 2001 07:48:59 -0700
Received: from rftzy232.ca.nortel.com (rftzy232.ca.nortel.com [47.130.185.32])          by rftzy05y.ca.nortel.com (Switch-2.2.0/Switch-2.2.0) with ESMTP id          f9NEmPv17164; Tue, 23 Oct 2001 10:48:26 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from NORTELNETWORKS.COM (wftzh00e.ca.nortel.com [47.130.116.9]) by          rftzy232.ca.nortel.com with SMTP (Microsoft Exchange Internet Mail          Service Version 5.5.2653.13) id TSMXJGDZ; Tue, 23 Oct 2001 10:46:52          -0400
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.73C-CCK-MCD  [en] (X11; U; HP-UX B.10.20 9000/785)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20011023.084515.-3975269.0.kc2csh@juno.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3BD58346.4C0604FA@NORTELNETWORKS.COM>
Date:         Tue, 23 Oct 2001 10:48:38 -0400
Reply-To: "Leech, Marcus \(EXCHANGE:FITZ:8M86\)" <mleech@NORTELNETWORKS.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Leech, Marcus \(EXCHANGE:FITZ:8M86\)" <mleech@NORTELNETWORKS.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] T6 and high temperatures
Comments: To: kc2csh@JUNO.COM
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

kc2csh@JUNO.COM wrote:
>
>   Is there any better material available today than T6?
>
7000 series alloys are stronger, but:

  a) MUCH more expensive
  b) hard to find
  c) harder to machine than 6061-T6

7075-T6 has a tensile yield of around 500MPa, while 6061-T6 is around 275MPa.

Yarde Metals lists various forms of 7075-T6, but I don't know whether they
  actually have stock (www.yardemetals.com).

--
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Marcus Leech                             Mail:   Dept 8M70, MS 012, FITZ
Advisor                                  Phone: (ESN) 393-9145  +1 613 763 9145
Security Architecture and Planning       Fax:   (ESN) 393-9435  +1 613 763 9435
Nortel Networks                          mleech@nortelnetworks.com
-----------------Expressed opinions are my own, not my employer's------

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 27717 invoked from network); 23 Oct 2001 15:54:26 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.105]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 23 Oct 2001 15:54:26 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 960 invoked by uid 50005); 23 Oct 2001 15:53:15 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpy with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.208048 secs); 23 Oct 2001 15:53:15 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 23 Oct 2001 15:53:14 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA12042; Tue, 23 Oct 2001 08:23:50 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 121437 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 23 Oct 2001 15:23:49          +0000
Received: from smtp007pub.verizon.net (smtp007pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.186])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA12028 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 23 Oct 2001 08:23:48 -0700
Received: from [65.229.52.47] (1Cust39.tnt1.rancho-cucamonga.ca.da.uu.net          [63.24.225.39]) by smtp007pub.verizon.net  with ESMTP for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; id f9NFNGj19525 Tue, 23 Oct 2001 10:23:16          -0500 (CDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: GTE/01rocket@mail.gte.net
References: <5.0.2.1.0.20011022172737.0287f118@mailsj-v1.corp.adobe.com>            <v0421010db7fa7f51da8b@[10.0.0.2]>            <a05100335b7faa1e2db2c@[65.229.52.47]>            <v04210113b7faac777e80@[10.0.0.2]>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <a0510033bb7fb3b92d7cb@[65.229.52.47]>
Date:         Tue, 23 Oct 2001 08:23:22 -0700
Reply-To: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] commercial HPR altitude record?
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <v04210113b7faac777e80@[10.0.0.2]>

>>>We're talking commercially available high power alphabet motors, right?
>>>
>>>Craig Snyder
>>>Oct 5, 2001 Black Rock Nevada
>>>34,988 feet - M to K two stager


Now that ONE guy in history BARELY got a rocket to fly as high as an
airplane, can we have unlimited altitude FAA waivers now? (note to
rmr groupies, I spelled wavier right this time)

Jerry

>>
>>
>>That's impressive.
>>
>>Altimiter track?
>
>R-DAS, but of course.
>
>http://www.aeroconsystems.com/electronics/rdas.htm


--
Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
Opinion, the whole thing.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 16728 invoked from network); 23 Oct 2001 16:07:42 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 23 Oct 2001 16:07:42 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 4375 invoked by uid 50005); 23 Oct 2001 14:54:16 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4165. . Clean. Processed in 0.190691 secs); 23 Oct 2001 14:54:16 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 23 Oct 2001 14:54:15 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA12011; Tue, 23 Oct 2001 08:21:02 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 121430 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 23 Oct 2001 15:20:55          +0000
Received: from smtppop1pub.verizon.net (smtppop1pub.gte.net [206.46.170.20]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA11997 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 23 Oct 2001 08:20:54 -0700
Received: from [65.229.52.47] (1Cust39.tnt1.rancho-cucamonga.ca.da.uu.net          [63.24.225.39]) by smtppop1pub.verizon.net  with ESMTP for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; id KAA30059613 Tue, 23 Oct 2001 10:19:35 -0500          (CDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: GTE/01rocket@mail.gte.net
References: <4.3.1.2.20011022235411.06fe09c0@mail.idsoftware.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <a0510033ab7fb3a2b8360@[65.229.52.47]>
Date:         Tue, 23 Oct 2001 08:20:33 -0700
Reply-To: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] T6 and high temperatures
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <4.3.1.2.20011022235411.06fe09c0@mail.idsoftware.com>

>At 02:18 PM 10/23/2001 +1000, you wrote:
>>This brings up a question... since 400F is the hottest we ever want to see
>>in a casing, is there a paint, or finish we can use which visibly changes
>>at 400F
>>
>>It'd be nice to know your case is safe if it's blue, unsafe if red. or
>>similar.
>>
>>Thinking out loud,
>>Des
>
>Search for "temperature indicating crayons" at McMaster-Carr.
>
>I grabbed a couple of these, but I haven't used them yet, so I don't know
>how easily they rub off (probably varies with temperature).


We use those to test for the NAR case temp limit.  However we are
doing temperature vs time studies to see how aluminum tube reloadable
motor casings cycle over many firings.  This is to see if there is a
lifecycle issue consumers are not aware of.

We have had very few firings that detempered tubes, but we use tubes
that are thicker than AT and propellants designed for reloadables.
If we were to use thinner AT cases with DPS style propellants as
consumers often do now we think there would be significant issues
resulting in possible case pops.  Not a designed failure mote and
potentially hazardous as compared to closure failure.

Jerry

>
>John Carmack


--
Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
Opinion, the whole thing.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 27279 invoked from network); 23 Oct 2001 18:06:57 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 23 Oct 2001 18:06:57 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 17363 invoked by uid 50005); 23 Oct 2001 16:53:30 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4165. . Clean. Processed in 0.285258 secs); 23 Oct 2001 16:53:30 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 23 Oct 2001 16:53:29 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA12660; Tue, 23 Oct 2001 10:52:43 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 121452 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 23 Oct 2001 17:52:42          +0000
Received: from smtp009pub.verizon.net ([206.46.170.188]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA12139 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue,          23 Oct 2001 08:43:59 -0700
Received: from [65.229.52.47] (1Cust39.tnt1.rancho-cucamonga.ca.da.uu.net          [63.24.225.39]) by smtp009pub.verizon.net  with ESMTP for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; id f9NFhkk08872 Tue, 23 Oct 2001 10:43:46          -0500 (CDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: GTE/01rocket@mail.gte.net
References: <001601c15bd4$65c099c0$6601a8c0@koreynew>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <a05100340b7fb4058f6da@[65.229.52.47]>
Date:         Tue, 23 Oct 2001 08:43:36 -0700
Reply-To: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] commercial HPR altitude record?
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <001601c15bd4$65c099c0$6601a8c0@koreynew>

>Just for the record,
>That's Kline 119780 Ft......not a certified HPR motor, but commercially
>available.
>K2


Pardon me for the mistake.  Congradulatons.  Korey was well mentioned
in Aviation Week magazine for this BTW.

Has anyone commercially purchased any since then?

Jerry

Korey Kline: the ace of space.

>
>>  -----Original Message-----
>>  From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU]On
>>  Behalf Of Jerry Irvine
>>  Sent: Monday, October 22, 2001 9:09 PM
>>  To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
>>  Subject: Re: [AR] commercial HPR altitude record?
>>
>>
>>  >Does anyone here know the absolute altitude record for HPR rockets on
>>  >commercial motors?
>>
>>
>>  Kline 92k feet?
>>
>>  But if you mean motors that are commercial
>>  25k USR L1000 1990 ish
>>  and others since higher, but commercial?
>>
>>
>>  >
>>  >         -p
>>  >
>>  >
>>  >Mars or Bust!
>>  >www.marssociety.com
>>
>>
>>  --
>>  Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
>  > Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
>  > Opinion, the whole thing.
>  >


--
Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
Opinion, the whole thing.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 27802 invoked from network); 23 Oct 2001 18:07:04 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 23 Oct 2001 18:07:04 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 30894 invoked by uid 50005); 23 Oct 2001 18:06:10 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4164. . Clean. Processed in 0.218399 secs); 23 Oct 2001 18:06:10 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 23 Oct 2001 18:06:09 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA12642; Tue, 23 Oct 2001 10:52:37 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 121450 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 23 Oct 2001 17:52:36          +0000
Received: from femail18.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail18.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.0.95.145]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA12128          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 23 Oct 2001 08:42:29 -0700
Received: from c1649002-a.earthlink.net ([24.20.95.67]) by          femail18.sdc1.sfba.home.com (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20          201-229-121-120-20010223) with ESMTP id          <20011023154218.VOLQ27771.femail18.sdc1.sfba.home.com@c1649002-a.earthlink.net>; Tue, 23 Oct 2001 08:42:18          -0700
X-Sender: forkbomb@mail.earthlink.net
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.0.2
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <5.0.2.1.0.20011023083806.03082128@mail.earthlink.net>
Date:         Tue, 23 Oct 2001 08:42:19 -0700
Reply-To: "Pierce Nichols" <forkbomb@EARTHLINK.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Pierce Nichols" <forkbomb@EARTHLINK.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] T6 and high temperatures
Comments: To: kc2csh@JUNO.COM
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <20011023.084515.-3975269.0.kc2csh@juno.com>

At 08:42 AM 10/23/2001 -0400, kc2csh@JUNO.COM wrote:
>   Is there any better material available today than T6?


         Better in what sense? T6 is the strongest temper of 6061 Al (I
think), and the most common. 6061 Al is great because it's really common
(*everyone* carries it), pretty cheap, and machines easily. It's probably
the best bang for the buck in non-ferrous metals you can get. Titanium is
stronger and more heat resistant, but it's incredibly expensive and a bitch
to machine.

         -p



>                    Jay
>
>On Mon, 22 Oct 2001 22:50:20 -0500 Mark Kruep <mkruep@HOTMAIL.COM>
>writes:
> > Actually to totally anneal it ( T0 ), you need to bake it around 900
> > degrees
> > F for 8-9 hours and then slowly reduce the temperature (no more than
> > 50
> > degrees every 30 minutes) until the temperature in the oven reaches
> > 500
> > degrees. Then it can cool in the air, which will very slightly
> > retemper it,
> > but not appreciably (values given are approximate).
> >
> > The 350 degrees for 8 hours is how the metal is artificially aged
> > after
> > being heat treated at around 900 degrees for 30 minutes, then
> > quenched
> > rapidly, then reheated to 350 degrees. It takes approximately
> > (varies
> > greatly) 100+ hours once after this cycle to reach full hardness.
> > The
> > problem with motor casings getting heated is that they are allowed
> > to cool
> > very gradually and if hot enough, the aluminum grains start to
> > "recrystallize" which kills strength quickly. This is due to the
> > numerous
> > "phases" that aluminum alloys have. Ideally, you need to rapidly
> > cool the
> > metal as fast as possible (instantly) to freeze the grains in their
> > desired
> > phase. Allowing the metal to air cool lets it return to less
> > desirable/more
> > relaxed phases.
> >
> > Mark
>
>________________________________________________________________
>GET INTERNET ACCESS FROM JUNO!
>Juno offers FREE or PREMIUM Internet access for less!
>Join Juno today!  For your FREE software, visit:
>http://dl.www.juno.com/get/web/.

Mars or Bust!
www.marssociety.com

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 21110 invoked from network); 23 Oct 2001 18:13:06 -0000
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 23 Oct 2001 18:13:06 -0000
Received: (qmail 30638 invoked by uid 50005); 23 Oct 2001 18:12:56 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4166. . Clean. Processed in 0.466564 secs); 23 Oct 2001 18:12:56 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 23 Oct 2001 18:12:54 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA12694; Tue, 23 Oct 2001 10:52:51 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 121471 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 23 Oct 2001 17:52:50          +0000
Received: from conint.consumersinterest.com (consumersinterest.com          [207.195.143.118] (may be forged)) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with          ESMTP id JAA12360 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 23 Oct 2001          09:40:15 -0700
Received: from DEPUTYDOG1 [131.107.3.72] by conint.consumersinterest.com          (SMTPD32-6.04) id A16E74900B2; Tue, 23 Oct 2001 09:57:18 -0700
References:  <001601c15bd4$65c099c0$6601a8c0@koreynew>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <035501c15be1$4f3ab020$87ae1cac@redmond.corp.microsoft.com>
Date:         Tue, 23 Oct 2001 09:39:39 -0700
Reply-To: "Greg Deputy" <greg@BLASTZONE.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Greg Deputy" <greg@BLASTZONE.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] commercial HPR altitude record?
Comments: To: Korey Kline <k2@HYBRIDS.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Was the rocket successfully recovered from that altitude?

----- Original Message -----
From: "Korey Kline" <k2@HYBRIDS.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Tuesday, October 23, 2001 8:07 AM
Subject: Re: [AR] commercial HPR altitude record?


> Just for the record,
> That's Kline 119780 Ft......not a certified HPR motor, but commercially
> available.
> K2
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU]On
> > Behalf Of Jerry Irvine
> > Sent: Monday, October 22, 2001 9:09 PM
> > To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
> > Subject: Re: [AR] commercial HPR altitude record?
> >
> >
> > >Does anyone here know the absolute altitude record for HPR rockets on
> > >commercial motors?
> >
> >
> > Kline 92k feet?
> >
> > But if you mean motors that are commercial
> > 25k USR L1000 1990 ish
> > and others since higher, but commercial?
> >
> >
> > >
> > >         -p
> > >
> > >
> > >Mars or Bust!
> > >www.marssociety.com
> >
> >
> > --
> > Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
> > Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
> > Opinion, the whole thing.
> >
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 7129 invoked from network); 23 Oct 2001 18:17:08 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 23 Oct 2001 18:17:08 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 3411 invoked by uid 50005); 23 Oct 2001 18:15:53 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4166. . Clean. Processed in 0.123544 secs); 23 Oct 2001 18:15:53 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 23 Oct 2001 18:15:52 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA12625; Tue, 23 Oct 2001 10:52:19 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 121448 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 23 Oct 2001 17:52:09          +0000
Received: from smtp004pub.verizon.net (smtp004pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.183])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA12117 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 23 Oct 2001 08:41:31 -0700
Received: from [65.229.52.47] (1Cust39.tnt1.rancho-cucamonga.ca.da.uu.net          [63.24.225.39]) by smtp004pub.verizon.net  with ESMTP for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; id f9NFexr20714 Tue, 23 Oct 2001 10:41:00          -0500 (CDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: GTE/01rocket@mail.gte.net
References: <20011023.084515.-3975269.0.kc2csh@juno.com>            <3BD58346.4C0604FA@NORTELNETWORKS.COM>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <a0510033fb7fb3fb5d093@[65.229.52.47]>
Date:         Tue, 23 Oct 2001 08:41:10 -0700
Reply-To: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] T6 and high temperatures
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <3BD58346.4C0604FA@NORTELNETWORKS.COM>

>kc2csh@JUNO.COM wrote:
>>
>>    Is there any better material available today than T6?


6061-T6 aluminum is the standard for aerospace for a reason.  It is
also codified now in several places including NAR and NFPA.

Steel is still suitable for zinc-sulfur :)


>  >
>7000 series alloys are stronger, but:
>
>   a) MUCH more expensive
>   b) hard to find
>   c) harder to machine than 6061-T6
>
>7075-T6 has a tensile yield of around 500MPa, while 6061-T6 is around 275MPa.
>
>Yarde Metals lists various forms of 7075-T6, but I don't know whether they
>   actually have stock (www.yardemetals.com).
>
>--
>----------------------------------------------------------------------
>Marcus Leech                             Mail:   Dept 8M70, MS 012, FITZ
>Advisor                                  Phone: (ESN) 393-9145  +1
>613 763 9145
>Security Architecture and Planning       Fax:   (ESN) 393-9435  +1
>613 763 9435
>Nortel Networks                          mleech@nortelnetworks.com
>-----------------Expressed opinions are my own, not my employer's------


--
Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
Opinion, the whole thing.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 14410 invoked from network); 23 Oct 2001 18:26:20 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 23 Oct 2001 18:26:20 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 5008 invoked by uid 50005); 23 Oct 2001 17:13:26 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4166. . Clean. Processed in 0.787538 secs); 23 Oct 2001 17:13:26 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 23 Oct 2001 17:13:23 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA12762; Tue, 23 Oct 2001 10:53:04 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 121444 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 23 Oct 2001 17:53:03          +0000
Received: from smtp009pub.verizon.net ([206.46.170.188]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA12061 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue,          23 Oct 2001 08:27:55 -0700
Received: from [65.229.52.47] (1Cust39.tnt1.rancho-cucamonga.ca.da.uu.net          [63.24.225.39]) by smtp009pub.verizon.net  with ESMTP for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; id f9NFRbk25694 Tue, 23 Oct 2001 10:27:37          -0500 (CDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: GTE/01rocket@mail.gte.net
References: <Pine.LNX.4.10.10110222015560.5316-100000@itc.uci.edu>            <OE38LqJ2j6GaxK3LM7z0001474c@hotmail.com>            <005401c15bb6$8b2de1e0$0a01a8c0@cx814151a>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <a0510033db7fb3cc41fae@[65.229.52.47]>
Date:         Tue, 23 Oct 2001 08:27:28 -0700
Reply-To: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] T6 and high temperatures
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <005401c15bb6$8b2de1e0$0a01a8c0@cx814151a>

>6061 at 212 degrees has 90% of original strength and 50% of original at 350
>degrees.


The NAR limit is 200 degrees.


>
>I can look up more values if needed for any type of aluminum.
>
>John Bolene
>Tripoli Oklahoma Prefect and webmaster
>Tripoli Oklahoma Web page -> http://members.home.com/tripoli-oklahoma/
>
>
>>  > On Tue, 23 Oct 2001, Emil Johnsen wrote:
>>  >
>>  > > At what temperature does 6000-series T6 aluminium become damaged? Is
>it
>>  > > instant or must it stay at this temp for some time? How much is the
>>  yield
>>  > > strength of T6 aluminium reduced when this happens?
>  > > >
>  > > > --
>  > > > Emil Johnsen
>  > > >
>  > >


--
Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
Opinion, the whole thing.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 19961 invoked from network); 23 Oct 2001 18:27:47 -0000
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 23 Oct 2001 18:27:47 -0000
X-Priority: 3
Received: (qmail 13070 invoked by uid 50005); 23 Oct 2001 17:14:20 -0000
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4165. . Clean. Processed in 0.429687 secs); 23 Oct 2001 17:14:20 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 23 Oct 2001 17:14:19 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA12677; Tue, 23 Oct 2001 10:52:45 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 121454 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 23 Oct 2001 17:52:44          +0000
Received: from m1.jersey.juno.com (m1.jersey.juno.com [64.136.16.64]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA12206 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 23 Oct 2001 09:00:10 -0700
Received: from cookie.juno.com by cookie.juno.com for          <"H3WK6e6N+bsCVJQMHM9sZKArAPmFhnF8ouhH8K45UEiKf4nwCL7kYg==">
Received: (from kc2csh@juno.com) by m1.jersey.juno.com (queuemail) id GJFTLP5J;          Tue, 23 Oct 2001 11:58:24 EDT
X-Mailer: Juno 4.0.11
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Juno-Line-Breaks: 0-1,5-6,12-13,15-16,18-26,28-31,33-37,39-41
X-Juno-Att: 0
X-Juno-RefParts: 0
Message-ID:  <20011023.120315.-3884873.0.kc2csh@juno.com>
Date:         Tue, 23 Oct 2001 11:59:21 -0400
Reply-To: <kc2csh@JUNO.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <kc2csh@JUNO.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] T6 and high temperatures
Comments: To: henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

  Thank you Henry, let me rephrase the question  :-)

  Better would be anything that could support longer duration, higher
temps, higher preasures, failure of insulation, etc. safely; preferably
with weight better than or equal than current.  The potential to lose
temper without detection seems to be an obvious safety hazard.

  Certain stainless steels and etc. seem to work well, but also seem to
be heavily disfavored by the amateur and HPR community.  The best
explaination I have heard is that they don't fail well when they do fail.
 The second reason for T6 seems to be that the existing approach is so
simple, cheap, etc.  Third main reason seems to be sunk investment and
inertia.

  Certain mil spec alloys have obvious advantages, even very obsolete
ones, but are prohibitively expensive IF they can even be obtained.

  A 1-200% increase in materials and manufacturing portion of the total
costs would not seem to be a major financial drag on participation.

  Any thoughts.

       Jay




On Tue, 23 Oct 2001 10:09:58 -0400 Henry Spencer <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
writes:
> On Tue, 23 Oct 2001 kc2csh@JUNO.COM wrote:
> >   Is there any better material available today than T6?
>
> First you need to define "better".  There certainly are materials
which
> improve on just about any of its properties you care to name,  although
> when you include cost and ease of use in the list, finding one that
> improves on *all* of them may be difficult.
>
>                                                           Henry
Spencer
>
> henry@spsystems.net

________________________________________________________________
GET INTERNET ACCESS FROM JUNO!
Juno offers FREE or PREMIUM Internet access for less!
Join Juno today!  For your FREE software, visit:
http://dl.www.juno.com/get/web/.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 8152 invoked from network); 23 Oct 2001 18:32:11 -0000
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 23 Oct 2001 18:32:11 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 25918 invoked by uid 50005); 23 Oct 2001 18:32:07 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4166. . Clean. Processed in 0.217104 secs); 23 Oct 2001 18:32:07 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 23 Oct 2001 18:32:06 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA13031; Tue, 23 Oct 2001 11:27:07 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 121532 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 23 Oct 2001 18:27:02          +0000
Received: from avocet.prod.itd.earthlink.net (avocet.mail.pas.earthlink.net          [207.217.121.50]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA12942          for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Tue, 23 Oct 2001 11:17:01 -0700
Received: from dialup-209.245.132.37.dial1.sanjose1.level3.net          ([209.245.132.37] helo=earthlink.net ident=dave) by          avocet.prod.itd.earthlink.net with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id          15w66m-0000xZ-00; Tue, 23 Oct 2001 11:17:00 -0700
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.75 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.16-22 i686)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20011023.084515.-3975269.0.kc2csh@juno.com>            <3BD58346.4C0604FA@NORTELNETWORKS.COM>            <025601c15be2$cfef7d80$c36122c0@cronos>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3BD5B4E1.E4121265@earthlink.net>
Date:         Tue, 23 Oct 2001 11:20:17 -0700
Reply-To: "David Weinshenker" <daze39@EARTHLINK.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "David Weinshenker" <daze39@EARTHLINK.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] T6 and high temperatures
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Wedge Oldham wrote:
>
> Ok, don't anybody flame me for my ignorance....but what about Titanium?

Same disadvantages as listed below for 7075 vs. 6061, except
more so (especially "c" - "a" and "b" are no longer quite as
bad as they once were, though it's by no means as available
as aluminum...).


> >   a) MUCH more expensive
> >   b) hard to find
> >   c) harder to machine than 6061-T6

-dave w

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 29713 invoked from network); 23 Oct 2001 18:37:34 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 23 Oct 2001 18:37:34 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 567 invoked by uid 50005); 23 Oct 2001 18:37:30 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4166. . Clean. Processed in 0.828121 secs); 23 Oct 2001 18:37:30 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 23 Oct 2001 18:37:28 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA12745; Tue, 23 Oct 2001 10:53:02 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 121476 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 23 Oct 2001 17:53:01          +0000
Received: from df01-e12.danfoss.dk (mailx.danfoss.com [193.162.34.6]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA12546 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 23 Oct 2001 10:43:00 -0700
Received: from df01-e12.danfoss.dk (dkdnisvw.danfoss.dk [10.6.2.20]) by          df01-e12.danfoss.dk with SMTP (Microsoft Exchange Internet Mail          Service Version 5.5.2653.13) id 4HZ24XTT; Tue, 23 Oct 2001 19:42:28          +0200
Received: from 10.8.13.36 by df01-e12.danfoss.dk (InterScan E-Mail VirusWall          NT); Tue, 23 Oct 2001 19:42:28 +0200
Received: by mailx.danfoss.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) id          <Q7W2GVKT>; Tue, 23 Oct 2001 19:42:27 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19)
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Message-ID:  <61A2F0A8E936D311876A0008C74BF1EC96AB3F@DD21AE02>
Date:         Tue, 23 Oct 2001 19:42:16 +0200
Reply-To: "Nielson Byron" <BYRONNIELSON@DANFOSS.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Nielson Byron" <BYRONNIELSON@DANFOSS.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Requests for comments - NFPA codes
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Where?

All I could find were proposals for changes.

Best Regards,
Byron


-----Original Message-----
From: kc2csh@JUNO.COM [mailto:kc2csh@JUNO.COM]
Sent: Tuesday, October 23, 2001 8:36 AM
To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
Subject: [AR] Requests for comments - NFPA codes


  NFPA is now seeking comments and proposals relating to the 2002 review
cycle of the NFPA 1122, 1125, & 1127; the code proposals relating to
model rocket motors, HPR, and motor manufacture.
  For those interested; procedures, text of codes, and etc. seems to be
all available on the website now.
  As an aside, normally you must purchase copies of the codes at VERY
high prices, but copies of the codes in this revision cycle seem to be
available for free PDF download.

  I am preparing comments for submission.  If anyone has any ideas, but
doesn't want to take the time to make a submission, feel free to send it
and I'll see if its consistant with what I plan to submit.

  Site is www.nfpa.org
________________________________________________________________
GET INTERNET ACCESS FROM JUNO!
Juno offers FREE or PREMIUM Internet access for less!
Join Juno today!  For your FREE software, visit:
http://dl.www.juno.com/get/web/.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 10961 invoked from network); 23 Oct 2001 18:40:38 -0000
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 23 Oct 2001 18:40:38 -0000
Received: (qmail 5309 invoked by uid 50005); 23 Oct 2001 18:40:34 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4166. . Clean. Processed in 0.180388 secs); 23 Oct 2001 18:40:34 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 23 Oct 2001 18:40:33 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA13109; Tue, 23 Oct 2001 11:34:16 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 121556 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 23 Oct 2001 18:34:12          +0000
Received: from femail44.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail44.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.254.60.38]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA13095          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 23 Oct 2001 11:34:12 -0700
Received: from cc334751a ([65.13.214.65]) by femail44.sdc1.sfba.home.com          (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20 201-229-121-120-20010223) with SMTP id          <20011023183405.IUNW21343.femail44.sdc1.sfba.home.com@cc334751a>;          Tue, 23 Oct 2001 11:34:05 -0700
References:  <20011023.120315.-3884873.0.kc2csh@juno.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2462.0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <011f01c15bf1$07639fe0$6601a8c0@home.com>
Date:         Tue, 23 Oct 2001 12:32:10 -0600
Reply-To: "Brian Kosko" <bkosko1@HOME.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Brian Kosko" <bkosko1@HOME.COM>
Subject:      [AR] Cheap T7075 tube
Comments: To: kc2csh@JUNO.COM
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

I bought a slightly used (once) Sidewinder motor tube at the 'Rocket
Junkyard' in Alamogordo. It is a beautiful 5 inch diamater, about six feet
long, 1/8 inch wall T7075 tube. Sold for scrap, $33!! Ray's heading down
there soon, you might let him know if you'd be interested in any he might
find.

Our local scrap dealer also occasionally gets T7075 that he sells for scrap
price. Always scrounge!

Brian

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 13801 invoked from network); 31 Aug 2001 20:46:28 -0000
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 31 Aug 2001 20:46:28 -0000
Received: (qmail 1872 invoked by uid 50005); 31 Aug 2001 20:44:24 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpf with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.153043 secs); 31 Aug 2001 20:44:24 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 31 Aug 2001 20:44:23 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA25868; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 13:42:31 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 103932 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 20:42:29          +0000
Received: from smtp-out.nrtc.net (host-216-163-120-25.nrtc.net [216.163.120.25]          (may be forged)) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA25854          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 13:42:28 -0700
Received: from foy (dial-12-21-155-107.wfeca.net [12.21.155.107]) by          smtp-out.nrtc.net (8.9.3/8.9.1) with SMTP id QAA02554 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 16:42:23 -0400
References:  <20010831.120210.-3955305.2.kc2csh@juno.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <002501c1325c$927c8a60$6b9b150c@foy>
Date:         Fri, 31 Aug 2001 15:36:10 -0500
Reply-To: "foy" <foy@WFECA.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "foy" <foy@WFECA.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] propellant musings
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

        Don,t but have you tried map gas?
Foy
----- Original Message -----
From: <kc2csh@JUNO.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Friday, August 31, 2001 11:02 AM
Subject: Re: [AR] propellant musings


>   In something of this same vane, has anyone explored tri-propellant or
> quad-propellant type systems.
>   If, for example, in high ISP LH/LOX engines half the LH is combusted
> and half is just heated to exhaust as gas, given the low density of LH,
> why not burn propane or kero or whatever, then add H2.
>   The combinations of 3s and 4s that seem to have complementary
> charastics, particularly from the perspective of density and
> preasurization seems long.  For example, why not use N2O and peroxide
> together.  The N20 could both chill and preasurize the peroxide.
> Combustion started with N20 would largely eliminate issues of catalysts
> for peroxide wouldn't it?
>   I understand the issues of greatly increased complexity.  The question
> I guess is do you get enough potential benefit to offset the complexity?
>
>                      Jay
>
> On Fri, 31 Aug 2001 11:41:38 -0400 Henry Spencer <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
> writes:
> > On Fri, 31 Aug 2001, Pierce Nichols wrote:
> > > Does anyone know the solubility of hydrogen in liquid propane at
> 100K and
> > > various pressures?
> >
> > I had the same idea a few years ago...  I'm told it's minimal, not
> > enough
> > to be worth the trouble.  (I don't have actual numbers on hand.)
> > Pity.
> >
> >                                                           Henry
> > Spencer
> >
> > henry@spsystems.net
>
> ________________________________________________________________
> GET INTERNET ACCESS FROM JUNO!
> Juno offers FREE or PREMIUM Internet access for less!
> Join Juno today!  For your FREE software, visit:
> http://dl.www.juno.com/get/tagj.
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 6763 invoked from network); 31 Aug 2001 20:52:18 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 31 Aug 2001 20:52:18 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 17888 invoked by uid 50005); 31 Aug 2001 20:53:05 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpa with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.2832 secs); 31 Aug 2001 20:53:05 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 31 Aug 2001 20:53:04 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA25912; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 13:46:34 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 103943 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 20:46:32          +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (f211.law15.hotmail.com [64.4.23.211]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA25898 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 13:46:32 -0700
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Fri,          31 Aug 2001 13:46:02 -0700
Received: from 213.224.83.70 by lw15fd.law15.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Fri, 31          Aug 2001 20:45:58 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [213.224.83.70]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 31 Aug 2001 20:46:02.0412 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[F273FEC0:01C1325D]
Message-ID:  <F211TbdkSmLAztxc1o800000f3c@hotmail.com>
Date:         Fri, 31 Aug 2001 20:46:32 +0000
Reply-To: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] gun launch
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

It 'll take some time to decrypt your numbers here. I'll probably need more
info. We'll keep in touch.

BTW: during WW1, *very* high pressure H2 was made by reacting strips of Al
with aqueous NaOH: cheap.

jd


>From: Aaron Smith <ttocs@GTE.NET>
>Reply-To: Aaron Smith <ttocs@GTE.NET>
>To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
>Subject: Re: [AR] gun launch
>Date: Tue, 28 Aug 2001 09:08:42 -1000
>
>The 10 Kg launcher I described WOULD get 2 km (well, without air
>resistance...).  Bring that 10 foot system up to 20 feet, and you would get
>7845 meters (again, no resistance...)  30 feet (which would probably be the
>maximum useful size) and 17652 meters (almost 58,000 feet) - I think that
>could be useful!  The last one would need a propellant with a SOS of higher
>than 2000 ft/sec - which I think eliminates a pneumatic system, so a
>propellant gun such as propane would be needed.  Unless we can find cheap
>H2.  Any powder, and those humorless men in dark suits might show up.
>Launching 10 Kg projectiles to 58,000 feet would attract some attention...
>Just for the hell of it, let's see what a 40 foot system would do -
>31,381m.  102,929 feet.  This number is probably close to the mark, because
>of less air resistance.  I think some amatuer could find a use for THAT!
>
>Gerald Bull was on the right track, until he started working for that other
>dude.
>
>Aaron
>
>P.S.  --  Please note that this was typed up quickly and there could be
>errors in the math.  Don't start drooling yet.
>
>
>At 11:06 AM +0000 8/31/01, John Dom wrote:
> >AS wrote:
> >
> >>A gun launcher is by no means elaborate - it's two pipes and a valve.
> >
> >Huh? Depends how high up you want to go. And what kind of gun. If you
>choose
> >a gas gun & go for a 10-30 kg projectile (in which you could stash away
>some
> >experimental packages) to be launched to say, 2 km up only... then a bike
> >pump won't do.
> >
> >The valve may be simple but may and take a long time to design & realize.
> >Next you need high pressure gas cylinders, a compressor, and even a
> >generator if you want multiple launches_afield.
> >
> >Check pumpkin launchers on trucks URLs. Those guys work for years on
> >their_very long_expensive_guns. The barrel tubings require a truck to
> >transport (up to 10 m long).
> >
> >If you chose a powder gun eg a mortar, that 'd lead to smaller
>contraptions.
> >Heavy barrels. Any ideas on such?
> >
> >jd


_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 6280 invoked from network); 31 Aug 2001 21:07:27 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 31 Aug 2001 21:07:27 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 8272 invoked by uid 50005); 31 Aug 2001 21:08:18 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpb with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.126343 secs); 31 Aug 2001 21:08:18 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 31 Aug 2001 21:08:17 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA26027; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 14:00:32 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 103966 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 21:00:27          +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (f139.law15.hotmail.com [64.4.23.139]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA26013 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 14:00:26 -0700
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Fri,          31 Aug 2001 13:59:56 -0700
Received: from 213.224.83.70 by lw15fd.law15.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Fri, 31          Aug 2001 20:59:56 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [213.224.83.70]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 31 Aug 2001 20:59:56.0534 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[E3A0E960:01C1325F]
Message-ID:  <F139ZgzDgtZKpjE5aHa00001293@hotmail.com>
Date:         Fri, 31 Aug 2001 21:00:27 +0000
Reply-To: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Aerospike , etc...
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Heck, I who am I (silently; are we) to judge all this very sophisticated
material: clever, so it seems. They did not make it. Maybe their idea makes
it,....for the future?

jd

>From: "Bendel, Timothy B" <timothy.b.bendel@LMCO.COM>
>Reply-To: "Bendel, Timothy B" <timothy.b.bendel@LMCO.COM>
>To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
>Subject: Re: [AR] Aerospike , etc...
>Date: Fri, 31 Aug 2001 14:21:13 -0600
>
>         >>>The only vehicle that I know of that *approximates* an
>aerospike
>was the
>         >>>Russian N-1 "Moon Rocket". It had 24 NK-33s around the edge and
>6
>NK-33s in
>         >>>the center. The aft end was sort of hemispherical such that the
>6
>central
>         >>>engines were lower than the engines on the rim, forming a
>rudimentary
>         >>>"spike".
>         >>
>         >>Must be missing the point here since motors in the N-1 stage 1
>cluster were
>         >>all bell shaped. So the Saturn cluster was an aerospike(?)
>         >>
>         >>jd
>
>         >They did all have bell nozzles, but were arranged around a dome
>that could
>         >have acted as a spike.
>
>         Remember that I said *approximates*; the dome was intended to act
>as
>a shallow "plug" nozzle. The original version of the N-1 actually only has
>24 engines, until Korelev figured out that there was going to be too many
>thermo problems with the big dome inside the ring of engines. He stuck 6
>more engines in there partially to alleviate this problem (and for more
>thrust). The engines could handle the high temperature environment due to
>their regenerative cooling.
>
>         Timothy Bendel


_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 17344 invoked from network); 31 Aug 2001 21:18:39 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 31 Aug 2001 21:18:39 -0000
Received: (qmail 19682 invoked by uid 50005); 31 Aug 2001 21:19:30 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpb with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.406577 secs); 31 Aug 2001 21:19:30 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 31 Aug 2001 21:19:29 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA26175; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 14:15:12 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 103992 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 21:15:09          +0000
Received: from cablecom.laribay.net (cablecom.laribay.net [66.20.57.4]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA26161 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 14:15:08 -0700
Received: from billbull (dial109.laribay.net [66.20.57.109]) by          cablecom.laribay.net (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id PAA28294 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 15:56:33 -0500 (CDT)          (envelope-from bpbullock@laribay.net)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0C43_01C56B69.4E6F43E0"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <002401c13262$2f5d1de0$6d391442@billbull>
Date:         Fri, 31 Aug 2001 16:16:01 -0500
Reply-To: "Bill Bullock" <bpbullock@LARIBAY.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Bill Bullock" <bpbullock@LARIBAY.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Cotronics
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0C43_01C56B69.4E6F43E0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

    Some members asked me to post anything I learned about the ceramic =
materials I work with, so: The past two days I have been spending part =
of my time in the shop preparing some samples and testing them.
    One sample was the coating of Zircar, Inc. ceramic fiberboard with =
their rigidizer and firing it. Four soaking coats of rigidizer were =
applied to a square of 3200 deg. F. compatible fiberboard furnace liner =
and fired to 2500 deg. F. The predicted rigidizing ceramic surface layer =
was produced to a measured thickness of just over 3/16" thick within the =
surface of the fiberboard. The sample was then brought up to 2800-3000 =
deg F and held for 125 seconds. The back side of the fiberboard went =
from an original 82 deg. F. to 103 deg F. during this time. The surface =
attained a white-hot condition and radiated such an aura that we had to =
use welders goggles to view it.
    A piece of steel 1.8" thick and 1" wide by 4" long was laid onto =
this fired surface and melted with a welders cutting torch without =
appreciable damage to the surface. (This entailed a temperature of the =
metal strip and the surrounding surface of approximately 1800 deg. F.) =
This took 2 1/2 minutes and the back surface reached 118 deg. F. The =
front surface retained a temperature of over 250 deg. F for over 3 =
minutes while the back surface began to cool almost immediately.
    The Cotronics ceramic adhesive was coated onto a square of 1" thick =
fiberboard and allowed to cure for 48 hours. Another was adhered to a =
square of unprepared (raw) steel and allowed to cure for the same period =
of 48 hours. The square of adhered fiberboard was pulled off the steel =
plate leaving a 3/16" thick layer of fiberboard and adhesive which could =
not be scraped off except with a sharpened gasket scraper and much =
effort.
    The surface-coated adhesive was fired to 2,300 deg. F. It formed a =
hard surface coating measured in several places at an average of  5/32" =
thick. This layer was hard, rough and relatively brittle but very =
resistant to breakage. It was heated to 3,200 deg. F. (400 deg. F. over =
its design operational temperature) and formed scattered surface cracks =
but remained adhered to the fiberboard substrate. Thermal transfer =
through the fiberboard was comparable to the previous model.
    A piece of 1/8" steel bar stock was sandblasted to a pure white =
profile on Wednesday and coated with an 80 mil coating of the Contronics =
adhesive and cured until today. A welder's cutting torch with a neutral =
flame was used (in the hands of a 35-year experienced welder) to heat =
the steel bar. The steel around and up to the edges of the coating were =
carefully melted away by playing the flame across the width of the bar, =
i.e., across bare metal, cured adhesive and then bare metal on the other =
side in order to attempt to expose the metal and the coating to the same =
conditions. The cured ceramic adhesive was slightly browned to a light =
tan color but did not crack of detach from the metal. It could not be =
scraped from the metal with a knife before or after =
heating/curing/firing.
    I will have a new 2400 deg. F. electric kiln/furnace delivered by =
Monday and will continue with more precise testing as well as firing =
ceramic/ceramic- and ceramic/metallic composite materials and nozzles. I =
will post my finding if they are of interest to anyone in the group.
    Respectfully,
Bill

------=_NextPart_000_0C43_01C56B69.4E6F43E0
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META content=3D"text/html; charset=3Diso-8859-1" =
http-equiv=3DContent-Type>
<META content=3D"MSHTML 5.00.2614.3500" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Some members asked me to post anything I learned =
about=20
the ceramic materials I work with, so: The past two days I have been =
spending=20
part of my time in the shop preparing some samples and testing =
them.</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; One sample was the coating of Zircar, Inc. =
ceramic=20
fiberboard with their rigidizer and firing it. Four soaking coats of =
rigidizer=20
were applied to a square of 3200 deg. F. compatible fiberboard furnace =
liner and=20
fired to 2500 deg. F. The predicted rigidizing ceramic surface layer was =

produced to a measured thickness of just over 3/16" thick within the =
surface of=20
the fiberboard. The sample was then brought up to 2800-3000 deg F and =
held for=20
125 seconds. The back side of the fiberboard went from an original 82 =
deg. F. to=20
103 deg F. during this time. The surface attained a white-hot condition =
and=20
radiated such an aura that we had to use welders goggles to view =
it.</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; A piece of steel 1.8" thick and 1" wide by 4" =
long was=20
laid onto this fired surface and melted with a welders cutting torch =
without=20
appreciable damage to the surface. (This entailed a temperature of the =
metal=20
strip and the surrounding surface of approximately 1800 deg. F.) This =
took 2 1/2=20
minutes and the back surface reached 118 deg. F. The front surface =
retained a=20
temperature of over 250 deg. F for over 3 minutes while the back surface =
began=20
to cool almost immediately.</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; The Cotronics ceramic adhesive was coated onto a =
square=20
of 1" thick fiberboard and allowed to cure for 48 hours. Another was =
adhered to=20
a square of unprepared (raw) steel and allowed to cure for the&nbsp;same =
period=20
of 48 hours. The square of adhered fiberboard was pulled off the steel =
plate=20
leaving a 3/16" thick layer of fiberboard and adhesive which could not =
be=20
scraped off except with a sharpened gasket scraper and much =
effort.</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; The surface-coated adhesive was fired to 2,300 =
deg. F.=20
It formed a hard surface coating measured in several places at an =
average of =20
5/32" thick. This layer was hard, rough and relatively brittle but very=20
resistant to breakage. It was heated to 3,200 deg. F. (400 deg. F. over =
its=20
design operational temperature) and formed scattered surface cracks but =
remained=20
adhered to the fiberboard substrate. Thermal transfer through the =
fiberboard was=20
comparable to the previous model.</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; A piece of 1/8" steel bar stock was sandblasted=20
to&nbsp;a pure white profile on Wednesday and coated with an 80 mil =
coating of=20
the Contronics adhesive and cured until today. A welder's cutting torch =
with a=20
neutral flame was used (in the hands of a 35-year experienced welder) to =
heat=20
the steel bar. The steel around and up to the edges of the coating were=20
carefully melted away by playing the flame across the width of the bar, =
i.e.,=20
across bare metal, cured adhesive and then bare metal on the other side =
in order=20
to attempt to expose the metal and the coating to the same conditions. =
The cured=20
ceramic adhesive was slightly browned to a light tan color but did not =
crack of=20
detach from the metal. It could not be scraped from the metal with a =
knife=20
before or after heating/curing/firing.</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; I will have a new 2400 deg. F. electric =
kiln/furnace=20
delivered by Monday and will continue with more precise testing as well =
as=20
firing ceramic/ceramic- and ceramic/metallic composite materials and =
nozzles. I=20
will post my finding if they are of interest to anyone in the =
group.</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Respectfully,</DIV>
<DIV>Bill</DIV></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0C43_01C56B69.4E6F43E0--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 3362 invoked from network); 31 Aug 2001 21:22:32 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 31 Aug 2001 21:22:32 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 1761 invoked by uid 50005); 31 Aug 2001 21:21:06 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.184128 secs); 31 Aug 2001 21:21:06 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 31 Aug 2001 21:21:06 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA26214; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 14:18:11 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 104003 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 21:18:10          +0000
Received: from smtp005pub.verizon.net (smtp005pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.184])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA26200 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 14:18:10 -0700
Received: from [63.10.189.44] (1Cust44.tnt2.hilo.hi.da.uu.net [63.10.189.44])          by smtp005pub.verizon.net  with ESMTP for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; id          f7VLHbg11470 Fri, 31 Aug 2001 16:17:37 -0500 (CDT)
X-Sender: ttocs@mail.gte.net
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <l03130302b7b1b8832261@[63.10.189.118]>
Date:         Tue, 28 Aug 2001 11:17:09 -1000
Reply-To: "Aaron Smith" <ttocs@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Aaron Smith" <ttocs@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] gun launch
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <F211TbdkSmLAztxc1o800000f3c@hotmail.com>

Hydrogen would be nice, but for the small velocity gun I would use air for
simplicity's sake, and the big ones propane.  It is hard to find parts for
a big valve, so combustion wins over a hydrogen pneumatic.

As for decryption, the formula for altitude is d = a*t*t/2, where
d=distance, a=acceleration (9.80665 m/s), and t=time (muzzle velocity /
9.80665).  Altitude thus increases with the square of the time it takes to
deccelerate.  That's why the numbers aren't what you would expect them to
be.

Aaron


At 8:46 PM +0000 8/31/01, John Dom wrote:
>It 'll take some time to decrypt your numbers here. I'll probably need more
>info. We'll keep in touch.
>
>BTW: during WW1, *very* high pressure H2 was made by reacting strips of Al
>with aqueous NaOH: cheap.
>
>jd
>
>
>>From: Aaron Smith <ttocs@GTE.NET>
>>Reply-To: Aaron Smith <ttocs@GTE.NET>
>>To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
>>Subject: Re: [AR] gun launch
>>Date: Tue, 28 Aug 2001 09:08:42 -1000
>>
>>The 10 Kg launcher I described WOULD get 2 km (well, without air
>>resistance...).  Bring that 10 foot system up to 20 feet, and you would get
>>7845 meters (again, no resistance...)  30 feet (which would probably be the
>>maximum useful size) and 17652 meters (almost 58,000 feet) - I think that
>>could be useful!  The last one would need a propellant with a SOS of higher
>>than 2000 ft/sec - which I think eliminates a pneumatic system, so a
>>propellant gun such as propane would be needed.  Unless we can find cheap
>>H2.  Any powder, and those humorless men in dark suits might show up.
>>Launching 10 Kg projectiles to 58,000 feet would attract some attention...
>>Just for the hell of it, let's see what a 40 foot system would do -
>>31,381m.  102,929 feet.  This number is probably close to the mark, because
>>of less air resistance.  I think some amatuer could find a use for THAT!
>>
>>Gerald Bull was on the right track, until he started working for that other
>>dude.
>>
>>Aaron
>>
>>P.S.  --  Please note that this was typed up quickly and there could be
>>errors in the math.  Don't start drooling yet.
>>
>>
>>At 11:06 AM +0000 8/31/01, John Dom wrote:
>> >AS wrote:
>> >
>> >>A gun launcher is by no means elaborate - it's two pipes and a valve.
>> >
>> >Huh? Depends how high up you want to go. And what kind of gun. If you
>>choose
>> >a gas gun & go for a 10-30 kg projectile (in which you could stash away
>>some
>> >experimental packages) to be launched to say, 2 km up only... then a bike
>> >pump won't do.
>> >
>> >The valve may be simple but may and take a long time to design & realize.
>> >Next you need high pressure gas cylinders, a compressor, and even a
>> >generator if you want multiple launches_afield.
>> >
>> >Check pumpkin launchers on trucks URLs. Those guys work for years on
>> >their_very long_expensive_guns. The barrel tubings require a truck to
>> >transport (up to 10 m long).
>> >
>> >If you chose a powder gun eg a mortar, that 'd lead to smaller
>>contraptions.
>> >Heavy barrels. Any ideas on such?
>> >
>> >jd
>
>
>_________________________________________________________________
>Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 26494 invoked from network); 31 Aug 2001 22:47:59 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 31 Aug 2001 22:47:59 -0000
Received: (qmail 2577 invoked by uid 50005); 31 Aug 2001 22:46:32 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.149173 secs); 31 Aug 2001 22:46:32 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 31 Aug 2001 22:46:31 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA26598; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 15:36:13 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 104062 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 22:35:01          +0000
Received: from smtp006pub.verizon.net (smtp006pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.185])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA26583 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 15:35:00 -0700
Received: from [63.10.201.237] (1Cust237.tnt3.hilo.hi.da.uu.net          [63.10.201.237]) by smtp006pub.verizon.net  with ESMTP for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; id f7VMYSA08988 Fri, 31 Aug 2001 17:34:28          -0500 (CDT)
X-Sender: ttocs@mail.gte.net (Unverified)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <l03130300b7b1c784a8da@[63.10.189.44]>
Date:         Tue, 28 Aug 2001 12:33:58 -1000
Reply-To: "Aaron Smith" <ttocs@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Aaron Smith" <ttocs@GTE.NET>
Subject:      [AR] Doh!  Now I've gone and made an ass out of myself...
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Sorry list, but I was writing too fast and did my maths wrong with some of
the gun launch assumptions.  Very wrong.  I forgot that velocity only
increases by 1.414 when you double the length of the gun.  Now I feel like
a complete ass.

If you can still trust me (doubtful ;-)), a 217 foot gun should get 30,000
meters.  Hardly reasonable.  BUT a 40 foot gun COULD get 30,000 meters, but
the accels might be a bit high - 2474 g average.  Something in the back of
my mind tells me this might still be useful.

Feeling stupid,
Aaron

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 24174 invoked from network); 1 Sep 2001 00:22:34 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 1 Sep 2001 00:22:34 -0000
Received: (qmail 29580 invoked by uid 50005); 1 Sep 2001 00:21:41 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.719885 secs); 01 Sep 2001 00:21:41 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 1 Sep 2001 00:21:40 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA26981; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 17:15:11 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 104106 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 1 Sep 2001 00:14:28          +0000
Received: from web5101.mail.yahoo.com (web5101.mail.yahoo.com [216.115.106.71])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id RAA26963 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 17:14:28 -0700
Received: from [12.106.64.19] by web5101.mail.yahoo.com via HTTP; Fri, 31 Aug          2001 17:14:28 PDT
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <20010901001428.14480.qmail@web5101.mail.yahoo.com>
Date:         Fri, 31 Aug 2001 17:14:28 -0700
Reply-To: "Adam Uhl" <kydrocket@YAHOO.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Adam Uhl" <kydrocket@YAHOO.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] questionable motor
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <002001c131c6$725bf7c0$979b150c@foy>

It will cato.

Those dimensions give you a Kn (burning surface area /
throat area) of about 500.  I'm using Kn/Dextrose
(burnes faster that sucrose) and a Kn of 300 yields
chamber pressures of about 1000psi.  Given that 2" abs
tube will only be good for a few hundred psi (just
guessing) Kn=500 is way too high.

You should study Richard Nakkas web site.  He has done
a great job characterizing candy propellant and has
excel spreadsheets available to help you design your
motor.

(This is assuming your using the melt/cast method.  I
am not familiar with the burn rate of re-crystalized
candy propellant)

Adam Uhl

--- foy <foy@WFECA.NET> wrote:
>         This will be the first motor I have designed
> any comments would help. I am using sch 40 black
> pipe 2.1 id . The grain is 65/35 Kn/sorbitol free
> standing uninhibited it measures 2.0 od .625 id X
> 8.8 long. The nozzle has 50 deg con. and 24 deg div.
> angles with .438 dia throat. If you think or know
> this will cato say it!
> HMMMM
>                                 Foy
>


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get email alerts & NEW webcam video instant messaging with Yahoo! Messenger
http://im.yahoo.com

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 24458 invoked from network); 1 Sep 2001 00:22:38 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 1 Sep 2001 00:22:38 -0000
Received: (qmail 5956 invoked by uid 50005); 1 Sep 2001 00:21:11 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.103118 secs); 01 Sep 2001 00:21:11 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 1 Sep 2001 00:21:11 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA27010; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 17:19:09 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 104113 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 1 Sep 2001 00:19:08          +0000
Received: from web5104.mail.yahoo.com (web5104.mail.yahoo.com [216.115.106.74])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id RAA26983 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 17:15:27 -0700
Received: from [12.106.64.19] by web5104.mail.yahoo.com via HTTP; Fri, 31 Aug          2001 17:15:26 PDT
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <20010901001526.10938.qmail@web5104.mail.yahoo.com>
Date:         Fri, 31 Aug 2001 17:15:26 -0700
Reply-To: "Adam Uhl" <kydrocket@YAHOO.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Adam Uhl" <kydrocket@YAHOO.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] questionable motor
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <002001c131c6$725bf7c0$979b150c@foy>

It will cato.

Those dimensions give you a Kn (burning surface area /
throat area) of about 500.  I'm using Kn/Dextrose
(burnes faster that sorbitol) and a Kn of 300 yields
chamber pressures of about 1000psi.  Given that 2" abs
tube will only be good for a few hundred psi (just
guessing) Kn=500 is way too high.

You should study Richard Nakkas web site.  He has done
a great job characterizing candy propellant and has
excel spreadsheets available to help you design your
motor.

(This is assuming your using the melt/cast method.  I
am not familiar with the burn rate of re-crystalized
candy propellant)

Adam Uhl

--- foy <foy@WFECA.NET> wrote:
>         This will be the first motor I have designed
> any comments would help. I am using sch 40 black
> pipe 2.1 id . The grain is 65/35 Kn/sorbitol free
> standing uninhibited it measures 2.0 od .625 id X
> 8.8 long. The nozzle has 50 deg con. and 24 deg div.
> angles with .438 dia throat. If you think or know
> this will cato say it!
> HMMMM
>                                 Foy
>


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get email alerts & NEW webcam video instant messaging with Yahoo! Messenger
http://im.yahoo.com

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 2495 invoked from network); 1 Sep 2001 00:25:10 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 1 Sep 2001 00:25:10 -0000
Received: (qmail 31951 invoked by uid 50005); 1 Sep 2001 00:24:18 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.407946 secs); 01 Sep 2001 00:24:18 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 1 Sep 2001 00:24:17 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA27036; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 17:21:51 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 104120 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 1 Sep 2001 00:21:50          +0000
Received: from web5101.mail.yahoo.com (web5101.mail.yahoo.com [216.115.106.71])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id RAA26987 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 17:15:49 -0700
Received: from [12.106.64.19] by web5101.mail.yahoo.com via HTTP; Fri, 31 Aug          2001 17:15:49 PDT
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <20010901001549.14532.qmail@web5101.mail.yahoo.com>
Date:         Fri, 31 Aug 2001 17:15:49 -0700
Reply-To: "Adam Uhl" <kydrocket@YAHOO.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Adam Uhl" <kydrocket@YAHOO.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] questionable motor
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <002001c131c6$725bf7c0$979b150c@foy>

It will cato.

Those dimensions give you a Kn (burning surface area /
throat area) of about 500.  I'm using Kn/Dextrose
(burnes faster that sorbitol) and a Kn of 300 yields
chamber pressures of about 1000psi.  Given that 2" abs
tube will only be good for a few hundred psi (just
guessing) Kn=500 is way too high.

You should study Richard Nakkas web site.  He has done
a great job characterizing candy propellant and has
excel spreadsheets available to help you design your
motor.

(This is assuming your using the melt/cast method.  I
am not familiar with the burn rate of re-crystalized
candy propellant)

Adam Uhl

--- foy <foy@WFECA.NET> wrote:
>         This will be the first motor I have designed
> any comments would help. I am using sch 40 black
> pipe 2.1 id . The grain is 65/35 Kn/sorbitol free
> standing uninhibited it measures 2.0 od .625 id X
> 8.8 long. The nozzle has 50 deg con. and 24 deg div.
> angles with .438 dia throat. If you think or know
> this will cato say it!
> HMMMM
>                                 Foy
>



__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get email alerts & NEW webcam video instant messaging with Yahoo! Messenger
http://im.yahoo.com

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 16122 invoked from network); 1 Sep 2001 01:35:37 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 1 Sep 2001 01:35:37 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 21360 invoked by uid 50005); 1 Sep 2001 01:36:24 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpa with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.197497 secs); 01 Sep 2001 01:36:24 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 1 Sep 2001 01:36:24 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA27303; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 18:31:46 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 104161 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 1 Sep 2001 01:31:42          +0000
Received: from smtp004pub.verizon.net (smtp004pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.183])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA27289 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 18:31:41 -0700
Received: from [63.24.225.157] (1Cust157.tnt1.rancho-cucamonga.ca.da.uu.net          [63.24.225.157]) by smtp004pub.verizon.net  with ESMTP for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; id f811V8r01297 Fri, 31 Aug 2001 20:31:09          -0500 (CDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: GTE/01rocket@mail.gte.net (Unverified)
References: <000401c13222$fa2cc740$67391442@billbull>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <a05100301b7b578058c19@[63.27.96.42]>
Date:         Fri, 31 Aug 2001 10:23:25 -0700
Reply-To: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Gun Launch
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <000401c13222$fa2cc740$67391442@billbull>

>     The site I referenced before (


I am not a particular gun geek, never have been.  But the latest
Aviation Leak has a gun fired self-propelled scramjet projectile than
can maintain M5+ for a considerable time which I assume substantially
improves range.  It looks to be primarily a kinetic kill device but
might have some incidental HE.

Jerry

--
Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
Opinion, the whole thing.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 1833 invoked from network); 1 Sep 2001 02:06:58 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 1 Sep 2001 02:06:58 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 4206 invoked by uid 50005); 1 Sep 2001 02:05:30 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.202381 secs); 01 Sep 2001 02:05:30 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 1 Sep 2001 02:05:30 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA27443; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 19:03:26 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 104183 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 1 Sep 2001 02:03:20          +0000
Received: from po4.glue.umd.edu (po4.glue.umd.edu [128.8.10.124]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA27429 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 19:03:19 -0700
Received: from z.glue.umd.edu (IDENT:root@z.glue.umd.edu [128.8.10.71]) by          po4.glue.umd.edu (8.10.1/8.10.1) with ESMTP id f8122ki16663; Fri, 31          Aug 2001 22:02:46 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from z.glue.umd.edu (IDENT:sendmail@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by          z.glue.umd.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id WAA08323; Fri, 31 Aug 2001          22:02:46 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from localhost (acase@localhost) by z.glue.umd.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with          ESMTP id WAA08319; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 22:02:46 -0400 (EDT)
X-Authentication-Warning: z.glue.umd.edu: acase owned process doing -bs
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.GSO.4.21.0108312154050.7998-100000@z.glue.umd.edu>
Date:         Fri, 31 Aug 2001 22:02:45 -0400
Reply-To: "Andrew Case" <acase@GLUE.UMD.EDU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Andrew Case" <acase@GLUE.UMD.EDU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Cotronics
Comments: To: Bill Bullock <bpbullock@LARIBAY.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <002401c13262$2f5d1de0$6d391442@billbull>

On Fri, 31 Aug 2001, Bill Bullock wrote:

>     I will have a new 2400 deg. F. electric kiln/furnace delivered by
> Monday and will continue with more precise testing as well as firing
> ceramic/ceramic- and ceramic/metallic composite materials and nozzles.
> I will post my finding if they are of interest to anyone in the group.

I'm certainly interested. One test that might be handy would be to
heat the test piece to max temp. and then play the flame from the
welding torch across the surface so that the flame is moving almost
parallel to the surface (to look for signs of erosion). This might
help eliminate candidates before going to all the trouble of constructing
and coating a nozzle.

Great stuff.
......Andrew

Andrew Case                             |
acase@plasma.umd.edu                    |
Institute for Plasma Research           |
University of Maryland, College Park    |

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 5105 invoked from network); 1 Sep 2001 02:28:19 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 1 Sep 2001 02:28:19 -0000
Received: (qmail 3142 invoked by uid 50005); 1 Sep 2001 02:26:12 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpf with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.1591 secs); 01 Sep 2001 02:26:12 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 1 Sep 2001 02:26:12 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA27534; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 19:23:50 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 104201 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 1 Sep 2001 02:23:44          +0000
Received: from spsystems.net (spsystems.net [209.47.149.227]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA27520 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Fri,          31 Aug 2001 19:23:44 -0700
Received: (from henry@localhost) by spsystems.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id WAA16892;          Fri, 31 Aug 2001 22:23:08 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010831222218.16706B-100000@spsystems.net>
Date:         Fri, 31 Aug 2001 22:23:08 -0400
Reply-To: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] propellant musings
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <F4060mJWEsBk31TZ14e000023b6@hotmail.com>

On Fri, 31 Aug 2001, John Dom wrote:
> >Peroxide works fine as a classical non-hypergolic oxidizer.
>
> Non-hypergolic? Argh! Please the titles of the 4th HP International
> Conference contributions. Very hypergolic HP bipropellant results without HP
> pre-decomposition catalyst pack nonsence...

And without some of its advantages too.  Besides, John, you're starting to
sound like a broken record (remember them?).  My statement remains correct.

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 21216 invoked from network); 1 Sep 2001 03:05:18 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 1 Sep 2001 03:05:18 -0000
Received: (qmail 19761 invoked by uid 50005); 1 Sep 2001 03:04:25 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.456798 secs); 01 Sep 2001 03:04:25 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 1 Sep 2001 03:04:24 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA27748; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 20:01:17 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 104242 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 1 Sep 2001 02:59:50          +0000
Received: from femail5.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail5.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.0.95.85]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA27724 for          <arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 19:59:50 -0700
Received: from cc334751a ([65.13.214.65]) by femail5.sdc1.sfba.home.com          (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20 201-229-121-120-20010223) with SMTP id          <20010901025950.NIOV1258.femail5.sdc1.sfba.home.com@cc334751a> for          <arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 19:59:50 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0C46_01C56B69.4E7B2AC0"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2462.0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <01ab01c13292$187ddbc0$6601a8c0@home.com>
Date:         Fri, 31 Aug 2001 20:59:19 -0600
Reply-To: "Brian Kosko" <bkosko1@HOME.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Brian Kosko" <bkosko1@HOME.COM>
Subject:      [AR] STK Ver 4.2
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0C46_01C56B69.4E7B2AC0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

One of our club guys was at an AIAA conference in town and got a few =
demo copies of Satellite Tool Kit. Any of you familiar with this =
software? Are there any cool and/or useful rocket stuff that a novice =
user could figure out?

Thanks,
Brian=20

------=_NextPart_000_0C46_01C56B69.4E7B2AC0
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Diso-8859-1">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 6.00.2462.0" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>One of our club guys was at an AIAA =
conference in=20
town and got a few demo copies of Satellite Tool Kit. Any of you =
familiar with=20
this software? Are there any cool and/or useful rocket stuff that a =
novice user=20
could figure out?</FONT></DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Thanks,</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Brian</FONT>&nbsp;</DIV></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0C46_01C56B69.4E7B2AC0--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 27681 invoked from network); 1 Sep 2001 04:07:35 -0000
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 1 Sep 2001 04:07:35 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 28255 invoked by uid 50005); 1 Sep 2001 04:07:53 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpe with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.228736 secs); 01 Sep 2001 04:07:53 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 1 Sep 2001 04:07:53 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA27947; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 21:04:04 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 104257 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 1 Sep 2001 04:03:59          +0000
Received: from grucom2.gru.net (grucom2.gru.net [209.251.129.7]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA27933 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri,          31 Aug 2001 21:03:58 -0700
Received: from [209.251.151.238] by grucom2.sfcc.net (NTMail          6.04.0010/NU4112.00.db1c8a4b) with ESMTP id ashriaaa for          AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 1 Sep 2001 00:03:57 -0400
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (Win95; I)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20010901001428.14480.qmail@web5101.mail.yahoo.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B905E9C.C11F26A0@sfcc.net>
Date:         Sat, 1 Sep 2001 00:05:48 -0400
Reply-To: "James Yawn" <jyawn@SFCC.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "James Yawn" <jyawn@SFCC.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] questionable motor
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Foy:

I have been working up my motors in size, some using outside-inhibited Bates
grains, some uninhibited.  Those with uninhibited grains have intense thrust
for a very short time.  With the inhibited grain, there is a more civilized
burn for a longer time.

Thus I would suggest that you inhibit the grain.  Jay Ward reports doing this
by coating each grain with epoxy and wrapping with paper.  I pack
warmed/softened KN/sucrose in paper or PVC tubes.

My largest so far is 1-1/2 inch diameter in white sch40 pvc, 5 inches long,
packed-clay nozzle 3/8 inch diameter with a single inhibited grain.  All of
this style have fired well in static tests.

This weekend I hope to make one approximately the size of yours  - I made the
fuel tonight - and will report my results as soon as there are any.

In the meantime, I think you should fire your engine in such a way as to get
your nozzle back.  It's too pretty to lose.

Good luck!
Jimmy Yawn

Adam Uhl wrote:

> It will cato.
>
> Those dimensions give you a Kn (burning surface area /
> throat area) of about 500.  I'm using Kn/Dextrose
> (burnes faster that sucrose) and a Kn of 300 yields
> chamber pressures of about 1000psi.  Given that 2" abs
> tube will only be good for a few hundred psi (just
> guessing) Kn=500 is way too high.
>
> You should study Richard Nakkas web site.  He has done
> a great job characterizing candy propellant and has
> excel spreadsheets available to help you design your
> motor.
>
> (This is assuming your using the melt/cast method.  I
> am not familiar with the burn rate of re-crystalized
> candy propellant)
>
> Adam Uhl
>
> --- foy <foy@WFECA.NET> wrote:
> >         This will be the first motor I have designed
> > any comments would help. I am using sch 40 black
> > pipe 2.1 id . The grain is 65/35 Kn/sorbitol free
> > standing uninhibited it measures 2.0 od .625 id X
> > 8.8 long. The nozzle has 50 deg con. and 24 deg div.
> > angles with .438 dia throat. If you think or know
> > this will cato say it!
> > HMMMM
> >                                 Foy
> >
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Get email alerts & NEW webcam video instant messaging with Yahoo! Messenger
> http://im.yahoo.com

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 11706 invoked from network); 1 Sep 2001 04:27:18 -0000
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 1 Sep 2001 04:27:18 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 14298 invoked by uid 50005); 1 Sep 2001 04:27:36 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpe with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.224947 secs); 01 Sep 2001 04:27:36 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 1 Sep 2001 04:27:35 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA28108; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 21:25:10 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 104292 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 1 Sep 2001 04:25:04          +0000
Received: from grucom2.gru.net (grucom2.gru.net [209.251.129.7]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA28094 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri,          31 Aug 2001 21:25:03 -0700
Received: from [209.251.151.238] by grucom2.sfcc.net (NTMail          6.04.0010/NU4112.00.db1c8a4b) with ESMTP id eeiriaaa for          AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 1 Sep 2001 00:25:02 -0400
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (Win95; I)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B90638E.37AABAE6@sfcc.net>
Date:         Sat, 1 Sep 2001 00:26:54 -0400
Reply-To: "James Yawn" <jyawn@SFCC.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "James Yawn" <jyawn@SFCC.NET>
Subject:      [AR] Steam powered rocket?
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Many years ago I read an article in a popular magazine which mentioned a
"steam-powered rocket" which flew to 20,000 feet.  In retrospect, it
seems likely that this meant HTP monopropellant.  But the magazine,
being popular, was very careful to avoid any details that my hungry
adolescent mind could have used for good or evil.

What I imagined then was a metal rocket filled with water, on a launch
rail inside a chimney-pipe, with lots of gas jets playing their flames
upon it.  Or maybe one big burner at the bottom.  At some point a burst
diaphraghm just ahead of the nozzle breaks, releasing the superheated
water which flashes into steam creating thrust.

My question is:  was this a naive fantasy, or has this kind of thing
been done?

I would love to hear any reports or comments.

Jimmy Yawn

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 20178 invoked from network); 1 Sep 2001 04:44:06 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 1 Sep 2001 04:44:06 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 31836 invoked by uid 50005); 1 Sep 2001 04:43:14 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.399385 secs); 01 Sep 2001 04:43:14 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 1 Sep 2001 04:43:13 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA28191; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 21:42:07 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 104307 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 1 Sep 2001 04:42:05          +0000
Received: from mail.aros.net (mail.aros.net [207.173.16.20]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA28177 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri,          31 Aug 2001 21:42:05 -0700
Received: from biomicro.com (dm3-138.slc.aros.net [207.173.25.138]) by          mail.aros.net (8.11.6/8.9.3) with ESMTP id f814g3973037 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 22:42:04 -0600 (MDT)
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.77 [en] (Win98; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <3B90638E.37AABAE6@sfcc.net>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B906712.C50D555D@biomicro.com>
Date:         Fri, 31 Aug 2001 22:41:54 -0600
Reply-To: "Mark K. Spute" <mks@BIOMICRO.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Mark K. Spute" <mks@BIOMICRO.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Steam powered rocket?
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Yes, it has been done.

Check out the RRS website, www.rrs.org and look for information on the
"Scalded Cat."  A beautiful rocket that was built essentially as you
described.  A stainless steel fuselage filled with water, and heated by
a very impressive propane burner.  It flew one of the lovliest flights I
have ever seen and returned via parachute.  Very nice.

James Yawn wrote:
>
> Many years ago I read an article in a popular magazine which mentioned a
> "steam-powered rocket" which flew to 20,000 feet.  In retrospect, it
> seems likely that this meant HTP monopropellant.  But the magazine,
> being popular, was very careful to avoid any details that my hungry
> adolescent mind could have used for good or evil.
>
> What I imagined then was a metal rocket filled with water, on a launch
> rail inside a chimney-pipe, with lots of gas jets playing their flames
> upon it.  Or maybe one big burner at the bottom.  At some point a burst
> diaphraghm just ahead of the nozzle breaks, releasing the superheated
> water which flashes into steam creating thrust.
>
> My question is:  was this a naive fantasy, or has this kind of thing
> been done?
>
> I would love to hear any reports or comments.
>
> Jimmy Yawn

--
Mark K. Spute
Senior Research Engineer
BioMicro Systems Inc.

KD7IWE,  RRS

"It is difficult to say what is impossible, for the dream of yesterday
is the hope of today and the reality of tomorrow."
     Dr. Robert H. Goddard

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 14187 invoked from network); 1 Sep 2001 05:20:28 -0000
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 1 Sep 2001 05:20:28 -0000
Received: (qmail 14110 invoked by uid 50005); 1 Sep 2001 05:18:22 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpf with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.268661 secs); 01 Sep 2001 05:18:22 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 1 Sep 2001 05:18:21 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA28305; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 22:17:32 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 104322 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 1 Sep 2001 05:17:24          +0000
Received: from smtp-out.nrtc.net (host-216-163-120-25.nrtc.net [216.163.120.25]          (may be forged)) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA28291          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 22:17:23 -0700
Received: from foy (dial-12-21-155-125.wfeca.net [12.21.155.125]) by          smtp-out.nrtc.net (8.9.3/8.9.1) with SMTP id BAA05953 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 1 Sep 2001 01:17:21 -0400
References: <20010901001428.14480.qmail@web5101.mail.yahoo.com>             <3B905E9C.C11F26A0@sfcc.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <001001c132a4$7f6f23e0$7d9b150c@foy>
Date:         Sat, 1 Sep 2001 00:11:02 -0500
Reply-To: "foy" <foy@WFECA.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "foy" <foy@WFECA.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] questionable motor
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

          All the motors I have fired so far are in a stand of very stout
construction (overkill). The nozzle and case are restrianed. My main worry
is the guages being rapidly scatered due to motor failure. A short .5 sec
400# is my goal for now.
----- Original Message -----
From: "James Yawn" <jyawn@SFCC.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Friday, August 31, 2001 11:05 PM
Subject: Re: [AR] questionable motor


> Foy:
>
> I have been working up my motors in size, some using outside-inhibited
Bates
> grains, some uninhibited.  Those with uninhibited grains have intense
thrust
> for a very short time.  With the inhibited grain, there is a more
civilized
> burn for a longer time.
>
> Thus I would suggest that you inhibit the grain.  Jay Ward reports doing
this
> by coating each grain with epoxy and wrapping with paper.  I pack
> warmed/softened KN/sucrose in paper or PVC tubes.
>
> My largest so far is 1-1/2 inch diameter in white sch40 pvc, 5 inches
long,
> packed-clay nozzle 3/8 inch diameter with a single inhibited grain.  All
of
> this style have fired well in static tests.
>
> This weekend I hope to make one approximately the size of yours  - I made
the
> fuel tonight - and will report my results as soon as there are any.
>
> In the meantime, I think you should fire your engine in such a way as to
get
> your nozzle back.  It's too pretty to lose.
>
> Good luck!
> Jimmy Yawn
>
> Adam Uhl wrote:
>
> > It will cato.
> >
> > Those dimensions give you a Kn (burning surface area /
> > throat area) of about 500.  I'm using Kn/Dextrose
> > (burnes faster that sucrose) and a Kn of 300 yields
> > chamber pressures of about 1000psi.  Given that 2" abs
> > tube will only be good for a few hundred psi (just
> > guessing) Kn=500 is way too high.
> >
> > You should study Richard Nakkas web site.  He has done
> > a great job characterizing candy propellant and has
> > excel spreadsheets available to help you design your
> > motor.
> >
> > (This is assuming your using the melt/cast method.  I
> > am not familiar with the burn rate of re-crystalized
> > candy propellant)
> >
> > Adam Uhl
> >
> > --- foy <foy@WFECA.NET> wrote:
> > >         This will be the first motor I have designed
> > > any comments would help. I am using sch 40 black
> > > pipe 2.1 id . The grain is 65/35 Kn/sorbitol free
> > > standing uninhibited it measures 2.0 od .625 id X
> > > 8.8 long. The nozzle has 50 deg con. and 24 deg div.
> > > angles with .438 dia throat. If you think or know
> > > this will cato say it!
> > > HMMMM
> > >                                 Foy
> > >
> >
> > __________________________________________________
> > Do You Yahoo!?
> > Get email alerts & NEW webcam video instant messaging with Yahoo!
Messenger
> > http://im.yahoo.com
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 6477 invoked from network); 1 Sep 2001 05:30:32 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 1 Sep 2001 05:30:32 -0000
Received: (qmail 6167 invoked by uid 50005); 1 Sep 2001 05:29:38 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.601839 secs); 01 Sep 2001 05:29:38 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 1 Sep 2001 05:29:37 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA28366; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 22:27:58 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 104333 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 1 Sep 2001 05:27:53          +0000
Received: from femail19.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail19.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.0.95.128]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA28351          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 22:27:53 -0700
Received: from hal2001 ([24.77.53.16]) by femail19.sdc1.sfba.home.com          (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20 201-229-121-120-20010223) with SMTP id          <20010901052753.VRFM6174.femail19.sdc1.sfba.home.com@hal2001> for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 22:27:53 -0700
References: <20010901001428.14480.qmail@web5101.mail.yahoo.com>                       <3B905E9C.C11F26A0@sfcc.net>  <001001c132a4$7f6f23e0$7d9b150c@foy>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <00a101c132a5$b2d54b00$0400a8c0@hatjs>
Date:         Fri, 31 Aug 2001 22:19:38 -0700
Reply-To: "Jamie Morken" <jmorken@HOME.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jamie Morken" <jmorken@HOME.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] questionable motor
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Hi all,

>           All the motors I have fired so far are in a stand of very stout
> construction (overkill). The nozzle and case are restrianed. My main worry
> is the guages being rapidly scatered due to motor failure. A short .5 sec
> 400# is my goal for now.

Is your casing is steel pipe?  What type of nozzle are you using and how is
it held in the casing?
If the answers are steel, steel, snap ring or bolts then I think it should
work fine!

best regards,
Jamie Morken

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 4374 invoked from network); 1 Sep 2001 05:56:59 -0000
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 1 Sep 2001 05:56:59 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 20589 invoked by uid 50005); 1 Sep 2001 05:57:17 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpe with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.222773 secs); 01 Sep 2001 05:57:17 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 1 Sep 2001 05:57:16 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA28501; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 22:54:20 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 104364 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 1 Sep 2001 05:54:18          +0000
Received: from dns2.seanet.com (dns2.seanet.com [199.181.164.2]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA28487 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri,          31 Aug 2001 22:54:17 -0700
Received: from seanet.com (ssstolt.seanet.com [204.182.68.23]) by          dns2.seanet.com (8.11.6/8.11.5) with ESMTP id f815rtb18628; Fri, 31          Aug 2001 22:54:05 -0700 (PDT)
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.73 [en] (Win98; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <00c101c13164$258d6a80$c36122c0@cronos>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B907621.39F647FC@seanet.com>
Date:         Fri, 31 Aug 2001 22:46:10 -0700
Reply-To: "Sherwood Stolt" <ssstolt@SEANET.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Sherwood Stolt" <ssstolt@SEANET.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] High Altitude Mach plus flights
Comments: cc: Wedge Oldham <wedge@WESTWORLD.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

I was hoping someone with a formal education in hypersonic heat transfer
would provide a more specific answer but since they haven't I will try.

Wedge Oldham wrote:

> Guys I've just finished the simulations on a rocket if thinking of building.
> The performance of this rocket far exceeds my expectations. Could/should hit
> an altitude of 100K feet. It also raises a number of questions.
>
> 1. Does the CP of a rocket change with air density. I wouldn't think so, but
> felt I better ask.

Download a copy of Aerolab and find out your Cp at any mach and altitude.

> 2. I have a formula for atmospheric heating which is (velocity (in
> feet/second) / 110) squared = delta degrees F. I'd have to assume this
> formula is for sea level.....would this heating be proportional to air
> density i.e. 1/2 density yields 1/2 the heating?

The crude simple formula is the adiabatic stagnation temperature:

Ttotal = (1 + 0.2 x M x M) x Ta
M is mach number
Ta is the local ambient absolute air temperature (use the one for
the correct altitude from a standard atmosphere table)

This is the temperature a bit of air would reach if it was brought to
a stop relative your rocket without any heat transfer. There are
several reasons why this is conservatively high.  First it only applies
off the tip of the nose because the air elsewhere is moving with
respect to the rocket.  Second there is a film around the rocket that
effects the equilibrium temperature.  There are formulas in
aerodynamics texts that involve such things as surface roughness
that estimate what is called the recovery temperature.  There is
also the problem of conduction that causes the surface temperature
to be between the recovery temp and whatever heat sink is below.
There is also radiation that keeps the temp below about 1000F for
all but leading edges where heat transfer rates are the highest.
This doesn't help much at amateur rocket mach numbers.
And finally there is the fact that the peak temp is just a point
in time and somewhat lower temps last only a few seconds
and so there is the thermal inertia of the material to figure in.

If you have a metal or ceramic surface then don't worry the
problem.  If you have a less thermally conductive material like
an epoxy composite then I think you could assume the surface
would follow the recovery temp and so calculate how much heat
penetrates into the structure by conduction.  I don't remember
the recovery temperature formula off hand but I think I was
at one point trying to use the outputs from Aerolab to estimate
a skin friction coefficient to plug into one when I was trying
to do these calculations once before.  Using the formula above
would definitely be conservative at all but orbital type
velocities where the air gets red hot and radiates into the structure.

> 3. The sim says a maximum velocity of Mach 2.9 @ 45K' MSL. I've built
> rockets that hit Mach 1.6 at 3100' MSL.... is there a way I can compare
> these two items? I'm sure that Mach 2 at sea level and Mach 2 at 50K present
> different levels of stress on the fins & airframe...but how do I compare the
> two? Is this again just a simple function of air density?

Use Aerolab to calculate drag and lift of various body/fin parts and
make some crude estimates based on that.  Remember, however, that
for steeply swept fins vortex lift and flow separation increase loads
at high angles of attack and so I like to assume full static plus
dynamic pressure on one side of the fin and absolute zero pressure
on the other with zero margin of safety if that does not cause too
severe a structural weight penalty.

But don't forget about fin flutter.  Someone produced a spreadsheet
a while back to estimate that.

> 4. What high temperature epoxies are available on the market?

Seems like the 500F stuff out to do it for the bulk of the structure.  If
necessary a thin coat of some  less thermally conductive material
like others have suggested.

> 5. Anybody got the perfect Mach PLUS fin shape? I've got one I like based on
> some basic guidelines....long root edge, short span, 30 degree leading edge,
> 60 degree trailing edge, and just looks cool. I'd like to replace the "just
> looks cool" with something more scientific.

Find the maximum velocity your rocket reaches inside enough air
to produce significant drag and figure out the mach angle.  Make
both leading and trailing edges sweep more than that.  Same thing
with the nose cone.  If you really have thermal problems you may
need to figure the mach angle for the reentry to keep shock
waves from creating hot spots.  I am not sure that is a problem
for rockets but some X planes had holes melted in some surfaces.
Plug it into Aerolab to see if you have low enough drag and
enough lift for the right Cp.

Guess what is my favorite rocket design program.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 12705 invoked from network); 1 Sep 2001 06:00:45 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 1 Sep 2001 06:00:45 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 7015 invoked by uid 50005); 1 Sep 2001 05:59:17 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.237467 secs); 01 Sep 2001 05:59:17 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 1 Sep 2001 05:59:16 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA28546; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 22:57:24 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 104376 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 1 Sep 2001 05:57:23          +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (f225.law15.hotmail.com [64.4.23.225]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA28532 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 22:57:23 -0700
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Fri,          31 Aug 2001 22:56:53 -0700
Received: from 213.224.83.70 by lw15fd.law15.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Sat, 01          Sep 2001 05:56:53 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [213.224.83.70]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 01 Sep 2001 05:56:53.0460 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[E669B140:01C132AA]
Message-ID:  <F225MWuLn5U9T3TGJ2T00000925@hotmail.com>
Date:         Sat, 1 Sep 2001 05:57:23 +0000
Reply-To: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] propellant musings
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Here are some very recent advances on the "broken record" topic:

 Investigation of Hypergolic Fuels with Hydrogen Peroxide
  Melof, B.; Grubelich, M., Sandia National Laboratories, USA

 Bipropellant Injector Studies Utilizing Hydrogen Peroxide and a
Non-Toxic Hypergolic Fuel
  Austin, B.; Funk, J.; Long, M.; Palmer, R.; Matthews, J.B.;
  Heister, S.; Rusek, J.J.; Purdue University, USA

 Investigation of Homogeneous and Heterogeneous Catalysis for the
Propulsive Decomposition of Hydrogen Peroxide
  Pourpoint, T.; Rusek, J.; Swift Enterprise LTD, United States

As stated earlier, ordering these papers can be a problem.

jd









>From: Henry Spencer <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
>Reply-To: Henry Spencer <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
>To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
>Subject: Re: [AR] propellant musings
>Date: Fri, 31 Aug 2001 22:23:08 -0400
>
>On Fri, 31 Aug 2001, John Dom wrote:
> > >Peroxide works fine as a classical non-hypergolic oxidizer.
> >
> > Non-hypergolic? Argh! Please the titles of the 4th HP International
> > Conference contributions. Very hypergolic HP bipropellant results
>without HP
> > pre-decomposition catalyst pack nonsence...
>
>And without some of its advantages too.  Besides, John, you're starting to
>sound like a broken record (remember them?).  My statement remains correct.
>
>                                                           Henry Spencer
>                                                        henry@spsystems.net


_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 17491 invoked from network); 1 Sep 2001 06:02:56 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 1 Sep 2001 06:02:56 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 23838 invoked by uid 50005); 1 Sep 2001 06:03:13 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpe with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.158866 secs); 01 Sep 2001 06:03:13 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 1 Sep 2001 06:03:13 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA28577; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 23:00:34 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 104383 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 1 Sep 2001 06:00:33          +0000
Received: from smtp008pub.verizon.net (smtp008pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.187])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA28563 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 23:00:32 -0700
Received: from [63.24.225.157] (1Cust193.tnt1.rancho-cucamonga.ca.da.uu.net          [63.24.225.193]) by smtp008pub.verizon.net  with ESMTP for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; id f81600q18156 Sat, 1 Sep 2001 01:00:01 -0500          (CDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: GTE/01rocket@mail.gte.net
References: <01ab01c13292$187ddbc0$6601a8c0@home.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <a05100301b7b6295e712f@[63.24.225.157]>
Date:         Fri, 31 Aug 2001 23:00:01 -0700
Reply-To: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] STK Ver 4.2
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <01ab01c13292$187ddbc0$6601a8c0@home.com>

>One of our club guys was at an AIAA conference in town and got a few
>demo copies of Satellite Tool Kit. Any of you familiar with this
>software? Are there any cool and/or useful rocket stuff that a
>novice user could figure out?
>
>Thanks,
>Brian

I find STK to be very useful once you get to orbit but fairly useless
to optimize how to get there,  I invite insight on this topic.  I
have self-written 2d trajectory launch software for the item at issue.

Jerry


--
Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
Opinion, the whole thing.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 26131 invoked from network); 1 Sep 2001 06:06:54 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 1 Sep 2001 06:06:54 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 26975 invoked by uid 50005); 1 Sep 2001 06:07:40 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpa with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.168471 secs); 01 Sep 2001 06:07:40 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 1 Sep 2001 06:07:40 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA28622; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 23:05:02 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 104394 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 1 Sep 2001 06:05:01          +0000
Received: from smtp002pub.verizon.net (smtp002pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.181])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA28605 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 23:05:00 -0700
Received: from [63.24.225.157] (1Cust193.tnt1.rancho-cucamonga.ca.da.uu.net          [63.24.225.193]) by smtp002pub.verizon.net  with ESMTP for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; id f8164T316266 Sat, 1 Sep 2001 01:04:29 -0500          (CDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: GTE/01rocket@mail.gte.net
References: <00c101c13164$258d6a80$c36122c0@cronos>            <3B907621.39F647FC@seanet.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <a05100302b7b62abec410@[63.24.225.157]>
Date:         Fri, 31 Aug 2001 23:04:30 -0700
Reply-To: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] High Altitude Mach plus flights
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <3B907621.39F647FC@seanet.com>

>Download a copy of Aerolab


Pardon my ignorance.  What is the URL?

--
Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
Opinion, the whole thing.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 2003 invoked from network); 1 Sep 2001 06:09:40 -0000
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 1 Sep 2001 06:09:40 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 27217 invoked by uid 50005); 1 Sep 2001 06:09:57 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpe with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.170396 secs); 01 Sep 2001 06:09:57 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 1 Sep 2001 06:09:57 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA28654; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 23:06:29 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 104405 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 1 Sep 2001 06:06:28          +0000
Received: from smtp007pub.verizon.net (smtp007pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.186])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA28640 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 23:06:27 -0700
Received: from [63.24.225.157] (1Cust193.tnt1.rancho-cucamonga.ca.da.uu.net          [63.24.225.193]) by smtp007pub.verizon.net  with ESMTP for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; id f8165ti02803 Sat, 1 Sep 2001 01:05:55 -0500          (CDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: GTE/01rocket@mail.gte.net
References: <F225MWuLn5U9T3TGJ2T00000925@hotmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by itc.uci.edu id XAA28641
Message-ID:  <a05100303b7b62b0ad5c5@[63.24.225.157]>
Date:         Fri, 31 Aug 2001 23:05:56 -0700
Reply-To: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] propellant musings
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <F225MWuLn5U9T3TGJ2T00000925@hotmail.com>

>Here are some very recent advances on the "broken record" topic:
>
> Investigation of Hypergolic Fuels with Hydrogen Peroxide
>  Melof, B.; Grubelich, M., Sandia National Laboratories, USA

I happen to know Grubelich and he knows most of the others. . . .

Jerry

--
Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
Opinion, the whole thing.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 21126 invoked from network); 1 Sep 2001 06:47:19 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 1 Sep 2001 06:47:19 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 7545 invoked by uid 50005); 1 Sep 2001 06:45:50 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.193213 secs); 01 Sep 2001 06:45:50 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 1 Sep 2001 06:45:50 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA28875; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 23:45:19 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 104456 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 1 Sep 2001 06:45:10          +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (f204.law15.hotmail.com [64.4.23.204]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA28861 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 23:45:09 -0700
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Fri,          31 Aug 2001 23:44:39 -0700
Received: from 213.224.83.70 by lw15fd.law15.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Sat, 01          Sep 2001 06:44:39 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [213.224.83.70]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 01 Sep 2001 06:44:39.0714 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[92D55820:01C132B1]
Message-ID:  <F204kGhAj5p1Fjxe0ym00001556@hotmail.com>
Date:         Sat, 1 Sep 2001 06:45:10 +0000
Reply-To: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      [AR] gun launch
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

AS wrote:

>I forgot that velocity only increases by 1.414 when you double the length
>of the gun

Not familiar with this number. You mean this compensates for air resistance
in the barrel?

jd

_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 914 invoked from network); 1 Sep 2001 07:08:30 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 1 Sep 2001 07:08:30 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 21999 invoked by uid 50005); 1 Sep 2001 07:06:23 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpf with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4155. . Clean. Processed in 0.098624 secs); 01 Sep 2001 07:06:23 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 1 Sep 2001 07:06:23 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA28982; Sat, 1 Sep 2001 00:06:27 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 104479 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 1 Sep 2001 07:06:21          +0000
Received: from smtp006pub.verizon.net (smtp006pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.185])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA28968 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 1 Sep 2001 00:06:21 -0700
Received: from [63.25.193.125] (1Cust125.tnt1.hilo.hi.da.uu.net          [63.25.193.125]) by smtp006pub.verizon.net  with ESMTP for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; id f8175mA15635 Sat, 1 Sep 2001 02:05:49 -0500          (CDT)
X-Sender: ttocs@mail.gte.net
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <l03130300b7b242a994e6@[63.10.201.237]>
Date:         Tue, 28 Aug 2001 21:05:27 -1000
Reply-To: "Aaron Smith" <ttocs@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Aaron Smith" <ttocs@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] gun launch
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <F204kGhAj5p1Fjxe0ym00001556@hotmail.com>

At 6:45 AM +0000 9/1/01, John Dom wrote:
>AS wrote:
>
>>I forgot that velocity only increases by 1.414 when you double the length
>>of the gun
>
>Not familiar with this number. You mean this compensates for air resistance
>in the barrel?
>
>jd

No.  The projectile is in the second half of the barrel for a much shorter
time than the first, as it is already moving.  I don't know if that made
sense, but it's the best way I can describe it.

Aaron

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 8909 invoked from network); 23 Oct 2001 18:48:04 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 23 Oct 2001 18:48:04 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 30944 invoked by uid 50005); 23 Oct 2001 17:35:09 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4166. . Clean. Processed in 0.191534 secs); 23 Oct 2001 17:35:09 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 23 Oct 2001 17:35:09 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA12976; Tue, 23 Oct 2001 11:22:13 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 121533 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 23 Oct 2001 18:21:59          +0000
Received: from zianet.com (virtmail.zianet.com [216.234.192.37]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id LAA12962 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue,          23 Oct 2001 11:21:58 -0700
Received: (qmail 13737 invoked by alias); 23 Oct 2001 18:22:05 -0000
References: <20011023.093557.-3975269.2.kc2csh@juno.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <20011023182205.13735.qmail@zianet.com>
Date:         Tue, 23 Oct 2001 18:22:05 GMT
Reply-To: <dburnam@ZIANET.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <dburnam@ZIANET.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Requests for comments - NFPA codes
Comments: To: kc2csh@JUNO.COM
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <20011023.093557.-3975269.2.kc2csh@juno.com>

Yes!  And thanks for the offer.  Most of the comments I have pertain to NFC
1127 although I can think of a few for NFC 1122 too.

I'll review all three tonight but what kind of time frame are you looking
at for having comments in your hands?

Thanks,
Denzil


kc2csh@JUNO.COM writes:

>   NFPA is now seeking comments and proposals relating to the 2002 review
> cycle of the NFPA 1122, 1125, & 1127; the code proposals relating to
> model rocket motors, HPR, and motor manufacture.
>   For those interested; procedures, text of codes, and etc. seems to be
> all available on the website now.
>   As an aside, normally you must purchase copies of the codes at VERY
> high prices, but copies of the codes in this revision cycle seem to be
> available for free PDF download.
>
>   I am preparing comments for submission.  If anyone has any ideas, but
> doesn't want to take the time to make a submission, feel free to send it
> and I'll see if its consistant with what I plan to submit.
>
>   Site is www.nfpa.org
> ________________________________________________________________
> GET INTERNET ACCESS FROM JUNO!
> Juno offers FREE or PREMIUM Internet access for less!
> Join Juno today!  For your FREE software, visit:
> http://dl.www.juno.com/get/web/.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 9071 invoked from network); 24 Oct 2001 11:13:11 -0000
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 24 Oct 2001 11:13:11 -0000
Received: (qmail 17083 invoked by uid 50005); 24 Oct 2001 11:12:19 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4164. . Clean. Processed in 0.170304 secs); 24 Oct 2001 11:12:19 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 24 Oct 2001 11:12:19 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id EAA18787; Wed, 24 Oct 2001 04:10:01 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 122226 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 24 Oct 2001 11:09:53          +0000
Received: from fep4-orange.clear.net.nz (fep4-orange.clear.net.nz          [203.97.32.4]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id EAA18767          for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Wed, 24 Oct 2001 04:09:52 -0700
Received: from mkbs (d1-u29.acld.clear.net.nz [203.97.48.29]) by          fep4-orange.clear.net.nz (1.5/1.7) with SMTP id AAA06132; Thu, 25 Oct          2001 00:09:49 +1300 (NZDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="Windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <01e101c15c7c$80c6d920$0700a8c0@mkbs>
Date:         Thu, 25 Oct 2001 00:08:30 +1300
Reply-To: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Organization: Applied Technology
Subject:      [AR] Fw: Jonathan's Space Report, No. 465
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

QuickBird imaging resolution given as 0.6m


        RM

________________________________________






Jonathan's Space Report
No. 465                                         2001 Oct 22  Cambridge, MA
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
---
Sender: owner-jsr@head-cfa.harvard.edu
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: jmcdowell@head-cfa.harvard.edu

Shuttle and Station
--------------------

The Expedition 3 crew entered their Soyuz TM transport (spacecraft
206, or Soyuz TM-33) on Oct 19 and
undocked from the nadir port of Zarya at 1048 UTC, flying it out and
then sideways a few meters before approaching the station again to dock
with the Pirs nadir port at 1104 UTC. This frees up Zarya for the
arrival of a new Soyuz. The docking port at the aft end of Zvezda is
occupied by the Progress M-45 cargo ship.

Soyuz spacecraft 11F732 serial no. 207, or Soyuz TM-33, was launched
from Baykonur at 0859 UTC on Oct 21. The four strapon boosters and the
core stage that make up the 11S59 central packet accelerated the vehicle
out of the atmosphere, and the 11S510 Blok-I third stage placed Soyuz
TM-33 in orbit at 0908 UTC. Vladimir Agapov reports that the first two
orbit correction burns were successful at 1243 and 1315 UTC.
Crew of Soyuz TM-33 are Viktor Afanasev (commander), Konstantin Kozeev
(flight engineer) and Claudie Haignere (flight engineer-2).
Afanasev and Kozeev represent the Russian Space Agency and Haignere
is a CNES astronaut - CNES is the French space agency. Soyuz TM-33
is expected to dock with Zarya on Oct 23.

Recent Launches
---------------

The second QuickBird commercial imaging satellite was launched on Oct 18
by a Boeing Delta 2 from Vandenberg. The first QuickBird was lost in a
launch failure in Nov 2000. QB is owned by DigitalGlobe (formerly
EarthWatch) and is a Ball BCP2000 with a launch mass of 1028 kg and a
dry mass of about 995 kg. It will return imagery with a resolution of
0.6m. The Delta entered a 185 x 472 km x 98.1 deg orbit at 1902 UTC. At
1948 UTC it reached apogee and fired again to deploy QB into a 461 x 465
km x 97.2 deg orbit. It must have had quite a bit of spare fuel, since
its depletion burn both lowered perigee to 167 km and changed
inclination by over 10 degrees to 108.9 deg.



Table of Recent Launches
-----------------------

Date UT       Name            Launch Vehicle  Site            Mission
INTL.

DES.
Sep  7 1939   Picosat 7/8       -              Sindri, LEO      Technology
00-42C
Sep  8 1525   USA 160       )   Atlas IIAS     Vandenberg SLC3E Sigint
40A
              NRO satellite )
40C
Sep 14 2335   Pirs           )  Soyuz-U        Baykonur LC1     Station
module
              Progress M-SO1 )                                  Cargo
41A
Sep 21 1849   Orbview-4  )      Taurus 2110    Vandenberg 576E  Imaging
F01
              QuikTOMS   )                                      Environment
F01
              SBD        )                                      Technology
F01
              Celestis-4 )                                      Burial
F01
Sep 25 2321   Atlantic Bird 2   Ariane 44P     Kourou ELA2      Ku telecom
42A
Sep 30 0240   Starshine 3  )    Athena-1       Kodiak           Science
43A
              Picosat      )                                    Technology
43B
              PCSat        )                                    UHF/VHF comm
43C
              Sapphire     )                                    Technology
43D
Oct  5 2120   USA 161           Titan 4B       Vandenberg SLC4E Imaging
44A
Oct  6 1645   Raduga-1          Proton-K/DM2?  Baykonur         C telecom
45A
Oct 11 0232   USA 162           Atlas IIAS     Canaveral SLC36B Data relay?
46A
Oct 18 1851   QuickBird         Delta 7320     Vandenberg SLC2W Imaging
47A
Oct 21 0859   Soyuz TM-33       Soyuz-U        Baykonur LC1     Spaceship
48A

Current Shuttle Processing Status
_________________________________

Orbiters               Location   Mission    Launch Due

OV-102 Columbia        OPF Bay 3     STS-109 2002 Feb     HST SM-3B
OV-103 Discovery       OPF Bay 2     Maintenance
OV-104 Atlantis        VAB           STS-110 2002 Mar     ISS 8A
OV-105 Endeavour       OPF Bay 1     STS-108 2001 Nov 29  ISS UF-1


.-------------------------------------------------------------------------.
|  Jonathan McDowell                 |  phone : (617) 495-7176            |
|  Harvard-Smithsonian Center for    |                                    |
|   Astrophysics                     |                                    |
|  60 Garden St, MS6                 |                                    |
|  Cambridge MA 02138                |  inter : jcm@cfa.harvard.edu       |
|  USA                               |          jmcdowell@cfa.harvard.edu |
|                                                                         |
| JSR: http://hea-www.harvard.edu/~jcm/space/jsr/jsr.html                 |
| Back issues:  http://hea-www.harvard.edu/~jcm/space/jsr/back            |
| Subscribe/unsub: mail majordomo@head-cfa.harvard.edu, (un)subscribe jsr |
'-------------------------------------------------------------------------'

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 28370 invoked from network); 24 Oct 2001 12:05:22 -0000
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 24 Oct 2001 12:05:22 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 23536 invoked by uid 50005); 24 Oct 2001 10:51:49 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4165. . Clean. Processed in 2.521361 secs); 24 Oct 2001 10:51:49 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 24 Oct 2001 10:51:43 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id FAA18928; Wed, 24 Oct 2001 05:02:34 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 122233 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 24 Oct 2001 12:02:31          +0000
Received: from thunder.trej.net (mailgw.trej.net [213.88.233.65]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id FAA18914 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 24 Oct 2001 05:02:30 -0700
Received: from mailgw.trej.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by thunder.trej.net          (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id f9OC2Ja09311 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>;          Wed, 24 Oct 2001 14:02:19 +0200
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
User-Agent: IMHO/0.98.3t (Webmail for Roxen)
MIME-Version: 1.0
3j-viruscheck: Found to be clean
Message-ID:  <200110241202.f9OC2Ja09311@thunder.trej.net>
Date:         Wed, 24 Oct 2001 14:02:19 +0200
Reply-To: "Sture Bloom" <racing@SLC.SE>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Sture Bloom" <racing@SLC.SE>
Subject:      [AR] Leaving
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <20011024.005336.-523983.0.icantdecide@juno.com>

Ok guys, this is it.
Im leaving the list.
Its been educating and fun, but topics vary too much - and my inbox
gets crammed with a lot of totally OT posts.
Regards,
Sture Bloom

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 1483 invoked from network); 24 Oct 2001 12:06:10 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 24 Oct 2001 12:06:10 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 15749 invoked by uid 50005); 24 Oct 2001 10:53:09 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4166. . Clean. Processed in 2.221862 secs); 24 Oct 2001 10:53:10 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 24 Oct 2001 10:53:03 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id FAA18952; Wed, 24 Oct 2001 05:03:45 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 122240 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 24 Oct 2001 12:03:44          +0000
Received: from mail.edstud.chalmers.se          (IDENT:qpQL9YdrpYZ+THwwnYGgZRWLcAOXSfTz@osiris.edstud.chalmers.se          [129.16.30.197]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id FAA18937          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 24 Oct 2001 05:03:43 -0700
Received: from pirenne.dtek.chalmers.se (pirenne.dtek.chalmers.se          [129.16.30.47]) by mail.edstud.chalmers.se (Postfix) with ESMTP id          601E83B227; Wed, 24 Oct 2001 14:03:36 +0200 (MEST)
Received: (from d3august@localhost) by pirenne.dtek.chalmers.se (8.9.3/8.9.3)          id OAA07828; Wed, 24 Oct 2001 14:03:36 +0200 (MEST)
References: <20011023.084515.-3975269.0.kc2csh@juno.com>            <3BD58346.4C0604FA@NORTELNETWORKS.COM>            <5.0.2.1.0.20011023112723.024345e0@mail.earthlink.net>            <OE29CWbzwWJv3zOdnjQ000039a0@hotmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Disposition: inline
User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i
Message-ID:  <20011024140335.A7697@pirenne.dtek.chalmers.se>
Date:         Wed, 24 Oct 2001 14:03:35 +0200
Reply-To: "Bj|rn Augustsson" <d3august@DTEK.CHALMERS.SE>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Bj|rn Augustsson" <d3august@DTEK.CHALMERS.SE>
Subject:      Re: [AR] T6 and high temperatures
Comments: To: Mark Kruep <mkruep@HOTMAIL.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <OE29CWbzwWJv3zOdnjQ000039a0@hotmail.com>; from              mkruep@HOTMAIL.COM on Tue, Oct 23, 2001 at 04:25:41PM -0500

Quoting Mark Kruep <mkruep@HOTMAIL.COM>:
>
> As far as using a different series or temper of aluminum, I can't see as you
> could really improve the thermal characteristics all that much. Yes 7075 is
> stronger than 6061. So is 2024. They will expand less under heat and handle
> higher pressure, but they'll still degrade quickly if heated to high. I
> would like to use 2024 or 7075 for a casing, but for their strength
> properties not their thermal properties.

I was reading up on some old-timer stuff on NASA's (excellent!) NACA site
( http://naca.larc.nasa.gov/ ), and they seemed to make a lot of stuff
like this out of a family of nickel alloys called inconel. It can take
a lot of temperature, but I never hear of anyone using it nowadays.

Does it have some kind of hidden drawback? Apart from cost.

/August.
--
Wrong on most accounts.  const Foo *foo; and Foo const *foo; mean the same: foo
being a pointer to const Foo.  const Foo const *foo; would mean the same but is
illegal (double const).  You are confusing this with Foo * const foo; and const
Foo * const foo; respectively. -David Kastrup, comp.os.linux.development.system

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 7059 invoked from network); 24 Oct 2001 14:24:01 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 24 Oct 2001 14:24:01 -0000
Received: (qmail 27541 invoked by uid 50005); 24 Oct 2001 13:11:00 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4166. . Clean. Processed in 0.884744 secs); 24 Oct 2001 13:11:00 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 24 Oct 2001 13:10:59 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA19248; Wed, 24 Oct 2001 06:44:44 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 122250 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 24 Oct 2001 13:44:39          +0000
Received: from spsystems.net (spsystems.net [209.47.149.227]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA19233 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Wed,          24 Oct 2001 06:44:38 -0700
Received: (from henry@localhost) by spsystems.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id JAA09858;          Wed, 24 Oct 2001 09:44:06 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1011024094214.9153A-100000@spsystems.net>
Date:         Wed, 24 Oct 2001 09:44:06 -0400
Reply-To: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] T6 and high temperatures
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <20011024140335.A7697@pirenne.dtek.chalmers.se>

On Wed, 24 Oct 2001, Bj|rn Augustsson wrote:
> I was reading up on some old-timer stuff on NASA's (excellent!) NACA site
> ( http://naca.larc.nasa.gov/ ), and they seemed to make a lot of stuff
> like this out of a family of nickel alloys called inconel. It can take
> a lot of temperature, but I never hear of anyone using it nowadays.
> Does it have some kind of hidden drawback? Apart from cost.

It still sees considerable use, but it's heavy, and expensive to work with.

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 26422 invoked from network); 24 Oct 2001 15:05:11 -0000
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 24 Oct 2001 15:05:11 -0000
Received: (qmail 13713 invoked by uid 50005); 24 Oct 2001 15:04:18 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4164. . Clean. Processed in 0.218883 secs); 24 Oct 2001 15:04:18 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 24 Oct 2001 15:04:18 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA19355; Wed, 24 Oct 2001 07:04:06 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 122268 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 24 Oct 2001 14:04:01          +0000
Received: from albatross.wgn.net ([208.179.155.113]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA19341 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed,          24 Oct 2001 07:04:01 -0700
Received: from cronos (eli-208-187-17-80.wgn.net [208.187.17.80]) by          albatross.wgn.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id HAA16516 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 24 Oct 2001 07:06:04 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <003d01c15c94$de6ec0c0$c36122c0@cronos>
Date:         Wed, 24 Oct 2001 07:04:57 -0700
Reply-To: "Wedge Oldham" <wedge@WESTWORLD.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Wedge Oldham" <wedge@WESTWORLD.COM>
Subject:      [AR] Nike Hercules slide show/movie
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Ok, guys. I made this some time ago, and had intended to make it perfect.
Turns out perfect was too hard, so I'm leaving it as is.
I took a number of construction photos, and bunch of photos taken during the
prep of the Nike at LDRS and put them together (along with some music) into
a slide show type movie. I was even able to splice in some actually video
footage of the flight. Like I said it's not perfect, but every time I
watch....it's kinda moving.

So before you download the link lemme say a couple of things:

1. It's a BIG file, now I mean really big....12.6 Meg worth of big.
2. DO NOT try and view it from my server, I don't think my server can keep
up with the demand. Save the file to the hard drive and watch it from there.
3. In my opinion you need to crank the sound up on this one. I've played it
LOUD, and quiet...and it really looses something when played softly.

That's about it... here's the link
http://nikeproject.com/launch/NikeProject.wmv

Wedge Oldham
http://NikeProject.com
Only those who risk going too far,
will ever know how far they can go.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 1647 invoked from network); 24 Oct 2001 15:54:25 -0000
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 24 Oct 2001 15:54:25 -0000
Received: (qmail 22925 invoked by uid 50005); 24 Oct 2001 15:54:21 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4166. . Clean. Processed in 0.207597 secs); 24 Oct 2001 15:54:21 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 24 Oct 2001 15:54:20 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA19315; Wed, 24 Oct 2001 06:57:56 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 122261 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 24 Oct 2001 13:57:54          +0000
Received: from albatross.wgn.net ([208.179.155.113]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA19301 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed,          24 Oct 2001 06:57:54 -0700
Received: from cronos (eli-208-187-17-80.wgn.net [208.187.17.80]) by          albatross.wgn.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id GAB16123 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 24 Oct 2001 06:59:38 -0700
References:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1011024094214.9153A-100000@spsystems.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <002901c15c93$f7e34860$c36122c0@cronos>
Date:         Wed, 24 Oct 2001 06:58:31 -0700
Reply-To: "Wedge Oldham" <wedge@WESTWORLD.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Wedge Oldham" <wedge@WESTWORLD.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] T6 and high temperatures
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

It would seem that most of the commercial motor cases are 6061-T6 aluminum
that has been anodized. At my work we send out a large number of aluminum
parts to be nickel plated. Would a motor case benefit from being nickel
plated as opposed to being anodized. And if so what would be the benefit?

Wedge Oldham
http://NikeProject.com
Only those who risk going too far,
will ever know how far they can go.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 12547 invoked from network); 24 Oct 2001 16:16:49 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 24 Oct 2001 16:16:49 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 7166 invoked by uid 50005); 24 Oct 2001 16:15:57 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4164. . Clean. Processed in 0.124212 secs); 24 Oct 2001 16:15:57 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 24 Oct 2001 16:15:57 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA19854; Wed, 24 Oct 2001 08:43:44 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 122298 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 24 Oct 2001 15:42:45          +0000
Received: from smtp009pub.verizon.net ([206.46.170.188]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA19839 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed,          24 Oct 2001 08:42:45 -0700
Received: from [65.229.52.47] (1Cust175.tnt1.rancho-cucamonga.ca.da.uu.net          [63.24.225.175]) by smtp009pub.verizon.net  with ESMTP for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; id f9OFgVk20812 Wed, 24 Oct 2001 10:42:31          -0500 (CDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: GTE/01rocket@mail.gte.net
References: <Pine.BSI.3.91.1011024094214.9153A-100000@spsystems.net>            <002901c15c93$f7e34860$c36122c0@cronos>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <a05100355b7fc91758226@[65.229.52.47]>
Date:         Wed, 24 Oct 2001 08:42:25 -0700
Reply-To: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] T6 and high temperatures
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <002901c15c93$f7e34860$c36122c0@cronos>

>It would seem that most of the commercial motor cases are 6061-T6 aluminum
>that has been anodized. At my work we send out a large number of aluminum
>parts to be nickel plated. Would a motor case benefit from being nickel
>plated as opposed to being anodized. And if so what would be the benefit?

There are no limitations on the plating method.  Anodizing is an
oxide IIRC and nickel might oxidize with APCP.

I am not an expert.

Jerry

>
>Wedge Oldham
>http://NikeProject.com
>Only those who risk going too far,
>will ever know how far they can go.


--
Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
Opinion, the whole thing.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 1434 invoked from network); 24 Oct 2001 17:43:11 -0000
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 24 Oct 2001 17:43:11 -0000
X-Priority: 3
Received: (qmail 20445 invoked by uid 50005); 24 Oct 2001 17:43:07 -0000
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4166. . Clean. Processed in 0.973994 secs); 24 Oct 2001 17:43:07 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 24 Oct 2001 17:43:04 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA20095; Wed, 24 Oct 2001 09:45:40 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 122315 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 24 Oct 2001 16:45:35          +0000
Received: from nt2000s2.dgmicro.com (cn815472-c.newcas1.de.home.com          [24.40.74.93]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA20081          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 24 Oct 2001 09:45:35 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="utf-8"
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
content-class: urn:content-classes:message
X-MS-Has-Attach: 
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: 
Thread-Topic:      Re: [AR] T6 and high temperatures
Thread-Index: AcFcozZRlmLqpkdhRAKfUZOF8Kgw3wAB5cpC
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from base64 to 8bit by itc.uci.edu id JAA20082
Message-ID:  <C0F7BF4DCEC1D2479A01031347184DCD3855@nt2000s2.dgmicro.com>
Date:         Wed, 24 Oct 2001 12:45:04 -0400
Reply-To: "Darren Wright" <dwright@D2-TECH.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Darren Wright" <dwright@D2-TECH.COM>
Subject:      [AR] Max 54mm medusa Nozzle size
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

What is the max size that anyone has run in a 54mm medusa nozzle?  There
has to be a limit of the hole sizes before the webbing gets too weak.



Right now I've got a 3/8 center and 5/16 outers.....that seems pretty
big, but it's still only about 0.6 inch.



-Darren

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 13991 invoked from network); 24 Oct 2001 17:54:10 -0000
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 24 Oct 2001 17:54:10 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 27322 invoked by uid 50005); 24 Oct 2001 16:41:08 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4166. . Clean. Processed in 0.520065 secs); 24 Oct 2001 16:41:08 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 24 Oct 2001 16:41:07 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA20147; Wed, 24 Oct 2001 09:57:19 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 122322 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 24 Oct 2001 16:57:15          +0000
Received: from rftzy05y.ca.nortel.com (h161s130a130n47.user.nortelnetworks.com          [47.130.130.161]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA20078          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 24 Oct 2001 09:45:30 -0700
Received: from rftzy232.ca.nortel.com (rftzy232.ca.nortel.com [47.130.185.32])          by rftzy05y.ca.nortel.com (Switch-2.2.0/Switch-2.2.0) with ESMTP id          f9OGidg22616; Wed, 24 Oct 2001 12:44:39 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from NORTELNETWORKS.COM (wftzh00e.ca.nortel.com [47.130.116.9]) by          rftzy232.ca.nortel.com with SMTP (Microsoft Exchange Internet Mail          Service Version 5.5.2653.13) id VPQA6MW5; Wed, 24 Oct 2001 12:43:04          -0400
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.73C-CCK-MCD  [en] (X11; U; HP-UX B.10.20 9000/785)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <Pine.BSI.3.91.1011024094214.9153A-100000@spsystems.net>            <002901c15c93$f7e34860$c36122c0@cronos>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3BD6F003.ECD1FAB9@NORTELNETWORKS.COM>
Date:         Wed, 24 Oct 2001 12:44:52 -0400
Reply-To: "Leech, Marcus \(EXCHANGE:FITZ:8M86\)" <mleech@NORTELNETWORKS.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Leech, Marcus \(EXCHANGE:FITZ:8M86\)" <mleech@NORTELNETWORKS.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] T6 and high temperatures
Comments: To: Wedge Oldham <wedge@WESTWORLD.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Wedge Oldham wrote:
>
> It would seem that most of the commercial motor cases are 6061-T6 aluminum
> that has been anodized. At my work we send out a large number of aluminum
> parts to be nickel plated. Would a motor case benefit from being nickel
> plated as opposed to being anodized. And if so what would be the benefit?
>
Nickel has substantial oxygen resistance, but I can't immediately see any
  real benefit above anodizing for motor casings.  If you've designed things
  properly, the casing sees very little in the way of hot gases during
  operation, and nickel-plating will do nothing to assist in the post-burn
  heat soak.

--
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Marcus Leech                             Mail:   Dept 8M70, MS 012, FITZ
Advisor                                  Phone: (ESN) 393-9145  +1 613 763 9145
Security Architecture and Planning       Fax:   (ESN) 393-9435  +1 613 763 9435
Nortel Networks                          mleech@nortelnetworks.com
-----------------Expressed opinions are my own, not my employer's------

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 18157 invoked from network); 24 Oct 2001 17:55:13 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 24 Oct 2001 17:55:13 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 5403 invoked by uid 50005); 24 Oct 2001 17:54:21 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4164. . Clean. Processed in 0.15545 secs); 24 Oct 2001 17:54:21 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 24 Oct 2001 17:54:21 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA20251; Wed, 24 Oct 2001 10:10:56 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 122347 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 24 Oct 2001 17:10:54          +0000
Received: from fw1-bv.tek.com (fw1-bv.tek.com [192.65.40.16]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA20237 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed,          24 Oct 2001 10:10:53 -0700
Received: from fw1-bv.tek.com (root@localhost) by fw1-bv.tek.com with ESMTP id          f9OHAN514729 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 24 Oct 2001 10:10:23          -0700 (PDT)
Received: from tektronix.tek.com (tektronix.tek.com [128.181.6.43]) by          fw1-bv.tek.com with ESMTP id f9OHAN514725 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>;          Wed, 24 Oct 2001 10:10:23 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from us-bv-u07.bv.tek.com (webshield.tek.com [128.181.2.130]) by          tektronix.tek.com (8.10.2+Sun/8.10.2) with SMTP id f9OHAN800892 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 24 Oct 2001 10:10:23 -0700 (PDT)
Received: FROM us-bv-m01.bv.tek.com BY us-bv-u07.bv.tek.com ; Wed Oct 24          10:10:22 2001 -0700
Received: by us-bv-m01.bv.tek.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) id          <VLDH4TRC>; Wed, 24 Oct 2001 10:10:22 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19)
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Message-ID:  <5832AFF5FC75D411844300508BC216B70302AB0E@us-bv-m07.bv.tek.com>
Date:         Wed, 24 Oct 2001 10:10:21 -0700
Reply-To: <john.w.lyngdal@EXGATE.TEK.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <john.w.lyngdal@EXGATE.TEK.COM>
Subject:      [AR] Last Call for38/54/75mm  Liner/Casting tubes
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

-----Original Message-----
From: Lyngdal, John W
Sent: Tuesday, October 09, 2001 2:52 PM
To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
Subject: [AR] 54mm Liner/Casting tube offer


Well it seems that it's time to make another production run of 54mm
liner/casting tube sets that fit 54mm Kosdon hardware. The sets will be just
like those I had made last Spring, except I'm going to try to get the
casting tubes in single 48" lengths rather than shipping two 26" casting
tubes with each length of 48" liner.

The liner will be constructed of .037" paper phenolic and the casting tubes
will be Kraft paper wound with a .030" wall and a white glassine outer
layer. The 54mm liner sets will cost $6.00 each, plus actual shipping
charges. For my sanity and shipping convenience, the minimum order will be 8
sets. 38mm and 75mm liner/casting tube sets are also currently in stock,
e-mail me for specifications, availability, and prices.

To order your liner/casting tube sets, drop me an e-mail with the number of
liner/casting tube sets in your order with your Zip Code so I can calculate
the UPS shipping charges. Orders need to be placed by e-mail before
10/26/01, and payment received by 11/2/01(personal check or Money Order).
These liner/casting tube sets are a special order item, so allow 6 weeks
from the order queue closing date for delivery. Your check won't be cashed
until your order is shipped and you receive a UPS tracking number. Feel free
to e-mail me with any product questions, for product reviews or comments
just ask the other subscribers to these e-mail lists.


        John "The Liner Guy" Lyngdal

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 19475 invoked from network); 24 Oct 2001 17:55:34 -0000
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 24 Oct 2001 17:55:34 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 5727 invoked by uid 50005); 24 Oct 2001 17:54:43 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4164. . Clean. Processed in 0.214577 secs); 24 Oct 2001 17:54:43 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 24 Oct 2001 17:54:42 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA20300; Wed, 24 Oct 2001 10:13:57 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 122364 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 24 Oct 2001 17:13:56          +0000
Received: from mail.aros.net (mail.aros.net [207.173.16.20]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA20286 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Wed,          24 Oct 2001 10:13:55 -0700
Received: from biomicro.com ([208.187.122.40]) by mail.aros.net (8.11.6/8.9.3)          with ESMTP id f9OHDqi86160 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Wed, 24 Oct          2001 11:13:53 -0600 (MDT)
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.77 [en] (Win98; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <000601c15c2d$f7b236a0$a037cbcc@zip>            <a05100352b7fbfa4dff21@[65.229.52.47]>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3BD6F71B.E0A860CF@biomicro.com>
Date:         Wed, 24 Oct 2001 11:15:07 -0600
Reply-To: "Mark K. Spute" <mks@BIOMICRO.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Mark K. Spute" <mks@BIOMICRO.COM>
Subject:      [AR] Legal Issues, was [AR] Public apology, was [OT warning]
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

The legal issues surrounding rocketry are beginning to interest me.  I'm
planning to return to school soon (as soon as the new baby, finances,
and job allow) and I'm seriously considering law school as an option.
I'd like to specialize in some form of law dealing with rocketry, and
I'd like to solicit counsel from anyone here who could help.  i.e. what
areas of law do rocketeers need help with.  Incidentally, I'm not
planning on becoming a practicing attorney, I just think that there is
so much ambiguity with the law, that it would help to actually have some
legal training.

My plans are to specialize in international corporate law, and also in
international space law and admiralty law (since I believe that space
laws should be based on admiralty law, i.e. the "law of the sea."  UN
treaties regarding space are a socialist nightmares that completely
ignore the rights of the individual.)

I can see that some education in administrative law and regulatory law
would be warranted as well.

Patent law?

What am I missing?



Jerry Irvine wrote:

[snip]

> I want to work with people here and other
> places to expand the clarity of legality surrounding rocketry, and
> simplify the law making it legal, preferably by exemption (ie ATF
> 55.141).

[snip]

--
Mark K. Spute
Senior Research Engineer
BioMicro Systems Inc.

KD7IWE,  RRS, hopeful future Stolly owner

"It is difficult to say what is impossible, for the dream of yesterday
is the hope of today and the reality of tomorrow."
     Dr. Robert H. Goddard

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 6461 invoked from network); 24 Oct 2001 18:44:27 -0000
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 24 Oct 2001 18:44:27 -0000
Received: (qmail 21546 invoked by uid 50005); 24 Oct 2001 18:43:35 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4164. . Clean. Processed in 0.196385 secs); 24 Oct 2001 18:43:35 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 24 Oct 2001 18:43:35 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA20567; Wed, 24 Oct 2001 11:14:16 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 122390 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 24 Oct 2001 18:13:52          +0000
Received: from spock.alohanet.com (spock.alohanet.com [209.31.4.252]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA20553 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Wed, 24 Oct 2001 11:13:51 -0700
Received: from NATE2 (NATE2.alohanet.com [192.168.233.104]) by          spock.alohanet.com (Post.Office MTA v3.5.2 release 221 ID#          0-55447U100L2S100V35) with SMTP id com for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>;          Wed, 24 Oct 2001 11:11:58 -0700
References: <Pine.BSI.3.91.1011024094214.9153A-100000@spsystems.net>                       <002901c15c93$f7e34860$c36122c0@cronos>             <3BD6F003.ECD1FAB9@NORTELNETWORKS.COM>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <011301c15cb8$6135d3e0$68e9a8c0@NATE2>
Date:         Wed, 24 Oct 2001 11:19:11 -0700
Reply-To: "Nathan Hays" <nhays@ALOHANET.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Nathan Hays" <nhays@ALOHANET.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] T6 and high temperatures
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Ahh, but it looks so nice!  It's also a helluva lot harder than anodized
aluminum.

- Nate



> Wedge Oldham wrote:
> >
> > It would seem that most of the commercial motor cases are 6061-T6
aluminum
> > that has been anodized. At my work we send out a large number of
aluminum
> > parts to be nickel plated. Would a motor case benefit from being nickel
> > plated as opposed to being anodized. And if so what would be the
benefit?
> >
> Nickel has substantial oxygen resistance, but I can't immediately see any
>   real benefit above anodizing for motor casings.  If you've designed
things
>   properly, the casing sees very little in the way of hot gases during
>   operation, and nickel-plating will do nothing to assist in the post-burn
>   heat soak.
> Marcus Leech

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 6122 invoked from network); 24 Oct 2001 19:35:30 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 24 Oct 2001 19:35:30 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: (qmail 8644 invoked by uid 50005); 24 Oct 2001 19:34:38 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4164. . Clean. Processed in 0.193261 secs); 24 Oct 2001 19:34:38 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 24 Oct 2001 19:34:38 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA20858; Wed, 24 Oct 2001 12:30:48 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 122410 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 24 Oct 2001 19:30:43          +0000
Received: from cisco.com (cypher.cisco.com [171.69.11.18]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA20843 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed,          24 Oct 2001 12:30:43 -0700
Received: (from billw@localhost) by cisco.com (8.8.8/2.6/Cisco List          Logging/8.8.8) id MAA06116; Wed, 24 Oct 2001 12:30:11 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID:  <CMM.0.90.4.1003951811.billw@cypher>
Date:         Wed, 24 Oct 2001 12:30:11 PDT
Reply-To: "Bill Westfield" <billw@cisco.com>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "William Chops Westfield" <billw@cisco.com>
Subject:      Re: [AR] T6 and high temperatures
Comments: To: Nathan Hays <nhays@ALOHANET.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  Your message of Wed, 24 Oct 2001 11:19:11 -0700

CAN you nickle-plate aluminum?  I though that was used on steel for the same
reasons that anodization was used on Al - hardness and corrosion resistance.

Does anodization have any significant effect on hardness and/or strength of
Al?  I mean, you're talking a saphire coating, more or less, right?

BillW


From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 3826 invoked from network); 24 Oct 2001 20:19:41 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 24 Oct 2001 20:19:41 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 28000 invoked by uid 50005); 24 Oct 2001 19:06:04 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4165. . Clean. Processed in 1.449618 secs); 24 Oct 2001 19:06:04 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 24 Oct 2001 19:06:01 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA20999; Wed, 24 Oct 2001 13:06:57 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 122422 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 24 Oct 2001 20:06:50          +0000
Received: from smtppop1pub.verizon.net (smtppop1pub.gte.net [206.46.170.20]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA20985 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 24 Oct 2001 13:06:49 -0700
Received: from [65.229.52.47] (1Cust232.tnt2.rancho-cucamonga.ca.da.uu.net          [63.15.225.232]) by smtppop1pub.verizon.net  with ESMTP for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; id PAA27529410 Wed, 24 Oct 2001 15:05:28 -0500          (CDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: GTE/01rocket@mail.gte.net
References: <000601c15c2d$f7b236a0$a037cbcc@zip>            <a05100352b7fbfa4dff21@[65.229.52.47]>            <3BD6F71B.E0A860CF@biomicro.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <a05100359b7fccf767654@[65.229.52.47]>
Date:         Wed, 24 Oct 2001 13:06:25 -0700
Reply-To: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Legal Issues, was [AR] Public apology, was [OT warning]
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <3BD6F71B.E0A860CF@biomicro.com>

>and job allow) and I'm seriously considering law school as an option.
>I'd like to specialize in some form of law dealing with rocketry, and



>I can see that some education in administrative law and regulatory law
would be warranted as well.

I would focus on regulatory law and procedures to lobby/convince
regulators to change practices.  Heck maybe what is needed is a
course on schmoozong.

Jerry


--
Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
Opinion, the whole thing.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 12821 invoked from network); 24 Oct 2001 21:13:11 -0000
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 24 Oct 2001 21:13:11 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 19335 invoked by uid 50005); 24 Oct 2001 19:59:35 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4165. . Clean. Processed in 3.334853 secs); 24 Oct 2001 19:59:35 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 24 Oct 2001 19:59:29 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA21223; Wed, 24 Oct 2001 14:06:45 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 122435 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 24 Oct 2001 21:05:59          +0000
Received: from johnson.mail.mindspring.net (johnson.mail.mindspring.net          [207.69.200.177]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA21206          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 24 Oct 2001 14:05:58 -0700
Received: from mindspring.com (sdn-ar-011casfrMP091.dialsprint.net          [158.252.242.93]) by johnson.mail.mindspring.net (8.9.3/8.8.5) with          ESMTP id RAA09547; Wed, 24 Oct 2001 17:05:51 -0400 (EDT)
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 (Macintosh; U; PPC)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <CMM.0.90.4.1003951811.billw@cypher>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3BD72F0A.59B4AA0@mindspring.com>
Date:         Wed, 24 Oct 2001 14:13:47 -0700
Reply-To: "Alan Shinn" <alshinn@MINDSPRING.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Alan Shinn" <alshinn@MINDSPRING.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] T6 and high temperatures
Comments: To: Bill Westfield <billw@cisco.com>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Anodizing has a very good effect on corrosion protection for aluminum
and its easy to dye so you can make it pretty too. It also protects
against abrasion. There is a process called hard anodizing that is
thicker and can be used as a wear surface for moving parts and is even
hard to break through with cutting tool. I am not sure that it is
exactly saphire - I seem to remember something about aluminum hydroxide
being involved and I know that there is some sort of porosity or such
that makes it easy to dye which is then sealed somehow.

William Chops Westfield wrote:
>
> CAN you nickle-plate aluminum?  I though that was used on steel for the same
> reasons that anodization was used on Al - hardness and corrosion resistance.
>
> Does anodization have any significant effect on hardness and/or strength of
> Al?  I mean, you're talking a saphire coating, more or less, right?
>
> BillW

--
Looking forward:
Alan Shinn


Experience the
beginnings of microscopy.
Make your own replica
of one of Antony van Leeuwenhoek's microscopes.
visit    http://www.mindspring.com/~alshinn/

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 5395 invoked from network); 24 Oct 2001 21:19:05 -0000
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 24 Oct 2001 21:19:05 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 1956 invoked by uid 50005); 24 Oct 2001 21:18:14 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4164. . Clean. Processed in 0.221015 secs); 24 Oct 2001 21:18:14 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 24 Oct 2001 21:18:14 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA21272; Wed, 24 Oct 2001 14:12:43 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 122446 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 24 Oct 2001 21:12:40          +0000
Received: from inet03.citec.qld.gov.au (firewall-user@inet03.citec.qld.gov.au          [203.5.10.10]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA21258          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 24 Oct 2001 14:12:38 -0700
Received: by inet03.citec.qld.gov.au; id HAA07664; Thu, 25 Oct 2001 07:12:35          +1000 (EST)
Received: from citec.com.au(pcux.citec.qld.gov.au 147.132.17.12) by          inet03.citec.qld.gov.au via smap (V2.0) id xma007649; Thu, 25 Oct 01          07:12:33 +1000
Received: from CITEC-Message_Server by citec.com.au with Novell_GroupWise; Thu,          25 Oct 2001 07:13:11 +1000
X-Mailer: Novell GroupWise 5.5.4
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by itc.uci.edu id OAA21259
Message-ID:  <sbd7bb87.076@citec.com.au>
Date:         Thu, 25 Oct 2001 07:13:05 +1000
Reply-To: "Des Bromilow" <Des.Bromilow@CITEC.COM.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Des Bromilow" <Des.Bromilow@CITEC.COM.AU>
Subject:      [AR] online copy of NPFA1122 and NPFA1127? or on CD?
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Hi,

I'm getting ready to try for my L1 and L2 early to mid next year. I'm also going to be discussing the certification of HPR in Qld and the recognition of the flyer certification processes.
Before i can do that, I'd better get familiar with the above mentioned NPFA codes.

Does anyone know of an online copy, or have it one CD that they can copy for me?

Thanks,
Des Bromilow
Brisbane
Australia

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 7710 invoked from network); 24 Oct 2001 21:43:09 -0000
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 24 Oct 2001 21:43:09 -0000
Received: (qmail 9300 invoked by uid 50005); 24 Oct 2001 21:42:18 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4164. . Clean. Processed in 0.16119 secs); 24 Oct 2001 21:42:18 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 24 Oct 2001 21:42:18 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA21470; Wed, 24 Oct 2001 14:38:17 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 122472 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 24 Oct 2001 21:38:16          +0000
Received: from smtprelay2.abs.adelphia.net (smtprelay.abs.adelphia.net          [64.8.20.11]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA21454 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 24 Oct 2001 14:38:16 -0700
Received: from jlgrady ([24.53.101.238]) by smtprelay2.abs.adelphia.net          (Netscape Messaging Server 4.15) with SMTP id GLQC3303.0Q6 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 24 Oct 2001 17:37:51 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook CWS, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <000501c15cd4$ec3e69e0$0200a8c0@24.53.64.18>
Date:         Wed, 24 Oct 2001 17:43:29 -0400
Reply-To: "Jeff Grady" <jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jeff Grady" <jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] T6 and high temperatures
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <CMM.0.90.4.1003951811.billw@cypher>

There are anodizing processes used in the firearms industry that increase
the hardness of aluminum...

-----Original Message-----
From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@itc.uci.edu]On
Behalf Of William Chops Westfield
Sent: Wednesday, October 24, 2001 3:30 PM
To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
Subject: Re: [AR] T6 and high temperatures


CAN you nickle-plate aluminum?  I though that was used on steel for the same
reasons that anodization was used on Al - hardness and corrosion resistance.

Does anodization have any significant effect on hardness and/or strength of
Al?  I mean, you're talking a saphire coating, more or less, right?

BillW

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 6658 invoked from network); 24 Oct 2001 21:51:10 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 24 Oct 2001 21:51:10 -0000
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 4001 invoked by uid 50005); 24 Oct 2001 20:38:07 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4166. . Clean. Processed in 0.799925 secs); 24 Oct 2001 20:38:07 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 24 Oct 2001 20:38:05 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA21399; Wed, 24 Oct 2001 14:34:02 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 122457 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 24 Oct 2001 21:33:50          +0000
Received: from neomail.tns.net (mail.tns.net [216.7.148.3]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA21347 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed,          24 Oct 2001 14:23:49 -0700
Received: from andy.tns.net (prime.tns.net [216.86.128.10]) by neomail.tns.net          (8.11.6/8.11.0 Terracom Mail Server III) with ESMTP id f9OLNmp52349          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 24 Oct 2001 14:23:49 -0700 (PDT)
X-Sender: andy@mail.tns.net
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <5.1.0.14.2.20011024142533.02bc3440@mail.tns.net>
Date:         Wed, 24 Oct 2001 14:26:58 -0700
Reply-To: "Andy Woerner" <andy@TNS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Andy Woerner" <andy@TNS.NET>
Subject:      [AR] KNO3 and sugar motors
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Does anyone have a formula or table to calculate or estimate total impulse
of a KNO3 / Sugar motor based on 65/35 ratio?







Andy Woerner
Terracom, Inc.

Voice (858) 268-8911
FAX (858) 268-9212
www.tns.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 12624 invoked from network); 24 Oct 2001 21:52:48 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 24 Oct 2001 21:52:48 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: (qmail 18816 invoked by uid 50005); 24 Oct 2001 20:39:11 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4165. . Clean. Processed in 0.720395 secs); 24 Oct 2001 20:39:11 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 24 Oct 2001 20:39:10 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA21588; Wed, 24 Oct 2001 14:49:17 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 122494 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 24 Oct 2001 21:49:14          +0000
Received: from localhost (dmccue@localhost) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with          ESMTP id OAA21574 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 24 Oct 2001          14:49:14 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.LNX.4.10.10110241442500.19531-100000@itc.uci.edu>
Date:         Wed, 24 Oct 2001 14:49:14 -0700
Reply-To: "David J. McCue" <dmccue@itc.uci.edu>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "David J. McCue" <dmccue@itc.uci.edu>
Subject:      Re: [AR] online copy of NPFA1122 and NPFA1127? or on CD?
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <sbd7bb87.076@citec.com.au>

I don't think you'll find the actual Codes on the web, because NFPA holds
copyright and sells them. However, I believe you get copies of NFPA 1122
and NFPA 1127 in your Tripoli Handbook. In any case, a brief summation of
major points is available on the Tripoli website, at:

http://www.tripoli.org/saftshrt.htm

(ugly URL of the day, must be 8.3 filename disease)

Good luck,
Dave McCue

On Thu, 25 Oct 2001, Des Bromilow wrote:

> Hi,
>
> I'm getting ready to try for my L1 and L2 early to mid next year. I'm also going to be discussing the certification of HPR in Qld and the recognition of the flyer certification processes.
> Before i can do that, I'd better get familiar with the above mentioned NPFA codes.
>
> Does anyone know of an online copy, or have it one CD that they can copy for me?
>
> Thanks,
> Des Bromilow
> Brisbane
> Australia
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 18463 invoked from network); 24 Oct 2001 22:02:25 -0000
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 24 Oct 2001 22:02:25 -0000
Received: (qmail 22455 invoked by uid 50005); 24 Oct 2001 20:49:22 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4166. . Clean. Processed in 0.150058 secs); 24 Oct 2001 20:49:22 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 24 Oct 2001 20:49:21 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA21440; Wed, 24 Oct 2001 14:36:14 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 122465 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 24 Oct 2001 21:36:12          +0000
Received: from smtprelay3.abs.adelphia.net (smtprelay.abs.adelphia.net          [64.8.20.11]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA21426 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 24 Oct 2001 14:36:12 -0700
Received: from jlgrady ([24.53.101.238]) by smtprelay3.abs.adelphia.net          (Netscape Messaging Server 4.15) with SMTP id GLQBZH01.L94; Wed, 24          Oct 2001 17:35:41 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook CWS, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <000401c15cd4$a2034530$0200a8c0@24.53.64.18>
Date:         Wed, 24 Oct 2001 17:41:26 -0400
Reply-To: "Jeff Grady" <jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jeff Grady" <jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] T6 and high temperatures
Comments: To: Nathan Hays <nhays@ALOHANET.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <011301c15cb8$6135d3e0$68e9a8c0@NATE2>

Hard chrome plating...MUCH harder than nickel. I used to hard chrome pistol
parts. Just .005" thick could substantially strengthen the inner walls of a
tube, but applying HC to aluminum is a bit more involved than applying it to
steel substrates. I doubt neither would be worth the added weight. Anodizing
is pretty easy to do. HC plating requires high current & temps for extended
periods of time. HC might be better suited for use in nozzles.

Speaking of rocket nozzles:

I know that tungsten is VERY EXPENSIVE (and hard to machine) but seems it
would be ideal for rocket nozzles (melting point: 6,098/F)... At least as
throat inserts. Anybody on the list have experience doing this?

Jeff

-----Original Message-----
From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@itc.uci.edu]On
Behalf Of Nathan Hays
Sent: Wednesday, October 24, 2001 2:19 PM
To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
Subject: Re: [AR] T6 and high temperatures


Ahh, but it looks so nice!  It's also a helluva lot harder than anodized
aluminum.

- Nate



> Wedge Oldham wrote:
> >
> > It would seem that most of the commercial motor cases are 6061-T6
aluminum
> > that has been anodized. At my work we send out a large number of
aluminum
> > parts to be nickel plated. Would a motor case benefit from being nickel
> > plated as opposed to being anodized. And if so what would be the
benefit?
> >
> Nickel has substantial oxygen resistance, but I can't immediately see any
>   real benefit above anodizing for motor casings.  If you've designed
things
>   properly, the casing sees very little in the way of hot gases during
>   operation, and nickel-plating will do nothing to assist in the post-burn
>   heat soak.
> Marcus Leech

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 1907 invoked from network); 24 Oct 2001 22:06:01 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 24 Oct 2001 22:06:01 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: (qmail 14923 invoked by uid 50005); 24 Oct 2001 22:05:57 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4166. . Clean. Processed in 0.099609 secs); 24 Oct 2001 22:05:57 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 24 Oct 2001 22:05:56 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA21664; Wed, 24 Oct 2001 14:59:54 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 122505 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 24 Oct 2001 21:59:49          +0000
Received: from VOLSB01.libertyville.com (216-180-161-058.fsi.net          [216.180.161.58] (may be forged)) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with          ESMTP id OAA21650 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 24 Oct 2001          14:59:48 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Message-ID:  <8241D5C473414F48B12A866EBBBF182A9814@VOLSB01.libertyville.com>
Date:         Wed, 24 Oct 2001 16:57:08 -0500
Reply-To: "Ed Dewey" <edewey@LIBERTYVILLE.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Ed Dewey" <edewey@LIBERTYVILLE.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] online copy of NPFA1122 and NPFA1127? or on CD?
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

The TRA handbook has 1127 in it for sure.  I don't think it has 1122.

Ed

-----Original Message-----
From: David J. McCue [mailto:dmccue@itc.uci.edu]
Sent: Wednesday, October 24, 2001 4:49 PM
To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
Subject: Re: [AR] online copy of NPFA1122 and NPFA1127? or on CD?


I don't think you'll find the actual Codes on the web, because NFPA holds
copyright and sells them. However, I believe you get copies of NFPA 1122
and NFPA 1127 in your Tripoli Handbook. In any case, a brief summation of
major points is available on the Tripoli website, at:

http://www.tripoli.org/saftshrt.htm

(ugly URL of the day, must be 8.3 filename disease)

Good luck,
Dave McCue

On Thu, 25 Oct 2001, Des Bromilow wrote:

> Hi,
>
> I'm getting ready to try for my L1 and L2 early to mid next year. I'm also
going to be discussing the certification of HPR in Qld and the recognition
of the flyer certification processes.
> Before i can do that, I'd better get familiar with the above mentioned
NPFA codes.
>
> Does anyone know of an online copy, or have it one CD that they can copy
for me?
>
> Thanks,
> Des Bromilow
> Brisbane
> Australia
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 16562 invoked from network); 24 Oct 2001 22:09:44 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 24 Oct 2001 22:09:44 -0000
Received: (qmail 21788 invoked by uid 50005); 24 Oct 2001 22:08:53 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4164. . Clean. Processed in 0.197533 secs); 24 Oct 2001 22:08:53 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 24 Oct 2001 22:08:53 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA21722; Wed, 24 Oct 2001 15:02:24 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 122516 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 24 Oct 2001 22:02:19          +0000
Received: from proxy4.ba.best.com (root@proxy4.ba.best.com [206.184.139.15]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA21708 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Wed, 24 Oct 2001 15:02:19 -0700
Received: from [10.0.0.2] (snvadslgw2poold155.snjs.uswestqwest.net          [168.103.213.155]) by proxy4.ba.best.com (8.9.3/8.9.2/best.out) with          ESMTP id PAA20284 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Wed, 24 Oct 2001          15:02:10 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Sender:  (Unverified)
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <v04210111b7fce96335f8@[10.0.0.2]>
Date:         Wed, 24 Oct 2001 15:01:36 -0700
Reply-To: "bob fortune" <bob@FORTUNEPAINT.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "bob fortune" <bob@FORTUNEPAINT.COM>
Subject:      [AR] OT posting
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

My apologies to the list and Jerry Irvine.

The question I asked yesterday afternoon wasn't really a fair one and
I have felt bad about it since I hit the send button.  My mistake.

Bob Fortune

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 5939 invoked from network); 24 Oct 2001 22:15:05 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 24 Oct 2001 22:15:05 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 30482 invoked by uid 50005); 24 Oct 2001 22:14:14 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4164. . Clean. Processed in 0.163891 secs); 24 Oct 2001 22:14:14 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 24 Oct 2001 22:14:14 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA21542; Wed, 24 Oct 2001 14:44:13 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 122487 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 24 Oct 2001 21:44:09          +0000
Received: from df01-e12.danfoss.dk (mailx.danfoss.com [193.162.34.6]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA21528 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 24 Oct 2001 14:44:08 -0700
Received: from df01-e12.danfoss.dk (dkdnisvw.danfoss.dk [10.6.2.20]) by          df01-e12.danfoss.dk with SMTP (Microsoft Exchange Internet Mail          Service Version 5.5.2653.13) id 4HZ2WCVJ; Wed, 24 Oct 2001 23:43:37          +0200
Received: from 10.8.13.36 by df01-e12.danfoss.dk (InterScan E-Mail VirusWall          NT); Wed, 24 Oct 2001 23:43:37 +0200
Received: by mailx.danfoss.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) id          <Q7W2HXVD>; Wed, 24 Oct 2001 23:43:36 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19)
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Message-ID:  <61A2F0A8E936D311876A0008C74BF1EC96AB43@DD21AE02>
Date:         Wed, 24 Oct 2001 23:44:31 +0200
Reply-To: "Nielson Byron" <BYRONNIELSON@DANFOSS.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Nielson Byron" <BYRONNIELSON@DANFOSS.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Requests for comments - NFPA codes
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Thanks.

I was just scanning 1127 and section 1.2.3 seemed a bit negative.
Then 6.2 paragraph (5) jumped out and grabbed me.
It specifically outlaws armature rocketry.

Best Regards,
Byron

...Cut NFPA RFC notice

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 27119 invoked from network); 24 Oct 2001 23:14:41 -0000
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 24 Oct 2001 23:14:41 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 29467 invoked by uid 50005); 24 Oct 2001 22:01:37 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4166. . Clean. Processed in 1.781918 secs); 24 Oct 2001 22:01:37 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 24 Oct 2001 22:01:32 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA22161; Wed, 24 Oct 2001 16:09:46 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 122553 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 24 Oct 2001 23:09:36          +0000
Received: from mail.aros.net (mail.aros.net [207.173.16.20]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA22147 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Wed,          24 Oct 2001 16:09:36 -0700
Received: from biomicro.com ([208.187.122.40]) by mail.aros.net (8.11.6/8.9.3)          with ESMTP id f9ON9Zm40543; Wed, 24 Oct 2001 17:09:35 -0600 (MDT)
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.77 [en] (Win98; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <61A2F0A8E936D311876A0008C74BF1EC96AB43@DD21AE02>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3BD74A7D.7164F3DC@biomicro.com>
Date:         Wed, 24 Oct 2001 17:10:53 -0600
Reply-To: "Mark K. Spute" <mks@BIOMICRO.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Mark K. Spute" <mks@BIOMICRO.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Requests for comments - NFPA codes
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

You seem to be right.  NFPA 6.1(5) specifically outlaws

"6.1 Prohibited Acts. The following activities shall be prohibited by
this code:" . . .
. . ."(5) Making, operating, launching, flying, testing, activating,
discharging, or otherwise experimenting with high power rocket
motors, motor reloading kits, or pyrotechnic modules that have not
been certified in accordance with NFPA 1125, other than for the
purpose of evaluation of new high power rocket motor technology by
a recognized national user organization or an authority having
jurisdiction, provided that all other requirements of this code are met
and all activities are in accordance with applicable laws, regulations,
and ordinances."

Note that it does not expempt liquids or hybrids.  It seems to outlaw
all rocket motors that have not been certified in accordance with NFPA
1125, have not been evaluated by a "recognized national user
organization" (Read NAR and Tripoli) and that said motors must also meet
all other requirements of NFPA 1127.



Nielson Byron wrote:
>
> Thanks.
>
> I was just scanning 1127 and section 1.2.3 seemed a bit negative.
> Then 6.2 paragraph (5) jumped out and grabbed me.
> It specifically outlaws armature rocketry.
>
> Best Regards,
> Byron
>
> ...Cut NFPA RFC notice

--
Mark K. Spute
Senior Research Engineer
BioMicro Systems Inc.

KD7IWE,  RRS, hopeful future Stolly owner

"It is difficult to say what is impossible, for the dream of yesterday
is the hope of today and the reality of tomorrow."
     Dr. Robert H. Goddard

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 19100 invoked from network); 24 Oct 2001 23:35:55 -0000
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 24 Oct 2001 23:35:55 -0000
Received: (qmail 4750 invoked by uid 50005); 24 Oct 2001 22:22:17 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4165. . Clean. Processed in 0.27806 secs); 24 Oct 2001 22:22:17 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 24 Oct 2001 22:22:16 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA22330; Wed, 24 Oct 2001 16:28:58 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 122575 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 24 Oct 2001 23:28:52          +0000
Received: from smtprelay2.abs.adelphia.net (smtprelay.abs.adelphia.net          [64.8.20.11]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA22316 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 24 Oct 2001 16:28:51 -0700
Received: from jlgrady ([24.53.101.238]) by smtprelay2.abs.adelphia.net          (Netscape Messaging Server 4.15) with SMTP id GLQH7F01.C0K for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 24 Oct 2001 19:28:27 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook CWS, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <000201c15ce4$5f3285d0$0200a8c0@24.53.64.18>
Date:         Wed, 24 Oct 2001 19:34:05 -0400
Reply-To: "Jeff Grady" <jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jeff Grady" <jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] T6 and high temperatures
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <CMM.0.90.4.1003951811.billw@cypher>

Found this: http://www.qualitycoatings.com/hardcoat.htm


-----Original Message-----
From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@itc.uci.edu]On
Behalf Of William Chops Westfield
Sent: Wednesday, October 24, 2001 3:30 PM
To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
Subject: Re: [AR] T6 and high temperatures


CAN you nickle-plate aluminum?  I though that was used on steel for the same
reasons that anodization was used on Al - hardness and corrosion resistance.

Does anodization have any significant effect on hardness and/or strength of
Al?  I mean, you're talking a saphire coating, more or less, right?

BillW

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 8784 invoked from network); 24 Oct 2001 23:48:10 -0000
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 24 Oct 2001 23:48:10 -0000
Received: (qmail 25991 invoked by uid 50005); 24 Oct 2001 22:35:06 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4166. . Clean. Processed in 0.392322 secs); 24 Oct 2001 22:35:06 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 24 Oct 2001 22:35:05 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA22418; Wed, 24 Oct 2001 16:45:08 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 122582 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 24 Oct 2001 23:44:59          +0000
Received: from spock.alohanet.com (spock.alohanet.com [209.31.4.252]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA22401 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Wed, 24 Oct 2001 16:44:58 -0700
Received: from NATE2 (NATE2.alohanet.com [192.168.233.104]) by          spock.alohanet.com (Post.Office MTA v3.5.2 release 221 ID#          0-55447U100L2S100V35) with SMTP id com for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>;          Wed, 24 Oct 2001 16:43:06 -0700
References: <61A2F0A8E936D311876A0008C74BF1EC96AB43@DD21AE02>             <3BD74A7D.7164F3DC@biomicro.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <016801c15ce6$a3001690$68e9a8c0@NATE2>
Date:         Wed, 24 Oct 2001 16:50:18 -0700
Reply-To: "Nathan Hays" <nhays@ALOHANET.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Nathan Hays" <nhays@ALOHANET.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Requests for comments - NFPA codes
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Some comments:

To be nit-picky, the NFPA codes do not outlaw anything.  They may be adopted
and written into law by some jurisdiction.

It is common for exceptions and waivers to be available.  For example, the
FAA outlaws 5lb 1000Ns rockets flying a mile in the air.  However, we're all
aware of the waiver process.  In California, it's illegal to transport any
quantity of APCP on major freeways.  However, the law is only enforced when
the quantities are on the scale of what the DOT requires.  You shouldn't
worry about being prosecuted for an H motor though.  The judge would see
that as capricious and arbitrary - exactly the claim TRA-NAR is making in
the ATF suit.

In California, our CSFM has adopted a licensing program to allow Ex
activities under certain guidelines.  Other than being a pain, I see this as
reasonable.  After all, many counties require you to call the fire dept.
before you burn a pile of leaves.

What I would like to see is a more uniform application of standards.  I
wouldn't even mind the ATF's role if it weren't so skewed.  Acetylene,
gasoline, spray paint - these are all dangerous and can be stored in large
quantities in any zoning district I know of.  Hell, just knocking the gas
line off the pipe is extremely hazardous.

Here's my suggestion:
The NFPA should be the one specifying storage requirements for these
flammable solids, not the ATF with their explosives guidelines.  For this to
happen, reasonable research into the danger and nature of APCP will have to
be made.  The NFPA then adopts storage guidelines.  When brought to the
attention of a federal judge that the NFPA has given due process to their
recommendations while the ATF has not, we might have a favorable ruling.

- Nate


----- Original Message -----
From: "Mark K. Spute" <mks@BIOMICRO.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Wednesday, October 24, 2001 4:10 PM
Subject: Re: [AR] Requests for comments - NFPA codes


> You seem to be right.  NFPA 6.1(5) specifically outlaws
>
> "6.1 Prohibited Acts. The following activities shall be prohibited by
> this code:" . . .
> . . ."(5) Making, operating, launching, flying, testing, activating,
> discharging, or otherwise experimenting with high power rocket
> motors, motor reloading kits, or pyrotechnic modules that have not
> been certified in accordance with NFPA 1125, other than for the
> purpose of evaluation of new high power rocket motor technology by
> a recognized national user organization or an authority having
> jurisdiction, provided that all other requirements of this code are met
> and all activities are in accordance with applicable laws, regulations,
> and ordinances."
>
> Note that it does not expempt liquids or hybrids.  It seems to outlaw
> all rocket motors that have not been certified in accordance with NFPA
> 1125, have not been evaluated by a "recognized national user
> organization" (Read NAR and Tripoli) and that said motors must also meet
> all other requirements of NFPA 1127.
>
>
>
> Nielson Byron wrote:
> >
> > Thanks.
> >
> > I was just scanning 1127 and section 1.2.3 seemed a bit negative.
> > Then 6.2 paragraph (5) jumped out and grabbed me.
> > It specifically outlaws armature rocketry.
> >
> > Best Regards,
> > Byron
> >
> > ...Cut NFPA RFC notice
>
> --
> Mark K. Spute
> Senior Research Engineer
> BioMicro Systems Inc.
>
> KD7IWE,  RRS, hopeful future Stolly owner
>
> "It is difficult to say what is impossible, for the dream of yesterday
> is the hope of today and the reality of tomorrow."
>      Dr. Robert H. Goddard

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 29356 invoked from network); 24 Oct 2001 23:53:23 -0000
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 24 Oct 2001 23:53:23 -0000
Received: (qmail 7876 invoked by uid 50005); 24 Oct 2001 23:51:48 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4166. . Clean. Processed in 0.621101 secs); 24 Oct 2001 23:51:48 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 24 Oct 2001 23:51:47 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA22444; Wed, 24 Oct 2001 16:47:24 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 122589 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 24 Oct 2001 23:47:23          +0000
Received: from fep3-orange.clear.net.nz (fep3-orange.clear.net.nz          [203.97.32.3]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA22430          for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Wed, 24 Oct 2001 16:47:22 -0700
Received: from mkbs (203-167-162-21.dialup.clear.net.nz [203.167.162.21]) by          fep3-orange.clear.net.nz (1.5/1.8) with SMTP id MAA21302; Thu, 25 Oct          2001 12:47:11 +1300 (NZDT)
References:  <5.1.0.14.2.20011024142533.02bc3440@mail.tns.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <028401c15ce6$4e289340$0700a8c0@mkbs>
Date:         Thu, 25 Oct 2001 12:46:10 +1300
Reply-To: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Organization: Applied Technology
Subject:      Re: [AR] KNO3 and sugar motors
Comments: To: Andy Woerner <andy@TNS.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

> Does anyone have a formula or table to calculate or estimate total impulse
> of a KNO3 / Sugar motor based on 65/35 ratio?

Impulse = Isp x Propellant_Mass x g

For Candy delivered Isp is liable to be in the range of 100 to 130 with the
latter figure being unlikely.
Using an Isp of 100, 1 kg of propellant, g = 9.8 m/s/s  this would give a
figure of

    100 x 1 x 9.8 ~= 1000 NS per kg of propellant.

(or 100 x 1 = 100 pound.second per lb of propellant. (as pounds are already
units of force don't use g here))
(Using this method makes the  meaning of Isp rather clear here).

ie 1 kg gives you something like a full J to a medium K.
For more or less propellant simply go up or down the series by one letter
for each doubling or halving of propellant mass.




        Russell McMahon

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 7927 invoked from network); 25 Oct 2001 00:10:31 -0000
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 25 Oct 2001 00:10:31 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 32571 invoked by uid 50005); 24 Oct 2001 22:56:54 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4165. . Clean. Processed in 1.474835 secs); 24 Oct 2001 22:56:54 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 24 Oct 2001 22:56:49 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA22584; Wed, 24 Oct 2001 17:06:35 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 122617 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 25 Oct 2001 00:06:33          +0000
Received: from smtp02.roc.frontiernet.net (alteon01.roc.frontiernet.net          [66.133.130.237] (may be forged)) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with          SMTP id RAA22570 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 24 Oct 2001 17:06:32          -0700
Received: (qmail 3276 invoked from network); 25 Oct 2001 00:06:01 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO frontiernet.net) ([64.214.165.232])          (envelope-sender <tbinford@frontiernet.net>) by 0 (qmail-ldap-1.03)          with SMTP for <mks@BIOMICRO.COM>; 25 Oct 2001 00:06:01 -0000
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.74 [en] (Win98; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <61A2F0A8E936D311876A0008C74BF1EC96AB43@DD21AE02>            <3BD74A7D.7164F3DC@biomicro.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3BD758F5.5DC60BFB@frontiernet.net>
Date:         Wed, 24 Oct 2001 20:12:38 -0400
Reply-To: <tbinford@frontiernet.net>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Tom Binford" <tbinford@frontiernet.net>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Requests for comments - NFPA codes
Comments: To: "Mark K. Spute" <mks@BIOMICRO.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

"Mark K. Spute" wrote:
>
> You seem to be right.  NFPA 6.1(5) specifically outlaws
>
> "6.1 Prohibited Acts. The following activities shall be prohibited by
> this code:" . . .
> . . ."(5) Making, operating, launching, flying, testing, activating,
> discharging, or otherwise experimenting with high power rocket
> motors, motor reloading kits, or pyrotechnic modules that have not
> been certified in accordance with NFPA 1125, other than for the
> purpose of evaluation of new high power rocket motor technology by
> a recognized national user organization or an authority having
> jurisdiction, provided that all other requirements of this code are met
> and all activities are in accordance with applicable laws, regulations,
> and ordinances."

This only prohibits these activities as a part of high power rocketry.
It does not prohibit amateur rocketry, this is outside the scope of HPR.
If a state adopts 1127, then prohibits rocketry outside of HPR, then it
means something.

Tom

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 23276 invoked from network); 25 Oct 2001 00:36:46 -0000
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 25 Oct 2001 00:36:46 -0000
Received: (qmail 11842 invoked by uid 50005); 24 Oct 2001 23:23:42 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4166. . Clean. Processed in 0.953987 secs); 24 Oct 2001 23:23:42 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 24 Oct 2001 23:23:40 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA22769; Wed, 24 Oct 2001 17:32:40 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 122656 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 25 Oct 2001 00:32:34          +0000
Received: from femail36.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail36.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.254.60.26]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA22755          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 24 Oct 2001 17:32:34 -0700
Received: from cc334751a ([65.13.214.65]) by femail36.sdc1.sfba.home.com          (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20 201-229-121-120-20010223) with SMTP id          <20011025003227.LBSC27661.femail36.sdc1.sfba.home.com@cc334751a>;          Wed, 24 Oct 2001 17:32:27 -0700
References: <61A2F0A8E936D311876A0008C74BF1EC96AB43@DD21AE02>             <3BD74A7D.7164F3DC@biomicro.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2462.0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <006601c15ceb$f3c92440$6601a8c0@home.com>
Date:         Wed, 24 Oct 2001 18:28:21 -0600
Reply-To: "Brian Kosko" <bkosko1@HOME.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Brian Kosko" <bkosko1@HOME.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Requests for comments - NFPA codes
Comments: To: "Mark K. Spute" <mks@BIOMICRO.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

If I were cynical; I'd say this was 'put in' by some HP motor manufacturer
looking to protect their turf. Especially the part about 'motor reloading
kits'. How many fire bureaucrat types would even be aware of the existence
of reloadable HP motors?


----- Original Message -----
From: "Mark K. Spute" <mks@BIOMICRO.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Wednesday, October 24, 2001 5:10 PM
Subject: Re: [AR] Requests for comments - NFPA codes


> You seem to be right.  NFPA 6.1(5) specifically outlaws
>
> "6.1 Prohibited Acts. The following activities shall be prohibited by
> this code:" . . .
> . . ."(5) Making, operating, launching, flying, testing, activating,
> discharging, or otherwise experimenting with high power rocket
> motors, motor reloading kits, or pyrotechnic modules that have not
> been certified in accordance with NFPA 1125, other than for the
> purpose of evaluation of new high power rocket motor technology by
> a recognized national user organization or an authority having
> jurisdiction, provided that all other requirements of this code are met
> and all activities are in accordance with applicable laws, regulations,
> and ordinances."
>
> Note that it does not expempt liquids or hybrids.  It seems to outlaw
> all rocket motors that have not been certified in accordance with NFPA
> 1125, have not been evaluated by a "recognized national user
> organization" (Read NAR and Tripoli) and that said motors must also meet
> all other requirements of NFPA 1127.
>
>
>
> Nielson Byron wrote:
> >
> > Thanks.
> >
> > I was just scanning 1127 and section 1.2.3 seemed a bit negative.
> > Then 6.2 paragraph (5) jumped out and grabbed me.
> > It specifically outlaws armature rocketry.
> >
> > Best Regards,
> > Byron
> >
> > ...Cut NFPA RFC notice
>
> --
> Mark K. Spute
> Senior Research Engineer
> BioMicro Systems Inc.
>
> KD7IWE,  RRS, hopeful future Stolly owner
>
> "It is difficult to say what is impossible, for the dream of yesterday
> is the hope of today and the reality of tomorrow."
>      Dr. Robert H. Goddard
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 2103 invoked from network); 25 Oct 2001 00:53:14 -0000
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 25 Oct 2001 00:53:14 -0000
Received: (qmail 10845 invoked by uid 50005); 24 Oct 2001 23:39:37 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4165. . Clean. Processed in 0.1882 secs); 24 Oct 2001 23:39:37 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 24 Oct 2001 23:39:36 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA22832; Wed, 24 Oct 2001 17:37:09 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 122665 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 25 Oct 2001 00:37:08          +0000
Received: from Blastzone.com (consumersinterest.com [207.195.143.118] (may be          forged)) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA22818 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 24 Oct 2001 17:37:07 -0700
Received: from greg [64.24.187.179] by Blastzone.com with ESMTP (SMTPD32-6.04)          id A2AB4D31014E; Wed, 24 Oct 2001 17:54:03 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook, Build 10.0.2627
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <000401c15ced$9dc73fd0$640a0a0a@greg>
Date:         Wed, 24 Oct 2001 17:40:06 -0700
Reply-To: <greg@blastzone.com>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Greg Deputy" <greg@blastzone.com>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Requests for comments - NFPA codes
Comments: To: Nathan Hays <nhays@ALOHANET.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <016801c15ce6$a3001690$68e9a8c0@NATE2>

Also keep in mind that if you are a licensed business NFPA 1127 does not
apply to you.  At least according to the last changes, that's on the
first page on the stuff online.  Of course, getting all necessary
permits is not always easy...

-----Original Message-----
From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@itc.uci.edu] On
Behalf Of Nathan Hays
Sent: Wednesday, October 24, 2001 4:50 PM
To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
Subject: Re: [AR] Requests for comments - NFPA codes

Some comments:

To be nit-picky, the NFPA codes do not outlaw anything.  They may be
adopted
and written into law by some jurisdiction.

It is common for exceptions and waivers to be available.  For example,
the
FAA outlaws 5lb 1000Ns rockets flying a mile in the air.  However, we're
all
aware of the waiver process.  In California, it's illegal to transport
any
quantity of APCP on major freeways.  However, the law is only enforced
when
the quantities are on the scale of what the DOT requires.  You shouldn't
worry about being prosecuted for an H motor though.  The judge would see
that as capricious and arbitrary - exactly the claim TRA-NAR is making
in
the ATF suit.

In California, our CSFM has adopted a licensing program to allow Ex
activities under certain guidelines.  Other than being a pain, I see
this as
reasonable.  After all, many counties require you to call the fire dept.
before you burn a pile of leaves.

What I would like to see is a more uniform application of standards.  I
wouldn't even mind the ATF's role if it weren't so skewed.  Acetylene,
gasoline, spray paint - these are all dangerous and can be stored in
large
quantities in any zoning district I know of.  Hell, just knocking the
gas
line off the pipe is extremely hazardous.

Here's my suggestion:
The NFPA should be the one specifying storage requirements for these
flammable solids, not the ATF with their explosives guidelines.  For
this to
happen, reasonable research into the danger and nature of APCP will have
to
be made.  The NFPA then adopts storage guidelines.  When brought to the
attention of a federal judge that the NFPA has given due process to
their
recommendations while the ATF has not, we might have a favorable ruling.

- Nate


----- Original Message -----
From: "Mark K. Spute" <mks@BIOMICRO.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Wednesday, October 24, 2001 4:10 PM
Subject: Re: [AR] Requests for comments - NFPA codes


> You seem to be right.  NFPA 6.1(5) specifically outlaws
>
> "6.1 Prohibited Acts. The following activities shall be prohibited by
> this code:" . . .
> . . ."(5) Making, operating, launching, flying, testing, activating,
> discharging, or otherwise experimenting with high power rocket
> motors, motor reloading kits, or pyrotechnic modules that have not
> been certified in accordance with NFPA 1125, other than for the
> purpose of evaluation of new high power rocket motor technology by
> a recognized national user organization or an authority having
> jurisdiction, provided that all other requirements of this code are
met
> and all activities are in accordance with applicable laws,
regulations,
> and ordinances."
>
> Note that it does not expempt liquids or hybrids.  It seems to outlaw
> all rocket motors that have not been certified in accordance with NFPA
> 1125, have not been evaluated by a "recognized national user
> organization" (Read NAR and Tripoli) and that said motors must also
meet
> all other requirements of NFPA 1127.
>
>
>
> Nielson Byron wrote:
> >
> > Thanks.
> >
> > I was just scanning 1127 and section 1.2.3 seemed a bit negative.
> > Then 6.2 paragraph (5) jumped out and grabbed me.
> > It specifically outlaws armature rocketry.
> >
> > Best Regards,
> > Byron
> >
> > ...Cut NFPA RFC notice
>
> --
> Mark K. Spute
> Senior Research Engineer
> BioMicro Systems Inc.
>
> KD7IWE,  RRS, hopeful future Stolly owner
>
> "It is difficult to say what is impossible, for the dream of yesterday
> is the hope of today and the reality of tomorrow."
>      Dr. Robert H. Goddard

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 29705 invoked from network); 25 Oct 2001 01:20:49 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 25 Oct 2001 01:20:49 -0000
Received: (qmail 28531 invoked by uid 50005); 25 Oct 2001 00:07:11 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4165. . Clean. Processed in 2.160175 secs); 25 Oct 2001 00:07:11 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 25 Oct 2001 00:07:05 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA23032; Wed, 24 Oct 2001 18:16:58 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 122678 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 25 Oct 2001 01:16:41          +0000
Received: from spsystems.net (spsystems.net [209.47.149.227]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA23017 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Wed,          24 Oct 2001 18:16:41 -0700
Received: (from henry@localhost) by spsystems.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id VAA20509;          Wed, 24 Oct 2001 21:16:06 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1011024211404.20140B-100000@spsystems.net>
Date:         Wed, 24 Oct 2001 21:16:05 -0400
Reply-To: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] T6 and high temperatures
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <CMM.0.90.4.1003951811.billw@cypher>

On Wed, 24 Oct 2001, William Chops Westfield wrote:
> Does anodization have any significant effect on hardness and/or strength of
> Al?  I mean, you're talking a saphire coating, more or less, right?

Not exactly -- it's an aluminum-oxide, aka alumina, coating.  Chemically
that is the same as sapphire, but sapphire is crystalline, and that does
make a difference.

(Aluminum spontaneously forms a thin oxide coating.  Anodizing makes it
thicker by an electrochemical process.)

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 22402 invoked from network); 25 Oct 2001 01:33:22 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 25 Oct 2001 01:33:22 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 10933 invoked by uid 50005); 25 Oct 2001 01:25:07 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4166. . Clean. Processed in 1.401402 secs); 25 Oct 2001 01:25:07 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 25 Oct 2001 01:25:03 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA23084; Wed, 24 Oct 2001 18:22:36 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 122685 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 25 Oct 2001 01:22:35          +0000
Received: from smtp001pub.verizon.net (smtp001pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.180])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA23070 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 24 Oct 2001 18:22:35 -0700
Received: from [63.24.225.78] (1Cust250.tnt2.rancho-cucamonga.ca.da.uu.net          [63.15.225.250]) by smtp001pub.verizon.net  with ESMTP for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; id f9P1Ljr12337 Wed, 24 Oct 2001 20:21:45          -0500 (CDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: GTE/01rocket@mail.gte.net
References: <61A2F0A8E936D311876A0008C74BF1EC96AB43@DD21AE02>            <3BD74A7D.7164F3DC@biomicro.com>            <016801c15ce6$a3001690$68e9a8c0@NATE2>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <a05100302b7fd18ab144f@[63.24.225.78]>
Date:         Wed, 24 Oct 2001 18:23:57 -0700
Reply-To: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Requests for comments - NFPA codes
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <016801c15ce6$a3001690$68e9a8c0@NATE2>

>Some comments:
>
>To be nit-picky, the NFPA codes do not outlaw anything.  They may be adopted
>and written into law by some jurisdiction.


However it is common to have a state recognize all NFPA codes in toto
without individual review on the assumption "experts" wrote it.  If
you have met the members of the committee that writes 1122/1125/1127
you might think it contains some "clowns".


>
>It is common for exceptions and waivers to be available.  For example, the


There is no wavier process from statute, regulation, code.

Adding one would be a feature.


>Here's my suggestion:
>The NFPA should be the one specifying storage requirements for these
>flammable solids, not the ATF with their explosives guidelines.  For this to


I proposed exactly this, it passed, went to the full committee for
vote, was well supported and a model rocket committee member stood up
to object.  In this process it is a rubber stamp unless there is
objection at that stage then it goes back.  As far as I know it has
not been implemented since.  The exemption was 50 pounds net of any
certified MR or HPR motor or loads in any dwelling or structure if in
an ammo box or equivelent.


>happen, reasonable research into the danger and nature of APCP will have to
>be made.  The NFPA then adopts storage guidelines.  When brought to the
>attention of a federal judge that the NFPA has given due process to their
>recommendations while the ATF has not, we might have a favorable ruling.


The NFPA does not study anything.  Its technical committe can, but
that is still a private cooperative effort.  Nothing even arocket
could not do.  Arocket could be the authority having jurisdiction for
amateur rocketry for example.

Jerry

--
Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
Opinion, the whole thing.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 5886 invoked from network); 25 Oct 2001 01:51:43 -0000
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 25 Oct 2001 01:51:43 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 23552 invoked by uid 50005); 25 Oct 2001 00:38:39 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4166. . Clean. Processed in 1.365402 secs); 25 Oct 2001 00:38:39 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 25 Oct 2001 00:38:36 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA23193; Wed, 24 Oct 2001 18:48:09 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 122699 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 25 Oct 2001 01:47:59          +0000
Received: from iridium.carolina.net ([208.170.147.165]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA23179 for <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Wed,          24 Oct 2001 18:47:58 -0700
Received: from ac.net (ip228-as5300-1-7lakes-nc.carolina.net [206.100.51.228])          by iridium.carolina.net (Vircom SMTPRS 5.1.195) with ESMTP id          <B0004195145@iridium.carolina.net>; Wed, 24 Oct 2001 21:59:12 -0400
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en]C-CCK-MCD EBM-Compaq  (Win95; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <Pine.BSI.3.91.1011024211404.20140B-100000@spsystems.net>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3BD76F45.2EF4364A@ac.net>
Date:         Wed, 24 Oct 2001 21:47:49 -0400
Reply-To: "Bill Shamblin" <wshamblin@AC.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Bill Shamblin" <wshamblin@AC.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] T6 and high temperatures
Comments: To: Henry Spencer <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Actually, the anodized coating >is< crystalline. The warmer the process, the more
porous the coating ("hard" anodizing does not dye well). Hard anodizing is done
at cooler temperatures. This is from a co-worker who used to do anodizing. If
anyone is interested, I can ask him specific questions, when he returns from
medical leave in about a month.
Regs! Bill KU4QB TRA#07455 L2

Henry Spencer wrote:

> On Wed, 24 Oct 2001, William Chops Westfield wrote:
> > Does anodization have any significant effect on hardness and/or strength of
> > Al?  I mean, you're talking a saphire coating, more or less, right?
>
> Not exactly -- it's an aluminum-oxide, aka alumina, coating.  Chemically
> that is the same as sapphire, but sapphire is crystalline, and that does
> make a difference.
>
> (Aluminum spontaneously forms a thin oxide coating.  Anodizing makes it
> thicker by an electrochemical process.)
>
>                                                           Henry Spencer
>                                                        henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 2103 invoked from network); 25 Oct 2001 03:00:47 -0000
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 25 Oct 2001 03:00:47 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 2566 invoked by uid 50005); 25 Oct 2001 01:47:09 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4165. . Clean. Processed in 0.212655 secs); 25 Oct 2001 01:47:09 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 25 Oct 2001 01:47:08 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA23474; Wed, 24 Oct 2001 19:56:22 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 122732 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 25 Oct 2001 02:56:07          +0000
Received: from smtp04.roc.frontiernet.net (alteon01.roc.frontiernet.net          [66.133.130.235] (may be forged)) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with          SMTP id TAA23456 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 24 Oct 2001 19:56:07          -0700
Received: (qmail 2195 invoked from network); 25 Oct 2001 01:37:36 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO frontiernet.net) ([64.208.236.206])          (envelope-sender <tbinford@frontiernet.net>) by 0 (qmail-ldap-1.03)          with SMTP for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; 25 Oct 2001 01:37:36 -0000
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.74 [en] (Win98; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <61A2F0A8E936D311876A0008C74BF1EC96AB43@DD21AE02>            <3BD74A7D.7164F3DC@biomicro.com>            <006601c15ceb$f3c92440$6601a8c0@home.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3BD76E6D.27D5E4CC@frontiernet.net>
Date:         Wed, 24 Oct 2001 21:44:13 -0400
Reply-To: <tbinford@frontiernet.net>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Tom Binford" <tbinford@frontiernet.net>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Requests for comments - NFPA codes
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Brian Kosko wrote:
>
> If I were cynical; I'd say this was 'put in' by some HP motor manufacturer
> looking to protect their turf. Especially the part about 'motor reloading
> kits'. How many fire bureaucrat types would even be aware of the existence
> of reloadable HP motors?
>


BTW, since 1122 and 1127 are out for revision and in the review stage,
draft versions are free from the NFPA web site.

Tom

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 684 invoked from network); 25 Oct 2001 04:18:56 -0000
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 25 Oct 2001 04:18:56 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 8074 invoked by uid 50005); 25 Oct 2001 03:05:51 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4166. . Clean. Processed in 0.140064 secs); 25 Oct 2001 03:05:51 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 25 Oct 2001 03:05:51 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA23904; Wed, 24 Oct 2001 21:15:56 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 122818 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 25 Oct 2001 04:15:47          +0000
Received: from femail31.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail31.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.254.60.21]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA23888          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 24 Oct 2001 21:15:47 -0700
Received: from home.com ([24.13.246.32]) by femail31.sdc1.sfba.home.com          (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20 201-229-121-120-20010223) with ESMTP id          <20011025041542.SBPF6400.femail31.sdc1.sfba.home.com@home.com>; Wed,          24 Oct 2001 21:15:42 -0700
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.77 [en] (Win98; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <200110241344.GAA19237@itc.uci.edu>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3BD7929F.94C0ED95@home.com>
Date:         Thu, 25 Oct 2001 00:18:39 -0400
Reply-To: "Alex Fraser" <beatnic@HOME.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Alex Fraser" <beatnic@HOME.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] T6 and high temperatures
Comments: To: Henry Spencer <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

I machined inconel at a shipyard in the early 80's. I used a rex49 which
is a very soft high speed tool steel and ran at about 30 rpm with a .015
feed in a WW2 lathe. The chips came off in a continuous spiral which I
would break when it started to tangle. It made a very high pitched
screeching. The chips are very beautiful and I still have one which
makes a great Christmas decoration. I love Inconel.

--
<<***********************************>>
~~~~~~~~ Alex Fraser  N3DER ~~~~~~~~~~~
--------- beatnic@home.com ------------
~~~~ http://members.home.com/beatnic ~~
>>***********************************<<

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 4364 invoked from network); 25 Oct 2001 05:04:20 -0000
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 25 Oct 2001 05:04:20 -0000
Received: (qmail 6439 invoked by uid 50005); 25 Oct 2001 03:50:41 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4165. . Clean. Processed in 0.208343 secs); 25 Oct 2001 03:50:41 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 25 Oct 2001 03:50:40 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA24286; Wed, 24 Oct 2001 22:01:44 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 122851 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 25 Oct 2001 05:01:38          +0000
Received: from mta04.mail.mel.aone.net.au (mta04.mail.au.uu.net [203.2.192.84])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA24272 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 24 Oct 2001 22:01:37 -0700
Received: from unknown ([63.34.214.111]) by mta04.mail.mel.aone.net.au with          SMTP id <20011025050116.XUMC6258.mta04.mail.mel.aone.net.au@unknown>          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 25 Oct 2001 15:01:16 +1000
References: Conversation <CMM.0.90.4.1003951811.billw@cypher> with last message            <Pine.BSI.3.91.1011024211404.20140B-100000@spsystems.net>
Priority: Normal
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Priority: 3
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	X-MAPIextension=.TXT;
	charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>
Date:         Thu, 25 Oct 2001 05:01:38 +0000
Reply-To: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] T6 and high temperatures
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1011024211404.20140B-100000@spsystems.net>

----------
> On Wed, 24 Oct 2001, William Chops Westfield wrote:
> > Does anodization have any significant effect on hardness and/or
strength of
> > Al?  I mean, you're talking a saphire coating, more or less, right?
>
> Not exactly -- it's an aluminum-oxide, aka alumina, coating.  Chemically
> that is the same as sapphire, but sapphire is crystalline, and that does
> make a difference.

Alumina is often used in sandblasting applications due to its degree of
hardness IIRC. I don't think the ultra thin coating affects the overall
strength of the Al though.

>
> (Aluminum spontaneously forms a thin oxide coating.  Anodizing makes it
> thicker by an electrochemical process.)

IIRC pure Al forms a reasonably thick (maybe not thick enough) natural
oxide coating however most of the structural *alloys* of Al are far less
reactive and form a thinner one. I'm not sure what the level of oxidation
is that constitutes most of this naturally occurring surface layer as Al
has few different levels.

Troy.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 23333 invoked from network); 25 Oct 2001 05:09:56 -0000
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 25 Oct 2001 05:09:56 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 12722 invoked by uid 50005); 25 Oct 2001 03:56:17 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4165. . Clean. Processed in 0.268046 secs); 25 Oct 2001 03:56:17 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 25 Oct 2001 03:56:16 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA24330; Wed, 24 Oct 2001 22:07:11 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 122861 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 25 Oct 2001 05:07:09          +0000
Received: from dns2.seanet.com (dns2.seanet.com [199.181.164.2]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA24316 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed,          24 Oct 2001 22:07:08 -0700
Received: from seanet.com (ssstolt.seanet.com [204.182.68.23]) by          dns2.seanet.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id f9P576F09384; Wed, 24          Oct 2001 22:07:06 -0700 (PDT)
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.73 [en] (Win98; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <61A2F0A8E936D311876A0008C74BF1EC96AB43@DD21AE02>            <3BD74A7D.7164F3DC@biomicro.com> <3BD758F5.5DC60BFB@frontiernet.net>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3BD79BEC.A12E156E@seanet.com>
Date:         Wed, 24 Oct 2001 21:58:20 -0700
Reply-To: "Sherwood Stolt" <ssstolt@SEANET.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Sherwood Stolt" <ssstolt@SEANET.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Requests for comments - NFPA codes
Comments: To: tbinford@frontiernet.net
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Tom Binford wrote:

> This only prohibits these activities as a part of high power rocketry.
> It does not prohibit amateur rocketry, this is outside the scope of HPR.
> If a state adopts 1127, then prohibits rocketry outside of HPR, then it
> means something.
>
> Tom

Wishful thinking.  1127 defines HPR as any rocket with a total impulse
in the range.  Flying any rocket that doesn't meet the requirements of
the code is prohibited.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 17061 invoked from network); 25 Oct 2001 05:25:09 -0000
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 25 Oct 2001 05:25:09 -0000
Received: (qmail 4939 invoked by uid 50005); 25 Oct 2001 04:09:20 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4165. . Clean. Processed in 2.277451 secs); 25 Oct 2001 04:09:20 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 25 Oct 2001 04:09:14 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA24385; Wed, 24 Oct 2001 22:19:54 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 122868 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 25 Oct 2001 05:19:50          +0000
Received: from Blastzone.com (consumersinterest.com [207.195.143.118] (may be          forged)) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA24370 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 24 Oct 2001 22:19:50 -0700
Received: from greg [64.24.187.174] by Blastzone.com with ESMTP (SMTPD32-6.04)          id A4FAE30007E; Wed, 24 Oct 2001 22:36:58 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook, Build 10.0.2627
Importance: Normal
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <000901c15d15$23843d90$640a0a0a@greg>
Date:         Wed, 24 Oct 2001 22:23:10 -0700
Reply-To: <greg@blastzone.com>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Greg Deputy" <greg@blastzone.com>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Requests for comments - NFPA codes
Comments: To: Sherwood Stolt <ssstolt@SEANET.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <3BD79BEC.A12E156E@seanet.com>

Again, unless you're an individual engaged in the business of testing,
developing, (blah blah, I forget the exact text right now) rockets.  In
other words, get a business license, any necessary local and atf
permits, and you're in this category.  1127 then does not apply to you.

-----Original Message-----
From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@itc.uci.edu] On
Behalf Of Sherwood Stolt
Sent: Wednesday, October 24, 2001 9:58 PM
To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
Subject: Re: [AR] Requests for comments - NFPA codes

Tom Binford wrote:

> This only prohibits these activities as a part of high power rocketry.
> It does not prohibit amateur rocketry, this is outside the scope of
HPR.
> If a state adopts 1127, then prohibits rocketry outside of HPR, then
it
> means something.
>
> Tom

Wishful thinking.  1127 defines HPR as any rocket with a total impulse
in the range.  Flying any rocket that doesn't meet the requirements of
the code is prohibited.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 19731 invoked from network); 25 Oct 2001 05:25:47 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 25 Oct 2001 05:25:47 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: (qmail 9776 invoked by uid 50005); 25 Oct 2001 04:11:50 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4165. . Clean. Processed in 0.276329 secs); 25 Oct 2001 04:11:50 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 25 Oct 2001 04:11:49 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA24419; Wed, 24 Oct 2001 22:22:50 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 122875 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 25 Oct 2001 05:22:49          +0000
Received: from cisco.com (cypher.cisco.com [171.69.11.18]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA24404 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed,          24 Oct 2001 22:22:48 -0700
Received: (from billw@localhost) by cisco.com (8.8.8/2.6/Cisco List          Logging/8.8.8) id WAA02523; Wed, 24 Oct 2001 22:22:17 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID:  <CMM.0.90.4.1003987337.billw@cypher>
Date:         Wed, 24 Oct 2001 22:22:17 PDT
Reply-To: "Bill Westfield" <billw@cisco.com>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "William Chops Westfield" <billw@cisco.com>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Requests for comments - NFPA codes
Comments: To: Sherwood Stolt <ssstolt@SEANET.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  Your message of Wed, 24 Oct 2001 21:58:20 -0700

Do any states other than California actually define amateur rocketry?
For that matter, what laws at the federal level define rocketry as
anything other than "really big fireworks"?  (amateur OR professional?)

BillW


From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 9427 invoked from network); 25 Oct 2001 08:29:05 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 25 Oct 2001 08:29:05 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 6755 invoked by uid 50005); 25 Oct 2001 07:15:24 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4165. . Clean. Processed in 0.816599 secs); 25 Oct 2001 07:15:24 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 25 Oct 2001 07:15:23 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id BAA25073; Thu, 25 Oct 2001 01:09:49 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 122960 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 25 Oct 2001 08:09:44          +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (f228.law15.hotmail.com [64.4.23.228]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id BAA25059 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 25 Oct 2001 01:09:43 -0700
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Thu,          25 Oct 2001 01:09:13 -0700
Received: from 4.48.137.141 by lw15fd.law15.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Thu, 25          Oct 2001 08:09:13 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [4.48.137.141]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 25 Oct 2001 08:09:13.0389 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[554935D0:01C15D2C]
Message-ID:  <F228w0tFV4koO7bhXfT0001c063@hotmail.com>
Date:         Thu, 25 Oct 2001 01:09:13 -0700
Reply-To: "CalPoly RADES" <cp_rades@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "CalPoly RADES" <cp_rades@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Inconel (was T6 and high temperatures)
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Hey all,
Our club just got some scrap inconel with the intent of casting nozzles out
of our foundry.  The only problem is that it requires a very unreactive
environment to be worked with (argon blanket or vacuum pour.)  We are
setting up an argon hood that should give us pretty good "amateur quality"
parts.
The stuff is pretty heavy too, I believe.  I?m about to email my friend to
see if he has the densities for inconel vs. the standard grade of stainless
that the company uses just to be sure.  Last I heard the bulk sell back for
inconel is somewhere around $0.20/lb.  So, given a community college or
university foundry, the (easy) intro to industrial mfg. class, the right
scrap yard, and a tank of argon you can make some pretty cool rocket parts.
        (Yes, I?ve heard that after that statement all those out there who have
actually worked with the stuff will be sitting back and smiling at me.  I
guess the words "learning experience," should be coming to mind right?)
Coincidently, if anyone out there has any tips on machining this stuff or
good reference books for working with it, I?m open to suggestions.  I hope
to have the hood ready for first melt and then machining in about 2 weeks.
Let everyone know how it goes when we get there,
Dale H.
CP Rocketeers

Dale

>From: Henry Spencer <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
>Reply-To: Henry Spencer <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
>To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
>Subject: Re: [AR] T6 and high temperatures
>Date: Wed, 24 Oct 2001 09:44:06 -0400
>
>On Wed, 24 Oct 2001, Bj|rn Augustsson wrote:
> > I was reading up on some old-timer stuff on NASA's (excellent!) NACA
>site
> > ( http://naca.larc.nasa.gov/ ), and they seemed to make a lot of stuff
> > like this out of a family of nickel alloys called inconel. It can take
> > a lot of temperature, but I never hear of anyone using it nowadays.
> > Does it have some kind of hidden drawback? Apart from cost.
>
>It still sees considerable use, but it's heavy, and expensive to work with.
>
>                                                           Henry Spencer
>                                                        henry@spsystems.net


_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 13577 invoked from network); 25 Oct 2001 13:19:30 -0000
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 25 Oct 2001 13:19:30 -0000
Received: (qmail 26436 invoked by uid 50005); 25 Oct 2001 13:18:41 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4164. . Clean. Processed in 0.176352 secs); 25 Oct 2001 13:18:41 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 25 Oct 2001 13:18:40 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA25904; Thu, 25 Oct 2001 06:15:15 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 122988 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 25 Oct 2001 13:15:03          +0000
Received: from cablecom.laribay.net (cablecom.laribay.net [66.20.57.4]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA25890 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 25 Oct 2001 06:15:03 -0700
Received: from billbull (dial097.laribay.net [66.20.57.97]) by          cablecom.laribay.net (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id HAA10952 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 25 Oct 2001 07:54:09 -0500 (CDT)          (envelope-from bpbullock@laribay.net)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0D74_01C56B69.538E9B00"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <002601c15d57$77f271c0$61391442@billbull>
Date:         Thu, 25 Oct 2001 08:17:32 -0500
Reply-To: "Bill Bullock" <bpbullock@LARIBAY.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Bill Bullock" <bpbullock@LARIBAY.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Inconel (was T6 and high temperatures)
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0D74_01C56B69.538E9B00
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Specific Gravity:
Inconel =3D 8-9 (according to alloying formulation)
Stainless Steel =3D 7-7+ (according to alloying formulation)
Source: Cornell University Material Safety Data Sheets Site =
http://msds.pdc.cornell.edu/msdsresults.asp
Bill

------=_NextPart_000_0D74_01C56B69.538E9B00
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META content=3D"text/html; charset=3Diso-8859-1" =
http-equiv=3DContent-Type>
<META content=3D"MSHTML 5.00.2614.3500" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV>Specific Gravity:</DIV>
<DIV>Inconel =3D 8-9 (according to alloying formulation)</DIV>
<DIV>Stainless Steel&nbsp;=3D 7-7+ (according to alloying =
formulation)</DIV>
<DIV>Source: Cornell University Material Safety Data Sheets Site <A=20
href=3D"http://msds.pdc.cornell.edu/msdsresults.asp">http://msds.pdc.corn=
ell.edu/msdsresults.asp</A></DIV>
<DIV>Bill</DIV></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0D74_01C56B69.538E9B00--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 11206 invoked from network); 25 Oct 2001 14:42:28 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 25 Oct 2001 14:42:28 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 26311 invoked by uid 50005); 25 Oct 2001 14:42:24 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4166. . Clean. Processed in 0.272511 secs); 25 Oct 2001 14:42:24 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 25 Oct 2001 14:42:23 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA26150; Thu, 25 Oct 2001 07:37:33 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 123006 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 25 Oct 2001 14:37:29          +0000
Received: from smtp007pub.verizon.net (smtp007pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.186])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA26135 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 25 Oct 2001 07:37:29 -0700
Received: from [63.24.225.78] (1Cust195.tnt1.rancho-cucamonga.ca.da.uu.net          [63.24.225.195]) by smtp007pub.verizon.net  with ESMTP for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; id f9PEatj20850 Thu, 25 Oct 2001 09:36:55          -0500 (CDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: GTE/01rocket@mail.gte.net
References: <CMM.0.90.4.1003987337.billw@cypher>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <a05100306b7fdd40cb4c9@[63.24.225.78]>
Date:         Thu, 25 Oct 2001 07:38:56 -0700
Reply-To: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Requests for comments - NFPA codes
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <CMM.0.90.4.1003987337.billw@cypher>

>Do any states other than California actually define amateur rocketry?
>For that matter, what laws at the federal level define rocketry as
>anything other than "really big fireworks"?  (amateur OR professional?)
>
>BillW

There are several.  But notably Washington state recently repealed
ALL rocket laws as nonsense and not worth enforcing.  We might put a
10 year effort into getting states to follow suit.

Jerry


--
Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
Opinion, the whole thing.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 2478 invoked from network); 25 Oct 2001 15:30:51 -0000
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 25 Oct 2001 15:30:51 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 21657 invoked by uid 50005); 25 Oct 2001 14:17:42 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4166. . Clean. Processed in 0.138077 secs); 25 Oct 2001 14:17:42 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 25 Oct 2001 14:17:42 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA26451; Thu, 25 Oct 2001 08:10:49 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 123048 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 25 Oct 2001 15:10:45          +0000
Received: from mail.aros.net (mail.aros.net [207.173.16.20]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA26437 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Thu,          25 Oct 2001 08:10:45 -0700
Received: from biomicro.com ([208.187.122.40]) by mail.aros.net (8.11.6/8.9.3)          with ESMTP id f9PFAia76347 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Thu, 25 Oct          2001 09:10:44 -0600 (MDT)
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.77 [en] (Win98; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <000a01c15d61$5ba78280$5d38d940@escher.efgwaco.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3BD82BC3.829E5297@biomicro.com>
Date:         Thu, 25 Oct 2001 09:12:03 -0600
Reply-To: "Mark K. Spute" <mks@BIOMICRO.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Mark K. Spute" <mks@BIOMICRO.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Requests for comments - NFPA codes
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

So what do we do?  How do we get them to change the code?  I presume the
comment period is still open.  I went to their website and tried to go
to their on-line comments page, but it wasn't working.  Perhaps they
don't really want any comments.



Charles Barnett wrote:

[snip]

> Here is a quote from the proposed code:
>
> "1.2.3 The purpose of this code also shall be to
> discourage the following to minimize deaths and injuries:
>
>  (1) Experiments with explosive or highly energetic
>  rocket propellants
>  (2) Construction of homemade rocket propulsion
>  motors
>  (3) Attempted launches or operation of homemade
>  rocket devices"
>
> You will notice that is doesn't say "to minimize
> deaths and injuries by encouraging all experimental
> rocketry activity to be conducted safely". It says
> "to discourage the following" and lists all
> experimental rocketry activity. It justifies this
> loss of freedom "to minimize deaths and injuries".
>
> Even the portions of the code which are "enabling"
> are written in such a way that they can (and will)
> be misused by those seeking to regulate the hobby
> out of existence.
>
> Much of the rest of the code is also bad code which
> will result in bad law unless it is changed.
>
> Attacks by regulatory bodies on freedom to pursue
> this hobby are attacks on the personal freedom of
> all involved in the hobby whether or not they
> realize it.
>
> Charles

--
Mark K. Spute
Senior Research Engineer
BioMicro Systems Inc.

KD7IWE,  RRS, hopeful future Stolly owner

"It is difficult to say what is impossible, for the dream of yesterday
is the hope of today and the reality of tomorrow."
     Dr. Robert H. Goddard

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 2457 invoked from network); 25 Oct 2001 15:38:44 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 25 Oct 2001 15:38:44 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 18555 invoked by uid 50005); 25 Oct 2001 14:25:01 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4165. . Clean. Processed in 0.552233 secs); 25 Oct 2001 14:25:01 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 25 Oct 2001 14:24:59 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA26210; Thu, 25 Oct 2001 07:40:46 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 123013 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 25 Oct 2001 14:40:44          +0000
Received: from smtp005pub.verizon.net (smtp005pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.184])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA26196 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 25 Oct 2001 07:40:44 -0700
Received: from [63.24.225.78] (1Cust195.tnt1.rancho-cucamonga.ca.da.uu.net          [63.24.225.195]) by smtp005pub.verizon.net  with ESMTP for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; id f9PEe9W17334 Thu, 25 Oct 2001 09:40:11          -0500 (CDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: GTE/01rocket@mail.gte.net
References: <000901c15d15$23843d90$640a0a0a@greg>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <a05100307b7fdd493d487@[63.24.225.78]>
Date:         Thu, 25 Oct 2001 07:42:12 -0700
Reply-To: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Requests for comments - NFPA codes
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <000901c15d15$23843d90$640a0a0a@greg>

>Again, unless you're an individual engaged in the business of testing,
>developing, (blah blah, I forget the exact text right now) rockets.  In
>other words, get a business license, any necessary local and atf
>permits, and you're in this category.  1127 then does not apply to you.

It is my understanding from carefully reading the orange book that
even if you are doing commercial activities but are doing them in one
state, there is not ATF permit requirement.  This is important
because ATF is so intrusive and capricious when it does decide to
enforce.  They're real polite as they show up unannounced for
inspections and ding you because you don't record a WEEKLY inspection
of your storage IN WRITING for your 3 HPR motors that are exempt
under 55.141 anyway.

Jerry

--
Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
Opinion, the whole thing.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 17064 invoked from network); 25 Oct 2001 15:57:36 -0000
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 25 Oct 2001 15:57:36 -0000
Received: (qmail 3604 invoked by uid 50005); 25 Oct 2001 14:44:25 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4166. . Clean. Processed in 0.405921 secs); 25 Oct 2001 14:44:25 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 25 Oct 2001 14:44:24 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA27008; Thu, 25 Oct 2001 08:48:01 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 123086 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 25 Oct 2001 15:47:52          +0000
Received: from mail.texnet.net (64-217-63-11.ded.swbell.net [64.217.63.11]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA26992 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 25 Oct 2001 08:47:52 -0700
Received: from 18barnett (64-217-56-93.ded.swbell.net [64.217.56.93]) by          mail.texnet.net (2.5 Build 2639 (Berkeley 8.8.6)/8.8.4) with SMTP id          KAA27698 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 25 Oct 2001 10:54:48 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook CWS, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <000b01c15d6b$496193e0$5d38d940@escher.efgwaco.com>
Date:         Thu, 25 Oct 2001 10:39:50 -0500
Reply-To: "Charles Barnett" <cbarnett@TEXNET.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Charles Barnett" <cbarnett@TEXNET.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Requests for comments - NFPA codes
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <61A2F0A8E936D311876A0008C74BF1EC96AB49@DD21AE02>

Nielson Byron said:

> How do we respond to this?
> I would like to help them make reasonable changes that will make it
> legal to continue amateur activities.

> I have no background in the regulatory process.
> I don't want them to dismiss this input due to lack of "professional
> appearance" etc.

> Best Regards,
> Byron

Byron,

I believe that qualified members of the amateur rocketry community SHOULD
STEP FORWARD and co-ordinate comments and replacement code which is clear,
promotes safe practices, and is difficult to take out of context when law is
written.  The coordinating leader should have experience working with
regulatory agencies in a non-confrontational manner.  Some members of the
team should have credentials which will lend additional weight and
credibility to the recommendations.  This includes individuals outside the
amateur rocketry community but whose qualifications are significant to
impact the decision of the NFPA review.  All suggestions should be carefully
analyzed in view of how the NFPA and other regulatory agencies will modify
them over time.

Discussion of the recommendations should take place and be available to the
community.  After finalization, the responses agreed upon by the committee
should be formally forwarded by the group to the NFPA.

The final agreed responses should be released into the rocketry community
with specific recommendations to be quoted and guidelines for efficient and
effective response by individual members to the NFPA.

This is an opportunity for the amateur rocketry community to have
significant input to the long term regulation of the hobby.  It is important
and should be fast-tracked.

Charles

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 15686 invoked from network); 25 Oct 2001 16:11:47 -0000
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 25 Oct 2001 16:11:47 -0000
Received: (qmail 29901 invoked by uid 50005); 25 Oct 2001 14:58:37 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4166. . Clean. Processed in 3.390785 secs); 25 Oct 2001 14:58:37 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 25 Oct 2001 14:58:31 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA26293; Thu, 25 Oct 2001 07:46:49 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 123005 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 25 Oct 2001 14:46:47          +0000
Received: from mail.texnet.net (64-217-63-11.ded.swbell.net [64.217.63.11]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA26129 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 25 Oct 2001 07:36:46 -0700
Received: from 18barnett (64-217-56-93.ded.swbell.net [64.217.56.93]) by          mail.texnet.net (2.5 Build 2639 (Berkeley 8.8.6)/8.8.4) with SMTP id          JAA24286 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 25 Oct 2001 09:43:43 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook CWS, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <000a01c15d61$5ba78280$5d38d940@escher.efgwaco.com>
Date:         Thu, 25 Oct 2001 09:28:46 -0500
Reply-To: "Charles Barnett" <cbarnett@TEXNET.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Charles Barnett" <cbarnett@TEXNET.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Requests for comments - NFPA codes
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <016801c15ce6$a3001690$68e9a8c0@NATE2>

> Nathan Hays said:
>
> To be nit-picky, the NFPA codes do not outlaw
> anything.  They may be adopted and written
> into law by some jurisdiction.

> In California, it's illegal to transport any
> quantity of APCP on major freeways.  However,
> the law is only enforced when the quantities
> are on the scale of what the DOT requires.
> .... In California, our CSFM has adopted a
> licensing program to allow Ex activities under
> certain guidelines.  Other than being a pain,
> I see this as reasonable.

California has the well deserved reputation as
being one of the most rocketry unfriendly states
in the union.  California has laws which are
unduly restrictive and bad for rocketry.  The
rocketry related laws in California are not an
example of what we should allow to go
unchallenged during their formulation.  They
are an example of just the opposite.

NFPA codes are designed to become law.  Accepting
and defending language in the code which is
specifically designed to eliminate your hobby
seems unwise.

> What I would like to see is a more uniform
> application of standards.  I wouldn't even
> mind the ATF's role if it weren't so skewed.
> Acetylene, gasoline, spray paint - these are
> all dangerous and can be stored in large
> quantities in any zoning district I know of.
> Hell, just knocking the gas line off the pipe
> is extremely hazardous.

Wanting the rest of the world to see more
restrictions because we have ours threatened
does not seem like a productive approach.  I'm
hoping that you mean the relaxation or elimination
of unduly restrictive regulations on rocketry to
match that of other areas.  However, the argument
I'm hearing is in favor of acceptance of more
restrictive code.

Here is a quote from the proposed code:

"1.2.3 The purpose of this code also shall be to
discourage the following to minimize deaths and injuries:

 (1) Experiments with explosive or highly energetic
 rocket propellants
 (2) Construction of homemade rocket propulsion
 motors
 (3) Attempted launches or operation of homemade
 rocket devices"

You will notice that is doesn't say "to minimize
deaths and injuries by encouraging all experimental
rocketry activity to be conducted safely". It says
"to discourage the following" and lists all
experimental rocketry activity. It justifies this
loss of freedom "to minimize deaths and injuries".

Even the portions of the code which are "enabling"
are written in such a way that they can (and will)
be misused by those seeking to regulate the hobby
out of existence.

Much of the rest of the code is also bad code which
will result in bad law unless it is changed.

Attacks by regulatory bodies on freedom to pursue
this hobby are attacks on the personal freedom of
all involved in the hobby whether or not they
realize it.

Charles

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 10157 invoked from network); 25 Oct 2001 16:18:06 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 25 Oct 2001 16:18:06 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 7981 invoked by uid 50005); 25 Oct 2001 15:04:57 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4166. . Clean. Processed in 0.550654 secs); 25 Oct 2001 15:04:57 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 25 Oct 2001 15:04:56 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA26663; Thu, 25 Oct 2001 08:23:56 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 123065 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 25 Oct 2001 15:23:54          +0000
Received: from smtp007pub.verizon.net (smtp007pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.186])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA26649 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 25 Oct 2001 08:23:53 -0700
Received: from [63.24.225.78] (1Cust195.tnt1.rancho-cucamonga.ca.da.uu.net          [63.24.225.195]) by smtp007pub.verizon.net  with ESMTP for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; id f9PFNIj04555 Thu, 25 Oct 2001 10:23:18          -0500 (CDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: GTE/01rocket@mail.gte.net
References: <000a01c15d61$5ba78280$5d38d940@escher.efgwaco.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <a05100308b7fdde551f6c@[63.24.225.78]>
Date:         Thu, 25 Oct 2001 08:25:16 -0700
Reply-To: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Requests for comments - NFPA codes
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <000a01c15d61$5ba78280$5d38d940@escher.efgwaco.com>

Sniping nothing because it is so insightful.  Do you know what NFPA
1122/1125/1127 (thousands of lines of code) replaced?

A single line of NFPA code that stated: Rockets flown in conjunction
with a federal state or local government, an educational program, a
school or university, or a commercial enterprise is exempt from this
code.

This made launches where motors were sold legal.
This made the educational process of amateur rocketry legal

You had to do something malicious to get busted then and that was
covered by laws on assault, property destruction, etc.

ALL of the rocket laws are unnecessary.

Jerry


>Charles Barnett:


>  > Nathan Hays said:
>>
>>  To be nit-picky, the NFPA codes do not outlaw
>>  anything.  They may be adopted and written
>>  into law by some jurisdiction.
>
>>  In California, it's illegal to transport any
>>  quantity of APCP on major freeways.  However,
>>  the law is only enforced when the quantities
>>  are on the scale of what the DOT requires.
>>  .... In California, our CSFM has adopted a
>>  licensing program to allow Ex activities under
>>  certain guidelines.  Other than being a pain,
>>  I see this as reasonable.
>
>California has the well deserved reputation as
>being one of the most rocketry unfriendly states
>in the union.  California has laws which are
>unduly restrictive and bad for rocketry.  The
>rocketry related laws in California are not an
>example of what we should allow to go
>unchallenged during their formulation.  They
>are an example of just the opposite.
>
>NFPA codes are designed to become law.  Accepting
>and defending language in the code which is
>specifically designed to eliminate your hobby
>seems unwise.
>
>>  What I would like to see is a more uniform
>>  application of standards.  I wouldn't even
>>  mind the ATF's role if it weren't so skewed.
>>  Acetylene, gasoline, spray paint - these are
>>  all dangerous and can be stored in large
>>  quantities in any zoning district I know of.
>>  Hell, just knocking the gas line off the pipe
>>  is extremely hazardous.
>
>Wanting the rest of the world to see more
>restrictions because we have ours threatened
>does not seem like a productive approach.  I'm
>hoping that you mean the relaxation or elimination
>of unduly restrictive regulations on rocketry to
>match that of other areas.  However, the argument
>I'm hearing is in favor of acceptance of more
>restrictive code.
>
>Here is a quote from the proposed code:
>
>"1.2.3 The purpose of this code also shall be to
>discourage the following to minimize deaths and injuries:
>
>  (1) Experiments with explosive or highly energetic
>  rocket propellants
>  (2) Construction of homemade rocket propulsion
>  motors
>  (3) Attempted launches or operation of homemade
>  rocket devices"
>
>You will notice that is doesn't say "to minimize
>deaths and injuries by encouraging all experimental
>rocketry activity to be conducted safely". It says
>"to discourage the following" and lists all
>experimental rocketry activity. It justifies this
>loss of freedom "to minimize deaths and injuries".
>
>Even the portions of the code which are "enabling"
>are written in such a way that they can (and will)
>be misused by those seeking to regulate the hobby
>out of existence.
>
>Much of the rest of the code is also bad code which
>will result in bad law unless it is changed.
>
>Attacks by regulatory bodies on freedom to pursue
>this hobby are attacks on the personal freedom of
>all involved in the hobby whether or not they
>realize it.
>
>Charles


--
Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
Opinion, the whole thing.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 3221 invoked from network); 25 Oct 2001 16:24:10 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 25 Oct 2001 16:24:10 -0000
Received: (qmail 3473 invoked by uid 50005); 25 Oct 2001 16:23:21 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4164. . Clean. Processed in 0.193678 secs); 25 Oct 2001 16:23:21 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 25 Oct 2001 16:23:20 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA27554; Thu, 25 Oct 2001 09:15:51 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 123118 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 25 Oct 2001 16:15:47          +0000
Received: from localhost (rcalkins@localhost) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with          ESMTP id JAA27540; Thu, 25 Oct 2001 09:15:46 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.LNX.4.10.10110250912320.26191-100000@itc.uci.edu>
Date:         Thu, 25 Oct 2001 09:15:46 -0700
Reply-To: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Requests for comments - NFPA codes
Comments: To: Charles Barnett <cbarnett@TEXNET.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <000a01c15d61$5ba78280$5d38d940@escher.efgwaco.com>

I've been looking through the NFPA site ( http://www.nfpa.org ) and
haven't found where the quote was taken from.  Where did you find it?

Ray

On Thu, 25 Oct 2001, Charles Barnett wrote:
>
> Here is a quote from the proposed code:
>
> "1.2.3 The purpose of this code also shall be to
> discourage the following to minimize deaths and injuries:
>
>  (1) Experiments with explosive or highly energetic
>  rocket propellants
>  (2) Construction of homemade rocket propulsion
>  motors
>  (3) Attempted launches or operation of homemade
>  rocket devices"

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 14317 invoked from network); 25 Oct 2001 16:27:09 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 25 Oct 2001 16:27:09 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: (qmail 8167 invoked by uid 50005); 25 Oct 2001 16:26:20 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4164. . Clean. Processed in 0.199166 secs); 25 Oct 2001 16:26:20 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 25 Oct 2001 16:26:20 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA27376; Thu, 25 Oct 2001 09:06:18 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 123107 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 25 Oct 2001 16:06:13          +0000
Received: from VOLSB01.libertyville.com (216-180-161-058.fsi.net          [216.180.161.58] (may be forged)) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with          ESMTP id JAA27362 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 25 Oct 2001          09:06:12 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Message-ID:  <8241D5C473414F48B12A866EBBBF182A9833@VOLSB01.libertyville.com>
Date:         Thu, 25 Oct 2001 11:03:42 -0500
Reply-To: "Ed Dewey" <edewey@LIBERTYVILLE.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Ed Dewey" <edewey@LIBERTYVILLE.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Requests for comments - NFPA codes
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

I think Charles has an very important point.  Now is definitely the time to
do something.  Would someone please volunteer?  Does anyone have a
nomination(s).  I think Terry McCreary and Henry Spencer would represent us
well if they were to volunteer (although Terry's off the list for a while).

Ed

-----Original Message-----
From: Charles Barnett [mailto:cbarnett@TEXNET.NET]
Sent: Thursday, October 25, 2001 10:40 AM
To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
Subject: Re: [AR] Requests for comments - NFPA codes


Nielson Byron said:

> How do we respond to this?
> I would like to help them make reasonable changes that will make it
> legal to continue amateur activities.

> I have no background in the regulatory process.
> I don't want them to dismiss this input due to lack of "professional
> appearance" etc.

> Best Regards,
> Byron

Byron,

I believe that qualified members of the amateur rocketry community SHOULD
STEP FORWARD and co-ordinate comments and replacement code which is clear,
promotes safe practices, and is difficult to take out of context when law is
written.  The coordinating leader should have experience working with
regulatory agencies in a non-confrontational manner.  Some members of the
team should have credentials which will lend additional weight and
credibility to the recommendations.  This includes individuals outside the
amateur rocketry community but whose qualifications are significant to
impact the decision of the NFPA review.  All suggestions should be carefully
analyzed in view of how the NFPA and other regulatory agencies will modify
them over time.

Discussion of the recommendations should take place and be available to the
community.  After finalization, the responses agreed upon by the committee
should be formally forwarded by the group to the NFPA.

The final agreed responses should be released into the rocketry community
with specific recommendations to be quoted and guidelines for efficient and
effective response by individual members to the NFPA.

This is an opportunity for the amateur rocketry community to have
significant input to the long term regulation of the hobby.  It is important
and should be fast-tracked.

Charles

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 18381 invoked from network); 25 Oct 2001 16:43:57 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 25 Oct 2001 16:43:57 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 11883 invoked by uid 50005); 25 Oct 2001 16:43:53 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4166. . Clean. Processed in 0.128336 secs); 25 Oct 2001 16:43:53 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 25 Oct 2001 16:43:53 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA27855; Thu, 25 Oct 2001 09:34:34 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 123136 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 25 Oct 2001 16:34:33          +0000
Received: from smtppop3pub.verizon.net (smtppop3pub.gte.net [206.46.170.22]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA27840 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 25 Oct 2001 09:34:32 -0700
Received: from [63.24.225.78] (1Cust132.tnt1.rancho-cucamonga.ca.da.uu.net          [63.24.225.132]) by smtppop3pub.verizon.net  with ESMTP for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; id LAA41233596 Thu, 25 Oct 2001 11:33:47 -0500          (CDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: GTE/01rocket@mail.gte.net
References: <000a01c15d61$5ba78280$5d38d940@escher.efgwaco.com>            <a05100308b7fdde551f6c@[63.24.225.78]>            <3BD834B6.1AB63E03@biomicro.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <a05100309b7fdef9b2e5a@[63.24.225.78]>
Date:         Thu, 25 Oct 2001 09:36:04 -0700
Reply-To: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Requests for comments - NFPA codes
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <3BD834B6.1AB63E03@biomicro.com>

>Well I won't argue with that.
>
>I just submitted a comment to add a paragraph to NFPA 1127:
>
>"1.3.6  This code shall not apply to the following:"
>That is existing text.  Then there are two paragraphs exempting model
>rockets as defined in NFPA 1122 & firworks rockets, skyrockets, and
>rockets with sticks as defined in NFPA 1123 & 1126.
>Then I proposed the addition of:
>
>                  "(3) Amateur and Experimental rockets as defined
>                  by the FAA."


FAA does not define them.  It should say as defined by RRS or by PRS
or by ARS (and re-form ARS).


>
>And added the following reasoning.
>
>Substantiation:  There are many individuals and groups that do a
>                  wide variety of research with rockets other than
>                  HPR. NFPA 1127 is adopted by many states and
>                  municipalities by reference. By not exempting these
>                  other rocketry activities specifically, NFPA 1127
>                  as currently written prohibits them. Current
>                  research includes research with large composite
>                  motors, LOx and NO2 Hybrid engines, liquid
>                  bi-propellant and liquid mono-propellant engines
>                  for a variety of flight regimes unobtainable with
>                  commercial HPR motors. i.e. VTVL, long duration
>                  low acceleration burn times, altitudes greater than
>                  100,000 feet agl, multiple start engines, air
>                  augmented ramjet engines, etc.
>
>Probably not the best logic, or prose, but I hope it wins an exemption
>from this code.  I tried to make it broad rather than specific.

Jerry

--
Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
Opinion, the whole thing.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 23155 invoked from network); 25 Oct 2001 16:52:52 -0000
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 25 Oct 2001 16:52:52 -0000
Received: (qmail 15712 invoked by uid 50005); 25 Oct 2001 15:39:09 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4165. . Clean. Processed in 1.434242 secs); 25 Oct 2001 15:39:09 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 25 Oct 2001 15:39:07 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA27833; Thu, 25 Oct 2001 09:34:02 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 123129 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 25 Oct 2001 16:33:56          +0000
Received: from spock.alohanet.com (spock.alohanet.com [209.31.4.252]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA27809 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Thu, 25 Oct 2001 09:33:54 -0700
Received: from NATE2 (NATE2.alohanet.com [192.168.233.104]) by          spock.alohanet.com (Post.Office MTA v3.5.2 release 221 ID#          0-55447U100L2S100V35) with SMTP id com for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>;          Thu, 25 Oct 2001 09:32:00 -0700
References: <000a01c15d61$5ba78280$5d38d940@escher.efgwaco.com>             <a05100308b7fdde551f6c@[63.24.225.78]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <01f001c15d73$92d7c140$68e9a8c0@NATE2>
Date:         Thu, 25 Oct 2001 09:39:10 -0700
Reply-To: "Nathan Hays" <nhays@ALOHANET.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Nathan Hays" <nhays@ALOHANET.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Requests for comments - NFPA codes
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Yes, the historical perspective.  I laugh at myself when I think of what I
am willing to accept simply because that's the way it was three years ago
when I *re*started this mad hobby.

The essence of the regs I'm in favor of are more of the notification kind.
It'd be a pain for the local fire department to see clouds of smoke and not
have been notified.  Other than problems with the upper limits, the FAA
waiver process seems to work well.

On the other hand, the ATF's role in storage is out of line.  When
transporting there is the DOT.  When flying there is the FAA.  But where is
the responsibility for storage?  If not the ATF, then who?  Local regs are
not consistent (nor should they - a city magazine and a desert one don't
have the same rsik).  However, the ATF is involved only because they've
claimed it's their turf.

I can understand the ATF stepping in when AN and FO are put together, but
they don't regulate them separately.  That's because ANFO serves only to
explode.  For APCP, that rationale doesn't exist.  They can't regulate
hybrids.  They can't regulate biprops.  They can't regulate H2O2.  They
can't regulate candy.  What's the difference?


So why did NFPA replace their single line of code?  What was solved?  Is
there any way out of the increasing mess?  What laws did Washington state
drop?  were they NFPA based?

- Nate




> Sniping nothing because it is so insightful.  Do you know what NFPA
> 1122/1125/1127 (thousands of lines of code) replaced?
>
> A single line of NFPA code that stated: Rockets flown in conjunction
> with a federal state or local government, an educational program, a
> school or university, or a commercial enterprise is exempt from this
> code.
>
> This made launches where motors were sold legal.
> This made the educational process of amateur rocketry legal
>
> You had to do something malicious to get busted then and that was
> covered by laws on assault, property destruction, etc.
>
> ALL of the rocket laws are unnecessary.
>
> Jerry
>
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 15665 invoked from network); 25 Oct 2001 16:58:28 -0000
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 25 Oct 2001 16:58:28 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 11479 invoked by uid 50005); 25 Oct 2001 15:45:18 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4166. . Clean. Processed in 2.085418 secs); 25 Oct 2001 15:45:18 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 25 Oct 2001 15:45:14 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA28165; Thu, 25 Oct 2001 09:48:38 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 123162 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 25 Oct 2001 16:48:33          +0000
Received: from mail.aros.net (mail.aros.net [207.173.16.20]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA28151 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Thu,          25 Oct 2001 09:48:32 -0700
Received: from biomicro.com ([208.187.122.40]) by mail.aros.net (8.11.6/8.9.3)          with ESMTP id f9PGmUC60244 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Thu, 25 Oct          2001 10:48:31 -0600 (MDT)
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.77 [en] (Win98; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <000a01c15d61$5ba78280$5d38d940@escher.efgwaco.com>            <a05100308b7fdde551f6c@[63.24.225.78]>            <01f001c15d73$92d7c140$68e9a8c0@NATE2>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3BD842AE.852E5C7@biomicro.com>
Date:         Thu, 25 Oct 2001 10:49:50 -0600
Reply-To: "Mark K. Spute" <mks@BIOMICRO.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Mark K. Spute" <mks@BIOMICRO.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Requests for comments - NFPA codes
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Nathan Hays wrote:


> So why did NFPA replace their single line of code?

I'm a cynic so take this for what it is worth:  Keeps everyone there
employed.

> What was solved?

Workfare for bureacrats.

> Is there any way out of the increasing mess?

Short of a Federal court decision that it is unconstitional to
incorporate as law by reference only code recommendations drafted
without public input, legislative representation, or judicial review as
required in the constitution of every state in the union and probably by
the charters of most cities and towns, no I can't see any.

--
Mark K. Spute
Senior Research Engineer
BioMicro Systems Inc.

KD7IWE,  RRS, hopeful future Stolly owner

"It is difficult to say what is impossible, for the dream of yesterday
is the hope of today and the reality of tomorrow."
     Dr. Robert H. Goddard

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 4953 invoked from network); 25 Oct 2001 17:10:49 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 25 Oct 2001 17:10:49 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 28386 invoked by uid 50005); 25 Oct 2001 17:10:45 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4166. . Clean. Processed in 1.587579 secs); 25 Oct 2001 17:10:45 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 25 Oct 2001 17:10:41 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA27970; Thu, 25 Oct 2001 09:37:05 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 123151 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 25 Oct 2001 16:37:04          +0000
Received: from smtppop3pub.verizon.net (smtppop3pub.gte.net [206.46.170.22]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA27956 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 25 Oct 2001 09:37:03 -0700
Received: from [63.24.225.78] (1Cust132.tnt1.rancho-cucamonga.ca.da.uu.net          [63.24.225.132]) by smtppop3pub.verizon.net  with ESMTP for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; id LAA38375255 Thu, 25 Oct 2001 11:36:18 -0500          (CDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: GTE/01rocket@mail.gte.net
References: <8241D5C473414F48B12A866EBBBF182A9833@VOLSB01.libertyville.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <a0510030ab7fdefff45d6@[63.24.225.78]>
Date:         Thu, 25 Oct 2001 09:38:35 -0700
Reply-To: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Requests for comments - NFPA codes
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <8241D5C473414F48B12A866EBBBF182A9833@VOLSB01.libertyville.com>

>I think Charles has an very important point.  Now is definitely the time to
>do something.  Would someone please volunteer?  Does anyone have a
>nomination(s).  I think Terry McCreary and Henry Spencer would represent us
>well if they were to volunteer (although Terry's off the list for a while).


I have actually DONE the process before.  But frankly the other
members of the committee are many of the individuals who keep making
active efforts to ban me from TRA.  Therefore if I may be of behind
the scenes effort, please let me know.

The first step is to be added to the committee on sport rocketry on
the basis that "experimental/amateur rocketry is not represented and
a rep should be added.

Jerry


>Ed
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Charles Barnett [mailto:cbarnett@TEXNET.NET]
>Sent: Thursday, October 25, 2001 10:40 AM
>To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
>Subject: Re: [AR] Requests for comments - NFPA codes
>
>
>Nielson Byron said:
>
>>  How do we respond to this?
>>  I would like to help them make reasonable changes that will make it
>>  legal to continue amateur activities.
>
>>  I have no background in the regulatory process.
>>  I don't want them to dismiss this input due to lack of "professional
>>  appearance" etc.
>
>>  Best Regards,
>>  Byron
>
>Byron,
>
>I believe that qualified members of the amateur rocketry community SHOULD
>STEP FORWARD and co-ordinate comments and replacement code which is clear,
>promotes safe practices, and is difficult to take out of context when law is
>written.  The coordinating leader should have experience working with
>regulatory agencies in a non-confrontational manner.  Some members of the
>team should have credentials which will lend additional weight and
>credibility to the recommendations.  This includes individuals outside the
>amateur rocketry community but whose qualifications are significant to
>impact the decision of the NFPA review.  All suggestions should be carefully
>analyzed in view of how the NFPA and other regulatory agencies will modify
>them over time.
>
>Discussion of the recommendations should take place and be available to the
>community.  After finalization, the responses agreed upon by the committee
>should be formally forwarded by the group to the NFPA.
>
>The final agreed responses should be released into the rocketry community
>with specific recommendations to be quoted and guidelines for efficient and
>effective response by individual members to the NFPA.
>
>This is an opportunity for the amateur rocketry community to have
>significant input to the long term regulation of the hobby.  It is important
>and should be fast-tracked.
>
>Charles


--
Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
Opinion, the whole thing.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 14747 invoked from network); 25 Oct 2001 17:37:15 -0000
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 25 Oct 2001 17:37:15 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 8310 invoked by uid 50005); 25 Oct 2001 17:37:11 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4166. . Clean. Processed in 0.208171 secs); 25 Oct 2001 17:37:11 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 25 Oct 2001 17:37:11 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA27036; Thu, 25 Oct 2001 08:48:58 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 123093 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 25 Oct 2001 15:48:57          +0000
Received: from mail.aros.net (mail.aros.net [207.173.16.20]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA27022 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Thu,          25 Oct 2001 08:48:57 -0700
Received: from biomicro.com ([208.187.122.40]) by mail.aros.net (8.11.6/8.9.3)          with ESMTP id f9PFmtT05965 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Thu, 25 Oct          2001 09:48:55 -0600 (MDT)
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.77 [en] (Win98; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <000a01c15d61$5ba78280$5d38d940@escher.efgwaco.com>            <a05100308b7fdde551f6c@[63.24.225.78]>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3BD834B6.1AB63E03@biomicro.com>
Date:         Thu, 25 Oct 2001 09:50:14 -0600
Reply-To: "Mark K. Spute" <mks@BIOMICRO.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Mark K. Spute" <mks@BIOMICRO.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Requests for comments - NFPA codes
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Well I won't argue with that.

I just submitted a comment to add a paragraph to NFPA 1127:

"1.3.6  This code shall not apply to the following:"
That is existing text.  Then there are two paragraphs exempting model
rockets as defined in NFPA 1122 & firworks rockets, skyrockets, and
rockets with sticks as defined in NFPA 1123 & 1126.
Then I proposed the addition of:

                 "(3) Amateur and Experimental rockets as defined
                 by the FAA."

And added the following reasoning.

Substantiation:  There are many individuals and groups that do a
                 wide variety of research with rockets other than
                 HPR. NFPA 1127 is adopted by many states and
                 municipalities by reference. By not exempting these
                 other rocketry activities specifically, NFPA 1127
                 as currently written prohibits them. Current
                 research includes research with large composite
                 motors, LOx and NO2 Hybrid engines, liquid
                 bi-propellant and liquid mono-propellant engines
                 for a variety of flight regimes unobtainable with
                 commercial HPR motors. i.e. VTVL, long duration
                 low acceleration burn times, altitudes greater than
                 100,000 feet agl, multiple start engines, air
                 augmented ramjet engines, etc.

Probably not the best logic, or prose, but I hope it wins an exemption
from this code.  I tried to make it broad rather than specific.

Jerry Irvine wrote:
>
> Sniping nothing because it is so insightful.  Do you know what NFPA
> 1122/1125/1127 (thousands of lines of code) replaced?
>
> A single line of NFPA code that stated: Rockets flown in conjunction
> with a federal state or local government, an educational program, a
> school or university, or a commercial enterprise is exempt from this
> code.
>
> This made launches where motors were sold legal.
> This made the educational process of amateur rocketry legal
>
> You had to do something malicious to get busted then and that was
> covered by laws on assault, property destruction, etc.
>
> ALL of the rocket laws are unnecessary.


--
Mark K. Spute
Senior Research Engineer
BioMicro Systems Inc.

KD7IWE,  RRS, hopeful future Stolly owner

"It is difficult to say what is impossible, for the dream of yesterday
is the hope of today and the reality of tomorrow."
     Dr. Robert H. Goddard

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 300 invoked from network); 25 Oct 2001 17:48:53 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 25 Oct 2001 17:48:53 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: (qmail 2687 invoked by uid 50005); 25 Oct 2001 16:35:44 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4166. . Clean. Processed in 0.502213 secs); 25 Oct 2001 16:35:44 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 25 Oct 2001 16:35:43 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA28314; Thu, 25 Oct 2001 09:54:39 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 123174 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 25 Oct 2001 16:54:37          +0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA28297 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu,          25 Oct 2001 09:54:37 -0700
Message-ID:  <200110251654.JAA28297@itc.uci.edu>
Date:         Thu, 25 Oct 2001 16:54:37 +0000
Reply-To: "Dave McCue" <dmccue@UCI.EDU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Dave McCue" <dmccue@UCI.EDU>
Subject:      [AR] NFPA 1127
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Folks, I think there is some confusion here. According to the webpage
referenced below, the deadline for comments ended on 5 October 2001.

http://www.nfpa.org/Codes/NFPA_Codes_and_Standards/List_of_NFPA_documents/NF
PA_1127.asp

And, if you look at the proposed changes to 1127 made by the responsible
committee, many changes we would like to see are planned for adoption in the
2002 revision.

The prospective code for 2002, with changes and rationale is at:

http://www.nfpa.org/codesonline/nfc.asp?path=NFPA/ROPROC/nfpa1000-1499/1127/
1127-02-rop.pdf

More to the point, I don't see what we could do at this late date anyhow,
since the deadline for commants has passed. I think the next forum for
change will be in the individual state legislatures.

-Dave McCue


From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 17404 invoked from network); 25 Oct 2001 18:15:32 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 25 Oct 2001 18:15:32 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 10317 invoked by uid 50005); 25 Oct 2001 18:13:50 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4166. . Clean. Processed in 3.57885 secs); 25 Oct 2001 18:13:50 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 25 Oct 2001 18:13:43 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA29347; Thu, 25 Oct 2001 11:04:36 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 123206 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 25 Oct 2001 18:04:31          +0000
Received: from ns.vanguard.com (ns.VANGUARD.COM [192.175.173.31]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA29333 for          <ARocket@ITC.UCI.edu>; Thu, 25 Oct 2001 11:04:30 -0700
Received: from eagle1.vanguard.com (eagle1.VANGUARD.COM [192.175.141.70]) by          ns.vanguard.com (Switch-2.1.3/Switch-2.1.0) with ESMTP id          f9PI3cw17102 for <ARocket@ITC.UCI.edu>; Thu, 25 Oct 2001 14:03:38          -0400 (EDT)
Received: from vgi4mail.vanguard.com (vgi4mail.vanguard.com [10.254.65.16]) by          eagle1.vanguard.com (Switch-2.1.3/Switch-2.1.0) with SMTP id          f9PI4QE03731 for <ARocket@ITC.UCI.edu>; Thu, 25 Oct 2001 14:04:26          -0400 (EDT)
Received: by vgi4mail.vanguard.com(Lotus SMTP MTA v4.6.6  (890.1 7-16-1999))           id 85256AF0.00634008 ; Thu, 25 Oct 2001 14:04:04 -0400
X-Lotus-FromDomain: VGINOTES
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Disposition: inline
Message-ID:  <85256AF0.00633E36.00@vgi4mail.vanguard.com>
Date:         Thu, 25 Oct 2001 14:04:05 -0400
Reply-To: <Waysie_Atkins@VANGUARD.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Waysie Atkins" <Waysie_Atkins@VANGUARD.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Requests for comments - NFPA codes
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

snipped from post by Mark Spute:
<Short of a Federal court decision that it is unconstitutional to
<incorporate as law by reference only code recommendations drafted
<without public input, legislative representation, or judicial review as
<required in the constitution of every state in the union and probably by
<the charters of most cities and towns, no I can't see any.


Thank you for putting this so well.  I've been a bit perplexed since learning
that one must purchase these codes (normally when not in review mode) given that
they are also adopted as state laws by some states.  Seems to me that once they
become state law the state in question must provide copies of those codes in
public libraries etc for free public viewing and also required to provide copies
at a nominal cost ( to cover actual copying expenses- a few cents a page) under
FOIA (Freedom of Information Act).  Also seems as though there should have been
public review etc at the time each states adopted the codes as law, course
that's a mute point now.

Is there a split with HPR manufacturers here?  Some of these codes *seem* to be
written to force everyone to do biz with Estes AT, etc.  Not to 'dis them, or
blame them, but to know the basis for the language used.  How did people come up
with these laws/codes and what type of organized resistance, from others in
HPR/model rocketry, will our ideas come up against.  Will Estes types fight Ex
types to *insulate* their activities from over reaction that might come from
problems stemming from Ex activities.  (Think Jerry might have hinted at this).

Fixing the problem via this review seems to be the way to go now, but in my
limited and humble opinion I think that the lawsuit route *could* be successful.
But the up front costs and the slow process could make it very difficult to
succeed.

          snipped from post by Jerry Irvine
<The NFPA does not study anything.  Its technical committee can, but
<that is still a private cooperative effort.  Nothing even arocket
<could not do.  Arocket could be the authority having jurisdiction for
<amateur rocketry for example.

Would we really want to go the route of making ARocket a 'competent
jurisdiction'.  Seems Arocket is a bit of a loose association of enthusiasts.
Would it not need to be more formal to allow this?  And then is everyone at the
mercy of this one group for future participation in Ex?  Once again not to 'dis
anyone, but it ain't freedom if only one person/organization holds all the
marbles or makes all the rules and defines who can or cannot participate.
There's a great exchange of ideas and info going on here- its awesome- but
personal differences could create splits in the future.  And of course
competition -even friendly- makes for better results.

Some thoughts and questions as we quickly move forward on this.

Respectfully,

Waysie Atkins



*All comments and ideas expressed are my own, not those of my employer.*

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 4941 invoked from network); 25 Oct 2001 18:19:31 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 25 Oct 2001 18:19:31 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: (qmail 17053 invoked by uid 50005); 25 Oct 2001 18:17:25 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4166. . Clean. Processed in 1.938392 secs); 25 Oct 2001 18:17:25 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 25 Oct 2001 18:17:20 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA29267; Thu, 25 Oct 2001 10:56:09 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 123187 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 25 Oct 2001 17:55:02          +0000
Received: from localhost (rcalkins@localhost) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with          ESMTP id KAA29251 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Thu, 25 Oct 2001          10:55:02 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.LNX.4.10.10110251051280.26191-100000@itc.uci.edu>
Date:         Thu, 25 Oct 2001 10:55:02 -0700
Reply-To: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
Subject:      [AR] Offline for a few days...
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Hey all.  I blew the engine in my car last night, and I'll be out of town
(offline) for a few days, helping a friend bring a car down that I can
borrow for a couple of weeks.

If anybody needs to get in touch, call me on my cell (505)249-5356.  I'll
be on roaming fees (expensive minutes) so I'd appreciate it if you can
keep calls short and to the point.

Of course, the timing is terrible, but I have little choice in the matter.

I'll be back within a week.

Ray

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 12578 invoked from network); 25 Oct 2001 18:56:51 -0000
Received: from smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.105]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 25 Oct 2001 18:56:51 -0000
Received: (qmail 16779 invoked by uid 50005); 25 Oct 2001 18:54:45 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpy with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.166932 secs); 25 Oct 2001 18:54:45 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 25 Oct 2001 18:54:45 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA29574; Thu, 25 Oct 2001 11:35:29 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 123240 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 25 Oct 2001 18:35:22          +0000
Received: from pintail.mail.pas.earthlink.net (pintail.mail.pas.earthlink.net          [207.217.120.122]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id          LAA29560 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 25 Oct 2001 11:35:22 -0700
Received: from tus20054 (cpe-24-221-155-19.az.sprintbbd.net [24.221.155.19]) by          pintail.mail.pas.earthlink.net (EL-8_9_3_3/8.9.3) with SMTP id          LAA29645 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 25 Oct 2001 11:35:21 -0700          (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <NEBBLMGNCMMGBANIEOEHEEECCKAA.jmrosson@earthlink.net>
Date:         Thu, 25 Oct 2001 11:34:16 -0700
Reply-To: <jmrosson@earthlink.net>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <jmrosson@earthlink.net>
Subject:      Re: [AR] NFPA 1127
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <200110251654.JAA28297@itc.uci.edu>

I disagree, they are other ways to comment on the NFPA guidelines.  The
rocketry side of the NFPA is very accessible, if you know how!

IF ANYONE wants to provide valid and useful comments to the NFPA rocketry
guidelines, it can ALWAYS be accomplished!  The public comment period is for
any individual regardless of affiliation to provide comments.  Outside of
the public comment period, it's more difficult to get officially recognized,
and have the NFPA sub-committee be force to act, but it can be accomplished.
You also have to consider that the documents are under a 2-3 year revision
cycle.  Comments made outside of the regular public period may take awhile
to get reviewed and included.

If you are a member of NAR or Tripoli, you can provide written (not email,
but a real letter) to the organizations NFPA representative for discussion
at the next NFPA meeting.  You can also make a request directly to the
committee chair (or all committee members) to present your case directly at
the next NFPA meeting.  The head of the rocket sub committee is Pat Miller
(NAR).  Other primary members include; Bruce Kelly (TRA), Vern Estes, as
well as 1 voting representative from Aerotech, Estes, Quest Rocketry, and
the ATF.  The process is very bureaucratic, BUT Rocketeers write and shape
1127, 1125, & 1122.  If you want a change something, contact one or several
representatives, don't just complain here!

Having participated in changing an evil provision last year, by presenting
material directly to the Rocket and Pyro sub-committees, I can provide
detailed insight to anyone with a serious interest in making changes.  It's
not hard, just time consuming.

Best Regards....

#->-----Original Message-----
#->From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@itc.uci.edu]On
#->Behalf Of Dave McCue
#->Sent: Thursday, October 25, 2001 9:55 AM
#->To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
#->Subject: NFPA 1127
#->
#->
#->Folks, I think there is some confusion here. According to the webpage
#->referenced below, the deadline for comments ended on 5 October 2001.
#->
#->http://www.nfpa.org/Codes/NFPA_Codes_and_Standards/List_of_NFPA_d
#->ocuments/NF
#->PA_1127.asp
#->
#->And, if you look at the proposed changes to 1127 made by the responsible
#->committee, many changes we would like to see are planned for
#->adoption in the
#->2002 revision.
#->
#->The prospective code for 2002, with changes and rationale is at:
#->
#->http://www.nfpa.org/codesonline/nfc.asp?path=NFPA/ROPROC/nfpa1000
#->-1499/1127/
#->1127-02-rop.pdf
#->
#->More to the point, I don't see what we could do at this late date anyhow,
#->since the deadline for commants has passed. I think the next forum for
#->change will be in the individual state legislatures.
#->
#->-Dave McCue
#->

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 29380 invoked from network); 25 Oct 2001 19:15:44 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 25 Oct 2001 19:15:44 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 26709 invoked by uid 50005); 25 Oct 2001 19:14:55 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4164. . Clean. Processed in 0.189379 secs); 25 Oct 2001 19:14:55 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 25 Oct 2001 19:14:55 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA29752; Thu, 25 Oct 2001 12:09:40 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 123262 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 25 Oct 2001 19:09:39          +0000
Received: from smtp005pub.verizon.net (smtp005pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.184])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA29738 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 25 Oct 2001 12:09:38 -0700
Received: from [63.24.225.78] (1Cust148.tnt1.rancho-cucamonga.ca.da.uu.net          [63.24.225.148]) by smtp005pub.verizon.net  with ESMTP for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; id f9PJ93W29865 Thu, 25 Oct 2001 14:09:03          -0500 (CDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: GTE/01rocket@mail.gte.net
References: <000a01c15d61$5ba78280$5d38d940@escher.efgwaco.com>            <a05100308b7fdde551f6c@[63.24.225.78]>            <01f001c15d73$92d7c140$68e9a8c0@NATE2>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <a0510030db7fe138a79be@[63.24.225.78]>
Date:         Thu, 25 Oct 2001 12:11:04 -0700
Reply-To: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Requests for comments - NFPA codes
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <01f001c15d73$92d7c140$68e9a8c0@NATE2>

>I can understand the ATF stepping in when AN and FO are put together, but
>they don't regulate them separately.  That's because ANFO serves only to
>explode.  For APCP, that rationale doesn't exist.  They can't regulate
>hybrids.  They can't regulate biprops.  They can't regulate H2O2.  They
>can't regulate candy.  What's the difference?

They fear good technology they don't understand.


>
>
>So why did NFPA replace their single line of code?  What was solved?  Is


TRA asked them to.
Solved?  TRA put itself in a position of increased authority over
non-members hoping to swell the ranks.  The opposite occured.
Way out? With a committee devoted to INCREASING the rule count, might
be hard to go back in time.  But every individual on the committee
would be better served by the old code than the new and they know it.


>there any way out of the increasing mess?  What laws did Washington state
>drop?  were they NFPA based?


WA had state specific code similar to CA but without the journeyman
system installed to employ theatrical pyro-ops.

Jerry
>


--
Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
Opinion, the whole thing.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 6355 invoked from network); 25 Oct 2001 19:23:57 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 25 Oct 2001 19:23:57 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 1892 invoked by uid 50005); 25 Oct 2001 18:10:47 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4166. . Clean. Processed in 0.669009 secs); 25 Oct 2001 18:10:47 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 25 Oct 2001 18:10:46 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA29800; Thu, 25 Oct 2001 12:13:12 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 123273 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 25 Oct 2001 19:13:11          +0000
Received: from smtp007pub.verizon.net (smtp007pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.186])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA29786 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 25 Oct 2001 12:13:10 -0700
Received: from [63.24.225.78] (1Cust148.tnt1.rancho-cucamonga.ca.da.uu.net          [63.24.225.148]) by smtp007pub.verizon.net  with ESMTP for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; id f9PJCdj10385 Thu, 25 Oct 2001 14:12:39          -0500 (CDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: GTE/01rocket@mail.gte.net
References: <85256AF0.00633E36.00@vgi4mail.vanguard.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <a0510030eb7fe14adbde9@[63.24.225.78]>
Date:         Thu, 25 Oct 2001 12:14:43 -0700
Reply-To: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Requests for comments - NFPA codes
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <85256AF0.00633E36.00@vgi4mail.vanguard.com>

>Is there a split with HPR manufacturers here?  Some of these codes
>*seem* to be
>written to force everyone to do biz with Estes AT, etc.  Not to 'dis them, or

Gary Rosenfield drafted 1125 to include his production method and
exclude everybody elses.  For example it excludes the dual planetary
vacuum mixers EVERYONE uses from Vulcan to Thiokol to China Lake.


>blame them, but to know the basis for the language used.  How did
>people come up
>with these laws/codes and what type of organized resistance, from others in
>HPR/model rocketry, will our ideas come up against.  Will Estes types fight Ex
>types to *insulate* their activities from over reaction that might come from
>problems stemming from Ex activities.  (Think Jerry might have
>hinted at this).

Jerry

--
Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
Opinion, the whole thing.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 1548 invoked from network); 25 Oct 2001 19:30:21 -0000
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 25 Oct 2001 19:30:21 -0000
Received: (qmail 9506 invoked by uid 50005); 25 Oct 2001 19:29:32 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4164. . Clean. Processed in 0.1618 secs); 25 Oct 2001 19:29:32 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 25 Oct 2001 19:29:32 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA29729; Thu, 25 Oct 2001 12:08:44 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 123255 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 25 Oct 2001 19:08:36          +0000
Received: from spock.alohanet.com (spock.alohanet.com [209.31.4.252]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA29715 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Thu, 25 Oct 2001 12:08:35 -0700
Received: from NATE2 (NATE2.alohanet.com [192.168.233.104]) by          spock.alohanet.com (Post.Office MTA v3.5.2 release 221 ID#          0-55447U100L2S100V35) with SMTP id com for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>;          Thu, 25 Oct 2001 12:06:35 -0700
References:  <85256AF0.00633E36.00@vgi4mail.vanguard.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <021001c15d89$2b108450$68e9a8c0@NATE2>
Date:         Thu, 25 Oct 2001 12:13:42 -0700
Reply-To: "Nathan Hays" <nhays@ALOHANET.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Nathan Hays" <nhays@ALOHANET.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Requests for comments - NFPA codes
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

*Flame suit on*

It seems to me that in the NAR and TRA we have a "stable" forum/organization
for working with these regulatory processes.  The problem is that they seem
(emphasizing my lack of inside info) to be biased towards certain
manufacturers.  Moreover, TRA is only kinda-sorta moving into eX activities.
I know many here abhor working with them.

The legitimacy of TRA sponsored advocacy hangs on this last point.  I can
believe that it is now easier for clubs to hold regular launches under HPR
rules because local authorities have confidence in TRA/NAR sponsorship and
insurance (a BIG thing for permits).  The work done limiting rocketry in the
NFPA codes may actually have increased the number of HPR flights.

Now to amateur/eX.  How does the loose collection of patriots represented on
aRocket get represented?  If TRA gets a nice NFPA standard for eX that
requires oversight by TRA - a likely scenario, will that push independent
hobbyists into the nether-world?  The solution is to have an/some
independent organization(s) such as RRS that is recognized as a legitimate
oversight org in the NFPA

The challenge:

NAR and TRA are *relatively* well organized, experienced, and recognized.
An independent group needs to have similar stature and representation.  That
takes time, consistency, money, and talent. Y'all up to it?

The alternative is for TRA to open up the eX group, expand the board to
include an RRS or aRocket type, and build on our mutual and complimentary
strengths.  I don't think TRA should be going it alone, and I don't think it
is good to have rival groups fighting in front of the regulatory agencies.
TRA will win in that case.

- Nate






----- Original Message -----
From: "Waysie Atkins" <Waysie_Atkins@VANGUARD.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Thursday, October 25, 2001 11:04 AM
Subject: Re: [AR] Requests for comments - NFPA codes


> snipped from post by Mark Spute:
> <Short of a Federal court decision that it is unconstitutional to
> <incorporate as law by reference only code recommendations drafted
> <without public input, legislative representation, or judicial review as
> <required in the constitution of every state in the union and probably by
> <the charters of most cities and towns, no I can't see any.
>
>
> Thank you for putting this so well.  I've been a bit perplexed since
learning
> that one must purchase these codes (normally when not in review mode)
given that
> they are also adopted as state laws by some states.  Seems to me that once
they
> become state law the state in question must provide copies of those codes
in
> public libraries etc for free public viewing and also required to provide
copies
> at a nominal cost ( to cover actual copying expenses- a few cents a page)
under
> FOIA (Freedom of Information Act).  Also seems as though there should have
been
> public review etc at the time each states adopted the codes as law, course
> that's a mute point now.
>
> Is there a split with HPR manufacturers here?  Some of these codes *seem*
to be
> written to force everyone to do biz with Estes AT, etc.  Not to 'dis them,
or
> blame them, but to know the basis for the language used.  How did people
come up
> with these laws/codes and what type of organized resistance, from others
in
> HPR/model rocketry, will our ideas come up against.  Will Estes types
fight Ex
> types to *insulate* their activities from over reaction that might come
from
> problems stemming from Ex activities.  (Think Jerry might have hinted at
this).
>
> Fixing the problem via this review seems to be the way to go now, but in
my
> limited and humble opinion I think that the lawsuit route *could* be
successful.
> But the up front costs and the slow process could make it very difficult
to
> succeed.
>
>           snipped from post by Jerry Irvine
> <The NFPA does not study anything.  Its technical committee can, but
> <that is still a private cooperative effort.  Nothing even arocket
> <could not do.  Arocket could be the authority having jurisdiction for
> <amateur rocketry for example.
>
> Would we really want to go the route of making ARocket a 'competent
> jurisdiction'.  Seems Arocket is a bit of a loose association of
enthusiasts.
> Would it not need to be more formal to allow this?  And then is everyone
at the
> mercy of this one group for future participation in Ex?  Once again not to
'dis
> anyone, but it ain't freedom if only one person/organization holds all the
> marbles or makes all the rules and defines who can or cannot participate.
> There's a great exchange of ideas and info going on here- its awesome- but
> personal differences could create splits in the future.  And of course
> competition -even friendly- makes for better results.
>
> Some thoughts and questions as we quickly move forward on this.
>
> Respectfully,
>
> Waysie Atkins
>
>
>
> *All comments and ideas expressed are my own, not those of my employer.*

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 19637 invoked from network); 25 Oct 2001 19:42:29 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 25 Oct 2001 19:42:29 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: (qmail 4679 invoked by uid 50005); 25 Oct 2001 18:28:44 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4165. . Clean. Processed in 0.467253 secs); 25 Oct 2001 18:28:44 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 25 Oct 2001 18:28:43 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA30238; Thu, 25 Oct 2001 12:33:54 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 123313 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 25 Oct 2001 19:33:52          +0000
Received: from VOLSB01.libertyville.com (216-180-161-058.fsi.net          [216.180.161.58] (may be forged)) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with          ESMTP id MAA30224 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 25 Oct 2001          12:33:51 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Message-ID:  <8241D5C473414F48B12A866EBBBF182A9840@VOLSB01.libertyville.com>
Date:         Thu, 25 Oct 2001 14:31:07 -0500
Reply-To: "Ed Dewey" <edewey@LIBERTYVILLE.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Ed Dewey" <edewey@LIBERTYVILLE.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Requests for comments - NFPA codes
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

-snip


I don't think TRA should be going it alone, and I don't think it
is good to have rival groups fighting in front of the regulatory agencies.
TRA will win in that case. (Nate)

** I think TRA would benefit in many ways from the multiple talents evident
in aRocket members.  But for many individuals --most?--, whether TRA or
amateur types, working together harmoniously would almost certainly be a
problem, and it doesn't take much reflection to figure out why.

Ed






----- Original Message -----
From: "Waysie Atkins" <Waysie_Atkins@VANGUARD.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Thursday, October 25, 2001 11:04 AM
Subject: Re: [AR] Requests for comments - NFPA codes


> snipped from post by Mark Spute:
> <Short of a Federal court decision that it is unconstitutional to
> <incorporate as law by reference only code recommendations drafted
> <without public input, legislative representation, or judicial review as
> <required in the constitution of every state in the union and probably by
> <the charters of most cities and towns, no I can't see any.
>
>
> Thank you for putting this so well.  I've been a bit perplexed since
learning
> that one must purchase these codes (normally when not in review mode)
given that
> they are also adopted as state laws by some states.  Seems to me that once
they
> become state law the state in question must provide copies of those codes
in
> public libraries etc for free public viewing and also required to provide
copies
> at a nominal cost ( to cover actual copying expenses- a few cents a page)
under
> FOIA (Freedom of Information Act).  Also seems as though there should have
been
> public review etc at the time each states adopted the codes as law, course
> that's a mute point now.
>
> Is there a split with HPR manufacturers here?  Some of these codes *seem*
to be
> written to force everyone to do biz with Estes AT, etc.  Not to 'dis them,
or
> blame them, but to know the basis for the language used.  How did people
come up
> with these laws/codes and what type of organized resistance, from others
in
> HPR/model rocketry, will our ideas come up against.  Will Estes types
fight Ex
> types to *insulate* their activities from over reaction that might come
from
> problems stemming from Ex activities.  (Think Jerry might have hinted at
this).
>
> Fixing the problem via this review seems to be the way to go now, but in
my
> limited and humble opinion I think that the lawsuit route *could* be
successful.
> But the up front costs and the slow process could make it very difficult
to
> succeed.
>
>           snipped from post by Jerry Irvine
> <The NFPA does not study anything.  Its technical committee can, but
> <that is still a private cooperative effort.  Nothing even arocket
> <could not do.  Arocket could be the authority having jurisdiction for
> <amateur rocketry for example.
>
> Would we really want to go the route of making ARocket a 'competent
> jurisdiction'.  Seems Arocket is a bit of a loose association of
enthusiasts.
> Would it not need to be more formal to allow this?  And then is everyone
at the
> mercy of this one group for future participation in Ex?  Once again not to
'dis
> anyone, but it ain't freedom if only one person/organization holds all the
> marbles or makes all the rules and defines who can or cannot participate.
> There's a great exchange of ideas and info going on here- its awesome- but
> personal differences could create splits in the future.  And of course
> competition -even friendly- makes for better results.
>
> Some thoughts and questions as we quickly move forward on this.
>
> Respectfully,
>
> Waysie Atkins
>
>
>
> *All comments and ideas expressed are my own, not those of my employer.*

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 14501 invoked from network); 25 Oct 2001 21:09:47 -0000
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 25 Oct 2001 21:09:47 -0000
X-Priority: 3
Received: (qmail 29663 invoked by uid 50005); 25 Oct 2001 19:56:02 -0000
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4165. . Clean. Processed in 0.902689 secs); 25 Oct 2001 19:56:02 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 25 Oct 2001 19:55:59 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA31287; Thu, 25 Oct 2001 14:05:00 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 123373 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 25 Oct 2001 21:04:58          +0000
Received: from m1.jersey.juno.com (m1.jersey.juno.com [64.136.16.64]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA31273 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 25 Oct 2001 14:04:58 -0700
Received: from cookie.juno.com by cookie.juno.com for          <"H3WK6e6N+bsCVJQMHM9sZKogOFEFyhybaxQStV8NxsGW12n6lDS7og==">
Received: (from kc2csh@juno.com) by m1.jersey.juno.com (queuemail) id GJMHUR8E;          Thu, 25 Oct 2001 17:03:29 EDT
X-Mailer: Juno 4.0.11
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Juno-Line-Breaks: 2,5,7,9-12,14-15
X-Juno-Att: 0
X-Juno-RefParts: 0
Message-ID:  <20011025.170818.-3893083.1.kc2csh@juno.com>
Date:         Thu, 25 Oct 2001 16:58:20 -0400
Reply-To: <kc2csh@JUNO.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <kc2csh@JUNO.COM>
Subject:      [AR] Is this a good idea - was  Requests for comments - NFPA codes
Comments: To: 01rocket@GTE.NET
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

  I'm considering proposing and/or commenting that the distinctions
between 1122 and 1127 are artificial, confusing, unsound, and should be
abolished by integrating the 2 into a single, unified, rocketry code.
  The distinction between 1122 and 1127 aplying is generally close to but
slightly different than ATF, CPSC, and FAA distinctions, and that causes
needless confusion.
  Also, 1122 is widely adopted and generally represents the law in most
of the US; 1127 is law almost no place.
  Further, 1127 simply stops at the 2N impulse range; many rockets are
actually larger than that

  Thoughts; comments, suggestions?

  In any revision keep in mind that TRA and NAR reps are members of the
committee, and we are not.  Perhaps that should change!!

      Jay
________________________________________________________________
GET INTERNET ACCESS FROM JUNO!
Juno offers FREE or PREMIUM Internet access for less!
Join Juno today!  For your FREE software, visit:
http://dl.www.juno.com/get/web/.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 18068 invoked from network); 25 Oct 2001 21:10:40 -0000
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 25 Oct 2001 21:10:40 -0000
X-Priority: 3
Received: (qmail 9713 invoked by uid 50005); 25 Oct 2001 21:09:52 -0000
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4164. . Clean. Processed in 0.159608 secs); 25 Oct 2001 21:09:52 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 25 Oct 2001 21:09:51 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA31330; Thu, 25 Oct 2001 14:05:12 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 123387 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 25 Oct 2001 21:05:11          +0000
Received: from m1.jersey.juno.com (m1.jersey.juno.com [64.136.16.64]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA31294 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 25 Oct 2001 14:05:02 -0700
Received: from cookie.juno.com by cookie.juno.com for          <"H3WK6e6N+bsCVJQMHM9sZKogOFEFyhybi3kJu4IfHBWWBvLhmJ8H7w==">
Received: (from kc2csh@juno.com) by m1.jersey.juno.com (queuemail) id GJMHUR7N;          Thu, 25 Oct 2001 17:03:29 EDT
X-Mailer: Juno 4.0.11
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Juno-Line-Breaks: 0,2-3,5-12,14-31
X-Juno-Att: 0
X-Juno-RefParts: 0
Message-ID:  <20011025.170818.-3893083.0.kc2csh@juno.com>
Date:         Thu, 25 Oct 2001 16:52:52 -0400
Reply-To: <kc2csh@JUNO.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <kc2csh@JUNO.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Requests for comments - NFPA codes
Comments: To: 01rocket@GTE.NET
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Jerry:
  Beg to differ.  FAA (sort of) does define amateur rocketry.  Its
anything not
exempt under Pt 101 and not commercial.  See Parts 400 etc. seq.
  That said, its a bad defination for purposes of 1127 because almost
everything
1127 would apply to is within FAA defination of amateur rocketry.

                                    Jay




On Thu, 25 Oct 2001 09:36:04 -0700 Jerry Irvine <01rocket@GTE.NET>
writes:
> >Well I won't argue with that.
> >
> >I just submitted a comment to add a paragraph to NFPA 1127:
> >
> >"1.3.6  This code shall not apply to the following:"
> >That is existing text.  Then there are two paragraphs exempting
> model
> >rockets as defined in NFPA 1122 & firworks rockets, skyrockets, and
> >rockets with sticks as defined in NFPA 1123 & 1126.
> >Then I proposed the addition of:
> >
> >                  "(3) Amateur and Experimental rockets as defined
> >                  by the FAA."
>
>
> FAA does not define them.  It should say as defined by RRS or by PRS
> or by ARS (and re-form ARS).

________________________________________________________________
GET INTERNET ACCESS FROM JUNO!
Juno offers FREE or PREMIUM Internet access for less!
Join Juno today!  For your FREE software, visit:
http://dl.www.juno.com/get/web/.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 9184 invoked from network); 25 Oct 2001 21:23:28 -0000
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 25 Oct 2001 21:23:28 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 19512 invoked by uid 50005); 25 Oct 2001 20:09:43 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4165. . Clean. Processed in 0.181855 secs); 25 Oct 2001 20:09:43 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 25 Oct 2001 20:09:43 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA31150; Thu, 25 Oct 2001 13:53:04 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 123355 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 25 Oct 2001 20:53:00          +0000
Received: from inet03.citec.qld.gov.au (firewall-user@inet03.citec.qld.gov.au          [203.5.10.10]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA31130          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 25 Oct 2001 13:52:58 -0700
Received: by inet03.citec.qld.gov.au; id GAA18701; Fri, 26 Oct 2001 06:52:56          +1000 (EST)
Received: from citec.com.au(pcux.citec.qld.gov.au 147.132.17.12) by          inet03.citec.qld.gov.au via smap (V2.0) id xma018685; Fri, 26 Oct 01          06:52:51 +1000
Received: from CITEC-Message_Server by citec.com.au with Novell_GroupWise; Fri,          26 Oct 2001 06:53:29 +1000
X-Mailer: Novell GroupWise 5.5.4
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by itc.uci.edu id NAA31137
Message-ID:  <sbd90869.064@citec.com.au>
Date:         Fri, 26 Oct 2001 06:53:07 +1000
Reply-To: "Des Bromilow" <Des.Bromilow@CITEC.COM.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Des Bromilow" <Des.Bromilow@CITEC.COM.AU>
Subject:      [AR] recommended launch site dimensions
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Hi,

I know I should know this, but bear with me.

The TRA safety code has the table of launch site sizes on it. ie: for J the dimension is given as 5,280' (1 mile)

is that mile the radius of the site, or the diameter? (documentation isn't really clear)

When we started QRA we were always down in A-D, and then moved into E-G. Our grounds have always been more than adequate, but as we move into HPR, I need to make sure I ask landowners for the right thing.

Thanks,
Des

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 13036 invoked from network); 25 Oct 2001 21:31:56 -0000
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 25 Oct 2001 21:31:56 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 8112 invoked by uid 50005); 25 Oct 2001 21:31:07 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4164. . Clean. Processed in 0.203019 secs); 25 Oct 2001 21:31:07 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 25 Oct 2001 21:31:07 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA31504; Thu, 25 Oct 2001 14:26:07 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 123423 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 25 Oct 2001 21:26:04          +0000
Received: from mail.aros.net (mail.aros.net [207.173.16.20]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA31488 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Thu,          25 Oct 2001 14:26:03 -0700
Received: from biomicro.com ([208.187.122.40]) by mail.aros.net (8.11.6/8.9.3)          with ESMTP id f9PLPwb68171 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Thu, 25 Oct          2001 15:26:00 -0600 (MDT)
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.77 [en] (Win98; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20011025.170818.-3893083.1.kc2csh@juno.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3BD883B6.A13D06D4@biomicro.com>
Date:         Thu, 25 Oct 2001 15:27:18 -0600
Reply-To: "Mark K. Spute" <mks@BIOMICRO.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Mark K. Spute" <mks@BIOMICRO.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Is this a good idea
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

I would think that perhaps a better approach (IMHO) is to once an for
all clearly define the differences between HPR and Am/Ex rocketry.
(Right!  Good luck.)  That way the NFPA, NAR and TRA could keep their
precious codes, but AM/EX would be clearly expempt from them.

How would we define the differences between HPR and Am/Ex.


kc2csh@JUNO.COM wrote:
>
>   I'm considering proposing and/or commenting that the distinctions
> between 1122 and 1127 are artificial, confusing, unsound, and should be
> abolished by integrating the 2 into a single, unified, rocketry code.
>   The distinction between 1122 and 1127 aplying is generally close to but
> slightly different than ATF, CPSC, and FAA distinctions, and that causes
> needless confusion.
>   Also, 1122 is widely adopted and generally represents the law in most
> of the US; 1127 is law almost no place.
>   Further, 1127 simply stops at the 2N impulse range; many rockets are
> actually larger than that
>
>   Thoughts; comments, suggestions?
>
>   In any revision keep in mind that TRA and NAR reps are members of the
> committee, and we are not.  Perhaps that should change!!
>
>       Jay

--
Mark K. Spute
Senior Research Engineer
BioMicro Systems Inc.

KD7IWE,  RRS, hopeful future Stolly owner

"It is difficult to say what is impossible, for the dream of yesterday
is the hope of today and the reality of tomorrow."
     Dr. Robert H. Goddard

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 25475 invoked from network); 25 Oct 2001 21:35:15 -0000
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 25 Oct 2001 21:35:15 -0000
X-Priority: 3
Received: (qmail 22222 invoked by uid 50005); 25 Oct 2001 20:22:05 -0000
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4166. . Clean. Processed in 0.180702 secs); 25 Oct 2001 20:22:05 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 25 Oct 2001 20:22:05 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA31313; Thu, 25 Oct 2001 14:05:06 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 123380 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 25 Oct 2001 21:05:05          +0000
Received: from m1.jersey.juno.com (m1.jersey.juno.com [64.136.16.64]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA31291 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 25 Oct 2001 14:05:01 -0700
Received: from cookie.juno.com by cookie.juno.com for          <"H3WK6e6N+bsCVJQMHM9sZKogOFEFyhybv5tFnTmSyKNkpDx+pul/hQ==">
Received: (from kc2csh@juno.com) by m1.jersey.juno.com (queuemail) id GJMHUR95;          Thu, 25 Oct 2001 17:03:29 EDT
X-Mailer: Juno 4.0.11
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Juno-Line-Breaks: 0-1,3-5,7,9-10,12-15,21-22
X-Juno-Att: 0
X-Juno-RefParts: 0
Message-ID:  <20011025.170818.-3893083.2.kc2csh@juno.com>
Date:         Thu, 25 Oct 2001 17:06:45 -0400
Reply-To: <kc2csh@JUNO.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <kc2csh@JUNO.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Requests for comments - NFPA codes
Comments: To: nhays@ALOHANET.COM
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

On Thu, 25 Oct 2001 12:13:42 -0700 Nathan Hays <nhays@ALOHANET.COM>
writes:
> *Flame suit on*
>
> It seems to me that in the NAR and TRA we have a "stable"
forum/organization
> for working with these regulatory processes.  The problem is that  they
seem
> (emphasizing my lack of inside info) to be biased towards certain
> manufacturers.  Moreover, TRA is only kinda-sorta moving into eX
activities.
> I know many here abhor working with them.
>
>
  And I got it direct from the current NAR president that their official
position is that they will do anything possible to prevent the public
from making rocket motors and that to prohibit use of liquid fuel
rockets.  I was also told that there was no receptivity to considering
any change in that position.  There people are working from a different
adjenda that the members of this list.

        Jay
________________________________________________________________
GET INTERNET ACCESS FROM JUNO!
Juno offers FREE or PREMIUM Internet access for less!
Join Juno today!  For your FREE software, visit:
http://dl.www.juno.com/get/web/.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 25759 invoked from network); 25 Oct 2001 21:35:21 -0000
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 25 Oct 2001 21:35:21 -0000
Received: (qmail 22320 invoked by uid 50005); 25 Oct 2001 20:22:11 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4166. . Clean. Processed in 0.264554 secs); 25 Oct 2001 20:22:11 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 25 Oct 2001 20:22:10 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA31536; Thu, 25 Oct 2001 14:29:06 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 123433 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 25 Oct 2001 21:29:05          +0000
Received: from cablecom.laribay.net (cablecom.laribay.net [66.20.57.4]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA31522 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 25 Oct 2001 14:29:04 -0700
Received: from billbull (dial098.laribay.net [66.20.57.98]) by          cablecom.laribay.net (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id QAA15495 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 25 Oct 2001 16:07:47 -0500 (CDT)          (envelope-from bpbullock@laribay.net)
References:  <85256AF0.00633E36.00@vgi4mail.vanguard.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0D77_01C56B69.53C0A780"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <000e01c15d9c$6bc46940$62391442@billbull>
Date:         Thu, 25 Oct 2001 16:31:13 -0500
Reply-To: "Bill Bullock" <bpbullock@LARIBAY.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Bill Bullock" <bpbullock@LARIBAY.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Requests for comments - NFPA codes
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0D77_01C56B69.53C0A780
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

    Recently a man with the same opinion posted the whole shebang on his =
website and used the same arguments when they hauled him into court for =
theft if memory serves. He lost the primary battle and appeals. Big fine =
and a forced promise to be a good little citizen from now on.
Bill
  ----- Original Message -----=20
  From: Waysie Atkins=20
  To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU=20
  Sent: Thursday, October 25, 2001 1:04 PM
  Subject: Re: [AR] Requests for comments - NFPA codes


  snipped from post by Mark Spute:
  <Short of a Federal court decision that it is unconstitutional to
  <incorporate as law by reference only code recommendations drafted
  <without public input, legislative representation, or judicial review =
as
  <required in the constitution of every state in the union and probably =
by
  <the charters of most cities and towns, no I can't see any.
  Some thoughts and questions as we quickly move forward on this.
  (Lots deleted)
  Respectfully,

  Waysie Atkins



  *All comments and ideas expressed are my own, not those of my =
employer.*



------=_NextPart_000_0D77_01C56B69.53C0A780
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META content=3D"text/html; charset=3Diso-8859-1" =
http-equiv=3DContent-Type>
<META content=3D"MSHTML 5.00.2614.3500" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Recently a man with the same opinion posted the =
whole=20
shebang on his website and used the same arguments when they hauled him =
into=20
court for theft if memory serves. He lost the primary battle and =
appeals. Big=20
fine and a forced promise to be a good little citizen from now on.</DIV>
<DIV>Bill</DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE=20
style=3D"BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: =
0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; PADDING-RIGHT: 0px">
  <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial">----- Original Message ----- </DIV>
  <DIV=20
  style=3D"BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; FONT: 10pt arial; font-color: =
black"><B>From:</B>=20
  <A href=3D"mailto:Waysie_Atkins@VANGUARD.COM"=20
  title=3DWaysie_Atkins@VANGUARD.COM>Waysie Atkins</A> </DIV>
  <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A =
href=3D"mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU"=20
  title=3DAROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU</A> </DIV>
  <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> Thursday, October 25, =
2001 1:04=20
  PM</DIV>
  <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> Re: [AR] Requests for =
comments -=20
  NFPA codes</DIV>
  <DIV><BR></DIV>snipped from post by Mark Spute:<BR>&lt;Short of a =
Federal=20
  court decision that it is unconstitutional to<BR>&lt;incorporate as =
law by=20
  reference only code recommendations drafted<BR>&lt;without public =
input,=20
  legislative representation, or judicial review as<BR>&lt;required in =
the=20
  constitution of every state in the union and probably by<BR>&lt;the =
charters=20
  of most cities and towns, no I can't see any.<BR>Some thoughts and =
questions=20
  as we quickly move forward on this.<BR>(Lots=20
  deleted)<BR>Respectfully,<BR><BR>Waysie Atkins<BR><BR><BR><BR>*All =
comments=20
  and ideas expressed are my own, not those of my=20
employer.*<BR><BR></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0D77_01C56B69.53C0A780--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 5186 invoked from network); 25 Oct 2001 21:45:51 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 25 Oct 2001 21:45:51 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: (qmail 6314 invoked by uid 50005); 25 Oct 2001 20:32:40 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4166. . Clean. Processed in 0.364759 secs); 25 Oct 2001 20:32:40 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 25 Oct 2001 20:32:40 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA31670; Thu, 25 Oct 2001 14:40:01 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 123460 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 25 Oct 2001 21:39:59          +0000
Received: from VOLSB01.libertyville.com (216-180-161-058.fsi.net          [216.180.161.58] (may be forged)) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with          ESMTP id OAA31651 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 25 Oct 2001          14:39:58 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Message-ID:  <8241D5C473414F48B12A866EBBBF182A9849@VOLSB01.libertyville.com>
Date:         Thu, 25 Oct 2001 16:37:28 -0500
Reply-To: "Ed Dewey" <edewey@LIBERTYVILLE.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Ed Dewey" <edewey@LIBERTYVILLE.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Is this a good idea
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Well I would think the key difference is using a motor that is commercially
manufactured, vs. privately constructed.  After that, a lot of the material
could be the same, except for safety issues.

Ed

-----Original Message-----
From: Mark K. Spute [mailto:mks@BIOMICRO.COM]
Sent: Thursday, October 25, 2001 4:27 PM
To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
Subject: Re: [AR] Is this a good idea


I would think that perhaps a better approach (IMHO) is to once an for
all clearly define the differences between HPR and Am/Ex rocketry.
(Right!  Good luck.)  That way the NFPA, NAR and TRA could keep their
precious codes, but AM/EX would be clearly expempt from them.

How would we define the differences between HPR and Am/Ex.


kc2csh@JUNO.COM wrote:
>
>   I'm considering proposing and/or commenting that the distinctions
> between 1122 and 1127 are artificial, confusing, unsound, and should be
> abolished by integrating the 2 into a single, unified, rocketry code.
>   The distinction between 1122 and 1127 aplying is generally close to but
> slightly different than ATF, CPSC, and FAA distinctions, and that causes
> needless confusion.
>   Also, 1122 is widely adopted and generally represents the law in most
> of the US; 1127 is law almost no place.
>   Further, 1127 simply stops at the 2N impulse range; many rockets are
> actually larger than that
>
>   Thoughts; comments, suggestions?
>
>   In any revision keep in mind that TRA and NAR reps are members of the
> committee, and we are not.  Perhaps that should change!!
>
>       Jay

--
Mark K. Spute
Senior Research Engineer
BioMicro Systems Inc.

KD7IWE,  RRS, hopeful future Stolly owner

"It is difficult to say what is impossible, for the dream of yesterday
is the hope of today and the reality of tomorrow."
     Dr. Robert H. Goddard

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 11261 invoked from network); 25 Oct 2001 21:54:42 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 25 Oct 2001 21:54:42 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 3432 invoked by uid 50005); 25 Oct 2001 21:47:05 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4166. . Clean. Processed in 0.498608 secs); 25 Oct 2001 21:47:05 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 25 Oct 2001 21:47:04 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA31712; Thu, 25 Oct 2001 14:40:51 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 123468 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 25 Oct 2001 21:40:50          +0000
Received: from smtp005pub.verizon.net (smtp005pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.184])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA31698 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 25 Oct 2001 14:40:50 -0700
Received: from [63.24.225.78] (1Cust197.tnt2.rancho-cucamonga.ca.da.uu.net          [63.15.225.197]) by smtp005pub.verizon.net  with ESMTP for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; id f9PLeIW10260 Thu, 25 Oct 2001 16:40:18          -0500 (CDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: GTE/01rocket@mail.gte.net
References: <20011025.170818.-3893083.1.kc2csh@juno.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <a0510030fb7fe36ecc9eb@[63.24.225.78]>
Date:         Thu, 25 Oct 2001 14:42:21 -0700
Reply-To: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Is this a good idea - was  Requests for comments - NFPA              codes
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <20011025.170818.-3893083.1.kc2csh@juno.com>

>   I'm considering proposing and/or commenting that the distinctions
>between 1122 and 1127 are artificial, confusing, unsound, and should be
>abolished by integrating the 2 into a single, unified, rocketry code.
>   The distinction between 1122 and 1127 aplying is generally close to but
>slightly different than ATF, CPSC, and FAA distinctions, and that causes
>needless confusion.


The Estes lobby (including NAR, Quest) INSISTS that model rocketry be
distinct from all other forms of rocketry.

The solution therefore is to abolish 1127 altogether, state that
rockets above model rocketry are exempt from regulation so long as
users follow set forth by NAR or ARA (fictitious name added to imply
arocket is there).  Then any activity allowed by internal club fiat
is legal under the LAW.  This is common practice in other industries
and how NFPA got the idea to do what it does in the first place.  It
just does it with a particular stamp of credibility that alot of
groups have aligned with since.

Jerry

>   Also, 1122 is widely adopted and generally represents the law in most
>of the US; 1127 is law almost no place.
>   Further, 1127 simply stops at the 2N impulse range; many rockets are
>actually larger than that
>
>   Thoughts; comments, suggestions?
>
>   In any revision keep in mind that TRA and NAR reps are members of the
>committee, and we are not.  Perhaps that should change!!
>
>       Jay
>________________________________________________________________
>GET INTERNET ACCESS FROM JUNO!
>Juno offers FREE or PREMIUM Internet access for less!
>Join Juno today!  For your FREE software, visit:
>http://dl.www.juno.com/get/web/.


--
Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
Opinion, the whole thing.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 28893 invoked from network); 25 Oct 2001 22:05:47 -0000
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 25 Oct 2001 22:05:47 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 32490 invoked by uid 50005); 25 Oct 2001 22:04:58 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4164. . Clean. Processed in 0.213887 secs); 25 Oct 2001 22:04:58 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 25 Oct 2001 22:04:58 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA32028; Thu, 25 Oct 2001 14:59:10 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 123530 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 25 Oct 2001 21:59:07          +0000
Received: from mail.aros.net (mail.aros.net [207.173.16.20]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA32014 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Thu,          25 Oct 2001 14:59:06 -0700
Received: from biomicro.com ([208.187.122.40]) by mail.aros.net (8.11.6/8.9.3)          with ESMTP id f9PLx6b92983 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Thu, 25 Oct          2001 15:59:06 -0600 (MDT)
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.77 [en] (Win98; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <8241D5C473414F48B12A866EBBBF182A9849@VOLSB01.libertyville.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3BD88B79.5E54FA5F@biomicro.com>
Date:         Thu, 25 Oct 2001 16:00:25 -0600
Reply-To: "Mark K. Spute" <mks@BIOMICRO.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Mark K. Spute" <mks@BIOMICRO.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Is this a good idea
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Not necessarily.  Eric Claypool (or was it Tom Mueller?) used a
commercially manufactured Atlas Vernier engine on one of his liquid
bi-props.  Clearly not HPR, but would be under that definition.

What we need is a matrix of characteristics of Model, HPR, Amateur and
Experimental rockets.  Compare them and see what characteristics define
them.

I'll Start:             Model           HPR             Am              Ex

Total Impulse:          <160Ns      160 to 40.96KNs     any             any
Propellants:       BP, Composite(?) Hyb, Composite(?)   any             any
Building Matls: paper, plastic      Paper, plastic,     any             any
                                    FG, ductile metals
Ballistic Coeff:        (Maybe not a good classifier)
Weight:


What else?

Give me some data points and I'll put together a spreadsheet.



Ed Dewey wrote:
>
> Well I would think the key difference is using a motor that is commercially
> manufactured, vs. privately constructed.  After that, a lot of the material
> could be the same, except for safety issues.
>
> Ed
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Mark K. Spute [mailto:mks@BIOMICRO.COM]
> Sent: Thursday, October 25, 2001 4:27 PM
> To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
> Subject: Re: [AR] Is this a good idea
>
> I would think that perhaps a better approach (IMHO) is to once an for
> all clearly define the differences between HPR and Am/Ex rocketry.
> (Right!  Good luck.)  That way the NFPA, NAR and TRA could keep their
> precious codes, but AM/EX would be clearly expempt from them.
>
> How would we define the differences between HPR and Am/Ex.

--
Mark K. Spute
Senior Research Engineer
BioMicro Systems Inc.

KD7IWE,  RRS, hopeful future Stolly owner

"It is difficult to say what is impossible, for the dream of yesterday
is the hope of today and the reality of tomorrow."
     Dr. Robert H. Goddard

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 13084 invoked from network); 25 Oct 2001 22:08:42 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 25 Oct 2001 22:08:42 -0000
Received: (qmail 5232 invoked by uid 50005); 25 Oct 2001 22:07:53 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4164. . Clean. Processed in 0.211095 secs); 25 Oct 2001 22:07:53 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 25 Oct 2001 22:07:53 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA31366; Thu, 25 Oct 2001 14:08:37 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 123398 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 25 Oct 2001 21:08:35          +0000
Received: from localhost (dmccue@localhost) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with          ESMTP id OAA31352; Thu, 25 Oct 2001 14:08:33 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.LNX.4.10.10110251332200.28532-100000@itc.uci.edu>
Date:         Thu, 25 Oct 2001 14:08:33 -0700
Reply-To: "David J. McCue" <dmccue@itc.uci.edu>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "David J. McCue" <dmccue@itc.uci.edu>
Subject:      Re: [AR] NFPA 1127
Comments: To: jmrosson@earthlink.net
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <NEBBLMGNCMMGBANIEOEHEEECCKAA.jmrosson@earthlink.net>

I did not mean to advocate abandoning the NFPA process, just that the time
to act on this cycle of the revision has passed. I fully intend to
participate over the long run, but think the next venue for action is at
the level of the state legislatures.

I think that the NFPA committee process can yield some good, but it will
be difficult. Interesting to note is the fact that Tripoli allows
experimental motor launches, yet the language in 1127 seems to prohibit it
completely.

How do people interpret the following from the proposed 2002 edition?

>From NFPA 1127 Chapter 6

"6.1 Prohibited acts. The following activities shall be prohibited by this
code:"

[several items skipped]

"(5) Making, operating, launching, flying, testing, activating,
discharging, or otherwise experimenting with high power rocket motors,
motor reloading kits, or pyrotechnic modules that have not been certified
in accordance with NFPA 1125, other than for the purpose of evaluation of
new high power rocket motor technology by a recognized national user
organization or an authority having jurisdiction, provided that all other
requirements of this code are met and all activities are in accordance
with applicable laws, regulations, and ordinances."

Does this mean that the organisation may make motors, as part of a
reaserch program for example, or may individual members make motors?
I take it to mean that only the organization is permitted to do so.

-Dave McCue

PS. A rereading of my original post shows that I committed a bonehead
error by removing the ironic smiley when I edited the part about the new
version have the changes we want in it. Can't proof my own work...

On Thu, 25 Oct 2001 jmrosson@earthlink.net wrote:

> I disagree, they are other ways to comment on the NFPA guidelines.  The
> rocketry side of the NFPA is very accessible, if you know how!
>
> IF ANYONE wants to provide valid and useful comments to the NFPA rocketry
> guidelines, it can ALWAYS be accomplished!  The public comment period is for
> any individual regardless of affiliation to provide comments.  Outside of
> the public comment period, it's more difficult to get officially recognized,
> and have the NFPA sub-committee be force to act, but it can be accomplished.
> You also have to consider that the documents are under a 2-3 year revision
> cycle.  Comments made outside of the regular public period may take awhile
> to get reviewed and included.
>
> If you are a member of NAR or Tripoli, you can provide written (not email,
> but a real letter) to the organizations NFPA representative for discussion
> at the next NFPA meeting.  You can also make a request directly to the
> committee chair (or all committee members) to present your case directly at
> the next NFPA meeting.  The head of the rocket sub committee is Pat Miller
> (NAR).  Other primary members include; Bruce Kelly (TRA), Vern Estes, as
> well as 1 voting representative from Aerotech, Estes, Quest Rocketry, and
> the ATF.  The process is very bureaucratic, BUT Rocketeers write and shape
> 1127, 1125, & 1122.  If you want a change something, contact one or several
> representatives, don't just complain here!
>
> Having participated in changing an evil provision last year, by presenting
> material directly to the Rocket and Pyro sub-committees, I can provide
> detailed insight to anyone with a serious interest in making changes.  It's
> not hard, just time consuming.
>
> Best Regards....
>
> #->-----Original Message-----
> #->From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@itc.uci.edu]On
> #->Behalf Of Dave McCue
> #->Sent: Thursday, October 25, 2001 9:55 AM
> #->To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
> #->Subject: NFPA 1127
> #->
> #->
> #->Folks, I think there is some confusion here. According to the webpage
> #->referenced below, the deadline for comments ended on 5 October 2001.
> #->
> #->http://www.nfpa.org/Codes/NFPA_Codes_and_Standards/List_of_NFPA_d
> #->ocuments/NF
> #->PA_1127.asp
> #->
> #->And, if you look at the proposed changes to 1127 made by the responsible
> #->committee, many changes we would like to see are planned for
> #->adoption in the
> #->2002 revision.
> #->
> #->The prospective code for 2002, with changes and rationale is at:
> #->
> #->http://www.nfpa.org/codesonline/nfc.asp?path=NFPA/ROPROC/nfpa1000
> #->-1499/1127/
> #->1127-02-rop.pdf
> #->
> #->More to the point, I don't see what we could do at this late date anyhow,
> #->since the deadline for commants has passed. I think the next forum for
> #->change will be in the individual state legislatures.
> #->
> #->-Dave McCue
> #->
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 23732 invoked from network); 25 Oct 2001 22:10:45 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 25 Oct 2001 22:10:45 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 14822 invoked by uid 50005); 25 Oct 2001 20:57:34 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4166. . Clean. Processed in 0.210631 secs); 25 Oct 2001 20:57:34 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 25 Oct 2001 20:57:34 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA31889; Thu, 25 Oct 2001 14:48:25 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 123500 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 25 Oct 2001 21:48:24          +0000
Received: from smtppop1pub.verizon.net (smtppop1pub.gte.net [206.46.170.20]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA31875 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 25 Oct 2001 14:48:23 -0700
Received: from [63.24.225.78] (1Cust197.tnt2.rancho-cucamonga.ca.da.uu.net          [63.15.225.197]) by smtppop1pub.verizon.net  with ESMTP for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; id QAA30895435 Thu, 25 Oct 2001 16:47:02 -0500          (CDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: GTE/01rocket@mail.gte.net
References: <20011025.170818.-3893083.1.kc2csh@juno.com>            <3BD883B6.A13D06D4@biomicro.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <a05100310b7fe38150f9f@[63.24.225.78]>
Date:         Thu, 25 Oct 2001 14:49:55 -0700
Reply-To: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Is this a good idea
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <3BD883B6.A13D06D4@biomicro.com>

>I would think that perhaps a better approach (IMHO) is to once an for
>all clearly define the differences between HPR and Am/Ex rocketry.
>(Right!  Good luck.)  That way the NFPA, NAR and TRA could keep their
>precious codes, but AM/EX would be clearly expempt from them.
>
>How would we define the differences between HPR and Am/Ex.


The current definition:

Model rocketry
under 1500g total mass
under 125g propellant mass
follow the dafety code
motors certified by AHJ (currently TRA/NAR, but open to new)
follow CSPC guidelines (80N peak thrust, over 18 to buy certain motors)
Follow defunct DOT-E-7887 62.5g max per propellant unit, thus motor

HPR
anything that does not meet those limits in any way and
follow the HPR safety code
motors certified by AHJ (currently TRA/NAR, but open to new)
consumer certification levels

Am/EX
anything that does not meet those limits in any way
and is non-commercial

Commercial
anything that does not meet those limits in any way
and has a compensation element

Destructive device
anything outside of that

Please correct me if I am wrong or vague.

Jerry


>
>
>kc2csh@JUNO.COM wrote:
>>
>>    I'm considering proposing and/or commenting that the distinctions
>>  between 1122 and 1127 are artificial, confusing, unsound, and should be
>>  abolished by integrating the 2 into a single, unified, rocketry code.
>>    The distinction between 1122 and 1127 aplying is generally close to but
>>  slightly different than ATF, CPSC, and FAA distinctions, and that causes
>>  needless confusion.
>>    Also, 1122 is widely adopted and generally represents the law in most
>>  of the US; 1127 is law almost no place.
>>    Further, 1127 simply stops at the 2N impulse range; many rockets are
>>  actually larger than that
>>
>>    Thoughts; comments, suggestions?
>>
>>    In any revision keep in mind that TRA and NAR reps are members of the
>>  committee, and we are not.  Perhaps that should change!!
>>
>>        Jay
>
>--
>Mark K. Spute
>Senior Research Engineer
>BioMicro Systems Inc.
>
>KD7IWE,  RRS, hopeful future Stolly owner
>
>"It is difficult to say what is impossible, for the dream of yesterday
>is the hope of today and the reality of tomorrow."
>      Dr. Robert H. Goddard


--
Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
Opinion, the whole thing.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 19927 invoked from network); 25 Oct 2001 22:31:56 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 25 Oct 2001 22:31:56 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 11601 invoked by uid 50005); 25 Oct 2001 22:31:07 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4164. . Clean. Processed in 0.17352 secs); 25 Oct 2001 22:31:07 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 25 Oct 2001 22:31:07 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA31957; Thu, 25 Oct 2001 14:53:54 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 123513 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 25 Oct 2001 21:53:45          +0000
Received: from bailey.dscga.com (bailey.dscga.com [198.78.9.11]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA31943 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu,          25 Oct 2001 14:53:43 -0700
Received: from bailey.dscga.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by bailey.dscga.com          (8.12.1/8.12.1) with ESMTP id f9PLoDlc004735; Thu, 25 Oct 2001          17:50:13 -0400 (EDT)
Received: (from michael@localhost) by bailey.dscga.com (8.12.1/8.12.1/Submit)          id f9PLoC5l004734; Thu, 25 Oct 2001 17:50:12 -0400 (EDT)
References: <20011025.170818.-3893083.1.kc2csh@juno.com>            <a0510030fb7fe36ecc9eb@[63.24.225.78]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Disposition: inline
User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.22.1i
Message-ID:  <20011025175012.Q2873@bailey.dscga.com>
Date:         Thu, 25 Oct 2001 17:50:12 -0400
Reply-To: "Michael Mealling" <michael@NEONYM.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Michael Mealling" <michael@NEONYM.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Is this a good idea - was  Requests for comments - NFPA              codes
Comments: To: Jerry Irvine <01rocket@GTE.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <a0510030fb7fe36ecc9eb@[63.24.225.78]>

On Thu, Oct 25, 2001 at 02:42:21PM -0700, Jerry Irvine wrote:
> >  I'm considering proposing and/or commenting that the distinctions
> >between 1122 and 1127 are artificial, confusing, unsound, and should be
> >abolished by integrating the 2 into a single, unified, rocketry code.
> >  The distinction between 1122 and 1127 aplying is generally close to but
> >slightly different than ATF, CPSC, and FAA distinctions, and that causes
> >needless confusion.
>
>
> The Estes lobby (including NAR, Quest) INSISTS that model rocketry be
> distinct from all other forms of rocketry.
>
> The solution therefore is to abolish 1127 altogether, state that
> rockets above model rocketry are exempt from regulation so long as
> users follow set forth by NAR or ARA (fictitious name added to imply
> arocket is there).  Then any activity allowed by internal club fiat
> is legal under the LAW.  This is common practice in other industries
> and how NFPA got the idea to do what it does in the first place.  It
> just does it with a particular stamp of credibility that alot of
> groups have aligned with since.

One thing this group could really do is take what Jerry just said
and turn it into legislative language so that those in each state
can take it to their legislators for approval. I've done some lobbying
in the past and as long as you can show good reasons to do it and show
at least one state that has done it without being turned into a smoking
hole in the ground they will generally go for it. State legislatures
are full of people who are willing to do something like this in order to
look technology friendly. You just have to do their legwork for them by
having the proposed legislation already written...

-MM

--
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Michael Mealling        |      Vote Libertarian!       | urn:pin:1
michael@neonym.net      |                              | http://www.neonym.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 8520 invoked from network); 26 Oct 2001 00:30:15 -0000
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 26 Oct 2001 00:30:15 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 4631 invoked by uid 50005); 25 Oct 2001 23:17:04 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4166. . Clean. Processed in 1.494068 secs); 25 Oct 2001 23:17:04 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 25 Oct 2001 23:17:01 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA00363; Thu, 25 Oct 2001 17:22:53 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 123580 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 26 Oct 2001 00:22:16          +0000
Received: from izzy6.izzy.net (izzy6.izzy.net [207.158.132.178]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA00346 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu,          25 Oct 2001 17:22:16 -0700
Received: from izzy.net (annex-0-9-port-5.dialup.coast.net [207.158.169.69]) by          izzy6.izzy.net (8.9.2/8.9.3) with ESMTP id UAA16563 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 25 Oct 2001 20:22:13 -0400 (EDT)
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (Win95; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <Pine.LNX.4.10.10110251332200.28532-100000@itc.uci.edu>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3BD8AD2A.F007103F@izzy.net>
Date:         Thu, 25 Oct 2001 20:24:10 -0400
Reply-To: <cscholl@izzy.net>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Curtis Scholl" <cscholl@izzy.net>
Subject:      Re: [AR] NFPA 1127 comments
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Hi All:

   Here in Michigan, where code is King, the NFPA 1122/1125 are
incorporated into the Michigan Compiled Laws. In Order for the 1127 to
even be considered it will have to go to the legislators so in reality
HPR is illegal by the LETTER of the law. (shhhhhhh, I launched an L2
rocket in Michigan). In it's current mode draft NFPA 1127 would prohibit
amateur activities unless the amateur is a licensed businessman involved
in research. Or someone like Commonwealth Displays which is a business.

   In the scope and purpose 1.2.3 the code states the purpose "to
discourage experimentation and minimize death and injury" by those
experimenting with "energetic materials". They don't define an energetic
material that is usable therefore all energetic materials will be
suspect. Zn/S being more or less the bad boy while AP composites are
less a bad boy.

   In the body of the text part 1.3.3 relegates any experimentation to
an "individual, partnership, corporation....as a licensed business
engaged in research, etc. ". So, if you want to experiment you have to
be a licensed business. I find this totally outrageous. What purpose
does it serve to have to be in business for a once in a while or
seasonal item.

   Both of these are totally discriminatory  against the amateur
operator. This code WILL be included and not much debate will take place
if the Michigan Legislators get it to include in the current Michigan
compiled Laws. ( Not that anyone in the legislature is focused on it).

   What I propose is that the NFPA-1127 include a section that states it
does not apply to those who chose to be experimenters and amateur motor
makers. HPR is not amateur rocketry and should not impose it's version
of life upon the Amateur Community through this kind of code that by
reference or legislation gets placed verbatim into law.

   Barring that, to change it we amateurs need get a spot  in the NFPA
and create an NFPA 11XX- Code for Amateur and Experimental Rocketry.
California has it laid down quite well. Why not cut it up to fit our use
as an NFPA guideline set?


   I for one am tired of being one step away from being illegal in my
activities by having a body such as NFPA being so business oriented and
guaranteeing future business for the members of the committees. People
such as Gary Rosenfeld, Vern Estes (I know he sold it, but..) and the
others related to the Pyro committee. Yes, they want to save the
children and certain teenagers, but they need to realize the magnitude
of the effect they will have. I should not have to be in business to
enjoy a hobby I like. I want to fly my motors someday.

Curtis Scholl
TRA 3976
NAR 72953
Reaction Research Society Associate Member

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 4005 invoked from network); 26 Oct 2001 01:05:35 -0000
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 26 Oct 2001 01:05:35 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 2948 invoked by uid 50005); 25 Oct 2001 23:52:24 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4166. . Clean. Processed in 0.166146 secs); 25 Oct 2001 23:52:24 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 25 Oct 2001 23:52:23 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA00551; Thu, 25 Oct 2001 17:42:34 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 123596 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 26 Oct 2001 00:42:31          +0000
Received: from izzy6.izzy.net (izzy6.izzy.net [207.158.132.178]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA00537 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu,          25 Oct 2001 17:42:31 -0700
Received: from izzy.net (annex-0-9-port-5.dialup.coast.net [207.158.169.69]) by          izzy6.izzy.net (8.9.2/8.9.3) with ESMTP id UAA17317; Thu, 25 Oct 2001          20:42:27 -0400 (EDT)
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (Win95; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20011025.170818.-3893083.1.kc2csh@juno.com>            <3BD883B6.A13D06D4@biomicro.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3BD8B1E8.A2D99227@izzy.net>
Date:         Thu, 25 Oct 2001 20:44:24 -0400
Reply-To: <cscholl@izzy.net>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Curtis Scholl" <cscholl@izzy.net>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Is this a good idea
Comments: To: "Mark K. Spute" <mks@BIOMICRO.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Hi All:

   In response to the question raised by Mark ( see below) I came up
with a comparison.
I accept all criticism.


HPR


1. HPR is a larger scale CONSUMER activity and all of the supposed
"safety aspects" of manufacturing a motor are taken care of by the motor
manufacturer. The manufacturer has taken all the risk to provide a
product that will be relatively safe to use for competent consumers.

2. HPR is a larger scale MODEL BUILDING activity and all of the "safety
aspects" of manufacturing a HPR rocket are taken care of by the builder
by using such lightweight and non metallic materials as they can safely
get by with.

3. HPR designs rockets around existing motors. When that dries up, no
more HPR.

AMATEUR

1. Is an Scientific trial experimental activity with the safety
considerations being on the experimenter's shoulders. The materials used
in the making of a motor have to be carefully and thoroughly researched.

2. The Rocket itself is made of whatever material suits the mission. If
that means Stainless Steel pressure vessels for steam rockets then that
is what is used.

3. The motor is designed to suit the mission. Or if the motor has been
characterized, the rocket can
be designed around the motor. We have the choice because we weighed all
of the factors ourselves.
AND we don't have to depend on a certain supplier or suppliers. We make
motors out of whatever WORKS!



Curtis Scholl
cscholl@izzy.net

TRA 3976
NAR 72953
RRS Associate Member









"Mark K. Spute" wrote:
>
> I would think that perhaps a better approach (IMHO) is to once an for
> all clearly define the differences between HPR and Am/Ex rocketry.
> (Right!  Good luck.)  That way the NFPA, NAR and TRA could keep their
> precious codes, but AM/EX would be clearly expempt from them.
>
> How would we define the differences between HPR and Am/Ex.
>
> kc2csh@JUNO.COM wrote:
> >
> >   I'm considering proposing and/or commenting that the distinctions
> > between 1122 and 1127 are artificial, confusing, unsound, and should be
> > abolished by integrating the 2 into a single, unified, rocketry code.
> >   The distinction between 1122 and 1127 aplying is generally close to but
> > slightly different than ATF, CPSC, and FAA distinctions, and that causes
> > needless confusion.
> >   Also, 1122 is widely adopted and generally represents the law in most
> > of the US; 1127 is law almost no place.
> >   Further, 1127 simply stops at the 2N impulse range; many rockets are
> > actually larger than that
> >
> >   Thoughts; comments, suggestions?
> >
> >   In any revision keep in mind that TRA and NAR reps are members of the
> > committee, and we are not.  Perhaps that should change!!
> >
> >       Jay
>
> --
> Mark K. Spute
> Senior Research Engineer
> BioMicro Systems Inc.
>
> KD7IWE,  RRS, hopeful future Stolly owner
>
> "It is difficult to say what is impossible, for the dream of yesterday
> is the hope of today and the reality of tomorrow."
>      Dr. Robert H. Goddard

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 19467 invoked from network); 26 Oct 2001 01:08:50 -0000
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 26 Oct 2001 01:08:50 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 23964 invoked by uid 50005); 25 Oct 2001 23:55:04 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4165. . Clean. Processed in 1.74118 secs); 25 Oct 2001 23:55:04 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 25 Oct 2001 23:55:00 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA00789; Thu, 25 Oct 2001 18:02:32 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 123607 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 26 Oct 2001 01:02:30          +0000
Received: from iridium.carolina.net ([208.170.147.165]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA00775 for <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Thu,          25 Oct 2001 18:02:30 -0700
Received: from ac.net (ip210-as5300-1-7lakes-nc.carolina.net [206.100.51.210])          by iridium.carolina.net (Vircom SMTPRS 5.1.195) with ESMTP id          <B0004213063@iridium.carolina.net>; Thu, 25 Oct 2001 21:13:45 -0400
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en]C-CCK-MCD EBM-Compaq  (Win95; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20011025.170818.-3893083.2.kc2csh@juno.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3BD8B621.6F3EBAC5@ac.net>
Date:         Thu, 25 Oct 2001 21:02:25 -0400
Reply-To: "Bill Shamblin" <wshamblin@AC.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Bill Shamblin" <wshamblin@AC.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Requests for comments - NFPA codes
Comments: To: kc2csh@JUNO.COM
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

I warned about that some time ago (probably with some loss of face ;^} ).
TRA, on the other hand, seems to me to be very EX friendly. Liquid biprops
excepted, of course, but then, perhaps it should be realized that progress
should be achieved in steps... There is a practical political process known
as "nibbling", based on the concept of "legal precedence". I'm no lawyer, my
experience is based on dealing with local zoning laws, but maybe someone on
the list has the background to expand on the subject?
Bill (just trying to "brainstorm") Shamblin TRA#07455 L2

kc2csh@JUNO.COM wrote:

>   And I got it direct from the current NAR president that their official
> position is that they will do anything possible to prevent the public
> from making rocket motors and that to prohibit use of liquid fuel
> rockets.  I was also told that there was no receptivity to considering
> any change in that position.  There people are working from a different
> adjenda that the members of this list.
>
>         Jay

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 26940 invoked from network); 26 Oct 2001 01:10:24 -0000
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 26 Oct 2001 01:10:24 -0000
Received: (qmail 4083 invoked by uid 50005); 26 Oct 2001 01:09:36 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4164. . Clean. Processed in 0.254039 secs); 26 Oct 2001 01:09:36 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 26 Oct 2001 01:09:35 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA00814; Thu, 25 Oct 2001 18:04:37 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 123614 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 26 Oct 2001 01:04:36          +0000
Received: from angel.comcen.com.au (angel.comcen.com.au [203.23.236.69]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA00800 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 25 Oct 2001 18:04:35 -0700
Received: from win2pk2 (modem019.sydney.spin.net.au [202.172.123.19] (may be          forged)) by angel.comcen.com.au (8.11.4/8.10.1) with SMTP id          f9Q14Va16934 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 26 Oct 2001 11:04:32          +1000 (EST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
Importance: Normal
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <JJEFLLHFFAHHMBBIHFAEMEKMCHAA.pkelly@comcen.com.au>
Date:         Fri, 26 Oct 2001 11:05:52 +1000
Reply-To: "Paul Kelly" <pkelly@COMCEN.COM.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Paul Kelly" <pkelly@COMCEN.COM.AU>
Subject:      [AR] Regulations, my 2c worth.
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <3BD8AD2A.F007103F@izzy.net>

IMHO If you have a piece of legislation who's stated purpose (which may or
may not be different from it's intended purpose) is to prevent injury and
mishap. Then you are pushing S*&T uphill trying to convince the regulator
that amateur rocketry should be less regulated than HPR. Am/Ex is inherently
more dangerous than HPR. We have more crashes, more cato's, and a higher
injury rate. These are indisputable facts. To say that Am/Ex rocketry should
be allowed to self regulate like other areas are implies the existence of
the ability to do so? There is no amateur rocketry organisation recognised
by suppliers of oxidisers. Where as if you get your L2 ticket taken off you,
you are gonna have some trouble buying an Ameritech reload.
The very act of regulating an individuals access to the means of producing
pyrotechnic compositions by the beurocracy or any one else conjures
emotional responses in us all.

So what do we do?
I have no silver bullet. But in my experience the clear and obvious
distinction we make between mod/hpr/amateur is nowhere near as clear in the
minds of the regulators. Most of the officials I've dealt with just see guys
flying rockets. I'm fortunate enough to represent the interests of both the
amateur, model and hpr groups in my state and was able to present a
coordinated case for them as a whole. Even then, it was a tedious process,
one that was begun two generations of club executive back, and one that
continues to this day. I say that we need to stop factionalising and work as
a group of guys who fly rockets. because that is how we are often perceived.


PK

-----Original Message-----
From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU]On
Behalf Of Curtis Scholl
Sent: Friday, 26 October 2001 10:24 AM
To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
Subject: Re: [AR] NFPA 1127 comments


Hi All:

   Here in Michigan, where code is King, the NFPA 1122/1125 are
incorporated into the Michigan Compiled Laws. In Order for the 1127 to
even be considered it will have to go to the legislators so in reality
HPR is illegal by the LETTER of the law. (shhhhhhh, I launched an L2
rocket in Michigan). In it's current mode draft NFPA 1127 would prohibit
amateur activities unless the amateur is a licensed businessman involved
in research. Or someone like Commonwealth Displays which is a business.

   In the scope and purpose 1.2.3 the code states the purpose "to
discourage experimentation and minimize death and injury" by those
experimenting with "energetic materials". They don't define an energetic
material that is usable therefore all energetic materials will be
suspect. Zn/S being more or less the bad boy while AP composites are
less a bad boy.

   In the body of the text part 1.3.3 relegates any experimentation to
an "individual, partnership, corporation....as a licensed business
engaged in research, etc. ". So, if you want to experiment you have to
be a licensed business. I find this totally outrageous. What purpose
does it serve to have to be in business for a once in a while or
seasonal item.

   Both of these are totally discriminatory  against the amateur
operator. This code WILL be included and not much debate will take place
if the Michigan Legislators get it to include in the current Michigan
compiled Laws. ( Not that anyone in the legislature is focused on it).

   What I propose is that the NFPA-1127 include a section that states it
does not apply to those who chose to be experimenters and amateur motor
makers. HPR is not amateur rocketry and should not impose it's version
of life upon the Amateur Community through this kind of code that by
reference or legislation gets placed verbatim into law.

   Barring that, to change it we amateurs need get a spot  in the NFPA
and create an NFPA 11XX- Code for Amateur and Experimental Rocketry.
California has it laid down quite well. Why not cut it up to fit our use
as an NFPA guideline set?


   I for one am tired of being one step away from being illegal in my
activities by having a body such as NFPA being so business oriented and
guaranteeing future business for the members of the committees. People
such as Gary Rosenfeld, Vern Estes (I know he sold it, but..) and the
others related to the Pyro committee. Yes, they want to save the
children and certain teenagers, but they need to realize the magnitude
of the effect they will have. I should not have to be in business to
enjoy a hobby I like. I want to fly my motors someday.

Curtis Scholl
TRA 3976
NAR 72953
Reaction Research Society Associate Member

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 15835 invoked from network); 26 Oct 2001 01:21:33 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 26 Oct 2001 01:21:33 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: (qmail 25091 invoked by uid 50005); 26 Oct 2001 01:20:43 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4164. . Clean. Processed in 0.172702 secs); 26 Oct 2001 01:20:43 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 26 Oct 2001 01:20:43 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA00917; Thu, 25 Oct 2001 18:15:06 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 123636 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 26 Oct 2001 01:15:05          +0000
Received: from cisco.com (cypher.cisco.com [171.69.11.18]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA00903 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu,          25 Oct 2001 18:15:05 -0700
Received: (from billw@localhost) by cisco.com (8.8.8/2.6/Cisco List          Logging/8.8.8) id SAA00886; Thu, 25 Oct 2001 18:14:34 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID:  <CMM.0.90.4.1004058874.billw@cypher>
Date:         Thu, 25 Oct 2001 18:14:34 PDT
Reply-To: "Bill Westfield" <billw@cisco.com>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "William Chops Westfield" <billw@cisco.com>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Requests for comments - NFPA codes
Comments: To: Jerry Irvine <01rocket@GTE.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  Your message of Thu, 25 Oct 2001 07:38:56 -0700

    >Do any states other than California actually define amateur rocketry?
    >For that matter, what laws at the federal level define rocketry as
    >anything other than "really big fireworks"?  (amateur OR professional?)

    There are several.  But notably Washington state recently repealed
    ALL rocket laws as nonsense and not worth enforcing.  We might put a
    10 year effort into getting states to follow suit.

I am *NOT* happy with state laws that leave rocketry entirely undefined,
leaving things at the whim of AHJ/etc whether my rocketry activities are
"fireworks", "destructive devices", "weapons of mass destruction", and/or
"terrorist devices."  California may be awful, but at least they have some
concept of what a rocket is...

BillW


From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 9542 invoked from network); 26 Oct 2001 01:27:17 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 26 Oct 2001 01:27:17 -0000
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 885 invoked by uid 50005); 26 Oct 2001 01:26:29 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4164. . Clean. Processed in 0.166453 secs); 26 Oct 2001 01:26:29 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 26 Oct 2001 01:26:28 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA00891; Thu, 25 Oct 2001 18:14:20 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 123629 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 26 Oct 2001 01:14:15          +0000
Received: from rasmus.uib.no (exim@rasmus.uib.no [129.177.12.30]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA00877 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Thu, 25 Oct 2001 18:14:14 -0700
Received: from tunnel-44-249.vpn.uib.no (emil.rasmus.uib.no) [129.177.44.249]          by rasmus.uib.no for arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU with esmtp (Exim 3.16) id          15wvZT-0006x2-00; Fri, 26 Oct 2001 03:14:03 +0200
X-Sender: st07696@rasmus.uib.no
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <5.1.0.14.0.20011026025351.028da028@lstud.ii.uib.no>
Date:         Fri, 26 Oct 2001 03:14:43 +0200
Reply-To: "Emil Johnsen" <Emil.Johnsen@STUDENT.UIB.NO>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Emil Johnsen" <Emil.Johnsen@STUDENT.UIB.NO>
Subject:      Re: [AR] T6 and high temperatures
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Thanks for all the replies to my question.

The reason I asked about al is that I am uncertain how suited it is for use
in long burn hybrids where a lot of heat will be transferred from the
nozzle to the motor casing during and after the burn leading to reduced
strength during the next firering of the motor.

I'm not sure when at what size and burn time it will become excessively
difficult to keep the casing within the acceptable temperature for
aluminium. I will be measuring how warm the case gets the next time I fire
my hybrid. If anyone have such data from hybrid firerings, this data would
be very interesting, particularly if we compare it with the burn time,
combustion temperature and the material(s) used for the nozzle.

Another possible material would be thin walled stainless steel tubing.
Looks like a good option, not much penalty in mass, might be worth it if it
leads to increased reliability or a reduction in complexity.



Emil Johnsen

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 29535 invoked from network); 26 Oct 2001 01:51:07 -0000
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 26 Oct 2001 01:51:07 -0000
Received: (qmail 10109 invoked by uid 50005); 26 Oct 2001 01:51:03 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4166. . Clean. Processed in 3.711697 secs); 26 Oct 2001 01:51:03 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 26 Oct 2001 01:50:56 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA01039; Thu, 25 Oct 2001 18:32:20 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 123663 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 26 Oct 2001 01:32:09          +0000
Received: from angel.comcen.com.au (angel.comcen.com.au [203.23.236.69]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA01025 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 25 Oct 2001 18:32:06 -0700
Received: from win2pk2 (modem019.sydney.spin.net.au [202.172.123.19] (may be          forged)) by angel.comcen.com.au (8.11.4/8.10.1) with SMTP id          f9Q1ULa40347; Fri, 26 Oct 2001 11:30:21 +1000 (EST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
Importance: Normal
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <JJEFLLHFFAHHMBBIHFAEIEKNCHAA.pkelly@comcen.com.au>
Date:         Fri, 26 Oct 2001 11:31:42 +1000
Reply-To: "Paul Kelly" <pkelly@COMCEN.COM.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Paul Kelly" <pkelly@COMCEN.COM.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] T6 and high temperatures
Comments: To: Emil Johnsen <Emil.Johnsen@STUDENT.UIB.NO>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <5.1.0.14.0.20011026025351.028da028@lstud.ii.uib.no>

I did a series of tests with 40mm x 1.8mm tube hybrids in the 500Ns range.
Final temp was entirely determined by the effectiveness of the insulation
and the mass of graphite you use.
In a typical 'semi submerged' design where part of the nozzle is tucked into
the aft end of the grain, I measured 120deg C max temperature after a 3
second burn. Nb with short burns you need to differentiate between radiated
heat during the burn, and post burn heat soak from the graphite nozzle.
Phenolic is your friend in the latter case, a few mm of phenolic tube around
even a large lump of graphite will make a big difference to the rate at
which it can dump energy into your case.
Additionally, don't underestimate the effectiveness of metal fins, thermally
connected to the motor case as radiators..

A few months back I did a 10+ second burn in a 50mm motor with a cast
phenolic nozzle (about 1200Ns). Now the throat was badly eroded but the case
couldn't have been more that 40 deg C after that burn! Amazing stuff.


PK

-----Original Message-----
From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU]On
Behalf Of Emil Johnsen
Sent: Friday, 26 October 2001 11:15 AM
To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
Subject: Re: [AR] T6 and high temperatures


Thanks for all the replies to my question.

The reason I asked about al is that I am uncertain how suited it is for use
in long burn hybrids where a lot of heat will be transferred from the
nozzle to the motor casing during and after the burn leading to reduced
strength during the next firering of the motor.

I'm not sure when at what size and burn time it will become excessively
difficult to keep the casing within the acceptable temperature for
aluminium. I will be measuring how warm the case gets the next time I fire
my hybrid. If anyone have such data from hybrid firerings, this data would
be very interesting, particularly if we compare it with the burn time,
combustion temperature and the material(s) used for the nozzle.

Another possible material would be thin walled stainless steel tubing.
Looks like a good option, not much penalty in mass, might be worth it if it
leads to increased reliability or a reduction in complexity.



Emil Johnsen

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 29611 invoked from network); 26 Oct 2001 01:58:36 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 26 Oct 2001 01:58:36 -0000
Received: (qmail 18714 invoked by uid 50005); 26 Oct 2001 01:55:53 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4166. . Clean. Processed in 2.418949 secs); 26 Oct 2001 01:55:53 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 26 Oct 2001 01:55:50 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA01184; Thu, 25 Oct 2001 18:51:01 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 123687 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 26 Oct 2001 01:50:56          +0000
Received: from spsystems.net (spsystems.net [209.47.149.227]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA01169 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Thu,          25 Oct 2001 18:50:55 -0700
Received: (from henry@localhost) by spsystems.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id VAA09620;          Thu, 25 Oct 2001 21:50:12 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1011025214916.9149B-100000@spsystems.net>
Date:         Thu, 25 Oct 2001 21:50:12 -0400
Reply-To: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Requests for comments - NFPA codes
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <8241D5C473414F48B12A866EBBBF182A9833@VOLSB01.libertyville.com>

On Thu, 25 Oct 2001, Ed Dewey wrote:
> ...Would someone please volunteer?  Does anyone have a
> nomination(s).  I think Terry McCreary and Henry Spencer would represent us
> well if they were to volunteer...

I'm flattered, but swamped right now.  There might also be some political
difficulties, since I believe NFPA is firmly an American group, and I'm
Canadian (by both citizenship and residency).

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 3820 invoked from network); 26 Oct 2001 02:06:54 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 26 Oct 2001 02:06:54 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 23315 invoked by uid 50005); 26 Oct 2001 00:53:07 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4165. . Clean. Processed in 1.173186 secs); 26 Oct 2001 00:53:07 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 26 Oct 2001 00:53:05 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA01271; Thu, 25 Oct 2001 19:01:58 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 123707 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 26 Oct 2001 02:01:57          +0000
Received: from smtppop1pub.verizon.net (smtppop1pub.gte.net [206.46.170.20]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA01256 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 25 Oct 2001 19:01:56 -0700
Received: from [63.24.225.78] (1Cust180.tnt1.rancho-cucamonga.ca.da.uu.net          [63.24.225.180]) by smtppop1pub.verizon.net  with ESMTP for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; id VAA32156307 Thu, 25 Oct 2001 21:00:36 -0500          (CDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: GTE/01rocket@mail.gte.net
References: <JJEFLLHFFAHHMBBIHFAEMEKMCHAA.pkelly@comcen.com.au>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <a05100315b7fe72bd6732@[63.24.225.78]>
Date:         Thu, 25 Oct 2001 19:02:43 -0700
Reply-To: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Regulations, my 2c worth.
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <JJEFLLHFFAHHMBBIHFAEMEKMCHAA.pkelly@comcen.com.au>

>Kelly:


>IMHO If you have a piece of legislation who's stated purpose (which may or
>may not be different from it's intended purpose) is to prevent injury and
>mishap. Then you are pushing S*&T uphill trying to convince the regulator
>that amateur rocketry should be less regulated than HPR. Am/Ex is inherently
>more dangerous than HPR. We have more crashes, more cato's, and a higher
>injury rate. These are indisputable facts. To say that Am/Ex rocketry should
>be allowed to self regulate like other areas are implies the existence of


The ladder industry, a series of totally unrelated small
manufacturing businesses, was responsible for dozens of deaths and
hundreds of injuries and spurred thousands of lawsuits.  A subset of
them got together, defined a series of guidelines for making ladders
that met minimal safety guidelines, and printed stickers to cover the
rest and BOOM, lawsuits dropped alot, injuries alot more, deaths
almost to zero and all because of self regulation by a SUBSET of the
industry the remainder of the industry VOLUNTARILY complied with ONLY
TO A DEGREE.  It still worked.


>the ability to do so? There is no amateur rocketry organisation recognised
>by suppliers of oxidisers. Where as if you get your L2 ticket taken off you,
>you are gonna have some trouble buying an Ameritech reload.


If the supplier were not a monopoly your fear would return.

I have proposed that membership in American Rocket Association (or
whatever) be a PERMIT to engage in amateur rocketry on the basis you
are at least objectively aware of and have access to safety
guidelines.

Even scientists can kill themselves :)


>The very act of regulating an individuals access to the means of producing
>pyrotechnic compositions by the beurocracy or any one else conjures
>emotional responses in us all.


And is ultimately not practical and unenforceable.


>
>So what do we do?
>I have no silver bullet. But in my experience the clear and obvious


I just posted one, and ironically ATF approved it at one of the NFPA
meetings but TRA rejected it!  It would not rely on THEM.

That's why another voice need be heard.  TRA has RUINED rocketry in
about a dozen proveable ways.  They need to be offset.  There is no
practical way to get rid of them.  The fools have rights :(

"The right to succeed, the right to fail." - J Paul Getty


>distinction we make between mod/hpr/amateur is nowhere near as clear in the
>minds of the regulators. Most of the officials I've dealt with just see guys
>flying rockets. I'm fortunate enough to represent the interests of both the


That's why self regulation and differentiation between MR / HPR / AM
/ COMMERCIAL is CRITICAL.


>amateur, model and hpr groups in my state and was able to present a
>coordinated case for them as a whole. Even then, it was a tedious process,
>one that was begun two generations of club executive back, and one that
>continues to this day. I say that we need to stop factionalising and work as
>a group of guys who fly rockets. because that is how we are often perceived.
>
>
PK

Jerry

--
Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
Opinion, the whole thing.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 10253 invoked from network); 26 Oct 2001 02:08:25 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 26 Oct 2001 02:08:25 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 25811 invoked by uid 50005); 26 Oct 2001 00:54:39 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4165. . Clean. Processed in 0.520711 secs); 26 Oct 2001 00:54:39 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 26 Oct 2001 00:54:38 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA01295; Thu, 25 Oct 2001 19:03:50 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 123714 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 26 Oct 2001 02:03:49          +0000
Received: from smtp002pub.verizon.net (smtp002pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.181])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA01281 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 25 Oct 2001 19:03:48 -0700
Received: from [63.24.225.78] (1Cust180.tnt1.rancho-cucamonga.ca.da.uu.net          [63.24.225.180]) by smtp002pub.verizon.net  with ESMTP for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; id f9Q23FD16020 Thu, 25 Oct 2001 21:03:16          -0500 (CDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: GTE/01rocket@mail.gte.net
References: <Pine.BSI.3.91.1011025214916.9149B-100000@spsystems.net>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <a05100316b7fe7537fc2d@[63.24.225.78]>
Date:         Thu, 25 Oct 2001 19:05:20 -0700
Reply-To: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Requests for comments - NFPA codes
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1011025214916.9149B-100000@spsystems.net>

>On Thu, 25 Oct 2001, Ed Dewey wrote:
>>  ...Would someone please volunteer?  Does anyone have a
>>  nomination(s).  I think Terry McCreary and Henry Spencer would represent us
>>  well if they were to volunteer...
>
>I'm flattered, but swamped right now.  There might also be some political
>difficulties, since I believe NFPA is firmly an American group, and I'm
>Canadian (by both citizenship and residency).
>
>                                                           Henry Spencer
>                                                        henry@spsystems.net


There are no citizenship limitations, but I cannot solve the swamp issue :)

Jerry
--
Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
Opinion, the whole thing.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 15892 invoked from network); 26 Oct 2001 02:35:03 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 26 Oct 2001 02:35:03 -0000
Received: (qmail 27972 invoked by uid 50005); 26 Oct 2001 01:21:51 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4166. . Clean. Processed in 0.239988 secs); 26 Oct 2001 01:21:51 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 26 Oct 2001 01:21:51 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA01439; Thu, 25 Oct 2001 19:31:15 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 123742 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 26 Oct 2001 02:31:09          +0000
Received: from imo-m06.mx.aol.com (imo-m06.mx.aol.com [64.12.136.161]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA01425 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Thu, 25 Oct 2001 19:31:08 -0700
Received: from MONTMACH@aol.com by imo-m06.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v31_r1.8.) id          w.30.1cbf0043 (4265) for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Thu, 25 Oct 2001          22:30:23 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0D7A_01C56B69.53D87540"
X-Mailer: AOL 6.0 for Windows US sub 10536
Message-ID:  <30.1cbf0043.290a24bf@aol.com>
Date:         Thu, 25 Oct 2001 22:30:23 EDT
Reply-To: <MONTMACH@AOL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <MONTMACH@AOL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Inconel (was T6 and high temperatures)
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0D7A_01C56B69.53D87540
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Hello, Dale.  We machine inconel all day long, mostly for aerospace hardware.
  For drilling you should use a good-quality cobalt drill (I use
PrecisionTwist drills).  RPM's should be around 20 surface feet per minute
and you should definitely use cutting oil.  For turning I use Micro 100
carbide tools at about 80 surface feet per minute.  Question: Why inconel?
The melting point of inconel is way lower than the flame temperature of your
motor.  Keep it simple and use graphite!  BTW, we sell our inconel scrap from
$1.50 to $2 per pound.
Dave Griffith

> Hey all,
> Our club just got some scrap inconel with the intent of casting nozzles out
> of our foundry.  The only problem is that it requires a very unreactive
> environment to be worked with (argon blanket or vacuum pour.)  We are
> setting up an argon hood that should give us pretty good "amateur quality"
> parts.
> The stuff is pretty heavy too, I believe.  I?m about to email my friend to
> see if he has the densities for inconel vs. the standard grade of stainless
> that the company uses just to be sure.  Last I heard the bulk sell back for
> inconel is somewhere around $0.20/lb.  So, given a community college or
> university foundry, the (easy) intro to industrial mfg. class, the right
> scrap yard, and a tank of argon you can make some pretty cool rocket parts.
>         (Yes, I?ve heard that after that statement all those out there who
> have
> actually worked with the stuff will be sitting back and smiling at me.  I
> guess the words "learning experience," should be coming to mind right?)
> Coincidently, if anyone out there has any tips on machining this stuff or
> good reference books for working with it, I?m open to suggestions.  I hope
> to have the hood ready for first melt and then machining in about 2 weeks.
> Let everyone know how it goes when we get there,
> Dale H.
> CP Rocketeers
>



------=_NextPart_000_0D7A_01C56B69.53D87540
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<HTML><FONT FACE=arial,helvetica><FONT  SIZE=2>Hello, Dale. &nbsp;We machine inconel all day long, mostly for aerospace hardware.
<BR> &nbsp;For drilling you should use a good-quality cobalt drill (I use PrecisionTwist drills). &nbsp;RPM's should be around 20 surface feet per minute and you should definitely use cutting oil. &nbsp;For turning I use Micro 100 carbide tools at about 80 surface feet per minute. &nbsp;Question: Why inconel? &nbsp;The melting point of inconel is way lower than the flame temperature of your motor. &nbsp;Keep it simple and use graphite! &nbsp;BTW, we sell our inconel scrap from $1.50 to $2 per pound.
<BR>Dave Griffith
<BR>
<BR><BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE style="BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px">Hey all,
<BR>Our club just got some scrap inconel with the intent of casting nozzles out
<BR>of our foundry. &nbsp;The only problem is that it requires a very unreactive
<BR>environment to be worked with (argon blanket or vacuum pour.) &nbsp;We are
<BR>setting up an argon hood that should give us pretty good "amateur quality"
<BR>parts.
<BR>The stuff is pretty heavy too, I believe. &nbsp;I?m about to email my friend to
<BR>see if he has the densities for inconel vs. the standard grade of stainless
<BR>that the company uses just to be sure. &nbsp;Last I heard the bulk sell back for
<BR>inconel is somewhere around $0.20/lb. &nbsp;So, given a community college or
<BR>university foundry, the (easy) intro to industrial mfg. class, the right
<BR>scrap yard, and a tank of argon you can make some pretty cool rocket parts.
<BR> &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;(Yes, I?ve heard that after that statement all those out there who have
<BR>actually worked with the stuff will be sitting back and smiling at me. &nbsp;I
<BR>guess the words "learning experience," should be coming to mind right?)
<BR>Coincidently, if anyone out there has any tips on machining this stuff or
<BR>good reference books for working with it, I?m open to suggestions. &nbsp;I hope
<BR>to have the hood ready for first melt and then machining in about 2 weeks.
<BR>Let everyone know how it goes when we get there,
<BR>Dale H.
<BR>CP Rocketeers
<BR></BLOCKQUOTE>
<BR>
<BR></FONT></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0D7A_01C56B69.53D87540--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 2288 invoked from network); 26 Oct 2001 02:55:54 -0000
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 26 Oct 2001 02:55:54 -0000
Received: (qmail 18803 invoked by uid 50005); 26 Oct 2001 02:55:06 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4164. . Clean. Processed in 0.122682 secs); 26 Oct 2001 02:55:06 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 26 Oct 2001 02:55:05 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA01563; Thu, 25 Oct 2001 19:52:17 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 123762 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 26 Oct 2001 02:52:11          +0000
Received: from femail17.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail17.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.0.95.144]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA01549          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 25 Oct 2001 19:52:11 -0700
Received: from hal2001 ([24.77.58.213]) by femail17.sdc1.sfba.home.com          (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20 201-229-121-120-20010223) with SMTP id          <20011026025206.DVZA14800.femail17.sdc1.sfba.home.com@hal2001> for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 25 Oct 2001 19:52:06 -0700
References:  <000401c15cd4$a2034530$0200a8c0@24.53.64.18>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <006901c15dc9$7619da60$4a00a8c0@hatjs>
Date:         Thu, 25 Oct 2001 19:53:58 -0700
Reply-To: "Jamie Morken" <jmorken@HOME.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jamie Morken" <jmorken@HOME.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] T6 and high temperatures
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Hi all,

> Hard chrome plating...MUCH harder than nickel. I used to hard chrome
pistol
> parts. Just .005" thick could substantially strengthen the inner walls of
a
> tube, but applying HC to aluminum is a bit more involved than applying it
to
> steel substrates. I doubt neither would be worth the added weight.
Anodizing
> is pretty easy to do. HC plating requires high current & temps for
extended
> periods of time. HC might be better suited for use in nozzles.

Anyone have info on depositing a thin film of some metal (chrome or nickel)
onto a fiberglass
(G-10) part or any other type of substrate?

> Speaking of rocket nozzles:
>
> I know that tungsten is VERY EXPENSIVE (and hard to machine) but seems it
> would be ideal for rocket nozzles (melting point: 6,098/F)... At least as
> throat inserts. Anybody on the list have experience doing this?

The SORAC project was apparently using tungsten nozzle inserts in their big
hybrids.
To machine it I think it needs to be heated up and then "it cuts like
butter" :)

best regards,
Jamie

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 22508 invoked from network); 26 Oct 2001 04:51:15 -0000
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 26 Oct 2001 04:51:15 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 2712 invoked by uid 50005); 26 Oct 2001 04:50:27 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4164. . Clean. Processed in 0.157862 secs); 26 Oct 2001 04:50:27 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 26 Oct 2001 04:50:27 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA01892; Thu, 25 Oct 2001 21:47:51 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 123791 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 26 Oct 2001 04:47:42          +0000
Received: from mail.aros.net (mail.aros.net [207.173.16.20]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA01877 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Thu,          25 Oct 2001 21:47:42 -0700
Received: from biomicro.com (dm5-217.slc.aros.net [207.173.25.217]) by          mail.aros.net (8.11.6/8.9.3) with ESMTP id f9Q4leg45035 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Thu, 25 Oct 2001 22:47:40 -0600 (MDT)
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.77 [en] (Win98; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <JJEFLLHFFAHHMBBIHFAEMEKMCHAA.pkelly@comcen.com.au>            <a05100315b7fe72bd6732@[63.24.225.78]>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3BD8EB3A.95B35851@biomicro.com>
Date:         Thu, 25 Oct 2001 22:48:58 -0600
Reply-To: "Mark K. Spute" <mks@BIOMICRO.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Mark K. Spute" <mks@BIOMICRO.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Regulations, my 2c worth.
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Jerry Irvine wrote:

[snip]

> That's why another voice need be heard.  TRA has RUINED rocketry in
> about a dozen proveable ways.  They need to be offset.  There is no
> practical way to get rid of them.  The fools have rights :(

Evidently not in NFPA's mind.

> "The right to succeed, the right to fail." - J Paul Getty

The right to blow ourselves to kingdom come by our own hands if we so
choose, as long as we don't take anyone else with us.  But also the
right to prove to ourselves, if no one else, that we can sucessfully
avoid blowing ourselves to kingdom come, too.

--
Mark K. Spute
Senior Research Engineer
BioMicro Systems Inc.

KD7IWE,  RRS, hopeful future Stolly owner

"It is difficult to say what is impossible, for the dream of yesterday
is the hope of today and the reality of tomorrow."
     Dr. Robert H. Goddard

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 15978 invoked from network); 26 Oct 2001 05:10:44 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 26 Oct 2001 05:10:44 -0000
Received: (qmail 12800 invoked by uid 50005); 26 Oct 2001 03:57:32 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4166. . Clean. Processed in 0.482384 secs); 26 Oct 2001 03:57:32 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 26 Oct 2001 03:57:31 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA01984; Thu, 25 Oct 2001 22:06:02 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 123806 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 26 Oct 2001 05:05:59          +0000
Received: from localhost (rcalkins@localhost) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with          ESMTP id WAA01966; Thu, 25 Oct 2001 22:05:59 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.LNX.4.10.10110252200120.1478-100000@itc.uci.edu>
Date:         Thu, 25 Oct 2001 22:05:58 -0700
Reply-To: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
Subject:      Re: [AR] NFPA 1127
Comments: To: Dave McCue <dmccue@UCI.EDU>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <200110251654.JAA28297@itc.uci.edu>

I propose a fairly easy way around this mess.  Suppose I (or somebody
else, go ahead...) were to incorporate a non-profit educational/research
LLC.  That company could contract individuals to conduct research and
publish their results.  These researchers would then be paid "in kind",
meaning they have access to the published results of all the other
researchers.

Self-regulation would occour by following a "safety code" which we would
have to hash out ourselves.

Since we're a company doing independant research, we would be exempt from
the NFPA as I understand it.

Comments?

Ray

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 9214 invoked from network); 26 Oct 2001 05:28:07 -0000
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 26 Oct 2001 05:28:07 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 25147 invoked by uid 50005); 26 Oct 2001 05:27:19 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4164. . Clean. Processed in 0.192624 secs); 26 Oct 2001 05:27:19 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 26 Oct 2001 05:27:19 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA02080; Thu, 25 Oct 2001 22:24:51 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 123827 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 26 Oct 2001 05:24:48          +0000
Received: from mail.aros.net (mail.aros.net [207.173.16.20]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA02066 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Thu,          25 Oct 2001 22:24:48 -0700
Received: from biomicro.com (dm5-217.slc.aros.net [207.173.25.217]) by          mail.aros.net (8.11.6/8.9.3) with ESMTP id f9Q5Okg67897 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Thu, 25 Oct 2001 23:24:46 -0600 (MDT)
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.77 [en] (Win98; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <Pine.LNX.4.10.10110252200120.1478-100000@itc.uci.edu>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3BD8F3EC.F720D5E6@biomicro.com>
Date:         Thu, 25 Oct 2001 23:26:04 -0600
Reply-To: "Mark K. Spute" <mks@BIOMICRO.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Mark K. Spute" <mks@BIOMICRO.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] NFPA 1127
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Interesting idea Ray.  However it leaves those unaffiliated with the LLC
out in the rain.  I have problems with that.  A person or persons should
be able to participate in research, hobbies, or whatever without having
to incorporate to do so.

<SOAPBOX MODE ON>

I have problems with all-encompassing regulations, espescially when they
are written by technical writers without a clue about what they are
regulating, and then foisted on an unsuspecting public as law by lazy
legislators who don't care enough to find out what they are actually
legislating.  The current code as written by NFPA is nice regulations
for a small group.  However it is very bad law.

<SOAPBOX MODE OFF>

Having said that, An LLC or something like that might be a short term
solution 'till I graduate from law school and ram that code right back
down NFPA's throat.

Ray, did you get my last e-mail to you?
(BTW, You got wheels again?)

Ray Calkins wrote:
>
> I propose a fairly easy way around this mess.  Suppose I (or somebody
> else, go ahead...) were to incorporate a non-profit educational/research
> LLC.  That company could contract individuals to conduct research and
> publish their results.  These researchers would then be paid "in kind",
> meaning they have access to the published results of all the other
> researchers.
>
> Self-regulation would occour by following a "safety code" which we would
> have to hash out ourselves.
>
> Since we're a company doing independant research, we would be exempt from
> the NFPA as I understand it.
>
> Comments?
>
> Ray

--
Mark K. Spute
Senior Research Engineer
BioMicro Systems Inc.

KD7IWE,  RRS, hopeful future Stolly owner

"It is difficult to say what is impossible, for the dream of yesterday
is the hope of today and the reality of tomorrow."
     Dr. Robert H. Goddard

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 7019 invoked from network); 26 Oct 2001 06:30:38 -0000
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 26 Oct 2001 06:30:38 -0000
Received: (qmail 4025 invoked by uid 50005); 26 Oct 2001 05:16:50 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4165. . Clean. Processed in 2.442906 secs); 26 Oct 2001 05:16:50 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 26 Oct 2001 05:16:46 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA02348; Thu, 25 Oct 2001 23:24:20 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 123855 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 26 Oct 2001 06:24:12          +0000
Received: from robin.mail.pas.earthlink.net (robin.mail.pas.earthlink.net          [207.217.120.65]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id          XAA02333; Thu, 25 Oct 2001 23:24:12 -0700
Received: from cpe-24-221-155-19.az.sprintbbd.net ([24.221.155.19]          helo=tus20054) by robin.mail.pas.earthlink.net with smtp (Exim 3.33          #1) id 15x0Pb-0000qJ-00; Thu, 25 Oct 2001 23:24:11 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <NEBBLMGNCMMGBANIEOEHMEEHCKAA.jmrosson@earthlink.net>
Date:         Thu, 25 Oct 2001 23:23:05 -0700
Reply-To: <jmrosson@earthlink.net>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <jmrosson@earthlink.net>
Subject:      Re: [AR] NFPA 1127
Comments: To: Ray Calkins <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <Pine.LNX.4.10.10110252200120.1478-100000@itc.uci.edu>

Ray:

Your proposal is one of the reasons that several larger Pyrotechnic
organizations are incorporated, not for profit (NFP) companies.  We know
that TRA & NAR follow this model, even the National Rifle Association
follows it too.  The bureaucratic (federally derived) processes do no easily
recognize individuals.  Just being a $25 member of a corporation, that
establishes and protects the hobby rights gives all people more access.  The
money derived is spent on making the hobby more accessible and safe.
Without the money support, no one could afford the travel expenses to
achieve face time at the quarterly/biannual NFPA meetings.  Trouble as
always; is finding knowledgeable, reliable people who are good at politics
to help the effort along.  It takes consistency to wear them down.  Sending
an incompetent representative hurts your cause more than it helps.

Bottom line-
What you are really suggesting is new NFP INC group that is focused towards
Amateur Rocketry.
So do it!
Incorporate 3 people, write bylaws, call a membership meeting, collect
membership dues, elect a board, hold one board meeting a year, you are done!
Spend the rest of the time/money on placing verbally talented, knowledgeable
people in front of the controlling bodies and canvassing the amateur crowd
for constructive input.  In time, after establishing a net positive effect
on safety and exercising good politics, you can change things for the
better.

Best Regards.
Jim Rosson

#->-----Original Message-----
#->From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@itc.uci.edu]On
#->Behalf Of Ray Calkins
#->Sent: Thursday, October 25, 2001 10:06 PM
#->To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
#->Subject: Re: NFPA 1127
#->
#->
#->I propose a fairly easy way around this mess.  Suppose I (or somebody
#->else, go ahead...) were to incorporate a non-profit educational/research
#->LLC.  That company could contract individuals to conduct research and
#->publish their results.  These researchers would then be paid "in kind",
#->meaning they have access to the published results of all the other
#->researchers.
#->
#->Self-regulation would occur by following a "safety code" which we would
#->have to hash out ourselves.
#->
#->Since we're a company doing independent research, we would be exempt from
#->the NFPA as I understand it.
#->
#->Comments?
#->
#->Ray
#->

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 14670 invoked from network); 26 Oct 2001 12:11:45 -0000
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 26 Oct 2001 12:11:45 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 23789 invoked by uid 50005); 26 Oct 2001 10:57:55 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4165. . Clean. Processed in 2.451907 secs); 26 Oct 2001 10:57:55 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 26 Oct 2001 10:57:50 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id FAA03251; Fri, 26 Oct 2001 05:07:33 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 123891 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 26 Oct 2001 12:07:23          +0000
Received: from femail26.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail26.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.254.60.16]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id FAA03237          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 26 Oct 2001 05:07:23 -0700
Received: from home.com ([24.22.71.82]) by femail26.sdc1.sfba.home.com          (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20 201-229-121-120-20010223) with ESMTP id          <20011026120717.JDJN2746.femail26.sdc1.sfba.home.com@home.com>; Fri,          26 Oct 2001 05:07:17 -0700
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.75 [en] (Win98; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20011025.170818.-3893083.1.kc2csh@juno.com>            <3BD883B6.A13D06D4@biomicro.com> <3BD8B1E8.A2D99227@izzy.net>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3BD9525A.FA5C0F55@home.com>
Date:         Fri, 26 Oct 2001 08:08:58 -0400
Reply-To: "Mark Simpson" <mark.simpson@HOME.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Mark Simpson" <mark.simpson@HOME.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Is this a good idea
Comments: To: cscholl@izzy.net
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

That works for me. Nice summary Curtis.

Mark Simpson

Curtis Scholl wrote:

> Hi All:
>
>    In response to the question raised by Mark ( see below) I came up
> with a comparison.
> I accept all criticism.
>
> HPR
>
> 1. HPR is a larger scale CONSUMER activity and all of the supposed
> "safety aspects" of manufacturing a motor are taken care of by the motor
> manufacturer. The manufacturer has taken all the risk to provide a
> product that will be relatively safe to use for competent consumers.
>
> 2. HPR is a larger scale MODEL BUILDING activity and all of the "safety
> aspects" of manufacturing a HPR rocket are taken care of by the builder
> by using such lightweight and non metallic materials as they can safely
> get by with.
>
> 3. HPR designs rockets around existing motors. When that dries up, no
> more HPR.
>
> AMATEUR
>
> 1. Is an Scientific trial experimental activity with the safety
> considerations being on the experimenter's shoulders. The materials used
> in the making of a motor have to be carefully and thoroughly researched.
>
> 2. The Rocket itself is made of whatever material suits the mission. If
> that means Stainless Steel pressure vessels for steam rockets then that
> is what is used.
>
> 3. The motor is designed to suit the mission. Or if the motor has been
> characterized, the rocket can
> be designed around the motor. We have the choice because we weighed all
> of the factors ourselves.
> AND we don't have to depend on a certain supplier or suppliers. We make
> motors out of whatever WORKS!
>
> Curtis Scholl
> cscholl@izzy.net
>
> TRA 3976
> NAR 72953
> RRS Associate Member
>
> "Mark K. Spute" wrote:
> >
> > I would think that perhaps a better approach (IMHO) is to once an for
> > all clearly define the differences between HPR and Am/Ex rocketry.
> > (Right!  Good luck.)  That way the NFPA, NAR and TRA could keep their
> > precious codes, but AM/EX would be clearly expempt from them.
> >
> > How would we define the differences between HPR and Am/Ex.
> >
> > kc2csh@JUNO.COM wrote:
> > >
> > >   I'm considering proposing and/or commenting that the distinctions
> > > between 1122 and 1127 are artificial, confusing, unsound, and should be
> > > abolished by integrating the 2 into a single, unified, rocketry code.
> > >   The distinction between 1122 and 1127 aplying is generally close to but
> > > slightly different than ATF, CPSC, and FAA distinctions, and that causes
> > > needless confusion.
> > >   Also, 1122 is widely adopted and generally represents the law in most
> > > of the US; 1127 is law almost no place.
> > >   Further, 1127 simply stops at the 2N impulse range; many rockets are
> > > actually larger than that
> > >
> > >   Thoughts; comments, suggestions?
> > >
> > >   In any revision keep in mind that TRA and NAR reps are members of the
> > > committee, and we are not.  Perhaps that should change!!
> > >
> > >       Jay
> >
> > --
> > Mark K. Spute
> > Senior Research Engineer
> > BioMicro Systems Inc.
> >
> > KD7IWE,  RRS, hopeful future Stolly owner
> >
> > "It is difficult to say what is impossible, for the dream of yesterday
> > is the hope of today and the reality of tomorrow."
> >      Dr. Robert H. Goddard

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 17687 invoked from network); 26 Oct 2001 12:29:42 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 26 Oct 2001 12:29:42 -0000
Received: (qmail 22629 invoked by uid 50005); 26 Oct 2001 12:29:38 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4166. . Clean. Processed in 0.274569 secs); 26 Oct 2001 12:29:38 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 26 Oct 2001 12:29:37 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id FAA03361; Fri, 26 Oct 2001 05:26:14 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 123902 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 26 Oct 2001 12:26:04          +0000
Received: from localhost (rcalkins@localhost) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with          ESMTP id FAA03346; Fri, 26 Oct 2001 05:26:02 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.LNX.4.10.10110260513090.3272-100000@itc.uci.edu>
Date:         Fri, 26 Oct 2001 05:26:02 -0700
Reply-To: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
Subject:      Re: [AR] NFPA 1127
Comments: To: "Mark K. Spute" <mks@BIOMICRO.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <3BD8F3EC.F720D5E6@biomicro.com>

On Thu, 25 Oct 2001, Mark K. Spute wrote:

> Interesting idea Ray.  However it leaves those unaffiliated with the LLC
> out in the rain.  I have problems with that.

I do too.  The non-profit corporation has legal status however, and can
work to enact change to benefit all rocketry "citizen scientists" around
the world.

> Having said that, An LLC or something like that might be a short term
> solution 'till I graduate from law school and ram that code right back
> down NFPA's throat.

Exactly!  I'm working this from several angles, and think the non-profit
corp is a good idea for many reasons.  First of all, it gives us a common,
legal voice.  It also opens us up to more easily handle money, recieve
donations and such.  Money that can be used to cover things like legal
expenses, advertising changing public opinion, supporting large projects,
etc.


> Ray, did you get my last e-mail to you?

Um, probably, I'm a little behind in my e-mail, let me check...

> (BTW, You got wheels again?)

This is the last e-mail I'll be writing in a week, I'll be on the road,
helping some non-rocket friend close out their father's estate.  I'll
worry about wheels when I return.  As always, I welcome phone calls on
this matter, and if somebody would do the research on how to set this
thing up in my absense, I'd be very grateful.  I'm willing to put the time
in to make this thing a reality, and even a few bucks.

Ad Astra per Ardura!

Ray

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 28000 invoked from network); 26 Oct 2001 14:43:15 -0000
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 26 Oct 2001 14:43:15 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 20459 invoked by uid 50005); 26 Oct 2001 13:29:59 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4166. . Clean. Processed in 0.388213 secs); 26 Oct 2001 13:29:59 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 26 Oct 2001 13:29:58 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA03846; Fri, 26 Oct 2001 07:29:48 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 123914 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 26 Oct 2001 14:29:43          +0000
Received: from rftzy05y.ca.nortel.com (h161s130a130n47.user.nortelnetworks.com          [47.130.130.161]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA03807          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 26 Oct 2001 07:18:22 -0700
Received: from rftzy232.ca.nortel.com (rftzy232.ca.nortel.com [47.130.185.32])          by rftzy05y.ca.nortel.com (Switch-2.2.0/Switch-2.2.0) with ESMTP id          f9QEGvY06794; Fri, 26 Oct 2001 10:16:57 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from NORTELNETWORKS.COM (wftzh00e.ca.nortel.com [47.130.116.9]) by          rftzy232.ca.nortel.com with SMTP (Microsoft Exchange Internet Mail          Service Version 5.5.2653.13) id VPQA6P5K; Fri, 26 Oct 2001 10:15:21          -0400
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.73C-CCK-MCD  [en] (X11; U; HP-UX B.10.20 9000/785)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <Pine.BSI.3.91.1011025214916.9149B-100000@spsystems.net>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3BD97065.8E3F215E@NORTELNETWORKS.COM>
Date:         Fri, 26 Oct 2001 10:17:10 -0400
Reply-To: "Leech, Marcus \(EXCHANGE:FITZ:8M86\)" <mleech@NORTELNETWORKS.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Leech, Marcus \(EXCHANGE:FITZ:8M86\)" <mleech@NORTELNETWORKS.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Requests for comments - NFPA codes
Comments: To: Henry Spencer <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Henry Spencer wrote:

>
> I'm flattered, but swamped right now.  There might also be some political
> difficulties, since I believe NFPA is firmly an American group, and I'm
> Canadian (by both citizenship and residency).
>
>                                                           Henry Spencer
>                                                        henry@spsystems.net
Canadian fire authorities and municipalities have adopted NFPA codes, so it
  isn't an exclusively USAn club...  I'm not aware of any of them having
  adopted 1122,1125, or 1127, however.

--
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Marcus Leech                             Mail:   Dept 8M70, MS 012, FITZ
Advisor                                  Phone: (ESN) 393-9145  +1 613 763 9145
Security Architecture and Planning       Fax:   (ESN) 393-9435  +1 613 763 9435
Nortel Networks                          mleech@nortelnetworks.com
-----------------Expressed opinions are my own, not my employer's------

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 24248 invoked from network); 26 Oct 2001 14:57:26 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 26 Oct 2001 14:57:26 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 23885 invoked by uid 50005); 26 Oct 2001 14:56:39 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4164. . Clean. Processed in 0.243164 secs); 26 Oct 2001 14:56:39 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 26 Oct 2001 14:56:39 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA03976; Fri, 26 Oct 2001 07:51:50 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 123928 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 26 Oct 2001 14:51:26          +0000
Received: from smtp006pub.verizon.net (smtp006pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.185])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA03962 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 26 Oct 2001 07:51:26 -0700
Received: from [63.24.225.78] (1Cust103.tnt1.rancho-cucamonga.ca.da.uu.net          [63.24.225.103]) by smtp006pub.verizon.net  with ESMTP for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; id f9QEorr21506 Fri, 26 Oct 2001 09:50:54          -0500 (CDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: GTE/01rocket@mail.gte.net
References: <Pine.LNX.4.10.10110252200120.1478-100000@itc.uci.edu>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <a05100318b7ff29130aa6@[63.24.225.78]>
Date:         Fri, 26 Oct 2001 07:52:58 -0700
Reply-To: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] NFPA 1127
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <Pine.LNX.4.10.10110252200120.1478-100000@itc.uci.edu>

>I propose a fairly easy way around this mess.  Suppose I (or somebody
>else, go ahead...) were to incorporate a non-profit educational/research
>LLC.  That company could contract individuals to conduct research and
>publish their results.  These researchers would then be paid "in kind",
>meaning they have access to the published results of all the other
>researchers.


Very practical suggestion to solve the short term problem.  But soon
the rest of the laws will find a way to bite us.


>
>Self-regulation would occour by following a "safety code" which we would
>have to hash out ourselves.
>
>Since we're a company doing independant research, we would be exempt from
>the NFPA as I understand it.
>
>Comments?
>
>Ray


--
Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
Opinion, the whole thing.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 28749 invoked from network); 26 Oct 2001 14:58:36 -0000
Received: from smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.105]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 26 Oct 2001 14:58:36 -0000
Received: (qmail 24883 invoked by uid 50005); 26 Oct 2001 14:56:21 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpy with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4151. . Clean. Processed in 0.219578 secs); 26 Oct 2001 14:56:21 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 26 Oct 2001 14:56:20 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA03995; Fri, 26 Oct 2001 07:52:23 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 123927 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 26 Oct 2001 14:52:22          +0000
Received: from cesaroni.net ([204.101.26.130]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7)          with ESMTP id HAA03937 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 26 Oct 2001          07:42:21 -0700
Received: from Anthony by cesaroni.net with SMTP (MDaemon.v2.8.7.0.R) for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 26 Oct 2001 10:45:37 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 8.5, Build 4.71.2173.0
Importance: Normal
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
X-MDaemon-Deliver-To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
X-Return-Path: ACesaroni@cesaroni.net
Message-ID:  <003d01c15e2c$cbd09120$1b0101c0@Anthony>
Date:         Fri, 26 Oct 2001 10:45:03 -0400
Reply-To: "Anthony Cesaroni" <ACesaroni@cesaroni.net>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Anthony Cesaroni" <ACesaroni@cesaroni.net>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Requests for comments - NFPA codes
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <3BD97065.8E3F215E@NORTELNETWORKS.COM>

Marcus,

Transport Canada cites NFPA 1127 in the HPR regulations. I believe the
Ontario Fire Code has them included as well. Richard Bose of ERD/CERL in
Ottawa sits on the NFPA.

Anthony.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@itc.uci.edu]On
> Behalf Of Leech, Marcus (EXCHANGE:FITZ:8M86)
> Sent: Friday, October 26, 2001 10:17 AM
> To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
> Subject: Re: Requests for comments - NFPA codes
>
>
> Henry Spencer wrote:
>
> >
> > I'm flattered, but swamped right now.  There might also be some
> political
> > difficulties, since I believe NFPA is firmly an American group, and I'm
> > Canadian (by both citizenship and residency).
> >
> >                                                           Henry Spencer
> >
> henry@spsystems.net
> Canadian fire authorities and municipalities have adopted NFPA
> codes, so it
>   isn't an exclusively USAn club...  I'm not aware of any of them having
>   adopted 1122,1125, or 1127, however.
>
> --
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> Marcus Leech                             Mail:   Dept 8M70, MS 012, FITZ
> Advisor                                  Phone: (ESN) 393-9145
> +1 613 763 9145
> Security Architecture and Planning       Fax:   (ESN) 393-9435
> +1 613 763 9435
> Nortel Networks                          mleech@nortelnetworks.com
> -----------------Expressed opinions are my own, not my employer's------
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 28536 invoked from network); 26 Oct 2001 15:05:45 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 26 Oct 2001 15:05:45 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 2376 invoked by uid 50005); 26 Oct 2001 15:04:58 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4164. . Clean. Processed in 0.157374 secs); 26 Oct 2001 15:04:58 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 26 Oct 2001 15:04:58 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA04134; Fri, 26 Oct 2001 08:00:59 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 123971 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 26 Oct 2001 15:00:58          +0000
Received: from smtp007pub.verizon.net (smtp007pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.186])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA04120 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 26 Oct 2001 08:00:58 -0700
Received: from [63.24.225.78] (1Cust103.tnt1.rancho-cucamonga.ca.da.uu.net          [63.24.225.103]) by smtp007pub.verizon.net  with ESMTP for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; id f9QF0Qj09243 Fri, 26 Oct 2001 10:00:26          -0500 (CDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: GTE/01rocket@mail.gte.net
References: <Pine.LNX.4.10.10110260513090.3272-100000@itc.uci.edu>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <a0510031ab7ff2a996655@[63.24.225.78]>
Date:         Fri, 26 Oct 2001 08:02:31 -0700
Reply-To: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] NFPA 1127
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <Pine.LNX.4.10.10110260513090.3272-100000@itc.uci.edu>

>Ray:


>worry about wheels when I return.  As always, I welcome phone calls on
>this matter, and if somebody would do the research on how to set this
>thing up in my absense, I'd be very grateful.  I'm willing to put the time
>in to make this thing a reality, and even a few bucks.

I will send Ray a draft LLC operating agreement, but we need to come
up with tentative names.

Citizen Rocket Scientists LLC (descriptive) [CRS]
arocket LLC (shows source of effort) [A]
Civil Rocketry LLC [CR]
Amateur Rocket Society LLC [ARS] (ARS was American Rocket Society before)
Experimental Rocket Society LLC [ERS]
all these names are geography independent


--
Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
Opinion, the whole thing.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 14439 invoked from network); 26 Oct 2001 15:16:22 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 26 Oct 2001 15:16:22 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 7929 invoked by uid 50005); 26 Oct 2001 15:16:18 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4166. . Clean. Processed in 0.198963 secs); 26 Oct 2001 15:16:18 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 26 Oct 2001 15:16:18 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA04023; Fri, 26 Oct 2001 07:55:15 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 123941 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 26 Oct 2001 14:55:14          +0000
Received: from smtp001pub.verizon.net (smtp001pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.180])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA04009 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 26 Oct 2001 07:55:13 -0700
Received: from [63.24.225.78] (1Cust103.tnt1.rancho-cucamonga.ca.da.uu.net          [63.24.225.103]) by smtp001pub.verizon.net  with ESMTP for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; id f9QEsPr02383 Fri, 26 Oct 2001 09:54:25          -0500 (CDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: GTE/01rocket@mail.gte.net
References: <NEBBLMGNCMMGBANIEOEHMEEHCKAA.jmrosson@earthlink.net>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <a05100319b7ff29c233c9@[63.24.225.78]>
Date:         Fri, 26 Oct 2001 07:56:47 -0700
Reply-To: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] NFPA 1127
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <NEBBLMGNCMMGBANIEOEHMEEHCKAA.jmrosson@earthlink.net>

>Jim Rosson in a moment of intense insight summarized:


>What you are really suggesting is new NFP INC group that is focused towards
>Amateur Rocketry.
>So do it!
>Incorporate 3 people, write bylaws, call a membership meeting, collect
>membership dues, elect a board, hold one board meeting a year, you are done!
>Spend the rest of the time/money on placing verbally talented, knowledgeable
>people in front of the controlling bodies and canvassing the amateur crowd
>for constructive input.  In time, after establishing a net positive effect
>on safety and exercising good politics, you can change things for the
>better.


I volunteer to assist with the formation effort and to develop an
initial plan with my peers.

Jerry
--
Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
Opinion, the whole thing.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 7468 invoked from network); 26 Oct 2001 15:22:07 -0000
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 26 Oct 2001 15:22:07 -0000
Received: (qmail 13832 invoked by uid 50005); 26 Oct 2001 15:22:02 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4166. . Clean. Processed in 0.174046 secs); 26 Oct 2001 15:22:02 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 26 Oct 2001 15:22:02 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA04099; Fri, 26 Oct 2001 07:58:55 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 123964 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 26 Oct 2001 14:58:53          +0000
Received: from mail.trib.com (mail.trib.com [12.10.158.17]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA04084; Fri, 26 Oct 2001 07:58:53 -0700
Received: from [63.229.150.98] (HELO hppav) by mail.trib.com (CommuniGate Pro          SMTP 3.4.6) with SMTP id 54476633; Fri, 26 Oct 2001 08:58:51 -0600
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <NKEHJAOOKBPGIKOOPDEFAEPPCCAA.jwckman@space-rockets.com>
Date:         Fri, 26 Oct 2001 08:57:00 -0600
Reply-To: "John Wickman" <jwckman@SPACE-ROCKETS.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Wickman" <jwckman@SPACE-ROCKETS.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Requests for comments - NFPA codes
Comments: To: Ray Calkins <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <Pine.LNX.4.10.10110250912320.26191-100000@itc.uci.edu>

Ray,

Go to the site and look up 1127.  The original with the changes and comments
are listed along with the completely revised version in Adobe PDF format.

John Wickman


-----Original Message-----
From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU]On
Behalf Of Ray Calkins
Sent: Thursday, October 25, 2001 10:16 AM
To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
Subject: Re: [AR] Requests for comments - NFPA codes


I've been looking through the NFPA site ( http://www.nfpa.org ) and
haven't found where the quote was taken from.  Where did you find it?

Ray

On Thu, 25 Oct 2001, Charles Barnett wrote:
>
> Here is a quote from the proposed code:
>
> "1.2.3 The purpose of this code also shall be to
> discourage the following to minimize deaths and injuries:
>
>  (1) Experiments with explosive or highly energetic
>  rocket propellants
>  (2) Construction of homemade rocket propulsion
>  motors
>  (3) Attempted launches or operation of homemade
>  rocket devices"

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 19407 invoked from network); 26 Oct 2001 15:48:26 -0000
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 26 Oct 2001 15:48:26 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 17505 invoked by uid 50005); 26 Oct 2001 15:48:06 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4166. . Clean. Processed in 0.521271 secs); 26 Oct 2001 15:48:06 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 26 Oct 2001 15:48:05 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA04288; Fri, 26 Oct 2001 08:32:22 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 123995 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 26 Oct 2001 15:32:14          +0000
Received: from vmmr1.verisignmail.com (vmmr1.verisignmail.com          [216.168.230.137]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id          IAA04274 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Fri, 26 Oct 2001 08:32:13 -0700
Received: from vmms1.verisignmail.com (vmms1.verisignmail.com [10.166.0.138])          by vmmr1.verisignmail.com (Mirapoint) with ESMTP id AAX14504; Fri, 26          Oct 2001 11:31:42 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from vmms1.verisignmail.com (localhost.verisignmail.com [127.0.0.1])          by vmms1.verisignmail.com (Mirapoint) with SMTP id AEO59265 (AUTH          mpoulton@mtptech.com); Fri, 26 Oct 2001 11:32:04 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from 129.93.206.94 by vmms1.verisignmail.com with HTTP/1.1; Fri, 26          Oct 2001 11:32:03 -0400
X-Mailer: Mirapoint Webmail Direct 2.9.1.1
Message-ID:  <200110261532.AEO59265@vmms1.verisignmail.com>
Date:         Fri, 26 Oct 2001 11:32:03 -0400
Reply-To: <mpoulton@MTPTECH.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Mike Poulton" <mpoulton@MTPTECH.COM>
Subject:      [AR] NFPA Problems
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

If we form an non-profit corporation under which to do our
work, won't we have to comply with all the complicated
business-related hazmat and EPA regulations, OSHA standards,
land-use issues, etc.?
Mike Poulton
KC0LLX


From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 14430 invoked from network); 26 Oct 2001 16:02:53 -0000
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 26 Oct 2001 16:02:53 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 8927 invoked by uid 50005); 26 Oct 2001 16:02:06 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4164. . Clean. Processed in 0.302336 secs); 26 Oct 2001 16:02:06 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 26 Oct 2001 16:02:06 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA04331; Fri, 26 Oct 2001 08:37:21 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 123994 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 26 Oct 2001 15:37:20          +0000
Received: from rftzy05y.ca.nortel.com (h161s130a130n47.user.nortelnetworks.com          [47.130.130.161]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA04253          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 26 Oct 2001 08:25:59 -0700
Received: from rftzy232.ca.nortel.com (rftzy232.ca.nortel.com [47.130.185.32])          by rftzy05y.ca.nortel.com (Switch-2.2.0/Switch-2.2.0) with ESMTP id          f9QFPPY12288; Fri, 26 Oct 2001 11:25:26 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from NORTELNETWORKS.COM (wftzh00e.ca.nortel.com [47.130.116.9]) by          rftzy232.ca.nortel.com with SMTP (Microsoft Exchange Internet Mail          Service Version 5.5.2653.13) id VPQA6QAL; Fri, 26 Oct 2001 11:23:49          -0400
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.73C-CCK-MCD  [en] (X11; U; HP-UX B.10.20 9000/785)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <003d01c15e2c$cbd09120$1b0101c0@Anthony>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3BD98054.B9A4F4EF@NORTELNETWORKS.COM>
Date:         Fri, 26 Oct 2001 11:25:08 -0400
Reply-To: "Leech, Marcus \(EXCHANGE:FITZ:8M86\)" <mleech@NORTELNETWORKS.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Leech, Marcus \(EXCHANGE:FITZ:8M86\)" <mleech@NORTELNETWORKS.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Requests for comments - NFPA codes
Comments: To: Anthony Cesaroni <ACesaroni@cesaroni.net>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Anthony Cesaroni wrote:
>
> Marcus,
>
> Transport Canada cites NFPA 1127 in the HPR regulations. I believe the
> Ontario Fire Code has them included as well. Richard Bose of ERD/CERL in
> Ottawa sits on the NFPA.
>
I'd forgotten about TC referencing 1127.  Last time I checked, the OFC
  didn't explicitly include 1127,1125, or 1122.  I happened to be talking
  to the Ottawa Fire Department chief regulatory guy once (on a flight from
  Ottawa to Denver, I think), and we got talking about NFPA codes; he said
  they only adopt certain codes, and 1122,1125,and 1127 weren't adopted.
  Lots of local fire authorities have *subscriptions* to the entire NFPA
  code set, but pick and choose which codes they adopt.

It seems probable to me, not being a regulatory expert or anything, that the
  OFC applies only in situations where the local municipality hasn't
  constructed on of their own.

While parts of 1127 may be offensive to Am/Ex types here, parts of 1125 are
  downright *insulting* to manufacturers.  There are parts of it that very
  much limit reasonable design choices one could make. It is irksome
  that a committee where less than half the voting members are even *in*
  the HPR manufacturing business get to make arbitrary decisions affecting
  design choices.  In places where 1125 has been adopted as law, existing
  manufacturers, with existing product, could find themselves in violation.
  This is just dumb.

--
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Marcus Leech                             Mail:   Dept 8M70, MS 012, FITZ
Advisor                                  Phone: (ESN) 393-9145  +1 613 763 9145
Security Architecture and Planning       Fax:   (ESN) 393-9435  +1 613 763 9435
Nortel Networks                          mleech@nortelnetworks.com
-----------------Expressed opinions are my own, not my employer's------

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 15820 invoked from network); 26 Oct 2001 18:48:16 -0000
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 26 Oct 2001 18:48:16 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
Received: (qmail 28487 invoked by uid 50005); 26 Oct 2001 17:34:23 -0000
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4165. . Clean. Processed in 0.228045 secs); 26 Oct 2001 17:34:23 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 26 Oct 2001 17:34:22 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA04944; Fri, 26 Oct 2001 11:43:39 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 124047 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 26 Oct 2001 18:43:38          +0000
Received: from adobe.com (smtp-relay-2.adobe.com [192.150.11.2]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA04930 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri,          26 Oct 2001 11:43:38 -0700
Received: from inner-relay-1.corp.adobe.com ([153.32.1.51]) by adobe.com          (1.0.0/8.11.4) with ESMTP id f9QIgLA29111 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>;          Fri, 26 Oct 2001 11:42:21 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mailsj-v1.corp.adobe.com (mailsj-dev.corp.adobe.com          [153.32.1.192]) by inner-relay-1.corp.adobe.com (8.11.4/8.11.4) with          ESMTP id f9QIhGS14427 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 26 Oct 2001          11:43:16 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from sronald.earthlink.net ([153.32.63.111]) by          mailsj-v1.corp.adobe.com (Netscape Messaging Server 4.15 v1 Jul 11          2001 16:32:57) with ESMTP id GLTTBQ00.CCP; Fri, 26 Oct 2001 11:43:02          -0700
X-Sender: forkbomb@mail.earthlink.net
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
References: <Pine.LNX.4.10.10110260513090.3272-100000@itc.uci.edu>            <Pine.LNX.4.10.10110260513090.3272-100000@itc.uci.edu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <5.1.0.14.0.20011026114518.03a203e0@mail.earthlink.net>
Date:         Fri, 26 Oct 2001 11:47:21 -0700
Reply-To: <forkbomb@EARTHLINK.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <forkbomb@EARTHLINK.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] NFPA 1127
Comments: To: Jerry Irvine <01rocket@GTE.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <a0510031ab7ff2a996655@[63.24.225.78]>

At 08:02 AM 10/26/01 -0700, Jerry Irvine wrote:
>>Ray:
>
>
>>worry about wheels when I return.  As always, I welcome phone calls on
>>this matter, and if somebody would do the research on how to set this
>>thing up in my absense, I'd be very grateful.  I'm willing to put the time
>>in to make this thing a reality, and even a few bucks.
>
>I will send Ray a draft LLC operating agreement, but we need to come
>up with tentative names.
>
>Citizen Rocket Scientists LLC (descriptive) [CRS]
>arocket LLC (shows source of effort) [A]
>Civil Rocketry LLC [CR]
>Amateur Rocket Society LLC [ARS] (ARS was American Rocket Society before)
>Experimental Rocket Society LLC [ERS]
>all these names are geography independent


         I like the last two the best. I also like Experimental Rocketry
Association [ERA], but the acronym carries echoes of other political fights
that have nothing to do with our hobby.

         -p

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 26582 invoked from network); 26 Oct 2001 18:58:06 -0000
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 26 Oct 2001 18:58:06 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
Received: (qmail 29880 invoked by uid 50005); 26 Oct 2001 18:57:49 -0000
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4166. . Clean. Processed in 1.267083 secs); 26 Oct 2001 18:57:49 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 26 Oct 2001 18:57:47 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA04909; Fri, 26 Oct 2001 11:39:51 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 124040 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 26 Oct 2001 18:39:37          +0000
Received: from adobe.com (smtp-relay-1.adobe.com [192.150.11.1]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA04893; Fri, 26 Oct 2001 11:39:36 -0700
Received: from inner-relay-1.corp.adobe.com ([153.32.1.51]) by adobe.com          (1.0.0/8.11.4) with ESMTP id f9QIdwv21326; Fri, 26 Oct 2001 11:39:58          -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mailsj-v1.corp.adobe.com (mailsj-dev.corp.adobe.com          [153.32.1.192]) by inner-relay-1.corp.adobe.com (8.11.4/8.11.4) with          ESMTP id f9QIdES12173; Fri, 26 Oct 2001 11:39:14 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from sronald.earthlink.net ([153.32.63.111]) by          mailsj-v1.corp.adobe.com (Netscape Messaging Server 4.15 v1 Jul 11          2001 16:32:57) with ESMTP id GLTT5000.O5X; Fri, 26 Oct 2001 11:39:00          -0700
X-Sender: forkbomb@mail.earthlink.net
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
References: <200110251654.JAA28297@itc.uci.edu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <5.1.0.14.0.20011026114026.00ae3170@mail.earthlink.net>
Date:         Fri, 26 Oct 2001 11:43:20 -0700
Reply-To: <forkbomb@EARTHLINK.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <forkbomb@EARTHLINK.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] NFPA 1127
Comments: To: Ray Calkins <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <Pine.LNX.4.10.10110252200120.1478-100000@itc.uci.edu>

At 10:05 PM 10/25/01 -0700, Ray Calkins wrote:
>I propose a fairly easy way around this mess.  Suppose I (or somebody
>else, go ahead...) were to incorporate a non-profit educational/research
>LLC.  That company could contract individuals to conduct research and
>publish their results.  These researchers would then be paid "in kind",
>meaning they have access to the published results of all the other
>researchers.
>
>Self-regulation would occour by following a "safety code" which we would
>have to hash out ourselves.
>
>Since we're a company doing independant research, we would be exempt from
>the NFPA as I understand it.

         I like this. It could be a good regulatory tool for getting us
amateur/experimental folks our own voice in regulatory matters. It would
provide a nicely symmetrical progression for the regulators -- NAR handles
model rocketry, Tripoli handles HPR, and this new org handles amateur and
experimental rocketry.

         -p

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 11837 invoked from network); 26 Oct 2001 19:02:01 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 26 Oct 2001 19:02:01 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 4285 invoked by uid 50005); 26 Oct 2001 19:01:57 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4166. . Clean. Processed in 0.235796 secs); 26 Oct 2001 19:01:57 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 26 Oct 2001 19:01:57 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA05009; Fri, 26 Oct 2001 11:56:19 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 124057 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 26 Oct 2001 18:56:17          +0000
Received: from proxy2.ba.best.com (root@proxy2.ba.best.com [206.184.139.14]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA04995 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Fri, 26 Oct 2001 11:56:17 -0700
Received: from [10.0.0.2] (snvadslgw2poold155.snjs.uswestqwest.net          [168.103.213.155]) by proxy2.ba.best.com (8.9.3/8.9.2/best.out) with          ESMTP id LAA20754 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Fri, 26 Oct 2001          11:55:30 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Sender:  (Unverified)
References: <v04210100b7ff0cddbc7a@[10.0.0.2]> <3BD9AD97.A42FC13E@hollinet.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <v04210107b7ff5f5b2ba4@[10.0.0.2]>
Date:         Fri, 26 Oct 2001 11:54:57 -0700
Reply-To: "bob fortune" <bob@FORTUNEPAINT.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "bob fortune" <bob@FORTUNEPAINT.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Zn/S
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <3BD9AD97.A42FC13E@hollinet.com>

Bill Colburn and I have been chatting about the changes in NFPA.
Here are his comments on zinc-sulfur:

>This is how misconcepts get promulgated, we are watching it happen before our
>very eyes!
>
>Zn/S if about an order of magnitude safer than APCP's. Its energy
>level alone is
>about 1/5th to 1/10th that of APCP. In the tests that are used for safety
>comparisons by the bureau of mines and picatinny arsenal, Zn/S far
>outshines APCP
>as far as safety goes. If gary had been making Zn/S in Las vegas, he
>likely would
>never have had a fire!
>
>There has only been one accident attributable to micrograin in
>recent times and
>the victim, I am absolutely certain, misreported what happened. In the first
>place the "law" for micrograin is that you never bring it home to
>your garage! It
>does not store worth a damn anyway. Secondly, a spark will not
>ignite it unless
>it is dispersed in air (a very foolhardy thing to do). But the same spark will
>also ignite mere sulfur in air too. And aluminum, etc. etc.
>
>I have seen a piece of aluminum sheet melted out from under a bit of
>micrograin
>powder without it being ignited. Its autoignition temperature under controlled
>conditions is 800 F! Where APCP is 450 F! that tells the story right
>there. Zn/S
>can't be initiated by percussion whereas many APCP comps can. APCP
>under ceertain
>conditions may be detonbable creating pressures of millions of psi. Zn/S is
>limited to a few thousand psi by the vapor pressure of the ZnS and Zn
>consituents.
>
>BC

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 24345 invoked from network); 26 Oct 2001 22:33:16 -0000
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 26 Oct 2001 22:33:16 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 323 invoked by uid 50005); 26 Oct 2001 21:19:58 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4166. . Clean. Processed in 0.514612 secs); 26 Oct 2001 21:19:58 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 26 Oct 2001 21:19:57 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA05594; Fri, 26 Oct 2001 15:20:33 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 124093 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 26 Oct 2001 22:19:27          +0000
Received: from izzy6.izzy.net (izzy6.izzy.net [207.158.132.178]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA05573 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri,          26 Oct 2001 15:19:26 -0700
Received: from izzy.net (host-224.subnet-140.med.umich.edu [141.214.140.224])          by izzy6.izzy.net (8.9.2/8.9.3) with ESMTP id SAA17085 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 26 Oct 2001 18:19:14 -0400 (EDT)
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.78 [en] (WinNT; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <Pine.LNX.4.10.10110260513090.3272-100000@itc.uci.edu>            <Pine.LNX.4.10.10110260513090.3272-100000@itc.uci.edu>            <5.1.0.14.0.20011026114518.03a203e0@mail.earthlink.net>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3BD9E165.DDFDFBDD@izzy.net>
Date:         Fri, 26 Oct 2001 18:19:17 -0400
Reply-To: <cscholl@izzy.net>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Curtis Scholl" <cscholl@izzy.net>
Subject:      Re: [AR] NFPA 1127 And Our Incorporation
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Hi All:

  I don't really want ot rain on anyone's parade here, but I do recall a
predecessor organization that espoused the benefits of a national
organization. They had a magazine, military support at times, and were
using moneys collected to build a great launching center.

  They too had this idea of being a force for good Amateur Society
building.

   They became the AIAA. With big payrolls. I couldn't even begin to
describe my shock and surprise at the costs of the reports they generate
now. Once they got the big contracts they divorced themselves from the
rest of the Amateur World.

  If I am wrong on this please correct me. I also don't want another
Bruce Kelly's TRA situation. And I can just sense someone just waiting
to become another Bruce Kelly here. It could happen. Although we are
rocket oriented we are not just rocket oriented. We are a rocketRY
organization and a propulsion research org.

I propose the:

Amateur Rocketry Research Society LLC (International w/out saying it)
ARRS

American Rocketry Research Society LLC (Limiting to the Americas and
using some of the old in the new vis. ARS of old and taking out
AMATEUR.)
ARRS

Amateur Rocketry Research Association LLC (International w/out saying it
but still amateur)
ARRA

Experimental Rocketry Research Society LLC (International in scope and
takes AMATEUR out of it.)
ERRS

Continental Rocketry Research Society LLC (includes Canada, Mexico and
S.America and limits area and takes Amateur out of it)
CRRS

American Propulsion Research Society LLC
APRS
Continental Propulsion Research Society LLC
CPRS
Experimental Propulsion Research Society LLC
EPRS not to be confused with the ERPS.

WE are amateurs but we don't have to act like it or advertise it. We are
as professional as the next guy given our status.

Curtis Scholl
cscholl@izzy.net

Reaction Research Society
TRA 3976
NAR 72953



> >Amateur Rocket Society LLC [ARS] (ARS was American Rocket Society before)
> >Experimental Rocket Society LLC [ERS]

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 15128 invoked from network); 26 Oct 2001 22:38:57 -0000
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 26 Oct 2001 22:38:57 -0000
Received: (qmail 9977 invoked by uid 50005); 26 Oct 2001 21:25:39 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4166. . Clean. Processed in 1.31407 secs); 26 Oct 2001 21:25:39 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 26 Oct 2001 21:25:37 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA05647; Fri, 26 Oct 2001 15:34:43 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 124103 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 26 Oct 2001 22:34:41          +0000
Received: from cesaroni.net ([204.101.26.130]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7)          with ESMTP id PAA05633 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 26 Oct 2001          15:34:40 -0700
Received: from Anthony by cesaroni.net with SMTP (MDaemon.v2.8.7.0.R) for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 26 Oct 2001 18:38:47 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 8.5, Build 4.71.2173.0
Importance: Normal
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
X-MDaemon-Deliver-To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
X-Return-Path: ACesaroni@cesaroni.net
Message-ID:  <004a01c15e6e$c133de60$1b0101c0@Anthony>
Date:         Fri, 26 Oct 2001 18:37:12 -0400
Reply-To: "Anthony Cesaroni" <ACesaroni@cesaroni.net>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Anthony Cesaroni" <ACesaroni@cesaroni.net>
Subject:      Re: [AR] NFPA 1127 And Our Incorporation
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <3BD9E165.DDFDFBDD@izzy.net>

How do you propose such an organization would deal with ITAR and CGRP laws?

Anthony.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@itc.uci.edu]On
> Behalf Of Curtis Scholl
> Sent: Friday, October 26, 2001 6:19 PM
> To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
> Subject: Re: NFPA 1127 And Our Incorporation
>
>
> Hi All:
>
>   I don't really want ot rain on anyone's parade here, but I do recall a
> predecessor organization that espoused the benefits of a national
> organization. They had a magazine, military support at times, and were
> using moneys collected to build a great launching center.
>
>   They too had this idea of being a force for good Amateur Society
> building.
>
>    They became the AIAA. With big payrolls. I couldn't even begin to
> describe my shock and surprise at the costs of the reports they generate
> now. Once they got the big contracts they divorced themselves from the
> rest of the Amateur World.
>
>   If I am wrong on this please correct me. I also don't want another
> Bruce Kelly's TRA situation. And I can just sense someone just waiting
> to become another Bruce Kelly here. It could happen. Although we are
> rocket oriented we are not just rocket oriented. We are a rocketRY
> organization and a propulsion research org.
>
> I propose the:
>
> Amateur Rocketry Research Society LLC (International w/out saying it)
> ARRS
>
> American Rocketry Research Society LLC (Limiting to the Americas and
> using some of the old in the new vis. ARS of old and taking out
> AMATEUR.)
> ARRS
>
> Amateur Rocketry Research Association LLC (International w/out saying it
> but still amateur)
> ARRA
>
> Experimental Rocketry Research Society LLC (International in scope and
> takes AMATEUR out of it.)
> ERRS
>
> Continental Rocketry Research Society LLC (includes Canada, Mexico and
> S.America and limits area and takes Amateur out of it)
> CRRS
>
> American Propulsion Research Society LLC
> APRS
> Continental Propulsion Research Society LLC
> CPRS
> Experimental Propulsion Research Society LLC
> EPRS not to be confused with the ERPS.
>
> WE are amateurs but we don't have to act like it or advertise it. We are
> as professional as the next guy given our status.
>
> Curtis Scholl
> cscholl@izzy.net
>
> Reaction Research Society
> TRA 3976
> NAR 72953
>
>
>
> > >Amateur Rocket Society LLC [ARS] (ARS was American Rocket
> Society before)
> > >Experimental Rocket Society LLC [ERS]
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 22394 invoked from network); 26 Oct 2001 23:06:21 -0000
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 26 Oct 2001 23:06:21 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 19942 invoked by uid 50005); 26 Oct 2001 23:06:17 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4166. . Clean. Processed in 0.125813 secs); 26 Oct 2001 23:06:17 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 26 Oct 2001 23:06:16 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA05751; Fri, 26 Oct 2001 16:00:52 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 124110 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 26 Oct 2001 23:00:50          +0000
Received: from fcexgw03.efi.com ([192.68.228.82]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7)          with SMTP id PAA05703 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Fri, 26 Oct 2001          15:50:49 -0700
Received: from 10.10.12.104 by fcexgw03.efi.com (InterScan E-Mail VirusWall          NT); Fri, 26 Oct 2001 15:50:29 -0700
Received: from earthlink.net (peroxide.efi.com [10.10.89.46]) by          EX-IMC3-CORP.efi.com with SMTP (Microsoft Exchange Internet Mail          Service Version 5.5.2653.13) id 4W789FG3; Fri, 26 Oct 2001 15:50:50          -0700
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.14-5.0 i686)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <004a01c15e6e$c133de60$1b0101c0@Anthony>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3BD9E8CE.B74D1302@earthlink.net>
Date:         Fri, 26 Oct 2001 15:50:54 -0700
Reply-To: "David Weinshenker" <daze39@EARTHLINK.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "David Weinshenker" <daze39@EARTHLINK.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] NFPA 1127 And Our Incorporation
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Anthony Cesaroni wrote:
> How do you propose such an organization would deal with ITAR and CGRP laws?

What _exactly_ do these laws prohibit?
Are they country-specific, or is there some
sort of internationally-mandated formal structure?

-dave w

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 20527 invoked from network); 26 Oct 2001 23:57:27 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 26 Oct 2001 23:57:27 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 12817 invoked by uid 50005); 26 Oct 2001 22:43:33 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4165. . Clean. Processed in 0.476435 secs); 26 Oct 2001 22:43:33 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 26 Oct 2001 22:43:32 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA05887; Fri, 26 Oct 2001 16:38:44 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 124130 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 26 Oct 2001 23:38:43          +0000
Received: from smtp009pub.verizon.net ([206.46.170.188]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA05873 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri,          26 Oct 2001 16:38:42 -0700
Received: from [63.24.225.78] (1Cust35.tnt1.rancho-cucamonga.ca.da.uu.net          [63.24.225.35]) by smtp009pub.verizon.net  with ESMTP for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; id f9QNcQk00122 Fri, 26 Oct 2001 18:38:26          -0500 (CDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: GTE/01rocket@mail.gte.net
References: <Pine.LNX.4.10.10110260513090.3272-100000@itc.uci.edu>            <Pine.LNX.4.10.10110260513090.3272-100000@itc.uci.edu>            <5.1.0.14.0.20011026114518.03a203e0@mail.earthlink.net>            <3BD9E165.DDFDFBDD@izzy.net>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <a0510031bb7ffa3ee22ca@[63.24.225.78]>
Date:         Fri, 26 Oct 2001 16:40:12 -0700
Reply-To: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] NFPA 1127 And Our Incorporation
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <3BD9E165.DDFDFBDD@izzy.net>

>Scholl:


>   They too had this idea of being a force for good Amateur Society
>building.
>
>    They became the AIAA.


Which raises the point they might actually assist given that was
their original charter and they have drifted far from it.

Lemonade from lemons and all.


>
>   If I am wrong on this please correct me. I also don't want another
>Bruce Kelly's TRA situation. And I can just sense someone just waiting
>to become another Bruce Kelly here.

Bruce is a meglomaniac.  There are not that many people with that
personality trait in this discussion or they would have moved
forward, formed the club and claimed we all supported them.

>Amateur Rocketry Research Society LLC (International w/out saying it)
>ARRS
>
>American Rocketry Research Society LLC (Limiting to the Americas and
>using some of the old in the new vis. ARS of old and taking out
>AMATEUR.)
>ARRS
>
>Amateur Rocketry Research Association LLC (International w/out saying it
>but still amateur)
>ARRA
>
>Experimental Rocketry Research Society LLC (International in scope and
>takes AMATEUR out of it.)
>ERRS
>
>Continental Rocketry Research Society LLC (includes Canada, Mexico and
>S.America and limits area and takes Amateur out of it)
>CRRS
>
>American Propulsion Research Society LLC
>APRS
>Continental Propulsion Research Society LLC
>CPRS
>Experimental Propulsion Research Society LLC
>EPRS not to be confused with the ERPS.
>
>WE are amateurs but we don't have to act like it or advertise it. We are
>as professional as the next guy given our status.

Thanks for the good input.

Jerry

--
Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
Opinion, the whole thing.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 29211 invoked from network); 26 Oct 2001 23:59:55 -0000
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 26 Oct 2001 23:59:55 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 1791 invoked by uid 50005); 26 Oct 2001 23:59:09 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4164. . Clean. Processed in 0.149899 secs); 26 Oct 2001 23:59:09 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 26 Oct 2001 23:59:09 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA05851; Fri, 26 Oct 2001 16:36:33 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 124119 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 26 Oct 2001 23:36:20          +0000
Received: from mta2.snet.net (mta2.snet.net [204.60.203.71]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA05837 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri,          26 Oct 2001 16:36:19 -0700
Received: from snet.net (2.69.252.64.snet.net [64.252.69.2] (may be forged)) by          mta2.snet.net (8.12.1/8.12.1/SNET-mx-1.1/D-1.1/O-1.1) with ESMTP id          f9QNaIL2026564 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 26 Oct 2001 19:36:18          -0400 (EDT)
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.75 [en] (Win98; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <Pine.LNX.4.10.10110260513090.3272-100000@itc.uci.edu>            <Pine.LNX.4.10.10110260513090.3272-100000@itc.uci.edu>            <5.1.0.14.0.20011026114518.03a203e0@mail.earthlink.net>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3BD9F54C.8EDDE88E@snet.net>
Date:         Fri, 26 Oct 2001 19:44:12 -0400
Reply-To: "Blake Mantel" <BMantel@SNET.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Blake Mantel" <BMantel@SNET.NET>
Organization: done through the use of very fuzzy logic!
Subject:      Re: [AR] NFPA 1127
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

forkbomb@EARTHLINK.NET wrote:

> At 08:02 AM 10/26/01 -0700, Jerry Irvine wrote:
> >>Ray:
> >I will send Ray a draft LLC operating agreement, but we need to come
> >up with tentative names.
> >
> >Citizen Rocket Scientists LLC (descriptive) [CRS]
> >arocket LLC (shows source of effort) [A]
> >Civil Rocketry LLC [CR]
> >Amateur Rocket Society LLC [ARS] (ARS was American Rocket Society before)
> >Experimental Rocket Society LLC [ERS]
> >all these names are geography independent
>
>          I like the last two the best. I also like Experimental Rocketry
> Association [ERA], but the acronym carries echoes of other political fights
> that have nothing to do with our hobby.
>          -p

How about....

Amateur Rocketry Cooperative - ARC

Blake
--
CUM CATAPULTAE PROSCRIPTAE ERUNT TUM SOLI PROSCRIPTI CATAPULTAS HABEBUNT.
(When catapults are outlawed, only outlaws will have catapults....)
Triumph Tiger Motorcycle page at: http://pages.cthome.net/bmantel/

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 27663 invoked from network); 27 Oct 2001 00:07:57 -0000
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 27 Oct 2001 00:07:57 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 30989 invoked by uid 50005); 26 Oct 2001 22:54:38 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4166. . Clean. Processed in 0.474531 secs); 26 Oct 2001 22:54:38 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 26 Oct 2001 22:54:36 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA05958; Fri, 26 Oct 2001 16:50:16 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 124141 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 26 Oct 2001 23:50:14          +0000
Received: from smtp04.roc.frontiernet.net (alteon01.roc.frontiernet.net          [66.133.130.235] (may be forged)) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with          SMTP id QAA05944 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 26 Oct 2001 16:50:14          -0700
Received: (qmail 7785 invoked from network); 26 Oct 2001 23:49:43 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO frontiernet.net) ([64.208.224.231])          (envelope-sender <tbinford@frontiernet.net>) by 0 (qmail-ldap-1.03)          with SMTP for <ssstolt@seanet.com>; 26 Oct 2001 23:49:43 -0000
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.74 [en] (Win98; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <61A2F0A8E936D311876A0008C74BF1EC96AB43@DD21AE02>            <3BD74A7D.7164F3DC@biomicro.com>            <3BD758F5.5DC60BFB@frontiernet.net> <3BD79BEC.A12E156E@seanet.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3BD9F820.EA146D51@frontiernet.net>
Date:         Fri, 26 Oct 2001 19:56:16 -0400
Reply-To: <tbinford@frontiernet.net>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Tom Binford" <tbinford@frontiernet.net>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Requests for comments - NFPA codes
Comments: To: Sherwood Stolt <ssstolt@seanet.com>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Sherwood Stolt wrote:
>
> Tom Binford wrote:
>
> > This only prohibits these activities as a part of high power rocketry.
> > It does not prohibit amateur rocketry, this is outside the scope of HPR.
> > If a state adopts 1127, then prohibits rocketry outside of HPR, then it
> > means something.
> >
> > Tom
>
> Wishful thinking.  1127 defines HPR as any rocket with a total impulse
> in the range.  Flying any rocket that doesn't meet the requirements of
> the code is prohibited.

Not wishful at all - always check the scope:

>From the list of adopted modifications, page 1817:

1.1.1 This code shall apply to the design, construction, limitation
of propellant mass and power, and reliability of all high power
rocket motors and motor components produced commercially for
sale to or use by the certified user for education, recreation, and
sporting competition.

Note the reference to "produced commercially"
Also, in the proposed full version, starting on page 1825, about 2/3
through the pdf file:

1.3 Application. This code shall apply to the design, construction,
limitation of propellant mass and power, and reliability of high power
rocket motors and motor components produced commercially for
sale or for use by a certified user for education, recreation, and
sporting competition.

A non-commercial self made motor is *not* included in the definition of
a HPR motor.
It's up to the states to determine what to do with self made motors,
they can ignore, treat as fireworks, treat as any other explosive (GA
does this so far), or go the California route with a set of regulations,
or outright ban them.

Tom

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 3355 invoked from network); 27 Oct 2001 00:44:31 -0000
X-Priority: 3
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 27 Oct 2001 00:44:31 -0000
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 23433 invoked by uid 50005); 26 Oct 2001 23:30:37 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4165. . Clean. Processed in 0.267803 secs); 26 Oct 2001 23:30:37 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 26 Oct 2001 23:30:36 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA06102; Fri, 26 Oct 2001 17:27:59 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 124159 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 27 Oct 2001 00:27:56          +0000
Received: from imo-r07.mx.aol.com (imo-r07.mx.aol.com [152.163.225.103]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA06088 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Fri, 26 Oct 2001 17:27:55 -0700
Received: from Bbobrocket@aol.com by imo-r07.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v31_r1.8.) id          i.20.1e06f7d8 (4331); Fri, 26 Oct 2001 20:27:44 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0D7F_01C56B69.5405C6D0"
X-Mailer: AOL 6.0 for Windows US sub 10536
Message-ID:  <20.1e06f7d8.290b5980@aol.com>
Date:         Fri, 26 Oct 2001 20:27:44 EDT
Reply-To: <Bbobrocket@AOL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <Bbobrocket@AOL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] KNO3 and sugar motors
Comments: To: andy@tns.net
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0D7F_01C56B69.5405C6D0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit


 Hi Andy,
     To calculate ISP and a great web site for Candy motors see Richard
Nakka's Experimental Rocketry Site at <A HREF="http://www.nakka-rocketry.net/">www.nakka-rocketry.net</A>.


 Bob P.





------=_NextPart_000_0D7F_01C56B69.5405C6D0
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<HTML><FONT FACE=arial,helvetica><FONT  SIZE=2>
<BR> Hi Andy,
<BR> &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;To calculate ISP and a great web site for Candy motors see Richard Nakka's Experimental Rocketry Site at <A HREF="http://www.nakka-rocketry.net/">www.nakka-rocketry.net</A>.
<BR>
<BR>
<BR> Bob P.
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR></FONT></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0D7F_01C56B69.5405C6D0--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 8177 invoked from network); 27 Oct 2001 01:03:37 -0000
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 27 Oct 2001 01:03:37 -0000
Received: (qmail 2980 invoked by uid 50005); 27 Oct 2001 01:02:52 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4164. . Clean. Processed in 0.167752 secs); 27 Oct 2001 01:02:52 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 27 Oct 2001 01:02:51 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA06195; Fri, 26 Oct 2001 17:46:08 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 124170 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 27 Oct 2001 00:46:03          +0000
Received: from mta03.mail.mel.aone.net.au (mta03.mail.au.uu.net [203.2.192.83])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA06180 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 26 Oct 2001 17:46:02 -0700
Received: from win2pk ([63.34.210.1]) by mta03.mail.mel.aone.net.au with SMTP          id <20011027004554.ZMFD15297.mta03.mail.mel.aone.net.au@win2pk> for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 27 Oct 2001 10:45:54 +1000
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
Importance: Normal
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <NEBBJIGOELOLIBCCPKDCCEAPCCAA.geordi@c031.aone.net.au>
Date:         Sat, 27 Oct 2001 11:12:51 +1000
Reply-To: "Troy Prideaux" <geordi@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Troy Prideaux" <geordi@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Zn/S
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <v04210107b7ff5f5b2ba4@[10.0.0.2]>

Well, I totally disagree with his views on this and can probably go on all
day as to why but that's not going to help anyone or fix anything. I will
say that the primary factor in determining a propellants level of hazard to
*personal injury* when dealing with amateur quantities is its burn rate.
THAT'S No.1 and it stands out on its own by a mile. Next is the propellants
sensitivity it auto ignition, then sensitivity to fiction, shock, stability,
energy required for ignition, sensitivity to foreign materials & moisture,
energy contained & released etc. Now, IMHO non catalysed APCP can outperform
on most of the before mentioned safety hazards against ZnS especially the
low solid loadings varieties. True, ZnS may outperform some high solids
loadings/highly catalysed APCP in many of the points but it's not a true
comparison of what amateurs are playing around with IMHO.


Troy.

>-----Original Message-----
>From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@itc.uci.edu]On
>Behalf Of bob fortune
>Sent: Saturday, 27 October 2001 4:55 AM
>To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
>Subject: Re: [AR] Zn/S
>
>
>Bill Colburn and I have been chatting about the changes in NFPA.
>Here are his comments on zinc-sulfur:
>
>>This is how misconcepts get promulgated, we are watching it
>happen before our
>>very eyes!
>>
>>Zn/S if about an order of magnitude safer than APCP's. Its energy
>>level alone is
>>about 1/5th to 1/10th that of APCP. In the tests that are used for safety
>>comparisons by the bureau of mines and picatinny arsenal, Zn/S far
>>outshines APCP
>>as far as safety goes. If gary had been making Zn/S in Las vegas, he
>>likely would
>>never have had a fire!
>>
>>There has only been one accident attributable to micrograin in
>>recent times and
>>the victim, I am absolutely certain, misreported what happened.
>In the first
>>place the "law" for micrograin is that you never bring it home to
>>your garage! It
>>does not store worth a damn anyway. Secondly, a spark will not
>>ignite it unless
>>it is dispersed in air (a very foolhardy thing to do). But the
>same spark will
>>also ignite mere sulfur in air too. And aluminum, etc. etc.
>>
>>I have seen a piece of aluminum sheet melted out from under a bit of
>>micrograin
>>powder without it being ignited. Its autoignition temperature
>under controlled
>>conditions is 800 F! Where APCP is 450 F! that tells the story right
>>there. Zn/S
>>can't be initiated by percussion whereas many APCP comps can. APCP
>>under ceertain
>>conditions may be detonbable creating pressures of millions of
>psi. Zn/S is
>>limited to a few thousand psi by the vapor pressure of the ZnS and Zn
>>consituents.
>>
>>BC
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 9569 invoked from network); 27 Oct 2001 01:31:50 -0000
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 27 Oct 2001 01:31:50 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 31646 invoked by uid 50005); 27 Oct 2001 00:18:31 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4166. . Clean. Processed in 0.429322 secs); 27 Oct 2001 00:18:31 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 27 Oct 2001 00:18:31 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA06311; Fri, 26 Oct 2001 18:17:09 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 124181 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 27 Oct 2001 01:17:06          +0000
Received: from fcexgw02.efi.com (ns3.efi.com [192.68.228.85] (may be forged))          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id SAA06269 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 26 Oct 2001 18:07:05 -0700
Received: from 10.10.12.104 by fcexgw02.efi.com (InterScan E-Mail VirusWall          NT); Fri, 26 Oct 2001 18:06:56 -0700
Received: from earthlink.net (peroxide.efi.com [10.10.89.46]) by          EX-IMC3-CORP.efi.com with SMTP (Microsoft Exchange Internet Mail          Service Version 5.5.2653.13) id VWJC19CA; Fri, 26 Oct 2001 18:07:08          -0700
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.14-5.0 i686)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <61A2F0A8E936D311876A0008C74BF1EC96AB43@DD21AE02>            <3BD74A7D.7164F3DC@biomicro.com>            <3BD758F5.5DC60BFB@frontiernet.net> <3BD79BEC.A12E156E@seanet.com>            <3BD9F820.EA146D51@frontiernet.net>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3BDA08C9.29E09FF5@earthlink.net>
Date:         Fri, 26 Oct 2001 18:07:21 -0700
Reply-To: "David Weinshenker" <daze39@EARTHLINK.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "David Weinshenker" <daze39@EARTHLINK.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Requests for comments - NFPA codes
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Tom Binford wrote:
> > Wishful thinking.  1127 defines HPR as any rocket with a total impulse
> > in the range.  Flying any rocket that doesn't meet the requirements of
> > the code is prohibited.
>
> Not wishful at all - always check the scope:
>
> >From the list of adopted modifications, page 1817:
>
> 1.1.1 This code shall apply to the design, construction, limitation
> of propellant mass and power, and reliability of all high power
> rocket motors and motor components produced commercially for
> sale to or use by the certified user for education, recreation, and
> sporting competition.
>
> Note the reference to "produced commercially"
> Also, in the proposed full version, starting on page 1825, about 2/3
> through the pdf file:
>
> 1.3 Application. This code shall apply to the design, construction,
> limitation of propellant mass and power, and reliability of high power
> rocket motors and motor components produced commercially for
> sale or for use by a certified user for education, recreation, and
> sporting competition.
>
> A non-commercial self made motor is *not* included in the definition of
> a HPR motor.
> It's up to the states to determine what to do with self made motors,
> they can ignore, treat as fireworks, treat as any other explosive (GA
> does this so far), or go the California route with a set of regulations,
> or outright ban them.

It seems to me to be rather a "bug in the code" that NFPA1127 both declares
amateur rocketry to be outside its scope, and also forbids it... this certainly
has the potential to create ambiguities if the states are not careful about
how they "link it in" to their fire safety regulations.

-dave w

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 24997 invoked from network); 27 Oct 2001 01:46:13 -0000
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 27 Oct 2001 01:46:13 -0000
X-Priority: 3
Received: (qmail 8663 invoked by uid 50005); 27 Oct 2001 01:46:09 -0000
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4166. . Clean. Processed in 0.157056 secs); 27 Oct 2001 01:46:09 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 27 Oct 2001 01:46:08 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA06410; Fri, 26 Oct 2001 18:41:54 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 124192 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 27 Oct 2001 01:41:51          +0000
Received: from rftzy05y.ca.nortel.com (h161s130a130n47.user.nortelnetworks.com          [47.130.130.161]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA06368          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 26 Oct 2001 18:30:30 -0700
Received: from rftzy232.ca.nortel.com (rftzy232.ca.nortel.com [47.130.185.32])          by rftzy05y.ca.nortel.com (Switch-2.2.0/Switch-2.2.0) with ESMTP id          f9R1TvY00160; Fri, 26 Oct 2001 21:29:57 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from nortelnetworks.com (acart12m.ca.nortel.com [47.129.8.130]) by          rftzy232.ca.nortel.com with SMTP (Microsoft Exchange Internet Mail          Service Version 5.5.2653.13) id VVPJ03MK; Fri, 26 Oct 2001 21:28:19          -0400
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.77 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.19 i686)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <004a01c15e6e$c133de60$1b0101c0@Anthony>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3BDA0ECF.33248D54@nortelnetworks.com>
Date:         Fri, 26 Oct 2001 21:33:03 -0400
Reply-To: "Marcus D. Leech" <mleech@NORTELNETWORKS.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Marcus D. Leech" <mleech@NORTELNETWORKS.COM>
Organization: Nortel Networks: Information Systems
Subject:      Re: [AR] NFPA 1127 And Our Incorporation
Comments: To: Anthony Cesaroni <ACesaroni@cesaroni.net>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Anthony Cesaroni wrote:
>
> How do you propose such an organization would deal with ITAR and CGRP laws?
>
> Anthony.
>
I don't know about CGRP, but ITAR applies to individuals as well as
corporations
  and other legal structures.  While I'm not a lawyer, my experience
with ITAR and
  cryptography would tend to suggest that having a corporate structure
wouldn't
  drastically increase exposure to ITAR regulations.

It seems entirely likely that there have been discussion on this list
that some
  over-zealous ITARite could construe as being in violation.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 2107 invoked from network); 27 Oct 2001 02:06:22 -0000
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 27 Oct 2001 02:06:22 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 9164 invoked by uid 50005); 27 Oct 2001 02:06:18 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4166. . Clean. Processed in 0.21634 secs); 27 Oct 2001 02:06:18 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 27 Oct 2001 02:06:17 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA06494; Fri, 26 Oct 2001 19:02:24 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 124205 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 27 Oct 2001 02:02:20          +0000
Received: from izzy6.izzy.net (izzy6.izzy.net [207.158.132.178]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA06480 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri,          26 Oct 2001 19:02:19 -0700
Received: from izzy.net (annex-1-1-port-32.dialup.coast.net [207.158.135.96])          by izzy6.izzy.net (8.9.2/8.9.3) with ESMTP id WAA25599; Fri, 26 Oct          2001 22:02:06 -0400 (EDT)
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (Win95; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <004a01c15e6e$c133de60$1b0101c0@Anthony>            <3BDA0ECF.33248D54@nortelnetworks.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3BDA1612.B275E698@izzy.net>
Date:         Fri, 26 Oct 2001 22:04:02 -0400
Reply-To: <cscholl@izzy.net>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Curtis Scholl" <cscholl@izzy.net>
Subject:      Re: [AR] NFPA 1127 And Our Incorporation
Comments: To: "Marcus D. Leech" <mleech@NORTELNETWORKS.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

OK. I'll bite...


   what is ITAR and CGRP??

Curtis Scholl

cscholl@izzy.net

"Marcus D. Leech" wrote:
>
> Anthony Cesaroni wrote:
> >
> > How do you propose such an organization would deal with ITAR and CGRP laws?
> >
> > Anthony.
> >
> I don't know about CGRP, but ITAR applies to individuals as well as
> corporations
>   and other legal structures.  While I'm not a lawyer, my experience
> with ITAR and
>   cryptography would tend to suggest that having a corporate structure
> wouldn't
>   drastically increase exposure to ITAR regulations.
>
> It seems entirely likely that there have been discussion on this list
> that some
>   over-zealous ITARite could construe as being in violation.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 11563 invoked from network); 27 Oct 2001 02:22:29 -0000
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 27 Oct 2001 02:22:29 -0000
Received: (qmail 10146 invoked by uid 50005); 27 Oct 2001 01:09:10 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4166. . Clean. Processed in 0.29842 secs); 27 Oct 2001 01:09:10 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 27 Oct 2001 01:09:09 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA06549; Fri, 26 Oct 2001 19:17:48 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 124212 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 27 Oct 2001 02:17:47          +0000
Received: from fep3-orange.clear.net.nz (fep3-orange.clear.net.nz          [203.97.32.3]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA06535          for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Fri, 26 Oct 2001 19:17:46 -0700
Received: from mkbs (203-167-161-33.dialup.clear.net.nz [203.167.161.33]) by          fep3-orange.clear.net.nz (1.5/1.8) with SMTP id PAA29041; Sat, 27 Oct          2001 15:17:38 +1300 (NZDT)
References:  <000401c15cd4$a2034530$0200a8c0@24.53.64.18>              <006901c15dc9$7619da60$4a00a8c0@hatjs>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <000501c15e8d$aade9c80$0700a8c0@mkbs>
Date:         Sat, 27 Oct 2001 00:19:38 +1300
Reply-To: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Organization: Applied Technology
Subject:      Re: [AR] T6 and high temperatures
Comments: To: Jamie Morken <jmorken@HOME.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

> > I know that tungsten is VERY EXPENSIVE (and hard to machine) but seems
it
> > would be ideal for rocket nozzles (melting point: 6,098/F)... At least
as
> > throat inserts. Anybody on the list have experience doing this?
>
> The SORAC project was apparently using tungsten nozzle inserts in their
big
> hybrids.
> To machine it I think it needs to be heated up and then "it cuts like
> butter" :)


How hot ? (6000 F :-) ?)

Also VERY heavy (one of the densest materials known)..
AFAIR it may not like an oxidising exhaust as much as a reducing one so
mixture may be important.



                    Russell McMahon

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 21157 invoked from network); 27 Oct 2001 02:39:30 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 27 Oct 2001 02:39:30 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 19658 invoked by uid 50005); 27 Oct 2001 01:25:34 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4165. . Clean. Processed in 0.455101 secs); 27 Oct 2001 01:25:34 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 27 Oct 2001 01:25:34 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA06597; Fri, 26 Oct 2001 19:24:03 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 124219 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 27 Oct 2001 02:24:01          +0000
Received: from smtp007pub.verizon.net (smtp007pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.186])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA06583 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 26 Oct 2001 19:24:00 -0700
Received: from [63.24.225.78] (1Cust179.tnt2.rancho-cucamonga.ca.da.uu.net          [63.15.225.179]) by smtp007pub.verizon.net  with ESMTP for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; id f9R2NQj20485 Fri, 26 Oct 2001 21:23:26          -0500 (CDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: GTE/01rocket@mail.gte.net
References: <Pine.LNX.4.10.10110260513090.3272-100000@itc.uci.edu>            <Pine.LNX.4.10.10110260513090.3272-100000@itc.uci.edu>            <5.1.0.14.0.20011026114518.03a203e0@mail.earthlink.net>            <3BD9F54C.8EDDE88E@snet.net>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <a0510031eb7ffcb5133bb@[63.24.225.78]>
Date:         Fri, 26 Oct 2001 19:25:30 -0700
Reply-To: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] NFPA 1127
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <3BD9F54C.8EDDE88E@snet.net>

>forkbomb@EARTHLINK.NET wrote:
>
>>  At 08:02 AM 10/26/01 -0700, Jerry Irvine wrote:
>>  >>Ray:
>>  >I will send Ray a draft LLC operating agreement, but we need to come
>>  >up with tentative names.
>>  >
>>  >Citizen Rocket Scientists LLC (descriptive) [CRS]
>>  >arocket LLC (shows source of effort) [A]
>>  >Civil Rocketry LLC [CR]
>>  >Amateur Rocket Society LLC [ARS] (ARS was American Rocket Society before)
>>  >Experimental Rocket Society LLC [ERS]
>>  >all these names are geography independent
>>
>>           I like the last two the best. I also like Experimental Rocketry
>>  Association [ERA], but the acronym carries echoes of other political fights
>>  that have nothing to do with our hobby.
>>           -p
>
>How about....
>
>Amateur Rocketry Cooperative - ARC


I would like to see a consensus form.  In private email I have been getting:
Experimental Rocket Society LLC [ERS]

However whatever really floats to the top here takes a strong position as well.


>
>Blake
>--
>CUM CATAPULTAE PROSCRIPTAE ERUNT TUM SOLI PROSCRIPTI CATAPULTAS HABEBUNT.
>(When catapults are outlawed, only outlaws will have catapults....)
>Triumph Tiger Motorcycle page at: http://pages.cthome.net/bmantel/


--
Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
Opinion, the whole thing.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 24169 invoked from network); 27 Oct 2001 04:56:00 -0000
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 27 Oct 2001 04:56:00 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 15565 invoked by uid 50005); 27 Oct 2001 04:55:15 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4164. . Clean. Processed in 0.186496 secs); 27 Oct 2001 04:55:15 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 27 Oct 2001 04:55:14 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA06918; Fri, 26 Oct 2001 21:49:02 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 124233 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 27 Oct 2001 04:48:56          +0000
Received: from dns2.seanet.com (dns2.seanet.com [199.181.164.2]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA06904 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri,          26 Oct 2001 21:48:56 -0700
Received: from seanet.com (ssstolt.seanet.com [204.182.68.23]) by          dns2.seanet.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id f9R4mrF03262; Fri, 26          Oct 2001 21:48:53 -0700 (PDT)
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.73 [en] (Win98; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <61A2F0A8E936D311876A0008C74BF1EC96AB43@DD21AE02>            <3BD74A7D.7164F3DC@biomicro.com>            <3BD758F5.5DC60BFB@frontiernet.net> <3BD79BEC.A12E156E@seanet.com>            <3BD9F820.EA146D51@frontiernet.net>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3BDA3A80.218F33F4@seanet.com>
Date:         Fri, 26 Oct 2001 21:39:28 -0700
Reply-To: "Sherwood Stolt" <ssstolt@SEANET.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Sherwood Stolt" <ssstolt@SEANET.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Requests for comments - NFPA codes
Comments: To: tbinford@frontiernet.net
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

I agree the code is written in a strange way.  It restates some of the
requirements
in the scope and definitions.  Using your logic it means that the code only
applies
to the rockets that meet the requirements of the code.  For example the scope
also
uses the term high power rocket which is defined as a rocket that meets several
requirements that restate many of the requirements elsewhere in the code.
Violating any of those requirements makes the whole code not applicable and
therefor nobody is prohibited from doing anything.  Considering 1.2.3 is part
of the "Purpose" I don't think your interpretation is what they intended.  But
maybe its a handy loop hole to keep in mund.

Tom Binford wrote:

> Not wishful at all - always check the scope:
>
> >From the list of adopted modifications, page 1817:
>
> 1.1.1 This code shall apply to the design, construction, limitation
> of propellant mass and power, and reliability of all high power
> rocket motors and motor components produced commercially for
> sale to or use by the certified user for education, recreation, and
> sporting competition.
>
> Note the reference to "produced commercially"
> Also, in the proposed full version, starting on page 1825, about 2/3
> through the pdf file:
>
> 1.3 Application. This code shall apply to the design, construction,
> limitation of propellant mass and power, and reliability of high power
> rocket motors and motor components produced commercially for
> sale or for use by a certified user for education, recreation, and
> sporting competition.
>
> A non-commercial self made motor is *not* included in the definition of
> a HPR motor.
> It's up to the states to determine what to do with self made motors,
> they can ignore, treat as fireworks, treat as any other explosive (GA
> does this so far), or go the California route with a set of regulations,
> or outright ban them.
>
> Tom

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 7705 invoked from network); 27 Oct 2001 06:43:59 -0000
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 27 Oct 2001 06:43:59 -0000
Received: (qmail 13738 invoked by uid 50005); 27 Oct 2001 05:30:02 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4165. . Clean. Processed in 0.423563 secs); 27 Oct 2001 05:30:02 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 27 Oct 2001 05:30:01 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA07239; Fri, 26 Oct 2001 23:39:47 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 124256 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 27 Oct 2001 06:39:41          +0000
Received: from avocet.prod.itd.earthlink.net (avocet.mail.pas.earthlink.net          [207.217.121.50]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA07225          for <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Fri, 26 Oct 2001 23:39:41 -0700
Received: from cpe-24-221-155-19.az.sprintbbd.net ([24.221.155.19]          helo=tus20054) by avocet.prod.itd.earthlink.net with smtp (Exim 3.33          #1) id 15xN3I-0003Dn-00; Fri, 26 Oct 2001 23:34:41 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0)
Importance: Normal
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <NEBBLMGNCMMGBANIEOEHCEEMCKAA.jmrosson@earthlink.net>
Date:         Fri, 26 Oct 2001 23:33:32 -0700
Reply-To: <jmrosson@earthlink.net>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <jmrosson@earthlink.net>
Subject:      Re: [AR] NFPA Problems
Comments: To: mpoulton@mtptech.com
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <200110261532.AEO59265@vmms1.verisignmail.com>

Good question, looked this up several years ago -

Hazmat & EPA issues are mostly state dependent.
The local building code is usually where a lot of the details are hidden,
including federal references if they apply.
Most state building codes have several weight/volume limits that define when
you are in considered to be in "commerce" even if it's for personal use, or
have small business.  I don't have a copy of the uniform building code
(adopted in ~35 states) anymore, but I remember AP & Al quantities are ~500+
lbs, before commercial building code must be followed.  Mg has a limit of
~50lb.

OSHA is concerned only if you have employees.
Most individuals don't have any.  OSHA laws don't apply to business owners,
the laws can't protect the person making the decisions.


#->-----Original Message-----
#->From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@itc.uci.edu]On
#->Behalf Of Mike Poulton
#->Sent: Friday, October 26, 2001 8:32 AM
#->To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
#->Subject: NFPA Problems
#->
#->
#->If we form an non-profit corporation under which to do our
#->work, won't we have to comply with all the complicated
#->business-related hazmat and EPA regulations, OSHA standards,
#->land-use issues, etc.?
#->Mike Poulton
#->KC0LLX
#->

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 11475 invoked from network); 27 Oct 2001 08:03:40 -0000
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 27 Oct 2001 08:03:40 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 16317 invoked by uid 50005); 27 Oct 2001 06:49:43 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4165. . Clean. Processed in 0.903746 secs); 27 Oct 2001 06:49:43 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 27 Oct 2001 06:49:41 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA07443; Sat, 27 Oct 2001 00:59:56 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 124270 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 27 Oct 2001 07:59:48          +0000
Received: from pintail.mail.pas.earthlink.net (pintail.mail.pas.earthlink.net          [207.217.120.122]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id          AAA07429 for <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Sat, 27 Oct 2001 00:59:48 -0700
Received: from dialup-209.245.142.165.dial1.sanjose1.level3.net          ([209.245.142.165] helo=earthlink.net) by          pintail.mail.pas.earthlink.net with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id          15xONe-0004V8-00; Sat, 27 Oct 2001 00:59:47 -0700
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (Win98; I)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <Pine.LNX.4.10.10110260513090.3272-100000@itc.uci.edu>            <Pine.LNX.4.10.10110260513090.3272-100000@itc.uci.edu>            <5.1.0.14.0.20011026114518.03a203e0@mail.earthlink.net>            <3BD9F54C.8EDDE88E@snet.net> <a0510031eb7ffcb5133bb@[63.24.225.78]>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3BDA6D48.45AA3A@earthlink.net>
Date:         Sat, 27 Oct 2001 01:16:08 -0700
Reply-To: <thomgaf@energyrs.com>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Thomas M. Mcgaffey" <energyrelease@EARTHLINK.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] NFPA 1127
Comments: To: Jerry Irvine <01rocket@GTE.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Hi Jerry,

I have a small company (Energy Release Systems) that does rocketry
research and we label our stuff with a label that uses "ERS" as part of
our logo.  If you want to start a rocketry group and don't mind that we
already use the letters "ERS" as a short form for the full name "Energy
Release Systems" then go ahead and use it.  But don't expect us to
change our label or stop using "ERS".  We have patches with the letters
"ERS" on them and also decals.  I don't mind if people mix us up with
your proposed new group and I will probably join up anyway.

Thom

Thomas M. McGaffey
Energy Release Systems (ERS)
408-226-7502
thomgaf@energyrs.com



Jerry Irvine wrote:

> I would like to see a consensus form.  In private email I have been getting:
> Experimental Rocket Society LLC [ERS]
>
> However whatever really floats to the top here takes a strong position as well.
>
> >
> >Blake
> >--
> >CUM CATAPULTAE PROSCRIPTAE ERUNT TUM SOLI PROSCRIPTI CATAPULTAS HABEBUNT.
> >(When catapults are outlawed, only outlaws will have catapults....)
> >Triumph Tiger Motorcycle page at: http://pages.cthome.net/bmantel/
>
> --
> Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
> Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
> Opinion, the whole thing.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 9587 invoked from network); 27 Oct 2001 13:09:35 -0000
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 27 Oct 2001 13:09:35 -0000
Received: (qmail 8827 invoked by uid 50005); 27 Oct 2001 13:08:51 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4164. . Clean. Processed in 0.143896 secs); 27 Oct 2001 13:08:51 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 27 Oct 2001 13:08:51 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA08267; Sat, 27 Oct 2001 06:05:20 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 124315 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 27 Oct 2001 13:05:12          +0000
Received: from fep4-orange.clear.net.nz (fep4-orange.clear.net.nz          [203.97.32.4]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA08251          for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Sat, 27 Oct 2001 06:05:07 -0700
Received: from mkbs (203-167-160-212.dialup.clear.net.nz [203.167.160.212]) by          fep4-orange.clear.net.nz (1.5/1.7) with SMTP id CAA24266; Sun, 28 Oct          2001 02:04:55 +1300 (NZDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="Windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <01f801c15ee8$1cfdc020$0700a8c0@mkbs>
Date:         Sun, 28 Oct 2001 01:57:08 +1300
Reply-To: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Organization: Applied Technology
Subject:      [AR] V2 / A4
Comments: To: erps-list@LunaCity.com
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Very extensive V2 information.
Many pictures and diagrams.
Some excellent technical pictures  eg gyros
Downloadable blue-print drawings

        http://www.v2rocket.com/ or
        http://www.v2rocket.com/start/makeup/design.html

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 18202 invoked from network); 27 Oct 2001 14:48:43 -0000
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 27 Oct 2001 14:48:43 -0000
Received: (qmail 9298 invoked by uid 50005); 27 Oct 2001 13:34:43 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4165. . Clean. Processed in 0.815289 secs); 27 Oct 2001 13:34:43 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 27 Oct 2001 13:34:42 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA08494; Sat, 27 Oct 2001 07:30:14 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 124336 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 27 Oct 2001 14:30:11          +0000
Received: from femail7.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail7.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.0.95.87]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA08479 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 27 Oct 2001 07:30:11 -0700
Received: from cx814151a ([24.14.55.118]) by femail7.sdc1.sfba.home.com          (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20 201-229-121-120-20010223) with SMTP id          <20011027143008.UYHX610.femail7.sdc1.sfba.home.com@cx814151a> for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 27 Oct 2001 07:30:08 -0700
References:  <01f801c15ee8$1cfdc020$0700a8c0@mkbs>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="Windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.3018.1300
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <03c701c15ef3$157f1b40$0a01a8c0@cx814151a>
Date:         Sat, 27 Oct 2001 09:24:26 -0500
Reply-To: "John Bolene" <jbolene@HOME.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Bolene" <jbolene@HOME.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] V2 / A4
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Tracy Dungan is a member of the OKC TRA group and does this web site.
He has gotten quite in depth lately and has taken 2 trips to Germany so far
to collect information.
And I thought I was fanatical about rocketry.

John Bolene
Tripoli Oklahoma Prefect and webmaster
Tripoli Oklahoma Web page -> http://members.home.com/tripoli-oklahoma/



----- Original Message -----
From: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Saturday, October 27, 2001 7:57 AM
Subject: [AR] V2 / A4


> Very extensive V2 information.
> Many pictures and diagrams.
> Some excellent technical pictures  eg gyros
> Downloadable blue-print drawings
>
>         http://www.v2rocket.com/ or
>         http://www.v2rocket.com/start/makeup/design.html

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 814 invoked from network); 27 Oct 2001 16:39:16 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 27 Oct 2001 16:39:16 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 16116 invoked by uid 50005); 27 Oct 2001 16:39:12 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4166. . Clean. Processed in 0.489179 secs); 27 Oct 2001 16:39:12 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 27 Oct 2001 16:39:11 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA08783; Sat, 27 Oct 2001 09:34:35 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 124349 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 27 Oct 2001 16:34:26          +0000
Received: from rasmus.uib.no (exim@rasmus.uib.no [129.177.12.30]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA08769 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Sat, 27 Oct 2001 09:34:25 -0700
Received: from tunnel-44-137.vpn.uib.no (emil.rasmus.uib.no) [129.177.44.137]          by rasmus.uib.no for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU with esmtp (Exim 3.16) id          15xWPU-0003Vg-00; Sat, 27 Oct 2001 18:34:12 +0200
X-Sender: st07696@rasmus.uib.no
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
References: <5.1.0.14.0.20011026025351.028da028@lstud.ii.uib.no>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <5.1.0.14.0.20011026035308.028dbaf0@lstud.ii.uib.no>
Date:         Sat, 27 Oct 2001 18:25:38 +0200
Reply-To: "Emil Johnsen" <Emil.Johnsen@STUDENT.UIB.NO>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Emil Johnsen" <Emil.Johnsen@STUDENT.UIB.NO>
Subject:      Re: [AR] T6 and high temperatures
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <JJEFLLHFFAHHMBBIHFAEIEKNCHAA.pkelly@comcen.com.au>

>Phenolic is your friend in the latter case, a few mm of phenolic tube around
>even a large lump of graphite will make a big difference to the rate at
>which it can dump energy into your case.

Do you use pure phenolic or the phenolic/paper tubes used for liners etc?

>Additionally, don't underestimate the effectiveness of metal fins, thermally
>connected to the motor case as radiators..

Interesting, use the rocket's fins as heat sinks.. Should be even more
efficient in flight.

>A few months back I did a 10+ second burn in a 50mm motor with a cast
>phenolic nozzle (about 1200Ns). Now the throat was badly eroded but the case
>couldn't have been more that 40 deg C after that burn! Amazing stuff.

That sounds like good stuff. I'm using a stainless steel nozzle with a
graphite insert. Unfortunately ss conducts heat ~30 times more efficiently
than phenolic does, but that's still a lot better than just graphite. I
would like to try a phenolic nozzle with a graphite insert if I could
locate phenolic at an affordable price.

Did you cast the nozzle yourself?


Emil

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 13178 invoked from network); 27 Oct 2001 17:05:23 -0000
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 27 Oct 2001 17:05:23 -0000
Received: (qmail 1737 invoked by uid 50005); 27 Oct 2001 17:04:40 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4164. . Clean. Processed in 0.241693 secs); 27 Oct 2001 17:04:40 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 27 Oct 2001 17:04:39 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA08891; Sat, 27 Oct 2001 10:01:17 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 124356 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 27 Oct 2001 17:01:15          +0000
Received: from mailhost0.trib.com (mailhost0.trib.com [63.229.150.3]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA08877 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Sat, 27 Oct 2001 10:01:14 -0700
Received: from mail.trib.com (mail.trib.com [12.10.158.17]) by          mailhost0.trib.com (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f9RH1D893045; Sat,          27 Oct 2001 11:01:13 -0600 (MDT) (envelope-from          jwckman@space-rockets.com)
Received: from [63.229.150.83] (HELO hppav) by mail.trib.com (CommuniGate Pro          SMTP 3.4.6) with SMTP id 54655368; Sat, 27 Oct 2001 11:01:12 -0600
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
Importance: Normal
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <NKEHJAOOKBPGIKOOPDEFOEACCDAA.jwckman@space-rockets.com>
Date:         Sat, 27 Oct 2001 10:59:19 -0600
Reply-To: "John Wickman" <jwckman@SPACE-ROCKETS.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Wickman" <jwckman@SPACE-ROCKETS.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Requests for comments - NFPA codes
Comments: To: tbinford@frontiernet.net
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <3BD9F820.EA146D51@frontiernet.net>

Tom,

I have to say that both of your posts have been a voice of reason in the
midst of the panic running rampant in this group right now.  Where have
these people been?  1127 is old news.  It was adopted a few years back and
it did nothing to hinder the growth of amateur rocketry.  Believe me, with
the CP Tech. stuff, we would be the first to know.  The revisions do nothing
to change that.  1127 is written for high power rocketry and applies only to
that.

The last thing amateur rocketry needs is a new amateur rocketry organization
created in a panic that runs off half cocked to the NFPA and government
authorities.

John Wickman




-----Original Message-----
From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@itc.uci.edu]On
Behalf Of Tom Binford
Sent: Friday, October 26, 2001 5:56 PM
To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
Subject: Re: [AR] Requests for comments - NFPA codes


Sherwood Stolt wrote:
>
> Tom Binford wrote:
>
> > This only prohibits these activities as a part of high power rocketry.
> > It does not prohibit amateur rocketry, this is outside the scope of HPR.
> > If a state adopts 1127, then prohibits rocketry outside of HPR, then it
> > means something.
> >
> > Tom
>
> Wishful thinking.  1127 defines HPR as any rocket with a total impulse
> in the range.  Flying any rocket that doesn't meet the requirements of
> the code is prohibited.

Not wishful at all - always check the scope:

>>From the list of adopted modifications, page 1817:

1.1.1 This code shall apply to the design, construction, limitation
of propellant mass and power, and reliability of all high power
rocket motors and motor components produced commercially for
sale to or use by the certified user for education, recreation, and
sporting competition.

Note the reference to "produced commercially"
Also, in the proposed full version, starting on page 1825, about 2/3
through the pdf file:

1.3 Application. This code shall apply to the design, construction,
limitation of propellant mass and power, and reliability of high power
rocket motors and motor components produced commercially for
sale or for use by a certified user for education, recreation, and
sporting competition.

A non-commercial self made motor is *not* included in the definition of
a HPR motor.
It's up to the states to determine what to do with self made motors,
they can ignore, treat as fireworks, treat as any other explosive (GA
does this so far), or go the California route with a set of regulations,
or outright ban them.

Tom

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 9813 invoked from network); 27 Oct 2001 18:32:12 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 27 Oct 2001 18:32:12 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 28024 invoked by uid 50005); 27 Oct 2001 18:32:08 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4166. . Clean. Processed in 1.194824 secs); 27 Oct 2001 18:32:08 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 27 Oct 2001 18:32:05 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA09127; Sat, 27 Oct 2001 11:27:29 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 124363 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 27 Oct 2001 18:27:24          +0000
Received: from smtp004pub.verizon.net (smtp004pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.183])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA09112 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 27 Oct 2001 11:27:24 -0700
Received: from [63.24.225.78] (1Cust54.tnt1.rancho-cucamonga.ca.da.uu.net          [63.24.225.54]) by smtp004pub.verizon.net  with ESMTP for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; id f9RIQqn24674 Sat, 27 Oct 2001 13:26:52          -0500 (CDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: GTE/01rocket@mail.gte.net
References: <NKEHJAOOKBPGIKOOPDEFOEACCDAA.jwckman@space-rockets.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <a05100322b800acec157d@[63.24.225.78]>
Date:         Sat, 27 Oct 2001 11:29:00 -0700
Reply-To: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Requests for comments - NFPA codes
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <NKEHJAOOKBPGIKOOPDEFOEACCDAA.jwckman@space-rockets.com>

>Tom,
>
>I have to say that both of your posts have been a voice of reason in the
>midst of the panic running rampant in this group right now.  Where have
>these people been?  1127 is old news.  It was adopted a few years back and
>it did nothing to hinder the growth of amateur rocketry.  Believe me, with
>the CP Tech. stuff, we would be the first to know.  The revisions do nothing
>to change that.  1127 is written for high power rocketry and applies only to
>that.

Logic of your point aside, nobody is enforcing 1127 worldwide yet.

Jerry

>
>The last thing amateur rocketry needs is a new amateur rocketry organization
>created in a panic that runs off half cocked to the NFPA and government
>authorities.
>
>John Wickman

But how about "full cocked" to getting EXEMPTIONS and providing
objective evidence of compliance and safety?

Jerry

--
Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
Opinion, the whole thing.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 6256 invoked from network); 27 Oct 2001 20:53:14 -0000
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 27 Oct 2001 20:53:14 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 19226 invoked by uid 50005); 27 Oct 2001 19:39:12 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4165. . Clean. Processed in 3.617764 secs); 27 Oct 2001 19:39:12 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 27 Oct 2001 19:39:06 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA09514; Sat, 27 Oct 2001 13:48:11 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 124398 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 27 Oct 2001 20:48:02          +0000
Received: from dns2.seanet.com (dns2.seanet.com [199.181.164.2]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA09500 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat,          27 Oct 2001 13:48:01 -0700
Received: from seanet.com (ssstolt.seanet.com [204.182.68.23]) by          dns2.seanet.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id f9RKlwF16971; Sat, 27          Oct 2001 13:47:59 -0700 (PDT)
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.73 [en] (Win98; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <000a01c15d61$5ba78280$5d38d940@escher.efgwaco.com>            <a05100308b7fdde551f6c@[63.24.225.78]>            <3BD834B6.1AB63E03@biomicro.com>            <a05100309b7fdef9b2e5a@[63.24.225.78]>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Message-ID:  <3BDB1B70.D9F39516@seanet.com>
Date:         Sat, 27 Oct 2001 13:39:12 -0700
Reply-To: "Sherwood Stolt" <ssstolt@SEANET.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Sherwood Stolt" <ssstolt@SEANET.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Requests for comments - NFPA codes
Comments: To: Jerry Irvine <01rocket@GTE.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Well that half right.  Experimental rocket is not defined but 14 CFR 401.5
includes:

Amateur rocket activities means launch activities conducted at private
sites
involving rockets powered by a motor or motors having a total impulse of
200,000 pound-seconds or less and a total burning or operating time of less

than 15 seconds, and a rocket having a ballistic coefficienti.e., gross
weight in pounds divided by frontal area of rocket vehicleless than 12
pounds per square inch.

Jerry Irvine wrote:

> >Well I won't argue with that.
> >
> >I just submitted a comment to add a paragraph to NFPA 1127:
> >
> >"1.3.6  This code shall not apply to the following:"
> >That is existing text.  Then there are two paragraphs exempting model
> >rockets as defined in NFPA 1122 & firworks rockets, skyrockets, and
> >rockets with sticks as defined in NFPA 1123 & 1126.
> >Then I proposed the addition of:
> >
> >                  "(3) Amateur and Experimental rockets as defined
> >                  by the FAA."
>
> FAA does not define them.  It should say as defined by RRS or by PRS
> or by ARS (and re-form ARS).
>
> >
> >And added the following reasoning.
> >
> >Substantiation:  There are many individuals and groups that do a
> >                  wide variety of research with rockets other than
> >                  HPR. NFPA 1127 is adopted by many states and
> >                  municipalities by reference. By not exempting these
> >                  other rocketry activities specifically, NFPA 1127
> >                  as currently written prohibits them. Current
> >                  research includes research with large composite
> >                  motors, LOx and NO2 Hybrid engines, liquid
> >                  bi-propellant and liquid mono-propellant engines
> >                  for a variety of flight regimes unobtainable with
> >                  commercial HPR motors. i.e. VTVL, long duration
> >                  low acceleration burn times, altitudes greater than
> >                  100,000 feet agl, multiple start engines, air
> >                  augmented ramjet engines, etc.
> >
> >Probably not the best logic, or prose, but I hope it wins an exemption
> >from this code.  I tried to make it broad rather than specific.
>
> Jerry
>
> --
> Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
> Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
> Opinion, the whole thing.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 9396 invoked from network); 27 Oct 2001 22:47:00 -0000
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 27 Oct 2001 22:47:00 -0000
Received: (qmail 6473 invoked by uid 50005); 27 Oct 2001 22:46:55 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4166. . Clean. Processed in 0.235466 secs); 27 Oct 2001 22:46:55 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 27 Oct 2001 22:46:54 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA09776; Sat, 27 Oct 2001 15:41:11 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 124412 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 27 Oct 2001 22:40:47          +0000
Received: from mailhost0.trib.com (mailhost0.trib.com [63.229.150.3]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA09761 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Sat, 27 Oct 2001 15:40:46 -0700
Received: from mail.trib.com (mail.trib.com [12.10.158.17]) by          mailhost0.trib.com (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f9RMeg803998; Sat,          27 Oct 2001 16:40:42 -0600 (MDT) (envelope-from          jwckman@space-rockets.com)
Received: from [63.229.150.94] (HELO hppav) by mail.trib.com (CommuniGate Pro          SMTP 3.4.6) with SMTP id 54689222; Sat, 27 Oct 2001 16:40:40 -0600
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
Importance: Normal
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <NKEHJAOOKBPGIKOOPDEFEEAECDAA.jwckman@space-rockets.com>
Date:         Sat, 27 Oct 2001 16:38:46 -0600
Reply-To: "John Wickman" <jwckman@SPACE-ROCKETS.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Wickman" <jwckman@SPACE-ROCKETS.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Requests for comments - NFPA codes
Comments: To: Jerry Irvine <01rocket@gte.net>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <a05100322b800acec157d@[63.24.225.78]>

>>>Logic of your point aside, nobody is enforcing 1127 worldwide yet.
Jerry<<<<

I don't know about the world, but it won't happen in the US because 1127
contains a fatal legal flaw, which has not been fixed.  If adopted as law by
a state, county or city, it transfers statutory legal authority to TRA, NAR
or some other organization with respect to HPR.   These organizations would
make up the tests, conduct the tests, require membership and decide who can
legally engage in HPR activities.  In essence, these organizations would
possess governmental powers under 1127.   No state or local government can
transfer those powers under US law.

It would be legal for NAR or TRA to administer a test to an individual for
purposes of obtaining a license or certification to conduct a hobby
activity.  They could charge a fee, but only to recover expenses in
administrating the test.  The test would have to be a government approved
test.  It could not be changed without government approval and some
government entity would have to have oversight of the testing processing and
those administrating the test.  It would be illegal to require membership in
any organization to take the test or to obtain and maintain a license or
certification.  The test would have to identical regardless of who is
administrating the test, TRA, NAR or some other group.   The important thing
is that the government entity would pass a law requiring a license or
certificate to conduct the activity and decide on the testing requirements.

This is commonly done in the case of hunting licenses where the state
requires hunters to take a safe hunting class before obtaining a hunting
license.  These classes are often run by local National Rifle Association
groups, other hunting groups or gun clubs, or by the state itself.
Membership is not required to take the class and the state oversees the
administration of the class and instructors.  It would be illegal to require
membership in the National Rifle Association in order to obtain a hunting
license.

The same is often done with respect to an FCC ham license.   The tests are
usually given by a local ham radio club.  You do not have to belong to the
club to take the test.  They are allowed to charge a fee to administer the
test.

>>>But how about "full cocked" to getting EXEMPTIONS and providing
objective evidence of compliance and safety?
Jerry>>>>

There are efforts to get all local and state laws abolished on all forms of
rocketry plus get the ATF out of the picture.  I'm not referring to the
TRA-NAR lawsuit or anything they are doing. There are other efforts going on
behind the scenes.  Unfortunately, Sept. 11th has not helped the situation.
The argument for making these changes to rocketry laws goes something like
this.   Rockets are vehicles that fly in the air or space.  Vehicles that
travel in the air or space are regulated by the federal government, not by
state, local or city government.  Therefore, it is only proper for the
federal government to take all jurisdictional authority on all rocketry
activities.   The FAA is the logical place for this authority to reside.
The ATF should have no jurisdictional authority because rockets are flight
vehicles.  Although rockets can explode, they are not explosives.

The example here is aircraft, which are totally out of the jurisdiction of
all government bodies but the federal government. Aircraft can explode on
impact(Sept. 11th) or in the air under normal operating conditions (TWA
flight 800).  Yet, aircraft are not consider explosives and they do not fall
under ATF regulations.  Rockets can explode on impact or under normal
operating conditions, just like aircraft they should not be under ATF
authority.

John Wickman

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 21043 invoked from network); 27 Oct 2001 23:03:48 -0000
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 27 Oct 2001 23:03:48 -0000
Received: (qmail 31615 invoked by uid 50005); 27 Oct 2001 23:03:05 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4164. . Clean. Processed in 0.14568 secs); 27 Oct 2001 23:03:05 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 27 Oct 2001 23:03:05 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA09845; Sat, 27 Oct 2001 15:58:40 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 124423 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 27 Oct 2001 22:58:38          +0000
Received: from castor.ridgenet.net (IDENT:root@castor.ridgenet.net          [199.120.150.29]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA09831          for <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Sat, 27 Oct 2001 15:58:37 -0700
Received: from kristinscomp (pm171.ridgenet.net [204.154.246.171]) by          castor.ridgenet.net (8.11.0/8.11.0) with SMTP id f9RMkeW19882 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Sat, 27 Oct 2001 15:46:40 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <001801c15f3c$39b62780$1b30fea9@kristinscomp>
Date:         Sat, 27 Oct 2001 16:08:00 -0700
Reply-To: "Kristin & David Hall" <thehalls@RIDGENET.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Kristin & David Hall" <thehalls@RIDGENET.NET>
Subject:      [AR] Newtonian Motion
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Heya folks,

  I was just wondering if anybody happens to have a copy of the equations of
motion (Newtonian - relativity not required!) for a finite body in matrix
format.

--
Dave and/or Kristin Hall

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 9098 invoked from network); 28 Oct 2001 00:08:25 -0000
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 28 Oct 2001 00:08:25 -0000
Received: (qmail 22941 invoked by uid 50005); 28 Oct 2001 00:08:21 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4166. . Clean. Processed in 0.738888 secs); 28 Oct 2001 00:08:21 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 28 Oct 2001 00:08:20 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA10094; Sat, 27 Oct 2001 17:00:26 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 124446 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 28 Oct 2001 00:00:21          +0000
Received: from mta01.mail.mel.aone.net.au (mta01.mail.au.uu.net [203.2.192.81])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA10080 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 27 Oct 2001 17:00:21 -0700
Received: from unknown ([63.60.220.33]) by mta01.mail.mel.aone.net.au with SMTP          id <20011028000017.LNYQ363.mta01.mail.mel.aone.net.au@unknown> for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 28 Oct 2001 11:00:17 +1100
References: Conversation <5.1.0.14.0.20011026025351.028da028@lstud.ii.uib.no>            with last message            <5.1.0.14.0.20011026035308.028dbaf0@lstud.ii.uib.no>
Priority: Normal
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Priority: 3
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	X-MAPIextension=.TXT;
	charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>
Date:         Sun, 28 Oct 2001 00:00:21 +0000
Reply-To: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] T6 and high temperatures
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <5.1.0.14.0.20011026035308.028dbaf0@lstud.ii.uib.no>

----------
> >Phenolic is your friend in the latter case, a few mm of phenolic tube
around
> >even a large lump of graphite will make a big difference to the rate at
> >which it can dump energy into your case.
>
> Do you use pure phenolic or the phenolic/paper tubes used for liners etc?
>
> >Additionally, don't underestimate the effectiveness of metal fins,
thermally
> >connected to the motor case as radiators..
>
> Interesting, use the rocket's fins as heat sinks.. Should be even more
> efficient in flight.
>
> >A few months back I did a 10+ second burn in a 50mm motor with a cast
> >phenolic nozzle (about 1200Ns). Now the throat was badly eroded but the
case
> >couldn't have been more that 40 deg C after that burn! Amazing stuff.
>
> That sounds like good stuff. I'm using a stainless steel nozzle with a
> graphite insert. Unfortunately ss conducts heat ~30 times more efficiently
> than phenolic does, but that's still a lot better than just graphite. I
> would like to try a phenolic nozzle with a graphite insert if I could
> locate phenolic at an affordable price.
>
> Did you cast the nozzle yourself?

I made the nozzles for those tests but kinda f%$#& up the post cure to the
point where they turned out an orange colour. This contributed to the
totally unacceptable ablation experienced with those long tests but wasn't
the only factor. I'm quite sure phenolic just isn't up to the job for long
burn motors on its own. It obviously requires a graphite (or substitute)
insert but also requires a filler (maybe glass) for the phenolic.
Unfortunately I haven't performed much experimentation on using fillers yet
but hope to in the not too distant future. The phenolic resin I use is a
laminating resin and is really designed to be used in conjunction with a
paper or cloth or some other type of composite medium. Again, most of my
phenolic nozzles to this point have been straight casts with no additives
and show similar (on a par) ablative attributes to the AT phenolic nozzles.
Note though, making phenolic parts isn't as easy as epoxy composites for
example. The process is virtually the same up until post curing where the
parts require exposure to a special temperature cycle (gradually increase
the temps from 60 - 150 deg C say @ 10 deg increments per hour). The
biggest hurdle of all is obtaining the resin though. It's very difficult to
get hold of the stuff in small quantities but is generally quite cheap if
you can:-)

Troy.


>
>
> Emil

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 11024 invoked from network); 28 Oct 2001 00:09:09 -0000
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 28 Oct 2001 00:09:09 -0000
Received: (qmail 30082 invoked by uid 50005); 27 Oct 2001 22:55:43 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4166. . Clean. Processed in 0.11071 secs); 27 Oct 2001 22:55:43 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 27 Oct 2001 22:55:43 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA10131; Sat, 27 Oct 2001 17:05:12 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 124453 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 28 Oct 2001 00:05:11          +0000
Received: from mta03.mail.mel.aone.net.au (mta03.mail.au.uu.net [203.2.192.83])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA10117 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 27 Oct 2001 17:05:10 -0700
Received: from unknown ([63.34.218.34]) by mta03.mail.mel.aone.net.au with SMTP          id <20011028000508.WFVU15297.mta03.mail.mel.aone.net.au@unknown> for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 28 Oct 2001 11:05:08 +1100
References: Conversation <001801c15f3c$39b62780$1b30fea9@kristinscomp> with            last message <001801c15f3c$39b62780$1b30fea9@kristinscomp>
Priority: Normal
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Priority: 3
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	X-MAPIextension=.TXT;
	charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>
Date:         Sun, 28 Oct 2001 00:05:11 +0000
Reply-To: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Newtonian Motion
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <001801c15f3c$39b62780$1b30fea9@kristinscomp>

This isn't another one of those "feeler" questions is it:-)?

Troy.

----------
> Heya folks,
>
>   I was just wondering if anybody happens to have a copy of the equations
of
> motion (Newtonian - relativity not required!) for a finite body in matrix
> format.
>
> --
> Dave and/or Kristin Hall
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 11941 invoked from network); 28 Oct 2001 00:20:30 -0000
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 28 Oct 2001 00:20:30 -0000
Received: (qmail 4320 invoked by uid 50005); 27 Oct 2001 23:06:27 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4165. . Clean. Processed in 0.39183 secs); 27 Oct 2001 23:06:27 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 27 Oct 2001 23:06:26 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA10216; Sat, 27 Oct 2001 17:16:20 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 124473 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 28 Oct 2001 00:16:18          +0000
Received: from castor.ridgenet.net (IDENT:root@castor.ridgenet.net          [199.120.150.29]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA10202          for <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Sat, 27 Oct 2001 17:16:18 -0700
Received: from kristinscomp (pm028.ridgenet.net [204.154.246.28]) by          castor.ridgenet.net (8.11.0/8.11.0) with SMTP id f9S04UW24849; Sat,          27 Oct 2001 17:04:30 -0700
References: <001801c15f3c$39b62780$1b30fea9@kristinscomp>            <20011027200900.A9056@mace.ddts.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <001101c15f47$195e1f00$1b30fea9@kristinscomp>
Date:         Sat, 27 Oct 2001 17:25:50 -0700
Reply-To: "Kristin & David Hall" <thehalls@RIDGENET.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Kristin & David Hall" <thehalls@RIDGENET.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Newtonian Motion
Comments: To: antoinelefebvre@softhome.net
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

If you've got the longform equations, that's fine.  I can turn them into
matrix format easy enough, I just don't like the vector format so often
bandied about.

> I probably have what you want. I have the set of equations for 6 degre of
> freedom motion over flat earth or rotating earth. It is not actually in
> matrix format but it is fairly simple to write the matrix format from the
> expanded form. Tell me what you exactly need and I will try to send it
> to you in the next week.

Well, LA area when compared to Canada, but I'm about 3 hours drive North of
LA.

> By the way, I think you live in the LA area ? I am actually studying at
> Cal Poly Pomona for the quarter as an exchange program with Canada. I
would
> be interested to meet you and talk about what you do/did in rocketry if
you
> have the time.
>
> Antoine
>
> On Sat, Oct 27, 2001 at 04:08:00PM -0700, Kristin & David Hall wrote:
> > Heya folks,
> >
> >   I was just wondering if anybody happens to have a copy of the
equations of
> > motion (Newtonian - relativity not required!) for a finite body in
matrix
> > format.
> >
> > --
> > Dave and/or Kristin Hall
>
> --
> Antoine Lefebvre
> antoine.lefebvre@polymtl.ca
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 1842 invoked from network); 28 Oct 2001 02:09:15 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 28 Oct 2001 02:09:15 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 24362 invoked by uid 50005); 28 Oct 2001 00:55:48 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4166. . Clean. Processed in 0.736703 secs); 28 Oct 2001 00:55:48 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 28 Oct 2001 00:55:47 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA10523; Sat, 27 Oct 2001 19:01:36 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 124495 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 28 Oct 2001 02:01:21          +0000
Received: from smtp006pub.verizon.net (smtp006pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.185])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA10508 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 27 Oct 2001 19:01:21 -0700
Received: from [63.24.225.78] (1Cust170.tnt1.rancho-cucamonga.ca.da.uu.net          [63.24.225.170]) by smtp006pub.verizon.net  with ESMTP for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; id f9S20e020969 Sat, 27 Oct 2001 21:00:44          -0500 (CDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: GTE/01rocket@mail.gte.net
References: <NKEHJAOOKBPGIKOOPDEFEEAECDAA.jwckman@space-rockets.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <a05100323b80116dfbcf3@[63.24.225.78]>
Date:         Sat, 27 Oct 2001 19:02:45 -0700
Reply-To: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Requests for comments - NFPA codes
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <NKEHJAOOKBPGIKOOPDEFEEAECDAA.jwckman@space-rockets.com>

>Wickman


>There are efforts to get all local and state laws abolished on all forms of
>rocketry plus get the ATF out of the picture.  I'm not referring to the
>TRA-NAR lawsuit or anything they are doing.



>The argument for making these changes to rocketry laws goes something like
>this.   Rockets are vehicles that fly in the air or space.  Vehicles that
>travel in the air or space are regulated by the federal government, not by
>state, local or city government.  Therefore, it is only proper for the
>federal government to take all jurisdictional authority on all rocketry
>activities.   The FAA is the logical place for this authority to reside.
>The ATF should have no jurisdictional authority because rockets are flight
>vehicles.  Although rockets can explode, they are not explosives.
>
>The example here is aircraft, which are totally out of the jurisdiction of
>all government bodies but the federal government. Aircraft can explode on
>impact(Sept. 11th) or in the air under normal operating conditions (TWA
>flight 800).  Yet, aircraft are not consider explosives and they do not fall
>under ATF regulations.  Rockets can explode on impact or under normal
>operating conditions, just like aircraft they should not be under ATF
>authority.


Firstly I agree with the above interpretation.

I therefore find the new association all the more important because
BOTH NAR and TRA rely upon 1122/1125/1127 as a central tennet.

Jerry


>
>John Wickman


--
Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
Opinion, the whole thing.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 3190 invoked from network); 28 Oct 2001 04:44:30 -0000
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 28 Oct 2001 04:44:30 -0000
Received: (qmail 22184 invoked by uid 50005); 28 Oct 2001 04:43:48 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4164. . Clean. Processed in 0.254478 secs); 28 Oct 2001 04:43:48 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 28 Oct 2001 04:43:47 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA11607; Sat, 27 Oct 2001 21:40:18 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 124512 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 28 Oct 2001 04:40:10          +0000
Received: from imf09bis.bellsouth.net (mail309.mail.bellsouth.net          [205.152.58.169]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA11064          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 27 Oct 2001 19:52:04 -0700
Received: from bellsouth ([209.214.174.77]) by imf09bis.bellsouth.net          (InterMail vM.5.01.01.01 201-252-104) with SMTP id          <20011028025239.LJEP12367.imf09bis.bellsouth.net@bellsouth> for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 27 Oct 2001 22:52:39 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0D84_01C56B69.542BEC70"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <005501c15f5b$7c445440$4daed6d1@net>
Date:         Sat, 27 Oct 2001 21:51:46 -0500
Reply-To: "Reyes" <reyes@BELLSOUTH.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Reyes" <reyes@BELLSOUTH.NET>
Subject:      [AR]
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0D84_01C56B69.542BEC70
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Reyes replied:
> [M] dot [A] =3D [F]

BZZZZZ!!!!  The key word in the request was "finite".  The equation you =
list
is for a point mass.  A point is not finite.

OK, =20

[M} dot [A] =3D [F] ;
[I] dot [alpha] =3D [T]


------=_NextPart_000_0D84_01C56B69.542BEC70
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Diso-8859-1">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 5.50.4134.100" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Reyes replied:</FONT></DIV>
<DIV>&gt; [M] dot [A] =3D [F]<BR><BR>BZZZZZ!!!!&nbsp; The key word in =
the request=20
was "finite".&nbsp; The equation you list<BR>is for a point mass.&nbsp; =
A point=20
is not finite.</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>OK,&nbsp; </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>[M} dot [A] =3D [F] ;</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>[I] dot [alpha] =3D [T]</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0D84_01C56B69.542BEC70--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 3247 invoked from network); 28 Oct 2001 04:44:32 -0000
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 28 Oct 2001 04:44:32 -0000
Received: (qmail 22273 invoked by uid 50005); 28 Oct 2001 04:43:50 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4164. . Clean. Processed in 0.273718 secs); 28 Oct 2001 04:43:50 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 28 Oct 2001 04:43:49 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA11625; Sat, 27 Oct 2001 21:40:51 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 124506 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 28 Oct 2001 04:40:50          +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (oe62.law12.hotmail.com [64.4.18.197]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA10566 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 27 Oct 2001 19:10:48 -0700
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Sat,          27 Oct 2001 19:10:18 -0700
X-Originating-IP: [24.92.128.69]
References: <001801c15f3c$39b62780$1b30fea9@kristinscomp>                       <20011027200900.A9056@mace.ddts.net>             <001101c15f47$195e1f00$1b30fea9@kristinscomp>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 28 Oct 2001 02:10:18.0361 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[B0A5F690:01C15F55]
Message-ID:  <OE62hFAypjDQe6PiyT6000178ec@hotmail.com>
Date:         Sat, 27 Oct 2001 21:08:22 -0500
Reply-To: "Mark Kruep" <mkruep@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Mark Kruep" <mkruep@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Newtonian Motion
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Have you ever checked out www.efunda.com ? They have a lot of engineering
formulas etc. on their site.

Mark

----- Original Message -----
From: "Kristin & David Hall" <thehalls@RIDGENET.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Saturday, October 27, 2001 7:25 PM
Subject: Re: [AR] Newtonian Motion


> If you've got the longform equations, that's fine.  I can turn them into
> matrix format easy enough, I just don't like the vector format so often
> bandied about.
>
> > I probably have what you want. I have the set of equations for 6 degre
of
> > freedom motion over flat earth or rotating earth. It is not actually in
> > matrix format but it is fairly simple to write the matrix format from
the
> > expanded form. Tell me what you exactly need and I will try to send it
> > to you in the next week.
>
> Well, LA area when compared to Canada, but I'm about 3 hours drive North
of
> LA.
>
> > By the way, I think you live in the LA area ? I am actually studying at
> > Cal Poly Pomona for the quarter as an exchange program with Canada. I
> would
> > be interested to meet you and talk about what you do/did in rocketry if
> you
> > have the time.
> >
> > Antoine
> >
> > On Sat, Oct 27, 2001 at 04:08:00PM -0700, Kristin & David Hall wrote:
> > > Heya folks,
> > >
> > >   I was just wondering if anybody happens to have a copy of the
> equations of
> > > motion (Newtonian - relativity not required!) for a finite body in
> matrix
> > > format.
> > >
> > > --
> > > Dave and/or Kristin Hall
> >
> > --
> > Antoine Lefebvre
> > antoine.lefebvre@polymtl.ca
> >
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 12802 invoked from network); 28 Oct 2001 04:48:55 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 28 Oct 2001 04:48:55 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 13005 invoked by uid 50005); 28 Oct 2001 04:48:50 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4166. . Clean. Processed in 0.377841 secs); 28 Oct 2001 04:48:50 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 28 Oct 2001 04:48:49 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA11692; Sat, 27 Oct 2001 21:43:58 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 124552 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 28 Oct 2001 04:43:57          +0000
Received: from idsoftware.com (predator.idsoftware.com [192.246.40.34]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA11674 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Sat, 27 Oct 2001 21:43:51 -0700
Received: from [192.246.40.144] (account johnc HELO pluto.idsoftware.com) by          idsoftware.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 3.4.7) with ESMTP id 447508;          Sat, 27 Oct 2001 23:43:51 -0500
X-Sender: johnc@mail.idsoftware.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <4.3.1.2.20011027231722.029f49e8@mail.idsoftware.com>
Date:         Sat, 27 Oct 2001 23:49:40 -0500
Reply-To: "John Carmack" <johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Carmack" <johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM>
Subject:      [AR] big videos
Comments: cc: erps-list@lists.erps.org
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

The video we had running at the Space Frontier conference is now on our web
site:

Low bandwidth version ( 14 megs )
http://media.armadilloaerospace.com/sff_low.mpg

High bandwidth version ( 50 megs )
http://media.armadilloaerospace.com/sff_high.mpg

My wife's company did the video production work, so it is pretty slick...

John Carmack

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 14961 invoked from network); 28 Oct 2001 05:01:46 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 28 Oct 2001 05:01:46 -0000
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 22397 invoked by uid 50005); 28 Oct 2001 03:47:41 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4165. . Clean. Processed in 1.055543 secs); 28 Oct 2001 03:47:41 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 28 Oct 2001 03:47:39 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA11764; Sat, 27 Oct 2001 21:57:25 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 124563 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 28 Oct 2001 04:57:23          +0000
Received: from ares.idirect.com (ares.idirect.com [207.136.80.180]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA11750 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 27 Oct 2001 21:57:23 -0700
Received: from .idirect.com (on-osh-ahp-01-52.look.ca [216.154.47.52]) by          ares.idirect.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id BAA38187; Sun, 28 Oct          2001 01:37:32 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="ISO-8859-1"
X-Mailer: BeOS Mail
Message-ID:  <200110280537.BAA38187@ares.idirect.com>
Date:         Sun, 28 Oct 2001 00:55:10 EDT
Reply-To: <earlcp@idirect.com>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Earl Colby Pottinger" <earlcp@idirect.com>
Subject:      Re: [AR] NFPA 1127 And Our Incorporation
Comments: To: cscholl@IZZY.NET
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

>Hi All:
>
>  I don't really want ot rain on anyone's parade here, but I do recall a
>predecessor organization that espoused the benefits of a national
>organization. They had a magazine, military support at times, and were
>using moneys collected to build a great launching center.
>
>  They too had this idea of being a force for good Amateur Society
>building.
>
>   They became the AIAA. With big payrolls. I couldn't even begin to
>describe my shock and surprise at the costs of the reports they generate
>now. Once they got the big contracts they divorced themselves from the
>rest of the Amateur World.

This also reminds me of TPUG - The Toronto Pet User's Group.  At one time they claimed to be the world's largest computer club with over 150,000 members.  I joined the group very early on and it was great!  But as it got bigger the people running were finding that they did not have the free time to do it all, so some of them started to draw a wage from the group instead of holding other full time jobs.  The problem is over time they keep upping thier wages, when I left I believe the top wage wage $45,000 a year.  And the club was pulling in about $2,000,000 in just clubs dues (I don't know what software sales made).

The problem is when the group gets this big and so much money starts becoming available you get people who start caring more about how much money they can make off the club, rather than what the purpose of the club was.  Towards the end TPUG had some (not all) people running who did not even know anything about computers and many of the best computer people had left in disgust at the politics interfering with doing what the club was started for in the first place for.  IE trading info programming and hardware design.

               Earl Colby Pottinger

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 22364 invoked from network); 28 Oct 2001 05:16:06 -0000
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 28 Oct 2001 05:16:06 -0000
Received: (qmail 11865 invoked by uid 50005); 28 Oct 2001 04:02:01 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4165. . Clean. Processed in 0.575744 secs); 28 Oct 2001 04:02:01 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 28 Oct 2001 04:02:00 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA11829; Sat, 27 Oct 2001 22:07:08 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 124577 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 28 Oct 2001 05:07:06          +0000
Received: from castor.ridgenet.net (IDENT:root@castor.ridgenet.net          [199.120.150.29]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA11815          for <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Sat, 27 Oct 2001 22:07:06 -0700
Received: from kristinscomp (pm150.ridgenet.net [204.154.246.150]) by          castor.ridgenet.net (8.11.0/8.11.0) with SMTP id f9S4tCW11742; Sat,          27 Oct 2001 21:55:13 -0700
References: <001801c15f3c$39b62780$1b30fea9@kristinscomp>            <20011027200900.A9056@mace.ddts.net>            <001101c15f47$195e1f00$1b30fea9@kristinscomp>            <20011027223612.A9147@mace.ddts.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <001d01c15f6f$b671bb80$1b30fea9@kristinscomp>
Date:         Sat, 27 Oct 2001 22:16:33 -0700
Reply-To: "Kristin & David Hall" <thehalls@RIDGENET.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Kristin & David Hall" <thehalls@RIDGENET.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Newtonian Motion
Comments: To: antoinelefebvre@softhome.net
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

I presume Ixx, etc. are in the body frame of reference?

--
Dave and/or Kristin Hall
----- Original Message -----
From: Antoine Lefebvre <antoine@shield.ddts.net>
To: Kristin & David Hall <thehalls@ridgenet.net>; <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
Sent: Saturday, October 27, 2001 7:36 PM
Subject: Re: Newtonian Motion


> Equation of motion over flat earth
> ----------------------------------
>
> variables
> ---------
> u : x velocity in the moving frame
> v : y velocity "  "
> w : z velocity "  "
>
> p : roll rate
> q : pitch rate
> r : yaw rate
>
> phi, theta and psi are the Euler angles that relate the orientation of the
> bofy frame (moving) to the earth fixed frame
>
> X, Y and Z are the externals forces acting on the body
> L, M and N are the external moments
>
> I express the derivative of a variables with respect to time by _dot
>
> Equations
> ---------
> X - m*g*sin(theta) = m*(u_dot + q*w - r*v)
> Y + m*g*cos(theta)*sin(phi) = m*(v_dot + r*u - p*w)
> Z + m*g*cos(theta)*cos(phi) = m*(w_dot + p*v - q*u)
>
> L = Ix * p_dot - Ixz * r_dot + q*r*(Iz - Iy) - Ixz * p * q
> M = Iy * q_dot + r*p*(Ix - Iz) + Ixz*(p^2 - r^2)
> N = -Ixz * p_dot + Iz * r_dot + p*q*(Iy - Ix) + Ixz * q * r
>
> p = phi_dot - psi_dot * sin(theta)
> q = theta_dot * cos(phi) + psi_dot * cos(theta)*sin(phi)
> r = psi_dot * cos(theta) * cos(phi) - theta_dot * sin(phi)
>
> theta_dot = q*cos(phi) - r * sin(phi)
> phi_dot = p + q*sin(phi)*tan(theta) + r*cos(phi)*tan(theta)
> psi_dot = (q*sin(phi) + r*cos(phi))*sec(theta)
>
> If there is anything not clear, just ask me.
>
> Good luck.
>
> On Sat, Oct 27, 2001 at 05:25:50PM -0700, Kristin & David Hall wrote:
> >
> > If you've got the longform equations, that's fine.  I can turn them into
> > matrix format easy enough, I just don't like the vector format so often
> > bandied about.
> >
> > > I probably have what you want. I have the set of equations for 6 degre
of
> > > freedom motion over flat earth or rotating earth. It is not actually
in
> > > matrix format but it is fairly simple to write the matrix format from
the
> > > expanded form. Tell me what you exactly need and I will try to send it
> > > to you in the next week.
> >
>
> --
> Antoine Lefebvre
> antoine.lefebvre@polymtl.ca
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 2865 invoked from network); 28 Oct 2001 15:08:27 -0000
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 28 Oct 2001 15:08:27 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 551 invoked by uid 50005); 28 Oct 2001 13:54:56 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4166. . Clean. Processed in 0.40683 secs); 28 Oct 2001 13:54:56 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 28 Oct 2001 13:54:55 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA13577; Sun, 28 Oct 2001 07:03:42 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 124692 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 28 Oct 2001 15:03:35          +0000
Received: from izzy6.izzy.net (izzy6.izzy.net [207.158.132.178]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA13563 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun,          28 Oct 2001 07:03:34 -0800
Received: from izzy.net (annex-0-4-port-25.dialup.coast.net [207.158.181.25])          by izzy6.izzy.net (8.9.2/8.9.3) with ESMTP id KAA04061 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 28 Oct 2001 10:03:32 -0500 (EST)
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (Win95; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3BDC1EBB.F6AAE6F6@izzy.net>
Date:         Sun, 28 Oct 2001 10:05:31 -0500
Reply-To: <cscholl@izzy.net>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Curtis Scholl" <cscholl@izzy.net>
Subject:      [AR] OK I give! The NFPA sucks and we can get over it.
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Hi All..

I am sorry I got involved in this and added any fuel to the "panic" that
John Wickman describes. I just hate it when an org gets itsself in such
a megalomaniac mood such as that of the PYRO group of NFPA. It would be
in order to get rid of the law as it stands in Michigan as it has been
done in WA state. This may not be the forum for this. Maybe AROCKETPOL
list? No, this is not a suggestion for Ray.

Curtis Scholl

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 17850 invoked from network); 28 Oct 2001 17:23:20 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 28 Oct 2001 17:23:20 -0000
Received: (qmail 30825 invoked by uid 50005); 28 Oct 2001 17:23:15 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4166. . Clean. Processed in 2.159222 secs); 28 Oct 2001 17:23:15 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 28 Oct 2001 17:23:11 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA13963; Sun, 28 Oct 2001 09:19:48 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 124710 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 28 Oct 2001 17:19:42          +0000
Received: from localhost (dmccue@localhost) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with          ESMTP id JAA13949; Sun, 28 Oct 2001 09:19:40 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.LNX.4.10.10110280808380.13746-100000@itc.uci.edu>
Date:         Sun, 28 Oct 2001 09:19:40 -0800
Reply-To: "David J. McCue" <dmccue@itc.uci.edu>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "David J. McCue" <dmccue@itc.uci.edu>
Subject:      Re: [AR] OK I give! The NFPA sucks and we can get over it.
Comments: To: Curtis Scholl <cscholl@IZZY.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <3BDC1EBB.F6AAE6F6@izzy.net>

On Sun, 28 Oct 2001, Curtis Scholl wrote:

> Hi All..
>
> I am sorry I got involved in this and added any fuel to the "panic" that
> John Wickman describes. I just hate it when an org gets itsself in such
> a megalomaniac mood such as that of the PYRO group of NFPA. It would be
> in order to get rid of the law as it stands in Michigan as it has been
> done in WA state. This may not be the forum for this. Maybe AROCKETPOL
> list? No, this is not a suggestion for Ray.
>
> Curtis Scholl
>
I have been wondering the same thing: what purpose is a new group going to
serve?

My rereading of NFPA 1127 recently led me to wonder if an organization
could serve to provide an umbrella for individual experimenters. After
some consideration, I don't see how. The intent of 1127 is clear, and
people charged with enforcing laws are bright enough to see through
something as transparant as a shill corporation that claims to conduct
research through a bunch of independent workers who are largely doing the
same thing and not functioning in a coordinated program.

The other possible purpose of an organization might be to serve as a
political tool to change either NFPA 112x or advocate alternative
legislation. Having had some involvement in this kind of effort, I can say
that it quickly degenerates into a lot of tedious work that winds up being
done by a handful of people. I am skeptical that there are many in this
group that are willing to put forth the effort needed for the amount of
time it will take to accomplish anything. Not even Tripoli, which supports
the idea of motor making by its members, has put together a legislative
advocacy program so far.

I suggest that those who are interested in making a better legal
environment for experimental rocketry think about how much effert they are
really willing to put in to the effort. I am willing to facilitate
the effort by providing electronic forums and doing some of the
needed research, but I think that this is something for all on this list
to think about before continuing the discussion on aRocket. If there
is sufficient interest in a real political program, I'll support it, and
those interested in such an effort can contact me off-list. In the
meantime, I ask that folks refrain from all this public hand-wringing
about the issue.

Thank you,
Dave McCue

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 17188 invoked from network); 28 Oct 2001 22:51:45 -0000
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 28 Oct 2001 22:51:45 -0000
Received: (qmail 26390 invoked by uid 50005); 28 Oct 2001 21:38:12 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4166. . Clean. Processed in 0.114525 secs); 28 Oct 2001 21:38:12 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 28 Oct 2001 21:38:11 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA14857; Sun, 28 Oct 2001 14:49:40 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 124756 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 28 Oct 2001 22:49:34          +0000
Received: from castor.ridgenet.net (IDENT:root@castor.ridgenet.net          [199.120.150.29]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA14834          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 28 Oct 2001 14:48:06 -0800
Received: from kristinscomp (pm034.ridgenet.net [204.154.246.34]) by          castor.ridgenet.net (8.11.0/8.11.0) with SMTP id f9SMa6W03116; Sun,          28 Oct 2001 14:36:06 -0800
References:  <90.181cfbb2.289c2e1c@aol.com>              <002501c11fec$47e1ae40$0400a8c0@hatjs>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <000b01c16002$a4b040e0$1b30fea9@kristinscomp>
Date:         Sun, 28 Oct 2001 14:48:20 -0800
Reply-To: "Kristin & David Hall" <thehalls@RIDGENET.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Kristin & David Hall" <thehalls@RIDGENET.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] US Standard Atmosphere - 1962
Comments: To: Jamie Morken <jmorken@HOME.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Also, x = altitude....in what units?

--
Dave and/or Kristin Hall
----- Original Message -----
From: Jamie Morken <jmorken@HOME.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Wednesday, August 08, 2001 1:27 AM
Subject: Re: [AR] US Standard Atmosphere - 1962


> Hi all,
>
> I converted the standard atmosphere info off of Arocket.net into
polynomials
> (using tablecurve software)
> Please contact me if you want the output from tablecurve which contains
the
> standard deviation of these functions etc (I think they are pretty close
to
> the data on Arocket.net..)
>
> best regards,
> Jamie
>
>
> ps. here it is!:
>
>     x = altitude
>
>     'density calculation
>     a = 0.816329267409428
>     b = 7.89656837331484E-05
>     c = 4.70772116155895E-09
>     d = 1.53644444040785E-13
>     e = 4.51715967589257E-18
>     f = 1.63058118831337E-21
>     y = a + b * x + c * x ^ 2 + d * x ^ 3 + e * x ^ 4 + f * x ^ 5
>     ramCalc.density1 = y ^ -1
>
>     'pressure calculation
>     a = 9.87112869543132E-06
>     b = 1.17197158509061E-09
>     c = 8.20619500918129E-14
>     d = 4.24431702536488E-18
>     e = 2.20462329250301E-22
>     f = 1.4696038908295E-26
>     y = a + b * x + c * x ^ 2 + d * x ^ 3 + e * x ^ 4 + f * x ^ 5
>     ramCalc.pressure1 = y ^ -1
>
>     'temperature calculation
>     a = 3.49302722882021E-03
>     b = 8.7722320539364E-08
>     c = 8.66573513750265E-13
>     d = -1.74418088309309E-16
>     e = 3.38160082090756E-21
>     f = -1.82238855205536E-26
>     y = a + b * x + c * x ^ 2 + d * x ^ 3 + e * x ^ 4 + f * x ^ 5
>     ramCalc.temperature1 = y ^ -1
>
>
>
>
> > In a message dated 01/08/03 10:04:31 Eastern Daylight Time,
> > Rockitman@SPRINTMAIL.COM writes:
> >
> > << Does anyone on this list know where I can find polynomials expressing
> >  the US 1962 Standard Atmosphere?
> >  (Altitude Vs' Temp, Pressure, Q, S.O.S, and density) >>
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 20917 invoked from network); 28 Oct 2001 22:53:06 -0000
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 28 Oct 2001 22:53:06 -0000
Received: (qmail 28197 invoked by uid 50005); 28 Oct 2001 21:39:33 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4166. . Clean. Processed in 0.194597 secs); 28 Oct 2001 21:39:33 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 28 Oct 2001 21:39:33 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA14832; Sun, 28 Oct 2001 14:47:54 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 124749 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 28 Oct 2001 22:46:51          +0000
Received: from castor.ridgenet.net (IDENT:root@castor.ridgenet.net          [199.120.150.29]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA14815          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 28 Oct 2001 14:46:51 -0800
Received: from kristinscomp (pm034.ridgenet.net [204.154.246.34]) by          castor.ridgenet.net (8.11.0/8.11.0) with SMTP id f9SMYoW03050; Sun,          28 Oct 2001 14:34:51 -0800
References:  <90.181cfbb2.289c2e1c@aol.com>              <002501c11fec$47e1ae40$0400a8c0@hatjs>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <000701c16002$77a3a920$1b30fea9@kristinscomp>
Date:         Sun, 28 Oct 2001 14:47:04 -0800
Reply-To: "Kristin & David Hall" <thehalls@RIDGENET.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Kristin & David Hall" <thehalls@RIDGENET.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] US Standard Atmosphere - 1962
Comments: To: Jamie Morken <jmorken@HOME.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

BTW, what's the maximum altitude for this data?

--
Dave and/or Kristin Hall
----- Original Message -----
From: Jamie Morken <jmorken@HOME.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Wednesday, August 08, 2001 1:27 AM
Subject: Re: [AR] US Standard Atmosphere - 1962


> Hi all,
>
> I converted the standard atmosphere info off of Arocket.net into
polynomials
> (using tablecurve software)
> Please contact me if you want the output from tablecurve which contains
the
> standard deviation of these functions etc (I think they are pretty close
to
> the data on Arocket.net..)
>
> best regards,
> Jamie
>
>
> ps. here it is!:
>
>     x = altitude
>
>     'density calculation
>     a = 0.816329267409428
>     b = 7.89656837331484E-05
>     c = 4.70772116155895E-09
>     d = 1.53644444040785E-13
>     e = 4.51715967589257E-18
>     f = 1.63058118831337E-21
>     y = a + b * x + c * x ^ 2 + d * x ^ 3 + e * x ^ 4 + f * x ^ 5
>     ramCalc.density1 = y ^ -1
>
>     'pressure calculation
>     a = 9.87112869543132E-06
>     b = 1.17197158509061E-09
>     c = 8.20619500918129E-14
>     d = 4.24431702536488E-18
>     e = 2.20462329250301E-22
>     f = 1.4696038908295E-26
>     y = a + b * x + c * x ^ 2 + d * x ^ 3 + e * x ^ 4 + f * x ^ 5
>     ramCalc.pressure1 = y ^ -1
>
>     'temperature calculation
>     a = 3.49302722882021E-03
>     b = 8.7722320539364E-08
>     c = 8.66573513750265E-13
>     d = -1.74418088309309E-16
>     e = 3.38160082090756E-21
>     f = -1.82238855205536E-26
>     y = a + b * x + c * x ^ 2 + d * x ^ 3 + e * x ^ 4 + f * x ^ 5
>     ramCalc.temperature1 = y ^ -1
>
>
>
>
> > In a message dated 01/08/03 10:04:31 Eastern Daylight Time,
> > Rockitman@SPRINTMAIL.COM writes:
> >
> > << Does anyone on this list know where I can find polynomials expressing
> >  the US 1962 Standard Atmosphere?
> >  (Altitude Vs' Temp, Pressure, Q, S.O.S, and density) >>
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 27803 invoked from network); 29 Oct 2001 02:29:09 -0000
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 29 Oct 2001 02:29:09 -0000
Received: (qmail 26449 invoked by uid 50005); 29 Oct 2001 02:29:05 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4166. . Clean. Processed in 0.200201 secs); 29 Oct 2001 02:29:05 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 29 Oct 2001 02:29:04 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA15666; Sun, 28 Oct 2001 18:26:55 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 124824 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 29 Oct 2001 02:26:48          +0000
Received: from fep4-orange.clear.net.nz (fep4-orange.clear.net.nz          [203.97.32.4]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA15644          for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Sun, 28 Oct 2001 18:26:47 -0800
Received: from mkbs (203-167-156-175.dialup.clear.net.nz [203.167.156.175]) by          fep4-orange.clear.net.nz (1.5/1.7) with SMTP id PAA03368; Mon, 29 Oct          2001 15:26:41 +1300 (NZDT)
References:  <005001c16006$f5afe460$6601a8c0@home.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0D87_01C56B69.543A4450"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <06e101c16021$48643ac0$0700a8c0@mkbs>
Date:         Mon, 29 Oct 2001 14:23:05 +1300
Reply-To: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Organization: Applied Technology
Subject:      Re: [AR] unsubscribe
Comments: To: Brian Kosko <bkosko1@HOME.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0D87_01C56B69.543A4450
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Subject: [AR] unsubscribe

Why?
Anytime anyone with 100 plus posts in the last 10 months leave we'd =
probably l\all like to know the reason.=20
Whether its disatisfaction with the list or a new job/city/life.... ?
I hope its one of the latter.


regards


    Russell McMahon




------=_NextPart_000_0D87_01C56B69.543A4450
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Diso-8859-1">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 5.50.4522.1800" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><B>Subject:</B> [AR] unsubscribe</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>Why?</DIV>
<DIV>Anytime anyone with 100 plus posts in the last 10 months leave we'd =

probably l\all like to know the reason. </DIV>
<DIV>Whether its disatisfaction with the list or a new job/city/life.... =
?</DIV>
<DIV>I hope its one of the latter.</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>regards</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Russell McMahon</DIV>
<DIV><BR>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0D87_01C56B69.543A4450--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 28529 invoked from network); 29 Oct 2001 02:29:22 -0000
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 29 Oct 2001 02:29:22 -0000
Received: (qmail 31222 invoked by uid 50005); 29 Oct 2001 02:28:42 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4164. . Clean. Processed in 0.14509 secs); 29 Oct 2001 02:28:42 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 29 Oct 2001 02:28:42 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA15683; Sun, 28 Oct 2001 18:27:08 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 124831 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 29 Oct 2001 02:27:02          +0000
Received: from fep4-orange.clear.net.nz (fep4-orange.clear.net.nz          [203.97.32.4]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA15656          for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Sun, 28 Oct 2001 18:26:50 -0800
Received: from mkbs (203-167-156-175.dialup.clear.net.nz [203.167.156.175]) by          fep4-orange.clear.net.nz (1.5/1.7) with SMTP id PAA03460; Mon, 29 Oct          2001 15:26:47 +1300 (NZDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="Windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <06e901c16021$4c94ec20$0700a8c0@mkbs>
Date:         Mon, 29 Oct 2001 14:37:23 +1300
Reply-To: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Organization: Applied Technology
Subject:      [AR] [OT]: The USA Returns to Mars
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

> NASA Science News for October 24, 2001
>
> NASA's 2001 Mars Odyssey spacecraft reached Mars last night and was
> captured into orbit after a successful main engine burn.
>
> FULL STORY at
>
> http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2001/ast24oct_1.htm?list16511

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 13553 invoked from network); 29 Oct 2001 03:06:38 -0000
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 29 Oct 2001 03:06:38 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 7042 invoked by uid 50005); 29 Oct 2001 01:53:04 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4166. . Clean. Processed in 0.197226 secs); 29 Oct 2001 01:53:04 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 29 Oct 2001 01:53:04 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA15837; Sun, 28 Oct 2001 19:03:18 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 124854 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 29 Oct 2001 03:03:08          +0000
Received: from granger.mail.mindspring.net (granger.mail.mindspring.net          [207.69.200.148]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA15823          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 28 Oct 2001 19:03:08 -0800
Received: from mindspring.com (sdn-ar-011casfrMP166.dialsprint.net          [158.252.242.168]) by granger.mail.mindspring.net (8.9.3/8.8.5) with          ESMTP id WAA27193; Sun, 28 Oct 2001 22:03:03 -0500 (EST)
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 (Macintosh; U; PPC)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3BDCC8CC.79B2DB86@mindspring.com>
Date:         Sun, 28 Oct 2001 20:11:10 -0700
Reply-To: "Alan Shinn" <alshinn@MINDSPRING.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Alan Shinn" <alshinn@MINDSPRING.COM>
Subject:      [AR] Ammonium nitrate explosion, BIG
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Well, I don't know if this is off topic enough to get me expelled from
the list or not but I'll take a chance, since my recent question about
the details of expellable offenses was never answered.
I just learned that there was a huge explosion in Toulouse, France at a
chemical factory which "killed 29 people, injured several thousand and
destroyed numerous buildings on Sept. 21". Actually I may have heard
about it but I didn't know that there is a now 150 ft crater where there
used to be 300 tons of ammonium nitrate.
This may or may not apply to amature rocketry as there is a chance that
it was a terrorist act.
There is a New York Times (??) article at:

http://www.chemicalindustryarchives.org/whatsnew/press/nyt20011006.asp

arocket content - if you are of swarthy complexion with facial hair,
with a middle eastern accent,  perhaps you should get someone else to
buy your ammonium nitrate for you for awhile.

later - I hope.
--
Looking forward:
Alan Shinn


Experience the
beginnings of microscopy.
Make your own replica
of one of Antony van Leeuwenhoek's microscopes.
visit    http://www.mindspring.com/~alshinn/

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 5109 invoked from network); 29 Oct 2001 04:01:03 -0000
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 29 Oct 2001 04:01:03 -0000
Received: (qmail 1658 invoked by uid 50005); 29 Oct 2001 02:47:28 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4166. . Clean. Processed in 0.150861 secs); 29 Oct 2001 02:47:28 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 29 Oct 2001 02:47:27 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA16059; Sun, 28 Oct 2001 19:59:08 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 124872 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 29 Oct 2001 03:58:46          +0000
Received: from femail18.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail18.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.0.95.145]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA16031          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 28 Oct 2001 19:58:46 -0800
Received: from cx814151a ([24.14.55.118]) by femail18.sdc1.sfba.home.com          (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20 201-229-121-120-20010223) with SMTP id          <20011029035836.TAKG27771.femail18.sdc1.sfba.home.com@cx814151a> for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 28 Oct 2001 19:58:36 -0800
References:  <3BDCC8CC.79B2DB86@mindspring.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.3018.1300
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <04da01c1602e$4291d460$0a01a8c0@cx814151a>
Date:         Sun, 28 Oct 2001 22:00:32 -0600
Reply-To: "John Bolene" <jbolene@HOME.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Bolene" <jbolene@HOME.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Ammonium nitrate explosion, BIG
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

AN, while it can be used in rocket propellant (and some say it is better
than AP), can also explode in large quantities as it has in the past.  I
would wonder how it was stored, all in one pile or several separate piles in
metal containers sealed against moisture.

John Bolene
Tripoli Oklahoma Prefect and webmaster
Tripoli Oklahoma Web page -> http://members.home.com/tripoli-oklahoma/



----- Original Message -----
From: "Alan Shinn" <alshinn@MINDSPRING.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Sunday, October 28, 2001 9:11 PM
Subject: [AR] Ammonium nitrate explosion, BIG


> Well, I don't know if this is off topic enough to get me expelled from
> the list or not but I'll take a chance, since my recent question about
> the details of expellable offenses was never answered.
> I just learned that there was a huge explosion in Toulouse, France at a
> chemical factory which "killed 29 people, injured several thousand and
> destroyed numerous buildings on Sept. 21". Actually I may have heard
> about it but I didn't know that there is a now 150 ft crater where there
> used to be 300 tons of ammonium nitrate.
> This may or may not apply to amature rocketry as there is a chance that
> it was a terrorist act.
> There is a New York Times (??) article at:
>
> http://www.chemicalindustryarchives.org/whatsnew/press/nyt20011006.asp
>
> arocket content - if you are of swarthy complexion with facial hair,
> with a middle eastern accent,  perhaps you should get someone else to
> buy your ammonium nitrate for you for awhile.
>
> later - I hope.
> --
> Looking forward:
> Alan Shinn
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 23501 invoked from network); 29 Oct 2001 04:08:44 -0000
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 29 Oct 2001 04:08:44 -0000
Received: (qmail 31321 invoked by uid 50005); 29 Oct 2001 02:54:30 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4165. . Clean. Processed in 0.949533 secs); 29 Oct 2001 02:54:30 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 29 Oct 2001 02:54:29 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA16107; Sun, 28 Oct 2001 20:04:43 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 124883 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 29 Oct 2001 04:03:56          +0000
Received: from femail31.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail31.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.254.60.21]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA16092          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 28 Oct 2001 20:03:56 -0800
Received: from cc334751a ([65.13.214.65]) by femail31.sdc1.sfba.home.com          (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20 201-229-121-120-20010223) with SMTP id          <20011029040351.QGGS6400.femail31.sdc1.sfba.home.com@cc334751a> for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 28 Oct 2001 20:03:51 -0800
References:  <005001c16006$f5afe460$6601a8c0@home.com>              <06e101c16021$48643ac0$0700a8c0@mkbs>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0D8A_01C56B69.544D5720"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2462.0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <002c01c1602e$6e40ff00$6601a8c0@home.com>
Date:         Sun, 28 Oct 2001 21:01:46 -0700
Reply-To: "Brian Kosko" <bkosko1@HOME.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Brian Kosko" <bkosko1@HOME.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] unsubscribe
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0D8A_01C56B69.544D5720
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

A couple of reasons, one is the increased risk with sleazebag reporters =
sniffing around. My computer life has also just gotten very busy and I =
find I mainly spend time deleting arocket messages. As I said before, =
any of the real arocket guys are free to email if my wild opinions are =
needed.

Brian
  ----- Original Message -----=20
  From: Russell McMahon=20
  To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU=20
  Sent: Sunday, October 28, 2001 6:23 PM
  Subject: Re: [AR] unsubscribe


  Subject: [AR] unsubscribe

  Why?
  Anytime anyone with 100 plus posts in the last 10 months leave we'd =
probably l\all like to know the reason.=20
  Whether its disatisfaction with the list or a new job/city/life.... ?
  I hope its one of the latter.


  regards


      Russell McMahon

  =20


------=_NextPart_000_0D8A_01C56B69.544D5720
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Diso-8859-1">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 6.00.2462.0" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>A couple of reasons, one is the =
increased risk with=20
sleazebag reporters sniffing around. My computer life has also just =
gotten very=20
busy and I find I mainly spend time deleting arocket messages. As I said =
before,=20
any of the real arocket guys are free to email if my wild opinions are=20
needed.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Brian</FONT></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE dir=3Dltr=20
style=3D"PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; =
BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
  <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial">----- Original Message ----- </DIV>
  <DIV=20
  style=3D"BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; FONT: 10pt arial; font-color: =
black"><B>From:</B>=20
  <A title=3Dapptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ =
href=3D"mailto:apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ">Russell=20
  McMahon</A> </DIV>
  <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A =
title=3DAROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU=20
  href=3D"mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU">AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU</A> </DIV>
  <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> Sunday, October 28, 2001 =
6:23=20
  PM</DIV>
  <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> Re: [AR] =
unsubscribe</DIV>
  <DIV><BR></DIV>
  <DIV><B>Subject:</B> [AR] unsubscribe</DIV>
  <DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
  <DIV>Why?</DIV>
  <DIV>Anytime anyone with 100 plus posts in the last 10 months leave =
we'd=20
  probably l\all like to know the reason. </DIV>
  <DIV>Whether its disatisfaction with the list or a new =
job/city/life....=20
  ?</DIV>
  <DIV>I hope its one of the latter.</DIV>
  <DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
  <DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
  <DIV>regards</DIV>
  <DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
  <DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
  <DIV>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Russell McMahon</DIV>
  <DIV><BR>&nbsp;</DIV>
  <DIV>&nbsp;</DIV></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0D8A_01C56B69.544D5720--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 20314 invoked from network); 29 Oct 2001 05:05:29 -0000
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 29 Oct 2001 05:05:29 -0000
Received: (qmail 5271 invoked by uid 50005); 29 Oct 2001 05:04:49 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4164. . Clean. Processed in 0.172971 secs); 29 Oct 2001 05:04:49 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 29 Oct 2001 05:04:49 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA16282; Sun, 28 Oct 2001 21:01:21 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 124899 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 29 Oct 2001 05:01:08          +0000
Received: from cablecom.laribay.net (cablecom.laribay.net [66.20.57.4]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA16267 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 28 Oct 2001 21:01:07 -0800
Received: from billbull (dial099.laribay.net [66.20.57.99]) by          cablecom.laribay.net (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id WAA08448 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 28 Oct 2001 22:46:16 -0600 (CST)          (envelope-from bpbullock@laribay.net)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <006c01c16036$b91d7320$53391442@billbull>
Date:         Sun, 28 Oct 2001 23:01:08 -0600
Reply-To: "Bill Bullock" <bpbullock@LARIBAY.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Bill Bullock" <bpbullock@LARIBAY.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Heat-Sensitive Coatings
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

    Try:
http://www.t-m-c.com/html/paints.htm , or
http://www.thermalpaint.com/main.html
  I knew that if I looked long enough I would remember where I saw it. Some
of the stuff from these two sites is used in aerospace/rockets, etc... I
used some a few years ago on a job I did. (Have I neglected to inform that I
"...do a wee bit of 'precision' sandblasting and painting from time to
time?")
Bill

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 2899 invoked from network); 29 Oct 2001 05:26:20 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 29 Oct 2001 05:26:20 -0000
Received: (qmail 21081 invoked by uid 50005); 29 Oct 2001 04:12:45 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4166. . Clean. Processed in 0.127819 secs); 29 Oct 2001 04:12:45 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 29 Oct 2001 04:12:45 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA16381; Sun, 28 Oct 2001 21:23:48 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 124915 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 29 Oct 2001 05:23:39          +0000
Received: from wrench.toolcity.net (root@wrench.toolcity.net [208.0.188.2]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA16367 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 28 Oct 2001 21:23:39 -0800
Received: from [208.22.189.150]          (dap-208-22-189-150.meadville-tnt-0.pa.toolcity.net [208.22.189.150])          by wrench.toolcity.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id AAA02130; Mon, 29          Oct 2001 00:23:33 -0500 (EST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <v01510101b8029da709e9@[208.22.189.150]>
Date:         Mon, 29 Oct 2001 00:26:03 -0600
Reply-To: "al bradley" <abradley@TOOLCITY.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "al bradley" <abradley@TOOLCITY.NET>
Subject:      [AR] Re2: [AR] unsubscribe
Comments: To: Brian Kosko <bkosko1@HOME.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Brian:
Hate to see you go -- your posts have been among the more interesting and
have stimulated discussion.

As far as "deleting arocket messages" I understand this, doing it myself,
for there has been more than one contributor who is more interested in how
many times he can post to the list instead of how well he can make himself
thouroughly understood in a single communication. I too don't choose to
give the hours of my life away searching for a theme that I can't readily
see. (Or
that may well be just a reflection of my inate stupidity -- :-) )

Anyhow, if you find something real interesting rocketry-wise feel free to
post to me directly off line.
-------------------
>A couple of reasons, one is the increased risk with sleazebag reporters
>sniffing around. My computer life has also just gotten very busy and I
>find I mainly spend time deleting arocket messages. As I said before, any
>of the real arocket guys are free to email if my wild opinions are needed.
>
>Brian

------------------------------------------------------------------
Can you live Life with this?: "Unless there is a law, an agreement, or a
long-standing custom, No one `Deserves' Anything -- Either Good or Bad!"

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 18798 invoked from network); 29 Oct 2001 05:33:26 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 29 Oct 2001 05:33:26 -0000
Received: (qmail 989 invoked by uid 50005); 29 Oct 2001 05:32:46 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4164. . Clean. Processed in 0.197199 secs); 29 Oct 2001 05:32:46 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 29 Oct 2001 05:32:46 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA16432; Sun, 28 Oct 2001 21:30:50 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 124926 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 29 Oct 2001 05:30:43          +0000
Received: from localhost (dmccue@localhost) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with          ESMTP id VAA16418; Sun, 28 Oct 2001 21:30:42 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.LNX.4.10.10110282027110.16057-100000@itc.uci.edu>
Date:         Sun, 28 Oct 2001 21:30:42 -0800
Reply-To: "David J. McCue" <dmccue@itc.uci.edu>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "David J. McCue" <dmccue@itc.uci.edu>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Ammonium nitrate explosion, BIG
Comments: To: Alan Shinn <alshinn@MINDSPRING.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <3BDCC8CC.79B2DB86@mindspring.com>

Since you asked...

Getting expelled from the list is actually somewhat difficult.

Accidentally spamming the list because of an email virus is by far the
most common reason. When that happens, the person is removed from the list
and is notified that they have a virus. This is done to protect the
list membership from additional messages that might come from the infected
computer. When the person lets us know that they have cleared the problem,
we add 'em back in.

In the time I have been on this list, I can think of only four cases of
someone being removed for an off-topic post, and one of them was off the
list for only four hours. In that case, the individual involved had been
notified of other inappropriate postings prior to that action.
Nevertheless, the banishment was temporary.

While this list does get all over the place, I will point out that a
couple of things will get you in trouble with me, if not Ray. They are
political postings and rudeness to others. No, I don't mean that you can't
discuss politics as it affects rocketry, if you really want to beat the
NFPA horse, do so. But I do not want to provide a forum for your political
positions on topics unrelated to rocketry, even if rockets are incidental
to your topic.

I also ask that you refrain from comments of a personal nature. If you
don't agree with someone, you are free to disagree vigorously with them
here, but I expect you to refrain from disparaging remarks about them.
Let's be polite, please! (Or at least be civil, ok?)

In short, keep yer politics to yerself, and do the same with snide
remarks! All of this is covered in Terry's FAQ, but since it was asked, I
replied. It is always ok to ask for clarification, if you are unsure.

This group is large and full of many interests. This lists often reflects
that because it gets off on a TON of tangents! Not surprising that this
happens, this is a bright bunch of curious people (yes, I meant that both
ways!)

I think those of us who stay on the list do so because the good stuff is
worth putting up with the irrelevant stuff. Sadly, a number of valuable
people have left this forum, sometimes because of the irrelevant stuff and
sometimes because of the nastiness. My goal is to try and maintain some
minimum level of on-topic, useful exchange of information in a civil
atmosphere. I believe that Ray has this in mind as well, that's why I go
to the trouble of supporting this list for him, and you.

If you disagree, I'd be happy to hear from you directly, or you can visit
RMR and tell me why that's better.

Thanks for reading,
Dave McCue

PS. Alan: don't store your AN in a big pile. It may go off. Sadly, it
seems that the manufacturer in France may have forgotten this. It may be
many months before we find out why, but it has happened before. More than
once.

On Sun, 28 Oct 2001, Alan Shinn wrote:

> Well, I don't know if this is off topic enough to get me expelled from
> the list or not but I'll take a chance, since my recent question about
> the details of expellable offenses was never answered.
> I just learned that there was a huge explosion in Toulouse, France at a
> chemical factory which "killed 29 people, injured several thousand and
> destroyed numerous buildings on Sept. 21". Actually I may have heard
> about it but I didn't know that there is a now 150 ft crater where there
> used to be 300 tons of ammonium nitrate.
> This may or may not apply to amature rocketry as there is a chance that
> it was a terrorist act.
> There is a New York Times (??) article at:
>
> http://www.chemicalindustryarchives.org/whatsnew/press/nyt20011006.asp
>
> arocket content - if you are of swarthy complexion with facial hair,
> with a middle eastern accent,  perhaps you should get someone else to
> buy your ammonium nitrate for you for awhile.
>
> later - I hope.
> --
> Looking forward:
> Alan Shinn
>
>
> Experience the
> beginnings of microscopy.
> Make your own replica
> of one of Antony van Leeuwenhoek's microscopes.
> visit    http://www.mindspring.com/~alshinn/
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 9499 invoked from network); 29 Oct 2001 06:20:31 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 29 Oct 2001 06:20:31 -0000
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 29180 invoked by uid 50005); 29 Oct 2001 05:06:18 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4165. . Clean. Processed in 0.188483 secs); 29 Oct 2001 05:06:18 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 29 Oct 2001 05:06:18 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA16584; Sun, 28 Oct 2001 22:13:39 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 124942 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 29 Oct 2001 06:13:31          +0000
Received: from rasmus.uib.no (exim@rasmus.uib.no [129.177.12.30]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA16570 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Sun, 28 Oct 2001 22:13:31 -0800
Received: from tunnel-44-137.vpn.uib.no (emil.rasmus.uib.no) [129.177.44.137]          by rasmus.uib.no for arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU with esmtp (Exim 3.16) id          15y5ff-0001hk-00; Mon, 29 Oct 2001 07:13:19 +0100
X-Sender: st07696@rasmus.uib.no
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <5.1.0.14.0.20011027193006.028e9020@lstud.ii.uib.no>
Date:         Mon, 29 Oct 2001 07:13:27 +0100
Reply-To: "Emil Johnsen" <Emil.Johnsen@STUDENT.UIB.NO>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Emil Johnsen" <Emil.Johnsen@STUDENT.UIB.NO>
Subject:      [AR] Using N2O to pressurize NA or HTP
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

I have been thinking about the possible advantages of using oxidizers such
as WFNA or hydrogen peroxide in hybrids because of their higher density and
possibly lower cost compared to N2O. However, using nitrogen or helium for
either blow down or regulated pressurization would add significant mass and
offset the density advantage in amateur size rockets. Adding just enough
liquid N2O that it can vaporize and keep the oxidant pressurized seems to
be a better method. This method has been mentioned on arocket before, but I
have not been able to find much information or anyone who's actually tried
it, so I have some questions.

Is N2O incompatible with HNO3 or H2O2 in any way? Will N2O dissolve in
these liquids or will it float on top?

Has anyone used N2O in combination with HNO3 or H2O2? Did it work? What
problems were encountered?


Emil

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 13287 invoked from network); 29 Oct 2001 09:03:10 -0000
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 29 Oct 2001 09:03:10 -0000
Received: (qmail 18744 invoked by uid 50005); 29 Oct 2001 09:02:31 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4164. . Clean. Processed in 0.142248 secs); 29 Oct 2001 09:02:31 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 29 Oct 2001 09:02:30 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id BAA17038; Mon, 29 Oct 2001 01:00:31 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 124971 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 29 Oct 2001 09:00:10          +0000
Received: from angel.comcen.com.au (angel.comcen.com.au [203.23.236.69]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id BAA17022 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 29 Oct 2001 01:00:08 -0800
Received: from win2pk2 (modem041.sydney.spin.net.au [202.172.120.41] (may be          forged)) by angel.comcen.com.au (8.11.4/8.10.1) with SMTP id          f9T8xjC99672; Mon, 29 Oct 2001 19:59:46 +1100 (EST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
Importance: Normal
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <JJEFLLHFFAHHMBBIHFAEAEMBCHAA.pkelly@comcen.com.au>
Date:         Mon, 29 Oct 2001 20:01:12 +1100
Reply-To: "Paul Kelly" <pkelly@COMCEN.COM.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Paul Kelly" <pkelly@COMCEN.COM.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Ammonium nitrate explosion, BIG
Comments: To: Alan Shinn <alshinn@MINDSPRING.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <3BDCC8CC.79B2DB86@mindspring.com>

I read about this a while back. It was reported in the local press as a
being a chemical reprocessing/recycling plant that had a large storage tank
of contaminated AN. The report didn't elaborate on what was meant by
contaminated though. Big amounts of AN can (and have on a number of
occasions) undergo DDT. So even small fires can be dangerous.


PK

-----Original Message-----
From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU]On
Behalf Of Alan Shinn
Sent: Monday, 29 October 2001 2:11 PM
To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
Subject: [AR] Ammonium nitrate explosion, BIG


Well, I don't know if this is off topic enough to get me expelled from
the list or not but I'll take a chance, since my recent question about
the details of expellable offenses was never answered.
I just learned that there was a huge explosion in Toulouse, France at a
chemical factory which "killed 29 people, injured several thousand and
destroyed numerous buildings on Sept. 21". Actually I may have heard
about it but I didn't know that there is a now 150 ft crater where there
used to be 300 tons of ammonium nitrate.
This may or may not apply to amature rocketry as there is a chance that
it was a terrorist act.
There is a New York Times (??) article at:

http://www.chemicalindustryarchives.org/whatsnew/press/nyt20011006.asp

arocket content - if you are of swarthy complexion with facial hair,
with a middle eastern accent,  perhaps you should get someone else to
buy your ammonium nitrate for you for awhile.

later - I hope.
--
Looking forward:
Alan Shinn


Experience the
beginnings of microscopy.
Make your own replica
of one of Antony van Leeuwenhoek's microscopes.
visit    http://www.mindspring.com/~alshinn/

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 14904 invoked from network); 29 Oct 2001 10:52:58 -0000
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 29 Oct 2001 10:52:58 -0000
Received: (qmail 20881 invoked by uid 50005); 29 Oct 2001 10:52:19 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4164. . Clean. Processed in 0.145872 secs); 29 Oct 2001 10:52:19 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 29 Oct 2001 10:52:18 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id CAA17341; Mon, 29 Oct 2001 02:50:17 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 125001 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 29 Oct 2001 10:50:07          +0000
Received: from fep3-orange.clear.net.nz (fep3-orange.clear.net.nz          [203.97.32.3]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id CAA17327          for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Mon, 29 Oct 2001 02:50:06 -0800
Received: from mkbs (203-167-160-29.dialup.clear.net.nz [203.167.160.29]) by          fep3-orange.clear.net.nz (1.5/1.8) with SMTP id XAA09679; Mon, 29 Oct          2001 23:49:30 +1300 (NZDT)
References: <4.3.1.2.20011026134322.03619658@mail.idsoftware.com>            <4.3.1.2.20011028141701.03027df8@mail.idsoftware.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <010901c16067$88a99e40$0700a8c0@mkbs>
Date:         Mon, 29 Oct 2001 23:49:20 +1300
Reply-To: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Organization: Applied Technology
Subject:      Re: [AR] [ERPS] V2 aerodynamics
Comments: To: John Carmack <johnc@idsoftware.com>, erps-list@LunaCity.com
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Summary:
Discusses energy dissipation requirements for "re-entry" from altitudes
around 100 km but well below orbital speeds. May be of interest to people
playing with high altitude rocketry. May be wrong :-)

        Copied to Arocket as it has a possible chance of interesting some.

E&OE on all figures.
I think the figures are approx correct but I won't be entirely surprised if
I've dropped a power of 10 (or 2) somewhere here.

> >On a flight to 100 km (62 miles) when you get to the atmospheric
> >interface (about 400,000 feet) you'll have been falling for over
> >250,000 feet in a virtual vacuum. You're going to hit hard and going
> >to heat up very rapidly. It won't be fun.

> Straight up and down to 200km would not be possible with a man inside, but
> 100km is not that bad, and the logistics, and likely regulatory, benefits
> of minimising overflight area are significant.

Orbital velocity is about 8000 m/s
For an UVF (undecelerated vertical fall) (ie entirely out of atmosphere)
velocity increases with the square of the fall.
For a 100 km UVF  you speed up by about 1400 m/s
For a 50 km UVF its about 1000 m/s and
For a 25 km UVF its about 700 m/s

Clearly for anything much under 100 km of UVF the velocities are much less
than orbital.
Energy content is proportional to the square of velocity so orbital velocity
implies about 30 times the energy of an undecelerated fall of 100 km.

Another perspective is that energy is proportional to height

        E = mgh.

You need to fall from around 3000 km to get the same energy dissipation as
from LEO re-entry!

For a 1 kg mass falling through an undecelerated 1 km the kinetic energy
gained is

        1 x 9.8 x 1000 ~= 10,000 Newton metre

A Nm = a watt-second so each km fall adds about 10 kiloWatt seconds per km
of fall.
(1 kWs = 1 kJ but watt seconds is better visualised when you deal in 1 bar
heaters as below).
This is a good rule of thumb for energy dissipation calculations.

>From an Apogee of 100 km a 200 kg craft is going to have to get rid of 100 x
200 x 10 = 200,000 kW seconds of energy before it soft lands.
The rate this is dissipated and where it goes depends on the mix or
aerobraking, streamer, parachute, retrorocket etc but it has to go
somewhere. In other terms that's approximately the same as running 10 x 1
bar heaters for 6 hours, or 100 heaters for 36 minutes, or 1000 heaters for
3.6 minutes etc. The last is probably closest to what will be experienced.

This may sound challenging but comparison with the energy in typical
propellants puts it in perspective.
Typical hydrocarbons will yield around 10 kWh/kg (give or take a factor of
1.5  or so) = 36,000 kWS
So the 200.000 kWS above is equivalent to about 6 kg of Propane and an
appropriate amount of oxidiser. You need to be able to survive dissipating
the energy from this in somewhere between 30 seconds and 5 minutes in your
thermal shielding. Obviously the slower the better.  Which suggests it may
be useful to get some sort of drogue or drag device out as soon as possible
with suitable energy re-radiating capabilities to provide a staged slowdown.
I'm not aware of it being done but something which was staged to keep energy
dissipation rate somewhat constant as velocity fell and air density
increased may be useful. But, maybe this just isn't necessary.
(Constant drag hinged airbrakes maybe ? :-) )

Not trivial, but still somewhat easier to deal with than the equivalent
craft returning from orbit and dissipating around 6,000,000 kW seconds or
30,000 1 bar heaters for 3.6 minutes (or 180 kg of Propane plus requisite
oxidiser) ! :-)

Note that the energy dissipated / fuel equivalent is far less than the
propellant required to put the craft there in the first place. This is due
to the rather inefficient bootstrap nature of rockets and the reason why we
really really want space elevators if we are ever going to move mass
offplanet efficiently. Next millennium, maybe.


regards

                    Russell McMahon

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 11584 invoked from network); 29 Oct 2001 17:09:27 -0000
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 29 Oct 2001 17:09:27 -0000
Received: (qmail 15219 invoked by uid 50005); 29 Oct 2001 15:55:49 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4167. . Clean. Processed in 0.840115 secs); 29 Oct 2001 15:55:49 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 29 Oct 2001 15:55:47 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA18307; Mon, 29 Oct 2001 08:20:33 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 125047 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 29 Oct 2001 16:20:07          +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (oe18.law12.hotmail.com [64.4.18.122]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA18292 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 29 Oct 2001 08:20:07 -0800
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Mon,          29 Oct 2001 08:19:29 -0800
X-Originating-IP: [24.92.128.69]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 29 Oct 2001 16:19:29.0979 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[7C97A0B0:01C16095]
Message-ID:  <OE18tphzYWkeS6DuNcb000187f2@hotmail.com>
Date:         Mon, 29 Oct 2001 10:17:14 -0600
Reply-To: "Mark Kruep" <mkruep@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Mark Kruep" <mkruep@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      [AR] Anodizing (was T6 and temperature)
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Since we were discussing platings, anodizing, etc. in the T6/Temperature
thread, I thought I'd post these 2 sites I came across. They briefly
describe do it yourself anodizing at home which would make those homemade
aluminum motor casings look much cooler.

http://www.warpig.com/paintball/technical/anodize.shtml
http://www.focuser.com/atm/anodize/anodize.html

The second link is a little better since it adds photos, but I thought I'd
share both anyway. I hope this isn't taken as off topic, but if so, please
give me a verbal lashing before booting me. I mean for this post to be used
in an amateur rocketry sense.


Mark

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 6267 invoked from network); 29 Oct 2001 17:15:53 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 29 Oct 2001 17:15:53 -0000
Received: (qmail 755 invoked by uid 50005); 29 Oct 2001 17:15:14 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4167. . Clean. Processed in 0.160762 secs); 29 Oct 2001 17:15:14 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 29 Oct 2001 17:15:14 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA18412; Mon, 29 Oct 2001 08:50:11 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 125058 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 29 Oct 2001 16:50:09          +0000
Received: from localhost (dmccue@localhost) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with          ESMTP id IAA18393; Mon, 29 Oct 2001 08:49:59 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.LNX.4.10.10110290839350.18214-100000@itc.uci.edu>
Date:         Mon, 29 Oct 2001 08:49:59 -0800
Reply-To: "David J. McCue" <dmccue@itc.uci.edu>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "David J. McCue" <dmccue@itc.uci.edu>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Anodizing (was T6 and temperature)
Comments: To: Mark Kruep <mkruep@HOTMAIL.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <OE18tphzYWkeS6DuNcb000187f2@hotmail.com>

Dear Mark,

I'm sorry you feel it necessary to make such remarks about being removed
from the list. I don't know if your concern is genuine or you are
attempting to make a point of some kind, but if I haven't stated my
position clearly enough for you, please let me know, off-list.

Thanks!
Dave McCue

On Mon, 29 Oct 2001, Mark Kruep wrote:

[good stuff about anodizing deleted]
>
> The second link is a little better since it adds photos, but I thought I'd
> share both anyway. I hope this isn't taken as off topic, but if so, please
> give me a verbal lashing before booting me. I mean for this post to be used
> in an amateur rocketry sense.
>
>
> Mark
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 1201 invoked from network); 29 Oct 2001 18:16:45 -0000
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 29 Oct 2001 18:16:45 -0000
Received: (qmail 22028 invoked by uid 50005); 29 Oct 2001 18:16:40 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4167. . Clean. Processed in 1.424 secs); 29 Oct 2001 18:16:40 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 29 Oct 2001 18:16:37 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA18838; Mon, 29 Oct 2001 09:48:55 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 125082 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 29 Oct 2001 17:48:42          +0000
Received: from albatross.wgn.net ([208.179.155.113]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA18824 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon,          29 Oct 2001 09:48:42 -0800
Received: from cronos (eli-208-187-17-78.wgn.net [208.187.17.78]) by          albatross.wgn.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id JAA28803 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 29 Oct 2001 09:49:56 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <015f01c160a1$e1718940$c36122c0@cronos>
Date:         Mon, 29 Oct 2001 09:48:07 -0800
Reply-To: "Wedge Oldham" <wedge@WESTWORLD.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Wedge Oldham" <wedge@WESTWORLD.COM>
Subject:      [AR] Motor Size
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Guys:
I need an educated wild guess here. I'm upscaling a previous rocket of mine,
and am trying to take a stab at what size motor I could end up with.

I'll have room for a 6" diameter motor of about 72" long. Could somebody
take a guess as to how many total NewtonSeconds that *could* end up being.
I'd like to stay with simple AP-AL-HTPB combination, no exotic stuff. Just a
simple, reliable motor. An AN motor would also be acceptable, and may even
be prefered to give a long burn time.

I will also have room for up to 12" diameter motor, but I feel that the 9" &
12" motors are either difficult, costly or unreliable. Somebody correct me
here if I'm wrong.

Now I will not be building this motor myself, I'd just like to get a better
idea of what is possible before I enter into discussions with the motor
producer.

Wedge Oldham
http://NikeProject.com
Only those who risk going too far,
will ever know how far they can go.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 8511 invoked from network); 29 Oct 2001 18:42:17 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 29 Oct 2001 18:42:17 -0000
Received: (qmail 22515 invoked by uid 50005); 29 Oct 2001 18:41:38 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4167. . Clean. Processed in 0.136039 secs); 29 Oct 2001 18:41:38 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 29 Oct 2001 18:41:38 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA18969; Mon, 29 Oct 2001 10:22:05 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 125099 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 29 Oct 2001 18:22:01          +0000
Received: from localhost (dmccue@localhost) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with          ESMTP id KAA18955; Mon, 29 Oct 2001 10:22:01 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.LNX.4.10.10110291010310.18214-100000@itc.uci.edu>
Date:         Mon, 29 Oct 2001 10:22:01 -0800
Reply-To: "David J. McCue" <dmccue@itc.uci.edu>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "David J. McCue" <dmccue@itc.uci.edu>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Anodizing (was T6 and temperature)
Comments: To: john.w.lyngdal@exgate.tek.com
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <5832AFF5FC75D411844300508BC216B70302AB33@us-bv-m07.bv.tek.com>

Gadzooks! I didn't make myself too clear, did I! No, Mark was not removed
from the list - I was referring to his comments stating his concerns, not
any action on my part.

To make myself as clear as I can, just about anything is ok except
politics unrelated to rocketry, and repeated rude/off-topic postings.
Is that helpful?

Please refer to Terry's FAQ or contact Ray or me if unclear.

Above all, safety first!
Dave McCue

On Mon, 29 Oct 2001 john.w.lyngdal@exgate.tek.com wrote:

>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: David J. McCue [mailto:dmccue@ITC.UCI.EDU]
> Sent: Monday, October 29, 2001 8:50 AM
> To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
> Subject: Re: [AR] Anodizing (was T6 and temperature)
>
>
> Dear Mark,
> Dave,
>
>       It's a thankless task serving as a moderator, but after reading this
> message I still can't definitively ascertain if Mark was bounced from the
> Arocket group for this message. Personally, I think the URLs listed are
> useful to those folks who like burning APCP in aluminum hardware, as
> anodization greatly improves the corrosion resistance of the hardware. Not
> to mention most folks don't have the anodization volume needed to have it
> economically performed by a commercial company.
>
>       John
>
>
>
>
>
>
> I'm sorry you feel it necessary to make such remarks about being removed
> from the list. I don't know if your concern is genuine or you are
> attempting to make a point of some kind, but if I haven't stated my
> position clearly enough for you, please let me know, off-list.
>
> Thanks!
> Dave McCue
>
> On Mon, 29 Oct 2001, Mark Kruep wrote:
>
> [good stuff about anodizing deleted]
> >
> > The second link is a little better since it adds photos, but I thought I'd
> > share both anyway. I hope this isn't taken as off topic, but if so, please
> > give me a verbal lashing before booting me. I mean for this post to be
> used
> > in an amateur rocketry sense.
> >
> >
> > Mark
> >
> Since we were discussing platings, anodizing, etc. in the T6/Temperature
> thread, I thought I'd post these 2 sites I came across. They briefly
> describe do it yourself anodizing at home which would make those homemade
> aluminum motor casings look much cooler.
>
> http://www.warpig.com/paintball/technical/anodize.shtml
> http://www.focuser.com/atm/anodize/anodize.html
>
> The second link is a little better since it adds photos, but I thought I'd
> share both anyway. I hope this isn't taken as off topic, but if so, please
> give me a verbal lashing before booting me. I mean for this post to be used
> in an amateur rocketry sense.
>
>
> Mark
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 27259 invoked from network); 29 Oct 2001 18:55:16 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 29 Oct 2001 18:55:16 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 9928 invoked by uid 50005); 29 Oct 2001 18:54:38 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4167. . Clean. Processed in 0.18276 secs); 29 Oct 2001 18:54:38 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 29 Oct 2001 18:54:37 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA19049; Mon, 29 Oct 2001 10:37:43 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 125112 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 29 Oct 2001 18:37:40          +0000
Received: from smtp003pub.verizon.net (smtp003pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.182])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA19035 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 29 Oct 2001 10:37:39 -0800
Received: from [63.24.225.78] (2Cust50.tnt1.rancho-cucamonga.ca.da.uu.net          [63.24.224.114]) by smtp003pub.verizon.net  with ESMTP for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; id f9TIai317836 Mon, 29 Oct 2001 12:36:45          -0600 (CST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: GTE/01rocket@mail.gte.net
References: <015f01c160a1$e1718940$c36122c0@cronos>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <a05100326b80351afd4a1@[63.24.225.78]>
Date:         Mon, 29 Oct 2001 10:36:15 -0800
Reply-To: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Motor Size
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <015f01c160a1$e1718940$c36122c0@cronos>

>Guys:
>I need an educated wild guess here. I'm upscaling a previous rocket of mine,
>and am trying to take a stab at what size motor I could end up with.
>
>I'll have room for a 6" diameter motor of about 72" long. Could somebody


A 21" grain for a 6 inch motor is a full N (approximately).


>take a guess as to how many total NewtonSeconds that *could* end up being.
>I'd like to stay with simple AP-AL-HTPB combination, no exotic stuff. Just a
>simple, reliable motor. An AN motor would also be acceptable, and may even
>be prefered to give a long burn time.
>
>I will also have room for up to 12" diameter motor, but I feel that the 9" &
>12" motors are either difficult, costly or unreliable. Somebody correct me
>here if I'm wrong.


Our 9 and 12" motors are more reliable than some of the reload stuff
due to cost compromises on the smaller stuff.

And when you scale the propellant cost all of a sudden a "good"
casing is lost in the noise.

Jerry

>
>Now I will not be building this motor myself, I'd just like to get a better
>idea of what is possible before I enter into discussions with the motor
>producer.
>
>Wedge Oldham
>http://NikeProject.com
>Only those who risk going too far,
>will ever know how far they can go.


--
Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
Opinion, the whole thing.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 17480 invoked from network); 29 Oct 2001 19:40:43 -0000
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 29 Oct 2001 19:40:43 -0000
Received: (qmail 19776 invoked by uid 50005); 29 Oct 2001 18:27:04 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4167. . Clean. Processed in 0.193941 secs); 29 Oct 2001 18:27:04 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 29 Oct 2001 18:27:03 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA19192; Mon, 29 Oct 2001 11:14:48 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 125128 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 29 Oct 2001 19:14:44          +0000
Received: from femail14.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail14.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.0.95.141]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA19178          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 29 Oct 2001 11:14:44 -0800
Received: from hal2001 ([24.77.58.213]) by femail14.sdc1.sfba.home.com          (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20 201-229-121-120-20010223) with SMTP id          <20011029191443.QKQC8787.femail14.sdc1.sfba.home.com@hal2001>; Mon,          29 Oct 2001 11:14:43 -0800
References:  <90.181cfbb2.289c2e1c@aol.com>                         <002501c11fec$47e1ae40$0400a8c0@hatjs>              <000b01c16002$a4b040e0$1b30fea9@kristinscomp>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <006b01c160ae$3c67dbe0$4a00a8c0@hatjs>
Date:         Mon, 29 Oct 2001 11:16:38 -0800
Reply-To: "Jamie Morken" <jmorken@HOME.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jamie Morken" <jmorken@HOME.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] US Standard Atmosphere - 1962
Comments: To: Kristin & David Hall <thehalls@RIDGENET.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Hi all,

> Also, x = altitude....in what units?

It is in metric and it is from -5000m to 90000m.
It isn't perfect but it is pretty close :)

Ray put up the data too (he has all the units there)
http://arocket.itc.uci.edu/library/Environment/Atmosphere/

best regards,
Jamie

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 22559 invoked from network); 29 Oct 2001 20:05:48 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 29 Oct 2001 20:05:48 -0000
Received: (qmail 18055 invoked by uid 50005); 29 Oct 2001 20:05:44 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4167. . Clean. Processed in 2.101769 secs); 29 Oct 2001 20:05:44 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 29 Oct 2001 20:05:39 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA19304; Mon, 29 Oct 2001 11:46:05 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 125141 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 29 Oct 2001 19:45:41          +0000
Received: from proxy4.ba.best.com (root@proxy4.ba.best.com [206.184.139.15]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA19290 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Mon, 29 Oct 2001 11:45:41 -0800
Received: from [10.0.0.2] (snvadslgw2poold155.snjs.uswestqwest.net          [168.103.213.155]) by proxy4.ba.best.com (8.9.3/8.9.2/best.out) with          ESMTP id LAA03233 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Mon, 29 Oct 2001          11:45:36 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Sender:  (Unverified)
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <v04210104b8035b419a87@[10.0.0.2]>
Date:         Mon, 29 Oct 2001 11:45:02 -0800
Reply-To: "bob fortune" <bob@FORTUNEPAINT.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "bob fortune" <bob@FORTUNEPAINT.COM>
Subject:      [AR] "Model of shuttle,              which accelerate itself without throwing anything in space"
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Every once in a while I get some wacky emails through Aerocon.  This
gentleman will be presenting his ideas to various aerospace companies
today, I thought I'd share with you his propulsion system. He states
"Any body is free to use this model because from now I can not
progresses (can not build it because it will require several man and
new technology for its every aspect). I want nothing if any body want
to use it."

so what the heck, here it is:

http://www.aeroconsystems.com/Singh_machine/singh_machine.html

Yes, I realize it's akin to an astronaut with a sledgehammer banging
on the hull of the spacecraft but it certainly shows that his heart
is in the right place and he deserves an A for effort.  He obviously
doesn't have the resources to test his theory - might anyone have a
URL (or 2) for simple ways to experiment with conservation of
momentum?  Or a clever way for him to demonstrate his principle and
make the correct observations for himself?

Bob

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 17056 invoked from network); 29 Oct 2001 20:42:56 -0000
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 29 Oct 2001 20:42:56 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 27897 invoked by uid 50005); 29 Oct 2001 19:28:37 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4165. . Clean. Processed in 0.20795 secs); 29 Oct 2001 19:28:37 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 29 Oct 2001 19:28:36 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA19646; Mon, 29 Oct 2001 12:24:03 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 125215 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 29 Oct 2001 20:22:24          +0000
Received: from inet03.citec.qld.gov.au (firewall-user@inet03.citec.qld.gov.au          [203.5.10.10]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA19627          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 29 Oct 2001 12:22:22 -0800
Received: by inet03.citec.qld.gov.au; id GAA17982; Tue, 30 Oct 2001 06:22:20          +1000 (EST)
Received: from citec.com.au(pcux.citec.qld.gov.au 147.132.17.12) by          inet03.citec.qld.gov.au via smap (V2.0) id xma017846; Tue, 30 Oct 01          06:22:10 +1000
Received: from CITEC-Message_Server by citec.com.au with Novell_GroupWise; Tue,          30 Oct 2001 06:22:54 +1000
X-Mailer: Novell GroupWise 5.5.4
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by itc.uci.edu id MAA19628
Message-ID:  <sbde473e.082@citec.com.au>
Date:         Tue, 30 Oct 2001 06:22:23 +1000
Reply-To: "Des Bromilow" <Des.Bromilow@CITEC.COM.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Des Bromilow" <Des.Bromilow@CITEC.COM.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] "Model of shuttle,which accelerate itself without              throwing              anything in space"
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

An experiment to demonstrate....

how about standing on a skateboard (on a hard concrete floor - to reduce rolling resistance), and be tapping the back of the board with a sledge hammer. It would "prove" the concept in one dimension.

Des

>>> bob fortune <bob@FORTUNEPAINT.COM> 30/10/01 5:45:02 am >>>
Every once in a while I get some wacky emails through Aerocon.  This
gentleman will be presenting his ideas to various aerospace companies
today, I thought I'd share with you his propulsion system. He states
"Any body is free to use this model because from now I can not
progresses (can not build it because it will require several man and
new technology for its every aspect). I want nothing if any body want
to use it."

so what the heck, here it is:

http://www.aeroconsystems.com/Singh_machine/singh_machine.html

Yes, I realize it's akin to an astronaut with a sledgehammer banging
on the hull of the spacecraft but it certainly shows that his heart
is in the right place and he deserves an A for effort.  He obviously
doesn't have the resources to test his theory - might anyone have a
URL (or 2) for simple ways to experiment with conservation of
momentum?  Or a clever way for him to demonstrate his principle and
make the correct observations for himself?

Bob

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 24287 invoked from network); 29 Oct 2001 21:43:17 -0000
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 29 Oct 2001 21:43:17 -0000
Received: (qmail 18504 invoked by uid 50005); 29 Oct 2001 20:29:37 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4167. . Clean. Processed in 0.325411 secs); 29 Oct 2001 20:29:37 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 29 Oct 2001 20:29:37 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA19880; Mon, 29 Oct 2001 13:21:56 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 125249 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 29 Oct 2001 21:21:53          +0000
Received: from angel.comcen.com.au (angel.comcen.com.au [203.23.236.69]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA19866 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 29 Oct 2001 13:21:52 -0800
Received: from win2pk2 (modem023.sydney.spin.net.au [202.172.120.23] (may be          forged)) by angel.comcen.com.au (8.11.4/8.10.1) with SMTP id          f9TLLcC96379; Tue, 30 Oct 2001 08:21:38 +1100 (EST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <JJEFLLHFFAHHMBBIHFAEMEMDCHAA.pkelly@comcen.com.au>
Date:         Tue, 30 Oct 2001 08:23:04 +1100
Reply-To: "Paul Kelly" <pkelly@COMCEN.COM.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Paul Kelly" <pkelly@COMCEN.COM.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Anodizing (was T6 and temperature)
Comments: To: Mark Kruep <mkruep@HOTMAIL.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <OE18tphzYWkeS6DuNcb000187f2@hotmail.com>

I do my own anodising (when I can be bothered these days). It's fairly easy
to get good results. It's VERY hard to get consistent results, which is fine
for the amateur.

Some additions to the info presented on the two pages below:

Cleanliness is EVERYTHING! unless you want your fingerprint immortalised on
the finished product, wear gloves (you can see a copy of my fingerprint on
the pin puller picture on my site).

As mentioned on one of the links, keeping things cool is important. Instead
of lead cathodes, use a coil of thin wall 1/2" al pipe, and run water
through it. Refrigeration would be better.

The size of your cathode matters. Imagine ions moving between your job and
the cathode. If the cathode is on one side of the job, then that side will
get a thicker anodised layer. For small tanks I line the base and sides with
4" wide lead roof flashing strip (hardware store) and use it as the cathode.

Keep an eye on current, it's a good indicator of what's going on. If it
drops then you've lost electrical connection to the job, if it runs away
then your tank is hot.

Be careful when you heat the dye, it boils like milk and is bad for your
marriage.

Don't try running the cell at two low a current. I'm not sure why but I get
poor results below 8-9 amps/ sq foot of job area. You really need a beefy
supply to do anything bigger than a closure, DC welders work well.


All I can think off right now....


PK

-----Original Message-----
From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU]On
Behalf Of Mark Kruep
Sent: Tuesday, 30 October 2001 3:17 AM
To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
Subject: [AR] Anodizing (was T6 and temperature)


Since we were discussing platings, anodizing, etc. in the T6/Temperature
thread, I thought I'd post these 2 sites I came across. They briefly
describe do it yourself anodizing at home which would make those homemade
aluminum motor casings look much cooler.

http://www.warpig.com/paintball/technical/anodize.shtml
http://www.focuser.com/atm/anodize/anodize.html

The second link is a little better since it adds photos, but I thought I'd
share both anyway. I hope this isn't taken as off topic, but if so, please
give me a verbal lashing before booting me. I mean for this post to be used
in an amateur rocketry sense.


Mark

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 28116 invoked from network); 29 Oct 2001 21:44:15 -0000
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 29 Oct 2001 21:44:15 -0000
Received: (qmail 15133 invoked by uid 50005); 29 Oct 2001 20:29:55 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4165. . Clean. Processed in 0.128251 secs); 29 Oct 2001 20:29:55 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 29 Oct 2001 20:29:55 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA19917; Mon, 29 Oct 2001 13:28:20 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 125256 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 29 Oct 2001 21:28:14          +0000
Received: from angel.comcen.com.au (angel.comcen.com.au [203.23.236.69]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA19903 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 29 Oct 2001 13:28:12 -0800
Received: from win2pk2 (modem023.sydney.spin.net.au [202.172.120.23] (may be          forged)) by angel.comcen.com.au (8.11.4/8.10.1) with SMTP id          f9TLS1C05993; Tue, 30 Oct 2001 08:28:01 +1100 (EST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <JJEFLLHFFAHHMBBIHFAEAEMECHAA.pkelly@comcen.com.au>
Date:         Tue, 30 Oct 2001 08:29:27 +1100
Reply-To: "Paul Kelly" <pkelly@COMCEN.COM.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Paul Kelly" <pkelly@COMCEN.COM.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] "Model of shuttle,              which accelerate itself without throwing anything in space"
Comments: To: bob fortune <bob@FORTUNEPAINT.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <v04210104b8035b419a87@[10.0.0.2]>

OH dear. One can imagine what it must be like working PR for an aerospace
company having to deal with the good intentions of guys like this on a daily
basis. Tell him to sit it on a skateboard and watch it accelerate..... back
and forth.

PK

-----Original Message-----
From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU]On
Behalf Of bob fortune
Sent: Tuesday, 30 October 2001 6:45 AM
To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
Subject: [AR] "Model of shuttle, which accelerate itself without
throwing anything in space"


Every once in a while I get some wacky emails through Aerocon.  This
gentleman will be presenting his ideas to various aerospace companies
today, I thought I'd share with you his propulsion system. He states
"Any body is free to use this model because from now I can not
progresses (can not build it because it will require several man and
new technology for its every aspect). I want nothing if any body want
to use it."

so what the heck, here it is:

http://www.aeroconsystems.com/Singh_machine/singh_machine.html

Yes, I realize it's akin to an astronaut with a sledgehammer banging
on the hull of the spacecraft but it certainly shows that his heart
is in the right place and he deserves an A for effort.  He obviously
doesn't have the resources to test his theory - might anyone have a
URL (or 2) for simple ways to experiment with conservation of
momentum?  Or a clever way for him to demonstrate his principle and
make the correct observations for himself?

Bob

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 23129 invoked from network); 29 Oct 2001 23:01:41 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 29 Oct 2001 23:01:41 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 26209 invoked by uid 50005); 29 Oct 2001 22:57:12 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4167. . Clean. Processed in 2.21104 secs); 29 Oct 2001 22:57:12 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 29 Oct 2001 22:57:09 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA20293; Mon, 29 Oct 2001 14:29:45 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 125327 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 29 Oct 2001 22:28:37          +0000
Received: from ns.vanguard.com (ns.VANGUARD.COM [192.175.173.31]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA20278 for          <Arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 29 Oct 2001 14:28:32 -0800
Received: from eagle1.vanguard.com (eagle1.VANGUARD.COM [192.175.141.70]) by          ns.vanguard.com (Switch-2.1.3/Switch-2.1.0) with ESMTP id          f9TMRVw01230 for <Arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 29 Oct 2001 17:27:31          -0500 (EST)
Received: from vgi4mail.vanguard.com (vgi4mail.vanguard.com [10.254.65.16]) by          eagle1.vanguard.com (Switch-2.1.3/Switch-2.1.0) with SMTP id          f9TMSLE09115 for <Arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 29 Oct 2001 17:28:21          -0500 (EST)
Received: by vgi4mail.vanguard.com(Lotus SMTP MTA v4.6.6  (890.1 7-16-1999))           id 85256AF4.007B7155 ; Mon, 29 Oct 2001 17:28:19 -0500
X-Lotus-FromDomain: VGINOTES
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Disposition: inline
Message-ID:  <85256AF4.007B6F9A.00@vgi4mail.vanguard.com>
Date:         Mon, 29 Oct 2001 17:28:15 -0500
Reply-To: <Waysie_Atkins@VANGUARD.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Waysie Atkins" <Waysie_Atkins@VANGUARD.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] [ERPS] V2 aerodynamics
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

snipped
> >On a flight to 100 km (62 miles) when you get to the atmospheric
> >interface (about 400,000 feet) you'll have been falling for over
> >250,000 feet in a virtual vacuum. You're going to hit hard and going
> >to heat up very rapidly. It won't be fun.


Correct my math as necessary but 62 miles times 528 ft/mile equals 327,360 feet
at apogee.
How does one fall 250,000 feet from there and still be at an altitude of 400,000
ft?



Curiously,

Waysie

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 6224 invoked from network); 29 Oct 2001 23:05:15 -0000
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 29 Oct 2001 23:05:15 -0000
Received: (qmail 14647 invoked by uid 50005); 29 Oct 2001 21:50:53 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4165. . Clean. Processed in 2.634926 secs); 29 Oct 2001 21:50:53 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 29 Oct 2001 21:50:51 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA20348; Mon, 29 Oct 2001 14:39:35 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 125338 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 29 Oct 2001 22:39:25          +0000
Received: from mta03.mail.mel.aone.net.au (mta03.mail.au.uu.net [203.2.192.83])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA20331 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 29 Oct 2001 14:39:20 -0800
Received: from unknown ([63.34.212.115]) by mta03.mail.mel.aone.net.au with          SMTP id <20011029223822.TAPR15297.mta03.mail.mel.aone.net.au@unknown>          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 30 Oct 2001 09:38:22 +1100
References: Conversation <v04210104b8035b419a87@[10.0.0.2]> with last message            <v04210104b8035b419a87@[10.0.0.2]>
Priority: Normal
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Priority: 3
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	X-MAPIextension=.TXT;
	charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>
Date:         Mon, 29 Oct 2001 22:39:25 +0000
Reply-To: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] "Model of shuttle,              which accelerate itself without throwing
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <v04210104b8035b419a87@[10.0.0.2]>

Problem is it appears to me that he hasn't allowed for the fact that to
accelerate a body in a particular direction requires equal force in the
opposite direction (providing mass stays constant, which it does) ie.
Newtons second law. Remembering the rotational devices supplying the
kinetic energy to the system can't be factored into the force/acceleration
equation because its forces and movements are balanced (in equilibrium).
The only force or movements that can be affected outside the direct system
are the lateral ones in this case and it just so happens they balance each
other out. So, at the end of the day, no net thrust will be experienced.
  Saying that, I am of the belief that it's possible to achieve an external
net thrust from a closed system but that it can only be achieved using a
working fluid (likely a gas) as the medium for energy conversion. As you
mentioned, good on him for trying. Amateurs will one day get to orbit but
(as I've said before) not with conventional propulsion.

Troy.

----------
> Every once in a while I get some wacky emails through Aerocon.  This
> gentleman will be presenting his ideas to various aerospace companies
> today, I thought I'd share with you his propulsion system. He states
> "Any body is free to use this model because from now I can not
> progresses (can not build it because it will require several man and
> new technology for its every aspect). I want nothing if any body want
> to use it."
>
> so what the heck, here it is:
>
> http://www.aeroconsystems.com/Singh_machine/singh_machine.html
>
> Yes, I realize it's akin to an astronaut with a sledgehammer banging
> on the hull of the spacecraft but it certainly shows that his heart
> is in the right place and he deserves an A for effort.  He obviously
> doesn't have the resources to test his theory - might anyone have a
> URL (or 2) for simple ways to experiment with conservation of
> momentum?  Or a clever way for him to demonstrate his principle and
> make the correct observations for himself?
>
> Bob

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 23005 invoked from network); 29 Oct 2001 23:24:41 -0000
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 29 Oct 2001 23:24:41 -0000
Received: (qmail 406 invoked by uid 50005); 29 Oct 2001 23:24:03 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4167. . Clean. Processed in 0.215337 secs); 29 Oct 2001 23:24:03 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 29 Oct 2001 23:24:03 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA20489; Mon, 29 Oct 2001 15:02:47 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 125362 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 29 Oct 2001 23:01:28          +0000
Received: from fep4-orange.clear.net.nz (fep4-orange.clear.net.nz          [203.97.32.4]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA20473          for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Mon, 29 Oct 2001 15:01:21 -0800
Received: from mkbs (203-167-160-127.dialup.clear.net.nz [203.167.160.127]) by          fep4-orange.clear.net.nz (1.5/1.7) with SMTP id MAA25327; Tue, 30 Oct          2001 12:01:11 +1300 (NZDT)
References: <4.3.1.2.20011026134322.03619658@mail.idsoftware.com>            <4.3.1.2.20011028141701.03027df8@mail.idsoftware.com>            <010901c16067$88a99e40$0700a8c0@mkbs>            <163486913524.20011029124208@aro.ch>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <01c701c160cd$bdcee6a0$0700a8c0@mkbs>
Date:         Tue, 30 Oct 2001 12:02:05 +1300
Reply-To: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Organization: Applied Technology
Subject:      Re: [AR] [ERPS] V2 aerodynamics
Comments: To: erps-list@LunaCity.com
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

> You make interesting comparisons, what`s about in terms of energy
> dissipation, to come down from suborbital and orbital journeys.
> But what the heck is a 1 bar heater? Bar is normally used as an
> unit for pressure ( 1 bar = 10*5 N/m2 ).


Sorry - terminology didn't translate well across languages :-)
A one bar heater is an almost  universally recognised  unit of energy
consumption well understood almost anywhere in the world - once I make it
clear what it is :-)
.
I meant a "radiator" or electric heating appliance such as is used for house
heating that you plug into a mains outlet/socket to create warmth. These
typically have a power rating of 100 watts for each element or "bar" used. I
used this as an energy dissipation measure as most of us have a reasonable
feel for how much energy one of these dissipates in use.

regards


            Russell McMahon


The terms energy and power tend to get confused a little in such
discussions.
1 Newton-metre = 1 Joule = 1 watt second.
Energy = power x time.
Power energy per time.
Watts = power (same watts for more seconds = more energy)) = Joules per
second

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 2237 invoked from network); 30 Oct 2001 00:03:06 -0000
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 30 Oct 2001 00:03:06 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 6791 invoked by uid 50005); 30 Oct 2001 00:02:27 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4167. . Clean. Processed in 0.274977 secs); 30 Oct 2001 00:02:27 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 30 Oct 2001 00:02:27 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA20672; Mon, 29 Oct 2001 15:46:25 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 125390 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 29 Oct 2001 23:45:21          +0000
Received: from cascara.uvic.ca (root@cascara.uvic.ca [142.104.5.28]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA20653 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 29 Oct 2001 15:45:18 -0800
Received: from home.com (tsunami.cfs.me.UVic.CA [142.104.121.74]) by          cascara.uvic.ca (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id f9TNj27250182 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 29 Oct 2001 15:45:02 -0800
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.6 (Macintosh; I; PPC)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <JJEFLLHFFAHHMBBIHFAEMECFCHAA.pkelly@comcen.com.au>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	x-mac-type=54455854;
	x-mac-creator=4D4F5353;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3BDDDCDC.AED090E9@home.com>
Date:         Mon, 29 Oct 2001 15:49:01 -0700
Reply-To: "Jamie Morken" <jmorken@HOME.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jamie Morken" <jmorken@HOME.COM>
Subject:      [AR] Please ignore unless you are Dave Hall
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Sorry that I am posting this to arocket but my email to Dave Hall never gets
through..

Dave:  you can use the polynomials for whatever you want!

best regards,
Jamie

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 5942 invoked from network); 30 Oct 2001 00:03:44 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 30 Oct 2001 00:03:44 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 24556 invoked by uid 50005); 29 Oct 2001 22:49:22 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4165. . Clean. Processed in 2.501622 secs); 29 Oct 2001 22:49:22 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 29 Oct 2001 22:49:17 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA20695; Mon, 29 Oct 2001 15:48:12 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 125397 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 29 Oct 2001 23:48:11          +0000
Received: from proxy4.ba.best.com (root@proxy4.ba.best.com [206.184.139.15]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA20665 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Mon, 29 Oct 2001 15:45:45 -0800
Received: from [10.0.0.2] (snvadslgw2poold155.snjs.uswestqwest.net          [168.103.213.155]) by proxy4.ba.best.com (8.9.3/8.9.2/best.out) with          ESMTP id PAA16393 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Mon, 29 Oct 2001          15:43:59 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Sender:  (Unverified)
References: <v04210104b8035b419a87@[10.0.0.2]>            <001501c160c0$664d16c0$1b30fea9@kristinscomp>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <v0421010ab80395644c76@[10.0.0.2]>
Date:         Mon, 29 Oct 2001 15:43:26 -0800
Reply-To: "bob fortune" <bob@FORTUNEPAINT.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "bob fortune" <bob@FORTUNEPAINT.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] "Model of shuttle,              which accelerate itself without throwing anything in space"
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <001501c160c0$664d16c0$1b30fea9@kristinscomp>

Yeah,  unfortunately the guy is probably the latter but like I said
he's sure trying.  Someone out there just like him one day is going
to stumble on something simple which will revolutionize our world -
the problem of course is winnowing the wheat from the chaff.

I get all kinds of email and phone calls like Singh.  Couple of
months ago, about 10 at night, I got a call from somebody at a
payphone in Chicago who wanted an H2O2 motor for a full scale replica
of a Me-163 Komet.  He said all he was lacking was the engine, I
guess he planned on being the pilot.  The animated AT&T voice kept on
interrupting the conversation stating "Please deposit $1.35 for the
next 3 minutes".  Never heard from him again.

Sometimes they work out.  I'll have a cool little aerospike nozzle
for commercial hybrid and solid motors pretty soon which is the
result of a wacky inventor.  Neat little design that.

A lot of times they don't.  A good example is a home raingutter
installer who came up with a design for a Special Forces insertion
device who needed a rocket motor for his Airmat winged vehicle.
(Imagine a flying Ski-Doo dropped from the back of a C-130) Don't
think he ever got funding or else this guy,
http://www.kineticaerospace.com/ , snuck in and got to the DoD first.


Bob



>Bob, I would be very impressed if the guys he gave his talk to managed to
>keep a straight face.  As far as demonstrations, there aren't any.  The guy
>doesn't understand the concept of the law of conservation of momentum and
>thus is going to write off any Earth-bound demo as inherently flawed due to
>frictional forces of bearings/whatever.  In short, he's either the greatest
>mind since Einstein or the most amusing twit I've seen since the rocketyguy
>up in Oregon.
>
>--
>Dave and/or Kristin Hall

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 23965 invoked from network); 30 Oct 2001 01:12:12 -0000
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 30 Oct 2001 01:12:12 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 9232 invoked by uid 50005); 30 Oct 2001 01:11:34 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4167. . Clean. Processed in 0.147833 secs); 30 Oct 2001 01:11:34 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 30 Oct 2001 01:11:34 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA21005; Mon, 29 Oct 2001 16:56:15 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 125444 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 30 Oct 2001 00:56:11          +0000
Received: from mail005.syd.optusnet.com.au (mail005.syd.optusnet.com.au          [203.2.75.229]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA20991          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 29 Oct 2001 16:56:10 -0800
Received: from webmail03.syd.optusnet.com.au (webmail03.syd.optusnet.com.au          [203.2.75.236]) by mail005.syd.optusnet.com.au (8.11.1/8.11.1) with          ESMTP id f9U0u2D27430 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 30 Oct 2001          11:56:03 +1100
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: MIME-tools 5.411 (Entity 5.404)
Received: from  [209.36.247.3] as user strudwicke@optusnet.com.au by          webmail.optusnet.com.au with HTTP;
Message-ID:  <200110300056.f9U0u2D27430@mail005.syd.optusnet.com.au>
Date:         Tue, 30 Oct 2001 11:56:01 +1100
Reply-To: "Craig Strudwicke" <strudwicke@OPTUSNET.COM.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Craig Strudwicke" <strudwicke@OPTUSNET.COM.AU>
Subject:      [AR] Recovery Harnesses
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

My rockets thus far have only been rather small and hence recovery harnesses
have not been required to be very 'robust' or absorb any real energy.

Are others out there using harnesses or other devices to absorb some of the
kinetic energy of the two halves seperating and during chute deployment ? I have
seen many people using straps that look like passenger car seat belts and this
just doesn't seem like a good idea to me (no compliance). I slip knot
configuration using climbing rope has also been used and this seems to be OK
(unless the slip knot is too tight) as an energy absorber.

Thoughts/ideas appreciated.

Craig

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 10804 invoked from network); 30 Oct 2001 01:39:37 -0000
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 30 Oct 2001 01:39:37 -0000
Received: (qmail 1617 invoked by uid 50005); 30 Oct 2001 01:38:59 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4167. . Clean. Processed in 0.152323 secs); 30 Oct 2001 01:38:59 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 30 Oct 2001 01:38:59 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA21212; Mon, 29 Oct 2001 17:36:57 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 125480 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 30 Oct 2001 01:36:55          +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (oe67.law12.hotmail.com [64.4.18.202]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA21198 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 29 Oct 2001 17:36:55 -0800
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Mon,          29 Oct 2001 17:36:06 -0800
X-Originating-IP: [24.92.128.69]
References:  <200110300056.f9U0u2D27430@mail005.syd.optusnet.com.au>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 30 Oct 2001 01:36:06.0000 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[3E2C0700:01C160E3]
Message-ID:  <OE67qp2T0apMHi0SYNI00018b11@hotmail.com>
Date:         Mon, 29 Oct 2001 19:33:19 -0600
Reply-To: "Mark Kruep" <mkruep@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Mark Kruep" <mkruep@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Recovery Harnesses
Comments: To: Craig Strudwicke <strudwicke@OPTUSNET.COM.AU>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Opinions on this will be a dime a dozen. There are some articles about this
topic in the InfoCentral section of Rocketryonline. There are numerous
different ways to go about recovery and the most common type is usually
overbuilding the rocket to some huge factor so that it doesn't get destroyed
by the kinetic energy. That usually involves wide straps and thick
bulkheads. This is also usually the simplest method because of costs or
space in the rocket.

Other methods include "daisy chains" where successive knots are broken to
dissipate energy, bungee, elastic, etc. I have seen some systems where a
purposely weak bungee cord was used and it snapped at some point thereby
absorbing a great deal of shock before it hit the main harness. Using bungee
alone is usually frowned upon because it doesn't like heat, becomes brittle
with age and without obvious signs, and it just converts kinetic to
potential energy and slams the 2 sections back together. Elastic is great
for small rockets, but is very unsafe for big rockets for many of the same
reasons as bungee, but the list is longer.

Probably the best method for amateurs is a well designed compromise between
the overbuilt method and one using either reefed chutes or deployment bags
and pilot chutes. That's how the big boys do it, but between cost, space,
and complexity it is not usually used unless you're into a level 3 bird. One
might also look into dynamic rope since it will stretch without rebounding
so hard like bungee and it's very strong. You will pay the penalty in
weight, space, and zippering potential though. It may also help to use a
multi-point harness attachment to both distribute the load and orient the
rocket for a better landing. If you want more info on any of these just send
me an email and I'll share any info I know of. I'm sure there are other ways
and differing opinions on what I wrote, but that's for you to decide what
you're comfortable doing.

Mark


----- Original Message -----
From: "Craig Strudwicke" <strudwicke@OPTUSNET.COM.AU>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Monday, October 29, 2001 6:56 PM
Subject: [AR] Recovery Harnesses


> My rockets thus far have only been rather small and hence recovery
harnesses
> have not been required to be very 'robust' or absorb any real energy.
>
> Are others out there using harnesses or other devices to absorb some of
the
> kinetic energy of the two halves seperating and during chute deployment ?
I have
> seen many people using straps that look like passenger car seat belts and
this
> just doesn't seem like a good idea to me (no compliance). I slip knot
> configuration using climbing rope has also been used and this seems to be
OK
> (unless the slip knot is too tight) as an energy absorber.
>
> Thoughts/ideas appreciated.
>
> Craig
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 11141 invoked from network); 30 Oct 2001 01:39:43 -0000
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 30 Oct 2001 01:39:43 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 23551 invoked by uid 50005); 30 Oct 2001 00:25:22 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4165. . Clean. Processed in 0.776211 secs); 30 Oct 2001 00:25:22 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 30 Oct 2001 00:25:20 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA21131; Mon, 29 Oct 2001 17:28:10 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 125460 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 30 Oct 2001 01:28:08          +0000
Received: from inet03.citec.qld.gov.au (firewall-user@inet03.citec.qld.gov.au          [203.5.10.10]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA21117          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 29 Oct 2001 17:28:06 -0800
Received: by inet03.citec.qld.gov.au; id LAA15775; Tue, 30 Oct 2001 11:27:53          +1000 (EST)
Received: from citec.com.au(pcux.citec.qld.gov.au 147.132.17.12) by          inet03.citec.qld.gov.au via smap (V2.0) id xma015477; Tue, 30 Oct 01          11:27:44 +1000
Received: from CITEC-Message_Server by citec.com.au with Novell_GroupWise; Tue,          30 Oct 2001 11:28:29 +1000
X-Mailer: Novell GroupWise 5.5.4
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by itc.uci.edu id RAA21118
Message-ID:  <sbde8edd.026@citec.com.au>
Date:         Tue, 30 Oct 2001 11:28:09 +1000
Reply-To: "Des Bromilow" <Des.Bromilow@CITEC.COM.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Des Bromilow" <Des.Bromilow@CITEC.COM.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Recovery Harnesses
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

What I use....
I have LONG lines of nylon lne (brickies line, or braid, or rope) which I loop in a figure-8. I then tape the loops with a turn of masking tape at each end. Basically the ejction event pulls the line out of the model, then breaks the tape/s, then un ravells the figure 8's.

I've seen people researching the use of velcro, or deformable lengths as energy dissapation mechanisms.

the deforming lengths was a great idea (albeit potentially quite heavy)... basically copper wire, wound into a spiral, or cylinder. The ejection event would unravel the spiral, or cylinder. (Basically the plastic deformation of the ductile metal). Once recovered, the copper was then recoiled into the shape, and stowed.

Where are you Craig?

Des Bromilow
Brisbane

>>> Craig Strudwicke <strudwicke@OPTUSNET.COM.AU> 30/10/01 10:56:01 am >>>
My rockets thus far have only been rather small and hence recovery harnesses
have not been required to be very 'robust' or absorb any real energy.

Are others out there using harnesses or other devices to absorb some of the
kinetic energy of the two halves seperating and during chute deployment ? I have
seen many people using straps that look like passenger car seat belts and this
just doesn't seem like a good idea to me (no compliance). I slip knot
configuration using climbing rope has also been used and this seems to be OK
(unless the slip knot is too tight) as an energy absorber.

Thoughts/ideas appreciated.

Craig

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 19322 invoked from network); 30 Oct 2001 01:49:54 -0000
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 30 Oct 2001 01:49:54 -0000
Received: (qmail 7729 invoked by uid 50005); 30 Oct 2001 00:35:33 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4165. . Clean. Processed in 0.328108 secs); 30 Oct 2001 00:35:33 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 30 Oct 2001 00:35:32 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA21274; Mon, 29 Oct 2001 17:46:24 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 125491 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 30 Oct 2001 01:46:18          +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (oe41.law12.hotmail.com [64.4.18.98]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA21260 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon,          29 Oct 2001 17:46:18 -0800
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Mon,          29 Oct 2001 17:45:44 -0800
X-Originating-IP: [24.92.128.69]
References: <JJEFLLHFFAHHMBBIHFAEMEMDCHAA.pkelly@comcen.com.au>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 30 Oct 2001 01:45:44.0140 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[96C530C0:01C160E4]
Message-ID:  <OE41INoZy3qtSRwv5E90000965a@hotmail.com>
Date:         Mon, 29 Oct 2001 19:42:57 -0600
Reply-To: "Mark Kruep" <mkruep@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Mark Kruep" <mkruep@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Anodizing (was T6 and temperature)
Comments: To: Paul Kelly <pkelly@comcen.com.au>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Thanks for the extra info. I'm curious as to whether the super concentrated
drain cleaners (97% Sulfuric acid) are pure enough to pull this off (in the
weak electrolyte solution)? I'm not sure what constitutes the other 3%.
Also, maybe the use of random smudges, fingerprints, or whatever could add
that weird finish like Dr Rocket used on his millennium cans? How's that
done exactly?

TIA
Mark
----- Original Message -----
From: "Paul Kelly" <pkelly@comcen.com.au>
To: "Mark Kruep" <mkruep@HOTMAIL.COM>; <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Monday, October 29, 2001 3:23 PM
Subject: RE: [AR] Anodizing (was T6 and temperature)


> I do my own anodising (when I can be bothered these days). It's fairly
easy
> to get good results. It's VERY hard to get consistent results, which is
fine
> for the amateur.
>
> Some additions to the info presented on the two pages below:
>
> Cleanliness is EVERYTHING! unless you want your fingerprint immortalised
on
> the finished product, wear gloves (you can see a copy of my fingerprint on
> the pin puller picture on my site).
>
> As mentioned on one of the links, keeping things cool is important.
Instead
> of lead cathodes, use a coil of thin wall 1/2" al pipe, and run water
> through it. Refrigeration would be better.
>
> The size of your cathode matters. Imagine ions moving between your job and
> the cathode. If the cathode is on one side of the job, then that side will
> get a thicker anodised layer. For small tanks I line the base and sides
with
> 4" wide lead roof flashing strip (hardware store) and use it as the
cathode.
>
> Keep an eye on current, it's a good indicator of what's going on. If it
> drops then you've lost electrical connection to the job, if it runs away
> then your tank is hot.
>
> Be careful when you heat the dye, it boils like milk and is bad for your
> marriage.
>
> Don't try running the cell at two low a current. I'm not sure why but I
get
> poor results below 8-9 amps/ sq foot of job area. You really need a beefy
> supply to do anything bigger than a closure, DC welders work well.
>
>
> All I can think off right now....
>
>
> PK
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU]On
> Behalf Of Mark Kruep
> Sent: Tuesday, 30 October 2001 3:17 AM
> To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
> Subject: [AR] Anodizing (was T6 and temperature)
>
>
> Since we were discussing platings, anodizing, etc. in the T6/Temperature
> thread, I thought I'd post these 2 sites I came across. They briefly
> describe do it yourself anodizing at home which would make those homemade
> aluminum motor casings look much cooler.
>
> http://www.warpig.com/paintball/technical/anodize.shtml
> http://www.focuser.com/atm/anodize/anodize.html
>
> The second link is a little better since it adds photos, but I thought I'd
> share both anyway. I hope this isn't taken as off topic, but if so, please
> give me a verbal lashing before booting me. I mean for this post to be
used
> in an amateur rocketry sense.
>
>
> Mark
>
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 26423 invoked from network); 30 Oct 2001 02:40:29 -0000
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 30 Oct 2001 02:40:29 -0000
Received: (qmail 21312 invoked by uid 50005); 30 Oct 2001 01:26:47 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4167. . Clean. Processed in 0.459114 secs); 30 Oct 2001 01:26:47 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 30 Oct 2001 01:26:46 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA21481; Mon, 29 Oct 2001 18:37:44 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 125513 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 30 Oct 2001 02:37:20          +0000
Received: from albatross.wgn.net ([208.179.155.113]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA21466 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon,          29 Oct 2001 18:37:16 -0800
Received: from hogwild (sc-66-74-66-111.socal.rr.com [66.74.66.111]) by          albatross.wgn.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id SAA23606 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 29 Oct 2001 18:38:32 -0800
References:  <200110300056.f9U0u2D27430@mail005.syd.optusnet.com.au>              <OE67qp2T0apMHi0SYNI00018b11@hotmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <002901c160eb$a3b1bcc0$6f424a42@socal.rr.com>
Date:         Mon, 29 Oct 2001 18:36:10 -0800
Reply-To: "Wedge Oldham" <wedge@WESTWORLD.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Wedge Oldham" <wedge@WESTWORLD.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Recovery Harnesses
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Mark has brought up a lot of good points. But I would like to emphasis on
point that didn't seem to be mentioned, and is often overlooked.

Ejection forces should not be overlooked. along with chute opening stresses.
I think a common miss-conception when making the transition for small
(model) rocket to large (high power/ experimental) rockets is that the
ejection forces should be *absorbed*. The forces should be dissipated, not
absorbed.

The method I choose, is to use a long length of shock cord. I choose tubular
nylon, 1/2" width for rockets under 2 pounds. Up to 1" wide for my larger
rockets (202 lbs on the pad). But the one rule I always follow is use an
obscene amount of cordage. A 23 pound rocket I last flew  had 75' of 1"
tubular nylon. This rocket shredded as it hit Mach 1.0, and deployed the
chute as a result. The upper airframe shattered but the bulkheads (1/2"
plywood) and the cord all held.

I a kidding manner I would suggest you use as much shock cord as will fit in
your airframe. This may be an over exaggeration for some rocket, but not by
much.

The only hazard with using very long shock cords is having them tangle on
deployment. This can easily be prevented by "Z" folding them to lengths of
about 12" and a wrap of tape around each end, before stuffing it in the
airframe.

Wedge Oldham
http://NikeProject.com


----- Original Message -----
From: "Mark Kruep" <mkruep@HOTMAIL.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Monday, October 29, 2001 5:33 PM
Subject: Re: [AR] Recovery Harnesses


> Opinions on this will be a dime a dozen. There are some articles about
this
> topic in the InfoCentral section of Rocketryonline. There are numerous
> different ways to go about recovery and the most common type is usually
> overbuilding the rocket to some huge factor so that it doesn't get
destroyed
> by the kinetic energy. That usually involves wide straps and thick
> bulkheads. This is also usually the simplest method because of costs or
> space in the rocket.
>
> Other methods include "daisy chains" where successive knots are broken to
> dissipate energy, bungee, elastic, etc. I have seen some systems where a
> purposely weak bungee cord was used and it snapped at some point thereby
> absorbing a great deal of shock before it hit the main harness. Using
bungee
> alone is usually frowned upon because it doesn't like heat, becomes
brittle
> with age and without obvious signs, and it just converts kinetic to
> potential energy and slams the 2 sections back together. Elastic is great
> for small rockets, but is very unsafe for big rockets for many of the same
> reasons as bungee, but the list is longer.
>
> Probably the best method for amateurs is a well designed compromise
between
> the overbuilt method and one using either reefed chutes or deployment bags
> and pilot chutes. That's how the big boys do it, but between cost, space,
> and complexity it is not usually used unless you're into a level 3 bird.
One
> might also look into dynamic rope since it will stretch without rebounding
> so hard like bungee and it's very strong. You will pay the penalty in
> weight, space, and zippering potential though. It may also help to use a
> multi-point harness attachment to both distribute the load and orient the
> rocket for a better landing. If you want more info on any of these just
send
> me an email and I'll share any info I know of. I'm sure there are other
ways
> and differing opinions on what I wrote, but that's for you to decide what
> you're comfortable doing.
>
> Mark
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Craig Strudwicke" <strudwicke@OPTUSNET.COM.AU>
> To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
> Sent: Monday, October 29, 2001 6:56 PM
> Subject: [AR] Recovery Harnesses
>
>
> > My rockets thus far have only been rather small and hence recovery
> harnesses
> > have not been required to be very 'robust' or absorb any real energy.
> >
> > Are others out there using harnesses or other devices to absorb some of
> the
> > kinetic energy of the two halves seperating and during chute deployment
?
> I have
> > seen many people using straps that look like passenger car seat belts
and
> this
> > just doesn't seem like a good idea to me (no compliance). I slip knot
> > configuration using climbing rope has also been used and this seems to
be
> OK
> > (unless the slip knot is too tight) as an energy absorber.
> >
> > Thoughts/ideas appreciated.
> >
> > Craig
> >

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 11506 invoked from network); 30 Oct 2001 03:10:36 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 30 Oct 2001 03:10:36 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 32319 invoked by uid 50005); 30 Oct 2001 03:09:59 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4167. . Clean. Processed in 0.197477 secs); 30 Oct 2001 03:09:59 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 30 Oct 2001 03:09:58 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA21671; Mon, 29 Oct 2001 19:07:46 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 125538 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 30 Oct 2001 03:07:43          +0000
Received: from femail20.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail20.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.0.95.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA21657          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 29 Oct 2001 19:07:43 -0800
Received: from c1649002-a.earthlink.net ([24.20.95.67]) by          femail20.sdc1.sfba.home.com (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20          201-229-121-120-20010223) with ESMTP id          <20011030030736.PYD637.femail20.sdc1.sfba.home.com@c1649002-a.earthlink.net>; Mon, 29 Oct 2001 19:07:36          -0800
X-Sender: forkbomb@mail.earthlink.net
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.0.2
References: <200110300056.f9U0u2D27430@mail005.syd.optusnet.com.au>            <OE67qp2T0apMHi0SYNI00018b11@hotmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <5.0.2.1.0.20011029190225.02290278@mail.earthlink.net>
Date:         Mon, 29 Oct 2001 19:07:30 -0800
Reply-To: "Pierce Nichols" <forkbomb@EARTHLINK.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Pierce Nichols" <forkbomb@EARTHLINK.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Recovery Harnesses
Comments: To: Wedge Oldham <wedge@WESTWORLD.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <002901c160eb$a3b1bcc0$6f424a42@socal.rr.com>

At 06:36 PM 10/29/2001 -0800, Wedge Oldham wrote:
>Mark has brought up a lot of good points. But I would like to emphasis on
>point that didn't seem to be mentioned, and is often overlooked.
>
>Ejection forces should not be overlooked. along with chute opening stresses.
>I think a common miss-conception when making the transition for small
>(model) rocket to large (high power/ experimental) rockets is that the
>ejection forces should be *absorbed*. The forces should be dissipated, not
>absorbed.
>
>The method I choose, is to use a long length of shock cord. I choose tubular
>nylon, 1/2" width for rockets under 2 pounds. Up to 1" wide for my larger
>rockets (202 lbs on the pad). But the one rule I always follow is use an
>obscene amount of cordage. A 23 pound rocket I last flew  had 75' of 1"
>tubular nylon. This rocket shredded as it hit Mach 1.0, and deployed the
>chute as a result. The upper airframe shattered but the bulkheads (1/2"
>plywood) and the cord all held.
>
>I a kidding manner I would suggest you use as much shock cord as will fit in
>your airframe. This may be an over exaggeration for some rocket, but not by
>much.


         It would probably be lighter just to cut back on the ejection
forces by using a smaller charge. If your first ejection charge fires near
the apogee, then you are going to have relatively low aerodynamic forces to
overcome with the ejection charge. The second ejection (assuming dual-break
deployment) only has to overcome the friction forces holding the rocket
together. It would be useful to run static ground tests with the full-up
recovery system installed to determine the minimum ejection charge
necessary to get good separation, and use only that much powder.


>The only hazard with using very long shock cords is having them tangle on
>deployment. This can easily be prevented by "Z" folding them to lengths of
>about 12" and a wrap of tape around each end, before stuffing it in the
>airframe.


         I've seen the tape wraps not break when they needed to... fan-fold
secured with rubber bands may deploy more easily.

         -p


Mars or Bust!
www.marssociety.com

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 2028 invoked from network); 30 Oct 2001 03:16:59 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 30 Oct 2001 03:16:59 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: (qmail 9852 invoked by uid 50005); 30 Oct 2001 03:16:22 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4167. . Clean. Processed in 0.154731 secs); 30 Oct 2001 03:16:22 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 30 Oct 2001 03:16:21 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA21746; Mon, 29 Oct 2001 19:13:34 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 125556 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 30 Oct 2001 03:13:32          +0000
Received: from localhost (dmccue@localhost) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with          ESMTP id TAA21732 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 29 Oct 2001          19:13:32 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.LNX.4.10.10110291859340.21358-100000@itc.uci.edu>
Date:         Mon, 29 Oct 2001 19:13:32 -0800
Reply-To: "David J. McCue" <dmccue@itc.uci.edu>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "David J. McCue" <dmccue@itc.uci.edu>
Subject:      [AR] List feature preferences
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <3BDDDCDC.AED090E9@home.com>

On Mon, 29 Oct 2001, Jamie Morken wrote:

> Sorry that I am posting this to arocket but my email to Dave Hall never gets
> through..
>
[snip]

Jamie raises an interesting point. When I set this list up for Ray, I set
it so that not even list members could get access to the big list of names
and email addresses. The idea was that spammers couldn't join and grab the
list of addresses, and the fact that I tend to favor privacy in general.

Now, any member can get the address of another member who has posted at
least once by looking through the web archive of aRocket. Would it be
useful to allow members to scan through a master list? People could
conceal themselves from being listed, but they would be in the big list by
default. Alternatively, I could make it so no one is in the list until
they add themselves.

I ask this question because I am about to begin preparations to move this
list to new software that does not have a 500 member limit. It is a good
time to seek improvements. All current features will be retained (web
archive and such) but other features are possible.

Please email your thoughts to me privately, and I will summarize people's
wishes in a later post, perhaps to put the issues to a vote. My guess is
that things will remain as they are, but if you would like to see a change
now is the time to speak.

Thanks!
Dave McCue

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 4320 invoked from network); 30 Oct 2001 03:17:42 -0000
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 30 Oct 2001 03:17:42 -0000
Received: (qmail 24743 invoked by uid 50005); 30 Oct 2001 02:03:59 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4167. . Clean. Processed in 1.708662 secs); 30 Oct 2001 02:03:59 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 30 Oct 2001 02:03:56 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA21723; Mon, 29 Oct 2001 19:13:16 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 125549 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 30 Oct 2001 03:13:13          +0000
Received: from femail26.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail26.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.254.60.16]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA21708          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 29 Oct 2001 19:13:13 -0800
Received: from officenew ([24.1.27.168]) by femail26.sdc1.sfba.home.com          (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20 201-229-121-120-20010223) with SMTP id          <20011030031307.BKKU2746.femail26.sdc1.sfba.home.com@officenew>; Mon,          29 Oct 2001 19:13:07 -0800
References:  <200110300056.f9U0u2D27430@mail005.syd.optusnet.com.au>                        <OE67qp2T0apMHi0SYNI00018b11@hotmail.com>              <002901c160eb$a3b1bcc0$6f424a42@socal.rr.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2462.0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <005801c160f0$cc300080$8300a8c0@olmpi1.wa.home.com>
Date:         Mon, 29 Oct 2001 19:13:07 -0800
Reply-To: "Tomm Aldridge" <taldridge@HOME.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Tomm Aldridge" <taldridge@HOME.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Recovery Harnesses
Comments: To: Wedge Oldham <wedge@WESTWORLD.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

I agree with Wedge.  My L3 rocket had ~50' of 1", 20' in the drogue section
and 30' in the main section and worked just fine in a nominal deployment.
This is all that would fit in the 4" airframe and also accomodate the
chutes.  Under a stressful deploy, I would have preferred 1.5x as much but
this is not a science (yet).
----- Original Message -----
From: "Wedge Oldham" <wedge@WESTWORLD.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Monday, October 29, 2001 6:36 PM
Subject: Re: [AR] Recovery Harnesses


> Mark has brought up a lot of good points. But I would like to emphasis on
> point that didn't seem to be mentioned, and is often overlooked.
>
> Ejection forces should not be overlooked. along with chute opening
stresses.
> I think a common miss-conception when making the transition for small
> (model) rocket to large (high power/ experimental) rockets is that the
> ejection forces should be *absorbed*. The forces should be dissipated, not
> absorbed.
>
> The method I choose, is to use a long length of shock cord. I choose
tubular
> nylon, 1/2" width for rockets under 2 pounds. Up to 1" wide for my larger
> rockets (202 lbs on the pad). But the one rule I always follow is use an
> obscene amount of cordage. A 23 pound rocket I last flew  had 75' of 1"
> tubular nylon. This rocket shredded as it hit Mach 1.0, and deployed the
> chute as a result. The upper airframe shattered but the bulkheads (1/2"
> plywood) and the cord all held.
>
> I a kidding manner I would suggest you use as much shock cord as will fit
in
> your airframe. This may be an over exaggeration for some rocket, but not
by
> much.
>
> The only hazard with using very long shock cords is having them tangle on
> deployment. This can easily be prevented by "Z" folding them to lengths of
> about 12" and a wrap of tape around each end, before stuffing it in the
> airframe.
>
> Wedge Oldham
> http://NikeProject.com
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Mark Kruep" <mkruep@HOTMAIL.COM>
> To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
> Sent: Monday, October 29, 2001 5:33 PM
> Subject: Re: [AR] Recovery Harnesses
>
>
> > Opinions on this will be a dime a dozen. There are some articles about
> this
> > topic in the InfoCentral section of Rocketryonline. There are numerous
> > different ways to go about recovery and the most common type is usually
> > overbuilding the rocket to some huge factor so that it doesn't get
> destroyed
> > by the kinetic energy. That usually involves wide straps and thick
> > bulkheads. This is also usually the simplest method because of costs or
> > space in the rocket.
> >
> > Other methods include "daisy chains" where successive knots are broken
to
> > dissipate energy, bungee, elastic, etc. I have seen some systems where a
> > purposely weak bungee cord was used and it snapped at some point thereby
> > absorbing a great deal of shock before it hit the main harness. Using
> bungee
> > alone is usually frowned upon because it doesn't like heat, becomes
> brittle
> > with age and without obvious signs, and it just converts kinetic to
> > potential energy and slams the 2 sections back together. Elastic is
great
> > for small rockets, but is very unsafe for big rockets for many of the
same
> > reasons as bungee, but the list is longer.
> >
> > Probably the best method for amateurs is a well designed compromise
> between
> > the overbuilt method and one using either reefed chutes or deployment
bags
> > and pilot chutes. That's how the big boys do it, but between cost,
space,
> > and complexity it is not usually used unless you're into a level 3 bird.
> One
> > might also look into dynamic rope since it will stretch without
rebounding
> > so hard like bungee and it's very strong. You will pay the penalty in
> > weight, space, and zippering potential though. It may also help to use a
> > multi-point harness attachment to both distribute the load and orient
the
> > rocket for a better landing. If you want more info on any of these just
> send
> > me an email and I'll share any info I know of. I'm sure there are other
> ways
> > and differing opinions on what I wrote, but that's for you to decide
what
> > you're comfortable doing.
> >
> > Mark
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Craig Strudwicke" <strudwicke@OPTUSNET.COM.AU>
> > To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
> > Sent: Monday, October 29, 2001 6:56 PM
> > Subject: [AR] Recovery Harnesses
> >
> >
> > > My rockets thus far have only been rather small and hence recovery
> > harnesses
> > > have not been required to be very 'robust' or absorb any real energy.
> > >
> > > Are others out there using harnesses or other devices to absorb some
of
> > the
> > > kinetic energy of the two halves seperating and during chute
deployment
> ?
> > I have
> > > seen many people using straps that look like passenger car seat belts
> and
> > this
> > > just doesn't seem like a good idea to me (no compliance). I slip knot
> > > configuration using climbing rope has also been used and this seems to
> be
> > OK
> > > (unless the slip knot is too tight) as an energy absorber.
> > >
> > > Thoughts/ideas appreciated.
> > >
> > > Craig
> > >

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 5566 invoked from network); 30 Oct 2001 03:18:06 -0000
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 30 Oct 2001 03:18:06 -0000
Received: (qmail 11461 invoked by uid 50005); 30 Oct 2001 03:17:28 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4167. . Clean. Processed in 0.185581 secs); 30 Oct 2001 03:17:28 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 30 Oct 2001 03:17:28 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA21794; Mon, 29 Oct 2001 19:15:53 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 125563 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 30 Oct 2001 03:15:50          +0000
Received: from smtprelay3.abs.adelphia.net (smtprelay.abs.adelphia.net          [64.8.20.11]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA21780 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 29 Oct 2001 19:15:49 -0800
Received: from jlgrady ([24.53.101.238]) by smtprelay3.abs.adelphia.net          (Netscape Messaging Server 4.15) with SMTP id GM011Z03.JLR for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 29 Oct 2001 22:15:35 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook CWS, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
Importance: Normal
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <001f01c160f1$d9078ca0$0200a8c0@24.53.64.18>
Date:         Mon, 29 Oct 2001 22:20:38 -0500
Reply-To: "Jeff Grady" <jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jeff Grady" <jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Anodizing (was T6 and temperature)
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <OE41INoZy3qtSRwv5E90000965a@hotmail.com>

You can buy pure SO4 from Wal-mart, K-mart or auto parts store. Mostly sold
for rejuvenating motorcycle batteries.

To get very good results, the article must be absolutely clean. First,
degrease the article with an Al compatible degreaser that leaves no residue.
Used to could use 1,1,1 trichloroethane...But EPA did away with that stuff.
You can use a 1,1,1 replacement - there are several on the market. Any bit
of dust, finger oil, etc will prohibit the surface from being anodized (or
plated for that matter). Then, electro-clean the part. This causes hydrogen
gas bubbles to emit from the surface of the metal and lifts dirt and grime
right off the part. (Electro cleaning steel this way leaves a surface so
clean that it will rust before your very eyes if a minute or more goes by
without going to the next step in the plating process.)

For Al, use 4oz of sodium bicarbonate and 4oz sodium carbonate per gallon of
DISTILLED water. This is not the only thing that works, but is what I have
had success with. In the plating/anodizing biz, using tap water will screw
ya up big time. I found this out the hard way. Make the article the cathode
and use steel sheet metal (also must be clean) for the anode. You can use a
10-20 amp car battery charger for a power source. This will generate a LOT
of oxygen and hydrogen in the cleaning bath, so keep the sparks to a
minimum. Once, while chrome plating a handgun, I made the mistake of moving
one of the anode wires and caused a big spark. That set off the hydrogen gas
which caused "skid-marks" :)

Use a wire clothes hanger to hand the article in the cleaner bath. Also, be
sure to make the article the cathode, otherwise you will be anodizing the
work before its ready. Electro-clean for 3 minutes. Once the article is
clean, you will need to rinse it thoroughly by vigorous swashing in a
DISTILLED rinsing bath. I used 3 gal Rubbermaid tubs from Wal-Mart for bath
and plating tanks.

To anodize, use aluminum wire for hanging in the solution. The anodizing
solution should consist of 15-20% SO4 in DISTILLED water. I would use
aluminum sheet (a pie plate will actually work) for the cathode. Just make
sure you have the same surface area in cathode as the work to be anodized.
Count ALL exposed surface areas. Notice, I said cathode which is the
opposite of what I said above. Hang the article into the anodizing solution
and apply 10-20 amps of current from the battery charger for about 15-20
minutes. If no gas bubbles are seen, then you have a bad connection.

Use an ohmmeter to determine if the oxide layer has protected the article.
Testing conductivity of the anodized surface with an ohmmeter set on its
highest scale should show NO movement. The article will have a porous
covering not visible with the naked eye. To close these pores, boil the
article in water for about 10 minutes.

Jeff

P.S. Never tried to dye, so can't help there...

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 659 invoked from network); 30 Oct 2001 03:25:35 -0000
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 30 Oct 2001 03:25:35 -0000
Received: (qmail 24865 invoked by uid 50005); 30 Oct 2001 03:24:58 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4167. . Clean. Processed in 0.187404 secs); 30 Oct 2001 03:24:58 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 30 Oct 2001 03:24:57 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA21882; Mon, 29 Oct 2001 19:20:19 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 125583 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 30 Oct 2001 03:20:18          +0000
Received: from angel.comcen.com.au (angel.comcen.com.au [203.23.236.69]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA21868 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 29 Oct 2001 19:20:16 -0800
Received: from win2pk2 (modem038.sydney.spin.net.au [202.172.121.38] (may be          forged)) by angel.comcen.com.au (8.11.4/8.10.1) with SMTP id          f9U3K7h10573; Tue, 30 Oct 2001 14:20:07 +1100 (EST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <JJEFLLHFFAHHMBBIHFAEGEMICHAA.pkelly@comcen.com.au>
Date:         Tue, 30 Oct 2001 14:21:34 +1100
Reply-To: "Paul Kelly" <pkelly@COMCEN.COM.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Paul Kelly" <pkelly@COMCEN.COM.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Anodizing (was T6 and temperature)
Comments: To: Mark Kruep <mkruep@hotmail.com>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <OE41INoZy3qtSRwv5E90000965a@hotmail.com>

Thanks for the extra info. I'm curious as to whether the super concentrated
drain cleaners (97% Sulfuric acid) are pure enough to pull this off (in the
weak electrolyte solution)? I'm not sure what constitutes the other 3%.
Also, maybe the use of random smudges, fingerprints, or whatever could add
that weird finish like Dr Rocket used on his millennium cans? How's that
done exactly?

I use 1:1 battery acid tap water.

AFAIR those casings were splash anodised. You mix your dye's with cornflour
to get a thick consistency, then trickle different colours over the job
before sealing it.


PK

TIA
Mark
----- Original Message -----
From: "Paul Kelly" <pkelly@comcen.com.au>
To: "Mark Kruep" <mkruep@HOTMAIL.COM>; <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Monday, October 29, 2001 3:23 PM
Subject: RE: [AR] Anodizing (was T6 and temperature)


> I do my own anodising (when I can be bothered these days). It's fairly
easy
> to get good results. It's VERY hard to get consistent results, which is
fine
> for the amateur.
>
> Some additions to the info presented on the two pages below:
>
> Cleanliness is EVERYTHING! unless you want your fingerprint immortalised
on
> the finished product, wear gloves (you can see a copy of my fingerprint on
> the pin puller picture on my site).
>
> As mentioned on one of the links, keeping things cool is important.
Instead
> of lead cathodes, use a coil of thin wall 1/2" al pipe, and run water
> through it. Refrigeration would be better.
>
> The size of your cathode matters. Imagine ions moving between your job and
> the cathode. If the cathode is on one side of the job, then that side will
> get a thicker anodised layer. For small tanks I line the base and sides
with
> 4" wide lead roof flashing strip (hardware store) and use it as the
cathode.
>
> Keep an eye on current, it's a good indicator of what's going on. If it
> drops then you've lost electrical connection to the job, if it runs away
> then your tank is hot.
>
> Be careful when you heat the dye, it boils like milk and is bad for your
> marriage.
>
> Don't try running the cell at two low a current. I'm not sure why but I
get
> poor results below 8-9 amps/ sq foot of job area. You really need a beefy
> supply to do anything bigger than a closure, DC welders work well.
>
>
> All I can think off right now....
>
>
> PK
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU]On
> Behalf Of Mark Kruep
> Sent: Tuesday, 30 October 2001 3:17 AM
> To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
> Subject: [AR] Anodizing (was T6 and temperature)
>
>
> Since we were discussing platings, anodizing, etc. in the T6/Temperature
> thread, I thought I'd post these 2 sites I came across. They briefly
> describe do it yourself anodizing at home which would make those homemade
> aluminum motor casings look much cooler.
>
> http://www.warpig.com/paintball/technical/anodize.shtml
> http://www.focuser.com/atm/anodize/anodize.html
>
> The second link is a little better since it adds photos, but I thought I'd
> share both anyway. I hope this isn't taken as off topic, but if so, please
> give me a verbal lashing before booting me. I mean for this post to be
used
> in an amateur rocketry sense.
>
>
> Mark
>
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 16245 invoked from network); 30 Oct 2001 03:30:25 -0000
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 30 Oct 2001 03:30:25 -0000
Received: (qmail 17485 invoked by uid 50005); 30 Oct 2001 02:16:43 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4167. . Clean. Processed in 0.608489 secs); 30 Oct 2001 02:16:43 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 30 Oct 2001 02:16:41 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA21954; Mon, 29 Oct 2001 19:27:33 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 125598 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 30 Oct 2001 03:27:29          +0000
Received: from angel.comcen.com.au (angel.comcen.com.au [203.23.236.69]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA21939 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 29 Oct 2001 19:27:28 -0800
Received: from win2pk2 (modem038.sydney.spin.net.au [202.172.121.38] (may be          forged)) by angel.comcen.com.au (8.11.4/8.10.1) with SMTP id          f9U3RQh13287 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 30 Oct 2001 14:27:26          +1100 (EST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <JJEFLLHFFAHHMBBIHFAEAEMJCHAA.pkelly@comcen.com.au>
Date:         Tue, 30 Oct 2001 14:28:54 +1100
Reply-To: "Paul Kelly" <pkelly@COMCEN.COM.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Paul Kelly" <pkelly@COMCEN.COM.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Recovery Harnesses
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <005801c160f0$cc300080$8300a8c0@olmpi1.wa.home.com>

WO:
A 23 pound rocket I last flew  had 75' of 1"
> tubular nylon.

PN:
I agree with Wedge.  My L3 rocket had ~50' of 1", 20' in the drogue section
and 30'

PK:
Why does this work?

Alternatives:
Look at commercial fall arrester harness' I've flown one.

A hangman's noose ties around a ring is a superb way to soak up energy in
the 2-10Kg range (dry rocket weight). You can adjust the friction by
changing the number of turns around the "neck" of the knot.

Larger than that, go to your local climbing shop and survey the plethora of
belay devices..


PK

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 28985 invoked from network); 30 Oct 2001 03:42:25 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 30 Oct 2001 03:42:25 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 9292 invoked by uid 50005); 30 Oct 2001 02:28:43 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4167. . Clean. Processed in 0.707707 secs); 30 Oct 2001 02:28:43 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 30 Oct 2001 02:28:42 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA22150; Mon, 29 Oct 2001 19:39:26 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 125614 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 30 Oct 2001 03:39:18          +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (f60.law12.hotmail.com [64.4.19.60]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA22136 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Mon,          29 Oct 2001 19:39:18 -0800
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Mon,          29 Oct 2001 19:38:44 -0800
Received: from 24.92.128.69 by lw12fd.law12.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Tue, 30          Oct 2001 03:38:44 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [24.92.128.69]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 30 Oct 2001 03:38:44.0755 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[6054EE30:01C160F4]
Message-ID:  <F60Ug8pNS2qsFKEwhBR00007c78@hotmail.com>
Date:         Mon, 29 Oct 2001 21:38:44 -0600
Reply-To: "Mark Kruep" <mkruep@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Mark Kruep" <mkruep@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Recovery Harnesses
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Fairly expensive climbing rope. It's designed so that when a climber falls
they don't get their back broken when the cord catches. I've heard of some
nut jobs that have purposely jumped off things with it and survived
unscathed to the detriment of the gene pool. It gives around 30-35% of it's
total length without much rebound. It is basically a shock absorbing outer
nylon sheath that allows give over a dense inner core designed for strength.
It is a round cord usually around 11mm in diameter so it could unzip a
rocket body quite easily if you don't account for that possibility. On the
plus side, a double S knot with this rope will hold a man so it's easy to
attach.

Go to www.rei.com and look under the climbing gear. It is not cheap (IMHO)
and has to be purchased in fairly long lengths (between 45-60 meters) and
costs around $100 for low end shorter lengths and over $200 for the top of
the line 60m ropes. Of course you could just know someone who works at a
climbing gear store who gives you 80 feet for free because it's dyed wrong
:-). It's pretty heavy and doesn't fit in small spaces very well either.

It's also only rated to take one fall and then be replaced. This means you
may find some climbers willing to part with old ropes cheaply, BUT they will
probably make you sign something in blood stating you will not use it to
climb and they are not responsible for damages should you ignore them. Most
people I've talked to just hack them into pieces too small to use on
anything and then chuck 'em. This is apparently a pretty big deal, because
someone got burned on it in our "stupid person sues someone for doing
something stupid with their product despite it not being intended for that
use" society. Any climbing store will make you sign similar agreements for
non-rated rope.

Mark


>From: "David J. McCue" <dmccue@itc.uci.edu>
>To: Mark Kruep <mkruep@HOTMAIL.COM>
>CC: "David J. McCue" <dmccue@itc.uci.edu>
>Subject: Re: [AR] Recovery Harnesses
>Date: Mon, 29 Oct 2001 18:46:18 -0800 (PST)
>
>You've got me curious! What is dynamic rope? -Dave Mc
>
>On Mon, 29 Oct 2001, Mark Kruep wrote:
>
> > Opinions on this will be a dime a dozen. There are some articles about
>this
> > topic in the InfoCentral section of Rocketryonline. There are numerous
> > different ways to go about recovery and the most common type is usually
> > overbuilding the rocket to some huge factor so that it doesn't get
>destroyed
> > by the kinetic energy. That usually involves wide straps and thick
> > bulkheads. This is also usually the simplest method because of costs or
> > space in the rocket.
> >
> > Other methods include "daisy chains" where successive knots are broken
>to
> > dissipate energy, bungee, elastic, etc. I have seen some systems where a
> > purposely weak bungee cord was used and it snapped at some point thereby
> > absorbing a great deal of shock before it hit the main harness. Using
>bungee
> > alone is usually frowned upon because it doesn't like heat, becomes
>brittle
> > with age and without obvious signs, and it just converts kinetic to
> > potential energy and slams the 2 sections back together. Elastic is
>great
> > for small rockets, but is very unsafe for big rockets for many of the
>same
> > reasons as bungee, but the list is longer.
> >
> > Probably the best method for amateurs is a well designed compromise
>between
> > the overbuilt method and one using either reefed chutes or deployment
>bags
> > and pilot chutes. That's how the big boys do it, but between cost,
>space,
> > and complexity it is not usually used unless you're into a level 3 bird.
>One
> > might also look into dynamic rope since it will stretch without
>rebounding
> > so hard like bungee and it's very strong. You will pay the penalty in
> > weight, space, and zippering potential though. It may also help to use a
> > multi-point harness attachment to both distribute the load and orient
>the
> > rocket for a better landing. If you want more info on any of these just
>send
> > me an email and I'll share any info I know of. I'm sure there are other
>ways
> > and differing opinions on what I wrote, but that's for you to decide
>what
> > you're comfortable doing.
> >
> > Mark
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Craig Strudwicke" <strudwicke@OPTUSNET.COM.AU>
> > To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
> > Sent: Monday, October 29, 2001 6:56 PM
> > Subject: [AR] Recovery Harnesses
> >
> >
> > > My rockets thus far have only been rather small and hence recovery
> > harnesses
> > > have not been required to be very 'robust' or absorb any real energy.
> > >
> > > Are others out there using harnesses or other devices to absorb some
>of
> > the
> > > kinetic energy of the two halves seperating and during chute
>deployment ?
> > I have
> > > seen many people using straps that look like passenger car seat belts
>and
> > this
> > > just doesn't seem like a good idea to me (no compliance). I slip knot
> > > configuration using climbing rope has also been used and this seems to
>be
> > OK
> > > (unless the slip knot is too tight) as an energy absorber.
> > >
> > > Thoughts/ideas appreciated.
> > >
> > > Craig
> > >
> >
>


_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 19688 invoked from network); 30 Oct 2001 05:05:08 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 30 Oct 2001 05:05:08 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 2164 invoked by uid 50005); 30 Oct 2001 03:51:26 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4167. . Clean. Processed in 0.454843 secs); 30 Oct 2001 03:51:26 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 30 Oct 2001 03:51:25 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA22438; Mon, 29 Oct 2001 21:00:04 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 125644 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 30 Oct 2001 04:59:51          +0000
Received: from smtp009pub.verizon.net ([206.46.170.188]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA22415 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon,          29 Oct 2001 20:59:50 -0800
Received: from [63.24.225.78] (1Cust110.tnt2.rancho-cucamonga.ca.da.uu.net          [63.15.225.110]) by smtp009pub.verizon.net  with ESMTP for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; id f9U4xTk10253 Mon, 29 Oct 2001 22:59:33          -0600 (CST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: GTE/01rocket@mail.gte.net
References: <Pine.LNX.4.10.10110291859340.21358-100000@itc.uci.edu>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <a0510032eb803e3f8462f@[63.24.225.78]>
Date:         Mon, 29 Oct 2001 20:59:15 -0800
Reply-To: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] List feature preferences
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <Pine.LNX.4.10.10110291859340.21358-100000@itc.uci.edu>

>On Mon, 29 Oct 2001, Jamie Morken wrote:
>
>>  Sorry that I am posting this to arocket but my email to Dave Hall never gets
>>  through..
>>
>[snip]
>
>Jamie raises an interesting point. When I set this list up for Ray, I set
>it so that not even list members could get access to the big list of names
>and email addresses. The idea was that spammers couldn't join and grab the
>list of addresses, and the fact that I tend to favor privacy in general.


I agree, don't post the full list.


>
>Now, any member can get the address of another member who has posted at
>least once by looking through the web archive of aRocket. Would it be
>useful to allow members to scan through a master list? People could
>conceal themselves from being listed, but they would be in the big list by
>default. Alternatively, I could make it so no one is in the list until
>they add themselves.
>
>I ask this question because I am about to begin preparations to move this
>list to new software that does not have a 500 member limit. It is a good
>time to seek improvements. All current features will be retained (web
>archive and such) but other features are possible.
>
>Please email your thoughts to me privately, and I will summarize people's
>wishes in a later post, perhaps to put the issues to a vote. My guess is
>that things will remain as they are, but if you would like to see a change
>now is the time to speak.
>
>Thanks!
>Dave McCue


--
Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
Opinion, the whole thing.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 13855 invoked from network); 30 Oct 2001 06:56:00 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 30 Oct 2001 06:56:00 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: (qmail 16140 invoked by uid 50005); 30 Oct 2001 06:55:23 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4167. . Clean. Processed in 2.262671 secs); 30 Oct 2001 06:55:23 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 30 Oct 2001 06:55:21 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA22855; Mon, 29 Oct 2001 22:49:40 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 125689 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 30 Oct 2001 06:49:02          +0000
Received: from cisco.com (cypher.cisco.com [171.69.11.18]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA22839 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon,          29 Oct 2001 22:49:01 -0800
Received: (from billw@localhost) by cisco.com (8.8.8/2.6/Cisco List          Logging/8.8.8) id WAA25876; Mon, 29 Oct 2001 22:48:25 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID:  <CMM.0.90.4.1004424505.billw@cypher>
Date:         Mon, 29 Oct 2001 22:48:25 PST
Reply-To: "Bill Westfield" <billw@cisco.com>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "William Chops Westfield" <billw@cisco.com>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Anodizing (was T6 and temperature)
Comments: To: Jeff Grady <jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  Your message of Mon, 29 Oct 2001 22:20:38 -0500

    You can buy pure SO4 from Wal-mart, K-mart or auto parts store. Mostly
    sold for rejuvenating motorcycle batteries.

Pure, 98% sulfuric acid, is unlikely to be found anywhere outside a
chemistry lab.  It's heavy, rather thick syrupy stuff that'll suck the
water out of just about anything (pour some on a thin layer of sugar, and
you'll shortly have a puffy loaf of pure carbon.)  It fumes slightly in
air and smells...

Battery acid is relatively pure, but not that concentrated.  I doubt that
it is worth finding anything more concentrated than battery acid for most
applications...

I'm not sure about drain cleaner - most of the stuff around here is lye,
rather than acid...

BillW


From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 15476 invoked from network); 30 Oct 2001 14:18:39 -0000
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 30 Oct 2001 14:18:39 -0000
Received: (qmail 9125 invoked by uid 50005); 30 Oct 2001 13:04:03 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4165. . Clean. Processed in 4.365243 secs); 30 Oct 2001 13:04:03 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 30 Oct 2001 13:03:53 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA24083; Tue, 30 Oct 2001 06:15:27 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 125731 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 30 Oct 2001 14:15:15          +0000
Received: from mail.icehouse.net (mail.icehouse.net [204.203.53.2]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id GAA24069 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 30 Oct 2001 06:15:15 -0800
Received: (qmail 13320 invoked by uid 10000); 30 Oct 2001 14:15:10 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO zip) ([204.203.52.68]) (envelope-sender          <airdale@icehouse.net>) by mail.icehouse.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with          SMTP for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; 30 Oct 2001 14:15:10 -0000
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook CWS, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <000801c1614d$4ab115a0$4434cbcc@zip>
Date:         Tue, 30 Oct 2001 06:15:13 -0800
Reply-To: <airdale@icehouse.net>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jay Smith" <airdale@icehouse.net>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Recovery Harnesses
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Please remember to use Mil-Spec nylon or Kevlar thread on the loop ends of
the harnesses using a box X stitch configuration. The Gates Brothers lost
Porthos II due to the wrong choice of thread and lack of inspection on the
harness assemblies. At Blackrock XIII this year. More info can be found at
http://www.gbrocketry.com/porthos_ii.htm

Jay Smith
NAR 78687 -SR  L1
S.P.A.R.C. -Spokane Area Rocket Club
The Spokane Area's NAR Section # 626
Until then may your Sky's be clear and LAUNCHING
in  5,  4,  3,  2,  1,  Liftoff !
A+ Cert.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 6632 invoked from network); 30 Oct 2001 16:27:48 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 30 Oct 2001 16:27:48 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: (qmail 9733 invoked by uid 50005); 30 Oct 2001 16:27:12 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4167. . Clean. Processed in 0.268683 secs); 30 Oct 2001 16:27:12 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 30 Oct 2001 16:27:12 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA24594; Tue, 30 Oct 2001 08:04:36 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 125770 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 30 Oct 2001 16:04:32          +0000
Received: from VOLSB01.libertyville.com (216-180-161-058.fsi.net          [216.180.161.58] (may be forged)) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with          ESMTP id IAA24579 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 30 Oct 2001          08:04:31 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Message-ID:  <8241D5C473414F48B12A866EBBBF182A98B2@VOLSB01.libertyville.com>
Date:         Tue, 30 Oct 2001 10:01:42 -0600
Reply-To: "Ed Dewey" <edewey@LIBERTYVILLE.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Ed Dewey" <edewey@LIBERTYVILLE.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Recovery Harnesses
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

I have a rule of thumb that has been working very well for rockets in the 50
- 70 pound range.  I use a (total) recovery harness length of 10 times the
length of the rocket.  My L3 rocket was 10.5 feet long, so I chose 100 feet
of 1 inch tubular nylon.  I chose the tubular nylon over kevlar because the
nylon does have some stretch to it.  I use 35 feet of the 100 in the drogue
section and 65 in the main.

The idea, of course, is to allow everything time to slow down as it pops
apart, but beyond that, the lengths I choose allow all the component parts
of a dual-recovery rocket to hang from the harnesses in such a way as to
allow deployment of the main from being tangled with the drogue and for both
'chutes to stay out of each other's way once deployed.

I attach the main and drogue one-third the length of each harness, from the
top.  I also use the z-fold method, folding about 4 levels, securing them
with masking tape (just one layer) on each end, then having about a foot of
free nylon before doing another.  Makes loading easier, dissipates energy,
prevents tangles.  Many successful recoveries using this method (so far,
100%  --knock on formica laminate-- or wood, if you can find it).  Zoomed-in
videos of my flights graphically show why it works well.

Of course you do need to make sure you are not under or over-loading the
ejection charges.  Correct termination of the ends is important, and
multi-point attachments (at least two) are an excellent idea.  Also, shear
pins are the only way to go, especially for larger projects.

To add to the topic under discussion, I've had debates with fellow
rocketeers about whether the drogue should be in the lower airframe or the
upper (on dual, break-apart, recovery setups).  IMHO, the answer is
rocket-specific:  If your lower airframe is light enough and/or has enough
drag, it can (I've seen this happen) float above the the upper airframe
(which has the main 'chute) after deployment of the drogue.  When the main
pops out the lower airframe, which has been trailing above the upper, can
fall into either the main 'chute, or through the harness.  But if your lower
airframe will hang below the upper during descent under drogue, it's best to
put the main in the upper airframe.  This is one of main the reasons I did a
test flight with an L motor before my cert flight.

I think recovery is a relatively neglected area and needs a lot more
attention.  In my personal experience, recovery is where I see most
failures.  Good electronics and good recovery design are not easy, but
essential for successful flights and for safety.

Ed

-----Original Message-----
From: Tomm Aldridge [mailto:taldridge@HOME.COM]
Sent: Monday, October 29, 2001 9:13 PM
To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
Subject: Re: [AR] Recovery Harnesses


I agree with Wedge.  My L3 rocket had ~50' of 1", 20' in the drogue section
and 30' in the main section and worked just fine in a nominal deployment.
This is all that would fit in the 4" airframe and also accomodate the
chutes.  Under a stressful deploy, I would have preferred 1.5x as much but
this is not a science (yet).
----- Original Message -----
From: "Wedge Oldham" <wedge@WESTWORLD.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Monday, October 29, 2001 6:36 PM
Subject: Re: [AR] Recovery Harnesses


> Mark has brought up a lot of good points. But I would like to emphasis on
> point that didn't seem to be mentioned, and is often overlooked.
>
> Ejection forces should not be overlooked. along with chute opening
stresses.
> I think a common miss-conception when making the transition for small
> (model) rocket to large (high power/ experimental) rockets is that the
> ejection forces should be *absorbed*. The forces should be dissipated, not
> absorbed.
>
> The method I choose, is to use a long length of shock cord. I choose
tubular
> nylon, 1/2" width for rockets under 2 pounds. Up to 1" wide for my larger
> rockets (202 lbs on the pad). But the one rule I always follow is use an
> obscene amount of cordage. A 23 pound rocket I last flew  had 75' of 1"
> tubular nylon. This rocket shredded as it hit Mach 1.0, and deployed the
> chute as a result. The upper airframe shattered but the bulkheads (1/2"
> plywood) and the cord all held.
>
> I a kidding manner I would suggest you use as much shock cord as will fit
in
> your airframe. This may be an over exaggeration for some rocket, but not
by
> much.
>
> The only hazard with using very long shock cords is having them tangle on
> deployment. This can easily be prevented by "Z" folding them to lengths of
> about 12" and a wrap of tape around each end, before stuffing it in the
> airframe.
>
> Wedge Oldham
> http://NikeProject.com
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Mark Kruep" <mkruep@HOTMAIL.COM>
> To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
> Sent: Monday, October 29, 2001 5:33 PM
> Subject: Re: [AR] Recovery Harnesses
>
>
> > Opinions on this will be a dime a dozen. There are some articles about
> this
> > topic in the InfoCentral section of Rocketryonline. There are numerous
> > different ways to go about recovery and the most common type is usually
> > overbuilding the rocket to some huge factor so that it doesn't get
> destroyed
> > by the kinetic energy. That usually involves wide straps and thick
> > bulkheads. This is also usually the simplest method because of costs or
> > space in the rocket.
> >
> > Other methods include "daisy chains" where successive knots are broken
to
> > dissipate energy, bungee, elastic, etc. I have seen some systems where a
> > purposely weak bungee cord was used and it snapped at some point thereby
> > absorbing a great deal of shock before it hit the main harness. Using
> bungee
> > alone is usually frowned upon because it doesn't like heat, becomes
> brittle
> > with age and without obvious signs, and it just converts kinetic to
> > potential energy and slams the 2 sections back together. Elastic is
great
> > for small rockets, but is very unsafe for big rockets for many of the
same
> > reasons as bungee, but the list is longer.
> >
> > Probably the best method for amateurs is a well designed compromise
> between
> > the overbuilt method and one using either reefed chutes or deployment
bags
> > and pilot chutes. That's how the big boys do it, but between cost,
space,
> > and complexity it is not usually used unless you're into a level 3 bird.
> One
> > might also look into dynamic rope since it will stretch without
rebounding
> > so hard like bungee and it's very strong. You will pay the penalty in
> > weight, space, and zippering potential though. It may also help to use a
> > multi-point harness attachment to both distribute the load and orient
the
> > rocket for a better landing. If you want more info on any of these just
> send
> > me an email and I'll share any info I know of. I'm sure there are other
> ways
> > and differing opinions on what I wrote, but that's for you to decide
what
> > you're comfortable doing.
> >
> > Mark
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Craig Strudwicke" <strudwicke@OPTUSNET.COM.AU>
> > To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
> > Sent: Monday, October 29, 2001 6:56 PM
> > Subject: [AR] Recovery Harnesses
> >
> >
> > > My rockets thus far have only been rather small and hence recovery
> > harnesses
> > > have not been required to be very 'robust' or absorb any real energy.
> > >
> > > Are others out there using harnesses or other devices to absorb some
of
> > the
> > > kinetic energy of the two halves seperating and during chute
deployment
> ?
> > I have
> > > seen many people using straps that look like passenger car seat belts
> and
> > this
> > > just doesn't seem like a good idea to me (no compliance). I slip knot
> > > configuration using climbing rope has also been used and this seems to
> be
> > OK
> > > (unless the slip knot is too tight) as an energy absorber.
> > >
> > > Thoughts/ideas appreciated.
> > >
> > > Craig
> > >

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 17787 invoked from network); 30 Oct 2001 16:30:44 -0000
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 30 Oct 2001 16:30:44 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 14353 invoked by uid 50005); 30 Oct 2001 16:30:07 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4167. . Clean. Processed in 0.258319 secs); 30 Oct 2001 16:30:07 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 30 Oct 2001 16:30:07 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA24669; Tue, 30 Oct 2001 08:19:16 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 125777 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 30 Oct 2001 16:19:07          +0000
Received: from munch.biochem.duke.edu (munch.biochem.duke.edu [152.3.174.65])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA24615 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Tue, 30 Oct 2001 08:09:07 -0800
Received: from nc.rr.com (IDENT:jeff@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by          munch.biochem.duke.edu (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f9UGHnE26636 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Tue, 30 Oct 2001 11:17:49 -0500
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.76 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.4.3 i686)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3BDED2AD.9A416135@nc.rr.com>
Date:         Tue, 30 Oct 2001 11:17:49 -0500
Reply-To: "Jeff Taylor" <jtaylor@NC.RR.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jeff Taylor" <jtaylor@NC.RR.COM>
Organization: Loki Research
Subject:      [AR] Aussies test a scramjet
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Here's the link to the BBC's coverage:

 http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/sci/tech/newsid_1626000/1626448.stm

They don't know yet if it worked.  Cool pictures anyway.

- Jeff Taylor

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 6788 invoked from network); 30 Oct 2001 17:35:45 -0000
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 30 Oct 2001 17:35:45 -0000
Received: (qmail 15833 invoked by uid 50005); 30 Oct 2001 16:21:18 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4165. . Clean. Processed in 1.53571 secs); 30 Oct 2001 16:21:18 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 30 Oct 2001 16:21:15 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA24988; Tue, 30 Oct 2001 09:24:47 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 125828 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 30 Oct 2001 17:24:46          +0000
Received: from smtprelay1.abs.adelphia.net (smtprelay.abs.adelphia.net          [64.8.20.11]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA24974 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 30 Oct 2001 09:24:40 -0800
Received: from jlgrady ([24.53.101.238]) by smtprelay1.abs.adelphia.net          (Netscape Messaging Server 4.15) with SMTP id GM14C902.NCY for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 30 Oct 2001 12:24:09 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook CWS, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
Importance: Normal
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <002301c16168$5fe37600$0200a8c0@24.53.64.18>
Date:         Tue, 30 Oct 2001 12:29:05 -0500
Reply-To: "Jeff Grady" <jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jeff Grady" <jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Aussies test a scramjet
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <3BDED2AD.9A416135@nc.rr.com>

>From the looks of that picture (smoke/vapor trail), it couldn't get out of
its own way! Kind of like releasing the neck on a toy balloon.

-----Original Message-----
From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@itc.uci.edu]On
Behalf Of Jeff Taylor
Sent: Tuesday, October 30, 2001 11:18 AM
To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
Subject: [AR] Aussies test a scramjet


Here's the link to the BBC's coverage:

 http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/sci/tech/newsid_1626000/1626448.stm

They don't know yet if it worked.  Cool pictures anyway.

- Jeff Taylor

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 4786 invoked from network); 30 Oct 2001 18:06:15 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 30 Oct 2001 18:06:15 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 28483 invoked by uid 50005); 30 Oct 2001 16:52:29 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4167. . Clean. Processed in 0.430589 secs); 30 Oct 2001 16:52:29 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 30 Oct 2001 16:52:28 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA24813; Tue, 30 Oct 2001 08:52:03 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 125803 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 30 Oct 2001 16:51:57          +0000
Received: from proxy4.ba.best.com (root@proxy4.ba.best.com [206.184.139.15]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA24799 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Tue, 30 Oct 2001 08:51:56 -0800
Received: from [10.0.0.2] (snvadslgw2poold155.snjs.uswestqwest.net          [168.103.213.155]) by proxy4.ba.best.com (8.9.3/8.9.2/best.out) with          ESMTP id IAA21534 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Tue, 30 Oct 2001          08:50:10 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Sender:  (Unverified)
References: <8241D5C473414F48B12A866EBBBF182A98B2@VOLSB01.libertyville.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <v04210102b80486a06533@[10.0.0.2]>
Date:         Tue, 30 Oct 2001 08:49:36 -0800
Reply-To: "bob fortune" <bob@FORTUNEPAINT.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "bob fortune" <bob@FORTUNEPAINT.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Recovery Harnesses
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <8241D5C473414F48B12A866EBBBF182A98B2@VOLSB01.libertyville.com>

In the past I've been pretty successful with tubular nylon, nylon
strap, and kevlar strap.  I've found that coiling the bridle similar
to this:
http://www.artransforms.com/gifs/lamson/gl003b_b.gif
the same ID as the airframe works pretty well.  Using zipties (cable
ties) to hold the coils together keeps things neat and the force
required to break the ties also slows down the parts of the airframe
as they separate. The diameter of the airframe, thickness and length
of bridle will dictate the number of coils necessary to keep things
shipshape.  The coil makes a dandy piston of sorts as well.  Cotton
string or sisal could be used in lieu of zipties for those concerned
about litter - string makes great birdie nest building material.

Alternatively one could use coiled cable wound around a mandril, akin
to a fishing reel, then removed from the mandril and inserted into
the airframe.  The trick is keeping the coil stacked nicely so it
will deploy properly and this can be accomplished by pouring
expanding 2 part foam into the airframe within the coil of cable.
This will locate and bond the cable to itself so it will deploy in a
linear fashion.  One could make a couple of these units with cable
eyes on both ends and have them ready to go come flight time.

Bob

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 24528 invoked from network); 30 Oct 2001 18:34:28 -0000
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 30 Oct 2001 18:34:28 -0000
Received: (qmail 15435 invoked by uid 50005); 30 Oct 2001 17:20:41 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4167. . Clean. Processed in 0.454895 secs); 30 Oct 2001 17:20:41 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 30 Oct 2001 17:20:41 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA24943; Tue, 30 Oct 2001 09:21:20 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 125816 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 30 Oct 2001 17:20:48          +0000
Received: from smtprelay1.abs.adelphia.net (smtprelay.abs.adelphia.net          [64.8.20.11]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA24929 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 30 Oct 2001 09:20:41 -0800
Received: from jlgrady ([24.53.101.238]) by smtprelay1.abs.adelphia.net          (Netscape Messaging Server 4.15) with SMTP id GM145J03.LF8 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 30 Oct 2001 12:20:07 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook CWS, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
Importance: Normal
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <002201c16167$cf32e730$0200a8c0@24.53.64.18>
Date:         Tue, 30 Oct 2001 12:25:02 -0500
Reply-To: "Jeff Grady" <jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jeff Grady" <jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Anodizing (was T6 and temperature)
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <CMM.0.90.4.1004424505.billw@cypher>

When I said pure, I was referring to just plain SO4 without any other
chemicals that make the product a "cleaner" or "drain opener". Pure was not
an appropriate term. FRESH battery acid is perfect for electro cleaning and
plating purposes. I wouldn't go drain grandpa's tractor battery as a source
:)

JG

-----Original Message-----
From: Bill Westfield [mailto:billw@cisco.com]
Sent: Tuesday, October 30, 2001 1:48 AM
To: Jeff Grady
Cc: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
Subject: Re: [AR] Anodizing (was T6 and temperature)


    You can buy pure SO4 from Wal-mart, K-mart or auto parts store. Mostly
    sold for rejuvenating motorcycle batteries.

Pure, 98% sulfuric acid, is unlikely to be found anywhere outside a
chemistry lab.  It's heavy, rather thick syrupy stuff that'll suck the
water out of just about anything (pour some on a thin layer of sugar, and
you'll shortly have a puffy loaf of pure carbon.)  It fumes slightly in
air and smells...

Battery acid is relatively pure, but not that concentrated.  I doubt that
it is worth finding anything more concentrated than battery acid for most
applications...

I'm not sure about drain cleaner - most of the stuff around here is lye,
rather than acid...

BillW

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 12580 invoked from network); 30 Oct 2001 20:46:42 -0000
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 30 Oct 2001 20:46:42 -0000
Received: (qmail 8478 invoked by uid 50005); 30 Oct 2001 19:29:55 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4167. . Clean. Processed in 2.912746 secs); 30 Oct 2001 19:29:55 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 30 Oct 2001 19:29:50 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA26059; Tue, 30 Oct 2001 12:03:09 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 125926 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 30 Oct 2001 20:01:29          +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (oe24.law4.hotmail.com [216.33.148.17]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA26039 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 30 Oct 2001 12:01:28 -0800
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Tue,          30 Oct 2001 11:49:30 -0800
X-Originating-IP: [130.235.245.10]
References:  <4.3.1.2.20011027231722.029f49e8@mail.idsoftware.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 30 Oct 2001 19:49:30.0651 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[FD9756B0:01C1617B]
Message-ID:  <OE2471yEXUIEAOeIiGX0000664b@hotmail.com>
Date:         Tue, 30 Oct 2001 20:48:20 -0000
Reply-To: "Carsten Glans" <cag@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Carsten Glans" <cag@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] big videos
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Hi!

This was a real cool video, well worth the download time, though i had to
download it at work since I'm on a bandwidth diet at home. Great work!
Looking forward to the next release!

Regards

Carsten Glans
http://www.min-sajt.com/cag

----- Original Message -----
From: "John Carmack" <johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Sunday, October 28, 2001 4:49 AM
Subject: [AR] big videos


> The video we had running at the Space Frontier conference is now on our
web
> site:
>
> Low bandwidth version ( 14 megs )
> http://media.armadilloaerospace.com/sff_low.mpg
>
> High bandwidth version ( 50 megs )
> http://media.armadilloaerospace.com/sff_high.mpg
>
> My wife's company did the video production work, so it is pretty slick...
>
> John Carmack
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 2470 invoked from network); 30 Oct 2001 20:51:25 -0000
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 30 Oct 2001 20:51:25 -0000
Received: (qmail 17054 invoked by uid 50005); 30 Oct 2001 19:34:03 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4167. . Clean. Processed in 2.106614 secs); 30 Oct 2001 19:34:03 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 30 Oct 2001 19:33:58 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA26167; Tue, 30 Oct 2001 12:32:55 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 125940 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 30 Oct 2001 20:31:29          +0000
Received: from angel.comcen.com.au (angel.comcen.com.au [203.23.236.69]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA26151 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 30 Oct 2001 12:31:28 -0800
Received: from win2pk2 (modem022.sydney.spin.net.au [202.172.120.22] (may be          forged)) by angel.comcen.com.au (8.11.4/8.10.1) with SMTP id          f9UKUxh60968; Wed, 31 Oct 2001 07:31:00 +1100 (EST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <JJEFLLHFFAHHMBBIHFAEOEMNCHAA.pkelly@comcen.com.au>
Date:         Wed, 31 Oct 2001 07:32:31 +1100
Reply-To: "Paul Kelly" <pkelly@COMCEN.COM.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Paul Kelly" <pkelly@COMCEN.COM.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Aussies test a scramjet
Comments: To: Jeff Taylor <jtaylor@NC.RR.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <3BDED2AD.9A416135@nc.rr.com>

We are trying to find out how it went. From the looks of things (lots of ass
covering and vague references to further work and more money needed) I'm
guessing that it didn't..


PK

-----Original Message-----
From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU]On
Behalf Of Jeff Taylor
Sent: Wednesday, 31 October 2001 3:18 AM
To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
Subject: [AR] Aussies test a scramjet


Here's the link to the BBC's coverage:

 http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/sci/tech/newsid_1626000/1626448.stm

They don't know yet if it worked.  Cool pictures anyway.

- Jeff Taylor

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 26944 invoked from network); 30 Oct 2001 22:39:56 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 30 Oct 2001 22:39:56 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 18257 invoked by uid 50005); 30 Oct 2001 22:33:46 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4167. . Clean. Processed in 1.11014 secs); 30 Oct 2001 22:33:46 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 30 Oct 2001 22:33:44 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA26765; Tue, 30 Oct 2001 14:30:44 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 125959 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 30 Oct 2001 22:27:52          +0000
Received: from smtppop3pub.verizon.net (smtppop3pub.gte.net [206.46.170.22]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA26743 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 30 Oct 2001 14:27:52 -0800
Received: from [63.24.225.78] (1Cust42.tnt1.rancho-cucamonga.ca.da.uu.net          [63.24.225.42]) by smtppop3pub.verizon.net  with ESMTP for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; id QAA43463969 Tue, 30 Oct 2001 16:27:04 -0600          (CST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: GTE/01rocket@mail.gte.net
References: <JJEFLLHFFAHHMBBIHFAEOEMNCHAA.pkelly@comcen.com.au>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <a05100334b804d96f314f@[63.24.225.78]>
Date:         Tue, 30 Oct 2001 14:27:21 -0800
Reply-To: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Aussies test a scramjet
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <JJEFLLHFFAHHMBBIHFAEOEMNCHAA.pkelly@comcen.com.au>

>We are trying to find out how it went. From the looks of things (lots of ass
>covering and vague references to further work and more money needed) I'm
>guessing that it didn't..
>

They were forced by IMHO poor range safety rules, to fire it downward
rather than upward as preferred (more test time).

It would be shocking if it had time to function in the short time
till ballistic impact.

Jerry

>PK
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU]On
>Behalf Of Jeff Taylor
>Sent: Wednesday, 31 October 2001 3:18 AM
>To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
>Subject: [AR] Aussies test a scramjet
>
>
>Here's the link to the BBC's coverage:
>
>  http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/sci/tech/newsid_1626000/1626448.stm
>
>They don't know yet if it worked.  Cool pictures anyway.
>
>- Jeff Taylor


--
Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
Opinion, the whole thing.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 2356 invoked from network); 31 Oct 2001 00:56:11 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 31 Oct 2001 00:56:11 -0000
Received: (qmail 6304 invoked by uid 50005); 31 Oct 2001 00:49:28 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpb with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4167. . Clean. Processed in 0.333202 secs); 31 Oct 2001 00:49:28 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 31 Oct 2001 00:49:28 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA27207; Tue, 30 Oct 2001 16:48:51 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 125995 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 31 Oct 2001 00:47:52          +0000
Received: from fep3-orange.clear.net.nz (fep3-orange.clear.net.nz          [203.97.32.3]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA27192          for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Tue, 30 Oct 2001 16:47:51 -0800
Received: from mkbs (b002-m009-p014.acld.clear.net.nz [203.167.200.14]) by          fep3-orange.clear.net.nz (1.5/1.8) with SMTP id NAA12646; Wed, 31 Oct          2001 13:47:47 +1300 (NZDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="Windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <01bc01c161a5$cf6cd9c0$0700a8c0@mkbs>
Date:         Wed, 31 Oct 2001 09:26:51 +1300
Reply-To: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Organization: Applied Technology
Subject:      [AR] Fw: Jonathan's Space Report, No. 466
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Note comments on Odyssey aerobraking.
180C on panels.


__________________________________


Jonathan's Space Report
No. 466                                             2001 Oct 27 Cambridge,
MA
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
---
Sender: owner-jsr@head-cfa.harvard.edu
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: jmcdowell@head-cfa.harvard.edu

Shuttle and Station
--------------------

Soyuz TM-33 docked at Zarya's nadir docking port at 1044 UTC on Oct 23
with the EP-2 visiting crew. EP-2 Commander Afanas'ev, Flight engineer-1
Haignere'   and flight engineer-2 Kozeev joined the Ex-3 crew of
Commander Frank Culbertson, Soyuz commander Dezhurov and flight engineer
Tyurin aboard the station with hatch opening around 1215 UTC.

A slight correction to JSR 465: Haignere is now an ESA astronaut
flying a mission for CNES, rather than a CNES astronaut. And of course
vehicle 206 is Soyuz TM-32, it's vehicle 207 that is Soyuz TM-33.

Endeavour has been moved to the VAB. In preparation for flight STS-108
it will be connected to the BI-110 stack consisting of the RSRM-82 solid
rocket motors and the ET-111 external tank. The payload bay will contain
the Raffaello logistics module, the MACH-1 Hitchiker experiment bridge,
and the new LMC lightweight experiment bridge as well as an adapter beam
with two GAS canisters and the RMS-303 manipulator arm. STS-108
will deploy the Starshine-2 and SPASE subsatellites in addition to
its logistics delivery to the Station. Meanwhile, there has still
been no contact with the Simplesat astronomy test satellite deployed
on the last flight and it now seems probable that the satellite failed.


Red Planet
----------

Congratulations to the JPL Mars team on a successful milestone in the
Mars 2001 mission, navigating Odyssey to within 1 kilometer of its
insertion target!

The 2001 Mars Odyssey probe entered Mars orbit on Oct 24. The orbit
insertion burn with the main 640N bipropellant hydrazine/N2O4 engine
began at 0218UTC and ended at 0238 UTC after a 20 min 19 sec burn with a
300 km periapsis at 0231 UTC. Mass of the spacecraft is now about 456 kg
(including 79 kg of fuel left) compared with 725 kg at launch.

The Odyssey team has kindly provided the orbital data at first apogee:
relative to a 3397.5km radius for Mars, the  orbit was 272 x 26818 km x
93.42 deg with a period of 18hr 36min. Longitude of node is 278.4 deg
and argument of perigee is 112.5 deg, putting closest approach near the
Martian north pole. The choice of a 93.4 deg orbit, the same as for MGS,
makes the spacecraft sun-synchronous. Apogee was reached at 1147 UTC on
Oct 24 and the next perigee was at 2105 UTC (by which time orbital
mechanics reduced the apogee slightly to 26400 km). Aerobraking was due
to begin on Oct 26; the solar panels will reach almost 180 deg C when
Odyssey dips through the Martian atmosphere.

Observations with the THEMIS infrared mapper and the MARIE radiation
experiment begin shortly; the gamma-ray spectrometer will take some
data, but its 6-meter experiment boom will not be deployed until next
spring,
after MO has reached its 400 km circular mapping orbit.



Recent Launches
---------------

India launched the Technology Experiment Satellite (TES) on Oct 22. TES
is an experimental spy satellite, or at least an imaging satellite
intended to try out spy satellite technology; it is probably a modified
IRS remote sensing satellite. It has a mass of 1108 kg at launch, and
carries cameras and instruments designed to develop a future Indian
space reconnaissance capability. India decided to move into the spy
satellite game when a 1999 incursion into disputed territory in Kashmir
caught it by surprise. TES was developed by ISRO, the Indian Space
Research Organization.

Two small secondary payloads were carried on the PSLV. BIRD (Bispectral
IR Detector) is a German research satellite testing a new sensor for
Earth imaging studies, detecting forest fires and other hot spots and
studying vegetation changes. BIRD is being referred to as BIRD-2 by US
Space Command, presumably because of the unrelated BIRD-Rubin payload
carried on a Kosmos-3M launch last year.

Proba is a European Space Agency technology development minisatellite
with a mass of 94 kg, carrying an IR spectrometer, debris impact
detectors, and Earth imaging cameras as well as an experimental
spacecraft processor and spacecraft autonomy experiments. The
satellite was built by Verheart in Belgium using the MiniSIL bus
developed by SI of England, and is being controlled from Belgium.

PSLV-C3 took off from Sriharikota at 0453UTC on Oct 22 and its first
three stages completed their burns and separated b 0501 UTC when the PS4
stage began its long 7 minute insertion burn. The PS4 uses two MON-3/MMH
bipropellant 7kN LVS engines developed by ISRO; at 0509:10 UTC the PS4
deployed the TES satellite into a 550 x 579 km x 97.8 deg
sun-synchronous orbit, with ejection of BIRD coming 40 seconds later.
PS4's small RCS engines then raised the orbit to 553 x 676 km, and PROBA
was ejected at 0520 UTC.

An Molniya-3 communications satellite built by  NPO PM was launched from
Plesetsk on Oct 25 on an 8K78M Molniya-M launch vehicle with a 2BL upper
stage. This is the second Molniya-3 this year, following only 4 launches
in the previous 5 years. The 8K78M's 11S59 packet and 11S510 third
stage put the Molniya-3/ML stage combo into a 214 x 617 km x 62.8 deg
parking orbit at 1143 UTC, 9 min after launch. At around 1230 UTC,
near apogee over the South Pacific, the BOZ ullage motor fired
and separated, as the ML main engine ignited and put the Molniya-3
satellite in a 615 x 40659 km x 62.8 deg orbit with apogee over the
northern hemisphere.


Table of Recent Launches
-----------------------

Date UT       Name            Launch Vehicle  Site            Mission
INTL.

DES.
Sep  7 1939   Picosat 7/8       -              Sindri, LEO      Technology
00-42C
Sep  8 1525   USA 160       )   Atlas IIAS     Vandenberg SLC3E Sigint
40A
              NRO satellite )
40C
Sep 14 2335   Pirs           )  Soyuz-U        Baykonur LC1     Station
module
              Progress M-SO1 )                                  Cargo
41A
Sep 21 1849   Orbview-4  )      Taurus 2110    Vandenberg 576E  Imaging
F01
              QuikTOMS   )                                      Environment
F01
              SBD        )                                      Technology
F01
              Celestis-4 )                                      Burial
F01
Sep 25 2321   Atlantic Bird 2   Ariane 44P     Kourou ELA2      Ku telecom
42A
Sep 30 0240   Starshine 3  )    Athena-1       Kodiak           Science
43A
              Picosat      )                                    Technology
43B
              PCSat        )                                    UHF/VHF comm
43C
              Sapphire     )                                    Technology
43D
Oct  5 2120   USA 161           Titan 4B       Vandenberg SLC4E Imaging
44A
Oct  6 1645   Raduga-1          Proton-K/DM2?  Baykonur         C telecom
45A
Oct 11 0232   USA 162           Atlas IIAS     Canaveral SLC36B Data relay?
46A
Oct 18 1851   QuickBird         Delta 7320     Vandenberg SLC2W Imaging
47A
Oct 21 0859   Soyuz TM-33       Soyuz-U        Baykonur LC1     Spaceship
48A
Oct 22 0453   TES      )        PSLV           Sriharikota      Imaging?
49A
              BIRD     )                                        Imaging
49C
              PROBA    )                                        Imaging/tech
49B
Oct 25 1134   Molniya-3         Molniya-M      Plesetsk LC43/3  Comms
50A

Current Shuttle Processing Status
_________________________________

Orbiters               Location   Mission    Launch Due

OV-102 Columbia        OPF Bay 3     STS-109 2002 Feb 14  HST SM-3B
OV-103 Discovery       OPF Bay 1?    Maintenance
OV-104 Atlantis        OPF Bay 2?    STS-110 2002 Mar 21  ISS 8A
OV-105 Endeavour       VAB Bay 1     STS-108 2001 Nov 29  ISS UF-1


.-------------------------------------------------------------------------.
|  Jonathan McDowell                 |  phone : (617) 495-7176            |
|  Harvard-Smithsonian Center for    |                                    |
|   Astrophysics                     |                                    |
|  60 Garden St, MS6                 |                                    |
|  Cambridge MA 02138                |  inter : jcm@cfa.harvard.edu       |
|  USA                               |          jmcdowell@cfa.harvard.edu |
|                                                                         |
| JSR: http://hea-www.harvard.edu/~jcm/space/jsr/jsr.html                 |
| Back issues:  http://hea-www.harvard.edu/~jcm/space/jsr/back            |
| Subscribe/unsub: mail majordomo@head-cfa.harvard.edu, (un)subscribe jsr |
'-------------------------------------------------------------------------'

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 9736 invoked from network); 31 Oct 2001 18:03:08 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 31 Oct 2001 18:03:08 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 910 invoked by uid 50005); 31 Oct 2001 18:03:04 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4167. . Clean. Processed in 0.259276 secs); 31 Oct 2001 18:03:04 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 31 Oct 2001 18:03:03 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA30170; Wed, 31 Oct 2001 09:47:18 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 126151 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 31 Oct 2001 17:47:07          +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (f85.law8.hotmail.com [216.33.241.85]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA30156 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 31 Oct 2001 09:47:06 -0800
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Wed,          31 Oct 2001 09:46:36 -0800
Received: from 165.127.249.69 by lw8fd.law8.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Wed, 31          Oct 2001 17:46:36 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [165.127.249.69]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 31 Oct 2001 17:46:36.0326 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[FC906460:01C16233]
Message-ID:  <F85ik6kvXsn2Yf0scL900004ea3@hotmail.com>
Date:         Wed, 31 Oct 2001 17:46:36 +0000
Reply-To: "Bryan Flynt" <b_flynt@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Bryan Flynt" <b_flynt@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      [AR] Particle size??
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

<html><div style='background-color:'>&nbsp;
<P class=MsoNormal>Has anyone done any work on using smaller particle sizes (both oxidizer and metals) to achieve high efficacy in small solid motors?<SPAN style="mso-spacerun: yes">&nbsp; </SPAN>Im sure research has been done in large motors but how about small motors less than 20,000 Ns.<SPAN style="mso-spacerun: yes">&nbsp; </SPAN>My train of thought is small motors have short residence times in the chamber so smaller particle sizes would burn quicker with a higher percentage burning before being expelled out the nozzle.<SPAN style="mso-spacerun: yes">&nbsp; </SPAN>If you have experimented yourself what have you found or if you know of some journal articles on the subject I would be interested in knowing where and when so I can read up on it.</P>
<P class=MsoNormal>To clarify if I was confusing:</P>
<P class=MsoNormal>I know that smaller particle sizes increase the burn rate coefficient a and possibly the exponent n but that is not what Im talking about.<SPAN style="mso-spacerun: yes">&nbsp; </SPAN>I am asking if it would increase the percentage of the theoretical Isp that the motor performs at.<SPAN style="mso-spacerun: yes">&nbsp; </SPAN>So a motor with 400 micron AP and Al<SPAN style="mso-spacerun: yes">&nbsp; </SPAN>theoretically has an Isp of 255 but in most small motors we get around 205, only 80% of theoretical.<SPAN st  style="mso-spacerun: yes">&nbsp; </SPAN>A motor with 2 micron AP and Al still has a theoretical Isp of 255 but would it perform higher than 80% of that.<SPAN style="mso-spacerun: yes">&nbsp; </SPAN>My numbers are just made up.<SPAN style="mso-spacerun: yes">&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; </SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal>Thanks,</P>
<P class=MsoNormal>Bryan Flynt<SPAN style="mso-spacerun: yes">&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; </SPAN></P></div><br clear=all><hr>Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at <a href='http://go.msn.com/bql/hmtag_itl_EN.asp'>http://explorer.msn.com</a><br></html>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 14829 invoked from network); 31 Oct 2001 18:27:40 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.105]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 31 Oct 2001 18:27:40 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 12342 invoked by uid 50005); 31 Oct 2001 18:25:30 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpy with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4167. . Clean. Processed in 0.131163 secs); 31 Oct 2001 18:25:30 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 31 Oct 2001 18:25:30 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA30322; Wed, 31 Oct 2001 10:25:11 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 126167 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 31 Oct 2001 18:25:08          +0000
Received: from smtp001pub.verizon.net (smtp001pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.180])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA30308 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 31 Oct 2001 10:25:08 -0800
Received: from [63.24.225.78] (1Cust41.tnt1.rancho-cucamonga.ca.da.uu.net          [63.24.225.41]) by smtp001pub.verizon.net  with ESMTP for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; id f9VIO5r06837 Wed, 31 Oct 2001 12:24:09          -0600 (CST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: GTE/01rocket@mail.gte.net
References: <F85ik6kvXsn2Yf0scL900004ea3@hotmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <a05100338b805f1dfdc0b@[63.24.225.78]>
Date:         Wed, 31 Oct 2001 10:24:27 -0800
Reply-To: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Particle size??
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <F85ik6kvXsn2Yf0scL900004ea3@hotmail.com>

>
>
Has anyone done any work on using smaller particle sizes (both
oxidizer and metals) to achieve high efficacy in small solid motors?

Small motors already have 90-95% of the theoretical efficiency.  I
would think more could be achieved with minimizing temperature losses
(nozzle and grain design) than with particle size. But someone here
already knows the final answer and probably cannot say :)

Jerry

--
Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
Opinion, the whole thing.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 5108 invoked from network); 31 Oct 2001 19:31:32 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 31 Oct 2001 19:31:32 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 21479 invoked by uid 50005); 31 Oct 2001 18:16:55 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4165. . Clean. Processed in 0.151514 secs); 31 Oct 2001 18:16:55 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 31 Oct 2001 18:16:55 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA30519; Wed, 31 Oct 2001 11:07:48 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 126183 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 31 Oct 2001 19:07:36          +0000
Received: from fw1-bv.tek.com (fw1-bv.tek.com [192.65.40.16]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA30504 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed,          31 Oct 2001 11:07:35 -0800
Received: from fw1-bv.tek.com (root@localhost) by fw1-bv.tek.com with ESMTP id          f9VJ75o09464 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 31 Oct 2001 11:07:05          -0800 (PST)
Received: from tektronix.tek.com (tektronix.tek.com [128.181.6.43]) by          fw1-bv.tek.com with ESMTP id f9VJ75s09456 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>;          Wed, 31 Oct 2001 11:07:05 -0800 (PST)
Received: from us-bv-u16 (us-bv-u16.bv.tek.com [128.181.2.45]) by          tektronix.tek.com (8.10.2+Sun/8.10.2) with SMTP id f9VJ75A00469 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 31 Oct 2001 11:07:05 -0800 (PST)
Received: FROM us-bv-m01.bv.tek.com BY us-bv-u16 ; Wed Oct 31 11:07:04 2001          -0800
Received: by us-bv-m01.bv.tek.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) id          <V88RZ51A>; Wed, 31 Oct 2001 11:07:04 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19)
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Message-ID:  <5832AFF5FC75D411844300508BC216B70302AB58@us-bv-m07.bv.tek.com>
Date:         Wed, 31 Oct 2001 11:07:02 -0800
Reply-To: <john.w.lyngdal@EXGATE.TEK.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <john.w.lyngdal@EXGATE.TEK.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Particle size??
Comments: To: b_flynt@hotmail.com
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Brian,

            I think that you'll find that the combustion efficiencies are
more a function of the particle size of the fuel than a function of the
oxidizer size. There are some excellent research data on this aspect of
motor performance in the NASA Technical reports Ray posted an Excel
spreadsheet on the Arocket website that will calculate the residence time
for neutral burning motors.

    John



-----Original Message-----
From: Bryan Flynt [mailto:b_flynt@hotmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, October 31, 2001 9:47 AM
To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
Subject: [AR] Particle size??




Has anyone done any work on using smaller particle sizes (both oxidizer and
metals) to achieve high efficacy in small solid motors?  I'm sure research
has been done in large motors but how about small motors less than 20,000
Ns.  My train of thought is small motors have short residence times in the
chamber so smaller particle sizes would burn quicker with a higher
percentage burning before being expelled out the nozzle.  If you have
experimented yourself what have you found or if you know of some journal
articles on the subject I would be interested in knowing where and when so I
can read up on it.

To clarify if I was confusing:

I know that smaller particle sizes increase the burn rate coefficient a and
possibly the exponent n but that is not what I'm talking about.  I am asking
if it would increase the percentage of the theoretical Isp that the motor
performs at.  So a motor with 400 micron AP and Al  theoretically has an Isp
of 255 but in most small motors we get around 205, only 80% of theoretical.
A motor with 2 micron AP and Al still has a theoretical Isp of 255 but would
it perform higher than 80% of that.  My numbers are just made up.


Thanks,

Bryan Flynt


  _____

Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
<http://go.msn.com/bql/hmtag_itl_EN.asp>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 2772 invoked from network); 31 Oct 2001 20:46:29 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 31 Oct 2001 20:46:29 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: (qmail 8749 invoked by uid 50005); 31 Oct 2001 19:31:51 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4165. . Clean. Processed in 0.216641 secs); 31 Oct 2001 19:31:51 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 31 Oct 2001 19:31:51 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA31286; Wed, 31 Oct 2001 12:38:04 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 126212 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 31 Oct 2001 20:37:58          +0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA31242; Wed, 31 Oct 2001 12:27:57 -0800
Message-ID:  <200110312027.MAA31242@itc.uci.edu>
Date:         Wed, 31 Oct 2001 20:27:57 +0000
Reply-To: "Andrew MacMillen" <andrewm@HAWKFEATHER.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Andrew MacMillen" <andrewm@HAWKFEATHER.COM>
Subject:      [AR] book request
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Hi, all. New to the list, and getting interested in EX hybids. Speaking of
which: anybody know where/how I can get a copy of the out of print book &
video "Advanced Hybrid Manual" by William H. Colburn, Jr.? Bob Fortune's
said it's not on the horizon for reprint, and it seems to be the only book
out there.

TIA, Andrew.


From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 7925 invoked from network); 31 Oct 2001 22:34:40 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 31 Oct 2001 22:34:41 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 14585 invoked by uid 50005); 31 Oct 2001 21:20:02 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4165. . Clean. Processed in 0.243173 secs); 31 Oct 2001 21:20:02 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 31 Oct 2001 21:20:01 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA31859; Wed, 31 Oct 2001 14:29:35 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 126235 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 31 Oct 2001 22:29:26          +0000
Received: from smtp004pub.verizon.net (smtp004pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.183])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA31845 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 31 Oct 2001 14:29:26 -0800
Received: from [63.24.225.78] (1Cust66.tnt1.rancho-cucamonga.ca.da.uu.net          [63.24.225.66]) by smtp004pub.verizon.net  with ESMTP for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; id f9VMSkn00938 Wed, 31 Oct 2001 16:28:50          -0600 (CST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: GTE/01rocket@mail.gte.net
References: <200110312027.MAA31242@itc.uci.edu>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <a0510033ab8062b6a38af@[63.24.225.78]>
Date:         Wed, 31 Oct 2001 14:28:51 -0800
Reply-To: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] book request
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <200110312027.MAA31242@itc.uci.edu>

>Hi, all. New to the list, and getting interested in EX hybids. Speaking of
>which: anybody know where/how I can get a copy of the out of print book &
>video "Advanced Hybrid Manual" by William H. Colburn, Jr.? Bob Fortune's
>said it's not on the horizon for reprint, and it seems to be the only book
>out there.
>
>TIA, Andrew.

You might want to mention to Bill there is a publisher who WILL reprint it.

www.v-serv.com/crp


--
Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
Opinion, the whole thing.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 8697 invoked from network); 31 Oct 2001 23:19:28 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 31 Oct 2001 23:19:28 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 2658 invoked by uid 50005); 31 Oct 2001 23:18:56 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4167. . Clean. Processed in 0.200327 secs); 31 Oct 2001 23:18:56 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 31 Oct 2001 23:18:55 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA32081; Wed, 31 Oct 2001 15:15:46 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 126267 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 31 Oct 2001 23:15:43          +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (f160.law8.hotmail.com [216.33.241.160]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA32067 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 31 Oct 2001 15:15:42 -0800
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Wed,          31 Oct 2001 15:15:12 -0800
Received: from 165.127.249.69 by lw8fd.law8.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Wed, 31          Oct 2001 23:15:12 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [165.127.249.69]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 31 Oct 2001 23:15:12.0592 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[E45FD500:01C16261]
Message-ID:  <F160eqdGSyMp69YDqSk0000ee06@hotmail.com>
Date:         Wed, 31 Oct 2001 23:15:12 +0000
Reply-To: "Bryan Flynt" <b_flynt@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Bryan Flynt" <b_flynt@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      [AR] Ball Milling?
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

<html><div style='background-color:'>&nbsp;
<P class=MsoNormal>This is a little off topic and I realize there is probably a better forum to post this but it does in some cases apply.<SPAN style="mso-spacerun: yes">&nbsp; </SPAN>If people want to reply privately that would be much appreciated.</P>
<P class=MsoNormal>Why should you never Ball Mill metal powders?<SPAN style="mso-spacerun: yes">&nbsp; </SPAN>I understand the static electricity issues but I keep reading that it can be pyroforic and spontaneously ignite.<SPAN style="mso-spacerun: yes">&nbsp; </SPAN>What is that? </P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN style="mso-spacerun: yes">&nbsp;</SPAN>Im guessing it is where the metal doesnt get an oxide coating on it when it is in the drum but when you open the container it starts to form and releases heat which if great enough can ignite the powdered metal.<SPAN style="mso-spacerun: yes">&nbsp; </SPAN>If that is the case couldnt you put some type of wax or oil (or maybe just your HTPB) that would coat the particles in the drum and form a barrier against this when you brought it out of the drum?<SPAN style="mso-spacerun: yes">&nbsp; </SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal>&nbsp;<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" /><o:p></o:p></P>
<P class=MsoNormal>Bryan Flynt </P></div><br clear=all><hr>Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at <a href='http://go.msn.com/bql/hmtag_itl_EN.asp'>http://explorer.msn.com</a><br></html>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 6684 invoked from network); 1 Nov 2001 00:28:19 -0000
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 1 Nov 2001 00:28:19 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 26770 invoked by uid 50005); 31 Oct 2001 23:14:23 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4167. . Clean. Processed in 0.162435 secs); 31 Oct 2001 23:14:23 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 31 Oct 2001 23:14:23 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA32483; Wed, 31 Oct 2001 16:23:15 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 126297 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 1 Nov 2001 00:22:26          +0000
Received: from inet03.citec.qld.gov.au (firewall-user@inet03.citec.qld.gov.au          [203.5.10.10]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA32468          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 31 Oct 2001 16:22:24 -0800
Received: by inet03.citec.qld.gov.au; id KAA24149; Thu, 1 Nov 2001 10:22:20          +1000 (EST)
Received: from citec.com.au(pcux.citec.qld.gov.au 147.132.17.12) by          inet03.citec.qld.gov.au via smap (V2.0) id xma023940; Thu, 1 Nov 01          10:22:14 +1000
Received: from CITEC-Message_Server by citec.com.au with Novell_GroupWise; Thu,          01 Nov 2001 10:22:59 +1000
X-Mailer: Novell GroupWise 5.5.4
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by itc.uci.edu id QAA32469
Message-ID:  <sbe12283.074@citec.com.au>
Date:         Thu, 1 Nov 2001 10:22:26 +1000
Reply-To: "Des Bromilow" <Des.Bromilow@CITEC.COM.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Des Bromilow" <Des.Bromilow@CITEC.COM.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Ball Milling?
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Get yourself over to new:rec.pyrotechnics all questions will be answered, all fears will be allied....
Seriously.. rec.pyro can answer these questions better than I, but the jist of it is.. YEs, the biggest issue is the formation of the oxide layer.
The r.p guys usually crackopen the jar periodically (most common method) or introduce something like stearin to form a protective coating.

HTH,
Des

>>> Bryan Flynt <b_flynt@HOTMAIL.COM> 1/11/01 9:15:12 am >>>

This is a little off topic and I realize there is probably a better forum to post this but it does in some cases apply.  If people want to reply privately that would be much appreciated.

Why should you never Ball Mill metal powders?  I understand the static electricity issues but I keep reading that it can be pyroforic and spontaneously ignite.  What is that?

 I'm guessing it is where the metal doesn't get an oxide coating on it when it is in the drum but when you open the container it starts to form and releases heat which if great enough can ignite the powdered metal.  If that is the case couldn't you put some type of wax or oil (or maybe just your HTPB) that would coat the particles in the drum and form a barrier against this when you brought it out of the drum?

 >

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 3169 invoked from network); 1 Nov 2001 03:06:15 -0000
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 1 Nov 2001 03:06:15 -0000
Received: (qmail 27564 invoked by uid 50005); 1 Nov 2001 01:52:18 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4167. . Clean. Processed in 0.248878 secs); 01 Nov 2001 01:52:18 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 1 Nov 2001 01:52:18 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA00541; Wed, 31 Oct 2001 18:59:59 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 126347 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 1 Nov 2001 02:59:50          +0000
Received: from fep4-orange.clear.net.nz (fep4-orange.clear.net.nz          [203.97.32.4]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA00527          for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Wed, 31 Oct 2001 18:59:49 -0800
Received: from mkbs (203-167-160-242.dialup.clear.net.nz [203.167.160.242]) by          fep4-orange.clear.net.nz (1.5/1.7) with SMTP id PAA18680; Thu, 1 Nov          2001 15:59:18 +1300 (NZDT)
References: <JJEFLLHFFAHHMBBIHFAEOEMNCHAA.pkelly@comcen.com.au>             <a05100334b804d96f314f@[63.24.225.78]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <03d601c16281$5b215960$0700a8c0@mkbs>
Date:         Thu, 1 Nov 2001 08:54:56 +1300
Reply-To: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Organization: Applied Technology
Subject:      Re: [AR] Aussies test a scramjet
Comments: To: Jerry Irvine <01rocket@GTE.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

> It would be shocking if it had time to function in the short time
> till ballistic impact.


Can you expand on "shocking".
Obviously it was *designed* to fire well within that time.
How much time was available?


    Russell McMahon

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 24906 invoked from network); 1 Nov 2001 03:21:47 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 1 Nov 2001 03:21:47 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 31649 invoked by uid 50005); 1 Nov 2001 03:21:42 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4167. . Clean. Processed in 1.06244 secs); 01 Nov 2001 03:21:42 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 1 Nov 2001 03:21:40 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA00681; Wed, 31 Oct 2001 19:20:03 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 126364 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 1 Nov 2001 03:20:01          +0000
Received: from hobbiton.shire.net (frogmorton.shire.net [204.228.145.136]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA00643 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Wed, 31 Oct 2001 19:20:01 -0800
Received: from pool-64-223-150-95.man.east.verizon.net ([64.223.150.95]          helo=me-513q3sc0zun0.pengar.com) by hobbiton.shire.net with asmtp          (Exim 3.22 #6) id 15z8Jt-0002SZ-00 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 31          Oct 2001 20:15:05 -0700
X-Sender: seth@pengar.com@hobbiton.shire.net
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
References: <JJEFLLHFFAHHMBBIHFAEOEMNCHAA.pkelly@comcen.com.au>            <a05100334b804d96f314f@[63.24.225.78]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <5.1.0.14.0.20011031222437.02d92378@hobbiton.shire.net>
Date:         Wed, 31 Oct 2001 22:26:50 -0500
Reply-To: "Seth Leigh" <seth@PENGAR.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Seth Leigh" <seth@PENGAR.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Aussies test a scramjet
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <03d601c16281$5b215960$0700a8c0@mkbs>

At 02:54 PM 10/31/2001, Russell McMahon wrote:
> > It would be shocking if it had time to function in the short time
> > till ballistic impact.
>
>
>Can you expand on "shocking".
>Obviously it was *designed* to fire well within that time.
>How much time was available?

A few seconds.  Honestly, the US fires a scramjet out of a cannon, and it's
supposed to burn and "fly under its own power" for .3 seconds before
slamming into a brick wall, and we're supposed to learn something from
this?  The Aussie scramjet was supposed to ignite and burn for something
like 5 seconds before flying into the ground at Warp 9.  Why didn't they
ignite the scramjet on the way *up* and give it time till it leaves the
atmosphere?  Oh well, what do I know?  (don't answer that...)

Seth

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 17246 invoked from network); 1 Nov 2001 03:28:28 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 1 Nov 2001 03:28:28 -0000
Received: (qmail 20796 invoked by uid 50005); 1 Nov 2001 02:14:31 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4167. . Clean. Processed in 0.190477 secs); 01 Nov 2001 02:14:31 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 1 Nov 2001 02:14:31 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA00712; Wed, 31 Oct 2001 19:26:01 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 126371 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 1 Nov 2001 03:25:56          +0000
Received: from spsystems.net (spsystems.net [209.47.149.227]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA00698 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Wed,          31 Oct 2001 19:25:55 -0800
Received: (from henry@localhost) by spsystems.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id WAA16267;          Wed, 31 Oct 2001 22:25:20 -0500 (EST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1011031222309.15753B-100000@spsystems.net>
Date:         Wed, 31 Oct 2001 22:25:20 -0500
Reply-To: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Aussies test a scramjet
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <5.1.0.14.0.20011031222437.02d92378@hobbiton.shire.net>

On Wed, 31 Oct 2001, Seth Leigh wrote:
> >How much time was available?
>
> A few seconds.  Honestly, the US fires a scramjet out of a cannon, and it's
> supposed to burn and "fly under its own power" for .3 seconds before
> slamming into a brick wall, and we're supposed to learn something from
> this?

Yes.  Most of the early tests of new big rocket engines last only a
fraction of a second each -- just long enough to confirm successful
ignition and stable combustion.

One common limitation of scramjet tests in particular is that the hydrogen
fuel is stored as compressed gas -- to avoid the hassles of dealing with
liquid hydrogen -- which means the fuel supply is severely limited.

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 22308 invoked from network); 1 Nov 2001 04:50:29 -0000
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 1 Nov 2001 04:50:29 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 1198 invoked by uid 50005); 1 Nov 2001 04:49:57 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4167. . Clean. Processed in 0.14642 secs); 01 Nov 2001 04:49:57 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 1 Nov 2001 04:49:57 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA01160; Wed, 31 Oct 2001 20:43:04 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 126401 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 1 Nov 2001 04:42:59          +0000
Received: from vmmr1.verisignmail.com (vmmr1.verisignmail.com          [216.168.230.137]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id          UAA01145 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Wed, 31 Oct 2001 20:42:59 -0800
Received: from vmms1.verisignmail.com (vmms1.verisignmail.com [10.166.0.138])          by vmmr1.verisignmail.com (Mirapoint) with ESMTP id AAX93958; Wed, 31          Oct 2001 23:42:17 -0500 (EST)
Received: from vmms1.verisignmail.com (localhost.verisignmail.com [127.0.0.1])          by vmms1.verisignmail.com (Mirapoint) with SMTP id AEQ76057 (AUTH          mpoulton@mtptech.com); Wed, 31 Oct 2001 23:42:30 -0500 (EST)
Received: from 129.93.206.94 by vmms1.verisignmail.com with HTTP/1.1; Wed, 31          Oct 2001 23:42:32 -0500
X-Mailer: Mirapoint Webmail Direct 2.9.1.1
Message-ID:  <200111010442.AEQ76057@vmms1.verisignmail.com>
Date:         Wed, 31 Oct 2001 23:42:32 -0500
Reply-To: <mpoulton@MTPTECH.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Mike Poulton" <mpoulton@MTPTECH.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Ball Milling?
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

You are quite correct about the nature of pyrophoric metal
powders, although other sources of ignition may cause
problems, too (static, friction, etc.).  Adding a protective
coating will fix this, but makes the milling ineffective.  If
you have enough hydrocarbon to protect the metal, it won't
mill well.  The solution is to mill in an inert atmosphere
(FYI, CO2 is NOT inert!) and control the re-exposure of the
product to air, perhaps treating with a protectant while
still under inert gas.

---- Original message ----
>Date: Wed, 31 Oct 2001 23:15:12 +0000
>From: Bryan Flynt <b_flynt@HOTMAIL.COM>
>Subject: [AR] Ball Milling?
>To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
>
Mike Poulton
MTP Technologies
KC0LLX


From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 3468 invoked from network); 1 Nov 2001 11:47:58 -0000
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 1 Nov 2001 11:47:58 -0000
Received: (qmail 19005 invoked by uid 50005); 1 Nov 2001 10:33:59 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4167. . Clean. Processed in 0.747195 secs); 01 Nov 2001 10:33:59 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 1 Nov 2001 10:33:57 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id DAA02284; Thu, 1 Nov 2001 03:45:39 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 126437 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 1 Nov 2001 11:45:31          +0000
Received: from fep3-orange.clear.net.nz (fep3-orange.clear.net.nz          [203.97.32.3]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id DAA02269          for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Thu, 1 Nov 2001 03:45:30 -0800
Received: from mkbs (203-167-160-59.dialup.clear.net.nz [203.167.160.59]) by          fep3-orange.clear.net.nz (1.5/1.8) with SMTP id AAA20640; Fri, 2 Nov          2001 00:45:28 +1300 (NZDT)
References:  <200111010442.AEQ76057@vmms1.verisignmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <054801c162ca$dd7913a0$0700a8c0@mkbs>
Date:         Thu, 1 Nov 2001 22:51:15 +1300
Reply-To: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Organization: Applied Technology
Subject:      Re: [AR] Ball Milling?
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

1.    >The solution is to mill in an inert atmosphere
        > (FYI, CO2 is NOT inert!)
.
Neither is Nitrogen, depending of course on what you are milling.
AFAIK Magnesium will burn happily in Nitrogen.

2. >This is a little off topic

This sounds entirely on topic to me for what I understand this list is
about.
As there seems to be a reasonable degree of uncertainty lately about what is
off and on topic would someone knowledgeable like to comment on the
on/offtopicness of subjects like this?

    RM

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 167 invoked from network); 1 Nov 2001 15:25:57 -0000
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 1 Nov 2001 15:25:57 -0000
Received: (qmail 12007 invoked by uid 50005); 1 Nov 2001 15:09:19 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4167. . Clean. Processed in 1.277225 secs); 01 Nov 2001 15:09:19 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 1 Nov 2001 15:09:17 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA02877; Thu, 1 Nov 2001 07:05:21 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 126464 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 1 Nov 2001 15:05:12          +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (oe64.law12.hotmail.com [64.4.18.199]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA02862 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 1 Nov 2001 07:05:11 -0800
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Thu,          1 Nov 2001 07:04:41 -0800
X-Originating-IP: [24.92.128.69]
References: <JJEFLLHFFAHHMBBIHFAEOEMNCHAA.pkelly@comcen.com.au>                       <a05100334b804d96f314f@[63.24.225.78]>             <5.1.0.14.0.20011031222437.02d92378@hobbiton.shire.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 01 Nov 2001 15:04:41.0582 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[8889D8E0:01C162E6]
Message-ID:  <OE64Ul1wW8hcWy7X5W1000081a1@hotmail.com>
Date:         Thu, 1 Nov 2001 09:02:39 -0600
Reply-To: "Mark Kruep" <mkruep@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Mark Kruep" <mkruep@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Aussies test a scramjet
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Not to say I like their test methods, but in all likelyhood, they had more
time on the way down than on the way up. If you consider it has to reach
Mach 5 to start operating and that even a good rocket probably doesn't reach
that speed for several seconds in the thick lower atmosphere, the way down
actually gives them more time to operate. Remember if it has to breath
oxygen from the air for combustion it would have to be less than ?? 30 miles
up??( I'm guessing but I think I'm close). Either way it's ignorant. Why not
fly at some angle back in and get more room to operate in case something
goofs? I realize that might sacrifice some air inflow and create turbulence
in that air, but at Mach 7.6 the air wouldn't have time to get out of it's
own way anyway. Or better yet, send it sub-orbital and then let it skip
across the top of the atmosphere on re-entry. Anything sounds better than
lawn darting an object moving faster than a mile per second. As my wife says
about my rocket activities "It goes up, it comes down. What's so interesting
about that?" :-).

Mark

----- Original Message -----
From: "Seth Leigh" <seth@PENGAR.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Wednesday, October 31, 2001 9:26 PM
Subject: Re: [AR] Aussies test a scramjet


> At 02:54 PM 10/31/2001, Russell McMahon wrote:
> > > It would be shocking if it had time to function in the short time
> > > till ballistic impact.
> >
> >
> >Can you expand on "shocking".
> >Obviously it was *designed* to fire well within that time.
> >How much time was available?
>
> A few seconds.  Honestly, the US fires a scramjet out of a cannon, and
it's
> supposed to burn and "fly under its own power" for .3 seconds before
> slamming into a brick wall, and we're supposed to learn something from
> this?  The Aussie scramjet was supposed to ignite and burn for something
> like 5 seconds before flying into the ground at Warp 9.  Why didn't they
> ignite the scramjet on the way *up* and give it time till it leaves the
> atmosphere?  Oh well, what do I know?  (don't answer that...)
>
> Seth
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 3218 invoked from network); 1 Nov 2001 17:26:24 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 1 Nov 2001 17:26:24 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: (qmail 25887 invoked by uid 50005); 1 Nov 2001 17:19:27 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpb with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4167. . Clean. Processed in 0.136461 secs); 01 Nov 2001 17:19:27 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 1 Nov 2001 17:19:27 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA03385; Thu, 1 Nov 2001 09:21:06 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 126507 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 1 Nov 2001 17:20:58          +0000
Received: from localhost (dmccue@localhost) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with          ESMTP id JAA03371 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 1 Nov 2001 09:20:58          -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.LNX.4.10.10111010824420.3060-100000@itc.uci.edu>
Date:         Thu, 1 Nov 2001 09:20:57 -0800
Reply-To: "David J. McCue" <dmccue@itc.uci.edu>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "David J. McCue" <dmccue@itc.uci.edu>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Ball Milling?
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <054801c162ca$dd7913a0$0700a8c0@mkbs>

On Thu, 1 Nov 2001, Russell McMahon wrote:

> 1.    >The solution is to mill in an inert atmosphere
>         > (FYI, CO2 is NOT inert!)
> .
> Neither is Nitrogen, depending of course on what you are milling.
> AFAIK Magnesium will burn happily in Nitrogen.
>
> 2. >This is a little off topic
>
> This sounds entirely on topic to me for what I understand this list is
> about.
> As there seems to be a reasonable degree of uncertainty lately about what is
> off and on topic would someone knowledgeable like to comment on the
> on/offtopicness of subjects like this?
>
>     RM
>
The short answer is that most anything related to amateur rocketry,
including propulsion, aerodynamics, regulation, safety, avionics, careers,
and many other topics is perfecty ok.

What can get you into trouble are postings about politics unrelated to
rocketry (as opposed to the political issues that affect amateur
rocketry, that is very much on-topic), rudeness to others, excessive
commercial posting, and ignoring advice to refrian from these kind of
things.

What got Jerry Irvine suspended from the list was the posting of a
link to a political animated cartoon that happened to include rockets. If
this had been the first transgression, it would not have resulted in
suspension. Jerry and I have discussed the matter off-list, and while we
may agree to disagree on some issues, Jerry has a clearer understanding
that there are some limits.

I hope this makes the whole matter clearer to all--

Cheers,
Dave McCue

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 4710 invoked from network); 1 Nov 2001 17:34:39 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 1 Nov 2001 17:34:39 -0000
Received: (qmail 5273 invoked by uid 50005); 1 Nov 2001 17:27:44 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpb with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4167. . Clean. Processed in 0.33281 secs); 01 Nov 2001 17:27:44 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 1 Nov 2001 17:27:43 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA03491; Thu, 1 Nov 2001 09:30:18 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 126527 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 1 Nov 2001 17:30:16          +0000
Received: from localhost (rcalkins@localhost) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with          ESMTP id JAA03477; Thu, 1 Nov 2001 09:30:15 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.LNX.4.10.10111010908070.3225-100000@itc.uci.edu>
Date:         Thu, 1 Nov 2001 09:30:15 -0800
Reply-To: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
Subject:      Re: [AR] NFPA 1127 And Our Incorporation
Comments: To: Earl Colby Pottinger <earlcp@IDIRECT.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <200110280537.BAA38187@ares.idirect.com>

Earl and others bring up good points.  First of all, let me make it clear
that I'd rather be rocketeering than setting up a non-profit.  I'm not
interested in acruing personal power or wealth here.

My motivation is serving amateur rocketry, freeing them to innovate.  I
want to make this perfectly clear.  Accordingly, the charter, bylaws and
such will be drafted to minimize the possiblity that the group could be
used for personal gain.

As always, I appreciate your input.

Ray

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 17513 invoked from network); 1 Nov 2001 18:33:21 -0000
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 1 Nov 2001 18:33:21 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 6759 invoked by uid 50005); 1 Nov 2001 17:19:20 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4167. . Clean. Processed in 0.521475 secs); 01 Nov 2001 17:19:20 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 1 Nov 2001 17:19:19 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA03673; Thu, 1 Nov 2001 10:10:54 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 126550 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 1 Nov 2001 18:10:50          +0000
Received: from imf12bis.bellsouth.net (mail012.mail.bellsouth.net          [205.152.58.32]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA03659          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 1 Nov 2001 10:10:50 -0800
Received: from gate.net ([216.78.252.243]) by imf12bis.bellsouth.net (InterMail          vM.5.01.01.01 201-252-104) with ESMTP id          <20011101181118.JPTM25593.imf12bis.bellsouth.net@gate.net> for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 1 Nov 2001 13:11:18 -0500
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Win98; en-US; rv:0.9.4) Gecko/20011019            Netscape6/6.2
X-Accept-Language: en-us
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3BE18FA2.6000509@gate.net>
Date:         Thu, 1 Nov 2001 23:08:34 +0500
Reply-To: <jaywward@gate.net>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jay Ward" <jaywward@gate.net>
Organization: Group 739
Subject:      [AR] Tubing`
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

    I recently found a source of 12' lengths of  6061-T6 AL 3" x.065
anodized tubing. $15 a stick plus shipping. Minor cosmetic flaws in the
anodizing.  Anyone interested?

--
Jay Ward
Deerfield Beach, Florida
http://www.gate.net/~jaywward
KE4ZOG, NAR 78126, L2

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 22730 invoked from network); 1 Nov 2001 20:06:16 -0000
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 1 Nov 2001 20:06:16 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 11404 invoked by uid 50005); 1 Nov 2001 19:43:20 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4167. . Clean. Processed in 1.610117 secs); 01 Nov 2001 19:43:20 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 1 Nov 2001 19:43:18 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA03942; Thu, 1 Nov 2001 11:22:07 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 126570 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 1 Nov 2001 19:22:03          +0000
Received: from rftzy05y.ca.nortel.com (h161s130a130n47.user.nortelnetworks.com          [47.130.130.161]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA03866          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 1 Nov 2001 11:10:43 -0800
Received: from rftzy232.ca.nortel.com (rftzy232.ca.nortel.com [47.130.185.32])          by rftzy05y.ca.nortel.com (Switch-2.2.0/Switch-2.2.0) with ESMTP id          fA1JA4Y12169; Thu, 1 Nov 2001 14:10:05 -0500 (EST)
Received: from NORTELNETWORKS.COM (wftzh00e.ca.nortel.com [47.130.116.9]) by          rftzy232.ca.nortel.com with SMTP (Microsoft Exchange Internet Mail          Service Version 5.5.2653.13) id WA4JC83W; Thu, 1 Nov 2001 14:08:22          -0500
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.73C-CCK-MCD  [en] (X11; U; HP-UX B.10.20 9000/785)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <3BE18FA2.6000509@gate.net>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3BE19E19.793E6D13@NORTELNETWORKS.COM>
Date:         Thu, 1 Nov 2001 14:10:17 -0500
Reply-To: "Leech, Marcus \(EXCHANGE:FITZ:8M86\)" <mleech@NORTELNETWORKS.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Leech, Marcus \(EXCHANGE:FITZ:8M86\)" <mleech@NORTELNETWORKS.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Tubing`
Comments: To: jaywward@gate.net
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Jay Ward wrote:
>
>     I recently found a source of 12' lengths of  6061-T6 AL 3" x.065
> anodized tubing. $15 a stick plus shipping. Minor cosmetic flaws in the
> anodizing.  Anyone interested?
>
It's a tad thin for use at 1000PSI...

--
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Marcus Leech                             Mail:   Dept 8M70, MS 012, FITZ
Advisor                                  Phone: (ESN) 393-9145  +1 613 763 9145
Security Architecture and Planning       Fax:   (ESN) 393-9435  +1 613 763 9435
Nortel Networks                          mleech@nortelnetworks.com
-----------------Expressed opinions are my own, not my employer's------

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 11227 invoked from network); 1 Nov 2001 21:08:48 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 1 Nov 2001 21:08:48 -0000
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 22670 invoked by uid 50005); 1 Nov 2001 21:08:18 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4167. . Clean. Processed in 0.509232 secs); 01 Nov 2001 21:08:18 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 1 Nov 2001 21:08:17 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA04261; Thu, 1 Nov 2001 13:02:51 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 126593 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 1 Nov 2001 21:02:46          +0000
Received: from idsoftware.com (predator.idsoftware.com [192.246.40.34]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA04246 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Thu, 1 Nov 2001 13:02:45 -0800
Received: from [192.246.40.129] (account johnc HELO lightning.idsoftware.com)          by idsoftware.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 3.4.7) with ESMTP id 454744          for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 01 Nov 2001 15:02:45 -0600
X-Sender: johnc@mail.idsoftware.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <4.3.1.2.20011101142738.036de7c0@mail.idsoftware.com>
Date:         Thu, 1 Nov 2001 15:01:01 -0600
Reply-To: "John Carmack" <johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Carmack" <johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM>
Subject:      [AR] Fiction and life
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

I picked up a copy of Victor Koman's "Kings of the High Frontier" at the
SFF conference a couple weeks ago.  I was a little skeptical about the
book, which has a couple billionaires building their own space ships, and
college kids building a roton in an abandoned warehouse, but I have been
enjoying it quite a lot, and I suspect many others here would find it worth
the time to track down a copy.

It reads a fair amount like a space oriented "Atlas Shrugged", with
government and societal crusaders obstructing the protagonists from making
progress.

Back in the real world...

Last week, my waiver request for testing our vehicles to 5000' was denied
by the FAA.  I'm pretty sure we will be able to work it out with them after
going back and forth a few more times,  but the arbitrariness of it still
grates.

Yesterday, the place I wanted to buy rocket drawn parachutes from said they
were too nervous about liability issues with an unconventional application
"especially in these times" to do business with us, although they were
sympathetic enough to recommend that we should be able to find a used one.

Today's space.com article http://www.space.com/news/iss_society_011031.html
drips with the "serve society, don't line industry pockets, and all the
governments must come together" position.

Hmmm.

John Carmack

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 2375 invoked from network); 1 Nov 2001 22:28:37 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 1 Nov 2001 22:28:37 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 1205 invoked by uid 50005); 1 Nov 2001 22:28:07 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4167. . Clean. Processed in 0.179958 secs); 01 Nov 2001 22:28:07 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 1 Nov 2001 22:28:06 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA04537; Thu, 1 Nov 2001 14:24:20 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 126624 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 1 Nov 2001 22:24:06          +0000
Received: from po3.glue.umd.edu (po3.glue.umd.edu [128.8.10.123]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA04523 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 1 Nov 2001 14:24:05 -0800
Received: from y.glue.umd.edu (IDENT:root@y.glue.umd.edu [128.8.10.68]) by          po3.glue.umd.edu (8.10.1/8.10.1) with ESMTP id fA1MO3v17805; Thu, 1          Nov 2001 17:24:03 -0500 (EST)
Received: from y.glue.umd.edu (IDENT:sendmail@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by          y.glue.umd.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id RAA24260; Thu, 1 Nov 2001          17:24:03 -0500 (EST)
Received: from localhost (acase@localhost) by y.glue.umd.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with          ESMTP id RAA24256; Thu, 1 Nov 2001 17:24:03 -0500 (EST)
X-Authentication-Warning: y.glue.umd.edu: acase owned process doing -bs
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.GSO.4.21.0111011716500.23565-100000@y.glue.umd.edu>
Date:         Thu, 1 Nov 2001 17:24:02 -0500
Reply-To: "Andrew Case" <acase@GLUE.UMD.EDU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Andrew Case" <acase@GLUE.UMD.EDU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Fiction and life
Comments: To: John Carmack <johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <4.3.1.2.20011101142738.036de7c0@mail.idsoftware.com>

On Thu, 1 Nov 2001, John Carmack wrote:
> Last week, my waiver request for testing our vehicles to 5000' was denied
> by the FAA.  I'm pretty sure we will be able to work it out with them after
> going back and forth a few more times,  but the arbitrariness of it still
> grates.

This will almost certainly pass once things settle down a bit. In related
news, NASA has taken down a whole bunch of useful information from various
sites. I spent a long time searching for the SP-8XXX series pdfs that had
been available. Most sites had taken them down, but I was able to find
one that had all of them (except for SP-8106 for some reason) and download
the lot before the hole was plugged (if it has been -I haven't been back
since Tuesday). Sometimes bureaucratic ineptitude is good.

> Today's space.com article http://www.space.com/news/iss_society_011031.html
> drips with the "serve society, don't line industry pockets, and all the
> governments must come together" position.

Space.com seems to me to buy the NASA = Starfleet line quite thoroughly.

......Andrew

Andrew Case                             |
acase@plasma.umd.edu                    |
Institute for Plasma Research           |
University of Maryland, College Park    |

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 5133 invoked from network); 1 Nov 2001 22:43:53 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 1 Nov 2001 22:43:53 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 27937 invoked by uid 50005); 1 Nov 2001 22:35:57 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpb with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4167. . Clean. Processed in 1.174222 secs); 01 Nov 2001 22:35:57 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 1 Nov 2001 22:35:55 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA04626; Thu, 1 Nov 2001 14:40:39 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 126641 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 1 Nov 2001 22:40:34          +0000
Received: from proxy4.ba.best.com (root@proxy4.ba.best.com [206.184.139.15]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA04612 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Thu, 1 Nov 2001 14:40:34 -0800
Received: from [10.0.0.2] (snvadslgw2poold155.snjs.uswestqwest.net          [168.103.213.155]) by proxy4.ba.best.com (8.9.3/8.9.2/best.out) with          ESMTP id OAA00151 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Thu, 1 Nov 2001 14:39:39          -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Sender:  (Unverified)
References: <4.3.1.2.20011101142738.036de7c0@mail.idsoftware.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <v04210105b807783b4293@[10.0.0.2]>
Date:         Thu, 1 Nov 2001 14:39:01 -0800
Reply-To: "bob fortune" <bob@FORTUNEPAINT.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "bob fortune" <bob@FORTUNEPAINT.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Fiction and life
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <4.3.1.2.20011101142738.036de7c0@mail.idsoftware.com>

John,

Hows about buying a used ultralight or hangglider  - or at least
learning the lingo so when asked by the ballistic chute rep your
answers sound credible.  Here is one resource for ballistic systems
that maybe you haven't tried:

http://www.airplaneparachutes.com/oft.htm

Find one that matches the anticipated deployment speed and weight of
your lander and buy the corresponding system. Nothing like fighting
fiction with fiction.

When trying to buy black powder for ejection charges the BP dealer
will often require one to own a black powder piece.  When I say I
have a Kentucky .50 Cal Percussion rifle with a blued 33 1/2" barrel
the vendor won't hesitate to sell me 50 pounds of BP which I can then
store under my bed or in the living room. If I say I'm going to use
it in a rocket they just laugh at me and say no.  It's silly but
that's the law - NRA is a pretty powerful lobby.


Bob


>I picked up a copy of Victor Koman's "Kings of the High Frontier" at the
>SFF conference a couple weeks ago.  I was a little skeptical about the
>book, which has a couple billionaires building their own space ships, and
>college kids building a roton in an abandoned warehouse, but I have been
>enjoying it quite a lot, and I suspect many others here would find it worth
>the time to track down a copy.
>
>It reads a fair amount like a space oriented "Atlas Shrugged", with
>government and societal crusaders obstructing the protagonists from making
>progress.
>
>Back in the real world...
>
>Last week, my waiver request for testing our vehicles to 5000' was denied
>by the FAA.  I'm pretty sure we will be able to work it out with them after
>going back and forth a few more times,  but the arbitrariness of it still
>grates.
>
>Yesterday, the place I wanted to buy rocket drawn parachutes from said they
>were too nervous about liability issues with an unconventional application
>"especially in these times" to do business with us, although they were
>sympathetic enough to recommend that we should be able to find a used one.
>
>Today's space.com article http://www.space.com/news/iss_society_011031.html
>drips with the "serve society, don't line industry pockets, and all the
>governments must come together" position.
>
>Hmmm.
>
>John Carmack

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 15982 invoked from network); 1 Nov 2001 22:54:34 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 1 Nov 2001 22:54:34 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 6373 invoked by uid 50005); 1 Nov 2001 22:42:31 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4167. . Clean. Processed in 0.39221 secs); 01 Nov 2001 22:42:31 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 1 Nov 2001 22:42:31 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA04700; Thu, 1 Nov 2001 14:46:55 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 126664 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 1 Nov 2001 22:46:53          +0000
Received: from idsoftware.com (predator.idsoftware.com [192.246.40.34]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA04686 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Thu, 1 Nov 2001 14:46:53 -0800
Received: from [192.246.40.129] (account johnc HELO lightning.idsoftware.com)          by idsoftware.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 3.4.7) with ESMTP id 454940          for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 01 Nov 2001 16:46:53 -0600
X-Sender: johnc@mail.idsoftware.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.1
References: <4.3.1.2.20011101142738.036de7c0@mail.idsoftware.com>            <4.3.1.2.20011101142738.036de7c0@mail.idsoftware.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <4.3.1.2.20011101164239.036e8630@mail.idsoftware.com>
Date:         Thu, 1 Nov 2001 16:45:09 -0600
Reply-To: "John Carmack" <johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Carmack" <johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Fiction and life
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <v04210105b807783b4293@[10.0.0.2]>

At 02:39 PM 11/1/2001 -0800, you wrote:
>John,
>
>Hows about buying a used ultralight or hangglider  - or at least
>learning the lingo so when asked by the ballistic chute rep your
>answers sound credible.  Here is one resource for ballistic systems
>that maybe you haven't tried:
>
>http://www.airplaneparachutes.com/oft.htm
>
>Find one that matches the anticipated deployment speed and weight of
>your lander and buy the corresponding system. Nothing like fighting
>fiction with fiction.

That is the place I was talking to.  I don't want to deceive anyone, so I
am going try to find another place that will work with us with the full
knowledge of what we are doing.  I want some expert advice in many cases,
not just the product off the shelf.

John Carmack

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 11124 invoked from network); 1 Nov 2001 23:00:56 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 1 Nov 2001 23:00:56 -0000
Received: (qmail 16947 invoked by uid 50005); 1 Nov 2001 22:51:22 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4167. . Clean. Processed in 1.305101 secs); 01 Nov 2001 22:51:22 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 1 Nov 2001 22:51:19 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA04773; Thu, 1 Nov 2001 14:56:03 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 126681 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 1 Nov 2001 22:55:58          +0000
Received: from corinth.bossig.com (corinth.bossig.com [208.26.239.66]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA04759 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Thu, 1 Nov 2001 14:55:58 -0800
Received: from BruceE.Watson (unverified [208.26.232.161]) by          corinth.bossig.com (Rockliffe SMTPRA 4.5.4) with SMTP id          <B0079265157@corinth.bossig.com> for <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Thu, 1          Nov 2001 15:01:26 -0800
References:  <Pine.GSO.4.21.0111011716500.23565-100000@y.glue.umd.edu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2314.1300
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <001601c16328$44a21880$a1e81ad0@Watson>
Date:         Thu, 1 Nov 2001 14:53:27 -0800
Reply-To: "Bruce E. Watson" <bwatson@3-CITIES.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Bruce E. Watson" <bwatson@3-CITIES.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Fiction and life
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

> This will almost certainly pass once things settle down a bit. In related
> news, NASA has taken down a whole bunch of useful information from various
> sites. I spent a long time searching for the SP-8XXX series pdfs that had
> been available. Most sites had taken them down, but I was able to find
> one that had all of them (except for SP-8106 for some reason) and download
> the lot before the hole was plugged (if it has been -I haven't been back
> since Tuesday). Sometimes bureaucratic ineptitude is good.

I received the following message today when I went over to the Glenn
Research Center to their technical report server.  Others I have not been
able to get to at all.

Access Denied
Please Note: Public access to many of our web sites is temporarily limited.
In most cases, no action is required of you. Access should be restored in
the next few working days, so please try the site again. We apologize for
any inconvenience.

Hopefully, as they indicate, they will be back up in a few days again.  But,
what will be missing when they do come back up.  Several NASA and government
sites with advanced technical information are still up, but for how long?  I
was able to still get over to a NASA site that lists the NASA SPACE VEHICLE
DESIGN CRITERIA SP-8000 series
(http://library.msfc.nasa.gov/cgi-bin/lsp8000).  SP-8106 isn't on the list,
but, I don't think it ever was (the Last Revised date is Nov. 16, 2000).

Regards;
Bruce E. Watson

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 7752 invoked from network); 2 Nov 2001 00:11:11 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 2 Nov 2001 00:11:11 -0000
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 17202 invoked by uid 50005); 2 Nov 2001 00:09:37 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4167. . Clean. Processed in 0.969134 secs); 02 Nov 2001 00:09:37 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 2 Nov 2001 00:09:35 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA05153; Thu, 1 Nov 2001 16:01:45 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 126760 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 2 Nov 2001 00:01:41          +0000
Received: from ares.idirect.com (ares.idirect.com [207.136.80.180]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA05138; Thu, 1 Nov 2001          16:01:40 -0800
Received: from .idirect.com (on-osh-ahp-01-65.look.ca [216.154.47.65]) by          ares.idirect.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id TAA74456; Thu, 1 Nov 2001          19:41:47 -0500 (EST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="ISO-8859-1"
X-Mailer: BeOS Mail
Message-ID:  <200111020041.TAA74456@ares.idirect.com>
Date:         Thu, 1 Nov 2001 18:59:20 EST
Reply-To: <earlcp@idirect.com>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Earl Colby Pottinger" <earlcp@idirect.com>
Subject:      Re: [AR] NFPA 1127 And Our Incorporation
Comments: To: Ray Calkins <rcalkins@ITC.UCI.EDU>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

To be clear, I have no bad opinions of you or any others trying to create an organization to help people like me.  It is just that sometimes the founders have no idea how large thier organizations may grow, or how much power or money them may come to represent.  If the charters do not have limits placed in them from the very beginning it it usually too late when the time comes to add them.

     Good Luck
               Earl Colby Pottinger

>Earl and others bring up good points.  First of all, let me make it clear
>that I'd rather be rocketeering than setting up a non-profit.  I'm not
>interested in acruing personal power or wealth here.
>
>My motivation is serving amateur rocketry, freeing them to innovate.  I
>want to make this perfectly clear.  Accordingly, the charter, bylaws and
>such will be drafted to minimize the possiblity that the group could be
>used for personal gain.
>
>As always, I appreciate your input.
>
>Ray

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 11379 invoked from network); 2 Nov 2001 08:15:53 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 2 Nov 2001 08:15:53 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 18125 invoked by uid 50005); 2 Nov 2001 07:01:47 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4167. . Clean. Processed in 0.610215 secs); 02 Nov 2001 07:01:47 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 2 Nov 2001 07:01:46 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA06528; Fri, 2 Nov 2001 00:11:57 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 126841 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 2 Nov 2001 08:09:31          +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (f117.law9.hotmail.com [64.4.9.117]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA06502 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri,          2 Nov 2001 00:09:30 -0800
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Fri,          2 Nov 2001 00:09:00 -0800
Received: from 66.81.22.31 by lw9fd.law9.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Fri, 02 Nov          2001 08:09:00 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [66.81.22.31]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 02 Nov 2001 08:09:00.0584 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[A0F55280:01C16375]
Message-ID:  <F1176xfPTeip68V8zDv0001df4e@hotmail.com>
Date:         Fri, 2 Nov 2001 00:09:00 -0800
Reply-To: "James Grover" <jgroverman@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "James Grover" <jgroverman@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      [AR] Solid loadings and Performance
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Currently I have some formulations that are working very well for me (Im a
newbie). After reading a few threads I began to wonder how much performance
I was sacrificing over its workability. My formulations run about 78% solid
loadings, and after being pumped they flow rather nicely. Anything higher
becomes a bit difficult to work with.

I guess what Im asking is would it be worth my while to go to a higher
solid loading formulation (say 79-80% )? Or should I just stay with whats
working for me?

I really like my current formulations because they are easy to mix/cast and
after being pumped, I dont have to worry about air bubbles that are
normally associated with lower solid loadings. So far the motors I have made
in the I-L range seem to perform great. I assume with smaller motors the
performance loss isnt going to be so bad, but becomes more significant with
the larger motors. Thanks in advance.

James Grover
TRA#6866 L3
www.groveraerospace.com


_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 16401 invoked from network); 2 Nov 2001 10:14:23 -0000
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 2 Nov 2001 10:14:23 -0000
Received: (qmail 17041 invoked by uid 50005); 2 Nov 2001 10:13:53 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4167. . Clean. Processed in 0.956976 secs); 02 Nov 2001 10:13:53 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 2 Nov 2001 10:13:52 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id CAA06826; Fri, 2 Nov 2001 02:12:33 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 126861 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 2 Nov 2001 10:12:25          +0000
Received: from fep4-orange.clear.net.nz (fep4-orange.clear.net.nz          [203.97.32.4]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id CAA06811          for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Fri, 2 Nov 2001 02:12:24 -0800
Received: from mkbs (203-167-156-199.dialup.clear.net.nz [203.167.156.199]) by          fep4-orange.clear.net.nz (1.5/1.7) with SMTP id XAA11345; Fri, 2 Nov          2001 23:12:03 +1300 (NZDT)
References:  <Pine.GSO.4.21.0111011716500.23565-100000@y.glue.umd.edu>              <001601c16328$44a21880$a1e81ad0@Watson>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <0c3c01c16387$031495a0$0700a8c0@mkbs>
Date:         Fri, 2 Nov 2001 23:03:09 +1300
Reply-To: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Organization: Applied Technology
Subject:      Re: [AR] Fiction and life
Comments: To: "Bruce E. Watson" <bwatson@3-CITIES.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

They seem to be available from

    > (http://library.msfc.nasa.gov/cgi-bin/lsp8000).

Downloading 8105 now.

> I received the following message today when I went over to the Glenn
> Research Center to their technical report server.  Others I have not been
> able to get to at all.
>
> Access Denied
> Please Note: Public access to many of our web sites is temporarily
limited.
> In most cases, no action is required of you. Access should be restored in
> the next few working days, so please try the site again. We apologize for
> any inconvenience.
>
> Hopefully, as they indicate, they will be back up in a few days again.
But,
> what will be missing when they do come back up.  Several NASA and
government
> sites with advanced technical information are still up, but for how long?
I
> was able to still get over to a NASA site that lists the NASA SPACE
VEHICLE
> DESIGN CRITERIA SP-8000 series
> (http://library.msfc.nasa.gov/cgi-bin/lsp8000).  SP-8106 isn't on the
list,
> but, I don't think it ever was (the Last Revised date is Nov. 16, 2000).
>
> Regards;
> Bruce E. Watson
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 5015 invoked from network); 2 Nov 2001 13:48:49 -0000
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 2 Nov 2001 13:48:49 -0000
Received: (qmail 16885 invoked by uid 50005); 2 Nov 2001 13:48:44 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4167. . Clean. Processed in 2.57158 secs); 02 Nov 2001 13:48:44 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 2 Nov 2001 13:48:38 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id FAA07411; Fri, 2 Nov 2001 05:44:06 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 126885 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 2 Nov 2001 13:43:48          +0000
Received: from femail6.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail6.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.0.95.86]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id FAA07395 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 2 Nov 2001 05:43:48 -0800
Received: from cx814151a ([24.14.55.118]) by femail6.sdc1.sfba.home.com          (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20 201-229-121-120-20010223) with SMTP id          <20011102134347.YUJW20257.femail6.sdc1.sfba.home.com@cx814151a> for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 2 Nov 2001 05:43:47 -0800
References:  <F1176xfPTeip68V8zDv0001df4e@hotmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.3018.1300
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <009a01c163a4$4f55e460$0a01a8c0@cx814151a>
Date:         Fri, 2 Nov 2001 07:43:09 -0600
Reply-To: "John Bolene" <jbolene@HOME.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Bolene" <jbolene@HOME.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Solid loadings and Performance
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Seems to me that you are doing darn good.
You would get a bit more performance and less smoke going to a 80-82% solids
but only a few percent.
Curious if you are using a power saw to cut those grains, they look smooth?

John Bolene
Tripoli Oklahoma Prefect and webmaster
Mostly Missiles Web page -> http://members.home.com/mostlymissiles/



----- Original Message -----
From: "James Grover" <jgroverman@HOTMAIL.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Friday, November 02, 2001 2:09 AM
Subject: [AR] Solid loadings and Performance


> Currently I have some formulations that are working very well for me (I'm
a
> newbie). After reading a few threads I began to wonder how much
performance
> I was sacrificing over its workability. My formulations run about 78%
solid
> loadings, and after being pumped they "flow" rather nicely. Anything
higher
> becomes a bit difficult to work with.
>
> I guess what I'm asking is would it be worth my while to go to a higher
> solid loading formulation (say 79-80% )? Or should I just stay with what's
> working for me?
>
> I really like my current formulations because they are easy to mix/cast
and
> after being pumped, I don't have to worry about air bubbles that are
> normally associated with lower solid loadings. So far the motors I have
made
> in the I-L range seem to perform great. I assume with smaller motors the
> performance loss isn't going to be so bad, but becomes more significant
with
> the larger motors. Thanks in advance.
>
> James Grover
> TRA#6866 L3
> www.groveraerospace.com
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 17079 invoked from network); 2 Nov 2001 13:52:03 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 2 Nov 2001 13:52:03 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 29307 invoked by uid 50005); 2 Nov 2001 13:51:34 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4167. . Clean. Processed in 0.149202 secs); 02 Nov 2001 13:51:34 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 2 Nov 2001 13:51:34 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id FAA07469; Fri, 2 Nov 2001 05:50:16 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 126898 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 2 Nov 2001 13:50:15          +0000
Received: from hobbiton.shire.net (frogmorton.shire.net [204.228.145.136]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id FAA07455 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Fri, 2 Nov 2001 05:50:14 -0800
Received: from pool-64-223-150-95.man.east.verizon.net ([64.223.150.95]          helo=me-513q3sc0zun0.pengar.com) by hobbiton.shire.net with asmtp          (Exim 3.22 #6) id 15zedN-00088L-00 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 02          Nov 2001 06:45:21 -0700
X-Sender: seth@pengar.com@hobbiton.shire.net
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <5.1.0.14.0.20011102085428.0202eef0@hobbiton.shire.net>
Date:         Fri, 2 Nov 2001 08:57:06 -0500
Reply-To: "Seth Leigh" <seth@PENGAR.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Seth Leigh" <seth@PENGAR.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Solid loadings and Performance
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <F1176xfPTeip68V8zDv0001df4e@hotmail.com>

At 03:09 AM 11/2/2001, James Grover wrote:
[snip]

>I guess what I'm asking is would it be worth my while to go to a higher
>solid loading formulation (say 79-80% )? Or should I just stay with what's
>working for me?

Remember I'm more than a newbie.  I'm new to being a newbie.  But let's put
this in perspective.  You said you are at 78% solids.  You ask if it's
worth sacrificing ease of handling to go to 79-80%.  I can't think that a
2% increase in solids from what you have yields even 2% performance
increase.  So, for maybe something over 1% increase in performance, are
*you* willing to give up your ease of handling?  So, instead of your rocket
flying up to 2000 feet, it would fly up to 2020 feet.

Seth

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 18988 invoked from network); 2 Nov 2001 14:47:45 -0000
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 2 Nov 2001 14:47:45 -0000
Received: (qmail 30181 invoked by uid 50005); 2 Nov 2001 14:47:40 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4167. . Clean. Processed in 1.621843 secs); 02 Nov 2001 14:47:40 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 2 Nov 2001 14:47:36 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA07708; Fri, 2 Nov 2001 06:45:43 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 126930 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 2 Nov 2001 14:45:39          +0000
Received: from iota.aps.anl.gov (firewall-user@iotaanl.aps.anl.gov          [164.54.56.3]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA07694          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 2 Nov 2001 06:45:39 -0800
Received: by iota.aps.anl.gov; id IAA03679; Fri, 2 Nov 2001 08:45:38 -0600 (CST)
Received: from epics.aps.anl.gov(164.54.8.141) by iota.aps.anl.gov via csmap          (V6.0) id srcAAALlaWlh; Fri, 2 Nov 01 08:45:38 -0600
Received: from oxygen.aps.anl.gov (oxygen [164.54.52.4]) by epics.aps.anl.gov          (8.10.2+Sun/8.10.2) with ESMTP id fA2EjbI26897; Fri, 2 Nov 2001          08:45:37 -0600 (CST)
Received: from aps.anl.gov (kang [164.54.85.209]) by oxygen.aps.anl.gov          (8.10.2+Sun/8.10.2) with ESMTP id fA2EjbP14743; Fri, 2 Nov 2001          08:45:37 -0600 (CST)
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.76 [en] (Win95; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <01f801c15ee8$1cfdc020$0700a8c0@mkbs>            <03c701c15ef3$157f1b40$0a01a8c0@cx814151a>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3BE2B190.F5F71F87@aps.anl.gov>
Date:         Fri, 2 Nov 2001 08:45:36 -0600
Reply-To: "Cletus Scharle" <scharle@APS.ANL.GOV>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Cletus Scharle" <scharle@APS.ANL.GOV>
Organization: APS, ANL
Subject:      Re: [AR] V2 / A4
Comments: To: John Bolene <jbolene@HOME.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Are detailed block diagrams or schematics of the A4's guidance system
available anywhere?

John Bolene wrote:
>
> Tracy Dungan is a member of the OKC TRA group and does this web site.
> He has gotten quite in depth lately and has taken 2 trips to Germany so far
> to collect information.
> And I thought I was fanatical about rocketry.
>
> John Bolene
> Tripoli Oklahoma Prefect and webmaster
> Tripoli Oklahoma Web page -> http://members.home.com/tripoli-oklahoma/
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
> To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
> Sent: Saturday, October 27, 2001 7:57 AM
> Subject: [AR] V2 / A4
>
> > Very extensive V2 information.
> > Many pictures and diagrams.
> > Some excellent technical pictures  eg gyros
> > Downloadable blue-print drawings
> >
> >         http://www.v2rocket.com/ or
> >         http://www.v2rocket.com/start/makeup/design.html

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 14408 invoked from network); 2 Nov 2001 15:19:28 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 2 Nov 2001 15:19:28 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 23666 invoked by uid 50005); 2 Nov 2001 15:19:23 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4167. . Clean. Processed in 1.20294 secs); 02 Nov 2001 15:19:23 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 2 Nov 2001 15:19:19 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA07906; Fri, 2 Nov 2001 07:17:13 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 126976 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 2 Nov 2001 15:17:11          +0000
Received: from mail1.murraystate.edu (mail1.murraystate.edu [216.249.159.50])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id HAA07892 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 2 Nov 2001 07:17:10 -0800
Received: from jjcomputer.murraystate.edu (216.249.150.117) by          mail1.murraystate.edu (NPlex 5.5.031) id 3B859680001A2E5E for          AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 2 Nov 2001 09:14:36 -0600
X-Sender: terry.mccreary@mail.murraystate.edu
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <5.1.0.14.0.20011102085609.026d34e0@mail.murraystate.edu>
Date:         Fri, 2 Nov 2001 09:18:58 -0600
Reply-To: "Terry McCreary" <terry.mccreary@MURRAYSTATE.EDU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Terry McCreary" <terry.mccreary@MURRAYSTATE.EDU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Solid loadings and Performance
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <F1176xfPTeip68V8zDv0001df4e@hotmail.com>

Hi everyone!  Did ya miss me?!  :)

At 12:09 AM 11/2/01 -0800, you wrote:
>Currently I have some formulations that are working very well for me (I'm a
>newbie). After reading a few threads I began to wonder how much performance
>I was sacrificing over its workability. My formulations run about 78% solid
>loadings, and after being pumped they "flow" rather nicely. Anything higher
>becomes a bit difficult to work with.
>
>I guess what I'm asking is would it be worth my while to go to a higher
>solid loading formulation (say 79-80% )? Or should I just stay with what's
>working for me?

Hello James:

That depends on what you want from the propellant.

Higher solids loading also allows increased performance; both density and
specific impulse increase.  But...

A 78% solids propellant that is 10% Al might give Isp=242 s, d = 0.059
lb/in^3.  An 80% solids propellant, 10% Al, Isp = 246.5, d= 0.060.  For the
first propellant, a 6 grain 38mm motor might produce 820 N-s total
impulse.  For the second, the same motor at the same chamber pressure might
produce about 855 N-s.

Is the extra 35 N-s worth it?  That's up to the user.

My experience has been that a propellant is easiest to work if it's either
(a) pourable or (b) so high in solids that it doesn't sag significantly
when rolled into a ball.  Propellant of the latter type might be 82-87%
solids.  It benefits little from vacuum processing; tends to just rise up a
bit then fall back when the vacuum is released.  Such propellant is usually
more work to process (esp in small motors).

With higher solids loading the fuel content goes down and the flame can be
made "cleaner", if that is a goal.  Some workers like a smoke-free flame.

P'rfesser

Dr. Terry McCreary
Associate Professor
Department of Chemistry
Murray State University
Murray, KY  42071
270-762-6499

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 3088 invoked from network); 2 Nov 2001 16:38:34 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 2 Nov 2001 16:38:34 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 20919 invoked by uid 50005); 2 Nov 2001 16:24:34 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4165. . Clean. Processed in 0.389753 secs); 02 Nov 2001 16:24:34 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 2 Nov 2001 16:24:33 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA08181; Fri, 2 Nov 2001 08:35:15 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 126995 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 2 Nov 2001 16:35:09          +0000
Received: from fw1-bv.tek.com (fw1-bv.tek.com [192.65.40.16]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA08167 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri,          2 Nov 2001 08:35:09 -0800
Received: from fw1-bv.tek.com (root@localhost) by fw1-bv.tek.com with ESMTP id          fA2GYcI15339 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 2 Nov 2001 08:34:38          -0800 (PST)
Received: from tektronix.tek.com (tektronix.tek.com [128.181.6.43]) by          fw1-bv.tek.com with ESMTP id fA2GYc715330 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>;          Fri, 2 Nov 2001 08:34:38 -0800 (PST)
Received: from us-bv-u16 (us-bv-u16.bv.tek.com [128.181.2.45]) by          tektronix.tek.com (8.10.2+Sun/8.10.2) with SMTP id fA2GYcI22307 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 2 Nov 2001 08:34:38 -0800 (PST)
Received: FROM us-bv-m01.bv.tek.com BY us-bv-u16 ; Fri Nov 02 08:34:37 2001          -0800
Received: by us-bv-m01.bv.tek.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) id          <V88R763X>; Fri, 2 Nov 2001 08:34:37 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19)
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Message-ID:  <5832AFF5FC75D411844300508BC216B70302AB6B@us-bv-m07.bv.tek.com>
Date:         Fri, 2 Nov 2001 08:34:35 -0800
Reply-To: <john.w.lyngdal@EXGATE.TEK.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <john.w.lyngdal@EXGATE.TEK.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Solid loadings and Performance
Comments: To: jgroverman@HOTMAIL.COM
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

James,

        I started out my EX activities using 83-87% solids AP/AL/HTBP,
non-vacuum processed, hand-packed propellant and could achieve propellant
densities in the range of 91-93% of the theoretical value. The big issue I
faced was getting the batch to batch consistency I needed to produce large
motors. With a target operational pressure of 700 psi, you don't have the 4X
pressure margins in large hardware as you would in smaller motors, so
consistency and repeatability are big issues for my projects.

        Over the past year I've refined new propellant formulations that are
now in the 81-82% solids range, vacuum processed and pourable. The
propellant densities are close to 100% of the theoretical value, the
propellant burn rate dropped about 10-15% over similar non-vacuum processed
propellants. The increase in propellant density has more than offset the
reduced ISP of the lower solids formulations and the propellant mechanicals
are much better. Not having to hand pack the propellant has doubled our
daily processing capability to 40 kgs. in a single day, and eliminated the
sore shoulder syndrome associated with hand-packing propellant grains.

        John


-----Original Message-----
From: James Grover [mailto:jgroverman@HOTMAIL.COM]
Sent: Friday, November 02, 2001 12:09 AM
To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
Subject: [AR] Solid loadings and Performance


Currently I have some formulations that are working very well for me (I'm a
newbie). After reading a few threads I began to wonder how much performance
I was sacrificing over its workability. My formulations run about 78% solid
loadings, and after being pumped they "flow" rather nicely. Anything higher
becomes a bit difficult to work with.

I guess what I'm asking is would it be worth my while to go to a higher
solid loading formulation (say 79-80% )? Or should I just stay with what's
working for me?

I really like my current formulations because they are easy to mix/cast and
after being pumped, I don't have to worry about air bubbles that are
normally associated with lower solid loadings. So far the motors I have made
in the I-L range seem to perform great. I assume with smaller motors the
performance loss isn't going to be so bad, but becomes more significant with
the larger motors. Thanks in advance.

James Grover
TRA#6866 L3
www.groveraerospace.com


_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 27443 invoked from network); 3 Nov 2001 04:46:54 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 3 Nov 2001 04:46:54 -0000
Received: (qmail 31507 invoked by uid 50005); 3 Nov 2001 04:46:27 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4167. . Clean. Processed in 0.171034 secs); 03 Nov 2001 04:46:27 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 3 Nov 2001 04:46:27 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA10792; Fri, 2 Nov 2001 20:29:24 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 127132 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 3 Nov 2001 04:28:46          +0000
Received: from proxy4.ba.best.com (root@proxy4.ba.best.com [206.184.139.15]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA10776 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Fri, 2 Nov 2001 20:28:46 -0800
Received: from [10.0.0.2] (snvadslgw2poold155.snjs.uswestqwest.net          [168.103.213.155]) by proxy4.ba.best.com (8.9.3/8.9.2/best.out) with          ESMTP id UAA21602 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Fri, 2 Nov 2001 20:27:46          -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Sender:  (Unverified)
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <v04210107b80921951a42@[10.0.0.2]>
Date:         Fri, 2 Nov 2001 20:27:12 -0800
Reply-To: "bob fortune" <bob@FORTUNEPAINT.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "bob fortune" <bob@FORTUNEPAINT.COM>
Subject:      [AR] Inexpensive but accurate groove cutter?
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Hey folks,

Might anyone know of a peppy but cheap way to cut snap or o-ring
grooves in tubing?  Chucking up a 6 foot section of 4" pipe in a
lathe is beyond most amateurs, might there be a shoe or attachment of
some kind for a router that can be dialed in to take off a couple of
thousands at a whack?  Maybe an attachment for some woodworking
handtool that can be utilized?  It would sure save a lot of expense
and trips to the big machine shop in town.

Thanks


Bob

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 20067 invoked from network); 3 Nov 2001 04:55:34 -0000
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 3 Nov 2001 04:55:34 -0000
Received: (qmail 14304 invoked by uid 50005); 3 Nov 2001 04:41:29 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4165. . Clean. Processed in 0.831217 secs); 03 Nov 2001 04:41:29 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 3 Nov 2001 04:41:27 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA10871; Fri, 2 Nov 2001 20:40:11 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 127149 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 3 Nov 2001 04:40:10          +0000
Received: from mx2.comcen.com.au (mx2.comcen.com.au [203.23.236.70]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA10857 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 2 Nov 2001 20:40:09 -0800
Received: from win2pk2 (modem049.sydney.spin.net.au [202.172.122.49] (may be          forged)) by mx2.comcen.com.au (8.11.6/8.11.6) with SMTP id          fA2IeCC63645; Sat, 3 Nov 2001 05:40:13 +1100 (EST) (envelope-from          pkelly@comcen.com.au)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <JJEFLLHFFAHHMBBIHFAEKEOCCHAA.pkelly@comcen.com.au>
Date:         Sat, 3 Nov 2001 15:41:21 +1100
Reply-To: "Paul Kelly" <pkelly@COMCEN.COM.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Paul Kelly" <pkelly@COMCEN.COM.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Inexpensive but accurate groove cutter?
Comments: To: bob fortune <bob@FORTUNEPAINT.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <v04210107b80921951a42@[10.0.0.2]>

Big Vblock or pipe vice mounted on the saddle. Tool in 4 jaw chuck (or
boring head).
Can do threads that way too.  If you are gonna do a few, mount the vblock on
a 90deg angle and get it spot on center.


PK

-----Original Message-----
From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU]On
Behalf Of bob fortune
Sent: Saturday, 3 November 2001 3:27 PM
To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
Subject: [AR] Inexpensive but accurate groove cutter?


Hey folks,

Might anyone know of a peppy but cheap way to cut snap or o-ring
grooves in tubing?  Chucking up a 6 foot section of 4" pipe in a
lathe is beyond most amateurs, might there be a shoe or attachment of
some kind for a router that can be dialed in to take off a couple of
thousands at a whack?  Maybe an attachment for some woodworking
handtool that can be utilized?  It would sure save a lot of expense
and trips to the big machine shop in town.

Thanks


Bob

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 20166 invoked from network); 3 Nov 2001 04:55:37 -0000
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 3 Nov 2001 04:55:37 -0000
Received: (qmail 15031 invoked by uid 50005); 3 Nov 2001 04:55:10 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4167. . Clean. Processed in 0.153208 secs); 03 Nov 2001 04:55:10 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 3 Nov 2001 04:55:09 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA10959; Fri, 2 Nov 2001 20:50:40 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 127166 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 3 Nov 2001 04:50:38          +0000
Received: from smtprelay3.abs.adelphia.net (smtprelay.abs.adelphia.net          [64.8.20.11]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA10945 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 2 Nov 2001 20:50:37 -0800
Received: from jlgrady ([24.53.101.238]) by smtprelay3.abs.adelphia.net          (Netscape Messaging Server 4.15) with SMTP id GM7K3T03.DPK for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 2 Nov 2001 23:50:17 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook CWS, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <000001c16423$029f1ea0$0200a8c0@24.53.64.18>
Date:         Fri, 2 Nov 2001 23:50:06 -0500
Reply-To: "Jeff Grady" <jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jeff Grady" <jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Inexpensive but accurate groove cutter?
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <v04210107b80921951a42@[10.0.0.2]>

PVC or metal?

-----Original Message-----
From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@itc.uci.edu]On
Behalf Of bob fortune
Sent: Friday, November 02, 2001 11:27 PM
To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
Subject: [AR] Inexpensive but accurate groove cutter?


Hey folks,

Might anyone know of a peppy but cheap way to cut snap or o-ring
grooves in tubing?  Chucking up a 6 foot section of 4" pipe in a
lathe is beyond most amateurs, might there be a shoe or attachment of
some kind for a router that can be dialed in to take off a couple of
thousands at a whack?  Maybe an attachment for some woodworking
handtool that can be utilized?  It would sure save a lot of expense
and trips to the big machine shop in town.

Thanks


Bob

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 25458 invoked from network); 3 Nov 2001 05:21:03 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 3 Nov 2001 05:21:03 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 31373 invoked by uid 50005); 3 Nov 2001 05:06:57 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4165. . Clean. Processed in 2.499664 secs); 03 Nov 2001 05:06:57 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 3 Nov 2001 05:06:51 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA11090; Fri, 2 Nov 2001 21:18:49 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 127183 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 3 Nov 2001 05:18:47          +0000
Received: from proxy4.ba.best.com (root@proxy4.ba.best.com [206.184.139.15]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA11076 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Fri, 2 Nov 2001 21:18:46 -0800
Received: from [10.0.0.2] (snvadslgw2poold155.snjs.uswestqwest.net          [168.103.213.155]) by proxy4.ba.best.com (8.9.3/8.9.2/best.out) with          ESMTP id VAA03553 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Fri, 2 Nov 2001 21:18:44          -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Sender:  (Unverified)
References: <000001c16423$029f1ea0$0200a8c0@24.53.64.18>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <v04210109b8092e611e9b@[10.0.0.2]>
Date:         Fri, 2 Nov 2001 21:18:10 -0800
Reply-To: "bob fortune" <bob@FORTUNEPAINT.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "bob fortune" <bob@FORTUNEPAINT.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Inexpensive but accurate groove cutter?
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <000001c16423$029f1ea0$0200a8c0@24.53.64.18>

Aluminum.


>PVC or metal?
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@itc.uci.edu]On
>Behalf Of bob fortune
>Sent: Friday, November 02, 2001 11:27 PM
>To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
>Subject: [AR] Inexpensive but accurate groove cutter?

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 6078 invoked from network); 3 Nov 2001 05:38:27 -0000
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 3 Nov 2001 05:38:27 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 28067 invoked by uid 50005); 3 Nov 2001 05:38:22 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4167. . Clean. Processed in 1.054381 secs); 03 Nov 2001 05:38:22 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 3 Nov 2001 05:38:20 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA11163; Fri, 2 Nov 2001 21:29:03 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 127200 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 3 Nov 2001 05:29:01          +0000
Received: from sys32.hou.wt.net (sys32.hou.wt.net [205.230.159.32]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA11149 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 2 Nov 2001 21:29:00 -0800
Received: from localhost (216-119-138-162.ipset18.wt.net [216.119.138.162]) by          sys32.hou.wt.net (8.9.1/8.9.1) with ESMTP id XAA07873; Fri, 2 Nov          2001 23:29:07 -0600 (CST)
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="US-ASCII"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.472)
Message-ID:  <B4BE2B3E-D01B-11D5-8742-0050E43A5105@netaxs.com>
Date:         Fri, 2 Nov 2001 23:29:09 -0600
Reply-To: "Donald McCorvey" <dlm3@NETAXS.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Donald McCorvey" <dlm3@NETAXS.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Inexpensive but accurate groove cutter?
Comments: To: bob fortune <bob@FORTUNEPAINT.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <v04210109b8092e611e9b@[10.0.0.2]>

Just a wild thought, but could you modify an engine cylinder hone to
make a tool that might work ? Something along the lines of making a
profile on each cutter and including fixed stop in the profile or an
adjustable stop on the tool to control the position of the groove in the
tube. You control the depth of the cut either with the profile of the
cutter or with the number of turns you make in the cylinder.

It might require services of a machine shop to do the mods, but it seems
to me you might be able to rig one to make the groove you're looking for.

Don McCorvey

On Friday, November 2, 2001, at 11:18  PM, bob fortune wrote:

> Aluminum.
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 29562 invoked from network); 3 Nov 2001 06:00:56 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 3 Nov 2001 06:00:56 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: (qmail 1979 invoked by uid 50005); 3 Nov 2001 06:00:51 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4167. . Clean. Processed in 0.392441 secs); 03 Nov 2001 06:00:51 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 3 Nov 2001 06:00:51 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA11428; Fri, 2 Nov 2001 21:58:54 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 127217 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 3 Nov 2001 05:58:43          +0000
Received: from localhost (dmccue@localhost) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with          ESMTP id VAA11414 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 2 Nov 2001 21:58:43          -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.LNX.4.10.10111022140530.11317-100000@itc.uci.edu>
Date:         Fri, 2 Nov 2001 21:58:43 -0800
Reply-To: "David J. McCue" <dmccue@itc.uci.edu>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "David J. McCue" <dmccue@itc.uci.edu>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Inexpensive but accurate groove cutter?
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <v04210109b8092e611e9b@[10.0.0.2]>

Bob,

I think a router could do it easily. It would require the right bit and
setup, but it should not be beyond the skills of any woodworker. I have
been meaning to try this method ever since a friend suggested it.

Other aluminum machining I have done with a router suggests this is an
underused tool that many people already have. Ever since my first success,
I have been looking at aluminum as just another kind of wood and
experimenting with other woodworking techniques I know.

My other great (re)discovery is how well a diamond blade saw cuts
composites like fiberglass. What I used to dread is now an easy task. The
only problem is dust control. At least it isn't as nasty as some kinds of
wood sawdust!

-Dave Mc

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 2113 invoked from network); 3 Nov 2001 08:00:50 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 3 Nov 2001 08:00:50 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 4162 invoked by uid 50005); 3 Nov 2001 08:00:23 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4167. . Clean. Processed in 0.201683 secs); 03 Nov 2001 08:00:23 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 3 Nov 2001 08:00:22 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA11738; Fri, 2 Nov 2001 23:45:39 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 127241 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 3 Nov 2001 07:45:34          +0000
Received: from femail12.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail12.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.0.95.108]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA11723;          Fri, 2 Nov 2001 23:45:34 -0800
Received: from c1649002-a.earthlink.net ([24.20.95.67]) by          femail12.sdc1.sfba.home.com (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20          201-229-121-120-20010223) with ESMTP id          <20011103074533.KQFH17506.femail12.sdc1.sfba.home.com@c1649002-a.earthlink.net>; Fri, 2 Nov 2001 23:45:33          -0800
X-Sender: forkbomb@mail.earthlink.net
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.0.2
References: <v04210109b8092e611e9b@[10.0.0.2]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <5.0.2.1.0.20011102234406.01b5d008@mail.earthlink.net>
Date:         Fri, 2 Nov 2001 23:45:35 -0800
Reply-To: "Pierce Nichols" <forkbomb@EARTHLINK.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Pierce Nichols" <forkbomb@EARTHLINK.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Inexpensive but accurate groove cutter?
Comments: To: "David J. McCue" <dmccue@itc.uci.edu>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <Pine.LNX.4.10.10111022140530.11317-100000@itc.uci.edu>

At 09:58 PM 11/2/2001 -0800, David J. McCue wrote:
>Bob,
>
>I think a router could do it easily. It would require the right bit and
>setup, but it should not be beyond the skills of any woodworker. I have
>been meaning to try this method ever since a friend suggested it.
>
>Other aluminum machining I have done with a router suggests this is an
>underused tool that many people already have. Ever since my first success,
>I have been looking at aluminum as just another kind of wood and
>experimenting with other woodworking techniques I know.


         Would you care to elaborate? I have some ideas that would benefit
enormously from being able to work aluminum without recourse to a machine
shop...


>My other great (re)discovery is how well a diamond blade saw cuts
>composites like fiberglass. What I used to dread is now an easy task. The
>only problem is dust control. At least it isn't as nasty as some kinds of
>wood sawdust!


         What kind of saw are you using to mount that diamond blade?



Mars or Bust!
www.marssociety.com

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 24386 invoked from network); 3 Nov 2001 08:11:00 -0000
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 3 Nov 2001 08:11:00 -0000
Received: (qmail 29730 invoked by uid 50005); 3 Nov 2001 07:56:54 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4165. . Clean. Processed in 1.878231 secs); 03 Nov 2001 07:56:54 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 3 Nov 2001 07:56:50 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA11802; Fri, 2 Nov 2001 23:55:32 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 127254 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 3 Nov 2001 07:55:31          +0000
Received: from mx2.comcen.com.au (mx2.comcen.com.au [203.23.236.70]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA11788 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 2 Nov 2001 23:55:30 -0800
Received: from win2pk2 (modem049.sydney.spin.net.au [202.172.122.49] (may be          forged)) by mx2.comcen.com.au (8.11.6/8.11.6) with SMTP id          fA2LtYC66843; Sat, 3 Nov 2001 08:55:34 +1100 (EST) (envelope-from          pkelly@comcen.com.au)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <JJEFLLHFFAHHMBBIHFAECEOECHAA.pkelly@comcen.com.au>
Date:         Sat, 3 Nov 2001 18:56:45 +1100
Reply-To: "Paul Kelly" <pkelly@COMCEN.COM.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Paul Kelly" <pkelly@COMCEN.COM.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Inexpensive but accurate groove cutter?
Comments: To: Pierce Nichols <forkbomb@EARTHLINK.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <5.0.2.1.0.20011102234406.01b5d008@mail.earthlink.net>

About 2 months ago these little tile cutters appeared in hardware stores.
They look like a little bench saw, about 12" square. I bought one to cur PCB
materials. The best thing about them is that they use a wet diamond blade.
Works a treat and no dust.


Re the original post. I once made a tool consisting of a slip fitting plug
that could be rotated in the bore of a piece of Al pipe located by a
shoulder. It had a cutting tool that was advanced by a cam. The idea being
to be able to cut snap ring grooves by hand. Took ages to get it right and
even then it's a ton of work to use.
We recently got threads turned in the ends of two long lengths of pipe for
US$40. Apparently, this included some tooling up costs that we wouldn't have
to wear again.. Pretty easy to blow that much on a half assed tool that
wouldn't do as good a job.


PK



-----Original Message-----
From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU]On
Behalf Of Pierce Nichols
Sent: Saturday, 3 November 2001 6:46 PM
To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
Subject: Re: [AR] Inexpensive but accurate groove cutter?


At 09:58 PM 11/2/2001 -0800, David J. McCue wrote:
>Bob,
>
>I think a router could do it easily. It would require the right bit and
>setup, but it should not be beyond the skills of any woodworker. I have
>been meaning to try this method ever since a friend suggested it.
>
>Other aluminum machining I have done with a router suggests this is an
>underused tool that many people already have. Ever since my first success,
>I have been looking at aluminum as just another kind of wood and
>experimenting with other woodworking techniques I know.


         Would you care to elaborate? I have some ideas that would benefit
enormously from being able to work aluminum without recourse to a machine
shop...


>My other great (re)discovery is how well a diamond blade saw cuts
>composites like fiberglass. What I used to dread is now an easy task. The
>only problem is dust control. At least it isn't as nasty as some kinds of
>wood sawdust!


         What kind of saw are you using to mount that diamond blade?



Mars or Bust!
www.marssociety.com

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 9169 invoked from network); 3 Nov 2001 12:13:28 -0000
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 3 Nov 2001 12:13:28 -0000
Received: (qmail 28096 invoked by uid 50005); 3 Nov 2001 10:59:14 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4167. . Clean. Processed in 0.11795 secs); 03 Nov 2001 10:59:14 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 3 Nov 2001 10:59:13 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id EAA12663; Sat, 3 Nov 2001 04:09:01 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 127356 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 3 Nov 2001 12:08:51          +0000
Received: from mail013.syd.optusnet.com.au (mail013.syd.optusnet.com.au          [203.2.75.174]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id DAA12517          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 3 Nov 2001 03:58:50 -0800
Received: from jack (wagax3-071.dialup.optusnet.com.au [198.142.145.71]) by          mail013.syd.optusnet.com.au (8.11.1/8.11.1) with SMTP id fA3Bwld21794          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 3 Nov 2001 22:58:47 +1100
References:  <Pine.LNX.4.10.10111022140530.11317-100000@itc.uci.edu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <000d01c1645f$cf3aea20$47918ec6@jack>
Date:         Sat, 3 Nov 2001 23:05:18 +1100
Reply-To: "Jack" <jack_36@OPTUSNET.COM.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jack" <jack_36@OPTUSNET.COM.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Inexpensive but accurate groove cutter?
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

where i work we cut 16mm alum plate with a circular wood saw and blade, cuts
like butter till you get a little crooked, then you just hang on tighter.
maybe an internal fly cutter or just a peice of hss held in a small jig, 4
inches isn't a real tight spot to get into.

..take it easy..

          ..Jack..



----- Original Message -----
From: David J. McCue <dmccue@ITC.UCI.EDU>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Saturday, November 03, 2001 4:58 PM
Subject: Re: [AR] Inexpensive but accurate groove cutter?


> Bob,
>
> I think a router could do it easily. It would require the right bit and
> setup, but it should not be beyond the skills of any woodworker. I have
> been meaning to try this method ever since a friend suggested it.
>
> Other aluminum machining I have done with a router suggests this is an
> underused tool that many people already have. Ever since my first success,
> I have been looking at aluminum as just another kind of wood and
> experimenting with other woodworking techniques I know.
>
> My other great (re)discovery is how well a diamond blade saw cuts
> composites like fiberglass. What I used to dread is now an easy task. The
> only problem is dust control. At least it isn't as nasty as some kinds of
> wood sawdust!
>
> -Dave Mc

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 3386 invoked from network); 3 Nov 2001 12:23:04 -0000
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 3 Nov 2001 12:23:04 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 12755 invoked by uid 50005); 3 Nov 2001 11:08:50 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4167. . Clean. Processed in 0.738171 secs); 03 Nov 2001 11:08:50 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 3 Nov 2001 11:08:48 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id EAA12735; Sat, 3 Nov 2001 04:21:18 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 127373 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 3 Nov 2001 12:21:16          +0000
Received: from iron.carolina.net (iron.carolina.net [208.170.147.84]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id EAA12721 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Sat, 3 Nov 2001 04:21:16 -0800
Received: from ac.net (ip27-as5300-1-7lakes-nc.carolina.net [206.100.51.27]) by          iron.carolina.net (Vircom SMTPRS 5.1.195) with ESMTP id          <B0003908682@iron.carolina.net>; Sat, 3 Nov 2001 07:38:59 -0500
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en]C-CCK-MCD EBM-Compaq  (Win95; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <Pine.LNX.4.10.10111022140530.11317-100000@itc.uci.edu>            <000d01c1645f$cf3aea20$47918ec6@jack>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3BE3E137.B343698F@ac.net>
Date:         Sat, 3 Nov 2001 07:21:11 -0500
Reply-To: "Bill Shamblin" <wshamblin@AC.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Bill Shamblin" <wshamblin@AC.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Inexpensive but accurate groove cutter?
Comments: To: Jack <jack_36@OPTUSNET.COM.AU>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Just be sure and wear a face shield, Those chips are HOT. '-}
The more teeth (preferably carbide) on the blade, the better.
Regs! Bill KU4QB TRA#07455 L2

Jack wrote:

> where i work we cut 16mm alum plate with a circular wood saw and blade, cuts
> like butter till you get a little crooked, then you just hang on tighter.
> maybe an internal fly cutter or just a peice of hss held in a small jig, 4
> inches isn't a real tight spot to get into.
>
> ..take it easy..
>
>           ..Jack..
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: David J. McCue <dmccue@ITC.UCI.EDU>
> To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
> Sent: Saturday, November 03, 2001 4:58 PM
> Subject: Re: [AR] Inexpensive but accurate groove cutter?
>
> > Bob,
> >
> > I think a router could do it easily. It would require the right bit and
> > setup, but it should not be beyond the skills of any woodworker. I have
> > been meaning to try this method ever since a friend suggested it.
> >
> > Other aluminum machining I have done with a router suggests this is an
> > underused tool that many people already have. Ever since my first success,
> > I have been looking at aluminum as just another kind of wood and
> > experimenting with other woodworking techniques I know.
> >
> > My other great (re)discovery is how well a diamond blade saw cuts
> > composites like fiberglass. What I used to dread is now an easy task. The
> > only problem is dust control. At least it isn't as nasty as some kinds of
> > wood sawdust!
> >
> > -Dave Mc

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 28696 invoked from network); 3 Nov 2001 13:17:03 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 3 Nov 2001 13:17:03 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 7284 invoked by uid 50005); 3 Nov 2001 13:16:36 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4167. . Clean. Processed in 0.182676 secs); 03 Nov 2001 13:16:36 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 3 Nov 2001 13:16:36 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id FAA12909; Sat, 3 Nov 2001 05:15:07 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 127395 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 3 Nov 2001 13:15:04          +0000
Received: from mail1.murraystate.edu (mail1.murraystate.edu [216.249.159.50])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id FAA12895 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 3 Nov 2001 05:15:03 -0800
Received: from jjcomputer.murraystate.edu (216.249.158.65) by          mail1.murraystate.edu (NPlex 5.5.031) id 3B859680001A8047 for          AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 3 Nov 2001 07:12:29 -0600
X-Sender: terry.mccreary@mail.murraystate.edu
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
References: <v04210109b8092e611e9b@[10.0.0.2]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <5.1.0.14.0.20011103052820.0251c1a0@mail.murraystate.edu>
Date:         Sat, 3 Nov 2001 07:16:51 -0600
Reply-To: "Terry McCreary" <terry.mccreary@MURRAYSTATE.EDU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Terry McCreary" <terry.mccreary@MURRAYSTATE.EDU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Inexpensive but accurate groove cutter?
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <Pine.LNX.4.10.10111022140530.11317-100000@itc.uci.edu>

At 09:58 PM 11/2/01 -0800, you wrote:
>Bob,
>
>I think a router could do it easily. It would require the right bit and
>setup, but it should not be beyond the skills of any woodworker. I have
>been meaning to try this method ever since a friend suggested it.

"Routing aluminum" has been a topic several times on
rec.crafts.metalworking.  A Google search might be useful.  If memory
serves "noise" is one concern.  When members of a metalworking group think
that noise is a problem in some activity, that concern might be justified...

Never done this, so this is pure brain-in-freewheel-mode discussion:  I
envision a turned wooden flange fastened to the outside end of the pipe,
flush with the end and clamped in a rather large vise, as the router
table.  Instead of a vise one might dig a hole large enough to hold the
pipe at the appropriate level, and backfill with dirt and sand (might cut
down on vibration and noise, I dunno).    A router bit (half-inch shank,
not quarter-inch!) ground to the appropriate profile, with one of those
ball bearing rollers to obtain the appropriate depth of cut.

Another thought:  Some sort of fixture (wooden ring) that slips on the
outside of the pipe and is bolted to the router.  Rotate fixture around to
cut groove.  I see that feeding the router might be a problem here.

I'd want to get some opinions about the "appropriate profile" for the bit,
from someone with experience.

The eye protection goes on first, then the earplug protectors, then the
earmuff-type protectors...

For those who didn't get it the first time; this is something I've never
done and am not recommending.

P'rfesser

Dr. Terry McCreary
Associate Professor
Department of Chemistry
Murray State University
Murray, KY  42071
270-762-6499

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 166 invoked from network); 3 Nov 2001 14:19:56 -0000
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 3 Nov 2001 14:19:56 -0000
Received: (qmail 22974 invoked by uid 50005); 3 Nov 2001 14:19:30 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4167. . Clean. Processed in 0.168848 secs); 03 Nov 2001 14:19:30 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 3 Nov 2001 14:19:29 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA13477; Sat, 3 Nov 2001 06:17:55 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 127425 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 3 Nov 2001 14:17:52          +0000
Received: from mail.argotech.net ([209.76.235.6]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7)          with ESMTP id GAA13463 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 3 Nov 2001          06:17:51 -0800
Received: from Wayne ([209.76.232.83]) by mail.argotech.net (Post.Office MTA          v3.5.3 release 223 ID# 0-55624U2500L250S0V35) with SMTP id net for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 3 Nov 2001 06:18:24 -0800
References: <v04210109b8092e611e9b@[10.0.0.2]>             <5.1.0.14.0.20011103052820.0251c1a0@mail.murraystate.edu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4807.1700
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <002801c16472$c279dc20$6701a8c0@Argotech.net>
Date:         Sat, 3 Nov 2001 06:20:59 -0800
Reply-To: "Wayne Mrazek" <wmrazek@earthlink.net>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Wayne Mrazek" <wmrazek@earthlink.net>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Inexpensive but accurate groove cutter?
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Although I have not cut O-ring grooves, I have operated a side business
using wood working equipment on non-ferrous metals and plastics for several
years, and have created a lot of aluminum chips.  I don't think noise is any
more of a problem with aluminum than it is for hard wood, you need hearing
protection either way.  Tolerances of .005-.007 can be held with hand fed
material.  O-ring cut tolerance could be improved to better than that by
using a custom ball bearing router bit.  I would think possibly even the
groove exit chamfer could be built into the router bit.  The router could be
moved over fixtured tubing, or the tubing could be held in a carrier and fed
into a fixed table router.

Wayne
----- Original Message -----
From: "Terry McCreary" <terry.mccreary@MURRAYSTATE.EDU>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Saturday, November 03, 2001 5:16 AM
Subject: Re: [AR] Inexpensive but accurate groove cutter?


> At 09:58 PM 11/2/01 -0800, you wrote:
> >Bob,
> >
> >I think a router could do it easily. It would require the right bit and
> >setup, but it should not be beyond the skills of any woodworker. I have
> >been meaning to try this method ever since a friend suggested it.
>
> "Routing aluminum" has been a topic several times on
> rec.crafts.metalworking.  A Google search might be useful.  If memory
> serves "noise" is one concern.  When members of a metalworking group think
> that noise is a problem in some activity, that concern might be
justified...
>
> Never done this, so this is pure brain-in-freewheel-mode discussion:  I
> envision a turned wooden flange fastened to the outside end of the pipe,
> flush with the end and clamped in a rather large vise, as the router
> table.  Instead of a vise one might dig a hole large enough to hold the
> pipe at the appropriate level, and backfill with dirt and sand (might cut
> down on vibration and noise, I dunno).    A router bit (half-inch shank,
> not quarter-inch!) ground to the appropriate profile, with one of those
> ball bearing rollers to obtain the appropriate depth of cut.
>
> Another thought:  Some sort of fixture (wooden ring) that slips on the
> outside of the pipe and is bolted to the router.  Rotate fixture around to
> cut groove.  I see that feeding the router might be a problem here.
>
> I'd want to get some opinions about the "appropriate profile" for the bit,
> from someone with experience.
>
> The eye protection goes on first, then the earplug protectors, then the
> earmuff-type protectors...
>
> For those who didn't get it the first time; this is something I've never
> done and am not recommending.
>
> P'rfesser
>
> Dr. Terry McCreary
> Associate Professor
> Department of Chemistry
> Murray State University
> Murray, KY  42071
> 270-762-6499

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 21834 invoked from network); 3 Nov 2001 15:27:15 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 3 Nov 2001 15:27:15 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 12397 invoked by uid 50005); 3 Nov 2001 15:26:49 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4167. . Clean. Processed in 0.199748 secs); 03 Nov 2001 15:26:49 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 3 Nov 2001 15:26:49 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA13675; Sat, 3 Nov 2001 07:25:04 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 127438 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 3 Nov 2001 15:24:57          +0000
Received: from proxy4.ba.best.com (root@proxy4.ba.best.com [206.184.139.15]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA13657 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Sat, 3 Nov 2001 07:24:56 -0800
Received: from [10.0.0.2] (snvadslgw2poold155.snjs.uswestqwest.net          [168.103.213.155]) by proxy4.ba.best.com (8.9.3/8.9.2/best.out) with          ESMTP id HAA05158 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Sat, 3 Nov 2001 07:24:45          -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Sender:  (Unverified)
References: <v04210109b8092e611e9b@[10.0.0.2]>            <5.1.0.14.0.20011103052820.0251c1a0@mail.murraystate.edu>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <v04210100b809b6847081@[10.0.0.2]>
Date:         Sat, 3 Nov 2001 07:23:50 -0800
Reply-To: "bob fortune" <bob@FORTUNEPAINT.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "bob fortune" <bob@FORTUNEPAINT.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Inexpensive but accurate groove cutter?
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <5.1.0.14.0.20011103052820.0251c1a0@mail.murraystate.edu>

Hi Terry,

I'm with Jack, it's pretty easy to cut aluminum with a conventional
wood tool but it's creepy  - especially when the blade takes too big
a bite and the work (or tool) jumps.  Plus it's noisy. Add a router,
which is already noisy to begin with, and it's going to be
cacophonous.  But I can't imagine another handtool that would do the
job except for a biscuit joiner maybe.

What I was imagining was a phenolic shoe for the router, because its
fairly easy to cut and is dimensionally stable, with some kind of
roller bearing arrangement to keep things located.  I think the depth
of cut into the sidewall could be managed by cranking the bearings in
or out with screws.  A screw always has a pitch to it, like 32
threads per inch, so a full one full turn would give you 1/32 of an
inch or .031.  Half a turn would give .015.  Full, half and 1/4 turns
are pretty easy to keep track of.  The router could run around the
lip of the pipe like a tubing cutter runs around the outside of the
tube it's cutting.

Bob


>Terry wrote:
>"Routing aluminum" has been a topic several times on
>rec.crafts.metalworking.  A Google search might be useful.  If memory
>serves "noise" is one concern.  When members of a metalworking group think
>that noise is a problem in some activity, that concern might be justified...
>
>Never done this, so this is pure brain-in-freewheel-mode discussion:  I
>envision a turned wooden flange fastened to the outside end of the pipe,
>flush with the end and clamped in a rather large vise, as the router
>table.  Instead of a vise one might dig a hole large enough to hold the
>pipe at the appropriate level, and backfill with dirt and sand (might cut
>down on vibration and noise, I dunno).    A router bit (half-inch shank,
>not quarter-inch!) ground to the appropriate profile, with one of those
>ball bearing rollers to obtain the appropriate depth of cut.
>
>Another thought:  Some sort of fixture (wooden ring) that slips on the
>outside of the pipe and is bolted to the router.  Rotate fixture around to
>cut groove.  I see that feeding the router might be a problem here.
>
>I'd want to get some opinions about the "appropriate profile" for the bit,
>from someone with experience.
>
>The eye protection goes on first, then the earplug protectors, then the
>earmuff-type protectors...
>
>For those who didn't get it the first time; this is something I've never
>done and am not recommending.
>
>P'rfesser
>
>Dr. Terry McCreary
>Associate Professor
>Department of Chemistry
>Murray State University
>Murray, KY  42071
>270-762-6499

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 26371 invoked from network); 3 Nov 2001 15:49:13 -0000
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 3 Nov 2001 15:49:13 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 27127 invoked by uid 50005); 3 Nov 2001 14:34:56 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4167. . Clean. Processed in 2.217206 secs); 03 Nov 2001 14:34:56 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 3 Nov 2001 14:34:51 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA13772; Sat, 3 Nov 2001 07:47:23 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 127451 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 3 Nov 2001 15:47:21          +0000
Received: from smtp004pub.verizon.net (smtp004pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.183])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA13735 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 3 Nov 2001 07:37:20 -0800
Received: from gte.net (1Cust155.tnt6.santa-monica.ca.da.uu.net          [63.17.154.155]) by smtp004pub.verizon.net  with ESMTP ; id          fA3Fa6n08243 Sat, 3 Nov 2001 09:36:06 -0600 (CST)
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.5 [en] (Win98; I)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <v04210107b80921951a42@[10.0.0.2]>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3BE40E8B.9E11A364@gte.net>
Date:         Sat, 3 Nov 2001 07:34:35 -0800
Reply-To: "Greg Coleman" <g.coleman@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Greg Coleman" <g.coleman@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Inexpensive but accurate groove cutter?
Comments: To: bob fortune <bob@FORTUNEPAINT.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

There is a tool for reaming the ridge off a warn cylinder bore that might be
adapted to this purpose. I don't have one to look at now, but the ones I have
used had a cutting tool with a feed screw. If the cutting tool was ground to the
correct width, it might cut a pretty nice groove. The tool is designed to adjust
to a range of bore sizes and center with little trouble.

Greg Coleman

bob fortune wrote:

> Hey folks,
>
> Might anyone know of a peppy but cheap way to cut snap or o-ring
> grooves in tubing?  Chucking up a 6 foot section of 4" pipe in a
> lathe is beyond most amateurs, might there be a shoe or attachment of
> some kind for a router that can be dialed in to take off a couple of
> thousands at a whack?  Maybe an attachment for some woodworking
> handtool that can be utilized?  It would sure save a lot of expense
> and trips to the big machine shop in town.
>
> Thanks
>
> Bob

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 25439 invoked from network); 3 Nov 2001 18:44:27 -0000
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 3 Nov 2001 18:44:27 -0000
Received: (qmail 16556 invoked by uid 50005); 3 Nov 2001 18:44:22 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4167. . Clean. Processed in 1.960979 secs); 03 Nov 2001 18:44:22 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 3 Nov 2001 18:44:18 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA14330; Sat, 3 Nov 2001 10:37:01 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 127509 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 3 Nov 2001 18:36:54          +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (oe37.law12.hotmail.com [64.4.18.94]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA14316 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat,          3 Nov 2001 10:36:54 -0800
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Sat,          3 Nov 2001 10:36:20 -0800
X-Originating-IP: [24.92.128.69]
References:  <Pine.LNX.4.10.10111022140530.11317-100000@itc.uci.edu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 03 Nov 2001 18:36:20.0181 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[6E51C850:01C16496]
Message-ID:  <OE37qiDSIUmz6XXQTu70001bcef@hotmail.com>
Date:         Sat, 3 Nov 2001 12:35:04 -0600
Reply-To: "Mark Kruep" <mkruep@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Mark Kruep" <mkruep@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Inexpensive but accurate groove cutter?
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

OK, I have an idea. Make a 2 piece "bulkhead" out of aluminum that fits into
the tube with as tight of tolerances as you can get. Machine/router a groove
on the end of one bulkhead. Drill holes axially through the bulkheads so
that 2 long bolts can be used to sandwich these 2 bulkheads together. In
that groove you place a tool steel or carbide cutter. In the center, you
have a cam lobe that can be rotated from the end of the bulkhead so as to
index the cutter.

 Place this whole assembly into the casing (which you will have measured and
figured out where it needs to sit) and attach it to a drill or router and
apply copious amounts of cutting oil to the bulkhead and tube (before and
during installation). Lock down the whole assembly rock solid so nothing can
walk or move. Turn the drill/router on after indexing the cutter a few
thousandths. Use a moderate speed and you should get a nice boundary layer
of oil flowing between the bulkhead and tube and the hydrodynamic forces
should keep the spacing fairly accurate and continuous minus a little
eccentricity from the cutter. You'll also need to kind of neck down the
bulkheads (i.e. smaller diameter) at the attachment point (the middle where
the cutter is) to account for the chips created.

It would be slow and tedious since you'd have to stop often enough to remove
chips and index the cutter a couple thousandths, but I believe that would
work. Snap ring grooves in rocket motors are not held to very high accuracy
anyway, so a few thousandths one way or another really wouldn't matter, and
if you were off a small amount, just adjust the liner length to make up the
difference. Yeah it might cost a bit for the initial bulkhead machining but
it should be useable for a long time if used properly. Of course this might
be a lot more difficult in practice than in theory too. My 2 cents.

Mark


----- Original Message -----
From: "David J. McCue" <dmccue@itc.uci.edu>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Friday, November 02, 2001 11:58 PM
Subject: Re: [AR] Inexpensive but accurate groove cutter?


> Bob,
>
> I think a router could do it easily. It would require the right bit and
> setup, but it should not be beyond the skills of any woodworker. I have
> been meaning to try this method ever since a friend suggested it.
>
> Other aluminum machining I have done with a router suggests this is an
> underused tool that many people already have. Ever since my first success,
> I have been looking at aluminum as just another kind of wood and
> experimenting with other woodworking techniques I know.
>
> My other great (re)discovery is how well a diamond blade saw cuts
> composites like fiberglass. What I used to dread is now an easy task. The
> only problem is dust control. At least it isn't as nasty as some kinds of
> wood sawdust!
>
> -Dave Mc
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 18815 invoked from network); 3 Nov 2001 20:29:03 -0000
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 3 Nov 2001 20:29:03 -0000
Received: (qmail 326 invoked by uid 50005); 3 Nov 2001 20:14:53 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4165. . Clean. Processed in 0.422296 secs); 03 Nov 2001 20:14:53 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 3 Nov 2001 20:14:52 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA14666; Sat, 3 Nov 2001 12:27:23 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 127545 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 3 Nov 2001 20:27:18          +0000
Received: from corlabs (24-216-244-100.hsacorp.net [24.216.244.100]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA14652 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Sat, 3 Nov 2001 12:27:17 -0800
Received: from [24.216.244.164] by corlabs (ArGoSoft Mail Server Pro for          WinNT/2000, Version 1.62 (1.6.2.1)); Sat, 3 Nov 2001 15:02:59 -0600
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook CWS, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <000601c164a7$71324340$0200a8c0@charter.net>
Date:         Sat, 3 Nov 2001 14:38:05 -0600
Reply-To: "Carl A. Blood" <cablood@CORLABS.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Carl A. Blood" <cablood@CORLABS.COM>
Subject:      [AR] site test
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Can any one get on http://www.arocket.net ?

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 19910 invoked from network); 3 Nov 2001 20:53:31 -0000
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 3 Nov 2001 20:53:31 -0000
Received: (qmail 21116 invoked by uid 50005); 3 Nov 2001 20:53:06 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4167. . Clean. Processed in 0.264746 secs); 03 Nov 2001 20:53:06 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 3 Nov 2001 20:53:05 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA14753; Sat, 3 Nov 2001 12:51:48 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 127557 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 3 Nov 2001 20:51:46          +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (oe76.law4.hotmail.com [216.33.148.172]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA14739 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 3 Nov 2001 12:51:46 -0800
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Sat,          3 Nov 2001 12:51:15 -0800
X-Originating-IP: [130.235.245.76]
References:  <000601c164a7$71324340$0200a8c0@charter.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 03 Nov 2001 20:51:15.0937 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[47C41D10:01C164A9]
Message-ID:  <OE76UfusjV4tpez1z8c00007ac1@hotmail.com>
Date:         Sat, 3 Nov 2001 21:50:02 -0000
Reply-To: "Carsten Glans" <cag@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Carsten Glans" <cag@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] site test
Comments: To: "Carl A. Blood" <cablood@CORLABS.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Hi!

Nope, the dns name does not seam to exist...

ping www.arocket.net
Unknown host www.arocket.net.


Best regards

Carsten Glans
http://www.min-sajt.com/cag

----- Original Message -----
From: "Carl A. Blood" <cablood@CORLABS.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Saturday, November 03, 2001 8:38 PM
Subject: [AR] site test


> Can any one get on http://www.arocket.net ?
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 29620 invoked from network); 3 Nov 2001 20:57:39 -0000
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 3 Nov 2001 20:57:39 -0000
Received: (qmail 13032 invoked by uid 50005); 3 Nov 2001 19:43:22 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4167. . Clean. Processed in 1.589202 secs); 03 Nov 2001 19:43:22 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 3 Nov 2001 19:43:18 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA14790; Sat, 3 Nov 2001 12:55:36 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 127564 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 3 Nov 2001 20:55:35          +0000
Received: from veggie.isd.net (veggie.isd.net [208.153.200.21]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA14776 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat,          3 Nov 2001 12:55:34 -0800
Received: from bb1400 (DSL-2-115.isd.net [198.144.6.115]) by veggie.isd.net          (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id OAA30099; Sat, 3 Nov 2001 14:55:26 -0600
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook, Build 10.0.2627
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <002401c164a9$bf7ee6a0$6401a8c0@bb1400>
Date:         Sat, 3 Nov 2001 14:54:06 -0600
Reply-To: "Bennett Benson" <Bennett.Benson@ISD.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Bennett Benson" <Bennett.Benson@ISD.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] site test
Comments: To: "Carl A. Blood" <cablood@CORLABS.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <000601c164a7$71324340$0200a8c0@charter.net>

I can't.

-----Original Message-----
From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU] On
Behalf Of Carl A. Blood
Sent: Saturday, November 03, 2001 2:38 PM
To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
Subject: [AR] site test


Can any one get on http://www.arocket.net ?

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 5304 invoked from network); 3 Nov 2001 20:59:56 -0000
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 3 Nov 2001 20:59:56 -0000
Received: (qmail 31611 invoked by uid 50005); 3 Nov 2001 20:59:30 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4167. . Clean. Processed in 0.166369 secs); 03 Nov 2001 20:59:30 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 3 Nov 2001 20:59:30 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA14831; Sat, 3 Nov 2001 12:57:32 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 127573 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 3 Nov 2001 20:57:15          +0000
Received: from corlabs (24-216-244-100.hsacorp.net [24.216.244.100]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA14812 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Sat, 3 Nov 2001 12:57:14 -0800
Received: from [24.216.244.164] by corlabs (ArGoSoft Mail Server Pro for          WinNT/2000, Version 1.62 (1.6.2.1)); Sat, 3 Nov 2001 15:32:55 -0600
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook CWS, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <000c01c164ab$a026b100$0200a8c0@charter.net>
Date:         Sat, 3 Nov 2001 15:08:00 -0600
Reply-To: "Carl A. Blood" <cablood@CORLABS.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Carl A. Blood" <cablood@CORLABS.COM>
Subject:      [AR] Site
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

All,

The site was suspiciously expired by Network Solutions on 9/11/2001 and Ray
will be checking into this as soon as he can.

Carl

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 7023 invoked from network); 3 Nov 2001 23:10:07 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 3 Nov 2001 23:10:07 -0000
Received: (qmail 29763 invoked by uid 50005); 3 Nov 2001 23:10:02 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4167. . Clean. Processed in 0.980861 secs); 03 Nov 2001 23:10:02 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 3 Nov 2001 23:10:00 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA15942; Sat, 3 Nov 2001 15:07:23 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 127623 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 3 Nov 2001 23:07:13          +0000
Received: from localhost (rcalkins@localhost) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with          ESMTP id PAA15927; Sat, 3 Nov 2001 15:07:09 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.LNX.4.10.10111031506030.14546-100000@itc.uci.edu>
Date:         Sat, 3 Nov 2001 15:07:09 -0800
Reply-To: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
Subject:      Re: [AR] site test
Comments: To: "Carl A. Blood" <cablood@CORLABS.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <000601c164a7$71324340$0200a8c0@charter.net>

Untill the DNS issue is straightened out, try one of the mirrors:
http://arocket.mid-south.net
http://arocket.itc.uci.edu


Ray

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 425 invoked from network); 4 Nov 2001 00:17:22 -0000
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 4 Nov 2001 00:17:22 -0000
Received: (qmail 15994 invoked by uid 50005); 4 Nov 2001 00:17:17 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4167. . Clean. Processed in 0.103484 secs); 04 Nov 2001 00:17:17 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 4 Nov 2001 00:17:17 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA16183; Sat, 3 Nov 2001 16:14:33 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 127658 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 4 Nov 2001 00:14:23          +0000
Received: from mailhost0.trib.com (mailhost0.trib.com [63.229.150.3]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA16169 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Sat, 3 Nov 2001 16:14:23 -0800
Received: from mail.trib.com (mail.trib.com [12.10.158.17]) by          mailhost0.trib.com (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id fA40DoC91391; Sat, 3          Nov 2001 17:13:50 -0700 (MST) (envelope-from          jwckman@space-rockets.com)
Received: from [63.229.150.79] (HELO hppav) by mail.trib.com (CommuniGate Pro          SMTP 3.4.6) with SMTP id 55901383; Sat, 03 Nov 2001 17:13:49 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <NKEHJAOOKBPGIKOOPDEFOECACDAA.jwckman@space-rockets.com>
Date:         Sat, 3 Nov 2001 17:12:49 -0700
Reply-To: "John Wickman" <jwckman@SPACE-ROCKETS.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Wickman" <jwckman@SPACE-ROCKETS.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Inexpensive but accurate groove cutter?
Comments: To: bob fortune <bob@fortunepaint.com>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <v04210107b80921951a42@[10.0.0.2]>

Bob,

I don't know of a way to do it yourself, but you may want to consider an
alternative method of holding in a bulkhead or nozzle.  I have used a
retaining ring that is bolted to the chamber.   You do not have to cut any
grooves in the tube.   The ring slides behind the nozzle and bolts to the
chamber.   Seal the nozzle with o-rings in the nozzle piece.  It is a lot
easier to cut o-ring grooves in that piece with a smaller lathe.   I have
used this on small and big motors with success.   For a 4" pipe, you could
machine the ring or maybe find another piece of pipe that just fit inside
the 4" pipe.  Cut a piece off that smaller pipe to make the ring.   For
larger motors with 12" ID and up, I have had a piece of aluminum bar stock
rolled into a ring.   One word of caution is to make the bolt holes smaller
than the o-ring diameter or else it can cause problems when the ring slides
past the holes.

If you go to  www.space-rockets.com/s1launch.html there is a picture of one
end of the motor with the ring and bolts in place.

John Wickman


-----Original Message-----
From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU]On
Behalf Of bob fortune
Sent: Friday, November 02, 2001 9:27 PM
To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
Subject: [AR] Inexpensive but accurate groove cutter?


Hey folks,

Might anyone know of a peppy but cheap way to cut snap or o-ring
grooves in tubing?  Chucking up a 6 foot section of 4" pipe in a
lathe is beyond most amateurs, might there be a shoe or attachment of
some kind for a router that can be dialed in to take off a couple of
thousands at a whack?  Maybe an attachment for some woodworking
handtool that can be utilized?  It would sure save a lot of expense
and trips to the big machine shop in town.

Thanks


Bob

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 19505 invoked from network); 4 Nov 2001 08:59:41 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 4 Nov 2001 08:59:41 -0000
Received: (qmail 12086 invoked by uid 50005); 4 Nov 2001 07:45:20 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4167. . Clean. Processed in 1.061947 secs); 04 Nov 2001 07:45:20 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 4 Nov 2001 07:45:18 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA18263; Sun, 4 Nov 2001 00:57:04 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 127766 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 4 Nov 2001 08:56:31          +0000
Received: from wrench.toolcity.net (root@wrench.toolcity.net [208.0.188.2]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA18249 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 4 Nov 2001 00:56:30 -0800
Received: from [208.22.189.30]          (dap-208-22-189-30.meadville-tnt-0.pa.toolcity.net [208.22.189.30])          by wrench.toolcity.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id DAA05521; Sun, 4          Nov 2001 03:56:24 -0500 (EST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <v01510100b80ac061b400@[208.22.189.22]>
Date:         Sun, 4 Nov 2001 03:58:55 -0600
Reply-To: "al bradley" <abradley@TOOLCITY.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "al bradley" <abradley@TOOLCITY.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] 2[AR] Inexpensive but accurate groove cutter?
Comments: To: Mark Kruep <mkruep@HOTMAIL.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Since I have been able to cast workable "pistons" for pressed candy-motors
from resins it doesn't seem to far out to me to be able to cast a
slow-rotating tool that will carry an adjustable cutting bit.

al bradley
----------------

>OK, I have an idea. Make a 2 piece "bulkhead" out of aluminum that fits into
>the tube with as tight of tolerances as you can get. Machine/router a groove
>on the end of one bulkhead. Drill holes axially through the bulkheads so
>that 2 long bolts can be used to sandwich these 2 bulkheads together. In
>that groove you place a tool steel or carbide cutter. In the center, you
>have a cam lobe that can be rotated from the end of the bulkhead so as to
>index the cutter.
>
> Place this whole assembly into the casing (which you will have measured and
>figured out where it needs to sit) and attach it to a drill or router and
>apply copious amounts of cutting oil to the bulkhead and tube (before and
>during installation). Lock down the whole assembly rock solid so nothing can
>walk or move. Turn the drill/router on after indexing the cutter a few
>thousandths. Use a moderate speed and you should get a nice boundary layer
>of oil flowing between the bulkhead and tube and the hydrodynamic forces
>should keep the spacing fairly accurate and continuous minus a little
>eccentricity from the cutter. You'll also need to kind of neck down the
>bulkheads (i.e. smaller diameter) at the attachment point (the middle where
>the cutter is) to account for the chips created.
>
>It would be slow and tedious since you'd have to stop often enough to remove
>chips and index the cutter a couple thousandths, but I believe that would
>work. Snap ring grooves in rocket motors are not held to very high accuracy
>anyway, so a few thousandths one way or another really wouldn't matter, and
>if you were off a small amount, just adjust the liner length to make up the
>difference. Yeah it might cost a bit for the initial bulkhead machining but
>it should be useable for a long time if used properly. Of course this might
>be a lot more difficult in practice than in theory too. My 2 cents.
>
>Mark
>
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "David J. McCue" <dmccue@itc.uci.edu>
>To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
>Sent: Friday, November 02, 2001 11:58 PM
>Subject: Re: [AR] Inexpensive but accurate groove cutter?
>
>
>> Bob,
>>
>> I think a router could do it easily. It would require the right bit and
>> setup, but it should not be beyond the skills of any woodworker. I have
>> been meaning to try this method ever since a friend suggested it.
>>
>> Other aluminum machining I have done with a router suggests this is an
>> underused tool that many people already have. Ever since my first success,
>> I have been looking at aluminum as just another kind of wood and
>> experimenting with other woodworking techniques I know.
>>
>> My other great (re)discovery is how well a diamond blade saw cuts
>> composites like fiberglass. What I used to dread is now an easy task. The
>> only problem is dust control. At least it isn't as nasty as some kinds of
>> wood sawdust!
>>
>> -Dave Mc
>>

------------------------------------------------------------------
Can you live Life with this?: "Unless there is a law, an agreement, or a
long-standing custom, No one `Deserves' Anything -- Either Good or Bad!"

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 1193 invoked from network); 4 Nov 2001 15:18:43 -0000
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 4 Nov 2001 15:18:43 -0000
Received: (qmail 6775 invoked by uid 50005); 4 Nov 2001 15:18:38 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4167. . Clean. Processed in 0.69607 secs); 04 Nov 2001 15:18:38 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 4 Nov 2001 15:18:37 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA19338; Sun, 4 Nov 2001 07:03:30 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 127798 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 4 Nov 2001 15:03:12          +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (oe25.law7.hotmail.com [216.33.236.245]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA19322 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 4 Nov 2001 07:03:12 -0800
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Sun,          4 Nov 2001 07:02:42 -0800
X-Originating-IP: [216.202.170.84]
References:  <NKEHJAOOKBPGIKOOPDEFOECACDAA.jwckman@space-rockets.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 04 Nov 2001 15:02:42.0310 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[C0AFA260:01C16541]
Message-ID:  <OE25DTgnzmDxddiBj5k0000c155@hotmail.com>
Date:         Sat, 3 Nov 2001 20:38:23 -0800
Reply-To: "Kevin Fisher" <fearfactor18@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Kevin Fisher" <fearfactor18@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      [AR] Transmitter/Receiver for FCP M-2
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Hi guys,

    I remember hearing that the Olsen FCP M-2 could be set up with a
transmitter and receiver to gain real time telemetry.  If this is true, how
would I go about building or purchasing a device that would accomplish this.
Thanks, Kevin Fisher


Kevin Fisher
SCARS
http://scarsociety.homestead.com

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 21693 invoked from network); 4 Nov 2001 18:30:46 -0000
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 4 Nov 2001 18:30:46 -0000
Received: (qmail 24480 invoked by uid 50005); 4 Nov 2001 18:30:41 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4167. . Clean. Processed in 0.241709 secs); 04 Nov 2001 18:30:41 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 4 Nov 2001 18:30:40 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA20043; Sun, 4 Nov 2001 10:14:54 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 127830 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 4 Nov 2001 18:14:40          +0000
Received: from falcon.prod.itd.earthlink.net (falcon.mail.pas.earthlink.net          [207.217.120.74]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA20028          for <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Sun, 4 Nov 2001 10:14:40 -0800
Received: from 1cust36.tnt1.holman.wi.da.uu.net ([63.20.200.36] helo=scottje)          by falcon.prod.itd.earthlink.net with smtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id          160Rn5-0005d5-00 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 04 Nov 2001 10:14:39          -0800
References:  <NKEHJAOOKBPGIKOOPDEFOECACDAA.jwckman@space-rockets.com>              <OE25DTgnzmDxddiBj5k0000c155@hotmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <000a01c1655c$739621a0$f072fea9@scottje>
Date:         Sun, 4 Nov 2001 12:13:47 -0600
Reply-To: "Scott & Jeanette" <frazer2001@EARTHLINK.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Scott & Jeanette" <frazer2001@EARTHLINK.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Transmitter/Receiver for FCP M-2
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Contact Scott at : http://www.olsenae.com/
He will point you in the right direction


Scott F

> Hi guys,
>
>     I remember hearing that the Olsen FCP M-2 could be set up with a
> transmitter and receiver to gain real time telemetry.  If this is true,
how
> would I go about building or purchasing a device that would accomplish
this.
> Thanks, Kevin Fisher
>
>
> Kevin Fisher
> SCARS
> http://scarsociety.homestead.com

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 24114 invoked from network); 4 Nov 2001 19:43:22 -0000
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 4 Nov 2001 19:43:22 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 9655 invoked by uid 50005); 4 Nov 2001 19:29:04 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4165. . Clean. Processed in 1.900503 secs); 04 Nov 2001 19:29:04 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 4 Nov 2001 19:29:01 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA20263; Sun, 4 Nov 2001 11:23:05 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 127858 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 4 Nov 2001 19:22:55          +0000
Received: from mta2.snet.net (mta2.snet.net [204.60.203.71]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA20249 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun,          4 Nov 2001 11:22:54 -0800
Received: from snet.net (74.74.252.64.snet.net [64.252.74.74] (may be forged))          by mta2.snet.net (8.12.1/8.12.1/SNET-mx-1.1/D-1.1/O-1.1) with ESMTP          id fA4JMaL2018571; Sun, 4 Nov 2001 14:22:37 -0500 (EST)
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.75 [en] (Win98; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/mixed;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0D8D_01C56B69.56898B80"
Message-ID:  <3BE59767.5A558B4@snet.net>
Date:         Sun, 4 Nov 2001 14:30:47 -0500
Reply-To: "Blake Mantel" <BMantel@SNET.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Blake Mantel" <BMantel@SNET.NET>
Organization: done through the use of very fuzzy logic!
Subject:      [AR] The best little Converter
Comments: To: Paul Lamar <rotaryeng@earthlink.net>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0D8D_01C56B69.56898B80
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Quick, easy and will hopefully keep you from making the same mistakes NASA made
in converting units.

Blake
--
CUM CATAPULTAE PROSCRIPTAE ERUNT TUM SOLI PROSCRIPTI CATAPULTAS HABEBUNT.
(When catapults are outlawed, only outlaws will have catapults....)
Triumph Tiger Motorcycle page at: http://pages.cthome.net/bmantel/


------=_NextPart_000_0D8D_01C56B69.56898B80
Content-Type: message/rfc822
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline

Return-Path: <mantelb@pweh.com>
Received: from moat.pweh.com (moat.pweh.com [192.54.250.131])
        by pop.snet.net (8.12.1/8.12.1/SNET-pop-1.2/D-1.2/O-1.2) with ESMTP id f9UL4APO017730
        for <bmantel@snet.net>; Tue, 30 Oct 2001 16:04:11 -0500 (EST)
Received: (from uucp@localhost)
        by moat.pweh.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id QAA25294
        for <bmantel@snet.net>; Tue, 30 Oct 2001 16:04:05 -0500 (EST)
Received: from drawbridge.eh.pweh.com(191.29.71.250) by moat.pweh.com via smap (V4.2)
        id xmaa25187; Tue, 30 Oct 01 16:03:46 -0500
Received: (from uucp@localhost)
        by drawbridge.eh.pweh.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id QAA28994
        for <bmantel@snet.net>; Tue, 30 Oct 2001 16:03:50 -0500 (EST)
Received: from engines.pratt-whitney.com(192.168.4.71) by drawbridge.eh.pweh.com via smap (4.0a)
        id xma028647; Tue, 30 Oct 01 16:03:15 -0500
Received: (from uucp@localhost)
        by engines.pratt-whitney.com (8.10.0/8.10.0) id f9UL3E600642
        for <bmantel@snet.net>; Tue, 30 Oct 2001 16:03:14 -0500 (EST)
Received: from unknown(191.29.171.2) by engines.pratt-whitney.com via smap (V5.5)
        id xma000521; Tue, 30 Oct 01 16:02:45 -0500
Received: from ehposrv5.eh.pweh.com by pweh711.eh.pweh.com (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4)
        id QAA16525; Tue, 30 Oct 2001 16:02:40 -0500
Received: by ehposrv5.eh.pweh.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2654.52)
        id <S48QTD3F>; Tue, 30 Oct 2001 16:02:42 -0500
Message-ID: <D30064BBFF2DD51180BC00508BDF3EE70113760D@pusehe07.eh.pweh.com>
From: "Mantel, Blake" <mantelb@pweh.com>
To: "'bmantel@snet.net'" <bmantel@snet.net>
Subject: FW:
Date: Tue, 30 Oct 2001 16:02:13 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2654.52)
Content-Type: multipart/mixed;
        boundary="----_=_NextPart_000_01C16186.261FBA50"
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000

This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand
this format, some or all of this message may not be legible.

------_=_NextPart_000_01C16186.261FBA50
Content-Type: text/plain;
        charset="iso-8859-1"



>  -----Original Message-----
> From:         Drescher, Joseph D.
> Sent: Tuesday, October 30, 2001 13:15
> To:   Mantel, Blake
> Subject:
>
>  <<Unitconv.zip>>

------_=_NextPart_000_01C16186.261FBA50
Content-Type: application/octet-stream;
        name="Unitconv.zip"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
Content-Disposition: attachment;
        filename="Unitconv.zip"
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------_=_NextPart_000_01C16186.261FBA50--


------=_NextPart_000_0D8D_01C56B69.56898B80--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 9243 invoked from network); 4 Nov 2001 21:13:29 -0000
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 4 Nov 2001 21:13:29 -0000
Received: (qmail 24235 invoked by uid 50005); 4 Nov 2001 21:13:05 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4167. . Clean. Processed in 0.269479 secs); 04 Nov 2001 21:13:05 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 4 Nov 2001 21:13:05 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA20547; Sun, 4 Nov 2001 12:58:11 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 127876 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 4 Nov 2001 20:57:59          +0000
Received: from castor.ridgenet.net (IDENT:root@castor.ridgenet.net          [199.120.150.29]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA20532          for <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Sun, 4 Nov 2001 12:57:59 -0800
Received: from kristinscomp (pm043.ridgenet.net [204.154.246.43]) by          castor.ridgenet.net (8.11.0/8.11.0) with SMTP id fA4KjVW15817; Sun, 4          Nov 2001 12:45:31 -0800
References:  <3BE59767.5A558B4@snet.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <002201c16573$72f9c320$1b30fea9@kristinscomp>
Date:         Sun, 4 Nov 2001 12:57:48 -0800
Reply-To: "Kristin & David Hall" <thehalls@RIDGENET.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Kristin & David Hall" <thehalls@RIDGENET.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] The best little Converter
Comments: To: Blake Mantel <BMantel@SNET.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

God damnit Blake!  While you are no doubt well intentioned, bianaries have
no fucking place on this list!  Just put them up on a web/ftp site and send
the link.  Some of us do *NOT* have broadband and it pisses us off to no end
to see shit like this take forever to download when we have ZERO desire for
it!

Yes, I'll take my medication now.

--
Dave and/or Kristin Hall
----- Original Message -----
From: Blake Mantel <BMantel@SNET.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Sunday, November 04, 2001 11:30 AM
Subject: [AR] The best little Converter


> Quick, easy and will hopefully keep you from making the same mistakes NASA
made
> in converting units.
>
> Blake
> --
> CUM CATAPULTAE PROSCRIPTAE ERUNT TUM SOLI PROSCRIPTI CATAPULTAS HABEBUNT.
> (When catapults are outlawed, only outlaws will have catapults....)
> Triumph Tiger Motorcycle page at: http://pages.cthome.net/bmantel/
>
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 24808 invoked from network); 4 Nov 2001 22:39:25 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 4 Nov 2001 22:39:25 -0000
Received: (qmail 18548 invoked by uid 50005); 4 Nov 2001 22:39:19 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4167. . Clean. Processed in 0.747224 secs); 04 Nov 2001 22:39:19 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 4 Nov 2001 22:39:17 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA20844; Sun, 4 Nov 2001 14:22:58 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 127899 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 4 Nov 2001 22:22:43          +0000
Received: from localhost (dmccue@localhost) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with          ESMTP id OAA20830; Sun, 4 Nov 2001 14:22:41 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.LNX.4.10.10111041410110.20726-100000@itc.uci.edu>
Date:         Sun, 4 Nov 2001 14:22:41 -0800
Reply-To: "David J. McCue" <dmccue@itc.uci.edu>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "David J. McCue" <dmccue@itc.uci.edu>
Subject:      Re: [AR] The best little Converter
Comments: To: Kristin & David Hall <thehalls@RIDGENET.NET>, bmantel@snet.net
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <002201c16573$72f9c320$1b30fea9@kristinscomp>

Well, Dave Hall stole my thunder, but I do want to remind folks that
Dave's position is the official policy of the list: no attachments!

Binary files that look like they may be programs have the additional
liability that they trigger the spam filters at many ISPs, so those folks
don't see your message (it's rejected) but I do, because their mail system
sends me a note about it. I get lots of notes.

So, what to do? Several months ago, Greg Deputy was gracious enough to
provide a place on a webserver that you could send files to and then let
the list know that you put them there, but I seem to have misplaced that
information. Greg?

Another thing you can do is to post a note to the list that explains what
you have to share and ask those interested in a copy to reply OFF-LIST
directly to you. Finally, you can send a copy of the file(s) to me and I
can put them in a publicly available place, but you'll have to wait for me
to do that, because I don't spent every waking moment in front of a
computer, just most moments!

We will add more detail to the FAQ in the hope it helps avoid more
misteaks, um, mistakes.

-Dave Mc, minder o' the box

On Sun, 4 Nov 2001, Kristin & David Hall wrote:

> God damnit Blake!  While you are no doubt well intentioned, bianaries have
> no fucking place on this list!  Just put them up on a web/ftp site and send
> the link.  Some of us do *NOT* have broadband and it pisses us off to no end
> to see shit like this take forever to download when we have ZERO desire for
> it!
>
> Yes, I'll take my medication now.
>
> --
> Dave and/or Kristin Hall
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Blake Mantel <BMantel@SNET.NET>
> To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
> Sent: Sunday, November 04, 2001 11:30 AM
> Subject: [AR] The best little Converter
>
>
> > Quick, easy and will hopefully keep you from making the same mistakes NASA
> made
> > in converting units.
> >
> > Blake
> > --
> > CUM CATAPULTAE PROSCRIPTAE ERUNT TUM SOLI PROSCRIPTI CATAPULTAS HABEBUNT.
> > (When catapults are outlawed, only outlaws will have catapults....)
> > Triumph Tiger Motorcycle page at: http://pages.cthome.net/bmantel/
> >
> >
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 1627 invoked from network); 4 Nov 2001 23:35:17 -0000
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 4 Nov 2001 23:35:17 -0000
Received: (qmail 16744 invoked by uid 50005); 4 Nov 2001 23:35:12 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4167. . Clean. Processed in 0.185663 secs); 04 Nov 2001 23:35:12 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 4 Nov 2001 23:35:12 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA21067; Sun, 4 Nov 2001 15:19:11 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 127922 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 4 Nov 2001 23:19:11          +0000
Received: from fep4-orange.clear.net.nz (fep4-orange.clear.net.nz          [203.97.32.4]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA21034          for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Sun, 4 Nov 2001 15:18:59 -0800
Received: from mkbs (203-167-157-199.dialup.clear.net.nz [203.167.157.199]) by          fep4-orange.clear.net.nz (1.5/1.7) with SMTP id MAA23600; Mon, 5 Nov          2001 12:18:51 +1300 (NZDT)
References:  <3BE59767.5A558B4@snet.net>              <002201c16573$72f9c320$1b30fea9@kristinscomp>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <027001c16587$3ef7c4a0$0700a8c0@mkbs>
Date:         Mon, 5 Nov 2001 11:05:42 +1300
Reply-To: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Organization: Applied Technology
Subject:      Re: [AR] The best little Converter
Comments: To: Kristin & David Hall <thehalls@RIDGENET.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

> Yes, I'll take my medication now.

Nah - you're meant to take it FIRST - wait half an hour, and then post to
the list :-). Some (few?) may be more concerned about expletives-non-deleted
(to paraphrase Nixon) or vain pleas for divine intervention than the
occasional binary that may be of occasional use (even if it doesn't know how
about acceleration in SI units). (I presently have a 56k connection).



        Russell McMahon

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 2165 invoked from network); 4 Nov 2001 23:35:30 -0000
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 4 Nov 2001 23:35:30 -0000
Received: (qmail 32333 invoked by uid 50005); 4 Nov 2001 23:35:07 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4167. . Clean. Processed in 0.129369 secs); 04 Nov 2001 23:35:07 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 4 Nov 2001 23:35:06 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA21050; Sun, 4 Nov 2001 15:19:03 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 127915 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 4 Nov 2001 23:19:00          +0000
Received: from fep4-orange.clear.net.nz (fep4-orange.clear.net.nz          [203.97.32.4]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA21033          for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Sun, 4 Nov 2001 15:18:59 -0800
Received: from mkbs (203-167-157-199.dialup.clear.net.nz [203.167.157.199]) by          fep4-orange.clear.net.nz (1.5/1.7) with SMTP id MAA23669; Mon, 5 Nov          2001 12:18:56 +1300 (NZDT)
References:  <004001c164f9$00993740$b5a3a4cb@CO3021553A>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <027101c16587$40d55e40$0700a8c0@mkbs>
Date:         Mon, 5 Nov 2001 11:14:03 +1300
Reply-To: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Organization: Applied Technology
Subject:      [AR] Re  =%5BPIC%5D%3A Speedtrap warning device using any GPS              receiver.
Comments: To: artstar@optushome.com.au
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

> In other words, what you're saying is "drive slow". What needs to be
> realised here, without getting into an argument about who's right and
> who's wrong, is that people will go over the speed limit - be it a
> little or a lot.
>
> So, for those who want such a device, help them out for the sake of what
> this PIClist is about, rather than preaching about what is deemed
> appropriate motorist behaviour. Fair enough?


OK.
Many (most?) modern speedometers are electronically analog driven.
Add a pot and a comparator to monitor this signal and you can tell when a
given speed is exceeded. A suitable caution can be sounded. Add a PIC and
you could have a unit which checks all common speed limits and sounds
different distinctive tones once when each of the limits is exceeded by more
than a certain amount for a certain period. This way the tome for eg 20 or
30 kph does not sound continuously when travelling at eg 50 kph. When the
highest allowable legal speed is exceeded by more than a certain amount the
appropriate tome could sound continuously or a and a speed reduction  signal
could be applied to the auto's system if the speed were exceeded
continuously for more than a certain period. This should pretty much meet
the above objectives.

Is this what you had in mind ? :-)



        RM

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 12748 invoked from network); 5 Nov 2001 00:49:54 -0000
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 5 Nov 2001 00:49:54 -0000
Received: (qmail 12920 invoked by uid 50005); 4 Nov 2001 23:35:28 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4167. . Clean. Processed in 2.443147 secs); 04 Nov 2001 23:35:28 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 4 Nov 2001 23:35:23 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA21389; Sun, 4 Nov 2001 16:33:19 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 127968 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 5 Nov 2001 00:33:14          +0000
Received: from Blastzone.com (consumersinterest.com [207.195.143.118] (may be          forged)) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA21375 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 4 Nov 2001 16:33:13 -0800
Received: from greg [64.24.187.28] by Blastzone.com with ESMTP (SMTPD32-6.04)          id A25F7F5014A; Sun, 04 Nov 2001 16:50:39 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook, Build 10.0.2627
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <000301c16591$efb6c340$640a0a0a@greg>
Date:         Sun, 4 Nov 2001 16:36:39 -0800
Reply-To: <greg@blastzone.com>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Greg Deputy" <greg@blastzone.com>
Subject:      Re: [AR] The best little Converter
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <Pine.LNX.4.10.10111041410110.20726-100000@itc.uci.edu>

The uploads page is at www.blastzone.com/arocket.  Username arocket,
password uploads.

-----Original Message-----
From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@itc.uci.edu] On
Behalf Of David J. McCue
Sent: Sunday, November 04, 2001 2:23 PM
To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
Subject: Re: [AR] The best little Converter

Well, Dave Hall stole my thunder, but I do want to remind folks that
Dave's position is the official policy of the list: no attachments!

Binary files that look like they may be programs have the additional
liability that they trigger the spam filters at many ISPs, so those
folks
don't see your message (it's rejected) but I do, because their mail
system
sends me a note about it. I get lots of notes.

So, what to do? Several months ago, Greg Deputy was gracious enough to
provide a place on a webserver that you could send files to and then let
the list know that you put them there, but I seem to have misplaced that
information. Greg?

Another thing you can do is to post a note to the list that explains
what
you have to share and ask those interested in a copy to reply OFF-LIST
directly to you. Finally, you can send a copy of the file(s) to me and I
can put them in a publicly available place, but you'll have to wait for
me
to do that, because I don't spent every waking moment in front of a
computer, just most moments!

We will add more detail to the FAQ in the hope it helps avoid more
misteaks, um, mistakes.

-Dave Mc, minder o' the box

On Sun, 4 Nov 2001, Kristin & David Hall wrote:

> God damnit Blake!  While you are no doubt well intentioned, bianaries
have
> no fucking place on this list!  Just put them up on a web/ftp site and
send
> the link.  Some of us do *NOT* have broadband and it pisses us off to
no end
> to see shit like this take forever to download when we have ZERO
desire for
> it!
>
> Yes, I'll take my medication now.
>
> --
> Dave and/or Kristin Hall
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Blake Mantel <BMantel@SNET.NET>
> To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
> Sent: Sunday, November 04, 2001 11:30 AM
> Subject: [AR] The best little Converter
>
>
> > Quick, easy and will hopefully keep you from making the same
mistakes NASA
> made
> > in converting units.
> >
> > Blake
> > --
> > CUM CATAPULTAE PROSCRIPTAE ERUNT TUM SOLI PROSCRIPTI CATAPULTAS
HABEBUNT.
> > (When catapults are outlawed, only outlaws will have catapults....)
> > Triumph Tiger Motorcycle page at: http://pages.cthome.net/bmantel/
> >
> >
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 8816 invoked from network); 5 Nov 2001 00:58:50 -0000
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 5 Nov 2001 00:58:50 -0000
Received: (qmail 27993 invoked by uid 50005); 4 Nov 2001 23:44:24 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4167. . Clean. Processed in 2.770561 secs); 04 Nov 2001 23:44:24 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 4 Nov 2001 23:44:20 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA21453; Sun, 4 Nov 2001 16:43:05 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 127981 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 5 Nov 2001 00:43:03          +0000
Received: from mx2.comcen.com.au (mx2.comcen.com.au [203.23.236.70]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA21439 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 4 Nov 2001 16:43:02 -0800
Received: from win2pk2 (modem177.sydney.spin.net.au [202.172.120.185] (may be          forged)) by mx2.comcen.com.au (8.11.6/8.11.6) with SMTP id          fA4EglC02927; Mon, 5 Nov 2001 01:42:47 +1100 (EST) (envelope-from          pkelly@comcen.com.au)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <JJEFLLHFFAHHMBBIHFAEOEONCHAA.pkelly@comcen.com.au>
Date:         Mon, 5 Nov 2001 11:43:55 +1100
Reply-To: "Paul Kelly" <pkelly@COMCEN.COM.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Paul Kelly" <pkelly@COMCEN.COM.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Inexpensive but accurate groove cutter?
Comments: To: Jeff Taylor <jtaylor@NC.RR.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <NBEJKDFBFOEFALBMBCDPIEOPCEAA.jtaylor@nc.rr.com>

Paul -

Interesting idea.  I can see how you could do threads this way, but with a
retaining ring groove you have to start with the tool in the pipe.  How then
would you feed the tool?


Use a tool with a shank parallel to the lathe axis. Much like a standard
groove cutting tool.
You can then adjust the boring head or 4 jaw without changing the depth
setting.
Given the capability to do this though, I can't envisage why you wouldn't
cut a thread.
Another option is to use an automatic boring head. But if you can afford one
of these then you can afford to have someone else cut a few threads for you.

PK

- Jeff Taylor

>
>Big Vblock or pipe vice mounted on the saddle. Tool in 4 jaw chuck (or
>boring head).
>Can do threads that way too.  If you are gonna do a few, mount the
>vblock on
>a 90deg angle and get it spot on center.
>
>
>PK
>
>Bob

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 26601 invoked from network); 5 Nov 2001 01:13:24 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 5 Nov 2001 01:13:24 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 28383 invoked by uid 50005); 5 Nov 2001 01:13:19 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4167. . Clean. Processed in 0.595483 secs); 05 Nov 2001 01:13:19 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 5 Nov 2001 01:13:18 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA21541; Sun, 4 Nov 2001 16:58:01 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 127996 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 5 Nov 2001 00:57:54          +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (f97.law3.hotmail.com [209.185.241.97]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA21527 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 4 Nov 2001 16:57:53 -0800
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Sun,          4 Nov 2001 16:57:23 -0800
Received: from 63.49.113.135 by lw3fd.law3.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Mon, 05          Nov 2001 00:57:23 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [63.49.113.135]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 05 Nov 2001 00:57:23.0483 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[D4528EB0:01C16594]
Message-ID:  <F97ftdDIEfmfNykoS1N000032dc@hotmail.com>
Date:         Sun, 4 Nov 2001 19:57:23 -0500
Reply-To: "rocket Man" <varocketry@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "rocket Man" <varocketry@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      [AR] Apology required maybe BANNING too          Re: [AR] The best              little Converter
Comments: To: thehalls@RIDGENET.NET
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

<html><div style='background-color:'><DIV>
<P>Kristin:</P>
<P>I am deeply offended by your profanity and flaming. I cannot ever recall anyone acting like this on this list. More than owe us all an apology, I think you should be <STRONG><U>banned </U></STRONG>until proof is provided your typing fingers have been washed out with soap.</P>
<P>Seriously, shame on you.</P>
<P>Jim</P></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>&gt;From: Kristin &amp; David Hall <THEHALLS@RIDGENET.NET>
<DIV></DIV>&gt;Reply-To: Kristin &amp; David Hall <THEHALLS@RIDGENET.NET>
<DIV></DIV>&gt;To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
<DIV></DIV>&gt;Subject: Re: [AR] The best little Converter
<DIV></DIV>&gt;Date: Sun, 4 Nov 2001 12:57:48 -0800
<DIV></DIV>&gt;
<DIV></DIV>&gt;God damnit Blake! While you are no doubt well intentioned, bianaries have
<DIV></DIV>&gt;no fucking place on this list! Just put them up on a web/ftp site and send
<DIV></DIV>&gt;the link. Some of us do *NOT* have broadband and it pisses us off to no end
<DIV></DIV>&gt;to see shit like this take forever to download when we have ZERO desire for
<DIV></DIV>&gt;it!
<DIV></DIV>&gt;
<DIV></DIV>&gt;Yes, I'll take my medication now.
<DIV></DIV>&gt;
<DIV></DIV>&gt;--
<DIV></DIV>&gt;Dave and/or Kristin Hall
<DIV></DIV>&gt;----- Original Message -----
<DIV></DIV>&gt;From: Blake Mantel <BMANTEL@SNET.NET>
<DIV></DIV>&gt;To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
<DIV></DIV>&gt;Sent: Sunday, November 04, 2001 11:30 AM
<DIV></DIV>&gt;Subject: [AR] The best little Converter
<DIV></DIV>&gt;
<DIV></DIV>&gt;
<DIV></DIV>&gt; &gt; Quick, easy and will hopefully keep you from making the same mistakes NASA
<DIV></DIV>&gt;made
<DIV></DIV>&gt; &gt; in converting units.
<DIV></DIV>&gt; &gt;
<DIV></DIV>&gt; &gt; Blake
<DIV></DIV>&gt; &gt; --
<DIV></DIV>&gt; &gt; CUM CATAPULTAE PROSCRIPTAE ERUNT TUM SOLI PROSCRIPTI CATAPULTAS HABEBUNT.
<DIV></DIV>&gt; &gt; (When catapults are outlawed, only outlaws will have catapults....)
<DIV></DIV>&gt; &gt; Triumph Tiger Motorcycle page at: http://pages.cthome.net/bmantel/
<DIV></DIV>&gt; &gt;
<DIV></DIV>&gt; &gt;
<DIV></DIV></div><br clear=all><hr>Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at <a href='http://go.msn.com/bql/hmtag_itl_EN.asp'>http://explorer.msn.com</a><br></html>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 27901 invoked from network); 5 Nov 2001 01:31:38 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 5 Nov 2001 01:31:38 -0000
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 29397 invoked by uid 50005); 5 Nov 2001 01:31:16 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4167. . Clean. Processed in 0.185638 secs); 05 Nov 2001 01:31:16 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 5 Nov 2001 01:31:15 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA21629; Sun, 4 Nov 2001 17:15:57 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 128013 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 5 Nov 2001 01:15:52          +0000
Received: from smtppop1pub.verizon.net (smtppop1pub.gte.net [206.46.170.20]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA21615 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 4 Nov 2001 17:15:51 -0800
Received: from [63.25.193.46] (1Cust46.tnt1.hilo.hi.da.uu.net [63.25.193.46])          by smtppop1pub.verizon.net  with ESMTP for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; id          TAA38151625 Sun, 4 Nov 2001 19:14:21 -0600 (CST)
X-Sender: ttocs@mail.gte.net
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <l03130300b80b962e1d4b@[63.10.189.148]>
Date:         Sun, 4 Nov 2001 15:15:04 -1000
Reply-To: "Aaron Smith" <ttocs@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Aaron Smith" <ttocs@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Apology required maybe BANNING too
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <F97ftdDIEfmfNykoS1N000032dc@hotmail.com>

Grow up.  If your pristine little ears can not afford to be soiled by
language we all listen to (and probably use) every day, perhaps you should
leave and come back when you can cope with things that don't fit into your
perfect world.

Sorry for the rant, everyone.  Back to rockets.

At 7:57 PM -0500 11/4/01, rocket Man wrote:
>
>
>Kristin:
>
>
>
>I am deeply offended by your profanity and flaming. I cannot ever recall
>anyone acting like this on this list. More than owe us all an apology, I
>think you should be banned until proof is provided your typing fingers
>have been washed out with soap.
>
>
>
>Seriously, shame on you.
>
>
>
>Jim
>
>  >From: Kristin & David Hall  >Reply-To: Kristin & David Hall  >To:
>AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU >Subject: Re: [AR] The best little Converter >Date:
>Sun, 4 Nov 2001 12:57:48 -0800 > >God damnit Blake! While you are no doubt
>well intentioned, bianaries have >no fucking place on this list! Just put
>them up on a web/ftp site and send >the link. Some of us do *NOT* have
>broadband and it pisses us off to no end >to see shit like this take
>forever to download when we have ZERO desire for >it! > >Yes, I'll take my
>medication now. > >-- >Dave and/or Kristin Hall >----- Original Message
>----- >From: Blake Mantel  >To:  >Sent: Sunday, November 04, 2001 11:30 AM
>>Subject: [AR] The best little Converter > > > > Quick, easy and will
>hopefully keep you from making the same mistakes NASA >made > > in
>converting units. > > > > Blake > > -- > > CUM CATAPULTAE PROSCRIPTAE
>ERUNT TUM SOLI PROSCRIPTI CATAPULTAS HABEBUNT. > > (When catapults are
>outlawed, only outlaws will have catapults....) > > Triumph Tiger
>Motorcycle page at: http://pages.cthome.net/bmantel/ > > > >
>Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at
><http://go.msn.com/bql/hmtag_itl_EN.asp'>http://explorer.msn.com
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 15488 invoked from network); 5 Nov 2001 03:09:22 -0000
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 5 Nov 2001 03:09:22 -0000
Received: (qmail 32580 invoked by uid 50005); 5 Nov 2001 01:54:55 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4167. . Clean. Processed in 2.745587 secs); 05 Nov 2001 01:54:55 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 5 Nov 2001 01:54:50 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA21892; Sun, 4 Nov 2001 18:48:22 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 128033 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 5 Nov 2001 02:48:12          +0000
Received: from mail.cac.net ([209.44.14.13]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with          ESMTP id SAA21878 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 4 Nov 2001 18:48:12          -0800
Received: from jfackertcac (216-234-98-97.as5300-1.det2.hexcom.net          [216.234.98.97]) by mail.cac.net (8.11.3/8.11.3) with SMTP id          fA52mkf95322 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 4 Nov 2001 21:48:47          -0500 (EST) (envelope-from jfackert@cac.net)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook CWS, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0)
Importance: Normal
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <000101c165a3$7f516580$6162ead8@net>
Date:         Sun, 4 Nov 2001 21:03:34 -0500
Reply-To: <jfackert@cac.net>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jim Fackert" <jfackert@cac.net>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Inexpensive but accurate groove cutter?
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <Pine.LNX.4.10.10111022140530.11317-100000@itc.uci.edu>

A router bit with a ball bearing edge guide would work great. I think htere
are edge grooving carbide bits for making grooves in the edge of panels to
insert edge moulding, and they have a ball bearing mounted on their tips to
al;low the cutter to cut exactly the right depth. Find a cutter of the right
width, make a collar to go over the bearing to reduce the depth, and you've
got it made. I suggest using a wax stick type cutter lubricant to prevent
the gummy aluminum from sticking to the bit.

I have cut and groove dlots of aluminum on a table saw with a triple chip
carbide blade... works great!

Jim Fackert

Bob,

I think a router could do it easily. It would require the right bit and
setup, but it should not be beyond the skills of any woodworker. I have
been meaning to try this method ever since a friend suggested it.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 15816 invoked from network); 5 Nov 2001 03:09:30 -0000
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 5 Nov 2001 03:09:30 -0000
Received: (qmail 6047 invoked by uid 50005); 5 Nov 2001 03:09:07 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4167. . Clean. Processed in 0.187684 secs); 05 Nov 2001 03:09:07 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 5 Nov 2001 03:09:07 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA21949; Sun, 4 Nov 2001 18:54:07 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 128046 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 5 Nov 2001 02:54:05          +0000
Received: from mx2.comcen.com.au (mx2.comcen.com.au [203.23.236.70]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA21935 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 4 Nov 2001 18:54:04 -0800
Received: from win2pk2 (modem177.sydney.spin.net.au [202.172.120.185] (may be          forged)) by mx2.comcen.com.au (8.11.6/8.11.6) with SMTP id          fA4GrwC07608; Mon, 5 Nov 2001 03:54:05 +1100 (EST) (envelope-from          pkelly@comcen.com.au)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <JJEFLLHFFAHHMBBIHFAEMEPACHAA.pkelly@comcen.com.au>
Date:         Mon, 5 Nov 2001 13:55:07 +1100
Reply-To: "Paul Kelly" <pkelly@COMCEN.COM.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Paul Kelly" <pkelly@COMCEN.COM.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Inexpensive but accurate groove cutter?
Comments: To: jfackert@CAC.NET
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <000101c165a3$7f516580$6162ead8@net>

But how do you locate the router on the end of the tube in a manner the
ensures the sides of the cut groove are exactly perpendicular to the bore
axis?

PK

-----Original Message-----
From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU]On
Behalf Of Jim Fackert
Sent: Monday, 5 November 2001 1:04 PM
To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
Subject: Re: [AR] Inexpensive but accurate groove cutter?


A router bit with a ball bearing edge guide would work great. I think htere
are edge grooving carbide bits for making grooves in the edge of panels to
insert edge moulding, and they have a ball bearing mounted on their tips to
al;low the cutter to cut exactly the right depth. Find a cutter of the right
width, make a collar to go over the bearing to reduce the depth, and you've
got it made. I suggest using a wax stick type cutter lubricant to prevent
the gummy aluminum from sticking to the bit.

I have cut and groove dlots of aluminum on a table saw with a triple chip
carbide blade... works great!

Jim Fackert

Bob,

I think a router could do it easily. It would require the right bit and
setup, but it should not be beyond the skills of any woodworker. I have
been meaning to try this method ever since a friend suggested it.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 11397 invoked from network); 5 Nov 2001 03:17:50 -0000
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 5 Nov 2001 03:17:50 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 26260 invoked by uid 50005); 5 Nov 2001 03:03:28 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4165. . Clean. Processed in 2.241502 secs); 05 Nov 2001 03:03:29 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 5 Nov 2001 03:03:25 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA22030; Sun, 4 Nov 2001 19:02:28 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 128059 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 5 Nov 2001 03:02:26          +0000
Received: from mta2.snet.net (mta2.snet.net [204.60.203.71]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA22016 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun,          4 Nov 2001 19:02:25 -0800
Received: from snet.net (234.68.252.64.snet.net [64.252.68.234] (may be          forged)) by mta2.snet.net (8.12.1/8.12.1/SNET-mx-1.1/D-1.1/O-1.1)          with ESMTP id fA532OL2016761 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 4 Nov          2001 22:02:24 -0500 (EST)
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.75 [en] (Win98; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <F97ftdDIEfmfNykoS1N000032dc@hotmail.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0D91_01C56B69.56AAF630"
Message-ID:  <3BE6031F.E134D6@snet.net>
Date:         Sun, 4 Nov 2001 22:10:23 -0500
Reply-To: "Blake Mantel" <BMantel@SNET.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Blake Mantel" <BMantel@SNET.NET>
Organization: done through the use of very fuzzy logic!
Subject:      Re: [AR] Apology required maybe BANNING too          Re: [AR] The              bestlittle Converter
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0D91_01C56B69.56AAF630
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

rocket Man wrote:

> Kristin:
> I am deeply offended by your profanity and flaming. I cannot ever recall
> anyone acting like this on this list. More than owe us all an apology, I think
> you should be banned until proof is provided your typing fingers have been
> washed out with soap.
> Seriously, shame on you.
> Jim
>
O.K. everyone, take a Valium and chase it with some ETOH!!!

I'm sorry that I posted this file to the list, I have high speed access at home
and at Pratt. So I tend to forget that others may not be so blessed. And it
takes me longer to read this message than it took me to UL or DL the file....
;-O

It must have been a tough day and I am not that thin skinned, so I have had my
knuckles wrapped by the Hall's ruler!

The rotary aviation letter is fully attachment oriented (we are now tackling the
fun of cross platform DXF file transfers - no all DXF's are not treated the
same) and makes the flow of information much faster when diagrams and text are
adjacent to each other. But that is another issue all together.

Blake
--
CUM CATAPULTAE PROSCRIPTAE ERUNT TUM SOLI PROSCRIPTI CATAPULTAS HABEBUNT.
(When catapults are outlawed, only outlaws will have catapults....)
Triumph Tiger Motorcycle page at: http://pages.cthome.net/bmantel/


------=_NextPart_000_0D91_01C56B69.56AAF630
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<!doctype html public "-//w3c//dtd html 4.0 transitional//en">
<html>
rocket Man wrote:
<blockquote TYPE=CITE>
<div style='background-color:'>Kristin:
<br>I am deeply offended by your profanity and flaming. I cannot ever recall
anyone acting like this on this list. More than owe us all an apology,
I think you should be <b><u>banned </u></b>until proof is provided your
typing fingers have been washed out with soap.
<br>Seriously, shame on you.
<br>Jim</div>
</blockquote>
O.K. everyone, take a Valium and chase it with some ETOH!!!
<p>I'm sorry that I posted this file to the list, I have high speed access
at home and at Pratt. So I tend to forget that others may not be so blessed.
And it takes me longer to read this message than it took me to UL or DL
the file.... ;-O
<p>It must have been a tough day and I am not that thin skinned, so I have
had my knuckles wrapped by the Hall's ruler!
<p>The rotary aviation letter is fully attachment oriented (we are now
tackling the fun of cross platform DXF file transfers - no all DXF's are
not treated the same) and makes the flow of information much faster when
diagrams and text are adjacent to each other. But that is another issue
all together.
<p>Blake
<br>--
<br>CUM CATAPULTAE PROSCRIPTAE ERUNT TUM SOLI PROSCRIPTI CATAPULTAS HABEBUNT.
<br>(When catapults are outlawed, only outlaws will have catapults....)
<br>Triumph Tiger Motorcycle page at: <A HREF="http://pages.cthome.net/bmantel/">http://pages.cthome.net/bmantel/</A>
<br>&nbsp;</html>

------=_NextPart_000_0D91_01C56B69.56AAF630--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 16183 invoked from network); 5 Nov 2001 03:55:15 -0000
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 5 Nov 2001 03:55:15 -0000
Received: (qmail 26868 invoked by uid 50005); 5 Nov 2001 03:55:10 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4167. . Clean. Processed in 1.565676 secs); 05 Nov 2001 03:55:10 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 5 Nov 2001 03:55:06 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA22214; Sun, 4 Nov 2001 19:39:41 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 128090 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 5 Nov 2001 03:39:39          +0000
Received: from falcon.prod.itd.earthlink.net (falcon.mail.pas.earthlink.net          [207.217.120.74]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA22200          for <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Sun, 4 Nov 2001 19:39:38 -0800
Received: from user-2iniv50.dialup.mindspring.com ([165.121.124.160]          helo=DGBNHY01) by falcon.prod.itd.earthlink.net with smtp (Exim 3.33          #1) id 160abo-0006jQ-00; Sun, 04 Nov 2001 19:39:37 -0800
References:  <l03130300b80b962e1d4b@[63.10.189.148]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <002d01c165aa$ccc0fd10$a07c79a5@DGBNHY01>
Date:         Sun, 4 Nov 2001 21:34:01 -0600
Reply-To: "Hydrazine" <Rockitman@SPRINTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Hydrazine" <Rockitman@SPRINTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Apology required maybe BANNING too
Comments: To: Aaron Smith <ttocs@GTE.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Aaron,

I have to agree with rocket man.  Strongly worded language is one thing,
foul language is another.  Daves choice of words was foul and offensive.  He
can write anything he wants for all I care.  I use plenty myself (but not at
work or on Arocket).   I didn't want or consider the need for an apology,
but it was offensive none the less.

If anyone on this list used foul language consistantly, I would say ban
them.  Nobody here does and everyone, including myself, should be allowed an
occasional malfunction.

If people can be banned for the mere attachment of small files or benign web
links, the same can apply for crossing the line into fowl language.  (That
is unless Ray says otherwise.  Its his Arocket.)

I only want to make the point that reasonable etiquette cuts both ways.
Tony


> Grow up.  If your pristine little ears can not afford to be soiled by
> language we all listen to (and probably use) every day, perhaps you should
> leave and come back when you can cope with things that don't fit into your
> perfect world.
>
> Sorry for the rant, everyone.  Back to rockets.
>
> At 7:57 PM -0500 11/4/01, rocket Man wrote:
> >
> >
> >Kristin:
> >
> >
> >
> >I am deeply offended by your profanity and flaming. I cannot ever recall
> >anyone acting like this on this list. More than owe us all an apology, I
> >think you should be banned until proof is provided your typing fingers
> >have been washed out with soap.
> >
> >
> >
> >Seriously, shame on you.
> >
> >
> >
> >Jim
> >
> >  >From: Kristin & David Hall  >Reply-To: Kristin & David Hall  >To:
> >AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU >Subject: Re: [AR] The best little Converter >Date:
> >Sun, 4 Nov 2001 12:57:48 -0800 > >God damnit Blake! While you are no
doubt
> >well intentioned, bianaries have >no fucking place on this list! Just put
> >them up on a web/ftp site and send >the link. Some of us do *NOT* have
> >broadband and it pisses us off to no end >to see shit like this take
> >forever to download when we have ZERO desire for >it! > >Yes, I'll take
my
> >medication now. > >-- >Dave and/or Kristin Hall >----- Original Message
> >----- >From: Blake Mantel  >To:  >Sent: Sunday, November 04, 2001 11:30
AM
> >>Subject: [AR] The best little Converter > > > > Quick, easy and will
> >hopefully keep you from making the same mistakes NASA >made > > in
> >converting units. > > > > Blake > > -- > > CUM CATAPULTAE PROSCRIPTAE
> >ERUNT TUM SOLI PROSCRIPTI CATAPULTAS HABEBUNT. > > (When catapults are
> >outlawed, only outlaws will have catapults....) > > Triumph Tiger
> >Motorcycle page at: http://pages.cthome.net/bmantel/ > > > >
> >Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at
> ><http://go.msn.com/bql/hmtag_itl_EN.asp'>http://explorer.msn.com
> >
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 26710 invoked from network); 5 Nov 2001 05:43:39 -0000
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 5 Nov 2001 05:43:39 -0000
Received: (qmail 19809 invoked by uid 50005); 5 Nov 2001 05:43:17 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4167. . Clean. Processed in 0.167107 secs); 05 Nov 2001 05:43:17 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 5 Nov 2001 05:43:17 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA22661; Sun, 4 Nov 2001 21:28:17 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 128150 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 5 Nov 2001 05:28:03          +0000
Received: from cablecom.laribay.net (cablecom.laribay.net [66.20.57.4]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA22647 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 4 Nov 2001 21:28:02 -0800
Received: from billbull (dial079.laribay.net [66.20.57.79]) by          cablecom.laribay.net (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id XAA03685 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 4 Nov 2001 23:12:50 -0600 (CST)          (envelope-from bpbullock@laribay.net)
References:  <JJEFLLHFFAHHMBBIHFAEMEPACHAA.pkelly@comcen.com.au>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0D96_01C56B69.56AAF630"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <009e01c165ba$ac75ac80$41391442@billbull>
Date:         Sun, 4 Nov 2001 23:28:16 -0600
Reply-To: "Bill Bullock" <bpbullock@LARIBAY.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Bill Bullock" <bpbullock@LARIBAY.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Inexpensive but accurate groove cutter?
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0D96_01C56B69.56AAF630
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

     Make sure the end of the tube is milled perpendicular to the axis =
of the tube. Mount the router on a baseplate of acrylic, aluminum or =
steel at least 2.5 times the diameter of the tube, set your tool and =
start milling with the newly-made baseplate firmly in contact with the =
mouth of the tube at all times and the router depth set at the desired =
distance of the groove from the end of the tube. It helps to have either =
a variable-speed router or a speed control for your constant-speed unit =
when milling non-ferrous metals.
    You can make a solid "bearing" instead of using a ball bearing. =
Disks band-sawed from a bar of brass and center-drilled work pretty =
well. To increase the depth-of-groove cut, pull the thing out and spin =
it up with the router while you "mill" the bearing down with a hand-held =
file. The speed controller makes it easier to handle.
    To cut an outside groove, run the same set-up around the outside of =
the tube making sure to not get any body parts tangled up in the cutter. =
Makes quite a mess, that. Hurts to.
Bill
----- Original Message -----=20
  From: Paul Kelly=20
  To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU=20
  Sent: Sunday, November 04, 2001 8:55 PM
  Subject: Re: [AR] Inexpensive but accurate groove cutter?


  But how do you locate the router on the end of the tube in a manner =
the
  ensures the sides of the cut groove are exactly perpendicular to the =
bore
  axis?

  PK

  (A Bunch Snipped Here)


------=_NextPart_000_0D96_01C56B69.56AAF630
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META content=3D"text/html; charset=3Diso-8859-1" =
http-equiv=3DContent-Type>
<META content=3D"MSHTML 5.00.2614.3500" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Make sure the end of the tube is milled=20
perpendicular to the axis of the tube. Mount the router on a baseplate =
of=20
acrylic, aluminum or steel at least 2.5 times the diameter of the tube, =
set your=20
tool and start milling with the newly-made baseplate firmly in contact =
with the=20
mouth of the tube at all times and the router depth set at the desired =
distance=20
of the groove from the end of the tube. It helps to have either a =
variable-speed=20
router or a speed control for your constant-speed unit when milling =
non-ferrous=20
metals.</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; You can make a solid "bearing" instead of using =
a ball=20
bearing. Disks band-sawed from a bar of brass and center-drilled work =
pretty=20
well. To increase the depth-of-groove cut, pull the thing out and spin =
it up=20
with the router while you "mill" the bearing down with a hand-held file. =
The=20
speed controller makes it easier to handle.</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; To cut an outside groove, run the =
same&nbsp;set-up=20
around the outside of the tube making sure to not get any body parts =
tangled up=20
in the cutter. Makes quite a mess, that. Hurts to.</DIV>
<DIV>Bill</DIV>
<DIV>----- Original Message ----- </DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE=20
style=3D"BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: =
0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; PADDING-RIGHT: 0px">
  <DIV=20
  style=3D"BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; FONT: 10pt arial; font-color: =
black"><B>From:</B>=20
  <A href=3D"mailto:pkelly@COMCEN.COM.AU" =
title=3Dpkelly@COMCEN.COM.AU>Paul=20
  Kelly</A> </DIV>
  <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A =
href=3D"mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU"=20
  title=3DAROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU</A> </DIV>
  <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> Sunday, November 04, 2001 =
8:55=20
  PM</DIV>
  <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> Re: [AR] Inexpensive =
but=20
  accurate groove cutter?</DIV>
  <DIV><BR></DIV>
  <DIV>But how do you locate the router on the end of the tube in a =
manner=20
  the<BR>ensures the sides of the cut groove are exactly perpendicular =
to the=20
  bore<BR>axis?<BR><BR>PK<BR></DIV>
  <DIV>(A Bunch Snipped Here)<BR></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0D96_01C56B69.56AAF630--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 14952 invoked from network); 5 Nov 2001 05:51:17 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 5 Nov 2001 05:51:17 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 14835 invoked by uid 50005); 5 Nov 2001 05:36:49 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4165. . Clean. Processed in 0.255702 secs); 05 Nov 2001 05:36:49 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 5 Nov 2001 05:36:49 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA22727; Sun, 4 Nov 2001 21:36:03 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 128163 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 5 Nov 2001 05:35:58          +0000
Received: from femail30.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail30.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.254.60.20]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA22709          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 4 Nov 2001 21:35:58 -0800
Received: from c396957-b.home.net ([24.17.249.10]) by          femail30.sdc1.sfba.home.com (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20          201-229-121-120-20010223) with ESMTP id          <20011105053548.KDW13262.femail30.sdc1.sfba.home.com@c396957-b.home.net> for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 4          Nov 2001 21:35:48 -0800
X-Sender: spiegl@mail (Unverified)
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <5.1.0.14.2.20011104233101.00b54208@mail>
Date:         Sun, 4 Nov 2001 23:34:58 -0600
Reply-To: "Mark C Spiegl" <spiegl@HOME.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Mark C Spiegl" <spiegl@HOME.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Tubing`
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <3BE18FA2.6000509@gate.net>

At 11:08 PM 11/1/2001 +0500, Jay Ward wrote:
>   I recently found a source of 12' lengths of  6061-T6 AL 3" x.065
>anodized tubing. $15 a stick plus shipping. Minor cosmetic flaws in the
>anodizing.  Anyone interested?

Feeling dense tonight... what do you mean "$15 a stick?"

Will your new found source cut the tube into two 6' lengths?
Shipping cost drops significantly in smaller lengths.

Thanks.

--MCS

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 19845 invoked from network); 5 Nov 2001 07:07:38 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 5 Nov 2001 07:07:38 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 11058 invoked by uid 50005); 5 Nov 2001 06:53:10 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4165. . Clean. Processed in 1.711853 secs); 05 Nov 2001 06:53:10 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 5 Nov 2001 06:53:06 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA23054; Sun, 4 Nov 2001 22:52:05 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 128203 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 5 Nov 2001 06:50:40          +0000
Received: from proxy2.ba.best.com (root@proxy2.ba.best.com [206.184.139.14]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA23039 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Sun, 4 Nov 2001 22:50:39 -0800
Received: from [10.0.0.2] (snvadslgw2poold155.snjs.uswestqwest.net          [168.103.213.155]) by proxy2.ba.best.com (8.9.3/8.9.2/best.out) with          ESMTP id WAA05072 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Sun, 4 Nov 2001 22:50:19          -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Sender:  (Unverified)
References: <JJEFLLHFFAHHMBBIHFAEMEPACHAA.pkelly@comcen.com.au>            <009e01c165ba$ac75ac80$41391442@billbull>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <v04210101b80be5bb05cb@[10.0.0.2]>
Date:         Sun, 4 Nov 2001 22:49:48 -0800
Reply-To: "bob fortune" <bob@FORTUNEPAINT.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "bob fortune" <bob@FORTUNEPAINT.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Inexpensive but accurate groove cutter?
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <009e01c165ba$ac75ac80$41391442@billbull>

Hey Bill,

A shoe of some kind on a router with a bearing was what I was
imagining at the outset.  Your suggestion of simply making the shoe
much bigger than the tube to be cut would keep the tool perpendicular
to the work if done with caution.  There are several different
diameters of bearings available but it would be simple work on a
lathe to make a set of bearing bushings (sounds like an oxymoron) to
adjust the depth of cut from a couple of thousands graduated through
the full depth of cut necessary for a particular application or
tubing wall thickness.

cheers

Bob



>    Make sure the end of the tube is milled perpendicular to the
>axis of the tube. Mount the router on a baseplate of acrylic,
>aluminum or steel at least 2.5 times the diameter of the tube, set
>your tool and start milling with the newly-made baseplate firmly in
>contact with the mouth of the tube at all times and the router depth
>set at the desired distance of the groove from the end of the tube.
>It helps to have either a variable-speed router or a speed control
>for your constant-speed unit when milling non-ferrous metals.
>    You can make a solid "bearing" instead of using a ball bearing.
>Disks band-sawed from a bar of brass and center-drilled work pretty
>well. To increase the depth-of-groove cut, pull the thing out and
>spin it up with the router while you "mill" the bearing down with a
>hand-held file. The speed controller makes it easier to handle.
>    To cut an outside groove, run the same set-up around the outside
>of the tube making sure to not get any body parts tangled up in the
>cutter. Makes quite a mess, that. Hurts to.
>Bill

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 20326 invoked from network); 5 Nov 2001 07:20:35 -0000
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 5 Nov 2001 07:20:35 -0000
Received: (qmail 25436 invoked by uid 50005); 5 Nov 2001 07:06:07 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4165. . Clean. Processed in 0.152375 secs); 05 Nov 2001 07:06:07 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 5 Nov 2001 07:06:07 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA23178; Sun, 4 Nov 2001 23:05:24 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 128231 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 5 Nov 2001 07:04:02          +0000
Received: from castor.ridgenet.net (IDENT:root@castor.ridgenet.net          [199.120.150.29]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA23151          for <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Sun, 4 Nov 2001 23:04:02 -0800
Received: from kristinscomp (pm017.ridgenet.net [204.154.246.17]) by          castor.ridgenet.net (8.11.0/8.11.0) with SMTP id fA56piW29064 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Sun, 4 Nov 2001 22:51:44 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <003c01c165c8$201387e0$1b30fea9@kristinscomp>
Date:         Sun, 4 Nov 2001 23:04:34 -0800
Reply-To: "Kristin & David Hall" <thehalls@RIDGENET.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Kristin & David Hall" <thehalls@RIDGENET.NET>
Subject:      [AR] [OT] Off to Embry-Riddle
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Just a quick note:  6 hours from now I'll be hopping on a plane (I really
should be in bed!) - so if any of you try to get ahold of me for the next
week.... Sorry, it'll have to wait.
--
Dave and/or Kristin Hall

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 22403 invoked from network); 5 Nov 2001 11:38:20 -0000
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 5 Nov 2001 11:38:20 -0000
Received: (qmail 31427 invoked by uid 50005); 5 Nov 2001 10:23:43 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4167. . Clean. Processed in 0.306438 secs); 05 Nov 2001 10:23:43 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 5 Nov 2001 10:23:42 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id DAA24075; Mon, 5 Nov 2001 03:19:53 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 128286 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 5 Nov 2001 11:19:37          +0000
Received: from mail017.syd.optusnet.com.au (mail017.syd.optusnet.com.au          [203.2.75.179]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id DAA24061          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 5 Nov 2001 03:19:36 -0800
Received: from jack (wagax4-074.dialup.optusnet.com.au [198.142.146.74]) by          mail017.syd.optusnet.com.au (8.11.1/8.11.1) with SMTP id fA5BJWZ20021          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 5 Nov 2001 22:19:33 +1100
References: <JJEFLLHFFAHHMBBIHFAEMEPACHAA.pkelly@comcen.com.au>                      <009e01c165ba$ac75ac80$41391442@billbull>             <v04210101b80be5bb05cb@[10.0.0.2]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <005801c165ec$b1b37560$4a928ec6@jack>
Date:         Mon, 5 Nov 2001 22:26:19 +1100
Reply-To: "Jack" <jack_36@OPTUSNET.COM.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jack" <jack_36@OPTUSNET.COM.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Inexpensive but accurate groove cutter?
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

bob,

i reckon you would quite easily take a 2mm (0.080") cut in one pass. ive
used a die grinder with with a chunky burr on ally and it rips it out
without much effort at all. i think the biggest challenge would be working
so high and trying to be steady so you get a clean cut.
          ..Jack..


----- Original Message -----
From: bob fortune <bob@FORTUNEPAINT.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Monday, November 05, 2001 5:49 PM
Subject: Re: [AR] Inexpensive but accurate groove cutter?


> Hey Bill,
>
> A shoe of some kind on a router with a bearing was what I was
> imagining at the outset.  Your suggestion of simply making the shoe
> much bigger than the tube to be cut would keep the tool perpendicular
> to the work if done with caution.  There are several different
> diameters of bearings available but it would be simple work on a
> lathe to make a set of bearing bushings (sounds like an oxymoron) to
> adjust the depth of cut from a couple of thousands graduated through
> the full depth of cut necessary for a particular application or
> tubing wall thickness.
>
> cheers
>
> Bob
>
>
>
> >    Make sure the end of the tube is milled perpendicular to the
> >axis of the tube. Mount the router on a baseplate of acrylic,
> >aluminum or steel at least 2.5 times the diameter of the tube, set
> >your tool and start milling with the newly-made baseplate firmly in
> >contact with the mouth of the tube at all times and the router depth
> >set at the desired distance of the groove from the end of the tube.
> >It helps to have either a variable-speed router or a speed control
> >for your constant-speed unit when milling non-ferrous metals.
> >    You can make a solid "bearing" instead of using a ball bearing.
> >Disks band-sawed from a bar of brass and center-drilled work pretty
> >well. To increase the depth-of-groove cut, pull the thing out and
> >spin it up with the router while you "mill" the bearing down with a
> >hand-held file. The speed controller makes it easier to handle.
> >    To cut an outside groove, run the same set-up around the outside
> >of the tube making sure to not get any body parts tangled up in the
> >cutter. Makes quite a mess, that. Hurts to.
> >Bill

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 20789 invoked from network); 5 Nov 2001 14:48:19 -0000
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 5 Nov 2001 14:48:18 -0000
Received: (qmail 26707 invoked by uid 50005); 5 Nov 2001 13:33:49 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4167. . Clean. Processed in 0.431507 secs); 05 Nov 2001 13:33:49 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 5 Nov 2001 13:33:48 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA24737; Mon, 5 Nov 2001 06:32:28 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 128318 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 5 Nov 2001 14:32:16          +0000
Received: from cablecom.laribay.net (cablecom.laribay.net [66.20.57.4]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA24721 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 5 Nov 2001 06:32:15 -0800
Received: from billbull (dial081.laribay.net [66.20.57.81]) by          cablecom.laribay.net (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id IAA08029 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 5 Nov 2001 08:17:02 -0600 (CST)          (envelope-from bpbullock@laribay.net)
References: <JJEFLLHFFAHHMBBIHFAEMEPACHAA.pkelly@comcen.com.au>                      <009e01c165ba$ac75ac80$41391442@billbull>             <v04210101b80be5bb05cb@[10.0.0.2]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0D99_01C56B69.56B6DD10"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <001401c16606$b50f4bc0$51391442@billbull>
Date:         Mon, 5 Nov 2001 08:32:32 -0600
Reply-To: "Bill Bullock" <bpbullock@LARIBAY.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Bill Bullock" <bpbullock@LARIBAY.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Inexpensive but accurate groove cutter?
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0D99_01C56B69.56B6DD10
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Bob:
    Precisely what I had in mind. Of course one also might consider =
using a vertical router table where the horizontal table flips up into a =
vertical position and the router is now running in a horizontal =
position. Then you can butt the tube against the now-vertical table and =
simply rotate the tube...using a set of pipe rollers on vertically =
adjustable stands for supports.
    The idea of making a set of pre-measured solid bearings is better =
than mine of doing a quick grind-down of one bearing disk as you =
proceed. My way I always had to start with a new disk and throw it away =
when I got through with it.
    Using the carbide-tipped slot-cutter router bits is a nice thought. =
They can be ground down to whatever width/thickness one desires on a =
good slow-speed stone. A water bath helps keep from destroying them. In =
the shop we are constantly re-grinding or re-shaping lathe cutting tools =
this way. A diamond impregnated sharpening stone will retouch carbide in =
a hurry.
    One more small trick: if you are using a hand-held circular saw or a =
table saw for a cut-off saw you might consider using a fine-toothed =
carbide-tipped blade but turn it to rotate backwards . It is far less =
likely to hang up or kick back plus it makes a smoother cut. This is a =
greater safety feature with harder aluminum than soft materials. You can =
use the same procedure on a table saw with a home-made carriage to mill =
fin slots in the sides of aluminum bodied rockets.=20
    Or, if anyone wants to work with really big motor casings the shop I =
use has an old all-electric Edelstall that will turn 42" O.D. by 40 foot =
long tubing up to 8.5 tons..... I don't get to run that one.
Bill
  ----- Original Message -----=20
  From: bob fortune=20
  To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU=20
  Sent: Monday, November 05, 2001 12:49 AM
  Subject: Re: [AR] Inexpensive but accurate groove cutter?


  Hey Bill,

  A shoe of some kind on a router with a bearing was what I was
  imagining at the outset.  Your suggestion of simply making the shoe
  much bigger than the tube to be cut would keep the tool perpendicular
  to the work if done with caution.  There are several different
  diameters of bearings available but it would be simple work on a
  lathe to make a set of bearing bushings (sounds like an oxymoron) to
  adjust the depth of cut from a couple of thousands graduated through
  the full depth of cut necessary for a particular application or
  tubing wall thickness.

  cheers

  Bob

  (Some Snipped Here)


------=_NextPart_000_0D99_01C56B69.56B6DD10
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META content=3D"text/html; charset=3Diso-8859-1" =
http-equiv=3DContent-Type>
<META content=3D"MSHTML 5.00.2614.3500" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV>Bob:</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Precisely what I had in mind. Of course one also =
might=20
consider using a vertical router table where the horizontal table flips =
up into=20
a vertical position and the router is now running in a horizontal =
position. Then=20
you can butt the tube against the now-vertical table and simply rotate =
the=20
tube...using a set of pipe rollers on vertically adjustable stands for=20
supports.</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; The idea of making a set of pre-measured solid =
bearings=20
is better than mine of doing a quick grind-down of one bearing disk as =
you=20
proceed. My way I always had to start with a new disk and throw it away =
when I=20
got through with it.</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Using the carbide-tipped slot-cutter router bits =
is a=20
nice thought. They can be ground down to whatever width/thickness one =
desires on=20
a good slow-speed stone. A water bath helps keep from destroying them. =
In the=20
shop we are constantly re-grinding or re-shaping lathe cutting tools =
this way. A=20
diamond impregnated sharpening stone will retouch carbide in a =
hurry.</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; One more small trick: if you are using a =
hand-held=20
circular saw or a table saw for a cut-off saw you might consider using a =

fine-toothed carbide-tipped blade but turn it to rotate <U>backwards =
</U>. It is=20
far less likely to hang up or kick back&nbsp;plus it makes a smoother =
cut. This=20
is a greater safety feature with harder aluminum than soft materials. =
You can=20
use the same procedure on a table saw with a home-made carriage to mill =
fin=20
slots in the sides of aluminum bodied rockets. </DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Or, if anyone wants to work with really big =
motor=20
casings the shop I use has an old all-electric Edelstall that will turn =
42" O.D.=20
by 40 foot long&nbsp;tubing up to 8.5 tons..... I don't get to run that=20
one.</DIV>
<DIV>Bill</DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE=20
style=3D"BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: =
0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; PADDING-RIGHT: 0px">
  <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial">----- Original Message ----- </DIV>
  <DIV=20
  style=3D"BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; FONT: 10pt arial; font-color: =
black"><B>From:</B>=20
  <A href=3D"mailto:bob@FORTUNEPAINT.COM" =
title=3Dbob@FORTUNEPAINT.COM>bob=20
  fortune</A> </DIV>
  <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A =
href=3D"mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU"=20
  title=3DAROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU</A> </DIV>
  <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> Monday, November 05, 2001 =
12:49=20
  AM</DIV>
  <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> Re: [AR] Inexpensive =
but=20
  accurate groove cutter?</DIV>
  <DIV><BR></DIV>Hey Bill,<BR><BR>A shoe of some kind on a router with a =
bearing=20
  was what I was<BR>imagining at the outset.&nbsp; Your suggestion of =
simply=20
  making the shoe<BR>much bigger than the tube to be cut would keep the =
tool=20
  perpendicular<BR>to the work if done with caution.&nbsp; There are =
several=20
  different<BR>diameters of bearings available but it would be simple =
work on=20
  a<BR>lathe to make a set of bearing bushings (sounds like an oxymoron) =

  to<BR>adjust the depth of cut from a couple of thousands graduated=20
  through<BR>the full depth of cut necessary for a particular =
application=20
  or<BR>tubing wall thickness.<BR><BR>cheers<BR><BR>Bob<BR><BR>(Some =
Snipped=20
  Here)<BR></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0D99_01C56B69.56B6DD10--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 2503 invoked from network); 5 Nov 2001 18:22:42 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 5 Nov 2001 18:22:42 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 5798 invoked by uid 50005); 5 Nov 2001 18:22:21 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4168. . Clean. Processed in 0.141158 secs); 05 Nov 2001 18:22:21 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 5 Nov 2001 18:22:21 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA25623; Mon, 5 Nov 2001 10:20:20 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 128374 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 5 Nov 2001 18:20:17          +0000
Received: from mail-srv1.micron.com (masquerade.micron.com [137.201.242.130])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA25609 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 5 Nov 2001 10:20:12 -0800
Received: from mail-srv1.micron.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by          mail-srv1.micron.com (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id fA5IJfB28152 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 5 Nov 2001 11:19:41 -0700 (MST)
Received: from ntexchange01.micron.com (ntexchange01 [137.201.104.84]) by          mail-srv1.micron.com (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id fA5IJdq28091; Mon,          5 Nov 2001 11:19:39 -0700 (MST)
Received: by ntexchange01.micron.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19)          id <VPX3P8VY>; Mon, 5 Nov 2001 11:19:38 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19)
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Message-ID:  <2DCA36C44BF3D211917F0008C7C9C9DD067ECF9E@ntexchange06.micron.com>
Date:         Mon, 5 Nov 2001 11:19:20 -0700
Reply-To: "gacrowell" <gacrowell@MICRON.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "gacrowell" <gacrowell@MICRON.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] The best little Converter
Comments: To: Blake Mantel <BMantel@SNET.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Aside from the predictable responses to a binary, that is the best little
converter I've seen.

Thanks,

Gary Crowell

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Blake Mantel [mailto:BMantel@SNET.NET]
> Sent: Sunday, November 04, 2001 12:31 PM
> To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
> Subject: [AR] The best little Converter
>
>
> Quick, easy and will hopefully keep you from making the same
> mistakes NASA made
> in converting units.
>
> Blake
> --
> CUM CATAPULTAE PROSCRIPTAE ERUNT TUM SOLI PROSCRIPTI
> CATAPULTAS HABEBUNT.
> (When catapults are outlawed, only outlaws will have catapults....)
> Triumph Tiger Motorcycle page at: http://pages.cthome.net/bmantel/
>
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 24649 invoked from network); 5 Nov 2001 18:53:11 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 5 Nov 2001 18:53:11 -0000
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 22503 invoked by uid 50005); 5 Nov 2001 17:38:40 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4168. . Clean. Processed in 0.635692 secs); 05 Nov 2001 17:38:40 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 5 Nov 2001 17:38:38 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA25740; Mon, 5 Nov 2001 10:44:41 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 128395 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 5 Nov 2001 18:44:35          +0000
Received: from mail1.murraystate.edu (mail1.murraystate.edu [216.249.159.50])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id KAA25726 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 5 Nov 2001 10:44:35 -0800
Received: from jjcomputer.murraystate.edu (216.249.150.117) by          mail1.murraystate.edu (NPlex 5.5.031) id 3B859680001B0D0D for          AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 5 Nov 2001 12:30:18 -0600
X-Sender: terry.mccreary@mail.murraystate.edu
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <5.1.0.14.0.20011105121941.02536ec0@mail.murraystate.edu>
Date:         Mon, 5 Nov 2001 12:35:04 -0600
Reply-To: "Terry McCreary" <terry.mccreary@MURRAYSTATE.EDU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Terry McCreary" <terry.mccreary@MURRAYSTATE.EDU>
Subject:      [AR] Administrivia:  Arocket
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Hello all:  It's been quite a while since this was posted, and I've been
off the list for a while, and some have asked about unsubscribing, so...

Please note that the http://arocket.mid-south.net link does indeed appear
to work, though http://www.arocket.net does not, for the time being.  I'm
sure that the problem is being resolved.


Administrivia updated 2 Aug 2001

Arocket is a mailing list for amateur (experimental) rocketry.  It is a
fairly active list with about four hundred members worldwide.  Expect
20-100 messages daily from the list, depending on the topic; some topics
generate more response than others.  The list manager is Ray Calkins.  The
person sending this email is just a helper...

SUBSCRIBING AND UNSUBSCRIBING:
      -go to http://arocket.mid-south.net
      -select "Forum"
      -fill out the form.

Posting:

A.  Send posts to arocket@itc.uci.edu

B.  The subject is "amateur rocketry".  Other subjects such as nuclear
weaponry, prop aircraft, and the general stupidity of the Ugly American may
be popular subjects -- but are off-topic.  Please stay on-topic.

C.  Be nice.  No flames.  If you feel duty-bound to flame or to reply to
such, take it to private e-mail.

D.  Text only.  No HTML.  Go to the 'HELP' of your email program or browser
for info on how to turn off HTML.

E.  Text only.  No attachments, figures, JPGs, BMPs, programs, etc.  Keep
in mind that some poor slugs on the list have very slow access, and long
attachments can cause their ISPs to spasm and disconnect.

If you have a program or figure that might be of widespread interest,
contact the list manager to have it placed on the web site (see (G)).  That
way you won't tickoff people who don't want it, and future subscribers will
be able to get it.

F.  Archives and FAQ:  http://arocket.mid-south.net then go to the "FAQ",
"Library", or "Site Map".  Thanks to Ray, Dave McCue, Ross Borden et al for
their efforts on the list and web site.

G.  New list members:  please read the list for a week or so before
posting, to get a feel for what goes on here.  Read the FAQ to find out
what subjects are FARTs (frequently annoying recurring threads).  The
library on the Arocket site has more information than you will know what to
do with.  Take a little time to browse the library.

H.  Replying to messages:  note that the arocket email address does NOT
necessarily appear as the 'reply to' address.  You may have to delete the
original poster's address and paste the arocket address in its place.

J.  More replying to messages:  please save bandwidth, listee time, and
annoyance by snipping unrelated or unnecessary text from the original
message(s).  Fifty lines of quoted text followed by a one-line reply or
"Me-Too" is simply rude.

K.  Spamming:   may get you booted from the list.  In addition, many
listees feel rather strongly about spam, and may send large, hairy men with
tree-trunk arms to visit your home and wreak havoc on your bodily functions.

L.  Advertisements:  brief, occasional, amateur-rocketry-specific ads are
ok.  Preface the subject with "[AD]" so that those who don't want to read
it can delete it.  Frequent, long, or other-related ads:  see (K).

Announcements of group purchases not-for-profit are ok.

M.  Many persons prefer mailing lists to newsgroups because of the
goofiness that shows up on newsgroups.  Please leave rocket-related
goofiness in the newsgroup rec.models.rockets or elsewhere.

N.  Administrative problems:  if you are having problems posting, receiving
messages, etc., do not post your problems to the list.  It may make listees
unhappy, and (K) may apply.  The list manager can help you at
listmgr@arocket.mid-south.net.

Being an irritant is no badge of honor in itself: A grain of sand in an
oyster is an irritant that produces a pearl. A mosquito on a human is an
irritant that produces itching welts and malaria before it gets swatted
into oblivion. Apparently, no one explained to you the difference between
storming the Bastille and p!$$!ng in the punchbowl. -- Timothy A. McDaniel

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 27407 invoked from network); 5 Nov 2001 23:38:05 -0000
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 5 Nov 2001 23:38:05 -0000
Received: (qmail 17958 invoked by uid 50005); 5 Nov 2001 23:37:45 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4168. . Clean. Processed in 0.216231 secs); 05 Nov 2001 23:37:45 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 5 Nov 2001 23:37:45 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA26983; Mon, 5 Nov 2001 15:08:32 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 128447 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 5 Nov 2001 23:06:58          +0000
Received: from mail.cac.net (mail.cac.net [209.44.14.13]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA26967 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon,          5 Nov 2001 15:06:58 -0800
Received: from jfackertcac (3639246098.mi.dial.hexcom.net [216.234.125.19]) by          mail.cac.net (8.11.3/8.11.3) with SMTP id fA5N7Tf07872 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 5 Nov 2001 18:07:33 -0500 (EST)          (envelope-from jfackert@cac.net)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook CWS, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0)
Importance: Normal
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <000001c1664d$bf51ab40$137dead8@net>
Date:         Sun, 4 Nov 2001 22:29:13 -0500
Reply-To: <jfackert@cac.net>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jim Fackert" <jfackert@cac.net>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Inexpensive but accurate groove cutter?
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <JJEFLLHFFAHHMBBIHFAEMEPACHAA.pkelly@comcen.com.au>

Make a flange that clamps on the end of the tube and gives you a 1 square
foot or so area of perpendicular flatness (APF) to zoom the router around
on... and clamp the pipe in a vise or onto the edge of a heavy work bench so
it doesn't wobble around a lot...

Jim

PS: big advantage of triple chip saw blades for cutting aluminum is that
they have a little negative rake, so that alarming KBAM when a positive rake
tooth grabs the metal doesn't happen, and you don't have to hang on quite so
tightly to the workpiece...

Jim

-----Original Message-----
From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU]On
Behalf Of Paul Kelly
Sent: Sunday, November 04, 2001 9:55 PM
To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
Subject: Re: [AR] Inexpensive but accurate groove cutter?


But how do you locate the router on the end of the tube in a manner the
ensures the sides of the cut groove are exactly perpendicular to the bore
axis?

PK

-----Original Message-----
From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU]On
Behalf Of Jim Fackert
Sent: Monday, 5 November 2001 1:04 PM
To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
Subject: Re: [AR] Inexpensive but accurate groove cutter?


A router bit with a ball bearing edge guide would work great. I think htere
are edge grooving carbide bits for making grooves in the edge of panels to
insert edge moulding, and they have a ball bearing mounted on their tips to
al;low the cutter to cut exactly the right depth. Find a cutter of the right
width, make a collar to go over the bearing to reduce the depth, and you've
got it made. I suggest using a wax stick type cutter lubricant to prevent
the gummy aluminum from sticking to the bit.

I have cut and groove dlots of aluminum on a table saw with a triple chip
carbide blade... works great!

Jim Fackert

Bob,

I think a router could do it easily. It would require the right bit and
setup, but it should not be beyond the skills of any woodworker. I have
been meaning to try this method ever since a friend suggested it.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 14784 invoked from network); 5 Nov 2001 23:58:41 -0000
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 5 Nov 2001 23:58:41 -0000
Received: (qmail 12816 invoked by uid 50005); 5 Nov 2001 22:44:09 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4168. . Clean. Processed in 0.285328 secs); 05 Nov 2001 22:44:09 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 5 Nov 2001 22:44:08 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA27094; Mon, 5 Nov 2001 15:35:26 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 128456 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 5 Nov 2001 23:33:16          +0000
Received: from mail-nb00s0.nbnet.nb.ca (smtp1.nbnet.nb.ca [198.164.200.23]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA27035 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 5 Nov 2001 15:23:15 -0800
Received: from grmiller ([142.166.249.58]) by mail-nb00s0.nbnet.nb.ca          (Post.Office MTA v3.5.3 release 223 ID# 0-72041U145000L145000S0V35)          with SMTP id ca for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 5 Nov 2001 19:23:02          -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.2106.4
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <002101c16565$c8d9be20$3af9a68e@grmiller>
Date:         Sun, 4 Nov 2001 19:20:36 -0000
Reply-To: "Gary Miller" <grmiller@NBNET.NB.CA>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Gary Miller" <grmiller@NBNET.NB.CA>
Subject:      Re: [AR] The best little Converter
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

There is a newer version of it out there with some more conversions in it.
I've got version 4.08 I think.
gary

-----Original Message-----
From: gacrowell <gacrowell@MICRON.COM>
To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Date: Monday, November 05, 2001 6:21 PM
Subject: Re: [AR] The best little Converter


>Aside from the predictable responses to a binary, that is the best little
>converter I've seen.
>
>Thanks,
>
>Gary Crowell
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Blake Mantel [mailto:BMantel@SNET.NET]
>> Sent: Sunday, November 04, 2001 12:31 PM
>> To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
>> Subject: [AR] The best little Converter
>>
>>
>> Quick, easy and will hopefully keep you from making the same
>> mistakes NASA made
>> in converting units.
>>
>> Blake
>> --
>> CUM CATAPULTAE PROSCRIPTAE ERUNT TUM SOLI PROSCRIPTI
>> CATAPULTAS HABEBUNT.
>> (When catapults are outlawed, only outlaws will have catapults....)
>> Triumph Tiger Motorcycle page at: http://pages.cthome.net/bmantel/
>>
>>
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 17075 invoked from network); 6 Nov 2001 00:29:47 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 6 Nov 2001 00:29:47 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: (qmail 27591 invoked by uid 50005); 5 Nov 2001 23:15:14 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4168. . Clean. Processed in 2.15506 secs); 05 Nov 2001 23:15:14 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 5 Nov 2001 23:15:11 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA27302; Mon, 5 Nov 2001 16:19:21 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 128480 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 6 Nov 2001 00:19:16          +0000
Received: from web10506.mail.yahoo.com (web10506.mail.yahoo.com          [216.136.130.156]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id QAA27288          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 5 Nov 2001 16:19:16 -0800
Received: from [129.219.23.228] by web10506.mail.yahoo.com via HTTP; Mon, 05          Nov 2001 16:19:15 PST
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <20011106001915.3678.qmail@web10506.mail.yahoo.com>
Date:         Mon, 5 Nov 2001 16:19:15 -0800
Reply-To: "Justin Pucci" <drrockit5150@YAHOO.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Justin Pucci" <drrockit5150@YAHOO.COM>
Subject:      [AR] Flanged Steel Pipes
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Hey guys,

I was wondering if you would know where I could get
ahold of some steel pipe with flanges on the ends for
use in a hybrid test engine?  Probably 3-4" OD with
flanges that bolt on...  Thanks for the help!

-->Justin Pucci

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Find a job, post your resume.
http://careers.yahoo.com

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 2652 invoked from network); 6 Nov 2001 02:13:23 -0000
X-Priority: 3
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 6 Nov 2001 02:13:23 -0000
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 29219 invoked by uid 50005); 6 Nov 2001 01:58:54 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4168. . Clean. Processed in 0.443196 secs); 06 Nov 2001 01:58:54 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 6 Nov 2001 01:58:53 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA27668; Mon, 5 Nov 2001 18:10:16 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 128515 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 6 Nov 2001 02:09:54          +0000
Received: from sys32.hou.wt.net (sys32.hou.wt.net [205.230.159.32]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA27647 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 5 Nov 2001 18:09:53 -0800
Received: from localhost (216-119-130-154.ipset10.wt.net [216.119.130.154]) by          sys32.hou.wt.net (8.9.1/8.9.1) with ESMTP id UAA24870 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 5 Nov 2001 20:09:59 -0600 (CST)
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0D9C_01C56B69.56C9EFE0"
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.472)
Message-ID:  <62F2BECE-D25B-11D5-B097-0050E43A5105@netaxs.com>
Date:         Mon, 5 Nov 2001 20:10:01 -0600
Reply-To: "Donald McCorvey" <dlm3@NETAXS.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Donald McCorvey" <dlm3@NETAXS.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Inexpensive but accurate groove cutter?
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <009e01c165ba$ac75ac80$41391442@billbull>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0D9C_01C56B69.56C9EFE0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="US-ASCII"

If you use a router to make this groove, make yourself a jig to hold the
pipe and support the router.

Take a piece of MDF, lexan, aluminum, or other smooth, solid, easily
machined material, at least twice the diameter of your router base+tube
diameter, and 1/2" thick (it just has to be of a known thickness and
strong enough to support the router without bending.  Use a
circle-cutting jig attached to your router to cut a hole to the inside
diameter of your tube in the center of your base plate.

Install a flange large enough to support your tube beneath the base
plate centered on the guide hole. The tube should fit snugly, and be
able to slide until it is flush with the bottom of the jig plate. The
inside of the tube should be flush with your jig. Use a laminate
trimming bit, if necessary, to clean up the edges of the jig until it is
perfectly flush with the tube.

Attach the jig to a stand of appropriate height to ensure that it s
higher than the tube you wish to machine.

Use a carbide slot cutting bit of the desired thickness, say 1/16", and
1" diameter. Install a collar in the base of your router to set the
depth of cut, i.e. if you want 1/16" depth, use a 7/8" dia. collar. You
can work out combinations of bit diameters, and collars to get your
desired groove depth.

Set the router on the jig, ensuring that it has adequate support and is
not in contact with the tube yet. Turn it on, then make one or two
passes around the diameter of the tube until you don't cut any more
material.

Keep in mind that I haven't actually built this jig - I'm just using
basic principles that I have used or seen used, plus a bit of educated
guessing.

Good luck!

Don McCorvey

>
> ----- Original Message -----
>
> From: Paul Kelly
> To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
> Sent: Sunday, November 04, 2001 8:55 PM
> Subject: Re: [AR] Inexpensive but accurate groove cutter?
>
> But how do you locate the router on the end of the tube in a manner the
> ensures the sides of the cut groove are exactly perpendicular to the
> bore
> axis?
>
> PK
> (A Bunch Snipped Here)
>

------=_NextPart_000_0D9C_01C56B69.56C9EFE0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Type: text/enriched;
	charset="US-ASCII"

If you use a router to make this groove, make yourself a jig to hold
the pipe and support the router.


Take a piece of MDF, lexan, aluminum, or other smooth, solid, easily
machined material, at least twice the diameter of your router
base+tube diameter, and 1/2" thick (it just has to be of a known
thickness and strong enough to support the router without bending.
Use a circle-cutting jig attached to your router to cut a hole to the
inside diameter of your tube in the center of your base plate.


Install a flange large enough to support your tube beneath the base
plate centered on the guide hole. The tube should fit snugly, and be
able to slide until it is flush with the bottom of the jig plate. The
inside of the tube should be flush with your jig. Use a laminate
trimming bit, if necessary, to clean up the edges of the jig until it
is perfectly flush with the tube.


Attach the jig to a stand of appropriate height to ensure that it s
higher than the tube you wish to machine.


Use a carbide slot cutting bit of the desired thickness, say 1/16",
and 1" diameter. Install a collar in the base of your router to set
the depth of cut, i.e. if you want 1/16" depth, use a 7/8" dia.
collar. You can work out combinations of bit diameters, and collars to
get your desired groove depth.


Set the router on the jig, ensuring that it has adequate support and
is not in contact with the tube yet. Turn it on, then make one or two
passes around the diameter of the tube until you don't cut any more
material.


Keep in mind that I haven't actually built this jig - I'm just using
basic principles that I have used or seen used, plus a bit of educated
guessing.


Good luck!


Don McCorvey


<excerpt>

----- Original Message -----


<bold>From:</bold> <underline><color><param>1999,1999,FFFF</param>Paul
Kelly</color></underline>

<bold>To:</bold>
<underline><color><param>1999,1999,FFFF</param>AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU</color></underline>

<bold>Sent:</bold> Sunday, November 04, 2001 8:55 PM

<bold>Subject:</bold> Re: [AR] Inexpensive but accurate groove cutter?


But how do you locate the router on the end of the tube in a manner the

ensures the sides of the cut groove are exactly perpendicular to the
bore

axis?


PK

(A Bunch Snipped Here)


</excerpt>
------=_NextPart_000_0D9C_01C56B69.56C9EFE0--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 198 invoked from network); 6 Nov 2001 03:11:13 -0000
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 6 Nov 2001 03:11:13 -0000
Received: (qmail 16183 invoked by uid 50005); 6 Nov 2001 02:56:25 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4168. . Clean. Processed in 1.043922 secs); 06 Nov 2001 02:56:25 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 6 Nov 2001 02:56:23 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA27924; Mon, 5 Nov 2001 19:08:14 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 128545 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 6 Nov 2001 03:08:11          +0000
Received: from cablecom.laribay.net (cablecom.laribay.net [66.20.57.4]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA27910 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 5 Nov 2001 19:08:11 -0800
Received: from billbull (dial102.laribay.net [66.20.57.102]) by          cablecom.laribay.net (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id UAA14723 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 5 Nov 2001 20:52:57 -0600 (CST)          (envelope-from bpbullock@laribay.net)
References:  <20011106001915.3678.qmail@web10506.mail.yahoo.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <006c01c16670$4faa0f80$32391442@billbull>
Date:         Mon, 5 Nov 2001 21:08:29 -0600
Reply-To: "Bill Bullock" <bpbullock@LARIBAY.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Bill Bullock" <bpbullock@LARIBAY.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Flanged Steel Pipes
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Justin:
    Most welding supply businesses can get you any kind of weldable flanges
made of almost any material you want. You have them welded onto the desired
size and type pipe you need for your application. If you are going to run an
appreciable level of pressure I would strongly suggest having a certified
welder to do the work. He will be able to make sure the flanges are
perpendicular to the axis of the tube as part of the job.
    These standard flanges are used with standard-sized gaskets so there is
no special-order concerns. I personally like the Ragco double-jacketed
gaskets with a Grafoil-type (Graphite Foil) filler and a stainless steel
covering/jacket. I particularly like the Style 127 Double Shell Gasket with
the SS jacketing. It is extremely durable and will stand temperatures up to
about 1650 deg. F. for extended periods. That's getting close to the melting
temperature of some grades of steel. You can find the nearest Ragco dealer
at www.ragco.com .
    If you need special-service or non-standard sized gaskets they can
custom make them for you. They are also a good source for high-temp sealers
and thread lubes for the flange bolts.
Bill
----- Original Message -----
From: Justin Pucci <drrockit5150@YAHOO.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Monday, November 05, 2001 6:19 PM
Subject: [AR] Flanged Steel Pipes


> Hey guys,
>
> I was wondering if you would know where I could get
> ahold of some steel pipe with flanges on the ends for
> use in a hybrid test engine?  Probably 3-4" OD with
> flanges that bolt on...  Thanks for the help!
>
> -->Justin Pucci
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Find a job, post your resume.
> http://careers.yahoo.com
>
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 151 invoked from network); 6 Nov 2001 04:35:13 -0000
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 6 Nov 2001 04:35:13 -0000
Received: (qmail 17835 invoked by uid 50005); 6 Nov 2001 04:20:43 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4168. . Clean. Processed in 0.963416 secs); 06 Nov 2001 04:20:43 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 6 Nov 2001 04:20:41 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA28189; Mon, 5 Nov 2001 20:30:58 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 128571 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 6 Nov 2001 04:30:41          +0000
Received: from castor.ridgenet.net (IDENT:root@castor.ridgenet.net          [199.120.150.29]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA28175          for <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Mon, 5 Nov 2001 20:30:41 -0800
Received: from kristinscomp (pm174.ridgenet.net [204.154.246.174]) by          castor.ridgenet.net (8.11.0/8.11.0) with SMTP id fA64I9W13751; Mon, 5          Nov 2001 20:18:09 -0800
References: <3BE59767.5A558B4@snet.net>            <002201c16573$72f9c320$1b30fea9@kristinscomp>            <3BE712D8.F9830E1A@home.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <004201c1667b$d8a9c5e0$1b30fea9@kristinscomp>
Date:         Mon, 5 Nov 2001 20:31:03 -0800
Reply-To: "Kristin & David Hall" <thehalls@RIDGENET.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Kristin & David Hall" <thehalls@RIDGENET.NET>
Subject:      [AR] Speech
Comments: To: Mark Simpson <mark.simpson@home.com>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

> And your foul language has no place on this list either!
>
I'm sending this as David is out of town and can't reply.  Haven't you
gotten really angry over something and had good reason?  Try not being able
to get the rest of your email while waiting to download one particular email
that had no place in your inbox.  Remember how angry that might have made
you?  Yes, he used foul language.  But he feels it was justified.  We are
all adults here, and sometimes the only way to get a particular point across
is to be extremely blunt, or shocking.  In this instance, Dave's way was to
use foul language.  He doesn't feel the need to apologize just because some
people were offended by it.  He was offended by having to take forever to
download a file.  Apologies are polite, but they still don't get rid of hard
feelings.  And Dave feels no need to apologize for speaking his mind.  And
I'm pretty sure he doesn't intend to.

-Kristin
--
Dave and/or Kristin Hall

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 27626 invoked from network); 6 Nov 2001 05:37:03 -0000
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 6 Nov 2001 05:37:03 -0000
Received: (qmail 25049 invoked by uid 50005); 6 Nov 2001 05:36:43 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4168. . Clean. Processed in 0.403999 secs); 06 Nov 2001 05:36:43 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 6 Nov 2001 05:36:43 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA28454; Mon, 5 Nov 2001 21:34:26 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 128603 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 6 Nov 2001 05:34:22          +0000
Received: from albqpop1.albq.uswest.net (albqpop1.albq.uswest.net          [207.108.240.1]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id VAA28440          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 5 Nov 2001 21:34:21 -0800
Received: (qmail 8754 invoked by alias); 6 Nov 2001 05:33:49 -0000
Delivered-To: fixup-AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU@fixme
Received: (qmail 8706 invoked by uid 0); 6 Nov 2001 05:33:48 -0000
Received: from cc898542-a.prdise1.nm.home.com (HELO cc898542a) (65.7.151.152)          by albqpop1.albq.uswest.net with SMTP; 6 Nov 2001 05:33:48 -0000
References: <3BE59767.5A558B4@snet.net>                       <002201c16573$72f9c320$1b30fea9@kristinscomp>                       <3BE712D8.F9830E1A@home.com>             <004201c1667b$d8a9c5e0$1b30fea9@kristinscomp>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <002c01c16684$8fae0ff0$0100a8c0@cc898542a>
Date:         Mon, 5 Nov 2001 22:33:26 -0700
Reply-To: "Paxton" <darkspunge@USWEST.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Paxton" <darkspunge@USWEST.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Speech
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

While I wasnt so much offended as others might of been, I thought it was
totally unprovoked and not justified.
To be fair the file should not have been posted. To be more fair it is not
the lists, or the original postors fault
that it took "forever" to download 150KB. 99% of the websites out there
contain more data then this. If it took
more then 30-45 seconds tops to download then I would contact your ISP or
phone company, or look at problems
that could be related to the computer. That is NO justification to biting
somebody's head off. NONE. The fact of
the matter is that this is totally silly, pointless, and is causing way too
much grief for what is it. It's like getting into a fist
fight because somebody bumped into the back of you while standing in a line.
Common people. Stubborness is fine
and all, but get real. How about focousing some of that energy into helping
a youngin break into the aerospace industry huh?
:-)

Paxton


----- Original Message -----
From: "Kristin & David Hall" <thehalls@RIDGENET.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Monday, November 05, 2001 9:31 PM
Subject: [AR] Speech


> > And your foul language has no place on this list either!
> >
> I'm sending this as David is out of town and can't reply.  Haven't you
> gotten really angry over something and had good reason?  Try not being
able
> to get the rest of your email while waiting to download one particular
email
> that had no place in your inbox.  Remember how angry that might have made
> you?  Yes, he used foul language.  But he feels it was justified.  We are
> all adults here, and sometimes the only way to get a particular point
across
> is to be extremely blunt, or shocking.  In this instance, Dave's way was
to
> use foul language.  He doesn't feel the need to apologize just because
some
> people were offended by it.  He was offended by having to take forever to
> download a file.  Apologies are polite, but they still don't get rid of
hard
> feelings.  And Dave feels no need to apologize for speaking his mind.  And
> I'm pretty sure he doesn't intend to.
>
> -Kristin
> --
> Dave and/or Kristin Hall
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 18528 invoked from network); 6 Nov 2001 07:03:26 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 6 Nov 2001 07:03:26 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 1743 invoked by uid 50005); 6 Nov 2001 07:03:07 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4168. . Clean. Processed in 0.215709 secs); 06 Nov 2001 07:03:07 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 6 Nov 2001 07:03:07 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA28703; Mon, 5 Nov 2001 22:55:49 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 128620 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 6 Nov 2001 06:55:44          +0000
Received: from smtp010pub.verizon.net ([206.46.170.189]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA28688 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon,          5 Nov 2001 22:55:43 -0800
Received: from [67.192.162.183] (11Cust183.tnt3.hilo.hi.da.uu.net          [67.192.162.183]) by smtp010pub.verizon.net  with ESMTP for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; id fA66tv822652 Tue, 6 Nov 2001 00:55:58 -0600          (CST)
X-Sender: ttocs@mail.gte.net (Unverified)
References: <3BE59767.5A558B4@snet.net>            <002201c16573$72f9c320$1b30fea9@kristinscomp>            <3BE712D8.F9830E1A@home.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <l03130300b80d36b7120c@[67.192.162.186]>
Date:         Mon, 5 Nov 2001 20:55:37 -1000
Reply-To: "Aaron Smith" <ttocs@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Aaron Smith" <ttocs@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Speech
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <004201c1667b$d8a9c5e0$1b30fea9@kristinscomp>

I just don't see what all the hubub is about.  If someone cusses a little,
who cares?  I, for one, listen to stuff like that every day and am not
bothered by it in the least.  If someone is offended, that is their
problem.  They can unsubscribe if they like.

Now, to keep this post ON topic...  I have been looking for performance
data for furfyl <sp?> alcohol and nitric acid.  Any references out there?

-Aaron

At 8:31 PM -0800 11/5/01, Kristin & David Hall wrote:
>> And your foul language has no place on this list either!
>>
>I'm sending this as David is out of town and can't reply.  Haven't you
>gotten really angry over something and had good reason?  Try not being able
>to get the rest of your email while waiting to download one particular email
>that had no place in your inbox.  Remember how angry that might have made
>you?  Yes, he used foul language.  But he feels it was justified.  We are
>all adults here, and sometimes the only way to get a particular point across
>is to be extremely blunt, or shocking.  In this instance, Dave's way was to
>use foul language.  He doesn't feel the need to apologize just because some
>people were offended by it.  He was offended by having to take forever to
>download a file.  Apologies are polite, but they still don't get rid of hard
>feelings.  And Dave feels no need to apologize for speaking his mind.  And
>I'm pretty sure he doesn't intend to.
>
>-Kristin
>--
>Dave and/or Kristin Hall

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 15358 invoked from network); 6 Nov 2001 15:08:50 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 6 Nov 2001 15:08:50 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: (qmail 10264 invoked by uid 50005); 6 Nov 2001 15:08:31 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4168. . Clean. Processed in 0.190605 secs); 06 Nov 2001 15:08:31 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 6 Nov 2001 15:08:31 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA29981; Tue, 6 Nov 2001 07:03:48 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 128664 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 6 Nov 2001 15:03:37          +0000
Received: from VOLSB01.libertyville.com (216-180-161-058.fsi.net          [216.180.161.58] (may be forged)) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with          ESMTP id HAA29966 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 6 Nov 2001 07:03:37          -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Message-ID:  <8241D5C473414F48B12A866EBBBF182A9990@VOLSB01.libertyville.com>
Date:         Tue, 6 Nov 2001 09:00:44 -0600
Reply-To: "Ed Dewey" <edewey@LIBERTYVILLE.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Ed Dewey" <edewey@LIBERTYVILLE.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Speech
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Understandable points on both sides.  List members really should read (or
re-read) the rules and follow them.  It might have been best that David
respond to the individual privately, though, rather than the whole list, but
I know he was making a point, and wanted to remind everyone.  It's EXTREMELY
irritating to have a modem connection and have someone send a large file.

-----Original Message-----
From: Kristin & David Hall [mailto:thehalls@RIDGENET.NET]
Sent: Monday, November 05, 2001 10:31 PM
To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
Subject: [AR] Speech


> And your foul language has no place on this list either!
>
I'm sending this as David is out of town and can't reply.  Haven't you
gotten really angry over something and had good reason?  Try not being able
to get the rest of your email while waiting to download one particular email
that had no place in your inbox.  Remember how angry that might have made
you?  Yes, he used foul language.  But he feels it was justified.  We are
all adults here, and sometimes the only way to get a particular point across
is to be extremely blunt, or shocking.  In this instance, Dave's way was to
use foul language.  He doesn't feel the need to apologize just because some
people were offended by it.  He was offended by having to take forever to
download a file.  Apologies are polite, but they still don't get rid of hard
feelings.  And Dave feels no need to apologize for speaking his mind.  And
I'm pretty sure he doesn't intend to.

-Kristin
--
Dave and/or Kristin Hall

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 19189 invoked from network); 6 Nov 2001 18:27:19 -0000
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 6 Nov 2001 18:27:19 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 18000 invoked by uid 50005); 6 Nov 2001 18:27:13 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4168. . Clean. Processed in 0.514936 secs); 06 Nov 2001 18:27:13 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 6 Nov 2001 18:27:12 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA30692; Tue, 6 Nov 2001 10:21:51 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 128706 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 6 Nov 2001 18:21:34          +0000
Received: from mail.aros.net (mail.aros.net [207.173.16.20]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA30675 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Tue,          6 Nov 2001 10:21:33 -0800
Received: from biomicro.com ([208.187.122.40]) by mail.aros.net (8.11.6/8.9.3)          with ESMTP id fA6ILWq28488 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Tue, 6 Nov 2001          11:21:32 -0700 (MST)
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.77 [en] (Win98; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3BE82A83.10B92C00@biomicro.com>
Date:         Tue, 6 Nov 2001 11:22:59 -0700
Reply-To: "Mark K. Spute" <mks@BIOMICRO.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Mark K. Spute" <mks@BIOMICRO.COM>
Subject:      [AR] N20/Propane
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Hi List;

I've decided to design a Nitrous Oxide/LPG engine to round out my
stable.

Does anyone know, off the top of their heads, what common mixture ratios
are for N2O/LPG?


--
Mark K. Spute
Senior Research Engineer
BioMicro Systems Inc.

KD7IWE,  RRS, hopeful future Stolly owner

"It is difficult to say what is impossible, for the dream of yesterday
is the hope of today and the reality of tomorrow."
     Dr. Robert H. Goddard

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 7025 invoked from network); 6 Nov 2001 21:51:34 -0000
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 6 Nov 2001 21:51:34 -0000
Received: (qmail 10836 invoked by uid 50005); 6 Nov 2001 21:36:58 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4168. . Clean. Processed in 0.28057 secs); 06 Nov 2001 21:36:58 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 6 Nov 2001 21:36:57 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA31363; Tue, 6 Nov 2001 13:37:19 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 128731 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 6 Nov 2001 21:37:09          +0000
Received: from fep3-orange.clear.net.nz (fep3-orange.clear.net.nz          [203.97.32.3]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA31349          for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Tue, 6 Nov 2001 13:37:07 -0800
Received: from mkbs (203-167-160-229.dialup.clear.net.nz [203.167.160.229]) by          fep3-orange.clear.net.nz (1.5/1.8) with SMTP id KAA15621; Wed, 7 Nov          2001 10:36:59 +1300 (NZDT)
References: <3BE59767.5A558B4@snet.net>                       <002201c16573$72f9c320$1b30fea9@kristinscomp>                       <3BE712D8.F9830E1A@home.com>             <l03130300b80d36b7120c@[67.192.162.186]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <00ad01c1670b$5c866fa0$0700a8c0@mkbs>
Date:         Wed, 7 Nov 2001 10:32:50 +1300
Reply-To: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Organization: Applied Technology
Subject:      Re: [AR] Speech
Comments: To: Aaron Smith <ttocs@GTE.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

> Now, to keep this post ON topic...  I have been looking for performance
> data for furfyl <sp?> alcohol and nitric acid.  Any references out there?

No, but the fact that it was used as a hypergolic starter slug for Nitric
plus xxx suggests that xxx is substantially better or they would have saved
the bother and stuck with Furfuryl alone.

Spelling is AFAIR "Furfuryl Alcohol". It's made from Oats I believe.



        RM

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 3237 invoked from network); 7 Nov 2001 03:05:55 -0000
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 7 Nov 2001 03:05:55 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 2409 invoked by uid 50005); 7 Nov 2001 03:07:03 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4168. . Clean. Processed in 1.35156 secs); 07 Nov 2001 03:07:03 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 7 Nov 2001 03:07:00 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA00747; Tue, 6 Nov 2001 18:58:33 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 128866 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 7 Nov 2001 02:57:54          +0000
Received: from priv-edtnes15-hme0.telusplanet.net (defout.telus.net          [199.185.220.240]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id          SAA00733 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 6 Nov 2001 18:57:53 -0800
Received: from telus.net ([66.183.45.79]) by priv-edtnes15-hme0.telusplanet.net          (InterMail vM.4.01.03.10 201-229-121-110) with ESMTP id          <20011107025722.QJEE14333.priv-edtnes15-hme0.telusplanet.net@telus.net> for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 6 Nov          2001 19:57:22 -0700
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (Win95; I)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3BE8A2F6.D966AD4B@telus.net>
Date:         Tue, 6 Nov 2001 18:56:55 -0800
Reply-To: "David Wakarchuk" <dwakarchuk@TELUS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "David Wakarchuk" <dwakarchuk@TELUS.NET>
Subject:      [AR] AN particle sizes
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Here is a question for the AN motor gurus.  I know when folks put
together APCP motors often they use a blend of AP particle sizes so that
the propellant not only has good processing properties but also has an
optimized packing (final density).  Is this also typically true for
AN/Mg based motors or is it simply a matter of using the finest particle
sizes of AN and Mg one can get a hold of ?

David Wakarchuk

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 15156 invoked from network); 7 Nov 2001 04:02:37 -0000
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 7 Nov 2001 04:02:37 -0000
Received: (qmail 23474 invoked by uid 50005); 7 Nov 2001 04:02:32 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4168. . Clean. Processed in 0.229358 secs); 07 Nov 2001 04:02:32 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 7 Nov 2001 04:02:31 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA00958; Tue, 6 Nov 2001 19:57:48 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 128895 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 7 Nov 2001 03:57:41          +0000
Received: from fep3-orange.clear.net.nz (fep3-orange.clear.net.nz          [203.97.32.3]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA00944          for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Tue, 6 Nov 2001 19:57:40 -0800
Received: from mkbs (203-167-165-25.dialup.clear.net.nz [203.167.165.25]) by          fep3-orange.clear.net.nz (1.5/1.8) with SMTP id QAA28172; Wed, 7 Nov          2001 16:57:36 +1300 (NZDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="Windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <003f01c16740$87ee6500$0700a8c0@mkbs>
Date:         Wed, 7 Nov 2001 16:34:08 +1300
Reply-To: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Organization: Applied Technology
Subject:      [AR] Propellant table
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

31 rocket propellant formulae.
More of a pyrotechnic bias but may be of interest.



        http://207.189.173.137/webdoc1.htg/CompDB/Rocket.html

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 5178 invoked from network); 7 Nov 2001 04:18:47 -0000
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 7 Nov 2001 04:18:47 -0000
Received: (qmail 17504 invoked by uid 50005); 7 Nov 2001 04:18:42 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4168. . Clean. Processed in 0.855467 secs); 07 Nov 2001 04:18:42 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 7 Nov 2001 04:18:40 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA01064; Tue, 6 Nov 2001 20:14:31 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 128912 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 7 Nov 2001 04:14:27          +0000
Received: from nt2000s2.dgmicro.com (cn815472-c.newcas1.de.home.com          [24.40.74.93]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA01050          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 6 Nov 2001 20:14:23 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
X-MS-Has-Attach: 
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: 
Thread-Topic: Grain Geometry - Thoughts?
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
content-class: urn:content-classes:message
Thread-Index: AcFnQQJozzy0McL/RBOYzBEztMlzeAAAFA1A
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by itc.uci.edu id UAA01051
Message-ID:  <C0F7BF4DCEC1D2479A01031347184DCD386E@nt2000s2.dgmicro.com>
Date:         Tue, 6 Nov 2001 23:13:43 -0500
Reply-To: "Darren Wright" <dwright@D2-TECH.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Darren Wright" <dwright@D2-TECH.COM>
Subject:      [AR] Grain Geometry - Thoughts?
Comments: cc: Jeff Taylor <jtaylor@nc.rr.com>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

I've already talked to a few persons about geometry, but I thought I'd
throw this out to get some opinions:

I am involved in an O motor project, and the grain geometry is in
question.

We are looking at 3 10" grains, and 2 5" grains, all 4.5" diameter. The
two possible scenarios are:

A) 2 5" grains at bottom, 2" core. And then top 3 grains 10" x 1.5"
core.

B) 10" x 2" core grain at bottom, 2 10x1.5" core grains, then 2 5"x1.5"
grains top.

In any case the bottom 10" will be a slower formula.

In all my motor building, I have put the short grains on the
bottom....primarily to clear out the area around the nozzle.  However,
this leaves an empty space that propellant could possibly collapse into.


My partner has always put the short grains on the top.  However, I can
see that there may be more of a heat issue this way.

Anyone have thoughts on this issue?  I'm interested to hear if anyone
has done this either way.

I think we are going to go with "B" if noone has a good reason not too.

-Darren

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 17352 invoked from network); 7 Nov 2001 04:33:02 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 7 Nov 2001 04:33:02 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 6507 invoked by uid 50005); 7 Nov 2001 04:32:57 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4168. . Clean. Processed in 0.244099 secs); 07 Nov 2001 04:32:57 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 7 Nov 2001 04:32:57 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA01140; Tue, 6 Nov 2001 20:29:29 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 128929 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 7 Nov 2001 04:29:27          +0000
Received: from smtp003pub.verizon.net (smtp003pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.182])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA01126 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 6 Nov 2001 20:29:27 -0800
Received: from [63.15.225.33] (1Cust197.tnt2.rancho-cucamonga.ca.da.uu.net          [63.15.225.197]) by smtp003pub.verizon.net  with ESMTP for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; id fA74SS319418 Tue, 6 Nov 2001 22:28:28 -0600          (CST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: GTE/01rocket@mail.gte.net
References: <C0F7BF4DCEC1D2479A01031347184DCD386E@nt2000s2.dgmicro.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <a05100310b80e68c35eda@[63.15.225.33]>
Date:         Tue, 6 Nov 2001 20:28:52 -0800
Reply-To: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Grain Geometry - Thoughts?
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <C0F7BF4DCEC1D2479A01031347184DCD386E@nt2000s2.dgmicro.com>

>I've already talked to a few persons about geometry, but I thought I'd
>throw this out to get some opinions:
>
>I am involved in an O motor project, and the grain geometry is in
>question.
>
>We are looking at 3 10" grains, and 2 5" grains, all 4.5" diameter. The
>two possible scenarios are:
>
>A) 2 5" grains at bottom, 2" core. And then top 3 grains 10" x 1.5"
>core.
>
>B) 10" x 2" core grain at bottom, 2 10x1.5" core grains, then 2 5"x1.5"
>grains top.
>
>In any case the bottom 10" will be a slower formula.
>
>In all my motor building, I have put the short grains on the
>bottom....primarily to clear out the area around the nozzle.  However,
>this leaves an empty space that propellant could possibly collapse into.
>
>
>My partner has always put the short grains on the top.  However, I can
>see that there may be more of a heat issue this way.


The way you have framed the issue I would say structural integrity
exceeds the insulation issue because there will be exposure somewhere
either way, but the structure issue and be addressed.

Jerry


>
>Anyone have thoughts on this issue?  I'm interested to hear if anyone
>has done this either way.
>
>I think we are going to go with "B" if noone has a good reason not too.
>
>-Darren


--
Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
Opinion, the whole thing.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 3141 invoked from network); 7 Nov 2001 05:44:54 -0000
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 7 Nov 2001 05:44:54 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 18161 invoked by uid 50005); 7 Nov 2001 05:44:48 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4168. . Clean. Processed in 0.592797 secs); 07 Nov 2001 05:44:48 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 7 Nov 2001 05:44:47 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA01373; Tue, 6 Nov 2001 21:29:01 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 128961 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 7 Nov 2001 05:28:46          +0000
Received: from scaup.prod.itd.earthlink.net (scaup.mail.pas.earthlink.net          [207.217.120.49]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA01332          for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Tue, 6 Nov 2001 21:18:45 -0800
Received: from dialup-209.245.135.40.dial1.sanjose1.level3.net          ([209.245.135.40] helo=earthlink.net ident=dave) by          scaup.prod.itd.earthlink.net with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id          161L6q-0005vK-00; Tue, 06 Nov 2001 21:18:45 -0800
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.75 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.16-22 i686)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3BE8C518.C9FBFDC7@earthlink.net>
Date:         Tue, 6 Nov 2001 21:22:32 -0800
Reply-To: "David Weinshenker" <daze39@EARTHLINK.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "David Weinshenker" <daze39@EARTHLINK.NET>
Subject:      [AR] tapered core geometry for small solid motors?
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

I've been contemplating the mechanical design of
very simple single-use solid motors, with graphite
end-plugs in filament-wound composite tubing, and
cast-in-place center-cored composite propellant.
(In case anyone's wondering, yes, my inspiration
_is_ the old RDC "Enerjet" motors...)

I've been wondering if there might be virtue, in such motors,
of making the core in a conical tapered shape, instead of a
cylindrical opening:

I see the following advantages -
1. Easier to remove mandrel after casting.
2. Less "progressive" - initial core area is
   larger compared to average area during burn.
3. Avoids erosive accelaration from high flow velocities
   through core... tapered core has more cross-sectional
   aperture toward nozzle, where it's needed to handle
   gas from upstream burn area, while providing higher
   overall fill density than there would be with a
   cylindrical core of that size over its entire length.

The potential disadvantage I see is that toward the end
of the burn, the forward part of the casing will be
exposed to hot internal gas... is this likely to be a
major problem with small (29-38mm) motors? (I note that
the 29mm Aerotech "Hobby RMS" motors, such as the G64,
used a sawed C-slot core that exposed the cardboard liner
to gas throughout the burn.) Would a thin cast-in layer of
ablatable insulation (glass microspheres in HTPB resin,
perhaps?) be a reasonable way of dealing with the issue?

-dave w

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 14627 invoked from network); 7 Nov 2001 07:02:24 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 7 Nov 2001 07:02:24 -0000
Received: (qmail 9591 invoked by uid 50005); 7 Nov 2001 07:02:18 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4168. . Clean. Processed in 0.56757 secs); 07 Nov 2001 07:02:18 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 7 Nov 2001 07:02:17 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA01640; Tue, 6 Nov 2001 22:42:15 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 128989 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 7 Nov 2001 06:42:07          +0000
Received: from imo-r08.mx.aol.com (imo-r08.mx.aol.com [152.163.225.104]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA01606 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Tue, 6 Nov 2001 22:32:06 -0800
Received: from Mdilsave@aol.com by imo-r08.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v31_r1.8.) id          w.171.3842b46 (24895) for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Wed, 7 Nov 2001          01:32:03 -0500 (EST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0DA1_01C56B69.56D820B0"
X-Mailer: AOL 6.0 for Windows US sub 10539
Message-ID:  <171.3842b46.291a2f61@aol.com>
Date:         Wed, 7 Nov 2001 01:32:01 EST
Reply-To: <Mdilsave@AOL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Michael Dilsaver" <Mdilsave@AOL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Flanged Steel Pipes
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0DA1_01C56B69.56D820B0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

I have a 15" long piece of 3.5" OD x .250" wall stainless steel tubing you're
welcome to if that is what you need.  There's a (very) remote chance I could
find some scrap flanges too.  Describe what you need and I'll see what I can
do.  You're on your own for welding.

Mike Dilsaver

In a message dated 11/5/01 6:20:22 PM Central Standard Time,
drrockit5150@YAHOO.COM writes:


> Hey guys,
>
> I was wondering if you would know where I could get
> ahold of some steel pipe with flanges on the ends for
> use in a hybrid test engine?  Probably 3-4" OD with
> flanges that bolt on...  Thanks for the help!
>
> -->Justin Pucci
>
>



------=_NextPart_000_0DA1_01C56B69.56D820B0
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<HTML><FONT FACE=arial,helvetica><FONT  SIZE=2>I have a 15" long piece of 3.5" OD x .250" wall stainless steel tubing you're welcome to if that is what you need. &nbsp;There's a (very) remote chance I could find some scrap flanges too. &nbsp;Describe what you need and I'll see what I can do. &nbsp;You're on your own for welding.
<BR>
<BR>Mike Dilsaver &nbsp;
<BR>
<BR>In a message dated 11/5/01 6:20:22 PM Central Standard Time, drrockit5150@YAHOO.COM writes:
<BR>
<BR>
<BR><BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE style="BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px">Hey guys,
<BR>
<BR>I was wondering if you would know where I could get
<BR>ahold of some steel pipe with flanges on the ends for
<BR>use in a hybrid test engine? &nbsp;Probably 3-4" OD with
<BR>flanges that bolt on... &nbsp;Thanks for the help!
<BR>
<BR>--&gt;Justin Pucci
<BR>
<BR></FONT><FONT  COLOR="#000000" SIZE=3 FAMILY="SANSSERIF" FACE="Arial" LANG="0"></BLOCKQUOTE>
<BR></FONT><FONT  COLOR="#000000" SIZE=2 FAMILY="SANSSERIF" FACE="Arial" LANG="0">
<BR></FONT></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0DA1_01C56B69.56D820B0--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 7134 invoked from network); 7 Nov 2001 09:16:32 -0000
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 7 Nov 2001 09:16:32 -0000
Received: (qmail 22524 invoked by uid 50005); 7 Nov 2001 09:16:27 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4168. . Clean. Processed in 0.154028 secs); 07 Nov 2001 09:16:27 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 7 Nov 2001 09:16:27 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA02014; Wed, 7 Nov 2001 00:57:34 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 129012 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 7 Nov 2001 08:57:29          +0000
Received: from mta04.mail.mel.aone.net.au (mta04.mail.au.uu.net [203.2.192.84])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA01999 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 7 Nov 2001 00:57:28 -0800
Received: from unknown ([63.34.220.240]) by mta04.mail.mel.aone.net.au with          SMTP id <20011107085723.IAJX3908.mta04.mail.mel.aone.net.au@unknown>          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 7 Nov 2001 19:57:23 +1100
References: Conversation <3BE8C518.C9FBFDC7@earthlink.net> with last message            <3BE8C518.C9FBFDC7@earthlink.net>
Priority: Normal
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Priority: 3
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	X-MAPIextension=.TXT;
	charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>
Date:         Wed, 7 Nov 2001 08:57:29 +0000
Reply-To: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] tapered core geometry for small solid motors?
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <3BE8C518.C9FBFDC7@earthlink.net>

----------
> I've been contemplating the mechanical design of
> very simple single-use solid motors, with graphite
> end-plugs in filament-wound composite tubing, and
> cast-in-place center-cored composite propellant.
> (In case anyone's wondering, yes, my inspiration
> _is_ the old RDC "Enerjet" motors...)
>
> I've been wondering if there might be virtue, in such motors,
> of making the core in a conical tapered shape, instead of a
> cylindrical opening:
>
> I see the following advantages -
> 1. Easier to remove mandrel after casting.
> 2. Less "progressive" - initial core area is
>    larger compared to average area during burn.
> 3. Avoids erosive accelaration from high flow velocities
>    through core... tapered core has more cross-sectional
>    aperture toward nozzle, where it's needed to handle
>    gas from upstream burn area, while providing higher
>    overall fill density than there would be with a
>    cylindrical core of that size over its entire length.

Grains 2K spreadsheet will simulate both cored end burners (restricted),
cone end burners (restricted) & tapered core BATES (unrestricted) type
geometries. Don't expect to get neutral profiles from many of these
geometries though:-( The results may disappoint. I have on previous
occasions submitted a high volumetric loadings BATES design which uses
tapered cores and weird grain dimensions that provides both a neutral
profile and erosive burning reductions. It should be in the Aroc archives
somewhere (this one's not for beginners though).

>
> The potential disadvantage I see is that toward the end
> of the burn, the forward part of the casing will be
> exposed to hot internal gas... is this likely to be a
> major problem with small (29-38mm) motors?

So I assume you're referring more to a tapered BATES type geometery as
opposed to a core or coned end burner by where the core stops short of
perforating all the way though to the forward end of the grain?

(I note that
> the 29mm Aerotech "Hobby RMS" motors, such as the G64,
> used a sawed C-slot core that exposed the cardboard liner
> to gas throughout the burn.) Would a thin cast-in layer of
> ablatable insulation (glass microspheres in HTPB resin,
> perhaps?) be a reasonable way of dealing with the issue?

For smallish motors I don't feel the solution needs to be even that
exotic:-)

Troy.

>
> -dave w

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 20982 invoked from network); 7 Nov 2001 09:22:08 -0000
X-Priority: 3
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 7 Nov 2001 09:22:08 -0000
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 12410 invoked by uid 50005); 7 Nov 2001 09:22:03 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4168. . Clean. Processed in 0.933083 secs); 07 Nov 2001 09:22:03 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 7 Nov 2001 09:22:01 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id BAA02111; Wed, 7 Nov 2001 01:07:12 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 129033 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 7 Nov 2001 09:07:10          +0000
Received: from imo-r08.mx.aol.com (imo-r08.mx.aol.com [152.163.225.104]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id BAA02097 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Wed, 7 Nov 2001 01:07:09 -0800
Received: from Sociald84@aol.com by imo-r08.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v31_r1.8.) id          g.16e.381fd65 (30953); Wed, 7 Nov 2001 04:07:01 -0500 (EST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0DA6_01C56B69.56E1BDA0"
X-Mailer: AOL 6.0 for Windows US sub 10540
Message-ID:  <16e.381fd65.291a53b5@aol.com>
Date:         Wed, 7 Nov 2001 04:07:01 EST
Reply-To: <Sociald84@AOL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <Sociald84@AOL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Grain Geometry - Thoughts?
Comments: To: dwright@d2-tech.com
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0DA6_01C56B69.56E1BDA0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

How about something like this 1 5"L X 2"C grain at the bottom with 1 5" X
1.75"C grain on top of that with the 3 10"L X 1.5"C grains above that?

Mark


In a message dated 11/6/2001 9:15:42 PM Mountain Standard Time,
dwright@D2-TECH.COM writes:


> I've already talked to a few persons about geometry, but I thought I'd
> throw this out to get some opinions:
>
> I am involved in an O motor project, and the grain geometry is in
> question.
>
> We are looking at 3 10" grains, and 2 5" grains, all 4.5" diameter. The
> two possible scenarios are:
>
> A) 2 5" grains at bottom, 2" core. And then top 3 grains 10" x 1.5"
> core.
>
> B) 10" x 2" core grain at bottom, 2 10x1.5" core grains, then 2 5"x1.5"
> grains top.
>
> In any case the bottom 10" will be a slower formula.
>
> In all my motor building, I have put the short grains on the
> bottom....primarily to clear out the area around the nozzle.  However,
> this leaves an empty space that propellant could possibly collapse into.
>
>
> My partner has always put the short grains on the top.  However, I can
> see that there may be more of a heat issue this way.
>
> Anyone have thoughts on this issue?  I'm interested to hear if anyone
> has done this either way.
>
> I think we are going to go with "B" if noone has a good reason not too.
>
> -Darren



------=_NextPart_000_0DA6_01C56B69.56E1BDA0
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<HTML><FONT FACE=arial,helvetica><FONT  SIZE=2>How about something like this 1 5"L X 2"C grain at the bottom with 1 5" X 1.75"C grain on top of that with the 3 10"L X 1.5"C grains above that?
<BR>
<BR>Mark
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>In a message dated 11/6/2001 9:15:42 PM Mountain Standard Time, dwright@D2-TECH.COM writes:
<BR>
<BR>
<BR><BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE style="BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px">I've already talked to a few persons about geometry, but I thought I'd
<BR>throw this out to get some opinions:
<BR>
<BR>I am involved in an O motor project, and the grain geometry is in
<BR>question.
<BR>
<BR>We are looking at 3 10" grains, and 2 5" grains, all 4.5" diameter. The
<BR>two possible scenarios are:
<BR>
<BR>A) 2 5" grains at bottom, 2" core. And then top 3 grains 10" x 1.5"
<BR>core.
<BR>
<BR>B) 10" x 2" core grain at bottom, 2 10x1.5" core grains, then 2 5"x1.5"
<BR>grains top.
<BR>
<BR>In any case the bottom 10" will be a slower formula.
<BR>
<BR>In all my motor building, I have put the short grains on the
<BR>bottom....primarily to clear out the area around the nozzle. &nbsp;However,
<BR>this leaves an empty space that propellant could possibly collapse into.
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>My partner has always put the short grains on the top. &nbsp;However, I can
<BR>see that there may be more of a heat issue this way.
<BR>
<BR>Anyone have thoughts on this issue? &nbsp;I'm interested to hear if anyone
<BR>has done this either way.
<BR>
<BR>I think we are going to go with "B" if noone has a good reason not too.
<BR>
<BR>-Darren</FONT><FONT  COLOR="#000000" SIZE=3 FAMILY="SANSSERIF" FACE="Arial" LANG="0"></BLOCKQUOTE>
<BR></FONT><FONT  COLOR="#000000" SIZE=2 FAMILY="SANSSERIF" FACE="Arial" LANG="0">
<BR></FONT></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0DA6_01C56B69.56E1BDA0--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 21700 invoked from network); 7 Nov 2001 12:51:50 -0000
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 7 Nov 2001 12:51:50 -0000
Received: (qmail 5080 invoked by uid 50005); 7 Nov 2001 12:51:44 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4168. . Clean. Processed in 2.04988 secs); 07 Nov 2001 12:51:44 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 7 Nov 2001 12:51:41 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id EAA02755; Wed, 7 Nov 2001 04:36:47 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 129077 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 7 Nov 2001 12:36:41          +0000
Received: from femail47.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail47.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.254.60.41]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id EAA02739          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 7 Nov 2001 04:36:41 -0800
Received: from cx814151a ([24.14.55.118]) by femail47.sdc1.sfba.home.com          (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20 201-229-121-120-20010223) with SMTP id          <20011107123641.DTOP5981.femail47.sdc1.sfba.home.com@cx814151a> for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 7 Nov 2001 04:36:41 -0800
References:  <C0F7BF4DCEC1D2479A01031347184DCD386E@nt2000s2.dgmicro.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.3018.1300
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <026801c16788$0dbba8e0$0a01a8c0@cx814151a>
Date:         Wed, 7 Nov 2001 06:30:58 -0600
Reply-To: "John Bolene" <jbolene@HOME.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Bolene" <jbolene@HOME.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Grain Geometry - Thoughts?
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Option C.

I would keep all the grains 10" long with the same propellant, it makes
things burn smoother.

Nozzle grain 5" at 2" core, 5" at 1" core.
The rest of the grains have 1" core.
This gives a longer burn time with more propellant.
This results in around 29K to 31K NS depending on propellant used.
Burn time is dependant on nozzle throat size (probably 1.5") which
determines internal pressure, but you should get a 6 to 8 second burn at 625
PSI.

What internal pressure you looking for as a maximum?

Subject: [AR] Grain Geometry - Thoughts?


> I've already talked to a few persons about geometry, but I thought I'd
> throw this out to get some opinions:
>
> I am involved in an O motor project, and the grain geometry is in
> question.
>
> We are looking at 3 10" grains, and 2 5" grains, all 4.5" diameter. The
> two possible scenarios are:
>
> A) 2 5" grains at bottom, 2" core. And then top 3 grains 10" x 1.5"
> core.
>
> B) 10" x 2" core grain at bottom, 2 10x1.5" core grains, then 2 5"x1.5"
> grains top.
>
> In any case the bottom 10" will be a slower formula.
>
> In all my motor building, I have put the short grains on the
> bottom....primarily to clear out the area around the nozzle.  However,
> this leaves an empty space that propellant could possibly collapse into.
>
>
> My partner has always put the short grains on the top.  However, I can
> see that there may be more of a heat issue this way.
>
> Anyone have thoughts on this issue?  I'm interested to hear if anyone
> has done this either way.
>
> I think we are going to go with "B" if noone has a good reason not too.
>
> -Darren

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 8049 invoked from network); 7 Nov 2001 14:57:28 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 7 Nov 2001 14:57:28 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 22776 invoked by uid 50005); 7 Nov 2001 14:57:23 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4168. . Clean. Processed in 0.102935 secs); 07 Nov 2001 14:57:23 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 7 Nov 2001 14:57:22 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA03163; Wed, 7 Nov 2001 06:37:39 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 129127 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 7 Nov 2001 14:37:35          +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (f240.law7.hotmail.com [216.33.237.240]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA03149 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 7 Nov 2001 06:37:35 -0800
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Wed,          7 Nov 2001 06:37:01 -0800
Received: from 212.150.6.218 by lw7fd.law7.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Wed, 07          Nov 2001 14:37:00 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [212.150.6.218]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 07 Nov 2001 14:37:01.0183 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[A95790F0:01C16799]
Message-ID:  <F240rblZz02H67yRLVb0000ec9a@hotmail.com>
Date:         Wed, 7 Nov 2001 14:37:35 +0000
Reply-To: "flint hapirat" <flinthapirat@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "flint hapirat" <flinthapirat@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      [AR]
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

<html><div style='background-color:'><P>Hi, </P>
<P>I wish to move my Arocket groop mail to a new account (hotmail is giving me problems)</P>
<P>- <A href="mailto:flinthapirat@yahoo.com">flinthapirat@yahoo.com</A></P>
<P>Please let me know if it's possible. </P>
<P>Thanks </P>
<P>&nbsp;</P>
<P>Flint</P>
<P>&nbsp;</P></div><br clear=all><hr>Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at <a href='http://go.msn.com/bql/hmtag_itl_EN.asp'>http://explorer.msn.com</a><br></html>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 23056 invoked from network); 7 Nov 2001 16:11:37 -0000
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 7 Nov 2001 16:11:37 -0000
Received: (qmail 25338 invoked by uid 50005); 7 Nov 2001 16:11:31 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4168. . Clean. Processed in 0.500487 secs); 07 Nov 2001 16:11:31 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 7 Nov 2001 16:11:29 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA03509; Wed, 7 Nov 2001 07:43:59 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 129155 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 7 Nov 2001 15:43:53          +0000
Received: from mailhost0.trib.com (mailhost0.trib.com [63.229.150.3]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA03495 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Wed, 7 Nov 2001 07:43:52 -0800
Received: from mail.trib.com (mail.trib.com [12.10.158.17]) by          mailhost0.trib.com (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id fA7FhnC56058; Wed, 7          Nov 2001 08:43:49 -0700 (MST) (envelope-from          jwckman@space-rockets.com)
Received: from [63.229.150.73] (HELO hppav) by mail.trib.com (CommuniGate Pro          SMTP 3.4.6) with SMTP id 56537877; Wed, 07 Nov 2001 08:43:48 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <NKEHJAOOKBPGIKOOPDEFCECMCDAA.jwckman@space-rockets.com>
Date:         Wed, 7 Nov 2001 08:42:45 -0700
Reply-To: "John Wickman" <jwckman@SPACE-ROCKETS.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Wickman" <jwckman@SPACE-ROCKETS.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] AN particle sizes
Comments: To: David Wakarchuk <dwakarchuk@telus.net>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <3BE8A2F6.D966AD4B@telus.net>

The same physical principals with respect to processing and density apply to
AN propellants.  Spherical particles are better than ground and 10:1
particle diameter ratios are rules of thumb in making the particle
selection.

The problem with AN is that when you grind it and look at it under the
microscope, it looks like shards of glass.   These will lock up in the
propellant mix and make it very thick.   Most people are using ground AN.
If you screen it into particle sizes, you can try using different particle
sizes to help the mix, but I believe it is not really going to help it much
due to the resultant particle shapes you have to deal with.   At one time,
Atlas Powder in Joplin, MO was making an ammonium nitrate blend from its
graining kettles.  It was like sugar in particle size and looked  oblong
under the microscope, like little potatoes.   Under an AF contract, we had
modified that equipment to produce about 50,000 lbs a day of PSAN in grained
form.  Industry didn't want it and the Air Force lost interest.  That
modification is gone.

We used to make a prill or atomized PSAN powder that was available in a
variety of particle sizes.   The demand was too low to support production
and when the equipment wore out, we did not replace it.   We now grind ours
with a hammermill.

A long winded answer, but AN users would use a variety of particle sizes to
optimize processing and packing if a wide variety of particle sizes were
available and they were not shaped like shards of glass.  Someday, the
demand may permit this.

John Wickman




-----Original Message-----
From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU]On
Behalf Of David Wakarchuk
Sent: Tuesday, November 06, 2001 7:57 PM
To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
Subject: [AR] AN particle sizes


Here is a question for the AN motor gurus.  I know when folks put
together APCP motors often they use a blend of AP particle sizes so that
the propellant not only has good processing properties but also has an
optimized packing (final density).  Is this also typically true for
AN/Mg based motors or is it simply a matter of using the finest particle
sizes of AN and Mg one can get a hold of ?

David Wakarchuk

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 28896 invoked from network); 7 Nov 2001 16:43:25 -0000
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 7 Nov 2001 16:43:25 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 13425 invoked by uid 50005); 7 Nov 2001 16:43:20 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4168. . Clean. Processed in 0.155897 secs); 07 Nov 2001 16:43:20 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 7 Nov 2001 16:43:20 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA03745; Wed, 7 Nov 2001 08:27:04 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 129191 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 7 Nov 2001 16:27:01          +0000
Received: from swan.prod.itd.earthlink.net (swan.mail.pas.earthlink.net          [207.217.120.123]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id          IAA03708 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Wed, 7 Nov 2001 08:17:01 -0800
Received: from dialup-209.245.128.196.dial1.sanjose1.level3.net          ([209.245.128.196] helo=earthlink.net ident=dave) by          swan.prod.itd.earthlink.net with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id          161VNs-0003dp-00; Wed, 07 Nov 2001 08:17:00 -0800
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.75 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.16-22 i686)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <9c.15d8a3e4.291ab4cf@aol.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3BE95F61.6F56BEFF@earthlink.net>
Date:         Wed, 7 Nov 2001 08:20:49 -0800
Reply-To: "David Weinshenker" <daze39@EARTHLINK.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "David Weinshenker" <daze39@EARTHLINK.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] tapered core geometry for small solid motors?
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

JMKrell@AOL.COM wrote:
> Single use 29-38mm motors should not require insulation.
> The exposure time to the hot gases is short. Post firing
> analysis of the PlasmaJet "I" motor casing showed only a
> slight superficial ablation of the wall during a 0.3 second
> exposure. If the casing exposure is greater than 1 second
> then you might need to use a cardboard insulator, depending
> on the type of casing material you are using.

Ah, thanks - that's precisely the sort of feedback I was looking
for on the idea... what material was the casing on the Plasmajet
motor you mentioned - filament wound epoxy/glass, or something
else?

-dave w

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 25138 invoked from network); 7 Nov 2001 17:12:10 -0000
X-Priority: 3
Received: from smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.105]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 7 Nov 2001 17:12:10 -0000
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 12098 invoked by uid 50005); 7 Nov 2001 17:12:05 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpy with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4168. . Clean. Processed in 2.518678 secs); 07 Nov 2001 17:12:05 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 7 Nov 2001 17:11:58 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA03620; Wed, 7 Nov 2001 08:01:58 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 129173 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 7 Nov 2001 16:01:55          +0000
Received: from imo-d03.mx.aol.com (imo-d03.mx.aol.com [205.188.157.35]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA03606 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Wed, 7 Nov 2001 08:01:55 -0800
Received: from JMKrell@aol.com by imo-d03.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v31_r1.8.) id          w.9c.15d8a3e4 (3932); Wed, 7 Nov 2001 11:01:20 -0500 (EST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0DAB_01C56B69.56EDA480"
X-Mailer: AOL 6.0 for Windows US sub 10540
Message-ID:  <9c.15d8a3e4.291ab4cf@aol.com>
Date:         Wed, 7 Nov 2001 11:01:19 EST
Reply-To: <JMKrell@AOL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <JMKrell@AOL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] tapered core geometry for small solid motors?
Comments: cc: daze39@earthlink.net
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0DAB_01C56B69.56EDA480
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Dave,

A slightly tapered core offers all of the advantages listed. The PlasmaJet
"I" motor used a tapered mandrel to cast a 15" long grain. The tapered grain
reduced the burnout pressure level delivering a smoother burnout transition
and slightly longer burn time.

"The potential disadvantage I see is that toward the end
of the burn, the forward part of the casing will be
exposed to hot internal gas... is this likely to be a
major problem with small (29-38mm) motors? (I note that
the 29mm Aerotech "Hobby RMS" motors, such as the G64,
used a sawed C-slot core that exposed the cardboard liner
to gas throughout the burn.) Would a thin cast-in layer of
ablatable insulation (glass microspheres in HTPB resin,
perhaps?) be a reasonable way of dealing with the issue?"

Single use 29-38mm motors should not require insulation. The exposure time to
the hot gases is short. Post firing analysis of the PlasmaJet "I" motor
casing showed only a slight superficial ablation of the wall during a 0.3
second exposure. If the casing exposure is greater than 1 second then you
might need to use a cardboard insulator, depending on the type of casing
material you are using.

John Krell
TRA0289





------=_NextPart_000_0DAB_01C56B69.56EDA480
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<HTML><FONT FACE=arial,helvetica><FONT  SIZE=2>Dave,
<BR>
<BR>A slightly tapered core offers all of the advantages listed. The PlasmaJet "I" motor used a tapered mandrel to cast a 15" long grain. The tapered grain reduced the burnout pressure level delivering a smoother burnout transition and slightly longer burn time.
<BR>
<BR>"The potential disadvantage I see is that toward the end
<BR>of the burn, the forward part of the casing will be
<BR>exposed to hot internal gas... is this likely to be a
<BR>major problem with small (29-38mm) motors? (I note that
<BR>the 29mm Aerotech "Hobby RMS" motors, such as the G64,
<BR>used a sawed C-slot core that exposed the cardboard liner
<BR>to gas throughout the burn.) Would a thin cast-in layer of
<BR>ablatable insulation (glass microspheres in HTPB resin,
<BR>perhaps?) be a reasonable way of dealing with the issue?"
<BR>
<BR>Single use 29-38mm motors should not require insulation. The exposure time to the hot gases is short. Post firing analysis of the PlasmaJet "I" motor casing showed only a slight superficial ablation of the wall during a 0.3 second exposure. If the casing exposure is greater than 1 second then you might need to use a cardboard insulator, depending on the type of casing material you are using.
<BR>
<BR>John Krell
<BR>TRA0289
<BR> &nbsp;&nbsp;
<BR>
<BR>
<BR></FONT></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0DAB_01C56B69.56EDA480--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 29160 invoked from network); 8 Nov 2001 02:35:39 -0000
X-Priority: 3
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 8 Nov 2001 02:35:39 -0000
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 14095 invoked by uid 50005); 8 Nov 2001 02:35:34 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4168. . Clean. Processed in 0.204529 secs); 08 Nov 2001 02:35:34 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 8 Nov 2001 02:35:34 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA06011; Wed, 7 Nov 2001 18:28:11 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 129303 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 8 Nov 2001 02:27:13          +0000
Received: from imo-m03.mx.aol.com (imo-m03.mx.aol.com [64.12.136.6]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA05996 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Wed, 7 Nov 2001 18:27:12 -0800
Received: from JMKrell@aol.com by imo-m03.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v31_r1.8.) id          w.126.6c532f1 (4207); Wed, 7 Nov 2001 21:26:39 -0500 (EST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0DB0_01C56B69.56EDA480"
X-Mailer: AOL 6.0 for Windows US sub 10540
Message-ID:  <126.6c532f1.291b475e@aol.com>
Date:         Wed, 7 Nov 2001 21:26:38 EST
Reply-To: <JMKrell@AOL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <JMKrell@AOL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] tapered core geometry for small solid motors?
Comments: cc: daze39@earthlink.net
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0DB0_01C56B69.56EDA480
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Dave,

We tested and used two casing materials, filament wound epoxy/glass and a
high pressure paper/phenolic laminate. Don't try standard paper/phenolic tube
material, it fails under the pressure load. This material resembled a
Tyvek/phenolic composition and it could withstand 500 psig pressure loads.
The epoxy/glass casings were used when operating pressures were taken above
500 psig or when safety and reliability were issues with the customer.

Cost was the primary concern during the development of the motor and the high
pressure paper/phenolic ran $1.25 a casing while the epoxy/glass casing was
$3.75.

John Krell
TRA0289


------=_NextPart_000_0DB0_01C56B69.56EDA480
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<HTML><FONT FACE=arial,helvetica><FONT  SIZE=2>Dave,
<BR>
<BR>We tested and used two casing materials, filament wound epoxy/glass and a high pressure paper/phenolic laminate. Don't try standard paper/phenolic tube material, it fails under the pressure load. This material resembled a Tyvek/phenolic composition and it could withstand 500 psig pressure loads. The epoxy/glass casings were used when operating pressures were taken above 500 psig or when safety and reliability were issues with the customer.
<BR>
<BR>Cost was the primary concern during the development of the motor and the high pressure paper/phenolic ran $1.25 a casing while the epoxy/glass casing was $3.75.
<BR>
<BR>John Krell
<BR>TRA0289
<BR> &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;</FONT></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0DB0_01C56B69.56EDA480--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 17815 invoked from network); 8 Nov 2001 06:01:55 -0000
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 8 Nov 2001 06:01:55 -0000
Received: (qmail 4832 invoked by uid 50005); 8 Nov 2001 06:01:50 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4168. . Clean. Processed in 0.244847 secs); 08 Nov 2001 06:01:50 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 8 Nov 2001 06:01:50 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA06701; Wed, 7 Nov 2001 21:56:52 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 129346 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 8 Nov 2001 05:55:25          +0000
Received: from femail12.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail12.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.0.95.108]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA06684          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 7 Nov 2001 21:55:25 -0800
Received: from officenew ([24.1.27.168]) by femail12.sdc1.sfba.home.com          (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20 201-229-121-120-20010223) with SMTP id          <20011108055519.OFLB21713.femail12.sdc1.sfba.home.com@officenew>;          Wed, 7 Nov 2001 21:55:19 -0800
References:  <126.6c532f1.291b475e@aol.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0DB5_01C56B69.56FBFC60"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2462.0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <006a01c16819$ede58e40$8300a8c0@olmpi1.wa.home.com>
Date:         Wed, 7 Nov 2001 21:55:02 -0800
Reply-To: "Tomm Aldridge" <taldridge@HOME.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Tomm Aldridge" <taldridge@HOME.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] tapered core geometry for small solid motors?
Comments: To: JMKrell@AOL.COM
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0DB5_01C56B69.56FBFC60
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

For what it is worth, I suggest you include Al tubing with paper liners =
in your decision matrix.  Cheap, easy to obtain and epoxy bonded nozzles =
have been shown to work well in Al tubes.  I remember and love the old =
Enerjets though, what a kick to bring real rocket hardware to the club =
launch!=20
  ----- Original Message -----=20
  From: JMKrell@AOL.COM=20
  To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU=20
  Sent: Wednesday, November 07, 2001 6:26 PM
  Subject: Re: [AR] tapered core geometry for small solid motors?


  Dave,=20

  We tested and used two casing materials, filament wound epoxy/glass =
and a high pressure paper/phenolic laminate. Don't try standard =
paper/phenolic tube material, it fails under the pressure load. This =
material resembled a Tyvek/phenolic composition and it could withstand =
500 psig pressure loads. The epoxy/glass casings were used when =
operating pressures were taken above 500 psig or when safety and =
reliability were issues with the customer.=20

  Cost was the primary concern during the development of the motor and =
the high pressure paper/phenolic ran $1.25 a casing while the =
epoxy/glass casing was $3.75.=20

  John Krell=20
  TRA0289=20
       =20

------=_NextPart_000_0DB5_01C56B69.56FBFC60
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Diso-8859-1">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 6.00.2462.0" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>For what it is worth, I suggest you =
include Al=20
tubing with paper liners in your decision matrix.&nbsp; Cheap, easy to =
obtain=20
and epoxy bonded nozzles have been shown to work well in Al tubes.&nbsp; =
I=20
remember and love the old Enerjets though, what a kick to bring real =
rocket=20
hardware to the club launch! </FONT></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE=20
style=3D"PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; =
BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
  <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial">----- Original Message ----- </DIV>
  <DIV=20
  style=3D"BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; FONT: 10pt arial; font-color: =
black"><B>From:</B>=20
  <A title=3DJMKrell@AOL.COM =
href=3D"mailto:JMKrell@AOL.COM">JMKrell@AOL.COM</A>=20
  </DIV>
  <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A =
title=3DAROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU=20
  href=3D"mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU">AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU</A> </DIV>
  <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> Wednesday, November 07, =
2001 6:26=20
  PM</DIV>
  <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> Re: [AR] tapered core =
geometry=20
  for small solid motors?</DIV>
  <DIV><BR></DIV><FONT face=3Darial,helvetica><FONT size=3D2>Dave, =
<BR><BR>We tested=20
  and used two casing materials, filament wound epoxy/glass and a high =
pressure=20
  paper/phenolic laminate. Don't try standard paper/phenolic tube =
material, it=20
  fails under the pressure load. This material resembled a =
Tyvek/phenolic=20
  composition and it could withstand 500 psig pressure loads. The =
epoxy/glass=20
  casings were used when operating pressures were taken above 500 psig =
or when=20
  safety and reliability were issues with the customer. <BR><BR>Cost was =
the=20
  primary concern during the development of the motor and the high =
pressure=20
  paper/phenolic ran $1.25 a casing while the epoxy/glass casing was =
$3.75.=20
  <BR><BR>John Krell <BR>TRA0289 =
<BR>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;</FONT>=20
  </FONT></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0DB5_01C56B69.56FBFC60--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 25597 invoked from network); 8 Nov 2001 16:28:28 -0000
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 8 Nov 2001 16:28:28 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 14767 invoked by uid 50005); 8 Nov 2001 16:28:22 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4168. . Clean. Processed in 0.166632 secs); 08 Nov 2001 16:28:22 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 8 Nov 2001 16:28:22 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA08192; Thu, 8 Nov 2001 07:52:43 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 129394 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 8 Nov 2001 15:32:33          +0000
Received: from ll.mit.edu (LLMAIL.LL.MIT.EDU [129.55.12.40]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA08121 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu,          8 Nov 2001 07:31:57 -0800
Received: (from smtp@localhost) by ll.mit.edu (8.11.3/8.8.8) id fA8FVie15232;          Thu, 8 Nov 2001 10:31:44 -0500 (EST)
Received: from UNKNOWN(            ),          claiming to be "ll.mit.edu" via SMTP by llmail,          id smtpdAAA2cai1C; Thu Nov  8 10:31:40 2001
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.76 [en]C-CCK-MCD MITLL  (WinNT; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3BEAA628.D5EB11F3@ll.mit.edu>
Date:         Thu, 8 Nov 2001 10:35:04 -0500
Reply-To: "Robert Galejs" <galejs@LL.MIT.EDU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Robert Galejs" <galejs@LL.MIT.EDU>
Organization: MIT Lincoln Laboratory
Subject:      [AR] Potential KMZ51 bulk purchase
Comments: To: "Marcus D. Leech" <mleech@nortelnetworks.com>,          "Cuomo, Kevin" <cuomo@ll.mit.edu>, Dan Miner <miner@centtech.com>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

I've been getting lots of inquiries about how to
buy small quantities of KMZ51 magnetic sensor chips.
The short answer is that you can't.  They are
special order parts that come in reels of 1000
at a cost of about US$2 each.

If enough people would be willing to buy a lot
of 100 then I will go ahead and buy a reel
and split it up.

Any takers?

If there is enough interest, I'll get a firm
price and we'll go from there.

- Robert Galejs

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 14059 invoked from network); 8 Nov 2001 17:33:43 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 8 Nov 2001 17:33:43 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 3082 invoked by uid 50005); 8 Nov 2001 17:33:38 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4168. . Clean. Processed in 0.881389 secs); 08 Nov 2001 17:33:38 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 8 Nov 2001 17:33:36 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA08615; Thu, 8 Nov 2001 09:19:11 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 129433 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 8 Nov 2001 17:18:22          +0000
Received: from femail42.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail42.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.254.60.36]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA08600          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 8 Nov 2001 09:18:22 -0800
Received: from c1649002-a.earthlink.net ([24.20.95.67]) by          femail42.sdc1.sfba.home.com (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20          201-229-121-120-20010223) with ESMTP id          <20011108171814.ZHBV12838.femail42.sdc1.sfba.home.com@c1649002-a.earthlink.net>; Thu, 8 Nov 2001 09:18:14          -0800
X-Sender: forkbomb@mail.earthlink.net
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.0.2
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <5.0.2.1.0.20011108091658.02e91008@mail.earthlink.net>
Date:         Thu, 8 Nov 2001 09:18:11 -0800
Reply-To: "Pierce Nichols" <forkbomb@EARTHLINK.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Pierce Nichols" <forkbomb@EARTHLINK.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Potential KMZ51 bulk purchase
Comments: To: Robert Galejs <galejs@LL.MIT.EDU>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <3BEAA628.D5EB11F3@ll.mit.edu>

At 10:35 AM 11/8/2001 -0500, Robert Galejs wrote:
>I've been getting lots of inquiries about how to
>buy small quantities of KMZ51 magnetic sensor chips.
>The short answer is that you can't.  They are
>special order parts that come in reels of 1000
>at a cost of about US$2 each.
>
>If enough people would be willing to buy a lot
>of 100 then I will go ahead and buy a reel
>and split it up.
>
>Any takers?
>
>If there is enough interest, I'll get a firm
>price and we'll go from there.


         Have you tried calling the sales office and asking for sample
chips? Most chip makers are more than willing to give you a few chips,
especially relatively cheap ones like the KMZ51, for free, if you can give
them a good excuse.

         -p


Mars or Bust!
www.marssociety.com

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 9277 invoked from network); 8 Nov 2001 18:17:20 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 8 Nov 2001 18:17:20 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 5262 invoked by uid 50005); 8 Nov 2001 18:17:14 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4168. . Clean. Processed in 0.195427 secs); 08 Nov 2001 18:17:14 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 8 Nov 2001 18:17:14 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA08823; Thu, 8 Nov 2001 10:00:35 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 129462 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 8 Nov 2001 18:00:19          +0000
Received: from smtp007pub.verizon.net (smtp007pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.186])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA08809 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 8 Nov 2001 10:00:18 -0800
Received: from [63.24.225.35] (1Cust137.tnt1.rancho-cucamonga.ca.da.uu.net          [63.24.225.137]) by smtp007pub.verizon.net  with ESMTP for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; id fA8Hxij09278 Thu, 8 Nov 2001 11:59:45 -0600          (CST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: GTE/01rocket@mail.gte.net
References: <5.0.2.1.0.20011108091658.02e91008@mail.earthlink.net>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <a05100301b810785dc26e@[63.24.225.35]>
Date:         Thu, 8 Nov 2001 09:59:44 -0800
Reply-To: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Potential KMZ51 bulk purchase
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <5.0.2.1.0.20011108091658.02e91008@mail.earthlink.net>

>At 10:35 AM 11/8/2001 -0500, Robert Galejs wrote:
>>I've been getting lots of inquiries about how to
>>buy small quantities of KMZ51 magnetic sensor chips.
>>The short answer is that you can't.  They are
>>special order parts that come in reels of 1000
>>at a cost of about US$2 each.
>>
>>If enough people would be willing to buy a lot
>>of 100 then I will go ahead and buy a reel
>>and split it up.
>>
>>Any takers?
>>
>>If there is enough interest, I'll get a firm
>>price and we'll go from there.


If someone were to make, say 100, complete systems I would be willing
to see that they are sold through U.S. Rockets.


>
>         Have you tried calling the sales office and asking for sample
>chips? Most chip makers are more than willing to give you a few chips,
>especially relatively cheap ones like the KMZ51, for free, if you can give
>them a good excuse.
>
>         -p
>
>
>Mars or Bust!
>www.marssociety.com


--
Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
Opinion, the whole thing.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 11131 invoked from network); 8 Nov 2001 23:07:27 -0000
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 8 Nov 2001 23:07:27 -0000
Received: (qmail 16351 invoked by uid 50005); 8 Nov 2001 23:07:21 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4168. . Clean. Processed in 0.446918 secs); 08 Nov 2001 23:07:21 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 8 Nov 2001 23:07:20 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA09939; Thu, 8 Nov 2001 14:23:25 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 129512 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 8 Nov 2001 22:23:14          +0000
Received: from albqpop1.albq.uswest.net (albqpop1.albq.uswest.net          [207.108.240.1]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id OAA09925          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 8 Nov 2001 14:23:13 -0800
Received: (qmail 79251 invoked by alias); 8 Nov 2001 22:22:42 -0000
Delivered-To: fixup-AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU@fixme
Received: (qmail 79219 invoked by uid 0); 8 Nov 2001 22:22:42 -0000
Received: from cc898542-a.prdise1.nm.home.com (HELO cc898542a) (65.7.151.152)          by albqpop1.albq.uswest.net with SMTP; 8 Nov 2001 22:22:42 -0000
References: <5.0.2.1.0.20011108091658.02e91008@mail.earthlink.net>             <a05100301b810785dc26e@[63.24.225.35]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <001001c168a3$da76eef0$0100a8c0@cc898542a>
Date:         Thu, 8 Nov 2001 15:22:12 -0700
Reply-To: "Paxton" <darkspunge@USWEST.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Paxton" <darkspunge@USWEST.NET>
Subject:      [AR] Aluminum vendor
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Which rocket vendor was it that sold/sells aluminum for motors? It happened
to be the only
advertised motor making supply, but was decently priced. Was it Rocketdyne?
If it is
it is not on the website anymore.

Pax

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 17734 invoked from network); 8 Nov 2001 23:31:22 -0000
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 8 Nov 2001 23:31:22 -0000
Received: (qmail 13518 invoked by uid 50005); 8 Nov 2001 23:31:17 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4168. . Clean. Processed in 0.282511 secs); 08 Nov 2001 23:31:17 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 8 Nov 2001 23:31:16 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA10157; Thu, 8 Nov 2001 15:26:53 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 129532 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 8 Nov 2001 23:26:42          +0000
Received: from albqpop1.albq.uswest.net (albqpop1.albq.uswest.net          [207.108.240.1]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id PAA10143          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 8 Nov 2001 15:26:42 -0800
Received: (qmail 28067 invoked by alias); 8 Nov 2001 23:21:48 -0000
Delivered-To: fixup-AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU@fixme
Received: (qmail 25484 invoked by uid 0); 8 Nov 2001 23:20:50 -0000
Received: from cc898542-a.prdise1.nm.home.com (HELO cc898542a) (65.7.151.152)          by albqpop1.albq.uswest.net with SMTP; 8 Nov 2001 23:20:50 -0000
References: <5.0.2.1.0.20011108091658.02e91008@mail.earthlink.net>                        <a05100301b810785dc26e@[63.24.225.35]>             <001001c168a3$da76eef0$0100a8c0@cc898542a>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <002b01c168ab$f9c83b30$0100a8c0@cc898542a>
Date:         Thu, 8 Nov 2001 16:20:37 -0700
Reply-To: "Paxton" <darkspunge@USWEST.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Paxton" <darkspunge@USWEST.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Aluminum vendor
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Thanks guys. Hawk Mountine was the one.

Pax

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 11221 invoked from network); 8 Nov 2001 23:58:48 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 8 Nov 2001 23:58:48 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 31737 invoked by uid 50005); 8 Nov 2001 23:58:43 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4168. . Clean. Processed in 0.412033 secs); 08 Nov 2001 23:58:43 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 8 Nov 2001 23:58:42 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA10270; Thu, 8 Nov 2001 15:49:03 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 129549 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 8 Nov 2001 23:48:51          +0000
Received: from smtp004pub.verizon.net (smtp004pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.183])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA10255 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 8 Nov 2001 15:48:50 -0800
Received: from [63.24.225.35] (1Cust28.tnt1.rancho-cucamonga.ca.da.uu.net          [63.24.225.28]) by smtp004pub.verizon.net  with ESMTP for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; id fA8NmIn26334 Thu, 8 Nov 2001 17:48:19 -0600          (CST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: GTE/01rocket@mail.gte.net
References: <5.0.2.1.0.20011108091658.02e91008@mail.earthlink.net>            <a05100301b810785dc26e@[63.24.225.35]>            <001001c168a3$da76eef0$0100a8c0@cc898542a>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <a0510030bb810ca167ce7@[63.24.225.35]>
Date:         Thu, 8 Nov 2001 15:48:19 -0800
Reply-To: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Aluminum vendor
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <001001c168a3$da76eef0$0100a8c0@cc898542a>

>Which rocket vendor was it that sold/sells aluminum for motors? It happened
>to be the only
>advertised motor making supply, but was decently priced. Was it Rocketdyne?
>If it is
>it is not on the website anymore.
>
>Pax

Rocketflite sold BP aluminum motors.
ISP sold aluminum motors.
All Reloads are aluminum motors.

Jerry

--
Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
Opinion, the whole thing.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 29208 invoked from network); 9 Nov 2001 00:18:13 -0000
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 9 Nov 2001 00:18:13 -0000
Received: (qmail 22168 invoked by uid 50005); 9 Nov 2001 00:18:07 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4168. . Clean. Processed in 1.428903 secs); 09 Nov 2001 00:18:07 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 9 Nov 2001 00:18:04 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA10454; Thu, 8 Nov 2001 16:04:37 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 129597 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 9 Nov 2001 00:04:29          +0000
Received: from albqpop1.albq.uswest.net (albqpop1.albq.uswest.net          [207.108.240.1]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id QAA10440          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 8 Nov 2001 16:04:28 -0800
Received: (qmail 21868 invoked by alias); 9 Nov 2001 00:03:58 -0000
Delivered-To: fixup-AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU@fixme
Received: (qmail 21860 invoked by uid 0); 9 Nov 2001 00:03:57 -0000
Received: from cc898542-a.prdise1.nm.home.com (HELO cc898542a) (65.7.151.152)          by albqpop1.albq.uswest.net with SMTP; 9 Nov 2001 00:03:57 -0000
References: <5.0.2.1.0.20011108091658.02e91008@mail.earthlink.net>                       <a05100301b810785dc26e@[63.24.225.35]>                       <001001c168a3$da76eef0$0100a8c0@cc898542a>             <a0510030bb810ca167ce7@[63.24.225.35]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <001a01c168b1$ffdfc640$0100a8c0@cc898542a>
Date:         Thu, 8 Nov 2001 17:03:44 -0700
Reply-To: "Paxton" <darkspunge@USWEST.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Paxton" <darkspunge@USWEST.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Aluminum vendor
Comments: To: Jerry Irvine <01rocket@GTE.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

I think you missed a coupld words in your evaluation of the question. Unless
you want me to buy reloads and extract the Al.
I don't even think you could do that. Out of curiosity can you easily break
down a PBAN or HTPB matrix?

Pax


----- Original Message -----
From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Thursday, November 08, 2001 4:48 PM
Subject: Re: [AR] Aluminum vendor


> >Which rocket vendor was it that sold/sells aluminum for motors? It
happened
> >to be the only
> >advertised motor making supply, but was decently priced. Was it
Rocketdyne?
> >If it is
> >it is not on the website anymore.
> >
> >Pax
>
> Rocketflite sold BP aluminum motors.
> ISP sold aluminum motors.
> All Reloads are aluminum motors.
>
> Jerry
>
> --
> Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
> Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
> Opinion, the whole thing.
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 417 invoked from network); 9 Nov 2001 00:41:25 -0000
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 9 Nov 2001 00:41:25 -0000
Received: (qmail 27270 invoked by uid 50005); 9 Nov 2001 00:41:19 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4168. . Clean. Processed in 0.191826 secs); 09 Nov 2001 00:41:19 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 9 Nov 2001 00:41:19 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA10779; Thu, 8 Nov 2001 16:28:23 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 129676 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 9 Nov 2001 00:25:48          +0000
Received: from mtiwmhc25.worldnet.att.net (mtiwmhc25.worldnet.att.net          [204.127.131.50]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA10756          for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Thu, 8 Nov 2001 16:25:48 -0800
Received: from ejabd ([12.83.23.140]) by mtiwmhc25.worldnet.att.net (InterMail          vM.4.01.03.27 201-229-121-127-20010626) with SMTP id          <20011109002517.TEXO11294.mtiwmhc25.worldnet.att.net@ejabd> for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Fri, 9 Nov 2001 00:25:17 +0000
References: <5.0.2.1.0.20011108091658.02e91008@mail.earthlink.net>                         <a05100301b810785dc26e@[63.24.225.35]>                                 <001001c168a3$da76eef0$0100a8c0@cc898542a>                       <a0510030bb810ca167ce7@[63.24.225.35]>             <001a01c168b1$ffdfc640$0100a8c0@cc898542a>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <002601c168ac$46192080$8c17530c@ejabd>
Date:         Thu, 8 Nov 2001 17:22:45 -0600
Reply-To: "Rick VanVoorhis" <rickv2@WORLDNET.ATT.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Rick VanVoorhis" <rickv2@WORLDNET.ATT.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Aluminum vendor
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

I think that there might have been some misunderstanding, the AL that is
wanted is the powdered AL for mixing in with the AP for propellant casting,
not AL tubing for the cases.  Just adding this as an observer.

Rick VanVoorhis
----- Original Message -----
From: Paxton <darkspunge@USWEST.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Thursday, November 08, 2001 6:03 PM
Subject: Re: [AR] Aluminum vendor


> I think you missed a coupld words in your evaluation of the question.
Unless
> you want me to buy reloads and extract the Al.
> I don't even think you could do that. Out of curiosity can you easily
break
> down a PBAN or HTPB matrix?
>
> Pax
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
> To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
> Sent: Thursday, November 08, 2001 4:48 PM
> Subject: Re: [AR] Aluminum vendor
>
>
> > >Which rocket vendor was it that sold/sells aluminum for motors? It
> happened
> > >to be the only
> > >advertised motor making supply, but was decently priced. Was it
> Rocketdyne?
> > >If it is
> > >it is not on the website anymore.
> > >
> > >Pax
> >
> > Rocketflite sold BP aluminum motors.
> > ISP sold aluminum motors.
> > All Reloads are aluminum motors.
> >
> > Jerry
> >
> > --
> > Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
> > Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
> > Opinion, the whole thing.
> >
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 8445 invoked from network); 9 Nov 2001 01:05:15 -0000
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 9 Nov 2001 01:05:15 -0000
Received: (qmail 4257 invoked by uid 50005); 9 Nov 2001 01:05:09 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4168. . Clean. Processed in 0.158698 secs); 09 Nov 2001 01:05:09 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 9 Nov 2001 01:05:09 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA10941; Thu, 8 Nov 2001 16:55:15 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 129706 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 9 Nov 2001 00:53:53          +0000
Received: from mailin7.bigpond.com (mailin7.bigpond.com [139.134.6.95]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA10921 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Thu, 8 Nov 2001 16:53:52 -0800
Received: from tardis ([144.135.24.81]) by mailin7.bigpond.com (Netscape          Messaging Server 4.15) with SMTP id GMIDFS00.D51 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Fri, 9 Nov 2001 10:59:52 +1000
Received: from CPE-203-45-128-99.qld.bigpond.net.au ([203.45.128.99]) by          bwmam05.mailsvc.email.bigpond.com(MailRouter V2.9k 8335/1787544); 09          Nov 2001 10:53:18
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook CWS, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <00b601c168b8$de48aae0$641010ac@tardis>
Date:         Fri, 9 Nov 2001 10:52:54 +1000
Reply-To: "Ashley Roll" <ash@DIGITALNEMESIS.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Ashley Roll" <ash@DIGITALNEMESIS.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Potential KMZ51 bulk purchase
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <3BEAA628.D5EB11F3@ll.mit.edu>

This time I'll actually send it to the list :)

Hi All,

I've just finished a prototype magnetic apogee detector that uses the more
available UGN3503 Hall effect sensor.. This is available from hobbyist
electronic stores in Australia, so I dare say it is easy to get.

Give me a few days to do up some documentation and I'll place it on my web
site. I've also used mainly surface mount components which may unfortunately
make it more difficult to source for a hobbyist, but everything is available
from Farnell. I'll look into alternative components later.

Note that I haven't flight tested this yet. But it appears to function well
on the ground and it fires my pyrotechnic igniters well. Also it is designed
to be able to be switched from Southern hemisphere to Northern hemisphere
operation easily.

Cheers,
Ash.

---
Ashley Roll
Digital Nemesis Pty Ltd
www.digitalnemesis.com
Mobile: +61 (0)417 705 718




> -----Original Message-----
> From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@itc.uci.edu]On
> Behalf Of Robert Galejs
> Sent: Friday, 9 November 2001 1:35 AM
> To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
> Subject: [AR] Potential KMZ51 bulk purchase
>
>
> I've been getting lots of inquiries about how to
> buy small quantities of KMZ51 magnetic sensor chips.
> The short answer is that you can't.  They are
> special order parts that come in reels of 1000
> at a cost of about US$2 each.
>
> If enough people would be willing to buy a lot
> of 100 then I will go ahead and buy a reel
> and split it up.
>
> Any takers?
>
> If there is enough interest, I'll get a firm
> price and we'll go from there.
>
> - Robert Galejs
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 23291 invoked from network); 9 Nov 2001 01:08:51 -0000
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 9 Nov 2001 01:08:51 -0000
Received: (qmail 2408 invoked by uid 50005); 9 Nov 2001 01:08:46 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4168. . Clean. Processed in 1.379399 secs); 09 Nov 2001 01:08:46 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 9 Nov 2001 01:08:44 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA10978; Thu, 8 Nov 2001 16:58:51 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 129717 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 9 Nov 2001 00:57:30          +0000
Received: from albqpop1.albq.uswest.net (albqpop1.albq.uswest.net          [207.108.240.1]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id QAA10963          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 8 Nov 2001 16:57:29 -0800
Received: (qmail 17557 invoked by alias); 9 Nov 2001 00:46:59 -0000
Delivered-To: fixup-AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU@fixme
Received: (qmail 3533 invoked by uid 0); 9 Nov 2001 00:41:18 -0000
Received: from cc898542-a.prdise1.nm.home.com (HELO cc898542a) (65.7.151.152)          by albqpop1.albq.uswest.net with SMTP; 9 Nov 2001 00:41:18 -0000
References: <5.0.2.1.0.20011108091658.02e91008@mail.earthlink.net>                         <a05100301b810785dc26e@[63.24.225.35]>                                         <001001c168a3$da76eef0$0100a8c0@cc898542a>                                  <a0510030bb810ca167ce7@[63.24.225.35]>                        <001a01c168b1$ffdfc640$0100a8c0@cc898542a>             <002601c168ac$46192080$8c17530c@ejabd>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <001001c168b7$37745800$0100a8c0@cc898542a>
Date:         Thu, 8 Nov 2001 17:41:05 -0700
Reply-To: "Paxton" <darkspunge@USWEST.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Paxton" <darkspunge@USWEST.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Aluminum vendor
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

I know. I forgot a word too. Course that doesnt explain why jerry was
talking about who makes motors containing Al.

oh well :-)


----- Original Message -----
From: "Rick VanVoorhis" <rickv2@WORLDNET.ATT.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Thursday, November 08, 2001 4:22 PM
Subject: Re: [AR] Aluminum vendor


> I think that there might have been some misunderstanding, the AL that is
> wanted is the powdered AL for mixing in with the AP for propellant
casting,
> not AL tubing for the cases.  Just adding this as an observer.
>
> Rick VanVoorhis
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Paxton <darkspunge@USWEST.NET>
> To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
> Sent: Thursday, November 08, 2001 6:03 PM
> Subject: Re: [AR] Aluminum vendor
>
>
> > I think you missed a coupld words in your evaluation of the question.
> Unless
> > you want me to buy reloads and extract the Al.
> > I don't even think you could do that. Out of curiosity can you easily
> break
> > down a PBAN or HTPB matrix?
> >
> > Pax
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
> > To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
> > Sent: Thursday, November 08, 2001 4:48 PM
> > Subject: Re: [AR] Aluminum vendor
> >
> >
> > > >Which rocket vendor was it that sold/sells aluminum for motors? It
> > happened
> > > >to be the only
> > > >advertised motor making supply, but was decently priced. Was it
> > Rocketdyne?
> > > >If it is
> > > >it is not on the website anymore.
> > > >
> > > >Pax
> > >
> > > Rocketflite sold BP aluminum motors.
> > > ISP sold aluminum motors.
> > > All Reloads are aluminum motors.
> > >
> > > Jerry
> > >
> > > --
> > > Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
> > > Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
> > > Opinion, the whole thing.
> > >
> >
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 21281 invoked from network); 9 Nov 2001 01:24:07 -0000
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 9 Nov 2001 01:24:07 -0000
X-Priority: 3
Received: (qmail 706 invoked by uid 50005); 9 Nov 2001 01:24:02 -0000
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4168. . Clean. Processed in 0.165161 secs); 09 Nov 2001 01:24:02 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 9 Nov 2001 01:24:01 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA11196; Thu, 8 Nov 2001 17:21:01 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 129756 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 9 Nov 2001 01:19:38          +0000
Received: from inet03.citec.qld.gov.au (firewall-user@inet03.citec.qld.gov.au          [203.5.10.10]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA11174          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.edu>; Thu, 8 Nov 2001 17:19:35 -0800
Received: by inet03.citec.qld.gov.au; id LAA09978; Fri, 9 Nov 2001 11:19:30          +1000 (EST)
Received: from citec.com.au(pcux.citec.qld.gov.au 147.132.17.12) by          inet03.citec.qld.gov.au via smap (V2.0) id xma009809; Fri, 9 Nov 01          11:19:22 +1000
Received: from CITEC-Message_Server by citec.com.au with Novell_GroupWise; Fri,          09 Nov 2001 11:20:19 +1000
X-Mailer: Novell GroupWise 5.5.4
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by itc.uci.edu id RAA11175
Message-ID:  <sbebbbf3.008@citec.com.au>
Date:         Fri, 9 Nov 2001 11:20:05 +1000
Reply-To: "Des Bromilow" <Des.Bromilow@CITEC.COM.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Des Bromilow" <Des.Bromilow@CITEC.COM.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Potential KMZ51 bulk purchase
Comments: To: ash@DIGITALNEMESIS.COM
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

You got that working???!!!!!!!

I was playing with that earlier in the year and couldn't get that one to work well... I'd be very interested to see how your design is different from mine. (I suspect my problem was on sensitivity, but  I had to shelve the project due to work commitments...)

eagerly waiting to see what you did,

Des

>>> Ashley Roll <ash@DIGITALNEMESIS.COM> 9/11/01 10:52:54 am >>>
This time I'll actually send it to the list :)

Hi All,

I've just finished a prototype magnetic apogee detector that uses the more
available UGN3503 Hall effect sensor.. This is available from hobbyist
electronic stores in Australia, so I dare say it is easy to get.

Give me a few days to do up some documentation and I'll place it on my web
site. I've also used mainly surface mount components which may unfortunately
make it more difficult to source for a hobbyist, but everything is available
from Farnell. I'll look into alternative components later.

Note that I haven't flight tested this yet. But it appears to function well
on the ground and it fires my pyrotechnic igniters well. Also it is designed
to be able to be switched from Southern hemisphere to Northern hemisphere
operation easily.

Cheers,
Ash.

---
Ashley Roll
Digital Nemesis Pty Ltd
www.digitalnemesis.com
Mobile: +61 (0)417 705 718




> -----Original Message-----
> From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@itc.uci.edu]On
> Behalf Of Robert Galejs
> Sent: Friday, 9 November 2001 1:35 AM
> To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
> Subject: [AR] Potential KMZ51 bulk purchase
>
>
> I've been getting lots of inquiries about how to
> buy small quantities of KMZ51 magnetic sensor chips.
> The short answer is that you can't.  They are
> special order parts that come in reels of 1000
> at a cost of about US$2 each.
>
> If enough people would be willing to buy a lot
> of 100 then I will go ahead and buy a reel
> and split it up.
>
> Any takers?
>
> If there is enough interest, I'll get a firm
> price and we'll go from there.
>
> - Robert Galejs
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 26651 invoked from network); 9 Nov 2001 02:26:43 -0000
Received: from smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.105]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 9 Nov 2001 02:26:43 -0000
Received: (qmail 1811 invoked by uid 50005); 9 Nov 2001 02:26:37 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpy with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4168. . Clean. Processed in 0.753797 secs); 09 Nov 2001 02:26:37 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 9 Nov 2001 02:26:36 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA12397; Thu, 8 Nov 2001 18:19:18 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 129838 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 9 Nov 2001 02:17:44          +0000
Received: from mailin5.bigpond.com (mailin5.bigpond.com [139.134.6.78]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA12364 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Thu, 8 Nov 2001 18:17:43 -0800
Received: from tardis ([144.135.24.81]) by mailin5.bigpond.com (Netscape          Messaging Server 4.15) with SMTP id GMIHC700.2EW for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Fri, 9 Nov 2001 12:24:07 +1000
Received: from CPE-203-45-128-99.qld.bigpond.net.au ([203.45.128.99]) by          bwmam05.mailsvc.email.bigpond.com(MailRouter V2.9k 8335/1897216); 09          Nov 2001 12:17:32
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook CWS, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <00b801c168c4$9ef88390$641010ac@tardis>
Date:         Fri, 9 Nov 2001 12:16:50 +1000
Reply-To: "Ashley Roll" <ash@DIGITALNEMESIS.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Ashley Roll" <ash@DIGITALNEMESIS.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Potential KMZ51 bulk purchase
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <sbebbbf3.008@citec.com.au>

Hi Des,

Yep, seems to work. I'm still testing it and messing around trying to
determine how sensitive it is to environmental conditions it is..

At present I know I have to let it "warm up" and settle down at its working
temperature for a few minutes before use otherwise it drifts. I suspect that
this is the '3503.

I'm using a MCP604 (Quad CMOS Rail to Rail opamp) from Microchip which I had
lying around from a previous thermocouple project.

Your welcome to drop over after work and have a look if you like..

Cheers,
Ash.

---
Ashley Roll
Digital Nemesis Pty Ltd
www.digitalnemesis.com
Mobile: +61 (0)417 705 718




> -----Original Message-----
> From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@itc.uci.edu]On
> Behalf Of Des Bromilow
> Sent: Friday, 9 November 2001 11:20 AM
> To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
> Subject: Re: [AR] Potential KMZ51 bulk purchase
>
>
> You got that working???!!!!!!!
>
> I was playing with that earlier in the year and couldn't get
> that one to work well... I'd be very interested to see how
> your design is different from mine. (I suspect my problem was
> on sensitivity, but  I had to shelve the project due to work
> commitments...)
>
> eagerly waiting to see what you did,
>
> Des

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 28365 invoked from network); 9 Nov 2001 02:42:13 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 9 Nov 2001 02:42:13 -0000
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 583 invoked by uid 50005); 9 Nov 2001 02:40:06 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4168. . Clean. Processed in 0.898831 secs); 09 Nov 2001 02:40:06 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 9 Nov 2001 02:40:04 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA12623; Thu, 8 Nov 2001 18:34:31 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 129860 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 9 Nov 2001 02:33:08          +0000
Received: from athol.localdomain (57.106.252.64.snet.net [64.252.106.57]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA12608 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 8 Nov 2001 18:33:07 -0800
Received: by athol.localdomain (Postfix, from userid 500) id 03BA5B46A0; Thu,           8 Nov 2001 21:33:04 -0500 (EST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Disposition: inline
User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.21i
Message-ID:  <20011108213304.A26735@athol.localdomain>
Date:         Thu, 8 Nov 2001 21:33:04 -0500
Reply-To: <norman.yarvin@SNET.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Norman Yarvin" <yarvin_listbox@SNET.NET>
Subject:      [AR] Gyro integration, again
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

About a month ago, I sent some stuff to this list about integrating gyro
outputs to get the orientation of a spacecraft, and managed to word
things poorly enough that I was misunderstood both by Henry Spencer and
by John Carmack.  If people like that misunderstand, it's a strong sign
that the explanation is seriously deficient -- and not just in the
particular phrases that they took the wrong way.  I have some more time
now, so let me try again, from the beginning.

The reason why integrating gyro outputs is not just integration, but
rather solving an ordinary differential equation (ODE), is that the
derivatives of the state variables (the state variables being the angles
relative to the ground, or relative to the original position of the
spacecraft) depend on the current values of the state variables.  An
example is how an airplane turns: when it wants to turn to the right, it
rolls over to the right, pitches up, and then rolls back to the left once
the turn is over.  The banking converts what from the airplane's point
of view is a pitching motion (nose up), to what from the absolute point
of view is a yawing motion (nose to the side).  If the meaning of a
motion didn't depend on the current state like this (and in two
dimensions, it doesn't), the problem would be pure integration; as it is,
the problem is solving a differential equation.

Textbooks that talk about numerical methods for solving ODEs usually talk
in terms of the calculation being totally internal to the computer.  But
they never really rely on this, and there's no reason why it has to be
so.  The derivatives can equally well be computed partly from sensor
inputs, as in this case.

I'm not deeply familiar with gyros, and it's conceivable that some set of
state variables could be chosen (not simply the usual three angles) that
would make the problem into an integration problem.  But I've never heard
of any such set of state variables, and the normal way of representing
the state of the spacecraft, in terms of orientation, is as three angles,
which makes the problem into one of ODE-solving.

The problem of solving an ODE is truly a difficult one: lots of
intelligent people have spent years on it.  But it is also a solved
problem: there are lots of canned ODE solvers that can be used without
any major mental effort.  They can be found in almost any numerical
analysis book, and probably also at netlib (www.netlib.org).  In general,
the one major hitch in using ODE solvers is a property called stiffness.
An ODE is "stiff" if the problem has two different time scales, one of
which is much faster than the other, and if on the faster time scale all
that is happening is a very fast decay -- so that one is tempted just to
solve things on the slower time scale, where all the interesting behavior
is.  This description of stiffness is something of an oversimplification,
but it's enough to make it clear that this particular problem has nothing
like stiffness in it, and thus that the cautions about "stiffness" in
numerical analysis books can all be ignored for this problem.

(I'm going into this sort of detail because I'm approaching this from the
point of view of not having any practical experience -- at least not with
this problem in particular; there is nothing dubious about the theory I'm
using, but it does have to be applied thoroughly to be reliable.  And
when talking to people who might blow themselves up using the techniques
that one is talking about, it pays to be reliable.)

If this were just an integration problem, none of the theory of numerical
integration would be of much use: in integrating, the simplest possible
thing to do -- just summing up equispaced samples of the input -- is
generally the best thing to do.  Summing up equispaced samples -- aka the
"trapezoidal rule" -- is described in many numerical analysis textbooks
as being a first order method (and thus relatively lousy); but that
really only describes the error that the method makes near the ends of
the interval of integration.  With gyros, the concern is for error that
accumulates over a long period; a tiny period of error near startup, and
a tiny period of error near the current time, is of little concern.  In
the middle of the interval of integration, the trapezoidal rule
integrates perfectly every sine wave up to one point per wavelength.
(Yes, it's twice as good as the Nyquist criterion of two points per
wavelength; just integrating a function is easier than determining all
its component frequencies.)

Unfortunately, this is not the problem at hand, which is solving an ODE.
With ODE solvers, the simplest possible thing to do -- the forward Euler
method, which solves the ODE

        u' = f(u)

by the formula

        u[n+1] = u[n] + h*f(u[n]),

where h is the timestep, does accumulate discretization error.  The error
scales with the timestep as O(h^2), making it a "first order method"; and
unlike the trapezoidal rule for integration, it really is a first order
method.  In better methods, the error scales as O(h^3), O(h^4), or
better.  By using a high order method, one can probably get to something
like the Nyquist criterion -- at least half as good as it.

To really kill the problem dead, you then have to use some kind of
mechanical filtering, to filter out all the frequencies which might get
to the gyro but which the discretization doesn't handle.  This might be a
matter of mounting the gyros on rubber supports; John Carmack has talked
about electrical noise causing problems with gyros, but near a rocket
engine, there is plenty of mechanical noise (vibration), too.  Any of it
that gets into the gyros, and is too high frequency for the ODE solver to
handle, will produce errors that accumulate.

All this may seem like overkill -- and maybe it is; lacking practical
experience, I don't know the numbers, so I can't put a size to the error.
But if discretization error is a problem, this is the way to solve it.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 19942 invoked from network); 9 Nov 2001 02:55:07 -0000
Received: from smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.105]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 9 Nov 2001 02:55:07 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 12006 invoked by uid 50005); 9 Nov 2001 02:55:01 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpy with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4168. . Clean. Processed in 0.794474 secs); 09 Nov 2001 02:55:01 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 9 Nov 2001 02:54:59 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA12743; Thu, 8 Nov 2001 18:50:03 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 129880 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 9 Nov 2001 02:48:41          +0000
Received: from mail006.syd.optusnet.com.au (mail006.syd.optusnet.com.au          [203.2.75.230]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA12722          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 8 Nov 2001 18:48:39 -0800
Received: from webmail02.syd.optusnet.com.au (webmail02.syd.optusnet.com.au          [203.2.75.235]) by mail006.syd.optusnet.com.au (8.11.1/8.11.1) with          ESMTP id fA92mX217984; Fri, 9 Nov 2001 13:48:34 +1100
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: MIME-tools 5.411 (Entity 5.404)
Received: from  [209.36.247.3] as user strudwicke@optusnet.com.au by          webmail.optusnet.com.au with HTTP;
Message-ID:  <200111090248.fA92mX217984@mail006.syd.optusnet.com.au>
Date:         Fri, 9 Nov 2001 13:48:24 +1100
Reply-To: "Craig Strudwicke" <strudwicke@OPTUSNET.COM.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Craig Strudwicke" <strudwicke@OPTUSNET.COM.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Gyro integration, again
Comments: To: "norman . yarvin @ SNET . NET" <norman.yarvin@SNET.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Is it not valid to assume all high frequency noise is random and has a reasonably
standard distribution ?
Therefore, applying electrical filtering to the rate gyro signals (eg unity gain active
lowpass)  is a viable and in my opinion a much more sensible thing to do than
use a mechanical "filter" (ie rubber mount or similar) to remove these signals.
This compliance will only add more unwanted effects to the system, ie low
freqency components.

Craig

> Norman Yarvin <yarvin_listbox@SNET.NET> wrote:
>
> About a month ago, I sent some stuff to this list about integrating
> gyro
> outputs to get the orientation of a spacecraft, and managed to word
> things poorly enough that I was misunderstood both by Henry Spencer
> and
> by John Carmack.  If people like that misunderstand, it's a strong
> sign
> that the explanation is seriously deficient -- and not just in the
> particular phrases that they took the wrong way.  I have some more
> time
> now, so let me try again, from the beginning.
>
> The reason why integrating gyro outputs is not just integration, but
> rather solving an ordinary differential equation (ODE), is that the
> derivatives of the state variables (the state variables being the
> angles
> relative to the ground, or relative to the original position of the
> spacecraft) depend on the current values of the state variables.  An
> example is how an airplane turns: when it wants to turn to the right,
> it
> rolls over to the right, pitches up, and then rolls back to the left
> once
> the turn is over.  The banking converts what from the airplane's
> point
> of view is a pitching motion (nose up), to what from the absolute
> point
> of view is a yawing motion (nose to the side).  If the meaning of a
> motion didn't depend on the current state like this (and in two
> dimensions, it doesn't), the problem would be pure integration; as it
> is,
> the problem is solving a differential equation.
>
> Textbooks that talk about numerical methods for solving ODEs usually
> talk
> in terms of the calculation being totally internal to the computer.
> But
> they never really rely on this, and there's no reason why it has to
> be
> so.  The derivatives can equally well be computed partly from sensor
> inputs, as in this case.
>
> I'm not deeply familiar with gyros, and it's conceivable that some
> set of
> state variables could be chosen (not simply the usual three angles)
> that
> would make the problem into an integration problem.  But I've never
> heard
> of any such set of state variables, and the normal way of
> representing
> the state of the spacecraft, in terms of orientation, is as three
> angles,
> which makes the problem into one of ODE-solving.
>
> The problem of solving an ODE is truly a difficult one: lots of
> intelligent people have spent years on it.  But it is also a solved
> problem: there are lots of canned ODE solvers that can be used
> without
> any major mental effort.  They can be found in almost any numerical
> analysis book, and probably also at netlib (www.netlib.org).  In
> general,
> the one major hitch in using ODE solvers is a property called
> stiffness.
> An ODE is "stiff" if the problem has two different time scales, one
> of
> which is much faster than the other, and if on the faster time scale
> all
> that is happening is a very fast decay -- so that one is tempted just
> to
> solve things on the slower time scale, where all the interesting
> behavior
> is.  This description of stiffness is something of an
> oversimplification,
> but it's enough to make it clear that this particular problem has
> nothing
> like stiffness in it, and thus that the cautions about "stiffness" in
> numerical analysis books can all be ignored for this problem.
>
> (I'm going into this sort of detail because I'm approaching this from
> the
> point of view of not having any practical experience -- at least not
> with
> this problem in particular; there is nothing dubious about the theory
> I'm
> using, but it does have to be applied thoroughly to be reliable.  And
> when talking to people who might blow themselves up using the
> techniques
> that one is talking about, it pays to be reliable.)
>
> If this were just an integration problem, none of the theory of
> numerical
> integration would be of much use: in integrating, the simplest
> possible
> thing to do -- just summing up equispaced samples of the input -- is
> generally the best thing to do.  Summing up equispaced samples -- aka
> the
> "trapezoidal rule" -- is described in many numerical analysis
> textbooks
> as being a first order method (and thus relatively lousy); but that
> really only describes the error that the method makes near the ends
> of
> the interval of integration.  With gyros, the concern is for error
> that
> accumulates over a long period; a tiny period of error near startup,
> and
> a tiny period of error near the current time, is of little concern.
> In
> the middle of the interval of integration, the trapezoidal rule
> integrates perfectly every sine wave up to one point per wavelength.
> (Yes, it's twice as good as the Nyquist criterion of two points per
> wavelength; just integrating a function is easier than determining
> all
> its component frequencies.)
>
> Unfortunately, this is not the problem at hand, which is solving an
> ODE.
> With ODE solvers, the simplest possible thing to do -- the forward
> Euler
> method, which solves the ODE
>
>         u' = f(u)
>
> by the formula
>
>         u[n+1] = u[n] + h*f(u[n]),
>
> where h is the timestep, does accumulate discretization error.  The
> error
> scales with the timestep as O(h^2), making it a "first order method";
> and
> unlike the trapezoidal rule for integration, it really is a first
> order
> method.  In better methods, the error scales as O(h^3), O(h^4), or
> better.  By using a high order method, one can probably get to
> something
> like the Nyquist criterion -- at least half as good as it.
>
> To really kill the problem dead, you then have to use some kind of
> mechanical filtering, to filter out all the frequencies which might
> get
> to the gyro but which the discretization doesn't handle.  This might
> be a
> matter of mounting the gyros on rubber supports; John Carmack has
> talked
> about electrical noise causing problems with gyros, but near a rocket
> engine, there is plenty of mechanical noise (vibration), too.  Any of
> it
> that gets into the gyros, and is too high frequency for the ODE
> solver to
> handle, will produce errors that accumulate.
>
> All this may seem like overkill -- and maybe it is; lacking practical
> experience, I don't know the numbers, so I can't put a size to the
> error.
> But if discretization error is a problem, this is the way to solve
> it.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 9060 invoked from network); 9 Nov 2001 03:17:28 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 9 Nov 2001 03:17:28 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 19971 invoked by uid 50005); 9 Nov 2001 03:17:23 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4168. . Clean. Processed in 0.209462 secs); 09 Nov 2001 03:17:23 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 9 Nov 2001 03:17:22 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA13017; Thu, 8 Nov 2001 19:15:03 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 129898 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 9 Nov 2001 03:13:36          +0000
Received: from idsoftware.com (predator.idsoftware.com [192.246.40.34]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA12996 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Thu, 8 Nov 2001 19:13:36 -0800
Received: from [192.246.40.129] (account johnc HELO lightning.idsoftware.com)          by idsoftware.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 3.4.7) with ESMTP id 470730          for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 08 Nov 2001 21:13:35 -0600
X-Sender: johnc@mail.idsoftware.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <4.3.1.2.20011108210525.05a97b60@mail.idsoftware.com>
Date:         Thu, 8 Nov 2001 21:11:48 -0600
Reply-To: "John Carmack" <johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Carmack" <johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Gyro integration, again
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <200111090248.fA92mX217984@mail006.syd.optusnet.com.au>

At 01:48 PM 11/9/2001 +1100, you wrote:
>Is it not valid to assume all high frequency noise is random and has a
>reasonably
>standard distribution ?
>Therefore, applying electrical filtering to the rate gyro signals (eg
>unity gain active
>lowpass)  is a viable and in my opinion a much more sensible thing to do than
>use a mechanical "filter" (ie rubber mount or similar) to remove these
>signals.
>This compliance will only add more unwanted effects to the system, ie low
>freqency components.
>
>Craig

Unfortunately, no, that isn't the "right" thing to do.  A signal needs to
be band limited before it is sampled by the sensor for all the signal
theory to apply.  The only way to band limit a rate or acceleration is with
some form of spring/damper or foam arrangement.

Just how important doing everything in the best theoretical manner actually
is, is open to debate.

John Carmack

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 23979 invoked from network); 9 Nov 2001 03:31:29 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 9 Nov 2001 03:31:29 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 7740 invoked by uid 50005); 9 Nov 2001 03:31:23 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4168. . Clean. Processed in 0.198162 secs); 09 Nov 2001 03:31:23 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 9 Nov 2001 03:31:23 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA13259; Thu, 8 Nov 2001 19:29:04 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 129922 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 9 Nov 2001 03:27:43          +0000
Received: from athol.localdomain (57.106.252.64.snet.net [64.252.106.57]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA13211 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Thu, 8 Nov 2001 19:26:29 -0800
Received: by athol.localdomain (Postfix, from userid 500) id B8D01B46A0; Thu,           8 Nov 2001 22:26:27 -0500 (EST)
References: <200111090248.fA92mX217984@mail006.syd.optusnet.com.au>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Disposition: inline
User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.21i
Message-ID:  <20011108222627.A26973@athol.localdomain>
Date:         Thu, 8 Nov 2001 22:26:27 -0500
Reply-To: <norman.yarvin@SNET.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Norman Yarvin" <yarvin_listbox@SNET.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Gyro integration, again
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <200111090248.fA92mX217984@mail006.syd.optusnet.com.au>

On Fri, Nov 09, 2001 at 01:48:24PM +1100, Craig Strudwicke wrote:
>Is it not valid to assume all high frequency noise is random and has a
>reasonably standard distribution ?
>Therefore, applying electrical filtering to the rate gyro signals (eg
>unity gain active lowpass) is a viable and in my opinion a much more
>sensible thing to do than use a mechanical "filter" (ie rubber mount or
>similar) to remove these signals. This compliance will only add more
>unwanted effects to the system, ie low freqency components.

Mechanical filtering would add delay to the control feedback loop, but
then so would electrical filtering.  The advantage of mechanical
filtering is that it's easier to analyze: you absolutely know that the
difference between the orientation of the gyro, and the orientation of
the spacecraft, is less than the maximum stretch of the rubber allows.
With electrical filtering, there is no such guarantee, because you'd be
filtering each signal separately, but each signal affects what the other
signals mean -- not hugely, but it's hard to put a bound on the resulting
error.  And unless the analog circuitry were very accurate, it would
introduce its own errors.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 25849 invoked from network); 9 Nov 2001 03:32:03 -0000
Received: from smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.105]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 9 Nov 2001 03:32:03 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 3195 invoked by uid 50005); 9 Nov 2001 03:31:57 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpy with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4168. . Clean. Processed in 1.075214 secs); 09 Nov 2001 03:31:57 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 9 Nov 2001 03:31:56 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA13226; Thu, 8 Nov 2001 19:27:19 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 129909 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 9 Nov 2001 03:25:48          +0000
Received: from sys27.hou.wt.net (sys27.hou.wt.net [205.230.159.27]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA13186 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 8 Nov 2001 19:25:45 -0800
Received: from localhost (216-119-130-159.ipset10.wt.net [216.119.130.159]) by          sys27.hou.wt.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id VAA93624; Thu, 8 Nov          2001 21:25:36 -0600 (CST)
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="US-ASCII"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.472)
Message-ID:  <7B785527-D4C1-11D5-B0AE-0050E43A5105@netaxs.com>
Date:         Thu, 8 Nov 2001 21:25:53 -0600
Reply-To: "Donald McCorvey" <dlm3@NETAXS.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Donald McCorvey" <dlm3@NETAXS.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Gyro integration, again
Comments: To: Craig Strudwicke <strudwicke@OPTUSNET.COM.AU>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <200111090248.fA92mX217984@mail006.syd.optusnet.com.au>

Also important, you want to do lowpass filtering on your gyro signals
(or anything for that matter) for anti-aliasing so that the sampled
signal does not contain higher frequency components which have wrapped
back into your frequencies of interest. You can use an ordinary
Butterworth lowpass or more complex elliptical filters, but in either
case you're trying to put the maximum phase change an octave or so above
your Nyquist frequency to avoid phase lag creeping into your system
while at the same time keeping spurious noise or other signals well
below 3db from your passband.

John's problem would not be solved with filtering, if I read his posts
correctly - his problem was more fundamental in the form of pickup and
grounding issues. Filtering does absolutely nothing for these problems
because they are driven by the ground reference at the input to your A/D
converter - if the reference is contaminated, so will be the sampled
signal. Prefiltering or filtering in the sampled domain will be of
little use against this kind of problem.

I'm not sure I understand Norman's problem with integrators - with a
sampled system you can use rectangular or trapezoidal integrators with
relatively little code for realtime applications (most applications I've
seen use only simple rectangular integrators which are adequate with
high sample rates).

The only time I've ever gotten into trouble with stiffness in my
integrators has come when doing largish simulation models with stiff
spring rates that caused instabilities in the results.

Don

On Thursday, November 8, 2001, at 08:48  PM, Craig Strudwicke wrote:

> Is it not valid to assume all high frequency noise is random and has a
> reasonably
> standard distribution ?
> Therefore, applying electrical filtering to the rate gyro signals (eg
> unity gain active
> lowpass)  is a viable and in my opinion a much more sensible thing to
> do than
> use a mechanical "filter" (ie rubber mount or similar) to remove these
> signals.
> This compliance will only add more unwanted effects to the system, ie
> low
> freqency components.
>
> Craig
>
>> Norman Yarvin <yarvin_listbox@SNET.NET> wrote:
>>
>> About a month ago, I sent some stuff to this list about integrating
>> gyro
>> outputs to get the orientation of a spacecraft, and managed to word
>> things poorly enough that I was misunderstood both by Henry Spencer
>> and
>> by John Carmack.  If people like that misunderstand, it's a strong
>> sign
>> that the explanation is seriously deficient -- and not just in the
>> particular phrases that they took the wrong way.  I have some more
>> time
>> now, so let me try again, from the beginning.
>>
>> The reason why integrating gyro outputs is not just integration, but
>> rather solving an ordinary differential equation (ODE), is that the
>> derivatives of the state variables (the state variables being the
>> angles
>> relative to the ground, or relative to the original position of the
>> spacecraft) depend on the current values of the state variables.  An
>> example is how an airplane turns: when it wants to turn to the right,
>> it
>> rolls over to the right, pitches up, and then rolls back to the left
>> once
>> the turn is over.  The banking converts what from the airplane's
>> point
>> of view is a pitching motion (nose up), to what from the absolute
>> point
>> of view is a yawing motion (nose to the side).  If the meaning of a
>> motion didn't depend on the current state like this (and in two
>> dimensions, it doesn't), the problem would be pure integration; as it
>> is,
>> the problem is solving a differential equation.
>>
>> Textbooks that talk about numerical methods for solving ODEs usually
>> talk
>> in terms of the calculation being totally internal to the computer.
>> But
>> they never really rely on this, and there's no reason why it has to
>> be
>> so.  The derivatives can equally well be computed partly from sensor
>> inputs, as in this case.
>>
>> I'm not deeply familiar with gyros, and it's conceivable that some
>> set of
>> state variables could be chosen (not simply the usual three angles)
>> that
>> would make the problem into an integration problem.  But I've never
>> heard
>> of any such set of state variables, and the normal way of
>> representing
>> the state of the spacecraft, in terms of orientation, is as three
>> angles,
>> which makes the problem into one of ODE-solving.
>>
>> The problem of solving an ODE is truly a difficult one: lots of
>> intelligent people have spent years on it.  But it is also a solved
>> problem: there are lots of canned ODE solvers that can be used
>> without
>> any major mental effort.  They can be found in almost any numerical
>> analysis book, and probably also at netlib (www.netlib.org).  In
>> general,
>> the one major hitch in using ODE solvers is a property called
>> stiffness.
>> An ODE is "stiff" if the problem has two different time scales, one
>> of
>> which is much faster than the other, and if on the faster time scale
>> all
>> that is happening is a very fast decay -- so that one is tempted just
>> to
>> solve things on the slower time scale, where all the interesting
>> behavior
>> is.  This description of stiffness is something of an
>> oversimplification,
>> but it's enough to make it clear that this particular problem has
>> nothing
>> like stiffness in it, and thus that the cautions about "stiffness" in
>> numerical analysis books can all be ignored for this problem.
>>
>> (I'm going into this sort of detail because I'm approaching this from
>> the
>> point of view of not having any practical experience -- at least not
>> with
>> this problem in particular; there is nothing dubious about the theory
>> I'm
>> using, but it does have to be applied thoroughly to be reliable.  And
>> when talking to people who might blow themselves up using the
>> techniques
>> that one is talking about, it pays to be reliable.)
>>
>> If this were just an integration problem, none of the theory of
>> numerical
>> integration would be of much use: in integrating, the simplest
>> possible
>> thing to do -- just summing up equispaced samples of the input -- is
>> generally the best thing to do.  Summing up equispaced samples -- aka
>> the
>> "trapezoidal rule" -- is described in many numerical analysis
>> textbooks
>> as being a first order method (and thus relatively lousy); but that
>> really only describes the error that the method makes near the ends
>> of
>> the interval of integration.  With gyros, the concern is for error
>> that
>> accumulates over a long period; a tiny period of error near startup,
>> and
>> a tiny period of error near the current time, is of little concern.
>> In
>> the middle of the interval of integration, the trapezoidal rule
>> integrates perfectly every sine wave up to one point per wavelength.
>> (Yes, it's twice as good as the Nyquist criterion of two points per
>> wavelength; just integrating a function is easier than determining
>> all
>> its component frequencies.)
>>
>> Unfortunately, this is not the problem at hand, which is solving an
>> ODE.
>> With ODE solvers, the simplest possible thing to do -- the forward
>> Euler
>> method, which solves the ODE
>>
>>         u' = f(u)
>>
>> by the formula
>>
>>         u[n+1] = u[n] + h*f(u[n]),
>>
>> where h is the timestep, does accumulate discretization error.  The
>> error
>> scales with the timestep as O(h^2), making it a "first order method";
>> and
>> unlike the trapezoidal rule for integration, it really is a first
>> order
>> method.  In better methods, the error scales as O(h^3), O(h^4), or
>> better.  By using a high order method, one can probably get to
>> something
>> like the Nyquist criterion -- at least half as good as it.
>>
>> To really kill the problem dead, you then have to use some kind of
>> mechanical filtering, to filter out all the frequencies which might
>> get
>> to the gyro but which the discretization doesn't handle.  This might
>> be a
>> matter of mounting the gyros on rubber supports; John Carmack has
>> talked
>> about electrical noise causing problems with gyros, but near a rocket
>> engine, there is plenty of mechanical noise (vibration), too.  Any of
>> it
>> that gets into the gyros, and is too high frequency for the ODE
>> solver to
>> handle, will produce errors that accumulate.
>>
>> All this may seem like overkill -- and maybe it is; lacking practical
>> experience, I don't know the numbers, so I can't put a size to the
>> error.
>> But if discretization error is a problem, this is the way to solve
>> it.
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 8923 invoked from network); 9 Nov 2001 03:45:49 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 9 Nov 2001 03:45:49 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 28971 invoked by uid 50005); 9 Nov 2001 03:45:44 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4168. . Clean. Processed in 0.330161 secs); 09 Nov 2001 03:45:44 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 9 Nov 2001 03:45:43 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA13524; Thu, 8 Nov 2001 19:41:41 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 129956 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 9 Nov 2001 03:40:15          +0000
Received: from idsoftware.com (predator.idsoftware.com [192.246.40.34]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA13509 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Thu, 8 Nov 2001 19:40:14 -0800
Received: from [192.246.40.129] (account johnc HELO lightning.idsoftware.com)          by idsoftware.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 3.4.7) with ESMTP id 470761          for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 08 Nov 2001 21:40:14 -0600
X-Sender: johnc@mail.idsoftware.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <4.3.1.2.20011108204626.05aa6260@mail.idsoftware.com>
Date:         Thu, 8 Nov 2001 21:38:27 -0600
Reply-To: "John Carmack" <johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Carmack" <johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Gyro integration, again
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <20011108213304.A26735@athol.localdomain>

At 09:33 PM 11/8/2001 -0500, you wrote:
>About a month ago, I sent some stuff to this list about integrating gyro
>outputs to get the orientation of a spacecraft, and managed to word
>things poorly enough that I was misunderstood both by Henry Spencer and
>by John Carmack.  If people like that misunderstand, it's a strong sign
>that the explanation is seriously deficient -- and not just in the
>particular phrases that they took the wrong way.  I have some more time
>now, so let me try again, from the beginning.

Ok, now I understand what you are getting at -- discretization error.

I'm not sure how significant of an effect this is.  I may write some
simulations to experiment with the effect.  A hardcore math guy could
probably just analytically determine the error, but I would probably make a
simulated path and sample it with a properly filtered virtual sensor and
compare the tracked position with the actual position.

All of my experience in other fields leads me to attack discretization
problems by just cranking the sampling rate, rather than applying higher
order methods.  With my previous system, I was sampling and updating the
orientation matrix 1000 times a second based on a sensor with 100 hz
bandwidth.  Few systems still have noticeable discretization error with 10x
oversampling.

However, I just moved us over to a new gyro (a Crossbow FOG IMU) that
communicates digitally with only 200 samples a second, so I may be
experiencing more discretization error as a result.  Early bench testing
shows it to be much improved due to the RMS noise being 1/3 what our old
system was (we also get twice the range on both rates and acceleration, as
well as the lower noise level).

Even with the new system, random noise is still a big factor.  Attitude
will only drift a degree every few minutes when at rest, which is good
enough for orbital insertion in my book, but when combined into a full 6DOF
inertial navigation system, the full errors in position pile up
frighteningly quickly due to the fact that unless the accelerometer noise
is phased exactly the same way the gyro noise is (and it never is), the
noise doesn't average out in terms of velocity, which then integrates into
an even worse position.

It is possible that a high order integrator might improve things if the
signal noise behaves in appropriate ways, but I don't think it does.

A highly accurate sensor that is sampled at a relatively low rate would be
the poster-child case for higher order methods.

>I'm not deeply familiar with gyros, and it's conceivable that some set of
>state variables could be chosen (not simply the usual three angles) that
>would make the problem into an integration problem.  But I've never heard
>of any such set of state variables, and the normal way of representing
>the state of the spacecraft, in terms of orientation, is as three angles,
>which makes the problem into one of ODE-solving.

I would think that all serious simulations would maintain orientation as a
full 3x3 matrix, rather than the problematic three angles.

The documentation for the Crossbow inertial unit with option vertical gyro
simulation software mentions using "quaternion integration" on the rates,
but doesn't go into more detail.  I don't know if that is a fully general
technique that is cheaper than the matrix operations, or if it has some
implied gimbal-like limitations that aren't relevant in an airplane VG setting.


John Carmack

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 29932 invoked from network); 9 Nov 2001 04:02:48 -0000
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 9 Nov 2001 04:02:48 -0000
Received: (qmail 32014 invoked by uid 50005); 9 Nov 2001 04:02:42 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4168. . Clean. Processed in 0.554978 secs); 09 Nov 2001 04:02:42 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 9 Nov 2001 04:02:41 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA13882; Thu, 8 Nov 2001 19:59:59 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 129977 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 9 Nov 2001 03:58:32          +0000
Received: from mailin7.bigpond.com (mailin7.bigpond.com [139.134.6.95]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA13861 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Thu, 8 Nov 2001 19:58:31 -0800
Received: from tardis ([144.135.24.81]) by mailin7.bigpond.com (Netscape          Messaging Server 4.15) with SMTP id GMIM0A00.2HS for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Fri, 9 Nov 2001 14:04:58 +1000
Received: from CPE-203-45-128-99.qld.bigpond.net.au ([203.45.128.99]) by          bwmam05.mailsvc.email.bigpond.com(MailRouter V2.9k 8335/2037230); 09          Nov 2001 13:58:23
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook CWS, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <00b901c168d2$b59694d0$641010ac@tardis>
Date:         Fri, 9 Nov 2001 13:57:53 +1000
Reply-To: "Ashley Roll" <ash@DIGITALNEMESIS.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Ashley Roll" <ash@DIGITALNEMESIS.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Potential KMZ51 bulk purchase
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <00b801c168c4$9ef88390$641010ac@tardis>

Hi All,

Well, my UGN3503 based magnetic apogee sensor basically works on the ground.

UNFORTUNATELY, I just discovered that there is a significant piezo-electric
(I assume) effect when force is applied to the '3503 sensor! It also
conspires to be in exactly the wrong direction for the force applied by the
motor - as soon as the motor fires and accelerates the rocket, it would
trigger the recovery system.

This stress induced voltage is significantly larger then the signal from the
magnetic field and so swamps the detector and causes it to fire.

Bummer.. Looks like this is not going to be possible with this sensor.

Oh well, next project..

Cheers,
Ash.

---
Ashley Roll
Digital Nemesis Pty Ltd
www.digitalnemesis.com
Mobile: +61 (0)417 705 718




> -----Original Message-----
> From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@itc.uci.edu]On
> Behalf Of Ashley Roll
> Sent: Friday, 9 November 2001 12:17 PM
> To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
> Subject: Re: [AR] Potential KMZ51 bulk purchase
>
>
> Hi Des,
>
> Yep, seems to work. I'm still testing it and messing around trying to
> determine how sensitive it is to environmental conditions it is..
>
> At present I know I have to let it "warm up" and settle down
> at its working
> temperature for a few minutes before use otherwise it drifts.
> I suspect that
> this is the '3503.
>
> I'm using a MCP604 (Quad CMOS Rail to Rail opamp) from
> Microchip which I had
> lying around from a previous thermocouple project.
>
> Your welcome to drop over after work and have a look if you like..

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 1516 invoked from network); 9 Nov 2001 04:35:59 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 9 Nov 2001 04:35:59 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 9818 invoked by uid 50005); 9 Nov 2001 04:35:54 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4168. . Clean. Processed in 0.133426 secs); 09 Nov 2001 04:35:54 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 9 Nov 2001 04:35:53 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA14224; Thu, 8 Nov 2001 20:31:57 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 130013 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 9 Nov 2001 04:30:29          +0000
Received: from idsoftware.com (predator.idsoftware.com [192.246.40.34]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA14208 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Thu, 8 Nov 2001 20:30:28 -0800
Received: from [192.246.40.129] (account johnc HELO lightning.idsoftware.com)          by idsoftware.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 3.4.7) with ESMTP id 470815          for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 08 Nov 2001 22:30:28 -0600
X-Sender: johnc@mail.idsoftware.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.1
References: <4.3.1.2.20011108204626.05aa6260@mail.idsoftware.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <4.3.1.2.20011108222403.02f2afd8@mail.idsoftware.com>
Date:         Thu, 8 Nov 2001 22:28:41 -0600
Reply-To: "John Carmack" <johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Carmack" <johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Gyro integration, again
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <0E559453-D4C9-11D5-B0AE-0050E43A5105@netaxs.com>

At 10:20 PM 11/8/2001 -0600, you wrote:
>John,
>
>FWIW: I have it on good authority that quaternions are used widely to
>simplify the computational requirements on a certain manned spacecraft. It
>allows relatively complex rotations without running into gimbal-lock that
>happens when you do multiple Euler rotations, and it's computationally
>cheap. You specify the axis you want to rotate around (unit vector) and
>the rotation angle (radians) all packaged in a four-element vector.
>There's a series of matrix operations to go with them which are relatively
>well documented.
>
>I found several good references searching for the word "quaternion" on google.
>
>Don

Heck, now that I think about it for a second, that is obvious -- rotating a
quaternion around a vector, which is what rate gyro integration is, is trivial.

I'm going to have to convert my axis tracking over to quaternions now,
which will let me avoid even thinking about the axis losing orthogonality
with successive rotations. (not that I was really concerned in our short
timeframes)

Some graphics people "grew up" with quaternions, but I have always just
used either euler angles or a full matrix, so I don't think about them very
much.

John Carmack

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 16586 invoked from network); 9 Nov 2001 07:05:23 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 9 Nov 2001 07:05:23 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 30662 invoked by uid 50005); 9 Nov 2001 07:05:17 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4168. . Clean. Processed in 0.323953 secs); 09 Nov 2001 07:05:17 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 9 Nov 2001 07:05:17 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA14902; Thu, 8 Nov 2001 23:02:17 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 130109 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 9 Nov 2001 07:00:47          +0000
Received: from athol.localdomain (57.106.252.64.snet.net [64.252.106.57]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA14884 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Thu, 8 Nov 2001 23:00:46 -0800
Received: by athol.localdomain (Postfix, from userid 500) id 74033B46A0; Fri,           9 Nov 2001 02:00:44 -0500 (EST)
References: <20011108213304.A26735@athol.localdomain>            <4.3.1.2.20011108204626.05aa6260@mail.idsoftware.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Disposition: inline
User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.21i
Message-ID:  <20011109020044.A27465@athol.localdomain>
Date:         Fri, 9 Nov 2001 02:00:44 -0500
Reply-To: <norman.yarvin@SNET.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Norman Yarvin" <yarvin_listbox@SNET.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Gyro integration, again
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <4.3.1.2.20011108204626.05aa6260@mail.idsoftware.com>

On Thu, Nov 08, 2001 at 09:38:27PM -0600, John Carmack wrote:

>Ok, now I understand what you are getting at -- discretization error.
>
>I'm not sure how significant of an effect this is.  I may write some
>simulations to experiment with the effect.  A hardcore math guy could
>probably just analytically determine the error, but I would probably make a
>simulated path and sample it with a properly filtered virtual sensor and
>compare the tracked position with the actual position.

The procedure that I was taught by hardcore math guys was to do the
computer experiment first, to determine the error, then do the
calculation of what the error should be, in order to write the paper.

>All of my experience in other fields leads me to attack discretization
>problems by just cranking the sampling rate, rather than applying higher
>order methods.  With my previous system, I was sampling and updating the
>orientation matrix 1000 times a second based on a sensor with 100 hz
>bandwidth.  Few systems still have noticeable discretization error with 10x
>oversampling.

Yeah, an error of O(h^2) may be poor compared to other methods, but it
still means that multiplying the sample rate by 10 gives a factor of 100
increase in accuracy.

>However, I just moved us over to a new gyro (a Crossbow FOG IMU) that
>communicates digitally with only 200 samples a second, so I may be
>experiencing more discretization error as a result.  Early bench testing
>shows it to be much improved due to the RMS noise being 1/3 what our old
>system was (we also get twice the range on both rates and acceleration, as
>well as the lower noise level).
>
>Even with the new system, random noise is still a big factor.  Attitude
>will only drift a degree every few minutes when at rest, which is good
>enough for orbital insertion in my book, but when combined into a full 6DOF
>inertial navigation system, the full errors in position pile up
>frighteningly quickly due to the fact that unless the accelerometer noise
>is phased exactly the same way the gyro noise is (and it never is), the
>noise doesn't average out in terms of velocity, which then integrates into
>an even worse position.

A lot of rockets are guided using only attitude data and not position
data, during their ascent to orbit.  (I was informed of this a few years
ago on one of the sci.space newsgroups; see

http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=541hfj%24nmt%40herald.concentric.net

and previous articles in the thread by the same poster, for the details.)


>>I'm not deeply familiar with gyros, and it's conceivable that some set of
>>state variables could be chosen (not simply the usual three angles) that
>>would make the problem into an integration problem.  But I've never heard
>>of any such set of state variables, and the normal way of representing
>>the state of the spacecraft, in terms of orientation, is as three angles,
>>which makes the problem into one of ODE-solving.
>
>I would think that all serious simulations would maintain orientation as a
>full 3x3 matrix, rather than the problematic three angles.

This is the matrix for transforming the ground coordinate system into the
spacecraft's coordinate system?

Let's see: then you're not summing things up; instead, at each timestep,
you're multiplying by a new rotation matrix.  Yeah, that probably
completely kills this issue.  The inputs you get from the gyros may not
be the best ones for making a rotation matrix from the old state to the
new state -- but on the other hand, they probably aren't samples of the
rates of turn at a single point in time, like most numerical methods
would assume they were.  (This seems like a blind spot in numerical
analysis: real inputs are very often averages over some period of time of
a function, not samples of the function at a single instant.)

Now I see why you didn't know what I was talking about.  I didn't know
what I was talking about, either.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 14952 invoked from network); 9 Nov 2001 15:31:31 -0000
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 9 Nov 2001 15:31:31 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 21860 invoked by uid 50005); 9 Nov 2001 15:31:26 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4168. . Clean. Processed in 0.164451 secs); 09 Nov 2001 15:31:26 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 9 Nov 2001 15:31:25 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA16202; Fri, 9 Nov 2001 07:07:38 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 130173 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 9 Nov 2001 15:06:03          +0000
Received: from m5.boston.juno.com (m5.boston.juno.com [64.136.24.68]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA16187 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Fri, 9 Nov 2001 07:06:03 -0800
Received: from cookie.juno.com by cookie.juno.com for          <"r2Fo8hpwT0kn33UwylHELMN/WOTpJvUcoYpktSxE8Bn4xOywLVnEVA==">
Received: (from icantdecide@juno.com) by m5.boston.juno.com (queuemail) id          GKTG96LE; Fri, 09 Nov 2001 10:04:28 EST
X-Mailer: Juno 4.0.9
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Juno-Line-Breaks: 5-11,13-74
X-Juno-Att: 0
X-Juno-RefParts: 0
Message-ID:  <20011109.100450.-588141.0.icantdecide@juno.com>
Date:         Fri, 9 Nov 2001 10:04:50 -0600
Reply-To: "James G Selin" <icantdecide@JUNO.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "James G Selin" <icantdecide@JUNO.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Potential KMZ51 bulk purchase
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Did you try changing the orientation of the sensor? IIRC, the
piezoelectric effect is dependant upon which axis, crystalographically,
is being stressed. Could you try holding it in your hand and slamming the
back of your hand on a table to trigger it? A sudden decceleration like
that would exceed the g's from a launch I would think. If it triggered
say an LED you could do multiple trys changing the axis.

Just my 2 cents...

Jim Selin


On Fri, 9 Nov 2001 13:57:53 +1000 Ashley Roll <ash@DIGITALNEMESIS.COM>
writes:
> Hi All,
>
> Well, my UGN3503 based magnetic apogee sensor basically works on the
> ground.
>
> UNFORTUNATELY, I just discovered that there is a significant
> piezo-electric
> (I assume) effect when force is applied to the '3503 sensor! It also
> conspires to be in exactly the wrong direction for the force applied
> by the
> motor - as soon as the motor fires and accelerates the rocket, it
> would
> trigger the recovery system.
>
> This stress induced voltage is significantly larger then the signal
> from the
> magnetic field and so swamps the detector and causes it to fire.
>
> Bummer.. Looks like this is not going to be possible with this
> sensor.
>
> Oh well, next project..
>
> Cheers,
> Ash.
>
> ---
> Ashley Roll
> Digital Nemesis Pty Ltd
> www.digitalnemesis.com
> Mobile: +61 (0)417 705 718
>
>
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list
> [mailto:AROCKET@itc.uci.edu]On
> > Behalf Of Ashley Roll
> > Sent: Friday, 9 November 2001 12:17 PM
> > To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
> > Subject: Re: [AR] Potential KMZ51 bulk purchase
> >
> >
> > Hi Des,
> >
> > Yep, seems to work. I'm still testing it and messing around trying
> to
> > determine how sensitive it is to environmental conditions it is..
> >
> > At present I know I have to let it "warm up" and settle down
> > at its working
> > temperature for a few minutes before use otherwise it drifts.
> > I suspect that
> > this is the '3503.
> >
> > I'm using a MCP604 (Quad CMOS Rail to Rail opamp) from
> > Microchip which I had
> > lying around from a previous thermocouple project.
> >
> > Your welcome to drop over after work and have a look if you like..

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 6233 invoked from network); 9 Nov 2001 16:12:37 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 9 Nov 2001 16:12:37 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 31911 invoked by uid 50005); 9 Nov 2001 16:12:31 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4168. . Clean. Processed in 0.182656 secs); 09 Nov 2001 16:12:31 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 9 Nov 2001 16:12:31 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA16827; Fri, 9 Nov 2001 08:03:47 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 130225 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 9 Nov 2001 16:02:21          +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (f91.law8.hotmail.com [216.33.241.91]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA16812 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 9 Nov 2001 08:02:21 -0800
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Fri,          9 Nov 2001 08:01:43 -0800
Received: from 165.127.249.69 by lw8fd.law8.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Fri, 09          Nov 2001 16:01:42 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [165.127.249.69]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 09 Nov 2001 16:01:43.0211 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[D34AFFB0:01C16937]
Message-ID:  <F91cp51dyZSdA6kvAdx00000621@hotmail.com>
Date:         Fri, 9 Nov 2001 16:01:42 +0000
Reply-To: "Bryan Flynt" <b_flynt@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Bryan Flynt" <b_flynt@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      [AR] Reports
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

<html><div style='background-color:'>Is there a better place on the net where reports are available?<SPAN style="mso-spacerun: yes">&nbsp; </SPAN>Ive checked out all the Arocket mirrored libraries and found a few.<SPAN style="mso-spacerun: yes">&nbsp; </SPAN>Ive also seen the lists of all the 8000 series NASA reports but Im looking for stuff that isnt 8000 series.<SPAN style="mso-spacerun: yes">&nbsp; </SPAN>
<P class=MsoNormal>I can find virtually everything on the NASA Technical Report Server at <SPAN style="COLOR: black"><A href="http://techreports.larc.nasa.gov/cgi-bin/NTRS">http://techreports.larc.nasa.gov/cgi-bin/NTRS</A> but they want you to pay $30-$140 for every report, even the 8000 series that I can download off other websites for free.<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" /><o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN style="COLOR: black">So Im hoping there are other sights out there that have more than the 8000 series available for download.<SPAN style="mso-spacerun: yes">&nbsp; </SPAN><o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN style="COLOR: black">In particular Im currently looking for: </SPAN><SPAN style="COLOR: black"></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN style="COLOR: black">NASA SP-273<o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN style="COLOR: black">NASA TN D-1737 Supp. 1<o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN style="COLOR: black">AIAA 1984 Vol. 90 pp.515-598<o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN style="COLOR: black">AIAA Paper 78-979 July 1978<SPAN style="mso-spacerun: yes">&nbsp; </SPAN><o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN style="COLOR: black">&nbsp;<o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN style="COLOR: black">Thanks,<o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN style="COLOR: black">Bryan Flynt<o:p></o:p></SPAN></P></div><br clear=all><hr>Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at <a href='http://go.msn.com/bql/hmtag_itl_EN.asp'>http://explorer.msn.com</a><br></html>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 8165 invoked from network); 9 Nov 2001 17:06:57 -0000
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 9 Nov 2001 17:06:57 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 30843 invoked by uid 50005); 9 Nov 2001 17:06:51 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4168. . Clean. Processed in 0.277314 secs); 09 Nov 2001 17:06:51 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 9 Nov 2001 17:06:50 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA17093; Fri, 9 Nov 2001 08:42:46 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 130251 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 9 Nov 2001 16:41:18          +0000
Received: from m1.jersey.juno.com (m1.jersey.juno.com [64.136.16.64]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA17074 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 9 Nov 2001 08:41:18 -0800
Received: from cookie.juno.com by cookie.juno.com for          <"H3WK6e6N+bsCVJQMHM9sZJbcQ8VG3HNrqlCn/qFm+ra33zyrXlYQlA==">
Received: (from kc2csh@juno.com) by m1.jersey.juno.com (queuemail) id GKTNREY2;          Fri, 09 Nov 2001 11:40:11 EST
X-Mailer: Juno 5.0.33
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Juno-Line-Breaks: 1,8,12,14,17-22,24-63
Message-ID:  <20011109.114452.-4126087.1.kc2csh@juno.com>
Date:         Fri, 9 Nov 2001 11:38:54 -0500
Reply-To: <kc2csh@JUNO.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <kc2csh@JUNO.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Grain Geometry - Thoughts?
Comments: To: dwright@D2-TECH.COM
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

  I'm reading into your question that these are all bates grains, and
that you are burning the upper surface of the upper grain.  Correct?
  Have you considered the possibility of a cone shaped core  that does
not go completely through the  entire grain length in the uppermost
grain?  Keep a solid portion of the grain at the top equal to the
thickness of a grain, in your description about 1.5"   It should help
slightly with propellant loading and progressiveness issues.  A simple
cone will give you some propellant waste, but with slightly more
complexity, like "I" slots off the cone, waste is minimal.
  In theory, chamber preasure should then help hold upper grain in place.
 This is obviously more significant if it is a 10" than a 5" grain.  In
effect, you take the mass of that grain off the force that would
otherwise tend to collapse the stack, right?
  With a little effort you can cast an ignitor right into the point of
the grain.
  Also, you didn't mention if the grains were mechanically bonded to the
casing?  If so, you can then be bonding the entire upper surface of the
upper grain as well.

         Jay



On Tue, 6 Nov 2001 23:13:43 -0500 Darren Wright <dwright@D2-TECH.COM>
writes:
> I've already talked to a few persons about geometry, but I thought
> I'd
> throw this out to get some opinions:
>
> I am involved in an O motor project, and the grain geometry is in
> question.
>
> We are looking at 3 10" grains, and 2 5" grains, all 4.5" diameter.
> The
> two possible scenarios are:
>
> A) 2 5" grains at bottom, 2" core. And then top 3 grains 10" x 1.5"
> core.
>
> B) 10" x 2" core grain at bottom, 2 10x1.5" core grains, then 2
> 5"x1.5"
> grains top.
>
> In any case the bottom 10" will be a slower formula.
>
> In all my motor building, I have put the short grains on the
> bottom....primarily to clear out the area around the nozzle.
> However,
> this leaves an empty space that propellant could possibly collapse
> into.
>
>
> My partner has always put the short grains on the top.  However, I
> can
> see that there may be more of a heat issue this way.
>
> Anyone have thoughts on this issue?  I'm interested to hear if
> anyone
> has done this either way.
>
> I think we are going to go with "B" if noone has a good reason not
> too.
>
> -Darren
>
________________________________________________________________
GET INTERNET ACCESS FROM JUNO!
Juno offers FREE or PREMIUM Internet access for less!
Join Juno today!  For your FREE software, visit:
http://dl.www.juno.com/get/web/.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 13649 invoked from network); 9 Nov 2001 17:08:25 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 9 Nov 2001 17:08:25 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 1625 invoked by uid 50005); 9 Nov 2001 17:08:19 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4168. . Clean. Processed in 0.257708 secs); 09 Nov 2001 17:08:19 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 9 Nov 2001 17:08:19 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA17174; Fri, 9 Nov 2001 08:46:58 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 130269 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 9 Nov 2001 16:45:36          +0000
Received: from mail-srv1.micron.com (masquerade.micron.com [137.201.242.130])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA17141 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 9 Nov 2001 08:45:36 -0800
Received: from mail-srv1.micron.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by          mail-srv1.micron.com (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id fA9Gj4B11113 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 9 Nov 2001 09:45:04 -0700 (MST)
Received: from ntexchange01.micron.com (ntexchange01 [137.201.104.84]) by          mail-srv1.micron.com (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id fA9Gj3q11055 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 9 Nov 2001 09:45:03 -0700 (MST)
Received: by ntexchange01.micron.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19)          id <VPX38S6Y>; Fri, 9 Nov 2001 09:45:02 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19)
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Message-ID:  <2DCA36C44BF3D211917F0008C7C9C9DD067ECFAA@ntexchange06.micron.com>
Date:         Fri, 9 Nov 2001 09:44:34 -0700
Reply-To: "gacrowell" <gacrowell@MICRON.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "gacrowell" <gacrowell@MICRON.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Gyro integration, again
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

FWIW I have the following three .pdf documents regarding quaternions.  I got
all of them off of the web, but I don't have the url's, they should be
findable tho.


Introduction to 6-DOF Simulation of Air Vehicles (VisSim Tutorial)

NPSNET: Flight Simulation Dynamic Modeling Using Quaternions

NASA-CR-2497.pdf        A Standard Kinematic Model for Flight Simulation at
NASA - Ames


I'd be glad to forward them to anyone, if needed.

Gary Crowell

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 26379 invoked from network); 9 Nov 2001 17:19:34 -0000
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 9 Nov 2001 17:19:34 -0000
Received: (qmail 27853 invoked by uid 50005); 9 Nov 2001 17:19:28 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4168. . Clean. Processed in 0.327216 secs); 09 Nov 2001 17:19:28 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 9 Nov 2001 17:19:27 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA17112; Fri, 9 Nov 2001 08:44:15 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 130258 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 9 Nov 2001 16:42:54          +0000
Received: from corinth.bossig.com (corinth.bossig.com [208.26.239.66]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA17083 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Fri, 9 Nov 2001 08:42:10 -0800
Received: from BruceE.Watson (unverified [208.26.232.53]) by corinth.bossig.com          (Rockliffe SMTPRA 4.5.4) with SMTP id          <B0080437077@corinth.bossig.com> for <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Fri, 9          Nov 2001 08:47:42 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0DB8_01C56B69.573534D0"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2314.1300
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <000c01c1693d$5a701160$35e81ad0@Watson>
Date:         Fri, 9 Nov 2001 08:41:14 -0800
Reply-To: "Bruce E. Watson" <bwatson@3-CITIES.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Bruce E. Watson" <bwatson@3-CITIES.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Attitude sensing
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0DB8_01C56B69.573534D0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Can anyone give a web page that this autopilot is detailed on.  I went =
over to
the Futaba site (http://www.futaba-rc.com/index.html) but could not find =
it.

Thanks;
Bruce E. Watson

----- Original Message -----
From: Paul Kelly <pkelly@COMCEN.COM.AU>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Tuesday, October 16, 2001 1:35 AM
Subject: [AR] Attitude sensing


> Futaba (an R/C company) make an autopilot that, AFAIK, employs 4 LDR's
> looking out through narrow vertical slits. The rationale is that, in =
level
> flight, the horizon will appear at the same level in each of the =
slits,
> pitch or roll (airplane versions) will result in less or more light =
coming
> through opposing slits as the sky s 3 times brighter than the ground.  =
A
bit
> of averaging and they seem to be able to make it work at only a few
hundred
> feet!
>
> PK
>

(Note:  I sent this message last night, but it didn't appear to get =
through, as I never received it back from the list.  If I was the only =
one that this happened to and this duplicates things, I'm sorry about =
that. BW)



------=_NextPart_000_0DB8_01C56B69.573534D0
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META content=3D"text/html; charset=3Diso-8859-1" =
http-equiv=3DContent-Type>
<META content=3D"MSHTML 5.00.2314.1000" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Can&nbsp;anyone give a web page that =
this autopilot=20
is detailed on.&nbsp; I went over to<BR>the Futaba site (<A=20
href=3D"http://www.futaba-rc.com/index.html">http://www.futaba-rc.com/ind=
ex.html</A>)=20
but could not find it.<BR><BR>Thanks;<BR>Bruce E. Watson</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>----- Original Message -----<BR>From: =
Paul Kelly=20
&lt;<A =
href=3D"mailto:pkelly@COMCEN.COM.AU">pkelly@COMCEN.COM.AU</A>&gt;<BR>To: =

&lt;<A =
href=3D"mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU">AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU</A>&gt;<BR>Sent: =

Tuesday, October 16, 2001 1:35 AM<BR>Subject: [AR] Attitude=20
sensing<BR><BR><BR>&gt; Futaba (an R/C company) make an autopilot that, =
AFAIK,=20
employs 4 LDR's<BR>&gt; looking out through narrow vertical slits. The =
rationale=20
is that, in level<BR>&gt; flight, the horizon will appear at the same =
level in=20
each of the slits,<BR>&gt; pitch or roll (airplane versions) will result =
in less=20
or more light coming<BR>&gt; through opposing slits as the sky s 3 times =

brighter than the ground.&nbsp; A<BR>bit<BR>&gt; of averaging and they =
seem to=20
be able to make it work at only a few<BR>hundred<BR>&gt; =
feet!<BR>&gt;<BR>&gt;=20
PK<BR>&gt;<BR></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>(Note:&nbsp; I sent this message last =
night, but it=20
didn't appear to get through, as I never received it back from the =
list.&nbsp;=20
If I was the only one that this happened to and this duplicates things, =
I'm=20
sorry about that. BW)</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2><BR>&nbsp;</DIV></FONT></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0DB8_01C56B69.573534D0--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 4322 invoked from network); 9 Nov 2001 19:40:09 -0000
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 9 Nov 2001 19:40:09 -0000
Received: (qmail 8995 invoked by uid 50005); 9 Nov 2001 19:40:04 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4168. . Clean. Processed in 0.462142 secs); 09 Nov 2001 19:40:04 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 9 Nov 2001 19:40:02 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA18009; Fri, 9 Nov 2001 11:30:52 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 130329 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 9 Nov 2001 19:29:26          +0000
Received: from angel.comcen.com.au (angel.comcen.com.au [203.23.236.69]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA17989 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 9 Nov 2001 11:29:25 -0800
Received: from win2pk2 (dialup05.morpheus.dragon.net.au [203.56.245.5]) by          angel.comcen.com.au (8.11.4/8.10.1) with SMTP id fA9JTHk78899; Sat,          10 Nov 2001 06:29:17 +1100 (EST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0DBB_01C56B69.57377EC0"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <JJEFLLHFFAHHMBBIHFAEMECICIAA.pkelly@comcen.com.au>
Date:         Sat, 10 Nov 2001 06:30:37 +1100
Reply-To: "Paul Kelly" <pkelly@COMCEN.COM.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Paul Kelly" <pkelly@COMCEN.COM.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Attitude sensing
Comments: To: "Bruce E. Watson" <bwatson@3-CITIES.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <000c01c1693d$5a701160$35e81ad0@Watson>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0DBB_01C56B69.57377EC0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

It's there:
http://www.futaba-rc.com/radioaccys/futm0999.html
  -----Original Message-----
  From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU]On
Behalf Of Bruce E. Watson
  Sent: Saturday, 10 November 2001 3:41 AM
  To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
  Subject: Re: [AR] Attitude sensing


  Can anyone give a web page that this autopilot is detailed on.  I went
over to
  the Futaba site (http://www.futaba-rc.com/index.html) but could not find
it.

  Thanks;
  Bruce E. Watson

  ----- Original Message -----
  From: Paul Kelly <pkelly@COMCEN.COM.AU>
  To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
  Sent: Tuesday, October 16, 2001 1:35 AM
  Subject: [AR] Attitude sensing


  > Futaba (an R/C company) make an autopilot that, AFAIK, employs 4 LDR's
  > looking out through narrow vertical slits. The rationale is that, in
level
  > flight, the horizon will appear at the same level in each of the slits,
  > pitch or roll (airplane versions) will result in less or more light
coming
  > through opposing slits as the sky s 3 times brighter than the ground.  A
  bit
  > of averaging and they seem to be able to make it work at only a few
  hundred
  > feet!
  >
  > PK
  >

  (Note:  I sent this message last night, but it didn't appear to get
through, as I never received it back from the list.  If I was the only one
that this happened to and this duplicates things, I'm sorry about that. BW)



------=_NextPart_000_0DBB_01C56B69.57377EC0
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Diso-8859-1">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 5.50.4807.2300" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><SPAN class=3D410442919-09112001><FONT face=3DArial color=3D#0000ff =
size=3D2>It's=20
there:</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=3D410442919-09112001><FONT face=3DArial color=3D#0000ff =
size=3D2><A=20
href=3D"http://www.futaba-rc.com/radioaccys/futm0999.html">http://www.fut=
aba-rc.com/radioaccys/futm0999.html</A></FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE dir=3Dltr style=3D"MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
  <DIV class=3DOutlookMessageHeader dir=3Dltr align=3Dleft><FONT =
face=3DTahoma=20
  size=3D2>-----Original Message-----<BR><B>From:</B> Amateur Rocketry =
discussion=20
  list [mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU]<B>On Behalf Of </B>Bruce E.=20
  Watson<BR><B>Sent:</B> Saturday, 10 November 2001 3:41 =
AM<BR><B>To:</B>=20
  AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU<BR><B>Subject:</B> Re: [AR] Attitude=20
  sensing<BR><BR></FONT></DIV>
  <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Can&nbsp;anyone give a web page that =
this=20
  autopilot is detailed on.&nbsp; I went over to<BR>the Futaba site (<A=20
  =
href=3D"http://www.futaba-rc.com/index.html">http://www.futaba-rc.com/ind=
ex.html</A>)=20
  but could not find it.<BR><BR>Thanks;<BR>Bruce E. Watson</FONT></DIV>
  <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
  <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>----- Original Message -----<BR>From: =
Paul Kelly=20
  &lt;<A =
href=3D"mailto:pkelly@COMCEN.COM.AU">pkelly@COMCEN.COM.AU</A>&gt;<BR>To: =

  &lt;<A =
href=3D"mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU">AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU</A>&gt;<BR>Sent: =

  Tuesday, October 16, 2001 1:35 AM<BR>Subject: [AR] Attitude=20
  sensing<BR><BR><BR>&gt; Futaba (an R/C company) make an autopilot =
that, AFAIK,=20
  employs 4 LDR's<BR>&gt; looking out through narrow vertical slits. The =

  rationale is that, in level<BR>&gt; flight, the horizon will appear at =
the=20
  same level in each of the slits,<BR>&gt; pitch or roll (airplane =
versions)=20
  will result in less or more light coming<BR>&gt; through opposing =
slits as the=20
  sky s 3 times brighter than the ground.&nbsp; A<BR>bit<BR>&gt; of =
averaging=20
  and they seem to be able to make it work at only a =
few<BR>hundred<BR>&gt;=20
  feet!<BR>&gt;<BR>&gt; PK<BR>&gt;<BR></FONT></DIV>
  <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>(Note:&nbsp; I sent this message last =
night, but=20
  it didn't appear to get through, as I never received it back from the=20
  list.&nbsp; If I was the only one that this happened to and this =
duplicates=20
  things, I'm sorry about that. BW)</FONT></DIV>
  <DIV><FONT face=3DArial =
size=3D2><BR>&nbsp;</DIV></BLOCKQUOTE></FONT></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0DBB_01C56B69.57377EC0--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 10555 invoked from network); 9 Nov 2001 19:56:49 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 9 Nov 2001 19:56:49 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 12117 invoked by uid 50005); 9 Nov 2001 19:56:43 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4168. . Clean. Processed in 0.171194 secs); 09 Nov 2001 19:56:43 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 9 Nov 2001 19:56:43 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA18063; Fri, 9 Nov 2001 11:41:57 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 130339 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 9 Nov 2001 19:40:35          +0000
Received: from athol.localdomain (57.106.252.64.snet.net [64.252.106.57]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA18045 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Fri, 9 Nov 2001 11:40:33 -0800
Received: by athol.localdomain (Postfix, from userid 500) id 8363CB46A3; Fri,           9 Nov 2001 14:40:32 -0500 (EST)
References: <4.3.1.2.20011108204626.05aa6260@mail.idsoftware.com>            <4.3.1.2.20011108222403.02f2afd8@mail.idsoftware.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Disposition: inline
User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.21i
Message-ID:  <20011109144032.A30307@athol.localdomain>
Date:         Fri, 9 Nov 2001 14:40:32 -0500
Reply-To: <norman.yarvin@SNET.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Norman Yarvin" <yarvin_listbox@SNET.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Gyro integration, again
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <4.3.1.2.20011108222403.02f2afd8@mail.idsoftware.com>

>>FWIW: I have it on good authority that quaternions are used widely to
>>simplify the computational requirements on a certain manned spacecraft. It
>>allows relatively complex rotations without running into gimbal-lock that
>>happens when you do multiple Euler rotations, and it's computationally
>>cheap.

Gimbal lock is a problem on mechanical gyros, where the measuring axes
can get parallel to each other, or close to it.  With fiber optic gyros,
the measuring axes are always perpendicular, so generating a rotation
matrix from gyro outputs is a very well-conditioned problem (as is
multiplying by such a matrix, since it is always a unitary matrix).  Very
little precision will be lost, even during long runs.


Let me illustrate what I meant by considering this problem as an ODE,
using the actual equations at hand.  Actually I'll wimp out and do two
dimensions, but the basic idea carries over fine into three.

The rotation matrix, in two dimensions, is:

        cos theta       sin theta
        -sin theta      cos theta

where theta is the angle of rotation.  If theta is very small, this
simplifies to

        1               theta
        -theta          1.

The update process is:

        U[n+1] = U[n] * R,

where U is the state of the system (a 3x3 matrix, that starts out as the
identity matrix), and R is the above matrix (either the full one with
sines or cosines, or the simplified small-theta version).

Superficially, this update equation may not look like an ODE, or any
approximation thereto.  But if the small-theta approximation is used, it
is equivalent to using the forward Euler method for solving ODEs, or at
least very close to it.  The diagonal elements of R are equal to one, so
the equation can be written as:

        U[n+1] = U[n] + (R-I)*U[n],

where R-I is a matrix of small values; in the simplified version it's:

        0               theta
        -theta          0

When multiplied by U, it gives the derivative of U with respect to time.
Well, not quite the derivative; instead the derivative multiplied by the
time interval, which I've been calling h.  So the derivative is

        1/h * (R-I)*U.

Plugging this formula for the derivative into the standard forward Euler
method, which is:

        u[n+1] = u[n] + h*u'[n],

yields the update equation that we started with.  But the same derivative
can equally well be plugged into a higher order solver.  The caveat is,
as I said before, that all these solvers assume that the derivative they
are given is truly an instantaneous measurement of the derivative, at a
single point in time, but real sensors measure something more like an
average over some time period.  What I've been assuming, in order to call
this the derivative, is that the given value of theta reflects only the
motion at exactly timestep n.  Since this isn't really the case, using a
higher-order solver, which relied on that assumption more heavily, might
even increase the error.  Also, to use a higher-order solver in this way,
the simplified version of R has to be used, to get the real derivative;
but using the exact version of R is obviously better.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 6320 invoked from network); 9 Nov 2001 22:06:41 -0000
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 9 Nov 2001 22:06:41 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 17316 invoked by uid 50005); 9 Nov 2001 22:06:36 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4168. . Clean. Processed in 0.670643 secs); 09 Nov 2001 22:06:36 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 9 Nov 2001 22:06:34 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA18854; Fri, 9 Nov 2001 14:04:17 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 130399 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 9 Nov 2001 22:02:46          +0000
Received: from localhost (rcalkins@localhost) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with          ESMTP id OAA18837; Fri, 9 Nov 2001 14:02:45 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from QUOTED-PRINTABLE to 8bit by itc.uci.edu id OAA18838
Message-ID:  <Pine.LNX.4.10.10111091401290.18772-100000@itc.uci.edu>
Date:         Fri, 9 Nov 2001 14:02:45 -0800
Reply-To: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Reports
Comments: To: Bryan Flynt <b_flynt@HOTMAIL.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <F91cp51dyZSdA6kvAdx00000621@hotmail.com>

Hi Bryan,

I'll make you a deal.  I'll find most if not all of what you need and get
them to you, upload what you've got to the arocket files server at -
http://www.blastzone.com/arocket
Username - arocket
Password - uploads


Deal?

Ray



On Fri, 9 Nov 2001, Bryan Flynt wrote:

> Is there a better place on the net where reports are available?  Ive
> checked out all the Arocket mirrored libraries and found a few.  Ive
> also seen the lists of all the 8000 series NASA reports but Im looking
> for stuff that isnt 8000 series.
>
> I can find virtually everything on the NASA Technical Report Server at
> http://techreports.larc.nasa.gov/cgi-bin/NTRS but they want you to pay
> $30-$140 for every report, even the 8000 series that I can download off
> other websites for free.
>
> So Im hoping there are other sights out there that have more than the
> 8000 series available for download.
>
> In particular Im currently looking for:
>
> NASA SP-273
>
> NASA TN D-1737 Supp. 1
>
> AIAA 1984 Vol. 90 pp.515-598
>
> AIAA Paper 78-979 July 1978
>
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> Bryan Flynt
>
>
> ________________________________________________________________________________
>
> Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
>
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 10315 invoked from network); 9 Nov 2001 23:20:47 -0000
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 9 Nov 2001 23:20:47 -0000
Received: (qmail 15949 invoked by uid 50005); 9 Nov 2001 23:20:41 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4168. . Clean. Processed in 0.770037 secs); 09 Nov 2001 23:20:41 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 9 Nov 2001 23:20:39 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA19090; Fri, 9 Nov 2001 15:04:43 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 130418 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 9 Nov 2001 23:02:41          +0000
Received: from mailin9.bigpond.com (mailin9.bigpond.com [139.134.6.86]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA19074 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Fri, 9 Nov 2001 15:02:40 -0800
Received: from tardis ([144.135.24.81]) by mailin9.bigpond.com (Netscape          Messaging Server 4.15) with SMTP id GMK2ZC00.7L5 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Sat, 10 Nov 2001 09:09:12 +1000
Received: from CPE-203-45-128-99.qld.bigpond.net.au ([203.45.128.99]) by          bwmam05.mailsvc.email.bigpond.com(MailRouter V2.9k 8335/2977138); 10          Nov 2001 09:02:37
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook CWS, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <00ce01c16972$94786170$641010ac@tardis>
Date:         Sat, 10 Nov 2001 09:02:16 +1000
Reply-To: "Ashley Roll" <ash@DIGITALNEMESIS.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Ashley Roll" <ash@DIGITALNEMESIS.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Potential KMZ51 bulk purchase
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <20011109.100450.-588141.0.icantdecide@juno.com>

Hi James,

Unfortunately, that won't work - I tried.

Basically by flipping the sensor over, you reverse the piezo effect, however
you also reverse the signal generated by the magnetic field. So again you
have the signals going the same way and it becomes unusable. :(

The only way would be to flip it over and reverse the earths magnetic field.
This I can do If I move to the Northern Hemisphere, which I'm not so
inclined to do (I like my Aussie Christmas - drinking cold beer in a
swimming pool) ;)

However it probably wont perform any better in the northern hemisphere - the
acceleration would be ok, but the deceleration would get you.. it could fire
when the motor burns out.

This effect is substantial. Just gently pushing the sensor with your finger
causes it to fire - several G's would definitely be a problem.

Basically I think this piezo effect makes the sensor unusable for this
situation.

Cheers,
Ash.

---
Ashley Roll
Digital Nemesis Pty Ltd
www.digitalnemesis.com
Mobile: +61 (0)417 705 718




> -----Original Message-----
> From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@itc.uci.edu]On
> Behalf Of James G Selin
> Sent: Saturday, 10 November 2001 2:05 AM
> To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
> Subject: Re: [AR] Potential KMZ51 bulk purchase
>
>
> Did you try changing the orientation of the sensor? IIRC, the
> piezoelectric effect is dependant upon which axis,
> crystalographically,
> is being stressed. Could you try holding it in your hand and
> slamming the
> back of your hand on a table to trigger it? A sudden
> decceleration like
> that would exceed the g's from a launch I would think. If it triggered
> say an LED you could do multiple trys changing the axis.
>
> Just my 2 cents...
>
> Jim Selin

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 23026 invoked from network); 10 Nov 2001 00:23:46 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 10 Nov 2001 00:23:46 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 25552 invoked by uid 50005); 10 Nov 2001 00:23:40 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4168. . Clean. Processed in 1.221071 secs); 10 Nov 2001 00:23:40 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 10 Nov 2001 00:23:38 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA19536; Fri, 9 Nov 2001 16:21:42 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 130468 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 10 Nov 2001 00:20:08          +0000
Received: from fw1-bv.tek.com (fw1-bv.tek.com [192.65.40.16]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA19521 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri,          9 Nov 2001 16:20:08 -0800
Received: from fw1-bv.tek.com (root@localhost) by fw1-bv.tek.com with ESMTP id          fAA0JbC10177 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 9 Nov 2001 16:19:37          -0800 (PST)
Received: from tektronix.tek.com (tektronix.tek.com [128.181.6.43]) by          fw1-bv.tek.com with ESMTP id fAA0Jbr10173 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>;          Fri, 9 Nov 2001 16:19:37 -0800 (PST)
Received: from us-bv-u16 (us-bv-u16.bv.tek.com [128.181.2.45]) by          tektronix.tek.com (8.10.2+Sun/8.10.2) with SMTP id fAA0Jb227602 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 9 Nov 2001 16:19:37 -0800 (PST)
Received: FROM us-bv-m01.bv.tek.com BY us-bv-u16 ; Fri Nov 09 16:19:36 2001          -0800
Received: by us-bv-m01.bv.tek.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) id          <V88SGF3W>; Fri, 9 Nov 2001 16:19:36 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19)
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Message-ID:  <5832AFF5FC75D411844300508BC216B70302ABCD@us-bv-m07.bv.tek.com>
Date:         Fri, 9 Nov 2001 16:19:33 -0800
Reply-To: <john.w.lyngdal@EXGATE.TEK.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <john.w.lyngdal@EXGATE.TEK.COM>
Subject:      [AR] What Can I say????
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Here's the section regarding motor/propellants in the currently posted TRA
EX rules:

""Motors" and "rocket motors" shall refer only to composite solid and
nitrous oxide solid fuel motors (I.E. hybrid motors). Black powder based
motors shall not be included as composites, regardless of binder and/or
formulation modifications.""

Now here's the latest from Bruce...


> -----Original Message-----
> From: BRUCE KELLY [mailto:71161.2351@compuserve.com]
> Sent: Friday, November 09, 2001 3:13 PM
> To: Blind.Copy.Receiver@compuserve.com
> Subject: One more thing
>
>
> To all Prefects
>
> 8 November 2001
>
>
> I almost forgot one thing.
>
> Yesterday afternoon I got a call from an ATF field agent in Michigan. He
> called to ask me about a member who just bought a 100-pound bag of
ammonium
> nitrate. He said, "This fellow claims to be a member of your
> organization..."
>
> Wooah! Excuse me, but when did WE (TRA) approve the use of anfo-motors?
>
> Anyway, he wanted to check out our member's claim of TRA membership. I was
> happy to report the member was in good standing (so far). Then he asked me
> questions about the hobby. It was at this point I explained to him that we
> use APCP and do not allow anfo-motors at our certified/insured launches.
> But I also explained that our member could use those on his own. The field
> agent understood, and he seemed pleased and relieved that he was using the
> motors for rockets and nothing else.
>
> Here are a couple of points to remember:
>
> 1. If you buy a 100-pound bag of ammonium nitrate, you are going to be
> checked out - and you should be. If you are not, it means that security is
> worse than I thought.
>
> 2. If you use anfo motors, you can say anything you would like. BUT, do
not
> represent anfo activity as Tripoli activity. It is not even a part of our
> EX program. It could be in the future, but it is not now. No one has made
a
> formal presentation to the BOD for our consideration.
>
> B Kelly
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 22173 invoked from network); 10 Nov 2001 00:40:59 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 10 Nov 2001 00:40:59 -0000
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 9811 invoked by uid 50005); 10 Nov 2001 00:40:53 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4168. . Clean. Processed in 0.562926 secs); 10 Nov 2001 00:40:53 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 10 Nov 2001 00:40:52 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA19656; Fri, 9 Nov 2001 16:38:18 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 130491 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 10 Nov 2001 00:36:56          +0000
Received: from strauss.udel.edu (tproseus@strauss.udel.edu [128.175.13.74]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA19639 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 9 Nov 2001 16:36:56 -0800
Received: from localhost (tproseus@localhost) by strauss.udel.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3)          with ESMTP id TAA10874; Fri, 9 Nov 2001 19:36:54 -0500 (EST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.SOL.4.31.0111091934490.10018-100000@strauss.udel.edu>
Date:         Fri, 9 Nov 2001 19:36:53 -0500
Reply-To: "Timothy E Proseus" <tproseus@UDEL.EDU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Timothy E Proseus" <tproseus@UDEL.EDU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] What Can I say????
Comments: To: john.w.lyngdal@EXGATE.TEK.COM
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <5832AFF5FC75D411844300508BC216B70302ABCD@us-bv-m07.bv.tek.com>

Well, I suspect that guy has to worry more about scrutiny from TRA than
the ATF now.

Ted Proseus

http://copland.udel.edu/~tproseus
http://www.dreamwater.net/biz/rocketchutes/parachutes.html


+'^'+.,.+'^'+.,.+'^'+.,.+'^'+.,.+'^'+.,.+'^'+.,.+'^'+.,.+'^'+.,.+'^'+.,.+

                                Ted Proseus

                             Research Associate
                 Plant Biochemistry/Biophysics Laboratory
              University of Delaware, College of Marine Studies
                           Lab/Office: 302-645-4022

+'^'+.,.+'^'+.,.+'^'+.,.+'^'+.,.+'^'+.,.+'^'+.,.+'^'+.,.+'^'+.,.+'^'+.,.+

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 27191 invoked from network); 10 Nov 2001 00:42:27 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 10 Nov 2001 00:42:27 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 15877 invoked by uid 50005); 10 Nov 2001 00:42:22 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4168. . Clean. Processed in 0.216296 secs); 10 Nov 2001 00:42:22 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 10 Nov 2001 00:42:21 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA19701; Fri, 9 Nov 2001 16:40:49 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 130498 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 10 Nov 2001 00:39:28          +0000
Received: from smtp003pub.verizon.net (smtp003pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.182])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA19665 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 9 Nov 2001 16:39:27 -0800
Received: from [63.24.225.54] (1Cust54.tnt1.rancho-cucamonga.ca.da.uu.net          [63.24.225.54]) by smtp003pub.verizon.net  with ESMTP for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; id fAA0cP307763 Fri, 9 Nov 2001 18:38:25 -0600          (CST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: GTE/01rocket@mail.gte.net
References: <5832AFF5FC75D411844300508BC216B70302ABCD@us-bv-m07.bv.tek.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <a05100300b812270b5d27@[63.24.225.223]>
Date:         Fri, 9 Nov 2001 16:38:57 -0800
Reply-To: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] What Can I say????
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <5832AFF5FC75D411844300508BC216B70302ABCD@us-bv-m07.bv.tek.com>

>Here's the section regarding motor/propellants in the currently posted TRA
>EX rules:
>
>""Motors" and "rocket motors" shall refer only to composite solid and
>nitrous oxide solid fuel motors (I.E. hybrid motors). Black powder based
>motors shall not be included as composites, regardless of binder and/or
>formulation modifications.""
>
>Now here's the latest from Bruce...
>


Responding to the whole post, whoa!  I know Bruce allowed Kosdon to
fire ANCP motors at several launches.  What's up with his general
denial this has happened in the past?  And he did not turn Frank into
either the ATF or any other authority that I know of.

The hypocracy would be bad enough but this might rise to the level of
a false police report.

Jerry


>  > -----Original Message-----
>>  From: BRUCE KELLY [mailto:71161.2351@compuserve.com]
>>  Sent: Friday, November 09, 2001 3:13 PM
>>  To: Blind.Copy.Receiver@compuserve.com
>>  Subject: One more thing
>>
>>
>>  To all Prefects
>>
>>  8 November 2001
>>
>>
>>  I almost forgot one thing.
>>
>>  Yesterday afternoon I got a call from an ATF field agent in Michigan. He
>>  called to ask me about a member who just bought a 100-pound bag of
>ammonium
>>  nitrate. He said, "This fellow claims to be a member of your
>>  organization..."
>>
>>  Wooah! Excuse me, but when did WE (TRA) approve the use of anfo-motors?
>>
>>  Anyway, he wanted to check out our member's claim of TRA membership. I was
>>  happy to report the member was in good standing (so far). Then he asked me
>>  questions about the hobby. It was at this point I explained to him that we
>>  use APCP and do not allow anfo-motors at our certified/insured launches.
>>  But I also explained that our member could use those on his own. The field
>>  agent understood, and he seemed pleased and relieved that he was using the
>>  motors for rockets and nothing else.
>>
>>  Here are a couple of points to remember:
>>
>>  1. If you buy a 100-pound bag of ammonium nitrate, you are going to be
>>  checked out - and you should be. If you are not, it means that security is
>>  worse than I thought.
>>
>>  2. If you use anfo motors, you can say anything you would like. BUT, do
>not
>>  represent anfo activity as Tripoli activity. It is not even a part of our
>>  EX program. It could be in the future, but it is not now. No one has made
>a
>  > formal presentation to the BOD for our consideration.
>  >
>  > B Kelly
>  >


--
Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
Opinion, the whole thing.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 7521 invoked from network); 10 Nov 2001 00:53:49 -0000
Received: from smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.105]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 10 Nov 2001 00:53:49 -0000
Received: (qmail 12773 invoked by uid 50005); 10 Nov 2001 00:53:44 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpy with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4168. . Clean. Processed in 0.207509 secs); 10 Nov 2001 00:53:44 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 10 Nov 2001 00:53:43 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA19829; Fri, 9 Nov 2001 16:52:04 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 130529 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 10 Nov 2001 00:50:42          +0000
Received: from conint.consumersinterest.com (consumersinterest.com          [207.195.143.118] (may be forged)) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with          ESMTP id QAA19806 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 9 Nov 2001 16:50:41          -0800
Received: from DEPUTYDOG1 [207.46.137.8] by conint.consumersinterest.com          (SMTPD32-6.04) id AE0717B2009C; Fri, 09 Nov 2001 17:08:23 -0800
References: <5832AFF5FC75D411844300508BC216B70302ABCD@us-bv-m07.bv.tek.com>             <a05100300b812270b5d27@[63.24.225.223]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <001501c16981$a0101230$8cac1cac@redmond.corp.microsoft.com>
Date:         Fri, 9 Nov 2001 16:49:59 -0800
Reply-To: "Greg Deputy" <greg@BLASTZONE.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Greg Deputy" <greg@BLASTZONE.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] What Can I say????
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Yeah I remember AN motors launched at BALLS in 99 and 2000.  Pretty
impressive.  Something like N class total impulse with 20 second burns or
so....  But yeah, AN at a TRA sanctioned EX launch.  With Bruce present, I
believe.


----- Original Message -----
From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Friday, November 09, 2001 4:38 PM
Subject: Re: [AR] What Can I say????


> >Here's the section regarding motor/propellants in the currently posted
TRA
> >EX rules:
> >
> >""Motors" and "rocket motors" shall refer only to composite solid and
> >nitrous oxide solid fuel motors (I.E. hybrid motors). Black powder based
> >motors shall not be included as composites, regardless of binder and/or
> >formulation modifications.""
> >
> >Now here's the latest from Bruce...
> >
>
>
> Responding to the whole post, whoa!  I know Bruce allowed Kosdon to
> fire ANCP motors at several launches.  What's up with his general
> denial this has happened in the past?  And he did not turn Frank into
> either the ATF or any other authority that I know of.
>
> The hypocracy would be bad enough but this might rise to the level of
> a false police report.
>
> Jerry
>
>
> >  > -----Original Message-----
> >>  From: BRUCE KELLY [mailto:71161.2351@compuserve.com]
> >>  Sent: Friday, November 09, 2001 3:13 PM
> >>  To: Blind.Copy.Receiver@compuserve.com
> >>  Subject: One more thing
> >>
> >>
> >>  To all Prefects
> >>
> >>  8 November 2001
> >>
> >>
> >>  I almost forgot one thing.
> >>
> >>  Yesterday afternoon I got a call from an ATF field agent in Michigan.
He
> >>  called to ask me about a member who just bought a 100-pound bag of
> >ammonium
> >>  nitrate. He said, "This fellow claims to be a member of your
> >>  organization..."
> >>
> >>  Wooah! Excuse me, but when did WE (TRA) approve the use of
anfo-motors?
> >>
> >>  Anyway, he wanted to check out our member's claim of TRA membership. I
was
> >>  happy to report the member was in good standing (so far). Then he
asked me
> >>  questions about the hobby. It was at this point I explained to him
that we
> >>  use APCP and do not allow anfo-motors at our certified/insured
launches.
> >>  But I also explained that our member could use those on his own. The
field
> >>  agent understood, and he seemed pleased and relieved that he was using
the
> >>  motors for rockets and nothing else.
> >>
> >>  Here are a couple of points to remember:
> >>
> >>  1. If you buy a 100-pound bag of ammonium nitrate, you are going to be
> >>  checked out - and you should be. If you are not, it means that
security is
> >>  worse than I thought.
> >>
> >>  2. If you use anfo motors, you can say anything you would like. BUT,
do
> >not
> >>  represent anfo activity as Tripoli activity. It is not even a part of
our
> >>  EX program. It could be in the future, but it is not now. No one has
made
> >a
> >  > formal presentation to the BOD for our consideration.
> >  >
> >  > B Kelly
> >  >
>
>
> --
> Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
> Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
> Opinion, the whole thing.
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 11976 invoked from network); 10 Nov 2001 00:55:07 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 10 Nov 2001 00:55:07 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 6137 invoked by uid 50005); 10 Nov 2001 00:55:01 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4168. . Clean. Processed in 0.258853 secs); 10 Nov 2001 00:55:01 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 10 Nov 2001 00:55:01 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA19847; Fri, 9 Nov 2001 16:53:28 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 130536 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 10 Nov 2001 00:52:06          +0000
Received: from idsoftware.com (predator.idsoftware.com [192.246.40.34]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA19814 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Fri, 9 Nov 2001 16:50:56 -0800
Received: from [192.246.40.129] (account johnc HELO lightning.idsoftware.com)          by idsoftware.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 3.4.7) with ESMTP id 472084          for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 09 Nov 2001 18:50:55 -0600
X-Sender: johnc@mail.idsoftware.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <4.3.1.2.20011109184517.03a49090@mail.idsoftware.com>
Date:         Fri, 9 Nov 2001 18:49:08 -0600
Reply-To: "John Carmack" <johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Carmack" <johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] What Can I say????
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <5832AFF5FC75D411844300508BC216B70302ABCD@us-bv-m07.bv.tek. com>

> >
> > Wooah! Excuse me, but when did WE (TRA) approve the use of anfo-motors?
> >
> > Anyway, he wanted to check out our member's claim of TRA membership. I was
> > happy to report the member was in good standing (so far). Then he asked me
> > questions about the hobby. It was at this point I explained to him that we
> > use APCP and do not allow anfo-motors at our certified/insured launches.
> > But I also explained that our member could use those on his own. The field
> > agent understood, and he seemed pleased and relieved that he was using the
> > motors for rockets and nothing else.
> >
> > Here are a couple of points to remember:
> >
> > 2. If you use anfo motors, you can say anything you would like. BUT, do
>not
> > represent anfo activity as Tripoli activity. It is not even a part of our
> > EX program. It could be in the future, but it is not now. No one has made
>a

AFAIK, "anfo" refers to Ammonium Nitrate / Fuel Oil explosives, so nobody
should be referring to any sort of rocket motor as an "anfo motor", because
there is no fuel oil in thatm.  ANCP or just "AN composite" would be much
more accurate.

John Carmack

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 524 invoked from network); 10 Nov 2001 01:00:19 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.105]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 10 Nov 2001 01:00:19 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 23733 invoked by uid 50005); 10 Nov 2001 01:00:13 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpy with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4168. . Clean. Processed in 0.620169 secs); 10 Nov 2001 01:00:13 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 10 Nov 2001 01:00:12 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA19947; Fri, 9 Nov 2001 16:58:39 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 130561 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 10 Nov 2001 00:57:17          +0000
Received: from adobe.com (smtp-relay-2.adobe.com [192.150.11.2]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA19932 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri,          9 Nov 2001 16:57:17 -0800
Received: from inner-relay-2.corp.adobe.com ([153.32.1.52]) by adobe.com          (1.0.0/8.11.4) with ESMTP id fAA0tug01760 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>;          Fri, 9 Nov 2001 16:55:56 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mailsj-v1.corp.adobe.com (mailsj-dev.corp.adobe.com          [153.32.1.192]) by inner-relay-2.corp.adobe.com (8.11.4/8.11.4) with          ESMTP id fAA0tu123553 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 9 Nov 2001          16:55:56 -0800 (PST)
Received: from sronald.earthlink.net ([153.32.63.111]) by          mailsj-v1.corp.adobe.com (Netscape Messaging Server 4.15 v1 Jul 11          2001 16:32:57) with ESMTP id GMK7YH00.NB2; Fri, 9 Nov 2001 16:56:41          -0800
X-Sender: forkbomb@mail.earthlink.net
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <5.1.0.14.0.20011109170043.00a62080@mail.earthlink.net>
Date:         Fri, 9 Nov 2001 17:01:26 -0800
Reply-To: <forkbomb@EARTHLINK.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <forkbomb@EARTHLINK.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] What Can I say????
Comments: To: john.w.lyngdal@EXGATE.TEK.COM
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <5832AFF5FC75D411844300508BC216B70302ABCD@us-bv-m07.bv.tek. com>

         What the hell? The EX rules do not appear to restrict solid
oxidizers -- is Bruce changing the rules in mid-stream?

         -p

At 04:19 PM 11/9/01 -0800, john.w.lyngdal@EXGATE.TEK.COM wrote:
>Here's the section regarding motor/propellants in the currently posted TRA
>EX rules:
>
>""Motors" and "rocket motors" shall refer only to composite solid and
>nitrous oxide solid fuel motors (I.E. hybrid motors). Black powder based
>motors shall not be included as composites, regardless of binder and/or
>formulation modifications.""
>
>Now here's the latest from Bruce...
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: BRUCE KELLY [mailto:71161.2351@compuserve.com]
> > Sent: Friday, November 09, 2001 3:13 PM
> > To: Blind.Copy.Receiver@compuserve.com
> > Subject: One more thing
> >
> >
> > To all Prefects
> >
> > 8 November 2001
> >
> >
> > I almost forgot one thing.
> >
> > Yesterday afternoon I got a call from an ATF field agent in Michigan. He
> > called to ask me about a member who just bought a 100-pound bag of
>ammonium
> > nitrate. He said, "This fellow claims to be a member of your
> > organization..."
> >
> > Wooah! Excuse me, but when did WE (TRA) approve the use of anfo-motors?
> >
> > Anyway, he wanted to check out our member's claim of TRA membership. I was
> > happy to report the member was in good standing (so far). Then he asked me
> > questions about the hobby. It was at this point I explained to him that we
> > use APCP and do not allow anfo-motors at our certified/insured launches.
> > But I also explained that our member could use those on his own. The field
> > agent understood, and he seemed pleased and relieved that he was using the
> > motors for rockets and nothing else.
> >
> > Here are a couple of points to remember:
> >
> > 1. If you buy a 100-pound bag of ammonium nitrate, you are going to be
> > checked out - and you should be. If you are not, it means that security is
> > worse than I thought.
> >
> > 2. If you use anfo motors, you can say anything you would like. BUT, do
>not
> > represent anfo activity as Tripoli activity. It is not even a part of our
> > EX program. It could be in the future, but it is not now. No one has made
>a
> > formal presentation to the BOD for our consideration.
> >
> > B Kelly
> >

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 6325 invoked from network); 10 Nov 2001 01:01:58 -0000
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 10 Nov 2001 01:01:58 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 11406 invoked by uid 50005); 10 Nov 2001 01:01:52 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4168. . Clean. Processed in 0.270263 secs); 10 Nov 2001 01:01:52 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 10 Nov 2001 01:01:52 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA19971; Fri, 9 Nov 2001 17:00:15 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 130528 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 10 Nov 2001 00:58:54          +0000
Received: from fcexgw03.efi.com ([192.68.228.82]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7)          with SMTP id QAA19789 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 9 Nov 2001          16:48:45 -0800
Received: from 10.10.12.104 by fcexgw03.efi.com (InterScan E-Mail VirusWall          NT); Fri, 09 Nov 2001 16:48:17 -0800
Received: from earthlink.net (peroxide.efi.com [10.10.89.46]) by          EX-IMC3-CORP.efi.com with SMTP (Microsoft Exchange Internet Mail          Service Version 5.5.2653.13) id WM0YWLT3; Fri, 9 Nov 2001 16:48:41          -0800
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.14-5.0 i686)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <5832AFF5FC75D411844300508BC216B70302ABCD@us-bv-m07.bv.tek.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3BEC796C.DEF9BA55@earthlink.net>
Date:         Fri, 9 Nov 2001 16:48:44 -0800
Reply-To: "David Weinshenker" <daze39@EARTHLINK.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "David Weinshenker" <daze39@EARTHLINK.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] What Can I say????
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

john.w.lyngdal@EXGATE.TEK.COM wrote:
>
> Here's the section regarding motor/propellants in the currently posted TRA
> EX rules:
>
> ""Motors" and "rocket motors" shall refer only to composite solid and
> nitrous oxide solid fuel motors (I.E. hybrid motors). Black powder based
> motors shall not be included as composites, regardless of binder and/or
> formulation modifications.""
>
> Now here's the latest from Bruce...

What exactly does Bruce mean by "anfo-motors" - presumably this is ANFO for
"ammonium nitrate/fuel oil"? I've heard of this mixture used as a blasting
explosive (a relatively insensitive one that needs a substantial charge of
other explosive to "initiate" it)... is it useful for a solid propellant?
Even if it would deflagrate at a suitable rate, wouldn't the mechanical
properties of such a mixture make it unsuitable for forming into a propellant grain?

Or is Bruce using "anfo" to refer to AN/polymer composite propellant?
I believe motors using such formulas have been flown at TRA "experimental"
launches, though there are no motors of that type in "certified" production
for use at regular "sport" launches.

At least he reports that the ATF guy seemed relieved that the oxidizer was
to be used for rocket propellant - that's a sign of sanity (especially in
these times)...

-dave w

>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: BRUCE KELLY [mailto:71161.2351@compuserve.com]
> > Sent: Friday, November 09, 2001 3:13 PM
> > To: Blind.Copy.Receiver@compuserve.com
> > Subject: One more thing
> >
> >
> > To all Prefects
> >
> > 8 November 2001
> >
> >
> > I almost forgot one thing.
> >
> > Yesterday afternoon I got a call from an ATF field agent in Michigan. He
> > called to ask me about a member who just bought a 100-pound bag of
> ammonium
> > nitrate. He said, "This fellow claims to be a member of your
> > organization..."
> >
> > Wooah! Excuse me, but when did WE (TRA) approve the use of anfo-motors?
> >
> > Anyway, he wanted to check out our member's claim of TRA membership. I was
> > happy to report the member was in good standing (so far). Then he asked me
> > questions about the hobby. It was at this point I explained to him that we
> > use APCP and do not allow anfo-motors at our certified/insured launches.
> > But I also explained that our member could use those on his own. The field
> > agent understood, and he seemed pleased and relieved that he was using the
> > motors for rockets and nothing else.
> >
> > Here are a couple of points to remember:
> >
> > 1. If you buy a 100-pound bag of ammonium nitrate, you are going to be
> > checked out - and you should be. If you are not, it means that security is
> > worse than I thought.
> >
> > 2. If you use anfo motors, you can say anything you would like. BUT, do
> not
> > represent anfo activity as Tripoli activity. It is not even a part of our
> > EX program. It could be in the future, but it is not now. No one has made
> a
> > formal presentation to the BOD for our consideration.
> >
> > B Kelly
> >

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 1107 invoked from network); 10 Nov 2001 01:08:46 -0000
Received: from smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.105]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 10 Nov 2001 01:08:46 -0000
Received: (qmail 4701 invoked by uid 50005); 10 Nov 2001 01:08:41 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpy with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4168. . Clean. Processed in 0.206763 secs); 10 Nov 2001 01:08:41 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 10 Nov 2001 01:08:40 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA20084; Fri, 9 Nov 2001 17:06:46 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 130594 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 10 Nov 2001 01:05:24          +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (oe53.law12.hotmail.com [64.4.18.46]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA20061 for <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Fri,          9 Nov 2001 17:05:24 -0800
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Fri,          9 Nov 2001 17:04:50 -0800
X-Originating-IP: [24.92.128.69]
References:  <5832AFF5FC75D411844300508BC216B70302ABCD@us-bv-m07.bv.tek.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 10 Nov 2001 01:04:50.0064 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[B2922900:01C16983]
Message-ID:  <OE53prL6D6mdxrEzOwP00013782@hotmail.com>
Date:         Fri, 9 Nov 2001 19:04:00 -0600
Reply-To: "Mark Kruep" <mkruep@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Mark Kruep" <mkruep@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] What Can I say????
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

I have never seen nor heard of any rule specifically saying AN motors were
prohibited by TRA. I take exception to his description of "ANFO motors" as
ANFO is a whole other beast all together and him stating it like that makes
him no better than the politicians who make no distinction between ACPC and
explosives. I doubt ANFO could be used as any type of propellant at all or
at least not in a direction sense anyway since assuredly mines use it to
propel rock. I don't think that's a very good comparison to rocketry though.
It might get Bruce a job at Forbes doing reportive work though.

 If I were the member in question I might seek legal advice on the basis of
slander or deprivation of character based on comments made to prefects and
the ATF which could cause further legal problems for this individual, and if
I find out who that person is, I will make that recommendation to that
individual. This is nothing more than the usual bureaucratic "cover my own
ass at all costs" crap that is typical of power abusive individuals. It
seems amazing to me how quickly Bruce would go turncoat on the individual
over AN. I bet he'd ask for financial support for the legal fund from the
same person tomorrow without batting an eye and feel no guilt doing so. I
fully intend on sending Bruce a letter with my piece of mind and encourage
all to do the same. The letter Bruce wrote is not representative of a good
leader and the membership needs to make him know so. I won't vote for him
again regardless, even if that means writing in Donald Duck to succeed him.
Remember, it could be you being stabbed in the back tomorrow.

I also plan to post his letter on every rocket message board I can find so
that everyone knows what our leader is really made of.

Mark




----- Original Message -----
From: <john.w.lyngdal@EXGATE.TEK.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Friday, November 09, 2001 6:19 PM
Subject: [AR] What Can I say????


> Here's the section regarding motor/propellants in the currently posted TRA

> EX rules:
>
> ""Motors" and "rocket motors" shall refer only to composite solid and
> nitrous oxide solid fuel motors (I.E. hybrid motors). Black powder based
> motors shall not be included as composites, regardless of binder and/or
> formulation modifications.""
>
> Now here's the latest from Bruce...
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: BRUCE KELLY [mailto:71161.2351@compuserve.com]
> > Sent: Friday, November 09, 2001 3:13 PM
> > To: Blind.Copy.Receiver@compuserve.com
> > Subject: One more thing
> >
> >
> > To all Prefects
> >
> > 8 November 2001
> >
> >
> > I almost forgot one thing.
> >
> > Yesterday afternoon I got a call from an ATF field agent in Michigan. He
> > called to ask me about a member who just bought a 100-pound bag of
> ammonium
> > nitrate. He said, "This fellow claims to be a member of your
> > organization..."
> >
> > Wooah! Excuse me, but when did WE (TRA) approve the use of anfo-motors?
> >
> > Anyway, he wanted to check out our member's claim of TRA membership. I
was
> > happy to report the member was in good standing (so far). Then he asked
me
> > questions about the hobby. It was at this point I explained to him that
we
> > use APCP and do not allow anfo-motors at our certified/insured launches.
> > But I also explained that our member could use those on his own. The
field
> > agent understood, and he seemed pleased and relieved that he was using
the
> > motors for rockets and nothing else.
> >
> > Here are a couple of points to remember:
> >
> > 1. If you buy a 100-pound bag of ammonium nitrate, you are going to be
> > checked out - and you should be. If you are not, it means that security
is
> > worse than I thought.
> >
> > 2. If you use anfo motors, you can say anything you would like. BUT, do
> not
> > represent anfo activity as Tripoli activity. It is not even a part of
our
> > EX program. It could be in the future, but it is not now. No one has
made
> a
> > formal presentation to the BOD for our consideration.
> >
> > B Kelly
> >
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 4961 invoked from network); 10 Nov 2001 01:09:48 -0000
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 10 Nov 2001 01:09:48 -0000
X-Priority: 3
Received: (qmail 25193 invoked by uid 50005); 10 Nov 2001 01:09:42 -0000
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4168. . Clean. Processed in 0.156061 secs); 10 Nov 2001 01:09:42 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 10 Nov 2001 01:09:42 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA20106; Fri, 9 Nov 2001 17:08:08 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 130601 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 10 Nov 2001 01:06:47          +0000
Received: from nt2000s2.dgmicro.com (cn815472-c.newcas1.de.home.com          [24.40.74.93]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA20074          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 9 Nov 2001 17:06:36 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
X-MS-Has-Attach: 
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
content-class: urn:content-classes:message
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: 
Thread-Topic:      [AR] What Can I say????
Thread-Index: AcFpffXFtzUrIxYVSLSGrhp3JymoSwABYDfA
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by itc.uci.edu id RAA20075
Message-ID:  <C0F7BF4DCEC1D2479A01031347184DCD02FE7A@nt2000s2.dgmicro.com>
Date:         Fri, 9 Nov 2001 20:05:57 -0500
Reply-To: "Darren Wright" <dwright@D2-TECH.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Darren Wright" <dwright@D2-TECH.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] What Can I say????
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Oh my gad......

Can you imagine if George Bush said "You can't use gasoline to make
bombs"  gack!  Does Bruce have any idea what "composite motors" means?

This really scares me...that the president of this organization would
say something so wrong.

Man.....out with the old, in with the new!

-Darren


> -----Original Message-----
> From: john.w.lyngdal@EXGATE.TEK.COM
> [mailto:john.w.lyngdal@EXGATE.TEK.COM]
> Sent: Friday, November 09, 2001 7:20 PM
> To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
> Subject: [AR] What Can I say????
>
>
> Here's the section regarding motor/propellants in the
> currently posted TRA EX rules:
>
> ""Motors" and "rocket motors" shall refer only to composite
> solid and nitrous oxide solid fuel motors (I.E. hybrid
> motors). Black powder based motors shall not be included as
> composites, regardless of binder and/or formulation modifications.""
>
> Now here's the latest from Bruce...
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: BRUCE KELLY [mailto:71161.2351@compuserve.com]
> > Sent: Friday, November 09, 2001 3:13 PM
> > To: Blind.Copy.Receiver@compuserve.com
> > Subject: One more thing
> >
> >
> > To all Prefects
> >
> > 8 November 2001
> >
> >
> > I almost forgot one thing.
> >
> > Yesterday afternoon I got a call from an ATF field agent in
> Michigan.
> > He called to ask me about a member who just bought a
> 100-pound bag of
> ammonium
> > nitrate. He said, "This fellow claims to be a member of your
> > organization..."
> >
> > Wooah! Excuse me, but when did WE (TRA) approve the use of
> > anfo-motors?
> >
> > Anyway, he wanted to check out our member's claim of TRA
> membership. I
> > was happy to report the member was in good standing (so
> far). Then he
> > asked me questions about the hobby. It was at this point I
> explained
> > to him that we use APCP and do not allow anfo-motors at our
> > certified/insured launches. But I also explained that our
> member could
> > use those on his own. The field agent understood, and he seemed
> > pleased and relieved that he was using the motors for rockets and
> > nothing else.
> >
> > Here are a couple of points to remember:
> >
> > 1. If you buy a 100-pound bag of ammonium nitrate, you are
> going to be
> > checked out - and you should be. If you are not, it means that
> > security is worse than I thought.
> >
> > 2. If you use anfo motors, you can say anything you would
> like. BUT,
> > do
> not
> > represent anfo activity as Tripoli activity. It is not even
> a part of
> > our EX program. It could be in the future, but it is not
> now. No one
> > has made
> a
> > formal presentation to the BOD for our consideration.
> >
> > B Kelly
> >
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 5609 invoked from network); 10 Nov 2001 01:18:33 -0000
Received: from smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.105]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 10 Nov 2001 01:18:33 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 19839 invoked by uid 50005); 10 Nov 2001 01:18:27 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpy with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4168. . Clean. Processed in 0.919485 secs); 10 Nov 2001 01:18:27 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 10 Nov 2001 01:18:25 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA20231; Fri, 9 Nov 2001 17:16:48 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 130630 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 10 Nov 2001 01:15:26          +0000
Received: from m5.boston.juno.com (m5.boston.juno.com [64.136.24.68]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA20216 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Fri, 9 Nov 2001 17:15:26 -0800
Received: from cookie.juno.com by cookie.juno.com for          <"r2Fo8hpwT0kn33UwylHELMN/WOTpJvUckim+mj8o0EwK1xJivzrqtw==">
Received: (from icantdecide@juno.com) by m5.boston.juno.com (queuemail) id          GKUK7HYD; Fri, 09 Nov 2001 20:14:41 EST
X-Mailer: Juno 4.0.9
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Juno-Line-Breaks: 4-8,10-75
X-Juno-Att: 0
X-Juno-RefParts: 0
Message-ID:  <20011109.201503.-428489.0.icantdecide@juno.com>
Date:         Fri, 9 Nov 2001 20:15:02 -0600
Reply-To: "James G Selin" <icantdecide@JUNO.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "James G Selin" <icantdecide@JUNO.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Potential KMZ51 bulk purchase
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Oh you know what... I'm dumb. I was saying a 90 degree rotation from
vertical but I forgot that that was the condition for firing! The
definately wouldn't work. Sorry I hadn't thought it through. Its wild
that its actually a problem.... I wonder if its documented? I would
imagine it to be an issue they had to deal with.

-Jim Selin


On Sat, 10 Nov 2001 09:02:16 +1000 Ashley Roll <ash@DIGITALNEMESIS.COM>
writes:
> Hi James,
>
> Unfortunately, that won't work - I tried.
>
> Basically by flipping the sensor over, you reverse the piezo effect,
> however
> you also reverse the signal generated by the magnetic field. So
> again you
> have the signals going the same way and it becomes unusable. :(
>
> The only way would be to flip it over and reverse the earths
> magnetic field.
> This I can do If I move to the Northern Hemisphere, which I'm not so
> inclined to do (I like my Aussie Christmas - drinking cold beer in a
> swimming pool) ;)
>
> However it probably wont perform any better in the northern
> hemisphere - the
> acceleration would be ok, but the deceleration would get you.. it
> could fire
> when the motor burns out.
>
> This effect is substantial. Just gently pushing the sensor with your
> finger
> causes it to fire - several G's would definitely be a problem.
>
> Basically I think this piezo effect makes the sensor unusable for
> this
> situation.
>
> Cheers,
> Ash.
>
> ---
> Ashley Roll
> Digital Nemesis Pty Ltd
> www.digitalnemesis.com
> Mobile: +61 (0)417 705 718
>
>
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list
> [mailto:AROCKET@itc.uci.edu]On
> > Behalf Of James G Selin
> > Sent: Saturday, 10 November 2001 2:05 AM
> > To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
> > Subject: Re: [AR] Potential KMZ51 bulk purchase
> >
> >
> > Did you try changing the orientation of the sensor? IIRC, the
> > piezoelectric effect is dependant upon which axis,
> > crystalographically,
> > is being stressed. Could you try holding it in your hand and
> > slamming the
> > back of your hand on a table to trigger it? A sudden
> > decceleration like
> > that would exceed the g's from a launch I would think. If it
> triggered
> > say an LED you could do multiple trys changing the axis.
> >
> > Just my 2 cents...
> >
> > Jim Selin

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 20531 invoked from network); 10 Nov 2001 01:31:39 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 10 Nov 2001 01:31:39 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 24485 invoked by uid 50005); 10 Nov 2001 01:31:33 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4168. . Clean. Processed in 0.349156 secs); 10 Nov 2001 01:31:33 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 10 Nov 2001 01:31:32 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA20322; Fri, 9 Nov 2001 17:29:39 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 130647 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 10 Nov 2001 01:28:16          +0000
Received: from smtp003pub.verizon.net (smtp003pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.182])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA20307 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 9 Nov 2001 17:28:15 -0800
Received: from [63.24.225.54] (1Cust150.tnt1.rancho-cucamonga.ca.da.uu.net          [63.24.225.150]) by smtp003pub.verizon.net  with ESMTP for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; id fAA1RD305541 Fri, 9 Nov 2001 19:27:14 -0600          (CST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: GTE/01rocket@mail.gte.net
References: <5.1.0.14.0.20011109170043.00a62080@mail.earthlink.net>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <a05100301b81232e22588@[63.24.225.54]>
Date:         Fri, 9 Nov 2001 17:27:46 -0800
Reply-To: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] What Can I say????
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <5.1.0.14.0.20011109170043.00a62080@mail.earthlink.net>

>         What the hell? The EX rules do not appear to restrict solid
>oxidizers -- is Bruce changing the rules in mid-stream?
>

With all due respect (not much), that is standard procedure.

Jerry

--
Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
Opinion, the whole thing.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 25606 invoked from network); 10 Nov 2001 01:48:51 -0000
X-Priority: 3
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 10 Nov 2001 01:48:51 -0000
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 29064 invoked by uid 50005); 10 Nov 2001 01:48:45 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4168. . Clean. Processed in 2.115912 secs); 10 Nov 2001 01:48:45 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 10 Nov 2001 01:48:39 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA20427; Fri, 9 Nov 2001 17:46:24 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 130664 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 10 Nov 2001 01:45:02          +0000
Received: from sys32.hou.wt.net (sys32.hou.wt.net [205.230.159.32]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA20410 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 9 Nov 2001 17:45:01 -0800
Received: from localhost (216-119-138-153.ipset18.wt.net [216.119.138.153]) by          sys32.hou.wt.net (8.9.1/8.9.1) with ESMTP id TAA14727 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 9 Nov 2001 19:45:06 -0600 (CST)
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0DBF_01C56B69.57542E80"
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.472)
Message-ID:  <9523244A-D57C-11D5-B0AE-0050E43A5105@netaxs.com>
Date:         Fri, 9 Nov 2001 19:45:13 -0600
Reply-To: "Donald McCorvey" <dlm3@NETAXS.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Donald McCorvey" <dlm3@NETAXS.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Gyro integration, again
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <20011109144032.A30307@athol.localdomain>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0DBF_01C56B69.57542E80
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="US-ASCII"

On Friday, November 9, 2001, at 01:40  PM, Norman Yarvin wrote:

Gimbal lock is a problem on mechanical gyros, where the measuring axes
can get parallel to each other, or close to it.  With fiber optic gyros,
the measuring axes are always perpendicular, so generating a rotation
matrix from gyro outputs is a very well-conditioned problem (as is
multiplying by such a matrix, since it is always a unitary matrix).  Very
little precision will be lost, even during long runs.

---------

a) gimbal lock is only a problem on mechanical attitude-sensing gyros
where a gimbal is used to counteract the torque created by the spinning
gyro when the vehicle rotates around it causing it to precess. Pure rate
gyros of any sort do not have this problem because they are fixed to the
vehicle. A strapdown IMU, whether mechanical or solid state will produce
orthogonal rates and attitudes, whether you use Euler angle or
quaternion notation.

b) 'gimbal lock' is also used to describe conditions in rotations where
multiple rotations cause one axis to be mapped onto another, sometimes
resulting in a condition where you can no longer make the desired
rotation.

Obviously, when you're using a set of gyro signals, they will be
orthogonal by definition. The problem comes from the steering end of the
equation when a commanded attitude results in a rotation that causes the
gimbal lock condition. This, and when you are severely
computation-limited are reasons for using quaternions in the forward
path of a guidance/steering control loop. You end up using them in the
feedback path simply to avoid the conversion back to Euler angles.

There's more detail on quaternion arithmetic at:

        http://www.cs.ualberta.ca/~andreas/math/matrfaq_latest.html

Don McCorvey


------=_NextPart_000_0DBF_01C56B69.57542E80
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Type: text/enriched;
	charset="US-ASCII"

On Friday, November 9, 2001, at 01:40  PM, Norman Yarvin wrote:


<color><param>0000,0000,DEDE</param>Gimbal lock is a problem on
mechanical gyros, where the measuring axes

can get parallel to each other, or close to it.  With fiber optic
gyros,

the measuring axes are always perpendicular, so generating a rotation

matrix from gyro outputs is a very well-conditioned problem (as is

multiplying by such a matrix, since it is always a unitary matrix).
Very

little precision will be lost, even during long runs.

</color>

---------


a) gimbal lock is only a problem on mechanical attitude-sensing gyros
where a gimbal is used to counteract the torque created by the
spinning gyro when the vehicle rotates around it causing it to
precess. Pure rate gyros of any sort do not have this problem because
they are fixed to the vehicle. A strapdown IMU, whether mechanical or
solid state will produce orthogonal rates and attitudes, whether you
use Euler angle or quaternion notation.


b) 'gimbal lock' is also used to describe conditions in rotations
where multiple rotations cause one axis to be mapped onto another,
sometimes resulting in a condition where you can no longer make the
desired rotation.


Obviously, when you're using a set of gyro signals, they will be
orthogonal by definition. The problem comes from the steering end of
the equation when a commanded attitude results in a rotation that
causes the gimbal lock condition. This, and when you are severely
computation-limited are reasons for using quaternions in the forward
path of a guidance/steering control loop. You end up using them in the
feedback path simply to avoid the conversion back to Euler angles.


There's more detail on quaternion arithmetic at:


        http://www.cs.ualberta.ca/~andreas/math/matrfaq_latest.html


Don McCorvey



------=_NextPart_000_0DBF_01C56B69.57542E80--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 3946 invoked from network); 10 Nov 2001 02:24:22 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 10 Nov 2001 02:24:22 -0000
Received: (qmail 24373 invoked by uid 50005); 10 Nov 2001 02:24:17 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4168. . Clean. Processed in 0.342092 secs); 10 Nov 2001 02:24:17 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 10 Nov 2001 02:24:16 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA20788; Fri, 9 Nov 2001 18:22:16 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 130693 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 10 Nov 2001 02:20:53          +0000
Received: from localhost (dmccue@localhost) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with          ESMTP id SAA20767; Fri, 9 Nov 2001 18:20:52 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.LNX.4.10.10111091817020.20639-100000@itc.uci.edu>
Date:         Fri, 9 Nov 2001 18:20:52 -0800
Reply-To: "David J. McCue" <dmccue@itc.uci.edu>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "David J. McCue" <dmccue@itc.uci.edu>
Subject:      Re: [AR] What Can I say????
Comments: To: john.w.lyngdal@EXGATE.TEK.COM
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <5832AFF5FC75D411844300508BC216B70302ABCD@us-bv-m07.bv.tek.com>

Truly bizarre - I expect to see Mr. Kelly tomorrow and I will ask him
about his position, since it seems to be both contradictory and ill
informed. anfo? What is he thinking?

-Dave Mc

On Fri, 9 Nov 2001 john.w.lyngdal@EXGATE.TEK.COM wrote:

> Here's the section regarding motor/propellants in the currently posted TRA
> EX rules:
>
> ""Motors" and "rocket motors" shall refer only to composite solid and
> nitrous oxide solid fuel motors (I.E. hybrid motors). Black powder based
> motors shall not be included as composites, regardless of binder and/or
> formulation modifications.""
>
> Now here's the latest from Bruce...
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: BRUCE KELLY [mailto:71161.2351@compuserve.com]
> > Sent: Friday, November 09, 2001 3:13 PM
> > To: Blind.Copy.Receiver@compuserve.com
> > Subject: One more thing
> >
> >
> > To all Prefects
> >
> > 8 November 2001
> >
> >
> > I almost forgot one thing.
> >
> > Yesterday afternoon I got a call from an ATF field agent in Michigan. He
> > called to ask me about a member who just bought a 100-pound bag of
> ammonium
> > nitrate. He said, "This fellow claims to be a member of your
> > organization..."
> >
> > Wooah! Excuse me, but when did WE (TRA) approve the use of anfo-motors?
> >
> > Anyway, he wanted to check out our member's claim of TRA membership. I was
> > happy to report the member was in good standing (so far). Then he asked me
> > questions about the hobby. It was at this point I explained to him that we
> > use APCP and do not allow anfo-motors at our certified/insured launches.
> > But I also explained that our member could use those on his own. The field
> > agent understood, and he seemed pleased and relieved that he was using the
> > motors for rockets and nothing else.
> >
> > Here are a couple of points to remember:
> >
> > 1. If you buy a 100-pound bag of ammonium nitrate, you are going to be
> > checked out - and you should be. If you are not, it means that security is
> > worse than I thought.
> >
> > 2. If you use anfo motors, you can say anything you would like. BUT, do
> not
> > represent anfo activity as Tripoli activity. It is not even a part of our
> > EX program. It could be in the future, but it is not now. No one has made
> a
> > formal presentation to the BOD for our consideration.
> >
> > B Kelly
> >
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 20713 invoked from network); 10 Nov 2001 02:29:31 -0000
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 10 Nov 2001 02:29:31 -0000
Received: (qmail 31948 invoked by uid 50005); 10 Nov 2001 02:29:23 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4168. . Clean. Processed in 1.318396 secs); 10 Nov 2001 02:29:23 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 10 Nov 2001 02:29:21 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA20884; Fri, 9 Nov 2001 18:27:28 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 130704 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 10 Nov 2001 02:26:06          +0000
Received: from mailin8.bigpond.com (mailin8.bigpond.com [139.134.6.96]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA20862 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Fri, 9 Nov 2001 18:26:05 -0800
Received: from tardis ([144.135.24.81]) by mailin8.bigpond.com (Netscape          Messaging Server 4.15) with SMTP id GMKCED00.75S for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Sat, 10 Nov 2001 12:32:37 +1000
Received: from CPE-203-45-128-99.qld.bigpond.net.au ([203.45.128.99]) by          bwmam05.mailsvc.email.bigpond.com(MailRouter V2.9k 8335/3160977); 10          Nov 2001 12:26:02
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook CWS, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <00d301c1698e$fc9ec2a0$641010ac@tardis>
Date:         Sat, 10 Nov 2001 12:25:37 +1000
Reply-To: "Ashley Roll" <ash@DIGITALNEMESIS.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Ashley Roll" <ash@DIGITALNEMESIS.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Potential KMZ51 bulk purchase
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <20011109.201503.-428489.0.icantdecide@juno.com>

Hi Jim,

Don't worry, I managed to unsolder it and turn it over (not a trivial thing
on my prototype) and try it before I realised that it wouldn't work :P

I looked at the datasheet and there is no mention of the peizo effect on the
sensor. I guess that the assume that it will be used in a stationary
sensor..

Actually I'm wondering if the effect is because of the body moving against
the legs.. Perhaps if I embed it in a solid lump of epoxy.. I'll give it a
go and see if that helps.

Cheers,
Ash.

---
Ashley Roll
Digital Nemesis Pty Ltd
www.digitalnemesis.com
Mobile: +61 (0)417 705 718




> -----Original Message-----
> From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@itc.uci.edu]On
> Behalf Of James G Selin
> Sent: Saturday, 10 November 2001 12:15 PM
> To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
> Subject: Re: [AR] Potential KMZ51 bulk purchase
>
>
> Oh you know what... I'm dumb. I was saying a 90 degree rotation from
> vertical but I forgot that that was the condition for firing! The
> definately wouldn't work. Sorry I hadn't thought it through. Its wild
> that its actually a problem.... I wonder if its documented? I would
> imagine it to be an issue they had to deal with.
>
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 458 invoked from network); 10 Nov 2001 03:18:01 -0000
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 10 Nov 2001 03:18:01 -0000
Received: (qmail 31440 invoked by uid 50005); 10 Nov 2001 03:17:55 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4168. . Clean. Processed in 0.153885 secs); 10 Nov 2001 03:17:55 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 10 Nov 2001 03:17:55 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA21337; Fri, 9 Nov 2001 19:15:57 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 130745 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 10 Nov 2001 03:14:28          +0000
Received: from cablecom.laribay.net (cablecom.laribay.net [66.20.57.4]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA21319 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 9 Nov 2001 19:14:27 -0800
Received: from billbull (dial106.laribay.net [66.20.57.106]) by          cablecom.laribay.net (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id UAA09450; Fri, 9 Nov          2001 20:59:01 -0600 (CST) (envelope-from bpbullock@laribay.net)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0DC4_01C56B69.57628660"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <00bc01c16995$dd126b60$61391442@billbull>
Date:         Fri, 9 Nov 2001 21:14:50 -0600
Reply-To: "Bill Bullock" <bpbullock@LARIBAY.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Bill Bullock" <bpbullock@LARIBAY.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] What Can I say????
Comments: cc: Bruce Kelly <71161.2351@compuserve.com>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0DC4_01C56B69.57628660
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

>From the quote below may I assume that it is Mr. Kelly's position (and =
that of TRA as well) that if I go down to the local  Feed-and-Seed =
tomorrow and buy a 100 pound sack of 33% ammonium nitrate fertilizer to =
use on my tomatoes and corn I should be investigated by the ATF for my =
subversive activities? We literally buy the stuff by the ton here. It =
is, after all, primarily used as an agricultural fertilizer!
Bill
**********
From: BRUCE KELLY [mailto:71161.2351@compuserve.com]
> > Sent: Friday, November 09, 2001 3:13 PM
> > To: Blind.Copy.Receiver@compuserve.com
> > Subject: One more thing
(Deleted Section)
> > 1. If you buy a 100-pound bag of ammonium nitrate, you are going to =
be
> > checked out - and you should be. If you are not, it means that =
security is
> > worse than I thought
(Deleted Section)
> > B Kelly


------=_NextPart_000_0DC4_01C56B69.57628660
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META content=3D"text/html; charset=3Diso-8859-1" =
http-equiv=3DContent-Type>
<META content=3D"MSHTML 5.00.2614.3500" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV>From the quote below may I assume that it is Mr. Kelly's position =
(and that=20
of TRA as well) that if I go down to the local &nbsp;Feed-and-Seed =
tomorrow and=20
buy a 100 pound sack of 33% ammonium nitrate <U>fertilizer </U>to use on =
my=20
tomatoes and corn I should be investigated by the ATF for my subversive=20
activities? We literally buy the stuff by the <U>ton</U> here. It is, =
after all,=20
primarily used as an agricultural fertilizer!</DIV>
<DIV>Bill</DIV>
<DIV>**********</DIV>
<DIV>From: BRUCE KELLY [<A=20
href=3D"mailto:71161.2351@compuserve.com">mailto:71161.2351@compuserve.co=
m</A>]<BR>&gt;=20
&gt; Sent: Friday, November 09, 2001 3:13 PM<BR>&gt; &gt; To: <A=20
href=3D"mailto:Blind.Copy.Receiver@compuserve.com">Blind.Copy.Receiver@co=
mpuserve.com</A><BR>&gt;=20
&gt; Subject: One more thing<BR>(Deleted Section)</DIV>
<DIV>&gt; &gt; 1. If you buy a 100-pound bag of ammonium nitrate, you =
are going=20
to be<BR>&gt; &gt; checked out - and you should be. If you are not, it =
means=20
that security is<BR>&gt; &gt; worse than I thought</DIV>
<DIV>(Deleted Section)</DIV>
<DIV>&gt; &gt; B Kelly<BR></DIV></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0DC4_01C56B69.57628660--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 2558 invoked from network); 10 Nov 2001 03:47:08 -0000
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 10 Nov 2001 03:47:08 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 7496 invoked by uid 50005); 10 Nov 2001 03:47:03 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4168. . Clean. Processed in 0.15606 secs); 10 Nov 2001 03:47:03 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 10 Nov 2001 03:47:02 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA21466; Fri, 9 Nov 2001 19:45:27 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 130762 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 10 Nov 2001 03:44:04          +0000
Received: from iridium.carolina.net ([208.170.147.165]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA21435 for <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Fri,          9 Nov 2001 19:44:03 -0800
Received: from ac.net (ip159-as5300-1-7lakes-nc.carolina.net [206.100.51.159])          by iridium.carolina.net (Vircom SMTPRS 1.0.201) with ESMTP id          <B0004382684@iridium.carolina.net> for <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Fri, 9          Nov 2001 22:56:18 -0500
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en]C-CCK-MCD EBM-Compaq  (Win95; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <C0F7BF4DCEC1D2479A01031347184DCD02FE7A@nt2000s2.dgmicro.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3BECA0D9.E6A94E41@ac.net>
Date:         Fri, 9 Nov 2001 22:36:57 -0500
Reply-To: "Bill Shamblin" <wshamblin@AC.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Bill Shamblin" <wshamblin@AC.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] What Can I say????
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This sounds way too much like a "Bunny" I know. The world, as we know it,
has truly changed...
Bill KU4QB TRA#07455 L2

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 15626 invoked from network); 10 Nov 2001 04:22:03 -0000
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 10 Nov 2001 04:22:03 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 17660 invoked by uid 50005); 10 Nov 2001 04:21:57 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4168. . Clean. Processed in 0.502688 secs); 10 Nov 2001 04:21:57 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 10 Nov 2001 04:21:56 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA21627; Fri, 9 Nov 2001 20:20:18 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 130783 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 10 Nov 2001 04:18:53          +0000
Received: from iridium.carolina.net ([208.170.147.165]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA21606 for <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Fri,          9 Nov 2001 20:18:53 -0800
Received: from ac.net (ip159-as5300-1-7lakes-nc.carolina.net [206.100.51.159])          by iridium.carolina.net (Vircom SMTPRS 1.0.201) with ESMTP id          <B0004382889@iridium.carolina.net> for <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Fri, 9          Nov 2001 23:31:08 -0500
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en]C-CCK-MCD EBM-Compaq  (Win95; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <C0F7BF4DCEC1D2479A01031347184DCD02FE7A@nt2000s2.dgmicro.com>            <3BECA0D9.E6A94E41@ac.net>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3BECA908.40D10194@ac.net>
Date:         Fri, 9 Nov 2001 23:11:52 -0500
Reply-To: "Bill Shamblin" <wshamblin@AC.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Bill Shamblin" <wshamblin@AC.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] What Can I say????Addendum
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Nonspecific warnings of terrorist attacks: "There may be an attack this week"
(Well, Duhh!)
The media desperately encouraging the terrorists to try Smallpox, next.
The justice Dept. announcing that attorney client privilege is no longer
valid.
American troops deployed on American soil (airports).
Total panic over a half-assed attack which has affected less than two dozen
people (anthrax).
World wide recession resulting from the destruction of a few buildings. (Yes,
it was an atrocity, but nowhere near the scale of, say, the Holocaust )
And now this?
I gotta tell ya, folks. The terrorists have won!
They were looking for blind, stupid panic and they have found it.
Bill (I can't possibly be the only sane person in this world can I?) Shamblin

Bill Shamblin wrote:

> This sounds way too much like a "Bunny" I know. The world, as we know it,
> has truly changed...
> Bill KU4QB TRA#07455 L2

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 7848 invoked from network); 10 Nov 2001 05:18:38 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 10 Nov 2001 05:18:38 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 16611 invoked by uid 50005); 10 Nov 2001 05:18:33 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4168. . Clean. Processed in 0.129519 secs); 10 Nov 2001 05:18:33 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 10 Nov 2001 05:18:33 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA21960; Fri, 9 Nov 2001 21:16:20 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 130840 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 10 Nov 2001 05:14:57          +0000
Received: from smtp002pub.verizon.net (smtp002pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.181])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA21937 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 9 Nov 2001 21:14:56 -0800
Received: from [63.24.225.54] (1Cust241.tnt2.rancho-cucamonga.ca.da.uu.net          [63.15.225.241]) by smtp002pub.verizon.net  with ESMTP for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; id fAA5ENh13544 Fri, 9 Nov 2001 23:14:24 -0600          (CST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: GTE/01rocket@mail.gte.net
References: <Pine.LNX.4.10.10111091817020.20639-100000@itc.uci.edu>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <a05100302b81267e8055d@[63.24.225.54]>
Date:         Fri, 9 Nov 2001 21:14:26 -0800
Reply-To: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] What Can I say????
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <Pine.LNX.4.10.10111091817020.20639-100000@itc.uci.edu>

>Truly bizarre - I expect to see Mr. Kelly tomorrow and I will ask him
>about his position, since it seems to be both contradictory and ill
>informed. anfo? What is he thinking?


I am more concerned with what is readable, since "authorities" would
look at that.  He has no self-control.

Jerry


>-Dave Mc
>
>On Fri, 9 Nov 2001 john.w.lyngdal@EXGATE.TEK.COM wrote:
>
>>  Here's the section regarding motor/propellants in the currently posted TRA
>>  EX rules:
>>
>>  ""Motors" and "rocket motors" shall refer only to composite solid and
>>  nitrous oxide solid fuel motors (I.E. hybrid motors). Black powder based
>>  motors shall not be included as composites, regardless of binder and/or
>>  formulation modifications.""
>>
>>  Now here's the latest from Bruce...
>>
>>
>>  > -----Original Message-----
>>  > From: BRUCE KELLY [mailto:71161.2351@compuserve.com]
>>  > Sent: Friday, November 09, 2001 3:13 PM
>>  > To: Blind.Copy.Receiver@compuserve.com
>>  > Subject: One more thing
>>  >
>>  >
>>  > To all Prefects
>>  >
>>  > 8 November 2001
>>  >
>>  >
>>  > I almost forgot one thing.
>>  >
>>  > Yesterday afternoon I got a call from an ATF field agent in Michigan. He
>>  > called to ask me about a member who just bought a 100-pound bag of
>>  ammonium
>>  > nitrate. He said, "This fellow claims to be a member of your
>>  > organization..."
>>  >
>>  > Wooah! Excuse me, but when did WE (TRA) approve the use of anfo-motors?
>>  >
>>  > Anyway, he wanted to check out our member's claim of TRA membership. I was
>>  > happy to report the member was in good standing (so far). Then he asked me
>>  > questions about the hobby. It was at this point I explained to him that we
>>  > use APCP and do not allow anfo-motors at our certified/insured launches.
>>  > But I also explained that our member could use those on his own. The field
>>  > agent understood, and he seemed pleased and relieved that he was using the
>>  > motors for rockets and nothing else.
>>  >
>>  > Here are a couple of points to remember:
>>  >
>>  > 1. If you buy a 100-pound bag of ammonium nitrate, you are going to be
>>  > checked out - and you should be. If you are not, it means that security is
>>  > worse than I thought.
>>  >
>>  > 2. If you use anfo motors, you can say anything you would like. BUT, do
>>  not
>>  > represent anfo activity as Tripoli activity. It is not even a part of our
>>  > EX program. It could be in the future, but it is not now. No one has made
>  > a
>  > > formal presentation to the BOD for our consideration.
>  > >
>  > > B Kelly
>  > >
>  >


--
Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
Opinion, the whole thing.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 10202 invoked from network); 10 Nov 2001 05:19:42 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 10 Nov 2001 05:19:42 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 30958 invoked by uid 50005); 10 Nov 2001 05:19:36 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4168. . Clean. Processed in 0.195398 secs); 10 Nov 2001 05:19:36 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 10 Nov 2001 05:19:36 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA21980; Fri, 9 Nov 2001 21:17:51 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 130847 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 10 Nov 2001 05:16:30          +0000
Received: from smtp009pub.verizon.net ([206.46.170.188]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA21949 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri,          9 Nov 2001 21:15:37 -0800
Received: from [63.24.225.54] (1Cust241.tnt2.rancho-cucamonga.ca.da.uu.net          [63.15.225.241]) by smtp009pub.verizon.net  with ESMTP for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; id fAA5FFk09563 Fri, 9 Nov 2001 23:15:16 -0600          (CST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: GTE/01rocket@mail.gte.net
References: <00bc01c16995$dd126b60$61391442@billbull>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <a05100303b81268511dec@[63.24.225.54]>
Date:         Fri, 9 Nov 2001 21:15:08 -0800
Reply-To: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] What Can I say????
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <00bc01c16995$dd126b60$61391442@billbull>

>>From the quote below may I assume that it is Mr. Kelly's position
>(and that of TRA as well) that if I go down to the local
> Feed-and-Seed tomorrow and buy a 100 pound sack of 33% ammonium
>nitrate fertilizer to use on my tomatoes and corn I should be
>investigated by the ATF for my subversive activities? We literally
>buy the stuff by the ton here. It is, after all, primarily used as
>an agricultural fertilizer!


Yes.


>Bill
>**********
>From: BRUCE KELLY
>[<mailto:71161.2351@compuserve.com>mailto:71161.2351@compuserve.com]
>>  > Sent: Friday, November 09, 2001 3:13 PM
>>  > To:
>><mailto:Blind.Copy.Receiver@compuserve.com>Blind.Copy.Receiver@compuserve.com
>>  > Subject: One more thing
>(Deleted Section)
>  > > 1. If you buy a 100-pound bag of ammonium nitrate, you are going to be
>>  > checked out - and you should be. If you are not, it means that security is
>  > > worse than I thought
>(Deleted Section)
>  > > B Kelly


--
Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
Opinion, the whole thing.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 19318 invoked from network); 10 Nov 2001 06:28:35 -0000
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 10 Nov 2001 06:28:35 -0000
Received: (qmail 2589 invoked by uid 50005); 10 Nov 2001 06:28:29 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4168. . Clean. Processed in 0.140852 secs); 10 Nov 2001 06:28:29 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 10 Nov 2001 06:28:29 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA22306; Fri, 9 Nov 2001 22:26:53 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 130892 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 10 Nov 2001 06:25:27          +0000
Received: from albqpop1.albq.uswest.net (albqpop1.albq.uswest.net          [207.108.240.1]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id WAA22290          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 9 Nov 2001 22:25:25 -0800
Received: (qmail 14020 invoked by alias); 10 Nov 2001 06:24:54 -0000
Delivered-To: fixup-AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU@fixme
Received: (qmail 13897 invoked by uid 0); 10 Nov 2001 06:24:48 -0000
Received: from cc898542-a.prdise1.nm.home.com (HELO cc898542a) (65.7.151.152)          by albqpop1.albq.uswest.net with SMTP; 10 Nov 2001 06:24:48 -0000
References:  <5832AFF5FC75D411844300508BC216B70302ABCD@us-bv-m07.bv.tek.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <005901c169b0$5f3bce00$0100a8c0@cc898542a>
Date:         Fri, 9 Nov 2001 23:24:36 -0700
Reply-To: "Paxton" <darkspunge@USWEST.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Paxton" <darkspunge@USWEST.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] What Can I say????
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

I think everybody on this list who is a TRA member should write to the TRA
administration inclusing Bruce about the issue, and anybody else who would
feel so inclined. As far as I know ANCP motors are fired and probably damn
near all EX launches because they are so popular, especially among beginners
due to John Wickmans nice info set. John lyngdal is a pretty respected guy
in my opinion so I would not take this as a BS post.

Pax

PS-I hope John Wickman personally goes and stuffs bruce into a 1 foot square
box and ships him off to alaska or something. That is, unless this is some
sort of misunderstanding.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 115 invoked from network); 10 Nov 2001 11:26:45 -0000
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 10 Nov 2001 11:26:45 -0000
Received: (qmail 8577 invoked by uid 50005); 10 Nov 2001 11:26:40 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4168. . Clean. Processed in 0.25487 secs); 10 Nov 2001 11:26:40 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 10 Nov 2001 11:26:39 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id DAA23030; Sat, 10 Nov 2001 03:24:40 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 130952 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 10 Nov 2001 11:23:14          +0000
Received: from fep3-orange.clear.net.nz (fep3-orange.clear.net.nz          [203.97.32.3]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id DAA23015          for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Sat, 10 Nov 2001 03:23:13 -0800
Received: from mkbs (203-167-160-224.dialup.clear.net.nz [203.167.160.224]) by          fep3-orange.clear.net.nz (1.5/1.8) with SMTP id AAA25261; Sun, 11 Nov          2001 00:23:09 +1300 (NZDT)
References: <5.1.0.14.2.20011024142533.02bc3440@mail.tns.net>            <3.0.6.32.20011108212313.008045e0@pop.alphalink.com.au>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/mixed;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0DC7_01C56B69.576E6D40"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <017101c169da$4b717bc0$0700a8c0@mkbs>
Date:         Sun, 11 Nov 2001 00:00:31 +1300
Reply-To: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Organization: Applied Technology
Subject:      Re: [AR] apogee detecter
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0DC7_01C56B69.576E6D40
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

> hi just wondering if you still have your gif picture of the circuit
> of the apogee detector that you sent to the list.?
> if you do could you send it to me please


This is the circuit of the experimental detector that I tried using 2 x
UGN3503
I have only used it "on the bench" so it may suffer in practice.
This cct is NOT temperature compensated.
The UGN 3503 is generally cheaper and more available than the KMZ51 but
that's no great help if it doesn't work :-) !

The two detectors are mounted physically 180 degrees reversed so that one's
output decreases and the other increases as a magnetic field of given sense
is applied. Using 2 detectors allows "differential action" which is highly
desirable due to the much smaller output swing of the Hall Cell compared to
the KMZ51 bridge.

LM358 opamp has a second section which can be used as desired. As shown the
output swings from ground to high as the unit is inverted. Driving a
transistor may be needed depending on what the desired load is.

Pot P1 is used to adjust the voltage of the opamp's inverting input to "just
below" the non-inverting input when the magnetic field is applied such that
IC2 is producing its most positive output. If that doesn't make sense just
twiddle the pot with the unit aligned each way up and watch the output flip,
then turn it over. Adjustment point becomes obvious pretty quickly.
Whether this is a suitable substitute in practice for KMZ51 based circuits
is yet to be seen.

Supply voltage from 4.5 to 6 volts.
2 x Lithium coin cells (3V each) or one of the tiny "remote control" 6v
batteries would do.

If you are interested in playing with this basic design contact me offlist .


regards


                                    Russell McMahon






------=_NextPart_000_0DC7_01C56B69.576E6D40
Content-Type: image/gif;
	name="apogee2.gif"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
Content-Disposition: attachment;
	filename="apogee2.gif"
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------=_NextPart_000_0DC7_01C56B69.576E6D40--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 1749 invoked from network); 10 Nov 2001 13:27:41 -0000
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 10 Nov 2001 13:27:41 -0000
Received: (qmail 7869 invoked by uid 50005); 10 Nov 2001 13:27:36 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4168. . Clean. Processed in 0.219321 secs); 10 Nov 2001 13:27:36 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 10 Nov 2001 13:27:35 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id FAA23459; Sat, 10 Nov 2001 05:25:11 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 130971 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 10 Nov 2001 13:23:46          +0000
Received: from cablecom.laribay.net (cablecom.laribay.net [66.20.57.4]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id FAA23439 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 10 Nov 2001 05:23:45 -0800
Received: from billbull (dial071.laribay.net [66.20.57.71]) by          cablecom.laribay.net (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id HAA15836; Sat, 10 Nov          2001 07:08:18 -0600 (CST) (envelope-from bpbullock@laribay.net)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <001201c169ea$fba5dee0$47391442@billbull>
Date:         Sat, 10 Nov 2001 07:24:09 -0600
Reply-To: "Bill Bullock" <bpbullock@LARIBAY.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Bill Bullock" <bpbullock@LARIBAY.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] What Can I say????
Comments: cc: Bruce Kelly <71161.2351@compuserve.com>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

    I thought long and hard before posting this, so please bear with me
here. I have a definition I often quote: " Ignorance is a simple lack of
knowledge; Stupidity is being Ignorant and proud of it!" I sincere;y assume
that Mr. Kelly is simply ignorant of a few facts, which is really no
disgrace for anyone and can be remedied.
    I have another dictum I go by: "If you do now want your motors to
experience catastrophic failures lean how to make them blow up and don't do
that anymore!" I guess this works pretty well because I have not had an
unintentional catastrophic failure since late-1978. I do not count the one I
blew up in Oklahoma City in early-December of 1987 because I did that one to
demonstrate how hard it is to make one of mine fail.
    Therefore I would submit the following:
1)    "anfo" or "AN/FO is a misnomer for an ammonium nitrate detonation
material. The proper language with which to denote this phenomenon is
"sensitization" of a solid-phase oxidizer. (Search under "sensitized
ammonium nitrate" and see for yourself.)
2)    "Fuel Oil" includes a wide range of substances ranging from Diesel (#2
Fuel Oil) through Bunker-C (#6 Fuel Oil). The ranking of these materials is
based upon the "C-count" which is simply the number of carbon atoms in each
molecule. "Bunker-C" has over 35-36 C-count and vulcanized rubber is
C-infinity due to the molecular linking of the vulcanizing process.The
higher the C-count the less desirable the material for oxidizer
sensitization...
3)    Actually sensitizing an oxidizer is much better done with certain
chemicals which are not even remotely considered as fuel oils as was amply
demonstrated by Mr. McVey et. al. in OKC as shown by the official FBI
report. I.e: they used sensitizers other than just Diesel Fuel in their
bomb.
4)     The addition of these alternate substances renders the solid-phase
oxidizers physically undesirable as a solid-fueled rocket propellant.
Asphalt/C-6/Rubber make pretty good rocket fuels but they will not
appreciably sensitize the oxidizer. Therefore ammonium nitrate is just as
safe, and probably more so, than other presently used solid phase oxidizers.
This fact has been repeatedly and admirably demonstrated by Mr. John Wicknam
and his organization's members' research and actual demonstrations.
    I would sincerely hope that Mr. Kelly will aquaint himself with the true
readily-available facts before demonizing a whole segment of the
amateur/experimental rocketry movement based solely upon their choice to use
a particular oxidizer in their work. I would also hope that he will realize
that in the end we will all be lumped together and have to fight together
for our rights and the continuation of our sport.
    Respectfully,
Bill Bullock
PS: I will get down off my soap-box now.....

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 12778 invoked from network); 10 Nov 2001 17:45:16 -0000
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 10 Nov 2001 17:45:16 -0000
Received: (qmail 16334 invoked by uid 50005); 10 Nov 2001 17:45:10 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4168. . Clean. Processed in 0.11866 secs); 10 Nov 2001 17:45:10 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 10 Nov 2001 17:45:10 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA24073; Sat, 10 Nov 2001 09:32:09 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 131006 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 10 Nov 2001 17:30:47          +0000
Received: from mailhost0.trib.com (mailhost0.trib.com [63.229.150.3]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA24044 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Sat, 10 Nov 2001 09:30:10 -0800
Received: from mail.trib.com (mail.trib.com [12.10.158.17]) by          mailhost0.trib.com (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id fAAHU9C77589 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Sat, 10 Nov 2001 10:30:09 -0700 (MST)          (envelope-from jwckman@space-rockets.com)
Received: from [63.229.150.83] (HELO hppav) by mail.trib.com (CommuniGate Pro          SMTP 3.4.6) with SMTP id 57185610 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 10          Nov 2001 10:30:08 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
Importance: Normal
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <NKEHJAOOKBPGIKOOPDEFMEDICDAA.jwckman@space-rockets.com>
Date:         Sat, 10 Nov 2001 10:29:06 -0700
Reply-To: "John Wickman" <jwckman@SPACE-ROCKETS.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Wickman" <jwckman@SPACE-ROCKETS.COM>
Subject:      [AR] AN-FO Motors?
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

To all my fellow rocketeers,

The following was sent today by me to B. Kelly.  It speaks for itself.

John Wickman

---------------------------------------

Bruce,

This was posted on Arocket and I was shocked by your comments to the ATF
agent.   After advertising in your magazine for almost 6 years, I cannot
understand how you could refer to AN COMPOSITE motors as AN/FO motors.   You
must also know that AN composite motors have flown many times at TRA
sanctioned experimental launches in your presence and with your full
knowledge.   Nobody makes AN/FO motors.   However, a great many people make
AN COMPOSITE motors.

At least, you didn't urge the ATF to arrest an innocent amateur rocketeer.

Please cancel all of CP Technologies advertisements in High Power Rocketry
magazine.  Today, we will be dropping our link to TRA from our web site.
We had provided that link as a courtesy based on Bruce Lee's request.  I do
not think your organization is now worth that courtesy.

John Wickman
CP Technologies

From: BRUCE KELLY [mailto:71161.2351@compuserve.com]
> Sent: Friday, November 09, 2001 3:13 PM
> To: Blind.Copy.Receiver@compuserve.com
> Subject: One more thing
>
>
> To all Prefects
>
> 8 November 2001
>
>
> I almost forgot one thing.
>
> Yesterday afternoon I got a call from an ATF field agent in Michigan. He
> called to ask me about a member who just bought a 100-pound bag of
ammonium
> nitrate. He said, "This fellow claims to be a member of your
> organization..."
>
> Wooah! Excuse me, but when did WE (TRA) approve the use of anfo-motors?
>
> Anyway, he wanted to check out our member's claim of TRA membership. I was
> happy to report the member was in good standing (so far). Then he asked me
> questions about the hobby. It was at this point I explained to him that we
> use APCP and do not allow anfo-motors at our certified/insured launches.
> But I also explained that our member could use those on his own. The field
> agent understood, and he seemed pleased and relieved that he was using the
> motors for rockets and nothing else.
>
> Here are a couple of points to remember:
>
> 1. If you buy a 100-pound bag of ammonium nitrate, you are going to be
> checked out - and you should be. If you are not, it means that security is
> worse than I thought.
>
> 2. If you use anfo motors, you can say anything you would like. BUT, do
not
> represent anfo activity as Tripoli activity. It is not even a part of our
> EX program. It could be in the future, but it is not now. No one has made
a
> formal presentation to the BOD for our consideration.
>
> B Kelly

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 13353 invoked from network); 10 Nov 2001 17:45:30 -0000
Received: from smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.105]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 10 Nov 2001 17:45:30 -0000
Received: (qmail 29736 invoked by uid 50005); 10 Nov 2001 17:45:24 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpy with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4168. . Clean. Processed in 0.184802 secs); 10 Nov 2001 17:45:24 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 10 Nov 2001 17:45:24 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA24054; Sat, 10 Nov 2001 09:30:27 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 130999 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 10 Nov 2001 17:29:01          +0000
Received: from odyssey.rlpotter.com (IDENT:root@[204.131.176.254]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA24025 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Sat, 10 Nov 2001 09:29:01 -0800
Received: from Jane (jane.rlpotter.com [204.131.176.34]) by          odyssey.rlpotter.com (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id JAA18010 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Sat, 10 Nov 2001 09:50:53 -0700
References:  <20011106001915.3678.qmail@web10506.mail.yahoo.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <006101c16a0d$d02836a0$22b083cc@rlpotter.com>
Date:         Sat, 10 Nov 2001 10:33:29 -0700
Reply-To: "Ryan" <ryan@RLPOTTER.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Ryan" <ryan@RLPOTTER.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Flanged Steel Pipes
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Justin,
I am making a 6" hybrid right now, and had to make the flanged pipe.  It was
a pain, but, looks like it worked out well.  We're going to hydro test it
next week.  But, couldn't find anywhere that would supply exactly what we
needed (for a reasonable price, anyways).
here's a pic:
http://mach-sr1.org/gallery/construction/combustion_chamber/13-Flanged_Chamb
er.JPG

ryan


----- Original Message -----
From: "Justin Pucci" <drrockit5150@YAHOO.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Monday, November 05, 2001 5:19 PM
Subject: [AR] Flanged Steel Pipes


> Hey guys,
>
> I was wondering if you would know where I could get
> ahold of some steel pipe with flanges on the ends for
> use in a hybrid test engine?  Probably 3-4" OD with
> flanges that bolt on...  Thanks for the help!
>
> -->Justin Pucci
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Find a job, post your resume.
> http://careers.yahoo.com

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 19668 invoked from network); 10 Nov 2001 18:21:48 -0000
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 10 Nov 2001 18:21:48 -0000
Received: (qmail 7621 invoked by uid 50005); 10 Nov 2001 18:21:43 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4168. . Clean. Processed in 0.321801 secs); 10 Nov 2001 18:21:43 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 10 Nov 2001 18:21:42 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA24261; Sat, 10 Nov 2001 10:19:43 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 131033 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 10 Nov 2001 18:18:14          +0000
Received: from cablecom.laribay.net (cablecom.laribay.net [66.20.57.4]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA24246 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 10 Nov 2001 10:18:13 -0800
Received: from billbull (dial075.laribay.net [66.20.57.75]) by          cablecom.laribay.net (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id MAA18038 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 10 Nov 2001 12:02:42 -0600 (CST)          (envelope-from bpbullock@laribay.net)
References:  <NKEHJAOOKBPGIKOOPDEFMEDICDAA.jwckman@space-rockets.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0DCA_01C56B69.5777E320"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <00a901c16a14$1c240f60$47391442@billbull>
Date:         Sat, 10 Nov 2001 12:18:31 -0600
Reply-To: "Bill Bullock" <bpbullock@LARIBAY.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Bill Bullock" <bpbullock@LARIBAY.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] AN-FO Motors?
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0DCA_01C56B69.5777E320
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Mr. John:  (That is an address of a sign of deep respect down here.)
    Well done! Now I have something over and above your work to respect =
you for.
Bill

----- Original Message -----=20
  From: John Wickman=20
  To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU=20
  Sent: Saturday, November 10, 2001 11:29 AM
  Subject: [AR] AN-FO Motors?


  To all my fellow rocketeers,

  The following was sent today by me to B. Kelly.  It speaks for itself.

  John Wickman

  ---------------------------------------

  Bruce,

  This was posted on Arocket and I was shocked by your comments to the =
ATF
  agent.   After advertising in your magazine for almost 6 years, I =
cannot
  understand how you could refer to AN COMPOSITE motors as AN/FO motors. =
  You
  must also know that AN composite motors have flown many times at TRA
  sanctioned experimental launches in your presence and with your full
  knowledge.   Nobody makes AN/FO motors.   However, a great many people =
make
  AN COMPOSITE motors.

  At least, you didn't urge the ATF to arrest an innocent amateur =
rocketeer.

  Please cancel all of CP Technologies advertisements in High Power =
Rocketry
  magazine.  Today, we will be dropping our link to TRA from our web =
site.
  We had provided that link as a courtesy based on Bruce Lee's request.  =
I do
  not think your organization is now worth that courtesy.

  John Wickman
  CP Technologies


------=_NextPart_000_0DCA_01C56B69.5777E320
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META content=3D"text/html; charset=3Diso-8859-1" =
http-equiv=3DContent-Type>
<META content=3D"MSHTML 5.00.2614.3500" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV>Mr. John:&nbsp; (That is an address of a sign of deep respect down=20
here.)</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Well done! Now I have something over and above =
your work=20
to respect you for.</DIV>
<DIV>Bill</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>----- Original Message ----- </DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE=20
style=3D"BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: =
0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; PADDING-RIGHT: 0px">
  <DIV=20
  style=3D"BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; FONT: 10pt arial; font-color: =
black"><B>From:</B>=20
  <A href=3D"mailto:jwckman@SPACE-ROCKETS.COM"=20
  title=3Djwckman@SPACE-ROCKETS.COM>John Wickman</A> </DIV>
  <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A =
href=3D"mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU"=20
  title=3DAROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU</A> </DIV>
  <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> Saturday, November 10, =
2001 11:29=20
  AM</DIV>
  <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> [AR] AN-FO =
Motors?</DIV>
  <DIV><BR></DIV>To all my fellow rocketeers,<BR><BR>The following was =
sent=20
  today by me to B. Kelly.&nbsp; It speaks for itself.<BR><BR>John=20
  =
Wickman<BR><BR>---------------------------------------<BR><BR>Bruce,<BR><=
BR>This=20
  was posted on Arocket and I was shocked by your comments to the=20
  ATF<BR>agent.&nbsp;&nbsp; After advertising in your magazine for =
almost 6=20
  years, I cannot<BR>understand how you could refer to AN COMPOSITE =
motors as=20
  AN/FO motors.&nbsp;&nbsp; You<BR>must also know that AN composite =
motors have=20
  flown many times at TRA<BR>sanctioned experimental launches in your =
presence=20
  and with your full<BR>knowledge.&nbsp;&nbsp; Nobody makes AN/FO=20
  motors.&nbsp;&nbsp; However, a great many people make<BR>AN COMPOSITE=20
  motors.<BR><BR>At least, you didn't urge the ATF to arrest an innocent =
amateur=20
  rocketeer.<BR><BR>Please cancel all of CP Technologies advertisements =
in High=20
  Power Rocketry<BR>magazine.&nbsp; Today, we will be dropping our link =
to TRA=20
  from our web site.<BR>We had provided that link as a courtesy based on =
Bruce=20
  Lee's request.&nbsp; I do<BR>not think your organization is now worth =
that=20
  courtesy.<BR><BR>John Wickman<BR>CP =
Technologies<BR></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0DCA_01C56B69.5777E320--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 24074 invoked from network); 10 Nov 2001 19:51:41 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.105]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 10 Nov 2001 19:51:41 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 16149 invoked by uid 50005); 10 Nov 2001 19:51:35 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpy with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4168. . Clean. Processed in 0.184191 secs); 10 Nov 2001 19:51:35 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 10 Nov 2001 19:51:35 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA24584; Sat, 10 Nov 2001 11:49:53 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 131073 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 10 Nov 2001 19:48:28          +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (f179.law9.hotmail.com [64.4.9.179]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA24568 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat,          10 Nov 2001 11:48:28 -0800
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Sat,          10 Nov 2001 11:47:43 -0800
Received: from 4.48.25.222 by lw9fd.law9.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Sat, 10 Nov          2001 19:47:43 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [4.48.25.222]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 10 Nov 2001 19:47:43.0471 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[904037F0:01C16A20]
Message-ID:  <F179u1ZuSPom8ZBLzus0000c005@hotmail.com>
Date:         Sat, 10 Nov 2001 13:47:43 -0600
Reply-To: "ben romashko" <pleaselaunchme@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "ben romashko" <pleaselaunchme@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] What Can I say????
Comments: To: bpbullock@LARIBAY.NET
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Half of the fields around here currently have massive piles of it waiting to
be spread and plowed in just sitting there...better investigate them, too


--------------------
Ben Romashko
pleaselaunchme@hotmail.com
AIM- Attican123
--------------------




>
>>From the quote below may I assume that it is Mr. Kelly's position (and that
>of TRA as well) that if I go down to the local  Feed-and-Seed tomorrow and
>buy a 100 pound sack of 33% ammonium nitrate fertilizer to use on my
>tomatoes and corn I should be investigated by the ATF for my subversive
>activities? We literally buy the stuff by the ton here. It is, after all,
>primarily used as an agricultural fertilizer!
>Bill
>**********
>From: BRUCE KELLY [mailto:71161.2351@compuserve.com]
> > > Sent: Friday, November 09, 2001 3:13 PM
> > > To: Blind.Copy.Receiver@compuserve.com
> > > Subject: One more thing
>(Deleted Section)
> > > 1. If you buy a 100-pound bag of ammonium nitrate, you are going to be
> > > checked out - and you should be. If you are not, it means that
>security is
> > > worse than I thought
>(Deleted Section)
> > > B Kelly
>


_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 5930 invoked from network); 10 Nov 2001 19:56:29 -0000
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 10 Nov 2001 19:56:29 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 17751 invoked by uid 50005); 10 Nov 2001 19:56:24 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4168. . Clean. Processed in 0.409525 secs); 10 Nov 2001 19:56:24 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 10 Nov 2001 19:56:23 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA24645; Sat, 10 Nov 2001 11:55:01 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 131072 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 10 Nov 2001 19:53:39          +0000
Received: from swan.prod.itd.earthlink.net (swan.mail.pas.earthlink.net          [207.217.120.123]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id          LAA24555 for <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Sat, 10 Nov 2001 11:43:39 -0800
Received: from dialup-209.247.138.117.dial1.sanjose1.level3.net          ([209.247.138.117] helo=earthlink.net ident=dave) by          swan.prod.itd.earthlink.net with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id          162e2U-0006Dz-00; Sat, 10 Nov 2001 11:43:38 -0800
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.75 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.16-22 i686)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <NKEHJAOOKBPGIKOOPDEFMEDICDAA.jwckman@space-rockets.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3BED8455.9F3DF7EC@earthlink.net>
Date:         Sat, 10 Nov 2001 11:47:33 -0800
Reply-To: "David Weinshenker" <daze39@EARTHLINK.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "David Weinshenker" <daze39@EARTHLINK.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] AN-FO Motors?
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

John Wickman wrote:
[to Bruce Kelly:]
> Today, we will be dropping our link to TRA from our web site.

Hmmm... as an ironic note, that exact link (IIRC) was how
I first found the TRA website, and thereby, found out about
modern sport rocketry. (I was one of those folks who had
flown small BP motors years ago, but this was the first
time I'd seen the "rocket alphabet" extended past "F"...)

-dave w

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 6053 invoked from network); 10 Nov 2001 20:08:01 -0000
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 10 Nov 2001 20:08:01 -0000
Received: (qmail 8272 invoked by uid 50005); 10 Nov 2001 20:07:56 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4168. . Clean. Processed in 0.156272 secs); 10 Nov 2001 20:07:56 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 10 Nov 2001 20:07:56 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA24700; Sat, 10 Nov 2001 12:06:29 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 131096 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 10 Nov 2001 20:05:07          +0000
Received: from angel.comcen.com.au (angel.comcen.com.au [203.23.236.69]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA24680 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Sat, 10 Nov 2001 12:05:06 -0800
Received: from win2pk2 (dialup02.morpheus.dragon.net.au [203.56.245.2]) by          angel.comcen.com.au (8.11.4/8.10.1) with SMTP id fAAK53k96640 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Sun, 11 Nov 2001 07:05:04 +1100 (EST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: <JJEFLLHFFAHHMBBIHFAEMECOCIAA.pkelly@comcen.com.au>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <JJEFLLHFFAHHMBBIHFAEMECOCIAA.pkelly@comcen.com.au>
Date:         Sun, 11 Nov 2001 07:06:21 +1100
Reply-To: "Paul Kelly" <pkelly@COMCEN.COM.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Paul Kelly" <pkelly@COMCEN.COM.AU>
Subject:      [AR] New altimeter code, drawings an fairwell
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

For those that have constructed altimeters based on the design on my site,
there's a new version of the firmware available for download. It's worth
having too.
Additionally, (for those not on SUGPRO) there are some drawings of the 80mm
candy cases we've been making.

and finally, I've asked to be unsubscribed from Arocket. Lists change their
focus over time, nothing wrong with that.. Those who've been here for a
while will understand.

As always I remain happy to correspond and assist in any serious rocketry
project.



Cheers


PK

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 24669 invoked from network); 10 Nov 2001 20:26:30 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 10 Nov 2001 20:26:30 -0000
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 18798 invoked by uid 50005); 10 Nov 2001 20:26:25 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4168. . Clean. Processed in 0.179297 secs); 10 Nov 2001 20:26:25 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 10 Nov 2001 20:26:24 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA24829; Sat, 10 Nov 2001 12:24:38 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 131123 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 10 Nov 2001 20:23:16          +0000
Received: from web10506.mail.yahoo.com (web10506.mail.yahoo.com          [216.136.130.156]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id MAA24814          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 10 Nov 2001 12:23:16 -0800
Received: from [129.219.185.153] by web10506.mail.yahoo.com via HTTP; Sat, 10          Nov 2001 12:23:15 PST
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <20011110202315.58832.qmail@web10506.mail.yahoo.com>
Date:         Sat, 10 Nov 2001 12:23:15 -0800
Reply-To: "Justin Pucci" <drrockit5150@YAHOO.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Justin Pucci" <drrockit5150@YAHOO.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Flanged Steel Pipes
Comments: To: Ryan <ryan@RLPOTTER.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <006101c16a0d$d02836a0$22b083cc@rlpotter.com>

Ryan,

Very impressive C.C.! So you made that from scratch?
Nice.  Is that just plain old carbon steel?  I have
found a company that will sell me the flanges and
blind flanges, plus the seamless SCH80 pipe for about
$250.  This will make a 4" engine about 30" long.  How
much did you pay for all of that, if you don't mind me
asking?  Thanks!

-->Justin

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Find a job, post your resume.
http://careers.yahoo.com

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 27479 invoked from network); 10 Nov 2001 21:13:22 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 10 Nov 2001 21:13:22 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: (qmail 21085 invoked by uid 50005); 10 Nov 2001 21:13:16 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4168. . Clean. Processed in 0.148985 secs); 10 Nov 2001 21:13:16 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 10 Nov 2001 21:13:16 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA25002; Sat, 10 Nov 2001 13:11:37 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 131140 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 10 Nov 2001 21:10:12          +0000
Received: from wrench.toolcity.net (root@wrench.toolcity.net [208.0.188.2]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA24987 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 10 Nov 2001 13:10:12 -0800
Received: from [208.22.189.234]          (dap-208-22-189-234.meadville-tnt-0.pa.toolcity.net [208.22.189.234])          by wrench.toolcity.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id QAA08583 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 10 Nov 2001 16:10:07 -0500 (EST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <v01510100b81353af6575@[63.169.101.225]>
Date:         Sat, 10 Nov 2001 16:12:41 -0600
Reply-To: "al bradley" <abradley@TOOLCITY.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "al bradley" <abradley@TOOLCITY.NET>
Subject:      [AR] AN controversy -- was -- Re: [AR] What Can I say????
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

>>>From the quote below may I assume that it is Mr. Kelly's position (and that
>>of TRA as well) that if I go down to the local  Feed-and-Seed tomorrow and
>>buy a 100 pound sack of 33% ammonium nitrate fertilizer to use on my
>>tomatoes and corn I should be investigated by the ATF for my subversive
>>activities? We literally buy the stuff by the ton here. It is, after all,
>>primarily used as an agricultural fertilizer!
>>Bill

Way back -- when I used to do a bit of licensed explosives work in this
state I occasionally used a bit of AN with fuel oil around the dynamite. As
did the strip mines and quarry's who used a lot of ANfo and very little
dynamite for their work.

We all used AN close to *100%* this way. I don't think 33% would have
worked, and I find myself wondering, with AN as a fertilizer what the
remaining 67% would have been composed of? Growing things usually need
potassium, nitrogen and phosphorus. And some trace minerals.

puzzled,
al bradley

------------------------------------------------------------------
Can you live Life with this?: "Unless there is a law, an agreement, or a
long-standing custom, No one `Deserves' Anything -- Either Good or Bad!"

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 17489 invoked from network); 10 Nov 2001 23:20:05 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 10 Nov 2001 23:20:05 -0000
Received: (qmail 11762 invoked by uid 50005); 10 Nov 2001 23:19:59 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4168. . Clean. Processed in 0.263452 secs); 10 Nov 2001 23:19:59 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 10 Nov 2001 23:19:59 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA25407; Sat, 10 Nov 2001 15:15:21 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 131182 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 10 Nov 2001 23:14:53          +0000
Received: from spsystems.net (spsystems.net [209.47.149.227]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA25389 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Sat,          10 Nov 2001 15:14:53 -0800
Received: (from henry@localhost) by spsystems.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id SAA01792;          Sat, 10 Nov 2001 18:14:11 -0500 (EST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1011110181235.1774A-100000@spsystems.net>
Date:         Sat, 10 Nov 2001 18:14:11 -0500
Reply-To: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Potential KMZ51 bulk purchase
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <00ce01c16972$94786170$641010ac@tardis>

On Sat, 10 Nov 2001, Ashley Roll wrote:
> This effect is substantial. Just gently pushing the sensor with your finger
> causes it to fire - several G's would definitely be a problem.

This sounds like it's responding to being *bent*, rather than to being
accelerated.  That may just mean you need a very solid mount for it.

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 17823 invoked from network); 11 Nov 2001 00:17:41 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 11 Nov 2001 00:17:41 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 14331 invoked by uid 50005); 11 Nov 2001 00:17:36 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4168. . Clean. Processed in 0.183777 secs); 11 Nov 2001 00:17:36 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 11 Nov 2001 00:17:35 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA25630; Sat, 10 Nov 2001 16:14:21 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 131213 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 11 Nov 2001 00:14:12          +0000
Received: from rasmus.uib.no (exim@rasmus.uib.no [129.177.12.30]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA25615 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Sat, 10 Nov 2001 16:14:12 -0800
Received: from tunnel-44-26.vpn.uib.no (emil.rasmus.uib.no) [129.177.44.26] by          rasmus.uib.no for arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU with esmtp (Exim 3.16) id          162iGA-000052-00; Sun, 11 Nov 2001 01:14:03 +0100
X-Sender: st07696@rasmus.uib.no
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
X-Scanner: exiscan *162iGA-000052-00*vJ1SE69WcGo*           http://tjinfo.uib.no/virus.html
Message-ID:  <5.1.0.14.0.20011111005526.00b403c8@lstud.ii.uib.no>
Date:         Sun, 11 Nov 2001 01:07:15 +0100
Reply-To: "Emil Johnsen" <Emil.Johnsen@STUDENT.UIB.NO>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Emil Johnsen" <Emil.Johnsen@STUDENT.UIB.NO>
Subject:      [AR] Swirl cup injector
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Anyone know where I can find information about swirl cup injectors?

It seems to be far easier to make than most other bi-prop injector types,
but information about it is hard to come by. It's not mentioned in SP-8089
or Sutton (6th ed.) Any significant disadvantages to this injector? How is
performance compared to other injector types?


Emil

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 8978 invoked from network); 11 Nov 2001 00:36:05 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 11 Nov 2001 00:36:05 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 26716 invoked by uid 50005); 11 Nov 2001 00:35:59 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4168. . Clean. Processed in 0.295599 secs); 11 Nov 2001 00:35:59 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 11 Nov 2001 00:35:58 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA25724; Sat, 10 Nov 2001 16:33:21 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 131230 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 11 Nov 2001 00:33:12          +0000
Received: from rasmus.uib.no (exim@rasmus.uib.no [129.177.12.30]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA25709 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Sat, 10 Nov 2001 16:33:11 -0800
Received: from tunnel-44-26.vpn.uib.no (emil.rasmus.uib.no) [129.177.44.26] by          rasmus.uib.no for arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU with esmtp (Exim 3.16) id          162iXt-0000fV-00; Sun, 11 Nov 2001 01:32:21 +0100
X-Sender: st07696@rasmus.uib.no
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
X-Scanner: exiscan *162iXt-0000fV-00*Zjx8Wea6nRM*           http://tjinfo.uib.no/virus.html
Message-ID:  <5.1.0.14.0.20011111010720.027708f0@lstud.ii.uib.no>
Date:         Sun, 11 Nov 2001 01:28:25 +0100
Reply-To: "Emil Johnsen" <Emil.Johnsen@STUDENT.UIB.NO>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Emil Johnsen" <Emil.Johnsen@STUDENT.UIB.NO>
Subject:      [AR] Optimal O/F for N2O/Alcohol
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

How is the optimal O/F ratio determined when optimizing for highest
possible Isp? With N2O and 95%Ethanol optimal shifting Isp is (according to
Guipep) archived at 4.8 and optimal frozen Isp at 4.1. And then there is
the issue of the molecular weight of the exhaust products, which becomes
lower when running fuel rich. How are all these factors, and whatever I
have left out, combined to get a reasonable guess for the optimal O/F?

What O/F ratios have been used in N2O/Alcohol motors?


Emil

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 14309 invoked from network); 11 Nov 2001 01:21:50 -0000
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 11 Nov 2001 01:21:50 -0000
Received: (qmail 21790 invoked by uid 50005); 11 Nov 2001 01:21:44 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4168. . Clean. Processed in 1.098467 secs); 11 Nov 2001 01:21:44 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 11 Nov 2001 01:21:41 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA25909; Sat, 10 Nov 2001 17:18:55 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 131258 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 11 Nov 2001 01:18:46          +0000
Received: from odyssey.rlpotter.com (IDENT:root@[204.131.176.254]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA25894 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Sat, 10 Nov 2001 17:18:46 -0800
Received: from Jane (jane.rlpotter.com [204.131.176.34]) by          odyssey.rlpotter.com (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id RAA21524 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Sat, 10 Nov 2001 17:40:40 -0700
References:  <20011110202315.58832.qmail@web10506.mail.yahoo.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <001301c16a4f$6ed99b40$22b083cc@rlpotter.com>
Date:         Sat, 10 Nov 2001 18:23:13 -0700
Reply-To: "Ryan" <ryan@RLPOTTER.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Ryan" <ryan@RLPOTTER.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Flanged Steel Pipes
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Thanks Justin.

Ya, made it from a SCH40 carbon steel seamless pipe with carbon steel
flanges.
Well, we needed enough to make 3 chambers, so we bought an entire pipe (21
feet) for a couple hundred bucks, and bought some plasma-cut plate that we
milled out and made flanges from for cheap.
So, each chamber is about 5 feet long, 6" nom.
I'd recommend going with NSTM standard flange dimensions.  Ours are a little
smaller, and are a little difficult to work with.
With flanges, pipe, and gaskets, each chamber costs just under $100.

make sure that you have the facilities to make flanges, though.  after
milling out the plates and welding them onto the pipe, we had to lathe the
mating surfaces flat because the flanges warped from the welding heat .. and
we even had huge heat sinks attached and did it in steps to minimize
warpage.  The lathe we used was enormous (well, since it's a 6" pipe) and
was a pain to work with.
( http://mach-sr1.org/gallery/construction/tools/01-Big_lathe.JPG )

I guess what I'm trying to say is to make sure that you've thought through
the process completely before you start, or you'll make a lot of headaches
for yourself.


Ryan



Sent: Saturday, November 10, 2001 1:23 PM
Subject: Re: [AR] Flanged Steel Pipes


> Ryan,
>
> Very impressive C.C.! So you made that from scratch?
> Nice.  Is that just plain old carbon steel?  I have
> found a company that will sell me the flanges and
> blind flanges, plus the seamless SCH80 pipe for about
> $250.  This will make a 4" engine about 30" long.  How
> much did you pay for all of that, if you don't mind me
> asking?  Thanks!
>
> -->Justin
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Find a job, post your resume.
> http://careers.yahoo.com

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 6950 invoked from network); 11 Nov 2001 02:04:41 -0000
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 11 Nov 2001 02:04:41 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 15370 invoked by uid 50005); 11 Nov 2001 02:04:35 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4168. . Clean. Processed in 0.312532 secs); 11 Nov 2001 02:04:35 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 11 Nov 2001 02:04:35 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA26070; Sat, 10 Nov 2001 18:01:38 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 131279 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 11 Nov 2001 02:01:29          +0000
Received: from femail43.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail43.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.254.60.37]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA26056          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 10 Nov 2001 18:01:29 -0800
Received: from coastnet.com ([24.77.50.26]) by femail43.sdc1.sfba.home.com          (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20 201-229-121-120-20010223) with ESMTP id          <20011111020122.EPQB21640.femail43.sdc1.sfba.home.com@coastnet.com>          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 10 Nov 2001 18:01:22 -0800
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.61 [en]C-AtHome0407  (Win95; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <v01510100b81353af6575@[63.169.101.225]>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3BEDDBE8.BC40EDD8@coastnet.com>
Date:         Sat, 10 Nov 2001 18:01:12 -0800
Reply-To: "Ross Borden" <rborden@COASTNET.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Ross Borden" <rborden@COASTNET.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] AN controversy -- was -- Re: [AR] What Can I say????
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

al bradley wrote:

> Way back -- when I used to do a bit of licensed explosives work in this
> state I occasionally used a bit of AN with fuel oil around the dynamite. As
> did the strip mines and quarry's who used a lot of ANfo and very little
> dynamite for their work.
>
> We all used AN close to *100%* this way. I don't think 33% would have
> worked, and I find myself wondering, with AN as a fertilizer what the
> remaining 67% would have been composed of? Growing things usually need
> potassium, nitrogen and phosphorus. And some trace minerals.

The 33% would refer to the nitrogen content of the AN.  It's usually
refered to in farming circles as 34-0-0 (the two zeros being phosphorus
and potassium.)

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 9455 invoked from network); 11 Nov 2001 02:28:54 -0000
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 11 Nov 2001 02:28:54 -0000
Received: (qmail 23823 invoked by uid 50005); 11 Nov 2001 02:28:48 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4168. . Clean. Processed in 0.279637 secs); 11 Nov 2001 02:28:48 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 11 Nov 2001 02:28:48 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA26229; Sat, 10 Nov 2001 18:26:21 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 131296 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 11 Nov 2001 02:26:13          +0000
Received: from cablecom.laribay.net (cablecom.laribay.net [66.20.57.4]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA26214 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 10 Nov 2001 18:26:13 -0800
Received: from billbull (dial096.laribay.net [66.20.57.96]) by          cablecom.laribay.net (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id UAA21190 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 10 Nov 2001 20:10:36 -0600 (CST)          (envelope-from bpbullock@laribay.net)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0DCD_01C56B69.578D66F0"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <010b01c16a58$43921d00$47391442@billbull>
Date:         Sat, 10 Nov 2001 20:26:25 -0600
Reply-To: "Bill Bullock" <bpbullock@LARIBAY.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Bill Bullock" <bpbullock@LARIBAY.NET>
Subject:      [AR] AN controversy -- was -- Re: [AR] What Can I say????
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0DCD_01C56B69.578D66F0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

----- Original Message -----=20
From: al bradley=20
To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU=20
Sent: Saturday, November 10, 2001 4:12 PM
Subject: [AR] AN controversy -- was -- Re: [AR] What Can I say????
(A Bunch Snipped Here)
We all used AN close to *100%* this way. I don't think 33% would have
worked, and I find myself wondering, with AN as a fertilizer what the
remaining 67% would have been composed of? Growing things usually need
potassium, nitrogen and phosphorus. And some trace minerals.
puzzled,
al bradley
**********
    There is AN and then there is "AN". Since Farmer Brown is not the =
least bit excited at the prospect of placing his 4020 John Deere tractor =
in Low Earth Orbit he is not concerned with the propellant potentials of =
his fertilizer. What he wants is "available nitrogen".=20
    100% pure Ammonium Nitrate (NH4NO3/33-0-0) has 33% (by weight) =
available nitrogen. There is another fertilizer called Urea/"Carbamide" =
((NH2CONH2/46-0-0) which has 46.0-46.3% available nitrogen, which is way =
too "hot" to use on crops most of the time. It also is a non-combustible =
and non-explosive material. (It is noted as having an "ammonia-like =
odor" in the analytical documents.)
    Urea is blended with a "milder" fertilizer called "ammonium =
nitrate". To differentiate between the two, the pure AN is designated as =
"33% Ammonium Nitrate" and the blend as "34% Ammonium Nitrate". Three =
guesses which you want for an oxidizer. Anyone wanting further proof of =
the difference in oxidizer desirability of the blend can email Mr. Foy =
and discuss the very green lawn he has courtesy of an either inept or =
unscrupulous fertilizer clerk. (That's what Mr. Foy did with the rest of =
the sack.) You might even discuss the problems he had with sample grain =
ignition before he discovered the misrepresentation.
    In light of these facts, it is no wonder that there is an often =
seemingly inexplicable inconsistency in the test results with the use of =
"AN" procured to be used as an oxidizer from the local Feed-and-Seed. =
One needs to know the difference and therafter inspect the bag in order =
to determine that what he is purchasing is, indeed, pure (33%) Ammonium =
Nitrate fertilizer and not the Urea (34%) blend.



------=_NextPart_000_0DCD_01C56B69.578D66F0
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META content=3D"text/html; charset=3Diso-8859-1" =
http-equiv=3DContent-Type>
<META content=3D"MSHTML 5.00.2614.3500" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV>
<DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial">----- Original Message ----- </DIV>
<DIV=20
style=3D"BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; FONT: 10pt arial; font-color: =
black"><B>From:</B> <A=20
href=3D"mailto:abradley@TOOLCITY.NET" title=3Dabradley@TOOLCITY.NET>al =
bradley</A>=20
</DIV>
<DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A =
href=3D"mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU"=20
title=3DAROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU</A> </DIV>
<DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> Saturday, November 10, 2001 =
4:12=20
PM</DIV>
<DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> [AR] AN controversy -- =
was -- Re:=20
[AR] What Can I say????</DIV>
<DIV>(A Bunch Snipped Here)<BR>We all used AN close to *100%* this way. =
I don't=20
think 33% would have<BR>worked, and I find myself wondering, with AN as =
a=20
fertilizer what the<BR>remaining 67% would have been composed of? =
Growing things=20
usually need<BR>potassium, nitrogen and phosphorus. And some trace=20
minerals.<BR>puzzled,<BR>al bradley</DIV>
<DIV>**********</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; There is AN and then there is "AN". Since Farmer =
Brown=20
is not the least bit excited at the prospect of placing his 4020 John =
Deere=20
tractor in Low Earth Orbit he is not concerned with the propellant =
potentials of=20
his fertilizer. What he wants is "available nitrogen". </DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;100% pure Ammonium Nitrate (NH4NO3/33-0-0) =
has 33%=20
(by weight) available nitrogen. There is another fertilizer called=20
Urea/"Carbamide" ((NH2CONH2/46-0-0) which has 46.0-46.3% available =
nitrogen,=20
which is way too "hot" to use on crops most of the time. It also is a=20
non-combustible and non-explosive material. (It is noted as having an=20
"ammonia-like odor" in the analytical documents.)</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Urea is blended with a "milder" fertilizer =
called=20
"ammonium nitrate". To differentiate between the two, the pure AN is =
designated=20
as "33% Ammonium Nitrate" and the blend as "34% Ammonium Nitrate". Three =
guesses=20
which you want for an oxidizer. Anyone wanting further proof of the =
difference=20
in oxidizer desirability of the blend can email Mr. Foy and discuss the =
very=20
green lawn he has courtesy of an either inept or unscrupulous fertilizer =
clerk.=20
(That's what&nbsp;Mr. Foy did with the rest of the sack.) You might even =
discuss=20
the problems he had with sample grain ignition before he discovered the=20
misrepresentation.</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; In light of these facts, it is no wonder that =
there is=20
an often seemingly inexplicable inconsistency in the test =
results&nbsp;with the=20
use of "AN" procured&nbsp;to be used as an oxidizer from the local=20
Feed-and-Seed. One needs to know the difference and therafter inspect =
the bag in=20
order to determine that what he is purchasing is, indeed, pure (33%) =
Ammonium=20
Nitrate fertilizer and not the Urea (34%)=20
blend.<BR><BR></DIV></DIV></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0DCD_01C56B69.578D66F0--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 2516 invoked from network); 11 Nov 2001 03:02:29 -0000
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 11 Nov 2001 03:02:29 -0000
Received: (qmail 3575 invoked by uid 50005); 11 Nov 2001 03:02:23 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4168. . Clean. Processed in 0.284994 secs); 11 Nov 2001 03:02:23 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 11 Nov 2001 03:02:23 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA26346; Sat, 10 Nov 2001 18:58:27 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 131311 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 11 Nov 2001 02:58:16          +0000
Received: from mailin8.bigpond.com (mailin8.bigpond.com [139.134.6.96]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA26332 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Sat, 10 Nov 2001 18:58:15 -0800
Received: from tardis ([144.135.24.81]) by mailin8.bigpond.com (Netscape          Messaging Server 4.15) with SMTP id GMM8JW00.BGT for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Sun, 11 Nov 2001 13:04:44 +1000
Received: from CPE-203-45-128-99.qld.bigpond.net.au ([203.45.128.99]) by          bwmam05.mailsvc.email.bigpond.com(MailRouter V2.9k 8335/4167168); 11          Nov 2001 12:58:09
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook CWS, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <00e201c16a5c$9a8138e0$641010ac@tardis>
Date:         Sun, 11 Nov 2001 12:57:29 +1000
Reply-To: "Ashley Roll" <ash@DIGITALNEMESIS.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Ashley Roll" <ash@DIGITALNEMESIS.COM>
Subject:      [AR] UGN3503 based Magnetic Apogee Detector
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Hi Everyone,

Several people have requested information about the apogee detector I'm
working on.. I've updated and uploaded a PDF of the schematic to my web site
so you can have a look.

http://www.digitalnemesis.com/ash/Projects/MagneticApogeeDetector/

Note that this is still very much a work in progress, I'd be very interested
in your feedback.

This has not be flight tested, and there is at least one known major
problem - the sensor seems to be very sensitive to "bending". I'm trying to
encapsulate the UGN3503 in a solid block of epoxy to see if that helps, but
it hasn't fully hardened yet, although it does look promising.

Cheers,
Ash.

---
Ashley Roll
Digital Nemesis Pty Ltd
www.digitalnemesis.com
Mobile: +61 (0)417 705 718

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 10971 invoked from network); 11 Nov 2001 03:05:51 -0000
Received: from smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.105]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 11 Nov 2001 03:05:51 -0000
Received: (qmail 26480 invoked by uid 50005); 11 Nov 2001 03:05:46 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpy with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4168. . Clean. Processed in 0.177201 secs); 11 Nov 2001 03:05:46 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 11 Nov 2001 03:05:45 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA26387; Sat, 10 Nov 2001 19:02:08 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 131318 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 11 Nov 2001 03:01:55          +0000
Received: from cablecom.laribay.net (cablecom.laribay.net [66.20.57.4]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA26372 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 10 Nov 2001 19:01:54 -0800
Received: from billbull (dial096.laribay.net [66.20.57.96]) by          cablecom.laribay.net (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id UAA21495 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 10 Nov 2001 20:46:25 -0600 (CST)          (envelope-from bpbullock@laribay.net)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0DD0_01C56B69.578FD7F0"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <016a01c16a5d$44e8e120$47391442@billbull>
Date:         Sat, 10 Nov 2001 21:02:15 -0600
Reply-To: "Bill Bullock" <bpbullock@LARIBAY.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Bill Bullock" <bpbullock@LARIBAY.NET>
Subject:      [AR] Fw: [AR] What Can I say????
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0DD0_01C56B69.578FD7F0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

    Good point, Ben. I have often wondered why Mr. McVey and company did =
not just go out into the Oklahoma countryside and load up a bit of AN =
here and there instead of leaving such a "paper trail". But maybe he had =
in mind the differences in 33% vs. 34% Ammonium Nitrate mentioned in the =
post I just sent.
    Whatever the excuses by the ATF for investigating the TRA member, I =
sincerely believe that experimental rocketry might be in for a "bumpy =
ride" much like the past decade assault on the firearms industry. I =
further firmly believe that practitioners of the art are going to have =
to unite in order to survive: AN proponents against AP users vs. Hybrid =
advocates against liquid users will get us all buried in so much red =
tape that most will forsake the pursuit or else will "go to ground" like =
I did for so many years. I think that we can either unite or else get =
ready for the funeral. And getting "pissed" at all the "political talk" =
is much like hiding in the cellar in the hopes that "they" will not =
bother you when they come. Believe me, they will get everyone if =
experimentation is outlawed.
Bill
PS: Now envision me descending from my pulpit once again...
  ----- Original Message -----=20
  From: ben romashko=20
  To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU=20
  Sent: Saturday, November 10, 2001 1:47 PM
  Subject: Re: [AR] What Can I say????


  Half of the fields around here currently have massive piles of it =
waiting to
  be spread and plowed in just sitting there...better investigate them, =
too


  --------------------
  Ben Romashko
  pleaselaunchme@hotmail.com
  AIM- Attican123
  --------------------




  >
  >From the quote below may I assume that it is Mr. Kelly's position =
(and that
  >of TRA as well) that if I go down to the local  Feed-and-Seed =
tomorrow and
  >buy a 100 pound sack of 33% ammonium nitrate fertilizer to use on my
  >tomatoes and corn I should be investigated by the ATF for my =
subversive
  >activities? We literally buy the stuff by the ton here. It is, after =
all,
  >primarily used as an agricultural fertilizer!
  >Bill
  >**********
  >From: BRUCE KELLY [mailto:71161.2351@compuserve.com]
  > > > Sent: Friday, November 09, 2001 3:13 PM
  > > > To: Blind.Copy.Receiver@compuserve.com
  > > > Subject: One more thing
  >(Deleted Section)
  > > > 1. If you buy a 100-pound bag of ammonium nitrate, you are going =
to be
  > > > checked out - and you should be. If you are not, it means that
  >security is
  > > > worse than I thought
  >(Deleted Section)
  > > > B Kelly
  >


  _________________________________________________________________
  Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at =
http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp



------=_NextPart_000_0DD0_01C56B69.578FD7F0
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META content=3D"text/html; charset=3Diso-8859-1" =
http-equiv=3DContent-Type>
<META content=3D"MSHTML 5.00.2614.3500" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Good point, Ben. I have often wondered why Mr. =
McVey and=20
company did not just go out into the Oklahoma countryside and load up a =
bit of=20
AN here and there instead of leaving such a "paper trail". But maybe he =
had in=20
mind the differences in 33% vs. 34% Ammonium Nitrate mentioned in the =
post I=20
just sent.</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Whatever the excuses by the ATF for =
investigating the=20
TRA member, I sincerely believe that experimental rocketry might be in =
for a=20
"bumpy ride" much like the past decade assault on the firearms industry. =
I=20
further firmly believe that practitioners of the art are going to have =
to unite=20
in order to survive: AN proponents against AP users vs. Hybrid advocates =
against=20
liquid users will get us all buried in so much red tape that most will =
forsake=20
the pursuit or else will "go to ground" like I did for so many years. I =
think=20
that we can either unite or else get ready for the funeral. And getting =
"pissed"=20
at all the "political talk" is much like hiding in the cellar in the =
hopes that=20
"they" will not bother you when they come. Believe me, they will get =
everyone if=20
experimentation is outlawed.</DIV>
<DIV>Bill</DIV>
<DIV>PS: Now envision me descending from my pulpit once again...</DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE=20
style=3D"BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: =
0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; PADDING-RIGHT: 0px">
  <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial">----- Original Message ----- </DIV>
  <DIV=20
  style=3D"BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; FONT: 10pt arial; font-color: =
black"><B>From:</B>=20
  <A href=3D"mailto:pleaselaunchme@HOTMAIL.COM"=20
  title=3Dpleaselaunchme@HOTMAIL.COM>ben romashko</A> </DIV>
  <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A =
href=3D"mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU"=20
  title=3DAROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU</A> </DIV>
  <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> Saturday, November 10, =
2001 1:47=20
  PM</DIV>
  <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> Re: [AR] What Can I=20
say????</DIV>
  <DIV><BR></DIV>Half of the fields around here currently have massive =
piles of=20
  it waiting to<BR>be spread and plowed in just sitting there...better=20
  investigate them, too<BR><BR><BR>--------------------<BR>Ben =
Romashko<BR><A=20
  =
href=3D"mailto:pleaselaunchme@hotmail.com">pleaselaunchme@hotmail.com</A>=
<BR>AIM-=20
  Attican123<BR>--------------------<BR><BR><BR><BR><BR>&gt;<BR>&gt;From =
the=20
  quote below may I assume that it is Mr. Kelly's position (and =
that<BR>&gt;of=20
  TRA as well) that if I go down to the local&nbsp; Feed-and-Seed =
tomorrow=20
  and<BR>&gt;buy a 100 pound sack of 33% ammonium nitrate fertilizer to =
use on=20
  my<BR>&gt;tomatoes and corn I should be investigated by the ATF for my =

  subversive<BR>&gt;activities? We literally buy the stuff by the ton =
here. It=20
  is, after all,<BR>&gt;primarily used as an agricultural=20
  fertilizer!<BR>&gt;Bill<BR>&gt;**********<BR>&gt;From: BRUCE KELLY [<A =

  =
href=3D"mailto:71161.2351@compuserve.com">mailto:71161.2351@compuserve.co=
m</A>]<BR>&gt;=20
  &gt; &gt; Sent: Friday, November 09, 2001 3:13 PM<BR>&gt; &gt; &gt; =
To: <A=20
  =
href=3D"mailto:Blind.Copy.Receiver@compuserve.com">Blind.Copy.Receiver@co=
mpuserve.com</A><BR>&gt;=20
  &gt; &gt; Subject: One more thing<BR>&gt;(Deleted Section)<BR>&gt; =
&gt; &gt;=20
  1. If you buy a 100-pound bag of ammonium nitrate, you are going to =
be<BR>&gt;=20
  &gt; &gt; checked out - and you should be. If you are not, it means=20
  that<BR>&gt;security is<BR>&gt; &gt; &gt; worse than I =
thought<BR>&gt;(Deleted=20
  Section)<BR>&gt; &gt; &gt; B=20
  =
Kelly<BR>&gt;<BR><BR><BR>________________________________________________=
_________________<BR>Get=20
  your FREE download of MSN Explorer at <A=20
  =
href=3D"http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp">http://explorer.msn.com/intl.as=
p</A><BR><BR></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0DD0_01C56B69.578FD7F0--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 29084 invoked from network); 11 Nov 2001 05:02:12 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 11 Nov 2001 05:02:12 -0000
Received: (qmail 19614 invoked by uid 50005); 11 Nov 2001 05:02:06 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4168. . Clean. Processed in 0.189514 secs); 11 Nov 2001 05:02:06 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 11 Nov 2001 05:02:06 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA26760; Sat, 10 Nov 2001 20:58:03 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 131365 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 11 Nov 2001 04:57:53          +0000
Received: from wrench.toolcity.net (root@wrench.toolcity.net [208.0.188.2]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA26746 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 10 Nov 2001 20:57:52 -0800
Received: from [63.169.101.124]          (dap-63-169-101-124.meadville-tnt-1.pa.toolcity.net [63.169.101.124])          by wrench.toolcity.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id XAA14942; Sat, 10          Nov 2001 23:57:45 -0500 (EST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <v01510100b813baf4068e@[208.22.189.234]>
Date:         Sun, 11 Nov 2001 00:00:19 -0600
Reply-To: "al bradley" <abradley@TOOLCITY.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "al bradley" <abradley@TOOLCITY.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] 3 AN controversy -- was -- Re: [AR] What Can I say????
Comments: To: Bill Bullock <bpbullock@LARIBAY.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

>We all used AN close to *100%* this way. I don't think 33% would have
>worked, and I find myself wondering, with AN as a fertilizer what the
>remaining 67% would have been composed of? Growing things usually need
>potassium, nitrogen and phosphorus. And some trace minerals.
>puzzled,
>al bradley
>**********
>    There is AN and then there is "AN". Since Farmer Brown is not the
>least bit excited at the prospect of placing his 4020 John Deere tractor
>in Low Earth Orbit he is not concerned with the propellant potentials of
>his fertilizer. What he wants is "available nitrogen".
>    100% pure Ammonium Nitrate (NH4NO3/33-0-0) has 33% (by weight)
>available nitrogen. There is another fertilizer called Urea/"Carbamide"
>((NH2CONH2/46-0-0) which has 46.0-46.3% available nitrogen, which is way
>too "hot" to use on crops most of the time. It also is a non-combustible
>and non-explosive material. (It is noted as having an "ammonia-like odor"
>in the analytical documents.)
>    Urea is blended with a "milder" fertilizer called "ammonium nitrate".
>To differentiate between the two, the pure AN is designated as "33%
>Ammonium Nitrate" and the blend as "34% Ammonium Nitrate". Three guesses
>which you want for an oxidizer.

snip . . .
---------------------------
Well, I guess I never thought about it just that way. But if that bag has
33% by weight of AN what is the remaining 67% of the weight in the bag
composed of??

Or with soluble agricultural KNO3 in a 25 lb. bag, which is shown as
nitrogen 13% by weight and 44% potassium by weight, what material
constitutes the remaining 47% by weight?

Or are these just more "fool's questions?" :-)

best regards,
al bradley

------------------------------------------------------------------
Can you live Life with this?: "Unless there is a law, an agreement, or a
long-standing custom, No one `Deserves' Anything -- Either Good or Bad!"

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 21693 invoked from network); 11 Nov 2001 05:13:42 -0000
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 11 Nov 2001 05:13:42 -0000
Received: (qmail 29755 invoked by uid 50005); 11 Nov 2001 05:13:36 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4168. . Clean. Processed in 0.375881 secs); 11 Nov 2001 05:13:36 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 11 Nov 2001 05:13:35 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA26851; Sat, 10 Nov 2001 21:11:07 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 131382 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 11 Nov 2001 05:11:00          +0000
Received: from femail44.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail44.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.254.60.38]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA26837          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 10 Nov 2001 21:11:00 -0800
Received: from cx814151a ([24.14.55.118]) by femail44.sdc1.sfba.home.com          (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20 201-229-121-120-20010223) with SMTP id          <20011111051050.IEKB29424.femail44.sdc1.sfba.home.com@cx814151a> for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 10 Nov 2001 21:10:50 -0800
References:  <20011110202315.58832.qmail@web10506.mail.yahoo.com>              <001301c16a4f$6ed99b40$22b083cc@rlpotter.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.3018.1300
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <00f201c16a6f$3ff63a20$0a01a8c0@cx814151a>
Date:         Sat, 10 Nov 2001 23:10:57 -0600
Reply-To: "John Bolene" <jbolene@HOME.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Bolene" <jbolene@HOME.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Flanged Steel Pipes
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Very nice large lathe, looks to be at least 8 feet long, but the other end
could not be seen.

John Bolene
Tripoli Oklahoma Prefect and webmaster
Tripoli Oklahoma Web page -> http://members.home.com/tripoli-oklahoma/



----- Original Message -----
From: "Ryan" <ryan@RLPOTTER.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Saturday, November 10, 2001 7:23 PM
Subject: Re: [AR] Flanged Steel Pipes


> Thanks Justin.
>
> Ya, made it from a SCH40 carbon steel seamless pipe with carbon steel
> flanges.
> Well, we needed enough to make 3 chambers, so we bought an entire pipe (21
> feet) for a couple hundred bucks, and bought some plasma-cut plate that we
> milled out and made flanges from for cheap.
> So, each chamber is about 5 feet long, 6" nom.
> I'd recommend going with NSTM standard flange dimensions.  Ours are a
little
> smaller, and are a little difficult to work with.
> With flanges, pipe, and gaskets, each chamber costs just under $100.
>
> make sure that you have the facilities to make flanges, though.  after
> milling out the plates and welding them onto the pipe, we had to lathe the
> mating surfaces flat because the flanges warped from the welding heat ..
and
> we even had huge heat sinks attached and did it in steps to minimize
> warpage.  The lathe we used was enormous (well, since it's a 6" pipe) and
> was a pain to work with.
> ( http://mach-sr1.org/gallery/construction/tools/01-Big_lathe.JPG )
>
> I guess what I'm trying to say is to make sure that you've thought through
> the process completely before you start, or you'll make a lot of headaches
> for yourself.
>
>
> Ryan

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 9846 invoked from network); 11 Nov 2001 06:16:35 -0000
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 11 Nov 2001 06:16:35 -0000
Received: (qmail 26217 invoked by uid 50005); 11 Nov 2001 06:16:29 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4168. . Clean. Processed in 0.177662 secs); 11 Nov 2001 06:16:29 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 11 Nov 2001 06:16:29 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA27050; Sat, 10 Nov 2001 22:13:30 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 131411 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 11 Nov 2001 06:13:20          +0000
Received: from corinth.bossig.com (corinth.bossig.com [208.26.239.66]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA27036 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Sat, 10 Nov 2001 22:13:20 -0800
Received: from BruceE.Watson (unverified [208.26.232.45]) by corinth.bossig.com          (Rockliffe SMTPRA 4.5.4) with SMTP id          <B0080360128@corinth.bossig.com> for <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Thu, 8          Nov 2001 20:22:35 -0800
References:  <JJEFLLHFFAHHMBBIHFAECEDKCHAA.pkelly@comcen.com.au>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2314.1300
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <004d01c168d5$369d8460$2de81ad0@Watson>
Date:         Thu, 8 Nov 2001 20:15:39 -0800
Reply-To: "Bruce E. Watson" <bwatson@3-CITIES.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Bruce E. Watson" <bwatson@3-CITIES.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Attitude sensing
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Paul:

Can you give a web page that this autopilot is detailed on.  I went over to
the Futaba site (http://www.futaba-rc.com/index.html) but could not find it.

Thanks;
Bruce E. Watson

----- Original Message -----
From: Paul Kelly <pkelly@COMCEN.COM.AU>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Tuesday, October 16, 2001 1:35 AM
Subject: [AR] Attitude sensing


> Futaba (an R/C company) make an autopilot that, AFAIK, employs 4 LDR's
> looking out through narrow vertical slits. The rationale is that, in level
> flight, the horizon will appear at the same level in each of the slits,
> pitch or roll (airplane versions) will result in less or more light coming
> through opposing slits as the sky s 3 times brighter than the ground.  A
bit
> of averaging and they seem to be able to make it work at only a few
hundred
> feet!
>
> PK
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 29657 invoked from network); 11 Nov 2001 06:52:30 -0000
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 11 Nov 2001 06:52:30 -0000
Received: (qmail 14138 invoked by uid 50005); 11 Nov 2001 06:52:25 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4168. . Clean. Processed in 0.221942 secs); 11 Nov 2001 06:52:25 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 11 Nov 2001 06:52:24 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA27225; Sat, 10 Nov 2001 22:49:45 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 131438 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 11 Nov 2001 06:49:38          +0000
Received: from cablecom.laribay.net (cablecom.laribay.net [66.20.57.4]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA27211 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 10 Nov 2001 22:49:37 -0800
Received: from billbull (dial080.laribay.net [66.20.57.80]) by          cablecom.laribay.net (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id AAA23174 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 11 Nov 2001 00:34:06 -0600 (CST)          (envelope-from bpbullock@laribay.net)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <002501c16a7d$11ceb420$50391442@billbull>
Date:         Sun, 11 Nov 2001 00:49:51 -0600
Reply-To: "Bill Bullock" <bpbullock@LARIBAY.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Bill Bullock" <bpbullock@LARIBAY.NET>
Subject:      [AR] Fw: Re: [AR] 3 AN controversy -- was -- Re: [AR] What Can I              say????
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

> ----- Original Message -----
> From: al bradley <abradley@TOOLCITY.NET>
> To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
> Sent: Sunday, November 11, 2001 12:00 AM
> Subject: Re: [AR] 3 AN controversy -- was -- Re: [AR] What Can I say????
> (snip)
>
> > Well, I guess I never thought about it just that way. But if that bag
has
> > 33% by weight of AN what is the remaining 67% of the weight in the bag
> > composed of??
> ******
> I believe that in Ammonium Nitrate (NH2 NO3) there is, by weight, about
> 35.902% Nitrogen, 2.583% Hydrogen and 61.151% Oxygen, which is what we are
> after. The "remaining 67%" is Hydrogen, Oxygen and insoluble nitrogen.
> ******
> > Or with soluble agricultural KNO3 in a 25 lb. bag, which is shown as
> > nitrogen 13% by weight and 44% potassium by weight, what material
> > constitutes the remaining 47% by weight?
> ******
> In KNO3 the molecular weight is approximately 101. By weight Potassium is
> about 38.61%, Nitrogen is about 13.86% and oxygen is about 47.52% for a
> total of approximately 99.99%. The figures from the bag (13%/44%/47%)
comes
> up to 104% which must be an error from the manufacturer. But whatever the
> intent of the printing, the "remaining 47%" is oxygen, which again is what
> we are after here.
> ******
> > Or are these just more "fool's questions?" :-)
> ******
> Al, there is no such thing as a "fool's" question. If there were such, I
> would be the most likely on this list to be wearing the fool's cap.
> > best regards,
> > al bradley
> ******
> Respectfully Yours,
> Bill
> ******
> > ------------------------------------------------------------------
> > Can you live Life with this?: "Unless there is a law, an agreement, or a
> > long-standing custom, No one `Deserves' Anything -- Either Good or Bad!"
> >
> >
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 22914 invoked from network); 11 Nov 2001 14:15:35 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.105]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 11 Nov 2001 14:15:35 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 17014 invoked by uid 50005); 11 Nov 2001 14:15:29 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpy with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4168. . Clean. Processed in 1.160064 secs); 11 Nov 2001 14:15:29 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 11 Nov 2001 14:15:26 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA28747; Sun, 11 Nov 2001 06:11:52 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 131507 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 11 Nov 2001 14:11:39          +0000
Received: from smtppop3pub.verizon.net (smtppop3pub.gte.net [206.46.170.22]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA28732 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 11 Nov 2001 06:11:39 -0800
Received: from [63.15.225.25] (1Cust180.tnt1.rancho-cucamonga.ca.da.uu.net          [63.24.225.180]) by smtppop3pub.verizon.net  with ESMTP for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; id IAA54367198 Sun, 11 Nov 2001 08:10:46 -0600          (CST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: GTE/01rocket@mail.gte.net
References: <v01510100b813baf4068e@[208.22.189.234]>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <a05100304b814368269ec@[63.15.225.25]>
Date:         Sun, 11 Nov 2001 06:11:05 -0800
Reply-To: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] 3 AN controversy -- was -- Re: [AR] What Can I say????
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <v01510100b813baf4068e@[208.22.189.234]>

>snip . . .
>---------------------------
>Well, I guess I never thought about it just that way. But if that bag has
>33% by weight of AN what is the remaining 67% of the weight in the bag
>composed of??

There are no foolish questions, only foolish behavior,

The high nitrogen content is precisely it is lower ISP than AP or KP.

Jerry

>Or are these just more "fool's questions?" :-)
>
>best regards,
>al bradley
>
>------------------------------------------------------------------
>Can you live Life with this?: "Unless there is a law, an agreement, or a
>long-standing custom, No one `Deserves' Anything -- Either Good or Bad!"


--
Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
Opinion, the whole thing.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 10741 invoked from network); 11 Nov 2001 17:45:38 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 11 Nov 2001 17:45:38 -0000
Received: (qmail 3607 invoked by uid 50005); 11 Nov 2001 17:45:32 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4168. . Clean. Processed in 0.187058 secs); 11 Nov 2001 17:45:32 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 11 Nov 2001 17:45:32 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA29312; Sun, 11 Nov 2001 09:42:02 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 131556 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 11 Nov 2001 17:41:48          +0000
Received: from spsystems.net (spsystems.net [209.47.149.227]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA29298 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Sun,          11 Nov 2001 09:41:47 -0800
Received: (from henry@localhost) by spsystems.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id MAA14681;          Sun, 11 Nov 2001 12:41:00 -0500 (EST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1011111122518.14501A-100000@spsystems.net>
Date:         Sun, 11 Nov 2001 12:41:00 -0500
Reply-To: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Optimal O/F for N2O/Alcohol
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <5.1.0.14.0.20011111010720.027708f0@lstud.ii.uib.no>

On Sun, 11 Nov 2001, Emil Johnsen wrote:
> How is the optimal O/F ratio determined when optimizing for highest
> possible Isp?  ...  How are all these factors, and whatever I
> have left out, combined to get a reasonable guess for the optimal O/F?

Basically, by calculating Isp for a range of possibilities and looking for
the best one.  It's a sufficiently complicated problem that there's no way
of going direct to the optimal solution.

In principle, the things which matter most are the energy release per unit
mass (equivalent to chamber_temperature/exhaust_molecular_weight) and the
efficiency with which a particular exhaust composition converts that
energy to exhaust kinetic energy.  The interplay between those two issues
gives you somewhat fuel-rich mixture ratios for typical combinations,
because leaving some of the C as CO and some of the H as H2 gives more
efficient conversion (simpler molecules have fewer places to hide energy)
than complete combustion to CO2 and H2O, even though it reduces the energy
release per unit mass.

But the equations are messy and solving them analytically is impractical.
And then you get to stir in complications like dissociation, non-constant
specific heats, non-zero initial energy content, etc.  Also, neither
shifting nor frozen equilibrium is physically realistic -- shifting to the
throat and frozen thereafter is a much better approximation for most
combinations -- although the difference is often small enough that this
isn't too important.

A thorough and realistic solution ends up basically simulating the gas
flow and expansion, in a simple 1D model, for one ratio after another,
homing in on the best result step by step.

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 16466 invoked from network); 11 Nov 2001 18:44:25 -0000
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 11 Nov 2001 18:44:25 -0000
Received: (qmail 17003 invoked by uid 50005); 11 Nov 2001 18:44:19 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4168. . Clean. Processed in 0.488292 secs); 11 Nov 2001 18:44:19 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 11 Nov 2001 18:44:18 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA29592; Sun, 11 Nov 2001 10:41:05 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 131588 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 11 Nov 2001 18:40:58          +0000
Received: from castor.ridgenet.net (IDENT:root@castor.ridgenet.net          [199.120.150.29]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA29578          for <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Sun, 11 Nov 2001 10:40:58 -0800
Received: from kristinscomp (pm069.ridgenet.net [204.154.246.69]) by          castor.ridgenet.net (8.11.0/8.11.0) with SMTP id fABISFW15497 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Sun, 11 Nov 2001 10:28:15 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <003001c16ae0$7d732040$1b30fea9@kristinscomp>
Date:         Sun, 11 Nov 2001 10:41:33 -0800
Reply-To: "Kristin & David Hall" <thehalls@RIDGENET.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Kristin & David Hall" <thehalls@RIDGENET.NET>
Subject:      [AR] My Final Reply
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Much has been said about my public flogging of (IIRC) Blain for posting of
binary files to this list.  There have been letters of support, hate mail,
and more than a few with elements of both in them.

With regards to the "not so positive" replies, a common theme has been
condemnation for my use of profane language and a demand that I apologize
for such.  I will not.  In my life's experience, when one absolutely
positively wants to get someone else's attention (in non-formal
communications) the use profane language is THE standard and most effective
method.  If this is so objectionable that such language alone is sufficient
to have me removed from this list, so be it.

I will, however, apologize for one slip in etiquette:  my response to Blain
was public.  I concede that standard practice is to flog a person off list.
The response should have been a private email.

One final note:  Blain's own reply which included words to the effect of "my
knuckles have been wrapped" says to me that he took the letter in the spirit
in which it was intended.  As a result, I find myself having no continuing
quarrel with Blain, while I find that my opinion of some others has indeed
been permanently altered.  Ironic, ain't it?

--
Dave and/or Kristin Hall

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 3458 invoked from network); 11 Nov 2001 20:08:07 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 11 Nov 2001 20:08:07 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 8857 invoked by uid 50005); 11 Nov 2001 20:08:00 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4168. . Clean. Processed in 2.740533 secs); 11 Nov 2001 20:08:00 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 11 Nov 2001 20:07:53 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA29818; Sun, 11 Nov 2001 12:00:57 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 131603 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 11 Nov 2001 20:00:46          +0000
Received: from smtp008pub.verizon.net (smtp008pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.187])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA29804 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 11 Nov 2001 12:00:46 -0800
Received: from [63.24.225.7] (1Cust20.tnt2.rancho-cucamonga.ca.da.uu.net          [63.15.225.20]) by smtp008pub.verizon.net  with ESMTP for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; id fABK0CD18858 Sun, 11 Nov 2001 14:00:14          -0600 (CST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: GTE/01rocket@mail.gte.net
References: <003001c16ae0$7d732040$1b30fea9@kristinscomp>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <a05100302b8148891c3f1@[63.24.225.7]>
Date:         Sun, 11 Nov 2001 12:00:11 -0800
Reply-To: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] My Final Reply
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <003001c16ae0$7d732040$1b30fea9@kristinscomp>

>Hall:
>
>
>communications) the use profane language is THE standard and most effective
>method.  If this is so objectionable that such language alone is sufficient
>to have me removed from this list, so be it.


I agree and it should be permissible to use occasional situation
specific language.  But to use it as a daily style or to annoy or
troll is what is not reasonable.


>quarrel with Blain, while I find that my opinion of some others has indeed
>been permanently altered.  Ironic, ain't it?

To me this is a quirk and a bad aspect of the internet.  It is
trivial to start a flame war and that is what that exchange was.

Jerry

--
Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
Opinion, the whole thing.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 6074 invoked from network); 11 Nov 2001 21:29:02 -0000
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 11 Nov 2001 21:29:02 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 11239 invoked by uid 50005); 11 Nov 2001 21:28:56 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4168. . Clean. Processed in 0.150086 secs); 11 Nov 2001 21:28:56 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 11 Nov 2001 21:28:56 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA30085; Sun, 11 Nov 2001 13:25:02 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 131621 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 11 Nov 2001 21:24:53          +0000
Received: from mta2.snet.net (mta2.snet.net [204.60.203.71]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA30068 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun,          11 Nov 2001 13:24:47 -0800
Received: from snet.net (123.72.252.64.snet.net [64.252.72.123] (may be          forged)) by mta2.snet.net (8.12.1/8.12.1/SNET-mx-1.1/D-1.1/O-1.1)          with ESMTP id fABLOkL2027266 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 11 Nov          2001 16:24:46 -0500 (EST)
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.75 [en] (Win98; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <003001c16ae0$7d732040$1b30fea9@kristinscomp>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3BEEEE94.5B56308@snet.net>
Date:         Sun, 11 Nov 2001 16:33:09 -0500
Reply-To: "Blake Mantel" <BMantel@SNET.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Blake Mantel" <BMantel@SNET.NET>
Organization: done through the use of very fuzzy logic!
Subject:      Re: [AR] My Final Reply
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Kristin & David Hall wrote:

> One final note:  Blain's own reply which included words to the effect of "my
> knuckles have been wrapped" says to me that he took the letter in the spirit
> in which it was intended.  As a result, I find myself having no continuing
> quarrel with Blain, while I find that my opinion of some others has indeed
> been permanently altered.  Ironic, ain't it?
> Dave and/or Kristin Hall

Dave,

It's Blake, but Blain is close!
Though when I was a Firefighter/EMT it was "Blade" since I carried one in the
pants and a bit bigger one in the boot.

Saw some Graphite that was surplused, disks had about a 2" ID,  4" OD, and about
.75" thick. Rather hard and a fingernail would barely scratch it, so I surmise
it has other materials in it as well. But might be suitable as a nozzle. If
anyone is interested I can return and purchase some.

Blake
--
CUM CATAPULTAE PROSCRIPTAE ERUNT TUM SOLI PROSCRIPTI CATAPULTAS HABEBUNT.
(When catapults are outlawed, only outlaws will have catapults....)
Triumph Tiger Motorcycle page at: http://pages.cthome.net/bmantel/

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 6318 invoked from network); 11 Nov 2001 21:39:13 -0000
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 11 Nov 2001 21:39:13 -0000
Received: (qmail 11233 invoked by uid 50005); 11 Nov 2001 21:39:08 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4168. . Clean. Processed in 0.263919 secs); 11 Nov 2001 21:39:08 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 11 Nov 2001 21:39:07 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA30146; Sun, 11 Nov 2001 13:35:45 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 131634 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 11 Nov 2001 21:34:18          +0000
Received: from mailhost0.trib.com (mailhost0.trib.com [63.229.150.3]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA30127 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Sun, 11 Nov 2001 13:34:17 -0800
Received: from mail.trib.com (mail.trib.com [12.10.158.17]) by          mailhost0.trib.com (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id fABLYGC48052 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Sun, 11 Nov 2001 14:34:16 -0700 (MST)          (envelope-from jwckman@space-rockets.com)
Received: from [63.229.150.102] (HELO hppav) by mail.trib.com (CommuniGate Pro          SMTP 3.4.6) with SMTP id 57359949 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 11          Nov 2001 14:34:14 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
Importance: Normal
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <NKEHJAOOKBPGIKOOPDEFKEEACDAA.jwckman@space-rockets.com>
Date:         Sun, 11 Nov 2001 14:33:10 -0700
Reply-To: "John Wickman" <jwckman@SPACE-ROCKETS.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Wickman" <jwckman@SPACE-ROCKETS.COM>
Subject:      [AR] Bruce Kelly's Response on ROL - ANFO motors
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

>To Prefects, BOD
>
>I have had this conversation with Brian Kosko and I don't think he will
mind
>me sharing it. It gives insight as to how we add new technologies to the
>Safety Code.
>
>And I've already been corrected on the misuse of the word "anfo." Of
course,
>all of you know what I mean. And, for the record, I am not against AN
motors.
>See my comments below.
>
>B Kelly
>
>************
>
><<>to mean any oxidizer (AP,AN, even KN) with some kind of polybutadiene
>binder.>>>
>
>True, the EX rules state "composite" which we have always interpreted
>as "ammonium perchlorate." It appears a big loop hole exists with
>interpretation. Most of the people I know understand AP is what is
>meant. Someone in your area probably gave "their" interpretation,
>passed it around and it stuck as official when it is not.
>
><<>an oxidizer as you could want. There is no logical,chemical, or safety
>reason to allow AP composites and not allow AN composites.>>>
>
>Right now our insurance only covers two propellants, APCP and nitrous
>hybrids. The insurance altogether prohibits liquid propellants and we
>would have to find a new carrier if we were to ever add those. Our EX
>rules are also (loosely) tied to NFPA 1127, and APCP and nitrous is
>all that is allowed in the code. Other things can be added, but there
>is a process.
>
><<>made.>>>>
>
>We need more than a "motion." We need someone to prepare a paper,
>present demonstrations to the Board of Directors, and then we can
>entertain motions. If it is proven safe, then we move forward. We
>welcome the addition of new and safe propellants.
>
><<>composite? They are extremely safe and are being made world wide.>>>
>
>No, they do not. Again, the concept has never been presented.
>
><<>this?>>>
>
>We formed a Future Directions Committee years ago and they stopped
>with APCP and hybrids. They recommended the use of these and further
>study before we allowed anything else. Those findings may be
>antiquated, but we don't just over turn policy without reason.
>
>If you are really interested in adding propellants to our list of
>"acceptables," you sure have my encouragement to do so. I outlined
>what you need to do above.
>
><<>>
>
>So far, anything that is not APCP and nitrous hybrids are prohibited.
>
><<>>
>
>I gave you some history, and the rest (politically and regulatory) is
>too long and complicated to go into here. Call me next week and I'll
>discuss all that with you. There is another short answer, though. No
>one asked for anything else until today. So let me return the
>question, and ask why is that?
>
>I will tell you this... It will be a lot easier for Tripoli to say
>"yes" and to move forward with additional propellants than it will be
>in the regulatory environment. We have to consider more than just your
>state. When you talk about adding things to an international
>organization, it becomes complicated. Come to our next NFPA meeting
>(April) in Huntsville and you'll see what kinds of crap I have to wade
>through just to do what we are doing now.
>
>I don't know if you are aware of this or not, but the International
>Building Code now references the NFPA documents for rocketry. States
>that adopt this IBC may find themselves outlawing other forms of
>rocketry. I have addressed my concerns about this with NFPA and have
>gotten nowhere. IBC has an aggressive campaign going on to get it
>accepted as "gospel" world wide.
>
><<>>
>
>We wanted to. Simple as that.
>
><<>>
>
>We have too many regulatory eyes on us right now to just allow it
>before it is reviewed from a technical position. As I said, we will
>look at anything presented, but we will not allow anything without a
>presentation. That is not a position of anti-liberal, it is a common
>sense approach.
>
><<>popular. And a lot of people who get into making their own motors
>start with sugar motors or AN motors. These are also the only ones
>non-U.S. types can make; they can't get AP.>>>
>
>Another good reason for looking at the issue, but again not without a
>technical presentation.
>
>Look at it this way. Let's say we say "yes" to everything and anything
>from the position that "it must be safe until we have an incident that
>proves otherwise, and because Mr. Kosko says it's OK." Now what kind
>of a position would that put our "organization" in if there was an
>accident? With our insurance company? With regulators?
>
>Now, let's look at our standing coming from a technical position...
>
>We have an accident and investigations follow. But in this case, I
>have a paper trail showing:
>
>1. Someone (you) asked us to look at something new to make available
>to 4,000 people.
>
>2. You present a technical paper.
>
>3. You give us a presentation to back up your technical findings.
>
>4. The BOD accepts, or asks for more info first and then accepts.
>
>5. Then I (or my successor) approaches the regulatory bodies with
>technical information.
>
>6. You may be asked to do your demonstration before a committee or
>two.
>
>7. The new propellant is generally accepted because the technical
>presentation was real convincing and also found to be technically
>sound. (This is how we won the sparky motor argument. The technical
>data was so sound that even the respect of Vern Estes could not
>convince the committee otherwise.)
>
>Using this approach, Tripoli is in a position to defend itself in
>almost any venue or litigious situation that may arise. It has also
>won Tripoli an tremendous amount of respect among our former enemies.
>
>In this day and age, this is the path we have to take. Any other path
>would be irresponsible and (socially) unacceptable. This may sound
>unfair, but that is the way it is - no thanks to the collection of
>idiots we have in our society.
>
><<>combustion catalysts, oxidizers, etc.? Right now the EX rules are
>pretty vague in terms of what's allowable, can we clear that up? There
>are several of us who have done extensive EX work and would be happy
>to give our input. And let's try to make EX MORE doable, not less.>>>>
>
>Look, I'm not going to do a run down of every little ingredient that
>may go into a motor. I know that catozine and ferrozine (sp) are
>prohibited the NFPA documents. I also know that, if we venture too far
>into exotic stuff we will be limited at places such as Black Rock. For
>example, we have some real problems with the BLM right now. They look
>at EPA studies and are asking questions and requiring difficult-to-get
>permits for certain things. The *!@# is going to hit the fan in other
>locations too. We have one other site that, right now, is being put
>under scrutiny because of the EPA.
>
>Let's take this one step at a time. You want AN motors? Send me a
>technical paper to distribute to the BOD, come to LDRS next July and
>give us a presentation. Chances are this is very doable. If several of
>you are happy to give us input, please - by all means - do! Spread
>this around and get as many people involved as you would like. I'll
>look forward to it,
>
>B Kelly
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 26107 invoked from network); 11 Nov 2001 22:50:59 -0000
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 11 Nov 2001 22:50:59 -0000
Received: (qmail 5921 invoked by uid 50005); 11 Nov 2001 22:50:54 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4168. . Clean. Processed in 0.245984 secs); 11 Nov 2001 22:50:54 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 11 Nov 2001 22:50:53 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA30442; Sun, 11 Nov 2001 14:46:30 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 131688 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 11 Nov 2001 22:44:56          +0000
Received: from scaup.prod.itd.earthlink.net (scaup.mail.pas.earthlink.net          [207.217.120.49]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA30423          for <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Sun, 11 Nov 2001 14:44:56 -0800
Received: from user-38ldm1t.dialup.mindspring.com ([209.86.216.61]          helo=DGBNHY01) by scaup.prod.itd.earthlink.net with smtp (Exim 3.33          #1) id 1633LN-0004DC-00; Sun, 11 Nov 2001 14:44:53 -0800
References:  <NKEHJAOOKBPGIKOOPDEFMEDICDAA.jwckman@space-rockets.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <004e01c16af1$b4c0c780$7e7379a5@DGBNHY01>
Date:         Sun, 11 Nov 2001 14:43:56 -0600
Reply-To: "Hydrazine" <Rockitman@SPRINTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Hydrazine" <Rockitman@SPRINTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      [AR] AN-FO Motors?
Comments: To: John Wickman <jwckman@SPACE-ROCKETS.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Thank you John,

Thank you for the message to B.K.  I couldn't agree more.  He has been the
antithesis of experimental propulsion from the beginning.  Sacrificing
experimental propulsion freedoms for minor and temporary gains for HPR.  I
don't know what he is thinking but to me, it sure looks like he working to
build a corner on the rocket propulsion market.

Tony
----- Original Message -----
From: "John Wickman" <jwckman@SPACE-ROCKETS.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Saturday, November 10, 2001 11:29 AM
Subject: [AR] AN-FO Motors?


> To all my fellow rocketeers,
>
> The following was sent today by me to B. Kelly.  It speaks for itself.
>
> John Wickman
>
> ---------------------------------------
>
> Bruce,
>
> This was posted on Arocket and I was shocked by your comments to the ATF
> agent.   After advertising in your magazine for almost 6 years, I cannot
> understand how you could refer to AN COMPOSITE motors as AN/FO motors.
You
> must also know that AN composite motors have flown many times at TRA
> sanctioned experimental launches in your presence and with your full
> knowledge.   Nobody makes AN/FO motors.   However, a great many people
make
> AN COMPOSITE motors.
>
> At least, you didn't urge the ATF to arrest an innocent amateur rocketeer.
>
> Please cancel all of CP Technologies advertisements in High Power Rocketry
> magazine.  Today, we will be dropping our link to TRA from our web site.
> We had provided that link as a courtesy based on Bruce Lee's request.  I
do
> not think your organization is now worth that courtesy.
>
> John Wickman
> CP Technologies
>
> From: BRUCE KELLY [mailto:71161.2351@compuserve.com]
> > Sent: Friday, November 09, 2001 3:13 PM
> > To: Blind.Copy.Receiver@compuserve.com
> > Subject: One more thing
> >
> >
> > To all Prefects
> >
> > 8 November 2001
> >
> >
> > I almost forgot one thing.
> >
> > Yesterday afternoon I got a call from an ATF field agent in Michigan. He
> > called to ask me about a member who just bought a 100-pound bag of
> ammonium
> > nitrate. He said, "This fellow claims to be a member of your
> > organization..."
> >
> > Wooah! Excuse me, but when did WE (TRA) approve the use of anfo-motors?
> >
> > Anyway, he wanted to check out our member's claim of TRA membership. I
was
> > happy to report the member was in good standing (so far). Then he asked
me
> > questions about the hobby. It was at this point I explained to him that
we
> > use APCP and do not allow anfo-motors at our certified/insured launches.
> > But I also explained that our member could use those on his own. The
field
> > agent understood, and he seemed pleased and relieved that he was using
the
> > motors for rockets and nothing else.
> >
> > Here are a couple of points to remember:
> >
> > 1. If you buy a 100-pound bag of ammonium nitrate, you are going to be
> > checked out - and you should be. If you are not, it means that security
is
> > worse than I thought.
> >
> > 2. If you use anfo motors, you can say anything you would like. BUT, do
> not
> > represent anfo activity as Tripoli activity. It is not even a part of
our
> > EX program. It could be in the future, but it is not now. No one has
made
> a
> > formal presentation to the BOD for our consideration.
> >
> > B Kelly

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 18935 invoked from network); 11 Nov 2001 23:10:39 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 11 Nov 2001 23:10:39 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 32235 invoked by uid 50005); 11 Nov 2001 23:10:33 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4168. . Clean. Processed in 0.135581 secs); 11 Nov 2001 23:10:33 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 11 Nov 2001 23:10:33 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA30568; Sun, 11 Nov 2001 15:07:12 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 131710 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 11 Nov 2001 23:05:44          +0000
Received: from smtp003pub.verizon.net (smtp003pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.182])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA30545 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 11 Nov 2001 15:05:44 -0800
Received: from [63.24.225.7] (1Cust79.tnt2.rancho-cucamonga.ca.da.uu.net          [63.15.225.79]) by smtp003pub.verizon.net  with ESMTP for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; id fABN4f315085 Sun, 11 Nov 2001 17:04:42          -0600 (CST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: GTE/01rocket@mail.gte.net
References: <NKEHJAOOKBPGIKOOPDEFKEEACDAA.jwckman@space-rockets.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <a05100304b814b469b282@[63.24.225.7]>
Date:         Sun, 11 Nov 2001 15:05:12 -0800
Reply-To: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Bruce Kelly's Response on ROL - ANFO motors
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <NKEHJAOOKBPGIKOOPDEFKEEACDAA.jwckman@space-rockets.com>

>  >And I've already been corrected on the misuse of the word "anfo." Of
>course,
>  >all of you know what I mean.

Yes.  ANFO.

My responsive comments are on rmr for sanity (Hi arocket admin) :)

Jerry

--
Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
Opinion, the whole thing.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 5421 invoked from network); 11 Nov 2001 23:37:12 -0000
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 11 Nov 2001 23:37:12 -0000
Received: (qmail 15483 invoked by uid 50005); 11 Nov 2001 23:37:06 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4168. . Clean. Processed in 0.189695 secs); 11 Nov 2001 23:37:06 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 11 Nov 2001 23:37:05 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA30675; Sun, 11 Nov 2001 15:34:12 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 131730 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 11 Nov 2001 23:32:20          +0000
Received: from cablecom.laribay.net (cablecom.laribay.net [66.20.57.4]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA30659 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 11 Nov 2001 15:32:19 -0800
Received: from billbull (dial105.laribay.net [66.20.57.105]) by          cablecom.laribay.net (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id RAA29867 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 11 Nov 2001 17:16:49 -0600 (CST)          (envelope-from bpbullock@laribay.net)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <006301c16b09$2bc9aec0$4a391442@billbull>
Date:         Sun, 11 Nov 2001 17:32:46 -0600
Reply-To: "Bill Bullock" <bpbullock@LARIBAY.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Bill Bullock" <bpbullock@LARIBAY.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Bruce Kelly's Response on ROL - ANFO motors
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

    I appreciate Mr. Kelly's stating the means for having Ammonium Nitrate
oxidizer experimental rocket motors authorized by the Board of Directors and
his admission that he has known that the practice has existed for quite some
time. I understand that he is charged with protecting his organization as
best he can. I have great sympathy for anyone who has to deal with The
Federal Bureau of Anything. I have a problem with anyone pushing another
organization, group or individual forward and saying, in effect, "Here; eat
this one first and let us go."
    Would it not have been far better, and vastly more statesmanlike, to
have simply told the ATF Agent," Yes, Ammonium Nitrate is often used as an
oxidizer in experimental rocket motors which are in fact sometimes fired at
out experimental launches. We have an prominent advertiser in our magazine
whose company not only does research in this field but also for NASA and
other Federal Agencies and is well respected throughout the Experimental
Rocketry movement. Would you like for me to set up an appointment for you to
meet with this man and see some of his company's work?"
    This not only would have avoided all this "confusion" but would have
been a golden opportunity to educate someone who is likely to become a
familiar fixture in the future of High Power Rocketry in general. It also
would have loaded John's wagon instead of Mr. Kelly's.
    This is my own personal opinion, but who ever accused me of not having
one of those???
Bill

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 8890 invoked from network); 12 Nov 2001 00:20:14 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.105]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 12 Nov 2001 00:20:14 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 28900 invoked by uid 50005); 12 Nov 2001 00:20:08 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpy with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4168. . Clean. Processed in 0.157064 secs); 12 Nov 2001 00:20:08 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 12 Nov 2001 00:20:07 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA30871; Sun, 11 Nov 2001 16:16:33 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 131763 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 12 Nov 2001 00:15:01          +0000
Received: from fw1-bv.tek.com (fw1-bv.tek.com [192.65.40.16]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA30852 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun,          11 Nov 2001 16:15:00 -0800
Received: from fw1-bv.tek.com (root@localhost) by fw1-bv.tek.com with ESMTP id          fAC0EUZ20054 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 11 Nov 2001 16:14:30          -0800 (PST)
Received: from tektronix.tek.com (tektronix.tek.com [128.181.6.43]) by          fw1-bv.tek.com with ESMTP id fAC0EUx20046 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>;          Sun, 11 Nov 2001 16:14:30 -0800 (PST)
Received: from us-bv-u16 (us-bv-u16.bv.tek.com [128.181.2.45]) by          tektronix.tek.com (8.10.2+Sun/8.10.2) with SMTP id fAC0ET223329 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 11 Nov 2001 16:14:30 -0800 (PST)
Received: FROM us-bv-m01.bv.tek.com BY us-bv-u16 ; Sun Nov 11 16:14:29 2001          -0800
Received: by us-bv-m01.bv.tek.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) id          <V88SHALG>; Sun, 11 Nov 2001 16:14:28 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19)
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Message-ID:  <5832AFF5FC75D411844300508BC216B70302ABDD@us-bv-m07.bv.tek.com>
Date:         Sun, 11 Nov 2001 16:14:23 -0800
Reply-To: <john.w.lyngdal@EXGATE.TEK.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <john.w.lyngdal@EXGATE.TEK.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Tripoli EX Update
Comments: To: bkosko1@home.com
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Brian,

            It looks like John Wickman's advertisement cancellation got
Bruce's attention on the topic.

    My reply to Bruce's responses are to reason #1; if the insurance policy
is limited to APCP and N20 Hybrids, then the TRA-EX rules need to clearly
state that. I don't have any problem of TRA-EX activities being limited to
APCP and N20 Hybrids because of insurance coverage
limitations/considerations, but it is unconscionable not to provide that
critical information to EX fliers who would otherwise believe that the
TRA-EX insurance coverage is in effect. As to reason #2, limiting the scope
of TRA-EX to APCP, precludes the use of KN/Sugar motors and ANCP, both of
which use materials that more readably available to rocketry enthusiasts
than AP and are outside of the ATF list of low explosives materials. I'm a
AP/HTPB person myself, but I don't for a minute think that's the boundary
for safe EX activities.

                John


-----Original Message-----
From: Brian Kosko [mailto:bkosko1@home.com]
Sent: Saturday, November 10, 2001 2:12 PM
To: Lyngdal, John W
Cc: dburnam@zianet.com
Subject: Fw: Tripoli EX Update


John,

Can you ship this off to the arocketr boys for me. Some of them may find it
interesting. Boy did Bruce get right back to me on my letter!

Brian
----- Original Message -----
From: Brian Kosko <mailto:bkosko1@home.com>
To: arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU <mailto:arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Cc: dburnam@zianet.com <mailto:dburnam@zianet.com>
Sent: Saturday, November 10, 2001 3:09 PM
Subject: Tripoli EX Update

I just got done e-chatting with Bruce Kelly about some EX stuff. He and I
certainly had different ideas; I'm wondering what you think. I told him that
we considered the 'composite propellant' allowed by Tripoli EX rules to be;
well, composite propellant. That is, stuff made with some kind of polymer
binder, not any specific oxidizer. He said oh no. It is only AP composite
that was meant, and it is the only type allowed. Not AN composite, not KP
composite, etc.

He gave two main reasons: 1) APCP and N2O hybrids are the only things
specifically in our insurance policy. Having never seen the policy I can't
illuminate that more. 2) Several years ago a group looked into the EX thing
and only recommended APCP.

He informed me that Mr. Kosko's recommendation alone was not sufficient to
change things. He invited me to gather data and make a technical
presentation to the BOD if I wanted any changes. The same goes for sugar or
Z/S propellants. Somehow I doubt we'd find a very receptive audience.

Oh well, for what it's worth.

Brian

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 14986 invoked from network); 12 Nov 2001 04:01:35 -0000
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 12 Nov 2001 04:01:35 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 21295 invoked by uid 50005); 12 Nov 2001 04:01:29 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4168. . Clean. Processed in 0.677399 secs); 12 Nov 2001 04:01:29 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 12 Nov 2001 04:01:28 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA31598; Sun, 11 Nov 2001 19:59:05 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 131822 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 12 Nov 2001 03:57:32          +0000
Received: from smtp03.roc.frontiernet.net (alteon02h.roc.frontiernet.net          [66.133.130.248]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id TAA31583          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 11 Nov 2001 19:57:31 -0800
Received: (qmail 16294 invoked from network); 12 Nov 2001 03:57:00 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO frontiernet.net) ([64.208.224.8]) (envelope-sender          <tbinford@frontiernet.net>) by 0 (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; 12 Nov 2001 03:57:00 -0000
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.74 [en] (Win98; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3BECA72D.31FAACAD@frontiernet.net>
Date:         Fri, 9 Nov 2001 23:03:57 -0500
Reply-To: <tbinford@frontiernet.net>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Tom Binford" <tbinford@frontiernet.net>
Subject:      [AR] P motor static test
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

I fired the P motor today, successful burn and good data.

The motor is 6" diameter, 84" long with a fiberglass case. It's built as
a single use. Total weight is 118 lb. with 76 lb. of propellant in 8
5.275 x 2.25 x 8" long grains and 1 grain 9" long. Propellant type is
68-10. Total impulse was 16,682 Lb-sec (74,200 N-s) and burn time 8.3
seconds.

Thrust curve available on request.

Tom

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 7393 invoked from network); 12 Nov 2001 05:10:41 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Received: from smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.105]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 12 Nov 2001 05:10:41 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 3298 invoked by uid 50005); 12 Nov 2001 05:10:34 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpy with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4168. . Clean. Processed in 1.506173 secs); 12 Nov 2001 05:10:34 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 12 Nov 2001 05:10:30 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA31778; Sun, 11 Nov 2001 20:56:43 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 131843 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 12 Nov 2001 04:55:20          +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (f65.law8.hotmail.com [216.33.241.65]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA31758 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 11 Nov 2001 20:55:20 -0800
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Sun,          11 Nov 2001 20:54:49 -0800
Received: from 63.50.170.168 by lw8fd.law8.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Mon, 12          Nov 2001 04:54:49 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [63.50.170.168]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 12 Nov 2001 04:54:49.0759 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[28A802F0:01C16B36]
Message-ID:  <F65KPc99ir3wSimD3Jk000024a7@hotmail.com>
Date:         Mon, 12 Nov 2001 04:54:49 +0000
Reply-To: "Bryan Flynt" <b_flynt@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Bryan Flynt" <b_flynt@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Tripoli EX Update
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

<html><div style='background-color:'><DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV><FONT size=2>
<P>This seems like a total reversal from what has been occurring at TRA EX launches for a couple of years. Last year at Balls I know of an individual that launched several AN motors, because I set up right next to him and helped on a few occasions. Bruce Kelly himself came over several times and spoke about the motors with the maker; I watched and listened with my very own eyes and ears. This year the same guy had convinced some APCP makers to switch to AN and they were planning to make a big presence at Balls.</P>
<P>If Im not mistaken: Last year at Balls even Aerotech flew a (endburner?) motor with there WARP-9 propellant that uses KP.</P>
<P>The vague wording of the rules seems to indicate AN and KP are OK to use. If they were not it would only make since that they would be specifically prohibited. So to say the least Im a little discouraged as to what appears to be taking place here.</P>
<P>Bryan Flynt</P>
<P>&nbsp;</P></FONT>
<P>&gt;----- Original Message ----- </P>
<DIV></DIV>&gt;From: Brian Kosko <?xml:namespace prefix = mailto /><mailto:bkosko1@home.com>
<DIV></DIV>&gt;To: arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU <mailto:arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
<DIV></DIV>&gt;Cc: dburnam@zianet.com <mailto:dburnam@zianet.com>
<DIV></DIV>&gt;Sent: Saturday, November 10, 2001 3:09 PM
<DIV></DIV>&gt;Subject: Tripoli EX Update
<DIV></DIV>
<P>chopped text</P>
<P>"Not AN composite, not KP" </P>
<DIV>chopped text</DIV></mailto:dburnam@zianet.com></mailto:arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU></mailto:bkosko1@home.com></div><br clear=all><hr>Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at <a href='http://go.msn.com/bql/hmtag_itl_EN.asp'>http://explorer.msn.com</a><br></html>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 8412 invoked from network); 12 Nov 2001 07:20:01 -0000
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 12 Nov 2001 07:20:01 -0000
Received: (qmail 9974 invoked by uid 50005); 12 Nov 2001 07:19:55 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4168. . Clean. Processed in 0.390769 secs); 12 Nov 2001 07:19:55 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 12 Nov 2001 07:19:54 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA32337; Sun, 11 Nov 2001 23:15:39 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 131933 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 12 Nov 2001 07:14:05          +0000
Received: from corlabs (24-216-244-100.hsacorp.net [24.216.244.100]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA32318 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Sun, 11 Nov 2001 23:14:04 -0800
Received: from [24.216.244.164] by corlabs (ArGoSoft Mail Server Pro for          WinNT/2000, Version 1.62 (1.6.2.1)); Mon, 12 Nov 2001 01:51:33 -0600
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook CWS, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <006901c16b4b$1c3fb160$0200a8c0@charter.net>
Date:         Mon, 12 Nov 2001 01:24:47 -0600
Reply-To: "Carl A. Blood" <cablood@CORLABS.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Carl A. Blood" <cablood@CORLABS.COM>
Subject:      [AR] Tripoli
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

There site is down.

I was looking for confirmation of the comment made and the current response
from Mr. Kelly
Does anyone have direct links to this end?

Thanks
Carl

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 25088 invoked from network); 12 Nov 2001 08:09:40 -0000
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 12 Nov 2001 08:09:40 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 2819 invoked by uid 50005); 12 Nov 2001 08:09:34 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4168. . Clean. Processed in 0.138027 secs); 12 Nov 2001 08:09:34 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 12 Nov 2001 08:09:34 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA32543; Mon, 12 Nov 2001 00:07:33 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 131957 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 12 Nov 2001 08:06:11          +0000
Received: from scaup.prod.itd.earthlink.net (scaup.mail.pas.earthlink.net          [207.217.120.49]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA32527          for <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Mon, 12 Nov 2001 00:06:11 -0800
Received: from dialup-209.245.136.232.dial1.sanjose1.level3.net          ([209.245.136.232] helo=earthlink.net) by          scaup.prod.itd.earthlink.net with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id          163C6X-0007Q7-00; Mon, 12 Nov 2001 00:06:06 -0800
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (Win98; I)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <3BECA72D.31FAACAD@frontiernet.net>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3BEF8313.6CB31051@earthlink.net>
Date:         Mon, 12 Nov 2001 00:06:43 -0800
Reply-To: <thomgaf@energyrs.com>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Thomas M. Mcgaffey" <energyrelease@EARTHLINK.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] P motor static test
Comments: To: tbinford@frontiernet.net
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Hi Tom,

Congratulations! on the successful firing of your single use "P" motor.
I hope you have some pictures to share with us?  What is propellant type
68-10?  What chamber pressure did the motor at?  I would like to see
your thrust curve if are willing to share it.

Thom

Thomas M. McGaffey
thomgaf@energyrs.com
408-226-7502
Energy Release Systems
San Jose, Kalifornia


Tom Binford wrote:
>
> I fired the P motor today, successful burn and good data.
>
> The motor is 6" diameter, 84" long with a fiberglass case. It's built as
> a single use. Total weight is 118 lb. with 76 lb. of propellant in 8
> 5.275 x 2.25 x 8" long grains and 1 grain 9" long. Propellant type is
> 68-10. Total impulse was 16,682 Lb-sec (74,200 N-s) and burn time 8.3
> seconds.
>
> Thrust curve available on request.
>
> Tom
om

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 9501 invoked from network); 12 Nov 2001 16:34:35 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 12 Nov 2001 16:34:35 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 17107 invoked by uid 50005); 12 Nov 2001 16:34:29 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4169. . Clean. Processed in 0.176391 secs); 12 Nov 2001 16:34:29 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 12 Nov 2001 16:34:28 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA01669; Mon, 12 Nov 2001 08:18:12 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 132077 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 12 Nov 2001 16:17:46          +0000
Received: from fw1-bv.tek.com (fw1-bv.tek.com [192.65.40.16]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA01655 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon,          12 Nov 2001 08:17:46 -0800
Received: from fw1-bv.tek.com (root@localhost) by fw1-bv.tek.com with ESMTP id          fACGHF616642 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 12 Nov 2001 08:17:15          -0800 (PST)
Received: from tektronix.tek.com (tektronix.tek.com [128.181.6.43]) by          fw1-bv.tek.com with ESMTP id fACGHFx16635 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>;          Mon, 12 Nov 2001 08:17:15 -0800 (PST)
Received: from us-bv-u16 (us-bv-u16.bv.tek.com [128.181.2.45]) by          tektronix.tek.com (8.10.2+Sun/8.10.2) with SMTP id fACGHFX23598 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 12 Nov 2001 08:17:15 -0800 (PST)
Received: FROM us-bv-m01.bv.tek.com BY us-bv-u16 ; Mon Nov 12 08:17:14 2001          -0800
Received: by us-bv-m01.bv.tek.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) id          <V88SHVNV>; Mon, 12 Nov 2001 08:17:14 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19)
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Message-ID:  <5832AFF5FC75D411844300508BC216B70302ABE9@us-bv-m07.bv.tek.com>
Date:         Mon, 12 Nov 2001 08:17:11 -0800
Reply-To: <john.w.lyngdal@EXGATE.TEK.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <john.w.lyngdal@EXGATE.TEK.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Bruce Kelly's Response on ROL - ANFO motors
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

>True, the EX rules state "composite" which we have always interpreted
>as "ammonium perchlorate." It appears a big loop hole exists with
>interpretation. Most of the people I know understand AP is what is
>meant. Someone in your area probably gave "their" interpretation,
>passed it around and it stuck as official when it is not.
>

If I'm not mistaken some of the first early 1960's composite motors used KP
as the oxidizer and the binder was polysulfone based, so there is early
history of composite motors not containing AP and the binder not being HTPB.


Bruce's biggest understatement is: "It appears a big loop hole exists with
interpretation".

If the propellant formulations for TRA-EX are limited to APCP and N20
hybrids, then why wasn't that stated. They took the time to exclude BP
motors, so it would have been almost as easy to state the boundaries as APCP
and N20 Hybrids and deal with the BP motor issue all at the same time.

The final sentence is a doozy... "Someone in your area probably gave "their"
interpretation,
passed it around and it stuck as official when it is not".

Wow, talk about passing the buck. How about we(TRA BoD) knew what the
limitations of TRA-EX were but we didn't communicate them to the membership
in an effectual manner, which left to TRA-EX rules open to literal
interpretations.


><<>an oxidizer as you could want. There is no logical,chemical, or safety
>reason to allow AP composites and not allow AN composites.>>>
>
>Right now our insurance only covers two propellants, APCP and nitrous
>hybrids. The insurance altogether prohibits liquid propellants and we
>would have to find a new carrier if we were to ever add those. Our EX
>rules are also (loosely) tied to NFPA 1127, and APCP and nitrous is
>all that is allowed in the code. Other things can be added, but there
>is a process.

Another clarification that is clear as mud.

Our EX rules are also (loosely) tied to NFPA 1127, and APCP and nitrous is
all that is allowed in the code.

Is the code Bruce is referring to NFPA 1127 or the TRA-EX Safety Code?

I don't have copies of NFPA 1127, but if anyone has a copy I'd like to know
if there are any limitations on the propellant chemistry stated, and if so
what they are?

>
><<>made.>>>>
>
>We need more than a "motion." We need someone to prepare a paper,
>present demonstrations to the Board of Directors, and then we can
>entertain motions. If it is proven safe, then we move forward. We
>welcome the addition of new and safe propellants.


OK, I'll bite. Has anyone seen the presentations or data used to support the
safe use of APCP and N20 hybrids in the TRA-EX program? Or even a mention
that they occurred in the BoD meeting minutes? Don't get me wrong, I agree
that they are safe; but it would be helpful to see what level of
documentation that has been used in the past to prepare for the
presentation.

>
><<>composite? They are extremely safe and are being made world wide.>>>
>
>No, they do not. Again, the concept has never been presented.
>
><<>this?>>>
>
>We formed a Future Directions Committee years ago and they stopped
>with APCP and hybrids. They recommended the use of these and further
>study before we allowed anything else. Those findings may be
>antiquated, but we don't just over turn policy without reason.


The members of this committee are........


>
>If you are really interested in adding propellants to our list of
>"acceptables," you sure have my encouragement to do so. I outlined
>what you need to do above.
>
><<>>
>
>So far, anything that is not APCP and nitrous hybrids are prohibited.


Well, thanks for the belated clarification. Thankfully there hasn't been a
need to use the TRA-EX insurance, as finding out that insurance coverage
wasn't in effect because of the flavor of composite propellant used in the
motor would have been an unpleasant discovery.


I'll leave the rest of the message for your own interpretation


        John




>
><<>>
>
>I gave you some history, and the rest (politically and regulatory) is
>too long and complicated to go into here. Call me next week and I'll
>discuss all that with you. There is another short answer, though. No
>one asked for anything else until today. So let me return the
>question, and ask why is that?
>
>I will tell you this... It will be a lot easier for Tripoli to say
>"yes" and to move forward with additional propellants than it will be
>in the regulatory environment. We have to consider more than just your
>state. When you talk about adding things to an international
>organization, it becomes complicated. Come to our next NFPA meeting
>(April) in Huntsville and you'll see what kinds of crap I have to wade
>through just to do what we are doing now.
>
>I don't know if you are aware of this or not, but the International
>Building Code now references the NFPA documents for rocketry. States
>that adopt this IBC may find themselves outlawing other forms of
>rocketry. I have addressed my concerns about this with NFPA and have
>gotten nowhere. IBC has an aggressive campaign going on to get it
>accepted as "gospel" world wide.
>
><<>>
>
>We wanted to. Simple as that.
>
><<>>
>
>We have too many regulatory eyes on us right now to just allow it
>before it is reviewed from a technical position. As I said, we will
>look at anything presented, but we will not allow anything without a
>presentation. That is not a position of anti-liberal, it is a common
>sense approach.
>
><<>popular. And a lot of people who get into making their own motors
>start with sugar motors or AN motors. These are also the only ones
>non-U.S. types can make; they can't get AP.>>>
>
>Another good reason for looking at the issue, but again not without a
>technical presentation.
>
>Look at it this way. Let's say we say "yes" to everything and anything
>from the position that "it must be safe until we have an incident that
>proves otherwise, and because Mr. Kosko says it's OK." Now what kind
>of a position would that put our "organization" in if there was an
>accident? With our insurance company? With regulators?
>
>Now, let's look at our standing coming from a technical position...
>
>We have an accident and investigations follow. But in this case, I
>have a paper trail showing:
>
>1. Someone (you) asked us to look at something new to make available
>to 4,000 people.
>
>2. You present a technical paper.
>
>3. You give us a presentation to back up your technical findings.
>
>4. The BOD accepts, or asks for more info first and then accepts.
>
>5. Then I (or my successor) approaches the regulatory bodies with
>technical information.
>
>6. You may be asked to do your demonstration before a committee or
>two.
>
>7. The new propellant is generally accepted because the technical
>presentation was real convincing and also found to be technically
>sound. (This is how we won the sparky motor argument. The technical
>data was so sound that even the respect of Vern Estes could not
>convince the committee otherwise.)
>
>Using this approach, Tripoli is in a position to defend itself in
>almost any venue or litigious situation that may arise. It has also
>won Tripoli an tremendous amount of respect among our former enemies.
>
>In this day and age, this is the path we have to take. Any other path
>would be irresponsible and (socially) unacceptable. This may sound
>unfair, but that is the way it is - no thanks to the collection of
>idiots we have in our society.
>
><<>combustion catalysts, oxidizers, etc.? Right now the EX rules are
>pretty vague in terms of what's allowable, can we clear that up? There
>are several of us who have done extensive EX work and would be happy
>to give our input. And let's try to make EX MORE doable, not less.>>>>
>
>Look, I'm not going to do a run down of every little ingredient that
>may go into a motor. I know that catozine and ferrozine (sp) are
>prohibited the NFPA documents. I also know that, if we venture too far
>into exotic stuff we will be limited at places such as Black Rock. For
>example, we have some real problems with the BLM right now. They look
>at EPA studies and are asking questions and requiring difficult-to-get
>permits for certain things. The *!@# is going to hit the fan in other
>locations too. We have one other site that, right now, is being put
>under scrutiny because of the EPA.
>
>Let's take this one step at a time. You want AN motors? Send me a
>technical paper to distribute to the BOD, come to LDRS next July and
>give us a presentation. Chances are this is very doable. If several of
>you are happy to give us input, please - by all means - do! Spread
>this around and get as many people involved as you would like. I'll
>look forward to it,
>
>B Kelly
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 25073 invoked from network); 12 Nov 2001 17:08:33 -0000
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 12 Nov 2001 17:08:33 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 4929 invoked by uid 50005); 12 Nov 2001 17:08:27 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4169. . Clean. Processed in 0.614772 secs); 12 Nov 2001 17:08:27 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 12 Nov 2001 17:08:26 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA02164; Mon, 12 Nov 2001 09:05:05 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 132145 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 12 Nov 2001 17:04:58          +0000
Received: from rftzy05y.ca.nortel.com (h161s130a130n47.user.nortelnetworks.com          [47.130.130.161]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA01944          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 12 Nov 2001 08:53:38 -0800
Received: from rftzy232.ca.nortel.com (rftzy232.ca.nortel.com [47.130.185.32])          by rftzy05y.ca.nortel.com (Switch-2.2.0/Switch-2.2.0) with ESMTP id          fACGqhF24973; Mon, 12 Nov 2001 11:52:44 -0500 (EST)
Received: from NORTELNETWORKS.COM (wftzh00e.ca.nortel.com [47.130.116.9]) by          rftzy232.ca.nortel.com with SMTP (Microsoft Exchange Internet Mail          Service Version 5.5.2653.13) id WA4JD284; Mon, 12 Nov 2001 11:50:51          -0500
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.73C-CCK-MCD  [en] (X11; U; HP-UX B.10.20 9000/785)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <5832AFF5FC75D411844300508BC216B70302ABE9@us-bv-m07.bv.tek.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3BEFFE68.D50BCE1F@NORTELNETWORKS.COM>
Date:         Mon, 12 Nov 2001 11:52:56 -0500
Reply-To: "Leech, Marcus \(EXCHANGE:FITZ:8M86\)" <mleech@NORTELNETWORKS.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Leech, Marcus \(EXCHANGE:FITZ:8M86\)" <mleech@NORTELNETWORKS.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Bruce Kelly's Response on ROL - ANFO motors
Comments: To: john.w.lyngdal@EXGATE.TEK.COM
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

john.w.lyngdal@EXGATE.TEK.COM wrote:

> Another clarification that is clear as mud.
>
> Our EX rules are also (loosely) tied to NFPA 1127, and APCP and nitrous is
> all that is allowed in the code.
>
> Is the code Bruce is referring to NFPA 1127 or the TRA-EX Safety Code?
>
> I don't have copies of NFPA 1127, but if anyone has a copy I'd like to know
> if there are any limitations on the propellant chemistry stated, and if so
> what they are?
>
He's blowing smoke.  NFPA-1127 *does not* limit operations to only APCP and
  N2O/Fuel, although some of the definitions in it for hybrids are tied to
  N2O (the definition of a flight cylinder, for example), there's *nothing*
  in the code that precludes other types of composite or hybrid motors.
  Even the most recent versions of 1125 (the manufacturing code) have
  stripped much of the oxidizer-specific language.

The TRA limitations on experimentation are just plain silly.  I would, without
  hesitation, explicitly allow ANCP, and KNCP propellants, and I'd certainly
  allow greater flexibility in hybrids and liquid bi-props.  TRA-EX rules
  currently exclude liquid bi-props, but there's plenty of experience with
  N2O+Fuel biprops out there that can show safety as least as good as
  as other TRA-EX technologies.

Fortunately, I can engage in these activities without TRA involvement at all,
  so it's largely irrelevant to me.

--
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Marcus Leech                             Mail:   Dept 8M70, MS 012, FITZ
Advisor                                  Phone: (ESN) 393-9145  +1 613 763 9145
Security Architecture and Planning       Fax:   (ESN) 393-9435  +1 613 763 9435
Nortel Networks                          mleech@nortelnetworks.com
-----------------Expressed opinions are my own, not my employer's------

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 8677 invoked from network); 12 Nov 2001 17:35:10 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 12 Nov 2001 17:35:10 -0000
Received: (qmail 17257 invoked by uid 50005); 12 Nov 2001 17:35:04 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4169. . Clean. Processed in 0.633816 secs); 12 Nov 2001 17:35:04 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 12 Nov 2001 17:35:03 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA02315; Mon, 12 Nov 2001 09:24:17 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 132191 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 12 Nov 2001 17:24:08          +0000
Received: from www.rocketry.org (root@[209.125.21.145]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA02301 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Mon,          12 Nov 2001 09:24:07 -0800
Received: from localhost (tim@localhost) by www.rocketry.org (8.11.4/8.11.4)          with ESMTP id fACHLVv24066 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Mon, 12 Nov          2001 10:21:31 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.LNX.4.33.0111121020200.24059-100000@www.rocketry.org>
Date:         Mon, 12 Nov 2001 10:21:31 -0700
Reply-To: "T.J." <tim@ROCKETRY.ORG>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "T.J." <tim@ROCKETRY.ORG>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Bruce Kelly's Response on ROL - ANFO motors
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <3BEFFE68.D50BCE1F@NORTELNETWORKS.COM>

> > Another clarification that is clear as mud.
> >
> > Our EX rules are also (loosely) tied to NFPA 1127, and APCP and nitrous is
> > all that is allowed in the code.
> >
> > Is the code Bruce is referring to NFPA 1127 or the TRA-EX Safety Code?
> >
> > I don't have copies of NFPA 1127, but if anyone has a copy I'd like to know
> > if there are any limitations on the propellant chemistry stated, and if so
> > what they are?
> >
> He's blowing smoke.  NFPA-1127 *does not* limit operations to only APCP and
>   N2O/Fuel, although some of the definitions in it for hybrids are tied to
>   N2O (the definition of a flight cylinder, for example), there's *nothing*
>   in the code that precludes other types of composite or hybrid motors.
>   Even the most recent versions of 1125 (the manufacturing code) have
>   stripped much of the oxidizer-specific language.

He said that their insurance carrier was the reason for that limit. He
stated in that message that they would need to find another insurance
carrier to allow liquid bi-propellants, etc..

TIM

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 28435 invoked from network); 12 Nov 2001 17:56:57 -0000
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 12 Nov 2001 17:56:57 -0000
Received: (qmail 17281 invoked by uid 50005); 12 Nov 2001 17:56:51 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4169. . Clean. Processed in 0.156004 secs); 12 Nov 2001 17:56:51 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 12 Nov 2001 17:56:50 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA02541; Mon, 12 Nov 2001 09:50:47 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 132235 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 12 Nov 2001 17:50:38          +0000
Received: from mailhost0.trib.com (mailhost0.trib.com [63.229.150.3]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA02523 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Mon, 12 Nov 2001 09:50:38 -0800
Received: from mail.trib.com (mail.trib.com [12.10.158.17]) by          mailhost0.trib.com (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id fACHoaC85134; Mon,          12 Nov 2001 10:50:36 -0700 (MST) (envelope-from          jwckman@space-rockets.com)
Received: from [63.229.150.71] (HELO hppav) by mail.trib.com (CommuniGate Pro          SMTP 3.4.6) with SMTP id 57488915; Mon, 12 Nov 2001 10:49:42 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <NKEHJAOOKBPGIKOOPDEFIEEECDAA.jwckman@space-rockets.com>
Date:         Mon, 12 Nov 2001 10:48:39 -0700
Reply-To: "John Wickman" <jwckman@SPACE-ROCKETS.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Wickman" <jwckman@SPACE-ROCKETS.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] P motor static test
Comments: To: tbinford@frontiernet.net
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <3BECA72D.31FAACAD@frontiernet.net>

Tom,

That's great!  When and where do we see the second version fly?

John Wickman


-----Original Message-----
From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@itc.uci.edu]On
Behalf Of Tom Binford
Sent: Friday, November 09, 2001 9:04 PM
To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
Subject: [AR] P motor static test


I fired the P motor today, successful burn and good data.

The motor is 6" diameter, 84" long with a fiberglass case. It's built as
a single use. Total weight is 118 lb. with 76 lb. of propellant in 8
5.275 x 2.25 x 8" long grains and 1 grain 9" long. Propellant type is
68-10. Total impulse was 16,682 Lb-sec (74,200 N-s) and burn time 8.3
seconds.

Thrust curve available on request.

Tom

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 29362 invoked from network); 12 Nov 2001 17:57:11 -0000
Received: from smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.105]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 12 Nov 2001 17:57:11 -0000
Received: (qmail 3051 invoked by uid 50005); 12 Nov 2001 17:57:05 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpy with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4169. . Clean. Processed in 0.323246 secs); 12 Nov 2001 17:57:05 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 12 Nov 2001 17:57:04 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA02558; Mon, 12 Nov 2001 09:50:54 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 132242 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 12 Nov 2001 17:50:48          +0000
Received: from mailhost0.trib.com (mailhost0.trib.com [63.229.150.3]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA02534 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Mon, 12 Nov 2001 09:50:45 -0800
Received: from mail.trib.com (mail.trib.com [12.10.158.17]) by          mailhost0.trib.com (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id fACHoaC85136; Mon,          12 Nov 2001 10:50:37 -0700 (MST) (envelope-from          jwckman@space-rockets.com)
Received: from [63.229.150.71] (HELO hppav) by mail.trib.com (CommuniGate Pro          SMTP 3.4.6) with SMTP id 57488917; Mon, 12 Nov 2001 10:49:44 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <NKEHJAOOKBPGIKOOPDEFKEEECDAA.jwckman@space-rockets.com>
Date:         Mon, 12 Nov 2001 10:48:41 -0700
Reply-To: "John Wickman" <jwckman@SPACE-ROCKETS.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Wickman" <jwckman@SPACE-ROCKETS.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Tripoli
Comments: To: "Carl A. Blood" <cablood@corlabs.com>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <006901c16b4b$1c3fb160$0200a8c0@charter.net>

Carl,

I should have said that I got the reported response by B. Kelly from the
forum on Rocketryonline.  I believe it was the general forum.

John Wickman


-----Original Message-----
From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@itc.uci.edu]On
Behalf Of Carl A. Blood
Sent: Monday, November 12, 2001 12:25 AM
To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
Subject: [AR] Tripoli


There site is down.

I was looking for confirmation of the comment made and the current response
from Mr. Kelly
Does anyone have direct links to this end?

Thanks
Carl

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 11649 invoked from network); 12 Nov 2001 18:31:39 -0000
Received: from smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.105]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 12 Nov 2001 18:31:39 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 28645 invoked by uid 50005); 12 Nov 2001 18:31:33 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpy with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4169. . Clean. Processed in 0.249938 secs); 12 Nov 2001 18:31:33 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 12 Nov 2001 18:31:33 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA02872; Mon, 12 Nov 2001 10:29:11 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 132305 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 12 Nov 2001 18:28:48          +0000
Received: from dns2.seanet.com (dns2.seanet.com [199.181.164.2]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA02858 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon,          12 Nov 2001 10:28:47 -0800
Received: from seanet.com (ssstolt.seanet.com [204.182.68.23]) by          dns2.seanet.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id fACISjF02803; Mon, 12          Nov 2001 10:28:45 -0800 (PST)
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.73 [en] (Win98; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <5832AFF5FC75D411844300508BC216B70302ABE9@us-bv-m07.bv.tek.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3BF01497.ADD57419@seanet.com>
Date:         Mon, 12 Nov 2001 10:27:35 -0800
Reply-To: "Sherwood Stolt" <ssstolt@SEANET.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Sherwood Stolt" <ssstolt@SEANET.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Bruce Kelly's Response on ROL - ANFO motors
Comments: To: john.w.lyngdal@EXGATE.TEK.COM
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

I searched throuh 1127 fairly carefully and found a limtation on hybrids
to only use N2O but I found no restriction on solid propellant chemistry.
Of course 1127 applies only to HPR rockets which have certified
commercially produced motors so you would probably have to look
at the manufacture and certification regulations to find any restrictions.

john.w.lyngdal@EXGATE.TEK.COM wrote:

>
>
> Is the code Bruce is referring to NFPA 1127 or the TRA-EX Safety Code?
>
> I don't have copies of NFPA 1127, but if anyone has a copy I'd like to know
> if there are any limitations on the propellant chemistry stated, and if so
> what they are?

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 18591 invoked from network); 12 Nov 2001 18:33:16 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 12 Nov 2001 18:33:16 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 16333 invoked by uid 50005); 12 Nov 2001 18:33:10 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4169. . Clean. Processed in 0.213649 secs); 12 Nov 2001 18:33:10 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 12 Nov 2001 18:33:10 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA02904; Mon, 12 Nov 2001 10:30:50 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 132312 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 12 Nov 2001 18:30:43          +0000
Received: from smtp003pub.verizon.net (smtp003pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.182])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA02887 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 12 Nov 2001 10:30:42 -0800
Received: from [63.15.225.174] (1Cust174.tnt2.rancho-cucamonga.ca.da.uu.net          [63.15.225.174]) by smtp003pub.verizon.net  with ESMTP for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; id fACITb308949 Mon, 12 Nov 2001 12:29:38          -0600 (CST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: GTE/01rocket@mail.gte.net
References: <5832AFF5FC75D411844300508BC216B70302ABE9@us-bv-m07.bv.tek.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <a05100300b815c3921f66@[63.24.225.49]>
Date:         Mon, 12 Nov 2001 10:30:08 -0800
Reply-To: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Bruce Kelly's Response on ROL - ANFO motors
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <5832AFF5FC75D411844300508BC216B70302ABE9@us-bv-m07.bv.tek.com>

>  >True, the EX rules state "composite" which we have always interpreted
>>as "ammonium perchlorate." It appears a big loop hole exists with
>>interpretation. Most of the people I know understand AP is what is
>>meant. Someone in your area probably gave "their" interpretation,
>>passed it around and it stuck as official when it is not.
>>
>
>If I'm not mistaken some of the first early 1960's composite motors used KP
>as the oxidizer and the binder was polysulfone based, so there is early


Polysulphide

Bruce is focused entirely on his world and regularly ignores history.
This is not new.


>history of composite motors not containing AP and the binder not being HTPB.
>
>
>Bruce's biggest understatement is: "It appears a big loop hole exists with
>interpretation".
>
>If the propellant formulations for TRA-EX are limited to APCP and N20
>hybrids, then why wasn't that stated. They took the time to exclude BP


Exactly.  It was written that way to ENCOURAGE new propellants that
would then be added to the TMT rules for certification. It is that
TMT rule process he is confusing with EX rulemaking.  It was never
intended to limit the propellant choices to narrow choices.

Bruce also likes to rewrite history to cover his tracks so lets watch
and be entertained as it happens and is played out on rmr in all its
politically messy details :)



>motors, so it would have been almost as easy to state the boundaries as APCP
>and N20 Hybrids and deal with the BP motor issue all at the same time.
>
>The final sentence is a doozy... "Someone in your area probably gave "their"
>interpretation,
>passed it around and it stuck as official when it is not".
>
>Wow, talk about passing the buck. How about we(TRA BoD) knew what the
>limitations of TRA-EX were but we didn't communicate them to the membership
>in an effectual manner, which left to TRA-EX rules open to literal
>interpretations.
>
>
>><<>an oxidizer as you could want. There is no logical,chemical, or safety
>>reason to allow AP composites and not allow AN composites.>>>
>>
>>Right now our insurance only covers two propellants, APCP and nitrous
>>hybrids. The insurance altogether prohibits liquid propellants and we
>>would have to find a new carrier if we were to ever add those. Our EX
>>rules are also (loosely) tied to NFPA 1127, and APCP and nitrous is
>>all that is allowed in the code. Other things can be added, but there
>>is a process.
>
>Another clarification that is clear as mud.
>
>Our EX rules are also (loosely) tied to NFPA 1127, and APCP and nitrous is
>all that is allowed in the code.
>
>Is the code Bruce is referring to NFPA 1127 or the TRA-EX Safety Code?


He refers to NFPA-1127 and EX rules for TRA.


>
>I don't have copies of NFPA 1127, but if anyone has a copy I'd like to know
>if there are any limitations on the propellant chemistry stated, and if so
>what they are?


I do believe there are limitations in 1127 because it approximates
the CERTIFIED motor rules for TRA (TMT).


>
>>
>><<>made.>>>>
>>
>>We need more than a "motion." We need someone to prepare a paper,
>>present demonstrations to the Board of Directors, and then we can
>>entertain motions. If it is proven safe, then we move forward. We
>>welcome the addition of new and safe propellants.
>
>
>OK, I'll bite. Has anyone seen the presentations or data used to support the
>safe use of APCP and N20 hybrids in the TRA-EX program? Or even a mention


There were not any.  Bruce mistakenly refers to normal certified
motor tests.  NOT EX stuff.


>that they occurred in the BoD meeting minutes? Don't get me wrong, I agree
>that they are safe; but it would be helpful to see what level of
>documentation that has been used in the past to prepare for the
>presentation.
>
>  >
>  ><<>composite? They are extremely safe and are being made world wide.>>>
>>
>>No, they do not. Again, the concept has never been presented.
>>
>><<>this?>>>
>>
>>We formed a Future Directions Committee years ago and they stopped


Korey Kline and Tom Blazanin leaders.


>  >with APCP and hybrids. They recommended the use of these and further
>  >study before we allowed anything else. Those findings may be
>>antiquated, but we don't just over turn policy without reason.
>
>
>The members of this committee are........
>
>
>>
>>If you are really interested in adding propellants to our list of
>>"acceptables," you sure have my encouragement to do so. I outlined
>>what you need to do above.
>>
>><<>>
>>
>>So far, anything that is not APCP and nitrous hybrids are prohibited.
>
>
>Well, thanks for the belated clarification. Thankfully there hasn't been a
>need to use the TRA-EX insurance, as finding out that insurance coverage
>wasn't in effect because of the flavor of composite propellant used in the
>motor would have been an unpleasant discovery.
>
>
>I'll leave the rest of the message for your own interpretation
>
>
>         John
>
>
>
>
>>
>><<>>
>>
>>I gave you some history, and the rest (politically and regulatory) is
>>too long and complicated to go into here. Call me next week and I'll
>>discuss all that with you. There is another short answer, though. No


So he wants to be called.  Apparently he has not yet learned incoming
calls from all over the country where the content is repeated over
and over is a grand waste of time.  No wonder he cannot get out a
magazine (that communicates alot more info than vernal communication
to thousands more people.


>  >one asked for anything else until today. So let me return the
>>question, and ask why is that?
>>
>>I will tell you this... It will be a lot easier for Tripoli to say
>>"yes" and to move forward with additional propellants than it will be
>>in the regulatory environment. We have to consider more than just your
>>state. When you talk about adding things to an international
>>organization, it becomes complicated. Come to our next NFPA meeting
>>(April) in Huntsville and you'll see what kinds of crap I have to wade
>>through just to do what we are doing now.
>>
>>I don't know if you are aware of this or not, but the International
>>Building Code now references the NFPA documents for rocketry. States
>>that adopt this IBC may find themselves outlawing other forms of
>>rocketry. I have addressed my concerns about this with NFPA and have
>>gotten nowhere. IBC has an aggressive campaign going on to get it
>>accepted as "gospel" world wide.
>>
>><<>>
>>
>>We wanted to. Simple as that.
>>
>><<>>
>>
>>We have too many regulatory eyes on us right now to just allow it
>>before it is reviewed from a technical position. As I said, we will
>>look at anything presented, but we will not allow anything without a
>>presentation. That is not a position of anti-liberal, it is a common
>>sense approach.
>>
>><<>popular. And a lot of people who get into making their own motors
>>start with sugar motors or AN motors. These are also the only ones
>>non-U.S. types can make; they can't get AP.>>>
>>
>>Another good reason for looking at the issue, but again not without a
>>technical presentation.
>>
>>Look at it this way. Let's say we say "yes" to everything and anything
>>from the position that "it must be safe until we have an incident that
>>proves otherwise, and because Mr. Kosko says it's OK." Now what kind
>>of a position would that put our "organization" in if there was an
>>accident? With our insurance company? With regulators?
>>
>>Now, let's look at our standing coming from a technical position...
>>
>>We have an accident and investigations follow. But in this case, I
>>have a paper trail showing:
>>
>>1. Someone (you) asked us to look at something new to make available
>>to 4,000 people.
>>
>>2. You present a technical paper.
>>
>>3. You give us a presentation to back up your technical findings.
>>
>>4. The BOD accepts, or asks for more info first and then accepts.
>>
>>5. Then I (or my successor) approaches the regulatory bodies with
>>technical information.
>>
>>6. You may be asked to do your demonstration before a committee or
>>two.
>>
>>7. The new propellant is generally accepted because the technical
>>presentation was real convincing and also found to be technically
>>sound. (This is how we won the sparky motor argument. The technical
>>data was so sound that even the respect of Vern Estes could not
>>convince the committee otherwise.)
>  >
>>Using this approach, Tripoli is in a position to defend itself in
>>almost any venue or litigious situation that may arise. It has also
>>won Tripoli an tremendous amount of respect among our former enemies.
>>
>>In this day and age, this is the path we have to take. Any other path
>>would be irresponsible and (socially) unacceptable. This may sound
>>unfair, but that is the way it is - no thanks to the collection of
>>idiots we have in our society.
>>
>><<>combustion catalysts, oxidizers, etc.? Right now the EX rules are
>>pretty vague in terms of what's allowable, can we clear that up? There
>>are several of us who have done extensive EX work and would be happy
>>to give our input. And let's try to make EX MORE doable, not less.>>>>
>>
>>Look, I'm not going to do a run down of every little ingredient that
>>may go into a motor. I know that catozine and ferrozine (sp) are
>>prohibited the NFPA documents. I also know that, if we venture too far
>>into exotic stuff we will be limited at places such as Black Rock. For
>>example, we have some real problems with the BLM right now. They look
>>at EPA studies and are asking questions and requiring difficult-to-get
>>permits for certain things. The *!@# is going to hit the fan in other
>>locations too. We have one other site that, right now, is being put
>>under scrutiny because of the EPA.
>>
>>Let's take this one step at a time. You want AN motors? Send me a
>>technical paper to distribute to the BOD, come to LDRS next July and
>>give us a presentation. Chances are this is very doable. If several of
>>you are happy to give us input, please - by all means - do! Spread
>>this around and get as many people involved as you would like. I'll
>>look forward to it,
>>
>>B Kelly
>>



Jerry

TRA 012 (pending refund)

--
Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
Opinion, the whole thing.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 7241 invoked from network); 12 Nov 2001 18:46:31 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 12 Nov 2001 18:46:31 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 2537 invoked by uid 50005); 12 Nov 2001 18:46:25 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4169. . Clean. Processed in 0.209452 secs); 12 Nov 2001 18:46:25 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 12 Nov 2001 18:46:24 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA03103; Mon, 12 Nov 2001 10:44:28 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 132345 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 12 Nov 2001 18:44:21          +0000
Received: from mail-srv1.micron.com (masquerade.micron.com [137.201.242.130])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA03088 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 12 Nov 2001 10:44:20 -0800
Received: from mail-srv1.micron.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by          mail-srv1.micron.com (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id fACIhnP12921 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 12 Nov 2001 11:43:49 -0700 (MST)
Received: from ntexchange01.micron.com (ntexchange01 [137.201.104.84]) by          mail-srv1.micron.com (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id fACIhm712887 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 12 Nov 2001 11:43:48 -0700 (MST)
Received: by ntexchange01.micron.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19)          id <WWJAA7CX>; Mon, 12 Nov 2001 11:43:48 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19)
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Message-ID:  <2DCA36C44BF3D211917F0008C7C9C9DD067ECFB4@ntexchange06.micron.com>
Date:         Mon, 12 Nov 2001 11:43:46 -0700
Reply-To: "gacrowell" <gacrowell@MICRON.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "gacrowell" <gacrowell@MICRON.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] quaternions, 2nd try
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Well nuts, my apologies to all.  Attachments to the arocket list on the
prior message were entirely by accident, it should have been addressed to
Jerry only.

Gary Crowell

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 16604 invoked from network); 12 Nov 2001 18:49:10 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 12 Nov 2001 18:49:10 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: (qmail 1252 invoked by uid 50005); 12 Nov 2001 18:49:04 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4169. . Clean. Processed in 0.665562 secs); 12 Nov 2001 18:49:04 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 12 Nov 2001 18:49:02 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA03144; Mon, 12 Nov 2001 10:47:26 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 132354 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 12 Nov 2001 18:47:20          +0000
Received: from spsystems.net (spsystems.net [209.47.149.227]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA03128 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Mon,          12 Nov 2001 10:47:20 -0800
Received: (from henry@localhost) by spsystems.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id NAA02714;          Mon, 12 Nov 2001 13:46:47 -0500 (EST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1011112133758.2148A-100000@spsystems.net>
Date:         Mon, 12 Nov 2001 13:46:44 -0500
Reply-To: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] NFPA codes in revision
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

When the topic of the NFPA revisions first came up last month, I mentioned
it to Randall Clague, ERPS's Regulatory Affairs Officer, since it sounded
like something he might want to check on.  For his own use, he did a
summary of the interesting (from his viewpoint) changes in the drafts;
with his permission, I append it, as something that might be of interest
to other readers.

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net
----------
The total impulse of the rocket, from all engines, not just rockets,
must be 40,960 N-sec (O class) or less.  This recommendation comes
from the NFPA Natl Committee on Pyro, which says there is no change in
intent - but they did strike the word "rocket" in describing the
motors whose total impulse is constrained;

Excludes pressurized liquid rockets (water rockets) from the standard,
regardless of mass;

Clarifies RSO's role, and rejects proposals for specific roles/titles
for RSO's assistants (whaddya know - an opportunity to tighten the
standard, and they turned it down - these guys have some sense);

Sets a minimum launch T/W of 3:1, based on certified average thrust;

Requires rockets with more than 2560 N-sec total impulse (I class) to
use electronic recovery, as primary or backup;

Changes utility notification requirement from, "user shall attempt to
notify utility," to, "utility shall be notified;"

Removes the launch rod cap requirement for HPRs;

Increases the minimum clear distance by 50% for rockets using motors
with titanium sponge;

Approval from owner of inhabited building inside minimum clear
distance must now be in writing;

Includes parking area in spectator/participant exclusion area around pad;

Manufacturing stuff in Chapter 3 was moved to NFPA 1125;

Certification now requires proof of age;

"Sparky" motors are now permitted, over the objections of Boles and Estes.
----------

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 8616 invoked from network); 12 Nov 2001 19:02:45 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.105]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 12 Nov 2001 19:02:45 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 11499 invoked by uid 50005); 12 Nov 2001 19:02:39 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpy with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4169. . Clean. Processed in 0.500607 secs); 12 Nov 2001 19:02:39 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 12 Nov 2001 19:02:38 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA03253; Mon, 12 Nov 2001 11:00:48 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 132378 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 12 Nov 2001 19:00:40          +0000
Received: from mail-srv1.micron.com (masquerade.micron.com [137.201.242.130])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA03239 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 12 Nov 2001 11:00:39 -0800
Received: from mail-srv1.micron.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by          mail-srv1.micron.com (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id fACJ09P26221 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 12 Nov 2001 12:00:09 -0700 (MST)
Received: from ntexchange01.micron.com (ntexchange01 [137.201.104.84]) by          mail-srv1.micron.com (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id fACJ08726210 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 12 Nov 2001 12:00:08 -0700 (MST)
Received: by ntexchange01.micron.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19)          id <WWJAA89D>; Mon, 12 Nov 2001 12:00:08 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19)
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Message-ID:  <2DCA36C44BF3D211917F0008C7C9C9DD067ECFB6@ntexchange06.micron.com>
Date:         Mon, 12 Nov 2001 12:00:05 -0700
Reply-To: "gacrowell" <gacrowell@MICRON.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "gacrowell" <gacrowell@MICRON.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] quaternions, 2nd try
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Hey, its Monday, OK?  Apparently the email with attachments did not go to
arocket after all.  So...

I apologize for the prior apology which was made in error.  Those
responsible have been sacked.

GC

> -----Original Message-----
> From: gacrowell [mailto:gacrowell@MICRON.COM]
> Sent: Monday, November 12, 2001 11:44 AM
> To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
> Subject: Re: [AR] quaternions, 2nd try
>
>
> Well nuts, my apologies to all.  Attachments to the arocket
> list on the
> prior message were entirely by accident, it should have been
> addressed to
> Jerry only.
>
> Gary Crowell
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 25962 invoked from network); 12 Nov 2001 20:44:43 -0000
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 12 Nov 2001 20:44:43 -0000
Received: (qmail 26231 invoked by uid 50005); 12 Nov 2001 20:44:36 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4169. . Clean. Processed in 1.266889 secs); 12 Nov 2001 20:44:36 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 12 Nov 2001 20:44:34 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA03924; Mon, 12 Nov 2001 12:42:03 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 132458 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 12 Nov 2001 20:41:50          +0000
Received: from mailhost0.trib.com (mailhost0.trib.com [63.229.150.3]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA03910 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Mon, 12 Nov 2001 12:41:49 -0800
Received: from mail.trib.com (mail.trib.com [12.10.158.17]) by          mailhost0.trib.com (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id fACKflC61478; Mon,          12 Nov 2001 13:41:47 -0700 (MST) (envelope-from          jwckman@space-rockets.com)
Received: from [63.229.150.81] (HELO default) by mail.trib.com (CommuniGate Pro          SMTP 3.4.6) with SMTP id 57511430; Mon, 12 Nov 2001 13:41:45 -0700
References:  <Pine.LNX.4.33.0111121020200.24059-100000@www.rocketry.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2314.1300
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <001501c16bba$1de7bca0$5196e53f@default>
Date:         Mon, 12 Nov 2001 13:39:14 -0700
Reply-To: "John Wickman" <jwckman@SPACE-ROCKETS.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Wickman" <jwckman@SPACE-ROCKETS.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Bruce Kelly's Response on ROL - ANFO motors
Comments: To: "T.J." <tim@rocketry.org>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Tim,

It is a fact that AN composite motors have flown on the current insurance
policy with B. Kelly's and TRA Board's knowledge.   It was their intention
to let them fly again at the Balls launch scheduled for Sept. 29th of this
year with same insurance policy.  In fact, he had told some of the people
bringing the AN motors that he looked forward to seeing them  fly.   He is
on videotape admiring AN motors during a TRA INSURED experimental launch.

John Wickman




----- Original Message -----
From: T.J. <tim@ROCKETRY.ORG>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Monday, November 12, 2001 10:21 AM
Subject: Re: [AR] Bruce Kelly's Response on ROL - ANFO motors


> > > Another clarification that is clear as mud.
> > >
> > > Our EX rules are also (loosely) tied to NFPA 1127, and APCP and
nitrous is
> > > all that is allowed in the code.
> > >
> > > Is the code Bruce is referring to NFPA 1127 or the TRA-EX Safety Code?
> > >
> > > I don't have copies of NFPA 1127, but if anyone has a copy I'd like to
know
> > > if there are any limitations on the propellant chemistry stated, and
if so
> > > what they are?
> > >
> > He's blowing smoke.  NFPA-1127 *does not* limit operations to only APCP
and
> >   N2O/Fuel, although some of the definitions in it for hybrids are tied
to
> >   N2O (the definition of a flight cylinder, for example), there's
*nothing*
> >   in the code that precludes other types of composite or hybrid motors.
> >   Even the most recent versions of 1125 (the manufacturing code) have
> >   stripped much of the oxidizer-specific language.
>
> He said that their insurance carrier was the reason for that limit. He
> stated in that message that they would need to find another insurance
> carrier to allow liquid bi-propellants, etc..
>
> TIM

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 28821 invoked from network); 12 Nov 2001 20:45:23 -0000
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 12 Nov 2001 20:45:23 -0000
X-Priority: 3
Received: (qmail 1328 invoked by uid 50005); 12 Nov 2001 20:45:17 -0000
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4169. . Clean. Processed in 0.157283 secs); 12 Nov 2001 20:45:17 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 12 Nov 2001 20:45:16 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA03947; Mon, 12 Nov 2001 12:42:56 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 132465 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 12 Nov 2001 20:42:49          +0000
Received: from nt2000s2.dgmicro.com (cn815472-c.newcas1.de.home.com          [24.40.74.93]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA03933          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 12 Nov 2001 12:42:48 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
X-MS-Has-Attach: 
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
content-class: urn:content-classes:message
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: 
Thread-Topic: AN Reply from Bruce
Thread-Index: AcFrrg0vdIAvfSWBSVOoz/xIYDW9nwADDjPA
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by itc.uci.edu id MAA03934
Message-ID:  <C0F7BF4DCEC1D2479A01031347184DCD02FE83@nt2000s2.dgmicro.com>
Date:         Mon, 12 Nov 2001 15:42:17 -0500
Reply-To: "Darren Wright" <dwright@D2-TECH.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Darren Wright" <dwright@D2-TECH.COM>
Subject:      [AR] AN Reply from Bruce
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Bruce sent me  a reply to my letter.  It is well thought out this time,
although he still does not address the discrepancy between the rules and
the "AN" issue.

-Darren


---------------------------------
Darren,

I appreciate your concerns, but I can assure you that I have not done
anything recently (or that I can remember) on the "Whim of Bruce Kelly"
as you put it. If you are involved in Rockets for Schools, you know Bob
Justus - and he knows me. Before you go off rushing to judgement,
consider this. It was Bruce Kelly's administration that brought EX
rocketry back into Tripoli. I formed the committee and moved EX forward.
It is Bruce Kelly that continues to promote it today.

My only problem is with everyone making "assumptions" and
"interpretations" without checking with the BOD first. I am not against
AN no more than I'm against gasoline-powered rockets. My point is before
ANY formal adoption of anything OTHER THAN AP or nitrous hybrids, we
must have someone present it. This has never been done. No one has ever
asked - they just assumed.

We do have a set of real rules that "others" want to make assumptions
with.

The process has always been as I have stated, even before I became pres.
For example, back in 1989 Gary Rosenfied formerly introduced reloadable
motors. He was asked by the pres at that time to make a presentation -
which he did without any bitching or moaning. He brought the new product
to LDRS in Colorado and the BOD reviewed it and set up a 6-month trial
use period. My daughter was the first to actually certify on one. After
the 6- month period, the BOD voted to accept. And we actually did this
before NFPAs input. In fact, it was TRA's decision that moved the NFPA
to review and accept reloadables. It took them 5 years and it only took
us 6 months.

The second time was after my election. In 1994, Korey Kline contacted me
about hybrids. I said, sure - send us the technical data and I'll set it
up with the BOD to review. We approved hybrids 3 years ahead of NFPA,
even with strong opposition.

A couple of years after this, I asked Korey and Sonny to chair a Tripoli
Research committee and set up an experimental program. I did this on my
own without you or anyone else pushing for it. The rest is history.

If this progressive level-headed approach offends you, all I can say is
"good bye." If you choose to leave for this reason, don't let the door
hit you in the butt on the way out. Tripoli will continue without you
and it will continue without me. However, as Tripoli continues with new
things (to
us) it will be open, above board, and without assumptions. There will be
more
opportunities based on technical data and presentations, and not the
whims of
anyone, myself included, who does not have the wherewithal to make a
simple
request and a follow-up presentation.

However, if your heart is really into rocketry and you want to help TRA
progress and move forward in this area, you are welcomed (and I
encourage
you) to stay. And if you drop your TRA membership, remember this. You
will
then be violating your NAR membership; NAR does not recognize any EX
activities at all. How will they react if ATF calls them about one of
their
members purchasig a bag of AN? Heck, if I were so "against" it, I could
have
told this AFT agent a different story and hung our MI member out to dry.
I
think you have misinterpreted my statements and, therfore, my
intentions.

I have some additional comments on your remarks below.

B Kelly
****************************************

Bruce,

   As an avid rocketeer in the Tripoli organization, I have done quite a
bit to promote the hobby.  I frequently attend Boy Scount Meetings, I
participate in Rockets for Schools, and I am a resident lecturer at a
few local NAR chapters for people who are looking to jump into high
power.

Althought I am relatively new to the sport, I am quite aware of the
politics that have gone on as of late.  I have dismissed all the rumors
and gave Tripoli the benefit of the doubt.

(comment: If you are aware, truly, of all the "politics that have gone
on as of late" how come I have not heard from you until now? You have my
email address and my phone number is public. How can you be "aware"
without getting both sides of the story? Have you ever thought about
calling for at least my side of the story? It's an awfully thin pancake
that has only one side. I like to be aware of both sides when I seek
information, and I go directly to the original source every time.)

As an avid experimental motor maker, I was deeply offended by the lack
of research done on "composite motors".  Nowhere in the experimental
rules does it state "AP only".  There are plenty of other oxiders, some
better, some worse than AP.

(comment: True, it does not say that. But most people who have been
involved deeply with TRA know that even our EX program is based on the
safety code. Since 1985 when TRA was first incorporated, TRA was about
AP- based motors. Then, as I explained above, we moved into other areas.
We have never done any testing - or even been approached by anyone to do
anything beyond AP and hybrids. I am aware that there are many other
propellants that can be safe for an organization to use. All we need to
move forward in that direction is for our members who have the desire
and experience to promote it in the manner I outlined. This has always
been TRA's pattern for acceptance and it is not based on my whim.)

The fact that you singled out AN is ridiculous.  Althought I primarily
use AP....AN is better for the environment, safer for the builder, and
much cheaper.

(comment: I did not single out anything. I was merely reporting on a
call from ATF about a member who bought a 100-pound bag. I said we do
not yet allow AN at TRA insured launches. But I think it goes without
saying we do not allow a great many things, such as liquids,
zinc/sulfur, nuclear, etc. I could have mentioned these and more, but my
point is I got a call about one thing and so I just mentioned that one
thing - I did not single anything out. If AN "is better for the
environment, safe for the builder, and
much cheaper" prove it. You have my undivided attention.)

I can only now theorize that the "change Tripoli rules on the fly" or
the "Whim of Bruce Kelly" rumors are in fact true.  As President, you
have a resposibility to see that the rules and regulations of TRA, not
Bruce Kelly, are upheld.  I can see now that this has not been done.

(commented on this above.)

I will not be renewing my Tripoli membership, and will not renew until a
"real" set of rules are in place.

(totally up to you)

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 16631 invoked from network); 12 Nov 2001 21:48:03 -0000
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 12 Nov 2001 21:48:03 -0000
X-Priority: 3
Received: (qmail 6461 invoked by uid 50005); 12 Nov 2001 21:47:57 -0000
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4169. . Clean. Processed in 0.439932 secs); 12 Nov 2001 21:47:57 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 12 Nov 2001 21:47:56 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA04325; Mon, 12 Nov 2001 13:45:37 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 132516 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 12 Nov 2001 21:45:24          +0000
Received: from nt2000s2.dgmicro.com (cn815472-c.newcas1.de.home.com          [24.40.74.93]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA04310          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 12 Nov 2001 13:45:23 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
X-MS-Has-Attach: 
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
content-class: urn:content-classes:message
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: 
Thread-Topic:      [AR] AN Reply from Bruce
Thread-Index: AcFrrg0vdIAvfSWBSVOoz/xIYDW9nwADDjPAAAIiLNA=
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by itc.uci.edu id NAA04311
Message-ID:  <C0F7BF4DCEC1D2479A01031347184DCD02FE86@nt2000s2.dgmicro.com>
Date:         Mon, 12 Nov 2001 16:44:53 -0500
Reply-To: "Darren Wright" <dwright@D2-TECH.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Darren Wright" <dwright@D2-TECH.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] AN Reply from Bruce
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

All,

  Bruce followed up yet again, and has put a positive light on the whole
issue.  We agreed that there is no inherent problem with AN
motors....just a lack of documentation.  When the EX rules were written,
AP was the only composite motor even thought of.  We both agreed that
with the proliferation of AN, the rules need to address this.  So all
seems on the right track at TRA.....

-Darren

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 15668 invoked from network); 12 Nov 2001 21:55:19 -0000
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 12 Nov 2001 21:55:19 -0000
Received: (qmail 8028 invoked by uid 50005); 12 Nov 2001 21:55:13 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4169. . Clean. Processed in 0.434549 secs); 12 Nov 2001 21:55:13 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 12 Nov 2001 21:55:12 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA04403; Mon, 12 Nov 2001 13:53:02 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 132539 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 12 Nov 2001 21:52:55          +0000
Received: from femail15.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail15.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.0.95.142]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA04389          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 12 Nov 2001 13:52:55 -0800
Received: from hal2001 ([24.77.58.213]) by femail15.sdc1.sfba.home.com          (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20 201-229-121-120-20010223) with SMTP id          <20011112215244.FZWW17075.femail15.sdc1.sfba.home.com@hal2001> for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 12 Nov 2001 13:52:44 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <001001c16bc4$aa407e80$4a00a8c0@hatjs>
Date:         Mon, 12 Nov 2001 13:54:54 -0800
Reply-To: "Jamie Morken" <jmorken@HOME.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jamie Morken" <jmorken@HOME.COM>
Subject:      [AR] I'll be back
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Hi all,

I am taking a break from rocketry and am leaving Arocket for now.  Thanks to
all of you (you guys know who you are :) for answering so many questions and
helping to spread your knowledge.

best regards,
Jamie Morken
Victoria BC Canada

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 20511 invoked from network); 12 Nov 2001 22:25:30 -0000
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 12 Nov 2001 22:25:30 -0000
Received: (qmail 28315 invoked by uid 50005); 12 Nov 2001 22:25:24 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4169. . Clean. Processed in 0.396767 secs); 12 Nov 2001 22:25:24 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 12 Nov 2001 22:25:23 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA04727; Mon, 12 Nov 2001 14:23:34 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 132567 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 12 Nov 2001 22:23:27          +0000
Received: from fep3-orange.clear.net.nz (fep3-orange.clear.net.nz          [203.97.32.3]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA04712          for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Mon, 12 Nov 2001 14:23:26 -0800
Received: from mkbs (203-167-163-115.dialup.clear.net.nz [203.167.163.115]) by          fep3-orange.clear.net.nz (1.5/1.8) with SMTP id LAA29758; Tue, 13 Nov          2001 11:23:23 +1300 (NZDT)
References:  <Pine.LNX.4.33.0111121020200.24059-100000@www.rocketry.org>              <001501c16bba$1de7bca0$5196e53f@default>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <01a101c16bc8$df4ed000$0700a8c0@mkbs>
Date:         Tue, 13 Nov 2001 11:24:34 +1300
Reply-To: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Organization: Applied Technology
Subject:      Re: [AR] AN Controversy
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

OK - I've read all this with bemused interest (and it IS interesting).
I'm down here on the bottom of the world and don't know about the fine
points of the politics up there topside

BUT

Why can't all you children play together happily ? :-)

It seems to me down here (blissfully unaware of reality perhaps) that there
has been some uninformed comment and  some shoot from the lip and think
afterwards and thast everyone has then got on the band wagon, thrown in
their badges, abused the miscreant and said they won't go to his party
anymore no matter what. This doesn't seem to be the best way to achieve the
best outcome for the majority. BIMBW. Once you start accusing and abusing
someone in public, withdrawing your support (albeit reciprocally) and
generally bad mouthing each other then the chances of future cooperation is
much reduced even if everyone is subsequently polite and apparently nice to
each other).

There are some very very capable people here and some often justifiably big
egos - many here have achieved some very substantial things in rocketry.
Surely a little slowness on the draw when someone else (also of large
stature and ego, regardless of how they got there) says something a bit ill
advised, is in order.

How about (too late now) something like (fleshed out and word-smithed)

- I have this email etc that says xxx
- This appears to be in somewhat in error because yyy
- As you will recall (politely/gently/detail/videos mentioned/meets
mentioned/past (recorded?) comments mentioned
- People have been using zzz since xxx and it has a record of xxx
- Comparative advantages/differences include xxx. Comparative disadvantages
include xxx but, as can be seen from yyy years of experience, etc etc

Having such a reasoned paper trail also can't hurt later on when the
discussion exopands to a wider audience.
I wouldn't want to use too mucvh of the trail I have seen so far to convince
a wider audience :-)


But maybe things don't work this way up there?



bemusedly,


                Russell McMahon

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 19684 invoked from network); 12 Nov 2001 22:40:31 -0000
X-Priority: 3
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 12 Nov 2001 22:40:31 -0000
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 26265 invoked by uid 50005); 12 Nov 2001 22:40:25 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4169. . Clean. Processed in 0.135276 secs); 12 Nov 2001 22:40:25 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 12 Nov 2001 22:40:25 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA04805; Mon, 12 Nov 2001 14:33:21 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 132585 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 12 Nov 2001 22:33:15          +0000
Received: from web13608.mail.yahoo.com (web13608.mail.yahoo.com          [216.136.175.119]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id OAA04791          for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Mon, 12 Nov 2001 14:33:14 -0800
Received: from [195.92.67.72] by web13608.mail.yahoo.com via HTTP; Mon, 12 Nov          2001 22:33:14 GMT
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <20011112223314.47149.qmail@web13608.mail.yahoo.com>
Date:         Mon, 12 Nov 2001 22:33:14 +0000
Reply-To: "andy saunders" <andysaunders1@YAHOO.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "andy saunders" <andysaunders1@YAHOO.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] New altimeter code, drawings an fairwell
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <JJEFLLHFFAHHMBBIHFAEMECOCIAA.pkelly@comcen.com.au>

Paul

I'm very disappointed that you've decided to leave the
list but understand.

You've been a major contributor to the list in the
year that i've been on here.  Thanks for your input
and help to myself but also on behalf of others on the
list who have undoubtedly benefited from your
knowledge.

Andy



 --- Paul Kelly <pkelly@COMCEN.COM.AU> wrote: > For
those that have constructed altimeters based on
> the design on my site,
> there's a new version of the firmware available for
> download. It's worth
> having too.
> Additionally, (for those not on SUGPRO) there are
> some drawings of the 80mm
> candy cases we've been making.
>
> and finally, I've asked to be unsubscribed from
> Arocket. Lists change their
> focus over time, nothing wrong with that.. Those
> who've been here for a
> while will understand.
>
> As always I remain happy to correspond and assist in
> any serious rocketry
> project.
>
>
>
> Cheers
>
>
> PK

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Everything you'll ever need on one web page from News and Sport to Email and Music Charts
http://uk.my.yahoo.com

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 27002 invoked from network); 12 Nov 2001 22:42:22 -0000
Received: from smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.105]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 12 Nov 2001 22:42:22 -0000
Received: (qmail 5466 invoked by uid 50005); 12 Nov 2001 22:42:15 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpy with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4169. . Clean. Processed in 1.270205 secs); 12 Nov 2001 22:42:15 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 12 Nov 2001 22:42:12 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA04889; Mon, 12 Nov 2001 14:40:30 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 132580 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 12 Nov 2001 22:40:24          +0000
Received: from tomts7-srv.bellnexxia.net (tomts7.bellnexxia.net          [209.226.175.40]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA04774          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 12 Nov 2001 14:30:22 -0800
Received: from brian ([65.93.32.11]) by tomts7-srv.bellnexxia.net (InterMail          vM.4.01.03.16 201-229-121-116-20010115) with SMTP id          <20011112222947.HRWA9080.tomts7-srv.bellnexxia.net@brian> for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 12 Nov 2001 17:29:47 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
Importance: Normal
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <NFBBKADEMLBLIEKNLLEPCELDCFAA.bfeeney@davinciproject.com>
Date:         Mon, 12 Nov 2001 17:29:57 -0600
Reply-To: "Brian Feeney" <bfeeney@DAVINCIPROJECT.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Brian Feeney" <bfeeney@DAVINCIPROJECT.COM>
Subject:      [AR] stress formula
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <C0F7BF4DCEC1D2479A01031347184DCD02FE86@nt2000s2.dgmicro.com>

All,

Can anyone give me the correct formula to calculate the stress on a fabric
sphere and fabric cylinder. I'm aware of the usual approach of calculating
the stresses when you know the wall thickness. When you use a fabric (no
binder other than an elastomer to hold the internal gas pressure in this
case) the strength of the fabric is expressed in terms of its actual
strength as constructed. The thickness does not play a direct relationship
to its potential strength as the weave can vary etc. In one case I'm looking
at a fabric of 220 psi strength and one at 2300 psi. The max. dia of the
conical object is 300 inches at 15 psi internal pressure. Is the stress
force on the fabric  - Internal P x R?

If you go to the below ILC Dover link you will see what I'm getting at. They
don't say what the dia is or at least I can't achieve it as I'm not getting
the stress to internal pressure relationships sorted out.

http://www.ilcdover.com/Products/SpaceInf/Landing/ballutes.htm

It's probably a simple formula staring me right in the face but I'm not
getting it. I'm sure it's got something to do with using Mohr's law. Any
enlightenment is appreciated.

Cheers,
Brian

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 18395 invoked from network); 12 Nov 2001 23:11:26 -0000
Received: from smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.105]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 12 Nov 2001 23:11:26 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 20857 invoked by uid 50005); 12 Nov 2001 23:11:20 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpy with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4169. . Clean. Processed in 0.162553 secs); 12 Nov 2001 23:11:20 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 12 Nov 2001 23:11:20 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA05192; Mon, 12 Nov 2001 15:09:23 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 132672 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 12 Nov 2001 23:09:14          +0000
Received: from dns2.seanet.com (dns2.seanet.com [199.181.164.2]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA05178 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Mon,          12 Nov 2001 15:09:13 -0800
Received: from seanet.com (ssstolt.seanet.com [204.182.68.23]) by          dns2.seanet.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id fACN9CF24708 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Mon, 12 Nov 2001 15:09:12 -0800 (PST)
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.73 [en] (Win98; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3BF05676.C2452721@seanet.com>
Date:         Mon, 12 Nov 2001 15:08:38 -0800
Reply-To: "Sherwood Stolt" <ssstolt@SEANET.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Sherwood Stolt" <ssstolt@SEANET.COM>
Subject:      [AR] Sassy Flea
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

I was looking over the FAA's table of maximum probable loss
determinations
and saw one suborbital entry at VAFB from the year 2000 listed as: SASSY
Flea
Society for Amateur Scientists.  Does anybody know who this is and what
they are up to?

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 14054 invoked from network); 12 Nov 2001 23:41:17 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 12 Nov 2001 23:41:17 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 25376 invoked by uid 50005); 12 Nov 2001 23:41:12 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4169. . Clean. Processed in 0.151376 secs); 12 Nov 2001 23:41:12 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 12 Nov 2001 23:41:11 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA05681; Mon, 12 Nov 2001 15:39:18 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 132691 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 12 Nov 2001 23:38:56          +0000
Received: from smtp010pub.verizon.net ([206.46.170.189]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA05667 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon,          12 Nov 2001 15:38:56 -0800
Received: from [63.24.225.78] (1Cust78.tnt1.rancho-cucamonga.ca.da.uu.net          [63.24.225.78]) by smtp010pub.verizon.net  with ESMTP for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; id fACNd7812770 Mon, 12 Nov 2001 17:39:07          -0600 (CST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: GTE/01rocket@mail.gte.net
References: <C0F7BF4DCEC1D2479A01031347184DCD02FE86@nt2000s2.dgmicro.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <a05100301b8160dd33bb3@[63.24.225.78]>
Date:         Mon, 12 Nov 2001 15:38:25 -0800
Reply-To: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] AN Reply from Bruce
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <C0F7BF4DCEC1D2479A01031347184DCD02FE86@nt2000s2.dgmicro.com>

>All,
>
>   Bruce followed up yet again, and has put a positive light on the whole
>issue.  We agreed that there is no inherent problem with AN
>motors....just a lack of documentation.  When the EX rules were written,


Simply not true.  Damage control.

Jerry


>AP was the only composite motor even thought of.  We both agreed that
>with the proliferation of AN, the rules need to address this.  So all
>seems on the right track at TRA.....
>
>-Darren


--
Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
Opinion, the whole thing.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 29152 invoked from network); 12 Nov 2001 23:45:25 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 12 Nov 2001 23:45:25 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 29008 invoked by uid 50005); 12 Nov 2001 23:45:18 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4169. . Clean. Processed in 1.509643 secs); 12 Nov 2001 23:45:18 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 12 Nov 2001 23:45:13 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA05718; Mon, 12 Nov 2001 15:41:26 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 132700 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 12 Nov 2001 23:41:19          +0000
Received: from smtp002pub.verizon.net (smtp002pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.181])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA05704 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 12 Nov 2001 15:41:19 -0800
Received: from [63.24.225.78] (1Cust78.tnt1.rancho-cucamonga.ca.da.uu.net          [63.24.225.78]) by smtp002pub.verizon.net  with ESMTP for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; id fACNekh14160 Mon, 12 Nov 2001 17:40:46          -0600 (CST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: GTE/01rocket@mail.gte.net
References: <Pine.LNX.4.33.0111121020200.24059-100000@www.rocketry.org>            <001501c16bba$1de7bca0$5196e53f@default>            <01a101c16bc8$df4ed000$0700a8c0@mkbs>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <a05100302b8160e0c490d@[63.24.225.78]>
Date:         Mon, 12 Nov 2001 15:40:46 -0800
Reply-To: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] AN Controversy
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <01a101c16bc8$df4ed000$0700a8c0@mkbs>

>Why can't all you children play together happily ? :-)


EGO.

Jerry



>
>It seems to me down here (blissfully unaware of reality perhaps) that there
>has been some uninformed comment and  some shoot from the lip and think
>afterwards and thast everyone has then got on the band wagon, thrown in
>their badges, abused the miscreant and said they won't go to his party
>anymore no matter what.


You seem to have it figured perfectly.


>This doesn't seem to be the best way to achieve the
>best outcome for the majority. BIMBW. Once you start accusing and abusing
>someone in public, withdrawing your support (albeit reciprocally) and
>generally bad mouthing each other then the chances of future cooperation is
>much reduced even if everyone is subsequently polite and apparently nice to
>each other).


Given.


>
>There are some very very capable people here and some often justifiably big
>egos - many here have achieved some very substantial things in rocketry.
>Surely a little slowness on the draw when someone else (also of large
>stature and ego, regardless of how they got there) says something a bit ill
>advised, is in order.
>
>How about (too late now) something like (fleshed out and word-smithed)
>
>- I have this email etc that says xxx
>- This appears to be in somewhat in error because yyy
>- As you will recall (politely/gently/detail/videos mentioned/meets
>mentioned/past (recorded?) comments mentioned
>- People have been using zzz since xxx and it has a record of xxx
>- Comparative advantages/differences include xxx. Comparative disadvantages
>include xxx but, as can be seen from yyy years of experience, etc etc
>
>Having such a reasoned paper trail also can't hurt later on when the
>discussion exopands to a wider audience.
>I wouldn't want to use too mucvh of the trail I have seen so far to convince
>a wider audience :-)
>
>
>But maybe things don't work this way up there?
>


The problem lies in not wanting to even read the claimed data.

Jerry


>
>bemusedly,
>
>
>                 Russell McMahon


--
Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
Opinion, the whole thing.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 22399 invoked from network); 13 Nov 2001 00:34:30 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 13 Nov 2001 00:34:30 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 14348 invoked by uid 50005); 13 Nov 2001 00:34:24 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4169. . Clean. Processed in 0.261425 secs); 13 Nov 2001 00:34:24 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 13 Nov 2001 00:34:24 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA06032; Mon, 12 Nov 2001 16:32:25 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 132741 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 13 Nov 2001 00:32:08          +0000
Received: from fw1-bv.tek.com (fw1-bv.tek.com [192.65.40.16]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA06018 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon,          12 Nov 2001 16:32:07 -0800
Received: from fw1-bv.tek.com (root@localhost) by fw1-bv.tek.com with ESMTP id          fAD0Vbh25378 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 12 Nov 2001 16:31:37          -0800 (PST)
Received: from tektronix.tek.com (tektronix.tek.com [128.181.6.43]) by          fw1-bv.tek.com with ESMTP id fAD0Vax25374 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>;          Mon, 12 Nov 2001 16:31:37 -0800 (PST)
Received: from us-bv-u16 (us-bv-u16.bv.tek.com [128.181.2.45]) by          tektronix.tek.com (8.10.2+Sun/8.10.2) with SMTP id fAD0VaX08265 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 12 Nov 2001 16:31:36 -0800 (PST)
Received: FROM us-bv-m01.bv.tek.com BY us-bv-u16 ; Mon Nov 12 16:31:35 2001          -0800
Received: by us-bv-m01.bv.tek.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) id          <V88S2NNY>; Mon, 12 Nov 2001 16:31:34 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19)
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Message-ID:  <5832AFF5FC75D411844300508BC216B70302ABF8@us-bv-m07.bv.tek.com>
Date:         Mon, 12 Nov 2001 16:31:28 -0800
Reply-To: <john.w.lyngdal@EXGATE.TEK.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <john.w.lyngdal@EXGATE.TEK.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] AN Reply from Bruce
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Bruce Kelly to Darren:

Darren,

I appreciate your concerns, but I can assure you that I have not done
anything recently (or that I can remember) on the "Whim of Bruce Kelly"
as you put it. If you are involved in Rockets for Schools, you know Bob
Justus - and he knows me. Before you go off rushing to judgement,
consider this. It was Bruce Kelly's administration that brought EX
rocketry back into Tripoli. I formed the committee and moved EX forward.
It is Bruce Kelly that continues to promote it today.

<Comment>
How did Bruce move EX forward? Yes, there is TRA-EX "insurance" that is
coverage of the last resort and very limited is scope. Just how limited the
EX community learned only recently. In any event, it's hardly a
groundbreaking event. There is no EX education/competence training or test
similar to that of a basic TRA L2 certification test. Is there any
significant linkage between flying a airframe on a J350 and designing,
building, and flying a L class EX motor? The TRA-EX program is like the NRA
handing out free guns and safety instructions in hieroglyphics and then
claiming that they are promoting safe gun ownership(FWIW, I'm a NRA Life
member).

If you want to see an example of someone promoting EX, then take a look at
the tremendous service to the EX community Terry McCreary has done by
writing and publishing Experimental Composite Propellants.
<End>



My only problem is with everyone making "assumptions" and
"interpretations" without checking with the BOD first. I am not against
AN no more than I'm against gasoline-powered rockets. My point is before
ANY formal adoption of anything OTHER THAN AP or nitrous hybrids, we
must have someone present it. This has never been done. No one has ever
asked - they just assumed.

We do have a set of real rules that "others" want to make assumptions
with.

<Comment>

This from a person who's organization approved rules that state:

""Motors" and "rocket motors" shall refer only to composite solid and
nitrous oxide solid fuel motors (I.E. hybrid motors). Black powder based
motors shall not be included as composites, regardless of binder and/or
formulation modifications.""


Come on Bruce, trying to pin this foul-up on the people reading a trying to
follow your published rules is a bit of a stretch given the circumstances.
You have been present at TRA-EX launches were ANCP motors have been flown
with your full knowledge and approval, you accept CP Technologies
advertising dollars, and knew that the TRA-EX insurance only covers APCP and
N20 Hybrids and didn't have the courtesy to inform the people organizing
TRA-EX launches as to the limitations. OK, if our actions were assumptions,
yours actions were malfeasance.
<End>

The process has always been as I have stated, even before I became pres.
For example, back in 1989 Gary Rosenfied formerly introduced reloadable
motors. He was asked by the pres at that time to make a presentation -
which he did without any bitching or moaning. He brought the new product
to LDRS in Colorado and the BOD reviewed it and set up a 6-month trial
use period. My daughter was the first to actually certify on one. After
the 6- month period, the BOD voted to accept. And we actually did this
before NFPAs input. In fact, it was TRA's decision that moved the NFPA
to review and accept reloadables. It took them 5 years and it only took
us 6 months.

The second time was after my election. In 1994, Korey Kline contacted me
about hybrids. I said, sure - send us the technical data and I'll set it
up with the BOD to review. We approved hybrids 3 years ahead of NFPA,
even with strong opposition.

A couple of years after this, I asked Korey and Sonny to chair a Tripoli
Research committee and set up an experimental program. I did this on my
own without you or anyone else pushing for it. The rest is history.

<Comment>

I doubt there's anyone who doesn't think that Korey didn't a heck of a job
designing the Hypertek system, but let's toss out the hybrid tangent to keep
the topic track of composite propellants.

I agree that reloadable hardware design Gary designed and marketed is a big
improvement to a general use rocketry product and warranted a review by TRA,
but does TRA perform a technical review new propellant formulations other
than motor testing? What about the KP based NCR motors, there didn't employ
an APCP propellant? What about the AT Warp-9 propellant that is reported to
use KP as the oxidizer? The Pro-38 hardware is a major change in rocket
motor design, was that reviewed at the BoD level before it was submitted to
TMT testing?
<End>

If this progressive level-headed approach offends you, all I can say is
"good bye." If you choose to leave for this reason, don't let the door
hit you in the butt on the way out. Tripoli will continue without you
and it will continue without me. However, as Tripoli continues with new
things (to
us) it will be open, above board, and without assumptions. There will be
more
opportunities based on technical data and presentations, and not the
whims of
anyone, myself included, who does not have the wherewithal to make a
simple
request and a follow-up presentation.

However, if your heart is really into rocketry and you want to help TRA
progress and move forward in this area, you are welcomed (and I
encourage
you) to stay. And if you drop your TRA membership, remember this. You
will
then be violating your NAR membership; NAR does not recognize any EX
activities at all. How will they react if ATF calls them about one of
their
members purchasig a bag of AN? Heck, if I were so "against" it, I could
have
told this AFT agent a different story and hung our MI member out to dry.
I
think you have misinterpreted my statements and, therfore, my
intentions.

<Comment>

In fact Bruce did hang the MI member out to dry by identifying him as an
outliner to the ATF.
This, even though he had no intention of being one and was doing something
that Bruce had given wink in the eye approval to at previous TRA-EX
launches. Besides if Bruce were so concerned about how the TRA member was
viewed by the ATF what was qualifying comment at the end of this sentence
sent to the Prefects all about?

I was happy to report the member was in good standing (so far).

As far as violating the NAR membership rules, Mark doesn't care so long as
you don't claim to your activities to be affiliated with NAR and you pursue
the activity safely. Almost half of the current NAR L3CC members also fly
EX, so this is nothing more than warm road apples.

John Lyngdal
NAR L3CC

<End>







I have some additional comments on your remarks below.

B Kelly
****************************************

Bruce,

   As an avid rocketeer in the Tripoli organization, I have done quite a
bit to promote the hobby.  I frequently attend Boy Scount Meetings, I
participate in Rockets for Schools, and I am a resident lecturer at a
few local NAR chapters for people who are looking to jump into high
power.

Althought I am relatively new to the sport, I am quite aware of the
politics that have gone on as of late.  I have dismissed all the rumors
and gave Tripoli the benefit of the doubt.

(comment: If you are aware, truly, of all the "politics that have gone
on as of late" how come I have not heard from you until now? You have my
email address and my phone number is public. How can you be "aware"
without getting both sides of the story? Have you ever thought about
calling for at least my side of the story? It's an awfully thin pancake
that has only one side. I like to be aware of both sides when I seek
information, and I go directly to the original source every time.)

As an avid experimental motor maker, I was deeply offended by the lack
of research done on "composite motors".  Nowhere in the experimental
rules does it state "AP only".  There are plenty of other oxiders, some
better, some worse than AP.

(comment: True, it does not say that. But most people who have been
involved deeply with TRA know that even our EX program is based on the
safety code. Since 1985 when TRA was first incorporated, TRA was about
AP- based motors. Then, as I explained above, we moved into other areas.
We have never done any testing - or even been approached by anyone to do
anything beyond AP and hybrids. I am aware that there are many other
propellants that can be safe for an organization to use. All we need to
move forward in that direction is for our members who have the desire
and experience to promote it in the manner I outlined. This has always
been TRA's pattern for acceptance and it is not based on my whim.)

The fact that you singled out AN is ridiculous.  Althought I primarily
use AP....AN is better for the environment, safer for the builder, and
much cheaper.

(comment: I did not single out anything. I was merely reporting on a
call from ATF about a member who bought a 100-pound bag. I said we do
not yet allow AN at TRA insured launches. But I think it goes without
saying we do not allow a great many things, such as liquids,
zinc/sulfur, nuclear, etc. I could have mentioned these and more, but my
point is I got a call about one thing and so I just mentioned that one
thing - I did not single anything out. If AN "is better for the
environment, safe for the builder, and
much cheaper" prove it. You have my undivided attention.)

I can only now theorize that the "change Tripoli rules on the fly" or
the "Whim of Bruce Kelly" rumors are in fact true.  As President, you
have a resposibility to see that the rules and regulations of TRA, not
Bruce Kelly, are upheld.  I can see now that this has not been done.

(commented on this above.)

I will not be renewing my Tripoli membership, and will not renew until a
"real" set of rules are in place.

(totally up to you)

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 8237 invoked from network); 13 Nov 2001 02:04:37 -0000
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 13 Nov 2001 02:04:37 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 6624 invoked by uid 50005); 13 Nov 2001 02:04:31 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4169. . Clean. Processed in 0.571388 secs); 13 Nov 2001 02:04:31 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 13 Nov 2001 02:04:29 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA06523; Mon, 12 Nov 2001 18:02:39 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 132831 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 13 Nov 2001 02:02:25          +0000
Received: from dns2.seanet.com (dns2.seanet.com [199.181.164.2]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA06508 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Mon,          12 Nov 2001 18:02:24 -0800
Received: from seanet.com (ssstolt.seanet.com [204.182.68.23]) by          dns2.seanet.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id fAD22NF19298 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Mon, 12 Nov 2001 18:02:23 -0800 (PST)
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.73 [en] (Win98; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3BF07EE5.889AB5FA@seanet.com>
Date:         Mon, 12 Nov 2001 18:01:10 -0800
Reply-To: "Sherwood Stolt" <ssstolt@SEANET.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Sherwood Stolt" <ssstolt@SEANET.COM>
Subject:      [AR] Launch site license approach
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

There has been talk recently about forming an amateur rocketry
organization.  While influencing future regulations is a good
long term goal I think some more near term relief is needed.
I see three main problems that need a quick solution.  One
is the failure of several CATS groups to successfully get
launch licenses, another is the insurance liability issue,
and a third is that uneasiness about the possibility of
a visit from the BAFT or local sheriff because of some
detail we misunderstood.

It seems to me that solving these requires several well
coordinated local efforts.  Specifically I think we should
decide on a range of rocket types and characteristics that
envelopes the current state of our hobby and then for
each commonly used amateur launch site form a group
of local enthusiasts that work through the process of
obtaining a launch site license that covers the full range
of amateur activities.  These groups would be amateurs
with a goal of promoting the hobby (not NAR, TRA
or even CATS members) with an interest in their local
launch site.

These groups would work together (rather than in
competition as the CATS groups) and so hopefully
eventually be successful.  They would also individually
contact local authorities and so tailor their efforts and
acquaint locals with the federally licensed
project and so hopefully find and solve any local
complications.  The FAA would accomplish the federal
agency coordination.  Once all the hurdles of the license
process are satisfied hopefully the insurance issue
would be solved.  But mostly (if I understand the license
process right) each individual amateur would just need
to work with the local (but internationally certified) RSO
rather than get his own license.

I suppose those with no intention of exceeding the FAA's
limits on amateur rocketry may not embrace any effort to
put bounds on the hobby but I think having known limits
fixed in a five year license would be solve more problems
than it creates.  At least there would be a federal license
to point at when local authorities get interested.  Also an
organization with several FAA licenses would trump any
TRA or NAR influence with local, state or federal authorities
including BATF and NFPA.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 25854 invoked from network); 13 Nov 2001 04:49:56 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 13 Nov 2001 04:49:56 -0000
Received: (qmail 2230 invoked by uid 50005); 13 Nov 2001 04:49:50 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4169. . Clean. Processed in 0.319074 secs); 13 Nov 2001 04:49:50 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 13 Nov 2001 04:49:50 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA07647; Mon, 12 Nov 2001 20:47:50 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 133021 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 13 Nov 2001 04:47:38          +0000
Received: from localhost (dmccue@localhost) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with          ESMTP id UAA07633; Mon, 12 Nov 2001 20:47:37 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.LNX.4.10.10111122045150.7525-100000@itc.uci.edu>
Date:         Mon, 12 Nov 2001 20:47:37 -0800
Reply-To: "David J. McCue" <dmccue@itc.uci.edu>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "David J. McCue" <dmccue@itc.uci.edu>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Sassy Flea
Comments: To: Sherwood Stolt <ssstolt@SEANET.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <3BF05676.C2452721@seanet.com>

SAS (http://www.sas.org/) is the organization headed by Shawn Carlson, the
last person to conduct the Scientific American magazine's column "The
Amateur Scientist".

On Mon, 12 Nov 2001, Sherwood Stolt wrote:

> I was looking over the FAA's table of maximum probable loss
> determinations
> and saw one suborbital entry at VAFB from the year 2000 listed as: SASSY
> Flea
> Society for Amateur Scientists.  Does anybody know who this is and what
> they are up to?
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 4961 invoked from network); 13 Nov 2001 05:17:42 -0000
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 13 Nov 2001 05:17:42 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 1083 invoked by uid 50005); 13 Nov 2001 05:17:36 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4169. . Clean. Processed in 0.828371 secs); 13 Nov 2001 05:17:36 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 13 Nov 2001 05:17:34 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA07979; Mon, 12 Nov 2001 21:15:38 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 133032 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 13 Nov 2001 05:15:27          +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (oe26.pav0.hotmail.com [64.4.32.106]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA07964 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon,          12 Nov 2001 21:15:26 -0800
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Mon,          12 Nov 2001 21:14:56 -0800
X-Originating-IP: [65.230.92.245]
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: MSN Explorer 7.00.0021.1700
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0DD3_01C56B69.57EA5400"
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 13 Nov 2001 05:14:56.0535 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[225D2A70:01C16C02]
Message-ID:  <OE26NJOpiMOHsF3ZfHQ0000d002@hotmail.com>
Date:         Tue, 13 Nov 2001 00:14:03 -0500
Reply-To: "KELLY MERCER" <kellyrmercer@MSN.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "KELLY MERCER" <kellyrmercer@MSN.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] AN Reply from Bruce
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0DD3_01C56B69.57EA5400
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Darren, =20
Appreciate that you and Bruce have agreed. Thanks for clearing up this li=
ttle misunderstanding on behalf of us all. Bruce has used you as his pawn=
. Good to know that all is well at TRA. All sarcasim aside, Bruce has mor=
e colors than an artist's palette, more faces than a pinochle deck. He is=
 using the so called insurance as a lever. I have never heard of anyone h=
aving actually seen this policy. Who underwrites it? What are it's provis=
ions? What are it's real cost implications to the membership. Does it eve=
n exist? Does anyone other than Bruce even know the answers to these ques=
tions?
He has been more than aware of AN motors flying at TRA-EX launches (or ma=
ybe not, maybe he has had his head in the sand and does not keep up with =
what is flying these last several years).Who reads HPR? Mostly TRA member=
s. And who has been one of the most regular full page advertisers in HPR =
for many years? CP Technologies. Put it together, it doesn't take a rocke=
t scientist. Of course I am sure his defense will be that he accepts cold=
 hard cash from System Solaire also, and you can't fly those at TRA eithe=
r:) If the cash is green, *#@% the ethics. Is that acceptable language?
Kelly

----- Original Message -----
From: Darren Wright
Sent: Monday, November 12, 2001 4:49 PM
To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
Subject: Re: [AR] AN Reply from Bruce

All,

  Bruce followed up yet again, and has put a positive light on the whole
issue.  We agreed that there is no inherent problem with AN
motors....just a lack of documentation.  When the EX rules were written,
AP was the only composite motor even thought of.  We both agreed that
with the proliferation of AN, the rules need to address this.  So all
seems on the right track at TRA.....

-Darren

------=_NextPart_000_0DD3_01C56B69.57EA5400
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<HTML><BODY STYLE=3D"font:10pt verdana; border:none;"><DIV>Darren, </DIV>=
 <DIV>Appreciate that you and Bruce have agreed. Thanks for clearing up t=
his little misunderstanding on behalf of us all. Bruce has used you as hi=
s pawn. Good to know that all is well at TRA. All sarcasim aside, Bruce h=
as more colors than an artist's palette, more faces than a pinochle deck.=
 He&nbsp;is using the so called insurance as a lever. I have never heard =
of anyone having actually seen this policy. Who underwrites it? What are =
it's provisions? What are it's real cost implications to the membership. =
Does it even exist? Does anyone other than Bruce even know the answers to=
 these questions?</DIV> <DIV>He has been more than aware of AN motors fly=
ing at TRA-EX launches (or maybe not, maybe he has had his head in the sa=
nd and does not keep up with what is flying these last several years).Who=
 reads HPR? Mostly TRA members. And who has been one of the most regular =
full page advertisers in HPR for many years? CP Technologies. Put it toge=
ther, it doesn't take a rocket scientist. Of course I am sure his defense=
 will be that he accepts cold hard cash from System Solaire also, and you=
 can't fly those at TRA either:) If the cash is green, *#@% the ethics. I=
s that acceptable language?</DIV> <DIV>Kelly</DIV> <DIV>&nbsp;</DIV> <BLO=
CKQUOTE style=3D"BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN=
-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; PADDING-RIGHT: 0px"> <DIV style=3D"FONT: =
10pt Arial">----- Original Message -----</DIV> <DIV style=3D"BACKGROUND: =
#e4e4e4; COLOR: black; FONT: 10pt Arial"><B>From:</B> Darren Wright</DIV>=
 <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt Arial"><B>Sent:</B> Monday, November 12, 2001 4=
:49 PM</DIV> <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt Arial"><B>To:</B> AROCKET@ITC.UCI.E=
DU</DIV> <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt Arial"><B>Subject:</B> Re: [AR] AN Repl=
y from Bruce</DIV> <DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>All,<BR><BR>&nbsp; Bruce followed up =
yet again, and has put a positive light on the whole<BR>issue.&nbsp; We a=
greed that there is no inherent problem with AN<BR>motors....just a lack =
of documentation.&nbsp; When the EX rules were written,<BR>AP was the onl=
y composite motor even thought of.&nbsp; We both agreed that<BR>with the =
proliferation of AN, the rules need to address this.&nbsp; So all<BR>seem=
s on the right track at TRA.....<BR><BR>-Darren<BR></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></=
HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0DD3_01C56B69.57EA5400--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 17844 invoked from network); 13 Nov 2001 06:23:42 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 13 Nov 2001 06:23:42 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 15038 invoked by uid 50005); 13 Nov 2001 06:23:36 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4169. . Clean. Processed in 0.189968 secs); 13 Nov 2001 06:23:36 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 13 Nov 2001 06:23:35 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA08232; Mon, 12 Nov 2001 22:21:56 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 133069 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 13 Nov 2001 06:21:43          +0000
Received: from femail21.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail21.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.0.95.146]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA08218          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 12 Nov 2001 22:21:43 -0800
Received: from c396957-b.home.net ([24.17.249.10]) by          femail21.sdc1.sfba.home.com (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20          201-229-121-120-20010223) with ESMTP id          <20011113062131.SZYI26106.femail21.sdc1.sfba.home.com@c396957-b.home.net> for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 12          Nov 2001 22:21:31 -0800
X-Sender: spiegl@mail
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <5.1.0.14.2.20011113001325.00b4fc30@mail>
Date:         Tue, 13 Nov 2001 00:22:41 -0600
Reply-To: "Mark C Spiegl" <spiegl@HOME.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Mark C Spiegl" <spiegl@HOME.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] AN Reply from Bruce
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <5832AFF5FC75D411844300508BC216B70302ABF8@us-bv-m07.bv.tek. com>

Well now you've banged my funny-bone and it smarts.

Rockets for Schools was NOT a Tripoli program. (say it again.. NOT Tripoli)
RFS was a nasa program from the start. It was funded by nasa; it was
insured by nasa; the 1M (yes that's million foot) waiver was secured by
nasa; the EPA studies were done by nasa; risk analysis was done by nasa;
the radar tracking was provided by the Coast Guard under the direction of
nasa. Need I continue?

Both NAR and Tripoli got a big wedgie about violations of *THE* safety
code. [sarcasm alert] They were reminded that Rockets for Schools was not
flying under Tripoli/NAR rules or insurance but rather under nasa
jurisdiction. *THE* safety code didn't apply.

The game got ugly and folks like myself politely walked away. If I ever
participate again it will only be as a personal favor to the most
honorable Bob Justus.

With Tripoli gaining control of RFS you will notice that the large amateur
projects no longer fly. And the professional sounding rockets, which were
always the highlight of the day, are no longer part of the program.

We spent thousands - no tens of thousands - of dollars of personal money,
talked to gazillions of politicians regulators etc, and spent untold hours
to make Rockets for Schools a kick-ass program. The original volunteers
walked away with a big shoe print on our butts. There is plenty of blame
to circulate; I only feel regret for the shameful end of a great program.
(okay "evolution" to be technically correct)

Now that I've vented let me get back to the point. I find it intriguing
that the bureaucratic nightmare called NASA, frequently worthy of
dissolution for its anal-ness, never saw fit to put in place the
barriers that hobby organizations have!


--MCS

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 14140 invoked from network); 13 Nov 2001 09:01:26 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 13 Nov 2001 09:01:26 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: (qmail 19460 invoked by uid 50005); 13 Nov 2001 09:01:20 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4169. . Clean. Processed in 0.130575 secs); 13 Nov 2001 09:01:20 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 13 Nov 2001 09:01:20 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA08747; Tue, 13 Nov 2001 00:57:36 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 133102 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 13 Nov 2001 08:56:01          +0000
Received: from wrench.toolcity.net (root@wrench.toolcity.net [208.0.188.2]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA08731 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 13 Nov 2001 00:56:00 -0800
Received: from [208.22.189.130]          (dap-208-22-189-130.meadville-tnt-0.pa.toolcity.net [208.22.189.130])          by wrench.toolcity.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id DAA12297 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 13 Nov 2001 03:55:56 -0500 (EST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <v01510100b816988f2b3b@[208.11.233.32]>
Date:         Tue, 13 Nov 2001 03:58:30 -0600
Reply-To: "al bradley" <abradley@TOOLCITY.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "al bradley" <abradley@TOOLCITY.NET>
Subject:      [AR] The Newbies and the politics -- Re: [AR] Bruce Kelly's              Response              on ROL - ANFO motors
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Looking at the obvious displeasures and the slants of each side which are
not distinguishable to all but those deep inside the controversy:

What are the newbies to think in trying to find a slot where they can
home-build and fly their own motors??

Should they give up their interests? Just fly bootleg launches? Risk going
to jail? No longer able to draw on the forum that arocket has provided?

Finally they might say "a pox on it all!" and find another area of
scientific inquiry that has more acceptability and companionship?

Short of inclusion in hell, will somesone clearly show where we newbies belong?

al bradley

------------------------------------------------------------------
Can you live Life with this?: "Unless there is a law, an agreement, or a
long-standing custom, No one `Deserves' Anything -- Either Good or Bad!"

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 17068 invoked from network); 13 Nov 2001 09:52:25 -0000
Received: from smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.105]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 13 Nov 2001 09:52:25 -0000
Received: (qmail 25797 invoked by uid 50005); 13 Nov 2001 09:52:19 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpy with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4169. . Clean. Processed in 0.209819 secs); 13 Nov 2001 09:52:19 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 13 Nov 2001 09:52:19 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id BAA08942; Tue, 13 Nov 2001 01:50:21 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 133131 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 13 Nov 2001 09:48:53          +0000
Received: from fep3-orange.clear.net.nz (fep3-orange.clear.net.nz          [203.97.32.3]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id BAA08922          for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Tue, 13 Nov 2001 01:48:52 -0800
Received: from mkbs (203-167-156-211.dialup.clear.net.nz [203.167.156.211]) by          fep3-orange.clear.net.nz (1.5/1.8) with SMTP id WAA24065; Tue, 13 Nov          2001 22:48:36 +1300 (NZDT)
References:  <5.1.0.14.2.20011113001325.00b4fc30@mail>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <008301c16c28$9aa857e0$0700a8c0@mkbs>
Date:         Tue, 13 Nov 2001 22:33:45 +1300
Reply-To: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Organization: Applied Technology
Subject:      Re: [AR] AN Reply from Bruce
Comments: To: Mark C Spiegl <spiegl@HOME.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

> insured by NASA; the 1M (yes that's million foot) waiver was secured by
> NASSAU

That includes LEO :-)



                RM

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 5016 invoked from network); 13 Nov 2001 15:08:38 -0000
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 13 Nov 2001 15:08:38 -0000
Received: (qmail 26382 invoked by uid 50005); 13 Nov 2001 15:08:32 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4169. . Clean. Processed in 0.522478 secs); 13 Nov 2001 15:08:32 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 13 Nov 2001 15:08:31 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA10134; Tue, 13 Nov 2001 06:55:37 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 133237 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 13 Nov 2001 14:54:05          +0000
Received: from mail.cac.net (mail.cac.net [209.44.14.13]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA10115 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue,          13 Nov 2001 06:54:04 -0800
Received: from jfackertcac (3639245984.mi.dial.hexcom.net [216.234.124.161]) by          mail.cac.net (8.11.3/8.11.3) with SMTP id fADEspA05340 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 13 Nov 2001 09:54:51 -0500 (EST)          (envelope-from jfackert@cac.net)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook CWS, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0)
Importance: Normal
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <000d01c16c52$3b5922e0$a17cead8@net>
Date:         Tue, 13 Nov 2001 09:27:03 -0500
Reply-To: <jfackert@cac.net>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jim Fackert" <jfackert@cac.net>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Bruce Kelly's Response on ROL - ANFO motors
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <NKEHJAOOKBPGIKOOPDEFKEEACDAA.jwckman@space-rockets.com>

I am totally amazed that "composite rocket motors" would be interpreted as
AP based only. by ANYONE versed in the art!

IMHO, a composite is any oxidizer with a organic rubber or plastic
fuel/binder and any additional fuels, including powdered metals, and any
additional burn rate modifiers, etc.

Any perchlorate, any nitrate can be used in composites. Just like any
oxidizer can be used in hybrids, though nitrous oxide is most prevalent.

I wonder if the insurance policy specifies AP only, and if so, why this
restriction would not be carried on into the rules.

And the ignorant use of the term "ANFO" is really, uhhh... ignorant.

Doesn't Bruce read his own magazine?

Jim Fackert

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 29381 invoked from network); 13 Nov 2001 15:14:28 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 13 Nov 2001 15:14:28 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 7226 invoked by uid 50005); 13 Nov 2001 15:14:15 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4169. . Clean. Processed in 1.135461 secs); 13 Nov 2001 15:14:15 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 13 Nov 2001 15:14:13 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA10225; Tue, 13 Nov 2001 07:09:16 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 133256 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 13 Nov 2001 15:07:54          +0000
Received: from smtppop1pub.verizon.net (smtppop1pub.gte.net [206.46.170.20]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA10207 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 13 Nov 2001 07:07:54 -0800
Received: from [63.24.225.226] (1Cust226.tnt1.rancho-cucamonga.ca.da.uu.net          [63.24.225.226]) by smtppop1pub.verizon.net  with ESMTP for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; id JAA44028165 Tue, 13 Nov 2001 09:06:17 -0600          (CST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: GTE/01rocket@mail.gte.net
References: <v01510100b816988f2b3b@[208.11.233.32]>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <a05100303b816e741eda2@[63.24.225.226]>
Date:         Tue, 13 Nov 2001 07:07:25 -0800
Reply-To: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] The Newbies and the politics -- Re: [AR] Bruce Kelly's              Response               on ROL - ANFO motors
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <v01510100b816988f2b3b@[208.11.233.32]>

>Al Bradley:


>Looking at the obvious displeasures and the slants of each side which are
>not distinguishable to all but those deep inside the controversy:
>
>What are the newbies to think in trying to find a slot where they can
>home-build and fly their own motors??
>
>Should they give up their interests? Just fly bootleg launches? Risk going
>to jail? No longer able to draw on the forum that arocket has provided?
>
>Finally they might say "a pox on it all!" and find another area of
>scientific inquiry that has more acceptability and companionship?
>
>Short of inclusion in hell, will somesone clearly show where we
>newbies belong?
>
>al bradley


This is why arocket which is uniquely qualified intellectually and
aware legally to form a new EX club that addresses these issues
specifically.  NAR has been waiting for such a club to form for over
a decade now so it could become a sister organization.

TRA is the black sheep in the family and makes everyone nervous.

Jerry

--
Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
Opinion, the whole thing.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 14932 invoked from network); 13 Nov 2001 15:17:51 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.105]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 13 Nov 2001 15:17:51 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 19598 invoked by uid 50005); 13 Nov 2001 15:17:45 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpy with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4169. . Clean. Processed in 0.164316 secs); 13 Nov 2001 15:17:45 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 13 Nov 2001 15:17:45 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA10191; Tue, 13 Nov 2001 07:04:05 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 133249 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 13 Nov 2001 15:02:43          +0000
Received: from smtp005pub.verizon.net (smtp005pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.184])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA10176 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 13 Nov 2001 07:02:42 -0800
Received: from [63.24.225.226] (1Cust226.tnt1.rancho-cucamonga.ca.da.uu.net          [63.24.225.226]) by smtp005pub.verizon.net  with ESMTP for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; id fADF2AW01876 Tue, 13 Nov 2001 09:02:10          -0600 (CST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: GTE/01rocket@mail.gte.net
References: <OE26NJOpiMOHsF3ZfHQ0000d002@hotmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <a05100301b816e659b70d@[63.24.225.226]>
Date:         Tue, 13 Nov 2001 07:02:14 -0800
Reply-To: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] AN Reply from Bruce
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <OE26NJOpiMOHsF3ZfHQ0000d002@hotmail.com>

>Darren,
>Appreciate that you and Bruce have agreed. Thanks for clearing up
>this little misunderstanding on behalf of us all. Bruce has used you
>as his pawn. Good to know that all is well at TRA. All sarcasim
>aside, Bruce has more colors than an artist's palette, more faces
>than a pinochle deck. He is using the so called insurance as a
>lever. I have never heard of anyone having actually seen this
>policy. Who underwrites it? What are it's provisions? What are it's
>real cost implications to the membership. Does it even exist? Does
>anyone other than Bruce even know the answers to these questions?
>He has been more than aware of AN motors flying at TRA-EX launches
>(or maybe not, maybe he has had his head in the sand and does not
>keep up with what is flying these last several years).Who reads HPR?
>Mostly TRA members. And who has been one of the most regular full
>page advertisers in HPR for many years? CP Technologies. Put it
>together, it doesn't take a rocket scientist. Of course I am sure
>his defense will be that he accepts cold hard cash from System
>Solaire also, and you can't fly those at TRA either:) If the cash is
>green, *#@% the ethics. Is that acceptable language?
>Kelly

Yes.  And many accurate observations as well.

Jerry

--
Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
Opinion, the whole thing.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 6453 invoked from network); 13 Nov 2001 15:52:06 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 13 Nov 2001 15:52:06 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 28951 invoked by uid 50005); 13 Nov 2001 15:52:00 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4169. . Clean. Processed in 0.107931 secs); 13 Nov 2001 15:52:00 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 13 Nov 2001 15:52:00 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA10512; Tue, 13 Nov 2001 07:37:30 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 133324 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 13 Nov 2001 15:35:59          +0000
Received: from mail-srv1.micron.com (masquerade.micron.com [137.201.242.130])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA10496 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 13 Nov 2001 07:35:58 -0800
Received: from mail-srv1.micron.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by          mail-srv1.micron.com (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id fADFZRP14964 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 13 Nov 2001 08:35:27 -0700 (MST)
Received: from ntexchange01.micron.com (ntexchange01 [137.201.104.84]) by          mail-srv1.micron.com (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id fADFZR714946 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 13 Nov 2001 08:35:27 -0700 (MST)
Received: by ntexchange01.micron.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19)          id <WWJADT2X>; Tue, 13 Nov 2001 08:35:26 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19)
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Message-ID:  <2DCA36C44BF3D211917F0008C7C9C9DD067ECFBA@ntexchange06.micron.com>
Date:         Tue, 13 Nov 2001 08:35:23 -0700
Reply-To: "gacrowell" <gacrowell@MICRON.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "gacrowell" <gacrowell@MICRON.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] AN Reply from Bruce
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

John.W.Lyngdal commenting on Bruce Kelly:

"OK, if our actions were assumptions,
yours actions were malfeasance."



I think that sums it up pretty nicely.

Gary Crowell

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 12424 invoked from network); 13 Nov 2001 16:07:53 -0000
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 13 Nov 2001 16:07:53 -0000
Received: (qmail 12598 invoked by uid 50005); 13 Nov 2001 16:07:47 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4169. . Clean. Processed in 0.326904 secs); 13 Nov 2001 16:07:47 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 13 Nov 2001 16:07:47 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA10601; Tue, 13 Nov 2001 07:47:10 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 133347 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 13 Nov 2001 15:45:48          +0000
Received: from c002.snv.cp.net (c002-h007.c002.snv.cp.net [209.228.32.171]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id HAA10586 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 13 Nov 2001 07:45:48 -0800
Received: (cpmta 10156 invoked from network); 13 Nov 2001 07:45:17 -0800
Received: from 63.21.80.60 (HELO default) by smtp.peoplepc.com (209.228.32.171)          with SMTP; 13 Nov 2001 07:45:17 -0800
X-Sent: 13 Nov 2001 15:45:17 GMT
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0DD6_01C56B69.57F8ABE0"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <004301c16c5c$643b8d60$3c50153f@default>
Date:         Tue, 13 Nov 2001 11:00:59 -0500
Reply-To: "David Muesing" <dmuesing@PEOPLEPC.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "David Muesing" <dmuesing@PEOPLEPC.COM>
Subject:      [AR] Composite Definition?
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0DD6_01C56B69.57F8ABE0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

I understand the word composite (as used with regards to solid rocket =
motors) to mean: "a mixture (composition) of propellant ingredients in a =
matrix of a solid material which has gone from liquid to solid in the =
manufacturing process". Example: any solid, liquid or gas (oxidizer or =
fuel) mixed into any liquid (fuel, oxidizer or inert) that then =
solidifies. Like: AP in R-45, KN in melted then solidified Sugar, KN in =
Epoxy, etc.=20

Am I getting close here?

Dave=20

------=_NextPart_000_0DD6_01C56B69.57F8ABE0
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Diso-8859-1">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 6.00.2600.0" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=3DOCRA color=3D#0000ff>I understand the word =
<U>composite</U> (as=20
used with regards to solid rocket motors) to mean: "a mixture=20
(composition)&nbsp;of&nbsp;propellant ingredients in a matrix of a solid =

material which has gone from liquid to solid in the manufacturing =
process".=20
Example: any solid, liquid or gas (oxidizer or fuel) mixed into any =
liquid=20
(fuel, oxidizer or inert) that then solidifies. Like: AP in R-45, KN in =
melted=20
then solidified Sugar, KN in Epoxy, etc. </FONT></DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DOCRA color=3D#0000ff>Am I getting close =
here?</FONT></DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DOCRA =
color=3D#0000ff>Dave</FONT>&nbsp;</DIV></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0DD6_01C56B69.57F8ABE0--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 1749 invoked from network); 13 Nov 2001 16:19:54 -0000
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 13 Nov 2001 16:19:54 -0000
Received: (qmail 28492 invoked by uid 50005); 13 Nov 2001 16:19:48 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4169. . Clean. Processed in 0.147727 secs); 13 Nov 2001 16:19:48 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 13 Nov 2001 16:19:48 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA10725; Tue, 13 Nov 2001 08:01:39 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 133380 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 13 Nov 2001 16:00:17          +0000
Received: from albatross.wgn.net (2-154-239-64.pajo.com [64.239.154.2] (may be          forged)) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA10707 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 13 Nov 2001 08:00:16 -0800
Received: from cronos ([208.187.17.79]) by albatross.wgn.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with          SMTP id IAA29144 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 13 Nov 2001 08:02:24          -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <00a901c16c5c$511c8860$c36122c0@cronos>
Date:         Tue, 13 Nov 2001 08:00:27 -0800
Reply-To: "Wedge Oldham" <wedge@WESTWORLD.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Wedge Oldham" <wedge@WESTWORLD.COM>
Subject:      [AR] Model, High Power, and Experimental
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Either I or everyone else seems to be confused. I would have to assume that
it's me, and I would appreciate someone clarifying something for me.

If I remember my history correctly, first there was model rocketry. One of
the main rules of Model Rocketry was only commercial motors would be used.
This generated a clear division between Model Rocketry and
Experimental/Amateur Rocketry. The NAR was founded to serve the Model Rocket
community, and basically excluded the Experimental/Amateur community.

As commercial manufactures developed larger motors, there soon became a need
for High Power Rocketry. Tripoli was built. This shared the same basic rule
that only commercially built motors would be flown. Again separating
themselves from the Experimental/Amateur community.

So what we have today is:
Model Rocketry, governed by NFPA 1122, and served by the NAR.
High Power Rocketry, governed by NFPA 1127, and served by Tripoli.
Experimental/Amateur Rocketry, governed by ?????, and served by ?????

What I do see is Experimental/Amateur people complaining the organization
setup to exclude them (Tripoli) doesn't fit their needs.
What I do see is Experimental/Amateur people complaining the rules setup to
exclude their activities (NFPA 1127), is limiting their activity.

Shouldn't the Experimental/Amateur community get their own set of rules to
follow (NFPA 11??), and their own organization setup to serve their
interests?

I think people should reply to me privately, unless AROCKET would really
benefit  from your answer.

Wedge Oldham

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 3584 invoked from network); 13 Nov 2001 16:20:21 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 13 Nov 2001 16:20:21 -0000
Received: (qmail 23438 invoked by uid 50005); 13 Nov 2001 16:20:15 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4169. . Clean. Processed in 0.561221 secs); 13 Nov 2001 16:20:15 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 13 Nov 2001 16:20:14 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA10808; Tue, 13 Nov 2001 08:07:30 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 133398 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 13 Nov 2001 16:06:08          +0000
Received: from localhost (rcalkins@localhost) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with          ESMTP id IAA10785; Tue, 13 Nov 2001 08:06:07 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.LNX.4.10.10111130759250.10554-100000@itc.uci.edu>
Date:         Tue, 13 Nov 2001 08:06:07 -0800
Reply-To: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Composite Definition?
Comments: To: David Muesing <dmuesing@PEOPLEPC.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <004301c16c5c$643b8d60$3c50153f@default>

On Tue, 13 Nov 2001, David Muesing wrote:

> I understand the word composite (as used with regards to solid rocket
> motors) to mean: "a mixture (composition) of propellant ingredients in
> a matrix of a solid material which has gone from liquid to solid in
> the manufacturing process". Example: any solid, liquid or gas
> (oxidizer or fuel) mixed into any liquid (fuel, oxidizer or inert)
> that then solidifies. Like: AP in R-45, KN in melted then solidified
> Sugar, KN in Epoxy, etc.

That about sums it up.  I think molten sulfur based micrograin applies and
also Asphalt-Potassium Perchlorate.

I found this table on Mark Wade's definitive site
http://www.astronautix.com/articles/solables.htm


List Of Ingredients Used For Composite Propellants
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Oxidizer
--AP: ammonium perchlorate
--AN: ammonium nitrate
--NP: nitronium perchlorate
--KP: potassium perchlorate
--RDX: cyclotrimethylene trinitramine
--HMX: cyclotetramethylene tetranitramine

-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Binder
--PS: polysulfide
--PVC: polyvinyl chloride
--PU: polyurethane
--CTPB: carboxyl terminated polybutadiene
--HTPB: hydroxyl terminated polybutadiene

-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Curing And/Or Crosslinking Agents
--PQD: paraquinone dioxime
--TDI: toluene-2,4-diisocyanate
--MAPO: tris(1-(2-methyl) aziridinyl) phosphine oxide
--ERLA-O51O: N,N,O-tri (1,2-epoxy propyl)-4-aminophenol
--IPDI: isophorone diiosocyanate

-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Bonding Agent
--MAPO: tris( 1-(2-methyl) aziridinyl) phosphine oxide
--TEA: triethanolamine
--MT-4: adduct of 2.0 moles MAPO, 0.7 mole azipic acid,
.........and 0.3 mole tararic acid

-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Plasticizer
--DOA: dioctyl adipate
--IDP: isodecyl pelargonete
--DOP: dioctyl phthalate

-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Burning Rate Catalyst
--Fe2O3: ferric oxide
--FeO(OH): hydrated ferric oxide
--nBF: n-butyl ferrocene
--DnBF: di-n-butyl ferrocene
--LiF: lithium fluoride

-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Metal Fuel
--Al: aluminum
--Mg: magnesium
--Be: beryllium
--B: boron

-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Combustion Instability Suppressant
--Al: aluminum
--Zr: zirconium
--ZrC: zirconium carbide

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 4217 invoked from network); 13 Nov 2001 16:28:06 -0000
X-Priority: 3
Received: from smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.105]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 13 Nov 2001 16:28:06 -0000
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 8801 invoked by uid 50005); 13 Nov 2001 16:27:59 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpy with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4169. . Clean. Processed in 0.209084 secs); 13 Nov 2001 16:27:59 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 13 Nov 2001 16:27:59 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA10776; Tue, 13 Nov 2001 08:05:13 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 133391 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 13 Nov 2001 16:03:50          +0000
Received: from mta11.onebox.com (mta11.onebox.com [64.68.76.121]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA10752 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 13 Nov 2001 08:03:50 -0800
Received: from onebox.com ([10.1.101.5]) by mta11.onebox.com (InterMail          vM.4.01.03.23 201-229-121-123-20010418) with SMTP id          <20011113160320.IDDN29441.mta11.onebox.com@onebox.com> for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 13 Nov 2001 08:03:20 -0800
Received: from [216.16.193.186] by onebox.com with HTTP; Tue, 13 Nov 2001          08:03:19 -0800
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID:  <20011113160320.IDDN29441.mta11.onebox.com@onebox.com>
Date:         Tue, 13 Nov 2001 08:03:19 -0800
Reply-To: "David Bellhorn" <hellborn@ONEBOX.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "David Bellhorn" <hellborn@ONEBOX.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] The Newbies and the politics
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Personally, I was planning to start with candy motors at my local Tripoli
EX launch after earning Level 2 early next year.  Now I will probably
begin experimenting on my own in the very near future.  While I would
prefer to test my motors at a group launch so I can ask for advice, at
least I do not have to wait any longer.  Hopefully I can collect enough
data for a technical presentation, as Bruce mentioned, for the Tripoli
BoD.
--
David Bellhorn


---- al bradley <abradley@TOOLCITY.NET> wrote:
> Looking at the obvious displeasures and the slants of each side which
> are
> not distinguishable to all but those deep inside the controversy:
>
> What are the newbies to think in trying to find a slot where they can
> home-build and fly their own motors??
>
> Should they give up their interests? Just fly bootleg launches? Risk
> going
> to jail? No longer able to draw on the forum that arocket has provided?
>
> Finally they might say "a pox on it all!" and find another area of
> scientific inquiry that has more acceptability and companionship?
>
> Short of inclusion in hell, will somesone clearly show where we newbies
> belong?
>
> al bradley
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------
> Can you live Life with this?: "Unless there is a law, an agreement,
> or a
> long-standing custom, No one `Deserves' Anything -- Either Good or
> Bad!"
>

__________________________________________________
FREE voicemail, email, and fax...all in one place.
Sign Up Now! http://www.onebox.com

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 13999 invoked from network); 13 Nov 2001 16:37:29 -0000
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 13 Nov 2001 16:37:29 -0000
Received: (qmail 21457 invoked by uid 50005); 13 Nov 2001 16:37:23 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4169. . Clean. Processed in 0.194954 secs); 13 Nov 2001 16:37:23 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 13 Nov 2001 16:37:23 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA10687; Tue, 13 Nov 2001 07:58:01 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 133370 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 13 Nov 2001 15:56:34          +0000
Received: from cablecom.laribay.net (cablecom.laribay.net [66.20.57.4]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA10670 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 13 Nov 2001 07:56:33 -0800
Received: from billbull (dial071.laribay.net [66.20.57.71]) by          cablecom.laribay.net (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id JAA20578 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 13 Nov 2001 09:40:57 -0600 (CST)          (envelope-from bpbullock@laribay.net)
References:  <v01510100b816988f2b3b@[208.11.233.32]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <006501c16c5b$d631dba0$47391442@billbull>
Date:         Tue, 13 Nov 2001 09:57:02 -0600
Reply-To: "Bill Bullock" <bpbullock@LARIBAY.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Bill Bullock" <bpbullock@LARIBAY.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] The Newbies and the politics -- Re: [AR] Bruce Kelly's              Response             on ROL - ANFO motors
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

----- Original Message -----
From: al bradley <abradley@TOOLCITY.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Tuesday, November 13, 2001 3:58 AM
Subject: [AR] The Newbies and the politics -- Re: [AR] Bruce Kelly's
Response on ROL - ANFO motors


> Looking at the obvious displeasures and the slants of each side which are
> not distinguishable to all but those deep inside the controversy:
>
> What are the newbies to think in trying to find a slot where they can
> home-build and fly their own motors??
******
    First off, aRocket is what all us "oldbies" who were American Amateur
Rocket Society and the like back in the 50's-60's were praying for. It just
took 50 years for computers to come along so it would work. This is now your
home, and mine.
******
> Should they give up their interests? Just fly bootleg launches? Risk going
> to jail? No longer able to draw on the forum that arocket has provided?
******
No, there is no reasonable resaon to give up rocketry, experimental or
otherwise, just because the water gets a bit muddy at times. Boot-leg
launches? I did them for years. But with modern radar that is not a very
good idea. (Remind me to tell  you someday what happens when you go "way
back in the boonies" and pop one off to about 8500"' at Mach 1.3 in what is,
unknown to you, shortly going to be an "Oil-Burner Route" practice attach
corridor for a bunch of A-10's and your pretty new aluminum airframe really
lights up the screen at England Air Force Base. Do you have any idea how
fast a bunch of black-suited SF guys from Ft. Polk can travel 50 miles in
helicopters if they are really motivated...or how "pissed" they will be when
they get there???)

If you want to fly your rockets you can get waivers and fly them wherever
you are as long as you stay within the rules and regulations. I talked to a
friend who is also on this list just last night. He lives in Florida and has
nowhere to fly. Instead of sitting in ashes and bemoaning the fact, he
started bugging the wee-wee out of the FAA, teh Air Force (he lives within
the Tynedale AFB restricted zone) and now has it set up to get single-person
or group clearances to fly from hib BACK YARD!!! (Of course he lives out in
the country, but he can fly anything within reason there.) So please don't
anyone tell me that you cannot legally fly. You may not get to go for the
X-Prize from the "back-40" but you can fly.

I live in a small town down here. My grandsons and I can fly from
municipally-owned property inside the city limits and just three blocks from
our home because I sought and got premission. I can't launch my "Big Boys"
but they can fly a few "finger rockets" with their friends.

As for giving up on aRocket and going somewhere else? Only when Ray and Dave
tell me that you folks will be better off without me. Until then, who wants
to fight over this...?
******
> Finally they might say "a pox on it all!" and find another area of
> scientific inquiry that has more acceptability and companionship?
******
Better solution: a pox on anyone who wants to take our rights away from us!
I have "fought" NAR and Tripoli for years in an attempt to get them to let
me come to their meets and shoot something a little bigger than an Estes. I
started petitioning to fly at Estes-sponsored meets in the 1980's. Their
answer was always that they do not want me or people like me, so I am
admittedly prejudiced against them. I was always told,"You were in the AARS?
That bunch of nuts? NOBODY allows people like you to shoot your stuff
anymore!"

I belong to neither organization, but I attend their meets/launches and take
my two grandsons. I think they are doing great work. I hope they last a
thousand years. I hope they have a combined membership of a million by next
year. I hope they get over being STUPID (Please reference back to my
definitions of Stupid vs. Ignorance a few days ago).
******
> Short of inclusion in hell, will somesone clearly show where we newbies
belong?
******
Al, you are already in hell. Lets see if we can change the complexion of the
scenery plus educate some folks who certainly should know better.
******
> al bradle
******
    Respectfully,
Bill
******
> ------------------------------------------------------------------
> Can you live Life with this?: "Unless there is a law, an agreement, or a
> long-standing custom, No one `Deserves' Anything -- Either Good or Bad!"
******
    "The greatest tragedy would have been not to have tried."
Werner Von Braun/Christmas, Florida/July, 1957

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 26995 invoked from network); 13 Nov 2001 16:40:52 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 13 Nov 2001 16:40:52 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: (qmail 24161 invoked by uid 50005); 13 Nov 2001 16:40:45 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4169. . Clean. Processed in 0.153676 secs); 13 Nov 2001 16:40:45 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 13 Nov 2001 16:40:45 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA11155; Tue, 13 Nov 2001 08:25:15 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 133477 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 13 Nov 2001 16:23:52          +0000
Received: from localhost (rcalkins@localhost) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with          ESMTP id IAA11125 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Tue, 13 Nov 2001          08:23:52 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.LNX.4.10.10111130819000.10554-100000@itc.uci.edu>
Date:         Tue, 13 Nov 2001 08:23:51 -0800
Reply-To: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
Subject:      [AR] History of Composite Solid Propellants
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

http://www.astronautix.com/articles/comlants.htm

Mark Wade has put up a well researched document that goes into great
detail about exactly what a composite propellant is and has historically
been.  Good reading, and some neat photos of solid propellant vehicles.

Ray

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 1112 invoked from network); 13 Nov 2001 17:20:15 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 13 Nov 2001 17:20:15 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: (qmail 6336 invoked by uid 50005); 13 Nov 2001 17:20:09 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4169. . Clean. Processed in 0.209766 secs); 13 Nov 2001 17:20:09 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 13 Nov 2001 17:20:08 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA11627; Tue, 13 Nov 2001 09:11:31 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 133573 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 13 Nov 2001 17:10:10          +0000
Received: from cisco.com (cypher.cisco.com [171.69.11.18]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA11610 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue,          13 Nov 2001 09:10:09 -0800
Received: (from billw@localhost) by cisco.com (8.8.8/2.6/Cisco List          Logging/8.8.8) id JAA26702; Tue, 13 Nov 2001 09:09:07 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID:  <CMM.0.90.4.1005671347.billw@cypher>
Date:         Tue, 13 Nov 2001 09:09:07 PST
Reply-To: "Bill Westfield" <billw@cisco.com>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "William Chops Westfield" <billw@cisco.com>
Subject:      Re: [AR] The Newbies and the politics -- Re: [AR] Bruce Kelly's              Response on ROL - ANFO motors
Comments: To: al bradley <abradley@TOOLCITY.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  Your message of Tue, 13 Nov 2001 03:58:30 -0600

    What are the newbies to think in trying to find a slot where they can
    home-build and fly their own motors??

Not much has actually changed in recent history, that I can tell.


    Should they give up their interests? Just fly bootleg launches? Risk going
    to jail? No longer able to draw on the forum that arocket has provided?

Those are all possibilities.  They always have been.  "arocket" is a
comparatively recent "innovation" - in the past, amateur rocketeers have had
to have their discussions on pyrotechnics-related lists and newsgroups, and
before that...  I guess one thing that has changed is that people are more
aware of the "iffy" status of amateur rocketry, and the assorted laws that
they may need to try to comply with.


    Finally they might say "a pox on it all!" and find another area of
    scientific inquiry that has more acceptability and companionship?

Definately.


    will somesone clearly show where we newbies belong?

I wouldn't take the politics that show up on the internet has being
representative of "operational reality."  From the wars on
rec.models.rockets, you'd swear that a typical model rocket launch was full
of assorted prima donnas sneering down their noses on various issues, and
it's just not so in practice.  People are much nicer in person.  So instead
of condemning TRA's EX program for its omissions, politics and crony-ism,
you might as well be happy that it provides a venue for *ANY* amateur
activity...

BillW


From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 3888 invoked from network); 13 Nov 2001 17:35:30 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 13 Nov 2001 17:35:30 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 4129 invoked by uid 50005); 13 Nov 2001 17:35:24 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4169. . Clean. Processed in 0.583659 secs); 13 Nov 2001 17:35:24 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 13 Nov 2001 17:35:23 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA11488; Tue, 13 Nov 2001 08:57:15 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 133548 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 13 Nov 2001 16:55:35          +0000
Received: from smtppop3pub.verizon.net (smtppop3pub.gte.net [206.46.170.22]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA11471 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 13 Nov 2001 08:55:34 -0800
Received: from [63.24.225.226] (1Cust44.tnt1.rancho-cucamonga.ca.da.uu.net          [63.24.225.44]) by smtppop3pub.verizon.net  with ESMTP for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; id KAA55636183 Tue, 13 Nov 2001 10:54:40 -0600          (CST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: GTE/01rocket@mail.gte.net
References: <004301c16c5c$643b8d60$3c50153f@default>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <a05100304b81700896596@[63.24.225.226]>
Date:         Tue, 13 Nov 2001 08:55:02 -0800
Reply-To: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Composite Definition?
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <004301c16c5c$643b8d60$3c50153f@default>

>Muesing:


>I understand the word composite (as used with regards to solid
>rocket motors) to mean: "a mixture (composition) of propellant
>ingredients in a matrix of a solid material which has gone from
>liquid to solid in the manufacturing process". Example: any solid,
>liquid or gas (oxidizer or fuel) mixed into any liquid (fuel,
>oxidizer or inert) that then solidifies. Like: AP in R-45, KN in
>melted then solidified Sugar, KN in Epoxy, etc.
>
>Am I getting close here?
>
>Dave

You are technically and scientifically correct.

Whether you are politically correct is subject to the frame of
reference of the reader.  Brucie being on one end of the spectrum and
you being on the other.

Jerry


--
Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
Opinion, the whole thing.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 28576 invoked from network); 13 Nov 2001 17:49:40 -0000
Received: from smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.105]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 13 Nov 2001 17:49:40 -0000
Received: (qmail 23513 invoked by uid 50005); 13 Nov 2001 17:49:34 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpy with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4169. . Clean. Processed in 0.177473 secs); 13 Nov 2001 17:49:34 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 13 Nov 2001 17:49:34 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA11596; Tue, 13 Nov 2001 09:08:41 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 133566 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 13 Nov 2001 17:07:15          +0000
Received: from mailhost0.trib.com (mailhost0.trib.com [63.229.150.3]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA11578 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Tue, 13 Nov 2001 09:07:14 -0800
Received: from mail.trib.com (mail.trib.com [12.10.158.17]) by          mailhost0.trib.com (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id fADH7DC00883; Tue,          13 Nov 2001 10:07:13 -0700 (MST) (envelope-from          jwckman@space-rockets.com)
Received: from [63.229.150.109] (HELO hppav) by mail.trib.com (CommuniGate Pro          SMTP 3.4.6) with SMTP id 57676637; Tue, 13 Nov 2001 10:07:12 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0DD9_01C56B69.580492C0"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <NKEHJAOOKBPGIKOOPDEFIEELCDAA.jwckman@space-rockets.com>
Date:         Tue, 13 Nov 2001 10:06:08 -0700
Reply-To: "John Wickman" <jwckman@SPACE-ROCKETS.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Wickman" <jwckman@SPACE-ROCKETS.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] AN Reply from Bruce
Comments: To: KELLY MERCER <kellyrmercer@msn.com>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <OE26NJOpiMOHsF3ZfHQ0000d002@hotmail.com>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0DD9_01C56B69.580492C0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Kelly,

He has been very much aware of AN motors at TRA insured experimental
launches.  It is well documented, even on videotape.  Several AN motors were
going to be at Balls this year including an "O" motor using AN composite
propellant.  He was personally told of this and replied that he looked
forward to seeing it and the others fly.   This years Ball launch would have
been TRA insured, if it had been held.

John Wickman

   >>> He has been more than aware of AN motors flying at TRA-EX launches
(or maybe not, maybe he has had his head in the sand and does not keep up
with what is flying these last several years).<<<<

------=_NextPart_000_0DD9_01C56B69.580492C0
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Diso-8859-1">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 5.50.4611.1300" name=3DGENERATOR></HEAD>
<BODY=20
style=3D"BORDER-RIGHT: medium none; BORDER-TOP: medium none; FONT: 10pt =
verdana; BORDER-LEFT: medium none; BORDER-BOTTOM: medium none">
<DIV><SPAN class=3D800285816-13112001><FONT=20
face=3Dverdana>Kelly,</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=3D800285816-13112001></SPAN>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=3D800285816-13112001><FONT face=3Dverdana>He has been =
very much=20
aware of AN motors at TRA <U>insured</U> experimental launches.&nbsp; It =
is well=20
documented, even on videotape.&nbsp; Several AN motors were going to be =
at Balls=20
this year including an "O" motor using AN composite propellant.&nbsp; He =
was=20
personally told of this and replied that he looked forward to seeing it =
and the=20
others fly.&nbsp;&nbsp; This years Ball launch would have been TRA =
insured, if=20
it had been held.</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=3D800285816-13112001></SPAN>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=3D800285816-13112001><FONT face=3Dverdana>John=20
Wickman</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=3D800285816-13112001></SPAN>&nbsp;</DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE dir=3Dltr style=3D"MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
  <DIV><SPAN class=3D800285816-13112001><FONT=20
  face=3Dverdana>&nbsp;&gt;&gt;&gt;&nbsp;</FONT></SPAN>He has been more =
than aware=20
  of AN motors flying at TRA-EX launches (or maybe not, maybe he has had =
his=20
  head in the sand and does not keep up with what is flying these last =
several=20
  years).<SPAN class=3D800285816-13112001><FONT=20
  =
face=3Dverdana>&lt;&lt;&lt;&lt;&nbsp;</FONT></SPAN></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE></B=
ODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0DD9_01C56B69.580492C0--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 9628 invoked from network); 13 Nov 2001 17:59:17 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 13 Nov 2001 17:59:17 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: (qmail 7960 invoked by uid 50005); 13 Nov 2001 17:59:11 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4169. . Clean. Processed in 0.189835 secs); 13 Nov 2001 17:59:11 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 13 Nov 2001 17:59:11 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA11876; Tue, 13 Nov 2001 09:38:53 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 133625 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 13 Nov 2001 17:37:30          +0000
Received: from cisco.com (cypher.cisco.com [171.69.11.18]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA11859; Tue, 13 Nov 2001 09:37:30 -0800
Received: (from billw@localhost) by cisco.com (8.8.8/2.6/Cisco List          Logging/8.8.8) id JAA03496; Tue, 13 Nov 2001 09:36:59 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID:  <CMM.0.90.4.1005673019.billw@cypher>
Date:         Tue, 13 Nov 2001 09:36:59 PST
Reply-To: "Bill Westfield" <billw@cisco.com>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "William Chops Westfield" <billw@cisco.com>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Composite Definition?
Comments: To: Ray Calkins <rcalkins@ITC.UCI.EDU>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  Your message of Tue, 13 Nov 2001 08:06:07 -0800

    > I understand the word composite (as used with regards to solid rocket
    > motors) to mean: "a mixture (composition) of propellant ingredients in
    > a matrix of a solid material which has gone from liquid to solid in
    > the manufacturing process". Example: any solid, liquid or gas
    > (oxidizer or fuel) mixed into any liquid (fuel, oxidizer or inert)
    > that then solidifies. Like: AP in R-45, KN in melted then solidified
    > Sugar, KN in Epoxy, etc.

    That about sums it up.  I think molten sulfur based micrograin applies and
    also Asphalt-Potassium Perchlorate.

I don't think "composite propellant", as commonly used, includes either
Candy or cast micrograin.  There's an assumption somewhere that the binder
is a polymer of "substantial structural strength", or something.  But
there's little doubt that the term isn't very clearly defined.  Come to
think of it, isn't there a "definition" of composite in military circles
that has something to do with homegenaity, that would tend to EXCLUDE
what we normally all agree is a 'composite'?

BillW


From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 2320 invoked from network); 13 Nov 2001 18:12:41 -0000
Received: from smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.105]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 13 Nov 2001 18:12:41 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 26741 invoked by uid 50005); 13 Nov 2001 18:12:35 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpy with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4169. . Clean. Processed in 0.218844 secs); 13 Nov 2001 18:12:35 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 13 Nov 2001 18:12:34 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA11985; Tue, 13 Nov 2001 09:55:34 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 133639 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 13 Nov 2001 17:54:11          +0000
Received: from mail.aros.net (mail.aros.net [207.173.16.20]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA11957 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Tue,          13 Nov 2001 09:54:11 -0800
Received: from biomicro.com (cust-208-187-122-40.bbsc.net [208.187.122.40]) by          mail.aros.net (8.11.6/8.9.3) with ESMTP id fADHsAC40059 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Tue, 13 Nov 2001 10:54:10 -0700 (MST)
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.77 [en] (Win98; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <00a901c16c5c$511c8860$c36122c0@cronos>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3BF15E91.F9996838@biomicro.com>
Date:         Tue, 13 Nov 2001 10:55:29 -0700
Reply-To: "Mark K. Spute" <mks@BIOMICRO.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Mark K. Spute" <mks@BIOMICRO.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Model, High Power, and Experimental
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Wedge Oldham wrote:

[Snip of stuff about history.  FWIW Experimental rocketry came first and
amateur rocketry came next.  Then model rocketry etc.]

> So what we have today is:
> Model Rocketry, governed by NFPA 1122, and served by the NAR.
> High Power Rocketry, governed by NFPA 1127, and served by Tripoli.
> Experimental/Amateur Rocketry, governed by ?????, and served by ?????

Amateur rocketery could potentially have some kind of governing
regulation like NFPA 1122 or 1127.  Currently it is covered by FAA regs
and in some cases BATF.

Experimental rocketry, by it's very nature, needs to be as unconstrained
as possible.

Organizations exist for both of these:  PRS, RRS, EPRS (I think) and
others around the world.  Arocket is the prime "meeting place" for all
of these and is more of a bulletin board and reference library than a
governing organization.

I'm not sure if that is good or bad.

> What I do see is Experimental/Amateur people complaining the organization
> setup to exclude them (Tripoli) doesn't fit their needs.

Actually I could care les what TRA and NAR do, as long as it doesn't
affect the Am/Ex community.

> What I do see is Experimental/Amateur people complaining the rules setup to
> exclude their activities (NFPA 1127), is limiting their activity.

What I am concerned about is NFPA adopted in such a way as to prohibit
Am/Ex activities.  Am/Ex does not tell TRA or NAR how to conduct their
meets, what propellants or propellant combinations they can use, how
high they can go, etc. etc.
All I ask is that they not appoint themselves as the guardians of all
things rocketry related.  I'm not sure they will do that, however.

Power gives them the ability to regulate their activities and obtain
favorable political and regulatory environments.  By "becoming" the
aforementioned guardians, they have more power, and thus a greater
ability to reach their ends, to the detriment of Am/Ex's.

> Shouldn't the Experimental/Amateur community get their own set of rules to
> follow (NFPA 11??), and their own organization setup to serve their
> interests?

One of the problems is, that the Am/Ex community has such an incredibly
broad array of interests that it would be very difficult to write a set
of rules that would not exclude members of the group, unless it was
sufficiently broad and vague as to be essentially useless as a useful
regulation.

Perhaps one set of regulations could be set down for Amateurs and one
set for Experimenters, but the line between those two groups (if they
even exist as separate groups) is pretty broad and very fuzzy.

It seems to me that in order to be effective and workable, amateur and
espescially experimental rocketry should remain as unregulated as
possible.  If there were some way to consolidate and enumerate the
existing regulatory environment, that would be a good thing I think.
But there should be some relaxation of the BATF "explosive" regulations
for what are actually non-explosive propellants.


--
Mark K. Spute
Senior Research Engineer
BioMicro Systems Inc.

KD7IWE,  RRS, hopeful future Stolly owner

"It is difficult to say what is impossible, for the dream of yesterday
is the hope of today and the reality of tomorrow."
     Dr. Robert H. Goddard

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 17791 invoked from network); 13 Nov 2001 18:38:42 -0000
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 13 Nov 2001 18:38:42 -0000
Received: (qmail 20926 invoked by uid 50005); 13 Nov 2001 18:38:36 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4169. . Clean. Processed in 0.151841 secs); 13 Nov 2001 18:38:36 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 13 Nov 2001 18:38:36 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA12124; Tue, 13 Nov 2001 10:22:15 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 133660 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 13 Nov 2001 18:20:51          +0000
Received: from mrtwig.citlink.net (mrtwig.citlink.net [207.173.229.137]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA12105 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 13 Nov 2001 10:20:50 -0800
Received: from ams ([216.67.212.56]) by mrtwig.citlink.net (InterMail          vK.4.03.04.00 201-232-130 license a3e2d54ac3b1df4217e834deb9d77e31)          with SMTP id <20011113182505.VOVF136188.mrtwig@ams> for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 13 Nov 2001 12:25:05 -0600
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4807.1700
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <043f01c16c6e$622e7a20$1d90fea9@ams>
Date:         Tue, 13 Nov 2001 11:09:48 -0700
Reply-To: "Greg Boyd" <pyrofx@CITLINK.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Greg Boyd" <pyrofx@CITLINK.NET>
Subject:      [AR] Stable horizontal flight
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Hello , allow me to introduce myself and explain my question .
My name is Greg Boyd , and I am a member of multiple pyrotechnic groups . I
am also a licensed manufacture of high and low explosives .

Here is my question .

At our next convention , we would like to do a helicopter  missile special
effects shot . We will be using a Cobra helicopter with 2.75" rocket pods .
The shot will take place at either hover or 10 to 20 knots forward speed .
For obvious reasons , I cannot use the real deal . I am looking for input on
what to use . My main concern is the horizontal stability . In the fireworks
field the drag on our sticks will make a launched rocket head straight up .
We would like to use black powder based fuels because of the exhaust plume
would be full of titanium .

I am open to any and all suggestions , both on and off list .


Thanks ,
Greg

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 687 invoked from network); 13 Nov 2001 18:57:25 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 13 Nov 2001 18:57:25 -0000
Received: (qmail 19913 invoked by uid 50005); 13 Nov 2001 18:57:19 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4169. . Clean. Processed in 0.1339 secs); 13 Nov 2001 18:57:19 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 13 Nov 2001 18:57:18 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA12264; Tue, 13 Nov 2001 10:42:45 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 133687 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 13 Nov 2001 18:41:18          +0000
Received: from spsystems.net (spsystems.net [209.47.149.227]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA12242 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Tue,          13 Nov 2001 10:41:18 -0800
Received: (from henry@localhost) by spsystems.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id NAA22570;          Tue, 13 Nov 2001 13:40:38 -0500 (EST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1011113133527.20879C-100000@spsystems.net>
Date:         Tue, 13 Nov 2001 13:40:37 -0500
Reply-To: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Composite Definition?
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <CMM.0.90.4.1005673019.billw@cypher>

On Tue, 13 Nov 2001, William Chops Westfield wrote:
> there's little doubt that the term isn't very clearly defined.  Come to
> think of it, isn't there a "definition" of composite in military circles
> that has something to do with homegenaity, that would tend to EXCLUDE
> what we normally all agree is a 'composite'?

The normal pro-rocketry definition, after stripping away comments on usual
compositions and manufacturing etc., is that a composite propellant is a
*heterogeneous* solid propellant -- one in which fuel and oxidizer are
physically separate, e.g. with the oxidizer as grains within a matrix of
fuel, rather than being parts of the same compound.

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 1419 invoked from network); 13 Nov 2001 19:26:26 -0000
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 13 Nov 2001 19:26:26 -0000
Received: (qmail 12914 invoked by uid 50005); 13 Nov 2001 19:26:20 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4169. . Clean. Processed in 0.609726 secs); 13 Nov 2001 19:26:20 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 13 Nov 2001 19:26:18 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA12346; Tue, 13 Nov 2001 10:53:44 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 133701 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 13 Nov 2001 18:52:22          +0000
Received: from cablecom.laribay.net (cablecom.laribay.net [66.20.57.4]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA12325 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 13 Nov 2001 10:52:22 -0800
Received: from billbull (dial080.laribay.net [66.20.57.80]) by          cablecom.laribay.net (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id MAA22206 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 13 Nov 2001 12:36:39 -0600 (CST)          (envelope-from bpbullock@laribay.net)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <006d01c16c74$615d5fc0$49391442@billbull>
Date:         Tue, 13 Nov 2001 12:51:33 -0600
Reply-To: "Bill Bullock" <bpbullock@LARIBAY.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Bill Bullock" <bpbullock@LARIBAY.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] The Newbies and the politics / Oh Dear Me!!!
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

    I note that in an earlier post I asked the question,"Until then, who
wants
to fight over this...?" I hope that it is understood that this was directed
toward outsiders who might be inclined to attack out sport and not at list
mates.
    Please now envision me contritely retiring back into The Cave to
contemplate my belly-button and its relationship to the Cosmos.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 7923 invoked from network); 13 Nov 2001 19:35:33 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 13 Nov 2001 19:35:33 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 27736 invoked by uid 50005); 13 Nov 2001 19:35:27 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4169. . Clean. Processed in 0.523904 secs); 13 Nov 2001 19:35:27 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 13 Nov 2001 19:35:26 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA12771; Tue, 13 Nov 2001 11:30:22 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 133803 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 13 Nov 2001 19:29:01          +0000
Received: from fw1-bv.tek.com (fw1-bv.tek.com [192.65.40.16]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA12750 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue,          13 Nov 2001 11:29:01 -0800
Received: from fw1-bv.tek.com (root@localhost) by fw1-bv.tek.com with ESMTP id          fADJSU505419 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 13 Nov 2001 11:28:30          -0800 (PST)
Received: from tektronix.tek.com (tektronix.tek.com [128.181.6.43]) by          fw1-bv.tek.com with ESMTP id fADJSUx05415 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>;          Tue, 13 Nov 2001 11:28:30 -0800 (PST)
Received: from us-bv-u16 (us-bv-u16.bv.tek.com [128.181.2.45]) by          tektronix.tek.com (8.10.2+Sun/8.10.2) with SMTP id fADJSUj23835 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 13 Nov 2001 11:28:30 -0800 (PST)
Received: FROM us-bv-m01.bv.tek.com BY us-bv-u16 ; Tue Nov 13 11:28:29 2001          -0800
Received: by us-bv-m01.bv.tek.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) id          <V88SJVK7>; Tue, 13 Nov 2001 11:28:29 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19)
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Message-ID:  <5832AFF5FC75D411844300508BC216B70302AC01@us-bv-m07.bv.tek.com>
Date:         Tue, 13 Nov 2001 11:28:27 -0800
Reply-To: <john.w.lyngdal@EXGATE.TEK.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <john.w.lyngdal@EXGATE.TEK.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] The Newbies and the politics / Oh Dear Me!!!
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Bill,

        I just see this current debacle as just another data point in how
Bruce runs TRA and how he views the members of the organization. If we
complain about the abysmal magazine delivery performance we're whiners. If
we accept and follow the TRA-EX rules he controls, and find our activities
outside of those the insurance coverage were making unwarranted assumptions.
Never have I seen him stand up and say that he's responsible for anything
that goes awry. If this is his model of leadership, then we need to work for
change or start a new organization. Continued support of the current
situation is a kin to self-abuse.

        Changing TRA is a difficult task, but not impossible. The president
of TRA is elected by the BoD from a member of the BoD. So the only chance
for change is to hope that Bruce isn't re-elected to the BoD, or that there
is sufficient change in the BoD membership that will allow a new president
to be elected. Unfortunately, there is a history of tossing  BoD members
that don't walk in lockstep with Bruce. All in all a pretty sad state of
affairs.

        I'd jump at the chance to join a EX organization that is well run,
owns a launch site, and is conveniently located; perhaps I should look into
joining RRS.

        John




-----Original Message-----
From: Bill Bullock [mailto:bpbullock@LARIBAY.NET]
Sent: Tuesday, November 13, 2001 10:52 AM
To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
Subject: Re: [AR] The Newbies and the politics / Oh Dear Me!!!


    I note that in an earlier post I asked the question,"Until then, who
wants
to fight over this...?" I hope that it is understood that this was directed
toward outsiders who might be inclined to attack out sport and not at list
mates.
    Please now envision me contritely retiring back into The Cave to
contemplate my belly-button and its relationship to the Cosmos.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 20481 invoked from network); 13 Nov 2001 20:14:49 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.105]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 13 Nov 2001 20:14:49 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 24299 invoked by uid 50005); 13 Nov 2001 20:14:42 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpy with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4169. . Clean. Processed in 1.208219 secs); 13 Nov 2001 20:14:42 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 13 Nov 2001 20:14:40 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA12718; Tue, 13 Nov 2001 11:25:23 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 133791 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 13 Nov 2001 19:23:58          +0000
Received: from femail40.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail40.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.254.60.34]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA12692          for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Tue, 13 Nov 2001 11:23:58 -0800
Received: from c396957-b.home.net ([24.17.249.10]) by          femail40.sdc1.sfba.home.com (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20          201-229-121-120-20010223) with ESMTP id          <20011113192352.PTMW13029.femail40.sdc1.sfba.home.com@c396957-b.home.net> for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Tue, 13          Nov 2001 11:23:52 -0800
X-Sender: spiegl@mail
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
References: <5.1.0.14.2.20011113001325.00b4fc30@mail>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <5.1.0.14.2.20011113131456.00b49480@mail>
Date:         Tue, 13 Nov 2001 13:25:01 -0600
Reply-To: "Mark C Spiegl" <spiegl@HOME.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Mark C Spiegl" <spiegl@HOME.NET>
Subject:      [AR] LEO (was Re: [AR] AN Reply from Bruce)
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <008301c16c28$9aa857e0$0700a8c0@mkbs>

> > insured by NASA; the 1M (yes that's million foot) waiver was secured by
> > NASSAU
>
>
> That includes LEO :-)
>

Unfortunately no.

Nasa required proof of a ballistic trajectory which would bring the rocket
back down into Lake Michigan. The Coast Guard provided radar track and
fished the rockets out of the lake.

Weather balloons were release prior to flight and final calculations made
on site. But a little known fun fact is that one of the 50 mile flights
caught some unexpected upper atmospheric winds and blew the top half of
the rocket across the lake where it landed in Michigan (the state).

I didn't tell you that. :)


--MCS

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 13761 invoked from network); 13 Nov 2001 20:35:07 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.105]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 13 Nov 2001 20:35:07 -0000
Received: (qmail 22855 invoked by uid 50005); 13 Nov 2001 20:35:01 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpy with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4169. . Clean. Processed in 0.27165 secs); 13 Nov 2001 20:35:01 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 13 Nov 2001 20:35:00 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA13385; Tue, 13 Nov 2001 12:18:04 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 133889 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 13 Nov 2001 20:15:42          +0000
Received: from localhost (dmccue@localhost) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with          ESMTP id MAA13360; Tue, 13 Nov 2001 12:15:36 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.LNX.4.10.10111131211210.13120-100000@itc.uci.edu>
Date:         Tue, 13 Nov 2001 12:15:36 -0800
Reply-To: "David J. McCue" <dmccue@itc.uci.edu>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "David J. McCue" <dmccue@itc.uci.edu>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Model, High Power, and Experimental
Comments: To: Wedge Oldham <wedge@WESTWORLD.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <00a901c16c5c$511c8860$c36122c0@cronos>

I have to disagree with your analysis, Wedge, because Tripoli HAS an
experimental/amateur program. The topic is Bruce Kelly's new interpretation
of Tripoli EX rules.

-Dave McCue

On Tue, 13 Nov 2001, Wedge Oldham wrote:

> Either I or everyone else seems to be confused. I would have to assume that
> it's me, and I would appreciate someone clarifying something for me.
>
> If I remember my history correctly, first there was model rocketry. One of
> the main rules of Model Rocketry was only commercial motors would be used.
> This generated a clear division between Model Rocketry and
> Experimental/Amateur Rocketry. The NAR was founded to serve the Model Rocket
> community, and basically excluded the Experimental/Amateur community.
>
> As commercial manufactures developed larger motors, there soon became a need
> for High Power Rocketry. Tripoli was built. This shared the same basic rule
> that only commercially built motors would be flown. Again separating
> themselves from the Experimental/Amateur community.
>
> So what we have today is:
> Model Rocketry, governed by NFPA 1122, and served by the NAR.
> High Power Rocketry, governed by NFPA 1127, and served by Tripoli.
> Experimental/Amateur Rocketry, governed by ?????, and served by ?????
>
> What I do see is Experimental/Amateur people complaining the organization
> setup to exclude them (Tripoli) doesn't fit their needs.
> What I do see is Experimental/Amateur people complaining the rules setup to
> exclude their activities (NFPA 1127), is limiting their activity.
>
> Shouldn't the Experimental/Amateur community get their own set of rules to
> follow (NFPA 11??), and their own organization setup to serve their
> interests?
>
> I think people should reply to me privately, unless AROCKET would really
> benefit  from your answer.
>
> Wedge Oldham
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 18385 invoked from network); 13 Nov 2001 20:51:26 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 13 Nov 2001 20:51:26 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 17223 invoked by uid 50005); 13 Nov 2001 20:51:20 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4169. . Clean. Processed in 0.596262 secs); 13 Nov 2001 20:51:20 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 13 Nov 2001 20:51:18 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA13697; Tue, 13 Nov 2001 12:46:20 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 133941 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 13 Nov 2001 20:44:59          +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (f224.law9.hotmail.com [64.4.9.224]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA13675 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue,          13 Nov 2001 12:44:58 -0800
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Tue,          13 Nov 2001 12:44:28 -0800
Received: from 216.125.36.3 by lw9fd.law9.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Tue, 13          Nov 2001 20:44:26 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [216.125.36.3]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 13 Nov 2001 20:44:28.0539 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[FD119CB0:01C16C83]
Message-ID:  <F2243KDzvT0WFBit5r80000695f@hotmail.com>
Date:         Tue, 13 Nov 2001 14:44:26 -0600
Reply-To: "ben romashko" <pleaselaunchme@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "ben romashko" <pleaselaunchme@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      [AR] Attention Tom Binford
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Tom,
I seem to have lost your e-mail address.  I would like to know if you are
still selling nichrome, if so me and  a friend would both like to order
some.  Please e-mail me either way.  Thank you.

--------------------
Ben Romashko
pleaselaunchme@hotmail.com
AIM- Attican123
--------------------


_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 26339 invoked from network); 13 Nov 2001 21:00:35 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 13 Nov 2001 21:00:35 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 1847 invoked by uid 50005); 13 Nov 2001 21:00:29 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4169. . Clean. Processed in 0.140827 secs); 13 Nov 2001 21:00:29 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 13 Nov 2001 21:00:28 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA13648; Tue, 13 Nov 2001 12:42:40 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 133929 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 13 Nov 2001 20:40:26          +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (f160.law9.hotmail.com [64.4.9.160]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA13631 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue,          13 Nov 2001 12:40:25 -0800
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Tue,          13 Nov 2001 12:39:55 -0800
Received: from 216.125.36.3 by lw9fd.law9.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Tue, 13          Nov 2001 20:39:54 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [216.125.36.3]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 13 Nov 2001 20:39:55.0210 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[5A26EAA0:01C16C83]
Message-ID:  <F160W3KDzvT0WFBit5r000186bb@hotmail.com>
Date:         Tue, 13 Nov 2001 14:39:54 -0600
Reply-To: "ben romashko" <pleaselaunchme@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "ben romashko" <pleaselaunchme@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      [AR] KNO3/epoxy trials
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

I finally got my hands upon some more KNO3 yesterday, so i mixed up a small
test batch of Epoxy/KNO3 just to see how it will mix/handle/ and cure.  For
this,  I used Bob Smith 30 minute, and a finely ground KNO3.  i used about 2
parts epoxy to 3 parts KNO3, which resultes in a thick mix.  it burned
alright, but, as i suspected it would be, was too fuel rich.  My question
is, i guess, what is the best ratio?  I plan to mix up a 3:7, 1:2 and
possibly a 3:8 batch tonight to see which will burn the best.  Any
suggestions and or comments from the more experienced?

Ben Romashko

_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 20166 invoked from network); 13 Nov 2001 21:34:08 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 13 Nov 2001 21:34:08 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 27906 invoked by uid 50005); 13 Nov 2001 21:34:02 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4169. . Clean. Processed in 1.100218 secs); 13 Nov 2001 21:34:02 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 13 Nov 2001 21:34:00 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA13820; Tue, 13 Nov 2001 13:05:47 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 133964 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 13 Nov 2001 21:04:25          +0000
Received: from idsoftware.com (predator.idsoftware.com [192.246.40.34]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA13797 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Tue, 13 Nov 2001 13:04:24 -0800
Received: from [192.246.40.129] (account johnc HELO lightning.idsoftware.com)          by idsoftware.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 3.4.7) with ESMTP id 476289          for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 13 Nov 2001 15:04:24 -0600
X-Sender: johnc@mail.idsoftware.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.1
References: <v01510100b816988f2b3b@[208.11.233.32]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <4.3.1.2.20011113145037.036e5b70@mail.idsoftware.com>
Date:         Tue, 13 Nov 2001 15:02:35 -0600
Reply-To: "John Carmack" <johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Carmack" <johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM>
Subject:      [AR] waivers (was Re: [AR] The Newbies and the politics)
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <006501c16c5b$d631dba0$47391442@billbull>

>If you want to fly your rockets you can get waivers and fly them wherever
>you are as long as you stay within the rules and regulations. I talked to a
>friend who is also on this list just last night. He lives in Florida and has
>nowhere to fly. Instead of sitting in ashes and bemoaning the fact, he
>started bugging the wee-wee out of the FAA, teh Air Force (he lives within
>the Tynedale AFB restricted zone) and now has it set up to get single-person
>or group clearances to fly from hib BACK YARD!!! (Of course he lives out in
>the country, but he can fly anything within reason there.) So please don't
>anyone tell me that you cannot legally fly. You may not get to go for the
>X-Prize from the "back-40" but you can fly.

I have 100 acres of land outside of class B airspace and not under any
regular flight paths, but I had a request for a 5000' waiver denied
recently, with the FAA guy basically saying "we don't let rockets fly in
our airspace".  He is wrong, and I expect we will still get it worked out,
but it probably will involve bugging the FAA a lot more.  We had quite a
bit of difficulty just filing a notification to fly LMR last week, which is
planned to be our "foot in the door" for the next re-application for the
waiver.

Tomorrow, I am heading off to the Oklahoma Spaceport meeting to see about
doing high altitude flights from there next year.

It is a little bit sad, but I am also probably going to start getting to
know my local representatives and congressmen, so I at least have some
official channel to complain through if necessary.

John Carmack

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 20530 invoked from network); 13 Nov 2001 21:49:07 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 13 Nov 2001 21:49:07 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 10015 invoked by uid 50005); 13 Nov 2001 21:49:01 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4169. . Clean. Processed in 0.137432 secs); 13 Nov 2001 21:49:01 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 13 Nov 2001 21:49:00 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA14109; Tue, 13 Nov 2001 13:44:00 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 134019 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 13 Nov 2001 21:42:36          +0000
Received: from fw1-bv.tek.com (fw1-bv.tek.com [192.65.40.16]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA14093 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue,          13 Nov 2001 13:42:35 -0800
Received: from fw1-bv.tek.com (root@localhost) by fw1-bv.tek.com with ESMTP id          fADLg5W12658 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 13 Nov 2001 13:42:05          -0800 (PST)
Received: from tektronix.tek.com (tektronix.tek.com [128.181.6.43]) by          fw1-bv.tek.com with ESMTP id fADLg5x12653 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>;          Tue, 13 Nov 2001 13:42:05 -0800 (PST)
Received: from us-bv-u16 (us-bv-u16.bv.tek.com [128.181.2.45]) by          tektronix.tek.com (8.10.2+Sun/8.10.2) with SMTP id fADLg4j24521 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 13 Nov 2001 13:42:05 -0800 (PST)
Received: FROM us-bv-m01.bv.tek.com BY us-bv-u16 ; Tue Nov 13 13:42:04 2001          -0800
Received: by us-bv-m01.bv.tek.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) id          <V88SJ9X7>; Tue, 13 Nov 2001 13:42:03 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19)
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Message-ID:  <5832AFF5FC75D411844300508BC216B70302AC05@us-bv-m07.bv.tek.com>
Date:         Tue, 13 Nov 2001 13:42:02 -0800
Reply-To: <john.w.lyngdal@EXGATE.TEK.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <john.w.lyngdal@EXGATE.TEK.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] The Newbies and the politics / Oh Dear Me!!!
Comments: To: bpbullock@LARIBAY.NET
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Great news can be found here:

http://www.shadowaero.com/Kosdon!.htm

Frank's running for TRA BoD.


John


-----Original Message-----
From: Bill Bullock [mailto:bpbullock@LARIBAY.NET]
Sent: Tuesday, November 13, 2001 10:52 AM
To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
Subject: Re: [AR] The Newbies and the politics / Oh Dear Me!!!


    I note that in an earlier post I asked the question,"Until then, who
wants
to fight over this...?" I hope that it is understood that this was directed
toward outsiders who might be inclined to attack out sport and not at list
mates.
    Please now envision me contritely retiring back into The Cave to
contemplate my belly-button and its relationship to the Cosmos.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 13534 invoked from network); 13 Nov 2001 22:47:46 -0000
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 13 Nov 2001 22:47:46 -0000
Received: (qmail 17074 invoked by uid 50005); 13 Nov 2001 22:47:40 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4169. . Clean. Processed in 0.428245 secs); 13 Nov 2001 22:47:40 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 13 Nov 2001 22:47:40 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA14466; Tue, 13 Nov 2001 14:40:16 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 134100 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 13 Nov 2001 22:37:25          +0000
Received: from albqpop1.albq.uswest.net (albqpop1.albq.uswest.net          [207.108.240.1]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id OAA14444          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 13 Nov 2001 14:37:24 -0800
Received: (qmail 96660 invoked by alias); 13 Nov 2001 22:36:53 -0000
Delivered-To: fixup-AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU@fixme
Received: (qmail 96649 invoked by uid 0); 13 Nov 2001 22:36:52 -0000
Received: from cc898542-a.prdise1.nm.home.com (HELO cc898542a) (65.7.151.152)          by albqpop1.albq.uswest.net with SMTP; 13 Nov 2001 22:36:52 -0000
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0DDD_01C56B69.580E2FB0"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <006d01c16c93$b3c37cd0$0100a8c0@cc898542a>
Date:         Tue, 13 Nov 2001 15:36:56 -0700
Reply-To: "Paxton" <darkspunge@USWEST.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Paxton" <darkspunge@USWEST.NET>
Subject:      [AR] Everybody send Brian Kosko and e-mail...
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0DDD_01C56B69.580E2FB0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

... saying he should run with Frank for BOD. :-)

Paxton

------=_NextPart_000_0DDD_01C56B69.580E2FB0
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META content=3D"text/html; charset=3Diso-8859-1" =
http-equiv=3DContent-Type>
<META content=3D"MSHTML 5.00.3315.2870" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>... saying he should run with Frank for =
BOD.=20
:-)</FONT></DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Paxton</FONT></DIV></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0DDD_01C56B69.580E2FB0--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 9759 invoked from network); 13 Nov 2001 22:54:36 -0000
Received: from smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.105]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 13 Nov 2001 22:54:36 -0000
Received: (qmail 16605 invoked by uid 50005); 13 Nov 2001 22:54:29 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpy with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4169. . Clean. Processed in 0.923035 secs); 13 Nov 2001 22:54:29 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 13 Nov 2001 22:54:28 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA14526; Tue, 13 Nov 2001 14:49:19 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 134111 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 13 Nov 2001 22:47:55          +0000
Received: from conint.consumersinterest.com (consumersinterest.com          [207.195.143.118] (may be forged)) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with          ESMTP id OAA14506 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 13 Nov 2001          14:47:54 -0800
Received: from DEPUTYDOG1 [131.107.3.83] by conint.consumersinterest.com          (SMTPD32-6.04) id A742346D00AE; Tue, 13 Nov 2001 15:05:38 -0800
References:  <006d01c16c93$b3c37cd0$0100a8c0@cc898542a>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0DE0_01C56B69.581079A0"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <00a901c16c95$1cf575e0$87ae1cac@redmond.corp.microsoft.com>
Date:         Tue, 13 Nov 2001 14:47:03 -0800
Reply-To: "Greg Deputy" <greg@BLASTZONE.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Greg Deputy" <greg@BLASTZONE.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Everybody send Brian Kosko and e-mail...
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0DE0_01C56B69.581079A0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

I havent yet decided if Kosdon's platform is exciting or scary...
  ----- Original Message -----=20
  From: Paxton=20
  To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU=20
  Sent: Tuesday, November 13, 2001 2:36 PM
  Subject: [AR] Everybody send Brian Kosko and e-mail...


  ... saying he should run with Frank for BOD. :-)

  Paxton

------=_NextPart_000_0DE0_01C56B69.581079A0
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Diso-8859-1">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 6.00.2600.0" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>I havent yet decided if Kosdon's =
platform is=20
exciting or scary...</FONT></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE dir=3Dltr=20
style=3D"PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; =
BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
  <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial">----- Original Message ----- </DIV>
  <DIV=20
  style=3D"BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; FONT: 10pt arial; font-color: =
black"><B>From:</B>=20
  <A title=3Ddarkspunge@USWEST.NET =
href=3D"mailto:darkspunge@USWEST.NET">Paxton</A>=20
  </DIV>
  <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A =
title=3DAROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU=20
  href=3D"mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU">AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU</A> </DIV>
  <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> Tuesday, November 13, =
2001 2:36=20
  PM</DIV>
  <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> [AR] Everybody send =
Brian Kosko=20
  and e-mail...</DIV>
  <DIV><BR></DIV>
  <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>... saying he should run with Frank =
for BOD.=20
  :-)</FONT></DIV>
  <DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
  <DIV><FONT face=3DArial =
size=3D2>Paxton</FONT></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0DE0_01C56B69.581079A0--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 28889 invoked from network); 13 Nov 2001 22:59:09 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 13 Nov 2001 22:59:09 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 6032 invoked by uid 50005); 13 Nov 2001 22:59:03 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4169. . Clean. Processed in 0.147253 secs); 13 Nov 2001 22:59:03 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 13 Nov 2001 22:59:03 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA14594; Tue, 13 Nov 2001 14:54:34 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 134126 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 13 Nov 2001 22:53:09          +0000
Received: from smtp008pub.verizon.net (smtp008pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.187])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA14570 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 13 Nov 2001 14:53:08 -0800
Received: from [63.24.225.226] (1Cust188.tnt1.rancho-cucamonga.ca.da.uu.net          [63.24.225.188]) by smtp008pub.verizon.net  with ESMTP for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; id fADMqWG11293 Tue, 13 Nov 2001 16:52:32          -0600 (CST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: GTE/01rocket@mail.gte.net
References: <006d01c16c93$b3c37cd0$0100a8c0@cc898542a>            <00a901c16c95$1cf575e0$87ae1cac@redmond.corp.microsoft.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <a0510030bb8175471ba30@[63.24.225.226]>
Date:         Tue, 13 Nov 2001 14:52:36 -0800
Reply-To: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Everybody send Brian Kosko and e-mail...
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <00a901c16c95$1cf575e0$87ae1cac@redmond.corp.microsoft.com>

>I havent yet decided if Kosdon's platform is exciting or scary...


If you substitute certifying manufacturers for eliminating
certification altogether, and the criteria being motor consistency,
it is sensible and not scary.

Jerry

TRA012 pending

>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: <mailto:darkspunge@USWEST.NET>Paxton
>To: <mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
>Sent: Tuesday, November 13, 2001 2:36 PM
>Subject: [AR] Everybody send Brian Kosko and e-mail...
>
>... saying he should run with Frank for BOD. :-)
>
>Paxton


--
Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
Opinion, the whole thing.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 7509 invoked from network); 13 Nov 2001 23:00:52 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 13 Nov 2001 23:00:52 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 5658 invoked by uid 50005); 13 Nov 2001 23:00:45 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4169. . Clean. Processed in 0.693708 secs); 13 Nov 2001 23:00:45 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 13 Nov 2001 23:00:44 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA14625; Tue, 13 Nov 2001 14:55:56 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 134133 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 13 Nov 2001 22:54:35          +0000
Received: from fw1-bv.tek.com (fw1-bv.tek.com [192.65.40.16]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA14583 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue,          13 Nov 2001 14:53:44 -0800
Received: from fw1-bv.tek.com (root@localhost) by fw1-bv.tek.com with ESMTP id          fADMrDl20842 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 13 Nov 2001 14:53:13          -0800 (PST)
Received: from tektronix.tek.com (tektronix.tek.com [128.181.6.43]) by          fw1-bv.tek.com with ESMTP id fADMrDx20838 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>;          Tue, 13 Nov 2001 14:53:13 -0800 (PST)
Received: from us-bv-u16 (us-bv-u16.bv.tek.com [128.181.2.45]) by          tektronix.tek.com (8.10.2+Sun/8.10.2) with SMTP id fADMrCj29030 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 13 Nov 2001 14:53:12 -0800 (PST)
Received: FROM us-bv-m01.bv.tek.com BY us-bv-u16 ; Tue Nov 13 14:53:12 2001          -0800
Received: by us-bv-m01.bv.tek.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) id          <V88SKDPP>; Tue, 13 Nov 2001 14:53:11 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19)
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Message-ID:  <5832AFF5FC75D411844300508BC216B70302AC0C@us-bv-m07.bv.tek.com>
Date:         Tue, 13 Nov 2001 14:53:07 -0800
Reply-To: <john.w.lyngdal@EXGATE.TEK.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <john.w.lyngdal@EXGATE.TEK.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Everybody send Brian Kosko and e-mail...
Comments: To: greg@BLASTZONE.COM
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Well it's a little of both, which should make it quite interesting to see
what the future holds.

    John

-----Original Message-----
From: Greg Deputy [mailto:greg@BLASTZONE.COM]
Sent: Tuesday, November 13, 2001 2:47 PM
To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
Subject: Re: [AR] Everybody send Brian Kosko and e-mail...


I havent yet decided if Kosdon's platform is exciting or scary...
----- Original Message -----
From: Paxton
To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
Sent: Tuesday, November 13, 2001 2:36 PM
Subject: [AR] Everybody send Brian Kosko and e-mail...


... saying he should run with Frank for BOD. :-)

Paxton

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 23794 invoked from network); 13 Nov 2001 23:11:46 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 13 Nov 2001 23:11:46 -0000
X-Priority: 3
Received: (qmail 23189 invoked by uid 50005); 13 Nov 2001 23:11:40 -0000
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4169. . Clean. Processed in 0.443915 secs); 13 Nov 2001 23:11:40 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 13 Nov 2001 23:11:39 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA14784; Tue, 13 Nov 2001 15:07:29 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 134175 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 13 Nov 2001 23:06:07          +0000
Received: from adobe.com (smtp-relay-1.adobe.com [192.150.11.1]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA14769 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue,          13 Nov 2001 15:06:07 -0800
Received: from inner-relay-1.corp.adobe.com ([153.32.1.51]) by adobe.com          (1.0.0/8.11.4) with ESMTP id fADN6Y025617 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>;          Tue, 13 Nov 2001 15:06:34 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mailsj-v1.corp.adobe.com (mailsj-dev.corp.adobe.com          [153.32.1.192]) by inner-relay-1.corp.adobe.com (8.11.4/8.11.4) with          ESMTP id fADN5lS13078 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 13 Nov 2001          15:05:47 -0800 (PST)
Received: from sronald.earthlink.net ([153.32.63.111]) by          mailsj-v1.corp.adobe.com (Netscape Messaging Server 4.15 v1 Jul 11          2001 16:32:57) with ESMTP id GMRHH700.JDR; Tue, 13 Nov 2001 15:05:31          -0800
X-Sender: forkbomb@mail.earthlink.net
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
References: <00a901c16c95$1cf575e0$87ae1cac@redmond.corp.microsoft.com>            <006d01c16c93$b3c37cd0$0100a8c0@cc898542a>            <00a901c16c95$1cf575e0$87ae1cac@redmond.corp.microsoft.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <5.1.0.14.0.20011113150837.00a64b10@mail.earthlink.net>
Date:         Tue, 13 Nov 2001 15:10:23 -0800
Reply-To: <forkbomb@EARTHLINK.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <forkbomb@EARTHLINK.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Everybody send Brian Kosko and e-mail...
Comments: To: Jerry Irvine <01rocket@GTE.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <a0510030bb8175471ba30@[63.24.225.226]>

At 02:52 PM 11/13/01 -0800, Jerry Irvine wrote:
>>I havent yet decided if Kosdon's platform is exciting or scary...
>
>
>If you substitute certifying manufacturers for eliminating
>certification altogether, and the criteria being motor consistency,
>it is sensible and not scary.


         I concur -- this is a sensible regulation and probably meets the
legal requirements that the current TRA leadership has managed to have
enacted. Bluntly put, if I buy a motor, I want to know that it is safe. If
I build one, I know it's my job to make it safe.

         -p



>Jerry
>
>TRA012 pending
>
>>
>>----- Original Message -----
>>From: <mailto:darkspunge@USWEST.NET>Paxton
>>To: <mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
>>Sent: Tuesday, November 13, 2001 2:36 PM
>>Subject: [AR] Everybody send Brian Kosko and e-mail...
>>
>>... saying he should run with Frank for BOD. :-)
>>
>>Paxton
>
>
>--
>Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
>Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
>Opinion, the whole thing.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 24378 invoked from network); 13 Nov 2001 23:11:55 -0000
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 13 Nov 2001 23:11:55 -0000
Received: (qmail 11132 invoked by uid 50005); 13 Nov 2001 23:10:48 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4169. . Clean. Processed in 0.373425 secs); 13 Nov 2001 23:10:48 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 13 Nov 2001 23:10:47 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA14758; Tue, 13 Nov 2001 15:05:24 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 134168 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 13 Nov 2001 23:04:02          +0000
Received: from cesaroni.net ([204.101.26.130]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7)          with ESMTP id PAA14740 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 13 Nov 2001          15:04:01 -0800
Received: from Anthony by cesaroni.net with SMTP (MDaemon.v2.8.7.0.R) for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 13 Nov 2001 18:02:34 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 8.5, Build 4.71.2173.0
Importance: Normal
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
X-MDaemon-Deliver-To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
X-Return-Path: ACesaroni@cesaroni.net
Message-ID:  <006301c16c94$43e31640$1b0101c0@Anthony>
Date:         Tue, 13 Nov 2001 17:40:59 -0500
Reply-To: "Anthony Cesaroni" <ACesaroni@cesaroni.net>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Anthony Cesaroni" <ACesaroni@cesaroni.net>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Everybody send Brian Kosko and e-mail...
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <a0510030bb8175471ba30@[63.24.225.226]>

Jerry,

Why don't you and Kline run too. It would be like old times again.

Anthony.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@itc.uci.edu]On
> Behalf Of Jerry Irvine
> Sent: Tuesday, November 13, 2001 5:53 PM
> To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
> Subject: Re: Everybody send Brian Kosko and e-mail...
>
>
> >I havent yet decided if Kosdon's platform is exciting or scary...
>
>
> If you substitute certifying manufacturers for eliminating
> certification altogether, and the criteria being motor consistency,
> it is sensible and not scary.
>
> Jerry
>
> TRA012 pending
>
> >
> >----- Original Message -----
> >From: <mailto:darkspunge@USWEST.NET>Paxton
> >To: <mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
> >Sent: Tuesday, November 13, 2001 2:36 PM
> >Subject: [AR] Everybody send Brian Kosko and e-mail...
> >
> >... saying he should run with Frank for BOD. :-)
> >
> >Paxton
>
>
> --
> Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
> Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
> Opinion, the whole thing.
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 22463 invoked from network); 13 Nov 2001 23:34:01 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 13 Nov 2001 23:34:01 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 23966 invoked by uid 50005); 13 Nov 2001 23:33:54 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4169. . Clean. Processed in 0.200579 secs); 13 Nov 2001 23:33:54 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 13 Nov 2001 23:33:54 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA14961; Tue, 13 Nov 2001 15:28:43 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 134209 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 13 Nov 2001 23:27:20          +0000
Received: from smtp002pub.verizon.net (smtp002pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.181])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA14940 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 13 Nov 2001 15:27:19 -0800
Received: from [63.24.225.226] (1Cust208.tnt2.rancho-cucamonga.ca.da.uu.net          [63.15.225.208]) by smtp002pub.verizon.net  with ESMTP for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; id fADNQlh10401 Tue, 13 Nov 2001 17:26:47          -0600 (CST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: GTE/01rocket@mail.gte.net
References: <006301c16c94$43e31640$1b0101c0@Anthony>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <a0510030cb8175c8f53c6@[63.24.225.226]>
Date:         Tue, 13 Nov 2001 15:26:51 -0800
Reply-To: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Everybody send Brian Kosko and e-mail...
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <006301c16c94$43e31640$1b0101c0@Anthony>

>Jerry,
>
>Why don't you and Kline run too. It would be like old times again.


Good point.  I volunteer if Kline will have me.

Jerry


>
>Anthony.
>
>>  -----Original Message-----
>>  From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@itc.uci.edu]On
>>  Behalf Of Jerry Irvine
>>  Sent: Tuesday, November 13, 2001 5:53 PM
>>  To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
>>  Subject: Re: Everybody send Brian Kosko and e-mail...
>>
>>
>>  >I havent yet decided if Kosdon's platform is exciting or scary...
>>
>>
>>  If you substitute certifying manufacturers for eliminating
>>  certification altogether, and the criteria being motor consistency,
>>  it is sensible and not scary.
>>
>>  Jerry
>>
>>  TRA012 pending
>>
>>  >
>>  >----- Original Message -----
>>  >From: <mailto:darkspunge@USWEST.NET>Paxton
>>  >To: <mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
>>  >Sent: Tuesday, November 13, 2001 2:36 PM
>>  >Subject: [AR] Everybody send Brian Kosko and e-mail...
>>  >
>>  >... saying he should run with Frank for BOD. :-)
>>  >
>>  >Paxton
>>
>>
>>  --
>>  Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
>  > Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
>  > Opinion, the whole thing.
>  >


--
Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
Opinion, the whole thing.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 9610 invoked from network); 13 Nov 2001 23:38:16 -0000
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 13 Nov 2001 23:38:16 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 19206 invoked by uid 50005); 13 Nov 2001 23:38:09 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4169. . Clean. Processed in 0.136949 secs); 13 Nov 2001 23:38:09 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 13 Nov 2001 23:38:09 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA15029; Tue, 13 Nov 2001 15:34:31 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 134226 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 13 Nov 2001 23:33:09          +0000
Received: from mail.aros.net (mail.aros.net [207.173.16.20]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA15006 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue,          13 Nov 2001 15:33:08 -0800
Received: from biomicro.com (cust-208-187-122-40.bbsc.net [208.187.122.40]) by          mail.aros.net (8.11.6/8.9.3) with ESMTP id fADNX6u29115 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 13 Nov 2001 16:33:06 -0700 (MST)
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.77 [en] (Win98; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <5832AFF5FC75D411844300508BC216B70302AC05@us-bv-m07.bv.tek.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3BF1AE00.CB1D6EB4@biomicro.com>
Date:         Tue, 13 Nov 2001 16:34:24 -0700
Reply-To: "Mark K. Spute" <mks@BIOMICRO.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Mark K. Spute" <mks@BIOMICRO.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] The Newbies and the politics / Oh Dear Me!!!
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Cool!

Well said, Frank.  Makes me want to join TRA just so I can vote for him.

How long do I have to be a TRA member before I can run with him on the
same platform?

john.w.lyngdal@EXGATE.TEK.COM wrote:
>
> Great news can be found here:
>
> http://www.shadowaero.com/Kosdon!.htm
>
> Frank's running for TRA BoD.
>
> John

--
Mark K. Spute
Senior Research Engineer
BioMicro Systems Inc.

KD7IWE,  RRS, hopeful future Stolly owner

"It is difficult to say what is impossible, for the dream of yesterday
is the hope of today and the reality of tomorrow."
     Dr. Robert H. Goddard

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 2172 invoked from network); 13 Nov 2001 23:43:29 -0000
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 13 Nov 2001 23:43:29 -0000
Received: (qmail 17774 invoked by uid 50005); 13 Nov 2001 23:43:23 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4169. . Clean. Processed in 0.269044 secs); 13 Nov 2001 23:43:23 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 13 Nov 2001 23:43:22 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA15135; Tue, 13 Nov 2001 15:39:27 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 134250 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 13 Nov 2001 23:38:05          +0000
Received: from syntheon.inicom.com          (IDENT:root@66.mueb.miam.philapaaz.dsl.att.net [63.242.216.66]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA15095 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 13 Nov 2001 15:38:05 -0800
Received: from koreynew (adsl-81-1-199.mia.bellsouth.net [65.81.1.199]) by          syntheon.inicom.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id VAA13907 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 13 Nov 2001 21:00:01 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 8.5, Build 4.71.2173.0
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <001101c16c9c$56c789a0$6501a8c0@koreynew>
Date:         Tue, 13 Nov 2001 18:38:46 -0500
Reply-To: "Korey Kline" <k2@HYBRIDS.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Korey Kline" <k2@HYBRIDS.COM>
Subject:      [AR] Kosdon on the BOD :-)
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

I guess I see a little conflicting information in Frank's statement:

>There is no such thing in nature as a 'low explosive'. A substance -is-
or -is not- an explosive, just like a woman -is- or -is not- pregnant. The
term 'low explosive' is simply a euphemism that satisfies the bureaucratic
need for control.<

>About 1956 I made and fired my first motor. It exploded and I was only
about 2 feet away. The pieces missed and I was never that close again.<

If he's going to run against the "Establishment" perhaps he needs his own
"Propaganda Minister"

I still hopes he wins just to shake things up!!!!!!!!

K2 TRA 0009

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 3481 invoked from network); 14 Nov 2001 00:12:31 -0000
Received: from smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.105]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 14 Nov 2001 00:12:31 -0000
Received: (qmail 5659 invoked by uid 50005); 14 Nov 2001 00:12:24 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpy with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4169. . Clean. Processed in 0.442905 secs); 14 Nov 2001 00:12:24 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 14 Nov 2001 00:12:24 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA16096; Tue, 13 Nov 2001 16:08:18 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 134492 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 14 Nov 2001 00:06:46          +0000
Received: from smtprelay3.abs.adelphia.net (smtprelay.abs.adelphia.net          [64.8.20.11]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA16081 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 13 Nov 2001 16:06:45 -0800
Received: from jlgrady ([24.53.101.238]) by smtprelay3.abs.adelphia.net          (Netscape Messaging Server 4.15) with SMTP id GMRKAC00.T5B for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 13 Nov 2001 19:06:12 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook CWS, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <000001c16ca0$3e2edbb0$0200a8c0@24.53.64.18>
Date:         Tue, 13 Nov 2001 19:06:41 -0500
Reply-To: "Jeff Grady" <jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jeff Grady" <jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] KNO3/epoxy trials
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <F160W3KDzvT0WFBit5r000186bb@hotmail.com>

I've made a total of about 2 lbs of KNO3/Epoxy in small batches. I've tried
several brands/types (PE/mercapto...) using KNO3 with widely varying
results. The last batch I made was using a 5 min. "dual syringe" epoxy and
added a pinch of charcoal (which made a BIG difference in burn rate). The
results were surprising. That last batch was: 68/25/7. I thought the 1/4"
stick of this stuff was gonna leave my test table and head out to the yard
when I lit it. Burned pretty lively and much quicker than the others. PE
resins are easier to work with when going above 70% KNO3. Can't wait to see
how this stuff works with AP.

JG

-----Original Message-----
From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@itc.uci.edu]On
Behalf Of ben romashko
Sent: Tuesday, November 13, 2001 3:40 PM
To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
Subject: [AR] KNO3/epoxy trials


I finally got my hands upon some more KNO3 yesterday, so i mixed up a small
test batch of Epoxy/KNO3 just to see how it will mix/handle/ and cure.  For
this,  I used Bob Smith 30 minute, and a finely ground KNO3.  i used about 2
parts epoxy to 3 parts KNO3, which resultes in a thick mix.  it burned
alright, but, as i suspected it would be, was too fuel rich.  My question
is, i guess, what is the best ratio?  I plan to mix up a 3:7, 1:2 and
possibly a 3:8 batch tonight to see which will burn the best.  Any
suggestions and or comments from the more experienced?

Ben Romashko

_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 240 invoked from network); 14 Nov 2001 00:18:59 -0000
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 14 Nov 2001 00:18:59 -0000
Received: (qmail 31390 invoked by uid 50005); 14 Nov 2001 00:18:52 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4169. . Clean. Processed in 0.105054 secs); 14 Nov 2001 00:18:52 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 14 Nov 2001 00:18:52 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA16179; Tue, 13 Nov 2001 16:14:29 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 134510 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 14 Nov 2001 00:13:06          +0000
Received: from cesaroni.net ([204.101.26.130]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7)          with ESMTP id QAA16159 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 13 Nov 2001          16:13:05 -0800
Received: from Anthony by cesaroni.net with SMTP (MDaemon.v2.8.7.0.R) for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 13 Nov 2001 19:10:25 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 8.5, Build 4.71.2173.0
Importance: Normal
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
X-MDaemon-Deliver-To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
X-Return-Path: ACesaroni@cesaroni.net
Message-ID:  <006801c16c9d$a9d8af60$1b0101c0@Anthony>
Date:         Tue, 13 Nov 2001 18:48:15 -0500
Reply-To: "Anthony Cesaroni" <ACesaroni@cesaroni.net>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Anthony Cesaroni" <ACesaroni@cesaroni.net>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Everybody send Brian Kosko and e-mail...
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <a0510030cb8175c8f53c6@[63.24.225.226]>

Jerry,

Could be a conflict of interest to have manufacturers or associates on the
TMT BOD though?

Anthony.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@itc.uci.edu]On
> Behalf Of Jerry Irvine
> Sent: Tuesday, November 13, 2001 6:27 PM
> To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
> Subject: Re: Everybody send Brian Kosko and e-mail...
>
>
> >Jerry,
> >
> >Why don't you and Kline run too. It would be like old times again.
>
>
> Good point.  I volunteer if Kline will have me.
>
> Jerry
>
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 8459 invoked from network); 14 Nov 2001 00:28:13 -0000
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 14 Nov 2001 00:28:13 -0000
X-Priority: 3
Received: (qmail 31921 invoked by uid 50005); 14 Nov 2001 00:28:07 -0000
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4169. . Clean. Processed in 0.121521 secs); 14 Nov 2001 00:28:07 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 14 Nov 2001 00:28:06 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA16370; Tue, 13 Nov 2001 16:24:05 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 134557 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 14 Nov 2001 00:22:42          +0000
Received: from nt2000s2.dgmicro.com (cn815472-c.newcas1.de.home.com          [24.40.74.93]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA16353          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 13 Nov 2001 16:22:41 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="utf-8"
X-MS-Has-Attach: 
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
content-class: urn:content-classes:message
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: 
Thread-Topic: Frank K
Thread-Index: AcFsombbkUKaFDHkQ4+1i8zd854GSA==
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from base64 to 8bit by itc.uci.edu id QAA16354
Message-ID:  <C0F7BF4DCEC1D2479A01031347184DCD3874@nt2000s2.dgmicro.com>
Date:         Tue, 13 Nov 2001 19:22:11 -0500
Reply-To: "Darren Wright" <dwright@D2-TECH.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Darren Wright" <dwright@D2-TECH.COM>
Subject:      [AR] Frank K
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

WOW.   That's all I have to say.  Apparently this AN really shook up
some nerves.  I wish Frank all the support....I guess I have to renew my
membership now so I can vote for him.

GO FRANK!

-Darren

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 2436 invoked from network); 14 Nov 2001 00:41:19 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.105]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 14 Nov 2001 00:41:19 -0000
X-Priority: 3
Received: (qmail 20022 invoked by uid 50005); 14 Nov 2001 00:41:12 -0000
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpy with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4169. . Clean. Processed in 0.34147 secs); 14 Nov 2001 00:41:12 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 14 Nov 2001 00:41:12 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA16460; Tue, 13 Nov 2001 16:34:00 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 134580 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 14 Nov 2001 00:32:31          +0000
Received: from adobe.com (smtp-relay-2.adobe.com [192.150.11.2]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA16444 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue,          13 Nov 2001 16:32:30 -0800
Received: from inner-relay-1.corp.adobe.com ([153.32.1.51]) by adobe.com          (1.0.0/8.11.4) with ESMTP id fAE0V6g22516 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>;          Tue, 13 Nov 2001 16:31:06 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mailsj-v1.corp.adobe.com (mailsj-dev.corp.adobe.com          [153.32.1.192]) by inner-relay-1.corp.adobe.com (8.11.4/8.11.4) with          ESMTP id fAE0WCS28188 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 13 Nov 2001          16:32:12 -0800 (PST)
Received: from sronald.earthlink.net ([153.32.63.111]) by          mailsj-v1.corp.adobe.com (Netscape Messaging Server 4.15 v1 Jul 11          2001 16:32:57) with ESMTP id GMRLH700.D1J; Tue, 13 Nov 2001 16:31:55          -0800
X-Sender: forkbomb@mail.earthlink.net
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
References: <a0510030cb8175c8f53c6@[63.24.225.226]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <5.1.0.14.0.20011113163614.0328d660@mail.earthlink.net>
Date:         Tue, 13 Nov 2001 16:36:47 -0800
Reply-To: <forkbomb@EARTHLINK.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <forkbomb@EARTHLINK.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Everybody send Brian Kosko and e-mail...
Comments: To: Anthony Cesaroni <ACesaroni@cesaroni.net>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <006801c16c9d$a9d8af60$1b0101c0@Anthony>

At 06:48 PM 11/13/01 -0500, Anthony Cesaroni wrote:
>Jerry,
>
>Could be a conflict of interest to have manufacturers or associates on the
>TMT BOD though?


         Can't be much worse than the (apparent) current policy of
attempting to establish and enforce an Aerotech monopoly.

         -p



>Anthony.
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@itc.uci.edu]On
> > Behalf Of Jerry Irvine
> > Sent: Tuesday, November 13, 2001 6:27 PM
> > To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
> > Subject: Re: Everybody send Brian Kosko and e-mail...
> >
> >
> > >Jerry,
> > >
> > >Why don't you and Kline run too. It would be like old times again.
> >
> >
> > Good point.  I volunteer if Kline will have me.
> >
> > Jerry
> >
> >

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 1603 invoked from network); 14 Nov 2001 00:48:47 -0000
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 14 Nov 2001 00:48:47 -0000
Received: (qmail 32727 invoked by uid 50005); 14 Nov 2001 00:48:12 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4169. . Clean. Processed in 0.166985 secs); 14 Nov 2001 00:48:12 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 14 Nov 2001 00:48:12 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA16619; Tue, 13 Nov 2001 16:46:28 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 134623 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 14 Nov 2001 00:45:06          +0000
Received: from nt2000s2.dgmicro.com (cn815472-c.newcas1.de.home.com          [24.40.74.93]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA16601          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 13 Nov 2001 16:45:06 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="utf-8"
X-MS-Has-Attach: 
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
content-class: urn:content-classes:message
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: 
Thread-Topic:      Re: [AR] Everybody send Brian Kosko and e-mail...
Thread-Index: AcFspINsovCqJACZSTisPhTtdrEsMAAAOgW9
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from base64 to 8bit by itc.uci.edu id QAA16602
Message-ID:  <C0F7BF4DCEC1D2479A01031347184DCD3876@nt2000s2.dgmicro.com>
Date:         Tue, 13 Nov 2001 19:44:35 -0500
Reply-To: "Darren Wright" <dwright@D2-TECH.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Darren Wright" <dwright@D2-TECH.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Everybody send Brian Kosko and e-mail...
Comments: To: forkbomb@EARTHLINK.NET
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Especially if there is no certification.  That will eliminate the
favoritism.

-Darren


        -----Original Message-----
        From: forkbomb@EARTHLINK.NET
        Sent: Tue 11/13/2001 7:36 PM
        To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
        Cc:
        Subject: Re: [AR] Everybody send Brian Kosko and e-mail...



        At 06:48 PM 11/13/01 -0500, Anthony Cesaroni wrote:
        >Jerry,
        >
        >Could be a conflict of interest to have manufacturers or
associates on the
        >TMT BOD though?


                 Can't be much worse than the (apparent) current policy
of
        attempting to establish and enforce an Aerotech monopoly.

                 -p



        >Anthony.
        >
        > > -----Original Message-----
        > > From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [
mailto:AROCKET@itc.uci.edu]On
        > > Behalf Of Jerry Irvine
        > > Sent: Tuesday, November 13, 2001 6:27 PM
        > > To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
        > > Subject: Re: Everybody send Brian Kosko and e-mail...
        > >
        > >
        > > >Jerry,
        > > >
        > > >Why don't you and Kline run too. It would be like old times
again.
        > >
        > >
        > > Good point.  I volunteer if Kline will have me.
        > >
        > > Jerry
        > >
        > >


From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 4952 invoked from network); 14 Nov 2001 00:50:56 -0000
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 14 Nov 2001 00:50:56 -0000
Received: (qmail 3592 invoked by uid 50005); 14 Nov 2001 00:50:50 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4169. . Clean. Processed in 0.462985 secs); 14 Nov 2001 00:50:50 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 14 Nov 2001 00:50:49 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA16663; Tue, 13 Nov 2001 16:49:07 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 134634 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 14 Nov 2001 00:47:45          +0000
Received: from mta05.mail.mel.aone.net.au (mta05.mail.au.uu.net [203.2.192.85])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA16640 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 13 Nov 2001 16:47:44 -0800
Received: from unknown ([63.60.247.143]) by mta05.mail.mel.aone.net.au with          SMTP id <20011114004738.QSGS4322.mta05.mail.mel.aone.net.au@unknown>          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 14 Nov 2001 11:47:38 +1100
References: Conversation <F160W3KDzvT0WFBit5r000186bb@hotmail.com> with last            message <000001c16ca0$3e2edbb0$0200a8c0@24.53.64.18>
Priority: Normal
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Priority: 3
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	X-MAPIextension=.TXT;
	charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>
Date:         Wed, 14 Nov 2001 00:47:45 +0000
Reply-To: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] KNO3/epoxy trials
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <000001c16ca0$3e2edbb0$0200a8c0@24.53.64.18>

en I lit it. Burned pretty lively and much quicker than the others. PE
> resins are easier to work with when going above 70% KNO3. Can't wait to
see
> how this stuff works with AP.

Warning though, the only composite CATO I've experienced that went to "High
Order Det" was an AP/Epoxy/CuO composition. Never again!!! The Kn ratio of
that motor was sub-70.

Troy.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 10004 invoked from network); 14 Nov 2001 00:54:23 -0000
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 14 Nov 2001 00:54:23 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 12978 invoked by uid 50005); 14 Nov 2001 00:54:17 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4169. . Clean. Processed in 0.146034 secs); 14 Nov 2001 00:54:17 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 14 Nov 2001 00:54:16 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA16729; Tue, 13 Nov 2001 16:52:14 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 134651 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 14 Nov 2001 00:50:41          +0000
Received: from iridium.carolina.net ([208.170.147.165]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA16710 for <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Tue,          13 Nov 2001 16:50:41 -0800
Received: from ac.net (ip217-as5300-1-7lakes-nc.carolina.net [206.100.51.217])          by iridium.carolina.net (Vircom SMTPRS 1.0.201) with ESMTP id          <B0004428322@iridium.carolina.net> for <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Tue, 13          Nov 2001 20:03:08 -0500
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en]C-CCK-MCD EBM-Compaq  (Win95; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <v01510100b816988f2b3b@[208.11.233.32]>            <a05100303b816e741eda2@[63.24.225.226]>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3BF1BE2D.A071AD9C@ac.net>
Date:         Tue, 13 Nov 2001 19:43:25 -0500
Reply-To: "Bill Shamblin" <wshamblin@AC.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Bill Shamblin" <wshamblin@AC.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] The Newbies and the politics -- Re: [AR] Bruce              Kelly'sResponse               on ROL - ANFO motors
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Jerry Irvine wrote:

>   NAR has been waiting for such a club to form for over
> a decade now so it could become a sister organization.
> >NAR wants to sister up with us "basement bombers" (Bunnie's own words)?
>
> Jerry
>
> --
> Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
> Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
> Opinion, the whole thing.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 6168 invoked from network); 14 Nov 2001 01:54:51 -0000
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 14 Nov 2001 01:54:51 -0000
Received: (qmail 32405 invoked by uid 50005); 14 Nov 2001 01:54:45 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4169. . Clean. Processed in 0.200669 secs); 14 Nov 2001 01:54:45 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 14 Nov 2001 01:54:45 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA17193; Tue, 13 Nov 2001 17:51:57 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 134753 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 14 Nov 2001 01:50:32          +0000
Received: from fep4-orange.clear.net.nz (fep4-orange.clear.net.nz          [203.97.32.4]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA17177          for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Tue, 13 Nov 2001 17:50:31 -0800
Received: from mkbs (203-167-157-133.dialup.clear.net.nz [203.167.157.133]) by          fep4-orange.clear.net.nz (1.5/1.7) with SMTP id OAA10135; Wed, 14 Nov          2001 14:50:23 +1300 (NZDT)
References:  <004301c16c5c$643b8d60$3c50153f@default>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <001901c16cae$f601b1a0$0700a8c0@mkbs>
Date:         Wed, 14 Nov 2001 11:33:29 +1300
Reply-To: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Organization: Applied Technology
Subject:      Re: [AR] Composite Definition?
Comments: To: David Muesing <dmuesing@PEOPLEPC.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

I understand the word composite (as used with regards to solid rocket
motors) to mean: "a mixture (composition) of propellant ingredients in a
matrix of a solid material which has gone from liquid to solid in the
manufacturing process". Example: any solid, liquid or gas (oxidizer or fuel)
mixed into any liquid (fuel, oxidizer or inert) that then solidifies. Like:
AP in R-45, KN in melted then solidified Sugar, KN in Epoxy, etc.

Sounds like most current composites.
AFAIK, originally "composite" largely referred to Nitrocellulose /
Nitroglycerine mixes (Cordite?) where the combination is more one of
solution of one in the other than of setting a liquid. Much the same result.




        Russell McMahon

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 12244 invoked from network); 14 Nov 2001 02:25:45 -0000
Received: from smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.105]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 14 Nov 2001 02:25:45 -0000
Received: (qmail 20932 invoked by uid 50005); 14 Nov 2001 02:25:38 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpy with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4169. . Clean. Processed in 0.370477 secs); 14 Nov 2001 02:25:38 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 14 Nov 2001 02:25:37 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA17313; Tue, 13 Nov 2001 18:20:41 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 134768 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 14 Nov 2001 02:18:21          +0000
Received: from smtprelay3.abs.adelphia.net (smtprelay.abs.adelphia.net          [64.8.20.11]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA17282 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 13 Nov 2001 18:18:20 -0800
Received: from jlgrady ([24.53.101.238]) by smtprelay3.abs.adelphia.net          (Netscape Messaging Server 4.15) with SMTP id GMRQDN02.U6Q for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 13 Nov 2001 21:17:47 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook CWS, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <000001c16cb2$9fa195b0$0200a8c0@24.53.64.18>
Date:         Tue, 13 Nov 2001 21:18:17 -0500
Reply-To: "Jeff Grady" <jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jeff Grady" <jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] KNO3/epoxy trials
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <000901c16bbc$7fef56e0$ebf9a68e@grmiller>

Produced by Devcon. Part No: 46409/20845 5-minute epoxy. They also have an
aluminum filled epoxy that I will try if I can find it around here. I video
taped my burn rate tests on several pieces which measured .975" each (cut a
single strand using a band saw and forgot to allow for blade kerf width). I
calculated the burn rate by averaging the times show on the camcorder ET
readout, down to the hundredth of a second. Two of the burns showed times
of: 13.79 sec and 13.74 sec. Average burn rate was 1.8mm/sec.

Here's a link to the aluminum filled stuff I'd like to try. If it's pure
epoxy + Al, it might be worth a try. Other "fillers" contain calcium
carbonate and talc... They don't work so well.

http://www.devcon.com/devconfamilyproduct.cfm?familyid=108.0&catid=34

JG

-----Original Message-----
From: Gary Miller [mailto:grmiller@nbnet.nb.ca]
Sent: Monday, November 12, 2001 3:56 PM
To: Jeff Grady
Subject: Re: Re: [AR] KNO3/epoxy trials


What brand of epoxy did you use?  (the stuff that came in the dual syringe).

Thanks,
Gary

----- Original Message -----
From: "Jeff Grady" <jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Wednesday, November 14, 2001 12:06 AM
Subject: Re: [AR] KNO3/epoxy trials


> I've made a total of about 2 lbs of KNO3/Epoxy in small batches. I've
tried
> several brands/types (PE/mercapto...) using KNO3 with widely varying
> results. The last batch I made was using a 5 min. "dual syringe" epoxy and
> added a pinch of charcoal (which made a BIG difference in burn rate). The
> results were surprising. That last batch was: 68/25/7. I thought the 1/4"
> stick of this stuff was gonna leave my test table and head out to the yard
> when I lit it. Burned pretty lively and much quicker than the others. PE
> resins are easier to work with when going above 70% KNO3. Can't wait to
see
> how this stuff works with AP.
>
> JG
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@itc.uci.edu]On
> Behalf Of ben romashko
> Sent: Tuesday, November 13, 2001 3:40 PM
> To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
> Subject: [AR] KNO3/epoxy trials
>
>
> I finally got my hands upon some more KNO3 yesterday, so i mixed up a
small
> test batch of Epoxy/KNO3 just to see how it will mix/handle/ and cure.
For
> this,  I used Bob Smith 30 minute, and a finely ground KNO3.  i used about
2
> parts epoxy to 3 parts KNO3, which resultes in a thick mix.  it burned
> alright, but, as i suspected it would be, was too fuel rich.  My question
> is, i guess, what is the best ratio?  I plan to mix up a 3:7, 1:2 and
> possibly a 3:8 batch tonight to see which will burn the best.  Any
> suggestions and or comments from the more experienced?
>
> Ben Romashko
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 29312 invoked from network); 14 Nov 2001 02:37:42 -0000
Received: from smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.105]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 14 Nov 2001 02:37:42 -0000
Received: (qmail 5442 invoked by uid 50005); 14 Nov 2001 02:37:36 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpy with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4169. . Clean. Processed in 0.208837 secs); 14 Nov 2001 02:37:36 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 14 Nov 2001 02:37:35 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA17391; Tue, 13 Nov 2001 18:34:19 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 134783 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 14 Nov 2001 02:32:57          +0000
Received: from mta04.mail.mel.aone.net.au (mta04.mail.au.uu.net [203.2.192.84])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA17375 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 13 Nov 2001 18:32:56 -0800
Received: from unknown ([63.34.210.195]) by mta04.mail.mel.aone.net.au with          SMTP id <20011114023248.MBVN2245.mta04.mail.mel.aone.net.au@unknown>          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 14 Nov 2001 13:32:48 +1100
References: Conversation <004301c16c5c$643b8d60$3c50153f@default> with last            message <001901c16cae$f601b1a0$0700a8c0@mkbs>
Priority: Normal
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Priority: 3
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	X-MAPIextension=.TXT;
	charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>
Date:         Wed, 14 Nov 2001 02:32:57 +0000
Reply-To: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Composite Definition?
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <001901c16cae$f601b1a0$0700a8c0@mkbs>

----------
> I understand the word composite (as used with regards to solid rocket
> motors) to mean: "a mixture (composition) of propellant ingredients in a
> matrix of a solid material which has gone from liquid to solid in the
> manufacturing process". Example: any solid, liquid or gas (oxidizer or
fuel)
> mixed into any liquid (fuel, oxidizer or inert) that then solidifies.
Like:
> AP in R-45, KN in melted then solidified Sugar, KN in Epoxy, etc.
>
> Sounds like most current composites.
> AFAIK, originally "composite" largely referred to Nitrocellulose /
> Nitroglycerine mixes (Cordite?) where the combination is more one of
> solution of one in the other than of setting a liquid. Much the same
result.

Historically DB propellants were always referred to as homogenous NOT
composite. As Henry pointed out, composite propellants are generally
referred to as truly heterogeneous mixtures. Defining composite propellants
this way is easy, defining what propellants are heterogeneous is the real
trick and will always be debatable with propellants such as Candy,
Micrograin, BP and others.

Troy.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 4072 invoked from network); 14 Nov 2001 02:46:19 -0000
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 14 Nov 2001 02:46:19 -0000
Received: (qmail 26925 invoked by uid 50005); 14 Nov 2001 02:46:12 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4169. . Clean. Processed in 1.315425 secs); 14 Nov 2001 02:46:12 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 14 Nov 2001 02:46:09 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA17501; Tue, 13 Nov 2001 18:44:01 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 134810 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 14 Nov 2001 02:42:39          +0000
Received: from femail45.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail45.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.254.60.39]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA17483          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 13 Nov 2001 18:42:39 -0800
Received: from cx814151a ([24.14.55.118]) by femail45.sdc1.sfba.home.com          (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20 201-229-121-120-20010223) with SMTP id          <20011114024233.GERZ19618.femail45.sdc1.sfba.home.com@cx814151a> for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 13 Nov 2001 18:42:33 -0800
References:  <000001c16cb2$9fa195b0$0200a8c0@24.53.64.18>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.3018.1300
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <01a401c16cb5$15f2d240$0a01a8c0@cx814151a>
Date:         Tue, 13 Nov 2001 20:35:54 -0600
Reply-To: "John Bolene" <jbolene@HOME.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Bolene" <jbolene@HOME.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] KNO3/epoxy trials
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Be careful since you are using a band saw to cut propellant.
The dust gets everywhere and can be ignited by the sparks in the electric
motor.
It is much better to use a hand saw of some type.

John Bolene
Tripoli Oklahoma Prefect and webmaster
Tripoli Oklahoma Web page -> http://members.home.com/tripoli-oklahoma/



----- Original Message -----
From: "Jeff Grady" <jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Tuesday, November 13, 2001 8:18 PM
Subject: Re: [AR] KNO3/epoxy trials


> Produced by Devcon. Part No: 46409/20845 5-minute epoxy. They also have an
> aluminum filled epoxy that I will try if I can find it around here. I
video
> taped my burn rate tests on several pieces which measured .975" each (cut
a
> single strand using a band saw and forgot to allow for blade kerf width).
I
> calculated the burn rate by averaging the times show on the camcorder ET
> readout, down to the hundredth of a second. Two of the burns showed times
> of: 13.79 sec and 13.74 sec. Average burn rate was 1.8mm/sec.
>
> Here's a link to the aluminum filled stuff I'd like to try. If it's pure
> epoxy + Al, it might be worth a try. Other "fillers" contain calcium
> carbonate and talc... They don't work so well.
>
> http://www.devcon.com/devconfamilyproduct.cfm?familyid=108.0&catid=34
>
> JG

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 12445 invoked from network); 14 Nov 2001 03:12:12 -0000
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 14 Nov 2001 03:12:12 -0000
Received: (qmail 12248 invoked by uid 50005); 14 Nov 2001 03:12:05 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4169. . Clean. Processed in 0.426364 secs); 14 Nov 2001 03:12:05 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 14 Nov 2001 03:12:05 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA17639; Tue, 13 Nov 2001 18:55:38 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 134847 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 14 Nov 2001 02:54:16          +0000
Received: from smtprelay3.abs.adelphia.net (smtprelay.abs.adelphia.net          [64.8.20.11]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA17615 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 13 Nov 2001 18:54:15 -0800
Received: from jlgrady ([24.53.101.238]) by smtprelay3.abs.adelphia.net          (Netscape Messaging Server 4.15) with SMTP id GMRS1J02.L7P for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 13 Nov 2001 21:53:43 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook CWS, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <000101c16cb7$a2fe8a10$0200a8c0@24.53.64.18>
Date:         Tue, 13 Nov 2001 21:54:09 -0500
Reply-To: "Jeff Grady" <jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jeff Grady" <jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] KNO3/epoxy trials
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <01a401c16cb5$15f2d240$0a01a8c0@cx814151a>

Looked for 10 minutes for my hand saw... I'm sure my 9 yr old son has it
stuck in a tree or somewhere similar :)

Cutting 1/4" dia. sticks didn't generate enough heat to set it off, but had
it been a larger sample or motor grain, I would have made ANOTHER trip to
Home Depot to get yet another hand saw. I remember my dad getting really
pissed about the same crap... Glad my daughter doesn't like tools - it could
get much more expensive...

JG

-----Original Message-----
From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@itc.uci.edu]On
Behalf Of John Bolene
Sent: Tuesday, November 13, 2001 9:36 PM
To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
Subject: Re: [AR] KNO3/epoxy trials


Be careful since you are using a band saw to cut propellant.
The dust gets everywhere and can be ignited by the sparks in the electric
motor.
It is much better to use a hand saw of some type.

John Bolene
Tripoli Oklahoma Prefect and webmaster
Tripoli Oklahoma Web page -> http://members.home.com/tripoli-oklahoma/



----- Original Message -----
From: "Jeff Grady" <jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Tuesday, November 13, 2001 8:18 PM
Subject: Re: [AR] KNO3/epoxy trials


> Produced by Devcon. Part No: 46409/20845 5-minute epoxy. They also have an
> aluminum filled epoxy that I will try if I can find it around here. I
video
> taped my burn rate tests on several pieces which measured .975" each (cut
a
> single strand using a band saw and forgot to allow for blade kerf width).
I
> calculated the burn rate by averaging the times show on the camcorder ET
> readout, down to the hundredth of a second. Two of the burns showed times
> of: 13.79 sec and 13.74 sec. Average burn rate was 1.8mm/sec.
>
> Here's a link to the aluminum filled stuff I'd like to try. If it's pure
> epoxy + Al, it might be worth a try. Other "fillers" contain calcium
> carbonate and talc... They don't work so well.
>
> http://www.devcon.com/devconfamilyproduct.cfm?familyid=108.0&catid=34
>
> JG

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 21933 invoked from network); 14 Nov 2001 03:23:15 -0000
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 14 Nov 2001 03:23:15 -0000
Received: (qmail 2208 invoked by uid 50005); 14 Nov 2001 03:23:09 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4169. . Clean. Processed in 0.60295 secs); 14 Nov 2001 03:23:09 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 14 Nov 2001 03:23:07 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA17808; Tue, 13 Nov 2001 19:08:21 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 134901 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 14 Nov 2001 03:06:59          +0000
Received: from femail27.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail27.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.254.60.17]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA17791          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 13 Nov 2001 19:06:59 -0800
Received: from cx814151a ([24.14.55.118]) by femail27.sdc1.sfba.home.com          (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20 201-229-121-120-20010223) with SMTP id          <20011114030653.FZWK2326.femail27.sdc1.sfba.home.com@cx814151a> for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 13 Nov 2001 19:06:53 -0800
References:  <000101c16cb7$a2fe8a10$0200a8c0@24.53.64.18>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.3018.1300
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <01b301c16cb8$63e63ca0$0a01a8c0@cx814151a>
Date:         Tue, 13 Nov 2001 20:59:33 -0600
Reply-To: "John Bolene" <jbolene@HOME.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Bolene" <jbolene@HOME.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] KNO3/epoxy trials
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

A saw that I am really partial to is the Japanese no-kerf saw from Harbor
Freight for about $8.

John Bolene
Tripoli Oklahoma Prefect and webmaster
Tripoli Oklahoma Web page -> http://members.home.com/tripoli-oklahoma/



----- Original Message -----
From: "Jeff Grady" <jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Tuesday, November 13, 2001 8:54 PM
Subject: Re: [AR] KNO3/epoxy trials


> Looked for 10 minutes for my hand saw... I'm sure my 9 yr old son has it
> stuck in a tree or somewhere similar :)
>
> Cutting 1/4" dia. sticks didn't generate enough heat to set it off, but
had
> it been a larger sample or motor grain, I would have made ANOTHER trip to
> Home Depot to get yet another hand saw. I remember my dad getting really
> pissed about the same crap... Glad my daughter doesn't like tools - it
could
> get much more expensive...
>
> JG

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 18014 invoked from network); 14 Nov 2001 03:54:37 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.105]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 14 Nov 2001 03:54:37 -0000
Received: (qmail 28800 invoked by uid 50005); 14 Nov 2001 03:54:31 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpy with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4169. . Clean. Processed in 0.213143 secs); 14 Nov 2001 03:54:31 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 14 Nov 2001 03:54:30 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA18160; Tue, 13 Nov 2001 19:52:37 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 134998 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 14 Nov 2001 03:51:12          +0000
Received: from wrench.toolcity.net (root@wrench.toolcity.net [208.0.188.2]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA18139 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 13 Nov 2001 19:51:12 -0800
Received: from [208.22.189.232]          (dap-208-22-189-232.meadville-tnt-0.pa.toolcity.net [208.22.189.232])          by wrench.toolcity.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id WAA09257; Tue, 13          Nov 2001 22:51:03 -0500 (EST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <v01510101b817a5dad99d@[208.22.189.232]>
Date:         Tue, 13 Nov 2001 22:53:38 -0600
Reply-To: "al bradley" <abradley@TOOLCITY.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "al bradley" <abradley@TOOLCITY.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] 3 The Newbies and the politics -- Re: [AR] . . .
Comments: To: Bill Westfield <billw@cisco.com>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

snip . . .


>to comply with.
>
>
>    Finally they might say "a pox on it all!" and find another area of
>    scientific inquiry that has more acceptability and companionship?
>
>Definately.
>
>
>    will somesone clearly show where we newbies belong?
>
>So instead
>of condemning TRA's EX program for its omissions, politics and crony-ism,
>you might as well be happy that it provides a venue for *ANY* amateur
>activity...
>
>BillW
-------------------

You have taken what I wrote out of context! There was not one word of
condemnation in what I wrote! Look again if you will!

That posting illustrated what I see happening, and was only an inquiry
trying to find a place for all newbies who just want to grow further into a
challenging sport without being caught up in someone else's infighting! In
the future please read before you write.

respectfully, I think,
al bradley


------------------------------------------------------------------
Can you live Life with this?: "Unless there is a law, an agreement, or a
long-standing custom, No one `Deserves' Anything -- Either Good or Bad!"

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 13988 invoked from network); 14 Nov 2001 04:09:21 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 14 Nov 2001 04:09:21 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 28045 invoked by uid 50005); 14 Nov 2001 04:09:14 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4169. . Clean. Processed in 0.854201 secs); 14 Nov 2001 04:09:15 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 14 Nov 2001 04:09:12 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA18294; Tue, 13 Nov 2001 20:05:16 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 135033 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 14 Nov 2001 04:03:53          +0000
Received: from smtp009pub.verizon.net ([206.46.170.188]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA18276 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue,          13 Nov 2001 20:03:52 -0800
Received: from [63.24.225.226] (1Cust73.tnt3.rancho-cucamonga.ca.da.uu.net          [65.229.52.73]) by smtp009pub.verizon.net  with ESMTP for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; id fAE43Sk11226 Tue, 13 Nov 2001 22:03:29          -0600 (CST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: GTE/01rocket@mail.gte.net
References: <000001c16cb2$9fa195b0$0200a8c0@24.53.64.18>            <01a401c16cb5$15f2d240$0a01a8c0@cx814151a>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <a0510030fb8179d5ef325@[63.24.225.226]>
Date:         Tue, 13 Nov 2001 20:03:24 -0800
Reply-To: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] KNO3/epoxy trials
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <01a401c16cb5$15f2d240$0a01a8c0@cx814151a>

>Be careful since you are using a band saw to cut propellant.
>The dust gets everywhere and can be ignited by the sparks in the electric
>motor.
>It is much better to use a hand saw of some type.


Please use an x-acto knife and cut along a motor casing.  Please.


>
>John Bolene
>Tripoli Oklahoma Prefect and webmaster
>Tripoli Oklahoma Web page -> http://members.home.com/tripoli-oklahoma/

--
Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
Opinion, the whole thing.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 8583 invoked from network); 14 Nov 2001 04:38:20 -0000
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 14 Nov 2001 04:38:20 -0000
X-Priority: 3
Received: (qmail 19871 invoked by uid 50005); 14 Nov 2001 04:38:14 -0000
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4169. . Clean. Processed in 0.510177 secs); 14 Nov 2001 04:38:14 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 14 Nov 2001 04:38:13 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA18576; Tue, 13 Nov 2001 20:36:34 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 135113 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 14 Nov 2001 04:35:03          +0000
Received: from nt2000s2.dgmicro.com (cn815472-c.newcas1.de.home.com          [24.40.74.93]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA18561          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 13 Nov 2001 20:35:02 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
X-MS-Has-Attach: 
content-class: urn:content-classes:message
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: 
Thread-Topic: Carbonates
Thread-Index: AcFsombbkUKaFDHkQ4+1i8zd854GSAAIt/JA
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by itc.uci.edu id UAA18562
Message-ID:  <C0F7BF4DCEC1D2479A01031347184DCD02FE8F@nt2000s2.dgmicro.com>
Date:         Tue, 13 Nov 2001 23:34:31 -0500
Reply-To: "Darren Wright" <dwright@D2-TECH.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Darren Wright" <dwright@D2-TECH.COM>
Subject:      [AR] Carbonates
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

I think I asked this before and did not get much of a response.

Have any of you worked with Strontium Carbonate, Copper Carbonate, or
Barium Carbonate for colors?

I have a good red, blue and green formula, but the red and green are
both slow because of the Nitrates added.  I am told that smaller amounts
of carbonates will do the same.

However, experimenting with Strontium carbonate, I got diddily.  Nada.

Anyone elses experiences different?

-Darren

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 14018 invoked from network); 14 Nov 2001 05:23:18 -0000
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 14 Nov 2001 05:23:18 -0000
Received: (qmail 3896 invoked by uid 50005); 14 Nov 2001 05:23:12 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4169. . Clean. Processed in 0.167327 secs); 14 Nov 2001 05:23:12 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 14 Nov 2001 05:23:12 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA18830; Tue, 13 Nov 2001 21:21:09 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 135172 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 14 Nov 2001 05:19:42          +0000
Received: from albqpop1.albq.uswest.net (albqpop1.albq.uswest.net          [207.108.240.1]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id VAA18810          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 13 Nov 2001 21:19:41 -0800
Received: (qmail 59502 invoked by alias); 14 Nov 2001 05:19:10 -0000
Delivered-To: fixup-AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU@fixme
Received: (qmail 59494 invoked by uid 0); 14 Nov 2001 05:19:09 -0000
Received: from cc898542-a.prdise1.nm.home.com (HELO cc898542a) (65.7.151.152)          by albqpop1.albq.uswest.net with SMTP; 14 Nov 2001 05:19:09 -0000
References:  <C0F7BF4DCEC1D2479A01031347184DCD02FE8F@nt2000s2.dgmicro.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <000701c16ccb$e5479880$0100a8c0@cc898542a>
Date:         Tue, 13 Nov 2001 22:19:11 -0700
Reply-To: "Paxton" <darkspunge@USWEST.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Paxton" <darkspunge@USWEST.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Carbonates
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

What oxydizers?  You should not need more then 5 parts strontium carb for
one. 10 parts max. It is bassically inert to the propellant. The strontium
nitrate still has some oxygen in there. You can make a plenty fast
propellant with barium nitrate also.
Back to the strontium carb, if you are using KN, you need to add a chlorine
donor to achive the color I believe. KP, AP, or KC, would normally provide
enough chlorine to get a red, with AP doing the best job.
What formulations have you tried and we could be of more help.

Pax



----- Original Message -----
From: "Darren Wright" <dwright@D2-TECH.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Tuesday, November 13, 2001 9:34 PM
Subject: [AR] Carbonates


> I think I asked this before and did not get much of a response.
>
> Have any of you worked with Strontium Carbonate, Copper Carbonate, or
> Barium Carbonate for colors?
>
> I have a good red, blue and green formula, but the red and green are
> both slow because of the Nitrates added.  I am told that smaller amounts
> of carbonates will do the same.
>
> However, experimenting with Strontium carbonate, I got diddily.  Nada.
>
> Anyone elses experiences different?
>
> -Darren
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 27325 invoked from network); 14 Nov 2001 05:37:34 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 14 Nov 2001 05:37:34 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 1718 invoked by uid 50005); 14 Nov 2001 05:37:28 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4169. . Clean. Processed in 0.832606 secs); 14 Nov 2001 05:37:28 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 14 Nov 2001 05:37:26 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA18919; Tue, 13 Nov 2001 21:35:31 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 135191 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 14 Nov 2001 05:34:06          +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (f149.law9.hotmail.com [64.4.9.149]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA18901 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue,          13 Nov 2001 21:34:06 -0800
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Tue,          13 Nov 2001 21:33:36 -0800
Received: from 66.81.49.113 by lw9fd.law9.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Wed, 14          Nov 2001 05:33:35 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [66.81.49.113]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 14 Nov 2001 05:33:36.0326 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[E8397660:01C16CCD]
Message-ID:  <F149ilzDhBlt79EPUnW00016806@hotmail.com>
Date:         Tue, 13 Nov 2001 21:33:35 -0800
Reply-To: "James Grover" <jgroverman@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "James Grover" <jgroverman@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      [AR] Optimal Core diameter
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

All of the motors I have been making up to this point have been designed
around pre-constructed hardware. I have been thinking of designing some of
my own and ran into some questions. First, when designing a motor, how do
you determine the proper or optimal core diameter of the grains (When using
a bates grain geometry with out different diameter cores)? Im assuming
there is a ratio involving the grain diameter and total length of
propellant, but not sure exactly how to find this proper value. With the
Kosdon hardware and etc. Ive been using, I made the cores in accordance
with the rules of erosive burning.

Knowing what Kn I want to run my propellant at, I guess I could work
backwards and find this value, but it seems like there is an easier
way...Thanks.

James Grover
TRA#6866 L3
www.groveraerospace.com




_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 1811 invoked from network); 14 Nov 2001 05:39:02 -0000
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 14 Nov 2001 05:39:02 -0000
Received: (qmail 28912 invoked by uid 50005); 14 Nov 2001 05:38:56 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4169. . Clean. Processed in 0.235707 secs); 14 Nov 2001 05:38:56 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 14 Nov 2001 05:38:55 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA18947; Tue, 13 Nov 2001 21:37:04 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 135198 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 14 Nov 2001 05:35:43          +0000
Received: from mta04.mail.mel.aone.net.au (mta04.mail.au.uu.net [203.2.192.84])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA18927 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 13 Nov 2001 21:35:37 -0800
Received: from unknown ([63.34.218.18]) by mta04.mail.mel.aone.net.au with SMTP          id <20011114053519.QMQE2245.mta04.mail.mel.aone.net.au@unknown> for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 14 Nov 2001 16:35:19 +1100
References: Conversation            <C0F7BF4DCEC1D2479A01031347184DCD02FE8F@nt2000s2.dgmicro.com> with            last message            <C0F7BF4DCEC1D2479A01031347184DCD02FE8F@nt2000s2.dgmicro.com>
Priority: Normal
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Priority: 3
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	X-MAPIextension=.TXT;
	charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>
Date:         Wed, 14 Nov 2001 05:35:43 +0000
Reply-To: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Carbonates
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <C0F7BF4DCEC1D2479A01031347184DCD02FE8F@nt2000s2.dgmicro.com>

----------
> I think I asked this before and did not get much of a response.
>
> Have any of you worked with Strontium Carbonate, Copper Carbonate, or
> Barium Carbonate for colors?
>
> I have a good red, blue and green formula, but the red and green are
> both slow because of the Nitrates added.  I am told that smaller amounts
> of carbonates will do the same.
>
> However, experimenting with Strontium carbonate, I got diddily.  Nada.
>
> Anyone elses experiences different?

Strontium carbonate generally offers a deeper red than strontium nitrate.
It's harder to get rich greens from Barium compounds. Easy to get
reasonable blues from virtually
any copper compound. Ask the people at Firefox. They are truly the experts
with these questions unless you're after performance (or a trade off), then
we can help you.

Troy.

> -Darren

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 8193 invoked from network); 14 Nov 2001 06:01:54 -0000
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 14 Nov 2001 06:01:54 -0000
Received: (qmail 14397 invoked by uid 50005); 14 Nov 2001 06:01:48 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4169. . Clean. Processed in 0.287623 secs); 14 Nov 2001 06:01:48 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 14 Nov 2001 06:01:48 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA19224; Tue, 13 Nov 2001 21:59:54 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 135232 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 14 Nov 2001 05:58:31          +0000
Received: from mailin7.bigpond.com (mailin7.bigpond.com [139.134.6.95]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA19168 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Tue, 13 Nov 2001 21:58:30 -0800
Received: from tardis ([144.135.24.84]) by mailin7.bigpond.com (Netscape          Messaging Server 4.15) with SMTP id GMS0VN00.DAT for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Wed, 14 Nov 2001 16:04:35 +1000
Received: from CPE-203-45-128-99.qld.bigpond.net.au ([203.45.128.99]) by          bwmam06.mailsvc.email.bigpond.com(MailRouter V2.9k 8341/8159788); 14          Nov 2001 15:57:58
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook CWS, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <000901c16cd1$3f983970$641010ac@tardis>
Date:         Wed, 14 Nov 2001 15:57:30 +1000
Reply-To: "Ashley Roll" <ash@DIGITALNEMESIS.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Ashley Roll" <ash@DIGITALNEMESIS.COM>
Subject:      [AR] UGN3503 based Magnetic Apogee Detector - Progress
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <00e201c16a5c$9a8138e0$641010ac@tardis>

Hi Everyone..

Ok, The Epoxy has finally cured enough and I just gave it a bit of a bash
around and it seems to work - its a lot better then before. I can still
twist it enough to get it to trigger, but I can't make it trigger because of
"bumps" any longer. I think that if I secure the epoxy well onto the board
it should be cool.

I'll spend some time over the next few days and update the website below
with a PCB design, parts list and some instructions for those interested in
building one to try.

If anyone is interested I can probably get some PCBs made and even put
together a kit of parts. Most are surface mount so not available from
hobbyist stores in general. Farnell stocks them all however.

Cheers,
Ash.

---
Ashley Roll
Digital Nemesis Pty Ltd
www.digitalnemesis.com
Mobile: +61 (0)417 705 718

>
> http://www.digitalnemesis.com/ash/Projects/MagneticApogeeDetector/
>
> This has not be flight tested, and there is at least one known major
> problem - the sensor seems to be very sensitive to "bending".
> I'm trying to
> encapsulate the UGN3503 in a solid block of epoxy to see if
> that helps, but
> it hasn't fully hardened yet, although it does look promising.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 20503 invoked from network); 14 Nov 2001 06:06:12 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.105]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 14 Nov 2001 06:06:12 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: (qmail 19234 invoked by uid 50005); 14 Nov 2001 06:06:06 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpy with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4169. . Clean. Processed in 0.735326 secs); 14 Nov 2001 06:06:06 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 14 Nov 2001 06:06:04 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA19367; Tue, 13 Nov 2001 22:03:56 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 135252 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 14 Nov 2001 06:02:35          +0000
Received: from cisco.com (cypher.cisco.com [171.69.11.18]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA19344 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Tue,          13 Nov 2001 22:02:35 -0800
Received: (from billw@localhost) by cisco.com (8.8.8/2.6/Cisco List          Logging/8.8.8) id WAA28698; Tue, 13 Nov 2001 22:01:29 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID:  <CMM.0.90.4.1005717689.billw@cypher>
Date:         Tue, 13 Nov 2001 22:01:29 PST
Reply-To: "Bill Westfield" <billw@cisco.com>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "William Chops Westfield" <billw@cisco.com>
Subject:      Re: [AR] 3 The Newbies and the politics -- Re: [AR] . . .
Comments: To: al bradley <abradley@toolcity.net>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  Your message of Tue, 13 Nov 2001 22:53:38 -0600

    > So instead of condemning TRA's EX program for its omissions,
    > politics and crony-ism, you might as well be happy that it provides
    > a venue for *ANY* amateur activity...

    You have taken what I wrote out of context! There was not one word of
    condemnation in what I wrote! Look again if you will!

I didn't mean to imply that you personally were condemning TRA, just
"people in general."  Sorry for the poor wording.

Personally, I think TRA's experimental program was a quick replacement
for all the friends of the BoD that used to show up at launches and
say "Yeah, I'm a motor vendor; this is a demo.  Right!", rather than
a serious amateur rocketry opportunity.  But that's not so bad anyway:

1) assorted would-be vendors DO need a venue for flying their
   experiments, and some of them are good enough that having them
   classed as "experimental rocketeers" is good for the overall image.
   ("would-be model or HPR motor vendor" is an interesting class of
    motor design in itself, quite different from "would-be CATS or
    Xprize contendor", but perhap with a similar overall difficulty
    level.  (You get to trade the difficulties of 200K waivers/etc for
    the difficulties of DOT EX numbers and "real" licenses, for instance.)


2) assorted other amateurs DO get a chance to fire motors/rockets that
   they wouldn't have had before...

The remaining alternative is amateur pyrotechnic conventions, at least
for small motors...

BillW


From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 28970 invoked from network); 14 Nov 2001 06:19:42 -0000
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 14 Nov 2001 06:19:42 -0000
Received: (qmail 25930 invoked by uid 50005); 14 Nov 2001 06:19:36 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4169. . Clean. Processed in 0.175657 secs); 14 Nov 2001 06:19:36 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 14 Nov 2001 06:19:36 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA19563; Tue, 13 Nov 2001 22:17:22 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 135280 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 14 Nov 2001 06:15:57          +0000
Received: from corlabs (24-216-244-100.hsacorp.net [24.216.244.100]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA19538 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Tue, 13 Nov 2001 22:15:55 -0800
Received: from [24.216.244.164] by corlabs (ArGoSoft Mail Server Pro for          WinNT/2000, Version 1.62 (1.6.2.1)); Wed, 14 Nov 2001 00:53:03 -0600
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook CWS, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <001b01c16cd5$6e685650$0200a8c0@charter.net>
Date:         Wed, 14 Nov 2001 00:27:26 -0600
Reply-To: "Carl A. Blood" <cablood@CORLABS.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Carl A. Blood" <cablood@CORLABS.COM>
Subject:      [AR] World Amateur and Experimental Space Technology Association
Comments: cc: "Robert Brashear (E-mail)" <rjb@artimex.com>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

To All,

Bob Brashear and myself (Carl A. Blood that is) have evaluated the situation
and feel that it is time
to act.

OK here it is (for now) we will call it the "World Amateur and Experimental
Space Technology Association"
and the forum (distribution list) for this new organization will be started
now.

This forum will attempt to establish the rules, regulations, policies, and
bylaws that will be put in place
no later that 03/01/2002 for this new organization.

This will be an open forum for all who wish to communicate their opinions
and recommendation for the formal
formation of this organization. ALL ARE INVITED! (Simple rules for this
distribution list are listed below.)

Here is what we (Bob and I) will do to organize the effort:

1) For the first two weeks the posts on this list will be constrained to an
open and general discussion of
   the formation of an organization that will truly represent the best
interests of Armature and Experimental
   Racketeers / Space Technologists. Any thing goes! (within the rules
listed below) This discussion can, should
   and will include the international community. (not US only)

2) We will collect this information, organize it, and formulate the compiled
comments into a structure for
   a more pointed discussion.

3) Then we (the list participants) will address each item on the list in
more detail. (more than one thread
   can be going on at a time.) This will continue for 4 weeks.

4) We (Bob and I) will the compile all the information and draft the bylaws,
safety rules, and any other documents
   that are to be represented. This will take about 2 weeks.

5) The documents will then be placed out to all on the list for  final
review and comments. A period lasting
   no longer than 2 weeks unless changes by popular vote.

6) final version of the documents will be invoked and we will have our
   "World Amateur and Experimental Space Technology Association" and fair
representation.

7) Web sites across the world will be created and lists like AROCKET will be
sponsored.



SUBSCRIBING AND UNSUBSCRIBING:

      Send message to: cablood@pad17.com
      Message to send: Subscribe or Unsubscribe in the Subject or body
      It may take up to 24hrs to get on the list as I will be doing it by
hand
      until I automate the product.



Posting Rules:

A.  Send posts to WAMEX@pad17.com

B.  Please stay on-topic.

C.  Be nice.  No flames.  If you feel duty-bound to flame or to reply to
    such, take it to private e-mail.

D.  Text only.  No HTML.  Go to the 'HELP' of your email program or browser
    for info on how to turn off HTML.

E.  Text only.  If you have attachments send them to me personally, I'll
place them
    up on pad17.com where everyone that wants them can get them or see them.

F.  Spamming:   Will get you booted from the list.

L.  Advertisements:  Not allowed! see (F)

N.  Administrative problems:  if you are having problems posting, receiving
    messages, etc., do not post your problems to the list.  Contact me
personally at:
    cablood@pad17.com or 612-710-2204


I would like to personally thank Ray for his permission to use this list to
support this new adventure.
Bob and I are eagerly awaiting your intellectual contribution to this
effort.

Thank you
Carl A. Blood

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 29243 invoked from network); 14 Nov 2001 06:29:21 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 14 Nov 2001 06:29:21 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: (qmail 7751 invoked by uid 50005); 14 Nov 2001 06:29:15 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4169. . Clean. Processed in 0.772391 secs); 14 Nov 2001 06:29:15 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 14 Nov 2001 06:29:13 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA19683; Tue, 13 Nov 2001 22:26:54 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 135296 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 14 Nov 2001 06:25:28          +0000
Received: from cisco.com (cypher.cisco.com [171.69.11.18]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA19667 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue,          13 Nov 2001 22:25:27 -0800
Received: (from billw@localhost) by cisco.com (8.8.8/2.6/Cisco List          Logging/8.8.8) id WAA02566; Tue, 13 Nov 2001 22:24:55 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID:  <CMM.0.90.4.1005719094.billw@cypher>
Date:         Tue, 13 Nov 2001 22:24:54 PST
Reply-To: "Bill Westfield" <billw@cisco.com>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "William Chops Westfield" <billw@cisco.com>
Subject:      Re: [AR] UGN3503 based Magnetic Apogee Detector - Progress
Comments: To: Ashley Roll <ash@DIGITALNEMESIS.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  Your message of Wed, 14 Nov 2001 15:57:30 +1000

I may regret mentioning this, but ...  I recently bought a used LPKF
mechanical circuit board plotter (the kind that uses a high speed router
bit to mill away copper and leave the relevant traces behind), and I'm
almost to the point where I might offer to make small quantities of smallish
circuit boards (1 or 2, up to 3x4 inches or so) as part of the "learning
process" for this thing.  This works best for very small boards where the
alternative is getting "way too many" board panelized onto the 5x6 minimum
size that is typical of the more reasonable "prototype" board houses.

On the other hand, the LPKF produced boards are pretty raw - no plated
through holes, no soldermask, no silkscreen, no tin plate.  My initial
project has been a re-layout of the components from a disposable camera,
with slight modifications, to make a repeating strobe that'll fit easilly
in a 24mm body tube.  (2nd project - 18mm body tube.  3rd project, maybe
get the newer version of the flash into a 13mm tube...)

BillW


From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 6040 invoked from network); 14 Nov 2001 06:31:55 -0000
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 14 Nov 2001 06:31:55 -0000
Received: (qmail 11334 invoked by uid 50005); 14 Nov 2001 06:31:49 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4169. . Clean. Processed in 0.45084 secs); 14 Nov 2001 06:31:49 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 14 Nov 2001 06:31:48 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA19718; Tue, 13 Nov 2001 22:30:04 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 135306 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 14 Nov 2001 06:28:42          +0000
Received: from albqpop1.albq.uswest.net (albqpop1.albq.uswest.net          [207.108.240.1]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id WAA19693          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 13 Nov 2001 22:28:19 -0800
Received: (qmail 43296 invoked by alias); 14 Nov 2001 06:27:49 -0000
Delivered-To: fixup-AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU@fixme
Received: (qmail 43268 invoked by uid 0); 14 Nov 2001 06:27:48 -0000
Received: from cc898542-a.prdise1.nm.home.com (HELO cc898542a) (65.7.151.152)          by albqpop1.albq.uswest.net with SMTP; 14 Nov 2001 06:27:48 -0000
References: Conversation                       <C0F7BF4DCEC1D2479A01031347184DCD02FE8F@nt2000s2.dgmicro.com> with             last message                       <C0F7BF4DCEC1D2479A01031347184DCD02FE8F@nt2000s2.dgmicro.com>             <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <007a01c16cd5$7c300440$0100a8c0@cc898542a>
Date:         Tue, 13 Nov 2001 23:27:50 -0700
Reply-To: "Paxton" <darkspunge@USWEST.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Paxton" <darkspunge@USWEST.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Carbonates
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

----- Original Message -----
From: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Tuesday, November 13, 2001 10:35 PM
Subject: Re: [AR] Carbonates


> ----------
> > I think I asked this before and did not get much of a response.
> >
> > Have any of you worked with Strontium Carbonate, Copper Carbonate, or
> > Barium Carbonate for colors?
> >
> > I have a good red, blue and green formula, but the red and green are
> > both slow because of the Nitrates added.  I am told that smaller amounts
> > of carbonates will do the same.
> >
> > However, experimenting with Strontium carbonate, I got diddily.  Nada.
> >
> > Anyone elses experiences different?
>
> Strontium carbonate generally offers a deeper red than strontium nitrate.
> It's harder to get rich greens from Barium compounds. Easy to get
> reasonable blues from virtually
> any copper compound. Ask the people at Firefox. They are truly the experts
> with these questions unless you're after performance (or a trade off),
then
> we can help you.

I dunno, I think it is th eoposite in the pyro world. Blues and rich yellows
are the hardest, with reds and greens being the easy ones. How odd.

Pax


> Troy.
>
> > -Darren
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 1810 invoked from network); 14 Nov 2001 07:59:12 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 14 Nov 2001 07:59:12 -0000
Received: (qmail 16741 invoked by uid 50005); 14 Nov 2001 07:59:06 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4169. . Clean. Processed in 0.151088 secs); 14 Nov 2001 07:59:06 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 14 Nov 2001 07:59:05 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA20246; Tue, 13 Nov 2001 23:57:34 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 135408 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 14 Nov 2001 07:56:09          +0000
Received: from localhost (rcalkins@localhost) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with          ESMTP id XAA20231; Tue, 13 Nov 2001 23:56:04 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.LNX.4.10.10111132034040.18200-100000@itc.uci.edu>
Date:         Tue, 13 Nov 2001 23:56:03 -0800
Reply-To: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
Subject:      Re: [AR] The Newbies and the politics -- Re: [AR] Bruce Kelly's              Response              on ROL - ANFO motors
Comments: To: al bradley <abradley@TOOLCITY.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <v01510100b816988f2b3b@[208.11.233.32]>

Hi Al,

> What are the newbies to think in trying to find a slot where they can
> home-build and fly their own motors??

Al, as always, (depending on your state law) anybody in the US is free to
fly anything as long as they don't violate FAA regs without their consent
(known as a waiver or variance).  In the construction of motors, you may
come up against the BATF regs.  In transporting across state lines, you
come up with DOT regs.  If you use a radio transmitter in you rocket, you
need to address the FCC's concerns.

Many people here are familiar with each of these regs, an inquiry is
always apropriate.


> Should they give up their interests?
Not in my opinion.


> Just fly bootleg launches?  Risk going to jail?

As long as you comply with local, state, FAA, BATF, DOT and FCC regs
(which you HAVE to do if you are NAR, TRA, RRS or etc anyway), you don't
have _any_ risk of going to jail.


Exactly what "bootleg" launches are, I'm not totally clear.  If it means
taking personal initiative to ensure you are complying with all local,
state and federal legal requirements, without the aid of TRA or others,
then I heartily recommend it. If it means avoiding all legal requirements
and launching "out of site, out of mind", I ask that you please
reconsider.

Perhaps you've heard of Murphy's Laws.  What you may not know was that
Murphy was a real technician on a rocket project just a few miles away
from here.  Even on a well controlled government-funded rocket-sled
project, it was realized that "Anything that can go wrong, will."  Imagine
the range of possible failures with a totally unsupervised, illegal
launch.  And imagine the potential problems this could cause to all the
rest of us working on our projects!


> No longer able to draw on the forum that arocket has provided?

Not at all.  First of all, I highly recommend static testing your motors
many times before flight.  This is the only way you can be sure you're not
going to set the countryside afire, with a rocket sent askew by a thrust
curve only theorized.


> Finally they might say "a pox on it all!" and find another area of
> scientific inquiry that has more acceptability and companionship?

Companionship is what I endeavor to provide here, Al.  I'm not always
successful, but I try.  As far as acceptability, I think most people here
accept most anything.   I've not heard any condemnation about anything
except where it is demonstrated to provide poor performance or hurt your
personal safety.


> Short of inclusion in hell, will somesone clearly show where we
> newbies belong?

I've always thought _this_ was where they belonged.

Ray

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 2487 invoked from network); 14 Nov 2001 08:43:08 -0000
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 14 Nov 2001 08:43:08 -0000
Received: (qmail 32154 invoked by uid 50005); 14 Nov 2001 08:43:02 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4169. . Clean. Processed in 0.549663 secs); 14 Nov 2001 08:43:02 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 14 Nov 2001 08:43:00 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA20435; Wed, 14 Nov 2001 00:41:02 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 135442 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 14 Nov 2001 08:39:39          +0000
Received: from corlabs (24-216-244-100.hsacorp.net [24.216.244.100]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA20414 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Wed, 14 Nov 2001 00:39:36 -0800
Received: from [24.216.244.164] by corlabs (ArGoSoft Mail Server Pro for          WinNT/2000, Version 1.62 (1.6.2.1)); Wed, 14 Nov 2001 03:16:36 -0600
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook CWS, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <002101c16ce9$7dafaf50$0200a8c0@charter.net>
Date:         Wed, 14 Nov 2001 02:51:02 -0600
Reply-To: "Carl A. Blood" <cablood@CORLABS.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Carl A. Blood" <cablood@CORLABS.COM>
Subject:      [AR] Correction
Comments: cc: "Robert Brashear (E-mail)" <rjb@artimex.com>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

All.

Please use cablood@corlabs.com to send your subscription requests to.

Thanks

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 13884 invoked from network); 14 Nov 2001 09:09:55 -0000
Received: from smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.105]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 14 Nov 2001 09:09:55 -0000
Received: (qmail 22105 invoked by uid 50005); 14 Nov 2001 09:09:49 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpy with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4169. . Clean. Processed in 0.391041 secs); 14 Nov 2001 09:09:49 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 14 Nov 2001 09:09:48 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id BAA20537; Wed, 14 Nov 2001 01:04:46 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 135455 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 14 Nov 2001 09:03:23          +0000
Received: from corlabs (24-216-244-100.hsacorp.net [24.216.244.100]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id BAA20521 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Wed, 14 Nov 2001 01:03:20 -0800
Received: from [24.216.244.164] by corlabs (ArGoSoft Mail Server Pro for          WinNT/2000, Version 1.62 (1.6.2.1)); Wed, 14 Nov 2001 03:40:29 -0600
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook CWS, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <002601c16cec$d43417f0$0200a8c0@charter.net>
Date:         Wed, 14 Nov 2001 03:14:54 -0600
Reply-To: "Carl A. Blood" <cablood@CORLABS.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Carl A. Blood" <cablood@CORLABS.COM>
Subject:      [AR] Correction
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

The email address cablood@pad17.com now works just fine. You may however,
use ether email address.

Thanks
Carl

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 578 invoked from network); 14 Nov 2001 09:28:52 -0000
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 14 Nov 2001 09:28:52 -0000
Received: (qmail 25967 invoked by uid 50005); 14 Nov 2001 09:28:46 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4169. . Clean. Processed in 0.317738 secs); 14 Nov 2001 09:28:46 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 14 Nov 2001 09:28:45 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id BAA20632; Wed, 14 Nov 2001 01:26:38 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 135470 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 14 Nov 2001 09:25:15          +0000
Received: from mta02.mail.mel.aone.net.au (mta02.mail.au.uu.net [203.2.192.82])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id BAA20613 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 14 Nov 2001 01:25:14 -0800
Received: from unknown ([63.34.212.12]) by mta02.mail.mel.aone.net.au with SMTP          id <20011114092509.DXDU8095.mta02.mail.mel.aone.net.au@unknown> for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 14 Nov 2001 20:25:09 +1100
References: Conversation <F149ilzDhBlt79EPUnW00016806@hotmail.com> with last            message <F149ilzDhBlt79EPUnW00016806@hotmail.com>
Priority: Normal
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Priority: 3
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	X-MAPIextension=.TXT;
	charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Message-ID:  <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>
Date:         Wed, 14 Nov 2001 09:25:15 +0000
Reply-To: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Optimal Core diameter
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <F149ilzDhBlt79EPUnW00016806@hotmail.com>

----------
> All of the motors I have been making up to this point have been designed
> around pre-constructed hardware. I have been thinking of designing some of
> my own and ran into some questions. First, when designing a motor, how do
> you determine the proper or optimal core diameter of the grains (When
using
> a bates grain geometry with out different diameter cores)? Im assuming
> there is a ratio involving the grain diameter and total length of
> propellant, but not sure exactly how to find this proper value. With the
> Kosdon hardware and etc. Ive been using, I made the cores in accordance
> with the rules of erosive burning.


The rules are quite simple.
Larger core areas = lower gas velocities over propellant surface which
reduces a possible erosive burning spike.
Large core areas = less pronounced "hump" effect which becomes VERY
noticeable with propellants containing high "n" values.
Smaller cores = higher propellant or volumetric loadings.

Grain diameter & core diameter can be matched with the correct grain length
to supply the most neutral profile possible for BATES geometries ie.
Initial Kn ~= Final Kn.

Generally the core *size* isn't the major controlling influence on the
reduction or suppression of resonance burning or oscillatory based
combustion instability but can have a major influence on "composite" (to
use bad terminology)  based instabilities eg. larger cores will reduce the
susceptibility to chuffing and other low frequency or random disturbances.

Troy.


>
> Knowing what Kn I want to run my propellant at, I guess I could work
> backwards and find this value, but it seems like there is an easier
> way...Thanks.
>
> James Grover
> TRA#6866 L3
> www.groveraerospace.com
>
>
>
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 2609 invoked from network); 14 Nov 2001 09:29:45 -0000
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 14 Nov 2001 09:29:45 -0000
Received: (qmail 6175 invoked by uid 50005); 14 Nov 2001 09:29:38 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4169. . Clean. Processed in 0.134283 secs); 14 Nov 2001 09:29:38 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 14 Nov 2001 09:29:38 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id BAA20651; Wed, 14 Nov 2001 01:28:01 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 135477 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 14 Nov 2001 09:26:40          +0000
Received: from mta04.mail.mel.aone.net.au (mta04.mail.au.uu.net [203.2.192.84])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id BAA20621 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 14 Nov 2001 01:25:35 -0800
Received: from unknown ([63.34.212.12]) by mta04.mail.mel.aone.net.au with SMTP          id <20011114092526.VJUH2245.mta04.mail.mel.aone.net.au@unknown> for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 14 Nov 2001 20:25:26 +1100
References: Conversation            <C0F7BF4DCEC1D2479A01031347184DCD02FE8F@nt2000s2.dgmicro.com> with            last message <007a01c16cd5$7c300440$0100a8c0@cc898542a>
Priority: Normal
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Priority: 3
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	X-MAPIextension=.TXT;
	charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>
Date:         Wed, 14 Nov 2001 09:26:40 +0000
Reply-To: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Carbonates
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <007a01c16cd5$7c300440$0100a8c0@cc898542a>

> > Strontium carbonate generally offers a deeper red than strontium
nitrate.
> > It's harder to get rich greens from Barium compounds. Easy to get
> > reasonable blues from virtually
> > any copper compound. Ask the people at Firefox. They are truly the
experts
> > with these questions unless you're after performance (or a trade off),
> then
> > we can help you.
>
> I dunno, I think it is th eoposite in the pyro world. Blues and rich
yellows
> are the hardest, with reds and greens being the easy ones. How odd.

Rich or even noticeable greens are very difficult to obtain in rocket
propellants from my experience. *Rich* reds are the easiest. Blues, well,
notice I didn't say *rich* blues. What I meant was noticeable blues. Many
APCP compositions only require 1-2% colouring agent to obtain quite a
noticeable blue to the plume. No I haven't tried obtaining rich blues from
composite propellants but I can't see why it can't be possible. Generally
to obtain *rich* colours requires running the propellants at lower
operating temps which obviously affects performance. This was probably the
most influencing reason for me to ditch the pyro colour fix..

Troy.


>
> Pax
>
>
> > Troy.
> >
> > > -Darren
> >

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 27587 invoked from network); 14 Nov 2001 10:30:04 -0000
Received: from smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.105]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 14 Nov 2001 10:30:04 -0000
Received: (qmail 28851 invoked by uid 50005); 14 Nov 2001 10:29:52 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpy with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4169. . Clean. Processed in 0.206366 secs); 14 Nov 2001 10:29:52 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 14 Nov 2001 10:29:52 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id CAA20960; Wed, 14 Nov 2001 02:18:43 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 135550 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 14 Nov 2001 10:17:18          +0000
Received: from fep3-orange.clear.net.nz (fep3-orange.clear.net.nz          [203.97.32.3]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id CAA20943          for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Wed, 14 Nov 2001 02:17:17 -0800
Received: from mkbs (b002-m009-p031.acld.clear.net.nz [203.167.200.31]) by          fep3-orange.clear.net.nz (1.5/1.8) with SMTP id XAA01872; Wed, 14 Nov          2001 23:17:12 +1300 (NZDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="Windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <015201c16cf5$c3844f20$0700a8c0@mkbs>
Date:         Wed, 14 Nov 2001 23:17:53 +1300
Reply-To: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Organization: Applied Technology
Subject:      [AR] Fw: Jonathan's Space Report, No. 467
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Jonathan's Space Report
No. 467                                        2001 Nov 14 Cambridge, MA
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
---

Shuttle and Station
--------------------

The EP-2 crew - Afanas'ev, Haignere and Kozeev - undocked Soyuz TM-32
from the Pirs module at 0138:30 UTC on Oct 31. Deorbit burn was at 0404
UTC, with landing 180 km SE of Dzhezkazgan at 0459:26 UTC. This leaves
the Ex-3 crew of Culbertston, Dezhurov and Tyurin with a fresh Soyuz
transport ship, Soyuz TM-33, docked with the Zarya module.

On Nov 12 Culbertson and Dezhurov made a spacewalk from the Pirs module.
It was depressurized past 50 mbar around 2127 UTC,  and the hatch was
opened at 2141 UTC. The astronauts completed external connections for
the Pirs module and finished setting up the Kurs rendezvous system. The
hatch was closed at 0245 UTC on Nov 13 and repressurization
began at around 0250 UTC for a duration of about 5 hr 23min.

Preparations are continuing for the launch of STS-108, with
Endeavour now at pad 39B.


Red Planet - Erratum
---------------------

I can't believe I did this - thanks to alert reader Mike Grabois who
pointed out my use of 'perigee' and 'apogee' when I meant to type the
generic terms 'periapsis' and 'apoapsis'. In the 1960s-70s the
planet-specific terms - in this case I believe `periares', `apoares' -
had a brief popularity, although the difficulty of coming up with new
terms for each new body (how about `perieroticon'  for NEAR about Eros?)
has led to the generic terms winning out for the most part. Exceptions
are perihelion/aphelion which is well-hallowed in use for the Sun;
perijove and apojove which seem to be in common use for Galileo at
Jupiter; in astronomy,  periastron/apastron and
perigalacticon/apogalacticon are sometimes seen for stars and galaxies
respectively.

Recent Launches
---------------

No new orbital launches this week. A suborbital STARS missile defense
target(Polaris with Orbus-1 upper stage) was destroyed during launch
from Kodiak on Nov 9.  A successful Minuteman 3 operational test flew
from Vandenberg to Kwajalein on Nov 7. A Topol' was launched from
Plesetsk to Kamchatka on Nov 1.

Mars Odyssey continues aerobraking and now has a periapsis of 110 km.
Genesis is now arriving at the Earth-Sun L1 point. A malfunctioning
thermal radiator is causing some concern for the health of the
sample return capsule's critical battery, which is overheating,
but Genesis is expected to begin collecting solar wind samples
on schedule.


Table of Recent Launches
-----------------------

Date UT       Name            Launch Vehicle  Site            Mission
INTL.

DES.
Sep  7 1939   Picosat 7/8       -              Sindri, LEO      Technology
00-42C
Sep  8 1525   USA 160       )   Atlas IIAS     Vandenberg SLC3E Sigint
40A
              NRO satellite )
40C
Sep 14 2335   Pirs           )  Soyuz-U        Baykonur LC1     Station
module
              Progress M-SO1 )                                  Cargo
41A
Sep 21 1849   Orbview-4  )      Taurus 2110    Vandenberg 576E  Imaging
F01
              QuikTOMS   )                                      Environment
F01
              SBD        )                                      Technology
F01
              Celestis-4 )                                      Burial
F01
Sep 25 2321   Atlantic Bird 2   Ariane 44P     Kourou ELA2      Ku telecom
42A
Sep 30 0240   Starshine 3  )    Athena-1       Kodiak           Science
43A
              Picosat      )                                    Technology
43B
              PCSat        )                                    UHF/VHF comm
43C
              Sapphire     )                                    Technology
43D
Oct  5 2120   USA 161           Titan 4B       Vandenberg SLC4E Imaging
44A
Oct  6 1645   Raduga-1          Proton-K/DM2?  Baykonur         C telecom
45A
Oct 11 0232   USA 162           Atlas IIAS     Canaveral SLC36B Data relay?
46A
Oct 18 1851   QuickBird         Delta 7320     Vandenberg SLC2W Imaging
47A
Oct 21 0859   Soyuz TM-33       Soyuz-U        Baykonur LC1     Spaceship
48A
Oct 22 0453   TES      )        PSLV           Sriharikota      Imaging?
49A
              BIRD     )                                        Imaging
49C
              PROBA    )                                        Imaging/tech
49B
Oct 25 1134   Molniya-3         Molniya-M      Plesetsk LC43/3  Comms
50A

Current Shuttle Processing Status
_________________________________

Orbiters               Location   Mission    Launch Due

OV-102 Columbia        OPF Bay 3     STS-109 2002 Feb 14  HST SM-3B
OV-103 Discovery       OPF Bay 1?    Maintenance
OV-104 Atlantis        OPF Bay 2?    STS-110 2002 Mar 21  ISS 8A
OV-105 Endeavour       LC39B         STS-108 2001 Nov 29  ISS UF-1


.-------------------------------------------------------------------------.
|  Jonathan McDowell                 |  phone : (617) 495-7176            |
|  Harvard-Smithsonian Center for    |                                    |
|   Astrophysics                     |                                    |
|  60 Garden St, MS6                 |                                    |
|  Cambridge MA 02138                |  inter : jcm@cfa.harvard.edu       |
|  USA                               |          jmcdowell@cfa.harvard.edu |
|                                                                         |
| JSR: http://hea-www.harvard.edu/~jcm/space/jsr/jsr.html                 |
| Back issues:  http://hea-www.harvard.edu/~jcm/space/jsr/back            |
| Subscribe/unsub: mail majordomo@head-cfa.harvard.edu, (un)subscribe jsr |
'-------------------------------------------------------------------------'

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 5846 invoked from network); 14 Nov 2001 12:38:21 -0000
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 14 Nov 2001 12:38:21 -0000
Received: (qmail 19863 invoked by uid 50005); 14 Nov 2001 12:38:15 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4169. . Clean. Processed in 0.519348 secs); 14 Nov 2001 12:38:15 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 14 Nov 2001 12:38:14 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id EAA21513; Wed, 14 Nov 2001 04:36:14 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 135616 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 14 Nov 2001 12:34:45          +0000
Received: from femail34.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail34.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.254.60.24]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id EAA21495          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 14 Nov 2001 04:34:44 -0800
Received: from cx814151a ([24.14.55.118]) by femail34.sdc1.sfba.home.com          (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20 201-229-121-120-20010223) with SMTP id          <20011114123438.SGGI23126.femail34.sdc1.sfba.home.com@cx814151a> for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 14 Nov 2001 04:34:38 -0800
References: Conversation                      <C0F7BF4DCEC1D2479A01031347184DCD02FE8F@nt2000s2.dgmicro.com> with             last message <007a01c16cd5$7c300440$0100a8c0@cc898542a>             <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.3018.1300
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <020e01c16d07$51089480$0a01a8c0@cx814151a>
Date:         Wed, 14 Nov 2001 06:24:32 -0600
Reply-To: "John Bolene" <jbolene@HOME.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Bolene" <jbolene@HOME.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Carbonates
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

I use carbonates for red, yellow, and orange flames in AP mixes.
The red is what I call really red and it is a wonderful rich red.
The orange is more of a translucent pumpkin which took many tries to get
right (not too yellow or too red).
The yellow looks like a sodium spotlight climbing into the sky.

The carbonates are used in place of AP and act as coolants and colorants.
Only a few percent is needed.
Yes, they will detract from the motor performance as they are use instead of
AP, but the effect is really neat.

I don't make any green, since that requires barium or boron compounds which
are more toxic.
A good AP blue is not hard either.

Now if you are not using AP, the problem is much tougher.

John Bolene
Mostly Missiles Web page -> http://members.home.com/mostlymissiles



----- Original Message -----
From: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Wednesday, November 14, 2001 3:26 AM
Subject: Re: [AR] Carbonates


> > > Strontium carbonate generally offers a deeper red than strontium
> nitrate.
> > > It's harder to get rich greens from Barium compounds. Easy to get
> > > reasonable blues from virtually
> > > any copper compound. Ask the people at Firefox. They are truly the
> experts
> > > with these questions unless you're after performance (or a trade off),
> > then
> > > we can help you.
> >
> > I dunno, I think it is th eoposite in the pyro world. Blues and rich
> yellows
> > are the hardest, with reds and greens being the easy ones. How odd.
>
> Rich or even noticeable greens are very difficult to obtain in rocket
> propellants from my experience. *Rich* reds are the easiest. Blues, well,
> notice I didn't say *rich* blues. What I meant was noticeable blues. Many
> APCP compositions only require 1-2% colouring agent to obtain quite a
> noticeable blue to the plume. No I haven't tried obtaining rich blues from
> composite propellants but I can't see why it can't be possible. Generally
> to obtain *rich* colours requires running the propellants at lower
> operating temps which obviously affects performance. This was probably the
> most influencing reason for me to ditch the pyro colour fix..
>
> Troy.
>
>
> >
> > Pax
> >
> >
> > > Troy.
> > >
> > > > -Darren
> > >

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 13191 invoked from network); 14 Nov 2001 12:58:05 -0000
Received: from smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.105]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 14 Nov 2001 12:58:05 -0000
Received: (qmail 6885 invoked by uid 50005); 14 Nov 2001 12:57:58 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpy with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4169. . Clean. Processed in 0.543007 secs); 14 Nov 2001 12:57:58 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 14 Nov 2001 12:57:57 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id EAA21581; Wed, 14 Nov 2001 04:50:56 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 135627 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 14 Nov 2001 12:49:34          +0000
Received: from femail47.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail47.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.254.60.41]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id EAA21560          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 14 Nov 2001 04:49:34 -0800
Received: from cx814151a ([24.14.55.118]) by femail47.sdc1.sfba.home.com          (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20 201-229-121-120-20010223) with SMTP id          <20011114124933.TQRB8623.femail47.sdc1.sfba.home.com@cx814151a>; Wed,          14 Nov 2001 04:49:33 -0800
References:  <F149ilzDhBlt79EPUnW00016806@hotmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.3018.1300
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <022f01c16d0a$e68d3940$0a01a8c0@cx814151a>
Date:         Wed, 14 Nov 2001 06:50:12 -0600
Reply-To: "John Bolene" <jbolene@HOME.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Bolene" <jbolene@HOME.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Optimal Core diameter
Comments: To: James Grover <jgroverman@HOTMAIL.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

I normally go for more propellant in the casing with a modified Bates
geometry using a larger core for the nozzle grain to reduce erosive burning.
The smaller core sizes cause a longer burn with more total NS.

Now it all depends on how heavy the rocket is and how fast you want the
motor to burn.

Larger cores=faster and shorter burn.

John Bolene
Tripoli Oklahoma Prefect and webmaster
Tripoli Oklahoma Web page -> http://members.home.com/tripoli-oklahoma/



----- Original Message -----
From: "James Grover" <jgroverman@HOTMAIL.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Tuesday, November 13, 2001 11:33 PM
Subject: [AR] Optimal Core diameter


> All of the motors I have been making up to this point have been designed
> around pre-constructed hardware. I have been thinking of designing some of
> my own and ran into some questions. First, when designing a motor, how do
> you determine the proper or optimal core diameter of the grains (When
using
> a bates grain geometry with out different diameter cores)? I'm assuming
> there is a ratio involving the grain diameter and total length of
> propellant, but not sure exactly how to find this proper value. With the
> Kosdon hardware and etc. I've been using, I made the cores in accordance
> with the rules of erosive burning.
> James Grover
> TRA#6866 L3
> www.groveraerospace.com
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 26497 invoked from network); 14 Nov 2001 13:10:27 -0000
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 14 Nov 2001 13:10:27 -0000
Received: (qmail 17392 invoked by uid 50005); 14 Nov 2001 13:10:21 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4169. . Clean. Processed in 0.187129 secs); 14 Nov 2001 13:10:21 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 14 Nov 2001 13:10:20 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id EAA21625; Wed, 14 Nov 2001 04:55:31 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 135634 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 14 Nov 2001 12:54:10          +0000
Received: from mailrelay3.inwind.it (mailrelay3.inwind.it [212.141.54.103]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id EAA21604 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 14 Nov 2001 04:54:09 -0800
Received: from ziostefo (62.98.226.10) by mailrelay3.inwind.it (5.5.029) id          3BDECF65005FB965 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 14 Nov 2001 13:53:29          +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2014.211
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <00ac01c16d0b$09795920$3900fd80@ziostefo>
Date:         Wed, 14 Nov 2001 13:51:06 +0100
Reply-To: "Stefano Innocenti" <s.innocenti@AGORA.STM.IT>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Stefano Innocenti" <s.innocenti@AGORA.STM.IT>
Subject:      [AR] "I" class Hybrid motor
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Hi list,

At: http://members.xoom.it/laserist/nibrid.htm is online the schematic of a
class 'I' hybrid motor with a total Impulse of 400 Ns. The technical design
is at http://members.xoom.it/laserist/ibri5.gif

For any question about it, please email to tasknet@tin.it

ciao, Stefo

---------------------------Stefano Innocenti ----------------------------
http://www.razzimodellismo.it   http://utenti.tripod.it/missilistica

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 18099 invoked from network); 14 Nov 2001 13:16:37 -0000
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 14 Nov 2001 13:16:37 -0000
X-Priority: 3
Received: (qmail 25699 invoked by uid 50005); 14 Nov 2001 13:16:31 -0000
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4169. . Clean. Processed in 0.201653 secs); 14 Nov 2001 13:16:31 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 14 Nov 2001 13:16:30 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id FAA21744; Wed, 14 Nov 2001 05:14:26 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 135663 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 14 Nov 2001 13:13:04          +0000
Received: from nt2000s2.dgmicro.com (cn815472-c.newcas1.de.home.com          [24.40.74.93]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id FAA21729          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 14 Nov 2001 05:13:03 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
X-MS-Has-Attach: 
content-class: urn:content-classes:message
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: 
Thread-Topic:      Re: [AR] Carbonates
Thread-Index: AcFtDZT0GpRtL5jeRgaAe5BSPx3UxQAAEZlw
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by itc.uci.edu id FAA21730
Message-ID:  <C0F7BF4DCEC1D2479A01031347184DCD02FE94@nt2000s2.dgmicro.com>
Date:         Wed, 14 Nov 2001 08:12:33 -0500
Reply-To: "Darren Wright" <dwright@D2-TECH.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Darren Wright" <dwright@D2-TECH.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Carbonates
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

All my colors have been with 15%+ Nitrates.  I have tried carbonates
with AP, in the sugggested 5-10% and have gotten very poor results.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: John Bolene [mailto:jbolene@HOME.COM]
> Sent: Wednesday, November 14, 2001 7:25 AM
> To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
> Subject: Re: [AR] Carbonates
>
>
> I use carbonates for red, yellow, and orange flames in AP
> mixes. The red is what I call really red and it is a
> wonderful rich red. The orange is more of a translucent
> pumpkin which took many tries to get right (not too yellow or
> too red). The yellow looks like a sodium spotlight climbing
> into the sky.
>
> The carbonates are used in place of AP and act as coolants
> and colorants. Only a few percent is needed. Yes, they will
> detract from the motor performance as they are use instead of
> AP, but the effect is really neat.
>
> I don't make any green, since that requires barium or boron
> compounds which are more toxic. A good AP blue is not hard either.
>
> Now if you are not using AP, the problem is much tougher.
>
> John Bolene
> Mostly Missiles Web page -> http://members.home.com/mostlymissiles
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
> To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
> Sent: Wednesday, November 14, 2001 3:26 AM
> Subject: Re: [AR] Carbonates
>
>
> > > > Strontium carbonate generally offers a deeper red than strontium
> > nitrate.
> > > > It's harder to get rich greens from Barium compounds.
> Easy to get
> > > > reasonable blues from virtually any copper compound. Ask the
> > > > people at Firefox. They are truly the
> > experts
> > > > with these questions unless you're after performance
> (or a trade
> > > > off),
> > > then
> > > > we can help you.
> > >
> > > I dunno, I think it is th eoposite in the pyro world.
> Blues and rich
> > yellows
> > > are the hardest, with reds and greens being the easy
> ones. How odd.
> >
> > Rich or even noticeable greens are very difficult to obtain
> in rocket
> > propellants from my experience. *Rich* reds are the easiest. Blues,
> > well, notice I didn't say *rich* blues. What I meant was noticeable
> > blues. Many APCP compositions only require 1-2% colouring agent to
> > obtain quite a noticeable blue to the plume. No I haven't tried
> > obtaining rich blues from composite propellants but I can't
> see why it
> > can't be possible. Generally to obtain *rich* colours
> requires running
> > the propellants at lower operating temps which obviously affects
> > performance. This was probably the most influencing reason
> for me to
> > ditch the pyro colour fix..
> >
> > Troy.
> >
> >
> > >
> > > Pax
> > >
> > >
> > > > Troy.
> > > >
> > > > > -Darren
> > > >
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 19127 invoked from network); 14 Nov 2001 16:40:47 -0000
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 14 Nov 2001 16:40:47 -0000
Received: (qmail 16607 invoked by uid 50005); 14 Nov 2001 16:40:41 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4169. . Clean. Processed in 0.190654 secs); 14 Nov 2001 16:40:41 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 14 Nov 2001 16:40:41 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA22469; Wed, 14 Nov 2001 08:29:33 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 135766 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 14 Nov 2001 16:27:51          +0000
Received: from mailhost0.trib.com (mailhost0.trib.com [63.229.150.3]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA22449 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Wed, 14 Nov 2001 08:27:50 -0800
Received: from mail.trib.com (mail.trib.com [12.10.158.17]) by          mailhost0.trib.com (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id fAEGRlC41870; Wed,          14 Nov 2001 09:27:48 -0700 (MST) (envelope-from          jwckman@space-rockets.com)
Received: from [63.229.150.73] (HELO hppav) by mail.trib.com (CommuniGate Pro          SMTP 3.4.6) with SMTP id 57878555; Wed, 14 Nov 2001 09:27:47 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
Importance: Normal
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <NKEHJAOOKBPGIKOOPDEFAEFDCDAA.jwckman@space-rockets.com>
Date:         Wed, 14 Nov 2001 09:26:41 -0700
Reply-To: "John Wickman" <jwckman@SPACE-ROCKETS.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Wickman" <jwckman@SPACE-ROCKETS.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Kosdon on the BOD :-)
Comments: To: Korey Kline <k2@hybrids.com>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <001101c16c9c$56c789a0$6501a8c0@koreynew>

I think Frank meant that the case failed due to overpressurization, not that
the propellant detonated or exploded.

John Wickman


-----Original Message-----
From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU]On
Behalf Of Korey Kline
Sent: Tuesday, November 13, 2001 4:39 PM
To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
Subject: [AR] Kosdon on the BOD :-)


I guess I see a little conflicting information in Frank's statement:

>There is no such thing in nature as a 'low explosive'. A substance -is-
or -is not- an explosive, just like a woman -is- or -is not- pregnant. The
term 'low explosive' is simply a euphemism that satisfies the bureaucratic
need for control.<

>About 1956 I made and fired my first motor. It exploded and I was only
about 2 feet away. The pieces missed and I was never that close again.<

If he's going to run against the "Establishment" perhaps he needs his own
"Propaganda Minister"

I still hopes he wins just to shake things up!!!!!!!!

K2 TRA 0009

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 24422 invoked from network); 14 Nov 2001 16:57:01 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 14 Nov 2001 16:57:01 -0000
Received: (qmail 17102 invoked by uid 50005); 14 Nov 2001 16:56:55 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4169. . Clean. Processed in 0.336831 secs); 14 Nov 2001 16:56:55 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 14 Nov 2001 16:56:54 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA22519; Wed, 14 Nov 2001 08:32:31 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 135780 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 14 Nov 2001 16:31:09          +0000
Received: from localhost (rcalkins@localhost) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with          ESMTP id IAA22489; Wed, 14 Nov 2001 08:30:08 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.LNX.4.10.10111140815490.22373-100000@itc.uci.edu>
Date:         Wed, 14 Nov 2001 08:30:07 -0800
Reply-To: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
Subject:      Re: [AR] "I" class Hybrid motor
Comments: To: Stefano Innocenti <s.innocenti@AGORA.STM.IT>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <00ac01c16d0b$09795920$3900fd80@ziostefo>

Very nice work, Stafano.  I had a question about the termovalvola.  How
does it work?

For all of you (like me) whose Italian reading skills are rusty or
non-existent, a free online translator exists -
http://babelfish.altavista.com

Just type in the address, select Italian -> English and wait a minute
while the software converts it.  Pretty nifty.

Ray

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 5703 invoked from network); 14 Nov 2001 17:07:32 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 14 Nov 2001 17:07:32 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 22097 invoked by uid 50005); 14 Nov 2001 17:07:26 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4169. . Clean. Processed in 0.50726 secs); 14 Nov 2001 17:07:26 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 14 Nov 2001 17:07:25 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA22658; Wed, 14 Nov 2001 08:43:03 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 135810 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 14 Nov 2001 16:41:42          +0000
Received: from smtp004pub.verizon.net (smtp004pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.183])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA22638 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 14 Nov 2001 08:41:41 -0800
Received: from [63.24.225.226] (1Cust54.tnt1.rancho-cucamonga.ca.da.uu.net          [63.24.225.54]) by smtp004pub.verizon.net  with ESMTP for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; id fAEGf5o13979 Wed, 14 Nov 2001 10:41:06          -0600 (CST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: GTE/01rocket@mail.gte.net
References: <NKEHJAOOKBPGIKOOPDEFCEFDCDAA.jwckman@space-rockets.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <a05100313b8184ee7a8d0@[63.24.225.226]>
Date:         Wed, 14 Nov 2001 08:41:10 -0800
Reply-To: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Everybody send Brian Kosko and e-mail...
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <NKEHJAOOKBPGIKOOPDEFCEFDCDAA.jwckman@space-rockets.com>

>There is no conflict of interest when all the motor certification nonsense
>is eliminated.
>
>John Wickman


Or if whatever cert process remains does NOT require board rulings
and President rulings to function.

Jerry



--
Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
Opinion, the whole thing.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 13249 invoked from network); 14 Nov 2001 17:09:20 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 14 Nov 2001 17:09:20 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: (qmail 24839 invoked by uid 50005); 14 Nov 2001 17:09:14 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4169. . Clean. Processed in 0.4754 secs); 14 Nov 2001 17:09:14 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 14 Nov 2001 17:09:13 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA22589; Wed, 14 Nov 2001 08:39:49 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 135795 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 14 Nov 2001 16:38:26          +0000
Received: from cisco.com (cypher.cisco.com [171.69.11.18]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA22570; Wed, 14 Nov 2001 08:38:26 -0800
Received: (from billw@localhost) by cisco.com (8.8.8/2.6/Cisco List          Logging/8.8.8) id IAA01886; Wed, 14 Nov 2001 08:37:55 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID:  <CMM.0.90.4.1005755875.billw@cypher>
Date:         Wed, 14 Nov 2001 08:37:55 PST
Reply-To: "Bill Westfield" <billw@cisco.com>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "William Chops Westfield" <billw@cisco.com>
Subject:      Re: [AR] The Newbies and the politics -- Re: [AR] Bruce Kelly's              Response on ROL - ANFO motors
Comments: To: Ray Calkins <rcalkins@ITC.UCI.EDU>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  Your message of Tue, 13 Nov 2001 23:56:03 -0800

    As long as you comply with local, state, FAA, BATF, DOT and FCC
    regs (which you HAVE to do if you are NAR, TRA, RRS or etc
    anyway), you don't have _any_ risk of going to jail.

Of course, in many areas this is effectively impossible, or would at least
require several thousand dollars a year in assorted license fees.  As near
as I can tell, the RRS manages to operate by the slimmest of legal margins,
and even then only the basis of having "certified pyro operators" that have
effectively put their legal asses on the line so that other members can
have a shot at the "on site" manufacture of propellant.  Small wonder that
much of their efforts are aimed at things (liquids, hybrids) you can
machine offsite and only turn into an actual "rocket" in the middle of the
desert.

BillW


From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 1997 invoked from network); 14 Nov 2001 17:13:59 -0000
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 14 Nov 2001 17:13:59 -0000
Received: (qmail 9330 invoked by uid 50005); 14 Nov 2001 17:13:53 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4169. . Clean. Processed in 0.139677 secs); 14 Nov 2001 17:13:53 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 14 Nov 2001 17:13:52 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA22501; Wed, 14 Nov 2001 08:31:03 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 135773 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 14 Nov 2001 16:29:38          +0000
Received: from mailhost0.trib.com (mailhost0.trib.com [63.229.150.3]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA22453 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Wed, 14 Nov 2001 08:27:52 -0800
Received: from mail.trib.com (mail.trib.com [12.10.158.17]) by          mailhost0.trib.com (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id fAEGRnC41878; Wed,          14 Nov 2001 09:27:49 -0700 (MST) (envelope-from          jwckman@space-rockets.com)
Received: from [63.229.150.73] (HELO hppav) by mail.trib.com (CommuniGate Pro          SMTP 3.4.6) with SMTP id 57878556; Wed, 14 Nov 2001 09:27:49 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
Importance: Normal
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <NKEHJAOOKBPGIKOOPDEFCEFDCDAA.jwckman@space-rockets.com>
Date:         Wed, 14 Nov 2001 09:26:44 -0700
Reply-To: "John Wickman" <jwckman@SPACE-ROCKETS.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Wickman" <jwckman@SPACE-ROCKETS.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Everybody send Brian Kosko and e-mail...
Comments: To: Anthony Cesaroni <ACesaroni@cesaroni.net>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <006801c16c9d$a9d8af60$1b0101c0@Anthony>

There is no conflict of interest when all the motor certification nonsense
is eliminated.

John Wickman


-----Original Message-----
From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU]On
Behalf Of Anthony Cesaroni
Sent: Tuesday, November 13, 2001 4:48 PM
To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
Subject: Re: [AR] Everybody send Brian Kosko and e-mail...


Jerry,

Could be a conflict of interest to have manufacturers or associates on the
TMT BOD though?

Anthony.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@itc.uci.edu]On
> Behalf Of Jerry Irvine
> Sent: Tuesday, November 13, 2001 6:27 PM
> To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
> Subject: Re: Everybody send Brian Kosko and e-mail...
>
>
> >Jerry,
> >
> >Why don't you and Kline run too. It would be like old times again.
>
>
> Good point.  I volunteer if Kline will have me.
>
> Jerry
>
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 2493 invoked from network); 14 Nov 2001 17:29:52 -0000
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 14 Nov 2001 17:29:52 -0000
Received: (qmail 2107 invoked by uid 50005); 14 Nov 2001 17:29:45 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4169. . Clean. Processed in 0.304683 secs); 14 Nov 2001 17:29:45 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 14 Nov 2001 17:29:45 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA23150; Wed, 14 Nov 2001 09:10:02 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 135899 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 14 Nov 2001 17:08:39          +0000
Received: from mailrelay3.inwind.it (mailrelay3.inwind.it [212.141.54.103]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA23127 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 14 Nov 2001 09:08:38 -0800
Received: from ziostefo (62.98.192.47) by mailrelay3.inwind.it (5.5.029) id          3BDECF650061560B for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 14 Nov 2001 18:08:08          +0100
References: <Pine.LNX.4.10.10111140815490.22373-100000@itc.uci.edu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2014.211
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <022801c16d2e$9c1c2d20$3900fd80@ziostefo>
Date:         Wed, 14 Nov 2001 18:05:42 +0100
Reply-To: "Stefano Innocenti" <s.innocenti@AGORA.STM.IT>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Stefano Innocenti" <s.innocenti@AGORA.STM.IT>
Subject:      Re: [AR] "I" class Hybrid motor
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

It' a little plastic tube that resists to the pressure with a 'blob' of
pyrogen at the end. An igniter fires it and so on...

Stefano

--------------------------------Stefano
Innocenti ---------------------------------
http://www.razzimodellismo.it   http://utenti.tripod.it/missilistica


-----Messaggio Originale-----
Da: Ray Calkins <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
A: Stefano Innocenti <s.innocenti@AGORA.STM.IT>
Cc: <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
Data invio: mercoled 14 novembre 2001 17.30
Oggetto: Re: [AR] "I" class Hybrid motor


> Very nice work, Stafano.  I had a question about the termovalvola.  How
> does it work?
>
> For all of you (like me) whose Italian reading skills are rusty or
> non-existent, a free online translator exists -
> http://babelfish.altavista.com
>
> Just type in the address, select Italian -> English and wait a minute
> while the software converts it.  Pretty nifty.
>
> Ray
>
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 27880 invoked from network); 14 Nov 2001 18:09:32 -0000
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 14 Nov 2001 18:09:32 -0000
Received: (qmail 1702 invoked by uid 50005); 14 Nov 2001 18:09:26 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4169. . Clean. Processed in 0.136028 secs); 14 Nov 2001 18:09:26 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 14 Nov 2001 18:09:26 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA23371; Wed, 14 Nov 2001 09:39:46 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 135943 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 14 Nov 2001 17:38:22          +0000
Received: from albqpop1.albq.uswest.net (albqpop1.albq.uswest.net          [207.108.240.1]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id JAA23355          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 14 Nov 2001 09:38:21 -0800
Received: (qmail 48491 invoked by alias); 14 Nov 2001 17:37:49 -0000
Delivered-To: fixup-AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU@fixme
Received: (qmail 48464 invoked by uid 0); 14 Nov 2001 17:37:49 -0000
Received: from cc898542-a.prdise1.nm.home.com (HELO cc898542a) (65.7.151.152)          by albqpop1.albq.uswest.net with SMTP; 14 Nov 2001 17:37:49 -0000
References:  <C0F7BF4DCEC1D2479A01031347184DCD02FE94@nt2000s2.dgmicro.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <006601c16d33$1771faf0$0100a8c0@cc898542a>
Date:         Wed, 14 Nov 2001 10:37:53 -0700
Reply-To: "Paxton" <darkspunge@USWEST.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Paxton" <darkspunge@USWEST.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Carbonates
Comments: To: Darren Wright <dwright@D2-TECH.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Then you either dont have real AP, or dont have real strontium carb. As
mentioned before, 5% really should be the max for rocket propellant. 10-15%
for a purly colored fire comp. It must be the strontium. How much Aluminum
are you running? Try cutting it back to like 1-2% or none at all. It will
wash out the color. If possible use Mg instead in the 3% range. All of the
aboved worked well for me, but I was making fountines and stuff instead.
Regardless, acording to firefox's book, it is pretty much the same except
for adding metal sparks and AP particle sizes.

70-75 AP you can experiemnt with the sizes. usually 40-60 parts 200 micron
and the rest 90.
5   strontium carb
3-5  400 mesh Mg or finer.
The rest is the liquids.

That has worked great for me.

Pax

----- Original Message -----
From: "Darren Wright" <dwright@D2-TECH.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Wednesday, November 14, 2001 6:12 AM
Subject: Re: [AR] Carbonates


> All my colors have been with 15%+ Nitrates.  I have tried carbonates
> with AP, in the sugggested 5-10% and have gotten very poor results.
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: John Bolene [mailto:jbolene@HOME.COM]
> > Sent: Wednesday, November 14, 2001 7:25 AM
> > To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
> > Subject: Re: [AR] Carbonates
> >
> >
> > I use carbonates for red, yellow, and orange flames in AP
> > mixes. The red is what I call really red and it is a
> > wonderful rich red. The orange is more of a translucent
> > pumpkin which took many tries to get right (not too yellow or
> > too red). The yellow looks like a sodium spotlight climbing
> > into the sky.
> >
> > The carbonates are used in place of AP and act as coolants
> > and colorants. Only a few percent is needed. Yes, they will
> > detract from the motor performance as they are use instead of
> > AP, but the effect is really neat.
> >
> > I don't make any green, since that requires barium or boron
> > compounds which are more toxic. A good AP blue is not hard either.
> >
> > Now if you are not using AP, the problem is much tougher.
> >
> > John Bolene
> > Mostly Missiles Web page -> http://members.home.com/mostlymissiles
> >
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
> > To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
> > Sent: Wednesday, November 14, 2001 3:26 AM
> > Subject: Re: [AR] Carbonates
> >
> >
> > > > > Strontium carbonate generally offers a deeper red than strontium
> > > nitrate.
> > > > > It's harder to get rich greens from Barium compounds.
> > Easy to get
> > > > > reasonable blues from virtually any copper compound. Ask the
> > > > > people at Firefox. They are truly the
> > > experts
> > > > > with these questions unless you're after performance
> > (or a trade
> > > > > off),
> > > > then
> > > > > we can help you.
> > > >
> > > > I dunno, I think it is th eoposite in the pyro world.
> > Blues and rich
> > > yellows
> > > > are the hardest, with reds and greens being the easy
> > ones. How odd.
> > >
> > > Rich or even noticeable greens are very difficult to obtain
> > in rocket
> > > propellants from my experience. *Rich* reds are the easiest. Blues,
> > > well, notice I didn't say *rich* blues. What I meant was noticeable
> > > blues. Many APCP compositions only require 1-2% colouring agent to
> > > obtain quite a noticeable blue to the plume. No I haven't tried
> > > obtaining rich blues from composite propellants but I can't
> > see why it
> > > can't be possible. Generally to obtain *rich* colours
> > requires running
> > > the propellants at lower operating temps which obviously affects
> > > performance. This was probably the most influencing reason
> > for me to
> > > ditch the pyro colour fix..
> > >
> > > Troy.
> > >
> > >
> > > >
> > > > Pax
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > > Troy.
> > > > >
> > > > > > -Darren
> > > > >
> >
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 1515 invoked from network); 14 Nov 2001 18:32:37 -0000
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 14 Nov 2001 18:32:37 -0000
Received: (qmail 15949 invoked by uid 50005); 14 Nov 2001 18:32:31 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4169. . Clean. Processed in 0.269118 secs); 14 Nov 2001 18:32:31 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 14 Nov 2001 18:32:31 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA23456; Wed, 14 Nov 2001 09:45:46 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 135962 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 14 Nov 2001 17:44:23          +0000
Received: from spock.alohanet.com (spock.alohanet.com [209.31.4.252]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA23435 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Wed, 14 Nov 2001 09:44:22 -0800
Received: from NATE2 (spock.alohanet.com [209.31.4.252]) by spock.alohanet.com          (Post.Office MTA v3.5.2 release 221 ID# 0-55447U100L2S100V35) with          SMTP id com for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Wed, 14 Nov 2001 09:47:42 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0DE3_01C56B69.587703A0"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <016d01c16d34$b9d007f0$68e9a8c0@NATE2>
Date:         Wed, 14 Nov 2001 09:49:36 -0800
Reply-To: "Nathan Hays" <nhays@ALOHANET.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Nathan Hays" <nhays@ALOHANET.COM>
Subject:      [AR] eX Launches and the Boss
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0DE3_01C56B69.587703A0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

I've argued before that TRA eX launches allow ANYTHING to be flown, not =
just a rocket containing a non certified motor.  I want to try some =
ideas I have for high speed recovery such as when the trajectory arcs =
over.  To test this reliably, I need to fire the ejection charge on the =
way up at a known velocity.  Clearly this is not cool at a normal =
launch.  eX rules should allow and encourage this kind of activity.

I was told I couldn't launch such a thing unless I stuck an experimental =
motor in as well.  I was also told that if I mix Blue Thunder and White =
Lightning grains in the same reload, this would qualify.  Or, if I just =
launched it and didn't say anything that no one would be taking notes.  =
Excuse me?  If the insurance would be null this is acceptable?  Clearly, =
the eX rules were hastily thrown together without real buy-in from the =
prefects.  I even understand that the provision that the rocket SHALL =
contain a non certified motor was thrown in at the last minute.

I really don't mind if TRA is undergoing a discovery process about just =
what a TRA eX launch is.  Great.  Discover it, write it, promote it, =
explain it, and enforce it, just don't take a half-ass stab at it and =
waffle around it.  BK is clearly trying to please everyone at once, =
particularly himself.  That kind of politicking rarely ever works.  =
Sooner or later, the BATF, the NFPA, the insurance, the motor vendors, =
or the members will not put up with such inconsistency.  Spend 100K+ on =
a BATF lawsuit and then, for ten cents worth of ill chosen words give =
them cause to say, "Look - TRA doesn't even enforce their own rules!  =
Their COB lies about it.  Then they blame the BATF about being Arbitrary =
and Capricious?"

I realize establishing policy is not easy and that few are willing to =
stick the process out until it works.  I greatly appreciate that BK is =
willing to put in that effort.  However, I'm ticked off that he lacks =
the even headedness the job requires.  Does Frank, Korey, or Jerry have =
it?  I don't know because I don't know them personally and haven't =
experienced their track record.

I've spent probably 10K on this hobby in the last few years and plan to =
spend plenty more.  I'd like to know my representatives will be =
effective in expanding the TRA venue to include more than just HPR.

Grrrr,

- Nate



------=_NextPart_000_0DE3_01C56B69.587703A0
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META content=3D"text/html; charset=3Diso-8859-1" =
http-equiv=3DContent-Type>
<META content=3D"MSHTML 5.00.3103.1000" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>I've argued before that TRA eX launches =
allow=20
ANYTHING to be flown, not just a rocket containing a non certified =
motor.&nbsp;=20
I want to try some ideas I have for high speed recovery such as when the =

trajectory arcs over.&nbsp; To&nbsp;test this reliably, I need to fire =
the=20
ejection charge on the way up at a known velocity.&nbsp; Clearly this is =
not=20
cool at a normal launch.&nbsp; <FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>eX rules =
should allow and=20
encourage this kind of activity.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>I was told I couldn't launch such a thing unless I stuck an =
experimental=20
motor in as well.&nbsp; I was also told that if I mix Blue Thunder and =
White=20
Lightning grains in the same reload, this would qualify.&nbsp; Or, if I =
just=20
launched it and didn't say anything that no one would be taking =
notes.&nbsp;=20
Excuse me?&nbsp; If the insurance would be null this is =
acceptable?&nbsp;=20
Clearly, the eX rules were hastily thrown together without real buy-in =
from the=20
prefects.&nbsp; I even understand that the provision that the rocket =
SHALL=20
contain a non certified motor was thrown in at the last minute.</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>I really don't mind if TRA is undergoing a discovery process about =
just=20
what a TRA eX launch is.&nbsp; Great.&nbsp; Discover it, write it, =
promote it,=20
explain it, and enforce it, just don't take a half-ass stab at it and =
waffle=20
around it.&nbsp; BK is clearly trying to please everyone at once, =
particularly=20
himself.&nbsp; That kind of politicking rarely ever works.&nbsp; Sooner =
or=20
later, the BATF, the NFPA, the insurance, the motor vendors, or the =
members will=20
not put up with such inconsistency.&nbsp; Spend 100K+ on a BATF lawsuit =
and=20
then, for ten cents worth of ill chosen words give them cause to say, =
"Look -=20
TRA doesn't even enforce their own rules!&nbsp; Their COB lies about =
it.&nbsp;=20
Then they blame the BATF about being Arbitrary and =
Capricious?"</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>I realize establishing policy is not =
easy and that=20
few are willing to stick the process out until it works.&nbsp; I greatly =

appreciate that BK is willing to put in that effort.&nbsp; However, I'm =
ticked=20
off that he lacks the even headedness the job requires.&nbsp; Does =
Frank, Korey,=20
or Jerry have it?&nbsp; I don't know because I don't know them =
personally and=20
haven't experienced their track record.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>I've spent probably 10K on this hobby =
in the last=20
few years and plan to spend plenty more.&nbsp; I'd like to know my=20
representatives will be effective in expanding the TRA venue to include =
more=20
than just HPR.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Grrrr,</FONT></DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>- Nate</FONT></DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0DE3_01C56B69.587703A0--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 9169 invoked from network); 14 Nov 2001 18:57:16 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 14 Nov 2001 18:57:16 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: (qmail 11687 invoked by uid 50005); 14 Nov 2001 18:57:10 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4169. . Clean. Processed in 0.358976 secs); 14 Nov 2001 18:57:10 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 14 Nov 2001 18:57:09 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA23733; Wed, 14 Nov 2001 10:22:59 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 136013 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 14 Nov 2001 18:21:35          +0000
Received: from cisco.com (cypher.cisco.com [171.69.11.18]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA23716 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed,          14 Nov 2001 10:21:34 -0800
Received: (from billw@localhost) by cisco.com (8.8.8/2.6/Cisco List          Logging/8.8.8) id KAA01618; Wed, 14 Nov 2001 10:21:03 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID:  <CMM.0.90.4.1005762063.billw@cypher>
Date:         Wed, 14 Nov 2001 10:21:03 PST
Reply-To: "Bill Westfield" <billw@cisco.com>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "William Chops Westfield" <billw@cisco.com>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Carbonates
Comments: To: Paxton <darkspunge@USWEST.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  Your message of Wed, 14 Nov 2001 10:37:53 -0700

I'd expect propellants containing Al to be much more difficult to
effectively "colorize" that propellants containing Mg or no metals.

BillW


From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 2175 invoked from network); 14 Nov 2001 19:10:19 -0000
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 14 Nov 2001 19:10:19 -0000
Received: (qmail 11857 invoked by uid 50005); 14 Nov 2001 19:10:13 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4169. . Clean. Processed in 0.201597 secs); 14 Nov 2001 19:10:13 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 14 Nov 2001 19:10:13 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA23895; Wed, 14 Nov 2001 10:52:54 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 136041 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 14 Nov 2001 18:52:41          +0000
Received: from smtp01-001.eacceleration.com (grx01-002.eacceleration.com          [208.202.169.25]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id KAA23880          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 14 Nov 2001 10:52:39 -0800
Received: (qmail 1513 invoked from network); 14 Nov 2001 18:52:36 -0000
Received: from mimirs.server.accelerationsw.com (HELO mimir) (192.168.3.40) by          gw2.server.accelerationsw.com with SMTP; 14 Nov 2001 18:52:36 -0000
References:  <00ac01c16d0b$09795920$3900fd80@ziostefo>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4807.1700
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <004d01c16d3d$873f74c0$2803a8c0@server.accelerationsw.com>
Date:         Wed, 14 Nov 2001 10:52:37 -0800
Reply-To: "Andrew MacMillen" <andrewm@hawkfeather.com>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Andrew MacMillen" <andrewm@hawkfeather.com>
Subject:      Re: [AR] "I" class Hybrid motor
Comments: To: Stefano Innocenti <s.innocenti@AGORA.STM.IT>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Very nice. Do you have any details on the loading valve?

Thank you.
Andrew MacMillen

----- Original Message -----
From: "Stefano Innocenti" <s.innocenti@AGORA.STM.IT>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Wednesday, November 14, 2001 4:51 AM
Subject: [AR] "I" class Hybrid motor


> Hi list,
>
> At: http://members.xoom.it/laserist/nibrid.htm is online the
schematic of a
> class 'I' hybrid motor with a total Impulse of 400 Ns. The technical
design
> is at http://members.xoom.it/laserist/ibri5.gif
>
> For any question about it, please email to tasknet@tin.it
>
> ciao, Stefo
>
> ---------------------------Stefano
Innocenti ----------------------------
> http://www.razzimodellismo.it   http://utenti.tripod.it/missilistica
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 12963 invoked from network); 14 Nov 2001 19:46:11 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 14 Nov 2001 19:46:11 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 24643 invoked by uid 50005); 14 Nov 2001 19:46:05 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4169. . Clean. Processed in 0.150659 secs); 14 Nov 2001 19:46:05 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 14 Nov 2001 19:46:05 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA23966; Wed, 14 Nov 2001 11:00:55 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 136054 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 14 Nov 2001 19:00:49          +0000
Received: from mail-srv1.micron.com (masquerade.micron.com [137.201.242.130])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA23952 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 14 Nov 2001 11:00:48 -0800
Received: from mail-srv1.micron.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by          mail-srv1.micron.com (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id fAEJ0HI04962 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 14 Nov 2001 12:00:17 -0700 (MST)
Received: from ntexchange01.micron.com (ntexchange01 [137.201.104.84]) by          mail-srv1.micron.com (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id fAEJ0GN04939 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 14 Nov 2001 12:00:16 -0700 (MST)
Received: by ntexchange01.micron.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19)          id <W6MY3J1C>; Wed, 14 Nov 2001 12:00:15 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19)
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Message-ID:  <2DCA36C44BF3D211917F0008C7C9C9DD067ECFBF@ntexchange06.micron.com>
Date:         Wed, 14 Nov 2001 12:00:13 -0700
Reply-To: "gacrowell" <gacrowell@MICRON.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "gacrowell" <gacrowell@MICRON.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] quaternions, more
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

On this subject, I thought I might mention two other resources that I
thought worthy of note.


The following book is particularly focused on the subject:

Computational Rigid Vehicle Dynamics
by Amnon Katz

Hardcover Bk&disk edition (January 1997)
Krieger Publishing Company; ISBN: 1575240165

>From Amazon:  A series of lecture notes presented as an introduction to the
computer simulation of rigid aerospace vehicles addressing the area between
purely mathematical and engineering texts. The volume covers the kinematics
of rigid objects including rotation matrices, quaternions, and Euler angles,
then adds the dynamics with topics in the tensor of inertia, the angular
momentum, and rotational dynamic equations in earth axes, and concludes by
putting all the elements together in an airplane simulation, tested by
"flying" the full six degree of freedom simulation in the computer. Includes
a disk with computer code, graphs, tables, equations, and selected problems
and answers.


I haven't tried to plow through it, but it appears to be a very complete
treatment.  In a world of $100+ textbooks, its nice that this is only $29.95
at Amazon. (BTW, I notice a used one for $16.95 at www.alibris.com)


The other source is probably a bit harder to find, but is also probably the
most readable (to a non-mathematician) and practical explanation of the
subject that I have ever run across.  It appeared as a series of articles
and a regular column in the magazine 'Embedded Systems Programming', running
from the December 1993 through July 1994, written by Jack W. Crenshaw.  From
the introduction of one of the articles: "In this ... series, we're going to
look at rotational motion -- not just static motion, but rotational dynamics
-- in such detail, you'll feel quite comfortable with the concepts and be
able to apply them to new situations. ... I'll also show you some tricks of
the real gurus in the field.  To add some concreteness to an otherwise
bewildering subject, we'll also look at some practical applications
involving the motion of such things as airplanes and robot arms."

The whole series of articles runs probably 80 pages or so, and is simply
excellent.  I was hoping that Crenshaw would eventually write a book, and
looking now at Amazon, I notice that he has!

Math Toolkit for Real-Time Programming
by Jack W. Crenshaw

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/stores/detail/-/books/1929629095/reader
/8/102-3386784-8073752#reader-link


Unfortunately this doesn't appear to go into rotational motion (there are 25
sample pages with the contents and index on Amazon), but it does appear to
cover numerical integration (which he also wrote about in his 'Embedded
Systems' articles) and has a section on dynamic simulation.  I was a fan of
his articles and I'm quite excited about finding his book - I'll be getting
it as soon as I can.  Read some of the reviews on Amazon and you'll see what
I mean.

Also, I notice that on the web site for the magazine, www.embedded.com , all
of the back issues from 1988 to the present are available on a cd-rom, for
$89.95.  BTW, its a very good magazine too (an industry freebe type that's
not all just advertising).

Gary

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 54 invoked from network); 14 Nov 2001 19:50:23 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 14 Nov 2001 19:50:23 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 21469 invoked by uid 50005); 14 Nov 2001 19:50:17 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4169. . Clean. Processed in 0.201916 secs); 14 Nov 2001 19:50:17 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 14 Nov 2001 19:50:16 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA24064; Wed, 14 Nov 2001 11:09:19 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 136078 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 14 Nov 2001 19:09:12          +0000
Received: from smtp008pub.verizon.net (smtp008pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.187])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA24050 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 14 Nov 2001 11:09:11 -0800
Received: from [63.24.225.160] (1Cust160.tnt1.rancho-cucamonga.ca.da.uu.net          [63.24.225.160]) by smtp008pub.verizon.net  with ESMTP for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; id fAEJ8d910424 Wed, 14 Nov 2001 13:08:40          -0600 (CST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: GTE/01rocket@mail.gte.net
References: <016d01c16d34$b9d007f0$68e9a8c0@NATE2>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <a05100300b8186febaa5c@[63.24.225.226]>
Date:         Wed, 14 Nov 2001 11:08:36 -0800
Reply-To: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] eX Launches and the Boss
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <016d01c16d34$b9d007f0$68e9a8c0@NATE2>

>that BK is willing to put in that effort.  However, I'm ticked off
>that he lacks the even headedness the job requires.  Does Frank,
>Korey, or Jerry have it?  I don't know because I don't know them
>personally and haven't experienced their track record.


Frank is persistent but a hot head.  I would not bet on his ability
to get along with others long term.  Showing up at a NFPA meeting in
a room full of suits with a "bathing suit" while entertaining for the
members (for a decade later), was wholely inappropriate.  He hates
authority with a passion.  Possibly a good plank for a policy, but
not the best overall condition for a successful politician or
administrator since you actually have to work with the system to
change it.

Korey is an expert on the issues, is in favor of freeform rocketry
and understands the benefit of a good exemption over a permit or
wavier or court order.  It is hard for him to stick with
administrative things long term because he wants to build stuff.
However as a member of a voting block I would choose him any day.

Jerry does get along well with others, has an understanding of the
issues, a clear long term plan for rocketry that is sadly often 10
years ahead of its time.  He needs more external support for his
ideas and for them to be refined to meet practical today
implementation form.

All three are pro HPR, pro EX and Irvine alone is in lockstep with
Estes/Roberts and Quest/Boles on model rocketry issues.

Jerry

>
>I've spent probably 10K on this hobby in the last few years and plan
>to spend plenty more.  I'd like to know my representatives will be
>effective in expanding the TRA venue to include more than just HPR.
>
>Grrrr,
>
>- Nate
>
>


--
Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
Opinion, the whole thing.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 24354 invoked from network); 14 Nov 2001 20:26:05 -0000
Received: from smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.105]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 14 Nov 2001 20:26:05 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 21987 invoked by uid 50005); 14 Nov 2001 20:25:58 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpy with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4169. . Clean. Processed in 0.791625 secs); 14 Nov 2001 20:25:58 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 14 Nov 2001 20:25:57 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA23936; Wed, 14 Nov 2001 10:59:10 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 136038 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 14 Nov 2001 18:59:03          +0000
Received: from scaup.prod.itd.earthlink.net (scaup.mail.pas.earthlink.net          [207.217.120.49]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA23855          for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Wed, 14 Nov 2001 10:49:03 -0800
Received: from dialup-209.245.134.186.dial1.sanjose1.level3.net          ([209.245.134.186] helo=earthlink.net ident=dave) by          scaup.prod.itd.earthlink.net with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id          16455q-0001MG-00; Wed, 14 Nov 2001 10:49:02 -0800
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.75 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.16-22 i686)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <CMM.0.90.4.1005755875.billw@cypher>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3BF2BD8E.74943FC8@earthlink.net>
Date:         Wed, 14 Nov 2001 10:53:02 -0800
Reply-To: "David Weinshenker" <daze39@EARTHLINK.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "David Weinshenker" <daze39@EARTHLINK.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] The Newbies and the politics -- Re: [AR] Bruce              Kelly'sResponse on ROL - ANFO motors
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

William Chops Westfield wrote:
>  As near
> as I can tell, the RRS manages to operate by the slimmest of legal margins,
> and even then only the basis of having "certified pyro operators" that have
> effectively put their legal asses on the line so that other members can
> have a shot at the "on site" manufacture of propellant.

Hmmm... that's perhaps a bit melodramatic... the applicable regulations are
spelled out in the California Pyrotechnics Codes under the "Experimental
Rockets Unlimitied" section. But then California is sligntly different
in that one also needs a Licensed Pyro Operator to hold a high power
launch, and the consent of the local fire marshal is required for _any_
rocket launching, even model rockets.

-dave w

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 19284 invoked from network); 14 Nov 2001 21:00:41 -0000
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 14 Nov 2001 21:00:41 -0000
Received: (qmail 26453 invoked by uid 50005); 14 Nov 2001 21:00:34 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4169. . Clean. Processed in 0.377142 secs); 14 Nov 2001 21:00:34 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 14 Nov 2001 21:00:33 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA24790; Wed, 14 Nov 2001 12:41:54 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 136180 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 14 Nov 2001 20:40:31          +0000
Received: from mailhost0.trib.com (mailhost0.trib.com [63.229.150.3]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA24767 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Wed, 14 Nov 2001 12:40:31 -0800
Received: from mail.trib.com (mail.trib.com [12.10.158.17]) by          mailhost0.trib.com (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id fAEKeTC63734; Wed,          14 Nov 2001 13:40:29 -0700 (MST) (envelope-from          jwckman@space-rockets.com)
Received: from [63.229.150.91] (HELO default) by mail.trib.com (CommuniGate Pro          SMTP 3.4.6) with SMTP id 57916659; Wed, 14 Nov 2001 13:40:26 -0700
References: <00a901c16c95$1cf575e0$87ae1cac@redmond.corp.microsoft.com>                    <006d01c16c93$b3c37cd0$0100a8c0@cc898542a>                      <00a901c16c95$1cf575e0$87ae1cac@redmond.corp.microsoft.com>             <5.1.0.14.0.20011113150837.00a64b10@mail.earthlink.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2314.1300
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <003c01c16d4c$3eef5960$5b96e53f@default>
Date:         Wed, 14 Nov 2001 13:32:02 -0700
Reply-To: "John Wickman" <jwckman@SPACE-ROCKETS.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Wickman" <jwckman@SPACE-ROCKETS.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Everybody send Brian Kosko and e-mail...
Comments: To: forkbomb@earthlink.net
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Dear Forkbomb,

Those are nice thoughts, but certification does NOT mean the motor is safe,
just that it probably will be.  I have seen commercial, TRA/NAR certified
motors (single use and reloads) explode on the pad from more than one
manufacturer.  I'm not talking bulkhead failure or nozzle failure, here.
I'm talking about a massive CATO - KABOOM!  In the case of the reloads, this
was not due to inexperienced people assembling the motor.  You have to
assume (and with good reason) that the motor will explode, which is why
there is a minimum distance depending on impulse from the pad to the launch
controller.

This point is really the whole weakness behind TRA rules about separating
experimental motors from commercial, certified motors at launches, i.e, the
FALSE assumption that only experimental motors explode, not commercial.
Once you realize that both commercial and experimental motors explode on the
pad, does it really matter whether a commercial J motor or an experimental J
motor is exploding.   When you are a safe distance away from the pad based
on the impulse vs. distance tables, nobody gets hurt.  If the experimental
motor has a case material that fragments more than aluminum, then you add
more distance.   No big deal and everyone is still safe.

The issue of which type of motor is more likely to explode, experimental or
commercial is bogus.   Again, the distance tables take care of that and if
you want to be really conservative, double the distance for experimental
motors.   Today, with the variety of books and software on the market about
making motors, the build'em and bust'em type of experimental testing of the
old days is fading away.   Once the propellant is characterized with respect
to burn rate parameters, you should be able to get within 25 psi on the
chamber pressure prediction.   We do that routinely and so do others.   The
state of the art for experimental rocketry is light years beyond the old
days and still accelerating.

On the issue of certification, what has gotten lost over the years is that
certification of motors started because TRA members thought the performance
specs. on commercial motors were being inflated by the manufacturers.   The
thrust and impulse levels were not as high as the manufacturer claimed.
Consequently, TRA started testing motors independently to see what the
performance of the motor was and published that information for members.
Somehow, that got twisted into you could not fly a motor unless it received
a seal of approval (certification) from TRA.   Now, they are trying to
implement the same policy on TRA experimental motors, you cannot fly a
propellant without the TRA Board seal of approval.  Again, does it really
matter whether an AP motor or an AN motor or a KN motor is exploding on the
pad?   It doesn't matter when you follow the safety rules and keep the pad
far enough way so that no one is hurt, IF it explodes.

Vote for Frank!!!

John Wickman


>          I concur -- this is a sensible regulation and probably meets the
> legal requirements that the current TRA leadership has managed to have
> enacted. Bluntly put, if I buy a motor, I want to know that it is safe. If
> I build one, I know it's my job to make it safe.
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 27046 invoked from network); 14 Nov 2001 21:45:12 -0000
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 14 Nov 2001 21:45:12 -0000
Received: (qmail 6907 invoked by uid 50005); 14 Nov 2001 21:45:06 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4169. . Clean. Processed in 0.226644 secs); 14 Nov 2001 21:45:06 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 14 Nov 2001 21:45:05 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA25288; Wed, 14 Nov 2001 13:30:34 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 136274 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 14 Nov 2001 21:29:04          +0000
Received: from nt2000s2.dgmicro.com (cn815472-c.newcas1.de.home.com          [24.40.74.93]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA25267          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 14 Nov 2001 13:29:03 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
X-MS-Has-Attach: 
content-class: urn:content-classes:message
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: 
Thread-Topic:      Re: [AR] Carbonates
Thread-Index: AcFtM+mKdHqJNZPlSgmAN5Vga5Qg/gAHzoNg
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by itc.uci.edu id NAA25268
Message-ID:  <C0F7BF4DCEC1D2479A01031347184DCD02FE96@nt2000s2.dgmicro.com>
Date:         Wed, 14 Nov 2001 16:28:29 -0500
Reply-To: "Darren Wright" <dwright@D2-TECH.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Darren Wright" <dwright@D2-TECH.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Carbonates
Comments: To: Paxton <darkspunge@USWEST.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Generally my colored formulas are about 82% solids, 2% Mg, and the color
agent.

I'll try the strontium carbonate again.....maybe at a higher %, maybe 7%
or so.

-Darren


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Paxton [mailto:darkspunge@USWEST.NET]
> Sent: Wednesday, November 14, 2001 12:38 PM
> To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
> Subject: Re: [AR] Carbonates
>
>
> Then you either dont have real AP, or dont have real
> strontium carb. As mentioned before, 5% really should be the
> max for rocket propellant. 10-15% for a purly colored fire
> comp. It must be the strontium. How much Aluminum are you
> running? Try cutting it back to like 1-2% or none at all. It
> will wash out the color. If possible use Mg instead in the 3%
> range. All of the aboved worked well for me, but I was making
> fountines and stuff instead. Regardless, acording to
> firefox's book, it is pretty much the same except for adding
> metal sparks and AP particle sizes.
>
> 70-75 AP you can experiemnt with the sizes. usually 40-60
> parts 200 micron and the rest 90.
> 5   strontium carb
> 3-5  400 mesh Mg or finer.
> The rest is the liquids.
>
> That has worked great for me.
>
> Pax
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Darren Wright" <dwright@D2-TECH.COM>
> To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
> Sent: Wednesday, November 14, 2001 6:12 AM
> Subject: Re: [AR] Carbonates
>
>
> > All my colors have been with 15%+ Nitrates.  I have tried
> carbonates
> > with AP, in the sugggested 5-10% and have gotten very poor results.
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: John Bolene [mailto:jbolene@HOME.COM]
> > > Sent: Wednesday, November 14, 2001 7:25 AM
> > > To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
> > > Subject: Re: [AR] Carbonates
> > >
> > >
> > > I use carbonates for red, yellow, and orange flames in AP
> mixes. The
> > > red is what I call really red and it is a wonderful rich red. The
> > > orange is more of a translucent pumpkin which took many
> tries to get
> > > right (not too yellow or too red). The yellow looks like a sodium
> > > spotlight climbing into the sky.
> > >
> > > The carbonates are used in place of AP and act as coolants and
> > > colorants. Only a few percent is needed. Yes, they will
> detract from
> > > the motor performance as they are use instead of AP, but
> the effect
> > > is really neat.
> > >
> > > I don't make any green, since that requires barium or boron
> > > compounds which are more toxic. A good AP blue is not hard either.
> > >
> > > Now if you are not using AP, the problem is much tougher.
> > >
> > > John Bolene
> > > Mostly Missiles Web page -> http://members.home.com/mostlymissiles
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
> > > To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
> > > Sent: Wednesday, November 14, 2001 3:26 AM
> > > Subject: Re: [AR] Carbonates
> > >
> > >
> > > > > > Strontium carbonate generally offers a deeper red than
> > > > > > strontium
> > > > nitrate.
> > > > > > It's harder to get rich greens from Barium compounds.
> > > Easy to get
> > > > > > reasonable blues from virtually any copper
> compound. Ask the
> > > > > > people at Firefox. They are truly the
> > > > experts
> > > > > > with these questions unless you're after performance
> > > (or a trade
> > > > > > off),
> > > > > then
> > > > > > we can help you.
> > > > >
> > > > > I dunno, I think it is th eoposite in the pyro world.
> > > Blues and rich
> > > > yellows
> > > > > are the hardest, with reds and greens being the easy
> > > ones. How odd.
> > > >
> > > > Rich or even noticeable greens are very difficult to obtain
> > > in rocket
> > > > propellants from my experience. *Rich* reds are the easiest.
> > > > Blues, well, notice I didn't say *rich* blues. What I meant was
> > > > noticeable blues. Many APCP compositions only require 1-2%
> > > > colouring agent to obtain quite a noticeable blue to
> the plume. No
> > > > I haven't tried obtaining rich blues from composite propellants
> > > > but I can't
> > > see why it
> > > > can't be possible. Generally to obtain *rich* colours
> > > requires running
> > > > the propellants at lower operating temps which
> obviously affects
> > > > performance. This was probably the most influencing reason
> > > for me to
> > > > ditch the pyro colour fix..
> > > >
> > > > Troy.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Pax
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > > Troy.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > -Darren
> > > > > >
> > >
> >
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 16487 invoked from network); 14 Nov 2001 22:05:35 -0000
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 14 Nov 2001 22:05:35 -0000
Received: (qmail 19872 invoked by uid 50005); 14 Nov 2001 22:05:28 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4169. . Clean. Processed in 0.641288 secs); 14 Nov 2001 22:05:28 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 14 Nov 2001 22:05:26 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA24650; Wed, 14 Nov 2001 12:31:57 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 136151 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 14 Nov 2001 20:29:32          +0000
Received: from mail.texnet.net (64-217-63-11.ded.swbell.net [64.217.63.11]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA24626 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 14 Nov 2001 12:29:32 -0800
Received: from 18barnett (64-217-56-93.ded.swbell.net [64.217.56.93]) by          mail.texnet.net (2.5 Build 2639 (Berkeley 8.8.6)/8.8.4) with SMTP id          OAA30667 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 14 Nov 2001 14:38:17 -0600
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook CWS, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <000a01c16d49$ce3f9c40$5d38d940@escher.efgwaco.com>
Date:         Wed, 14 Nov 2001 14:20:29 -0600
Reply-To: "Charles Barnett" <cbarnett@TEXNET.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Charles Barnett" <cbarnett@TEXNET.NET>
Subject:      [AR] AN launch photos and AN/AP comparison
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Much has been said comparing AN and AP.  The following link describing real
world results will hopefully be of interest to the group.  It has some
flight photos, curves, and comparisons of altitudes utilizing identical
weight of propellant for AN and AP in the same rocket.  There is also a
movie of an AN flight two weeks ago.

http://www.texnet.net/ccent/rockets/mtr/an_flights.htm

Charles

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 13766 invoked from network); 14 Nov 2001 22:56:25 -0000
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 14 Nov 2001 22:56:25 -0000
Received: (qmail 28658 invoked by uid 50005); 14 Nov 2001 22:56:19 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4169. . Clean. Processed in 0.240042 secs); 14 Nov 2001 22:56:19 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 14 Nov 2001 22:56:18 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA25682; Wed, 14 Nov 2001 14:04:27 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 136368 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 14 Nov 2001 22:03:05          +0000
Received: from mta01.mail.mel.aone.net.au (mta01.mail.au.uu.net [203.2.192.81])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA25661 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 14 Nov 2001 14:03:04 -0800
Received: from unknown ([63.34.214.122]) by mta01.mail.mel.aone.net.au with          SMTP id <20011114220254.FUNP16012.mta01.mail.mel.aone.net.au@unknown>          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 15 Nov 2001 09:02:54 +1100
References: Conversation            <C0F7BF4DCEC1D2479A01031347184DCD02FE96@nt2000s2.dgmicro.com> with            last message            <C0F7BF4DCEC1D2479A01031347184DCD02FE96@nt2000s2.dgmicro.com>
Priority: Normal
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Priority: 3
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	X-MAPIextension=.TXT;
	charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>
Date:         Wed, 14 Nov 2001 22:03:05 +0000
Reply-To: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Carbonates
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <C0F7BF4DCEC1D2479A01031347184DCD02FE96@nt2000s2.dgmicro.com>

Firefox mentions amounts as high as 14% in their manual for straight SrCO3
and amounts close to 10% when Sr2NO3 is also included in large amounts.

Troy.

----------
> Generally my colored formulas are about 82% solids, 2% Mg, and the color
> agent.
>
> I'll try the strontium carbonate again.....maybe at a higher %, maybe 7%
> or so.
>
> -Darren
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Paxton [mailto:darkspunge@USWEST.NET]
> > Sent: Wednesday, November 14, 2001 12:38 PM
> > To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
> > Subject: Re: [AR] Carbonates
> >
> >
> > Then you either dont have real AP, or dont have real
> > strontium carb. As mentioned before, 5% really should be the
> > max for rocket propellant. 10-15% for a purly colored fire
> > comp. It must be the strontium. How much Aluminum are you
> > running? Try cutting it back to like 1-2% or none at all. It
> > will wash out the color. If possible use Mg instead in the 3%
> > range. All of the aboved worked well for me, but I was making
> > fountines and stuff instead. Regardless, acording to
> > firefox's book, it is pretty much the same except for adding
> > metal sparks and AP particle sizes.
> >
> > 70-75 AP you can experiemnt with the sizes. usually 40-60
> > parts 200 micron and the rest 90.
> > 5   strontium carb
> > 3-5  400 mesh Mg or finer.
> > The rest is the liquids.
> >
> > That has worked great for me.
> >
> > Pax
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Darren Wright" <dwright@D2-TECH.COM>
> > To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
> > Sent: Wednesday, November 14, 2001 6:12 AM
> > Subject: Re: [AR] Carbonates
> >
> >
> > > All my colors have been with 15%+ Nitrates.  I have tried
> > carbonates
> > > with AP, in the sugggested 5-10% and have gotten very poor results.
> > >
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > From: John Bolene [mailto:jbolene@HOME.COM]
> > > > Sent: Wednesday, November 14, 2001 7:25 AM
> > > > To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
> > > > Subject: Re: [AR] Carbonates
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > I use carbonates for red, yellow, and orange flames in AP
> > mixes. The
> > > > red is what I call really red and it is a wonderful rich red. The
> > > > orange is more of a translucent pumpkin which took many
> > tries to get
> > > > right (not too yellow or too red). The yellow looks like a sodium
> > > > spotlight climbing into the sky.
> > > >
> > > > The carbonates are used in place of AP and act as coolants and
> > > > colorants. Only a few percent is needed. Yes, they will
> > detract from
> > > > the motor performance as they are use instead of AP, but
> > the effect
> > > > is really neat.
> > > >
> > > > I don't make any green, since that requires barium or boron
> > > > compounds which are more toxic. A good AP blue is not hard either.
> > > >
> > > > Now if you are not using AP, the problem is much tougher.
> > > >
> > > > John Bolene
> > > > Mostly Missiles Web page -> http://members.home.com/mostlymissiles
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > > From: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
> > > > To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
> > > > Sent: Wednesday, November 14, 2001 3:26 AM
> > > > Subject: Re: [AR] Carbonates
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > > > > Strontium carbonate generally offers a deeper red than
> > > > > > > strontium
> > > > > nitrate.
> > > > > > > It's harder to get rich greens from Barium compounds.
> > > > Easy to get
> > > > > > > reasonable blues from virtually any copper
> > compound. Ask the
> > > > > > > people at Firefox. They are truly the
> > > > > experts
> > > > > > > with these questions unless you're after performance
> > > > (or a trade
> > > > > > > off),
> > > > > > then
> > > > > > > we can help you.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I dunno, I think it is th eoposite in the pyro world.
> > > > Blues and rich
> > > > > yellows
> > > > > > are the hardest, with reds and greens being the easy
> > > > ones. How odd.
> > > > >
> > > > > Rich or even noticeable greens are very difficult to obtain
> > > > in rocket
> > > > > propellants from my experience. *Rich* reds are the easiest.
> > > > > Blues, well, notice I didn't say *rich* blues. What I meant was
> > > > > noticeable blues. Many APCP compositions only require 1-2%
> > > > > colouring agent to obtain quite a noticeable blue to
> > the plume. No
> > > > > I haven't tried obtaining rich blues from composite propellants
> > > > > but I can't
> > > > see why it
> > > > > can't be possible. Generally to obtain *rich* colours
> > > > requires running
> > > > > the propellants at lower operating temps which
> > obviously affects
> > > > > performance. This was probably the most influencing reason
> > > > for me to
> > > > > ditch the pyro colour fix..
> > > > >
> > > > > Troy.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Pax
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > Troy.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > -Darren
> > > > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 20804 invoked from network); 14 Nov 2001 22:58:03 -0000
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 14 Nov 2001 22:58:03 -0000
Received: (qmail 15542 invoked by uid 50005); 14 Nov 2001 22:57:56 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4169. . Clean. Processed in 0.889844 secs); 14 Nov 2001 22:57:56 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 14 Nov 2001 22:57:53 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA25572; Wed, 14 Nov 2001 13:54:32 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 136338 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 14 Nov 2001 21:53:03          +0000
Received: from mta02.mail.mel.aone.net.au (mta02.mail.au.uu.net [203.2.192.82])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA25557 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 14 Nov 2001 13:53:02 -0800
Received: from unknown ([63.34.214.122]) by mta02.mail.mel.aone.net.au with          SMTP id <20011114215259.TND1616.mta02.mail.mel.aone.net.au@unknown>          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 15 Nov 2001 08:52:59 +1100
References: Conversation            <C0F7BF4DCEC1D2479A01031347184DCD02FE94@nt2000s2.dgmicro.com> with            last message <006601c16d33$1771faf0$0100a8c0@cc898542a>
Priority: Normal
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Priority: 3
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	X-MAPIextension=.TXT;
	charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>
Date:         Wed, 14 Nov 2001 21:53:03 +0000
Reply-To: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Carbonates
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <006601c16d33$1771faf0$0100a8c0@cc898542a>

----------
> Then you either dont have real AP, or dont have real strontium carb.

I have experienced better colors from strontium carbonate than nitrate and
theoretically there are a number of reasons for this. The most notable
being the electron valencies of the ions being discussed ie. Sr+2, CO3-2,
NO3-1 so SrC03 contains approximately twice the amount of Sr+2 (the ion
that ultimately provides the color) than Sr2NO3.

Troy.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 27701 invoked from network); 14 Nov 2001 22:59:31 -0000
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 14 Nov 2001 22:59:31 -0000
Received: (qmail 18509 invoked by uid 50005); 14 Nov 2001 22:59:25 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4169. . Clean. Processed in 1.157682 secs); 14 Nov 2001 22:59:25 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 14 Nov 2001 22:59:22 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA25899; Wed, 14 Nov 2001 14:27:33 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 136420 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 14 Nov 2001 22:26:09          +0000
Received: from mailrelay3.inwind.it (mailrelay3.inwind.it [212.141.54.103]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA25884 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 14 Nov 2001 14:26:08 -0800
Received: from celeron667 (62.98.226.178) by mailrelay3.inwind.it (5.5.029) id          3BDECF65006376EC; Wed, 14 Nov 2001 23:25:26 +0100
References:  <00ac01c16d0b$09795920$3900fd80@ziostefo>              <004d01c16d3d$873f74c0$2803a8c0@server.accelerationsw.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2919.6600
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <004301c16d5a$b6c78da0$b2e2623e@celeron667>
Date:         Wed, 14 Nov 2001 23:21:31 +0100
Reply-To: "Stefano Innocenti" <s.innocenti@AGORA.STM.IT>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Stefano Innocenti" <s.innocenti@AGORA.STM.IT>
Subject:      Re: [AR] "I" class Hybrid motor
Comments: To: Andrew MacMillen <andrewm@hawkfeather.com>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

All the details you want is better to ask to Eugenio tasknet@tin.it

Stefano

----- Original Message -----
From: "Andrew MacMillen" <andrewm@hawkfeather.com>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Wednesday, November 14, 2001 7:52 PM
Subject: Re: [AR] "I" class Hybrid motor


> Very nice. Do you have any details on the loading valve?
>
> Thank you.
> Andrew MacMillen
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Stefano Innocenti" <s.innocenti@AGORA.STM.IT>
> To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
> Sent: Wednesday, November 14, 2001 4:51 AM
> Subject: [AR] "I" class Hybrid motor
>
>
> > Hi list,
> >
> > At: http://members.xoom.it/laserist/nibrid.htm is online the
> schematic of a
> > class 'I' hybrid motor with a total Impulse of 400 Ns. The technical
> design
> > is at http://members.xoom.it/laserist/ibri5.gif
> >
> > For any question about it, please email to tasknet@tin.it
> >
> > ciao, Stefo
> >
> > ---------------------------Stefano
> Innocenti ----------------------------
> > http://www.razzimodellismo.it   http://utenti.tripod.it/missilistica
> >
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 29034 invoked from network); 14 Nov 2001 23:06:55 -0000
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 14 Nov 2001 23:06:55 -0000
Received: (qmail 456 invoked by uid 50005); 14 Nov 2001 23:06:49 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4169. . Clean. Processed in 1.178129 secs); 14 Nov 2001 23:06:49 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 14 Nov 2001 23:06:46 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA25399; Wed, 14 Nov 2001 13:38:56 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 136302 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 14 Nov 2001 21:37:32          +0000
Received: from albqpop1.albq.uswest.net (albqpop1.albq.uswest.net          [207.108.240.1]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id NAA25383          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 14 Nov 2001 13:37:31 -0800
Received: (qmail 7525 invoked by alias); 14 Nov 2001 21:37:00 -0000
Delivered-To: fixup-AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU@fixme
Received: (qmail 7498 invoked by uid 0); 14 Nov 2001 21:37:00 -0000
Received: from cc898542-a.prdise1.nm.home.com (HELO cc898542a) (65.7.151.152)          by albqpop1.albq.uswest.net with SMTP; 14 Nov 2001 21:37:00 -0000
References:  <C0F7BF4DCEC1D2479A01031347184DCD02FE96@nt2000s2.dgmicro.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <005801c16d54$814f8fc0$0100a8c0@cc898542a>
Date:         Wed, 14 Nov 2001 14:37:05 -0700
Reply-To: "Paxton" <darkspunge@USWEST.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Paxton" <darkspunge@USWEST.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Carbonates
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

If you are not getting a good red with 5% then something is wrong. Where did
you get the carb from? Maybe a bad batch.

Pax


----- Original Message -----
From: "Darren Wright" <dwright@D2-TECH.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Wednesday, November 14, 2001 2:28 PM
Subject: Re: [AR] Carbonates


> Generally my colored formulas are about 82% solids, 2% Mg, and the color
> agent.
>
> I'll try the strontium carbonate again.....maybe at a higher %, maybe 7%
> or so.
>
> -Darren
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Paxton [mailto:darkspunge@USWEST.NET]
> > Sent: Wednesday, November 14, 2001 12:38 PM
> > To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
> > Subject: Re: [AR] Carbonates
> >
> >
> > Then you either dont have real AP, or dont have real
> > strontium carb. As mentioned before, 5% really should be the
> > max for rocket propellant. 10-15% for a purly colored fire
> > comp. It must be the strontium. How much Aluminum are you
> > running? Try cutting it back to like 1-2% or none at all. It
> > will wash out the color. If possible use Mg instead in the 3%
> > range. All of the aboved worked well for me, but I was making
> > fountines and stuff instead. Regardless, acording to
> > firefox's book, it is pretty much the same except for adding
> > metal sparks and AP particle sizes.
> >
> > 70-75 AP you can experiemnt with the sizes. usually 40-60
> > parts 200 micron and the rest 90.
> > 5   strontium carb
> > 3-5  400 mesh Mg or finer.
> > The rest is the liquids.
> >
> > That has worked great for me.
> >
> > Pax

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 3139 invoked from network); 15 Nov 2001 00:30:15 -0000
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 15 Nov 2001 00:30:15 -0000
Received: (qmail 15992 invoked by uid 50005); 15 Nov 2001 00:30:09 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4169. . Clean. Processed in 0.187864 secs); 15 Nov 2001 00:30:09 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 15 Nov 2001 00:30:08 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA26373; Wed, 14 Nov 2001 16:12:05 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 136504 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 15 Nov 2001 00:10:02          +0000
Received: from smtprelay2.abs.adelphia.net (smtprelay.abs.adelphia.net          [64.8.20.11]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA26353 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 14 Nov 2001 16:10:02 -0800
Received: from jlgrady ([24.53.101.238]) by smtprelay2.abs.adelphia.net          (Netscape Messaging Server 4.15) with SMTP id GMTF3U02.VJO for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 14 Nov 2001 19:09:30 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook CWS, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <000001c16d69$d773aac0$0200a8c0@24.53.64.18>
Date:         Wed, 14 Nov 2001 19:09:48 -0500
Reply-To: "Jeff Grady" <jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jeff Grady" <jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET>
Subject:      [AR] GUIPEP Question
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>

Stupid question #862:

I'd like to load GUIPEP's chemical list with the ingredients from a two part
epoxy I am using as a binder/fuel. I know the ingredients BEFORE mixing and
also know that a catalytic reaction occurs when mixed. Does it matter if I
load the ingredients for part A and part B separately (assuming that guipep
will recognize that a catalytic action will occur) or must I determine the
final chemical make-up of the mixed and catalyzed epoxy and load that
instead?

JG

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 25062 invoked from network); 15 Nov 2001 00:50:29 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.105]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 15 Nov 2001 00:50:29 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 12978 invoked by uid 50005); 15 Nov 2001 00:50:11 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpy with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4169. . Clean. Processed in 0.637119 secs); 15 Nov 2001 00:50:11 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 15 Nov 2001 00:50:09 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA26450; Wed, 14 Nov 2001 16:20:27 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 136522 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 15 Nov 2001 00:19:05          +0000
Received: from fw1-bv.tek.com (fw1-bv.tek.com [192.65.40.16]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA26423 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed,          14 Nov 2001 16:19:05 -0800
Received: from fw1-bv.tek.com (root@localhost) by fw1-bv.tek.com with ESMTP id          fAF0IZb26917 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 14 Nov 2001 16:18:35          -0800 (PST)
Received: from tektronix.tek.com (tektronix.tek.com [128.181.6.43]) by          fw1-bv.tek.com with ESMTP id fAF0IYx26911 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>;          Wed, 14 Nov 2001 16:18:34 -0800 (PST)
Received: from us-bv-u16 (us-bv-u16.bv.tek.com [128.181.2.45]) by          tektronix.tek.com (8.10.2+Sun/8.10.2) with SMTP id fAF0IYm28831 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 14 Nov 2001 16:18:34 -0800 (PST)
Received: FROM us-bv-m01.bv.tek.com BY us-bv-u16 ; Wed Nov 14 16:18:34 2001          -0800
Received: by us-bv-m01.bv.tek.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) id          <W75XWWX7>; Wed, 14 Nov 2001 16:18:33 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19)
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Message-ID:  <5832AFF5FC75D411844300508BC216B70302AC22@us-bv-m07.bv.tek.com>
Date:         Wed, 14 Nov 2001 16:18:32 -0800
Reply-To: <john.w.lyngdal@EXGATE.TEK.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <john.w.lyngdal@EXGATE.TEK.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] GUIPEP Question
Comments: To: jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

I don't think it will make much difference either way.

Reacting the two epoxy components only slightly lowers the entropy of the
binder system, as evidenced by the small amount of heat generated during the
curing process. This combined with the small amount of epoxy added in the
propellant formulation would, further diminish the thermodynamic effects
related to the epoxy as compared to the whole propellant system.

        John


-----Original Message-----
From: Jeff Grady [mailto:jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET]
Sent: Wednesday, November 14, 2001 4:10 PM
To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
Subject: [AR] GUIPEP Question


Stupid question #862:

I'd like to load GUIPEP's chemical list with the ingredients from a two part
epoxy I am using as a binder/fuel. I know the ingredients BEFORE mixing and
also know that a catalytic reaction occurs when mixed. Does it matter if I
load the ingredients for part A and part B separately (assuming that guipep
will recognize that a catalytic action will occur) or must I determine the
final chemical make-up of the mixed and catalyzed epoxy and load that
instead?

JG

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 14926 invoked from network); 15 Nov 2001 00:55:13 -0000
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 15 Nov 2001 00:55:13 -0000
Received: (qmail 5857 invoked by uid 50005); 15 Nov 2001 00:55:06 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4169. . Clean. Processed in 0.436191 secs); 15 Nov 2001 00:55:06 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 15 Nov 2001 00:55:05 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA26525; Wed, 14 Nov 2001 16:33:15 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 136537 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 15 Nov 2001 00:31:52          +0000
Received: from smtprelay3.abs.adelphia.net (smtprelay.abs.adelphia.net          [64.8.20.11]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA26510 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 14 Nov 2001 16:31:52 -0800
Received: from jlgrady ([24.53.101.238]) by smtprelay3.abs.adelphia.net          (Netscape Messaging Server 4.15) with SMTP id GMTG4302.YHT for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 14 Nov 2001 19:31:15 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook CWS, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <000101c16d6c$e2daa500$0200a8c0@24.53.64.18>
Date:         Wed, 14 Nov 2001 19:31:36 -0500
Reply-To: "Jeff Grady" <jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jeff Grady" <jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] GUIPEP Question
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <5832AFF5FC75D411844300508BC216B70302AC22@us-bv-m07.bv.tek.com>

I think I get it... But that pops another question: Would this mean that the
more heat generated during the catalyzing process, the less heat will be
generated when the grain burns? I have used several different epoxies over
the last two months and had one that got so hot, I quit mixing it and laid
the mixing cup on the driveway and backed off till it cooled. It also did
not burn very well when ignited. In fact, it would not stay lit. The epoxy I
have been most impressed with generates very little heat while curing and is
a 5 minute epoxy. The resulting grain burns vigorously - using the same
percentages of components (KNO3/Charcoal).

JG

-----Original Message-----
From: john.w.lyngdal@exgate.tek.com
[mailto:john.w.lyngdal@exgate.tek.com]
Sent: Wednesday, November 14, 2001 7:19 PM
To: jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET; AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
Subject: RE: [AR] GUIPEP Question


I don't think it will make much difference either way.

Reacting the two epoxy components only slightly lowers the entropy of the
binder system, as evidenced by the small amount of heat generated during the
curing process. This combined with the small amount of epoxy added in the
propellant formulation would, further diminish the thermodynamic effects
related to the epoxy as compared to the whole propellant system.

        John


-----Original Message-----
From: Jeff Grady [mailto:jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET]
Sent: Wednesday, November 14, 2001 4:10 PM
To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
Subject: [AR] GUIPEP Question


Stupid question #862:

I'd like to load GUIPEP's chemical list with the ingredients from a two part
epoxy I am using as a binder/fuel. I know the ingredients BEFORE mixing and
also know that a catalytic reaction occurs when mixed. Does it matter if I
load the ingredients for part A and part B separately (assuming that guipep
will recognize that a catalytic action will occur) or must I determine the
final chemical make-up of the mixed and catalyzed epoxy and load that
instead?

JG

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 529 invoked from network); 15 Nov 2001 00:59:13 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 15 Nov 2001 00:59:13 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 12449 invoked by uid 50005); 15 Nov 2001 00:59:07 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4169. . Clean. Processed in 0.352494 secs); 15 Nov 2001 00:59:07 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 15 Nov 2001 00:59:06 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA26792; Wed, 14 Nov 2001 16:54:17 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 136595 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 15 Nov 2001 00:52:47          +0000
Received: from smtp006pub.verizon.net (smtp006pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.185])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA26771 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 14 Nov 2001 16:52:47 -0800
Received: from [63.24.225.160] (1Cust2.tnt1.rancho-cucamonga.ca.da.uu.net          [63.24.225.2]) by smtp006pub.verizon.net  with ESMTP for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; id fAF0qET21845 Wed, 14 Nov 2001 18:52:15          -0600 (CST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: GTE/01rocket@mail.gte.net
References: <CMM.0.90.4.1005755875.billw@cypher>            <3BF2BD8E.74943FC8@earthlink.net>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <a05100303b818c1e75d49@[63.24.225.160]>
Date:         Wed, 14 Nov 2001 16:52:00 -0800
Reply-To: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] The Newbies and the politics -- Re: [AR] Bruce              Kelly'sResponse on ROL - ANFO motors
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <3BF2BD8E.74943FC8@earthlink.net>

>William Chops Westfield wrote:
>>   As near
>>  as I can tell, the RRS manages to operate by the slimmest of legal margins,
>>  and even then only the basis of having "certified pyro operators" that have
>>  effectively put their legal asses on the line so that other members can
>>  have a shot at the "on site" manufacture of propellant.
>
>Hmmm... that's perhaps a bit melodramatic... the applicable regulations are
>spelled out in the California Pyrotechnics Codes under the "Experimental
>Rockets Unlimitied" section. But then California is sligntly different
>in that one also needs a Licensed Pyro Operator to hold a high power
>launch, and the consent of the local fire marshal is required for _any_
>rocket launching, even model rockets.
>
>-dave w


It is close to true.  They discourage some rockets which have
compliance issues in question (offsite made amateur solids).  They
don't stop them but they put the rocketeers through an additional
level if disclaimer.

Jerry



--
Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
Opinion, the whole thing.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 21929 invoked from network); 15 Nov 2001 01:04:38 -0000
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 15 Nov 2001 01:04:38 -0000
Received: (qmail 14335 invoked by uid 50005); 15 Nov 2001 01:04:31 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4169. . Clean. Processed in 0.867374 secs); 15 Nov 2001 01:04:31 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 15 Nov 2001 01:04:28 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA26639; Wed, 14 Nov 2001 16:46:28 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 136567 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 15 Nov 2001 00:45:06          +0000
Received: from mta03.mail.mel.aone.net.au (mta03.mail.au.uu.net [203.2.192.83])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA26619 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 14 Nov 2001 16:45:05 -0800
Received: from unknown ([63.34.212.35]) by mta03.mail.mel.aone.net.au with SMTP          id <20011115004452.GINU25070.mta03.mail.mel.aone.net.au@unknown> for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 15 Nov 2001 11:44:54 +1100
References: Conversation            <5832AFF5FC75D411844300508BC216B70302AC22@us-bv-m07.bv.tek.com>            with last message <000101c16d6c$e2daa500$0200a8c0@24.53.64.18>
Priority: Normal
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Priority: 3
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	X-MAPIextension=.TXT;
	charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>
Date:         Thu, 15 Nov 2001 00:45:06 +0000
Reply-To: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] GUIPEP Question
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <000101c16d6c$e2daa500$0200a8c0@24.53.64.18>

----------
> I think I get it... But that pops another question: Would this mean that
the
> more heat generated during the catalyzing process, the less heat will be
> generated when the grain burns?

The curing of epoxy isn't really a catalyzing process but yes, if energy is
liberated from a system then there must be less available energy left in
the system.

 I have used several different epoxies over
> the last two months and had one that got so hot, I quit mixing it and laid
> the mixing cup on the driveway and backed off till it cooled. It also did
> not burn very well when ignited. In fact, it would not stay lit. The
epoxy I
> have been most impressed with generates very little heat while curing and
is
> a 5 minute epoxy. The resulting grain burns vigorously - using the same
> percentages of components (KNO3/Charcoal).

There ya go.

Troy.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 17902 invoked from network); 15 Nov 2001 01:18:11 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 15 Nov 2001 01:18:11 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 28742 invoked by uid 50005); 15 Nov 2001 01:18:04 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4169. . Clean. Processed in 2.10426 secs); 15 Nov 2001 01:18:04 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 15 Nov 2001 01:18:01 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA26884; Wed, 14 Nov 2001 17:03:03 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 136618 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 15 Nov 2001 01:01:41          +0000
Received: from smtp003pub.verizon.net (smtp003pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.182])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA26862 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 14 Nov 2001 17:01:40 -0800
Received: from [63.24.225.160] (1Cust2.tnt1.rancho-cucamonga.ca.da.uu.net          [63.24.225.2]) by smtp003pub.verizon.net  with ESMTP for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; id fAF10a312305 Wed, 14 Nov 2001 19:00:36          -0600 (CST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: GTE/01rocket@mail.gte.net
References: <00a901c16c95$1cf575e0$87ae1cac@redmond.corp.microsoft.com>            <006d01c16c93$b3c37cd0$0100a8c0@cc898542a>            <00a901c16c95$1cf575e0$87ae1cac@redmond.corp.microsoft.com>            <5.1.0.14.0.20011113150837.00a64b10@mail.earthlink.net>            <003c01c16d4c$3eef5960$5b96e53f@default>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <a05100304b818c327a7fd@[63.24.225.160]>
Date:         Wed, 14 Nov 2001 17:01:05 -0800
Reply-To: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Everybody send Brian Kosko and e-mail...
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <003c01c16d4c$3eef5960$5b96e53f@default>

>I'm talking about a massive CATO - KABOOM!

I question this.  I suspect either the flights you witnessed were
bashed reloads or mismatched nozzles because I know for a fact after
firing thousands of firings this just does not happen.  Admittedly
some other manufacturer's procedures could be wacked (Kosdon for
example) but not generally errortech.



>
>This point is really the whole weakness behind TRA rules about separating
>experimental motors from commercial, certified motors at launches, i.e, the
>FALSE assumption that only experimental motors explode, not commercial.


TRA is bogus on so many levels, this is but one more obvious one.


>On the issue of certification, what has gotten lost over the years is that
>certification of motors started because TRA members thought the performance
>specs. on commercial motors were being inflated by the manufacturers.   The
>thrust and impulse levels were not as high as the manufacturer claimed.
>Consequently, TRA started testing motors independently to see what the
>performance of the motor was and published that information for members.
>Somehow, that got twisted into you could not fly a motor unless it received
>a seal of approval (certification) from TRA.   Now, they are trying to
>implement the same policy on TRA experimental motors, you cannot fly a
>propellant without the TRA Board seal of approval.

Correct.

I went to the site you referenced and was astounded the AN EZI rocket
flights resulted in higher altitudes with similar propellant weight
AND higher ISP/power.  I attribute the higher altitudes to lower
thrust.  But the higher ISP is interesting to me.  This is beginning
to justify PSAN.

Jerry



--
Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
Opinion, the whole thing.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 19535 invoked from network); 15 Nov 2001 01:57:31 -0000
X-Priority: 3
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 15 Nov 2001 01:57:31 -0000
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 25541 invoked by uid 50005); 15 Nov 2001 01:57:24 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4169. . Clean. Processed in 0.365905 secs); 15 Nov 2001 01:57:24 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 15 Nov 2001 01:57:24 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA27334; Wed, 14 Nov 2001 17:54:44 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 136698 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 15 Nov 2001 01:53:13          +0000
Received: from imo-r02.mx.aol.com (imo-r02.mx.aol.com [152.163.225.98]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA27226 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Wed, 14 Nov 2001 17:43:12 -0800
Received: from Jhw748@aol.com by imo-r02.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v31_r1.9.) id          w.93.134374de (18711) for <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Wed, 14 Nov 2001          20:43:07 -0500 (EST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: AOL 7.0 for Windows US sub 118
Message-ID:  <93.134374de.292477ab@aol.com>
Date:         Wed, 14 Nov 2001 20:43:07 EST
Reply-To: <Jhw748@AOL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <Jhw748@AOL.COM>
Subject:      [AR] ATF comes knocking
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Hi Guys,
I have read about some of the visits you fellows have had but it could NEVER
HAPPEN TO ME!
Well, actually, they didn't come knocking. They just walked on in and ask
where I might be found. At WORK of all places. ( I'll be hearing these jokes
for a LONG time.)
But to make this short they were very polite and about as nice as They will
ever be.
Seems my last purchase of a drum of tec. grade AN set off all kinds of BIG
RED FLAGS. ( Maybe the fact that 750# of AN went to my home address was why
they sent not 1 or 2, but 3 BIG Agents over to see what gives :-)
There was not a single problem as far as they were concerned and I for one
was just as pleased to see them go as they seemed to be going.
Sooo, if you get a visitor that you would just as soon not have, Be Nice and
maybe like mine, they will just go away.
Clear Skies,
Jim Williams

Keep up the good work!

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 28135 invoked from network); 15 Nov 2001 03:41:08 -0000
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 15 Nov 2001 03:41:08 -0000
Received: (qmail 16640 invoked by uid 50005); 15 Nov 2001 03:41:01 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4169. . Clean. Processed in 0.148607 secs); 15 Nov 2001 03:41:01 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 15 Nov 2001 03:41:01 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA27925; Wed, 14 Nov 2001 19:38:01 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 136822 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 15 Nov 2001 03:36:32          +0000
Received: from cablecom.laribay.net (cablecom.laribay.net [66.20.57.4]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA27907 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 14 Nov 2001 19:36:31 -0800
Received: from billbull (dial108.laribay.net [66.20.57.108]) by          cablecom.laribay.net (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id VAA11692 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 14 Nov 2001 21:20:52 -0600 (CST)          (envelope-from bpbullock@laribay.net)
References: <00a901c16c95$1cf575e0$87ae1cac@redmond.corp.microsoft.com>                    <006d01c16c93$b3c37cd0$0100a8c0@cc898542a>                      <00a901c16c95$1cf575e0$87ae1cac@redmond.corp.microsoft.com>                    <5.1.0.14.0.20011113150837.00a64b10@mail.earthlink.net>                      <003c01c16d4c$3eef5960$5b96e53f@default>             <a05100304b818c327a7fd@[63.24.225.160]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <015701c16d86$cb33cf20$5a391442@billbull>
Date:         Wed, 14 Nov 2001 21:37:03 -0600
Reply-To: "Bill Bullock" <bpbullock@LARIBAY.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Bill Bullock" <bpbullock@LARIBAY.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Everybody send Brian Kosko and e-mail...
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

----- Original Message -----
From: Jerry Irvine <01rocket@GTE.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Wednesday, November 14, 2001 7:01 PM
Subject: Re: [AR] Everybody send Brian Kosko and e-mail...
(Snipped Here)

Jerry said:
>This is beginning to justify PSAN.
> Jerry
******
    Say what???? Did I read this right??? (I could not resist, Jerry. Sorry,
but not much.)
Bill
---------------
> Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
> Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
> Opinion, the whole thing.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 26054 invoked from network); 15 Nov 2001 04:08:46 -0000
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 15 Nov 2001 04:08:46 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 873 invoked by uid 50005); 15 Nov 2001 04:08:40 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4169. . Clean. Processed in 1.094063 secs); 15 Nov 2001 04:08:40 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 15 Nov 2001 04:08:37 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA28179; Wed, 14 Nov 2001 20:02:17 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 136851 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 15 Nov 2001 04:00:48          +0000
Received: from mail7.nc.rr.com (fe7.southeast.rr.com [24.93.67.54]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA28112 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Wed, 14 Nov 2001 19:50:46 -0800
Received: from nc.rr.com ([24.162.230.106]) by mail7.nc.rr.com  with Microsoft          SMTPSVC(5.5.1877.687.68); Wed, 14 Nov 2001 20:55:23 -0500
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.76 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.4.1 i686)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <000101c16cb7$a2fe8a10$0200a8c0@24.53.64.18>            <01b301c16cb8$63e63ca0$0a01a8c0@cx814151a>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3BF322A0.9F52C049@nc.rr.com>
Date:         Wed, 14 Nov 2001 21:04:16 -0500
Reply-To: "Jeff Taylor" <JTaylor@NC.RR.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jeff Taylor" <JTaylor@NC.RR.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Tom's P Motor
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Here's a picture of Tom Binford's P motor test firing.  I was standing
1000 feet away and took this picture with a zoom lens.  Enjoy!

http://home.nc.rr.com/jstaylor/Pmotor.jpg

- Jeff Taylor

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 11599 invoked from network); 15 Nov 2001 04:13:54 -0000
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 15 Nov 2001 04:13:54 -0000
Received: (qmail 5263 invoked by uid 50005); 15 Nov 2001 04:13:48 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4169. . Clean. Processed in 1.361186 secs); 15 Nov 2001 04:13:48 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 15 Nov 2001 04:13:45 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA28225; Wed, 14 Nov 2001 20:10:56 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 136864 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 15 Nov 2001 04:09:34          +0000
Received: from mta02.mail.mel.aone.net.au (mta02.mail.au.uu.net [203.2.192.82])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA28203 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 14 Nov 2001 20:09:34 -0800
Received: from unknown ([63.60.247.19]) by mta02.mail.mel.aone.net.au with SMTP          id <20011115040859.HSZU1616.mta02.mail.mel.aone.net.au@unknown> for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 15 Nov 2001 15:08:59 +1100
References: Conversation            <00a901c16c95$1cf575e0$87ae1cac@redmond.corp.microsoft.com> with            last message <015701c16d86$cb33cf20$5a391442@billbull>
Priority: Normal
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Priority: 3
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	X-MAPIextension=.TXT;
	charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>
Date:         Thu, 15 Nov 2001 04:09:34 +0000
Reply-To: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Everybody send Brian Kosko and e-mail...
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <015701c16d86$cb33cf20$5a391442@billbull>

----------
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Jerry Irvine <01rocket@GTE.NET>
> To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
> Sent: Wednesday, November 14, 2001 7:01 PM
> Subject: Re: [AR] Everybody send Brian Kosko and e-mail...
> (Snipped Here)
>
> Jerry said:
> >This is beginning to justify PSAN.
> > Jerry
> ******
>     Say what???? Did I read this right??? (I could not resist, Jerry.
Sorry,
> but not much.)

Yes, it can be interpreted to justify PSAN as viable replacement for many
amateur and some HPR applications. NO it does absolutely nothing what so
ever to justify it for high performance applications unfortunately where
dIsps required are >450 in which state of the art AP propellants can easily
exceed.

Troy.


> Bill
> ---------------
> > Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
> > Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
> > Opinion, the whole thing.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 16358 invoked from network); 15 Nov 2001 05:22:45 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.105]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 15 Nov 2001 05:22:45 -0000
Received: (qmail 13883 invoked by uid 50005); 15 Nov 2001 05:22:38 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpy with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4169. . Clean. Processed in 1.059854 secs); 15 Nov 2001 05:22:38 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 15 Nov 2001 05:22:36 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA28805; Wed, 14 Nov 2001 21:20:27 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 136958 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 15 Nov 2001 05:18:52          +0000
Received: from copland.udel.edu (copland.udel.edu [128.175.13.92]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA28748 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 14 Nov 2001 21:08:51 -0800
Received: from localhost (mayspace@localhost) by copland.udel.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3)          with ESMTP id AAA21563 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 15 Nov 2001          00:08:35 -0500 (EST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.SOL.4.31.0111150007230.8831-100000@copland.udel.edu>
Date:         Thu, 15 Nov 2001 00:08:35 -0500
Reply-To: "Joseph Ernest May Jr." <mayspace@UDEL.EDU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Joseph Ernest May Jr." <mayspace@UDEL.EDU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Kosdon on the BOD :-)
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <NKEHJAOOKBPGIKOOPDEFAEFDCDAA.jwckman@space-rockets.com>

Kosdon for President!
'Nuff said!

Joe

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 22127 invoked from network); 15 Nov 2001 06:35:23 -0000
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 15 Nov 2001 06:35:23 -0000
Received: (qmail 29001 invoked by uid 50005); 15 Nov 2001 06:35:17 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4169. . Clean. Processed in 0.221322 secs); 15 Nov 2001 06:35:17 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 15 Nov 2001 06:35:16 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA29094; Wed, 14 Nov 2001 22:20:26 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 137022 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 15 Nov 2001 06:19:01          +0000
Received: from corlabs (24-216-244-100.hsacorp.net [24.216.244.100]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA29072 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Wed, 14 Nov 2001 22:18:59 -0800
Received: from [24.216.244.164] by corlabs (ArGoSoft Mail Server Pro          Win2000/XP, Version 1.70 (1.7.0.4)); Thu, 15 Nov 2001 00:56:02 -0600
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook CWS, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <007701c16d9f$08ba0180$0200a8c0@charter.net>
Date:         Thu, 15 Nov 2001 00:30:35 -0600
Reply-To: "Carl A. Blood" <cablood@CORLABS.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Carl A. Blood" <cablood@CORLABS.COM>
Subject:      [AR] WAMEX Automation
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

All,


Please DO NOT USE MY email addresses to get on the list now.

Automated list sign up is running!

Send a message to : listmanager@pad17.com
With the words: SUBSCRIBE WAMEXList
in the body of the message.

The system will send you a confirming message. Just reply to the message and
you will receive a welcome message back.
Your in...

remember to send your posts to WAMEX@pad17.com

You will be given instruction on how the get removed from the list.

Thanks
Carl

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 29060 invoked from network); 15 Nov 2001 06:37:50 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.105]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 15 Nov 2001 06:37:50 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: (qmail 6403 invoked by uid 50005); 15 Nov 2001 06:37:43 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpy with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4169. . Clean. Processed in 1.33523 secs); 15 Nov 2001 06:37:43 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 15 Nov 2001 06:37:40 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA29135; Wed, 14 Nov 2001 22:26:52 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 137033 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 15 Nov 2001 06:25:22          +0000
Received: from cisco.com (cypher.cisco.com [171.69.11.18]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA29118 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed,          14 Nov 2001 22:25:22 -0800
Received: (from billw@localhost) by cisco.com (8.8.8/2.6/Cisco List          Logging/8.8.8) id WAA12845; Wed, 14 Nov 2001 22:24:48 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID:  <CMM.0.90.4.1005805488.billw@cypher>
Date:         Wed, 14 Nov 2001 22:24:48 PST
Reply-To: "Bill Westfield" <billw@cisco.com>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "William Chops Westfield" <billw@cisco.com>
Subject:      Re: [AR] The Newbies and the politics -- Re: [AR] Bruce              Kelly'sResponse on ROL - ANFO motors
Comments: To: Jerry Irvine <01rocket@GTE.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  Your message of Wed, 14 Nov 2001 16:52:00 -0800

> the applicable regulations are spelled out in the California Pyrotechnics
> Codes under the "Experimental Rockets Unlimitied" section.

Does that include the manufacturing restrictions?  I haven't figured out
whether the the on-site mixing requirements of RRS are specifically spelled
out, or whether they're just the result of "well it sure isn't legal to
do it anywhere else and then transport the motor."


>>   As near
>>  as I can tell, the RRS manages to operate by the slimmest of legal margins,
>>  and even then only the basis of having "certified pyro operators" that have
>>  effectively put their legal asses on the line so that other members can
>>  have a shot at the "on site" manufacture of propellant.
>
>Hmmm... that's perhaps a bit melodramatic...

Which part?  I've gone to seminars on getting your Ca pyro license for
fireworks operator, and they're all real clear on things like "legal
manufacturing is next to impossible and the fines are lower than the
license fees anyway" and "if anything goes wrong, then YOU as the permit
holder are held responsible..."

BillW


From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 5764 invoked from network); 15 Nov 2001 09:15:40 -0000
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 15 Nov 2001 09:15:40 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 20979 invoked by uid 50005); 15 Nov 2001 09:15:34 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4169. . Clean. Processed in 0.173415 secs); 15 Nov 2001 09:15:34 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 15 Nov 2001 09:15:34 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id BAA29685; Thu, 15 Nov 2001 01:13:55 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 137107 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 15 Nov 2001 09:12:29          +0000
Received: from avocet.prod.itd.earthlink.net (avocet.mail.pas.earthlink.net          [207.217.120.50]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id BAA29646          for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Thu, 15 Nov 2001 01:02:28 -0800
Received: from dialup-209.245.139.239.dial1.sanjose1.level3.net          ([209.245.139.239] helo=earthlink.net ident=dave) by          avocet.prod.itd.earthlink.net with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id          164IPj-0004BX-00; Thu, 15 Nov 2001 01:02:27 -0800
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.75 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.16-22 i686)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <CMM.0.90.4.1005805488.billw@cypher>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3BF38597.9A70CE97@earthlink.net>
Date:         Thu, 15 Nov 2001 01:06:31 -0800
Reply-To: "David Weinshenker" <daze39@EARTHLINK.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "David Weinshenker" <daze39@EARTHLINK.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] The Newbies and the politics -- Re: [AR]              BruceKelly'sResponse              on ROL - ANFO motors
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

William Chops Westfield wrote:
>
> > the applicable regulations are spelled out in the California Pyrotechnics
> > Codes under the "Experimental Rockets Unlimitied" section.
>
> Does that include the manufacturing restrictions?  I haven't figured out
> whether the the on-site mixing requirements of RRS are specifically spelled
> out, or whether they're just the result of "well it sure isn't legal to
> do it anywhere else and then transport the motor."

Well, I don't have any direct information (other than noting the
restriction you mentioned in the brochure I received with my RRS
membership card) but it seems to make perfect sense to me as a way
to keep things simple with respect to the hazmat codes (especially
the part about "new explosives" having to be "examined, classified,
and approved" as being fit for shipment in an acceptable hazard
category)... it's a lot less complicated if you bring fuels and oxidizers
separately to the test site, I believe... they already know what shipping
precautions should apply without having to test each individual variety.

-dave w

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 14177 invoked from network); 15 Nov 2001 11:25:34 -0000
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 15 Nov 2001 11:25:34 -0000
Received: (qmail 28301 invoked by uid 50005); 15 Nov 2001 11:25:28 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4169. . Clean. Processed in 1.32932 secs); 15 Nov 2001 11:25:28 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 15 Nov 2001 11:25:25 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id DAA30122; Thu, 15 Nov 2001 03:23:39 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 137172 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 15 Nov 2001 11:23:28          +0000
Received: from fep4-orange.clear.net.nz (fep4-orange.clear.net.nz          [203.97.32.4]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id DAA30107          for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Thu, 15 Nov 2001 03:23:26 -0800
Received: from mkbs (b002-m010-p042.acld.clear.net.nz [203.167.200.106]) by          fep4-orange.clear.net.nz (1.5/1.7) with SMTP id AAA22779; Fri, 16 Nov          2001 00:23:13 +1300 (NZDT)
References: <000101c16cb7$a2fe8a10$0200a8c0@24.53.64.18>                       <01b301c16cb8$63e63ca0$0a01a8c0@cx814151a>             <3BF322A0.9F52C049@nc.rr.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <000101c16dc8$27eb3fa0$0700a8c0@mkbs>
Date:         Thu, 15 Nov 2001 22:07:03 +1300
Reply-To: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Organization: Applied Technology
Subject:      Re: [AR] Tom's P Motor
Comments: To: Jeff Taylor <JTaylor@NC.RR.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

> Here's a picture of Tom Binford's P motor test firing.  I was standing
> 1000 feet away and took this picture with a zoom lens.  Enjoy!
>
> http://home.nc.rr.com/jstaylor/Pmotor.jpg


Sounds like you were at about the right distance.

What are the observers looking at? - doesn't seem to be the motor proper.

I'd say the man on the left was a potential dead man walking depending,
perhaps, on what the casing was made of, and the man on the right may be
better off in a CATO depending how the trailer reacted. Then again, maybe
the telephoto lens has greatly foreshortened the perspective but it sure
looks potentially fatally close to me.




        Russell McMahon

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 27053 invoked from network); 15 Nov 2001 22:12:07 -0000
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 15 Nov 2001 22:12:07 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 14126 invoked by uid 50005); 15 Nov 2001 22:12:00 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4169. . Clean. Processed in 0.193665 secs); 15 Nov 2001 22:12:00 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 15 Nov 2001 22:12:00 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA01929; Thu, 15 Nov 2001 13:31:01 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 80449 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 15 Nov 2001 21:29:08          +0000
Received: from cicero1.cybercity.dk (cicero1.cybercity.dk [212.242.40.4]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id NAA01893 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 15 Nov 2001 13:29:00 -0800
Received: from usr04.cybercity.dk (usr04.cybercity.dk [212.242.40.36]) by          cicero1.cybercity.dk (Postfix) with ESMTP id E5A3215FCB3 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 15 Nov 2001 22:28:58 +0100 (CET)
Received: from vip.cybercity.dk (port21.cvx1-noe.ppp.cybercity.dk          [217.157.69.214]) by usr04.cybercity.dk (8.11.6/8.11.0) with ESMTP id          fAFLSwx64573 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 15 Nov 2001 22:28:58          +0100 (CET) (envelope-from hot@vip.cybercity.dk)
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.75 [en] (Win95; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <000101c16cb7$a2fe8a10$0200a8c0@24.53.64.18>            <01b301c16cb8$63e63ca0$0a01a8c0@cx814151a>            <3BF322A0.9F52C049@nc.rr.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3BF436C6.F63F3D01@vip.cybercity.dk>
Date:         Thu, 15 Nov 2001 22:42:30 +0100
Reply-To: "Hans Olaf Toft" <hot@VIP.CYBERCITY.DK>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Hans Olaf Toft" <hot@VIP.CYBERCITY.DK>
Subject:      [AR] motor data files
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Some time ago, someone suggested the definition of motor thrust data in
XML format. I would be very interested to see proposals for such a format.

Hans Olaf Toft

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 23978 invoked from network); 15 Nov 2001 23:49:58 -0000
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 15 Nov 2001 23:49:58 -0000
Received: (qmail 18292 invoked by uid 50005); 15 Nov 2001 23:49:52 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4169. . Clean. Processed in 0.304893 secs); 15 Nov 2001 23:49:52 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 15 Nov 2001 23:49:51 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA02723; Thu, 15 Nov 2001 15:45:54 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 80528 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 15 Nov 2001 23:44:04          +0000
Received: from smtprelay3.abs.adelphia.net (smtprelay.abs.adelphia.net          [64.8.20.11]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id PAA02704 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 15 Nov 2001 15:44:03 -0800
Received: from jlgrady ([24.53.101.238]) by smtprelay3.abs.adelphia.net          (Netscape Messaging Server 4.15) with SMTP id GMV8KD02.B6L for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 15 Nov 2001 18:43:25 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook CWS, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
Importance: Normal
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <000001c16e2f$58b46460$0200a8c0@24.53.64.18>
Date:         Thu, 15 Nov 2001 18:43:36 -0500
Reply-To: "Jeff Grady" <jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jeff Grady" <jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] motor data files
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <3BF436C6.F63F3D01@vip.cybercity.dk>

I made the suggestion, but have no time to develop a DTD. I think it would
be a great way to share motor data that would be instantly available to
applications (web or otherwise) built to use it.

JG

-----Original Message-----
From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@itc.uci.edu]On
Behalf Of Hans Olaf Toft
Sent: Thursday, November 15, 2001 4:43 PM
To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
Subject: [AR] motor data files


Some time ago, someone suggested the definition of motor thrust data in
XML format. I would be very interested to see proposals for such a format.

Hans Olaf Toft

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 4399 invoked from network); 16 Nov 2001 01:54:34 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 16 Nov 2001 01:54:34 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 19646 invoked by uid 50005); 16 Nov 2001 01:54:26 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4169. . Clean. Processed in 0.305402 secs); 16 Nov 2001 01:54:26 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 16 Nov 2001 01:54:26 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA03257; Thu, 15 Nov 2001 17:52:56 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 80575 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 16 Nov 2001 01:51:35          +0000
Received: from smtp002pub.verizon.net (smtp002pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.181])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id RAA03234 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 15 Nov 2001 17:51:34 -0800
Received: from [63.15.225.132] (1Cust132.tnt2.rancho-cucamonga.ca.da.uu.net          [63.15.225.132]) by smtp002pub.verizon.net  with ESMTP for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; id fAG1oth12400 Thu, 15 Nov 2001 19:51:00          -0600 (CST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: GTE/01rocket@mail.gte.net
References: <000001c16e2f$58b46460$0200a8c0@24.53.64.18>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <a05100300b81a20a06e79@[63.24.225.160]>
Date:         Thu, 15 Nov 2001 17:50:53 -0800
Reply-To: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] motor data files
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <000001c16e2f$58b46460$0200a8c0@24.53.64.18>

>I made the suggestion, but have no time to develop a DTD. I think it would
>be a great way to share motor data that would be instantly available to
>applications (web or otherwise) built to use it.
>
>JG


The current standard data format is "jend" which includes inflection points.

One simple example:

jend:      Govt: 5.5 KS 765 - P - F
0.0-0      ILP: 18715 N 3403 - P - F
0.2-875
1.0-875
2.0-650
3.0-760
4.0-875
5.0-875
5.5-0

21# propellant

A sample data file from RASALT4.bas

Data file format for a rocket motor
Compatible with other rocket programs
copyright 1983, 88 Jerry Irvine

00  MRev 01......:
01  Designation..: E25USR
02  Data date....: 07-27-90
03  Manufacturer.: U.S.ROCKETS
04  Cost.........: 6.95
05  Grain type...: B
06  Propellant ID: 571
07  O.D..........: 0.938
08  Case Len     : 2.75
09  Wgt Units....: G
10  Specs........: T
11  Wt Prop. gms.: 20
12  Load Wt. gms.: 41.5
13  Burn time....: 1.60
14  Favg Lbs.....: 5.59999
15  Favg Newtons.: 24.9088
16  TotImp Lbsecs: 8.95999
17  TotImp Ntsecs: 39.8540
18  REM1.........:
19  REM2.........:
20  Time /Thrust.: 0.00    6.00
20  Time /Thrust.: 1.59    5.20
20  Time /Thrust.: 1.60    0.00
61  Mass Fraction: .482
62  Isp lb/s/lb  : 203.2
63  Rating.......:   40-E-25
64  Pct Full.....:  99% E



>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@itc.uci.edu]On
>Behalf Of Hans Olaf Toft
>Sent: Thursday, November 15, 2001 4:43 PM
>To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
>Subject: [AR] motor data files
>
>
>Some time ago, someone suggested the definition of motor thrust data in
>XML format. I would be very interested to see proposals for such a format.
>
>Hans Olaf Toft


--
Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
Opinion, the whole thing.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 4394 invoked from network); 16 Nov 2001 01:54:34 -0000
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 16 Nov 2001 01:54:34 -0000
Received: (qmail 317 invoked by uid 50005); 16 Nov 2001 01:54:25 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4169. . Clean. Processed in 0.783858 secs); 16 Nov 2001 01:54:25 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 16 Nov 2001 01:54:24 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA03219; Thu, 15 Nov 2001 17:49:45 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 80568 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 16 Nov 2001 01:47:48          +0000
Received: from vail.net (vail.net [199.45.148.10]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7)          with SMTP id RAA03203 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 15 Nov 2001          17:47:47 -0800
Received: from 0015771985 (vailmax4-30.vail.net [204.144.161.130]) by vail.net          (Postfix) with SMTP id 9DB4614E28D for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 15          Nov 2001 18:44:31 -0700 (MST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <002901c16e41$0cd99440$82a190cc@0015771985>
Date:         Thu, 15 Nov 2001 18:50:19 -0700
Reply-To: "Connie Steiert" <steiert@VAIL.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Connie Steiert" <steiert@VAIL.NET>
Subject:      [AR] Motor Simulation software
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

I was looking for a better motor design program than the one I currently
have, and hoped that someone here could tell me what's out there for
amateurs. I know GDP Lite is said to be good, but if there's something new
I've never heard of (or something not from the Netherlands) I would
appreciate it if you could tell me (preferably at steiert@vail.net).

Thanks,
Dak

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 24303 invoked from network); 16 Nov 2001 05:55:54 -0000
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 16 Nov 2001 05:55:54 -0000
Received: (qmail 6284 invoked by uid 50005); 16 Nov 2001 05:55:48 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4169. . Clean. Processed in 0.154972 secs); 16 Nov 2001 05:55:48 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 16 Nov 2001 05:55:48 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA04784; Thu, 15 Nov 2001 21:54:02 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 80667 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 16 Nov 2001 05:52:36          +0000
Received: from smtprelay2.abs.adelphia.net (smtprelay.abs.adelphia.net          [64.8.20.11]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id VAA04763 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 15 Nov 2001 21:52:35 -0800
Received: from jlgrady ([24.53.101.238]) by smtprelay2.abs.adelphia.net          (Netscape Messaging Server 4.15) with SMTP id GMVPMS00.222 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 16 Nov 2001 00:52:04 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook CWS, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
Importance: Normal
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <000001c16e62$d5188990$0200a8c0@24.53.64.18>
Date:         Fri, 16 Nov 2001 00:52:08 -0500
Reply-To: "Jeff Grady" <jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jeff Grady" <jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] motor data files
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <a05100300b81a20a06e79@[63.24.225.160]>

Who developed the "jend" standard? Is there a publication that describes the
elements and attributes of those elements? For example: What is "Specs" and
what values other than "T" is valid? Is O.D. the outside diameter of the
case or the grain? While I can make assumptions for what some of this is,
some of it I cannot. How is this compatible with other rocket programs? Do
other programs read this data directly? How is it stored? ASCII text, XLS,
DIF, CSV, DBF ??? What other rocket programs will read this data?

XML data is "self-describing" - to a point. XML data is usually accompanied
by a Data Type Definition document. The DTD describes in great detail, the
characteristics of the data that follows it.

I'm tired, but I'll give a "from-the-hip" example of the data (does not
include DTD) for just the grain. This is by no means all inclusive set of
data for a propellant grain, but maybe the idea will be conveyed. It may not
come out formatted as I have typed it; all text between each set of < and >
should be on the same line for readability. Don't try to make sense of the
EXACT information provided between the tags because I made the values up.

<grain type="bates" uom="inches" od=".750" oal="2.75">
        <core type="round" uom="inches" dia=".250" len="2.75" />
        <propellant uom="gm" weight="20">
                <chem group="solid" form="powder" use="oxidizer" name="Potassium Nitrate"
chemname="KNO3" uom="pct" qty="72" />
                <chem group="solid" form="powder" use="fuel" name="Sulphur" chemname="S"
uom="pct" qty="10" />
                <chem group="solid" form="powder" use="fuel" name="Charcoal" chemname="C"
uom="pct" qty="15" />
                <chem group="solid" form="powder" use="binder" name="Dextrin"
chemname="Dextrin" uom="pct" qty="3" />
        </propellant>
        <inhibitor mat="kraft paper" design="spiral wound" uom="inches"
thickness=".125" />
        <burnrate uom="inches" time="sec" value="1.71875" />
        <isp>143</isp>
</grain>



The surface area of the core can be calculated; so can the gms of each
individual chemical component of the propellant. For a multi-grain motor,
there would be another set of the above data for each grain, and each grain
could have different parameters (attribute values). In any case, this data
could be made available across the web instantly via a URL. Any application
written to understand the data via the DTD


-----Original Message-----
From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@itc.uci.edu]On
Behalf Of Jerry Irvine
Sent: Thursday, November 15, 2001 8:51 PM
To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
Subject: Re: [AR] motor data files


>I made the suggestion, but have no time to develop a DTD. I think it would
>be a great way to share motor data that would be instantly available to
>applications (web or otherwise) built to use it.
>
>JG


The current standard data format is "jend" which includes inflection points.

One simple example:

jend:      Govt: 5.5 KS 765 - P - F
0.0-0      ILP: 18715 N 3403 - P - F
0.2-875
1.0-875
2.0-650
3.0-760
4.0-875
5.0-875
5.5-0

21# propellant

A sample data file from RASALT4.bas

Data file format for a rocket motor
Compatible with other rocket programs
copyright 1983, 88 Jerry Irvine

00  MRev 01......:
01  Designation..: E25USR
02  Data date....: 07-27-90
03  Manufacturer.: U.S.ROCKETS
04  Cost.........: 6.95
05  Grain type...: B
06  Propellant ID: 571
07  O.D..........: 0.938
08  Case Len     : 2.75
09  Wgt Units....: G
10  Specs........: T
11  Wt Prop. gms.: 20
12  Load Wt. gms.: 41.5
13  Burn time....: 1.60
14  Favg Lbs.....: 5.59999
15  Favg Newtons.: 24.9088
16  TotImp Lbsecs: 8.95999
17  TotImp Ntsecs: 39.8540
18  REM1.........:
19  REM2.........:
20  Time /Thrust.: 0.00    6.00
20  Time /Thrust.: 1.59    5.20
20  Time /Thrust.: 1.60    0.00
61  Mass Fraction: .482
62  Isp lb/s/lb  : 203.2
63  Rating.......:   40-E-25
64  Pct Full.....:  99% E



>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@itc.uci.edu]On
>Behalf Of Hans Olaf Toft
>Sent: Thursday, November 15, 2001 4:43 PM
>To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
>Subject: [AR] motor data files
>
>
>Some time ago, someone suggested the definition of motor thrust data in
>XML format. I would be very interested to see proposals for such a format.
>
>Hans Olaf Toft


--
Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
Opinion, the whole thing.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 26431 invoked from network); 16 Nov 2001 06:36:47 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 16 Nov 2001 06:36:47 -0000
Received: (qmail 24148 invoked by uid 50005); 16 Nov 2001 06:36:40 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4169. . Clean. Processed in 0.10051 secs); 16 Nov 2001 06:36:40 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 16 Nov 2001 06:36:40 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA05155; Thu, 15 Nov 2001 22:29:23 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 80745 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 16 Nov 2001 06:27:39          +0000
Received: from wrench.toolcity.net (root@wrench.toolcity.net [208.0.188.2]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id WAA05139; Thu, 15 Nov 2001          22:27:38 -0800
Received: from [63.169.101.43]          (dap-63-169-101-43.meadville-tnt-1.pa.toolcity.net [63.169.101.43])          by wrench.toolcity.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id BAA13294; Fri, 16          Nov 2001 01:27:33 -0500 (EST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <v01510100b81a63b034d4@[208.22.189.232]>
Date:         Fri, 16 Nov 2001 01:30:08 -0600
Reply-To: "al bradley" <abradley@TOOLCITY.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "al bradley" <abradley@TOOLCITY.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] 3The Newbies and the politics -- Re:
Comments: To: Ray Calkins <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Among other things, Ray writes:

>Exactly what "bootleg" launches are, I'm not totally clear.  If it means
>taking personal initiative to ensure you are complying with all local,
>state and federal legal requirements, without the aid of TRA or others,
>then I heartily recommend it. If it means avoiding all legal requirements
>and launching "out of site, out of mind", I ask that you please
>reconsider.
>
Ray, I considered and readily reconsidered without a violation occurring.
However, regarding the pioneer spirit I often see on arocket, I suspect
that listees and many others have had at least one "bootleg launch" before
the considerations scared them. And were frustrated when they found there
was no legal launch organizations and facilities without having to drive
hours/days to get there. And could not legally transport their home-built
motors because state lines (and other things?) were involved. The latter is
one reason that I purchased a lathe and will have to study hybrids or more
advanced propulsions before long.
----------------
>> No longer able to draw on the forum that arocket has provided?
>
>Not at all.  First of all, I highly recommend static testing your motors
>many times before flight.  This is the only way you can be sure you're not
>going to set the countryside afire, with a rocket sent askew by a thrust
>curve only theorized.
>
Makes sense real easily. So, in the context of a "by-the-way", I have often
wondered if *anyone on arocket* has ever designed a non-digital, (even
mostly mechanical) chart-recorder with test stand  suitable for such
non-hi-tech, low-budget, back-yard tests? A great incentive for the newbie
with no launch site available, huh?
----------------

>> Short of inclusion in hell, will somesone clearly show where we
>> newbies belong?
>
>I've always thought _this_ was where they belonged.
>
>Ray

Mmmm! Ray, does "_this_" refer to hell as the place they belong? <quizzical
smile>

al bradley




------------------------------------------------------------------
Can you live Life with this?: "Unless there is a law, an agreement, or a
long-standing custom, No one `Deserves' Anything -- Either Good or Bad!"

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 27480 invoked from network); 16 Nov 2001 07:10:34 -0000
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 16 Nov 2001 07:10:34 -0000
Received: (qmail 26664 invoked by uid 50005); 16 Nov 2001 07:10:28 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4169. . Clean. Processed in 0.164341 secs); 16 Nov 2001 07:10:28 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 16 Nov 2001 07:10:28 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA05295; Thu, 15 Nov 2001 23:08:55 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 80760 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 16 Nov 2001 07:07:24          +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (oe35.law4.hotmail.com [216.33.148.28]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id XAA05279 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 15 Nov 2001 23:07:23 -0800
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Thu,          15 Nov 2001 23:06:53 -0800
X-Originating-IP: [130.235.244.160]
References:  <000001c16e2f$58b46460$0200a8c0@24.53.64.18>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 16 Nov 2001 07:06:53.0273 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[45174C90:01C16E6D]
Message-ID:  <OE35pyLAPDVXLuSbh290000bd33@hotmail.com>
Date:         Fri, 16 Nov 2001 08:05:21 -0000
Reply-To: "Carsten Glans" <cag@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Carsten Glans" <cag@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] motor data files
Comments: To: Jeff Grady <jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Hi!


Just for the protocol... ;-)


Carsten Glans
http://www.min-sajt.com/cag

----- Original Message -----
From: "Jeff Grady" <jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Tuesday, September 18, 2001 3:43 PM
Subject: Re: [AR] Motor Specs Database


> That's an excellent idea. I'm currently developing an intranet application
> for my employer and can say that XML/XSLT is a great way to share data.
> There would be a rather large list of tags that needs to be defined and
> published with definitions. Kind of an "EDI" standards list.
>
> Jeff Grady
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@itc.uci.edu]On
> Behalf Of Carsten Glans
> Sent: Tuesday, September 18, 2001 8:35 AM
> To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
> Subject: Re: [AR] Motor Specs Database
>
>
> Hi all!
>
> I like this idea very much and would also like to suggest that we define a
> XML-schema for rocket motors, flights etc so that all different software
> tools we build can utilize the information stored in many different
sources.
>
> Regards
>
> Carsten Glans
> http://www.min-sajt.com/cag
>
>
>
> >From: Darren Wright <dwright@D2-TECH.COM>
> >Reply-To: Darren Wright <dwright@D2-TECH.COM>
> >To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
> >Subject: [AR] Motor Specs Database
> >Date: Mon, 17 Sep 2001 23:54:43 -0400
> >
> >Hello all,
> >
> >    I am compiling an online, searchable database for commerical motor
> >dimensions, a slight addendum to John Coker's site.  I have found some
> >of these dimensions a good start for designing a motor for a certain
> >case.
> >I'm only interested in composite....no hybrid data.  If you have a made
> >a load, have fired it enough times to be consistent....send it along if
> >you would like to share.
> >
> >    If you have measurements for any Kosdon / Aerotech / Cesaroni / Ellis
> >/ USR / DPT / APS, etc I would like:
> >
> >1. Motor Diameter
> >2. Motor Designation
> >3. Propellant Type
> >4. Propellant Diameter
> >5. Grain Type
> >6. Grain Length
> >7. Core Size
> >8. Nozzle Throat Size
> >9. Propellant Weight (I guess not possible with commerical, but a close
> >guesstimate)
> >
> >
> >I already have a ton of information.....it will take a bit of time to
> >get it entered.
> >
> >I will post the URL when I'm ready.
> >
> >Thanks!
> >
> >-Darren Wright
> >
> >Ozark Propulsion Labs
> >http://www.dgmicro.com/opl
>
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp
>
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jeff Grady" <jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Thursday, November 15, 2001 11:43 PM
Subject: Re: [AR] motor data files


> I made the suggestion, but have no time to develop a DTD. I think it would
> be a great way to share motor data that would be instantly available to
> applications (web or otherwise) built to use it.
>
> JG
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@itc.uci.edu]On
> Behalf Of Hans Olaf Toft
> Sent: Thursday, November 15, 2001 4:43 PM
> To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
> Subject: [AR] motor data files
>
>
> Some time ago, someone suggested the definition of motor thrust data in
> XML format. I would be very interested to see proposals for such a format.
>
> Hans Olaf Toft
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 18608 invoked from network); 16 Nov 2001 08:05:00 -0000
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 16 Nov 2001 08:05:00 -0000
Received: (qmail 19056 invoked by uid 50005); 16 Nov 2001 08:04:54 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4169. . Clean. Processed in 0.153909 secs); 16 Nov 2001 08:04:54 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 16 Nov 2001 08:04:54 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA05445; Fri, 16 Nov 2001 00:03:28 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 80771 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 16 Nov 2001 08:02:05          +0000
Received: from smtprelay1.abs.adelphia.net (smtprelay.abs.adelphia.net          [64.8.20.11]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id AAA05430 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 16 Nov 2001 00:02:04 -0800
Received: from jlgrady ([24.53.101.238]) by smtprelay1.abs.adelphia.net          (Netscape Messaging Server 4.15) with SMTP id GMVVMM03.Q2T; Fri, 16          Nov 2001 03:01:34 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook CWS, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <000001c16e74$eb7bb7e0$0200a8c0@24.53.64.18>
Date:         Fri, 16 Nov 2001 03:01:38 -0500
Reply-To: "Jeff Grady" <jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jeff Grady" <jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] motor data files
Comments: To: Carsten Glans <cag@HOTMAIL.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <OE35pyLAPDVXLuSbh290000bd33@hotmail.com>

I stand corrected! I do remember it was a topic of discussion and I gave my
2 cents worth... My wife says I have a selective memory... Not true. Just a
faulty one.

JG

-----Original Message-----
From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@itc.uci.edu]On
Behalf Of Carsten Glans
Sent: Friday, November 16, 2001 3:05 AM
To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
Subject: Re: [AR] motor data files


Hi!


Just for the protocol... ;-)


Carsten Glans
http://www.min-sajt.com/cag

----- Original Message -----
From: "Jeff Grady" <jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Tuesday, September 18, 2001 3:43 PM
Subject: Re: [AR] Motor Specs Database


> That's an excellent idea. I'm currently developing an intranet application
> for my employer and can say that XML/XSLT is a great way to share data.
> There would be a rather large list of tags that needs to be defined and
> published with definitions. Kind of an "EDI" standards list.
>
> Jeff Grady
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@itc.uci.edu]On
> Behalf Of Carsten Glans
> Sent: Tuesday, September 18, 2001 8:35 AM
> To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
> Subject: Re: [AR] Motor Specs Database
>
>
> Hi all!
>
> I like this idea very much and would also like to suggest that we define a
> XML-schema for rocket motors, flights etc so that all different software
> tools we build can utilize the information stored in many different
sources.
>
> Regards
>
> Carsten Glans
> http://www.min-sajt.com/cag
>
>
>
> >From: Darren Wright <dwright@D2-TECH.COM>
> >Reply-To: Darren Wright <dwright@D2-TECH.COM>
> >To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
> >Subject: [AR] Motor Specs Database
> >Date: Mon, 17 Sep 2001 23:54:43 -0400
> >
> >Hello all,
> >
> >    I am compiling an online, searchable database for commerical motor
> >dimensions, a slight addendum to John Coker's site.  I have found some
> >of these dimensions a good start for designing a motor for a certain
> >case.
> >I'm only interested in composite....no hybrid data.  If you have a made
> >a load, have fired it enough times to be consistent....send it along if
> >you would like to share.
> >
> >    If you have measurements for any Kosdon / Aerotech / Cesaroni / Ellis
> >/ USR / DPT / APS, etc I would like:
> >
> >1. Motor Diameter
> >2. Motor Designation
> >3. Propellant Type
> >4. Propellant Diameter
> >5. Grain Type
> >6. Grain Length
> >7. Core Size
> >8. Nozzle Throat Size
> >9. Propellant Weight (I guess not possible with commerical, but a close
> >guesstimate)
> >
> >
> >I already have a ton of information.....it will take a bit of time to
> >get it entered.
> >
> >I will post the URL when I'm ready.
> >
> >Thanks!
> >
> >-Darren Wright
> >
> >Ozark Propulsion Labs
> >http://www.dgmicro.com/opl
>
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp
>
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jeff Grady" <jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Thursday, November 15, 2001 11:43 PM
Subject: Re: [AR] motor data files


> I made the suggestion, but have no time to develop a DTD. I think it would
> be a great way to share motor data that would be instantly available to
> applications (web or otherwise) built to use it.
>
> JG
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@itc.uci.edu]On
> Behalf Of Hans Olaf Toft
> Sent: Thursday, November 15, 2001 4:43 PM
> To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
> Subject: [AR] motor data files
>
>
> Some time ago, someone suggested the definition of motor thrust data in
> XML format. I would be very interested to see proposals for such a format.
>
> Hans Olaf Toft
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 4290 invoked from network); 16 Nov 2001 08:11:17 -0000
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 16 Nov 2001 08:11:17 -0000
Received: (qmail 28566 invoked by uid 50005); 16 Nov 2001 08:11:11 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4169. . Clean. Processed in 0.150827 secs); 16 Nov 2001 08:11:11 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 16 Nov 2001 08:11:11 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA05480; Fri, 16 Nov 2001 00:09:11 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 80778 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 16 Nov 2001 08:07:47          +0000
Received: from smtprelay3.abs.adelphia.net (smtprelay.abs.adelphia.net          [64.8.20.11]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id AAA05465 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 16 Nov 2001 00:07:47 -0800
Received: from jlgrady ([24.53.101.238]) by smtprelay3.abs.adelphia.net          (Netscape Messaging Server 4.15) with SMTP id GMVVW102.81N for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 16 Nov 2001 03:07:13 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook CWS, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
Importance: Normal
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <000001c16e75$b80f6450$0200a8c0@24.53.64.18>
Date:         Fri, 16 Nov 2001 03:07:21 -0500
Reply-To: "Jeff Grady" <jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jeff Grady" <jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET>
Subject:      [AR] GUIPEP Data Question
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <OE35pyLAPDVXLuSbh290000bd33@hotmail.com>

-----Original Message-----
From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@itc.uci.edu]On
Behalf Of Carsten Glans
Sent: Friday, November 16, 2001 3:05 AM
To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
Subject: Re: [AR] motor data files


Hi!


Just for the protocol... ;-)


Carsten Glans
http://www.min-sajt.com/cag

----- Original Message -----
From: "Jeff Grady" <jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Tuesday, September 18, 2001 3:43 PM
Subject: Re: [AR] Motor Specs Database


> That's an excellent idea. I'm currently developing an intranet application
> for my employer and can say that XML/XSLT is a great way to share data.
> There would be a rather large list of tags that needs to be defined and
> published with definitions. Kind of an "EDI" standards list.
>
> Jeff Grady
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@itc.uci.edu]On
> Behalf Of Carsten Glans
> Sent: Tuesday, September 18, 2001 8:35 AM
> To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
> Subject: Re: [AR] Motor Specs Database
>
>
> Hi all!
>
I would like to include a new chemical in GUIPEP's datalist. It is for:


Bisphenol A diglycidyl ether resin

C 2 1H 2 4O 4 / C 2H 3OCH 2OC 6H 3C 3H 6C 6H 5OCH 2C 2H 3O

Looks like GUIPEP only accepts a limited number of elements, that
observation based on what I see when viewing the list. Is this true or could
I key this many elements onto a line in GUIPEP's datalist and have GUIPEP
recognize this product?

Jeff

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 12843 invoked from network); 16 Nov 2001 10:30:28 -0000
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 16 Nov 2001 10:30:28 -0000
Received: (qmail 31989 invoked by uid 50005); 16 Nov 2001 10:30:21 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4169. . Clean. Processed in 0.716618 secs); 16 Nov 2001 10:30:21 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 16 Nov 2001 10:30:19 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id CAA05876; Fri, 16 Nov 2001 02:28:33 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 80810 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 16 Nov 2001 10:26:38          +0000
Received: from mta03.mail.mel.aone.net.au (mta03.mail.au.uu.net [203.2.192.83])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id CAA05860 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 16 Nov 2001 02:26:37 -0800
Received: from unknown ([63.60.247.12]) by mta03.mail.mel.aone.net.au with SMTP          id <20011116102634.WIAE25070.mta03.mail.mel.aone.net.au@unknown> for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 16 Nov 2001 21:26:34 +1100
References: Conversation <OE35pyLAPDVXLuSbh290000bd33@hotmail.com> with last            message <000001c16e75$b80f6450$0200a8c0@24.53.64.18>
Priority: Normal
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Priority: 3
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	X-MAPIextension=.TXT;
	charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>
Date:         Fri, 16 Nov 2001 10:26:38 +0000
Reply-To: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] GUIPEP Data Question
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <000001c16e75$b80f6450$0200a8c0@24.53.64.18>

Yes *Propep* only accepts a max of 10 IIRC, that's if you're referring to
the Pepcoded.daf input, but hey, you only have 3 (C,H,O) so there's no
problem. That's right, you add em up and join the dots:-) You will need the
heats of formation though.

Troy.


> > Hi all!
> >
> I would like to include a new chemical in GUIPEP's datalist. It is for:
>
>
> Bisphenol A diglycidyl ether resin
>
> C 2 1H 2 4O 4 / C 2H 3OCH 2OC 6H 3C 3H 6C 6H 5OCH 2C 2H 3O
>
> Looks like GUIPEP only accepts a limited number of elements, that
> observation based on what I see when viewing the list. Is this true or
could
> I key this many elements onto a line in GUIPEP's datalist and have GUIPEP
> recognize this product?
>
> Jeff

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 14726 invoked from network); 16 Nov 2001 13:09:26 -0000
Received: from smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.105]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 16 Nov 2001 13:09:26 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 994 invoked by uid 50005); 16 Nov 2001 13:09:19 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpy with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4169. . Clean. Processed in 0.142016 secs); 16 Nov 2001 13:09:19 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 16 Nov 2001 13:09:19 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id FAA06465; Fri, 16 Nov 2001 05:07:45 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 80868 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 16 Nov 2001 13:06:16          +0000
Received: from priv-edtnes10-hme0.telusplanet.net (mtaout.telus.net          [199.185.220.235]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id FAA06449          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 16 Nov 2001 05:06:15 -0800
Received: from telus.net ([66.183.45.79]) by priv-edtnes10-hme0.telusplanet.net          (InterMail vM.4.01.03.10 201-229-121-110) with ESMTP id          <20011116130544.EEQA16585.priv-edtnes10-hme0.telusplanet.net@telus.net>; Fri, 16 Nov 2001 06:05:44          -0700
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (Win95; I)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <v01510100b81a63b034d4@[208.22.189.232]>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3BF50F52.455CE538@telus.net>
Date:         Fri, 16 Nov 2001 05:06:27 -0800
Reply-To: "David Wakarchuk" <dwakarchuk@TELUS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "David Wakarchuk" <dwakarchuk@TELUS.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] 3The Newbies and the politics -- Re:
Comments: To: al bradley <abradley@TOOLCITY.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

al bradley wrote:

> >
> Makes sense real easily. So, in the context of a "by-the-way", I have often
> wondered if *anyone on arocket* has ever designed a non-digital, (even
> mostly mechanical) chart-recorder with test stand  suitable for such
> non-hi-tech, low-budget, back-yard tests? A great incentive for the newbie
> with no launch site available, huh?
> ----------------

I'm sure Ray could point you to these but if you are after non-digital test
stands you'd be wanting to look at the work of the master amateur himself,
Richard Nakka.  At the bottom of Richard's page there is link to an ultra cheap
test device.  Here's a couple of URL's to look at for test stands based on
hydraulic load cells.

http://members.aol.com/riccnakk/hydlc.html

http://www.geocities.com/Yosemite/Rapids/5056/pyro/teststand.htm

David Wakarchuk

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 14907 invoked from network); 16 Nov 2001 14:04:30 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 16 Nov 2001 14:04:30 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 19652 invoked by uid 50005); 16 Nov 2001 14:04:24 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4169. . Clean. Processed in 0.78726 secs); 16 Nov 2001 14:04:24 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 16 Nov 2001 14:04:22 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA06620; Fri, 16 Nov 2001 06:02:54 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 80883 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 16 Nov 2001 14:01:19          +0000
Received: from rasmus.uib.no (exim@rasmus.uib.no [129.177.12.30]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id GAA06604 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Fri, 16 Nov 2001 06:01:18 -0800
Received: from tunnel-44-115.vpn.uib.no (exw6pg5boa.student.uib.no)          [129.177.44.115] by rasmus.uib.no  with esmtp (Exim 3.16) id          164jXt-0000DT-00; Fri, 16 Nov 2001 15:00:41 +0100
X-Sender: st07696@erasmus.uib.no
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
X-Scanner: exiscan *164jXt-0000DT-00*6ycO61pUa1Q*           http://tjinfo.uib.no/virus.html
Message-ID:  <5.1.0.14.0.20011116141346.00b302d0@erasmus.uib.no>
Date:         Fri, 16 Nov 2001 15:01:21 +0100
Reply-To: "Emil Johnsen" <emil.johnsen@STUDENT.UIB.NO>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Emil Johnsen" <emil.johnsen@STUDENT.UIB.NO>
Subject:      Re: [AR] 3The Newbies and the politics -- Re:
Comments: To: al bradley <abradley@TOOLCITY.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <v01510100b81a63b034d4@[208.22.189.232]>

>Makes sense real easily. So, in the context of a "by-the-way", I have often
>wondered if *anyone on arocket* has ever designed a non-digital, (even
>mostly mechanical) chart-recorder with test stand  suitable for such
>non-hi-tech, low-budget, back-yard tests? A great incentive for the newbie
>with no launch site available, huh?

There are plans for a mechanical test stand using a brake cylinder and a
pressure gouge on Richard Nakka's web site:
http://members.aol.com/riccnakk/hydlc.html

I have built a similar test stand, but it allows vertical testing and uses
a lever to allow motors of different thrust to be tested while still using
most of the range of the pressure gouge. I have not fired a motor on this
test stand yet, so I don't know yet if my mods are functional.. Also I need
to find a good way to calibrate it. The readings appears to be proportional
with the applied force, when this is not to small, but I think it will be
necessary to accurately calibrate it to get good measurements. I have not
yet found a method to apply a known force in the same location as the motor
will thrust against.


Emil

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 27166 invoked from network); 16 Nov 2001 14:45:00 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 16 Nov 2001 14:45:00 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 2391 invoked by uid 50005); 16 Nov 2001 14:44:54 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4169. . Clean. Processed in 0.149778 secs); 16 Nov 2001 14:44:54 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 16 Nov 2001 14:44:54 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA06769; Fri, 16 Nov 2001 06:35:58 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 80909 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 16 Nov 2001 14:34:32          +0000
Received: from mail1.murraystate.edu (mail1.murraystate.edu [216.249.159.50])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id GAA06750 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 16 Nov 2001 06:34:32 -0800
Received: from jjcomputer.murraystate.edu (216.249.150.117) by          mail1.murraystate.edu (NPlex 5.5.031) id 3B859680001FDEED for          AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 16 Nov 2001 08:31:40 -0600
X-Sender: terry.mccreary@mail.murraystate.edu
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <5.1.0.14.0.20011116082957.01f9fec0@mail.murraystate.edu>
Date:         Fri, 16 Nov 2001 08:37:58 -0600
Reply-To: "Terry McCreary" <terry.mccreary@MURRAYSTATE.EDU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Terry McCreary" <terry.mccreary@MURRAYSTATE.EDU>
Subject:      [AR] Non-digital test stand
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <v01510100b81a63b034d4@[208.22.189.232]>

At 01:30 AM 11/16/01 -0600, Al Bradley wrote:

>Makes sense real easily. So, in the context of a "by-the-way", I have often
>wondered if *anyone on arocket* has ever designed a non-digital, (even
>mostly mechanical) chart-recorder with test stand  suitable for such
>non-hi-tech, low-budget, back-yard tests? A great incentive for the newbie
>with no launch site available, huh?

The old Teleflite book that describes how to make BP motors also showed a
"chart recorder" made from a cookie tin and BBQ motor.  Briefly, the rocket
motor was placed in a spring-loaded holder.  A piece of paper was wrapped
around the cookie tin which was driven by the BBQ motor, and a pen was
attached to an arm that was connected to the rocket motor.  On ignition,
the rocket motor moved forward, the pen drew a thrust curve.

The response time of most of the old electronic chart recorders isn't
nearly fast enough for most rocket motors.  The el-cheapo 8-bit ADC from
Dataq plus a homemade load cell a la R. Nakka will outperform most older
technology at a comparable outlay.

P'rfesser

Dr. Terry McCreary
Associate Professor
Department of Chemistry
Murray State University
Murray, KY  42071
270-762-6499

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 4652 invoked from network); 16 Nov 2001 15:02:10 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 16 Nov 2001 15:02:10 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 20438 invoked by uid 50005); 16 Nov 2001 15:02:02 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4169. . Clean. Processed in 1.750817 secs); 16 Nov 2001 15:02:02 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 16 Nov 2001 15:01:59 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA06848; Fri, 16 Nov 2001 06:56:40 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 80920 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 16 Nov 2001 14:55:17          +0000
Received: from out007pub.verizon.net (out007pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.107])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id GAA06832 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 16 Nov 2001 06:55:16 -0800
Received: from [63.15.225.132] (1Cust106.tnt1.rancho-cucamonga.ca.da.uu.net          [63.24.225.106]) by out007pub.verizon.net  with ESMTP for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; id fAGEuQH18624 Fri, 16 Nov 2001 08:56:26          -0600 (CST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: GTE/01rocket@mail.gte.net
References: <000001c16e62$d5188990$0200a8c0@24.53.64.18>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <a0510030ab81ad2b0115b@[63.15.225.132]>
Date:         Fri, 16 Nov 2001 06:54:40 -0800
Reply-To: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] motor data files
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <000001c16e62$d5188990$0200a8c0@24.53.64.18>

>Who developed the "jend" standard? Is there a publication that describes the


Jerry Irvine.  It stands for Jerry's Endpoint Method.  Named by Chuck
Rogers and used on the collaboratively written Alt and alt3 and alt3
and alt4 (now being published by Rogers Aeroscience).


>elements and attributes of those elements? For example: What is "Specs" and
>what values other than "T" is valid? Is O.D. the outside diameter of the
>case or the grain? While I can make assumptions for what some of this is,
>some of it I cannot. How is this compatible with other rocket programs? Do
>other programs read this data directly? How is it stored? ASCII text, XLS,
>DIF, CSV, DBF ??? What other rocket programs will read this data?

There was a project to convert all known EDX files to wrasp amd other
programs.  I think there might have been a converter.  But the point
of an edx file is open source file format so writing an input module
is trivial for the partly experienced programmer.

One simple example:

jend:      Govt: 5.5 KS 765 - P - F

This is the US government nomenclature for describing the "action
time"performance of a motor.  Action time is different from burning
time in that it only includes thrust which is 10% or more of peak
thrust.  Burning time, propellant formula, average thrust in pounds,
and the designators are added from the ILP method.  KS is APCP.  An
old article by Bill Wood in Tripolitan listed others.  It would be
useful to have at reference the identifiers for APCP, KPCP, ANCP,
GAPCP, and possibly others.


ILP: 18715 N 3403 - P - F

The ILP method started out as simply adding the "leading power" to
the NAR motor code so a true power is disclosed also facilitating
burntime calculation for the first time.  It stands for Irvine
Leading Power method.  These methods have been in use since the early
80's and were mostly used as a sales tool for the then largest
distributor of larger than model rocket motors. It also specifies
delay (P=plug, X=15 seconds modifiable, 4=seconds, M=medium, etc) It
evolved to include propellant styles (WL=white lightning, BT=blue
thunder, F=fast, WS=whitestar, FS=firestarter.).

The method of selecting inflection points grew out of increasing
difficulty with other methods when describing moonburners, d-grains,
case bonded coreburners with slopey and sometimes jagged thrust
curves (endburners).  This generally describes a curve in 2-12
segments.

jend:
0.0-0
0.2-875
1.0-875
2.0-650
3.0-760
4.0-875
5.0-875
5.5-0

21# propellant

Of course with the propellant weight one can calculate ISP and input
into ballistic programs.


A sample data file from RASALT4.bas

Data file format for a rocket motor
Compatible with other rocket programs
copyright 1983, 88 Jerry Irvine

00  MRev 01......:
01  Designation..: E25USR  -filename
02  Data date....: 07-27-90  -update date
03  Manufacturer.: U.S.ROCKETS -maker or seller
04  Cost.........: 6.95  -retail price
05  Grain type...: B - Bates=B, core=C, C-slot=CS, d-grain=D, star=s,
rod and tube = RAT
06  Propellant ID: 571 - Manufacturer sesignated propellant (ie WL)
07  O.D..........: 0.938 - case OD
08  Case Len     : 2.75 -case length
09  Wgt Units....: G  - units used for weight
10  Specs........: T - I forget, but I can look it up sometime
11  Wt Prop. gms.: 20 - pro wt
12  Load Wt. gms.: 41.5 - motor weight
13  Burn time....: 1.60  -burn time based on JEND data
14  Favg Lbs.....: 5.59999 - average thrust
15  Favg Newtons.: 24.9088 - average thrust
16  TotImp Lbsecs: 8.95999 - power
17  TotImp Ntsecs: 39.8540 - power
18  REM1.........:                    -notes or comments
19  REM2.........:                   -notes or comments
20  Time /Thrust.: 0.00    6.00    -Inflection point #1 (always zero)
20  Time /Thrust.: 1.59    5.20    -Inflection point #2 (2-11
intermediate points)
20  Time /Thrust.: 1.60    0.00    -Inflection point #last (always zero)
61  Mass Fraction: .482 - Propellant to initial weight ratio
62  Isp lb/s/lb  : 203.2 - ISP in a weight calculated method
63  Rating.......:   40-E-25 - ILP
64  Pct Full.....:  99% E - Reference to NAR table of power




>
>XML data is "self-describing" - to a point. XML data is usually accompanied


It shouldn't be very hard to do an edx to XML converter either.
There can be several (12) line 20's.

I suppose with a liquid or hybris with combustion instability you
might conceivably need and want 200 or more jend points.


>by a Data Type Definition document. The DTD describes in great detail, the
>characteristics of the data that follows it.
>
>I'm tired, but I'll give a "from-the-hip" example of the data (does not
>include DTD) for just the grain. This is by no means all inclusive set of
>data for a propellant grain, but maybe the idea will be conveyed. It may not
>come out formatted as I have typed it; all text between each set of < and >
>should be on the same line for readability. Don't try to make sense of the
>EXACT information provided between the tags because I made the values up.
>
><grain type="bates" uom="inches" od=".750" oal="2.75">
>         <core type="round" uom="inches" dia=".250" len="2.75" />
>         <propellant uom="gm" weight="20">
>                 <chem group="solid" form="powder" use="oxidizer"
>name="Potassium Nitrate"
>chemname="KNO3" uom="pct" qty="72" />
>                 <chem group="solid" form="powder" use="fuel"
>name="Sulphur" chemname="S"
>uom="pct" qty="10" />
>                 <chem group="solid" form="powder" use="fuel"
>name="Charcoal" chemname="C"
>uom="pct" qty="15" />
>                 <chem group="solid" form="powder" use="binder" name="Dextrin"
>chemname="Dextrin" uom="pct" qty="3" />
>         </propellant>
>         <inhibitor mat="kraft paper" design="spiral wound" uom="inches"
>thickness=".125" />
>         <burnrate uom="inches" time="sec" value="1.71875" />
>         <isp>143</isp>
></grain>
>
>
>
>The surface area of the core can be calculated; so can the gms of each
>individual chemical component of the propellant. For a multi-grain motor,
>there would be another set of the above data for each grain, and each grain
>could have different parameters (attribute values). In any case, this data
>could be made available across the web instantly via a URL. Any application
>written to understand the data via the DTD
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@itc.uci.edu]On
>Behalf Of Jerry Irvine
>Sent: Thursday, November 15, 2001 8:51 PM
>To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
>Subject: Re: [AR] motor data files
>
>
>>I made the suggestion, but have no time to develop a DTD. I think it would
>  >be a great way to share motor data that would be instantly available to
>  >applications (web or otherwise) built to use it.
>  >
>  >JG
>
>
>The current standard data format is "jend" which includes inflection points.
>
>One simple example:
>
>jend:      Govt: 5.5 KS 765 - P - F
>0.0-0      ILP: 18715 N 3403 - P - F
>0.2-875
>1.0-875
>2.0-650
>3.0-760
>4.0-875
>5.0-875
>5.5-0
>
>21# propellant
>
>A sample data file from RASALT4.bas
>
>Data file format for a rocket motor
>Compatible with other rocket programs
>copyright 1983, 88 Jerry Irvine
>
>00  MRev 01......:
>01  Designation..: E25USR
>02  Data date....: 07-27-90
>03  Manufacturer.: U.S.ROCKETS
>04  Cost.........: 6.95
>05  Grain type...: B
>06  Propellant ID: 571
>07  O.D..........: 0.938
>08  Case Len     : 2.75
>09  Wgt Units....: G
>10  Specs........: T
>11  Wt Prop. gms.: 20
>12  Load Wt. gms.: 41.5
>13  Burn time....: 1.60
>14  Favg Lbs.....: 5.59999
>15  Favg Newtons.: 24.9088
>16  TotImp Lbsecs: 8.95999
>17  TotImp Ntsecs: 39.8540
>18  REM1.........:
>19  REM2.........:
>20  Time /Thrust.: 0.00    6.00
>20  Time /Thrust.: 1.59    5.20
>20  Time /Thrust.: 1.60    0.00
>61  Mass Fraction: .482
>62  Isp lb/s/lb  : 203.2
>63  Rating.......:   40-E-25
>64  Pct Full.....:  99% E
>
>
>
>>
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@itc.uci.edu]On
>>Behalf Of Hans Olaf Toft
>>Sent: Thursday, November 15, 2001 4:43 PM
>>To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
>>Subject: [AR] motor data files
>>
>>
>>Some time ago, someone suggested the definition of motor thrust data in
>>XML format. I would be very interested to see proposals for such a format.
>  >
>>Hans Olaf Toft
>
>
>--
>Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
>Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
>Opinion, the whole thing.


--
Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
Opinion, the whole thing.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 6365 invoked from network); 16 Nov 2001 15:10:15 -0000
Received: from smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.105]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 16 Nov 2001 15:10:15 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 1831 invoked by uid 50005); 16 Nov 2001 15:10:08 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpy with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4169. . Clean. Processed in 0.789843 secs); 16 Nov 2001 15:10:08 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 16 Nov 2001 15:10:07 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA06925; Fri, 16 Nov 2001 07:07:13 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 80931 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 16 Nov 2001 15:05:50          +0000
Received: from df01-e12.danfoss.dk (mailx.danfoss.com [193.162.34.6]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id HAA06910 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 16 Nov 2001 07:05:49 -0800
Received: from df01-e12.danfoss.dk (dkdnisvw.danfoss.dk [10.6.2.20]) by          df01-e12.danfoss.dk with SMTP (Microsoft Exchange Internet Mail          Service Version 5.5.2653.13) id 4HZ20W1N; Fri, 16 Nov 2001 16:05:15          +0100
Received: from 10.8.13.36 by df01-e12.danfoss.dk (InterScan E-Mail VirusWall          NT); Fri, 16 Nov 2001 16:05:15 +0100
Received: by mailx.danfoss.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) id          <Q7W2P36V>; Fri, 16 Nov 2001 16:05:14 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19)
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by itc.uci.edu id HAA06911
Message-ID:  <61A2F0A8E936D311876A0008C74BF1EC0175176A@DD21AE02>
Date:         Fri, 16 Nov 2001 16:08:57 +0100
Reply-To: "Nielson Byron" <BYRONNIELSON@DANFOSS.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Nielson Byron" <BYRONNIELSON@DANFOSS.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] 3The Newbies and the politics -- Re:
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Don't forget this one...

http://www.missileworks.com/test_stand.htm

Mit freundlichen Gren,
Med Venlig Hilsen,
Best Regards,
Byron


-----Original Message-----
From: Emil Johnsen [mailto:emil.johnsen@STUDENT.UIB.NO]
Sent: Friday, November 16, 2001 8:01 AM
To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
Subject: Re: [AR] 3The Newbies and the politics -- Re:


>Makes sense real easily. So, in the context of a "by-the-way", I have often
>wondered if *anyone on arocket* has ever designed a non-digital, (even
>mostly mechanical) chart-recorder with test stand  suitable for such
>non-hi-tech, low-budget, back-yard tests? A great incentive for the newbie
>with no launch site available, huh?

There are plans for a mechanical test stand using a brake cylinder and a
pressure gouge on Richard Nakka's web site:
http://members.aol.com/riccnakk/hydlc.html

I have built a similar test stand, but it allows vertical testing and uses
a lever to allow motors of different thrust to be tested while still using
most of the range of the pressure gouge. I have not fired a motor on this
test stand yet, so I don't know yet if my mods are functional.. Also I need
to find a good way to calibrate it. The readings appears to be proportional
with the applied force, when this is not to small, but I think it will be
necessary to accurately calibrate it to get good measurements. I have not
yet found a method to apply a known force in the same location as the motor
will thrust against.


Emil

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 13904 invoked from network); 16 Nov 2001 15:35:21 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.105]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 16 Nov 2001 15:35:21 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: (qmail 699 invoked by uid 50005); 16 Nov 2001 15:35:14 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpy with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4169. . Clean. Processed in 0.098193 secs); 16 Nov 2001 15:35:14 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 16 Nov 2001 15:35:14 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA07084; Fri, 16 Nov 2001 07:33:19 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 80956 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 16 Nov 2001 15:31:57          +0000
Received: from VOLSB01.libertyville.com (216-180-161-058.fsi.net          [216.180.161.58]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id HAA07061          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 16 Nov 2001 07:31:56 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Message-ID:  <8241D5C473414F48B12A866EBBBF182A9A63@VOLSB01.libertyville.com>
Date:         Fri, 16 Nov 2001 09:28:29 -0600
Reply-To: "Ed Dewey" <edewey@LIBERTYVILLE.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Ed Dewey" <edewey@LIBERTYVILLE.COM>
Subject:      [AR] Freeze-Thaw cycles & AP/HTPB
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Hi list,

Does anyone have any data relating to AP/HTPB and freeze-thaw cycles?  Also,
how long can the motors be stored and still function as designed and/or
safely?

Just curious.  I've tried to get info from manufacturers on this, but they
haven't said much.  Many of us store our reloads in magazines located
outside, and in Wisconsin you can have many freeze-thaw cycles in one year.

Ed

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 19828 invoked from network); 16 Nov 2001 15:36:49 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.105]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 16 Nov 2001 15:36:49 -0000
Received: (qmail 2448 invoked by uid 50005); 16 Nov 2001 15:36:42 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpy with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4169. . Clean. Processed in 0.351331 secs); 16 Nov 2001 15:36:42 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 16 Nov 2001 15:36:41 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA06977; Fri, 16 Nov 2001 07:19:36 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 80938 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 16 Nov 2001 15:18:09          +0000
Received: from spsystems.net (spsystems.net [209.47.149.227]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id HAA06958 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Fri,          16 Nov 2001 07:18:07 -0800
Received: (from henry@localhost) by spsystems.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id KAA14494;          Fri, 16 Nov 2001 10:17:36 -0500 (EST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1011116101140.14454A-100000@spsystems.net>
Date:         Fri, 16 Nov 2001 10:17:35 -0500
Reply-To: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Non-digital test stand
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <5.1.0.14.0.20011116082957.01f9fec0@mail.murraystate.edu>

On Fri, 16 Nov 2001, Terry McCreary wrote:
> The response time of most of the old electronic chart recorders isn't
> nearly fast enough for most rocket motors.  The el-cheapo 8-bit ADC from
> Dataq plus a homemade load cell a la R. Nakka will outperform most older
> technology at a comparable outlay.

This probably deserves emphasizing.  Chart recorders are as obsolete as
quill pens.  Nowadays it is *easier* and *cheaper* to build a computerized
data-acquisition system than to build a decent chart recorder.

(That's true even if you don't have the computer already -- secondhand
computers are dirt cheap, and even if they don't run the latest and
greatest from Microslop, they work just fine under Linux.)

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 23875 invoked from network); 16 Nov 2001 17:17:50 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 16 Nov 2001 17:17:50 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 8582 invoked by uid 50005); 16 Nov 2001 17:17:43 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4169. . Clean. Processed in 1.281235 secs); 16 Nov 2001 17:17:43 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 16 Nov 2001 17:17:40 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA07331; Fri, 16 Nov 2001 08:25:16 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 80969 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 16 Nov 2001 16:23:46          +0000
Received: from mail1.murraystate.edu (mail1.murraystate.edu [216.249.159.50])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id IAA07312 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 16 Nov 2001 08:23:30 -0800
Received: from jjcomputer.murraystate.edu (216.249.150.117) by          mail1.murraystate.edu (NPlex 5.5.031) id 3B859680001FEC24 for          AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 16 Nov 2001 10:20:50 -0600
X-Sender: terry.mccreary@mail.murraystate.edu
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
References: <5.1.0.14.0.20011116082957.01f9fec0@mail.murraystate.edu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <5.1.0.14.0.20011116102221.01fa4b00@mail.murraystate.edu>
Date:         Fri, 16 Nov 2001 10:27:08 -0600
Reply-To: "Terry McCreary" <terry.mccreary@MURRAYSTATE.EDU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Terry McCreary" <terry.mccreary@MURRAYSTATE.EDU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Non-digital test stand
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1011116101140.14454A-100000@spsystems.net>

At 10:17 AM 11/16/01 -0500, you wrote:
>On Fri, 16 Nov 2001, Terry McCreary wrote:
> > The response time of most of the old electronic chart recorders isn't
> > nearly fast enough for most rocket motors.  The el-cheapo 8-bit ADC from
> > Dataq plus a homemade load cell a la R. Nakka will outperform most older
> > technology at a comparable outlay.
>
>This probably deserves emphasizing.  Chart recorders are as obsolete as
>quill pens.  Nowadays it is *easier* and *cheaper* to build a computerized
>data-acquisition system than to build a decent chart recorder.

Absolutely correct.  My point was that one doesn't ordinarily want to
bother with a strip chart recorder, even if it can be obtained for
cheap/free, because the response time is a bit slow (maybe 3 Hz or
thereabouts) for the phenomena that we want to see.  Also, the resolution
of a typical recorder is 8 bits at best.

There's an old saying:  "Cheaper, faster, better:  pick two."  Electronic
data acquisition really is the exception; it's all three.

P'rfesser

Dr. Terry McCreary
Associate Professor
Department of Chemistry
Murray State University
Murray, KY  42071
270-762-6499

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 3238 invoked from network); 16 Nov 2001 18:18:47 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 16 Nov 2001 18:18:47 -0000
Received: (qmail 7494 invoked by uid 50005); 16 Nov 2001 18:18:41 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4169. . Clean. Processed in 0.135458 secs); 16 Nov 2001 18:18:41 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 16 Nov 2001 18:18:40 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA07650; Fri, 16 Nov 2001 09:46:09 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 81000 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 16 Nov 2001 17:44:45          +0000
Received: from spsystems.net (spsystems.net [209.47.149.227]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id JAA07632 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Fri,          16 Nov 2001 09:44:44 -0800
Received: (from henry@localhost) by spsystems.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id MAA16494;          Fri, 16 Nov 2001 12:44:11 -0500 (EST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1011116123727.15998I-100000@spsystems.net>
Date:         Fri, 16 Nov 2001 12:44:11 -0500
Reply-To: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Non-digital test stand
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <5.1.0.14.0.20011116102221.01fa4b00@mail.murraystate.edu>

On Fri, 16 Nov 2001, Terry McCreary wrote:
> >This probably deserves emphasizing.  Chart recorders are as obsolete as
> >quill pens.  Nowadays it is *easier* and *cheaper* to build a computerized
> >data-acquisition system than to build a decent chart recorder.
>
> Absolutely correct.  My point was that one doesn't ordinarily want to
> bother with a strip chart recorder, even if it can be obtained for
> cheap/free, because the response time is a bit slow... Also, the resolution
> of a typical recorder is 8 bits at best.

Not to mention it being much easier to work with the data afterward.
Agreed;  the electronic solution is better as well as easier.  I thought
of noting that, but decided that it diluted my primary message. :-)

> There's an old saying:  "Cheaper, faster, better:  pick two."

The version I now favor is:

        Faster, better, cheaper, same old management:  pick three.

(One reason why Mars Pathfinder was faster, better, *and* cheaper was that
most everyone at JPL expected it to be an embarrassing failure, so nobody
wanted to be associated with it, and the MP team was left alone to get
work done.  But once it was a success, well, everybody wanted in on the
next such efforts:  MPL and MCO...)

I'm sure there are people out there in the traditional space/rocket world
whose managers are still insisting on using chart recorders...

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 24193 invoked from network); 16 Nov 2001 18:30:42 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 16 Nov 2001 18:30:42 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 25953 invoked by uid 50005); 16 Nov 2001 18:30:35 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4169. . Clean. Processed in 0.936963 secs); 16 Nov 2001 18:30:35 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 16 Nov 2001 18:30:33 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA07564; Fri, 16 Nov 2001 09:20:51 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 80989 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 16 Nov 2001 17:19:27          +0000
Received: from femail48.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail48.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.254.60.42]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id JAA07543          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 16 Nov 2001 09:19:26 -0800
Received: from c1649002-a.earthlink.net ([24.20.95.67]) by          femail48.sdc1.sfba.home.com (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20          201-229-121-120-20010223) with ESMTP id          <20011116171909.EQRL10057.femail48.sdc1.sfba.home.com@c1649002-a.earthlink.net>; Fri, 16 Nov 2001 09:19:09          -0800
X-Sender: forkbomb@mail.earthlink.net
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.0.2
References: <v01510100b81a63b034d4@[208.22.189.232]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <5.0.2.1.0.20011116091713.028c7078@mail.earthlink.net>
Date:         Fri, 16 Nov 2001 09:19:10 -0800
Reply-To: "Pierce Nichols" <forkbomb@EARTHLINK.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Pierce Nichols" <forkbomb@EARTHLINK.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] 3The Newbies and the politics -- Re:
Comments: To: Emil Johnsen <emil.johnsen@STUDENT.UIB.NO>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <5.1.0.14.0.20011116141346.00b302d0@erasmus.uib.no>

At 03:01 PM 11/16/2001 +0100, Emil Johnsen wrote:
>>Makes sense real easily. So, in the context of a "by-the-way", I have often
>>wondered if *anyone on arocket* has ever designed a non-digital, (even
>>mostly mechanical) chart-recorder with test stand  suitable for such
>>non-hi-tech, low-budget, back-yard tests? A great incentive for the newbie
>>with no launch site available, huh?
>
>There are plans for a mechanical test stand using a brake cylinder and a
>pressure gouge on Richard Nakka's web site:
>http://members.aol.com/riccnakk/hydlc.html
>
>I have built a similar test stand, but it allows vertical testing and uses
>a lever to allow motors of different thrust to be tested while still using
>most of the range of the pressure gouge. I have not fired a motor on this
>test stand yet, so I don't know yet if my mods are functional.. Also I need
>to find a good way to calibrate it. The readings appears to be proportional
>with the applied force, when this is not to small, but I think it will be
>necessary to accurately calibrate it to get good measurements. I have not
>yet found a method to apply a known force in the same location as the motor
>will thrust against.


         You really shouldn't have to calibrate it -- the pressure is
exactly proportional to the force applied to the brake cylinder, as long as
the system has no air bubbles and the hose isn't too long. You can figure
out what pressure corresponds to what force on the cylinder by dividing the
pressure by the area of the piston.

         -p




>Emil

Mars or Bust!
www.marssociety.com

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 11929 invoked from network); 16 Nov 2001 19:05:53 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 16 Nov 2001 19:05:53 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 21907 invoked by uid 50005); 16 Nov 2001 19:05:46 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4169. . Clean. Processed in 1.480259 secs); 16 Nov 2001 19:05:46 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 16 Nov 2001 19:05:43 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA08022; Fri, 16 Nov 2001 10:51:49 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 81042 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 16 Nov 2001 18:50:19          +0000
Received: from rasmus.uib.no (exim@rasmus.uib.no [129.177.12.30]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id KAA08006 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Fri, 16 Nov 2001 10:50:18 -0800
Received: from tunnel-44-115.vpn.uib.no (exw6pg5boa.student.uib.no)          [129.177.44.115] by rasmus.uib.no  with esmtp (Exim 3.16) id          164o3d-0003uk-00; Fri, 16 Nov 2001 19:49:45 +0100
X-Sender: st07696@erasmus.uib.no
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
References: <5.1.0.14.0.20011116141346.00b302d0@erasmus.uib.no>            <v01510100b81a63b034d4@[208.22.189.232]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
X-Scanner: exiscan *164o3d-0003uk-00*0dWoIXzA5xI*           http://tjinfo.uib.no/virus.html
Message-ID:  <5.1.0.14.0.20011116193900.00b302d0@erasmus.uib.no>
Date:         Fri, 16 Nov 2001 19:50:25 +0100
Reply-To: "Emil Johnsen" <emil.johnsen@STUDENT.UIB.NO>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Emil Johnsen" <emil.johnsen@STUDENT.UIB.NO>
Subject:      Re: [AR] 3The Newbies and the politics -- Re:
Comments: To: Pierce Nichols <forkbomb@EARTHLINK.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <5.0.2.1.0.20011116091713.028c7078@mail.earthlink.net>

>         You really shouldn't have to calibrate it -- the pressure is
>exactly proportional to the force applied to the brake cylinder, as long as
>the system has no air bubbles and the hose isn't too long. You can figure
>out what pressure corresponds to what force on the cylinder by dividing the
>pressure by the area of the piston.

Yes, but I think there are some error sources that will need to be
corrected for, such as friction in the rubber cups in the brake cylinder.


Emil

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 23745 invoked from network); 16 Nov 2001 19:16:32 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 16 Nov 2001 19:16:32 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: (qmail 6871 invoked by uid 50005); 16 Nov 2001 19:16:25 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4169. . Clean. Processed in 0.238777 secs); 16 Nov 2001 19:16:25 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 16 Nov 2001 19:16:25 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA07803; Fri, 16 Nov 2001 09:59:19 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 81016 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 16 Nov 2001 17:57:54          +0000
Received: from localhost (rcalkins@localhost) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with          ESMTP id JAA07788 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Fri, 16 Nov 2001          09:57:53 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.LNX.4.10.10111160956210.7682-100000@itc.uci.edu>
Date:         Fri, 16 Nov 2001 09:57:53 -0800
Reply-To: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
Subject:      [AR] offline for rocket testing
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Hey Guys,

I'll be offline for the next several days, hopefully getting back Monday.
We'll be static firing some motors out in the desert.

Ray

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 104 invoked from network); 16 Nov 2001 19:33:44 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 16 Nov 2001 19:33:44 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 4886 invoked by uid 50005); 16 Nov 2001 19:33:37 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4169. . Clean. Processed in 0.438461 secs); 16 Nov 2001 19:33:37 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 16 Nov 2001 19:33:36 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA08123; Fri, 16 Nov 2001 11:08:48 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 81061 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 16 Nov 2001 19:07:22          +0000
Received: from femail46.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail46.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.254.60.40]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id LAA08103          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 16 Nov 2001 11:07:21 -0800
Received: from c1649002-a.earthlink.net ([24.20.95.67]) by          femail46.sdc1.sfba.home.com (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20          201-229-121-120-20010223) with ESMTP id          <20011116190709.HFSK17262.femail46.sdc1.sfba.home.com@c1649002-a.earthlink.net> for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>;          Fri, 16 Nov 2001 11:07:09 -0800
X-Sender: forkbomb@mail.earthlink.net
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.0.2
References: <5.0.2.1.0.20011116091713.028c7078@mail.earthlink.net>            <5.1.0.14.0.20011116141346.00b302d0@erasmus.uib.no>            <v01510100b81a63b034d4@[208.22.189.232]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <5.0.2.1.0.20011116110303.01b8f720@mail.earthlink.net>
Date:         Fri, 16 Nov 2001 11:07:06 -0800
Reply-To: "Pierce Nichols" <forkbomb@EARTHLINK.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Pierce Nichols" <forkbomb@EARTHLINK.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] 3The Newbies and the politics -- Re:
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <5.1.0.14.0.20011116193900.00b302d0@erasmus.uib.no>

At 07:50 PM 11/16/2001 +0100, Emil Johnsen wrote:
>>         You really shouldn't have to calibrate it -- the pressure is
>>exactly proportional to the force applied to the brake cylinder, as long as
>>the system has no air bubbles and the hose isn't too long. You can figure
>>out what pressure corresponds to what force on the cylinder by dividing the
>>pressure by the area of the piston.
>
>Yes, but I think there are some error sources that will need to be
>corrected for, such as friction in the rubber cups in the brake cylinder.


         That's a response time issue, I think, and a small one at that,
especially if you use a larger cylinder. In any case, such a system has a
slow response time and is less accurate than a load cell. It is, of course,
much cheaper, and good enough for most amateur work.

         -p



Mars or Bust!
www.marssociety.com

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 8653 invoked from network); 16 Nov 2001 23:27:47 -0000
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 16 Nov 2001 23:27:47 -0000
Received: (qmail 26585 invoked by uid 50005); 16 Nov 2001 23:27:40 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4169. . Clean. Processed in 0.189392 secs); 16 Nov 2001 23:27:40 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 16 Nov 2001 23:27:39 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA08925; Fri, 16 Nov 2001 15:24:32 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 81141 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 16 Nov 2001 23:23:02          +0000
Received: from smtprelay2.abs.adelphia.net (smtprelay.abs.adelphia.net          [64.8.20.11]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id PAA08910 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 16 Nov 2001 15:22:56 -0800
Received: from jlgrady ([24.53.101.238]) by smtprelay2.abs.adelphia.net          (Netscape Messaging Server 4.15) with SMTP id GMX29D00.271 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 16 Nov 2001 18:22:25 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook CWS, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
Importance: Normal
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <000001c16ef5$8c2851a0$0200a8c0@24.53.64.18>
Date:         Fri, 16 Nov 2001 18:22:22 -0500
Reply-To: "Jeff Grady" <jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jeff Grady" <jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] GUIPEP Data Question
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>

I was hoping to find a web calculator that might calculate the heats of
formation for this stuff, but have had no luck so far. Can anyone point me
in the right direction? I need this in layman's terms (shade tree) if
possible. Also, the 4 / C and the 5OCH is puzzling me.

Bisphenol A diglycidyl ether resin

C 2 1H 2 4O 4 / C 2H 3OCH 2OC 6H 3C 3H 6C 6H 5OCH 2C 2H 3O

JG

-----Original Message-----
From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@itc.uci.edu]On
Behalf Of Troy Prideaux
Sent: Friday, November 16, 2001 5:27 AM
To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
Subject: Re: [AR] GUIPEP Data Question


Yes *Propep* only accepts a max of 10 IIRC, that's if you're referring to
the Pepcoded.daf input, but hey, you only have 3 (C,H,O) so there's no
problem. That's right, you add em up and join the dots:-) You will need the
heats of formation though.

Troy.


> > Hi all!
> >
> I would like to include a new chemical in GUIPEP's datalist. It is for:
>
>
> Bisphenol A diglycidyl ether resin
>
> C 2 1H 2 4O 4 / C 2H 3OCH 2OC 6H 3C 3H 6C 6H 5OCH 2C 2H 3O
>
> Looks like GUIPEP only accepts a limited number of elements, that
> observation based on what I see when viewing the list. Is this true or
could
> I key this many elements onto a line in GUIPEP's datalist and have GUIPEP
> recognize this product?
>
> Jeff

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 19658 invoked from network); 17 Nov 2001 00:28:53 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 17 Nov 2001 00:28:53 -0000
Received: (qmail 3041 invoked by uid 50005); 17 Nov 2001 00:28:41 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4169. . Clean. Processed in 0.146194 secs); 17 Nov 2001 00:28:41 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 17 Nov 2001 00:28:40 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA09132; Fri, 16 Nov 2001 16:26:43 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 81155 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 17 Nov 2001 00:25:14          +0000
Received: from cisco.com (cypher.cisco.com [171.69.11.18]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id QAA09117 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri,          16 Nov 2001 16:25:14 -0800
Received: (from billw@localhost) by cisco.com (8.8.8/2.6/Cisco List          Logging/8.8.8) id QAA23951; Fri, 16 Nov 2001 16:22:48 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID:  <CMM.0.90.4.1005956568.billw@cypher>
Date:         Fri, 16 Nov 2001 16:22:48 PST
Reply-To: <Your.message.of.Fri@cisco.com>,
	<45.-0500@cisco.com>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
Comments:     RFC822 error: <W> REPLY-TO field duplicated. Last occurrence was              retained.
From: "William Chops Westfield" <billw@cisco.com>
Subject:      Re: [AR] GUIPEP Data Question
Comments: To: Jeff Grady <jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  Your message of Fri, 16 Nov 2001 18:22:22 -0500 Fri, 16 Nov 2001              22:50:21 +0100

>    C 2 1H 2 4O 4 / C 2H 3OCH 2OC 6H 3C 3H 6C 6H 5OCH 2C 2H 3O

That's a weird looking formula.  Is it:

        C21 H24 O4 / C2 H3 O C H2 O C6 H3 C3 H6 C6 H5 O CH2 C2 H3 O

Or are there parenthesis somewhere?

It also looks like you have C21 H24 O4, with the stuff after the / being
a rewrite with "structural hints."

Chemistry/thermo wise, I didn't think that there was all that much
difference between any of of the "mostly-hydrocarbons", (excepting perhaps
things with triple bonds) so you might be able to get reasonably accurate
info out of propep by modeling it as so much methane + so much alchohol.

BillW


From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 15414 invoked from network); 17 Nov 2001 00:43:15 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 17 Nov 2001 00:43:15 -0000
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 28148 invoked by uid 50005); 17 Nov 2001 00:43:08 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4169. . Clean. Processed in 0.187472 secs); 17 Nov 2001 00:43:08 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 17 Nov 2001 00:43:07 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA09203; Fri, 16 Nov 2001 16:41:15 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 81162 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 17 Nov 2001 00:39:52          +0000
Received: from mail50.fg.online.no (mail50-s.fg.online.no [148.122.161.50]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id QAA09148 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 16 Nov 2001 16:29:51 -0800
Received: from epox.online.no (ti132110a062-0344.dialup.online.no          [130.67.109.90]) by mail50.fg.online.no (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id          BAA12263 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 17 Nov 2001 01:29:16 +0100          (MET)
X-Sender: eirimeer@pop.online.no
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <5.1.0.14.2.20011117011820.00b8b550@pop.online.no>
Date:         Sat, 17 Nov 2001 01:29:43 +0100
Reply-To: "Eirik van der Meer" <eirimeer@ONLINE.NO>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Eirik van der Meer" <eirimeer@ONLINE.NO>
Subject:      [AR] New member
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Greetings from Norway to all people on the list. I just got approved to the
list and thought I'd write a bit about myself.

First of all, I'm pretty much new to rockets. I have made a few motors in
the past, but never worked on them long enough to get any consistent
performance. And I've only tried to launch a complete rocket once... But I
do have quite a bit of experience from pyrotechnics, and have constructed
numerous firework items like arial shells, fountains and turbillions. So I
should have the nessesery skills to design a working motor.

The project involves a small (15mm OD, 210mm long) rocket made entirelly
from paper, and a rammed KNO3/sucrose motor (8mm ID, 60mm long). I've had
two sucsessful static test fires before the tooling broke, hopefully the
new will be ready tomorrow. If all goes well I'll be launching the Tiger Mk
I (Black Adder) then...

Anyway, my plan is to mostly lurk around here and pick up ideas, but if
anyone out there has worked on rammed motors with paper casings and
bentonite nozzles feel free to relay any experience.

Well, that's about it, thanx for letting me in.


--
Eirik van der Meer <eirimeer@online.no>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 8214 invoked from network); 17 Nov 2001 02:31:09 -0000
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 17 Nov 2001 02:31:09 -0000
Received: (qmail 25575 invoked by uid 50005); 17 Nov 2001 02:31:03 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4169. . Clean. Processed in 0.394589 secs); 17 Nov 2001 02:31:03 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 17 Nov 2001 02:31:01 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA09538; Fri, 16 Nov 2001 18:28:09 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 81184 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 17 Nov 2001 02:26:19          +0000
Received: from smtprelay1.abs.adelphia.net (smtprelay.abs.adelphia.net          [64.8.20.11]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id SAA09517 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 16 Nov 2001 18:26:18 -0800
Received: from jlgrady ([24.53.101.238]) by smtprelay1.abs.adelphia.net          (Netscape Messaging Server 4.15) with SMTP id GMXAQZ02.R0B for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 16 Nov 2001 21:25:47 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook CWS, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <000201c16f0f$28eae5c0$0200a8c0@24.53.64.18>
Date:         Fri, 16 Nov 2001 21:25:43 -0500
Reply-To: "Jeff Grady" <jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jeff Grady" <jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] GUIPEP Data Question
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <CMM.0.90.4.1005956568.billw@cypher>

That's the only formula I could find under that exact name. Other epoxy
resins close in name have almost the same makeup. One site I found shows the
formula to be C15 H16, O2. In any case, the high hydrogen content seems to
be the kicker in this stuff. I've used KNO3 as oxidizer and it REALLY kicks
off. Of course, this is my observation compared to BP motors that I have
built... It's performance may not even raise eyebrows of the more
experienced folk. I'm sending in an order for AP and a few other things this
weekend - can't wait to see what I get using AP and maybe some Al. Now, to
track down the formula for the hardener...

JG

-----Original Message-----
From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@itc.uci.edu]On
Behalf Of William Chops Westfield
Sent: Friday, November 16, 2001 7:23 PM
To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
Subject: Re: [AR] GUIPEP Data Question


>    C 2 1H 2 4O 4 / C 2H 3OCH 2OC 6H 3C 3H 6C 6H 5OCH 2C 2H 3O

That's a weird looking formula.  Is it:

        C21 H24 O4 / C2 H3 O C H2 O C6 H3 C3 H6 C6 H5 O CH2 C2 H3 O

Or are there parenthesis somewhere?

It also looks like you have C21 H24 O4, with the stuff after the / being
a rewrite with "structural hints."

Chemistry/thermo wise, I didn't think that there was all that much
difference between any of of the "mostly-hydrocarbons", (excepting perhaps
things with triple bonds) so you might be able to get reasonably accurate
info out of propep by modeling it as so much methane + so much alchohol.

BillW

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 28456 invoked from network); 17 Nov 2001 03:21:20 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 17 Nov 2001 03:21:20 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 18417 invoked by uid 50005); 17 Nov 2001 03:21:13 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4169. . Clean. Processed in 0.642335 secs); 17 Nov 2001 03:21:13 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 17 Nov 2001 03:21:12 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA09683; Fri, 16 Nov 2001 19:19:07 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 81198 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 17 Nov 2001 03:17:41          +0000
Received: from out003pub.verizon.net (out003pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.103])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id TAA09667 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 16 Nov 2001 19:17:40 -0800
Received: from [63.15.225.164] (1Cust1.tnt2.rancho-cucamonga.ca.da.uu.net          [63.15.225.1]) by out003pub.verizon.net  with ESMTP for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; id fAH3Cit28313 Fri, 16 Nov 2001 21:12:44          -0600 (CST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: GTE/01rocket@mail.gte.net
References: <8241D5C473414F48B12A866EBBBF182A9A63@VOLSB01.libertyville.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <a05100305b81b86d47304@[63.15.225.164]>
Date:         Fri, 16 Nov 2001 19:17:03 -0800
Reply-To: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Freeze-Thaw cycles & AP/HTPB
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <8241D5C473414F48B12A866EBBBF182A9A63@VOLSB01.libertyville.com>

>Hi list,
>
>Does anyone have any data relating to AP/HTPB and freeze-thaw cycles?  Also,
>how long can the motors be stored and still function as designed and/or
>safely?
>
>Just curious.  I've tried to get info from manufacturers on this, but they
>haven't said much.  Many of us store our reloads in magazines located
>outside, and in Wisconsin you can have many freeze-thaw cycles in one year.
>
>Ed

Composite propellant SU motors and reload kits are essentially immune
from temperature issues.  They can withstand long duration storage.
You generally want to store them in a sealed bad so they do not
oxidize and become harder to ignite.

I have fired 30 year old propellant.

Jerry

--
Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
Opinion, the whole thing.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 13478 invoked from network); 17 Nov 2001 04:19:57 -0000
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 17 Nov 2001 04:19:57 -0000
Received: (qmail 1903 invoked by uid 50005); 17 Nov 2001 04:19:51 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4169. . Clean. Processed in 0.169573 secs); 17 Nov 2001 04:19:51 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 17 Nov 2001 04:19:51 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA09847; Fri, 16 Nov 2001 20:17:20 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 81213 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 17 Nov 2001 04:15:56          +0000
Received: from femail21.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail21.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.0.95.146]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id UAA09828 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 16 Nov 2001 20:15:56 -0800
Received: from cx814151a ([24.14.55.118]) by femail21.sdc1.sfba.home.com          (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20 201-229-121-120-20010223) with SMTP id          <20011117041551.LRZX1594.femail21.sdc1.sfba.home.com@cx814151a> for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 16 Nov 2001 20:15:51 -0800
References: <8241D5C473414F48B12A866EBBBF182A9A63@VOLSB01.libertyville.com>             <a05100305b81b86d47304@[63.15.225.164]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.3018.1300
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <01fa01c16f1e$196165c0$0a01a8c0@cx814151a>
Date:         Fri, 16 Nov 2001 22:12:39 -0600
Reply-To: "John Bolene" <jbolene@HOME.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Bolene" <jbolene@HOME.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Freeze-Thaw cycles & AP/HTPB
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Actually better to double bag.
Humidity is the killer of APCP, not temperature cycling.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Friday, November 16, 2001 9:17 PM
Subject: Re: [AR] Freeze-Thaw cycles & AP/HTPB


> >Hi list,
> >
> >Does anyone have any data relating to AP/HTPB and freeze-thaw cycles?
Also,
> >how long can the motors be stored and still function as designed and/or
> >safely?
> >
> >Just curious.  I've tried to get info from manufacturers on this, but
they
> >haven't said much.  Many of us store our reloads in magazines located
> >outside, and in Wisconsin you can have many freeze-thaw cycles in one
year.
> >
> >Ed
>
> Composite propellant SU motors and reload kits are essentially immune
> from temperature issues.  They can withstand long duration storage.
> You generally want to store them in a sealed bad so they do not
> oxidize and become harder to ignite.
>
> I have fired 30 year old propellant.
>
> Jerry
>
> --
> Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
> Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
> Opinion, the whole thing.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 14444 invoked from network); 17 Nov 2001 04:42:14 -0000
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 17 Nov 2001 04:42:14 -0000
Received: (qmail 3729 invoked by uid 50005); 17 Nov 2001 04:42:08 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4169. . Clean. Processed in 0.306492 secs); 17 Nov 2001 04:42:08 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 17 Nov 2001 04:42:07 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA09970; Fri, 16 Nov 2001 20:40:07 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 81240 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 17 Nov 2001 04:38:43          +0000
Received: from cablecom.laribay.net (cablecom.laribay.net [66.20.57.4]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id UAA09946 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 16 Nov 2001 20:38:43 -0800
Received: from billbull (dial099.laribay.net [66.20.57.99]) by          cablecom.laribay.net (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id WAA09778 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 16 Nov 2001 22:22:57 -0600 (CST)          (envelope-from bpbullock@laribay.net)
References: <5.1.0.14.0.20011116141346.00b302d0@erasmus.uib.no>                      <v01510100b81a63b034d4@[208.22.189.232]>             <5.1.0.14.0.20011116193900.00b302d0@erasmus.uib.no>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <00cc01c16f21$d10bcd20$5c391442@billbull>
Date:         Fri, 16 Nov 2001 22:39:16 -0600
Reply-To: "Bill Bullock" <bpbullock@LARIBAY.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Bill Bullock" <bpbullock@LARIBAY.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] 3The Newbies and the politics -- Re:
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Emil:
    I agree that any system must be calibrated before use. My own personal
opinion, formed from what I learned working as a Telemetry Standardization
Technician way back in the Good Old Days at Cape Canaveral is that any
calculation is just that; a calculation/scientific guess. It usually, no
matter how well modeled, can never compensate for all the variables
encountered in design or day-to-day operational variables.
    The load cell designed and described by Mr. Nakka is very well thought
out and a breeze to calibrate. All you have to do is devise a weight of,
say, a total of 10# including a suspension device (cable, bent coat hanger
or whatever) and hang this weight from the lever arm. Then slide it away
from the fulcrum until the pressure on the gauge reads 10#. This is your "1X
Point, or the point at which you can take a direct and un-corrected reading.
If the gauge reads 300 pounds you are generating 300 pounds of thrust.
    Then slide the weight out until the gauge reads 6.6# and this is your
"0.66 X Point", or where you would position your motor and multiply the
reading by 0.66 to get a true reading. Same for a calibration reading of
0.5# (your 0.5 X Point) and 2.5# (your 0.25 X Point). With this procedure
you can use true readings and not calculations.
    Another "trick" we used to use in order to negate the possibility of
induced drag or friction between the movable plunger (against which the
motor/lever arm pressed) and the cylinder/seals was to fix the stationary
plunger to the solid beams of the structure, the movable plunger to the
motor holder or movable beam and rotate the cylinder with a
sprocket/chain/small electric motor as the test motor is fired. It helps a
lot if the cylinder is made of precision ground chrome-lined tube or else
polished to a high gloss finish with a small hone and very fine grinding
compound. A finish pass with a set of fabric pads and jeweler's rouge would
not hurt.
    When using this arrangement, you position the motor and holder over the
appropriate position along the length of the lever arm and note the weight
of the motor/holder assembly. This factor will be subtracted from the thrust
readings and is a direct weighing method. If you position the motor to fire
horizontally you can delete the required compensative calculations for the
weight of fuel burned at any point in time during the test firing. Otherwise
you are still flying blind to some degree.
    Fire the motor and take the readings. We used to use an 8mm movie camera
and analyzed the pictures (including the pressure gauge and a clock with a
sweep second hand) frame-by-frame for plotting a thrust curve. (I still have
an 8mm film editor we used for this.) I now have a VCR camera I use for
this. The old Bell and Howell is retired for now.
    Well, once again I have talked too long. Sorry if I bored anyone.
Bill
----- Original Message -----
From: Emil Johnsen <emil.johnsen@STUDENT.UIB.NO>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Friday, November 16, 2001 12:50 PM
Subject: Re: [AR] 3The Newbies and the politics -- Re:


> >         You really shouldn't have to calibrate it -- the pressure is
> >exactly proportional to the force applied to the brake cylinder, as long
as
> >the system has no air bubbles and the hose isn't too long. You can figure
> >out what pressure corresponds to what force on the cylinder by dividing
the
> >pressure by the area of the piston.
>
> Yes, but I think there are some error sources that will need to be
> corrected for, such as friction in the rubber cups in the brake cylinder.
>
>
> Emil
>
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 27911 invoked from network); 17 Nov 2001 05:35:58 -0000
Received: from smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.105]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 17 Nov 2001 05:35:58 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 3319 invoked by uid 50005); 17 Nov 2001 05:35:51 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpy with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4169. . Clean. Processed in 0.095683 secs); 17 Nov 2001 05:35:51 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 17 Nov 2001 05:35:51 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA10237; Fri, 16 Nov 2001 21:33:45 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 81289 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 17 Nov 2001 05:32:12          +0000
Received: from mail.aros.net (mail.aros.net [207.173.16.20]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id VAA10217 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Fri,          16 Nov 2001 21:32:12 -0800
Received: from biomicro.com (dm5-219.slc.aros.net [207.173.25.219]) by          mail.aros.net (8.11.6/8.9.3) with ESMTP id fAH5WAZ82008 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Fri, 16 Nov 2001 22:32:10 -0700 (MST)
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.77 [en] (Win98; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3BF5F6A5.6C406A6F@biomicro.com>
Date:         Fri, 16 Nov 2001 22:33:25 -0700
Reply-To: "Mark K. Spute" <mks@BIOMICRO.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Mark K. Spute" <mks@BIOMICRO.COM>
Subject:      [AR] OT - New member
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Sorry if this is too off topic, but I'll try to tie it in somehow.

I've got to tell everyone.  Wednesday evening my wife gave birth to
Arockets newest member:  Aurora Marguerite Spute.  7 pounds 12 ounces of
payload with a 21 inch fuselage length.  Currently a milk based
monopropellant.  Seems to have pretty good performance and makes lots of
noise on lift off.

Thanks for indulging me.
--
Mark K. Spute
Senior Research Engineer
BioMicro Systems Inc.

KD7IWE,  RRS, hopeful future Stolly owner

"It is difficult to say what is impossible, for the dream of yesterday
is the hope of today and the reality of tomorrow."
     Dr. Robert H. Goddard

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 5007 invoked from network); 17 Nov 2001 14:48:35 -0000
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 17 Nov 2001 14:48:35 -0000
Received: (qmail 5772 invoked by uid 50005); 17 Nov 2001 14:48:29 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4169. . Clean. Processed in 0.17907 secs); 17 Nov 2001 14:48:29 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 17 Nov 2001 14:48:29 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA11654; Sat, 17 Nov 2001 06:40:25 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 81373 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 17 Nov 2001 14:38:54          +0000
Received: from femail5.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail5.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.0.95.85]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id GAA11633 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 17 Nov 2001 06:38:53 -0800
Received: from cx814151a ([24.14.55.118]) by femail5.sdc1.sfba.home.com          (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20 201-229-121-120-20010223) with SMTP id          <20011117143853.GWXA16883.femail5.sdc1.sfba.home.com@cx814151a> for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 17 Nov 2001 06:38:53 -0800
References:  <3BF5F6A5.6C406A6F@biomicro.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.3018.1300
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <022d01c16f76$41bfd6c0$0a01a8c0@cx814151a>
Date:         Sat, 17 Nov 2001 08:43:43 -0600
Reply-To: "John Bolene" <jbolene@HOME.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Bolene" <jbolene@HOME.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] OT - New member
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Just have to watch out for the biohazard output from the nozzle.  (G)

Congrats Mark, now you will have less time for anything else in your life.

John Bolene
Tripoli Oklahoma Prefect and webmaster
Tripoli Oklahoma Web page -> http://members.home.com/tripoli-oklahoma/



----- Original Message -----
From: "Mark K. Spute" <mks@BIOMICRO.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Friday, November 16, 2001 11:33 PM
Subject: [AR] OT - New member


> Sorry if this is too off topic, but I'll try to tie it in somehow.
>
> I've got to tell everyone.  Wednesday evening my wife gave birth to
> Arockets newest member:  Aurora Marguerite Spute.  7 pounds 12 ounces of
> payload with a 21 inch fuselage length.  Currently a milk based
> monopropellant.  Seems to have pretty good performance and makes lots of
> noise on lift off.
>
> Thanks for indulging me.
> --
> Mark K. Spute
> Senior Research Engineer
> BioMicro Systems Inc.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 10031 invoked from network); 17 Nov 2001 15:59:34 -0000
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 17 Nov 2001 15:59:34 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 16221 invoked by uid 50005); 17 Nov 2001 15:59:27 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4169. . Clean. Processed in 0.777501 secs); 17 Nov 2001 15:59:27 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 17 Nov 2001 15:59:25 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA11887; Sat, 17 Nov 2001 07:56:56 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 81403 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 17 Nov 2001 15:55:28          +0000
Received: from cicero1.cybercity.dk (cicero1.cybercity.dk [212.242.40.4]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id HAA11871 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 17 Nov 2001 07:55:27 -0800
Received: from usr02.cybercity.dk (usr02.cybercity.dk [212.242.40.82]) by          cicero1.cybercity.dk (Postfix) with ESMTP id 64B3015FD0B for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 17 Nov 2001 16:55:25 +0100 (CET)
Received: from vip.cybercity.dk (port0.cvx1-noe.ppp.cybercity.dk          [217.157.69.193]) by usr02.cybercity.dk (8.11.6/8.11.0) with ESMTP id          fAHFtNo98175 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 17 Nov 2001 16:55:23          +0100 (CET) (envelope-from hot@vip.cybercity.dk)
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.75 [en] (Win95; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <000001c16e62$d5188990$0200a8c0@24.53.64.18>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3BF68B9B.378461DA@vip.cybercity.dk>
Date:         Sat, 17 Nov 2001 17:08:59 +0100
Reply-To: "Hans Olaf Toft" <hot@VIP.CYBERCITY.DK>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Hans Olaf Toft" <hot@VIP.CYBERCITY.DK>
Subject:      Re: [AR] motor data files
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Based on the example by JG, I have made some additions and modifications. I apologize for
being a  complete novice in the XML language, so the following will probably suffer from
syntax bugs - however I assume that it will be suficiently readble for those interested.

The scope for the motor data format has not been defined, but it could be for
* motor data bases
* motor simulation
* flight simulation

I propose the general structure as follows:

<motor>
      <designation ..../>
      <casing .........../>
      <nozzle .........../>
      <grain ............./>
      <grain ............./>
      <data ............../>
</motor>

The designation field could be like:
      <designation name="Space Tech PQ719"/>

The casing field could be:
      <casing uom="kg" weight="1.5" uom="mm" CG_pos_from_top="147.3" uom="kg" uom="m" uom="s"
Ix=0.224 Iy=1.56 Iz=1.56/>

Nozzle could be:
      <nozzle uom="mm" throatdia="7.5" exitdia="35.2"/>

Grain could be as proposed by JG although I oppose the <isp> tag as it relates to the ovarall
performance and not to the grain itself - it could be replaced by a c* tag. If the grain is
not known/specified/relevant the grain structure could look like:
      <grain type="unspecified"
            <propellant_mass uom="kg" value="0.95"/>
            <residue uom="pct" value="3.7"/>
      </grain>

The data field embeds actual measurements/simulations of a given motor and could be like:
      <data>
           <Block>
                <header uom="s" value="time" uom="N" value="thrust" uom="kg" value=mass/>
                <data>
                       0.0 400.0 0.95
                       .........
                </data>
           </block>
      </data>

but the data field could also be more simple like:
     <data>
          <generic shape="rectangular" uom="s" burn_time=2.3 isp="143"/>
     </data>

BTW, I feel that I have to write too many uom tags - I would suggest that units of measure
are metric - m, kg, s, A and their descendants without prefixes by default, leaving the uom
tag optional.

Hans Olaf Toft

Jeff Grady wrote:

> Who developed the "jend" standard? Is there a publication that describes the
> elements and attributes of those elements? For example: What is "Specs" and
> what values other than "T" is valid? Is O.D. the outside diameter of the
> case or the grain? While I can make assumptions for what some of this is,
> some of it I cannot. How is this compatible with other rocket programs? Do
> other programs read this data directly? How is it stored? ASCII text, XLS,
> DIF, CSV, DBF ??? What other rocket programs will read this data?
>
> XML data is "self-describing" - to a point. XML data is usually accompanied
> by a Data Type Definition document. The DTD describes in great detail, the
> characteristics of the data that follows it.
>
> I'm tired, but I'll give a "from-the-hip" example of the data (does not
> include DTD) for just the grain. This is by no means all inclusive set of
> data for a propellant grain, but maybe the idea will be conveyed. It may not
> come out formatted as I have typed it; all text between each set of < and >
> should be on the same line for readability. Don't try to make sense of the
> EXACT information provided between the tags because I made the values up.
>
> <grain type="bates" uom="inches" od=".750" oal="2.75">
>         <core type="round" uom="inches" dia=".250" len="2.75" />
>         <propellant uom="gm" weight="20">
>                 <chem group="solid" form="powder" use="oxidizer" name="Potassium Nitrate"
> chemname="KNO3" uom="pct" qty="72" />
>                 <chem group="solid" form="powder" use="fuel" name="Sulphur" chemname="S"
> uom="pct" qty="10" />
>                 <chem group="solid" form="powder" use="fuel" name="Charcoal" chemname="C"
> uom="pct" qty="15" />
>                 <chem group="solid" form="powder" use="binder" name="Dextrin"
> chemname="Dextrin" uom="pct" qty="3" />
>         </propellant>
>         <inhibitor mat="kraft paper" design="spiral wound" uom="inches"
> thickness=".125" />
>         <burnrate uom="inches" time="sec" value="1.71875" />
>         <isp>143</isp>
> </grain>
>
> The surface area of the core can be calculated; so can the gms of each
> individual chemical component of the propellant. For a multi-grain motor,
> there would be another set of the above data for each grain, and each grain
> could have different parameters (attribute values). In any case, this data
> could be made available across the web instantly via a URL. Any application
> written to understand the data via the DTD
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@itc.uci.edu]On
> Behalf Of Jerry Irvine
> Sent: Thursday, November 15, 2001 8:51 PM
> To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
> Subject: Re: [AR] motor data files
>
> >I made the suggestion, but have no time to develop a DTD. I think it would
> >be a great way to share motor data that would be instantly available to
> >applications (web or otherwise) built to use it.
> >
> >JG
>
> The current standard data format is "jend" which includes inflection points.
>
> One simple example:
>
> jend:      Govt: 5.5 KS 765 - P - F
> 0.0-0      ILP: 18715 N 3403 - P - F
> 0.2-875
> 1.0-875
> 2.0-650
> 3.0-760
> 4.0-875
> 5.0-875
> 5.5-0
>
> 21# propellant
>
> A sample data file from RASALT4.bas
>
> Data file format for a rocket motor
> Compatible with other rocket programs
> copyright 1983, 88 Jerry Irvine
>
> 00  MRev 01......:
> 01  Designation..: E25USR
> 02  Data date....: 07-27-90
> 03  Manufacturer.: U.S.ROCKETS
> 04  Cost.........: 6.95
> 05  Grain type...: B
> 06  Propellant ID: 571
> 07  O.D..........: 0.938
> 08  Case Len     : 2.75
> 09  Wgt Units....: G
> 10  Specs........: T
> 11  Wt Prop. gms.: 20
> 12  Load Wt. gms.: 41.5
> 13  Burn time....: 1.60
> 14  Favg Lbs.....: 5.59999
> 15  Favg Newtons.: 24.9088
> 16  TotImp Lbsecs: 8.95999
> 17  TotImp Ntsecs: 39.8540
> 18  REM1.........:
> 19  REM2.........:
> 20  Time /Thrust.: 0.00    6.00
> 20  Time /Thrust.: 1.59    5.20
> 20  Time /Thrust.: 1.60    0.00
> 61  Mass Fraction: .482
> 62  Isp lb/s/lb  : 203.2
> 63  Rating.......:   40-E-25
> 64  Pct Full.....:  99% E
>
> >
> >-----Original Message-----
> >From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@itc.uci.edu]On
> >Behalf Of Hans Olaf Toft
> >Sent: Thursday, November 15, 2001 4:43 PM
> >To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
> >Subject: [AR] motor data files
> >
> >
> >Some time ago, someone suggested the definition of motor thrust data in
> >XML format. I would be very interested to see proposals for such a format.
> >
> >Hans Olaf Toft
>
> --
> Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
> Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
> Opinion, the whole thing.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 27423 invoked from network); 17 Nov 2001 16:45:42 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 17 Nov 2001 16:45:42 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 29918 invoked by uid 50005); 17 Nov 2001 16:45:35 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4169. . Clean. Processed in 0.251531 secs); 17 Nov 2001 16:45:35 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 17 Nov 2001 16:45:34 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA12065; Sat, 17 Nov 2001 08:41:44 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 81421 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 17 Nov 2001 16:40:21          +0000
Received: from smtppop1pub.verizon.net (smtppop1pub.gte.net [206.46.170.20]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id IAA12049 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 17 Nov 2001 08:40:20 -0800
Received: from [63.24.225.20] (1Cust20.tnt1.rancho-cucamonga.ca.da.uu.net          [63.24.225.20]) by smtppop1pub.verizon.net  with ESMTP for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; id KAA47228119 Sat, 17 Nov 2001 10:38:40 -0600          (CST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: GTE/01rocket@mail.gte.net
References: <5.1.0.14.0.20011116082957.01f9fec0@mail.murraystate.edu>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <a05100301b81c42ec8271@[63.24.225.20]>
Date:         Sat, 17 Nov 2001 08:39:45 -0800
Reply-To: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Non-digital test stand
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <5.1.0.14.0.20011116082957.01f9fec0@mail.murraystate.edu>

>At 01:30 AM 11/16/01 -0600, Al Bradley wrote:
>
>>Makes sense real easily. So, in the context of a "by-the-way", I have often
>>wondered if *anyone on arocket* has ever designed a non-digital, (even
>>mostly mechanical) chart-recorder with test stand  suitable for such
>>non-hi-tech, low-budget, back-yard tests? A great incentive for the newbie
>>with no launch site available, huh?
>
>The old Teleflite book that describes how to make BP motors also showed a
>"chart recorder" made from a cookie tin and BBQ motor.  Briefly, the rocket
>motor was placed in a spring-loaded holder.  A piece of paper was wrapped
>around the cookie tin which was driven by the BBQ motor, and a pen was
>attached to an arm that was connected to the rocket motor.  On ignition,
>the rocket motor moved forward, the pen drew a thrust curve.


The earliest example of this I saw was the Claremont Rocket Society
test stand in circa 1964-66 which used a large coffee can and the BBQ
motor trick.  We got really good looking thrust curves of Estes and
FSI motors.


>
>The response time of most of the old electronic chart recorders isn't
>nearly fast enough for most rocket motors.  The el-cheapo 8-bit ADC from
>Dataq plus a homemade load cell a la R. Nakka will outperform most older
>technology at a comparable outlay.
>
>P'rfesser
>
>Dr. Terry McCreary
>Associate Professor
>Department of Chemistry
>Murray State University
>Murray, KY  42071
>270-762-6499


--
Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
Opinion, the whole thing.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 13869 invoked from network); 17 Nov 2001 19:02:16 -0000
Received: from smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.105]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 17 Nov 2001 19:02:16 -0000
Received: (qmail 19782 invoked by uid 50005); 17 Nov 2001 19:02:10 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpy with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4169. . Clean. Processed in 0.328056 secs); 17 Nov 2001 19:02:10 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 17 Nov 2001 19:02:09 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA12406; Sat, 17 Nov 2001 10:52:34 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 81455 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 17 Nov 2001 18:50:53          +0000
Received: from smtprelay2.abs.adelphia.net (smtprelay.abs.adelphia.net          [64.8.20.11]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id KAA12387 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 17 Nov 2001 10:50:52 -0800
Received: from jlgrady ([24.53.101.238]) by smtprelay2.abs.adelphia.net          (Netscape Messaging Server 4.15) with SMTP id GMYKBM01.62U for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 17 Nov 2001 13:50:10 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook CWS, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <000001c16f98$a8c772c0$0200a8c0@24.53.64.18>
Date:         Sat, 17 Nov 2001 13:49:58 -0500
Reply-To: "Jeff Grady" <jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jeff Grady" <jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] motor data files
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <3BF68B9B.378461DA@vip.cybercity.dk>

An entire flight vehicle could be defined with XML. Just like a bill of
materials. However, motor data is all I would be interested in. The data
Jerry Irvine posted could be translated by a simple XSLT doc to produce XML
data. One problem I see with examples below is that "uom" specified multiple
times per row of data becomes ambiguous. Each "uom" should be prefixed with
what the unit of measure is for. The examples of "uom" below would be
positional data - something to avoid.

Having XML data is great for web page presentation of tables of information,
but software would need to be written (rewritten??) to use the XML formatted
data. Web pages designed to accumulate and store motor info in XML format
could easily share the resulting data with anyone in the world (security
would be a problem to address given the current world events). Even programs
such as GUIPEP/PROPEP could be re-written into web applets that run live,
real-time on the web and could use sources of info in XML format from any
source repository on the planet (www). GUIPEP, RockSim and others could be
re-written to use this. (I know RockSim is proprietary...).

Simulation software such as:
http://www.grc.nasa.gov/WWW/K-12/airplane/ienzl.html
                                and: http://www.grc.nasa.gov/WWW/K-12/airplane/ngnsim.html
                                and: http://www.grc.nasa.gov/WWW/K-12/airplane/ngnsimr.html

can all become REAL simulation software - not just games used by school
kids. Launch an applet and supply either a local location of data (such as
on your puter's hard drive) or via a web URL. These applets could read data
directly from another computer located anywhere on the WWW.

-----Original Message-----
From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@itc.uci.edu]On
Behalf Of Hans Olaf Toft
Sent: Saturday, November 17, 2001 11:09 AM
To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
Subject: Re: [AR] motor data files


Based on the example by JG, I have made some additions and modifications. I
apologize for
being a  complete novice in the XML language, so the following will probably
suffer from
syntax bugs - however I assume that it will be suficiently readble for those
interested.

The scope for the motor data format has not been defined, but it could be
for
* motor data bases
* motor simulation
* flight simulation

I propose the general structure as follows:

<motor>
      <designation ..../>
      <casing .........../>
      <nozzle .........../>
      <grain ............./>
      <grain ............./>
      <data ............../>
</motor>

The designation field could be like:
      <designation name="Space Tech PQ719"/>

The casing field could be:
      <casing uom="kg" weight="1.5" uom="mm" CG_pos_from_top="147.3"
uom="kg" uom="m" uom="s"
Ix=0.224 Iy=1.56 Iz=1.56/>

Nozzle could be:
      <nozzle uom="mm" throatdia="7.5" exitdia="35.2"/>

Grain could be as proposed by JG although I oppose the <isp> tag as it
relates to the ovarall
performance and not to the grain itself - it could be replaced by a c* tag.
If the grain is
not known/specified/relevant the grain structure could look like:
      <grain type="unspecified"
            <propellant_mass uom="kg" value="0.95"/>
            <residue uom="pct" value="3.7"/>
      </grain>

The data field embeds actual measurements/simulations of a given motor and
could be like:
      <data>
           <Block>
                <header uom="s" value="time" uom="N" value="thrust" uom="kg"
value=mass/>
                <data>
                       0.0 400.0 0.95
                       .........
                </data>
           </block>
      </data>

but the data field could also be more simple like:
     <data>
          <generic shape="rectangular" uom="s" burn_time=2.3 isp="143"/>
     </data>

BTW, I feel that I have to write too many uom tags - I would suggest that
units of measure
are metric - m, kg, s, A and their descendants without prefixes by default,
leaving the uom
tag optional.

Hans Olaf Toft

Jeff Grady wrote:

> Who developed the "jend" standard? Is there a publication that describes
the
> elements and attributes of those elements? For example: What is "Specs"
and
> what values other than "T" is valid? Is O.D. the outside diameter of the
> case or the grain? While I can make assumptions for what some of this is,
> some of it I cannot. How is this compatible with other rocket programs? Do
> other programs read this data directly? How is it stored? ASCII text, XLS,
> DIF, CSV, DBF ??? What other rocket programs will read this data?
>
> XML data is "self-describing" - to a point. XML data is usually
accompanied
> by a Data Type Definition document. The DTD describes in great detail, the
> characteristics of the data that follows it.
>
> I'm tired, but I'll give a "from-the-hip" example of the data (does not
> include DTD) for just the grain. This is by no means all inclusive set of
> data for a propellant grain, but maybe the idea will be conveyed. It may
not
> come out formatted as I have typed it; all text between each set of < and
>
> should be on the same line for readability. Don't try to make sense of the
> EXACT information provided between the tags because I made the values up.
>
> <grain type="bates" uom="inches" od=".750" oal="2.75">
>         <core type="round" uom="inches" dia=".250" len="2.75" />
>         <propellant uom="gm" weight="20">
>                 <chem group="solid" form="powder" use="oxidizer"
name="Potassium Nitrate"
> chemname="KNO3" uom="pct" qty="72" />
>                 <chem group="solid" form="powder" use="fuel"
name="Sulphur" chemname="S"
> uom="pct" qty="10" />
>                 <chem group="solid" form="powder" use="fuel"
name="Charcoal" chemname="C"
> uom="pct" qty="15" />
>                 <chem group="solid" form="powder" use="binder"
name="Dextrin"
> chemname="Dextrin" uom="pct" qty="3" />
>         </propellant>
>         <inhibitor mat="kraft paper" design="spiral wound" uom="inches"
> thickness=".125" />
>         <burnrate uom="inches" time="sec" value="1.71875" />
>         <isp>143</isp>
> </grain>
>
> The surface area of the core can be calculated; so can the gms of each
> individual chemical component of the propellant. For a multi-grain motor,
> there would be another set of the above data for each grain, and each
grain
> could have different parameters (attribute values). In any case, this data
> could be made available across the web instantly via a URL. Any
application
> written to understand the data via the DTD
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@itc.uci.edu]On
> Behalf Of Jerry Irvine
> Sent: Thursday, November 15, 2001 8:51 PM
> To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
> Subject: Re: [AR] motor data files
>
> >I made the suggestion, but have no time to develop a DTD. I think it
would
> >be a great way to share motor data that would be instantly available to
> >applications (web or otherwise) built to use it.
> >
> >JG
>
> The current standard data format is "jend" which includes inflection
points.
>
> One simple example:
>
> jend:      Govt: 5.5 KS 765 - P - F
> 0.0-0      ILP: 18715 N 3403 - P - F
> 0.2-875
> 1.0-875
> 2.0-650
> 3.0-760
> 4.0-875
> 5.0-875
> 5.5-0
>
> 21# propellant
>
> A sample data file from RASALT4.bas
>
> Data file format for a rocket motor
> Compatible with other rocket programs
> copyright 1983, 88 Jerry Irvine
>
> 00  MRev 01......:
> 01  Designation..: E25USR
> 02  Data date....: 07-27-90
> 03  Manufacturer.: U.S.ROCKETS
> 04  Cost.........: 6.95
> 05  Grain type...: B
> 06  Propellant ID: 571
> 07  O.D..........: 0.938
> 08  Case Len     : 2.75
> 09  Wgt Units....: G
> 10  Specs........: T
> 11  Wt Prop. gms.: 20
> 12  Load Wt. gms.: 41.5
> 13  Burn time....: 1.60
> 14  Favg Lbs.....: 5.59999
> 15  Favg Newtons.: 24.9088
> 16  TotImp Lbsecs: 8.95999
> 17  TotImp Ntsecs: 39.8540
> 18  REM1.........:
> 19  REM2.........:
> 20  Time /Thrust.: 0.00    6.00
> 20  Time /Thrust.: 1.59    5.20
> 20  Time /Thrust.: 1.60    0.00
> 61  Mass Fraction: .482
> 62  Isp lb/s/lb  : 203.2
> 63  Rating.......:   40-E-25
> 64  Pct Full.....:  99% E
>
> >
> >-----Original Message-----
> >From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@itc.uci.edu]On
> >Behalf Of Hans Olaf Toft
> >Sent: Thursday, November 15, 2001 4:43 PM
> >To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
> >Subject: [AR] motor data files
> >
> >
> >Some time ago, someone suggested the definition of motor thrust data in
> >XML format. I would be very interested to see proposals for such a
format.
> >
> >Hans Olaf Toft
>
> --
> Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
> Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
> Opinion, the whole thing.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 5329 invoked from network); 17 Nov 2001 19:34:01 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 17 Nov 2001 19:34:01 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 9811 invoked by uid 50005); 17 Nov 2001 19:33:54 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4169. . Clean. Processed in 1.978169 secs); 17 Nov 2001 19:33:54 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 17 Nov 2001 19:33:50 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA12519; Sat, 17 Nov 2001 11:31:10 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 81469 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 17 Nov 2001 19:29:47          +0000
Received: from mail-srv1.micron.com (masquerade.micron.com [137.201.242.130])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id LAA12498 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 17 Nov 2001 11:29:46 -0800
Received: from mail-srv1.micron.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by          mail-srv1.micron.com (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id fAHJTFI04211 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 17 Nov 2001 12:29:15 -0700 (MST)
Received: from ntexchange01.micron.com (ntexchange01 [137.201.104.84]) by          mail-srv1.micron.com (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id fAHJTEN04204 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 17 Nov 2001 12:29:14 -0700 (MST)
Received: by ntexchange01.micron.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19)          id <W9B7Q2L2>; Sat, 17 Nov 2001 12:29:13 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19)
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Message-ID:  <2DCA36C44BF3D211917F0008C7C9C9DD067ECFCE@ntexchange06.micron.com>
Date:         Sat, 17 Nov 2001 12:29:13 -0700
Reply-To: "gacrowell" <gacrowell@MICRON.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "gacrowell" <gacrowell@MICRON.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] motor data files
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Would an 'environment' block be useful, to record the ambient temp &
pressure at which the data was taken, or perhaps include this in the data
block.

GC

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Hans Olaf Toft [mailto:hot@VIP.CYBERCITY.DK]
> Sent: Saturday, November 17, 2001 9:09 AM
> To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
> Subject: Re: [AR] motor data files
>
>
> Based on the example by JG, I have made some additions and
> modifications. I apologize for
> being a  complete novice in the XML language, so the
> following will probably suffer from
> syntax bugs - however I assume that it will be suficiently
> readble for those interested.
>
> The scope for the motor data format has not been defined, but
> it could be for
> * motor data bases
> * motor simulation
> * flight simulation
>
> I propose the general structure as follows:
>
> <motor>
>       <designation ..../>
>       <casing .........../>
>       <nozzle .........../>
>       <grain ............./>
>       <grain ............./>
>       <data ............../>
> </motor>
>
> The designation field could be like:
>       <designation name="Space Tech PQ719"/>
>
> The casing field could be:
>       <casing uom="kg" weight="1.5" uom="mm"
> CG_pos_from_top="147.3" uom="kg" uom="m" uom="s"
> Ix=0.224 Iy=1.56 Iz=1.56/>
>
> Nozzle could be:
>       <nozzle uom="mm" throatdia="7.5" exitdia="35.2"/>
>
> Grain could be as proposed by JG although I oppose the <isp>
> tag as it relates to the ovarall
> performance and not to the grain itself - it could be
> replaced by a c* tag. If the grain is
> not known/specified/relevant the grain structure could look like:
>       <grain type="unspecified"
>             <propellant_mass uom="kg" value="0.95"/>
>             <residue uom="pct" value="3.7"/>
>       </grain>
>
> The data field embeds actual measurements/simulations of a
> given motor and could be like:
>       <data>
>            <Block>
>                 <header uom="s" value="time" uom="N"
> value="thrust" uom="kg" value=mass/>
>                 <data>
>                        0.0 400.0 0.95
>                        .........
>                 </data>
>            </block>
>       </data>
>
> but the data field could also be more simple like:
>      <data>
>           <generic shape="rectangular" uom="s" burn_time=2.3
> isp="143"/>
>      </data>
>
> BTW, I feel that I have to write too many uom tags - I would
> suggest that units of measure
> are metric - m, kg, s, A and their descendants without
> prefixes by default, leaving the uom
> tag optional.
>
> Hans Olaf Toft
>
> Jeff Grady wrote:
>
> > Who developed the "jend" standard? Is there a publication
> that describes the
> > elements and attributes of those elements? For example:
> What is "Specs" and
> > what values other than "T" is valid? Is O.D. the outside
> diameter of the
> > case or the grain? While I can make assumptions for what
> some of this is,
> > some of it I cannot. How is this compatible with other
> rocket programs? Do
> > other programs read this data directly? How is it stored?
> ASCII text, XLS,
> > DIF, CSV, DBF ??? What other rocket programs will read this data?
> >
> > XML data is "self-describing" - to a point. XML data is
> usually accompanied
> > by a Data Type Definition document. The DTD describes in
> great detail, the
> > characteristics of the data that follows it.
> >
> > I'm tired, but I'll give a "from-the-hip" example of the
> data (does not
> > include DTD) for just the grain. This is by no means all
> inclusive set of
> > data for a propellant grain, but maybe the idea will be
> conveyed. It may not
> > come out formatted as I have typed it; all text between
> each set of < and >
> > should be on the same line for readability. Don't try to
> make sense of the
> > EXACT information provided between the tags because I made
> the values up.
> >
> > <grain type="bates" uom="inches" od=".750" oal="2.75">
> >         <core type="round" uom="inches" dia=".250" len="2.75" />
> >         <propellant uom="gm" weight="20">
> >                 <chem group="solid" form="powder"
> use="oxidizer" name="Potassium Nitrate"
> > chemname="KNO3" uom="pct" qty="72" />
> >                 <chem group="solid" form="powder"
> use="fuel" name="Sulphur" chemname="S"
> > uom="pct" qty="10" />
> >                 <chem group="solid" form="powder"
> use="fuel" name="Charcoal" chemname="C"
> > uom="pct" qty="15" />
> >                 <chem group="solid" form="powder"
> use="binder" name="Dextrin"
> > chemname="Dextrin" uom="pct" qty="3" />
> >         </propellant>
> >         <inhibitor mat="kraft paper" design="spiral wound"
> uom="inches"
> > thickness=".125" />
> >         <burnrate uom="inches" time="sec" value="1.71875" />
> >         <isp>143</isp>
> > </grain>
> >
> > The surface area of the core can be calculated; so can the
> gms of each
> > individual chemical component of the propellant. For a
> multi-grain motor,
> > there would be another set of the above data for each
> grain, and each grain
> > could have different parameters (attribute values). In any
> case, this data
> > could be made available across the web instantly via a URL.
> Any application
> > written to understand the data via the DTD
> >

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 22233 invoked from network); 17 Nov 2001 20:14:51 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 17 Nov 2001 20:14:51 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 21310 invoked by uid 50005); 17 Nov 2001 20:14:44 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4169. . Clean. Processed in 0.783562 secs); 17 Nov 2001 20:14:44 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 17 Nov 2001 20:14:43 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA12680; Sat, 17 Nov 2001 12:03:39 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 81501 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 17 Nov 2001 20:02:14          +0000
Received: from out004pub.verizon.net (out004pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.104])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id MAA12665 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 17 Nov 2001 12:02:14 -0800
Received: from [63.24.225.20] (1Cust108.tnt1.rancho-cucamonga.ca.da.uu.net          [63.24.225.108]) by out004pub.verizon.net  with ESMTP for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; id fAHK35Y17917 Sat, 17 Nov 2001 14:03:06          -0600 (CST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: GTE/01rocket@mail.gte.net
References: <000001c16f98$a8c772c0$0200a8c0@24.53.64.18>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <a05100303b81c71cf5fb9@[63.24.225.20]>
Date:         Sat, 17 Nov 2001 12:01:36 -0800
Reply-To: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] motor data files
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <000001c16f98$a8c772c0$0200a8c0@24.53.64.18>

>An entire flight vehicle could be defined with XML. Just like a bill of
>materials. However, motor data is all I would be interested in. The data
>Jerry Irvine posted could be translated by a simple XSLT doc to produce XML
>data. One problem I see with examples below is that "uom" specified multiple
>times per row of data becomes ambiguous. Each "uom" should be prefixed with
>what the unit of measure is for. The examples of "uom" below would be
>positional data - something to avoid.

What I am having trouble understanding is why we need yet another
standard data file.  Since a program can read a text file or an XLM
file, why net keep the data in txt files.  They seem to have legs.
They have been around for more than 35 years and probably will be
around another 10+.

The .edx file I posted (prior to annotating it) is a pretty good one.
I find the original design with null values in the unneeded of the 12
thrust inflection points an even more "standard" format, but this
version seemed to be preferred by Brennion and Rogers.

Jerry

--
Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
Opinion, the whole thing.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 10031 invoked from network); 17 Nov 2001 20:43:59 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 17 Nov 2001 20:43:59 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 27874 invoked by uid 50005); 17 Nov 2001 20:43:52 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4169. . Clean. Processed in 0.291476 secs); 17 Nov 2001 20:43:52 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 17 Nov 2001 20:43:51 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA12869; Sat, 17 Nov 2001 12:40:56 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 81518 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 17 Nov 2001 20:39:33          +0000
Received: from out007pub.verizon.net (out007pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.107])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id MAA12848 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 17 Nov 2001 12:39:32 -0800
Received: from [63.24.225.20] (1Cust43.tnt1.rancho-cucamonga.ca.da.uu.net          [63.24.225.43]) by out007pub.verizon.net  with ESMTP for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; id fAHKehH15700 Sat, 17 Nov 2001 14:40:43          -0600 (CST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: GTE/01rocket@mail.gte.net
References: <2DCA36C44BF3D211917F0008C7C9C9DD067ECFCE@ntexchange06.micron.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <a05100304b81c7b2d690b@[63.24.225.20]>
Date:         Sat, 17 Nov 2001 12:38:58 -0800
Reply-To: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] motor data files
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <2DCA36C44BF3D211917F0008C7C9C9DD067ECFCE@ntexchange06.micron.com>

>Would an 'environment' block be useful, to record the ambient temp &
>pressure at which the data was taken, or perhaps include this in the data
>block.

I find this to be essential for original certification data, so yes.

--
Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
Opinion, the whole thing.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 4235 invoked from network); 17 Nov 2001 21:27:17 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.105]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 17 Nov 2001 21:27:17 -0000
Received: (qmail 11114 invoked by uid 50005); 17 Nov 2001 21:27:10 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpy with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4169. . Clean. Processed in 0.126999 secs); 17 Nov 2001 21:27:10 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 17 Nov 2001 21:27:10 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA13109; Sat, 17 Nov 2001 13:23:12 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 81542 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 17 Nov 2001 21:21:37          +0000
Received: from localhost (dmccue@localhost) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with          ESMTP id NAA13085; Sat, 17 Nov 2001 13:21:35 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.LNX.4.10.10111171317560.13025-100000@itc.uci.edu>
Date:         Sat, 17 Nov 2001 13:21:35 -0800
Reply-To: "David J. McCue" <dmccue@itc.uci.edu>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "David J. McCue" <dmccue@itc.uci.edu>
Subject:      Re: [AR] OT - New member
Comments: To: "Mark K. Spute" <mks@BIOMICRO.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <3BF5F6A5.6C406A6F@biomicro.com>

Congratulations! Just be aware of the hazardous nature of the propellant!
The exhaust can be nasty!

Fun rocketry fact: baby wipes make a great finishing wipe when cleaning
reusable motor casings. They leave the motor smelling baby-powder fresh
too!

-Dave Mc

On Fri, 16 Nov 2001, Mark K. Spute wrote:

> Sorry if this is too off topic, but I'll try to tie it in somehow.
>
> I've got to tell everyone.  Wednesday evening my wife gave birth to
> Arockets newest member:  Aurora Marguerite Spute.  7 pounds 12 ounces of
> payload with a 21 inch fuselage length.  Currently a milk based
> monopropellant.  Seems to have pretty good performance and makes lots of
> noise on lift off.
>
> Thanks for indulging me.
> --
> Mark K. Spute
> Senior Research Engineer
> BioMicro Systems Inc.
>
> KD7IWE,  RRS, hopeful future Stolly owner
>
> "It is difficult to say what is impossible, for the dream of yesterday
> is the hope of today and the reality of tomorrow."
>      Dr. Robert H. Goddard
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 1095 invoked from network); 17 Nov 2001 21:48:38 -0000
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 17 Nov 2001 21:48:38 -0000
Received: (qmail 17259 invoked by uid 50005); 17 Nov 2001 21:48:31 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4169. . Clean. Processed in 0.167105 secs); 17 Nov 2001 21:48:31 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 17 Nov 2001 21:48:31 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA13205; Sat, 17 Nov 2001 13:45:29 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 81559 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 17 Nov 2001 21:44:03          +0000
Received: from smtprelay1.abs.adelphia.net (smtprelay.abs.adelphia.net          [64.8.20.11]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id NAA13186 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 17 Nov 2001 13:44:02 -0800
Received: from jlgrady ([24.53.101.238]) by smtprelay1.abs.adelphia.net          (Netscape Messaging Server 4.15) with SMTP id GMYSBY00.Z5Z; Sat, 17          Nov 2001 16:43:10 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook CWS, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <000001c16fb0$d2b94910$0200a8c0@24.53.64.18>
Date:         Sat, 17 Nov 2001 16:42:57 -0500
Reply-To: "Jeff Grady" <jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jeff Grady" <jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] motor data files
Comments: To: Jerry Irvine <01rocket@GTE.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <a05100303b81c71cf5fb9@[63.24.225.20]>

XML data has the ability to describe hierarchical data - text files don't.
XML carries with it a DTD (document) that describes characteristics about
its elements - text files don't. XML is rapidly becoming (already has in my
opinion) the world wide standard for data exchange. I use XML/XSLT to render
web page content from my employer's central customer/products database. We
also use it as supplied by common freight carriers to track shipments of
products (same as tracking UPS/Fed-X shipments). XML is rapidly replacing
EDI in the US and abroad. Text files are positional in nature (See the
pepcoded.daf file) where XML need not be positional at all. No need to
include null values (actually empty strings) in XML - you simply leave it
out. Null is nothing so why include it?

In any case, a standard cannot be developed without people who understand
what data is needed in order to do useful calculations (duh!). People such
as yourself supply knowledge about the important data elements, and others
such as myself who don't know all the data elements will become familiar
with them. People such as myself can supply software development expertise
(been doing it 20+ years) to put this data to work in a non-proprietary web
environment available to all. I can make software do lots of things, but I
do not have the in-depth knowledge of chemistry & physics to develop an
applet that would, for example, determine the heats of formation for a
particular formula. Something I am trying to learn on my own right now.

Once I can do that on paper and understand what I am doing, it should be a
relatively simple task to create a web page that accepts a chemical formula
and produces the result. The byproduct of my effort would be a web page that
anyone could use. While I want to understand how to do this, a pre-existing
web-based applet would have cut the man-hours I'll spend teaching myself
this, down to a few seconds to just get the answer I need to feed into the
pepcoded.daf to get yet another set of answers.

The result for that formula could also be stored in an XML file or XML
enabled database (SQL Server 2000) easily accessible by others via a URL.
Instead of hundreds of people world wide, downloading and using tools like
PROPEP and maintaining their own pepcoded.daf, they could instead have the
option to share a common source centrally located or to use their own with a
simple drop-down selection box. Select the input XML file from your own hard
drive or select a URL to retrieve data directly from a source located
anywhere in the world. No need to download software, and the headaches
associated with distributing software fixes and upgrades vanish.

What I would like to see are simulation/calculation applets on a central
website that allows one to go from scratch to end product with a certain
degree of safety and wind up with a motor or entire vehicle that should
perform as modeled. Recording the results (the good and the bad) cuts down
on redundant work world wide. How many people in this hobby have re-invented
the "wheel" that NASA invented 30-40 years ago?

My wife says I'm done now. I have to go mingle with doctors and nurses...

Jeff

-----Original Message-----
From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@itc.uci.edu]On
Behalf Of Jerry Irvine
Sent: Saturday, November 17, 2001 3:02 PM
To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
Subject: Re: [AR] motor data files


>An entire flight vehicle could be defined with XML. Just like a bill of
>materials. However, motor data is all I would be interested in. The data
>Jerry Irvine posted could be translated by a simple XSLT doc to produce XML
>data. One problem I see with examples below is that "uom" specified
multiple
>times per row of data becomes ambiguous. Each "uom" should be prefixed with
>what the unit of measure is for. The examples of "uom" below would be
>positional data - something to avoid.

What I am having trouble understanding is why we need yet another
standard data file.  Since a program can read a text file or an XLM
file, why net keep the data in txt files.  They seem to have legs.
They have been around for more than 35 years and probably will be
around another 10+.

The .edx file I posted (prior to annotating it) is a pretty good one.
I find the original design with null values in the unneeded of the 12
thrust inflection points an even more "standard" format, but this
version seemed to be preferred by Brennion and Rogers.

Jerry

--
Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
Opinion, the whole thing.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 5907 invoked from network); 17 Nov 2001 23:00:14 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.105]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 17 Nov 2001 23:00:14 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 22473 invoked by uid 50005); 17 Nov 2001 23:00:07 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpy with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4169. . Clean. Processed in 0.760999 secs); 17 Nov 2001 23:00:07 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 17 Nov 2001 23:00:06 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA13544; Sat, 17 Nov 2001 14:45:14 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 81602 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 17 Nov 2001 22:43:20          +0000
Received: from out003pub.verizon.net (out003pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.103])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id OAA13525 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 17 Nov 2001 14:43:20 -0800
Received: from [63.24.225.200] (1Cust200.tnt1.rancho-cucamonga.ca.da.uu.net          [63.24.225.200]) by out003pub.verizon.net  with ESMTP for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; id fAHMOnt23535 Sat, 17 Nov 2001 16:24:50          -0600 (CST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: GTE/01rocket@mail.gte.net
References: <000001c16fb0$d2b94910$0200a8c0@24.53.64.18>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <a05100304b81c939efaef@[63.24.225.200]>
Date:         Sat, 17 Nov 2001 14:29:07 -0800
Reply-To: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] motor data files
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <000001c16fb0$d2b94910$0200a8c0@24.53.64.18>

>XML data has the ability to describe hierarchical data - text files don't.
>XML carries with it a DTD (document) that describes characteristics about
>its elements - text files don't. XML is rapidly becoming (already has in my
>opinion) the world wide standard for data exchange. I use XML/XSLT to render
>web page content from my employer's central customer/products database.



>
>In any case, a standard cannot be developed without people who understand
>what data is needed in order to do useful calculations (duh!). People such
>as yourself supply knowledge about the important data elements, and others
>such as myself who don't know all the data elements will become familiar
>with them. People such as myself can supply software development expertise
>(been doing it 20+ years) to put this data to work in a non-proprietary web
>environment available to all.


You have addressed my *question* of why develop a new standard.  I am
convinced.  Since one of the "features" of motors is they have
dependant variables this might be a dramatic improvent.

For example there are several styles of 29mm SU G60 motors.  There
are 3 types of propellants and 4 delays in each of these from a
single manufacturer.  I get the impression these slight differences
in data files for a motor can be developed from attributes using a
database like procedure.


>and produces the result. The byproduct of my effort would be a web page that
>anyone could use.


I would like to start by adding a feature or two to
www.v-serv.com/usr as the methodology would be directly applicable to
Aerotech, Vulcan, CTI, USR, and Brand X in the future.


>PROPEP and maintaining their own pepcoded.daf, they could instead have the
>option to share a common source centrally located or to use their own with a
>simple drop-down selection box. Select the input XML file from your own hard


Exactly.  And I offer space on my unix based account OR my WinXX
based server account to do that.  Someone needs to start offering
online tech support that is not likely to go out of business in a
year (Rocket Vision) or keep it as internal and proprietary as
possible (AeroTech).


>drive or select a URL to retrieve data directly from a source located
>anywhere in the world. No need to download software, and the headaches
>associated with distributing software fixes and upgrades vanish.
>
>What I would like to see are simulation/calculation applets on a central
>website that allows one to go from scratch to end product with a certain
>degree of safety and wind up with a motor or entire vehicle that should
>perform as modeled. Recording the results (the good and the bad) cuts down
>on redundant work world wide. How many people in this hobby have re-invented
>the "wheel" that NASA invented 30-40 years ago?
>
>My wife says I'm done now. I have to go mingle with doctors and nurses...


I am sooooooooooooo on your side on this.

Jerry

>
>Jeff
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@itc.uci.edu]On
>Behalf Of Jerry Irvine
>Sent: Saturday, November 17, 2001 3:02 PM
>To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
>Subject: Re: [AR] motor data files
>
>
>>An entire flight vehicle could be defined with XML. Just like a bill of
>>materials. However, motor data is all I would be interested in. The data
>>Jerry Irvine posted could be translated by a simple XSLT doc to produce XML
>>data. One problem I see with examples below is that "uom" specified
>multiple
>>times per row of data becomes ambiguous. Each "uom" should be prefixed with
>>what the unit of measure is for. The examples of "uom" below would be
>>positional data - something to avoid.
>
>What I am having trouble understanding is why we need yet another
>standard data file.  Since a program can read a text file or an XLM
>file, why net keep the data in txt files.  They seem to have legs.
>They have been around for more than 35 years and probably will be
>around another 10+.
>
>The .edx file I posted (prior to annotating it) is a pretty good one.
>I find the original design with null values in the unneeded of the 12
>thrust inflection points an even more "standard" format, but this
>version seemed to be preferred by Brennion and Rogers.
>
>Jerry
>
>--
>Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
>Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
>Opinion, the whole thing.


--
Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
Opinion, the whole thing.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 13621 invoked from network); 17 Nov 2001 23:26:45 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 17 Nov 2001 23:26:45 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 26362 invoked by uid 50005); 17 Nov 2001 23:26:38 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4169. . Clean. Processed in 1.955325 secs); 17 Nov 2001 23:26:38 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 17 Nov 2001 23:26:35 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA13696; Sat, 17 Nov 2001 15:21:55 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 81629 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 17 Nov 2001 23:20:32          +0000
Received: from bailey.dscga.com (11-130.dscga.com [198.78.11.130] (may be          forged)) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id PAA13680 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 17 Nov 2001 15:20:31 -0800
Received: from bailey.dscga.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by bailey.dscga.com          (8.12.1/8.12.1) with ESMTP id fAHNGQij029933; Sat, 17 Nov 2001          18:16:26 -0500 (EST)
Received: (from michael@localhost) by bailey.dscga.com (8.12.1/8.12.1/Submit)          id fAHNGQVq029932; Sat, 17 Nov 2001 18:16:26 -0500 (EST)
References: <000001c16f98$a8c772c0$0200a8c0@24.53.64.18>            <a05100303b81c71cf5fb9@[63.24.225.20]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Disposition: inline
User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.22.1i
Message-ID:  <20011117181625.B29632@bailey.dscga.com>
Date:         Sat, 17 Nov 2001 18:16:25 -0500
Reply-To: "Michael Mealling" <michael@NEONYM.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Michael Mealling" <michael@NEONYM.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] motor data files
Comments: To: Jerry Irvine <01rocket@GTE.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <a05100303b81c71cf5fb9@[63.24.225.20]>

On Sat, Nov 17, 2001 at 12:01:36PM -0800, Jerry Irvine wrote:
> >An entire flight vehicle could be defined with XML. Just like a bill of
> >materials. However, motor data is all I would be interested in. The data
> >Jerry Irvine posted could be translated by a simple XSLT doc to produce XML
> >data. One problem I see with examples below is that "uom" specified
> >multiple
> >times per row of data becomes ambiguous. Each "uom" should be prefixed with
> >what the unit of measure is for. The examples of "uom" below would be
> >positional data - something to avoid.
>
> What I am having trouble understanding is why we need yet another
> standard data file.  Since a program can read a text file or an XLM
> file, why net keep the data in txt files.  They seem to have legs.
> They have been around for more than 35 years and probably will be
> around another 10+.
>
> The .edx file I posted (prior to annotating it) is a pretty good one.
> I find the original design with null values in the unneeded of the 12
> thrust inflection points an even more "standard" format, but this
> version seemed to be preferred by Brennion and Rogers.

The main reason is that the XML format is quickly becoming
the standard for just about every piece of software as its preferred
input method. XML also has a standardized method for specifying transformations
into other formats (stylesheets). They can be easily displayed in any
modern web browser. And most modern databases can handle XML input, output
and queries.

Saying that variously formatted text files in old formats still 'works'
is like comparing gopher to the web. Sure, gopher still works but
there's a reason you're not still using it...

Besides, XML _is_ in text. My favorite XML editor is still /bin/vi

-MM

--
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Michael Mealling        |      Vote Libertarian!       | urn:pin:1
michael@neonym.net      |                              | http://www.neonym.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 10884 invoked from network); 17 Nov 2001 23:49:43 -0000
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 17 Nov 2001 23:49:43 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 28556 invoked by uid 50005); 17 Nov 2001 23:49:36 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4169. . Clean. Processed in 0.163081 secs); 17 Nov 2001 23:49:36 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 17 Nov 2001 23:49:35 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA13841; Sat, 17 Nov 2001 15:46:58 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 81647 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 17 Nov 2001 23:45:30          +0000
Received: from ginsberg.uol.com.br (ginsberg.uol.com.br [200.231.206.26]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id PAA13760 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 17 Nov 2001 15:35:28 -0800
Received: from uol.com.br ([200.210.18.238]) by ginsberg.uol.com.br          (8.9.1/8.9.1) with ESMTP id UAA07274 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat,          17 Nov 2001 20:15:30 -0200 (BRST)
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.74 [en] (Windows NT 5.0; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3A15AE85.E0F32368@uol.com.br>
Date:         Fri, 17 Nov 2000 20:17:41 -0200
Reply-To: "Frederico Paro" <fredericoparo@UOL.COM.BR>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Frederico Paro" <fredericoparo@UOL.COM.BR>
Subject:      [AR] Why use isopropyl?
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

What is the point in using isopropyl alcohol rather than ethanol in
rocket propulsion? Ethanol is much cheaper, specially here in Brazil
where it's used as fuel in cars.

Thanks,
Fred

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 12092 invoked from network); 17 Nov 2001 23:50:10 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 17 Nov 2001 23:50:09 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 333 invoked by uid 50005); 17 Nov 2001 23:50:03 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4169. . Clean. Processed in 1.935697 secs); 17 Nov 2001 23:50:03 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 17 Nov 2001 23:49:58 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA13789; Sat, 17 Nov 2001 15:40:26 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 81648 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 17 Nov 2001 23:39:03          +0000
Received: from bailey.dscga.com (11-130.dscga.com [198.78.11.130] (may be          forged)) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id PAA13769 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 17 Nov 2001 15:39:01 -0800
Received: from bailey.dscga.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by bailey.dscga.com          (8.12.1/8.12.1) with ESMTP id fAHNZ0ij029949; Sat, 17 Nov 2001          18:35:00 -0500 (EST)
Received: (from michael@localhost) by bailey.dscga.com (8.12.1/8.12.1/Submit)          id fAHNYxbB029948; Sat, 17 Nov 2001 18:34:59 -0500 (EST)
References: <3BF68B9B.378461DA@vip.cybercity.dk>            <000001c16f98$a8c772c0$0200a8c0@24.53.64.18>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Disposition: inline
User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.22.1i
Message-ID:  <20011117183459.C29632@bailey.dscga.com>
Date:         Sat, 17 Nov 2001 18:34:59 -0500
Reply-To: "Michael Mealling" <michael@NEONYM.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Michael Mealling" <michael@NEONYM.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] motor data files
Comments: To: Jeff Grady <jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <000001c16f98$a8c772c0$0200a8c0@24.53.64.18>

On Sat, Nov 17, 2001 at 01:49:58PM -0500, Jeff Grady wrote:
> An entire flight vehicle could be defined with XML. Just like a bill of
> materials. However, motor data is all I would be interested in.

It would be nice for various design software to use the same standard (Rocksim
and spacecad).

> The data > Jerry Irvine posted could be translated by a simple XSLT doc to
> produce XML data. One problem I see with examples below is that "uom"
> specified multiple times per row of data becomes ambiguous. Each "uom"
> should be prefixed with what the unit of measure is for. The examples of
> "uom" below would be positional data - something to avoid.

Plus its not valid XML. Good XML design suggests that you should
have those values as tags, not attributes. Then have standardized
data types. For example, the casing tag that looks like this:

>       <casing uom="kg" weight="1.5" uom="mm" CG_pos_from_top="147.3"
> uom="kg" uom="m" uom="s"
> Ix=0.224 Iy=1.56 Iz=1.56/>

should look like this:

<casing>
   <weight uom="mm">1.5</weight>
   <cg_pos from="top" uom="mm">147.3</cg_pos>
   <Ix uom="kg">0.224</Ix>
   <Iy uom="m">1.56</Ix>
   <Iz uom="s">1.56</Ix>
</casing>

Then in the DTD you define things 'weight' and 'cg_pos' as standard
data types that can be used for the various components.



> I propose the general structure as follows:
>
> <motor>
>       <designation ..../>
>       <casing .........../>
>       <nozzle .........../>
>       <grain ............./>
>       <grain ............./>
>       <data ............../>
> </motor>
>
> The designation field could be like:
>       <designation name="Space Tech PQ719"/>

If this is the only tag that designation has then just make it an
attribute of the motor tag...

> The casing field could be:
>       <casing uom="kg" weight="1.5" uom="mm" CG_pos_from_top="147.3"
> uom="kg" uom="m" uom="s"
> Ix=0.224 Iy=1.56 Iz=1.56/>
>
> Nozzle could be:
>       <nozzle uom="mm" throatdia="7.5" exitdia="35.2"/>
>
> Grain could be as proposed by JG although I oppose the <isp> tag as it
> relates to the ovarall
> performance and not to the grain itself - it could be replaced by a c* tag.
> If the grain is
> not known/specified/relevant the grain structure could look like:
>       <grain type="unspecified"
>             <propellant_mass uom="kg" value="0.95"/>
>             <residue uom="pct" value="3.7"/>
>       </grain>
>
> The data field embeds actual measurements/simulations of a given motor and
> could be like:
>       <data>
>            <Block>
>                 <header uom="s" value="time" uom="N" value="thrust" uom="kg"
> value=mass/>
>                 <data>
>                        0.0 400.0 0.95
>                        .........
>                 </data>
>            </block>
>       </data>

This one needs some work. Your essentially doing positional field definition
with XML which is what XML is supposed to fix. I.e. here XML has no way
of knowing about the individiual data elements, thus you can use a stylesheet
on them to transform them into something else. Instead use IDs and
a generic data-point element like this:

<data>
  <block>
        <field-descriptor id=1>
             <data-type>time</data-type>
             <uom>seconds</uom>
        </field-descriptor>
        <field-descriptor id=2>
             <data-type>thrust</data-type>
             <uom>newtons</uom>
        </field-descriptor>
        <field-descriptor id=3>
             <data-type>mass</data-type>
             <uom>kg</uom>
        </field-descriptor>
        <values>
          <row>
            <column id=1>0.0</field>
            <column id=2>400.0</field>
            <column id=3>0.95</field>
          </row>
          <row>... </row>
        </values>
   </block>
</data>


-MM

--
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Michael Mealling        |      Vote Libertarian!       | urn:pin:1
michael@neonym.net      |                              | http://www.neonym.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 27774 invoked from network); 18 Nov 2001 00:20:28 -0000
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 18 Nov 2001 00:20:28 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 19403 invoked by uid 50005); 18 Nov 2001 00:20:22 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4169. . Clean. Processed in 0.513031 secs); 18 Nov 2001 00:20:22 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 18 Nov 2001 00:20:21 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA14024; Sat, 17 Nov 2001 16:17:41 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 81696 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 18 Nov 2001 00:16:17          +0000
Received: from mta2.snet.net (mta2.snet.net [204.60.203.71]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id QAA14007 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat,          17 Nov 2001 16:16:16 -0800
Received: from snet.net (225.73.252.64.snet.net [64.252.73.225] (may be          forged)) by mta2.snet.net (8.12.1/8.12.1/SNET-smtp-1.1/D-1.1/O-1.1)          with ESMTP id fAI0GFYg001492 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 17 Nov          2001 19:16:15 -0500 (EST)
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.75 [en] (Win98; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <3BF5F6A5.6C406A6F@biomicro.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3BF6FFD4.5E691BCB@snet.net>
Date:         Sat, 17 Nov 2001 19:24:52 -0500
Reply-To: "Blake Mantel" <BMantel@SNET.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Blake Mantel" <BMantel@SNET.NET>
Organization: done through the use of very fuzzy logic!
Subject:      Re: [AR] OT - New member
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

"Mark K. Spute" wrote:

> Sorry if this is too off topic, but I'll try to tie it in somehow.
> I've got to tell everyone.  Wednesday evening my wife gave birth to
> Arockets newest member:  Aurora Marguerite Spute.  7 pounds 12 ounces of
> payload with a 21 inch fuselage length.  Currently a milk based
> monopropellant.  Seems to have pretty good performance and makes lots of
> noise on lift off.
> Thanks for indulging me.
> Mark K. Spute

Congratulations!
Blake
--
CUM CATAPULTAE PROSCRIPTAE ERUNT TUM SOLI PROSCRIPTI CATAPULTAS HABEBUNT.
(When catapults are outlawed, only outlaws will have catapults....)
Triumph Tiger Motorcycle page at: http://pages.cthome.net/bmantel/

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 3843 invoked from network); 18 Nov 2001 01:37:53 -0000
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 18 Nov 2001 01:37:53 -0000
Received: (qmail 5162 invoked by uid 50005); 18 Nov 2001 01:37:47 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4169. . Clean. Processed in 0.230994 secs); 18 Nov 2001 01:37:47 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 18 Nov 2001 01:37:46 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA14238; Sat, 17 Nov 2001 17:34:25 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 81718 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 18 Nov 2001 01:32:51          +0000
Received: from cablecom.laribay.net (cablecom.laribay.net [66.20.57.4]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id RAA14222 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 17 Nov 2001 17:32:51 -0800
Received: from billbull (dial086.laribay.net [66.20.57.86]) by          cablecom.laribay.net (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id TAA20251 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 17 Nov 2001 19:16:54 -0600 (CST)          (envelope-from bpbullock@laribay.net)
References:  <3A15AE85.E0F32368@uol.com.br>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0DE6_01C56B69.59014240"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <007701c16fd0$fdfbc1a0$4e391442@billbull>
Date:         Sat, 17 Nov 2001 19:33:13 -0600
Reply-To: "Bill Bullock" <bpbullock@LARIBAY.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Bill Bullock" <bpbullock@LARIBAY.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Why use isopropyl?
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0DE6_01C56B69.59014240
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Fred:
    While I am by no means the resident guru of liquid-fueled motors, in =
my experience you burn what you can get. I believe that ethanol =
(CH3-CH2-OH*)/hydrogen peroxide is a good combination. The Germans used =
it to great effect in WWII in their rockets. Isopropyl alcohol, also =
known as 2-propanol (CH3-CH3-CH-OH*) is "rubbing alcohol". Methanol  =
a.k.a. Methyl Alcohol (CH3-OH*) is the one commonly known as "wood =
alcohol" which is a deadly poison.
    If ethanol is what you have available, design and build around that. =
Please let the rest of us know how it turns out. It should be an =
interesting avenue of exploration. Good luck!
Bill=20
   =20
*Taken from CHEMISTRY PRINCIPALS AND STRUCTURES, 1982)
  ----- Original Message -----=20
  From: Frederico Paro=20
  To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU=20
  Sent: Friday, November 17, 2000 4:17 PM
  Subject: [AR] Why use isopropyl?


  What is the point in using isopropyl alcohol rather than ethanol in
  rocket propulsion? Ethanol is much cheaper, specially here in Brazil
  where it's used as fuel in cars.

  Thanks,
  Fred



------=_NextPart_000_0DE6_01C56B69.59014240
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META content=3D"text/html; charset=3Diso-8859-1" =
http-equiv=3DContent-Type>
<META content=3D"MSHTML 5.00.2614.3500" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV>Fred:</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; While I am by no means the resident guru of=20
liquid-fueled motors, in my experience you burn what you can get. I =
believe that=20
ethanol (CH3-CH2-OH*)/hydrogen peroxide is a good combination. The =
Germans used=20
it to great effect in WWII in their rockets. Isopropyl alcohol, also =
known as=20
2-propanol (CH3-CH3-CH-OH*) is "rubbing alcohol". Methanol&nbsp; a.k.a. =
Methyl=20
Alcohol (CH3-OH*) is the one commonly known as "wood alcohol" which is a =
deadly=20
poison.</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; If ethanol is what you have available, design =
and build=20
around that. Please let the rest of us know how it turns out. It should =
be an=20
interesting avenue of exploration. Good luck!</DIV>
<DIV>Bill&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; </DIV>
<DIV>*Taken from <U>CHEMISTRY PRINCIPALS AND STRUCTURES,</U> 1982)</DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE=20
style=3D"BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: =
0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; PADDING-RIGHT: 0px">
  <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial">----- Original Message ----- </DIV>
  <DIV=20
  style=3D"BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; FONT: 10pt arial; font-color: =
black"><B>From:</B>=20
  <A href=3D"mailto:fredericoparo@UOL.COM.BR"=20
  title=3Dfredericoparo@UOL.COM.BR>Frederico Paro</A> </DIV>
  <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A =
href=3D"mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU"=20
  title=3DAROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU</A> </DIV>
  <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> Friday, November 17, 2000 =
4:17=20
  PM</DIV>
  <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> [AR] Why use =
isopropyl?</DIV>
  <DIV><BR></DIV>What is the point in using isopropyl alcohol rather =
than=20
  ethanol in<BR>rocket propulsion? Ethanol is much cheaper, specially =
here in=20
  Brazil<BR>where it's used as fuel in=20
cars.<BR><BR>Thanks,<BR>Fred<BR><BR></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0DE6_01C56B69.59014240--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 14062 invoked from network); 18 Nov 2001 01:41:40 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 18 Nov 2001 01:41:40 -0000
Received: (qmail 2271 invoked by uid 50005); 18 Nov 2001 01:41:33 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4169. . Clean. Processed in 0.333834 secs); 18 Nov 2001 01:41:33 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 18 Nov 2001 01:41:32 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA14292; Sat, 17 Nov 2001 17:39:10 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 81731 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 18 Nov 2001 01:37:48          +0000
Received: from spsystems.net (spsystems.net [209.47.149.227]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id RAA14276 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Sat,          17 Nov 2001 17:37:47 -0800
Received: (from henry@localhost) by spsystems.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id UAA09113;          Sat, 17 Nov 2001 20:37:05 -0500 (EST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1011117203433.9006A-100000@spsystems.net>
Date:         Sat, 17 Nov 2001 20:37:05 -0500
Reply-To: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Why use isopropyl?
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <3A15AE85.E0F32368@uol.com.br>

On Fri, 17 Nov 2000, Frederico Paro wrote:
> What is the point in using isopropyl alcohol rather than ethanol in
> rocket propulsion? Ethanol is much cheaper, specially here in Brazil
> where it's used as fuel in cars.

High-purity ethanol is often legally regulated because of its use in
liquor.  Denatured ethanol (e.g. with methanol added) may or may not have
a well-defined composition or a significant water content.  Isopropyl
alcohol is easily available in pure form without legal complications.

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 11326 invoked from network); 18 Nov 2001 02:26:18 -0000
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 18 Nov 2001 02:26:18 -0000
Received: (qmail 1131 invoked by uid 50005); 18 Nov 2001 02:26:12 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4169. . Clean. Processed in 0.184869 secs); 18 Nov 2001 02:26:12 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 18 Nov 2001 02:26:11 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA14470; Sat, 17 Nov 2001 18:21:30 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 81751 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 18 Nov 2001 02:20:01          +0000
Received: from cablecom.laribay.net (cablecom.laribay.net [66.20.57.4]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id SAA14455 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 17 Nov 2001 18:20:00 -0800
Received: from billbull (dial086.laribay.net [66.20.57.86]) by          cablecom.laribay.net (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id UAA20623 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 17 Nov 2001 20:04:01 -0600 (CST)          (envelope-from bpbullock@laribay.net)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0DE9_01C56B69.59014240"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <00ad01c16fd7$927e7f60$4e391442@billbull>
Date:         Sat, 17 Nov 2001 20:20:19 -0600
Reply-To: "Bill Bullock" <bpbullock@LARIBAY.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Bill Bullock" <bpbullock@LARIBAY.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Why use isopropyl?
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0DE9_01C56B69.59014240
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable


    While this is most certainly true in the U.S. I believe, and Fred =
can correct me if I am wrong here, that in Brazil ethanol is sold much =
like gasoline here. I do not know if there is an additive package in the =
ethanol in order to make it more stable as a motor fuel, but I would =
think from talking to several Brazilians that it is not as highly =
restricted there as here.
    As a point in fact, Brazil is probably the leading =
research/utilization society of ethanol motor-fuel users in the world =
today. A truly renewable energy resource.
Bill
  ----- Original Message -----=20
  From: Henry Spencer=20
  To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU=20
  Sent: Saturday, November 17, 2001 7:37 PM
  Subject: Re: [AR] Why use isopropyl?


  On Fri, 17 Nov 2000, Frederico Paro wrote:
  > What is the point in using isopropyl alcohol rather than ethanol in
  > rocket propulsion? Ethanol is much cheaper, specially here in Brazil
  > where it's used as fuel in cars.

  High-purity ethanol is often legally regulated because of its use in
  liquor.  Denatured ethanol (e.g. with methanol added) may or may not =
have
  a well-defined composition or a significant water content.  Isopropyl
  alcohol is easily available in pure form without legal complications.

                                                            Henry =
Spencer
                                                         =
henry@spsystems.net



------=_NextPart_000_0DE9_01C56B69.59014240
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META content=3D"text/html; charset=3Diso-8859-1" =
http-equiv=3DContent-Type>
<META content=3D"MSHTML 5.00.2614.3500" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; While this&nbsp;is most certainly true in the =
U.S. I=20
believe, and Fred can correct me if I am wrong here, that in Brazil =
ethanol is=20
sold much like gasoline here. I do not know if there is an additive=20
package&nbsp;in the&nbsp;ethanol in order to make it more stable as a =
motor=20
fuel, but I would think from talking to several Brazilians that it is =
not as=20
highly restricted there as here.</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;As a point in fact, Brazil is probably the =
leading=20
research/utilization society of ethanol motor-fuel users in the world =
today. A=20
truly renewable energy resource.</DIV>
<DIV>Bill</DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE=20
style=3D"BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: =
0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; PADDING-RIGHT: 0px">
  <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial">----- Original Message ----- </DIV>
  <DIV=20
  style=3D"BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; FONT: 10pt arial; font-color: =
black"><B>From:</B>=20
  <A href=3D"mailto:henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET" =
title=3Dhenry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>Henry=20
  Spencer</A> </DIV>
  <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A =
href=3D"mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU"=20
  title=3DAROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU</A> </DIV>
  <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> Saturday, November 17, =
2001 7:37=20
  PM</DIV>
  <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> Re: [AR] Why use=20
isopropyl?</DIV>
  <DIV><BR></DIV>On Fri, 17 Nov 2000, Frederico Paro wrote:<BR>&gt; What =
is the=20
  point in using isopropyl alcohol rather than ethanol in<BR>&gt; rocket =

  propulsion? Ethanol is much cheaper, specially here in Brazil<BR>&gt; =
where=20
  it's used as fuel in cars.<BR><BR>High-purity ethanol is often legally =

  regulated because of its use in<BR>liquor.&nbsp; Denatured ethanol =
(e.g. with=20
  methanol added) may or may not have<BR>a well-defined composition or a =

  significant water content.&nbsp; Isopropyl<BR>alcohol is easily =
available in=20
  pure form without legal=20
  =
complications.<BR><BR>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nb=
sp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbs=
p;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp=
;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;=
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; =

  Henry=20
  =
Spencer<BR>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&n=
bsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nb=
sp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbs=
p;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp=
;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;=20
  <A=20
href=3D"mailto:henry@spsystems.net">henry@spsystems.net</A><BR><BR></BLOC=
KQUOTE></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0DE9_01C56B69.59014240--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 18080 invoked from network); 18 Nov 2001 03:11:01 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 18 Nov 2001 03:11:01 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: (qmail 1983 invoked by uid 50005); 18 Nov 2001 03:10:46 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4169. . Clean. Processed in 1.821352 secs); 18 Nov 2001 03:10:46 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 18 Nov 2001 03:10:43 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA14616; Sat, 17 Nov 2001 19:05:37 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 81769 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 18 Nov 2001 03:03:49          +0000
Received: from wrench.toolcity.net (root@wrench.toolcity.net [208.0.188.2]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id TAA14597 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 17 Nov 2001 19:03:48 -0800
Received: from [63.169.101.241]          (dap-63-169-101-241.meadville-tnt-1.pa.toolcity.net [63.169.101.241])          by wrench.toolcity.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id WAA14918 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 17 Nov 2001 22:03:44 -0500 (EST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <v01510100b81cdf56cefd@[63.169.101.191]>
Date:         Sat, 17 Nov 2001 22:06:19 -0600
Reply-To: "al bradley" <abradley@TOOLCITY.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "al bradley" <abradley@TOOLCITY.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Why use isopropyl?
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

>High-purity ethanol is often  . . .

Looking at the history of this material I gather that this should be stored
in charred-oak casks until time of usage???

al bradley

------------------------------------------------------------------
Can you live Life with this?: "Unless there is a law, an agreement, or a
long-standing custom, No one `Deserves' Anything -- Either Good or Bad!"

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 25496 invoked from network); 18 Nov 2001 03:47:09 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 18 Nov 2001 03:47:09 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 11678 invoked by uid 50005); 18 Nov 2001 03:47:02 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4169. . Clean. Processed in 0.280624 secs); 18 Nov 2001 03:47:02 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 18 Nov 2001 03:47:01 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA14813; Sat, 17 Nov 2001 19:44:01 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 81807 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 18 Nov 2001 03:42:38          +0000
Received: from smtp.tscnet.net (smtp.tscnet.net [66.152.64.20]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id TAA14790 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat,          17 Nov 2001 19:42:37 -0800
Received: from [192.168.0.2] (tr650.hawkfeather.com [66.152.67.138]) by          smtp.tscnet.net (8.11.5/8.11.2) with ESMTP id fAI3gao08924 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 17 Nov 2001 19:42:37 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: andrewm%mail.hawkfeather.com@mail.hawkfeather.com
References: <v01510100b81cdf56cefd@[63.169.101.191]>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <a05100301b81cddcbcfff@[192.168.0.2]>
Date:         Sat, 17 Nov 2001 19:39:56 -0800
Reply-To: "Andrew MacMillen" <andrewm@HAWKFEATHER.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Andrew MacMillen" <andrewm@HAWKFEATHER.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Why use isopropyl?
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <v01510100b81cdf56cefd@[63.169.101.191]>

Mmm... highland single malt exhaust...

At 10:06 PM -0600 11/17/01, al bradley wrote:
>  >High-purity ethanol is often  . . .
>
>Looking at the history of this material I gather that this should be stored
>in charred-oak casks until time of usage???
>
>al bradley
>
>------------------------------------------------------------------
>Can you live Life with this?: "Unless there is a law, an agreement, or a
>long-standing custom, No one `Deserves' Anything -- Either Good or Bad!"

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 1911 invoked from network); 18 Nov 2001 04:41:29 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 18 Nov 2001 04:41:29 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: (qmail 14805 invoked by uid 50005); 18 Nov 2001 04:41:23 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4169. . Clean. Processed in 0.185437 secs); 18 Nov 2001 04:41:23 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 18 Nov 2001 04:41:23 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA15114; Sat, 17 Nov 2001 20:38:17 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 81872 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 18 Nov 2001 04:36:51          +0000
Received: from cisco.com (cypher.cisco.com [171.69.11.18]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id UAA15098 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat,          17 Nov 2001 20:36:50 -0800
Received: (from billw@localhost) by cisco.com (8.8.8/2.6/Cisco List          Logging/8.8.8) id UAA18520; Sat, 17 Nov 2001 20:35:48 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID:  <CMM.0.90.4.1006058148.billw@cypher>
Date:         Sat, 17 Nov 2001 20:35:48 PST
Reply-To: "Bill Westfield" <billw@cisco.com>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "William Chops Westfield" <billw@cisco.com>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Why use isopropyl?
Comments: To: al bradley <abradley@TOOLCITY.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  Your message of Sat, 17 Nov 2001 22:06:19 -0600

    >High-purity ethanol is often  . . .

    Looking at the history of this material I gather that this should
    be stored in charred-oak casks until time of usage???

No, that's how you're supposed to store the LOW purity ethanol...

BillW


From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 8146 invoked from network); 18 Nov 2001 05:10:42 -0000
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 18 Nov 2001 05:10:42 -0000
Received: (qmail 26766 invoked by uid 50005); 18 Nov 2001 05:10:35 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4169. . Clean. Processed in 0.176388 secs); 18 Nov 2001 05:10:35 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 18 Nov 2001 05:10:35 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA15192; Sat, 17 Nov 2001 20:54:39 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 81883 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 18 Nov 2001 04:53:17          +0000
Received: from smtprelay1.abs.adelphia.net (smtprelay.abs.adelphia.net          [64.8.20.11]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id UAA15177 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 17 Nov 2001 20:53:11 -0800
Received: from jlgrady ([24.53.101.238]) by smtprelay1.abs.adelphia.net          (Netscape Messaging Server 4.15) with SMTP id GMZC7T03.G1F for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 17 Nov 2001 23:52:41 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook CWS, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
Importance: Normal
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <000301c16fec$d1f45420$0200a8c0@24.53.64.18>
Date:         Sat, 17 Nov 2001 23:52:25 -0500
Reply-To: "Jeff Grady" <jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jeff Grady" <jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET>
Subject:      [AR] OT: Leonid Meteor Shower reminder
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <v01510100b81cdf56cefd@[63.169.101.191]>

Sunday AM...3:00 - 6:00 AM EST

estimates are 600 - 3,000 MPH (meteors per hour :)

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 27305 invoked from network); 18 Nov 2001 13:17:15 -0000
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 18 Nov 2001 13:17:15 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 12640 invoked by uid 50005); 18 Nov 2001 13:17:08 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4169. . Clean. Processed in 0.261601 secs); 18 Nov 2001 13:17:08 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 18 Nov 2001 13:17:08 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id EAA16961; Sun, 18 Nov 2001 04:52:58 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 82087 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 18 Nov 2001 12:51:20          +0000
Received: from stud.uni-goettingen.de (root@s2.stud.uni-goettingen.de          [134.76.60.22]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id EAA16945          for <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Sun, 18 Nov 2001 04:51:19 -0800
Received: from router.atw.stud.uni-goettingen.de ([134.76.62.65]          helo=stud.uni-goettingen.de) by stud.uni-goettingen.de with esmtp          (Exim 2.12 #8) id 165RPj-0005Z4-00 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 18          Nov 2001 13:51:11 +0100
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [de] (Win98; I)
X-Accept-Language: de
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3BF7AEE6.D0828B90@stud.uni-goettingen.de>
Date:         Sun, 18 Nov 2001 13:51:51 +0100
Reply-To: "Thomas Engelhardt" <tengelh@STUD.UNI-GOETTINGEN.DE>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Thomas Engelhardt" <tengelh@STUD.UNI-GOETTINGEN.DE>
Organization: =?iso-8859-1?Q?Rocket_Research_G=F6ttingen_=28RRG=29?=
Subject:      Re: [AR] Why use isopropyl?
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Hi Fred,

I'm using it in my design, because it is cheaper than ethanol, the
catalyst solves in it more readily (and the solution is more stable
longer than with ethanol).
The ISP (shifting eq. at 300 PSI chamber pressure) is 221 s with both
isopropanol and ethanol. Methanol gives a lower ISP at the same chamber
pressure (209s) and is toxic.

BTW; did you send me an email lately about my project? The virus scanner
deleted it before I had a chance to answer, so if you had any questions,
please write again, the mail adress on the website is still valid.

Cheers,

Tom

RRG http://www.liquid-propulsion.de

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 19500 invoked from network); 18 Nov 2001 18:40:59 -0000
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 18 Nov 2001 18:40:59 -0000
Received: (qmail 31664 invoked by uid 50005); 18 Nov 2001 18:40:52 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4169. . Clean. Processed in 0.139717 secs); 18 Nov 2001 18:40:52 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 18 Nov 2001 18:40:52 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA17905; Sun, 18 Nov 2001 10:38:28 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 82157 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 18 Nov 2001 18:36:58          +0000
Received: from mailhost0.trib.com (mailhost0.trib.com [63.229.150.3]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id KAA17889 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Sun, 18 Nov 2001 10:36:57 -0800
Received: from mail.trib.com (mail.trib.com [12.10.158.17]) by          mailhost0.trib.com (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id fAIIaLF29597; Sun,          18 Nov 2001 11:36:21 -0700 (MST) (envelope-from          jwckman@space-rockets.com)
Received: from [63.229.150.98] (HELO hppav) by mail.trib.com (CommuniGate Pro          SMTP 3.4.6) with SMTP id 58654886; Sun, 18 Nov 2001 11:36:20 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
Importance: Normal
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <NKEHJAOOKBPGIKOOPDEFCEGLCDAA.jwckman@space-rockets.com>
Date:         Sun, 18 Nov 2001 11:35:15 -0700
Reply-To: "John Wickman" <jwckman@SPACE-ROCKETS.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Wickman" <jwckman@SPACE-ROCKETS.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] OT: Leonid Meteor Shower reminder
Comments: To: Jeff Grady <jgrady@ga.prestige.net>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <000301c16fec$d1f45420$0200a8c0@24.53.64.18>

Jeff,

I set my alarm to 2:45 and got the whole family up to watch it.  It was
really worth it.  I had never seen meteors with smoke trails behind them.
It seemed like everyone had a big long smoke trail.  One of them I could
actually hear hissing and fizzing as it went by.

John Wickman

-----Original Message-----
From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU]On
Behalf Of Jeff Grady
Sent: Saturday, November 17, 2001 9:52 PM
To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
Subject: [AR] OT: Leonid Meteor Shower reminder


Sunday AM...3:00 - 6:00 AM EST

estimates are 600 - 3,000 MPH (meteors per hour :)

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 1266 invoked from network); 18 Nov 2001 18:45:40 -0000
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 18 Nov 2001 18:45:40 -0000
Received: (qmail 5865 invoked by uid 50005); 18 Nov 2001 18:45:33 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4169. . Clean. Processed in 0.304144 secs); 18 Nov 2001 18:45:33 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 18 Nov 2001 18:45:33 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA17953; Sun, 18 Nov 2001 10:43:52 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 82168 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 18 Nov 2001 18:42:30          +0000
Received: from smtprelay3.abs.adelphia.net (smtprelay.abs.adelphia.net          [64.8.20.11]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id KAA17938 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Sun, 18 Nov 2001 10:42:30 -0800
Received: from jlgrady ([24.53.101.238]) by smtprelay3.abs.adelphia.net          (Netscape Messaging Server 4.15) with SMTP id GN0ELY02.73A for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Sun, 18 Nov 2001 13:41:58 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook CWS, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
Importance: Normal
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <000001c17060$ccadd440$0200a8c0@24.53.64.18>
Date:         Sun, 18 Nov 2001 13:42:39 -0500
Reply-To: "Jeff Grady" <jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jeff Grady" <jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] OT: Leonid Meteor Shower reminder
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <NKEHJAOOKBPGIKOOPDEFCEGLCDAA.jwckman@space-rockets.com>

My wife and I camped out on the front lawn in sleeping bags... My 9yr old
was too sleepy to get up and I knew he would want to see, so I picked him up
covers and all and carried him to the lawn. The 35 degree air woke him right
up. I quit counting at 250 meteors, but must have seen another 500-600. I
even have a few on my Sony camcorder - it has super night vision...

Was also a good night with the telescope. Took several pics of Jupiter and
Saturn.

Jeff

-----Original Message-----
From: John Wickman [mailto:jwckman@space-rockets.com]
Sent: Sunday, November 18, 2001 1:35 PM
To: Jeff Grady; AROCKET@itc.uci.edu
Subject: RE: [AR] OT: Leonid Meteor Shower reminder


Jeff,

I set my alarm to 2:45 and got the whole family up to watch it.  It was
really worth it.  I had never seen meteors with smoke trails behind them.
It seemed like everyone had a big long smoke trail.  One of them I could
actually hear hissing and fizzing as it went by.

John Wickman

-----Original Message-----
From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU]On
Behalf Of Jeff Grady
Sent: Saturday, November 17, 2001 9:52 PM
To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
Subject: [AR] OT: Leonid Meteor Shower reminder


Sunday AM...3:00 - 6:00 AM EST

estimates are 600 - 3,000 MPH (meteors per hour :)

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 19135 invoked from network); 18 Nov 2001 21:52:57 -0000
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 18 Nov 2001 21:52:57 -0000
Received: (qmail 1293 invoked by uid 50005); 18 Nov 2001 21:52:50 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4169. . Clean. Processed in 0.770314 secs); 18 Nov 2001 21:52:50 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 18 Nov 2001 21:52:49 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA18760; Sun, 18 Nov 2001 13:50:25 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 82276 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 18 Nov 2001 21:48:58          +0000
Received: from fep4-orange.clear.net.nz (fep4-orange.clear.net.nz          [203.97.32.4]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id NAA18739 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Sun, 18 Nov 2001 13:48:58 -0800
Received: from mkbs (203-167-158-47.dialup.clear.net.nz [203.167.158.47]) by          fep4-orange.clear.net.nz (1.5/1.7) with SMTP id KAA00673; Mon, 19 Nov          2001 10:48:49 +1300 (NZDT)
References:  <CMM.0.90.4.1006058148.billw@cypher>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="Windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <011701c1707b$14120c60$0700a8c0@mkbs>
Date:         Sun, 18 Nov 2001 21:35:19 +1300
Reply-To: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Organization: Applied Technology
Subject:      Re: [AR] Why use isopropyl?
Comments: To: Bill Westfield <billw@CISCO.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

>     >High-purity ethanol is often  . . .
>
>     Looking at the history of this material I gather that this should
>     be stored in charred-oak casks until time of usage???
>
> No, that's how you're supposed to store the LOW purity ethanol...


True, true (no, that's lower still).

They tell me that relatively high purity is stored in (Russian made) glass
and run with a dash of pepper.
Higher purity again and you can eliminate the pepper.

Alternative storage for reasonable purity Western hemisphere product is cut
glass or crystal.

All forms tend to be hypergolic with livers.
Residency time generally short

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 3835 invoked from network); 18 Nov 2001 22:09:03 -0000
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 18 Nov 2001 22:09:03 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 2769 invoked by uid 50005); 18 Nov 2001 22:08:56 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4169. . Clean. Processed in 0.980119 secs); 18 Nov 2001 22:08:56 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 18 Nov 2001 22:08:54 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA18843; Sun, 18 Nov 2001 14:04:04 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 82292 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 18 Nov 2001 22:02:43          +0000
Received: from omta04.mta.everyone.net (sitemail.everyone.net [216.200.145.35])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id OAA18827 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 18 Nov 2001 14:02:42 -0800
Received: from sitemail.everyone.net (reports [216.200.145.62]) by          omta04.mta.everyone.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9CFD74EE1F for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 18 Nov 2001 14:02:42 -0800 (PST)
Received: by sitemail.everyone.net (Postfix, from userid 99) id 853702756; Sun,          18 Nov 2001 14:02:42 -0800 (PST)
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: MIME-tools 5.41 (Entity 5.404)
X-Originating-IP: [202.67.66.244]
Message-ID:  <20011118220242.853702756@sitemail.everyone.net>
Date:         Sun, 18 Nov 2001 14:02:42 -0800
Reply-To: <blast_tech@techemail.com>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Mark Broadfoot" <blast_tech@techemail.com>
Subject:      [AR] Optimum Motor length?
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

I've just come across some 47mm stainless pipe that i intend using for  KN-suc, KN-Dex and AN fuels. If i use 5 bates grain with KN propellant I'm looking at about 400mm. Is this the optimum length?
Ideas anyone?

Many thanks
Mark Broadfoot
Cert.No 02909611
PAC-AGG BLAST-C
PSC-SIESMIC WK-C

_____________________________________________________________
Are you a Techie? Get Your Free Tech Email Address Now! Visit http://www.TechEmail.com

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 9279 invoked from network); 18 Nov 2001 22:32:20 -0000
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 18 Nov 2001 22:32:20 -0000
Received: (qmail 2827 invoked by uid 50005); 18 Nov 2001 22:32:13 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4169. . Clean. Processed in 0.313018 secs); 18 Nov 2001 22:32:13 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 18 Nov 2001 22:32:12 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA19058; Sun, 18 Nov 2001 14:28:01 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 82312 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 18 Nov 2001 22:26:39          +0000
Received: from albqpop1.albq.uswest.net (albqpop1.albq.uswest.net          [207.108.240.1]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id OAA19036          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 18 Nov 2001 14:26:38 -0800
Received: (qmail 73904 invoked by alias); 18 Nov 2001 22:26:03 -0000
Delivered-To: fixup-AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU@fixme
Received: (qmail 73883 invoked by uid 0); 18 Nov 2001 22:26:03 -0000
Received: from cc898542-a.prdise1.nm.home.com (HELO cc898542a) (65.7.151.152)          by albqpop1.albq.uswest.net with SMTP; 18 Nov 2001 22:26:03 -0000
References:  <20011118220242.853702756@sitemail.everyone.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <000b01c1707f$94d132a0$0100a8c0@cc898542a>
Date:         Sun, 18 Nov 2001 15:22:59 -0700
Reply-To: "Paxton" <darkspunge@USWEST.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Paxton" <darkspunge@USWEST.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Optimum Motor length?
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Ideal for what? Simply the most NS without too large of a core? Ideal for
solids loading value? Initial thrust, average thrust? Do you want a long
burn time or a very short powerful thrust?

Paxton



----- Original Message -----
From: "Mark Broadfoot" <blast_tech@TECHEMAIL.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Sunday, November 18, 2001 3:02 PM
Subject: [AR] Optimum Motor length?


> I've just come across some 47mm stainless pipe that i intend using for
KN-suc, KN-Dex and AN fuels. If i use 5 bates grain with KN propellant I'm
looking at about 400mm. Is this the optimum length?
> Ideas anyone?
>
> Many thanks
> Mark Broadfoot
> Cert.No 02909611
> PAC-AGG BLAST-C
> PSC-SIESMIC WK-C
>
> _____________________________________________________________
> Are you a Techie? Get Your Free Tech Email Address Now! Visit
http://www.TechEmail.com
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 1121 invoked from network); 19 Nov 2001 00:22:15 -0000
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 19 Nov 2001 00:22:15 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 7744 invoked by uid 50005); 19 Nov 2001 00:22:08 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4169. . Clean. Processed in 0.425669 secs); 19 Nov 2001 00:22:08 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 19 Nov 2001 00:22:08 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA19669; Sun, 18 Nov 2001 16:19:11 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 82382 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 19 Nov 2001 00:19:06          +0000
Received: from omta02.mta.everyone.net (sitemail.everyone.net [216.200.145.35])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id QAA19655 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 18 Nov 2001 16:19:05 -0800
Received: from sitemail.everyone.net (reports [216.200.145.62]) by          omta02.mta.everyone.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id C54E71C4F24; Sun, 18          Nov 2001 16:19:05 -0800 (PST)
Received: by sitemail.everyone.net (Postfix, from userid 99) id B8E8A2756; Sun,          18 Nov 2001 16:19:05 -0800 (PST)
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: MIME-tools 5.41 (Entity 5.404)
X-Originating-IP: [202.67.66.244]
Message-ID:  <20011119001905.B8E8A2756@sitemail.everyone.net>
Date:         Sun, 18 Nov 2001 16:19:05 -0800
Reply-To: <blast_tech@techemail.com>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Mark Broadfoot" <blast_tech@techemail.com>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Optimum Motor length?
Comments: To: Paxton <darkspunge@USWEST.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Am looking for a long burn maximising average thrust. All the motors I've designed so far burn for short periods 0.5-1.2 sec. What is the best way to increase burn time using KN-Suc(a propellant I'm very familiar with)?

--- Paxton <darkspunge@USWEST.NET> wrote:
>Ideal for what? Simply the most NS without too large of a core? Ideal for
>solids loading value? Initial thrust, average thrust?
Do you want a long
>burn time or a very short powerful thrust?
>
>Paxton
>
>
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Mark Broadfoot" <blast_tech@TECHEMAIL.COM>
>To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
>Sent: Sunday, November 18, 2001 3:02 PM
>Subject: [AR] Optimum Motor length?
>
>
>> I've just come across some 47mm stainless pipe that i intend using for
>KN-suc, KN-Dex and AN fuels. If i use 5 bates grain with KN propellant I'm
>looking at about 400mm. Is this the optimum length?
>> Ideas anyone?
>>
>> Many thanks
>> Mark Broadfoot
>> Cert.No 02909611
>> PAC-AGG BLAST-C
>> PSC-SIESMIC WK-C
>>
>> _____________________________________________________________
>> Are you a Techie? Get Your Free Tech Email Address Now! Visit
>http://www.TechEmail.com
>>

_____________________________________________________________
Are you a Techie? Get Your Free Tech Email Address Now! Visit http://www.TechEmail.com

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 24702 invoked from network); 19 Nov 2001 01:53:21 -0000
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 19 Nov 2001 01:53:21 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 24422 invoked by uid 50005); 19 Nov 2001 01:52:03 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4169. . Clean. Processed in 0.182426 secs); 19 Nov 2001 01:52:03 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 19 Nov 2001 01:52:02 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA20448; Sun, 18 Nov 2001 17:46:55 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 82429 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 19 Nov 2001 01:46:51          +0000
Received: from tungsten.btinternet.com (tungsten.btinternet.com [194.73.73.81])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id RAA20434 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Sun, 18 Nov 2001 17:46:50 -0800
Received: from [217.39.3.35] (helo=tesco.net) by tungsten.btinternet.com with          esmtp (Exim 3.22 #6) id 165dWK-0001JO-00; Mon, 19 Nov 2001 01:46:48          +0000
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Win98; en-US; rv:0.9.4) Gecko/20011019            Netscape6/6.2
X-Accept-Language: en,en-GB,en-US
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3BF8654F.4020504@tesco.net>
Date:         Mon, 19 Nov 2001 01:50:07 +0000
Reply-To: "Ian Woollard" <ian.woollard@TESCO.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Ian Woollard" <ian.woollard@TESCO.NET>
Subject:      [AR] History tech question: centrojet rocket sled
Comments: cc: jim_bowery@hotmail.com
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Does anyone here happen to know what the problem was with the
Centrojet rocket sled (it's a self-pumping Rotary Rocket-style
engine- the rotation of the engine pumps the fuel to rim and into
the combustion chamber.)

Theoretically this is supposed to be the most efficient turbopumped
design, but they had some practical issues that weren't overcome at
the time. I'm wondering whether the improved knowledge and
engineering techniques we have now could overcome them- Rotary
Rocket seemed to think they could do this kind of design anyway.

I've done some web searches- there's a video available from NASA on
the sled (but I probably don't have the right sort of player), and
a very few other things, but information is scarce.

The only reason for failure I've found so far is something vague
like insoluble problems with mountings for the engine- my guess is
that they had huge problems with the engine rotating fast and it
getting thrown off balance by either static or dynamic balance
issues, but I'm not sure. I've worked out a possible strategy that
could overcome such issues (allow the engine to rotate about its
own center of mass, using a clever bearing design), but it would be
nice to know what the problems actually were.

Also, I'm wondering whether these issues were addressed by Rotary
Rocket.

Refs: see http://www.geocities.com/jim_bowery/enginefaq.html for an
'amateur' [well, he has a patent] who is apparently trying to do
this. (Although his engine exploded after a hard start, and I
suspect he is going to end up with an engine rich rich exhaust
using aluminum, but I'm not an expert.)

--
- Ian Woollard (ian.woollard@tesco.net)

"Is a planetary surface the right place for an expanding
technological civilization?"
- Gerard O'Neill

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 10785 invoked from network); 19 Nov 2001 03:19:48 -0000
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 19 Nov 2001 03:19:48 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 15032 invoked by uid 50005); 19 Nov 2001 03:19:41 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4169. . Clean. Processed in 0.196732 secs); 19 Nov 2001 03:19:41 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 19 Nov 2001 03:19:41 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA21062; Sun, 18 Nov 2001 19:16:26 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 82518 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 19 Nov 2001 03:15:54          +0000
Received: from mx1.relaypoint.net (ns2.generalbroadband.com [64.32.62.5]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id TAA21046 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Sun, 18 Nov 2001 19:15:53 -0800
Received: from [208.131.72.74] (account <jabowery@wwc.com>) by          mx1.relaypoint.net (CommuniGate Pro WebUser 3.4.8) with HTTP id          1400146; Sun, 18 Nov 2001 19:15:53 -0800
X-Mailer: CommuniGate Pro Web Mailer v.3.4.8
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <web-1400146@mx1.relaypoint.net>
Date:         Sun, 18 Nov 2001 19:15:53 -0800
Reply-To: "James Bowery" <jabowery@WWC.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "James Bowery" <jabowery@WWC.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] History tech question: centrojet rocket sled
Comments: To: Ian Woollard <ian.woollard@TESCO.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <3BF8654F.4020504@tesco.net>

On Mon, 19 Nov 2001 01:50:07 +0000
 Ian Woollard <ian.woollard@TESCO.NET> wrote:
> Does anyone here happen to know what the problem was with
> the
> Centrojet rocket sled

Bill Colburn is the guy who warned me that centrojet
technology could be prior art and he's the guy I hired to
look up the info on the centrojet -- if he could.  I don't
have any problem sharing Bill's discovery -- which is that
unfortunately the centrojet documentation, if extant, is
buried in JPL's archives and difficult to get under most
normal library budgets.

Yes, it seems to have been a problem with the rotary seals
but Bill is a better one to answer that.


> could overcome such issues (allow the engine to rotate
> about its
> own center of mass, using a clever bearing design), but
> it would be
> nice to know what the problems actually were.

You have to watch out for imbalances not only in the engine
material but in the fuel.  Incompressible liquids tend to
have few problems but they're not going to help if you have
any gas in the lines or channels.   This can produce a
feedback runaway.  There is also the problem of
supercritical fluids that usually are no-nos for regen
cooling systems -- but you may use them in ultracentrifugal
systems if the free convection sustains fluid movement at
sufficiently high levels.


> Also, I'm wondering whether these issues were addressed
> by Rotary
> Rocket.

Greason is a guy to get in touch with on that.


> Refs: see http://www.geocities.com/jim_bowery/enginefaq.html
> for an
> 'amateur' [well, he has a patent] who is apparently
> trying to do
> this. (Although his engine exploded after a hard start,
> and I
> suspect he is going to end up with an engine rich rich
> exhaust
> using aluminum, but I'm not an expert.)

I do need to update that FAQ.  The international patent
application deadline lapsed just after Hackers, where Roger
Gregory was attempting to raise money.  Roger had an
exclusive on the pursuit of financing during the first year
of the patent under our contract, drawn up when it looked
like the best source of money that could exist was hot for
the engine via Roger, so I decided to voluntarily step aside
and let Roger try to handle that with me being compensated
however.  Unfortunately, the investor disappeared
(coincidentally being involved in an alternative physics
development) and then the surrounding investors from Silicon
Valley, etc. evaporated.  There is a one-year deadline for
filing internationally and that is over.  $150,000 for the
PCT applications is too much and I had already put more than
$20,000 into the various processes, PCT as well as domestic.
Nasty business.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 20388 invoked from network); 19 Nov 2001 04:48:09 -0000
Received: from smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.105]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 19 Nov 2001 04:48:09 -0000
Received: (qmail 27231 invoked by uid 50005); 19 Nov 2001 04:48:02 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpy with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4169. . Clean. Processed in 0.160781 secs); 19 Nov 2001 04:48:02 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 19 Nov 2001 04:48:02 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA21663; Sun, 18 Nov 2001 20:44:15 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 82584 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 19 Nov 2001 04:44:10          +0000
Received: from fep4-orange.clear.net.nz (fep4-orange.clear.net.nz          [203.97.32.4]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id UAA21649 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Sun, 18 Nov 2001 20:44:09 -0800
Received: from mkbs (203-167-156-145.dialup.clear.net.nz [203.167.156.145]) by          fep4-orange.clear.net.nz (1.5/1.7) with SMTP id RAA07794; Mon, 19 Nov          2001 17:44:05 +1300 (NZDT)
References:  <20011119001905.B8E8A2756@sitemail.everyone.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="Windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <005e01c170b5$15f5b420$0700a8c0@mkbs>
Date:         Mon, 19 Nov 2001 17:43:50 +1300
Reply-To: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Organization: Applied Technology
Subject:      Re: [AR] Optimum Motor length?
Comments: To: blast_tech@techemail.com
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

> Am looking for a long burn maximising average thrust. All the motors I've
designed so far burn for short periods 0.5-1.2 sec. What is the best way to
increase burn time using KN-Suc(a propellant I'm very familiar with)?

Hopefully you have fully digested everything on Richard Nakka's superb Candy
site

    http://members.aol.com/ricnakk/index.html

This sounds like you may be burning all faces.
Passivating the outer face will slow burn time somewhat.
Your thrust profile will vary with and without outer face passivation. For a
(relatively) neutral burn you will have different Length to OD ratios in
each case.

Going to an end burner will further slow burn times - especially for long
thin motors.
With Candy and a steel casing this shouldn't add too many insulations
problems but with a lower temperature rated case material or a more
energetic propellant, end-burners require greater attention to casing
insulation.


        RM

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 2306 invoked from network); 19 Nov 2001 05:17:53 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 19 Nov 2001 05:17:53 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 5840 invoked by uid 50005); 19 Nov 2001 05:17:46 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4169. . Clean. Processed in 0.369986 secs); 19 Nov 2001 05:17:46 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 19 Nov 2001 05:17:45 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA21772; Sun, 18 Nov 2001 21:13:05 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 82597 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 19 Nov 2001 05:13:00          +0000
Received: from idsoftware.com (predator.idsoftware.com [192.246.40.34]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id VAA21757 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Sun, 18 Nov 2001 21:12:59 -0800
Received: from [192.246.40.144] (account johnc HELO pluto.idsoftware.com) by          idsoftware.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 3.4.7) with ESMTP id 482115 for          AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 18 Nov 2001 23:12:59 -0600
X-Sender: johnc@mail.idsoftware.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <4.3.1.2.20011118232514.02a68fa8@mail.idsoftware.com>
Date:         Sun, 18 Nov 2001 23:27:58 -0600
Reply-To: "John Carmack" <johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Carmack" <johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] History tech question: centrojet rocket sled
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <3BF8654F.4020504@tesco.net>

At 01:50 AM 11/19/2001 +0000, you wrote:
>Does anyone here happen to know what the problem was with the
>Centrojet rocket sled (it's a self-pumping Rotary Rocket-style
>engine- the rotation of the engine pumps the fuel to rim and into
>the combustion chamber.)

I would also be interested in hearing anything that turns up.  At
Armadillo, we have been tossing around the idea of building a roton-like
vehicle, which might be space-shot capable on monopropellent peroxide.

John Carmack
www.armadilloaerospace.com

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 6863 invoked from network); 19 Nov 2001 05:43:11 -0000
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 19 Nov 2001 05:43:11 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 9388 invoked by uid 50005); 19 Nov 2001 05:43:04 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4169. . Clean. Processed in 0.316916 secs); 19 Nov 2001 05:43:04 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 19 Nov 2001 05:43:02 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA22003; Sun, 18 Nov 2001 21:40:17 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 82628 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 19 Nov 2001 05:40:14          +0000
Received: from omta04.mta.everyone.net (sitemail.everyone.net [216.200.145.35])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id VAA21989 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 18 Nov 2001 21:40:14 -0800
Received: from sitemail.everyone.net (reports [216.200.145.62]) by          omta04.mta.everyone.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6450D4EE6F; Sun, 18          Nov 2001 21:40:03 -0800 (PST)
Received: by sitemail.everyone.net (Postfix, from userid 99) id 262083ECC; Sun,          18 Nov 2001 21:40:03 -0800 (PST)
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: MIME-tools 5.41 (Entity 5.404)
X-Originating-IP: [202.67.66.244]
Message-ID:  <20011119054003.262083ECC@sitemail.everyone.net>
Date:         Sun, 18 Nov 2001 21:40:03 -0800
Reply-To: <blast_tech@techemail.com>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Mark Broadfoot" <blast_tech@techemail.com>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Optimum Motor length?
Comments: To: Russell McMahon <apptech@clear.net.nz>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

 Thanks for the reply, I am well read on Richard Nakka's site and have designed motors in the J-K range for a little while now but an looking at altering the burn profile. All the motors I've made previously have been built to provide the highest output possible , where as this time I'm happy to aim at a different target of a long burn and not power or altitude.
 I thought that there may be dramatically different effects between KN-Sugar and AN type propellants and that someone may have had some background in this. It's a shame that there is an element of opposition towards AN out there as it effects us all no matter what we use for propellant.
 If I was to build up a long burn motor which is the best propellant to use for this?


--- "Russell McMahon" <apptech@clear.net.nz> wrote:
>> Am looking for a long burn maximising average thrust. All the motors I've
>designed so far burn for short periods 0.5-1.2 sec. What is the best way to
>increase burn time using KN-Suc(a propellant I'm very familiar with)?
>
>Hopefully you have fully digested everything on Richard Nakka's superb Candy
>site
>
>    http://members.aol.com/ricnakk/index.html
>
>This sounds like you may be burning all faces.
>Passivating the outer face will slow burn time somewhat.
>Your thrust profile will vary with and without outer face passivation. For a
>(relatively) neutral burn you will have different Length to OD ratios in
>each case.
>
>Going to an end burner will further slow burn times - especially for long
>thin motors.
>With Candy and a steel casing this shouldn't add too many insulations
>problems but with a lower temperature rated case material or a more
>energetic propellant, end-burners require greater attention to casing
>insulation.
>
>
>        RM

_____________________________________________________________
Are you a Techie? Get Your Free Tech Email Address Now! Visit http://www.TechEmail.com

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 9840 invoked from network); 19 Nov 2001 06:18:57 -0000
Received: from smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.105]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 19 Nov 2001 06:18:57 -0000
Received: (qmail 29781 invoked by uid 50005); 19 Nov 2001 06:18:50 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpy with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4169. . Clean. Processed in 0.563836 secs); 19 Nov 2001 06:18:50 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 19 Nov 2001 06:18:48 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA22181; Sun, 18 Nov 2001 22:15:47 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 82664 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 19 Nov 2001 06:15:29          +0000
Received: from cablecom.laribay.net (cablecom.laribay.net [66.20.57.4]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id WAA22167 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 18 Nov 2001 22:15:29 -0800
Received: from billbull (dial090.laribay.net [66.20.57.90]) by          cablecom.laribay.net (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id XAA02018 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 18 Nov 2001 23:59:38 -0600 (CST)          (envelope-from bpbullock@laribay.net)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0DEC_01C56B69.59206300"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <00a301c170c1$acf1a080$5a391442@billbull>
Date:         Mon, 19 Nov 2001 00:16:06 -0600
Reply-To: "Bill Bullock" <bpbullock@LARIBAY.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Bill Bullock" <bpbullock@LARIBAY.NET>
Subject:      [AR]
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0DEC_01C56B69.59206300
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Mark:
    Might I ask (on-line or off) the type of SS you found as well as the =
wall thickness? I am building a 3-casing set of 45mm test motors and =
would like to compare with you.
Bill
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Mark Broadfoot" <blast_tech@TECHEMAIL.COM>
>To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
>Sent: Sunday, November 18, 2001 3:02 PM
>Subject: [AR] Optimum Motor length?
>
>
>> I've just come across some 47mm stainless pipe that i intend using =
for
>KN-suc, KN-Dex and AN fuels. If i use 5 bates grain with KN propellant =
I'm
>looking at about 400mm. Is this the optimum length?
> Ideas anyone?
> Many thanks
> Mark Broadfoot
> Cert.No 02909611
> PAC-AGG BLAST-C
> PSC-SIESMIC WK-C
_____________________________________________________________
>> Are you a Techie? Get Your Free Tech Email Address Now! Visit
>http://www.TechEmail.com


------=_NextPart_000_0DEC_01C56B69.59206300
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META content=3D"text/html; charset=3Diso-8859-1" =
http-equiv=3DContent-Type>
<META content=3D"MSHTML 5.00.2614.3500" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV>Mark:</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Might I ask (on-line or off) the type of SS you =
found as=20
well as the wall thickness? I am building a 3-casing set of 45mm test =
motors and=20
would like to compare with you.</DIV>
<DIV>Bill</DIV>
<DIV>&gt;----- Original Message -----<BR>&gt;From: "Mark Broadfoot" =
&lt;<A=20
href=3D"mailto:blast_tech@TECHEMAIL.COM">blast_tech@TECHEMAIL.COM</A>&gt;=
<BR>&gt;To:=20
&lt;<A=20
href=3D"mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU">AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU</A>&gt;<BR>&gt;Se=
nt:=20
Sunday, November 18, 2001 3:02 PM<BR>&gt;Subject: [AR] Optimum Motor=20
length?<BR>&gt;<BR>&gt;<BR>&gt;&gt; I've just come across some 47mm =
stainless=20
pipe that i intend using for<BR>&gt;KN-suc, KN-Dex and AN fuels. If i =
use 5=20
bates grain with KN propellant I'm<BR>&gt;looking at about 400mm. Is =
this the=20
optimum length?<BR>&gt; Ideas anyone?<BR>&gt; Many thanks<BR>&gt; Mark=20
Broadfoot<BR>&gt; Cert.No 02909611<BR>&gt; PAC-AGG BLAST-C<BR>&gt; =
PSC-SIESMIC=20
WK-C<BR>_____________________________________________________________<BR>=
&gt;&gt;=20
Are you a Techie? Get Your Free Tech Email Address Now! Visit<BR>&gt;<A=20
href=3D"http://www.TechEmail.com">http://www.TechEmail.com</A><BR></DIV><=
/BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0DEC_01C56B69.59206300--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 878 invoked from network); 19 Nov 2001 11:24:55 -0000
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 19 Nov 2001 11:24:55 -0000
Received: (qmail 15360 invoked by uid 50005); 19 Nov 2001 11:24:48 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4169. . Clean. Processed in 0.224432 secs); 19 Nov 2001 11:24:48 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 19 Nov 2001 11:24:48 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id DAA23225; Mon, 19 Nov 2001 03:22:06 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 82769 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 19 Nov 2001 11:21:33          +0000
Received: from fep3-orange.clear.net.nz (fep3-orange.clear.net.nz          [203.97.32.3]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id DAA23210 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Mon, 19 Nov 2001 03:21:32 -0800
Received: from mkbs (203-167-160-53.dialup.clear.net.nz [203.167.160.53]) by          fep3-orange.clear.net.nz (1.5/1.8) with SMTP id AAA19968; Tue, 20 Nov          2001 00:21:21 +1300 (NZDT)
References:  <20011119054003.262083ECC@sitemail.everyone.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="Windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <00af01c170ec$99da5520$0700a8c0@mkbs>
Date:         Tue, 20 Nov 2001 00:22:41 +1300
Reply-To: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Organization: Applied Technology
Subject:      Re: [AR] Optimum Motor length?
Comments: To: blast_tech@techemail.com
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

> Thanks for the reply, I am well read on Richard Nakka's site and have
designed motors in the J-K range for a little while now but an looking at
altering the burn profile. All the motors I've made previously have been
built to provide the highest output possible , where as this time I'm happy
to aim at a different target of a long burn and not power or altitude.
>  I thought that there may be dramatically different effects between
KN-Sugar and AN type propellants and that someone may have had some
background in this. It's a shame that there is an element of opposition
towards AN out there as it effects us all no matter what we use for
propellant.
>  If I was to build up a long burn motor which is the best propellant to
use for this?

Others here are far far (far ..) better qualified to answer this, but here's
a starter for them to critique...

There are many ways of slowing down burn rates for a wide range of
propellants - which one is "best" may depend more on other characteristics.
What is your application that requires a long burn time? (Increasing burn
times for small solids can give substantial increases in maximum altitude
for lightly loaded rockets).

Long burn times with small AP solids generally will require an end burner.

AN propellants generally have a substantially slower burn rate than AP and
lend themselves to *somewhat* longer burn times than AP.
AN can be used in end burners but the high Kn required combined with small
burning area leads to very small throat sizes and is liable to increase
nozzle obstruction danger.

For a "worst of all worlds" solution but one which conceptually can give
good results - consider multiple grains which burn in a staged manner. For
this the casing sees an end burner as each grain burns individually with a
delay between each. General logistics and isolating the grains to prevent
ignition of any except the "current" one could make life interesting.




        RM

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 27633 invoked from network); 19 Nov 2001 13:36:33 -0000
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 19 Nov 2001 13:36:33 -0000
X-Priority: 3
Received: (qmail 2397 invoked by uid 50005); 19 Nov 2001 13:36:26 -0000
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4169. . Clean. Processed in 0.203489 secs); 19 Nov 2001 13:36:26 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 19 Nov 2001 13:36:26 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id FAA23635; Mon, 19 Nov 2001 05:33:11 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 82780 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 19 Nov 2001 13:33:02          +0000
Received: from nt2000s2.dgmicro.com (cn815472-c.newcas1.de.home.com          [24.40.74.93]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id FAA23619 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 19 Nov 2001 05:33:01 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
content-class: urn:content-classes:message
X-MS-Has-Attach: 
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: 
Thread-Topic: Fastest Propellant - Kosdon 2550 casing
Thread-Index: AcFwnLlbad1YVwkHQa6fVHEtwcvWxgAClWMA
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by itc.uci.edu id FAA23620
Message-ID:  <C0F7BF4DCEC1D2479A01031347184DCD3881@nt2000s2.dgmicro.com>
Date:         Mon, 19 Nov 2001 08:32:12 -0500
Reply-To: "Darren Wright" <dwright@D2-TECH.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Darren Wright" <dwright@D2-TECH.COM>
Subject:      [AR] Fastest Propellant - Kosdon 2550 casing
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

I'm wondering what the nastiest propellant anyone has sucessfully done
in the Kosdon 2550 casing.

Jerry O'Sullivan flew my 4 grain, Fast Tiger Tail this past weekend.
I was hoping for a 1.2-1.3 sec burn, but it ended up being about 1.8.
My regular Tiger Tail burns 2.0 seconds.

Tiger Tail is 77 AP 200 / 2 AL

This fast was 70 AP 200 / 10 AP 90 / 2 AL / 0.1 FeO


Has anyone gotten anything more ignorant?

-Darren

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 18149 invoked from network); 19 Nov 2001 16:48:33 -0000
Received: from smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.105]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 19 Nov 2001 16:48:33 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 18607 invoked by uid 50005); 19 Nov 2001 16:48:26 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpy with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4171. . Clean. Processed in 0.204051 secs); 19 Nov 2001 16:48:26 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 19 Nov 2001 16:48:25 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA24427; Mon, 19 Nov 2001 08:45:10 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 82839 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 19 Nov 2001 16:45:00          +0000
Received: from grucom2.gru.net (grucom2.gru.net [209.251.129.7]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id IAA24409 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon,          19 Nov 2001 08:45:00 -0800
Received: from [209.251.151.105] by grucom2.sfcc.net (NTMail          7.00.0022/NU4112.00.db1c8a4b) with ESMTP id zycepaaa for          AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 19 Nov 2001 11:44:53 -0500
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (Win95; I)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20011119054003.262083ECC@sitemail.everyone.net>            <00af01c170ec$99da5520$0700a8c0@mkbs>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3BF937CF.B69F0B02@sfcc.net>
Date:         Mon, 19 Nov 2001 11:48:15 -0500
Reply-To: "James Yawn" <jyawn@SFCC.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "James Yawn" <jyawn@SFCC.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Optimum Motor length?
Comments: To: Russell McMahon <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Russell McMahon wrote:

> For a "worst of all worlds" solution but one which conceptually can give
> good results - consider multiple grains which burn in a staged manner. For
> this the casing sees an end burner as each grain burns individually with a
> delay between each. General logistics and isolating the grains to prevent
> ignition of any except the "current" one could make life interesting.
>
>         RM

Jimmy Yawn wrote:

In my recent experiments coating KN/Sucrose grains with nitrocellulose lacquer I
noticed a delay in ignition time of about 0.7 seconds.  This leads me to wonder
if a less-flammable coating might be used to further retard ignition for some
grains, allowing staged ignition such as Mr. McMahon describes.  Has anyone
tried this?  If so, what kinds of coatings might be recommended?  I like long
burns, especially the idea of using a high-thrust lower stage and a long-burning
second-stage.  Any comments on these ideas?

Jimmy Yawn
jyawn@sfcc.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 12552 invoked from network); 19 Nov 2001 18:25:17 -0000
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 19 Nov 2001 18:25:17 -0000
Received: (qmail 24601 invoked by uid 50005); 19 Nov 2001 18:25:11 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4171. . Clean. Processed in 0.188844 secs); 19 Nov 2001 18:25:11 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 19 Nov 2001 18:25:10 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA24752; Mon, 19 Nov 2001 10:09:40 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 82866 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 19 Nov 2001 18:09:31          +0000
Received: from cablecom.laribay.net (cablecom.laribay.net [66.20.57.4]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id KAA24738 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 19 Nov 2001 10:09:31 -0800
Received: from billbull (dial083.laribay.net [66.20.57.83]) by          cablecom.laribay.net (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id LAA07957 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 19 Nov 2001 11:53:38 -0600 (CST)          (envelope-from bpbullock@laribay.net)
References: <20011119054003.262083ECC@sitemail.everyone.net>                      <00af01c170ec$99da5520$0700a8c0@mkbs>  <3BF937CF.B69F0B02@sfcc.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <009201c17125$6db6a6e0$6d391442@billbull>
Date:         Mon, 19 Nov 2001 12:10:07 -0600
Reply-To: "Bill Bullock" <bpbullock@LARIBAY.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Bill Bullock" <bpbullock@LARIBAY.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Optimum Motor length?
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

I have found that it is easier to "stage" propellant grains by casting the
segments as a part of the whole...no delay/ignition/etc. problems. It works
pretty well on restricted-surface grains in that it burns through the length
of the lower segment and transitions directly into the next segment.
    A problem I have found, and discussed off-list with some other members,
is designing a grain and formulation package which will operate efficiently
through a single nozzle configuration throughout the transitions in thrust
and burn characteristics. (A bit hard to stop and change nozzles between
propellant segments.) One option discussed is a controlled ablation nozzle
which will "open up" during flight as a result of ablation, but this raises
the question of how to achieve a symmetrical ablation rate without greater
erosion in certain parts of the nozzle throat than others. (Obviously
undesirable at best.)
    Personally, I would more than welcome additional thoughts on solution of
this problem.
Bill
----- Original Message -----
From: James Yawn <jyawn@SFCC.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Monday, November 19, 2001 10:48 AM
Subject: Re: [AR] Optimum Motor length?


> Russell McMahon wrote:
>
> > For a "worst of all worlds" solution but one which conceptually can give
> > good results - consider multiple grains which burn in a staged manner.
For
> > this the casing sees an end burner as each grain burns individually with
a
> > delay between each. General logistics and isolating the grains to
prevent
> > ignition of any except the "current" one could make life interesting.
> >
> >         RM
>
> Jimmy Yawn wrote:
>
> In my recent experiments coating KN/Sucrose grains with nitrocellulose
lacquer I
> noticed a delay in ignition time of about 0.7 seconds.  This leads me to
wonder
> if a less-flammable coating might be used to further retard ignition for
some
> grains, allowing staged ignition such as Mr. McMahon describes.  Has
anyone
> tried this?  If so, what kinds of coatings might be recommended?  I like
long
> burns, especially the idea of using a high-thrust lower stage and a
long-burning
> second-stage.  Any comments on these ideas?
>
> Jimmy Yawn
> jyawn@sfcc.net
>
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 7784 invoked from network); 19 Nov 2001 18:39:23 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 19 Nov 2001 18:39:23 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 13262 invoked by uid 50005); 19 Nov 2001 18:39:16 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4171. . Clean. Processed in 0.187631 secs); 19 Nov 2001 18:39:16 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 19 Nov 2001 18:39:15 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA24853; Mon, 19 Nov 2001 10:23:14 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 82886 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 19 Nov 2001 18:23:12          +0000
Received: from out004pub.verizon.net (out004pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.104])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id KAA24839 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 19 Nov 2001 10:23:11 -0800
Received: from [63.24.225.138] (1Cust172.tnt2.rancho-cucamonga.ca.da.uu.net          [63.15.225.172]) by out004pub.verizon.net  with ESMTP for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; id fAJIO1Y25766 Mon, 19 Nov 2001 12:24:01          -0600 (CST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: GTE/01rocket@mail.gte.net
References: <C0F7BF4DCEC1D2479A01031347184DCD3881@nt2000s2.dgmicro.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <a05100305b81eefe09fe0@[63.24.225.138]>
Date:         Mon, 19 Nov 2001 09:23:00 -0800
Reply-To: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Fastest Propellant - Kosdon 2550 casing
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <C0F7BF4DCEC1D2479A01031347184DCD3881@nt2000s2.dgmicro.com>

>I'm wondering what the nastiest propellant anyone has sucessfully done
>in the Kosdon 2550 casing.
>
>Jerry O'Sullivan flew my 4 grain, Fast Tiger Tail this past weekend.
>I was hoping for a 1.2-1.3 sec burn, but it ended up being about 1.8.
>My regular Tiger Tail burns 2.0 seconds.
>
>Tiger Tail is 77 AP 200 / 2 AL
>
>This fast was 70 AP 200 / 10 AP 90 / 2 AL / 0.1 FeO
>
>
>Has anyone gotten anything more ignorant?


Keeping in mind I am of the position the Kosdon 2550 is actually the
Irvine 2550 sincer I designed both the casing system and the
propellant and have a court order saying it is mine.

I have made APCP propellants with 1.1 second burn at 500 psi and
coreburning.  I have the ability to make propellants with star core
and 0.4 sec burn at 1000 psi and keep that casing from popping.  But
unless you are trying to shoot at tanks or something, why?

Jerry

>
>-Darren


--
Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
Opinion, the whole thing.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 20778 invoked from network); 19 Nov 2001 18:57:41 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.105]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 19 Nov 2001 18:57:41 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 16052 invoked by uid 50005); 19 Nov 2001 18:57:33 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpy with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4171. . Clean. Processed in 0.205288 secs); 19 Nov 2001 18:57:33 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 19 Nov 2001 18:57:33 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA25011; Mon, 19 Nov 2001 10:41:43 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 82927 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 19 Nov 2001 18:41:41          +0000
Received: from out006pub.verizon.net (out006pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.106])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id KAA24997 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 19 Nov 2001 10:41:40 -0800
Received: from [63.24.225.138] (1Cust172.tnt2.rancho-cucamonga.ca.da.uu.net          [63.15.225.172]) by out006pub.verizon.net  with ESMTP for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; id fAJIdAo11592 Mon, 19 Nov 2001 12:39:10          -0600 (CST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: GTE/01rocket@mail.gte.net
References: <20011119054003.262083ECC@sitemail.everyone.net>            <00af01c170ec$99da5520$0700a8c0@mkbs> <3BF937CF.B69F0B02@sfcc.net>            <009201c17125$6db6a6e0$6d391442@billbull>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <a05100306b81f020b7deb@[63.24.225.138]>
Date:         Mon, 19 Nov 2001 10:41:05 -0800
Reply-To: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Optimum Motor length?
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <009201c17125$6db6a6e0$6d391442@billbull>

>I have found that it is easier to "stage" propellant grains by casting the
>segments as a part of the whole...no delay/ignition/etc. problems. It works
>pretty well on restricted-surface grains in that it burns through the length
>of the lower segment and transitions directly into the next segment.
>     A problem I have found, and discussed off-list with some other members,
>is designing a grain and formulation package which will operate efficiently
>through a single nozzle configuration throughout the transitions in thrust
>and burn characteristics. (A bit hard to stop and change nozzles between
>propellant segments.) One option discussed is a controlled ablation nozzle
>which will "open up" during flight as a result of ablation, but this raises
>the question of how to achieve a symmetrical ablation rate without greater
>erosion in certain parts of the nozzle throat than others. (Obviously
>undesirable at best.)
>     Personally, I would more than welcome additional thoughts on solution of
>this problem.


Some of the motors I made in the early 70's, and a procedure adopted
later by Composite Dynamics, is to make your nozzle using a washer as
a throat and pot it with an ablative material.  I used casting resin
and composite dynamics used a ceramic filled material similar to the
rock putty used by some BP motor makers.

It erodes at a predictable rate (with somewhat unpredictable
concentricity) to the washer where the throat is fixed.  It also
expands automagically to a perfect bell shaped nozzle.

More to the point, it works.

Jerry

--
Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
Opinion, the whole thing.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 29012 invoked from network); 19 Nov 2001 20:40:11 -0000
Received: from smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.105]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 19 Nov 2001 20:40:11 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 22104 invoked by uid 50005); 19 Nov 2001 20:40:03 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpy with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4171. . Clean. Processed in 0.687716 secs); 19 Nov 2001 20:40:03 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 19 Nov 2001 20:40:02 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA25392; Mon, 19 Nov 2001 12:10:56 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 82992 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 19 Nov 2001 20:09:34          +0000
Received: from mail.aros.net (mail.aros.net [207.173.16.20]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA25372 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon,          19 Nov 2001 12:09:33 -0800
Received: from biomicro.com (cust-208-187-122-40.bbsc.net [208.187.122.40]) by          mail.aros.net (8.11.6/8.9.3) with ESMTP id fAJK9XX14440 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 19 Nov 2001 13:09:33 -0700 (MST)
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.77 [en] (Win98; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <Pine.BSI.3.91.1011116123727.15998I-100000@spsystems.net>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3BF95924.2B94C651@biomicro.com>
Date:         Mon, 19 Nov 2001 12:10:28 -0700
Reply-To: "Mark K. Spute" <mks@BIOMICRO.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Mark K. Spute" <mks@BIOMICRO.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Non-digital test stand
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

"Whaddya mean there's something better?  Why in my day . . ."

Henry Spencer wrote:

> I'm sure there are people out there in the traditional space/rocket world
> whose managers are still insisting on using chart recorders...


--
Mark K. Spute
Senior Research Engineer
BioMicro Systems Inc.

KD7IWE,  RRS, hopeful future Stolly owner

"It is difficult to say what is impossible, for the dream of yesterday
is the hope of today and the reality of tomorrow."
     Dr. Robert H. Goddard

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 6670 invoked from network); 19 Nov 2001 20:41:59 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 19 Nov 2001 20:41:59 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 14719 invoked by uid 50005); 19 Nov 2001 20:41:52 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4171. . Clean. Processed in 0.176736 secs); 19 Nov 2001 20:41:52 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 19 Nov 2001 20:41:52 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA25332; Mon, 19 Nov 2001 12:02:18 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 82978 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 19 Nov 2001 20:00:49          +0000
Received: from femail37.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail37.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.254.60.31]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA25313          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 19 Nov 2001 12:00:48 -0800
Received: from c1649002-a.earthlink.net ([24.20.95.67]) by          femail37.sdc1.sfba.home.com (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20          201-229-121-120-20010223) with ESMTP id          <20011119200024.TSVO618.femail37.sdc1.sfba.home.com@c1649002-a.earthlink.net>; Mon, 19 Nov 2001 12:00:24          -0800
X-Sender: forkbomb@mail.earthlink.net
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.0.2
References: <C0F7BF4DCEC1D2479A01031347184DCD3881@nt2000s2.dgmicro.com>            <C0F7BF4DCEC1D2479A01031347184DCD3881@nt2000s2.dgmicro.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <5.0.2.1.0.20011119115943.0316f818@mail.earthlink.net>
Date:         Mon, 19 Nov 2001 12:00:26 -0800
Reply-To: "Pierce Nichols" <forkbomb@EARTHLINK.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Pierce Nichols" <forkbomb@EARTHLINK.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Fastest Propellant - Kosdon 2550 casing
Comments: To: Jerry Irvine <01rocket@GTE.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <a05100305b81eefe09fe0@[63.24.225.138]>

At 09:23 AM 11/19/2001 -0800, Jerry Irvine wrote:
>>I'm wondering what the nastiest propellant anyone has sucessfully done
>>in the Kosdon 2550 casing.
>>
>>Jerry O'Sullivan flew my 4 grain, Fast Tiger Tail this past weekend.
>>I was hoping for a 1.2-1.3 sec burn, but it ended up being about 1.8.
>>My regular Tiger Tail burns 2.0 seconds.
>>
>>Tiger Tail is 77 AP 200 / 2 AL
>>
>>This fast was 70 AP 200 / 10 AP 90 / 2 AL / 0.1 FeO
>>
>>
>>Has anyone gotten anything more ignorant?
>
>
>Keeping in mind I am of the position the Kosdon 2550 is actually the
>Irvine 2550 sincer I designed both the casing system and the
>propellant and have a court order saying it is mine.
>
>I have made APCP propellants with 1.1 second burn at 500 psi and
>coreburning.  I have the ability to make propellants with star core
>and 0.4 sec burn at 1000 psi and keep that casing from popping.  But
>unless you are trying to shoot at tanks or something, why?


         Testing a hypersonic airframe? Trying to get a really big,
slow-burning sustainer off the rod?

         -p


Mars or Bust!
www.marssociety.com

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 20782 invoked from network); 19 Nov 2001 21:05:26 -0000
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 19 Nov 2001 21:05:26 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 20709 invoked by uid 50005); 19 Nov 2001 21:05:19 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4171. . Clean. Processed in 0.146254 secs); 19 Nov 2001 21:05:19 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 19 Nov 2001 21:05:18 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA25672; Mon, 19 Nov 2001 12:54:12 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 83048 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 19 Nov 2001 20:52:49          +0000
Received: from mail.aros.net (mail.aros.net [207.173.16.20]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA25653 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon,          19 Nov 2001 12:52:48 -0800
Received: from biomicro.com (cust-208-187-122-40.bbsc.net [208.187.122.40]) by          mail.aros.net (8.11.6/8.9.3) with ESMTP id fAJKqlK49583 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 19 Nov 2001 13:52:48 -0700 (MST)
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.77 [en] (Win98; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <000001c16e62$d5188990$0200a8c0@24.53.64.18>            <3BF68B9B.378461DA@vip.cybercity.dk>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3BF96347.31302F82@biomicro.com>
Date:         Mon, 19 Nov 2001 12:53:43 -0700
Reply-To: "Mark K. Spute" <mks@BIOMICRO.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Mark K. Spute" <mks@BIOMICRO.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] motor data files
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Boy, do I second that proposal.  Make everything metric.

However, please, please, PLEASE measure force in Newtons and not
Kilograms.  There is no such thing as a kilogram force.  Kgf is for
people who can't multiply or divide by 10.

Hans Olaf Toft wrote:

> BTW, I feel that I have to write too many uom tags -
> I would suggest that units of measure
> are metric - m, kg, s, A and their descendants without
> prefixes by default, leaving the uom tag optional.

--
Mark K. Spute
Senior Research Engineer
BioMicro Systems Inc.

KD7IWE,  RRS, hopeful future Stolly owner

"It is difficult to say what is impossible, for the dream of yesterday
is the hope of today and the reality of tomorrow."
     Dr. Robert H. Goddard

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 12962 invoked from network); 19 Nov 2001 21:16:57 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 19 Nov 2001 21:16:57 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 11394 invoked by uid 50005); 19 Nov 2001 21:16:51 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4171. . Clean. Processed in 0.148611 secs); 19 Nov 2001 21:16:51 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 19 Nov 2001 21:16:50 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA25482; Mon, 19 Nov 2001 12:26:35 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 83008 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 19 Nov 2001 20:25:12          +0000
Received: from out007pub.verizon.net (out007pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.107])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA25458 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 19 Nov 2001 12:25:12 -0800
Received: from [63.24.225.138] (1Cust253.tnt1.rancho-cucamonga.ca.da.uu.net          [63.24.225.253]) by out007pub.verizon.net  with ESMTP for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; id fAJKPvH07330 Mon, 19 Nov 2001 14:25:59          -0600 (CST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: GTE/01rocket@mail.gte.net
References: <C0F7BF4DCEC1D2479A01031347184DCD3881@nt2000s2.dgmicro.com>            <C0F7BF4DCEC1D2479A01031347184DCD3881@nt2000s2.dgmicro.com>            <5.0.2.1.0.20011119115943.0316f818@mail.earthlink.net>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <a05100309b81f19e2bcdd@[63.24.225.138]>
Date:         Mon, 19 Nov 2001 12:24:16 -0800
Reply-To: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Fastest Propellant - Kosdon 2550 casing
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <5.0.2.1.0.20011119115943.0316f818@mail.earthlink.net>

>>and 0.4 sec burn at 1000 psi and keep that casing from popping.  But
>>unless you are trying to shoot at tanks or something, why?
>
>
>         Testing a hypersonic airframe? Trying to get a really big,
>slow-burning sustainer off the rod?


To achieve hypersonic you want a progressive thrust curve with a
higher burning rate exponent propellant (KP) so you get TIME to
accelerate to a spike at burnout.

To boost a liquid the required speed is fairly standard of, say
500-800 fps and this is best achieved by a mission specific solid
with a bates or star grain.  The actual burn time is more a function
of acceleration limits than anything else.  You probably do not want
to hammer a liquid with a starbruning GAP booster to 1000 fps in 0.2
sec :)  Sloshing would ensue.

Jerry

--
Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
Opinion, the whole thing.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 24588 invoked from network); 19 Nov 2001 21:40:12 -0000
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 19 Nov 2001 21:40:12 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 15531 invoked by uid 50005); 19 Nov 2001 21:37:34 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4171. . Clean. Processed in 0.419512 secs); 19 Nov 2001 21:37:34 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 19 Nov 2001 21:37:33 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA25821; Mon, 19 Nov 2001 13:16:59 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 83077 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 19 Nov 2001 21:15:35          +0000
Received: from cicero0.cybercity.dk (cicero0.cybercity.dk [212.242.40.52]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA25799 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 19 Nov 2001 13:15:23 -0800
Received: from usr01.cybercity.dk (usr01.cybercity.dk [212.242.40.35]) by          cicero0.cybercity.dk (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1A0D6102911 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 19 Nov 2001 22:15:18 +0100 (CET)
Received: from vip.cybercity.dk (port10.cvx1-noe.ppp.cybercity.dk          [217.157.69.203]) by usr01.cybercity.dk (8.11.6/8.11.0) with ESMTP id          fAJLFGG90882 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 19 Nov 2001 22:15:16          +0100 (CET) (envelope-from hot@vip.cybercity.dk)
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.75 [en] (Win95; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <000001c16e62$d5188990$0200a8c0@24.53.64.18>            <3BF68B9B.378461DA@vip.cybercity.dk>            <3BF96347.31302F82@biomicro.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3BF97999.B096A9AC@vip.cybercity.dk>
Date:         Mon, 19 Nov 2001 22:28:57 +0100
Reply-To: "Hans Olaf Toft" <hot@VIP.CYBERCITY.DK>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Hans Olaf Toft" <hot@VIP.CYBERCITY.DK>
Subject:      Re: [AR] motor data files
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

"Mark K. Spute" wrote:

> Boy, do I second that proposal.  Make everything metric.
>
> However, please, please, PLEASE measure force in Newtons and not
> Kilograms.  There is no such thing as a kilogram force.  Kgf is for
> people who can't multiply or divide by 10.

Naturally, but Newton is not a base unit as m, Kg, s or A are - Newton =
kg*m/s^2

;-) Hans

>
>
> Hans Olaf Toft wrote:
>
> > BTW, I feel that I have to write too many uom tags -
> > I would suggest that units of measure
> > are metric - m, kg, s, A and their descendants without
> > prefixes by default, leaving the uom tag optional.
>
> --
> Mark K. Spute
> Senior Research Engineer
> BioMicro Systems Inc.
>
> KD7IWE,  RRS, hopeful future Stolly owner
>
> "It is difficult to say what is impossible, for the dream of yesterday
> is the hope of today and the reality of tomorrow."
>      Dr. Robert H. Goddard

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 29408 invoked from network); 19 Nov 2001 22:02:18 -0000
Received: from smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.105]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 19 Nov 2001 22:02:18 -0000
Received: (qmail 26213 invoked by uid 50005); 19 Nov 2001 22:02:11 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpy with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4171. . Clean. Processed in 1.021837 secs); 19 Nov 2001 22:02:11 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 19 Nov 2001 22:02:08 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA26055; Mon, 19 Nov 2001 13:56:59 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 83117 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 19 Nov 2001 21:56:58          +0000
Received: from mta05.mail.mel.aone.net.au (mta05.mail.au.uu.net [203.2.192.85])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA26041 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 19 Nov 2001 13:56:57 -0800
Received: from unknown ([63.60.247.212]) by mta05.mail.mel.aone.net.au with          SMTP id          <20011119215655.ZLGV15299.mta05.mail.mel.aone.net.au@unknown>; Tue,          20 Nov 2001 08:56:55 +1100
References: Conversation <000001c16e62$d5188990$0200a8c0@24.53.64.18> with last            message <3BF96347.31302F82@biomicro.com>
Priority: Normal
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Priority: 3
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	X-MAPIextension=.TXT;
	charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>
Date:         Mon, 19 Nov 2001 21:56:58 +0000
Reply-To: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] motor data files
Comments: To: "Mark K. Spute" <mks@BIOMICRO.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <3BF96347.31302F82@biomicro.com>

----------
> Boy, do I second that proposal.  Make everything metric.
>
> However, please, please, PLEASE measure force in Newtons and not
> Kilograms.  There is no such thing as a kilogram force.  Kgf is for
> people who can't multiply or divide by 10.

Actually 9.80665... which is why those people prefer to deal in Kgf.

Troy.

>
> Hans Olaf Toft wrote:
>
> > BTW, I feel that I have to write too many uom tags -
> > I would suggest that units of measure
> > are metric - m, kg, s, A and their descendants without
> > prefixes by default, leaving the uom tag optional.
>
> --
> Mark K. Spute
> Senior Research Engineer
> BioMicro Systems Inc.
>
> KD7IWE,  RRS, hopeful future Stolly owner
>
> "It is difficult to say what is impossible, for the dream of yesterday
> is the hope of today and the reality of tomorrow."
>      Dr. Robert H. Goddard

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 23397 invoked from network); 19 Nov 2001 22:23:01 -0000
Received: from smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.105]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 19 Nov 2001 22:23:01 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 28805 invoked by uid 50005); 19 Nov 2001 22:22:54 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpy with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4171. . Clean. Processed in 0.1772 secs); 19 Nov 2001 22:22:54 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 19 Nov 2001 22:22:54 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA26023; Mon, 19 Nov 2001 13:53:12 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 83110 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 19 Nov 2001 21:53:05          +0000
Received: from mail.aros.net (mail.aros.net [207.173.16.20]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA26008 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon,          19 Nov 2001 13:53:04 -0800
Received: from biomicro.com (cust-208-187-122-40.bbsc.net [208.187.122.40]) by          mail.aros.net (8.11.6/8.9.3) with ESMTP id fAJLr3301766 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 19 Nov 2001 14:53:03 -0700 (MST)
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.77 [en] (Win98; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <3BF68B9B.378461DA@vip.cybercity.dk>            <000001c16f98$a8c772c0$0200a8c0@24.53.64.18>            <20011117183459.C29632@bailey.dscga.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3BF97166.55A871D1@biomicro.com>
Date:         Mon, 19 Nov 2001 13:53:58 -0700
Reply-To: "Mark K. Spute" <mks@BIOMICRO.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Mark K. Spute" <mks@BIOMICRO.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] motor data files
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Okay, this is looking pretty good to me.  I'll even retract my earlier
comment about going strictly metric as it appears to me that it should
be easy to use a tag to specify english (yck!) or metric (yea!) units of
measurement.  Or maybe it can just stay as an attribute.  Or maybe I
ought to just shut up.  Yeah.  That's it.

Michael Mealling wrote:
>
> On Sat, Nov 17, 2001 at 01:49:58PM -0500, Jeff Grady wrote:
> > An entire flight vehicle could be defined with XML. Just like a bill of
> > materials. However, motor data is all I would be interested in.
>
> It would be nice for various design software to use the same standard (Rocksim
> and spacecad).
>
> > The data > Jerry Irvine posted could be translated by a simple XSLT doc to
> > produce XML data. One problem I see with examples below is that "uom"
> > specified multiple times per row of data becomes ambiguous. Each "uom"
> > should be prefixed with what the unit of measure is for. The examples of
> > "uom" below would be positional data - something to avoid.
>
> Plus its not valid XML. Good XML design suggests that you should
> have those values as tags, not attributes. Then have standardized
> data types. For example, the casing tag that looks like this:
>
> >       <casing uom="kg" weight="1.5" uom="mm" CG_pos_from_top="147.3"
> > uom="kg" uom="m" uom="s"
> > Ix=0.224 Iy=1.56 Iz=1.56/>
>
> should look like this:
>
> <casing>
>    <weight uom="mm">1.5</weight>
>    <cg_pos from="top" uom="mm">147.3</cg_pos>
>    <Ix uom="kg">0.224</Ix>
>    <Iy uom="m">1.56</Ix>
>    <Iz uom="s">1.56</Ix>
> </casing>
>
> Then in the DTD you define things 'weight' and 'cg_pos' as standard
> data types that can be used for the various components.
>
> > I propose the general structure as follows:
> >
> > <motor>
> >       <designation ..../>
> >       <casing .........../>
> >       <nozzle .........../>
> >       <grain ............./>
> >       <grain ............./>
> >       <data ............../>
> > </motor>
> >
> > The designation field could be like:
> >       <designation name="Space Tech PQ719"/>
>
> If this is the only tag that designation has then just make it an
> attribute of the motor tag...
>
> > The casing field could be:
> >       <casing uom="kg" weight="1.5" uom="mm" CG_pos_from_top="147.3"
> > uom="kg" uom="m" uom="s"
> > Ix=0.224 Iy=1.56 Iz=1.56/>
> >
> > Nozzle could be:
> >       <nozzle uom="mm" throatdia="7.5" exitdia="35.2"/>
> >
> > Grain could be as proposed by JG although I oppose the <isp> tag as it
> > relates to the ovarall
> > performance and not to the grain itself - it could be replaced by a c* tag.
> > If the grain is
> > not known/specified/relevant the grain structure could look like:
> >       <grain type="unspecified"
> >             <propellant_mass uom="kg" value="0.95"/>
> >             <residue uom="pct" value="3.7"/>
> >       </grain>
> >
> > The data field embeds actual measurements/simulations of a given motor and
> > could be like:
> >       <data>
> >            <Block>
> >                 <header uom="s" value="time" uom="N" value="thrust" uom="kg"
> > value=mass/>
> >                 <data>
> >                        0.0 400.0 0.95
> >                        .........
> >                 </data>
> >            </block>
> >       </data>
>
> This one needs some work. Your essentially doing positional field definition
> with XML which is what XML is supposed to fix. I.e. here XML has no way
> of knowing about the individiual data elements, thus you can use a stylesheet
> on them to transform them into something else. Instead use IDs and
> a generic data-point element like this:
>
> <data>
>   <block>
>         <field-descriptor id=1>
>              <data-type>time</data-type>
>              <uom>seconds</uom>
>         </field-descriptor>
>         <field-descriptor id=2>
>              <data-type>thrust</data-type>
>              <uom>newtons</uom>
>         </field-descriptor>
>         <field-descriptor id=3>
>              <data-type>mass</data-type>
>              <uom>kg</uom>
>         </field-descriptor>
>         <values>
>           <row>
>             <column id=1>0.0</field>
>             <column id=2>400.0</field>
>             <column id=3>0.95</field>
>           </row>
>           <row>... </row>
>         </values>
>    </block>
> </data>
>
> -MM
>
> --
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Michael Mealling        |      Vote Libertarian!       | urn:pin:1
> michael@neonym.net      |                              | http://www.neonym.net

--
Mark K. Spute
Senior Research Engineer
BioMicro Systems Inc.

KD7IWE,  RRS, hopeful future Stolly owner

"It is difficult to say what is impossible, for the dream of yesterday
is the hope of today and the reality of tomorrow."
     Dr. Robert H. Goddard

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 13675 invoked from network); 19 Nov 2001 22:50:30 -0000
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 19 Nov 2001 22:50:30 -0000
Received: (qmail 18359 invoked by uid 50005); 19 Nov 2001 22:50:23 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4171. . Clean. Processed in 0.361805 secs); 19 Nov 2001 22:50:23 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 19 Nov 2001 22:50:22 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA26343; Mon, 19 Nov 2001 14:41:23 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 83163 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 19 Nov 2001 22:41:18          +0000
Received: from mta03.mail.mel.aone.net.au (mta03.mail.au.uu.net [203.2.192.83])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA26329 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 19 Nov 2001 14:41:18 -0800
Received: from unknown ([63.34.218.22]) by mta03.mail.mel.aone.net.au with SMTP          id <20011119224114.ECKR12354.mta03.mail.mel.aone.net.au@unknown> for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 20 Nov 2001 09:41:14 +1100
References: Conversation <20011119054003.262083ECC@sitemail.everyone.net> with            last message <3BF937CF.B69F0B02@sfcc.net>
Priority: Normal
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Priority: 3
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	X-MAPIextension=.TXT;
	charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>
Date:         Mon, 19 Nov 2001 22:41:18 +0000
Reply-To: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Optimum Motor length?
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <3BF937CF.B69F0B02@sfcc.net>

There are a 2 main issues to design for to achieve optimum length for a
solid motor. (1) Gas velocities down the core & (2) efficiency of expansion
cone or nozzle divergent section. (1) is also related to propellant
loadings limitations and (2) is also related to burn rate.
Looking at (1): longer motors generally require larger core areas to allow
for the extra mass flow. There are various exceptions ie. non-linear affect
gas velocity has on erosive burning with some propellants but these effects
are generally beyond the amateur scope.
Looking at (2): Longer motors require larger throats to keep the Kn ratio
constant which requires larger expansion areas to keep the expansion ratio
constant. You can decrease the throat diam but as a consequence will
increase chamber pressures which require higher expansion ratios for a gain
in efficiency. Yep, catch 22 (not a directly proportional one though:-)
 The solution to (2) is to use a slower burning propellant which will also
fix some of the issues with (1).

Traditionally slow burning solid propellants are KN03/epoxy, AN composite
propellants, Cooled AP composite propellants.

Troy.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 8433 invoked from network); 19 Nov 2001 23:32:49 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 19 Nov 2001 23:32:49 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 4567 invoked by uid 50005); 19 Nov 2001 23:32:42 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4171. . Clean. Processed in 1.095709 secs); 19 Nov 2001 23:32:42 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 19 Nov 2001 23:32:40 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA26079; Mon, 19 Nov 2001 13:58:41 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 83124 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 19 Nov 2001 21:58:39          +0000
Received: from smtppop2pub.verizon.net (smtppop2pub.gte.net [206.46.170.21]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA26065 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 19 Nov 2001 13:58:38 -0800
Received: from [63.24.225.138] (1Cust222.tnt1.rancho-cucamonga.ca.da.uu.net          [63.24.225.222]) by smtppop2pub.verizon.net  with ESMTP for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; id PAA30664053 Mon, 19 Nov 2001 15:59:58 -0600          (CST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: GTE/01rocket@mail.gte.net
References: <000001c16e62$d5188990$0200a8c0@24.53.64.18>            <3BF68B9B.378461DA@vip.cybercity.dk>            <3BF96347.31302F82@biomicro.com>            <3BF97999.B096A9AC@vip.cybercity.dk>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <a0510030ab81f30cdab95@[63.24.225.138]>
Date:         Mon, 19 Nov 2001 13:58:03 -0800
Reply-To: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] motor data files
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <3BF97999.B096A9AC@vip.cybercity.dk>

>"Mark K. Spute" wrote:
>
>>  Boy, do I second that proposal.  Make everything metric.
>>
>>  However, please, please, PLEASE measure force in Newtons and not
>>  Kilograms.  There is no such thing as a kilogram force.  Kgf is for
>>  people who can't multiply or divide by 10.
>
>Naturally, but Newton is not a base unit as m, Kg, s or A are - Newton =
>kg*m/s^2
>
>;-) Hans


All I ask is the UOM be specified in a remarks tag.

Jerry


>
>>
>>
>>  Hans Olaf Toft wrote:
>>
>>  > BTW, I feel that I have to write too many uom tags -
>>  > I would suggest that units of measure
>>  > are metric - m, kg, s, A and their descendants without
>>  > prefixes by default, leaving the uom tag optional.
>>
>>  --
>>  Mark K. Spute
>>  Senior Research Engineer
>>  BioMicro Systems Inc.
>>
>>  KD7IWE,  RRS, hopeful future Stolly owner
>>
>>  "It is difficult to say what is impossible, for the dream of yesterday
>  > is the hope of today and the reality of tomorrow."
>  >      Dr. Robert H. Goddard


--
Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
Opinion, the whole thing.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 29771 invoked from network); 19 Nov 2001 23:45:01 -0000
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 19 Nov 2001 23:45:01 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 23294 invoked by uid 50005); 19 Nov 2001 23:44:54 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4171. . Clean. Processed in 0.208429 secs); 19 Nov 2001 23:44:54 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 19 Nov 2001 23:44:54 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA26577; Mon, 19 Nov 2001 15:34:26 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 83194 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 19 Nov 2001 23:34:22          +0000
Received: from hawk.prod.itd.earthlink.net (hawk.mail.pas.earthlink.net          [207.217.120.22]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA26542          for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Mon, 19 Nov 2001 15:24:22 -0800
Received: from dialup-209.245.128.252.dial1.sanjose1.level3.net          ([209.245.128.252] helo=earthlink.net ident=dave) by          hawk.prod.itd.earthlink.net with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id          165xm1-00002G-00; Mon, 19 Nov 2001 15:24:22 -0800
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.75 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.16-22 i686)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <C0F7BF4DCEC1D2479A01031347184DCD3881@nt2000s2.dgmicro.com>            <C0F7BF4DCEC1D2479A01031347184DCD3881@nt2000s2.dgmicro.com>            <5.0.2.1.0.20011119115943.0316f818@mail.earthlink.net>            <a05100309b81f19e2bcdd@[63.24.225.138]>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3BF995A3.5E1E8F55@earthlink.net>
Date:         Mon, 19 Nov 2001 15:28:35 -0800
Reply-To: "David Weinshenker" <daze39@EARTHLINK.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "David Weinshenker" <daze39@EARTHLINK.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Fastest Propellant - Kosdon 2550 casing
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Jerry Irvine wrote:
> To achieve hypersonic you want a progressive thrust curve with a
> higher burning rate exponent propellant (KP) so you get TIME to
> accelerate to a spike at burnout.

Hmmm... how does KP compare with AP in cost, availability in amateur
quantities, compliance overhead, handling safety, etc.?... the stuff
that _really matters! :) (Is KP what the old RDC "Enerjets" used?)

-dave w

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 6415 invoked from network); 20 Nov 2001 00:26:10 -0000
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 20 Nov 2001 00:26:10 -0000
Received: (qmail 20428 invoked by uid 50005); 20 Nov 2001 00:26:03 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4171. . Clean. Processed in 1.282735 secs); 20 Nov 2001 00:26:03 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 20 Nov 2001 00:26:00 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA26884; Mon, 19 Nov 2001 16:20:58 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 83276 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 20 Nov 2001 00:17:44          +0000
Received: from cablecom.laribay.net (cablecom.laribay.net [66.20.57.4]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA26854 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 19 Nov 2001 16:17:43 -0800
Received: from billbull (dial067.laribay.net [66.20.57.67]) by          cablecom.laribay.net (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id RAA11570 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 19 Nov 2001 17:56:05 -0600 (CST)          (envelope-from bpbullock@laribay.net)
References: <Pine.BSI.3.91.1011116123727.15998I-100000@spsystems.net>             <3BF95924.2B94C651@biomicro.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <005601c17158$10b5dfa0$70391442@billbull>
Date:         Mon, 19 Nov 2001 18:12:38 -0600
Reply-To: "Bill Bullock" <bpbullock@LARIBAY.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Bill Bullock" <bpbullock@LARIBAY.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Non-digital test stand
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

    I remember making a lot of weeklies installing a multitude of
quad-channel recorders in Blockhouse 14 at the Cape. Wish I had some of that
old stuff now...
Bill
----- Original Message -----
From: Mark K. Spute <mks@BIOMICRO.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Monday, November 19, 2001 1:10 PM
Subject: Re: [AR] Non-digital test stand


> "Whaddya mean there's something better?  Why in my day . . ."
>
> Henry Spencer wrote:
>
> > I'm sure there are people out there in the traditional space/rocket
world
> > whose managers are still insisting on using chart recorders...
>
>
> --
> Mark K. Spute
> Senior Research Engineer
> BioMicro Systems Inc.
>
> KD7IWE,  RRS, hopeful future Stolly owner
>
> "It is difficult to say what is impossible, for the dream of yesterday
> is the hope of today and the reality of tomorrow."
>      Dr. Robert H. Goddard
>
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 5336 invoked from network); 20 Nov 2001 00:35:28 -0000
Received: from smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.105]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 20 Nov 2001 00:35:28 -0000
Received: (qmail 9334 invoked by uid 50005); 20 Nov 2001 00:35:19 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpy with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4171. . Clean. Processed in 1.367092 secs); 20 Nov 2001 00:35:19 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 20 Nov 2001 00:35:17 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA27100; Mon, 19 Nov 2001 16:33:03 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 83328 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 20 Nov 2001 00:31:41          +0000
Received: from fep4-orange.clear.net.nz (fep4-orange.clear.net.nz          [203.97.32.4]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA27079          for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Mon, 19 Nov 2001 16:31:41 -0800
Received: from mkbs (203-167-158-212.dialup.clear.net.nz [203.167.158.212]) by          fep4-orange.clear.net.nz (1.5/1.7) with SMTP id NAA25913; Tue, 20 Nov          2001 13:31:27 +1300 (NZDT)
References: <C0F7BF4DCEC1D2479A01031347184DCD3881@nt2000s2.dgmicro.com>                    <C0F7BF4DCEC1D2479A01031347184DCD3881@nt2000s2.dgmicro.com>                    <5.0.2.1.0.20011119115943.0316f818@mail.earthlink.net>             <a05100309b81f19e2bcdd@[63.24.225.138]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <00ba01c1715a$f7a89360$0700a8c0@mkbs>
Date:         Tue, 20 Nov 2001 10:31:12 +1300
Reply-To: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Organization: Applied Technology
Subject:      Re: [AR] Fastest Propellant - Kosdon 2550 casing
Comments: To: Jerry Irvine <01rocket@GTE.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

> You probably do not want  to hammer a liquid with
> a starbruning GAP booster to 1000 fps in 0.2 sec :)
> Sloshing would ensue.


Probably only 1 slosh though :-)

    RM

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 12006 invoked from network); 20 Nov 2001 00:37:25 -0000
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 20 Nov 2001 00:37:25 -0000
Received: (qmail 454 invoked by uid 50005); 20 Nov 2001 00:37:18 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4171. . Clean. Processed in 0.164224 secs); 20 Nov 2001 00:37:18 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 20 Nov 2001 00:37:17 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA27123; Mon, 19 Nov 2001 16:34:26 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 83335 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 20 Nov 2001 00:33:05          +0000
Received: from mta02.mail.mel.aone.net.au (mta02.mail.au.uu.net [203.2.192.82])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA27090 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 19 Nov 2001 16:32:22 -0800
Received: from unknown ([63.34.218.201]) by mta02.mail.mel.aone.net.au with          SMTP id <20011120003219.CHME25415.mta02.mail.mel.aone.net.au@unknown>          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 20 Nov 2001 11:32:19 +1100
References: Conversation            <C0F7BF4DCEC1D2479A01031347184DCD3881@nt2000s2.dgmicro.com> with            last message <3BF995A3.5E1E8F55@earthlink.net>
Priority: Normal
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Priority: 3
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	X-MAPIextension=.TXT;
	charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>
Date:         Tue, 20 Nov 2001 00:33:05 +0000
Reply-To: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Fastest Propellant - Kosdon 2550 casing
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <3BF995A3.5E1E8F55@earthlink.net>

----------
> Jerry Irvine wrote:
> > To achieve hypersonic you want a progressive thrust curve with a
> > higher burning rate exponent propellant (KP) so you get TIME to
> > accelerate to a spike at burnout.

That's a very inefficient way of doing things (re: High "n" propellant in
that config). To achieve hypersonic velocities you simply require an
efficient design and reasonable performing propellant (to do it
efficiently). That could mean a gazillion different options in itself. When
efficiency doesn't count, then any rocket with enough propellant will do
the trick.

Troy.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 24334 invoked from network); 20 Nov 2001 00:41:14 -0000
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 20 Nov 2001 00:41:14 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 2854 invoked by uid 50005); 20 Nov 2001 00:41:07 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4171. . Clean. Processed in 0.120913 secs); 20 Nov 2001 00:41:07 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 20 Nov 2001 00:41:06 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA27012; Mon, 19 Nov 2001 16:28:31 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 83297 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 20 Nov 2001 00:27:10          +0000
Received: from smtp04.roc.frontiernet.net (alteon01e.roc.frontiernet.net          [66.133.130.235]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id QAA26956          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 19 Nov 2001 16:25:08 -0800
Received: (qmail 14588 invoked from network); 20 Nov 2001 00:24:27 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO frontiernet.net) ([64.208.236.69])          (envelope-sender <tbinford@frontiernet.net>) by 0 (qmail-ldap-1.03)          with SMTP for <dwright@D2-TECH.COM>; 20 Nov 2001 00:24:27 -0000
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.74 [en] (Win98; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <C0F7BF4DCEC1D2479A01031347184DCD3881@nt2000s2.dgmicro.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3BF7016B.ACE38F34@frontiernet.net>
Date:         Sat, 17 Nov 2001 19:31:39 -0500
Reply-To: <tbinford@frontiernet.net>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Tom Binford" <tbinford@frontiernet.net>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Fastest Propellant - Kosdon 2550 casing
Comments: To: Darren Wright <dwright@D2-TECH.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Darren Wright wrote:
>
> I'm wondering what the nastiest propellant anyone has sucessfully done
> in the Kosdon 2550 casing.

Diamondback, 1.4 sec burn works well in this case (L2000). A fater
propellant was tried last week at the Orangeburg EX launch (L2630) and
it resulted in a large collection of rocket pieces.

Tom

>
> Jerry O'Sullivan flew my 4 grain, Fast Tiger Tail this past weekend.
> I was hoping for a 1.2-1.3 sec burn, but it ended up being about 1.8.
> My regular Tiger Tail burns 2.0 seconds.
>
> Tiger Tail is 77 AP 200 / 2 AL
>
> This fast was 70 AP 200 / 10 AP 90 / 2 AL / 0.1 FeO
>
> Has anyone gotten anything more ignorant?
>
> -Darren

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 26179 invoked from network); 20 Nov 2001 00:49:29 -0000
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 20 Nov 2001 00:49:29 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 24448 invoked by uid 50005); 20 Nov 2001 00:48:22 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4171. . Clean. Processed in 1.582002 secs); 20 Nov 2001 00:48:23 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 20 Nov 2001 00:48:19 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA27171; Mon, 19 Nov 2001 16:39:53 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 83348 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 20 Nov 2001 00:38:25          +0000
Received: from inet03.citec.qld.gov.au (firewall-user@inet03.citec.qld.gov.au          [203.5.10.10]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA27152          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 19 Nov 2001 16:38:22 -0800
Received: by inet03.citec.qld.gov.au; id SAA14669; Mon, 19 Nov 2001 18:20:08          +1000 (EST)
Received: from citec.com.au(pcux.citec.qld.gov.au 147.132.17.12) by          inet03.citec.qld.gov.au via smap (V2.0) id xma014662; Mon, 19 Nov 01          18:20:06 +1000
Received: from CITEC-Message_Server by citec.com.au with Novell_GroupWise; Mon,          19 Nov 2001 18:21:18 +1000
X-Mailer: Novell GroupWise 5.5.4
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by itc.uci.edu id QAA27153
Message-ID:  <sbf94d9e.085@citec.com.au>
Date:         Mon, 19 Nov 2001 18:21:10 +1000
Reply-To: "Des Bromilow" <Des.Bromilow@CITEC.COM.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Des Bromilow" <Des.Bromilow@CITEC.COM.AU>
Subject:      [AR] log book help sought
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

I posted for some explosives help on rmr, and basically got a reaction I wasn't looking for.

Basically the long story is, I got a lot of help starting the Qld club from the local inspector, who has subsequently left the service due to health issues. I fear with his sudden departure, coupled with the breaks he cut me, I may have fallen through the cracks.
I need to remedy this, but i don't want to do it with no records, etc which was never covered by my patron.

 this isn't an invite for trouble, or angst. Simply the request for me to get up to speed to prevent overlooking turning into oversight.

The motors in my safe are everything from Quest micromaxx through to Aerotech G reloads.

I don't want to ring the new inspector and just rely on good graces and intentions. I need to show I've tried to do the right thing. I've been doing everything by the book (as I understood it), but my records were never covered, and in the current state, I've no guarantee that's a good enough excuse.

TIA,
Des

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 12368 invoked from network); 20 Nov 2001 00:52:36 -0000
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 20 Nov 2001 00:52:36 -0000
Received: (qmail 20225 invoked by uid 50005); 20 Nov 2001 00:52:29 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4171. . Clean. Processed in 0.370341 secs); 20 Nov 2001 00:52:29 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 20 Nov 2001 00:52:28 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA27036; Mon, 19 Nov 2001 16:29:54 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 83308 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 20 Nov 2001 00:28:33          +0000
Received: from cablecom.laribay.net (cablecom.laribay.net [66.20.57.4]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA26974 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 19 Nov 2001 16:26:22 -0800
Received: from billbull (dial067.laribay.net [66.20.57.67]) by          cablecom.laribay.net (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id SAA11717 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 19 Nov 2001 18:10:21 -0600 (CST)          (envelope-from bpbullock@laribay.net)
References: <20011119054003.262083ECC@sitemail.everyone.net>                      <00af01c170ec$99da5520$0700a8c0@mkbs> <3BF937CF.B69F0B02@sfcc.net>             <009201c17125$6db6a6e0$6d391442@billbull>             <a05100306b81f020b7deb@[63.24.225.138]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <007201c1715a$0e824be0$70391442@billbull>
Date:         Mon, 19 Nov 2001 18:26:53 -0600
Reply-To: "Bill Bullock" <bpbullock@LARIBAY.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Bill Bullock" <bpbullock@LARIBAY.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Optimum Motor length?
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

----- Original Message -----
From: Jerry Irvine <01rocket@GTE.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Monday, November 19, 2001 12:41 PM
Subject: Re: [AR] Optimum Motor length?
(Snipped)

> Some of the motors I made in the early 70's, and a procedure adopted
> later by Composite Dynamics, is to make your nozzle using a washer as
> a throat and pot it with an ablative material.  I used casting resin
> and composite dynamics used a ceramic filled material similar to the
> rock putty used by some BP motor makers.
>
> It erodes at a predictable rate (with somewhat unpredictable
> concentricity) to the washer where the throat is fixed.  It also
> expands automagically to a perfect bell shaped nozzle.
> More to the point, it works.
> Jerry
******
Jerry:
    A thought: one of the problems I have encountered in designing bell
nozzles is calculating all those variable radii along the expansion curve of
the interior. Do you think this phenomenon mentioned above might be a
practical (as adverse to a calculated) way to determine what profile a
certain propellant grain/nozzle throat cross-sectional area/etc... in a
specific system would "want" in order to be most efficient? If the motor
could "etch" its own optimum expansion contour it would save a lot of work.
And being basically a rather lazy person, this would certainly appeal to me.
    Of course it is understood that such a derived contour would be specific
to a set of parameters including altitude, etc... but might be a positive
starting place for further exploration. Thoughts anyone???
Bill

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 19129 invoked from network); 20 Nov 2001 00:53:54 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 20 Nov 2001 00:53:54 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 578 invoked by uid 50005); 20 Nov 2001 00:53:47 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4171. . Clean. Processed in 0.138795 secs); 20 Nov 2001 00:53:47 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 20 Nov 2001 00:53:46 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA26994; Mon, 19 Nov 2001 16:27:09 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 83290 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 20 Nov 2001 00:24:48          +0000
Received: from out001pub.verizon.net (out001pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.101])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA26943 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 19 Nov 2001 16:24:47 -0800
Received: from [63.24.225.138] (1Cust209.tnt1.rancho-cucamonga.ca.da.uu.net          [63.24.225.209]) by out001pub.verizon.net  with ESMTP for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; id fAK0Ori05072 Mon, 19 Nov 2001 18:24:53          -0600 (CST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: GTE/01rocket@mail.gte.net
References: <C0F7BF4DCEC1D2479A01031347184DCD3881@nt2000s2.dgmicro.com>            <C0F7BF4DCEC1D2479A01031347184DCD3881@nt2000s2.dgmicro.com>            <5.0.2.1.0.20011119115943.0316f818@mail.earthlink.net>            <a05100309b81f19e2bcdd@[63.24.225.138]>            <3BF995A3.5E1E8F55@earthlink.net>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <a0510030cb81f52b10899@[63.24.225.138]>
Date:         Mon, 19 Nov 2001 16:24:06 -0800
Reply-To: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Fastest Propellant - Kosdon 2550 casing
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <3BF995A3.5E1E8F55@earthlink.net>

>Jerry Irvine wrote:
>>  To achieve hypersonic you want a progressive thrust curve with a
>  > higher burning rate exponent propellant (KP) so you get TIME to
>>  accelerate to a spike at burnout.
>
>Hmmm... how does KP compare with AP in cost, availability in amateur
>quantities, compliance overhead, handling safety, etc.?... the stuff
>that _really matters! :) (Is KP what the old RDC "Enerjets" used?)
>
>-dave w

KP and KPCP are actually easier on all of those issues than APCP
because KPCP is not on the falsified ATF list.  And KP is cheaper.
The reason it is not in widespread use is it has a high burning rate
exponent and is either chuffy, hard on casings, or needs alot more
testing to characterize. :)

Jerry

--
Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
Opinion, the whole thing.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 6168 invoked from network); 20 Nov 2001 01:03:10 -0000
Received: from smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.105]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 20 Nov 2001 01:03:10 -0000
Received: (qmail 25782 invoked by uid 50005); 20 Nov 2001 01:03:03 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpy with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4171. . Clean. Processed in 0.31753 secs); 20 Nov 2001 01:03:03 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 20 Nov 2001 01:03:02 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA27215; Mon, 19 Nov 2001 16:44:28 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 83355 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 20 Nov 2001 00:43:07          +0000
Received: from mta04.mail.mel.aone.net.au (mta04.mail.au.uu.net [203.2.192.84])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA27199 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 19 Nov 2001 16:43:06 -0800
Received: from unknown ([63.34.218.201]) by mta04.mail.mel.aone.net.au with          SMTP id <20011120004300.BYOG27785.mta04.mail.mel.aone.net.au@unknown>          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 20 Nov 2001 11:43:00 +1100
References: Conversation            <C0F7BF4DCEC1D2479A01031347184DCD3881@nt2000s2.dgmicro.com> with            last message <3BF995A3.5E1E8F55@earthlink.net>
Priority: Normal
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Priority: 3
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	X-MAPIextension=.TXT;
	charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>
Date:         Tue, 20 Nov 2001 00:43:07 +0000
Reply-To: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Fastest Propellant - Kosdon 2550 casing
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <3BF995A3.5E1E8F55@earthlink.net>

----------
> Jerry Irvine wrote:
> > To achieve hypersonic you want a progressive thrust curve with a
> > higher burning rate exponent propellant (KP) so you get TIME to
> > accelerate to a spike at burnout.
>
> Hmmm... how does KP compare with AP in cost, availability in amateur

KP is generally more available, easier to make hence slightly cheaper.
Because of its cation (and products of) are in condensed phase the Isps can
be expected to max out at ~190sec and burn rate exponents to be high.
That's without the inclusion of a gaseous rich additive and preferably an
energetic one ie. an ammonium based compound.

> quantities, compliance overhead, handling safety, etc.?... the stuff
> that _really matters! :) (Is KP what the old RDC "Enerjets" used?)

I thought they were APCP but could be wrong.

>
> -dave w

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 8119 invoked from network); 20 Nov 2001 01:31:38 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 20 Nov 2001 01:31:38 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 31499 invoked by uid 50005); 20 Nov 2001 01:31:30 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4171. . Clean. Processed in 0.161727 secs); 20 Nov 2001 01:31:30 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 20 Nov 2001 01:31:30 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA27530; Mon, 19 Nov 2001 17:24:54 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 83409 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 20 Nov 2001 01:23:33          +0000
Received: from rasmus.uib.no (exim@rasmus.uib.no [129.177.12.30]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA27507 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Mon, 19 Nov 2001 17:23:32 -0800
Received: from tunnel-44-43.vpn.uib.no (exw6pg5boa.student.uib.no)          [129.177.44.43] by rasmus.uib.no  with esmtp (Exim 3.16) id          165zcJ-0001kY-00; Tue, 20 Nov 2001 02:22:28 +0100
X-Sender: st07696@erasmus.uib.no
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
References: <5.1.0.14.0.20011116141346.00b302d0@erasmus.uib.no>            <v01510100b81a63b034d4@[208.22.189.232]>            <5.1.0.14.0.20011116193900.00b302d0@erasmus.uib.no>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
X-Scanner: exiscan *165zcJ-0001kY-00*tuwOOvbsKEU*           http://tjinfo.uib.no/virus.html
Message-ID:  <5.1.0.14.0.20011117140723.02a8eab8@erasmus.uib.no>
Date:         Tue, 20 Nov 2001 02:23:06 +0100
Reply-To: "Emil Johnsen" <emil.johnsen@STUDENT.UIB.NO>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Emil Johnsen" <emil.johnsen@STUDENT.UIB.NO>
Subject:      Re: [AR] 3The Newbies and the politics -- Re:
Comments: To: Bill Bullock <bpbullock@LARIBAY.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <00cc01c16f21$d10bcd20$5c391442@billbull>

>     I agree that any system must be calibrated before use. My own personal
>
>     The load cell designed and described by Mr. Nakka is very well thought
>out and a breeze to calibrate. All you have to do is devise a weight of,
>say, a total of 10# including a suspension device (cable, bent coat hanger
>or whatever) and hang this weight from the lever arm. Then slide it away
>from the fulcrum until the pressure on the gauge reads 10#. This is your "1X
>Point, or the point at which you can take a direct and un-corrected reading.
>If the gauge reads 300 pounds you are generating 300 pounds of thrust.
>     Then slide the weight out until the gauge reads 6.6# and this is your
>"0.66 X Point", or where you would position your motor and multiply the
>reading by 0.66 to get a true reading. Same for a calibration reading of
>0.5# (your 0.5 X Point) and 2.5# (your 0.25 X Point). With this procedure
>you can use true readings and not calculations.
>
>     Well, once again I have talked too long. Sorry if I bored anyone.

I have considered horizontal testing, but it would be unpractical with
hybrids and there would be safety problem with liquids.

I'm planning to add a weigh to the end of the beam opposite to the motor,
resulting in a force of  ~100N. There are two reasons for this: Avoid using
the lower end of the range where the measurements are less accurate and
response time longer. Being able to measure the mass of the motor before
firering, if it is a hybrid I would be able to use this to measure the
exact amount of nitrous in the motor. There is a drawing of the test stand
at http://www.lstud.ii.uib.no/~s0646/temp/teststand.gif

Not to long at all, it was very interesting.


Emil

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 12349 invoked from network); 20 Nov 2001 01:38:51 -0000
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 20 Nov 2001 01:38:51 -0000
Received: (qmail 17390 invoked by uid 50005); 20 Nov 2001 01:38:44 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4171. . Clean. Processed in 0.321191 secs); 20 Nov 2001 01:38:44 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 20 Nov 2001 01:38:43 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA27497; Mon, 19 Nov 2001 17:21:54 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 83402 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 20 Nov 2001 01:20:29          +0000
Received: from cpimssmtpu05.email.msn.com (cpimssmtpu05.email.msn.com          [207.46.181.81]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA27474          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 19 Nov 2001 17:20:29 -0800
Received: from kelly ([65.230.92.206]) by cpimssmtpu05.email.msn.com with          Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.3779); Mon, 19 Nov 2001 17:19:08 -0800
References: <C0F7BF4DCEC1D2479A01031347184DCD3881@nt2000s2.dgmicro.com>             <a05100305b81eefe09fe0@[63.24.225.138]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 20 Nov 2001 01:19:09.0336 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[5ADE2980:01C17161]
Message-ID:  <005c01c17161$52f15a80$ce5ce641@kelly>
Date:         Mon, 19 Nov 2001 20:18:53 -0500
Reply-To: "kellyrmercer" <kellyrmercer@MSN.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "kellyrmercer" <kellyrmercer@MSN.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Fastest Propellant - Kosdon 2550 casing
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Why?
Perhaps with a view of becoming the next Tripoli Appoved Motor Manufacturer.
At least, this is the rumor.
Kelly
---- Original Message -----
From: Jerry Irvine <01rocket@GTE.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Monday, November 19, 2001 12:23 PM
Subject: Re: [AR] Fastest Propellant - Kosdon 2550 casing


> >I'm wondering what the nastiest propellant anyone has sucessfully done
> >in the Kosdon 2550 casing.
> >
> >Jerry O'Sullivan flew my 4 grain, Fast Tiger Tail this past weekend.
> >I was hoping for a 1.2-1.3 sec burn, but it ended up being about 1.8.
> >My regular Tiger Tail burns 2.0 seconds.
> >
> >Tiger Tail is 77 AP 200 / 2 AL
> >
> >This fast was 70 AP 200 / 10 AP 90 / 2 AL / 0.1 FeO
> >
> >
> >Has anyone gotten anything more ignorant?
>
>
> Keeping in mind I am of the position the Kosdon 2550 is actually the
> Irvine 2550 sincer I designed both the casing system and the
> propellant and have a court order saying it is mine.
>
> I have made APCP propellants with 1.1 second burn at 500 psi and
> coreburning.  I have the ability to make propellants with star core
> and 0.4 sec burn at 1000 psi and keep that casing from popping.  But
> unless you are trying to shoot at tanks or something, why?
>
> Jerry
>
> >
> >-Darren
>
>
> --
> Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
> Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
> Opinion, the whole thing.
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 25523 invoked from network); 20 Nov 2001 01:49:56 -0000
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 20 Nov 2001 01:49:56 -0000
Received: (qmail 7774 invoked by uid 50005); 20 Nov 2001 01:49:49 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4171. . Clean. Processed in 0.479498 secs); 20 Nov 2001 01:49:49 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 20 Nov 2001 01:49:48 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA27638; Mon, 19 Nov 2001 17:42:42 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 83425 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 20 Nov 2001 01:41:17          +0000
Received: from smtprelay1.abs.adelphia.net (smtprelay.abs.adelphia.net          [64.8.20.11]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA27623 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 19 Nov 2001 17:41:16 -0800
Received: from jlgrady ([24.53.101.238]) by smtprelay1.abs.adelphia.net          (Netscape Messaging Server 4.15) with SMTP id GN2SNX03.G9W for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 19 Nov 2001 20:40:45 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook CWS, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <000201c17164$6f9f8c80$0200a8c0@24.53.64.18>
Date:         Mon, 19 Nov 2001 20:41:11 -0500
Reply-To: "Jeff Grady" <jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jeff Grady" <jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] motor data files
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <3BF97166.55A871D1@biomicro.com>

While it really does not matter what system (english or metric) it would
make sense to use the same standard per data set (not mixing systems per
motor). As for who wants to see what - that should be a function of the user
interface. The user should select (click) the system they want to see
measurements in. Users should be able to load XML motor data based in either
uom system, but see it in the system of their choice. That means a database
of uom conversion factors will be needed. XSLT is capable of making simple
computations (add, subtract, multiply and divide) and by merging the motor
data with the uom conversion data, browser display of motor data in either
system is possible.

I am working on a set of web pages for uom conversion (as I have time).
Seems I can't find ONE website that has all the conversions I'd like to do -
so I'll just do it myself. It's needed at work, so I can get paid for doing
it as well :)

If my ISP wasn't such a sh*t*ss, I would offer to host the database (SQL
Server 7.0 with 2000 on the way) and the web server. But I can't run a web
server over THEIR broadband connection. Seems 100.00 a month for cable TV
and a broadband connection just isn't enough money for them to allow such.
But, that's OK, DSL is just around the corner and DirecTV dishes are
sprouting up everywhere :)

Jeff

-----Original Message-----
From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@itc.uci.edu]On
Behalf Of Mark K. Spute
Sent: Monday, November 19, 2001 3:54 PM
To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
Subject: Re: [AR] motor data files


Okay, this is looking pretty good to me.  I'll even retract my earlier
comment about going strictly metric as it appears to me that it should
be easy to use a tag to specify english (yck!) or metric (yea!) units of
measurement.  Or maybe it can just stay as an attribute.  Or maybe I
ought to just shut up.  Yeah.  That's it.

Michael Mealling wrote:
>
> On Sat, Nov 17, 2001 at 01:49:58PM -0500, Jeff Grady wrote:
> > An entire flight vehicle could be defined with XML. Just like a bill of
> > materials. However, motor data is all I would be interested in.
>
> It would be nice for various design software to use the same standard
(Rocksim
> and spacecad).
>
> > The data > Jerry Irvine posted could be translated by a simple XSLT doc
to
> > produce XML data. One problem I see with examples below is that "uom"
> > specified multiple times per row of data becomes ambiguous. Each "uom"
> > should be prefixed with what the unit of measure is for. The examples of
> > "uom" below would be positional data - something to avoid.
>
> Plus its not valid XML. Good XML design suggests that you should
> have those values as tags, not attributes. Then have standardized
> data types. For example, the casing tag that looks like this:
>
> >       <casing uom="kg" weight="1.5" uom="mm" CG_pos_from_top="147.3"
> > uom="kg" uom="m" uom="s"
> > Ix=0.224 Iy=1.56 Iz=1.56/>
>
> should look like this:
>
> <casing>
>    <weight uom="mm">1.5</weight>
>    <cg_pos from="top" uom="mm">147.3</cg_pos>
>    <Ix uom="kg">0.224</Ix>
>    <Iy uom="m">1.56</Ix>
>    <Iz uom="s">1.56</Ix>
> </casing>
>
> Then in the DTD you define things 'weight' and 'cg_pos' as standard
> data types that can be used for the various components.
>
> > I propose the general structure as follows:
> >
> > <motor>
> >       <designation ..../>
> >       <casing .........../>
> >       <nozzle .........../>
> >       <grain ............./>
> >       <grain ............./>
> >       <data ............../>
> > </motor>
> >
> > The designation field could be like:
> >       <designation name="Space Tech PQ719"/>
>
> If this is the only tag that designation has then just make it an
> attribute of the motor tag...
>
> > The casing field could be:
> >       <casing uom="kg" weight="1.5" uom="mm" CG_pos_from_top="147.3"
> > uom="kg" uom="m" uom="s"
> > Ix=0.224 Iy=1.56 Iz=1.56/>
> >
> > Nozzle could be:
> >       <nozzle uom="mm" throatdia="7.5" exitdia="35.2"/>
> >
> > Grain could be as proposed by JG although I oppose the <isp> tag as it
> > relates to the ovarall
> > performance and not to the grain itself - it could be replaced by a c*
tag.
> > If the grain is
> > not known/specified/relevant the grain structure could look like:
> >       <grain type="unspecified"
> >             <propellant_mass uom="kg" value="0.95"/>
> >             <residue uom="pct" value="3.7"/>
> >       </grain>
> >
> > The data field embeds actual measurements/simulations of a given motor
and
> > could be like:
> >       <data>
> >            <Block>
> >                 <header uom="s" value="time" uom="N" value="thrust"
uom="kg"
> > value=mass/>
> >                 <data>
> >                        0.0 400.0 0.95
> >                        .........
> >                 </data>
> >            </block>
> >       </data>
>
> This one needs some work. Your essentially doing positional field
definition
> with XML which is what XML is supposed to fix. I.e. here XML has no way
> of knowing about the individiual data elements, thus you can use a
stylesheet
> on them to transform them into something else. Instead use IDs and
> a generic data-point element like this:
>
> <data>
>   <block>
>         <field-descriptor id=1>
>              <data-type>time</data-type>
>              <uom>seconds</uom>
>         </field-descriptor>
>         <field-descriptor id=2>
>              <data-type>thrust</data-type>
>              <uom>newtons</uom>
>         </field-descriptor>
>         <field-descriptor id=3>
>              <data-type>mass</data-type>
>              <uom>kg</uom>
>         </field-descriptor>
>         <values>
>           <row>
>             <column id=1>0.0</field>
>             <column id=2>400.0</field>
>             <column id=3>0.95</field>
>           </row>
>           <row>... </row>
>         </values>
>    </block>
> </data>
>
> -MM
>
> --
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
------
> Michael Mealling        |      Vote Libertarian!       | urn:pin:1
> michael@neonym.net      |                              |
http://www.neonym.net

--
Mark K. Spute
Senior Research Engineer
BioMicro Systems Inc.

KD7IWE,  RRS, hopeful future Stolly owner

"It is difficult to say what is impossible, for the dream of yesterday
is the hope of today and the reality of tomorrow."
     Dr. Robert H. Goddard

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 22669 invoked from network); 20 Nov 2001 02:11:29 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 20 Nov 2001 02:11:29 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 32314 invoked by uid 50005); 20 Nov 2001 02:11:22 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4171. . Clean. Processed in 0.615265 secs); 20 Nov 2001 02:11:22 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 20 Nov 2001 02:11:20 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA27860; Mon, 19 Nov 2001 18:08:32 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 83477 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 20 Nov 2001 02:07:11          +0000
Received: from out006pub.verizon.net (out006pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.106])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA27840 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 19 Nov 2001 18:07:05 -0800
Received: from [63.24.225.138] (1Cust188.tnt2.rancho-cucamonga.ca.da.uu.net          [63.15.225.188]) by out006pub.verizon.net  with ESMTP for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; id fAK24do29814 Mon, 19 Nov 2001 20:04:39          -0600 (CST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: GTE/01rocket@mail.gte.net
References: Conversation            <C0F7BF4DCEC1D2479A01031347184DCD3881@nt2000s2.dgmicro.com> with            last message <3BF995A3.5E1E8F55@earthlink.net>            <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <a0510030fb81f6ad8b51b@[63.24.225.138]>
Date:         Mon, 19 Nov 2001 18:06:35 -0800
Reply-To: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Fastest Propellant - Kosdon 2550 casing
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>

>I thought they were APCP but could be wrong.


AP and Flexane.  Rocket Development Corporation incidentally made
some solid motors for a movie called Mosquito Coast, as did we.

The consumer RDC motors were sold to Enerjet and the rest is history.

Jerry

>
>  >
>  > -dave w


--
Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
Opinion, the whole thing.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 4495 invoked from network); 20 Nov 2001 02:14:33 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 20 Nov 2001 02:14:33 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 4679 invoked by uid 50005); 20 Nov 2001 02:14:26 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4171. . Clean. Processed in 0.160045 secs); 20 Nov 2001 02:14:26 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 20 Nov 2001 02:14:25 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA27829; Mon, 19 Nov 2001 18:05:23 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 83470 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 20 Nov 2001 02:04:01          +0000
Received: from smtppop2pub.verizon.net (smtppop2pub.gte.net [206.46.170.21]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA27806 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 19 Nov 2001 18:04:01 -0800
Received: from [63.24.225.138] (1Cust188.tnt2.rancho-cucamonga.ca.da.uu.net          [63.15.225.188]) by smtppop2pub.verizon.net  with ESMTP for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; id UAA30391185 Mon, 19 Nov 2001 20:05:27 -0600          (CST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: GTE/01rocket@mail.gte.net
References: <20011119054003.262083ECC@sitemail.everyone.net>            <00af01c170ec$99da5520$0700a8c0@mkbs> <3BF937CF.B69F0B02@sfcc.net>            <009201c17125$6db6a6e0$6d391442@billbull>            <a05100306b81f020b7deb@[63.24.225.138]>            <007201c1715a$0e824be0$70391442@billbull>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <a0510030eb81f693b540b@[63.24.225.138]>
Date:         Mon, 19 Nov 2001 18:03:31 -0800
Reply-To: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Optimum Motor length?
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <007201c1715a$0e824be0$70391442@billbull>

>----- Original Message -----
>From: Jerry Irvine <01rocket@GTE.NET>
>To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
>Sent: Monday, November 19, 2001 12:41 PM
>Subject: Re: [AR] Optimum Motor length?
>(Snipped)
>
>>  Some of the motors I made in the early 70's, and a procedure adopted
>>  later by Composite Dynamics, is to make your nozzle using a washer as
>>  a throat and pot it with an ablative material.  I used casting resin
>>  and composite dynamics used a ceramic filled material similar to the
>>  rock putty used by some BP motor makers.
>>
>>  It erodes at a predictable rate (with somewhat unpredictable
>>  concentricity) to the washer where the throat is fixed.  It also
>>  expands automagically to a perfect bell shaped nozzle.
>>  More to the point, it works.
>>  Jerry
>******
>Jerry:
>     A thought: one of the problems I have encountered in designing bell
>nozzles is calculating all those variable radii along the expansion curve of
>the interior. Do you think this phenomenon mentioned above might be a
>practical (as adverse to a calculated) way to determine what profile a
>certain propellant grain/nozzle throat cross-sectional area/etc... in a
>specific system would "want" in order to be most efficient? If the motor
>could "etch" its own optimum expansion contour it would save a lot of work.
>And being basically a rather lazy person, this would certainly appeal to me.
>     Of course it is understood that such a derived contour would be specific
>to a set of parameters including altitude, etc... but might be a positive
>starting place for further exploration. Thoughts anyone???
>Bill


I used to debate this point with John Davis of CD.  I claimed it was
a post facto method of expansion calculation that could be truncated
in length based on first order calculations of expansion exit.  He
claimed the angles are different as eroded vs what you would want if
machined.  The debate ended when I pointed out the difference was
less than a 10% error between methods, and in overall motor
performance it was less than 1%.  He then proceeded to drink 6  16
ounce beers.

I am pretty sure that had a higher expansion ratio than the nozzles
based on his belly and the gas ejections :)

In short, yes.

Jerry


--
Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
Opinion, the whole thing.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 29459 invoked from network); 20 Nov 2001 02:21:07 -0000
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 20 Nov 2001 02:21:07 -0000
Received: (qmail 27322 invoked by uid 50005); 20 Nov 2001 02:21:00 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4171. . Clean. Processed in 0.266582 secs); 20 Nov 2001 02:21:00 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 20 Nov 2001 02:20:59 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA27797; Mon, 19 Nov 2001 18:03:06 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 83463 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 20 Nov 2001 02:01:44          +0000
Received: from nt2000s2.dgmicro.com (cn815472-c.newcas1.de.home.com          [24.40.74.93]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA27782          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 19 Nov 2001 18:01:44 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
content-class: urn:content-classes:message
X-MS-Has-Attach: 
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: 
Thread-Topic:      Re: [AR] Fastest Propellant - Kosdon 2550 casing
Thread-Index: AcFxZejZusrmW1IxS/iMcEqErKTIQAAAUOXA
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by itc.uci.edu id SAA27783
Message-ID:  <C0F7BF4DCEC1D2479A01031347184DCD02FEB5@nt2000s2.dgmicro.com>
Date:         Mon, 19 Nov 2001 21:01:13 -0500
Reply-To: "Darren Wright" <dwright@D2-TECH.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Darren Wright" <dwright@D2-TECH.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Fastest Propellant - Kosdon 2550 casing
Comments: To: kellyrmercer <kellyrmercer@MSN.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Kelly,

   Are you referring to me?!??  What have you heard?


-Darren


> -----Original Message-----
> From: kellyrmercer [mailto:kellyrmercer@MSN.COM]
> Sent: Monday, November 19, 2001 8:19 PM
> To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
> Subject: Re: [AR] Fastest Propellant - Kosdon 2550 casing
>
>
> Why?
> Perhaps with a view of becoming the next Tripoli Appoved
> Motor Manufacturer. At least, this is the rumor. Kelly
> ---- Original Message -----
> From: Jerry Irvine <01rocket@GTE.NET>
> To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
> Sent: Monday, November 19, 2001 12:23 PM
> Subject: Re: [AR] Fastest Propellant - Kosdon 2550 casing
>
>
> > >I'm wondering what the nastiest propellant anyone has sucessfully
> > >done in the Kosdon 2550 casing.
> > >
> > >Jerry O'Sullivan flew my 4 grain, Fast Tiger Tail this
> past weekend.
> > >I was hoping for a 1.2-1.3 sec burn, but it ended up being
> about 1.8.
> > >My regular Tiger Tail burns 2.0 seconds.
> > >
> > >Tiger Tail is 77 AP 200 / 2 AL
> > >
> > >This fast was 70 AP 200 / 10 AP 90 / 2 AL / 0.1 FeO
> > >
> > >
> > >Has anyone gotten anything more ignorant?
> >
> >
> > Keeping in mind I am of the position the Kosdon 2550 is
> actually the
> > Irvine 2550 sincer I designed both the casing system and the
> > propellant and have a court order saying it is mine.
> >
> > I have made APCP propellants with 1.1 second burn at 500 psi and
> > coreburning.  I have the ability to make propellants with star core
> > and 0.4 sec burn at 1000 psi and keep that casing from
> popping.  But
> > unless you are trying to shoot at tanks or something, why?
> >
> > Jerry
> >
> > >
> > >-Darren
> >
> >
> > --
> > Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
> > Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
> > Opinion, the whole thing.
> >
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 26882 invoked from network); 20 Nov 2001 03:12:50 -0000
Received: from smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.105]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 20 Nov 2001 03:12:50 -0000
Received: (qmail 20612 invoked by uid 50005); 20 Nov 2001 03:12:43 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpy with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4171. . Clean. Processed in 0.231852 secs); 20 Nov 2001 03:12:43 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 20 Nov 2001 03:12:42 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA28239; Mon, 19 Nov 2001 19:08:16 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 83550 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 20 Nov 2001 03:06:51          +0000
Received: from femail9.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail9.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.0.95.89]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA28223 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 19 Nov 2001 19:06:51 -0800
Received: from cx814151a ([24.14.55.118]) by femail9.sdc1.sfba.home.com          (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20 201-229-121-120-20010223) with SMTP id          <20011120030650.FZVP623.femail9.sdc1.sfba.home.com@cx814151a> for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 19 Nov 2001 19:06:50 -0800
References: <20011119054003.262083ECC@sitemail.everyone.net>                       <00af01c170ec$99da5520$0700a8c0@mkbs> <3BF937CF.B69F0B02@sfcc.net>             <009201c17125$6db6a6e0$6d391442@billbull>                       <a05100306b81f020b7deb@[63.24.225.138]>                       <007201c1715a$0e824be0$70391442@billbull>             <a0510030eb81f693b540b@[63.24.225.138]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4807.1700
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <009901c17170$cc3b51c0$0a01a8c0@cx814151a>
Date:         Mon, 19 Nov 2001 21:09:40 -0600
Reply-To: "John Bolene" <jbolene@HOME.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Bolene" <jbolene@HOME.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Optimum Motor length?
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

According to Rocket Propulsion by Marcel Barrere, the bell nozzle is 4% more
efficient than a cone nozzle.
In a motor burning for minutes, this will make a big difference.
In a motor burning for up to 15 seconds, it makes very little difference.

John Bolene
Tripoli Oklahoma Prefect and webmaster
Tripoli Oklahoma Web page -> http://members.home.com/tripoli-oklahoma/

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 25750 invoked from network); 20 Nov 2001 04:04:37 -0000
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 20 Nov 2001 04:04:37 -0000
Received: (qmail 31204 invoked by uid 50005); 20 Nov 2001 04:04:30 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4171. . Clean. Processed in 0.201855 secs); 20 Nov 2001 04:04:30 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 20 Nov 2001 04:04:29 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA28513; Mon, 19 Nov 2001 19:53:29 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 83569 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 20 Nov 2001 03:52:06          +0000
Received: from femail22.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail22.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.0.95.147]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA28497          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 19 Nov 2001 19:52:06 -0800
Received: from officenew ([24.1.27.168]) by femail22.sdc1.sfba.home.com          (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20 201-229-121-120-20010223) with SMTP id          <20011120035204.COPK621.femail22.sdc1.sfba.home.com@officenew>; Mon,          19 Nov 2001 19:52:04 -0800
References: <20011119054003.262083ECC@sitemail.everyone.net>                       <00af01c170ec$99da5520$0700a8c0@mkbs> <3BF937CF.B69F0B02@sfcc.net>             <009201c17125$6db6a6e0$6d391442@billbull>                       <a05100306b81f020b7deb@[63.24.225.138]>                       <007201c1715a$0e824be0$70391442@billbull>             <a0510030eb81f693b540b@[63.24.225.138]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2462.0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <00b601c17176$b781c7e0$8300a8c0@olmpi1.wa.home.com>
Date:         Mon, 19 Nov 2001 19:52:03 -0800
Reply-To: "Tomm Aldridge" <taldridge@HOME.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Tomm Aldridge" <taldridge@HOME.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Optimum Motor length?
Comments: To: Jerry Irvine <01rocket@GTE.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Exquisite Coincidence!  There is no physical reason why an optimally
expanded bell shape and an eroded nozzle should share a common curve.  There
is probably a good reason why to a first order a straight taper, a perfect
bell and your eroded shape all perform just about the same, especially at
sea level.  The moral of this story as far as I'm concerned is that for
atmospheric rockets, we have very little to gain from optimization of the
exit cone profile.

That said, I have a beautiful surplus Aerojet nozzle wound from composite
with a machined graphite insert just begging to be profiled.  It bolts up to
a 10" casing and has a classic bell shape.

Tomm
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Monday, November 19, 2001 6:03 PM
Subject: Re: [AR] Optimum Motor length?


> >----- Original Message -----
> >From: Jerry Irvine <01rocket@GTE.NET>
> >To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
> >Sent: Monday, November 19, 2001 12:41 PM
> >Subject: Re: [AR] Optimum Motor length?
> >(Snipped)
> >
> >>  Some of the motors I made in the early 70's, and a procedure adopted
> >>  later by Composite Dynamics, is to make your nozzle using a washer as
> >>  a throat and pot it with an ablative material.  I used casting resin
> >>  and composite dynamics used a ceramic filled material similar to the
> >>  rock putty used by some BP motor makers.
> >>
> >>  It erodes at a predictable rate (with somewhat unpredictable
> >>  concentricity) to the washer where the throat is fixed.  It also
> >>  expands automagically to a perfect bell shaped nozzle.
> >>  More to the point, it works.
> >>  Jerry
> >******
> >Jerry:
> >     A thought: one of the problems I have encountered in designing bell
> >nozzles is calculating all those variable radii along the expansion curve
of
> >the interior. Do you think this phenomenon mentioned above might be a
> >practical (as adverse to a calculated) way to determine what profile a
> >certain propellant grain/nozzle throat cross-sectional area/etc... in a
> >specific system would "want" in order to be most efficient? If the motor
> >could "etch" its own optimum expansion contour it would save a lot of
work.
> >And being basically a rather lazy person, this would certainly appeal to
me.
> >     Of course it is understood that such a derived contour would be
specific
> >to a set of parameters including altitude, etc... but might be a positive
> >starting place for further exploration. Thoughts anyone???
> >Bill
>
>
> I used to debate this point with John Davis of CD.  I claimed it was
> a post facto method of expansion calculation that could be truncated
> in length based on first order calculations of expansion exit.  He
> claimed the angles are different as eroded vs what you would want if
> machined.  The debate ended when I pointed out the difference was
> less than a 10% error between methods, and in overall motor
> performance it was less than 1%.  He then proceeded to drink 6  16
> ounce beers.
>
> I am pretty sure that had a higher expansion ratio than the nozzles
> based on his belly and the gas ejections :)
>
> In short, yes.
>
> Jerry
>
>
> --
> Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
> Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
> Opinion, the whole thing.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 19814 invoked from network); 20 Nov 2001 04:31:21 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 20 Nov 2001 04:31:21 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 28870 invoked by uid 50005); 20 Nov 2001 04:31:14 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4171. . Clean. Processed in 0.178598 secs); 20 Nov 2001 04:31:14 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 20 Nov 2001 04:31:14 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA28630; Mon, 19 Nov 2001 20:13:43 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 83585 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 20 Nov 2001 04:12:20          +0000
Received: from rasmus.uib.no (exim@rasmus.uib.no [129.177.12.30]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA28603 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Mon, 19 Nov 2001 20:12:19 -0800
Received: from tunnel-44-43.vpn.uib.no (exw6pg5boa.student.uib.no)          [129.177.44.43] by rasmus.uib.no for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU with esmtp          (Exim 3.16) id 1662Fs-0000On-00; Tue, 20 Nov 2001 05:11:29 +0100
X-Sender: st07696@erasmus.uib.no
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
References: <20011119054003.262083ECC@sitemail.everyone.net>            <00af01c170ec$99da5520$0700a8c0@mkbs> <3BF937CF.B69F0B02@sfcc.net>            <009201c17125$6db6a6e0$6d391442@billbull>            <a05100306b81f020b7deb@[63.24.225.138]>            <007201c1715a$0e824be0$70391442@billbull>            <a0510030eb81f693b540b@[63.24.225.138]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
X-Scanner: exiscan *1662Fs-0000On-00*1TiNNIl3sR6*           http://tjinfo.uib.no/virus.html
Message-ID:  <5.1.0.14.0.20011120044108.00b575d0@erasmus.uib.no>
Date:         Tue, 20 Nov 2001 05:11:53 +0100
Reply-To: "Emil Johnsen" <emil.johnsen@STUDENT.UIB.NO>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Emil Johnsen" <emil.johnsen@STUDENT.UIB.NO>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Optimum Motor length?
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <009901c17170$cc3b51c0$0a01a8c0@cx814151a>

>According to Rocket Propulsion by Marcel Barrere, the bell nozzle is 4% more
>efficient than a cone nozzle.

If I understand Sutton (p.71-72) correctly, a bell nozzle has similar
performance as a 10-25% longer conical nozzle or ~1% difference in Isp if
keeping the nozzle length constant.

In Space Propulsion Analysis and Design on page 224, the efficiency of a
80% bell nozzle (80% of the length of a 15deg conical nozzle) is given as
0.987. From equation 5.40 in same book the efficiency of a 15degrees
conical nozzle is estimated to be 0.983. A conical nozzle with 80% of the
length of a 15 degrees conical nozzle would have an half angle of 18.5
degrees and an efficiency of 0.974.


Emil

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 14815 invoked from network); 20 Nov 2001 04:58:58 -0000
Received: from smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.105]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 20 Nov 2001 04:58:58 -0000
Received: (qmail 1820 invoked by uid 50005); 20 Nov 2001 04:58:50 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpy with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4171. . Clean. Processed in 1.089116 secs); 20 Nov 2001 04:58:50 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 20 Nov 2001 04:58:48 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA28963; Mon, 19 Nov 2001 20:55:21 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 83679 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 20 Nov 2001 04:53:55          +0000
Received: from cablecom.laribay.net (cablecom.laribay.net [66.20.57.4]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA28941 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 19 Nov 2001 20:53:54 -0800
Received: from billbull (dial074.laribay.net [66.20.57.74]) by          cablecom.laribay.net (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id WAA14447 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 19 Nov 2001 22:38:01 -0600 (CST)          (envelope-from bpbullock@laribay.net)
References: <20011119054003.262083ECC@sitemail.everyone.net>                               <00af01c170ec$99da5520$0700a8c0@mkbs> <3BF937CF.B69F0B02@sfcc.net>             <009201c17125$6db6a6e0$6d391442@billbull>                                 <a05100306b81f020b7deb@[63.24.225.138]>                                 <007201c1715a$0e824be0$70391442@billbull>                       <a0510030eb81f693b540b@[63.24.225.138]>             <009901c17170$cc3b51c0$0a01a8c0@cx814151a>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <008701c1717f$7391ba00$4a391442@billbull>
Date:         Mon, 19 Nov 2001 22:54:34 -0600
Reply-To: "Bill Bullock" <bpbullock@LARIBAY.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Bill Bullock" <bpbullock@LARIBAY.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Optimum Motor length?
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

    I can turn a bell nozzle just as easily as a straight nozzle after I
make the tool (which is then re-usable on other nozzles) so a 4% gain in
performance "for free" appears to me to be worth it. I have even started
making bell nozzles for my AeroTech 29mm casings, a friend's 38mm AT/DR.R
casings (making him some special casings to go with them) and am going to
make one for my grandsons 18mm just to prove to myself that I can.
Bill
PS: I know it is stupid, but to me a bell nozzle just looks "more rockety".
I may skip paint, but I love the best of metal...
----- Original Message -----
From: John Bolene <jbolene@HOME.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Monday, November 19, 2001 9:09 PM
Subject: Re: [AR] Optimum Motor length?


> According to Rocket Propulsion by Marcel Barrere, the bell nozzle is 4%
more
> efficient than a cone nozzle.
> In a motor burning for minutes, this will make a big difference.
> In a motor burning for up to 15 seconds, it makes very little difference.
>
> John Bolene
> Tripoli Oklahoma Prefect and webmaster
> Tripoli Oklahoma Web page -> http://members.home.com/tripoli-oklahoma/
>
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 29529 invoked from network); 20 Nov 2001 06:13:14 -0000
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 20 Nov 2001 06:13:14 -0000
Received: (qmail 12783 invoked by uid 50005); 20 Nov 2001 06:13:07 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4171. . Clean. Processed in 0.287929 secs); 20 Nov 2001 06:13:07 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 20 Nov 2001 06:13:06 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA29436; Mon, 19 Nov 2001 22:06:00 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 83775 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 20 Nov 2001 06:04:36          +0000
Received: from trueband.net (director.trueband.net [216.163.120.8]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id WAA29415 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 19 Nov 2001 22:04:35 -0800
Received: (qmail 21593 invoked by uid 1006); 20 Nov 2001 06:04:34 -0000
Received: from foy@wfeca.net by rs0 with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan:          v4.1.40/v4121. . Clean. Processed in 0.405737 secs); 20 Nov 2001          06:04:34 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO foy) (12.21.155.108) by -v with SMTP; 20 Nov 2001          06:04:34 -0000
References: <20011119054003.262083ECC@sitemail.everyone.net>                               <00af01c170ec$99da5520$0700a8c0@mkbs> <3BF937CF.B69F0B02@sfcc.net>             <009201c17125$6db6a6e0$6d391442@billbull>                                      <a05100306b81f020b7deb@[63.24.225.138]>                                        <007201c1715a$0e824be0$70391442@billbull>                                  <a0510030eb81f693b540b@[63.24.225.138]>                        <009901c17170$cc3b51c0$0a01a8c0@cx814151a>             <008701c1717f$7391ba00$4a391442@billbull>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <007901c17188$3f97f9e0$6c9b150c@foy>
Date:         Mon, 19 Nov 2001 23:57:32 -0600
Reply-To: "foy" <foy@WFECA.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "foy" <foy@WFECA.NET>
Subject:      [AR] graphite supply found
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

      I have a large supply of 3x3x12" graphite. I would like to send a
sample to someone with the knowledge and facilities to properly evaluate the
grade of this stuff. It could benefit a lot of rocketeers. Bill, Jerry, Ray?

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 7862 invoked from network); 20 Nov 2001 06:47:30 -0000
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 20 Nov 2001 06:47:30 -0000
Received: (qmail 32218 invoked by uid 50005); 20 Nov 2001 06:47:23 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4171. . Clean. Processed in 0.385374 secs); 20 Nov 2001 06:47:23 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 20 Nov 2001 06:47:22 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA29559; Mon, 19 Nov 2001 22:15:47 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 83802 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 20 Nov 2001 06:14:26          +0000
Received: from corlabs (24-216-244-100.hsacorp.net [24.216.244.100]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA29537 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Mon, 19 Nov 2001 22:14:24 -0800
Received: from [24.216.244.164] by corlabs (ArGoSoft Mail Server Pro          Win2000/XP, Version 1.70 (1.7.0.4)); Tue, 20 Nov 2001 00:52:44 -0600
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook CWS, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <00f101c1718c$37e35510$0200a8c0@charter.net>
Date:         Tue, 20 Nov 2001 00:25:56 -0600
Reply-To: "Carl A. Blood" <cablood@CORLABS.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Carl A. Blood" <cablood@CORLABS.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] graphite supply found
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <007901c17188$3f97f9e0$6c9b150c@foy>

If it's good stuff, I am now in the market for some.


Carl


-----Original Message-----
From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@itc.uci.edu]On
Behalf Of foy
Sent: Monday, November 19, 2001 11:58 PM
To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
Subject: [AR] graphite supply found


      I have a large supply of 3x3x12" graphite. I would like to send a
sample to someone with the knowledge and facilities to properly evaluate the
grade of this stuff. It could benefit a lot of rocketeers. Bill, Jerry, Ray?

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 889 invoked from network); 20 Nov 2001 06:56:04 -0000
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 20 Nov 2001 06:56:04 -0000
Received: (qmail 14660 invoked by uid 50005); 20 Nov 2001 06:55:57 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4171. . Clean. Processed in 0.154936 secs); 20 Nov 2001 06:55:57 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 20 Nov 2001 06:55:57 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA29700; Mon, 19 Nov 2001 22:35:30 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 83829 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 20 Nov 2001 06:34:08          +0000
Received: from trueband.net (director.trueband.net [216.163.120.8]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id WAA29676 for          <ARocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 19 Nov 2001 22:34:07 -0800
Received: (qmail 11510 invoked by uid 1006); 20 Nov 2001 06:34:07 -0000
Received: from foy@wfeca.net by rs0 with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan:          v4.1.40/v4121. . Clean. Processed in 0.654354 secs); 20 Nov 2001          06:34:07 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO foy) (12.21.155.108) by -v with SMTP; 20 Nov 2001          06:34:06 -0000
References:  <00f101c1718c$37e35510$0200a8c0@charter.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <009201c1718c$60160320$6c9b150c@foy>
Date:         Tue, 20 Nov 2001 00:27:05 -0600
Reply-To: "foy" <foy@WFECA.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "foy" <foy@WFECA.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] graphite supply found
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

         It looks good but I would like the opinion of a pro. If it is good
it will be very cheep. I need someone to compare it to the good stuff. Then
it will be for sale.                                                     Foy
----- Original Message -----
From: "Carl A. Blood" <cablood@CORLABS.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Tuesday, November 20, 2001 12:25 AM
Subject: Re: [AR] graphite supply found


> If it's good stuff, I am now in the market for some.
>
>
> Carl
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@itc.uci.edu]On
> Behalf Of foy
> Sent: Monday, November 19, 2001 11:58 PM
> To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
> Subject: [AR] graphite supply found
>
>
>       I have a large supply of 3x3x12" graphite. I would like to send a
> sample to someone with the knowledge and facilities to properly evaluate
the
> grade of this stuff. It could benefit a lot of rocketeers. Bill, Jerry,
Ray?
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 3203 invoked from network); 20 Nov 2001 14:19:20 -0000
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 20 Nov 2001 14:19:20 -0000
Received: (qmail 5425 invoked by uid 50005); 20 Nov 2001 14:19:13 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4171. . Clean. Processed in 0.748864 secs); 20 Nov 2001 14:19:13 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 20 Nov 2001 14:19:11 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id EAA31164; Tue, 20 Nov 2001 04:47:55 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 84028 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 20 Nov 2001 12:27:17          +0000
Received: from femail24.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail24.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.0.95.149]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id EAA31103          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 20 Nov 2001 04:26:52 -0800
Received: from cx814151a ([24.14.55.118]) by femail24.sdc1.sfba.home.com          (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20 201-229-121-120-20010223) with SMTP id          <20011120122640.ESRP28663.femail24.sdc1.sfba.home.com@cx814151a>;          Tue, 20 Nov 2001 04:26:40 -0800
References:  <00f101c1718c$37e35510$0200a8c0@charter.net>              <009201c1718c$60160320$6c9b150c@foy>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4807.1700
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <00c301c171be$e09b8ce0$0a01a8c0@cx814151a>
Date:         Tue, 20 Nov 2001 06:28:35 -0600
Reply-To: "John Bolene" <jbolene@HOME.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Bolene" <jbolene@HOME.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] graphite supply found
Comments: To: foy <foy@WFECA.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

I have made quite a few nozzles and have a wonderful grade of graphite to
work with now.
I would be happy to look at a sample for you.

John Bolene
Mostly Missiles Web page -> http://members.home.com/mostlymissiles



----- Original Message -----
From: "foy" <foy@WFECA.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Tuesday, November 20, 2001 12:27 AM
Subject: Re: [AR] graphite supply found


>          It looks good but I would like the opinion of a pro. If it is
good
> it will be very cheep. I need someone to compare it to the good stuff.
Then
> it will be for sale.
Foy

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 7460 invoked from network); 21 Nov 2001 05:44:58 -0000
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 21 Nov 2001 05:44:58 -0000
Received: (qmail 18320 invoked by uid 50005); 21 Nov 2001 05:44:50 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4171. . Clean. Processed in 1.881732 secs); 21 Nov 2001 05:44:50 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 21 Nov 2001 05:44:46 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA02252; Tue, 20 Nov 2001 21:27:38 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 84332 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 21 Nov 2001 05:27:07          +0000
Received: from corlabs (24-216-244-100.hsacorp.net [24.216.244.100]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA02233 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Tue, 20 Nov 2001 21:27:06 -0800
Received: from [24.216.244.164] by corlabs (ArGoSoft Mail Server Pro          Win2000/XP, Version 1.70 (1.7.0.4)); Wed, 21 Nov 2001 00:05:18 -0600
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook CWS, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <012301c1724e$c7185240$0200a8c0@charter.net>
Date:         Tue, 20 Nov 2001 23:38:40 -0600
Reply-To: "Carl A. Blood" <cablood@CORLABS.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Carl A. Blood" <cablood@CORLABS.COM>
Subject:      [AR] WAMEXList
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Another call to All that wish to bend the arm of history,



Bob Brashear and myself (Carl A. Blood that is) have opened a forum that is
attempting to establish the rules, regulations, policies, and bylaws that
will be put in place
no later that 03/01/2002 for a new armature and experimental space
technology organization. The name of this org will be selected with in 2
weeks.

This is an open forum for all who wish to communicate their opinions and
recommendation for the formal
formation of this organization. ALL ARE INVITED! (Simple rules for this
distribution list are listed below.)

Here is what we (Bob and I) will do to organize the effort:

1) For the first two weeks the posts on this list will be constrained to an
open and general discussion of
   the formation of an organization that will truly represent the best
interests of Armature and Experimental
   Racketeers / Space Technologists. Any thing goes! (within the rules
listed below) This discussion can, should
   and will include the international community. (not US only)

2) We will collect this information, organize it, and formulate the compiled
comments into a structure for
   a more pointed discussion.

3) Then we (the list participants) will address each item on the list in
more detail. (more than one thread
   can be going on at a time.) This will continue for 4 weeks.

4) We (Bob and I) will the compile all the information and draft the bylaws,
safety rules, and any other documents
   that are to be represented. This will take about 2 weeks.

5) The documents will then be placed out to all on the list for  final
review and comments. A period lasting
   no longer than 2 weeks unless changes by popular vote.

6) final version of the documents will be invoked and we will have our
   "World Amateur and Experimental Space Technology Association" and fair
representation.

7) Web sites across the world will be created and lists like AROCKET will be
sponsored.






Posting Rules:

A.  Send posts to WAMEX@pad17.com

B.  Please stay on-topic.

C.  Be nice.  No flames.  If you feel duty-bound to flame or to reply to
    such, take it to private e-mail.

D.  Text only.  No HTML.  Go to the 'HELP' of your email program or browser
    for info on how to turn off HTML.

E.  Text only.  If you have attachments send them to me personally, I'll
place them
    up on pad17.com where everyone that wants them can get them or see them.

F.  Spamming:   Will get you booted from the list.

L.  Advertisements:  Not allowed! see (F)

N.  Administrative problems:  if you are having problems posting, receiving
    messages, etc., do not post your problems to the list.  Contact me
personally at:
    cablood@pad17.com or 612-710-2204


I would like to personally thank Ray again for his permission to use this
list to support this new adventure.
Bob and I are eagerly awaiting your intellectual contribution to this
effort.



SUBSCRIBING AND UNSUBSCRIBING:
Automated list sign up is running!

Send a message to : listmanager@pad17.com
With the words: SUBSCRIBE WAMEXList
in the body of the message.

The system will send you a confirming message. Just reply to the message and
you will receive a welcome message back.
Your in...

remember to send your posts to WAMEX@pad17.com

You will be given instruction on how the get removed from the list.

Thanks
Carl

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 20466 invoked from network); 22 Nov 2001 11:37:07 -0000
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 22 Nov 2001 11:37:07 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 9177 invoked by uid 50005); 22 Nov 2001 11:37:00 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4171. . Clean. Processed in 0.175496 secs); 22 Nov 2001 11:37:00 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 22 Nov 2001 11:37:00 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id DAA08406; Thu, 22 Nov 2001 03:33:12 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 84897 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 22 Nov 2001 11:32:42          +0000
Received: from scaup.prod.itd.earthlink.net (scaup.mail.pas.earthlink.net          [207.217.120.49]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id DAA08391          for <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Thu, 22 Nov 2001 03:32:42 -0800
Received: from dialup-209.245.143.111.dial1.sanjose1.level3.net          ([209.245.143.111] helo=earthlink.net) by          scaup.prod.itd.earthlink.net with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id          166s5x-0005HB-00 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 22 Nov 2001 03:32:41          -0800
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (Win98; I)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3BFCE290.CBC679E6@earthlink.net>
Date:         Thu, 22 Nov 2001 03:33:36 -0800
Reply-To: <thomgaf@energyrs.com>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Thomas M. Mcgaffey" <energyrelease@EARTHLINK.NET>
Subject:      [AR] test
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is atest message!

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 4254 invoked from network); 22 Nov 2001 15:04:22 -0000
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 22 Nov 2001 15:04:22 -0000
Received: (qmail 14111 invoked by uid 50005); 22 Nov 2001 15:04:14 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4171. . Clean. Processed in 0.405783 secs); 22 Nov 2001 15:04:14 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 22 Nov 2001 15:04:13 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA09002; Thu, 22 Nov 2001 07:01:51 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 84921 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 22 Nov 2001 15:01:34          +0000
Received: from zcars0m9.nortelnetworks.com (zcars0m9.nortelnetworks.com          [47.129.242.157]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA08988          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 22 Nov 2001 07:01:34 -0800
Received: from zcars04e.ca.nortel.com (zcars04e.ca.nortel.com [47.129.242.56])          by zcars0m9.nortelnetworks.com (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id          fAMF0KS29562 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 22 Nov 2001 10:00:20          -0500 (EST)
Received: from rftzy232.ca.nortel.com by zcars04e.ca.nortel.com; Thu, 22 Nov          2001 10:00:31 -0500
Received: from NORTELNETWORKS.COM (wcarh0vc.ca.nortel.com [47.129.148.226]) by          rftzy232.ca.nortel.com with SMTP (Microsoft Exchange Internet Mail          Service Version 5.5.2653.13) id XHJ5NZML; Thu, 22 Nov 2001 09:58:30          -0500
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.73C-CCK-MCD [en] (X11; U; HP-UX B.10.20 9000/785)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <00f101c1718c$37e35510$0200a8c0@charter.net>            <009201c1718c$60160320$6c9b150c@foy>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Orig: <mleech@NORTELNETWORKS.COM>
Message-ID:  <3BFD131E.7CF2B179@NORTELNETWORKS.COM>
Date:         Thu, 22 Nov 2001 10:00:46 -0500
Reply-To: "Marcus Leech" <mleech@NORTELNETWORKS.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Marcus Leech" <mleech@NORTELNETWORKS.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] graphite supply found
Comments: To: foy <foy@WFECA.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

foy wrote:
>
>          It looks good but I would like the opinion of a pro. If it is good
> it will be very cheep. I need someone to compare it to the good stuff. Then
> it will be for sale.                                                     Foy
>
"Good" is a relative term for graphite.  I've found that even the cheapest
  grades of graphite are "good enough" for single-use motors, while some of
  the highest-density iso-moulded grades are mechanically inferior in certain
  configurations.

For my smaller motors (<= 1" diameter), I've been buying extruded graphite
  from Sunset Art Glass.  The stuff is relatively cheap, somewhat soft, and
  has worked well for multi-use nozzles for 22mm motors.

--
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Marcus Leech                             Mail:   Dept 8M70, MS 012, FITZ
Advisor                                  Phone: (ESN) 393-9145  +1 613 763 9145
Security Architecture and Planning       Fax:   (ESN) 393-9435  +1 613 763 9435
Nortel Networks                          mleech@nortelnetworks.com
-----------------Expressed opinions are my own, not my employer's------

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 169 invoked from network); 22 Nov 2001 16:40:40 -0000
Received: from smtpv.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.110]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 22 Nov 2001 16:40:40 -0000
Received: (qmail 6881 invoked by uid 50005); 22 Nov 2001 16:36:17 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpv with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4171. . Clean. Processed in 0.285117 secs); 22 Nov 2001 16:36:17 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpv.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 22 Nov 2001 16:36:16 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA09278; Thu, 22 Nov 2001 08:37:28 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 84947 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 22 Nov 2001 16:37:22          +0000
Received: from c002.snv.cp.net (c002-h007.c002.snv.cp.net [209.228.32.171]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id IAA09264 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 22 Nov 2001 08:37:22 -0800
Received: (cpmta 4105 invoked from network); 22 Nov 2001 08:36:50 -0800
Received: from 63.21.81.1 (HELO default) by smtp.peoplepc.com (209.228.32.171)          with SMTP; 22 Nov 2001 08:36:50 -0800
X-Sent: 22 Nov 2001 16:36:50 GMT
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0DEF_01C56B69.5973B320"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <012501c17376$1e77fe00$0151153f@default>
Date:         Thu, 22 Nov 2001 11:52:47 -0500
Reply-To: "David Muesing" <dmuesing@PEOPLEPC.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "David Muesing" <dmuesing@PEOPLEPC.COM>
Subject:      [AR] AD--------Epoxy
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0DEF_01C56B69.5973B320
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Greetings Rocketeers,

Mr. Fiberglass is now carrying a new epoxy. I will still sell the West =
System epoxy at 10% off. I've labeled the new product with my business =
name of "Mr. Fiberglass". I guess if Bob Smith can do it so can I.=20

The major benefit with my new epoxy is that it is quite a bit less =
expensive than the West System.

It comes in many sizes and with 3 different hardeners. Pumps are =
available too, the pumps are not as good as I would like but I'm working =
on that. They have a tendency to loose their prime if left sitting very =
long. Repriming is no problem though.

I know you're thinking "does Mr. Fiberglass use Mr. Fiberglass epoxy?" =
Very definitely! Please don't tell the WS guys.=20

The hardeners are classified as Fast, Medium & Slow. See below for =
comparison:

FAST---
Pot Life: 15 min at 80 F; Set Time: 1-2 hrs; Cure: 3-4 hrs


MEDIUM---
Pot Life: 20-25 min at 80 F; Set Time: 2-3 hrs; Cure 8-10 hrs
 =20

SLOW---Not recommemded below 65 F.
Pot Life:  35-40 min at 80 F; Set Time: 4-5 hrs; Cure 24 hrs

Below are prices for "kits". One unit of resin comes with the matching =
unit of hardener. The resin is the same in each kit. Pump sets are sold =
seperately for $6.68.


FAST---
1 qrt Resin w/.25 qrt Hardener--$18.90
1/2 gal Resin w/.5 qrt Hardener--$31.73
1 gal Resin w/1 qrt Hardener--$56.03
2 gal Resin w/2 qrt Hardener--$99.90
5 gal Resin w/1.25 gal Hardener--$209.25


MEDIUM---
1 qrt Resin w/.33 qrt Hardener--$19.58
1/2 gal Resin w/.17 gal Hardener--$33.08
1 gal Resin w/.33 gal Hardener--$57.38
2 gal Resin w/.66 gal Hardener--$103.28
5 gal Resin w/1.6 gal Hardener--$222.75


SLOW---
1 qrt Resin w/.5 qrt Hardener--$21.60
1/2 gal Resin w/1 qrt Hardener--$34.43
1 gal Resin w/.5 gal Hardener--$60.08
2 gal Resin w/1 gal Hardener--$111.38
5 gal Resin w/2.5 gal Hardener--$253.13

Shipping is by UPS Ground unless otherwise specified.

Epoxy makes a great Christmas gift! :)

Happy Holidays!

Dave Muesing     Reply to me directly at   dmuesing@peoplepc.com
                 Thanks!=20

------=_NextPart_000_0DEF_01C56B69.5973B320
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Diso-8859-1">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 6.00.2600.0" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=3DOCRA color=3D#0000ff>Greetings =
Rocketeers,</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DOCRA color=3D#0000ff></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DOCRA color=3D#0000ff>Mr. Fiberglass is now carrying a =
new epoxy. I=20
will still sell the West System epoxy at 10% off. I've labeled the new =
product=20
with my business name of "Mr. Fiberglass". I guess if Bob Smith can do =
it so can=20
I. </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DOCRA color=3D#0000ff></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DOCRA color=3D#0000ff>The major benefit with my new =
epoxy is that=20
it is <FONT color=3D#ff0000>quite a bit less</FONT> <FONT=20
color=3D#ff0000>expensive</FONT> than the West System.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DOCRA color=3D#0000ff></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DOCRA color=3D#0000ff>It comes in many sizes and with 3 =
different=20
hardeners. Pumps are available too, the pumps are not as good as I would =
like=20
but I'm working on that. They have a tendency to loose their prime if =
left=20
sitting very long. Repriming is no problem though.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DOCRA color=3D#0000ff></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DOCRA color=3D#0000ff>I know you're thinking "does Mr. =
Fiberglass=20
use Mr. Fiberglass epoxy?" Very definitely! Please don't tell the=20
WS&nbsp;guys.&nbsp;</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DOCRA color=3D#0000ff></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DOCRA color=3D#0000ff>The hardeners are classified as =
Fast, Medium=20
&amp; Slow. See below for comparison:</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DOCRA color=3D#0000ff></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DOCRA color=3D#0000ff>FAST---</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DOCRA color=3D#0000ff>Pot Life: 15 min at 80&nbsp;F; =
Set Time: 1-2=20
hrs; Cure: 3-4 hrs</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DOCRA color=3D#0000ff></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DOCRA color=3D#0000ff></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DOCRA color=3D#0000ff>MEDIUM---</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DOCRA color=3D#0000ff>Pot Life: 20-25 min at 80 F; Set =
Time: 2-3=20
hrs; Cure 8-10 hrs</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DOCRA color=3D#0000ff>&nbsp;&nbsp;</FONT></DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DOCRA color=3D#0000ff>SLOW---Not recommemded below 65=20
F.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DOCRA color=3D#0000ff>Pot Life: </FONT>&nbsp;<FONT =
face=3DOCRA=20
color=3D#0000ff>35-40 min at 80 F; Set Time: 4-5 hrs; Cure 24 =
hrs</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DOCRA color=3D#0000ff></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DOCRA color=3D#0000ff>Below are prices for "kits". One =
unit of=20
resin comes with the matching unit of hardener. The resin is the same in =
each=20
kit. Pump sets are sold seperately for $6.68.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DOCRA color=3D#0000ff></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DOCRA color=3D#0000ff></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DOCRA color=3D#0000ff>FAST---</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DOCRA color=3D#ff0000>1 qrt Resin w/.25 qrt=20
Hardener--$18.90</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DOCRA color=3D#ff0000>1/2 gal Resin w/.5 qrt=20
Hardener--$31.73</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DOCRA color=3D#ff0000>1 gal Resin w/1 qrt=20
Hardener--$56.03</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DOCRA color=3D#ff0000>2 gal Resin w/2 qrt=20
Hardener--$99.90</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DOCRA color=3D#ff0000>5 gal Resin w/1.25 gal=20
Hardener--$209.25</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DOCRA color=3D#ff0000></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DOCRA color=3D#ff0000></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DOCRA color=3D#0000ff>MEDIUM---</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DOCRA color=3D#ff0000>1 qrt Resin w/.33 qrt=20
Hardener--$19.58</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DOCRA color=3D#ff0000>1/2 gal Resin w/.17 gal=20
Hardener--$33.08</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DOCRA color=3D#ff0000>1 gal Resin w/.33=20
gal&nbsp;Hardener--$57.38</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DOCRA color=3D#ff0000>2 gal Resin w/.66 gal=20
Hardener--$103.28</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DOCRA color=3D#ff0000>5 gal Resin w/1.6 gal=20
Hardener--$222.75</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DOCRA color=3D#ff0000></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DOCRA color=3D#0000ff></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DOCRA color=3D#0000ff>SLOW---</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DOCRA color=3D#ff0000>1 qrt Resin w/.5 qrt=20
Hardener--$21.60</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DOCRA color=3D#ff0000>1/2 gal Resin w/1 qrt=20
Hardener--$34.43</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DOCRA color=3D#ff0000>1 gal Resin w/.5 gal=20
Hardener--$60.08</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DOCRA color=3D#ff0000>2 gal Resin w/1 gal=20
Hardener--$111.38</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DOCRA color=3D#ff0000>5 gal Resin w/2.5 gal=20
Hardener--$253.13</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DOCRA color=3D#ff0000></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DOCRA color=3D#0000ff>Shipping is by UPS Ground unless =
otherwise=20
specified.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DOCRA color=3D#0000ff></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DOCRA color=3D#0000ff>Epoxy makes a great Christmas =
gift!=20
:)</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DOCRA color=3D#0000ff></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DOCRA color=3D#0000ff>Happy Holidays!</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DOCRA color=3D#0000ff></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DOCRA color=3D#0000ff>Dave =
Muesing&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; <FONT=20
color=3D#ff0000>Reply to me directly at&nbsp;&nbsp; </FONT><A=20
href=3D"mailto:dmuesing@peoplepc.com"><FONT=20
color=3D#ff0000>dmuesing@peoplepc.com</FONT></A></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DOCRA=20
color=3D#ff0000>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nb=
sp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Thanks!=20
</FONT></DIV></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0DEF_01C56B69.5973B320--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 2636 invoked from network); 22 Nov 2001 17:48:13 -0000
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 22 Nov 2001 17:48:13 -0000
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 12288 invoked by uid 50005); 22 Nov 2001 17:48:06 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4171. . Clean. Processed in 0.101192 secs); 22 Nov 2001 17:48:06 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 22 Nov 2001 17:48:06 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA09507; Thu, 22 Nov 2001 09:44:30 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 84970 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 22 Nov 2001 17:44:21          +0000
Received: from mta06.mail.mel.aone.net.au (mta06.mail.au.uu.net [203.2.192.87])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA09493 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 22 Nov 2001 09:44:21 -0800
Received: from [127.0.0.1] by mta06.mail.mel.aone.net.au with SMTP id          <20011122174419.DCNY6057.mta06.mail.mel.aone.net.au@[127.0.0.1]> for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 23 Nov 2001 04:44:19 +1100
X-Priority: 3
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <20011122174419.DCNY6057.mta06.mail.mel.aone.net.au@[127.0.0.1]>
Date:         Fri, 23 Nov 2001 04:44:19 +1100
Reply-To: <tomjan@OZEMAIL.COM.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <tomjan@OZEMAIL.COM.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] graphite supply found
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

There's some graphit going on ebay at the moment, both in slab and rectangular bar form. Just thought it worth a mention

Thomas.
>
> From: Marcus Leech <mleech@NORTELNETWORKS.COM>
> Subject: Re: [AR] graphite supply found
> Date: 22/11/2001 10:00:46
> To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
>
> foy wrote:
> >
> >          It looks good but I would like the opinion of a pro. If it is good
> > it will be very cheep. I need someone to compare it to the good stuff. Then
> > it will be for sale.                                                     Foy
> >
> "Good" is a relative term for graphite.  I've found that even the cheapest
>   grades of graphite are "good enough" for single-use motors, while some of
>   the highest-density iso-moulded grades are mechanically inferior in certain
>   configurations.
>
> For my smaller motors (<= 1" diameter), I've been buying extruded graphite
>   from Sunset Art Glass.  The stuff is relatively cheap, somewhat soft, and
>   has worked well for multi-use nozzles for 22mm motors.
>
> --
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> Marcus Leech                             Mail:   Dept 8M70, MS 012, FITZ
> Advisor                                  Phone: (ESN) 393-9145  +1 613 763 9145
> Security Architecture and Planning       Fax:   (ESN) 393-9435  +1 613 763 9435
> Nortel Networks                          mleech@nortelnetworks.com
> -----------------Expressed opinions are my own, not my employer's------
>

This message was sent through MyMail http://www.mymail.com.au

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 9531 invoked from network); 22 Nov 2001 21:39:25 -0000
X-Priority: 3
Received: from smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.105]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 22 Nov 2001 21:39:25 -0000
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 20667 invoked by uid 50005); 22 Nov 2001 21:39:17 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpy with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4171. . Clean. Processed in 0.250675 secs); 22 Nov 2001 21:39:17 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 22 Nov 2001 21:39:17 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA10203; Thu, 22 Nov 2001 13:37:13 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 85028 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 22 Nov 2001 21:37:03          +0000
Received: from imo-m03.mx.aol.com (imo-m03.mx.aol.com [64.12.136.6]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA10188 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Thu, 22 Nov 2001 13:36:58 -0800
Received: from Sociald84@aol.com by imo-m03.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v31_r1.9.) id          g.f6.12b55876 (18404); Thu, 22 Nov 2001 16:36:22 -0500 (EST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0DF2_01C56B69.59762420"
X-Mailer: AOL 6.0 for Windows US sub 10540
Message-ID:  <f6.12b55876.292ec9d5@aol.com>
Date:         Thu, 22 Nov 2001 16:36:21 EST
Reply-To: <Sociald84@AOL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <Sociald84@AOL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Non-digital test stand
Comments: To: terry.mccreary@murraystate.edu
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0DF2_01C56B69.59762420
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

For my high school physics class I made a test stand that was basically two
12" square steel plates with holes drilled at the corners. I put a long bolt
with a spring around it through the holes, and attatched a pen to the top
plate. The whole thing was mounted to a wooden base with a DC motor spinning
a coffee can. Wrap some paper around the coffee can and turn it on just prior
to firing. I still have it but it needs work.

Mark

In a message dated 11/16/2001 7:38:01 AM Mountain Standard Time,
terry.mccreary@MURRAYSTATE.EDU writes:


> >Makes sense real easily. So, in the context of a "by-the-way", I have often
> >wondered if *anyone on arocket* has ever designed a non-digital, (even
> >mostly mechanical) chart-recorder with test stand  suitable for such
> >non-hi-tech, low-budget, back-yard tests? A great incentive for the newbie
> >with no launch site available, huh?
>
> The old Teleflite book that describes how to make BP motors also showed a
> "chart recorder" made from a cookie tin and BBQ motor.  Briefly, the rocket
> motor was placed in a spring-loaded holder.  A piece of paper was wrapped
> around the cookie tin which was driven by the BBQ motor, and a pen was
> attached to an arm that was connected to the rocket motor.  On ignition,
> the rocket motor moved forward, the pen drew a thrust curve.
>
> The response time of most of the old electronic chart recorders isn't
> nearly fast enough for most rocket motors.  The el-cheapo 8-bit ADC from
> Dataq plus a homemade load cell a la R. Nakka will outperform most older
> technology at a comparable outlay.
>
> P'rfesser
>
> Dr. Terry McCreary
> Associate Professor
> Department of Chemistry
> Murray State University
> Murray, KY  42071
> 270-762-6499



------=_NextPart_000_0DF2_01C56B69.59762420
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<HTML><FONT FACE=arial,helvetica><FONT  SIZE=2>For my high school physics class I made a test stand that was basically two 12" square steel plates with holes drilled at the corners. I put a long bolt with a spring around it through the holes, and attatched a pen to the top plate. The whole thing was mounted to a wooden base with a DC motor spinning a coffee can. Wrap some paper around the coffee can and turn it on just prior to firing. I still have it but it needs work.
<BR>
<BR>Mark
<BR>
<BR>In a message dated 11/16/2001 7:38:01 AM Mountain Standard Time, terry.mccreary@MURRAYSTATE.EDU writes:
<BR>
<BR>
<BR><BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE style="BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px">&gt;Makes sense real easily. So, in the context of a "by-the-way", I have often
<BR>&gt;wondered if *anyone on arocket* has ever designed a non-digital, (even
<BR>&gt;mostly mechanical) chart-recorder with test stand &nbsp;suitable for such
<BR>&gt;non-hi-tech, low-budget, back-yard tests? A great incentive for the newbie
<BR>&gt;with no launch site available, huh?
<BR>
<BR>The old Teleflite book that describes how to make BP motors also showed a
<BR>"chart recorder" made from a cookie tin and BBQ motor. &nbsp;Briefly, the rocket
<BR>motor was placed in a spring-loaded holder. &nbsp;A piece of paper was wrapped
<BR>around the cookie tin which was driven by the BBQ motor, and a pen was
<BR>attached to an arm that was connected to the rocket motor. &nbsp;On ignition,
<BR>the rocket motor moved forward, the pen drew a thrust curve.
<BR>
<BR>The response time of most of the old electronic chart recorders isn't
<BR>nearly fast enough for most rocket motors. &nbsp;The el-cheapo 8-bit ADC from
<BR>Dataq plus a homemade load cell a la R. Nakka will outperform most older
<BR>technology at a comparable outlay.
<BR>
<BR>P'rfesser
<BR>
<BR>Dr. Terry McCreary
<BR>Associate Professor
<BR>Department of Chemistry
<BR>Murray State University
<BR>Murray, KY &nbsp;42071
<BR>270-762-6499</FONT><FONT  COLOR="#000000" SIZE=3 FAMILY="SANSSERIF" FACE="Arial" LANG="0"></BLOCKQUOTE>
<BR></FONT><FONT  COLOR="#000000" SIZE=2 FAMILY="SANSSERIF" FACE="Arial" LANG="0">
<BR></FONT></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0DF2_01C56B69.59762420--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 24160 invoked from network); 22 Nov 2001 21:45:42 -0000
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 22 Nov 2001 21:45:42 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 904 invoked by uid 50005); 22 Nov 2001 21:45:35 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4171. . Clean. Processed in 0.186118 secs); 22 Nov 2001 21:45:35 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 22 Nov 2001 21:45:35 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA10249; Thu, 22 Nov 2001 13:43:31 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 85037 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 22 Nov 2001 21:43:28          +0000
Received: from mail003.syd.optusnet.com.au (mail003.syd.optusnet.com.au          [203.2.75.251]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA10234;          Thu, 22 Nov 2001 13:43:27 -0800
Received: from webmail01.syd.optusnet.com.au (webmail01.syd.optusnet.com.au          [203.2.75.234]) by mail003.syd.optusnet.com.au (8.11.1/8.11.1) with          ESMTP id fAMLguA25775; Fri, 23 Nov 2001 08:42:56 +1100
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: MIME-tools 5.411 (Entity 5.404)
Received: from  [209.36.247.3] as user strudwicke@optusnet.com.au by          webmail.optusnet.com.au with HTTP;
Message-ID:  <200111222142.fAMLguA25775@mail003.syd.optusnet.com.au>
Date:         Fri, 23 Nov 2001 08:42:56 +1100
Reply-To: "Craig Strudwicke" <strudwicke@OPTUSNET.COM.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Craig Strudwicke" <strudwicke@OPTUSNET.COM.AU>
Subject:      [AR] KNSB high pressure burnrate data
Comments: To: SUGPRO@ITC.UCI.EDU
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Does anyone have burn rate data for KNSB (65/35) at elevated pressures ie
1500 to 4000psi ? I am also looking for catalysts and burn rates of catalysed
KNSB (65/35) when using say Fe2O3 or others. Anyone ?

I have plans for a scuba tank based booster motor, running at between 2000 and
3500 psi (14 to 24.5MPa) hence the need for burn rate data in this range.

Craig

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 7505 invoked from network); 22 Nov 2001 22:29:46 -0000
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 22 Nov 2001 22:29:46 -0000
Received: (qmail 10921 invoked by uid 50005); 22 Nov 2001 22:29:39 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4171. . Clean. Processed in 0.209691 secs); 22 Nov 2001 22:29:39 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 22 Nov 2001 22:29:39 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA10477; Thu, 22 Nov 2001 14:27:20 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 85083 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 22 Nov 2001 22:27:17          +0000
Received: from mta01.mail.mel.aone.net.au (mta01.mail.au.uu.net [203.2.192.81])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA10463 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 22 Nov 2001 14:27:16 -0800
Received: from unknown ([63.60.220.169]) by mta01.mail.mel.aone.net.au with          SMTP id <20011122222712.HGDV19414.mta01.mail.mel.aone.net.au@unknown>          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 23 Nov 2001 09:27:12 +1100
References: Conversation <00f101c1718c$37e35510$0200a8c0@charter.net> with last            message <3BFD131E.7CF2B179@NORTELNETWORKS.COM>
Priority: Normal
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Priority: 3
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	X-MAPIextension=.TXT;
	charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>
Date:         Thu, 22 Nov 2001 22:27:17 +0000
Reply-To: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] graphite supply found
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <3BFD131E.7CF2B179@NORTELNETWORKS.COM>

----------
> foy wrote:
> >
> >          It looks good but I would like the opinion of a pro. If it is
good
> > it will be very cheep. I need someone to compare it to the good stuff.
Then
> > it will be for sale.
 Foy
> >
> "Good" is a relative term for graphite.  I've found that even the cheapest
>   grades of graphite are "good enough" for single-use motors, while some
of
>   the highest-density iso-moulded grades are mechanically inferior in
certain
>   configurations.

Yep, this is also my experience.

Troy.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 9702 invoked from network); 22 Nov 2001 22:30:30 -0000
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 22 Nov 2001 22:30:30 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 25696 invoked by uid 50005); 22 Nov 2001 22:30:22 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4171. . Clean. Processed in 0.204881 secs); 22 Nov 2001 22:30:22 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 22 Nov 2001 22:30:22 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA10500; Thu, 22 Nov 2001 14:27:55 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 85090 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 22 Nov 2001 22:27:53          +0000
Received: from inet03.citec.qld.gov.au (firewall-user@inet03.citec.qld.gov.au          [203.5.10.10]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA10486          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 22 Nov 2001 14:27:52 -0800
Received: by inet03.citec.qld.gov.au; id IAA00101; Fri, 23 Nov 2001 08:27:48          +1000 (EST)
Received: from citec.com.au(pcux.citec.qld.gov.au 147.132.17.12) by          inet03.citec.qld.gov.au via smap (V2.0) id xma029956; Fri, 23 Nov 01          08:27:45 +1000
Received: from CITEC-Message_Server by citec.com.au with Novell_GroupWise; Fri,          23 Nov 2001 08:29:01 +1000
X-Mailer: Novell GroupWise 5.5.4
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by itc.uci.edu id OAA10487
Message-ID:  <sbfe08cd.001@citec.com.au>
Date:         Fri, 23 Nov 2001 08:28:56 +1000
Reply-To: "Des Bromilow" <Des.Bromilow@CITEC.COM.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Des Bromilow" <Des.Bromilow@CITEC.COM.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Non-digital test stand
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

When I get started into the actual construction and test firing of my motors (hybrids) I'll be either making a coffee can style force recorder, or I'll be rich enough to pick up a pressure transducer (load cell)

I have nearly everything else I need, but $200+ for a load cell is going to take a little bit of time, especially with everything else I'm trying to do.

If I do go the way of the coffe can, I'll have two recorders (pens), one attached (physically) to the motor mount, and another pen attached to a timed pulse (for reliable time marks)

Des

>>> <Sociald84@AOL.COM> 23/11/01 7:36:21 am >>>
For my high school physics class I made a test stand that was basically two
12" square steel plates with holes drilled at the corners. I put a long bolt
with a spring around it through the holes, and attatched a pen to the top
plate. The whole thing was mounted to a wooden base with a DC motor spinning
a coffee can. Wrap some paper around the coffee can and turn it on just prior
to firing. I still have it but it needs work.

Mark

In a message dated 11/16/2001 7:38:01 AM Mountain Standard Time,
terry.mccreary@MURRAYSTATE.EDU writes:


> >Makes sense real easily. So, in the context of a "by-the-way", I have often
> >wondered if *anyone on arocket* has ever designed a non-digital, (even
> >mostly mechanical) chart-recorder with test stand  suitable for such
> >non-hi-tech, low-budget, back-yard tests? A great incentive for the newbie
> >with no launch site available, huh?
>
> The old Teleflite book that describes how to make BP motors also showed a
> "chart recorder" made from a cookie tin and BBQ motor.  Briefly, the rocket
> motor was placed in a spring-loaded holder.  A piece of paper was wrapped
> around the cookie tin which was driven by the BBQ motor, and a pen was
> attached to an arm that was connected to the rocket motor.  On ignition,
> the rocket motor moved forward, the pen drew a thrust curve.
>
> The response time of most of the old electronic chart recorders isn't
> nearly fast enough for most rocket motors.  The el-cheapo 8-bit ADC from
> Dataq plus a homemade load cell a la R. Nakka will outperform most older
> technology at a comparable outlay.
>
> P'rfesser
>
> Dr. Terry McCreary
> Associate Professor
> Department of Chemistry
> Murray State University
> Murray, KY  42071
> 270-762-6499

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 16852 invoked from network); 22 Nov 2001 22:33:40 -0000
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 22 Nov 2001 22:33:40 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 7013 invoked by uid 50005); 22 Nov 2001 22:33:32 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4171. . Clean. Processed in 0.392103 secs); 22 Nov 2001 22:33:32 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 22 Nov 2001 22:33:32 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA10538; Thu, 22 Nov 2001 14:31:07 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 85097 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 22 Nov 2001 22:31:05          +0000
Received: from inet03.citec.qld.gov.au (firewall-user@inet03.citec.qld.gov.au          [203.5.10.10]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA10524          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 22 Nov 2001 14:31:04 -0800
Received: by inet03.citec.qld.gov.au; id IAA04781; Fri, 23 Nov 2001 08:31:01          +1000 (EST)
Received: from citec.com.au(pcux.citec.qld.gov.au 147.132.17.12) by          inet03.citec.qld.gov.au via smap (V2.0) id xma004668; Fri, 23 Nov 01          08:30:55 +1000
Received: from CITEC-Message_Server by citec.com.au with Novell_GroupWise; Fri,          23 Nov 2001 08:32:12 +1000
X-Mailer: Novell GroupWise 5.5.4
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by itc.uci.edu id OAA10525
Message-ID:  <sbfe098c.015@citec.com.au>
Date:         Fri, 23 Nov 2001 08:31:57 +1000
Reply-To: "Des Bromilow" <Des.Bromilow@CITEC.COM.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Des Bromilow" <Des.Bromilow@CITEC.COM.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Non-digital test stand
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

I've seen one the UK version of rmr some discussion of using CO2 solenoids for NOX feeds. Is this correct?

Des

>>> <Sociald84@AOL.COM> 23/11/01 7:36:21 am >>>
For my high school physics class I made a test stand that was basically two
12" square steel plates with holes drilled at the corners. I put a long bolt
with a spring around it through the holes, and attatched a pen to the top
plate. The whole thing was mounted to a wooden base with a DC motor spinning
a coffee can. Wrap some paper around the coffee can and turn it on just prior
to firing. I still have it but it needs work.

Mark

In a message dated 11/16/2001 7:38:01 AM Mountain Standard Time,
terry.mccreary@MURRAYSTATE.EDU writes:


> >Makes sense real easily. So, in the context of a "by-the-way", I have often
> >wondered if *anyone on arocket* has ever designed a non-digital, (even
> >mostly mechanical) chart-recorder with test stand  suitable for such
> >non-hi-tech, low-budget, back-yard tests? A great incentive for the newbie
> >with no launch site available, huh?
>
> The old Teleflite book that describes how to make BP motors also showed a
> "chart recorder" made from a cookie tin and BBQ motor.  Briefly, the rocket
> motor was placed in a spring-loaded holder.  A piece of paper was wrapped
> around the cookie tin which was driven by the BBQ motor, and a pen was
> attached to an arm that was connected to the rocket motor.  On ignition,
> the rocket motor moved forward, the pen drew a thrust curve.
>
> The response time of most of the old electronic chart recorders isn't
> nearly fast enough for most rocket motors.  The el-cheapo 8-bit ADC from
> Dataq plus a homemade load cell a la R. Nakka will outperform most older
> technology at a comparable outlay.
>
> P'rfesser
>
> Dr. Terry McCreary
> Associate Professor
> Department of Chemistry
> Murray State University
> Murray, KY  42071
> 270-762-6499

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 6081 invoked from network); 22 Nov 2001 23:06:12 -0000
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 22 Nov 2001 23:06:12 -0000
Received: (qmail 18633 invoked by uid 50005); 22 Nov 2001 23:06:05 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4171. . Clean. Processed in 0.250623 secs); 22 Nov 2001 23:06:05 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 22 Nov 2001 23:06:05 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA10732; Thu, 22 Nov 2001 15:04:03 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 85139 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 22 Nov 2001 23:03:56          +0000
Received: from mta03.mail.mel.aone.net.au (mta03.mail.au.uu.net [203.2.192.83])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA10718 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 22 Nov 2001 15:03:54 -0800
Received: from unknown ([63.34.214.87]) by mta03.mail.mel.aone.net.au with SMTP          id <20011122230350.ZRTL14302.mta03.mail.mel.aone.net.au@unknown> for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 23 Nov 2001 10:03:50 +1100
References: Conversation <sbfe098c.015@citec.com.au> with last message            <sbfe098c.015@citec.com.au>
Priority: Normal
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Priority: 3
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	X-MAPIextension=.TXT;
	charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>
Date:         Thu, 22 Nov 2001 23:03:56 +0000
Reply-To: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Non-digital test stand
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <sbfe098c.015@citec.com.au>

Probably. CO2 & NOX have very similar physical properties although
chemically CO2 is considerably more inert than NOX although NOX is stable
enough to be reasonably compatible with most field equipment for amateur
rocketry.

Troy.

----------
> I've seen one the UK version of rmr some discussion of using CO2
solenoids for
> NOX feeds. Is this correct?
>
> Des
>
> >>> <Sociald84@AOL.COM> 23/11/01 7:36:21 am >>>
> For my high school physics class I made a test stand that was basically
two
> 12" square steel plates with holes drilled at the corners. I put a long
bolt
> with a spring around it through the holes, and attatched a pen to the top
> plate. The whole thing was mounted to a wooden base with a DC motor
spinning
> a coffee can. Wrap some paper around the coffee can and turn it on just
prior
> to firing. I still have it but it needs work.
>
> Mark
>
> In a message dated 11/16/2001 7:38:01 AM Mountain Standard Time,
> terry.mccreary@MURRAYSTATE.EDU writes:
>
>
> > >Makes sense real easily. So, in the context of a "by-the-way", I have
often
> > >wondered if *anyone on arocket* has ever designed a non-digital, (even
> > >mostly mechanical) chart-recorder with test stand  suitable for such
> > >non-hi-tech, low-budget, back-yard tests? A great incentive for the
newbie
> > >with no launch site available, huh?
> >
> > The old Teleflite book that describes how to make BP motors also showed
a
> > "chart recorder" made from a cookie tin and BBQ motor.  Briefly, the
rocket
> > motor was placed in a spring-loaded holder.  A piece of paper was
wrapped
> > around the cookie tin which was driven by the BBQ motor, and a pen was
> > attached to an arm that was connected to the rocket motor.  On ignition,
> > the rocket motor moved forward, the pen drew a thrust curve.
> >
> > The response time of most of the old electronic chart recorders isn't
> > nearly fast enough for most rocket motors.  The el-cheapo 8-bit ADC from
> > Dataq plus a homemade load cell a la R. Nakka will outperform most older
> > technology at a comparable outlay.
> >
> > P'rfesser
> >
> > Dr. Terry McCreary
> > Associate Professor
> > Department of Chemistry
> > Murray State University
> > Murray, KY  42071
> > 270-762-6499

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 11036 invoked from network); 22 Nov 2001 23:19:42 -0000
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 22 Nov 2001 23:19:42 -0000
Received: (qmail 16596 invoked by uid 50005); 22 Nov 2001 23:19:34 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4171. . Clean. Processed in 0.281614 secs); 22 Nov 2001 23:19:34 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 22 Nov 2001 23:19:34 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA10795; Thu, 22 Nov 2001 15:17:11 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 85149 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 22 Nov 2001 23:17:09          +0000
Received: from mta03.mail.mel.aone.net.au (mta03.mail.au.uu.net [203.2.192.83])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA10781 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 22 Nov 2001 15:17:08 -0800
Received: from unknown ([63.34.220.89]) by mta03.mail.mel.aone.net.au with SMTP          id <20011122231639.ZZCJ14302.mta03.mail.mel.aone.net.au@unknown> for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 23 Nov 2001 10:16:40 +1100
References: Conversation <sbfe098c.015@citec.com.au> with last message            <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>
Priority: Normal
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Priority: 3
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	X-MAPIextension=.TXT;
	charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>
Date:         Thu, 22 Nov 2001 23:17:09 +0000
Reply-To: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Non-digital test stand
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

----------
> Probably. CO2 & NOX have very similar physical properties although
> chemically CO2 is considerably more inert than NOX although NOX is stable
> enough to be reasonably compatible with most field equipment for amateur
> rocketry.

I should have said "remote equipment".

Troy.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 14744 invoked from network); 23 Nov 2001 04:09:38 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 23 Nov 2001 04:09:38 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: (qmail 17382 invoked by uid 50005); 23 Nov 2001 04:09:30 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4171. . Clean. Processed in 0.174094 secs); 23 Nov 2001 04:09:30 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 23 Nov 2001 04:09:30 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA11813; Thu, 22 Nov 2001 20:06:47 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 85285 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 23 Nov 2001 04:05:19          +0000
Received: from wrench.toolcity.net (root@wrench.toolcity.net [208.0.188.2]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA11797 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 22 Nov 2001 20:05:18 -0800
Received: from [208.22.189.188] ([208.22.189.188]) by wrench.toolcity.net          (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id XAA00927 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu,          22 Nov 2001 23:05:13 -0500 (EST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <v01510100b8237c338569@[63.169.101.30]>
Date:         Thu, 22 Nov 2001 23:07:49 -0600
Reply-To: "al bradley" <abradley@TOOLCITY.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "al bradley" <abradley@TOOLCITY.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Non-digital test stand
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

>>>>I have often
>>>> wondered if *anyone on arocket* has ever designed a non-digital, (even
>>>> mostly mechanical) chart-recorder with test stand  suitable for such
>>>> non-hi-tech, low-budget, back-yard tests? A great incentive for the newbie
>>>> with no launch site available, huh?
 ----------------
>>On Fri, 16 Nov 2001, Terry McCreary wrote:
>> > The response time of most of the old electronic chart recorders isn't
>> > nearly fast enough for most rocket motors.  The el-cheapo 8-bit ADC from
>> > Dataq plus a homemade load cell a la R. Nakka will outperform most older
>> > technology at a comparable outlay.
-----------------
>>This probably deserves emphasizing.  Chart recorders are as obsolete as
>>quill pens.  Nowadays it is *easier* and *cheaper* to build a computerized
>>data-acquisition system than to build a decent chart recorder.
------------
>Absolutely correct.  My point was that one doesn't ordinarily want to
>bother with a strip chart recorder, even if it can be obtained for
>cheap/free, because the response time is a bit slow (maybe 3 Hz or
>thereabouts) for the phenomena that we want to see.  Also, the resolution
>of a typical recorder is 8 bits at best.
>
>There's an old saying:  "Cheaper, faster, better:  pick two."  Electronic
>data acquisition really is the exception; it's all three.
>
>P'rfesser
-------------

OK, these opinions are probably valid. So how does the experimenter only
familiar with analogue circuits find out how to build a digital group
capable of doing this? On what is the data stored? On what is it read out?
Have to connect the storage unit to my home computer -- how? What software
will I need? Anyone know of a tutorial geared to all this for the digital
dumbhead?

Might be better than a homemade chart recorder, but with the questions I
list here perhaps the expenses and headaches aren't so small after all.

respectfully,
al bradley

------------------------------------------------------------------
Can you live Life with this?: "Unless there is a law, an agreement, or a
long-standing custom, No one `Deserves' Anything -- Either Good or Bad!"

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 9929 invoked from network); 23 Nov 2001 06:18:27 -0000
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 23 Nov 2001 06:18:27 -0000
Received: (qmail 16598 invoked by uid 50005); 23 Nov 2001 06:18:20 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4171. . Clean. Processed in 0.145643 secs); 23 Nov 2001 06:18:20 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 23 Nov 2001 06:18:20 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA12168; Thu, 22 Nov 2001 22:16:28 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 85322 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 23 Nov 2001 06:14:54          +0000
Received: from Blastzone.com (consumersinterest.com [207.195.143.118] (may be          forged)) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA12150 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 22 Nov 2001 22:14:53 -0800
Received: from greg [64.24.214.177] by Blastzone.com with ESMTP (SMTPD32-6.04)          id ADBE39A011E; Thu, 22 Nov 2001 22:33:34 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook, Build 10.0.2627
Importance: Normal
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <000701c173e6$c4451aa0$640a0a0a@greg>
Date:         Thu, 22 Nov 2001 22:19:09 -0800
Reply-To: <greg@blastzone.com>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Greg Deputy" <greg@blastzone.com>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Non-digital test stand
Comments: To: Des Bromilow <Des.Bromilow@CITEC.COM.AU>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <sbfe08cd.001@citec.com.au>

Watch ebay.  A brand new in the box Futek 3000 lb load cell just went
for $40.  I'm still kicking myself, missed the end of the auction by
about an hour...

-----Original Message-----
From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@itc.uci.edu] On
Behalf Of Des Bromilow
Sent: Thursday, November 22, 2001 2:29 PM
To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
Subject: Re: [AR] Non-digital test stand


When I get started into the actual construction and test firing of my
motors (hybrids) I'll be either making a coffee can style force
recorder, or I'll be rich enough to pick up a pressure transducer (load
cell)

I have nearly everything else I need, but $200+ for a load cell is going
to take a little bit of time, especially with everything else I'm trying
to do.

If I do go the way of the coffe can, I'll have two recorders (pens), one
attached (physically) to the motor mount, and another pen attached to a
timed pulse (for reliable time marks)

Des

>>> <Sociald84@AOL.COM> 23/11/01 7:36:21 am >>>
For my high school physics class I made a test stand that was basically
two 12" square steel plates with holes drilled at the corners. I put a
long bolt with a spring around it through the holes, and attatched a pen
to the top plate. The whole thing was mounted to a wooden base with a DC
motor spinning a coffee can. Wrap some paper around the coffee can and
turn it on just prior to firing. I still have it but it needs work.

Mark

In a message dated 11/16/2001 7:38:01 AM Mountain Standard Time,
terry.mccreary@MURRAYSTATE.EDU writes:


> >Makes sense real easily. So, in the context of a "by-the-way", I have

> >often wondered if *anyone on arocket* has ever designed a
> >non-digital, (even mostly mechanical) chart-recorder with test stand

> >suitable for such non-hi-tech, low-budget, back-yard tests? A great
> >incentive for the newbie with no launch site available, huh?
>
> The old Teleflite book that describes how to make BP motors also
> showed a "chart recorder" made from a cookie tin and BBQ motor.
> Briefly, the rocket motor was placed in a spring-loaded holder.  A
> piece of paper was wrapped around the cookie tin which was driven by
> the BBQ motor, and a pen was attached to an arm that was connected to
> the rocket motor.  On ignition, the rocket motor moved forward, the
> pen drew a thrust curve.
>
> The response time of most of the old electronic chart recorders isn't
> nearly fast enough for most rocket motors.  The el-cheapo 8-bit ADC
> from Dataq plus a homemade load cell a la R. Nakka will outperform
> most older technology at a comparable outlay.
>
> P'rfesser
>
> Dr. Terry McCreary
> Associate Professor
> Department of Chemistry
> Murray State University
> Murray, KY  42071
> 270-762-6499

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 9738 invoked from network); 23 Nov 2001 07:13:36 -0000
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 23 Nov 2001 07:13:36 -0000
Received: (qmail 29662 invoked by uid 50005); 23 Nov 2001 07:13:28 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4171. . Clean. Processed in 0.178748 secs); 23 Nov 2001 07:13:28 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 23 Nov 2001 07:13:28 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA12329; Thu, 22 Nov 2001 23:11:37 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 85335 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 23 Nov 2001 07:10:13          +0000
Received: from femail39.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail39.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.254.60.33]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA12314          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 22 Nov 2001 23:10:12 -0800
Received: from officenew ([24.1.27.168]) by femail39.sdc1.sfba.home.com          (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20 201-229-121-120-20010223) with SMTP id          <20011123071012.GFPY11395.femail39.sdc1.sfba.home.com@officenew>;          Thu, 22 Nov 2001 23:10:12 -0800
References:  <v01510100b8237c338569@[63.169.101.30]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2462.0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <00f001c173ed$e7684be0$8300a8c0@olmpi1.wa.home.com>
Date:         Thu, 22 Nov 2001 23:10:16 -0800
Reply-To: "Tomm Aldridge" <taldridge@HOME.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Tomm Aldridge" <taldridge@HOME.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Non-digital test stand
Comments: To: al bradley <abradley@TOOLCITY.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Suggestion:

An AROCKET BASIC DIGITAL INSTRUMENT PROJECT.  Between us I'm sure we have
the savvy to come up with a basic multi channel data logger project
including analog signal conditioning for Pressure, Strain and Temperature
transducers.  I propose we attempt to spec the HW and the SW and then turn
it into an easy to buy and make system.  Probably learn a thing or two along
the way as well.

My thoughts:

Base the data logger on a commercial single board computer.
Have flexible IO so that anything from RS232 to Ethernet can be used to
setup and extract data.
Have both digital ins and outs (GPIO) and Analog inputs.  At least 8 of
each.
Source Code is completely open.  Design Files as well (thinking of the Data
IO board)
Use Eagle for any circuit and PCB design as it is free ware and accessable
to all.
Make the project useful for both ground data collection as well as flight
operation.

Tomm
----- Original Message -----
From: "al bradley" <abradley@TOOLCITY.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Thursday, November 22, 2001 9:07 PM
Subject: Re: [AR] Non-digital test stand


> >>>>I have often
> >>>> wondered if *anyone on arocket* has ever designed a non-digital,
(even
> >>>> mostly mechanical) chart-recorder with test stand  suitable for such
> >>>> non-hi-tech, low-budget, back-yard tests? A great incentive for the
newbie
> >>>> with no launch site available, huh?
>  ----------------
> >>On Fri, 16 Nov 2001, Terry McCreary wrote:
> >> > The response time of most of the old electronic chart recorders isn't
> >> > nearly fast enough for most rocket motors.  The el-cheapo 8-bit ADC
from
> >> > Dataq plus a homemade load cell a la R. Nakka will outperform most
older
> >> > technology at a comparable outlay.
> -----------------
> >>This probably deserves emphasizing.  Chart recorders are as obsolete as
> >>quill pens.  Nowadays it is *easier* and *cheaper* to build a
computerized
> >>data-acquisition system than to build a decent chart recorder.
> ------------
> >Absolutely correct.  My point was that one doesn't ordinarily want to
> >bother with a strip chart recorder, even if it can be obtained for
> >cheap/free, because the response time is a bit slow (maybe 3 Hz or
> >thereabouts) for the phenomena that we want to see.  Also, the resolution
> >of a typical recorder is 8 bits at best.
> >
> >There's an old saying:  "Cheaper, faster, better:  pick two."  Electronic
> >data acquisition really is the exception; it's all three.
> >
> >P'rfesser
> -------------
>
> OK, these opinions are probably valid. So how does the experimenter only
> familiar with analogue circuits find out how to build a digital group
> capable of doing this? On what is the data stored? On what is it read out?
> Have to connect the storage unit to my home computer -- how? What software
> will I need? Anyone know of a tutorial geared to all this for the digital
> dumbhead?
>
> Might be better than a homemade chart recorder, but with the questions I
> list here perhaps the expenses and headaches aren't so small after all.
>
> respectfully,
> al bradley
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------
> Can you live Life with this?: "Unless there is a law, an agreement, or a
> long-standing custom, No one `Deserves' Anything -- Either Good or Bad!"

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 15043 invoked from network); 23 Nov 2001 07:15:57 -0000
Received: from smtpv.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.110]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 23 Nov 2001 07:15:57 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 15109 invoked by uid 50005); 23 Nov 2001 07:11:29 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpv with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4171. . Clean. Processed in 0.227298 secs); 23 Nov 2001 07:11:29 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpv.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 23 Nov 2001 07:11:29 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA12358; Thu, 22 Nov 2001 23:14:02 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 85342 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 23 Nov 2001 07:12:40          +0000
Received: from grucom2.gru.net (grucom2.gru.net [209.251.129.7]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA12339 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu,          22 Nov 2001 23:12:40 -0800
Received: from [209.251.150.157] by grucom2.sfcc.net (NTMail          7.00.0022/NU4112.00.db1c8a4b) with ESMTP id lkgmpaaa for          AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 23 Nov 2001 02:12:39 -0500
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (Win95; I)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <000701c173e6$c4451aa0$640a0a0a@greg>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3BFDF7B9.EC8D7990@sfcc.net>
Date:         Fri, 23 Nov 2001 02:16:09 -0500
Reply-To: "James Yawn" <jyawn@SFCC.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "James Yawn" <jyawn@SFCC.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Non-digital test stand
Comments: To: greg@blastzone.com
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

I have been playing with another alternative to the digital recorder.  It
involves attaching an engine to a large weight, firing it upward, and
recording the flight with a camcorder.

Currently I am using an 8-foot 2x4 for my "stabilizer" and lifting it with
engines that should be in the "F" to "G" range based on the amount of fuel
in them.  Today's test burned 130 grams of KN/Sucrose, total weight 10.9
pounds, apogee was at about 95 feet.

This test is illustrated with too many pictures and bad jokes at:
http://www.angelfire.com/apes/jyawn/2x4/index.htm

So my question:  What formula might I use to determine the thrust of this
engine?  (Please be gentle - I'm just a psych major.)

Obviously one would not get a thrust curve, but it seems that by knowing the
weight and altitude one could obtain an indication of total thrust.

Jimmy Yawn
jyawn@sfcc.net


> > The old Teleflite book that describes how to make BP motors also
> > showed a "chart recorder" made from a cookie tin and BBQ motor.
> > Briefly, the rocket motor was placed in a spring-loaded holder.  A
> > piece of paper was wrapped around the cookie tin which was driven by
> > the BBQ motor, and a pen was attached to an arm that was connected to
> > the rocket motor.  On ignition, the rocket motor moved forward, the
> > pen drew a thrust curve.
>
> >
> > Dr. Terry McCreary
> > Associate Professor
> > Department of Chemistry
> > Murray State University
> > Murray, KY  42071
> > 270-762-6499

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 22473 invoked from network); 23 Nov 2001 09:37:13 -0000
Received: from smtpv.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.110]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 23 Nov 2001 09:37:13 -0000
Received: (qmail 12878 invoked by uid 50005); 23 Nov 2001 09:32:44 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpv with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4171. . Clean. Processed in 0.253171 secs); 23 Nov 2001 09:32:44 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpv.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 23 Nov 2001 09:32:44 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id BAA12782; Fri, 23 Nov 2001 01:34:50 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 85391 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 23 Nov 2001 09:33:02          +0000
Received: from mail015.syd.optusnet.com.au (mail015.syd.optusnet.com.au          [203.2.75.178]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id BAA12766          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 23 Nov 2001 01:33:01 -0800
Received: from jack (wagax3-183.dialup.optusnet.com.au [198.142.145.183]) by          mail015.syd.optusnet.com.au (8.11.1/8.11.1) with SMTP id fAN9WSd14620          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 23 Nov 2001 20:32:29 +1100
References:  <v01510100b8237c338569@[63.169.101.30]>              <00f001c173ed$e7684be0$8300a8c0@olmpi1.wa.home.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <005701c17401$d67d26c0$b7918ec6@jack>
Date:         Fri, 23 Nov 2001 20:32:57 +1100
Reply-To: "Jack" <jack_36@OPTUSNET.COM.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jack" <jack_36@OPTUSNET.COM.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Non-digital test stand
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

i'm just about ready to test some hybrids and have been looking at different
options for data aquisition, that dont cost an arm and a leg.
what ive come up with is a pic based unit that reads the input from the load
cell (home made, ill get to that) at 50ms intervals and sends them via rs232
to a qbasic program so that the speed of the computer is irrelavent  (any
old laptop will do). the data is then displayed on a graph and also written
to a file which can also be converted to a wrasp file. this is the first
computer program ive written since  i owned a commadore64 so its very basic.
the pic unit is just a pic, an 8bit adc, an instriment amp, and a serial
uart with a max232 line driver so it can be plugged straight into the
computer.
the load cell is like richard nakkas' hydraulic load cell using a home made
2" hydraulic cylinder which is capped and tapped to suit an electronic
engine oil pressure sensor. with the calibration been made with the
instriment amp and also in the computer program. the load cell is all but
finished and looks like its going to work fine, im just a bit worried ive
made the seal on the piston too tight and ill get delayed readings, but that
will be easily fixed.

im a welder by trade and all this stuff is self taught so nothing is
impossable, if you really want something.
total cost was about AUS$120 (and the laptop was $80 of that)

          ..Jack..


----- Original Message -----
From: Tomm Aldridge <taldridge@HOME.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Friday, November 23, 2001 6:10 PM
Subject: Re: [AR] Non-digital test stand


> Suggestion:
>
> An AROCKET BASIC DIGITAL INSTRUMENT PROJECT.  Between us I'm sure we have
> the savvy to come up with a basic multi channel data logger project
> including analog signal conditioning for Pressure, Strain and Temperature
> transducers.  I propose we attempt to spec the HW and the SW and then turn
> it into an easy to buy and make system.  Probably learn a thing or two
along
> the way as well.
>
> My thoughts:
>
> Base the data logger on a commercial single board computer.
> Have flexible IO so that anything from RS232 to Ethernet can be used to
> setup and extract data.
> Have both digital ins and outs (GPIO) and Analog inputs.  At least 8 of
> each.
> Source Code is completely open.  Design Files as well (thinking of the
Data
> IO board)
> Use Eagle for any circuit and PCB design as it is free ware and accessable
> to all.
> Make the project useful for both ground data collection as well as flight
> operation.
>
> Tomm
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "al bradley" <abradley@TOOLCITY.NET>
> To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
> Sent: Thursday, November 22, 2001 9:07 PM
> Subject: Re: [AR] Non-digital test stand
>
>
> > >>>>I have often
> > >>>> wondered if *anyone on arocket* has ever designed a non-digital,
> (even
> > >>>> mostly mechanical) chart-recorder with test stand  suitable for
such
> > >>>> non-hi-tech, low-budget, back-yard tests? A great incentive for the
> newbie
> > >>>> with no launch site available, huh?
> >  ----------------
> > >>On Fri, 16 Nov 2001, Terry McCreary wrote:
> > >> > The response time of most of the old electronic chart recorders
isn't
> > >> > nearly fast enough for most rocket motors.  The el-cheapo 8-bit ADC
> from
> > >> > Dataq plus a homemade load cell a la R. Nakka will outperform most
> older
> > >> > technology at a comparable outlay.
> > -----------------
> > >>This probably deserves emphasizing.  Chart recorders are as obsolete
as
> > >>quill pens.  Nowadays it is *easier* and *cheaper* to build a
> computerized
> > >>data-acquisition system than to build a decent chart recorder.
> > ------------
> > >Absolutely correct.  My point was that one doesn't ordinarily want to
> > >bother with a strip chart recorder, even if it can be obtained for
> > >cheap/free, because the response time is a bit slow (maybe 3 Hz or
> > >thereabouts) for the phenomena that we want to see.  Also, the
resolution
> > >of a typical recorder is 8 bits at best.
> > >
> > >There's an old saying:  "Cheaper, faster, better:  pick two."
Electronic
> > >data acquisition really is the exception; it's all three.
> > >
> > >P'rfesser
> > -------------
> >
> > OK, these opinions are probably valid. So how does the experimenter only
> > familiar with analogue circuits find out how to build a digital group
> > capable of doing this? On what is the data stored? On what is it read
out?
> > Have to connect the storage unit to my home computer -- how? What
software
> > will I need? Anyone know of a tutorial geared to all this for the
digital
> > dumbhead?
> >
> > Might be better than a homemade chart recorder, but with the questions I
> > list here perhaps the expenses and headaches aren't so small after all.
> >
> > respectfully,
> > al bradley
> >
> > ------------------------------------------------------------------
> > Can you live Life with this?: "Unless there is a law, an agreement, or a
> > long-standing custom, No one `Deserves' Anything -- Either Good or Bad!"

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Received: (qmail 14678 invoked from network); 23 Nov 2001 14:10:56 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpv.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.110]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 23 Nov 2001 14:10:56 -0000
Received: (qmail 16360 invoked by uid 50005); 23 Nov 2001 14:06:25 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpv with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4171. . Clean. Processed in 0.770863 secs); 23 Nov 2001 14:06:25 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpv.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 23 Nov 2001 14:06:23 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA13531; Fri, 23 Nov 2001 06:07:18 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 85436 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 23 Nov 2001 14:05:30          +0000
Received: from web21104.mail.yahoo.com (web21104.mail.yahoo.com          [216.136.227.106]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id GAA13515          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 23 Nov 2001 06:05:30 -0800
Received: from [212.150.6.218] by web21104.mail.yahoo.com via HTTP; Fri, 23 Nov          2001 06:05:28 PST
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <20011123140528.57803.qmail@web21104.mail.yahoo.com>
Date:         Fri, 23 Nov 2001 06:05:28 -0800
Reply-To: "flint hapirat" <flinthapirat@YAHOO.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "flint hapirat" <flinthapirat@YAHOO.COM>
Subject:      [AR] Epoxy based propellant
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <012501c17376$1e77fe00$0151153f@default>

I've seen some mails regarding a metal epoxy
propellant
someone here is developping...
I can't find it anymore as my server erased it but I'm
interested in the results:
What kind of epoxy glues did you use?
What are the ratios (with nitrates/perchlorates etc.)
of fuel/epoxy
and all other related info.

BTW
I saw a long time ago an epoxy used for car fixing -
it's very hard
you require a machine to cut it or polish it... and it
looks metallic I found it under the name steal
epoxy.
Did you see it? Find it or test it?

Any info on the subject would be highly appriciated...
thanks
Flint


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! GeoCities - quick and easy web site hosting, just $8.95/month.
http://geocities.yahoo.com/ps/info1

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 16380 invoked from network); 23 Nov 2001 16:08:49 -0000
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 23 Nov 2001 16:08:49 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 10117 invoked by uid 50005); 23 Nov 2001 16:08:42 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4171. . Clean. Processed in 0.277722 secs); 23 Nov 2001 16:08:42 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 23 Nov 2001 16:08:41 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA13862; Fri, 23 Nov 2001 08:06:51 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 85457 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 23 Nov 2001 16:05:25          +0000
Received: from gj.net (mail.gj.net [216.169.77.40]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA13846 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri,          23 Nov 2001 08:05:24 -0800
Received: from gj.net [216.169.64.213] by gj.net with ESMTP (SMTPD32-6.06) id          A4E490E00EC; Fri, 23 Nov 2001 09:10:12 -0700
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (Win98; I)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <000701c173e6$c4451aa0$640a0a0a@greg>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3BFE807F.D7AF3396@gj.net>
Date:         Fri, 23 Nov 2001 08:59:43 -0800
Reply-To: "Carlo Godel" <regiaero@GJ.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Carlo Godel" <regiaero@GJ.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Non-digital test stand
Comments: To: greg@blastzone.com
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Have you considered a small camcorder it has a built in timing device
called frames per second and just recording the movement of the pen will
ensure accurate timing to within 1/32 of a second.
Another is a 12 volt AC bell they run at 60 cycles per second and are
reasonably accurate for the pulse.
Carlo

Greg Deputy wrote:
>
> Watch ebay.  A brand new in the box Futek 3000 lb load cell just went
> for $40.  I'm still kicking myself, missed the end of the auction by
> about an hour...
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@itc.uci.edu] On
> Behalf Of Des Bromilow
> Sent: Thursday, November 22, 2001 2:29 PM
> To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
> Subject: Re: [AR] Non-digital test stand
>
> When I get started into the actual construction and test firing of my
> motors (hybrids) I'll be either making a coffee can style force
> recorder, or I'll be rich enough to pick up a pressure transducer (load
> cell)
>
> I have nearly everything else I need, but $200+ for a load cell is going
> to take a little bit of time, especially with everything else I'm trying
> to do.
>
> If I do go the way of the coffe can, I'll have two recorders (pens), one
> attached (physically) to the motor mount, and another pen attached to a
> timed pulse (for reliable time marks)
>
> Des
>
> >>> <Sociald84@AOL.COM> 23/11/01 7:36:21 am >>>
> For my high school physics class I made a test stand that was basically
> two 12" square steel plates with holes drilled at the corners. I put a
> long bolt with a spring around it through the holes, and attatched a pen
> to the top plate. The whole thing was mounted to a wooden base with a DC
> motor spinning a coffee can. Wrap some paper around the coffee can and
> turn it on just prior to firing. I still have it but it needs work.
>
> Mark
>
> In a message dated 11/16/2001 7:38:01 AM Mountain Standard Time,
> terry.mccreary@MURRAYSTATE.EDU writes:
>
> > >Makes sense real easily. So, in the context of a "by-the-way", I have
>
> > >often wondered if *anyone on arocket* has ever designed a
> > >non-digital, (even mostly mechanical) chart-recorder with test stand
>
> > >suitable for such non-hi-tech, low-budget, back-yard tests? A great
> > >incentive for the newbie with no launch site available, huh?
> >
> > The old Teleflite book that describes how to make BP motors also
> > showed a "chart recorder" made from a cookie tin and BBQ motor.
> > Briefly, the rocket motor was placed in a spring-loaded holder.  A
> > piece of paper was wrapped around the cookie tin which was driven by
> > the BBQ motor, and a pen was attached to an arm that was connected to
> > the rocket motor.  On ignition, the rocket motor moved forward, the
> > pen drew a thrust curve.
> >
> > The response time of most of the old electronic chart recorders isn't
> > nearly fast enough for most rocket motors.  The el-cheapo 8-bit ADC
> > from Dataq plus a homemade load cell a la R. Nakka will outperform
> > most older technology at a comparable outlay.
> >
> > P'rfesser
> >
> > Dr. Terry McCreary
> > Associate Professor
> > Department of Chemistry
> > Murray State University
> > Murray, KY  42071
> > 270-762-6499

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 13290 invoked from network); 23 Nov 2001 16:47:47 -0000
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 23 Nov 2001 16:47:47 -0000
Received: (qmail 27103 invoked by uid 50005); 23 Nov 2001 16:47:39 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4171. . Clean. Processed in 0.514351 secs); 23 Nov 2001 16:47:39 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 23 Nov 2001 16:47:38 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA13991; Fri, 23 Nov 2001 08:45:47 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 85470 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 23 Nov 2001 16:44:22          +0000
Received: from web.camasnet.com (IDENT:root@[12.32.48.35]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA13944 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri,          23 Nov 2001 08:34:21 -0800
Received: from betbob (g1modem4.camasnet.com [12.110.66.18] (may be forged)) by          web.camasnet.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id IAA08591 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 23 Nov 2001 08:25:17 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0DF7_01C56B69.599062E0"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2919.6600
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <001201c1743c$8b882620$12426e0c@betbob>
Date:         Fri, 23 Nov 2001 08:33:02 -0800
Reply-To: "Beth & Bob Fogarty" <betbob@camasnet.com>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Beth & Bob Fogarty" <betbob@camasnet.com>
Subject:      [AR] Another Newby
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0DF7_01C56B69.599062E0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Hello all,

Another newby here. I'm Bob Fogarty, a firefighter by profession, and =
based in central Idaho, about 200 miles south of Spokane.

I've been lurking here for several weeks now, and find most of the =
discussion quite interesting.

Although I've been out of the field for some time, I've been tinkering =
with assorted solid motors since the late 50's with some success, and my =
current interest is in liquids.

Regarding load cells for test stands. I don't know if they're really =
suitable for short duration burns, but quite a few large trucks have =
load cell scales built in. A quick check with a local truck wrecking =
yard might turn up something usable, and fairly inexpensive.

Bob Fogarty=20

bob@permanent.com=20

http://www.permanent.com=20


------=_NextPart_000_0DF7_01C56B69.599062E0
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META content=3D"text/html; charset=3Diso-8859-1" =
http-equiv=3DContent-Type>
<META content=3D"MSHTML 5.00.2919.6307" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=3D"Times New Roman">
<P>Hello all,</P>
<P>Another newby here. I&#8217;m Bob Fogarty, a firefighter by =
profession, and based=20
in central Idaho, about 200 miles south of Spokane.</P>
<P>I&#8217;ve been lurking here for several weeks now, and find most of =
the discussion=20
quite interesting.</P>
<P>Although I&#8217;ve been out of the field for some time, I&#8217;ve =
been tinkering with=20
assorted solid motors since the late 50&#8217;s with some success, and =
my current=20
interest is in liquids.</P>
<P>Regarding load cells for test stands. I don&#8217;t know if =
they&#8217;re really suitable=20
for short duration burns, but quite a few large trucks have load cell =
scales=20
built in. A quick check with a local truck wrecking yard might turn up =
something=20
usable, and fairly inexpensive.</P>
<P>Bob Fogarty </P>
<P><A href=3D"mailto:bob@permanent.com">bob@permanent.com</A> </P>
<P><A href=3D"http://www.permanent.com">http://www.permanent.com</A>=20
</P></FONT></DIV></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0DF7_01C56B69.599062E0--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 17177 invoked from network); 23 Nov 2001 16:48:58 -0000
Received: from smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.105]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 23 Nov 2001 16:48:58 -0000
Received: (qmail 10437 invoked by uid 50005); 23 Nov 2001 16:48:51 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpy with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4171. . Clean. Processed in 0.222733 secs); 23 Nov 2001 16:48:51 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 23 Nov 2001 16:48:50 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA14013; Fri, 23 Nov 2001 08:47:14 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 85480 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 23 Nov 2001 16:45:52          +0000
Received: from mail.texnet.net (64-217-63-11.ded.swbell.net [64.217.63.11] (may          be forged)) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA13980 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Fri, 23 Nov 2001 08:45:27 -0800
Received: from 18barnett (64-217-56-93.ded.swbell.net [64.217.56.93] (may be          forged)) by mail.texnet.net (2.5 Build 2639 (Berkeley 8.8.6)/8.8.4)          with SMTP id KAA08060 for <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Fri, 23 Nov 2001          10:55:27 -0600
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook CWS, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <000201c1743d$01773060$5d38d940@escher.efgwaco.com>
Date:         Fri, 23 Nov 2001 10:36:28 -0600
Reply-To: "Charles Barnett" <cbarnett@TEXNET.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Charles Barnett" <cbarnett@TEXNET.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Non-digital test stand
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <3BFE807F.D7AF3396@gj.net>

If you are building cheap, you might consider the following.  The plans make
140 lbs thrust measurements possible for $15.00 if you have a video
recorder.
http://www.texnet.net/ccent/rockets/TestStand/TestStand.htm

Charles

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 25100 invoked from network); 23 Nov 2001 18:12:14 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpv.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.110]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 23 Nov 2001 18:12:14 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: (qmail 18388 invoked by uid 50005); 23 Nov 2001 18:07:42 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpv with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4171. . Clean. Processed in 0.104963 secs); 23 Nov 2001 18:07:42 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpv.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 23 Nov 2001 18:07:42 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA14468; Fri, 23 Nov 2001 10:10:23 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 85528 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 23 Nov 2001 18:10:07          +0000
Received: from wrench.toolcity.net (root@wrench.toolcity.net [208.0.188.2]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA14453 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 23 Nov 2001 10:10:06 -0800
Received: from [63.169.101.74]          (dap-63-169-101-74.meadville-tnt-1.pa.toolcity.net [63.169.101.74])          by wrench.toolcity.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id NAA28692 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 23 Nov 2001 13:10:02 -0500 (EST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <v01510102b8244e0a6618@[63.169.101.74]>
Date:         Fri, 23 Nov 2001 13:12:38 -0600
Reply-To: "al bradley" <abradley@TOOLCITY.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "al bradley" <abradley@TOOLCITY.NET>
Subject:      [AR] 1 Digital vs.Non-digital test stand
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

My inquiry here refers to the 5 snippets of postings/opinions on the end of
this  entry.
------
OK, these opinions are probably valid. So how does the experimenter only
familiar with analogue circuits find out how to build a digital group
capable of doing this? On what is the data stored? On what is it read out?
Have to connect the storage unit to my home computer -- how? What software
will I need? Anyone know of a tutorial geared to all this for the digital
dumbhead?

Might be better than a homemade mechanical chart recorder, but with the
questions I list here perhaps the expenses and headaches aren't so small
after all.

respectfully,
al bradley
------------------------------------------------------

>>>>>I have often
>>>>> wondered if *anyone on arocket* has ever designed a non-digital, (even
>>>>> mostly mechanical) chart-recorder with test stand  suitable for such
>>>>> non-hi-tech, low-budget, back-yard tests? A great incentive for the newbie
>>>>> with no launch site available, huh?
> ----------------
>>>On Fri, 16 Nov 2001, Terry McCreary wrote:
>>> > The response time of most of the old electronic chart recorders isn't
>>> > nearly fast enough for most rocket motors.  The el-cheapo 8-bit ADC from
>>> > Dataq plus a homemade load cell a la R. Nakka will outperform most older
>>> > technology at a comparable outlay.
>-----------------
>>>This probably deserves emphasizing.  Chart recorders are as obsolete as
>>>quill pens.  Nowadays it is *easier* and *cheaper* to build a computerized
>>>data-acquisition system than to build a decent chart recorder.
>------------
>>Absolutely correct.  My point was that one doesn't ordinarily want to
>>bother with a strip chart recorder, even if it can be obtained for
>>cheap/free, because the response time is a bit slow (maybe 3 Hz or
>>thereabouts) for the phenomena that we want to see.  Also, the resolution
>>of a typical recorder is 8 bits at best.
>>
>>There's an old saying:  "Cheaper, faster, better:  pick two."  Electronic
>>data acquisition really is the exception; it's all three.
>>
>>P'rfesser
>-------------

------------------------------------------------------------------
Can you live Life with this?: "Unless there is a law, an agreement, or a
long-standing custom, No one `Deserves' Anything -- Either Good or Bad!"

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 7805 invoked from network); 23 Nov 2001 18:36:06 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 23 Nov 2001 18:36:06 -0000
Received: (qmail 20024 invoked by uid 50005); 23 Nov 2001 18:35:59 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4171. . Clean. Processed in 0.157035 secs); 23 Nov 2001 18:35:59 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 23 Nov 2001 18:35:59 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA14542; Fri, 23 Nov 2001 10:34:14 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 85537 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 23 Nov 2001 18:34:12          +0000
Received: from spsystems.net (spsystems.net [209.47.149.227]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA14528 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Fri,          23 Nov 2001 10:34:11 -0800
Received: (from henry@localhost) by spsystems.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id NAA08244;          Fri, 23 Nov 2001 13:33:38 -0500 (EST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1011123132043.5234G-100000@spsystems.net>
Date:         Fri, 23 Nov 2001 13:33:38 -0500
Reply-To: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] 1 Digital vs.Non-digital test stand
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <v01510102b8244e0a6618@[63.169.101.74]>

On Fri, 23 Nov 2001, al bradley wrote:
> OK, these opinions are probably valid. So how does the experimenter only
> familiar with analogue circuits find out how to build a digital group
> capable of doing this? On what is the data stored? On what is it read out?
> Have to connect the storage unit to my home computer -- how? What software
> will I need? Anyone know of a tutorial geared to all this for the digital
> dumbhead?

Fortunately, there is no great need for you to get involved in digital
circuitry, unless your requirements are unusual.  The necessary hardware
and software can now be had quite cheaply as a package deal, assuming you
already have a computer available.  There are lots of old-style analog
engineers who suddenly find themselves needing to do a bit of data
acquisition, and plenty of data-acquisition companies which are anxious to
get a foot in the door by helping to solve that problem.

For example, B&B Electronics (www.bb-elec.com) sells a little box which
has a serial connector on one end and a bunch of analog inputs on the
other end.  Connect the first end to a serial port with a normal serial
cable, connect the other end to your analog electronics, supply power, and
you've got a multi-channel data-acquisition system.  It comes with a CDROM
of software, which I haven't explored because it's for the wrong operating
system (I don't run Windows).

The one modest gotcha in this is that it assumes that your test setup is
within easy reach of AC power.  If not, the computer has to be a laptop or
palmtop so it can run without a power cord, and you need battery power for
the data-acquisition box too.

You can get data-acquisition boxes which have built-in storage, and can be
programmed with things like sampling rates etc., and then connected to a
computer later to dump all the data.  But they are more expensive, and for
short tests out in the field, quite probably you would be better off with
a secondhand laptop.  (No, you do not need gigahertz processors and
multimedia video to do simple data acquisition, so something two or three
generations behind the current leading edge -- probably available quite
cheaply -- should do a fine job.)

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 11134 invoked from network); 23 Nov 2001 19:59:18 -0000
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 23 Nov 2001 19:59:18 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 24846 invoked by uid 50005); 23 Nov 2001 19:59:11 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4171. . Clean. Processed in 0.122306 secs); 23 Nov 2001 19:59:11 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 23 Nov 2001 19:59:10 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA14768; Fri, 23 Nov 2001 11:57:27 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 85557 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 23 Nov 2001 19:57:22          +0000
Received: from cicero0.cybercity.dk (cicero0.cybercity.dk [212.242.40.52]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA14753 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 23 Nov 2001 11:57:21 -0800
Received: from usr03.cybercity.dk (usr03.cybercity.dk [212.242.40.83]) by          cicero0.cybercity.dk (Postfix) with ESMTP id D9C4C102B1D for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 23 Nov 2001 20:57:19 +0100 (CET)
Received: from vip.cybercity.dk (port7.cvx1-noe.ppp.cybercity.dk          [217.157.69.200]) by usr03.cybercity.dk (8.11.6/8.11.0) with ESMTP id          fANJvIk79515 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 23 Nov 2001 20:57:19          +0100 (CET) (envelope-from hot@vip.cybercity.dk)
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.75 [en] (Win95; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20011123140528.57803.qmail@web21104.mail.yahoo.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Message-ID:  <3BFEAD5D.D1880CB9@vip.cybercity.dk>
Date:         Fri, 23 Nov 2001 21:11:09 +0100
Reply-To: "Hans Olaf Toft" <hot@VIP.CYBERCITY.DK>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Hans Olaf Toft" <hot@VIP.CYBERCITY.DK>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Epoxy based propellant
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Flint,

Various people on this list has tried making KNO3/epoxy propellants. It
seems that *most* epoxies can be used, but there may be some differences
in performance (c* and burn rate) between different brands or types. West
Systems is often reffered to as a possible manufacturer of suitable epoxy
types and it seems that they have a type that includes aluminium powder -
if this is the optimal epoxy for propellant I don't know however.

Concerning the ratios, I have found that

Epoxy 27%
Aluminium: 2%
Sulfur: 5%
KNO3: 66%

exhibits stable burn, good ignition characteristics and low residue. Burn
rates and chamber pressures below are from static test firings:
kn = 1000   -> Pc = 35bar    &    br = 1.8mm/s
kn = 1500   -> Pc = 60bar    &    br = 2.7mm/s
kn = 2000   -> Pc = 90bar    &    br = 3.2mm/s

Regards
Hans Olaf Toft

flint hapirat wrote:

> I've seen some mails regarding a metal epoxy
> propellant
> someone here is developping...
> I can't find it anymore as my server erased it but I'm
> interested in the results:
> What kind of epoxy glues did you use?
> What are the ratios (with nitrates/perchlorates etc.)
> of fuel/epoxy
> and all other related info.
>
> BTW
> I saw a long time ago an epoxy used for car fixing -
> it's very hard
> you require a machine to cut it or polish it... and it
> looks metallic I found it under the name steal
> epoxy.
> Did you see it? Find it or test it?
>
> Any info on the subject would be highly appriciated...
> thanks
> Flint
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Yahoo! GeoCities - quick and easy web site hosting, just $8.95/month.
> http://geocities.yahoo.com/ps/info1

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 1434 invoked from network); 23 Nov 2001 22:42:16 -0000
Received: from smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.105]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 23 Nov 2001 22:42:16 -0000
Received: (qmail 24238 invoked by uid 50005); 23 Nov 2001 22:42:08 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpy with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4171. . Clean. Processed in 0.179807 secs); 23 Nov 2001 22:42:08 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 23 Nov 2001 22:42:08 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA15492; Fri, 23 Nov 2001 14:36:41 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 85654 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 23 Nov 2001 22:36:30          +0000
Received: from c002.snv.cp.net (c002-h008.c002.snv.cp.net [209.228.32.172]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id OAA15478 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 23 Nov 2001 14:36:29 -0800
Received: (cpmta 5786 invoked from network); 23 Nov 2001 14:35:58 -0800
Received: from 63.39.121.137 (HELO default) by smtp.peoplepc.com          (209.228.32.172) with SMTP; 23 Nov 2001 14:35:58 -0800
X-Sent: 23 Nov 2001 22:35:58 GMT
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0DFA_01C56B69.599C49C0"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <000e01c17471$8044bf00$8979273f@default>
Date:         Fri, 23 Nov 2001 17:52:14 -0500
Reply-To: "David Muesing" <dmuesing@PEOPLEPC.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "David Muesing" <dmuesing@PEOPLEPC.COM>
Subject:      [AR] West System Epoxy & Aluminum
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0DFA_01C56B69.599C49C0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

I sell the WS epoxy. The AL powder is sold separately as a filler just =
as graphite, Cu, Fumed Silica, etc is.

FWIW, 20% WS epoxy + 80% AP burns very nicely with no visible smoke. =
I'll be trying AP with Mr. Fiberglass epoxy soon.

Dave Muesing
www.mrfiberglass.com

------=_NextPart_000_0DFA_01C56B69.599C49C0
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Diso-8859-1">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 6.00.2600.0" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=3DOCRA color=3D#0000ff>I sell the WS epoxy. The AL =
powder is sold=20
separately as a filler just as graphite, Cu, Fumed Silica, etc =
is.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DOCRA color=3D#0000ff></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DOCRA color=3D#0000ff>FWIW, 20% WS epoxy + 80% AP burns =
very nicely=20
with no visible smoke.&nbsp;I'll be trying AP with Mr. Fiberglass epoxy=20
soon.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DOCRA color=3D#0000ff></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DOCRA color=3D#0000ff>Dave Muesing<BR><A=20
href=3D"http://www.mrfiberglass.com">www.mrfiberglass.com</A></FONT></DIV=
></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0DFA_01C56B69.599C49C0--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 10992 invoked from network); 24 Nov 2001 02:11:46 -0000
Received: from smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.105]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 24 Nov 2001 02:11:46 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 26658 invoked by uid 50005); 24 Nov 2001 02:11:39 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpy with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4171. . Clean. Processed in 0.280916 secs); 24 Nov 2001 02:11:39 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 24 Nov 2001 02:11:38 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA16170; Fri, 23 Nov 2001 18:09:09 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 85687 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 24 Nov 2001 02:08:58          +0000
Received: from localhost (rcalkins@localhost) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with          ESMTP id SAA16156; Fri, 23 Nov 2001 18:08:56 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from QUOTED-PRINTABLE to 8bit by itc.uci.edu id SAA16157
Message-ID:  <Pine.LNX.4.10.10111231807360.16147-100000@itc.uci.edu>
Date:         Fri, 23 Nov 2001 18:08:56 -0800
Reply-To: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Epoxy based propellant
Comments: To: Hans Olaf Toft <hot@VIP.CYBERCITY.DK>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <3BFEAD5D.D1880CB9@vip.cybercity.dk>

Just a safety note here.  AP is not considered generally safe when used
with epoxy as it reacts with epoxy, producing a ammonia odor.

Ray

On Fri, 23 Nov 2001, Hans Olaf Toft wrote:

> Flint,
>
> Various people on this list has tried making KNO3/epoxy propellants. It
> seems that *most* epoxies can be used, but there may be some differences
> in performance (c* and burn rate) between different brands or types. West
> Systems is often reffered to as a possible manufacturer of suitable epoxy
> types and it seems that they have a type that includes aluminium powder -
> if this is the optimal epoxy for propellant I don't know however.
>
> Concerning the ratios, I have found that
>
> Epoxy 27%
> Aluminium: 2%
> Sulfur: 5%
> KNO3: 66%
>
> exhibits stable burn, good ignition characteristics and low residue. Burn
> rates and chamber pressures below are from static test firings:
> kn = 1000   -> Pc = 35bar    &    br = 1.8mm/s
> kn = 1500   -> Pc = 60bar    &    br = 2.7mm/s
> kn = 2000   -> Pc = 90bar    &    br = 3.2mm/s
>
> Regards
> Hans Olaf Toft
>
> flint hapirat wrote:
>
> > I've seen some mails regarding a metal epoxy
> > propellant
> > someone here is developping...
> > I can't find it anymore as my server erased it but I'm
> > interested in the results:
> > What kind of epoxy glues did you use?
> > What are the ratios (with nitrates/perchlorates etc.)
> > of fuel/epoxy
> > and all other related info.
> >
> > BTW
> > I saw a long time ago an epoxy used for car fixing -
> > it's very hard
> > you require a machine to cut it or polish it... and it
> > looks metallic I found it under the name steal
> > epoxy.
> > Did you see it? Find it or test it?
> >
> > Any info on the subject would be highly appriciated...
> > thanks
> > Flint
> >
> > __________________________________________________
> > Do You Yahoo!?
> > Yahoo! GeoCities - quick and easy web site hosting, just $8.95/month.
> > http://geocities.yahoo.com/ps/info1
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 14080 invoked from network); 24 Nov 2001 02:12:59 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 24 Nov 2001 02:12:59 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: (qmail 21713 invoked by uid 50005); 24 Nov 2001 02:12:51 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4171. . Clean. Processed in 0.999541 secs); 24 Nov 2001 02:12:51 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 24 Nov 2001 02:12:49 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA16204; Fri, 23 Nov 2001 18:11:23 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 85694 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 24 Nov 2001 02:11:21          +0000
Received: from localhost (rcalkins@localhost) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with          ESMTP id SAA16186 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Fri, 23 Nov 2001          18:11:21 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.LNX.4.10.10111231809190.16147-100000@itc.uci.edu>
Date:         Fri, 23 Nov 2001 18:11:21 -0800
Reply-To: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
Subject:      [AR] New Superpower Space Race Brewing?
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

As has been reported here before, China is making big moves into space.
Here's the newest mainstream report I've seen.

Taken from http://www.drudgereport.com

CHINA VOWS SPACE RACE
Thu Nov 22 2001 10:29:59 ET

BEIJING -- XINHUA -- China is speeding up its aerospace industry and plans
to launch more projects concerning rockets, satellites, spacecraft,
exploration of planets and outer space, according to a senior aerospace
official.

Luan Enjie, director of the State Aerospace Bureau, said Thursday at a
meeting that his bureau will push the development of space technology,
space utilization and space science in civil sectors, promoting the
country's economic and social development and national defense.

The meeting was held to mark the first anniversary of the release of the
White Paper on China's Aerospace Development.

China has achieved outstanding results in many space programs, including
launching satellites and rockets, and outer space exploration. Meanwhile,
space technology has produced tools which are transforming weather
forecasting, environmental protection, humanitarian assistance, education,
medicine, agriculture and a wide range of other activities.

At present, China's research on recoverable satellites, soft-landing
technology and micro-gravitation has entered a more mature testing stage.
China is now carrying out space breeding and life resources observation.

In the field of space physics, China has set up a small ground-level
laboratory to study physical changes in the universe under artificial
high-temperatures and densities by means of laser induced plasma.

The country plans to send an additional 30 satellites into outer space in
the next five years with the aim of accelerating the development of the
space industry, according to bureau sources.

The satellites, with improved quality and function, will be used in fields
such as telecommunications, weather forecasting, environmental protection
and navigation.

New carrier rockets, satellites and even manned space flights will be the
development priorities of China's space industry in the early years of the
21st century.

On top of the agenda will be a new-type carrier rocket which is not only
more powerful but also environmentally-friendly, said Min, a member of the
Chinese Academy of Sciences and the Chinese Academy of Engineering.

Efforts will also focus on the development of new types of remote-sensing,
communications and navigation satellites, in addition to manned space
flight.

To date, China has successfully developed and launched 48 satellites, with
a success rate of 90 percent.

China launched and recovered its second unmanned spacecraft, the Shenzhou
II, earlier this year following its maiden space flight in late 1999.
China is also preparing to carry out manned flights, Luan said.

As outer space exploration inspires people and leads to technologies that
can benefit all people, China will continue to support outer space
research and cooperation with other countries in this field, including a
planet-probe program with the European Space Agency and cooperation on two
earth resources satellites with Brazil, according to Luan.

Data from China's self-developed resources satellite and meteorological
satellite have become an indispensable part of the data bank of the
international satellite network shared by all countries.

China's exploration and utilization of space, the so-called "fourth
frontier" of mankind, has been encouraging and promising as the country is
improving its aerospace technology and the national strength.

Experts claim that the increasing population and the decreasing resources
on the earth have made it necessary to seek new living space and resources
in outer space.

China's space research will focus on the moon and outer space, Luan
disclosed at the China Industrial Hi-tech Forum last October.His bureau
has just launched a project cooperating with its European counterpart to
make breakthroughs in exploring the moon in the next decade or longer.

The plan was initially made public when the Chinese government released
the White Paper. According to the plan, China will launch moon probes from
Long March carrier rockets on the basis of applied technology development.

Since the launch of its first man-made satellite in 1971, China has
established itself near the top in the world in terms of aerospace
technology, with a full set of carrier rockets and applied satellites, and
a related research and development center and production base.

END

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 15779 invoked from network); 24 Nov 2001 05:13:43 -0000
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 24 Nov 2001 05:13:43 -0000
Received: (qmail 15492 invoked by uid 50005); 24 Nov 2001 05:13:35 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4171. . Clean. Processed in 0.249639 secs); 24 Nov 2001 05:13:35 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 24 Nov 2001 05:13:34 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA16876; Fri, 23 Nov 2001 21:12:06 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 85779 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 24 Nov 2001 05:12:04          +0000
Received: from mx1.relaypoint.net (ns2.generalbroadband.com [64.32.62.5]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA16861; Fri, 23 Nov 2001          21:12:03 -0800
Received: from [208.131.72.86] (HELO atlantis) by mx1.relaypoint.net          (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 3.4.8) with SMTP id 1479922; Fri, 23 Nov 2001          21:12:02 -0800
References:  <Pine.LNX.4.10.10111231809190.16147-100000@itc.uci.edu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <013001c174a6$3ea86120$4b4883d0@atlantis>
Date:         Fri, 23 Nov 2001 21:09:47 -0800
Reply-To: "Jim Bowery" <jabowery@WWC.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jim Bowery" <jabowery@WWC.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] New Superpower Space Race Brewing?
Comments: To: Ray Calkins <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

I was telling my boomer generation friends who were starting families back
in 1980 to teach their daughters Chinese for a very good reason.  If the
Chinese have leadership that is wise enough to know what to do with their
young men, as it appears they might, the West should thank their lucky stars
for such greatness in their adversaries and meet the Chinese with a response
that is an equally positive and uniquely Western.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Friday, November 23, 2001 6:11 PM
Subject: [AR] New Superpower Space Race Brewing?


> As has been reported here before, China is making big moves into space.
> Here's the newest mainstream report I've seen.
>
> Taken from http://www.drudgereport.com
>
> CHINA VOWS SPACE RACE

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 5787 invoked from network); 24 Nov 2001 18:21:02 -0000
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 24 Nov 2001 18:21:02 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 14253 invoked by uid 50005); 24 Nov 2001 18:20:52 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4171. . Clean. Processed in 0.274589 secs); 24 Nov 2001 18:20:52 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 24 Nov 2001 18:20:52 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA19412; Sat, 24 Nov 2001 10:05:45 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 85856 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 24 Nov 2001 18:05:43          +0000
Received: from femail11.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail11.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.0.95.107]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA18237          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 24 Nov 2001 06:19:42 -0800
Received: from home.com ([24.13.246.32]) by femail11.sdc1.sfba.home.com          (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20 201-229-121-120-20010223) with ESMTP id          <20011124141941.UDOW16125.femail11.sdc1.sfba.home.com@home.com>; Sat,          24 Nov 2001 06:19:41 -0800
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.77 [en] (Win98; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <200111230712.XAA12342@itc.uci.edu>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3BFFAC86.D2C3A12D@home.com>
Date:         Sat, 24 Nov 2001 09:19:50 -0500
Reply-To: "Alex Fraser" <beatnic@HOME.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Alex Fraser" <beatnic@HOME.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Non-digital test stand
Comments: To: James Yawn <jyawn@SFCC.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Absolutely beautiful! Science should be fun and this is definitely science fun.
Thanks for taking the time to document, the page was great.



James Yawn wrote:

> I have been playing with another alternative to the digital recorder.  It
> involves attaching an engine to a large weight, firing it upward, and
> recording the flight with a camcorder.
>
> Currently I am using an 8-foot 2x4 for my "stabilizer" and lifting it with
> engines that should be in the "F" to "G" range based on the amount of fuel
> in them.  Today's test burned 130 grams of KN/Sucrose, total weight 10.9
> pounds, apogee was at about 95 feet.
>
> This test is illustrated with too many pictures and bad jokes at:
> http://www.angelfire.com/apes/jyawn/2x4/index.htm
>
> So my question:  What formula might I use to determine the thrust of this
> engine?  (Please be gentle - I'm just a psych major.)
>
> Obviously one would not get a thrust curve, but it seems that by knowing the
> weight and altitude one could obtain an indication of total thrust.
>
> Jimmy Yawn
> jyawn@sfcc.net
>
> > > The old Teleflite book that describes how to make BP motors also
> > > showed a "chart recorder" made from a cookie tin and BBQ motor.
> > > Briefly, the rocket motor was placed in a spring-loaded holder.  A
> > > piece of paper was wrapped around the cookie tin which was driven by
> > > the BBQ motor, and a pen was attached to an arm that was connected to
> > > the rocket motor.  On ignition, the rocket motor moved forward, the
> > > pen drew a thrust curve.
> >
> > >
> > > Dr. Terry McCreary
> > > Associate Professor
> > > Department of Chemistry
> > > Murray State University
> > > Murray, KY  42071
> > > 270-762-6499

--
<<***********************************>>
~~~~~~~~ Alex Fraser  N3DER ~~~~~~~~~~~
--------- beatnic@home.com ------------
~~~~ http://members.home.com/beatnic ~~
>>***********************************<<

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 5753 invoked from network); 24 Nov 2001 18:21:01 -0000
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 24 Nov 2001 18:21:01 -0000
Received: (qmail 14233 invoked by uid 50005); 24 Nov 2001 18:20:52 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4171. . Clean. Processed in 0.15318 secs); 24 Nov 2001 18:20:52 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 24 Nov 2001 18:20:51 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA19447; Sat, 24 Nov 2001 10:05:50 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 85806 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 24 Nov 2001 18:05:48          +0000
Received: from charon (charon.whro.org [64.5.141.4]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA17142 for <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Fri,          23 Nov 2001 22:47:49 -0800
Received: from mail pickup service by charon with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Sat, 24          Nov 2001 01:47:47 -0500
Received: from venus.whro.org ([64.5.141.2]) by charon with Microsoft          SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.2966); Sat, 24 Nov 2001 01:47:45 -0500
Received: from skrall (22.di.whro.net [64.5.132.22]) by venus.whro.org with          SMTP (Microsoft Exchange Internet Mail Service Version 5.5.2653.13)          id W6QRTA2P; Sat, 24 Nov 2001 01:46:30 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook, Build 10.0.2627
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 24 Nov 2001 06:47:45.0859 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[EC7BD130:01C174B3]
Message-ID:  <001101c174b3$735d31e0$16840540@skrall>
Date:         Sat, 24 Nov 2001 01:44:16 -0500
Reply-To: <skrall@whro.org>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Stephen Krall" <skrall@whro.org>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Epoxy based propellant
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <Pine.LNX.4.10.10111231807360.16147-100000@itc.uci.edu>

Actually, AP produces an ammonia odor when it is mixed with just about
anything. If mixed in a well ventilated area it is not a problem.

Stephen Krall
TRA L3 # 06721
NAR L3 # 73262
www.colonialvirginiahpr.org
www.sevra.org
5...4...3...2...1...WOW!!!

-----Original Message-----
From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@itc.uci.edu] On
Behalf Of Ray Calkins
Sent: Friday, November 23, 2001 9:09 PM
To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
Subject: Re: [AR] Epoxy based propellant

Just a safety note here.  AP is not considered generally safe when used
with epoxy as it reacts with epoxy, producing a ammonia odor.

Ray

On Fri, 23 Nov 2001, Hans Olaf Toft wrote:

> Flint,
>
> Various people on this list has tried making KNO3/epoxy propellants.
It
> seems that *most* epoxies can be used, but there may be some
differences
> in performance (c* and burn rate) between different brands or types.
West
> Systems is often reffered to as a possible manufacturer of suitable
epoxy
> types and it seems that they have a type that includes aluminium
powder -
> if this is the optimal epoxy for propellant I don't know however.
>
> Concerning the ratios, I have found that
>
> Epoxy 27%
> Aluminium: 2%
> Sulfur: 5%
> KNO3: 66%
>
> exhibits stable burn, good ignition characteristics and low residue.
Burn
> rates and chamber pressures below are from static test firings:
> kn = 1000   -> Pc = 35bar    &    br = 1.8mm/s
> kn = 1500   -> Pc = 60bar    &    br = 2.7mm/s
> kn = 2000   -> Pc = 90bar    &    br = 3.2mm/s
>
> Regards
> Hans Olaf Toft
>
> flint hapirat wrote:
>
> > I've seen some mails regarding a metal epoxy
> > propellant
> > someone here is developping...
> > I can't find it anymore as my server erased it but I'm
> > interested in the results:
> > What kind of epoxy glues did you use?
> > What are the ratios (with nitrates/perchlorates etc.)
> > of fuel/epoxy
> > and all other related info.
> >
> > BTW
> > I saw a long time ago an epoxy used for car fixing -
> > it's very hard
> > you require a machine to cut it or polish it... and it
> > looks metallic. I found it under the name "steal
> > epoxy".
> > Did you see it? Find it or test it?
> >
> > Any info on the subject would be highly appriciated...
> > thanks
> > Flint
> >
> > __________________________________________________
> > Do You Yahoo!?
> > Yahoo! GeoCities - quick and easy web site hosting, just
$8.95/month.
> > http://geocities.yahoo.com/ps/info1
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 10655 invoked from network); 24 Nov 2001 18:22:05 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.105]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 24 Nov 2001 18:22:05 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: (qmail 31410 invoked by uid 50005); 24 Nov 2001 18:20:52 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpy with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4171. . Clean. Processed in 0.206857 secs); 24 Nov 2001 18:20:52 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 24 Nov 2001 18:20:51 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA19392; Sat, 24 Nov 2001 10:04:56 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 85816 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 24 Nov 2001 18:04:16          +0000
Received: from wrench.toolcity.net (root@wrench.toolcity.net [208.0.188.2]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA17298 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 23 Nov 2001 23:50:28 -0800
Received: from [208.22.189.137]          (dap-208-22-189-137.meadville-tnt-0.pa.toolcity.net [208.22.189.137])          by wrench.toolcity.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id CAA28886 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 24 Nov 2001 02:50:24 -0500 (EST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <v01510101b8250f28b469@[208.22.189.137]>
Date:         Sat, 24 Nov 2001 02:53:00 -0600
Reply-To: "al bradley" <abradley@TOOLCITY.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "al bradley" <abradley@TOOLCITY.NET>
Subject:      [AR] electronics part -- almost off-topic
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Do any of our electronics buffs on the list have a catalog and address in
the US where I can find an adjustable voltage regulator (or its direct
replacement only) listed as a 350T? Just need one, volume dealers not
suitable. <grin>

thanks for any help! answer me off-list.
al bradley

------------------------------------------------------------------
Can you live Life with this?: "Unless there is a law, an agreement, or a
long-standing custom, No one `Deserves' Anything -- Either Good or Bad!"

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 10760 invoked from network); 24 Nov 2001 18:22:06 -0000
Received: from smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.105]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 24 Nov 2001 18:22:06 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 31433 invoked by uid 50005); 24 Nov 2001 18:20:52 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpy with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4171. . Clean. Processed in 0.26323 secs); 24 Nov 2001 18:20:52 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 24 Nov 2001 18:20:52 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA19429; Sat, 24 Nov 2001 10:05:47 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 85866 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 24 Nov 2001 18:05:45          +0000
Received: from cicero1.cybercity.dk (cicero1.cybercity.dk [212.242.40.4]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA18737 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Sat, 24 Nov 2001 07:20:28 -0800
Received: from usr05.cybercity.dk (usr05.cybercity.dk [212.242.40.85]) by          cicero1.cybercity.dk (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0C271160329 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Sat, 24 Nov 2001 16:20:26 +0100 (CET)
Received: from vip.cybercity.dk (port8.cvx1-noe.ppp.cybercity.dk          [217.157.69.201]) by usr05.cybercity.dk (8.11.6/8.11.0) with ESMTP id          fAOFKP558132 for <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Sat, 24 Nov 2001 16:20:25          +0100 (CET) (envelope-from hot@vip.cybercity.dk)
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.75 [en] (Win95; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <Pine.LNX.4.10.10111231807360.16147-100000@itc.uci.edu>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Message-ID:  <3BFFBDFA.A066167C@vip.cybercity.dk>
Date:         Sat, 24 Nov 2001 16:34:18 +0100
Reply-To: "Hans Olaf Toft" <hot@VIP.CYBERCITY.DK>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Hans Olaf Toft" <hot@VIP.CYBERCITY.DK>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Epoxy based propellant
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

I am not into the chemestry, but it has been mentioned - on this list I  think
- that the ammonia generated when AP is mixed with epoxy in reality origins
from the curing agent, not from the AP.

It has been mentioned that AP epoxy propellants yields spectacular cato's,
suspecting that organic perclorates may be the reason for this, but one much
more likely reason for such a cato is that epoxy generally has higher density
than HTPB. The required minimum of binder to do a safe grain will thereby be
larger - I have tried this myself and the result was *spectacular* (the last
reading on the pressure transducer was some 300bar (>4000psi) and it occured
within a split second from ignition).

Hans Olaf Toft

Ray Calkins wrote:

> Just a safety note here.  AP is not considered generally safe when used
> with epoxy as it reacts with epoxy, producing a ammonia odor.
>
> Ray
>
> On Fri, 23 Nov 2001, Hans Olaf Toft wrote:
>
> > Flint,
> >
> > Various people on this list has tried making KNO3/epoxy propellants. It
> > seems that *most* epoxies can be used, but there may be some differences
> > in performance (c* and burn rate) between different brands or types. West
> > Systems is often reffered to as a possible manufacturer of suitable epoxy
> > types and it seems that they have a type that includes aluminium powder -
> > if this is the optimal epoxy for propellant I don't know however.
> >
> > Concerning the ratios, I have found that
> >
> > Epoxy 27%
> > Aluminium: 2%
> > Sulfur: 5%
> > KNO3: 66%
> >
> > exhibits stable burn, good ignition characteristics and low residue. Burn
> > rates and chamber pressures below are from static test firings:
> > kn = 1000   -> Pc = 35bar    &    br = 1.8mm/s
> > kn = 1500   -> Pc = 60bar    &    br = 2.7mm/s
> > kn = 2000   -> Pc = 90bar    &    br = 3.2mm/s
> >
> > Regards
> > Hans Olaf Toft
> >
> > flint hapirat wrote:
> >
> > > I've seen some mails regarding a metal epoxy
> > > propellant
> > > someone here is developping...
> > > I can't find it anymore as my server erased it but I'm
> > > interested in the results:
> > > What kind of epoxy glues did you use?
> > > What are the ratios (with nitrates/perchlorates etc.)
> > > of fuel/epoxy
> > > and all other related info.
> > >
> > > BTW
> > > I saw a long time ago an epoxy used for car fixing -
> > > it's very hard
> > > you require a machine to cut it or polish it... and it
> > > looks metallic I found it under the name steal
> > > epoxy.
> > > Did you see it? Find it or test it?
> > >
> > > Any info on the subject would be highly appriciated...
> > > thanks
> > > Flint
> > >
> > > __________________________________________________
> > > Do You Yahoo!?
> > > Yahoo! GeoCities - quick and easy web site hosting, just $8.95/month.
> > > http://geocities.yahoo.com/ps/info1
> >

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 1945 invoked from network); 24 Nov 2001 18:49:56 -0000
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 24 Nov 2001 18:49:56 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 408 invoked by uid 50005); 24 Nov 2001 18:49:49 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4171. . Clean. Processed in 0.148861 secs); 24 Nov 2001 18:49:49 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 24 Nov 2001 18:49:49 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA19637; Sat, 24 Nov 2001 10:39:18 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 85924 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 24 Nov 2001 18:39:13          +0000
Received: from priv-edtnes11-hme0.telusplanet.net (fepout3.telus.net          [199.185.220.238]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id          KAA19623 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 24 Nov 2001 10:39:12 -0800
Received: from telus.net ([66.183.45.79]) by priv-edtnes11-hme0.telusplanet.net          (InterMail vM.4.01.03.16 201-229-121-116-20010115) with ESMTP id          <20011124183841.IARR12770.priv-edtnes11-hme0.telusplanet.net@telus.net> for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 24          Nov 2001 11:38:41 -0700
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (Win95; I)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <Pine.LNX.4.10.10111231807360.16147-100000@itc.uci.edu>            <3BFFBDFA.A066167C@vip.cybercity.dk>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3BFFE99F.C2E0849@telus.net>
Date:         Sat, 24 Nov 2001 10:40:32 -0800
Reply-To: "David Wakarchuk" <dwakarchuk@TELUS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "David Wakarchuk" <dwakarchuk@TELUS.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Epoxy based propellant
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Hans Olaf Toft wrote:

> I am not into the chemestry, but it has been mentioned - on this list I  think
> - that the ammonia generated when AP is mixed with epoxy in reality origins
> from the curing agent, not from the AP.



Hans Olaf Toft wrote:

> I am not into the chemestry, but it has been mentioned - on this list I  think
> - that the ammonia generated when AP is mixed with epoxy in reality origins
> from the curing agent, not from the AP.
>

Stephen Krall wrote:

Actually, AP produces an ammonia odor when it is mixed with just about
anything. If mixed in a well ventilated area it is not a problem.

Hi Guys,

What is happening here is likely an exchange reaction where the amino groups of
the curative are reacting the amino groups of the AP.  A similiar reaction occurs
when you use tepanol as a binder in composite AP based propellant.  I can't
comment about the safety of such issues but it should be something that is taken
into consideration when working with these substances. I don't imagine ammonia
based bubbles in your propellant will help the burn characteristics much.  Those
who don't notice chemical reactions occuring in their propellant mixtures are more
likely to have other rude surprizes awaiting!

David Wakarchuk

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 6624 invoked from network); 24 Nov 2001 18:51:48 -0000
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 24 Nov 2001 18:51:48 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 3388 invoked by uid 50005); 24 Nov 2001 18:51:40 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4171. . Clean. Processed in 0.151211 secs); 24 Nov 2001 18:51:40 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 24 Nov 2001 18:51:40 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA19667; Sat, 24 Nov 2001 10:41:05 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 85931 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 24 Nov 2001 18:41:00          +0000
Received: from barry.mail.mindspring.net (barry.mail.mindspring.net          [207.69.200.25]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA19653          for <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Sat, 24 Nov 2001 10:40:59 -0800
Received: from sdn-ar-012casfrmp136.dialsprint.net ([158.252.216.138]          helo=mindspring.com) by barry.mail.mindspring.net with esmtp (Exim          3.33 #1) id 167hjU-0007Sm-00; Sat, 24 Nov 2001 13:40:57 -0500
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 (Macintosh; U; PPC)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <v01510101b8250f28b469@[208.22.189.137]>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3BFFEBC7.62E1EDA0@mindspring.com>
Date:         Sat, 24 Nov 2001 11:49:45 -0700
Reply-To: "Alan Shinn" <alshinn@MINDSPRING.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Alan Shinn" <alshinn@MINDSPRING.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] electronics part -- almost off-topic
Comments: To: al bradley <abradley@TOOLCITY.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

LM350T  National Semi TO-220 pack - DigiKey $4.70  www.digikey.com   1-800-344-4539

al bradley wrote:
>
> Do any of our electronics buffs on the list have a catalog and address in
> the US where I can find an adjustable voltage regulator (or its direct
> replacement only) listed as a 350T? Just need one, volume dealers not
> suitable. <grin>
>
> thanks for any help! answer me off-list.
> al bradley
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------
> Can you live Life with this?: "Unless there is a law, an agreement, or a
> long-standing custom, No one `Deserves' Anything -- Either Good or Bad!"

--
Looking forward:
Alan Shinn


Experience the
beginnings of microscopy.
Make your own replica
of one of Antony van Leeuwenhoek's microscopes.
visit    http://www.mindspring.com/~alshinn/

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 1846 invoked from network); 24 Nov 2001 19:37:07 -0000
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 24 Nov 2001 19:37:07 -0000
Received: (qmail 22420 invoked by uid 50005); 24 Nov 2001 19:36:59 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4171. . Clean. Processed in 0.306016 secs); 24 Nov 2001 19:36:59 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 24 Nov 2001 19:36:59 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA19865; Sat, 24 Nov 2001 11:25:41 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 85964 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 24 Nov 2001 19:25:36          +0000
Received: from cesaroni.net ([204.101.26.130]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7)          with ESMTP id LAA19851 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 24 Nov 2001          11:25:35 -0800
Received: from Anthony by cesaroni.net with SMTP (MDaemon.v2.8.7.0.R) for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 24 Nov 2001 14:24:30 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 8.5, Build 4.71.2173.0
Importance: Normal
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
X-MDaemon-Deliver-To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
X-Return-Path: ACesaroni@cesaroni.net
Message-ID:  <001f01c1751a$3fca3320$1b0101c0@Anthony>
Date:         Sat, 24 Nov 2001 14:00:14 -0500
Reply-To: "Anthony Cesaroni" <ACesaroni@cesaroni.net>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Anthony Cesaroni" <ACesaroni@cesaroni.net>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Epoxy based propellant
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <3BFFE99F.C2E0849@telus.net>

There are a number of issues to be aware of in this regard. Epoxy is used
with Urethane and Azido binders extensively as a modifier, coupling agent
etc. I'm at a loss for why you would want to use it by it self however. One
of the issues that can bite you with ammonia liberation is micro-porosity
formed in the finished propellant. This can become quite evident with
non-vacuum processed propellants (I'm not of fan of those either). Certain
types of epoxy modifiers that are used with GAP and HTPB are formulated
specifically to deal with this very issue. HX-878 or tepinol is not one of
them BTW. These epoxies also cost more than $100 per pound but then again, a
little goes a long way. I can imagine that a propellant based on straight
"boat" epoxy binder would produce quite a microscopic Aero Bar for lack of a
better term. This can generate some very difficult to manage ballistic
properties ranging from poor repeatability and sensitivity issues to
relative mass flow going to infinity. As far a the specific gravity theory
is concerned, I've worked with fluorine based polyols with specific
gravities as high as 1.8~2 so I don't see the connection there unless the
process is aggressive enough to cause micro-fracturing of the AP. Someone
actually patented that trick. This is another documented condition can cause
rapid unscheduled disassembly of the experiment.

In short, any reaction that liberates gas, especially in a non-vacuum
processing scheme can be a problem and should be avoided.

Anthony.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@itc.uci.edu]On
> Behalf Of David Wakarchuk
> Sent: Saturday, November 24, 2001 1:41 PM
> To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
> Subject: Re: Epoxy based propellant
>
>
> Hans Olaf Toft wrote:
>
> > I am not into the chemestry, but it has been mentioned - on
> this list I  think
> > - that the ammonia generated when AP is mixed with epoxy in
> reality origins
> > from the curing agent, not from the AP.
>
>
>
> Hans Olaf Toft wrote:
>
> > I am not into the chemestry, but it has been mentioned - on
> this list I  think
> > - that the ammonia generated when AP is mixed with epoxy in
> reality origins
> > from the curing agent, not from the AP.
> >
>
> Stephen Krall wrote:
>
> Actually, AP produces an ammonia odor when it is mixed with just about
> anything. If mixed in a well ventilated area it is not a problem.
>
> Hi Guys,
>
> What is happening here is likely an exchange reaction where the
> amino groups of
> the curative are reacting the amino groups of the AP.  A similiar
> reaction occurs
> when you use tepanol as a binder in composite AP based
> propellant.  I can't
> comment about the safety of such issues but it should be
> something that is taken
> into consideration when working with these substances. I don't
> imagine ammonia
> based bubbles in your propellant will help the burn
> characteristics much.  Those
> who don't notice chemical reactions occuring in their propellant
> mixtures are more
> likely to have other rude surprizes awaiting!
>
> David Wakarchuk
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 8974 invoked from network); 23 Oct 2001 18:55:37 -0000
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 23 Oct 2001 18:55:37 -0000
Received: (qmail 22835 invoked by uid 50005); 23 Oct 2001 17:42:10 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4165. . Clean. Processed in 0.705414 secs); 23 Oct 2001 17:42:10 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 23 Oct 2001 17:42:09 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA12711; Tue, 23 Oct 2001 10:52:54 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 121473 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 23 Oct 2001 17:52:52          +0000
Received: from albatross.wgn.net ([208.179.155.113]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA12390 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue,          23 Oct 2001 09:50:06 -0700
Received: from cronos (eli-208-187-16-243.wgn.net [208.187.16.243]) by          albatross.wgn.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id JAA26532 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 23 Oct 2001 09:51:30 -0700
References: <20011023.084515.-3975269.0.kc2csh@juno.com>             <3BD58346.4C0604FA@NORTELNETWORKS.COM>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <025601c15be2$cfef7d80$c36122c0@cronos>
Date:         Tue, 23 Oct 2001 09:50:22 -0700
Reply-To: "Wedge Oldham" <wedge@WESTWORLD.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Wedge Oldham" <wedge@WESTWORLD.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] T6 and high temperatures
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Ok, don't anybody flame me for my ignorance....but what about Titanium?
Wedge Oldham
http://NikeProject.com
Only those who risk going too far,
will ever know how far they can go.


----- Original Message -----
From: "Leech, Marcus (EXCHANGE:FITZ:8M86)" <mleech@NORTELNETWORKS.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: 23 October, 2001 7:48 AM
Subject: Re: [AR] T6 and high temperatures


> kc2csh@JUNO.COM wrote:
> >
> >   Is there any better material available today than T6?
> >
> 7000 series alloys are stronger, but:
>
>   a) MUCH more expensive
>   b) hard to find
>   c) harder to machine than 6061-T6
>
> 7075-T6 has a tensile yield of around 500MPa, while 6061-T6 is around
275MPa.
>
> Yarde Metals lists various forms of 7075-T6, but I don't know whether they
>   actually have stock (www.yardemetals.com).
>
> --
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> Marcus Leech                             Mail:   Dept 8M70, MS 012, FITZ
> Advisor                                  Phone: (ESN) 393-9145  +1 613 763
9145
> Security Architecture and Planning       Fax:   (ESN) 393-9435  +1 613 763
9435
> Nortel Networks                          mleech@nortelnetworks.com
> -----------------Expressed opinions are my own, not my employer's------

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 12360 invoked from network); 23 Oct 2001 19:03:56 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 23 Oct 2001 19:03:56 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: (qmail 2908 invoked by uid 50005); 23 Oct 2001 19:03:36 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4166. . Clean. Processed in 0.819221 secs); 23 Oct 2001 19:03:36 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 23 Oct 2001 19:03:34 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA12728; Tue, 23 Oct 2001 10:52:56 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 121475 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 23 Oct 2001 17:52:55          +0000
Received: from localhost (dmccue@localhost) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with          ESMTP id KAA12540 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 23 Oct 2001          10:42:21 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.LNX.4.10.10110231007510.11886-100000@itc.uci.edu>
Date:         Tue, 23 Oct 2001 10:42:21 -0700
Reply-To: "David J. McCue" <dmccue@itc.uci.edu>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "David J. McCue" <dmccue@itc.uci.edu>
Subject:      Re: [AR] T6 and high temperatures
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <3BD58346.4C0604FA@NORTELNETWORKS.COM>

I ask that everyone please remember that the reason 6061T6 was chosen for
rocket motor cases is not ultimate strength, but its graceful mode of
failure. 6061 cases will "tear open" rather than shatter when they fail.

-Dave Mc

On Tue, 23 Oct 2001, Leech, Marcus (EXCHANGE:FITZ:8M86) wrote:

> kc2csh@JUNO.COM wrote:
> >
> >   Is there any better material available today than T6?
> >
> 7000 series alloys are stronger, but:
>
>   a) MUCH more expensive
>   b) hard to find
>   c) harder to machine than 6061-T6
>
> 7075-T6 has a tensile yield of around 500MPa, while 6061-T6 is around 275MPa.
>
> Yarde Metals lists various forms of 7075-T6, but I don't know whether they
>   actually have stock (www.yardemetals.com).
>
> --
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> Marcus Leech                             Mail:   Dept 8M70, MS 012, FITZ
> Advisor                                  Phone: (ESN) 393-9145  +1 613 763 9145
> Security Architecture and Planning       Fax:   (ESN) 393-9435  +1 613 763 9435
> Nortel Networks                          mleech@nortelnetworks.com
> -----------------Expressed opinions are my own, not my employer's------
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 29587 invoked from network); 23 Oct 2001 19:08:12 -0000
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 23 Oct 2001 19:08:12 -0000
Received: (qmail 23955 invoked by uid 50005); 23 Oct 2001 17:55:17 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4166. . Clean. Processed in 0.337421 secs); 23 Oct 2001 17:55:17 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 23 Oct 2001 17:55:16 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA13202; Tue, 23 Oct 2001 11:59:39 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 121563 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 23 Oct 2001 18:59:24          +0000
Received: from syntheon.inicom.com          (IDENT:root@66.mueb.miam.philapaaz.dsl.att.net [63.242.216.66]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA13187 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 23 Oct 2001 11:59:23 -0700
Received: from koreynew (adsl-81-1-135.mia.bellsouth.net [65.81.1.135]) by          syntheon.inicom.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id RAA19508 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 23 Oct 2001 17:10:08 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 8.5, Build 4.71.2173.0
Importance: Normal
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <000801c15bf4$ba495340$6601a8c0@koreynew>
Date:         Tue, 23 Oct 2001 14:58:39 -0400
Reply-To: "Korey Kline" <k2@HYBRIDS.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Korey Kline" <k2@HYBRIDS.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] commercial HPR altitude record?
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <035501c15be1$4f3ab020$87ae1cac@redmond.corp.microsoft.com>

That rocket flight was also listed in the Millennium edition of Guinness
book of world records.  It was the third flight of a four flight series and
was not recovered (deployment failure). The forth flight was flown to 110280
ft. with FULL recovery!

K2

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU]On
> Behalf Of Greg Deputy
> Sent: Tuesday, October 23, 2001 12:40 PM
> To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
> Subject: Re: [AR] commercial HPR altitude record?
>
>
> Was the rocket successfully recovered from that altitude?
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Korey Kline" <k2@HYBRIDS.COM>
> To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
> Sent: Tuesday, October 23, 2001 8:07 AM
> Subject: Re: [AR] commercial HPR altitude record?
>
>
> > Just for the record,
> > That's Kline 119780 Ft......not a certified HPR motor, but commercially
> > available.
> > K2
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU]On
> > > Behalf Of Jerry Irvine
> > > Sent: Monday, October 22, 2001 9:09 PM
> > > To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
> > > Subject: Re: [AR] commercial HPR altitude record?
> > >
> > >
> > > >Does anyone here know the absolute altitude record for HPR rockets on
> > > >commercial motors?
> > >
> > >
> > > Kline 92k feet?
> > >
> > > But if you mean motors that are commercial
> > > 25k USR L1000 1990 ish
> > > and others since higher, but commercial?
> > >
> > >
> > > >
> > > >         -p
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >Mars or Bust!
> > > >www.marssociety.com
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
> > > Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
> > > Opinion, the whole thing.
> > >
> >
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 13498 invoked from network); 23 Oct 2001 19:11:33 -0000
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 23 Oct 2001 19:11:33 -0000
X-Priority: 3
Received: (qmail 12056 invoked by uid 50005); 23 Oct 2001 17:58:05 -0000
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4165. . Clean. Processed in 0.22302 secs); 23 Oct 2001 17:58:05 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 23 Oct 2001 17:58:05 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA13297; Tue, 23 Oct 2001 12:06:21 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 121570 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 23 Oct 2001 19:06:19          +0000
Received: from nt2000s2.dgmicro.com (cn815472-c.newcas1.de.home.com          [24.40.74.93]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA13283          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 23 Oct 2001 12:06:19 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
content-class: urn:content-classes:message
X-MS-Has-Attach: 
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: 
Thread-Topic:      Re: [AR] commercial HPR altitude record?
Thread-Index: AcFb9Xe/HsO3xwwRTbKr6QrEqoEDUQAADLHg
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by itc.uci.edu id MAA13284
Message-ID:  <C0F7BF4DCEC1D2479A01031347184DCD02FE30@nt2000s2.dgmicro.com>
Date:         Tue, 23 Oct 2001 15:05:48 -0400
Reply-To: "Darren Wright" <dwright@D2-TECH.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Darren Wright" <dwright@D2-TECH.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] commercial HPR altitude record?
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Yes it sure was!  I have it sitting on my shelf...

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Korey Kline [mailto:k2@HYBRIDS.COM]
> Sent: Tuesday, October 23, 2001 2:59 PM
> To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
> Subject: Re: [AR] commercial HPR altitude record?
>
>
> That rocket flight was also listed in the Millennium edition
> of Guinness book of world records.  It was the third flight
> of a four flight series and was not recovered (deployment
> failure). The forth flight was flown to 110280 ft. with FULL recovery!
>
> K2

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 15503 invoked from network); 23 Oct 2001 19:12:05 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 23 Oct 2001 19:12:05 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 12176 invoked by uid 50005); 23 Oct 2001 19:11:11 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4164. . Clean. Processed in 0.193465 secs); 23 Oct 2001 19:11:11 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 23 Oct 2001 19:11:10 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA13062; Tue, 23 Oct 2001 11:28:35 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 121549 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 23 Oct 2001 18:28:29          +0000
Received: from femail37.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail37.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.254.60.31]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA13048          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 23 Oct 2001 11:28:29 -0700
Received: from c1649002-a.earthlink.net ([24.20.95.67]) by          femail37.sdc1.sfba.home.com (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20          201-229-121-120-20010223) with ESMTP id          <20011023182823.KJBU14145.femail37.sdc1.sfba.home.com@c1649002-a.earthlink.net>; Tue, 23 Oct 2001 11:28:23          -0700
X-Sender: forkbomb@mail.earthlink.net
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.0.2
References: <20011023.084515.-3975269.0.kc2csh@juno.com>            <3BD58346.4C0604FA@NORTELNETWORKS.COM>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <5.0.2.1.0.20011023112723.024345e0@mail.earthlink.net>
Date:         Tue, 23 Oct 2001 11:28:23 -0700
Reply-To: "Pierce Nichols" <forkbomb@EARTHLINK.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Pierce Nichols" <forkbomb@EARTHLINK.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] T6 and high temperatures
Comments: To: Wedge Oldham <wedge@WESTWORLD.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <025601c15be2$cfef7d80$c36122c0@cronos>

At 09:50 AM 10/23/2001 -0700, Wedge Oldham wrote:
>Ok, don't anybody flame me for my ignorance....but what about Titanium?


         If you've got the money and the tool, go for it... just be aware
that it's about 20 to 30 times more expensive for not all that much
benefit. And that's not including the value of the time and tools needed to
machine the stuff.

         -p


>Wedge Oldham
>http://NikeProject.com
>Only those who risk going too far,
>will ever know how far they can go.
>
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Leech, Marcus (EXCHANGE:FITZ:8M86)" <mleech@NORTELNETWORKS.COM>
>To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
>Sent: 23 October, 2001 7:48 AM
>Subject: Re: [AR] T6 and high temperatures
>
>
> > kc2csh@JUNO.COM wrote:
> > >
> > >   Is there any better material available today than T6?
> > >
> > 7000 series alloys are stronger, but:
> >
> >   a) MUCH more expensive
> >   b) hard to find
> >   c) harder to machine than 6061-T6
> >
> > 7075-T6 has a tensile yield of around 500MPa, while 6061-T6 is around
>275MPa.
> >
> > Yarde Metals lists various forms of 7075-T6, but I don't know whether they
> >   actually have stock (www.yardemetals.com).
> >
> > --
> > ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> > Marcus Leech                             Mail:   Dept 8M70, MS 012, FITZ
> > Advisor                                  Phone: (ESN) 393-9145  +1 613 763
>9145
> > Security Architecture and Planning       Fax:   (ESN) 393-9435  +1 613 763
>9435
> > Nortel Networks                          mleech@nortelnetworks.com
> > -----------------Expressed opinions are my own, not my employer's------

Mars or Bust!
www.marssociety.com

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 21652 invoked from network); 23 Oct 2001 19:57:59 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 23 Oct 2001 19:57:59 -0000
Received: (qmail 17874 invoked by uid 50005); 23 Oct 2001 19:54:00 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4166. . Clean. Processed in 0.384474 secs); 23 Oct 2001 19:54:00 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 23 Oct 2001 19:53:59 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA13506; Tue, 23 Oct 2001 12:48:53 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 121601 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 23 Oct 2001 19:48:46          +0000
Received: from smtp005pub.verizon.net (smtp005pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.184])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA13492 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 23 Oct 2001 12:48:46 -0700
Received: from [65.229.52.47] (2Cust9.tnt1.rancho-cucamonga.ca.da.uu.net          [63.24.224.73]) by smtp005pub.verizon.net  with ESMTP for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; id f9NJmBW05719 Tue, 23 Oct 2001 14:48:12          -0500 (CDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: GTE/01rocket@mail.gte.net
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <a05100344b7fb79cf57ef@[65.229.52.47]>
Date:         Tue, 23 Oct 2001 12:47:53 -0700
Reply-To: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Subject:      [AR] [OT warning]
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Jerry If you think Arocket list would like this please share it with them as I
am at work and do not have access the listserver

http://www.bodfishbob.com/taliban.htm

Jay Smith
airdale@icehouse.net
--
Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
Opinion, the whole thing.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 9799 invoked from network); 23 Oct 2001 20:31:27 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 23 Oct 2001 20:31:27 -0000
Received: (qmail 29261 invoked by uid 50005); 23 Oct 2001 20:30:33 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4164. . Clean. Processed in 0.280321 secs); 23 Oct 2001 20:30:33 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 23 Oct 2001 20:30:33 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA13557; Tue, 23 Oct 2001 13:00:30 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 121608 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 23 Oct 2001 20:00:14          +0000
Received: from localhost (rcalkins@localhost) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with          ESMTP id NAA13543; Tue, 23 Oct 2001 13:00:12 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.LNX.4.10.10110231259420.11185-100000@itc.uci.edu>
Date:         Tue, 23 Oct 2001 13:00:12 -0700
Reply-To: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
Subject:      Re: [AR] commercial HPR altitude record?
Comments: To: Korey Kline <k2@HYBRIDS.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <000801c15bf4$ba495340$6601a8c0@koreynew>

Hi Korey,

How was altitude determined/verified?

Ray

On Tue, 23 Oct 2001, Korey Kline wrote:

> That rocket flight was also listed in the Millennium edition of Guinness
> book of world records.  It was the third flight of a four flight series and
> was not recovered (deployment failure). The forth flight was flown to 110280
> ft. with FULL recovery!
>
> K2
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU]On
> > Behalf Of Greg Deputy
> > Sent: Tuesday, October 23, 2001 12:40 PM
> > To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
> > Subject: Re: [AR] commercial HPR altitude record?
> >
> >
> > Was the rocket successfully recovered from that altitude?
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Korey Kline" <k2@HYBRIDS.COM>
> > To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
> > Sent: Tuesday, October 23, 2001 8:07 AM
> > Subject: Re: [AR] commercial HPR altitude record?
> >
> >
> > > Just for the record,
> > > That's Kline 119780 Ft......not a certified HPR motor, but commercially
> > > available.
> > > K2
> > >
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU]On
> > > > Behalf Of Jerry Irvine
> > > > Sent: Monday, October 22, 2001 9:09 PM
> > > > To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
> > > > Subject: Re: [AR] commercial HPR altitude record?
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > >Does anyone here know the absolute altitude record for HPR rockets on
> > > > >commercial motors?
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Kline 92k feet?
> > > >
> > > > But if you mean motors that are commercial
> > > > 25k USR L1000 1990 ish
> > > > and others since higher, but commercial?
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >         -p
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >Mars or Bust!
> > > > >www.marssociety.com
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
> > > > Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
> > > > Opinion, the whole thing.
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 1624 invoked from network); 23 Oct 2001 20:52:04 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 23 Oct 2001 20:52:04 -0000
Received: (qmail 21320 invoked by uid 50005); 23 Oct 2001 19:38:36 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4165. . Clean. Processed in 0.263907 secs); 23 Oct 2001 19:38:36 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 23 Oct 2001 19:38:35 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA13626; Tue, 23 Oct 2001 13:11:29 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 121619 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 23 Oct 2001 20:11:24          +0000
Received: from localhost (dmccue@localhost) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with          ESMTP id NAA13612; Tue, 23 Oct 2001 13:11:22 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.LNX.4.10.10110231310580.11886-100000@itc.uci.edu>
Date:         Tue, 23 Oct 2001 13:11:22 -0700
Reply-To: "David J. McCue" <dmccue@itc.uci.edu>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "David J. McCue" <dmccue@itc.uci.edu>
Subject:      Re: [AR] [OT warning]
Comments: To: Jerry Irvine <01rocket@GTE.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <a05100344b7fb79cf57ef@[65.229.52.47]>

Jerry just got himself removed from aRocket--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 28113 invoked from network); 23 Oct 2001 21:14:19 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 23 Oct 2001 21:14:19 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 30021 invoked by uid 50005); 23 Oct 2001 21:12:58 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4166. . Clean. Processed in 1.082364 secs); 23 Oct 2001 21:12:58 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 23 Oct 2001 21:12:56 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA13767; Tue, 23 Oct 2001 13:37:31 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 121631 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 23 Oct 2001 20:37:27          +0000
Received: from proxy2.ba.best.com (root@proxy2.ba.best.com [206.184.139.14]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA13753 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Tue, 23 Oct 2001 13:37:27 -0700
Received: from [10.0.0.2] (snvadslgw2poold155.snjs.uswestqwest.net          [168.103.213.155]) by proxy2.ba.best.com (8.9.3/8.9.2/best.out) with          ESMTP id NAA25459 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Tue, 23 Oct 2001          13:36:38 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Sender:  (Unverified)
References: <Pine.LNX.4.10.10110231310580.11886-100000@itc.uci.edu>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <v04210101b7fb81ccb6d3@[10.0.0.2]>
Date:         Tue, 23 Oct 2001 13:36:05 -0700
Reply-To: "bob fortune" <bob@FORTUNEPAINT.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "bob fortune" <bob@FORTUNEPAINT.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] [OT warning]
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <Pine.LNX.4.10.10110231310580.11886-100000@itc.uci.edu>

>Jerry just got himself removed from aRocket--

Nothing like swift justice....

I'm not sure of the aRocket aRules but does this mean that, as he's
an ex-aRocketeer, comments of a more personal nature can be made
regarding his business style and opinions?

Or do we need to continue doing so off list?

Don't boot me!  I'm just asking.

Bob

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 4876 invoked from network); 23 Oct 2001 21:31:07 -0000
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 23 Oct 2001 21:31:07 -0000
Received: (qmail 21264 invoked by uid 50005); 23 Oct 2001 20:18:11 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4166. . Clean. Processed in 0.346883 secs); 23 Oct 2001 20:18:11 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 23 Oct 2001 20:18:11 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA14101; Tue, 23 Oct 2001 14:11:22 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 121652 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 23 Oct 2001 21:11:10          +0000
Received: from syntheon.inicom.com          (IDENT:root@66.mueb.miam.philapaaz.dsl.att.net [63.242.216.66]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA14086 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 23 Oct 2001 14:11:09 -0700
Received: from koreynew (adsl-81-1-135.mia.bellsouth.net [65.81.1.135]) by          syntheon.inicom.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id TAA19688 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 23 Oct 2001 19:21:57 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 8.5, Build 4.71.2173.0
Importance: Normal
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <001b01c15c07$0e8358e0$6601a8c0@koreynew>
Date:         Tue, 23 Oct 2001 17:09:51 -0400
Reply-To: "Korey Kline" <k2@HYBRIDS.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Korey Kline" <k2@HYBRIDS.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] commercial HPR altitude record?
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <Pine.LNX.4.10.10110231259420.11185-100000@itc.uci.edu>

We flew at Wallops Island and had them "Real Time Skin Track Radar" which
they claim to be accurate to 30 Ft. There was actually four radar's
including two with black and white video telephoto cameras.  The first two
flights we had a GPS payload on board, at launch we had 5 satellites locked
on but within 2 seconds we lost them all.  Keep in mind that this was a few
years ago (96/97) and GPS weren't as refined as they are now. We were aware
of the 50K ft. and super sonic software cut off's and had a note from our
uncle to get the "State of the Art" GPS at the time.

I'll be the first to say I'm NOT a Electronics/GPS guy, but I think even
NASA is trying to get away from Radar Tracking and into GPS for altitude
determination.  I have heard of a few GPS's successfully flown (within the
last year)in rockets but have no clue who or where.  My hope is that
SOMEBODY here will get that figured out once and for all, other wise we'll
all still be saying  "Well, it goes this high on the computer" and I still
won't believe them. This issue could actually be one of the road blocks for
continued growth of Cheap Access to Space!

FYI Pictures of the Hyperion can be found on the web page [hybrids.com]

K2

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU]On
> Behalf Of Ray Calkins
> Sent: Tuesday, October 23, 2001 4:00 PM
> To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
> Subject: Re: [AR] commercial HPR altitude record?
>
>
> Hi Korey,
>
> How was altitude determined/verified?
>
> Ray
>
> On Tue, 23 Oct 2001, Korey Kline wrote:
>
> > That rocket flight was also listed in the Millennium edition of Guinness
> > book of world records.  It was the third flight of a four
> flight series and
> > was not recovered (deployment failure). The forth flight was
> flown to 110280
> > ft. with FULL recovery!
> >
> > K2
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU]On
> > > Behalf Of Greg Deputy
> > > Sent: Tuesday, October 23, 2001 12:40 PM
> > > To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
> > > Subject: Re: [AR] commercial HPR altitude record?
> > >
> > >
> > > Was the rocket successfully recovered from that altitude?
> > >
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: "Korey Kline" <k2@HYBRIDS.COM>
> > > To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
> > > Sent: Tuesday, October 23, 2001 8:07 AM
> > > Subject: Re: [AR] commercial HPR altitude record?
> > >
> > >
> > > > Just for the record,
> > > > That's Kline 119780 Ft......not a certified HPR motor, but
> commercially
> > > > available.
> > > > K2
> > > >
> > > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > > From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list
[mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU]On
> > > > Behalf Of Jerry Irvine
> > > > Sent: Monday, October 22, 2001 9:09 PM
> > > > To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
> > > > Subject: Re: [AR] commercial HPR altitude record?
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > >Does anyone here know the absolute altitude record for HPR rockets
on
> > > > >commercial motors?
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Kline 92k feet?
> > > >
> > > > But if you mean motors that are commercial
> > > > 25k USR L1000 1990 ish
> > > > and others since higher, but commercial?
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >         -p
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >Mars or Bust!
> > > > >www.marssociety.com
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
> > > > Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
> > > > Opinion, the whole thing.
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 23268 invoked from network); 23 Oct 2001 21:43:58 -0000
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 23 Oct 2001 21:43:58 -0000
Received: (qmail 29729 invoked by uid 50005); 23 Oct 2001 20:30:30 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4165. . Clean. Processed in 0.454921 secs); 23 Oct 2001 20:30:30 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 23 Oct 2001 20:30:29 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA14379; Tue, 23 Oct 2001 14:40:09 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 121682 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 23 Oct 2001 21:40:03          +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (oe29.law12.hotmail.com [64.4.18.86]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA14365 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue,          23 Oct 2001 14:40:02 -0700
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Tue,          23 Oct 2001 14:27:38 -0700
X-Originating-IP: [24.92.128.69]
References: <20011023.084515.-3975269.0.kc2csh@juno.com>                       <3BD58346.4C0604FA@NORTELNETWORKS.COM>             <5.0.2.1.0.20011023112723.024345e0@mail.earthlink.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 23 Oct 2001 21:27:38.0531 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[8A264730:01C15C09]
Message-ID:  <OE29CWbzwWJv3zOdnjQ000039a0@hotmail.com>
Date:         Tue, 23 Oct 2001 16:25:41 -0500
Reply-To: "Mark Kruep" <mkruep@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Mark Kruep" <mkruep@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] T6 and high temperatures
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Titanium is more of an in vogue metal than anything. You know, Ti golf
clubs, Ti drill bits, etc. plastered all over TV adds and such. What most
people fail to understand is, Ti is not even as strong as plain ole steel.
When alloyed with steel it is super strong, but stand alone...not so much.
Yes it's stronger than most aluminums, but the difference in cost (if it can
even be obtained in sizes we need) is gonna be dramatic. The aerospace
companies use it because it's lighter than steel (I believe in most cases
it's around 2/3rds the weight of steel but I don't remember now), has good
strength properties, and has a fairly high melting point (and most of the
time money is not a problem). As others have mentioned, machining it is
costly and difficult. I had asked about it at one time and if I remember
correctly the shop I talked to basically just doubled their rates if
titanium was involved.

Titanium usage in space craft is acceptable because they have to squeeze
every drop of performance they can out of the vehicle. For the average Joe,
the improvement vs. cost scale would be ridiculous. It's kinda like
comparing a street version Dodge Viper and a race ready Dodge Viper. To you
and me, the race ready one may actually be less enjoyable/comfortable, but a
race car driver has the skills to squeeze that last drop out and thus
justifies the cost difference. Lastly, titanium will shatter when it pops.

As far as using a different series or temper of aluminum, I can't see as you
could really improve the thermal characteristics all that much. Yes 7075 is
stronger than 6061. So is 2024. They will expand less under heat and handle
higher pressure, but they'll still degrade quickly if heated to high. I
would like to use 2024 or 7075 for a casing, but for their strength
properties not their thermal properties. The difference in melting points
and phases just isn't great enough to warrant the extra cost. There is
almost always a better material to use, it's just a matter of how bad do you
want that slight improvement and what you're willing to sacrifice to get it.
If you're flying by yourself and out in the middle of nowhere, steel would
probably be the best if you aren't worried about the weight penalty or the
fact you're igniting an anti-personnel mine everytime you hit the button.

Mark



----- Original Message -----
From: "Pierce Nichols" <forkbomb@EARTHLINK.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Tuesday, October 23, 2001 1:28 PM
Subject: Re: [AR] T6 and high temperatures


> At 09:50 AM 10/23/2001 -0700, Wedge Oldham wrote:
> >Ok, don't anybody flame me for my ignorance....but what about Titanium?
>
>
>          If you've got the money and the tool, go for it... just be aware
> that it's about 20 to 30 times more expensive for not all that much
> benefit. And that's not including the value of the time and tools needed
to
> machine the stuff.
>
>          -p
>
>
> >Wedge Oldham
> >http://NikeProject.com
> >Only those who risk going too far,
> >will ever know how far they can go.
> >
> >
> >----- Original Message -----
> >From: "Leech, Marcus (EXCHANGE:FITZ:8M86)" <mleech@NORTELNETWORKS.COM>
> >To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
> >Sent: 23 October, 2001 7:48 AM
> >Subject: Re: [AR] T6 and high temperatures
> >
> >
> > > kc2csh@JUNO.COM wrote:
> > > >
> > > >   Is there any better material available today than T6?
> > > >
> > > 7000 series alloys are stronger, but:
> > >
> > >   a) MUCH more expensive
> > >   b) hard to find
> > >   c) harder to machine than 6061-T6
> > >
> > > 7075-T6 has a tensile yield of around 500MPa, while 6061-T6 is around
> >275MPa.
> > >
> > > Yarde Metals lists various forms of 7075-T6, but I don't know whether
they
> > >   actually have stock (www.yardemetals.com).
> > >
> > > --
> > > ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > Marcus Leech                             Mail:   Dept 8M70, MS 012,
FITZ
> > > Advisor                                  Phone: (ESN) 393-9145  +1 613
763
> >9145
> > > Security Architecture and Planning       Fax:   (ESN) 393-9435  +1 613
763
> >9435
> > > Nortel Networks                          mleech@nortelnetworks.com
> > > -----------------Expressed opinions are my own, not my
employer's------
>
> Mars or Bust!
> www.marssociety.com
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 25891 invoked from network); 23 Oct 2001 22:16:33 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 23 Oct 2001 22:16:33 -0000
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 3900 invoked by uid 50005); 23 Oct 2001 22:15:39 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4164. . Clean. Processed in 0.381561 secs); 23 Oct 2001 22:15:39 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 23 Oct 2001 22:15:39 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA14574; Tue, 23 Oct 2001 15:09:56 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 121704 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 23 Oct 2001 22:09:36          +0000
Received: from localhost (dmccue@localhost) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with          ESMTP id PAA14553; Tue, 23 Oct 2001 15:09:31 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.LNX.4.10.10110231501440.13829-100000@itc.uci.edu>
Date:         Tue, 23 Oct 2001 15:09:31 -0700
Reply-To: "David J. McCue" <dmccue@itc.uci.edu>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "David J. McCue" <dmccue@itc.uci.edu>
Subject:      Re: [AR] [OT warning]
Comments: To: Airdale <airdale@icehouse.net>
Comments: cc: Ray Calkins <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <1003873229.3bd5e3cdce425@webmail.icehouse.net>

Dear Jay,

Jerry, or anyone, is responsible for what they post. I considered his
posting off-topic because I view it as a political cartoon that happened
to feature rockets, not a rocketry cartoon. I do not want a return to
political discussion on aRocket. This ain't the place.

As it happens, I have had correspondence with Jerry and agreed to return
him to aRocket. Jerry is back on the list--

-Dave McCue

On Tue, 23 Oct 2001, Airdale wrote:

> This is not Fair to Jerry for it was Jay Smith who asked him to post it if he
> thought it was ok. If any one should get booted it's me Jay Smith at
> icehouse.net
>
> Please if you need to burn someone burn me not Jerry.
>
> Jay Smith
>
>
>
> Quoting "David J. McCue" <dmccue@itc.uci.edu>:
>
> > Jerry just got himself removed from aRocket--
> >
>
>
>
> airdale@icehouse.net
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 10743 invoked from network); 23 Oct 2001 22:48:56 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 23 Oct 2001 22:48:56 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 26796 invoked by uid 50005); 23 Oct 2001 22:48:02 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4164. . Clean. Processed in 0.188452 secs); 23 Oct 2001 22:48:02 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 23 Oct 2001 22:48:02 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA14694; Tue, 23 Oct 2001 15:36:23 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 121724 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 23 Oct 2001 22:35:47          +0000
Received: from idsoftware.com (predator.idsoftware.com [192.246.40.34]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA14680 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Tue, 23 Oct 2001 15:35:47 -0700
Received: from [192.246.40.129] (account johnc HELO lightning.idsoftware.com)          by idsoftware.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 3.4.7) with ESMTP id 440675          for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 23 Oct 2001 17:35:46 -0500
X-Sender: johnc@mail.idsoftware.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.1
References: <1003873229.3bd5e3cdce425@webmail.icehouse.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <4.3.1.2.20011023173003.03551d38@mail.idsoftware.com>
Date:         Tue, 23 Oct 2001 17:34:05 -0500
Reply-To: "John Carmack" <johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Carmack" <johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] [OT warning]
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <Pine.LNX.4.10.10110231501440.13829-100000@itc.uci.edu>

At 03:09 PM 10/23/2001 -0700, you wrote:
>Dear Jay,
>
>Jerry, or anyone, is responsible for what they post. I considered his
>posting off-topic because I view it as a political cartoon that happened
>to feature rockets, not a rocketry cartoon. I do not want a return to
>political discussion on aRocket. This ain't the place.
>
>As it happens, I have had correspondence with Jerry and agreed to return
>him to aRocket. Jerry is back on the list--
>
>-Dave McCue

I'm glad -- it's not my list, but my preference would be to cut valuable
contributors a little more slack than a random lurker.

John Carmack

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 7348 invoked from network); 23 Oct 2001 23:40:03 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 23 Oct 2001 23:40:03 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 17836 invoked by uid 50005); 23 Oct 2001 22:26:34 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4165. . Clean. Processed in 0.421751 secs); 23 Oct 2001 22:26:34 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 23 Oct 2001 22:26:33 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA15338; Tue, 23 Oct 2001 16:37:00 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 121857 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 23 Oct 2001 23:36:48          +0000
Received: from hobbiton.shire.net (frogmorton.shire.net [204.228.145.136]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA15324 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Tue, 23 Oct 2001 16:36:48 -0700
Received: from pool-64-223-151-71.man.east.verizon.net ([64.223.151.71]          helo=me-513q3sc0zun0.pengar.com) by hobbiton.shire.net with asmtp          (Exim 3.22 #6) id 15wB1J-000KN9-00 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 23          Oct 2001 17:31:42 -0600
X-Sender: seth@pengar.com@hobbiton.shire.net
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
References: <Pine.LNX.4.10.10110231310580.11886-100000@itc.uci.edu>            <Pine.LNX.4.10.10110231310580.11886-100000@itc.uci.edu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <5.1.0.14.0.20011023193606.02a39a20@hobbiton.shire.net>
Date:         Tue, 23 Oct 2001 19:43:27 -0400
Reply-To: "Seth Leigh" <seth@PENGAR.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Seth Leigh" <seth@PENGAR.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] [OT warning]
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <v04210101b7fb81ccb6d3@[10.0.0.2]>

At 04:36 PM 10/23/2001, bob fortune wrote:
>>Jerry just got himself removed from aRocket--
>
>Nothing like swift justice....
>
>I'm not sure of the aRocket aRules but does this mean that, as he's
>an ex-aRocketeer, comments of a more personal nature can be made
>regarding his business style and opinions?

I'm sure you all recall the dire warnings and such when he first applied to
aRocket.  I read the opinions expressed, and filed it away for future
reference in my mind, as I had very little experience with him (that little
experience being just happening to read one or two threads on
www.rocketryonline.com, one of which was him getting kicked off that board.

However, I have to say that since he joined I've appreciated his
participation.  I can't see how (except posting the bin Laden thing)
anything he's done on the list in the past couple of months is in the least
disturbing to me.  It's clear to me that he knows a lot and has a lot of
experience.

I thought he was a perfectly reasonable member of the list, probably helped
a few people with comments he made, and I have nothing bad to say about him
after this exposure.

Any comments about his business style, etc. I'd think are way beyond the
scope of this group, and should be shared privately, if at all.  This is
not a gossip board, and we are not a bunch of ladies at the
hairdresser's.  It was a judgement call of the list operator to remove him
after he posted something deemed inappropriate.  No more, no less.  I
personally believe the action was a bit harsh, but on the other hand Ray
Calkins did in fact warn against further OT posts a week or two ago, and
posting things relating to rocket weaponry has been warned against
repeatedly in the past.  It's a judgement call that I might have made
differently, but on the other hand, I'm not the list maintainer or
operator, and it's not my judgement call to make.  From their point of
view, it was a valid judgement, and I don't challenge that.

Seth

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 2246 invoked from network); 23 Oct 2001 23:46:17 -0000
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 23 Oct 2001 23:46:17 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 28150 invoked by uid 50005); 23 Oct 2001 22:32:47 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4165. . Clean. Processed in 1.596019 secs); 23 Oct 2001 22:32:48 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 23 Oct 2001 22:32:45 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA15470; Tue, 23 Oct 2001 16:43:03 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 121856 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 23 Oct 2001 23:42:58          +0000
Received: from fcexgw02.efi.com (ns3.efi.com [192.68.228.85] (may be forged))          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id QAA15304 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 23 Oct 2001 16:32:57 -0700
Received: from 10.10.12.104 by fcexgw02.efi.com (InterScan E-Mail VirusWall          NT); Tue, 23 Oct 2001 16:32:38 -0700
Received: from earthlink.net (peroxide.efi.com [10.10.89.46]) by          EX-IMC3-CORP.efi.com with SMTP (Microsoft Exchange Internet Mail          Service Version 5.5.2653.13) id 4W788LFC; Tue, 23 Oct 2001 16:32:57          -0700
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.14-5.0 i686)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <200110231646.f9NGkJH07613@aeneas.net>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3BD5FE2A.27CA222B@earthlink.net>
Date:         Tue, 23 Oct 2001 16:32:58 -0700
Reply-To: "David Weinshenker" <daze39@EARTHLINK.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "David Weinshenker" <daze39@EARTHLINK.NET>
Subject:      [AR] virus??? \ Re: [AR] M. until 9:00 p.m.  Guest.
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

dpsmotor wrote:

--- snip ---

>                 Name: Parks.exe
>    Parks.exe    Type: unspecified type (application/octet-stream)
>             Encoding: base64

Is this one of those viruses that sends
random documents from your disk over your e-mail?

-dave w

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 1992 invoked from network); 23 Oct 2001 23:53:43 -0000
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 23 Oct 2001 23:53:43 -0000
Received: (qmail 7434 invoked by uid 50005); 23 Oct 2001 22:40:13 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4165. . Clean. Processed in 1.183726 secs); 23 Oct 2001 22:40:14 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 23 Oct 2001 22:40:12 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA15395; Tue, 23 Oct 2001 16:40:03 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 121872 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 23 Oct 2001 23:40:01          +0000
Received: from femail4.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail4.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.0.95.84]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA15381 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 23 Oct 2001 16:40:01 -0700
Received: from cx814151a ([24.14.55.118]) by femail4.sdc1.sfba.home.com          (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20 201-229-121-120-20010223) with SMTP id          <20011023233955.PQEW571.femail4.sdc1.sfba.home.com@cx814151a> for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 23 Oct 2001 16:39:55 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.3018.1300
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <00fa01c15c1b$c9c52f20$0a01a8c0@cx814151a>
Date:         Tue, 23 Oct 2001 18:38:15 -0500
Reply-To: "John Bolene" <jbolene@HOME.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Bolene" <jbolene@HOME.COM>
Subject:      [AR] dpsmotor VIRUS!!!!!
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

he has a virus and is trying to get rid of it
DO NOT open any files he sends.

John Bolene
Tripoli Oklahoma Prefect and webmaster
Tripoli Oklahoma Web page -> http://members.home.com/tripoli-oklahoma/

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 11607 invoked from network); 24 Oct 2001 00:34:12 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 24 Oct 2001 00:34:12 -0000
Received: (qmail 23734 invoked by uid 50005); 23 Oct 2001 23:21:15 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4166. . Clean. Processed in 0.209013 secs); 23 Oct 2001 23:21:15 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 23 Oct 2001 23:21:15 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA15758; Tue, 23 Oct 2001 17:17:04 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 121928 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 24 Oct 2001 00:16:42          +0000
Received: from localhost (rcalkins@localhost) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with          ESMTP id RAA15739; Tue, 23 Oct 2001 17:15:40 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.LNX.4.10.10110231705110.11185-100000@itc.uci.edu>
Date:         Tue, 23 Oct 2001 17:15:40 -0700
Reply-To: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
Subject:      Re: [AR] M. until 9:00 p.m.  Guest.
Comments: To: dpsmotor <dpsmotor@AENEAS.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <200110231646.f9NGkJH07613@aeneas.net>

dpsmotor has been removed from the aRocket list.

The attachment, Park.exe that came with this was a virus:
W32.Magistr.39921@mm

This is a pretty nasty virus, you really need a full virus scanner to take
care of it.  It can overwrite the first sector of your hard drive and
flash your BIOS, rendering your computer pretty much useless.
Furthermore, it can spread itself through Eudora as well as Outlook.  I
recommend Pegasus Mail or Pine.

If you don't have a virus scanner already, you can use
http://housecall.antivirus.com/
It's free and fairly good.  I have tested it with every virii sent to the
aRocket list and it has detected every one of them.

For more information on this virus, see -
http://www.sarc.com/avcenter/venc/data/w32.magistr.39921@mm.html

Ray

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 13359 invoked from network); 24 Oct 2001 00:42:17 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 24 Oct 2001 00:42:17 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 11923 invoked by uid 50005); 23 Oct 2001 23:28:47 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4165. . Clean. Processed in 0.368473 secs); 23 Oct 2001 23:28:47 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 23 Oct 2001 23:28:46 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA15875; Tue, 23 Oct 2001 17:39:10 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 121940 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 24 Oct 2001 00:39:07          +0000
Received: from smtppop3pub.verizon.net (smtppop3pub.gte.net [206.46.170.22]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA15832 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 23 Oct 2001 17:29:07 -0700
Received: from [65.229.52.47] (1Cust87.tnt1.rancho-cucamonga.ca.da.uu.net          [63.24.225.87]) by smtppop3pub.verizon.net  with ESMTP for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; id TAA39715415 Tue, 23 Oct 2001 19:28:22 -0500          (CDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: GTE/01rocket@mail.gte.net
References: <1003873229.3bd5e3cdce425@webmail.icehouse.net>            <4.3.1.2.20011023173003.03551d38@mail.idsoftware.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <a0510034cb7fbba2fc111@[65.229.52.47]>
Date:         Tue, 23 Oct 2001 17:25:54 -0700
Reply-To: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Subject:      [AR] Public apology, was [OT warning]
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <4.3.1.2.20011023173003.03551d38@mail.idsoftware.com>

>I'm glad -- it's not my list, but my preference would be to cut valuable
>contributors a little more slack than a random lurker.
>
>John Carmack

Thank you for inferring I am a valuable contributor.  I have also
been asked to post less.  So I will.

I think there is generally too little tolerance here and in society
these days.  There needs to be alot more allowance for rocketeers to
freely interchange, and then fly.

And as is customary when a dispute arises on arocket, I apologize.

I cant help the feeling this is the second sucker punch I have taken, however.

Jerry

--
Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
Opinion, the whole thing.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 11481 invoked from network); 24 Oct 2001 00:57:32 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 24 Oct 2001 00:57:32 -0000
Received: (qmail 28966 invoked by uid 50005); 24 Oct 2001 00:56:39 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4164. . Clean. Processed in 0.170824 secs); 24 Oct 2001 00:56:39 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 24 Oct 2001 00:56:39 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA15907; Tue, 23 Oct 2001 17:41:25 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 121951 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 24 Oct 2001 00:41:23          +0000
Received: from imo-r04.mx.aol.com (imo-r04.mx.aol.com [152.163.225.100]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA15893 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Tue, 23 Oct 2001 17:41:22 -0700
Received: from Balthezar@aol.com by imo-r04.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v31_r1.8.) id          w.133.37e42a3 (4411) for <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Tue, 23 Oct 2001          20:41:14 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0D64_01C56B69.53235610"
X-Mailer: AOL 6.0 for Windows US sub 10536
Message-ID:  <133.37e42a3.2907682a@aol.com>
Date:         Tue, 23 Oct 2001 20:41:14 EDT
Reply-To: <Balthezar@AOL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <Balthezar@AOL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] [OT warning]
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0D64_01C56B69.53235610
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

In a message dated 10/23/01 3:50:15 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
01rocket@GTE.NET writes:



> Jerry If you think Arocket list would like this please share it with them as
> I
>



Snip url....Personally, I don't see what the hubbub is. Jerry simply posted a
url. There has been a heck of a lot more OT stuff posted here than that in
the last few months. My .02? No big whoop! Besides, the target web site did
have rocket content! :-)

Bruce Kirchner

------=_NextPart_000_0D64_01C56B69.53235610
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<HTML><FONT FACE=arial,helvetica><FONT  SIZE=2>In a message dated 10/23/01 3:50:15 PM Eastern Daylight Time, 01rocket@GTE.NET writes:
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR><BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE style="BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px">Jerry If you think Arocket list would like this please share it with them as I
<BR>am at work and do not have access the listserver</BLOCKQUOTE>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>Snip url....Personally, I don't see what the hubbub is. Jerry simply posted a url. There has been a heck of a lot more OT stuff posted here than that in the last few months. My .02? No big whoop! Besides, the target web site did have rocket content! :-)
<BR>
<BR>Bruce Kirchner</FONT></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0D64_01C56B69.53235610--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 16415 invoked from network); 24 Oct 2001 01:52:19 -0000
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 24 Oct 2001 01:52:19 -0000
Received: (qmail 20932 invoked by uid 50005); 24 Oct 2001 01:51:26 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4164. . Clean. Processed in 0.139438 secs); 24 Oct 2001 01:51:26 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 24 Oct 2001 01:51:25 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA16442; Tue, 23 Oct 2001 18:48:53 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 121993 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 24 Oct 2001 01:48:40          +0000
Received: from mail.icehouse.net (mail.icehouse.net [204.203.53.8]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id SAA16428 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 23 Oct 2001 18:48:40 -0700
Received: (qmail 19612 invoked by uid 10000); 24 Oct 2001 01:48:37 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO zip) ([204.203.55.160]) (envelope-sender          <airdale@icehouse.net>) by mail.icehouse.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with          SMTP for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; 24 Oct 2001 01:48:37 -0000
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 1
X-MSMail-Priority: High
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook CWS, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: High
Message-ID:  <000601c15c2d$f7b236a0$a037cbcc@zip>
Date:         Tue, 23 Oct 2001 18:48:22 -0700
Reply-To: <airdale@icehouse.net>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jay Smith" <airdale@icehouse.net>
Subject:      [AR] Public apology, was [OT warning]
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

To the List It was I Jay Smith  that asked Mr. Irvine to post the URL to the
list and in the hope that a little levity would help take some of the strain
away from 9/11/2001. I did not expect the over the top trashing that Mr.
Irvine has received by a few individuals of aRocket, I owe Mr. Irvine a
public apology and here is. However there are others among the membership
that
owe him one as well.

"Personally, I don't see what the hubbub is. Jerry simply posted a url.
There has been a heck of a lot more OT stuff posted here
 than that in the last few months. My .02? No big whoop! Besides, the target
web site did have rocket content! :-)

Bruce Kirchner "
I personally agree with Mr. Kirchner

Jay Smith
NAR 78687 -SR  L1
S.P.A.R.C. -Spokane Area Rocket Club
The Spokane Area's NAR Section # 626
Until then may your Sky's be clear and LAUNCHING
in  5,  4,  3,  2,  1,  Liftoff !
A+ Cert.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 22329 invoked from network); 24 Oct 2001 02:37:34 -0000
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 24 Oct 2001 02:37:34 -0000
Received: (qmail 14226 invoked by uid 50005); 24 Oct 2001 01:24:04 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4165. . Clean. Processed in 0.594533 secs); 24 Oct 2001 01:24:04 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 24 Oct 2001 01:24:02 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA16613; Tue, 23 Oct 2001 19:31:26 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 122015 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 24 Oct 2001 02:31:24          +0000
Received: from cablecom.laribay.net (cablecom.laribay.net [66.20.57.4]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA16594 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 23 Oct 2001 19:31:23 -0700
Received: from billbull (dial096.laribay.net [66.20.57.96]) by          cablecom.laribay.net (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id VAA21617 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 23 Oct 2001 21:10:38 -0500 (CDT)          (envelope-from bpbullock@laribay.net)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0D69_01C56B69.5325A000"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <009101c15c34$6148cba0$66391442@billbull>
Date:         Tue, 23 Oct 2001 21:33:57 -0500
Reply-To: "Bill Bullock" <bpbullock@LARIBAY.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Bill Bullock" <bpbullock@LARIBAY.NET>
Subject:      [AR] Public apology, was [OT warning]
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0D69_01C56B69.5325A000
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

    My own personal opinion: Jerry and I have had one or two "words" =
off-list and a lot of help also off-list. And while I may not agree with =
his every utterance I appreciate his help and his opinions. And I would =
never take a shot at him when he has been suspended and could not =
respond to my broadside in his own defense.
    The list-owners have the right and the responsibility to enforce the =
rules as they exist irrespective of the stature of the offender. I =
personally think they do a great job.
   =20

------=_NextPart_000_0D69_01C56B69.5325A000
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META content=3D"text/html; charset=3Diso-8859-1" =
http-equiv=3DContent-Type>
<META content=3D"MSHTML 5.00.2614.3500" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; My own personal opinion: Jerry and I have had =
one or two=20
"words" off-list and a lot of help also off-list. And while I may not=20
agree&nbsp;with his every utterance I appreciate his help and his =
opinions. And=20
I would never take a shot at him when he has been suspended and could =
not=20
respond to my broadside in his own defense.</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; The list-owners have the right and the =
responsibility to=20
enforce the rules as they exist irrespective of the stature of the =
offender. I=20
personally think they do a great job.</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; </DIV></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0D69_01C56B69.5325A000--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 21032 invoked from network); 24 Oct 2001 03:25:05 -0000
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 24 Oct 2001 03:25:05 -0000
Received: (qmail 22188 invoked by uid 50005); 24 Oct 2001 03:25:01 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4166. . Clean. Processed in 1.313696 secs); 24 Oct 2001 03:25:01 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 24 Oct 2001 03:24:58 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA16753; Tue, 23 Oct 2001 20:07:11 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 122025 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 24 Oct 2001 03:07:03          +0000
Received: from c011.snv.cp.net (c011-h005.c011.snv.cp.net [209.228.34.218]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id TAA16695 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 23 Oct 2001 19:57:02 -0700
Received: (cpmta 26372 invoked from network); 23 Oct 2001 19:56:27 -0700
Received: from 64-76-4-48-tntats1.impsat.net.ar (HELO compu) (64.76.4.48) by          smtp.namezero.com (209.228.34.218) with SMTP; 23 Oct 2001 19:56:27          -0700
X-Sent: 24 Oct 2001 02:56:27 GMT
References:  <5.1.0.14.0.20011023042856.026ec358@lstud.ii.uib.no>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/mixed;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0D6C_01C56B69.53424FC0"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2919.6700
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <00c801c15c37$af2ea170$30044c40@compu>
Date:         Tue, 23 Oct 2001 23:35:24 -0300
Reply-To: "Esteban Gonzalez" <esteban@loscaranchos.org>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Esteban Gonzalez" <loscaranchos.org@NAMEZERO.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] T6 and high temperatures
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0D6C_01C56B69.53424FC0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_001_0D6D_01C56B69.53424FC0"


------=_NextPart_001_0D6D_01C56B69.53424FC0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable




----- Original Message -----=20
From: "Emil Johnsen" <Emil.Johnsen@STUDENT.UIB.NO>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Monday, October 22, 2001 11:40 PM
Subject: [AR] T6 and high temperatures


> At what temperature does 6000-series T6 aluminium become damaged? Is =
it
> instant or must it stay at this temp for some time? How much is the =
yield
> strength of T6 aluminium reduced when this happens?
>=20
> --
> Emil Johnsen
>=20

------=_NextPart_001_0D6D_01C56B69.53424FC0
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META content=3D"text/html; charset=3Diso-8859-1" =
http-equiv=3DContent-Type>
<META content=3D"MSHTML 5.00.2920.0" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DTahoma size=3D2>----- Original Message ----- </FONT>
<DIV><FONT face=3DTahoma size=3D2>From: "Emil Johnsen" &lt;</FONT><A=20
href=3D"mailto:Emil.Johnsen@STUDENT.UIB.NO"><FONT face=3DTahoma=20
size=3D2>Emil.Johnsen@STUDENT.UIB.NO</FONT></A><FONT face=3DTahoma=20
size=3D2>&gt;</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DTahoma size=3D2>To: &lt;</FONT><A=20
href=3D"mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU"><FONT face=3DTahoma=20
size=3D2>AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU</FONT></A><FONT face=3DTahoma =
size=3D2>&gt;</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DTahoma size=3D2>Sent: Monday, October 22, 2001 11:40=20
PM</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DTahoma size=3D2>Subject: [AR] T6 and high=20
temperatures</FONT></DIV></DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV><FONT face=3DTahoma size=3D2>&gt; At what temperature =
does=20
6000-series T6 aluminium become damaged? Is it<BR>&gt; instant or must =
it stay=20
at this temp for some time? How much is the yield<BR>&gt; strength of T6 =

aluminium reduced when this happens?<BR>&gt; <BR>&gt; --<BR>&gt; Emil=20
Johnsen<BR>&gt; </FONT></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_001_0D6D_01C56B69.53424FC0--

------=_NextPart_000_0D6C_01C56B69.53424FC0
Content-Type: image/gif;
	name="6061-T6.GIF"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
Content-Disposition: attachment;
	filename="6061-T6.GIF"

R0lGODlhHALQAncAMSH+GlNvZnR3YXJlOiBNaWNyb3NvZnQgT2ZmaWNlACwAAAAAHALQAoQAAAAR
EREAMwAzADMzMzMiIiIzZjNERERVVVVmM2ZmZmZ3d3dmmWaZZpmIiIiZmZmZzJmqqqq7u7vMmczM
zMzd3d3M/8z/zP/u7u7///8BAgMBAgMBAgMBAgMBAgMBAgMF/2AmjmRpnmiqrmzrvnAsz3Rt33iu
73zv/8CgcEgsGo/IpHLJbDqf0Kh0Sq1ar9isdsvter/gsHhMLpvP6LR6zW673/C4fE6v2+/4vH7P
7/v/gIGCg4SFhoeIiYqLjI2Oj5CRkpOUlZaXmJmam5ydnp+goaKjpKWmp6ipqqusra6vsLGys7S1
tre4ubq7vL2+v8DBwsPExcbHyMnKy8zNzs/Q0dLT1NXW19jZ2tvc3d7f4OHi4+Tl5ufo6err7O3u
7/Dx8vP09fb3+Pn6+/z9/v8AAwocSLCgwYMIEypcyLChw4cQI0qcSLGixYsYM2rcyLGjx48gQ4oc
SbKkyZMoU/+qXMmypcuXMGPKnEmzps2bOHPq3Mmzp8+fQIMKHUq0qNGjSJMqXcq0qdOnUKNKnUq1
qtWrWLNq3cq1q9evYMOKHUu2rNmZGA48EPEggYEHEwwQaCDh7LkHBNZSWECBggMDFDIYSGDXHAYE
egkoQDxAhAIDhc0hiJCBgoIMEgIEcExYhAUKEkKLHk26tOnTqFOrXs26tevXsGPLnk27tu3btAOf
U7C2At8IBdRSMIBgRAMAyJMrX868ufPn0KNLn069uvXr2LNr3869u/fu6AxQzoAXAQQKBPLqzuAA
QIG+D5BL6Pu+rwQC80ErcGD/AQL7FNRnGX+gRfAfaAH2Bdr/AfPNt599BACIn30L8DdfBAcAKOCD
BWYIIYAM5rcAX6BFiOABEVBIogQYaqjgAgCkSEGLCAooAYoqfniijBI4sOKNLvY1on1A1qigBJMh
6COC99mX5HwOKECkiSUCiJiO89k4WX5RThmkX1KC1qSRTj5gX5dVInglaA+EOV+E8yEAADp0iWDZ
AhdksEACFGAwQnsE2ImcboGOcAAJDtRl5wIkHMrWeJVdZmijfj46QqEiIFApeZBWIKkIjnI6gqck
YJqBpiM8AKmpqFoqAqmTsgVABSIc1igJCtAqQgRriWBqrqn2moGtsWbA6wjEgoqrrsY6gGxxjq13
bK3Q+orr/3qhZpCtlCP0eGux3harLQl8deustSOUK4IEjBbbHj6A1noAAIVmm22iI+xV6p+Q6nsp
Ca2yB2m2ATvQ76cZYKrqqAgTvOnCyo4QMMQZwIoueQBUWkG1CQP88MDLjjBtxRxjOvLG+44A7K7C
pqUysxGcO6y95Orm8r/pSivzzRfH/O3Feq4X7rg5m5uynnPeE68IS5t6wKYG54swplHbOTWlqa6K
tasVX82WsJYdfSqzDwjLKtnColxsfLqqDTQCaOOcadzUHu1z3XJnwO2uO1e7t7Etl3ytuL8KLTPR
Fw/Nc8fpKtps3gs4zu7PMMKL3AEEHFAAcgEc0Hnmnmeeef8BwYn++QGeY6656JifnjroAbBOOuqv
ox676LObjnrmp+feuuq1ExC76r67Pvzopf8OOgC0b57e76obL3vy0hNfenrGW6+68MCfLvz023du
O/i6w9696NxHf772uquPfPi7B18A6wTMb/v675evedL2LM0ecoyi2Z8c55uf4etV7YqYAtnjOFaR
gGIWQxwEvZapj4lrYpDCQMNElrFabVBim4oAyF4mssD9bGTJQpzeYGZCx7AQYGJb2al+pidmDU2F
obqhAEWgLszIzFQ91OGf+FcP/7UHAIxyGqIcFza5HTBSYsPgBS34KgpOkIZSfBsVSXY0tr1KcCT8
Wt5kiEL/MALuWTF8Id5WWEJk7TBo8oqh4WiIKSFCbo4LDOLhQlU5pdFriADQlL2g1q8EIq5qlTHk
ILOWt6cxsoo/u2LesqhCuAWLYZGcFSQvqEYVkrGFCiwjDT+JRheKrG9yXKMK9UjDHO6RhqwEWiwV
2Mf+/ZFpybkPDZ/or4tRrIla5NcUhblJX3bqgxV8JOOSybUImqyDXBxjJ39Ft2GZUZTSbGMcTcky
N8JSV4sDos68Kbe7zUxss8zWLJdZyyICoHfJKUD18tc61vUueenjXfyOt7rl7VN2z8PePq2HPtcx
L3oBLR7+NIdPfoqvfvRqnz5hl1Dq/RN99hOo+xhaUHt2/y95vvue7UDaUOAdlHcBfWjqEMo+6OkT
c/WDn/oQijv7zeuiMPUePC1HNQkgxwFv5KUiU0VAQzpQmQ5TZgRDJckFUjKpzaRgBKCZwm2F0Gwh
66YqQ4XNBSrgqqWsoTYzBUtsoROPC6zjK+9otDyiFXHtpIcRM4McJQ4wX0YlJhTF5UiusWqLzlQq
BU+1xb8KNpNtG6wlterJTqbQZKBcJhsZmyxSqpKaW61ZWxfoylZqdl0//KwPDUhEud6SgfE5rQqF
akAm5hWEeoWqqIopwWNicYuybeoy46Mxjm2LbFoL4xkzS1nfZnW41hQuCt+4snAe15zOBS0dRTs0
db6Vj/+lncdcKVDXrQlMal20LV8L611EBjaqUSSvxKpZVQ4mNo1jJZhjrxnZwo21suO87OCSK66/
2TGUa3XrZsW5WbhmVx7tCYCPFnAABCiAcwteQAFGNKIGU1gBBKCwhCls4RFhWMMTpnCIK4wAEUd4
xAwusYczLGIOH+DCLB5RAU6sABe3mMKKoTACXuzhGd+YwQCo8QI+/GMJC5nBPN4wjo+Mugv7WMY2
7vGJNZzjCidZASOu8gJ2DGIQR1jLKEaxlrls4h+TGcpFHnOSxaziLcd4AQqu8IHj0Z4C5OdBDw6k
gibUFw7N6EB9oZKf/aOgBO05PwM6tKKFRKIZeSjQLyL/kKMLzWcKMCjSey40jhitIAMhWkAwkhGN
IK2gJPVlSfTRtIz80ugbIZpKqF7Qq1WtoFgXiQKmBtORqIQeRK9pTKkutZlOHaYSfbrWxQa2ofuC
GC4Vm9e8UVCbKH3nOcNjrv9Dorh4SUFu31aZhuUaMHcr3mD61WNKNa6sNKbYhwnrt5f8ot3q+9yd
hepvXZVsc9XNQ2kJC4ebXZx1B0zdofLQ2u/AdoDopau+fndRBiyk2ByOyEWi113lrmQ15RvvrtlN
k/x16jQBNt9IRnZb/g4rGe09SrOO8bpH+69k00kuyQU4rto9bdXmBQBF3YuJVjzYt88NW6ZlXGFC
n6R6/5k522gq0ItO1/fGj1u2sC7zZGacLHIrW3K2nlNcPYTuDs0J8KLxzeujlRvOEewe0ewnNAQA
INwj4PbIhcY/o8FPaGosGryLxs6iIQDd9273++R98BLg+91DBPe6953xhg884hUf+dCgSDQjEg2G
RgN4dsUoNJsP/GjUgvnCd/5GDyi95vXe+NAMefV5H33qXa8A2Ft+9uyqPehZX3nUi/7vshdNlGIP
/NAMf/ecHw0CEmV83fd++cJHAPETj3B31NkB2G8w9o8IAOzPePsH2E+FMLx9Byg4+/vBPvm3/33v
l1/72D+/9yuU/eUvmADll7/2K7QA/PvI/OU3Yf+HAP/LVyHy5wACWCH7FyX+534+IicjwoDYZ4Dl
l2EDaH8IWIH85wA7NoH9l3/b14H3B4LbZ4EVIoIj0oCKEYIF6CPtB4AlKH4SFoAVmH5bdgD/N4Ps
N4EomIE7+H8r6CMKgIMUGIMDSIQuWILV1w7YJgLJASqEhFcRJ4VKR1TDdHFPl3G5NUJMp1sKA3Lt
tV5jhVnFdUIn91ygZFlk1V/MknUyJHNqNV1ml3arBHO4xFN3JQIBIB+r5VrhBV7jpVfh1nTnRYjt
Bm7ohoWIM1XsBl9iJHL3RV9WR4Zb5zcww3LZ9HUCJl3bpEAyN3CcOHN2iDR4yDSOkxyBQnFA11pU
aG7/TWdxhhhJWpiI5PFuJNdxj5UqYMhvWjcylJhvXHWGKpNya4Rvwhgt+jWMBZYtcUg41CUzoEiH
BmY5x+M7yiE/JaU/IZU9pkM+N8VS+SNQ2ghSBoVT9UM99uSN3GM+oxNR4og6zNONLaVT5POO68hR
OQU/uDM9HTU+LXWP9xg6+ciO/khP+VQ7ufOO2EhQyoM5vkM6/eg5S8gOTagtqcVgSzQqBsdAGhlF
D8SFhHVYa5NByBSSuwKSlFSIjOhBoxRCIKmGYViJo9RJM8RNMsmGEoNONnQ4/AaHzwh2o/guftRT
l3JEGJmHe3Ux3haIXLOFmCQ3XkiLFDOIusVUIOc2/5K1WLWYiTfZM/SmXC1zb10nSzbDXMSoicv0
iT9JlsuYLhO5DhX5NHGnGVEIcRjXilm5dCYZiyP5lE6FW7f4iCG3W1dZkmoIb2VYLMCIhiqXX4OJ
csnYb20JLgEmipsVjf8llLZElNbCc0TEWlCZdH8ZW7RoXkE3Klk3MVhVdITIbysZdZRYdUAjQ7IJ
m5HoiF0Jk8xILuDEXJdITj2DiZtIhwQWiuz0luqQYDimYgC4OQDEYW1GZGiWYjDWZUXWYeYHYkwW
nW82Yk22YtYpY9uZZkd2ZtKpZEAmZOcZZuW5ZtqpY0mGnuj5nUMWZu9pZU62ZPAZnvJJAG1mn8u5
n/9FNmJnJp9spmMxdqAjggDdiWPImQ6AoiDR9iZ9kUsSKmmElml9hqGAtmy9dqE60heXJiQEwiKP
hh6YViAdymsjuheNxqKINiR9MWrLFmozeqIw+iIvqmkx2mg0CmuthqOFlmu29mhEmmy8xmumpmwC
gmurhiZpQmq6FqIeeqQaymxPiqQS+qDoYETBxXOO80SF+EsbuZdTWV5HJ5JvA1yTxKa0xVWFGUUj
J4aJ6ZWTuF+PU4xnmYvK+Jh46pPG+UazBEQ2Rzlceg5xKSg6J5qHtIqNVJeVBFjIZF68+FRSmTZm
xFvyhpNNSXXHWJtYiZhbJ5anBJyN1YmWeXao2ln/zjiH1bWWtHSo5lCRmAIjBYCUvbRMiJSrTumK
pvmHtEWVqzk3aipBcdqmYxiYXXl1X2mTXWWMd9qnMak3o3h1lalOhcqWgTpEltN5lNd5chJIhBd9
ybd3zCcBDwB5pyd4jtd6c9eu6Kqu8JqunCcm9zF5pmevlzeui1eunjd49Pp3+oqvAisa+5p7j+ev
r4d8BXt7mOd8EcB6pEd7thca7yEazcYivHd6GYuwDGuxYnJ8IrSxyneuCysBFxsa0Od60vexckKN
4IeBL+g89bd96+eAQNWCH/iD88eC23eAAoh9BGizDeiDHGh/KUiD9JeAR7uDS7uBQzuBRdt+cmKD
/1P7fw7AYkKLg+5Hfyt4ghiogzgrgknotNj3tRyIhGIbfiHItTibgV5bY2/7gmg7hDRotmRrtHob
hGn7sxMIVHIbJW4Lg0Alq+WQqBLzToEhpqdpl2+TkaOpiEjnl3mJiKwJQZkKTVg5iL7ImJGZb7+Y
hmM5c715VqWKqs2YVrCKmTdnuORAq43yUxzpuI1KubB4pqz5q335plKJku5mu7r4XpwUX55qdcFo
vJ4bctC6qvs1reu0Q2rpqqElvYZairOLQ0+4q93GqINYcb0LiMZEuVQZXF2YprtylW5YTaGLmvMW
rc4qureZidH1vqZqMsKZqnSIma9FikMpiI2SWv8YoL1HI8CPWimI5DQYUCm1OW5U8wCVgmtyqsDD
OjYS3FtdhL5y2nGs4pibe7oJvJt9mqeaiG8OUCnzS62oiyuOI3Z2c7+EOiyYkUCEWimTA8PYRY3N
Exz3QzuxE0/0o8M7vDrbkzwrFcQMxcPdQzv188NJjDo25ZBNHMTniMRU7MSgo1FB7Dy7A8RFLJCj
AzpdrFKzszvicz/vQ8a0s1Io9Y9lPDwwpcMvZcRuHMbx88S+Q8dbHMW1I5BODMTV08dpfFD7Y71P
hMDz0jl+6C4EVJIT00Dfy7uK2KuRqkwadEJUValg5VUwk0GueYy9+G+WGL+aTFw2ia6eta1ASXD/
c+gXpEXIjkMz3JfISinLknUvvluskxusj1y5zZS5wjubc0q/n9usnwycMJl16nLCYVeZqatCxZm/
sDqN/WuKjZQpyMGooaK7nKWXDleVxSrJHCeYSxW8pDw2xCtctRmTiwmWKvebfIWnvOhf1zqZwzk0
z/xfa0dnOvfK3wKmeJnLScnLDzfJRge+5Ca+uzy+CH2+FsyVtXk2Y9XBdSp1oqybpouWz8zC5eTC
q1twR5PP13Y59HRSArmH7oFRHmWQKrXSAOVP4HjEEoWQGSVSL4VSNbVRXgzT9TRTEFVQA/XSCkVR
bDxQyNOPEzVSbAw7JCVTNR06MS09GMXUMi3V/yzt02vskEutja4rDRiQF6NiIk0Wpvv8zqCCHHjJ
VIucXki1y+MsubssySq5izGUyZ5E1+rsyV8lygswukDELIK6k6csjSAsmaHIutVrDnghLAyGaxJw
GNk81kATKtzVfbRLNRJ3hU2n0LocyQnN1sikqR43vIwF0RMNWe5bzMU4upA5mPaFyokzz9SrrYLN
rYaBGGzBgZbmGNWCuF51S+OWzY4a2Yhyy5zt1pdL3HzpSxjs0C+p2qJ8qnVq0V4ncKKl0Z7IzB0d
27GKDpNRMSiSFwTgJ4sxRN5qeoc3eHnGIH5nsfPasuwtefC6rgTbr8WXeIUXsO/tsBSb37633//x
qrAAMHuhx98T67EoG3z+HbEKC7Eka7CqkuASa7IM7q/9reD1jSTnenzueuDG594Wzt8r2yPuzbEZ
7t4cjiRbLQ22bQENgBeLkSIG8CnXh348q7c8h4M3a7Rsq35Xy370B7g1HrQ5S7R3O+Q8XuQI+OPw
p7dCvuQ7O7ZINIEzq4E++7YW+IBI++RGG7Vla+U/TrZie+V9K7VIfuVaTrdf7rZiu+VqPuVGuLU1
zrdg3n7zwt2QcioUUAHpYSZDxJm1/ECcIyTAmkhDl9mePehtXb5V2MuIBcnEOtrJy6fLur6p/dyr
7czRPNjRS9jEmelu2aXrwR4WoDdSkie45Of/QeVT3ffbesXApYnc3mzcih65yX11mpu+HRfOy5pD
jhPA5PJAzDIjyCIzDxDsd25IhlTstXI4yW7sv54u+XLsFw3N2i3Nm+m/hgI1ntdz+wua22y5UIjL
39zZdLqVjg51iW7OkM7OkSkIhi3bmZni4eA/kQPDCAzDBjPZEzbA3Ls1AUy+2uInfhI1fuLqTNMr
GGDwoEIrAz/BWimbGOA2XU3OEZ+aDG/uy3QYF191fiLRyPIHmIIB9T4s5hTy9e4nEdAuH6wy8g4O
R5TDVdzF9uOc2QPIaGw+PAzGMSXHYDzGDVnET6zGeJzHPA/zMV/GWizHaWzHfrz0PQ/EAXmr/0zj
YAoAARewKTAQ8Vh/AglcK1ufA10/A2AsxEQv8zrPxYK8Oa5M1tR8kZFUVB651jk57rJupi/pksDL
0O1ORs1t6R5EKxHQ4lYfAzNSIV8/KnS3LhMw6jxAARMQ6i/w7nVIzyCdcJBdy1HY1YrrRNjsXbgb
7rIe67OelW4a2sr9yxqnwZGeqeEXGJoTAQywGIk3GW2iANySeItxjplTe6hZgPMjAgZQAGby4g8w
ZPvhYOyyZfPhH5GjQbJPgP4hAF4tfaQefklyAvc8vZwe72vPWZB7RPxc9wUD67Mo/oB5uZiaSQ0N
zOcszH76KphxAALQAFYf3haJst1nAQOwFv8HUAE+NRkgsDhYEGVnFFEBEU3nFF3GMxEAgi0RBjyE
pFIIICQLAIVwekgkuInikSnwDplDjYA4cU9W7oLClTi431N4XDaDAd03PC6f0+v2Oz6v3/P7frsD
gNKJgwTXoFdXIRcAwBni4gnFQtfZFQbXg8kJYkZO5mZGhUIXoibXaGXX51JoJ2vG6UnqIVcEQMUs
KRuXQi6KFOfqb0ZEcAbGVi2yglgDAMOExSBBg4MDwgNGC8ZBRQ9ChMh26IM1ywNE67Q1A8ICRmHP
T+7NwbVDxRdDw5GBeJkCUqwQYOCAQahSXdKcILMMjZiGaxIRcvPnIsaMGjdy7NgnUIADBA7/FCgg
8kDIkSgJqCypspGgkSlJmhxJYOYBRydnEih5QGTInTZpnhzyU2bRAjZvnsx5dKVNn0hVsohaE2jT
mQViYn35lEXSnVmHSmUZdGQBWyyjmUtyIgqEBAS0FVCX7RkCbFKoHILwAF2wCA4owJVLSR4ABwQc
/CCggMwBCspaMACQ4IGCKAG0WVlQ410clTJZinT5k6dUmktnBrDo8TXs2LJnawwEyRDF3BkiiWpU
INcZ3pNUcYHFhNcJ46EqUEIuS9Qu3cqRe8KEIhSG6BlMAbCenXhy68WOWfJl61gyhbouW6Dg4xEA
wWXmZjBSecHWgKFuGRhgIIFF7klxg2AK/8QjwTxzNYDJA45Q0M1bACgAAH4EGCDSQJzERwx4GTBU
30SdfOgQcoHQdiKKKaoIm21c8NaJJcLBRMltXBCmXnguurKKeM/RIkwrqGj3So87FtfjMRUok9st
vyiJYwbmAfNQlMQYw0V61HVxAQMUbILBAw9UQIEYD1ywW2aPPTBYLMRUUEM6EwTDZZlikpkBBbkM
RoAFNtbQ5yYUPCCooDX4lcsmYT4Y2kIRgUjdiBNd0caKlVp6KaZwtEgIbpOaIZ4DyyFwQwAUBLdc
c7odUCR1q4IiJHg+amfJdNIRIyuODTo56zDnUSfleFguuR2WJ4iHRwRKSXBmbARwiIwcx//yYUmk
VFZbomuZarsttxxtulunMCrS6SSBUGhKKDdSWSuxR+po45Cv6gIlu0TKK8qwZzRo3ZNUAhumv7cm
ma+xOv3UJ6YuRAuaqQc0oE4GFyhwQBQR/NRAEAhQHEwnUF7rKURq4HhEtyWbfDIeIC2w8k8r4+cy
fgq43PLKox7RSAAua+GyzS4XAHMBMrN8gM9AC70AzQsoQADQMxO9sgI/F+1zZkNPvXLQTrscNcw5
s4wD1FJjbbTWY/v8jtVhA22sqw1RcAETEggWBAXXkBkmglIcZww+EfyCgQnpjDcYswYQUPdgxEjg
mCdiMI4nA4Cz4LgCjHmY1nYOeIbnmhX/MK0z2gv0vIDXK2sh9Ogvm54tyq27XrJtZBI2KJkFyJ7E
7VHIHgECXvomuwi79y677bIfIAHwg9V++/HJ7x4Z8c6TyfvtxZPZPJnBL2888tkr7+XwZB5OZiDd
SwD99td3X3cY6Uu2vuayn3/7ICQgkNlg9w+amQSjPpbsPQTzpPtdQQKVI8wXIETAuUSgIG95QDaS
kKooDSg5u7iSBIZwAgPITAyK4YQBleCZB42PTOGQnQOaIb7bnZB8KqTA4mQ3odfRsIaZ+laoWgWq
dFFCCAD4DSGWw6tP3YtWrJqXc4TYIeOQp1dLSFK8loALJOoGWFeyla+MNaz6He4CFjjT/w8w8Zgo
4YAT7ujgFkAjQpUoIz0JoFE9EtCKQRCwF2X4Qh0h0AA83eQtHdzNIKzwAw9FhFqOIlG7QiYR8JDM
ho58JG1wGK4OCWcXDZJQkCQRxRwFkUpt2026NvkcdQGJk7Ewkil9RDAp8muLTozFMTrxL/SschsW
+EZ77penzEiGCF4aAAKggITIMM4KjHnTHpFBTFLMZXGWfEDzHoeGMuwgCbuYRN0KYIAJWDMCDbDA
0oTxQYaI6JATMaTIkNNISLKznbURBLRCZR0lWMdVmJAnMtTlOQAEwBA5xMSN5gmtK+TinjwAEiYQ
UFBYQiugwrinFDCAgScJtJ4LDVNFk/9z0Yjia6AEsE6DxDDRLQgUWs2AFkYfmhyRwhITI/UoIwZA
AJlGkGhpElMDgRCB/0RuYoyjp/+OoQDDMVNpQSBECViigoWUwXMtcJRihqfUB0UNY4kY5EnbJUYE
YUIw83SphxCEDCOA9aNoYJ0706rWO5jrJyRRCUrcGle3KsWtPXErAmDyVruaxK1BOY1c6wpYvwYW
rncl7E8EWxq5/nWuiYVrYxvrk6P0dbAkMZhjM9vYw2pWrpzNLOa6caH/hCE7mCGXzCbKSzCtTArN
wUYEEBaLBijABGbtQgQSMIlmHEtwUTrpB3lnpuzwdjcIgIB1KAGFYvwCrnulLGIfy1f/xtIVrWu9
LnZdBE9OtWpcNppga9wgnAnSqgvHkc4RoRMrJVKHXUa0BXuZNEVmdMiKoSiPlbDjSjsoAGKvcVZG
jLARdC5SNx8DmYmyq2AFS9KT3pXEBGGSl/gm8hLvKmV17vWjROJqXem1VybV+5B9zWK/bxFYwDJB
yw7N4QLS4siz/IABZmWknOms8IHPsM4F8zitDVbVDmHFhZLAhMLvDfGRTynk3HQYvUV8JcC0CJ4m
URFknrBSE3uBZWHh6IoRMwCUrDiRLEXJUYLBkiVkGREI+ctREJBUmm0B5w59jMCPwlaP8+zOH1c4
RqithA8B8GcP3wvEoFwyhyls6Ocs/1pUuZpvvzD8L1RWKYsddc4xLCDHFE+JbVq2NJkrLKVQq5kL
ExizJc6ASDZj+GM2LnApd6znWdMQJGGZymnIQhqzNMUR4a0rr8UiFKtQRTRgQcuumSIWtAD7JkM5
C1RKcxWcHFs1IlE2rreya2hzmyzT/squU8MUrzB7KQJ4NrpJI26wRLsnzU7JaIYNlGefZKbhFsC1
nX0SR5T72tVmt7uLwhpwr6beZ9kKrRNe6+2Cq7su6hRziBNe3ER8XebtVJKbDDKNN7q94kkBloZY
jO5I2V8fj2UXrLhi5Hg5A5uu4pZLXumGHMPK1CJGnHshWwnUHMzIQaTNG3XjV985N/+yVjjSucVn
cT38u+q52SBIafMgY5hdG0YXojNOaSaiwsS6qjKtYm5llXOZ5SuXtNjJTHaZi3rNq3yLo07dhZcn
Eug5V2TR7Wx37Sa9793ic6ofjKchVgAmZRgOoZHMIw2LnOOLV7y7QrxhfZH80mhXMaeDxXZEeDnU
+AX1ksSM5vr+7e6E5MKbR//zOUPKnNZyvTqt6/fZp2jplaA6nibInUb4TeQWDjGMcH91xi/xw1BW
tC0g7XuFWjrsoJ/y2UWd9tCbOfqlRsbby2xqSfm8lHt//Y31znoPyZ725peNykx3v5WVLmagU5ro
Psd+qOWkEQhIXfuzprSk5f9oNFP/AP7pzNNkhtiQjtEIDf+RTdoQYNfMjIQoDde4TP/R39MYINXA
X8vITATO3/7ZlNIUYP8hIMWojelUDdIM4AZaYAlqIAjCjGNooOFAjQIMQAMqTc8woAS64DvITAK+
Hw9+jsyUzg2cHxGiSCBYj+6skOyUULkID/2QyShckg+ED+4s4e1oTxWqj/SAzxN6jxNaIfdsIRNi
zyS0DwyhTxYegfmgYQnpA/x8DxO2EPvIDxtCYfyQyfyAoQmpAPmYYR5KBh/OofF04R7qYRYCouw8
gBkeYgndoRI+omTQjqC8EBMm4SQS4gwVoSbGBuBRErmQ18PVHyYlnpI5meQ1HvJF/14pWpnViRyV
YR+9IEnmdZ6J0SLpgdoZrJ0y3SIsZp6cdIiqjZ+VuZrQwRrIHN0mJiNG2B4RcVeVQQIP5BWFAKPx
NeMqDt8pFh/mVd2tpGIsKN8Sid3ndVovMon1pdz09YKZjZmJaZ+qpJybCSMifF+rwd4w2iOClZ8y
7qMedCJ15JAmrdc38tMkqSJAsiLuSZ2+eGOGQV4qOZpzVF6kSV+hQdnA5Eqm0d04FgM7fho5sto9
ehr4wQCqTVlJtt7QFWPRJRIy8qNLpswPRUATvIPcZFBNLk4KyE3lyKQxHI9M2qRMyoxM3gDvNUEB
3GQL1KRQGiVSMkFQLkBNQtNNHv/lU/KkVP4kVTZBMwXl/9hkTWKBUnblVTKlTB6BJvCcTzLlVzql
EdSWWsokWJalW6aATpFlW04ABMgJAeQlBAClVhrKBBiV3DTQT95DTRoVT9alV8JlnDQQXy4OXk7A
+cQJBCgNXzbQVNYkNtQkZmJlE8hkXhxmONgl74SK3GxmYv5kXr0ka+7BEa6JA1AMPhQAPjgAbeKD
bF7DAszFbOJm5egmzlzDbQpnbd5Pb+LDYuDD/eHDbtbmcC6nbiYncSKnCFyDcU7nNTCNcuZFdDqn
clJIdx5ndlYnNnCnbdamdlpnNoQndt7fmjwAA/CmOQgAbCqGZxjExDgnbKZneer/p3ja52y+ZwPQ
5zX8QBQwxsTAZgNI53leQ4L+53ACqINiAXbG5m+m0D0E6DXkRGt2KFsxHG8EXtNBGHjwRuH9kCmu
otZlHfF53JOposZRHr/4ni5upC2aHZbQ3fVpXjnqoueppI6qpNw53EqKKN4hkvgxkj56qIcyo26M
V66kSwBsxaoY2kF23DO2aNVV40MiGudBWjvCgpfJUjo+xI3C3POdGC6G2d9039jFI5TMozyqJCIR
HT22JJMyqT96QUKK3EFOgjSOyu29KJ9q6cYZ2eOpqEWWHZPN13e0lziiY5oy2Tl6JI+qnZV05K84
SpCCQdxxH3jQY0jCWpLiWZ6e/6oiwBMm7AC00JMySRQy/FN9UIJLuaqsGtCJoii0rIpLyaqrJkNB
xcNBYYBDbUM8RRSxkhQy/KpCwSpj1Cq0ACtKIatkRKur6opEVSu0ulSzShTAYAKzfgMyrAkyvNS2
tpRE6YO1GkvjuBS5pqsVJNSiAE4ZYIK6nmt2PAgGWEC8Lmu0FheYaINEXUC/GqtEeZVEQQi+jtHB
0iqxuBRUupQ4lKvBkhGqXuxu8BNdQRZeSZZhVZZjKRZJHAACbMUPRddzddZPlKxz/RUC/JXIVtbL
dqwWSBfJuqzHBlbHVtfKOtbMrmxQaAxn4axntezOHgUBJMCF+KxkeVZfaQzMOv8tdR3AfwTFfyjF
hQDIf1iIf9CVSChtT/wH1RItdGkM0xbWyg4t2kIXyYbskmLsPu6plZ2XiDHZJ0qRIPzCsDzHioKd
oSYZyKVo4NYtyNyCd2SfgTSfpH7k253p2JXpzNVHzbUjsLgp0f0iF2jkjQUdGCjOOdHp+CUY3Oop
iBbkk/JQibJXN/BeoQJfojpeNpIio70uFD3artCL2JHppHJYpaop41qql2kana2Z5qoj6oHqQ4iq
nYYI6Crp6Oap3PoZvOBIJXXBxDVkw6VojP4t7bqo5DUumPIiQ6Hp7+Io29no2YkedeguMliukKIH
0xXp8IZf88be85KuEK6fAQr/TdbwoAfaDP+KIPwB8MrABIX07wkKTc4EsAZmoOj8jAJj4AgyYAQH
sATDn/7hxw6eIPxxTQUjjYSwIPztL9ZoIAfPH/9u8E9oYATKjP6tMARCMAfKzOmwDNOIMA2vHwAC
oQfP8G7u4AyOsNfkMNQQVQwLMdQQsAIssA/vjMz4Dwqr3wDf8AcKzRDebxGKx4sd4ZjMzhJ28SGK
QBfzDhg7i/eMsUIt4c00whXmg/iA8fF0cfCMCRl/8RlPTxq/cRje8SGi4RyfYRnLsaDhoTfYsRb2
oSG/DwotQBfn4Zj8Rh82ciEr4ZiEQxdrjiTnCSBe8iKasR4X4pgcThd7MiLe/40vJHIJYQYca/Ih
yqEqf7IXm3Igk0kmYnHSbcMaNMB/9FcCEE0oOKmVQelDHOTkDWTlrSKWEi7WZSmMbl03emny/Q3l
5u4rOe4ZWPPiXir17e6Ouq+nmlrNFa/8oiSsLW+Jvq0tK9gPSIEFSMEt2E4yBEfpEmn2Dp5ABuQy
3MxEHGTfEu5Csmgze+81vh2JWR5CEmrkOi7n9W5Cp2/aGenpIYM4R27qUYmcql490u83GyMi4Gk6
91g2LASHRsmSAPMn/anujWjuEUeuNsfsWiMxixJDct2WbqMyZwI4rgs1W2qUlePGRV95VB+jqq9P
d7PHfGoXuOk1C2Op4tghgf/iWX100oXDLIiApwCgdmUlTcpkVhImT8qMZqZlZ/YPVMpkbHJmVk5I
I0AlWHM1Z7bAV+/AaYq1TkWAUKYANPGkXzbQWdp1WS/m4rDlXaOlXqe1D8hkXtdkV2PBV3flYvc1
YhpDXSbLYdZWXv4AWnMmY3OlVdYlY8sNYvLcZE92NuA1AUQmBJw2X15GBOQlA9QWXv4Aaqv2BLx2
ZGI2Ty62aYpDEbg1T07YafY2Xdbkakq1wv0DMoixDgyKAZT0DxVobtombD7AcELThSINY7TndWco
Y9DmfsIEEeTFmnh3dhbnbyriYsDmbUKQeGsObwrndEsne/8ng7pneI53duf/FXO+t3QXqHzbd38z
RnrON3JON3m7ZwPAp3xXN9PAJgCiJ3Xiw4MjZ3Y3qICLwHhP92b494GmUAIwgDlQt4Y7+D3Ap4gX
qEBAd3ViBnen+IZeaH5m93COtHHTWgKYgHuUBBWwxKBoV428o0ojXm4Ic9VdEm1i3Osiauxq730l
OUCPnDRrIzmiL6MmkpddAOJCro9O9Kh1qu9mgF90yEWvb/2O6jiTX40n3HGMgtLqltI4Ssb+eJ8J
ntRB45NPihRuXXph4zVuEva+tEYZKnfMKO5aGvtqM/StAptOqi5mgDfDHRcoNTxuHzBuLkQT40af
ueimuSZGL51D9SrWOY8k/0EjnEGS/Skq3rl7OXmJxUr4/gqKke/4GvRCc4HwwvqafvmZGctEMwQG
eHlEg/lJllJtY7RTa/SRjp9Hc3rfHSG07ACs0hMm8KpEyVO2kkK0l+s/ESu2g2u5EhSehJerSDtB
OSsPABRJgauzCmyyJuzDTvs3QFS2w2q37ga7U5S6MwgupGu6v/uVJSxGeTu962ss1OtExau6j+sI
ABSYzbu8wuqaJKySuBRvHezCZ8A0fPtHUfyiZLzDR4khHOyCJCzCv7seUWzJk/tjJKw4fPzKdxU8
JOzGozmzd7rGPpbZBu1caUxdCe3T7rxgjcrPh0TO9yxR/pDOE710me3Qm/8taTC9xkBtz27WSEh9
2+r8059G1KOE02OW0u882Gd90rfttU391hMB0rpVAox924Js1nM9zpNsT5htAghAmxsADvxE3Sft
T/hHmwPAf/zHubU5SwT+Tdy9ZWxtXylt4jO+2Y5s24p9zyqF0xfA2TM9Otc8rX0L3UK0iYL65y+R
eUlYMhfzkh+0Q/65kn+jdyzfyeF6+ZqjosM+j3oC8AJ1Nku6pVb0BoFHmEf6/JKqStbNOWt+EZo0
nW9S9XpSjzjAr7H6TZ9+Mpf+Jr3iRB76mGazQlvarV/eR+biQy+6RB81OEPJGQwphplzRhujjmW+
8edZ9CYk6KOuQMsTUbb/TSvesz9Dv/M9UZVTHghUWVYp43icGSKO0XOmp9Jm74khqmzDY75T0U63
n26koBAduCNKqBwZgrNoBsI8JVSEE1a1jakWVkk2w8uQT2ZqxgFQyef0uv2Oz+v3/L7/DxiYBxew
oLBAcGC4UHioUOCIiLCIQBDZKOlYebn4GHmgSAAwqujpCGqoUNmJmUhZwLqwCHl64Fg4+1mq8Bh7
eADAu4AAeyt7SGuIeohpqmybWmyICerYazw7+UvQKU2gvbBsKK2Ae/jNqzDA6fidmmCZKtD9zp0u
wG6IbrjK3LmvKh4vSPriCDqIMKHChQwbAoJTgEIFCgseUJBIQKLEAxcl/y5woDECC40EJlb4aFKk
xgoZTWbU+FEiglEAAlA4IMEkSokqXep0MJGCBAQrX26UcPEkUIwdK+BMGnPi0KIa4eQUStRlUgoI
kEp0QIapya5JwZqUwFHrRLBJ0VJNiiBCWTJS03KNYJJt3bcy5U4smbSlRAV+KTxYEJSCYJYaD29d
vDhu4yRiBxd+QIOkSQUGHXr+DDq0aIVwuoxwIOGE6ScnUJ+gyKV16hGwVatAgOHEgwgnAtA8sPoN
7xElYo/YfaK47RO4dQ/PELz58ecVnEDXDaBFdeMjpGdAPiJ6jQc+MgBZ3qMJ9wxDXJQ/z75GEfPW
g7fHMAU9eytfxKCHUP8eGuutMUIb4Y1RxhkCjrBAZ6M9CGGEEjZUWmvPpXFAbqc9R4EJ/gmXnIes
oaAhiCMU8IAoo5QIHgkiLvgddS+m4R15H67AYnnKjfhAdsTNeJt85aXRXnpGuDEffDDGR8R7TiSx
hBtLQjlCGCOqYcUECmJ4gpZSpkFgBgYuucBsYi7gRoMTrslmm27OUeFpZgaXhmu0oYleix2uV+OF
JPgGAA8OcPjianoWehuLz0WnaHL1EQGAhtvpV6SNB84gpKPczTfppUjIdwYGPBSZZBrBEYjfekUC
iIOpXoTq6glhjnlqgtyp+Wauuu7qEEQRSBDBIRH8WgCwvxIw7LDCDvv/wAHJSlCssgsk26yx0FqL
bLKHAAvtrz2SIq2x1Q57rbKEMYsTudEeu5u06v7KLrnLvpDusfBy1u64xHIbwQHtRmAIt+tKQEC7
EvCSbAQEYCvvucMurK61Bww6bMDJQoyWwbxMAMEEKXbcMQEgT+AvBC8QwDHHKIOcAAMpI3xxyhCs
PIEhE1xs7cATJztMxOTuPKwDcSUb7VAO8op00krfAdEDDgitgNMPFOCA0w5QLbUtUivgr9RYQ731
xF5X/fTXzSrw9NRSO6BiTQggQDYia6NYNQJRV40I2VPrbfbbXlud4tNP+403AWRfTfZMFT1t+Nhp
cyP122TT7bThiSMg/3XeVtPtgCqZN17112yn3bm/hT/+kdMKGJA2AwWnHQDgkD/QwOtVx4761gnM
DTjumHVdNu9kK0K256EfTrzqwKv9NDBLPw/983G+MaeUdmZQ24iDvoanpzg6p99MowQQgIzctbjj
kn2G3+iPSEZ6JKWZek+qk5vaf2P96n3aZYBWXleFH+THe7NigJRWIwED3qhWbDgDAwu0pdYcLXoU
rOCEpnc9LsnmNYiaDgeltL4rseAABaDJcNLHA/R1sDvtU18L02coH5HAOjRqIZHmRx8k4Y9+OIRP
pd6jQQZFAQP/u2GTWuUGL90ITLa60qwUtBpcWXCKVBQNBhe1gxJt7/9ObrjeSdaTIfB5rzkSoEkA
kgBDC4UIhC0Uj252CKMeaWeFK8ChG92zP08liYZC6OGT+ANH+1hhgABEQpYURMjV9OdKDxSTAxHU
wC5OsIqUrKQgKoQBDAwqkxjoAiczxMlNZrJDnOykeTT5AE4erJSgzE0rUXlKT2byABUYZYNGUSwd
cFKWVeMkV05pSk6yIJSpzKQsc1DLTJLHl7o05inlOMpmBjOTw1QmE5wpzGRiwGmn5Aonr2NNTjoF
mMdMAiedJs4UZNKcymzAKce5S2CykyXklCcFzmnATF5AndjEQATcaQESvLKcEuAkwOLJSQUUNJMH
RSgGOGPJiEr0D4T/AAUxvnEABAQAARnVaEYzWgCMVqIAHH1bACwa0reBgqQl3ehHT1rSkFrUpSb9
6EWBQROSZpSmBEgER0loU5ju1KLAESlNPfrRnn4UqC1NaqBeGtSSIpWjSh1qTImq1J8WoKMHOGlG
CaBTjgp1qiQUKVhL2lWUmjURBkiAAQLgVlsAwK0JuGhbDTCAtsr1rhd160jpagAA6FWjJQWrXrsq
1bGm9Ks+JWxHFztStNK0hBOtrGXtgEEzBfE7ZkKhbjpLxxpVjzkqQA5OAQA3HpnvRiGc0guB5AL4
mQe2SCjRfIyIx/iNaI9S0p9ufXslIl1giZAskP/cMKYlMTGSTmzi/4ikeNnoWjaz+qkTh7pXyC1i
j7bf29ASG4WBCpQQlwQTo4v41MZEmTeNx5FhpwpZxyPyUL45RA9v5UdfH/pRVUN8VABdgEjuJDdW
QmQufJ8oSekquLLUDa4KrrenD3mRjmloEaPWG4Dx1qSgMVoja22oXg8Sh4/tlRR3f5i//X7ovlcC
rn7zu9n7bBbBPyiigZVbXEfeiMbPneSCf1zBBsM3jN7lYp6u+yUQM0eLMpLALUlRkdWOMb3MGY+O
VhgBGSrpjkaCLwvemMdCshi+Lv5jlHRL5v4OyLlLQmAE9cPjRg5YgkCuMxUrmogCyDStiehqIvKs
1J56NREnzfNW//9caFA8ldB/JuFWgZNoAgSg0XouqqQhDajxTbqnl+5zov38Zz17GjigmDSpK41o
UvOZhAAI9KBX7edTP/rSpDa1oS396USLuqi5JrWkA71rQdea0oeGtKpz/edOl9rXtnZ0sputa5kK
e9ShLvauVw1Wa0tb2b6xs7cpKGQ6Pbiz2BWUmbKHY/PWcL0vCilNwMVeFpr3wiI+b55k69kZ2NZP
mMqvf7u85T76u9+5re98uzOgGnhMBYTkwZzh7Fw5v/kNPv62xd8k5M1CeIUbR++8Q9xh98WgAt96
t93YqG6Qq/B92vl3fI9THvuoeLdwxC3AnzRzMg0xxvxR0P/c/KX/HI9puRBMU8UvjvQLtnqD3iOy
ibBXbjUSJ+oxULK8683eCjiAfGZMRG7oHXIvj0fKhZTjD06MQ5uPeTVrF3jBX1zwDPwcCmhupBId
XPQFCv2RsmKzoI6e9MCPJuPWOzd2DUUojxfZy691w25EpeFRIELl/L562N+bQny7vFJYJHiXMT/w
FMPY8xE4gwUaPoYWiKq3NWDVDwhceiTu2LlE1zF6oCv43EOIEItIhDDOmIt0VIMfxfDHOXaxiUU0
gxa8EMfy06EAV/CCGJdoBzQiT5NuQL8azIgESVPB/YFU/xeoTQdBjI8Muz3j96lYAEmFbw/xKx/8
tjB/9bMh/PoP/wT/vDBA/NWRDozgfXYjf8anDwSoAPAAffPAftMnEJ6gfMIQfQgIHL8ngeiwDdB3
fqKgex24e60GEw9QAX9hEoohESMYNSmBRiToERYxgiJRgoAxEWkxgjvBEiVIg0pxFiPBgjrIEyxQ
Rpn2VDkxESjRgzeRFDooFTyoGCNIAVaxhDHohE5xFVqHGCRoEjgxgloHEiOIFlL4FVcoFLSkGRrR
FVtoFkFhF2coEbRzgjexhU1ohkQoh0eIABAwGU6oGBegGSNoFmWIhX2xhYfhhCUxFnjRhlfYgxDl
gY0IGldUXaWVeOihXfGGBlRGIux2PlL2AJP2brshAhamcjryb/9mZ3BkZkdu9x2BFHr0YwUsRiVd
lgGJRHenKEheECAE9nAEFHFCR3VqAHiOKIwUtXRyQlxMB3VddG7c5R3atW6LF2Gq5WHhQXLvFihV
U3nddXm01SOSQmKWZylTgkOg93bfyCQAJnvnaANnsE9SgiozdkhBh46v546veAa1l1xRFIzDyI96
UBqZpAYRsEuspE29lEmrNJCZZJAYQEoJOUsFKZDGRJDE5EsKUEoEQJHR9E0YyZA38W6x45A5cE8K
WUwMiRsO2SMj6U0hSRTnVJIcSU0juU0OIE4nKZHhlElOcZHf1JI4GV42yU7bBFAXYAEDVUoK9Uk7
mVAy+QAMkE7/SulPNJmUIYmUDLUAVBmR/nSVU4kBuNePX9kHhPBTPdVSKuVRMSVSJJRYaFlYLLVT
ZqlYRpVYNkWWXxVWhEVVaUlTiFWWGmWNkgaXdNlYatlRG0VVT8VRd3lUcVmWhSmYS2WYb2mXkgWX
aPVoeUmZiblWd5UAG3VXeUVXAnAAcRWZjoUACSAABEBXPQVYoNlWArCaYcWXkqmZbfk2pkkMdCmb
hkkM+wiWv/lgxUg9x2iMRsYjhgdCkvhhmvghK7ecZvBuwEF50wgjWaYhSvKMXaZ2NdeK4tiKwLUC
rEdaomdc8ngFuViPBiZxCQacFncTEeEdCBFuhcc93FGJFIaJ/9ronJ6yn4wnKzUBKAUwHK31XjE0
R6qSiqTHiuWIoN/ZQwR2jqsHcWfGSF0ycQdGe3tndO1pcV0BAGaAXQdBeFUndduljNSZnS2SomSX
Qiw6nUORaQRjZSiKHapnjl9WcNsZZjwwZjr6W6Cyo7WInbVoe3h3BReKj3xXYHnXYxz6bYTxoVGz
EPN5IxB2eMgYjf65eGB3n5tInWBnYeIjecypR5rXoDCHX2had90pc6PHP28Hoe+4Zm7qKQtHjxPK
pEl6K77ppBF1E5N2lVNKCsCBarDWbIWqbLHmbLwGCoTWqLEGaJ7WZ792aoFGa45KqNsGbY+6aYaG
aJKWaWCVbf/M1miDVkLPxqmcSmy1pqqyhqqs6qmMyqrDplQFEGmm1lXaxmypSqvGNquM1qjKdqlp
VVSpmWqS2qiFem2LBmqMeqys1qd2ZgUUIpwZRJ/GGUfkpnhht6JfSqZayq2vkWmF8BwPtSlatnn7
lqY2UK7f2HYKmkeIQV9tlnp613c3povoOXsGpqcf4pXRGl0W6RlUeiVWap+TKEL5SaDc6KJL9nEz
8GSBgifk+B34xowz2mI5x3bcCa8/2p1Eomb7yqTplgF3R6/3yqTrKWF8CrBVxDZ/FiAiWq2ada3J
2JxkJ24l2q0ix584O50itIUadpVZaqAjdqZd1qZqeoo8uqD/b3pzHWsecbpzRxt7d+opi0SyWMKv
GuqvLNuyVIQUEpATgroa10MnTPZBlIic3/Wwmbh4+baNKFdvd9RJ1khbWXagrJV2QcKmH6uKsGiP
Qfpf4Zk/fpdEF6qyGIqv//m1P5ZtsSOojRB99ccIqWAKzad/m9CAk5sOxGC5knu5kxsNEsh8XJO5
xVcOqeB704e6oPt+mGt/wlC6p4VLEii5wKANzpC66YCBppsOoNu74Ud9o9t8lsC6tmu5r8s1xit+
vBC8+ne5Aqi6CAi6wEuB0JsM5ZAO/gd9klu5vEuBxvu9zqt/Ffi7quu1jVtBtXQSz0EHhOECtiAT
zmIFpXGC/xWxhS0xgvp7EiLohSyQv/frvxUwFQG8hTlYESdoiEexhUZIwFmxvyf4NFtYwBF8wESo
hDd4wQ0MFNURnSbohx8qEV+owCdYHRichoyxhWfoh4oIhwo8iC5MhhY8gixMcjK8wngxgoTohLSU
vyZRHTqMhAZcwzp8w3G4wBpMcjTQwybMv4RxgjyswihoxMGyhVPMiOobXdoSs6VFNdu1TSFVUBkl
QWU7WgWLsNmFZNWlsC1EtN+6s+DaImI6PlHQjTwrdm37cp9Xik2rjpyCcxQqoQc3yIo7j7bYP+mY
ZurJtU2qxdFFHptkB0GcjOIFP6pQxjqbRVj6i4cit0+HIf+NJ2E+67BKy2Xh2EmdmFNKYIpDCrU2
h8r/1qNEWrUGF4uz/F+ubEiL+yFYC48UCiZm4mTs+cgThRY44WRdfBu8ARuKEQBI4AT/mEnTEpKv
RM0HaZEOec0YgJA3+ZAZ2UkTOc0l2c3hTJKqZJPm/M3n3E8iCc7eRBFm5C8AoJLpDJPurJBSqc74
PJPMdJHPpM83AZX8jE6j1EpBWdDhZZRLmZMLvU4L1c8NDZW0YwESTZUQ3VD7XJVaKU4wmcXFbEnc
DFa7URF3gDkuYgETkJoScAEGEM3WCNMxLdMzTdM1bdM3jdM5rdM7zdM97dM/DdRBLdRDLdMgPVEk
h4g1UAf/cWEeDWAAUTMBbeUyEkTUVW3VV43VWa3VW83VXb3TRj1RE8BpKHIH8HsF6yACqDkBWgQA
BaATLniDJfzWJwiDMNyCdM2D4jWFHCHAdj2CfF2DHYwVQKy/NjgUhA3EWvgVXRjXf12FT3OCJLy/
+/tu0zLDjU2FEszYMkiFecHYkj3FaXgRl83ZZNHCOHiCpm2FOIjYqS3EnF3aSe0YhUjYUczEPYjZ
cWESs63Xm+EXS1zbKJi+YM0rBkABAtoAEEC2yJizxWmznqJd6BbKJXq234p4aTtleryw5/pudIRi
B7eKYbax4v23O+RiEHofLhcmtVzIQGevS1qk/erIxF1J/wqFNmCx3Is33dBIWxO2rSoKctHNsDRa
yuENtGBmtPf2ZJCgITSyt1XmtwxauN8ZuGgGssS5H7w8Ir6cnik7BsI8cXBA35YkASK4OtMqszC5
zfdszVlZzjC5kC8uzl2ZlSxekCW5kt4c4/Y84wt5z9WESv7skHAwhjl1lT8ukz5eSj0Z0Qzp0E/j
Sw5N0AHdSkye0Dp50QY90Bt95Qt9AQ1FlMd0z1y+lRqN0WXOEgk13CP+Ji/CEGL5NnWJm2Ml52rZ
lxelUoRpUnNZWHLpmH2e5255lnj+UYK+mILZmDUF6IW+lnEeKCoF01K1VYuOm5POWJZZmZfel295
VUnlU/+cnpuUPpt4CVIWReqnPulxbugqxRl3xZoI0FZjVZqXuVK3Oeu6GVVvQ1lsXkUC2yszi+EG
myeglZwpN55YN+B4HMdxDLfW+QM9ZUbPAVw+urR9C7VwJ4vobaNzOrJBtIuGHN+NDCMizut3xmkF
k9/D2XTjVp+j3O5Nl59O15/Xjcdg2nngSMoVa6MM+W4C+ccxV97kLeEZ66ARDt88p+GF9O3ynbgw
8q/l/jzcPAFi8ubAbqTqbqJHht0upMkF3p8tSuD4vpxY9413PEO0IaY2USNDooqxrEMC77Sw+KBn
2t45xt5BBAHu9N5am6fizgMPD/FK0zkAAAFMTRo1wbv/+ndGFpj0ncu8l7u6AdG9Abj0sMsLVR+6
UU99v9v0x8v15oeAUY/1yhv1oVv1uOv1V59Tyht+Y3+9nVu6Z8+8W9+8AxG+cA/28KeBey+7CFi6
f4+Amlv32ssLChi7g8/2zOv2ev/10bfmQS8hCkXPh0G2DTzAhjjZAryFMPjDNTjAnD/ZB2zC+Bv6
fz36nw/ApT/B/3vFmO8UJrz6Svz6aNjBD9z6aPihrP/DflkTZVH7rm/DsX/Ync+FcejDpX/CtG/8
K4zCtQ+HxM8VdHj8sk8YaOjCro/5TamH2H/F1b/Diuj63n/EtC3ckF9BmBEMXZHuZrvJ0Hil7g9G
aAvv/9ZN/x5/73scjgVao2saHjRhAuEIAkQ2ZkhFPg+JIWQmjpE6si48KmfsrC1OkSI82sHmUgAz
mCLpllkkM5LhyDe6QRou5tUFJU2b3miYxHUAXOo1u+1+w+PyOb1uv+MxskcUr0bfOESYbbk4SJBQ
KBSOPAyOKDJWYaA8ZnCVUI4IklQsEjZaRoJOosxcuiBoZjh2fo5wPQBoVlihjlQQAOwqyJBm5ASd
1kr64tpiBsecLpEoZxgrIY/RTDtHCa1gck0wSN6OfI2UgT+RLUgupPmxt7u/w8e3UxwcELy+A5Ic
iv1yQqLrl4EfQCNmVv17sWVVK1z4AlnyZLCKDlaWnP+YMNXJ1o0IAHRIFAgsQoBdAag4eRathsBs
1SYCw8bMCpIgVJqJrAkLpjgpVMphOQXUC6IdIhcU9ZlunbymTp9CjaoGCaUFltyhKRBhKwKrW7Vu
jUDAEVevQg6EjQA2QtewDtCGXSuWbAQFZgtICDs2bNutb9Pi3aqgl1+4X/Nu3SuYsFrEc8MODvvA
sFrIAMj+jZt2rIJdu8jKVVyX8QMCgCGTNq057AFBiyWrjnCA7oLUp1m7Ln17a+uwCxDABjzB0WCy
ulfzdh3hN3LZyplvfbAWAVOp1q9jz75mAZ8L3Cu2QxMgxQMECsgXIC/dAXnz5BfMRt/+fAr46tOT
J8D/PgUCBPL367dffw+wt8BY6Al4HnsOHJhCegA6IKB/Du5XWoXu1degdO0BECGBGuKXgn4poOGZ
AiFaKCGBH95HngL+LQiiegdwl8KL+zkQIo373UiijOTRSCKKKAZpI4wOqieAiwm0KB+Q3BUY34ZP
8ijllJNVp52WW3LZzgIFEECAAGHCo88mSW1jSFIUBLTTmYngk2YlIqkyp0OSNJRBSF2QUGcov/hp
kSt4znLMN8+UCEAABRxR0UrWQDPToY5KigOlPUz6S0qXEjGRBMzIGQ4ZVGDSEzngqNOlqquy2qWZ
AyXlBCYJjcLnQKK0qdBBdpYTaJ576ironYAydFEq/xWlgGlLHw1rawmO1uUZATqoVKmtj8KkU6TK
AuPoTZiklARLbv4Axk+hdvONE6aiRM045+6TZavz0qudBIMNlhRWAED0y6xr5hqLKHGmgpCxfRY7
KCm/clQwr5j4GhGksoAEabcalbYLAZRktMxGxYCaqVEvWSoMt+WIg5OzPbmkBLgkQBDyL+zOPOpE
qdabs85SIUBBBT+vsm8BGBBtFdEYbHz0AUBjwN7R9x6N9NFOEw310UkTvfTUD1wd9QEUbH00Bap0
TTR7FRA9dtRYLwG22Q6UTXTPRxMoNtlEYy2L22rHzYLbGNSNQQUlAVDAb38HLvgBa9PtANqKM340
Av8SNH50BYsTrYAEjyd+eeSZUw5535ofvRzRFlyAOd50L3AB0Z6PvjnRpq9+dC+lL/C41EXLu7Pv
v+NxCAUS+ByPeP0hACbyAfR3AALMI6988wUg4PzzzYeJ/AHUV3999wE473z2/UFPfvPJE9D99udD
b0/61a+/PPLJW4/A+N47z7z1yofPff7YA8B68fvf9wSYvfzpwjPhs1/6+se+7o2vHv7DH/0g2MDq
lQ98yDsgBuenv/4UQIDlo2AInZeA7CUAAQYYYfnCZIAEvFAAMIThAF74wggSgHskXGAEvZe83gEv
iEJ0Q20WECF9hYdf+4jVNwiSATZNxIlQBJQL8gT/sYQ1Cxy/IhjCeIWRVWxFYeTyiCbGVQ4FgPEU
G3sA4V6BLVK8kVwX81ifnMGpKmQrChZ7RsxckABJDEdd7lLKymxGCjQMMZGKZAMajyaPVzkxVLCC
kySk+JCFeNFhf8riDbYIk4gRSyOcRAGz9HTJPt2RCRTwjFZYYa1gxTFYc9xWp0pGR5d9I3e1LCQJ
JvATJ2ABXjUz1zDftZRFInORtWkAAxqARHZAkom72gSuoljNUG6yHIvjFbAEJsZeYVGWHROWniZW
SjMm4443oEABPOOIV3Ihluk0Gclm2TIzhqueZ4wCBH5iAEAK01naIse6DEkunCUzocCjgHr6kMQA
/+CLAAfAVwBqM5gC4EsBEsVX8jKK0cFsdDAdpahHMxpSBUAUXx8F6URFulKURrSlL3ppSi9qHpZS
1KInMqlMRzqYmh4AADf1KUxVelONyrSiKvVMAHtKU3zZg6NPNSpU7+FSqg6mHhmt6U6xWtSfmvSo
URXpALaKLwNYFawqDWtV1xrTtpIUpEBUKF1ZRQ8B3As8SZzWz77zM77+1Wd9fcDPKlCXwuaisH41
bA4KC9hcCLYCi33s1wobocJKwASOtazjfpZZxFJ2cz+77F8RewDRVoC0FRgbaC0LANF+drOFnRxn
ZfuzycliF1D4GT1aO9rOrnZptq0Fah+QO94K1/8TESiscQvb2+H2Arm+ve1yf9bc4QL2AY0N7nSV
y9zjJraw0f3ZYW3bmbqit16TAwCbvFEmJb7JWf9KRK4CsSYuloKaItmmfiFxSnIC64uZ7GI2iSEQ
WdCiYQR2ZU5OwMbPGKolr9wUPaVhR5ucjMK4PEoUAkmDfwrEw3IsKDF5aUxSIDS9Ku4SEl77AC28
t19y5O+tKLmwa8o3nFfkJn4T0k1NMliO40xWFmNRyh+jssLzZIU7LbwweB4BGzehiUy0cShx7REb
7h3BH0nRz28kw6ClSooEAhavFaOZS+e5zHmMB99JyldN9LXmN3fcX3GGM8C8qhWeB5xfACsYGkf/
DvQs84SRipRoPGObSDQMLNA7qkwlU+aJuF5GAprRAJi9/BalMWxiQtoqxWkeNVQwALbfAOeRhePL
XTZDl76cZTewzsxXXA2ZVuvl1YyhdWVeU5jdzIUskak1blDjFsqspTPGQXZaeuPrXifHMkyNDbSL
Ex1qy8XZdQHOtYv97OMQO9oywHazn8Ptcd/mAQwADmiA3RqyQAfabDELc9rNlbmSOt/zyFVTsjIf
JyHp3/WxUogwZFyCN4k9Bh/Shehj3B+Vx+EGapKIGg5wCwmcRQCnzn4mfvER8WdCV8K4kRIF8ReR
h0EUxzh7UO6j/FTI5RoPeMVffvEiaVfkIw+R/wKYZHOaT6ZGOb+50BWA8BQEVd9Kl0eZHRm0fdnX
XwarM48/qWMge/LGVF+wFbE+DPx6BCT4fVYQLLHkbeV2PHCE8oVvOS5tRUObUfbX3EfgSxeAmFx9
pPulDUriE5MLkUsf/DwIsIDD2+WZfojmfuXs3yjeF8xTdxYoR1ng/2ZClH0ucKApFuFHa17DtHzw
Za414UZVONLesjKHdynLnnyZBl22Vbo0NUhylMqgwRI14Xs/h7wi9unQfHNCJEkrM995ipS/+jRr
XOR9RGTsQzb7sTSPZCbrAAPST2X1b5nb0seT7eVyO5VTn2V9hnnTYK6w3K9R4teTOaC89z393f9A
gZ/0m19HM1rt8KY7o6GN1fQfAGKAAO5O1vwf1/TfEqAN2jhNAN7NAT5gAUYg22iNAyrgATLg41DN
alXg1LCX4NDD5/jN61CNBs6NA8JN2njGeCRNBdQN2oxg36Qg4CzA68BOCaJNDJqa6mgg6YjOApIO
6qjbBaDODPafcWGAESLhD0oA6liAEvafJ1AO2tAO2mDNedXfFq7K8fTH/bBQ9zCQ9kxQC71P9VCP
9bBQ/YChGIbQBp1h/JjPF8ahDvlQBdGhGs7PG9IhGYphCwXQ9HjQHrLhGX4QHo7h9LSTZ8ChH+ph
9BTiIIIQG9phGM6QDNlQDaXQ9WTiC5nH/SD/ACbOIQMZQH8kACbSkA0xUAL0nByOEB/aTyVuEL5x
YS1CBeNRnuM9UX0t0ZxR0cNgXfRNRNYtn59lXjbhUxAUipOB3i2d3aNQAOGoHS0xoyxVC7c8w6dk
mBdUhKWJCswIhTdqI999I+Dl3vuhCi3aYv0ZoREK3+IRH5pgUnyZEp4I436Fk4Bdnj1u3Z91Hdfd
I7l4Xj0CijqhHvk9EVMNgjwdJDW+HaSdXzWmn90FFDhkgSD13fv9HaiBg+Ct40cCgyemWoz1YpyV
5BP9lyV9Q6AUXzB+UycF5OaRkz4C2jAuo6NZI7KcwjNKCtKYSJBVo+itBBdIGuuZmMq8Hj/J/wzt
hWMu8ROMoYzu3cD8gWT92YKqyVj7JR/yOd8uwgSNGdo8duX1EWOvIAv1JVkjfF0xHNnYXSPlQSQu
BBUvMKT7IeT4OWREotMgXSQ5SsCWDYVdgtpGngoXUGVV+t68OQBSuBn4SFQBhJBENZVEBUCYSFBk
2oNj1sNkgolEhQn42MMBaKZoeub2lBABgCZlliZkug9qhmZQhSZkeqZreuZoVmZsgklmvuZtPiZm
0uZm1kMO8UttvuZkkiZuBmdqHmdvzqZmLqJJ+OZoGidvmmZzBmdn2gNrEqdEwWZoUud3liZvhskA
WOZvwuZjkmeYmKdtqmd11oNm5hBmyqZ3xv+mOiKm0gHH8BQPSdKj8QFMJSWFZK3fSdoZgOFXWRbo
P/pjTMbTMmqfyEADWtpSXrrAc5Ye+jVk3NFERYwjHs1M9lkM7DWll43opxHU7cmffd5nvh1CBRgh
VhJoE/3ngQ2M1Rlj5RGkrZQlTYYlQL4kKVVMtuhkg5lfhTIVfyVj2zkkUa6e6+XThn3a3dme3ZVo
VL7fOQJeOq5oLRqIeuLf8EVdjkFfPx6f5AGjjz7fPmITOUHMkGJoI7TlSnKfksZSAUhj4VDCXtKp
tcCd+M1SRGbA3s0YGACmN5qDRqJoJanoljIqG+CiVsIZSg5jTNJkQvAopVYdneSjS34eLN3/JKE9
Q49OKJGV0xZ4BETtQgsk6YTG0VtCaU466SDV3qvegJS+KpaCGq6eylQuaqOqmCcsplDsS02dFFdR
z1uJVFp91UkRlbEeVbF61LM6lVmBVFo1a7RGVFo5K1zNFLVqlFBdVVzZFLdua1ZZK03NJSt1q7ie
iEyNlVqdiFgp61Th1LrCa7xya1fBK1p561chFbnyFFTRqy74Kv0hwc+0mRy8RQ6MDVpEASAoFmGV
VmEll2RJrGFp1sRabGGVl8ZeTmRNlmmB7MWyxXSdjWdlbHj9TGWN1sVSVmSpVmxpLBrAVso+Fm39
1nDhbGoB13OVVmd0SAJNRnftrGr5bNH2/2zF3qxo+azKepd1gRcFPFZ2KcAFUIAFNO1jjRcMgpfW
VhfXTpcWFizhodEmfCkbeMIFMEBlUk71xEuYyhKNlanWpemCSl2mBh6Ddh9QtineatE57dGcUkSR
gkI75QAjQug9bain3WrdQWpP2KpWxp2hYlpSouMZ9OrY0hVb4ItetYH29Zx0VIEVQJKEloNKCgTq
muSdVSqmZhOfXaqmWl+gkVGn8qgaNSSpJmluKcIuFEAUCOVSuuqqHiqtOm7sGW+WykqiylHl7l7m
aq5C6afntoEnUAADtFNVkC6eoo1VPM7GfG8DYgB3CE4BolH4Fg3XBOD5rs7jfE35niD4Zv8N2GBg
+X7W1XAgYYmgKnxv+bYN/Oqv1DxODU6g2vSv2bCXDPJv7aBNzwBN4sgvC1Qh4MCNDC7OAVfALvjM
XDpO+8rNBCshxUoOCHfwyvpvBE+O4HgOBmsfCN9gAx6AOyKN69ig+BJAOyKNBZTveNlg+b6g9i2X
4CyHDZfvYUbvipVHbfSMHCiCHvDL5rxQvJih/FDxF9aPHD7PiyQiGkriKG5xGDbi9GhxFvehIFZx
8sxPG57x/WAxIAqQLEJiGN8hLLIxHNtPqj4PI85xJFYxHZ/hHb5i/YDxJMoxGcMQRN3QHwvAGAfA
JiKiKxKiH/Yx9B7xIlnBi8nB+E7UITj/TwNAwNvGqD/MaOCNMjidqd3WLYJyqimr6Rg5qPSl0S+U
7V26cuk9pwrwJDbGpSxXROCCQZVyQYdmwOxZqTkyb+BRciUnEgAmbByURtVeAgFQDijT4/KepPIF
i+rKpKgeo4FO6o+i6Ta7LvbZbobi7p5uYwzwQkKmKqzS8vASWspQrpRhZKBCpSwRZrtkZJYaZjIr
sxCNb39cBdSFMixMXo52ZERw5SUwHyojtDfVLdllU9+q5ckYmdjJqZLtbV0KmlApAVPZjzljIz2/
6fjpKV4WJiAB8zHrakB55D+jWQUQDyQ4FJiepDXTI+zuGeax5MH8mY/9146ucuyWszon/5iQhl7u
nl4MPM/vIk26BoBI79LwUm72zXMvLWWwIG9gluNgHvPzwnSaXYBIPQAEJMAnv5dzYiZ74qZ10md2
lqdrvrVqIidlBudybk9cf+d15uZnhudulqd2iiZg17VuznU7ladyKvZqrvVdU+d8fqZjx2YCVeai
TBt3LkphoyZmM3ZoyrVde2diSzZne2YBjIn7KHZoDoAAtOZeh7Z12jVpo7Znp2Y7hTWaRUIuzDJ/
Rqp/dgIvtrI4VZE0ObSeBXeCmi6OGreglRGoGiSdWsJJywDQLtpz0kQs11M2VulGSpIujcNKf3c9
F2+ufnU/3/aKXW8GjDX12nQ1y6iNkf+yL87YQSN3Pwp1OBP1QwNpRLtqLutTR3DNLmRWRytKEsAz
nU4aL/+340auOFZkS7ceP5/ZeadXZn1KL2yOm8GtbxdE6tao7GZTfi+3KodzfVsekx01iM+kUlu0
MGDALrCFEhCOopzAgbNqVmsYUuIq8up4LxVqpxnzPnOkeVM4etXCi2jxQLd3pMrKQWPzGQToQoOl
6cqt3gZ3fh/a7LIlRhekRqclhUqYFLTzE91yTBCumdPyPi24YEZu3mk1eHf1iQp5SoeDPxc54YkH
svorV53U9nhrSKFhvx5rvfrroP+rFg/sRJnHtWKV/SQVthI6o3/rUNErvr7Iu5brvy7/+sDeQwKt
lIVaevVYFQh5VZhIlaBTOqpnK0eVlbiauha3+r2GkEhhuke1lKiL1LLa+Z0vHcQO1nCx7MZ61nap
7GIBn8cGe8hS7Mhils3WFsp2F8s2DXC97LN7oMm+FrTrLGqp1tJae9YyVwdTR3JhwHPWQ3EdVw/O
Fro71w1j7QUQwLtbAM7SAwVYrQW4u70rAAQwFwN0F19dQHPZO75bAHRVVw177NZ2rMqKLa9v6aNy
uKSmbuSpODcrd1BbuUObeKke2Kci9S0Fb4tXNDB4NAlYaCmBuT0JhZs/KVejeQbYKga4ORf0ZfLG
OamU96XtusOryvVCAQWEEW9bqljO/23eyrc20bdYkrg304mbipPTX1/YRfQ4RQNFpzwszUA04oXJ
MxXKt2qVyd6VkcDM8+VPEHOtwvl4y/nNKyrPJxQGTEABDAB5sPcdQPx7Px6Nwrc4qzitYHw/drOC
Br7E2GSQEunIuzNQ4mT4cb0afR+ejgyUFuWHAXnq5BFWG6VFVuRGtgyEC4QRu/3vjM0im4fiBU/h
kIV5yEBlkMWBcEUvOMJf2Nu8YQZa2Jsj7IUjdEW7tf47jcbqy36t6f55yACDrD7rJ0YKTDfxqwVd
6MfqW5uIHL9WEMdlvJNp8H5iCAJxMAb1az/0E7/0Z7+1kQQAMP89dP1eRH9pkMW7yf8AdIg/sTlC
b8Q/8jsH9PvHHuQ+8r/I6kvH9INAFD3RsYzRgpBRgZYL+ahyiyJApu987//AoHBILBqPyKSyuFAE
FIfI8ucAFB5YRAx7xT662e3s4P16EQrvguwFPwiOc5o7wsLlXgeh7Moq6g5sXGV3fm11b2VoeQSI
fQ84cQ96joiFDwordF4HkpgIgHttXpllAACSVwenrCuZlpyepV6ig5xitWa3pHN2fGqavqO7WLO6
WJ1qUYfIOVPP0NHS09TQChQJkw7UVQQ7DhI7Bzzj3+E6FAvk5jsV6uLrOw/nGd47CBjyUjoVCjz2
GUi08wfvXj4dAnUAzIBP38B/OyL/ADjYD+IOBQcD7qvHQ0GFiA92YEAQL8MIkaco6BiHoQArAAEq
nNQx8uJHHTN1JCiZweMOAzx96pCwreDKHUR5ltOxQOXQohmWZmiKFGrUb86qad3KtavXHpKahJzW
jZ1CnuB2pLOYIS06gmcNftsotSHCjRWNJsyQN64OuxqNMsy4t+9VhABuViApGMFNk2MP6xAKWSRj
vzkxnAoQ1+VLGSKXUs5pQepCoRh27lhIVQeEyBhMV+XJ2mmGpH6n2sZ9lGnWr8CDCx/uo8IDDAoK
2I5WVodbyVEzOsALV/J0te96ryS8ceEB7g9XO+RXvS743I7lwb7MEfFN5Gx7Ps65/zA9zvUlM2/u
LfElgE6WXWRbBFaxJ9U1PwVl2wRWAWUUg0rx0NptUEk1IW+SLfAbcRx26GE0+VhwQTVVBHAAAQcU
UACKBJiI4gEBsJhiASfOWOMqB5y4Iost3vhfjTHWqCKQNwaJ4pAsupijkiryqCSOQBLAIpIwFikj
lT2+yCQAThZppZA0ovikkTYm6SOYJ0oJE5dZEuDfKWGeqCSZSKqZI4o/iimlmgmYqeWVK6Y5wItt
EiBAly/mCaOUaZooZ40EUNlko0Ju+OGlmGY6XHNt0SOVVM+tZdRz7kRoFnSAFVYdQKrylCpdPLwa
HmYTkRcfYDkdOB9+RuXEkAIAkP+01JsA8CofUpExxNMCjxko4WOv8eCgdhIk+6mEu1WI7WxGaajp
t+B+iwEF9EDD6XPe8RBqdu0F9tat57U72Hh8lUevYfXFm++99rrHj7M20XvargGKd59lwJIEELCs
aEjAQTVNNh9UqSlIk2wC7gChwX5NwABt2z7FsW7caudtuCinPBwGWJDF5amfSkddSdehw27M9JrH
L1utNhZvXY+1TBN7rCZG06qxEqzdsQcPnd96VQBQQkQvFRCAFU5LDJK08aEGMFO2QWCVatpFK5iF
2Qp2oVVLVaHy23BvZYHQzL3sHD3pnkoB0nepxfdfMo8MWM0Z7F1Sz+jpG2u8i+X/VytfXzMdUGQD
q9cO0VtfnIFLDyxFgWenaBiASrEF3HQGFQuGGsZa6zABbNO2uzHqrJMscm5rs3Vy3Lz3rsQFdJsL
kwLEo4iGE8QTXwACx6NIPPMFJI988Qckj0D0yT+R/PKZKOA88dqDjwYazo+PvfjUj3/98dOjTz4B
x4ef3PhQEPD89dKH72b10OfPPvdoOFH2nje/7gnQfPl73onUF72rwYh+oKta/5R3gPEdMBMC8F/y
jAe+BG6wgsWDX/fkpz/7xc+DFLSgCNuXHP7Vj376s5TvZkjDHrAsWc/oRgV2GAMM7JAAO9zhAYLo
jgcEUQIeCSIQeWjEHUoAH0ok/+IBKODDIkYxiEMMYhyO6BglVtEBDqjiE6tYgYcFEQEU2CEGtvhD
KaZxh2BU4xOJuMQKVOGNFPiOF88ogQr4MI4/JCMC+gjHMO4wj3Ss4iTUmMdxbUaQ/nGAS5qSxX5I
QJELuICIKEAATVLgAmbc4SB9mEdPgnKTFlDABEQ0twVUEZF7NA6zYllGIirgkjtMAS1vGcQZkDGU
wKqhMIdJE3K5DCDPuZbe+uWueinlZ4vbGccQJy9ZLc2aztSL0VCHOdNVJjejMVa7MkMSzcCkI/5B
wymemLHTKWtkCNJB7E6TNsEABEPKBFvJaoOUm2GFmAB9m0xuw5Vz4Q0t9BCVX/9C9bd59S1xc5mV
ZKipM4RQLpoPhRxbJEKRyKUqMrrKHDefdrm/nPMib6LAKSroTdKQTV6tuUA+JUeg0JSEN6UbWe6W
tlO/7C6gQNXUWijDDbu1BVbiCJzNaLYRhULnOxFdGlQziq+oZhM9QUPqX4IWGcMs5QHbrOo9lFZN
skbML3SLmEQ4g1L/uOAUlxkNVC4QuwPZppuTqadO2ILPZdGDN6z5K9t28NOgGtZDElAHYIrahwho
QQaNTYQMHjuCQNSgsZSdBBlQENk93CAGI+gsFkaABkAsI7QiwEQaKtsIyKJAsiQoLQlEKwPioYAS
riUBsOJAoNaiVgbJGIFtZ/v/2k7U4RVYwO1vI4BcXzAXJsUlVgm4hIJk6LYXieBscT0R2cha9xOw
0G4xQJHb5XbOE2sQ7wiCO4MV1KGxqzisfD3ESSeggV11A8NjZ+uFFvRXtmNwxGR7kd5hkKAWjp2D
f0ebC+LJwLKj7UKC8yAIGzB4OsVY7TEiAIfj9gLC/C0GKljb30dwWBbu/UIdTlxbDb9hxY9wMAlw
2zkujdYEb2rE1TRhAg8TQsA39gSCTdxjEtCAFiUe7ZE3EWISmEAGR16wk8WwZP+SVobzzTJXKBAA
FQlgALGrGzI9hVCJfpUeXuXJXirazDRTtaHYZDNF5fG4s8oLIyKt3OnsDBBy/xI2WALazEumG4B8
hNOmqntM7Sbkq4Xcc7Bq0yvaSpYhLGv50jM06MhA1VR2IXNmm1ZcUqWJVlBfU9SAs5ytOCYRxTCT
IWQN6Z6/5ucdcG4yEkjJSxxzim3E85sjhadt6toRvWaA2LdbGj+TvWwK0czSmI423DQtVXUllJkM
dZVSURUvw+nF1NUkDEgx2uavgVUxeJUc3fQ8uZKyWpy37olKg8UwXZ/z0FnjqVNkGh9GW8XREYG0
vks26WS3q7DSTjg03pMRaVShAD7EQAzUCMSI11Hix3GiRywe8Ylr3I9+rLgfp6jFjGNA5LF5I8bl
6BiLgxyMYmx5yEGeci0a8v/kNCe5H+NISpnjfOcAwKPPUT7KHU6C4yAfpBphfsghIn2NDggiIiPu
kqiPJLEwASsrrnYK4q1SkzOgIytPqckLKAACnnR6yMd+9rI/gAFln3rII+7LKCLdj3/o5SxxHvG8
+zHsFAc5whVO+CNgQMrVqVsAmIcA4zHvCcyz7/gcD4XoMX7xzOMgAlKUicd3fn3dk9LlPw/AxleQ
8Zb3fOZPX/nPQx56kTf96FHPeNnTfvaND1YAlxf5168v8qJ/POPnx/gFIvDyxRch7C+/0vWt4j9u
BZ0BQm/CTAyg88hDfQI6z3t1Yr8ACZj+5uE3Pt9jfvyxNz8DY7/ATPi+++j/7/zrXVL4+ithAmB4
jMONmswyL3VUaOZPcnE3PkNqEwVucqZVDtVmzMRRR9M1WZVoImVnS1FrOuAZH+ERa9UfrcBlKaEx
yTJPxXYPFmNwX9NXkUZwIeNsowJt9veCPGABaUQBVEQi/HdQgrEuPNNUcIZqC0hNrAJu+5JRQ8iA
PBNWHpUR9NERZoVXFlgPYFUA8hEBARAAk+ASVxMA07VN7UYTLyVrOYU7AwIb+YSCYrhPK2iGgweD
bBgR9sMADYBDwjNmZ7NtbnZU2PFMOUMOjMNMczaAzQQ0qhZs2nFuq4ZVIiWIs0ZS+RYVa3UsDPMF
AEA8wVIBvbYDZiNPXeMU/xSYhgLXLmYIHT1VcCyoHW7ThqjYA50zIltBbfICKte2g34DL1ZVhITj
baUmUUW4F7uIF074OI0jgRYFT1zlbpghTkO0CpiQgadAAuuUEsDCVl2YAfyWgrQDgQGHaNpRU5qj
U3rVbBgCEGuYii/4BgPwZWEmPEwSJ2MCKF1CJEcSJz1CJFGCJmJyJ4tij49Cj5ESKFJCJo6iJ1PC
jl8Sj+94jzrCJo+SKPhIJwRZj/EIKQFZJQbZKDISI1gYJFy3IoJmBS1iBYKSJlmSI4oSI2bCj2WS
kiOJIxF5kggpkJSiJ3ciKUoyj5HiguRIeHuTPFYhZjDjf3whgAERgLfCA//zIDh9KIuHGG57CIgi
IBJ/44Co82r4dmdNyIiEeBXAgiIfQYXFUg9wYjV7wyUfkYnHtiyK1m/GVoafCI7aQlhr+Wc5SY7j
8gdwZ4N0mBuwOIscc4uvNlV4eGoG+FUISG68aJi+eDhIiI2nI2vAxmcTiDmfcwo3cWu5Rm+Y+ZXB
81L01IikGIpLAZqe6I2U1jY4OZfS9mInwB4+SYDVpjdCCYSIiZQGGIS6OJuCOYxLWTQU8WrYxG5P
WIHIeIGUSZwhMRLBEjVVCBMV8Do7YAFfGDJhaJXZ2I1+EYpuaY2lWGmoiYpfkFjsxFg3oGBXwFn/
9QfJtVnEFVsaZlnqBVv/CWae5jlaAOae6zlhlaWeVnZgkjBh/IUClzBcvXVZKLBbM+ZZ/8mfo4Vc
+3liPkZi8qlao6UHl0UCXMdbO+ZkNuYZDXAKDGAM8OldJ+BcCQoDUJZi2XWfpfBeFVpdoBVgJfpk
I0ADLHpl3dmGFNA5y7Mc+UWfI6piMoCgkPCigSBgpPWjRRphMiBZR1peTAoJ6JkC6gmkqhUKryVa
4yleBzZaEjpjy5CgBqpZMLZioiBc5EmmvAVeBzqm42UJbKp1adprFjqJWvehoUNeA/peK8ZeCGph
TtafDEql+6kCbppbf7qg5CWoRdZeXApfp3mjlxZxPDoEEFBBEkABm/cA/7bhijOVbd/Gl7kZiLh5
VQdoZqPai8Y4UXWWblUJnOLUZ69KE1dzDuZ0E89nHFzigVYYK5toTyNocKwjmnCpgsMKrP8EqS9I
AXGYShsxBHtzARCgAAkAAakxLefSHUDpVHlJqnnjHNgKiLL5ZrSYUQl4m/6iUY1RjEtTlZ24iL1y
UrVKE5Q5mWP5ldYpipw4U4xGhvnRlqN5hsbqG8hajgIwInlkBHnUBBw2GZfBqXxoVU7VNp2mh+T6
sOL6qUupiM1UH+pKqhUIjA3VqkkTmRsVqzhxUj0BaKgDVylrABQwAKhQMODEienWU9DxaKaSV8Sq
TwE7FY86sIfVORCgrP8fUwSYCq0wy7BYUUc9FEhYRERNWwFjFEseJ7VQ5LRCBLUZV0ZkVElW5ERX
y7VMxEVB9HMj90Z2FHVzd0Zoy0ZWW7Z1VAWE1EgUJ0hta0hi60dKV0hSp0drm7Z9W0Un17WTaHTM
WQHzZgWs4Bmj03RjF0qpNLdql7eWpHeJVLdG50pNB7dq1A8RYLlY67mgi7XBBLSFl6MNoAA9KQTu
IBNSgnYG0LAw0Tyst3gjRD+Ot3ziQz7Vw30wFHn2FXq1C7y2y7vrFz/AB0L9U37dA3rvc7vIS33N
a3nuF3r0trzuB0EuZHzZlwnckwntp7sIgHkv5LvlB0HDs3lw5b0RdAr/BsAK3XN9kTeJaNAnLvR6
wYsGNKJCzQt52RtA5IcG/ju+6lM+5St5mWDA4YvAbmK6hfcGFpAELDN94NAnDzABS/uTOZhQQkkq
vglN4FqYFxuqa9YRSfmuEBM5eHY65VKDNKF/y4Fm+lcuB2IFKtEfUoABg8IlCcAKY8lWGIBsrfNU
z1KaN/WJn/mWPLudSzGODjxfJRAA5/hSzmo/I2IABLBKGeyar2hteThNE0ubRDiqYmWEYryxIzvC
7WKI3JrGwCYcp3GJWmeSB8AArCABV5PFXbdXwtaIndmzoIjE/wpTcekcP/vEAEUBDsCTeKnBS+Op
psiDORuY3DaYlhzC/wVIVeYGjCrcsUtAg+jAAzvkAzVMp26iskBxyjIBExBwCgRARUJsO9NJitx4
jb1CMYsmaYPMnYgsbXVJIPrXmp0SahDrabAZH4B5mKPmreZqxog4xmM1iGXcarvpxr6iBKpbOGEU
cA3XLpPZa5dZTjvhGVS0CvZzNSHBmUzox7/KxHwlyMVaitnZLYfcy8Kkmo5lg3NCkH+ijzZJkSo5
JgVpI/soky35jw0JJoiyJAM9KQCdjy25kAx9JAq5ku0oJM2qBCNgR6SDE/BzAEgEPjvSIlzXZVwn
JYfiGVLiGSriygCAxQW9KH4y0UsCKBKZ0BH9zyXJKP2oJZAiKf44kv/0Z8+YpmILEJ7HJA9ktsFf
bIpEuWleTMIi7MxMCc2ppsa8+YBnfM1JILUTug8e0xIclg/w4xTXsAoD8BpuEhKM0Ywmgc4ZkBKd
TII69RjC6s7aCVi7bJpEjWk5uj6TmkM3CNXHDMagWslW/YNCeMlXLaqYnLFUg25B4clLUC0YIAF1
bFEtIQH2oCsbKIkPQFeTcVIu8crNp5b3aldGzDF3bTulmMQl4cR9DVCkZAHdLMz9t8yUfIe3aMy6
XcKP7bG1eapuHK4BEVZwRlaf7AAikgZOMQInNzVWmWtWaEQA0ADQiRgAICKXiasqu640i9qAHJr+
Gs96bd4CJ9uzLUz/i4EACRDM+/dphM3F2kovuIjYlIyq1azG5SrVqfpVnDzZ9LIEF2wSKFIU0F0A
E9DZ6xyJ5kQBDnI9L7EKDjCZNZuvAo4TuLxRG57XSuza4SiX6y1fhhM8LlO8BjzAvJfAypsiv8vi
6zdC0zt8UnK70JvAyufiNt54OQ5A+YvAPN57EETjAey83esmtefjxdtCoSeHSFABEXzZoMwXKrFK
TqF8TK7SOPAfAwB8E951WPji+ss/Rr7k+8s84VvmKhTjAqy9xUe9Zn56m1d6/tvAI35Ya2Hi8d1x
JmdGPqR2GBdxSBRxXOtDJwBygw5yfl4BgH7oPvQwEZdFf2Ryif7o/xgw6YKOEYpO6GgUcXFw6WLr
Q52O6Zc+tZYOdFSEuFB06qKe6mvk5F6x6GjkR1WXDqxwHNjQayyzUi2BCk9nSVWkR6wO7Jded39O
6JAuE5o77It+S5fOMsve7Jd06SlA6MJeunceVJzEAJsXA43Mxd4hHbFo2Pu9HQJjsVRtm+UOa4PI
sdL8N2wMmdHsTkgw5YdnRO0A33rmEgHEsoVzyvjQH0CkIXbxxzc7yNOJs76K3jolWLpTz9muMjck
A+WC20v9yGEcyYfNZoTD8ZKMsYXzwU3Z2IWxyR2V4c2EBCNhDzOwyGNBIN18ICAUNav83fUmE+Nb
LPGKr6ndzrVMxP8aro08n2y0nN4QH/H293BBVLV1xOhoW7XMRUdL30RSm0RthEVPT/VNr3MrB7ZS
z0Nq+7ZXdLY2N/aLQUiAe0hddPV2BACENEdmv7d2BOtD0A+MAVX249EGANLZE3JVqKmXuk6L8R87
ZAErcAqvoQen0B8xUUt8tLljf3WjC0tsD3hZa/Z+J0uY/7m5ZPWO7w5Hj/SFVyLPw0Hde/oKjD0C
/EEGpPqn77/e07vjS0DFK3vEw3kyTj3T2z3d+3ssnvv6i7vKiz8nVDzXiz/AX0Dkk9FHgAlxoQU4
0QA6DAEPsznfW3qt4BLnA2anLHpwFSNWMD3Bf3wdZD7sZz/cx/v//ntBs5/8NGJAK6Q9Yw7//Vv6
oS/6CuewTM0PHfzU/v3/IJBVSlZmh/lE5mieLoKla4ma8cySJmFGQKWE2dVcimAp8nAxm8zHDlEi
7JQWwqSXIVBMRy8gkFEApCXFRRKeLBeAA4IstZ2RGHPRi8xIHC76S0nfH6HJQpegX17JocmgCZ2b
0yRlpeUlZqbmJmen5ydokwOAVoaDBE9hyakJBdGWCWuJq0tpBs4q6hSMTImKTm1OSUvqTW/G766x
sAheIDJAb4WzLS7ykifU6sIDgqISRgGEFuBXUlhJAQCNAoUagMDST9noum1jBgbgPSKf4iKsRKoC
Mur3iGAGfP5U/0kK5fAhxIgSJ1K0NKqUrGcnjjmgkYHCAlUdW4WE9OdYMo3WUhJbxPIVoJUeY+55
gE3Eq1IPgAyDCWOPkk/a8hUIQKEXOCw2bJnL8CMAKnV+IhBgEOEAAABLKKiTQqBMASP9nJUz+E8j
nYNoXSg8CKjtWTqjKtKta/cuXlAXY+lCCCgjyGC+PNIqVsLaSGWHUXpsSfCl4MXMqjEGZvIckmmR
xwC9yalCvwkQLrAIMhoCwKbzpKhb8gBr1qzYyBidJ8YQIn2bFUb4p9twbxO/FSc0a7i4o5KKG+Zt
7vw59IejAhwgcKBAgeoHqFvfbt06du0EAnzfrj38d+ra1Vsnf/8+e/sD6wl8x/59vPz41e1XH1+e
vXf1wWded+6BNyB+3b2xHynp5UegfOTV5xleA243YFFZqRMGfQNoqOF3IAaQ1YMSVgcgiuWhd2KJ
74mHonYXnscdhAH2V8B/5wEQHY89+vijKaTwdRlAgCn3zAN9OVaNC0ke5wxkhkVJnExE3lJZT6r8
0MsdAylwTFCaSGCBCCrIgIEKFfTSl5dgKjAiHFmpScUSX+HhhhRP9bXAHvuwZZyVacU1EJ+O/PMW
oIswBySjjTrq0F65HPdXX4EZlthHRwJyAEczncSMY3RMqRKWCFWZpZQ84bQZAp1pAsEASzTgwAII
SPDAAg4osIT/Pscc9wUUVLSWQVYUXGAAIvP0U6w+ZXiRG1l/GjpQKWr5idu0xMEl0o6PevstuJRE
akpfm7pgpEiV5sTLZOwOZplio1LGTEylakbkTtJEq0cKFFbymgQYGJBPABEMvAUJFgyAwAF+KPBw
WBhUMA19EaD5WrFZ9WAOBlnp0jEAYY1CB8fX1uGDb+YKFKi0K2u0rWGLhjszzYyOm5EtnMZC2Lrv
zqLppz6TCqpPQofqLjIeVVPTTUv6oKrT/CbhLyV3BCwFBlhoYUBIuh1AAgEyEIArxJ2BTEFsY/QD
mxBZ3SbVGdB6mahG1Q76a6L8ZKtotzX7/Td00ymAAAL0Ef7m/+BxBEB4HNYdfl3iiBNOX+KQH754
4gUwXjgVhAeQOAKaM2444dfF4XnipDOseeKfX7456ZLHIfrkcDAu+uCuF17G7YcjoHvosHt0icDG
JlzwwVTkI4UBDQSkDgGE0845AiTGpsD0Xy1O+PW/kzL716i/nvnm1W2uu+yq/x45+tkxbvn6t9u+
+vmp9w04/vlXdJGaGCxgMQay1j99DJAbAcSABI5wQAL073/9S+AAw9a/AwzQAQ/oHwMPSMH+WfCA
FIgBBjn4AA+CMIAZDOABjhLADppwgCk84AMcQMIDZu2Ao1AhBTi1wAHaCoZUmwQGEoAaBTigAQZg
w64S4IcuJf8gJEuhoQIk0D9coYlEZPiaFAM4D05V4GukqMCGAhZFNXUxghILYBRhuIADlnGHWlxj
ANvYwgOm8Y0YpOH/DhgBOKKwgffTHyAD+Ymb9SVn51JXZNA1KY6UK2im4Jkq5IW0lMzLF02jRgqg
1jPJWFITApsAH8hDmgqM5ygZsEACMsC1gJTDVauRg2qygjUhyuYrAHCYHUymNh/cZDgECY4QdAkz
hAxzODITJDKTWYmbeQoSnSKJSCBpJcQobZKN2SSmjnYDpk2zJteMzA8ys6/DuEoTprSABMZUgglY
rBUf6YIumOKqC2AFARQQAHb6MQ8BgHJgXxmPG3bUDiGMEzn/LlvLQVXGiL64hS0MBRoj/qjMiVI0
SBgp5EAAs8mUWIo4OhNavYgWSWlSqVSVvAYLxpkvVBGnKTaxBGlKcAFTXkBNJrCATYfhhLLw8iNX
vMCGgOKA1gRRBG6TQAACMIRcbmagSUgZOKF6HN78Q28HLcUxK6rVQI6iADbpxq5s4lWbRKAAFrRJ
HL66gAN8taxfTatN1vrVB4zVJmN7a1jpOlcCnBWsamXrV+sK1xjeVQV1fQBf8RrYvfZ1sA4orF5t
QoazPnauh02sZH/oiwKQyRUPYwAUENAACkAgAQj4XwYuYA0eMParCjDATmIjW25IVgEegu1dY4Mx
69AWsZad/+sBeju4vf42rggg7mK/GlzXHtewwO2tXJPbDYlutbr462oEsnva7JY1uyoYm3e3qwIH
HMC73dXu/7JLXu6eN7te5e523ctd33r3YdxdL3cLAF8FKKE35e2vfrkLXhXYV74CJmsECuxf9gYY
CrdU738NnN27ZndXVVNA2BIyxAEowAL3hMKcElYABaA2hgto8FU6QmCNRWBEu8pKR5TwsNguALy0
uUpsVIxYBrO3YdytlXd3nF/uDm6+AZbwa1S8RwQAuMcWVAKQm5xdrFi3yvoj5KQOCU0pffNJJrUm
vB7T5ZK2axlC61Kq7FBQ1WiWDwYgzUAZQIBUZi0LhwkJPf+7CLajMEWKjyVAAyyAgXqMUE4mgIAf
shIBMyAVACTY0NoIRTeFWkvSe7PqQog0Fytz2m/MZNmQZlG0R7Zi1BrBVEiFVhiXjHlonQTISi6p
pWgMA5NmRiklKJAAMqEhISMmGARs8LV8DCwBDAhEDyhgkwMkYKBBcQeeKmDodT7AArHBgxwSMm1f
MkWfUlXMQbjdsky/bNKGoG6n090oLHv0mT9LZKWOlLMvO3NnYdZJq5dWZnKKNM0sVUk5J0EBA8jg
AQz4IBVuhYVdUYAAJUnlKrUQvfQSgExTE06xroiyMWTlYB8pSsCKRVBLJ1QVlbbSMDF9cm2ru+Xe
mo6A1hP/IwNdB0E0gtCKEsSiAtFnPwO6Oc3RQx+guwg8RE+Pin7+oqTf5+jXadDOo04AHNVneE2Q
QAJ6kYB4UKCsLyRlAaR4Sik0MRD8IcAA6EOfs9uSPiRSO9Wzkvb8jIg8de8PjXTun6JL3UBszzvg
ez51HEVo6QJquo5crnibCUlSAKHUlhWjyMc3qZG3luSZN3kleoFZCJvc0r9T7ZQ2V2CEvmiHxBYQ
6BI0gE+9cM0KFNHKQ3sGxnq6OBidxQM5vUMXBS1UyYm08nJfetwrz+rik58XdvtFy+/GF0lN5W7p
95vVYRY9JTvfjEhCzdYne3VzZk9tjIehWWYIU7ZNAGnz/+dDl04ld932Fn9suQxR8o8EupWvf7ow
f1PTjxqpDQNE1UCpYF++VR/1gdQkNc1GqcoQDESr9JRwCMHEMEFNBVBqCdow5FQ+OEG39Qv5iUH6
AROhQcJOhEVAjdDvmZvw3Q1ApJzxueCm7R8N2gXzGVKoZcpIlRqr0BsnJc31gUpBnUoCAmHoPY2+
NFXASQABxF4c4INnEZEDGIACjJbBkBgoddFOGUHAYQB5AIArfNHo7d5NlJfHkIFWiBv9OcW3/VIb
qtyhxGBkIF8N1iGkhMHoRI/iMM6bwM78mA7jbE/h/CHt9OHr5OEheg7s6CH9BCIils70CGLozE/s
SKL7TP8OIwKiIk7OG0AiH1oi7NzEY1nMl9wTDVjFGAgAGnzYQClPOJDYCpiYIGKP7WAYI4aOOgTA
hkSP6owII1KHhuxi8CTiJL7PLRaiIJpP7xDjJVLPJkoPIZ7P6OSfHVZjJ1zEAeWRxISNBhUQACHQ
lyxQNo5QACUQDXGjxFCQDZFjDXXjOh6QOYrjCrHjB50jDanjPMZRDxyQPb1jANWjPA4aGP5jDATk
HajQoHlE8WhGncVNBjTAr9UZORwbASlPBqHjCByFBVzAA+iibMGJ96xRDGkQs9QQGUTPO1yFPdJR
wATQSMaRDpkQDMkQTK4kGrUkBuyRQdZRTvJR1uTDEFD/ozUOJSZ82uNN36qJ2b1p37zZ27/hWxBu
EwhSSReqlAN63y10oRBdAAmEw2wEAQNoTgkMQLDVQFdKwWkFxAdmAAQMzhC8SQE0XMYAATDlg8jB
Qot5TFasVVN5m3CYzPDBIcoxlAwKJVEe5iTcYEbFW7rwIKitQjP9IEeN2mT2IOddXmN4XzjVmpdw
kxAgi9XQlS48wGgVThQ9AD9xgwQEV2oV27EJmxHAQQJAAQl8kAOwhl6CYZjYpe7ZAKQF1ArujS/R
QV0O57jVpcrJ27khJnNqQv85EqYkJUYQhnLWm9A0pdFsFANCoA9m5VSuCr5oEqsEXAYkACpMQHYc
hTfc/wLXoScXiMDUiV2XRNwUjEB7qNDoxUEAzUGxjIh+9ZLbKEP1AEGjuZ9fWondUItD7Y39BR/L
NSeELlPIKJZYIRda5VV0VeiF/lVx2VVj5dVlfSiHStdgZWhkeSiFnihiiahNVJZ0TVaLQlaIvpVC
PkAXgIQMkRoUHAUFgFY2Ah+aIAMoKcKGWBBmhdZXuehe0sZwtahu0ZUS1AM3YIWMPhdzJWmVSlZz
xdBhHdZyaal0vYZwAZaGYkyENqcDqMkCKMBoxELIwFd6tRdVIFh8LdiQodd9RZicDliC8ZeEzWl/
zRiE8ViF8ZcKCNmfUlif3umEqUChBlkTMupkeVek/v+pj1VYm83CHoRCpaZYoPqpEjRhbNHKtc1X
bDRhg8UGjnXqkXlqdkXZnx4ZkDkqq7JXncJqqzaMo0aZYcGXYZ6p8j0WSNhoHLjpRWVZDnYUkkSf
QpHLNNkLZR4gZnoZAuoErW3fs35nXojfGH4mwQAAKgxoL3nRHGTS22gFyunTuJpcGzYouQkmkdAh
sOofSLSKzryWsTolWiAlNlHnZnyUERYh5gWsNklmGf7Ed96LS4jnk5AnXqxlt+ZDKjkFOgSUb8SB
s1SLx2xBGfQCxAbm/fUlg8qhpv3qvLacBbSDPWnBw+Sr4zVfsg5gZWYrZAYKv+4gZ1LrdWofAG4m
tqb/hjc9B7fupsCcgxhQwIj0kj3p4mqyQD1RLBi+4IG2n5a4IPE91VQZRHU+6MnWYcP5R1yWp1yE
zMRUADeULQOVbQqV7dlOjAS0Ctqy7QW5LdxOTNpOzNpOTNuSUtl2EQWUrQOkKd327d3mStm+LeH2
7QFIwN9WQODGrdpK0cQ87sTkUOJOLrgOLuTireQ6Lp/0beP2rehWLumOrunabeWiEgQA7iFUbtru
RABMjDp8LmiEzeze7Qi8AWgoGuqWLZOVLa6UreVubvC67uVODH8B7xH0LvLObenRLt8ir8l2bcu1
ytvOmJt+zsNYx8MgTvdqb+OEjwJUx8MoTvdyb+Z0/6/3mm8cYNjXPIz2wu/gbK/4hk75eq/7zq/9
fq/6jlj5oi/+Yk/7DqL++q/8bm8ZlK//mm/3sg79lm/8KoAANNv2UoECq6+jDQ7lnE4ER/ACj68F
D44Bq4P/ytIFj0hW3O8uomEGe3D7gvD8BrDrwPAF82/7Zkf3ku8Bz87pwHD7xu9XUK812hPHQgBH
NJ6zUl7M4qwIbO3m7ey0HmF2cudlSmarEee1FixnSKBGdBgXo9kiEC1Wvt9u3gIYYM1ddoltsIXG
oA06XC38UZrVumtDreHxTa8Qt5yvrAIS48xiRh5BaBQV1yysQWtkDOwTB+xJDexOiJMS7tsuXZxM
ef/cLyltZ34xySiaF4LryIHMbZzBO+QQGYDNcb5hyGZt8dmxC8prHtuhUe6rvialXPjrIkEywI6K
qFwxwiqgVIKfwiKJA5paBEpyF8cUrp3SqInxIxMzGFssH2TFZWDFJ4/BO6yVG6AATx3UOA0fHceh
KnNLK0OoYlrJ5CmlqA1ywIpedG5UZlom+C2ytFJsEv6KZ5qKxUWsaoGTJVsJmwnHxHIcus4Dr9jA
U/wJcHIFVLgr0ZpMcQpT3hjf1rJyONPgdPBdipyH4E1djhzIi8TIgrQH08nHR3sH3+GHzPkc4p00
SFv0zCXd0qk09OBdi8wHS39H2vXc3210zTXdf/T/NE4THn0IQH3U3dS5zYmkR8jMx3hwSN2RglLL
tIPIHEdHdXwUCIbQiHv4XEnTiDpMNHOOc5EwJr4oyQCacQpYnhUv5RTrbDpr3wMCx1U2FZgcrBfc
szITyV0DLReX57PIyTxk0J3oXkIEQbbVwzQDXxyz60C8xR7UcUGcMtd69VA+JzmLteRFH3YGoMDq
8loXMiQTYcGuFHjCWsBBbF5XsnCMcRd6XDsUywS8yS2BMW3owkC5AVR4slhANkGA7DdrCwsGiWQf
JlifGiJpmpIIcwHyLDurdVp7ttF4XyPnbEsFbWoY82kT5z7rNTP/8xGcIARgjAwBwrBscTigK+yW
//JfKvZjGhS5dTND4HFwq1tXpWiXsiiukOmJlih+z+iGlild2XeNdahjZSmKotWW8nc3bKmLlimM
ElaHruiV+ndVRLiDv6iCEzhiCdeFf5XDoeFwpTBkjUhzfWlXOJhWKJeGP3hdja+KW6lkkamXjmmH
Ull8WyN24Wmi2mqc4peE1SmP76mjLlqctip44bid9nh6xZCeEnmQw2KiNjmo/viRkYGjSjl7Ffmi
PrmjKhiitheX1yp3sRWRgSqishULvxiL5ZftXeqo4lgZTFmMLdl8gbmcUyqhwvmPMZmlxjmsQql2
wXeNcxplE2AsyyxnEzovN/doL2tUGmw3IaCoxP81PwdcOVh3dqP2yPHz1Mo2YcsGNAh2BoQRewco
x5bEMCFUYqNy/ZEs3wR6NQ435J3zpWA20mDKSWXTcj8lU/IsdGcxVg7zMUPsS0n3M+zmL8vTF7N2
pwe0LNUC23AMqUPaFmNtMEVGuDUrDPZ2q7t6Hb6y/xV6Yz6fc7e1dRJstDa6dyZ6Ig/7omNxZpha
P6eGXV+6Tlz60PYSd3dBBYzIEmHFPrzDjgqBddwSx0bt+3Gzbt8DYQ4mZM8gt+8f/+it8+Iu7u7t
oh3v2f7txZdtARBu6O4t7uat2Qpu19Vt9OJo5SLu5votaIw8xytu51JuBawmxmfuzG8Q83aR5FL/
gMzfra7F/Oe6A85Hr+dW7vDm/O+CBq0YfcX9ra2AhjoE2gfBWNz6+9NTgCjrLl+FwQhEQOUWb+32
bceDRvFiPcULb/L+LYjlfNqX3vL+7d2SwcPXoOA88AHLb/sC8P7evd4bcAA7sC3yrw3bvQirLxC/
b+ELPsS8MAC78PzqcOLffT3V8N0LcA6HcARHz+X3r+FvPuX//QtDPvY08AtnBQX7Iv/aUgJDDGzj
RzCGvgXPTuc/jOj7feYjPuSDb/7SfgjjbxDPPcT3MUbdgPPp4KUcNwRWHlvjcrVqnwEyt2iDMUJ4
MTEjOzOP02lbf8RyetsAgMX9Uy+gAAsz1T8V/4D5nbocLzaru3e8AjrwV9SgbwS4Qx8gZzaqKfch
H/q6V1MUt/vTvDsIZGJ2jBlyjdEzliNSqayIISYhj7XpikosWulsPspIAJiIKgCAMYPLFJrPHaYJ
yDywz4zEwbuNvuFRVLTokkXnTHoMbo0cWZP9js/r9/y+/w8YKDhIWMhHd+YgYVYmojhCoSDmuCgS
2XiCMfIQwfiiKcI5UiEpF9q5VMpmggCqhUrC6vowk1FBtBoKAHQ76QOkVdv2s1nba5ohRIMLZUIc
VIuRMPKcMdFE0xTnstAEhOFyABDA5q0SlwHeGIGujuymht4DD+fbbYifr7/P3+9fiGgOrHkHXP89
srSgkQNYFBJ6ElFw00Aes2CR8iUqFSYYEh+eAJbRlqpYuniNnMcR2rtqytIxO9Nyx0pgMQ1Q6wJh
XDZszURQWSZCgjYvP4OiI5nLy9F5bd4Y9ehUaaN7/6pavYo1Kz86AQ4QOFCggFdxB8Z2/Uog7FgC
Z8sCKJuWAFq2cA+0tYsWL9q7AfIGEPu1QFezY8PObUv3K97CBRTzzat271iyXqccnvzWrNzKYr0i
7os2sue6bQ17TTx67+a0jU8PCC03dhPAAQIAEHuW7bjTfT03kWu7N+u1g7+WBpy67OfVohGLNv01
c9o6Wqtbv479X0BK7+YdzNBQYSVbDiFiCon/sqKOkx01vmvVvqcI+KfWrwMACgN7aq4iTKRmQQ5A
IRMTM/OwVMsJ1ABzDQA21NBNARX0IBQ586lgGwtCAVCJBAkSVM87TcXzTlRrmOcIddmtyGKLLs4B
QCLjteHdeOE9FNIlHtH3yo7qWTLSGSFd5GN86cV3TFJb8PISKyAJ40wKKg2YVIG+ZICgDjb9MgIE
CvwlgTQUIPEATEO5U04BGIDjYBBL+XIiUnKaiM6IIaLohoov7slnn1vFOMd4BBlk0X4ZLARJeXJG
VB+emSBp6JCGPtqofB8VM4qhEezinqNZetqFlQRGY6AzNEUzTRHFEAAAGDax2sAwbcpUDgCd/3QD
gIZvIhMnUybQWSKJyNDhZ7HGHvsHHQXQ8sABCjC7LLTMPoDAs7QscMC00VJr7QPYajstAQ4w66y0
0I5LS7XMfmsutQisSwC4zIrLLALv0rJtmehyC6+81LZKiwPxtqtvvd3mS2+693o7ML71LuxAvggv
8DCzAs+7rwII2IbAxbY1EW6MD0Q87ce5iuPgAxoHTHK7CmQbsMTTHkAxLS8TTDOzN8dMrp7I/gy0
n8r6FwECCxBdANERxEu00UQ7cIDSSfvntH9QS6000/4pcLR/U/undQQKKPB01EgTzTXRzWJNdNhj
n902J1uT7d/acIvdat0EsO3fAQvNfXcEfv+jTfcKe9+9QOFl8i343xEkrvbhjRO+BQCx+oeF0igj
sLTUuH6FqwMLcN4236NnzTjNRJ/utdJVP05661T7HHTttmO33aGCYvLdjXjmqGgbPCLqKI+SYlTo
Rj/KabxFpeoCCpFJUZoMlAsK6NI6pGLyaTpbYskgCx+XskUAriwwxQJoxtKNsxTYVkCvjZy4/jzA
Ono/nlTdzn//WeX+HRoRChJBEkimMMGoHk1veMkbVgMXCBJYCO9JB3zIpr7xvPlQ0FOnGgJGtucR
lhwlVVjCCRhy8pYlsOp7CqBAEyTQJChQYUMK2FVS5AcVYVkqf0jZn/9+CER9AHB37+idonr/kKMC
fiJQ71mejpTEkEk1r4lIyuCSlhBDLk3JUikJhgdH9UUOYs8CJMzSBcSBCwUAoIwuzEwZNkQBNuVK
ByByEwJ/pUP7jQeHeQqiH/84CGVVYJAUo8AgCVABQ06IAopcgAMSWYGiQbICEiLkIxMJw0kiUpEH
YKQlFUkARVYglI18pCEzCcpBVsCRhqQAKg85yQNIAJKsHGQlBylLRTrAAYqUwAFUOUpI0kECp/xl
KlWZy0GKTpWIhCQCiJnIBzAAkr4UZSiVuQBqGhOWiuScMLPJSAoYoJsR+GYi1bhNCkxhmrdgRxN+
qcpKtjEApGjCD1rZTG5WwFuQpEA+KQlM/28aUmXxHKQhyQZJguJTlWoEpEMfqgeujE0BX5loACb6
JYxWdGwIIABGLzq2jWqsAB8t6URFCtKxkfSkzuLoSseWUpEi4KUZnShNy2JRjNJUpjSNqYNcmjiY
6hSjOBWqTasV0gRMdKZBrenLPOpSk6oUqU/F6ACOOlGvWDRGW10jRRGAspQ6NaxjawJVe5pVqBp1
rV9Na06xOjatvpWitIOoXf04xO6YwIiNeMB4Vqm8TRBxPsuTHlKOR8VKHalS+rlPfibVvQMFaIu0
QoqoxEjZNIbPDDECBaucUEI2ZVC0PkmhoyhkwznlEY93Qgqx7gpbQOZ1ejVKlEKieCUGFv+pUoYV
0gO5uDzhFTaLV7RFFqlHixBKqXphlM9lLdU9DLAQGBAwRhNQQYABAIoYdJgj/kCWjCZoYn1n4KNq
72Q/HfawrrFtb+1muyiD2EiJurNtd5Y3KEj19bcoieB7NiiS+5hkIx0EFaaoZFkQYpa5IygjTdrR
BAsdAIUSaGE5rIeGd2JgQ+GYX2qHoUM7PQUZPnSvid8LKO7Qdq82OiITgZTb4MoiPk+UD2IXOAsM
I/e3QsIPFq9UjZAMo8DG9cVzhzxGB2PvCjqBgmidIhQ1eaq7FNjUOMLkKzvSoI5oWO0IeHiGEp94
zMfqLlyaMxnhgAU5qCFLYNhcHLuQBjL/yIkzaDhDHNIw5jB+STOdCeOYP6sG0GCJkWQIoxnGINo4
gh4NoaFDF0LbBTmRkYsANnNn1uRlHLeR82cN7ZUIR8fPwanNxyJtHLikJc+JfvOe3TLny0gmMOwl
s61dBF8u1xch+x1F8FhhAiEDW7/IuDHz8Dtj3mrKx9kLIZGRnFntNfdA/UmQkoNCqm6E0gWfBUaE
8WdLkHUXW3BKbXrRy9oR66/Wt2437lK8a0vVltfDmi8Ckd2CwtLX2MKNT7+VjRFOBXgm2DsQkSsL
EwVD9+CaxR4JKpChKMBxJxJ2hhFCl6c28erD6ZbK9HjYg9e6e+QtyjXvWuwL4g0cxwZk/znAi83f
ZCvw2MT+HbOTBNwDL3zJGXyuwZc83XPQkQTfTgf8ssGxHT4BZRWQgG2y7PHTdvxE51b3ekmO9RXB
V4AtB4+h+HpfI8mc3zXPeaUmqHOcm2nA/y24k3SOcJ4DOVTtYKPcM1B0onBoPhGakMVH0ISE9J1A
HP9yiKduQ5FnffH/G4e9ZkqAxwfg8RujvFgeDxbKT95ecsF8ATQP+sc3RvKaP4DoIw/WzJPeXqO3
l11Cb6+unH71rDc951EP1s/TnlW2V33sLW/7juJ+87V/fOdTLwClGiAByee87pff/N+LPvjHh/70
jY/716PMQZyPMFj/8hviz9T0psfCTP9ns3vUKwf2kDe+7is/e+djnvhTYLz9sYKINWFgIWtysv5/
qX/8tyYVpn8YQAD6dzT6R4D6d4D9B4BrIoAGqH8PF4APoH8U0Ar914D7Z4FrEgkTuIE1UAH6Rwsa
OIEPyIH6dwsgSIJO4IEZuCYhiABxtCYjw4AFOIMk6AAqCIPNUIMdiAF+Z4L6l4M1uIMYcAFkpH8t
pIM8uCabEgA0iCXaAA4GiAUFqABh8oS/MYIgE4P69zgFWBBDuCZZCIbqowkhuABaiAFh+H8IyG73
J4eBBG8BxDsM4WIq5nVX4h3/QVhl51sV5HJeNIhDQlw3l0HgI3bXs0UX8D3OVQuOCGT/B8dCoRIN
LuBPGjeFrbID3WUhXaYCugEGWLAIqIUJIhZ1qBgnYRaHc+iKfgBAfkgC8iWI8qFyvhNf/kYRZYdE
MfcC/lU8AGZYSCRwvfV2WwRtDJYBFrBvCvdzlHVtydAOaXRlPiBIJcBkn1hCY1Amt+FPCJBC5WVu
iFcie2RDYvaK6QgIW3eHBNRrMLZb8bZYh4JbOFKPhShBY+c8RlaMiRhktdBfOncBPadwycgOWsKI
yrg+6VMEtiE4QSBehncOGDAFXdFdAiN0W3Yl+aOKedhH6giSgcAV5PIs4yIx4zIu6jIy34Iuy5KS
NXQtDfMALokvKMktLTkyNZmTKrlL/wNjkg+DkgJjkzRZJhSTku/ykzkpLuhiL0HpkzNZL62CkvGC
k+iylAojLVZplCqDlCNDlAWALhrjlEMZLo40MitDC7EyL1upAAmQky1DCx9DMTSjRrdhM7ORkzQT
lu9Sl/EyBSBjMzDzkziZlyWpMn7jMOhSLuNyMyi5LeIQkpFpDWMTR2MzSzDyNa/zNZ3TNF3DDmYj
O0XjmQ4QOxEQP6WDNp65mZIjNoVzNXeTNnUDmqYpAai5NaqZNXIjNp65OLCZK7LJOG6Dm0STLYQT
ObXpNcj5NnqDnKapOboJOQ9QXZJTnHMDARPACaxZALgiOJwgDtRpT32jCP7BOihDNv+ZQ56Fw5mh
OTnpiTTN2TFPU5qZ2YqSSXIVwAAUsAXZgoG4YHJFhHL1Votc5wiyOEWdcli++IeKpY+12AMXhGDP
qIwSemR3t2CXZWEiUF3DBhEbggFv4AAZwlkOwZEAIAlOp3HmVXWpSI7DUp/2OXIp8ABI4AP+WYcz
cnL2BUXumFgz928zZ4wvh4/xSHbQ82POpnMG6YwWunPQmJDJpZFmQEk/BQSsQh9/aQQiBCMAIHi3
EQMHGaUf52WgaHU9gI4wen9i4081CiMyEnYF6qBdh4s/ih67KKQJGqe/qHMBGQrGECnFKEVExqcK
mUU+93da5j03waQl0A1/8QQTJ0P/KZShUYd32jClEqKiLap0rWWmL4qmt6YymmBhCfA9XKFoo9Zq
a3aqsFYZedFmy7GqveEZjYZqbrZmssaqjBarioEacYGrlDEdq3EX0rEYrqarrRoacJZmpyEavfoY
q8oWgfZqwJFn0wFqn3UW4HcbjZGsa8Fpt/Exf6GsiYZnb+YYxMEcrYGq0/GprviNidMsXFML/+ko
YIcn3wFYHjEPdbpEd9qLebqgMzePIdFYBMJsBesp/SGL0VWoS5qQLaEgWmQNCZJFQ1Fae4dIvGci
H4KiMwWOJjqOEqluqph4ntquJ9ZGTTABbAEBy8WOAKqjNnaPNHd2DYqg/4qgdJqP//0KpIfIJLkF
YEo6bUwqtDQQjRDQDlyGKzQQHTZQAmoUFnQXBhuCHyjzIRs5pvRQpl9msidrYhOYDndAr7PYdcMo
p7+Wb4sYsEUKpFKEbxqUdsvGdhcKkKZCtItqt5RViXcbFEkXC6yyAFGApZwqAn+ZhiZqAuNgPuc1
sprqWl3rtVj3svVqb/bIo8UzQIN4i5HCYzZrdm0bcNFzXEG2sxILpUUGRghWtOkQjTWBCdoWRyXg
iSnCpUuGiaxSABQwbjsRjpq6oqvItZELo1xxerYnfpNne8dXFu8Hf+3nesx7vOQnfLS3MdJ7fLkH
e6NHfsdbemAlfMYLfMn7Fc8bfP/Ex3vkB73de3vgK3llcXuu17zNmxbe+3rU2xjLZwByQaqkOgD4
q7/Ltxmu178J8Hu295efh7zmB1YK3FG6Z3r0h37mV37eJ36d4XzsW3vJ68DNW3/CK5n5B4GdEIPp
sCZjuCYJ6IEKUIA4EMIKqMI3+IYBGAEMSMJVWIEXCIMS2MIpvMI1DAMVSMIsvCY//IMkjIE1LMR0
MIIYgIE9TIRLjAElOMJP3ISa0MQwHMVAuII0vIRGoAkjQ8IVYBOi6sVacIRBOMZTXIYb0izpYGVL
bGWI1IZnbMMxmDlYIDCtwioCQ4P6wYYH+YVL+McJwcUfCrke3G6xqK+0CI9JcYv/Hkk9KqezAMu2
O0akBakCgAq0SZq3hGpkmKyoiCoNoayQJARdFIAyLjBKprXKrUKpTPGxL8MxtpHHa/YEHOm4nYrI
kTm28wYeHplEfBhsBupE+7aPPcqva3vMNie63COondwSOPegl+jMQPew0fCIBkdaPlCNm4hIYJoO
g4IyioAFelzOEqK1XlAev3sUrLjLITm5ZAun9ObIAXpaMpa2/lq29HUpfbojwrhvmvzP2IN20YYj
oKwqW5QBdoeoCz13hxJ4nAVaaxhh5hUFHxsBKFoCn/YTuCyy6qwQh/zOY6YshVmVI0Mv47KYDJOT
UKnSMMnSjtnSYFmYOUmTQomS//aSk4EbMC7tLiMjOk9501dJmjBJMlO5SyNTLSjJ0ycNjkZ5MSeN
00p9L0eN0klNml3Z1In507sU1VwtMA0A1I3pAAyQMASwlTq9S2ZNlloZl4G3S3JZJnVpoki5S9Ey
mJVzMnb5l1jgSCu9My0zLmiNkmIJ1DQJmSOdjkNzm4FzOLUZm+wwn6lZNsgpAaupNLF52UQjAawZ
2XaT0V+j2aC92f7R2XJTYV1T2hmtNamtNrM5NRX2mysA25xdnY9DN6vtS9CpngTQnElTm5CT0b3Z
OhNwnQaA2mNj3NhJndJp3Mp9nWUyAaa9mbedOZfdXbtdNGZl2pxZm6f5OL8BNv+Yow3XFZ9WQzqr
XTSOQ5qcDd7gqNiLfaN69WK/LB4Aa8mYC4i86LkDq6Bb0Mw92hIU6rCeTHAGvY0igJ0mkM0dx2mt
IEtPl6EVWQn1MwYfs4MuQIrYkD/sPBUiHd/tFc8JhK/GHLMESo+LzN93OsmF6Kf8+A383EUtUdAG
XiUIneA2PqkQwAAmYMogtgwdWwBe8DFP0F3UAXVfUDkvc7Ebks4nQrIhHeKu2MssFrMhV7n6zaA8
G8yWe7NjV7dcvsyH1Y/V7M8LdrrSjLfXjJASu+AiYAG6lk0aia210gUYZ+FPgSsaPg410Cod7rju
POVyKEgH9QCedE2GREqJxEr/jFQ0rQRQhtTokTSDkJToEzJLkm5KowTpspRIDWFKrlTpik5LvOTo
o87pkJRLmm7pnU5Mmt5KMATpiT5MmNRJra7qr14By6Toru5JvN50t97ricTrrpROm8RICQAB4SQ6
4eRPrWQAE8DsaRBOwp7qhsQ54YRIVItJEdZKep0G1p7oCvWxacAFauRRD/DpKoPokP4s395Cn75J
9TTohD4OQRV5FhVUCyBWZZE4o6NW/I7v1ZI4HdVUAdBUO9VSX5LwExW4LTU62zlX/s41TKXvNkVU
C4/wGM81L7PwCtBTQYVGNnXwDd/xRcXwJ2U0cfXxEg9TIg/xM1VS/57viVNU/4kzAAN/8mg9UVd1
8VMVVCuFPr+BLbPB8nS98S8fVzyfOFiA8AiPu/nONV4RVEnfVhwV8D5V7/dX5fWNi1iO38YzWPm9
cnj65WKOzP99sG7rdmweoWsusRDbcNjG4K8LDLhwqSMIjgGwCGSAKxkUJ07vS3lCM1kLcjCy9fY3
4lZOzzJ74p7b4mWPs2Uf+ZEfpOH1s0has27fbDc+tJxPRpw/yiFUBUwxG5uYEMrgidjVWuLi9IVb
FCz60Xx0pol/a72cuXvoQPhN4rKYQGxrbP7ddmfe+WQ+t8zzzHqK4AnWXKubAUHX0A0usgj3sc1S
7idy5KVIuHrdCShj+OoVcv8gbvuy5Xi5F3kP7L2VZ8Dql3nga3oWvLzpj7wFzHrqt3noT36dZ3rz
673zr70NDALIgSCBSAbHeBDEWJ7lirQnUcTmSADrYZ50pIJK1HoJEcRTgXD6kUbC2xMojSIEzoSB
ekgcBgbuwDlujccBLhdAIpsTpnQZYAfw7F7R3TTFrej0ldgVseCIWCk57QAmMgFkSE5SVlpeYmZq
bnJ2en6ChoqOklo64GFgZDhEpGYQZLgeVMRisKZiUCjUvrqy1uri9sZmzPq2qhIII1T4PqjmKggr
xz48p1Yg8FKnMhM7PNTCujJDW+Nmb5sDUKhmT0NjIFAQPziI8867nmMjwFf/P4v1zpUyVwroqbIH
zcIBYgeJRXCg6gJDYq8yWJD0EOMBaMMQ2IkgIYAdibUOOMgDQEKziPE6ElNZQYEEiBKTucKwQAI0
CQteQlsQqRTRokaPIk2qdNQpWJIc1JTkVFLDSVAn6aI09ZekrJOmFqPENewkmJIeRJg0U+sktGp3
faXkr21aqXJVna2bIV3cswDw8rU7SQGts+EES5preJI8tpIiHI6lra9Geo8jXzAw2HKGiIwTOK4s
KXPoA3YeLCB5TxKGqqbt+PNcVitIAEQ4S1h9cdIC3Lp3ZxC6dDjx4saPJ21qNSpZqnhX6aWwgFLV
DG67Tp89SbF1vWC5j12r/737W+pyC1uPXD2Dt8WSxFNtC6Aw/Obs0UMen4HwpPysJ8fnnmTmbdZf
ZBmAJtpljGlG2X6cJYhYa3qQVAB6VWEgQQGFEPDbespoaIdv+u00iU8ErjIUciuy2KKLSyn3lHco
rsKcdKGN5RVixTx3VYCJPXddBjoCJySR3wU543ZJqgUgcBHM956TYPGXl4PtdRZZYE9qOSUlVWY5
iQURgilbLBHaV2VFJG54BwABsPYhASSFREtrBGLQJkxmgtWbiR7ypuKLgxJaqKFWvWnPAwcooGgB
4IDzKKQIKADpAgTYE6mijCq6AEqOQvrAo5tWGmmoktpDqQPgXHrqpAisiv8aprGOauqqDpAAqqIE
LBArCZCm5GqqACyQaYe6gsOrrwgg+4CyqcJq7KmK/nrrsabu2qs9CnzaAAOzOtsrOLmC822moob6
bAPXPhCAog4w6mZJ9hTwbr2v2VGvA7W2m6kCdxzwALeOvsvpqgPfqu+igh7asMMPI3VKARJEEIEC
C4gUwcQZE1CxSAjsVPGiFFO8scUYVwwvxSKZLEHHFUtw8cotvyzSxRmPnLHJMot8QMYakxxBwCTf
zPLKLsN8Msw5G20zAGhJwLSGR79MsQIK6Hz00BUvQFPPP5vcNcnOBr3xBBAkgFYEE1xNMQTORgDB
BAY8cDbbWJ8Nt9wQDLD/99xqkw2zyRHQffYAdgSwMgFHFwCzUG4uLnjQtdnRteA/w5oxrj/XDBLE
n4Meuicx1qjfej4OmR1iqFegOnA8WqXXeuDpVV91Qtp+F11XMillaA/85buDZcp+noGMOVmdfwPq
B+bbchUoyfOToLneRhk0uOP1bRJLwXrV5YbBnD2EFpwEI5VE4ojjnSK6+++7TzrqYJ1uI1w/ok7k
7L2/zp2R9xepdgBE0u5+xB7+5e4xUdoLAPfXlshQCT+RaQxllkdB7XFmeaTRCHomMMHsvQ5M1fsS
eiDAqztYqIKridn3KOGnmAFAN31a34+EA78b4tBQ8mPO93oUHddt5Yfl//Nf8cqCwAYWkIE0wpKQ
voMea5SHMsArzAX7J8HmPXGCyTvef2gEJihSL3oZgIBuMDDC6G0Qg5PwYHBQiJLm5IZGM7SKbtbj
J0nEcTw2zCEf+3icplCgArp4AAUKSQBBBpIAhQxkoxYZAWYUsgKHLGSxHAnJRCLSeyyhpAMQOclA
HkACi+yVJRFZAQtx0pKRpIAiERnKUTogkp+swCsDScpCSmAWskTkKURJgVyacpa1pIADFuDJTCIg
AoEkpjFxqctAopKZi8zlKhW5yGRGspiLhMABIonNQjagN4tspSEXmQ1llvOY3kQnBQQ2TTeRBJEC
y+QsP0mBb1ZAm9DMZP8jC+nOcS7zX34cKEGT86auXeoACA3A1bpWgIZyS6EXo8HFLsbQi7kAoRRd
aEUX8NCKqqChF3VoR0PaNQU8lKNdU4FGCdDRAJzUoyWVaGog+tGVMuqkN1UAQ1fqBp2+tKM4QGhI
LSrUq12sqFfb6U1NutSKKkAARwUpr5BaAITutAsnRWlMYVpRJ+i0qwhVAFiv5lSu/kteeLBpUBHq
hIrSQKUYpVTX4lrRm/KgoHrdqyh2aDqx2Mh1t2NOAoGURAda6T1ITKwS9UNExx4RRVACzGI18pzl
We+KXRyPBb00mA4eiEygpZEdOdNC3tCQLCWDHKwMWNo/qQ+2emQYX2v/a1ux4GE5DqofVoAYu96W
zyzk2dFjFfs7AQ6RfwRkbH2mMsXNElezIZRuFafSWS+W8IOfncT0mKc9KnpWEnfMQB4NCIuUcI8k
rdzReMs7RzwC6im0vS199+pX1wIWK5XNX2UP+FsDFrexP8JdfwOM2OHuZYt+AYyCOfhALD4Yus25
7vCy+JntCuhOEI7FaR28oDihyGWeklekmNPeOrowtdXZY31brNf7vk64OfItY2/EuyTSz4dRRAyB
h2jh6EZYwE9aYHON92ErctG7XEIedpOMPTFSWI1KphJnyChH2GZIAmpNAchO7CAvz9bFYi7oKVLg
ggIQwQVmVkEAXHDm/zSzYM0/YMEB0EznOdF5zm5uM53tHGcVqNnNdU5zC1JA5zWj2c14doGe2Sxo
O6s5z3x+853ljGg87FnSkn40Ef58aE6zoNCafrOi5dyDT7s50S3gQQIC3ecmhNrSm840oy19hBaU
gdaOPgSh57RqHnAPcW+yTa3vDOlBl7rP8x0zs+OX26fwkEb5o3HpsDNESjwg2ktKYmF7fGPGHlhI
GBigfPAy7uT2p4geDpOEravFJkuCjdvBMLsTUz4whTc42SWtbF3bugVQ7g4yTHG/m8PiZiNcdDCm
X36tzT7C9lfGSjIsc8ld8SUqV3fMbTCU6NPg/fx4ukmuovLeXWHuTv9QtCPvcHAso2EDXm8C8UVM
ee0zFXmsSuCxhS+KDp7wnz8Mxj38r5CDuOP+8S/cyB2Pt4mbdCMjuMh+oY/FEyPdzI48vFFOU8gx
kL3rbZ3K7Sa49GYOR7O/VhV8Ijt5Z94+oMM96M+udowbnjoU/Q/junU6t6vedPsEeLlRbzDwGAzv
9JxcQFsqOZMTX28z0nvrdqQiy8Ekbw6Hxkwvfx2Y7dN54Pg87qJ3UZmZwGgZBGEGTRABm6tgetbX
eQZcloLqTz97GawA1kZYwhVGoPtDyD74RYA17VNv+jQkQABsAEkaeEAANih/DMxnQxOa//wxRB8O
1meDAcTABZBQnwD/zfc+9rlfhjGEGv0/SEOnd+8DIUAh97YP/vHBQIDsG+D2U3CB8XsvAuIfQv8t
wgrcwPtBwugh4KAohyqUSDKwBo9Awy+ogk94xDhAB17EDDGIjwZ2RATWxQYSQwdWQyvEQlZAgwXe
gkBowwk+oDeoggTuhiqUA0AAwy7ghXNFSS54lgxamANCA38kRDi4wwrymBAmmAY6hSo8RELcgyqM
iUMgRGc04V40BAv+oGXQ0gNa4LhFoWfgQoL4oBS+BBJq4B1lyHSEoU7UhNpN4Z0w4LIlYBzCyNyN
RY4R3ZEQXWHBDmPZoYwcnXMtHZAJiBMF2ZbgIHj5WJCJneKFFxhN/xkJJVkagV0Z5dv1fMiXVNlv
gIV1mV2fMId7sd2JUEboyWEpRgwdapsBTRuK8Be6+SGARRbTBSLgPd22XZwUEVklhlwEBdkTVlCX
eFEGmRzIrRyNmCHLjZfMXRnPgdjOtR2JfOLMkaIpUmMpSAwsAZQsLZJ0xFIhPdI2WhM3qpI2LtIw
3RIrbaM5diMFfGM2iqM3dpM7ahI2llM5+hIFMEADTFM8JtIiNcBKFNLcgGM6spM+SRJBLpI+/RI/
HmQhKSQ1yeM3EdNBONMiJUBBitNCDuQ1oRNE1mMhSeQ/fWRDthNFfiQ6XhMhOaRJhuMgLZJIoqQu
wGE10iQolNkCdP9NWaXGWKXUXLUUTloUULLURFVV18AUVs0UUB7lxfTkpdCVAmyUUQplTl1NUe7k
xcgUVg7lTiJlRXEBVF1VRXnVAhgAACAVWuHkUmYlTp2UADQAVjblVqIlTxEVo9zVWI0lWUHUV4YV
RkGUXF7VQgGlU4aVYLrVU2pVXwYlW96lYfokUSrlYOqkU3HlpcxkTWLmlyAASyDKVqSifaziwwEX
ZB2WxkVdZf2d0pGm4qEmAGRELPSXNCQZLx4ZyWXd4UUZ2A0j183bhmXA5dkH+KBdKKIYahVcdbxd
ZirnJWAMLQHIwklbYOGI/bgiggne3wHiH5pmE23nLOLgBQiPINb/G9bVptbtJm0+HoCUyXlCIuZ9
WZUdyCUyo3kR53seZ6AsZ35WAkxAZWfuXXDqWFfsV+0IFnXUonP0Hd7NomoC2BPphW0q0Gvq4Xo6
nuTdpm/mZgYNZ/RAqIKMUQPw23wGZ30a0Oet2GXqJzVWRX/KlxD8nv4Zwuo1AuuhXqipAPAJoKH9
H//FXyLEKI8WYP8BYI/OWerdaJAWKe2xwRHcKPzNnvNxAZLWKO5FqSPoAPZdX6sVgPo5KQHyHpHq
nwucQfslKRFY342Cae2xXpea3pJuKRik6e7BHpuqwO8h6ezVGZB+6extSIqm6ENwAaKo1aASaqEa
6qEiaqIq6qIy/2qjOuqjQmqkSuqkUmqlIqqf6qf3XE10YCVOeuqngmqoiuqokmqpmuqpomqqomqn
quqosqqpduqrtuqsqqqs0iqsiqqt3uqumiqm6ueckKCvCuuwEmuxGuuxImuy0iQyZEk7tFMEoMdx
YIA9NEOz5gJaRCuLVIA1vOagREQgbes1fOtzrAgJhmsq5EY7tAgx8cS5MmG1IkeGxBIGuGt6wKuy
ZmorWYzAgAxqzMOKxEqH7CtUFgvAccaK6MQDNMC/vgjbEA4BNMADMEAC3MzVtMiitEOxOADFFovF
rsggcYvGJsDbFEtrIUfMPFK/bg5qPIDJ4uty2sLiyIMSPtReJP/Ox2LEAFwNLUTVLlyAAOjFiqSD
BQRA0LKIBSghAGhGnggAPVwKi9zTQVjAXAgAO2RAAxQAi4CDKNGSKgjAoiSGkxRHzLBQVbgLTJDA
y+bntlCABTgFV+1FARysccwEITWIXu6FIrnIWlzA4hSKAzSAA/gsD4CnpyAsTRwEaYhPANACA6yH
cVwNrhxAgwxABDgFyKxIzDRUVWDKigKQ2lIj9BFAGQgMeNKlzTLHcLBe6xwGfyiAztqs0R7HBewC
0couwDaABdBuzjZtcIDF2DZBE1AAaORJANAD1rKIn+xLgnxtgozAipSIUJjtAySIAYgt6JbiqlVG
BViM4EYuVM7/rVLYKNYQ0gQwC10JLsMebaVcTfgih7M8AMm+ZUW17OcWRyo8BPuCTKN4LHIMkgjk
Y9sIjOD+RnHsKw0UE8BBgMW8JYhir3IeRDIAQCtEgAlka3HQiVkWwwRjQAXPwqBIQBmo64uk1ZtI
gBY0A0gERIv8KwWUAS2ocLcixykwwAVQgABYSDIkDrneL091kgsLwAWoQgEIwATI8APT5AgXUkZc
AAS4L3FQwN7Qwy/hgigRSoY8MXJUwPmcTy5YBhXz8HFYhgVYcS5IgBC3yBaDJwZMgMt18bpyphmb
CE8gcR3b8R3jcR7r8R7zcR/78R8DciAL8iATciEb8iEjciIr//IiM3IjO/IjQ7IjE9OtHMhRUAR4
gkJuxEokc3Inl8IZ0kTqHoXcHDEnNIpIiLInq/IqZ8J14Eql0BK3vKUT5NLVoMWvQCWsAByljK4J
rUIokQBOUsoKawRL3CsrI3MyL4bbhtMEKxIE7AJKCYwtHNS+PE0GXMAtA0ADQEDfXq3P3APa4MoC
aUS/3q4yo3MkQ1HfQgDF9G0uTEcWKKx12EbGNMqQ8C8AMIARw8K35IfFnI/REkYYp3NBQ7J/VMql
mJAgTYc0YwpUXgy81MsYNYppvOU9bWzjhEM2CMwk4QWWGHRIQ/J18I3eHtKJvC40E1IsFEDiYMyQ
3N+/AI81dP+af5yCPvgtMYr0TjsyvY6GE4MnQtCCP7kOFVMAJm+jBRixF7cDFYlSKtzRMfP0VLNy
1FD1VWN1Vmv1VnN1V3v1V4N1WIv1WJN1WZv1WaN1Wqv1WrN1W7v1W8N1XMv1XNN1Xdv1XeN1Xuv1
XvN1X/v1XwN2YAv2YBN2YRv2YSN2Yiv2YjN2Yzv2Y0N2ZEv2ZFN2ZVv2ZWN2Zmv2ZnN2Z3v2Z4N2
aIv2aJN2aZv2aaN2aqv2arN2a7v2a8N2bMv2bNN2bdv2beN2buv2bvN2b/v2bwN3cAv3cBN3cRv3
cSN3civ3cjP3Xpkxvf6SUQhSKos2IilyBIjLA2zrOY9CO83/ayXkk9F2cLFE63hrNyVMq7fQwxaH
7xZzAuDmIwT8YxGX5QAYxQ8EAEE321gQB2S003hxAmoc7DkMFIDPsU4UUyyBN3VXAg/ASSKbRhM0
SgoghTwEQJs5ybgVbSWkRkszCm8EwIZ8eLxVLQBMgHUolCWgo35Lgh5ArAHI7QWYQBbDJrRmAgbM
uJTQsbZuJosjRTbwBA50Atn6+CWYhqhcsydsSCzRxM9arSfYA4OrOE0UOSfoAk/EkCWIDzO8SQtU
MgXk8I2bJY0Dcp0FEr2KxF5soxfvhTFPdwmOMGvEksaA0Cn4DCYnmD+AhFNkg57PXSzYAQSIz4m3
uSkhQNpo/8KMW0AEDIAAdM1aDUkgYYU/mcCBmBI9u9RT5HgkYYUpLfGQIBI0cDqoS/oqUUADKN8i
DQkdL5Ozxjlr/BJ9BBJLBIkJaAgkFYaqf4nOZsSot7qdcG0uQOuGaHch8XCpB/nT8BQCKHUr/Dqn
e/F0t4ANGjt4R9KyC5J1W0C1Z/uZF7qxp8Y8dE+cwwugM4NUF0MyUUKotxGvKLJp1ADwKNKcLTkL
vAKxxJpOnEAlVwBDYcb9JYDSMgBjkFcTuE4uGDx628EEHOSQJB8LEEu7DHwmXPgRbMjVrNWi0IB2
a0wT+Jpu0JKHY7dtyGYDtBnF7IB2V0AP8EAXiDDLM9SqvP8AIZWBVIE5DqgXHkAAQ2UASTyAjN8f
pYjAPUuCBXgUmhESSpVAh8jH4thZD6D8xnPGvxxSA6yAdptZCswEWLHS01w8CXRI6hJBBhA7DwhM
m1EASVAAyyutr7UOn114oo3b0GsJCyQV2rcZDlQAxRIAA0gAqi99b+DZkvOUImFaCljGxbR4iGOK
JbSLbrCSAFS6UGQ6hMMUKwBPwEywJOF7Q5iGRC8Spr0JYwQS6ax9J+05erfAq4uPIpErBgQ6K2UE
8DC8afSGBmcCHvSK0MDCyu+CAIjBm0yAFiwTpkx90UIAAAxAu9zPDWv30xet72tZA0AJO3QPSFS8
g699b9D/rvGCuVnWy8/uArFbwJhnvvOtUffwwNUYL0g0f71UgBh8v7MQwYXrBfyuvAuYsFlqGTuU
AJWDAAE8BRAAxgAoWZsVyDuWz0M8FwBQAMIrvN2q4tAtEA8J4CASuCqEwkJie2BWFOKypFDsvIei
hCJyTG5XoI7SIkRaAILDwXa1IgCHC1GY4AN4enaDhIWGh4iJiouMjY6NTBgtD3GUExUHAAx8ZAAL
BzEZFQELNQ8uFAEKlAAYFK8CBxEEAwevGRYJmmO3GAh5Y65sVwCXBGyUDBIiU54VWYUBNxEUBwUZ
GKoZBAcPDlYEbhJnD3UZCwFmAAIP2i1kONymFRV59Q/1/0IMF14BqvMA3mRQECDJiQUFIkA5diLC
lQkZJpCqITADBFXLSBE81wPVDQswtgVk4g2fi1k4BKz6di/DiVcPBIzIZGPdAFMS7DChQIMGOQwy
lSy40oAYjwQQGhhRQG1iDRcYqOhwgGZECwcFa0hQmqFIGAASoOSBcCOHnpctusFRIKnQhDwuCNZY
h2fBo7t48+rdy5dQuApXl1AQUODAiQYQVBRgQCYUhgXcmEJFt6JcgWsPFD+IcBmDFx06On/WcSMk
MQhk2GCKU2BiOgUFBA06oQMBE2yeMsw6cGCChQklBCC4Ye6CAX8+UrF4NwBChd2yLvAoNyKIEm49
5kSmBv/2nYgDMhuUbSdtQRYAEHApYDLFDjppqBUM4Lg8A4UBES6oFJmEmyzAdxAAAQZUgeLbCNns
wMQACEhAExfDEWcHCQHE1skDZCm0BgANWKBJDjsw4M9xUiDgEGQELACRd+EYUEUOp4gSYTledNUD
T4Wd4IAECXl41g4tKGBXBiu0UEESdogoGyb+AMGDbH1FKeWUVC4SzgWTxBGRA7MUaUAcbIDiUTrm
ZMBjQaLQIsqXCVgARQFigSYNnCKA5gYBMRADUQJWdKUKHw4gYCJCULpA2wrWYKONL1hg4FkcCkjo
QmZoulQfT/gw6gMGPt6TDw8LRGAFBmKZl0N6QXIYBQP/BTzgpggGDFNMC4kVBKB3RQ7kxAIdeecq
gxnQlMEvtrSl2w1pakIBjAlS4IUACtEkwlwE+GYHBt+xUYIZH6kgFJF2rTHYTZctsIqZrZlk5C/V
VuFhjBlQ0twFDAAQ7xIYRMDltsvgABda8R5QQRqS2LAKFA8k0OCE60CUw5BVRizxxBGTEQ5GFFf5
gAH1eTRwxiCLAlfIJJdsssRkFBCFAjklgi0Ct5qpwBztGECABSfnrPPOWaKAJc93UdAAvKhADHRf
9RR69NJMk4wVAAkYm4gDC8TsLIYDGNBAx0137XUjFrxS5teHUIAzITGT3UhUUqvt9tuMPHNL3Gm7
coEw//TArffeIcu9NjQoSyBM23hRILjhhActON+MN+7445DrxgAqDjRgjjdtCc0A0aI0wIDnDRi5
49RaMtLOARPrgEdAjUggwc92qK46XyBW1Mjckeeu++68L3JR1BnoN0AsDkkQQCgilY4KaDpgQ5Dt
hRRBQCPPtRzxCcazzggBQBCCfUN8AWXVIXOMvfXYvaev/vp6YzC8eZ4FAMFbgLQGf6rT+0VAW14p
ZCzeWZBeVLARjCy84hkDo8T+DEgBSdzigAgMSwXCIrUDviJBEcCeKILxDEddcBL5E9sFGwK+d8gN
QAYcmOEA9JgUTUU1YRGF4ZbBPRm+AiQISBz7dsjDHv+arB1RKIACBDCAV9RmC6oADK/yN4hwSMIC
tPgSAgThiwAwIQ7SK4KNbtCDCiGgQquoxPGkwYLbZEIBKTAMN6QBLx7B4HtgacgsLtMFTVDCFkFi
AY9UAscMau8FawxDKmiBANhcphztKCRorvELIFgjHJeBGROEVIFfwM6HmMykJqdkjQq8xQQFMCJp
nrOGR6EuWJHBVgjtoYtVOqACvPqKHOyllFlGgFcQ8IIbKgGWJaIyA7pYQAIEkLJOQIwToyiG6hqi
MgkUAQC1+EtbpjisUKYiICT84/G0EAAeMIYSOyLAnwSAJdowcgXPo0cX8KGyHT3qbJuMpzznqQh0
PMD/C0L0BEF4UxCCdJMj+bPTNgiAJZ7IggDCecfxKMAu6VEil1gEgBYuoEAFahEP04NNJxpgM1+c
sz5yUQJ64AgBJtxyHayAEjVDCsfsVcSKR9oQRC7CMnEuwJ5+9Ec1VqAk13WheM901g5wR8+iGnWT
YlGF2YbpjJ02aiBLuMoCvjHQFmCABABoVR0epTIrSg8Kw1sFJbRggVpilBJX1ZIEBBAAATgAAgko
AAYikQmI8cSK/hCpHyeQkQEwRnhSM5d9SsBUl5bQJTlKEQ9ygoEGyIQAYelEClQhTgEg5gKZIKMC
JmAxGDCJDAOA51FHS9r1YRVV7RhAy7ACCBf4Un9n/1sN8E5iRYTA7Bb1EoBviqCFmC6QAhctXSuX
ZYBrxHVYuXHBl6hSAF5EpYGPqRAblDOIWQDmFwygxRgOt7gWWFFUbDgVrkA6gihE4BehxBJWCtMF
1GTCANTAExTIWdr62ve+8zQM+vCEvkO4o2Tm0iF+B0zgAkcOpoR4gHkacTwBR0xUBo6whCe8tzEU
Im+3SxvILiBaCnv4wyAOsYhHTOISm/jEKE6xilfM4ha7+MUwjrGMZ0zjGtv4xjjOsY53zOMe+/jH
QA6ykIdM5CIb+chITrKSl8zkJjv5yVCOspSnTOUqW/nKWM6ylrfM5S57+ctgDrOYx0zmMpv5zGhO
s/aa18zmNrv5zXCOs5znTOc62/nOeM6znvfM5z77+c+ADrSgB03oQhv60IhOtKIXzehGO/rRkI60
pCdN6Upb+tKYzrSmN83pTnv606AOtahHTepSm/rUqE61qlfN6la7+tWwjrWsZ03rWtv61rjOta53
zete+/rXwA62sIdN7GIb+9jITrayl83sZjv72dCOtrSnTe1qW/va2M62trfN7W57+9vgDre4x03u
cpv73OhOt7rXze52u/vd8I63vOdN73rb+974zre+983vfvv73wAPuMAHTvCCG/zgCE+4whfO8IY7
/OEQj7jEJ07xilv84hjPuMYBHgIAOw==

------=_NextPart_000_0D6C_01C56B69.53424FC0--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 11791 invoked from network); 24 Oct 2001 04:13:03 -0000
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 24 Oct 2001 04:13:03 -0000
Received: (qmail 7220 invoked by uid 50005); 24 Oct 2001 02:59:32 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4165. . Clean. Processed in 0.485084 secs); 24 Oct 2001 02:59:32 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 24 Oct 2001 02:59:31 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA17178; Tue, 23 Oct 2001 20:55:17 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 122075 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 24 Oct 2001 03:55:10          +0000
Received: from angel.comcen.com.au (angel.comcen.com.au [203.23.236.69]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA17157 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 23 Oct 2001 20:54:43 -0700
Received: from win2pk2 (modem052.sydney.spin.net.au [202.172.120.52] (may be          forged)) by angel.comcen.com.au (8.11.4/8.10.1) with SMTP id          f9O3sQ586216; Wed, 24 Oct 2001 13:54:27 +1000 (EST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0D70_01C56B69.534499B0"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
Importance: Normal
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <JJEFLLHFFAHHMBBIHFAEGEJJCHAA.pkelly@comcen.com.au>
Date:         Wed, 24 Oct 2001 13:55:38 +1000
Reply-To: "Paul Kelly" <pkelly@COMCEN.COM.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Paul Kelly" <pkelly@COMCEN.COM.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] T6 and high temperatures
Comments: To: Esteban Gonzalez <esteban@loscaranchos.org>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <00c801c15c37$af2ea170$30044c40@compu>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0D70_01C56B69.534499B0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Interesting graph.  Temp vs yeild would be more interesting. I suspect the
curve would be steeper.

PK
  -----Original Message-----
  From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU]On
Behalf Of Esteban Gonzalez
  Sent: Wednesday, 24 October 2001 12:35 PM
  To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
  Subject: Re: [AR] T6 and high temperatures





  ----- Original Message -----
  From: "Emil Johnsen" <Emil.Johnsen@STUDENT.UIB.NO>
  To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
  Sent: Monday, October 22, 2001 11:40 PM
  Subject: [AR] T6 and high temperatures


  > At what temperature does 6000-series T6 aluminium become damaged? Is it
  > instant or must it stay at this temp for some time? How much is the
yield
  > strength of T6 aluminium reduced when this happens?
  >
  > --
  > Emil Johnsen
  >

------=_NextPart_000_0D70_01C56B69.534499B0
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Diso-8859-1">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 5.50.4807.2300" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY>
<DIV><SPAN class=3D060355203-24102001><FONT face=3DArial color=3D#0000ff =

size=3D2>Interesting graph.&nbsp;</FONT></SPAN><SPAN=20
class=3D060355203-24102001><FONT face=3DArial color=3D#0000ff size=3D2> =
Temp vs yeild=20
would be more interesting. I suspect the curve would be=20
steeper.</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=3D060355203-24102001><FONT face=3DArial color=3D#0000ff =

size=3D2></FONT></SPAN>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=3D060355203-24102001><FONT face=3DArial color=3D#0000ff =

size=3D2>PK</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE>
  <DIV class=3DOutlookMessageHeader dir=3Dltr align=3Dleft><FONT =
face=3DTahoma=20
  size=3D2>-----Original Message-----<BR><B>From:</B> Amateur Rocketry =
discussion=20
  list [mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU]<B>On Behalf Of </B>Esteban=20
  Gonzalez<BR><B>Sent:</B> Wednesday, 24 October 2001 12:35 =
PM<BR><B>To:</B>=20
  AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU<BR><B>Subject:</B> Re: [AR] T6 and high=20
  temperatures<BR><BR></FONT></DIV>
  <DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
  <DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
  <DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
  <DIV><FONT face=3DTahoma size=3D2>----- Original Message ----- </FONT>
  <DIV><FONT face=3DTahoma size=3D2>From: "Emil Johnsen" &lt;</FONT><A=20
  href=3D"mailto:Emil.Johnsen@STUDENT.UIB.NO"><FONT face=3DTahoma=20
  size=3D2>Emil.Johnsen@STUDENT.UIB.NO</FONT></A><FONT face=3DTahoma=20
  size=3D2>&gt;</FONT></DIV>
  <DIV><FONT face=3DTahoma size=3D2>To: &lt;</FONT><A=20
  href=3D"mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU"><FONT face=3DTahoma=20
  size=3D2>AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU</FONT></A><FONT face=3DTahoma=20
size=3D2>&gt;</FONT></DIV>
  <DIV><FONT face=3DTahoma size=3D2>Sent: Monday, October 22, 2001 11:40 =

  PM</FONT></DIV>
  <DIV><FONT face=3DTahoma size=3D2>Subject: [AR] T6 and high=20
  temperatures</FONT></DIV></DIV>
  <DIV><BR></DIV><FONT face=3DTahoma size=3D2>&gt; At what temperature =
does=20
  6000-series T6 aluminium become damaged? Is it<BR>&gt; instant or must =
it stay=20
  at this temp for some time? How much is the yield<BR>&gt; strength of =
T6=20
  aluminium reduced when this happens?<BR>&gt; <BR>&gt; --<BR>&gt; Emil=20
  Johnsen<BR>&gt; </FONT></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0D70_01C56B69.534499B0--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 5709 invoked from network); 24 Oct 2001 05:11:14 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 24 Oct 2001 05:11:14 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 27524 invoked by uid 50005); 24 Oct 2001 03:57:43 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4165. . Clean. Processed in 0.359486 secs); 24 Oct 2001 03:57:43 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 24 Oct 2001 03:57:42 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA17587; Tue, 23 Oct 2001 22:03:02 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 122119 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 24 Oct 2001 05:02:57          +0000
Received: from smtppop3pub.verizon.net (smtppop3pub.gte.net [206.46.170.22]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA17573 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 23 Oct 2001 22:02:56 -0700
Received: from [65.229.52.47] (1Cust56.tnt1.rancho-cucamonga.ca.da.uu.net          [63.24.225.56]) by smtppop3pub.verizon.net  with ESMTP for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; id AAA37012114 Wed, 24 Oct 2001 00:02:00 -0500          (CDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: GTE/01rocket@mail.gte.net
References: <000601c15c2d$f7b236a0$a037cbcc@zip>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <a05100352b7fbfa4dff21@[65.229.52.47]>
Date:         Tue, 23 Oct 2001 22:02:14 -0700
Reply-To: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Public apology, was [OT warning]
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <000601c15c2d$f7b236a0$a037cbcc@zip>

>away from 9/11/2001. I did not expect the over the top trashing that Mr.
>Irvine has received by a few individuals of aRocket,

Since I was offlist for a short time I would appreciate an email copy
of any posts addressing me specifically.  I understand one of them is
Bob Fortune.  Privately by email please.

I am not upset by too much email either. I hardly ever get negative
email.  It seems to be limited to rmr except a very small minority
that also post here.

Again thank you all for the many private messages of support in
email.  It was very gratifying and very strongly renews my faith in
rocketeers as well.  I note it.

I remind the casual reader that when times are tense people are
tense.  Times are tense.  I want to work with people here and other
places to expand the clarity of legality surrounding rocketry, and
simplify the law making it legal, preferably by exemption (ie ATF
55.141).

The list owners and managers have the authority, with my full
support, to do whatever they want.

I cannot even begin to tell you how much more satisfying arocket is
than rmr or sci.space.tech or ROL forums.  Whatever Ray and crew are
doing, it's being done right.

Jerry Irvine



--
Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
Opinion, the whole thing.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 11842 invoked from network); 24 Oct 2001 05:57:17 -0000
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 24 Oct 2001 05:57:17 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 30261 invoked by uid 50005); 24 Oct 2001 05:56:24 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4164. . Clean. Processed in 0.200034 secs); 24 Oct 2001 05:56:24 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 24 Oct 2001 05:56:24 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA17798; Tue, 23 Oct 2001 22:53:26 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 122151 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 24 Oct 2001 05:53:17          +0000
Received: from m5.boston.juno.com (m5.boston.juno.com [64.136.24.68]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA17780 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Tue, 23 Oct 2001 22:53:16 -0700
Received: from cookie.juno.com by cookie.juno.com for          <"r2Fo8hpwT0kn33UwylHELMN/WOTpJvUcT5Aj9wjVUhblnP/YlF8oVw==">
Received: (from icantdecide@juno.com) by m5.boston.juno.com (queuemail) id          GJHBCUXM; Wed, 24 Oct 2001 01:52:59 EDT
X-Mailer: Juno 4.0.9
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Juno-Line-Breaks: 17-20,22-45,48-56
X-Juno-Att: 0
X-Juno-RefParts: 0
Message-ID:  <20011024.005336.-523983.0.icantdecide@juno.com>
Date:         Wed, 24 Oct 2001 00:53:36 -0500
Reply-To: "James G Selin" <icantdecide@JUNO.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "James G Selin" <icantdecide@JUNO.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] High temp question
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

The solidus is the temperature at which a portion of the metal melts and
some remains solid. This is due to zone purification tendencies. Because
eutectics (stoichiometric metal-metal compounds) melt at lower
temperatures the metal melts as this compound first, leaving behind the
"extras". Between the liquidus and solidus (solidus is lower) the metal
as like a slush or like cement with sand in it. Some forming techniques
use the phenomenon to cast objects by packing it into place. When i melt
A356 this is very noticable and fun to play with. Note that in this case
the material doesn't flow but depending on an alloys closeness to the
eutectic point the effects will be less pronounced. To really "melt" a
metal you should go past the liquidus. Whoa I just checked and you were
asking about a tungsten refractory alloy. Things will be weird there but
the same concepts apply. I just assumed aluminum alloys since this is
what gets the most discussion here. Most tungsten alloys are damn near
impossible to melt so I think the solidus will be hard to notice. The
effects would be mostly mechanical with ductility going up and yield
strength coming down. Don't quote me because I couldn't say for sure.
Contacting the company should yield a lot of practical info.

Jim Selin

On Tue, 23 Oct 2001 00:09:51 -0500 Mark Kruep <mkruep@HOTMAIL.COM>
writes:
> The solidus line is a line on the phase diagram of a metal. It is the
> point
> (heat) at which the entire solution becomes solid from liquid. The
> liquidus
> is the liquid state of course, and then there can be many different
> phases
> between (part solid/part liquid) these 2 lines depending on
> temperature and
> composition. If you want to learn more, consult a metallurgy text.
>
> Mark
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Jeff Grady" <jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET>
> To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
> Sent: Tuesday, October 23, 2001 12:02 AM
> Subject: [AR] High temp question
>
>
> > Could someone explain the definition of "solidus" as it pertains
> on this
> > page (near the bottom):
> >
> >
>
http://www.matweb.com/SpecificMaterial.asp?bassnum=NCMW00&group=General&r
efe
> > rer=http://www.matweb.com/search.htm
> >
> > I can't find a definition anywhere I've looked.
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Jeff
> >

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 16362 invoked from network); 24 Nov 2001 20:06:38 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 24 Nov 2001 20:06:38 -0000
Received: (qmail 2158 invoked by uid 50005); 24 Nov 2001 20:06:30 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4171. . Clean. Processed in 0.249598 secs); 24 Nov 2001 20:06:30 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 24 Nov 2001 20:06:30 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA19969; Sat, 24 Nov 2001 11:55:18 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 85975 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 24 Nov 2001 19:55:15          +0000
Received: from web21106.mail.yahoo.com (web21106.mail.yahoo.com          [216.136.227.108]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id LAA19955          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 24 Nov 2001 11:55:14 -0800
Received: from [128.139.197.33] by web21106.mail.yahoo.com via HTTP; Sat, 24          Nov 2001 11:55:14 PST
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <20011124195514.96165.qmail@web21106.mail.yahoo.com>
Date:         Sat, 24 Nov 2001 11:55:14 -0800
Reply-To: "flint hapirat" <flinthapirat@YAHOO.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "flint hapirat" <flinthapirat@YAHOO.COM>
Subject:      [AR] Epoxy based propellant
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <3BFFBDFA.A066167C@vip.cybercity.dk>

Thanks guys - for all the help.
I intend to try these out soon - I have several epoxy
brands already at home and I'll mix them first.. and
then try some more. I also have a number of an epoxy
expert - I'll call him and ask for the most Al/Mg rich
epoxy available.
I'm not too bothered (actually, none at all) about the
reaction between AP and epoxy - since I don't have,
and can't get my hands on AP. I'll use KN.

Thanks for the info.
I'm more then interested in your results - if you are
still working on it - especially epoxy specific brands
and motor info.

Regards,
Flint

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! GeoCities - quick and easy web site hosting, just $8.95/month.
http://geocities.yahoo.com/ps/info1

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 23246 invoked from network); 26 Nov 2001 13:00:42 -0000
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 26 Nov 2001 13:00:42 -0000
Received: (qmail 11222 invoked by uid 50005); 26 Nov 2001 13:00:34 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4171. . Clean. Processed in 0.177073 secs); 26 Nov 2001 13:00:34 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 26 Nov 2001 13:00:33 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id EAA28463; Mon, 26 Nov 2001 04:44:02 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 86983 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 26 Nov 2001 12:44:00          +0000
Received: from femail6.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail6.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.0.95.86]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id EAA28449 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 26 Nov 2001 04:44:00 -0800
Received: from cx814151a ([24.14.55.118]) by femail6.sdc1.sfba.home.com          (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20 201-229-121-120-20010223) with SMTP id          <20011126124400.PVOB29597.femail6.sdc1.sfba.home.com@cx814151a> for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 26 Nov 2001 04:44:00 -0800
References:  <010601c1766a$2b99df80$0700a8c0@mkbs>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="Windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4807.1700
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <029901c17676$b8786140$0a01a8c0@cx814151a>
Date:         Mon, 26 Nov 2001 06:34:40 -0600
Reply-To: "John Bolene" <jbolene@HOME.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Bolene" <jbolene@HOME.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Starchaser X-Prize reaches 5000 feet, so far ...
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

That is something to send a 1,643-lb (740-kilogram) rocket to 5,000 feet and
get it back.

But that is a long way from orbit.

The largest TRA rocket that has flown was 1243 pounds, IIRC, Project 463.
It only left garbage when it impacted.

John Bolene
Tripoli Oklahoma Prefect and webmaster
Tripoli Oklahoma Web page -> http://members.home.com/tripoli-oklahoma/

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 1102 invoked from network); 26 Nov 2001 22:17:50 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 26 Nov 2001 22:17:50 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 5870 invoked by uid 50005); 26 Nov 2001 22:17:42 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4172. . Clean. Processed in 0.353638 secs); 26 Nov 2001 22:17:42 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 26 Nov 2001 22:17:42 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA30431; Mon, 26 Nov 2001 13:04:37 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 87180 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 26 Nov 2001 21:03:05          +0000
Received: from idsoftware.com (predator.idsoftware.com [192.246.40.34]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA30415 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Mon, 26 Nov 2001 13:03:05 -0800
Received: from [192.246.40.129] (account johnc HELO lightning.idsoftware.com)          by idsoftware.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 3.4.7) with ESMTP id 491067          for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 26 Nov 2001 15:03:04 -0600
X-Sender: johnc@mail.idsoftware.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.1
References: <010601c1766a$2b99df80$0700a8c0@mkbs>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <4.3.1.2.20011126145809.03512c58@mail.idsoftware.com>
Date:         Mon, 26 Nov 2001 15:01:10 -0600
Reply-To: "John Carmack" <johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Carmack" <johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Starchaser X-Prize reaches 5000 feet, so far ...
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <029901c17676$b8786140$0a01a8c0@cx814151a>

At 06:34 AM 11/26/2001 -0600, you wrote:
>That is something to send a 1,643-lb (740-kilogram) rocket to 5,000 feet and
>get it back.
>
>But that is a long way from orbit.
>
>The largest TRA rocket that has flown was 1243 pounds, IIRC, Project 463.
>It only left garbage when it impacted.
>
>John Bolene
>Tripoli Oklahoma Prefect and webmaster
>Tripoli Oklahoma Web page -> http://members.home.com/tripoli-oklahoma/

Yes, they are to be commended for having a nominal launch and partial
recovery of the worlds largest high power rocket, but they really do
overstate the sophistication of their efforts.

I'm impressed they got all their motors lit at once.

John Carmack

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 10147 invoked from network); 26 Nov 2001 23:34:49 -0000
Received: from smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.105]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 26 Nov 2001 23:34:49 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 27814 invoked by uid 50005); 26 Nov 2001 23:34:41 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpy with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4172. . Clean. Processed in 0.364793 secs); 26 Nov 2001 23:34:41 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 26 Nov 2001 23:34:41 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA30833; Mon, 26 Nov 2001 14:43:43 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 87226 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 26 Nov 2001 22:42:17          +0000
Received: from imo-r02.mx.aol.com (imo-r02.mx.aol.com [152.163.225.98]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA30818 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Mon, 26 Nov 2001 14:42:16 -0800
Received: from MilburnMNK@aol.com by imo-r02.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v31_r1.9.) id          r.6a.17154598 (4218); Mon, 26 Nov 2001 17:42:06 -0500 (EST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: AOL 5.0 for Windows sub 138
Message-ID:  <6a.17154598.29341f3d@aol.com>
Date:         Mon, 26 Nov 2001 17:42:05 EST
Reply-To: <MilburnMNK@AOL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <MilburnMNK@AOL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Starchaser X-Prize reaches 5000 feet, so far ...
Comments: To: johnc@idsoftware.com
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

In a message dated 11/26/01 3:06:02 PM Central Standard Time,
johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM writes:

<< Yes, they are to be commended for having a nominal launch and partial
 recovery of the worlds largest high power rocket, but they really do
 overstate the sophistication of their efforts.  I'm impressed they got all
their motors lit at once.   John Carmack >>
I'm impressed he didn't blow himself up and / or set fire to Morecambe beach!
 This guy is a dangerous nutter and a potential embarassment, if not danger,
to the experimental rocket community. His most viable skill appears to be
self advertisement. He has apparently found sponsors and raised cash on the
strength of launches that can be seen at most any Tripoli meet across the
USA. The enthusiasm is commendable - the rest is histrionics.

Did he develop his own propulsion this time or was it simply a cluster of
commercial AT motors?  Even a cluster of N's is quite a feat but X-Prize
material ............. Nah!

Neil M

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 26365 invoked from network); 27 Nov 2001 01:28:11 -0000
Received: from smtpv.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.110]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 27 Nov 2001 01:28:11 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 20758 invoked by uid 50005); 27 Nov 2001 01:23:12 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpv with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4172. . Clean. Processed in 1.084476 secs); 27 Nov 2001 01:23:12 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpv.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 27 Nov 2001 01:23:11 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA31106; Mon, 26 Nov 2001 15:46:45 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 87261 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 26 Nov 2001 23:46:41          +0000
Received: from femail32.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail32.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.254.60.22]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA31092          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 26 Nov 2001 15:46:40 -0800
Received: from home.com ([24.22.71.82]) by femail32.sdc1.sfba.home.com          (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20 201-229-121-120-20010223) with ESMTP id          <20011126234640.HRFP23924.femail32.sdc1.sfba.home.com@home.com> for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 26 Nov 2001 15:46:40 -0800
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.75 [en] (Win98; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <010601c1766a$2b99df80$0700a8c0@mkbs>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3C02D4D8.DE7A4871@home.com>
Date:         Mon, 26 Nov 2001 18:48:40 -0500
Reply-To: "Mark Simpson" <mark.simpson@HOME.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Mark Simpson" <mark.simpson@HOME.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Starchaser X-Prize reaches 5000 feet, so far ...
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

I'm surprised that all of his Estes Electron Beam Controllers worked. ;-) (In
case you're not familiar with Bennett, he has quite a long list of
"accomplishments" to his credit. Amongst them are an inate ability to burn out
British parks.) Why do you think he has to launch near the water now?
He's a PT Barnum Circus Act that manages to get sponsors to fork over some
serious cash to indulge his fantasies.  Anyone that would volunteer to go up in
his X Prize rocket deserves to win a Darwin Award instead.

Mark Simpson

Russell McMahon wrote:

> He's at it again ...
>
>         http://www.cnn.com/2001/TECH/space/11/22/rocket.test/index.html
>
> ________________________________________________
>
> CNN) -- After sending a prototype a mile into the sky on Thursday, an
> amateur rocket builder said he expects to win a $10 million prize to launch
> the first private astronaut team into space.
>
> The rocket soared during the morning flight to 5,000 feet (1,520 meters)
> over a mud flat expanse near Manchester in Northwest England early in the
> morning.
>
> Known as Nova, the reusable launch vehicle landed with the assistance of two
> parachutes. Many parts were recovered intact, according to Nova designer
> Steven Bennett. They will be refurbished and the 33-foot (11-meter) rocket
> will fly again within months.
>
> There were some minor glitches. A third parachute became tangled and the
> 1,643-lb (740-kilogram) rocket was supposed to reach 6,000 feet. But overall
> Bennett was pleased with the test, which had been postponed after the
> September 11 terror attacks in the United States.
>
> "It went very well. It was a real good flight," said Bennett. "We got pieces
> back so we're happy. We're going to launch it again."
>
> Bennett, an engineering professor at the University of Salford, expects to
> ride one of his rockets in 2002. The founder of Starchasers Industries,
> which builds his prototypes, Bennett has already overseen a dozen test
> flights in his quest for the X-prize.
>
> The U.S.-based contest will handsomely reward the first team to send and
> return a three-person crew safely into suborbital flight, about 63 miles
> high (101 kilometers), in the same vehicle twice within two weeks.
>
> To help raise funds, Bennett is selling seats for his ambitious project. The
> price could reach as high as $650,000 (US). For those with smaller travel
> budgets, the enterprising rocket man offers a lottery. One lucky winner can
> join the sky-high odyssey for a fraction of the cost.
>
> The task is certainly a daunting one, especially considering it must be done
> without the assistance of governments. What does his spouse think of the
> idea of Bennett cavorting on the edge of space?
>
> "My wife doesn't think I'm crazy. She wants to go," he said.
bi

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 10350 invoked from network); 27 Nov 2001 02:45:29 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 27 Nov 2001 02:45:29 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 23954 invoked by uid 50005); 27 Nov 2001 02:45:21 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4172. . Clean. Processed in 0.459807 secs); 27 Nov 2001 02:45:21 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 27 Nov 2001 02:45:20 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA32037; Mon, 26 Nov 2001 18:29:00 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 87311 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 27 Nov 2001 02:28:01          +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (f121.law14.hotmail.com [64.4.21.121]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA32022 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 26 Nov 2001 18:28:00 -0800
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Mon,          26 Nov 2001 18:27:30 -0800
Received: from 199.183.253.195 by lw14fd.law14.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Tue,          27 Nov 2001 02:27:30 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [199.183.253.195]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 27 Nov 2001 02:27:30.0650 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[105543A0:01C176EB]
Message-ID:  <F121mNeOYjcau6h8NNW00006569@hotmail.com>
Date:         Tue, 27 Nov 2001 02:27:30 +0000
Reply-To: "Matt Faulkner" <mattfaulkner9@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Matt Faulkner" <mattfaulkner9@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] cheap data aquisition
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Jack wrote:
>what about using a spring with a rod through its centre with the rod
> >connected to a slide potentiometer and use the joystick port for input
> >to the computer. the common audio slide pots are only 10k ohm as to a
> >joystick being 100k,

Sounds promising, but I would be careful with using a lower resistance slide
pot. Since current = voltage/resistance, using a 10k sinks 10 times the
power of a 100k through your computer's port. You can probably find a 100k
slide potentiometer with ease, and the higher resistance range (0-100k ohms)
should give more accurate readings than 0-10k ohms.
                                        -Matt Faulkner

_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 16574 invoked from network); 27 Nov 2001 02:54:49 -0000
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 27 Nov 2001 02:54:49 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 7526 invoked by uid 50005); 27 Nov 2001 02:54:41 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4172. . Clean. Processed in 0.12369 secs); 27 Nov 2001 02:54:41 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 27 Nov 2001 02:54:41 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA32121; Mon, 26 Nov 2001 18:34:57 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 87323 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 27 Nov 2001 02:34:55          +0000
Received: from izzy6.izzy.net (izzy6.izzy.net [207.158.132.178]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA32107 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon,          26 Nov 2001 18:34:54 -0800
Received: from izzy.net (annex-0-4-port-2.dialup.coast.net [207.158.181.2]) by          izzy6.izzy.net (8.9.2/8.9.3) with ESMTP id VAA24182 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 26 Nov 2001 21:34:52 -0500 (EST)
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (Win95; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3C02FC61.FDC463C2@izzy.net>
Date:         Mon, 26 Nov 2001 21:37:21 -0500
Reply-To: <cscholl@izzy.net>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Curtis Scholl" <cscholl@izzy.net>
Subject:      [AR] Have I been unsubscribed?
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Hi Folks:

   Have I been unsubscribed from Arocket, Sugpro and WAMEX?? I haven't
had a normal load of
email since last Wednesday! Or has everybody still got a tryptophane
glaze over their eyes?


Curtis Scholl

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 17156 invoked from network); 27 Nov 2001 03:11:19 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 27 Nov 2001 03:11:19 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 16787 invoked by uid 50005); 27 Nov 2001 03:11:11 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4172. . Clean. Processed in 0.149136 secs); 27 Nov 2001 03:11:11 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 27 Nov 2001 03:11:11 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA32614; Mon, 26 Nov 2001 18:55:15 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 87349 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 27 Nov 2001 02:55:08          +0000
Received: from mail45.fg.online.no (mail45-s.fg.online.no [148.122.161.45]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA32598 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 26 Nov 2001 18:55:06 -0800
Received: from y1036732.online.no ([136.164.46.207]) by mail45.fg.online.no          (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id DAA19377; Tue, 27 Nov 2001 03:54:35 +0100          (MET)
X-Sender: eirimeer@mail.online.no
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <5.1.0.14.0.20011127034535.009eb9a0@mail.online.no>
Date:         Tue, 27 Nov 2001 03:48:51 +0100
Reply-To: "Eirik van der Meer" <eirimeer@ONLINE.NO>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Eirik van der Meer" <eirimeer@ONLINE.NO>
Subject:      Re: [AR] cheap data aquisition
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <F121mNeOYjcau6h8NNW00006569@hotmail.com>

At 02:27 2001-11-27 +0000, Matt Faulkner wrote:
>Sounds promising, but I would be careful with using a lower resistance slide
>pot. Since current = voltage/resistance, using a 10k sinks 10 times the
>power of a 100k through your computer's port.

Only at it's highest resistance. Remember both go from zero...

The pot should be connected to short a low current signal, so that when the
pot is set to zero, all current is drawn over the pot (the signal source
must withstand a short).



--
Eirik van der Meer <eirimeer@online.no>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 4000 invoked from network); 27 Nov 2001 04:43:20 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 27 Nov 2001 04:43:20 -0000
Received: (qmail 16914 invoked by uid 50005); 27 Nov 2001 04:43:12 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4172. . Clean. Processed in 0.357958 secs); 27 Nov 2001 04:43:12 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 27 Nov 2001 04:43:12 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA01150; Mon, 26 Nov 2001 20:12:17 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 87383 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 27 Nov 2001 04:12:05          +0000
Received: from localhost (dmccue@localhost) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with          ESMTP id UAA01135; Mon, 26 Nov 2001 20:12:04 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.LNX.4.10.10111262004570.320-100000@itc.uci.edu>
Date:         Mon, 26 Nov 2001 20:12:04 -0800
Reply-To: "David J. McCue" <dmccue@itc.uci.edu>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "David J. McCue" <dmccue@itc.uci.edu>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Have I been unsubscribed?
Comments: To: Curtis Scholl <cscholl@IZZY.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <3C02FC61.FDC463C2@izzy.net>

Curtis,

I have checked the aRocket and SugPro lists, and you are in good standing
on both lists, so I don't know where the problem lies. Furthermore, I have
not been getting "undeliverable mail" messages for your address. If you
get this message, please reply to me directly, off-list. (This is more of
a Dave question than a Ray question because Dave can poke around the
server.)

To any others who may have concerns about message delivery or other issues
of an administrative nature, please contact Ray or me directly, and spare
the rest of these good people.

Thanks!
Dave McCue ;-)

PS. Can anyone tell me what WAMEX is? Will Dave Hall have to kill me if I
find out?

On Mon, 26 Nov 2001, Curtis Scholl wrote:

> Hi Folks:
>
>    Have I been unsubscribed from Arocket, Sugpro and WAMEX?? I haven't
> had a normal load of
> email since last Wednesday! Or has everybody still got a tryptophane
> glaze over their eyes?
>
>
> Curtis Scholl
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 2721 invoked from network); 27 Nov 2001 07:06:20 -0000
Received: from smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.105]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 27 Nov 2001 07:06:20 -0000
Received: (qmail 29511 invoked by uid 50005); 27 Nov 2001 07:06:11 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpy with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4172. . Clean. Processed in 3.176771 secs); 27 Nov 2001 07:06:11 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 27 Nov 2001 07:06:04 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA02211; Mon, 26 Nov 2001 22:36:20 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 87446 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 27 Nov 2001 06:36:18          +0000
Received: from mail017.syd.optusnet.com.au (mail017.syd.optusnet.com.au          [203.2.75.179]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA02197          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 26 Nov 2001 22:36:17 -0800
Received: from jack (wagax4-177.dialup.optusnet.com.au [198.142.146.177]) by          mail017.syd.optusnet.com.au (8.11.1/8.11.1) with SMTP id fAR6ZiZ11075          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 27 Nov 2001 17:35:45 +1100
References:  <5.1.0.14.0.20011127034535.009eb9a0@mail.online.no>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <003001c1770d$d7a24260$b1928ec6@jack>
Date:         Tue, 27 Nov 2001 17:36:26 +1100
Reply-To: "Jack" <jack_36@OPTUSNET.COM.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jack" <jack_36@OPTUSNET.COM.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] cheap data aquisition
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

in the joystick circuit there is no ground to the pot, its simply 5v into
the pot and the signal out is sampled.
i had a play with this and its very easy to acheive data , but could only
get 10 samples/sec

          ..Jack..

----- Original Message -----
From: Eirik van der Meer <eirimeer@ONLINE.NO>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Tuesday, November 27, 2001 1:48 PM
Subject: Re: [AR] cheap data aquisition


> At 02:27 2001-11-27 +0000, Matt Faulkner wrote:
> >Sounds promising, but I would be careful with using a lower resistance
slide
> >pot. Since current = voltage/resistance, using a 10k sinks 10 times the
> >power of a 100k through your computer's port.
>
> Only at it's highest resistance. Remember both go from zero...
>
> The pot should be connected to short a low current signal, so that when
the
> pot is set to zero, all current is drawn over the pot (the signal source
> must withstand a short).
>
>
>
> --
> Eirik van der Meer <eirimeer@online.no>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 27037 invoked from network); 27 Nov 2001 08:56:03 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 27 Nov 2001 08:56:03 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: (qmail 30960 invoked by uid 50005); 27 Nov 2001 08:55:55 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4172. . Clean. Processed in 1.945231 secs); 27 Nov 2001 08:55:55 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 27 Nov 2001 08:55:52 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA02905; Tue, 27 Nov 2001 00:40:39 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 87473 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 27 Nov 2001 08:40:24          +0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA02810 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue,          27 Nov 2001 00:30:24 -0800
Message-ID:  <200111270830.AAA02810@itc.uci.edu>
Date:         Tue, 27 Nov 2001 08:30:24 +0000
Reply-To: "Jeff Grady" <jeffrey.grady@AKZONOBEL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jeff Grady" <jeffrey.grady@AKZONOBEL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Epoxy based propellant
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

I found an aluminum filled epoxy by chance one day, and bought it before
having a chance to read the MSDS for it. Turns out it contained a lot of
other "junk" such as talc and calcium carbonate. It made a few good
igniters but would not stay lit when doing a burn rate test...

JG


From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 5505 invoked from network); 27 Nov 2001 09:09:15 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 27 Nov 2001 09:09:15 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: (qmail 21918 invoked by uid 50005); 27 Nov 2001 09:09:07 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4172. . Clean. Processed in 2.10031 secs); 27 Nov 2001 09:09:07 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 27 Nov 2001 09:09:03 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA02962; Tue, 27 Nov 2001 00:48:48 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 87475 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 27 Nov 2001 08:48:47          +0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA02858 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue,          27 Nov 2001 00:38:47 -0800
Message-ID:  <200111270838.AAA02858@itc.uci.edu>
Date:         Tue, 27 Nov 2001 08:38:47 +0000
Reply-To: "Jeff Grady" <jeffrey.grady@AKZONOBEL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jeff Grady" <jeffrey.grady@AKZONOBEL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Epoxy based propellant
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

I had a few real good burns with some epoxy samples using 68/25/7
KNO3/DevCon 5 minute epoxy/charcoal. I have a shipment of AP and AL coming
this week and will post results...

I'm searching for a 10-30 minute "version" of this epoxy with as close-to
the same chemical make-up as the 5-minute stuff. Five minutes is not enough
time to mix AND press the mixture into a motor casing. Unfortunately, one
component listed in its MSDS is proprietary (in the hardener) - so GUIPEP
data may not be worth the paper I print it own...Dunno, not a chemist.

JG


From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 5641 invoked from network); 27 Nov 2001 11:08:09 -0000
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 27 Nov 2001 11:08:09 -0000
Received: (qmail 22398 invoked by uid 50005); 27 Nov 2001 11:08:01 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4172. . Clean. Processed in 2.914659 secs); 27 Nov 2001 11:08:01 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 27 Nov 2001 11:07:55 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id CAA03398; Tue, 27 Nov 2001 02:52:10 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 87507 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 27 Nov 2001 10:51:59          +0000
Received: from fep3-orange.clear.net.nz (fep3-orange.clear.net.nz          [203.97.32.3]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id CAA03384          for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Tue, 27 Nov 2001 02:51:59 -0800
Received: from mkbs (203-167-159-171.dialup.clear.net.nz [203.167.159.171]) by          fep3-orange.clear.net.nz (1.5/1.8) with SMTP id XAA20747; Tue, 27 Nov          2001 23:50:38 +1300 (NZDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="Windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <015601c17731$ae2ef3a0$0700a8c0@mkbs>
Date:         Tue, 27 Nov 2001 23:39:46 +1300
Reply-To: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Organization: Applied Technology
Subject:      [AR] [OT]: Hearing meteors - at the speed of light
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

How it is possible to simultaneously see & hear meteors entering the
atmosphere at distances great enough that sound would take about 5 minutes
to reach the observer.


    http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2001/ast26nov_1.htm?list16511

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 1000 invoked from network); 27 Nov 2001 12:28:44 -0000
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 27 Nov 2001 12:28:44 -0000
Received: (qmail 14121 invoked by uid 50005); 27 Nov 2001 12:28:36 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4172. . Clean. Processed in 3.31632 secs); 27 Nov 2001 12:28:36 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 27 Nov 2001 12:28:29 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id EAA03721; Tue, 27 Nov 2001 04:23:07 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 87525 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 27 Nov 2001 12:22:58          +0000
Received: from mta02.mail.mel.aone.net.au (mta02.mail.au.uu.net [203.2.192.82])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id EAA03707 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 27 Nov 2001 04:22:58 -0800
Received: from unknown ([63.60.220.220]) by mta03.mail.mel.aone.net.au with          SMTP id <20011126211810.WZRA29864.mta03.mail.mel.aone.net.au@unknown>          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 27 Nov 2001 08:18:10 +1100
References: Conversation            <20011126122356.BYLU28497.mta06.mail.mel.aone.net.au@[127.0.0.1]>            with last message            <20011126122356.BYLU28497.mta06.mail.mel.aone.net.au@[127.0.0.1]>
Priority: Normal
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Priority: 3
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	X-MAPIextension=.TXT;
	charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>
Date:         Tue, 27 Nov 2001 12:22:58 +0000
Reply-To: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Starchaser X-Prize reaches 5000 feet, so far ...
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <20011126122356.BYLU28497.mta06.mail.mel.aone.net.au@[127.0.0.1]>

HA, you obviously don't know too much about this guy. Ask the local amateur
rocketry community what they think of this guy!!! Research his past success
rate and carefully examine his *technical* achievements/successes. Now
might be the time for some Dave Hall diplomacy me thinks:-)

Troy.

----------
> Yep, saw this launch on the news, quite impressive, I think he'll get
there.
>
> Thomas.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 7570 invoked from network); 27 Nov 2001 12:30:47 -0000
Received: from smtpv.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.110]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 27 Nov 2001 12:30:47 -0000
Received: (qmail 11374 invoked by uid 50005); 27 Nov 2001 12:25:44 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpv with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4172. . Clean. Processed in 3.762558 secs); 27 Nov 2001 12:25:44 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpv.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 27 Nov 2001 12:25:35 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id EAA03749; Tue, 27 Nov 2001 04:25:39 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 87532 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 27 Nov 2001 12:25:38          +0000
Received: from mail010.syd.optusnet.com.au (mail010.syd.optusnet.com.au          [203.2.75.171]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id EAA03735          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 27 Nov 2001 04:25:37 -0800
Received: from jack (wagax4-180.dialup.optusnet.com.au [198.142.146.180]) by          mail010.syd.optusnet.com.au (8.11.1/8.11.1) with SMTP id fARCP5g29786          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 27 Nov 2001 23:25:05 +1100
References:  <5.1.0.14.0.20011127034535.009eb9a0@mail.online.no>              <003001c1770d$d7a24260$b1928ec6@jack>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <001601c1773e$a46143c0$b4928ec6@jack>
Date:         Tue, 27 Nov 2001 23:25:46 +1100
Reply-To: "Jack" <jack_36@OPTUSNET.COM.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jack" <jack_36@OPTUSNET.COM.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] cheap data aquisition
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

ive had half a win with the joystick data aquisition, running it with
windows absolute best sample rate is about 18 sasmples/sec, the data is
outputed to a wrasp engine file, so its needed to view the data. there's
simple software calibration and it will be very easy to setup. connections
are: joystick port  pin 1 (5v) through the potentiometer to pin 3 (stick a,
x axis) and thats it.
let me know if anyones interested.

here's a sample of the outputed data

;Saved by jacks joystick logger  11-27-2001  23:19:57
;Using fuel  pvc rod/N2O
timetest  75  900  0  2  9  JACKs
                0.000         0.000
                 0.0469     364.0790
                 0.1094     452.6388
                 0.1563     432.9589
                 0.2188     432.9589
                 0.2656     437.8789
                 0.3281     432.9589
                 0.3828     457.5588
                 0.4375     432.9589
                 0.4922     472.3188
                 0.5469     531.3586
                 0.6016     531.3586
                 0.6563     506.7587
                 0.7109     605.1584
                 0.7656     664.1982
                 0.8203     688.7982
                 0.8828     698.6382
                 0.9297     683.8782
                 0.9922     659.2783
                 1.0391     713.3981
                 1.1016     664.1982
                 1.1484     678.9583
                 1.2109     713.3981


          ..Jack..

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 11761 invoked from network); 27 Nov 2001 13:32:55 -0000
X-Priority: 3
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 27 Nov 2001 13:32:55 -0000
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 18238 invoked by uid 50005); 27 Nov 2001 13:32:47 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4172. . Clean. Processed in 1.801888 secs); 27 Nov 2001 13:32:47 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 27 Nov 2001 13:32:43 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id FAA04138; Tue, 27 Nov 2001 05:28:25 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 87577 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 27 Nov 2001 13:28:24          +0000
Received: from web13602.mail.yahoo.com (web13602.mail.yahoo.com          [216.136.175.113]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id FAA04124          for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Tue, 27 Nov 2001 05:28:24 -0800
Received: from [195.92.194.17] by web13602.mail.yahoo.com via HTTP; Tue, 27 Nov          2001 13:28:23 GMT
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <20011127132823.99115.qmail@web13602.mail.yahoo.com>
Date:         Tue, 27 Nov 2001 13:28:23 +0000
Reply-To: "andy saunders" <andysaunders1@YAHOO.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "andy saunders" <andysaunders1@YAHOO.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Starchaser X-Prize reaches 5000 feet, so far ...
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <6a.17154598.29341f3d@aol.com>

This guy lives down the road from me and is often on
the local news.  No he didn't design the propulsion
system; it was a cluster of Aerotech motors (as
usual).  Very impressive launch but as others have
said its one thing to launch the rocket 5,000 feet but
63 miles is v different.  I know Starchaser are
working on a LOX / Kerosene motor as the possible
propulsion system but only in very early stages of
development.

He's planning to launch himself to 20,000 ft in April
in the Nova rocket launched last week and reckons
he'll be in space by the end of 2003. hmmmmmm.

Andy


 --- MilburnMNK@AOL.COM wrote: > In a message dated
11/26/01 3:06:02 PM Central
> Standard Time,
> johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM writes:
>
> << Yes, they are to be commended for having a
> nominal launch and partial
>  recovery of the worlds largest high power rocket,
> but they really do
>  overstate the sophistication of their efforts.  I'm
> impressed they got all
> their motors lit at once.   John Carmack >>
> I'm impressed he didn't blow himself up and / or set
> fire to Morecambe beach!
>  This guy is a dangerous nutter and a potential
> embarassment, if not danger,
> to the experimental rocket community. His most
> viable skill appears to be
> self advertisement. He has apparently found sponsors
> and raised cash on the
> strength of launches that can be seen at most any
> Tripoli meet across the
> USA. The enthusiasm is commendable - the rest is
> histrionics.
>
> Did he develop his own propulsion this time or was
> it simply a cluster of
> commercial AT motors?  Even a cluster of N's is
> quite a feat but X-Prize
> material ............. Nah!
>
> Neil M

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Everything you'll ever need on one web page from News and Sport to Email and Music Charts
http://uk.my.yahoo.com

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 17672 invoked from network); 27 Nov 2001 13:34:33 -0000
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 27 Nov 2001 13:34:33 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 10863 invoked by uid 50005); 27 Nov 2001 13:34:25 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4172. . Clean. Processed in 3.294484 secs); 27 Nov 2001 13:34:25 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 27 Nov 2001 13:34:19 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id FAA04113; Tue, 27 Nov 2001 05:25:33 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 87570 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 27 Nov 2001 13:25:28          +0000
Received: from scaup.prod.itd.earthlink.net (scaup.mail.pas.earthlink.net          [207.217.120.49]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id          FAA04070; Tue, 27 Nov 2001 05:15:28 -0800
Received: from user-2ivfk0v.dialup.mindspring.com ([165.247.208.31]          helo=RClague) by scaup.prod.itd.earthlink.net with smtp (Exim 3.33          #1) id 168i59-0003p3-00; Tue, 27 Nov 2001 05:15:28 -0800
References: <013001c174a6$3ea86120$4b4883d0@atlantis>            <Pine.LNX.4.10.10111241453210.20385-100000@itc.uci.edu>
X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.8/32.553
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by itc.uci.edu id FAA04071
Message-ID:  <iv170u8du6q7c85pmb5hfldh8ouf7ud1jm@4ax.com>
Date:         Tue, 27 Nov 2001 05:15:11 -0800
Reply-To: <rclague@RCLAGUE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Randall Clague" <rclague@RCLAGUE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] New Superpower Space Race Brewing?
Comments: To: Ray Calkins <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <Pine.LNX.4.10.10111241453210.20385-100000@itc.uci.edu>

On Sat, 24 Nov 2001 14:55:43 -0800, Ray Calkins <rcalkins@ITC.UCI.EDU>
wrote:

>On Fri, 23 Nov 2001, Jim Bowery wrote:
>
>> If the Chinese have leadership that is wise enough to know what to do
>> with their young men, as it appears they might, the West should thank
>> their lucky stars for such greatness in their adversaries and meet the
>> Chinese with a response that is an equally positive and uniquely
>> Western.
>
>That is so well put.  I only hope for equally enlightened leadership here
>in the west.  So far, I haven't seen anything very impressive along those
>lines.

We have lots of enlightened leadership here in the west.  Not much of
it is in government.  The wonderful thing about an open society is
that we don't _need_ to get our leadership from our government.  We
get it from each other.

-R

--
"...And the last thing I remember is asking,
'What could go wrong?'"

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 12010 invoked from network); 27 Nov 2001 16:18:57 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 27 Nov 2001 16:18:56 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: (qmail 13989 invoked by uid 50005); 27 Nov 2001 16:18:48 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4172. . Clean. Processed in 1.674239 secs); 27 Nov 2001 16:18:48 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 27 Nov 2001 16:18:44 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA04999; Tue, 27 Nov 2001 08:14:34 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 87668 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 27 Nov 2001 16:14:32          +0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA04982 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue,          27 Nov 2001 08:14:32 -0800
Message-ID:  <200111271614.IAA04982@itc.uci.edu>
Date:         Tue, 27 Nov 2001 16:14:32 +0000
Reply-To: "Jeff Grady" <jeffrey.grady@AKZONOBEL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jeff Grady" <jeffrey.grady@AKZONOBEL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Epoxy based propellant
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

I have tried about a half dozen epoxies including a 1:1 Marine epoxy from
Bondo, a MEKP catalyzed PE fiberglass resin (also Bondo). The DevCon epoxy
generates very little heat while curing and gave dramatic performance
improvement over the other epoxies I have tried. Have also tried several
Hobby Poxies in 5, 10 and 30 minute cure rates. Nothing has come close to
DevCon 5-minute stuff...

JG


From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 2167 invoked from network); 27 Nov 2001 16:30:36 -0000
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 27 Nov 2001 16:30:36 -0000
Received: (qmail 25541 invoked by uid 50005); 27 Nov 2001 16:30:27 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4172. . Clean. Processed in 0.430975 secs); 27 Nov 2001 16:30:27 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 27 Nov 2001 16:30:26 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA04890; Tue, 27 Nov 2001 08:00:49 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 87658 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 27 Nov 2001 16:00:47          +0000
Received: from zcars0m9.nortelnetworks.com (zcars0m9.nortelnetworks.com          [47.129.242.157]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA04876          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 27 Nov 2001 08:00:46 -0800
Received: from zcars04e.ca.nortel.com (zcars04e.ca.nortel.com [47.129.242.56])          by zcars0m9.nortelnetworks.com (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id          fARFxad15745 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 27 Nov 2001 10:59:36          -0500 (EST)
Received: from rftzy232.ca.nortel.com by zcars04e.ca.nortel.com; Tue, 27 Nov          2001 10:59:53 -0500
Received: from NORTELNETWORKS.COM (wcarh0vc.ca.nortel.com [47.129.148.226]) by          rftzy232.ca.nortel.com with SMTP (Microsoft Exchange Internet Mail          Service Version 5.5.2653.13) id XHJ5N9BA; Tue, 27 Nov 2001 10:57:47          -0500
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.73C-CCK-MCD [en] (X11; U; HP-UX B.10.20 9000/785)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <200111270838.AAA02858@itc.uci.edu>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Orig: <mleech@NORTELNETWORKS.COM>
Message-ID:  <3C03B887.5A361D11@NORTELNETWORKS.COM>
Date:         Tue, 27 Nov 2001 11:00:07 -0500
Reply-To: "Marcus Leech" <mleech@NORTELNETWORKS.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Marcus Leech" <mleech@NORTELNETWORKS.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Epoxy based propellant
Comments: To: Jeff Grady <jeffrey.grady@AKZONOBEL.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Jeff Grady wrote:
>
> I had a few real good burns with some epoxy samples using 68/25/7
> KNO3/DevCon 5 minute epoxy/charcoal. I have a shipment of AP and AL coming
> this week and will post results...
>
> I'm searching for a 10-30 minute "version" of this epoxy with as close-to
> the same chemical make-up as the 5-minute stuff. Five minutes is not enough
> time to mix AND press the mixture into a motor casing. Unfortunately, one
> component listed in its MSDS is proprietary (in the hardener) - so GUIPEP
> data may not be worth the paper I print it own...Dunno, not a chemist.
>
> JG
I've used West Systems with the 30-minute hardener in both AP and KN-based
  formulations.  In fact, I have a propellant I call APEX-70 that is based on this
  stuff:

  70% 200u AP
  29% West Systems epoxy+hardener
   1% Red Iron Oxide--fine powder

It burns quite well with a Kn of about 180.

--
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Marcus Leech                             Mail:   Dept 8M70, MS 012, FITZ
Advisor                                  Phone: (ESN) 393-9145  +1 613 763 9145
Security Architecture and Planning       Fax:   (ESN) 393-9435  +1 613 763 9435
Nortel Networks                          mleech@nortelnetworks.com
-----------------Expressed opinions are my own, not my employer's------

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 7594 invoked from network); 27 Nov 2001 16:37:40 -0000
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 27 Nov 2001 16:37:40 -0000
Received: (qmail 4771 invoked by uid 50005); 27 Nov 2001 16:37:32 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4172. . Clean. Processed in 1.442319 secs); 27 Nov 2001 16:37:32 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 27 Nov 2001 16:37:27 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA05117; Tue, 27 Nov 2001 08:19:18 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 87676 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 27 Nov 2001 16:19:16          +0000
Received: from mailhost0.trib.com (mailhost0.trib.com [63.229.150.3]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA05103 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Tue, 27 Nov 2001 08:19:16 -0800
Received: from mail.trib.com (mail.trib.com [12.10.158.17]) by          mailhost0.trib.com (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id fARGIiF55162; Tue,          27 Nov 2001 09:18:44 -0700 (MST) (envelope-from          jwckman@space-rockets.com)
Received: from [63.229.150.66] (HELO hppav) by mail.trib.com (CommuniGate Pro          SMTP 3.4.6) with SMTP id 60161703; Tue, 27 Nov 2001 09:15:38 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <NKEHJAOOKBPGIKOOPDEFMEJACDAA.jwckman@space-rockets.com>
Date:         Tue, 27 Nov 2001 09:14:28 -0700
Reply-To: "John Wickman" <jwckman@SPACE-ROCKETS.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Wickman" <jwckman@SPACE-ROCKETS.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Starchaser X-Prize reaches 5000 feet, so far ...
Comments: To: andy saunders <andysaunders1@yahoo.com>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <20011127132823.99115.qmail@web13602.mail.yahoo.com>

Andy,

He is going to get inside the rocket just launched and fly inside it in
April 2002?  Did I understand this correct?

John Wickman


>>>He's planning to launch himself to 20,000 ft in April
in the Nova rocket launched last week and reckons
he'll be in space by the end of 2003. hmmmmmm.

Andy<<<<

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 23054 invoked from network); 27 Nov 2001 16:40:33 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.105]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 27 Nov 2001 16:40:33 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: (qmail 7440 invoked by uid 50005); 27 Nov 2001 16:40:25 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpy with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4172. . Clean. Processed in 2.248095 secs); 27 Nov 2001 16:40:25 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 27 Nov 2001 16:40:21 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA05238; Tue, 27 Nov 2001 08:36:28 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 87693 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 27 Nov 2001 16:36:25          +0000
Received: from cisco.com (cypher.cisco.com [171.69.11.18]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA05224 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue,          27 Nov 2001 08:36:25 -0800
Received: (from billw@localhost) by cisco.com (8.8.8/2.6/Cisco List          Logging/8.8.8) id IAA07258; Tue, 27 Nov 2001 08:35:51 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID:  <CMM.0.90.4.1006878951.billw@cypher>
Date:         Tue, 27 Nov 2001 08:35:51 PST
Reply-To: "Bill Westfield" <billw@cisco.com>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "William Chops Westfield" <billw@cisco.com>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Starchaser X-Prize reaches 5000 feet, so far ...
Comments: To: Troy Prideaux <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

    Ask the local amateur rocketry community what they think of this guy!!!
    Research his past success rate and carefully examine his *technical*
    achievements/successes.

If he's gone from his previous disasters and near-disasters to launching
"the heaviest HPR rocket to reach 5000 feet", then he's advancing faster
than most.  OTOH, any "essentially HPR" attempt is pretty laughably far
from an X-prize attempt...

BillW


From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 9517 invoked from network); 27 Nov 2001 16:43:45 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 27 Nov 2001 16:43:45 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 25380 invoked by uid 50005); 27 Nov 2001 16:43:35 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4172. . Clean. Processed in 1.393201 secs); 27 Nov 2001 16:43:35 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 27 Nov 2001 16:43:31 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA05209; Tue, 27 Nov 2001 08:32:30 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 87686 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 27 Nov 2001 16:32:28          +0000
Received: from neomail.tns.net (mail.tns.net [216.86.143.7]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA05195 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue,          27 Nov 2001 08:32:28 -0800
Received: from andy.tns.net (prime.tns.net [216.86.128.10]) by neomail.tns.net          (8.11.6/8.11.0 Terracom Mail Server III) with ESMTP id fARGVwe97053          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 27 Nov 2001 08:31:58 -0800 (PST)
X-Sender: andy@mail.tns.net
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
References: <20011127132823.99115.qmail@web13602.mail.yahoo.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <5.1.0.14.2.20011127083151.026028a8@mail.tns.net>
Date:         Tue, 27 Nov 2001 08:32:19 -0800
Reply-To: "Andy Woerner" <andy@TNS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Andy Woerner" <andy@TNS.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Starchaser X-Prize reaches 5000 feet, so far ...
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <NKEHJAOOKBPGIKOOPDEFMEJACDAA.jwckman@space-rockets.com>

Where do I send the flowers to?


At 09:14 AM 11/27/2001 -0700, you wrote:
>Andy,
>
>He is going to get inside the rocket just launched and fly inside it in
>April 2002?  Did I understand this correct?
>
>John Wickman
>
>
> >>>He's planning to launch himself to 20,000 ft in April
>in the Nova rocket launched last week and reckons
>he'll be in space by the end of 2003. hmmmmmm.
>
>Andy<<<<





Andy Woerner
Terracom, Inc.

Voice (858) 268-8911
FAX (858) 268-9212
www.tns.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 26570 invoked from network); 27 Nov 2001 16:52:31 -0000
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 27 Nov 2001 16:52:31 -0000
Received: (qmail 5940 invoked by uid 50005); 27 Nov 2001 16:52:23 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4172. . Clean. Processed in 0.148623 secs); 27 Nov 2001 16:52:23 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 27 Nov 2001 16:52:22 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA04766; Tue, 27 Nov 2001 07:44:11 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 87638 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 27 Nov 2001 15:43:08          +0000
Received: from mailhost0.trib.com (mailhost0.trib.com [63.229.150.3]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA04751 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Tue, 27 Nov 2001 07:43:07 -0800
Received: from mail.trib.com (mail.trib.com [12.10.158.17]) by          mailhost0.trib.com (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id fARFgXF37086; Tue,          27 Nov 2001 08:42:34 -0700 (MST) (envelope-from          jwckman@space-rockets.com)
Received: from [63.229.150.77] (HELO hppav) by mail.trib.com (CommuniGate Pro          SMTP 3.4.6) with SMTP id 60155806; Tue, 27 Nov 2001 08:41:35 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="Windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <NKEHJAOOKBPGIKOOPDEFEEJACDAA.jwckman@space-rockets.com>
Date:         Tue, 27 Nov 2001 08:40:27 -0700
Reply-To: "John Wickman" <jwckman@SPACE-ROCKETS.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Wickman" <jwckman@SPACE-ROCKETS.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] [OT]: Hearing meteors - at the speed of light
Comments: To: Russell McMahon <apptech@clear.net.nz>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <015601c17731$ae2ef3a0$0700a8c0@mkbs>

Russell,

I'm glad to know I'm not going nuts.   I heard a fizzing sound on one I saw,
but it was delayed by a few seconds, if it was coming from the one I was
looking at.  That was a very interesting report.

John Wickman

-----Original Message-----
From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@itc.uci.edu]On
Behalf Of Russell McMahon
Sent: Tuesday, November 27, 2001 3:40 AM
To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
Subject: [AR] [OT]: Hearing meteors - at the speed of light


How it is possible to simultaneously see & hear meteors entering the
atmosphere at distances great enough that sound would take about 5 minutes
to reach the observer.


    http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2001/ast26nov_1.htm?list16511

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 11827 invoked from network); 27 Nov 2001 16:55:26 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 27 Nov 2001 16:55:26 -0000
Received: (qmail 3522 invoked by uid 50005); 27 Nov 2001 16:55:15 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4172. . Clean. Processed in 1.350383 secs); 27 Nov 2001 16:55:15 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 27 Nov 2001 16:55:12 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA04804; Tue, 27 Nov 2001 07:48:53 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 87645 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 27 Nov 2001 15:48:51          +0000
Received: from localhost (dmccue@localhost) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with          ESMTP id HAA04790; Tue, 27 Nov 2001 07:48:48 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.LNX.4.10.10111270740020.4662-100000@itc.uci.edu>
Date:         Tue, 27 Nov 2001 07:48:47 -0800
Reply-To: "David J. McCue" <dmccue@itc.uci.edu>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "David J. McCue" <dmccue@itc.uci.edu>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Virus Warning!!!!
Comments: To: "Carl A. Blood" <cablood@CORLABS.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <018001c1770b$0886eb90$0200a8c0@charter.net>

Carl,

I just looked at the aRocket list archive, and I cannot find any message
that contains the virus/worm. I suspect that it was actually sent from a
list member's computer by the virus and that close inpection of the
complete mail header will show the true origin of the message. This info
would be of help to the owner of the infected computer.

Everyone, please remember that the virus sends itself to the return
addresses of messages sitting unread in the Outlook Inbox.

-Dave McCue

PS. Would you want Microsoft to hold your credit card info in their
Passport system? Sorry, I can't help myself...but then, Passport has
already been breached.

On Tue, 27 Nov 2001, Carl A. Blood wrote:

> The W32/Badtrans@MM virus was just sent to me via the AROCKET mailing list.
> I have cleared it by updating my virus software to current.
> goto :
> http://www.mcafee.com/anti-virus/viruses/badtrans/
> for more details.
>
> W32/Badtrans@MM is a mass-mailing worm that drops a remote-access Trojan.
> The virus arrives via email in Microsoft Outlook and attempts to send itself
> by replying to unread email messages.
> The email may contain the text "Take a look to the attachment"
> in the message body and will contain an attachment that is 13,312 bytes
> in length. The attachment name is created from three sections.
>
> Once running, the Trojan attempts to mail the victim's IP Address
> to the author. Once this information is obtained, the author can
> connect to the infected system via the Internet and steal personal
> information such as usernames, and passwords. In addition, the
> Trojan also contains a keylogger program which is capable of capturing
> other vital information such as credit card and bank account numbers
> and passwords.
>
> Carl
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 12940 invoked from network); 27 Nov 2001 17:01:24 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 27 Nov 2001 17:01:24 -0000
Received: (qmail 27813 invoked by uid 50005); 27 Nov 2001 17:01:15 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4172. . Clean. Processed in 0.75531 secs); 27 Nov 2001 17:01:15 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 27 Nov 2001 17:01:14 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA05380; Tue, 27 Nov 2001 08:56:13 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 87708 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 27 Nov 2001 16:56:06          +0000
Received: from localhost (rcalkins@localhost) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with          ESMTP id IAA05364; Tue, 27 Nov 2001 08:56:04 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.LNX.4.10.10111270852330.5316-100000@itc.uci.edu>
Date:         Tue, 27 Nov 2001 08:56:04 -0800
Reply-To: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
Subject:      Re: [AR] [OT]: Hearing meteors - at the speed of light
Comments: To: John Wickman <jwckman@SPACE-ROCKETS.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <NKEHJAOOKBPGIKOOPDEFEEJACDAA.jwckman@space-rockets.com>

I saw lots of meteors Saturday night, but didn't hear any.  It was very
cold in the desert at 4:00 in the morning, so I did most of my observing
from inside the car.  I have heard one before, a most spectacular one that
lasted a long time which was captured on video, making the evening news.

Ray


On Tue, 27 Nov 2001, John Wickman wrote:

> Russell,
>
> I'm glad to know I'm not going nuts.   I heard a fizzing sound on one I saw,
> but it was delayed by a few seconds, if it was coming from the one I was
> looking at.  That was a very interesting report.
>
> John Wickman
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@itc.uci.edu]On
> Behalf Of Russell McMahon
> Sent: Tuesday, November 27, 2001 3:40 AM
> To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
> Subject: [AR] [OT]: Hearing meteors - at the speed of light
>
>
> How it is possible to simultaneously see & hear meteors entering the
> atmosphere at distances great enough that sound would take about 5 minutes
> to reach the observer.
>
>
>     http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2001/ast26nov_1.htm?list16511
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 9907 invoked from network); 27 Nov 2001 17:42:42 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 27 Nov 2001 17:42:42 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 25184 invoked by uid 50005); 27 Nov 2001 17:42:33 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4172. . Clean. Processed in 2.100997 secs); 27 Nov 2001 17:42:33 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 27 Nov 2001 17:42:28 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA05537; Tue, 27 Nov 2001 09:22:20 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 87721 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 27 Nov 2001 17:22:16          +0000
Received: from femail25.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail25.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.254.60.15]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA05523          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 27 Nov 2001 09:22:16 -0800
Received: from c1649002-a.earthlink.net ([24.20.95.67]) by          femail25.sdc1.sfba.home.com (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20          201-229-121-120-20010223) with ESMTP id          <20011127172214.JKTB5057.femail25.sdc1.sfba.home.com@c1649002-a.earthlink.net>; Tue, 27 Nov 2001 09:22:14          -0800
X-Sender: forkbomb@mail.earthlink.net
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.0.2
References: <6a.17154598.29341f3d@aol.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <5.0.2.1.0.20011127092157.03a92008@mail.earthlink.net>
Date:         Tue, 27 Nov 2001 09:22:17 -0800
Reply-To: "Pierce Nichols" <forkbomb@EARTHLINK.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Pierce Nichols" <forkbomb@EARTHLINK.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Starchaser X-Prize reaches 5000 feet, so far ...
Comments: To: andy saunders <andysaunders1@YAHOO.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <20011127132823.99115.qmail@web13602.mail.yahoo.com>

At 01:28 PM 11/27/2001 +0000, andy saunders wrote:
>This guy lives down the road from me and is often on
>the local news.  No he didn't design the propulsion
>system; it was a cluster of Aerotech motors (as
>usual).  Very impressive launch but as others have
>said its one thing to launch the rocket 5,000 feet but
>63 miles is v different.  I know Starchaser are
>working on a LOX / Kerosene motor as the possible
>propulsion system but only in very early stages of
>development.
>
>He's planning to launch himself to 20,000 ft in April
>in the Nova rocket launched last week and reckons
>he'll be in space by the end of 2003. hmmmmmm.


         Only if he buys one of those burial in space packages...

         -p



>Andy
>
>
>  --- MilburnMNK@AOL.COM wrote: > In a message dated
>11/26/01 3:06:02 PM Central
> > Standard Time,
> > johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM writes:
> >
> > << Yes, they are to be commended for having a
> > nominal launch and partial
> >  recovery of the worlds largest high power rocket,
> > but they really do
> >  overstate the sophistication of their efforts.  I'm
> > impressed they got all
> > their motors lit at once.   John Carmack >>
> > I'm impressed he didn't blow himself up and / or set
> > fire to Morecambe beach!
> >  This guy is a dangerous nutter and a potential
> > embarassment, if not danger,
> > to the experimental rocket community. His most
> > viable skill appears to be
> > self advertisement. He has apparently found sponsors
> > and raised cash on the
> > strength of launches that can be seen at most any
> > Tripoli meet across the
> > USA. The enthusiasm is commendable - the rest is
> > histrionics.
> >
> > Did he develop his own propulsion this time or was
> > it simply a cluster of
> > commercial AT motors?  Even a cluster of N's is
> > quite a feat but X-Prize
> > material ............. Nah!
> >
> > Neil M
>
>__________________________________________________
>Do You Yahoo!?
>Everything you'll ever need on one web page from News and Sport to Email
>and Music Charts
>http://uk.my.yahoo.com

Mars or Bust!
www.marssociety.com

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 23669 invoked from network); 27 Nov 2001 18:44:30 -0000
X-Priority: 3
Received: from smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.105]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 27 Nov 2001 18:44:30 -0000
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 8366 invoked by uid 50005); 27 Nov 2001 18:44:22 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpy with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4172. . Clean. Processed in 4.061881 secs); 27 Nov 2001 18:44:22 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 27 Nov 2001 18:44:14 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA05944; Tue, 27 Nov 2001 10:41:11 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 87748 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 27 Nov 2001 18:41:06          +0000
Received: from web13603.mail.yahoo.com (web13603.mail.yahoo.com          [216.136.175.114]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id KAA05930          for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Tue, 27 Nov 2001 10:41:06 -0800
Received: from [195.92.168.168] by web13603.mail.yahoo.com via HTTP; Tue, 27          Nov 2001 18:41:06 GMT
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <20011127184106.38764.qmail@web13603.mail.yahoo.com>
Date:         Tue, 27 Nov 2001 18:41:06 +0000
Reply-To: "andy saunders" <andysaunders1@YAHOO.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "andy saunders" <andysaunders1@YAHOO.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Starchaser X-Prize reaches 5000 feet, so far ...
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <NKEHJAOOKBPGIKOOPDEFMEJACDAA.jwckman@space-rockets.com>

Yep; thats what he said.  I've heard that the capsule
was a converted cement mixer - not sure how true that
is but he can certainly sit inside.  he's had
centrifuge training (I think it was up to 8g).  Not
sure how he'll get the vehicle up to 20,000 ft
compared to the 5,000 ft last week, or why he's mad
enough to pop himself inside but.......

Andy

--- John Wickman <jwckman@space-rockets.com> wrote: >
Andy,
>
> He is going to get inside the rocket just launched
> and fly inside it in
> April 2002?  Did I understand this correct?
>
> John Wickman
>
>
> >>>He's planning to launch himself to 20,000 ft in
> April
> in the Nova rocket launched last week and reckons
> he'll be in space by the end of 2003. hmmmmmm.
>
> Andy<<<<
>
>

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Everything you'll ever need on one web page from News and Sport to Email and Music Charts
http://uk.my.yahoo.com

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 8075 invoked from network); 27 Nov 2001 19:42:35 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 27 Nov 2001 19:42:35 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: (qmail 7328 invoked by uid 50005); 27 Nov 2001 19:42:27 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4172. . Clean. Processed in 0.185004 secs); 27 Nov 2001 19:42:27 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 27 Nov 2001 19:42:26 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA06204; Tue, 27 Nov 2001 11:33:23 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 87783 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 27 Nov 2001 19:33:16          +0000
Received: from cisco.com (cypher.cisco.com [171.69.11.18]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA06189 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue,          27 Nov 2001 11:33:15 -0800
Received: (from billw@localhost) by cisco.com (8.8.8/2.6/Cisco List          Logging/8.8.8) id LAA29073 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 27 Nov 2001          11:32:45 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID:  <CMM.0.90.4.1006889565.billw@cypher>
Date:         Tue, 27 Nov 2001 11:32:45 PST
Reply-To: "Bill Westfield" <billw@cisco.com>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "William Chops Westfield" <billw@cisco.com>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Starchaser X-Prize reaches 5000 feet, so far ...
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  Your message of Tue, 27 Nov 2001 18:41:06 +0000

> He is going to get inside the rocket just launched and fly inside it in
> April 2002?  Did I understand this correct?

No, I don't think you got it quite right.  To be correct, you need "he SAYS
he is going to..."  This is the major complaint against "starchaser" - the
claims far outreach the actual achievements.

BillW


From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 25296 invoked from network); 27 Nov 2001 23:00:15 -0000
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 27 Nov 2001 23:00:15 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 10744 invoked by uid 50005); 27 Nov 2001 23:00:07 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4172. . Clean. Processed in 1.925129 secs); 27 Nov 2001 23:00:07 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 27 Nov 2001 23:00:03 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA07549; Tue, 27 Nov 2001 14:39:33 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 88248 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 27 Nov 2001 22:39:24          +0000
Received: from inet03.citec.qld.gov.au (firewall-user@inet03.citec.qld.gov.au          [203.5.10.10]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA07535          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 27 Nov 2001 14:39:22 -0800
Received: by inet03.citec.qld.gov.au; id IAA18003; Wed, 28 Nov 2001 08:39:17          +1000 (EST)
Received: from citec.com.au(pcux.citec.qld.gov.au 147.132.17.12) by          inet03.citec.qld.gov.au via smap (V2.0) id xma017929; Wed, 28 Nov 01          08:39:11 +1000
Received: from CITEC-Message_Server by citec.com.au with Novell_GroupWise; Wed,          28 Nov 2001 08:40:33 +1000
X-Mailer: Novell GroupWise 5.5.4
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by itc.uci.edu id OAA07536
Message-ID:  <sc04a301.044@citec.com.au>
Date:         Wed, 28 Nov 2001 08:40:14 +1000
Reply-To: "Des Bromilow" <Des.Bromilow@CITEC.COM.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Des Bromilow" <Des.Bromilow@CITEC.COM.AU>
Subject:      [AR] POssible error/virus????
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Hi,

I just got an email with the subject - Re:      Re: [AR] Non-digital test stand

which is obviously from the AR list. (loosely speaking)  the sender address was : "Beth & Bob Fogarty" <_betbob@camasnet.com>

but a reply generated a "user unknown" message.

the email contains nothing but a "PIF" file.

does anyone know what's going on? (I haven't opened the attachemtn PIF, but three's no text or any other message.

Des

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 23140 invoked from network); 27 Nov 2001 23:21:18 -0000
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 27 Nov 2001 23:21:18 -0000
Received: (qmail 22489 invoked by uid 50005); 27 Nov 2001 23:21:10 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4172. . Clean. Processed in 0.219625 secs); 27 Nov 2001 23:21:10 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 27 Nov 2001 23:21:10 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA07880; Tue, 27 Nov 2001 15:04:57 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 88364 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 27 Nov 2001 23:04:56          +0000
Received: from mta02.mail.mel.aone.net.au (mta02.mail.au.uu.net [203.2.192.82])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA07866 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 27 Nov 2001 15:04:54 -0800
Received: from unknown ([63.34.218.218]) by mta02.mail.mel.aone.net.au with          SMTP id <20011127230441.JEAH5198.mta02.mail.mel.aone.net.au@unknown>          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 28 Nov 2001 10:04:41 +1100
References: Conversation <sc04a301.044@citec.com.au> with last message            <sc04a301.044@citec.com.au>
Priority: Normal
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Priority: 3
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	X-MAPIextension=.TXT;
	charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>
Date:         Tue, 27 Nov 2001 23:04:56 +0000
Reply-To: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] POssible error/virus????
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <sc04a301.044@citec.com.au>

I think I just received another one from "joe" subject heading "trainhrs108"

Troy.

----------
> Hi,
>
> I just got an email with the subject - Re:      Re: [AR] Non-digital test
> stand
>
> which is obviously from the AR list. (loosely speaking)  the sender
address
> was : "Beth & Bob Fogarty" <_betbob@camasnet.com>
>
> but a reply generated a "user unknown" message.
>
> the email contains nothing but a "PIF" file.
>
> does anyone know what's going on? (I haven't opened the attachemtn PIF,
but
> three's no text or any other message.
>
> Des

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 23510 invoked from network); 27 Nov 2001 23:21:24 -0000
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 27 Nov 2001 23:21:24 -0000
Received: (qmail 25090 invoked by uid 50005); 27 Nov 2001 23:21:14 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4172. . Clean. Processed in 2.640541 secs); 27 Nov 2001 23:21:14 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 27 Nov 2001 23:21:10 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA07849; Tue, 27 Nov 2001 15:04:32 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 88353 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 27 Nov 2001 23:04:31          +0000
Received: from mta01.mail.mel.aone.net.au (mta01.mail.au.uu.net [203.2.192.81])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA07829 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 27 Nov 2001 15:04:30 -0800
Received: from unknown ([63.34.218.218]) by mta01.mail.mel.aone.net.au with          SMTP id <20011127230428.FDCI28705.mta01.mail.mel.aone.net.au@unknown>          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 28 Nov 2001 10:04:28 +1100
References: Conversation <sc04a301.044@citec.com.au> with last message            <sc04a301.044@citec.com.au>
Priority: Normal
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Priority: 3
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	X-MAPIextension=.TXT;
	charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>
Date:         Tue, 27 Nov 2001 23:04:31 +0000
Reply-To: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] POssible error/virus????
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <sc04a301.044@citec.com.au>

Yep, I received a similar one from the same source but with a different
subject heading "Re:      Re: [AR] KNO3/epoxy trials"

Troy.

----------
> Hi,
>
> I just got an email with the subject - Re:      Re: [AR] Non-digital test
> stand
>
> which is obviously from the AR list. (loosely speaking)  the sender
address
> was : "Beth & Bob Fogarty" <_betbob@camasnet.com>
>
> but a reply generated a "user unknown" message.
>
> the email contains nothing but a "PIF" file.
>
> does anyone know what's going on? (I haven't opened the attachemtn PIF,
but
> three's no text or any other message.
>
> Des

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 24028 invoked from network); 27 Nov 2001 23:21:32 -0000
Received: from smtpv.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.110]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 27 Nov 2001 23:21:32 -0000
Received: (qmail 17526 invoked by uid 50005); 27 Nov 2001 23:13:15 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpv with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4172. . Clean. Processed in 1.428433 secs); 27 Nov 2001 23:13:15 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpv.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 27 Nov 2001 23:13:11 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA07794; Tue, 27 Nov 2001 15:01:55 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 88335 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 27 Nov 2001 23:01:49          +0000
Received: from mta01.mail.mel.aone.net.au (mta01.mail.au.uu.net [203.2.192.81])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA07780 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 27 Nov 2001 15:01:48 -0800
Received: from unknown ([63.34.218.218]) by mta01.mail.mel.aone.net.au with          SMTP id <20011127230146.FCQZ28705.mta01.mail.mel.aone.net.au@unknown>          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 28 Nov 2001 10:01:46 +1100
References: Conversation <CMM.0.90.4.1006878951.billw@cypher> with last message            <CMM.0.90.4.1006878951.billw@cypher>
Priority: Normal
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Priority: 3
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	X-MAPIextension=.TXT;
	charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>
Date:         Tue, 27 Nov 2001 23:01:49 +0000
Reply-To: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Starchaser X-Prize reaches 5000 feet, so far ...
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <CMM.0.90.4.1006878951.billw@cypher>

Absolutely, and I should point out that I respect anyone who gets off their
bum and puts things together like that, whether they work or not (that's
often how we learn). What I do get a bit incensed about is the apparent
attempts to eradicate all other development of E/A rocketry in the area
(maybe country) and apparently he's been reasonably successful with this
disgraceful pursuit.

Troy.

----------
>
>     Ask the local amateur rocketry community what they think of this
guy!!!
>     Research his past success rate and carefully examine his *technical*
>     achievements/successes.
>
> If he's gone from his previous disasters and near-disasters to launching
> "the heaviest HPR rocket to reach 5000 feet", then he's advancing faster
> than most.  OTOH, any "essentially HPR" attempt is pretty laughably far
> from an X-prize attempt...
>
> BillW

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 25394 invoked from network); 27 Nov 2001 23:36:19 -0000
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 27 Nov 2001 23:36:19 -0000
Received: (qmail 3232 invoked by uid 50005); 27 Nov 2001 23:36:11 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4172. . Clean. Processed in 0.237372 secs); 27 Nov 2001 23:36:11 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 27 Nov 2001 23:36:11 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA08002; Tue, 27 Nov 2001 15:17:31 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 88407 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 27 Nov 2001 23:17:27          +0000
Received: from smtprelay1.abs.adelphia.net (smtprelay.abs.adelphia.net          [64.8.20.11]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA07988 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 27 Nov 2001 15:17:27 -0800
Received: from jlgrady ([24.53.101.238]) by smtprelay1.abs.adelphia.net          (Netscape Messaging Server 4.15) with SMTP id GNHFC002.D8J; Tue, 27          Nov 2001 18:16:48 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook CWS, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
Importance: Normal
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <000001c17799$a42b0930$0200a8c0@24.53.64.18>
Date:         Tue, 27 Nov 2001 18:17:10 -0500
Reply-To: "Jeff Grady" <jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jeff Grady" <jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] POssible error/virus????
Comments: To: Des Bromilow <Des.Bromilow@CITEC.COM.AU>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <sc04a301.044@citec.com.au>

DELETE IT. It does have a virus. My virus checker caught it and I deleted
it...

JG

-----Original Message-----
From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@itc.uci.edu]On
Behalf Of Des Bromilow
Sent: Tuesday, November 27, 2001 5:40 PM
To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
Subject: [AR] POssible error/virus????


Hi,

I just got an email with the subject - Re:      Re: [AR] Non-digital test
stand

which is obviously from the AR list. (loosely speaking)  the sender address
was : "Beth & Bob Fogarty" <_betbob@camasnet.com>

but a reply generated a "user unknown" message.

the email contains nothing but a "PIF" file.

does anyone know what's going on? (I haven't opened the attachemtn PIF, but
three's no text or any other message.

Des

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 23590 invoked from network); 27 Nov 2001 23:56:37 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpv.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.110]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 27 Nov 2001 23:56:37 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 28537 invoked by uid 50005); 27 Nov 2001 23:51:12 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpv with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4172. . Clean. Processed in 1.460119 secs); 27 Nov 2001 23:51:12 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpv.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 27 Nov 2001 23:51:08 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA08088; Tue, 27 Nov 2001 15:29:33 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 88433 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 27 Nov 2001 23:29:28          +0000
Received: from rasmus.uib.no (exim@rasmus.uib.no [129.177.12.30]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA08074 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Tue, 27 Nov 2001 15:29:27 -0800
Received: from tunnel-46-72.vpn.uib.no (exw6pg5boa.student.uib.no)          [129.177.46.72] by rasmus.uib.no for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU with esmtp          (Exim 3.16) id 168ree-000390-00; Wed, 28 Nov 2001 00:28:44 +0100
X-Sender: st07696@erasmus.uib.no
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
References: <sc04a301.044@citec.com.au> <sc04a301.044@citec.com.au>            <sc04a301.044@citec.com.au>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
X-Scanner: exiscan *168ree-000390-00*homsk2f5g8o*           http://tjinfo.uib.no/virus.html
Message-ID:  <5.1.0.14.0.20011128002509.02c73e48@erasmus.uib.no>
Date:         Wed, 28 Nov 2001 00:29:23 +0100
Reply-To: "Emil Johnsen" <emil.johnsen@STUDENT.UIB.NO>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Emil Johnsen" <emil.johnsen@STUDENT.UIB.NO>
Subject:      Re: [AR] POssible error/virus????
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC8 22>

I have received two e-mails with this virus from the same source. It's a
virus called W32.Badtrans.B@mm. The virus replies to unread messages in the
inbox.

http://securityresponse.symantec.com/avcenter/venc/data/w32.badtrans.b@mm.html

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 26840 invoked from network); 28 Nov 2001 00:41:06 -0000
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 28 Nov 2001 00:41:06 -0000
Received: (qmail 1897 invoked by uid 50005); 28 Nov 2001 00:40:58 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4172. . Clean. Processed in 1.918995 secs); 28 Nov 2001 00:40:58 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 28 Nov 2001 00:40:55 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA08358; Tue, 27 Nov 2001 16:22:40 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 88472 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 28 Nov 2001 00:20:44          +0000
Received: from mta04.mail.mel.aone.net.au (mta04.mail.au.uu.net [203.2.192.84])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA08341 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 27 Nov 2001 16:20:42 -0800
Received: from unknown ([63.34.210.168]) by mta04.mail.mel.aone.net.au with          SMTP id <20011128002011.JJEJ4848.mta04.mail.mel.aone.net.au@unknown>          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 28 Nov 2001 11:20:12 +1100
References: Conversation <CMM.0.90.4.1006878951.billw@cypher> with last message            <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>
Priority: Normal
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Priority: 3
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	X-MAPIextension=.TXT;
	charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>
Date:         Wed, 28 Nov 2001 00:20:44 +0000
Reply-To: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Starchaser X-Prize reaches 5000 feet, so far ...
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

----------
> Absolutely, and I should point out that I respect anyone who gets off
their
> bum and puts things together like that, whether they work or not (that's
> often how we learn).

As long as it's done safely and in a proper manner of course (thanks Mark).

Troy.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 10649 invoked from network); 28 Nov 2001 01:12:17 -0000
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 28 Nov 2001 01:12:17 -0000
Received: (qmail 25412 invoked by uid 50005); 28 Nov 2001 01:12:09 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4172. . Clean. Processed in 0.565612 secs); 28 Nov 2001 01:12:09 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 28 Nov 2001 01:12:07 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA08532; Tue, 27 Nov 2001 16:56:06 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 88515 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 28 Nov 2001 00:55:58          +0000
Received: from mailhost0.trib.com (mailhost0.trib.com [63.229.150.3]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA08518 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Tue, 27 Nov 2001 16:55:58 -0800
Received: from mail.trib.com (mail.trib.com [12.10.158.17]) by          mailhost0.trib.com (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id fAS0tEF96082; Tue,          27 Nov 2001 17:55:14 -0700 (MST) (envelope-from          jwckman@space-rockets.com)
Received: from [63.229.150.109] (HELO hppav) by mail.trib.com (CommuniGate Pro          SMTP 3.4.6) with SMTP id 60248451; Tue, 27 Nov 2001 17:55:13 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
Importance: Normal
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <NKEHJAOOKBPGIKOOPDEFMEJDCDAA.jwckman@space-rockets.com>
Date:         Tue, 27 Nov 2001 17:54:04 -0700
Reply-To: "John Wickman" <jwckman@SPACE-ROCKETS.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Wickman" <jwckman@SPACE-ROCKETS.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] POssible error/virus????
Comments: To: Des Bromilow <Des.Bromilow@citec.com.au>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <sc04a301.044@citec.com.au>

I got one from the same address with a different subject.   The message was
empty with no attachments.

John Wickman

-----Original Message-----
From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU]On
Behalf Of Des Bromilow
Sent: Tuesday, November 27, 2001 3:40 PM
To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
Subject: [AR] POssible error/virus????


Hi,

I just got an email with the subject - Re:      Re: [AR] Non-digital test
stand

which is obviously from the AR list. (loosely speaking)  the sender address
was : "Beth & Bob Fogarty" <_betbob@camasnet.com>

but a reply generated a "user unknown" message.

the email contains nothing but a "PIF" file.

does anyone know what's going on? (I haven't opened the attachemtn PIF, but
three's no text or any other message.

Des

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 29246 invoked from network); 28 Nov 2001 01:31:19 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.105]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 28 Nov 2001 01:31:19 -0000
Received: (qmail 28640 invoked by uid 50005); 28 Nov 2001 01:31:11 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpy with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4172. . Clean. Processed in 0.69794 secs); 28 Nov 2001 01:31:11 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 28 Nov 2001 01:31:09 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA08632; Tue, 27 Nov 2001 17:15:48 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 88531 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 28 Nov 2001 01:15:41          +0000
Received: from localhost (rcalkins@localhost) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with          ESMTP id RAA08618; Tue, 27 Nov 2001 17:15:38 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.LNX.4.10.10111271706380.8597-100000@itc.uci.edu>
Date:         Tue, 27 Nov 2001 17:15:38 -0800
Reply-To: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
Subject:      Re: [AR] POssible error/virus????
Comments: To: Emil Johnsen <emil.johnsen@STUDENT.UIB.NO>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <5.1.0.14.0.20011128002509.02c73e48@erasmus.uib.no>

Hey All,

I removed Bob from aRocket about 2:00 this morning, untill he lets me know
his system is disinfected, thanks to Carl's vigilance.  The virus isn't
sending messages to the list yet, only to individuals.

As always, don't use Outlook Express (the software responsible for some
90% of all viruses in the wild) unless you are very security conscious,
and don't open any attachments unless they are previously arranged.

Also, a good anti-virus package _with_regular_updates_ is a must.

Ray

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 26044 invoked from network); 28 Nov 2001 02:24:37 -0000
Received: from smtpv.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.110]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 28 Nov 2001 02:24:37 -0000
Received: (qmail 25166 invoked by uid 50005); 28 Nov 2001 02:19:30 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpv with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4172. . Clean. Processed in 0.586795 secs); 28 Nov 2001 02:19:30 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpv.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 28 Nov 2001 02:19:27 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA08937; Tue, 27 Nov 2001 18:08:37 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 88553 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 28 Nov 2001 02:08:24          +0000
Received: from castor.ridgenet.net (IDENT:root@castor.ridgenet.net          [199.120.150.29]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA08923          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 27 Nov 2001 18:08:23 -0800
Received: from kristinscomp (pm045.ridgenet.net [204.154.246.45]) by          castor.ridgenet.net (8.11.0/8.11.0) with SMTP id fAS2B6b19404; Tue,          27 Nov 2001 18:11:06 -0800
References:  <015601c17731$ae2ef3a0$0700a8c0@mkbs>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="Windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <005701c177b1$864881a0$1b30fea9@kristinscomp>
Date:         Tue, 27 Nov 2001 18:08:07 -0800
Reply-To: "Kristin & David Hall" <thehalls@RIDGENET.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Kristin & David Hall" <thehalls@RIDGENET.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] [OT]: Hearing meteors - at the speed of light
Comments: To: Russell McMahon <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

THANK YOU.

Many years ago I witnessed a meteor that lit the ground up...well, not like
daylight, but a lot brighter than even full moon!  It was big.  It was not a
point of light - it was a well defined ball of light that moved slowly (IE,
wasn't a "streak") across the sky.

And it made a simultaneous roar.

I have never before understood that roar and as the years have passed have
tried very hard to convince myself that the sound was imagined - but in my
gut I know what I heard!

--
Dave and/or Kristin Hall
----- Original Message -----
From: Russell McMahon <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Tuesday, November 27, 2001 2:39 AM
Subject: [AR] [OT]: Hearing meteors - at the speed of light


> How it is possible to simultaneously see & hear meteors entering the
> atmosphere at distances great enough that sound would take about 5 minutes
> to reach the observer.
>
>
>     http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2001/ast26nov_1.htm?list16511

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 27156 invoked from network); 28 Nov 2001 03:21:49 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 28 Nov 2001 03:21:49 -0000
Received: (qmail 2501 invoked by uid 50005); 28 Nov 2001 03:21:40 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4172. . Clean. Processed in 1.411457 secs); 28 Nov 2001 03:21:40 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 28 Nov 2001 03:21:36 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA09216; Tue, 27 Nov 2001 19:06:22 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 88568 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 28 Nov 2001 03:06:18          +0000
Received: from spsystems.net (spsystems.net [209.47.149.227]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA09201 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Tue,          27 Nov 2001 19:06:18 -0800
Received: (from henry@localhost) by spsystems.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id WAA16663;          Tue, 27 Nov 2001 22:05:35 -0500 (EST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1011127220045.16490A-100000@spsystems.net>
Date:         Tue, 27 Nov 2001 22:05:35 -0500
Reply-To: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] [OT]: Hearing meteors - at the speed of light
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <005701c177b1$864881a0$1b30fea9@kristinscomp>

On Tue, 27 Nov 2001, Kristin & David Hall wrote:
> I have never before understood that roar and as the years have passed have
> tried very hard to convince myself that the sound was imagined - but in my
> gut I know what I heard!

As the news release notes, noisy meteors are not all that uncommon -- lots
of people have heard them.  There are still some mysteries in just *how*
the sound occurs (or the perceived sound occurs, anyway -- I'm not sure it
has ever been mechanically recorded), but there is little doubt that it is
a real phenomenon of some kind.

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 23929 invoked from network); 28 Nov 2001 03:29:02 -0000
Received: from smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.105]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 28 Nov 2001 03:29:02 -0000
Received: (qmail 10688 invoked by uid 50005); 28 Nov 2001 03:28:54 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpy with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4172. . Clean. Processed in 1.418366 secs); 28 Nov 2001 03:28:54 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 28 Nov 2001 03:28:51 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA09255; Tue, 27 Nov 2001 19:12:20 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 88575 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 28 Nov 2001 03:12:17          +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (oe62.law12.hotmail.com [64.4.18.197]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA09240 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Tue, 27 Nov 2001 19:12:17 -0800
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Tue,          27 Nov 2001 19:11:43 -0800
X-Originating-IP: [24.92.128.69]
References:  <015601c17731$ae2ef3a0$0700a8c0@mkbs>              <005701c177b1$864881a0$1b30fea9@kristinscomp>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="Windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 28 Nov 2001 03:11:43.0306 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[67DA32A0:01C177BA]
Message-ID:  <OE62e6MKIVCYaF6vBVo0000fe40@hotmail.com>
Date:         Tue, 27 Nov 2001 21:10:21 -0600
Reply-To: "Mark Kruep" <mkruep@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Mark Kruep" <mkruep@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] [OT]: Hearing meteors - at the speed of light
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

It was making noise before you started observing it. The sound you hear is
probably from 5 minutes ago, but because of how the brain interprets audio
and visual stimuli, it would probably APPEAR that the sound is real time.
The meteor should have a fairly constant noise created (and magnified by a
BIG auditorium) and thus, what it did 5 minutes ago sounds the same as what
right now looks like. Remember the word "Relativity". Relative to your
vantage point, the sight and sound are in sync.

That explanation may not totally explain it, but given the huge distances
both the sound and the meteor travel & the easily deceived human brain, it
seems the most logical answer. Of course it could be like some type of
auditory worm hole, but I'm not betting the house on that one.


Mark


----- Original Message -----
From: "Kristin & David Hall" <thehalls@RIDGENET.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Tuesday, November 27, 2001 8:08 PM
Subject: Re: [AR] [OT]: Hearing meteors - at the speed of light


> THANK YOU.
>
> Many years ago I witnessed a meteor that lit the ground up...well, not
like
> daylight, but a lot brighter than even full moon!  It was big.  It was not
a
> point of light - it was a well defined ball of light that moved slowly
(IE,
> wasn't a "streak") across the sky.
>
> And it made a simultaneous roar.
>
> I have never before understood that roar and as the years have passed have
> tried very hard to convince myself that the sound was imagined - but in my
> gut I know what I heard!
>
> --
> Dave and/or Kristin Hall
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Russell McMahon <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
> To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
> Sent: Tuesday, November 27, 2001 2:39 AM
> Subject: [AR] [OT]: Hearing meteors - at the speed of light
>
>
> > How it is possible to simultaneously see & hear meteors entering the
> > atmosphere at distances great enough that sound would take about 5
minutes
> > to reach the observer.
> >
> >
> >     http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2001/ast26nov_1.htm?list16511
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 4362 invoked from network); 28 Nov 2001 03:32:16 -0000
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 28 Nov 2001 03:32:16 -0000
Received: (qmail 7922 invoked by uid 50005); 28 Nov 2001 03:32:08 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4172. . Clean. Processed in 0.149273 secs); 28 Nov 2001 03:32:08 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 28 Nov 2001 03:32:07 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA09291; Tue, 27 Nov 2001 19:16:01 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 88584 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 28 Nov 2001 03:16:00          +0000
Received: from smtprelay3.abs.adelphia.net (smtprelay.abs.adelphia.net          [64.8.20.11]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA09277 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 27 Nov 2001 19:16:00 -0800
Received: from jlgrady ([24.53.101.238]) by smtprelay3.abs.adelphia.net          (Netscape Messaging Server 4.15) with SMTP id GNHQDQ03.A0X; Tue, 27          Nov 2001 22:15:26 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="Windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook CWS, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <000001c177ba$fd7525e0$0200a8c0@24.53.64.18>
Date:         Tue, 27 Nov 2001 22:15:53 -0500
Reply-To: "Jeff Grady" <jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jeff Grady" <jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] [OT]: Hearing meteors - at the speed of light
Comments: To: Kristin & David Hall <thehalls@RIDGENET.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <005701c177b1$864881a0$1b30fea9@kristinscomp>

I've heard them "fizz" also... Especially Sunday a week ago during the
Leonid meteor shower... I'd estimate 400-500 meteors between 12:00 midnight
and daylight. Several of them fizzed...Kind of sounds like a sparkler going
by (fireworks type).

JG

-----Original Message-----
From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@itc.uci.edu]On
Behalf Of Kristin & David Hall
Sent: Tuesday, November 27, 2001 9:08 PM
To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
Subject: Re: [AR] [OT]: Hearing meteors - at the speed of light


THANK YOU.

Many years ago I witnessed a meteor that lit the ground up...well, not like
daylight, but a lot brighter than even full moon!  It was big.  It was not a
point of light - it was a well defined ball of light that moved slowly (IE,
wasn't a "streak") across the sky.

And it made a simultaneous roar.

I have never before understood that roar and as the years have passed have
tried very hard to convince myself that the sound was imagined - but in my
gut I know what I heard!

--
Dave and/or Kristin Hall
----- Original Message -----
From: Russell McMahon <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Tuesday, November 27, 2001 2:39 AM
Subject: [AR] [OT]: Hearing meteors - at the speed of light


> How it is possible to simultaneously see & hear meteors entering the
> atmosphere at distances great enough that sound would take about 5 minutes
> to reach the observer.
>
>
>     http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2001/ast26nov_1.htm?list16511

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 11331 invoked from network); 28 Nov 2001 05:12:04 -0000
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 28 Nov 2001 05:12:04 -0000
Received: (qmail 1722 invoked by uid 50005); 28 Nov 2001 05:11:56 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4172. . Clean. Processed in 0.208294 secs); 28 Nov 2001 05:11:56 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 28 Nov 2001 05:11:55 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA09942; Tue, 27 Nov 2001 20:56:38 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 88655 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 28 Nov 2001 04:56:32          +0000
Received: from mta05.mail.mel.aone.net.au (mta05.mail.au.uu.net [203.2.192.85])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA09928 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 27 Nov 2001 20:56:31 -0800
Received: from unknown ([63.34.218.86]) by mta05.mail.mel.aone.net.au with SMTP          id <20011128045556.RWXJ16649.mta05.mail.mel.aone.net.au@unknown> for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 28 Nov 2001 15:55:56 +1100
References: Conversation <015601c17731$ae2ef3a0$0700a8c0@mkbs> with last            message <OE62e6MKIVCYaF6vBVo0000fe40@hotmail.com>
Priority: Normal
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Priority: 3
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	X-MAPIextension=.TXT;
	charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>
Date:         Wed, 28 Nov 2001 04:56:32 +0000
Reply-To: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] [OT]: Hearing meteors - at the speed of light
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <OE62e6MKIVCYaF6vBVo0000fe40@hotmail.com>

Nup, that explanation doesn't fit at all unless the sound is from a
previous meteor thereby the phenomenon could in all likelihood only occur
during meteor showers.  If the sound was from a previous meteor it may well
be from a falling meteorite quite close to the spectator(s). Yes, that
explanation all sounds a bit too coincidental if people are continually
hearing those sounds during a visual event. Very mysterious???

Troy.

----------
> It was making noise before you started observing it. The sound you hear is
> probably from 5 minutes ago, but because of how the brain interprets audio
> and visual stimuli, it would probably APPEAR that the sound is real time.
> The meteor should have a fairly constant noise created (and magnified by a
> BIG auditorium) and thus, what it did 5 minutes ago sounds the same as
what
> right now looks like. Remember the word "Relativity". Relative to your
> vantage point, the sight and sound are in sync.
>
> That explanation may not totally explain it, but given the huge distances
> both the sound and the meteor travel & the easily deceived human brain, it
> seems the most logical answer. Of course it could be like some type of
> auditory worm hole, but I'm not betting the house on that one.
>
>
> Mark
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Kristin & David Hall" <thehalls@RIDGENET.NET>
> To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
> Sent: Tuesday, November 27, 2001 8:08 PM
> Subject: Re: [AR] [OT]: Hearing meteors - at the speed of light
>
>
> > THANK YOU.
> >
> > Many years ago I witnessed a meteor that lit the ground up...well, not
> like
> > daylight, but a lot brighter than even full moon!  It was big.  It was
not
> a
> > point of light - it was a well defined ball of light that moved slowly
> (IE,
> > wasn't a "streak") across the sky.
> >
> > And it made a simultaneous roar.
> >
> > I have never before understood that roar and as the years have passed
have
> > tried very hard to convince myself that the sound was imagined - but in
my
> > gut I know what I heard!
> >
> > --
> > Dave and/or Kristin Hall
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: Russell McMahon <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
> > To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
> > Sent: Tuesday, November 27, 2001 2:39 AM
> > Subject: [AR] [OT]: Hearing meteors - at the speed of light
> >
> >
> > > How it is possible to simultaneously see & hear meteors entering the
> > > atmosphere at distances great enough that sound would take about 5
> minutes
> > > to reach the observer.
> > >
> > >
> > >     http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2001/ast26nov_1.htm?list16511
> >
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 15243 invoked from network); 28 Nov 2001 06:24:26 -0000
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 28 Nov 2001 06:24:26 -0000
Received: (qmail 31505 invoked by uid 50005); 28 Nov 2001 06:24:17 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4172. . Clean. Processed in 3.79733 secs); 28 Nov 2001 06:24:17 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 28 Nov 2001 06:24:10 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA10282; Tue, 27 Nov 2001 22:08:40 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 88683 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 28 Nov 2001 06:08:34          +0000
Received: from castor.ridgenet.net (IDENT:root@castor.ridgenet.net          [199.120.150.29]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA10268          for <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Tue, 27 Nov 2001 22:08:33 -0800
Received: from kristinscomp (pm234.ridgenet.net [204.154.246.234]) by          castor.ridgenet.net (8.11.0/8.11.0) with SMTP id fAS6CJb18658; Tue,          27 Nov 2001 22:12:19 -0800
References:  <015601c17731$ae2ef3a0$0700a8c0@mkbs>                         <005701c177b1$864881a0$1b30fea9@kristinscomp>              <OE62e6MKIVCYaF6vBVo0000fe40@hotmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="Windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <001d01c177d3$3924c380$1b30fea9@kristinscomp>
Date:         Tue, 27 Nov 2001 22:09:21 -0800
Reply-To: "Kristin & David Hall" <thehalls@RIDGENET.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Kristin & David Hall" <thehalls@RIDGENET.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] [OT]: Hearing meteors - at the speed of light
Comments: To: Mark Kruep <mkruep@HOTMAIL.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

> It was making noise before you started observing it. The sound you hear is
> probably from 5 minutes ago, but because of how the brain interprets audio
> and visual stimuli, it would probably APPEAR that the sound is real time.
> The meteor should have a fairly constant noise created (and magnified by a
> BIG auditorium) and thus, what it did 5 minutes ago sounds the same as
what
> right now looks like. Remember the word "Relativity". Relative to your
> vantage point, the sight and sound are in sync.

Does not compute.

First off, if we assume that the meteor is in the upper atmosphere...say
150,000 that means we're talking about (roughly) a 150 second time lag for
"real" sound to make it to me.  The life of a meteor once it starts to enter
the atmosphere is measured in seconds, maybe tens of seconds, but certainly
not 150 seconds.  Which means that the meteor should have been dead LONG
before I hear it.

Second, the meteor in question was at a roughly 45 degree elevation.  Now,
as shock waves travel vertically through the atmosphere they are refracted
upwards due to the changing density of the atmosphere.  It turns out that
one of the ways you can measure the altitude of a supersonic object is by
measuring the width of it's sonic footprint.  Too high up or too far off to
the side and the shockwave is actually refracted enough such that it begins
traveling *UP* again (and thus, never hits the ground).  Again, given a very
high altitude object and the pretty small elevation angle...I should never
have heard any sonic booms/rumble.  And I didn't.  Believe me that around
here you hear sonic booms all the time.  I know what a sonic boom sounds
like.  This was more like somebody tuning a radio to an empty channel and
turning the volume way up.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 27065 invoked from network); 28 Nov 2001 07:33:43 -0000
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 28 Nov 2001 07:33:43 -0000
Received: (qmail 3600 invoked by uid 50005); 28 Nov 2001 07:33:35 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4172. . Clean. Processed in 0.129237 secs); 28 Nov 2001 07:33:35 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 28 Nov 2001 07:33:34 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA10579; Tue, 27 Nov 2001 23:30:30 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 88709 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 28 Nov 2001 07:30:29          +0000
Received: from smtprelay2.abs.adelphia.net (smtprelay.abs.adelphia.net          [64.8.20.11]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA10565 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 27 Nov 2001 23:30:28 -0800
Received: from jlgrady ([24.53.101.238]) by smtprelay2.abs.adelphia.net          (Netscape Messaging Server 4.15) with SMTP id GNI25X01.536 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 28 Nov 2001 02:29:57 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="Windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook CWS, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <000001c177de$8c7cf8d0$0200a8c0@24.53.64.18>
Date:         Wed, 28 Nov 2001 02:30:26 -0500
Reply-To: "Jeff Grady" <jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jeff Grady" <jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] [OT]: Hearing meteors - at the speed of light
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <001d01c177d3$3924c380$1b30fea9@kristinscomp>

>>This was more like somebody tuning a radio to an empty channel and
>>turning the volume way up.

Yep. Sort of like the fizzing sound of a sparkler stick. Sometimes, I swear
I can "hear" the oscillator in an old radio or TV set (455khz??) but I know
the range of human hearing is nowhere near that high. Cut the TV or radio
off and the oscillations are gone. Lightening is not RF, but it sure plays
hell with AM radios. I think what I hear when I think I hear a meteor, is
static electricity crackling above my head. I don't feel it, but I hear it.
In fact, I'd like to try spotting a meteor while having an AM radio tuned
between stations to see if it crackles like it does when lightening strikes.

The last 2 cents I have on this subject.

JG

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 29762 invoked from network); 28 Nov 2001 07:34:44 -0000
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 28 Nov 2001 07:34:44 -0000
Received: (qmail 24236 invoked by uid 50005); 28 Nov 2001 07:34:35 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4172. . Clean. Processed in 2.455888 secs); 28 Nov 2001 07:34:35 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 28 Nov 2001 07:34:30 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA10543; Tue, 27 Nov 2001 23:25:48 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 88702 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 28 Nov 2001 07:25:43          +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (oe31.law12.hotmail.com [64.4.18.88]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA10529 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Tue,          27 Nov 2001 23:25:42 -0800
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Tue,          27 Nov 2001 23:25:08 -0800
X-Originating-IP: [24.92.128.69]
References:  <015601c17731$ae2ef3a0$0700a8c0@mkbs>                         <005701c177b1$864881a0$1b30fea9@kristinscomp>              <OE62e6MKIVCYaF6vBVo0000fe40@hotmail.com>             <001d01c177d3$3924c380$1b30fea9@kristinscomp>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="Windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 28 Nov 2001 07:25:08.0874 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[CF13BEA0:01C177DD]
Message-ID:  <OE31RLVbNDN4CxpAOAk0001b8bc@hotmail.com>
Date:         Wed, 28 Nov 2001 01:24:22 -0600
Reply-To: "Mark Kruep" <mkruep@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Mark Kruep" <mkruep@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] [OT]: Hearing meteors - at the speed of light
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Oops. I thought about it again a few minutes after I hit send and knew I
screwed up (while hoping no one caught it). My brain had envisioned some big
planet killin meteor streaking from horizon to horizon.?? Too much TV maybe?
Maybe I should have just followed the link to the story and read before I
ran my mouth?

Mark


----- Original Message -----
From: "Kristin & David Hall" <thehalls@ridgenet.net>
To: <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; "Mark Kruep" <mkruep@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sent: Wednesday, November 28, 2001 12:09 AM
Subject: Re: Re: [AR] [OT]: Hearing meteors - at the speed of light


>
> > It was making noise before you started observing it. The sound you hear
is
> > probably from 5 minutes ago, but because of how the brain interprets
audio
> > and visual stimuli, it would probably APPEAR that the sound is real
time.
> > The meteor should have a fairly constant noise created (and magnified by
a
> > BIG auditorium) and thus, what it did 5 minutes ago sounds the same as
> what
> > right now looks like. Remember the word "Relativity". Relative to your
> > vantage point, the sight and sound are in sync.
>
> Does not compute.
>
> First off, if we assume that the meteor is in the upper atmosphere...say
> 150,000 that means we're talking about (roughly) a 150 second time lag for
> "real" sound to make it to me.  The life of a meteor once it starts to
enter
> the atmosphere is measured in seconds, maybe tens of seconds, but
certainly
> not 150 seconds.  Which means that the meteor should have been dead LONG
> before I hear it.
>
> Second, the meteor in question was at a roughly 45 degree elevation.  Now,
> as shock waves travel vertically through the atmosphere they are refracted
> upwards due to the changing density of the atmosphere.  It turns out that
> one of the ways you can measure the altitude of a supersonic object is by
> measuring the width of it's sonic footprint.  Too high up or too far off
to
> the side and the shockwave is actually refracted enough such that it
begins
> traveling *UP* again (and thus, never hits the ground).  Again, given a
very
> high altitude object and the pretty small elevation angle...I should never
> have heard any sonic booms/rumble.  And I didn't.  Believe me that around
> here you hear sonic booms all the time.  I know what a sonic boom sounds
> like.  This was more like somebody tuning a radio to an empty channel and
> turning the volume way up.
>
>
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 20922 invoked from network); 28 Nov 2001 08:05:43 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 28 Nov 2001 08:05:43 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 1686 invoked by uid 50005); 28 Nov 2001 08:05:35 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4172. . Clean. Processed in 2.501213 secs); 28 Nov 2001 08:05:35 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 28 Nov 2001 08:05:30 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA10665; Wed, 28 Nov 2001 00:00:10 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 88716 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 28 Nov 2001 08:00:04          +0000
Received: from mtapop4pub.verizon.net (mtapop4pub.gte.net [206.46.170.37]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA10651 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 28 Nov 2001 00:00:04 -0800
Received: from [67.192.161.152] (1Cust152.tnt1.hilo.hi.da.uu.net          [67.192.161.152]) by mtapop4pub.verizon.net  with ESMTP ; id          BAA7493655 Wed, 28 Nov 2001 01:59:26 -0600 (CST)
X-Sender: ttocs@mail.gte.net
References: <NKEHJAOOKBPGIKOOPDEFMEJACDAA.jwckman@space-rockets.com>            <20011127132823.99115.qmail@web13602.mail.yahoo.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <l03130301b82a497b40ef@[67.192.169.245]>
Date:         Tue, 27 Nov 2001 21:58:21 -1000
Reply-To: "Melissa Smith" <ttocs@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Melissa Smith" <ttocs@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Starchaser X-Prize reaches 5000 feet, so far ...
Comments: To: Andy Woerner <andy@TNS.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <5.1.0.14.2.20011127083151.026028a8@mail.tns.net>

This guy should have a reserved '02 darwin award.

-Aaron

At 8:32 AM -0800 11/27/01, Andy Woerner wrote:
>Where do I send the flowers to?
>
>
>At 09:14 AM 11/27/2001 -0700, you wrote:
>>Andy,
>>
>>He is going to get inside the rocket just launched and fly inside it in
>>April 2002?  Did I understand this correct?
>>
>>John Wickman
>>
>>
>> >>>He's planning to launch himself to 20,000 ft in April
>>in the Nova rocket launched last week and reckons
>>he'll be in space by the end of 2003. hmmmmmm.
>>
>>Andy<<<<
>
>
>
>
>
>Andy Woerner
>Terracom, Inc.
>
>Voice (858) 268-8911
>FAX (858) 268-9212
>www.tns.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 11207 invoked from network); 28 Nov 2001 08:59:49 -0000
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 28 Nov 2001 08:59:49 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 5340 invoked by uid 50005); 28 Nov 2001 08:59:41 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4172. . Clean. Processed in 4.71521 secs); 28 Nov 2001 08:59:41 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 28 Nov 2001 08:59:35 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA10873; Wed, 28 Nov 2001 00:57:49 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 88760 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 28 Nov 2001 08:57:37          +0000
Received: from blount.mail.mindspring.net (blount.mail.mindspring.net          [207.69.200.226]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA10859          for <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Wed, 28 Nov 2001 00:57:37 -0800
Received: from sdn-ar-005casfrmp119.dialsprint.net ([158.252.212.121]          helo=mindspring.com) by blount.mail.mindspring.net with esmtp (Exim          3.33 #1) id 1690X7-0004nS-00; Wed, 28 Nov 2001 03:57:34 -0500
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 (Macintosh; U; PPC)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <015601c17731$ae2ef3a0$0700a8c0@mkbs>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3C04A912.8CC1898C@mindspring.com>
Date:         Wed, 28 Nov 2001 02:06:28 -0700
Reply-To: "Alan Shinn" <alshinn@MINDSPRING.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Alan Shinn" <alshinn@MINDSPRING.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] [OT]: Hearing meteors - at the speed of light
Comments: To: Russell McMahon <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

The web site is fun.
It says that meteors can emit Very Low Frequency waves. These waves can
make stuff like grass and wire eyeglass frames, etc. vibrate and produce
sound (even dry air can whisper, according to the article). being EM
waves they travel at C.
Here's the funnest part, the VLF emission is made by the following
sequence (I cannot attest to the following as I can barely tell what he
is saying) but---
The vapor trail is a plasma which can become very turbulent. This
turbulent plasma trail traps and twists up the earth's magnetic field.
As the gasses expand and cool they become nonconductive and release the
coiled up magnetic field with a burst of VLF radiation.
So how the heck did they figure that out!!!
So some meteors should be very noisy in that band, anyone know about that?

Russell McMahon wrote:
>
> How it is possible to simultaneously see & hear meteors entering the
> atmosphere at distances great enough that sound would take about 5 minutes
> to reach the observer.
>
>     http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2001/ast26nov_1.htm?list16511

--
Looking forward:
Alan Shinn


Experience the
beginnings of microscopy.
Make your own replica
of one of Antony van Leeuwenhoek's microscopes.
visit    http://www.mindspring.com/~alshinn/

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 25409 invoked from network); 28 Nov 2001 13:15:50 -0000
X-Priority: 3
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 28 Nov 2001 13:15:50 -0000
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 6799 invoked by uid 50005); 28 Nov 2001 13:15:42 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4172. . Clean. Processed in 1.228962 secs); 28 Nov 2001 13:15:42 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 28 Nov 2001 13:15:40 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id FAA12168; Wed, 28 Nov 2001 05:13:03 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 89164 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 28 Nov 2001 13:12:45          +0000
Received: from imo-d02.mx.aol.com (imo-d02.mx.aol.com [205.188.157.34]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id FAA12153 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Wed, 28 Nov 2001 05:12:44 -0800
Received: from Azt28@aol.com by imo-d02.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v31_r1.9.) id          h.136.5592ebd (4585); Wed, 28 Nov 2001 08:12:04 -0500 (EST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0E0C_01C56B69.5A243E70"
X-Mailer: AOL 6.0 for Windows FR sub 10506
Message-ID:  <136.5592ebd.29363ca4@aol.com>
Date:         Wed, 28 Nov 2001 08:12:04 EST
Reply-To: <Azt28@AOL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <Azt28@AOL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] [OT]: Hearing meteors - at the speed of light
Comments: To: apptech@clear.net.nz
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0E0C_01C56B69.5A243E70
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

From:
apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ


> How it is possible to simultaneously see & hear meteors entering the
> atmosphere at distances great enough that sound would take about 5 minutes
> to reach the observer.
>
>
>     http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2001/ast26nov_1.htm?list16511
>
There has been an article on that subject in New Scientist some months ago.
Outside meteor and aurora, theremonuclear devices produce an instant sound,
in this case a "clic". The low frequency wave has a power problem,
particularly for meteors. There is another explanation for the phenomenon:

When an object move at supersonic speed, it produces a shock wave, the well
known sonic boom. Yet, there is a limit to shock wave speed, beyond
approximately 30 km/s they don't fit the bill. You can then not think of the
moving object as simply evolving in ordinary space, you must take into
account  the full phase space of mechanics with 3 space dimensions and 3
impulsion ones. For objects moving at more than 30 km/s, it seems a sound
wave is produced in the impulsion dimensions. This sound would move at near
30 km/s, not the speed of light.

It has been suggested that galaxies have relative motions quantized in unit
of 27 km/s, this could be another side of the same physical effect. It would
explain too why satellites entering the atmosphere never produce such sounds:
they are far too slow.

Any idea to reverse the process and make a phase space sound motor? :-)

Yvan Bozzonetti


------=_NextPart_000_0E0C_01C56B69.5A243E70
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<HTML><FONT FACE=arial,helvetica><FONT  SIZE=2>From:
<BR>apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ
<BR>
<BR>
<BR><BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE style="BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px">How it is possible to simultaneously see &amp; hear meteors entering the
<BR>atmosphere at distances great enough that sound would take about 5 minutes
<BR>to reach the observer.
<BR>
<BR>
<BR> &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2001/ast26nov_1.htm?list16511
<BR></BLOCKQUOTE>
<BR>There has been an article on that subject in New Scientist some months ago. Outside meteor and aurora, theremonuclear devices produce an instant sound, in this case a "clic". The low frequency wave has a power problem, particularly for meteors. There is another explanation for the phenomenon:
<BR>
<BR>When an object move at supersonic speed, it produces a shock wave, the well known sonic boom. Yet, there is a limit to shock wave speed, beyond approximately 30 km/s they don't fit the bill. You can then not think of the moving object as simply evolving in ordinary space, you must take into account &nbsp;the full phase space of mechanics with 3 space dimensions and 3 impulsion ones. For objects moving at more than 30 km/s, it seems a sound wave is produced in the impulsion dimensions. This sound would move at near 30 km/s, not the speed of light.
<BR>
<BR>It has been suggested that galaxies have relative motions quantized in unit of 27 km/s, this could be another side of the same physical effect. It would explain too why satellites entering the atmosphere never produce such sounds: they are far too slow.
<BR>
<BR>Any idea to reverse the process and make a phase space sound motor? :-)
<BR>
<BR>Yvan Bozzonetti
<BR></FONT></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0E0C_01C56B69.5A243E70--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 17430 invoked from network); 28 Nov 2001 13:29:40 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 28 Nov 2001 13:29:40 -0000
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 24855 invoked by uid 50005); 28 Nov 2001 13:29:30 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4172. . Clean. Processed in 1.61609 secs); 28 Nov 2001 13:29:31 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 28 Nov 2001 13:29:27 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id FAA12303; Wed, 28 Nov 2001 05:27:23 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 89211 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 28 Nov 2001 13:27:20          +0000
Received: from spsystems.net (spsystems.net [209.47.149.227]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id FAA12288 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed,          28 Nov 2001 05:27:19 -0800
Received: (from henry@localhost) by spsystems.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id IAA25838;          Wed, 28 Nov 2001 08:26:47 -0500 (EST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1011128082101.25421D-100000@spsystems.net>
Date:         Wed, 28 Nov 2001 08:26:47 -0500
Reply-To: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] [OT]: Hearing meteors - at the speed of light
Comments: To: Jeff Grady <jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <000001c177de$8c7cf8d0$0200a8c0@24.53.64.18>

On Wed, 28 Nov 2001, Jeff Grady wrote:
> Yep. Sort of like the fizzing sound of a sparkler stick. Sometimes, I swear
> I can "hear" the oscillator in an old radio or TV set (455khz??) but I know
> the range of human hearing is nowhere near that high. Cut the TV or radio
> off and the oscillations are gone...

There may also be oscillations at lower frequencies running around in the
circuitry, and they can get out by surprising routes.  There are computers
which "sing" a bit, with the tone changing depending on what's happening
on the screen, because some capacitors are somewhat piezoelectric and will
vibrate with rhythmically changing voltages.

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 18383 invoked from network); 28 Nov 2001 16:28:55 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 28 Nov 2001 16:28:55 -0000
Received: (qmail 28199 invoked by uid 50005); 28 Nov 2001 16:28:46 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4172. . Clean. Processed in 1.341155 secs); 28 Nov 2001 16:28:46 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 28 Nov 2001 16:28:44 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA13636; Wed, 28 Nov 2001 08:15:46 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 89723 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 28 Nov 2001 16:15:39          +0000
Received: from localhost (dmccue@localhost) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with          ESMTP id IAA13618; Wed, 28 Nov 2001 08:15:35 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.LNX.4.10.10111280737060.13331-100000@itc.uci.edu>
Date:         Wed, 28 Nov 2001 08:15:35 -0800
Reply-To: "David J. McCue" <dmccue@itc.uci.edu>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "David J. McCue" <dmccue@itc.uci.edu>
Subject:      Re: [AR] [OT]: Hearing meteors - at the speed of light
Comments: To: Jeff Grady <jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <000001c177de$8c7cf8d0$0200a8c0@24.53.64.18>

On Wed, 28 Nov 2001, Jeff Grady wrote:

> >>This was more like somebody tuning a radio to an empty channel and
> >>turning the volume way up.
>
> Yep. Sort of like the fizzing sound of a sparkler stick. Sometimes, I swear
> I can "hear" the oscillator in an old radio or TV set (455khz??) but I know
> the range of human hearing is nowhere near that high. Cut the TV or radio
> off and the oscillations are gone. Lightening is not RF, but it sure plays
> hell with AM radios. I think what I hear when I think I hear a meteor, is
[snip]

The high-pitched tone you may hear from an old radio (I interpret that to
mean AM radio) you can also hear from a new AM radio, because it is caused
by "beat interference". This is a signal generated by the mixing of the
signals from two AM radio stations that are transmitting one channel
apart.

AM radio stations are assigned operating frequencies at ten kilohertz
intervals. If you tune to either one of two stations on successive
channels, you will hear the "beat" of the difference between the two
carrier frequencies. The radio has limited selectivity, and is mixing the
two signals together. You hear the product of that mixing (differencing,
in this case) as a ten kilohertz tone. Because of the potential for this
problem to occur, stations in the same area are not assigned adjacent
channels. You tend to hear this more at night, when signals from distant
AM stations can travel quite far and interfere with local signals.

The very high-pitched tone you hear from your TV is due to the magnetic
beam deflection coils in the TV that sweep the electron beam in the
picture tube from left to right. They can act as acoustic tranducers and
you hear them vibrate at the sweep frequency of 15,750 Hertz.

The NASA article shared the results of research into meteor "sounds"
which are electromagnetic signals (radio waves) generated by some meteors
and detected and converted to acoustic waves by earthly objects. In other
words, the signal is travelling at lightspeed for most of the distance,
then being converted to sound by things quite close to the observer. The
tree, the fence, the scrap of paper is the "radio" in this case. That's
how you can hear the signal at the same time you see the meteor.

If you get to visit the transmitter room of an AM radio station, you will
hear the radio signal that is carrying the programming being detected and
converted to sound by objects in the facility. It's a bit eerie, and gives
one an appreciation for the energy levels involved.

> static electricity crackling above my head. I don't feel it, but I hear it.
> In fact, I'd like to try spotting a meteor while having an AM radio tuned
> between stations to see if it crackles like it does when lightening strikes.

Because the frequency of the radio waves emmitted by these meteors is at
audio frequencies, what you want to use as your radio is an antenna to
collect the signal and an audio amplifier and speaker to detect it. The
reason this phenomenon was so hard to figure out is that the signals are
in such a low frequency region, well below the range of most equipment.

If you try this, you will find is that your biggest problem is the 60
Hertz signal from power lines that blankets the environment. I am
wandering too far into the realm of the Society of Amateur Scientists,
so I'll end here.

-Dave Mc

PS. I have heard concerns about the possible effects of rocket exhaust
plume on RF communication with a rocket in flight from several people, but
it always seemed unlikely to be worthy of concern to me. Opinions,
experience?

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 27310 invoked from network); 28 Nov 2001 17:05:08 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 28 Nov 2001 17:05:08 -0000
Received: (qmail 25736 invoked by uid 50005); 28 Nov 2001 17:04:59 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4172. . Clean. Processed in 0.383726 secs); 28 Nov 2001 17:04:59 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 28 Nov 2001 17:04:58 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA13972; Wed, 28 Nov 2001 08:59:15 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 89843 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 28 Nov 2001 16:59:05          +0000
Received: from spsystems.net (spsystems.net [209.47.149.227]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA13958 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Wed,          28 Nov 2001 08:59:04 -0800
Received: (from henry@localhost) by spsystems.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id LAA01054;          Wed, 28 Nov 2001 11:58:32 -0500 (EST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1011128115247.25421L-100000@spsystems.net>
Date:         Wed, 28 Nov 2001 11:58:32 -0500
Reply-To: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Subject:      [AR] rocket exhaust vs. radio
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <Pine.LNX.4.10.10111280737060.13331-100000@itc.uci.edu>

On Wed, 28 Nov 2001, David J. McCue wrote:
> PS. I have heard concerns about the possible effects of rocket exhaust
> plume on RF communication with a rocket in flight from several people, but
> it always seemed unlikely to be worthy of concern to me. Opinions,
> experience?

Whether it is a concern for amateur-sized rockets is hard to say -- if
nothing else, it depends on what you think "amateur size" is! -- but the
professionals do worry about this.  For example, the (solid) staging
retrorockets on the Saturn I first stage were notorious for interrupting
telemetry, perhaps because the fuel had potassium (easily ionized) in it.

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 29789 invoked from network); 28 Nov 2001 18:12:07 -0000
Received: from smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.105]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 28 Nov 2001 18:12:07 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 16009 invoked by uid 50005); 28 Nov 2001 18:11:58 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpy with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4172. . Clean. Processed in 0.155831 secs); 28 Nov 2001 18:11:58 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 28 Nov 2001 18:11:57 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA14819; Wed, 28 Nov 2001 10:08:40 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 90125 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 28 Nov 2001 18:08:31          +0000
Received: from mail.aros.net (mail.aros.net [207.173.16.20]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA14805 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed,          28 Nov 2001 10:08:30 -0800
Received: from biomicro.com (cust-208-187-122-40.bbsc.net [208.187.122.40]) by          mail.aros.net (8.11.6/8.9.3) with ESMTP id fASI8TX39603 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 28 Nov 2001 11:08:29 -0700 (MST)
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.77 [en] (Win98; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <Pine.BSI.3.91.1011128115247.25421L-100000@spsystems.net>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3C051C00.E84D27C@biomicro.com>
Date:         Wed, 28 Nov 2001 10:16:49 -0700
Reply-To: "Mark K. Spute" <mks@BIOMICRO.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Mark K. Spute" <mks@BIOMICRO.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] rocket exhaust vs. radio
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is also a function of the exhaust composition.  Propellants with heavy
metals loading would prove more problematic than those without.  Hybrids using
N2O and plastic (PVC, PP, PE, etc.) should have very little if any problems.
Likewise with liquid bipropellants like LOx/hydrocarbon, N2O/hydrocarbon, and
HTP/Hydrocarbon.  HTP monopropellants should have very little problems as well.

Did I leave anybody out?

Henry Spencer wrote:

> On Wed, 28 Nov 2001, David J. McCue wrote:
> > PS. I have heard concerns about the possible effects of rocket exhaust
> > plume on RF communication with a rocket in flight from several people, but
> > it always seemed unlikely to be worthy of concern to me. Opinions,
> > experience?
>
> Whether it is a concern for amateur-sized rockets is hard to say -- if
> nothing else, it depends on what you think "amateur size" is! -- but the
> professionals do worry about this.  For example, the (solid) staging
> retrorockets on the Saturn I first stage were notorious for interrupting
> telemetry, perhaps because the fuel had potassium (easily ionized) in it.
>
>                                                           Henry Spencer
>                                                        henry@spsystems.net

--
Mark K. Spute
Senior Research Engineer
BioMicro Systems Inc.

KD7IWE,  RRS, hopeful future Stolly owner

"It is difficult to say what is impossible, for the dream of yesterday is the
hope of today and the reality of tomorrow."
     Dr. Robert H. Goddard

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 2302 invoked from network); 28 Nov 2001 22:39:03 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 28 Nov 2001 22:39:03 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 12044 invoked by uid 50005); 28 Nov 2001 22:38:54 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4172. . Clean. Processed in 0.391121 secs); 28 Nov 2001 22:38:54 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 28 Nov 2001 22:38:53 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA17822; Wed, 28 Nov 2001 14:36:37 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 91425 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 28 Nov 2001 22:36:30          +0000
Received: from ns.vanguard.com (ns.VANGUARD.COM [192.175.173.31]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA17808 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 28 Nov 2001 14:36:30 -0800
Received: from eagle1.vanguard.com (eagle1.VANGUARD.COM [192.175.141.70]) by          ns.vanguard.com (Switch-2.2.0/Switch-2.1.0) with ESMTP id          fASMZGV11461 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 28 Nov 2001 17:35:16          -0500 (EST)
Received: from vgi4mail.vanguard.com (vgi4mail.vanguard.com [10.254.65.16]) by          eagle1.vanguard.com (Switch-2.2.0/Switch-2.1.0) with SMTP id          fASMaRD16755 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 28 Nov 2001 17:36:27          -0500 (EST)
Received: by vgi4mail.vanguard.com(Lotus SMTP MTA v4.6.6  (890.1 7-16-1999))           id 85256B12.007C2E50 ; Wed, 28 Nov 2001 17:36:23 -0500
X-Lotus-FromDomain: VGINOTES
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Disposition: inline
Message-ID:  <85256B12.007C2D5F.00@vgi4mail.vanguard.com>
Date:         Wed, 28 Nov 2001 17:36:24 -0500
Reply-To: <Waysie_Atkins@VANGUARD.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <Waysie_Atkins@VANGUARD.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] [OT]: Hearing meteors - at the speed of light
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Alan Shinn wrote:
So some meteors should be very noisy in that band, anyone know about that?
(lots snipped)


Yes meteroites can be heard on a radio.  One of the NASA sites has info on it.
I receive e-mailings from several NASA programs and IIRC  the Space Weather
updates keeps track of meteors per hour each day based on those heard via radio.

Check out www.spaceweather.com    at the bottom of the page it has radio meteors
per hour, then follow the link.

Also ck out  http://spacescience.com/newhome/headlines/ast27apr99_1.htm



Enjoy,

Waysie

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 20277 invoked from network); 28 Nov 2001 23:48:38 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 28 Nov 2001 23:48:38 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: (qmail 8221 invoked by uid 50005); 28 Nov 2001 23:48:28 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4172. . Clean. Processed in 1.201843 secs); 28 Nov 2001 23:48:28 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 28 Nov 2001 23:48:26 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA18708; Wed, 28 Nov 2001 15:43:39 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 91828 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 28 Nov 2001 23:43:05          +0000
Received: from localhost (dmccue@localhost) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with          ESMTP id PAA18683 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 28 Nov 2001          15:43:04 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.LNX.4.10.10111281537160.18589-100000@itc.uci.edu>
Date:         Wed, 28 Nov 2001 15:43:04 -0800
Reply-To: "David J. McCue" <dmccue@itc.uci.edu>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "David J. McCue" <dmccue@itc.uci.edu>
Subject:      Re: [AR] [OT]: Hearing meteors - at the speed of light
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <85256B12.007C2D5F.00@vgi4mail.vanguard.com>

On Wed, 28 Nov 2001 Waysie_Atkins@VANGUARD.COM wrote:

> Alan Shinn wrote:
> So some meteors should be very noisy in that band, anyone know about that?
> (lots snipped)
>
Waysie wrote:
>
> Yes meteroites can be heard on a radio.  One of the NASA sites has info on it.
> I receive e-mailings from several NASA programs and IIRC  the Space Weather
> updates keeps track of meteors per hour each day based on those heard via radio.
>
Just to keep things clear, the signals heard in these cases are the
reflections of earthly transmissions by the ionized meteor trail. They are
not generated by the meteor trail itself, unlike the other process that
got this whole thread started.

Hope that helps,
-DMc

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 8820 invoked from network); 29 Nov 2001 00:22:35 -0000
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 29 Nov 2001 00:22:35 -0000
Received: (qmail 3931 invoked by uid 50005); 29 Nov 2001 00:22:14 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4172. . Clean. Processed in 0.264246 secs); 29 Nov 2001 00:22:14 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 29 Nov 2001 00:22:14 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA19263; Wed, 28 Nov 2001 16:18:18 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 92092 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 29 Nov 2001 00:18:15          +0000
Received: from femail17.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail17.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.0.95.144]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA19249          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 28 Nov 2001 16:18:15 -0800
Received: from cx814151a ([24.14.55.118]) by femail17.sdc1.sfba.home.com          (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20 201-229-121-120-20010223) with SMTP id          <20011129001810.QZK5929.femail17.sdc1.sfba.home.com@cx814151a> for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 28 Nov 2001 16:18:10 -0800
References:  <85256B12.007C2D5F.00@vgi4mail.vanguard.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4807.1700
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <00dc01c1786b$3d6138a0$0a01a8c0@cx814151a>
Date:         Wed, 28 Nov 2001 18:17:32 -0600
Reply-To: "John Bolene" <jbolene@HOME.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Bolene" <jbolene@HOME.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] [OT]: Hearing meteors - at the speed of light
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

There is a company that has a specialized radio that can track meteors and
use their reflective trail to bounce transmitted messages past the horizon.
Darn if I can remember who they are.

John Bolene
Tripoli Oklahoma Prefect and webmaster
Tripoli Oklahoma Web page -> http://members.home.com/tripoli-oklahoma/



----- Original Message -----
From: <Waysie_Atkins@VANGUARD.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Wednesday, November 28, 2001 4:36 PM
Subject: Re: [AR] [OT]: Hearing meteors - at the speed of light


>
> Yes meteroites can be heard on a radio.  One of the NASA sites has info on
it.
> I receive e-mailings from several NASA programs and IIRC  the Space
Weather
> updates keeps track of meteors per hour each day based on those heard via
radio.
>
> Check out www.spaceweather.com    at the bottom of the page it has radio
meteors
> per hour, then follow the link.
>
> Also c

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 3236 invoked from network); 29 Nov 2001 00:35:27 -0000
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 29 Nov 2001 00:35:27 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 18617 invoked by uid 50005); 29 Nov 2001 00:35:17 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4172. . Clean. Processed in 1.82888 secs); 29 Nov 2001 00:35:17 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 29 Nov 2001 00:35:15 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA19383; Wed, 28 Nov 2001 16:27:40 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 92144 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 29 Nov 2001 00:27:38          +0000
Received: from gadolinium.btinternet.com (gadolinium.btinternet.com          [194.73.73.111]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA19369          for <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Wed, 28 Nov 2001 16:27:38 -0800
Received: from [217.39.3.91] (helo=tesco.net) by gadolinium.btinternet.com with          esmtp (Exim 3.22 #8) id 169F3A-0004TN-00 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU;          Thu, 29 Nov 2001 00:27:36 +0000
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Win98; en-US; rv:0.9.4) Gecko/20011019            Netscape6/6.2
X-Accept-Language: en,en-GB,en-US
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3C058215.6090608@tesco.net>
Date:         Thu, 29 Nov 2001 00:32:21 +0000
Reply-To: "Ian Woollard" <ian.woollard@TESCO.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Ian Woollard" <ian.woollard@TESCO.NET>
Subject:      [AR] Buzz's latest idea for a launch platform
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Apparently Buzz Aldrin is wandering around Congress trying to drum
up support for an idea he has- a new reusable first stage.
Apparently he's getting some people biting too.

The idea would be that the first stage would give a standard
interface that you can stuff more or less anything on top of.

Sounds like a good idea... except presumably he wants it financed
by the government too.

Wouldn't this either ensure that it was too expensive to launch, in
which case it wouldn't be worth doing, or it would basically turn
into a huge subsidy of a market that should by now be starting to
get up onto its own two feet and make some money in the real world?

Comments?

--
- Ian Woollard (ian.woollard@tesco.net)

"Is a planetary surface the right place for an expanding
technological civilization?"
- Gerard O'Neill

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 18942 invoked from network); 29 Nov 2001 00:54:03 -0000
Received: from smtpv.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.110]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 29 Nov 2001 00:54:03 -0000
Received: (qmail 12603 invoked by uid 50005); 29 Nov 2001 00:48:49 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpv with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4172. . Clean. Processed in 0.549297 secs); 29 Nov 2001 00:48:49 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpv.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 29 Nov 2001 00:48:48 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA19615; Wed, 28 Nov 2001 16:49:28 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 92245 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 29 Nov 2001 00:49:23          +0000
Received: from mx1.relaypoint.net (ns2.generalbroadband.com [64.32.62.5]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA19600 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Wed, 28 Nov 2001 16:49:23 -0800
Received: from [208.131.72.114] (HELO atlantis) by mx1.relaypoint.net          (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 3.4.8) with SMTP id 1563088; Wed, 28 Nov 2001          16:49:21 -0800
References:  <3C058215.6090608@tesco.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <002401c1786f$5cf13860$724883d0@atlantis>
Date:         Wed, 28 Nov 2001 16:47:01 -0800
Reply-To: "Jim Bowery" <jabowery@WWC.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jim Bowery" <jabowery@WWC.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Buzz's latest idea for a launch platform
Comments: To: Ian Woollard <ian.woollard@TESCO.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

----- Original Message -----
From: "Ian Woollard" <ian.woollard@TESCO.NET>
>  a new reusable first stage.
> The idea would be that the first stage would give a standard
> interface that you can stuff more or less anything on top of.

The model jet engines are getting to the point that a reusable launch
platform for amateur rockets might be built that uses them.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 707 invoked from network); 29 Nov 2001 01:04:38 -0000
Received: from smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.105]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 29 Nov 2001 01:04:38 -0000
Received: (qmail 18085 invoked by uid 50005); 29 Nov 2001 01:04:29 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpy with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4172. . Clean. Processed in 0.88889 secs); 29 Nov 2001 01:04:29 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 29 Nov 2001 01:04:28 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA19755; Wed, 28 Nov 2001 17:01:10 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 92296 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 29 Nov 2001 01:01:08          +0000
Received: from cesaroni.net ([204.101.26.130]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7)          with ESMTP id RAA19737 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 28 Nov 2001          17:01:07 -0800
Received: from Anthony by cesaroni.net with SMTP (MDaemon.v2.8.7.0.R) for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 28 Nov 2001 19:58:07 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 8.5, Build 4.71.2173.0
Importance: Normal
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
X-MDaemon-Deliver-To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
X-Return-Path: ACesaroni@cesaroni.net
Message-ID:  <000001c1786d$e68db6e0$1b0101c0@Anthony>
Date:         Wed, 28 Nov 2001 19:36:35 -0500
Reply-To: "Anthony Cesaroni" <ACesaroni@cesaroni.net>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Anthony Cesaroni" <ACesaroni@cesaroni.net>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Buzz's latest idea for a launch platform
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <3C058215.6090608@tesco.net>

Buzz is too late. A well known agency has already been funded to do this
already. Not NASA BTW.

Anthony.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@itc.uci.edu]On
> Behalf Of Ian Woollard
> Sent: Wednesday, November 28, 2001 7:32 PM
> To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
> Subject: Buzz's latest idea for a launch platform
>
>
> Apparently Buzz Aldrin is wandering around Congress trying to drum
> up support for an idea he has- a new reusable first stage.
> Apparently he's getting some people biting too.
>
> The idea would be that the first stage would give a standard
> interface that you can stuff more or less anything on top of.
>
> Sounds like a good idea... except presumably he wants it financed
> by the government too.
>
> Wouldn't this either ensure that it was too expensive to launch, in
> which case it wouldn't be worth doing, or it would basically turn
> into a huge subsidy of a market that should by now be starting to
> get up onto its own two feet and make some money in the real world?
>
> Comments?
>
> --
> - Ian Woollard (ian.woollard@tesco.net)
>
> "Is a planetary surface the right place for an expanding
> technological civilization?"
> - Gerard O'Neill
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 15761 invoked from network); 29 Nov 2001 01:15:15 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 29 Nov 2001 01:15:15 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 31199 invoked by uid 50005); 29 Nov 2001 01:15:06 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4172. . Clean. Processed in 3.096307 secs); 29 Nov 2001 01:15:06 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 29 Nov 2001 01:15:00 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA19847; Wed, 28 Nov 2001 17:10:40 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 92331 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 29 Nov 2001 01:10:38          +0000
Received: from adobe.com (smtp-relay-1.adobe.com [192.150.11.1]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA19833 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed,          28 Nov 2001 17:10:37 -0800
Received: from inner-relay-2.corp.adobe.com ([153.32.1.52]) by adobe.com          (1.0.0/8.11.4) with ESMTP id fAT1BAO23790 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>;          Wed, 28 Nov 2001 17:11:10 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mailsj-v1.corp.adobe.com (mailsj-dev.corp.adobe.com          [153.32.1.192]) by inner-relay-2.corp.adobe.com (8.11.4/8.11.4) with          ESMTP id fAT19B100854 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 28 Nov 2001          17:09:11 -0800 (PST)
Received: from sronald.earthlink.net ([153.32.63.111]) by          mailsj-v1.corp.adobe.com (Netscape Messaging Server 4.15 v1 Jul 11          2001 16:32:57) with ESMTP id GNJF8Q00.8OM; Wed, 28 Nov 2001 17:10:02          -0800
X-Sender: forkbomb@mail.earthlink.net
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <5.1.0.14.0.20011128170127.032f4210@mail.earthlink.net>
Date:         Wed, 28 Nov 2001 17:15:20 -0800
Reply-To: <forkbomb@EARTHLINK.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <forkbomb@EARTHLINK.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Buzz's latest idea for a launch platform
Comments: To: Ian Woollard <ian.woollard@TESCO.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <3C058215.6090608@tesco.net>

At 12:32 AM 11/29/01 +0000, Ian Woollard wrote:
>Apparently Buzz Aldrin is wandering around Congress trying to drum
>up support for an idea he has- a new reusable first stage.
>Apparently he's getting some people biting too.
>
>The idea would be that the first stage would give a standard
>interface that you can stuff more or less anything on top of.


         I assume you're talking about StarBooster... it looks like a
potentially viable reusable TSTO system... overall, I think it looks very
solid. The basic idea is really quite cool.


>Sounds like a good idea... except presumably he wants it financed
>by the government too.
 >Wouldn't this either ensure that it was too expensive to launch, in
>which case it wouldn't be worth doing, or it would basically turn
>into a huge subsidy of a market that should by now be starting to
>get up onto its own two feet and make some money in the real world?


         It really depends on how the funding is structured. If it's
something along the lines of a guaranteed customer for StarCraft, then it's
part of the legitimate functions of government in a high-tech capitalist
society, namely funding of scientific research and speculative tech
development. I only see it as problematic if it becomes another NASA
political monster along the lines of the shuttle, with suppliers in every
congressional district as a major design goal.

         -p

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 18736 invoked from network); 29 Nov 2001 01:59:21 -0000
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 29 Nov 2001 01:59:21 -0000
Received: (qmail 26387 invoked by uid 50005); 29 Nov 2001 01:59:12 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4172. . Clean. Processed in 2.067905 secs); 29 Nov 2001 01:59:12 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 29 Nov 2001 01:59:09 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA20019; Wed, 28 Nov 2001 17:56:32 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 92357 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 29 Nov 2001 01:56:27          +0000
Received: from fep4-orange.clear.net.nz (fep4-orange.clear.net.nz          [203.97.32.4]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA20004          for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Wed, 28 Nov 2001 17:56:27 -0800
Received: from mkbs (203-167-156-189.dialup.clear.net.nz [203.167.156.189]) by          fep4-orange.clear.net.nz (1.5/1.7) with SMTP id OAA15051; Thu, 29 Nov          2001 14:56:16 +1300 (NZDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="Windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <012601c17879$5c2fd8a0$0700a8c0@mkbs>
Date:         Thu, 29 Nov 2001 14:54:00 +1300
Reply-To: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Organization: Applied Technology
Subject:      [AR] [OT]:  Alien Atmospheres
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

From: "NASA Science News" <snglist@LYRIS.msfc.nasa.gov>

> Astronomers using the Hubble Space Telescope have detected the atmosphere
> of a planet circling a Sun-like star 150 light years away. Their
> ground-breaking discovery shows it is possible to measure the chemical
> makeup of distant planets -- and to search for chemical markers of life
> far beyond Earth.

> FULL STORY at

> http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2001/ast27nov_1.htm?list16511

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 5753 invoked from network); 29 Nov 2001 02:17:43 -0000
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 29 Nov 2001 02:17:43 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 7919 invoked by uid 50005); 29 Nov 2001 02:17:34 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4172. . Clean. Processed in 0.761028 secs); 29 Nov 2001 02:17:34 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 29 Nov 2001 02:17:32 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA20091; Wed, 28 Nov 2001 18:14:29 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 92364 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 29 Nov 2001 02:14:26          +0000
Received: from mail010.syd.optusnet.com.au (mail010.syd.optusnet.com.au          [203.2.75.171]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA20076          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 28 Nov 2001 18:14:25 -0800
Received: from webmail03.syd.optusnet.com.au (webmail03.syd.optusnet.com.au          [203.2.75.236]) by mail010.syd.optusnet.com.au (8.11.1/8.11.1) with          ESMTP id fAT2Dsg03115 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 29 Nov 2001          13:13:54 +1100
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: MIME-tools 5.411 (Entity 5.404)
Received: from  [209.36.247.3] as user strudwicke@optusnet.com.au by          webmail.optusnet.com.au with HTTP;
Message-ID:  <200111290213.fAT2Dsg03115@mail010.syd.optusnet.com.au>
Date:         Thu, 29 Nov 2001 13:13:54 +1100
Reply-To: "Craig Strudwicke" <strudwicke@OPTUSNET.COM.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Craig Strudwicke" <strudwicke@OPTUSNET.COM.AU>
Subject:      [AR] Hybrid pre-heater grain compositions
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

I am intereseted in knowing what others out there are using in N2O preheater
compositions.

The reason being I had a failed UC filled N2O/PVC Multiport hybrid startup and
have reason to believe that the preheater composition or burn characteristics
contributed to the failure. Geometry/ early fill line burn through and high N20 mas
flux are other possible contributors.

Details at :

http://www.members.optusnet.com.au/~strudwicke/80mm%20mulitport.htm

Comments appreciated.

I am also considering going straight to a pyro valve design. Comments ?

Craig

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 3912 invoked from network); 29 Nov 2001 02:38:44 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 29 Nov 2001 02:38:44 -0000
Received: (qmail 29458 invoked by uid 50005); 29 Nov 2001 02:38:35 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4172. . Clean. Processed in 0.188111 secs); 29 Nov 2001 02:38:35 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 29 Nov 2001 02:38:35 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA20197; Wed, 28 Nov 2001 18:36:34 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 92378 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 29 Nov 2001 02:36:32          +0000
Received: from localhost (rcalkins@localhost) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with          ESMTP id SAA20183; Wed, 28 Nov 2001 18:36:31 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.LNX.4.10.10111281835470.20175-100000@itc.uci.edu>
Date:         Wed, 28 Nov 2001 18:36:31 -0800
Reply-To: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Buzz's latest idea for a launch platform
Comments: To: Jim Bowery <jabowery@WWC.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <002401c1786f$5cf13860$724883d0@atlantis>

On Wed, 28 Nov 2001, Jim Bowery wrote:

> The model jet engines are getting to the point that a reusable launch
> platform for amateur rockets might be built that uses them.

Last I looked the model jet engines were rather pricey, coming in at
over a thousand dollars each.

Ray

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 13592 invoked from network); 29 Nov 2001 03:03:25 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 29 Nov 2001 03:03:25 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 22008 invoked by uid 50005); 29 Nov 2001 03:03:16 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4172. . Clean. Processed in 0.466448 secs); 29 Nov 2001 03:03:16 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 29 Nov 2001 03:03:15 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA20296; Wed, 28 Nov 2001 19:00:41 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 92398 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 29 Nov 2001 03:00:32          +0000
Received: from out007pub.verizon.net (out007pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.107])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA20282 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 28 Nov 2001 19:00:31 -0800
Received: from [63.24.225.7] (1Cust117.tnt1.rancho-cucamonga.ca.da.uu.net          [63.24.225.117]) by out007pub.verizon.net  with ESMTP for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; id fAT31hN07650 Wed, 28 Nov 2001 21:01:44          -0600 (CST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: GTE/01rocket@mail.gte.net
References: <5.1.0.14.0.20011128170127.032f4210@mail.earthlink.net>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <a0510031bb82b54f16a50@[63.24.225.7]>
Date:         Wed, 28 Nov 2001 19:00:00 -0800
Reply-To: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Buzz's latest idea for a launch platform
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <5.1.0.14.0.20011128170127.032f4210@mail.earthlink.net>

>At 12:32 AM 11/29/01 +0000, Ian Woollard wrote:
>>Apparently Buzz Aldrin is wandering around Congress trying to drum
>>up support for an idea he has- a new reusable first stage.
>>Apparently he's getting some people biting too.
>>
>>The idea would be that the first stage would give a standard
>>interface that you can stuff more or less anything on top of.
>
>
>         I assume you're talking about StarBooster... it looks like a
>potentially viable reusable TSTO system... overall, I think it looks very
>solid. The basic idea is really quite cool.
>
>>Sounds like a good idea... except presumably he wants it financed
>>by the government too.
>  >Wouldn't this either ensure that it was too expensive to launch, in
>>which case it wouldn't be worth doing, or it would basically turn
>>into a huge subsidy of a market that should by now be starting to
>>get up onto its own two feet and make some money in the real world?
>
>
>         It really depends on how the funding is structured. If it's
>something along the lines of a guaranteed customer for StarCraft, then it's
>part of the legitimate functions of government in a high-tech capitalist
>society, namely funding of scientific research and speculative tech
>development. I only see it as problematic if it becomes another NASA
>political monster along the lines of the shuttle, with suppliers in every
>congressional district as a major design goal.
>
>         -p


But if the CIA or NSA does it we will never hear about it and it will
be done fast, right and not cheap but half the cost of NASA.  And
make our close friends alot of money :)

Jerry



--
Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
Opinion, the whole thing.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 23060 invoked from network); 29 Nov 2001 03:05:47 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.105]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 29 Nov 2001 03:05:47 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 3215 invoked by uid 50005); 29 Nov 2001 03:05:38 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpy with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4172. . Clean. Processed in 1.236257 secs); 29 Nov 2001 03:05:38 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 29 Nov 2001 03:05:35 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA20321; Wed, 28 Nov 2001 19:01:47 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 92405 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 29 Nov 2001 03:01:47          +0000
Received: from out007pub.verizon.net (out007pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.107])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA20307 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 28 Nov 2001 19:01:46 -0800
Received: from [63.24.225.7] (1Cust117.tnt1.rancho-cucamonga.ca.da.uu.net          [63.24.225.117]) by out007pub.verizon.net  with ESMTP for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; id fAT331N08596 Wed, 28 Nov 2001 21:03:02          -0600 (CST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: GTE/01rocket@mail.gte.net
References: <200111290213.fAT2Dsg03115@mail010.syd.optusnet.com.au>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <a0510031cb82b554b7f89@[63.24.225.7]>
Date:         Wed, 28 Nov 2001 19:01:18 -0800
Reply-To: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Hybrid pre-heater grain compositions
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <200111290213.fAT2Dsg03115@mail010.syd.optusnet.com.au>

>I am intereseted in knowing what others out there are using in N2O preheater
>compositions.
>
>The reason being I had a failed UC filled N2O/PVC Multiport hybrid startup and
>have reason to believe that the preheater composition or burn characteristics
>contributed to the failure. Geometry/ early fill line burn through
>and high N20 mas
>flux are other possible contributors.
>
>Details at :
>
>http://www.members.optusnet.com.au/~strudwicke/80mm%20mulitport.htm
>
>Comments appreciated.
>
>I am also considering going straight to a pyro valve design. Comments ?


Pyro-valve.  Alot of our grains are used as hybrid pre-heaters.  What
you would think of as a 29mm reload grain but with special shapes.

Jerry

>Craig


--
Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
Opinion, the whole thing.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 2362 invoked from network); 29 Nov 2001 06:06:19 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpv.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.110]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 29 Nov 2001 06:06:19 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 21857 invoked by uid 50005); 29 Nov 2001 06:01:02 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpv with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4172. . Clean. Processed in 1.363985 secs); 29 Nov 2001 06:01:02 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpv.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 29 Nov 2001 06:00:58 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA21333; Wed, 28 Nov 2001 22:02:56 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 92555 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 29 Nov 2001 06:02:44          +0000
Received: from femail31.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail31.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.254.60.21]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA21319          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 28 Nov 2001 22:02:44 -0800
Received: from c1649002-a.earthlink.net ([24.20.95.67]) by          femail31.sdc1.sfba.home.com (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20          201-229-121-120-20010223) with ESMTP id          <20011129060244.LZPM7290.femail31.sdc1.sfba.home.com@c1649002-a.earthlink.net>; Wed, 28 Nov 2001 22:02:44          -0800
X-Sender: forkbomb@mail.earthlink.net
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.0.2
References: <5.1.0.14.0.20011128170127.032f4210@mail.earthlink.net>            <5.1.0.14.0.20011128170127.032f4210@mail.earthlink.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <5.0.2.1.0.20011128220133.01c3aa80@mail.earthlink.net>
Date:         Wed, 28 Nov 2001 22:02:47 -0800
Reply-To: "Pierce Nichols" <forkbomb@EARTHLINK.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Pierce Nichols" <forkbomb@EARTHLINK.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Buzz's latest idea for a launch platform
Comments: To: Jerry Irvine <01rocket@GTE.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <a0510031bb82b54f16a50@[63.24.225.7]>

At 07:00 PM 11/28/2001 -0800, Jerry Irvine wrote:

>But if the CIA or NSA does it we will never hear about it and it will
>be done fast, right and not cheap but half the cost of NASA.  And
>make our close friends alot of money :)


         And it will become available to the general public 10-20 years
later... I think I can live with that, if nothing else come along :).
They're not that good at keeping secrets anymore.

         -p


Mars or Bust!
www.marssociety.com

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 15120 invoked from network); 29 Nov 2001 10:54:07 -0000
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 29 Nov 2001 10:54:07 -0000
Received: (qmail 29348 invoked by uid 50005); 29 Nov 2001 10:53:59 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4172. . Clean. Processed in 0.159218 secs); 29 Nov 2001 10:53:59 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 29 Nov 2001 10:53:59 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id CAA22056; Thu, 29 Nov 2001 02:51:41 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 92592 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 29 Nov 2001 10:51:23          +0000
Received: from fep3-orange.clear.net.nz (fep3-orange.clear.net.nz          [203.97.32.3]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id CAA22041          for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Thu, 29 Nov 2001 02:51:22 -0800
Received: from mkbs (203-167-156-234.dialup.clear.net.nz [203.167.156.234]) by          fep3-orange.clear.net.nz (1.5/1.8) with SMTP id XAA15113; Thu, 29 Nov          2001 23:51:18 +1300 (NZDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="Windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <003301c178c4$18bf5500$0700a8c0@mkbs>
Date:         Thu, 29 Nov 2001 23:41:10 +1300
Reply-To: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Organization: Applied Technology
Subject:      [AR] Fw: Jonathan's Space Report, No. 468
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

There seem to be a lot of "imaging" satellites being launched lately.


                RM


__________________________________________________

Jonathan's Space Report
No. 468                                          2001 Nov 28 Cambridge, MA
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
---
Sender: owner-jsr@head-cfa.harvard.edu
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: jmcdowell@head-cfa.harvard.edu

Shuttle and Station
--------------------

The sojourn of Expedition 3 - Culbertson, Dezhurov, and Tyurin - is
drawing to a close aboard the International Space Station. The
Expedition 4 crew of Yuriy Onufrikeno (Commander) and Daniel Bursch and
Carl Walz (Flight Engineers) is preparing to ride to Station aboard
Endeavour to replace them. The crew of mission STS-108 consists of Dom
Gorie (Commander), Mark E. Kelley (Pilot), Linda Godwin and Dan Tani
(Mission Specialists). STS-108 will fly the UF-1 Utilization Flight
mission, distinguished from earlier Station flights which were
considered assembly flights. In addition to the crew swap, UF-1 will
bring supplies to the Station, and Godwin and Tani will do a spacewalk
to add thermal blankets to the gimbals on the Station's solar arrays.

In the cargo bay is the Raffaello (MPLM-2) logistics module with 4 RSP
and 8 RSR resupply racks. Earlier, the MELFI freezer had been scheduled
for this flight, but it isn't mentioned in the press kit. Also in the
cargo bay are the MACH-1 and LMC experiment trusses flown under the
Goddard small payloads program. MACH-1 is an MPESS-type Hitchhiker
bridge carrying the CAPL-3 capillary thermal control experiment on top.
On its forward side is the Starshine-2 launch canister, the CAPL-3
avionics plate, the Hitchhiker avionics plate, and the SEM-15 canister.
On the aft side is the G-761 canister containing experiments from
Argentina, the PSRD synchrotron detector (a prototype for the AMS
antimatter experiment which will fly on Station later), the COLLIDE-2
and SEM-11 canisters. The SEM (Space Experiment Modules) are collections
of high school experiments.

LMC, the Lightweight MPESS Carrier (a nested acronym in the grand NASA
tradition) is a new cargo bay bridge - it is actually LMC S/N 2,
presumably S/N 1 was a ground test article - and carries four canisters
with materials science and technology experiments: SEM-12, G-785, G-064
and G-730. In addition, an adapter beam on the starboard sidewall carries
G-221 and G-775, with materials science and biology experiments.

Jonathan's cargo manifest estimate:
(Masses are wild guesses this time around)
                                                            Mass/kg
Bay 1-2   Orbiter Docking System/External Airlock            1800
          3 EMU spacesuits?                                   360?
Bay 3S    Adapter beam with G-775/G-221                       200?
Bay  5    MACH-1 MPESS                                       2500?
          Starshine-2                                          39
Bay 7-12  MPLM FM2 (Raffaello) module                        9000?
Bay 13    LMC S/N 2                                          1000?
Sill      RMS arm No 303                                      410
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total                                                       15309?


A Progress robot cargo supply ship was launched on Nov 26. The vehicle
is Progress M1-7 (vehicle No. 256). Launch was by the uprated Soyuz-FG
rocket (a Soyuz-U with improved core packet engines). The Progress M-45
undocked from Zvezda's rear port on Nov 22 and was deorbited over the
Pacific later the same day.

Progress M1-7 docked with Zvezda on Nov 28. However, following `soft
dock' (initial capture), it appears that `hard dock' (firm latching) was
not completed, raising fears that  torques associated with next week's
planned Shuttle docking could break the vehicle loose. The Russian Space
Agency is continuing to evaluate the situation.

Recent Launches
---------------

The DirecTV-4S television broadcasting satellite was launched on Nov 27.
The Arianespace Ariane 44LP put the Boeing 601HP satellite in
geostationary transfer orbit. The satellite has a dry mass of 2100 kg
and a launch mass of 4300 kg.
DirecTV Inc. is currently owned by Hughes Electronics,
but a takeover by Echostar is in the works.



Table of Recent Launches
-----------------------

Date UT       Name            Launch Vehicle  Site            Mission
INTL.

DES.
Oct  5 2120   USA 161           Titan 4B       Vandenberg SLC4E Imaging
44A
Oct  6 1645   Raduga-1          Proton-K/DM2?  Baykonur         C telecom
45A
Oct 11 0232   USA 162           Atlas IIAS     Canaveral SLC36B Data relay?
46A
Oct 18 1851   QuickBird         Delta 7320     Vandenberg SLC2W Imaging
47A
Oct 21 0859   Soyuz TM-33       Soyuz-U        Baykonur LC1     Spaceship
48A
Oct 22 0453   TES      )        PSLV           Sriharikota      Imaging?
49A
              BIRD     )                                        Imaging
49C
              PROBA    )                                        Imaging/tech
49B
Oct 25 1134   Molniya-3         Molniya-M      Plesetsk LC43/3  Comms
50A
Nov 26 1824   Progress M1-7     Soyuz-FG       Baykonur LC1     Cargo
51A
Nov 27 0035   DirecTV 4S        Ariane 44LP    Kourou ELA2      TV broadcast
52A

Current Shuttle Processing Status
_________________________________

Orbiters               Location   Mission    Launch Due

OV-102 Columbia        OPF Bay 3     STS-109 2002 Feb 14  HST SM-3B
OV-103 Discovery       OPF Bay 1?    Maintenance
OV-104 Atlantis        OPF Bay 2?    STS-110 2002 Mar 21  ISS 8A
OV-105 Endeavour       LC39B         STS-108 2001 Nov 29  ISS UF-1


.-------------------------------------------------------------------------.
|  Jonathan McDowell                 |  phone : (617) 495-7176            |
|  Harvard-Smithsonian Center for    |                                    |
|   Astrophysics                     |                                    |
|  60 Garden St, MS6                 |                                    |
|  Cambridge MA 02138                |  inter : jcm@cfa.harvard.edu       |
|  USA                               |          jmcdowell@cfa.harvard.edu |
|                                                                         |
| JSR: http://hea-www.harvard.edu/~jcm/space/jsr/jsr.html                 |
| Back issues:  http://hea-www.harvard.edu/~jcm/space/jsr/back            |
| Subscribe/unsub: mail majordomo@head-cfa.harvard.edu, (un)subscribe jsr |
'-------------------------------------------------------------------------'

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 25378 invoked from network); 29 Nov 2001 14:15:13 -0000
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 29 Nov 2001 14:15:13 -0000
Received: (qmail 9051 invoked by uid 50005); 29 Nov 2001 14:15:04 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4172. . Clean. Processed in 1.584585 secs); 29 Nov 2001 14:15:04 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 29 Nov 2001 14:15:01 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA22793; Thu, 29 Nov 2001 06:12:23 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 92614 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 29 Nov 2001 14:12:15          +0000
Received: from cablecom.laribay.net (cablecom.laribay.net [66.20.57.4]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA22779 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 29 Nov 2001 06:12:14 -0800
Received: from billbull (dial103.laribay.net [66.20.57.103]) by          cablecom.laribay.net (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id HAA16386 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 29 Nov 2001 07:57:01 -0600 (CST)          (envelope-from bpbullock@laribay.net)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <003d01c178df$f9b65200$67391442@billbull>
Date:         Thu, 29 Nov 2001 08:13:09 -0600
Reply-To: "Bill Bullock" <bpbullock@LARIBAY.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Bill Bullock" <bpbullock@LARIBAY.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Buzz's latest idea for a launch platform
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

>>Apparently Buzz Aldrin is wandering around Congress trying to drum
>>up support for an idea he has- a new reusable first stage.
>>
 >>The idea would be that the first stage would give a standard
 >>interface that you can stuff more or less anything on top of.
(Snipped)
**********
    Wherever the money comes from or how the idea is implemented, I would
hypothecate that Buzz Aldrin stands a far better chance of getting this
project off the ground (both practically and metaphorically) than anyone
reading this post.
Bill

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 19154 invoked from network); 29 Nov 2001 16:14:57 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 29 Nov 2001 16:14:57 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 7369 invoked by uid 50005); 29 Nov 2001 16:14:48 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4172. . Clean. Processed in 0.646322 secs); 29 Nov 2001 16:14:48 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 29 Nov 2001 16:14:47 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA23485; Thu, 29 Nov 2001 08:13:30 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 92806 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 29 Nov 2001 16:13:29          +0000
Received: from fw1-bv.tek.com (fw1-bv.tek.com [192.65.40.16]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA23471 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu,          29 Nov 2001 08:13:29 -0800
Received: from fw1-bv.tek.com (root@localhost) by fw1-bv.tek.com with ESMTP id          fATGCwW08483 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 29 Nov 2001 08:12:58          -0800 (PST)
Received: from tektronix.tek.com (tektronix.tek.com [128.181.6.43]) by          fw1-bv.tek.com with ESMTP id fATGCvJ08461 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>;          Thu, 29 Nov 2001 08:12:57 -0800 (PST)
Received: from us-bv-u16 (us-bv-u16.bv.tek.com [128.181.2.45]) by          tektronix.tek.com (8.10.2+Sun/8.10.2) with SMTP id fATGCv819802 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 29 Nov 2001 08:12:57 -0800 (PST)
Received: FROM us-bv-m01.bv.tek.com BY us-bv-u16 ; Thu Nov 29 08:12:56 2001          -0800
Received: by us-bv-m01.bv.tek.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) id          <XLZCMYRC>; Thu, 29 Nov 2001 08:12:56 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19)
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Message-ID:  <5832AFF5FC75D411844300508BC216B70302ACAC@us-bv-m07.bv.tek.com>
Date:         Thu, 29 Nov 2001 08:12:55 -0800
Reply-To: <john.w.lyngdal@EXGATE.TEK.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <john.w.lyngdal@EXGATE.TEK.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Hybrid pre-heater grain compositions
Comments: To: strudwicke@OPTUSNET.COM.AU
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Craig,

        I have both the 98mm and 54mm AT hybrid systems and reloads for both
on hand. I can send you some .jpg files if you're interested.

        John

-----Original Message-----
From: Craig Strudwicke [mailto:strudwicke@OPTUSNET.COM.AU]
Sent: Wednesday, November 28, 2001 6:14 PM
To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
Subject: [AR] Hybrid pre-heater grain compositions


I am intereseted in knowing what others out there are using in N2O preheater
compositions.

The reason being I had a failed UC filled N2O/PVC Multiport hybrid startup
and
have reason to believe that the preheater composition or burn
characteristics
contributed to the failure. Geometry/ early fill line burn through and high
N20 mas
flux are other possible contributors.

Details at :

http://www.members.optusnet.com.au/~strudwicke/80mm%20mulitport.htm

Comments appreciated.

I am also considering going straight to a pyro valve design. Comments ?

Craig

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 19487 invoked from network); 29 Nov 2001 16:15:01 -0000
Received: from smtpv.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.110]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 29 Nov 2001 16:15:01 -0000
Received: (qmail 8030 invoked by uid 50005); 29 Nov 2001 16:09:42 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpv with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4172. . Clean. Processed in 2.334065 secs); 29 Nov 2001 16:09:42 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpv.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 29 Nov 2001 16:09:38 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA23463; Thu, 29 Nov 2001 08:13:12 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 92796 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 29 Nov 2001 16:13:00          +0000
Received: from mailhost0.trib.com (mailhost0.trib.com [63.229.150.3] (may be          forged)) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA23440 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Thu, 29 Nov 2001 08:12:57 -0800
Received: from mail.trib.com (mail.trib.com [12.10.158.17]) by          mailhost0.trib.com (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id fATGCMg00159; Thu,          29 Nov 2001 09:12:22 -0700 (MST) (envelope-from          jwckman@space-rockets.com)
Received: from [63.229.150.108] (HELO hppav) by mail.trib.com (CommuniGate Pro          SMTP 3.4.6) with SMTP id 60622590; Thu, 29 Nov 2001 09:12:20 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <NKEHJAOOKBPGIKOOPDEFGEJMCDAA.jwckman@space-rockets.com>
Date:         Thu, 29 Nov 2001 09:11:10 -0700
Reply-To: "John Wickman" <jwckman@SPACE-ROCKETS.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Wickman" <jwckman@SPACE-ROCKETS.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Buzz's latest idea for a launch platform
Comments: To: Ian Woollard <ian.woollard@tesco.net>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <3C058215.6090608@tesco.net>

This sounds like Preston Carter's program at DARPA called RASCAL, I believe.
It will modify the engines used on the SR-71 so that they can fly higher and
faster.   These engines would be the powerplant for a reusable first stage
that flies back to an airport.   The engines are modified so that an
oxidizer is sprayed into the inlet of the engine.  This also provides
cooling of the inlet air so you do not need to go to supersonic combustion
at high hypersonic speeds.  In theory, you could take the engine out of the
atmosphere by spraying enough oxidizer into the inlet to keep the engine
running.  The engine inlet conditions are kept at a lower altitude and speed
by controlling oxidizer flow rate regardless of what altitude and speed the
engine is really flying at.  Some tests have already been done by NASA on
the concept and it looks feasible.


John Wickman


-----Original Message-----
From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU]On
Behalf Of Ian Woollard
Sent: Wednesday, November 28, 2001 5:32 PM
To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
Subject: [AR] Buzz's latest idea for a launch platform


Apparently Buzz Aldrin is wandering around Congress trying to drum
up support for an idea he has- a new reusable first stage.
Apparently he's getting some people biting too.

The idea would be that the first stage would give a standard
interface that you can stuff more or less anything on top of.

Sounds like a good idea... except presumably he wants it financed
by the government too.

Wouldn't this either ensure that it was too expensive to launch, in
which case it wouldn't be worth doing, or it would basically turn
into a huge subsidy of a market that should by now be starting to
get up onto its own two feet and make some money in the real world?

Comments?

--
- Ian Woollard (ian.woollard@tesco.net)

"Is a planetary surface the right place for an expanding
technological civilization?"
- Gerard O'Neill

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 21370 invoked from network); 29 Nov 2001 16:48:53 -0000
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 29 Nov 2001 16:48:53 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 4453 invoked by uid 50005); 29 Nov 2001 16:48:44 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4172. . Clean. Processed in 1.955921 secs); 29 Nov 2001 16:48:44 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 29 Nov 2001 16:48:40 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA23679; Thu, 29 Nov 2001 08:46:58 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 92857 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 29 Nov 2001 16:46:54          +0000
Received: from mail.aros.net (mail.aros.net [207.173.16.20]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA23665 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Thu,          29 Nov 2001 08:46:54 -0800
Received: from biomicro.com (cust-208-187-122-40.bbsc.net [208.187.122.40]) by          mail.aros.net (8.11.6/8.9.3) with ESMTP id fATGkr867825 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Thu, 29 Nov 2001 09:46:53 -0700 (MST)
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.77 [en] (Win98; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <5832AFF5FC75D411844300508BC216B70302ACAC@us-bv-m07.bv.tek.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3C065738.E54C4DCE@biomicro.com>
Date:         Thu, 29 Nov 2001 08:41:44 -0700
Reply-To: "Mark K. Spute" <mks@BIOMICRO.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Mark K. Spute" <mks@BIOMICRO.COM>
Subject:      [AR] Hybrid engine sizes (Was Re: [AR] Hybrid pre-heater grain              compositions)
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

I see a lot of odd numbers associated with HPR engine sizes:  98 mm, 54 mm, 38
mm,  29mm.
What are all of the standard (are there standard?) sizes?
And why such odd numbers?
Does this refer to the OD of the engine?
Is it to fit non-metric body tubes?

--
Mark K. Spute
Senior Research Engineer
BioMicro Systems Inc.

KD7IWE,  RRS, hopeful future Stolly owner

"It is difficult to say what is impossible, for the dream of yesterday is the
hope of today and the reality of tomorrow."
     Dr. Robert H. Goddard

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 624 invoked from network); 29 Nov 2001 17:24:38 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 29 Nov 2001 17:24:38 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 13978 invoked by uid 50005); 29 Nov 2001 17:24:29 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4172. . Clean. Processed in 0.129787 secs); 29 Nov 2001 17:24:29 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 29 Nov 2001 17:24:29 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA23833; Thu, 29 Nov 2001 09:22:47 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 92877 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 29 Nov 2001 17:22:41          +0000
Received: from out001pub.verizon.net (out001pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.101])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA23819 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 29 Nov 2001 09:22:41 -0800
Received: from [63.24.225.7] (1Cust248.tnt2.rancho-cucamonga.ca.da.uu.net          [63.15.225.248]) by out001pub.verizon.net  with ESMTP for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; id fATHMi410323 Thu, 29 Nov 2001 11:22:44          -0600 (CST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: GTE/01rocket@mail.gte.net
References: <5832AFF5FC75D411844300508BC216B70302ACAC@us-bv-m07.bv.tek.com>            <3C065738.E54C4DCE@biomicro.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <a05100324b82c1c30bda8@[63.24.225.7]>
Date:         Thu, 29 Nov 2001 09:22:00 -0800
Reply-To: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Hybrid engine sizes (Was Re: [AR] Hybrid pre-heater grain              compositions)
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <3C065738.E54C4DCE@biomicro.com>

>I see a lot of odd numbers associated with HPR engine sizes:  98 mm, 54 mm, 38
>mm,  29mm.
>What are all of the standard (are there standard?) sizes?
>And why such odd numbers?
>Does this refer to the OD of the engine?
>Is it to fit non-metric body tubes?


It is to fit body tubes.  Like many "standards" they evolve
organically.  The 24mm standard is the Estes D12 size and they
determined the size to fit their most popular tube size, BT-50.

The 18mm and 13mm sizes are also Estes centric.

The 29mm standard is slightly larger than what was a defacto standard
for a very long time: FSI F100 25mm.  It was based around commonly
available industrial tubing for composite motors, 1.125" OD.  Then
companies made motor tubing to fit.  Mini-Max, Enerjet, Ace Rocket
Manufacturing and those standards were adopted by USR. LOC, PML, and
others later.

Each diameter increase is an approximate doubling of power per
diameter to make the compatibility with NAR letter classes more hits
than misses.

38mm was actually defined and popularized by me (yea!) and tubes were
later made to fit it.

54mm was also made by me (yea!) and early adopted by Internal
Ballistics and HPR popularized by Aerotech several years later. It
fits Estes BT-70 approximately.

There were several other sizes developed by me and adopted early such
as 64mm, 75mm, 95mm, 98mm, 152mm.  All of these sizes are essentially
english sizes expressed in metric to provide a shorthand method of
expressing them.

24mm 15/16"
29mm 1-1/8"
38mm 1-1/2"
54mm 2-1/8"
64mm 2-1/2"
75mm 3"
95mm 3-3/4"
98mm 3-7/8"
152mm 6"

Much long since forgotten who or why.

Jerry

>
>--
>Mark K. Spute
>Senior Research Engineer
>BioMicro Systems Inc.
>
>KD7IWE,  RRS, hopeful future Stolly owner
>
>"It is difficult to say what is impossible, for the dream of yesterday is the
>hope of today and the reality of tomorrow."
>      Dr. Robert H. Goddard


--
Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
Opinion, the whole thing.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 6494 invoked from network); 29 Nov 2001 20:00:41 -0000
Received: from smtpv.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.110]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 29 Nov 2001 20:00:41 -0000
Received: (qmail 3922 invoked by uid 50005); 29 Nov 2001 19:49:26 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpv with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4172. . Clean. Processed in 0.438218 secs); 29 Nov 2001 19:49:26 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpv.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 29 Nov 2001 19:49:25 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA24367; Thu, 29 Nov 2001 11:52:35 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 92901 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 29 Nov 2001 19:52:25          +0000
Received: from zcars0m9.nortelnetworks.com (zcars0m9.nortelnetworks.com          [47.129.242.157]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA24352          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 29 Nov 2001 11:52:24 -0800
Received: from zcars04f.ca.nortel.com (zcars04f.ca.nortel.com [47.129.242.57])          by zcars0m9.nortelnetworks.com (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id          fATJp8d07345 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 29 Nov 2001 14:51:12          -0500 (EST)
Received: from rftzy232.ca.nortel.com by zcars04f.ca.nortel.com; Thu, 29 Nov          2001 14:51:14 -0500
Received: from NORTELNETWORKS.COM (wcarh0vc.ca.nortel.com [47.129.148.226]) by          rftzy232.ca.nortel.com with SMTP (Microsoft Exchange Internet Mail          Service Version 5.5.2653.13) id XHJ53BJ7; Thu, 29 Nov 2001 14:49:05          -0500
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.73C-CCK-MCD [en] (X11; U; HP-UX B.10.20 9000/785)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <200111290213.fAT2Dsg03115@mail010.syd.optusnet.com.au>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Orig: <mleech@NORTELNETWORKS.COM>
Message-ID:  <3C0691BF.A3729C28@NORTELNETWORKS.COM>
Date:         Thu, 29 Nov 2001 14:51:27 -0500
Reply-To: "Marcus Leech" <mleech@NORTELNETWORKS.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Marcus Leech" <mleech@NORTELNETWORKS.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Hybrid pre-heater grain compositions
Comments: To: Craig Strudwicke <strudwicke@OPTUSNET.COM.AU>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Craig Strudwicke wrote:
>
> I am intereseted in knowing what others out there are using in N2O preheater
> compositions.
>
> The reason being I had a failed UC filled N2O/PVC Multiport hybrid startup and
> have reason to believe that the preheater composition or burn characteristics
> contributed to the failure. Geometry/ early fill line burn through and high N20 mas
> flux are other possible contributors.
>
> Details at :
>
> http://www.members.optusnet.com.au/~strudwicke/80mm%20mulitport.htm
>
> Comments appreciated.
>
> I am also considering going straight to a pyro valve design. Comments ?
>
Looking at your photos, it looks like you have only a fairly thin slice of
  pyro composition to get things going.  I would go for a "donut" that's about
  3/4" thick, and make absolutely certain that it's solidly held in place.

How many, and what size injector ports do you have?  [That is, what size is your
  fill tube, and how many "loops" are you using for the non-fill injectors].

--
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Marcus Leech                             Mail:   Dept 8M70, MS 012, FITZ
Advisor                                  Phone: (ESN) 393-9145  +1 613 763 9145
Security Architecture and Planning       Fax:   (ESN) 393-9435  +1 613 763 9435
Nortel Networks                          mleech@nortelnetworks.com
-----------------Expressed opinions are my own, not my employer's------

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 21185 invoked from network); 29 Nov 2001 20:18:16 -0000
Received: from smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.105]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 29 Nov 2001 20:18:16 -0000
Received: (qmail 7130 invoked by uid 50005); 29 Nov 2001 20:18:05 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpy with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4172. . Clean. Processed in 0.997815 secs); 29 Nov 2001 20:18:05 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 29 Nov 2001 20:18:03 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA24466; Thu, 29 Nov 2001 12:14:43 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 92908 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 29 Nov 2001 20:14:40          +0000
Received: from mail005.syd.optusnet.com.au (mail005.syd.optusnet.com.au          [203.2.75.229]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA24452          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 29 Nov 2001 12:14:39 -0800
Received: from ballbuster (blaax3-049.dialup.optusnet.com.au [210.49.128.49])          by mail005.syd.optusnet.com.au (8.11.1/8.11.1) with SMTP id          fATKE3O21544; Fri, 30 Nov 2001 07:14:03 +1100
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <NJEEJAOGEMKNPMLLEONACEBNCDAA.strudwicke@optusnet.com.au>
Date:         Fri, 30 Nov 2001 07:13:07 +1100
Reply-To: "craig strudwicke" <strudwicke@OPTUSNET.COM.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "craig strudwicke" <strudwicke@OPTUSNET.COM.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Hybrid pre-heater grain compositions
Comments: To: Marcus Leech <mleech@nortelnetworks.com>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <3C0691BF.A3729C28@NORTELNETWORKS.COM>

I have updated the web page with those details.

http://www.members.optusnet.com.au/~strudwicke/80mm%20mulitport.htm

Craig

-----Original Message-----
From: Marcus Leech [mailto:mleech@nortelnetworks.com]
Sent: Friday, 30 November 2001 6:51 AM
To: Craig Strudwicke
Cc: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
Subject: Re: [AR] Hybrid pre-heater grain compositions


Craig Strudwicke wrote:
>
> I am intereseted in knowing what others out there are using in N2O
preheater
> compositions.
>
> The reason being I had a failed UC filled N2O/PVC Multiport hybrid startup
and
> have reason to believe that the preheater composition or burn
characteristics
> contributed to the failure. Geometry/ early fill line burn through and
high N20 mas
> flux are other possible contributors.
>
> Details at :
>
> http://www.members.optusnet.com.au/~strudwicke/80mm%20mulitport.htm
>
> Comments appreciated.
>
> I am also considering going straight to a pyro valve design. Comments ?
>
Looking at your photos, it looks like you have only a fairly thin slice of
  pyro composition to get things going.  I would go for a "donut" that's
about
  3/4" thick, and make absolutely certain that it's solidly held in place.

How many, and what size injector ports do you have?  [That is, what size is
your
  fill tube, and how many "loops" are you using for the non-fill injectors].

--
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Marcus Leech                             Mail:   Dept 8M70, MS 012, FITZ
Advisor                                  Phone: (ESN) 393-9145  +1 613 763
9145
Security Architecture and Planning       Fax:   (ESN) 393-9435  +1 613 763
9435
Nortel Networks                          mleech@nortelnetworks.com
-----------------Expressed opinions are my own, not my employer's------

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 6933 invoked from network); 29 Nov 2001 21:26:09 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 29 Nov 2001 21:26:09 -0000
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 28993 invoked by uid 50005); 29 Nov 2001 21:25:59 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4172. . Clean. Processed in 0.551905 secs); 29 Nov 2001 21:25:59 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 29 Nov 2001 21:25:58 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA25268; Thu, 29 Nov 2001 13:10:42 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 92924 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 29 Nov 2001 21:10:37          +0000
Received: from idsoftware.com (predator.idsoftware.com [192.246.40.34]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA25254 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Thu, 29 Nov 2001 13:10:37 -0800
Received: from [192.246.40.129] (account johnc HELO lightning.idsoftware.com)          by idsoftware.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 3.4.7) with ESMTP id 496331          for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 29 Nov 2001 15:10:31 -0600
X-Sender: johnc@mail.idsoftware.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <4.3.1.2.20011129145758.034dc770@mail.idsoftware.com>
Date:         Thu, 29 Nov 2001 15:08:34 -0600
Reply-To: "John Carmack" <johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Carmack" <johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM>
Subject:      [AR] molybdenum nozzles
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Has anyone tried making a molybdenum nozzle?

That is one step down on the exotic materials list from rhenium, but unlike
rhenium, it is available as bar stock and plate, and can be machined,
formed, and resistance welded.  It is only good to about 3000 deg F, which
is well below the 4000 deg flame temperatures of the peroxide/hydrocarbon
mixes I am looking at, but it may be workable with a hybrid grain that goes
all the way to the nozzle to provide film cooling.

It needs an oxidation resistant coating, but various ceramics or platinum
group metals can be put on fairly cheaply.

It won't stand up to really aggressive engines, but it might be good for
completely reusable engines around the 225 Isp range without much
trouble.  Niobium is another possibility.

John Carmack

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 14391 invoked from network); 29 Nov 2001 23:25:18 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 29 Nov 2001 23:25:18 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 28412 invoked by uid 50005); 29 Nov 2001 23:23:11 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4172. . Clean. Processed in 0.557633 secs); 29 Nov 2001 23:23:11 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 29 Nov 2001 23:23:10 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA26099; Thu, 29 Nov 2001 15:09:19 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 93040 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 29 Nov 2001 23:09:13          +0000
Received: from po3.glue.umd.edu (po3.glue.umd.edu [128.8.10.123]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA26085 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 29 Nov 2001 15:09:12 -0800
Received: from z.glue.umd.edu (IDENT:root@z.glue.umd.edu [128.8.10.71]) by          po3.glue.umd.edu (8.10.1/8.10.1) with ESMTP id fATN97Z18512; Thu, 29          Nov 2001 18:09:11 -0500 (EST)
Received: from z.glue.umd.edu (IDENT:sendmail@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by          z.glue.umd.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id SAA07355; Thu, 29 Nov 2001          18:09:06 -0500 (EST)
Received: from localhost (acase@localhost) by z.glue.umd.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with          ESMTP id SAA07351; Thu, 29 Nov 2001 18:09:06 -0500 (EST)
X-Authentication-Warning: z.glue.umd.edu: acase owned process doing -bs
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.GSO.4.21.0111291801530.6884-100000@z.glue.umd.edu>
Date:         Thu, 29 Nov 2001 18:09:06 -0500
Reply-To: "Andrew Case" <acase@GLUE.UMD.EDU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Andrew Case" <acase@GLUE.UMD.EDU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] molybdenum nozzles
Comments: To: John Carmack <johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <4.3.1.2.20011129145758.034dc770@mail.idsoftware.com>

On Thu, 29 Nov 2001, John Carmack wrote:

> Has anyone tried making a molybdenum nozzle?

I've never made a molybdenum nozzle, but I made an oven out of
it for evaporating Barium. It's horrible to machine - not as bad
as I hear tungsten is, but I had a hell of a time getting a finish
I wasn't ashamed of - I gave up on a nice finish and tried to just
get something adequate. This was my first and only time with it,
so I imagine an experienced metalworker would have little trouble.
The upshot is if you try moly, have it made for you if you can.
If not, by plenty and practice a lot before you try the final
piece.

......Andrew

Andrew Case                             |
acase@plasma.umd.edu                    |
Institute for Plasma Research           |
University of Maryland, College Park    |

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 18133 invoked from network); 30 Nov 2001 02:58:09 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 30 Nov 2001 02:58:09 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 7219 invoked by uid 50005); 30 Nov 2001 02:58:00 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4172. . Clean. Processed in 0.237619 secs); 30 Nov 2001 02:58:00 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 30 Nov 2001 02:58:00 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA26896; Thu, 29 Nov 2001 18:48:03 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 93078 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 30 Nov 2001 02:47:35          +0000
Received: from rasmus.uib.no (exim@rasmus.uib.no [129.177.12.30]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA26881 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Thu, 29 Nov 2001 18:47:34 -0800
Received: from (exw6pg5boa.student.uib.no) [129.177.43.98] by rasmus.uib.no           with esmtp (Exim 3.16) id 169dhL-000140-00; Fri, 30 Nov 2001 03:46:43          +0100
X-Sender: st07696@erasmus.uib.no
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
X-Scanner: exiscan *169dhL-000140-00*L4OyGO84Q1Q*           http://tjinfo.uib.no/virus.html
Message-ID:  <5.1.0.14.0.20011129033953.03180f48@erasmus.uib.no>
Date:         Fri, 30 Nov 2001 03:47:16 +0100
Reply-To: "Emil Johnsen" <emil.johnsen@STUDENT.UIB.NO>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Emil Johnsen" <emil.johnsen@STUDENT.UIB.NO>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Hybrid pre-heater grain compositions
Comments: To: Craig Strudwicke <strudwicke@OPTUSNET.COM.AU>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <200111290213.fAT2Dsg03115@mail010.syd.optusnet.com.au>

>I am intereseted in knowing what others out there are using in N2O preheater
>compositions.

I have started using a mix of contact glue and 3F black powder. I cover the
top 4-5cm of the fill tube with a layer slightly less than 2mm thick. Total
amount is ~1.5-2g. I have only used this twice but it burned trough the 4mm
fill line and ignited my K180 N2O/PE hybrid quickly (~0.25) both times.

(Video of static test: http://www.lstud.ii.uib.no/~s0646/hybrid/hybrid-s5.mpg)


Emil

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 2143 invoked from network); 30 Nov 2001 03:10:01 -0000
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 30 Nov 2001 03:10:01 -0000
Received: (qmail 27606 invoked by uid 50005); 30 Nov 2001 03:09:52 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4172. . Clean. Processed in 0.350721 secs); 30 Nov 2001 03:09:52 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 30 Nov 2001 03:09:52 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA26969; Thu, 29 Nov 2001 19:05:44 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 93085 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 30 Nov 2001 03:05:41          +0000
Received: from castor.ridgenet.net (IDENT:root@castor.ridgenet.net          [199.120.150.29]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA26955          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 29 Nov 2001 19:05:41 -0800
Received: from kristinscomp (pm002.ridgenet.net [204.154.246.2]) by          castor.ridgenet.net (8.11.0/8.11.0) with SMTP id fAU39Cb17797; Thu,          29 Nov 2001 19:09:12 -0800
References:  <136.5592ebd.29363ca4@aol.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0E11_01C56B69.5A4CAE00"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <004401c1794b$fe2302e0$1b30fea9@kristinscomp>
Date:         Thu, 29 Nov 2001 19:05:39 -0800
Reply-To: "Kristin & David Hall" <thehalls@RIDGENET.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Kristin & David Hall" <thehalls@RIDGENET.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] [OT]: Hearing meteors - at the speed of light
Comments: To: Azt28@AOL.COM
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0E11_01C56B69.5A4CAE00
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable


OK, I admit it, my "upper level" physics is lacking.....  What're =
"impulsion" dimensions?
--
Dave and/or Kristin Hall
  can then not think of the moving object as simply evolving in ordinary =
space, you must take into account  the full phase space of mechanics =
with 3 space dimensions and 3 impulsion ones. For objects moving at more =
than 30 km/s, it seems a sound wave is produced in the impulsion =
dimensions. This sound would move at near 30 km/s, not the speed of =
light.=20


------=_NextPart_000_0E11_01C56B69.5A4CAE00
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META content=3D"text/html; charset=3Diso-8859-1" =
http-equiv=3DContent-Type>
<META content=3D"MSHTML 5.00.2614.3500" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>OK, I admit it, my "upper level" =
physics is=20
lacking.....&nbsp; What're "impulsion" dimensions?</FONT></DIV>
<DIV>--<BR>Dave and/or Kristin Hall</DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE=20
style=3D"BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: =
0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; PADDING-RIGHT: 0px"><FONT=20
  face=3Darial,helvetica><FONT size=3D2>can then not think of the moving =
object as=20
  simply evolving in ordinary space, you must take into account =
&nbsp;the full=20
  phase space of mechanics with 3 space dimensions and 3 impulsion ones. =
For=20
  objects moving at more than 30 km/s, it seems a sound wave is produced =
in the=20
  impulsion dimensions. This sound would move at near 30 km/s, not the =
speed of=20
  light. <BR></BLOCKQUOTE></FONT></FONT></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0E11_01C56B69.5A4CAE00--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 13317 invoked from network); 30 Nov 2001 04:13:05 -0000
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 30 Nov 2001 04:13:05 -0000
Received: (qmail 15097 invoked by uid 50005); 30 Nov 2001 04:12:56 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4172. . Clean. Processed in 0.179468 secs); 30 Nov 2001 04:12:56 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 30 Nov 2001 04:12:56 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA27275; Thu, 29 Nov 2001 20:10:06 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 93101 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 30 Nov 2001 04:10:00          +0000
Received: from trueband.net (director.trueband.net [216.163.120.8]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id UAA27261 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 29 Nov 2001 20:10:00 -0800
Received: (qmail 24156 invoked by uid 1006); 30 Nov 2001 04:09:59 -0000
Received: from foy@wfeca.net by rs0 with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan:          v4.1.40/v4121. . Clean. Processed in 0.62399 secs); 30 Nov 2001          04:09:59 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO l9l3e3) (12.21.155.38) by -v with SMTP; 30 Nov          2001 04:09:58 -0000
References:  <4.3.1.2.20011129145758.034dc770@mail.idsoftware.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <001201c17953$d5851640$269b150c@l9l3e3>
Date:         Thu, 29 Nov 2001 22:02:29 -0600
Reply-To: "foy" <foy@WFECA.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "foy" <foy@WFECA.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] molybdenum nozzles
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

        Have you checked the price of this!@

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 21045 invoked from network); 30 Nov 2001 05:00:53 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.105]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 30 Nov 2001 05:00:53 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 27082 invoked by uid 50005); 30 Nov 2001 05:00:44 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpy with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4172. . Clean. Processed in 0.618843 secs); 30 Nov 2001 05:00:44 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 30 Nov 2001 05:00:43 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA27440; Thu, 29 Nov 2001 20:54:19 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 93117 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 30 Nov 2001 04:54:11          +0000
Received: from idsoftware.com (predator.idsoftware.com [192.246.40.34]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA27426 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Thu, 29 Nov 2001 20:54:11 -0800
Received: from [192.246.40.129] (account johnc HELO lightning.idsoftware.com)          by idsoftware.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 3.4.7) with ESMTP id 496934          for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 29 Nov 2001 22:54:10 -0600
X-Sender: johnc@mail.idsoftware.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.1
References: <4.3.1.2.20011129145758.034dc770@mail.idsoftware.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <4.3.1.2.20011129224558.03530278@mail.idsoftware.com>
Date:         Thu, 29 Nov 2001 22:52:14 -0600
Reply-To: "John Carmack" <johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Carmack" <johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] molybdenum nozzles
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <001201c17953$d5851640$269b150c@l9l3e3>

At 10:02 PM 11/29/2001 -0600, you wrote:
>         Have you checked the price of this!@

Compared to iridium / rhenium, it is mundane stuff.

I am getting a quote for some molybdenum bar stock from
http://www.csm-moly.com/, and the prices for various platinum group metal
plating jobs from http://www.artisanplating.com look pretty reasonable.

John Carmack

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 16296 invoked from network); 30 Nov 2001 22:21:37 -0000
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 30 Nov 2001 22:21:37 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 15658 invoked by uid 50005); 30 Nov 2001 22:21:29 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4172. . Clean. Processed in 2.931484 secs); 30 Nov 2001 22:21:29 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 30 Nov 2001 22:21:23 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA30216; Fri, 30 Nov 2001 14:16:34 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 93203 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 30 Nov 2001 22:14:40          +0000
Received: from mail.aros.net (mail.aros.net [207.173.16.20]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA30193 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Fri,          30 Nov 2001 14:14:40 -0800
Received: from biomicro.com (cust-208-187-122-40.bbsc.net [208.187.122.40]) by          mail.aros.net (8.11.6/8.9.3) with ESMTP id fAUMEd468904 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Fri, 30 Nov 2001 15:14:39 -0700 (MST)
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.77 [en] (Win98; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3C07F1FA.4037A368@biomicro.com>
Date:         Fri, 30 Nov 2001 13:54:18 -0700
Reply-To: "Mark K. Spute" <mks@BIOMICRO.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Mark K. Spute" <mks@BIOMICRO.COM>
Subject:      [AR] On board power source
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

I was just fooling around with a little tubular fan we had to replace
here at work.  It measures 1" OD and is pretty light.  Blowing on it
with shop air @ 30 psi gives between 7 and 10 VDC @ 70 to 95 mA.  Just
wondering if the drag would be worth it as an on board power source.  It
might power a small altimeter or radio beacon.

The fans run $75 new.  I guess you could buy a bunch of lithium cells
for that.



--
Mark K. Spute
Senior Research Engineer
BioMicro Systems Inc.

KD7IWE,  RRS, hopeful future Stolly owner

"It is difficult to say what is impossible, for the dream of yesterday
is the hope of today and the reality of tomorrow."
     Dr. Robert H. Goddard

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 2172 invoked from network); 1 Dec 2001 00:18:22 -0000
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 1 Dec 2001 00:18:23 -0000
Received: (qmail 10274 invoked by uid 50005); 1 Dec 2001 00:18:14 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4172. . Clean. Processed in 0.193174 secs); 01 Dec 2001 00:18:14 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 1 Dec 2001 00:18:14 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA30562; Fri, 30 Nov 2001 16:16:06 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 93216 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 1 Dec 2001 00:15:25 +0000
Received: from corlabs (24-216-244-100.hsacorp.net [24.216.244.100]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA30547 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Fri, 30 Nov 2001 16:15:23 -0800
Received: from [24.216.244.164] by corlabs (ArGoSoft Mail Server Pro          Win2000/XP, Version 1.70 (1.7.0.4)); Fri, 30 Nov 2001 18:55:11 -0600
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook CWS, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <006901c179fe$faf2ba30$0200a8c0@charter.net>
Date:         Fri, 30 Nov 2001 18:27:37 -0600
Reply-To: "Carl A. Blood" <cablood@CORLABS.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Carl A. Blood" <cablood@CORLABS.COM>
Subject:      [AR] Mixer needed
Comments: To: "WAMEX (E-mail)" <WAMEX@pad17.com>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Hi All,
May be a bit off subject but we do use a small one to mix rocket fuel.

I(we) are looking to lighten Bob's mixing woes. His arm and back and hand,
etc. are getting all messed up from trying to mix the 4" grains.

SO we are looking to buy a 24 or 30 quart mixer with paddle and bowl.

If anyone runs across a good deal let me know.

Thanks
Carl

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 6029 invoked from network); 1 Dec 2001 00:44:12 -0000
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 1 Dec 2001 00:44:12 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 15157 invoked by uid 50005); 1 Dec 2001 00:44:03 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4172. . Clean. Processed in 1.359609 secs); 01 Dec 2001 00:44:03 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 1 Dec 2001 00:44:01 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA30866; Fri, 30 Nov 2001 16:42:38 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 93234 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 1 Dec 2001 00:42:32 +0000
Received: from smtp01.roc.frontiernet.net (alteon01b.roc.frontiernet.net          [66.133.130.232]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id QAA30852          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 30 Nov 2001 16:42:31 -0800
Received: (qmail 29152 invoked from network); 1 Dec 2001 00:42:00 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO frontiernet.net) ([64.208.236.116])          (envelope-sender <tbinford@frontiernet.net>) by 0 (qmail-ldap-1.03)          with SMTP for <cablood@CORLABS.COM>; 1 Dec 2001 00:42:00 -0000
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.74 [en] (Win98; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <006901c179fe$faf2ba30$0200a8c0@charter.net>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3C058621.E73BFD66@frontiernet.net>
Date:         Wed, 28 Nov 2001 19:49:37 -0500
Reply-To: <tbinford@frontiernet.net>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Tom Binford" <tbinford@frontiernet.net>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Mixer needed
Comments: To: "Carl A. Blood" <cablood@CORLABS.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

"Carl A. Blood" wrote:
>
> Hi All,
> May be a bit off subject but we do use a small one to mix rocket fuel.
>
> I(we) are looking to lighten Bob's mixing woes. His arm and back and hand,
> etc. are getting all messed up from trying to mix the 4" grains.
>
> SO we are looking to buy a 24 or 30 quart mixer with paddle and bowl.
>
> If anyone runs across a good deal let me know.
>
> Thanks
> Carl

Look at http://www.surplusrecord.com and search under 'mixer'

This is an industrial equipment clearing house and it will refer you to
the individual machinery dealer.

I haven't checked the site lately but a few months ago showed 50 or so
mixers in the print listing.

Tom

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 5309 invoked from network); 1 Dec 2001 00:59:18 -0000
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 1 Dec 2001 00:59:18 -0000
Received: (qmail 2398 invoked by uid 50005); 1 Dec 2001 00:59:10 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4172. . Clean. Processed in 1.470006 secs); 01 Dec 2001 00:59:10 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 1 Dec 2001 00:59:06 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA31021; Fri, 30 Nov 2001 16:57:50 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 93254 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 1 Dec 2001 00:57:47 +0000
Received: from albqpop1.albq.uswest.net (albqpop1.albq.uswest.net          [207.108.240.1]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id QAA31007          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 30 Nov 2001 16:57:46 -0800
Received: (qmail 75030 invoked by alias); 1 Dec 2001 00:57:15 -0000
Delivered-To: fixup-AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU@fixme
Received: (qmail 75025 invoked by uid 0); 1 Dec 2001 00:57:15 -0000
Received: from cc898542-a.prdise1.nm.home.com (HELO cc898542a) (65.7.151.152)          by albqpop1.albq.uswest.net with SMTP; 1 Dec 2001 00:57:15 -0000
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0E14_01C56B69.5A5B05E0"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <000a01c17a02$ca60f680$0100a8c0@cc898542a>
Date:         Fri, 30 Nov 2001 17:54:54 -0700
Reply-To: "Paxton" <darkspunge@USWEST.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Paxton" <darkspunge@USWEST.NET>
Subject:      [AR] Price of NOX
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0E14_01C56B69.5A5B05E0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

I was "designing" a "huge" NOX hybrid on Paul's spreadsheet a while back =
in the 300000NS range and guestimated it would cost less then 100 bucks =
in NOX for the flight. Well, I was guestimating and did not really have =
a clue at the time, so I started wondering. How much would it cost to =
obtain 300-400 pounds of NOX minus the tankage. And is it possible to =
rent tankage from a industrial supply type place. And how much does it =
cost most of you guys to fill up the local clubs NOX tank(s).

Not that I would be able to make said motor anytime soon, but I was just =
trying to figure the per flight costs.

Thanks

Paxton

------=_NextPart_000_0E14_01C56B69.5A5B05E0
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META content=3D"text/html; charset=3Diso-8859-1" =
http-equiv=3DContent-Type>
<META content=3D"MSHTML 5.00.3315.2870" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>I was "designing" a "huge" NOX hybrid =
on Paul's=20
spreadsheet a while back in the 300000NS range and guestimated it would =
cost=20
less then 100 bucks in NOX for the flight. Well, I was guestimating and =
did not=20
really have a clue at the time, so I started wondering. How much would =
it cost=20
to obtain 300-400 pounds of NOX minus the tankage. And is it possible to =
rent=20
tankage from a industrial supply type place. And how much does it cost =
most of=20
you guys to fill up the local clubs NOX tank(s).</FONT></DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Not that I would be able to make said =
motor anytime=20
soon, but I was just trying to figure the per flight costs.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Thanks</FONT></DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Paxton</FONT></DIV></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0E14_01C56B69.5A5B05E0--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 4544 invoked from network); 1 Dec 2001 01:15:09 -0000
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 1 Dec 2001 01:15:09 -0000
Received: (qmail 29887 invoked by uid 50005); 1 Dec 2001 01:15:00 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4172. . Clean. Processed in 1.330512 secs); 01 Dec 2001 01:15:00 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 1 Dec 2001 01:14:57 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA31112; Fri, 30 Nov 2001 17:13:42 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 93261 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 1 Dec 2001 01:13:40 +0000
Received: from mail017.syd.optusnet.com.au (mail017.syd.optusnet.com.au          [203.2.75.179]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA31098          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 30 Nov 2001 17:13:39 -0800
Received: from ballbuster (blaax3-016.dialup.optusnet.com.au [210.49.128.16])          by mail017.syd.optusnet.com.au (8.11.1/8.11.1) with SMTP id          fB11CrZ01620; Sat, 1 Dec 2001 12:12:54 +1100
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0E17_01C56B69.5A5B05E0"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <NJEEJAOGEMKNPMLLEONAAECCCDAA.strudwicke@optusnet.com.au>
Date:         Sat, 1 Dec 2001 12:12:01 +1100
Reply-To: "craig strudwicke" <strudwicke@OPTUSNET.COM.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "craig strudwicke" <strudwicke@OPTUSNET.COM.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Price of NOX
Comments: To: Paxton <darkspunge@USWEST.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <000a01c17a02$ca60f680$0100a8c0@cc898542a>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0E17_01C56B69.5A5B05E0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

We are paying about AU$20/kg in Sydney Australia.

Craig
  -----Original Message-----
  From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU]On
Behalf Of Paxton
  Sent: Saturday, 1 December 2001 11:55 AM
  To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
  Subject: [AR] Price of NOX


  I was "designing" a "huge" NOX hybrid on Paul's spreadsheet a while back
in the 300000NS range and guestimated it would cost less then 100 bucks in
NOX for the flight. Well, I was guestimating and did not really have a clue
at the time, so I started wondering. How much would it cost to obtain
300-400 pounds of NOX minus the tankage. And is it possible to rent tankage
from a industrial supply type place. And how much does it cost most of you
guys to fill up the local clubs NOX tank(s).

  Not that I would be able to make said motor anytime soon, but I was just
trying to figure the per flight costs.

  Thanks

  Paxton

------=_NextPart_000_0E17_01C56B69.5A5B05E0
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Diso-8859-1">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 5.50.4522.1800" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><SPAN class=3D097251101-01122001><FONT face=3DArial color=3D#0000ff =
size=3D2>We are=20
paying about AU$20/kg in Sydney Australia.</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=3D097251101-01122001><FONT face=3DArial color=3D#0000ff =

size=3D2></FONT></SPAN>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=3D097251101-01122001><FONT face=3DArial color=3D#0000ff =

size=3D2>Craig</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE dir=3Dltr style=3D"MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
  <DIV class=3DOutlookMessageHeader dir=3Dltr align=3Dleft><FONT =
face=3DTahoma=20
  size=3D2>-----Original Message-----<BR><B>From:</B> Amateur Rocketry =
discussion=20
  list [mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU]<B>On Behalf Of =
</B>Paxton<BR><B>Sent:</B>=20
  Saturday, 1 December 2001 11:55 AM<BR><B>To:</B>=20
  AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU<BR><B>Subject:</B> [AR] Price of =
NOX<BR><BR></FONT></DIV>
  <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>I was "designing" a "huge" NOX hybrid =
on Paul's=20
  spreadsheet a while back in the 300000NS range and guestimated it =
would cost=20
  less then 100 bucks in NOX for the flight. Well, I was guestimating =
and did=20
  not really have a clue at the time, so I started wondering. How much =
would it=20
  cost to obtain 300-400 pounds of NOX minus the tankage. And is it =
possible to=20
  rent tankage from a industrial supply type place. And how much does it =
cost=20
  most of you guys to fill up the local clubs NOX tank(s).</FONT></DIV>
  <DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
  <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Not that I would be able to make said =
motor=20
  anytime soon, but I was just trying to figure the per flight=20
  costs.</FONT></DIV>
  <DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
  <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Thanks</FONT></DIV>
  <DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
  <DIV><FONT face=3DArial =
size=3D2>Paxton</FONT></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0E17_01C56B69.5A5B05E0--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 9280 invoked from network); 1 Dec 2001 01:49:30 -0000
X-Priority: 3
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 1 Dec 2001 01:49:30 -0000
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 25984 invoked by uid 50005); 1 Dec 2001 01:49:21 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4172. . Clean. Processed in 1.912341 secs); 01 Dec 2001 01:49:21 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 1 Dec 2001 01:49:17 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA31237; Fri, 30 Nov 2001 17:46:33 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 93273 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 1 Dec 2001 01:45:48 +0000
Received: from imo-d06.mx.aol.com (imo-d06.mx.aol.com [205.188.157.38]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA31223 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Fri, 30 Nov 2001 17:45:47 -0800
Received: from Sociald84@aol.com by imo-d06.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v31_r1.9.) id          e.ae.1eb29e31 (4250); Fri, 30 Nov 2001 20:45:09 -0500 (EST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0E1B_01C56B69.5A5B05E0"
X-Mailer: AOL 6.0 for Windows US sub 10540
Message-ID:  <ae.1eb29e31.29399025@aol.com>
Date:         Fri, 30 Nov 2001 20:45:09 EST
Reply-To: <Sociald84@AOL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <Sociald84@AOL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Price of NOX
Comments: To: strudwicke@optusnet.com.au
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0E1B_01C56B69.5A5B05E0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

In a message dated 11/30/2001 6:14:46 PM Mountain Standard Time,
strudwicke@OPTUSNET.COM.AU writes:


> We are paying about AU$20/kg in Sydney Australia.
>
> Craig
>


Hot Rod shops around Denver have quoted me about $3.75 (US)/ lb.

Mark

------=_NextPart_000_0E1B_01C56B69.5A5B05E0
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<HTML><FONT FACE=arial,helvetica><FONT  SIZE=2>In a message dated 11/30/2001 6:14:46 PM Mountain Standard Time, strudwicke@OPTUSNET.COM.AU writes:
<BR>
<BR>
<BR></FONT><FONT  COLOR="#0000ff" SIZE=2 FAMILY="SANSSERIF" FACE="Arial" LANG="0"><BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE style="BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px">We are paying about AU$20/kg in Sydney Australia.</FONT><FONT  COLOR="#000000" SIZE=2 FAMILY="SANSSERIF" FACE="Arial" LANG="0">
<BR>
<BR></FONT><FONT  COLOR="#0000ff" SIZE=2 FAMILY="SANSSERIF" FACE="Arial" LANG="0">Craig</FONT><FONT  COLOR="#000000" SIZE=2 FAMILY="SANSSERIF" FACE="Arial" LANG="0">
<BR></BLOCKQUOTE>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>Hot Rod shops around Denver have quoted me about $3.75 (US)/ lb.
<BR>
<BR>Mark</FONT></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0E1B_01C56B69.5A5B05E0--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 21168 invoked from network); 1 Dec 2001 01:52:30 -0000
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 1 Dec 2001 01:52:30 -0000
Received: (qmail 22368 invoked by uid 50005); 1 Dec 2001 01:52:21 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4172. . Clean. Processed in 0.24651 secs); 01 Dec 2001 01:52:21 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 1 Dec 2001 01:52:20 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA31273; Fri, 30 Nov 2001 17:51:07 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 93280 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 1 Dec 2001 01:50:26 +0000
Received: from mail011.syd.optusnet.com.au (mail011.syd.optusnet.com.au          [203.2.75.173]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA31258          for <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Fri, 30 Nov 2001 17:50:25 -0800
Received: from ballbuster (blaax2-135.dialup.optusnet.com.au [210.49.117.135])          by mail011.syd.optusnet.com.au (8.11.1/8.11.1) with SMTP id          fB11noX14220; Sat, 1 Dec 2001 12:49:50 +1100
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0E20_01C56B69.5A5D76E0"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <NJEEJAOGEMKNPMLLEONAMECCCDAA.strudwicke@optusnet.com.au>
Date:         Sat, 1 Dec 2001 12:48:58 +1100
Reply-To: "craig strudwicke" <strudwicke@OPTUSNET.COM.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "craig strudwicke" <strudwicke@OPTUSNET.COM.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Price of NOX
Comments: To: Sociald84@aol.com
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <ae.1eb29e31.29399025@aol.com>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0E20_01C56B69.5A5D76E0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Yeah I'm sure that we'd pay at least that much here if we bought it from a
hot rod shop. We get it from BOC gases . Try the equivalent supplier over
there ie welding gas supplier etc...

Craig
  -----Original Message-----
  From: Sociald84@aol.com [mailto:Sociald84@aol.com]
  Sent: Saturday, 1 December 2001 12:45 PM
  To: strudwicke@optusnet.com.au; AROCKET@itc.uci.edu
  Subject: Re: [AR] Price of NOX


  In a message dated 11/30/2001 6:14:46 PM Mountain Standard Time,
strudwicke@OPTUSNET.COM.AU writes:



    We are paying about AU$20/kg in Sydney Australia.

    Craig




  Hot Rod shops around Denver have quoted me about $3.75 (US)/ lb.

  Mark

------=_NextPart_000_0E20_01C56B69.5A5D76E0
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Dus-ascii">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 5.50.4522.1800" name=3DGENERATOR></HEAD>
<BODY>
<DIV><SPAN class=3D666474701-01122001><FONT face=3DArial color=3D#0000ff =
size=3D2>Yeah=20
I'm sure that we'd pay at least that much here if we bought it from a =
hot rod=20
shop. We get it from BOC gases . Try the equivalent supplier over there =
ie=20
welding gas supplier etc...</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=3D666474701-01122001><FONT face=3DArial color=3D#0000ff =

size=3D2></FONT></SPAN>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=3D666474701-01122001><FONT face=3DArial color=3D#0000ff =

size=3D2>Craig</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE>
  <DIV class=3DOutlookMessageHeader dir=3Dltr align=3Dleft><FONT =
face=3DTahoma=20
  size=3D2>-----Original Message-----<BR><B>From:</B> Sociald84@aol.com=20
  [mailto:Sociald84@aol.com]<BR><B>Sent:</B> Saturday, 1 December 2001 =
12:45=20
  PM<BR><B>To:</B> strudwicke@optusnet.com.au;=20
  AROCKET@itc.uci.edu<BR><B>Subject:</B> Re: [AR] Price of=20
  NOX<BR><BR></FONT></DIV><FONT face=3Darial,helvetica><FONT size=3D2>In =
a message=20
  dated 11/30/2001 6:14:46 PM Mountain Standard Time, =
strudwicke@OPTUSNET.COM.AU=20
  writes: <BR><BR><BR></FONT><FONT lang=3D0 face=3DArial color=3D#0000ff =
size=3D2=20
  FAMILY=3D"SANSSERIF">
  <BLOCKQUOTE=20
  style=3D"PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px =
solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px"=20
  TYPE=3D"CITE">We are paying about AU$20/kg in Sydney =
Australia.</FONT><FONT=20
    lang=3D0 face=3DArial color=3D#000000 size=3D2 FAMILY=3D"SANSSERIF"> =

    <BR><BR></FONT><FONT lang=3D0 face=3DArial color=3D#0000ff size=3D2=20
    FAMILY=3D"SANSSERIF">Craig</FONT><FONT lang=3D0 face=3DArial =
color=3D#000000 size=3D2=20
    FAMILY=3D"SANSSERIF"> <BR></BLOCKQUOTE><BR><BR><BR>Hot Rod shops =
around Denver=20
  have quoted me about $3.75 (US)/ lb. <BR><BR>Mark</FONT>=20
</FONT></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0E20_01C56B69.5A5D76E0--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 28518 invoked from network); 1 Dec 2001 01:54:36 -0000
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 1 Dec 2001 01:54:36 -0000
Received: (qmail 24437 invoked by uid 50005); 1 Dec 2001 01:54:27 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4172. . Clean. Processed in 0.17638 secs); 01 Dec 2001 01:54:27 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 1 Dec 2001 01:54:27 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA31296; Fri, 30 Nov 2001 17:53:09 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 93287 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 1 Dec 2001 01:52:28 +0000
Received: from mail010.syd.optusnet.com.au (mail010.syd.optusnet.com.au          [203.2.75.171]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA31279          for <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Fri, 30 Nov 2001 17:51:51 -0800
Received: from ballbuster (blaax2-135.dialup.optusnet.com.au [210.49.117.135])          by mail010.syd.optusnet.com.au (8.11.1/8.11.1) with SMTP id          fB11pFg27508; Sat, 1 Dec 2001 12:51:15 +1100
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0E24_01C56B69.5A66ECC0"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <NJEEJAOGEMKNPMLLEONAAECDCDAA.strudwicke@optusnet.com.au>
Date:         Sat, 1 Dec 2001 12:50:23 +1100
Reply-To: "craig strudwicke" <strudwicke@OPTUSNET.COM.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "craig strudwicke" <strudwicke@OPTUSNET.COM.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Price of NOX
Comments: To: Sociald84@aol.com
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <ae.1eb29e31.29399025@aol.com>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0E24_01C56B69.5A66ECC0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Oops... just realised that your price still comes out at about AU$16/kg...
much less than I'm paying :-((

Craig
  -----Original Message-----
  From: Sociald84@aol.com [mailto:Sociald84@aol.com]
  Sent: Saturday, 1 December 2001 12:45 PM
  To: strudwicke@optusnet.com.au; AROCKET@itc.uci.edu
  Subject: Re: [AR] Price of NOX


  In a message dated 11/30/2001 6:14:46 PM Mountain Standard Time,
strudwicke@OPTUSNET.COM.AU writes:



    We are paying about AU$20/kg in Sydney Australia.

    Craig




  Hot Rod shops around Denver have quoted me about $3.75 (US)/ lb.

  Mark

------=_NextPart_000_0E24_01C56B69.5A66ECC0
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Dus-ascii">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 5.50.4522.1800" name=3DGENERATOR></HEAD>
<BODY>
<DIV><SPAN class=3D172084901-01122001><FONT face=3DArial color=3D#0000ff =

size=3D2>Oops... just realised that your price still comes out at about=20
AU$16/kg... much less than I'm paying :-((</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=3D172084901-01122001><FONT face=3DArial color=3D#0000ff =

size=3D2></FONT></SPAN>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=3D172084901-01122001><FONT face=3DArial color=3D#0000ff =

size=3D2>Craig</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE>
  <DIV class=3DOutlookMessageHeader dir=3Dltr align=3Dleft><FONT =
face=3DTahoma=20
  size=3D2>-----Original Message-----<BR><B>From:</B> Sociald84@aol.com=20
  [mailto:Sociald84@aol.com]<BR><B>Sent:</B> Saturday, 1 December 2001 =
12:45=20
  PM<BR><B>To:</B> strudwicke@optusnet.com.au;=20
  AROCKET@itc.uci.edu<BR><B>Subject:</B> Re: [AR] Price of=20
  NOX<BR><BR></FONT></DIV><FONT face=3Darial,helvetica><FONT size=3D2>In =
a message=20
  dated 11/30/2001 6:14:46 PM Mountain Standard Time, =
strudwicke@OPTUSNET.COM.AU=20
  writes: <BR><BR><BR></FONT><FONT lang=3D0 face=3DArial color=3D#0000ff =
size=3D2=20
  FAMILY=3D"SANSSERIF">
  <BLOCKQUOTE=20
  style=3D"PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px =
solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px"=20
  TYPE=3D"CITE">We are paying about AU$20/kg in Sydney =
Australia.</FONT><FONT=20
    lang=3D0 face=3DArial color=3D#000000 size=3D2 FAMILY=3D"SANSSERIF"> =

    <BR><BR></FONT><FONT lang=3D0 face=3DArial color=3D#0000ff size=3D2=20
    FAMILY=3D"SANSSERIF">Craig</FONT><FONT lang=3D0 face=3DArial =
color=3D#000000 size=3D2=20
    FAMILY=3D"SANSSERIF"> <BR></BLOCKQUOTE><BR><BR><BR>Hot Rod shops =
around Denver=20
  have quoted me about $3.75 (US)/ lb. <BR><BR>Mark</FONT>=20
</FONT></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0E24_01C56B69.5A66ECC0--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 14554 invoked from network); 1 Dec 2001 01:59:14 -0000
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 1 Dec 2001 01:59:14 -0000
Received: (qmail 9371 invoked by uid 50005); 1 Dec 2001 01:59:05 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4172. . Clean. Processed in 2.004597 secs); 01 Dec 2001 01:59:05 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 1 Dec 2001 01:59:01 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA31334; Fri, 30 Nov 2001 17:57:20 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 93294 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 1 Dec 2001 01:56:38 +0000
Received: from cesaroni.net ([204.101.26.130]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7)          with ESMTP id RAA31319 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 30 Nov 2001          17:56:38 -0800
Received: from Anthony by cesaroni.net with SMTP (MDaemon.v2.8.7.0.R) for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 30 Nov 2001 20:54:19 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0E28_01C56B69.5A66ECC0"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 8.5, Build 4.71.2173.0
Importance: Normal
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
X-MDaemon-Deliver-To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
X-Return-Path: ACesaroni@cesaroni.net
Message-ID:  <006b01c17a06$e08cc980$1b0101c0@Anthony>
Date:         Fri, 30 Nov 2001 20:24:09 -0500
Reply-To: "Anthony Cesaroni" <ACesaroni@cesaroni.net>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Anthony Cesaroni" <ACesaroni@cesaroni.net>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Price of NOX
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <ae.1eb29e31.29399025@aol.com>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0E28_01C56B69.5A66ECC0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

You're all being taken to the cleaners. We pay $ 1.50 a pound Canadian, or
about $1.05 ish U.S. We do have a volume discount though.

Anthony.
  -----Original Message-----
  From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@itc.uci.edu]On
Behalf Of Sociald84@AOL.COM
  Sent: Friday, November 30, 2001 8:45 PM
  To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
  Subject: Re: Price of NOX


  In a message dated 11/30/2001 6:14:46 PM Mountain Standard Time,
strudwicke@OPTUSNET.COM.AU writes:



    We are paying about AU$20/kg in Sydney Australia.

    Craig




  Hot Rod shops around Denver have quoted me about $3.75 (US)/ lb.

  Mark

------=_NextPart_000_0E28_01C56B69.5A66ECC0
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Dwindows-1252">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 6.00.2600.0" name=3DGENERATOR></HEAD>
<BODY>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial color=3D#0000ff size=3D2><SPAN =
class=3D470591901-01122001>You're=20
all being taken to the cleaners. We pay $ 1.50 a pound Canadian, or =
about $1.05=20
ish U.S. We do have a volume discount though.</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial color=3D#0000ff size=3D2><SPAN=20
class=3D470591901-01122001></SPAN></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial color=3D#0000ff size=3D2><SPAN=20
class=3D470591901-01122001>Anthony.</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE=20
style=3D"PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px =
solid">
  <DIV class=3DOutlookMessageHeader><FONT face=3D"Times New Roman"=20
  size=3D2>-----Original Message-----<BR><B>From:</B> Amateur Rocketry =
discussion=20
  list [mailto:AROCKET@itc.uci.edu]<B>On Behalf Of</B>=20
  Sociald84@AOL.COM<BR><B>Sent:</B> Friday, November 30, 2001 8:45=20
  PM<BR><B>To:</B> AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU<BR><B>Subject:</B> Re: Price of=20
  NOX<BR><BR></FONT></DIV><FONT face=3Darial,helvetica><FONT size=3D2>In =
a message=20
  dated 11/30/2001 6:14:46 PM Mountain Standard Time, =
strudwicke@OPTUSNET.COM.AU=20
  writes: <BR><BR><BR></FONT><FONT lang=3D0 face=3DArial color=3D#0000ff =
size=3D2=20
  FAMILY=3D"SANSSERIF">
  <BLOCKQUOTE=20
  style=3D"PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px =
solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px"=20
  TYPE=3D"CITE">We are paying about AU$20/kg in Sydney =
Australia.</FONT><FONT=20
    lang=3D0 face=3DArial color=3D#000000 size=3D2 FAMILY=3D"SANSSERIF"> =

    <BR><BR></FONT><FONT lang=3D0 face=3DArial color=3D#0000ff size=3D2=20
    FAMILY=3D"SANSSERIF">Craig</FONT><FONT lang=3D0 face=3DArial =
color=3D#000000 size=3D2=20
    FAMILY=3D"SANSSERIF"> <BR></BLOCKQUOTE><BR><BR><BR>Hot Rod shops =
around Denver=20
  have quoted me about $3.75 (US)/ lb. <BR><BR>Mark</FONT>=20
</FONT></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0E28_01C56B69.5A66ECC0--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 25008 invoked from network); 1 Dec 2001 03:19:11 -0000
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 1 Dec 2001 03:19:11 -0000
Received: (qmail 15585 invoked by uid 50005); 1 Dec 2001 03:19:02 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4172. . Clean. Processed in 1.267379 secs); 01 Dec 2001 03:19:02 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 1 Dec 2001 03:18:59 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA31565; Fri, 30 Nov 2001 19:17:29 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 93307 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 1 Dec 2001 03:17:18 +0000
Received: from albqpop1.albq.uswest.net (albqpop1.albq.uswest.net          [207.108.240.1]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id TAA31551          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 30 Nov 2001 19:17:17 -0800
Received: (qmail 71070 invoked by alias); 1 Dec 2001 03:16:46 -0000
Delivered-To: fixup-AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU@fixme
Received: (qmail 71058 invoked by uid 0); 1 Dec 2001 03:16:46 -0000
Received: from cc898542-a.prdise1.nm.home.com (HELO cc898542a) (65.7.151.152)          by albqpop1.albq.uswest.net with SMTP; 1 Dec 2001 03:16:46 -0000
References:  <006b01c17a06$e08cc980$1b0101c0@Anthony>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0E2C_01C56B69.5A66ECC0"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <002901c17a16$482ca880$0100a8c0@cc898542a>
Date:         Fri, 30 Nov 2001 20:14:25 -0700
Reply-To: "Paxton" <darkspunge@USWEST.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Paxton" <darkspunge@USWEST.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Price of NOX
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0E2C_01C56B69.5A66ECC0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Wow, so that means 67 thousand pounds of thrust would cost 300-350 bucks =
:-)
Hybrids do have their place. haha.

Pax


  ----- Original Message -----=20
  From: Anthony Cesaroni=20
  To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU=20
  Sent: Friday, November 30, 2001 6:24 PM
  Subject: Re: [AR] Price of NOX


  You're all being taken to the cleaners. We pay $ 1.50 a pound =
Canadian, or about $1.05 ish U.S. We do have a volume discount though.
  =20
  Anthony.
    -----Original Message-----
    From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list =
[mailto:AROCKET@itc.uci.edu]On Behalf Of Sociald84@AOL.COM
    Sent: Friday, November 30, 2001 8:45 PM
    To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
    Subject: Re: Price of NOX


    In a message dated 11/30/2001 6:14:46 PM Mountain Standard Time, =
strudwicke@OPTUSNET.COM.AU writes:=20



      We are paying about AU$20/kg in Sydney Australia.=20

      Craig=20




    Hot Rod shops around Denver have quoted me about $3.75 (US)/ lb.=20

    Mark=20

------=_NextPart_000_0E2C_01C56B69.5A66ECC0
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META content=3D"text/html; charset=3Diso-8859-1" =
http-equiv=3DContent-Type>
<META content=3D"MSHTML 5.00.3315.2870" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Wow, so that means 67 thousand pounds =
of thrust=20
would cost 300-350 bucks :-)</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Hybrids do have their place. =
haha.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Pax</FONT></DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE=20
style=3D"BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: =
0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; PADDING-RIGHT: 0px">
  <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial">----- Original Message ----- </DIV>
  <DIV=20
  style=3D"BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; FONT: 10pt arial; font-color: =
black"><B>From:</B>=20
  <A href=3D"mailto:ACesaroni@cesaroni.net" =
title=3DACesaroni@cesaroni.net>Anthony=20
  Cesaroni</A> </DIV>
  <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A =
href=3D"mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU"=20
  title=3DAROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU</A> </DIV>
  <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> Friday, November 30, 2001 =
6:24=20
  PM</DIV>
  <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> Re: [AR] Price of =
NOX</DIV>
  <DIV><BR></DIV>
  <DIV><FONT color=3D#0000ff face=3DArial size=3D2><SPAN=20
  class=3D470591901-01122001>You're all being taken to the cleaners. We =
pay $ 1.50=20
  a pound Canadian, or about $1.05 ish U.S. We do have a volume discount =

  though.</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
  <DIV><FONT color=3D#0000ff face=3DArial size=3D2><SPAN=20
  class=3D470591901-01122001></SPAN></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
  <DIV><FONT color=3D#0000ff face=3DArial size=3D2><SPAN=20
  class=3D470591901-01122001>Anthony.</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
  <BLOCKQUOTE=20
  style=3D"BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; =
PADDING-LEFT: 5px">
    <DIV class=3DOutlookMessageHeader><FONT face=3D"Times New Roman"=20
    size=3D2>-----Original Message-----<BR><B>From:</B> Amateur Rocketry =

    discussion list [<A=20
    =
href=3D"mailto:AROCKET@itc.uci.edu">mailto:AROCKET@itc.uci.edu</A>]<B>On =

    Behalf Of</B> <A=20
    =
href=3D"mailto:Sociald84@AOL.COM">Sociald84@AOL.COM</A><BR><B>Sent:</B>=20
    Friday, November 30, 2001 8:45 PM<BR><B>To:</B> <A=20
    =
href=3D"mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU">AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU</A><BR><B>Subject=
:</B>=20
    Re: Price of NOX<BR><BR></FONT></DIV><FONT =
face=3Darial,helvetica><FONT=20
    size=3D2>In a message dated 11/30/2001 6:14:46 PM Mountain Standard =
Time,=20
    strudwicke@OPTUSNET.COM.AU writes: <BR><BR><BR></FONT><FONT =
color=3D#0000ff=20
    face=3DArial lang=3D0 size=3D2 FAMILY=3D"SANSSERIF">
    <BLOCKQUOTE=20
    style=3D"BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; =
MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px"=20
    TYPE=3D"CITE">We are paying about AU$20/kg in Sydney =
Australia.</FONT><FONT=20
      color=3D#000000 face=3DArial lang=3D0 size=3D2 =
FAMILY=3D"SANSSERIF">=20
      <BR><BR></FONT><FONT color=3D#0000ff face=3DArial lang=3D0 =
size=3D2=20
      FAMILY=3D"SANSSERIF">Craig</FONT><FONT color=3D#000000 =
face=3DArial lang=3D0=20
      size=3D2 FAMILY=3D"SANSSERIF"> <BR></BLOCKQUOTE><BR><BR><BR>Hot =
Rod shops around=20
    Denver have quoted me about $3.75 (US)/ lb. <BR><BR>Mark</FONT>=20
  </FONT></BLOCKQUOTE></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0E2C_01C56B69.5A66ECC0--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 11945 invoked from network); 1 Dec 2001 08:52:30 -0000
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 1 Dec 2001 08:52:30 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 16242 invoked by uid 50005); 1 Dec 2001 08:52:15 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4172. . Clean. Processed in 0.265436 secs); 01 Dec 2001 08:52:15 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 1 Dec 2001 08:52:15 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA00961; Sat, 1 Dec 2001 00:50:40 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 93430 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 1 Dec 2001 08:50:33 +0000
Received: from snipe.prod.itd.earthlink.net (snipe.mail.pas.earthlink.net          [207.217.120.62]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA00946          for <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Sat, 1 Dec 2001 00:50:29 -0800
Received: from dialup-209.247.141.241.dial1.sanjose1.level3.net          ([209.247.141.241] helo=earthlink.net) by          snipe.prod.itd.earthlink.net with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id          16A5qu-0000fP-00 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 01 Dec 2001 00:50:29          -0800
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (Win98; I)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <006b01c17a06$e08cc980$1b0101c0@Anthony>            <002901c17a16$482ca880$0100a8c0@cc898542a>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3C089A1C.19744EBF@earthlink.net>
Date:         Sat, 1 Dec 2001 00:51:40 -0800
Reply-To: <thomgaf@energyrs.com>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Thomas M. Mcgaffey" <energyrelease@EARTHLINK.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Price of NOX
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Pax,

I think if you price out solid fuel (AP/AL) for the same size motor you
will find that NOX wins the cost race.

Thom

Thomas M. McGaffey
Energy Release Systems
408-226-7502
thomgaf@energyrs.com
San Jose, Kalifornia

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 21791 invoked from network); 1 Dec 2001 17:17:02 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 1 Dec 2001 17:17:02 -0000
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 31155 invoked by uid 50005); 1 Dec 2001 17:16:47 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4172. . Clean. Processed in 0.192558 secs); 01 Dec 2001 17:16:47 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 1 Dec 2001 17:16:47 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA02400; Sat, 1 Dec 2001 09:11:39 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 93508 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 1 Dec 2001 17:10:53 +0000
Received: from smtp.tscnet.net (smtp.tscnet.net [66.152.64.20]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA02386 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat,          1 Dec 2001 09:10:53 -0800
Received: from [192.168.0.2] (tr650.hawkfeather.com [66.152.67.138]) by          smtp.tscnet.net (8.11.6/8.11.2) with ESMTP id fB1HBOZ02199 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 1 Dec 2001 09:11:24 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <006b01c17a06$e08cc980$1b0101c0@Anthony>            <002901c17a16$482ca880$0100a8c0@cc898542a>            <3C089A1C.19744EBF@earthlink.net>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <a05100300b82ebea9e55f@[192.168.0.2]>
Date:         Sat, 1 Dec 2001 09:09:35 -0800
Reply-To: "Andrew MacMillen" <andrewm@HAWKFEATHER.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Andrew MacMillen" <andrewm@HAWKFEATHER.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Price of NOX
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <3C089A1C.19744EBF@earthlink.net>

I've made a price comparison table for NOX vs. solids for certified
motors (not EX) for a hybrid's article I'm writing. It's at:

http://www.hawkfeather.com/rockets/price.html

HTH, Andrew.


At 12:51 AM -0800 12/1/01, Thomas M. Mcgaffey wrote:
>Pax,
>
>I think if you price out solid fuel (AP/AL) for the same size motor you
>will find that NOX wins the cost race.
>
>Thom
>
>Thomas M. McGaffey
>Energy Release Systems
>408-226-7502
>thomgaf@energyrs.com
>San Jose, Kalifornia

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 6937 invoked from network); 1 Dec 2001 17:55:20 -0000
X-Priority: 3
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 1 Dec 2001 17:55:20 -0000
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 25799 invoked by uid 50005); 1 Dec 2001 17:55:05 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4172. . Clean. Processed in 0.785061 secs); 01 Dec 2001 17:55:05 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 1 Dec 2001 17:55:04 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA02565; Sat, 1 Dec 2001 09:51:46 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 93532 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 1 Dec 2001 17:51:36 +0000
Received: from imo-m09.mx.aol.com (imo-m09.mx.aol.com [64.12.136.164]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA02551 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Sat, 1 Dec 2001 09:51:35 -0800
Received: from Azt28@aol.com by imo-m09.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v31_r1.9.) id          4.59.13f2b43f (3893); Sat, 1 Dec 2001 12:50:52 -0500 (EST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0E2F_01C56B69.5A695DC0"
X-Mailer: AOL 6.0 for Windows FR sub 10506
Message-ID:  <59.13f2b43f.293a727c@aol.com>
Date:         Sat, 1 Dec 2001 12:50:52 EST
Reply-To: <Azt28@AOL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <Azt28@AOL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] [OT]: Hearing meteors - at the speed of light
Comments: To: thehalls@ridgenet.net
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0E2F_01C56B69.5A695DC0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit



>
> OK, I admit it, my "upper level" physics is lacking.....  What're
> "impulsion" dimensions?
> --
> Dave and/or Kristin Hall
>

In physics, "dimensions" is a word synonimous with free parameters. Many
problems get simpler if you can play with more parameters.  In dynamics, the
product of mass by velocity V  is often taken as free parameters or
dimensions. So you have the ordinary space dimensions: x, y, z and the
impulsion dimensions: mVx, mVy and mVz. Vx, Vy and Vz are the velocily
componments along directions x, y and z. Such a space with 6 dimensions is
called a phase space. ( in relativity, there are phase spaces with an
infinite number of dimensions). For cultural reasons it is not common to
think about phase spaces as real space where sounds can propagate but that is
only a cultural problem.

The interest of that explanation is that it solve a number of questions, for
example:
Why the Suttle don't produce "instant sounds" when it get back from space?
If instant sound  is produced by low frequency radio waves, where come from
the large energy of these waves? ( The 6 dim. phase space may not cover the
full 3 dim. "ordinary" space and so energy falls back at a slower pace than
the common inverse square law ).
If there is a sufficient energy store in a small space dust grain, why we
don't ear everywhere the sound produced by megawatts flowing in power lines?

More researches on that effect could bring unexpected applications, including
space transport.

Yvan Bozzonetti.


------=_NextPart_000_0E2F_01C56B69.5A695DC0
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<HTML><FONT FACE=arial,helvetica><FONT  SIZE=2>
<BR>
<BR><BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE style="BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px">
<BR>OK, I admit it, my "upper level" physics is lacking..... &nbsp;What're "impulsion" dimensions?
<BR>--
<BR>Dave and/or Kristin Hall
<BR></BLOCKQUOTE>
<BR>
<BR>In physics, "dimensions" is a word synonimous with free parameters. Many problems get simpler if you can play with more parameters. &nbsp;In dynamics, the product of mass by velocity V &nbsp;is often taken as free parameters or dimensions. So you have the ordinary space dimensions: x, y, z and the impulsion dimensions: mVx, mVy and mVz. Vx, Vy and Vz are the velocily componments along directions x, y and z. Such a space with 6 dimensions is called a phase space. ( in relativity, there are phase spaces with an infinite number of dimensions). For cultural reasons it is not common to think about phase spaces as real space where sounds can propagate but that is only a cultural problem.
<BR>
<BR>The interest of that explanation is that it solve a number of questions, for example:
<BR>Why the Suttle don't produce "instant sounds" when it get back from space?
<BR>If instant sound &nbsp;is produced by low frequency radio waves, where come from the large energy of these waves? ( The 6 dim. phase space may not cover the full 3 dim. "ordinary" space and so energy falls back at a slower pace than the common inverse square law ).
<BR>If there is a sufficient energy store in a small space dust grain, why we don't ear everywhere the sound produced by megawatts flowing in power lines?
<BR>
<BR>More researches on that effect could bring unexpected applications, including space transport.
<BR>
<BR>Yvan Bozzonetti.
<BR></FONT></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0E2F_01C56B69.5A695DC0--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 17309 invoked from network); 1 Dec 2001 18:10:19 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpv.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.110]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 1 Dec 2001 18:10:19 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 4914 invoked by uid 50005); 1 Dec 2001 18:04:27 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpv with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4172. . Clean. Processed in 0.127362 secs); 01 Dec 2001 18:04:27 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpv.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 1 Dec 2001 18:04:27 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA02634; Sat, 1 Dec 2001 10:06:29 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 93543 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 1 Dec 2001 18:05:47 +0000
Received: from out007pub.verizon.net (out007pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.107])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA02617 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 1 Dec 2001 10:05:47 -0800
Received: from [63.24.224.116] (2Cust52.tnt1.rancho-cucamonga.ca.da.uu.net          [63.24.224.116]) by out007pub.verizon.net  with ESMTP for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; id fB1I73N23867 Sat, 1 Dec 2001 12:07:03 -0600          (CST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: GTE/01rocket@mail.gte.net
References: <006b01c17a06$e08cc980$1b0101c0@Anthony>            <002901c17a16$482ca880$0100a8c0@cc898542a>            <3C089A1C.19744EBF@earthlink.net>            <a05100300b82ebea9e55f@[192.168.0.2]>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <a0510030bb82ecc0fca1d@[63.24.224.116]>
Date:         Sat, 1 Dec 2001 10:05:25 -0800
Reply-To: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Price of NOX
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <a05100300b82ebea9e55f@[192.168.0.2]>

>I've made a price comparison table for NOX vs. solids for certified
>motors (not EX) for a hybrid's article I'm writing. It's at:
>
>http://www.hawkfeather.com/rockets/price.html
>
>HTH, Andrew.


Thank you.  Very good chart.  Surprising to me how little savings
there are at the below M range.  Makes me want to offer slightly
lower price solids.

No longer a need for the $5 H I had certified by TRA in 1991 or so.

Jerry


>
>
>At 12:51 AM -0800 12/1/01, Thomas M. Mcgaffey wrote:
>>Pax,
>>
>>I think if you price out solid fuel (AP/AL) for the same size motor you
>>will find that NOX wins the cost race.
>>
>>Thom
>>
>>Thomas M. McGaffey
>>Energy Release Systems
>>408-226-7502
>>thomgaf@energyrs.com
>>San Jose, Kalifornia


--
Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
Opinion, the whole thing.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 28754 invoked from network); 1 Dec 2001 18:26:09 -0000
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 1 Dec 2001 18:26:09 -0000
Received: (qmail 31425 invoked by uid 50005); 1 Dec 2001 18:25:57 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4172. . Clean. Processed in 0.570686 secs); 01 Dec 2001 18:25:57 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 1 Dec 2001 18:25:55 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA02771; Sat, 1 Dec 2001 10:23:12 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 93562 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 1 Dec 2001 18:22:27 +0000
Received: from syntheon.inicom.com          (IDENT:root@66.mueb.miam.philapaaz.dsl.att.net [63.242.216.66]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA02753 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 1 Dec 2001 10:22:26 -0800
Received: from koreynew (adsl-81-3-19.mia.bellsouth.net [65.81.3.19]) by          syntheon.inicom.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id NAA02247 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 1 Dec 2001 13:51:02 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 8.5, Build 4.71.2173.0
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <003301c17a95$3afc17c0$6501a8c0@koreynew>
Date:         Sat, 1 Dec 2001 13:23:10 -0500
Reply-To: "Korey Kline" <k2@HYBRIDS.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Korey Kline" <k2@HYBRIDS.COM>
Subject:      [AR] FW: [AR] Price of NOX
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Andrew,

On your table you need to include the new Hypertek "I" motor that CTI just
TMT certified, it has been approved for TWO flights with the same grain
using the 300cc tank.....absolute lowest cost per flight!  When we do cost
comparisons of solids Vs hybrids we typically use cost per Newton-second or
even better, Newton seconds per dollar. This gives a real apples to apples
comparison and hybrids always win. In your article/table you mention that
even with the costs of GSE there are significant savings with the "M"
motors. Something worth mentioning is that Hypertek shipped just over 100
FREE GSE stations, so virtually every club should have a GSE by now & many
have more than one!  Also you might want to include the CTI Pro 38 solids
costs Vs Aerotech.....significant savings on hardware!

We buy "Industrial Grade" (not medical) N2O direct from Air Products for
$1.25 lb. Puritan Bennett is the source for "Nitrous Plus" which is normally
used by hot rod shops and more expensive with the addition of sulfur dioxide
to prevent abuse. (trust me ....it works :-)

K2


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU]On
> Behalf Of Andrew MacMillen
> Sent: Saturday, December 01, 2001 12:10 PM
> To:
> Subject: Re: [AR] Price of NOX
>
>
> I've made a price comparison table for NOX vs. solids for certified
> motors (not EX) for a hybrid's article I'm writing. It's at:
>
> http://www.hawkfeather.com/rockets/price.html
>
> HTH, Andrew.
>
>
> At 12:51 AM -0800 12/1/01, Thomas M. Mcgaffey wrote:
> >Pax,
> >
> >I think if you price out solid fuel (AP/AL) for the same size motor you
> >will find that NOX wins the cost race.
> >
> >Thom
> >
> >Thomas M. McGaffey
> >Energy Release Systems
> >408-226-7502
> >thomgaf@energyrs.com
> >San Jose, Kalifornia
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 13496 invoked from network); 1 Dec 2001 18:52:53 -0000
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 1 Dec 2001 18:52:53 -0000
Received: (qmail 8679 invoked by uid 50005); 1 Dec 2001 18:52:41 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4172. . Clean. Processed in 0.793595 secs); 01 Dec 2001 18:52:41 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 1 Dec 2001 18:52:39 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA02870; Sat, 1 Dec 2001 10:48:43 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 93581 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 1 Dec 2001 18:48:40 +0000
Received: from albqpop1.albq.uswest.net (albqpop1.albq.uswest.net          [207.108.240.1]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id KAA02856          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 1 Dec 2001 10:48:40 -0800
Received: (qmail 12377 invoked by alias); 1 Dec 2001 18:48:09 -0000
Delivered-To: fixup-AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU@fixme
Received: (qmail 12366 invoked by uid 0); 1 Dec 2001 18:48:08 -0000
Received: from cc898542-a.prdise1.nm.home.com (HELO cc898542a) (65.7.151.152)          by albqpop1.albq.uswest.net with SMTP; 1 Dec 2001 18:48:08 -0000
References:  <003301c17a95$3afc17c0$6501a8c0@koreynew>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <002001c17a98$66212370$0100a8c0@cc898542a>
Date:         Sat, 1 Dec 2001 11:45:50 -0700
Reply-To: "Paxton" <darkspunge@USWEST.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Paxton" <darkspunge@USWEST.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] FW: [AR] Price of NOX
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

I can't figure out how he did these calculations? Is he including the price
of hardware? That would not be an accurate representation of cost per
flight. Is the cost per flight under the hybrid section representing the
amount of reloads are included in the cost? In which case Jerry would be
very wrong. Also, as you mentioned, I suspect most people are paying less
for their nox. Also, for the J250, there is barely over a pound in the nox.
Which brings me to whether or no he is including 3 firings in one. Ideally
for the Hypertek system, 25 bucks for the grain, and 2-4 dollars for NOX.
And if you are an EX guy(which you prolly are if on aRocket), the 440cc tank
can normally fire the same grain twice(not efx).

Pax

----- Original Message -----
From: "Korey Kline" <k2@HYBRIDS.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Saturday, December 01, 2001 11:23 AM
Subject: [AR] FW: [AR] Price of NOX


> Andrew,
>
> On your table you need to include the new Hypertek "I" motor that CTI just
> TMT certified, it has been approved for TWO flights with the same grain
> using the 300cc tank.....absolute lowest cost per flight!  When we do cost
> comparisons of solids Vs hybrids we typically use cost per Newton-second
or
> even better, Newton seconds per dollar. This gives a real apples to apples
> comparison and hybrids always win. In your article/table you mention that
> even with the costs of GSE there are significant savings with the "M"
> motors. Something worth mentioning is that Hypertek shipped just over 100
> FREE GSE stations, so virtually every club should have a GSE by now & many
> have more than one!  Also you might want to include the CTI Pro 38 solids
> costs Vs Aerotech.....significant savings on hardware!
>
> We buy "Industrial Grade" (not medical) N2O direct from Air Products for
> $1.25 lb. Puritan Bennett is the source for "Nitrous Plus" which is
normally
> used by hot rod shops and more expensive with the addition of sulfur
dioxide
> to prevent abuse. (trust me ....it works :-)
>
> K2
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU]On
> > Behalf Of Andrew MacMillen
> > Sent: Saturday, December 01, 2001 12:10 PM
> > To:
> > Subject: Re: [AR] Price of NOX
> >
> >
> > I've made a price comparison table for NOX vs. solids for certified
> > motors (not EX) for a hybrid's article I'm writing. It's at:
> >
> > http://www.hawkfeather.com/rockets/price.html
> >
> > HTH, Andrew.
> >
> >
> > At 12:51 AM -0800 12/1/01, Thomas M. Mcgaffey wrote:
> > >Pax,
> > >
> > >I think if you price out solid fuel (AP/AL) for the same size motor you
> > >will find that NOX wins the cost race.
> > >
> > >Thom
> > >
> > >Thomas M. McGaffey
> > >Energy Release Systems
> > >408-226-7502
> > >thomgaf@energyrs.com
> > >San Jose, Kalifornia
> >
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 11486 invoked from network); 1 Dec 2001 19:25:14 -0000
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 1 Dec 2001 19:25:14 -0000
Received: (qmail 27113 invoked by uid 50005); 1 Dec 2001 19:25:00 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4172. . Clean. Processed in 1.243471 secs); 01 Dec 2001 19:25:00 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 1 Dec 2001 19:24:57 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA02993; Sat, 1 Dec 2001 11:21:37 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 93596 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 1 Dec 2001 19:21:29 +0000
Received: from syntheon.inicom.com          (IDENT:root@66.mueb.miam.philapaaz.dsl.att.net [63.242.216.66]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA02979 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 1 Dec 2001 11:21:29 -0800
Received: from koreynew (adsl-81-3-19.mia.bellsouth.net [65.81.3.19]) by          syntheon.inicom.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id OAA02275; Sat, 1 Dec          2001 14:50:04 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 8.5, Build 4.71.2173.0
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <003501c17a9d$77c778e0$6501a8c0@koreynew>
Date:         Sat, 1 Dec 2001 14:22:08 -0500
Reply-To: "Korey Kline" <k2@HYBRIDS.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Korey Kline" <k2@HYBRIDS.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] FW: [AR] Price of NOX
Comments: To: Paxton <darkspunge@USWEST.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <002001c17a98$66212370$0100a8c0@cc898542a>

If you can't figure out how he came up with the costs, that's good input to
Andrew for clarification for his article.

Firing the same grain TWICE has ALWAYS been against manufacturer's
recommendation and there for NOT TMT certified. Several people have
"experimented" with the 440cc tank and combinations of orifice sizes that
may allow two firings....again NOT recommended because certain combinations
of orifices will GUARANTEE a burn through!!!  The NEW 300cc tank motor is
the ONLY TMT & Mfg. approved multi use grain!

K2
The Future of High Power is NOT in your explosive magazine!

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU]On
> Behalf Of Paxton
> Sent: Saturday, December 01, 2001 1:46 PM
> To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
> Subject: Re: [AR] FW: [AR] Price of NOX
>
>
> I can't figure out how he did these calculations? Is he including
> the price
> of hardware? That would not be an accurate representation of cost per
> flight. Is the cost per flight under the hybrid section representing the
> amount of reloads are included in the cost? In which case Jerry would be
> very wrong. Also, as you mentioned, I suspect most people are paying less
> for their nox. Also, for the J250, there is barely over a pound
> in the nox.
> Which brings me to whether or no he is including 3 firings in one. Ideally
> for the Hypertek system, 25 bucks for the grain, and 2-4 dollars for NOX.
> And if you are an EX guy(which you prolly are if on aRocket), the
> 440cc tank
> can normally fire the same grain twice(not efx).
>
> Pax
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Korey Kline" <k2@HYBRIDS.COM>
> To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
> Sent: Saturday, December 01, 2001 11:23 AM
> Subject: [AR] FW: [AR] Price of NOX
>
>
> > Andrew,
> >
> > On your table you need to include the new Hypertek "I" motor
> that CTI just
> > TMT certified, it has been approved for TWO flights with the same grain
> > using the 300cc tank.....absolute lowest cost per flight!  When
> we do cost
> > comparisons of solids Vs hybrids we typically use cost per Newton-second
> or
> > even better, Newton seconds per dollar. This gives a real
> apples to apples
> > comparison and hybrids always win. In your article/table you
> mention that
> > even with the costs of GSE there are significant savings with the "M"
> > motors. Something worth mentioning is that Hypertek shipped
> just over 100
> > FREE GSE stations, so virtually every club should have a GSE by
> now & many
> > have more than one!  Also you might want to include the CTI Pro
> 38 solids
> > costs Vs Aerotech.....significant savings on hardware!
> >
> > We buy "Industrial Grade" (not medical) N2O direct from Air Products for
> > $1.25 lb. Puritan Bennett is the source for "Nitrous Plus" which is
> normally
> > used by hot rod shops and more expensive with the addition of sulfur
> dioxide
> > to prevent abuse. (trust me ....it works :-)
> >
> > K2
> >
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU]On
> > > Behalf Of Andrew MacMillen
> > > Sent: Saturday, December 01, 2001 12:10 PM
> > > To:
> > > Subject: Re: [AR] Price of NOX
> > >
> > >
> > > I've made a price comparison table for NOX vs. solids for certified
> > > motors (not EX) for a hybrid's article I'm writing. It's at:
> > >
> > > http://www.hawkfeather.com/rockets/price.html
> > >
> > > HTH, Andrew.
> > >
> > >
> > > At 12:51 AM -0800 12/1/01, Thomas M. Mcgaffey wrote:
> > > >Pax,
> > > >
> > > >I think if you price out solid fuel (AP/AL) for the same
> size motor you
> > > >will find that NOX wins the cost race.
> > > >
> > > >Thom
> > > >
> > > >Thomas M. McGaffey
> > > >Energy Release Systems
> > > >408-226-7502
> > > >thomgaf@energyrs.com
> > > >San Jose, Kalifornia
> > >
> >
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 19421 invoked from network); 1 Dec 2001 19:27:56 -0000
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 1 Dec 2001 19:27:56 -0000
Received: (qmail 31991 invoked by uid 50005); 1 Dec 2001 19:27:41 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4172. . Clean. Processed in 0.384045 secs); 01 Dec 2001 19:27:41 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 1 Dec 2001 19:27:40 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA03030; Sat, 1 Dec 2001 11:24:43 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 93607 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 1 Dec 2001 19:24:40 +0000
Received: from mail.argotech.net (mail.argotech.net [209.76.235.6]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA03016 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 1 Dec 2001 11:24:40 -0800
Received: from Wayne ([209.76.232.83]) by mail.argotech.net (Post.Office MTA          v3.5.3 release 223 ID# 0-55624U2500L250S0V35) with SMTP id net; Sat,          1 Dec 2001 11:25:16 -0800
References:  <003301c17a95$3afc17c0$6501a8c0@koreynew>              <002001c17a98$66212370$0100a8c0@cc898542a>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4807.1700
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <000701c17a9d$de04df80$6701a8c0@Argotech.net>
Date:         Sat, 1 Dec 2001 11:24:59 -0800
Reply-To: "Wayne Mrazek" <wmrazek@earthlink.net>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Wayne Mrazek" <wmrazek@earthlink.net>
Subject:      [AR] AP vs N20 comparison
Comments: To: Paxton <darkspunge@USWEST.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Some of the links in the chart refer to my Now Hybrids page, so I am going
to jump in.

I (and Andrew) calculated costs  based on MSRP, and assume the hardware will
only be used for the number of flights indicated.  N20 amount includes leak
testing and venting loss, in addition to the fill.  The M tank holds less
than 8 pounds, but 10 pounds was used in the calcs.  $3/lb was used because
that is a typical retail price.

The GSE was included in the cost per flight, so that someone considering
buying their own GSE could see how it amortizes.  If you leave out the GSE
on big motors, it's such a no brainer that you don't need a cost comparison
spreadsheet in the first place.

It is also a significant plus the once you have GSE, you also have the
ability to fly RATT motors, another low cost, LEUP free alternative.  And
for the experimenter without significant machining capability, the RATT
motor platform allows for easy testing of custom fuel, HTPB + Ti,  Sorbitol
+ nothing, rolled newspaper, etc.  Those options take the cost of an I motor
down to < $1 at an EX launch.  (+ the cost of your errors)

Wayne
www.nowhybrids.com

----- Original Message -----
From: "Paxton" <darkspunge@USWEST.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Saturday, December 01, 2001 10:45 AM
Subject: Re: [AR] FW: [AR] Price of NOX


> I can't figure out how he did these calculations? Is he including the
price
> of hardware? That would not be an accurate representation of cost per
> flight.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 16595 invoked from network); 1 Dec 2001 19:47:16 -0000
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 1 Dec 2001 19:47:16 -0000
Received: (qmail 13081 invoked by uid 50005); 1 Dec 2001 19:47:01 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4172. . Clean. Processed in 1.306817 secs); 01 Dec 2001 19:47:01 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 1 Dec 2001 19:46:57 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA03153; Sat, 1 Dec 2001 11:43:48 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 93631 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 1 Dec 2001 19:43:47 +0000
Received: from albqpop1.albq.uswest.net (albqpop1.albq.uswest.net          [207.108.240.1]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id LAA03132          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 1 Dec 2001 11:42:33 -0800
Received: (qmail 84856 invoked by alias); 1 Dec 2001 19:42:02 -0000
Delivered-To: fixup-AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU@fixme
Received: (qmail 84846 invoked by uid 0); 1 Dec 2001 19:42:02 -0000
Received: from cc898542-a.prdise1.nm.home.com (HELO cc898542a) (65.7.151.152)          by albqpop1.albq.uswest.net with SMTP; 1 Dec 2001 19:42:02 -0000
References:  <003501c17a9d$77c778e0$6501a8c0@koreynew>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <001101c17a9f$ed6ee0e0$0100a8c0@cc898542a>
Date:         Sat, 1 Dec 2001 12:39:43 -0700
Reply-To: "Paxton" <darkspunge@USWEST.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Paxton" <darkspunge@USWEST.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] FW: [AR] Price of NOX
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Like I said, for EX guys.... I am pretty sure using your own reloads in AT
cases are against the manufacturers suggestion as well....


----- Original Message -----
From: "Korey Kline" <k2@HYBRIDS.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Saturday, December 01, 2001 12:22 PM
Subject: Re: [AR] FW: [AR] Price of NOX


> If you can't figure out how he came up with the costs, that's good input
to
> Andrew for clarification for his article.
>
> Firing the same grain TWICE has ALWAYS been against manufacturer's
> recommendation and there for NOT TMT certified. Several people have
> "experimented" with the 440cc tank and combinations of orifice sizes that
> may allow two firings....again NOT recommended because certain
combinations
> of orifices will GUARANTEE a burn through!!!  The NEW 300cc tank motor is
> the ONLY TMT & Mfg. approved multi use grain!
>
> K2
> The Future of High Power is NOT in your explosive magazine!

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 17740 invoked from network); 1 Dec 2001 19:47:37 -0000
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 1 Dec 2001 19:47:37 -0000
Received: (qmail 746 invoked by uid 50005); 1 Dec 2001 19:47:19 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4172. . Clean. Processed in 0.720269 secs); 01 Dec 2001 19:47:19 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 1 Dec 2001 19:47:17 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA03128; Sat, 1 Dec 2001 11:42:25 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 93624 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 1 Dec 2001 19:42:22 +0000
Received: from syntheon.inicom.com          (IDENT:root@66.mueb.miam.philapaaz.dsl.att.net [63.242.216.66]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA03114 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 1 Dec 2001 11:42:21 -0800
Received: from koreynew (adsl-81-3-19.mia.bellsouth.net [65.81.3.19]) by          syntheon.inicom.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id PAA02295 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 1 Dec 2001 15:10:59 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 8.5, Build 4.71.2173.0
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <003601c17aa0$622da880$6501a8c0@koreynew>
Date:         Sat, 1 Dec 2001 14:42:59 -0500
Reply-To: "Korey Kline" <k2@HYBRIDS.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Korey Kline" <k2@HYBRIDS.COM>
Subject:      [AR] Price of NOX
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Pax

If you can't figure out how he came up with the costs, that's good input to
Andrew for clarification for his article.

Firing the same grain TWICE has ALWAYS been against manufacturer's
recommendation and there for NOT TMT certified. Several people have
"experimented" with the 440cc tank and combinations of orifice sizes that
may allow two firings....again NOT recommended because certain combinations
of orifices will GUARANTEE a burn through!!!  The NEW 300cc tank motor is
the ONLY TMT & Mfg. approved multi use grain!

K2
The Future of High Power is NOT in your explosive magazine!

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU]On
> Behalf Of Paxton
> Sent: Saturday, December 01, 2001 1:46 PM
> To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
> Subject: Re: [AR] FW: [AR] Price of NOX
>
>
> I can't figure out how he did these calculations? Is he including
> the price
> of hardware? That would not be an accurate representation of cost per
> flight. Is the cost per flight under the hybrid section representing the
> amount of reloads are included in the cost? In which case Jerry would be
> very wrong. Also, as you mentioned, I suspect most people are paying less
> for their nox. Also, for the J250, there is barely over a pound
> in the nox.
> Which brings me to whether or no he is including 3 firings in one. Ideally
> for the Hypertek system, 25 bucks for the grain, and 2-4 dollars for NOX.
> And if you are an EX guy(which you prolly are if on aRocket), the
> 440cc tank
> can normally fire the same grain twice(not efx).
>
> Pax
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Korey Kline" <k2@HYBRIDS.COM>
> To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
> Sent: Saturday, December 01, 2001 11:23 AM
> Subject: [AR] FW: [AR] Price of NOX
>
>
> > Andrew,
> >
> > On your table you need to include the new Hypertek "I" motor
> that CTI just
> > TMT certified, it has been approved for TWO flights with the same grain
> > using the 300cc tank.....absolute lowest cost per flight!  When
> we do cost
> > comparisons of solids Vs hybrids we typically use cost per Newton-second
> or
> > even better, Newton seconds per dollar. This gives a real
> apples to apples
> > comparison and hybrids always win. In your article/table you
> mention that
> > even with the costs of GSE there are significant savings with the "M"
> > motors. Something worth mentioning is that Hypertek shipped
> just over 100
> > FREE GSE stations, so virtually every club should have a GSE by
> now & many
> > have more than one!  Also you might want to include the CTI Pro
> 38 solids
> > costs Vs Aerotech.....significant savings on hardware!
> >
> > We buy "Industrial Grade" (not medical) N2O direct from Air Products for
> > $1.25 lb. Puritan Bennett is the source for "Nitrous Plus" which is
> normally
> > used by hot rod shops and more expensive with the addition of sulfur
> dioxide
> > to prevent abuse. (trust me ....it works :-)
> >
> > K2
> >
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU]On
> > > Behalf Of Andrew MacMillen
> > > Sent: Saturday, December 01, 2001 12:10 PM
> > > To:
> > > Subject: Re: [AR] Price of NOX
> > >
> > >
> > > I've made a price comparison table for NOX vs. solids for certified
> > > motors (not EX) for a hybrid's article I'm writing. It's at:
> > >
> > > http://www.hawkfeather.com/rockets/price.html
> > >
> > > HTH, Andrew.
> > >
> > >
> > > At 12:51 AM -0800 12/1/01, Thomas M. Mcgaffey wrote:
> > > >Pax,
> > > >
> > > >I think if you price out solid fuel (AP/AL) for the same
> size motor you
> > > >will find that NOX wins the cost race.
> > > >
> > > >Thom
> > > >
> > > >Thomas M. McGaffey
> > > >Energy Release Systems
> > > >408-226-7502
> > > >thomgaf@energyrs.com
> > > >San Jose, Kalifornia
> > >
> >
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 10531 invoked from network); 1 Dec 2001 19:55:44 -0000
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 1 Dec 2001 19:55:44 -0000
Received: (qmail 14027 invoked by uid 50005); 1 Dec 2001 19:55:30 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4172. . Clean. Processed in 0.594427 secs); 01 Dec 2001 19:55:30 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 1 Dec 2001 19:55:28 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA03207; Sat, 1 Dec 2001 11:49:19 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 93646 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 1 Dec 2001 19:49:17 +0000
Received: from syntheon.inicom.com          (IDENT:root@66.mueb.miam.philapaaz.dsl.att.net [63.242.216.66]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA03193 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 1 Dec 2001 11:49:16 -0800
Received: from koreynew (adsl-81-3-19.mia.bellsouth.net [65.81.3.19]) by          syntheon.inicom.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id PAA02300; Sat, 1 Dec          2001 15:17:53 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 8.5, Build 4.71.2173.0
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <003701c17aa1$58ec77a0$6501a8c0@koreynew>
Date:         Sat, 1 Dec 2001 14:49:54 -0500
Reply-To: "Korey Kline" <k2@HYBRIDS.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Korey Kline" <k2@HYBRIDS.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] AP vs N20 comparison
Comments: To: Wayne Mrazek <wmrazek@earthlink.net>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <000701c17a9d$de04df80$6701a8c0@Argotech.net>

Wayne,

Because so many motors have different total impulse ranges even with the
same "letter" prefix (baby "J" VS Full "J"), why not put everything on the
same level scale of Newton-seconds per dollar rather than saying that a "J"
flight cost $xx?

K2
10 out of 10 BATF agents have never heard of Hypertek!

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@itc.uci.edu]On
> Behalf Of Wayne Mrazek
> Sent: Saturday, December 01, 2001 2:25 PM
> To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
> Subject: [AR] AP vs N20 comparison
>
>
> Some of the links in the chart refer to my Now Hybrids page, so I am going
> to jump in.
>
> I (and Andrew) calculated costs  based on MSRP, and assume the
> hardware will
> only be used for the number of flights indicated.  N20 amount
> includes leak
> testing and venting loss, in addition to the fill.  The M tank holds less
> than 8 pounds, but 10 pounds was used in the calcs.  $3/lb was
> used because
> that is a typical retail price.
>
> The GSE was included in the cost per flight, so that someone considering
> buying their own GSE could see how it amortizes.  If you leave out the GSE
> on big motors, it's such a no brainer that you don't need a cost
> comparison
> spreadsheet in the first place.
>
> It is also a significant plus the once you have GSE, you also have the
> ability to fly RATT motors, another low cost, LEUP free alternative.  And
> for the experimenter without significant machining capability, the RATT
> motor platform allows for easy testing of custom fuel, HTPB + Ti,
>  Sorbitol
> + nothing, rolled newspaper, etc.  Those options take the cost of
> an I motor
> down to < $1 at an EX launch.  (+ the cost of your errors)
>
> Wayne
> www.nowhybrids.com
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Paxton" <darkspunge@USWEST.NET>
> To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
> Sent: Saturday, December 01, 2001 10:45 AM
> Subject: Re: [AR] FW: [AR] Price of NOX
>
>
> > I can't figure out how he did these calculations? Is he including the
> price
> > of hardware? That would not be an accurate representation of cost per
> > flight.
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 20390 invoked from network); 1 Dec 2001 20:32:17 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 1 Dec 2001 20:32:17 -0000
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 22412 invoked by uid 50005); 1 Dec 2001 20:32:05 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4172. . Clean. Processed in 0.65424 secs); 01 Dec 2001 20:32:05 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 1 Dec 2001 20:32:03 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA03359; Sat, 1 Dec 2001 12:28:28 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 93666 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 1 Dec 2001 20:28:01 +0000
Received: from smtp.tscnet.net (smtp.tscnet.net [66.152.64.20]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA03345 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat,          1 Dec 2001 12:28:00 -0800
Received: from [192.168.0.2] (tr650.hawkfeather.com [66.152.67.138]) by          smtp.tscnet.net (8.11.6/8.11.2) with ESMTP id fB1KSXZ02252 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 1 Dec 2001 12:28:33 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <003301c17a95$3afc17c0$6501a8c0@koreynew>            <002001c17a98$66212370$0100a8c0@cc898542a>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <a05100301b82eec95b397@[192.168.0.2]>
Date:         Sat, 1 Dec 2001 12:24:15 -0800
Reply-To: "Andrew MacMillen" <andrewm@HAWKFEATHER.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Andrew MacMillen" <andrewm@HAWKFEATHER.COM>
Subject:      [AR] hybrid article (was [AR] Price of NOX)
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <002001c17a98$66212370$0100a8c0@cc898542a>

Thanx all for the comments and questions. I've made some changes to
the price chart based on feedback, and pasted it into a draft of part
1 of my article at:

http://www.hawkfeather.com/rockets/hybrids1.html

Comments and questions glady accepted, flames rejected :)

Andrew.

PS: plz keep in mind that this is a general info article, both for
our club newsletter, and online.  I will cover a bit of EX in part 2.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 25710 invoked from network); 1 Dec 2001 23:40:12 -0000
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 1 Dec 2001 23:40:12 -0000
Received: (qmail 17348 invoked by uid 50005); 1 Dec 2001 23:39:57 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4172. . Clean. Processed in 1.165465 secs); 01 Dec 2001 23:39:57 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 1 Dec 2001 23:39:53 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA03946; Sat, 1 Dec 2001 15:34:17 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 93752 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 1 Dec 2001 23:33:41 +0000
Received: from mta03.mail.mel.aone.net.au (mta03.mail.au.uu.net [203.2.192.83])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA03927 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 1 Dec 2001 15:33:40 -0800
Received: from win2pk ([63.60.220.189]) by mta03.mail.mel.aone.net.au with SMTP          id <20011201232349.OKLZ22966.mta03.mail.mel.aone.net.au@win2pk> for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 2 Dec 2001 10:23:49 +1100
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
Importance: Normal
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <NEBBJIGOELOLIBCCPKDCEECJCCAA.geordi@c031.aone.net.au>
Date:         Sun, 2 Dec 2001 10:53:20 +1100
Reply-To: "Troy Prideaux" <geordi@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Troy Prideaux" <geordi@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] FW: [AR] Price of NOX
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <003301c17a95$3afc17c0$6501a8c0@koreynew>

>Andrew,
>
>On your table you need to include the new Hypertek "I" motor that CTI just
>TMT certified, it has been approved for TWO flights with the same grain
>using the 300cc tank.....absolute lowest cost per flight!  When we do cost
>comparisons of solids Vs hybrids we typically use cost per Newton-second or
>even better, Newton seconds per dollar. This gives a real apples to apples
>comparison and hybrids always win.

True of HPR, but hey, this list is NOT a HPR list and the day it is, is the
day I leave!!! When developing motors as amateurs we don't have to factor in
consumer suppliers level of profit margin, consumer suppliers level of
manufacturing efficiency, consumer suppliers liability costs, etc. No, this
is amateur rocketry where some of us look at parameters such as available &
potential energy density of propellant (which *DOES* cost money), system
cost, availability of materials and ingredients, level of safety, fun, legal
requirements, mission selection, pyrotechnic effects, system complexity,
system capability, mobility & ground support, scalability, track record and
reliability of the propulsion system, resources required for manufacturing,
storability of reactants etc, etc, etc...
 Now, it maybe true that NOX hybrids wins on most of the real valid points
that influences propulsion system selection for amateurs in general but the
table submitted and the points you make are too HPR specific to really
influence anyones line of judgement on this list I would have hoped. A true
representation should cover at least 12 different propulsion systems
available to the amateur with cost not begin the only measurable.

Troy.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 14967 invoked from network); 1 Dec 2001 23:47:29 -0000
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 1 Dec 2001 23:47:29 -0000
Received: (qmail 29444 invoked by uid 50005); 1 Dec 2001 23:47:14 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4172. . Clean. Processed in 0.180022 secs); 01 Dec 2001 23:47:14 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 1 Dec 2001 23:47:14 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA04013; Sat, 1 Dec 2001 15:40:25 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 93771 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 1 Dec 2001 23:40:24 +0000
Received: from smtprelay6.dc2.adelphia.net (smtprelay6.dc2.adelphia.net          [64.8.50.38]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA03998 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 1 Dec 2001 15:40:23 -0800
Received: from jlgrady ([24.53.101.238]) by smtprelay6.dc2.adelphia.net          (Netscape Messaging Server 4.15) with SMTP id GNOV2G00.6YB for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 1 Dec 2001 18:39:52 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook CWS, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
Importance: Normal
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <000201c17ac1$aaffc450$0200a8c0@24.53.64.18>
Date:         Sat, 1 Dec 2001 18:41:14 -0500
Reply-To: "Jeff Grady" <jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jeff Grady" <jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET>
Subject:      [AR] AP/Epoxy motor comments
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <001101c17a9f$ed6ee0e0$0100a8c0@cc898542a>

Received my shipment of AP & AL (325 mesh). Mixed some 5-min epoxy with the
AP & charcoal in my usual mixture (72/25/3). The epoxy does not want the
solidify when using the AP. Does fine with KNO3. I suspect it is the ammonia
giving the epoxy curing a hard time...Comments?

JG

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 28951 invoked from network); 2 Dec 2001 00:03:53 -0000
Received: from smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.105]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 2 Dec 2001 00:03:53 -0000
Received: (qmail 6698 invoked by uid 50005); 2 Dec 2001 00:03:38 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpy with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4172. . Clean. Processed in 1.531409 secs); 02 Dec 2001 00:03:38 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 2 Dec 2001 00:03:36 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA04198; Sat, 1 Dec 2001 16:02:04 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 93823 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 2 Dec 2001 00:02:01 +0000
Received: from mailhost0.trib.com (MAILHOST0.TRIB.COM [63.229.150.8]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA04184 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Sat, 1 Dec 2001 16:02:00 -0800
Received: from mail.trib.com (mail.trib.com [12.10.158.17]) by          mailhost0.trib.com (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id fB1Nxxl66379; Sat, 1          Dec 2001 16:59:59 -0700 (MST) (envelope-from          jwckman@space-rockets.com)
Received: from [63.229.150.78] (HELO hppav) by mail.trib.com (CommuniGate Pro          SMTP 3.4.6) with SMTP id 61131135; Sat, 01 Dec 2001 16:59:58 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
Importance: Normal
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <NKEHJAOOKBPGIKOOPDEFKEKGCDAA.jwckman@space-rockets.com>
Date:         Sat, 1 Dec 2001 16:58:38 -0700
Reply-To: "John Wickman" <jwckman@SPACE-ROCKETS.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Wickman" <jwckman@SPACE-ROCKETS.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] FW: [AR] Price of NOX
Comments: To: Troy Prideaux <geordi@c031.aone.net.au>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <NEBBJIGOELOLIBCCPKDCEECJCCAA.geordi@c031.aone.net.au>

Well said, Troy.

And maybe we can stop being bombarded by hybrid commercial slogans from a
certain quarter.

John Wickman


-----Original Message-----
From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU]On
Behalf Of Troy Prideaux
Sent: Saturday, December 01, 2001 4:53 PM
To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
Subject: Re: [AR] FW: [AR] Price of NOX


>Andrew,
>
>On your table you need to include the new Hypertek "I" motor that CTI just
>TMT certified, it has been approved for TWO flights with the same grain
>using the 300cc tank.....absolute lowest cost per flight!  When we do cost
>comparisons of solids Vs hybrids we typically use cost per Newton-second or
>even better, Newton seconds per dollar. This gives a real apples to apples
>comparison and hybrids always win.

True of HPR, but hey, this list is NOT a HPR list and the day it is, is the
day I leave!!! When developing motors as amateurs we don't have to factor in
consumer suppliers level of profit margin, consumer suppliers level of
manufacturing efficiency, consumer suppliers liability costs, etc. No, this
is amateur rocketry where some of us look at parameters such as available &
potential energy density of propellant (which *DOES* cost money), system
cost, availability of materials and ingredients, level of safety, fun, legal
requirements, mission selection, pyrotechnic effects, system complexity,
system capability, mobility & ground support, scalability, track record and
reliability of the propulsion system, resources required for manufacturing,
storability of reactants etc, etc, etc...
 Now, it maybe true that NOX hybrids wins on most of the real valid points
that influences propulsion system selection for amateurs in general but the
table submitted and the points you make are too HPR specific to really
influence anyones line of judgement on this list I would have hoped. A true
representation should cover at least 12 different propulsion systems
available to the amateur with cost not begin the only measurable.

Troy.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 6394 invoked from network); 2 Dec 2001 00:17:50 -0000
Received: from smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.105]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 2 Dec 2001 00:17:50 -0000
Received: (qmail 28093 invoked by uid 50005); 2 Dec 2001 00:17:35 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpy with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4172. . Clean. Processed in 1.346159 secs); 02 Dec 2001 00:17:35 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 2 Dec 2001 00:17:33 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA04296; Sat, 1 Dec 2001 16:15:32 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 93847 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 2 Dec 2001 00:15:29 +0000
Received: from mta04.mail.mel.aone.net.au (mta04.mail.au.uu.net [203.2.192.84])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA04282 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 1 Dec 2001 16:15:28 -0800
Received: from unknown ([63.34.214.93]) by mta04.mail.mel.aone.net.au with SMTP          id <20011202001526.FAOU4118.mta04.mail.mel.aone.net.au@unknown> for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 2 Dec 2001 11:15:26 +1100
References: Conversation <001101c17a9f$ed6ee0e0$0100a8c0@cc898542a> with last            message <000201c17ac1$aaffc450$0200a8c0@24.53.64.18>
Priority: Normal
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Priority: 3
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	X-MAPIextension=.TXT;
	charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>
Date:         Sun, 2 Dec 2001 00:15:29 +0000
Reply-To: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] AP/Epoxy motor comments
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <000201c17ac1$aaffc450$0200a8c0@24.53.64.18>

Can you smell any NH3 or other detectable vapours after the addition of the
curative? Is there any noticeable dissolving of AP into the epoxy?  If the
answer to the first is "yes", then (depending on the measure of NH3
liberation) this can be a concern. If the answer to the second question is
"yes", then that's even more of a concern.

Troy.

----------
> Received my shipment of AP & AL (325 mesh). Mixed some 5-min epoxy with
the
> AP & charcoal in my usual mixture (72/25/3). The epoxy does not want the
> solidify when using the AP. Does fine with KNO3. I suspect it is the
ammonia
> giving the epoxy curing a hard time...Comments?
>
> JG
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 2583 invoked from network); 2 Dec 2001 01:09:20 -0000
Received: from smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.105]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 2 Dec 2001 01:09:20 -0000
Received: (qmail 15474 invoked by uid 50005); 2 Dec 2001 01:09:05 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpy with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4172. . Clean. Processed in 0.161009 secs); 02 Dec 2001 01:09:05 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 2 Dec 2001 01:09:05 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA04477; Sat, 1 Dec 2001 17:06:16 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 93874 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 2 Dec 2001 01:05:32 +0000
Received: from albqpop1.albq.uswest.net (albqpop1.albq.uswest.net          [207.108.240.1]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id RAA04458          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 1 Dec 2001 17:05:31 -0800
Received: (qmail 80827 invoked by alias); 2 Dec 2001 01:05:00 -0000
Delivered-To: fixup-AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU@fixme
Received: (qmail 80801 invoked by uid 0); 2 Dec 2001 01:04:59 -0000
Received: from cc898542-a.prdise1.nm.home.com (HELO cc898542a) (65.7.151.152)          by albqpop1.albq.uswest.net with SMTP; 2 Dec 2001 01:04:59 -0000
References:  <NKEHJAOOKBPGIKOOPDEFKEKGCDAA.jwckman@space-rockets.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <001a01c17acd$0bc308a0$0100a8c0@cc898542a>
Date:         Sat, 1 Dec 2001 18:02:41 -0700
Reply-To: "Paxton" <darkspunge@USWEST.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Paxton" <darkspunge@USWEST.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Price of NOX
Comments: To: John Wickman <jwckman@SPACE-ROCKETS.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Anyway. Anthony was the closest on the info I was looking for. How about
what one would do to get something like a 400lb NOX tank?
Could it be rented, or would you have to actually buy one? I would think it
would be more cost effective to rent one for the day or two of the project
firing, but do industrial supply type places do such a thing?

Pax

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 9405 invoked from network); 2 Dec 2001 01:22:46 -0000
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 2 Dec 2001 01:22:46 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 27765 invoked by uid 50005); 2 Dec 2001 01:22:30 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4172. . Clean. Processed in 2.747691 secs); 02 Dec 2001 01:22:30 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 2 Dec 2001 01:22:25 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA04562; Sat, 1 Dec 2001 17:21:00 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 93893 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 2 Dec 2001 01:20:58 +0000
Received: from albatross.prod.itd.earthlink.net          (albatross.mail.pas.earthlink.net [207.217.120.120]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA04548 for <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Sat,          1 Dec 2001 17:20:57 -0800
Received: from dialup-209.245.137.182.dial1.sanjose1.level3.net          ([209.245.137.182] helo=earthlink.net) by          albatross.prod.itd.earthlink.net with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id          16ALJQ-0003by-00 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 01 Dec 2001 17:20:56          -0800
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (Win98; I)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <NEBBJIGOELOLIBCCPKDCEECJCCAA.geordi@c031.aone.net.au>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3C09823E.678ADEC2@earthlink.net>
Date:         Sat, 1 Dec 2001 17:22:06 -0800
Reply-To: <thomgaf@energyrs.com>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Thomas M. Mcgaffey" <energyrelease@EARTHLINK.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] FW: [AR] Price of NOX
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Troy,

I think you summed it up very well,  when I said that NOX wins the cost
race against AP/AL I was speaking of the chemicals cost.  As you point
out there are MANY other factors to be considered before one can make a
blanket statement on which system cost less or is better suited to an
application.  I have done almost all of my work in solids and have yet
to find a hybrid system (commercial or self built) that suits my needs,
of course I am speaking of research not sport or HPR activities.

Thom

Thomas M. McGaffey
Energy Release Systems
408-226-7502
thomgaf@energyrs.com
San Jose, Kalifornia


Troy Prideaux wrote:
>
> >Andrew,
> >
> >On your table you need to include the new Hypertek "I" motor that CTI just
> >TMT certified, it has been approved for TWO flights with the same grain
> >using the 300cc tank.....absolute lowest cost per flight!  When we do cost
> >comparisons of solids Vs hybrids we typically use cost per Newton-second or
> >even better, Newton seconds per dollar. This gives a real apples to apples
> >comparison and hybrids always win.
>
> True of HPR, but hey, this list is NOT a HPR list and the day it is, is the
> day I leave!!! When developing motors as amateurs we don't have to factor in
> consumer suppliers level of profit margin, consumer suppliers level of
> manufacturing efficiency, consumer suppliers liability costs, etc. No, this
> is amateur rocketry where some of us look at parameters such as available &
> potential energy density of propellant (which *DOES* cost money), system
> cost, availability of materials and ingredients, level of safety, fun, legal
> requirements, mission selection, pyrotechnic effects, system complexity,
> system capability, mobility & ground support, scalability, track record and
> reliability of the propulsion system, resources required for manufacturing,
> storability of reactants etc, etc, etc...
>  Now, it maybe true that NOX hybrids wins on most of the real valid points
> that influences propulsion system selection for amateurs in general but the
> table submitted and the points you make are too HPR specific to really
> influence anyones line of judgement on this list I would have hoped. A true
> representation should cover at least 12 different propulsion systems
> available to the amateur with cost not begin the only measurable.
>
> Troy.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 26857 invoked from network); 2 Dec 2001 03:02:00 -0000
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 2 Dec 2001 03:02:00 -0000
Received: (qmail 1151 invoked by uid 50005); 2 Dec 2001 03:01:51 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4172. . Clean. Processed in 0.204314 secs); 02 Dec 2001 03:01:51 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 2 Dec 2001 03:01:51 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA04831; Sat, 1 Dec 2001 19:00:24 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 93915 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 2 Dec 2001 03:00:15 +0000
Received: from mail014.syd.optusnet.com.au (mail014.syd.optusnet.com.au          [203.2.75.175]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA04812          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 1 Dec 2001 19:00:14 -0800
Received: from ballbuster (blaax1-224.dialup.optusnet.com.au [210.49.116.224])          by mail014.syd.optusnet.com.au (8.11.1/8.11.1) with SMTP id          fB22xfJ04884; Sun, 2 Dec 2001 13:59:42 +1100
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <NJEEJAOGEMKNPMLLEONAMECGCDAA.strudwicke@optusnet.com.au>
Date:         Sun, 2 Dec 2001 13:58:53 +1100
Reply-To: "craig strudwicke" <strudwicke@OPTUSNET.COM.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "craig strudwicke" <strudwicke@OPTUSNET.COM.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] FW: [AR] Price of NOX
Comments: To: Troy Prideaux <geordi@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <NEBBJIGOELOLIBCCPKDCEECJCCAA.geordi@c031.aone.net.au>

As an aside, this might be a good time to mention candy based Solids, if one
is mainly interested in Ns/$. A recent batch of motors PK & I built (80mm
KNSB motors, 3 grain K class, 5 grain L class) worked out to be about $40/
flight for the L class motors (assumeing 10 burns from the case and nozzle).
This equated to about 100Ns/$AU, all costs considered. Obviously ISP is not
up there (135 say) but this is not the be all and end all in many cases.

Craig

-----Original Message-----
From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU]On
Behalf Of Troy Prideaux
Sent: Sunday, 2 December 2001 10:53 AM
To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
Subject: Re: [AR] FW: [AR] Price of NOX


>Andrew,
>
>On your table you need to include the new Hypertek "I" motor that CTI just
>TMT certified, it has been approved for TWO flights with the same grain
>using the 300cc tank.....absolute lowest cost per flight!  When we do cost
>comparisons of solids Vs hybrids we typically use cost per Newton-second or
>even better, Newton seconds per dollar. This gives a real apples to apples
>comparison and hybrids always win.

True of HPR, but hey, this list is NOT a HPR list and the day it is, is the
day I leave!!! When developing motors as amateurs we don't have to factor in
consumer suppliers level of profit margin, consumer suppliers level of
manufacturing efficiency, consumer suppliers liability costs, etc. No, this
is amateur rocketry where some of us look at parameters such as available &
potential energy density of propellant (which *DOES* cost money), system
cost, availability of materials and ingredients, level of safety, fun, legal
requirements, mission selection, pyrotechnic effects, system complexity,
system capability, mobility & ground support, scalability, track record and
reliability of the propulsion system, resources required for manufacturing,
storability of reactants etc, etc, etc...
 Now, it maybe true that NOX hybrids wins on most of the real valid points
that influences propulsion system selection for amateurs in general but the
table submitted and the points you make are too HPR specific to really
influence anyones line of judgement on this list I would have hoped. A true
representation should cover at least 12 different propulsion systems
available to the amateur with cost not begin the only measurable.

Troy.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 514 invoked from network); 2 Dec 2001 04:06:19 -0000
Received: from smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.105]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 2 Dec 2001 04:06:19 -0000
Received: (qmail 2000 invoked by uid 50005); 2 Dec 2001 04:06:10 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpy with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4172. . Clean. Processed in 0.721423 secs); 02 Dec 2001 04:06:10 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 2 Dec 2001 04:06:08 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA05078; Sat, 1 Dec 2001 20:04:40 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 93962 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 2 Dec 2001 04:03:47 +0000
Received: from albqpop1.albq.uswest.net (albqpop1.albq.uswest.net          [207.108.240.1]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id UAA05059          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 1 Dec 2001 20:03:47 -0800
Received: (qmail 91551 invoked by alias); 2 Dec 2001 04:03:16 -0000
Delivered-To: fixup-AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU@fixme
Received: (qmail 91545 invoked by uid 0); 2 Dec 2001 04:03:16 -0000
Received: from cc898542-a.prdise1.nm.home.com (HELO cc898542a) (65.7.151.152)          by albqpop1.albq.uswest.net with SMTP; 2 Dec 2001 04:03:16 -0000
References:  <NJEEJAOGEMKNPMLLEONAMECGCDAA.strudwicke@optusnet.com.au>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <000701c17ae5$f36dbfc0$0100a8c0@cc898542a>
Date:         Sat, 1 Dec 2001 21:00:58 -0700
Reply-To: "Paxton" <darkspunge@USWEST.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Paxton" <darkspunge@USWEST.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] FW: [AR] Price of NOX
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

I was actually wondering how much people paid to fill up their clubs tanks,
and how much it would cost to either fill up, or rent and use a 400lb tank
of NOX. 300000NS would only cost about 175 bucks in a sugar motor. But the
motor would have to be physically larger in diameter then a long skinny
hybrid. At least to have a respectable solids loading and an ideal long burn
time. Then there is the fact that it is a brittle propellant. That would be
a good subject of research. It has already been started by Ray and others,
just needs to be finished and fired in a 12" motor :-)

Pax


----- Original Message -----
From: "craig strudwicke" <strudwicke@OPTUSNET.COM.AU>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Saturday, December 01, 2001 7:58 PM
Subject: Re: [AR] FW: [AR] Price of NOX


> As an aside, this might be a good time to mention candy based Solids, if
one
> is mainly interested in Ns/$. A recent batch of motors PK & I built (80mm
> KNSB motors, 3 grain K class, 5 grain L class) worked out to be about $40/
> flight for the L class motors (assumeing 10 burns from the case and
nozzle).
> This equated to about 100Ns/$AU, all costs considered. Obviously ISP is
not
> up there (135 say) but this is not the be all and end all in many cases.
>
> Craig
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU]On
> Behalf Of Troy Prideaux
> Sent: Sunday, 2 December 2001 10:53 AM
> To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
> Subject: Re: [AR] FW: [AR] Price of NOX
>
>
> >Andrew,
> >
> >On your table you need to include the new Hypertek "I" motor that CTI
just
> >TMT certified, it has been approved for TWO flights with the same grain
> >using the 300cc tank.....absolute lowest cost per flight!  When we do
cost
> >comparisons of solids Vs hybrids we typically use cost per Newton-second
or
> >even better, Newton seconds per dollar. This gives a real apples to
apples
> >comparison and hybrids always win.
>
> True of HPR, but hey, this list is NOT a HPR list and the day it is, is
the
> day I leave!!! When developing motors as amateurs we don't have to factor
in
> consumer suppliers level of profit margin, consumer suppliers level of
> manufacturing efficiency, consumer suppliers liability costs, etc. No,
this
> is amateur rocketry where some of us look at parameters such as available
&
> potential energy density of propellant (which *DOES* cost money), system
> cost, availability of materials and ingredients, level of safety, fun,
legal
> requirements, mission selection, pyrotechnic effects, system complexity,
> system capability, mobility & ground support, scalability, track record
and
> reliability of the propulsion system, resources required for
manufacturing,
> storability of reactants etc, etc, etc...
>  Now, it maybe true that NOX hybrids wins on most of the real valid points
> that influences propulsion system selection for amateurs in general but
the
> table submitted and the points you make are too HPR specific to really
> influence anyones line of judgement on this list I would have hoped. A
true
> representation should cover at least 12 different propulsion systems
> available to the amateur with cost not begin the only measurable.
>
> Troy.
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 4967 invoked from network); 2 Dec 2001 04:08:19 -0000
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 2 Dec 2001 04:08:19 -0000
Received: (qmail 27548 invoked by uid 50005); 2 Dec 2001 04:08:11 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4172. . Clean. Processed in 0.236448 secs); 02 Dec 2001 04:08:11 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 2 Dec 2001 04:08:10 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA05138; Sat, 1 Dec 2001 20:06:58 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 93981 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 2 Dec 2001 04:06:17 +0000
Received: from cablecom.laribay.net (cablecom.laribay.net [66.20.57.4]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA05119 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 1 Dec 2001 20:06:17 -0800
Received: from billbull (dial100.laribay.net [66.20.57.100]) by          cablecom.laribay.net (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id VAA23863 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 1 Dec 2001 21:50:56 -0600 (CST)          (envelope-from bpbullock@laribay.net)
References:  <000201c17ac1$aaffc450$0200a8c0@24.53.64.18>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <004501c17ae6$d45b3b20$64391442@billbull>
Date:         Sat, 1 Dec 2001 22:07:15 -0600
Reply-To: "Bill Bullock" <bpbullock@LARIBAY.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Bill Bullock" <bpbullock@LARIBAY.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] AP/Epoxy motor comments
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Jeff:
    If it was a new shipment of Ammonium Nitrate did you perchance run a
distillation test on a measured sample of it to determine possible moisture
content? Both myself and another list member have had burn stability
problems with AN/AL blends recently (63% An/ 37% Al for me...don't remember
exactly what his blend ratio is) and both of us found the cure to be
complete thermal dehydration of the oxidizer before mixing. If memory
serves, one problem I have encountered in the past of failure-to-cure
problems of cast epoxies has been excessive moisture which is often
indicated by a "hazing" or "blushing" of the mixed epoxy matrix material.
Bill
----- Original Message -----
From: Jeff Grady <jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Saturday, December 01, 2001 5:41 PM
Subject: [AR] AP/Epoxy motor comments


> Received my shipment of AP & AL (325 mesh). Mixed some 5-min epoxy with
the
> AP & charcoal in my usual mixture (72/25/3). The epoxy does not want the
> solidify when using the AP. Does fine with KNO3. I suspect it is the
ammonia
> giving the epoxy curing a hard time...Comments?
>
> JG
>
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 16257 invoked from network); 2 Dec 2001 04:13:13 -0000
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 2 Dec 2001 04:13:13 -0000
Received: (qmail 2271 invoked by uid 50005); 2 Dec 2001 04:13:04 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4172. . Clean. Processed in 2.034963 secs); 02 Dec 2001 04:13:04 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 2 Dec 2001 04:13:01 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA05214; Sat, 1 Dec 2001 20:11:38 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 94000 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 2 Dec 2001 04:10:57 +0000
Received: from mail010.syd.optusnet.com.au (mail010.syd.optusnet.com.au          [203.2.75.171]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA05196          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 1 Dec 2001 20:10:56 -0800
Received: from ballbuster (blaax1-224.dialup.optusnet.com.au [210.49.116.224])          by mail010.syd.optusnet.com.au (8.11.1/8.11.1) with SMTP id          fB24AMg01253; Sun, 2 Dec 2001 15:10:22 +1100
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <NJEEJAOGEMKNPMLLEONAEECHCDAA.strudwicke@optusnet.com.au>
Date:         Sun, 2 Dec 2001 15:09:34 +1100
Reply-To: "craig strudwicke" <strudwicke@OPTUSNET.COM.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "craig strudwicke" <strudwicke@OPTUSNET.COM.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] FW: [AR] Price of NOX
Comments: To: Paxton <darkspunge@USWEST.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <000701c17ae5$f36dbfc0$0100a8c0@cc898542a>

Has anyone on this list had much contact with the NEAR guys ? They seem to
have made some really large KNSB motors with success. I cant find the
details on their site anymore so I cant be sure of the motor sizes but I
seem to remember 100,000Ns. Diameter approx 200mm ?

Craig

-----Original Message-----
From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU]On
Behalf Of Paxton
Sent: Sunday, 2 December 2001 3:01 PM
To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
Subject: Re: [AR] FW: [AR] Price of NOX


I was actually wondering how much people paid to fill up their clubs tanks,
and how much it would cost to either fill up, or rent and use a 400lb tank
of NOX. 300000NS would only cost about 175 bucks in a sugar motor. But the
motor would have to be physically larger in diameter then a long skinny
hybrid. At least to have a respectable solids loading and an ideal long burn
time. Then there is the fact that it is a brittle propellant. That would be
a good subject of research. It has already been started by Ray and others,
just needs to be finished and fired in a 12" motor :-)

Pax


----- Original Message -----
From: "craig strudwicke" <strudwicke@OPTUSNET.COM.AU>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Saturday, December 01, 2001 7:58 PM
Subject: Re: [AR] FW: [AR] Price of NOX


> As an aside, this might be a good time to mention candy based Solids, if
one
> is mainly interested in Ns/$. A recent batch of motors PK & I built (80mm
> KNSB motors, 3 grain K class, 5 grain L class) worked out to be about $40/
> flight for the L class motors (assumeing 10 burns from the case and
nozzle).
> This equated to about 100Ns/$AU, all costs considered. Obviously ISP is
not
> up there (135 say) but this is not the be all and end all in many cases.
>
> Craig
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU]On
> Behalf Of Troy Prideaux
> Sent: Sunday, 2 December 2001 10:53 AM
> To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
> Subject: Re: [AR] FW: [AR] Price of NOX
>
>
> >Andrew,
> >
> >On your table you need to include the new Hypertek "I" motor that CTI
just
> >TMT certified, it has been approved for TWO flights with the same grain
> >using the 300cc tank.....absolute lowest cost per flight!  When we do
cost
> >comparisons of solids Vs hybrids we typically use cost per Newton-second
or
> >even better, Newton seconds per dollar. This gives a real apples to
apples
> >comparison and hybrids always win.
>
> True of HPR, but hey, this list is NOT a HPR list and the day it is, is
the
> day I leave!!! When developing motors as amateurs we don't have to factor
in
> consumer suppliers level of profit margin, consumer suppliers level of
> manufacturing efficiency, consumer suppliers liability costs, etc. No,
this
> is amateur rocketry where some of us look at parameters such as available
&
> potential energy density of propellant (which *DOES* cost money), system
> cost, availability of materials and ingredients, level of safety, fun,
legal
> requirements, mission selection, pyrotechnic effects, system complexity,
> system capability, mobility & ground support, scalability, track record
and
> reliability of the propulsion system, resources required for
manufacturing,
> storability of reactants etc, etc, etc...
>  Now, it maybe true that NOX hybrids wins on most of the real valid points
> that influences propulsion system selection for amateurs in general but
the
> table submitted and the points you make are too HPR specific to really
> influence anyones line of judgement on this list I would have hoped. A
true
> representation should cover at least 12 different propulsion systems
> available to the amateur with cost not begin the only measurable.
>
> Troy.
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 17884 invoked from network); 2 Dec 2001 10:18:29 -0000
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 2 Dec 2001 10:18:29 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 2909 invoked by uid 50005); 2 Dec 2001 10:18:20 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4172. . Clean. Processed in 1.240971 secs); 02 Dec 2001 10:18:20 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 2 Dec 2001 10:18:17 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id CAA06231; Sun, 2 Dec 2001 02:16:20 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 94107 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 2 Dec 2001 10:16:06 +0000
Received: from cicero2.cybercity.dk (cicero2.cybercity.dk [212.242.40.53]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id CAA06212 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 2 Dec 2001 02:16:05 -0800
Received: from usr04.cybercity.dk (usr04.cybercity.dk [212.242.40.36]) by          cicero2.cybercity.dk (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1517A100008 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun,  2 Dec 2001 11:16:04 +0100 (CET)
Received: from vip.cybercity.dk (port23.cvx1-noe.ppp.cybercity.dk          [217.157.69.216]) by usr04.cybercity.dk (8.11.6/8.11.0) with ESMTP id          fB2AG2d00248 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 2 Dec 2001 11:16:03          +0100 (CET) (envelope-from hot@vip.cybercity.dk)
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.75 [en] (Win95; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <000201c17ac1$aaffc450$0200a8c0@24.53.64.18>            <004501c17ae6$d45b3b20$64391442@billbull>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3C0A02B5.D3E8747@vip.cybercity.dk>
Date:         Sun, 2 Dec 2001 11:30:13 +0100
Reply-To: "Hans Olaf Toft" <hot@VIP.CYBERCITY.DK>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Hans Olaf Toft" <hot@VIP.CYBERCITY.DK>
Subject:      Re: [AR] AP/Epoxy motor comments
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

In my experience, AP will actually accelerate the curing process of epoxy
slightly.

With AN/epoxy I had a rather peculiar experience: Normally the curing occurs
within a few hours, but one batch failed to cure and remained unaltered for
most of a week, when suddenly it cured over night.

Hans Olaf Toft

Bill Bullock wrote:

> Jeff:
>     If it was a new shipment of Ammonium Nitrate did you perchance run a
> distillation test on a measured sample of it to determine possible moisture
> content? Both myself and another list member have had burn stability
> problems with AN/AL blends recently (63% An/ 37% Al for me...don't remember
> exactly what his blend ratio is) and both of us found the cure to be
> complete thermal dehydration of the oxidizer before mixing. If memory
> serves, one problem I have encountered in the past of failure-to-cure
> problems of cast epoxies has been excessive moisture which is often
> indicated by a "hazing" or "blushing" of the mixed epoxy matrix material.
> Bill
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Jeff Grady <jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET>
> To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
> Sent: Saturday, December 01, 2001 5:41 PM
> Subject: [AR] AP/Epoxy motor comments
>
> > Received my shipment of AP & AL (325 mesh). Mixed some 5-min epoxy with
> the
> > AP & charcoal in my usual mixture (72/25/3). The epoxy does not want the
> > solidify when using the AP. Does fine with KNO3. I suspect it is the
> ammonia
> > giving the epoxy curing a hard time...Comments?
> >
> > JG
> >
> >

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 9969 invoked from network); 2 Dec 2001 13:26:02 -0000
X-Priority: 3
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 2 Dec 2001 13:26:02 -0000
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 14281 invoked by uid 50005); 2 Dec 2001 13:25:53 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4172. . Clean. Processed in 1.371101 secs); 02 Dec 2001 13:25:53 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 2 Dec 2001 13:25:50 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id FAA06962; Sun, 2 Dec 2001 05:23:35 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 94147 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 2 Dec 2001 13:23:23 +0000
Received: from imo-m05.mx.aol.com (imo-m05.mx.aol.com [64.12.136.8]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id FAA06943 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Sun, 2 Dec 2001 05:23:23 -0800
Received: from Azt28@aol.com by imo-m05.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v31_r1.9.) id          4.14f.501d74c (657); Sun, 2 Dec 2001 08:22:46 -0500 (EST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0E34_01C56B69.5A96AF50"
X-Mailer: AOL 6.0 for Windows FR sub 10506
Message-ID:  <14f.501d74c.293b8526@aol.com>
Date:         Sun, 2 Dec 2001 08:22:46 EST
Reply-To: <Azt28@AOL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <Azt28@AOL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] [OT]: Hearing meteors - at the speed of light
Comments: To: thehalls@ridgenet.net
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0E34_01C56B69.5A96AF50
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit



>
> OK, I admit it, my "upper level" physics is lacking.....  What're
> "impulsion" dimensions?
> --
> Dave and/or Kristin Hall
>

In physics, "dimensions" is a word synonimous with free parameters. Many
problems get simpler if you can play with more parameters.  In dynamics, the
product of mass by velocity V  is often taken as free parameters or
dimensions. So you have the ordinary space dimensions: x, y, z and the
impulsion dimensions: mVx, mVy and mVz. Vx, Vy and Vz are the velocily
componments along directions x, y and z. Such a space with 6 dimensions is
called a phase space. ( in relativity, there are phase spaces with an
infinite number of dimensions). For cultural reasons it is not common to
think about phase spaces as real space where sounds can propagate but that is
only a cultural problem.

The interest of that explanation is that it solve a number of questions, for
example:
Why the Suttle don't produce "instant sounds" when it get back from space?
If instant sound  is produced by low frequency radio waves, where come from
the large energy of these waves? ( The 6 dim. phase space may not cover the
full 3 dim. "ordinary" space and so energy falls back at a slower pace than
the common inverse square law ).
If there is a sufficient energy store in a small space dust grain, why we
don't ear everywhere the sound produced by megawatts flowing in power lines?

More researches on that effect could bring unexpected applications, including
space transport.

Yvan Bozzonetti.


------=_NextPart_000_0E34_01C56B69.5A96AF50
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<HTML><FONT FACE=arial,helvetica><FONT  SIZE=2>
<BR>
<BR><BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE style="BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px">
<BR>OK, I admit it, my "upper level" physics is lacking..... &nbsp;What're "impulsion" dimensions?
<BR>--
<BR>Dave and/or Kristin Hall
<BR></BLOCKQUOTE>
<BR>
<BR>In physics, "dimensions" is a word synonimous with free parameters. Many problems get simpler if you can play with more parameters. &nbsp;In dynamics, the product of mass by velocity V &nbsp;is often taken as free parameters or dimensions. So you have the ordinary space dimensions: x, y, z and the impulsion dimensions: mVx, mVy and mVz. Vx, Vy and Vz are the velocily componments along directions x, y and z. Such a space with 6 dimensions is called a phase space. ( in relativity, there are phase spaces with an infinite number of dimensions). For cultural reasons it is not common to think about phase spaces as real space where sounds can propagate but that is only a cultural problem.
<BR>
<BR>The interest of that explanation is that it solve a number of questions, for example:
<BR>Why the Suttle don't produce "instant sounds" when it get back from space?
<BR>If instant sound &nbsp;is produced by low frequency radio waves, where come from the large energy of these waves? ( The 6 dim. phase space may not cover the full 3 dim. "ordinary" space and so energy falls back at a slower pace than the common inverse square law ).
<BR>If there is a sufficient energy store in a small space dust grain, why we don't ear everywhere the sound produced by megawatts flowing in power lines?
<BR>
<BR>More researches on that effect could bring unexpected applications, including space transport.
<BR>
<BR>Yvan Bozzonetti.
<BR></FONT></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0E34_01C56B69.5A96AF50--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 15322 invoked from network); 2 Dec 2001 19:39:38 -0000
Received: from smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.105]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 2 Dec 2001 19:39:38 -0000
Received: (qmail 24540 invoked by uid 50005); 2 Dec 2001 19:39:29 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpy with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4172. . Clean. Processed in 1.441898 secs); 02 Dec 2001 19:39:29 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 2 Dec 2001 19:39:25 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA07984; Sun, 2 Dec 2001 11:37:30 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 94231 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 2 Dec 2001 19:36:57 +0000
Received: from fep4-orange.clear.net.nz (fep4-orange.clear.net.nz          [203.97.32.4]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA07964          for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Sun, 2 Dec 2001 11:36:55 -0800
Received: from mkbs (203-167-149-99.dialup.clear.net.nz [203.167.149.99]) by          fep4-orange.clear.net.nz (1.5/1.7) with SMTP id IAA10465; Mon, 3 Dec          2001 08:36:22 +1300 (NZDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="Windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <019001c17b68$fadeb880$0700a8c0@mkbs>
Date:         Mon, 3 Dec 2001 08:35:43 +1300
Reply-To: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Organization: Applied Technology
Subject:      [AR] [OT]: Leonids - Fw: Explosions on the Moon
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

From: "NASA Science News" <snglist@LYRIS.msfc.nasa.gov>

> During the 2001 Leonid meteor storm, astronomers observed a curious flash
> on the Moon -- a telltale sign of meteoroids hitting the lunar surface and
> exploding.  In this story, experts describe the physics of lunar Leonid
> explosions ... and speculate about meteor showers for observers living on
> the Moon.
>
> FULL STORY at
>
> http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2001/ast30nov_1.htm?list16511

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 18124 invoked from network); 2 Dec 2001 21:37:54 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpv.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.110]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 2 Dec 2001 21:37:54 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 14104 invoked by uid 50005); 2 Dec 2001 21:32:10 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpv with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4172. . Clean. Processed in 0.677039 secs); 02 Dec 2001 21:32:10 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpv.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 2 Dec 2001 21:32:08 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA08310; Sun, 2 Dec 2001 13:36:08 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 94257 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 2 Dec 2001 21:35:58 +0000
Received: from mail1.murraystate.edu (mail1.murraystate.edu [216.249.159.50])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id NAA08290 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 2 Dec 2001 13:35:58 -0800
Received: from boothcomputer.murraystate.edu (216.249.158.12) by          mail1.murraystate.edu (NPlex 5.5.031) id 3BFBEB2D0003F7F6 for          AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 2 Dec 2001 15:33:11 -0600
X-Sender: terry.mccreary@murraystate.edu
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
References: <001101c17a9f$ed6ee0e0$0100a8c0@cc898542a>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <5.1.0.14.0.20011202052038.00a04750@murraystate.edu>
Date:         Sun, 2 Dec 2001 15:41:41 -0600
Reply-To: "Terry McCreary" <terry.mccreary@MURRAYSTATE.EDU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Terry McCreary" <terry.mccreary@MURRAYSTATE.EDU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] AP/Epoxy motor comments
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <000201c17ac1$aaffc450$0200a8c0@24.53.64.18>

At 06:41 PM 12/1/01 -0500, you wrote:
>Received my shipment of AP & AL (325 mesh). Mixed some 5-min epoxy with the
>AP & charcoal in my usual mixture (72/25/3). The epoxy does not want the
>solidify when using the AP. Does fine with KNO3. I suspect it is the ammonia
>giving the epoxy curing a hard time...Comments?
>
>JG

It's not the ammonia per se; AP can "use up" some of the curative and that
can form ammonia. A long-winded explanation follows, please ignore as
desired... :-)

Think of an epoxy resin molecule as a pipe having two male ends, and the
hardener or curative as a pipe fitting having two female ends.  Each end is
what we call a functional group, the actual reactive part of the
molecule.  In normal use there are roughly equal numbers of pipes and
fittings.  When the two are mixed a pipe joins a fitting joins a pipe,
etc., creating a long chain and using up virtually all the parts.  "Long
chain" means a rigid solid.

AP and other ammonium salts can react with certain functional groups called
amines.  Ammonia is displaced from the AP and the perchlorate ion latches
on to the functional group.  Unfortunately, some epoxy curatives have amine
groups.  Think of the AP as plugs that are glued into one or both of the
female ends of a pipe fitting.  Now when the fittings and pipes are mixed,
there aren't enough fittings to go around.  The result is a bunch of
smaller chains -- a less rigid solid or even a sticky liquid, depending on
how many fittings have been used up.

If you smell ammonia when the AP is mixed with the epoxy, this may be
what's happening.

One cure -- pun intended -- may be to add additional
curative.  Unfortunately, that approach is replete with variables.  What is
the reactivity of the curative?  How much of it has already reacted with
the AP?  How much of the additional curative will react with AP before
curing is complete?  How warm is the mixture?  A lot of trial, error, and
wasted AP.

Consider:  a gallon of PBAN and a quart of epoxy from Firefox are enough to
make 50+ lb of propellant, for about $25 plus shipping.  Or a quart of HTPB
(not as smelly or sticky or thick as PBAN) and a bottle of HDI from CP
Technologies will make ten or fifteen pounds of propellant that will cure
overnight at room temperature, for about $20.

For those who already have mastered an AP-epoxy mixture, more power to
ya.  For those who are starting out, it's generally false economy to use
inexpensive epoxy in place of a more conventional binder when you count the
wasted AP in the cost...

P'rfesser

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 11922 invoked from network); 3 Dec 2001 02:07:21 -0000
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 3 Dec 2001 02:07:21 -0000
Received: (qmail 10583 invoked by uid 50005); 3 Dec 2001 02:07:12 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4172. . Clean. Processed in 2.258032 secs); 03 Dec 2001 02:07:12 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 3 Dec 2001 02:07:07 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA09235; Sun, 2 Dec 2001 18:05:31 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 94339 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 3 Dec 2001 02:05:21 +0000
Received: from syntheon.inicom.com          (IDENT:root@66.mueb.miam.philapaaz.dsl.att.net [63.242.216.66]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA09217 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Sun, 2 Dec 2001 18:05:20 -0800
Received: from koreynew (adsl-81-3-19.mia.bellsouth.net [65.81.3.19]) by          syntheon.inicom.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id VAA05828 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Sun, 2 Dec 2001 21:34:35 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 8.5, Build 4.71.2173.0
Importance: Normal
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <000601c17b9e$d92033a0$6501a8c0@koreynew>
Date:         Sun, 2 Dec 2001 21:04:31 -0500
Reply-To: "Korey Kline" <k2@HYBRIDS.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Korey Kline" <k2@HYBRIDS.COM>
Subject:      [AR] Price of NOX
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <NEBBJIGOELOLIBCCPKDCEECJCCAA.geordi@c031.aone.net.au>

  Behalf Of Troy Prideaux
> True of HPR, but hey, this list is NOT a HPR list and the day it
> is, is the day I leave!!!

>>>I've made a price comparison table for NOX vs. solids for certified
>>>motors (not EX) for a hybrid's article I'm writing. It's at:
>>>http://www.hawkfeather.com/rockets/price.html
>>>Andrew.

>>>>I think if you price out solid fuel (AP/AL) for the same size motor you
>>>>will find that NOX wins the cost race.
>>>>Thomas

The original thread was already in the HPR zone......as far as I know
ARocket does NOT forbid discussions of HPR! And for once believe it or not,
I didn't start the hybrid thread. I do believe that there is enough
crossover information on costs of Solids Vs Hybrids to warrant discussion
and apparently you believe so as well.

> Now, it maybe true that NOX hybrids wins on most of the real valid points
> that influences propulsion system selection for amateurs in general but
the
> table submitted and the points you make are too HPR specific to really
> influence anyones line of judgement on this list I would have
> hoped. A true representation should cover at least 12 different propulsion
> systems available to the amateur with cost not begin the only measurable.
> Troy

Well, I'm intrigued. What 12 different amateur propulsion systems would you
compare?
I'm certainly aware of the many factors amateurs look at when choosing to
work on a
propulsion system, costs always seem to be near the top. What others would
you put near
the top and how does Solids, Liquids, Hybrids rate on each item?

As a special request I have two more slogans....and one is even amateur!

1) You can tell a man by his oxidizer!
2) Why play with thousand year old technology.....try something
new...Hybrids!

If anyone is seriously interested in discussing the advantages of amateur
solids, liquids, hybrids, I'm available.

K2


> When developing motors as amateurs we don't have
> to factor in
> consumer suppliers level of profit margin, consumer suppliers level of
> manufacturing efficiency, consumer suppliers liability costs,
> etc. No, this
> is amateur rocketry where some of us look at parameters such as
> available &
> potential energy density of propellant (which *DOES* cost money), system
> cost, availability of materials and ingredients, level of safety,
> fun, legal
> requirements, mission selection, pyrotechnic effects, system complexity,
> system capability, mobility & ground support, scalability, track
> record and
> reliability of the propulsion system, resources required for
> manufacturing,
> storability of reactants etc, etc, etc...
>  Now, it maybe true that NOX hybrids wins on most of the real valid points
> that influences propulsion system selection for amateurs in
> general but the
> table submitted and the points you make are too HPR specific to really
> influence anyones line of judgement on this list I would have
> hoped. A true
> representation should cover at least 12 different propulsion systems
> available to the amateur with cost not begin the only measurable.
>
> Troy.
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 19842 invoked from network); 3 Dec 2001 02:44:51 -0000
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 3 Dec 2001 02:44:51 -0000
Received: (qmail 29891 invoked by uid 50005); 3 Dec 2001 02:44:42 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4172. . Clean. Processed in 0.353288 secs); 03 Dec 2001 02:44:42 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 3 Dec 2001 02:44:41 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA09371; Sun, 2 Dec 2001 18:43:03 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 94358 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 3 Dec 2001 02:42:59 +0000
Received: from syntheon.inicom.com          (IDENT:root@66.mueb.miam.philapaaz.dsl.att.net [63.242.216.66]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA09356 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Sun, 2 Dec 2001 18:42:59 -0800
Received: from koreynew (adsl-81-3-19.mia.bellsouth.net [65.81.3.19]) by          syntheon.inicom.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id WAA05851 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Sun, 2 Dec 2001 22:12:18 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 8.5, Build 4.71.2173.0
Importance: Normal
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <000a01c17ba4$1b1fb3c0$6501a8c0@koreynew>
Date:         Sun, 2 Dec 2001 21:42:10 -0500
Reply-To: "Korey Kline" <k2@HYBRIDS.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Korey Kline" <k2@HYBRIDS.COM>
Subject:      [AR] FW: [AR] Price of NOX
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

So what are the advantages of of these systems?  Please don't tell me your
playing with #18 as an amature!
I still remember your ad in CMR to learn EOD at home :-)

K2

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jerry Irvine [mailto:01rocket@gte.net]
> Sent: Sunday, December 02, 2001 9:32 PM
> To: Korey Kline
> Subject: Re: [AR] Price of NOX
>
>
> >Kline a well known rocket god scribbled:
>
>
> >Well, I'm intrigued. What 12 different amateur propulsion
> systems would you
> >compare?
> >I'm certainly aware of the many factors amateurs look at when choosing to
> >work on a
> >propulsion system, costs always seem to be near the top. What
> others would
> >you put near
> >the top and how does Solids, Liquids, Hybrids rate on each item?
>
> 1. APCP
> 2. KPCP
> 3. ANCP
> 4. BP
> 5. N2O/plastic hybrid
> 6. N2O/HTPB hybrid
> 7. LOX/plastic hybrid
> 8. LOX/HTPB hybrid
> 9. LOX/Kero
> 10. Nitric Acid/Furfuryl Alcohol
> 11. H2O2/x
> 12. Water
> 13. Steam
> 14. Compressed gas
> 15. Zinc-Sulfur
> 16. Sugar/x
> 17. GAPCP
> 18. RDX/HMX/CP
> more...
>
> --
> Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
> Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
> Opinion, the whole thing.
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 15304 invoked from network); 3 Dec 2001 03:24:53 -0000
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 3 Dec 2001 03:24:53 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 13556 invoked by uid 50005); 3 Dec 2001 03:24:44 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4172. . Clean. Processed in 1.902676 secs); 03 Dec 2001 03:24:44 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 3 Dec 2001 03:24:41 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA09515; Sun, 2 Dec 2001 19:20:03 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 94377 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 3 Dec 2001 03:19:53 +0000
Received: from mail005.syd.optusnet.com.au (mail005.syd.optusnet.com.au          [203.2.75.229]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA09491          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 2 Dec 2001 19:19:52 -0800
Received: from webmail03.syd.optusnet.com.au (webmail03.syd.optusnet.com.au          [203.2.75.236]) by mail005.syd.optusnet.com.au (8.11.1/8.11.1) with          ESMTP id fB33JJO21911; Mon, 3 Dec 2001 14:19:19 +1100
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: MIME-tools 5.411 (Entity 5.404)
Received: from  [209.36.247.3] as user strudwicke@optusnet.com.au by          webmail.optusnet.com.au with HTTP;
Message-ID:  <200112030319.fB33JJO21911@mail005.syd.optusnet.com.au>
Date:         Mon, 3 Dec 2001 14:18:33 +1100
Reply-To: "Craig Strudwicke" <strudwicke@OPTUSNET.COM.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Craig Strudwicke" <strudwicke@OPTUSNET.COM.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] FW: [AR] Price of NOX
Comments: To: Korey Kline <k2@HYBRIDS.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Are these supposed to be in some sort of order of merit ?

If so, are you serious about BP ?

Craig

> Korey Kline <k2@HYBRIDS.COM> wrote:
>
> So what are the advantages of of these systems?  Please don't tell me
> your
> playing with #18 as an amature!
> I still remember your ad in CMR to learn EOD at home :-)
>
> K2
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Jerry Irvine [mailto:01rocket@gte.net]
> > Sent: Sunday, December 02, 2001 9:32 PM
> > To: Korey Kline
> > Subject: Re: [AR] Price of NOX
> >
> >
> > >Kline a well known rocket god scribbled:
> >
> >
> > >Well, I'm intrigued. What 12 different amateur propulsion
> > systems would you
> > >compare?
> > >I'm certainly aware of the many factors amateurs look at when
> choosing to
> > >work on a
> > >propulsion system, costs always seem to be near the top. What
> > others would
> > >you put near
> > >the top and how does Solids, Liquids, Hybrids rate on each item?
> >
> > 1. APCP
> > 2. KPCP
> > 3. ANCP
> > 4. BP
> > 5. N2O/plastic hybrid
> > 6. N2O/HTPB hybrid
> > 7. LOX/plastic hybrid
> > 8. LOX/HTPB hybrid
> > 9. LOX/Kero
> > 10. Nitric Acid/Furfuryl Alcohol
> > 11. H2O2/x
> > 12. Water
> > 13. Steam
> > 14. Compressed gas
> > 15. Zinc-Sulfur
> > 16. Sugar/x
> > 17. GAPCP
> > 18. RDX/HMX/CP
> > more...
> >
> > --
> > Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
> > Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
> > Opinion, the whole thing.
> >

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 13479 invoked from network); 3 Dec 2001 03:35:45 -0000
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 3 Dec 2001 03:35:45 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 31723 invoked by uid 50005); 3 Dec 2001 03:35:36 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4172. . Clean. Processed in 1.555694 secs); 03 Dec 2001 03:35:36 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 3 Dec 2001 03:35:33 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA09616; Sun, 2 Dec 2001 19:34:11 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 94396 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 3 Dec 2001 03:34:04 +0000
Received: from swan.prod.itd.earthlink.net (swan.mail.pas.earthlink.net          [207.217.120.123]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id          TAA09565 for <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Sun, 2 Dec 2001 19:24:04 -0800
Received: from dialup-209.245.141.231.dial1.sanjose1.level3.net          ([209.245.141.231] helo=earthlink.net) by swan.prod.itd.earthlink.net          with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 16Aji7-0003Qi-00; Sun, 02 Dec 2001          19:24:03 -0800
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.75 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.16-22 i686)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <000601c17b9e$d92033a0$6501a8c0@koreynew>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3C0AF05B.D6F6EDDB@earthlink.net>
Date:         Sun, 2 Dec 2001 19:24:11 -0800
Reply-To: "David Weinshenker" <daze39@EARTHLINK.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "David Weinshenker" <daze39@EARTHLINK.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Price of NOX
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Korey Kline wrote:
> You can tell a man by his oxidizer!

AP, in commercial solid motors; H2O2 in amateur liquids :)

(What does that say about me?)

-dave w

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 24335 invoked from network); 3 Dec 2001 03:40:10 -0000
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 3 Dec 2001 03:40:10 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 26043 invoked by uid 50005); 3 Dec 2001 03:40:01 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4172. . Clean. Processed in 1.684826 secs); 03 Dec 2001 03:40:01 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 3 Dec 2001 03:39:58 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA09655; Sun, 2 Dec 2001 19:38:40 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 94400 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 3 Dec 2001 03:38:38 +0000
Received: from pintail.mail.pas.earthlink.net (pintail.mail.pas.earthlink.net          [207.217.120.122]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id          TAA09586 for <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Sun, 2 Dec 2001 19:28:37 -0800
Received: from dialup-209.245.141.231.dial1.sanjose1.level3.net          ([209.245.141.231] helo=earthlink.net) by          pintail.mail.pas.earthlink.net with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id          16AjmX-0000eh-00; Sun, 02 Dec 2001 19:28:37 -0800
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.75 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.16-22 i686)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <000a01c17ba4$1b1fb3c0$6501a8c0@koreynew>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3C0AF169.24DECC0E@earthlink.net>
Date:         Sun, 2 Dec 2001 19:28:41 -0800
Reply-To: "David Weinshenker" <daze39@EARTHLINK.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "David Weinshenker" <daze39@EARTHLINK.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] FW: [AR] Price of NOX
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Korey Kline wrote:
> So what are the advantages of of these systems?
> Please don't tell me your playing with #18 as an amature!

#17 seems to make a lot of folks nervous too...

> Jerry Irvine wrote:
> > 1. APCP
> > 2. KPCP
> > 3. ANCP
> > 4. BP
> > 5. N2O/plastic hybrid
> > 6. N2O/HTPB hybrid
> > 7. LOX/plastic hybrid
> > 8. LOX/HTPB hybrid
> > 9. LOX/Kero
> > 10. Nitric Acid/Furfuryl Alcohol
> > 11. H2O2/x
> > 12. Water
> > 13. Steam
> > 14. Compressed gas
> > 15. Zinc-Sulfur
> > 16. Sugar/x
> > 17. GAPCP
> > 18. RDX/HMX/CP
> > more...

19. H2O2 monopropellant

-dave w

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 18873 invoked from network); 3 Dec 2001 04:02:07 -0000
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 3 Dec 2001 04:02:07 -0000
Received: (qmail 19274 invoked by uid 50005); 3 Dec 2001 04:01:58 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4172. . Clean. Processed in 0.775272 secs); 03 Dec 2001 04:01:58 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 3 Dec 2001 04:01:57 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA09870; Sun, 2 Dec 2001 20:00:28 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 94437 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 3 Dec 2001 04:00:24 +0000
Received: from syntheon.inicom.com          (IDENT:root@66.mueb.miam.philapaaz.dsl.att.net [63.242.216.66]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA09852 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 2 Dec 2001 20:00:24 -0800
Received: from koreynew (adsl-81-3-19.mia.bellsouth.net [65.81.3.19]) by          syntheon.inicom.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id XAA05877 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 2 Dec 2001 23:29:44 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 8.5, Build 4.71.2173.0
Importance: Normal
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <001101c17bae$e74d18c0$6501a8c0@koreynew>
Date:         Sun, 2 Dec 2001 22:59:27 -0500
Reply-To: "Korey Kline" <k2@HYBRIDS.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Korey Kline" <k2@HYBRIDS.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] FW: [AR] Price of NOX
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <200112030319.fB33JJO21911@mail005.syd.optusnet.com.au>

I don't believe there in any order....
I would probably group them together and not in any order:

1) Solids CP and discuss the advantages of the various oxidizer
2) Solids Others- BP ; Zn/S ; Double Base ; KP/Asphalt ; Candy
3) Hybrids LOX
4) Hybrids N2O
5) Hybrids Other- H2O2 ; HAN ; ANNA ; GasGen ; GAP
6) Liquids LOX- Kerosene ; Alcohol
7) Liquids Hyperbolic- Nitric acid ;
8) Liquids Self Pressurizing- N2O ; Ethane ; Ethylene ; Propane
9) Mono Propellants- H2O2 ; Nitromethane
10)Others- Water ; Steam ; Compressed gas

K2


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU]On
> Behalf Of Craig Strudwicke
> Sent: Sunday, December 02, 2001 10:19 PM
> To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
> Subject: Re: [AR] FW: [AR] Price of NOX
>
>
> Are these supposed to be in some sort of order of merit ?
>
> If so, are you serious about BP ?
>
> Craig
>
> > Korey Kline <k2@HYBRIDS.COM> wrote:
> >
> > So what are the advantages of of these systems?  Please don't tell me
> > your
> > playing with #18 as an amature!
> > I still remember your ad in CMR to learn EOD at home :-)
> >
> > K2
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Jerry Irvine [mailto:01rocket@gte.net]
> > > Sent: Sunday, December 02, 2001 9:32 PM
> > > To: Korey Kline
> > > Subject: Re: [AR] Price of NOX
> > >
> > >
> > > >Kline a well known rocket god scribbled:
> > >
> > >
> > > >Well, I'm intrigued. What 12 different amateur propulsion
> > > systems would you
> > > >compare?
> > > >I'm certainly aware of the many factors amateurs look at when
> > choosing to
> > > >work on a
> > > >propulsion system, costs always seem to be near the top. What
> > > others would
> > > >you put near
> > > >the top and how does Solids, Liquids, Hybrids rate on each item?
> > >
> > > 1. APCP
> > > 2. KPCP
> > > 3. ANCP
> > > 4. BP
> > > 5. N2O/plastic hybrid
> > > 6. N2O/HTPB hybrid
> > > 7. LOX/plastic hybrid
> > > 8. LOX/HTPB hybrid
> > > 9. LOX/Kero
> > > 10. Nitric Acid/Furfuryl Alcohol
> > > 11. H2O2/x
> > > 12. Water
> > > 13. Steam
> > > 14. Compressed gas
> > > 15. Zinc-Sulfur
> > > 16. Sugar/x
> > > 17. GAPCP
> > > 18. RDX/HMX/CP
> > > more...
> > >
> > > --
> > > Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
> > > Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
> > > Opinion, the whole thing.
> > >
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 859 invoked from network); 3 Dec 2001 04:07:07 -0000
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 3 Dec 2001 04:07:07 -0000
Received: (qmail 5314 invoked by uid 50005); 3 Dec 2001 04:06:58 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4172. . Clean. Processed in 0.489851 secs); 03 Dec 2001 04:06:58 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 3 Dec 2001 04:06:57 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA09918; Sun, 2 Dec 2001 20:05:22 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 94448 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 3 Dec 2001 04:05:21 +0000
Received: from syntheon.inicom.com          (IDENT:root@66.mueb.miam.philapaaz.dsl.att.net [63.242.216.66]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA09904 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 2 Dec 2001 20:05:20 -0800
Received: from koreynew (adsl-81-3-19.mia.bellsouth.net [65.81.3.19]) by          syntheon.inicom.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id XAA05888 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 2 Dec 2001 23:34:41 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 8.5, Build 4.71.2173.0
Importance: Normal
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <001301c17baf$97906340$6501a8c0@koreynew>
Date:         Sun, 2 Dec 2001 23:04:23 -0500
Reply-To: "Korey Kline" <k2@HYBRIDS.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Korey Kline" <k2@HYBRIDS.COM>
Subject:      [AR] FW: [AR] Price of NOX
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

I put both H2O2 & Nitric Acid guys in the category of gluttons for
punishment because they have to make every pound of their own oxidizers! :-)

K2


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU]On
> Behalf Of David Weinshenker
> Sent: Sunday, December 02, 2001 10:24 PM
> To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
> Subject: Re: [AR] Price of NOX
>
>
> Korey Kline wrote:
> > You can tell a man by his oxidizer!
>
> AP, in commercial solid motors; H2O2 in amateur liquids :)
>
> (What does that say about me?)
>
> -dave w
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 11969 invoked from network); 3 Dec 2001 04:11:54 -0000
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 3 Dec 2001 04:11:54 -0000
Received: (qmail 1487 invoked by uid 50005); 3 Dec 2001 04:11:45 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4172. . Clean. Processed in 1.230271 secs); 03 Dec 2001 04:11:45 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 3 Dec 2001 04:11:42 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA10014; Sun, 2 Dec 2001 20:10:10 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 94460 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 3 Dec 2001 04:10:08 +0000
Received: from mta02.mail.mel.aone.net.au (mta02.mail.au.uu.net [203.2.192.82])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA10000 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Sun, 2 Dec 2001 20:10:07 -0800
Received: from unknown ([63.34.213.120]) by mta02.mail.mel.aone.net.au with          SMTP id <20011203041003.QLOI24297.mta02.mail.mel.aone.net.au@unknown>          for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Mon, 3 Dec 2001 15:10:03 +1100
References: Conversation <NEBBJIGOELOLIBCCPKDCEECJCCAA.geordi@c031.aone.net.au>            with last message <000601c17b9e$d92033a0$6501a8c0@koreynew>
Priority: Normal
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Priority: 3
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	X-MAPIextension=.TXT;
	charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>
Date:         Mon, 3 Dec 2001 04:10:08 +0000
Reply-To: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Price of NOX
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <000601c17b9e$d92033a0$6501a8c0@koreynew>

----------
>   Behalf Of Troy Prideaux
> > True of HPR, but hey, this list is NOT a HPR list and the day it
> > is, is the day I leave!!!
>
> >>>I've made a price comparison table for NOX vs. solids for certified
> >>>motors (not EX) for a hybrid's article I'm writing. It's at:
> >>>http://www.hawkfeather.com/rockets/price.html
> >>>Andrew.
>
> >>>>I think if you price out solid fuel (AP/AL) for the same size motor
you
> >>>>will find that NOX wins the cost race.
> >>>>Thomas
>
> The original thread was already in the HPR zone......as far as I know
> ARocket does NOT forbid discussions of HPR! And for once believe it or
not,
> I didn't start the hybrid thread. I do believe that there is enough
> crossover information on costs of Solids Vs Hybrids to warrant discussion
> and apparently you believe so as well.

Yep, I do apologise for directing most of that at you. It wasn't my
intention. To clarify my position: I have no problem with TRA or it's
experimental program. What I do have a problem with is centring discussion
around *consumer* propulsion. Amateur/Experimental rocketry is not consumer
propulsion IMHO.


>
> > Now, it maybe true that NOX hybrids wins on most of the real valid
points
> > that influences propulsion system selection for amateurs in general but
> the
> > table submitted and the points you make are too HPR specific to really
> > influence anyones line of judgement on this list I would have
> > hoped. A true representation should cover at least 12 different
propulsion
> > systems available to the amateur with cost not begin the only
measurable.
> > Troy
>
> Well, I'm intrigued. What 12 different amateur propulsion systems would
you
> compare?

> I'm certainly aware of the many factors amateurs look at when choosing to
> work on a
> propulsion system, costs always seem to be near the top. What others would
> you put near
> the top and how does Solids, Liquids, Hybrids rate on each item?

Again I apologise for being a little ambiguous here when I used the term
"propulsion systems". I was referring more to the propellant selection &
propulsion system as you probably gathered.

Others I'd put near the top (for your general 100-10000Ns non-mission
specific amateur) are: performance, development cost & complexity, safety &
stability, reliability, storability, regulatory.

I would rate Solids and NOX Hybrids quite high for most of these primary
wants. If performance and complexity were your primary objectives; APCP
seems to be the go unless you can get your hands on some HTP. NOX hybrids
will win out if many of the other objectives are more important to you. If
cost and performance are the primary objectives, then it's probably a
battle between NOX hybrids and AN composites as I see it. Biprop advantages
include safety (depending on the chemicals used) and regulatory but lose
big time on performance and complexity.
 As I mentioned in a previous post; for your general amateur and probably
HPR requirements, it's very hard for me to argue against NOX hybrids from
an overall perspective. I can and will if pushed but with reluctance. It's
a lot easier to argue against Biprops than hybrids:-(


>
> As a special request I have two more slogans....and one is even amateur!
>
> 1) You can tell a man by his oxidizer!

Yep, give ya that one.

> 2) Why play with thousand year old technology.....try something
> new...Hybrids!

Or try something even newer; APCP technology!!! :-)

>
> If anyone is seriously interested in discussing the advantages of amateur
> solids, liquids, hybrids, I'm available.

I'm a solids man at heart but have done some work with Hybrids (~0.1% as
much as you have). I've never once started a debate on which propulsion
system is the best for everyone but have arced up in the past when someone
else has and that's only because solids got such a bagging in the years
97-99 on this list.


Troy.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 27326 invoked from network); 3 Dec 2001 04:55:12 -0000
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 3 Dec 2001 04:55:12 -0000
Received: (qmail 21379 invoked by uid 50005); 3 Dec 2001 04:55:03 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4172. . Clean. Processed in 1.859799 secs); 03 Dec 2001 04:55:03 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 3 Dec 2001 04:54:58 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA10332; Sun, 2 Dec 2001 20:50:56 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 94523 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 3 Dec 2001 04:50:55 +0000
Received: from mta05.mail.mel.aone.net.au (mta05.mail.au.uu.net [203.2.192.85])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA10307 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 2 Dec 2001 20:49:35 -0800
Received: from unknown ([63.60.247.94]) by mta05.mail.mel.aone.net.au with SMTP          id <20011203044930.VWZL4383.mta05.mail.mel.aone.net.au@unknown> for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 3 Dec 2001 15:49:30 +1100
References: Conversation            <200112030319.fB33JJO21911@mail005.syd.optusnet.com.au> with last            message <001101c17bae$e74d18c0$6501a8c0@koreynew>
Priority: Normal
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Priority: 3
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	X-MAPIextension=.TXT;
	charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>
Date:         Mon, 3 Dec 2001 04:50:55 +0000
Reply-To: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] FW: [AR] Price of NOX
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <001101c17bae$e74d18c0$6501a8c0@koreynew>

----------
> I don't believe there in any order....
> I would probably group them together and not in any order:
>
> 1) Solids CP and discuss the advantages of the various oxidizer
> 2) Solids Others- BP ; Zn/S ; Double Base ; KP/Asphalt ; Candy
> 3) Hybrids LOX
> 4) Hybrids N2O
> 5) Hybrids Other- H2O2 ; HAN ; ANNA ; GasGen ; GAP
> 6) Liquids LOX- Kerosene ; Alcohol
> 7) Liquids Hyperbolic- Nitric acid ;
> 8) Liquids Self Pressurizing- N2O ; Ethane ; Ethylene ; Propane
> 9) Mono Propellants- H2O2 ; Nitromethane
> 10)Others- Water ; Steam ; Compressed gas -

10) + & poorman nuclear propulsion ie. using conventional chemistry to heat
up a low MW propellant (normally H2 or He).

Troy.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 2505 invoked from network); 3 Dec 2001 04:57:24 -0000
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 3 Dec 2001 04:57:24 -0000
Received: (qmail 25297 invoked by uid 50005); 3 Dec 2001 04:57:15 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4172. . Clean. Processed in 1.769476 secs); 03 Dec 2001 04:57:15 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 3 Dec 2001 04:57:13 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA10302; Sun, 2 Dec 2001 20:49:30 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 94514 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 3 Dec 2001 04:49:20 +0000
Received: from mta02.mail.mel.aone.net.au (mta02.mail.au.uu.net [203.2.192.82])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA10284 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 2 Dec 2001 20:49:19 -0800
Received: from unknown ([63.60.247.94]) by mta02.mail.mel.aone.net.au with SMTP          id <20011203044917.RIFR24297.mta02.mail.mel.aone.net.au@unknown> for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 3 Dec 2001 15:49:17 +1100
References: Conversation <001301c17baf$97906340$6501a8c0@koreynew> with last            message <001301c17baf$97906340$6501a8c0@koreynew>
Priority: Normal
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Priority: 3
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	X-MAPIextension=.TXT;
	charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>
Date:         Mon, 3 Dec 2001 04:49:20 +0000
Reply-To: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] FW: [AR] Price of NOX
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <001301c17baf$97906340$6501a8c0@koreynew>

Huh? Half true for HTP (in most cases) but NA?

Troy.

----------
> I put both H2O2 & Nitric Acid guys in the category of gluttons for
> punishment because they have to make every pound of their own oxidizers!
:-)
>
> K2
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU]On
> > Behalf Of David Weinshenker
> > Sent: Sunday, December 02, 2001 10:24 PM
> > To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
> > Subject: Re: [AR] Price of NOX
> >
> >
> > Korey Kline wrote:
> > > You can tell a man by his oxidizer!
> >
> > AP, in commercial solid motors; H2O2 in amateur liquids :)
> >
> > (What does that say about me?)
> >
> > -dave w
> >

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 26905 invoked from network); 3 Dec 2001 05:07:39 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.105]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 3 Dec 2001 05:07:39 -0000
Received: (qmail 1681 invoked by uid 50005); 3 Dec 2001 05:07:29 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpy with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4172. . Clean. Processed in 1.805276 secs); 03 Dec 2001 05:07:30 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 3 Dec 2001 05:07:26 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA10475; Sun, 2 Dec 2001 21:06:10 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 94552 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 3 Dec 2001 05:06:05 +0000
Received: from spsystems.net (spsystems.net [209.47.149.227]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA10457 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Sun,          2 Dec 2001 21:06:05 -0800
Received: (from henry@localhost) by spsystems.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id AAA27697;          Mon, 3 Dec 2001 00:05:14 -0500 (EST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1011203000150.27469A-100000@spsystems.net>
Date:         Mon, 3 Dec 2001 00:05:14 -0500
Reply-To: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] FW: [AR] Price of NOX
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <001301c17baf$97906340$6501a8c0@koreynew>

On Sun, 2 Dec 2001, Korey Kline wrote:
> I put both H2O2 & Nitric Acid guys in the category of gluttons for
> punishment because they have to make every pound of their own oxidizers! :-)

Not really.  Rocket-grade peroxide is now commercially available, although
in a rather limited way.  And my understanding (can't say that I've
checked it out personally) is that WFNA is a standard industrial chemical,
albeit rather more costly than ordinary concentrated nitric acid (which
still has significant water content).

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 2306 invoked from network); 3 Dec 2001 05:10:08 -0000
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 3 Dec 2001 05:10:08 -0000
Received: (qmail 15093 invoked by uid 50005); 3 Dec 2001 05:09:59 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4172. . Clean. Processed in 1.233966 secs); 03 Dec 2001 05:09:59 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 3 Dec 2001 05:09:55 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA10510; Sun, 2 Dec 2001 21:08:24 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 94563 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 3 Dec 2001 05:08:23 +0000
Received: from mta01.mail.mel.aone.net.au (mta01.mail.au.uu.net [203.2.192.81])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA10493 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 2 Dec 2001 21:08:21 -0800
Received: from unknown ([63.34.218.39]) by mta01.mail.mel.aone.net.au with SMTP          id <20011203050806.CKHR6820.mta01.mail.mel.aone.net.au@unknown> for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 3 Dec 2001 16:08:06 +1100
References: Conversation <NEBBJIGOELOLIBCCPKDCEECJCCAA.geordi@c031.aone.net.au>            with last message            <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>
Priority: Normal
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Priority: 3
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	X-MAPIextension=.TXT;
	charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>
Date:         Mon, 3 Dec 2001 05:08:23 +0000
Reply-To: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Price of NOX
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

> wants. If performance and complexity were your primary objectives; APCP
> seems to be the go unless you can get your hands on some HTP.

Clarification: I wasn't suggesting HTP propulsion systems can outperform
APCP systems either. Maybe for Isp but certainly not for dIsp.

Troy.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 7488 invoked from network); 3 Dec 2001 05:51:14 -0000
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 3 Dec 2001 05:51:14 -0000
Received: (qmail 28449 invoked by uid 50005); 3 Dec 2001 05:51:04 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4172. . Clean. Processed in 1.001485 secs); 03 Dec 2001 05:51:04 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 3 Dec 2001 05:51:02 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA10849; Sun, 2 Dec 2001 21:36:50 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 94611 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 3 Dec 2001 05:36:45 +0000
Received: from scaup.prod.itd.earthlink.net (scaup.mail.pas.earthlink.net          [207.217.120.49]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA10835          for <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Sun, 2 Dec 2001 21:36:45 -0800
Received: from 1cust200.tnt1.holman.wi.da.uu.net ([63.20.200.200] helo=scottje)          by scaup.prod.itd.earthlink.net with smtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id          16AlmW-0005NB-00 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 02 Dec 2001 21:36:44          -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0E39_01C56B69.5AB0EE10"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <001a01c17bbc$d4b9d0a0$f072fea9@scottje>
Date:         Sun, 2 Dec 2001 23:39:07 -0600
Reply-To: "Scott & Jeanette" <frazer2001@EARTHLINK.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Scott & Jeanette" <frazer2001@EARTHLINK.NET>
Subject:      [AR] Cutting Kevlar Cloth
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0E39_01C56B69.5AB0EE10
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Does anyone have a good method for cutting Kevlar Cloth (6oz).  I know =
there are specialized tools but was looking for a way with common tools. =
 Feel free to reply to me direct.

Thanks

Scott F


------=_NextPart_000_0E39_01C56B69.5AB0EE10
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Diso-8859-1">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 6.00.2600.0" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Does anyone have a good method for =
cutting Kevlar=20
Cloth (6oz).&nbsp; I know there are specialized tools but was looking =
for a way=20
with common tools.&nbsp; Feel free to reply to me direct.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Thanks</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Scott F</FONT></DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0E39_01C56B69.5AB0EE10--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 10928 invoked from network); 3 Dec 2001 05:52:34 -0000
Received: from smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.105]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 3 Dec 2001 05:52:34 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 12082 invoked by uid 50005); 3 Dec 2001 05:52:25 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpy with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4172. . Clean. Processed in 0.46392 secs); 03 Dec 2001 05:52:25 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 3 Dec 2001 05:52:24 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA10872; Sun, 2 Dec 2001 21:38:17 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 94618 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 3 Dec 2001 05:38:16 +0000
Received: from m5.boston.juno.com (m5.boston.juno.com [64.136.24.68]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA10855 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Sun, 2 Dec 2001 21:37:22 -0800
Received: from cookie.juno.com by cookie.juno.com for          <"r2Fo8hpwT0kn33UwylHELMN/WOTpJvUcjdfTjhbrCMQW9N9r9gHaSQ==">
Received: (from icantdecide@juno.com) by m5.boston.juno.com (jqueuemail) id          GMQACTNG; Mon, 03 Dec 2001 00:37:15 EST
X-Mailer: Juno 4.0.9
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Juno-Line-Breaks: 0-9,11-12,19-20,28-29,34-39
X-Juno-Att: 0
X-Juno-RefParts: 0
Message-ID:  <20011130.003757.-753057.0.icantdecide@juno.com>
Date:         Fri, 30 Nov 2001 00:37:56 -0600
Reply-To: "James G Selin" <icantdecide@JUNO.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "James G Selin" <icantdecide@JUNO.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Price of NOX- hybrids
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

On Sun, 2 Dec 2001 21:04:31 -0500 Korey Kline <k2@HYBRIDS.COM> writes:
> As a special request I have two more slogans....and one is even
> amateur!
>
> 1) You can tell a man by his oxidizer!
> 2) Why play with thousand year old technology.....try something
> new...Hybrids!

Personally, I find hybrids less appealing because of two factors which
are specific to my goals.

First, The desire for precision, complexity, and a sense of achievement
of a task mandating these two qualities are what fuel my choices in
rockets. I find the lack of certainty of a hybrids exact behavior as
compared to say liquids a turn off. What may be thousand year old
technologies come with benefits... 1000 years of refinement! I'm the kind
of guy that like to graph all the changing conditions in excel and mash
numbers.

Second, fun. From a primative standpoint, the type of combustion isn't as
exciting. I find hybrid combustion similar to everyday combustion. Like
blowing on a fire or the extreme version of that a blast furnace with the
extreme being hybrids. Any solids guy can remember back to the initial
intrigue that merely a combination of chemicals, mundane on their own,
interact so spectacularly. Its a wonder. This is the sort of fire our
early ancestors didn't know. Liquids also have that appeal but not to the
extent that solids do. Just giving my honest thoughts...

This is goal specific however. If you are the sort of engineer who wants
to push new boundaries and try new things hybrids are and excellent
outlet. To each his* own. We should feel lucky our field has so many
avenues of exploration and stop trying to root for our teams.... its a
rare thing.

*(or her)

Just my 2 cents....

Jim Selin

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 26463 invoked from network); 3 Dec 2001 06:11:50 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 3 Dec 2001 06:11:50 -0000
Received: (qmail 10055 invoked by uid 50005); 3 Dec 2001 06:11:41 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4172. . Clean. Processed in 1.056899 secs); 03 Dec 2001 06:11:41 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 3 Dec 2001 06:11:38 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA11031; Sun, 2 Dec 2001 22:10:26 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 94641 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 3 Dec 2001 06:10:20 +0000
Received: from localhost (rcalkins@localhost) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with          ESMTP id WAA11017; Sun, 2 Dec 2001 22:10:19 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.LNX.4.10.10112022209280.10972-100000@itc.uci.edu>
Date:         Sun, 2 Dec 2001 22:10:19 -0800
Reply-To: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Cutting Kevlar Cloth
Comments: To: Scott & Jeanette <frazer2001@EARTHLINK.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <001a01c17bbc$d4b9d0a0$f072fea9@scottje>

You can get a good pair of Fiskars and never use them for anything but
Kevlar.  They'll work for quite a while, I've heard.

Ray



On Sun, 2 Dec 2001, Scott & Jeanette wrote:

> Does anyone have a good method for cutting Kevlar Cloth (6oz).  I know there are specialized tools but was looking for a way with common tools.  Feel free to reply to me direct.
>
> Thanks
>
> Scott F
>
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 15843 invoked from network); 3 Dec 2001 06:20:25 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 3 Dec 2001 06:20:25 -0000
Received: (qmail 5403 invoked by uid 50005); 3 Dec 2001 06:20:16 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4172. . Clean. Processed in 1.507389 secs); 03 Dec 2001 06:20:16 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 3 Dec 2001 06:20:12 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA11103; Sun, 2 Dec 2001 22:18:56 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 94652 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 3 Dec 2001 06:18:54 +0000
Received: from localhost (dmccue@localhost) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with          ESMTP id WAA11089; Sun, 2 Dec 2001 22:18:53 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.LNX.4.10.10112022214340.11071-100000@itc.uci.edu>
Date:         Sun, 2 Dec 2001 22:18:53 -0800
Reply-To: "David J. McCue" <dmccue@itc.uci.edu>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "David J. McCue" <dmccue@itc.uci.edu>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Cutting Kevlar Cloth
Comments: To: Scott & Jeanette <frazer2001@EARTHLINK.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <001a01c17bbc$d4b9d0a0$f072fea9@scottje>

On Sun, 2 Dec 2001, Scott & Jeanette wrote:

> Does anyone have a good method for cutting Kevlar Cloth (6oz).  I know there are specialized tools but was looking for a way with common tools.  Feel free to reply to me direct.
>
> Thanks
>
> Scott F
>
Aircraft Spruce carries two kinds of scissors for Kevlar, an expensive
ceramic edged pair and a less expensive steel edged pair. I have the less
expensive pair (about 16 dollars U.S., as I recall) and they work fine.

http://www.aircraftspruce.com/

-Dave Mc

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 18343 invoked from network); 3 Dec 2001 06:35:22 -0000
Received: from smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.105]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 3 Dec 2001 06:35:22 -0000
Received: (qmail 19400 invoked by uid 50005); 3 Dec 2001 06:35:12 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpy with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4172. . Clean. Processed in 3.53756 secs); 03 Dec 2001 06:35:12 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 3 Dec 2001 06:35:07 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA11174; Sun, 2 Dec 2001 22:34:02 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 94663 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 3 Dec 2001 06:33:58 +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (oe45.law12.hotmail.com [64.4.18.17]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA11160 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Sun,          2 Dec 2001 22:33:57 -0800
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Sun,          2 Dec 2001 22:33:27 -0800
X-Originating-IP: [24.92.128.69]
References:  <001a01c17bbc$d4b9d0a0$f072fea9@scottje>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0E3C_01C56B69.5ABA63F0"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 03 Dec 2001 06:33:27.0283 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[6A734430:01C17BC4]
Message-ID:  <OE45pcQABZTW5k1Ed28000034c7@hotmail.com>
Date:         Mon, 3 Dec 2001 00:32:41 -0600
Reply-To: "Mark Kruep" <mkruep@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Mark Kruep" <mkruep@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Cutting Kevlar Cloth
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0E3C_01C56B69.5ABA63F0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

I use a generic pair of scissors from Wal-Mart (blue handle and look =
like Fiskars but are generic) . They cost me $5. You can only use them =
for Kevlar and after about 6 months of use they will have to be =
replaced. They will still work great for fiberglass, but Kevlar is not =
something you want to waste much of, so I just get a new pair twice a =
year.=20

Unfortunately, the rotary blade type cutters don't work on Kevlar unless =
you spring for the industrial type. The industrial scissors from what =
I've heard aren't that much better until you get into the $30-40 a pair =
type and then they last a long time. But, that's just what I've heard.

Mark
  ----- Original Message -----=20
  From: Scott & Jeanette=20
  To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU=20
  Sent: Sunday, December 02, 2001 11:39 PM
  Subject: [AR] Cutting Kevlar Cloth


  Does anyone have a good method for cutting Kevlar Cloth (6oz).  I know =
there are specialized tools but was looking for a way with common tools. =
 Feel free to reply to me direct.

  Thanks

  Scott F


------=_NextPart_000_0E3C_01C56B69.5ABA63F0
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Diso-8859-1">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 5.50.4134.600" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>I use a generic pair of scissors from =
Wal-Mart=20
(blue handle and look like Fiskars but are&nbsp;generic)&nbsp;. They =
cost me $5.=20
You can only use them for Kevlar and after about 6 months of use they =
will have=20
to be replaced. They will still work great for fiberglass, but Kevlar is =
not=20
something you want to waste much of, so I just get a new pair twice a =
year.=20
</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Unfortunately, the rotary blade type =
cutters don't=20
work on Kevlar unless you spring for the industrial type. The industrial =

scissors from what I've heard aren't that much better until you get into =
the=20
$30-40 a pair type and then they last a long time. But, that's just what =
I've=20
heard.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Mark</FONT></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE dir=3Dltr=20
style=3D"PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; =
BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
  <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial">----- Original Message ----- </DIV>
  <DIV=20
  style=3D"BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; FONT: 10pt arial; font-color: =
black"><B>From:</B>=20
  <A title=3Dfrazer2001@EARTHLINK.NET =
href=3D"mailto:frazer2001@EARTHLINK.NET">Scott=20
  &amp; Jeanette</A> </DIV>
  <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A =
title=3DAROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU=20
  href=3D"mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU">AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU</A> </DIV>
  <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> Sunday, December 02, 2001 =
11:39=20
  PM</DIV>
  <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> [AR] Cutting Kevlar =
Cloth</DIV>
  <DIV><BR></DIV>
  <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Does anyone have a good method for =
cutting Kevlar=20
  Cloth (6oz).&nbsp; I know there are specialized tools but was looking =
for a=20
  way with common tools.&nbsp; Feel free to reply to me =
direct.</FONT></DIV>
  <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
  <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Thanks</FONT></DIV>
  <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
  <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Scott F</FONT></DIV>
  <DIV>&nbsp;</DIV></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0E3C_01C56B69.5ABA63F0--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 10278 invoked from network); 3 Dec 2001 06:59:05 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 3 Dec 2001 06:59:05 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: (qmail 26589 invoked by uid 50005); 3 Dec 2001 06:58:56 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4172. . Clean. Processed in 0.308762 secs); 03 Dec 2001 06:58:56 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 3 Dec 2001 06:58:55 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA11281; Sun, 2 Dec 2001 22:57:52 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 94682 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 3 Dec 2001 06:57:48 +0000
Received: from wrench.toolcity.net (root@wrench.toolcity.net [208.0.188.2]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA11267 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 2 Dec 2001 22:57:47 -0800
Received: from [63.169.101.31]          (dap-208-22-189-37.meadville-tnt-0.pa.toolcity.net [208.22.189.37])          by wrench.toolcity.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id BAA06724; Mon, 3          Dec 2001 01:57:43 -0500 (EST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <v01510101b830d57d3564@[63.169.101.31]>
Date:         Mon, 3 Dec 2001 02:00:22 -0600
Reply-To: "al bradley" <abradley@TOOLCITY.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "al bradley" <abradley@TOOLCITY.NET>
Subject:      [AR] "Toughness" in uncooked candy grain
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Just a few short words in looking at my earlier topic of using
hydraulically pressed uncooked candy grain:

Back in my previously work lifetime in the printing industry we had
manufacturers' tinted filters on the process-cameras to achieve various
light transformations. Those tinted filters were basically dyed sheets of
gelatin allowed to dry. They had a notable toughness and flexibility --
perhaps a bit like dried Jello. And they lasted and lasted. Could be even
dusted or blown off with compressed air.

Looked at the possible application for increasing grain shear strength in
uncooked pressed-candy grain. I ran 2 experiments in the basic candy mix
using hot gelatin introduced into a basic candy mix (both allowed to "dry"
3 weeks in a warm spot):

#1 -- Laid down in a 1/8" thick layer and allowed to dry hard. It would
bend a bit before it broke. Didn't burn too smoothly in open air, about 10%
residue.

#2 -- Laid down in a 1/4" layer in a stainless steel bowl. Had to be dug
out. Top was dry and hard, bottom had a wet sheen, gummy, probably would
slump a tiny bit if so tested. (Maybe reminiscent of some of the cooked
candy grains.)  Estimated about 3% residue from open-air burn.

And No. 2 burned much more vigorously than No. 1 in open air. I was much
surprised since it appeared so much "wetter" than No. 1!!

Does anyone on the list have any ideas on the physics and chemistry going
on here????  Prospects for further testing?

respectfully,
al bradley


------------------------------------------------------------------
Can you live Life with this?: "Unless there is a law, an agreement, or a
long-standing custom, No one `Deserves' Anything -- Either Good or Bad!"

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 1498 invoked from network); 3 Dec 2001 09:06:46 -0000
Received: from smtpv.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.110]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 3 Dec 2001 09:06:46 -0000
Received: (qmail 22621 invoked by uid 50005); 3 Dec 2001 09:00:59 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpv with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4172. . Clean. Processed in 1.880253 secs); 03 Dec 2001 09:00:59 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpv.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 3 Dec 2001 09:00:55 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id BAA11780; Mon, 3 Dec 2001 01:04:38 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 94768 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 3 Dec 2001 09:04:30 +0000
Received: from mta03.mail.mel.aone.net.au (mta03.mail.au.uu.net [203.2.192.83])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id BAA11766 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 3 Dec 2001 01:04:29 -0800
Received: from win2pk ([63.60.220.60]) by mta03.mail.mel.aone.net.au with SMTP          id <20011203090427.YPAX22966.mta03.mail.mel.aone.net.au@win2pk>; Mon,          3 Dec 2001 20:04:27 +1100
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
Importance: Normal
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <NEBBJIGOELOLIBCCPKDCGECNCCAA.geordi@c031.aone.net.au>
Date:         Mon, 3 Dec 2001 20:34:03 +1100
Reply-To: "Troy Prideaux" <geordi@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Troy Prideaux" <geordi@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] "Toughness" in uncooked candy grain
Comments: To: al bradley <abradley@TOOLCITY.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <v01510101b830d57d3564@[63.169.101.31]>

>-----Original Message-----
>From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@itc.uci.edu]On
>Behalf Of al bradley
>Sent: Monday, 3 December 2001 7:00 PM
>To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
>Subject: [AR] "Toughness" in uncooked candy grain
>
>
>Just a few short words in looking at my earlier topic of using
>hydraulically pressed uncooked candy grain:
>
>Back in my previously work lifetime in the printing industry we had
>manufacturers' tinted filters on the process-cameras to achieve various
>light transformations. Those tinted filters were basically dyed sheets of
>gelatin allowed to dry. They had a notable toughness and flexibility --
>perhaps a bit like dried Jello. And they lasted and lasted. Could be even
>dusted or blown off with compressed air.
>
>Looked at the possible application for increasing grain shear strength in
>uncooked pressed-candy grain. I ran 2 experiments in the basic candy mix
>using hot gelatin introduced into a basic candy mix (both allowed to "dry"
>3 weeks in a warm spot):
>
>#1 -- Laid down in a 1/8" thick layer and allowed to dry hard. It would
>bend a bit before it broke. Didn't burn too smoothly in open air, about 10%
>residue.
>
>#2 -- Laid down in a 1/4" layer in a stainless steel bowl. Had to be dug
>out. Top was dry and hard, bottom had a wet sheen, gummy, probably would
>slump a tiny bit if so tested. (Maybe reminiscent of some of the cooked
>candy grains.)  Estimated about 3% residue from open-air burn.
>
>And No. 2 burned much more vigorously than No. 1 in open air. I was much
>surprised since it appeared so much "wetter" than No. 1!!
>
>Does anyone on the list have any ideas on the physics and chemistry going
>on here????  Prospects for further testing?

Unfortunately I can't help you much here Al. I don't know much about the
physics or chemistry of gelatine (it's one of those really weird compounds)
other than it's used in the pharmaceutical industry (at least it was) as the
material of choice for making capsules. IIRC the gelatine crystals are added
to a receiver and heated. The temperature at which they're heated needs to
be very precise with careful monitoring. In fact, so precise the stainless
steel receiver must be carefully designed to dissipate the heat quite evenly
throughout. Apparently, there's a temperature window at which gelatine melts
and becomes a fluid. Any temperature under this window and the gelatine
remains solid and crystalline. If the temperature exceeds this window, the
gelatine will decompose and change molecular structure into another form of
protein I think. This change is permanent and as a consequence is impossible
to achieve the original properties of the gelatine. What results is a
crystalline substance very similar in appearance to the original gelatine
but it will be impossible to achieve the fluid state as explained earlier.
 So what temperature range is this window? ....I dunno, 60deg C rings a very
faint and distant bell but I honestly can't remember. Don't take any of this
as gospel, it's all coming from pretty scratchy memory.
 Of course, all this has absolutely nothing to do with the jelly type
process you refer to but may help shed some light on what can happen to
gelatine with different temps even during the combustion process.

Sorry I couldn't be of more help,

Troy.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 5845 invoked from network); 3 Dec 2001 12:13:59 -0000
Received: from smtpv.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.110]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 3 Dec 2001 12:13:59 -0000
Received: (qmail 22264 invoked by uid 50005); 3 Dec 2001 12:08:10 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpv with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4172. . Clean. Processed in 1.298346 secs); 03 Dec 2001 12:08:10 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpv.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 3 Dec 2001 12:08:06 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id EAA12444; Mon, 3 Dec 2001 04:12:23 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 94854 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 3 Dec 2001 12:12:16 +0000
Received: from mail010.syd.optusnet.com.au (mail010.syd.optusnet.com.au          [203.2.75.171]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id EAA12429          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 3 Dec 2001 04:12:16 -0800
Received: from jack (wagax4-122.dialup.optusnet.com.au [198.142.146.122]) by          mail010.syd.optusnet.com.au (8.11.1/8.11.1) with SMTP id fB3CBig18476          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 3 Dec 2001 23:11:44 +1100
References:  <001a01c17bbc$d4b9d0a0$f072fea9@scottje>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0E3F_01C56B69.5ABCD4F0"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <003e01c17bf3$e0cec080$7a928ec6@jack>
Date:         Mon, 3 Dec 2001 23:13:10 +1100
Reply-To: "Jack" <jack_36@OPTUSNET.COM.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jack" <jack_36@OPTUSNET.COM.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Cutting Kevlar Cloth
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0E3F_01C56B69.5ABCD4F0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

after the scissors, the utility knife, the sharpest pocket knife youve =
got, the brand new razor blade, and the tin snips have been thrown to =
the other end of the shed and youve said  ..F__K.. about a dozen times, =
go get the scissors and grab a sheet of fibreglass. i dont think the =
stuffing around is worth it.

          ..Jack..
  Does anyone have a good method for cutting Kevlar Cloth (6oz).  I know =
there are specialized tools but was looking for a way with common tools. =
 Feel free to reply to me direct.
  =20
  Thanks
  =20
  Scott F


------=_NextPart_000_0E3F_01C56B69.5ABCD4F0
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META content=3D"text/html; charset=3Diso-8859-1" =
http-equiv=3DContent-Type>
<META content=3D"MSHTML 5.00.2614.3500" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial>after the scissors, the utility knife, the =
sharpest pocket=20
knife youve got, the brand new razor blade, and the tin snips have been =
thrown=20
to the other end of the shed and youve said&nbsp; ..F__K.. about a dozen =
times,=20
go get the scissors and grab a sheet of fibreglass. i dont think the =
stuffing=20
around is worth it.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; =
..Jack..</DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE=20
style=3D"BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: =
0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; PADDING-RIGHT: 0px">
  <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Does anyone have a good method for =
cutting Kevlar=20
  Cloth (6oz).&nbsp; I know there are specialized tools but was looking =
for a=20
  way with common tools.&nbsp; Feel free to reply to me =
direct.</FONT></DIV>
  <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
  <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Thanks</FONT></DIV>
  <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
  <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Scott F</FONT></DIV>
  <DIV>&nbsp;</DIV></BLOCKQUOTE></DIV></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0E3F_01C56B69.5ABCD4F0--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 27552 invoked from network); 3 Dec 2001 17:00:37 -0000
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 3 Dec 2001 17:00:37 -0000
X-Priority: 3
Received: (qmail 23793 invoked by uid 50005); 3 Dec 2001 17:00:28 -0000
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4173. . Clean. Processed in 1.55472 secs); 03 Dec 2001 17:00:28 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 3 Dec 2001 17:00:23 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA13222; Mon, 3 Dec 2001 08:53:38 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 94923 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 3 Dec 2001 16:53:31 +0000
Received: from nt2000s2.dgmicro.com (cn815472-c.newcas1.de.home.com          [24.40.74.93]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA13208          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 3 Dec 2001 08:53:31 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
content-class: urn:content-classes:message
X-MS-Has-Attach: 
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: 
Thread-Topic: Ranc"O"r
Thread-Index: AcF7pIMpAEBQofFCSw2bZcrwe1fTaAAdg+7w
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by itc.uci.edu id IAA13209
Message-ID:  <C0F7BF4DCEC1D2479A01031347184DCD02FEFD@nt2000s2.dgmicro.com>
Date:         Mon, 3 Dec 2001 11:52:59 -0500
Reply-To: "Darren Wright" <dwright@D2-TECH.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Darren Wright" <dwright@D2-TECH.COM>
Subject:      [AR] Ranc"O"r
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Rancor flew sucessfully yesterday on an OPL O5500, 23,000ns.  The motor
worked fine, however, the grain design tested did not perform as we
would have liked it to.  The motor put the 145lb rocket to 8500ft.

Some pictures are online at:

http://www.dgmicro.com/opl/rancor.htm

-Darren

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 5420 invoked from network); 3 Dec 2001 17:02:33 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.105]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 3 Dec 2001 17:02:34 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: (qmail 30850 invoked by uid 50005); 3 Dec 2001 17:02:24 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpy with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4173. . Clean. Processed in 1.046793 secs); 03 Dec 2001 17:02:24 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 3 Dec 2001 17:02:22 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA13286; Mon, 3 Dec 2001 09:00:48 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 94934 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 3 Dec 2001 17:00:46 +0000
Received: from cisco.com (cypher.cisco.com [171.69.11.18]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA13272 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon,          3 Dec 2001 09:00:46 -0800
Received: (from billw@localhost) by cisco.com (8.8.8/2.6/Cisco List          Logging/8.8.8) id JAA13270; Mon, 3 Dec 2001 09:00:13 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID:  <CMM.0.90.4.1007398812.billw@cypher>
Date:         Mon, 3 Dec 2001 09:00:12 PST
Reply-To: "Bill Westfield" <billw@cisco.com>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "William Chops Westfield" <billw@cisco.com>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Price of NOX
Comments: To: Troy Prideaux <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  Your message of Sun, 2 Dec 2001 10:44:18 -0800

    What I do have a problem with is centring discussion around *consumer*
    propulsion.  Amateur/Experimental rocketry is not consumer propulsion...

I dunno.  Would be "consumer propulsion" providers are certainly a "class"
of amateur/experimental rocketeers - one with its own set of interesting
problems and issues...

"consumer propulsion" is certainly not ALL of amateur rocketry...

BillW


From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 16701 invoked from network); 3 Dec 2001 18:20:08 -0000
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 3 Dec 2001 18:20:08 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 13091 invoked by uid 50005); 3 Dec 2001 18:19:59 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4173. . Clean. Processed in 0.161515 secs); 03 Dec 2001 18:19:59 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 3 Dec 2001 18:19:59 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA13844; Mon, 3 Dec 2001 10:18:48 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 94998 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 3 Dec 2001 18:18:47 +0000
Received: from mta4.rcsntx.swbell.net (mta4.rcsntx.swbell.net [151.164.30.28])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA13729 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 3 Dec 2001 10:08:46 -0800
Received: from chris ([64.218.117.137]) by mta4.rcsntx.swbell.net (iPlanet          Messaging Server 5.1 (built May  7 2001)) with SMTP id          <0GNS00JVK52LAF@mta4.rcsntx.swbell.net> for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon,          03 Dec 2001 12:08:45 -0600 (CST)
Received: by localhost with Microsoft MAPI; Mon, 03 Dec 2001 12:10:11 -0600
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Microsoft Internet E-mail/MAPI - 8.0.0.4211
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <01C17BF3.75496C20.numbr@swbell.net>
Date:         Mon, 3 Dec 2001 12:10:10 -0600
Reply-To: "numbr@swbell.net" <numbr@SWBELL.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Chris Mealer" <numbr@SWBELL.NET>
Subject:      [AR] Candy Mixing Machine
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

I was wondering if anyone has ever looked at a bread machine modification
for the purposes of mixing/cooking candy propellant.  Mine bakes at 375
degrees but won't stir simultaneously, of course.  I don't think it would
be too difficult to bypass the presets, tweak the temp, and override the
motor to stir continuously but my wife says I have to show her a case study
before I'm allowed to donate ours to science (since it was a gift.) :-)

Thanks,
Chris

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 20923 invoked from network); 3 Dec 2001 18:21:14 -0000
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 3 Dec 2001 18:21:14 -0000
Received: (qmail 6745 invoked by uid 50005); 3 Dec 2001 18:21:04 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4173. . Clean. Processed in 2.555758 secs); 03 Dec 2001 18:21:04 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 3 Dec 2001 18:21:00 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA13825; Mon, 3 Dec 2001 10:17:41 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 95006 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 3 Dec 2001 18:17:29 +0000
Received: from prover.com (IDENT:root@chaos.sthlm.prover.com [192.71.47.101])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA13811 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 3 Dec 2001 10:17:28 -0800
Received: from somnus.sthlm.prover.com (somnus.sthlm.prover.com [192.71.47.5])          by prover.com (8.11.3/8.11.3) with ESMTP id fB3IGjJ09147 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 3 Dec 2001 19:16:45 +0100
Received: from PROVEIT ([12.33.29.141]) by somnus.sthlm.prover.com with          Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.3779); Mon, 3 Dec 2001 19:15:40 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0E42_01C56B69.5AC64AD0"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook, Build 10.0.2627
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 03 Dec 2001 18:15:42.0562 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[85089C20:01C17C26]
Message-ID:  <001e01c17c26$70fa5520$8d1d210c@PROVEIT>
Date:         Mon, 3 Dec 2001 10:15:07 -0800
Reply-To: "Duncan Mcdonald" <duncan.mcdonald@PROVER.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Duncan Mcdonald" <duncan.mcdonald@PROVER.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Cutting Kevlar Cloth
Comments: To: Scott & Jeanette <frazer2001@EARTHLINK.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <001a01c17bbc$d4b9d0a0$f072fea9@scottje>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0E42_01C56B69.5AC64AD0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Hi Scott,

I use shears I bought from ACP for cutting fiberglass and Kevlar. They
are incredibly sharp and will easily cut kevlar. Part number T-02D and
they cost $18. Once you try them, you can't live without them. You can
order them online at http://www.acp-composites.com/.

Duncan

-----Original Message-----
From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU] On
Behalf Of Scott & Jeanette
Sent: Sunday, December 02, 2001 9:39 PM
To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
Subject: [AR] Cutting Kevlar Cloth


Does anyone have a good method for cutting Kevlar Cloth (6oz).  I know
there are specialized tools but was looking for a way with common tools.
Feel free to reply to me direct.

Thanks

Scott F



------=_NextPart_000_0E42_01C56B69.5AC64AD0
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META HTTP-EQUIV=3D"Content-Type" CONTENT=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Dus-ascii">
<TITLE>Message</TITLE>

<META content=3D"MSHTML 6.00.2600.0" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><SPAN class=3D501211018-03122001><FONT face=3DArial =
color=3D#0000ff>Hi=20
Scott,</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=3D501211018-03122001><FONT face=3DArial=20
color=3D#0000ff></FONT></SPAN>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=3D501211018-03122001><FONT face=3DArial><FONT =
color=3D#0000ff>I use=20
shears I bought from ACP for cutting fiberglass and Kevlar. They are =
incredibly=20
sharp and will easily cut kevlar. Part number T-02D and they cost $18. =
Once you=20
try them, you can't live without them. You can order them online at <A=20
href=3D"http://www.acp-composites.com/">http://www.acp-composites.com/</A=
>.</FONT></FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=3D501211018-03122001><FONT =
face=3DArial></FONT></SPAN>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=3D501211018-03122001><FONT face=3DArial=20
color=3D#0000ff>Duncan</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE dir=3Dltr style=3D"MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
  <DIV></DIV>
  <DIV class=3DOutlookMessageHeader lang=3Den-us dir=3Dltr =
align=3Dleft><FONT=20
  face=3DTahoma size=3D2>-----Original Message-----<BR><B>From:</B> =
Amateur Rocketry=20
  discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU] <B>On Behalf Of </B>Scott =
&amp;=20
  Jeanette<BR><B>Sent:</B> Sunday, December 02, 2001 9:39 =
PM<BR><B>To:</B>=20
  AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU<BR><B>Subject:</B> [AR] Cutting Kevlar=20
  Cloth<BR><BR></FONT></DIV>
  <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Does anyone have a good method for =
cutting Kevlar=20
  Cloth (6oz).&nbsp; I know there are specialized tools but was looking =
for a=20
  way with common tools.&nbsp; Feel free to reply to me =
direct.</FONT></DIV>
  <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
  <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Thanks</FONT></DIV>
  <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
  <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Scott F</FONT></DIV>
  <DIV>&nbsp;</DIV></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0E42_01C56B69.5AC64AD0--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 2376 invoked from network); 3 Dec 2001 18:47:38 -0000
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 3 Dec 2001 18:47:38 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 20535 invoked by uid 50005); 3 Dec 2001 18:47:29 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4173. . Clean. Processed in 0.598336 secs); 03 Dec 2001 18:47:29 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 3 Dec 2001 18:47:28 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA14041; Mon, 3 Dec 2001 10:46:10 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 95043 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 3 Dec 2001 18:46:03 +0000
Received: from ae.poss.com (adam-m.poss.com [198.70.184.161]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA13992 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon,          3 Dec 2001 10:36:02 -0800
Received: from perfectorder.com ([198.70.184.156]) by ae.poss.com (Netscape          Messaging Server 4.1) with ESMTP id GNS6CX00.40A for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 3 Dec 2001 13:36:33 -0500
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (X11; I; SunOS 5.8 sun4u)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <001a01c17bbc$d4b9d0a0$f072fea9@scottje>            <OE45pcQABZTW5k1Ed28000034c7@hotmail.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0E46_01C56B69.5ACD76C0"
Message-ID:  <3C0BC66E.CB426218@perfectorder.com>
Date:         Mon, 3 Dec 2001 13:37:34 -0500
Reply-To: "Doug Bell" <dbell@PERFECTORDER.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Doug Bell" <dbell@PERFECTORDER.COM>
Organization: Perfect Order
Subject:      Re: [AR] Cutting Kevlar Cloth
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0E46_01C56B69.5ACD76C0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-15"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit


------=_NextPart_000_0E46_01C56B69.5ACD76C0
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-15"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<!doctype html public "-//w3c//dtd html 4.0 transitional//en">
<html>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
Fibreglast &lt;www.fibreglast.com>&nbsp; sells a set of scissors specially
for cutting Kevlar for about $20 or so.&nbsp; The big difference is that
the ground angle of the blade needs to be different to cut kevlar properly,
and not kill the blade.&nbsp; The reason they cost so much is because they
are all-metal and resharpen-able.
<p>Doug
<p>Mark Kruep wrote:
<blockquote TYPE=CITE><style></style>
<font face="Arial"><font size=-1>I
use a generic pair of scissors from Wal-Mart (blue handle and look like
Fiskars but are generic) . They cost me $5. You can only use them for Kevlar
and after about 6 months of use they will have to be replaced. They will
still work great for fiberglass, but Kevlar is not something you want to
waste much of, so I just get a new pair twice a year.</font></font>&nbsp;<font face="Arial"><font size=-1>Unfortunately,
the rotary blade type cutters don't work on Kevlar unless you spring for
the industrial type. The industrial scissors from what I've heard aren't
that much better until you get into the $30-40 a pair type and then they
last a long time. But, that's just what I've heard.</font></font>&nbsp;<font face="Arial"><font size=-1>Mark</font></font>
<blockquote dir=ltr
style="PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<div style="FONT: 10pt arial">----- Original Message -----</div>

<div
  style="BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; FONT: 10pt arial; font-color: black"><b>From:</b>
<a href="mailto:frazer2001@EARTHLINK.NET" title="frazer2001@EARTHLINK.NET">Scott
&amp; Jeanette</a></div>

<div style="FONT: 10pt arial"><b>To:</b> <a href="mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU" title="AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU">AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU</a></div>

<div style="FONT: 10pt arial"><b>Sent:</b> Sunday, December 02, 2001 11:39
PM</div>

<div style="FONT: 10pt arial"><b>Subject:</b> [AR] Cutting Kevlar Cloth</div>
&nbsp;<font face="Arial"><font size=-1>Does anyone have a good method for
cutting Kevlar Cloth (6oz).&nbsp; I know there are specialized tools but
was looking for a way with common tools.&nbsp; Feel free to reply to me
direct.</font></font>&nbsp;<font face="Arial"><font size=-1>Thanks</font></font>&nbsp;<font face="Arial"><font size=-1>Scott
F</font></font>&nbsp;</blockquote>
</blockquote>

</body>
</html>

------=_NextPart_000_0E46_01C56B69.5ACD76C0--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 15532 invoked from network); 3 Dec 2001 18:58:34 -0000
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 3 Dec 2001 18:58:34 -0000
Received: (qmail 1802 invoked by uid 50005); 3 Dec 2001 18:58:25 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4173. . Clean. Processed in 0.202626 secs); 03 Dec 2001 18:58:25 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 3 Dec 2001 18:58:25 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA14153; Mon, 3 Dec 2001 10:57:13 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 95063 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 3 Dec 2001 18:57:06 +0000
Received: from albqpop1.albq.uswest.net (albqpop1.albq.uswest.net          [207.108.240.1]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id KAA14138          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 3 Dec 2001 10:57:05 -0800
Received: (qmail 98728 invoked by alias); 3 Dec 2001 18:56:33 -0000
Delivered-To: fixup-AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU@fixme
Received: (qmail 98700 invoked by uid 0); 3 Dec 2001 18:56:32 -0000
Received: from cc898542-a.prdise1.nm.home.com (HELO cc898542a) (65.7.151.152)          by albqpop1.albq.uswest.net with SMTP; 3 Dec 2001 18:56:32 -0000
References:  <01C17BF3.75496C20.numbr@swbell.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <002801c17c2b$eb7732a0$0100a8c0@cc898542a>
Date:         Mon, 3 Dec 2001 11:54:21 -0700
Reply-To: "Paxton" <darkspunge@USWEST.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Paxton" <darkspunge@USWEST.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Candy Mixing Machine
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

I think Paul Kelly has schematics. :-)

Pax


----- Original Message -----
From: "Chris Mealer" <numbr@swbell.net>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Monday, December 03, 2001 11:10 AM
Subject: [AR] Candy Mixing Machine


> I was wondering if anyone has ever looked at a bread machine modification
> for the purposes of mixing/cooking candy propellant.  Mine bakes at 375
> degrees but won't stir simultaneously, of course.  I don't think it would
> be too difficult to bypass the presets, tweak the temp, and override the
> motor to stir continuously but my wife says I have to show her a case
study
> before I'm allowed to donate ours to science (since it was a gift.) :-)
>
> Thanks,
> Chris
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 11443 invoked from network); 3 Dec 2001 19:19:36 -0000
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 3 Dec 2001 19:19:36 -0000
Received: (qmail 13269 invoked by uid 50005); 3 Dec 2001 19:19:27 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4173. . Clean. Processed in 1.220341 secs); 03 Dec 2001 19:19:27 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 3 Dec 2001 19:19:25 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA14270; Mon, 3 Dec 2001 11:18:03 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 95086 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 3 Dec 2001 19:17:58 +0000
Received: from albqpop1.albq.uswest.net (albqpop1.albq.uswest.net          [207.108.240.1]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id LAA14256          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 3 Dec 2001 11:17:57 -0800
Received: (qmail 44081 invoked by alias); 3 Dec 2001 19:17:26 -0000
Delivered-To: fixup-AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU@fixme
Received: (qmail 44041 invoked by uid 0); 3 Dec 2001 19:17:26 -0000
Received: from cc898542-a.prdise1.nm.home.com (HELO cc898542a) (65.7.151.152)          by albqpop1.albq.uswest.net with SMTP; 3 Dec 2001 19:17:26 -0000
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0E4B_01C56B69.5ACD76C0"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <003101c17c2e$d6c10b80$0100a8c0@cc898542a>
Date:         Mon, 3 Dec 2001 12:15:15 -0700
Reply-To: "Paxton" <darkspunge@USWEST.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Paxton" <darkspunge@USWEST.NET>
Subject:      [AR] Melting devices
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0E4B_01C56B69.5ACD76C0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Richard and the rest of the active crew,

    I was wondering what everybody uses to melt their candy. I know =
Richard uses an oil bath with paraffin wax, or a little black electric =
thingamajig that I saw when he was here in New Mexico. I was wondering =
if you(Richard) could provide a couple details on that little guy. Such =
as how many coils on it run where, how even the heating is, the =
temperature it runs at etc etc? I am curious about any other direct =
heating devices you guys are using out there.

To the guys who use oil baths, how to you rig up your system to hold the =
melting pan above the bath? Also how to you cast your grains. Do you =
spoon it into the casting tube, or do you wipe off the oil and pour?

Right now I am using a semi-large deep fryer that is temperature =
controlled. It has a coil the runs in a circle under the pan. I am =
having issues with gauging the actual temperature, as my dextrose candy =
usually comes out tan as if it has caramelized. I have been setting it =
to about 300 degrees on the thermostat. However much less then that and =
it does not seem to be hot enough. What I am thinking is during its =
heating cycles it goes above the listed temperature then cools down =
below it. I do now think it is really making bad grains or anything, =
just wanting input from the list.

Thanks

------=_NextPart_000_0E4B_01C56B69.5ACD76C0
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META content=3D"text/html; charset=3Diso-8859-1" =
http-equiv=3DContent-Type>
<META content=3D"MSHTML 5.00.3315.2870" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Richard and the rest of the active=20
crew,</FONT></DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; I was wondering what =
everybody=20
uses to melt their candy. I know Richard uses an oil bath with paraffin =
wax, or=20
a little black electric thingamajig that I saw when he was here in New =
Mexico. I=20
was wondering if you(Richard) could provide a couple details on that =
little guy.=20
Such as how many coils on it run where, how even the heating is, the =
temperature=20
it runs at etc etc? I am curious about any other direct heating devices =
you guys=20
are using out there.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>To the guys who use oil baths, how to =
you rig up=20
your system to hold the melting pan above the bath? Also how to you cast =
your=20
grains. Do you spoon it into the casting tube, or do you wipe off the =
oil and=20
pour?</FONT></DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Right now I am using a semi-large deep =
fryer that=20
is temperature controlled. It has a coil the runs in a circle under the =
pan. I=20
am having issues with gauging the actual temperature, as my dextrose =
candy=20
usually comes out tan as if it has caramelized. I have been setting it =
to about=20
300 degrees on the thermostat. However much less then that and it does =
not seem=20
to be hot enough. What I am thinking is during its heating cycles it =
goes above=20
the listed temperature then cools down below it. I do now think it is =
really=20
making bad grains or anything, just wanting input from the =
list.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Thanks</FONT></DIV></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0E4B_01C56B69.5ACD76C0--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 22130 invoked from network); 3 Dec 2001 19:44:40 -0000
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 3 Dec 2001 19:44:40 -0000
Received: (qmail 25652 invoked by uid 50005); 3 Dec 2001 19:44:31 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4173. . Clean. Processed in 2.654122 secs); 03 Dec 2001 19:44:31 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 3 Dec 2001 19:44:26 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA14461; Mon, 3 Dec 2001 11:41:39 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 95115 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 3 Dec 2001 19:41:27 +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (oe63.law12.hotmail.com [64.4.18.198]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA14447 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Mon, 3 Dec 2001 11:41:27 -0800
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Mon,          3 Dec 2001 11:40:56 -0800
X-Originating-IP: [24.92.128.69]
References:  <CMM.0.90.4.1007398812.billw@cypher>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 03 Dec 2001 19:40:56.0843 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[6D61F5B0:01C17C32]
Message-ID:  <OE63WNoqiGAeGnOxUR200004105@hotmail.com>
Date:         Mon, 3 Dec 2001 13:40:11 -0600
Reply-To: "Mark Kruep" <mkruep@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Mark Kruep" <mkruep@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Manners (was Re: [AR] Price of NOX)
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

The definition of amateur for our concerns is as follows:

amateur- A person who engages in an art, science, study, or athletic
activity as a pastime rather than as a profession.

Other than Aerotech, I don't know of any company or person (in this hobby)
who lives solely off profits from rocket related sales (correct me if I'm
wrong). Therefore, by definition, with very few exceptions we are all
"amateur" rocketeers.

An observation, in the last 4-5 months, everyone in just about every rocket
forum I've seen has been on hair trigger mode just waiting to launch an
attack. I am just as guilty as anyone so don't think I'm going hypocrite
here. Maybe with the holidays approaching, we can all find the time to take
a breath and watch what we say to each other (I'll try too Thom and the
WAMEX guys-they'll know what I mean). Rocket people are the greatest bunch
of people around when it comes to helping each other out and working toward
common goals.

I personally know very little about hybrids or liquid props. My knowledge of
solids is still in its infancy. However, my knowledge, or lack thereof, has
nothing to do with someone's rights to post on this list. It's a public
list. If Korey wants to throw in little hybrid comments, so be it. No one
makes any of us read these posts, and if you don't like the content, stop
reading. I too am kind of tired of ads popping up here and there, but that's
the way of the internet. You can't ask that whatever you want to say be
regarded as acceptable while critiquing the speech of others. It all comes
down to who makes the decision on acceptability and I doubt anyone really
wants to have that job.

Everyone has seen a "which altimeter is best" post and there are sure to be
dozens more in the future. I have asked it before as have countless others
here. We all ask stupid questions from time to time. The point to this long
winded post is, alot of us have become quite sarcastic or otherwise nasty of
late. Can we all put down the keyboards and back away slowly for the good of
the list(s)? It sure would be nice if everyone got along and we had no
flames for at least a few weeks.

Happy Holidays,

Mark


----- Original Message -----
From: "William Chops Westfield" <billw@cisco.com>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Monday, December 03, 2001 11:00 AM
Subject: Re: [AR] Price of NOX


>     What I do have a problem with is centring discussion around *consumer*
>     propulsion.  Amateur/Experimental rocketry is not consumer
propulsion...
>
> I dunno.  Would be "consumer propulsion" providers are certainly a "class"
> of amateur/experimental rocketeers - one with its own set of interesting
> problems and issues...
>
> "consumer propulsion" is certainly not ALL of amateur rocketry...
>
> BillW
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 5536 invoked from network); 3 Dec 2001 19:47:34 -0000
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 3 Dec 2001 19:47:34 -0000
Received: (qmail 16329 invoked by uid 50005); 3 Dec 2001 19:47:26 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4173. . Clean. Processed in 0.26617 secs); 03 Dec 2001 19:47:26 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 3 Dec 2001 19:47:25 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA14502; Mon, 3 Dec 2001 11:45:07 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 95122 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 3 Dec 2001 19:45:05 +0000
Received: from mail001.syd.optusnet.com.au (mail001.syd.optusnet.com.au          [203.2.75.244]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA14487          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 3 Dec 2001 11:45:04 -0800
Received: from ballbuster (blaax1-102.dialup.optusnet.com.au [210.49.116.102])          by mail001.syd.optusnet.com.au (8.11.1/8.11.1) with SMTP id          fB3JiTE22294; Tue, 4 Dec 2001 06:44:29 +1100
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0E4E_01C56B69.5AD713B0"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
Importance: Normal
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <NJEEJAOGEMKNPMLLEONAOEDBCDAA.strudwicke@optusnet.com.au>
Date:         Tue, 4 Dec 2001 06:43:32 +1100
Reply-To: "craig strudwicke" <strudwicke@OPTUSNET.COM.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "craig strudwicke" <strudwicke@OPTUSNET.COM.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Melting devices
Comments: To: Paxton <darkspunge@USWEST.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <003101c17c2e$d6c10b80$0100a8c0@cc898542a>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0E4E_01C56B69.5AD713B0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

I have been making a fair bit of KNSB candy over the last months using PK's
candymatic in a number of different operating "modes".

Initially there was a pic based controller to sequence through a two
different processes :

1. Continuous Mix (about 10 minutes)
2. Heat + occasional mix (35minutes)

A thermostat is attached to the inner case of the breadmaker, in a suitable
position and with a suitable temperature rating.

More recently (since the death of the controller) the machine has just been
run in continuous mix and heat mode ie mixing & heating with thermostat temp
control. Works fine.

Bear in mind this is with KNSB.

Craig

  -----Original Message-----
  From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU]On
Behalf Of Paxton
  Sent: Tuesday, 4 December 2001 6:15 AM
  To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
  Subject: [AR] Melting devices


  Richard and the rest of the active crew,

      I was wondering what everybody uses to melt their candy. I know
Richard uses an oil bath with paraffin wax, or a little black electric
thingamajig that I saw when he was here in New Mexico. I was wondering if
you(Richard) could provide a couple details on that little guy. Such as how
many coils on it run where, how even the heating is, the temperature it runs
at etc etc? I am curious about any other direct heating devices you guys are
using out there.

  To the guys who use oil baths, how to you rig up your system to hold the
melting pan above the bath? Also how to you cast your grains. Do you spoon
it into the casting tube, or do you wipe off the oil and pour?

  Right now I am using a semi-large deep fryer that is temperature
controlled. It has a coil the runs in a circle under the pan. I am having
issues with gauging the actual temperature, as my dextrose candy usually
comes out tan as if it has caramelized. I have been setting it to about 300
degrees on the thermostat. However much less then that and it does not seem
to be hot enough. What I am thinking is during its heating cycles it goes
above the listed temperature then cools down below it. I do now think it is
really making bad grains or anything, just wanting input from the list.

  Thanks

------=_NextPart_000_0E4E_01C56B69.5AD713B0
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Diso-8859-1">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 5.50.4522.1800" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><SPAN class=3D931083819-03122001><FONT face=3DArial color=3D#0000ff =
size=3D2>I have=20
been making a fair bit of KNSB candy over the last months using PK's =
candymatic=20
in a number of different operating "modes".</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=3D931083819-03122001><FONT face=3DArial color=3D#0000ff =

size=3D2></FONT></SPAN>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=3D931083819-03122001><FONT face=3DArial color=3D#0000ff =

size=3D2>Initially there was a pic based controller to sequence through =
a=20
two&nbsp;different processes :</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=3D931083819-03122001></SPAN><SPAN =
class=3D931083819-03122001><FONT=20
face=3DArial color=3D#0000ff size=3D2></FONT></SPAN>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=3D931083819-03122001><FONT face=3DArial color=3D#0000ff =
size=3D2>1.=20
Continuous Mix (about 10 minutes)</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=3D931083819-03122001><FONT face=3DArial color=3D#0000ff =
size=3D2>2.=20
Heat + occasional mix (35minutes)</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=3D931083819-03122001><FONT face=3DArial color=3D#0000ff =

size=3D2></FONT></SPAN>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=3D931083819-03122001><FONT face=3DArial color=3D#0000ff =
size=3D2>A=20
thermostat is attached to the inner case of the breadmaker, in a =
suitable=20
position and with a suitable temperature rating.</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=3D931083819-03122001><FONT face=3DArial color=3D#0000ff =

size=3D2></FONT></SPAN>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=3D931083819-03122001><FONT face=3DArial color=3D#0000ff =
size=3D2>More=20
recently (since the death of the controller) the machine has just been =
run in=20
continuous mix and heat mode ie mixing &amp; heating with thermostat =
temp=20
control. Works fine.</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=3D931083819-03122001><FONT face=3DArial color=3D#0000ff =

size=3D2></FONT></SPAN>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=3D931083819-03122001><FONT face=3DArial color=3D#0000ff =
size=3D2>Bear=20
in mind this is with KNSB.</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=3D931083819-03122001><FONT face=3DArial color=3D#0000ff =

size=3D2></FONT></SPAN>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=3D931083819-03122001><FONT face=3DArial color=3D#0000ff =

size=3D2>Craig</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=3D931083819-03122001><FONT face=3DArial color=3D#0000ff =

size=3D2></FONT></SPAN>&nbsp;</DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE dir=3Dltr style=3D"MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
  <DIV class=3DOutlookMessageHeader dir=3Dltr align=3Dleft><FONT =
face=3DTahoma=20
  size=3D2>-----Original Message-----<BR><B>From:</B> Amateur Rocketry =
discussion=20
  list [mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU]<B>On Behalf Of =
</B>Paxton<BR><B>Sent:</B>=20
  Tuesday, 4 December 2001 6:15 AM<BR><B>To:</B>=20
  AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU<BR><B>Subject:</B> [AR] Melting=20
  devices<BR><BR></FONT></DIV>
  <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Richard and the rest of the active=20
  crew,</FONT></DIV>
  <DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
  <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; I was wondering =
what everybody=20
  uses to melt their candy. I know Richard uses an oil bath with =
paraffin wax,=20
  or a little black electric thingamajig that I saw when he was here in =
New=20
  Mexico. I was wondering if you(Richard) could provide a couple details =
on that=20
  little guy. Such as how many coils on it run where, how even the =
heating is,=20
  the temperature it runs at etc etc? I am curious about any other =
direct=20
  heating devices you guys are using out there.</FONT></DIV>
  <DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
  <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>To the guys who use oil baths, how to =
you rig up=20
  your system to hold the melting pan above the bath? Also how to you =
cast your=20
  grains. Do you spoon it into the casting tube, or do you wipe off the =
oil and=20
  pour?</FONT></DIV>
  <DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
  <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Right now I am using a semi-large =
deep fryer that=20
  is temperature controlled. It has a coil the runs in a circle under =
the pan. I=20
  am having issues with gauging the actual temperature, as my dextrose =
candy=20
  usually comes out tan as if it has caramelized. I have been setting it =
to=20
  about 300 degrees on the thermostat. However much less then that and =
it does=20
  not seem to be hot enough. What I am thinking is during its heating =
cycles it=20
  goes above the listed temperature then cools down below it. I do now =
think it=20
  is really making bad grains or anything, just wanting input from the=20
  list.</FONT></DIV>
  <DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
  <DIV><FONT face=3DArial =
size=3D2>Thanks</FONT></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0E4E_01C56B69.5AD713B0--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 29425 invoked from network); 3 Dec 2001 20:27:46 -0000
Received: from smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.105]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 3 Dec 2001 20:27:46 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 8381 invoked by uid 50005); 3 Dec 2001 20:27:29 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpy with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4173. . Clean. Processed in 1.048441 secs); 03 Dec 2001 20:27:29 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 3 Dec 2001 20:27:27 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA14664; Mon, 3 Dec 2001 12:24:25 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 95139 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 3 Dec 2001 20:24:15 +0000
Received: from mail.aros.net (mail.aros.net [207.173.16.20]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA14650 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Mon,          3 Dec 2001 12:24:14 -0800
Received: from biomicro.com (cust-208-187-122-40.bbsc.net [208.187.122.40]) by          mail.aros.net (8.11.6/8.9.3) with ESMTP id fB3KODS58078 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Mon, 3 Dec 2001 13:24:13 -0700 (MST)
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.77 [en] (Win98; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3C0BDFA5.C429EBDE@biomicro.com>
Date:         Mon, 3 Dec 2001 13:25:09 -0700
Reply-To: "Mark K. Spute" <mks@BIOMICRO.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Mark K. Spute" <mks@BIOMICRO.COM>
Subject:      [AR] Flared tubing fittings question
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Common AN fittings are 45 degree flared fittings.  JIC fittings are 37
degree flared fittings.  The two are not compatible.  Why are there two
different standards?  What are the advantages and disadvantages of
each?  More importantly (and directyl rocketry related) which would be
better to use for LOx, N2O, and Hydrocarbon lines (particularly
propane?)

TIA

--
Mark K. Spute
Senior Research Engineer
BioMicro Systems Inc.
1.801.256.1906  (phone)
1.801.256.1901  (fax)

KD7IWE,  RRS, hopeful future Stolly owner

"It is difficult to say what is impossible, for the dream of yesterday
is the hope of today and the reality of tomorrow."
     Dr. Robert H. Goddard

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 26593 invoked from network); 3 Dec 2001 20:40:30 -0000
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 3 Dec 2001 20:40:30 -0000
Received: (qmail 9801 invoked by uid 50005); 3 Dec 2001 20:40:21 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4173. . Clean. Processed in 0.182677 secs); 03 Dec 2001 20:40:21 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 3 Dec 2001 20:40:21 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA14744; Mon, 3 Dec 2001 12:37:42 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 95152 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 3 Dec 2001 20:37:39 +0000
Received: from c002.snv.cp.net (c002-h008.c002.snv.cp.net [209.228.32.172]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id MAA14730 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 3 Dec 2001 12:37:39 -0800
Received: (cpmta 20754 invoked from network); 3 Dec 2001 12:37:07 -0800
Received: from 63.39.121.143 (HELO default) by smtp.peoplepc.com          (209.228.32.172) with SMTP; 3 Dec 2001 12:37:07 -0800
X-Sent: 3 Dec 2001 20:37:07 GMT
References:  <003101c17c2e$d6c10b80$0100a8c0@cc898542a>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0E52_01C56B69.5AD713B0"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <001e01c17c3c$9c25f5e0$8f79273f@default>
Date:         Mon, 3 Dec 2001 15:53:47 -0500
Reply-To: "David Muesing" <dmuesing@PEOPLEPC.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "David Muesing" <dmuesing@PEOPLEPC.COM>
Subject:      [AR] Melting devices
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0E52_01C56B69.5AD713B0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

I use a large Fry "GranPappy" which I have modified with a temp =
controller. I run the oil at 325 F.

Richard, or anybody, what temp oil do you recommend for KN/Dex? And what =
temp mixture for best melting without too much browning?

I use a heavy "pewter" beer mug or other tall sided heavy pot for the =
mixture. I wipe it very well just before pouring the grain.

I put a couple saucers in the bottom of the FryPappy to hold the melting =
pot at the right heigth.

BTW, where do y'all stand on using Hydrated Dex or Anhydrous Dex?

Thanks!

Dave
  ----- Original Message -----=20
  From: Paxton=20
  To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU=20
  Sent: Monday, December 03, 2001 2:15 PM
  Subject: [AR] Melting devices


  Richard and the rest of the active crew,

      I was wondering what everybody uses to melt their candy. I know =
Richard uses an oil bath with paraffin wax, or a little black electric =
thingamajig that I saw when he was here in New Mexico. I was wondering =
if you(Richard) could provide a couple details on that little guy. Such =
as how many coils on it run where, how even the heating is, the =
temperature it runs at etc etc? I am curious about any other direct =
heating devices you guys are using out there.

  To the guys who use oil baths, how to you rig up your system to hold =
the melting pan above the bath? Also how to you cast your grains. Do you =
spoon it into the casting tube, or do you wipe off the oil and pour?

  Right now I am using a semi-large deep fryer that is temperature =
controlled. It has a coil the runs in a circle under the pan. I am =
having issues with gauging the actual temperature, as my dextrose candy =
usually comes out tan as if it has caramelized. I have been setting it =
to about 300 degrees on the thermostat. However much less then that and =
it does not seem to be hot enough. What I am thinking is during its =
heating cycles it goes above the listed temperature then cools down =
below it. I do now think it is really making bad grains or anything, =
just wanting input from the list.

  Thanks

------=_NextPart_000_0E52_01C56B69.5AD713B0
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Diso-8859-1">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 6.00.2600.0" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=3DOCRA color=3D#0000ff>I use a large Fry "GranPappy" =
which I have=20
modified with a temp controller. I run the oil at 325 F.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DOCRA color=3D#0000ff></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DOCRA color=3D#0000ff>Richard, or anybody,&nbsp;what =
temp oil do=20
you recommend for KN/Dex? And what temp mixture for best melting without =
too=20
much browning?</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DOCRA color=3D#0000ff></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DOCRA color=3D#0000ff>I use a heavy "pewter" beer mug =
or other tall=20
sided heavy pot for the mixture. I wipe it very well just before pouring =
the=20
grain.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DOCRA color=3D#0000ff></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DOCRA color=3D#0000ff>I put a couple saucers in the =
bottom of the=20
FryPappy to hold the melting pot at the right heigth.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DOCRA color=3D#0000ff></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DOCRA color=3D#0000ff>BTW, where do y'all stand on =
using Hydrated=20
Dex or Anhydrous Dex?</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DOCRA color=3D#0000ff></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DOCRA color=3D#0000ff>Thanks!</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DOCRA color=3D#0000ff></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DOCRA color=3D#0000ff>Dave</FONT></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE dir=3Dltr=20
style=3D"PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; =
BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
  <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial">----- Original Message ----- </DIV>
  <DIV=20
  style=3D"BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; FONT: 10pt arial; font-color: =
black"><B>From:</B>=20
  <A title=3Ddarkspunge@USWEST.NET =
href=3D"mailto:darkspunge@USWEST.NET">Paxton</A>=20
  </DIV>
  <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A =
title=3DAROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU=20
  href=3D"mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU">AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU</A> </DIV>
  <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> Monday, December 03, 2001 =
2:15=20
  PM</DIV>
  <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> [AR] Melting =
devices</DIV>
  <DIV><BR></DIV>
  <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Richard and the rest of the active=20
  crew,</FONT></DIV>
  <DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
  <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; I was wondering =
what everybody=20
  uses to melt their candy. I know Richard uses an oil bath with =
paraffin wax,=20
  or a little black electric thingamajig that I saw when he was here in =
New=20
  Mexico. I was wondering if you(Richard) could provide a couple details =
on that=20
  little guy. Such as how many coils on it run where, how even the =
heating is,=20
  the temperature it runs at etc etc? I am curious about any other =
direct=20
  heating devices you guys are using out there.</FONT></DIV>
  <DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
  <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>To the guys who use oil baths, how to =
you rig up=20
  your system to hold the melting pan above the bath? Also how to you =
cast your=20
  grains. Do you spoon it into the casting tube, or do you wipe off the =
oil and=20
  pour?</FONT></DIV>
  <DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
  <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Right now I am using a semi-large =
deep fryer that=20
  is temperature controlled. It has a coil the runs in a circle under =
the pan. I=20
  am having issues with gauging the actual temperature, as my dextrose =
candy=20
  usually comes out tan as if it has caramelized. I have been setting it =
to=20
  about 300 degrees on the thermostat. However much less then that and =
it does=20
  not seem to be hot enough. What I am thinking is during its heating =
cycles it=20
  goes above the listed temperature then cools down below it. I do now =
think it=20
  is really making bad grains or anything, just wanting input from the=20
  list.</FONT></DIV>
  <DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
  <DIV><FONT face=3DArial =
size=3D2>Thanks</FONT></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0E52_01C56B69.5AD713B0--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 3035 invoked from network); 3 Dec 2001 21:38:14 -0000
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 3 Dec 2001 21:38:14 -0000
Received: (qmail 5214 invoked by uid 50005); 3 Dec 2001 21:38:05 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4173. . Clean. Processed in 1.694604 secs); 03 Dec 2001 21:38:05 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 3 Dec 2001 21:38:01 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA14974; Mon, 3 Dec 2001 13:31:53 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 95180 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 3 Dec 2001 21:31:31 +0000
Received: from mta01.mail.mel.aone.net.au (mta01.mail.au.uu.net [203.2.192.81])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA14960 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 3 Dec 2001 13:31:30 -0800
Received: from unknown ([63.34.212.75]) by mta01.mail.mel.aone.net.au with SMTP          id <20011203213115.TWUV6820.mta01.mail.mel.aone.net.au@unknown>; Tue,          4 Dec 2001 08:31:15 +1100
References: Conversation <CMM.0.90.4.1007398812.billw@cypher> with last message            <CMM.0.90.4.1007398812.billw@cypher>
Priority: Normal
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Priority: 3
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	X-MAPIextension=.TXT;
	charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>
Date:         Mon, 3 Dec 2001 21:31:31 +0000
Reply-To: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Price of NOX
Comments: To: Bill Westfield <billw@CISCO.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <CMM.0.90.4.1007398812.billw@cypher>

----------
>
>     What I do have a problem with is centring discussion around *consumer*
>     propulsion.  Amateur/Experimental rocketry is not consumer
propulsion...
>
> I dunno.  Would be "consumer propulsion" providers are certainly a "class"
> of amateur/experimental rocketeers - one with its own set of interesting
> problems and issues...

So true, BUT their customers are NOT!!! It's really that simple. It'll be
great to get some technical feedback from the manufactures especially
Korey. I don't actually object to anything Korey has submitted here,
actually I welcome it and more. He hasn't achieved what he's achieved by
not being passionate about what believes in. What I do object to is the guy
who sent the comparison table of consumer motors. Like, how is that
supposed to help anyone here? I know some of the BEST past contributors who
have left this list due to this kinda thing which I suppose really hit the
raw nerve with me. Those who have been on this list for a while, such as
yourself Bill, will know that I've always objected to centralised
discussion on consumer HPR propulsion. Maybe I'm from the old school where
the difference in definition between Model/HPR and amateur rocketry used to
be based on the source of the propulsion system. Things have probably
changed (become a bit grey) a bit since then with TRA's experimental
program. I welcome any feedback on this issue, positive or negative and no,
I won't jump down anyone's throat.

Regards,

Troy.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 1367 invoked from network); 3 Dec 2001 21:45:20 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 3 Dec 2001 21:45:20 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 30588 invoked by uid 50005); 3 Dec 2001 21:45:12 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4173. . Clean. Processed in 0.211302 secs); 03 Dec 2001 21:45:12 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 3 Dec 2001 21:45:11 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA15043; Mon, 3 Dec 2001 13:39:45 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 95191 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 3 Dec 2001 21:39:43 +0000
Received: from mtapop4pub.verizon.net (mtapop4pub.gte.net [206.46.170.37]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA15029 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 3 Dec 2001 13:39:41 -0800
Received: from [63.24.224.116] (1Cust174.tnt2.rancho-cucamonga.ca.da.uu.net          [63.15.225.174]) by mtapop4pub.verizon.net  with ESMTP for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; id PAA13712567 Mon, 3 Dec 2001 15:39:09 -0600          (CST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: GTE/01rocket@mail.gte.net
References: <NBEJKDFBFOEFALBMBCDPIECCCFAA.jtaylor@nc.rr.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <a05100326b831a091165f@[63.24.224.116]>
Date:         Mon, 3 Dec 2001 13:39:09 -0800
Reply-To: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Subject:      [AR] WAMEX update for arocket readers
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <NBEJKDFBFOEFALBMBCDPIECCCFAA.jtaylor@nc.rr.com>

The listserv ray and Carl started after that swarm of posts on the
association formation, has been running nicely.

It has selected a company name, general purpose, many aspects of
operational conditions and a set of GUIDELINES that will assist in
COMPLYING with the law and helping to SET STANDARDS where none exist
or are needed.

It is impacted to only 50 members so if there are any suggestions
they can be posted here in reply to this thread or discussed in email.

Amateur rocketry.

Nobody has yet stepped forward to any of us three saying, "I want to
run HQ".  But we need one of those.

Jerry

--
Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
Opinion, the whole thing.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 60 invoked from network); 3 Dec 2001 23:49:37 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 3 Dec 2001 23:49:37 -0000
Received: (qmail 13786 invoked by uid 50005); 3 Dec 2001 23:49:27 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4173. . Clean. Processed in 2.81682 secs); 03 Dec 2001 23:49:27 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 3 Dec 2001 23:49:22 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA15432; Mon, 3 Dec 2001 15:33:10 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 95225 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 3 Dec 2001 23:32:51 +0000
Received: from out001pub.verizon.net (out001pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.101])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA15413 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 3 Dec 2001 15:32:51 -0800
Received: from [63.24.224.116] (1Cust244.tnt2.rancho-cucamonga.ca.da.uu.net          [63.15.225.244]) by out001pub.verizon.net  with ESMTP for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; id fB3NX4422890 Mon, 3 Dec 2001 17:33:04 -0600          (CST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: GTE/01rocket@mail.gte.net
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <a0510032ab831ba62a9d3@[63.24.224.116]>
Date:         Mon, 3 Dec 2001 15:32:20 -0800
Reply-To: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Subject:      [AR] Cal Pyro Op Class
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Mark Holthaus and I have arranged a Pyro Op class series to qualify
California residents or licensees for the State License.  We are also
recommending methods to streamline California Code if we get enough
users to get them to care.

The next events are Sunday December 7, 2001 and Sunday Jan 13, 2002

www.v-serv.com/mta

That fee is low.

There will be a solids making series soon as well.

That fee will be between $400-700 depending on hardware, typically
38mm or 75mm.

Jerry

--
Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
Opinion, the whole thing.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 5060 invoked from network); 4 Dec 2001 01:06:05 -0000
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 4 Dec 2001 01:06:05 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 30537 invoked by uid 50005); 4 Dec 2001 01:05:56 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4173. . Clean. Processed in 3.649434 secs); 04 Dec 2001 01:05:56 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 4 Dec 2001 01:05:48 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA15743; Mon, 3 Dec 2001 16:50:22 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 95259 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 4 Dec 2001 00:47:12 +0000
Received: from albatross.prod.itd.earthlink.net          (albatross.mail.pas.earthlink.net [207.217.120.120]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA15713 for <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Mon,          3 Dec 2001 16:47:11 -0800
Received: from dialup-209.245.138.93.dial1.sanjose1.level3.net          ([209.245.138.93] helo=earthlink.net) by          albatross.prod.itd.earthlink.net with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id          16B3jq-0005YE-00 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 03 Dec 2001 16:47:10          -0800
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (Win98; I)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <001a01c17bbc$d4b9d0a0$f072fea9@scottje>            <OE45pcQABZTW5k1Ed28000034c7@hotmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3C0C1D5B.BE916B5F@earthlink.net>
Date:         Mon, 3 Dec 2001 16:48:27 -0800
Reply-To: <thomgaf@energyrs.com>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Thomas M. Mcgaffey" <energyrelease@EARTHLINK.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Cutting Kevlar Cloth
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Hi Mark,

I don't know of a Wal-Mart near me and I am not familiar with "Fiakars"
so could you please describe these scissors more closely.  I bought two
pair of high priced >$45.00 scissors , one to cut Kevlar and the other
for fiberglass and put them in the shop (they were marked Kevlar and for
fiberglass only).  One developed legs and disappeared and the other
(Kevlar) pair was used by someone to cut SS screen.  I bought
replacements but now keep them locked in my desk.  If you can help me
identify the type of scissors that you use I will buy four pair for the
shop.


Thom

Thomas M. McGaffey
Energy Release Systems
408-226-7502
thomgaf@energyrs.com
San Jose, Kalifornia





>
> I use a generic pair of scissors from Wal-Mart (blue handle and look like Fiskars but are generic) . They cost
> me $5. You can only use them for Kevlar and after about 6 months of use they will have to be replaced. They
> will still work great for fiberglass, but Kevlar is not something you want to waste much of, so I just get a new
> pair twice a year.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 7805 invoked from network); 4 Dec 2001 01:06:44 -0000
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 4 Dec 2001 01:06:44 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 11496 invoked by uid 50005); 4 Dec 2001 01:06:33 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4173. . Clean. Processed in 2.803237 secs); 04 Dec 2001 01:06:33 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 4 Dec 2001 01:06:26 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA15762; Mon, 3 Dec 2001 16:51:44 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 95266 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 4 Dec 2001 00:51:43 +0000
Received: from smtp03.roc.frontiernet.net (alteon01h.roc.frontiernet.net          [66.133.130.238]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id QAA15728          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 3 Dec 2001 16:47:43 -0800
Received: (qmail 27899 invoked from network); 4 Dec 2001 00:47:11 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO frontiernet.net) ([64.211.177.42])          (envelope-sender <tbinford@frontiernet.net>) by 0 (qmail-ldap-1.03)          with SMTP for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; 4 Dec 2001 00:47:11 -0000
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.74 [en] (Win98; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <C0F7BF4DCEC1D2479A01031347184DCD02FEFD@nt2000s2.dgmicro.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3C097BDF.33E564C7@frontiernet.net>
Date:         Sat, 1 Dec 2001 19:54:55 -0500
Reply-To: <tbinford@frontiernet.net>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Tom Binford" <tbinford@frontiernet.net>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Ranc"O"r
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Darren Wright wrote:
>
> Rancor flew sucessfully yesterday on an OPL O5500, 23,000ns.

Very good looking flight. Congratulations!

What were you expecting? (Pretty hard to tell from the pictures.)

Tom

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 29073 invoked from network); 4 Dec 2001 01:11:44 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 4 Dec 2001 01:11:44 -0000
Received: (qmail 8589 invoked by uid 50005); 4 Dec 2001 01:11:34 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4173. . Clean. Processed in 5.216088 secs); 04 Dec 2001 01:11:34 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 4 Dec 2001 01:11:26 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA15802; Mon, 3 Dec 2001 16:56:53 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 95273 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 4 Dec 2001 00:56:51 +0000
Received: from smtppop2pub.verizon.net (smtppop2pub.gte.net [206.46.170.21]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA15788 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 3 Dec 2001 16:56:51 -0800
Received: from [63.24.224.116] (1Cust230.tnt2.rancho-cucamonga.ca.da.uu.net          [63.15.225.230]) by smtppop2pub.verizon.net  with ESMTP for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; id SAA4049724 Mon, 3 Dec 2001 18:44:42 -0600          (CST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: GTE/01rocket@mail.gte.net
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <a0510032db831cf95caf0@[63.24.224.116]>
Date:         Mon, 3 Dec 2001 16:56:20 -0800
Reply-To: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Subject:      [AR] Cal Pyro Op II Class
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

correction

Mark Holthaus and I have arranged a Pyro Op II class series to
qualify California residents or licensees for the State License.  We
are also recommending methods to streamline California Code if we get
enough users to get them to care.

The next events are Sunday December 17, 2001 and Sunday Jan 13, 2002

www.v-serv.com/mta

That fee is low.

There will be a solids making series soon as well.

That fee will be between $400-700 depending on hardware, typically
38mm or 75mm.

Jerry

--
Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
Opinion, the whole thing.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 25539 invoked from network); 4 Dec 2001 01:37:41 -0000
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 4 Dec 2001 01:37:41 -0000
Received: (qmail 8797 invoked by uid 50005); 4 Dec 2001 01:37:32 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4173. . Clean. Processed in 0.199829 secs); 04 Dec 2001 01:37:32 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 4 Dec 2001 01:37:31 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA15930; Mon, 3 Dec 2001 17:22:35 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 95288 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 4 Dec 2001 01:19:51 +0000
Received: from cablecom.laribay.net (cablecom.laribay.net [66.20.57.4]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA15901 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 3 Dec 2001 17:19:50 -0800
Received: from billbull (dial099.laribay.net [66.20.57.99]) by          cablecom.laribay.net (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id TAA07265 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 3 Dec 2001 19:04:27 -0600 (CST)          (envelope-from bpbullock@laribay.net)
References:  <003101c17c2e$d6c10b80$0100a8c0@cc898542a>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <005c01c17c61$e5b80980$63391442@billbull>
Date:         Mon, 3 Dec 2001 19:20:43 -0600
Reply-To: "Bill Bullock" <bpbullock@LARIBAY.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Bill Bullock" <bpbullock@LARIBAY.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Melting devices
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

  Right now I use a common double-boiler sauce pan and an electric heating
element, a lab thermometer in the Canola Oil (will not smoke or "burn" at
500+ deg. F.) as well another in the mix. I also use a 30+ year old deep fat
fryer and stainless steel canisters for test batches. I both dip-and-pour
and direct pour. Use the same rig to make melted AN/AL blends, GALCIT and
etc...
    I want to convert my vacuum chamber into a heated vacuum mixer. It is
made out of a Binks 3-gallon pressure paint pot and an old window air
conditioner compressor and has an air-driven paint mixer assembly on it. I
want to set it up with a 5 gallon oil heated bath and thermal Chromalox
controllers.
Bill
  ----- Original Message -----
  From: Paxton
  To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
  Sent: Monday, December 03, 2001 1:15 PM
  Subject: [AR] Melting devices


  Richard and the rest of the active crew,

      I was wondering what everybody uses to melt their candy. I know
Richard uses an oil bath with paraffin wax, or a little black electric
thingamajig that I saw when he was here in New Mexico. I was wondering if
you(Richard) could provide a couple details on that little guy. Such as how
many coils on it run where, how even the heating is, the temperature it runs
at etc etc? I am curious about any other direct heating devices you guys are
using out there.

  To the guys who use oil baths, how to you rig up your system to hold the
melting pan above the bath? Also how to you cast your grains. Do you spoon
it into the casting tube, or do you wipe off the oil and pour?

  Right now I am using a semi-large deep fryer that is temperature
controlled. It has a coil the runs in a circle under the pan. I am having
issues with gauging the actual temperature, as my dextrose candy usually
comes out tan as if it has caramelized. I have been setting it to about 300
degrees on the thermostat. However much less then that and it does not seem
to be hot enough. What I am thinking is during its heating cycles it goes
above the listed temperature then cools down below it. I do now think it is
really making bad grains or anything, just wanting input from the list.

  Thanks

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 25315 invoked from network); 4 Dec 2001 01:44:31 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpv.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.110]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 4 Dec 2001 01:44:31 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 28502 invoked by uid 50005); 4 Dec 2001 01:34:20 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpv with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4173. . Clean. Processed in 0.860842 secs); 04 Dec 2001 01:34:20 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpv.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 4 Dec 2001 01:34:18 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA15973; Mon, 3 Dec 2001 17:25:39 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 95298 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 4 Dec 2001 01:22:57 +0000
Received: from smtppop3pub.verizon.net (smtppop3pub.gte.net [206.46.170.22]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA15950 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 3 Dec 2001 17:22:56 -0800
Received: from [63.24.224.116] (1Cust230.tnt2.rancho-cucamonga.ca.da.uu.net          [63.15.225.230]) by smtppop3pub.verizon.net  with ESMTP for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; id TAA73138808 Mon, 3 Dec 2001 19:22:01 -0600          (CST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: GTE/01rocket@mail.gte.net
References: <001a01c17bbc$d4b9d0a0$f072fea9@scottje>            <OE45pcQABZTW5k1Ed28000034c7@hotmail.com>            <3C0C1D5B.BE916B5F@earthlink.net>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <a05100330b831d5a23718@[63.24.224.116]>
Date:         Mon, 3 Dec 2001 17:22:25 -0800
Reply-To: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Cutting Kevlar Cloth
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <3C0C1D5B.BE916B5F@earthlink.net>

>Hi Mark,
>
>I don't know of a Wal-Mart near me and I am not familiar with "Fiakars"



>San Jose, Kalifornia

Silicon Valley no K-mart?  Hmmmm.  Fiskars.

--
Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
Opinion, the whole thing.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 6853 invoked from network); 4 Dec 2001 01:54:05 -0000
Received: from smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.105]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 4 Dec 2001 01:54:05 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 12120 invoked by uid 50005); 4 Dec 2001 01:53:55 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpy with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4173. . Clean. Processed in 3.476825 secs); 04 Dec 2001 01:53:55 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 4 Dec 2001 01:53:48 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA16084; Mon, 3 Dec 2001 17:39:25 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 95311 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 4 Dec 2001 01:38:25 +0000
Received: from imo-d09.mx.aol.com (imo-d09.mx.aol.com [205.188.157.41]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA16069 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Mon, 3 Dec 2001 17:38:24 -0800
Received: from Ricanakk@aol.com by imo-d09.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v31_r1.9.) id          9.87.14132ae6 (25916); Mon, 3 Dec 2001 20:37:46 -0500 (EST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: AOL 5.0 for Windows sub 108
Message-ID:  <87.14132ae6.293d82ea@aol.com>
Date:         Mon, 3 Dec 2001 20:37:46 EST
Reply-To: <Ricanakk@AOL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <Ricanakk@AOL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Melting devices
Comments: To: darkspunge@uswest.net
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

In a message dated 01/12/03 14:21:22 Eastern Standard Time,
darkspunge@USWEST.NET writes:

<<  I was wondering what everybody uses to melt their candy. I know Richard
uses an oil bath with paraffin wax, or a little black electric thingamajig
that I saw when he was here in New Mexico. I was wondering if you(Richard)
could provide a couple details on that little guy. Such as how many coils on
it run where, how even the heating is, the temperature it runs at etc etc?>>

Paxton-
The black thingamajig is a "Tall-fry" deep fryer. Its about the same age as
you. And I don''t think they''re made anymore, pity (they''re probably
dime-a-dozen at garage sales, though). I no longer use an oil bath, I heat
the KN/dextrose directly in the device. It is thermostatically controlled,
and because the body is cast aluminum with integral heating elements, the
temperature is very uniform, and can be controlled  very well to just the
right temperature to melt the mixture. My slurry is heated to 125-135 C.
(checked with a thermocouple probe immersed into the slurry). A good sized
batch, say 400 grams, will be ready for casting in fifteen minutes. The
colour is consistent, a nice ivory. I always start with anhydrous dextrose.
The trick to getting a completely bubble/void-free grain is to press the
slurry down immediately after pouring (scooping,actually) with a steel or
aluminum bar (of a diameter slightly less than the casting tube) that has
been stored in the deep freeze for several hours. Then insert the coring rod.

cheers
Richard Nakka

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 5882 invoked from network); 4 Dec 2001 02:01:10 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 4 Dec 2001 02:01:10 -0000
Received: (qmail 2944 invoked by uid 50005); 4 Dec 2001 02:00:59 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4173. . Clean. Processed in 3.450041 secs); 04 Dec 2001 02:00:59 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 4 Dec 2001 02:00:53 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA16135; Mon, 3 Dec 2001 17:46:28 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 95322 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 4 Dec 2001 01:46:25 +0000
Received: from smtppop1pub.verizon.net (smtppop1pub.gte.net [206.46.170.20]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA16121 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 3 Dec 2001 17:46:25 -0800
Received: from [63.24.224.116] (1Cust230.tnt2.rancho-cucamonga.ca.da.uu.net          [63.15.225.230]) by smtppop1pub.verizon.net  with ESMTP for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; id TAA5017841 Mon, 3 Dec 2001 19:34:49 -0600          (CST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: GTE/01rocket@mail.gte.net
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <a05100331b831dade71d5@[63.24.224.116]>
Date:         Mon, 3 Dec 2001 17:45:53 -0800
Reply-To: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Subject:      [AR] Cal Pyro Op II Class (final)
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

correction 2
Considering this is the second correction I suggest emailing first.:)

Mark Holthaus and I have arranged a Pyro Op II class series to
qualify California residents or licensees for the State License.  We
are also recommending methods to streamline California Code if we get
enough users to get them to care.

The next events are Sunday December 9, 2001 and Sunday Jan 13, 2002

www.v-serv.com/mta

That fee is low.

There will be a solids making series soon as well.

That fee will be between $400-700 depending on hardware, typically
38mm or 75mm.

Jerry

FYI  "Mark J. Holthaus" <holthaus@ix.netcom.com>
--
Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
Opinion, the whole thing.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 29875 invoked from network); 4 Dec 2001 02:35:19 -0000
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 4 Dec 2001 02:35:19 -0000
Received: (qmail 24323 invoked by uid 50005); 4 Dec 2001 02:35:07 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4173. . Clean. Processed in 2.957303 secs); 04 Dec 2001 02:35:07 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 4 Dec 2001 02:35:00 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA16284; Mon, 3 Dec 2001 18:20:26 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 95334 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 4 Dec 2001 02:20:22 +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (oe58.law12.hotmail.com [64.4.18.193]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA16270 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Mon, 3 Dec 2001 18:20:21 -0800
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Mon,          3 Dec 2001 18:19:51 -0800
X-Originating-IP: [24.92.128.69]
References: <001a01c17bbc$d4b9d0a0$f072fea9@scottje>                       <OE45pcQABZTW5k1Ed28000034c7@hotmail.com>             <3C0C1D5B.BE916B5F@earthlink.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 04 Dec 2001 02:19:51.0560 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[2795F080:01C17C6A]
Message-ID:  <OE58A91E9GQvnbEG10G00008d05@hotmail.com>
Date:         Mon, 3 Dec 2001 20:19:03 -0600
Reply-To: "Mark Kruep" <mkruep@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Mark Kruep" <mkruep@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Cutting Kevlar Cloth
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

The only markings on the scissors themselves is the word "DuraSharp" which
has the registered trademark symbol behind it. Maybe a web search would be
fruitful. It also says 1000 Stainless and the shears portion is about 4"
long (actual cutting area not total length of scissors). I can even get them
in left handed if they still have them.

I don't remember the exact price, but they are like $5.69/pr or something
like that. I'll check on it and let you know the price. I can maybe grab a
bunch for people and mail them to you. BUT, remember I said hobby use. They
cut Kevlar as good as anything I've seen yet, but I don't use them everyday
and I make sure nothing but Kevlar ever touches them. A hard day in the shop
and they might be toast. I'll get back with you on cost and availability.


Mark


----- Original Message -----
From: "Thomas M. Mcgaffey" <energyrelease@EARTHLINK.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Monday, December 03, 2001 6:48 PM
Subject: Re: [AR] Cutting Kevlar Cloth


> Hi Mark,
>
> I don't know of a Wal-Mart near me and I am not familiar with "Fiakars"
> so could you please describe these scissors more closely.  I bought two
> pair of high priced >$45.00 scissors , one to cut Kevlar and the other
> for fiberglass and put them in the shop (they were marked Kevlar and for
> fiberglass only).  One developed legs and disappeared and the other
> (Kevlar) pair was used by someone to cut SS screen.  I bought
> replacements but now keep them locked in my desk.  If you can help me
> identify the type of scissors that you use I will buy four pair for the
> shop.
>
>
> Thom
>
> Thomas M. McGaffey
> Energy Release Systems
> 408-226-7502
> thomgaf@energyrs.com
> San Jose, Kalifornia
>
>
>
>
>
> >
> > I use a generic pair of scissors from Wal-Mart (blue handle and look
like Fiskars but are generic) . They cost
> > me $5. You can only use them for Kevlar and after about 6 months of use
they will have to be replaced. They
> > will still work great for fiberglass, but Kevlar is not something you
want to waste much of, so I just get a new
> > pair twice a year.
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 24262 invoked from network); 4 Dec 2001 03:34:29 -0000
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 4 Dec 2001 03:34:29 -0000
Received: (qmail 20602 invoked by uid 50005); 4 Dec 2001 03:34:19 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4173. . Clean. Processed in 0.683811 secs); 04 Dec 2001 03:34:19 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 4 Dec 2001 03:34:18 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA16525; Mon, 3 Dec 2001 19:19:33 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 95364 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 4 Dec 2001 03:19:28 +0000
Received: from fep4-orange.clear.net.nz (fep4-orange.clear.net.nz          [203.97.32.4]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA16511          for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Mon, 3 Dec 2001 19:19:23 -0800
Received: from mkbs (203-167-149-66.dialup.clear.net.nz [203.167.149.66]) by          fep4-orange.clear.net.nz (1.5/1.7) with SMTP id QAA26011; Tue, 4 Dec          2001 16:19:18 +1300 (NZDT)
References:  <87.14132ae6.293d82ea@aol.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <004901c17c72$cf110680$0700a8c0@mkbs>
Date:         Tue, 4 Dec 2001 16:20:11 +1300
Reply-To: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Organization: Applied Technology
Subject:      Re: [AR] Melting devices
Comments: To: Ricanakk@AOL.COM
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

> I always start with anhydrous dextrose.

Do you buy anhydrous dextrose or dehydrate the hydrated version?




        Russell McMahon

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 19163 invoked from network); 4 Dec 2001 03:40:36 -0000
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 4 Dec 2001 03:40:36 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 4568 invoked by uid 50005); 4 Dec 2001 03:40:27 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4173. . Clean. Processed in 0.249178 secs); 04 Dec 2001 03:40:27 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 4 Dec 2001 03:40:27 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA16580; Mon, 3 Dec 2001 19:26:10 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 95374 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 4 Dec 2001 03:26:03 +0000
Received: from swan.prod.itd.earthlink.net (swan.mail.pas.earthlink.net          [207.217.120.123]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id          TAA16565 for <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Mon, 3 Dec 2001 19:26:03 -0800
Received: from dialup-209.245.130.42.dial1.sanjose1.level3.net          ([209.245.130.42] helo=earthlink.net) by swan.prod.itd.earthlink.net          with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 16B6DW-0000iv-00 for          AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 03 Dec 2001 19:25:59 -0800
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (Win98; I)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <001a01c17bbc$d4b9d0a0$f072fea9@scottje>            <OE45pcQABZTW5k1Ed28000034c7@hotmail.com>            <3C0C1D5B.BE916B5F@earthlink.net>            <a05100330b831d5a23718@[63.24.224.116]>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3C0C4294.6470896D@earthlink.net>
Date:         Mon, 3 Dec 2001 19:27:16 -0800
Reply-To: <thomgaf@energyrs.com>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Thomas M. Mcgaffey" <energyrelease@EARTHLINK.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Cutting Kevlar Cloth
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Hi Jerry,

I don't know,  I have never been in a K-mart,  and have never seen a
Wal-Mart.

Thom

Thomas M. McGaffey
Energy Release Systems
408-226-7502
thomgaf@energyrs.com
San Jose, Kalifornia



Jerry Irvine wrote:

>
> Silicon Valley no K-mart?  Hmmmm.  Fiskars.
>
> --
> Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
> Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
> Opinion, the whole thing.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 18773 invoked from network); 4 Dec 2001 04:46:11 -0000
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 4 Dec 2001 04:46:11 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 8499 invoked by uid 50005); 4 Dec 2001 04:46:00 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4173. . Clean. Processed in 0.886552 secs); 04 Dec 2001 04:46:00 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 4 Dec 2001 04:45:58 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA16789; Mon, 3 Dec 2001 20:31:04 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 95396 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 4 Dec 2001 04:30:58 +0000
Received: from imo-r01.mx.aol.com (imo-r01.mx.aol.com [152.163.225.97]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA16775 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Mon, 3 Dec 2001 20:30:58 -0800
Received: from Ricanakk@aol.com by imo-r01.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v31_r1.9.) id          h.48.2c66d5c (3867); Mon, 3 Dec 2001 23:30:49 -0500 (EST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: AOL 5.0 for Windows sub 108
Message-ID:  <48.2c66d5c.293dab78@aol.com>
Date:         Mon, 3 Dec 2001 23:30:48 EST
Reply-To: <Ricanakk@AOL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <Ricanakk@AOL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Melting devices
Comments: To: apptech@clear.net.nz
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

In a message dated 01/12/03 22:19:24 Eastern Standard Time,
apptech@clear.net.nz writes:

<<
 Do you buy anhydrous dextrose or dehydrate the hydrated version? >>

I buy dextrose monohydrate at the local ''Food Barn''. I dehydrate it by
spreading it onto parchment paper on a cookie sheet, and place in an oven at
65C (150F) for 1.5 hours. I always weigh it before and after to ensure the
mass loss is 10%.

Richard Nakka

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 15536 invoked from network); 4 Dec 2001 04:54:20 -0000
Received: from smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.105]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 4 Dec 2001 04:54:20 -0000
Received: (qmail 9473 invoked by uid 50005); 4 Dec 2001 04:54:08 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpy with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4173. . Clean. Processed in 1.510325 secs); 04 Dec 2001 04:54:08 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 4 Dec 2001 04:54:04 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA16855; Mon, 3 Dec 2001 20:39:15 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 95405 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 4 Dec 2001 04:39:14 +0000
Received: from smtprelay6.dc2.adelphia.net (smtprelay6.dc2.adelphia.net          [64.8.50.38]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA16841 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 3 Dec 2001 20:39:13 -0800
Received: from jlgrady ([24.53.101.238]) by smtprelay6.dc2.adelphia.net          (Netscape Messaging Server 4.15) with SMTP id GNSY8I00.FN9 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 3 Dec 2001 23:38:42 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook CWS, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <000201c17c7d$bfc99560$0200a8c0@24.53.64.18>
Date:         Mon, 3 Dec 2001 23:40:06 -0500
Reply-To: "Jeff Grady" <jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jeff Grady" <jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET>
Subject:      [AR] OT: RE: [AR] Cutting Kevlar Cloth
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <3C0C4294.6470896D@earthlink.net>

>>I don't know,  I have never been in a K-mart,  and have never seen a
>>Wal-Mart.

Say What???? Never seen a Wal-Mart???

I know that when I die, regardless of my end destination, Heaven or Hell,
there will be a Wal-Mart, McDonalds and a Waffle House on every corner...

In Heaven, not a single item will need a price check, I will actually
receive what I order at McDonalds and all the waitresses at the Waffle House
will look like Kathy Ireland (with all teeth). In Hell...Well just stop in
one of those places today and you'll get a preview :)

JG

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 24840 invoked from network); 4 Dec 2001 05:35:15 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 4 Dec 2001 05:35:15 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 26595 invoked by uid 50005); 4 Dec 2001 05:35:06 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4173. . Clean. Processed in 2.011851 secs); 04 Dec 2001 05:35:06 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 4 Dec 2001 05:35:02 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA17046; Mon, 3 Dec 2001 21:09:32 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 95428 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 4 Dec 2001 05:09:28 +0000
Received: from smtp.tscnet.net (smtp.tscnet.net [66.152.64.20]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA17032 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon,          3 Dec 2001 21:09:28 -0800
Received: from [192.168.0.2] (tr650.hawkfeather.com [66.152.67.138]) by          smtp.tscnet.net (8.11.6/8.11.2) with ESMTP id fB45AXB01660; Mon, 3          Dec 2001 21:10:33 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <CMM.0.90.4.1007398812.billw@cypher>            <OE63WNoqiGAeGnOxUR200004105@hotmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <a05100301b8320987c39b@[192.168.0.2]>
Date:         Mon, 3 Dec 2001 21:04:39 -0800
Reply-To: "Andrew MacMillen" <andrewm@HAWKFEATHER.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Andrew MacMillen" <andrewm@HAWKFEATHER.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Manners (was Re: [AR] Price of NOX)
Comments: To: Mark Kruep <mkruep@HOTMAIL.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <OE63WNoqiGAeGnOxUR200004105@hotmail.com>

Hear, hear, and thank you! ...as a newbie, the poster of said price
comparison, and the recipient of the barbs. I may be fairly new to
rocketry, but I have done my homework, learned some lessons from some
nice people, and am trying to learn more. What I've learned here so
far is to lay low. As an old Internet hand, I'm dismayed by the lack
of courtesy herein.

Questions to ponder: why isn't the respect and willingness to teach
and share so evident at launches practiced in rocketry forums? Why do
people become more vituperative when their ideas/ideals become closer?

Let's all play together in the sand box, and let newbies like me
learn how to learn, not how to duck.

Andrew MacMillen

At 1:40 PM -0600 12/3/01, Mark Kruep wrote:
>The definition of amateur for our concerns is as follows:
>
>amateur- A person who engages in an art, science, study, or athletic
>activity as a pastime rather than as a profession.
>
>Other than Aerotech, I don't know of any company or person (in this hobby)
>who lives solely off profits from rocket related sales (correct me if I'm
>wrong). Therefore, by definition, with very few exceptions we are all
>"amateur" rocketeers.
>
>An observation, in the last 4-5 months, everyone in just about every rocket
>forum I've seen has been on hair trigger mode just waiting to launch an
>attack. I am just as guilty as anyone so don't think I'm going hypocrite
>here. Maybe with the holidays approaching, we can all find the time to take
>a breath and watch what we say to each other (I'll try too Thom and the
>WAMEX guys-they'll know what I mean). Rocket people are the greatest bunch
>of people around when it comes to helping each other out and working toward
>common goals.
>
>I personally know very little about hybrids or liquid props. My knowledge of
>solids is still in its infancy. However, my knowledge, or lack thereof, has
>nothing to do with someone's rights to post on this list. It's a public
>list. If Korey wants to throw in little hybrid comments, so be it. No one
>makes any of us read these posts, and if you don't like the content, stop
>reading. I too am kind of tired of ads popping up here and there, but that's
>the way of the internet. You can't ask that whatever you want to say be
>regarded as acceptable while critiquing the speech of others. It all comes
>down to who makes the decision on acceptability and I doubt anyone really
>wants to have that job.
>
>Everyone has seen a "which altimeter is best" post and there are sure to be
>dozens more in the future. I have asked it before as have countless others
>here. We all ask stupid questions from time to time. The point to this long
>winded post is, alot of us have become quite sarcastic or otherwise nasty of
>late. Can we all put down the keyboards and back away slowly for the good of
>the list(s)? It sure would be nice if everyone got along and we had no
>flames for at least a few weeks.
>
>Happy Holidays,
>
>Mark
>
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "William Chops Westfield" <billw@cisco.com>
>To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
>Sent: Monday, December 03, 2001 11:00 AM
>Subject: Re: [AR] Price of NOX
>
>
>>      What I do have a problem with is centring discussion around *consumer*
>>      propulsion.  Amateur/Experimental rocketry is not consumer
>propulsion...
>>
>>  I dunno.  Would be "consumer propulsion" providers are certainly a "class"
>  > of amateur/experimental rocketeers - one with its own set of interesting
>  > problems and issues...
>  >
>  > "consumer propulsion" is certainly not ALL of amateur rocketry...
>>
>>  BillW
>>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 7625 invoked from network); 4 Dec 2001 06:37:00 -0000
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 4 Dec 2001 06:37:00 -0000
Received: (qmail 7882 invoked by uid 50005); 4 Dec 2001 06:36:50 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4173. . Clean. Processed in 0.412587 secs); 04 Dec 2001 06:36:50 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 4 Dec 2001 06:36:49 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA17469; Mon, 3 Dec 2001 22:35:09 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 95477 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 4 Dec 2001 06:35:06 +0000
Received: from roll.akcecc.kiev.ua (roll.akcecc.kiev.ua [193.227.206.34]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA17455 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 3 Dec 2001 22:35:02 -0800
Received: from ssss (pool-119.akcecc.kiev.ua [193.227.207.119] (may be forged))          by roll.akcecc.kiev.ua (8.10.2/8.10.2) with SMTP id fB46Yso06543 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 4 Dec 2001 08:34:54 +0200
References:  <003101c17c2e$d6c10b80$0100a8c0@cc898542a>              <005c01c17c61$e5b80980$63391442@billbull>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2417.2000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <003f01c17c85$66c70c60$77cfe3c1@home>
Date:         Tue, 4 Dec 2001 08:33:52 +0300
Reply-To: "Serge Pipko" <spas@AKCECC.KIEV.UA>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Serge Pipko" <spas@AKCECC.KIEV.UA>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Melting devices
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Bill Bullock wrote:


> and direct pour. Use the same rig to make melted AN/AL blends, GALCIT and

PLEASE, explain, what does it mean "melted AN/AL blends" ? Did you really
mixed aluminium with molten NH4NO3 ???

Serge

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 28821 invoked from network); 4 Dec 2001 06:44:07 -0000
Received: from smtpv.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.110]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 4 Dec 2001 06:44:07 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 5663 invoked by uid 50005); 4 Dec 2001 06:22:39 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpv with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4173. . Clean. Processed in 1.635085 secs); 04 Dec 2001 06:22:39 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpv.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 4 Dec 2001 06:22:35 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA17368; Mon, 3 Dec 2001 22:15:00 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 95468 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 4 Dec 2001 06:14:49 +0000
Received: from harrier.prod.itd.earthlink.net (harrier.mail.pas.earthlink.net          [207.217.120.12]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA17335          for <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Mon, 3 Dec 2001 22:04:49 -0800
Received: from dialup-209.247.142.84.dial1.sanjose1.level3.net          ([209.247.142.84] helo=earthlink.net) by          harrier.prod.itd.earthlink.net with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id          16B8hD-0006Vk-00; Mon, 03 Dec 2001 22:04:47 -0800
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.75 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.16-22 i686)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <CMM.0.90.4.1007398812.billw@cypher>            <OE63WNoqiGAeGnOxUR200004105@hotmail.com>            <a05100301b8320987c39b@[192.168.0.2]>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3C0C6789.F44410E9@earthlink.net>
Date:         Mon, 3 Dec 2001 22:04:57 -0800
Reply-To: "David Weinshenker" <daze39@EARTHLINK.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "David Weinshenker" <daze39@EARTHLINK.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Manners (was Re: [AR] Price of NOX)
Comments: To: Andrew MacMillen <andrewm@HAWKFEATHER.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Andrew MacMillen wrote:
> Hear, hear, and thank you! ...as a newbie, the poster of said price
> comparison, and the recipient of the barbs. I may be fairly new to
> rocketry, but I have done my homework, learned some lessons from some
> nice people, and am trying to learn more. What I've learned here so
> far is to lay low. As an old Internet hand, I'm dismayed by the lack
> of courtesy herein.
>
> Questions to ponder: why isn't the respect and willingness to teach
> and share so evident at launches practiced in rocketry forums? Why do
> people become more vituperative when their ideas/ideals become closer?
>
> Let's all play together in the sand box, and let newbies like me
> learn how to learn, not how to duck.

Yeah really - it seemed some people were a bit snide
about the comparison being "too HPR-oriented" or something...

At present I've just wound up a series of HPR-powered test
flights of the configuration and recovery system of a birdie
that we're hoping to put up on H2O2 monoprop power 6in.
dia. x 9 ft. 4FNC, ~35 pounds in HPR trim, 38 lb. "dry"
in monoprop configuration. (1250 N nominal initial thrust,
4 L of H2O2 in a 10L blowdown tank starting at 350psig.)

We were gonna static test it this weekend but got rained
out. We're aiming to try again next weekend or as soon as
the weather clears, and to fly it on peroxide for the first
time sometime in the next few months (weather permitting, again.)

The peroxide project is known as "KISS" (keep it simple, sir) -
the seven "KISS-beta" flights, with off-the-shelf Aerotech motors,
that we did at Fresno and Black Rock HPR club launches, have us
reasonably confident in the overall flight and recovery package...
if it gets up in the air at all (nominal engine performance is
estimated at ~7000 N-sec, or about a low "M" in solid propellant
notation) we believe there's a reasonable chance of getting it
back down under fully deployed parachute. (The recovery system
mainly uses off-the-shelf HPR and rock-climbing components, along
with careful, sturdy construction and near-absolute electrical
redundancy.)

Look in the archives for messages with the subject "cheap rocket" -
therein was raised the question of how to prove out a recovery
system without risking amateur propulsion hardware (and its
time-intensive construction) in the attempt. I would say that
we've done just such a job, and I am _so_ not embarrassed to
post here about having done it. :> LOL :>

(I believe the thread started when one of us - Dave Hall??
said that he was discouraged with respect to amateur propulsion
projects because it seemed he'd seen too many of them end up as
"shovel recoveries". There was also some discussion of the use
of large, simple water rockets as test beds for recovery.)

-dave w

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 7537 invoked from network); 4 Dec 2001 06:56:34 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.105]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 4 Dec 2001 06:56:34 -0000
Received: (qmail 27062 invoked by uid 50005); 4 Dec 2001 06:56:24 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpy with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4173. . Clean. Processed in 2.373534 secs); 04 Dec 2001 06:56:24 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 4 Dec 2001 06:56:18 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA17568; Mon, 3 Dec 2001 22:53:58 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 95496 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 4 Dec 2001 06:53:53 +0000
Received: from localhost (rcalkins@localhost) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with          ESMTP id WAA17554; Mon, 3 Dec 2001 22:53:51 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.LNX.4.10.10112032236270.17449-100000@itc.uci.edu>
Date:         Mon, 3 Dec 2001 22:53:51 -0800
Reply-To: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Manners (was Re: [AR] Price of NOX)
Comments: To: Andrew MacMillen <andrewm@HAWKFEATHER.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <a05100301b8320987c39b@[192.168.0.2]>

Hello Andrew,

I am sorry for your bad experience here on aRocket.  For several years, I
waited by the computer for each post, and when I saw things heating up I
was quick to send out a carefully worded post off-list.  This worked well,
but required a lot of my time, especially as the list has been growing at
an average rate of nearly 100 new subscribers a year.

It finally got to be too much, and I put these responsibilities largely
into the hands of the subscribers.  I'll intervene when asked.

Ray

> Hear, hear, and thank you! ...as a newbie, the poster of said price
> comparison, and the recipient of the barbs. I may be fairly new to
> rocketry, but I have done my homework, learned some lessons from some
> nice people, and am trying to learn more. What I've learned here so
> far is to lay low. As an old Internet hand, I'm dismayed by the lack
> of courtesy herein.
>
> Questions to ponder: why isn't the respect and willingness to teach
> and share so evident at launches practiced in rocketry forums? Why do
> people become more vituperative when their ideas/ideals become closer?
>
> Let's all play together in the sand box, and let newbies like me
> learn how to learn, not how to duck.
>
> Andrew MacMillen
>
> At 1:40 PM -0600 12/3/01, Mark Kruep wrote:
> >The definition of amateur for our concerns is as follows:
> >
> >amateur- A person who engages in an art, science, study, or athletic
> >activity as a pastime rather than as a profession.
> >
> >Other than Aerotech, I don't know of any company or person (in this hobby)
> >who lives solely off profits from rocket related sales (correct me if I'm
> >wrong). Therefore, by definition, with very few exceptions we are all
> >"amateur" rocketeers.
> >
> >An observation, in the last 4-5 months, everyone in just about every rocket
> >forum I've seen has been on hair trigger mode just waiting to launch an
> >attack. I am just as guilty as anyone so don't think I'm going hypocrite
> >here. Maybe with the holidays approaching, we can all find the time to take
> >a breath and watch what we say to each other (I'll try too Thom and the
> >WAMEX guys-they'll know what I mean). Rocket people are the greatest bunch
> >of people around when it comes to helping each other out and working toward
> >common goals.
> >
> >I personally know very little about hybrids or liquid props. My knowledge of
> >solids is still in its infancy. However, my knowledge, or lack thereof, has
> >nothing to do with someone's rights to post on this list. It's a public
> >list. If Korey wants to throw in little hybrid comments, so be it. No one
> >makes any of us read these posts, and if you don't like the content, stop
> >reading. I too am kind of tired of ads popping up here and there, but that's
> >the way of the internet. You can't ask that whatever you want to say be
> >regarded as acceptable while critiquing the speech of others. It all comes
> >down to who makes the decision on acceptability and I doubt anyone really
> >wants to have that job.
> >
> >Everyone has seen a "which altimeter is best" post and there are sure to be
> >dozens more in the future. I have asked it before as have countless others
> >here. We all ask stupid questions from time to time. The point to this long
> >winded post is, alot of us have become quite sarcastic or otherwise nasty of
> >late. Can we all put down the keyboards and back away slowly for the good of
> >the list(s)? It sure would be nice if everyone got along and we had no
> >flames for at least a few weeks.
> >
> >Happy Holidays,
> >
> >Mark
> >
> >
> >----- Original Message -----
> >From: "William Chops Westfield" <billw@cisco.com>
> >To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
> >Sent: Monday, December 03, 2001 11:00 AM
> >Subject: Re: [AR] Price of NOX
> >
> >
> >>      What I do have a problem with is centring discussion around *consumer*
> >>      propulsion.  Amateur/Experimental rocketry is not consumer
> >propulsion...
> >>
> >>  I dunno.  Would be "consumer propulsion" providers are certainly a "class"
> >  > of amateur/experimental rocketeers - one with its own set of interesting
> >  > problems and issues...
> >  >
> >  > "consumer propulsion" is certainly not ALL of amateur rocketry...
> >>
> >>  BillW
> >>
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 10427 invoked from network); 4 Dec 2001 07:16:56 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 4 Dec 2001 07:16:56 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: (qmail 27214 invoked by uid 50005); 4 Dec 2001 07:16:46 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4173. . Clean. Processed in 0.149077 secs); 04 Dec 2001 07:16:46 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 4 Dec 2001 07:16:46 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA17639; Mon, 3 Dec 2001 23:14:20 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 95503 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 4 Dec 2001 07:14:17 +0000
Received: from wrench.toolcity.net (root@wrench.toolcity.net [208.0.188.2]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA17625 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 3 Dec 2001 23:14:16 -0800
Received: from [63.169.101.113]          (dap-63-169-101-113.meadville-tnt-1.pa.toolcity.net [63.169.101.113])          by wrench.toolcity.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id CAA01679 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 4 Dec 2001 02:14:12 -0500 (EST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <v01510100b83232dca82c@[63.169.101.31]>
Date:         Tue, 4 Dec 2001 02:16:50 -0600
Reply-To: "al bradley" <abradley@TOOLCITY.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "al bradley" <abradley@TOOLCITY.NET>
Subject:      [AR] Segway Scooter -- anything here Rocketeers can use??
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Looking at the TV news releases today on the Segway Scooter. Besides what
operation you could see its operation was said to rely on gyroscopes, god
knows which IC's, and obviously some quite compact batteries. Now, it may
stick around as a novelty, maybe it is a step in device evolution to be
seen later.

If you watched it you would have to admit it is ingenious. The fact that it
can sense the standing posture of an adult and immediately act on that so
the rider does not get dumped -- probably has principles usable in
rocketry.

Sure hope our best minds on this list can get enough details and put their
thoughts among us to see where our creative imaging could go.

respectfully,
al bradley

------------------------------------------------------------------
Can you live Life with this?: "Unless there is a law, an agreement, or a
long-standing custom, No one `Deserves' Anything -- Either Good or Bad!"

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 586 invoked from network); 4 Dec 2001 07:23:10 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 4 Dec 2001 07:23:10 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 10393 invoked by uid 50005); 4 Dec 2001 07:23:01 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4173. . Clean. Processed in 0.146387 secs); 04 Dec 2001 07:23:01 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 4 Dec 2001 07:23:01 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA17682; Mon, 3 Dec 2001 23:21:19 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 95510 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 4 Dec 2001 07:21:12 +0000
Received: from rwcrmhc51.attbi.com (rwcrmhc51.attbi.com [204.127.198.38]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA17668 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 3 Dec 2001 23:21:11 -0800
Received: from c1649002-a.earthlink.net ([12.232.75.28]) by rwcrmhc51.attbi.com          (InterMail vM.4.01.03.27 201-229-121-127-20010626) with ESMTP id          <20011204072033.VCDS5859.rwcrmhc51.attbi.com@c1649002-a.earthlink.net>; Tue, 4 Dec 2001 07:20:33          +0000
X-Sender: forkbomb@mail.earthlink.net
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.0.2
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <5.0.2.1.0.20011203232004.02807878@mail.earthlink.net>
Date:         Mon, 3 Dec 2001 23:20:44 -0800
Reply-To: "Pierce Nichols" <forkbomb@EARTHLINK.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Pierce Nichols" <forkbomb@EARTHLINK.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] FW: [AR] Price of NOX
Comments: To: Korey Kline <k2@HYBRIDS.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <001301c17baf$97906340$6501a8c0@koreynew>

At 11:04 PM 12/2/2001 -0500, Korey Kline wrote:
>I put both H2O2 & Nitric Acid guys in the category of gluttons for
>punishment because they have to make every pound of their own oxidizers! :-)


         I never heard of an H2O2 valve freezing shut, however <g>.

         -p



>K2
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU]On
> > Behalf Of David Weinshenker
> > Sent: Sunday, December 02, 2001 10:24 PM
> > To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
> > Subject: Re: [AR] Price of NOX
> >
> >
> > Korey Kline wrote:
> > > You can tell a man by his oxidizer!
> >
> > AP, in commercial solid motors; H2O2 in amateur liquids :)
> >
> > (What does that say about me?)
> >
> > -dave w
> >

Mars or Bust!
www.marssociety.com

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 14500 invoked from network); 4 Dec 2001 08:49:25 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
Received: from smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.105]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 4 Dec 2001 08:49:25 -0000
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 29048 invoked by uid 50005); 4 Dec 2001 08:49:12 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpy with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4173. . Clean. Processed in 1.533445 secs); 04 Dec 2001 08:49:12 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 4 Dec 2001 08:49:09 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA18124; Tue, 4 Dec 2001 00:47:14 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 95535 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 4 Dec 2001 08:47:05 +0000
Received: from out004pub.verizon.net (out004pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.104])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA18109 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 4 Dec 2001 00:47:04 -0800
Received: from [67.192.169.141] (1Cust141.tnt2.hilo.hi.da.uu.net          [67.192.169.141]) by out004pub.verizon.net  with ESMTP for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; id fB48m0U05506 Tue, 4 Dec 2001 02:48:01 -0600          (CST)
X-Sender: ttocs@mail.gte.net
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <l03130300b8323c04468e@[67.192.161.148]>
Date:         Mon, 3 Dec 2001 22:45:01 -1000
Reply-To: "Aaron Smith" <ttocs@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Aaron Smith" <ttocs@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Segway Scooter -- anything here Rocketeers can use??
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <v01510100b83232dca82c@[63.169.101.31]>

*Splutter*
*snort*
*Uncontrollable giggling*

Sorry, but that thing is totally useless.  There may be some good stuff in
the batteries, but that's it.  a $200 electric razor scooter can do the
same thing.  The only market I see for the Segway Human Individual
Transporter is people who can't balance and shouldn't be on the road to
begin with.

Yes, the technology is amazing - while at the same time utterly useless.

Sorry for the OT rant, all.  Back to rocketry.
-Aaron

>If you watched it you would have to admit it is ingenious. The fact that it
>can sense the standing posture of an adult and immediately act on that so
>the rider does not get dumped -- probably has principles usable in
>rocketry.
>
>Sure hope our best minds on this list can get enough details and put their
>thoughts among us to see where our creative imaging could go.
>
>respectfully,
>al bradley
>
>------------------------------------------------------------------
>Can you live Life with this?: "Unless there is a law, an agreement, or a
>long-standing custom, No one `Deserves' Anything -- Either Good or Bad!"

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 20286 invoked from network); 4 Dec 2001 09:43:52 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 4 Dec 2001 09:43:52 -0000
Received: (qmail 17954 invoked by uid 50005); 4 Dec 2001 09:43:41 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4173. . Clean. Processed in 3.277516 secs); 04 Dec 2001 09:43:41 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 4 Dec 2001 09:43:35 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id BAA18362; Tue, 4 Dec 2001 01:41:40 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 95562 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 4 Dec 2001 09:41:25 +0000
Received: from localhost (rcalkins@localhost) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with          ESMTP id BAA18348; Tue, 4 Dec 2001 01:41:24 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.LNX.4.10.10112040137100.18289-100000@itc.uci.edu>
Date:         Tue, 4 Dec 2001 01:41:24 -0800
Reply-To: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Segway Scooter -- anything here Rocketeers can use??
Comments: To: Aaron Smith <ttocs@GTE.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <l03130300b8323c04468e@[67.192.161.148]>

> Yes, the technology is amazing - while at the same time utterly useless.

Sure, it's nifty, and if the price comes down over an order of magnitude,
I'd even get one myself.  My question, what gyros does it use, and how
does it isolate them from mechanical effects.  Judging from what I've seen
from the Armadillo's team, mechanical gyros are very sensitive to things
like curbs, cracks in sidewalks, jostling from other pedestrians, etc.
They're either doing something different with software or hardware, or
codling the development unit from rough handling.

Comments, John?



Ray

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 2578 invoked from network); 4 Dec 2001 09:48:38 -0000
Received: from smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.105]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 4 Dec 2001 09:48:38 -0000
Received: (qmail 847 invoked by uid 50005); 4 Dec 2001 09:48:28 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpy with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4173. . Clean. Processed in 0.151578 secs); 04 Dec 2001 09:48:28 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 4 Dec 2001 09:48:28 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id BAA18391; Tue, 4 Dec 2001 01:45:58 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 95569 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 4 Dec 2001 09:45:57 +0000
Received: from mx1.relaypoint.net (ns2.generalbroadband.com [64.32.62.5]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id BAA18377 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Tue, 4 Dec 2001 01:45:56 -0800
Received: from [208.131.72.40] (HELO atlantis) by mx1.relaypoint.net          (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 3.4.8) with SMTP id 1653075; Tue, 04 Dec 2001          01:45:55 -0800
References:  <l03130300b8323c04468e@[67.192.161.148]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <001901c17ca8$24a493c0$284883d0@atlantis>
Date:         Tue, 4 Dec 2001 01:43:32 -0800
Reply-To: "Jim Bowery" <jabowery@WWC.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jim Bowery" <jabowery@WWC.COM>
Subject:      [AR] OT:  Segway Scooter -- anything here Rocketeers can use??
Comments: To: Aaron Smith <ttocs@GTE.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

First, there is no comparing private money thrown away on idiocy to what the
government does.  Anyone doing anything with private money -- even when they
psychotically hype it out of proportion -- is infinitely superior to what
the government does because, bottom line, they are doing it with THEIR
MONEY.  Now, having said that, and having more than paid my dues when it
comes to dressing down government pomposity, I just can't seem to help
myself on this one, despite Kaman's making like he was playing down the
hype, because I just looked at their website -- and it did seem a little too
'hyped up' to me (http://www.segway.com).  At least he's not going IPO (I
hope).

----- Original Message -----
From: "Aaron Smith" <ttocs@GTE.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Tuesday, December 04, 2001 12:45 AM
Subject: Re: [AR] Segway Scooter -- anything here Rocketeers can use??


> *Splutter*
> *snort*
> *Uncontrollable giggling*
>
> Sorry, but that thing is totally useless.  There may be some good stuff in
> the batteries, but that's it.  a $200 electric razor scooter can do the
> same thing.  The only market I see for the Segway Human Individual
> Transporter is people who can't balance and shouldn't be on the road to
> begin with.

But... it made Time Magazine's Amazon of the Year (Millennium issue no less)
honk with laughter!!!

I'll leave poor John Doerr out of this...

...as for rich John Doerr, he really should have known better than to put
$100M into a thing like that when the institutional investors were stopping
the "We'll buy any IPO you put up." Schick (if he didn't -- who did???)...
but like I said... it's his money (and the fund investors of course -- some
of whom may be a bit worried about _their_ money as well as John's at this
point).

I must be getting punchy.

PS: As for rockets, if you take 6 of those Segways you can get 6 degrees of
freedom, I'll betcha, with frequency response exceeding .1 Hz, I'll betcha
again.  Actually, it would be great to get things like this into fads for
extreme sports because they could get the cost per unit down and the
frequency response up -- to the point that it might work for rockets.

PPS:  Sorry Dean (or his friends)... the fact that you build things -- even
if they are merely interesting things seemingly out of a MAD magazine
cartoon -- makes me genuinely respect you even tho' I'm poking at you over
the hype, expense and what IMHO is questionable business judgement.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 10183 invoked from network); 4 Dec 2001 11:35:39 -0000
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 4 Dec 2001 11:35:39 -0000
Received: (qmail 12807 invoked by uid 50005); 4 Dec 2001 11:35:30 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4173. . Clean. Processed in 0.43952 secs); 04 Dec 2001 11:35:30 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 4 Dec 2001 11:35:29 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id DAA18743; Tue, 4 Dec 2001 03:33:50 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 95596 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 4 Dec 2001 11:33:40 +0000
Received: from fep4-orange.clear.net.nz (fep4-orange.clear.net.nz          [203.97.32.4]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id DAA18728;          Tue, 4 Dec 2001 03:33:39 -0800
Received: from mkbs (203-167-156-47.dialup.clear.net.nz [203.167.156.47]) by          fep4-orange.clear.net.nz (1.5/1.7) with SMTP id AAA29463; Wed, 5 Dec          2001 00:33:37 +1300 (NZDT)
References:  <Pine.LNX.4.10.10112040137100.18289-100000@itc.uci.edu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <012d01c17cb7$de27e360$0700a8c0@mkbs>
Date:         Wed, 5 Dec 2001 00:11:58 +1300
Reply-To: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Organization: Applied Technology
Subject:      Re: [AR] Segway Scooter -- anything here Rocketeers can use??
Comments: To: Ray Calkins <rcalkins@ITC.UCI.EDU>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

I suspect that a rate gyro in the forward-backward direction and perhaps an
accelerometer in the same axis may be all that is needed (although turning
may complicate things.) You know what the rate SHOULD be from a given
acceleration/deceleration situation that you are controlling and anything
else is caused by rotation which you want to correct.



      Russell McMahon


> Sure, it's nifty, and if the price comes down over an order of magnitude,
> I'd even get one myself.  My question, what gyros does it use, and how
> does it isolate them from mechanical effects.  Judging from what I've seen
> from the Armadillo's team, mechanical gyros are very sensitive to things
> like curbs, cracks in sidewalks, jostling from other pedestrians, etc.
> They're either doing something different with software or hardware, or
> codling the development unit from rough handling.
>
> Comments, John?
>
>
>
> Ray
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 19613 invoked from network); 4 Dec 2001 11:48:58 -0000
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 4 Dec 2001 11:48:58 -0000
Received: (qmail 32411 invoked by uid 50005); 4 Dec 2001 11:48:46 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4173. . Clean. Processed in 2.171396 secs); 04 Dec 2001 11:48:46 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 4 Dec 2001 11:48:41 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id DAA18797; Tue, 4 Dec 2001 03:46:28 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 95605 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 4 Dec 2001 11:46:26 +0000
Received: from fep4-orange.clear.net.nz (fep4-orange.clear.net.nz          [203.97.32.4]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id DAA18783          for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Tue, 4 Dec 2001 03:46:25 -0800
Received: from mkbs (203-167-156-15.dialup.clear.net.nz [203.167.156.15]) by          fep4-orange.clear.net.nz (1.5/1.7) with SMTP id AAA04415; Wed, 5 Dec          2001 00:46:16 +1300 (NZDT)
References:  <000201c17c7d$bfc99560$0200a8c0@24.53.64.18>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <014801c17cb9$a3176d20$0700a8c0@mkbs>
Date:         Wed, 5 Dec 2001 00:48:07 +1300
Reply-To: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Organization: Applied Technology
Subject:      Re: [AR] OT: RE: [AR] Nothing at all about cutting Kevlar Cloth
Comments: To: Jeff Grady <jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

> >>I don't know,  I have never been in a K-mart,  and have never seen a
> >>Wal-Mart.
>
> Say What???? Never seen a Wal-Mart???


We have no Wal-Marts here.
We have a few K-Marts but they are losing money AFAIK.

Waffle what ???

We do have Kentucky Fried, Golden Arches, P'Hut, McDonalds and more such
imports.

Also no AP unless you import it yourself :-( (as a local Pyro man does).

No Jabba the Hut BUT we do have "The Lord of the Rings" (and Peter Jackson).



        RM
.


> I know that when I die, regardless of my end destination, Heaven or Hell,
> there will be a Wal-Mart, McDonalds and a Waffle House on every corner...
>
> In Heaven, not a single item will need a price check, I will actually
> receive what I order at McDonalds and all the waitresses at the Waffle
House
> will look like Kathy Ireland (with all teeth). In Hell...Well just stop in
> one of those places today and you'll get a preview :)
>
> JG
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 29792 invoked from network); 4 Dec 2001 12:19:40 -0000
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 4 Dec 2001 12:19:40 -0000
Received: (qmail 31372 invoked by uid 50005); 4 Dec 2001 12:19:31 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4173. . Clean. Processed in 0.386976 secs); 04 Dec 2001 12:19:31 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 4 Dec 2001 12:19:31 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id EAA19021; Tue, 4 Dec 2001 04:18:22 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 95618 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 4 Dec 2001 12:18:14 +0000
Received: from femail20.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail20.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.0.95.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id EAA19007          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 4 Dec 2001 04:18:14 -0800
Received: from cx814151a ([24.14.55.118]) by femail20.sdc1.sfba.home.com          (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20 201-229-121-120-20010223) with SMTP id          <20011204121808.KIMG18964.femail20.sdc1.sfba.home.com@cx814151a> for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 4 Dec 2001 04:18:08 -0800
References:  <Pine.LNX.4.10.10112040137100.18289-100000@itc.uci.edu>              <012d01c17cb7$de27e360$0700a8c0@mkbs>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4807.1700
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <050301c17cbd$3b56ec20$0a01a8c0@cx814151a>
Date:         Tue, 4 Dec 2001 06:14:32 -0600
Reply-To: "John Bolene" <jbolene@HOME.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Bolene" <jbolene@HOME.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Segway Scooter -- anything here Rocketeers can use??
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

It has 5 very small gyros and 10 CPU's to handle all the calculations
needed.
I do wonder if it comes in colors or some other way to differentiate yours
from another.
Not that with the $3000 price tag, that there will be hundreds to sort your
from.
I thought it interesting that they have different keys to initiate different
modes such as beginner/expert.


In another note, a motorized gasoline scooter has been around for a few
years.
The goped has a racing version with a 5 HP motor and the normal one with a
weedeater motor that does 15 MPH.

John Bolene
Tripoli Oklahoma Prefect and webmaster
Tripoli Oklahoma Web page -> http://members.home.com/tripoli-oklahoma/

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 26768 invoked from network); 4 Dec 2001 15:07:34 -0000
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 4 Dec 2001 15:07:34 -0000
Received: (qmail 25358 invoked by uid 50005); 4 Dec 2001 15:07:24 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4173. . Clean. Processed in 2.104323 secs); 04 Dec 2001 15:07:24 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 4 Dec 2001 15:07:19 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA19515; Tue, 4 Dec 2001 07:04:40 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 95651 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 4 Dec 2001 15:03:22 +0000
Received: from cablecom.laribay.net (cablecom.laribay.net [66.20.57.4]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA19500 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 4 Dec 2001 07:03:22 -0800
Received: from billbull (dial088.laribay.net [66.20.57.88]) by          cablecom.laribay.net (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id IAA15451 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 4 Dec 2001 08:48:04 -0600 (CST)          (envelope-from bpbullock@laribay.net)
References:  <003101c17c2e$d6c10b80$0100a8c0@cc898542a>                         <005c01c17c61$e5b80980$63391442@billbull>              <003f01c17c85$66c70c60$77cfe3c1@home>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <003001c17cd4$f66c7ae0$58391442@billbull>
Date:         Tue, 4 Dec 2001 09:04:23 -0600
Reply-To: "Bill Bullock" <bpbullock@LARIBAY.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Bill Bullock" <bpbullock@LARIBAY.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Melting devices
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

    Yes, but not like you probably envision. When working with Ammonium
Nitrate I first use a thermal dehydration to remove all moisture. I used to
use a lab distillation set-up designed to run fractional distillations on
crude oil to evaporate, condense and recover the extracted water for
measurement. I have seen moisture contents above 23-25% by weight. Now I use
before/after weights and calculate the original moisture by subtraction.
    I do this because just taking "raw" agricultural-grade An and mixing
into a propellant grain will not give you the true potential of the blend.
As an example, if you use An which is 10+% moisture you are not only
including this water into your propellant but are "shorting" the oxidizer
proportion by that much.
    I ran a thermal dehydration test on some An this past weekend and this
is the results:
Starting weight = +/- 1#/456 grams
Dehydrated by ramp-up to 250 deg. F. over 2.5 hour's time
Cooled down in a sealed container (High-Tech: a 1/2 pint Kerr canning jar)
Weighed the processed material:
Residual Weight = 385.6 grams (appx 84.61% of original)
Moisture loss = 70.4 grams (appx 15.44% of original)
(I know that this comes to 100.005%, but I rounded off the calculated
results)
    This means that if I had used this stuff "as is" I would have been
including this amount of moisture in my grain. I can run some PROPEPs and
show about what it would have done to Isp/D-Isp if you want, but in all
probability it would have neither ignited nor burned.
    To make my final grain I will place this into my oil-bath heater and add
20% (by weight) distilled water and a bit of surfactant and heat until
everything dissolves into a super-saturated solution. Then I will add the
Aluminum (6 and 4 micron blend) and heat until it drives off the added
moisture and melts. Then I will pour it into the mold and slowly cool by
ramp-down method in a sealed container.
    I am working with two other list-members right now investigating
benefits of either deformation densification or else compressing/swaging
this grain under high pressures of up to 80 tons per square inch to achieve
maximum densification. I keep these propellant grains vacuum-packed until I
am ready to use them.
    A lot of this is new to me or recently learned and I am by no means an
expert, but I continue to experiment.
    Respectfully,
Bill

----- Original Message -----
From: Serge Pipko <spas@AKCECC.KIEV.UA>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Monday, December 03, 2001 11:33 PM
Subject: Re: [AR] Melting devices


> Bill Bullock wrote:
>
>
> > and direct pour. Use the same rig to make melted AN/AL blends, GALCIT
and
>
> PLEASE, explain, what does it mean "melted AN/AL blends" ? Did you really
> mixed aluminium with molten NH4NO3 ???
>
> Serge
>
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 29559 invoked from network); 4 Dec 2001 15:31:04 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 4 Dec 2001 15:31:04 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 826 invoked by uid 50005); 4 Dec 2001 15:30:54 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4173. . Clean. Processed in 3.015926 secs); 04 Dec 2001 15:30:55 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 4 Dec 2001 15:30:48 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA19611; Tue, 4 Dec 2001 07:28:17 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 95665 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 4 Dec 2001 15:26:47 +0000
Received: from po4.glue.umd.edu (po4.glue.umd.edu [128.8.10.124]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA19595 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 4 Dec 2001 07:26:47 -0800
Received: from y.glue.umd.edu (IDENT:root@y.glue.umd.edu [128.8.10.68]) by          po4.glue.umd.edu (8.10.1/8.10.1) with ESMTP id fB4FQiU08814; Tue, 4          Dec 2001 10:26:44 -0500 (EST)
Received: from y.glue.umd.edu (IDENT:sendmail@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by          y.glue.umd.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id KAA18833; Tue, 4 Dec 2001          10:26:44 -0500 (EST)
Received: from localhost (acase@localhost) by y.glue.umd.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with          ESMTP id KAA18829; Tue, 4 Dec 2001 10:26:44 -0500 (EST)
X-Authentication-Warning: y.glue.umd.edu: acase owned process doing -bs
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.GSO.4.21.0112041012590.15946-100000@y.glue.umd.edu>
Date:         Tue, 4 Dec 2001 10:26:44 -0500
Reply-To: "Andrew Case" <acase@GLUE.UMD.EDU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Andrew Case" <acase@GLUE.UMD.EDU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Segway Scooter -- anything here Rocketeers can use??
Comments: To: John Bolene <jbolene@HOME.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <050301c17cbd$3b56ec20$0a01a8c0@cx814151a>

On Tue, 4 Dec 2001, John Bolene wrote:

> It has 5 very small gyros and 10 CPU's to handle all the calculations
> needed.
> I do wonder if it comes in colors or some other way to differentiate yours
> from another.
> Not that with the $3000 price tag, that there will be hundreds to sort your
> from.

It's the gyros that interest me, too. Optimistically, either these things
are going to take off, in which case the volume will drive down the price
of decent gyros, or they'll bomb, in which case you'll be able to pick
up clapped out models cheaply for cannibalization. Either way it's a
good thing - assuming, of course, that the gyros are cannibalizable -
it's possible that the gyro package is so tightly integrated into the
control electronics that the only way to get them out it to break them.

The problem with this optimistic analysis is that Segway may simply die
fast in which case neither of the scenarios above will pan out, leaving
just the status quo. I'm not all that optimistic, given the price and the
state of the economy. Still, it's a clever idea, and it looks like it's
well implemented, so I wish Kamen the best of luck.

......Andrew

Andrew Case                             |
acase@plasma.umd.edu                    |
Institute for Plasma Research           |
University of Maryland, College Park    |

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 8133 invoked from network); 4 Dec 2001 15:33:09 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 4 Dec 2001 15:33:09 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 2276 invoked by uid 50005); 4 Dec 2001 15:33:00 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4173. . Clean. Processed in 1.727465 secs); 04 Dec 2001 15:33:00 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 4 Dec 2001 15:32:56 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA19644; Tue, 4 Dec 2001 07:31:48 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 95664 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 4 Dec 2001 15:30:26 +0000
Received: from mercury.Sun.COM (mercury.Sun.COM [192.9.25.1]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA19577 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue,          4 Dec 2001 07:20:25 -0800
Received: from pastene.East.Sun.COM ([129.148.183.32]) by mercury.Sun.COM          (8.9.3+Sun/8.9.3) with ESMTP id HAA11549; Tue, 4 Dec 2001 07:20:22          -0800 (PST)
Received: from chopin (chopin [129.148.183.180]) by pastene.East.Sun.COM          (8.9.3+Sun/8.9.3/ENSMAIL,v2.1p1) with SMTP id KAA22152; Tue, 4 Dec          2001 10:20:22 -0500 (EST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-MD5: JSOQYIik6BknKL462gZ24g==
X-Mailer: dtmail 1.3.0 @(#)CDE Version 1.3.5 SunOS 5.7 sun4u sparc
Message-ID:  <200112041520.KAA22152@pastene.East.Sun.COM>
Date:         Tue, 4 Dec 2001 10:20:22 -0500
Reply-To: "Peter Finch - High End Server Systems" <Peter.Finch@SUN.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Peter Finch - High End Server Systems" <Peter.Finch@SUN.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Cutting Kevlar Cloth
Comments: To: thomgaf@energyrs.com
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Isn't there still a Walmart on El Camino Real at the San Antonio
Shopping Center?

That's a little north of you; I think it's in Menlo Park, but it's not
hard to find.  There are several in the area, but that's the one I
remember for sure.

-Peter

> X-Accept-Language: en
> MIME-Version: 1.0
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
> Date: Mon, 3 Dec 2001 19:27:16 -0800
> From: "Thomas M. Mcgaffey" <energyrelease@EARTHLINK.NET>
> Subject: Re: [AR] Cutting Kevlar Cloth
> To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
>
> Hi Jerry,
>
> I don't know,  I have never been in a K-mart,  and have never seen a
> Wal-Mart.
>
> Thom
>
> Thomas M. McGaffey
> Energy Release Systems
> 408-226-7502
> thomgaf@energyrs.com
> San Jose, Kalifornia
>
>
>
> Jerry Irvine wrote:
>
> >
> > Silicon Valley no K-mart?  Hmmmm.  Fiskars.
> >
> > --
> > Jerry Irvine <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
> > Box 1242 Claremont, CA 91711 USA
> > Opinion, the whole thing.

--
Peter Finch, peter.finch@east.sun.com
Sun Microsystems, Inc. http://www.sun.com

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 10226 invoked from network); 4 Dec 2001 16:17:33 -0000
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 4 Dec 2001 16:17:33 -0000
Received: (qmail 13222 invoked by uid 50005); 4 Dec 2001 16:16:30 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4173. . Clean. Processed in 3.075137 secs); 04 Dec 2001 16:16:30 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 4 Dec 2001 16:16:22 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA19813; Tue, 4 Dec 2001 08:12:19 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 95685 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 4 Dec 2001 16:11:35 +0000
Received: from roll.akcecc.kiev.ua (roll.akcecc.kiev.ua [193.227.206.34]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA19794 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 4 Dec 2001 08:11:30 -0800
Received: from ssss (pool-119.akcecc.kiev.ua [193.227.207.119] (may be forged))          by roll.akcecc.kiev.ua (8.10.2/8.10.2) with SMTP id fB4GBGL16174 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 4 Dec 2001 18:11:16 +0200
References:  <003101c17c2e$d6c10b80$0100a8c0@cc898542a>                                    <005c01c17c61$e5b80980$63391442@billbull>                         <003f01c17c85$66c70c60$77cfe3c1@home>              <003001c17cd4$f66c7ae0$58391442@billbull>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2417.2000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <169e01c17cd5$ebdd1f20$77cfe3c1@home>
Date:         Tue, 4 Dec 2001 18:10:17 +0300
Reply-To: "Serge Pipko" <spas@AKCECC.KIEV.UA>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Serge Pipko" <spas@AKCECC.KIEV.UA>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Melting devices
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Bill Bullock wrote:

>     To make my final grain I will place this into my oil-bath heater and
add
> 20% (by weight) distilled water and a bit of surfactant and heat until
> everything dissolves into a super-saturated solution. Then I will add the
> Aluminum (6 and 4 micron blend) and heat until it drives off the added
> moisture and melts. Then I will pour it into the mold and slowly cool by
> ramp-down method in a sealed container.

You wrote "I will add the Aluminum ". Is this your plan or you already did
that ?
I can't believe that aluminum is stable in molten AN. If this is the case
by some miracle, then probably my results may be of some help for you.
You can use AN-KN eutectic for lovering melt temperature and some meal
to strengthening resulting grain.

Sorry for posting this one's more:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----------
It seems to me, that the dream of each roketeer is a propellant containing
not 10-20 % liquid binder, but 50 or even 90%. As the propellant can not
contain so much of binder-fuel, it should be a binder-oxidizer. Practically
sole candidate for this role for the amateur can be AN. It has rather low
melting point  (169 deg. C) and forms set of eutectic mixtures with a low
melting point. Among them are most interesting:
1. AN-KN (13.6 % KN), m.p. 156.5 deg. C.
At hardening of this eutectic phase-stabilized AN is formed.
2. AN-NaN (20.5 % NaN), m.p. 120.8 deg. C.
The large lack of this eutectic is that at its hardening a mixture of
crystals AN and NaN is formed, which has phase-transition points of both AN
and NaN. For example, at cooling under 84.2 deg. C crystals expand, thus a
test-tube, in which a fusion was made, frequently bursts.
3. AN-KN-NaN (66.5-12.5-21.0 %), m.p. 118.5 deg. C.
At hardening of this eutectic the phase-stabilized mix of crystals (AN + KN)
+ (NaN) is formed. The solid eutectic is rather strong to serve as a binder.

Certainly, fusible binder is not good binder, but taking into account
KN-sorbitol propellant experience, it can be successfully used by the
amateur. PROPEP gives Isp in the range of 201-203 for the mixtures of
triples eutectic with such fuels as carbon, sucrose or cellulose.

The purpose of my first experiments was to establish, what fuel can be
combined with a melt of an eutectic without decomposition and danger of
self-ignition. I began with triple eutectic as the most safe, the
experiments were carried out in a glass beaker submerged in an oil bath,
heated up to 130-135 deg. C. In all cases the stochiometric mixes was
prepared. Here are the basic results.

Activated charcoal.
I knew that the activated charcoal catalyzes decomposition of AN, but has
not found anywhere data, at what temperature it occurs. It has appeared,
that at 130 deg. C decomposition already is appreciable, the liquid mix
froths up, at cooling porous mass is formed.

Sorbitol (anhydrous).
The sorbitol easily dissolves in a melt, forming a stable colourless
solution. The solidified mixture easily crumbles, it is much less strong,
than eutectic alone.

Sucrose.
The sucrose quickly decomposes in a melt. After 1 minute the mixture becomes
brown and froths up.

Starch.
I supposed to use starch as insoluble fine-dyspersed fuel. On my surprise
starch swelled and then completely dissolved in a melt. The stable yellow
solution was formed which is appreciable thicker, than eutectic. All this
very much reminded dissolution of starch in water. At cooling mass was
formed, which was more stiffer than pure eutectic. Within two days I have
not noticed attributes of a hygroscopicity. It is very unexpected and
encouraging result.  BTW, maybe starch will be useful additive in Candy
propellant?

Cotton wool.
After experiment with starch I have thought: " maybe cellulose will be
dissolved in that super-solvent  too ? " But the cotton wool was not
dissolved, and also was not moistened completely because of its
voluminosity. It appears, 80 % binder can be not enough too!  ;)

Activated charcoal + starch.
It is known, that it is possible to find a poison for every catalyst. For
activated charcoal it can be substance adsorbed on its surface. It has
appeared, that starch can play this role and prevents AN decomposition in
the presence of activated charcoal. However analysis of the stiffened
mixture revealed, that the tiny bubbles of air have stuck to particles of
charcoal and mass has turned out porous. Next time I shall try vacuum
degassing.

Wheat flour swelled and the whole mass became dough-like and non-flowing.
The solidified mixture was very hard, but contained air bubbles, which had
not any chances to release from thick mass.

Gelatin did not swell, not dissolve, not decompose.

Polyvinyl alcohol slightly swelled and formed fluid suspension.

Carboxymethyl cellulose slightly swelled and, as cotton wool, was not
moistened completely because of its
voluminosity.

After experiments with triple eutectic (AN-KN-NaN) I have decided to return
to a double eutectic (AN-KN), because fuels on its basis should have higher
ISP (theoretically about 210). I have found, that at temperature of 160-165
deg C the alloys with starch and wheat flour can be easily obtained. At that
starch dissolves completely, and flour dissolves partially and forms fluid
suspension. At cooling of both melts hard mass was formed, and the
composition with flour was more stiffer and more homogeneous. Both
compositions do not burn at atmospheric pressure, that makes fusion
procedure reasonably safe.

I have fired composition with a flour in a test motor.

Composition:
NH4NO3 72.5 %
KNO3 11.4 %
Flour 16.1 %

BATES Grain OD 34 mm
Core 13 mm
Length 58 mm
Mass 63.2 g
Density 1.41 g/cm^3
Nozzle 4.5 mm
Kn 246

Igniter: BP tablet (34 mm OD, 5 mm long), placed on top of the grain with
2-3 mm gap, initiated with blackmatch.

The results were partially successful. The fuel has fired and burned down
completely and stably. However burn time was very long: 117 seconds.

Serge Pipko

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 29258 invoked from network); 4 Dec 2001 17:59:42 -0000
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 4 Dec 2001 17:59:42 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 397 invoked by uid 50005); 4 Dec 2001 17:59:32 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4173. . Clean. Processed in 0.109911 secs); 04 Dec 2001 17:59:32 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 4 Dec 2001 17:59:32 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA20298; Tue, 4 Dec 2001 09:52:21 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 95728 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 4 Dec 2001 17:52:16 +0000
Received: from falcon.prod.itd.earthlink.net (falcon.mail.pas.earthlink.net          [207.217.120.74]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA20284          for <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Tue, 4 Dec 2001 09:52:16 -0800
Received: from user-2ivfild.dialup.mindspring.com ([165.247.202.173]          helo=RClague) by falcon.prod.itd.earthlink.net with smtp (Exim 3.33          #1) id 16BJjm-0001o8-00; Tue, 04 Dec 2001 09:52:12 -0800
References: <000701c173e6$c4451aa0$640a0a0a@greg> <3BFDF7B9.EC8D7990@sfcc.net>
X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.8/32.553
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by itc.uci.edu id JAA20285
Message-ID:  <fi0q0u0jdsv20o9fntt1gfh5p3npflblff@4ax.com>
Date:         Tue, 4 Dec 2001 09:52:00 -0800
Reply-To: <rclague@RCLAGUE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Randall Clague" <rclague@RCLAGUE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Non-digital test stand
Comments: To: James Yawn <jyawn@SFCC.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <3BFDF7B9.EC8D7990@sfcc.net>

On Fri, 23 Nov 2001 02:16:09 -0500, James Yawn <jyawn@SFCC.NET> wrote:

>Currently I am using an 8-foot 2x4 for my "stabilizer" and lifting it with
>engines that should be in the "F" to "G" range based on the amount of fuel
>in them.  Today's test burned 130 grams of KN/Sucrose, total weight 10.9
>pounds, apogee was at about 95 feet.
>
>So my question:  What formula might I use to determine the thrust of this
>engine?  (Please be gentle - I'm just a psych major.)
>
>Obviously one would not get a thrust curve, but it seems that by knowing the
>weight and altitude one could obtain an indication of total thrust.

I haven't seen a response to this, so I'll throw my hat in the ring:

When you know the mass of the vehicle, and the apogee, you have a good
idea of the total impulse.  To calculate the thrust, you would also
need the burn time.

Math as follows:

Apogee = 95 ft = 29 meters = h
h = (a * t^2) / 2
a = 9.8 m/sec^2

Rearranging h = (a * t^2) / 2, we get

h = (a * t^2) / 2
(a * t^2) / 2 = h
(a * t^2) = 2 * h
t^2 = (2 * h) / a
t = sqrt((2 * h) / a)

So t = sqrt((2 * 29) / 9.8) = sqrt(58 / 9.8) = sqrt(5.92) = 2.43
seconds.

Now v = a * t, so v = 9.8 * 2.43 = 23.8 m/sec.

Total Impulse = m * v = oops, we need m.
m = 10.9 lbm = 4.95 kgm
m * v = 4.95 * 23.8 = 117.9 kg m/sec = 117.9 N sec

So it looks like you got a baby F there.

That's about you can tell just by looking at the weight and apogee and
doing back of the envelope stuff.  And that assumes the burn is
instantaneous, and neglects drag.  Well, drag probably is negligible
when you're flying a 2x4 to 95 feet.  :-)  But assuming the burn is
instantaneous artificially raises the total impulse, because some of
that altitude was achieved during the burn, which means the altitude
to which it coasted from MECO is less than 95 feet.

I'll play around with this in Lotus and produce a range thrust numbers
and realistic total impulses.

-R

--
"Sutton is the beginning of wisdom -
but only the beginning."
                     -- Jeff Greason

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 9505 invoked from network); 4 Dec 2001 19:03:03 -0000
Received: from smtpv.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.110]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 4 Dec 2001 19:03:03 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 9572 invoked by uid 50005); 4 Dec 2001 18:54:06 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpv with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4173. . Clean. Processed in 0.325964 secs); 04 Dec 2001 18:54:06 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpv.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 4 Dec 2001 18:54:05 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA20632; Tue, 4 Dec 2001 10:55:12 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 95804 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 4 Dec 2001 18:55:02 +0000
Received: from hawk.prod.itd.earthlink.net (hawk.mail.pas.earthlink.net          [207.217.120.22]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA20618          for <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Tue, 4 Dec 2001 10:55:02 -0800
Received: from user-2ivfild.dialup.mindspring.com ([165.247.202.173]          helo=RClague) by hawk.prod.itd.earthlink.net with smtp (Exim 3.33 #1)          id 16BKiP-0005ae-00 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 04 Dec 2001          10:54:55 -0800
References: <000701c173e6$c4451aa0$640a0a0a@greg> <3BFDF7B9.EC8D7990@sfcc.net>            <fi0q0u0jdsv20o9fntt1gfh5p3npflblff@4ax.com>
X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.8/32.553
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by itc.uci.edu id KAA20619
Message-ID:  <mj6q0usos3bvhicukjd3g1pp7jmpv8rc7v@4ax.com>
Date:         Tue, 4 Dec 2001 10:54:30 -0800
Reply-To: <rclague@RCLAGUE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Randall Clague" <rclague@RCLAGUE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Non-digital test stand
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <fi0q0u0jdsv20o9fntt1gfh5p3npflblff@4ax.com>

On Tue, 4 Dec 2001 09:52:00 -0800, Randall Clague
<rclague@RCLAGUE.NET> wrote:

>>Currently I am using an 8-foot 2x4 for my "stabilizer" and lifting it with
>>engines that should be in the "F" to "G" range based on the amount of fuel
>>in them.  Today's test burned 130 grams of KN/Sucrose, total weight 10.9
>>pounds, apogee was at about 95 feet.
>
>So it looks like you got a baby F there.
>
>That's about you can tell just by looking at the weight and apogee and
>doing back of the envelope stuff.  And that assumes the burn is
>instantaneous, and neglects drag.  Well, drag probably is negligible
>when you're flying a 2x4 to 95 feet.  :-)  But assuming the burn is
>instantaneous artificially raises the total impulse, because some of
>that altitude was achieved during the burn, which means the altitude
>to which it coasted from MECO is less than 95 feet.
>
>I'll play around with this in Lotus and produce a range thrust numbers
>and realistic total impulses.

Turns out you need the burn time to calculate anything useful.
Without the burn time, I have to guess at the thrust *and* the Isp,
which gives a range of answers too wide to be useful.  I could
calculate the Isp for KN/sucrose...if I knew your chamber pressure and
O:F ratio...um...it just gets worse and worse.  :-)

I also can't download the videos.  So what was your burn time, anyway?

Thanks,

-R

--
"Sutton is the beginning of wisdom -
but only the beginning."
                     -- Jeff Greason

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 23846 invoked from network); 4 Dec 2001 19:27:08 -0000
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 4 Dec 2001 19:27:08 -0000
Received: (qmail 23245 invoked by uid 50005); 4 Dec 2001 19:26:59 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4173. . Clean. Processed in 0.167106 secs); 04 Dec 2001 19:26:59 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 4 Dec 2001 19:26:59 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA20800; Tue, 4 Dec 2001 11:24:36 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 95853 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 4 Dec 2001 19:24:33 +0000
Received: from c002.snv.cp.net (c002-h008.c002.snv.cp.net [209.228.32.172]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id LAA20786 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 4 Dec 2001 11:24:32 -0800
Received: (cpmta 13648 invoked from network); 4 Dec 2001 11:24:01 -0800
Received: from 67.208.75.17 (HELO default) by smtp.peoplepc.com          (209.228.32.172) with SMTP; 4 Dec 2001 11:24:01 -0800
X-Sent: 4 Dec 2001 19:24:01 GMT
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <001901c17cfb$9227c540$114bd043@default>
Date:         Tue, 4 Dec 2001 14:40:43 -0500
Reply-To: "David Muesing" <dmuesing@PEOPLEPC.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "David Muesing" <dmuesing@PEOPLEPC.COM>
Subject:      [AR] NASA Gifts
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Some nice NASA stuff here:

 http://www.nasatech.com/store

Dave

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 11070 invoked from network); 4 Dec 2001 19:31:05 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 4 Dec 2001 19:31:05 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 31202 invoked by uid 50005); 4 Dec 2001 19:30:56 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4173. . Clean. Processed in 0.162239 secs); 04 Dec 2001 19:30:56 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 4 Dec 2001 19:30:56 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA20859; Tue, 4 Dec 2001 11:28:51 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 95875 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 4 Dec 2001 19:28:49 +0000
Received: from mail49.fg.online.no (mail49-s.fg.online.no [148.122.161.49]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA20845 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 4 Dec 2001 11:28:48 -0800
Received: from y1036732.online.no ([136.164.46.207]) by mail49.fg.online.no          (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id UAA13338; Tue, 4 Dec 2001 20:28:16 +0100          (MET)
X-Sender: eirimeer@mail.online.no
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
References: <003101c17c2e$d6c10b80$0100a8c0@cc898542a>            <005c01c17c61$e5b80980$63391442@billbull>            <003f01c17c85$66c70c60$77cfe3c1@home>            <003001c17cd4$f66c7ae0$58391442@billbull>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <5.1.0.14.0.20011204201629.009faec0@mail.online.no>
Date:         Tue, 4 Dec 2001 20:27:55 +0100
Reply-To: "Eirik van der Meer" <eirimeer@ONLINE.NO>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Eirik van der Meer" <eirimeer@ONLINE.NO>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Melting devices
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <169e01c17cd5$ebdd1f20$77cfe3c1@home>

At 18:10 2001-12-04 +0300, Serge Pipko wrote:

Facinating stuff, Serge. In fact I ran straight down to the storeroom and
picked up some 32% amoonia and 65% nitric acid to make a small batch   :-)

A few questions:

Have you noticed any difference in burn-rate between AN-KN and AN-KN-NaN?
If the latter has a higher burnrate/lower Kn it could be worth the decrease
in Isp.
I wasn't aware that activated charcoal catalysed AN, do you suppose the
same goes for regular charcoal? And I guess this means that using
dichromate as a catalyst would be out of the question?
Have you tried dextrose? Maybe a long shot, but it may perform different
from sucrose...


Also, you stated that all the tests were done with stochiometrical ratios,
wouldn't the performance be better with a mix slightly lean in fuel?


Anyway, I'll try to do some brainstorming to see if I can come up with a
suitable fuel.

Good luck...


--
Eirik van der Meer <eirimeer@online.no>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 7979 invoked from network); 4 Dec 2001 19:36:20 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.105]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 4 Dec 2001 19:36:20 -0000
Received: (qmail 17443 invoked by uid 50005); 4 Dec 2001 19:36:10 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpy with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4173. . Clean. Processed in 0.344037 secs); 04 Dec 2001 19:36:10 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 4 Dec 2001 19:36:09 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA20922; Tue, 4 Dec 2001 11:32:50 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 95897 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 4 Dec 2001 19:32:48 +0000
Received: from localhost (rcalkins@localhost) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with          ESMTP id LAA20908; Tue, 4 Dec 2001 11:32:48 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.LNX.4.10.10112041129240.18433-100000@itc.uci.edu>
Date:         Tue, 4 Dec 2001 11:32:48 -0800
Reply-To: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Non-digital test stand
Comments: To: Randall Clague <rclague@rclague.net>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <mj6q0usos3bvhicukjd3g1pp7jmpv8rc7v@4ax.com>

On Tue, 4 Dec 2001, Randall Clague wrote:
>
> I also can't download the videos.

Try downloading the videos from here -
http://www.geocities.com/jyawn51/index.html

Ray

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 2328 invoked from network); 4 Dec 2001 19:47:00 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpv.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.110]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 4 Dec 2001 19:47:00 -0000
Received: (qmail 7827 invoked by uid 50005); 4 Dec 2001 19:41:01 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpv with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4173. . Clean. Processed in 0.783627 secs); 04 Dec 2001 19:41:01 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpv.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 4 Dec 2001 19:40:59 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA21058; Tue, 4 Dec 2001 11:45:13 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 95949 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 4 Dec 2001 19:45:10 +0000
Received: from wrench.toolcity.net (root@wrench.toolcity.net [208.0.188.2]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA21040 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 4 Dec 2001 11:45:09 -0800
Received: from [208.22.189.2] (dap-208-22-189-2.meadville-tnt-0.pa.toolcity.net          [208.22.189.2]) by wrench.toolcity.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id          OAA16461; Tue, 4 Dec 2001 14:45:04 -0500 (EST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <v01510102b832e2a73bf7@[208.22.189.2]>
Date:         Tue, 4 Dec 2001 14:47:43 -0600
Reply-To: "al bradley" <abradley@TOOLCITY.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "al bradley" <abradley@TOOLCITY.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Segway Scooter -- anything here Rocketeers can use??
Comments: To: Andrew Case <acase@GLUE.UMD.EDU>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

>It's the gyros that interest me, too. Optimistically, either these things
>are going to take off, in which case the volume will drive down the price
>of decent gyros, or they'll bomb,  . . .

Yep, although my query did not concern whether it is marketable or will be
a financial success.

Looking at its similarities to the unicycle I found it interesting that the
system, *particularly including* its electric motors, is said to
effectively respond and correct much quicker to changes in the center of
gravity than the balance system of the human inner ear and the muscle
system of the human body.

Quick, someone run out and buy one so we can tear it apart and analyze it.
<Grin>

respectfully,
al bradley

------------------------------------------------------------------
Can you live Life with this?: "Unless there is a law, an agreement, or a
long-standing custom, No one `Deserves' Anything -- Either Good or Bad!"

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 26159 invoked from network); 4 Dec 2001 20:03:59 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.105]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 4 Dec 2001 20:03:59 -0000
Received: (qmail 986 invoked by uid 50005); 4 Dec 2001 20:03:48 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpy with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4173. . Clean. Processed in 0.827491 secs); 04 Dec 2001 20:03:48 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 4 Dec 2001 20:03:47 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA21219; Tue, 4 Dec 2001 12:02:11 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 96013 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 4 Dec 2001 20:02:01 +0000
Received: from spsystems.net (spsystems.net [209.47.149.227]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA21205 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Tue,          4 Dec 2001 12:02:00 -0800
Received: (from henry@localhost) by spsystems.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id PAA01859;          Tue, 4 Dec 2001 15:01:19 -0500 (EST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1011204150048.29121K-100000@spsystems.net>
Date:         Tue, 4 Dec 2001 15:01:19 -0500
Reply-To: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] NASA Gifts
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <001901c17cfb$9227c540$114bd043@default>

On Tue, 4 Dec 2001, David Muesing wrote:
> Some nice NASA stuff here:
>  http://www.nasatech.com/store

And some decent technical books too, surprisingly enough.  Might not be
the cheapest source, though...

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 10638 invoked from network); 4 Dec 2001 20:07:29 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 4 Dec 2001 20:07:29 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: (qmail 10551 invoked by uid 50005); 4 Dec 2001 20:07:18 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4173. . Clean. Processed in 0.176643 secs); 04 Dec 2001 20:07:18 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 4 Dec 2001 20:07:18 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA21288; Tue, 4 Dec 2001 12:06:03 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 96044 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 4 Dec 2001 20:05:59 +0000
Received: from localhost (dmccue@localhost) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with          ESMTP id MAA21271; Tue, 4 Dec 2001 12:05:59 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.LNX.4.10.10112041159250.20216-100000@itc.uci.edu>
Date:         Tue, 4 Dec 2001 12:05:59 -0800
Reply-To: "David J. McCue" <dmccue@itc.uci.edu>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "David J. McCue" <dmccue@itc.uci.edu>
Subject:      [AR] Virus warning - high alert - "Goner A" (fwd)
Comments: To: roc-announce@itc.uci.edu, rrs-announce@itc.uci.edu,          sugpro@itc.uci.edu
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

I have taken the liberty of forwarding the message below because of the
potential for trouble this virus represents. Since there are so many
Outlook users out there I felt it was neccessary.

The good news is that I am planning the implementation of a virus filter
for these lists, in the hope it will reduce the need for announcements of
this kind.

-Dave McCue
---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Tue, 04 Dec 2001 10:39:20 -0800
From: Bob Hudack
To: (undisclosed)
Subject: [UCICSCG] Virus waring - high alert - "Goner A"

This mass mailing worm attempts to send itself using Microsoft Outlook to
all entries found in the Outlook Address book. It uses ICQ to spread as
well. It arrives in an email message containing the following information:

Subject: Hi
Body:
How are you ?
When I saw this screen saver, I immediately thought about you
I am in a harry, I promise you will love it!

Attachment: GONE.SCR
Running this attachment infects the local system.

====== more info =======

Symantec -
http://securityresponse.symantec.com/avcenter/venc/data/w32.goner.a@mm.html

McAfee - http://vil.nai.com/vil/virusSummary.asp?virus_k=99272
There's a "Super Extra Dat" can run to update your protection on this page.


F-Secure - http://www.fsecure.com/v-descs/goner.shtml

Sophos - http://www.sophos.com/virusinfo/analyses/w32gonera.html

Bob Hudack
rjhudack@uci.edu
Indirect Support Team
Network & Academic Computing Services
UC Irvine

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 24366 invoked from network); 4 Dec 2001 20:10:56 -0000
Received: from smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.105]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 4 Dec 2001 20:10:56 -0000
Received: (qmail 13169 invoked by uid 50005); 4 Dec 2001 20:10:45 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpy with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4173. . Clean. Processed in 2.9209 secs); 04 Dec 2001 20:10:45 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 4 Dec 2001 20:10:38 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA21383; Tue, 4 Dec 2001 12:07:42 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 96077 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 4 Dec 2001 20:07:41 +0000
Received: from roll.akcecc.kiev.ua (roll.akcecc.kiev.ua [193.227.206.34]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA21357 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 4 Dec 2001 12:07:35 -0800
Received: from ssss (pool-131.akcecc.kiev.ua [193.227.207.131] (may be forged))          by roll.akcecc.kiev.ua (8.10.2/8.10.2) with SMTP id fB4K7QL26667 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 4 Dec 2001 22:07:26 +0200
References: <003101c17c2e$d6c10b80$0100a8c0@cc898542a>                      <005c01c17c61$e5b80980$63391442@billbull>                      <003f01c17c85$66c70c60$77cfe3c1@home>                      <003001c17cd4$f66c7ae0$58391442@billbull>             <5.1.0.14.0.20011204201629.009faec0@mail.online.no>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2417.2000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <005a01c17cf6$ebc5eaa0$83cfe3c1@home>
Date:         Tue, 4 Dec 2001 22:06:27 +0300
Reply-To: "Serge Pipko" <spas@AKCECC.KIEV.UA>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Serge Pipko" <spas@AKCECC.KIEV.UA>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Melting devices
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Eirik van der Meer wrote:

> A few questions:
>
> Have you noticed any difference in burn-rate between AN-KN and AN-KN-NaN?
> If the latter has a higher burnrate/lower Kn it could be worth the
decrease
> in Isp.

At atmospheric pressure they all burn very bad, so it is rather difficult to
see any difference. As I have only one motor test, I have not comparable
data.

> I wasn't aware that activated charcoal catalysed AN, do you suppose the
> same goes for regular charcoal?

I don't know whether it catalysed decomposition at 160-170 deg. C ,
but I think it will increase burn rate.

> And I guess this means that using
> dichromate as a catalyst would be out of the question?

I consider it as dangerous experiment and didn't try it.

> Have you tried dextrose? Maybe a long shot, but it may perform different
> from sucrose...

It seems to me that dextrose will be similar to sorbitol, which gives very
low-melting and practically non-combustible composition. AN needs fuel,
which chars and gives solid particles, which become centers of burning. That
is why
meal appears the best choice, I think.

> Also, you stated that all the tests were done with stochiometrical ratios,
> wouldn't the performance be better with a mix slightly lean in fuel?

I supposed stochiometrical mixtures will have maximum burn rate, if any ;^))

Serge Pipko

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 8381 invoked from network); 4 Dec 2001 20:21:05 -0000
Received: from smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.105]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 4 Dec 2001 20:21:05 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 31142 invoked by uid 50005); 4 Dec 2001 20:20:53 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpy with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4173. . Clean. Processed in 2.273037 secs); 04 Dec 2001 20:20:53 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 4 Dec 2001 20:20:46 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA21594; Tue, 4 Dec 2001 12:19:30 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 96109 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 4 Dec 2001 20:19:28 +0000
Received: from ae.poss.com (adam-m.poss.com [198.70.184.161]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA21458 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Tue,          4 Dec 2001 12:09:27 -0800
Received: from perfectorder.com ([198.70.184.156]) by ae.poss.com (Netscape          Messaging Server 4.1) with ESMTP id GNU5CM00.208 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Tue, 4 Dec 2001 15:09:58 -0500
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (X11; I; SunOS 5.8 sun4u)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-15"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3C0D2DD2.2206A4C7@perfectorder.com>
Date:         Tue, 4 Dec 2001 15:10:58 -0500
Reply-To: "Doug Bell" <dbell@PERFECTORDER.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Doug Bell" <dbell@PERFECTORDER.COM>
Organization: Perfect Order
Subject:      [AR] New Virus, please be careful.
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

I realize this is off topic, but it concerns the list.  There is a new
virus spreading VERY quickly called gone.scr.  It appears in an email
with the subject of "Hi!", and looks very benign.  It contains an
attachment called 'gone.scr'.  This worm will delete programs from your
hard disk, and replicate to everyone in your addressbook.  DO NOT open
this attachment if you are running Windows and Outlook.  However, this
is an Outlook-specific virus.  Everyone please update your virus
scanners as soon as your can.  Thanks

Doug Bell
Consultant
Perfect Order secure enterprise computing
dbell@perfectorder.com

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 251 invoked from network); 4 Dec 2001 20:59:20 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 4 Dec 2001 20:59:20 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: (qmail 12488 invoked by uid 50005); 4 Dec 2001 20:59:11 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4173. . Clean. Processed in 0.156631 secs); 04 Dec 2001 20:59:11 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 4 Dec 2001 20:59:11 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA22111; Tue, 4 Dec 2001 12:57:38 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 96312 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 4 Dec 2001 20:57:33 +0000
Received: from VOLSB01.libertyville.com (216-180-161-058.fsi.net          [216.180.161.58]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA22097          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 4 Dec 2001 12:57:33 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Message-ID:  <8241D5C473414F48B12A866EBBBF182A9C7F@VOLSB01.libertyville.com>
Date:         Tue, 4 Dec 2001 14:53:38 -0600
Reply-To: "Ed Dewey" <edewey@LIBERTYVILLE.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Ed Dewey" <edewey@LIBERTYVILLE.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] New Virus, please be careful.
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

I already got it, before I had the virus update in place, but I deny all
*.scr's, et. al., at the firewall, so they don't even make it to the
anti-virus software.  Saved our system many times with that.

-----Original Message-----
From: Doug Bell [mailto:dbell@PERFECTORDER.COM]
Sent: Tuesday, December 04, 2001 2:11 PM
To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
Subject: [AR] New Virus, please be careful.


I realize this is off topic, but it concerns the list.  There is a new
virus spreading VERY quickly called gone.scr.  It appears in an email
with the subject of "Hi!", and looks very benign.  It contains an
attachment called 'gone.scr'.  This worm will delete programs from your
hard disk, and replicate to everyone in your addressbook.  DO NOT open
this attachment if you are running Windows and Outlook.  However, this
is an Outlook-specific virus.  Everyone please update your virus
scanners as soon as your can.  Thanks

Doug Bell
Consultant
Perfect Order secure enterprise computing
dbell@perfectorder.com

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 23023 invoked from network); 4 Dec 2001 21:23:16 -0000
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 4 Dec 2001 21:23:16 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 15063 invoked by uid 50005); 4 Dec 2001 21:23:06 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4173. . Clean. Processed in 0.542021 secs); 04 Dec 2001 21:23:06 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 4 Dec 2001 21:23:04 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA22246; Tue, 4 Dec 2001 13:18:59 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 96331 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 4 Dec 2001 21:18:55 +0000
Received: from zcars0m9.nortelnetworks.com (zcars0m9.nortelnetworks.com          [47.129.242.157]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA22173          for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Tue, 4 Dec 2001 13:08:55 -0800
Received: from zcars04e.ca.nortel.com (zcars04e.ca.nortel.com [47.129.242.56])          by zcars0m9.nortelnetworks.com (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id          fB4L7hd14380 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Tue, 4 Dec 2001 16:07:44          -0500 (EST)
Received: from rftzy232.ca.nortel.com by zcars04e.ca.nortel.com; Tue, 4 Dec          2001 16:07:57 -0500
Received: from NORTELNETWORKS.COM (wcarh0vc.ca.nortel.com [47.129.148.226]) by          rftzy232.ca.nortel.com with SMTP (Microsoft Exchange Internet Mail          Service Version 5.5.2653.13) id XHJ53GB6; Tue, 4 Dec 2001 16:05:45          -0500
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.73C-CCK-MCD [en] (X11; U; HP-UX B.10.20 9000/785)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Orig: <mleech@NORTELNETWORKS.COM>
Message-ID:  <3C0D3B3C.D2F4F760@NORTELNETWORKS.COM>
Date:         Tue, 4 Dec 2001 16:08:12 -0500
Reply-To: "Marcus Leech" <mleech@NORTELNETWORKS.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Marcus Leech" <mleech@NORTELNETWORKS.COM>
Subject:      [AR] Integration of data stream in software
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

I'm looking for C code to perform an integration of audio data that are sampled
  at 8KHZ.  What I'm looking for is to simulate the traditional op-amp
  integrator.  While doing the area-under-the curve calculations for
  discrete chunks of data is simple, I'd like it to behave more like
  the continuous integration that is produced by an op-amp integrator.

I suppose that I should just run out and buy "Numerical Algorithms in C", but
  I thought I'd ask this august body first...

--
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Marcus Leech                             Mail:   Dept 8M70, MS 012, FITZ
Advisor                                  Phone: (ESN) 393-9145  +1 613 763 9145
Security Architecture and Planning       Fax:   (ESN) 393-9435  +1 613 763 9435
Nortel Networks                          mleech@nortelnetworks.com
-----------------Expressed opinions are my own, not my employer's------

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 24778 invoked from network); 4 Dec 2001 23:20:27 -0000
Received: from smtpv.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.110]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 4 Dec 2001 23:20:27 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 6510 invoked by uid 50005); 4 Dec 2001 23:13:25 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpv with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4173. . Clean. Processed in 1.660677 secs); 04 Dec 2001 23:13:25 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpv.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 4 Dec 2001 23:13:22 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA22854; Tue, 4 Dec 2001 15:16:33 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 96388 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 4 Dec 2001 23:16:21 +0000
Received: from gigi.excite.com (gigi.excite.com [199.172.152.110]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA22839; Tue, 4 Dec 2001          15:16:20 -0800
Received: from prance.excite.com ([199.172.153.84]) by gigi.excite.com          (InterMail vM.4.01.02.39 201-229-119-122) with ESMTP id          <20011204231550.RSSV23434.gigi.excite.com@prance.excite.com>; Tue, 4          Dec 2001 15:15:50 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Excite Inbox
X-Sender-Ip: 216.167.144.186
Message-ID:  <18647301.1007507750512.JavaMail.imail@prance.excite.com>
Date:         Tue, 4 Dec 2001 15:15:50 -0800
Reply-To: "bill moyer" <bmoyer007@EXCITE.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "bill moyer" <bmoyer007@EXCITE.COM>
Subject:      [AR] Experimental Frendly Rocket Launch 12/29
Comments: To: Ray Calkins <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
Comments: cc: dburnam@zianet.com, Jchandler@yucca.net, daveclary@dfn.com,          Toominater@Yahoo.com, mdsalamo@zianet.com, rocket@pdrpip.com,          moyer@dfn.com, otpeck@hotmail.com, djveitch@hotmail.com
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Greetings to All:


You are invited to an experimental rocket launch located near Portales New
Mexico. We have wide open spaces, friendly people, no facilities, no lines
and no launch fees. Bring your own lancher, food, water and warm clothes.
The launch site is located on private farm land near the Melrose Bombing
range in Eastern New Mexico. We have a 5000 AGL foot standing waiver, with a
19,000 AGL foot call in window. The launch site has an elevation of 4222
feet, and the land owner has expermented with home made rockets years ago
and really likes them today. The waiver will be opened at 8:00 am until we
are done. Signed liability waiver to protect land owner is required. The
public and press is not invited, only flyers and invited guests.

If you do not have any plans for the last Saturday of 2001 and want to end
2001 with flight, come on over.


For more information contact Bill Moyer at 505-356-3177 or send me an E-mail








______________________________________________________________________________
Send a friend your Buddy Card and stay in contact always with Excite Messenger
http://messenger.excite.com

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 28735 invoked from network); 4 Dec 2001 23:29:27 -0000
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 4 Dec 2001 23:29:27 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 27633 invoked by uid 50005); 4 Dec 2001 23:29:16 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4173. . Clean. Processed in 0.556929 secs); 04 Dec 2001 23:29:16 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 4 Dec 2001 23:29:15 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA22933; Tue, 4 Dec 2001 15:26:54 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 96403 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 4 Dec 2001 23:26:47 +0000
Received: from mta4.rcsntx.swbell.net (mta4.rcsntx.swbell.net [151.164.30.28])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA22919 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 4 Dec 2001 15:26:47 -0800
Received: from chris ([64.218.117.137]) by mta4.rcsntx.swbell.net (iPlanet          Messaging Server 5.1 (built May  7 2001)) with SMTP id          <0GNU00CPQEGLUB@mta4.rcsntx.swbell.net> for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue,          04 Dec 2001 17:26:46 -0600 (CST)
Received: by localhost with Microsoft MAPI; Tue, 04 Dec 2001 17:28:18 -0600
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Microsoft Internet E-mail/MAPI - 8.0.0.4211
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <01C17CE9.102B9380.numbr@swbell.net>
Date:         Tue, 4 Dec 2001 17:28:17 -0600
Reply-To: "numbr@swbell.net" <numbr@SWBELL.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Chris Mealer" <numbr@SWBELL.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Segway Scooter -- anything here Rocketeers can use??
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Here is a link to the company that manufactures the gyros...
http://www.siliconsensing.com

Chris Mealer

On Tuesday, December 04, 2001 2:48 PM, al bradley [SMTP:abradley@TOOLCITY.NET] wrote:
> >It's the gyros that interest me, too. Optimistically, either these things
> >are going to take off, in which case the volume will drive down the price
> >of decent gyros, or they'll bomb,  . . .
>
> Yep, although my query did not concern whether it is marketable or will be
> a financial success.
>
> Looking at its similarities to the unicycle I found it interesting that the
> system, *particularly including* its electric motors, is said to
> effectively respond and correct much quicker to changes in the center of
> gravity than the balance system of the human inner ear and the muscle
> system of the human body.
>
> Quick, someone run out and buy one so we can tear it apart and analyze it.
> <Grin>
>
> respectfully,
> al bradley
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------
> Can you live Life with this?: "Unless there is a law, an agreement, or a
> long-standing custom, No one `Deserves' Anything -- Either Good or Bad!"

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 2382 invoked from network); 4 Dec 2001 23:44:20 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 4 Dec 2001 23:44:20 -0000
Received: (qmail 22019 invoked by uid 50005); 4 Dec 2001 23:44:10 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4173. . Clean. Processed in 4.597846 secs); 04 Dec 2001 23:44:10 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 4 Dec 2001 23:44:00 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA23018; Tue, 4 Dec 2001 15:41:31 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 96414 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 4 Dec 2001 23:41:28 +0000
Received: from spsystems.net (spsystems.net [209.47.149.227]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA23004 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Tue,          4 Dec 2001 15:41:27 -0800
Received: (from henry@localhost) by spsystems.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id SAA04676;          Tue, 4 Dec 2001 18:40:46 -0500 (EST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1011204183149.4523A-100000@spsystems.net>
Date:         Tue, 4 Dec 2001 18:40:45 -0500
Reply-To: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Integration of data stream in software
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <3C0D3B3C.D2F4F760@NORTELNETWORKS.COM>

On Tue, 4 Dec 2001, Marcus Leech wrote:
> I'm looking for C code to perform an integration of audio data that are sampled
>   at 8KHZ.  What I'm looking for is to simulate the traditional op-amp
>   integrator.  While doing the area-under-the curve calculations for
>   discrete chunks of data is simple, I'd like it to behave more like
>   the continuous integration that is produced by an op-amp integrator.

You should explain what you mean by that last a little more precisely.
I'm guessing that you simply want a running estimate of the integral
rather than having to wait until the end.  In that case...

The Extended Trapezoidal Rule is

integral(n) = stepsize * total(n)
total(n) = 0.5*f(1) + f(2) + f(3) + ... + f(n-1) + 0.5*f(n)

(There are fancier ones like the Extended Simpson's Rule, but I doubt that
they will be much better, especially if the data is noisy.)  If you keep
the last term of the total and the running sum of the rest separate, it's
trivial to incrementally update this when f(n+1) appears.  That is, the
update is:

update(newvalue) {
        runningsum += lastterm
        lastterm = newvalue / 2
        return (runningsum + lastterm) * stepsize
}

This has essentially the same properties as the op-amp integrator.
Notably, if asked to integrate a signal with a DC component (long-term
average is non-zero), it will saturate unless it is periodically reset.

> I suppose that I should just run out and buy "Numerical Algorithms in C", but
>   I thought I'd ask this august body first...

Numerical Recipes (if that's what you're thinking of) actually doesn't
have anything specific on this, unless there's a discussion I missed.

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 14939 invoked from network); 5 Dec 2001 00:57:51 -0000
Received: from smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.105]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 5 Dec 2001 00:57:51 -0000
Received: (qmail 3508 invoked by uid 50005); 5 Dec 2001 00:57:41 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpy with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4173. . Clean. Processed in 0.479045 secs); 05 Dec 2001 00:57:41 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 5 Dec 2001 00:57:39 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA23418; Tue, 4 Dec 2001 16:52:16 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 96476 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 5 Dec 2001 00:47:46 +0000
Received: from cablecom.laribay.net (cablecom.laribay.net [66.20.57.4]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA23391 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 4 Dec 2001 16:47:35 -0800
Received: from billbull (dial075.laribay.net [66.20.57.75]) by          cablecom.laribay.net (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id SAA21969 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 4 Dec 2001 18:31:50 -0600 (CST)          (envelope-from bpbullock@laribay.net)
References:  <003101c17c2e$d6c10b80$0100a8c0@cc898542a>                                     <005c01c17c61$e5b80980$63391442@billbull>                                    <003f01c17c85$66c70c60$77cfe3c1@home>                         <003001c17cd4$f66c7ae0$58391442@billbull>              <169e01c17cd5$ebdd1f20$77cfe3c1@home>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <000d01c17d26$845b74e0$4b391442@billbull>
Date:         Tue, 4 Dec 2001 18:48:11 -0600
Reply-To: "Bill Bullock" <bpbullock@LARIBAY.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Bill Bullock" <bpbullock@LARIBAY.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Melting devices
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Serge:
    Thanks for the post. I printed out your original post on the AN-KN
eutectic and have re-read it several times.
    The reference "I will add the Aluminum " is to what is planned for this
particular batch of Ammonium Nitrate. I have done this several times in the
past without any indication of an unpleasant incidence. But I would not
advocate that anyone else try it. And most particularly NEVER ADD
FINELY-DIVIDED ALUMINUM OR MAGNESIUM TO MOLTEN AMMONIUM NITRATE OR ANY OTHER
OXIDIZER UNDER ANY CIRCUMSTANCES! It will blow up in your face or ignite
without warning.
    Please note that I do not add the metallic fuel to the molten oxidizer.
What I do is more akin to rapidly growing an oxidizer crystal which has
metallic fuel particles as "inclusions" within the oxidizer matrix.
    As an additional interesting observation: I have a small open jar with
some of the left-overs from former mixes from several months ago. It has sat
here with an average relative humidity of 85+% and thusfar has not absorbed
any moisture from the atmosphere. It was made using 63% agricultural-grade
ammonium nitrate and 37% aluminum.
    Respectfully,
Bill
----- Original Message -----
From: Serge Pipko <spas@AKCECC.KIEV.UA>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Tuesday, December 04, 2001 9:10 AM
Subject: Re: [AR] Melting devices


> Bill Bullock wrote:
>
> >     To make my final grain I will place this into my oil-bath heater and
> add
> > 20% (by weight) distilled water and a bit of surfactant and heat until
> > everything dissolves into a super-saturated solution. Then I will add
the
> > Aluminum (6 and 4 micron blend) and heat until it drives off the added
> > moisture and melts. Then I will pour it into the mold and slowly cool by
> > ramp-down method in a sealed container.
>
> You wrote "I will add the Aluminum ". Is this your plan or you already did
> that ?
> I can't believe that aluminum is stable in molten AN. If this is the case
> by some miracle, then probably my results may be of some help for you.
> You can use AN-KN eutectic for lovering melt temperature and some meal
> to strengthening resulting grain.
>
> Sorry for posting this one's more:
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 10374 invoked from network); 5 Dec 2001 01:04:00 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 5 Dec 2001 01:04:00 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 31435 invoked by uid 50005); 5 Dec 2001 01:00:18 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4173. . Clean. Processed in 2.499799 secs); 05 Dec 2001 01:00:18 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 5 Dec 2001 01:00:13 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA23491; Tue, 4 Dec 2001 16:58:26 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 96492 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 5 Dec 2001 00:58:24 +0000
Received: from adobe.com (smtp-relay-2.adobe.com [192.150.11.2]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA23477 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue,          4 Dec 2001 16:58:23 -0800
Received: from inner-relay-2.corp.adobe.com ([153.32.1.52]) by adobe.com          (1.0.0/8.11.4) with ESMTP id fB50uqS16784 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>;          Tue, 4 Dec 2001 16:56:52 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mailsj-v1.corp.adobe.com (mailsj-dev.corp.adobe.com          [153.32.1.192]) by inner-relay-2.corp.adobe.com (8.11.4/8.11.4) with          ESMTP id fB50us101047 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 4 Dec 2001          16:56:54 -0800 (PST)
Received: from sronald.earthlink.net ([153.32.63.111]) by          mailsj-v1.corp.adobe.com (Netscape Messaging Server 4.15 v1 Jul 11          2001 16:32:57) with ESMTP id GNUIOB00.N4R for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>;          Tue, 4 Dec 2001 16:57:47 -0800
X-Sender: forkbomb@mail.earthlink.net
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
References: <3C0D3B3C.D2F4F760@NORTELNETWORKS.COM>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <5.1.0.14.0.20011204165241.00aa8300@mail.earthlink.net>
Date:         Tue, 4 Dec 2001 17:03:17 -0800
Reply-To: "Pierce Nichols" <forkbomb@EARTHLINK.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Pierce Nichols" <forkbomb@EARTHLINK.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Integration of data stream in software
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1011204183149.4523A-100000@spsystems.net>

At 06:40 PM 12/4/01 -0500, Henry Spencer wrote:
>On Tue, 4 Dec 2001, Marcus Leech wrote:
> > I'm looking for C code to perform an integration of audio data that are
> sampled
> >   at 8KHZ.  What I'm looking for is to simulate the traditional op-amp
> >   integrator.  While doing the area-under-the curve calculations for
> >   discrete chunks of data is simple, I'd like it to behave more like
> >   the continuous integration that is produced by an op-amp integrator.
>
>You should explain what you mean by that last a little more precisely.
>I'm guessing that you simply want a running estimate of the integral
>rather than having to wait until the end.  In that case...
>
>The Extended Trapezoidal Rule is
>
>integral(n) = stepsize * total(n)
>total(n) = 0.5*f(1) + f(2) + f(3) + ... + f(n-1) + 0.5*f(n)
>
>(There are fancier ones like the Extended Simpson's Rule, but I doubt that
>they will be much better, especially if the data is noisy.)  If you keep
>the last term of the total and the running sum of the rest separate, it's
>trivial to incrementally update this when f(n+1) appears.  That is, the
>update is:
>
>update(newvalue) {
>         runningsum += lastterm
>         lastterm = newvalue / 2
>         return (runningsum + lastterm) * stepsize
>}
>
>This has essentially the same properties as the op-amp integrator.
>Notably, if asked to integrate a signal with a DC component (long-term
>average is non-zero), it will saturate unless it is periodically reset.


         How do you work this with a quantity that is naturally periodic,
such as orientation? Do you just keep running up the Euler angles to a
certain limit, and then reset them relative to the initial coordinates?


> > I suppose that I should just run out and buy "Numerical Algorithms in
> C", but
> >   I thought I'd ask this august body first...
>
>Numerical Recipes (if that's what you're thinking of) actually doesn't
>have anything specific on this, unless there's a discussion I missed.

         Numerical Recipes has some pretty extensive discussions on
numerical integration. However, that discussion is focused toward
integrations where the integrand is a formula rather than raw data, and
towards ODE solving. Personally, I find the discussion of numerical
integration in Hildebrand's "Introduction to Numerical Methods" to be far
clearer, although it does not include computer code (one of the big
advantage of Numerical Recipes, IMO). Hildebrand's book is available from
Dover, and is therefore relatively cheap. See the discussion in the
archives from a couple of months back about integrating the output from
rate gyros for even more extensive discussion of numerical integration
issues as they relate directly to rocketry.

         -p

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 11083 invoked from network); 5 Dec 2001 01:34:10 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 5 Dec 2001 01:34:10 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: (qmail 8955 invoked by uid 50005); 5 Dec 2001 01:34:01 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4173. . Clean. Processed in 0.255242 secs); 05 Dec 2001 01:34:01 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 5 Dec 2001 01:34:00 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA23709; Tue, 4 Dec 2001 17:32:14 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 96520 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 5 Dec 2001 01:32:07 +0000
Received: from cisco.com (cypher.cisco.com [171.69.11.18]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA23692 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue,          4 Dec 2001 17:32:07 -0800
Received: (from billw@localhost) by cisco.com (8.8.8/2.6/Cisco List          Logging/8.8.8) id RAA10547; Tue, 4 Dec 2001 17:31:33 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID:  <CMM.0.90.4.1007515892.billw@cypher>
Date:         Tue, 4 Dec 2001 17:31:32 PST
Reply-To: "Bill Westfield" <billw@cisco.com>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "William Chops Westfield" <billw@cisco.com>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Integration of data stream in software
Comments: To: Pierce Nichols <forkbomb@EARTHLINK.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  Your message of Tue, 4 Dec 2001 17:03:17 -0800 Your message of              Tue, 04 Dec 2001 13:02:11 -0800

    Numerical Recipes has some pretty extensive discussions on
    numerical integration. However, that discussion is focused toward
    integrations where the integrand is a formula rather than raw data

Say what?  Numerical integration (I thought) IS integration when you have
data rather than a formula.  You can use a formula for generating test
data, but if you have a formula in a real-world application then you ought
to do your integration symbolically before you write your program :-)

BillW


From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 22234 invoked from network); 5 Dec 2001 01:58:43 -0000
Received: from smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.105]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 5 Dec 2001 01:58:43 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 14550 invoked by uid 50005); 5 Dec 2001 01:58:32 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpy with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4173. . Clean. Processed in 1.62115 secs); 05 Dec 2001 01:58:32 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 5 Dec 2001 01:58:27 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA23932; Tue, 4 Dec 2001 17:56:43 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 96584 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 5 Dec 2001 01:56:31 +0000
Received: from grucom2.gru.net (grucom2.gru.net [209.251.129.7]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA23918 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue,          4 Dec 2001 17:56:30 -0800
Received: from [209.251.151.108] by grucom2.sfcc.net (NTMail          7.00.0022/NU4112.00.db1c8a4b) with ESMTP id emrjqaaa for          AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 4 Dec 2001 20:56:25 -0500
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (Win95; I)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <000701c173e6$c4451aa0$640a0a0a@greg> <3BFDF7B9.EC8D7990@sfcc.net>            <fi0q0u0jdsv20o9fntt1gfh5p3npflblff@4ax.com>            <mj6q0usos3bvhicukjd3g1pp7jmpv8rc7v@4ax.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3C0D7ECA.6A370C2E@sfcc.net>
Date:         Tue, 4 Dec 2001 20:56:26 -0500
Reply-To: "James Yawn" <jyawn@SFCC.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "James Yawn" <jyawn@SFCC.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Non-digital test stand
Comments: To: rclague@RCLAGUE.NET
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Randall Clague wrote:

> I also can't download the videos.  So what was your burn time, anyway?
>

Jimmy Yawn wrote:

Randall (and to all who attempted to load my 2x4 videos without success)

Please accept my apologies for the video failure.  The problem was with
AngelFire, which would send them to some people but not others.  So they are now
at:

http://www.geocities.com/jyawn51/index.html

Please let me know if these do not work.  I might actually pay for web space if
that's what it takes.

And thanks for the math!  Other had posts indicated that I did not have all the
pieces, but now I know what is missing.  Fortunately, it can be provided.

The burn-time was 0.7 seconds, and burnout occurred at 23.2 feet (7.1meters)
more or less.  Duration of the whole flight was 5.7 seconds.

Just for reference, launch-weight was 10.9 lbs (4.95kg) and apogee was about 95
feet (29meters)

I am not so much interested in the exact thrust of this particular engine as I
am in the formula used - seems that it would not be too hard to develop a
program for this once I am clear on the procedure, sort of a reverse RocCad.

Thanks again!
Jimmy Yawn
jyawn@sfcc.net





> Thanks,
>
> -R
>
> --
> "Sutton is the beginning of wisdom -
> but only the beginning."
>                      -- Jeff Greason

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 29512 invoked from network); 5 Dec 2001 03:16:04 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.105]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 5 Dec 2001 03:16:04 -0000
Received: (qmail 22031 invoked by uid 50005); 5 Dec 2001 03:15:53 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpy with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4173. . Clean. Processed in 0.194969 secs); 05 Dec 2001 03:15:53 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 5 Dec 2001 03:15:53 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA24403; Tue, 4 Dec 2001 19:12:17 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 96623 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 5 Dec 2001 03:12:01 +0000
Received: from spsystems.net (spsystems.net [209.47.149.227]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA24389 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Tue,          4 Dec 2001 19:12:00 -0800
Received: (from henry@localhost) by spsystems.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id WAA06914;          Tue, 4 Dec 2001 22:11:18 -0500 (EST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1011204220831.6869A-100000@spsystems.net>
Date:         Tue, 4 Dec 2001 22:11:15 -0500
Reply-To: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Integration of data stream in software
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <5.1.0.14.0.20011204165241.00aa8300@mail.earthlink.net>

On Tue, 4 Dec 2001, Pierce Nichols wrote:
>          How do you work this with a quantity that is naturally periodic,
> such as orientation? Do you just keep running up the Euler angles to a
> certain limit, and then reset them relative to the initial coordinates?

Well, you have to ask "what's the meaning of integrating this number?"
first.  That may lead you to a change of representation, e.g. to
quaternions.  Even doing statistics on cyclic quantities is tricky;
one simple change of representation that the statisticians sometimes
use is to work with the sine or cosine rather than the number itself.

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 7674 invoked from network); 5 Dec 2001 03:25:38 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 5 Dec 2001 03:25:38 -0000
Received: (qmail 25797 invoked by uid 50005); 5 Dec 2001 03:25:28 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4173. . Clean. Processed in 0.770156 secs); 05 Dec 2001 03:25:28 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 5 Dec 2001 03:25:27 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA24492; Tue, 4 Dec 2001 19:20:59 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 96644 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 5 Dec 2001 03:20:57 +0000
Received: from spsystems.net (spsystems.net [209.47.149.227]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA24478 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Tue,          4 Dec 2001 19:20:56 -0800
Received: (from henry@localhost) by spsystems.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id WAA06980;          Tue, 4 Dec 2001 22:20:14 -0500 (EST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1011204221524.6869C-100000@spsystems.net>
Date:         Tue, 4 Dec 2001 22:20:14 -0500
Reply-To: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Integration of data stream in software
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <CMM.0.90.4.1007515892.billw@cypher>

On Tue, 4 Dec 2001, William Chops Westfield wrote:
>     integrations where the integrand is a formula rather than raw data
>
> Say what?  Numerical integration (I thought) IS integration when you have
> data rather than a formula.

No, numerical integration is used mostly for cases where you have a
formula which cannot be integrated symbolically -- a common occurrence in
real-world problems.  It used to be frequent to grossly oversimplify a
model of a real-world phenomenon to reduce it to something you could
handle symbolically.  Nowadays you can numerically integrate a much more
realistic model instead.  (The advantage is more accurate results; the
disadvantage is much more limited insight.)

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 4904 invoked from network); 5 Dec 2001 06:15:30 -0000
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 5 Dec 2001 06:15:30 -0000
Received: (qmail 3153 invoked by uid 50005); 5 Dec 2001 06:15:13 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4173. . Clean. Processed in 0.184441 secs); 05 Dec 2001 06:15:13 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 5 Dec 2001 06:15:13 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA25481; Tue, 4 Dec 2001 22:12:52 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 96737 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 5 Dec 2001 06:12:42 +0000
Received: from roll.akcecc.kiev.ua (roll.akcecc.kiev.ua [193.227.206.34]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA25467 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 4 Dec 2001 22:12:37 -0800
Received: from ssss (pool-131.akcecc.kiev.ua [193.227.207.131] (may be forged))          by roll.akcecc.kiev.ua (8.10.2/8.10.2) with SMTP id fB56CUb10408 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 5 Dec 2001 08:12:30 +0200
References:  <003101c17c2e$d6c10b80$0100a8c0@cc898542a>                                     <005c01c17c61$e5b80980$63391442@billbull>                                      <003f01c17c85$66c70c60$77cfe3c1@home>                                    <003001c17cd4$f66c7ae0$58391442@billbull>                         <169e01c17cd5$ebdd1f20$77cfe3c1@home>              <000d01c17d26$845b74e0$4b391442@billbull>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2417.2000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <003501c17d4b$70300920$83cfe3c1@home>
Date:         Wed, 5 Dec 2001 08:11:28 +0300
Reply-To: "Serge Pipko" <spas@AKCECC.KIEV.UA>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Serge Pipko" <spas@AKCECC.KIEV.UA>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Melting devices
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Bill Bullock wrote:

> To make my final grain I will place this into my oil-bath heater and add
> 20% (by weight) distilled water and a bit of surfactant and heat until
> everything dissolves into a super-saturated solution. Then I will add the
> Aluminum (6 and 4 micron blend) and heat until it drives off the added
> moisture and melts. Then I will pour it into the mold and slowly cool by
> ramp-down method in a sealed container.

>     Please note that I do not add the metallic fuel to the molten
oxidizer.
> What I do is more akin to rapidly growing an oxidizer crystal which has
> metallic fuel particles as "inclusions" within the oxidizer matrix.

You wrote "heat until it drives off the added moisture and melts.
Then I will pour it into the mold ".  What is the final temperature
of the bath and mixture ? Is the final mixture all liquid except of aluminum
?
What surfactant do you use ? What is the burning properties of
obtaining compositions ?

Sorry for so many questions, but I have really great interest in
AN propellants. For example, if final temperature of your mixture
is about 100-120 deg. C, then your process is somewhat similar
to evaporation tecnique that I also have tried:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
In all cases I prepared  stochiometric mixtures, resulting propellants were
packed or poured in paper tubes 17 mm ID. I mark burn test results as
following:

B0  don't burn
B1  burn, but quickly go out
B2  very slowly burn, with foaming
B3  stable burn, little or no foaming, deserve attention

Some burn rates were measured, but these data aren't sufficiently precise,
because reproducibility was not as good as it must be. Nevertheless the
general trends are clear, for example, catalytic role of KN, charcoal, Cu
and Fe salts. Fumed silica improves mixing of fuels with AN-KN melt and
gives more sturdy propellant block. It has some catalytic effect also.


Evaporation technique :
All components were dissolved in water and allowed to evaporate to dryness
at 60-70 deg C, then packed in paper tubes by the means of hand pressing.

1) 1 g ascorbic acid + 4.54 g AN  : B0
2) 1 g ascorbic acid + 4.54 g AN + 0.05 g fumed silica : B1
3) 1 g ascorbic acid + 4.54 g AN + 0.05 g charcoal : B2
4) 1 g ascorbic acid + 4.54 g AN + 0.05 g K3Fe(CN)6 : B3
5) 1 g ascorbic acid + 4.54 g AN + 0.05 g Cu(CH3COO)2.H2O (copper acetate) :
upon heating solution became cloudy and dispersion of very small metallic
copper particles was formed (ascorbic acid reduced Cu(+2) to Cu(0) ). After
evaporation semicrystalline mass with subtle bronze shade was formed : B3.
6) 1 g ascorbic acid + 4.54 g AN + 0.11 g Cu(CH3COO)2.H2O (copper acetate) :
in this case copper particles dispersion was less stable and somewhat
agglomerated and so burn rate was slightly less : B3, R=0.11 mm/sec
7) 1 g ascorbic acid + 3.99 g AN + 0.44 g KN + 0.05 g charcoal : B3
8) 1 g sugar + 5.61 g AN + 0.13 g Cu(CH3COO)2.H2O (copper acetate) : B2
9) 1 g sugar + 4.60 g AN + 0.51 g KN : B2
10) 1 g sugar + 4.60 g AN + 0.51 g KN + 0.12 g S (colloidal sulfur): B2,
R=0.07 mm/sec
11) 1 g sugar + 4.60 g AN + 0.51 g KN + 0.12 g Cu(CH3COO)2.H2O (copper
acetate) : B3,  R=0.17 mm/sec
12) 1 g sugar + 4.60 g AN + 0.51 g KN + 0.12 g CuCl2.2H2O : B3,  R=0.12
mm/sec

This technique has some advantages, for example, it is less dangerous then
melting and it allows the use of virtually any burn rate catalyst. But
unsatisfactory mechanical properties of resulting propellant force me to
start experimenting with AN melt.


Additional data for melting process:
The experiments were carried out in a glass beaker submerged in an oil bath,
heated up to 165-170 deg. C. Fuels was gradually added to molten AN-KN
eutectic (13.6 % KN, m.p. 156.5 deg. C) with stirring. After homogeneous
solution or suspension was obtained, it was poured in paper tubes 17 mm ID.

1) 1.20 AN-KN + 0.16 C6H5COONa (sodium benzoate) : they didn't mixed at all,
after 1 minute benzoic acid begun to sublimate.
2) 1.58 AN-KN + 0.36 ascorbic acid : B1
3) 2.79 AN-KN + 0.35 NH2-C6H4-COOH (antranilic acid) : B0
4) 4.16 AN-KN + 0.57 HO-CH2-CC-CH2-OH (butindiol) : B2, R=0.10 mm/sec
5) 3.83 AN-KN + 0.73 wheat flour : B3, R=0.09 mm/sec
6) 8.35 AN-KN + 1.59 wheat flour + 0.10 fumed silica : B3, R=0.09 mm/sec
7) 8.52 AN-KN + 1.19 wheat flour + 0.20 charcoal : B3, R=0.12 mm/sec
8) 8.25 AN-KN + 0.49 wheat flour + 0.49 charcoal : B3, R=0.20 mm/sec
9) 8.49 AN-KN + 0.50 wheat flour + 0.50 charcoal + 0.10 fumed silica : B3,
R=0.20 mm/sec

The last composition is the most promising. It forms strong propellant block
and burns cleanly. Addition of fumed silica to (wheat flour + charcoal)
mixture prevents formation of lumps during its mixing with AN-KN melt. It is
possible that variations of component ratio and reduction of charcoal
particle size will further increase burn rate.

Serge Pipko

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 15254 invoked from network); 5 Dec 2001 17:40:43 -0000
Received: from smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.105]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 5 Dec 2001 17:40:43 -0000
Received: (qmail 11327 invoked by uid 50005); 5 Dec 2001 17:40:22 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpy with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4173. . Clean. Processed in 2.95343 secs); 05 Dec 2001 17:40:22 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 5 Dec 2001 17:40:15 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA27599; Wed, 5 Dec 2001 09:36:56 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 96879 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 5 Dec 2001 17:36:37 +0000
Received: from syntheon.inicom.com          (IDENT:root@66.mueb.miam.philapaaz.dsl.att.net [63.242.216.66]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA27585 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 5 Dec 2001 09:36:31 -0800
Received: from koreynew (adsl-81-3-189.mia.bellsouth.net [65.81.3.189]) by          syntheon.inicom.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id NAA08068 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 5 Dec 2001 13:07:12 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 8.5, Build 4.71.2173.0
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <002001c17db3$75271c80$6501a8c0@koreynew>
Date:         Wed, 5 Dec 2001 12:37:06 -0500
Reply-To: "Korey Kline" <k2@HYBRIDS.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Korey Kline" <k2@HYBRIDS.COM>
Subject:      [AR] Amateur?
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <OE63WNoqiGAeGnOxUR200004105@hotmail.com>

> The definition of amateur for our concerns is as follows:

> amateur- A person who engages in an art, science, study, or athletic
> activity as a pastime rather than as a profession.

> Other than Aerotech, I don't know of any company or person (in this hobby)
> who lives solely off profits from rocket related sales (correct me if I'm
> wrong). Therefore, by definition, with very few exceptions we are all
> "amateur" rocketeers.

I wanted to touch base on this topic, this may be the typically understood
definition, but it rarely is the case. The classic example is the "Dream
Team" of basketball players the USA sent over to tear up the rest of the
world in the last Olympics. To what degree of a profession? One could argue
that the following people make rocketry their profession: Myself, Irvine,
Kosdon, Chrisalli, Cesaroni/Dennett, B Kelly, C Rogers, K Michealson, F
Uroda, S Bartell, Piper/Goodson, Whittinghill, Anderson/Garbodon, Millirons,
Dixon, Mason, Pickens, Wickman, Everybody in the RRS who works at Rocketdyne
or TRW, Anybody who works at NASA (even though they rarely have anything to
do with rockets), as well as many entrepreneurs on this forum trying to
start a rocket company. Another definition the CATS people were pushing was,
people/groups who have taken government money. That would include most of
the people on this list as well who have been fortunate enough to win an
SBIR grant or Space grant. I would put small companies like Microcosm, Space
America, Rotron, Aerotech, Interorbital Systems, eAc, HMX, JP Aerospace, RRS
in this category as well. If you want real progress, it's going to cost more
than most individuals or even rich investors can afford.

Here is why this is important, there is a fine line between HPR & Amateur
(nearly ALL HPR motors were developed as Amateur), there is a fine line
between amateur & small business, but there is a GIANT Canyon between small
business and BIG business!  Big business represents Lockheed, Thiokol,
Boeing, even Orbital Science groups that live exclusively off government
contracts.  They exist to make money for investors who would just as well
make toasters rather then rockets and have had decades to make commercial
space flight inexpensive but choose to make it very expensive.  Remember
government contracts are typically "Cost Plus", meaning they get their
"Profit" as a percentage of the total cost of the program! What kind of
incentive is that for cost reduction?  My thoughts on these failed Billion
Dollar Contracts including ones for NASA "Welfare for Aerospace Workers".
There is a certain sense of PRIDE calling yourself an "Amateur Rocketeer"
knowing your trying something new and different on a real budget, hoping
that some day if your clever enough you can possibly do this for a living
(my pastime is my profession). Being able to work the "System" to get the
government to pay for this learning process and demonstrating that the
"Secrets of Rocket Science" are at a grass roots level. There has been some
attempt to try to minimize the efforts of some as; "Well there achievements
don't count, they're professionals". I choose to keep the term "Amateur" as
the widest possible definition as a way of describing NOT business as usual!

The definition previously given is actually definition #2 in my Webster's
dictionary, definition #1 is "Devotee, Admirer". Amateur comes from the
French "amator" or lover, and "amare" to love, so an Amateur Rocketeer is
someone who loves rockets, NOT whether he gets paid for rockets! I hope for
everyone's benefit we encourage this definition over the other. Rocketry is
a close knit group, we know who the "Amateurs" are. When I see the
presidents of Lockheed, Thiokol, Boeing, Orbital hanging out at RRS meetings
and testing rockets at MTA then I'll consider changing my definition of
Amateur.

Comments?
Now putting on my flack jacket and ducking behind flameproof wall.......I
almost typed an entire post without mentioning the word HYBRIDS!

K2

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 2398 invoked from network); 5 Dec 2001 18:06:08 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 5 Dec 2001 18:06:08 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 20043 invoked by uid 50005); 5 Dec 2001 18:05:59 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4173. . Clean. Processed in 2.111562 secs); 05 Dec 2001 18:05:59 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 5 Dec 2001 18:05:55 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA27709; Wed, 5 Dec 2001 10:00:11 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 96895 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 5 Dec 2001 18:00:09 +0000
Received: from rwcrmhc52.attbi.com (rwcrmhc52.attbi.com [216.148.227.88]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA27695 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 5 Dec 2001 10:00:01 -0800
Received: from c1649002-a.earthlink.net ([12.232.75.28]) by rwcrmhc52.attbi.com          (InterMail vM.4.01.03.27 201-229-121-127-20010626) with ESMTP id          <20011205175930.RMPF1879.rwcrmhc52.attbi.com@c1649002-a.earthlink.net>; Wed, 5 Dec 2001 17:59:30          +0000
X-Sender: forkbomb@mail.earthlink.net
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.0.2
References: <Your message of Tue, 4 Dec 2001 17:03:17 -0800 Your message of            Tue, 04 Dec 2001 13:02:11 -0800>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <5.0.2.1.0.20011205095828.03686f08@mail.earthlink.net>
Date:         Wed, 5 Dec 2001 09:59:33 -0800
Reply-To: "Pierce Nichols" <forkbomb@EARTHLINK.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Pierce Nichols" <forkbomb@EARTHLINK.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Integration of data stream in software
Comments: To: Bill Westfield <billw@cisco.com>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <CMM.0.90.4.1007515892.billw@cypher>

At 05:31 PM 12/4/2001 -0800, William "Chops" Westfield wrote:
>     Numerical Recipes has some pretty extensive discussions on
>     numerical integration. However, that discussion is focused toward
>     integrations where the integrand is a formula rather than raw data
>
>Say what?  Numerical integration (I thought) IS integration when you have
>data rather than a formula.  You can use a formula for generating test
>data, but if you have a formula in a real-world application then you ought
>to do your integration symbolically before you write your program :-)


         There are plenty of interesting formulae that are difficult if not
impossible to integrate symbolically. Elliptical integrals come immediately
to mind, but you can usually use a table for those.

         -p


Mars or Bust!
www.marssociety.com

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 25102 invoked from network); 5 Dec 2001 19:10:33 -0000
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 5 Dec 2001 19:10:33 -0000
Received: (qmail 2522 invoked by uid 50005); 5 Dec 2001 19:10:23 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4173. . Clean. Processed in 2.857571 secs); 05 Dec 2001 19:10:23 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 5 Dec 2001 19:10:16 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA27974; Wed, 5 Dec 2001 11:05:13 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 96931 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 5 Dec 2001 19:05:07 +0000
Received: from castor.ridgenet.net (IDENT:root@castor.ridgenet.net          [199.120.150.29]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA27960          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 5 Dec 2001 11:05:07 -0800
Received: from kristinscomp (pm007.ridgenet.net [204.154.246.7]) by          castor.ridgenet.net (8.11.0/8.11.0) with SMTP id fB5J8Nb12952; Wed, 5          Dec 2001 11:08:23 -0800
References:  <002001c17db3$75271c80$6501a8c0@koreynew>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <002001c17dbf$e0631560$1b30fea9@kristinscomp>
Date:         Wed, 5 Dec 2001 11:05:58 -0800
Reply-To: "Kristin & David Hall" <thehalls@RIDGENET.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Kristin & David Hall" <thehalls@RIDGENET.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Amateur?
Comments: To: Korey Kline <k2@HYBRIDS.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

> Dixon, Mason, Pickens, Wickman, Everybody in the RRS who works at
Rocketdyne
> or TRW, Anybody who works at NASA (even though they rarely have anything
to

Hey!  Some of us RRS guys have nothing to do with Rocketydyne or TRW but
still work in the propulsion industry....

> space flight inexpensive but choose to make it very expensive.  Remember
> government contracts are typically "Cost Plus", meaning they get their
> "Profit" as a percentage of the total cost of the program! What kind of
> incentive is that for cost reduction?  My thoughts on these failed Billion

This is rapidly changing.  In fact, the last I heard there was all but a
moritorium on new "cost plus" contracts.  I forget the name for the new
model but it's a strange mixture of fixed profit plus incentives.  Something
like cost + X dollars (NOT X percent as in the past) which means that the
more expensive the toy, the lower the profit margin.  And since investors
like large profit margins, suddenly there is a motivation to cut costs.
Further, there are incentives that basically say, "For every dollar you save
under the original cost estimate, you may pocket 50 cents in addition to
your nominal profit."

Of course, now you've a situation where you may be encouraging too much cost
cutting, but at least you're no longer encouraging artifically inflating the
costs.

> Dollar Contracts including ones for NASA "Welfare for Aerospace Workers".

Agree.  But I think the biggest WfAW program would have to be NMD.  Ironic
given the public support for it.


-Dave

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 12823 invoked from network); 5 Dec 2001 20:05:47 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 5 Dec 2001 20:05:47 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 1403 invoked by uid 50005); 5 Dec 2001 20:05:37 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4173. . Clean. Processed in 1.738557 secs); 05 Dec 2001 20:05:37 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 5 Dec 2001 20:05:34 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA28129; Wed, 5 Dec 2001 11:43:17 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 96948 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 5 Dec 2001 19:43:12 +0000
Received: from mtapop1pub.verizon.net (mtapop1pub.gte.net [206.46.170.34]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA28115 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 5 Dec 2001 11:43:12 -0800
Received: from [63.24.225.162] (1Cust192.tnt1.rancho-cucamonga.ca.da.uu.net          [63.24.225.192]) by mtapop1pub.verizon.net  with ESMTP for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; id NAA12913914 Wed, 5 Dec 2001 13:42:32 -0600          (CST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: GTE/01rocket@mail.gte.net
References: <002001c17db3$75271c80$6501a8c0@koreynew>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <a05100314b83428db8e88@[63.24.225.162]>
Date:         Wed, 5 Dec 2001 11:42:25 -0800
Reply-To: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Amateur?
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <002001c17db3$75271c80$6501a8c0@koreynew>

>Kline hits nail on head:


>The definition previously given is actually definition #2 in my Webster's
>dictionary, definition #1 is "Devotee, Admirer". Amateur comes from the
>French "amator" or lover, and "amare" to love, so an Amateur Rocketeer is
>someone who loves rockets, NOT whether he gets paid for rockets! I hope for
>everyone's benefit we encourage this definition over the other. Rocketry is
>a close knit group, we know who the "Amateurs" are.

Jerry
--
Jerry Irvine, Box 1242, Claremont, California USA
Opinion, the whole thing. <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
Bring common sense back to rocketry administration.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 4542 invoked from network); 5 Dec 2001 21:36:17 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 5 Dec 2001 21:36:17 -0000
Received: (qmail 28470 invoked by uid 50005); 5 Dec 2001 21:36:04 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4173. . Clean. Processed in 3.114003 secs); 05 Dec 2001 21:36:04 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 5 Dec 2001 21:35:58 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA28849; Wed, 5 Dec 2001 13:31:29 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 97003 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 5 Dec 2001 21:31:23 +0000
Received: from imo-m03.mx.aol.com (imo-m03.mx.aol.com [64.12.136.6]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA28834 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Wed, 5 Dec 2001 13:31:23 -0800
Received: from Azt28@aol.com by imo-m03.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v31_r1.9.) id          s.45.10146c01 (2170); Wed, 5 Dec 2001 16:30:49 -0500 (EST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0E55_01C56B69.5B3FE7A0"
X-Mailer: AOL 6.0 for Windows FR sub 10506
Message-ID:  <45.10146c01.293fec09@aol.com>
Date:         Wed, 5 Dec 2001 16:30:49 EST
Reply-To: <Azt28@AOL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <Azt28@AOL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Amateur?
Comments: To: 01rocket@gte.net
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0E55_01C56B69.5B3FE7A0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit


> Amateur comes from the
> >French "amator" or lover, and "amare" to love, so an Amateur Rocketeer is
> >someone who loves rockets, NOT whether he gets paid for rockets

In french, Amateur is... Amateur ! not Amator. The meaning is the same as
above.

Yvan Bozzonetti from France.


------=_NextPart_000_0E55_01C56B69.5B3FE7A0
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<HTML><FONT FACE=arial,helvetica><FONT  SIZE=2>
<BR><BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE style="BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px">Amateur comes from the
<BR>&gt;French "amator" or lover, and "amare" to love, so an Amateur Rocketeer is
<BR>&gt;someone who loves rockets, NOT whether he gets paid for rockets</FONT><FONT  COLOR="#000000" SIZE=3 FAMILY="SANSSERIF" FACE="Arial" LANG="1"></BLOCKQUOTE>
<BR></FONT><FONT  COLOR="#000000" SIZE=2 FAMILY="SANSSERIF" FACE="Arial" LANG="1">
<BR>In french, Amateur is... Amateur ! not Amator. The meaning is the same as above.
<BR>
<BR>Yvan Bozzonetti from France.
<BR></FONT></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0E55_01C56B69.5B3FE7A0--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 6417 invoked from network); 5 Dec 2001 22:31:27 -0000
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 5 Dec 2001 22:31:27 -0000
Received: (qmail 2387 invoked by uid 50005); 5 Dec 2001 22:31:18 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4173. . Clean. Processed in 0.852024 secs); 05 Dec 2001 22:31:18 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 5 Dec 2001 22:31:15 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA29006; Wed, 5 Dec 2001 13:57:10 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 97032 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 5 Dec 2001 21:57:07 +0000
Received: from mta05.mail.mel.aone.net.au (mta05.mail.au.uu.net [203.2.192.85])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA28988 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 5 Dec 2001 13:57:06 -0800
Received: from unknown ([63.34.214.72]) by mta05.mail.mel.aone.net.au with SMTP          id <20011205215702.NYSR12104.mta05.mail.mel.aone.net.au@unknown> for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 08:57:02 +1100
References: Conversation <OE63WNoqiGAeGnOxUR200004105@hotmail.com> with last            message <002001c17db3$75271c80$6501a8c0@koreynew>
Priority: Normal
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Priority: 3
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	X-MAPIextension=.TXT;
	charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>
Date:         Wed, 5 Dec 2001 21:57:07 +0000
Reply-To: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Amateur?
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <002001c17db3$75271c80$6501a8c0@koreynew>

> The definition previously given is actually definition #2 in my Webster's
> dictionary, definition #1 is "Devotee, Admirer". Amateur comes from the
> French "amator" or lover, and "amare" to love, so an Amateur Rocketeer is
> someone who loves rockets, NOT whether he gets paid for rockets! I hope
for
> everyone's benefit we encourage this definition over the other. Rocketry
is
> a close knit group, we know who the "Amateurs" are. When I see the
> presidents of Lockheed, Thiokol, Boeing, Orbital hanging out at RRS
meetings
> and testing rockets at MTA then I'll consider changing my definition of
> Amateur.
>
> Comments?
> Now putting on my flack jacket and ducking behind flameproof wall.......I
> almost typed an entire post without mentioning the word HYBRIDS!

I agree with most of what you've said except the use of the dictionary
definition. Historically there were clear definitions for model/HPR and
amateur/experimental rocketry. The keys difference being that model and HPR
participants were forced to follow a clear set of rules and guidelines. One
of these rules stated that motors had to be purchased from a certified
manufacturer. If a person was to develop their own motors, they would be
automatically be classified in "amateur rocketry" category later also
defined as "experimental rocketry" to avoid confusion with the dictionary
definition. If this definition has changed to the dictionary definition,
can someone please tell me when this happened and where it's officially
redefined?

Saying that, I must also mention that I'm ashamed of my personal attack on
Andrew a couple of days ago and I have already apologised to him off list
for this. I was out of line and will endeavour  to be more careful next
time.

Regards,

Troy.


>
> K2

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 24175 invoked from network); 5 Dec 2001 23:48:12 -0000
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 5 Dec 2001 23:48:12 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 27315 invoked by uid 50005); 5 Dec 2001 23:48:03 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4173. . Clean. Processed in 0.814327 secs); 05 Dec 2001 23:48:03 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 5 Dec 2001 23:48:01 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA29430; Wed, 5 Dec 2001 15:29:11 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 97079 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 5 Dec 2001 23:28:58 +0000
Received: from scaup.prod.itd.earthlink.net (scaup.mail.pas.earthlink.net          [207.217.120.49]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA29416          for <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Wed, 5 Dec 2001 15:28:58 -0800
Received: from user-2ivfimu.dialup.mindspring.com ([165.247.202.222]          helo=RClague) by scaup.prod.itd.earthlink.net with smtp (Exim 3.33          #1) id 16BlSs-0006mn-00 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 05 Dec 2001          15:28:46 -0800
References: <000701c173e6$c4451aa0$640a0a0a@greg> <3BFDF7B9.EC8D7990@sfcc.net>            <fi0q0u0jdsv20o9fntt1gfh5p3npflblff@4ax.com>            <mj6q0usos3bvhicukjd3g1pp7jmpv8rc7v@4ax.com>            <3C0D7ECA.6A370C2E@sfcc.net>
X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.8/32.553
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by itc.uci.edu id PAA29417
Message-ID:  <ub6t0uo542l1j5nt4sta7tkqnqvkuh1c3j@4ax.com>
Date:         Wed, 5 Dec 2001 15:28:00 -0800
Reply-To: <rclague@RCLAGUE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Randall Clague" <rclague@RCLAGUE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Non-digital test stand
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <3C0D7ECA.6A370C2E@sfcc.net>

On Tue, 04 Dec 2001 20:56:26 -0500, James Yawn <jyawn@sfcc.net> wrote:

>Please accept my apologies for the video failure.  The problem was with
>AngelFire, which would send them to some people but not others.  So they are now
>at:
>
>http://www.geocities.com/jyawn51/index.html
>
>Please let me know if these do not work.  I might actually pay for web space if
>that's what it takes.

That worked fine.  Interesting blood red color on the trees.  Is that
an artifact?  :-)

>And thanks for the math!  Other had posts indicated that I did not have all the
>pieces, but now I know what is missing.  Fortunately, it can be provided.
>
>The burn-time was 0.7 seconds, and burnout occurred at 23.2 feet (7.1meters)
>more or less.  Duration of the whole flight was 5.7 seconds.
>
>Just for reference, launch-weight was 10.9 lbs (4.95kg) and apogee was about 95
>feet (29meters)

Well, heck, you just made it trivial.  My copy of Lotus will be
disappointed, but a plain ol' calculator can do this.

The key datum here is the height at burnout.  The difference between
that and apogee gives you your velocity, and that, with the burn time,
gives you your acceleration.  Acceleration with vehicle mass gives you
thrust, and thrust with burn time gives you total impulse.  And here's
the kicker: total impulse with propellant mass gives you specific
impulse.

Ready?  Here we go,

Apogee - burnout altitude = rise height
Rise height is useful because the only force acting on the vehicle
during rise is gravity (we're neglecting drag, which is negligible at
these speeds).

29 - 7.1 = 21.9 meters

Now we apply h = (g * t^2) / 2, rearranged to t = sqrt((2 * h) / g)

t = sqrt((2 * 21.9) / 9.8) = 2.1 seconds.  That's time from burnout to
apogee.

(As a reality check, let's compare results so far to observed data:
reported burnout was at 0.7 seconds, calculated rise time is 2.1
seconds, so time to apogee is 2.8 seconds - just under half (49%) of
the reported total flight time, and well within experimental error.
Reality check passed)

Next up is velocity at burnout.

v = g * t

v = 9.8 * 2.1 = 20.6 m/sec.

Acceleration (different than gravity) (matter of fact, I just went
back and changed all those a's to g's, for clarity):

a = v / t

a = 20.6 / 0.7 = 29.4 m/sec^2.  That's actual acceleration.

To get thrust, we need felt acceleration.  Add gravity to get 39.2
m/sec^2.  A little low by HPR standards, but not exceptionally so.

So, thrust:

F = m * a

F = 4.95 * 39.2 = 194 Newtons.

Total impulse:

I = F * t

I = 194 * 0.7 = 136 N-sec.  That's a middlin' G.  See what a
difference burn time makes?  :-)

Last calc is Isp.

Isp = I / m(prop)

Isp = 136 / 0.13 = 1045 N-sec/kg.

Divide by gravity to get the more commonly used but inappropriate
seconds (thanks for the soapbox), and you get 107 seconds.  That's
better than black powder; is that about right for KN & sucrose?

One final reality check: calculate the fall time for the fall from
apogee, add it to the calculated climb (boost + rise) time, and see if
it matches the reported flight time.

h = (g * t^2) / 2, rearranged to t = sqrt((2 * h) / g)

t = sqrt((2 * 29) / 9.8) = 2.4 seconds.  So 0.7 seconds boost, 2.1
seconds coast, 2.4 seconds fall gives you - oops - 5.2 seconds.
That's a 9% deviation from the reported result, which confuses me.

OK, let's compare the velocity previously calculated from the reported
apogee and burnout altitude to the velocity calculated from the
reported burn time and burnout altitude.  The former is 20.6 m/sec.
To get the latter,

h = (a * t^2) / 2
(a * t^2) / 2 = h
(a * t^2) = 2 * h
a * t^2 = 2 * h
a = 2 * h / t^2

a = 2 * 7.1 / 0.7^2 = 14.2 / 0.49 = 29.0 m/sec.

Wow!  That's quite a discrepancy from the 20.6 m/sec calculated from
apogee and burnout altitude.  This is called experimental error;
welcome to real science.  :-)

Well, error resolution is a whole other ball game, which will have to
wait until tomorrow, at least for me.  The mad geniuses hereabouts
probably know some statistical or other fancy way to resolve this
error, but I'm inclined to just toss out the reported apogee - since
it wasn't actually observed - and start over.

I'm also wondering if a slow buildup to full thrust might reconcile
this discrepancy.  I'm not sure how I'd do the math on that one.

Thoughts?

>I am not so much interested in the exact thrust of this particular engine as I
>am in the formula used - seems that it would not be too hard to develop a
>program for this once I am clear on the procedure, sort of a reverse RocCad.

You could do it all in any spreadsheet.  I can send you an Excel or
Lotus file, if you're interested.  Anyone else, too, just ask.

HTH,

-R

--
"Sutton is the beginning of wisdom -
but only the beginning."
                     -- Jeff Greason

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 16621 invoked from network); 6 Dec 2001 00:15:24 -0000
Received: from smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.105]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 6 Dec 2001 00:15:24 -0000
Received: (qmail 19313 invoked by uid 50005); 6 Dec 2001 00:15:10 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpy with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4173. . Clean. Processed in 1.095517 secs); 06 Dec 2001 00:15:10 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 6 Dec 2001 00:15:09 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA29662; Wed, 5 Dec 2001 16:10:22 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 97118 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 00:10:17 +0000
Received: from c002.snv.cp.net (c002-h003.c002.snv.cp.net [209.228.32.167]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id QAA29648 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 5 Dec 2001 16:10:17 -0800
Received: (cpmta 28831 invoked from network); 5 Dec 2001 16:09:45 -0800
Received: from 67.201.74.72 (HELO default) by smtp.peoplepc.com          (209.228.32.167) with SMTP; 5 Dec 2001 16:09:45 -0800
X-Sent: 6 Dec 2001 00:09:45 GMT
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0E5A_01C56B69.5B4BCE80"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <001d01c17dec$a9310340$484ac943@default>
Date:         Wed, 5 Dec 2001 19:26:32 -0500
Reply-To: "David Muesing" <dmuesing@PEOPLEPC.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "David Muesing" <dmuesing@PEOPLEPC.COM>
Subject:      [AR] Why Epoxy and not R45 or Polyester?
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0E5A_01C56B69.5B4BCE80
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Are you saying epoxy is better than the other 2 for some reason? Reason?

Dave M

------=_NextPart_000_0E5A_01C56B69.5B4BCE80
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Diso-8859-1">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 6.00.2600.0" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=3DOCRA color=3D#0000ff>Are you saying epoxy is better =
than the other=20
2 for some reason? Reason?</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DOCRA color=3D#0000ff></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DOCRA color=3D#0000ff>Dave M</FONT></DIV></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0E5A_01C56B69.5B4BCE80--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 1620 invoked from network); 6 Dec 2001 00:56:16 -0000
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 6 Dec 2001 00:56:16 -0000
Received: (qmail 17121 invoked by uid 50005); 6 Dec 2001 00:56:05 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4173. . Clean. Processed in 3.691605 secs); 06 Dec 2001 00:56:05 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 6 Dec 2001 00:56:00 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA29792; Wed, 5 Dec 2001 16:36:58 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 97131 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 00:35:53 +0000
Received: from mx1.relaypoint.net (ns2.generalbroadband.com [64.32.62.5]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA29769 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Wed, 5 Dec 2001 16:35:53 -0800
Received: from [208.131.72.39] (HELO atlantis) by mx1.relaypoint.net          (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 3.4.8) with SMTP id 1688946; Wed, 05 Dec 2001          16:35:46 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0E5D_01C56B69.5B4BCE80"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <001801c17ded$a0ca05c0$274883d0@atlantis>
Date:         Wed, 5 Dec 2001 16:33:27 -0800
Reply-To: "Jim Bowery" <jabowery@WWC.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
Comments:     RFC822 error: <W> Incorrect or incomplete address field found and              ignored.
From: "Jim Bowery" <jabowery@WWC.COM>
Subject:      [AR] History they Won't Teach You at Dibner
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0E5D_01C56B69.5B4BCE80
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

A bit of technology policy history I just got around to scanning in from =
my archives -- history that they won't be teaching at MIT's Dibner =
Institute for the History of Science and Technology or any of the other =
prestigious places of ponderous learning about "history".  It concerns =
my work with Robert W. Bussard with US fusion development policy and may =
be particularly interesting for some of you who may be familiar with the =
science fictionalization of the "Bussard Ramjet" (the scientific paper =
upon which it was based, Bussard tells me, is something he isn't =
particularly proud of as he's convinced he was incorrect in his =
calculations):

http://www.geocities.com/jim_bowery/BussardsLetter.html


The following links are to scanned images of a legislative proposal sent =
by Robert W. Bussard, one of the founders of the US fusion energy =
program, to Congress suggesting that the fusion energy program be =
replaced by a system of prize awards for timely achievement of specific =
technical milestones. Dr. Bussard's cover letter contains some =
historically very important disclosures concerning the founding of the =
United State government's fusion energy program. The legislation, =
itself, was written by me, as Chairman of the Coalition for Science and =
Commerce with input actively solicited from all the privately financed =
fusion energy companies in existence during the early 1990s. The idea =
was to make a competition that the likely participants would view as not =
only fair, but also as likely to attract participation from capital =
sources not normally available to high-risk, long-term-payback =
development projects.=20

  1.. Cover letter page 1: Introduction.=20
  2.. Cover letter page 2: Confession of political subterfuge with =
outline of legislative measures to correct it.=20
  3.. Cover letter page 3: On the legislation's origin and importance.=20
  4.. Legislative language page 1: Findings.=20
  5.. Legislative language page 2: Policy Declaration.=20
  6.. Legislative language page 3: Definitions.=20
  7.. Legislative language page 4: Program Activities.=20
  8.. Legislative language page 5: Stimulation of Commercial Investment =
in Fusion Energy Technology.=20
  9.. Legislative language page 6: Stimulation of Commercial Investment =
in Fusion Energy Technology.=20
  10.. Legislative language page 7: Disposition of Interest, Helium-3, =
Test site land, Scientific findings and Information.=20
  11.. Legislative language page 8: Reporting and authorization of =
appropriations.=20
An interesting and even amusing historical anecdote: I hadn't =
participated in politics for a few years when Robert Johnson, with whom =
I was working at the time, came up to me with a letter in hand and said =
(paraphrasing), "I just received this from a colleague of mine at UCLA. =
Since I know you're interested in fusion energy technology and its =
policy, I thought you might want to review it. Apparently its gone out =
to all the research labs as well as Congress." When I looked at it, I =
recognized Bob Bussard's letterhead, and then when I opened to the =
legislative language, there I saw the type from my old dot-matrix =
printer -- which I was still using at the time I put forth the proposed =
draft legislation to the various fusion entrepreneurs. Bob (Bussard) had =
actually Xeroxed my draft -- perforation tears, sprocket holes and all. =
You see, I had no money by the end of my attempt to change the world =
"through proper channels" and was doing the best I could with very old =
equipment.=20

(The IRS even decided to audit me after all this public-spirited effort =
when I did the one thing you aren't allowed to do in politics: Call for =
judicial review of the legitimacy of the 16th Amendment to end, once and =
for all, the rhetorical posturing that still surrounds that historic =
ratification process.)=20

-- James Allen Bowery, December 5, 2001=20


------=_NextPart_000_0E5D_01C56B69.5B4BCE80
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Diso-8859-1">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 5.50.4207.2601" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>A bit of technology policy history I =
just got=20
around to scanning in from my archives -- history that they <EM>won't =
</EM>be=20
teaching at MIT's Dibner Institute for the History of Science and =
Technology or=20
any of the other prestigious places of ponderous learning about =
"history".&nbsp;=20
It concerns my work with Robert W. Bussard with US fusion development =
policy and=20
may be particularly interesting for some of you who may be familiar with =
the=20
science fictionalization of the&nbsp;"Bussard Ramjet" (the scientific =
paper upon=20
which it was based, Bussard tells me, is something he isn't particularly =
proud=20
of as&nbsp;he's convinced he was incorrect in his =
calculations):</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2><A=20
href=3D"http://www.geocities.com/jim_bowery/BussardsLetter.html">http://w=
ww.geocities.com/jim_bowery/BussardsLetter.html</A></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>The following links are to scanned images of a legislative proposal =
sent by=20
Robert W. Bussard, one of the founders of the US fusion energy program, =
to=20
Congress suggesting that the fusion energy program be replaced by a =
system of=20
prize awards for timely achievement of specific technical milestones. =
Dr.=20
Bussard's cover letter contains some historically very important =
disclosures=20
concerning the founding of the United State government's fusion energy =
program.=20
The legislation, itself, was written by me, as <A=20
href=3D"http://www.geocities.com/jim_bowery/testimny.htm">Chairman of =
the=20
Coalition for Science and Commerce</A> with input actively solicited =
from all=20
the privately financed fusion energy companies in existence during the =
early=20
1990s. The idea was to make a competition that the likely participants =
would=20
view as not only fair, but also as likely to attract participation from =
capital=20
sources not normally available to high-risk, long-term-payback =
development=20
projects.=20
<P>
<OL>
  <LI><A=20
  =
href=3D"http://www.geocities.com/jim_bowery/BussardsLetter/cover1.jpg">Co=
ver=20
  letter page 1</A>: Introduction.=20
  <LI><A=20
  =
href=3D"http://www.geocities.com/jim_bowery/BussardsLetter/cover2.jpg">Co=
ver=20
  letter page 2</A>: Confession of political subterfuge with outline of=20
  legislative measures to correct it.=20
  <LI><A=20
  =
href=3D"http://www.geocities.com/jim_bowery/BussardsLetter/cover3.jpg">Co=
ver=20
  letter page 3</A>: On the legislation's origin and importance.=20
  <LI><A=20
  =
href=3D"http://www.geocities.com/jim_bowery/BussardsLetter/legislation1.j=
pg">Legislative=20
  language page 1</A>: Findings.</A>=20
  <LI><A=20
  =
href=3D"http://www.geocities.com/jim_bowery/BussardsLetter/legislation2.j=
pg">Legislative=20
  language page 2</A>: Policy Declaration.</A>=20
  <LI><A=20
  =
href=3D"http://www.geocities.com/jim_bowery/BussardsLetter/legislation3.j=
pg">Legislative=20
  language page 3</A>: Definitions.</A>=20
  <LI><A=20
  =
href=3D"http://www.geocities.com/jim_bowery/BussardsLetter/legislation4.j=
pg">Legislative=20
  language page 4</A>: Program Activities.</A>=20
  <LI><A=20
  =
href=3D"http://www.geocities.com/jim_bowery/BussardsLetter/legislation5.j=
pg">Legislative=20
  language page 5</A>: Stimulation of Commercial Investment in Fusion =
Energy=20
  Technology.</A>=20
  <LI><A=20
  =
href=3D"http://www.geocities.com/jim_bowery/BussardsLetter/legislation6.j=
pg">Legislative=20
  language page 6</A>: Stimulation of Commercial Investment in Fusion =
Energy=20
  Technology.</A>=20
  <LI><A=20
  =
href=3D"http://www.geocities.com/jim_bowery/BussardsLetter/legislation7.j=
pg">Legislative=20
  language page 7</A>: Disposition of Interest, Helium-3, Test site =
land,=20
  Scientific findings and Information.</A>=20
  <LI><A=20
  =
href=3D"http://www.geocities.com/jim_bowery/BussardsLetter/legislation8.j=
pg">Legislative=20
  language page 8</A>: Reporting and authorization of =
appropriations.</A>=20
</LI></OL>
<P>An interesting and even amusing historical anecdote: I hadn't =
participated in=20
politics for a few years when <A=20
href=3D"http://www.cs.utah.edu/dept/history/#magnetic-ink-ref">Robert =
Johnson</A>,=20
with whom I was working at the time, came up to me with a letter in hand =
and=20
said (paraphrasing), "I just received this from a colleague of mine at =
UCLA.=20
Since I know you're interested in fusion energy technology and its =
policy, I=20
thought you might want to review it. Apparently its gone out to all the =
research=20
labs as well as Congress." When I looked at it, I recognized Bob =
Bussard's=20
letterhead, and then when I opened to the legislative language, there I =
saw the=20
type from my old dot-matrix printer -- which I was still using at the =
time I put=20
forth the proposed draft legislation to the various fusion =
entrepreneurs. Bob=20
(Bussard) had actually Xeroxed my draft -- perforation tears, sprocket =
holes and=20
all. You see, I had no money by the end of my attempt to change the =
world=20
"through proper channels" and was doing the best I could with very old=20
equipment.=20
<P>(The IRS even decided to audit me after all this public-spirited =
effort when=20
I did the one thing you aren't allowed to do in politics: Call for =
judicial=20
review of the legitimacy of the 16th Amendment to end, once and for all, =
the=20
rhetorical posturing that still surrounds that historic ratification =
process.)=20
<P>-- James Allen Bowery, December 5, 2001 </P></DIV></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0E5D_01C56B69.5B4BCE80--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 17539 invoked from network); 6 Dec 2001 00:59:56 -0000
Received: from smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.105]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 6 Dec 2001 00:59:56 -0000
Received: (qmail 1573 invoked by uid 50005); 6 Dec 2001 00:59:44 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpy with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4173. . Clean. Processed in 2.097317 secs); 06 Dec 2001 00:59:44 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 6 Dec 2001 00:59:41 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA29882; Wed, 5 Dec 2001 16:51:51 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 97144 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 00:51:07 +0000
Received: from mta03.mail.mel.aone.net.au (mta03.mail.au.uu.net [203.2.192.83])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA29867 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 5 Dec 2001 16:51:06 -0800
Received: from unknown ([63.34.210.47]) by mta03.mail.mel.aone.net.au with SMTP          id <20011206005051.RNUQ27349.mta03.mail.mel.aone.net.au@unknown> for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 11:50:51 +1100
References: Conversation <001d01c17dec$a9310340$484ac943@default> with last            message <001d01c17dec$a9310340$484ac943@default>
Priority: Normal
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Priority: 3
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	X-MAPIextension=.TXT;
	charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>
Date:         Thu, 6 Dec 2001 00:51:07 +0000
Reply-To: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Why Epoxy and not R45 or Polyester?
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <001d01c17dec$a9310340$484ac943@default>

KNO3 has a history of having more trouble maintaining stable combustion
with R45 or Polyester.

Troy.

----------
> Are you saying epoxy is better than the other 2 for some reason? Reason?
>
> Dave M

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 24661 invoked from network); 6 Dec 2001 01:07:10 -0000
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 6 Dec 2001 01:07:10 -0000
Received: (qmail 31870 invoked by uid 50005); 6 Dec 2001 01:06:58 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4173. . Clean. Processed in 1.654152 secs); 06 Dec 2001 01:06:58 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 6 Dec 2001 01:06:56 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA29978; Wed, 5 Dec 2001 17:04:30 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 97159 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 01:04:27 +0000
Received: from mailhost0.trib.com (MAILHOST1.TRIB.COM [63.229.150.11] (may be          forged)) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA29964 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Wed, 5 Dec 2001 17:04:27 -0800
Received: from mail.trib.com (mail.trib.com [12.10.158.17]) by          mailhost0.trib.com (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id fB613ui88138 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Wed, 5 Dec 2001 18:03:56 -0700 (MST)          (envelope-from jwckman@space-rockets.com)
Received: from [63.229.150.78] (HELO hppav) by mail.trib.com (CommuniGate Pro          SMTP 3.4.6) with SMTP id 61950001 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 05          Dec 2001 18:03:55 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <NKEHJAOOKBPGIKOOPDEFAEMCCDAA.jwckman@space-rockets.com>
Date:         Wed, 5 Dec 2001 18:02:43 -0700
Reply-To: "John Wickman" <jwckman@SPACE-ROCKETS.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Wickman" <jwckman@SPACE-ROCKETS.COM>
Subject:      [AR] Amateur?
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

I think the most straight forward definition is that someone who makes their
own motors without financial compensation is an amateur.  Buying and using
motors, puts you in HPR or model rocketry depending on the size of the
motor.

Regardless of the Olympics, which I will not get into as that is very off
topic, professionals are people who get paid for what they are doing.  The
number of hours they work or whether they are able to making a living at it
full time is irrelevant.  I think it does a disservice to amateurs to put
professionals in with them when comparing their achievements.  For example,
it is not fair to amateurs to "claim" an amateur altitude record when the
effort was entirely paid for by a US Government contract.  Most amateurs
cannot even compete for the record simply because they do not have the time
or financial resources.

John Wickman

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 6615 invoked from network); 6 Dec 2001 01:32:40 -0000
Received: from smtpv.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.110]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 6 Dec 2001 01:32:40 -0000
Received: (qmail 23035 invoked by uid 50005); 6 Dec 2001 01:19:28 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpv with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4173. . Clean. Processed in 2.379613 secs); 06 Dec 2001 01:19:28 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpv.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 6 Dec 2001 01:19:24 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA30108; Wed, 5 Dec 2001 17:21:02 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 97183 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 01:20:56 +0000
Received: from albqpop1.albq.uswest.net (albqpop1.albq.uswest.net          [207.108.240.1]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id RAA30094          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 5 Dec 2001 17:20:55 -0800
Received: (qmail 84923 invoked by alias); 6 Dec 2001 01:10:47 -0000
Delivered-To: fixup-AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU@fixme
Received: (qmail 74867 invoked by uid 0); 6 Dec 2001 01:05:43 -0000
Received: from cc898542-a.prdise1.nm.home.com (HELO cc898542a) (65.7.151.152)          by albqpop1.albq.uswest.net with SMTP; 6 Dec 2001 01:05:43 -0000
References:  <001d01c17dec$a9310340$484ac943@default>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0E60_01C56B69.5B57B560"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <002901c17df1$d6f11a40$98970741@prdise1.nm.home.com>
Date:         Wed, 5 Dec 2001 18:03:37 -0700
Reply-To: "Pax" <darkspunge@USWEST.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Pax" <darkspunge@USWEST.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Why Epoxy and not R45 or Polyester?
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0E60_01C56B69.5B57B560
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

That's what I am saying. It could be just for the fun of it. It could be =
because epoxy would burn easier.
I made a grain of HTPB with some dextrose and KN. The grain will not =
light with a blow torch. I could try different ratio's also, but I =
suspect the same thing will happen. I just got some propellant Al and I =
think that will make all the difference. Propep says up to a 15 pound =
ISP increase is possible. Then again you know how propep is...

Paxton
  ----- Original Message -----=20
  From: David Muesing=20
  To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU=20
  Sent: Wednesday, December 05, 2001 5:26 PM
  Subject: [AR] Why Epoxy and not R45 or Polyester?


  Are you saying epoxy is better than the other 2 for some reason? =
Reason?
  =20
  Dave M

------=_NextPart_000_0E60_01C56B69.5B57B560
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META content=3D"text/html; charset=3Diso-8859-1" =
http-equiv=3DContent-Type>
<META content=3D"MSHTML 5.00.2614.3500" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>That's what I am saying. It could be =
just for the=20
fun of it. It could be because epoxy would burn easier.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>I made a grain of HTPB with some =
dextrose and KN.=20
The grain will not light with a blow torch. I could try different =
ratio's also,=20
but I suspect the same thing will happen. I just got some propellant Al =
and I=20
think that will make all the difference. Propep says up to a 15 pound =
ISP=20
increase is possible. Then again you know how propep is...</FONT></DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Paxton</FONT></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE=20
style=3D"BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: =
0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; PADDING-RIGHT: 0px">
  <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial">----- Original Message ----- </DIV>
  <DIV=20
  style=3D"BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; FONT: 10pt arial; font-color: =
black"><B>From:</B>=20
  <A href=3D"mailto:dmuesing@PEOPLEPC.COM" =
title=3Ddmuesing@PEOPLEPC.COM>David=20
  Muesing</A> </DIV>
  <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A =
href=3D"mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU"=20
  title=3DAROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU</A> </DIV>
  <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> Wednesday, December 05, =
2001 5:26=20
  PM</DIV>
  <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> [AR] Why Epoxy and not =
R45 or=20
  Polyester?</DIV>
  <DIV><BR></DIV>
  <DIV><FONT color=3D#0000ff face=3DOCRA>Are you saying epoxy is better =
than the=20
  other 2 for some reason? Reason?</FONT></DIV>
  <DIV><FONT color=3D#0000ff face=3DOCRA></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
  <DIV><FONT color=3D#0000ff face=3DOCRA>Dave=20
M</FONT></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0E60_01C56B69.5B57B560--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 11806 invoked from network); 6 Dec 2001 01:33:44 -0000
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 6 Dec 2001 01:33:44 -0000
Received: (qmail 25792 invoked by uid 50005); 6 Dec 2001 01:33:35 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4173. . Clean. Processed in 0.539533 secs); 06 Dec 2001 01:33:35 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 6 Dec 2001 01:33:34 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA30192; Wed, 5 Dec 2001 17:30:49 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 97200 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 01:30:46 +0000
Received: from cesaroni.net ([204.101.26.130]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7)          with ESMTP id RAA30178 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 5 Dec 2001          17:30:46 -0800
Received: from Anthony by cesaroni.net with SMTP (MDaemon.v2.8.7.0.R) for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 05 Dec 2001 20:27:37 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 8.5, Build 4.71.2173.0
Importance: Normal
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
X-MDaemon-Deliver-To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
X-Return-Path: ACesaroni@cesaroni.net
Message-ID:  <012d01c17de6$35bfd900$1b0101c0@Anthony>
Date:         Wed, 5 Dec 2001 18:40:24 -0500
Reply-To: "Anthony Cesaroni" <ACesaroni@cesaroni.net>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Anthony Cesaroni" <ACesaroni@cesaroni.net>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Amateur?
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <NKEHJAOOKBPGIKOOPDEFAEMCCDAA.jwckman@space-rockets.com>

This is a bit in jest but good point John. Seeing that it's been at least 2
years plus since I inquired, I never did get the PSAN quote and TDP from you
that I requested, so I guess you are holding true to your position here ;).

Anthony

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@itc.uci.edu]On
> Behalf Of John Wickman
> Sent: Wednesday, December 05, 2001 8:03 PM
> To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
> Subject: Amateur?
>
>
> I think the most straight forward definition is that someone who
> makes their
> own motors without financial compensation is an amateur.  Buying and using
> motors, puts you in HPR or model rocketry depending on the size of the
> motor.
>
> Regardless of the Olympics, which I will not get into as that is very off
> topic, professionals are people who get paid for what they are doing.  The
> number of hours they work or whether they are able to making a
> living at it
> full time is irrelevant.  I think it does a disservice to amateurs to put
> professionals in with them when comparing their achievements.
> For example,
> it is not fair to amateurs to "claim" an amateur altitude record when the
> effort was entirely paid for by a US Government contract.  Most amateurs
> cannot even compete for the record simply because they do not
> have the time
> or financial resources.
>
> John Wickman
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 6123 invoked from network); 6 Dec 2001 02:02:41 -0000
Received: from smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.105]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 6 Dec 2001 02:02:41 -0000
Received: (qmail 10176 invoked by uid 50005); 6 Dec 2001 02:02:28 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpy with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4173. . Clean. Processed in 1.794056 secs); 06 Dec 2001 02:02:28 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 6 Dec 2001 02:02:25 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA30303; Wed, 5 Dec 2001 17:45:54 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 97219 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 01:45:48 +0000
Received: from cablecom.laribay.net (cablecom.laribay.net [66.20.57.4]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA30289 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 5 Dec 2001 17:45:47 -0800
Received: from billbull (dial080.laribay.net [66.20.57.80]) by          cablecom.laribay.net (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id TAA08399 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 5 Dec 2001 19:30:16 -0600 (CST)          (envelope-from bpbullock@laribay.net)
References:  <003101c17c2e$d6c10b80$0100a8c0@cc898542a>                                     <005c01c17c61$e5b80980$63391442@billbull>                                      <003f01c17c85$66c70c60$77cfe3c1@home>                                          <003001c17cd4$f66c7ae0$58391442@billbull>                                    <169e01c17cd5$ebdd1f20$77cfe3c1@home>                         <000d01c17d26$845b74e0$4b391442@billbull>              <003501c17d4b$70300920$83cfe3c1@home>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <003801c17df7$db434ea0$51391442@billbull>
Date:         Wed, 5 Dec 2001 19:44:28 -0600
Reply-To: "Bill Bullock" <bpbullock@LARIBAY.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Bill Bullock" <bpbullock@LARIBAY.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Melting devices
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Serge:
    Thanks for the response and the inclusion of your work. I am going to be
preparing about 2 pounds or so of propellant the next few days and if you
would like I will keep good step-by-step records and send you copies. I cna
scan them in, include some pictures and send them along.
    The mixture refered to first boiled off the water then went through a
"slump" like melting lead and then turned liquid. I do not remember the
temperatures but will record them on this next batch and pass them along.
    The product refuses to burn at ambient atmospheric pressures. It starts
to burn un-supported at about 450-500 psi. and is apparently most efficient
at about 1250-1500 psi. It burns with a brilliant white flame, no smoke and
leaves a dry white powder residue which turned out to be almost pure
aluminum oxide. The stuff is hard to ignite and so far I have had to use a
booster charge to get it started. The other member has reported the same
trait.
    Got to go now. I spent about 11 hours snuggled up to a lathe turning a
new bell nozzle for a motor I am building for a friend and the old man is
tired.
    Respectfully,
Bill
----- Original Message -----
From: Serge Pipko <spas@AKCECC.KIEV.UA>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Tuesday, December 04, 2001 11:11 PM
Subject: Re: [AR] Melting devices


> Bill Bullock wrote:
>
> > To make my final grain I will place this into my oil-bath heater and add
> > 20% (by weight) distilled water and a bit of surfactant and heat until
> > everything dissolves into a super-saturated solution. Then I will add
the
> > Aluminum (6 and 4 micron blend) and heat until it drives off the added
> > moisture and melts. Then I will pour it into the mold and slowly cool by
> > ramp-down method in a sealed container.
>
> >     Please note that I do not add the metallic fuel to the molten
> oxidizer.
> > What I do is more akin to rapidly growing an oxidizer crystal which has
> > metallic fuel particles as "inclusions" within the oxidizer matrix.
>
> You wrote "heat until it drives off the added moisture and melts.
> Then I will pour it into the mold ".  What is the final temperature
> of the bath and mixture ? Is the final mixture all liquid except of
aluminum
> ?
> What surfactant do you use ? What is the burning properties of
> obtaining compositions ?
>
> Sorry for so many questions, but I have really great interest in
> AN propellants. For example, if final temperature of your mixture
> is about 100-120 deg. C, then your process is somewhat similar
> to evaporation tecnique that I also have tried:
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> In all cases I prepared  stochiometric mixtures, resulting propellants
were
> packed or poured in paper tubes 17 mm ID. I mark burn test results as
> following:
>
> B0  don't burn
> B1  burn, but quickly go out
> B2  very slowly burn, with foaming
> B3  stable burn, little or no foaming, deserve attention
>
> Some burn rates were measured, but these data aren't sufficiently precise,
> because reproducibility was not as good as it must be. Nevertheless the
> general trends are clear, for example, catalytic role of KN, charcoal, Cu
> and Fe salts. Fumed silica improves mixing of fuels with AN-KN melt and
> gives more sturdy propellant block. It has some catalytic effect also.
>
>
> Evaporation technique :
> All components were dissolved in water and allowed to evaporate to dryness
> at 60-70 deg C, then packed in paper tubes by the means of hand pressing.
>
> 1) 1 g ascorbic acid + 4.54 g AN  : B0
> 2) 1 g ascorbic acid + 4.54 g AN + 0.05 g fumed silica : B1
> 3) 1 g ascorbic acid + 4.54 g AN + 0.05 g charcoal : B2
> 4) 1 g ascorbic acid + 4.54 g AN + 0.05 g K3Fe(CN)6 : B3
> 5) 1 g ascorbic acid + 4.54 g AN + 0.05 g Cu(CH3COO)2.H2O (copper acetate)
:
> upon heating solution became cloudy and dispersion of very small metallic
> copper particles was formed (ascorbic acid reduced Cu(+2) to Cu(0) ).
After
> evaporation semicrystalline mass with subtle bronze shade was formed : B3.
> 6) 1 g ascorbic acid + 4.54 g AN + 0.11 g Cu(CH3COO)2.H2O (copper acetate)
:
> in this case copper particles dispersion was less stable and somewhat
> agglomerated and so burn rate was slightly less : B3, R=0.11 mm/sec
> 7) 1 g ascorbic acid + 3.99 g AN + 0.44 g KN + 0.05 g charcoal : B3
> 8) 1 g sugar + 5.61 g AN + 0.13 g Cu(CH3COO)2.H2O (copper acetate) : B2
> 9) 1 g sugar + 4.60 g AN + 0.51 g KN : B2
> 10) 1 g sugar + 4.60 g AN + 0.51 g KN + 0.12 g S (colloidal sulfur): B2,
> R=0.07 mm/sec
> 11) 1 g sugar + 4.60 g AN + 0.51 g KN + 0.12 g Cu(CH3COO)2.H2O (copper
> acetate) : B3,  R=0.17 mm/sec
> 12) 1 g sugar + 4.60 g AN + 0.51 g KN + 0.12 g CuCl2.2H2O : B3,  R=0.12
> mm/sec
>
> This technique has some advantages, for example, it is less dangerous then
> melting and it allows the use of virtually any burn rate catalyst. But
> unsatisfactory mechanical properties of resulting propellant force me to
> start experimenting with AN melt.
>
>
> Additional data for melting process:
> The experiments were carried out in a glass beaker submerged in an oil
bath,
> heated up to 165-170 deg. C. Fuels was gradually added to molten AN-KN
> eutectic (13.6 % KN, m.p. 156.5 deg. C) with stirring. After homogeneous
> solution or suspension was obtained, it was poured in paper tubes 17 mm
ID.
>
> 1) 1.20 AN-KN + 0.16 C6H5COONa (sodium benzoate) : they didn't mixed at
all,
> after 1 minute benzoic acid begun to sublimate.
> 2) 1.58 AN-KN + 0.36 ascorbic acid : B1
> 3) 2.79 AN-KN + 0.35 NH2-C6H4-COOH (antranilic acid) : B0
> 4) 4.16 AN-KN + 0.57 HO-CH2-CC-CH2-OH (butindiol) : B2, R=0.10 mm/sec
> 5) 3.83 AN-KN + 0.73 wheat flour : B3, R=0.09 mm/sec
> 6) 8.35 AN-KN + 1.59 wheat flour + 0.10 fumed silica : B3, R=0.09 mm/sec
> 7) 8.52 AN-KN + 1.19 wheat flour + 0.20 charcoal : B3, R=0.12 mm/sec
> 8) 8.25 AN-KN + 0.49 wheat flour + 0.49 charcoal : B3, R=0.20 mm/sec
> 9) 8.49 AN-KN + 0.50 wheat flour + 0.50 charcoal + 0.10 fumed silica : B3,
> R=0.20 mm/sec
>
> The last composition is the most promising. It forms strong propellant
block
> and burns cleanly. Addition of fumed silica to (wheat flour + charcoal)
> mixture prevents formation of lumps during its mixing with AN-KN melt. It
is
> possible that variations of component ratio and reduction of charcoal
> particle size will further increase burn rate.
>
> Serge Pipko
>
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 29582 invoked from network); 6 Dec 2001 02:30:51 -0000
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 6 Dec 2001 02:30:51 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 8301 invoked by uid 50005); 6 Dec 2001 02:30:40 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4173. . Clean. Processed in 1.417139 secs); 06 Dec 2001 02:30:40 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 6 Dec 2001 02:30:38 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA30655; Wed, 5 Dec 2001 18:28:29 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 97259 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 02:27:04 +0000
Received: from m5.boston.juno.com (m5.boston.juno.com [64.136.24.68]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA30634 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Wed, 5 Dec 2001 18:27:03 -0800
Received: from cookie.juno.com by cookie.juno.com for          <"r2Fo8hpwT0kn33UwylHELMN/WOTpJvUcqwsGDcuZt0y6w0pORKwRnw==">
Received: (from icantdecide@juno.com) by m5.boston.juno.com (jqueuemail) id          GMXNL5MG; Wed, 05 Dec 2001 21:26:11 EST
X-Mailer: Juno 4.0.9
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Juno-Line-Breaks: 0-1,14-17,19-23
X-Juno-Att: 0
X-Juno-RefParts: 0
Message-ID:  <20011205.212701.-899859.0.icantdecide@juno.com>
Date:         Wed, 5 Dec 2001 21:27:01 -0600
Reply-To: "James G Selin" <icantdecide@JUNO.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "James G Selin" <icantdecide@JUNO.COM>
Subject:      [AR] Composite Sleeve NO2 tanks
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Heres something for discussion-

I've been toying with an idea for a while for a very lightweight nitrous
tank. Many composite suppliers carry carbon fiber, kevlar, and fiberglass
sleeves ranging from fractional inches to a few inches in diameter. I
have found some kevlar but its harder to come by. Basically, I would
machine two aluminum bulkheads (say 1.5") with some sort or retention
system. over a 1.5" mandrel I would lay up the composite sleeve and
vacuum bag it. Multiple layers could be added (as the sleeve facilitates
stretching) to achieve the desired strength. Would this be an acceptable
way to create a tank? What issues would I need to address that are
different from metal tanks? Would carbon fiber be to stiff or possibly
shatter when shocked? These products just seem like they would make nice
seemless lightweight tanks. Thoughts, concerns, etc.   Check out these
links to see some products.

http://www.acp-composites.com/acp-bcs.htm  -Carbon fiber sleeves

http://www.flextex.com/flex-sleeve.html  -fiberglass sleeve, also
available in kevlar

http://www.choctawkaul.com/prod/ct300.html   -Kevlar sleeve


Jim Selin

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 14636 invoked from network); 6 Dec 2001 02:57:13 -0000
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 6 Dec 2001 02:57:13 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 18372 invoked by uid 50005); 6 Dec 2001 02:57:02 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4173. . Clean. Processed in 1.421955 secs); 06 Dec 2001 02:57:02 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 6 Dec 2001 02:56:59 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA30768; Wed, 5 Dec 2001 18:51:30 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 97274 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 02:50:16 +0000
Received: from inet03.citec.qld.gov.au (firewall-user@inet03.citec.qld.gov.au          [203.5.10.10]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA30752          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 5 Dec 2001 18:50:14 -0800
Received: by inet03.citec.qld.gov.au; id MAA29742; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 12:50:11          +1000 (EST)
Received: from citec.com.au(pcux.citec.qld.gov.au 147.132.17.12) by          inet03.citec.qld.gov.au via smap (V2.0) id xma029587; Thu, 6 Dec 01          12:50:06 +1000
Received: from CITEC-Message_Server by citec.com.au with Novell_GroupWise; Thu,          06 Dec 2001 12:51:38 +1000
X-Mailer: Novell GroupWise 5.5.4
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by itc.uci.edu id SAA30753
Message-ID:  <sc0f69da.003@citec.com.au>
Date:         Thu, 6 Dec 2001 12:51:14 +1000
Reply-To: "Des Bromilow" <Des.Bromilow@CITEC.COM.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Des Bromilow" <Des.Bromilow@CITEC.COM.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Composite Sleeve NO2 tanks
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Can't comment on the validity, but on the water rocketry mailing list someone discussed the construction of a 100L filamament wound kevlar tank. The mandrel was made of that low melting point metal, then turned on a lathe. Once the mandrel had been wound over, they simply heated the finished structure to 45 degrees celcius, and melted the mandrel out from the centre.

The rated pressure of the finished tank was something phenomenal (1000 bar rings a bell)

If you need the posting, I may be able to dig it out of my archives. (not this week though)

Speaking of archives, does anyone have the posting about the small ramjet made from a m16 (.223) cartridge casing?, if so, could you please foreward it to me? (it had a small .gif either in it, or a URL to it in the posting) Thanks,

Des

>>> James G Selin <icantdecide@JUNO.COM> 6/12/01 1:27:01 pm >>>
Heres something for discussion-

I've been toying with an idea for a while for a very lightweight nitrous
tank. Many composite suppliers carry carbon fiber, kevlar, and fiberglass
sleeves ranging from fractional inches to a few inches in diameter. I
have found some kevlar but its harder to come by. Basically, I would
machine two aluminum bulkheads (say 1.5") with some sort or retention
system. over a 1.5" mandrel I would lay up the composite sleeve and
vacuum bag it. Multiple layers could be added (as the sleeve facilitates
stretching) to achieve the desired strength. Would this be an acceptable
way to create a tank? What issues would I need to address that are
different from metal tanks? Would carbon fiber be to stiff or possibly
shatter when shocked? These products just seem like they would make nice
seemless lightweight tanks. Thoughts, concerns, etc.   Check out these
links to see some products.

http://www.acp-composites.com/acp-bcs.htm  -Carbon fiber sleeves

http://www.flextex.com/flex-sleeve.html  -fiberglass sleeve, also
available in kevlar

http://www.choctawkaul.com/prod/ct300.html   -Kevlar sleeve


Jim Selin

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 4993 invoked from network); 6 Dec 2001 03:13:15 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 6 Dec 2001 03:13:15 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 14404 invoked by uid 50005); 6 Dec 2001 03:13:03 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4173. . Clean. Processed in 4.041788 secs); 06 Dec 2001 03:13:03 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 6 Dec 2001 03:12:57 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA30868; Wed, 5 Dec 2001 19:07:37 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 97292 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 03:07:32 +0000
Received: from rwcrmhc52.attbi.com (rwcrmhc52.attbi.com [216.148.227.88]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA30854 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 5 Dec 2001 19:07:32 -0800
Received: from c1649002-a.earthlink.net ([12.232.75.28]) by rwcrmhc52.attbi.com          (InterMail vM.4.01.03.27 201-229-121-127-20010626) with ESMTP id          <20011206030701.EKOR4213.rwcrmhc52.attbi.com@c1649002-a.earthlink.net>; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 03:07:01          +0000
X-Sender: forkbomb@mail.earthlink.net
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.0.2
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <5.0.2.1.0.20011205185452.0281cd68@mail.earthlink.net>
Date:         Wed, 5 Dec 2001 19:07:05 -0800
Reply-To: "Pierce Nichols" <forkbomb@EARTHLINK.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Pierce Nichols" <forkbomb@EARTHLINK.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Composite Sleeve NO2 tanks
Comments: To: James G Selin <icantdecide@JUNO.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <20011205.212701.-899859.0.icantdecide@juno.com>

At 09:27 PM 12/5/2001 -0600, James G Selin wrote:
>Heres something for discussion-
>
>I've been toying with an idea for a while for a very lightweight nitrous
>tank. Many composite suppliers carry carbon fiber, kevlar, and fiberglass
>sleeves ranging from fractional inches to a few inches in diameter. I
>have found some kevlar but its harder to come by. Basically, I would
>machine two aluminum bulkheads (say 1.5") with some sort or retention
>system. over a 1.5" mandrel I would lay up the composite sleeve and
>vacuum bag it. Multiple layers could be added (as the sleeve facilitates
>stretching) to achieve the desired strength. Would this be an acceptable
>way to create a tank? What issues would I need to address that are
>different from metal tanks? Would carbon fiber be to stiff or possibly
>shatter when shocked? These products just seem like they would make nice
>seemless lightweight tanks. Thoughts, concerns, etc.   Check out these
>links to see some products.


         The basic idea is solid and one that I've been kicking around.
Carbon is probably the best material since it's the strongest. I would add
a top layer of glass over the carbon, however, to provide additional
toughness and protection during handling. One thing you have to consider is
that carbon fiber and aluminum are incompatible; they form a galvanic
circuit and the aluminum corrodes rapidly. If you use aluminum bulkheads,
you need to isolate the carbon fiber from the aluminum; a layer of glass
will do nicely. The retention system is potentially problematic -- I'm not
sure how to attach the bulkheads in a safe, light, and durable fashion.
         One idea that I have been kicking around is attaching each
bulkhead to a relatively long (maybe 1.5 diameters?) grooved sleeve that
fits snugly into the completed tube. The bonding surface on the inside of
the tube would be appropriately prepared for bonding. The bond between the
sleeve and the tube would be made with some strong and compatible
industrial adhesive, such as HySol. The result would be a strong bond
between the tube and the sleeve. With proper attachment between the
bulkhead and the sleeve, this could even result in dismountable bulkheads.

         -p



>http://www.acp-composites.com/acp-bcs.htm  -Carbon fiber sleeves
>
>http://www.flextex.com/flex-sleeve.html  -fiberglass sleeve, also
>available in kevlar
>
>http://www.choctawkaul.com/prod/ct300.html   -Kevlar sleeve
>
>
>Jim Selin

Mars or Bust!
www.marssociety.com

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 23274 invoked from network); 6 Dec 2001 04:32:45 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 6 Dec 2001 04:32:45 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 26558 invoked by uid 50005); 6 Dec 2001 04:32:34 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4173. . Clean. Processed in 0.921272 secs); 06 Dec 2001 04:32:34 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 6 Dec 2001 04:32:33 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA31467; Wed, 5 Dec 2001 20:26:33 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 97367 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 04:26:27 +0000
Received: from mtapop1pub.verizon.net (mtapop1pub.gte.net [206.46.170.34]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA31452 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 5 Dec 2001 20:26:27 -0800
Received: from [63.24.225.162] (1Cust214.tnt2.rancho-cucamonga.ca.da.uu.net          [63.15.225.214]) by mtapop1pub.verizon.net  with ESMTP for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; id WAA13263067 Wed, 5 Dec 2001 22:25:55 -0600          (CST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: GTE/01rocket@mail.gte.net
References: <012d01c17de6$35bfd900$1b0101c0@Anthony>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <a05100318b834a348475e@[63.24.225.162]>
Date:         Wed, 5 Dec 2001 20:25:55 -0800
Reply-To: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Amateur?
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <012d01c17de6$35bfd900$1b0101c0@Anthony>

>  > full time is irrelevant.  I think it does a disservice to amateurs to put
>>  professionals in with them when comparing their achievements.
>>  For example,
>>  it is not fair to amateurs to "claim" an amateur altitude record when the
>>  effort was entirely paid for by a US Government contract.  Most amateurs
>>  cannot even compete for the record simply because they do not
>  > have the time
>  > or financial resources.
>

This not very couched dig at Korey Kline while fair, is still besides
the point.  He did fly a rocket.

I think if we transition from the term amateur to the term
Experimental this debate dies.  This is IEAS we are proposing. E for
experimental.

Jerry

--
Jerry Irvine, Box 1242, Claremont, California USA
Opinion, the whole thing. <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
Bring common sense back to rocketry administration.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 435 invoked from network); 6 Dec 2001 04:35:04 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 6 Dec 2001 04:35:04 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 22512 invoked by uid 50005); 6 Dec 2001 04:34:55 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4173. . Clean. Processed in 0.300795 secs); 06 Dec 2001 04:34:55 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 6 Dec 2001 04:34:55 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA31504; Wed, 5 Dec 2001 20:29:59 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 97378 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 04:29:58 +0000
Received: from smtppop2pub.verizon.net (smtppop2pub.gte.net [206.46.170.21]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA31490 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 5 Dec 2001 20:29:58 -0800
Received: from [63.24.225.162] (1Cust214.tnt2.rancho-cucamonga.ca.da.uu.net          [63.15.225.214]) by smtppop2pub.verizon.net  with ESMTP for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; id WAA4298990 Wed, 5 Dec 2001 22:17:51 -0600          (CST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: GTE/01rocket@mail.gte.net
References: <001801c17ded$a0ca05c0$274883d0@atlantis>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <a05100319b834a46f8caa@[63.24.225.162]>
Date:         Wed, 5 Dec 2001 20:29:26 -0800
Reply-To: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] History they Won't Teach You at Dibner
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <001801c17ded$a0ca05c0$274883d0@atlantis>

>(The IRS even decided to audit me after all this public-spirited
>effort when I did the one thing you aren't allowed to do in
>politics: Call for judicial review of the legitimacy of the 16th
>Amendment to end, once and for all, the rhetorical posturing that
>still surrounds that historic ratification process.)
>
>-- James Allen Bowery, December 5, 2001

No good deed goes unpunished.

I did a report on the feasibility of fusion for an ECON paper in
circa 1982.  I am amused.

Jerry

--
Jerry Irvine, Box 1242, Claremont, California USA
Opinion, the whole thing. <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
Bring common sense back to rocketry administration.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 22174 invoked from network); 6 Dec 2001 05:41:52 -0000
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 6 Dec 2001 05:41:52 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 11104 invoked by uid 50005); 6 Dec 2001 05:41:40 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4173. . Clean. Processed in 3.819959 secs); 06 Dec 2001 05:41:40 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 6 Dec 2001 05:41:33 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA31793; Wed, 5 Dec 2001 21:39:00 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 97422 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 05:38:05 +0000
Received: from grucom2.gru.net (grucom2.gru.net [209.251.129.7]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA31777 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed,          5 Dec 2001 21:38:05 -0800
Received: from [209.251.150.234] by grucom2.sfcc.net (NTMail          7.00.0022/NU4112.00.db1c8a4b) with ESMTP id xhfmqaaa for          AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 00:37:59 -0500
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (Win95; I)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <000701c173e6$c4451aa0$640a0a0a@greg> <3BFDF7B9.EC8D7990@sfcc.net>            <fi0q0u0jdsv20o9fntt1gfh5p3npflblff@4ax.com>            <mj6q0usos3bvhicukjd3g1pp7jmpv8rc7v@4ax.com>            <3C0D7ECA.6A370C2E@sfcc.net>            <ub6t0uo542l1j5nt4sta7tkqnqvkuh1c3j@4ax.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3C0F0437.8044B3B@sfcc.net>
Date:         Thu, 6 Dec 2001 00:37:59 -0500
Reply-To: "James Yawn" <jyawn@SFCC.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "James Yawn" <jyawn@SFCC.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Non-digital test stand
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Randall:  You post is a minor miracle to me.  Miraculous, in that it is clear enough
I can understand it.  I have applied your formulae to data for a similar but
different flight, and will post this tomorrow for correction and general critique -
it's getting late tonight and I want to do it right.

I was thinking of writing a VBasic program to automate these calculations, and
probably will, so that I can integrate them with other such things.  But if you
happen to have a spreadsheet lying around, I would love a copy.  I'm using mostly
Excel now, but can handle Lotus as well.

The blood-red trees are indeed an artifact.  Fall is not nearly as dramatic here as
elsewhere.  I have not quite figured out my camera (Sony MVC-CD1000) and sometimes
get "film noir" effects.  The video-editing software can correct this to a degree,
but in doing so introduces color distortions and odd flickerings such as you noted.

Thanks ever so much!
Jimmy Yawn
jyawn@sfcc.net

Randall Clague wrote:

>  Interesting blood red color on the trees.  Is that
> an artifact?  :-)
>
> Ready?  Here we go,
>
> (rocket math, clearly explained)

> You could do it all in any spreadsheet.  I can send you an Excel or
> Lotus file, if you're interested.  Anyone else, too, just ask.
>
> HTH,
>
> -R
>
> --
> "Sutton is the beginning of wisdom -
> but only the beginning."
>                      -- Jeff Greason

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 17692 invoked from network); 6 Dec 2001 06:11:07 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 6 Dec 2001 06:11:07 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 29381 invoked by uid 50005); 6 Dec 2001 06:10:57 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4173. . Clean. Processed in 1.126301 secs); 06 Dec 2001 06:10:57 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 6 Dec 2001 06:10:53 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA32029; Wed, 5 Dec 2001 22:07:03 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 97447 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 06:06:59 +0000
Received: from idsoftware.com (predator.idsoftware.com [192.246.40.34]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA32015 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Wed, 5 Dec 2001 22:06:59 -0800
Received: from [192.246.40.144] (account johnc HELO pluto.idsoftware.com) by          idsoftware.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 3.4.7) with ESMTP id 507351 for          AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 06 Dec 2001 00:06:58 -0600
X-Sender: johnc@mail.idsoftware.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <4.3.1.2.20011206002011.0328caa0@mail.idsoftware.com>
Date:         Thu, 6 Dec 2001 00:22:40 -0600
Reply-To: "John Carmack" <johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Carmack" <johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Flared tubing fittings question
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <3C0BDFA5.C429EBDE@biomicro.com>

At 01:25 PM 12/3/2001 -0700, you wrote:
>Common AN fittings are 45 degree flared fittings.  JIC fittings are 37
>degree flared fittings.  The two are not compatible.  Why are there two
>different standards?  What are the advantages and disadvantages of
>each?  More importantly (and directyl rocketry related) which would be
>better to use for LOx, N2O, and Hydrocarbon lines (particularly
>propane?)
>
>TIA
>
>--\


AN and JIC are both compatible 37 degree fittings, we use some JIC stuff
from McMaster with AN stuff from Earl's.  SAE fittings are 45 degrees, and
are incompatible.

I have heard that the 37 degree fittings are better for things that are
going to be taken apart several times, but I don't know the reasoning
behind it.

John Carmack
www.armadilloaerospace.com

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 8524 invoked from network); 6 Dec 2001 06:47:46 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 6 Dec 2001 06:47:46 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: (qmail 17873 invoked by uid 50005); 6 Dec 2001 06:47:36 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4173. . Clean. Processed in 0.54703 secs); 06 Dec 2001 06:47:36 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 6 Dec 2001 06:47:35 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA32160; Wed, 5 Dec 2001 22:33:28 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 97470 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 06:33:24 +0000
Received: from cisco.com (cypher.cisco.com [171.69.11.18]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA32146 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed,          5 Dec 2001 22:33:24 -0800
Received: (from billw@localhost) by cisco.com (8.8.8/2.6/Cisco List          Logging/8.8.8) id WAA29569; Wed, 5 Dec 2001 22:32:53 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID:  <CMM.0.90.4.1007620372.billw@cypher>
Date:         Wed, 5 Dec 2001 22:32:52 PST
Reply-To: "Bill Westfield" <billw@cisco.com>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "William Chops Westfield" <billw@cisco.com>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Amateur?
Comments: To: Jerry Irvine <01rocket@GTE.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  Your message of Wed, 5 Dec 2001 20:25:55 -0800

    I think if we transition from the term amateur to the term Experimental
    this debate dies.  This is IEAS we are proposing.  E for experimental.

Doesn't "amateur" carry with it some connotations of "scale" that we're
hoping will let us off the hook in certain regulatory issues?  I don't want
to have to be subject to the same rules for "experimentation" that Thiokol
is whenever they do "research."

John Wickman turning out ANCP by the ton for some NASA or DoD contract is a
professional, but John Wickman at MTA trying something new is an amateur?

BillW


From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 17477 invoked from network); 6 Dec 2001 07:21:49 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 6 Dec 2001 07:21:49 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 20354 invoked by uid 50005); 6 Dec 2001 07:21:38 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4173. . Clean. Processed in 0.488347 secs); 06 Dec 2001 07:21:38 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 6 Dec 2001 07:21:37 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA32349; Wed, 5 Dec 2001 23:17:41 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 97493 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 07:17:36 +0000
Received: from rasmus.uib.no (exim@rasmus.uib.no [129.177.12.30]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA32335 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Wed, 5 Dec 2001 23:17:35 -0800
Received: from dhcp-35.wlan.uib.no (exw6pg5boa.student.uib.no) [129.177.43.35]          by rasmus.uib.no for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU with esmtp (Exim 3.16) id          16Bsly-0001BC-00; Thu, 06 Dec 2001 08:16:46 +0100
X-Sender: st07696@erasmus.uib.no
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
X-Scanner: exiscan *16Bsly-0001BC-00*YSb80UisPBs*           http://tjinfo.uib.no/virus.html
Message-ID:  <5.1.0.14.0.20011206080303.00b4b428@erasmus.uib.no>
Date:         Thu, 6 Dec 2001 08:17:20 +0100
Reply-To: "Emil Johnsen" <emil.johnsen@STUDENT.UIB.NO>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Emil Johnsen" <emil.johnsen@STUDENT.UIB.NO>
Subject:      [AR] Starting bi-props
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

When reading about oxidizer lead in bi-props I have always assumed it was a
very short lead (a few tens of ms) and that making it to long would result
in hard starts, from oxidizer building up in the chamber.

However, in a NACA research memo (RM E57H01), I found this statement
relating to an experiment with different injectors in a 900N lox-ammonia
engine: "Starts were smooth with no noticeable detonations with a 1-second
oxidant lead. Reducing the oxidant lead resulted in extremely hard starts
or no ignition."

Why would such a long ox lead be needed/beneficial? Wouldn't the Lox either
be ejected from the engine and therefore be wasted, or pool up in the
engine resulting in a hard start? How long is the lead time normally in
modern engines?


Emil

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 10413 invoked from network); 6 Dec 2001 08:01:07 -0000
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 6 Dec 2001 08:01:07 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 18165 invoked by uid 50005); 6 Dec 2001 08:00:57 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4173. . Clean. Processed in 0.323346 secs); 06 Dec 2001 08:00:57 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 6 Dec 2001 08:00:56 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA32470; Wed, 5 Dec 2001 23:48:02 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 97512 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 07:47:57 +0000
Received: from pintail.mail.pas.earthlink.net (pintail.mail.pas.earthlink.net          [207.217.120.122]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id          XAA32456 for <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Wed, 5 Dec 2001 23:47:56 -0800
Received: from user-2ivflsp.dialup.mindspring.com ([165.247.215.153]          helo=RClague) by pintail.mail.pas.earthlink.net with smtp (Exim 3.33          #1) id 16BtG0-0003Mm-00 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 05 Dec 2001          23:47:56 -0800
References: <000701c173e6$c4451aa0$640a0a0a@greg> <3BFDF7B9.EC8D7990@sfcc.net>            <fi0q0u0jdsv20o9fntt1gfh5p3npflblff@4ax.com>            <mj6q0usos3bvhicukjd3g1pp7jmpv8rc7v@4ax.com>            <3C0D7ECA.6A370C2E@sfcc.net>            <ub6t0uo542l1j5nt4sta7tkqnqvkuh1c3j@4ax.com>            <3C0F0437.8044B3B@sfcc.net>
X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.8/32.553
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by itc.uci.edu id XAA32457
Message-ID:  <gh7u0usso68jmih95113j4am8j4a58dkut@4ax.com>
Date:         Wed, 5 Dec 2001 23:47:19 -0800
Reply-To: <rclague@RCLAGUE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Randall Clague" <rclague@RCLAGUE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Non-digital test stand
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <3C0F0437.8044B3B@sfcc.net>

On Thu, 6 Dec 2001 00:37:59 -0500, James Yawn <jyawn@SFCC.NET> wrote:

>Randall:  You post is a minor miracle to me.  Miraculous, in that it is clear enough
>I can understand it.
>Thanks ever so much!

Aw, shucks.  Glad to help.  :-)

>> You could do it all in any spreadsheet.  I can send you an Excel or
>> Lotus file, if you're interested.  Anyone else, too, just ask.

I'll send the spreadsheets under separate cover tomorrow, so as not to
spam the list.

-R

--
"Sutton is the beginning of wisdom -
but only the beginning."
                     -- Jeff Greason

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 14299 invoked from network); 6 Dec 2001 10:45:18 -0000
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 6 Dec 2001 10:45:18 -0000
Received: (qmail 23547 invoked by uid 50005); 6 Dec 2001 10:45:07 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4173. . Clean. Processed in 0.12687 secs); 06 Dec 2001 10:45:07 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 6 Dec 2001 10:45:07 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA00302; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 00:55:59 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 97558 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 08:55:54 +0000
Received: from mta02.mail.mel.aone.net.au (mta02.mail.au.uu.net [203.2.192.82])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA32756 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 00:55:50 -0800
Received: from unknown ([63.60.220.83]) by mta02.mail.mel.aone.net.au with SMTP          id <20011206085504.FYSS24297.mta02.mail.mel.aone.net.au@unknown> for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 19:55:04 +1100
References: Conversation <000701c173e6$c4451aa0$640a0a0a@greg> with last            message <3C0F0437.8044B3B@sfcc.net>
Priority: Normal
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Priority: 3
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	X-MAPIextension=.TXT;
	charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>
Date:         Thu, 6 Dec 2001 08:55:54 +0000
Reply-To: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Non-digital test stand
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <3C0F0437.8044B3B@sfcc.net>

Yes indeed, well explained. On the downside, it does assume a neutral
thrust profile but should get you close enough for most non-critical
applications. Well done Randall.

Troy.

----------
> Randall:  You post is a minor miracle to me.  Miraculous, in that it is
clear
> enough
> I can understand it.  I have applied your formulae to data for a similar
but
> different flight, and will post this tomorrow for correction and general
> critique -
> it's getting late tonight and I want to do it right.
>
> I was thinking of writing a VBasic program to automate these
calculations, and
> probably will, so that I can integrate them with other such things.  But
if
> you
> happen to have a spreadsheet lying around, I would love a copy.  I'm using
> mostly
> Excel now, but can handle Lotus as well.
>
> The blood-red trees are indeed an artifact.  Fall is not nearly as
dramatic
> here as
> elsewhere.  I have not quite figured out my camera (Sony MVC-CD1000) and
> sometimes
> get "film noir" effects.  The video-editing software can correct this to a
> degree,
> but in doing so introduces color distortions and odd flickerings such as
you
> noted.
>
> Thanks ever so much!
> Jimmy Yawn
> jyawn@sfcc.net
>
> Randall Clague wrote:
>
> >  Interesting blood red color on the trees.  Is that
> > an artifact?  :-)
> >
> > Ready?  Here we go,
> >
> > (rocket math, clearly explained)
>
> > You could do it all in any spreadsheet.  I can send you an Excel or
> > Lotus file, if you're interested.  Anyone else, too, just ask.
> >
> > HTH,
> >
> > -R
> >
> > --
> > "Sutton is the beginning of wisdom -
> > but only the beginning."
> >                      -- Jeff Greason

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 11751 invoked from network); 6 Dec 2001 12:32:34 -0000
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 6 Dec 2001 12:32:34 -0000
Received: (qmail 32656 invoked by uid 50005); 6 Dec 2001 12:32:02 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4173. . Clean. Processed in 0.188677 secs); 06 Dec 2001 12:32:02 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 6 Dec 2001 12:32:02 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id EAA01109; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 04:23:14 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 97632 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 12:23:03 +0000
Received: from mail007.syd.optusnet.com.au (mail007.syd.optusnet.com.au          [203.2.75.231]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id EAA01095          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 04:23:02 -0800
Received: from jack (wagax3-061.dialup.optusnet.com.au [198.142.145.61]) by          mail007.syd.optusnet.com.au (8.11.1/8.11.1) with SMTP id fB6CMUQ20746          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 23:22:30 +1100
References:  <4.3.1.2.20011206002011.0328caa0@mail.idsoftware.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <002101c17e50$eb96da20$3d918ec6@jack>
Date:         Thu, 6 Dec 2001 23:24:14 +1100
Reply-To: "Jack" <jack_36@OPTUSNET.COM.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jack" <jack_36@OPTUSNET.COM.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Flared tubing fittings question
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

> I have heard that the 37 degree fittings are better for things that are
> going to be taken apart several times, but I don't know the reasoning
> behind it.

its very easy to stuff SAE fittings by overtightening (stretching the flare)

          ..Jack..

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 27043 invoked from network); 6 Dec 2001 14:18:42 -0000
Received: from smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.105]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 6 Dec 2001 14:18:42 -0000
Received: (qmail 15128 invoked by uid 50005); 6 Dec 2001 14:18:31 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpy with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4173. . Clean. Processed in 1.831187 secs); 06 Dec 2001 14:18:31 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 6 Dec 2001 14:18:27 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA01506; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 06:16:07 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 97669 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 14:15:57 +0000
Received: from cesaroni.net ([204.101.26.130]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7)          with ESMTP id GAA01492 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 6 Dec 2001          06:15:57 -0800
Received: from Anthony by cesaroni.net with SMTP (MDaemon.v2.8.7.0.R) for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 06 Dec 2001 09:13:26 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 8.5, Build 4.71.2173.0
Importance: Normal
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
X-MDaemon-Deliver-To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
X-Return-Path: ACesaroni@cesaroni.net
Message-ID:  <013601c17e4f$4f5d1120$1b0101c0@Anthony>
Date:         Thu, 6 Dec 2001 07:12:44 -0500
Reply-To: "Anthony Cesaroni" <ACesaroni@cesaroni.net>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Anthony Cesaroni" <ACesaroni@cesaroni.net>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Composite Sleeve NO2 tanks
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <5.0.2.1.0.20011205185452.0281cd68@mail.earthlink.net>

Carbon will provide the highest stiffness and low density but there is a
trade on impact resistance depending on the application. The highest impact
resistance and lowest density is available with Kevlar aramid but the trade
is stiffness. S-2 glass has very good impact resistance and good stiffness
but the trade is density. S-2 is much more expensive than E-glass but you
don't require as much so there is a return on the investment. If you are
filament winding, 720 yield S-2 glass processes like a dream and will also
maintain it's properties several hundred degrees higher than the E variety.
Most people will still end up going to carbon over S-2 though because the
cost delta is out weighed by the density return in most cases. You can also
combine these materials to obtain a balance of properties but all of this is
very application specific.

Galvanic corrosion with aluminum and carbon is a well understood phenomenon
but does not preclude this combination in composites by any means. Carbon
fiber is used extensively with aluminum honeycomb for example. The trick is
to inhibit the aluminum. JD Lincon composites manufacture a variety of
inhibitor/primers that can be sprayed or dipped, then oven cured. In
addition, we apply a .75 oz. glass veil between the carbon and the peel ply
during bagging or autoclaving. This can also be done on the mandrel before
winding the carbon on. The Hyperion tanks are a 48 million modulus carbon
and have aluminum components for example.

When winding with kevlar, you can switch over to S-2 for the final ply or
lay up a glass layer as a finish as well. This will allow for more
traditional grinding techniques for finishing. A diamond saw will still be
required for parting off however.

Anthony.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@itc.uci.edu]On
> Behalf Of Pierce Nichols
> Sent: Wednesday, December 05, 2001 10:07 PM
> To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
> Subject: Re: Composite Sleeve NO2 tanks
>
>
> At 09:27 PM 12/5/2001 -0600, James G Selin wrote:
> >Heres something for discussion-
> >
> >I've been toying with an idea for a while for a very lightweight nitrous
> >tank. Many composite suppliers carry carbon fiber, kevlar, and fiberglass
> >sleeves ranging from fractional inches to a few inches in diameter. I
> >have found some kevlar but its harder to come by. Basically, I would
> >machine two aluminum bulkheads (say 1.5") with some sort or retention
> >system. over a 1.5" mandrel I would lay up the composite sleeve and
> >vacuum bag it. Multiple layers could be added (as the sleeve facilitates
> >stretching) to achieve the desired strength. Would this be an acceptable
> >way to create a tank? What issues would I need to address that are
> >different from metal tanks? Would carbon fiber be to stiff or possibly
> >shatter when shocked? These products just seem like they would make nice
> >seemless lightweight tanks. Thoughts, concerns, etc.   Check out these
> >links to see some products.
>
>
>          The basic idea is solid and one that I've been kicking around.
> Carbon is probably the best material since it's the strongest. I would add
> a top layer of glass over the carbon, however, to provide additional
> toughness and protection during handling. One thing you have to
> consider is
> that carbon fiber and aluminum are incompatible; they form a galvanic
> circuit and the aluminum corrodes rapidly. If you use aluminum bulkheads,
> you need to isolate the carbon fiber from the aluminum; a layer of glass
> will do nicely. The retention system is potentially problematic -- I'm not
> sure how to attach the bulkheads in a safe, light, and durable fashion.
>          One idea that I have been kicking around is attaching each
> bulkhead to a relatively long (maybe 1.5 diameters?) grooved sleeve that
> fits snugly into the completed tube. The bonding surface on the inside of
> the tube would be appropriately prepared for bonding. The bond between the
> sleeve and the tube would be made with some strong and compatible
> industrial adhesive, such as HySol. The result would be a strong bond
> between the tube and the sleeve. With proper attachment between the
> bulkhead and the sleeve, this could even result in dismountable bulkheads.
>
>          -p
>
>
>
> >http://www.acp-composites.com/acp-bcs.htm  -Carbon fiber sleeves
> >
> >http://www.flextex.com/flex-sleeve.html  -fiberglass sleeve, also
> >available in kevlar
> >
> >http://www.choctawkaul.com/prod/ct300.html   -Kevlar sleeve
> >
> >
> >Jim Selin
>
> Mars or Bust!
> www.marssociety.com
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 11702 invoked from network); 6 Dec 2001 15:19:30 -0000
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 6 Dec 2001 15:19:30 -0000
Received: (qmail 18543 invoked by uid 50005); 6 Dec 2001 15:19:21 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4173. . Clean. Processed in 0.3052 secs); 06 Dec 2001 15:19:21 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 6 Dec 2001 15:19:21 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA01698; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 07:15:11 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 97689 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 15:15:01 +0000
Received: from cablecom.laribay.net (cablecom.laribay.net [66.20.57.4]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA01684 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 07:15:01 -0800
Received: from billbull (dial087.laribay.net [66.20.57.87]) by          cablecom.laribay.net (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id IAA16876 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 08:59:37 -0600 (CST)          (envelope-from bpbullock@laribay.net)
References:  <CMM.0.90.4.1007620372.billw@cypher>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <003201c17e68$ed9be500$57391442@billbull>
Date:         Thu, 6 Dec 2001 09:16:04 -0600
Reply-To: "Bill Bullock" <bpbullock@LARIBAY.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Bill Bullock" <bpbullock@LARIBAY.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Amateur?/How big is experimental?
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Folks:
    My opinion, as if anyone ever accused me of not having one:
    "Amateur" to me means that one is utilizing technology already developed
and proven so if
one single-handedly builds an exact copy of a SRB in his garage he is
participating in "Amateur Rocketry" no matter how laudable his achievements.
"Experimental" denotes use, research or testing of a new, innovative or
novel technology or new, innovative or novel application/applications of
proven and/or accepted technology. This is pretty well based upon the
official accepted guidelines of the U.S. Patent Office.
    So, since John is mentioned, lets beat his horse for awhile here: Under
these guidelines if John builds a 17 gazillion pound thrust
standard-technology vehicle using his proven PSAN blends and fires it safely
from Downtown L.A. or wherever he is participating in an amateur launch
because he is using proven technology. However, if he uses an expended Estes
A10-0T paper casing with 0.05 oz. of propellant and the rest of the case
filled by circuitry and a hearing aid battery and thereby implements an
Electronically Actuated Linear Thrust Modulated Impulse Rocket Motor which
develops 0.237 oz. of thrust for 1/509th of a second he is participating in
an "Experimental Rocketry" activity based upon the required
new/novel/innovative criteria because what he is doing ain't never (at least
to my knowledge) been done before.
    And while we are on John's case this morning, what does his doing
business with the DoD or any other legal entity have to do with his
"Amateur" standing at "MTA" if he is launching or testing something he
developed in his own time and built himself. I was present in July of 1957
when Werner VonBraun came to my uncle's 27,000 acre ranch in Christmas,
Florida, and those two along with Bernard Dietz flew their home-built
rockets. They all three had a ball and Dr. VonBraun laughed his Germanic ass
off when my brand new motor exploded on the pad. These were "professionals"
of the highest stature every day 24/7, but for 5 hours out there in an
orange grove they were rank amateurs of the first order and kids once again.
    Now to my preferences: if I want to fly one of my 1/4+" thick walled
steel motors running 2500 psi I do not want anyone's children, family or
pets anywhere in sight. I have seen these things come apart and they make a
mess of steel and concrete, much less people. If I am firing a new motor in
my well-used Endeavor test frame I do not want anyone around because I have
seen a few just like it "fly" through both doors of an automobile. I want to
hunker down in a bunker, fire and collect data and pictures. If I want to
see the thing as it fires I have an old tank periscope I will use. In 36
years of marriage my wife has never seen one of my motors fired. My daughter
is 26 and she has never seen one fired. They ain't going to start now.
    If and when I want to take the grandkids out and shoot some rockets I
have about 30 or 35 kit-built or scratch-built vehicles and about 150+
commercial motors to use. We can fire anywhere from 150 feet to about 3500
feet altitude "out of the box" with these. These two boys aren't going to be
anywhere near a test firing. Interested non-participating adults are welcome
if they will follow the safety rules. After I run my tests they are welcome
to fire whatever they have from Estes 1/4A's to whatever we can get
clearance for. But at my tests until after the test is run and the equipment
is packed away nobody does anything else. And eventhough I am somewhat of a
connoisseur of the fermented barley, there ain't no "Miller Time" at my
parties. We can do that back at the house over boiled crawfish and ribs.
Nobody drinks anything but coffee, soft drinks or water if I am running the
show. Other drinks are un-professional in the extreme and it looks bad on an
accident report. Non-compliance gets you an escort to the gate and a boot in
the derriere. I will not allow some drunk get himself or someone else killed
or injured.
    So, now I will leave the pulpit and return to my former benevolent self.
Thanks for "listening".
Bill
----- Original Message -----
From: William Chops Westfield <billw@cisco.com>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2001 12:32 AM
Subject: Re: [AR] Amateur?


>     I think if we transition from the term amateur to the term
Experimental
>     this debate dies.  This is IEAS we are proposing.  E for experimental.
>
> Doesn't "amateur" carry with it some connotations of "scale" that we're
> hoping will let us off the hook in certain regulatory issues?  I don't
want
> to have to be subject to the same rules for "experimentation" that Thiokol
> is whenever they do "research."
>
> John Wickman turning out ANCP by the ton for some NASA or DoD contract is
a
> professional, but John Wickman at MTA trying something new is an amateur?
>
> BillW
>
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 17613 invoked from network); 6 Dec 2001 15:49:50 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 6 Dec 2001 15:49:50 -0000
Received: (qmail 14985 invoked by uid 50005); 6 Dec 2001 15:49:41 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4173. . Clean. Processed in 0.142747 secs); 06 Dec 2001 15:49:41 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 6 Dec 2001 15:49:40 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA01753; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 07:23:25 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 97700 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 15:23:19 +0000
Received: from spsystems.net (spsystems.net [209.47.149.227]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA01739 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Thu,          6 Dec 2001 07:23:18 -0800
Received: (from henry@localhost) by spsystems.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id KAA10251;          Thu, 6 Dec 2001 10:22:39 -0500 (EST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1011206101726.9993D-100000@spsystems.net>
Date:         Thu, 6 Dec 2001 10:22:39 -0500
Reply-To: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Starting bi-props
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <5.1.0.14.0.20011206080303.00b4b428@erasmus.uib.no>

On Thu, 6 Dec 2001, Emil Johnsen wrote:
> When reading about oxidizer lead in bi-props I have always assumed it was a
> very short lead (a few tens of ms) and that making it to long would result
> in hard starts, from oxidizer building up in the chamber.

Remember that in a sea-level start, the chamber is already full of an
oxidizer (air).  There's no reason why adding more would cause a hard
start.  You'd get a hard start only if positive ignition didn't occur when
the fuel arrived.

(The presence of air is why oxidizer lead typically works better than
fuel lead.)

> However, in a NACA research memo (RM E57H01), I found this statement
> relating to an experiment with different injectors in a 900N lox-ammonia
> engine: "Starts were smooth with no noticeable detonations with a 1-second
> oxidant lead. Reducing the oxidant lead resulted in extremely hard starts
> or no ignition."

A note of caution:  ammonia is a notoriously troublesome fuel, reluctant
to ignite and prone to combustion problems.  Problems with it don't
necessarily generalize.

> Why would such a long ox lead be needed/beneficial? Wouldn't the Lox either
> be ejected from the engine and therefore be wasted...

They're probably measuring lead from the "open valve" signal.  Depending
on the engine and plumbing, there may be a substantial delay for valves to
open, liquid to reach the chamber, and injector flow to become fully
established.

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 19969 invoked from network); 6 Dec 2001 16:46:35 -0000
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 6 Dec 2001 16:46:35 -0000
Received: (qmail 17838 invoked by uid 50005); 6 Dec 2001 16:46:26 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4173. . Clean. Processed in 0.32797 secs); 06 Dec 2001 16:46:26 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 6 Dec 2001 16:46:26 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA01941; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 08:02:20 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 97731 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 16:02:16 +0000
Received: from cesaroni.net ([204.101.26.130]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7)          with ESMTP id IAA01927 for <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Thu, 6 Dec 2001          08:02:15 -0800
Received: from Anthony by cesaroni.net with SMTP (MDaemon.v2.8.7.0.R) for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Thu, 06 Dec 2001 11:00:30 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 8.5, Build 4.71.2173.0
Importance: Normal
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
X-MDaemon-Deliver-To: AROCKET@itc.uci.edu
X-Return-Path: ACesaroni@cesaroni.net
Message-ID:  <014001c17e5d$f0e6cb40$1b0101c0@Anthony>
Date:         Thu, 6 Dec 2001 08:57:28 -0500
Reply-To: "Anthony Cesaroni" <ACesaroni@cesaroni.net>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Anthony Cesaroni" <ACesaroni@cesaroni.net>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Composite Sleeve NO2 tanks
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Carbon will provide the highest stiffness and low density but there is a
trade on impact resistance depending on the application. The highest impact
resistance and lowest density is available with Kevlar aramid but the trade
is stiffness. S-2 glass has very good impact resistance and good stiffness
but the trade is density. S-2 is much more expensive than E-glass but you
don't require as much so there is a return on the investment. If you are
filament winding, 720 yield S-2 glass processes like a dream and will also
maintain it's properties several hundred degrees higher than the E variety.
Most people will still end up going to carbon over S-2 though because the
cost delta is out weighed by the density return in most cases. You can also
combine these materials to obtain a balance of properties but all of this is
very application specific

Galvanic corrosion with aluminum and carbon is a well understood phenomenon
but does not preclude this combination in composites by any means. Carbon
fiber is used extensively with aluminum honeycomb for example. The trick is
to inhibit the aluminum. JD Lincon composites manufacture a variety of
inhibitor/primers that can be sprayed or dipped, then oven cured. In
addition, we apply a .75 oz. glass veil between the carbon and the peel ply
during bagging or autoclaving. This can also be done on the mandrel before
winding the carbon on. The Hyperion tanks are a 48 million modulus carbon
and have aluminum components for example. In short carbon makes a very good
N20 tank again depending on the application.

When winding with kevlar, you can switch over to S-2 for the final ply or
lay up a glass layer as a finish as well. This will allow for more
traditional grinding techniques for finishing. A diamond saw will still be
required for parting off however.

Anthony.

> >
> >I've been toying with an idea for a while for a very lightweight nitrous
> >tank. Many composite suppliers carry carbon fiber, kevlar, and fiberglass
> >sleeves ranging from fractional inches to a few inches in diameter. I
> >have found some kevlar but its harder to come by. Basically, I would
> >machine two aluminum bulkheads (say 1.5") with some sort or retention
> >system. over a 1.5" mandrel I would lay up the composite sleeve and
> >vacuum bag it. Multiple layers could be added (as the sleeve facilitates
> >stretching) to achieve the desired strength. Would this be an acceptable
> >way to create a tank? What issues would I need to address that are
> >different from metal tanks? Would carbon fiber be to stiff or possibly
> >shatter when shocked? These products just seem like they would make nice
> >seemless lightweight tanks. Thoughts, concerns, etc.   Check out these
> >links to see some products.
>
>
>          The basic idea is solid and one that I've been kicking around.
> Carbon is probably the best material since it's the strongest. I would add
> a top layer of glass over the carbon, however, to provide additional
> toughness and protection during handling. One thing you have to
> consider is
> that carbon fiber and aluminum are incompatible; they form a galvanic
> circuit and the aluminum corrodes rapidly. If you use aluminum bulkheads,
> you need to isolate the carbon fiber from the aluminum; a layer of glass
> will do nicely.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 9355 invoked from network); 6 Dec 2001 17:12:14 -0000
Received: from smtpv.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.110]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 6 Dec 2001 17:12:14 -0000
Received: (qmail 9328 invoked by uid 50005); 6 Dec 2001 17:05:59 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpv with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4173. . Clean. Processed in 2.772143 secs); 06 Dec 2001 17:05:59 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpv.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 6 Dec 2001 17:05:55 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA02249; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 08:53:17 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 97787 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 16:53:16 +0000
Received: from mailhost0.trib.com (MAILHOST1.TRIB.COM [63.229.150.11] (may be          forged)) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA02235 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 08:53:15 -0800
Received: from mail.trib.com (mail.trib.com [12.10.158.17]) by          mailhost0.trib.com (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id fB6Gqhi45245; Thu, 6          Dec 2001 09:52:44 -0700 (MST) (envelope-from          jwckman@space-rockets.com)
Received: from [63.229.150.79] (HELO hppav) by mail.trib.com (CommuniGate Pro          SMTP 3.4.6) with SMTP id 62062811; Thu, 06 Dec 2001 09:52:42 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <NKEHJAOOKBPGIKOOPDEFGEMHCDAA.jwckman@space-rockets.com>
Date:         Thu, 6 Dec 2001 09:51:30 -0700
Reply-To: "John Wickman" <jwckman@SPACE-ROCKETS.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Wickman" <jwckman@SPACE-ROCKETS.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Amateur?
Comments: To: Anthony Cesaroni <ACesaroni@cesaroni.net>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <012d01c17de6$35bfd900$1b0101c0@Anthony>

We do not export PSAN to Canada due to the hassle of export regulations.  We
used to do that for Bristol Aerospace and the Canadian Military back in the
early 90's.  It was sent by truck under a GDEST license from the US Commerce
Dept.  We also exported to other countries via Federal Express or Air
Freight during that time.   We have discontinued that in 1995 as it was more
hassle than it was worth with the permitting paperwork.

I cannot imagine not telling you that if you asked for a price quote on PSAN
being shipped to Canada.  I know our conversation would have been post 1995.
We have sold PSAN in bulk quantities to amateurs and one business currently
making HPR motors with another interested in getting into the field.  All of
them are located in the US.

John Wickman


>>>-----Original Message-----
From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@itc.uci.edu]On
Behalf Of Anthony Cesaroni
Sent: Wednesday, December 05, 2001 4:40 PM
To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
Subject: Re: [AR] Amateur?


This is a bit in jest but good point John. Seeing that it's been at least 2
years plus since I inquired, I never did get the PSAN quote and TDP from you
that I requested, so I guess you are holding true to your position here ;).

Anthony<<<<

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 1518 invoked from network); 6 Dec 2001 17:17:13 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.105]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 6 Dec 2001 17:17:13 -0000
Received: (qmail 32315 invoked by uid 50005); 6 Dec 2001 17:17:02 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpy with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4173. . Clean. Processed in 2.142159 secs); 06 Dec 2001 17:17:02 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 6 Dec 2001 17:16:57 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA02134; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 08:37:27 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 97765 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 16:37:25 +0000
Received: from imo-r02.mx.aol.com (imo-r02.mx.aol.com [152.163.225.98]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA02120 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 08:37:24 -0800
Received: from Azt28@aol.com by imo-r02.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v31_r1.9.) id          s.183.406960 (18252); Thu, 6 Dec 2001 11:37:17 -0500 (EST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0E63_01C56B69.5B71F420"
X-Mailer: AOL 6.0 for Windows FR sub 10506
Message-ID:  <183.406960.2940f8bd@aol.com>
Date:         Thu, 6 Dec 2001 11:37:17 EST
Reply-To: <Azt28@AOL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <Azt28@AOL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Amateur?
Comments: To: 01rocket@gte.net
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0E63_01C56B69.5B71F420
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit


> Amateur comes from the
> >French "amator" or lover, and "amare" to love, so an Amateur Rocketeer is
> >someone who loves rockets, NOT whether he gets paid for rockets

In french, Amateur is... Amateur ! not Amator. The meaning is the same as
above.

Yvan Bozzonetti from France.


------=_NextPart_000_0E63_01C56B69.5B71F420
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<HTML><FONT FACE=arial,helvetica><FONT  SIZE=2>
<BR><BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE style="BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px">Amateur comes from the
<BR>&gt;French "amator" or lover, and "amare" to love, so an Amateur Rocketeer is
<BR>&gt;someone who loves rockets, NOT whether he gets paid for rockets</FONT><FONT  COLOR="#000000" SIZE=3 FAMILY="SANSSERIF" FACE="Arial" LANG="1"></BLOCKQUOTE>
<BR></FONT><FONT  COLOR="#000000" SIZE=2 FAMILY="SANSSERIF" FACE="Arial" LANG="1">
<BR>In french, Amateur is... Amateur ! not Amator. The meaning is the same as above.
<BR>
<BR>Yvan Bozzonetti from France.
<BR></FONT></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0E63_01C56B69.5B71F420--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 8678 invoked from network); 6 Dec 2001 17:18:49 -0000
Received: from smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.105]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 6 Dec 2001 17:18:49 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 2695 invoked by uid 50005); 6 Dec 2001 17:18:39 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpy with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4173. . Clean. Processed in 0.466543 secs); 06 Dec 2001 17:18:39 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 6 Dec 2001 17:18:37 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA02442; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 09:13:10 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 97831 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 17:13:03 +0000
Received: from mail.aros.net (mail.aros.net [207.173.16.20]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA02428 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu,          6 Dec 2001 09:13:03 -0800
Received: from biomicro.com (cust-208-187-122-40.bbsc.net [208.187.122.40]) by          mail.aros.net (8.11.6/8.9.3) with ESMTP id fB6HD2j70360 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 10:13:02 -0700 (MST)
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.77 [en] (Win98; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <4.3.1.2.20011206002011.0328caa0@mail.idsoftware.com>            <002101c17e50$eb96da20$3d918ec6@jack>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3C0FA71D.E86C13AC@biomicro.com>
Date:         Thu, 6 Dec 2001 10:13:01 -0700
Reply-To: "Mark K. Spute" <mks@BIOMICRO.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Mark K. Spute" <mks@BIOMICRO.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Flared tubing fittings question
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Thanks, Jack and John C.

So, if I am understanding this correctly, the 45 deg SAE fittings are designed
to be more or less permanent connections due to the potential for stretching the
flare, while 37 deg  AN and JIC fittings are more amenable to being broken down
and re-coupled.

Thanks for your help.

Jack wrote:

> > I have heard that the 37 degree fittings are better for things that are
> > going to be taken apart several times, but I don't know the reasoning
> > behind it.
>
> its very easy to stuff SAE fittings by overtightening (stretching the flare)
>
>           ..Jack..

--
Mark K. Spute
Senior Research Engineer
BioMicro Systems Inc.
1.801.256.1906  (phone)
1.801.256.1901  (fax)

KD7IWE,  RRS, hopeful future Stolly owner

"It is difficult to say what is impossible, for the dream of yesterday is the
hope of today and the reality of tomorrow."
     Dr. Robert H. Goddard

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 7859 invoked from network); 6 Dec 2001 17:25:31 -0000
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 6 Dec 2001 17:25:31 -0000
Received: (qmail 28039 invoked by uid 50005); 6 Dec 2001 17:25:20 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4173. . Clean. Processed in 1.192326 secs); 06 Dec 2001 17:25:20 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 6 Dec 2001 17:25:18 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA02372; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 09:04:47 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 97815 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 17:04:45 +0000
Received: from syntheon.inicom.com          (IDENT:root@66.mueb.miam.philapaaz.dsl.att.net [63.242.216.66]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA02358 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 09:04:44 -0800
Received: from koreynew (adsl-81-3-189.mia.bellsouth.net [65.81.3.189]) by          syntheon.inicom.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id MAA09058 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 12:35:58 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 8.5, Build 4.71.2173.0
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <002b01c17e78$0dc564a0$6501a8c0@koreynew>
Date:         Thu, 6 Dec 2001 12:04:23 -0500
Reply-To: "Korey Kline" <k2@HYBRIDS.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Korey Kline" <k2@HYBRIDS.COM>
Subject:      [AR] Amateur or Experimental ?
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <CMM.0.90.4.1007620372.billw@cypher>

> I think if we transition from the term amateur to the term
> Experimental this debate dies.

This is a VERY good point! I use "amateur" as the traditional term for what
we are about and have always supported the term "Experimental" as a
politically correct variation because of the #3 definition of amateur in
Webster's dictionary: "One lacking in experience and competence in the art
or science."

Experimental is defined as "try out a new procedure, idea, or activity -
controlled conditions in order to discover an unknown effect"

> "Experimental" denotes use, research or testing of a new, innovative or
> novel technology or new, innovative or novel application/applications of
> proven and/or accepted technology. This is pretty well based upon the
> official accepted guidelines of the U.S. Patent Office.

This would imply that the FIRST time you try it it's an experiment, but the
Second time you try it your AMATEUR?
I guess I would just say they're all experiments because your not always
sure of the outcome!

OK "Experimental" HYBRIDS it is! :-)

K2

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 10268 invoked from network); 6 Dec 2001 17:26:07 -0000
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 6 Dec 2001 17:26:07 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 1715 invoked by uid 50005); 6 Dec 2001 17:25:58 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4173. . Clean. Processed in 2.723717 secs); 06 Dec 2001 17:25:58 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 6 Dec 2001 17:25:52 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA02226; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 08:52:09 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 97780 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 16:52:02 +0000
Received: from mail.aros.net (mail.aros.net [207.173.16.20]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA02212 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Thu,          6 Dec 2001 08:52:01 -0800
Received: from biomicro.com (cust-208-187-122-40.bbsc.net [208.187.122.40]) by          mail.aros.net (8.11.6/8.9.3) with ESMTP id fB6Gq1j42681; Thu, 6 Dec          2001 09:52:01 -0700 (MST)
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.77 [en] (Win98; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <CMM.0.90.4.1007620372.billw@cypher>            <003201c17e68$ed9be500$57391442@billbull>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3C0FA22F.7612312F@biomicro.com>
Date:         Thu, 6 Dec 2001 09:52:00 -0700
Reply-To: "Mark K. Spute" <mks@BIOMICRO.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Mark K. Spute" <mks@BIOMICRO.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Amateur?/How big is experimental?
Comments: To: "wamex@pad17.com" <wamex@pad17.com>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Okay, bill has made some excellent points here about experimental launches.  I
am ready to step back from my previous position about allowing HPR & MR
concurrent with Am/Ex.  It is now apparent to me that there are some times when
it is wholly inappropriate to allow non-participatory visitors anywhere near the
test stand/launch site.  However, I think this should be handled on a case by
case basis instead of issuing a blanket statement that I will not allow any HPR
or MR on site.

Adressing the amateur issue:  One of my favorite definitions, although
completely unscientific, is:" An amateur is someone who practices until he gets
it right.  A professional practices until he can't get it wrong."  Of course, by
that standard, everyone in rocketry is an amateur.

I really liked the post that defined amateurs as "lovers."  That fits.

Gotta do some actual work around here now . . .

Bill Bullock wrote:

> Folks:
>     My opinion, as if anyone ever accused me of not having one:
>     "Amateur" to me means that one is utilizing technology already developed
> and proven so if
> one single-handedly builds an exact copy of a SRB in his garage he is
> participating in "Amateur Rocketry" no matter how laudable his achievements.
> "Experimental" denotes use, research or testing of a new, innovative or
> novel technology or new, innovative or novel application/applications of
> proven and/or accepted technology. This is pretty well based upon the
> official accepted guidelines of the U.S. Patent Office.
>     So, since John is mentioned, lets beat his horse for awhile here: Under
> these guidelines if John builds a 17 gazillion pound thrust
> standard-technology vehicle using his proven PSAN blends and fires it safely
> from Downtown L.A. or wherever he is participating in an amateur launch
> because he is using proven technology. However, if he uses an expended Estes
> A10-0T paper casing with 0.05 oz. of propellant and the rest of the case
> filled by circuitry and a hearing aid battery and thereby implements an
> Electronically Actuated Linear Thrust Modulated Impulse Rocket Motor which
> develops 0.237 oz. of thrust for 1/509th of a second he is participating in
> an "Experimental Rocketry" activity based upon the required
> new/novel/innovative criteria because what he is doing ain't never (at least
> to my knowledge) been done before.
>     And while we are on John's case this morning, what does his doing
> business with the DoD or any other legal entity have to do with his
> "Amateur" standing at "MTA" if he is launching or testing something he
> developed in his own time and built himself. I was present in July of 1957
> when Werner VonBraun came to my uncle's 27,000 acre ranch in Christmas,
> Florida, and those two along with Bernard Dietz flew their home-built
> rockets. They all three had a ball and Dr. VonBraun laughed his Germanic ass
> off when my brand new motor exploded on the pad. These were "professionals"
> of the highest stature every day 24/7, but for 5 hours out there in an
> orange grove they were rank amateurs of the first order and kids once again.
>     Now to my preferences: if I want to fly one of my 1/4+" thick walled
> steel motors running 2500 psi I do not want anyone's children, family or
> pets anywhere in sight. I have seen these things come apart and they make a
> mess of steel and concrete, much less people. If I am firing a new motor in
> my well-used Endeavor test frame I do not want anyone around because I have
> seen a few just like it "fly" through both doors of an automobile. I want to
> hunker down in a bunker, fire and collect data and pictures. If I want to
> see the thing as it fires I have an old tank periscope I will use. In 36
> years of marriage my wife has never seen one of my motors fired. My daughter
> is 26 and she has never seen one fired. They ain't going to start now.
>     If and when I want to take the grandkids out and shoot some rockets I
> have about 30 or 35 kit-built or scratch-built vehicles and about 150+
> commercial motors to use. We can fire anywhere from 150 feet to about 3500
> feet altitude "out of the box" with these. These two boys aren't going to be
> anywhere near a test firing. Interested non-participating adults are welcome
> if they will follow the safety rules. After I run my tests they are welcome
> to fire whatever they have from Estes 1/4A's to whatever we can get
> clearance for. But at my tests until after the test is run and the equipment
> is packed away nobody does anything else. And eventhough I am somewhat of a
> connoisseur of the fermented barley, there ain't no "Miller Time" at my
> parties. We can do that back at the house over boiled crawfish and ribs.
> Nobody drinks anything but coffee, soft drinks or water if I am running the
> show. Other drinks are un-professional in the extreme and it looks bad on an
> accident report. Non-compliance gets you an escort to the gate and a boot in
> the derriere. I will not allow some drunk get himself or someone else killed
> or injured.
>     So, now I will leave the pulpit and return to my former benevolent self.
> Thanks for "listening".
> Bill
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: William Chops Westfield <billw@cisco.com>
> To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
> Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2001 12:32 AM
> Subject: Re: [AR] Amateur?
>
> >     I think if we transition from the term amateur to the term
> Experimental
> >     this debate dies.  This is IEAS we are proposing.  E for experimental.
> >
> > Doesn't "amateur" carry with it some connotations of "scale" that we're
> > hoping will let us off the hook in certain regulatory issues?  I don't
> want
> > to have to be subject to the same rules for "experimentation" that Thiokol
> > is whenever they do "research."
> >
> > John Wickman turning out ANCP by the ton for some NASA or DoD contract is
> a
> > professional, but John Wickman at MTA trying something new is an amateur?
> >
> > BillW
> >
> >

--
Mark K. Spute
Senior Research Engineer
BioMicro Systems Inc.
1.801.256.1906  (phone)
1.801.256.1901  (fax)

KD7IWE,  RRS, hopeful future Stolly owner

"It is difficult to say what is impossible, for the dream of yesterday is the
hope of today and the reality of tomorrow."
     Dr. Robert H. Goddard

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 13953 invoked from network); 6 Dec 2001 17:41:44 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 6 Dec 2001 17:41:44 -0000
Received: (qmail 22174 invoked by uid 50005); 6 Dec 2001 17:41:34 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4173. . Clean. Processed in 1.617804 secs); 06 Dec 2001 17:41:34 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 6 Dec 2001 17:41:31 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA02316; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 08:58:59 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 97802 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 16:58:57 +0000
Received: from spsystems.net (spsystems.net [209.47.149.227]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA02298 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Thu,          6 Dec 2001 08:58:57 -0800
Received: (from henry@localhost) by spsystems.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id LAA11368;          Thu, 6 Dec 2001 11:58:17 -0500 (EST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1011206114513.10578A-100000@spsystems.net>
Date:         Thu, 6 Dec 2001 11:58:17 -0500
Reply-To: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Starting bi-props
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <200112061627.LAA07114@pastene.East.Sun.COM>

On Thu, 6 Dec 2001, Peter Finch - High End Server Systems wrote:
> The problem is mostly mixing-before-ignition, not pooling of one propellent,
> right?

Right.  The deadly thing is mixing with no flame.

> If we were trying to start rockets
> in a methane atmosphere, we'd want a fuel lead?

Probably.  Note, though, that oxidizer lead is not an invariable rule even
here on Earth.  There are engines which start with a fuel lead.

There is some reason to suspect that fuel lead is trickier, because of the
oxygen atmosphere.  But the devil is in the details, and either way can be
made to work.  If memory serves, the RL10 (a high-altitude engine, but
often tested at sea level, and used at sea level in its DC-X variant) uses
a fuel lead.

> Is there a problem with a build up of liquid in the chambers?

Not specifically so, in general... but the habit of firing and testing
rockets in a vertical position may be hiding problems there.  (There was
some concern about this in some of the old aircraft rocket engines, I
believe, although that may have been associated with aborted starts rather
than successful ones.)

> Would the pound of lox gassify quickly enough?

Hmm, that's an interesting point.  Unless the chamber is prechilled, which
isn't usual, I'd guess that a lot of that is gas by the time the fuel
arrives.  Some of that lead time may be needed to chill the hardware and
establish *liquid* oxidizer flow.

> What if you completely filled the chamber with lox before introducing
> fuel?

I'd worry, but I don't have a good enough feel for the details to be sure.

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 14027 invoked from network); 6 Dec 2001 17:48:53 -0000
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 6 Dec 2001 17:48:53 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 7691 invoked by uid 50005); 6 Dec 2001 17:48:43 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4173. . Clean. Processed in 1.453267 secs); 06 Dec 2001 17:48:44 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 6 Dec 2001 17:48:41 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA02547; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 09:26:34 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 97857 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 17:26:31 +0000
Received: from mail.aros.net (mail.aros.net [207.173.16.20]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA02532 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu,          6 Dec 2001 09:26:30 -0800
Received: from biomicro.com (cust-208-187-122-40.bbsc.net [208.187.122.40]) by          mail.aros.net (8.11.6/8.9.3) with ESMTP id fB6HQUj87655 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 10:26:30 -0700 (MST)
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.77 [en] (Win98; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <Pine.BSI.3.91.1011206114513.10578A-100000@spsystems.net>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3C0FAA45.4A86F7C0@biomicro.com>
Date:         Thu, 6 Dec 2001 10:26:29 -0700
Reply-To: "Mark K. Spute" <mks@BIOMICRO.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Mark K. Spute" <mks@BIOMICRO.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Starting bi-props
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Henry Spencer wrote:

[snip]

> > Would the pound of lox gassify quickly enough?
>
> Hmm, that's an interesting point.  Unless the chamber is prechilled, which
> isn't usual, I'd guess that a lot of that is gas by the time the fuel
> arrives.  Some of that lead time may be needed to chill the hardware and
> establish *liquid* oxidizer flow.

It may or may not.  My very first hot-fire static test was a failure because of
the small size of the propellant lines that I used and their long lengths.  Almost
all of my LOx vaporized in the lines before reaching the engines.  The problem was
that the boiling LOx raised the pressure in the lines so high that they
essentially vapor-locked and I could not extablish liquid oxygen flow.  Got some
very interesting video (now long since gone) of a low frequency chugging.  It was
not an impressive test.

Lesson learned was to keep propellant line lengths as short as possible and use
the largest ID tube that you can with the thinnest wall that you can to keep the
thermal mass of the plumbing down.  Or pre-chill the entire thing with LN2 before
firing.  (Haven't actually tried that yet.)


--
Mark K. Spute
Senior Research Engineer
BioMicro Systems Inc.
1.801.256.1906  (phone)
1.801.256.1901  (fax)

KD7IWE,  RRS, hopeful future Stolly owner

"It is difficult to say what is impossible, for the dream of yesterday is the hope
of today and the reality of tomorrow."
     Dr. Robert H. Goddard

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 13852 invoked from network); 6 Dec 2001 18:05:06 -0000
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 6 Dec 2001 18:05:06 -0000
Received: (qmail 15923 invoked by uid 50005); 6 Dec 2001 18:04:53 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4175. . Clean. Processed in 8.016373 secs); 06 Dec 2001 18:04:53 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 6 Dec 2001 18:04:42 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA02677; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 09:43:38 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 97870 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 17:43:32 +0000
Received: from cablecom.laribay.net (cablecom.laribay.net [66.20.57.4]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA02662 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 09:43:32 -0800
Received: from billbull (dial071.laribay.net [66.20.57.71]) by          cablecom.laribay.net (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id LAA18409 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 11:28:01 -0600 (CST)          (envelope-from bpbullock@laribay.net)
References: <CMM.0.90.4.1007620372.billw@cypher>                      <003201c17e68$ed9be500$57391442@billbull>             <3C0FA22F.7612312F@biomicro.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <001701c17e7d$a926f940$47391442@billbull>
Date:         Thu, 6 Dec 2001 11:44:30 -0600
Reply-To: "Bill Bullock" <bpbullock@LARIBAY.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Bill Bullock" <bpbullock@LARIBAY.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Amateur?/How big is experimental?
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Mark:
    A Cajun gentleman once defined the difference in "Amateur" and
"Professional" to me by stating: "Professionals do it for money; Amateurs do
it for fun." Of course we were discussing women at the time...... Probably
pertains to rocketeers as well...
Bill
----- Original Message -----
From: Mark K. Spute <mks@BIOMICRO.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2001 10:52 AM
Subject: Re: [AR] Amateur?/How big is experimental?


> Adressing the amateur issue:  One of my favorite definitions, although
> completely unscientific, is:" An amateur is someone who practices until he
gets
> it right.  A professional practices until he can't get it wrong."  Of
course, by
> that standard, everyone in rocketry is an amateur.
>
> I really liked the post that defined amateurs as "lovers."  That fits.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 28715 invoked from network); 6 Dec 2001 18:19:12 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 6 Dec 2001 18:19:12 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 30969 invoked by uid 50005); 6 Dec 2001 18:19:03 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4173. . Clean. Processed in 1.727038 secs); 06 Dec 2001 18:19:03 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 6 Dec 2001 18:18:59 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA02072; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 08:30:24 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 97750 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 16:30:20 +0000
Received: from mercury.Sun.COM (mercury.Sun.COM [192.9.25.1]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA02058 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu,          6 Dec 2001 08:30:20 -0800
Received: from pastene.East.Sun.COM ([129.148.183.32]) by mercury.Sun.COM          (8.9.3+Sun/8.9.3) with ESMTP id IAA16800; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 08:29:03          -0800 (PST)
Received: from chopin (chopin [129.148.183.180]) by pastene.East.Sun.COM          (8.9.3+Sun/8.9.3/ENSMAIL,v2.1p1) with SMTP id LAA07114; Thu, 6 Dec          2001 11:27:44 -0500 (EST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-MD5: 3sBvEqZZPP5b6P7CAzOj9w==
X-Mailer: dtmail 1.3.0 @(#)CDE Version 1.3.5 SunOS 5.7 sun4u sparc
Message-ID:  <200112061627.LAA07114@pastene.East.Sun.COM>
Date:         Thu, 6 Dec 2001 11:27:44 -0500
Reply-To: "Peter Finch - High End Server Systems" <Peter.Finch@SUN.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Peter Finch - High End Server Systems" <Peter.Finch@SUN.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Starting bi-props
Comments: cc: henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

> > Why would such a long ox lead be needed/beneficial? Wouldn't the Lox either
> > be ejected from the engine and therefore be wasted...
>
> They're probably measuring lead from the "open valve" signal.  Depending
> on the engine and plumbing, there may be a substantial delay for valves to
> open, liquid to reach the chamber, and injector flow to become fully
> established.
>
>                                                           Henry Spencer
>                                                        henry@spsystems.net

Presumably if they were going to do that, they'd measure the difference between
the "open valve" signal for oxidizer and the "open valve" signal for fuel.  The
plumbing systems may differ in latency... particularly if the engine is
regeneratively cooled.  But typically engines are cooled by fuels, so that
would likely only exacerbate the lead.

That said, 1 second doesn't seem like a tremendous amount of time; it would
correspond to less than a pound of lox in the engine discussed.

The problem is mostly mixing-before-ignition, not pooling of one propellent,
right?  Air (oxidiser) is already pooled.  If we were trying to start rockets
in a methane atmosphere, we'd want a fuel lead?  Is there a problem with a
build up of liquid in the chambers?  Would the pound of lox gassify quickly
enough?  What if you completely filled the chamber with lox before introducing
fuel?

--
Peter Finch, peter.finch@east.sun.com
Sun Microsystems, Inc. http://www.sun.com

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 8903 invoked from network); 6 Dec 2001 19:57:48 -0000
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 6 Dec 2001 19:57:48 -0000
Received: (qmail 5439 invoked by uid 50005); 6 Dec 2001 19:57:37 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4175. . Clean. Processed in 1.612274 secs); 06 Dec 2001 19:57:37 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 6 Dec 2001 19:57:35 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA03235; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 11:29:24 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 97919 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 19:29:18 +0000
Received: from syntheon.inicom.com          (IDENT:root@66.mueb.miam.philapaaz.dsl.att.net [63.242.216.66]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA03221 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 11:29:18 -0800
Received: from koreynew (adsl-81-3-189.mia.bellsouth.net [65.81.3.189]) by          syntheon.inicom.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id PAA09204 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 15:00:34 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 8.5, Build 4.71.2173.0
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <003401c17e8c$3b52fc20$6501a8c0@koreynew>
Date:         Thu, 6 Dec 2001 14:28:49 -0500
Reply-To: "Korey Kline" <k2@HYBRIDS.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Korey Kline" <k2@HYBRIDS.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Amateur?
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <NKEHJAOOKBPGIKOOPDEFAEMCCDAA.jwckman@space-rockets.com>

> It is not fair to amateurs to "claim" an amateur altitude record when the
> effort was entirely paid for by a US Government contract.  Most amateurs
> cannot even compete for the record simply because they do not
> have the time or financial resources.
> John Wickman

>This not very couched dig at Korey Kline while fair, is still besides
>the point.  He did fly a rocket.
>J Irvine

A little history.......

The 6" N2O Hybrid rocket was designed in California PRIOR to eAc in Miami,
with the intent of flying at MTA. I still have the built 4" flight version
in California that would have been the worlds first N2O/HTPB flight, when
Kevin Smith(with phone help from me)flew his 2" first. We joined forces in
Miami and developed the Hypertek HPR system (not a small task at the
time)and continued refining the 6" from sub scale tests. Once we were fairly
happy with the design we started building prototype test hardware, nozzle
tooling and even poured the first two fuel grains. At the same time we
contacted Wallops about launching a 6" Sounding Rocket, what would it take
and how much would it cost? As a result of that phone call Marshall got word
and invited us in NASA/DARPA HPDP project to fulfill their flight
requirement. Apparently NONE of the BIG guys thought they could do it and
with our Hypertek track record we at least had a shot. Additionally (in my
opinion)if we failed there would be no dishonor to NASA and the BIG
company's great name as well as another example not to deal with small
business. After ENDLESS NASA design reviews NOTHING was changed with the
exception of the fins because of a requirement to spin all rockets from
Wallops! We had a running joke at the time, "When the stack of paper work
reaches the rocket's design altitude, we simply throw the rocket off the top
and say the flight was a success!" I believe with few exceptions everyone
knows we (Korey, Kevin, Tom & eAc) designed built and flew the Hyperion,
that's why I call it an amateur rocket!

The biggest misconception is mimicked by Wickman; "the effort was entirely
paid for by a US Government contract".
First of all we were one of seven other company's in a "consortium" of
Hybrid developers and the entire program was a technology "REINVESTMENT"
project at the 30% level. Which means YOU pay your own way for EVERYTHING
and AFTER you successfully complete your milestone, they REIMBURSE up to 30%
of what you've spent up to a limit!!! When it was all said and done it
worked out to about 22%. I personally watched Kevin write two of the three
checks to NASA Wallops from his personal checking account to pay for the
launches. So at the time we were thinking "Free Money" and "Cool Tours" for
something we were going to do anyway! I can tell you for a fact that NASA
involvement COST us more than the money we made and clearly it would have
been cheaper to fly out of Blackrock, but the behind the scene tours were
worth every cent at Wallops. The Wallops Island ground crew were a great
help and are truly "Steely Eyed Misslemen"!  Everything said and done, I
wouldn't trade the experience for anything.

>Most amateurs cannot even compete for the record simply because they do not
have the time or financial resources.<

Most people don't have the financial resources to invest that Kevin has
either, so what's your point? You want to put a spending cap on how much an
individual can invest to break the record?......Sorry Ky.......Sorry
Anthony.....I thought we just finished a discussion that LOW COST wasn't the
priority? Truth be told 120,000 ft isn't that tuff to beat.....it's just
that NOBODY SERIOUS is trying very hard. Excuses like "we can't afford to
static test the motor cuz the propellant costs to much".......That's
it.....get out of the sand box....go do something you can afford! I do agree
now with the whole FAA crackdown that most people may have lost the window
of opportunity to launch soon. I do believe once we get someone like Ky to
work all the details with the FAA others will follow closely behind. Even if
you look at the number of motors tested that could potentially break the
record it's nearly empty set! I think that GPS has evolved to actually
determine altitude so that should no longer be an issue. What other excuses
are there? Let's go back to money, that's one reason to not define
amateur/professional as related to money! The people who are getting things
done are using the Governments money to boot strap themselves up to
accomplish better things than they could otherwise!

So the question boils down to is an Amateur(experimental) Rocketeer limited
to 4 hours a week in his garage with a $200 a month budget that his wife has
to approve,  or somebody who simply loves rockets and will even sell his
immortal amateur soul to the government to build bigger things?  Trust me
when I say as a business that there is no money in rockets! At best it's a
"Get Rich SLOW Scheme".

I've said my piece, I feel better now, please go back to normal AROCKET
format.

Climbing into armored personnel carrier because I said Hybrid twice and
mentioned an HPR product twice. :-)

K2

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 12807 invoked from network); 6 Dec 2001 20:28:23 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 6 Dec 2001 20:28:23 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 7131 invoked by uid 50005); 6 Dec 2001 20:26:23 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpb with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4175. . Clean. Processed in 4.203086 secs); 06 Dec 2001 20:26:24 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 6 Dec 2001 20:26:18 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA03559; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 11:57:34 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 97949 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 19:57:23 +0000
Received: from m5.boston.juno.com (m5.boston.juno.com [64.136.24.68]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA03541 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 11:57:23 -0800
Received: from cookie.juno.com by cookie.juno.com for          <"r2Fo8hpwT0kn33UwylHELMN/WOTpJvUcvzQrpH368sy6//jmxlpqDQ==">
Received: (from icantdecide@juno.com) by m5.boston.juno.com (jqueuemail) id          GMZJNWGY; Thu, 06 Dec 2001 14:55:44 EST
X-Mailer: Juno 4.0.9
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Juno-Line-Breaks: 1-13,16-34,40-41,46-52
X-Juno-Att: 0
X-Juno-RefParts: 0
Message-ID:  <20011206.145633.-723577.1.icantdecide@juno.com>
Date:         Thu, 6 Dec 2001 14:56:33 -0600
Reply-To: "James G Selin" <icantdecide@JUNO.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "James G Selin" <icantdecide@JUNO.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Composite Sleeve NO2 tanks
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

On Thu, 6 Dec 2001 07:12:44 -0500 Anthony Cesaroni
<ACesaroni@cesaroni.net> writes:

> Galvanic corrosion with aluminum and carbon is a well understood
> phenomenon
> but does not preclude this combination in composites by any means.
> Carbon
> fiber is used extensively with aluminum honeycomb for example. The
> trick is
> to inhibit the aluminum. JD Lincon composites manufacture a variety
> of
> inhibitor/primers that can be sprayed or dipped, then oven cured.


I mentioned on another post the possibility of using anodized aluminum to
solve this problem. Would that be an adequate and appropriate step or are
the inhibitors still necessary?


> In addition, we apply a .75 oz. glass veil between the carbon and the
> peel ply
> during bagging or autoclaving. This can also be done on the mandrel
> before
> winding the carbon on. The Hyperion tanks are a 48 million modulus
> carbon
> and have aluminum components for example.
>
> When winding with kevlar, you can switch over to S-2 for the final
> ply or
> lay up a glass layer as a finish as well. This will allow for more
> traditional grinding techniques for finishing. A diamond saw will
> still be
> required for parting off however.


Excellent idea based on what I heard of peoples efforts to finish kevlar.
I would definately do this. On another note would I be able to say put a
layer of kevlar down first then carbon or do they need to be a woven mix
to enjoy both properties? Could there be issues with missmatches such as
thermal expansion that could case undue stress from chilled nitrous
during discharge?

Approximately how thick should such a tank be? If one were to create a
nitrous tank from carbon or kevlar cloth, how many wraps of what weight
cloth would be kosher? Obviously this can all be calculated but I don't
want to get into heavy (at least to me) analysis of fiber orientation and
matrix moduluses just jet.

Thanks for your help...

Jim Selin

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 17047 invoked from network); 6 Dec 2001 20:42:58 -0000
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 6 Dec 2001 20:42:58 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 11420 invoked by uid 50005); 6 Dec 2001 20:42:48 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4175. . Clean. Processed in 6.936234 secs); 06 Dec 2001 20:42:48 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 6 Dec 2001 20:42:39 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA03576; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 11:57:37 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 97956 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 19:57:36 +0000
Received: from m5.boston.juno.com (m5.boston.juno.com [64.136.24.68]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA03544 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 11:57:23 -0800
Received: from cookie.juno.com by cookie.juno.com for          <"r2Fo8hpwT0kn33UwylHELMN/WOTpJvUcvzQrpH368swQfvKug3XOXA==">
Received: (from icantdecide@juno.com) by m5.boston.juno.com (jqueuemail) id          GMZJNWDG; Thu, 06 Dec 2001 14:55:44 EST
X-Mailer: Juno 4.0.9
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Juno-Line-Breaks: 1-18,20-28,43-47
X-Juno-Att: 0
X-Juno-RefParts: 0
Message-ID:  <20011206.145633.-723577.0.icantdecide@juno.com>
Date:         Thu, 6 Dec 2001 14:39:27 -0600
Reply-To: "James G Selin" <icantdecide@JUNO.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "James G Selin" <icantdecide@JUNO.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Composite Sleeve NO2 tanks
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

On Wed, 05 Dec 2001 19:07:05 -0800 Pierce Nichols
<forkbomb@earthlink.net> writes:
>          The basic idea is solid and one that I've been kicking
> around.
> Carbon is probably the best material since it's the strongest. I
> would add
> a top layer of glass over the carbon, however, to provide additional
>
> toughness and protection during handling. One thing you have to
> consider is
> that carbon fiber and aluminum are incompatible; they form a
> galvanic
> circuit and the aluminum corrodes rapidly. If you use aluminum
> bulkheads,
> you need to isolate the carbon fiber from the aluminum; a layer of
> glass
> will do nicely.


How about anodizing the aluminum components before laying up the cloth?
That I imagine would take care of the problem.


> The retention system is potentially problematic --
> I'm not
> sure how to attach the bulkheads in a safe, light, and durable
> fashion.


I was thinking I would cut a groove on the outside like an o-ring groove
and tie a carbon or kevlar yarn around the sleeve at that point causing
it too depress into void tightly. Additionally, I would continue the
sleeve past this point and wrap it around a corner where it can be
compressed by a screw on ring of some kind up against an o-ring. I played
with some cross sections in CAD one day but never saved it. I'll see what
i can com up with again. In general, I was thinking I would bond the
sleeve to just a mounting rim, to which the bulkhead would screw into or
bolt onto securely. This would aid in core extraction and tank
preparation rather than just having say a narrow swagelock fitting to
work with. I was thinking I would attach the mounting rim to say an
aluminum rod so spacing and alignment would be precise and then build up
a layer of wax around the rod until its big enoung to be trimed to 1.5"
and flush with the bulkheads on a lathe. Then the wax could be gently
melted away, the rod removed, and the ID cleaned thoughly.

Jim Selin

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 6660 invoked from network); 6 Dec 2001 21:13:26 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.105]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 6 Dec 2001 21:13:26 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 3114 invoked by uid 50005); 6 Dec 2001 21:13:15 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpy with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4175. . Clean. Processed in 6.930119 secs); 06 Dec 2001 21:13:15 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 6 Dec 2001 21:13:06 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA04143; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 12:57:18 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 98035 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 20:57:08 +0000
Received: from adobe.com (smtp-relay-1.adobe.com [192.150.11.1]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA04129 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu,          6 Dec 2001 12:57:08 -0800
Received: from inner-relay-1.corp.adobe.com ([153.32.1.51]) by adobe.com          (1.0.0/8.11.4) with ESMTP id fB6Kvi025457 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>;          Thu, 6 Dec 2001 12:57:44 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mailsj-v1.corp.adobe.com (mailsj-dev.corp.adobe.com          [153.32.1.192]) by inner-relay-1.corp.adobe.com (8.11.4/8.11.4) with          ESMTP id fB6KupS13876 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 6 Dec 2001          12:56:51 -0800 (PST)
Received: from sronald.earthlink.net ([153.32.63.111]) by          mailsj-v1.corp.adobe.com (Netscape Messaging Server 4.15 v1 Jul 11          2001 16:32:57) with ESMTP id GNXWU800.VHK; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 12:56:32          -0800
X-Sender: forkbomb@mail.earthlink.net
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <5.1.0.14.0.20011206125039.03339990@mail.earthlink.net>
Date:         Thu, 6 Dec 2001 13:02:05 -0800
Reply-To: "Pierce Nichols" <forkbomb@EARTHLINK.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Pierce Nichols" <forkbomb@EARTHLINK.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Composite Sleeve NO2 tanks
Comments: To: James G Selin <icantdecide@JUNO.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <20011206.145633.-723577.0.icantdecide@juno.com>

At 02:39 PM 12/6/01 -0600, James G Selin wrote:

>How about anodizing the aluminum components before laying up the cloth?
>That I imagine would take care of the problem.


         The problem is that the oxide layer is still a bit porous -- hard
anodizing might work, since it's much less porous -- can one of the people
who know more about the problem than me shed some light?




> > The retention system is potentially problematic --
> > I'm not
> > sure how to attach the bulkheads in a safe, light, and durable
> > fashion.
>
>
>I was thinking I would cut a groove on the outside like an o-ring groove
>and tie a carbon or kevlar yarn around the sleeve at that point causing
>it too depress into void tightly. Additionally, I would continue the
>sleeve past this point and wrap it around a corner where it can be
>compressed by a screw on ring of some kind up against an o-ring. I played
>with some cross sections in CAD one day but never saved it. I'll see what
>i can com up with again. In general, I was thinking I would bond the
>sleeve to just a mounting rim, to which the bulkhead would screw into or
>bolt onto securely.


         I like dismountable bulkheads for all kinds of reasons...


>This would aid in core extraction and tank
>preparation rather than just having say a narrow swagelock fitting to
>work with. I was thinking I would attach the mounting rim to say an
>aluminum rod so spacing and alignment would be precise and then build up
>a layer of wax around the rod until its big enoung to be trimed to 1.5"
>and flush with the bulkheads on a lathe. Then the wax could be gently
>melted away, the rod removed, and the ID cleaned thoughly.

         So you would use a wax mandrel for making the tube? That sounds
like a good idea. There's only one caveat in my mind -- what normally
available waxes will stand up to post-curing of the laminate? Will standard
casting wax take it? Also, I'm thinking of using a product called heat tape
instead of vacuum bagging. It's a heat shrink tape that allows you to exert
pressure on the curing laminate without all the fuss and bother of vacuum
bagging. However, it requires curing the laminate at an elevated temperature.

         -p

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 1739 invoked from network); 6 Dec 2001 21:54:14 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 6 Dec 2001 21:54:14 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 17529 invoked by uid 50005); 6 Dec 2001 21:54:04 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4175. . Clean. Processed in 8.344083 secs); 06 Dec 2001 21:54:04 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 6 Dec 2001 21:53:52 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA04314; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 13:31:47 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 98074 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 21:31:42 +0000
Received: from out007pub.verizon.net (out007pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.107])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA04300 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 13:31:41 -0800
Received: from [63.24.225.162] (1Cust236.tnt1.rancho-cucamonga.ca.da.uu.net          [63.24.225.236]) by out007pub.verizon.net  with ESMTP for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; id fB6LWnN12331 Thu, 6 Dec 2001 15:32:49 -0600          (CST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: GTE/01rocket@mail.gte.net
References: <003401c17e8c$3b52fc20$6501a8c0@koreynew>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <a05100322b835937b8f6a@[63.24.225.162]>
Date:         Thu, 6 Dec 2001 13:31:01 -0800
Reply-To: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Amateur?
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <003401c17e8c$3b52fc20$6501a8c0@koreynew>

>work all the details with the FAA others will follow closely behind. Even if
>you look at the number of motors tested that could potentially break the
>record it's nearly empty set!

www.v-serv.com/-upload


>I think that GPS has evolved to actually
>determine altitude so that should no longer be an issue. What other excuses
>are there?

A stack of paper 190,000 feet tall?  4 pages is all that we advocate.  4 pages.


>Let's go back to money, that's one reason to not define
>amateur/professional as related to money! The people who are getting things
>done are using the Governments money to boot strap themselves up to
>accomplish better things than they could otherwise!



>K2


--
Jerry Irvine, Box 1242, Claremont, California USA
Opinion, the whole thing. <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
Bring common sense back to rocketry administration.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 29458 invoked from network); 6 Dec 2001 22:08:27 -0000
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 6 Dec 2001 22:08:27 -0000
Received: (qmail 3222 invoked by uid 50005); 6 Dec 2001 22:08:18 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4175. . Clean. Processed in 9.384339 secs); 06 Dec 2001 22:08:18 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 6 Dec 2001 22:08:05 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA04510; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 13:59:33 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 98107 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 21:59:28 +0000
Received: from cesaroni.net ([204.101.26.130]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7)          with ESMTP id NAA04496 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 6 Dec 2001          13:59:25 -0800
Received: from Anthony by cesaroni.net with SMTP (MDaemon.v2.8.7.0.R) for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 06 Dec 2001 16:58:33 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 8.5, Build 4.71.2173.0
Importance: Normal
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
X-MDaemon-Deliver-To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
X-Return-Path: ACesaroni@cesaroni.net
Message-ID:  <015f01c17e8e$c617f840$1b0101c0@Anthony>
Date:         Thu, 6 Dec 2001 14:47:01 -0500
Reply-To: "Anthony Cesaroni" <ACesaroni@cesaroni.net>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Anthony Cesaroni" <ACesaroni@cesaroni.net>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Composite Sleeve NO2 tanks
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <20011206.145633.-723577.1.icantdecide@juno.com>

In addition to protecting against galvanic corrosion, inhibitors promote
adhesion. Anodizing is a relatively low surface energy coating and will act
as a very good release agent for a structural adhesive. I have not had any
thermal problems with straight carbon and N2O. I should point out that this
is not a hand lay-up application. You will require a filament winder that
can accurately place the tow at the proper angle and tension. You will also
need a drum coater as an immersion bath may fracture the carbon if the
tension is not controlled properly. There is a good program available for
composite design that covers a wide range of configurations and materials if
you are really serious about this. It's called Composite Pro. You would be
better off just giving a specification to a qualified custom winding shop
and have them make you the part you want. Attempting to build a 1000 psi
pressure vessel using hand lay-up is not the way go and most likely will
fail.

Anthony.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@itc.uci.edu]On
> Behalf Of James G Selin
> Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2001 3:57 PM
> To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
> Subject: Re: Composite Sleeve NO2 tanks
>
>
> On Thu, 6 Dec 2001 07:12:44 -0500 Anthony Cesaroni
> <ACesaroni@cesaroni.net> writes:
>
> > Galvanic corrosion with aluminum and carbon is a well understood
> > phenomenon
> > but does not preclude this combination in composites by any means.
> > Carbon
> > fiber is used extensively with aluminum honeycomb for example. The
> > trick is
> > to inhibit the aluminum. JD Lincon composites manufacture a variety
> > of
> > inhibitor/primers that can be sprayed or dipped, then oven cured.
>
>
> I mentioned on another post the possibility of using anodized aluminum to
> solve this problem. Would that be an adequate and appropriate step or are
> the inhibitors still necessary?
>
>
> > In addition, we apply a .75 oz. glass veil between the carbon and the
> > peel ply
> > during bagging or autoclaving. This can also be done on the mandrel
> > before
> > winding the carbon on. The Hyperion tanks are a 48 million modulus
> > carbon
> > and have aluminum components for example.
> >
> > When winding with kevlar, you can switch over to S-2 for the final
> > ply or
> > lay up a glass layer as a finish as well. This will allow for more
> > traditional grinding techniques for finishing. A diamond saw will
> > still be
> > required for parting off however.
>
>
> Excellent idea based on what I heard of peoples efforts to finish kevlar.
> I would definately do this. On another note would I be able to say put a
> layer of kevlar down first then carbon or do they need to be a woven mix
> to enjoy both properties? Could there be issues with missmatches such as
> thermal expansion that could case undue stress from chilled nitrous
> during discharge?
>
> Approximately how thick should such a tank be? If one were to create a
> nitrous tank from carbon or kevlar cloth, how many wraps of what weight
> cloth would be kosher? Obviously this can all be calculated but I don't
> want to get into heavy (at least to me) analysis of fiber orientation and
> matrix moduluses just jet.
>
> Thanks for your help...
>
> Jim Selin
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 27729 invoked from network); 6 Dec 2001 22:22:52 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 6 Dec 2001 22:22:52 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 21439 invoked by uid 50005); 6 Dec 2001 22:22:38 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4175. . Clean. Processed in 8.778333 secs); 06 Dec 2001 22:22:38 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 6 Dec 2001 22:22:27 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA04639; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 14:14:20 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 98134 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 22:14:17 +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (f50.law8.hotmail.com [216.33.241.50]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA04625 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 14:14:17 -0800
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Thu,          6 Dec 2001 14:13:45 -0800
Received: from 165.127.249.69 by lw8fd.law8.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Thu, 06          Dec 2001 22:13:45 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [165.127.249.69]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 06 Dec 2001 22:13:45.0787 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[45BD08B0:01C17EA3]
Message-ID:  <F50SbloWgIkbXKMptW10001d50e@hotmail.com>
Date:         Thu, 6 Dec 2001 22:13:45 +0000
Reply-To: "Bryan Flynt" <b_flynt@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Bryan Flynt" <b_flynt@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Amateur?
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

<html><div style='background-color:'><DIV>
<P>Jerry, which link are you refrencing on the uploads page?</P>
<P>Bryan Flynt</P>
<P>&nbsp;</P>
<P><BR>&gt;&gt;work all the details with the FAA others will follow closely </P></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>&gt;&gt;behind. Even if
<DIV></DIV>&gt;&gt;you look at the number of motors tested that could potentially
<DIV></DIV>&gt;&gt;break the
<DIV></DIV>&gt;&gt;record it's nearly empty set!
<DIV></DIV>&gt;
<DIV></DIV>&gt;www.v-serv.com/-upload
<DIV></DIV>&gt;
<DIV></DIV></div><br clear=all><hr>Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at <a href='http://go.msn.com/bql/hmtag_itl_EN.asp'>http://explorer.msn.com</a><br></html>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 25084 invoked from network); 6 Dec 2001 23:22:26 -0000
Received: from smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.105]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 6 Dec 2001 23:22:26 -0000
Received: (qmail 27016 invoked by uid 50005); 6 Dec 2001 23:22:16 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpy with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4175. . Clean. Processed in 5.53691 secs); 06 Dec 2001 23:22:16 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 6 Dec 2001 23:22:08 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA04981; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 15:17:19 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 98161 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 23:17:13 +0000
Received: from mta04.mail.mel.aone.net.au (mta04.mail.au.uu.net [203.2.192.84])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA04967 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 15:17:10 -0800
Received: from unknown ([63.34.214.85]) by mta04.mail.mel.aone.net.au with SMTP          id <20011206231539.NUFE5614.mta04.mail.mel.aone.net.au@unknown> for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 7 Dec 2001 10:15:39 +1100
References: Conversation <5.1.0.14.0.20011206080303.00b4b428@erasmus.uib.no>            with last message            <Pine.BSI.3.91.1011206101726.9993D-100000@spsystems.net>
Priority: Normal
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Priority: 3
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	X-MAPIextension=.TXT;
	charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>
Date:         Thu, 6 Dec 2001 23:17:13 +0000
Reply-To: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Starting bi-props
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1011206101726.9993D-100000@spsystems.net>

>
> > However, in a NACA research memo (RM E57H01), I found this statement
> > relating to an experiment with different injectors in a 900N lox-ammonia
> > engine: "Starts were smooth with no noticeable detonations with a
1-second
> > oxidant lead. Reducing the oxidant lead resulted in extremely hard
starts
> > or no ignition."
>
> A note of caution:  ammonia is a notoriously troublesome fuel, reluctant
> to ignite and prone to combustion problems.  Problems with it don't
> necessarily generalize.

On the outside Ammonia seems like the perfect rocket fuel (in terms of
physical properties and performance) . It'd be great to hear that someone
can tame it.

Troy.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 29987 invoked from network); 7 Dec 2001 00:08:15 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 7 Dec 2001 00:08:15 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 23781 invoked by uid 50005); 7 Dec 2001 00:08:05 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4175. . Clean. Processed in 6.165352 secs); 07 Dec 2001 00:08:05 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 7 Dec 2001 00:07:58 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA05889; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 15:59:02 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 98372 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 23:58:57 +0000
Received: from out002pub.verizon.net (out002pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.102])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA05872 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 15:58:51 -0800
Received: from [63.24.225.162] (1Cust42.tnt1.rancho-cucamonga.ca.da.uu.net          [63.24.225.42]) by out002pub.verizon.net  with ESMTP for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; id fB6Nx8517126 Thu, 6 Dec 2001 17:59:09 -0600          (CST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: GTE/01rocket@mail.gte.net
References: <F50SbloWgIkbXKMptW10001d50e@hotmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <a05100324b835b59f94b0@[63.24.225.162]>
Date:         Thu, 6 Dec 2001 15:58:14 -0800
Reply-To: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Amateur?
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <F50SbloWgIkbXKMptW10001d50e@hotmail.com>

>Jerry, which link are you refrencing on the uploads page?
>
>Bryan Flynt


Let's see

6 inch x 8 foot star burn solid 3.7 mb QT
http://www.v-serv.com/-upload/5KS5000.mov

6 inch x 8 foot core burn solid 43k jpg
http://www.v-serv.com/-upload/6flight1a.jpg

Those are upper stages for

http://www.v-serv.com/-upload/9test4.jpg
9 inch x 12 foot core solid

>
>
>
>>>work all the details with the FAA others will follow closely
>
>  >>behind. Even if
>  >>you look at the number of motors tested that could potentially
>  >>break the
>  >>record it's nearly empty set!
>  >
>  >www.v-serv.com/-upload
>  >
>
>
>Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at
><http://go.msn.com/bql/hmtag_itl_EN.asp>http://explorer.msn.com


--
Jerry Irvine, Box 1242, Claremont, California USA
Opinion, the whole thing. <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
Bring common sense back to rocketry administration.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 3397 invoked from network); 7 Dec 2001 00:16:57 -0000
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 7 Dec 2001 00:16:57 -0000
Received: (qmail 20460 invoked by uid 50005); 7 Dec 2001 00:16:47 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4175. . Clean. Processed in 5.953335 secs); 07 Dec 2001 00:16:47 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 7 Dec 2001 00:16:40 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA06002; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 16:14:18 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 98397 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 7 Dec 2001 00:14:12 +0000
Received: from cablecom.laribay.net (cablecom.laribay.net [66.20.57.4]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA05988 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 16:14:11 -0800
Received: from billbull (dial103.laribay.net [66.20.57.103]) by          cablecom.laribay.net (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id RAA22697 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 17:58:40 -0600 (CST)          (envelope-from bpbullock@laribay.net)
References:  <002b01c17e78$0dc564a0$6501a8c0@koreynew>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <002c01c17eb4$3c51ee60$67391442@billbull>
Date:         Thu, 6 Dec 2001 18:15:10 -0600
Reply-To: "Bill Bullock" <bpbullock@LARIBAY.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Bill Bullock" <bpbullock@LARIBAY.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Amateur or Experimental ?
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

    Not necessarily so unless you are so good that in one attempt you can
achieve such staggeringly monumental success that your new technological
advancement becomes common knowledge and practice on the very first try. As
great as I am I still am not quite that good...not yet, anyway. (JOKE!)
Bill:
"Experimental Hybrids"??? You just now starting to play with that old toy???
(Another joke, Korey!)
----- Original Message -----
From: Korey Kline <k2@HYBRIDS.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2001 11:04 AM
Subject: [AR] Amateur or Experimental ?
(Snipped)

> This would imply that the FIRST time you try it it's an experiment, but
the
> Second time you try it your AMATEUR?
> OK "Experimental" HYBRIDS it is! :-)
> K2

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 21606 invoked from network); 7 Dec 2001 00:51:50 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 7 Dec 2001 00:51:50 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 15448 invoked by uid 50005); 7 Dec 2001 00:51:41 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4175. . Clean. Processed in 8.837248 secs); 07 Dec 2001 00:51:41 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 7 Dec 2001 00:51:32 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA06100; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 16:38:04 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 98414 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 7 Dec 2001 00:37:59 +0000
Received: from idsoftware.com (predator.idsoftware.com [192.246.40.34]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA06086 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 16:37:59 -0800
Received: from [192.246.40.129] (account johnc HELO lightning.idsoftware.com)          by idsoftware.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 3.4.7) with ESMTP id 508612          for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 06 Dec 2001 18:37:58 -0600
X-Sender: johnc@mail.idsoftware.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.1
References: <l03130300b8323c04468e@[67.192.161.148]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <4.3.1.2.20011206182909.037f7148@mail.idsoftware.com>
Date:         Thu, 6 Dec 2001 18:35:55 -0600
Reply-To: "John Carmack" <johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Carmack" <johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Segway Scooter -- anything here Rocketeers can use??
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <Pine.LNX.4.10.10112040137100.18289-100000@itc.uci.edu>

At 01:41 AM 12/4/2001 -0800, you wrote:
> > Yes, the technology is amazing - while at the same time utterly useless.
>
>Sure, it's nifty, and if the price comes down over an order of magnitude,
>I'd even get one myself.  My question, what gyros does it use, and how
>does it isolate them from mechanical effects.  Judging from what I've seen
>from the Armadillo's team, mechanical gyros are very sensitive to things
>like curbs, cracks in sidewalks, jostling from other pedestrians, etc.
>They're either doing something different with software or hardware, or
>codling the development unit from rough handling.
>
>Comments, John?

As long as you are on the ground, you can use a triaxial accelerometer to
constantly orient your up vector, allowing you to use cheap gyros.  In
fact, you could probably do a balancing scooter with just accelerometers,
because it isn't going to do any high-G maneuvers...

I would be curious to know exactly which gyros they are using.

I couldn't imagine how they would need 10 CPUs as John Bolene commented --
that may have been a number a marketing guy ginned up by counting dubious
parts like motor controllers.

John Carmack

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 12047 invoked from network); 7 Dec 2001 01:10:54 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 7 Dec 2001 01:10:54 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 29895 invoked by uid 50005); 7 Dec 2001 01:10:45 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4175. . Clean. Processed in 7.903218 secs); 07 Dec 2001 01:10:45 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 7 Dec 2001 01:10:34 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA06243; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 17:02:07 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 98428 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 7 Dec 2001 01:01:41 +0000
Received: from mail49.fg.online.no (mail49-s.fg.online.no [148.122.161.49]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA06229 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 17:01:40 -0800
Received: from y1036732.online.no ([136.164.46.207]) by mail49.fg.online.no          (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id CAA08040; Fri, 7 Dec 2001 02:01:00 +0100          (MET)
X-Sender: eirimeer@mail.online.no
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
References: <Pine.LNX.4.10.10112040137100.18289-100000@itc.uci.edu>            <l03130300b8323c04468e@[67.192.161.148]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <5.1.0.14.0.20011207015406.009f1b90@mail.online.no>
Date:         Fri, 7 Dec 2001 01:58:44 +0100
Reply-To: "Eirik van der Meer" <eirimeer@ONLINE.NO>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Eirik van der Meer" <eirimeer@ONLINE.NO>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Segway Scooter -- anything here Rocketeers can use??
Comments: To: John Carmack <johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <4.3.1.2.20011206182909.037f7148@mail.idsoftware.com>

At 18:35 2001-12-06 -0600, John Carmack wrote:

I know this is OffTopic, but whattheheck...

>I couldn't imagine how they would need 10 CPUs as John Bolene commented --
>that may have been a number a marketing guy ginned up by counting dubious
>parts like motor controllers.

Don't coun't on it. Not only does it need to keep it's own balance, it also
has to factor in a continously shifting load and figure out what the
operator wants to do based on the change in balance. It also has to have an
extremely short response time, if not the feedback would probably crash it
within a second.
This is far more complicated than just keeping track of what is up and what
is down. How long did it take to develop a bipedal walking robot (wasn't
Toyota involved in this)?


--
Eirik van der Meer <eirimeer@online.no>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 7107 invoked from network); 7 Dec 2001 01:32:43 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.105]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 7 Dec 2001 01:32:43 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 13554 invoked by uid 50005); 7 Dec 2001 01:32:34 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpy with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4175. . Clean. Processed in 4.183121 secs); 07 Dec 2001 01:32:34 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 7 Dec 2001 01:32:27 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA06357; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 17:29:13 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 98448 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 7 Dec 2001 01:28:17 +0000
Received: from idsoftware.com (predator.idsoftware.com [192.246.40.34]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA06342 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 17:28:17 -0800
Received: from [192.246.40.129] (account johnc HELO lightning.idsoftware.com)          by idsoftware.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 3.4.7) with ESMTP id 508682          for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 06 Dec 2001 19:28:16 -0600
X-Sender: johnc@mail.idsoftware.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.1
References: <4.3.1.2.20011206182909.037f7148@mail.idsoftware.com>            <Pine.LNX.4.10.10112040137100.18289-100000@itc.uci.edu>            <l03130300b8323c04468e@[67.192.161.148]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <4.3.1.2.20011206190015.037f7c60@mail.idsoftware.com>
Date:         Thu, 6 Dec 2001 19:26:12 -0600
Reply-To: "John Carmack" <johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Carmack" <johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Segway Scooter -- anything here Rocketeers can use??
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <5.1.0.14.0.20011207015406.009f1b90@mail.online.no>

At 01:58 AM 12/7/2001 +0100, you wrote:
>At 18:35 2001-12-06 -0600, John Carmack wrote:
>
>I know this is OffTopic, but whattheheck...
>
>>I couldn't imagine how they would need 10 CPUs as John Bolene commented --
>>that may have been a number a marketing guy ginned up by counting dubious
>>parts like motor controllers.
>
>Don't coun't on it. Not only does it need to keep it's own balance, it
>also has to factor in a continously shifting load and figure out what the
>operator wants to do based on the change in balance. It also has to have
>an extremely short response time, if not the feedback would probably crash
>it within a second.
>This is far more complicated than just keeping track of what is up and
>what is down. How long did it take to develop a bipedal walking robot
>(wasn't Toyota involved in this)?

The CPU processing involved in these types of things is not really
significant.  Sensor and actuator latency and bandwidth are much more critical.

There are sometimes valid reasons for embedded systems to wind up with
multiple CPUs, but it is usually a sign of being willing to trade a
suboptimal design for convenient engineering firewalls.

All control systems basically consist of sensing, computation, and
actuation, and there is never a fundamental reason why all computation
can't be done in one place.  Raw speed requirements can force multiple
processors in some very advanced embedded systems like synthetic aperture
radars, and sometimes it is cheaper to use to multiple moderate performance
processors instead of a faster single processor, but it is usually a
convenience issue to allow multiple engineers to not have to interact on
the same code.

John Carmack

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 17269 invoked from network); 7 Dec 2001 01:57:48 -0000
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 7 Dec 2001 01:57:48 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 31640 invoked by uid 50005); 7 Dec 2001 01:57:38 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4175. . Clean. Processed in 7.346321 secs); 07 Dec 2001 01:57:38 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 7 Dec 2001 01:57:28 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA06462; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 17:52:03 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 98465 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 7 Dec 2001 01:52:00 +0000
Received: from m5.boston.juno.com (m5.boston.juno.com [64.136.24.68]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA06448 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 17:51:59 -0800
Received: from cookie.juno.com by cookie.juno.com for          <"r2Fo8hpwT0kn33UwylHELMN/WOTpJvUcFNmP6DnqWJn7AORhUP6kjg==">
Received: (from icantdecide@juno.com) by m5.boston.juno.com (jqueuemail) id          GMZ6X9R2; Thu, 06 Dec 2001 20:50:22 EST
X-Mailer: Juno 4.0.9
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Juno-Line-Breaks: 0-1,3-32,40-41
X-Juno-Att: 0
X-Juno-RefParts: 0
Message-ID:  <20011206.205112.-503555.0.icantdecide@juno.com>
Date:         Thu, 6 Dec 2001 20:51:12 -0600
Reply-To: "James G Selin" <icantdecide@JUNO.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "James G Selin" <icantdecide@JUNO.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Composite Sleeve NO2 tanks
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

On Thu, 6 Dec 2001 14:47:01 -0500 Anthony Cesaroni
<ACesaroni@cesaroni.net> writes:
> In addition to protecting against galvanic corrosion, inhibitors
> promote
> adhesion. Anodizing is a relatively low surface energy coating and
> will act
> as a very good release agent for a structural adhesive. I have not
> had any
> thermal problems with straight carbon and N2O. I should point out
> that this
> is not a hand lay-up application. You will require a filament winder
> that
> can accurately place the tow at the proper angle and tension. You
> will also
> need a drum coater as an immersion bath may fracture the carbon if
> the
> tension is not controlled properly. There is a good program
> available for
> composite design that covers a wide range of configurations and
> materials if
> you are really serious about this. It's called Composite Pro. You
> would be
> better off just giving a specification to a qualified custom winding
> shop
> and have them make you the part you want. Attempting to build a 1000
> psi
> pressure vessel using hand lay-up is not the way go and most likely
> will
> fail.


Actually,  I wasn't planning on filiment winding I was interested using
commercially available carbon fiber or kevlar sleeve. The cloth available
from http://www.cstsales.com/carbon-sleeve.htm is braided at a 45 degree
angle with a fiber size of 3k and weighs .36 ounces a foot for the 1.5"
stuff which is 8.25 ounces per square yard cloth. Check it out and let me
know what you think. There are also other links available on the original
message. Thanks for the info about inhibitors I will definately use them
if I attempt this project.

Jim Selin

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 10086 invoked from network); 7 Dec 2001 02:10:28 -0000
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 7 Dec 2001 02:10:28 -0000
Received: (qmail 948 invoked by uid 50005); 7 Dec 2001 02:10:19 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4175. . Clean. Processed in 10.948421 secs); 07 Dec 2001 02:10:19 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 7 Dec 2001 02:10:03 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA06545; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 18:04:02 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 98478 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 7 Dec 2001 02:03:59 +0000
Received: from cesaroni.net ([204.101.26.130]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7)          with ESMTP id SAA06531 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 6 Dec 2001          18:03:57 -0800
Received: from Anthony by cesaroni.net with SMTP (MDaemon.v2.8.7.0.R) for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 06 Dec 2001 21:04:10 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 8.5, Build 4.71.2173.0
Importance: Normal
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
X-MDaemon-Deliver-To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
X-Return-Path: ACesaroni@cesaroni.net
Message-ID:  <017101c17eaf$f4ec7bc0$1b0101c0@Anthony>
Date:         Thu, 6 Dec 2001 18:44:33 -0500
Reply-To: "Anthony Cesaroni" <ACesaroni@cesaroni.net>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Anthony Cesaroni" <ACesaroni@cesaroni.net>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Composite Sleeve NO2 tanks
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <20011206.205112.-503555.0.icantdecide@juno.com>

No joy, GAMMA braid wont work in this scheme for a lot reasons. Play it safe
or you will have to make a very heavy part and spend a lot of time to get
this to go. Good, fast, cheap...you can only pick two.

Anthony.


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@itc.uci.edu]On
> Behalf Of James G Selin
> Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2001 9:51 PM
> To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
> Subject: Re: Composite Sleeve NO2 tanks
>
>
> On Thu, 6 Dec 2001 14:47:01 -0500 Anthony Cesaroni
> <ACesaroni@cesaroni.net> writes:
> > In addition to protecting against galvanic corrosion, inhibitors
> > promote
> > adhesion. Anodizing is a relatively low surface energy coating and
> > will act
> > as a very good release agent for a structural adhesive. I have not
> > had any
> > thermal problems with straight carbon and N2O. I should point out
> > that this
> > is not a hand lay-up application. You will require a filament winder
> > that
> > can accurately place the tow at the proper angle and tension. You
> > will also
> > need a drum coater as an immersion bath may fracture the carbon if
> > the
> > tension is not controlled properly. There is a good program
> > available for
> > composite design that covers a wide range of configurations and
> > materials if
> > you are really serious about this. It's called Composite Pro. You
> > would be
> > better off just giving a specification to a qualified custom winding
> > shop
> > and have them make you the part you want. Attempting to build a 1000
> > psi
> > pressure vessel using hand lay-up is not the way go and most likely
> > will
> > fail.
>
>
> Actually,  I wasn't planning on filiment winding I was interested using
> commercially available carbon fiber or kevlar sleeve. The cloth available
> from http://www.cstsales.com/carbon-sleeve.htm is braided at a 45 degree
> angle with a fiber size of 3k and weighs .36 ounces a foot for the 1.5"
> stuff which is 8.25 ounces per square yard cloth. Check it out and let me
> know what you think. There are also other links available on the original
> message. Thanks for the info about inhibitors I will definately use them
> if I attempt this project.
>
> Jim Selin
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 222 invoked from network); 7 Dec 2001 10:40:25 -0000
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 7 Dec 2001 10:40:25 -0000
Received: (qmail 15814 invoked by uid 50005); 7 Dec 2001 10:40:16 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4175. . Clean. Processed in 0.493839 secs); 07 Dec 2001 10:40:16 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 7 Dec 2001 10:40:16 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id CAA08812; Fri, 7 Dec 2001 02:36:44 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 98629 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 7 Dec 2001 10:36:37 +0000
Received: from fep3-orange.clear.net.nz (fep3-orange.clear.net.nz          [203.97.32.3]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id CAA08797          for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Fri, 7 Dec 2001 02:36:36 -0800
Received: from mkbs (203-167-149-114.dialup.clear.net.nz [203.167.149.114]) by          fep3-orange.clear.net.nz (1.5/1.8) with SMTP id XAA03978; Fri, 7 Dec          2001 23:36:26 +1300 (NZDT)
References: <Pine.LNX.4.10.10112040137100.18289-100000@itc.uci.edu>                       <l03130300b8323c04468e@[67.192.161.148]>             <5.1.0.14.0.20011207015406.009f1b90@mail.online.no>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <00da01c17f0b$63c7f0a0$0700a8c0@mkbs>
Date:         Fri, 7 Dec 2001 23:34:26 +1300
Reply-To: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Organization: Applied Technology
Subject:      Re: [AR] Segway Scooter -- anything here Rocketeers can use??
Comments: To: Eirik van der Meer <eirimeer@ONLINE.NO>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

> >I couldn't imagine how they would need 10 CPUs as John Bolene
commented --
> >that may have been a number a marketing guy ginned up by counting dubious
> >parts like motor controllers.

There are a number of modern processors which would certainly have enough
processing power to handle the real time tasks involved in a single
processor. As John noted, it can be useful for practical reasons to
distribute the tasks but this is not liable to be a necessity. While I am
not aware of exactly what is involved in this case I suspect that any
sensibly capable 16 bit microcontroller with suitable peripherals (analog to
digital and digital to analog converters mainly) would be adequate. Such
controllers have throughputs around 10 simple MIPS (millions of instructions
per second). You can do an awful lot with a million instructions - even
simple ones.

> Don't coun't on it. Not only does it need to keep it's own balance, it
also
> has to factor in a continously shifting load and figure out what the
> operator wants to do based on the change in balance. It also has to have
an
> extremely short response time, if not the feedback would probably crash it
> within a second.
> This is far more complicated than just keeping track of what is up and
what
> is down. How long did it take to develop a bipedal walking robot (wasn't
> Toyota involved in this)?

You may be referring to the Honda unit although there are a number of
efforts in this area. I have not studied the Honda unit in detail but from
the pictures that I have seen it does not seem to implement true "dynamic
walking" where a vertical line through the centre of mass is often outside
the edges of the current support footprint and balance depends on dynamic
adjustment of stance and prediction of where and when the next foot is going
to be placed. This task seems to be substantially more complex than the one
implemented by the Segway - although this is by no means trivial.




        Russell McMahon

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 15747 invoked from network); 7 Dec 2001 11:40:32 -0000
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 7 Dec 2001 11:40:32 -0000
Received: (qmail 21672 invoked by uid 50005); 7 Dec 2001 11:40:23 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4175. . Clean. Processed in 0.696753 secs); 07 Dec 2001 11:40:23 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 7 Dec 2001 11:40:21 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id DAA08999; Fri, 7 Dec 2001 03:37:07 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 98649 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 7 Dec 2001 11:37:03 +0000
Received: from fep4-orange.clear.net.nz (fep4-orange.clear.net.nz          [203.97.32.4]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id DAA08985          for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Fri, 7 Dec 2001 03:37:02 -0800
Received: from mkbs (203-167-149-114.dialup.clear.net.nz [203.167.149.114]) by          fep4-orange.clear.net.nz (1.5/1.7) with SMTP id AAA13488; Sat, 8 Dec          2001 00:36:14 +1300 (NZDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="Windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <018301c17f13$c076c580$0700a8c0@mkbs>
Date:         Sat, 8 Dec 2001 00:38:37 +1300
Reply-To: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Organization: Applied Technology
Subject:      [AR] [OT]: NASA Pluto mission
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Earliest launch 2006
Earliest arrival  2016

        http://www.cnn.com/2001/TECH/space/12/01/pluto.mission/index.html

More likely than not to be axed in the next few years.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 17540 invoked from network); 7 Dec 2001 11:41:08 -0000
Received: from smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.105]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 7 Dec 2001 11:41:08 -0000
Received: (qmail 24591 invoked by uid 50005); 7 Dec 2001 11:40:59 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpy with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4175. . Clean. Processed in 1.77863 secs); 07 Dec 2001 11:40:59 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 7 Dec 2001 11:40:56 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id DAA08976; Fri, 7 Dec 2001 03:36:27 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 98642 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 7 Dec 2001 11:36:19 +0000
Received: from fep4-orange.clear.net.nz (fep4-orange.clear.net.nz          [203.97.32.4]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id DAA08962          for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Fri, 7 Dec 2001 03:36:18 -0800
Received: from mkbs (203-167-149-114.dialup.clear.net.nz [203.167.149.114]) by          fep4-orange.clear.net.nz (1.5/1.7) with SMTP id AAA13472; Sat, 8 Dec          2001 00:36:12 +1300 (NZDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="Windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <018201c17f13$bc02f0a0$0700a8c0@mkbs>
Date:         Sat, 8 Dec 2001 00:36:52 +1300
Reply-To: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Organization: Applied Technology
Subject:      [AR] Dot-com tycoon space bound
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Dot-com tycoon space bound

A South African Internet tycoon is set to become the second paying tourist
in space. Russia's top space official says his agency is close to signing a
deal with Mark Shuttleworth to fly to the international space station next
year.

-FULL STORY-

        http://www.cnn.com/2001/TECH/space/12/05/space.saftourist/index.html

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 25323 invoked from network); 7 Dec 2001 12:31:23 -0000
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 7 Dec 2001 12:31:23 -0000
Received: (qmail 3813 invoked by uid 50005); 7 Dec 2001 12:31:08 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4175. . Clean. Processed in 3.769275 secs); 07 Dec 2001 12:31:08 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 7 Dec 2001 12:31:02 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id EAA09260; Fri, 7 Dec 2001 04:29:45 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 98667 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 7 Dec 2001 12:29:41 +0000
Received: from fep3-orange.clear.net.nz (fep3-orange.clear.net.nz          [203.97.32.3]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id EAA09246          for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Fri, 7 Dec 2001 04:29:39 -0800
Received: from mkbs (203-167-149-114.dialup.clear.net.nz [203.167.149.114]) by          fep3-orange.clear.net.nz (1.5/1.8) with SMTP id BAA27712; Sat, 8 Dec          2001 01:29:32 +1300 (NZDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="Windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <01cc01c17f1b$3119bf20$0700a8c0@mkbs>
Date:         Sat, 8 Dec 2001 01:32:02 +1300
Reply-To: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Organization: Applied Technology
Subject:      [AR] [OT]: Low cost step down regulator
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Report by Roman Black on an extremely cheap low power step down switching
regulator design which typically increases battery utilisation by a factor
of 2+ times when used with battery powered equipment. Not state of the art
but a very useful and economical design in many applications.

        http://centauri.ezy.net.au/~fastvid/smps.htm

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 23631 invoked from network); 7 Dec 2001 17:32:29 -0000
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 7 Dec 2001 17:32:29 -0000
Received: (qmail 16017 invoked by uid 50005); 7 Dec 2001 17:32:19 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4175. . Clean. Processed in 3.780352 secs); 07 Dec 2001 17:32:19 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 7 Dec 2001 17:32:14 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA10034; Fri, 7 Dec 2001 09:26:58 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 98727 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 7 Dec 2001 17:26:46 +0000
Received: from mail.trib.com (mail.trib.com [12.10.158.17]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA10020 for <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Fri,          7 Dec 2001 09:26:46 -0800
Received: from [63.229.150.74] (HELO hppav) by mail.trib.com (CommuniGate Pro          SMTP 3.4.6) with SMTP id 62215160; Fri, 07 Dec 2001 10:26:43 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
Importance: Normal
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <NKEHJAOOKBPGIKOOPDEFGEMOCDAA.jwckman@space-rockets.com>
Date:         Fri, 7 Dec 2001 10:25:29 -0700
Reply-To: "John Wickman" <jwckman@SPACE-ROCKETS.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Wickman" <jwckman@SPACE-ROCKETS.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Amateur?
Comments: To: Korey Kline <k2@HYBRIDS.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <003401c17e8c$3b52fc20$6501a8c0@koreynew>

Before we go back to a normal Arocket format, lets see if we can despin this
story a bit.

What most people in this group probably do not know is that Govt.
contractors are reimbursed for their in-house R&D, bid and proposal work and
many other things.  Without getting into a boring discussion of Govt.
contracting, these items are included in a company's contract overhead rate.
Our company's bid and proposal and R&D is included in our G&A rate tacked
onto every contract we do.  In other words, we bid on proposals and conduct
our own R&D using funds that are collected from contracts, which include
commercial contracts as well.

Apparently, with respect to the hybrid consortium, a contractor is paid 30%
of his direct costs for work done by NASA.  The 70% balance comes from the
overhead pool collected on other contracts.  I can assure you that none of
the large contractors paid the 70% out of their profit pool.  No, it came
from their overhead pool.

I'm also having a little problem with the fellow paying for the Wallop's
launch cost out of his personal checking account.  I don't doubt that he
wrote checks, but to cover the ENTIRE launch cost.  You see our company has
worked with various DoD and NASA facilities for years.  Here are some of the
cost numbers quoted to us: (1) Simple sounding rocket launch from White
Sands to test an upper stage - $350,000. min to as high as $500,000., (2) A
quick in and out (3 days) static firing at Redstone Arsenal with absolute
minimum personnel - $15,000 to $20,000 and (3) Orbital launch from
Vandenburg - $3.5 million once we roll through the gate with the meter still
running until launch.  I did talk with the people at NASA in charge of their
sounding rocket program about doing some launches out of Wallops a few years
back and while it was not a direct price quote, they indicated to me the
cost would be a few hundred thousand dollars.  My point, if you did not pay
the full freight for the launch, the balance was covered by NASA.

So let's summarize, 30% of the cost was paid directly from the consortium
contract with the balance coming from overhead.  If eAc did not have other
Govt. contracts to recover this cost that would be unfortunate.  However, in
my opinion that still does not put you in the amateur category that puts you
in a bad business position.

As for your definition that a love for the activity makes you an amateur, I
would suggest you try that theory out on the first professional athlete you
run into after he has played a game.  Walk over to him and say, "Boy, you
played like a real amateur today!".  My guess is you will get a punch in the
nose rather than a "Thank you!".

John Wickman


-----Original Message-----
From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU]On
Behalf Of Korey Kline
Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2001 12:29 PM
To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
Subject: Re: [AR] Amateur?


> It is not fair to amateurs to "claim" an amateur altitude record when the
> effort was entirely paid for by a US Government contract.  Most amateurs
> cannot even compete for the record simply because they do not
> have the time or financial resources.
> John Wickman

>This not very couched dig at Korey Kline while fair, is still besides
>the point.  He did fly a rocket.
>J Irvine

A little history.......

The 6" N2O Hybrid rocket was designed in California PRIOR to eAc in Miami,
with the intent of flying at MTA. I still have the built 4" flight version
in California that would have been the worlds first N2O/HTPB flight, when
Kevin Smith(with phone help from me)flew his 2" first. We joined forces in
Miami and developed the Hypertek HPR system (not a small task at the
time)and continued refining the 6" from sub scale tests. Once we were fairly
happy with the design we started building prototype test hardware, nozzle
tooling and even poured the first two fuel grains. At the same time we
contacted Wallops about launching a 6" Sounding Rocket, what would it take
and how much would it cost? As a result of that phone call Marshall got word

and invited us in NASA/DARPA HPDP project to fulfill their flight
requirement. Apparently NONE of the BIG guys thought they could do it and
with our Hypertek track record we at least had a shot. Additionally (in my
opinion)if we failed there would be no dishonor to NASA and the BIG
company's great name as well as another example not to deal with small
business. After ENDLESS NASA design reviews NOTHING was changed with the
exception of the fins because of a requirement to spin all rockets from
Wallops! We had a running joke at the time, "When the stack of paper work
reaches the rocket's design altitude, we simply throw the rocket off the top
and say the flight was a success!" I believe with few exceptions everyone
knows we (Korey, Kevin, Tom & eAc) designed built and flew the Hyperion,
that's why I call it an amateur rocket!

The biggest misconception is mimicked by Wickman; "the effort was entirely
paid for by a US Government contract".
First of all we were one of seven other company's in a "consortium" of
Hybrid developers and the entire program was a technology "REINVESTMENT"
project at the 30% level. Which means YOU pay your own way for EVERYTHING
and AFTER you successfully complete your milestone, they REIMBURSE up to 30%
of what you've spent up to a limit!!! When it was all said and done it
worked out to about 22%. I personally watched Kevin write two of the three
checks to NASA Wallops from his personal checking account to pay for the
launches. So at the time we were thinking "Free Money" and "Cool Tours" for
something we were going to do anyway! I can tell you for a fact that NASA
involvement COST us more than the money we made and clearly it would have
been cheaper to fly out of Blackrock, but the behind the scene tours were
worth every cent at Wallops. The Wallops Island ground crew were a great
help and are truly "Steely Eyed Misslemen"!  Everything said and done, I
wouldn't trade the experience for anything.

>Most amateurs cannot even compete for the record simply because they do not
have the time or financial resources.<

Most people don't have the financial resources to invest that Kevin has
either, so what's your point? You want to put a spending cap on how much an
individual can invest to break the record?......Sorry Ky.......Sorry
Anthony.....I thought we just finished a discussion that LOW COST wasn't the
priority? Truth be told 120,000 ft isn't that tuff to beat.....it's just
that NOBODY SERIOUS is trying very hard. Excuses like "we can't afford to
static test the motor cuz the propellant costs to much".......That's
it.....get out of the sand box....go do something you can afford! I do agree
now with the whole FAA crackdown that most people may have lost the window
of opportunity to launch soon. I do believe once we get someone like Ky to
work all the details with the FAA others will follow closely behind. Even if
you look at the number of motors tested that could potentially break the
record it's nearly empty set! I think that GPS has evolved to actually
determine altitude so that should no longer be an issue. What other excuses
are there? Let's go back to money, that's one reason to not define
amateur/professional as related to money! The people who are getting things
done are using the Governments money to boot strap themselves up to
accomplish better things than they could otherwise!

So the question boils down to is an Amateur(experimental) Rocketeer limited
to 4 hours a week in his garage with a $200 a month budget that his wife has
to approve,  or somebody who simply loves rockets and will even sell his
immortal amateur soul to the government to build bigger things?  Trust me
when I say as a business that there is no money in rockets! At best it's a
"Get Rich SLOW Scheme".

I've said my piece, I feel better now, please go back to normal AROCKET
format.

Climbing into armored personnel carrier because I said Hybrid twice and
mentioned an HPR product twice. :-)

K2

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 24560 invoked from network); 7 Dec 2001 19:03:15 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 7 Dec 2001 19:03:15 -0000
Received: (qmail 17874 invoked by uid 50005); 7 Dec 2001 19:03:06 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4175. . Clean. Processed in 1.236221 secs); 07 Dec 2001 19:03:06 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 7 Dec 2001 19:03:05 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA10298; Fri, 7 Dec 2001 10:39:01 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 98744 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 7 Dec 2001 18:38:55 +0000
Received: from localhost (rcalkins@localhost) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with          ESMTP id KAA10283; Fri, 7 Dec 2001 10:38:54 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.LNX.4.10.10112071036430.10152-100000@itc.uci.edu>
Date:         Fri, 7 Dec 2001 10:38:53 -0800
Reply-To: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Amateur?
Comments: To: John Wickman <jwckman@SPACE-ROCKETS.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <NKEHJAOOKBPGIKOOPDEFGEMOCDAA.jwckman@space-rockets.com>

I dunno, but this all sounds like a moot point to me, since the amateur
altitude record is generally recognized to belong to the RRS boosted dart
these days.


Ray

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 23204 invoked from network); 7 Dec 2001 19:18:04 -0000
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 7 Dec 2001 19:18:04 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 903 invoked by uid 50005); 7 Dec 2001 19:17:55 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4175. . Clean. Processed in 1.362697 secs); 07 Dec 2001 19:17:55 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 7 Dec 2001 19:17:53 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA10442; Fri, 7 Dec 2001 11:11:46 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 98755 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 7 Dec 2001 19:11:45 +0000
Received: from avocet.prod.itd.earthlink.net (avocet.mail.pas.earthlink.net          [207.217.120.50]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA10374          for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Fri, 7 Dec 2001 11:01:45 -0800
Received: from dialup-209.247.141.122.dial1.sanjose1.level3.net          ([209.247.141.122] helo=earthlink.net) by          avocet.prod.itd.earthlink.net with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id          16CQFk-0003nd-00; Fri, 07 Dec 2001 11:01:44 -0800
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.75 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.16-22 i686)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <Pine.LNX.4.10.10112071036430.10152-100000@itc.uci.edu>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3C11122B.D083D3C4@earthlink.net>
Date:         Fri, 7 Dec 2001 11:02:03 -0800
Reply-To: "David Weinshenker" <daze39@EARTHLINK.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "David Weinshenker" <daze39@EARTHLINK.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Amateur?
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Ray Calkins wrote:
>
> I dunno, but this all sounds like a moot point to me, since the amateur
> altitude record is generally recognized to belong to the RRS boosted dart
> these days.
>
> Ray

Reading about these boosted-dart flights, I keep thinking,
OK, now how high could you get if part of that dart mass
was propellant rather than inert? Fire it approaching apogee,
before it arcs over...

-dave w

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 10304 invoked from network); 7 Dec 2001 19:22:32 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 7 Dec 2001 19:22:32 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: (qmail 6284 invoked by uid 50005); 7 Dec 2001 19:22:23 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4175. . Clean. Processed in 1.475049 secs); 07 Dec 2001 19:22:23 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 7 Dec 2001 19:22:21 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA10422; Fri, 7 Dec 2001 11:10:39 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 98756 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 7 Dec 2001 19:10:35 +0000
Received: from localhost (rcalkins@localhost) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with          ESMTP id LAA10408 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Fri, 7 Dec 2001 11:10:35          -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.LNX.4.10.10112071057580.10360-100000@itc.uci.edu>
Date:         Fri, 7 Dec 2001 11:10:35 -0800
Reply-To: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
Subject:      [AR] DaVinci project update
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

I was checking on the DaVinci project's website and noticed an amazing
similarity between "their" engine test and the Microcosm's SR-XM test.
Anybody know if they're official partners?

compare:
http://www.davinciproject.com/english/multimedia/engine_testing/source/4.htm
http://www.smad.com/scorpius/press6.html

It appears to be the exact same photo, but DaVinci electronically removed
the flag and blurred the writing.

My guess?  One of the Scorpius crew is working for both folks.

Since the Scorpius motor was developed largely through NASA and DOD
contracts, doesn't this make the DaVinci project ineligible for the
X-Prize?

Ray

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 25709 invoked from network); 7 Dec 2001 19:33:57 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 7 Dec 2001 19:33:57 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 20197 invoked by uid 50005); 7 Dec 2001 19:33:47 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4175. . Clean. Processed in 2.720208 secs); 07 Dec 2001 19:33:47 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 7 Dec 2001 19:33:43 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA10492; Fri, 7 Dec 2001 11:24:01 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 98769 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 7 Dec 2001 19:23:59 +0000
Received: from smtp002pub.verizon.net (smtp002pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.181])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA10478 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 7 Dec 2001 11:23:59 -0800
Received: from [63.24.225.162] (1Cust105.tnt1.rancho-cucamonga.ca.da.uu.net          [63.24.225.105]) by smtp002pub.verizon.net  with ESMTP for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; id fB7JNQP11128 Fri, 7 Dec 2001 13:23:27 -0600          (CST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: GTE/01rocket@mail.gte.net
References: <Pine.LNX.4.10.10112071036430.10152-100000@itc.uci.edu>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <a05100328b836c6bb0d84@[63.24.225.162]>
Date:         Fri, 7 Dec 2001 11:23:30 -0800
Reply-To: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Amateur?
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <Pine.LNX.4.10.10112071036430.10152-100000@itc.uci.edu>

>I dunno, but this all sounds like a moot point to me, since the amateur
>altitude record is generally recognized to belong to the RRS boosted dart
>these days.
>
>
>Ray

There are different issues with that effort.  Not filing AST permits
(and not having any resulting negative outcomes).  The fact it was a
copy of a commercial unit flown to dispose of it.

Korey's while bootstrapped on a Mil/Comm process for permits was
actually fully amateur developed.  And it went higher, was flown more
times and was fully recovered on at least one occasion.  Not to
mention it was verified as a higher altitude.

I have to give that one to Korey.  My vote only.

I of course will try to break it just as soon as possible.

Korey got in Aviation Leak and Technology Transfer for it too.

I say let there be so many attempts it is confusing how many records
there are.  4 page launch application for sub-orbital.

Jerry

--
Jerry Irvine, Box 1242, Claremont, California USA
Opinion, the whole thing. <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
Bring common sense back to rocketry administration.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 5944 invoked from network); 7 Dec 2001 19:50:21 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 7 Dec 2001 19:50:21 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 11097 invoked by uid 50005); 7 Dec 2001 19:50:12 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4175. . Clean. Processed in 9.950664 secs); 07 Dec 2001 19:50:12 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 7 Dec 2001 19:49:57 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA10572; Fri, 7 Dec 2001 11:41:49 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 98776 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 7 Dec 2001 19:41:43 +0000
Received: from smtp001pub.verizon.net (smtp001pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.180])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA10558 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 7 Dec 2001 11:41:42 -0800
Received: from [63.24.225.162] (1Cust105.tnt1.rancho-cucamonga.ca.da.uu.net          [63.24.225.105]) by smtp001pub.verizon.net  with ESMTP for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; id fB7JeaI29038 Fri, 7 Dec 2001 13:40:36 -0600          (CST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: GTE/01rocket@mail.gte.net
References: <Pine.LNX.4.10.10112071036430.10152-100000@itc.uci.edu>            <3C11122B.D083D3C4@earthlink.net>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <a05100329b836cb872dec@[63.24.225.162]>
Date:         Fri, 7 Dec 2001 11:41:13 -0800
Reply-To: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Amateur?
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <3C11122B.D083D3C4@earthlink.net>

>Ray Calkins wrote:
>>
>>  I dunno, but this all sounds like a moot point to me, since the amateur
>>  altitude record is generally recognized to belong to the RRS boosted dart
>>  these days.
>>
>>  Ray
>
>Reading about these boosted-dart flights, I keep thinking,
>OK, now how high could you get if part of that dart mass
>was propellant rather than inert? Fire it approaching apogee,
>before it arcs over...
>
>-dave w


Propellant is usually less dense than the solid steel rod (IIRC) and
the runs I have done make verry little difference for typical motors
such as 12:1 aspect ratio.  I suppose if you made a 30:1 motor with
severe density it would go higher.

Jerry



--
Jerry Irvine, Box 1242, Claremont, California USA
Opinion, the whole thing. <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
Bring common sense back to rocketry administration.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 9307 invoked from network); 7 Dec 2001 20:52:27 -0000
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 7 Dec 2001 20:52:27 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 5871 invoked by uid 50005); 7 Dec 2001 20:52:18 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4175. . Clean. Processed in 0.943462 secs); 07 Dec 2001 20:52:18 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 7 Dec 2001 20:52:16 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA10789; Fri, 7 Dec 2001 12:49:07 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 98794 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 7 Dec 2001 20:49:03 +0000
Received: from cicero1.cybercity.dk (cicero1.cybercity.dk [212.242.40.4]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA10775 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 7 Dec 2001 12:49:02 -0800
Received: from usr03.cybercity.dk (usr03.cybercity.dk [212.242.40.83]) by          cicero1.cybercity.dk (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3BA7F15FFDC for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri,  7 Dec 2001 21:49:01 +0100 (CET)
Received: from vip.cybercity.dk (port22.cvx1-noe.ppp.cybercity.dk          [217.157.69.215]) by usr03.cybercity.dk (8.11.6/8.11.0) with ESMTP id          fB7Kn0i58359 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 7 Dec 2001 21:49:00          +0100 (CET) (envelope-from hot@vip.cybercity.dk)
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.75 [en] (Win95; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <Pine.LNX.4.10.10112071036430.10152-100000@itc.uci.edu>            <3C11122B.D083D3C4@earthlink.net>            <a05100329b836cb872dec@[63.24.225.162]>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3C112E9C.5826BDF9@vip.cybercity.dk>
Date:         Fri, 7 Dec 2001 22:03:24 +0100
Reply-To: "Hans Olaf Toft" <hot@VIP.CYBERCITY.DK>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Hans Olaf Toft" <hot@VIP.CYBERCITY.DK>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Amateur?
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

So... here we may have a niche for molten micrograin motors as dart motors ;-))

Hans Olaf Toft

Jerry Irvine wrote:

> >Ray Calkins wrote:
> >>
> >>  I dunno, but this all sounds like a moot point to me, since the amateur
> >>  altitude record is generally recognized to belong to the RRS boosted dart
> >>  these days.
> >>
> >>  Ray
> >
> >Reading about these boosted-dart flights, I keep thinking,
> >OK, now how high could you get if part of that dart mass
> >was propellant rather than inert? Fire it approaching apogee,
> >before it arcs over...
> >
> >-dave w
>
> Propellant is usually less dense than the solid steel rod (IIRC) and
> the runs I have done make verry little difference for typical motors
> such as 12:1 aspect ratio.  I suppose if you made a 30:1 motor with
> severe density it would go higher.
>
> Jerry
>
> --
> Jerry Irvine, Box 1242, Claremont, California USA
> Opinion, the whole thing. <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
> Bring common sense back to rocketry administration.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 22748 invoked from network); 7 Dec 2001 21:03:37 -0000
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 7 Dec 2001 21:03:37 -0000
Received: (qmail 4967 invoked by uid 50005); 7 Dec 2001 21:03:28 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4175. . Clean. Processed in 5.64114 secs); 07 Dec 2001 21:03:28 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 7 Dec 2001 21:03:20 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA10848; Fri, 7 Dec 2001 12:59:39 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 98803 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 7 Dec 2001 20:59:33 +0000
Received: from mail.trib.com (mail.trib.com [12.10.158.17]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA10833; Fri, 7 Dec 2001 12:59:32 -0800
Received: from [63.229.150.86] (HELO hppav) by mail.trib.com (CommuniGate Pro          SMTP 3.4.6) with SMTP id 62237173; Fri, 07 Dec 2001 13:59:32 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
Importance: Normal
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <NKEHJAOOKBPGIKOOPDEFIENACDAA.jwckman@space-rockets.com>
Date:         Fri, 7 Dec 2001 13:58:19 -0700
Reply-To: "John Wickman" <jwckman@SPACE-ROCKETS.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Wickman" <jwckman@SPACE-ROCKETS.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Amateur?
Comments: To: Ray Calkins <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <Pine.LNX.4.10.10112071036430.10152-100000@itc.uci.edu>

Ray,

I believe you are correct, RRS does hold the amateur record.

John Wickman


-----Original Message-----
From: Ray Calkins [mailto:rcalkins@itc.uci.edu]
Sent: Friday, December 07, 2001 11:39 AM
To: John Wickman
Cc: AROCKET@itc.uci.edu
Subject: Re: [AR] Amateur?


I dunno, but this all sounds like a moot point to me, since the amateur
altitude record is generally recognized to belong to the RRS boosted dart
these days.


Ray

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 7915 invoked from network); 7 Dec 2001 21:07:20 -0000
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 7 Dec 2001 21:07:20 -0000
Received: (qmail 18259 invoked by uid 50005); 7 Dec 2001 21:07:11 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4175. . Clean. Processed in 0.572311 secs); 07 Dec 2001 21:07:11 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 7 Dec 2001 21:07:10 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA10882; Fri, 7 Dec 2001 13:03:34 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 98810 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 7 Dec 2001 21:03:32 +0000
Received: from syntheon.inicom.com          (IDENT:root@66.mueb.miam.philapaaz.dsl.att.net [63.242.216.66]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA10868 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 7 Dec 2001 13:03:31 -0800
Received: from koreynew (adsl-81-3-189.mia.bellsouth.net [65.81.3.189]) by          syntheon.inicom.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id QAA10686 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 7 Dec 2001 16:35:20 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 8.5, Build 4.71.2173.0
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <000801c17f62$47496740$6501a8c0@koreynew>
Date:         Fri, 7 Dec 2001 16:01:01 -0500
Reply-To: "Korey Kline" <k2@HYBRIDS.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Korey Kline" <k2@HYBRIDS.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Amateur?
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <NKEHJAOOKBPGIKOOPDEFGEMOCDAA.jwckman@space-rockets.com>

Wickman writes:
> (1) Simple sounding rocket launch from White
> Sands to test an upper stage - $350,000. min to as high as
> $500,000.,

I guess that's the launch cost difference between dangerous explosive AN
solids and Inert Hybrids! Multiple CATS Prize teams received quotes of sub
$100K for both Wallops & White Sands, and I still think that's too high!

> So let's summarize, 30% of the cost was paid directly from the consortium
> contract with the balance coming from overhead.  If eAc did not have other
> Govt. contracts to recover this cost that would be unfortunate. However,
in
> my opinion that still does not put you in the amateur category
> that puts you in a bad business position.

It was a new company, that WAS the first "Contract".....plus the millions
that was POURING in from Hypertek!<g>
As I stated earlier;
>>So at the time we were thinking "Free Money" and "Cool Tours" for
something we were going to do anyway!
>>Trust me when I say as a business that there is no money in rockets! At
best it's a
>> "Get Rich SLOW Scheme".

> Our company's bid and proposal and R&D is included in our G&A rate tacked
> onto every contract we do.  In other words, we bid on proposals
> and conduct our own R&D using funds that are collected from contracts,
which include
> commercial contracts as well.

Great John,
Then take some of that professional government G&A and 103 Lbs. of AN
propellant and go fly to 119,780 ft with full recovery......that should be
easy for you with all your connections......until that time your just making
noise!

OK, I'm done.......What's the name of that hotel in Virginia with the secret
nuclear blast shelter?
K2


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@itc.uci.edu]On
> Behalf Of John Wickman
> Sent: Friday, December 07, 2001 12:25 PM
> To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
> Subject: Re: [AR] Amateur?
>
>
> Before we go back to a normal Arocket format, lets see if we can
> despin this
> story a bit.
>
> What most people in this group probably do not know is that Govt.
> contractors are reimbursed for their in-house R&D, bid and
> proposal work and
> many other things.  Without getting into a boring discussion of Govt.
> contracting, these items are included in a company's contract
> overhead rate.
> Our company's bid and proposal and R&D is included in our G&A rate tacked
> onto every contract we do.  In other words, we bid on proposals
> and conduct
> our own R&D using funds that are collected from contracts, which include
> commercial contracts as well.
>
> Apparently, with respect to the hybrid consortium, a contractor
> is paid 30%
> of his direct costs for work done by NASA.  The 70% balance comes from the
> overhead pool collected on other contracts.  I can assure you that none of
> the large contractors paid the 70% out of their profit pool.  No, it came
> from their overhead pool.
>
> I'm also having a little problem with the fellow paying for the Wallop's
> launch cost out of his personal checking account.  I don't doubt that he
> wrote checks, but to cover the ENTIRE launch cost.  You see our
> company has
> worked with various DoD and NASA facilities for years.  Here are
> some of the
> cost numbers quoted to us: (1) Simple sounding rocket launch from White
> Sands to test an upper stage - $350,000. min to as high as
> $500,000., (2) A
> quick in and out (3 days) static firing at Redstone Arsenal with absolute
> minimum personnel - $15,000 to $20,000 and (3) Orbital launch from
> Vandenburg - $3.5 million once we roll through the gate with the
> meter still
> running until launch.  I did talk with the people at NASA in
> charge of their
> sounding rocket program about doing some launches out of Wallops
> a few years
> back and while it was not a direct price quote, they indicated to me the
> cost would be a few hundred thousand dollars.  My point, if you
> did not pay
> the full freight for the launch, the balance was covered by NASA.
>
> So let's summarize, 30% of the cost was paid directly from the consortium
> contract with the balance coming from overhead.  If eAc did not have other
> Govt. contracts to recover this cost that would be unfortunate.
> However, in
> my opinion that still does not put you in the amateur category
> that puts you
> in a bad business position.
>
> As for your definition that a love for the activity makes you an
> amateur, I
> would suggest you try that theory out on the first professional
> athlete you
> run into after he has played a game.  Walk over to him and say, "Boy, you
> played like a real amateur today!".  My guess is you will get a
> punch in the
> nose rather than a "Thank you!".
>
> John Wickman
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU]On
> Behalf Of Korey Kline
> Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2001 12:29 PM
> To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
> Subject: Re: [AR] Amateur?
>
>
> > It is not fair to amateurs to "claim" an amateur altitude
> record when the
> > effort was entirely paid for by a US Government contract.  Most amateurs
> > cannot even compete for the record simply because they do not
> > have the time or financial resources.
> > John Wickman
>
> >This not very couched dig at Korey Kline while fair, is still besides
> >the point.  He did fly a rocket.
> >J Irvine
>
> A little history.......
>
> The 6" N2O Hybrid rocket was designed in California PRIOR to eAc in Miami,
> with the intent of flying at MTA. I still have the built 4" flight version
> in California that would have been the worlds first N2O/HTPB flight, when
> Kevin Smith(with phone help from me)flew his 2" first. We joined forces in
> Miami and developed the Hypertek HPR system (not a small task at the
> time)and continued refining the 6" from sub scale tests. Once we
> were fairly
> happy with the design we started building prototype test hardware, nozzle
> tooling and even poured the first two fuel grains. At the same time we
> contacted Wallops about launching a 6" Sounding Rocket, what would it take
> and how much would it cost? As a result of that phone call
> Marshall got word
>
> and invited us in NASA/DARPA HPDP project to fulfill their flight
> requirement. Apparently NONE of the BIG guys thought they could do it and
> with our Hypertek track record we at least had a shot. Additionally (in my
> opinion)if we failed there would be no dishonor to NASA and the BIG
> company's great name as well as another example not to deal with small
> business. After ENDLESS NASA design reviews NOTHING was changed with the
> exception of the fins because of a requirement to spin all rockets from
> Wallops! We had a running joke at the time, "When the stack of paper work
> reaches the rocket's design altitude, we simply throw the rocket
> off the top
> and say the flight was a success!" I believe with few exceptions everyone
> knows we (Korey, Kevin, Tom & eAc) designed built and flew the Hyperion,
> that's why I call it an amateur rocket!
>
> The biggest misconception is mimicked by Wickman; "the effort was entirely
> paid for by a US Government contract".
> First of all we were one of seven other company's in a "consortium" of
> Hybrid developers and the entire program was a technology "REINVESTMENT"
> project at the 30% level. Which means YOU pay your own way for EVERYTHING
> and AFTER you successfully complete your milestone, they
> REIMBURSE up to 30%
> of what you've spent up to a limit!!! When it was all said and done it
> worked out to about 22%. I personally watched Kevin write two of the three
> checks to NASA Wallops from his personal checking account to pay for the
> launches. So at the time we were thinking "Free Money" and "Cool
> Tours" for
> something we were going to do anyway! I can tell you for a fact that NASA
> involvement COST us more than the money we made and clearly it would have
> been cheaper to fly out of Blackrock, but the behind the scene tours were
> worth every cent at Wallops. The Wallops Island ground crew were a great
> help and are truly "Steely Eyed Misslemen"!  Everything said and done, I
> wouldn't trade the experience for anything.
>
> >Most amateurs cannot even compete for the record simply because
> they do not
> have the time or financial resources.<
>
> Most people don't have the financial resources to invest that Kevin has
> either, so what's your point? You want to put a spending cap on
> how much an
> individual can invest to break the record?......Sorry Ky.......Sorry
> Anthony.....I thought we just finished a discussion that LOW COST
> wasn't the
> priority? Truth be told 120,000 ft isn't that tuff to beat.....it's just
> that NOBODY SERIOUS is trying very hard. Excuses like "we can't afford to
> static test the motor cuz the propellant costs to much".......That's
> it.....get out of the sand box....go do something you can afford!
> I do agree
> now with the whole FAA crackdown that most people may have lost the window
> of opportunity to launch soon. I do believe once we get someone like Ky to
> work all the details with the FAA others will follow closely
> behind. Even if
> you look at the number of motors tested that could potentially break the
> record it's nearly empty set! I think that GPS has evolved to actually
> determine altitude so that should no longer be an issue. What
> other excuses
> are there? Let's go back to money, that's one reason to not define
> amateur/professional as related to money! The people who are
> getting things
> done are using the Governments money to boot strap themselves up to
> accomplish better things than they could otherwise!
>
> So the question boils down to is an Amateur(experimental)
> Rocketeer limited
> to 4 hours a week in his garage with a $200 a month budget that
> his wife has
> to approve,  or somebody who simply loves rockets and will even sell his
> immortal amateur soul to the government to build bigger things?  Trust me
> when I say as a business that there is no money in rockets! At best it's a
> "Get Rich SLOW Scheme".
>
> I've said my piece, I feel better now, please go back to normal AROCKET
> format.
>
> Climbing into armored personnel carrier because I said Hybrid twice and
> mentioned an HPR product twice. :-)
>
> K2
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 26477 invoked from network); 7 Dec 2001 21:27:40 -0000
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 7 Dec 2001 21:27:40 -0000
Received: (qmail 31415 invoked by uid 50005); 7 Dec 2001 21:27:30 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4175. . Clean. Processed in 1.40684 secs); 07 Dec 2001 21:27:30 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 7 Dec 2001 21:27:28 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA11031; Fri, 7 Dec 2001 13:25:16 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 98832 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 7 Dec 2001 21:25:11 +0000
Received: from spock.alohanet.com (spock.alohanet.com [209.31.4.252]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA11017 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Fri, 7 Dec 2001 13:25:11 -0800
Received: from NATE2 (NATE2.alohanet.com [192.168.233.104]) by          spock.alohanet.com (Post.Office MTA v3.5.2 release 221 ID#          0-55447U100L2S100V35) with SMTP id com for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>;          Fri, 7 Dec 2001 13:27:58 -0800
References: <Pine.LNX.4.10.10112071036430.10152-100000@itc.uci.edu>             <3C11122B.D083D3C4@earthlink.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <004701c17f66$9a31c7f0$68e9a8c0@NATE2>
Date:         Fri, 7 Dec 2001 13:31:59 -0800
Reply-To: "Nathan Hays" <nhays@ALOHANET.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Nathan Hays" <nhays@ALOHANET.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Amateur?
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

> Reading about these boosted-dart flights, I keep thinking,
> OK, now how high could you get if part of that dart mass
> was propellant rather than inert? Fire it approaching apogee,
> before it arcs over...
>
> -dave w
>

There's a fallacy here.  A rocket will go higher if the transition from one
stage to the next is continuous rather than waiting for apogee to fire the
second.  This is modulated a bit by drag, but for any case the optimum point
to ignite the second stage is far less than apogee.

- Nate

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 24647 invoked from network); 7 Dec 2001 21:42:38 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 7 Dec 2001 21:42:38 -0000
Received: (qmail 14488 invoked by uid 50005); 7 Dec 2001 21:42:29 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4175. . Clean. Processed in 1.482113 secs); 07 Dec 2001 21:42:29 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 7 Dec 2001 21:42:27 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA10993; Fri, 7 Dec 2001 13:21:05 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 98824 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 7 Dec 2001 21:21:03 +0000
Received: from spsystems.net (spsystems.net [209.47.149.227]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA10979 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Fri,          7 Dec 2001 13:21:03 -0800
Received: (from henry@localhost) by spsystems.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id QAA05198;          Fri, 7 Dec 2001 16:20:29 -0500 (EST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1011207161901.2225N-100000@spsystems.net>
Date:         Fri, 7 Dec 2001 16:20:29 -0500
Reply-To: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] DaVinci project update
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <4.3.1.2.20011207144901.034f2170@mail.idsoftware.com>

On Fri, 7 Dec 2001, John Carmack wrote:
> >I was checking on the DaVinci project's website and noticed an amazing
> >similarity between "their" engine test and the Microcosm's SR-XM test.
> >Anybody know if they're official partners?
>
> I asked Brian that a while ago, and he dodged the question. :-)

He has been evasive about just who makes their engines; apparently that is
not public information at this time.  It sure did sound like the Scorpius
engines.  Note, though, that it might be some of the same people working
under different corporate auspices.

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 15442 invoked from network); 7 Dec 2001 21:47:49 -0000
Received: from smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.105]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 7 Dec 2001 21:47:49 -0000
Received: (qmail 26952 invoked by uid 50005); 7 Dec 2001 21:47:39 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpy with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4175. . Clean. Processed in 2.646173 secs); 07 Dec 2001 21:47:39 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 7 Dec 2001 21:47:35 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA10949; Fri, 7 Dec 2001 13:19:15 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 98817 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 7 Dec 2001 21:19:08 +0000
Received: from syntheon.inicom.com          (IDENT:root@66.mueb.miam.philapaaz.dsl.att.net [63.242.216.66]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA10935 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 7 Dec 2001 13:19:07 -0800
Received: from koreynew (adsl-81-3-189.mia.bellsouth.net [65.81.3.189]) by          syntheon.inicom.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id QAA10712 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 7 Dec 2001 16:50:58 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 8.5, Build 4.71.2173.0
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <000901c17f64$76f1cda0$6501a8c0@koreynew>
Date:         Fri, 7 Dec 2001 16:16:41 -0500
Reply-To: "Korey Kline" <k2@HYBRIDS.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Korey Kline" <k2@HYBRIDS.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Amateur?
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <a05100328b836c6bb0d84@[63.24.225.162]>

> Jerry
> I say let there be so many attempts it is confusing how many records
> there are.

Agreed

>4 page launch application for sub-orbital.

How about 4 pages and an actual Thrust Trace!

K2

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 25783 invoked from network); 7 Dec 2001 23:02:24 -0000
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 7 Dec 2001 23:02:24 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 18403 invoked by uid 50005); 7 Dec 2001 23:02:15 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4175. . Clean. Processed in 0.88418 secs); 07 Dec 2001 23:02:15 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 7 Dec 2001 23:02:14 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA11351; Fri, 7 Dec 2001 15:00:25 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 98864 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 7 Dec 2001 23:00:19 +0000
Received: from pintail.mail.pas.earthlink.net (pintail.mail.pas.earthlink.net          [207.217.120.122]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id          PAA11337 for <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Fri, 7 Dec 2001 15:00:19 -0800
Received: from user-38lc15j.dialup.mindspring.com ([209.86.4.179] helo=RClague)          by pintail.mail.pas.earthlink.net with smtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id          16CTyA-0003cf-00 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 07 Dec 2001 15:00:04          -0800
References: <Pine.LNX.4.10.10112071057580.10360-100000@itc.uci.edu>
X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.8/32.553
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by itc.uci.edu id PAA11338
Message-ID:  <j7h21u4ns5df35oe5s03f347lt6gtlv0qg@4ax.com>
Date:         Fri, 7 Dec 2001 14:58:44 -0800
Reply-To: <rclague@RCLAGUE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Randall Clague" <rclague@RCLAGUE.NET>
Subject:      [AR] Energy of orbiting bodies
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <Pine.LNX.4.10.10112071057580.10360-100000@itc.uci.edu>

At the ERPS meeting last night, I was scoffing at the idea that a
beanstalk could be built to withstand the impact of a typical
satellite in LEO.  I proclaimed, "That's the energy of a small nuke.
Let me put it in perspective: if an explosion that big were to take
place here [the dining room in an IHOP], this building [an eight story
Holiday Inn with which the IHOP is colocated] would go away.  I'm not
talking pieces of it going flying into the air; it would *go away*."

Well...

Always run the numbers before you shoot off your mouth.

Turns out that an object in LEO has the kinetic energy equivalent to -
in an impact - the explosive energy of six times that much TNT.  So
our hypothetical 5 ton satellite would only hit the beanstalk as 30
tons of TNT.  That's a small nuke indeed.

(BTW, it wouldn't be hard to put that much TNT into a dining room; it
would only take up three booths floor to ceiling.  Yep - that's a lot
of energy...)

The rest of my statement, I stand by.

This helps explain to me why rockets are so failure-prone: the power
density is enormous.  And high power will always find the weakest
link.

-R

--
"Sutton is the beginning of wisdom -
but only the beginning."
                     -- Jeff Greason

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 363 invoked from network); 8 Dec 2001 00:12:17 -0000
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 8 Dec 2001 00:12:17 -0000
Received: (qmail 27913 invoked by uid 50005); 8 Dec 2001 00:12:08 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4175. . Clean. Processed in 1.489601 secs); 08 Dec 2001 00:12:08 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 8 Dec 2001 00:12:06 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA11604; Fri, 7 Dec 2001 16:09:31 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 98906 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 8 Dec 2001 00:09:10 +0000
Received: from mta08.mail.mel.aone.net.au ([203.2.192.89]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA11590 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri,          7 Dec 2001 16:09:09 -0800
Received: from win2pk ([63.60.249.24]) by mta08.mail.mel.aone.net.au with SMTP          id <20011208000907.PKFX1684.mta08.mail.mel.aone.net.au@win2pk> for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 8 Dec 2001 11:09:07 +1100
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
Importance: Normal
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <NEBBJIGOELOLIBCCPKDCGEDDCCAA.geordi@c031.aone.net.au>
Date:         Sat, 8 Dec 2001 11:39:04 +1100
Reply-To: "Troy Prideaux" <geordi@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Troy Prideaux" <geordi@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Energy of orbiting bodies
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <j7h21u4ns5df35oe5s03f347lt6gtlv0qg@4ax.com>

>At the ERPS meeting last night, I was scoffing at the idea that a
>beanstalk could be built to withstand the impact of a typical
>satellite in LEO.  I proclaimed, "That's the energy of a small nuke.
>Let me put it in perspective: if an explosion that big were to take
>place here [the dining room in an IHOP], this building [an eight story
>Holiday Inn with which the IHOP is colocated] would go away.  I'm not
>talking pieces of it going flying into the air; it would *go away*."


Yep, actually what's also interesting is how we (on Earth) could see tiny
flashes of light on the moon with 6" & 8" telescopes during the recent
meteor shower. Apparently the energy contained within these 1-2Kg babies is
somewhere close to some nukes? The theory goes something like: Meteoroid
hits moon surface, puff of dust is raised which is in the millions of
degrees IIRC, dust expands and cools and when is gets to so many thousands
of degrees it emits photons which is what we see on Earth. Sorry for the
vagueness here, all going from memory of a recent NASA release which I
wasn't really paying much attention too.

>
>Well...
>
>Always run the numbers before you shoot off your mouth.
>
>Turns out that an object in LEO has the kinetic energy equivalent to -
>in an impact - the explosive energy of six times that much TNT.  So
>our hypothetical 5 ton satellite would only hit the beanstalk as 30
>tons of TNT.  That's a small nuke indeed.
>
>(BTW, it wouldn't be hard to put that much TNT into a dining room; it
>would only take up three booths floor to ceiling.  Yep - that's a lot
>of energy...)
>
>The rest of my statement, I stand by.
>
>This helps explain to me why rockets are so failure-prone: the power
>density is enormous.  And high power will always find the weakest

That's what NASA's been saying for decades. "We're lucky we haven't
experienced more failures given the amounts of energy we're dealing with".
Unfortunately, good performance generally = poor energy efficiency.
Basically the difference between exit temps and the surrounds indicates
where most of the energy is wasted. Unfortunately narrowing that gap
generally requires a propulsive medium that's quite *inert* i.e.. Requires
external heat to do work (endothermic process) without releasing much/any
and that's where the catch 22 hits ya.

Troy.

>link.
>
>-R
>
>--
>"Sutton is the beginning of wisdom -
>but only the beginning."
>                     -- Jeff Greason
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 24134 invoked from network); 8 Dec 2001 00:34:19 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.105]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 8 Dec 2001 00:34:19 -0000
Received: (qmail 5929 invoked by uid 50005); 8 Dec 2001 00:34:09 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpy with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4175. . Clean. Processed in 1.954326 secs); 08 Dec 2001 00:34:09 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 8 Dec 2001 00:34:06 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA11755; Fri, 7 Dec 2001 16:32:45 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 98961 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 8 Dec 2001 00:32:41 +0000
Received: from imo-r03.mx.aol.com (imo-r03.mx.aol.com [152.163.225.99]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA11740 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Fri, 7 Dec 2001 16:32:41 -0800
Received: from MONTMACH@aol.com by imo-r03.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v31_r1.9.) id          w.51.15823b32 (24896) for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Fri, 7 Dec 2001          19:32:25 -0500 (EST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0E68_01C56B69.5BBE3F60"
X-Mailer: AOL 6.0 for Windows US sub 10536
Message-ID:  <51.15823b32.2942b99d@aol.com>
Date:         Fri, 7 Dec 2001 19:32:29 EST
Reply-To: <MONTMACH@AOL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <MONTMACH@AOL.COM>
Subject:      [AR] Silver bullet 8 flies again
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0E68_01C56B69.5BBE3F60
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Hello group,

      This last Saturday, Dec. 1st at the MTA, I flew the silver bullet 8
fuel injected hybrid again.  I first flew it at Black Rock in Sept. 2000.
The flight was perfect, but unfortunately the tracking smoke never ignited.
It burned out of sight in about 6 seconds, all we could hear was the motor
for another 15 seconds.  As it stands it is missing in action, estimated
altitude was 20,000 ft., there was zero wind at ground level, but upper winds
were about 50 to 70 mph.  This was proved by a second flight of a M-500
hybrid, on which the tracking smoke did ignite.  The rocket only had a small
Aerocon flare chute about 3 ft. in diameter, empty the rocket weight was
10lbs.            Observers could see the chute come out and watched it drift
quickly out of sight, guesstimate about 8 miles.  In the next couple weeks
I'm thinking of taking a plane ride to search for the missing rockets, as the
wall of my office looks empty without them.  If any body is interested in
looking at the fuel injected hybrid or tri-brid go to rattworks.com and click
on " in the works ".

                                                            Dave Griffith

------=_NextPart_000_0E68_01C56B69.5BBE3F60
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<HTML><FONT FACE=arial,helvetica><FONT  SIZE=2>Hello group,
<BR>
<BR> &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;This last Saturday, Dec. 1st at the MTA, I flew the silver bullet 8 fuel injected hybrid again. &nbsp;I first flew it at Black Rock in Sept. 2000. &nbsp;The flight was perfect, but unfortunately the tracking smoke never ignited. &nbsp;It burned out of sight in about 6 seconds, all we could hear was the motor for another 15 seconds. &nbsp;As it stands it is missing in action, estimated altitude was 20,000 ft., there was zero wind at ground level, but upper winds were about 50 to 70 mph. &nbsp  sp;This was proved by a second flight of a M-500 hybrid, on which the tracking smoke did ignite. &nbsp;The rocket only had a small Aerocon flare chute about 3 ft. in diameter, empty the rocket weight was 10lbs. &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Observers could see the chute come out and watched it drift quickly out of sight, guesstimate about 8 miles. &nbsp;In the next couple weeks I'm thinking of taking a plane ride to search!
 for the missing rockets, as the wall of my office looks empty without them. &nbsp;If any body is interested in looking at the fuel injected hybrid or tri-brid go to rattworks.com and click on " in the works ".
<BR>
<BR> &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Dave Griffith</FONT></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0E68_01C56B69.5BBE3F60--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 4945 invoked from network); 8 Dec 2001 00:52:06 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 8 Dec 2001 00:52:06 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 23542 invoked by uid 50005); 8 Dec 2001 00:51:57 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4175. . Clean. Processed in 0.658805 secs); 08 Dec 2001 00:51:57 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 8 Dec 2001 00:51:56 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA11852; Fri, 7 Dec 2001 16:50:35 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 98986 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 8 Dec 2001 00:50:32 +0000
Received: from adobe.com (smtp-relay-2.adobe.com [192.150.11.2]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA11838 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri,          7 Dec 2001 16:50:32 -0800
Received: from inner-relay-2.corp.adobe.com ([153.32.1.52]) by adobe.com          (1.0.0/8.11.4) with ESMTP id fB80mx426954 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>;          Fri, 7 Dec 2001 16:48:59 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mailsj-v1.corp.adobe.com (mailsj-dev.corp.adobe.com          [153.32.1.192]) by inner-relay-2.corp.adobe.com (8.11.4/8.11.4) with          ESMTP id fB80n2110996 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 7 Dec 2001          16:49:02 -0800 (PST)
Received: from sronald.earthlink.net ([153.32.63.111]) by          mailsj-v1.corp.adobe.com (Netscape Messaging Server 4.15 v1 Jul 11          2001 16:32:57) with ESMTP id GO02B800.FDI; Fri, 7 Dec 2001 16:49:56          -0800
X-Sender: forkbomb@mail.earthlink.net
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
References: <Pine.LNX.4.10.10112071057580.10360-100000@itc.uci.edu>            <Pine.LNX.4.10.10112071057580.10360-100000@itc.uci.edu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <5.1.0.14.0.20011207153317.032de960@mail.earthlink.net>
Date:         Fri, 7 Dec 2001 16:55:27 -0800
Reply-To: "Pierce Nichols" <forkbomb@EARTHLINK.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Pierce Nichols" <forkbomb@EARTHLINK.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Energy of orbiting bodies
Comments: To: rclague@rclague.net
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <j7h21u4ns5df35oe5s03f347lt6gtlv0qg@4ax.com>

At 02:58 PM 12/7/01 -0800, Randall Clague wrote:
>(BTW, it wouldn't be hard to put that much TNT into a dining room; it
>would only take up three booths floor to ceiling.  Yep - that's a lot
>of energy...)


         And it probably would cause the hotel to go away -- in lots of
little pieces at high speed.


>The rest of my statement, I stand by.


         Here's some solutions: http://www.tethers.com/Hoytether.html. I
was calling it the Holly Tether due to it being late and me not getting
enough sleep, but that page has a basic description and a link to a pretty
good paper on the subject of HoyTethers and their lifetimes in orbit.

         -p

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 2396 invoked from network); 8 Dec 2001 01:07:45 -0000
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 8 Dec 2001 01:07:45 -0000
Received: (qmail 9197 invoked by uid 50005); 8 Dec 2001 01:07:36 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4175. . Clean. Processed in 0.480922 secs); 08 Dec 2001 01:07:36 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 8 Dec 2001 01:07:35 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA11938; Fri, 7 Dec 2001 17:03:18 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 99005 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 8 Dec 2001 01:03:15 +0000
Received: from warspite.cnchost.com (warspite.concentric.net [207.155.248.9])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA11923; Fri, 7 Dec 2001          17:03:15 -0800
Received: from ericsathlon (adsl-64-169-112-3.dsl.lsan03.pacbell.net          [64.169.112.3]) by warspite.cnchost.com id UAA04440; Fri, 7 Dec 2001          20:03:14 -0500 (EST) [ConcentricHost SMTP Relay 1.14]
Errors-To: <Ericc@aeronumerics.com>
References:  <Pine.LNX.4.10.10112071057580.10360-100000@itc.uci.edu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4807.1700
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <003301c17f84$9c3c6960$1602a8c0@WorkGroup>
Date:         Fri, 7 Dec 2001 17:06:47 -0800
Reply-To: "Eric Claypool \(ANI\)" <Ericc@aeronumerics.com>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Eric Claypool \(ANI\)" <Ericc@aeronumerics.com>
Subject:      Re: [AR] DaVinci project update
Comments: To: Ray Calkins <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

  Well this IS the microcosm rocket. Go to the link below for the
davinciproject and look at the pictures.. ANYONE recognize the RRS MTA?  The
rocket test was done using the RRS Vertical Test Stand 2.. This certainly
wasn't davinciproject and definitely was Microcosm...  Why would
davinciproject hijack microcosm photos and claim they represent the work
done by them?... Quite disturbing.

Eric

-- This is the RRS MTA Vertical Test Stand 2 with the Microcosm rocket
mounted for testing. As far as I know as a RRS member nobody from
Davinciproject has ever tested anything at the MTA. I was able to see this
vehicle under contruction at Microcosm's shop before they tested it at the
MTA..

http://www.davinciproject.com/english/multimedia/engine_testing/source/2.htm




----- Original Message -----
From: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Friday, December 07, 2001 11:10 AM
Subject: [AR] DaVinci project update


> I was checking on the DaVinci project's website and noticed an amazing
> similarity between "their" engine test and the Microcosm's SR-XM test.
> Anybody know if they're official partners?
>
> compare:
>
http://www.davinciproject.com/english/multimedia/engine_testing/source/4.htm
> http://www.smad.com/scorpius/press6.html
>
> It appears to be the exact same photo, but DaVinci electronically removed
> the flag and blurred the writing.
>
> My guess?  One of the Scorpius crew is working for both folks.
>
> Since the Scorpius motor was developed largely through NASA and DOD
> contracts, doesn't this make the DaVinci project ineligible for the
> X-Prize?
>
> Ray
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 26470 invoked from network); 8 Dec 2001 01:14:12 -0000
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 8 Dec 2001 01:14:12 -0000
Received: (qmail 25277 invoked by uid 50005); 8 Dec 2001 01:14:03 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4175. . Clean. Processed in 0.355628 secs); 08 Dec 2001 01:14:03 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 8 Dec 2001 01:14:02 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA11984; Fri, 7 Dec 2001 17:11:24 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 99012 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 8 Dec 2001 01:11:19 +0000
Received: from cesaroni.net ([204.101.26.130]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7)          with ESMTP id RAA11970 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 7 Dec 2001          17:11:19 -0800
Received: from Anthony by cesaroni.net with SMTP (MDaemon.v2.8.7.0.R) for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 07 Dec 2001 20:10:26 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 8.5, Build 4.71.2173.0
Importance: Normal
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
X-MDaemon-Deliver-To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
X-Return-Path: ACesaroni@cesaroni.net
Message-ID:  <000f01c17f85$1f94ade0$1b0101c0@Anthony>
Date:         Fri, 7 Dec 2001 20:10:27 -0500
Reply-To: "Anthony Cesaroni" <ACesaroni@cesaroni.net>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Anthony Cesaroni" <ACesaroni@cesaroni.net>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Amateur?
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <NKEHJAOOKBPGIKOOPDEFGEMOCDAA.jwckman@space-rockets.com>

John,

Your right, let's despin this. I'm a life time RRS member and I would be
very surprised if the RRS and it's current infrastructure could not be
traced to government contracts. Your in the same boat too. Some will argue
that a dart is not a rocket so lets keep this on a level playing field and
let's keep that as a separate topic. Korey did his design before and clear
of HPDP and Kevin Smith has all the receipts from Wallops. I know how much
Kevin spent and the real costs and you don't. The H1-A shots were all about
getting the job done and it was very privately funded for a lot of good
reasons. Not a industry welfare project at the U.S. tax payers expense. Back
to a normal Arocket format.

Anthony.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@itc.uci.edu]On
> Behalf Of John Wickman
> Sent: Friday, December 07, 2001 12:25 PM
> To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
> Subject: Re: Amateur?
>
>
> Before we go back to a normal Arocket format, lets see if we can
> despin this
> story a bit.
>
> What most people in this group probably do not know is that Govt.
> contractors are reimbursed for their in-house R&D, bid and
> proposal work and
> many other things.  Without getting into a boring discussion of Govt.
> contracting, these items are included in a company's contract
> overhead rate.
> Our company's bid and proposal and R&D is included in our G&A rate tacked
> onto every contract we do.  In other words, we bid on proposals
> and conduct
> our own R&D using funds that are collected from contracts, which include
> commercial contracts as well.
>
> Apparently, with respect to the hybrid consortium, a contractor
> is paid 30%
> of his direct costs for work done by NASA.  The 70% balance comes from the
> overhead pool collected on other contracts.  I can assure you that none of
> the large contractors paid the 70% out of their profit pool.  No, it came
> from their overhead pool.
>
> I'm also having a little problem with the fellow paying for the Wallop's
> launch cost out of his personal checking account.  I don't doubt that he
> wrote checks, but to cover the ENTIRE launch cost.  You see our
> company has
> worked with various DoD and NASA facilities for years.  Here are
> some of the
> cost numbers quoted to us: (1) Simple sounding rocket launch from White
> Sands to test an upper stage - $350,000. min to as high as
> $500,000., (2) A
> quick in and out (3 days) static firing at Redstone Arsenal with absolute
> minimum personnel - $15,000 to $20,000 and (3) Orbital launch from
> Vandenburg - $3.5 million once we roll through the gate with the
> meter still
> running until launch.  I did talk with the people at NASA in
> charge of their
> sounding rocket program about doing some launches out of Wallops
> a few years
> back and while it was not a direct price quote, they indicated to me the
> cost would be a few hundred thousand dollars.  My point, if you
> did not pay
> the full freight for the launch, the balance was covered by NASA.
>
> So let's summarize, 30% of the cost was paid directly from the consortium
> contract with the balance coming from overhead.  If eAc did not have other
> Govt. contracts to recover this cost that would be unfortunate.
> However, in
> my opinion that still does not put you in the amateur category
> that puts you
> in a bad business position.
>
> As for your definition that a love for the activity makes you an
> amateur, I
> would suggest you try that theory out on the first professional
> athlete you
> run into after he has played a game.  Walk over to him and say, "Boy, you
> played like a real amateur today!".  My guess is you will get a
> punch in the
> nose rather than a "Thank you!".
>
> John Wickman
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU]On
> Behalf Of Korey Kline
> Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2001 12:29 PM
> To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
> Subject: Re: [AR] Amateur?
>
>
> > It is not fair to amateurs to "claim" an amateur altitude
> record when the
> > effort was entirely paid for by a US Government contract.  Most amateurs
> > cannot even compete for the record simply because they do not
> > have the time or financial resources.
> > John Wickman
>
> >This not very couched dig at Korey Kline while fair, is still besides
> >the point.  He did fly a rocket.
> >J Irvine
>
> A little history.......
>
> The 6" N2O Hybrid rocket was designed in California PRIOR to eAc in Miami,
> with the intent of flying at MTA. I still have the built 4" flight version
> in California that would have been the worlds first N2O/HTPB flight, when
> Kevin Smith(with phone help from me)flew his 2" first. We joined forces in
> Miami and developed the Hypertek HPR system (not a small task at the
> time)and continued refining the 6" from sub scale tests. Once we
> were fairly
> happy with the design we started building prototype test hardware, nozzle
> tooling and even poured the first two fuel grains. At the same time we
> contacted Wallops about launching a 6" Sounding Rocket, what would it take
> and how much would it cost? As a result of that phone call
> Marshall got word
>
> and invited us in NASA/DARPA HPDP project to fulfill their flight
> requirement. Apparently NONE of the BIG guys thought they could do it and
> with our Hypertek track record we at least had a shot. Additionally (in my
> opinion)if we failed there would be no dishonor to NASA and the BIG
> company's great name as well as another example not to deal with small
> business. After ENDLESS NASA design reviews NOTHING was changed with the
> exception of the fins because of a requirement to spin all rockets from
> Wallops! We had a running joke at the time, "When the stack of paper work
> reaches the rocket's design altitude, we simply throw the rocket
> off the top
> and say the flight was a success!" I believe with few exceptions everyone
> knows we (Korey, Kevin, Tom & eAc) designed built and flew the Hyperion,
> that's why I call it an amateur rocket!
>
> The biggest misconception is mimicked by Wickman; "the effort was entirely
> paid for by a US Government contract".
> First of all we were one of seven other company's in a "consortium" of
> Hybrid developers and the entire program was a technology "REINVESTMENT"
> project at the 30% level. Which means YOU pay your own way for EVERYTHING
> and AFTER you successfully complete your milestone, they
> REIMBURSE up to 30%
> of what you've spent up to a limit!!! When it was all said and done it
> worked out to about 22%. I personally watched Kevin write two of the three
> checks to NASA Wallops from his personal checking account to pay for the
> launches. So at the time we were thinking "Free Money" and "Cool
> Tours" for
> something we were going to do anyway! I can tell you for a fact that NASA
> involvement COST us more than the money we made and clearly it would have
> been cheaper to fly out of Blackrock, but the behind the scene tours were
> worth every cent at Wallops. The Wallops Island ground crew were a great
> help and are truly "Steely Eyed Misslemen"!  Everything said and done, I
> wouldn't trade the experience for anything.
>
> >Most amateurs cannot even compete for the record simply because
> they do not
> have the time or financial resources.<
>
> Most people don't have the financial resources to invest that Kevin has
> either, so what's your point? You want to put a spending cap on
> how much an
> individual can invest to break the record?......Sorry Ky.......Sorry
> Anthony.....I thought we just finished a discussion that LOW COST
> wasn't the
> priority? Truth be told 120,000 ft isn't that tuff to beat.....it's just
> that NOBODY SERIOUS is trying very hard. Excuses like "we can't afford to
> static test the motor cuz the propellant costs to much".......That's
> it.....get out of the sand box....go do something you can afford!
> I do agree
> now with the whole FAA crackdown that most people may have lost the window
> of opportunity to launch soon. I do believe once we get someone like Ky to
> work all the details with the FAA others will follow closely
> behind. Even if
> you look at the number of motors tested that could potentially break the
> record it's nearly empty set! I think that GPS has evolved to actually
> determine altitude so that should no longer be an issue. What
> other excuses
> are there? Let's go back to money, that's one reason to not define
> amateur/professional as related to money! The people who are
> getting things
> done are using the Governments money to boot strap themselves up to
> accomplish better things than they could otherwise!
>
> So the question boils down to is an Amateur(experimental)
> Rocketeer limited
> to 4 hours a week in his garage with a $200 a month budget that
> his wife has
> to approve,  or somebody who simply loves rockets and will even sell his
> immortal amateur soul to the government to build bigger things?  Trust me
> when I say as a business that there is no money in rockets! At best it's a
> "Get Rich SLOW Scheme".
>
> I've said my piece, I feel better now, please go back to normal AROCKET
> format.
>
> Climbing into armored personnel carrier because I said Hybrid twice and
> mentioned an HPR product twice. :-)
>
> K2
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 26331 invoked from network); 8 Dec 2001 01:38:16 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpv.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.110]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 8 Dec 2001 01:38:16 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 23410 invoked by uid 50005); 7 Dec 2001 20:33:22 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpv with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4175. . Clean. Processed in 7.161664 secs); 07 Dec 2001 20:33:22 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpv.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 7 Dec 2001 20:33:12 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA10747; Fri, 7 Dec 2001 12:37:05 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 98787 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 7 Dec 2001 20:36:51 +0000
Received: from idsoftware.com (predator.idsoftware.com [192.246.40.34]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA10733 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Fri, 7 Dec 2001 12:36:51 -0800
Received: from [192.246.40.144] (account johnc HELO pluto.idsoftware.com) by          idsoftware.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 3.4.7) with ESMTP id 510213 for          AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 07 Dec 2001 14:36:50 -0600
X-Sender: johnc@mail.idsoftware.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <4.3.1.2.20011207144901.034f2170@mail.idsoftware.com>
Date:         Fri, 7 Dec 2001 14:52:36 -0600
Reply-To: "John Carmack" <johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Carmack" <johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] DaVinci project update
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <Pine.LNX.4.10.10112071057580.10360-100000@itc.uci.edu>

At 11:10 AM 12/7/2001 -0800, you wrote:
>I was checking on the DaVinci project's website and noticed an amazing
>similarity between "their" engine test and the Microcosm's SR-XM test.
>Anybody know if they're official partners?

I asked Brian that a while ago, and he dodged the question. :-)

They also mentioned a test of their guidance software at the same time as a
scorpius test launch.


>Since the Scorpius motor was developed largely through NASA and DOD
>contracts, doesn't this make the DaVinci project ineligible for the
>X-Prize?

If the scorpius motors are available to anyone that wants to buy one, then
they are in the clear.

I suspect microcosm would be thrilled to sell some to other teams as well.

John Carmack

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 1006 invoked from network); 8 Dec 2001 02:56:42 -0000
Received: from smtpv.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.110]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 8 Dec 2001 02:56:42 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 13949 invoked by uid 50005); 7 Dec 2001 22:05:44 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpv with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4175. . Clean. Processed in 1.867652 secs); 07 Dec 2001 22:05:44 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpv.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 7 Dec 2001 22:05:41 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA11137; Fri, 7 Dec 2001 13:50:15 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 98848 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 7 Dec 2001 21:50:04 +0000
Received: from mail.aros.net (mail.aros.net [207.173.16.20]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA11123 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Fri,          7 Dec 2001 13:50:03 -0800
Received: from biomicro.com (cust-208-187-122-40.bbsc.net [208.187.122.40]) by          mail.aros.net (8.11.6/8.9.3) with ESMTP id fB7Lnw302221 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Fri, 7 Dec 2001 14:49:58 -0700 (MST)
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.77 [en] (Win98; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <000901c17f64$76f1cda0$6501a8c0@koreynew>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3C113959.A7F36E1A@biomicro.com>
Date:         Fri, 7 Dec 2001 14:49:13 -0700
Reply-To: "Mark K. Spute" <mks@BIOMICRO.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Mark K. Spute" <mks@BIOMICRO.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Amateur?
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

How about 1 page, like an FAA flight plan.

Description of vehicle, description of flight trajectory, and proposed
time and place of launch.

That should be sufficient.



Korey Kline wrote:

> > Jerry
> > I say let there be so many attempts it is confusing how many records
> > there are.
>
> Agreed
>
> >4 page launch application for sub-orbital.
>
> How about 4 pages and an actual Thrust Trace!
>
> K2

--
Mark K. Spute
Senior Research Engineer
BioMicro Systems Inc.
1.801.256.1906  (phone)
1.801.256.1901  (fax)

KD7IWE,  RRS, hopeful future Stolly owner

"It is difficult to say what is impossible, for the dream of yesterday is
the hope of today and the reality of tomorrow."
     Dr. Robert H. Goddard

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 8833 invoked from network); 8 Dec 2001 02:59:02 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 8 Dec 2001 02:59:02 -0000
Received: (qmail 3647 invoked by uid 50005); 8 Dec 2001 02:58:53 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4175. . Clean. Processed in 0.443988 secs); 08 Dec 2001 02:58:53 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 8 Dec 2001 02:58:53 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA12282; Fri, 7 Dec 2001 18:57:06 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 99028 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 8 Dec 2001 02:56:57 +0000
Received: from web20404.mail.yahoo.com (web20404.mail.yahoo.com          [216.136.226.123]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id SAA12245          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 7 Dec 2001 18:46:56 -0800
Received: from [63.42.74.162] by web20404.mail.yahoo.com via HTTP; Fri, 07 Dec          2001 18:46:56 PST
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <20011208024656.33605.qmail@web20404.mail.yahoo.com>
Date:         Fri, 7 Dec 2001 18:46:56 -0800
Reply-To: <mbwittig@alum.mit.edu>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Mike Wittig" <mike_wittig@YAHOO.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Segway Scooter -- anything here Rocketeers can use??
Comments: To: John Carmack <johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <4.3.1.2.20011206182909.037f7148@mail.idsoftware.com>

They are using a mechanical gyro to provide spin
stabilization.  This must be the case because it would
not be possible to balance the scooter and drive in
one direction at the same time using only the wheels
without some goofy motion.  You would often need to
accelerate in a direction other than the one you are
traveling in to give you a reaction force for
balancing, producing a jerky, inefficient motion at
best.  Consider the motion of a unicyclist.  Instead,
they have a large, high-momentum gyro mounted
underneath the person's feet.  The gyro imparts
natural stabilization because it doesn't want to
change its plane.  This same technology was used in
the 1800's and early 1900's on a very large scale to
stabilize a few ocean-crossing ships during storms...
now that's amazing!  Because of speed limitations for
safety and practicality, the gyro on the scooter
definitely has some mass to it, and this is evidenced
by the 65 pound weight of the unit.

With regard to the 10 processors- this is most likely
for redundancy.  The device probably has a relatively
nice failure mode- power goes off to the electric
motor maintaining the gyro's velocity, at which point
it slows down over time, giving the driver time to get
off before stabilization is lost.

John is right with his assertion that walking robots
and the like require little computational power.  I
used to build them at the MIT AI Lab and the ones we
had were running off of low-powered Texas Instruments
DSP boards.

With regard to someone's comments about Honda's
robots: Honda's robot does not build its own gait, but
rather plays back a recording of a human walking and
then uses mostly its ankle actuators to provide
overlayed balancing.  The robots in our lab did
perform all the calculations, but our robots didn't
look as humanistic as Honda's (obviously).  In fact
several of the MIT robots have reversed legs like
chickens to prevent onlookers from using their
natural, highly developed sense of what a natural walk
should look like to criticize the robots!

-Mike







--- John Carmack <johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM> wrote:
> At 01:41 AM 12/4/2001 -0800, you wrote:
> > > Yes, the technology is amazing - while at the
> same time utterly useless.
> >
> >Sure, it's nifty, and if the price comes down over
> an order of magnitude,
> >I'd even get one myself.  My question, what gyros
> does it use, and how
> >does it isolate them from mechanical effects.
> Judging from what I've seen
> >from the Armadillo's team, mechanical gyros are
> very sensitive to things
> >like curbs, cracks in sidewalks, jostling from
> other pedestrians, etc.
> >They're either doing something different with
> software or hardware, or
> >codling the development unit from rough handling.
> >
> >Comments, John?
>
> As long as you are on the ground, you can use a
> triaxial accelerometer to
> constantly orient your up vector, allowing you to
> use cheap gyros.  In
> fact, you could probably do a balancing scooter with
> just accelerometers,
> because it isn't going to do any high-G maneuvers...
>
> I would be curious to know exactly which gyros they
> are using.
>
> I couldn't imagine how they would need 10 CPUs as
> John Bolene commented --
> that may have been a number a marketing guy ginned
> up by counting dubious
> parts like motor controllers.
>
> John Carmack


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Send your FREE holiday greetings online!
http://greetings.yahoo.com

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 17025 invoked from network); 8 Dec 2001 03:37:04 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 8 Dec 2001 03:37:04 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 10847 invoked by uid 50005); 8 Dec 2001 03:36:54 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4175. . Clean. Processed in 1.006684 secs); 08 Dec 2001 03:36:54 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 8 Dec 2001 03:36:53 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA12411; Fri, 7 Dec 2001 19:34:32 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 99045 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 8 Dec 2001 03:34:28 +0000
Received: from mail44.fg.online.no (mail44-s.fg.online.no [148.122.161.44]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA12397 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 7 Dec 2001 19:34:27 -0800
Received: from y1036732.online.no ([136.164.46.207]) by mail44.fg.online.no          (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id EAA09602; Sat, 8 Dec 2001 04:33:55 +0100          (MET)
X-Sender: eirimeer@mail.online.no
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
References: <4.3.1.2.20011206182909.037f7148@mail.idsoftware.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <5.1.0.14.0.20011208042223.00a08280@mail.online.no>
Date:         Sat, 8 Dec 2001 04:30:20 +0100
Reply-To: "Eirik van der Meer" <eirimeer@ONLINE.NO>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Eirik van der Meer" <eirimeer@ONLINE.NO>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Segway Scooter -- anything here Rocketeers can use??
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <20011208024656.33605.qmail@web20404.mail.yahoo.com>

At 18:46 2001-12-07 -0800, Mike Wittig wrote:
>They are using a mechanical gyro to provide spin
>stabilization.  This must be the case because it would
>not be possible to balance the scooter and drive in
>one direction at the same time using only the wheels
>without some goofy motion.  You would often need to
>accelerate in a direction other than the one you are
>traveling in to give you a reaction force for
>balancing, producing a jerky, inefficient motion at
>best.

No, not if the forces can be countered fast enough. Just think of a drunk
person. While someone sober can stand and walk almost perfectly balanced an
intoxicated person (with poor responce time and inaccurate senses) will
sway and stagger about.


>Consider the motion of a unicyclist.

A skilled unicyclist can maintain an impressive balance and precision.


>With regard to someone's comments about Honda's
>robots: Honda's robot does not build its own gait, but
>rather plays back a recording of a human walking and
>then uses mostly its ankle actuators to provide
>overlayed balancing.

Yet it was more than capable of correcting for unexpected imputs. I saw a
clip where a person started pushing the robot on the "chest", and it
started walking backwards to avoid falling.


>   The robots in our lab did
>perform all the calculations, but our robots didn't
>look as humanistic as Honda's (obviously).  In fact
>several of the MIT robots have reversed legs like
>chickens to prevent onlookers from using their
>natural, highly developed sense of what a natural walk
>should look like to criticize the robots!

:-)



--
Eirik van der Meer <eirimeer@online.no>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 868 invoked from network); 8 Dec 2001 04:00:05 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 8 Dec 2001 04:00:05 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 2674 invoked by uid 50005); 8 Dec 2001 03:59:56 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4175. . Clean. Processed in 0.597695 secs); 08 Dec 2001 03:59:56 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 8 Dec 2001 03:59:55 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA12614; Fri, 7 Dec 2001 19:58:43 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 99060 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 8 Dec 2001 03:58:35 +0000
Received: from rwcrmhc51.attbi.com (rwcrmhc51.attbi.com [204.127.198.38]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA12512 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 7 Dec 2001 19:48:34 -0800
Received: from c396957-b.attbi.com ([12.248.139.34]) by rwcrmhc51.attbi.com          (InterMail vM.4.01.03.27 201-229-121-127-20010626) with ESMTP id          <20011208034750.MZYA5859.rwcrmhc51.attbi.com@c396957-b.attbi.com> for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 8 Dec 2001 03:47:50 +0000
X-Sender: spiegl@mail
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
References: <Pine.LNX.4.10.10112071057580.10360-100000@itc.uci.edu>            <Pine.LNX.4.10.10112071057580.10360-100000@itc.uci.edu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <5.1.0.14.2.20011207214142.00b58800@mail>
Date:         Fri, 7 Dec 2001 21:44:28 -0600
Reply-To: "Mark C Spiegl" <spiegl@ATTBI.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Mark C Spiegl" <spiegl@ATTBI.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Energy of orbiting bodies
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <j7h21u4ns5df35oe5s03f347lt6gtlv0qg@4ax.com>

> So our hypothetical 5 ton satellite would only hit the beanstalk as 30
> tons of TNT.  That's a small nuke indeed.

I have no reason to doubt your calculation, but careful with the decimal
point. Most nuc's are measured in KILOtons TNT.


--MCS

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 27661 invoked from network); 8 Dec 2001 04:28:15 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 8 Dec 2001 04:28:15 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 30885 invoked by uid 50005); 8 Dec 2001 04:28:06 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4175. . Clean. Processed in 0.313888 secs); 08 Dec 2001 04:28:06 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 8 Dec 2001 04:28:06 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA12805; Fri, 7 Dec 2001 20:26:36 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 99092 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 8 Dec 2001 04:26:32 +0000
Received: from adobe.com (smtp-relay-1.adobe.com [192.150.11.1]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA12791 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri,          7 Dec 2001 20:26:32 -0800
Received: from inner-relay-1.corp.adobe.com ([153.32.1.51]) by adobe.com          (1.0.0/8.11.4) with ESMTP id fB84R9V10837 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>;          Fri, 7 Dec 2001 20:27:09 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mailsj-v1.corp.adobe.com (mailsj-dev.corp.adobe.com          [153.32.1.192]) by inner-relay-1.corp.adobe.com (8.11.4/8.11.4) with          ESMTP id fB84Q9S26748 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 7 Dec 2001          20:26:09 -0800 (PST)
Received: from sronald.earthlink.net ([153.32.63.111]) by          mailsj-v1.corp.adobe.com (Netscape Messaging Server 4.15 v1 Jul 11          2001 16:32:57) with ESMTP id GO0CB300.7IR; Fri, 7 Dec 2001 20:25:51          -0800
X-Sender: forkbomb@mail.earthlink.net
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
References: <j7h21u4ns5df35oe5s03f347lt6gtlv0qg@4ax.com>            <Pine.LNX.4.10.10112071057580.10360-100000@itc.uci.edu>            <Pine.LNX.4.10.10112071057580.10360-100000@itc.uci.edu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <5.1.0.14.0.20011207203052.032ffec0@mail.earthlink.net>
Date:         Fri, 7 Dec 2001 20:31:22 -0800
Reply-To: "Pierce Nichols" <forkbomb@EARTHLINK.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Pierce Nichols" <forkbomb@EARTHLINK.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Energy of orbiting bodies
Comments: To: Mark C Spiegl <spiegl@ATTBI.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <5.1.0.14.2.20011207214142.00b58800@mail>

At 09:44 PM 12/7/01 -0600, Mark C Spiegl wrote:
> > So our hypothetical 5 ton satellite would only hit the beanstalk as 30
> > tons of TNT.  That's a small nuke indeed.
>
>I have no reason to doubt your calculation, but careful with the decimal
>point. Most nuc's are measured in KILOtons TNT.


         You can, theoretically at least, make a nuke that small. You
wouldn't necessarily want to, however.

         -p

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 23455 invoked from network); 8 Dec 2001 05:52:12 -0000
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 8 Dec 2001 05:52:12 -0000
Received: (qmail 22976 invoked by uid 50005); 8 Dec 2001 05:52:03 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4175. . Clean. Processed in 0.382533 secs); 08 Dec 2001 05:52:03 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 8 Dec 2001 05:52:03 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA13054; Fri, 7 Dec 2001 21:36:33 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 99136 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 8 Dec 2001 05:36:19 +0000
Received: from smtprelay7.dc2.adelphia.net (smtprelay7.dc2.adelphia.net          [64.8.50.39]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA13040 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 7 Dec 2001 21:36:19 -0800
Received: from jlgrady ([24.53.101.238]) by smtprelay7.dc2.adelphia.net          (Netscape Messaging Server 4.15) with SMTP id GNXT5A00.VEE for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 14:36:46 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook CWS, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
Importance: Normal
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <000101c17e8d$79f4f630$0200a8c0@24.53.64.18>
Date:         Thu, 6 Dec 2001 14:37:44 -0500
Reply-To: "Jeff Grady" <jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jeff Grady" <jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET>
Subject:      [AR] Email problems?
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

I have not received any emails from the aRocket list since the 4th. I can
see a few posts on the archives though...

Anyone else having this problem?

JG

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 4336 invoked from network); 8 Dec 2001 06:39:30 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 8 Dec 2001 06:39:30 -0000
Received: (qmail 21121 invoked by uid 50005); 8 Dec 2001 06:39:21 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4175. . Clean. Processed in 0.331367 secs); 08 Dec 2001 06:39:21 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 8 Dec 2001 06:39:21 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA13217; Fri, 7 Dec 2001 22:24:24 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 99158 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 8 Dec 2001 06:24:12 +0000
Received: from localhost (dmccue@localhost) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with          ESMTP id WAA13203; Fri, 7 Dec 2001 22:24:11 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.LNX.4.10.10112072219130.13148-100000@itc.uci.edu>
Date:         Fri, 7 Dec 2001 22:24:11 -0800
Reply-To: "David J. McCue" <dmccue@itc.uci.edu>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "David J. McCue" <dmccue@itc.uci.edu>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Email problems?
Comments: To: Jeff Grady <jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <000101c17e8d$79f4f630$0200a8c0@24.53.64.18>

On Thu, 6 Dec 2001, Jeff Grady wrote:

> I have not received any emails from the aRocket list since the 4th. I can
> see a few posts on the archives though...
>
> Anyone else having this problem?
>
> JG
>
Adelphia has been bouncing list mail to Jeff for the last dew days.
Why his mail goes through Adelphia, I don't know. I suspect an @home
element to this...

For general referance, if you think you are having technical trouble,
please contact Ray or me off-list. Whether it's a list problem or just
your ISP, we are the only ones who can do you any good. This also spares
the rest of the list from wondering if they each should reply, or just
skip your query because someone else has responded already.

Thanks!
Dave McCue

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 28391 invoked from network); 8 Dec 2001 06:48:51 -0000
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 8 Dec 2001 06:48:51 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 18988 invoked by uid 50005); 8 Dec 2001 06:48:42 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4175. . Clean. Processed in 7.600446 secs); 08 Dec 2001 06:48:42 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 8 Dec 2001 06:48:32 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA13367; Fri, 7 Dec 2001 22:46:47 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 99170 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 8 Dec 2001 06:46:32 +0000
Received: from m5.boston.juno.com (m5.boston.juno.com [64.136.24.68]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA13352 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Fri, 7 Dec 2001 22:46:32 -0800
Received: from cookie.juno.com by cookie.juno.com for          <"r2Fo8hpwT0kn33UwylHELMN/WOTpJvUchYsvFMp3bagZyywsclRxig==">
Received: (from icantdecide@juno.com) by m5.boston.juno.com (jqueuemail) id          GM499Y7X; Sat, 08 Dec 2001 01:45:50 EST
X-Mailer: Juno 4.0.9
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Juno-Line-Breaks: 1-22,24-25
X-Juno-Att: 0
X-Juno-RefParts: 0
Message-ID:  <20011208.014632.-828511.5.icantdecide@juno.com>
Date:         Sat, 8 Dec 2001 01:46:32 -0600
Reply-To: "James G Selin" <icantdecide@JUNO.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "James G Selin" <icantdecide@JUNO.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] DaVinci project update
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

On Fri, 7 Dec 2001 17:06:47 -0800 "Eric Claypool (ANI)"
<Ericc@aeronumerics.com> writes:
>   Well this IS the microcosm rocket. Go to the link below for the
> davinciproject and look at the pictures.. ANYONE recognize the RRS
> MTA?  The
> rocket test was done using the RRS Vertical Test Stand 2.. This
> certainly
> wasn't davinciproject and definitely was Microcosm...  Why would
> davinciproject hijack microcosm photos and claim they represent the
> work
> done by them?... Quite disturbing.
>
> Eric
>
> -- This is the RRS MTA Vertical Test Stand 2 with the Microcosm
> rocket
> mounted for testing. As far as I know as a RRS member nobody from
> Davinciproject has ever tested anything at the MTA. I was able to
> see this
> vehicle under contruction at Microcosm's shop before they tested it
> at the
> MTA..

Yeah the carbon fiber chambers from the photos were definately the same
ones at the Microcosm shop.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 5165 invoked from network); 8 Dec 2001 08:14:27 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 8 Dec 2001 08:14:27 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 25578 invoked by uid 50005); 8 Dec 2001 08:14:17 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4175. . Clean. Processed in 6.550969 secs); 08 Dec 2001 08:14:17 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 8 Dec 2001 08:14:08 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA13575; Fri, 7 Dec 2001 23:56:53 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 99190 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 8 Dec 2001 07:56:47 +0000
Received: from smtp009pub.verizon.net ([206.46.170.188]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA13561 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri,          7 Dec 2001 23:56:47 -0800
Received: from [67.192.162.223] (1Cust223.tnt3.hilo.hi.da.uu.net          [67.192.162.223]) by smtp009pub.verizon.net  with ESMTP for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; id fB87u9012063 Sat, 8 Dec 2001 01:56:09 -0600          (CST)
X-Sender: ttocs@mail.gte.net
References: <Pine.LNX.4.10.10112071057580.10360-100000@itc.uci.edu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <l03130300b83777c8f17d@[67.192.161.67]>
Date:         Fri, 7 Dec 2001 21:55:21 -1000
Reply-To: "Aaron Smith" <ttocs@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Aaron Smith" <ttocs@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] DaVinci project update
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <4.3.1.2.20011207144901.034f2170@mail.idsoftware.com>

Look at the shape of the clouds - exactly the same.

-Aaron

At 2:52 PM -0600 12/7/01, John Carmack wrote:
>At 11:10 AM 12/7/2001 -0800, you wrote:
>>I was checking on the DaVinci project's website and noticed an amazing
>>similarity between "their" engine test and the Microcosm's SR-XM test.
>>Anybody know if they're official partners?
>
>I asked Brian that a while ago, and he dodged the question. :-)
>
>They also mentioned a test of their guidance software at the same time as a
>scorpius test launch.
>
>
>>Since the Scorpius motor was developed largely through NASA and DOD
>>contracts, doesn't this make the DaVinci project ineligible for the
>>X-Prize?
>
>If the scorpius motors are available to anyone that wants to buy one, then
>they are in the clear.
>
>I suspect microcosm would be thrilled to sell some to other teams as well.
>
>John Carmack

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 17878 invoked from network); 8 Dec 2001 08:19:13 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 8 Dec 2001 08:19:13 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 31212 invoked by uid 50005); 8 Dec 2001 08:19:04 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4175. . Clean. Processed in 4.528225 secs); 08 Dec 2001 08:19:04 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 8 Dec 2001 08:18:58 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA13598; Fri, 7 Dec 2001 23:58:33 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 99197 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 8 Dec 2001 07:58:31 +0000
Received: from out002pub.verizon.net (out002pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.102])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA13584 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 7 Dec 2001 23:58:31 -0800
Received: from [63.24.225.73] (1Cust73.tnt1.rancho-cucamonga.ca.da.uu.net          [63.24.225.73]) by out002pub.verizon.net  with ESMTP for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; id fB87wt525829 Sat, 8 Dec 2001 01:58:55 -0600          (CST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: GTE/01rocket@mail.gte.net
References: <20011208.014632.-828511.5.icantdecide@juno.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <a05100301b83777ab921c@[63.24.225.73]>
Date:         Fri, 7 Dec 2001 23:57:52 -0800
Reply-To: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] DaVinci project update
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <20011208.014632.-828511.5.icantdecide@juno.com>

>Yeah the carbon fiber chambers from the photos were definately the same
>ones at the Microcosm shop.

Having visited the Microcosm shop at the invitation of RRS and seeing
the Scorpius itself in near completion, it was very cool, but
seemingly large and complicated for its performance.  I suspect it is
a low performance technology demonstrator.  Also they had about 5
times as much square footage as they needed, and downtown LA too.

The test fixture at MTA is also sweet, except of course for the flame
duct which disintegrated instantly on first motor firing.  I presume
that is the debris in the firing photo.

Jerry

--
Jerry Irvine, Box 1242, Claremont, California USA
Opinion, the whole thing. <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
Bring common sense back to rocketry administration.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 28316 invoked from network); 8 Dec 2001 09:37:20 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpv.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.110]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 8 Dec 2001 09:37:20 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 23641 invoked by uid 50005); 8 Dec 2001 07:35:46 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpv with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4175. . Clean. Processed in 5.592203 secs); 08 Dec 2001 07:35:46 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpv.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 8 Dec 2001 07:35:38 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA13482; Fri, 7 Dec 2001 23:24:40 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 99183 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 8 Dec 2001 07:24:36 +0000
Received: from out002pub.verizon.net (out002pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.102])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA13468 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 7 Dec 2001 23:24:35 -0800
Received: from [63.24.225.73] (1Cust73.tnt1.rancho-cucamonga.ca.da.uu.net          [63.24.225.73]) by out002pub.verizon.net  with ESMTP for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; id fB87Ox517581 Sat, 8 Dec 2001 01:24:59 -0600          (CST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: GTE/01rocket@mail.gte.net
References: <20011208024656.33605.qmail@web20404.mail.yahoo.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <a05100300b8376fe1bda5@[63.24.225.162]>
Date:         Fri, 7 Dec 2001 23:23:55 -0800
Reply-To: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Segway Scooter -- anything here Rocketeers can use??
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <20011208024656.33605.qmail@web20404.mail.yahoo.com>

>They are using a mechanical gyro to provide spin
>stabilization.

The thing that impressed me was the female host on GMA where I saw
the demo was sticking her leg way out the back and doing a swan dive
formation on the thing and it was still reacting properly.  The
person assigned her to catch her when she did something stupid jumped
into action, but had to do nothing to save her.

I agree this is potentially on-topic for arocket :)

Jerry


--
Jerry Irvine, Box 1242, Claremont, California USA
Opinion, the whole thing. <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
Bring common sense back to rocketry administration.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 1674 invoked from network); 8 Dec 2001 09:38:34 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.105]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 8 Dec 2001 09:38:34 -0000
Received: (qmail 28313 invoked by uid 50005); 8 Dec 2001 09:38:25 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpy with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4175. . Clean. Processed in 7.895141 secs); 08 Dec 2001 09:38:25 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 8 Dec 2001 09:38:15 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id BAA13809; Sat, 8 Dec 2001 01:23:43 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 99210 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 8 Dec 2001 09:23:34 +0000
Received: from smtp004pub.verizon.net (smtp004pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.183])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id BAA13794 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 8 Dec 2001 01:23:34 -0800
Received: from [67.192.169.43] (1Cust43.tnt2.hilo.hi.da.uu.net [67.192.169.43])          by smtp004pub.verizon.net  with ESMTP for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; id          fB89MpJ19493 Sat, 8 Dec 2001 03:22:52 -0600 (CST)
X-Sender: ttocs@mail.gte.net
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <l03130300b8378bcaa4e2@[67.192.162.223]>
Date:         Fri, 7 Dec 2001 23:22:01 -1000
Reply-To: "Aaron Smith" <ttocs@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Aaron Smith" <ttocs@GTE.NET>
Subject:      [AR] Interesting anagram
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <v01510100b83232dca82c@[63.169.101.31]>

It's space related, so not entirely OT....

That's one small step for a man; one giant leap for mankind.

A thin man ran... makes a large stride... left planet... pins
flag on moon... on to Mars!

:-)

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 13606 invoked from network); 8 Dec 2001 10:56:54 -0000
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 8 Dec 2001 10:56:54 -0000
Received: (qmail 4669 invoked by uid 50005); 8 Dec 2001 10:56:45 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4175. . Clean. Processed in 3.239268 secs); 08 Dec 2001 10:56:45 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 8 Dec 2001 10:56:41 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id CAA13985; Sat, 8 Dec 2001 02:39:12 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 99217 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 8 Dec 2001 10:39:05 +0000
Received: from fep3-orange.clear.net.nz (fep3-orange.clear.net.nz          [203.97.32.3]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id CAA13970          for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Sat, 8 Dec 2001 02:39:04 -0800
Received: from mkbs (203-167-157-217.dialup.clear.net.nz [203.167.157.217]) by          fep3-orange.clear.net.nz (1.5/1.8) with SMTP id XAA24382; Sat, 8 Dec          2001 23:38:53 +1300 (NZDT)
References: <c=US%a=_%p=Imetrix%l=SQUID-011205174151Z-1217@squid.imetrix.com>              <01b601c17dc9$00f15900$0700a8c0@mkbs> <3C10D467.4A@ezy.net.au>                 <001301c17fb6$2fde0760$5800a8c0@DELL8100>                                   <008701c17f9e$8d9f1d20$58bbeac8@alexandre>                        <005801c17fa3$ff068a20$1d94a7cb@joe>             <00cd01c17fa5$1cbe9cf0$58bbeac8@alexandre>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <00b401c17fd4$ebc16940$0700a8c0@mkbs>
Date:         Sat, 8 Dec 2001 23:40:35 +1300
Reply-To: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Organization: Applied Technology
Subject:      [AR] [OT]: Segway Scooter Braking.
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

        Not quite rocket science but as Segway has been discussed on ARocket
I'll
        venture posting there as welll. Pse yell at me offlist if this is
too too OT.

Been thinking about braking of Segway Scooter / Ginger / IT.

As someone (Peter Peres?) noted - weight is always 100% reacted vertically
through the wheels under braking.
As the scooter leans backwards against the direction of motion the
decelerating moment trying to pitch the rider forward is balanced by the
mass trying to tip the scooter backwards. Or, it is if the electronics
maintain control ! :-)

A few sums * shows the not too unexpected result that

        A = g tan(X) where X is the lean angle off vertical.

This is the forward de-acceleration which can be balanced at a given lean
angle.
At 45 degrees, tan X becomes 1 and resistable deceleration = 1g.
At backwards tip angles beyond this the resistable force rapidly increases
(as tan X goes to infinity as X approaches 90 degrees) BUT there is never
any need to exceed this angle greatly unless you can get a coefficient of
friction greater than 1 at the wheels. For practical purposes the following
lean angles are needed for given accelerations. In fact angles greater than
45 degrees or in fact greater than the available "friction angle" will
result in falling over backwards as the friction at the wheels is unable to
react the decelerating force.


DEGREES lean     / G deceleration

5      /    0.09
10    /    0. 18
15    /     0.27
20    /    0.36

25    /    0.47
30    /    0.56
35    /    0.70

As can be seen, up to 20 degrees tan(X) is linear to 2 significant figures
and braking equals about 0.02 g per degree of lean.
(or A ~= degrees/56 g deceleration).
I imagine a 20 degree angle of backwards lean would be quite unnerving until
you came to trust your control system. This is slightly more than a 1 in 3
lean - quite steep. The resultant 0.35g odd consequent braking is quite
respectable. On a dry surface at slowish speeds appropriate motorcycles can
be persuaded to straight line brake on front wheel alone - a good way to
impress the locals until you overdo it (don't try this at home). The Segway
with 2 side by side wheels and anti-rotation control should make this a
typically less painful exercise than on a motorcycle :-)



regards


        Russell McMahon


*  Derivation:

Braking moment pitching rider off = MARCosX
Backward moment due to weight = gMRSinX
Equate for balance and cancel
MARCosX=gMRSinX
A = G tanX

M = mass
A = braking acceleration
g = gravitational acceleration
R = radius of mass above pivot point
X = backwards tilt angle from vertical

Note that M can be point mass at cofg OR distributed mass taken point by
point as R for mass varies with the location of the mass and ALL masses
experience the same deceleration.

Reality may be very slightly complicated by the fact that the suspension
point is below the axle line and will rise very slightly as you lean
backwards thereby changing the geometry. In practice I imagine that this
effect would be vanishingly small.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 5779 invoked from network); 8 Dec 2001 14:54:03 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.105]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 8 Dec 2001 14:54:03 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 24528 invoked by uid 50005); 8 Dec 2001 14:53:54 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpy with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4175. . Clean. Processed in 4.665512 secs); 08 Dec 2001 14:53:54 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 8 Dec 2001 14:53:47 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA14576; Sat, 8 Dec 2001 06:13:50 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 99247 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 8 Dec 2001 14:13:41 +0000
Received: from po4.glue.umd.edu (po4.glue.umd.edu [128.8.10.124]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA14561 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 8 Dec 2001 06:13:41 -0800
Received: from y.glue.umd.edu (IDENT:root@y.glue.umd.edu [128.8.10.68]) by          po4.glue.umd.edu (8.10.1/8.10.1) with ESMTP id fB8EDYD28552; Sat, 8          Dec 2001 09:13:34 -0500 (EST)
Received: from y.glue.umd.edu (IDENT:sendmail@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by          y.glue.umd.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id JAA07484; Sat, 8 Dec 2001          09:13:34 -0500 (EST)
Received: from localhost (acase@localhost) by y.glue.umd.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with          ESMTP id JAA07480; Sat, 8 Dec 2001 09:13:33 -0500 (EST)
X-Authentication-Warning: y.glue.umd.edu: acase owned process doing -bs
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.GSO.4.21.0112080905100.6882-100000@y.glue.umd.edu>
Date:         Sat, 8 Dec 2001 09:13:33 -0500
Reply-To: "Andrew Case" <acase@GLUE.UMD.EDU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Andrew Case" <acase@GLUE.UMD.EDU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Segway Scooter -- anything here Rocketeers can use??
Comments: To: mbwittig@alum.mit.edu
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <20011208024656.33605.qmail@web20404.mail.yahoo.com>

On Fri, 7 Dec 2001, Mike Wittig wrote:

> They are using a mechanical gyro to provide spin
> stabilization.  This must be the case because it would
> not be possible to balance the scooter and drive in
> one direction at the same time using only the wheels
> without some goofy motion.

Actually they are using dynamic balancing, with five small
gyros for attitude sensing. The problem is moderately complex,
but well within the abilities of modern microprocessors. There is
no huge gyro for mechanical stabilization, though this was my first
thought, too.

The gyros they are using are small, and quite suitable for service
in am/ex rocketry, provided you can afford them. I contacted
the manufacturer about a prices for a prototyping/development kit,
but they haven't gotten back to me yet.

Aside: for fans of wacky gadgets (I know you're out there :) the
gyro stabilization idea has been around for a while. See:

http://lamp.man.deakin.edu.au/riding/gyro.html

......Andrew

Andrew Case                             |
acase@plasma.umd.edu                    |
Institute for Plasma Research           |
University of Maryland, College Park    |

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 26035 invoked from network); 8 Dec 2001 17:04:30 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpv.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.110]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 8 Dec 2001 17:04:30 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 15580 invoked by uid 50005); 8 Dec 2001 16:58:01 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpv with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4175. . Clean. Processed in 8.191206 secs); 08 Dec 2001 16:58:01 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpv.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 8 Dec 2001 16:57:49 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA15012; Sat, 8 Dec 2001 09:02:22 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 99281 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 8 Dec 2001 17:02:16 +0000
Received: from smtp004pub.verizon.net (smtp004pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.183])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA14998 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 8 Dec 2001 09:02:15 -0800
Received: from [63.24.225.73] (1Cust144.tnt1.rancho-cucamonga.ca.da.uu.net          [63.24.225.144]) by smtp004pub.verizon.net  with ESMTP for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; id fB8H1dJ05186 Sat, 8 Dec 2001 11:01:39 -0600          (CST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: GTE/01rocket@mail.gte.net
References: <c=US%a=_%p=Imetrix%l=SQUID-011205174151Z-1217@squid.imetrix.com>            <01b601c17dc9$00f15900$0700a8c0@mkbs> <3C10D467.4A@ezy.net.au>            <001301c17fb6$2fde0760$5800a8c0@DELL8100>            <008701c17f9e$8d9f1d20$58bbeac8@alexandre>            <005801c17fa3$ff068a20$1d94a7cb@joe>            <00cd01c17fa5$1cbe9cf0$58bbeac8@alexandre>            <00b401c17fd4$ebc16940$0700a8c0@mkbs>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <a05100302b837f70b54bd@[63.24.225.73]>
Date:         Sat, 8 Dec 2001 09:01:33 -0800
Reply-To: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] [OT]: Segway Scooter Braking.
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <00b401c17fd4$ebc16940$0700a8c0@mkbs>

>This is the forward de-acceleration which can be balanced at a given lean
>angle.



>DEGREES lean     / G deceleration
>
>5      /    0.09
>10    /    0. 18
>15    /     0.27
>20    /    0.36

Since these people are likely to appear on alot of interview shows to
promote this product someone should make a point of asking them what
the accleration is (exactly) at each of the peak speed ratings they
limit (8, 15, x mph).


>you came to trust your control system. This is slightly more than a 1 in 3
>lean - quite steep. The resultant 0.35g odd consequent braking is quite

Also the very FIRST thing they said is to LEAN FORWARDS or LEAN
BACKWARDS to move.  It could be that momentary motion is what is
resisted against during the acceleration itself to simultaneously
equalize.  The lean is a lever.

Jerry

PS Are we having phun yet?

>respectable. On a dry surface at slowish speeds appropriate motorcycles can
>be persuaded to straight line brake on front wheel alone - a good way to
>impress the locals until you overdo it (don't try this at home). The Segway
>with 2 side by side wheels and anti-rotation control should make this a
>typically less painful exercise than on a motorcycle :-)
>
>
>
>regards
>
>
>         Russell McMahon
>
>
>*  Derivation:
>
>Braking moment pitching rider off = MARCosX
>Backward moment due to weight = gMRSinX
>Equate for balance and cancel
>MARCosX=gMRSinX
>A = G tanX
>
>M = mass
>A = braking acceleration
>g = gravitational acceleration
>R = radius of mass above pivot point
>X = backwards tilt angle from vertical
>
>Note that M can be point mass at cofg OR distributed mass taken point by
>point as R for mass varies with the location of the mass and ALL masses
>experience the same deceleration.
>
>Reality may be very slightly complicated by the fact that the suspension
>point is below the axle line and will rise very slightly as you lean
>backwards thereby changing the geometry. In practice I imagine that this
>effect would be vanishingly small.


--
Jerry Irvine, Box 1242, Claremont, California USA
Opinion, the whole thing. <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
Bring common sense back to rocketry administration.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 3507 invoked from network); 8 Dec 2001 17:06:47 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 8 Dec 2001 17:06:47 -0000
Received: (qmail 9331 invoked by uid 50005); 8 Dec 2001 17:06:38 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4175. . Clean. Processed in 9.875591 secs); 08 Dec 2001 17:06:38 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 8 Dec 2001 17:06:25 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA15040; Sat, 8 Dec 2001 09:05:15 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 99288 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 8 Dec 2001 17:05:14 +0000
Received: from imo-r10.mx.aol.com (imo-r10.mx.aol.com [152.163.225.106]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA15026 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Sat, 8 Dec 2001 09:05:13 -0800
Received: from MONTMACH@aol.com by imo-r10.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v31_r1.9.) id          w.9b.1f4410fc (4232) for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Sat, 8 Dec 2001          12:05:11 -0500 (EST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0E6D_01C56B69.5BFC32C0"
X-Mailer: AOL 6.0 for Windows US sub 10535
Message-ID:  <9b.1f4410fc.2943a247@aol.com>
Date:         Sat, 8 Dec 2001 12:05:11 EST
Reply-To: <MONTMACH@AOL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <MONTMACH@AOL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Silver bullet 8 flies again
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0E6D_01C56B69.5BFC32C0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

  Here's some photos taken by Tony Richards of the flight. You can clearly
see as the motor  transitions from Hybrid to Tri-brid then to  Bi-propellent
all within 2 seconds.

  http://hometown.aol.com/montmach/tri-bridpage2.html

 Dave
>
>
>      This last Saturday, Dec. 1st at the MTA, I flew the silver bullet 8
> fuel injected hybrid again.  I first flew it at Black Rock in Sept. 2000.
> The flight was perfect, but unfortunately the tracking smoke never ignited.
>  It burned out of sight in about 6 seconds, all we could hear was the motor
> for another 15 seconds.  As it stands it is missing in action, estimated
> altitude was 20,000 ft., there was zero wind at ground level, but upper
> winds were about 50 to 70 mph.  This was proved by a second flight of a
> M-500 hybrid, on which the tracking smoke did ignite.  The rocket only had
> a small Aerocon flare chute about 3 ft. in diameter, empty the rocket
> weight was 10lbs.            Observers could see the chute come out and
> watched it drift quickly out of sight, guesstimate about 8 miles.  In the
> next couple weeks I'm thinking of taking a plane ride to search! for the
> missing rockets, as the wall of my office looks empty without them.  If any
> body is interested in looking at the fuel injected hybrid or tri-brid go to
> rattworks.com and click on " in the works ".
>



------=_NextPart_000_0E6D_01C56B69.5BFC32C0
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<HTML><FONT FACE=arial,helvetica><FONT  SIZE=2>  Here's some photos taken by Tony Richards of the flight. You can clearly see as the motor &nbsp;transitions from Hybrid to Tri-brid then to &nbsp;Bi-propellent all within 2 seconds.
<BR>
<BR> &nbsp;http://hometown.aol.com/montmach/tri-bridpage2.html
<BR>
<BR> Dave
<BR><BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE style="BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px">
<BR>
<BR> &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;This last Saturday, Dec. 1st at the MTA, I flew the silver bullet 8 fuel injected hybrid again. &nbsp;I first flew it at Black Rock in Sept. 2000. &nbsp;The flight was perfect, but unfortunately the tracking smoke never ignited. &nbsp;It burned out of sight in about 6 seconds, all we could hear was the motor for another 15 seconds. &nbsp;As it stands it is missing in action, estimated altitude was 20,000 ft., there was zero wind at ground level, but upper winds were about 50 to 70 mph. &nbsp;This was proved by a second flight of a M-500 hybrid, on which the tracking smoke did ignite. &nbsp;The rocket only had a small Aerocon flare chute about 3 ft. in diameter, empty the rocket weight was 10lbs. &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Observers could see the chute come out and watched it drift quickly out of sight, guesstimate about 8 miles. &nbsp;In the next couple weeks I'm thinking of taking a plane ride to  to search! for !
the missing rockets, as the wall of my office looks empty without them. &nbsp;If any body is interested in looking at the fuel injected hybrid or tri-brid go to rattworks.com and click on " in the works ".
<BR></BLOCKQUOTE>
<BR>
<BR></FONT></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0E6D_01C56B69.5BFC32C0--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 8526 invoked from network); 8 Dec 2001 18:40:55 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.105]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 8 Dec 2001 18:40:55 -0000
Received: (qmail 20861 invoked by uid 50005); 8 Dec 2001 18:40:45 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpy with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4175. . Clean. Processed in 6.456068 secs); 08 Dec 2001 18:40:45 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 8 Dec 2001 18:40:37 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA15281; Sat, 8 Dec 2001 10:39:32 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 99298 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 8 Dec 2001 18:39:21 +0000
Received: from spsystems.net (spsystems.net [209.47.149.227]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA15266 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Sat,          8 Dec 2001 10:39:20 -0800
Received: (from henry@localhost) by spsystems.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id NAA20871;          Sat, 8 Dec 2001 13:38:40 -0500 (EST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1011208131027.20321E-100000@spsystems.net>
Date:         Sat, 8 Dec 2001 13:38:40 -0500
Reply-To: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Energy of orbiting bodies
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <NEBBJIGOELOLIBCCPKDCGEDDCCAA.geordi@c031.aone.net.au>

On Sat, 8 Dec 2001, Troy Prideaux wrote:
> Yep, actually what's also interesting is how we (on Earth) could see tiny
> flashes of light on the moon with 6" & 8" telescopes during the recent
> meteor shower...

That one is less of a mystery:  the Leonids come in *very* fast, 60-70km/s.
They carry far more energy per kilogram than a mere satellite.

> That's what NASA's been saying for decades. "We're lucky we haven't
> experienced more failures given the amounts of energy we're dealing with".

On inspection, though, this somewhat falls apart.  The essence of a rocket
engine is that it *avoids* actually *handling* most of that energy.  Given
cautious design -- something NASA does not specialize in! -- the only
place where the high energies actually have any impact is in cooling the
chamber wall.  That's a non-trivial problem, but at least there are no
moving parts in that area; in most ways it's actually a much less severe
problem than a jet engine's turbine.

The high problem rate of rockets mostly reflects razor-thin design margins
and inadequate testing, not any inherent difficulty of the problem.

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 3785 invoked from network); 8 Dec 2001 23:37:48 -0000
Received: from smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.105]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 8 Dec 2001 23:37:48 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 26367 invoked by uid 50005); 8 Dec 2001 23:37:38 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpy with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4175. . Clean. Processed in 7.981416 secs); 08 Dec 2001 23:37:39 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 8 Dec 2001 23:37:28 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA16047; Sat, 8 Dec 2001 15:35:56 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 99334 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 8 Dec 2001 23:35:30 +0000
Received: from mplspop5.mpls.uswest.net (mplspop5.mpls.uswest.net          [204.147.80.2]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id PAA16013          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 8 Dec 2001 15:25:29 -0800
Received: (qmail 69427 invoked from network); 8 Dec 2001 23:25:27 -0000
Received: from wdskppp88.mpls.uswest.net (HELO qwest.net) (63.226.148.88) by          mplspop5.mpls.uswest.net with SMTP; 8 Dec 2001 23:25:27 -0000
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.76 [en] (WinNT; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <c=US%a=_%p=Imetrix%l=SQUID-011205174151Z-1217@squid.imetrix.com>            <01b601c17dc9$00f15900$0700a8c0@mkbs> <3C10D467.4A@ezy.net.au>            <001301c17fb6$2fde0760$5800a8c0@DELL8100>            <008701c17f9e$8d9f1d20$58bbeac8@alexandre>            <005801c17fa3$ff068a20$1d94a7cb@joe>            <00cd01c17fa5$1cbe9cf0$58bbeac8@alexandre>            <00b401c17fd4$ebc16940$0700a8c0@mkbs>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3C12A185.EF74B877@qwest.net>
Date:         Sat, 8 Dec 2001 17:25:57 -0600
Reply-To: "Jeff Hove" <jhove1@QWEST.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jeff Hove" <jhove1@QWEST.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] [OT]: Segway Scooter Braking.
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

I sincerely apologize for taking this thread even further Off-Topic, but
I want to clear up a dangerous misconception ...
    Also, as an EX newbie, this might be my only opportunity to ever
refute our esteemed Mr. McMahon :)

...
> On a dry surface at slowish speeds appropriate motorcycles can
> be persuaded to straight line brake on front wheel alone - a good way to
> impress the locals until you overdo it (don't try this at home). The Segway
> with 2 side by side wheels and anti-rotation control should make this a
> typically less painful exercise than on a motorcycle :-)
...

This is a common view of people who learned to ride on dirt-bikes and
never had proper motorcycle training.

On a street bike, 75% of the braking force is done with the front wheel,
*especially* when at higher speeds.
Because of the geometry of the suspension, as you brake there is a large
weight transfer to the front wheel, thus increasing the Normal Force on
that wheel tremendously, and increasing the friction force available for
stopping.
Meanwhile, the rear wheel is being un-weighted and has very limited
braking ability (which gets worse the quicker you try to stop).

In a panic stop from 60 (or even 100) mph, you can grab the front brake
for all you're worth and it is very, very hard to get it to lock up; I
haven't been able to make it happen.  While at that same speed, even
moderate rear braking will cause the rear wheel to lock-up and slide -
which can be difficult to control if you haven't practiced it, and does
little to slow the bike.

A lot of untrained riders do stupid things, like crashing into the backs
of suddenly stopped cars or sliding out, because they just don't realize
that they could have stopped in less than 1/2 the distance if they'd
used their front brake.

To help cure riders of this misconception, some racing schools teach
riders to keep their right toe off of the rear brake lever and not even
use the rear brake until they've become more experienced with front-only
braking.  The normal street riding schools do teach the use of both
brakes in a 75/25% front/rear split, but also teach how to handle the
bike while the rear wheel is locked up and sliding (which happens on
most panic stops).

The only time to avoid the front brake is on really slippery surfaces
like gravel or ice, which are easy to avoid if you're paying attention
to the road.  Once on a slippery surface, any braking must be done
gently and it does make sense to change the ratio to predominantly rear
braking since panic-stops aren't an option anyway.

And now, back to rocketry.

Blue Skies,
-Jeff "Once went two years without a car in Minnesota" Hove    NAR 78680
L2

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 9031 invoked from network); 9 Dec 2001 00:21:49 -0000
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 9 Dec 2001 00:21:49 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 19245 invoked by uid 50005); 9 Dec 2001 00:21:39 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4175. . Clean. Processed in 3.668447 secs); 09 Dec 2001 00:21:39 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 9 Dec 2001 00:21:34 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA16217; Sat, 8 Dec 2001 16:19:49 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 99353 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 9 Dec 2001 00:19:24 +0000
Received: from mplspop2.mpls.uswest.net (mplspop2.mpls.uswest.net          [204.147.80.4]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id QAA16203          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 8 Dec 2001 16:19:23 -0800
Received: (qmail 41965 invoked from network); 9 Dec 2001 00:19:22 -0000
Received: from wdskppp88.mpls.uswest.net (HELO qwest.net) (63.226.148.88) by          mplspop2.mpls.uswest.net with SMTP; 9 Dec 2001 00:19:22 -0000
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.76 [en] (WinNT; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3C12AE27.95A0D471@qwest.net>
Date:         Sat, 8 Dec 2001 18:19:51 -0600
Reply-To: "Jeff Hove" <jhove1@QWEST.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jeff Hove" <jhove1@QWEST.NET>
Subject:      [AR] System Solaire
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

I have an opportunity to assist with the constuction of a System Solaire
SS67B-3 H2O2/Gasoline rocket (the actual owner is very experienced at EX
but not active on this list).

Does anyone have experience or tips regarding these?

Thanks,
-Jeff Hove

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 27967 invoked from network); 9 Dec 2001 02:05:19 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpv.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.110]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 9 Dec 2001 02:05:19 -0000
Received: (qmail 15856 invoked by uid 50005); 9 Dec 2001 01:58:47 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpv with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4175. . Clean. Processed in 7.294679 secs); 09 Dec 2001 01:58:47 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpv.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 9 Dec 2001 01:58:37 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA16476; Sat, 8 Dec 2001 18:02:01 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 99367 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 9 Dec 2001 02:01:55 +0000
Received: from web20410.mail.yahoo.com (web20410.mail.yahoo.com          [216.136.226.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id SAA16461          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 8 Dec 2001 18:01:54 -0800
Received: from [63.42.69.75] by web20410.mail.yahoo.com via HTTP; Sat, 08 Dec          2001 18:01:54 PST
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <20011209020154.64158.qmail@web20410.mail.yahoo.com>
Date:         Sat, 8 Dec 2001 18:01:54 -0800
Reply-To: <mbwittig@alum.mit.edu>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Mike Wittig" <mike_wittig@YAHOO.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Segway Scooter -- anything here Rocketeers can use??
Comments: To: Eirik van der Meer <eirimeer@ONLINE.NO>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <5.1.0.14.0.20011208042223.00a08280@mail.online.no>

--- Eirik van der Meer <eirimeer@ONLINE.NO> wrote:
> No, not if the forces can be countered fast enough.
> Just think of a drunk
> person. While someone sober can stand and walk
> almost perfectly balanced an
> intoxicated person (with poor responce time and
> inaccurate senses) will
> sway and stagger about.

Ack I stand corrected!  Great example!  So, can we get
a patent on the mechanical gyro version? :) Im
confused now why the segway weighs so much- guess its
the batteries.

> >With regard to someone's comments about Honda's
> >robots: Honda's robot does not build its own gait,
> but
> >rather plays back a recording of a human walking
> and
> >then uses mostly its ankle actuators to provide
> >overlayed balancing.
>
> Yet it was more than capable of correcting for
> unexpected imputs. I saw a
> clip where a person started pushing the robot on the
> "chest", and it
> started walking backwards to avoid falling.

That's true, but the step it takes is mostly recorded
motion.  Unfortunately, while our lab and hondas had
algorithms to balance walking robots, the algorithms
never produced the same "look" as if a human was
walking.  Honda solved this problem by mixing the
balancing act with recorded walking data.  The motion
of the legs of the MIT robots is entirely
algorithm-generated- i.e., form follows function.

-Mike


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Send your FREE holiday greetings online!
http://greetings.yahoo.com

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 3945 invoked from network); 9 Dec 2001 23:11:47 -0000
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 9 Dec 2001 23:11:47 -0000
Received: (qmail 7769 invoked by uid 50005); 9 Dec 2001 23:11:38 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4175. . Clean. Processed in 0.646225 secs); 09 Dec 2001 23:11:38 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 9 Dec 2001 23:11:37 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA19891; Sun, 9 Dec 2001 15:08:20 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 99476 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 9 Dec 2001 23:08:02 +0000
Received: from mta01.mail.mel.aone.net.au (mta01.mail.au.uu.net [203.2.192.81])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA19877 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 9 Dec 2001 15:08:00 -0800
Received: from unknown ([63.34.210.73]) by mta01.mail.mel.aone.net.au with SMTP          id <20011209230755.LDHS314.mta01.mail.mel.aone.net.au@unknown> for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 10:07:55 +1100
References: Conversation <NEBBJIGOELOLIBCCPKDCGEDDCCAA.geordi@c031.aone.net.au>            with last message            <Pine.BSI.3.91.1011208131027.20321E-100000@spsystems.net>
Priority: Normal
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Priority: 3
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	X-MAPIextension=.TXT;
	charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>
Date:         Sun, 9 Dec 2001 23:08:02 +0000
Reply-To: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Energy of orbiting bodies
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1011208131027.20321E-100000@spsystems.net>

>
> On inspection, though, this somewhat falls apart.  The essence of a rocket
> engine is that it *avoids* actually *handling* most of that energy.  Given
> cautious design -- something NASA does not specialize in! -- the only
> place where the high energies actually have any impact is in cooling the
> chamber wall.  That's a non-trivial problem, but at least there are no
> moving parts in that area; in most ways it's actually a much less severe
> problem than a jet engine's turbine.

True to some extent but this maybe a somewhat narrow minded viewpoint.
Dealing with highly energetic materials/substances often raises issues from
storage/transportation to pumping (if applicable) to igniting (without the
hard starts) to maintaining stable combustion to dealing with heat transfer
to controlling the work done. The magnitude of all these issues are
generally quite proportional to the energy content of the reactants. Yes,
the increased risk can be offset by more testing (traditional American
approach) and/or greater design margins (traditional Russian approach) but
these both cost and it can be argued the risk v fixing cost curve can often
be more of an exponential shape than a linear one (especially for the
former approach).

Troy.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 25010 invoked from network); 10 Dec 2001 00:25:23 -0000
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 10 Dec 2001 00:25:23 -0000
Received: (qmail 7818 invoked by uid 50005); 10 Dec 2001 00:25:14 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4175. . Clean. Processed in 4.277299 secs); 10 Dec 2001 00:25:14 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 10 Dec 2001 00:25:08 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA20092; Sun, 9 Dec 2001 16:22:46 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 99487 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 00:22:12          +0000
Received: from fep3-orange.clear.net.nz (fep3-orange.clear.net.nz          [203.97.32.3]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA20078          for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Sun, 9 Dec 2001 16:22:11 -0800
Received: from mkbs (203-167-148-131.dialup.clear.net.nz [203.167.148.131]) by          fep3-orange.clear.net.nz (1.5/1.8) with SMTP id NAA20966; Mon, 10 Dec          2001 13:22:06 +1300 (NZDT)
References: <c=US%a=_%p=Imetrix%l=SQUID-011205174151Z-1217@squid.imetrix.com>              <01b601c17dc9$00f15900$0700a8c0@mkbs> <3C10D467.4A@ezy.net.au>                 <001301c17fb6$2fde0760$5800a8c0@DELL8100>                       <008701c17f9e$8d9f1d20$58bbeac8@alexandre>                       <005801c17fa3$ff068a20$1d94a7cb@joe>                       <00cd01c17fa5$1cbe9cf0$58bbeac8@alexandre>                       <00b401c17fd4$ebc16940$0700a8c0@mkbs>  <3C12A185.EF74B877@qwest.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <020501c18111$132b0c60$0700a8c0@mkbs>
Date:         Mon, 10 Dec 2001 13:23:56 +1300
Reply-To: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Organization: Applied Technology
Subject:      Re: [AR] [OT]: Segway Scooter Braking.
Comments: To: Jeff Hove <jhove1@QWEST.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

>     Also, as an EX newbie, this might be my only opportunity to ever
> refute our esteemed Mr. McMahon :)

Nobody calls me esteemed and gets away with it ! :-)
As far as EX goes I have minimal cred.
In other areas maybe a little more. Maybe not :-).

> > On a dry surface at slowish speeds appropriate motorcycles can
> > be persuaded to straight line brake on front wheel alone - a good way to
> > impress the locals until you overdo it (don't try this at home). The
Segway
> > with 2 side by side wheels and anti-rotation control should make this a
> > typically less painful exercise than on a motorcycle :-)
>
> This is a common view of people who learned to ride on dirt-bikes and
> never had proper motorcycle training.

Sorry, I didn't make myself clear enough.
I agree with what you say about front wheel braking.
What I meant was literally what I said - " front wheel *ALONE*  " - ie with
back wheel lifted off as the bike attempts to rotate around the front wheel
and pitch you over the handlebars - 100% front wheel weight transfer.
Slightly downhill helps.
(I have owned about 20 motorcycles but most never accelerated especially
fast. However one in particular stopped rather well so it was "easier" to do
silly things stopping than while accelerating :-) ) (as I said - don't try
this at home :-) )

This true single wheel braking model more closely approximates the Segway
braking action where it must create a rearwards moment arm (made by leaning
the rider backwards) to compensate for the forward deceleration moment. In
the case of the Segway we have a model similar to a motorcycle doing front
wheel ONLY braking BUT it also has two wheels side by side and a control
algorithm which (presumably) tries to keep it in a straight line - hence my
suggestion that the Segway MAY stop as well as a bike. With a bike, if you
allow the front wheel to turn under very heavy braking, and it can get
extremely hard
not to do so as you approach the limit,  (even with some back wheel contact
still present) you tend to "high side" which is both embarrassing and
potentially painful.


regards


        Russell McMahon

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 17237 invoked from network); 10 Dec 2001 00:51:09 -0000
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 10 Dec 2001 00:51:09 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 2810 invoked by uid 50005); 10 Dec 2001 00:50:59 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4175. . Clean. Processed in 6.630364 secs); 10 Dec 2001 00:50:59 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 10 Dec 2001 00:50:49 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA20160; Sun, 9 Dec 2001 16:49:21 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 99494 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 00:49:19          +0000
Received: from rhenium (rhenium.btinternet.com [194.73.73.93]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA20146 for <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Sun,          9 Dec 2001 16:49:18 -0800
Received: from host217-39-9-248.in-addr.btopenworld.com ([217.39.9.248]          helo=tesco.net) by rhenium with esmtp (Exim 3.22 #8) id          16DEdA-0006Wk-00 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 00:49:16          +0000
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Win98; en-US; rv:0.9.4) Gecko/20011019            Netscape6/6.2
X-Accept-Language: en,en-GB,en-US
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3C14068A.1070801@tesco.net>
Date:         Mon, 10 Dec 2001 00:49:14 +0000
Reply-To: "Ian Woollard" <ian.woollard@TESCO.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Ian Woollard" <ian.woollard@TESCO.NET>
Subject:      [AR] Low cost launching?
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

I think access to LEO is going to really get going in the
next decade. So I wondered what kind of rocket do we need?

Well, cheap obviously. So let's see what's needed.

Ok, so I've been playing with a rocket cost estimating web page

see:

http://members.axion.net/~enrique/spacecraftcost.html

It's a parametric cost estimating tool; it has its limitations
but it seems well thought out on the whole.

Anyway I've been playing around with it to see what kind of birds
might fly cheap.

The cheapest basic idea I've come up with seems to be:

http://members.axion.net/~enrique/spacecraftcost.html?acceleration=49.0&altitude=0.0&velocity=0.0&launch=0.2&empty=10&exhaust=2889.0&latitude=28.3&locationLabor=1.0&mass=300000.0&secondAcceleration=29.4&secondEmpty=10&secondReusability=120&secondExhaust=2889.0&secondPayload=1.2&structureTon=8000000.0&temperature=293.0&recalculateOnChange=false

Which is a pressure fed H2O2/Propane & ethane TSTO launcher
it claims a few tonnes to 8.2km/s for around $200/kg or less,
depending on maintainance issues mainly.

Of course to get that low you'd need to make it fully reusable;
but pressure feds are pretty rugged. I was thinking perhaps VTOL,
two stage- perhaps an H2O2/Propane&ethane pressure fed as
described by Bruce Dunn at:

http://www.dunnspace.com/self_pressurized_rockets.htm

Reentry is never easy, I was thinking a ballistic nose first
reentry pattern is simplest, and using restartable
engines to turn and avoid going splat, DC-X style.

Engines might be regenerative using the H2O2 (yeah, I know
it's unstable if it gets hot- so don't let it!)

The aim is that it would be used for tourism rather
than satellites- the low cost is more important in that
regime; the landing regime for the second (manned
stage) could be modified to use parachutes or rotary
rocket gyros.

Comments?

--
- Ian Woollard (ian.woollard@tesco.net)

"Is a planetary surface the right place for an expanding
technological civilization?"
- Gerard O'Neill

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 981 invoked from network); 10 Dec 2001 03:36:54 -0000
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 10 Dec 2001 03:36:54 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 16751 invoked by uid 50005); 10 Dec 2001 03:36:45 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4175. . Clean. Processed in 0.578601 secs); 10 Dec 2001 03:36:45 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 10 Dec 2001 03:36:43 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA20753; Sun, 9 Dec 2001 19:33:38 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 99552 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 03:33:32          +0000
Received: from mplspop3.mpls.uswest.net (mplspop3.mpls.uswest.net          [204.147.80.13]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id TAA20739          for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Sun, 9 Dec 2001 19:33:32 -0800
Received: (qmail 93169 invoked from network); 10 Dec 2001 03:33:29 -0000
Received: from wdskppp88.mpls.uswest.net (HELO qwest.net) (63.226.148.88) by          mplspop3.mpls.uswest.net with SMTP; 10 Dec 2001 03:33:29 -0000
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.76 [en] (WinNT; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <c=US%a=_%p=Imetrix%l=SQUID-011205174151Z-1217@squid.imetrix.com>              <01b601c17dc9$00f15900$0700a8c0@mkbs> <3C10D467.4A@ezy.net.au>                 <001301c17fb6$2fde0760$5800a8c0@DELL8100>                       <008701c17f9e$8d9f1d20$58bbeac8@alexandre>                       <005801c17fa3$ff068a20$1d94a7cb@joe>                       <00cd01c17fa5$1cbe9cf0$58bbeac8@alexandre>                       <00b401c17fd4$ebc16940$0700a8c0@mkbs>             <3C12A185.EF74B877@qwest.net> <020501c18111$132b0c60$0700a8c0@mkbs>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3C142D27.63322B5@qwest.net>
Date:         Sun, 9 Dec 2001 21:33:59 -0600
Reply-To: "Jeff Hove" <jhove1@QWEST.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jeff Hove" <jhove1@QWEST.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] [OT]: Segway Scooter Braking.
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Russell McMahon wrote:
...
> I agree with what you say about front wheel braking.
> What I meant was literally what I said - " front wheel *ALONE*  " - ie with
> back wheel lifted off as the bike attempts to rotate around the front wheel
> and pitch you over the handlebars - 100% front wheel weight transfer.
> Slightly downhill helps.

Ahhh, "Stoppies" (the opposite of "wheelies")!

Sorry for misunderstanding.  I've just heard so many "experienced"
riders tell new riders to "be careful not to use that front brake" that
I get a bit sensitive about it.  Glad that wasn't what you meant.

If you can pull those off with any reasonable success ratio, then you
are indeed a Maestro of Motorcycle Maneuvering.

I haven't tried stoppies, on purpose anyway :) , but have a friend who
was pretty good modulating the front brake to actually ride up on the
front wheel for a few feet, then recovering and pulling back up into a
wheelie.  It was very entertaining when we pulled up to stop signs.  He
also went through a lot of bikes.

It would be interesting to see a Segway driver do max performance panic
stops.

Did anyone see the newsdesk skit on Saturday Night Live last night?
  "Ending a year of speculation, inventor Dean Kamen introduces a whole
new way for people to be hit by cars."

As far as applying the scooter's gyro technology to rockets, I think
that 3D magnetometers would be simpler and less prone to cumulative
errors than gyros or accelerometers.  I've been using Robert Galejes'
Magnetic Apogee Detector for drogue deployment and it really works well
(at least up here in Minnesota).  Now I'll try connecting it's sensor to
a microprocessor and see how much detail can be recorded.  Ky's
Spaceshot rocket is using magnetometers but I don't know much about the
design.

-Jeff

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 11240 invoked from network); 10 Dec 2001 04:02:01 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 10 Dec 2001 04:02:01 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 27363 invoked by uid 50005); 10 Dec 2001 04:01:52 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4175. . Clean. Processed in 0.303326 secs); 10 Dec 2001 04:01:52 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 10 Dec 2001 04:01:51 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA20820; Sun, 9 Dec 2001 19:59:12 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 99559 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 03:59:10          +0000
Received: from out002pub.verizon.net (out002pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.102])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA20806 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 9 Dec 2001 19:59:10 -0800
Received: from [63.24.225.157] (1Cust114.tnt2.rancho-cucamonga.ca.da.uu.net          [63.15.225.114]) by out002pub.verizon.net  with ESMTP for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; id fBA3xY519197 Sun, 9 Dec 2001 21:59:35 -0600          (CST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: GTE/01rocket@mail.gte.net
References: <c=US%a=_%p=Imetrix%l=SQUID-011205174151Z-1217@squid.imetrix.com>            <01b601c17dc9$00f15900$0700a8c0@mkbs> <3C10D467.4A@ezy.net.au>            <001301c17fb6$2fde0760$5800a8c0@DELL8100>            <008701c17f9e$8d9f1d20$58bbeac8@alexandre>            <005801c17fa3$ff068a20$1d94a7cb@joe>            <00cd01c17fa5$1cbe9cf0$58bbeac8@alexandre>            <00b401c17fd4$ebc16940$0700a8c0@mkbs> <3C12A185.EF74B877@qwest.net>            <020501c18111$132b0c60$0700a8c0@mkbs> <3C142D27.63322B5@qwest.net>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <a05100301b839e31b38fc@[63.24.225.157]>
Date:         Sun, 9 Dec 2001 19:58:36 -0800
Reply-To: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] [OT]: Segway Scooter Braking.
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <3C142D27.63322B5@qwest.net>

>Did anyone see the newsdesk skit on Saturday Night Live last night?
>   "Ending a year of speculation, inventor Dean Kamen introduces a whole
>new way for people to be hit by cars."


Obviously a technology so advanced it is indistinguishable from magic :)

Jerry

How far OT?


--
Jerry Irvine, Box 1242, Claremont, California USA
Opinion, the whole thing. <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
Bring common sense back to rocketry administration.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 27356 invoked from network); 10 Dec 2001 04:20:33 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpv.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.110]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 10 Dec 2001 04:20:33 -0000
Received: (qmail 24915 invoked by uid 50005); 10 Dec 2001 04:13:52 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpv with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4175. . Clean. Processed in 4.089673 secs); 10 Dec 2001 04:13:52 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpv.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 10 Dec 2001 04:13:46 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA20948; Sun, 9 Dec 2001 20:19:07 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 99579 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 04:19:03          +0000
Received: from spsystems.net (spsystems.net [209.47.149.227]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA20934 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Sun,          9 Dec 2001 20:19:03 -0800
Received: (from henry@localhost) by spsystems.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id XAA11792;          Sun, 9 Dec 2001 23:18:13 -0500 (EST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1011209231639.11726B-100000@spsystems.net>
Date:         Sun, 9 Dec 2001 23:18:13 -0500
Reply-To: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] [OT]: Segway Scooter Braking.
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <3C142D27.63322B5@qwest.net>

On Sun, 9 Dec 2001, Jeff Hove wrote:
> As far as applying the scooter's gyro technology to rockets, I think
> that 3D magnetometers would be simpler and less prone to cumulative
> errors than gyros or accelerometers...

As has been discussed before, magnetometers are inherently only 2D.  They
cannot sense rotation on an axis parallel to the local magnetic field.
This limits their applications in rocketry.

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 8102 invoked from network); 10 Dec 2001 10:59:46 -0000
Received: from smtpv.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.110]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 10 Dec 2001 10:59:46 -0000
Received: (qmail 22715 invoked by uid 50005); 10 Dec 2001 10:53:04 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpv with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4175. . Clean. Processed in 2.571384 secs); 10 Dec 2001 10:53:04 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpv.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 10 Dec 2001 10:53:00 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id CAA21950; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 02:58:22 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 99645 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 10:58:05          +0000
Received: from fep4-orange.clear.net.nz (fep4-orange.clear.net.nz          [203.97.32.4]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id CAA21936          for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 02:58:04 -0800
Received: from mkbs (203-167-158-243.dialup.clear.net.nz [203.167.158.243]) by          fep4-orange.clear.net.nz (1.5/1.7) with SMTP id XAA24144; Mon, 10 Dec          2001 23:57:26 +1300 (NZDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="Windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <005f01c18169$e1a63580$0700a8c0@mkbs>
Date:         Mon, 10 Dec 2001 23:30:05 +1300
Reply-To: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Organization: Applied Technology
Subject:      [AR] [OT]: 1 & 2 wheel Gyro stabilised vehicles
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

BUT none side by side like the Segway-

Two wheels in line - Schilovski Gyrocar aka Wolseley Gyrocar (built 1912)

        http://www.dself.demon.co.uk/gyrocars/schilovs.htm


Page on 1 & 2 wheel gyro stabilised vehicles including one built in the USA
in the 1960's

        http://www.dself.demon.co.uk/gyrocars/gyrocar.htm


GYROVER - Single wheeled gyro stabilised prototype vehicle


http://www-2.cs.cmu.edu/afs/cs/project/space/www/gyrover/gyrover.html


Modern French microprocessor controlled 2 wheel tandem version - seeking
startup capital
Rather suspect photos

            http://www.sardou.net/gyrocar.htm

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 26167 invoked from network); 11 Dec 2001 01:34:28 -0000
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 11 Dec 2001 01:34:28 -0000
Received: (qmail 13295 invoked by uid 50005); 11 Dec 2001 01:34:19 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4175. . Clean. Processed in 2.462514 secs); 11 Dec 2001 01:34:19 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 11 Dec 2001 01:34:15 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA25003; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 17:27:11 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 99854 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 11 Dec 2001 01:27:08          +0000
Received: from castor.ridgenet.net (IDENT:root@castor.ridgenet.net          [199.120.150.29]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA24988          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 17:27:08 -0800
Received: from kristinscomp (pm146.ridgenet.net [204.154.246.146]) by          castor.ridgenet.net (8.11.0/8.11.0) with SMTP id fBB1TTb26424; Mon,          10 Dec 2001 17:29:33 -0800
References:  <004901c181de$e48f3d80$0700a8c0@mkbs>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="Windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <001c01c181e3$09e5d0e0$1b30fea9@kristinscomp>
Date:         Mon, 10 Dec 2001 17:27:12 -0800
Reply-To: "Kristin & David Hall" <thehalls@RIDGENET.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Kristin & David Hall" <thehalls@RIDGENET.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Maverick Missile Rate Gyros
Comments: To: Russell McMahon <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Well, my father did the autopilot/seeker integration for the Navy's first IR
Maverick.  Ya think that counts?  Got a specific question?

--
Dave and/or Kristin Hall
----- Original Message -----
From: Russell McMahon <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Monday, December 10, 2001 4:54 PM
Subject: [AR] Maverick Missile Rate Gyros


> Has anyone got any practical experience in using rate gyros from Maverick
> Missiles?
> Any comments on practical performance?
>
>
>             Russell McMahon
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 285 invoked from network); 11 Dec 2001 03:49:48 -0000
Received: from smtpv.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.110]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 11 Dec 2001 03:49:48 -0000
Received: (qmail 9923 invoked by uid 50005); 11 Dec 2001 00:55:22 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpv with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4175. . Clean. Processed in 6.607213 secs); 11 Dec 2001 00:55:22 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpv.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 11 Dec 2001 00:55:14 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA24869; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 16:56:53 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 99847 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 11 Dec 2001 00:55:58          +0000
Received: from fep4-orange.clear.net.nz (fep4-orange.clear.net.nz          [203.97.32.4]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA24854          for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 16:55:57 -0800
Received: from mkbs (203-167-149-245.dialup.clear.net.nz [203.167.149.245]) by          fep4-orange.clear.net.nz (1.5/1.7) with SMTP id NAA20452; Tue, 11 Dec          2001 13:55:21 +1300 (NZDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="Windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <004901c181de$e48f3d80$0700a8c0@mkbs>
Date:         Tue, 11 Dec 2001 13:54:35 +1300
Reply-To: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Organization: Applied Technology
Subject:      [AR] Maverick Missile Rate Gyros
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Has anyone got any practical experience in using rate gyros from Maverick
Missiles?
Any comments on practical performance?


            Russell McMahon

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 13266 invoked from network); 11 Dec 2001 08:14:17 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.105]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 11 Dec 2001 08:14:17 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 27324 invoked by uid 50005); 11 Dec 2001 08:14:06 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpy with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4175. . Clean. Processed in 11.632319 secs); 11 Dec 2001 08:14:06 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 11 Dec 2001 08:13:51 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA26344; Tue, 11 Dec 2001 00:12:21 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 99975 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 11 Dec 2001 08:12:15          +0000
Received: from mail0.rawbw.com (mail0.rawbw.com [198.144.192.41]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA26317 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 11 Dec 2001 00:12:14 -0800
Received: from gateway.rclague.net (c33.ppp.tsoft.com [198.144.204.33]) by          mail0.rawbw.com (8.11.3/8.11.3) with ESMTP id fBB8CDK04796 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 11 Dec 2001 00:12:13 -0800 (PST)          (envelope-from rclague@rclague.net)
X-Sender: rclague@pop.tsoft.net
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
References: <j7h21u4ns5df35oe5s03f347lt6gtlv0qg@4ax.com>            <Pine.LNX.4.10.10112071057580.10360-100000@itc.uci.edu>            <Pine.LNX.4.10.10112071057580.10360-100000@itc.uci.edu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <5.1.0.14.2.20011210234218.00a8d380@pop.tsoft.net>
Date:         Mon, 10 Dec 2001 23:44:07 -0800
Reply-To: "Randall Clague" <rclague@RCLAGUE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Randall Clague" <rclague@RCLAGUE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Energy of orbiting bodies
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <5.1.0.14.2.20011207214142.00b58800@mail>

At 07:44 PM 12/07/2001, Mark C Spiegl wrote:

> > So our hypothetical 5 ton satellite would only hit the beanstalk as 30
> > tons of TNT.  That's a small nuke indeed.
>
>I have no reason to doubt your calculation, but careful with the decimal
>point. Most nuc's are measured in KILOtons TNT.

Yes, I know.  I do these calculations based on ENW's definition of one KT
as 10^12 calories.  As I said, 30 tons (0.03 KT) is a small nuke indeed.  :-)

-R

--
No electrons were harmed in the creation of this message
PETE     -    People for the Ethical Treatment of Electrons
Randall Clague                                rclague@rclague.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 16168 invoked from network); 11 Dec 2001 08:15:14 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.105]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 11 Dec 2001 08:15:14 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 28483 invoked by uid 50005); 11 Dec 2001 08:15:05 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpy with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4175. . Clean. Processed in 9.162748 secs); 11 Dec 2001 08:15:05 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 11 Dec 2001 08:14:52 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA26378; Tue, 11 Dec 2001 00:12:31 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 99989 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 11 Dec 2001 08:12:29          +0000
Received: from mail0.rawbw.com (mail0.rawbw.com [198.144.192.41]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA26340 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 11 Dec 2001 00:12:19 -0800
Received: from gateway.rclague.net (c33.ppp.tsoft.com [198.144.204.33]) by          mail0.rawbw.com (8.11.3/8.11.3) with ESMTP id fBB8CGK04803; Tue, 11          Dec 2001 00:12:16 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from rclague@rclague.net)
X-Sender: rclague@pop.tsoft.net
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <5.1.0.14.2.20011210235522.054b2820@pop.tsoft.net>
Date:         Tue, 11 Dec 2001 00:03:06 -0800
Reply-To: "Randall Clague" <rclague@RCLAGUE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Randall Clague" <rclague@RCLAGUE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] System Solaire
Comments: To: Jeff Hove <jhove1@QWEST.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <3C12AE27.95A0D471@qwest.net>

At 04:19 PM 12/08/2001, Jeff Hove wrote:

>I have an opportunity to assist with the constuction of a System Solaire
>SS67B-3 H2O2/Gasoline rocket (the actual owner is very experienced at EX
>but not active on this list).
>
>Does anyone have experience or tips regarding these?

"Be afraid.  Be very afraid."

Actually it's not a dangerous vehicle if you use some precautions, because
even though it uses gasoline - a notorious detonation hazard - it only uses
a few ounces of it.

The problem is actually building it and getting it to fly.  They market it
as something so simple anyone can build it and fly it, but it uses, for
example, a hypergolic starting slug plus a solid propellant grain for
initial ignition and combustion, so it's a quadprop hybrid, not a biprop
liquid.  And its performance is abysmal; you can do as well with commercial
black powder, and not have to deal with HazMat regulations.

-R

--
No electrons were harmed in the creation of this message
PETE     -    People for the Ethical Treatment of Electrons
Randall Clague                                rclague@rclague.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 18441 invoked from network); 11 Dec 2001 08:15:58 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.105]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 11 Dec 2001 08:15:58 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 29401 invoked by uid 50005); 11 Dec 2001 08:15:48 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpy with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4175. . Clean. Processed in 7.574569 secs); 11 Dec 2001 08:15:48 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 11 Dec 2001 08:15:38 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA26361; Tue, 11 Dec 2001 00:12:28 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 99982 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 11 Dec 2001 08:12:27          +0000
Received: from mail0.rawbw.com (mail0.rawbw.com [198.144.192.41]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA26331 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 11 Dec 2001 00:12:16 -0800
Received: from gateway.rclague.net (c33.ppp.tsoft.com [198.144.204.33]) by          mail0.rawbw.com (8.11.3/8.11.3) with ESMTP id fBB8CFK04799 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 11 Dec 2001 00:12:15 -0800 (PST)          (envelope-from rclague@rclague.net)
X-Sender: rclague@pop.tsoft.net
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
References: <NEBBJIGOELOLIBCCPKDCGEDDCCAA.geordi@c031.aone.net.au>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <5.1.0.14.2.20011210234658.054b2d30@pop.tsoft.net>
Date:         Mon, 10 Dec 2001 23:54:53 -0800
Reply-To: "Randall Clague" <rclague@RCLAGUE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Randall Clague" <rclague@RCLAGUE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Energy of orbiting bodies
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1011208131027.20321E-100000@spsystems.net>

At 10:38 AM 12/08/2001, Henry Spencer wrote:

>On Sat, 8 Dec 2001, Troy Prideaux wrote:
> > Yep, actually what's also interesting is how we (on Earth) could see tiny
> > flashes of light on the moon with 6" & 8" telescopes during the recent
> > meteor shower...
>
>That one is less of a mystery:  the Leonids come in *very* fast, 60-70km/s.
>They carry far more energy per kilogram than a mere satellite.

Well, 70 km/sec is 10x what I was using for LEO (7700 m/sec less the
beanstalk's velocity, less a bit more to be nice to Pierce), so that's 100x
the energy.  Which bumps the conversion factor up to 600x, so Troy's 1-2 kg
meteoroids (those are big meteoroids!) have the energy of 600 to 1200 kg of
TNT.  I'd buy seeing that explosion from the moon through an 8" telescope
at high magnification, if the impact was on the night side and the day side
was kept out of the field of view.

Pretty cool.

"Whatcha lookin at, dude?"
"Leonids..."
"With a telescope?"
"...On the moon."

-R


--
No electrons were harmed in the creation of this message
PETE     -    People for the Ethical Treatment of Electrons
Randall Clague                                rclague@rclague.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 12750 invoked from network); 11 Dec 2001 11:07:56 -0000
Received: from smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.105]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 11 Dec 2001 11:07:56 -0000
Received: (qmail 31130 invoked by uid 50005); 11 Dec 2001 11:07:46 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpy with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4175. . Clean. Processed in 7.924029 secs); 11 Dec 2001 11:07:46 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 11 Dec 2001 11:07:35 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id DAA26855; Tue, 11 Dec 2001 03:04:10 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 100027 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 11 Dec 2001 11:04:04          +0000
Received: from mail001.syd.optusnet.com.au (mail001.syd.optusnet.com.au          [203.2.75.244]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id DAA26841          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 11 Dec 2001 03:04:03 -0800
Received: from ballbuster (blaax2-039.dialup.optusnet.com.au [210.49.117.39])          by mail001.syd.optusnet.com.au (8.11.1/8.11.1) with SMTP id          fBBB3UE28888 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 11 Dec 2001 22:03:31          +1100
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
Importance: Normal
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <NJEEJAOGEMKNPMLLEONAAEFDCDAA.strudwicke@optusnet.com.au>
Date:         Tue, 11 Dec 2001 22:02:31 +1100
Reply-To: "craig strudwicke" <strudwicke@OPTUSNET.COM.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "craig strudwicke" <strudwicke@OPTUSNET.COM.AU>
Subject:      [AR] Black powder relative burn rates
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Can any one give me an idea how the commercially available Blackpowder
'corn' sizes affect the burn rate ?

I know is basically is determined by surface area for a give volume, hence
the smaller grains will effectively burn faster. I guess I'm asking how the
F value relates to the size of the corns. ie is FFg twice the 'size' of
FFFFg ?

Craig

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 10549 invoked from network); 11 Dec 2001 14:01:03 -0000
Received: from smtpv.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.110]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 11 Dec 2001 14:01:03 -0000
Received: (qmail 7083 invoked by uid 50005); 11 Dec 2001 11:53:13 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpv with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4175. . Clean. Processed in 2.616805 secs); 11 Dec 2001 11:53:13 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpv.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 11 Dec 2001 11:53:09 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id DAA26998; Tue, 11 Dec 2001 03:56:58 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 100034 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 11 Dec 2001 11:56:53          +0000
Received: from fep3-orange.clear.net.nz (fep3-orange.clear.net.nz          [203.97.32.3]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id DAA26984          for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Tue, 11 Dec 2001 03:56:52 -0800
Received: from mkbs (203-167-148-249.dialup.clear.net.nz [203.167.148.249]) by          fep3-orange.clear.net.nz (1.5/1.8) with SMTP id AAA21759; Wed, 12 Dec          2001 00:56:45 +1300 (NZDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="Windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <020001c1823b$4b7191e0$0700a8c0@mkbs>
Date:         Wed, 12 Dec 2001 00:54:37 +1300
Reply-To: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Organization: Applied Technology
Subject:      [AR] Fw: Jonathan's Space Report, No. 469
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

A whole slew of interesting hardware has gone upstairs this month.

Note another small contribution to the manned versus unmanned controversy.
It took a manned spacewalk to clear the "debris" of an O-Ring from a docking
adaptor before the Progress M1-7 craft could properly dock with the
space-station. While a good case could be argued that the docking mechanism
should be more fool-proof the fact is that, in this real world situation,
without a manned presence this "lack of a horse-shoe nail" could have
aborted a mission. In this case the problem simply gave 2 Astronauts /
Cosmonauts the chance to have some fun. (It had better have been fun- when
it gets to the stage that a "spacewalk" becomes a boring job or another day
at the office rather than fun then they can come on down and let me take
over !). The fact that it subsequently took them over an hour to get back
inside suggests it's still fun.



        RM

_______________________________________________________



Jonathan's Space Report
No. 469                                            2001 Dec 11   Cambridge,
MA
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
---

Shuttle and Station
--------------------

Progress M1-7 soft docked to the Zvezda module at 1943 UTC on Nov 28.
The docking probe was connected to Zvezda, but the vehicle was not
firmly latched, preventing hatch opening and raising fears that
vibration from a Shuttle docking could knock the spacecraft loose. A
rubber seal left over from the previous occupant of the docking port,
Progress M-45 was blocking the docking system and a spacewalk was
required to clear it out of the way before a final seal could be made.
This was very similar to the situation in April 1987 when astronauts had
to make a spacewalk to fix an almost identical problem with the docking
of the Kvant module to Mir.

Dezhurov and Tyurin depressurized the Pirs airlock on Dec 3;  by 1306
UTC pressure passed 50 mbar. After a 5 minute leak check at 21 mbar,
the spacesuits went to battery power, the pressure was brought down even
lower to 14 mbar and the hatch was opened  at 1320 UTC. Dezhurov and
Tyurin emerged at around 1327 UTC and by 1440 UTC were at the aft end of
Zvezda. They identified the debris fouling the docking port as the
rubber O-ring from the Progress M-45 docking system. At 1453 UTC the
debris was removed and a minute later ground controllers successfully
commanded the Progress M1-7 to complete a firm docking. Dezhurov and
Tyurin returned to Pirs at 1559 UTC, closing the hatch at 1606 and
repressurizing at 1609 for an EVA duration of 3hr3min (depress/repress),
2hr46min (hatch open/close, Russian rule) or 2hr 55min (NASA rule).

Note: NASA refers to the new Progress as `Progress 6', a shorthand for
the fact that Progress M1-7 is space station flight 6P. However, the
real `Progress-6' was launched to Salyut-6 in May 1979, so I recommend
that this nomenclature be avoided - use `Progress mission 6P' or `ISS
6P' if you must, but Progress M1-7 or Progress No. 256 (the factory
serial number) is better.

Space Shuttle mission STS-108 (ISS mission UF-1) was launched on Dec 5
at 2219:28 UTC. Endeavour reached an orbit of approximately 58 x 230 km
(according to the NASA PAO) at 2228 UTC. At 2259 UTC Endeavour fired
its OMS engines to raise perigee to 225 km. Mass after OMS-2 was
114692 kg. Endeavour docked with the Station at 2003 UTC on Dec 7;
problems aligning the vehicles delayed hard dock until 2051 UTC, and
the hatch was opened at 2243 UTC.

The Raffaello module was unberthed from Endeavour at 1701 UTC on Dec 8
and berthed to Unity at 1755 UTC.

STS-108 astronauts Linda Godwin and Dan Tani carried out a spacewalk on
Dec 10 to install thermal blankets on the P6 solar array gimbal motor
bearings, which were distorting due to temperature changes. The
Shuttle's airlock was depressurized at about 1747 UTC, hatch was open at
1749 UTC, and the astronauts emerged at 1803 and 1814 UTC. The blankets
were installed by 2010 UTC; after failing to engage a solar array latch,
the crew moved on to retrieve tools for the next mission and returned to
the airlock to close the hatch about 2157 UTC. The airlock was
repressurized at 2204 UTC, for a duration of 4hr17m (depress/repress),
4h08m (hatch open/close) or 4h11m (NASA rule).

Recent Launches
---------------

Three Uragan (`Hurricane') navigation satellites were launched on Dec 1
as Block 30 of the Global Navigation Satellite System (GLONASS).  The
satellites, Uragan 790, Uragan 789 and Uragan-M 711, were renamed
Kosmos-2380, Kosmos-2381 and Kosmos-2382 on orbit. One of the new trio
is the first Uragan-M improved model. The first Uragan satellite was
launched in 1982; the Uragans are the Russian analogs of the Navstar GPS
satellites. Thanks to Richard Langley for passing on Russian data.

The Proton-K launch vehicle reached orbit at 1813 UTC and the Blok DM
lower adapter separated from the payload complex. Reentry of the adapter
and the Proton final stage were observed in the USA and Europe. The DM
made its first burn from low parking orbit at about 1908 UTC, raising
apogee to 19000 km. The orbit was circularized at apogee at about 2200
UTC and the satellites were deplyed by 2228 UTC. On Dec 7 the satellites
were in 19100 x 19130 km x 64.8 deg orbits.

The JASON/TIMED mission took off on Dec 7 at 1507 UTC. The Boeing Delta
7920-10C flew a complicated profile; the Delta second stage reached an
initial orbit of 215 x 1343 km x 66.2 deg at 1517 UTC. A second burn at
1559 UTC circularized at apogee to 1320 x 1330 km x 66.0 deg, and the
Jason 1 satellite was ejected at 1602 UTC. Five minutes later the DPAF
adapter separated to reveal the TIMED satellite inside it. Burn 3 at
1614 UTC put Delta/TIMED in a descending 636 x 1330 km x 71.3 deg orbit;
at perigee at 1706 UTC a fourth burn circularized at 627 x 640 km x 74.1
deg and TIMED was ejected six minutes later. A final depletion burn left
the Delta stage in a low perigee orbit.

Jason 1 is a joint mission between CNES (the French space agency) and
NASA/JPL, following on the Topex satellite which carried the Poseidon
sea surface altimeter. Jason carries Poseidon 2, as well as orbital
tracking experiments and a microwave radiometer which measures the
amount of water vapor, allowing path delay errors to be calibrated. The
satellite uses the Alcatel Proteus bus and has a dry mass of 472 kg plus
28 kg of hydrazine propellant.

The second payload, TIMED, is the first NASA Solar Terrestrial Probe,
operated by Johns Hopkins Applied Physics Lab to study the thermosphere,
mesosphere and lower ionosphere. TIMED was built in-house at APL and has
a mass of 587 kg; the project is managed at NASA-Goddard. It measures
solar and auroral energy input, atmospheric cooling rates, and
atmospheric composition, temperature and wind profiles.

Russia launched a Meteor-3M weather satellite on Dec 10 into a 996 x
1015 km x 99.7 deg orbit. The Meteor-3M No. 1, with a mass around 2500
kg, is an improved version of the Meteor-3 satellite first flown in
1984, and carries visible and IR sensors and NASA's SAGE III instrument
which studies aerosols and the ozone layer. Four small subsatellites
were also carried into orbit: Badr B, Maroc-Tubsat, Kompas and
Reflektor. The Zenit final stage and four small separation motor covers
(which will be in higher apogee orbits) are expected to be in orbit too,
for a total of 10 objects; 5 have been cataloged so far and it will
probably take a while to sort them out.

Badr B is Pakistan's second satellite. Built in collaboration with the
English company SIL, it has a mass of 70 kg and carries an Earth imager.
Maroc-Tubsat was built by the Technical University of Berlin for the
Centre Royal de Teledetection Spatiale, Morocco, and has a mass of 45
kg. It carries an imager and a store-forward communications test. The
Russian Kompas satellite, built by Makeev for the IZMIRAN geophysics
institute, is an 80 kg satellite with a magnetometer and other sensors
designed to attempt prediction of  earthquakes. The satellite was
originally built for use on the Shtil' rocket. Finally, the 8 kg
Reflektor was built by NII KP in Russia for space debris studies in a
joint experiment with the USAF's AF Research Lab.


Four Trident I C-4 submarine-launched ballistic missiles flew a
suborbital trajectory down the Eastern Range on Dec 9 after launched
from the USS Ohio. Lockheed Martin reports that 221 Trident Is have been
launched, although I have only been able to find public records of 153.

Table of Recent Launches
-----------------------

Date UT       Name            Launch Vehicle  Site            Mission
INTL.

DES.
Nov 26 1824   Progress M1-7     Soyuz-FG       Baykonur LC1     Cargo
51A
Nov 27 0035   DirecTV 4S        Ariane 44LP    Kourou ELA2      TV broadcast
52A
Dec  1 1804   Kosmos-2380 )     Proton-K/DM2   Baykonur         Navsat
53A
              Kosmos-2381 )                                     Navsat
53B
              Kosmos-2382 )                                     Navsat
53C
Dec  5 2219   Endeavour )       Shuttle        Kennedy LC39B    Spaceship
54A
              Raffaello )
Dec  7 1507   Jason 1   )       Delta 7920-10  Vandenberg SLC2W Science
55A
              TIMED     )                                       Science
55B
Dec 10 1719   Meteor-3M )       Zenit-2        Baykonur LC45    Weather
56A
              Badr B    )                                       Imaging
56
              Maroc-Tubsat)                                     Imaging
56
              Kompas    )                                       Science
56
              Reflektor )                                       Technology
56


Current Shuttle Processing Status
_________________________________

Orbiters               Location   Mission    Launch Due

OV-102 Columbia        OPF Bay 3     STS-109 2002 Feb 14  HST SM-3B
OV-103 Discovery       OPF Bay 1?    Maintenance
OV-104 Atlantis        OPF Bay 2?    STS-110 2002 Mar 21  ISS 8A
OV-105 Endeavour       ISS           STS-108 2001 Dec  7  ISS UF-1


.-------------------------------------------------------------------------.
|  Jonathan McDowell                 |  phone : (617) 495-7176            |
|  Harvard-Smithsonian Center for    |                                    |
|   Astrophysics                     |                                    |
|  60 Garden St, MS6                 |                                    |
|  Cambridge MA 02138                |  inter : jcm@cfa.harvard.edu       |
|  USA                               |          jmcdowell@cfa.harvard.edu |
|                                                                         |
| JSR: http://hea-www.harvard.edu/~jcm/space/jsr/jsr.html                 |
| Back issues:  http://hea-www.harvard.edu/~jcm/space/jsr/back            |
| Subscribe/unsub: mail majordomo@head-cfa.harvard.edu, (un)subscribe jsr |
'-------------------------------------------------------------------------'

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 5610 invoked from network); 11 Dec 2001 18:03:21 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 11 Dec 2001 18:03:21 -0000
Received: (qmail 22437 invoked by uid 50005); 11 Dec 2001 18:03:12 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4175. . Clean. Processed in 1.085225 secs); 11 Dec 2001 18:03:12 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 11 Dec 2001 18:03:11 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA28305; Tue, 11 Dec 2001 09:43:14 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 100168 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 11 Dec 2001 17:42:57          +0000
Received: from spsystems.net (spsystems.net [209.47.149.227]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA28291 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Tue,          11 Dec 2001 09:42:56 -0800
Received: (from henry@localhost) by spsystems.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id MAA15584;          Tue, 11 Dec 2001 12:42:16 -0500 (EST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1011211123956.14108D-100000@spsystems.net>
Date:         Tue, 11 Dec 2001 12:42:16 -0500
Reply-To: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Energy of orbiting bodies
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <5.1.0.14.2.20011210234658.054b2d30@pop.tsoft.net>

On Mon, 10 Dec 2001, Randall Clague wrote:
> ...Which bumps the conversion factor up to 600x, so Troy's 1-2 kg
> meteoroids (those are big meteoroids!) have the energy of ...

The nice thing about the Moon is that it's a very large target, much
larger than the part of Earth's atmosphere which is actually visible to a
single observer.  And the observers typically see only a few Leonid hits
per Leonid shower, so they're obviously seeing the extreme top end of the
Leonid size distribution.

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 857 invoked from network); 11 Dec 2001 20:06:22 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 11 Dec 2001 20:06:22 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 23831 invoked by uid 50005); 11 Dec 2001 20:06:12 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4175. . Clean. Processed in 4.679945 secs); 11 Dec 2001 20:06:12 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 11 Dec 2001 20:06:06 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA28671; Tue, 11 Dec 2001 11:28:04 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 100193 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 11 Dec 2001 19:27:54          +0000
Received: from mail0.rawbw.com (mail0.rawbw.com [198.144.192.41]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA28657 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 11 Dec 2001 11:27:53 -0800
Received: from gateway.rclague.net (c27.ppp.tsoft.com [198.144.204.27]) by          mail0.rawbw.com (8.11.3/8.11.3) with ESMTP id fBBJRDK51396; Tue, 11          Dec 2001 11:27:14 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from rclague@rclague.net)
X-Sender: rclague@pop.tsoft.net
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
References: <5.1.0.14.2.20011210234658.054b2d30@pop.tsoft.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <5.1.0.14.2.20011211105250.04a60610@pop.tsoft.net>
Date:         Tue, 11 Dec 2001 10:53:33 -0800
Reply-To: "Randall Clague" <rclague@RCLAGUE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Randall Clague" <rclague@RCLAGUE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Energy of orbiting bodies
Comments: To: Henry Spencer <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1011211123956.14108D-100000@spsystems.net>

At 09:42 AM 12/11/2001, Henry Spencer wrote:

>...so they're obviously seeing the extreme top end of the
>Leonid size distribution.

Doh!

-R

--
No electrons were harmed in the creation of this message
PETE     -    People for the Ethical Treatment of Electrons
Randall Clague                                rclague@rclague.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 21485 invoked from network); 12 Dec 2001 00:24:02 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.105]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 12 Dec 2001 00:24:02 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 10457 invoked by uid 50005); 12 Dec 2001 00:23:48 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpy with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4175. . Clean. Processed in 4.636523 secs); 12 Dec 2001 00:23:48 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 12 Dec 2001 00:23:42 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA29980; Tue, 11 Dec 2001 16:17:48 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 100279 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 12 Dec 2001 00:17:47          +0000
Received: from mailgate.purespeed.com (ns2.tidalwave.net [66.77.68.8]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA29833 for          <aROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 11 Dec 2001 16:07:47 -0800
Received: from purespeed.com (unknown [66.77.68.13]) by mailgate.purespeed.com          (Postfix Relay Hub) with ESMTP id 98CE313A85 for          <aROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 11 Dec 2001 19:52:02 -0500 (EST)
Received: from aragorn.purespeed.com [4.54.18.181] by purespeed.com with ESMTP          (SMTPD32-7.04) id AEE42E1B00D8; Tue, 11 Dec 2001 19:03:48 -0500
X-Sender: kas219@purespeed.com@mail.purespeed.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <5.1.0.14.2.20011211191023.00aa0428@mail.purespeed.com>
Date:         Tue, 11 Dec 2001 19:12:47 -0500
Reply-To: "Keith Soldavin" <kas219@PSUALUM.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Keith Soldavin" <kas219@PSUALUM.COM>
Subject:      [AR] dry ice
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

I'm looking for a supplier of dry ice in the northern Virginia area.  What
type of companies normally sells dry ice to ordinary people in small
quantities (< 5 lbs)?  Does anyone have a contact?

Thanks for your help.

keith

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 10471 invoked from network); 12 Dec 2001 00:35:37 -0000
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 12 Dec 2001 00:35:37 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 7074 invoked by uid 50005); 12 Dec 2001 00:35:26 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4175. . Clean. Processed in 9.258356 secs); 12 Dec 2001 00:35:26 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 12 Dec 2001 00:35:12 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA29902; Tue, 11 Dec 2001 16:14:42 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 100280 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 12 Dec 2001 00:14:35          +0000
Received: from grucom2.gru.net (grucom2.gru.net [209.251.129.7]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA29888 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue,          11 Dec 2001 16:14:34 -0800
Received: from [198.190.223.213] by grucom2.sfcc.net (NTMail          7.00.0022/NU4112.00.db1c8a4b) with ESMTP id jjowqaaa for          AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 11 Dec 2001 19:14:31 -0500
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.75 [en] (Win95; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <NJEEJAOGEMKNPMLLEONAAEFDCDAA.strudwicke@optusnet.com.au>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3C16A4EC.E79DC383@sfcc.net>
Date:         Tue, 11 Dec 2001 19:29:32 -0500
Reply-To: "James Yawn" <jyawn@SFCC.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "James Yawn" <jyawn@SFCC.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Black powder relative burn rates
Comments: To: craig strudwicke <strudwicke@OPTUSNET.COM.AU>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Craig:  I have some info on BP sizes:

Granulation            Passes Opening                       Won't pass
F                            .0689 (inch, I assume)            .0582
FF                          .0582                                     .0376
FFF                        .0376                                    .0170
FFFF                      .0170                                    .0111

This is from a 1998 Dixie Gun Works catalog.
(http://www.dixiegunworks.com)

All the commercial black powders burn pretty darned quick.  I have used sizes
1F through 4F more-or-less interchangably in my black powder guns (.45 cal.
rifles) with no obvious difference in performance, and no burst barrels.

I suspect that the larger grain sizes are used to allow air space for the
spreading of flame through a larger charge, more than to slow the burning rate
of the powder, but this is an opinion based on scattered and ephemeral
thoughts, little in the way of facts.

Hope this helps anyway,
Jimmy Yawn
jyawn@sfcc.net


I don't think the grain size is directly proportional to the burn rate

craig strudwicke wrote:

> Can any one give me an idea how the commercially available Blackpowder
> 'corn' sizes affect the burn rate ?
>
> I know is basically is determined by surface area for a give volume, hence
> the smaller grains will effectively burn faster. I guess I'm asking how the
> F value relates to the size of the corns. ie is FFg twice the 'size' of
> FFFFg ?
>
> Craig

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 14263 invoked from network); 12 Dec 2001 02:42:47 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtph.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.88]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 12 Dec 2001 02:42:47 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 25377 invoked by uid 50005); 12 Dec 2001 02:22:16 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtph with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4175. . Clean. Processed in 4.139211 secs); 12 Dec 2001 02:22:16 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtph.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 12 Dec 2001 02:22:10 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA30459; Tue, 11 Dec 2001 18:28:03 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 100329 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 12 Dec 2001 02:27:54          +0000
Received: from smtp007pub.verizon.net (smtp007pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.186])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA30445 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 11 Dec 2001 18:27:54 -0800
Received: from [63.24.225.213] (1Cust125.tnt3.ontario.ca.da.uu.net          [63.27.111.125]) by smtp007pub.verizon.net  with ESMTP for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; id fBC2RMT07044 Tue, 11 Dec 2001 20:27:22          -0600 (CST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: GTE/01rocket@mail.gte.net
References: <5.1.0.14.2.20011211191023.00aa0428@mail.purespeed.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <a05100307b83c70f7b453@[63.24.225.213]>
Date:         Tue, 11 Dec 2001 18:27:26 -0800
Reply-To: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] dry ice
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <5.1.0.14.2.20011211191023.00aa0428@mail.purespeed.com>

>I'm looking for a supplier of dry ice in the northern Virginia area.  What
>type of companies normally sells dry ice to ordinary people in small
>quantities (< 5 lbs)?  Does anyone have a contact?
>
>Thanks for your help.
>
>keith


Regular ice companies also sell dry ice.  It is common.



--
Jerry Irvine, Box 1242, Claremont, California USA
Opinion, the whole thing. <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
Bring common sense back to rocketry administration.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 27713 invoked from network); 12 Dec 2001 03:59:33 -0000
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 12 Dec 2001 03:59:33 -0000
Received: (qmail 7806 invoked by uid 50005); 12 Dec 2001 03:59:24 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4175. . Clean. Processed in 0.624991 secs); 12 Dec 2001 03:59:24 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 12 Dec 2001 03:59:23 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA30814; Tue, 11 Dec 2001 19:55:24 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 100355 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 12 Dec 2001 03:55:10          +0000
Received: from femail2.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail2.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.0.95.82]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA30799 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 11 Dec 2001 19:55:10 -0800
Received: from cx814151a ([24.14.55.118]) by femail2.sdc1.sfba.home.com          (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20 201-229-121-120-20010223) with SMTP id          <20011212035509.QRPP16198.femail2.sdc1.sfba.home.com@cx814151a> for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 11 Dec 2001 19:55:09 -0800
References:  <5.1.0.14.2.20011211191023.00aa0428@mail.purespeed.com>              <001e01c182a9$6f0a1460$22840540@EDROWE>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4807.1700
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <00e601c182c0$dd668620$0a01a8c0@cx814151a>
Date:         Tue, 11 Dec 2001 21:55:39 -0600
Reply-To: "John Bolene" <jbolene@HOME.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Bolene" <jbolene@HOME.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] dry ice
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Dry ice in Oklahoma can be found at most larger grocery stores and also
Sam's.

John Bolene
Tripoli Oklahoma Prefect and webmaster
Tripoli Oklahoma Web page -> http://members.home.com/tripoli-oklahoma/

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 19605 invoked from network); 12 Dec 2001 08:56:19 -0000
Received: from smtpv.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.110]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 12 Dec 2001 08:56:19 -0000
Received: (qmail 31539 invoked by uid 50005); 12 Dec 2001 01:18:01 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpv with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4175. . Clean. Processed in 4.052446 secs); 12 Dec 2001 01:18:02 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpv.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 12 Dec 2001 01:17:57 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA30192; Tue, 11 Dec 2001 17:10:19 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 100308 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 12 Dec 2001 01:09:49          +0000
Received: from proxima.whro.net (proxima.whro.net [64.5.129.2]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA30172 for <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Tue,          11 Dec 2001 17:09:49 -0800
Received: from EDROWE (34.di.whro.net [64.5.132.34]) by proxima.whro.net          (Rockliffe SMTPRA 3.4.6) with SMTP id <B0010354353@proxima.whro.net>;          Tue, 11 Dec 2001 20:06:49 -0500
References:  <5.1.0.14.2.20011211191023.00aa0428@mail.purespeed.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <001e01c182a9$6f0a1460$22840540@EDROWE>
Date:         Tue, 11 Dec 2001 20:07:55 -0500
Reply-To: "Ed Rowe" <edrowe@WHRO.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Ed Rowe" <edrowe@WHRO.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] dry ice
Comments: To: Keith Soldavin <kas219@PSUALUM.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

http://www.dryiceinfo.com/where.htm
....Ed

----- Original Message -----
From: "Keith Soldavin" <kas219@PSUALUM.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Tuesday, December 11, 2001 7:12 PM
Subject: [AR] dry ice


> I'm looking for a supplier of dry ice in the northern Virginia area.  What
> type of companies normally sells dry ice to ordinary people in small
> quantities (< 5 lbs)?  Does anyone have a contact?
>
> Thanks for your help.
>
> keith

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 29208 invoked from network); 12 Dec 2001 10:03:41 -0000
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 12 Dec 2001 10:03:41 -0000
Received: (qmail 7345 invoked by uid 50005); 12 Dec 2001 10:03:32 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4175. . Clean. Processed in 0.635392 secs); 12 Dec 2001 10:03:32 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 12 Dec 2001 10:03:31 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id CAA31844; Wed, 12 Dec 2001 02:01:51 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 100414 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 12 Dec 2001 10:01:30          +0000
Received: from fep3-orange.clear.net.nz (fep3-orange.clear.net.nz          [203.97.32.3]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id CAA31829          for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Wed, 12 Dec 2001 02:01:29 -0800
Received: from mkbs (203-167-157-29.dialup.clear.net.nz [203.167.157.29]) by          fep3-orange.clear.net.nz (1.5/1.8) with SMTP id XAA29831; Wed, 12 Dec          2001 23:01:20 +1300 (NZDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="Windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <000b01c182f4$5ad00d60$0700a8c0@mkbs>
Date:         Wed, 12 Dec 2001 23:03:55 +1300
Reply-To: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Organization: Applied Technology
Subject:      [AR] GPS guided parachute delivery system
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

A while ago people discussed real world guided parachute systems. I had seen
this but couldn't find the site.
I don;'t know if it is a real product but It LOOKS very real.
Numerous photos.
Glide ratio of 3.6:1 with no wind (15 miles range from 25,000 feet).
Multiple waypoints.


Strong Parachutes

        http://www.strongparachutes.com/home.html


Their "GPS Cargo Express", GPS guided  parachute cargo delivery system.


        http://www.strongparachutes.com/gpscargexp.html

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 11098 invoked from network); 12 Dec 2001 18:00:35 -0000
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 12 Dec 2001 18:00:35 -0000
Received: (qmail 11791 invoked by uid 50005); 12 Dec 2001 18:00:24 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4175. . Clean. Processed in 4.353989 secs); 12 Dec 2001 18:00:24 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 12 Dec 2001 18:00:19 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA00841; Wed, 12 Dec 2001 09:51:04 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 100488 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 12 Dec 2001 17:49:43          +0000
Received: from tomts17-srv.bellnexxia.net (tomts17.bellnexxia.net          [209.226.175.71]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA00821          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 12 Dec 2001 09:49:43 -0800
Received: from brian ([199.243.144.205]) by tomts17-srv.bellnexxia.net          (InterMail vM.4.01.03.16 201-229-121-116-20010115) with SMTP id          <20011212174908.TLHV23490.tomts17-srv.bellnexxia.net@brian> for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 12 Dec 2001 12:49:08 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="Windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <NFBBKADEMLBLIEKNLLEPOEGGCGAA.bfeeney@davinciproject.com>
Date:         Wed, 12 Dec 2001 12:49:24 -0600
Reply-To: "Brian Feeney" <bfeeney@DAVINCIPROJECT.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Brian Feeney" <bfeeney@DAVINCIPROJECT.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] GPS guided parachute delivery system
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <000b01c182f4$5ad00d60$0700a8c0@mkbs>

We've look at their parafoil for recovery of our rocket. It's a good system.

Cheers,
Brian
The da Vinci Project

-----Original Message-----
From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU]On
Behalf Of Russell McMahon
Sent: Wednesday, December 12, 2001 4:04 AM
To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
Subject: [AR] GPS guided parachute delivery system


A while ago people discussed real world guided parachute systems. I had seen
this but couldn't find the site.
I don;'t know if it is a real product but It LOOKS very real.
Numerous photos.
Glide ratio of 3.6:1 with no wind (15 miles range from 25,000 feet).
Multiple waypoints.


Strong Parachutes

        http://www.strongparachutes.com/home.html


Their "GPS Cargo Express", GPS guided  parachute cargo delivery system.


        http://www.strongparachutes.com/gpscargexp.html

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 14653 invoked from network); 12 Dec 2001 18:24:09 -0000
Received: from smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.105]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 12 Dec 2001 18:24:09 -0000
Received: (qmail 19143 invoked by uid 50005); 12 Dec 2001 18:23:53 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpy with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4175. . Clean. Processed in 0.958285 secs); 12 Dec 2001 18:23:53 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 12 Dec 2001 18:23:52 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA00812; Wed, 12 Dec 2001 09:48:28 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 100481 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 12 Dec 2001 17:46:58          +0000
Received: from tomts16-srv.bellnexxia.net (tomts16.bellnexxia.net          [209.226.175.4]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA00796          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 12 Dec 2001 09:46:58 -0800
Received: from brian ([199.243.144.205]) by tomts16-srv.bellnexxia.net          (InterMail vM.4.01.03.16 201-229-121-116-20010115) with SMTP id          <20011212174627.TLED27710.tomts16-srv.bellnexxia.net@brian> for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 12 Dec 2001 12:46:27 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <NFBBKADEMLBLIEKNLLEPKEGGCGAA.bfeeney@davinciproject.com>
Date:         Wed, 12 Dec 2001 12:46:42 -0600
Reply-To: "Brian Feeney" <bfeeney@DAVINCIPROJECT.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Brian Feeney" <bfeeney@DAVINCIPROJECT.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Da Vinci project update
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <20011208.014632.-828511.5.icantdecide@juno.com>

Hello all,

This is a few days beyond the thread but I still wanted to respond anyway.

I've remained silent on confirming any specific information on our engines,
strategies past and moving forward and for the most part won't be saying
much
else for competitive reasons. Any arrangements and relationships that we
have
with our suppliers in strategic hardware areas will have to remain
confidential
for those competitive reasons; and no there was no hijacking of print
material
involved and nor have we claimed they represent work done by us.

I'm usually pretty open about most aspects of the design and the project and
will
endeavour to answer any questions anyone may have. Thank you for your
queries.

Cheers for now,
Brian Feeney
The da Vinci Project


-----Original Message-----
From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU]On
Behalf Of James G Selin
Sent: Saturday, December 08, 2001 1:47 AM
To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
Subject: Re: [AR] DaVinci project update


On Fri, 7 Dec 2001 17:06:47 -0800 "Eric Claypool (ANI)"
<Ericc@aeronumerics.com> writes:
>   Well this IS the microcosm rocket. Go to the link below for the
> davinciproject and look at the pictures.. ANYONE recognize the RRS
> MTA?  The
> rocket test was done using the RRS Vertical Test Stand 2.. This
> certainly
> wasn't davinciproject and definitely was Microcosm...  Why would
> davinciproject hijack microcosm photos and claim they represent the
> work
> done by them?... Quite disturbing.
>
> Eric
>
> -- This is the RRS MTA Vertical Test Stand 2 with the Microcosm
> rocket
> mounted for testing. As far as I know as a RRS member nobody from
> Davinciproject has ever tested anything at the MTA. I was able to
> see this
> vehicle under contruction at Microcosm's shop before they tested it
> at the
> MTA..

Yeah the carbon fiber chambers from the photos were definately the same
ones at the Microcosm shop.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 4420 invoked from network); 12 Dec 2001 18:39:24 -0000
Received: from smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.105]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 12 Dec 2001 18:39:24 -0000
Received: (qmail 4422 invoked by uid 50005); 12 Dec 2001 18:39:09 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpy with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4175. . Clean. Processed in 1.311237 secs); 12 Dec 2001 18:39:09 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 12 Dec 2001 18:39:07 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA01007; Wed, 12 Dec 2001 10:22:06 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 100512 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 12 Dec 2001 18:20:03          +0000
Received: from mail.cac.net (mail.cac.net [209.44.14.13]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA00978 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed,          12 Dec 2001 10:20:00 -0800
Received: from jfackertcac (3639245913.mi.dial.hexcom.net [216.234.124.90]) by          mail.cac.net (8.11.3/8.11.3) with SMTP id fBCILYu49714; Wed, 12 Dec          2001 13:21:34 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from jfackert@cac.net)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook CWS, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0)
Importance: Normal
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <005701c1833a$eee659a0$5a7cead8@net>
Date:         Wed, 12 Dec 2001 13:12:26 -0500
Reply-To: <jfackert@cac.net>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jim Fackert" <jfackert@cac.net>
Subject:      Re: [AR] dry ice
Comments: To: Keith Soldavin <kas219@PSUALUM.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <5.1.0.14.2.20011211191023.00aa0428@mail.purespeed.com>

Try an ice cream company.  The old standby Washtenaw Dairy, favorite spot
for an after game little league team get together in Ann Arbor, is the best
source in the city... buy a pound or fifty.

Jim

-----Original Message-----
From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU]On
Behalf Of Keith Soldavin
Sent: Tuesday, December 11, 2001 7:13 PM
To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
Subject: [AR] dry ice


I'm looking for a supplier of dry ice in the northern Virginia area.  What
type of companies normally sells dry ice to ordinary people in small
quantities (< 5 lbs)?  Does anyone have a contact?

Thanks for your help.

keith

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 25096 invoked from network); 12 Dec 2001 20:54:48 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 12 Dec 2001 20:54:48 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 27590 invoked by uid 50005); 12 Dec 2001 20:54:38 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4175. . Clean. Processed in 0.749843 secs); 12 Dec 2001 20:54:38 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 12 Dec 2001 20:54:37 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA01515; Wed, 12 Dec 2001 12:24:31 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 100566 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 12 Dec 2001 20:23:02          +0000
Received: from bailey.dscga.com (bailey.neonym.net [198.78.11.130]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA01499 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 12 Dec 2001 12:23:00 -0800
Received: from bailey.dscga.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by bailey.dscga.com          (8.12.1/8.12.1) with ESMTP id fBCKIvij026947; Wed, 12 Dec 2001          15:18:57 -0500 (EST)
Received: (from michael@localhost) by bailey.dscga.com (8.12.1/8.12.1/Submit)          id fBCKIvcP026946; Wed, 12 Dec 2001 15:18:57 -0500 (EST)
References: <000b01c182f4$5ad00d60$0700a8c0@mkbs>            <NFBBKADEMLBLIEKNLLEPOEGGCGAA.bfeeney@davinciproject.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Disposition: inline
User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.22.1i
Message-ID:  <20011212151856.A26929@bailey.dscga.com>
Date:         Wed, 12 Dec 2001 15:18:57 -0500
Reply-To: "Michael Mealling" <michael@NEONYM.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Michael Mealling" <michael@NEONYM.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] GPS guided parachute delivery system
Comments: To: Brian Feeney <bfeeney@DAVINCIPROJECT.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <NFBBKADEMLBLIEKNLLEPOEGGCGAA.bfeeney@davinciproject.com>

On Wed, Dec 12, 2001 at 12:49:24PM -0600, Brian Feeney wrote:
> We've look at their parafoil for recovery of our rocket. It's a good system.

Can it be scaled down easily? I can't tell from the pictues what
the critical control components are...

-MM


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU]On
> Behalf Of Russell McMahon
> Sent: Wednesday, December 12, 2001 4:04 AM
> To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
> Subject: [AR] GPS guided parachute delivery system
>
>
> A while ago people discussed real world guided parachute systems. I had seen
> this but couldn't find the site.
> I don;'t know if it is a real product but It LOOKS very real.
> Numerous photos.
> Glide ratio of 3.6:1 with no wind (15 miles range from 25,000 feet).
> Multiple waypoints.
>
>
> Strong Parachutes
>
>         http://www.strongparachutes.com/home.html
>
>
> Their "GPS Cargo Express", GPS guided  parachute cargo delivery system.
>
>
>         http://www.strongparachutes.com/gpscargexp.html

--
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Michael Mealling        |      Vote Libertarian!       | urn:pin:1
michael@neonym.net      |                              | http://www.neonym.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 2138 invoked from network); 12 Dec 2001 22:34:23 -0000
Received: from smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.105]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 12 Dec 2001 22:34:23 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 25675 invoked by uid 50005); 12 Dec 2001 22:33:38 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpy with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4175. . Clean. Processed in 1.319923 secs); 12 Dec 2001 22:33:38 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 12 Dec 2001 22:33:36 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA01874; Wed, 12 Dec 2001 14:06:54 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 100602 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 12 Dec 2001 22:05:28          +0000
Received: from mail.aros.net (mail.aros.net [207.173.16.20]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA01855 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Wed,          12 Dec 2001 14:05:28 -0800
Received: from biomicro.com (cust-208-187-122-40.bbsc.net [208.187.122.40]) by          mail.aros.net (8.11.6/8.9.3) with ESMTP id fBCM5Rb53401 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Wed, 12 Dec 2001 15:05:27 -0700 (MST)
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.77 [en] (Win98; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3C17C4D7.6753A0CF@biomicro.com>
Date:         Wed, 12 Dec 2001 13:57:59 -0700
Reply-To: "Mark K. Spute" <mks@BIOMICRO.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Mark K. Spute" <mks@BIOMICRO.COM>
Subject:      [AR] Cinqo de Mayo Launch
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Rocketeers with launch vehicles wanted.

I'm putting together a launch for the 3rd and 4th of May, 2002.  The
purpose of this launch is to demonstrate to several county officials
what types of rockets would be commonly used at a launch site in the
western Utah desert.  These folks are very keen to open some kind of
launch range that could be used by rocketeers of all abilities from
model rocketeers all the way up to small commercial companies like
Microcosm, or Mr. Wickman and maybe even folks like Lockheed/Martin,
Boeing & Thiokol.

However, the idea is to start with the Am/Ex crowd and work up.  As a
result they want to see the kinds of activities that would be taking
place at an Am/Ex launch site.

Now the area is completely undeveloped.  You must be self suffucient as
far as your GSE goes.  I will try to get a portable launch tower out
here, and some tents for vehicle assembly and preparation as well as for
folks to sleep in.  There are no improvements whatsoever at this site.
Not even fenceposts.  No electricity.  No water.  Nothing.  It makes the
MTA look over developed.  So we will have to bring everything in.

I am applying for a 100,000 foot altitude waiver.  This is typical of
what I want to be able to fly out there, for starters at least.  What I
need is folks with various types of vehicles to come and launch.  I'm
looking for liquid bipropellants, solids, and hybrids of various kinds.
If you are interested in launching at a wide open site with good
altitude waivers, contact me off list please.

Thanks for your interest and support.


--
Mark K. Spute
Senior Research Engineer
BioMicro Systems Inc.
1.801.256.1906  (phone)
1.801.256.1901  (fax)

KD7IWE,  RRS, hopeful future Stolly owner

"It is difficult to say what is impossible, for the dream of yesterday
is the hope of today and the reality of tomorrow."
     Dr. Robert H. Goddard

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 11887 invoked from network); 12 Dec 2001 23:50:59 -0000
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 12 Dec 2001 23:50:59 -0000
Received: (qmail 11743 invoked by uid 50005); 12 Dec 2001 23:50:47 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4175. . Clean. Processed in 15.913174 secs); 12 Dec 2001 23:50:47 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 12 Dec 2001 23:50:24 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA02230; Wed, 12 Dec 2001 15:38:20 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 100659 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 12 Dec 2001 23:35:39          +0000
Received: from femail1.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail1.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.0.95.81]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA02206 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 12 Dec 2001 15:35:38 -0800
Received: from cx814151a ([24.14.55.118]) by femail1.sdc1.sfba.home.com          (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20 201-229-121-120-20010223) with SMTP id          <20011212233537.XNEN25880.femail1.sdc1.sfba.home.com@cx814151a> for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 12 Dec 2001 15:35:37 -0800
References:  <005701c1833a$eee659a0$5a7cead8@net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4807.1700
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <013301c18365$9c5164c0$0a01a8c0@cx814151a>
Date:         Wed, 12 Dec 2001 17:34:57 -0600
Reply-To: "John Bolene" <jbolene@HOME.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Bolene" <jbolene@HOME.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] dry ice
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Just remembered.
I think I would need the current memory storage downloaded into a completely
new husk, maybe it could remember better and would be  more than a few years
younger.


Anyway, try a Coke-Cola bottling plant.  We got it there many years ago.

John Bolene
Tripoli Oklahoma Prefect and webmaster
Tripoli Oklahoma Web page -> http://members.home.com/tripoli-oklahoma/



----- Original Message -----
From: "Jim Fackert" <jfackert@cac.net>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Wednesday, December 12, 2001 12:12 PM
Subject: Re: [AR] dry ice


> Try an ice cream company.  The old standby Washtenaw Dairy, favorite spot
> for an after game little league team get together in Ann Arbor, is the
best
> source in the city... buy a pound or fifty.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 28004 invoked from network); 13 Dec 2001 01:48:31 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 13 Dec 2001 01:48:31 -0000
Received: (qmail 6194 invoked by uid 50005); 13 Dec 2001 01:48:19 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4175. . Clean. Processed in 6.447515 secs); 13 Dec 2001 01:48:19 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 13 Dec 2001 01:48:11 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA02704; Wed, 12 Dec 2001 17:45:54 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 100716 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 13 Dec 2001 01:45:26          +0000
Received: from wrench.toolcity.net (root@wrench.toolcity.net [208.0.188.2]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA02688 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 12 Dec 2001 17:45:25 -0800
Received: from [63.169.102.235]          (dap-63-169-102-235.meadville-tnt-1.pa.toolcity.net [63.169.102.235])          by wrench.toolcity.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id UAA14529; Wed, 12          Dec 2001 20:45:19 -0500 (EST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <v01510101b83dc657084a@[63.169.102.235]>
Date:         Wed, 12 Dec 2001 20:48:01 -0600
Reply-To: "al bradley" <abradley@TOOLCITY.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "al bradley" <abradley@TOOLCITY.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] GPS guided parachute delivery system
Comments: To: Jeff Grady <jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

>A few years ago, while actively flying R/C planes, we had a guy that flew a
>large bi-plane with a G.I. Joe sitting in the pilot seat. He had one
>transmitter and a buddy had another. The guy flying the bi-plane to it up a
>few hundred feet, then inverted it. The G.I. Joe fell out and a rectangular
>airfoil chute deployed. That was when I noticed the other guy working the
>transmitter sticks. The G.I. Joe had a receiver and small servo embedded
>into his back. The servo would pull one way or the other on the chute lines
>and guided the little dude right down in front of the guy controlling him.
>

Wot! No RC Ejection Seat?

<grinning>
al bradley

------------------------------------------------------------------
Can you live Life with this?: "Unless there is a law, an agreement, or a
long-standing custom, No one `Deserves' Anything -- Either Good or Bad!"

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 10755 invoked from network); 13 Dec 2001 02:13:45 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 13 Dec 2001 02:13:45 -0000
Received: (qmail 3844 invoked by uid 50005); 13 Dec 2001 02:13:33 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4175. . Clean. Processed in 3.316737 secs); 13 Dec 2001 02:13:33 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 13 Dec 2001 02:13:30 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA02807; Wed, 12 Dec 2001 18:10:11 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 100733 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 13 Dec 2001 02:10:09          +0000
Received: from imo-d09.mx.aol.com (imo-d09.mx.aol.com [205.188.157.41]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA02793 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Wed, 12 Dec 2001 18:10:08 -0800
Received: from Sociald84@aol.com by imo-d09.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v31_r1.9.) id          w.158.5ac638a (4464) for <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Wed, 12 Dec 2001          21:09:27 -0500 (EST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0E72_01C56B69.5C463410"
X-Mailer: AOL 6.0 for Windows US sub 10540
Message-ID:  <158.5ac638a.294967d7@aol.com>
Date:         Wed, 12 Dec 2001 21:09:27 EST
Reply-To: <Sociald84@AOL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <Sociald84@AOL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] dry ice
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0E72_01C56B69.5C463410
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Most big grocery stores sell dry ice.

Mark

------=_NextPart_000_0E72_01C56B69.5C463410
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<HTML><FONT FACE=arial,helvetica><FONT  SIZE=2>Most big grocery stores sell dry ice.
<BR>
<BR>Mark</FONT></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0E72_01C56B69.5C463410--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 27255 invoked from network); 13 Dec 2001 02:39:10 -0000
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 13 Dec 2001 02:39:10 -0000
Received: (qmail 27188 invoked by uid 50005); 13 Dec 2001 02:39:01 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4175. . Clean. Processed in 0.707055 secs); 13 Dec 2001 02:39:01 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 13 Dec 2001 02:39:00 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA02925; Wed, 12 Dec 2001 18:37:41 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 100756 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 13 Dec 2001 02:37:38          +0000
Received: from smtprelay6.dc2.adelphia.net (smtprelay6.dc2.adelphia.net          [64.8.50.38]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA02911 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 12 Dec 2001 18:37:37 -0800
Received: from jlgrady ([24.53.101.238]) by smtprelay6.dc2.adelphia.net          (Netscape Messaging Server 4.15) with SMTP id GO9GLT00.96W for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 12 Dec 2001 21:37:05 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook CWS, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <000001c1837f$51b5d1c0$0200a8c0@cmngga.adelphia.net>
Date:         Wed, 12 Dec 2001 21:38:58 -0500
Reply-To: "Jeff Grady" <jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jeff Grady" <jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] GPS guided parachute delivery system
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <v01510101b83dc657084a@[63.169.102.235]>

Now there's a good use for those mini-maxx (or is it micro-maxx) motors!!
Receiver and servo in the back & mighty-maxx up the kazoo... That would
fire-em right outta there...

-----Original Message-----
From: al bradley [mailto:abradley@toolcity.net]
Sent: Wednesday, December 12, 2001 9:48 PM
To: Jeff Grady
Cc: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
Subject: Re: [AR] GPS guided parachute delivery system


>A few years ago, while actively flying R/C planes, we had a guy that flew a
>large bi-plane with a G.I. Joe sitting in the pilot seat. He had one
>transmitter and a buddy had another. The guy flying the bi-plane to it up a
>few hundred feet, then inverted it. The G.I. Joe fell out and a rectangular
>airfoil chute deployed. That was when I noticed the other guy working the
>transmitter sticks. The G.I. Joe had a receiver and small servo embedded
>into his back. The servo would pull one way or the other on the chute lines
>and guided the little dude right down in front of the guy controlling him.
>

Wot! No RC Ejection Seat?

<grinning>
al bradley

------------------------------------------------------------------
Can you live Life with this?: "Unless there is a law, an agreement, or a
long-standing custom, No one `Deserves' Anything -- Either Good or Bad!"

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 320 invoked from network); 13 Dec 2001 02:47:40 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 13 Dec 2001 02:47:40 -0000
Received: (qmail 9723 invoked by uid 50005); 13 Dec 2001 02:47:31 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4175. . Clean. Processed in 0.989264 secs); 13 Dec 2001 02:47:31 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 13 Dec 2001 02:47:29 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA02993; Wed, 12 Dec 2001 18:46:13 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 100771 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 13 Dec 2001 02:46:10          +0000
Received: from wrench.toolcity.net (root@wrench.toolcity.net [208.0.188.2]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA02979 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 12 Dec 2001 18:46:10 -0800
Received: from [63.169.102.235]          (dap-208-22-189-5.meadville-tnt-0.pa.toolcity.net [208.22.189.5]) by          wrench.toolcity.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id VAA06333; Wed, 12 Dec          2001 21:45:04 -0500 (EST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <v01510104b83dd09e7258@[63.169.102.235]>
Date:         Wed, 12 Dec 2001 21:47:45 -0600
Reply-To: "al bradley" <abradley@TOOLCITY.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "al bradley" <abradley@TOOLCITY.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] 1 Digital vs.Non-digital test stand
Comments: To: Henry Spencer <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

I asked:
>> OK, these opinions are probably valid. So how does the experimenter only
>> familiar with analogue circuits find out how to build a digital group
>> capable of doing this? On what is the data stored? On what is it read out?
>> Have to connect the storage unit to my home computer -- how? What software
>> will I need? Anyone know of a tutorial geared to all this for the digital
>> dumbhead?
>--------------

And Henry responded:
>Fortunately, there is no great need for you to get involved in digital
>circuitry, unless your requirements are unusual.  The necessary hardware
>and software can now be had quite cheaply as a package deal, assuming you
>already have a computer available.  There are lots of old-style analog
>engineers who suddenly find themselves needing to do a bit of data
>acquisition, and plenty of data-acquisition companies which are anxious to
>get a foot in the door by helping to solve that problem.
>
>For example, B&B Electronics (www.bb-elec.com) sells a little box which
>has a serial connector on one end and a bunch of analog inputs on the
>other end.  Connect the first end to a serial port with a normal serial
>cable, connect the other end to your analog electronics, supply power, and
>you've got a multi-channel data-acquisition system.  It comes with a CDROM
>of software, which I haven't explored because it's for the wrong operating
>system (I don't run Windows).
>
>The one modest gotcha in this is that it assumes that your test setup is
>within easy reach of AC power.  If not, the computer has to be a laptop or
>palmtop so it can run without a power cord, and you need battery power for
>the data-acquisition box too.
>
>You can get data-acquisition boxes which have built-in storage, and can be
>programmed with things like sampling rates etc., and then connected to a
>computer later to dump all the data.  But they are more expensive, and for
>short tests out in the field, quite probably you would be better off with
>a secondhand laptop.  (No, you do not need gigahertz processors and
>multimedia video to do simple data acquisition, so something two or three
>generations behind the current leading edge -- probably available quite
>cheaply -- should do a fine job.)
---------------
Just to show how dumb I am about digital this is like my asking someone how
to replace the clutch in my truck. Their response, "First open up a
Universal Joint".
And I say, "Uh, what's a Universal Joint?"

Now, fortunately, if I am serious about that, and if I have to, I can
procure a Chilton manual that breaks it down pretty well on how to get to
and do the clutch. But where do I find anything that elemental to lead me
step by step into and through enough terminologies and examples such as I
wondered about in my initial question?

still scratching my head,   :-)
al bradley

------------------------------------------------------------------
Can you live Life with this?: "Unless there is a law, an agreement, or a
long-standing custom, No one `Deserves' Anything -- Either Good or Bad!"

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 8635 invoked from network); 13 Dec 2001 04:22:31 -0000
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 13 Dec 2001 04:22:31 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 29394 invoked by uid 50005); 13 Dec 2001 04:22:21 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4175. . Clean. Processed in 8.600558 secs); 13 Dec 2001 04:22:21 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 13 Dec 2001 04:22:08 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA03579; Wed, 12 Dec 2001 20:20:36 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 100872 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 13 Dec 2001 04:20:30          +0000
Received: from grucom2.gru.net (grucom2.gru.net [209.251.129.7]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA03565 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed,          12 Dec 2001 20:20:29 -0800
Received: from [209.251.150.247] by grucom2.sfcc.net (NTMail          7.00.0022/NU4112.00.db1c8a4b) with ESMTP id jtgzqaaa for          AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 12 Dec 2001 23:20:24 -0500
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (Win95; I)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <v01510104b83dd09e7258@[63.169.102.235]>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3C182C83.D45F3C18@sfcc.net>
Date:         Wed, 12 Dec 2001 23:20:19 -0500
Reply-To: "James Yawn" <jyawn@SFCC.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "James Yawn" <jyawn@SFCC.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] 1 Digital vs.Non-digital test stand
Comments: To: al bradley <abradley@TOOLCITY.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

still scratching my head,   :-)
al bradley


I am at scratching too.  I have acquired a little DAQ equipment and don't quite
know what to do with it.

I bought the cute little Dataq 194 data-acquisiton board, astonished that it only
cost $14. postpaid.  It's been a lot of fun hooking it to various electrical
things and seeing the waves, bumps, and grunches on the screen, and recording
meaningless data to disk files.

So I ordered some strain gauges from Omega (KFG-5-120-C1-11L1M2R), intending to
create a load cell according to Richard Nakka's excellent
spreadsheet-instructions.  I ruined one gauge immediately.  Good thing they sell
them in lots of 10.   I super-glued another one to a hefty but somewhat flexible
steel bar.  Well, OK,  it's an old lawn-mower blade.  But I did grind the rust
off and polish a spot before gluing on the gauge.

When I hook this strain gauge to the Dataq unit, I get no reading whatsoever.
Even when the bar is flexed, and even when a voltage (AA battery) is introduced
into the circuit.

So what am I missing?  Should there be an amplifier between the gauge and the DAQ
unit?  Did I ruin another gauge?  Do I really need to buy the $100 Omega glue kit
for these strain gauges?  Did I save too much money?

Too many questions.  I would appreciate any answers.

Sincerely,
Jimmy Yawn
jyawn@sfcc.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 12533 invoked from network); 13 Dec 2001 04:52:58 -0000
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 13 Dec 2001 04:52:58 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 7856 invoked by uid 50005); 13 Dec 2001 04:52:49 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4175. . Clean. Processed in 2.764562 secs); 13 Dec 2001 04:52:49 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 13 Dec 2001 04:52:45 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA03706; Wed, 12 Dec 2001 20:51:28 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 100883 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 13 Dec 2001 04:51:25          +0000
Received: from albatross.prod.itd.earthlink.net          (albatross.mail.pas.earthlink.net [207.217.120.120]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA03657 for <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Wed,          12 Dec 2001 20:41:24 -0800
Received: from dialup-209.245.130.105.dial1.sanjose1.level3.net          ([209.245.130.105] helo=earthlink.net) by          albatross.prod.itd.earthlink.net with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id          16ENgR-0004jr-00; Wed, 12 Dec 2001 20:41:24 -0800
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.75 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.16-22 i686)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <v01510104b83dd09e7258@[63.169.102.235]>            <3C182C83.D45F3C18@sfcc.net>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3C183192.9F2A5294@earthlink.net>
Date:         Wed, 12 Dec 2001 20:41:54 -0800
Reply-To: "David Weinshenker" <daze39@EARTHLINK.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "David Weinshenker" <daze39@EARTHLINK.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] 1 Digital vs.Non-digital test stand
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

James Yawn wrote:
> Should there be an amplifier between
> the gauge and the DAQ unit?

Yes, most likely - strain gage sensors typically have outputs
on the order of a few millivolts per volt of excitation, while
your A-to-D system may have an input voltage range of 0-5 volts
or 0-10 volts. (Check the spec sheets of the devices you're
trying to connect to each other for actual figures.)

The device you're looking for is called an "instrumentation
amplifier", which senses the small voltage differences across
the outputs of strain-gage transducers and amplifies it to
convenient levels for data conversion. They range from
inexpensive IC chips requiring the user to connect a few
resistors to establish the desired gain range to rack-mounted
laboratory instruments with a series of pre-calibrated
gain ranges selectable by a rotary switch.

-dave w

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 29717 invoked from network); 13 Dec 2001 05:19:01 -0000
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 13 Dec 2001 05:19:01 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 27827 invoked by uid 50005); 13 Dec 2001 05:18:52 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4175. . Clean. Processed in 0.357997 secs); 13 Dec 2001 05:18:52 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 13 Dec 2001 05:18:52 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA03888; Wed, 12 Dec 2001 21:16:16 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 100914 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 13 Dec 2001 05:16:09          +0000
Received: from mail005.syd.optusnet.com.au (mail005.syd.optusnet.com.au          [203.2.75.229]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA03874          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 12 Dec 2001 21:16:08 -0800
Received: from webmail02.syd.optusnet.com.au (webmail02.syd.optusnet.com.au          [203.2.75.235]) by mail005.syd.optusnet.com.au (8.11.1/8.11.1) with          ESMTP id fBD5FOO22903; Thu, 13 Dec 2001 16:15:24 +1100
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: MIME-tools 5.411 (Entity 5.404)
Received: from  [209.36.247.3] as user strudwicke@optusnet.com.au by          webmail.optusnet.com.au with HTTP;
Message-ID:  <200112130515.fBD5FOO22903@mail005.syd.optusnet.com.au>
Date:         Thu, 13 Dec 2001 16:15:14 +1100
Reply-To: "Craig Strudwicke" <strudwicke@OPTUSNET.COM.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Craig Strudwicke" <strudwicke@OPTUSNET.COM.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] 1 Digital vs.Non-digital test stand
Comments: To: James Yawn <jyawn@SFCC.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

>From what I have been told, you really can't take any shortcuts when bonding
these strainguages to the material being measured. Sounds like you do need to
buy the expensive glue !

Also, are you supplying an excitation voltage to the strain gauge ? The
wheatstone bridge design requires an excitation voltage such that a measurable
voltage is produced at the output. Otherwise, you won't measure much at all !

Craig

Another idea I'm playing with is to use a commerically available pressure
transducer and a hyraulic piston & cylinder to measure force. I know there will be
some hysterisis but I reckon I can live with it if the thrust levels are high enough.


> James Yawn <jyawn@SFCC.NET> wrote:
>
> still scratching my head,   :-)
> al bradley
>
>
> I am at scratching too.  I have acquired a little DAQ equipment and
> don't quite
> know what to do with it.
>
> I bought the cute little Dataq 194 data-acquisiton board, astonished
> that it only
> cost $14. postpaid.  It's been a lot of fun hooking it to various
> electrical
> things and seeing the waves, bumps, and grunches on the screen, and
> recording
> meaningless data to disk files.
>
> So I ordered some strain gauges from Omega (KFG-5-120-C1-11L1M2R),
> intending to
> create a load cell according to Richard Nakka's excellent
> spreadsheet-instructions.  I ruined one gauge immediately.  Good
> thing they sell
> them in lots of 10.   I super-glued another one to a hefty but
> somewhat flexible
> steel bar.  Well, OK,  it's an old lawn-mower blade.  But I did grind
> the rust
> off and polish a spot before gluing on the gauge.
>
> When I hook this strain gauge to the Dataq unit, I get no reading
> whatsoever.
> Even when the bar is flexed, and even when a voltage (AA battery) is
> introduced
> into the circuit.
>
> So what am I missing?  Should there be an amplifier between the gauge
> and the DAQ
> unit?  Did I ruin another gauge?  Do I really need to buy the $100
> Omega glue kit
> for these strain gauges?  Did I save too much money?
>
> Too many questions.  I would appreciate any answers.
>
> Sincerely,
> Jimmy Yawn
> jyawn@sfcc.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 3023 invoked from network); 13 Dec 2001 14:52:01 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpv.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.110]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 13 Dec 2001 14:52:01 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 9754 invoked by uid 50005); 12 Dec 2001 23:35:56 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpv with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4175. . Clean. Processed in 3.465115 secs); 12 Dec 2001 23:35:56 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpv.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 12 Dec 2001 23:35:50 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA02025; Wed, 12 Dec 2001 14:51:28 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 100624 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 12 Dec 2001 22:48:43          +0000
Received: from adobe.com (smtp-relay-1.adobe.com [192.150.11.1]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA02001 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed,          12 Dec 2001 14:48:43 -0800
Received: from inner-relay-2.corp.adobe.com ([153.32.1.52]) by adobe.com          (1.0.0/8.11.4) with ESMTP id fBCMnLG00793 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>;          Wed, 12 Dec 2001 14:49:21 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mailsj-v1.corp.adobe.com (mailsj-dev.corp.adobe.com          [153.32.1.192]) by inner-relay-2.corp.adobe.com (8.11.4/8.11.4) with          ESMTP id fBCMlB100158 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 12 Dec 2001          14:47:11 -0800 (PST)
Received: from sronald.earthlink.net ([153.32.63.111]) by          mailsj-v1.corp.adobe.com (Netscape Messaging Server 4.15 v1 Jul 11          2001 16:32:57) with ESMTP id GO960700.RVZ; Wed, 12 Dec 2001 14:48:07          -0800
X-Sender: forkbomb@mail.earthlink.net
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <5.1.0.14.0.20011212145336.03280ec0@mail.earthlink.net>
Date:         Wed, 12 Dec 2001 14:53:47 -0800
Reply-To: "Pierce Nichols" <forkbomb@EARTHLINK.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Pierce Nichols" <forkbomb@EARTHLINK.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Cinqo de Mayo Launch
Comments: To: "Mark K. Spute" <mks@BIOMICRO.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <3C17C4D7.6753A0CF@biomicro.com>

         Where exactly is this place?

         -p

At 01:57 PM 12/12/01 -0700, Mark K. Spute wrote:
>Rocketeers with launch vehicles wanted.
>
>I'm putting together a launch for the 3rd and 4th of May, 2002.  The
>purpose of this launch is to demonstrate to several county officials
>what types of rockets would be commonly used at a launch site in the
>western Utah desert.  These folks are very keen to open some kind of
>launch range that could be used by rocketeers of all abilities from
>model rocketeers all the way up to small commercial companies like
>Microcosm, or Mr. Wickman and maybe even folks like Lockheed/Martin,
>Boeing & Thiokol.
>
>However, the idea is to start with the Am/Ex crowd and work up.  As a
>result they want to see the kinds of activities that would be taking
>place at an Am/Ex launch site.
>
>Now the area is completely undeveloped.  You must be self suffucient as
>far as your GSE goes.  I will try to get a portable launch tower out
>here, and some tents for vehicle assembly and preparation as well as for
>folks to sleep in.  There are no improvements whatsoever at this site.
>Not even fenceposts.  No electricity.  No water.  Nothing.  It makes the
>MTA look over developed.  So we will have to bring everything in.
>
>I am applying for a 100,000 foot altitude waiver.  This is typical of
>what I want to be able to fly out there, for starters at least.  What I
>need is folks with various types of vehicles to come and launch.  I'm
>looking for liquid bipropellants, solids, and hybrids of various kinds.
>If you are interested in launching at a wide open site with good
>altitude waivers, contact me off list please.
>
>Thanks for your interest and support.
>
>
>--
>Mark K. Spute
>Senior Research Engineer
>BioMicro Systems Inc.
>1.801.256.1906  (phone)
>1.801.256.1901  (fax)
>
>KD7IWE,  RRS, hopeful future Stolly owner
>
>"It is difficult to say what is impossible, for the dream of yesterday
>is the hope of today and the reality of tomorrow."
>      Dr. Robert H. Goddard

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 28519 invoked from network); 13 Dec 2001 14:58:17 -0000
Received: from smtpv.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.110]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 13 Dec 2001 14:58:17 -0000
Received: (qmail 14454 invoked by uid 50005); 12 Dec 2001 23:40:33 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpv with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4175. . Clean. Processed in 6.15601 secs); 12 Dec 2001 23:40:33 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpv.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 12 Dec 2001 23:40:26 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA02184; Wed, 12 Dec 2001 15:32:48 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 100648 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 12 Dec 2001 23:30:01          +0000
Received: from smtprelay6.dc2.adelphia.net (smtprelay6.dc2.adelphia.net          [64.8.50.38]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA02159 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 12 Dec 2001 15:30:00 -0800
Received: from jlgrady ([24.53.101.238]) by smtprelay6.dc2.adelphia.net          (Netscape Messaging Server 4.15) with SMTP id GO97VP00.TBZ; Wed, 12          Dec 2001 18:28:37 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="Windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook CWS, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <000201c18364$ed2be650$0200a8c0@cmngga.adelphia.net>
Date:         Wed, 12 Dec 2001 18:30:02 -0500
Reply-To: "Jeff Grady" <jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jeff Grady" <jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] GPS guided parachute delivery system
Comments: To: Russell McMahon <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <000b01c182f4$5ad00d60$0700a8c0@mkbs>

A few years ago, while actively flying R/C planes, we had a guy that flew a
large bi-plane with a G.I. Joe sitting in the pilot seat. He had one
transmitter and a buddy had another. The guy flying the bi-plane to it up a
few hundred feet, then inverted it. The G.I. Joe fell out and a rectangular
airfoil chute deployed. That was when I noticed the other guy working the
transmitter sticks. The G.I. Joe had a receiver and small servo embedded
into his back. The servo would pull one way or the other on the chute lines
and guided the little dude right down in front of the guy controlling him.

I still have all my R/C stuff and have considered using this idea to allow
me to launch to higher altitudes in the limited fields I have available
around here. Might employ a high visibility streamer on the back side of the
airfoil to show it's direction from high altitude...

Jeff

-----Original Message-----
From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@itc.uci.edu]On
Behalf Of Russell McMahon
Sent: Wednesday, December 12, 2001 5:04 AM
To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
Subject: [AR] GPS guided parachute delivery system


A while ago people discussed real world guided parachute systems. I had seen
this but couldn't find the site.
I don;'t know if it is a real product but It LOOKS very real.
Numerous photos.
Glide ratio of 3.6:1 with no wind (15 miles range from 25,000 feet).
Multiple waypoints.


Strong Parachutes

        http://www.strongparachutes.com/home.html


Their "GPS Cargo Express", GPS guided  parachute cargo delivery system.


        http://www.strongparachutes.com/gpscargexp.html

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 3723 invoked from network); 13 Dec 2001 19:00:51 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 13 Dec 2001 19:00:51 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 4644 invoked by uid 50005); 13 Dec 2001 19:00:39 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4175. . Clean. Processed in 5.896536 secs); 13 Dec 2001 19:00:39 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 13 Dec 2001 19:00:32 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA06222; Thu, 13 Dec 2001 10:40:15 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 101060 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 13 Dec 2001 18:40:11          +0000
Received: from adobe.com (smtp-relay-1.adobe.com [192.150.11.1]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA06208 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu,          13 Dec 2001 10:40:11 -0800
Received: from inner-relay-1.corp.adobe.com ([153.32.1.51]) by adobe.com          (1.0.0/8.11.4) with ESMTP id fBDIeoG18853 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>;          Thu, 13 Dec 2001 10:40:50 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mailsj-v1.corp.adobe.com (mailsj-dev.corp.adobe.com          [153.32.1.192]) by inner-relay-1.corp.adobe.com (8.11.4/8.11.4) with          ESMTP id fBDIdsS02378 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 13 Dec 2001          10:39:54 -0800 (PST)
Received: from sronald.earthlink.net ([153.32.63.111]) by          mailsj-v1.corp.adobe.com (Netscape Messaging Server 4.15 v1 Jul 11          2001 16:32:57) with ESMTP id GOAP5Z00.C37; Thu, 13 Dec 2001 10:39:35          -0800
X-Sender: forkbomb@mail.earthlink.net
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
References: <OF39FF5B6C.4102BD93-ON87256B21.00585E3E@mtroyal.ab.ca>            <a0510031bb83e909b67dc@[63.24.225.213]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <5.1.0.14.0.20011213104141.00b04260@mail.earthlink.net>
Date:         Thu, 13 Dec 2001 10:45:16 -0800
Reply-To: "Pierce Nichols" <forkbomb@EARTHLINK.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Pierce Nichols" <forkbomb@EARTHLINK.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Procedures needed
Comments: To: wamex@pad17.com
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <3C18D7E4.1CC9D49D@biomicro.com>

At 09:31 AM 12/13/01 -0700, Mark K. Spute wrote:
>I apologize for the cross post, but I think Jerry has hit on something
>here and I wanted the arocket folks to have a shot at this too.
>
>I think we need someone or someones to write a program that can be placed
>in the public domain to calculate 3 sigma dispersion patterns.  The FAA
>mandates it for launch permits, but does not (to my knowledge) tell you
>where you may have such an analysis done.  One assumes that some
>government contractor somewhere will do it for you for some nominal sum,
>followed by lots of zeros.  It amounts to government mandated support of
>the big aerospace industries, a fact undoubtedly not lost on the
>industry's well paid lobbiests.  We need to short circuit this attempt to
>monopolize the launch industry by a writing some very good, public domain
>software.
>
>Unfortunately, my programming skills are rudimentary at best.


         The programming is probably pretty simple -- the complexity is in
developing the algorithm for calculating the dispersion pattern. Anyone
know where there is some published information on how to do this? That is
where I would start. I believe that there is some information on that on
the AST site.

         -p

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 9757 invoked from network); 13 Dec 2001 19:02:18 -0000
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 13 Dec 2001 19:02:18 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 6445 invoked by uid 50005); 13 Dec 2001 19:02:07 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4175. . Clean. Processed in 3.787411 secs); 13 Dec 2001 19:02:07 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 13 Dec 2001 19:02:02 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA06020; Thu, 13 Dec 2001 09:52:23 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 101048 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 13 Dec 2001 17:52:14          +0000
Received: from mail.aros.net (mail.aros.net [207.173.16.20]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA06006 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Thu,          13 Dec 2001 09:52:13 -0800
Received: from biomicro.com (cust-208-187-122-40.bbsc.net [208.187.122.40]) by          mail.aros.net (8.11.6/8.9.3) with ESMTP id fBDHq9Z99896; Thu, 13 Dec          2001 10:52:09 -0700 (MST)
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.77 [en] (Win98; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <OF39FF5B6C.4102BD93-ON87256B21.00585E3E@mtroyal.ab.ca>            <a0510031bb83e909b67dc@[63.24.225.213]>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3C18D7E4.1CC9D49D@biomicro.com>
Date:         Thu, 13 Dec 2001 09:31:32 -0700
Reply-To: "Mark K. Spute" <mks@BIOMICRO.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Mark K. Spute" <mks@BIOMICRO.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Procedures needed
Comments: To: wamex@pad17.com
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

I apologize for the cross post, but I think Jerry has hit on something
here and I wanted the arocket folks to have a shot at this too.

I think we need someone or someones to write a program that can be placed
in the public domain to calculate 3 sigma dispersion patterns.  The FAA
mandates it for launch permits, but does not (to my knowledge) tell you
where you may have such an analysis done.  One assumes that some
government contractor somewhere will do it for you for some nominal sum,
followed by lots of zeros.  It amounts to government mandated support of
the big aerospace industries, a fact undoubtedly not lost on the
industry's well paid lobbiests.  We need to short circuit this attempt to
monopolize the launch industry by a writing some very good, public domain
software.

Unfortunately, my programming skills are rudimentary at best.

Anyone feel up to the job?


Jerry Irvine wrote:

> In the short term one of the leading causes of long launch
> applications is the need to calculate 3 sigma dispersion for the
> rocket, impact hazard analysis and other such calculation and
> statistical intense issues.
>
> One of the efforts should be to create a facility or program to
> calculate these for club member launches so launch permits can
> actually happen in less than 3 years.

[snip]

--
Mark K. Spute
Senior Research Engineer
BioMicro Systems Inc.
1.801.256.1906  (phone)
1.801.256.1901  (fax)

KD7IWE,  RRS, hopeful future Stolly owner

"It is difficult to say what is impossible, for the dream of yesterday is
the hope of today and the reality of tomorrow."
     Dr. Robert H. Goddard

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 4195 invoked from network); 13 Dec 2001 19:58:21 -0000
Received: from smtpv.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.110]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 13 Dec 2001 19:58:21 -0000
Received: (qmail 32110 invoked by uid 50005); 13 Dec 2001 02:45:45 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpv with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4175. . Clean. Processed in 6.701306 secs); 13 Dec 2001 02:45:45 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpv.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 13 Dec 2001 02:45:36 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA03044; Wed, 12 Dec 2001 18:51:03 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 100783 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 13 Dec 2001 02:51:01          +0000
Received: from smtprelay8.dc2.adelphia.net (smtprelay8.dc2.adelphia.net          [64.8.50.40]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA03030 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 12 Dec 2001 18:51:01 -0800
Received: from jlgrady ([24.53.101.238]) by smtprelay8.dc2.adelphia.net          (Netscape Messaging Server 4.15) with SMTP id GO9GXQ00.N5E for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 12 Dec 2001 21:44:14 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook CWS, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <000301c18380$51eb9250$0200a8c0@cmngga.adelphia.net>
Date:         Wed, 12 Dec 2001 21:46:09 -0500
Reply-To: "Jeff Grady" <jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jeff Grady" <jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] GPS guided parachute delivery system
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <v01510101b83dc657084a@[63.169.102.235]>

Has anyone used a GPS + flight computer with servo moveable fin tabs to get
one to fly perfectly straight up to counter slight off the rod launch
angles, wind cocking and upper winds?

Also, does anyone have knowledge of any flight computers or altimeters that
are or will be using flash cards to store programs/flight data?

Jeff

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 2112 invoked from network); 13 Dec 2001 20:34:48 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 13 Dec 2001 20:34:48 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 19431 invoked by uid 50005); 13 Dec 2001 20:34:39 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4175. . Clean. Processed in 0.990962 secs); 13 Dec 2001 20:34:39 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 13 Dec 2001 20:34:38 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA06399; Thu, 13 Dec 2001 11:09:58 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 101085 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 13 Dec 2001 19:09:52          +0000
Received: from po4.glue.umd.edu (po4.glue.umd.edu [128.8.10.124]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA06385 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 13 Dec 2001 11:09:52 -0800
Received: from z.glue.umd.edu (IDENT:root@z.glue.umd.edu [128.8.10.71]) by          po4.glue.umd.edu (8.10.1/8.10.1) with ESMTP id fBDJ9pB28130 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 13 Dec 2001 14:09:51 -0500 (EST)
Received: from z.glue.umd.edu (IDENT:sendmail@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by          z.glue.umd.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id OAA12880 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 13 Dec 2001 14:09:50 -0500 (EST)
Received: from localhost (acase@localhost) by z.glue.umd.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with          ESMTP id OAA12868 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 13 Dec 2001          14:09:50 -0500 (EST)
X-Authentication-Warning: z.glue.umd.edu: acase owned process doing -bs
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.GSO.4.21.0112131401450.11763-100000@z.glue.umd.edu>
Date:         Thu, 13 Dec 2001 14:09:50 -0500
Reply-To: "Andrew Case" <acase@GLUE.UMD.EDU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Andrew Case" <acase@GLUE.UMD.EDU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] 1 Digital vs.Non-digital test stand
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <3C1838EC.39F840C7@biomicro.com>

On Wed, 12 Dec 2001, Mark K. Spute wrote:

> Next, get a really good digital electronics cookbook.
> The best one I have ever seen or read is "The Art of Electronics"
> by Horowitz and Hill.

I second this recommendation. H&H is an excellent text, both
for learning and for reference.

Also the suggestion to get the Omega handbooks - it's virtually
certain that the Omega handbooks will include exactly the circuit
you need, and if it's not obvious how it works, H&H will help
you understand it.

......Andrew

Andrew Case                             |
acase@plasma.umd.edu                    |
Institute for Plasma Research           |
University of Maryland, College Park    |

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 4445 invoked from network); 13 Dec 2001 23:35:14 -0000
Received: from smtpv.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.110]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 13 Dec 2001 23:35:14 -0000
Received: (qmail 26086 invoked by uid 50005); 13 Dec 2001 05:54:36 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpv with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4175. . Clean. Processed in 3.651782 secs); 13 Dec 2001 05:54:36 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpv.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 13 Dec 2001 05:54:31 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA04099; Wed, 12 Dec 2001 21:59:41 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 100960 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 13 Dec 2001 05:58:13          +0000
Received: from Blastzone.com (consumersinterest.com [207.195.143.118] (may be          forged)) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA04079 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 12 Dec 2001 21:58:12 -0800
Received: from greg [64.24.215.54] by Blastzone.com with ESMTP (SMTPD32-6.04)          id A7FFF340034; Wed, 12 Dec 2001 22:17:35 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook, Build 10.0.2627
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <000201c1839b$19ce13f0$580a0a0a@greg>
Date:         Wed, 12 Dec 2001 21:57:50 -0800
Reply-To: "Greg Deputy" <greg@BLASTZONE.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Greg Deputy" <greg@BLASTZONE.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] 1 Digital vs.Non-digital test stand
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <3C183192.9F2A5294@earthlink.net>

And an instrumentation amp can be set up for next to nothing by someone
with only minimal electronics skills.  Take me for example.  Using the
instructions in Mcreary's book (good book, get it) and some help from
those on this list I was able to use an amp IC I got from texas
instruments for free, just requested a sample.  I think they're around
$20 if you buy them.  I got the Dataq unit for free when they were doing
that promotion a year or so back.  I cant solder to save my life, but
managed to get the amp set up and I can now collect thrust data.
Working on getting the pressure transducer set up next.  Got that on
ebay for $40...

It can be done, on a budget, and without a PhD in electronics.

-----Original Message-----
From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@itc.uci.edu] On
Behalf Of David Weinshenker
Sent: Wednesday, December 12, 2001 8:42 PM
To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
Subject: Re: [AR] 1 Digital vs.Non-digital test stand


James Yawn wrote:
> Should there be an amplifier between
> the gauge and the DAQ unit?

Yes, most likely - strain gage sensors typically have outputs on the
order of a few millivolts per volt of excitation, while your A-to-D
system may have an input voltage range of 0-5 volts or 0-10 volts.
(Check the spec sheets of the devices you're trying to connect to each
other for actual figures.)

The device you're looking for is called an "instrumentation amplifier",
which senses the small voltage differences across the outputs of
strain-gage transducers and amplifies it to convenient levels for data
conversion. They range from inexpensive IC chips requiring the user to
connect a few resistors to establish the desired gain range to
rack-mounted laboratory instruments with a series of pre-calibrated gain
ranges selectable by a rotary switch.

-dave w

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 23275 invoked from network); 14 Dec 2001 01:39:22 -0000
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 14 Dec 2001 01:39:22 -0000
Received: (qmail 1662 invoked by uid 50005); 14 Dec 2001 01:39:13 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4175. . Clean. Processed in 0.371739 secs); 14 Dec 2001 01:39:13 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 14 Dec 2001 01:39:12 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA07838; Thu, 13 Dec 2001 17:35:00 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 101204 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 14 Dec 2001 01:34:26          +0000
Received: from castor.ridgenet.net (IDENT:root@[199.120.150.29]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA07823 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu,          13 Dec 2001 17:34:17 -0800
Received: from kristinscomp (pm014.ridgenet.net [204.154.246.14]) by          castor.ridgenet.net (8.11.0/8.11.0) with SMTP id fBE1a5b17193; Thu,          13 Dec 2001 17:36:05 -0800
References: <OF39FF5B6C.4102BD93-ON87256B21.00585E3E@mtroyal.ab.ca>                      <a0510031bb83e909b67dc@[63.24.225.213]>             <3C18D7E4.1CC9D49D@biomicro.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <002c01c1843f$7429ff40$1b30fea9@kristinscomp>
Date:         Thu, 13 Dec 2001 17:34:19 -0800
Reply-To: "Kristin & David Hall" <thehalls@RIDGENET.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Kristin & David Hall" <thehalls@RIDGENET.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Procedures needed
Comments: To: "Mark K. Spute" <mks@BIOMICRO.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Actually, I'm already 2 months into the coding.  It was progressing quickly
until the holiday season put a serious damper on my spare time, but I hope
to have it finished before summer.  That being said, call me a greedy
asshole, but I've no plans to make it public domain - strictly for sale.
Mind you, I plan on a sale price of somewhere in the $40-$200 range(*) so I
don't think anybody could bitch too strongly.

(*) I'm actually coding multiple versions:  "Demo" (free), "Standard"
($40-$60ish), "Pro" ($100-$200ish).

On that note, FYI...

Demo:  Simple altitude model.  2-dimentional wind.  WGS-84 spheroid.
Non-rotating Earth.  Limited to single stage below I impulse. (other stuff)

Standard:  ISO 1976 atmosphere (to 400 km).  2-dimentional wind.  WGS-84
sphereoid.  Rotating Earth.  Limited to two stages with combined total
impulse (TBD). (other stuff)

Pro:  ISO 1976 atmosphere w/ current density altitude correction (to 400
km), 3-dimentional wind.  WGS-84 sphereoid with limited real-world
correction.  Rotating Earth.  Limited to 5 stages with no impulse limit.
Simple guidance algorithms may be included as well (TBD).

Oh, and each stage (for all versions) allows for a cluster of up to 5
engines.


> I think we need someone or someones to write a program that can be placed
> in the public domain to calculate 3 sigma dispersion patterns.  The FAA
> mandates it for launch permits, but does not (to my knowledge) tell you
> where you may have such an analysis done.  One assumes that some
> government contractor somewhere will do it for you for some nominal sum,
> followed by lots of zeros.  It amounts to government mandated support of
> the big aerospace industries, a fact undoubtedly not lost on the
> industry's well paid lobbiests.  We need to short circuit this attempt to
> monopolize the launch industry by a writing some very good, public domain
> software.
>
> Unfortunately, my programming skills are rudimentary at best.
>
> Anyone feel up to the job?
>
>
> Jerry Irvine wrote:
>
> > In the short term one of the leading causes of long launch
> > applications is the need to calculate 3 sigma dispersion for the
> > rocket, impact hazard analysis and other such calculation and
> > statistical intense issues.
> >
> > One of the efforts should be to create a facility or program to
> > calculate these for club member launches so launch permits can
> > actually happen in less than 3 years.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 26448 invoked from network); 14 Dec 2001 01:54:45 -0000
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 14 Dec 2001 01:54:45 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 27994 invoked by uid 50005); 14 Dec 2001 01:54:36 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4175. . Clean. Processed in 0.864965 secs); 14 Dec 2001 01:54:36 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 14 Dec 2001 01:54:35 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA07934; Thu, 13 Dec 2001 17:49:58 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 101224 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 14 Dec 2001 01:49:52          +0000
Received: from harrier.prod.itd.earthlink.net (harrier.mail.pas.earthlink.net          [207.217.120.12]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA07919          for <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Thu, 13 Dec 2001 17:49:52 -0800
Received: from dialup-209.244.107.97.dial1.sanjose1.level3.net          ([209.244.107.97] helo=earthlink.net) by          harrier.prod.itd.earthlink.net with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id          16EhTy-0005wy-00 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 13 Dec 2001 17:49:51          -0800
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (Win98; I)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <OF39FF5B6C.4102BD93-ON87256B21.00585E3E@mtroyal.ab.ca>            <a0510031bb83e909b67dc@[63.24.225.213]>            <3C18D7E4.1CC9D49D@biomicro.com>            <002c01c1843f$7429ff40$1b30fea9@kristinscomp>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3C195B1F.E9F800A3@earthlink.net>
Date:         Thu, 13 Dec 2001 17:51:27 -0800
Reply-To: <thomgaf@energyrs.com>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Thomas M. Mcgaffey" <energyrelease@EARTHLINK.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Procedures needed
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Ok, greedy asshole,

I will buy a pro copy when it is done!

Thom

Thomas M. McGaffey
Energy Release Systems
408-226-7502
thomgaf@energyrs.com
San Jose, Kalifornia


Kristin & David Hall wrote:
>
> Actually, I'm already 2 months into the coding.  It was progressing quickly
> until the holiday season put a serious damper on my spare time, but I hope
> to have it finished before summer.  That being said, call me a greedy
> asshole, but I've no plans to make it public domain - strictly for sale.
> Mind you, I plan on a sale price of somewhere in the $40-$200 range(*) so I
> don't think anybody could bitch too strongly.
>
> (*) I'm actually coding multiple versions:  "Demo" (free), "Standard"
> ($40-$60ish), "Pro" ($100-$200ish).
>
> On that note, FYI...
>
> Demo:  Simple altitude model.  2-dimentional wind.  WGS-84 spheroid.
> Non-rotating Earth.  Limited to single stage below I impulse. (other stuff)
>
> Standard:  ISO 1976 atmosphere (to 400 km).  2-dimentional wind.  WGS-84
> sphereoid.  Rotating Earth.  Limited to two stages with combined total
> impulse (TBD). (other stuff)
>
> Pro:  ISO 1976 atmosphere w/ current density altitude correction (to 400
> km), 3-dimentional wind.  WGS-84 sphereoid with limited real-world
> correction.  Rotating Earth.  Limited to 5 stages with no impulse limit.
> Simple guidance algorithms may be included as well (TBD).
>
> Oh, and each stage (for all versions) allows for a cluster of up to 5
> engines.
>
> > I think we need someone or someones to write a program that can be placed
> > in the public domain to calculate 3 sigma dispersion patterns.  The FAA
> > mandates it for launch permits, but does not (to my knowledge) tell you
> > where you may have such an analysis done.  One assumes that some
> > government contractor somewhere will do it for you for some nominal sum,
> > followed by lots of zeros.  It amounts to government mandated support of
> > the big aerospace industries, a fact undoubtedly not lost on the
> > industry's well paid lobbiests.  We need to short circuit this attempt to
> > monopolize the launch industry by a writing some very good, public domain
> > software.
> >
> > Unfortunately, my programming skills are rudimentary at best.
> >
> > Anyone feel up to the job?
> >
> >
> > Jerry Irvine wrote:
> >
> > > In the short term one of the leading causes of long launch
> > > applications is the need to calculate 3 sigma dispersion for the
> > > rocket, impact hazard analysis and other such calculation and
> > > statistical intense issues.
> > >
> > > One of the efforts should be to create a facility or program to
> > > calculate these for club member launches so launch permits can
> > > actually happen in less than 3 years.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 24676 invoked from network); 14 Dec 2001 02:02:16 -0000
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 14 Dec 2001 02:02:16 -0000
Received: (qmail 6536 invoked by uid 50005); 14 Dec 2001 02:02:07 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4175. . Clean. Processed in 1.384243 secs); 14 Dec 2001 02:02:07 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 14 Dec 2001 02:02:05 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA08008; Thu, 13 Dec 2001 18:00:44 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 101231 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 14 Dec 2001 02:00:37          +0000
Received: from zwolle.execulink.net (IDENT:root@[199.166.6.25]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA07947 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu,          13 Dec 2001 17:50:36 -0800
Received: from work5 (ppp197.ec1.56k.execulink.com [209.239.26.197]) by          zwolle.execulink.net (8.11.6/8.11.3) with SMTP id fBE1nsX12173 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 13 Dec 2001 20:49:54 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0E77_01C56B69.5C5E01D0"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <009801c18441$94701a80$0f02a8c0@mshome>
Date:         Thu, 13 Dec 2001 20:49:27 -0500
Reply-To: "Eric Pearson" <ecp@MGL.CA>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Eric Pearson" <ecp@MGL.CA>
Subject:      [AR] CATO tolerant airframes
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0E77_01C56B69.5C5E01D0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Hello...

At a local HPR launch, I experienced a motor cato. The cato retort was =
quite sharp, and totally shattered the motor and shreded the motor =
mount, however, the airframe failed in an interesting way and is fully =
intact. Perhaps this effect might be of use for those who are =
experimenting with small motor technology. It seems to provide a =
trade-off between destroying a beautiful crafted scale model, and the =
venerable 2x4 as a experimental flight test vehicle=20

Basically I use a fiberglass molded airframe consisting of 4 =
longitunally molded segments. For lower impulse motors, I use masking =
tape to hold the segments together. The intesting part is how the lower =
end expands symetrically when a cato occurs. Some images follow:

Symetrically expanded tail end as during 'event': =
http://www.mgl.ca/~ecp/arpics/open_wide.jpg
Relaxed normal airframe tail: =
http://www.mgl.ca/~ecp/arpics/normal_closed.jpg
Picture of booster module (past tense): =
http://www.mgl.ca/~ecp/arpics/29mm_booster.jpg

Regards,...

Eric Pearson
-- coming out with a rocket airframe kit 'sometime soon' --

------=_NextPart_000_0E77_01C56B69.5C5E01D0
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Diso-8859-1">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 5.50.4134.100" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Hello...</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>At&nbsp;a local&nbsp;HPR launch, I =
experienced a=20
motor cato. The cato retort was </FONT><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>quite =
sharp, and=20
totally shattered the motor and shreded the motor mount, however, the=20
</FONT><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>airframe failed in an=20
interesting&nbsp;way&nbsp;and is&nbsp;fully intact. Perhaps this effect =
might=20
</FONT><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>be&nbsp;of use for&nbsp;those who=20
are&nbsp;experimenting with small motor technology. It seems to provide =
a=20
trade-off between destroying a beautiful crafted scale model, and the =
venerable=20
2x4 as a&nbsp;experimental flight test vehicle&nbsp;</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Basically I use a fiberglass molded =
airframe=20
consisting of 4 longitunally molded segments. </FONT><FONT face=3DArial =
size=3D2>For=20
lower impulse motors, I use masking tape&nbsp;to hold the segments =
together. The=20
intesting part is </FONT><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>how the lower end =
expands=20
symetrically when a cato occurs. Some images follow:</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Symetrically expanded tail end as =
during 'event':=20
</FONT><A href=3D"http://www.mgl.ca/~ecp/arpics/open_wide.jpg"><FONT =
face=3DArial=20
size=3D2>http://www.mgl.ca/~ecp/arpics/open_wide.jpg</FONT></A></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Relaxed normal airframe tail: <A=20
href=3D"http://www.mgl.ca/~ecp/arpics/normal_closed.jpg">http://www.mgl.c=
a/~ecp/arpics/normal_closed.jpg</A></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Picture of booster module (past tense): =
<A=20
href=3D"http://www.mgl.ca/~ecp/arpics/29mm_booster.jpg">http://www.mgl.ca=
/~ecp/arpics/29mm_booster.jpg</A></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Regards,...</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Eric Pearson</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>-- </FONT><FONT face=3DArial =
size=3D2>coming out with=20
a&nbsp;rocket airframe&nbsp;kit 'sometime soon' =
--</FONT></DIV></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0E77_01C56B69.5C5E01D0--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 12609 invoked from network); 14 Dec 2001 08:56:36 -0000
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 14 Dec 2001 08:56:36 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 17905 invoked by uid 50005); 14 Dec 2001 08:56:27 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4175. . Clean. Processed in 2.339165 secs); 14 Dec 2001 08:56:27 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 14 Dec 2001 08:56:24 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA09161; Fri, 14 Dec 2001 00:54:32 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 101313 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 14 Dec 2001 08:54:14          +0000
Received: from hall.mail.mindspring.net (hall.mail.mindspring.net          [207.69.200.60]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA09146          for <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Fri, 14 Dec 2001 00:54:13 -0800
Received: from sdn-ar-012casfrmp122.dialsprint.net ([158.252.216.124]          helo=mindspring.com) by hall.mail.mindspring.net with esmtp (Exim          3.33 #1) id 16Eo6c-0002ET-00; Fri, 14 Dec 2001 03:54:10 -0500
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 (Macintosh; U; PPC)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <200112130515.fBD5FOO22903@mail005.syd.optusnet.com.au>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3C19BE25.B8C2B7D8@mindspring.com>
Date:         Fri, 14 Dec 2001 00:54:02 -0800
Reply-To: "Alan Shinn" <alshinn@MINDSPRING.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Alan Shinn" <alshinn@MINDSPRING.COM>
Subject:      [AR] preassure guage force measurement
Comments: To: Craig Strudwicke <strudwicke@OPTUSNET.COM.AU>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Has anyone used a metal bellows instead of a hydraulic cylinder - much
less hysterisis. Like

Craig Strudwicke wrote:
snip
>
> Another idea I'm playing with is to use a commerically available pressure
> transducer and a hyraulic piston & cylinder to measure force. I know there will be
> some hysterisis but I reckon I can live with it if the thrust levels are high enough.
>

--
Looking forward:
Alan Shinn


Experience the
beginnings of microscopy.
Make your own replica
of one of Antony van Leeuwenhoek's microscopes.
visit    http://www.mindspring.com/~alshinn/

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 2706 invoked from network); 14 Dec 2001 13:10:14 -0000
Received: from smtpv.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.110]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 14 Dec 2001 13:10:14 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 23670 invoked by uid 50005); 13 Dec 2001 17:56:28 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpv with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4175. . Clean. Processed in 6.700079 secs); 13 Dec 2001 17:56:28 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpv.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 13 Dec 2001 17:56:19 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA05812; Thu, 13 Dec 2001 08:47:33 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 101032 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 13 Dec 2001 16:47:12          +0000
Received: from mail.aros.net (mail.aros.net [207.173.16.20]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA05796 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Thu,          13 Dec 2001 08:47:11 -0800
Received: from biomicro.com (cust-208-187-122-40.bbsc.net [208.187.122.40]) by          mail.aros.net (8.11.6/8.9.3) with ESMTP id fBDGl9u53458 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Thu, 13 Dec 2001 09:47:09 -0700 (MST)
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.77 [en] (Win98; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <v01510104b83dd09e7258@[63.169.102.235]>            <3C182C83.D45F3C18@sfcc.net>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3C1838EC.39F840C7@biomicro.com>
Date:         Wed, 12 Dec 2001 22:13:16 -0700
Reply-To: "Mark K. Spute" <mks@BIOMICRO.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Mark K. Spute" <mks@BIOMICRO.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] 1 Digital vs.Non-digital test stand
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Here we go . . .

James Yawn wrote:

> still scratching my head,   :-)
> al bradley
>
> I am at scratching too.  I have acquired a little DAQ equipment and don't quite
> know what to do with it.
>
> I bought the cute little Dataq 194 data-acquisiton board, astonished that it only
> cost $14. postpaid.  It's been a lot of fun hooking it to various electrical
> things and seeing the waves, bumps, and grunches on the screen, and recording
> meaningless data to disk files.

Excellent start.  Sort of like playing with computers.  Just get in there, mess with
it and find out what it does.  What's the worst that can happen?  You fry a $14
board.

> So I ordered some strain gauges from Omega (KFG-5-120-C1-11L1M2R), intending to
> create a load cell according to Richard Nakka's excellent
> spreadsheet-instructions.  I ruined one gauge immediately.  Good thing they sell
> them in lots of 10.   I super-glued another one to a hefty but somewhat flexible
> steel bar.  Well, OK,  it's an old lawn-mower blade.  But I did grind the rust
> off and polish a spot before gluing on the gauge.

Ahh, moving up the tree, are we?  Excellent again.  Keep experimenting until . . .

> When I hook this strain gauge to the Dataq unit, I get no reading whatsoever.
> Even when the bar is flexed, and even when a voltage (AA battery) is introduced
> into the circuit.
>
> So what am I missing?  Should there be an amplifier between the gauge and the DAQ
> unit?  Did I ruin another gauge?  Do I really need to buy the $100 Omega glue kit
> for these strain gauges?  Did I save too much money?

. . . you run into something that you can't figure out.  Now Omega has engineers on
staff who are paid very good salaries to sit around and answer questions from folks
like you who have paid good money for their excellent products.  (Have I really used
the word "excellent" three times in the same letter?)

Ask for the application notes.  Order their manual set, a truly impressive set of
hardbound catalogs, application notes, and other useful information that will be
delivered to your door by a UPS person in a truss, for free.  That's right.  All ya
gotta do is ask, and they'll ship them right out.

Next, get a really good digital electronics cookbook.  The best one I have ever seen
or read is "The Art of Electronics" by Horowitz and Hill.  This is the de facto text
in many university physics labs.  Why?  Most physicists and astronomers freqently
need equipment that simply is not available off the shelf, but they don't want to be
electrical engineers; they want to be physicists.  This volume tells you how to build
very sophisticated electronic circuits using a few rules of thumb, some high school
algebra (a basic understanding of calculus is handy, but not necessary) and some
tricks, hints, and helps.

After that, it helps to find a friend who does embedded circuit design or something
like that.  Local LINUX user groups and HAM radio clubs are places to find that.
Many of them would be delighted to get into rocketry with you as they are members of
those groups simply because they are hopeless techno-geeks.

But by far, the most helpful of the above suggestions I've found is to read Horowitz
and Hill, and all of the application notes you can find on the parts you are using.
Also search for schematics on the web.  There is a wealth of information out there,
and hundreds of people who are willing to help.  You might also subscribe to "Nuts
and Volts."  It's pretty good journal type tabloid magazine for electronics
hobbiests.  Has lots of advertisements from people selling just about anything
electronic you can imagine.  Plus has lots of articles and columns about
electronics.  The only problem is you may have to wait through months of articles
about remote controlled sprinkler systems before you get to anything you are really
interested in.



--
Mark K. Spute
Senior Research Engineer
BioMicro Systems Inc.
1.801.256.1906  (phone)
1.801.256.1901  (fax)

KD7IWE,  RRS, hopeful future Stolly owner

"It is difficult to say what is impossible, for the dream of yesterday is the hope of
today and the reality of tomorrow."
     Dr. Robert H. Goddard

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 13825 invoked from network); 14 Dec 2001 16:15:16 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpv.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.110]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 14 Dec 2001 16:15:16 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 26685 invoked by uid 50005); 13 Dec 2001 20:16:15 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpv with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4175. . Clean. Processed in 6.400339 secs); 13 Dec 2001 20:16:16 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpv.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 13 Dec 2001 20:16:08 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA06701; Thu, 13 Dec 2001 12:07:26 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 101130 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 13 Dec 2001 20:07:21          +0000
Received: from df01-e12.danfoss.dk (mailx.danfoss.com [193.162.34.6]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA06687 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 13 Dec 2001 12:07:20 -0800
Received: from df01-e12.danfoss.dk (dkdnisvw.danfoss.dk [10.6.2.20]) by          df01-e12.danfoss.dk with SMTP (Microsoft Exchange Internet Mail          Service Version 5.5.2653.13) id YYGSVRT5; Thu, 13 Dec 2001 21:06:45          +0100
Received: from 10.8.13.35 by df01-e12.danfoss.dk (InterScan E-Mail VirusWall          NT); Thu, 13 Dec 2001 21:06:45 +0100
Received: by maily.danfoss.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) id          <YZ5WV5L8>; Thu, 13 Dec 2001 21:06:45 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19)
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Message-ID:  <61A2F0A8E936D311876A0008C74BF1EC017517CC@DD21AE02>
Date:         Thu, 13 Dec 2001 21:13:51 +0100
Reply-To: "Nielson Byron" <BYRONNIELSON@DANFOSS.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Nielson Byron" <BYRONNIELSON@DANFOSS.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] 1 Digital vs.Non-digital test stand
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Also look at the datasheet for the Texas Instruments INA125 instrumentation
amplifier.
It contains all of the bells and whistles needed for a strain gauge
amplifier in one package.
They also give out samples.

Best Regards,
Byron


-----Original Message-----
From: Andrew Case [mailto:acase@GLUE.UMD.EDU]
Sent: Thursday, December 13, 2001 1:10 PM
To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
Subject: Re: [AR] 1 Digital vs.Non-digital test stand


On Wed, 12 Dec 2001, Mark K. Spute wrote:

> Next, get a really good digital electronics cookbook.
> The best one I have ever seen or read is "The Art of Electronics"
> by Horowitz and Hill.

I second this recommendation. H&H is an excellent text, both
for learning and for reference.

Also the suggestion to get the Omega handbooks - it's virtually
certain that the Omega handbooks will include exactly the circuit
you need, and if it's not obvious how it works, H&H will help
you understand it.

......Andrew

Andrew Case                             |
acase@plasma.umd.edu                    |
Institute for Plasma Research           |
University of Maryland, College Park    |

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 16398 invoked from network); 14 Dec 2001 19:34:01 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 14 Dec 2001 19:34:01 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 16344 invoked by uid 50005); 14 Dec 2001 19:33:48 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4175. . Clean. Processed in 0.628313 secs); 14 Dec 2001 19:33:48 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 14 Dec 2001 19:33:47 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA10955; Fri, 14 Dec 2001 11:25:25 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 101405 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 14 Dec 2001 19:25:13          +0000
Received: from rwcrmhc52.attbi.com (rwcrmhc52.attbi.com [216.148.227.88]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA10941 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 14 Dec 2001 11:25:13 -0800
Received: from c396957-b.attbi.com ([12.248.139.34]) by rwcrmhc52.attbi.com          (InterMail vM.4.01.03.27 201-229-121-127-20010626) with ESMTP id          <20011214192442.XAWI403.rwcrmhc52.attbi.com@c396957-b.attbi.com> for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 14 Dec 2001 19:24:42 +0000
X-Sender: spiegl@mail
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <5.1.0.14.2.20011214132214.00b6a6b0@mail>
Date:         Fri, 14 Dec 2001 13:25:06 -0600
Reply-To: "Mark C Spiegl" <spiegl@ATTBI.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Mark C Spiegl" <spiegl@ATTBI.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] CATO tolerant airframes
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <009801c18441$94701a80$0f02a8c0@mshome>

Eric Pearson writes:

>Basically I use a fiberglass molded airframe consisting of 4 longitunally molded segments. For lower impulse motors, I use masking tape to hold the segments together. The intesting part is how the lower end expands symetrically when a cato occurs. Some images follow:

You bring up some interesting possibilities.

How did you make each of the four segments??
Layup around a mould or something else?


--MCS

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 19236 invoked from network); 14 Dec 2001 20:18:50 -0000
Received: from smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.105]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 14 Dec 2001 20:18:50 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 27594 invoked by uid 50005); 14 Dec 2001 20:18:40 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpy with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4175. . Clean. Processed in 6.34084 secs); 14 Dec 2001 20:18:40 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 14 Dec 2001 20:18:31 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA11127; Fri, 14 Dec 2001 12:10:57 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 101423 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 14 Dec 2001 20:10:55          +0000
Received: from mplspop6.mpls.uswest.net (mplspop6.mpls.uswest.net          [204.147.80.9]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id MAA11113          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 14 Dec 2001 12:10:55 -0800
Received: (qmail 34093 invoked from network); 14 Dec 2001 20:10:55 -0000
Received: from wdskppp88.mpls.uswest.net (HELO qwest.net) (63.226.148.88) by          mplspop6.mpls.uswest.net with SMTP; 14 Dec 2001 20:10:55 -0000
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.76 [en] (WinNT; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3C1A5CEB.AE75D3DF@qwest.net>
Date:         Fri, 14 Dec 2001 14:11:23 -0600
Reply-To: "Jeff Hove" <jhove1@QWEST.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jeff Hove" <jhove1@QWEST.NET>
Subject:      [AR] [Fwd: HPR Strength of Materials Study]
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Hi All,

This gentleman making an incredible offer to conduct sophisticated
materials testing as a free service to the rocketry community.

He agreed to allow me to repost his rec.models.rockets message to our
aRocket list.

Does anyone have some project ideas for him?

He also added links to his web pages:
  My Home Page: The bucket 'O' Photons
    http://home.sprynet.com/~monel/

  My metallurgy FAQ
    http://www.providenceco-op.com/metal/metalfaq.html

-Jeff Hove

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: HPR Strength of Materials Study
Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2001 07:40:01 -0500
From: "Drake" <monel@sprynet.com>
Organization: MindSpring Enterprises
Newsgroups: rec.models.rockets

First I'd like to thank everyone here. RMR and the HPR "community" as a
whole are a great bunch of people. I have been a lurker for some time
now
and have been only just recently been asking a few questions. Many of
you
have been helping me for a while and don't know it. I want to repay you
guys.

Who am I? My friends call me Doc. I am the Chief Metallurgist and
Laboratory
Director at The Scranton Army Ammunition Plant. And thus, this is how I
can
repay the HPR community.

I have seen much debate over "this glue is better than that" or "this
glue
is better for this material than that" and even brands and or cure time.

I have a $750k materials testing machine (OK it's the Army's but its
mine to
do with as I please). I can test the strength of materials in tension,
compression, shear and even cyclic fatigue (fin flutter). I can test at
any
temperature liquid nitrogen to 800 (+/- 0.01 F) degrees F. I can test
forces
up to 55,000lbs with an accuracy of +/- 0.00015 lbs. All reported values
are
NIST traceable and all of my dimension measuring equipment is traceable
to
the Army's Rock Island Measurement Labs. (+/- 0.0000005")

What I propose is this:
Come up with a HPR strength of materials test. It could be tensile
strength
of shock cords, the compression strength of various airframes, tensile
strength of glued substrates or something. We could glue pieces of Bud
Nosen
wood together or various shock cords or anything (within reason) else.
The
key is to have everything the same except for the test subject. Only one
variable. Dimensions aren't that critical because the result will be
force/(sq/area)/time/distance. What needs to be the same are things like
ply's in wood or type of wood, accuracy of measurement ratios of epoxy,
fillets or no fillets.

First we need to decide weather or not this is worth everybody's time.
Does
anyone care? The second thing we need to decide on is what to test. I
think
the most versatile (and mostly debated) is various glues.

Once decided, I will need all of us to make the test samples. The more
tests, the more accurate the results.  I will then test the samples and
publish all of the data. I can put it up on my webpage or anywhere else
we
decide.

I suggest we test CY, all speeds and brands of epoxy, and wood glue on
wood
to wood. Each person could make three samples, from three batches of
glue.

The results can include, tensile strength, yield strength (at any
strain),
modulus, shear strength, compressive strength, fracture toughness,
fatigue
crack growth or any mechanical property you can think of. I can also
then
report the hardness (Rockwell) of the glue and the mode of failure
(brittle/ductile).

OK, Let the comments, suggestions, and flames fly.

Drake "Doc" Damerau

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 12210 invoked from network); 14 Dec 2001 20:44:56 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.105]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 14 Dec 2001 20:44:56 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 27540 invoked by uid 50005); 14 Dec 2001 20:44:47 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpy with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4175. . Clean. Processed in 2.297582 secs); 14 Dec 2001 20:44:47 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 14 Dec 2001 20:44:44 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA11218; Fri, 14 Dec 2001 12:28:11 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 101435 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 14 Dec 2001 20:28:03          +0000
Received: from rwcrmhc51.attbi.com (rwcrmhc51.attbi.com [204.127.198.38]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA11204 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 14 Dec 2001 12:28:02 -0800
Received: from c396957-b.attbi.com ([12.248.139.34]) by rwcrmhc51.attbi.com          (InterMail vM.4.01.03.27 201-229-121-127-20010626) with ESMTP id          <20011214202629.XUNU5010.rwcrmhc51.attbi.com@c396957-b.attbi.com>;          Fri, 14 Dec 2001 20:26:29 +0000
X-Sender: spiegl@mail
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
References: <3C18D7E4.1CC9D49D@biomicro.com>            <OF39FF5B6C.4102BD93-ON87256B21.00585E3E@mtroyal.ab.ca>            <a0510031bb83e909b67dc@[63.24.225.213]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <5.1.0.14.2.20011214142614.00b69af8@mail>
Date:         Fri, 14 Dec 2001 14:26:58 -0600
Reply-To: "Mark C Spiegl" <spiegl@ATTBI.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Mark C Spiegl" <spiegl@ATTBI.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Procedures needed
Comments: To: wamex@pad17.com
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <5.1.0.14.0.20011213104141.00b04260@mail.earthlink.net>

> I think we need someone or someones to write a program that can be placed
> in the public domain to calculate 3 sigma dispersion patterns.

I am willing to help in this respect, but I could not even begin to guess
at the algorithms.

Which begs the 2nd question of whether any of the controlling agencies
would accept the results from an open-source PD software program. Proving
the correctness of the code could prove fun. (and expensive)


--MCS

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 14119 invoked from network); 14 Dec 2001 20:51:03 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 14 Dec 2001 20:51:03 -0000
Received: (qmail 26712 invoked by uid 50005); 14 Dec 2001 20:50:53 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4175. . Clean. Processed in 6.756384 secs); 14 Dec 2001 20:50:53 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 14 Dec 2001 20:50:43 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA11097; Fri, 14 Dec 2001 12:08:00 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 101416 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 14 Dec 2001 20:07:51          +0000
Received: from idsoftware.com (predator.idsoftware.com [192.246.40.34]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA11083 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Fri, 14 Dec 2001 12:07:51 -0800
Received: from [192.246.40.144] (account johnc HELO pluto.idsoftware.com) by          idsoftware.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 3.4.7) with ESMTP id 12697 for          AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 14 Dec 2001 14:07:49 -0600
X-Sender: johnc@mail.idsoftware.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <4.3.1.2.20011214135859.035039e8@mail.idsoftware.com>
Date:         Fri, 14 Dec 2001 14:23:52 -0600
Reply-To: "John Carmack" <johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Carmack" <johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM>
Subject:      [AR] rader/laser altimeters
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

I am about to dump a pretty significant amount of money on a rangefinder so
that we can get our vehicles auto-hovering and auto-landing.  If anyone can
offer me any better directions, I would appreciate it.

The best solution I have found so far is this, quoted at $7500:

www.armadilloaerospace.com/misc/oconner_altimeter.jpg

The next best is this at $6500 (plus filing for an export license from
England):

www.armadilloaerspace.com/misc/roke_altimeter.jpg

This laser unit is cheaper at $3500, but I'm not sure if the communication
rate is good enough to average enough samples for deriving accurate
velocity, and it may not work well over fields:

http://www.laseroptronix.com/flyg/altm400.html


The criteria I have is:

High update rate.  10hz is bare minimum.  Ideally rs232, but analog is ok.

Accurate enough to derive vertical velocity at those rates without
excessive noise.

At a minimum, accurate range from 5' to 100' or so.

No interference with 2.4ghz communication equipment.

Small and low power are a plus.


A high update rate GPS solution would probably work, but the 20hz gps
systems were $15k+ last time I checked.

I could probably make our intertial system accurate enough for our 15
second parking lot flights, but we are looking towards higher altitude
flights with long coast periods, and inertial systems good enough for that
are real expensive.  I really like direct measurement where possible,
rather than integrating continuously, anyway.

There are a lot of relatively cheap ($1500 or so) doppler radar speed
sensors available, but they only give the absolute value of speed, and also
pick up horizontal motion, so they won't work for hovering and landing.

John Carmack
www.armadilloaerospace.com

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 13876 invoked from network); 14 Dec 2001 23:52:55 -0000
Received: from smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.105]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 14 Dec 2001 23:52:55 -0000
Received: (qmail 32085 invoked by uid 50005); 14 Dec 2001 23:52:45 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpy with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4175. . Clean. Processed in 6.828349 secs); 14 Dec 2001 23:52:45 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 14 Dec 2001 23:52:35 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA11988; Fri, 14 Dec 2001 15:38:07 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 101502 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 14 Dec 2001 23:37:53          +0000
Received: from zwolle.execulink.net (IDENT:root@zwolle.execulink.net          [199.166.6.25]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA11974          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 14 Dec 2001 15:37:52 -0800
Received: from work5 (ppp8.ec1.56k.execulink.com [209.239.26.8]) by          zwolle.execulink.net (8.11.6/8.11.3) with SMTP id fBENboX28279 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 14 Dec 2001 18:37:50 -0500
References:  <5.1.0.14.2.20011214132214.00b6a6b0@mail>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <00bd01c184f8$4c460e60$0f02a8c0@mshome>
Date:         Fri, 14 Dec 2001 18:37:25 -0500
Reply-To: "Eric Pearson" <ecp@MGL.CA>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Eric Pearson" <ecp@MGL.CA>
Subject:      Re: [AR] CATO tolerant airframes
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

----- Original Message -----
From: "Mark C Spiegl" <spiegl@ATTBI.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Friday, December 14, 2001 2:25 PM
Subject: Re: [AR] CATO tolerant airframes


> Eric Pearson writes:
>
> >Basically I use a fiberglass molded airframe consisting of 4 longitunally
molded segments. For lower impulse motors, I use masking tape to hold the
segments together. The intesting part is how the lower end expands
symetrically when a cato occurs. Some images follow:
>
> You bring up some interesting possibilities.
>
> How did you make each of the four segments??
> Layup around a mould or something else?
>
> --MCS
>

I made a male plug of a 1/4 rocket, and then made a female fiberglass mold.
With the mold I now crank out the segments with finished outer surfaces. It
has allowed me to overcome the sentimental attachment to a particular
rocket. I no longer cry when my pet dies.

If your interested in the gory details, here's a pointer to the web page I'm
maintaining about the making of the molded segments:
http://www.mgl.ca/~ecp/gobweb/index.htm

Regards,...

Eric Pearson

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 17391 invoked from network); 14 Dec 2001 23:53:52 -0000
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 14 Dec 2001 23:53:52 -0000
Received: (qmail 27303 invoked by uid 50005); 14 Dec 2001 23:53:42 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4175. . Clean. Processed in 4.342024 secs); 14 Dec 2001 23:53:42 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 14 Dec 2001 23:53:37 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA12071; Fri, 14 Dec 2001 15:51:17 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 101511 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 14 Dec 2001 23:50:20          +0000
Received: from mail.trib.com (mail.trib.com [12.10.158.17]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA12056 for <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Fri,          14 Dec 2001 15:50:19 -0800
Received: from [63.229.150.78] (HELO hppav) by mail.trib.com (CommuniGate Pro          SMTP 3.4.6) with SMTP id 63163051; Fri, 14 Dec 2001 16:50:08 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
Importance: Normal
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <NKEHJAOOKBPGIKOOPDEFOEOKCDAA.jwckman@space-rockets.com>
Date:         Fri, 14 Dec 2001 16:48:51 -0700
Reply-To: "John Wickman" <jwckman@SPACE-ROCKETS.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Wickman" <jwckman@SPACE-ROCKETS.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Procedures needed
Comments: To: Mark C Spiegl <spiegl@ATTBI.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <5.1.0.14.2.20011214142614.00b69af8@mail>

Since there is no data base of flights, assuming new experimental rockets
here, you need to do a Monte-Carlo flight simulation of the experimental
rocket to get a sample sufficiently large to be credible for determining a
standard deviation.  The problem is two-fold.

First, you need a six degree of freedom trajectory program to get an
accurate simulation of the rocket trajectory.  That may not be so hard, but
the input can be a killer for the amateur or small business.

That is the second problem. For example, what are the moments of inertia for
the rocket?  Some software programs will calculate this for you, but they
are expensive.  Otherwise you will have to estimate it.  What is the
misalignment between the thrust and the CG?  Also, is the CG in the
cross-sectional center or off by some margin?   Of course, you can spin the
rocket to reduce deviation, but it still needs to be simulated. You need CG
movement with burn time. There is the issue of the CP moving with Mach
number during the flight.  The freeware Aerolab program does a nice job on
this one. It also does a good job with CD vs. Mach and altitude.  Another
parameter is the variation of the thrust of the motor on the basis of
propellant batch repeatability and temperature variation.   A real big one
is launch elevation angle and azimuth accuracy.  A simple 2D trajectory
program can show the major influence of a single degree in error on the
launch angle can have on downrange impact distance.  Besides the accuracy of
setting the launch rail to the desired angle, the other issue is will the
rail maintain it while the rocket is moving up it.  This is rather doubtful
when you look at some of the portable launch rails.  Typically, you have at
least five degrees off vertical on the rail to make people comfortable.  The
larger the angle, the more likely it will follow the azimuth angle, not go
left or right.  However, this extends the downrange distance and now azimuth
angle becomes more and more important.

So, once you have your 6D trajectory code, you then decide on what variables
to simulate and what are the maximum and minimum values.  These could also
be 3 sigma limits in each category.  Then, your software randomly picks
variables within the ranges and runs the 6D trajectory code.  You plot the
actual landing spot vs. target landing spot and with the number of flights
known, you can calculate a standard deviation (sigma) and get a 3 sigma.

I have not mentioned all the variables that need simulating by the way.
Just some of them to give you a feel for the problem.

John Wickman


-----Original Message-----
From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU]On
Behalf Of Mark C Spiegl
Sent: Friday, December 14, 2001 1:27 PM
To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
Subject: Re: [AR] Procedures needed


> I think we need someone or someones to write a program that can be placed
> in the public domain to calculate 3 sigma dispersion patterns.

I am willing to help in this respect, but I could not even begin to guess
at the algorithms.

Which begs the 2nd question of whether any of the controlling agencies
would accept the results from an open-source PD software program. Proving
the correctness of the code could prove fun. (and expensive)


--MCS

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 8584 invoked from network); 15 Dec 2001 00:16:15 -0000
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 15 Dec 2001 00:16:15 -0000
Received: (qmail 4692 invoked by uid 50005); 15 Dec 2001 00:16:06 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4175. . Clean. Processed in 3.819522 secs); 15 Dec 2001 00:16:06 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 15 Dec 2001 00:16:01 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA12203; Fri, 14 Dec 2001 16:14:16 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 101541 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 15 Dec 2001 00:14:13          +0000
Received: from mail.ez2.net ([208.179.192.9]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with          ESMTP id QAA12189 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 14 Dec 2001          16:14:13 -0800
Received: from hogwild [66.74.66.111] by mail.ez2.net with ESMTP (SMTPD32-6.06)          id A5CF3AA010C; Fri, 14 Dec 2001 16:14:07 -0800
References:  <4.3.1.2.20011214135859.035039e8@mail.idsoftware.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <002a01c184fd$151255c0$6f424a42@socal.rr.com>
Date:         Fri, 14 Dec 2001 16:11:44 -0800
Reply-To: "Wedge Oldham" <wedge@WESTWORLD.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Wedge Oldham" <wedge@WESTWORLD.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] rader/laser altimeters
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This may not be the type of solution you're looking for. But if it's only
use is for hovering and landing...A Polaroid ultrasonic range sensor (the
kind used in cameras) may be of use. You'd still need something else for
higher altitudes, but for near ground work it would be the most cost
effective/accurate system I could thing of.
Wedge Oldham
http://NikeProject.com


----- Original Message -----
From: "John Carmack" <johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Friday, December 14, 2001 12:23 PM
Subject: [AR] rader/laser altimeters


> I am about to dump a pretty significant amount of money on a rangefinder
so
> that we can get our vehicles auto-hovering and auto-landing.  If anyone
can
> offer me any better directions, I would appreciate it.
>
> The best solution I have found so far is this, quoted at $7500:
>
> www.armadilloaerospace.com/misc/oconner_altimeter.jpg
>
> The next best is this at $6500 (plus filing for an export license from
> England):
>
> www.armadilloaerspace.com/misc/roke_altimeter.jpg
>
> This laser unit is cheaper at $3500, but I'm not sure if the communication
> rate is good enough to average enough samples for deriving accurate
> velocity, and it may not work well over fields:
>
> http://www.laseroptronix.com/flyg/altm400.html
>
>
> The criteria I have is:
>
> High update rate.  10hz is bare minimum.  Ideally rs232, but analog is ok.
>
> Accurate enough to derive vertical velocity at those rates without
> excessive noise.
>
> At a minimum, accurate range from 5' to 100' or so.
>
> No interference with 2.4ghz communication equipment.
>
> Small and low power are a plus.
>
>
> A high update rate GPS solution would probably work, but the 20hz gps
> systems were $15k+ last time I checked.
>
> I could probably make our intertial system accurate enough for our 15
> second parking lot flights, but we are looking towards higher altitude
> flights with long coast periods, and inertial systems good enough for that
> are real expensive.  I really like direct measurement where possible,
> rather than integrating continuously, anyway.
>
> There are a lot of relatively cheap ($1500 or so) doppler radar speed
> sensors available, but they only give the absolute value of speed, and
also
> pick up horizontal motion, so they won't work for hovering and landing.
>
> John Carmack
> www.armadilloaerospace.com

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 13701 invoked from network); 15 Dec 2001 00:17:32 -0000
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 15 Dec 2001 00:17:32 -0000
Received: (qmail 23638 invoked by uid 50005); 15 Dec 2001 00:17:23 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4175. . Clean. Processed in 5.904705 secs); 15 Dec 2001 00:17:23 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 15 Dec 2001 00:17:16 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA12234; Fri, 14 Dec 2001 16:15:55 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 101548 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 15 Dec 2001 00:15:54          +0000
Received: from albqpop1.albq.uswest.net (albqpop1.albq.uswest.net          [207.108.240.1]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id QAA12218          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 14 Dec 2001 16:15:53 -0800
Received: (qmail 64726 invoked by alias); 15 Dec 2001 00:15:21 -0000
Delivered-To: fixup-AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU@fixme
Received: (qmail 64649 invoked by uid 0); 15 Dec 2001 00:15:16 -0000
Received: from cc898542-a.prdise1.nm.home.com (HELO cc898542a) (65.7.151.152)          by albqpop1.albq.uswest.net with SMTP; 15 Dec 2001 00:15:16 -0000
References:  <NKEHJAOOKBPGIKOOPDEFOEOKCDAA.jwckman@space-rockets.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <001701c184fd$54ddd120$98970741@prdise1.nm.home.com>
Date:         Fri, 14 Dec 2001 17:13:25 -0700
Reply-To: "Pax" <darkspunge@USWEST.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Pax" <darkspunge@USWEST.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Procedures needed
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Anyway somebody(as in the whole list) can get this in a FAQ type form and
put up on the arocket website?
Or even a step further. The FAA forms needed for a high altitude space shot.
And maybe a sample of all these
problems from one of the big dogs(this is prolly impossible, but that is why
I ask).
What would be neat is a list of said problems. A list of variables. And the
most important part for each problem
or point that needs to be addressed, maybe a listing of books on the theory
and existing software to tackle the problems.
Something very comprehensive oh what an amateur will face. I think this
would help out the groups looking at space shots
now, and the "youngins(me)" wanting to do one in the future. How much of
this would be reasonable to do and put out in
the public like that?

Pax


----- Original Message -----
From: John Wickman <jwckman@SPACE-ROCKETS.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Friday, December 14, 2001 4:48 PM
Subject: Re: [AR] Procedures needed


> Since there is no data base of flights, assuming new experimental rockets
> here, you need to do a Monte-Carlo flight simulation of the experimental
> rocket to get a sample sufficiently large to be credible for determining a
> standard deviation.  The problem is two-fold.
>
> First, you need a six degree of freedom trajectory program to get an
> accurate simulation of the rocket trajectory.  That may not be so hard,
but
> the input can be a killer for the amateur or small business.
>
> That is the second problem. For example, what are the moments of inertia
for
> the rocket?  Some software programs will calculate this for you, but they
> are expensive.  Otherwise you will have to estimate it.  What is the
> misalignment between the thrust and the CG?  Also, is the CG in the
> cross-sectional center or off by some margin?   Of course, you can spin
the
> rocket to reduce deviation, but it still needs to be simulated. You need
CG
> movement with burn time. There is the issue of the CP moving with Mach
> number during the flight.  The freeware Aerolab program does a nice job on
> this one. It also does a good job with CD vs. Mach and altitude.  Another
> parameter is the variation of the thrust of the motor on the basis of
> propellant batch repeatability and temperature variation.   A real big one
> is launch elevation angle and azimuth accuracy.  A simple 2D trajectory
> program can show the major influence of a single degree in error on the
> launch angle can have on downrange impact distance.  Besides the accuracy
of
> setting the launch rail to the desired angle, the other issue is will the
> rail maintain it while the rocket is moving up it.  This is rather
doubtful
> when you look at some of the portable launch rails.  Typically, you have
at
> least five degrees off vertical on the rail to make people comfortable.
The
> larger the angle, the more likely it will follow the azimuth angle, not go
> left or right.  However, this extends the downrange distance and now
azimuth
> angle becomes more and more important.
>
> So, once you have your 6D trajectory code, you then decide on what
variables
> to simulate and what are the maximum and minimum values.  These could also
> be 3 sigma limits in each category.  Then, your software randomly picks
> variables within the ranges and runs the 6D trajectory code.  You plot the
> actual landing spot vs. target landing spot and with the number of flights
> known, you can calculate a standard deviation (sigma) and get a 3 sigma.
>
> I have not mentioned all the variables that need simulating by the way.
> Just some of them to give you a feel for the problem.
>
> John Wickman
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU]On
> Behalf Of Mark C Spiegl
> Sent: Friday, December 14, 2001 1:27 PM
> To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
> Subject: Re: [AR] Procedures needed
>
>
> > I think we need someone or someones to write a program that can be
placed
> > in the public domain to calculate 3 sigma dispersion patterns.
>
> I am willing to help in this respect, but I could not even begin to guess
> at the algorithms.
>
> Which begs the 2nd question of whether any of the controlling agencies
> would accept the results from an open-source PD software program. Proving
> the correctness of the code could prove fun. (and expensive)
>
>
> --MCS
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 6281 invoked from network); 15 Dec 2001 01:11:33 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 15 Dec 2001 01:11:33 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 8298 invoked by uid 50005); 15 Dec 2001 01:11:23 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4175. . Clean. Processed in 2.090257 secs); 15 Dec 2001 01:11:23 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 15 Dec 2001 01:11:20 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA12533; Fri, 14 Dec 2001 17:06:22 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 101603 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 15 Dec 2001 01:06:13          +0000
Received: from idsoftware.com (predator.idsoftware.com [192.246.40.34]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA12519 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Fri, 14 Dec 2001 17:06:13 -0800
Received: from [192.246.40.129] (account johnc HELO lightning.idsoftware.com)          by idsoftware.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 3.4.7) with ESMTP id 13331          for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 14 Dec 2001 19:06:12 -0600
X-Sender: johnc@mail.idsoftware.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.1
References: <4.3.1.2.20011214135859.035039e8@mail.idsoftware.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <4.3.1.2.20011214190326.03155d10@mail.idsoftware.com>
Date:         Fri, 14 Dec 2001 19:04:08 -0600
Reply-To: "John Carmack" <johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Carmack" <johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] rader/laser altimeters
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <002a01c184fd$151255c0$6f424a42@socal.rr.com>

At 04:11 PM 12/14/2001 -0800, you wrote:
>This may not be the type of solution you're looking for. But if it's only
>use is for hovering and landing...A Polaroid ultrasonic range sensor (the
>kind used in cameras) may be of use. You'd still need something else for
>higher altitudes, but for near ground work it would be the most cost
>effective/accurate system I could thing of.
>Wedge Oldham
>http://NikeProject.com

We tried that early on, but, as expected, ultrasonic rangers completely
lose their mind when a rocket engine fires near them.

John Carmack

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 27849 invoked from network); 15 Dec 2001 01:17:46 -0000
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 15 Dec 2001 01:17:46 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 26789 invoked by uid 50005); 15 Dec 2001 01:17:37 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4175. . Clean. Processed in 3.889337 secs); 15 Dec 2001 01:17:37 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 15 Dec 2001 01:17:32 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA12595; Fri, 14 Dec 2001 17:15:14 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 101602 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 15 Dec 2001 01:15:12          +0000
Received: from fcexgw02.efi.com (ns3.efi.com [192.68.228.85] (may be forged))          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id RAA12513 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Fri, 14 Dec 2001 17:05:11 -0800
Received: from 10.10.12.104 by fcexgw02.efi.com (InterScan E-Mail VirusWall          NT); Fri, 14 Dec 2001 17:04:45 -0800
Received: from earthlink.net (peroxide.efi.com [10.10.89.46]) by          EX-IMC3-CORP.efi.com with SMTP (Microsoft Exchange Internet Mail          Service Version 5.5.2653.13) id Y3571PFJ; Fri, 14 Dec 2001 17:05:11          -0800
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.14-5.0 i686)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3C1AA1D0.B8F82CA6@earthlink.net>
Date:         Fri, 14 Dec 2001 17:05:20 -0800
Reply-To: "David Weinshenker" <daze39@EARTHLINK.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "David Weinshenker" <daze39@EARTHLINK.NET>
Subject:      [AR] carbon fiber reality check
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

I just ran some caluculations for carbon fiber reinforcent
of a tubular tank.

Assumptions: Tank structure consists of "hoop" fibers and "axial"
fibers (i.e., "0 degree / 90 degree" winding), diameter is 100 mm (4 in.)

By geometrical arguments:
P/Sh = 2Th/D
P/Sa = 4Ta/D

where:
P  = pressure
Sh = hoop stress in wall structure
Sa = axial stress in wall structure
D  = tank diameter
Th = effective thickness of hoop structure
Ta = effective thickness of axial structure

Setting P/Sh = P/Sa = 1/500, I get:
1/500 = 2Th/D  Th = D/1000
1/500 = 4Ta/D  Ta = D/2000

Using D = 100 mm (4 in.) we get:
Th = 0.1 mm (.004 in.)
Ta = 0.05mm (.002 in.)

Now, looking up a typical commmercial carbon fiber on www.matweb.com...
"Hexcel AS4D (12000 filaments)" has the following charactgeristics:
Tensile ultimate strength 620.6k psi
Volume density 1.79 g/cm^3
Length density .765 g/m

Calculating the volume of the fiber per unit length:
.765 g/m / 1.79 g/cm^3 = .427 cm^3 / m

Cross-sectional area is thus
Af = (.427 cm^3 / 100 cm) * 100 mm^2/cm^2 = .427 mm^2

This indicates that to get the desired effective thickness,
the hoop windings require a spacing of Af/Th = .427 mm^2 / .1 mm = 4.27 mm
and the axial windings require a spacing of Af/Ta = .427 mm^2 / .05 mm = 8.54 mm

Since the circumference is 314 mm, the number of axial windings around the
circumference becomes 314/8.57 = 36.7... let's round this down to an integer
and use 36 strands (1 every 10 degrees).

The hoop windings will require, per meter of tubing, 1000 mm / 4.27 mm
or 234.2 turns.

The theoretical bursting pressure will be (620.6k psi / 500) = 1.241k psi
based on hoop strength, and 1.241k psi * (36/36.7) = 1.217k psi based on
axial strength.

Total quantity of reinforcement required for 1 m of tank tubing:
Hoop windings 234.2 turns x .314 m/turn = 73.5 m
Axial windings 36 strands x 1m/strand = 36 m
Total 109.5 m of fiber (83.7 g, 0.18 lb.) at .765 g/m

So this says that with less than 3 ounces of carbon fiber, it should
be possible to reinforce a 40 in. by 4 in. (1m x 100 mm) tubular tank
to a theoretical bursting pressure of just over 1200 psi.

Does this seem like a realistic figure, or have I made some glaring error
in my assumptions or calculations?

-dave w

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 10913 invoked from network); 15 Dec 2001 01:46:04 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 15 Dec 2001 01:46:04 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 1679 invoked by uid 50005); 15 Dec 2001 01:45:55 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4175. . Clean. Processed in 0.358857 secs); 15 Dec 2001 01:45:55 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 15 Dec 2001 01:45:55 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA12707; Fri, 14 Dec 2001 17:44:34 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 101633 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 15 Dec 2001 01:44:24          +0000
Received: from adobe.com (smtp-relay-2.adobe.com [192.150.11.2]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA12693 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri,          14 Dec 2001 17:44:24 -0800
Received: from inner-relay-1.corp.adobe.com ([153.32.1.51]) by adobe.com          (1.0.0/8.11.4) with ESMTP id fBF1goL20599 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>;          Fri, 14 Dec 2001 17:42:50 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mailsj-v1.corp.adobe.com (mailsj-dev.corp.adobe.com          [153.32.1.192]) by inner-relay-1.corp.adobe.com (8.11.4/8.11.4) with          ESMTP id fBF1i8S29156 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 14 Dec 2001          17:44:08 -0800 (PST)
Received: from sronald.earthlink.net ([153.32.63.111]) by          mailsj-v1.corp.adobe.com (Netscape Messaging Server 4.15 v1 Jul 11          2001 16:32:57) with ESMTP id GOD3H000.KNP; Fri, 14 Dec 2001 17:43:48          -0800
X-Sender: forkbomb@mail.earthlink.net
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <5.1.0.14.0.20011214174014.00b127d0@mail.earthlink.net>
Date:         Fri, 14 Dec 2001 17:49:32 -0800
Reply-To: "Pierce Nichols" <forkbomb@EARTHLINK.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Pierce Nichols" <forkbomb@EARTHLINK.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] carbon fiber reality check
Comments: To: David Weinshenker <daze39@earthlink.net>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <3C1AA1D0.B8F82CA6@earthlink.net>

         Looks ok to me -- only thing to think about is that a real tank
would require a substantial amount of extra reinforcement against handling
and flight stresses. This would probably take the form of one or more plies
of +45/-45 windings. Also, you forgot to include the mass of the heads,
which could be taken as half spheres. However, this is a small tank -- just
under 8 liters. That might make a good tank for a largish (i.e. larger than
most if not all HPR birds) amateur hybrid. It would be just about the right
size for a dramatically uprated KISS, however.

         -p

At 05:05 PM 12/14/01 -0800, David Weinshenker wrote:
>I just ran some caluculations for carbon fiber reinforcent
>of a tubular tank.
>
>Assumptions: Tank structure consists of "hoop" fibers and "axial"
>fibers (i.e., "0 degree / 90 degree" winding), diameter is 100 mm (4 in.)
>
>By geometrical arguments:
>P/Sh = 2Th/D
>P/Sa = 4Ta/D
>
>where:
>P  = pressure
>Sh = hoop stress in wall structure
>Sa = axial stress in wall structure
>D  = tank diameter
>Th = effective thickness of hoop structure
>Ta = effective thickness of axial structure
>
>Setting P/Sh = P/Sa = 1/500, I get:
>1/500 = 2Th/D  Th = D/1000
>1/500 = 4Ta/D  Ta = D/2000
>
>Using D = 100 mm (4 in.) we get:
>Th = 0.1 mm (.004 in.)
>Ta = 0.05mm (.002 in.)
>
>Now, looking up a typical commmercial carbon fiber on www.matweb.com...
>"Hexcel AS4D (12000 filaments)" has the following charactgeristics:
>Tensile ultimate strength 620.6k psi
>Volume density 1.79 g/cm^3
>Length density .765 g/m
>
>Calculating the volume of the fiber per unit length:
>.765 g/m / 1.79 g/cm^3 = .427 cm^3 / m
>
>Cross-sectional area is thus
>Af = (.427 cm^3 / 100 cm) * 100 mm^2/cm^2 = .427 mm^2
>
>This indicates that to get the desired effective thickness,
>the hoop windings require a spacing of Af/Th = .427 mm^2 / .1 mm = 4.27 mm
>and the axial windings require a spacing of Af/Ta = .427 mm^2 / .05 mm =
>8.54 mm
>
>Since the circumference is 314 mm, the number of axial windings around the
>circumference becomes 314/8.57 = 36.7... let's round this down to an integer
>and use 36 strands (1 every 10 degrees).
>
>The hoop windings will require, per meter of tubing, 1000 mm / 4.27 mm
>or 234.2 turns.
>
>The theoretical bursting pressure will be (620.6k psi / 500) = 1.241k psi
>based on hoop strength, and 1.241k psi * (36/36.7) = 1.217k psi based on
>axial strength.
>
>Total quantity of reinforcement required for 1 m of tank tubing:
>Hoop windings 234.2 turns x .314 m/turn = 73.5 m
>Axial windings 36 strands x 1m/strand = 36 m
>Total 109.5 m of fiber (83.7 g, 0.18 lb.) at .765 g/m
>
>So this says that with less than 3 ounces of carbon fiber, it should
>be possible to reinforce a 40 in. by 4 in. (1m x 100 mm) tubular tank
>to a theoretical bursting pressure of just over 1200 psi.
>
>Does this seem like a realistic figure, or have I made some glaring error
>in my assumptions or calculations?
>
>-dave w

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 8746 invoked from network); 15 Dec 2001 01:53:34 -0000
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 15 Dec 2001 01:53:34 -0000
Received: (qmail 27343 invoked by uid 50005); 15 Dec 2001 01:53:25 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4175. . Clean. Processed in 2.921087 secs); 15 Dec 2001 01:53:25 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 15 Dec 2001 01:53:21 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA12766; Fri, 14 Dec 2001 17:52:10 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 101648 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 15 Dec 2001 01:52:07          +0000
Received: from cesaroni.net ([204.101.26.130]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7)          with ESMTP id RAA12752 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 14 Dec 2001          17:52:07 -0800
Received: from Anthony by cesaroni.net with SMTP (MDaemon.v2.8.7.0.R) for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 14 Dec 2001 20:49:47 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 8.5, Build 4.71.2173.0
Importance: Normal
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
X-MDaemon-Deliver-To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
X-Return-Path: ACesaroni@cesaroni.net
Message-ID:  <001a01c1850a$a842c5c0$1b0101c0@Anthony>
Date:         Fri, 14 Dec 2001 20:48:55 -0500
Reply-To: "Anthony Cesaroni" <ACesaroni@cesaroni.net>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Anthony Cesaroni" <ACesaroni@cesaroni.net>
Subject:      Re: [AR] carbon fiber reality check
Comments: cc: David Weinshenker <daze39@EARTHLINK.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <3C1AA1D0.B8F82CA6@earthlink.net>

David,

Good calcs., kudos. If you want to refine this a bit, go to
http://borderworlds.com/compositepro/ and download the demo version. I
recommend this program for anyone who is seriously pursuing this topic as a
starting point. It has a tutorial but it's not a composite "beginner"
program though. Data point, .125 wall x 6" OD Hyperion carbon tanks proof to
1800 PSI.

Anthony.


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@itc.uci.edu]On
> Behalf Of David Weinshenker
> Sent: Friday, December 14, 2001 8:05 PM
> To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
> Subject: carbon fiber reality check
>
>
> I just ran some caluculations for carbon fiber reinforcent
> of a tubular tank.
>
> Assumptions: Tank structure consists of "hoop" fibers and "axial"
> fibers (i.e., "0 degree / 90 degree" winding), diameter is 100 mm (4 in.)
>
> By geometrical arguments:
> P/Sh = 2Th/D
> P/Sa = 4Ta/D
>
> where:
> P  = pressure
> Sh = hoop stress in wall structure
> Sa = axial stress in wall structure
> D  = tank diameter
> Th = effective thickness of hoop structure
> Ta = effective thickness of axial structure
>
> Setting P/Sh = P/Sa = 1/500, I get:
> 1/500 = 2Th/D  Th = D/1000
> 1/500 = 4Ta/D  Ta = D/2000
>
> Using D = 100 mm (4 in.) we get:
> Th = 0.1 mm (.004 in.)
> Ta = 0.05mm (.002 in.)
>
> Now, looking up a typical commmercial carbon fiber on www.matweb.com...
> "Hexcel AS4D (12000 filaments)" has the following charactgeristics:
> Tensile ultimate strength 620.6k psi
> Volume density 1.79 g/cm^3
> Length density .765 g/m
>
> Calculating the volume of the fiber per unit length:
> .765 g/m / 1.79 g/cm^3 = .427 cm^3 / m
>
> Cross-sectional area is thus
> Af = (.427 cm^3 / 100 cm) * 100 mm^2/cm^2 = .427 mm^2
>
> This indicates that to get the desired effective thickness,
> the hoop windings require a spacing of Af/Th = .427 mm^2 / .1 mm = 4.27 mm
> and the axial windings require a spacing of Af/Ta = .427 mm^2 /
> .05 mm = 8.54 mm
>
> Since the circumference is 314 mm, the number of axial windings around the
> circumference becomes 314/8.57 = 36.7... let's round this down to
> an integer
> and use 36 strands (1 every 10 degrees).
>
> The hoop windings will require, per meter of tubing, 1000 mm / 4.27 mm
> or 234.2 turns.
>
> The theoretical bursting pressure will be (620.6k psi / 500) = 1.241k psi
> based on hoop strength, and 1.241k psi * (36/36.7) = 1.217k psi based on
> axial strength.
>
> Total quantity of reinforcement required for 1 m of tank tubing:
> Hoop windings 234.2 turns x .314 m/turn = 73.5 m
> Axial windings 36 strands x 1m/strand = 36 m
> Total 109.5 m of fiber (83.7 g, 0.18 lb.) at .765 g/m
>
> So this says that with less than 3 ounces of carbon fiber, it should
> be possible to reinforce a 40 in. by 4 in. (1m x 100 mm) tubular tank
> to a theoretical bursting pressure of just over 1200 psi.
>
> Does this seem like a realistic figure, or have I made some glaring error
> in my assumptions or calculations?
>
> -dave w
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 22484 invoked from network); 15 Dec 2001 02:56:02 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 15 Dec 2001 02:56:02 -0000
Received: (qmail 6201 invoked by uid 50005); 15 Dec 2001 02:55:53 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4175. . Clean. Processed in 2.964877 secs); 15 Dec 2001 02:55:53 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 15 Dec 2001 02:55:48 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA12950; Fri, 14 Dec 2001 18:54:03 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 101663 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 15 Dec 2001 02:53:53          +0000
Received: from imo-r04.mx.aol.com (imo-r04.mx.aol.com [152.163.225.100]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA12936 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Fri, 14 Dec 2001 18:53:52 -0800
Received: from Sociald84@aol.com by imo-r04.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v31_r1.9.) id          8.188.813cc5 (4592); Fri, 14 Dec 2001 21:53:46 -0500 (EST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0E7A_01C56B69.5C784090"
X-Mailer: AOL 6.0 for Windows US sub 10540
Message-ID:  <188.813cc5.294c1539@aol.com>
Date:         Fri, 14 Dec 2001 21:53:45 EST
Reply-To: <Sociald84@AOL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <Sociald84@AOL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Composite Sleeve NO2 tanks
Comments: To: ACesaroni@cesaroni.net
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0E7A_01C56B69.5C784090
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

In a message dated 12/6/2001 7:17:34 AM Mountain Standard Time,
ACesaroni@cesaroni.net writes:


> The Hyperion tanks are a 48 million modulus carbon
> and have aluminum components for example.

What is meant by "48 million modulus carbon"? Is that what  carbon fiber with
a tensile strength of 48 million psi is called? I have heard or carbon fibre
with a tensile strength of up to 80 million psi or MSI. Is this stuff even
available in small quantities to the small buyer?

Thanks

Mark

------=_NextPart_000_0E7A_01C56B69.5C784090
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<HTML><FONT FACE=arial,helvetica><FONT  SIZE=2>In a message dated 12/6/2001 7:17:34 AM Mountain Standard Time, ACesaroni@cesaroni.net writes:
<BR>
<BR>
<BR><BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE style="BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px">The Hyperion tanks are a 48 million modulus carbon
<BR>and have aluminum components for example.</FONT><FONT  COLOR="#000000" SIZE=3 FAMILY="SANSSERIF" FACE="Arial" LANG="0"></BLOCKQUOTE>
<BR></FONT><FONT  COLOR="#000000" SIZE=2 FAMILY="SANSSERIF" FACE="Arial" LANG="0">
<BR>What is meant by "48 million modulus carbon"? Is that what &nbsp;carbon fiber with a tensile strength of 48 million psi is called? I have heard or carbon fibre with a tensile strength of up to 80 million psi or MSI. Is this stuff even available in small quantities to the small buyer?
<BR>
<BR>Thanks
<BR>
<BR>Mark</FONT></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0E7A_01C56B69.5C784090--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 4728 invoked from network); 15 Dec 2001 03:34:31 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 15 Dec 2001 03:34:31 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 27810 invoked by uid 50005); 15 Dec 2001 03:34:22 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4175. . Clean. Processed in 0.807233 secs); 15 Dec 2001 03:34:22 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 15 Dec 2001 03:34:21 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA13122; Fri, 14 Dec 2001 19:32:40 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 101683 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 15 Dec 2001 03:32:35          +0000
Received: from out004pub.verizon.net (out004pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.104])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA13108 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 14 Dec 2001 19:32:35 -0800
Received: from [63.24.225.213] (1Cust225.tnt2.rancho-cucamonga.ca.da.uu.net          [63.15.225.225]) by out004pub.verizon.net  with ESMTP for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; id fBF3W2q02762 Fri, 14 Dec 2001 21:32:02          -0600 (CST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: GTE/01rocket@mail.gte.net
References: <NKEHJAOOKBPGIKOOPDEFOEOKCDAA.jwckman@space-rockets.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <a0510032eb840716098fb@[63.24.225.213]>
Date:         Fri, 14 Dec 2001 19:32:11 -0800
Reply-To: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Procedures needed
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <NKEHJAOOKBPGIKOOPDEFOEOKCDAA.jwckman@space-rockets.com>

>Wickman's can of worms:


>Since there is no data base of flights, assuming new experimental rockets
>here, you need to do a Monte-Carlo flight simulation of the experimental
>rocket to get a sample sufficiently large to be credible for determining a
>standard deviation.  The problem is two-fold.
>
>First, you need a six degree of freedom trajectory program to get an
>accurate simulation of the rocket trajectory.  That may not be so hard, but
>the input can be a killer for the amateur or small business.




http://www.v-serv.com/-upload/6dof%20irvine.zip

http://www.v-serv.com/-upload/6dof irvine.zip


>
>That is the second problem. For example, what are the moments of inertia for
>the rocket?  Some software programs will calculate this for you, but they
>are expensive.  Otherwise you will have to estimate it.  What is the
>misalignment between the thrust and the CG?  Also, is the CG in the

Estimate the moment of interia to be zero or a known value from another rocket.

Assume thrust misalignment to be zero

CG centered

Assume gentle spin (spinning is recommended on first unit flights at
government ranges at a 10 degree launch angle or more to address
these issues.)

CG vs burn time on a liquid needs to be modeled or estimated.  On a
solid it is far less mandatory since it always becomes more stable.

Use Aerolab for CP vs Mach or estimate it to get poorer by 0.5
calibers to peak velocity.

Assume propellant to be repeatable vs batch and temperature and model
a reasonable expected temp.  There are other factors worst than that
you cannot estimate that swamps these issues, so why bother?

Launch elevation can be done within 1% on a heavy rail or well
anchored tower.  A light rail or rod should not be used where this
type of application is at issue.

Launch azimuth is one of the variables they want you to modify in the
"wind weighting" calculations.  I prefer to fix it in the center of
expected wind directions and not launch if outside those parameters.
Unless you have alot of money for balloons, smaller rockets, special
weather equipment and experts.

I find a 2d program is within 3% of the 6DOF program for these issues
and anything more complex is not scientifically justified, but
government mandated based on assumptions of a team of 200 engineers
working full time for three years on the problem and it being an
orbital rocket.

They apply these standards to sub-orbital rockets.  That is the
problem we can and need to fix in cooperation with AST (lobbbying).


>cross-sectional center or off by some margin?   Of course, you can spin the
>rocket to reduce deviation, but it still needs to be simulated. You need CG
>movement with burn time. There is the issue of the CP moving with Mach
>number during the flight.  The freeware Aerolab program does a nice job on
>this one. It also does a good job with CD vs. Mach and altitude.  Another
>parameter is the variation of the thrust of the motor on the basis of
>propellant batch repeatability and temperature variation.   A real big one
>is launch elevation angle and azimuth accuracy.  A simple 2D trajectory
>program can show the major influence of a single degree in error on the
>launch angle can have on downrange impact distance.  Besides the accuracy of
>setting the launch rail to the desired angle, the other issue is will the
>rail maintain it while the rocket is moving up it.  This is rather doubtful
>when you look at some of the portable launch rails.  Typically, you have at
>least five degrees off vertical on the rail to make people comfortable.  The
>larger the angle, the more likely it will follow the azimuth angle, not go
>left or right.  However, this extends the downrange distance and now azimuth
>angle becomes more and more important.
>
So, once you have your 6D trajectory code, you then decide on what variables
>to simulate and what are the maximum and minimum values.  These could also
>be 3 sigma limits in each category.  Then, your software randomly picks
>variables within the ranges and runs the 6D trajectory code.  You plot the


Unless you design, assume variables out of it so you have fewer things to vary.
By new rule, scientific justification, or wavier.


>actual landing spot vs. target landing spot and with the number of flights
>known, you can calculate a standard deviation (sigma) and get a 3 sigma.


By doing this with "standard" rockets, new rockets can be inferred
from that.  I for one plan on several such flights for that purpose
with solids.  It would be relatively trivial to add liquids or
hybrids to the agenda (as compared to the alternative).


>
>I have not mentioned all the variables that need simulating by the way.
>Just some of them to give you a feel for the problem.
>
>John Wickman
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU]On
>Behalf Of Mark C Spiegl
>Sent: Friday, December 14, 2001 1:27 PM
>To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
>Subject: Re: [AR] Procedures needed
>
>
>  > I think we need someone or someones to write a program that can be placed
>>  in the public domain to calculate 3 sigma dispersion patterns.
>
>I am willing to help in this respect, but I could not even begin to guess
>at the algorithms.
>
>Which begs the 2nd question of whether any of the controlling agencies
>would accept the results from an open-source PD software program. Proving
>the correctness of the code could prove fun. (and expensive)
>
>
>--MCS


--
Jerry Irvine, Box 1242, Claremont, California USA
Opinion, the whole thing. <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
Bring common sense back to rocketry administration.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 25374 invoked from network); 15 Dec 2001 04:18:58 -0000
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 15 Dec 2001 04:18:58 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 3345 invoked by uid 50005); 15 Dec 2001 04:18:48 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4175. . Clean. Processed in 1.516739 secs); 15 Dec 2001 04:18:48 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 15 Dec 2001 04:18:46 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA13385; Fri, 14 Dec 2001 20:17:22 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 101754 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 15 Dec 2001 04:16:41          +0000
Received: from sys32.hou.wt.net (sys32.hou.wt.net [205.230.159.32]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA13370 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 14 Dec 2001 20:16:40 -0800
Received: from localhost (216-119-138-157.ipset18.wt.net [216.119.138.157]) by          sys32.hou.wt.net (8.9.1/8.9.1) with ESMTP id WAA27847 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 14 Dec 2001 22:16:47 -0600 (CST)
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="US-ASCII"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.475)
Message-ID:  <8D295CB8-F112-11D5-BA7B-0050E43A5105@netaxs.com>
Date:         Fri, 14 Dec 2001 22:16:45 -0600
Reply-To: "Don McCorvey" <dlm3@NETAXS.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Don McCorvey" <dlm3@NETAXS.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] rader/laser altimeters
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <4.3.1.2.20011214135859.035039e8@mail.idsoftware.com>

John,

Are you familiar with the (former) Terra Avionics radar altimeters ?
Terra was bought by Trimble whose avionics division was subsequently
bought by FreeFlight Sytems in Waco.

Anyway, I was contemplating using one of these RA units for an unmanned
tilt-rotor air vehicle about twelve years ago. What I recall had RS-232
communication, but the site below suggests it now uses ARINC-429 - which
will complicate your interface, but not a whole lot since you should be
able to buy boards that speak ARINC-429. Best of all, the thing was
fairly inexpensive - and still is. I don't recall the update rate,
unfortunately, but it seems to me it was adequate for the purpose I had
in mind at the time (autoland).

There's a little info here:

http://www.avionix.com/ralt.html

Hope this helps.

And a question - why are you worried about having a slow GPS when you
have an inertial sensor ? Assuming you use a DGPS to get high accuracy,
you should only need about 1-second update rates to keep your IMU from
drifting too far, shouldn't you ? Keeping in mind of course, that unlike
you I've never designed an IMU.<grin>

Don


On Friday, December 14, 2001, at 02:23  PM, John Carmack wrote:

> I am about to dump a pretty significant amount of money on a
> rangefinder so
> that we can get our vehicles auto-hovering and auto-landing.  If anyone
> can
> offer me any better directions, I would appreciate it.
>
> The best solution I have found so far is this, quoted at $7500:
>
> www.armadilloaerospace.com/misc/oconner_altimeter.jpg
>
> The next best is this at $6500 (plus filing for an export license from
> England):
>
> www.armadilloaerspace.com/misc/roke_altimeter.jpg
>
> This laser unit is cheaper at $3500, but I'm not sure if the
> communication
> rate is good enough to average enough samples for deriving accurate
> velocity, and it may not work well over fields:
>
> http://www.laseroptronix.com/flyg/altm400.html
>
>
> The criteria I have is:
>
> High update rate.  10hz is bare minimum.  Ideally rs232, but analog is
> ok.
>
> Accurate enough to derive vertical velocity at those rates without
> excessive noise.
>
> At a minimum, accurate range from 5' to 100' or so.
>
> No interference with 2.4ghz communication equipment.
>
> Small and low power are a plus.
>
>
> A high update rate GPS solution would probably work, but the 20hz gps
> systems were $15k+ last time I checked.
>
> I could probably make our intertial system accurate enough for our 15
> second parking lot flights, but we are looking towards higher altitude
> flights with long coast periods, and inertial systems good enough for
> that
> are real expensive.  I really like direct measurement where possible,
> rather than integrating continuously, anyway.
>
> There are a lot of relatively cheap ($1500 or so) doppler radar speed
> sensors available, but they only give the absolute value of speed, and
> also
> pick up horizontal motion, so they won't work for hovering and landing.
>
> John Carmack
> www.armadilloaerospace.com
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 746 invoked from network); 15 Dec 2001 04:20:48 -0000
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 15 Dec 2001 04:20:48 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 5467 invoked by uid 50005); 15 Dec 2001 04:20:38 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4175. . Clean. Processed in 4.144905 secs); 15 Dec 2001 04:20:38 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 15 Dec 2001 04:20:33 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA13413; Fri, 14 Dec 2001 20:19:22 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 101761 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 15 Dec 2001 04:19:21          +0000
Received: from dns2.seanet.com (dns2.seanet.com [199.181.164.2]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA13399 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri,          14 Dec 2001 20:19:20 -0800
Received: from seanet.com (ssstolt.seanet.com [204.182.68.23]) by          dns2.seanet.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id fBF4JA912845; Fri, 14          Dec 2001 20:19:16 -0800 (PST)
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.73 [en] (Win98; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <OF39FF5B6C.4102BD93-ON87256B21.00585E3E@mtroyal.ab.ca>            <a0510031bb83e909b67dc@[63.24.225.213]>            <3C18D7E4.1CC9D49D@biomicro.com>            <002c01c1843f$7429ff40$1b30fea9@kristinscomp>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3C1ACE86.7967EECE@seanet.com>
Date:         Fri, 14 Dec 2001 20:16:09 -0800
Reply-To: "Sherwood Stolt" <ssstolt@SEANET.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Sherwood Stolt" <ssstolt@SEANET.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Procedures needed
Comments: To: Kristin & David Hall <thehalls@RIDGENET.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

You didn't mention the dispersion analysis capability.  That is all the
misalignment, imbalance, wind gust, etc. variations that need means,
dispersions, and a mechanism to draw random samples.  Then you
need an outer process to repeat the calculations many times and then
calculate means and deviations for the impact coordinates.

Kristin & David Hall wrote:

> Actually, I'm already 2 months into the coding.  It was progressing quickly
> until the holiday season put a serious damper on my spare time, but I hope
> to have it finished before summer.  That being said, call me a greedy
> asshole, but I've no plans to make it public domain - strictly for sale.
> Mind you, I plan on a sale price of somewhere in the $40-$200 range(*) so I
> don't think anybody could bitch too strongly.
>
> (*) I'm actually coding multiple versions:  "Demo" (free), "Standard"
> ($40-$60ish), "Pro" ($100-$200ish).
>
> On that note, FYI...
>
> Demo:  Simple altitude model.  2-dimentional wind.  WGS-84 spheroid.
> Non-rotating Earth.  Limited to single stage below I impulse. (other stuff)
>
> Standard:  ISO 1976 atmosphere (to 400 km).  2-dimentional wind.  WGS-84
> sphereoid.  Rotating Earth.  Limited to two stages with combined total
> impulse (TBD). (other stuff)
>
> Pro:  ISO 1976 atmosphere w/ current density altitude correction (to 400
> km), 3-dimentional wind.  WGS-84 sphereoid with limited real-world
> correction.  Rotating Earth.  Limited to 5 stages with no impulse limit.
> Simple guidance algorithms may be included as well (TBD).
>
> Oh, and each stage (for all versions) allows for a cluster of up to 5
> engines.
>
> > I think we need someone or someones to write a program that can be placed
> > in the public domain to calculate 3 sigma dispersion patterns.  The FAA
> > mandates it for launch permits, but does not (to my knowledge) tell you
> > where you may have such an analysis done.  One assumes that some
> > government contractor somewhere will do it for you for some nominal sum,
> > followed by lots of zeros.  It amounts to government mandated support of
> > the big aerospace industries, a fact undoubtedly not lost on the
> > industry's well paid lobbiests.  We need to short circuit this attempt to
> > monopolize the launch industry by a writing some very good, public domain
> > software.
> >
> > Unfortunately, my programming skills are rudimentary at best.
> >
> > Anyone feel up to the job?
> >
> >
> > Jerry Irvine wrote:
> >
> > > In the short term one of the leading causes of long launch
> > > applications is the need to calculate 3 sigma dispersion for the
> > > rocket, impact hazard analysis and other such calculation and
> > > statistical intense issues.
> > >
> > > One of the efforts should be to create a facility or program to
> > > calculate these for club member launches so launch permits can
> > > actually happen in less than 3 years.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 11357 invoked from network); 15 Dec 2001 04:34:29 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.105]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 15 Dec 2001 04:34:29 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 9631 invoked by uid 50005); 15 Dec 2001 04:34:19 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpy with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4175. . Clean. Processed in 3.207007 secs); 15 Dec 2001 04:34:19 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 15 Dec 2001 04:34:15 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA13471; Fri, 14 Dec 2001 20:33:04 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 101771 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 15 Dec 2001 04:33:01          +0000
Received: from rwcrmhc52.attbi.com (rwcrmhc52.attbi.com [216.148.227.88]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA13457 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 14 Dec 2001 20:33:01 -0800
Received: from c1649002-a.earthlink.net ([12.232.75.28]) by rwcrmhc52.attbi.com          (InterMail vM.4.01.03.27 201-229-121-127-20010626) with ESMTP id          <20011215043230.MDLW403.rwcrmhc52.attbi.com@c1649002-a.earthlink.net>; Sat, 15 Dec 2001 04:32:30          +0000
X-Sender: forkbomb@mail.earthlink.net
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.0.2
References: <4.3.1.2.20011214135859.035039e8@mail.idsoftware.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <5.0.2.1.0.20011214203129.01f7f178@mail.earthlink.net>
Date:         Fri, 14 Dec 2001 20:32:35 -0800
Reply-To: "Pierce Nichols" <forkbomb@EARTHLINK.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Pierce Nichols" <forkbomb@EARTHLINK.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] rader/laser altimeters
Comments: To: Don McCorvey <dlm3@NETAXS.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <8D295CB8-F112-11D5-BA7B-0050E43A5105@netaxs.com>

At 10:16 PM 12/14/2001 -0600, Don McCorvey wrote:
>John,
>
>Are you familiar with the (former) Terra Avionics radar altimeters ?
>Terra was bought by Trimble whose avionics division was subsequently
>bought by FreeFlight Sytems in Waco.
>
>Anyway, I was contemplating using one of these RA units for an unmanned
>tilt-rotor air vehicle about twelve years ago. What I recall had RS-232
>communication, but the site below suggests it now uses ARINC-429 - which
>will complicate your interface, but not a whole lot since you should be
>able to buy boards that speak ARINC-429. Best of all, the thing was
>fairly inexpensive - and still is. I don't recall the update rate,
>unfortunately, but it seems to me it was adequate for the purpose I had
>in mind at the time (autoland).
>
>There's a little info here:
>
>http://www.avionix.com/ralt.html


         These units only indicate down to an altitude of about 40 ft... I
suspect that's still a bit too high for the contemplated application.

         -p


Mars or Bust!
www.marssociety.com

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 13074 invoked from network); 15 Dec 2001 05:07:15 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 15 Dec 2001 05:07:15 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 25489 invoked by uid 50005); 15 Dec 2001 05:07:06 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4175. . Clean. Processed in 0.752425 secs); 15 Dec 2001 05:07:06 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 15 Dec 2001 05:07:05 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA13609; Fri, 14 Dec 2001 21:05:45 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 101790 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 15 Dec 2001 05:05:41          +0000
Received: from idsoftware.com (predator.idsoftware.com [192.246.40.34]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA13594 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Fri, 14 Dec 2001 21:05:40 -0800
Received: from [192.246.40.129] (account johnc HELO lightning.idsoftware.com)          by idsoftware.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 3.4.7) with ESMTP id 13489          for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 14 Dec 2001 23:05:40 -0600
X-Sender: johnc@mail.idsoftware.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.1
References: <4.3.1.2.20011214135859.035039e8@mail.idsoftware.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <4.3.1.2.20011214225328.03684fb8@mail.idsoftware.com>
Date:         Fri, 14 Dec 2001 23:03:36 -0600
Reply-To: "John Carmack" <johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Carmack" <johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] rader/laser altimeters
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <8D295CB8-F112-11D5-BA7B-0050E43A5105@netaxs.com>

>
>There's a little info here:
>
>http://www.avionix.com/ralt.html
>
>Hope this helps.

Thanks, I'll look into it.

>And a question - why are you worried about having a slow GPS when you
>have an inertial sensor ? Assuming you use a DGPS to get high accuracy,
>you should only need about 1-second update rates to keep your IMU from
>drifting too far, shouldn't you ? Keeping in mind of course, that unlike
>you I've never designed an IMU.<grin>
>
>Don

I had been planning on using GPS/INS together like that, just resetting the
inertial frame to the GPS every second.  It gets a bit more complicated due
to the fact that the GPS position you get is from some time in the previous
second by the time you get it, but that can be dealt with by just buffering
up all the inertial data and back-applicating it.

The worse problem is that altitude is the least accurate of the GPS axis,
and it is not uncommon to see it jump around by several meters randomly
second to second.  The true blended GPS/INS systems take all the GPS data
and INS data and run everything through kalman filters to try and stabilize
everything, but they do it at the per-satellite level, rather than just
GPS-output and INS-output level.

The GPS velocity figure is more stable than position (done by carrier wave
doppler, rather than time of flight calculation), but in the one test that
we did that had our lander flying up to 30' AGL, the velocity was not
accurately represented.  It was a smooth curve, but it looked like it was
averaged over several seconds, never reaching the peaks it should have, and
lagging noticeably more than a second behind what was going on.  It was
probably coded assuming highway traffic sorts of speed changes.  I do think
that GPS altitude velocity is probably good enough for what we need, but
the consumer GPS boards don't seem to be set up ideally for them.  A high
update rate GPS velocity sensor (which is lots easier than the full
position sensor) would be a great project for someone...

In thinking about having a person on the vehicle, plummeting down from a
high altitude, I feel more comfortable with a direct ranger of some kind.

John Carmack

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 5062 invoked from network); 15 Dec 2001 05:27:12 -0000
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 15 Dec 2001 05:27:12 -0000
Received: (qmail 14666 invoked by uid 50005); 15 Dec 2001 05:27:02 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4175. . Clean. Processed in 0.312249 secs); 15 Dec 2001 05:27:02 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 15 Dec 2001 05:27:02 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA13700; Fri, 14 Dec 2001 21:25:34 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 101804 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 15 Dec 2001 05:25:29          +0000
Received: from castor.ridgenet.net (IDENT:root@castor.ridgenet.net          [199.120.150.29]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA13686          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 14 Dec 2001 21:25:28 -0800
Received: from kristinscomp (pm086.ridgenet.net [204.154.246.86]) by          castor.ridgenet.net (8.11.0/8.11.0) with SMTP id fBF5Rvb02221; Fri,          14 Dec 2001 21:27:58 -0800
References: <OF39FF5B6C.4102BD93-ON87256B21.00585E3E@mtroyal.ab.ca>                      <a0510031bb83e909b67dc@[63.24.225.213]>                      <3C18D7E4.1CC9D49D@biomicro.com>                      <002c01c1843f$7429ff40$1b30fea9@kristinscomp>             <3C1ACE86.7967EECE@seanet.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <003501c18529$06757980$1b30fea9@kristinscomp>
Date:         Fri, 14 Dec 2001 21:26:17 -0800
Reply-To: "Kristin & David Hall" <thehalls@RIDGENET.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Kristin & David Hall" <thehalls@RIDGENET.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Procedures needed
Comments: To: Sherwood Stolt <ssstolt@SEANET.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

I didn't mention dispersion analysis because it was a request for such that
brought up the topic.  I figured it was implied in the very fabric of the
previous conversation that yes, such capability is to be included.  But if
you need it explicetly stated:  Dispersion analysis is to be included and in
fact is the only reason why I am bothering with this endeavor!

--
Dave and/or Kristin Hall
----- Original Message -----
From: Sherwood Stolt <ssstolt@SEANET.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Friday, December 14, 2001 8:16 PM
Subject: Re: [AR] Procedures needed


> You didn't mention the dispersion analysis capability.  That is all the
> misalignment, imbalance, wind gust, etc. variations that need means,
> dispersions, and a mechanism to draw random samples.  Then you
> need an outer process to repeat the calculations many times and then
> calculate means and deviations for the impact coordinates.
>
> Kristin & David Hall wrote:
>
> > Actually, I'm already 2 months into the coding.  It was progressing
quickly
> > until the holiday season put a serious damper on my spare time, but I
hope
> > to have it finished before summer.  That being said, call me a greedy
> > asshole, but I've no plans to make it public domain - strictly for sale.
> > Mind you, I plan on a sale price of somewhere in the $40-$200 range(*)
so I
> > don't think anybody could bitch too strongly.
> >
> > (*) I'm actually coding multiple versions:  "Demo" (free), "Standard"
> > ($40-$60ish), "Pro" ($100-$200ish).
> >
> > On that note, FYI...
> >
> > Demo:  Simple altitude model.  2-dimentional wind.  WGS-84 spheroid.
> > Non-rotating Earth.  Limited to single stage below I impulse. (other
stuff)
> >
> > Standard:  ISO 1976 atmosphere (to 400 km).  2-dimentional wind.  WGS-84
> > sphereoid.  Rotating Earth.  Limited to two stages with combined total
> > impulse (TBD). (other stuff)
> >
> > Pro:  ISO 1976 atmosphere w/ current density altitude correction (to 400
> > km), 3-dimentional wind.  WGS-84 sphereoid with limited real-world
> > correction.  Rotating Earth.  Limited to 5 stages with no impulse limit.
> > Simple guidance algorithms may be included as well (TBD).
> >
> > Oh, and each stage (for all versions) allows for a cluster of up to 5
> > engines.
> >
> > > I think we need someone or someones to write a program that can be
placed
> > > in the public domain to calculate 3 sigma dispersion patterns.  The
FAA
> > > mandates it for launch permits, but does not (to my knowledge) tell
you
> > > where you may have such an analysis done.  One assumes that some
> > > government contractor somewhere will do it for you for some nominal
sum,
> > > followed by lots of zeros.  It amounts to government mandated support
of
> > > the big aerospace industries, a fact undoubtedly not lost on the
> > > industry's well paid lobbiests.  We need to short circuit this attempt
to
> > > monopolize the launch industry by a writing some very good, public
domain
> > > software.
> > >
> > > Unfortunately, my programming skills are rudimentary at best.
> > >
> > > Anyone feel up to the job?
> > >
> > >
> > > Jerry Irvine wrote:
> > >
> > > > In the short term one of the leading causes of long launch
> > > > applications is the need to calculate 3 sigma dispersion for the
> > > > rocket, impact hazard analysis and other such calculation and
> > > > statistical intense issues.
> > > >
> > > > One of the efforts should be to create a facility or program to
> > > > calculate these for club member launches so launch permits can
> > > > actually happen in less than 3 years.
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 3758 invoked from network); 15 Dec 2001 05:37:02 -0000
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 15 Dec 2001 05:37:02 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 25097 invoked by uid 50005); 15 Dec 2001 05:36:53 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4175. . Clean. Processed in 1.197093 secs); 15 Dec 2001 05:36:53 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 15 Dec 2001 05:36:51 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA13758; Fri, 14 Dec 2001 21:35:39 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 101811 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 15 Dec 2001 05:35:37          +0000
Received: from sys27.hou.wt.net (sys27.hou.wt.net [205.230.159.27]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA13744 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 14 Dec 2001 21:35:36 -0800
Received: from localhost (216-119-138-157.ipset18.wt.net [216.119.138.157]) by          sys27.hou.wt.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id XAA01347; Fri, 14 Dec          2001 23:35:27 -0600 (CST)
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="US-ASCII"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.475)
Message-ID:  <9431BB74-F11D-11D5-BA7B-0050E43A5105@netaxs.com>
Date:         Fri, 14 Dec 2001 23:35:41 -0600
Reply-To: "Don McCorvey" <dlm3@NETAXS.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Don McCorvey" <dlm3@NETAXS.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] rader/laser altimeters
Comments: To: John Carmack <johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <4.3.1.2.20011214225328.03684fb8@mail.idsoftware.com>

Have you considered a baro altimeter ? Not as glamorous as laser
rangefinders, but a heck of a lot cheaper...

Not to be flip, but barometric altitude has been used for the better
part of a century for aircraft altitude sensing. You can't use it for
operations close to the ground, since a wind gust might well ruin your
day, but as for the 'plummeting to earth' scenario, it would work just
fine to provide descent rate. You just need to be able to handle that
drop from about 10' or so (having dropped in a Cessna 150 - once - from
such an altitude, I have relevant experience). Most aircraft landing
gear uses oleo struts for just this reason.

Another thing you could do, of course, is actually use a ground contact
sensor for the last few inches of your landing. An LVDT of some sort
would be best, though a linear pot would do OK. Switches are more
common, of course.

One other thought - some time back, I know a few people were looking at
video-based landing systems for autonomous vehicles. I don't know where
the work is now, but if you were to invest in the computing horsepower
needed to do the job, you could use fixed references on the ground to
triangulate the position of the vehicle as it does final approach and
landing.

Don

On Friday, December 14, 2001, at 11:03  PM, John Carmack wrote:

>>
>> There's a little info here:
>>
>> http://www.avionix.com/ralt.html
>>
>> Hope this helps.
>
> Thanks, I'll look into it.
>
>> And a question - why are you worried about having a slow GPS when you
>> have an inertial sensor ? Assuming you use a DGPS to get high accuracy,
>> you should only need about 1-second update rates to keep your IMU from
>> drifting too far, shouldn't you ? Keeping in mind of course, that
>> unlike
>> you I've never designed an IMU.<grin>
>>
>> Don
>
> I had been planning on using GPS/INS together like that, just resetting
> the
> inertial frame to the GPS every second.  It gets a bit more complicated
> due
> to the fact that the GPS position you get is from some time in the
> previous
> second by the time you get it, but that can be dealt with by just
> buffering
> up all the inertial data and back-applicating it.
>
> The worse problem is that altitude is the least accurate of the GPS
> axis,
> and it is not uncommon to see it jump around by several meters randomly
> second to second.  The true blended GPS/INS systems take all the GPS
> data
> and INS data and run everything through kalman filters to try and
> stabilize
> everything, but they do it at the per-satellite level, rather than just
> GPS-output and INS-output level.
>
> The GPS velocity figure is more stable than position (done by carrier
> wave
> doppler, rather than time of flight calculation), but in the one test
> that
> we did that had our lander flying up to 30' AGL, the velocity was not
> accurately represented.  It was a smooth curve, but it looked like it
> was
> averaged over several seconds, never reaching the peaks it should have,
> and
> lagging noticeably more than a second behind what was going on.  It was
> probably coded assuming highway traffic sorts of speed changes.  I do
> think
> that GPS altitude velocity is probably good enough for what we need, but
> the consumer GPS boards don't seem to be set up ideally for them.  A
> high
> update rate GPS velocity sensor (which is lots easier than the full
> position sensor) would be a great project for someone...
>
> In thinking about having a person on the vehicle, plummeting down from a
> high altitude, I feel more comfortable with a direct ranger of some
> kind.
>
> John Carmack
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 5070 invoked from network); 15 Dec 2001 05:37:31 -0000
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 15 Dec 2001 05:37:31 -0000
Received: (qmail 25643 invoked by uid 50005); 15 Dec 2001 05:37:22 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4175. . Clean. Processed in 2.859382 secs); 15 Dec 2001 05:37:22 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 15 Dec 2001 05:37:18 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA13781; Fri, 14 Dec 2001 21:36:02 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 101818 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 15 Dec 2001 05:36:00          +0000
Received: from castor.ridgenet.net (IDENT:root@castor.ridgenet.net          [199.120.150.29]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA13767          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 14 Dec 2001 21:36:00 -0800
Received: from kristinscomp (pm086.ridgenet.net [204.154.246.86]) by          castor.ridgenet.net (8.11.0/8.11.0) with SMTP id fBF5cdb03120; Fri,          14 Dec 2001 21:38:39 -0800
References: <NKEHJAOOKBPGIKOOPDEFOEOKCDAA.jwckman@space-rockets.com>             <a0510032eb840716098fb@[63.24.225.213]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <003d01c1852a$84940ba0$1b30fea9@kristinscomp>
Date:         Fri, 14 Dec 2001 21:36:58 -0800
Reply-To: "Kristin & David Hall" <thehalls@RIDGENET.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Kristin & David Hall" <thehalls@RIDGENET.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Procedures needed
Comments: To: Jerry Irvine <01rocket@GTE.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

> Estimate the moment of interia to be zero or a known value from another
rocket.

Inertia equal to zero?  Congrats, your 6DOF just became a 3DOF or what is
sometimes refered to as a "pseudo 5DOF".

> Assume thrust misalignment to be zero

Then you may rest assured that the FAA will never sign off on the results.

> CG centered

You may get them to agree to this one.

> Assume gentle spin (spinning is recommended on first unit flights at
> government ranges at a 10 degree launch angle or more to address
> these issues.)

Nope, gonna have to do more than assume or once again, the powers that be
aren't likely to sign off on it.

> CG vs burn time on a liquid needs to be modeled or estimated.  On a
> solid it is far less mandatory since it always becomes more stable.

It is every bit as mandatory.  The more stable the vehicle, the more prone
to weathercocking.  See where this might effect dispersion?

> Use Aerolab for CP vs Mach or estimate it to get poorer by 0.5
> calibers to peak velocity.

Agreed.

> Assume propellant to be repeatable vs batch and temperature and model
> a reasonable expected temp.  There are other factors worst than that
> you cannot estimate that swamps these issues, so why bother?

Because it is something that the FAA asks for.  It is also very easy to do
so why the hell not?

> Launch elevation can be done within 1% on a heavy rail or well
> anchored tower.  A light rail or rod should not be used where this
> type of application is at issue.

Again, it is easy to do and is something they ask for....

> Launch azimuth is one of the variables they want you to modify in the
> "wind weighting" calculations.  I prefer to fix it in the center of
> expected wind directions and not launch if outside those parameters.
> Unless you have alot of money for balloons, smaller rockets, special
> weather equipment and experts.

True, using anticipated wind directions is the best you can do before the
day of the launch, but still they're going to want to see sensitivity to
azimuth.  Again, this one is trivial to do so why the hell not?

> I find a 2d program is within 3% of the 6DOF program for these issues
> and anything more complex is not scientifically justified, but
> government mandated based on assumptions of a team of 200 engineers
> working full time for three years on the problem and it being an

Whether or not your 3% statement is true is irrelevant.  Uncle Sam has the
playbook and you do not have the power to change the playbook.  You either
play by his rules or you don't play.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 9499 invoked from network); 15 Dec 2001 05:39:06 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 15 Dec 2001 05:39:06 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 26548 invoked by uid 50005); 15 Dec 2001 05:38:57 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4175. . Clean. Processed in 3.734801 secs); 15 Dec 2001 05:38:57 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 15 Dec 2001 05:38:53 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA13809; Fri, 14 Dec 2001 21:37:46 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 101825 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 15 Dec 2001 05:37:45          +0000
Received: from out001pub.verizon.net (out001pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.101])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA13795 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 14 Dec 2001 21:37:45 -0800
Received: from [63.24.225.213] (1Cust227.tnt1.rancho-cucamonga.ca.da.uu.net          [63.24.225.227]) by out001pub.verizon.net  with ESMTP for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; id fBF5bBZg007002 Fri, 14 Dec 2001 23:37:13          -0600 (CST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: GTE/01rocket@mail.gte.net
References: <OF39FF5B6C.4102BD93-ON87256B21.00585E3E@mtroyal.ab.ca>            <a0510031bb83e909b67dc@[63.24.225.213]>            <3C18D7E4.1CC9D49D@biomicro.com>            <002c01c1843f$7429ff40$1b30fea9@kristinscomp>            <3C1ACE86.7967EECE@seanet.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <a05100332b84090f9e965@[63.24.225.213]>
Date:         Fri, 14 Dec 2001 21:37:22 -0800
Reply-To: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Procedures needed
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <3C1ACE86.7967EECE@seanet.com>

>You didn't mention the dispersion analysis capability.  That is all the
>misalignment, imbalance, wind gust, etc. variations that need means,
>dispersions, and a mechanism to draw random samples.  Then you
>need an outer process to repeat the calculations many times and then
>calculate means and deviations for the impact coordinates.

I have never understood why all these mental masturbations were
needed when in reality all you care about is maximum ballistic range,
targets within that range, probability of impact, then pray.

After all, no matter how much or how little of these calculations you
perform the flight is still launched under the same conditions with
the same variables and same errors.  No corrective measures are taken.

It's all about doing something for the sheer sake of doing something.
Baffle people with numbers.  That's it.

You know what happens when a rocket actually hits something?  Ask the
folks at Woomera.  They had one land in a grocery store parking lot.

Rockets are essentially harmless in practice, even big ones.

Jerry

--
Jerry Irvine, Box 1242, Claremont, California USA
Opinion, the whole thing. <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
Bring common sense back to rocketry administration.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 17063 invoked from network); 15 Dec 2001 05:41:43 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 15 Dec 2001 05:41:43 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 30649 invoked by uid 50005); 15 Dec 2001 05:41:34 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4175. . Clean. Processed in 7.477615 secs); 15 Dec 2001 05:41:34 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 15 Dec 2001 05:41:25 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA13838; Fri, 14 Dec 2001 21:40:12 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 101832 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 15 Dec 2001 05:40:11          +0000
Received: from out006pub.verizon.net (out006pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.106])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA13824 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 14 Dec 2001 21:40:11 -0800
Received: from [63.24.225.213] (1Cust227.tnt1.rancho-cucamonga.ca.da.uu.net          [63.24.225.227]) by out006pub.verizon.net  with ESMTP for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; id fBF5ddh10480 Fri, 14 Dec 2001 23:39:39          -0600 (CST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: GTE/01rocket@mail.gte.net
References: <4.3.1.2.20011214135859.035039e8@mail.idsoftware.com>            <5.0.2.1.0.20011214203129.01f7f178@mail.earthlink.net>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <a05100333b84092403642@[63.24.225.213]>
Date:         Fri, 14 Dec 2001 21:39:49 -0800
Reply-To: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] rader/laser altimeters
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <5.0.2.1.0.20011214203129.01f7f178@mail.earthlink.net>

>>http://www.avionix.com/ralt.html
>
>
>         These units only indicate down to an altitude of about 40 ft... I
>suspect that's still a bit too high for the contemplated application.


If it like load cells, this is probably because they are calibrated
to operate over a wide range of altitudes.  If the range is narrowed
to say 100 feet then the accuracy goes up sufficiently for under a
foot error.

etc.

Jerry

--
Jerry Irvine, Box 1242, Claremont, California USA
Opinion, the whole thing. <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
Bring common sense back to rocketry administration.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 11241 invoked from network); 15 Dec 2001 05:50:24 -0000
Received: from smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.105]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 15 Dec 2001 05:50:24 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 28767 invoked by uid 50005); 15 Dec 2001 05:50:15 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpy with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4175. . Clean. Processed in 0.771469 secs); 15 Dec 2001 05:50:15 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 15 Dec 2001 05:50:14 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA13894; Fri, 14 Dec 2001 21:48:53 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 101843 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 15 Dec 2001 05:48:50          +0000
Received: from sys27.hou.wt.net (sys27.hou.wt.net [205.230.159.27]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA13880 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 14 Dec 2001 21:48:50 -0800
Received: from localhost (216-119-138-157.ipset18.wt.net [216.119.138.157]) by          sys27.hou.wt.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id XAA01635; Fri, 14 Dec          2001 23:48:42 -0600 (CST)
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="US-ASCII"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.475)
Message-ID:  <6DB3DA05-F11F-11D5-BA7B-0050E43A5105@netaxs.com>
Date:         Fri, 14 Dec 2001 23:48:56 -0600
Reply-To: "Don McCorvey" <dlm3@NETAXS.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Don McCorvey" <dlm3@NETAXS.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] rader/laser altimeters
Comments: To: Jerry Irvine <01rocket@GTE.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <a05100333b84092403642@[63.24.225.213]>

There's also a measure of error due to ground clutter/scattering, I
believe. Since it's meant for general aviation purposes, it's a rare
approach where you can't see the ground from 40' without busting FAA IFR
minimums, so it doesn't need to go lower for its designed purpose.

  As I recall the timing in the altimeter was determined by the length of
a coiled-up coaxial cable in the receiving antenna, so changing the
length of that cable would alter the altitude range of the instrument.

Don


On Friday, December 14, 2001, at 11:39  PM, Jerry Irvine wrote:

>>> http://www.avionix.com/ralt.html
>>
>>
>>         These units only indicate down to an altitude of about 40
>> ft... I
>> suspect that's still a bit too high for the contemplated application.
>
>
> If it like load cells, this is probably because they are calibrated
> to operate over a wide range of altitudes.  If the range is narrowed
> to say 100 feet then the accuracy goes up sufficiently for under a
> foot error.
>
> etc.
>
> Jerry
>
> --
> Jerry Irvine, Box 1242, Claremont, California USA
> Opinion, the whole thing. <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
> Bring common sense back to rocketry administration.
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 24387 invoked from network); 15 Dec 2001 05:55:18 -0000
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 15 Dec 2001 05:55:18 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 7408 invoked by uid 50005); 15 Dec 2001 05:55:10 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4175. . Clean. Processed in 0.420031 secs); 15 Dec 2001 05:55:10 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 15 Dec 2001 05:55:09 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA13956; Fri, 14 Dec 2001 21:53:58 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 101858 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 15 Dec 2001 05:53:56          +0000
Received: from sys32.hou.wt.net (sys32.hou.wt.net [205.230.159.32]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA13942 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 14 Dec 2001 21:53:56 -0800
Received: from localhost (216-119-138-157.ipset18.wt.net [216.119.138.157]) by          sys32.hou.wt.net (8.9.1/8.9.1) with ESMTP id XAA00734; Fri, 14 Dec          2001 23:54:04 -0600 (CST)
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="US-ASCII"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.475)
Message-ID:  <23D1F430-F120-11D5-BA7B-0050E43A5105@netaxs.com>
Date:         Fri, 14 Dec 2001 23:54:01 -0600
Reply-To: "Don McCorvey" <dlm3@NETAXS.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Don McCorvey" <dlm3@NETAXS.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] rader/laser altimeters
Comments: To: John Carmack <johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <4.3.1.2.20011214225328.03684fb8@mail.idsoftware.com>

What do you think it would take to develop something like that ? I'm
short on time (who isn't ?) but it sounds like an interesting project.

On Friday, December 14, 2001, at 11:03  PM, John Carmack wrote:
> A high
> update rate GPS velocity sensor (which is lots easier than the full
> position sensor) would be a great project for someone...
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 21124 invoked from network); 15 Dec 2001 06:05:32 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 15 Dec 2001 06:05:32 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 22177 invoked by uid 50005); 15 Dec 2001 06:05:23 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4175. . Clean. Processed in 1.489992 secs); 15 Dec 2001 06:05:23 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 15 Dec 2001 06:05:21 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA14042; Fri, 14 Dec 2001 22:03:46 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 101874 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 15 Dec 2001 06:03:43          +0000
Received: from smtp005pub.verizon.net (smtp005pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.184])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA14027 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 14 Dec 2001 22:03:43 -0800
Received: from [63.24.225.213] (1Cust227.tnt1.rancho-cucamonga.ca.da.uu.net          [63.24.225.227]) by smtp005pub.verizon.net  with ESMTP for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; id fBF63BY09743 Sat, 15 Dec 2001 00:03:11          -0600 (CST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: GTE/01rocket@mail.gte.net
References: <NKEHJAOOKBPGIKOOPDEFOEOKCDAA.jwckman@space-rockets.com>            <a0510032eb840716098fb@[63.24.225.213]>            <003d01c1852a$84940ba0$1b30fea9@kristinscomp>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <a05100334b840949cc434@[63.24.225.213]>
Date:         Fri, 14 Dec 2001 22:03:21 -0800
Reply-To: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Procedures needed
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <003d01c1852a$84940ba0$1b30fea9@kristinscomp>

>Hall:


>  > Estimate the moment of interia to be zero or a known value from another
>rocket.
>
>Inertia equal to zero?  Congrats, your 6DOF just became a 3DOF or what is
>sometimes refered to as a "pseudo 5DOF".


That's my point.  It's not necessary for ballistic sub-orbital
rockets.  Or should not be.  Even very high performance ones.


>
>>  Assume thrust misalignment to be zero
>
>Then you may rest assured that the FAA will never sign off on the results.


Unless you spin it (addressed later in my post), or unless you get a
wavier based on science or site issues (addressed later in my post).

In short, the requirements they have are inappropriate.  It might be
an uphill battle to change them, but for a very wide range of rockets
that is fully appropriate to change.


>
>>  CG centered
>
>You may get them to agree to this one.
>
>>  Assume gentle spin (spinning is recommended on first unit flights at
>>  government ranges at a 10 degree launch angle or more to address
>>  these issues.)
>
>Nope, gonna have to do more than assume or once again, the powers that be
>aren't likely to sign off on it.
>
>>  CG vs burn time on a liquid needs to be modeled or estimated.  On a
>>  solid it is far less mandatory since it always becomes more stable.
>
>It is every bit as mandatory.  The more stable the vehicle, the more prone
>to weathercocking.  See where this might effect dispersion?


I see where dispersion is non-estimateable to begin with, based on
real life data and attempts to do so generally and consistently fail.


>
>>  Use Aerolab for CP vs Mach or estimate it to get poorer by 0.5
>>  calibers to peak velocity.
>
>Agreed.
>
>>  Assume propellant to be repeatable vs batch and temperature and model
>>  a reasonable expected temp.  There are other factors worst than that
>>  you cannot estimate that swamps these issues, so why bother?
>
>Because it is something that the FAA asks for.  It is also very easy to do
>so why the hell not?


I am claiming on several of these line items FAA is wrong to ask for
minute details that error swamps anyway.  I say the rules need
rewriting, or waivers.


>
>>  Launch elevation can be done within 1% on a heavy rail or well
>>  anchored tower.  A light rail or rod should not be used where this
>>  type of application is at issue.
>
>Again, it is easy to do and is something they ask for....
>
>>  Launch azimuth is one of the variables they want you to modify in the
>>  "wind weighting" calculations.  I prefer to fix it in the center of
>>  expected wind directions and not launch if outside those parameters.
>>  Unless you have alot of money for balloons, smaller rockets, special
>>  weather equipment and experts.
>
>True, using anticipated wind directions is the best you can do before the
>day of the launch, but still they're going to want to see sensitivity to
>azimuth.  Again, this one is trivial to do so why the hell not?


All these things you discount as trivial are only trivial if you have
a program to do it and not many do.  Nobody on this list for example.


>
>>  I find a 2d program is within 3% of the 6DOF program for these issues
>>  and anything more complex is not scientifically justified, but
>>  government mandated based on assumptions of a team of 200 engineers
>>  working full time for three years on the problem and it being an
>
>Whether or not your 3% statement is true is irrelevant.  Uncle Sam has the
>playbook and you do not have the power to change the playbook.


Ah, now we get to it.  We do have the power to change the playbook.
RRI defined the current AST sub-orbital playbook over 10 years ago.
It needs some editing.

I suspect the orbital playbook has not been edited recently either
nor been adjusted for recent techniques.


>  You either
>play by his rules or you don't play.


Or change the rules, or get PERMISSION to avoid some of the rules, or
at least automate the process of complying with those rules that
cannot be waived or changed in time.

Jerry




--
Jerry Irvine, Box 1242, Claremont, California USA
Opinion, the whole thing. <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
Bring common sense back to rocketry administration.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 29410 invoked from network); 15 Dec 2001 06:08:50 -0000
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 15 Dec 2001 06:08:50 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 25672 invoked by uid 50005); 15 Dec 2001 06:08:41 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4175. . Clean. Processed in 1.272487 secs); 15 Dec 2001 06:08:41 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 15 Dec 2001 06:08:38 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA14080; Fri, 14 Dec 2001 22:07:28 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 101869 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 15 Dec 2001 06:07:26          +0000
Received: from snipe.prod.itd.earthlink.net (snipe.mail.pas.earthlink.net          [207.217.120.62]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA13984          for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Fri, 14 Dec 2001 21:57:25 -0800
Received: from dialup-209.245.141.220.dial1.sanjose1.level3.net          ([209.245.141.220] helo=earthlink.net) by          snipe.prod.itd.earthlink.net with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id          16F7p6-0003OR-00; Fri, 14 Dec 2001 21:57:25 -0800
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.75 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.16-22 i686)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <9431BB74-F11D-11D5-BA7B-0050E43A5105@netaxs.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3C1AE666.6A327BED@earthlink.net>
Date:         Fri, 14 Dec 2001 21:57:58 -0800
Reply-To: "David Weinshenker" <daze39@EARTHLINK.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "David Weinshenker" <daze39@EARTHLINK.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] rader/laser altimeters
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Don McCorvey wrote:
> One other thought - some time back, I know a few people were looking at
> video-based landing systems for autonomous vehicles. I don't know where
> the work is now, but if you were to invest in the computing horsepower
> needed to do the job, you could use fixed references on the ground to
> triangulate the position of the vehicle as it does final approach and
> landing.

Hmmm... use a laser to make a known spot on the ground (perhaps with a
precoded modulation to make it easier to pick out of a low-S/N return)
and then use a pair of spaced video cameras to image it. From the parallax
between the images, compute where the ground is.

This would require much slower primary (i.e., signal-processing)
electronics than any speed-of-light-based system with nanosecond
resolution. All the "front end" of this proposed rangefinder system
would have to do is frame-grab a video signal (of approx. 5 MHz
bandwidth) into digitized data blocks - then throw great steaming
screaming heaps of CPU bus power at the image-comparison problem, if
need be. (A 5 MHz flash 8-bit A/D is probably a fairly cheap chip
these days, I suspect... small B+W video cameras are available for
about $10-$100 these days; color ones slightly higher.)

-dave w

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 28834 invoked from network); 15 Dec 2001 06:20:27 -0000
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 15 Dec 2001 06:20:27 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 3794 invoked by uid 50005); 15 Dec 2001 06:20:18 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4175. . Clean. Processed in 0.690842 secs); 15 Dec 2001 06:20:18 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 15 Dec 2001 06:20:17 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA14148; Fri, 14 Dec 2001 22:18:59 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 101895 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 15 Dec 2001 06:18:56          +0000
Received: from sys27.hou.wt.net (sys27.hou.wt.net [205.230.159.27]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA14134 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 14 Dec 2001 22:18:56 -0800
Received: from localhost (216-119-138-157.ipset18.wt.net [216.119.138.157]) by          sys27.hou.wt.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id AAA02191; Sat, 15 Dec          2001 00:18:47 -0600 (CST)
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="US-ASCII"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.475)
Message-ID:  <A1E8A7BC-F123-11D5-BA7B-0050E43A5105@netaxs.com>
Date:         Sat, 15 Dec 2001 00:19:01 -0600
Reply-To: "Don McCorvey" <dlm3@NETAXS.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Don McCorvey" <dlm3@NETAXS.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] rader/laser altimeters
Comments: To: David Weinshenker <daze39@EARTHLINK.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <3C1AE666.6A327BED@earthlink.net>

Actually, I was thinking about the other way around - single camera,
multiple, known references. Simplifies the math since all you have to do
is measure the apparent distance between the reference points (in
pixels), then determine the altitude by comparing it to the known
distance.

Of course, another alternative is to keep all that computing power on
the ground and do the same thing, communicating the result via RF to the
vehicle...

Don

On Friday, December 14, 2001, at 11:57  PM, David Weinshenker wrote:

> Don McCorvey wrote:
>> One other thought - some time back, I know a few people were looking at
>> video-based landing systems for autonomous vehicles. I don't know where
>> the work is now, but if you were to invest in the computing horsepower
>> needed to do the job, you could use fixed references on the ground to
>> triangulate the position of the vehicle as it does final approach and
>> landing.
>
> Hmmm... use a laser to make a known spot on the ground (perhaps with a
> precoded modulation to make it easier to pick out of a low-S/N return)
> and then use a pair of spaced video cameras to image it. From the
> parallax
> between the images, compute where the ground is.
>
> This would require much slower primary (i.e., signal-processing)
> electronics than any speed-of-light-based system with nanosecond
> resolution. All the "front end" of this proposed rangefinder system
> would have to do is frame-grab a video signal (of approx. 5 MHz
> bandwidth) into digitized data blocks - then throw great steaming
> screaming heaps of CPU bus power at the image-comparison problem, if
> need be. (A 5 MHz flash 8-bit A/D is probably a fairly cheap chip
> these days, I suspect... small B+W video cameras are available for
> about $10-$100 these days; color ones slightly higher.)
>
> -dave w
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 27421 invoked from network); 15 Dec 2001 06:56:02 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.105]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 15 Dec 2001 06:56:02 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 855 invoked by uid 50005); 15 Dec 2001 06:55:52 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpy with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4175. . Clean. Processed in 4.10048 secs); 15 Dec 2001 06:55:52 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 15 Dec 2001 06:55:47 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA14287; Fri, 14 Dec 2001 22:54:30 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 101917 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 15 Dec 2001 06:54:17          +0000
Received: from idsoftware.com (predator.idsoftware.com [192.246.40.34]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA14273 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Fri, 14 Dec 2001 22:54:17 -0800
Received: from [192.246.40.144] (account johnc HELO pluto.idsoftware.com) by          idsoftware.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 3.4.7) with ESMTP id 13553 for          AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 15 Dec 2001 00:54:16 -0600
X-Sender: johnc@mail.idsoftware.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.1
References: <9431BB74-F11D-11D5-BA7B-0050E43A5105@netaxs.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <4.3.1.2.20011215010040.0360b688@mail.idsoftware.com>
Date:         Sat, 15 Dec 2001 01:10:20 -0600
Reply-To: "John Carmack" <johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Carmack" <johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] rader/laser altimeters
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <3C1AE666.6A327BED@earthlink.net>

At 09:57 PM 12/14/2001 -0800, you wrote:
>Don McCorvey wrote:
> > One other thought - some time back, I know a few people were looking at
> > video-based landing systems for autonomous vehicles. I don't know where
> > the work is now, but if you were to invest in the computing horsepower
> > needed to do the job, you could use fixed references on the ground to
> > triangulate the position of the vehicle as it does final approach and
> > landing.
>
>Hmmm... use a laser to make a known spot on the ground (perhaps with a
>precoded modulation to make it easier to pick out of a low-S/N return)
>and then use a pair of spaced video cameras to image it. From the parallax
>between the images, compute where the ground is.
>
>This would require much slower primary (i.e., signal-processing)
>electronics than any speed-of-light-based system with nanosecond
>resolution. All the "front end" of this proposed rangefinder system
>would have to do is frame-grab a video signal (of approx. 5 MHz
>bandwidth) into digitized data blocks - then throw great steaming
>screaming heaps of CPU bus power at the image-comparison problem, if
>need be. (A 5 MHz flash 8-bit A/D is probably a fairly cheap chip
>these days, I suspect... small B+W video cameras are available for
>about $10-$100 these days; color ones slightly higher.)
>
>-dave w

That is an interesting idea.

The unassisted altitude-from-image problem is difficult, even with a nice
fixed target of known dimensions and orientation to look at.  I did a
little bit of work with that a couple years ago for head tracking, and the
practice is a lot harder than the theory.  I am confident I could make it
work if I sweated it out, but it would take significant effort, and still
doesn't help when you are coming down someplace you didn't intend.

Locating a signal dot in two baselined cameras and calculating from that is
much, much easier.  The calibration will still be a bit tricky, but it is
feasible.  The resolution probably wouldn't be all that great, even with
subpixel center locating, but it might be good enough.

You might be able to extend it with multiple dots and more cameras to get
pitch and yaw over the ground as well.

John Carmack

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 19097 invoked from network); 15 Dec 2001 07:04:37 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 15 Dec 2001 07:04:37 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 27020 invoked by uid 50005); 15 Dec 2001 07:04:29 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4175. . Clean. Processed in 0.330855 secs); 15 Dec 2001 07:04:29 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 15 Dec 2001 07:04:28 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA14335; Fri, 14 Dec 2001 23:02:51 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 101924 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 15 Dec 2001 07:02:46          +0000
Received: from idsoftware.com (predator.idsoftware.com [192.246.40.34]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA14321 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Fri, 14 Dec 2001 23:02:46 -0800
Received: from [192.246.40.144] (account johnc HELO pluto.idsoftware.com) by          idsoftware.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 3.4.7) with ESMTP id 13565 for          AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 15 Dec 2001 01:02:45 -0600
X-Sender: johnc@mail.idsoftware.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.1
References: <4.3.1.2.20011214225328.03684fb8@mail.idsoftware.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <4.3.1.2.20011215011116.0362b7a8@mail.idsoftware.com>
Date:         Sat, 15 Dec 2001 01:18:50 -0600
Reply-To: "John Carmack" <johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Carmack" <johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] rader/laser altimeters
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <23D1F430-F120-11D5-BA7B-0050E43A5105@netaxs.com>

Don McCorvey wrote:
>What do you think it would take to develop something like that ? I'm
>short on time (who isn't ?) but it sounds like an interesting project.
>
>On Friday, December 14, 2001, at 11:03  PM, John Carmack wrote:
>>A high
>>update rate GPS velocity sensor (which is lots easier than the full
>>position sensor) would be a great project for someone...

The best way to go about it would probably be to make a minimal interface
from one of the 12 channel GPS correlator front end chips to a serial
interface, and just do all the rest on a normal CPU.  I don't think this is
all that much bandwidth -- you get carrier phase, a low bit rate signal,
and probably a signal strength for each channel.

Doing all the software for GPS is a lot of work, but I think there are some
implementations available online that may be good starts.

A cheap little raw GPS interface would be a neat thing to have for experiments.

John Carmack

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 19517 invoked from network); 15 Dec 2001 10:39:27 -0000
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 15 Dec 2001 10:39:27 -0000
Received: (qmail 17162 invoked by uid 50005); 15 Dec 2001 10:39:17 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4175. . Clean. Processed in 7.515295 secs); 15 Dec 2001 10:39:17 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 15 Dec 2001 10:39:07 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id CAA14825; Sat, 15 Dec 2001 02:37:44 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 101948 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 15 Dec 2001 10:37:30          +0000
Received: from fep3-orange.clear.net.nz (fep3-orange.clear.net.nz          [203.97.32.3]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id CAA14810          for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Sat, 15 Dec 2001 02:37:29 -0800
Received: from mkbs (203-167-148-98.dialup.clear.net.nz [203.167.148.98]) by          fep3-orange.clear.net.nz (1.5/1.8) with SMTP id XAA06355; Sat, 15 Dec          2001 23:37:23 +1300 (NZDT)
References: <9431BB74-F11D-11D5-BA7B-0050E43A5105@netaxs.com>             <4.3.1.2.20011215010040.0360b688@mail.idsoftware.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <008401c18554$e48edec0$0700a8c0@mkbs>
Date:         Sat, 15 Dec 2001 23:35:10 +1300
Reply-To: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Organization: Applied Technology
Subject:      Re: [AR] rader/laser altimeters
Comments: To: John Carmack <johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

> >Hmmm... use a laser to make a known spot on the ground (perhaps with a
> >precoded modulation to make it easier to pick out of a low-S/N return)
> >and then use a pair of spaced video cameras to image it. From the
parallax
> >between the images, compute where the ground is.


Then there's the 1940's technology "dam busters" method which is the
opposite of the two camera method. Two spots on the craft point approx
downwards with a small angle off vertical for each.
The inter-pot distance changes with height. They use crossed beams and
coloured lights so that you got a single spot at design height (60 feet?),
colour A ahead of colour B if too high and the opposite if too low. In this
case pointing BOTH "outwards - one frontward and one rearward would lead to
the two spots never converging and the spot images corresponding to height
plus a constant. As in prior method, a video camera can determine the
distance between spots.
As the camera image also shrinks with height you could adjust angle to use
this fact as well.



      Russell McMahon
_____________________________

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 1519 invoked from network); 15 Dec 2001 16:30:37 -0000
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 15 Dec 2001 16:30:37 -0000
Received: (qmail 28564 invoked by uid 50005); 15 Dec 2001 16:30:28 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4175. . Clean. Processed in 0.833712 secs); 15 Dec 2001 16:30:28 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 15 Dec 2001 16:30:27 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA15650; Sat, 15 Dec 2001 08:28:53 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 101966 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 15 Dec 2001 16:28:37          +0000
Received: from cesaroni.net ([204.101.26.130]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7)          with ESMTP id IAA15634 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 15 Dec 2001          08:28:37 -0800
Received: from Anthony by cesaroni.net with SMTP (MDaemon.v2.8.7.0.R) for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 15 Dec 2001 11:26:49 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0E7F_01C56B69.5C9BF530"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 8.5, Build 4.71.2173.0
Importance: Normal
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
X-MDaemon-Deliver-To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
X-Return-Path: ACesaroni@cesaroni.net
Message-ID:  <001f01c18584$dd399400$1b0101c0@Anthony>
Date:         Sat, 15 Dec 2001 11:23:42 -0500
Reply-To: "Anthony Cesaroni" <ACesaroni@cesaroni.net>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Anthony Cesaroni" <ACesaroni@cesaroni.net>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Composite Sleeve NO2 tanks
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <188.813cc5.294c1539@aol.com>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0E7F_01C56B69.5C9BF530
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Mark,

Modulus values describe the lamina stiffness. Go to
http://web.mit.edu/course/3/3.11/www/modules/composites.pdf. As far as
availability, that really depends on configuration, yield, PAN or Pitch
based etc. If you plan on winding operations, hi modulus carbon can be
difficult to process without proper equipment. Stick with E values in the
28~38m range to start.

Anthony.
  -----Original Message-----
  From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@itc.uci.edu]On
Behalf Of Sociald84@AOL.COM
  Sent: Friday, December 14, 2001 9:54 PM
  To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
  Subject: Re: Composite Sleeve NO2 tanks


  In a message dated 12/6/2001 7:17:34 AM Mountain Standard Time,
ACesaroni@cesaroni.net writes:



    The Hyperion tanks are a 48 million modulus carbon
    and have aluminum components for example.


  What is meant by "48 million modulus carbon"? Is that what  carbon fiber
with a tensile strength of 48 million psi is called? I have heard or carbon
fibre with a tensile strength of up to 80 million psi or MSI. Is this stuff
even available in small quantities to the small buyer?

  Thanks

  Mark

------=_NextPart_000_0E7F_01C56B69.5C9BF530
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Dwindows-1252">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 6.00.2600.0" name=3DGENERATOR></HEAD>
<BODY>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial color=3D#0000ff size=3D2><SPAN=20
class=3D800241216-15122001>Mark,</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial color=3D#0000ff size=3D2><SPAN=20
class=3D800241216-15122001></SPAN></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial color=3D#0000ff size=3D2><SPAN=20
class=3D800241216-15122001>Modulus values describe the lamina stiffness. =
Go to <A=20
href=3D"http://web.mit.edu/course/3/3.11/www/modules/composites.pdf">http=
://web.mit.edu/course/3/3.11/www/modules/composites.pdf</A>.=20
As far as availability, that really depends on configuration, yield, PAN =
or=20
Pitch based&nbsp;etc. If you plan on winding operations, hi modulus=20
carbon&nbsp;can be difficult to process without proper equipment. Stick=20
with&nbsp;E values in the 28~38m range to =
start.&nbsp;</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial color=3D#0000ff size=3D2><SPAN=20
class=3D800241216-15122001></SPAN></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial color=3D#0000ff size=3D2><SPAN=20
class=3D800241216-15122001>Anthony.&nbsp;&nbsp;</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE=20
style=3D"PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px =
solid">
  <DIV class=3DOutlookMessageHeader><FONT face=3D"Times New Roman"=20
  size=3D2>-----Original Message-----<BR><B>From:</B> Amateur Rocketry =
discussion=20
  list [mailto:AROCKET@itc.uci.edu]<B>On Behalf Of</B>=20
  Sociald84@AOL.COM<BR><B>Sent:</B> Friday, December 14, 2001 9:54=20
  PM<BR><B>To:</B> AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU<BR><B>Subject:</B> Re: Composite =
Sleeve=20
  NO2 tanks<BR><BR></FONT></DIV><FONT face=3Darial,helvetica><FONT =
size=3D2>In a=20
  message dated 12/6/2001 7:17:34 AM Mountain Standard Time,=20
  ACesaroni@cesaroni.net writes: <BR><BR><BR>
  <BLOCKQUOTE=20
  style=3D"PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px =
solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px"=20
  TYPE=3D"CITE">The Hyperion tanks are a 48 million modulus carbon =
<BR>and have=20
    aluminum components for example.</FONT><FONT lang=3D0 face=3DArial =
color=3D#000000=20
    size=3D3 FAMILY=3D"SANSSERIF"></BLOCKQUOTE><BR></FONT><FONT lang=3D0 =
face=3DArial=20
  color=3D#000000 size=3D2 FAMILY=3D"SANSSERIF"><BR>What is meant by "48 =
million=20
  modulus carbon"? Is that what &nbsp;carbon fiber with a tensile =
strength of 48=20
  million psi is called? I have heard or carbon fibre with a tensile =
strength of=20
  up to 80 million psi or MSI. Is this stuff even available in small =
quantities=20
  to the small buyer? <BR><BR>Thanks <BR><BR>Mark</FONT>=20
</FONT></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0E7F_01C56B69.5C9BF530--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 26854 invoked from network); 15 Dec 2001 16:56:49 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 15 Dec 2001 16:56:49 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 29187 invoked by uid 50005); 15 Dec 2001 16:56:40 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4175. . Clean. Processed in 0.867137 secs); 15 Dec 2001 16:56:40 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 15 Dec 2001 16:56:39 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA15794; Sat, 15 Dec 2001 08:55:32 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 101988 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 15 Dec 2001 16:55:28          +0000
Received: from hades.usol.com (IDENT:root@hades.usol.com [208.232.58.41]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA15780 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 15 Dec 2001 08:55:28 -0800
Received: from fredflin (pm14-5.usol.com [63.64.150.213]) by hades.usol.com          (8.11.6/8.11.6) with SMTP id fBFGtQi12647 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>;          Sat, 15 Dec 2001 11:55:26 -0500
X-Sender: mycrump@pop3.usol.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.5 (32)
References: <3C1AE666.6A327BED@earthlink.net>            <9431BB74-F11D-11D5-BA7B-0050E43A5105@netaxs.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <3.0.5.32.20011215064236.007b5cc0@pop3.usol.com>
Date:         Sat, 15 Dec 2001 06:42:36 -0500
Reply-To: "Daryl P. Dacko" <mycrump@USOL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Daryl P. Dacko" <mycrump@USOL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] rader/laser altimeters
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <4.3.1.2.20011215010040.0360b688@mail.idsoftware.com>

Has anyone looked at the radar level transmitters used in chemical process
instrumentation ?

They are usually short range, and can be set up for analog output...

Just an odd thought...

Daryl

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 29485 invoked from network); 15 Dec 2001 19:08:46 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 15 Dec 2001 19:08:46 -0000
Received: (qmail 8024 invoked by uid 50005); 15 Dec 2001 19:08:37 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4175. . Clean. Processed in 0.363949 secs); 15 Dec 2001 19:08:37 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 15 Dec 2001 19:08:36 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA16339; Sat, 15 Dec 2001 11:07:22 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 102038 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 15 Dec 2001 19:07:07          +0000
Received: from spsystems.net (spsystems.net [209.47.149.227]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA16325 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Sat,          15 Dec 2001 11:07:07 -0800
Received: (from henry@localhost) by spsystems.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id OAA05852;          Sat, 15 Dec 2001 14:06:26 -0500 (EST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1011215135738.3900A-100000@spsystems.net>
Date:         Sat, 15 Dec 2001 14:06:26 -0500
Reply-To: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Procedures needed
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <3C1ACE86.7967EECE@seanet.com>

On Fri, 14 Dec 2001, Sherwood Stolt wrote:
> You didn't mention the dispersion analysis capability.  That is all the
> misalignment, imbalance, wind gust, etc. variations that need means,
> dispersions, and a mechanism to draw random samples.  Then you
> need an outer process to repeat the calculations many times and then
> calculate means and deviations for the impact coordinates.

Well, that's what the whole exercise is about, after all.

To my mind, the hardest part of the problem is not the programming itself,
but just pulling together and understanding all the data (or the ways of
deriving the data) for all the variables.

Remember, also, that if you want to use the output of this thing as a
submission to the FAA, you will face the "verification" problem -- that
is, when the FAA asks you "how do you know the output is right?", you need
to have a better answer than "trust me" or "it looks plausible".  There's
a reason why people who develop simulation software for a living tend to
be obsessed not with writing the software and making it run, but with
verifying that the answers correspond to reality.

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 11692 invoked from network); 15 Dec 2001 19:43:52 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.105]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 15 Dec 2001 19:43:52 -0000
Received: (qmail 3705 invoked by uid 50005); 15 Dec 2001 19:43:43 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpy with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4175. . Clean. Processed in 0.725637 secs); 15 Dec 2001 19:43:43 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 15 Dec 2001 19:43:42 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA16455; Sat, 15 Dec 2001 11:42:24 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 102053 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 15 Dec 2001 19:42:16          +0000
Received: from spsystems.net (spsystems.net [209.47.149.227]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA16441 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Sat,          15 Dec 2001 11:42:15 -0800
Received: (from henry@localhost) by spsystems.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id OAA06377;          Sat, 15 Dec 2001 14:41:35 -0500 (EST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1011215143717.6131A-100000@spsystems.net>
Date:         Sat, 15 Dec 2001 14:41:35 -0500
Reply-To: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Composite Sleeve NO2 tanks
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <188.813cc5.294c1539@aol.com>

On Fri, 14 Dec 2001 Sociald84@AOL.COM wrote:
> > The Hyperion tanks are a 48 million modulus carbon
> > and have aluminum components for example.
>
> What is meant by "48 million modulus carbon"? Is that what  carbon fiber with
> a tensile strength of 48 million psi is called?

No, tensile strength and modulus are two different things.  Modulus is how
stiff the fiber is -- how little it stretches under load -- rather than
how strong it is -- how much load it can take before it breaks.  The two
are not that closely related; high-modulus carbon fiber is not necessarily
high-strength, and vice versa.  Different applications need different
combinations of characteristics, and stiffness is often important.

For pressure tanks, strength is the obvious issue... but stiffness might
matter too.  For example, you'll typically have carbon fiber embedded in
some sort of resin, and that resin may have limits as to how far *it*
will stretch, in which case the carbon needs to be stiff enough that it
won't exceed that limit at maximum load.

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 11291 invoked from network); 15 Dec 2001 20:31:43 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 15 Dec 2001 20:31:43 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 32649 invoked by uid 50005); 15 Dec 2001 20:31:34 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4175. . Clean. Processed in 0.389486 secs); 15 Dec 2001 20:31:34 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 15 Dec 2001 20:31:34 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA16626; Sat, 15 Dec 2001 12:30:01 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 102076 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 15 Dec 2001 20:29:55          +0000
Received: from rwcrmhc53.attbi.com (rwcrmhc53.attbi.com [204.127.198.39]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA16607 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 15 Dec 2001 12:29:55 -0800
Received: from c396957-b.attbi.com ([12.248.139.34]) by rwcrmhc53.attbi.com          (InterMail vM.4.01.03.27 201-229-121-127-20010626) with ESMTP id          <20011215202924.DEOJ10701.rwcrmhc53.attbi.com@c396957-b.attbi.com>;          Sat, 15 Dec 2001 20:29:24 +0000
X-Sender: spiegl@mail
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
References: <3C1ACE86.7967EECE@seanet.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <5.1.0.14.2.20011215141652.00b46c20@mail>
Date:         Sat, 15 Dec 2001 14:29:53 -0600
Reply-To: "Mark C Spiegl" <spiegl@ATTBI.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Mark C Spiegl" <spiegl@ATTBI.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Procedures needed
Comments: To: wamex@pad17.com
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1011215135738.3900A-100000@spsystems.net>

> Henry Spencer writes:
>
> Remember, also, that if you want to use the output of this thing as a
> submission to the FAA, you will face the "verification" problem -- that
> is, when the FAA asks you "how do you know the output is right?", you need
> to have a better answer than "trust me" or "it looks plausible".  There's
> a reason why people who develop simulation software for a living tend to
> be obsessed not with writing the software and making it run, but with
> verifying that the answers correspond to reality.

And there is the rub.

I don't work in Aerospace (or any gov't related business), but we do
extensive simulations. Everyone I know in the simulation end of things
spends about 99.9% of their time proving their numbers are good, not
generating the numbers.

The actual programming is usually done with (expensive) graphics based
sim languages so there is almost zero classic coding done. They drag
little triangles and circles around a screen, connect with lines,
input some parameters, and press "go."

I'm not a sim guy so I don't know what all the symbols and crud mean,
and I am insultingly simplifying their job, but I am sure where they
spend their time. (other than bothering me for input data :)


--MCS

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 16227 invoked from network); 15 Dec 2001 23:53:42 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.105]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 15 Dec 2001 23:53:42 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 3522 invoked by uid 50005); 15 Dec 2001 23:53:33 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpy with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4175. . Clean. Processed in 0.791646 secs); 15 Dec 2001 23:53:33 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 15 Dec 2001 23:53:32 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA17158; Sat, 15 Dec 2001 15:51:20 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 102121 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 15 Dec 2001 23:51:04          +0000
Received: from po3.glue.umd.edu (po3.glue.umd.edu [128.8.10.123]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA17144 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 15 Dec 2001 15:51:03 -0800
Received: from y.glue.umd.edu (IDENT:root@y.glue.umd.edu [128.8.10.68]) by          po3.glue.umd.edu (8.10.1/8.10.1) with ESMTP id fBFNp1d01767; Sat, 15          Dec 2001 18:51:01 -0500 (EST)
Received: from y.glue.umd.edu (IDENT:sendmail@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by          y.glue.umd.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id SAA08137; Sat, 15 Dec 2001          18:51:01 -0500 (EST)
Received: from localhost (acase@localhost) by y.glue.umd.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with          ESMTP id SAA08133; Sat, 15 Dec 2001 18:51:00 -0500 (EST)
X-Authentication-Warning: y.glue.umd.edu: acase owned process doing -bs
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.GSO.4.21.0112151844580.7447-100000@y.glue.umd.edu>
Date:         Sat, 15 Dec 2001 18:51:00 -0500
Reply-To: "Andrew Case" <acase@GLUE.UMD.EDU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Andrew Case" <acase@GLUE.UMD.EDU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] rader/laser altimeters
Comments: To: David Weinshenker <daze39@EARTHLINK.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <3C1AE666.6A327BED@earthlink.net>

On Fri, 14 Dec 2001, David Weinshenker wrote:
> Hmmm... use a laser to make a known spot on the ground (perhaps with a
> precoded modulation to make it easier to pick out of a low-S/N return)
> and then use a pair of spaced video cameras to image it. From the parallax
> between the images, compute where the ground is.

Or even simpler - single camera, scan the laser in a line/cross/circle.
Size of image correlates to height in a fairly simple manner. In the
end of the day it's likely that a laser altimeter is a better solution,
though. Once you get into fiddling around with a DIY system it's
probably better to just build a simplified copy of an established
system. That way at least there are people to talk to who've already
done it, and there are most likely technical documents freely available
so you don't have to reinvent the wheel.

......Andrew

Andrew Case                             |
acase@plasma.umd.edu                    |
Institute for Plasma Research           |
University of Maryland, College Park    |

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 7949 invoked from network); 16 Dec 2001 03:57:07 -0000
Received: from smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.105]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 16 Dec 2001 03:57:07 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 29800 invoked by uid 50005); 16 Dec 2001 03:56:58 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpy with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4175. . Clean. Processed in 0.294588 secs); 16 Dec 2001 03:56:58 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 16 Dec 2001 03:56:57 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA17842; Sat, 15 Dec 2001 19:54:39 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 102171 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 16 Dec 2001 03:54:23          +0000
Received: from mplspop4.mpls.uswest.net (mplspop4.mpls.uswest.net          [204.147.80.14]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id TAA17828          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 15 Dec 2001 19:54:23 -0800
Received: (qmail 16872 invoked from network); 16 Dec 2001 03:54:20 -0000
Received: from wdskppp148.mpls.uswest.net (HELO qwest.net) (63.226.148.148) by          mplspop4.mpls.uswest.net with SMTP; 16 Dec 2001 03:54:20 -0000
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.76 [en] (WinNT; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <9431BB74-F11D-11D5-BA7B-0050E43A5105@netaxs.com>            <3C1AE666.6A327BED@earthlink.net>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3C1C1B0A.ECAB3421@qwest.net>
Date:         Sat, 15 Dec 2001 21:54:50 -0600
Reply-To: "Jeff Hove" <jhove1@QWEST.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jeff Hove" <jhove1@QWEST.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] rader/laser altimeters
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

David Weinshenker wrote:
...
> Hmmm... use a laser to make a known spot on the ground (perhaps with a
> precoded modulation to make it easier to pick out of a low-S/N return)
> and then use a pair of spaced video cameras to image it. From the parallax
> between the images, compute where the ground is.
...

A friend of mine made a nice single-camera laser distancing system for
his robot using just the parallax between the video camera and laser.
  http://www.tcrobots.org/members/jsamp.htm  (see the robot named "Mars
1")

The laser is below the camera a set distance and pointed slightly
upwards to project a horizontal line on the walls/objects in front of
the robot.  He used a cylindrical lens to spread the beam into a line.
The camera points forward.  The farther away the wall or object is, the
higher the laser line appears in the video image.  The laser cycles at
30hz in synch with the alternating video frames.  Thus in any given pair
of images, one image contains the laser line, and one doesn't.  It is
then fairly simple to subtract the two images and you're left with only
the line.  Then measure how high the line is in the frame and calculate
the distance.

This system works very well for relatively slow speeds where not much
changes between video frames.  It also requires the laser to be fairly
bright in contrast to the ambient light, though this issue could be
resolved with appropriate filters.

I don't know how well this would work on a flying vehicle looking down
at uneven ground, but it was very good for ground-based robot obstacle
avoidance.  The Mars Rover used something similar.

-Jeff Hove

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 11056 invoked from network); 16 Dec 2001 17:18:34 -0000
Received: from smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.105]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 16 Dec 2001 17:18:34 -0000
Received: (qmail 27787 invoked by uid 50005); 16 Dec 2001 17:18:25 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpy with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4175. . Clean. Processed in 0.417516 secs); 16 Dec 2001 17:18:25 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 16 Dec 2001 17:18:25 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA19889; Sun, 16 Dec 2001 09:15:46 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 102225 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 16 Dec 2001 17:15:22          +0000
Received: from prover.com (IDENT:root@[192.71.47.101]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA19875 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun,          16 Dec 2001 09:15:21 -0800
Received: from somnus.sthlm.prover.com (somnus.sthlm.prover.com [192.71.47.5])          by prover.com (8.11.3/8.11.3) with ESMTP id fBGHENI25242 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 16 Dec 2001 18:14:23 +0100
Received: from PROVEIT ([64.139.0.245]) by somnus.sthlm.prover.com with          Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.3779); Sun, 16 Dec 2001 18:12:58 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook, Build 10.0.2627
Importance: Normal
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 16 Dec 2001 17:12:58.0546 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[E8E01920:01C18654]
Message-ID:  <003501c18654$e9f2c1a0$6501a8c0@PROVEIT>
Date:         Sun, 16 Dec 2001 09:12:57 -0800
Reply-To: "Duncan Mcdonald" <duncan.mcdonald@PROVER.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Duncan Mcdonald" <duncan.mcdonald@PROVER.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] carbon fiber reality check
Comments: To: David Weinshenker <daze39@EARTHLINK.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <3C1AA1D0.B8F82CA6@earthlink.net>

David,

I am not an expert by any means in composite structures but I think your
analysis may be going astray in two areas. You have assumed that the
overall structure is acting like the structure material is isotropic,
that is, it has the same properties in different directions like metal
does. When you build a structure with composite construction (laying
fiber on a mandrel and coating it with epoxy) the properties will be
orthotropic (different along the three major axis) at best. NASA SP-8007
Buckling of Thin Walled Circular Structures analyzes this type of
structure in terms of Young's modulus instead of ultimate tensile
strength as you have done. SP-8007 says that a orthotropic cylinder with
stiffeners must use the AVERAGE Young's modulus for each major axis and
not just the fiber strength. The average modulus is the fiber modulus
corrected for the fiber volume fraction according to the isostrain law:
Eavg=(Efiber*f)+(Ematrix*(1-f)) where f is the fiber volume fraction and
Ematrix is the Young's modulus of the epoxy. Since the modulus of the
epoxy is quite low compared to the carbon fiber you could simplify the
isostrain to Eavg=(Efiber*f). My own measurements have found that you
can only get a max fibervolume fraction of about 0.6 using vacuum
bagging so the fiber modulus will be reduced by 40%. In your case the
effective E is reduced from about 35 MPSI to 29 MPSI. A second area of
concern is the off axis strength. The fiber is strongest in the 0/90
directions and the strength is reduced as the applied force moves away
from the fiber axis. At an angle of 45 degrees away from the fiber the
strength is reduced by about 90%. That's why composite vessels are
usually filament wound at an angle of about 60 degrees.

Hopefully others can verify or refute these concerns.

Duncan

-----Original Message-----
From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU] On
Behalf Of David Weinshenker
Sent: Friday, December 14, 2001 5:05 PM
To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
Subject: [AR] carbon fiber reality check


I just ran some caluculations for carbon fiber reinforcent
of a tubular tank.

Assumptions: Tank structure consists of "hoop" fibers and "axial" fibers
(i.e., "0 degree / 90 degree" winding), diameter is 100 mm (4 in.)

By geometrical arguments:
P/Sh = 2Th/D
P/Sa = 4Ta/D

where:
P  = pressure
Sh = hoop stress in wall structure
Sa = axial stress in wall structure
D  = tank diameter
Th = effective thickness of hoop structure
Ta = effective thickness of axial structure

Setting P/Sh = P/Sa = 1/500, I get:
1/500 = 2Th/D  Th = D/1000
1/500 = 4Ta/D  Ta = D/2000

Using D = 100 mm (4 in.) we get:
Th = 0.1 mm (.004 in.)
Ta = 0.05mm (.002 in.)

Now, looking up a typical commmercial carbon fiber on www.matweb.com...
"Hexcel AS4D (12000 filaments)" has the following charactgeristics:
Tensile ultimate strength 620.6k psi Volume density 1.79 g/cm^3 Length
density .765 g/m

Calculating the volume of the fiber per unit length:
.765 g/m / 1.79 g/cm^3 = .427 cm^3 / m

Cross-sectional area is thus
Af = (.427 cm^3 / 100 cm) * 100 mm^2/cm^2 = .427 mm^2

This indicates that to get the desired effective thickness,
the hoop windings require a spacing of Af/Th = .427 mm^2 / .1 mm = 4.27
mm and the axial windings require a spacing of Af/Ta = .427 mm^2 / .05
mm = 8.54 mm

Since the circumference is 314 mm, the number of axial windings around
the circumference becomes 314/8.57 = 36.7... let's round this down to an
integer and use 36 strands (1 every 10 degrees).

The hoop windings will require, per meter of tubing, 1000 mm / 4.27 mm
or 234.2 turns.

The theoretical bursting pressure will be (620.6k psi / 500) = 1.241k
psi based on hoop strength, and 1.241k psi * (36/36.7) = 1.217k psi
based on axial strength.

Total quantity of reinforcement required for 1 m of tank tubing: Hoop
windings 234.2 turns x .314 m/turn = 73.5 m Axial windings 36 strands x
1m/strand = 36 m Total 109.5 m of fiber (83.7 g, 0.18 lb.) at .765 g/m

So this says that with less than 3 ounces of carbon fiber, it should be
possible to reinforce a 40 in. by 4 in. (1m x 100 mm) tubular tank to a
theoretical bursting pressure of just over 1200 psi.

Does this seem like a realistic figure, or have I made some glaring
error in my assumptions or calculations?

-dave w

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 23226 invoked from network); 16 Dec 2001 18:46:04 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 16 Dec 2001 18:46:04 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 26325 invoked by uid 50005); 16 Dec 2001 18:45:55 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4175. . Clean. Processed in 0.721572 secs); 16 Dec 2001 18:45:55 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 16 Dec 2001 18:45:54 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA20282; Sun, 16 Dec 2001 10:43:32 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 102267 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 16 Dec 2001 18:43:23          +0000
Received: from rwcrmhc51.attbi.com (rwcrmhc51.attbi.com [204.127.198.38]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA20268 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 16 Dec 2001 10:43:23 -0800
Received: from c1649002-a.earthlink.net ([12.232.75.28]) by rwcrmhc51.attbi.com          (InterMail vM.4.01.03.27 201-229-121-127-20010626) with ESMTP id          <20011216184252.LRSV5010.rwcrmhc51.attbi.com@c1649002-a.earthlink.net>; Sun, 16 Dec 2001 18:42:52          +0000
X-Sender: forkbomb@mail.earthlink.net
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.0.2
References: <9431BB74-F11D-11D5-BA7B-0050E43A5105@netaxs.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <5.0.2.1.0.20011216103907.00aff558@mail.earthlink.net>
Date:         Sun, 16 Dec 2001 10:42:56 -0800
Reply-To: "Pierce Nichols" <forkbomb@EARTHLINK.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Pierce Nichols" <forkbomb@EARTHLINK.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] rader/laser altimeters
Comments: To: David Weinshenker <daze39@earthlink.net>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <3C1AE666.6A327BED@earthlink.net>

At 09:57 PM 12/14/2001 -0800, David Weinshenker wrote:
>Don McCorvey wrote:
> > One other thought - some time back, I know a few people were looking at
> > video-based landing systems for autonomous vehicles. I don't know where
> > the work is now, but if you were to invest in the computing horsepower
> > needed to do the job, you could use fixed references on the ground to
> > triangulate the position of the vehicle as it does final approach and
> > landing.
>
>Hmmm... use a laser to make a known spot on the ground (perhaps with a
>precoded modulation to make it easier to pick out of a low-S/N return)
>and then use a pair of spaced video cameras to image it. From the parallax
>between the images, compute where the ground is.


         Why two? This works with one camera, because the position and
angle of the laser beam source is known, thereby giving you one 'arm' of
the parallax.


>This would require much slower primary (i.e., signal-processing)
>electronics than any speed-of-light-based system with nanosecond
>resolution. All the "front end" of this proposed rangefinder system
>would have to do is frame-grab a video signal (of approx. 5 MHz
>bandwidth) into digitized data blocks - then throw great steaming
>screaming heaps of CPU bus power at the image-comparison problem, if
>need be. (A 5 MHz flash 8-bit A/D is probably a fairly cheap chip
>these days, I suspect... small B+W video cameras are available for
>about $10-$100 these days; color ones slightly higher.)


         A B/W camera with a very selective filter would allow you to pick
out only the laser reflection. That would reduce the required image
processing power dramatically. In fact, if you've got a really good filter,
you might be able to filter out enough so that the image is only composed
of the laser reflection. You then measure it's position and size, and do
some simple math to turn that into a range.

         -p


Mars or Bust!
www.marssociety.com

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 3937 invoked from network); 16 Dec 2001 18:49:50 -0000
Received: from smtpv.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.110]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 16 Dec 2001 18:49:50 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 32164 invoked by uid 50005); 16 Dec 2001 18:10:16 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpv with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4175. . Clean. Processed in 1.736939 secs); 16 Dec 2001 18:10:16 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpv.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 16 Dec 2001 18:10:14 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA20134; Sun, 16 Dec 2001 10:13:37 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 102247 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 16 Dec 2001 18:13:32          +0000
Received: from hawk.prod.itd.earthlink.net (hawk.mail.pas.earthlink.net          [207.217.120.22]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA20093          for <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Sun, 16 Dec 2001 10:03:32 -0800
Received: from dialup-209.244.107.127.dial1.sanjose1.level3.net          ([209.244.107.127] helo=earthlink.net) by hawk.prod.itd.earthlink.net          with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 16FfdK-0002ee-00; Sun, 16 Dec 2001          10:03:31 -0800
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.75 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.16-22 i686)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <003501c18654$e9f2c1a0$6501a8c0@PROVEIT>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3C1CE219.6736774A@earthlink.net>
Date:         Sun, 16 Dec 2001 10:04:09 -0800
Reply-To: "David Weinshenker" <daze39@EARTHLINK.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "David Weinshenker" <daze39@EARTHLINK.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] carbon fiber reality check
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Duncan Mcdonald wrote:
>
> David,
>
> I am not an expert by any means in composite structures but I think your
> analysis may be going astray in two areas. You have assumed that the
> overall structure is acting like the structure material is isotropic,
> that is, it has the same properties in different directions like metal
> does.

Have I? I believe I was assuming that the cylinder
was reinforced in axial tension and hoop tension,
each by a separate set of fibers.

> When you build a structure with composite construction (laying
> fiber on a mandrel and coating it with epoxy) the properties will be
> orthotropic (different along the three major axis) at best. NASA SP-8007
> Buckling of Thin Walled Circular Structures analyzes this type of
> structure in terms of Young's modulus instead of ultimate tensile
> strength as you have done. SP-8007 says that a orthotropic cylinder with
> stiffeners must use the AVERAGE Young's modulus for each major axis and
> not just the fiber strength. The average modulus is the fiber modulus
> corrected for the fiber volume fraction according to the isostrain law:
> Eavg=(Efiber*f)+(Ematrix*(1-f)) where f is the fiber volume fraction and
> Ematrix is the Young's modulus of the epoxy. Since the modulus of the
> epoxy is quite low compared to the carbon fiber you could simplify the
> isostrain to Eavg=(Efiber*f). My own measurements have found that you
> can only get a max fibervolume fraction of about 0.6 using vacuum
> bagging so the fiber modulus will be reduced by 40%. In your case the
> effective E is reduced from about 35 MPSI to 29 MPSI. A second area of
> concern is the off axis strength. The fiber is strongest in the 0/90
> directions and the strength is reduced as the applied force moves away
> from the fiber axis. At an angle of 45 degrees away from the fiber the
> strength is reduced by about 90%. That's why composite vessels are
> usually filament wound at an angle of about 60 degrees.

This certainly goes beyond the scope of my prior calculation, which was
based only on reinforcing the cylinder against tensile stress in the walls
due to a positive internal pressure. Your point is certainly well taken
that  the strength of the cylinder against external compressive loads
(buckling, bending, etc.) will be dependent on the stiffnesses of the
assembled laminate (in various directions relative to the fiber orientations),
which will depend on resin, as well as fiber, characteristics, but internal
pressure should load the walls purely in tension. (I.e., I'm assuming here
that the cylinder is to be used as a "bladder" rather than a "column" or
"strut", or in rocketry terms, assume I'm calclating a "pressurant tank"
rather than "airframe tubing".)

-dave w

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 5331 invoked from network); 16 Dec 2001 19:31:27 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpv.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.110]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 16 Dec 2001 19:31:27 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 11498 invoked by uid 50005); 16 Dec 2001 19:23:55 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpv with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4175. . Clean. Processed in 3.282233 secs); 16 Dec 2001 19:23:55 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpv.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 16 Dec 2001 19:23:52 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA20440; Sun, 16 Dec 2001 11:29:08 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 102290 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 16 Dec 2001 19:29:04          +0000
Received: from rwcrmhc52.attbi.com (rwcrmhc52.attbi.com [216.148.227.88]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA20426 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 16 Dec 2001 11:29:04 -0800
Received: from c1649002-a.earthlink.net ([12.232.75.28]) by rwcrmhc52.attbi.com          (InterMail vM.4.01.03.27 201-229-121-127-20010626) with ESMTP id          <20011216192834.EUSE403.rwcrmhc52.attbi.com@c1649002-a.earthlink.net>; Sun, 16 Dec 2001 19:28:34          +0000
X-Sender: forkbomb@mail.earthlink.net
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.0.2
References: <3C1AA1D0.B8F82CA6@earthlink.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <5.0.2.1.0.20011216111546.00b13640@mail.earthlink.net>
Date:         Sun, 16 Dec 2001 11:28:38 -0800
Reply-To: "Pierce Nichols" <forkbomb@EARTHLINK.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Pierce Nichols" <forkbomb@EARTHLINK.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] carbon fiber reality check
Comments: To: Duncan Mcdonald <duncan.mcdonald@PROVER.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <003501c18654$e9f2c1a0$6501a8c0@PROVEIT>

At 09:12 AM 12/16/2001 -0800, Duncan Mcdonald wrote:
>David,
>
>I am not an expert by any means in composite structures but I think your
>analysis may be going astray in two areas. You have assumed that the
>overall structure is acting like the structure material is isotropic,
>that is, it has the same properties in different directions like metal
>does.


         No, he explicitly did not assume that. In fact, he calculated the
required reinforcement separately for each axis, assuming no strength in
the matrix and strength only in the direction of the fiber axis, which is
correct. It's also very preliminary calculation aimed at getting an order
of magnitude calculation of the results. Taken that way, it's a reasonable
calculation.

         -p


Mars or Bust!
www.marssociety.com

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 3028 invoked from network); 16 Dec 2001 21:47:51 -0000
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 16 Dec 2001 21:47:51 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 25609 invoked by uid 50005); 16 Dec 2001 21:47:42 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4175. . Clean. Processed in 0.725993 secs); 16 Dec 2001 21:47:42 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 16 Dec 2001 21:47:41 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA20865; Sun, 16 Dec 2001 13:45:41 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 102334 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 16 Dec 2001 21:45:27          +0000
Received: from grucom2.gru.net (grucom2.gru.net [209.251.129.7]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA20851 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun,          16 Dec 2001 13:45:26 -0800
Received: from [198.190.223.215] by grucom2.sfcc.net (NTMail          7.00.0022/NU4112.00.db1c8a4b) with ESMTP id soijraaa for          AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 16 Dec 2001 16:45:25 -0500
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.75 [en] (Win95; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <v01510104b83dd09e7258@[63.169.102.235]>            <3C182C83.D45F3C18@sfcc.net> <3C1838EC.39F840C7@biomicro.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3C1D1926.3AFB9F39@sfcc.net>
Date:         Sun, 16 Dec 2001 16:59:02 -0500
Reply-To: "James Yawn" <jyawn@SFCC.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "James Yawn" <jyawn@SFCC.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] 1 Digital vs.Non-digital test stand
Comments: To: "Mark K. Spute" <mks@BIOMICRO.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Thanks to all who responded to my query re:  DAQ - I now have what I need to go forward.

 And I am proud to have submitted a note that prompted Mr. Spute to use the word
"excellent" MORE than three times.  :)  But it is apt, in that my dealings with both
Dataq and Omega have been quite satisfying, and I will be calling upon them again.

Likewise the response from this list has been outstanding - I will obtain one of the TI
IC amplifiers several mentioned, and try Mr. Wickman's schematic to adapt it to my strain
gauges.  And I am intrigued by the electronic cookbooks, and will see if my school
library (or UF) has either of them.

Anyone know of a good on-line source for the INA 125?

On the other side of the equation, I have been attempting to use the formulae provided by
Mr. Clague to analyze my 2x4 launches.  So far I have results for one, posted at:

http://www.geocities.com/jyawn51/test2.html

This includes a spreadsheet to handle the calculations.  I have scheduled a meeting
tomorrow with one of our physics professors, who thinks this might be a good "extra
credit" problem for some of his students.  No doubt he will have his own suggestions,
comments, and agenda.

There are some inconsistencies in the results, but such is to be expected from a klutz
like me.  I think most of these are due to unaccounted factors such as air resistance, so
I still have hope for this method.  And I am especially motivated to complete the
instrumented test stand so that I have other measures with which to compare these
results.

Comment, criticisms are welcomed.
And please let me know if anything won't load for you.  GeoCities has been giving me some
trouble too.

Jimmy Yawn
jyawn@sfcc.net

"Mark K. Spute" wrote:

> Here we go . . .
>
> Excellent start.  Sort of like playing with computers.  Just get in there, mess with
> it and find out what it does.  What's the worst that can happen?  You fry a $14
> board.
>
> Ahh, moving up the tree, are we?  Excellent again.  Keep experimenting until . . .
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 7503 invoked from network); 16 Dec 2001 22:43:10 -0000
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 16 Dec 2001 22:43:10 -0000
Received: (qmail 7934 invoked by uid 50005); 16 Dec 2001 22:43:01 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4175. . Clean. Processed in 4.000054 secs); 16 Dec 2001 22:43:01 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 16 Dec 2001 22:42:55 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA21092; Sun, 16 Dec 2001 14:41:00 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 102374 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 16 Dec 2001 22:40:56          +0000
Received: from femail11.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail11.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.0.95.107]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA21075          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 16 Dec 2001 14:40:55 -0800
Received: from sean ([65.14.214.3]) by femail11.sdc1.sfba.home.com (InterMail          vM.4.01.03.20 201-229-121-120-20010223) with SMTP id          <20011216224055.EFVM20460.femail11.sdc1.sfba.home.com@sean> for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 16 Dec 2001 14:40:55 -0800
References: <v01510104b83dd09e7258@[63.169.102.235]>                       <3C182C83.D45F3C18@sfcc.net> <3C1838EC.39F840C7@biomicro.com>             <3C1D1926.3AFB9F39@sfcc.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4807.1700
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <001b01c18682$bb3a11a0$647ba8c0@annapolis1.md.home.com>
Date:         Sun, 16 Dec 2001 17:40:58 -0500
Reply-To: "Sean McAndrew" <seanmca79@HOME.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Sean McAndrew" <seanmca79@HOME.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] 1 Digital vs.Non-digital test stand
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

http://focus.ti.com/docs/prod/productfolder.jhtml?genericPartNumber=INA125

Best source is TI themselves. Get the free sample!

They also have some helpful schematics too if I remember right.

Sean

----- Original Message -----
From: "James Yawn" <jyawn@SFCC.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Sunday, December 16, 2001 4:59 PM
Subject: Re: [AR] 1 Digital vs.Non-digital test stand

> Anyone know of a good on-line source for the INA 125?
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 28878 invoked from network); 17 Dec 2001 00:01:39 -0000
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 17 Dec 2001 00:01:39 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 6194 invoked by uid 50005); 17 Dec 2001 00:01:30 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4175. . Clean. Processed in 1.826146 secs); 17 Dec 2001 00:01:30 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 17 Dec 2001 00:01:28 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA21423; Sun, 16 Dec 2001 15:59:47 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 102436 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 16 Dec 2001 23:59:02          +0000
Received: from pintail.mail.pas.earthlink.net (pintail.mail.pas.earthlink.net          [207.217.120.122]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id          PAA21409 for <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Sun, 16 Dec 2001 15:59:01 -0800
Received: from dialup-209.247.140.154.dial1.sanjose1.level3.net          ([209.247.140.154] helo=earthlink.net) by          pintail.mail.pas.earthlink.net with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id          16FlBM-0000I7-00 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 16 Dec 2001 15:59:01          -0800
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (Win98; I)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3C1D35A9.F145D803@earthlink.net>
Date:         Sun, 16 Dec 2001 16:00:41 -0800
Reply-To: <thomgaf@energyrs.com>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Thomas M. Mcgaffey" <energyrelease@EARTHLINK.NET>
Subject:      [AR] Test stand Data collection
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Arocket list,

I am in the process of designing and testing a new digital data
collection system for my new test stands.  I have tried many A/D PC plug
in boards from many venders.  They all have "worked" after a fashion.
They all needed filter and amplifier circuits for different sensors.
The custom software was a real pain as it was designed for factory
control or sum such, certainly not with rocketry in mind.

What I am doing this time is to take the "bull" by the horns and design
and build the system from scratch.  The design will include a
microcontroller based data collection system with a filtered / amplified
8 input 12 bit A/D converter,  storage RAM,  trigger circuit and
serial port for uploading the collected data to a PC for plotting by
custom software.  The software will be written in "C++" with custom
libraries for plotting and gauges and serial.

I intend to use this data collection system for my test stands and for
other rocket related instruments.  I will probably sell the plans to
build the system and the software to run it, maybe even a kit of parts
and boards, etc.

I was wondering if any of you would like to be a beta test site for my
new system.  All you would need is a PC with a hard disk and Win95 or
greater op sys.  I would supply a built and tested data collection
system and the software to run it.  What I hope you will be interested
in doing is helping us  work out bugs and get the "look and feel"
right.  Further, I especially believe you will be able to make sure the
users manual is written so anyone with even the most rudimentary skills
and experience will be able to set up and use the system.  As a beta
test site you would, of course, receive the data collection system and
software, as well as all future updates to the software, at no cost to
you.

While you use my system to test your motors you/we may come up with
features to add to the software.  I would be very interested in hearing
your ideas.

We MAY be able to provide some of you with the commercial sensors as
well.

I am looking for two to three people for beta sites.  The number and
size or type of rocket motors tested is less important then the way the
test are run.  So let me know what you think.

respectfully,

Thom

Thomas M. McGaffey
Energy Release Systems
408-226-7502
thomgaf@energyrs.com
San Jose, Kalifornia

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 19762 invoked from network); 17 Dec 2001 01:06:20 -0000
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 17 Dec 2001 01:06:20 -0000
Received: (qmail 23435 invoked by uid 50005); 17 Dec 2001 01:06:11 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4175. . Clean. Processed in 2.642778 secs); 17 Dec 2001 01:06:11 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 17 Dec 2001 01:06:08 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA21681; Sun, 16 Dec 2001 17:04:37 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 102480 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 17 Dec 2001 01:04:31          +0000
Received: from prover.com (IDENT:root@chaos.sthlm.prover.com [192.71.47.101])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA21667 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 16 Dec 2001 17:04:30 -0800
Received: from somnus.sthlm.prover.com (somnus.sthlm.prover.com [192.71.47.5])          by prover.com (8.11.3/8.11.3) with ESMTP id fBH13SI30495 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 17 Dec 2001 02:03:28 +0100
Received: from PROVEIT ([64.139.0.245]) by somnus.sthlm.prover.com with          Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.3779); Mon, 17 Dec 2001 02:02:02 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook, Build 10.0.2627
Importance: Normal
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 17 Dec 2001 01:02:02.0781 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[70258CD0:01C18696]
Message-ID:  <004001c18696$71313070$6501a8c0@PROVEIT>
Date:         Sun, 16 Dec 2001 17:02:01 -0800
Reply-To: "Duncan Mcdonald" <duncan.mcdonald@PROVER.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Duncan Mcdonald" <duncan.mcdonald@PROVER.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] carbon fiber reality check
Comments: To: David Weinshenker <daze39@EARTHLINK.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <3C1CE219.6736774A@earthlink.net>

David,

Your right, I was thinking of this as a section of airframe tubing that
was also acting as a pressure vessel, not as a bladder in pure axial and
hoop tension. I've been thinking about monocoque hybrid tanks recently
and was carrying those sorts of assumptions along.

Duncan


This certainly goes beyond the scope of my prior calculation, which was
based only on reinforcing the cylinder against tensile stress in the
walls due to a positive internal pressure. Your point is certainly well
taken that  the strength of the cylinder against external compressive
loads (buckling, bending, etc.) will be dependent on the stiffnesses of
the assembled laminate (in various directions relative to the fiber
orientations), which will depend on resin, as well as fiber,
characteristics, but internal pressure should load the walls purely in
tension. (I.e., I'm assuming here that the cylinder is to be used as a
"bladder" rather than a "column" or "strut", or in rocketry terms,
assume I'm calclating a "pressurant tank" rather than "airframe
tubing".)

-dave w

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 12387 invoked from network); 17 Dec 2001 03:42:53 -0000
Received: from smtpv.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.110]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 17 Dec 2001 03:42:53 -0000
Received: (qmail 29596 invoked by uid 50005); 17 Dec 2001 03:35:19 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpv with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4175. . Clean. Processed in 1.731708 secs); 17 Dec 2001 03:35:19 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpv.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 17 Dec 2001 03:35:16 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA22248; Sun, 16 Dec 2001 19:41:10 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 102550 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 17 Dec 2001 03:40:59          +0000
Received: from smtprelay7.dc2.adelphia.net (smtprelay7.dc2.adelphia.net          [64.8.50.39]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA22233 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 16 Dec 2001 19:40:59 -0800
Received: from jlgrady ([24.53.101.238]) by smtprelay7.dc2.adelphia.net          (Netscape Messaging Server 4.15) with SMTP id GOGY7F00.OGT for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 16 Dec 2001 22:40:27 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook CWS, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <000501c186ac$bcda3b00$0200a8c0@cmngga.adelphia.net>
Date:         Sun, 16 Dec 2001 22:41:39 -0500
Reply-To: "Jeff Grady" <jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jeff Grady" <jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET>
Subject:      [AR] OT - Low Tech shuttle equipment
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Was looking through some pics from STS-108 and saw something kinda funny...
Look on the dashboard - you might spot something (actually three of them)
the wife may have in the kitchen...

http://www.spaceflight.nasa.gov/gallery/images/shuttle/sts-108/html/s108e506
6.html

Jeff

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 19016 invoked from network); 17 Dec 2001 04:20:46 -0000
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 17 Dec 2001 04:20:46 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 27282 invoked by uid 50005); 17 Dec 2001 04:20:37 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4175. . Clean. Processed in 1.260241 secs); 17 Dec 2001 04:20:37 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 17 Dec 2001 04:20:35 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA22411; Sun, 16 Dec 2001 20:17:33 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 102583 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 17 Dec 2001 04:17:16          +0000
Received: from inet03.citec.qld.gov.au (firewall-user@inet03.citec.qld.gov.au          [203.5.10.10]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA22397          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 16 Dec 2001 20:17:15 -0800
Received: by inet03.citec.qld.gov.au; id OAA20039; Mon, 17 Dec 2001 14:17:12          +1000 (EST)
Received: from citec.com.au(pcux.citec.qld.gov.au 147.132.17.12) by          inet03.citec.qld.gov.au via smap (V2.0) id xma019839; Mon, 17 Dec 01          14:17:07 +1000
Received: from CITEC-Message_Server by citec.com.au with Novell_GroupWise; Mon,          17 Dec 2001 14:18:54 +1000
X-Mailer: Novell GroupWise 5.5.4
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by itc.uci.edu id UAA22398
Message-ID:  <sc1dfece.082@citec.com.au>
Date:         Mon, 17 Dec 2001 14:18:26 +1000
Reply-To: "Des Bromilow" <Des.Bromilow@CITEC.COM.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Des Bromilow" <Des.Bromilow@CITEC.COM.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] OT - Low Tech shuttle equipment
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

"cuse the ignorance, but what are they?... they certainly don't look like pots or pans.....

Des

>>> Jeff Grady <jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET> 17/12/01 1:41:39 pm >>>
Was looking through some pics from STS-108 and saw something kinda funny...
Look on the dashboard - you might spot something (actually three of them)
the wife may have in the kitchen...

http://www.spaceflight.nasa.gov/gallery/images/shuttle/sts-108/html/s108e506
6.html

Jeff

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 27187 invoked from network); 17 Dec 2001 05:02:39 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 17 Dec 2001 05:02:39 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: (qmail 3655 invoked by uid 50005); 17 Dec 2001 05:02:30 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4175. . Clean. Processed in 5.411095 secs); 17 Dec 2001 05:02:30 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 17 Dec 2001 05:02:23 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA22619; Sun, 16 Dec 2001 21:00:33 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 102619 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 17 Dec 2001 05:00:25          +0000
Received: from cisco.com (cypher.cisco.com [171.69.11.18]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA22605 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun,          16 Dec 2001 21:00:25 -0800
Received: (from billw@localhost) by cisco.com (8.8.8/2.6/Cisco List          Logging/8.8.8) id UAA19221; Sun, 16 Dec 2001 20:59:44 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID:  <CMM.0.90.4.1008565184.billw@cypher>
Date:         Sun, 16 Dec 2001 20:59:44 PST
Reply-To: "Bill Westfield" <billw@cisco.com>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "William Chops Westfield" <billw@cisco.com>
Subject:      Re: [AR] OT - Low Tech shuttle equipment
Comments: To: Des Bromilow <Des.Bromilow@CITEC.COM.AU>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  Your message of Mon, 17 Dec 2001 14:18:26 +1000

>>   Was looking through some pics from STS-108 and saw something kinda
>>   funny...  Look on the dashboard - you might spot something (actually
>>   three of them) the wife may have in the kitchen...
>>
>>   http://www.spaceflight.nasa.gov/gallery/images/shuttle/sts-108/html/s108e5066.html
>
>
> "cuse the ignorance, but what are they?... they certainly don't
> look like pots or pans.....

I assume you mean the three "stick-on" digital timer things?  Seems like
a handy thing to have around, much like the three voltmeters I have in
"the lab" these days...

I try to keep my wife out of the kitchen except for doing the dishes,
though.  Improves the food quality...

BillW


From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 339 invoked from network); 17 Dec 2001 05:18:00 -0000
Received: from smtpv.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.110]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 17 Dec 2001 05:18:00 -0000
Received: (qmail 24834 invoked by uid 50005); 17 Dec 2001 05:10:25 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpv with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4175. . Clean. Processed in 2.873239 secs); 17 Dec 2001 05:10:25 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpv.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 17 Dec 2001 05:10:21 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA22712; Sun, 16 Dec 2001 21:15:23 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 102630 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 17 Dec 2001 05:15:21          +0000
Received: from mail004.syd.optusnet.com.au (mail004.syd.optusnet.com.au          [203.2.75.228]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA22646          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 16 Dec 2001 21:05:20 -0800
Received: from co3064723a (c26172.farfl1.nsw.optusnet.com.au [203.164.57.209])          by mail004.syd.optusnet.com.au (8.11.1/8.11.1) with SMTP id          fBH54jJ29184; Mon, 17 Dec 2001 16:04:46 +1100
References:  <CMM.0.90.4.1008565184.billw@cypher>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <072701c186b8$9c126440$0100a8c0@co3064723a>
Date:         Mon, 17 Dec 2001 16:06:38 +1100
Reply-To: "Jake Anderson" <grooveee@OPTUSHOME.COM.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jake Anderson" <grooveee@OPTUSHOME.COM.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] OT - Low Tech shuttle equipment
Comments: To: Bill Westfield <billw@cisco.com>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

<snip>

> I try to keep my wife out of the kitchen except for doing the dishes,
> though.  Improves the food quality...
>
> BillW

I kinda hope for his sake he keeps his wife out of the computer too
(tehehehe)

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 24724 invoked from network); 17 Dec 2001 06:06:37 -0000
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 17 Dec 2001 06:06:37 -0000
Received: (qmail 2732 invoked by uid 50005); 17 Dec 2001 06:06:28 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4175. . Clean. Processed in 0.372549 secs); 17 Dec 2001 06:06:28 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 17 Dec 2001 06:06:28 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA22964; Sun, 16 Dec 2001 22:04:18 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 102684 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 17 Dec 2001 06:04:08          +0000
Received: from smtprelay6.dc2.adelphia.net (smtprelay6.dc2.adelphia.net          [64.8.50.38]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA22950 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 16 Dec 2001 22:04:07 -0800
Received: from jlgrady ([24.53.101.238]) by smtprelay6.dc2.adelphia.net          (Netscape Messaging Server 4.15) with SMTP id GOH4U000.9SH; Mon, 17          Dec 2001 01:03:36 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook CWS, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <000001c186c0$bbc09d90$0200a8c0@cmngga.adelphia.net>
Date:         Mon, 17 Dec 2001 01:04:47 -0500
Reply-To: "Jeff Grady" <jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jeff Grady" <jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] OT - Low Tech shuttle equipment
Comments: To: Des Bromilow <Des.Bromilow@CITEC.COM.AU>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <sc1dfece.082@citec.com.au>

Kitchen timers - Bought one myself from Kroger...

JG

-----Original Message-----
From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@itc.uci.edu]On
Behalf Of Des Bromilow
Sent: Sunday, December 16, 2001 11:18 PM
To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
Subject: Re: [AR] OT - Low Tech shuttle equipment


"cuse the ignorance, but what are they?... they certainly don't look like
pots or pans.....

Des

>>> Jeff Grady <jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET> 17/12/01 1:41:39 pm >>>
Was looking through some pics from STS-108 and saw something kinda funny...
Look on the dashboard - you might spot something (actually three of them)
the wife may have in the kitchen...

http://www.spaceflight.nasa.gov/gallery/images/shuttle/sts-108/html/s108e506
6.html

Jeff

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 20616 invoked from network); 17 Dec 2001 06:18:23 -0000
Received: from smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.105]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 17 Dec 2001 06:18:23 -0000
Received: (qmail 12659 invoked by uid 50005); 17 Dec 2001 06:18:12 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpy with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4175. . Clean. Processed in 2.144314 secs); 17 Dec 2001 06:18:12 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 17 Dec 2001 06:18:09 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA23008; Sun, 16 Dec 2001 22:15:55 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 102691 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 17 Dec 2001 06:15:53          +0000
Received: from smtprelay8.dc2.adelphia.net (smtprelay8.dc2.adelphia.net          [64.8.50.40]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA22994 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 16 Dec 2001 22:15:52 -0800
Received: from jlgrady ([24.53.101.238]) by smtprelay8.dc2.adelphia.net          (Netscape Messaging Server 4.15) with SMTP id GOH5DL00.QRU for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 17 Dec 2001 01:15:21 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook CWS, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <000101c186c2$5ffabd90$0200a8c0@cmngga.adelphia.net>
Date:         Mon, 17 Dec 2001 01:16:33 -0500
Reply-To: "Jeff Grady" <jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jeff Grady" <jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] OT - Low Tech shuttle equipment
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <072701c186b8$9c126440$0100a8c0@co3064723a>

You'd think a multi-billion dollar glider might have on-board computers
that, among other tasks, could handle a timer function or two... My nine
year old son could make one with VB. Then again, that is an IBM stinkpad on
the dash above the timers.

<snip>

> I try to keep my wife out of the kitchen except for doing the dishes,
> though.  Improves the food quality...
>
> BillW

A man who likes living on the edge!

JG

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 5904 invoked from network); 17 Dec 2001 06:52:17 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 17 Dec 2001 06:52:17 -0000
Received: (qmail 13868 invoked by uid 50005); 17 Dec 2001 06:52:08 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4175. . Clean. Processed in 1.682909 secs); 17 Dec 2001 06:52:08 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 17 Dec 2001 06:52:06 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA23362; Sun, 16 Dec 2001 22:50:24 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 102735 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 17 Dec 2001 06:50:20          +0000
Received: from spsystems.net (spsystems.net [209.47.149.227]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA23348 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Sun,          16 Dec 2001 22:50:19 -0800
Received: (from henry@localhost) by spsystems.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id BAA01217;          Mon, 17 Dec 2001 01:49:28 -0500 (EST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1011217014714.27442B-100000@spsystems.net>
Date:         Mon, 17 Dec 2001 01:49:28 -0500
Reply-To: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] OT - Low Tech shuttle equipment
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <000101c186c2$5ffabd90$0200a8c0@cmngga.adelphia.net>

On Mon, 17 Dec 2001, Jeff Grady wrote:
> You'd think a multi-billion dollar glider might have on-board computers
> that, among other tasks, could handle a timer function or two...

Why waste a computer -- which may have bigger jobs to do -- on a task that
a plain old kitchen timer does just as well?

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 4293 invoked from network); 17 Dec 2001 07:15:23 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 17 Dec 2001 07:15:23 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: (qmail 2778 invoked by uid 50005); 17 Dec 2001 07:15:15 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4175. . Clean. Processed in 2.548585 secs); 17 Dec 2001 07:15:15 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 17 Dec 2001 07:15:11 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA23476; Sun, 16 Dec 2001 23:13:08 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 102756 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 17 Dec 2001 07:13:01          +0000
Received: from cisco.com (cypher.cisco.com [171.69.11.18]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA23461 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun,          16 Dec 2001 23:13:00 -0800
Received: (from billw@localhost) by cisco.com (8.8.8/2.6/Cisco List          Logging/8.8.8) id XAA20910; Sun, 16 Dec 2001 23:12:29 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID:  <CMM.0.90.4.1008573149.billw@cypher>
Date:         Sun, 16 Dec 2001 23:12:29 PST
Reply-To: "Bill Westfield" <billw@cisco.com>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "William Chops Westfield" <billw@cisco.com>
Subject:      Re: [AR] OT - Low Tech shuttle equipment
Comments: To: Jeff Grady <jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  Your message of Mon, 17 Dec 2001 01:16:33 -0500

>    You'd think a multi-billion dollar glider might have on-board
>    computers that, among other tasks, could handle a timer function or
>    two... My nine year old son could make one with VB.

Yeah, but it's very much like the voltmeter analogy I made.  Sure, you've
got the $$$ full color digital oscilliscope/logic analyzer onhand (well,
potentially, anyway) and it CAN do EVERYTHING.  But it's hard to be the
trivial user interface of a simple voltmeter, along with the easy of just
snapping it on when and where you need it, without having to fiddle with
something more complicated.  Similarly, I've been attracted to those
keyboards with the built-in calculators - something that is superficially
ridiculous...

BillW


From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 16554 invoked from network); 17 Dec 2001 13:35:32 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 17 Dec 2001 13:35:32 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 10427 invoked by uid 50005); 17 Dec 2001 13:35:24 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpb with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4175. . Clean. Processed in 0.365314 secs); 17 Dec 2001 13:35:24 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 17 Dec 2001 13:35:23 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id FAA24536; Mon, 17 Dec 2001 05:33:27 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 102842 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 17 Dec 2001 13:33:16          +0000
Received: from grucom2.gru.net (grucom2.gru.net [209.251.129.7]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id FAA24521 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon,          17 Dec 2001 05:33:15 -0800
Received: from [209.251.151.24] by grucom2.sfcc.net (NTMail          7.00.0022/NU4112.00.db1c8a4b) with ESMTP id iugkraaa for          AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 17 Dec 2001 08:33:09 -0500
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.75 [en] (Win95; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <CMM.0.90.4.1008573149.billw@cypher>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3C1DF7A8.DE1843F3@sfcc.net>
Date:         Mon, 17 Dec 2001 08:48:25 -0500
Reply-To: "James Yawn" <jyawn@SFCC.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "James Yawn" <jyawn@SFCC.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] OT - Low Tech shuttle equipment
Comments: To: Bill Westfield <billw@cisco.com>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

William Chops Westfield wrote:

> Similarly, I've been attracted to those
> keyboards with the built-in calculators - something that is superficially
> ridiculous...
>
> BillW

I bought one of those recently (Focus 8200) because it is programmable,
thinking the calculator would be useless.  But it has a neat function - do a
calculation, press the SEND key and it sends your result to the cursor in
whatever application you are using.  I use it a lot, and just wish it had
more functions.  So I still have my $10. scientific calculator closeby the
$1000. computer.

Jimmy Yawn

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 22675 invoked from network); 17 Dec 2001 14:37:21 -0000
Received: from smtph.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.88]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 17 Dec 2001 14:37:21 -0000
Received: (qmail 2337 invoked by uid 50005); 17 Dec 2001 14:23:24 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtph with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4175. . Clean. Processed in 0.373893 secs); 17 Dec 2001 14:23:24 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtph.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 17 Dec 2001 14:23:24 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA24816; Mon, 17 Dec 2001 06:35:15 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 102863 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 17 Dec 2001 14:35:03          +0000
Received: from fep4-orange.clear.net.nz (fep4-orange.clear.net.nz          [203.97.32.4]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA24801          for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Mon, 17 Dec 2001 06:35:02 -0800
Received: from mkbs (203-167-148-79.dialup.clear.net.nz [203.167.148.79]) by          fep4-orange.clear.net.nz (1.5/1.7) with SMTP id DAA08090; Tue, 18 Dec          2001 03:34:22 +1300 (NZDT)
References:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1011217014714.27442B-100000@spsystems.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <00b801c18708$585d9260$0700a8c0@mkbs>
Date:         Tue, 18 Dec 2001 00:24:24 +1300
Reply-To: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Organization: Applied Technology
Subject:      Re: [AR] OT - Low Tech shuttle equipment
Comments: To: Henry Spencer <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

> On Mon, 17 Dec 2001, Jeff Grady wrote:
> > You'd think a multi-billion dollar glider might have on-board computers
> > that, among other tasks, could handle a timer function or two...
>
> Why waste a computer -- which may have bigger jobs to do -- on a task that
> a plain old kitchen timer does just as well?

Well, I haven't looked at the picture yet, BUT if these are used by the
"pilots" and they have anything to do with flight critical decisions or if
they are used for experiments and can have any affect on results, then at
$X,000 * per kg carried aloft and $XYZ per hour of actual mission time then
I would hope they would be as fault free and triply redundant as the fabled
and no doubt apocryphal $70,000 (or whatever the figure was) toilet seats.
(Although, as the man said in ? Independence Day "you didn't really think we
really spent all that money on toilet seat did you?".

:-)



        Russell McMahon

* - where X varies by possibly more than an order of magnitude depending on
the sort of cost accounting and amortisation you do to price shuttle
flights.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 28511 invoked from network); 17 Dec 2001 18:04:40 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 17 Dec 2001 18:04:40 -0000
Received: (qmail 14976 invoked by uid 50005); 17 Dec 2001 18:04:31 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4176. . Clean. Processed in 0.426091 secs); 17 Dec 2001 18:04:31 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 17 Dec 2001 18:04:30 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA25383; Mon, 17 Dec 2001 09:42:15 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 102901 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 17 Dec 2001 17:42:00          +0000
Received: from spsystems.net (spsystems.net [209.47.149.227]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA25364 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Mon,          17 Dec 2001 09:41:59 -0800
Received: (from henry@localhost) by spsystems.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id MAA09012;          Mon, 17 Dec 2001 12:41:27 -0500 (EST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1011217123429.7263E-100000@spsystems.net>
Date:         Mon, 17 Dec 2001 12:41:26 -0500
Reply-To: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] rader/laser altimeters
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <Pine.GSO.4.21.0112151844580.7447-100000@y.glue.umd.edu>

On Sat, 15 Dec 2001, Andrew Case wrote:
> Or even simpler - single camera, scan the laser in a line/cross/circle.
> Size of image correlates to height in a fairly simple manner.

Unfortunately, not so.  The angular size of the image (which is what you
get from the camera) is determined by the angular width of the scan, and
is *independent* of height.  At higher altitude the scan pattern on the
ground is larger, but the camera is viewing it from a greater distance,
and the two effects exactly cancel.

You have to introduce a distance into the on-board system somehow -- e.g.,
by having camera and laser separated by a known distance -- to turn angles
into distances.

One problem with any simple optical system, by the way, is that if you are
making an emergency landing at an unprepared spot, the engines may throw
up considerable dust at just the time when you need the altimeter most.

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 21800 invoked from network); 17 Dec 2001 18:33:28 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.105]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 17 Dec 2001 18:33:28 -0000
Received: (qmail 20316 invoked by uid 50005); 17 Dec 2001 18:33:19 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpy with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4176. . Clean. Processed in 0.376997 secs); 17 Dec 2001 18:33:19 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 17 Dec 2001 18:33:19 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA25506; Mon, 17 Dec 2001 10:16:59 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 102912 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 17 Dec 2001 18:16:54          +0000
Received: from spsystems.net (spsystems.net [209.47.149.227]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA25492 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Mon,          17 Dec 2001 10:16:54 -0800
Received: (from henry@localhost) by spsystems.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id NAA09451;          Mon, 17 Dec 2001 13:16:21 -0500 (EST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1011217131118.7263G-100000@spsystems.net>
Date:         Mon, 17 Dec 2001 13:16:21 -0500
Reply-To: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] carbon fiber reality check
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <003501c18654$e9f2c1a0$6501a8c0@PROVEIT>

On Sun, 16 Dec 2001, Duncan Mcdonald wrote:
> ...NASA SP-8007
> Buckling of Thin Walled Circular Structures analyzes this type of
> structure in terms of Young's modulus instead of ultimate tensile
> strength as you have done...

Buckling, which is what SP-8007 is talking about, is failure under
compressive load.  That is essentially a non-issue for pressure vessels
with any substantial internal pressure; the internal pressure stiffens
them far beyond what any realistic structural stiffening could accomplish.

Resistance to buckling and strength against internal pressure are *very*
different problems.

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 14819 invoked from network); 17 Dec 2001 18:39:04 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 17 Dec 2001 18:39:04 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 23322 invoked by uid 50005); 17 Dec 2001 18:38:55 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4175. . Clean. Processed in 0.326186 secs); 17 Dec 2001 18:38:55 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 17 Dec 2001 18:38:55 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA25604; Mon, 17 Dec 2001 10:33:06 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 102927 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 17 Dec 2001 18:33:03          +0000
Received: from po4.glue.umd.edu (po4.glue.umd.edu [128.8.10.124]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA25589 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 17 Dec 2001 10:33:02 -0800
Received: from z.glue.umd.edu (IDENT:root@z.glue.umd.edu [128.8.10.71]) by          po4.glue.umd.edu (8.10.1/8.10.1) with ESMTP id fBHIWPp00537; Mon, 17          Dec 2001 13:32:30 -0500 (EST)
Received: from z.glue.umd.edu (IDENT:sendmail@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by          z.glue.umd.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id NAA06988; Mon, 17 Dec 2001          13:32:25 -0500 (EST)
Received: from localhost (acase@localhost) by z.glue.umd.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with          ESMTP id NAA06984; Mon, 17 Dec 2001 13:32:25 -0500 (EST)
X-Authentication-Warning: z.glue.umd.edu: acase owned process doing -bs
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.GSO.4.21.0112171311500.4856-100000@z.glue.umd.edu>
Date:         Mon, 17 Dec 2001 13:32:24 -0500
Reply-To: "Andrew Case" <acase@GLUE.UMD.EDU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Andrew Case" <acase@GLUE.UMD.EDU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] rader/laser altimeters
Comments: To: Henry Spencer <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1011217123429.7263E-100000@spsystems.net>

On Mon, 17 Dec 2001, Henry Spencer wrote:

> On Sat, 15 Dec 2001, Andrew Case wrote:
> > Or even simpler - single camera, scan the laser in a line/cross/circle.
> > Size of image correlates to height in a fairly simple manner.
>
> Unfortunately, not so.  The angular size of the image (which is what you
> get from the camera) is determined by the angular width of the scan, and
> is *independent* of height.  At higher altitude the scan pattern on the
> ground is larger, but the camera is viewing it from a greater distance,
> and the two effects exactly cancel.

I posted way too fast - I was thinking about a system involving
a scanner with a fold mirror so that the path length scanner-ground is
longer than the path length camera-ground. This gives changes in angular
width with height. You can also increase the effective path length by
curving the fold mirror. The resolution is lousy at altitude, but it
improves the closer you are to the ground. The dust problem is still
there, though.

If I was setting out to build an altimeter I would try to avoid schemes
that image things and do everything with timing - It's simple, well
understood, and lots people have already done it, so there's documentation
and people to talk to. Also you don't have to make assumptions about the
shape of the ground.

......Andrew

Andrew Case                             |
acase@plasma.umd.edu                    |
Institute for Plasma Research           |
University of Maryland, College Park    |

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 5388 invoked from network); 17 Dec 2001 18:50:35 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.105]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 17 Dec 2001 18:50:35 -0000
Received: (qmail 9063 invoked by uid 50005); 17 Dec 2001 18:50:26 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpy with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4176. . Clean. Processed in 1.75306 secs); 17 Dec 2001 18:50:26 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 17 Dec 2001 18:50:23 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA25705; Mon, 17 Dec 2001 10:45:09 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 102948 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 17 Dec 2001 18:45:04          +0000
Received: from spsystems.net (spsystems.net [209.47.149.227]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA25690 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Mon,          17 Dec 2001 10:45:04 -0800
Received: (from henry@localhost) by spsystems.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id NAA09671;          Mon, 17 Dec 2001 13:44:31 -0500 (EST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1011217131631.7263H-100000@spsystems.net>
Date:         Mon, 17 Dec 2001 13:44:31 -0500
Reply-To: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] carbon fiber reality check
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <3C1AA1D0.B8F82CA6@earthlink.net>

On Fri, 14 Dec 2001, David Weinshenker wrote:
> "Hexcel AS4D (12000 filaments)" has the following charactgeristics:
> Tensile ultimate strength 620.6k psi

Considerable caution is needed here, and this number will have to be
de-rated a fair bit.  Ultimate strength and normal working strength are
two different numbers, bonding of the fiber to the matrix around it needs
to be considered, there is some inefficiency in having only hoop and axial
windings, and you always need a safety factor against surprises.

(The safety factor in particular can be large.  The normal safety factor
for commercial pressure vessels built using well-understood processes is a
factor of 5!  That's applied *after* deductions for all known issues; it
is solely a precaution against surprises.  Mind you, it assumes that the
pressure vessel will be operated in close proximity to people.)

> the hoop windings require a spacing of Af/Th = .427 mm^2 / .1 mm = 4.27 mm
> and the axial windings require a spacing of Af/Ta = .427 mm^2 / .05 mm = 8.54 mm

These windings are sufficiently widely spaced that the properties of the
material in between will be important, as will the load concentrations
under the fibers.  These aren't anywhere close to continuous windings, and
probably can't be safely analyzed as such.  I don't know much about methods
of analysis for net-reinforced structures, but I know they're complicated...

I would also worry that flaws in, or damage to, one or two adjacent fibers
could badly compromise the reinforcing.  Normally, the matrix surrounding
the fibers distributes load between the fibers and lets nearby intact
fibers handle the failure of a single fiber... but your fibers are too far
apart for that.  Pressure vessels are notoriously intolerant of even
localized flaws.

> So this says that with less than 3 ounces of carbon fiber, it should
> be possible to reinforce a 40 in. by 4 in. (1m x 100 mm) tubular tank
> to a theoretical bursting pressure of just over 1200 psi.
> Does this seem like a realistic figure, or have I made some glaring error
> in my assumptions or calculations?

Depends on what you mean by "realistic". :-)  For a severely idealized
situation, yes, that's the right sort of number.  Carbon fiber is really
strong stuff.  However, for a real tank, the issues noted above will have
to be considered, and the results won't be quite so impressive.  Your
assumptions, while not glaringly wrong, are much too optimistic.

(Mitch Burnside Clapp once thought he could build a pressure-fed SSTO.
Turned out that he was computing his tank masses directly from raw fiber
strength, essentially assuming that his tanks were made out of an
isotropic material with the same strength as the best fibers.  Alas, there
is no such material, and a more realistic mass calculation demolished that
design.)

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 18421 invoked from network); 17 Dec 2001 19:22:18 -0000
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 17 Dec 2001 19:22:18 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 16839 invoked by uid 50005); 17 Dec 2001 19:22:09 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4176. . Clean. Processed in 0.896861 secs); 17 Dec 2001 19:22:09 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 17 Dec 2001 19:22:08 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA25933; Mon, 17 Dec 2001 11:18:29 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 102990 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 17 Dec 2001 19:18:28          +0000
Received: from munch.biochem.duke.edu (munch.biochem.duke.edu [152.3.174.65])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA25858 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 17 Dec 2001 11:08:28 -0800
Received: from nc.rr.com (IDENT:jeff@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by          munch.biochem.duke.edu (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id fBHJ5wR20083 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 17 Dec 2001 14:05:58 -0500
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.76 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.4.3 i686)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <Pine.GSO.4.21.0112171311500.4856-100000@z.glue.umd.edu>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3C1E4216.5223037D@nc.rr.com>
Date:         Mon, 17 Dec 2001 14:05:58 -0500
Reply-To: "Jeff Taylor" <jtaylor@NC.RR.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jeff Taylor" <jtaylor@NC.RR.COM>
Organization: Loki Research
Subject:      Re: [AR] laser altimeters
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Wouldn't putting the laser beam through a diffraction grating be the way to
go?  Then you just need a camera to measure the distance between the spots.
No movement of the laser is needed, and if some of the spots are not visible
due to terrain variations it won't effect operation.

- Jeff Taylor

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 4598 invoked from network); 17 Dec 2001 20:00:24 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 17 Dec 2001 20:00:24 -0000
Received: (qmail 28900 invoked by uid 50005); 17 Dec 2001 20:00:15 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4176. . Clean. Processed in 2.960788 secs); 17 Dec 2001 20:00:15 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 17 Dec 2001 20:00:11 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA25914; Mon, 17 Dec 2001 11:17:08 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 102999 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 17 Dec 2001 19:17:04          +0000
Received: from spsystems.net (spsystems.net [209.47.149.227]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA25899 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon,          17 Dec 2001 11:17:04 -0800
Received: (from henry@localhost) by spsystems.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id OAA10095;          Mon, 17 Dec 2001 14:16:31 -0500 (EST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1011217140835.7263L-100000@spsystems.net>
Date:         Mon, 17 Dec 2001 14:16:31 -0500
Reply-To: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] carbon fiber reality check
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1011217131631.7263H-100000@spsystems.net>

> "Hexcel AS4D (12000 filaments)" has the following charactgeristics:
> Tensile ultimate strength 620.6k psi
> [works out to cross-section of 0.427 mm^2]

An afterthought on my previous comments:  this is an awfully fat fiber for
this application, nearly a millimeter in diameter.  Given that you need so
little fiber area (even after applying some more realistic assumptions),
you would be rather better off with a much finer fiber, which would permit
a much closer spacing and eliminate some of the more awkward problems.

Note, incidentally, that a single orthodox axial winding of fiber gives
you *two* layers of fibers.  So what you want is a fiber for which two
more-or-less-continuous layers supply the required strength.

As with metals, of course, there are minimum-gauge issues -- thinner
fibers are harder to handle.

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 2697 invoked from network); 17 Dec 2001 20:27:14 -0000
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 17 Dec 2001 20:27:14 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 15654 invoked by uid 50005); 17 Dec 2001 20:27:02 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4175. . Clean. Processed in 0.333425 secs); 17 Dec 2001 20:27:02 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 17 Dec 2001 20:27:02 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA26264; Mon, 17 Dec 2001 12:21:10 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 103052 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 17 Dec 2001 20:19:43          +0000
Received: from fcexgw03.efi.com ([192.68.228.82]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7)          with SMTP id MAA26194 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 17 Dec 2001          12:09:42 -0800
Received: from 10.10.12.104 by fcexgw03.efi.com (InterScan E-Mail VirusWall          NT); Mon, 17 Dec 2001 12:09:13 -0800
Received: from earthlink.net (peroxide.efi.com [10.10.89.46]) by          EX-IMC3-CORP.efi.com with SMTP (Microsoft Exchange Internet Mail          Service Version 5.5.2653.13) id Y35717AN; Mon, 17 Dec 2001 12:09:54          -0800
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.14-5.0 i686)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <Pine.BSI.3.91.1011217140835.7263L-100000@spsystems.net>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3C1E5124.3E3FAD1@earthlink.net>
Date:         Mon, 17 Dec 2001 12:10:12 -0800
Reply-To: "David Weinshenker" <daze39@EARTHLINK.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "David Weinshenker" <daze39@EARTHLINK.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] carbon fiber reality check
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Henry Spencer wrote:
>
> > "Hexcel AS4D (12000 filaments)" has the following charactgeristics:
> > Tensile ultimate strength 620.6k psi
> > [works out to cross-section of 0.427 mm^2]
>
> An afterthought on my previous comments:  this is an awfully fat fiber for
> this application, nearly a millimeter in diameter.  Given that you need so
> little fiber area (even after applying some more realistic assumptions),
> you would be rather better off with a much finer fiber, which would permit
> a much closer spacing and eliminate some of the more awkward problems.

Hmmm... how does carbon fiber behave in fabrication - is it pretty much a solid
cylindrical "string", or does it act more like a "yarn" of loose untwisted
filaments that could be spread out into a "ribbon" as it was wound on a structure?

-dave w

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 9480 invoked from network); 17 Dec 2001 21:11:08 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 17 Dec 2001 21:11:08 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 6557 invoked by uid 50005); 17 Dec 2001 21:10:59 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpf with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4176. . Clean. Processed in 0.322298 secs); 17 Dec 2001 21:10:59 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 17 Dec 2001 21:10:59 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA26440; Mon, 17 Dec 2001 12:53:24 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 103087 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 17 Dec 2001 20:52:00          +0000
Received: from adobe.com (smtp-relay-1.adobe.com [192.150.11.1]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA26424 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon,          17 Dec 2001 12:52:00 -0800
Received: from inner-relay-1.corp.adobe.com ([153.32.1.51]) by adobe.com          (1.0.0/8.11.4) with ESMTP id fBHKqc020656 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>;          Mon, 17 Dec 2001 12:52:39 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mailsj-v1.corp.adobe.com (mailsj-dev.corp.adobe.com          [153.32.1.192]) by inner-relay-1.corp.adobe.com (8.11.4/8.11.4) with          ESMTP id fBHKphh14955 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 17 Dec 2001          12:51:43 -0800 (PST)
Received: from sronald.earthlink.net ([153.32.63.111]) by          mailsj-v1.corp.adobe.com (Netscape Messaging Server 4.15 v1 Jul 11          2001 16:32:57) with ESMTP id GOI9XO00.UD0; Mon, 17 Dec 2001 12:51:24          -0800
X-Sender: forkbomb@mail.earthlink.net
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
References: <Pine.BSI.3.91.1011217140835.7263L-100000@spsystems.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <5.1.0.14.0.20011217124959.03cbf410@mail.earthlink.net>
Date:         Mon, 17 Dec 2001 12:57:12 -0800
Reply-To: "Pierce Nichols" <forkbomb@EARTHLINK.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Pierce Nichols" <forkbomb@EARTHLINK.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] carbon fiber reality check
Comments: To: David Weinshenker <daze39@earthlink.net>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <3C1E5124.3E3FAD1@earthlink.net>

At 12:10 PM 12/17/01 -0800, David Weinshenker wrote:
>Henry Spencer wrote:
> >
> > > "Hexcel AS4D (12000 filaments)" has the following charactgeristics:
> > > Tensile ultimate strength 620.6k psi
> > > [works out to cross-section of 0.427 mm^2]
> >
> > An afterthought on my previous comments:  this is an awfully fat fiber for
> > this application, nearly a millimeter in diameter.  Given that you need so
> > little fiber area (even after applying some more realistic assumptions),
> > you would be rather better off with a much finer fiber, which would permit
> > a much closer spacing and eliminate some of the more awkward problems.
>
>Hmmm... how does carbon fiber behave in fabrication - is it pretty much a
>solid
>cylindrical "string", or does it act more like a "yarn" of loose untwisted
>filaments that could be spread out into a "ribbon" as it was wound on a
>structure?


         More like a solid string. When I was waiting for the rest of the
test crew to show up on Sat out at CDI, I dropped by the MicroCenter place
that's up the road a couple of miles and ran across a couple of books on
the design of composite structures. I thought of picking one up until I
read the price tags (~$80) :). I looked up the stuff on composite tank
design -- it looks like real tanks are typically biaxially wound at some
appropriate angle to balance the axial and hoop loads and produce the
lightest tank for a given volume and proof loading. That technique avoids
the pitfalls Henry is talking about. I'm thinking of ordering one of those
books through FatBrain this week, so I can get some better clue about
composites.

         -p

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 26081 invoked from network); 17 Dec 2001 21:22:53 -0000
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 17 Dec 2001 21:22:53 -0000
Received: (qmail 19367 invoked by uid 50005); 17 Dec 2001 21:22:45 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4175. . Clean. Processed in 1.215291 secs); 17 Dec 2001 21:22:45 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 17 Dec 2001 21:22:43 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA26489; Mon, 17 Dec 2001 13:06:38 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 103094 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 17 Dec 2001 21:05:16          +0000
Received: from smtprelay7.dc2.adelphia.net (smtprelay7.dc2.adelphia.net          [64.8.50.39]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA26474 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 17 Dec 2001 13:05:15 -0800
Received: from jlgrady ([24.53.101.238]) by smtprelay7.dc2.adelphia.net          (Netscape Messaging Server 4.15) with SMTP id GOIAJV00.50F for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 17 Dec 2001 16:04:44 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook CWS, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <000601c1873e$bef31b90$0200a8c0@cmngga.adelphia.net>
Date:         Mon, 17 Dec 2001 16:06:50 -0500
Reply-To: "Jeff Grady" <jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jeff Grady" <jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] OT - Low Tech shuttle equipment
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1011217014714.27442B-100000@spsystems.net>

Henry Spencer wrote:

>>Why waste a computer -- which may have bigger jobs to do -- on a task that
>>a plain old kitchen timer does just as well?


You have to understand that I have worked in corporate IT departments
(development) for two decades and I am used to computer systems being
greatly under-utilized. Management seems hell-bent to invent new manual
tasks that existing computing power could easily handle.

If it's to wake them up from sleep, I would agree. I just thought it was
strange to see kitchen timers aboard our "newest" shuttle.

If you look at some of the other photos from that mission, its surprising to
see how many old IBM stinkpad laptops are velcro'd in the cabin...And that's
just the flight deck. If they save a few bucks this way, I'm all for it.

JG

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 6564 invoked from network); 17 Dec 2001 21:41:40 -0000
Received: from smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.105]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 17 Dec 2001 21:41:40 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 32064 invoked by uid 50005); 17 Dec 2001 21:41:31 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpy with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4176. . Clean. Processed in 0.558599 secs); 17 Dec 2001 21:41:31 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 17 Dec 2001 21:41:30 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA26551; Mon, 17 Dec 2001 13:23:29 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 103101 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 17 Dec 2001 21:22:00          +0000
Received: from ae.poss.com (adam-m.poss.com [198.70.184.161]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA26507 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon,          17 Dec 2001 13:12:00 -0800
Received: from perfectorder.com ([198.70.184.156]) by ae.poss.com (Netscape          Messaging Server 4.1) with ESMTP id GOIAWY00.LW1 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 17 Dec 2001 16:12:34 -0500
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (X11; I; SunOS 5.8 sun4u)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3C1E6001.297C5C71@perfectorder.com>
Date:         Mon, 17 Dec 2001 16:13:37 -0500
Reply-To: "Doug Bell" <dbell@PERFECTORDER.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Doug Bell" <dbell@PERFECTORDER.COM>
Organization: Perfect Order
Subject:      Re: [AR] carbon fiber reality check
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Just realizing what fiber type you are referring to, Mr. Spencer is
correct.
Carbon fibers 'bundles' are generally found in 1K, 3K, 6K, and 12K
flavors,
with 12K normally only used for very large projects, and 3K and 6K being
much
more common.  (and usually a fair bit cheaper too)

Yes, they are weaker in the tensile stregnth area, but for projects such
as
fibre-winding tanks, my concern would almost be more with modulus
strength
than tensile strength.

Doug Bell

On Monday 17 December 2001 14:16, Henry Spencer wrote:
> > "Hexcel AS4D (12000 filaments)" has the following charactgeristics:
> > Tensile ultimate strength 620.6k psi
> > [works out to cross-section of 0.427 mm^2]
>
> An afterthought on my previous comments:  this is an awfully fat fiber
for
> this application, nearly a millimeter in diameter.  Given that you
need so
> little fiber area (even after applying some more realistic
assumptions),
> you would be rather better off with a much finer fiber, which would
permit
> a much closer spacing and eliminate some of the more awkward problems.

>
> Note, incidentally, that a single orthodox axial winding of fiber
gives
> you *two* layers of fibers.  So what you want is a fiber for which two

> more-or-less-continuous layers supply the required strength.
>
> As with metals, of course, there are minimum-gauge issues -- thinner
> fibers are harder to handle.
>
>                                                           Henry
Spencer
>
henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 15025 invoked from network); 17 Dec 2001 22:01:40 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 17 Dec 2001 22:01:40 -0000
Received: (qmail 29539 invoked by uid 50005); 17 Dec 2001 22:01:28 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpe with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4176. . Clean. Processed in 0.48994 secs); 17 Dec 2001 22:01:28 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 17 Dec 2001 22:01:27 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA26723; Mon, 17 Dec 2001 13:50:41 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 103143 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 17 Dec 2001 21:49:18          +0000
Received: from spsystems.net (spsystems.net [209.47.149.227]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA26703 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Mon,          17 Dec 2001 13:49:18 -0800
Received: (from henry@localhost) by spsystems.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id QAA11508;          Mon, 17 Dec 2001 16:48:44 -0500 (EST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1011217164747.7263T-100000@spsystems.net>
Date:         Mon, 17 Dec 2001 16:48:44 -0500
Reply-To: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] carbon fiber reality check
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <3C1E5124.3E3FAD1@earthlink.net>

On Mon, 17 Dec 2001, David Weinshenker wrote:
> ... how does carbon fiber behave in fabrication - is it pretty much a solid
> cylindrical "string", or does it act more like a "yarn" of loose untwisted
> filaments that could be spread out into a "ribbon" as it was wound...

The former, I think -- binders are applied to the filaments to keep them
from getting away and encourage the fiber to hold its shape.

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 17484 invoked from network); 17 Dec 2001 22:02:22 -0000
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 17 Dec 2001 22:02:22 -0000
Received: (qmail 9407 invoked by uid 50005); 17 Dec 2001 22:02:14 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4176. . Clean. Processed in 3.218232 secs); 17 Dec 2001 22:02:14 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 17 Dec 2001 22:02:09 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA26749; Mon, 17 Dec 2001 13:54:55 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 103150 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 17 Dec 2001 21:53:33          +0000
Received: from mta02.mail.mel.aone.net.au (mta02.mail.au.uu.net [203.2.192.82])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA26734 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 17 Dec 2001 13:53:33 -0800
Received: from unknown ([63.60.220.209]) by mta02.mail.mel.aone.net.au with          SMTP id <20011217215328.LZAZ2177.mta02.mail.mel.aone.net.au@unknown>          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 18 Dec 2001 08:53:28 +1100
References: Conversation <3C1AA1D0.B8F82CA6@earthlink.net> with last message            <Pine.BSI.3.91.1011217131631.7263H-100000@spsystems.net>
Priority: Normal
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Priority: 3
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	X-MAPIextension=.TXT;
	charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>
Date:         Mon, 17 Dec 2001 21:53:33 +0000
Reply-To: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] carbon fiber reality check
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1011217131631.7263H-100000@spsystems.net>

----------
> On Fri, 14 Dec 2001, David Weinshenker wrote:
> > "Hexcel AS4D (12000 filaments)" has the following charactgeristics:
> > Tensile ultimate strength 620.6k psi
>
> Considerable caution is needed here, and this number will have to be
> de-rated a fair bit.  Ultimate strength and normal working strength are
> two different numbers, bonding of the fiber to the matrix around it needs
> to be considered, there is some inefficiency in having only hoop and axial
> windings, and you always need a safety factor against surprises.
>
> (The safety factor in particular can be large.  The normal safety factor
> for commercial pressure vessels built using well-understood processes is a
> factor of 5!  That's applied *after* deductions for all known issues; it
> is solely a precaution against surprises.  Mind you, it assumes that the
> pressure vessel will be operated in close proximity to people.)
>

Some issues like pressure & material strength variances due to anticipated
temperature fluctuations require careful consideration (somewhere along the
line) with commercial vessels (storage in particular) but maybe overlooked
to some extent for short term applications eg. propellant storage tanks on
rockets with careful utilisation of pressure relief or regulation and the
narrow range of temperatures the tanks can expect to experience during
operation (pressure cycle).

Troy.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 28305 invoked from network); 17 Dec 2001 23:41:15 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 17 Dec 2001 23:41:15 -0000
Received: (qmail 15000 invoked by uid 50005); 17 Dec 2001 23:41:06 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4176. . Clean. Processed in 0.950152 secs); 17 Dec 2001 23:41:06 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 17 Dec 2001 23:41:05 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA27284; Mon, 17 Dec 2001 15:12:04 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 103210 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 17 Dec 2001 23:10:29          +0000
Received: from spsystems.net (spsystems.net [209.47.149.227]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA27266 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Mon,          17 Dec 2001 15:10:29 -0800
Received: (from henry@localhost) by spsystems.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id SAA12614;          Mon, 17 Dec 2001 18:09:55 -0500 (EST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1011217180513.7263X-100000@spsystems.net>
Date:         Mon, 17 Dec 2001 18:09:54 -0500
Reply-To: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] carbon fiber reality check
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>

On Mon, 17 Dec 2001, Troy Prideaux wrote:
> > (The safety factor in particular can be large.  The normal safety factor
> > for commercial pressure vessels built using well-understood processes is a
> > factor of 5! ...
>
> Some issues like pressure & material strength variances due to anticipated
> temperature fluctuations require careful consideration (somewhere along the
> line) with commercial vessels (storage in particular) but maybe overlooked
> to some extent for short term applications eg. propellant storage tanks on
> rockets with careful utilisation of pressure relief or regulation and the
> narrow range of temperatures the tanks can expect to experience during
> operation (pressure cycle).

Much more significant, I think, is that the rocket tanks can be
constrained to be pressurized only when onlookers are at a safe distance.
The purpose of the safety factors for commercial pressure vessels is that
using them under pressure should *not* be a hazardous operation.  If use
is always treated as hazardous, with appropriate precautions taken, then
things can be much more relaxed.

(Where the issues do again get tricky, mind you, is if you want the thing
to be manned...)

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 10434 invoked from network); 18 Dec 2001 01:52:25 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 18 Dec 2001 01:52:25 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 31064 invoked by uid 50005); 18 Dec 2001 01:52:16 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4176. . Clean. Processed in 4.097864 secs); 18 Dec 2001 01:52:16 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 18 Dec 2001 01:52:10 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA27965; Mon, 17 Dec 2001 17:50:06 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 103290 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 18 Dec 2001 01:47:01          +0000
Received: from adobe.com (smtp-relay-2.adobe.com [192.150.11.2]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA27938 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon,          17 Dec 2001 17:47:01 -0800
Received: from inner-relay-1.corp.adobe.com ([153.32.1.51]) by adobe.com          (1.0.0/8.11.4) with ESMTP id fBI1jQL09480 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>;          Mon, 17 Dec 2001 17:45:26 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mailsj-v1.corp.adobe.com (mailsj-dev.corp.adobe.com          [153.32.1.192]) by inner-relay-1.corp.adobe.com (8.11.4/8.11.4) with          ESMTP id fBI1kih20528 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 17 Dec 2001          17:46:44 -0800 (PST)
Received: from sronald.earthlink.net ([153.32.63.111]) by          mailsj-v1.corp.adobe.com (Netscape Messaging Server 4.15 v1 Jul 11          2001 16:32:57) with ESMTP id GOINLD00.DDH; Mon, 17 Dec 2001 17:46:25          -0800
X-Sender: forkbomb@mail.earthlink.net
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
References: <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <5.1.0.14.0.20011217174457.03cbf5d0@mail.earthlink.net>
Date:         Mon, 17 Dec 2001 17:52:14 -0800
Reply-To: "Pierce Nichols" <forkbomb@EARTHLINK.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Pierce Nichols" <forkbomb@EARTHLINK.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] carbon fiber reality check
Comments: To: Henry Spencer <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1011217180513.7263X-100000@spsystems.net>

At 06:09 PM 12/17/01 -0500, Henry Spencer wrote:

>Much more significant, I think, is that the rocket tanks can be
>constrained to be pressurized only when onlookers are at a safe distance.
>The purpose of the safety factors for commercial pressure vessels is that
>using them under pressure should *not* be a hazardous operation.  If use
>is always treated as hazardous, with appropriate precautions taken, then
>things can be much more relaxed.


         If you're building tanks out of things like aluminum and steel,
this is the right way to go. However, if you are building out of filament
wound carbon or glass, then it makes more sense to me to just build in the
required safety factor  to make it safe to stand next to the pressurized
tank. The extra filament and matrix weight is likely to be small, as will
the marginal cost. However, it will make operations much simpler, because
you can approach the bird while it is pressurized and you don't have to go
through the whole vent/pressurize cycle just because you suddenly need a
human to fix something on the vehicle or pad/test stand. The only time you
would be worried about the extra margin of weight is when you are headed
for very high altitudes (100 km+) or orbit. And then you probably need the
safety margin, especially if you are trying to go reusable. Personally, I
consider expendables to be more or less beneath my notice :).

         -p

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 10499 invoked from network); 18 Dec 2001 02:15:48 -0000
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 18 Dec 2001 02:15:48 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 7853 invoked by uid 50005); 18 Dec 2001 02:15:39 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4175. . Clean. Processed in 3.623641 secs); 18 Dec 2001 02:15:39 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 18 Dec 2001 02:15:35 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA28097; Mon, 17 Dec 2001 18:13:47 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 103317 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 18 Dec 2001 02:12:24          +0000
Received: from sys27.hou.wt.net (sys27.hou.wt.net [205.230.159.27]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA28076 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 17 Dec 2001 18:12:24 -0800
Received: from localhost (216-119-130-136.ipset10.wt.net [216.119.130.136]) by          sys27.hou.wt.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id UAA45332; Mon, 17 Dec          2001 20:12:17 -0600 (CST)
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="US-ASCII"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.475)
Message-ID:  <B38260DD-F35C-11D5-A97A-0050E43A5105@netaxs.com>
Date:         Mon, 17 Dec 2001 20:12:35 -0600
Reply-To: "Don McCorvey" <dlm3@NETAXS.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Don McCorvey" <dlm3@NETAXS.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] OT - Low Tech shuttle equipment
Comments: To: Bill Westfield <billw@cisco.com>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <CMM.0.90.4.1008565184.billw@cypher>

Hate to burst your bubble, but such timers are commonly used for IFR
approaches in general aviation. For all its dated high-tech, the Shuttle
is still very much an experimental aircraft and there's no reason to
make a $10,000 approach timer when you can buy one for $30 + procurement
costs (~ $9,970), or a dozen for twelve times as much...

Don

On Sunday, December 16, 2001, at 10:59  PM, William Chops Westfield
wrote:

>>>   Was looking through some pics from STS-108 and saw something kinda
>>>   funny...  Look on the dashboard - you might spot something (actually
>>>   three of them) the wife may have in the kitchen...
>>>
>>>
>>> http://www.spaceflight.nasa.gov/gallery/images/shuttle/sts-108/html/s108e5066.
>>> html
>>
>>
>> "cuse the ignorance, but what are they?... they certainly don't
>> look like pots or pans.....
>
> I assume you mean the three "stick-on" digital timer things?  Seems like
> a handy thing to have around, much like the three voltmeters I have in
> "the lab" these days...
>
> I try to keep my wife out of the kitchen except for doing the dishes,
> though.  Improves the food quality...
>
> BillW
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 26692 invoked from network); 18 Dec 2001 02:29:52 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 18 Dec 2001 02:29:52 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: (qmail 3725 invoked by uid 50005); 18 Dec 2001 02:29:43 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpe with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4176. . Clean. Processed in 0.386427 secs); 18 Dec 2001 02:29:43 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 18 Dec 2001 02:29:42 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA28206; Mon, 17 Dec 2001 18:28:28 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 103345 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 18 Dec 2001 02:27:05          +0000
Received: from cisco.com (cypher.cisco.com [171.69.11.18]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA28190 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon,          17 Dec 2001 18:27:05 -0800
Received: (from billw@localhost) by cisco.com (8.8.8/2.6/Cisco List          Logging/8.8.8) id SAA22773; Mon, 17 Dec 2001 18:26:33 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID:  <CMM.0.90.4.1008642393.billw@cypher>
Date:         Mon, 17 Dec 2001 18:26:33 PST
Reply-To: "Bill Westfield" <billw@cisco.com>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "William Chops Westfield" <billw@cisco.com>
Subject:      Re: [AR] carbon fiber reality check
Comments: To: Pierce Nichols <forkbomb@EARTHLINK.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  Your message of Mon, 17 Dec 2001 17:52:14 -0800

    However, if you are building out of filament wound carbon or glass, then
    it makes more sense to me to just build in the required safety factor to
    make it safe to stand next to the pressurized tank. The extra filament
    and matrix weight is likely to be small, as will the marginal cost.

Huh?  It's linear, right?  5x overpressure rating would take 5x the wall
thickness and (somewhat more than) 5x the material...

OTOH, what you say about few amateur attempts needing that degree of
weight optimization is also true...

BillW


From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 23922 invoked from network); 18 Dec 2001 02:48:11 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 18 Dec 2001 02:48:11 -0000
Received: (qmail 2534 invoked by uid 50005); 18 Dec 2001 02:48:03 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4175. . Clean. Processed in 0.432316 secs); 18 Dec 2001 02:48:03 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 18 Dec 2001 02:48:02 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA28317; Mon, 17 Dec 2001 18:46:44 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 103371 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 18 Dec 2001 02:45:18          +0000
Received: from wrench.toolcity.net (root@wrench.toolcity.net [208.0.188.2]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA28295 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 17 Dec 2001 18:45:17 -0800
Received: from [208.22.189.59]          (dap-208-22-189-59.meadville-tnt-0.pa.toolcity.net [208.22.189.59])          by wrench.toolcity.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id VAA25920; Mon, 17          Dec 2001 21:45:12 -0500 (EST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <v01510100b8446c374a36@[208.22.189.206]>
Date:         Mon, 17 Dec 2001 21:47:55 -0600
Reply-To: "al bradley" <abradley@TOOLCITY.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "al bradley" <abradley@TOOLCITY.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] 2 OT - Low Tech shuttle equipment
Comments: To: Jeff Grady <jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

>If you look at some of the other photos from that mission, its surprising to
>see how many old IBM stinkpad laptops are velcro'd in the cabin...

"old IBM stinkpad laptops"

Anyone got an idea where this term originated, and how?

respectfully,
al bradley

------------------------------------------------------------------
Can you live Life with this?: "Unless there is a law, an agreement, or a
long-standing custom, No one `Deserves' Anything -- Either Good or Bad!"

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 1461 invoked from network); 18 Dec 2001 02:58:13 -0000
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 18 Dec 2001 02:58:13 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 14080 invoked by uid 50005); 18 Dec 2001 02:58:05 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4175. . Clean. Processed in 0.513563 secs); 18 Dec 2001 02:58:05 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 18 Dec 2001 02:58:04 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA28448; Mon, 17 Dec 2001 18:56:30 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 103408 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 18 Dec 2001 02:55:06          +0000
Received: from sys32.hou.wt.net (sys32.hou.wt.net [205.230.159.32]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA28424 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 17 Dec 2001 18:55:05 -0800
Received: from localhost (216-119-130-136.ipset10.wt.net [216.119.130.136]) by          sys32.hou.wt.net (8.9.1/8.9.1) with ESMTP id UAA17710; Mon, 17 Dec          2001 20:55:08 -0600 (CST)
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="US-ASCII"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.475)
Message-ID:  <A7A266B5-F362-11D5-A97A-0050E43A5105@netaxs.com>
Date:         Mon, 17 Dec 2001 20:55:12 -0600
Reply-To: "Don McCorvey" <dlm3@NETAXS.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Don McCorvey" <dlm3@NETAXS.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] OT - Low Tech shuttle equipment
Comments: To: Jeff Grady <jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <000601c1873e$bef31b90$0200a8c0@cmngga.adelphia.net>

It doesn't save just a *few* bucks.

It saves *millions* not having non-flight-critical applications running
on certified, tested, overtaxed computer hardware. The GPCs on board
(the five computers that run the entire system) are not quite ancient,
being somewhat newer than the first GPCs used back in the early 80's.
But unlike your home PC, they haven't been upgraded in quite some time.
While they're extremely reliable now, they're dated and are severely
resource limited. The software running on them is thoroughly tested at
great expense - you can't afford to have a bug which crashes the works,
especially in some app that only provides a simple timer function...

If a comparatively cheap laptop or approach timer can be used instead of
incorporating something into flight software, everybody wins, even us
taxpayers.

Don

On Monday, December 17, 2001, at 03:06  PM, Jeff Grady wrote:

> Henry Spencer wrote:
>
>>> Why waste a computer -- which may have bigger jobs to do -- on a task
>>> that
>>> a plain old kitchen timer does just as well?
>
>
> You have to understand that I have worked in corporate IT departments
> (development) for two decades and I am used to computer systems being
> greatly under-utilized. Management seems hell-bent to invent new manual
> tasks that existing computing power could easily handle.
>
> If it's to wake them up from sleep, I would agree. I just thought it was
> strange to see kitchen timers aboard our "newest" shuttle.
>
> If you look at some of the other photos from that mission, its
> surprising to
> see how many old IBM stinkpad laptops are velcro'd in the cabin...And
> that's
> just the flight deck. If they save a few bucks this way, I'm all for it.
>
> JG
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 9461 invoked from network); 18 Dec 2001 03:00:21 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 18 Dec 2001 03:00:21 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 32718 invoked by uid 50005); 18 Dec 2001 03:00:12 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4176. . Clean. Processed in 4.608691 secs); 18 Dec 2001 03:00:12 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 18 Dec 2001 03:00:06 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA28467; Mon, 17 Dec 2001 18:58:51 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 103415 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 18 Dec 2001 02:57:29          +0000
Received: from adobe.com (smtp-relay-2.adobe.com [192.150.11.2]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA28436 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon,          17 Dec 2001 18:55:36 -0800
Received: from inner-relay-1.corp.adobe.com ([153.32.1.51]) by adobe.com          (1.0.0/8.11.4) with ESMTP id fBI2s0L20950 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>;          Mon, 17 Dec 2001 18:54:00 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mailsj-v1.corp.adobe.com (mailsj-dev.corp.adobe.com          [153.32.1.192]) by inner-relay-1.corp.adobe.com (8.11.4/8.11.4) with          ESMTP id fBI2tKh22330 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 17 Dec 2001          18:55:20 -0800 (PST)
Received: from sronald.earthlink.net ([153.32.63.111]) by          mailsj-v1.corp.adobe.com (Netscape Messaging Server 4.15 v1 Jul 11          2001 16:32:57) with ESMTP id GOIQRO00.7YN; Mon, 17 Dec 2001 18:55:00          -0800
X-Sender: forkbomb@mail.earthlink.net
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
References: <Your message of Mon, 17 Dec 2001 17:52:14 -0800>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <5.1.0.14.0.20011217185726.00af67f0@mail.earthlink.net>
Date:         Mon, 17 Dec 2001 19:00:49 -0800
Reply-To: "Pierce Nichols" <forkbomb@EARTHLINK.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Pierce Nichols" <forkbomb@EARTHLINK.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] carbon fiber reality check
Comments: To: Bill Westfield <billw@cisco.com>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <CMM.0.90.4.1008642393.billw@cypher>

At 06:26 PM 12/17/01 -0800, William "Chops" Westfield wrote:
>     However, if you are building out of filament wound carbon or glass, then
>     it makes more sense to me to just build in the required safety factor to
>     make it safe to stand next to the pressurized tank. The extra filament
>     and matrix weight is likely to be small, as will the marginal cost.
>
>Huh?  It's linear, right?  5x overpressure rating would take 5x the wall
>thickness and (somewhat more than) 5x the material...


         That's five times a damn small number :). For any propellant of
reasonable density, the propellant mass so completely swamps the tank mass
that even quintupling it is small in relation to total vehicle weight.


>OTOH, what you say about few amateur attempts needing that degree of
>weight optimization is also true...


         And perhaps more important... easy operations are more important
for most amateurs.

         -p

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 14135 invoked from network); 18 Dec 2001 03:01:33 -0000
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 18 Dec 2001 03:01:33 -0000
Received: (qmail 18837 invoked by uid 50005); 18 Dec 2001 03:01:24 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4175. . Clean. Processed in 0.60357 secs); 18 Dec 2001 03:01:24 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 18 Dec 2001 03:01:23 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA28491; Mon, 17 Dec 2001 19:00:14 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 103422 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 18 Dec 2001 02:58:53          +0000
Received: from mail.cac.net (mail.cac.net [209.44.14.13]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA28440 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon,          17 Dec 2001 18:55:51 -0800
Received: from jfackertcac (216-234-99-40.ded.det2.hexcom.net [216.234.99.40])          by mail.cac.net (8.11.3/8.11.3) with SMTP id fBI2veD62302 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 17 Dec 2001 21:57:41 -0500 (EST)          (envelope-from jfackert@cac.net)
References: <CMM.0.90.4.1008573149.billw@cypher>  <3C1DF7A8.DE1843F3@sfcc.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <001e01c18770$f03e82c0$2863ead8@net>
Date:         Mon, 17 Dec 2001 22:06:06 -0500
Reply-To: "Jim Fackert" <jfackert@CAC.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jim Fackert" <jfackert@CAC.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] OT - Low Tech shuttle equipment
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

whaddya think it costs to send a kitchen timer into orbit???

lessee... timer $2.29 shipping, $3976...
usefulness, indespensable.

think they use it to time rehydration of their meals?

Jim

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 3897 invoked from network); 18 Dec 2001 03:14:39 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 18 Dec 2001 03:14:39 -0000
Received: (qmail 483 invoked by uid 50005); 18 Dec 2001 03:14:30 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4176. . Clean. Processed in 1.415594 secs); 18 Dec 2001 03:14:30 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 18 Dec 2001 03:14:28 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA28598; Mon, 17 Dec 2001 19:13:23 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 103449 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 18 Dec 2001 03:11:57          +0000
Received: from idsoftware.com (predator.idsoftware.com [192.246.40.34]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA28578 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Mon, 17 Dec 2001 19:11:57 -0800
Received: from [192.246.40.129] (account johnc HELO lightning.idsoftware.com)          by idsoftware.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 3.4.7) with ESMTP id 18196          for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 17 Dec 2001 21:11:56 -0600
X-Sender: johnc@mail.idsoftware.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <4.3.1.2.20011217205114.03616a20@mail.idsoftware.com>
Date:         Mon, 17 Dec 2001 21:09:52 -0600
Reply-To: "John Carmack" <johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Carmack" <johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM>
Subject:      [AR] intentionally bad fuels
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

If our tests with coated moly nozzles work out for the hybrid, it may be
interesting to look into the options for an uncooled biprop to get the
operability benefits over hybrids.

It looks like a coated moly chamber can probably be used to around 3000 deg
F (iridium / rhenium would be good to 4000 deg F).  Peroxide / PE hybrids
have a 4000 deg chamber temperature, but we are running the grain all the
way down to the nozzle, so we should have significant fuel film cooling.

A biprop might also be designed with sufficient fuel cooling, but you would
probably explode a bunch of motors trying to get it right.  A potentially
interesting option would be to choose a fuel combination that stayed under
3000 deg F.

Monoprop peroxide has about 1400 deg F / 1033 deg K temperature and 150
(standard condition) Isp.  If you had roughly the same gas properties, an
engine operating at 3000 deg F / 1921 deg K would have an Isp of 204.  Not
all that impressive, but it might still be worth doing.

A sufficiently watered alcohol would probably do the job, but I really want
to avoid miscable propellents, and the water might prevent it from igniting.

Any other thoughts?  What inert substances are soluble in hydrocarbons?

John Carmack

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 2469 invoked from network); 18 Dec 2001 03:37:12 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 18 Dec 2001 03:37:12 -0000
Received: (qmail 4426 invoked by uid 50005); 18 Dec 2001 03:37:03 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4176. . Clean. Processed in 2.851006 secs); 18 Dec 2001 03:37:03 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 18 Dec 2001 03:36:58 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA28785; Mon, 17 Dec 2001 19:35:33 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 103499 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 18 Dec 2001 03:33:59          +0000
Received: from spsystems.net (spsystems.net [209.47.149.227]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA28766 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Mon,          17 Dec 2001 19:33:21 -0800
Received: (from henry@localhost) by spsystems.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id WAA15702;          Mon, 17 Dec 2001 22:31:46 -0500 (EST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1011217222629.14373C-100000@spsystems.net>
Date:         Mon, 17 Dec 2001 22:31:46 -0500
Reply-To: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] 1 Digital vs.Non-digital test stand
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <3C1D1926.3AFB9F39@sfcc.net>

On Sun, 16 Dec 2001, James Yawn wrote:
> Anyone know of a good on-line source for the INA 125?

As others have noted, TI itself is generally happy to give out samples.

A good on-line source of electronics parts in general is Digi-Key,
www.digikey.com.

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 10990 invoked from network); 18 Dec 2001 03:55:19 -0000
Received: from smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.105]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 18 Dec 2001 03:55:19 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 4391 invoked by uid 50005); 18 Dec 2001 03:55:10 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpy with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4176. . Clean. Processed in 1.937015 secs); 18 Dec 2001 03:55:10 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 18 Dec 2001 03:55:08 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA28985; Mon, 17 Dec 2001 19:53:54 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 103527 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 18 Dec 2001 03:52:30          +0000
Received: from swan.prod.itd.earthlink.net (swan.mail.pas.earthlink.net          [207.217.120.123]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id          TAA28876 for <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Mon, 17 Dec 2001 19:42:30 -0800
Received: from dialup-209.247.136.177.dial1.sanjose1.level3.net          ([209.247.136.177] helo=earthlink.net) by swan.prod.itd.earthlink.net          with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 16GB9B-0005A2-00; Mon, 17 Dec 2001          19:42:29 -0800
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.75 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.16-22 i686)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <v01510100b8446c374a36@[208.22.189.206]>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3C1EBB4F.D6E922FA@earthlink.net>
Date:         Mon, 17 Dec 2001 19:43:11 -0800
Reply-To: "David Weinshenker" <daze39@EARTHLINK.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "David Weinshenker" <daze39@EARTHLINK.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] 2 OT - Low Tech shuttle equipment
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

al bradley wrote:
>
> >If you look at some of the other photos from that mission, its surprising to
> >see how many old IBM stinkpad laptops are velcro'd in the cabin...
>
> "old IBM stinkpad laptops"
>
> Anyone got an idea where this term originated, and how?

Probably from the usual tendency of computer-folks to
come up with deprecating terms for any hardware or
software... compare "Netscrape", "Internet Exploder",
"Macintrash", "Virus Basic", "Outbreak Express", etc, etc...

-dave w

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 12686 invoked from network); 18 Dec 2001 05:10:00 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 18 Dec 2001 05:10:00 -0000
Received: (qmail 8772 invoked by uid 50005); 18 Dec 2001 05:09:51 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4176. . Clean. Processed in 1.082461 secs); 18 Dec 2001 05:09:51 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 18 Dec 2001 05:09:50 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA29462; Mon, 17 Dec 2001 20:56:49 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 103658 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 18 Dec 2001 04:55:23          +0000
Received: from spsystems.net (spsystems.net [209.47.149.227]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA29445 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Mon,          17 Dec 2001 20:55:23 -0800
Received: (from henry@localhost) by spsystems.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id XAA16745;          Mon, 17 Dec 2001 23:54:47 -0500 (EST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1011217234804.16003C-100000@spsystems.net>
Date:         Mon, 17 Dec 2001 23:54:47 -0500
Reply-To: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] intentionally bad fuels
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <4.3.1.2.20011217205114.03616a20@mail.idsoftware.com>

On Mon, 17 Dec 2001, John Carmack wrote:
> A sufficiently watered alcohol would probably do the job, but I really want
> to avoid miscable propellents, and the water might prevent it from igniting.
> Any other thoughts?  What inert substances are soluble in hydrocarbons?

Fluorocarbons and the like, but they are (a) costly and (b) severely
restricted by ozone-depletion issues.

CO2 might be, but that would require pressure tanks, and in any case I'm
not sure it's soluble.

I can't immediately think of any other non-flammable non-polar liquids.
(If there were some, you can bet your booties that the dry-cleaning
industry would be using them, which makes me suspect that there aren't
any, at least not anything reasonably common.)

You could always just add a separate water tank, at the cost of an
annoying increase in complexity.

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 12969 invoked from network); 18 Dec 2001 05:31:20 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 18 Dec 2001 05:31:20 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 28860 invoked by uid 50005); 18 Dec 2001 05:31:11 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4175. . Clean. Processed in 0.427261 secs); 18 Dec 2001 05:31:11 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 18 Dec 2001 05:31:11 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA29610; Mon, 17 Dec 2001 21:20:36 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 103683 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 18 Dec 2001 05:19:14          +0000
Received: from out004pub.verizon.net (out004pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.104])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA29589 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 17 Dec 2001 21:19:13 -0800
Received: from [63.15.204.212] (1Cust231.tnt2.rancho-cucamonga.ca.da.uu.net          [63.15.225.231]) by out004pub.verizon.net  with ESMTP for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; id fBI5IgX07465 Mon, 17 Dec 2001 23:18:42          -0600 (CST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: GTE/01rocket@mail.gte.net
References: <v01510100b8446c374a36@[208.22.189.206]>            <3C1EBB4F.D6E922FA@earthlink.net>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <a05100303b8448220b788@[63.15.204.212]>
Date:         Mon, 17 Dec 2001 21:18:41 -0800
Reply-To: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] 2 OT - Low Tech shuttle equipment
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <3C1EBB4F.D6E922FA@earthlink.net>

>al bradley wrote:
>>
>>  >If you look at some of the other photos from that mission, its
>>surprising to
>>  >see how many old IBM stinkpad laptops are velcro'd in the cabin...
>>
>>  "old IBM stinkpad laptops"
>>
>>  Anyone got an idea where this term originated, and how?


The sales force of course.

>
>Probably from the usual tendency of computer-folks to
>come up with deprecating terms for any hardware or
>software... compare "Netscrape", "Internet Exploder",
>"Macintrash", "Virus Basic", "Outbreak Express", etc, etc...
>
>-dave w


--
Jerry Irvine, Box 1242, Claremont, California USA
Opinion, the whole thing. <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
Bring common sense back to rocketry administration.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 6554 invoked from network); 18 Dec 2001 05:59:09 -0000
Received: from smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.105]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 18 Dec 2001 05:59:09 -0000
Received: (qmail 12739 invoked by uid 50005); 18 Dec 2001 05:59:00 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpy with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4176. . Clean. Processed in 0.771247 secs); 18 Dec 2001 05:59:00 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 18 Dec 2001 05:58:59 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA29751; Mon, 17 Dec 2001 21:44:41 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 103716 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 18 Dec 2001 05:43:17          +0000
Received: from smtprelay7.dc2.adelphia.net (smtprelay7.dc2.adelphia.net          [64.8.50.39]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA29736 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 17 Dec 2001 21:43:17 -0800
Received: from jlgrady ([24.53.101.238]) by smtprelay7.dc2.adelphia.net          (Netscape Messaging Server 4.15) with SMTP id GOIYJ900.0QK; Tue, 18          Dec 2001 00:42:45 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook CWS, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <000201c18787$1e0b3430$0200a8c0@cmngga.adelphia.net>
Date:         Tue, 18 Dec 2001 00:44:52 -0500
Reply-To: "Jeff Grady" <jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jeff Grady" <jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] OT - Low Tech shuttle equipment
Comments: To: Don McCorvey <dlm3@netaxs.com>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <A7A266B5-F362-11D5-A97A-0050E43A5105@netaxs.com>

Don wrote:

>>It doesn't save just a *few* bucks.

>>It saves *millions* not having non-flight-critical applications running
>>on certified, tested, overtaxed computer hardware.

If an astronaut or engineer bought them an Wal-Mart then it saved a few
bucks,
but if requisitioned through the "proper channels", they are probably in the
same league
as the Air Force toilets.

JG

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 6828 invoked from network); 18 Dec 2001 06:30:56 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 18 Dec 2001 06:30:56 -0000
Received: (qmail 8087 invoked by uid 50005); 18 Dec 2001 06:30:47 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4175. . Clean. Processed in 0.361767 secs); 18 Dec 2001 06:30:47 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 18 Dec 2001 06:30:47 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA30017; Mon, 17 Dec 2001 22:20:02 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 103788 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 18 Dec 2001 06:18:27          +0000
Received: from spsystems.net (spsystems.net [209.47.149.227]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA29997 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Mon,          17 Dec 2001 22:18:26 -0800
Received: (from henry@localhost) by spsystems.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id BAA19688;          Tue, 18 Dec 2001 01:17:50 -0500 (EST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1011218011642.16003M-100000@spsystems.net>
Date:         Tue, 18 Dec 2001 01:17:49 -0500
Reply-To: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] OT - Low Tech shuttle equipment
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <000201c18787$1e0b3430$0200a8c0@cmngga.adelphia.net>

On Tue, 18 Dec 2001, Jeff Grady wrote:
> If an astronaut or engineer bought them an Wal-Mart then it saved a few
> bucks,
> but if requisitioned through the "proper channels", they are probably in the
> same league
> as the Air Force toilets.

They can't go *completely* through the back door, because NASA does want
to test cabin gear for a few potential problems like outgassing.

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 9799 invoked from network); 18 Dec 2001 06:32:03 -0000
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 18 Dec 2001 06:32:03 -0000
Received: (qmail 912 invoked by uid 50005); 18 Dec 2001 06:31:48 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4176. . Clean. Processed in 2.453514 secs); 18 Dec 2001 06:31:48 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 18 Dec 2001 06:31:44 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA30064; Mon, 17 Dec 2001 22:25:18 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 103799 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 18 Dec 2001 06:23:56          +0000
Received: from smtprelay7.dc2.adelphia.net (smtprelay7.dc2.adelphia.net          [64.8.50.39]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA30045 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 17 Dec 2001 22:23:55 -0800
Received: from jlgrady ([24.53.101.238]) by smtprelay7.dc2.adelphia.net          (Netscape Messaging Server 4.15) with SMTP id GOJ0F000.JV7 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 18 Dec 2001 01:23:24 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook CWS, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <000301c1878c$cb802a30$0200a8c0@cmngga.adelphia.net>
Date:         Tue, 18 Dec 2001 01:25:31 -0500
Reply-To: "Jeff Grady" <jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jeff Grady" <jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET>
Subject:      [AR] Kn calculation
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

I remember seeing a web page that calculated Kn values based on user input
some time ago and did not bookmark it...Anyone have a link to it?

JG

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 832 invoked from network); 18 Dec 2001 08:39:32 -0000
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 18 Dec 2001 08:39:32 -0000
Received: (qmail 2739 invoked by uid 50005); 18 Dec 2001 08:39:22 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4176. . Clean. Processed in 5.411474 secs); 18 Dec 2001 08:39:22 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 18 Dec 2001 08:39:14 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA30801; Tue, 18 Dec 2001 00:37:56 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 103973 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 18 Dec 2001 08:36:25          +0000
Received: from smtprelay9.dc2.adelphia.net (smtprelay9.dc2.adelphia.net          [64.8.50.53]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA30786 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 18 Dec 2001 00:36:25 -0800
Received: from jlgrady ([24.53.101.238]) by smtprelay9.dc2.adelphia.net          (Netscape Messaging Server 4.15) with SMTP id GOJ5AG00.R7Q for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 18 Dec 2001 03:08:40 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook CWS, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <000001c1879b$80018b30$0200a8c0@cmngga.adelphia.net>
Date:         Tue, 18 Dec 2001 03:10:47 -0500
Reply-To: "Jeff Grady" <jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jeff Grady" <jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] OT - Low Tech shuttle equipment
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1011218011642.16003M-100000@spsystems.net>

Henry wrote:

>>They can't go *completely* through the back door, because NASA does want
>>to test cabin gear for a few potential problems like outgassing.

OK, what happens if you fart in your EVA suit?

I wonder how many man-hours and money was spent on that question...



Yep, way OT...Sorry, it's late and I'm tired...G'night


JG

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 7086 invoked from network); 18 Dec 2001 08:42:05 -0000
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 18 Dec 2001 08:42:05 -0000
Received: (qmail 26853 invoked by uid 50005); 18 Dec 2001 08:41:56 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpf with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4176. . Clean. Processed in 0.490659 secs); 18 Dec 2001 08:41:56 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 18 Dec 2001 08:41:55 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA30843; Tue, 18 Dec 2001 00:40:42 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 103984 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 18 Dec 2001 08:39:21          +0000
Received: from roll.akcecc.kiev.ua (roll.akcecc.kiev.ua [193.227.206.34]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA30823 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 18 Dec 2001 00:39:17 -0800
Received: from ssss (pool-66.akcecc.kiev.ua [193.227.207.66] (may be forged))          by roll.akcecc.kiev.ua (8.10.2/8.10.2) with SMTP id fBI8dB108790 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 18 Dec 2001 10:39:11 +0200
References:  <4.3.1.2.20011217205114.03616a20@mail.idsoftware.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2417.2000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <001501c18797$196140e0$42cfe3c1@home>
Date:         Tue, 18 Dec 2001 10:38:25 +0300
Reply-To: "Serge Pipko" <spas@AKCECC.KIEV.UA>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Serge Pipko" <spas@AKCECC.KIEV.UA>
Subject:      Re: [AR] intentionally bad fuels
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

John Carmack wrote:

> A sufficiently watered alcohol would probably do the job, but I really
want
> to avoid miscable propellents, and the water might prevent it from
igniting.
>
> Any other thoughts?  What inert substances are soluble in hydrocarbons?

Maybe chlorinated solvents would do the job? For example, chloroform,
tetrachloromethan, trichloroethylene, tetrachloroethylene, etc. But their
combustion products contain HCl and so may be corrosive.

Another option - highly oxidated compounds, such as formic or acetic acid.

Serge

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 18298 invoked from network); 18 Dec 2001 09:11:48 -0000
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 18 Dec 2001 09:11:48 -0000
Received: (qmail 32447 invoked by uid 50005); 18 Dec 2001 09:11:38 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4176. . Clean. Processed in 4.105884 secs); 18 Dec 2001 09:11:38 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 18 Dec 2001 09:11:32 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id BAA31034; Tue, 18 Dec 2001 01:10:18 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 104031 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 18 Dec 2001 09:08:50          +0000
Received: from mta07.mail.mel.aone.net.au (mta07.mail.au.uu.net [203.2.192.88])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id BAA31012 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 18 Dec 2001 01:08:50 -0800
Received: from unknown ([63.34.210.210]) by mta07.mail.mel.aone.net.au with          SMTP id <20011218090847.WUVJ24613.mta07.mail.mel.aone.net.au@unknown>          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 18 Dec 2001 20:08:47 +1100
References: Conversation <4.3.1.2.20011217205114.03616a20@mail.idsoftware.com>            with last message            <Pine.BSI.3.91.1011217234804.16003C-100000@spsystems.net>
Priority: Normal
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Priority: 3
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	X-MAPIextension=.TXT;
	charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>
Date:         Tue, 18 Dec 2001 09:08:50 +0000
Reply-To: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] intentionally bad fuels
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1011217234804.16003C-100000@spsystems.net>

----------
> On Mon, 17 Dec 2001, John Carmack wrote:
> > A sufficiently watered alcohol would probably do the job, but I really
want
> > to avoid miscable propellents, and the water might prevent it from
igniting.
> > Any other thoughts?  What inert substances are soluble in hydrocarbons?
>
> Fluorocarbons and the like, but they are (a) costly and (b) severely
> restricted by ozone-depletion issues.
>
> CO2 might be, but that would require pressure tanks, and in any case I'm
> not sure it's soluble.
>
> I can't immediately think of any other non-flammable non-polar liquids.
> (If there were some, you can bet your booties that the dry-cleaning
> industry would be using them, which makes me suspect that there aren't
> any, at least not anything reasonably common.)

Maybe some carefully chosen aromatic compounds might disolve (to some
degree) in lightish hydrocarbons, but whilst they may not react with the
same readiness as your typical rocket fuels, they won't produce much in the
way of cooling ie. converting heat into mechanical work due to the very
unsaturated nature of them.

Troy.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 6320 invoked from network); 18 Dec 2001 09:29:48 -0000
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 18 Dec 2001 09:29:48 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 11104 invoked by uid 50005); 18 Dec 2001 09:29:38 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4176. . Clean. Processed in 7.66011 secs); 18 Dec 2001 09:29:38 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 18 Dec 2001 09:29:28 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id BAA31153; Tue, 18 Dec 2001 01:27:55 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 104062 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 18 Dec 2001 09:26:25          +0000
Received: from sys27.hou.wt.net (sys27.hou.wt.net [205.230.159.27]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id BAA31133 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 18 Dec 2001 01:26:24 -0800
Received: from localhost (216-119-138-150.ipset18.wt.net [216.119.138.150]) by          sys27.hou.wt.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id DAA60142; Tue, 18 Dec          2001 03:26:21 -0600 (CST)
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="US-ASCII"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.475)
Message-ID:  <5434AD72-F399-11D5-A97A-0050E43A5105@netaxs.com>
Date:         Tue, 18 Dec 2001 03:26:34 -0600
Reply-To: "Don McCorvey" <dlm3@NETAXS.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Don McCorvey" <dlm3@NETAXS.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] OT - Low Tech shuttle equipment
Comments: To: Jeff Grady <jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <000201c18787$1e0b3430$0200a8c0@cmngga.adelphia.net>

No doubt - as I alluded to in a previous post. While I know of a few
pieces of crew equipment that were in fact procured at Wal Mart, it's
not the norm, by any stretch.

We can all poke fun at the government for being wasteful - I do every
day and the gov't is my customer - but the sad fact is that you cannot
just go buy a $10 toilet seat from Home Depot and install it on an
airplane. Cost is not the only criterion for any part you install. It is
merely one of many.

If you're smart, you use cost to help design or select the part - often
you can save a lot by using already available, standard parts, or by
selecting materials that serve adequately over more exotic materials
that are 'better' for one reason or another. This may require revising
your design for something else, so you have to weigh the cost of the
revised design as well as the benefit of the standard part. If you're
lucky, it works. If not, it doesn't and you're stuck buying a custom
part.

Assuming you can't use a standard part for one reason or another, the
only choice is to write a specification for the part. Once you've taken
that step, there are strict rules which have been developed over time
which will ensure that you get a product that will serve well on your
vehicle - rules like tolerating salt air and humidity or being free of
fungus.

Any time you deviate from a part someone's already making, you're going
to incur additional cost, since there are invariably tooling charges and
engineering costs as the contractor makes the part to your spec.

Then the part has to be qualification tested or analyzed (where testing
is expensive or impractical) to verify that it meets every requirement
in your specification. This represents even more cost and may find flaws
which require the contractor to re-engineer the part.

Finally, you have to have the entire production process and end-product
monitored by a quality inspector(s) to ensure that the production parts
are made to the standards set for the part, and then acceptance tested
to verify that it meets the same specifications as the qualification
test part.

This entire process is usually overseen by a subcontracts administrator
and usually one or more engineers. At the contractor's offices, there's
a contracting officer, project managers, engineers, designers and
production people - for small contractors, this may be two people, for
large ones, it can be hundreds. All of these people have to be paid, and
the more people there are involved, the more it all costs.

My point is simple: whether you are a commercial or government entity,
the process is much the same. I don't blame the government for having
complex processes because it does achieve the desired result for the
very small quantities it procures.

Remember, things are different when you make products by the millions
like auto manufacturers and toilet-seat makers. You get economies of
scale that drastically reduce the part cost delivered to the consumer.
The aerospace industry and the military usually procures parts and
equipment by the hundreds or thousands; NASA by the ones or tens. The
fewer you make of something, the more development costs become as a
percentage of the individual part costs.

So as I said, as a taxpayer, you should be happy that NASA can procure a
'kitchen timer' (It isn't really, but you can buy the same one from
Sporty's Pilot Shop or your local FBO) or a common laptop to use on the
Shuttle, rather than spending millions developing and testing 'timer'
software that can be run on the GPCs on board. It's much lower cost,
even though it's not as cheap as you going to the store and buying one
with your own credit card - those people still have to be paid to fill
out the paperwork to get something like that into the inventory.

There are so many opportunities to point out waste in the Government,
especially NASA. You can count on seeing lots of it in the months ahead
as the new Administrator starts making sense of their turgid management
and opaque accounting. Picking on the few examples of smart, low-cost
solutions they've adopted simply because they can't procedurally buy
them from Wal Mart completely misses the point. They did something
'outside the box' and it works adequately at low cost. Is it the
optimum ? Not by a long shot. But at least they didn't design custom
hardware for it.

Don

BTW: the timer is probably used for doing precise timing of RCS jet
pulses for rendezvous and docking or manual reboosts of the ISS or
Hubble.

On Monday, December 17, 2001, at 11:44  PM, Jeff Grady wrote:

> Don wrote:
>
>>> It doesn't save just a *few* bucks.
>
>>> It saves *millions* not having non-flight-critical applications
>>> running
>>> on certified, tested, overtaxed computer hardware.
>
> If an astronaut or engineer bought them an Wal-Mart then it saved a few
> bucks,
> but if requisitioned through the "proper channels", they are probably
> in the
> same league
> as the Air Force toilets.
>
> JG
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 9319 invoked from network); 18 Dec 2001 09:30:50 -0000
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 18 Dec 2001 09:30:50 -0000
Received: (qmail 12300 invoked by uid 50005); 18 Dec 2001 09:30:41 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4176. . Clean. Processed in 7.065773 secs); 18 Dec 2001 09:30:41 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 18 Dec 2001 09:30:30 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id BAA31181; Tue, 18 Dec 2001 01:29:18 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 104069 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 18 Dec 2001 09:27:57          +0000
Received: from mta03.mail.mel.aone.net.au (mta03.mail.au.uu.net [203.2.192.83])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id BAA31146 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 18 Dec 2001 01:27:39 -0800
Received: from unknown ([63.34.218.66]) by mta03.mail.mel.aone.net.au with SMTP          id <20011218092735.TUKZ26229.mta03.mail.mel.aone.net.au@unknown> for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 18 Dec 2001 20:27:35 +1100
References: Conversation <4.3.1.2.20011217205114.03616a20@mail.idsoftware.com>            with last message            <4.3.1.2.20011217205114.03616a20@mail.idsoftware.com>
Priority: Normal
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Priority: 3
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	X-MAPIextension=.TXT;
	charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>
Date:         Tue, 18 Dec 2001 09:27:57 +0000
Reply-To: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] intentionally bad fuels
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <4.3.1.2.20011217205114.03616a20@mail.idsoftware.com>

Can you elaborate more on why you're considering a biprop configuration? To
me, the advantages of a HTP hybrid system heavily outweigh the potential
advantages of a HTP biprop from a development cost and complexity
perspective if what's been reported about HTP hybrids is true? To me, the
possible "passive" (so to speak) film cooling options for hybrid systems
seems degrees of magnitude easier to develop than the forced plumbing
required for biprop film cooling or regen cooling, or am I missing
something?

Troy.

----------
> If our tests with coated moly nozzles work out for the hybrid, it may be
> interesting to look into the options for an uncooled biprop to get the
> operability benefits over hybrids.
>
> It looks like a coated moly chamber can probably be used to around 3000
deg
> F (iridium / rhenium would be good to 4000 deg F).  Peroxide / PE hybrids
> have a 4000 deg chamber temperature, but we are running the grain all the
> way down to the nozzle, so we should have significant fuel film cooling.
>
> A biprop might also be designed with sufficient fuel cooling, but you
would
> probably explode a bunch of motors trying to get it right.  A potentially
> interesting option would be to choose a fuel combination that stayed under
> 3000 deg F.
>
> Monoprop peroxide has about 1400 deg F / 1033 deg K temperature and 150
> (standard condition) Isp.  If you had roughly the same gas properties, an
> engine operating at 3000 deg F / 1921 deg K would have an Isp of 204.  Not
> all that impressive, but it might still be worth doing.
>
> A sufficiently watered alcohol would probably do the job, but I really
want
> to avoid miscable propellents, and the water might prevent it from
igniting.
>
> Any other thoughts?  What inert substances are soluble in hydrocarbons?
>
> John Carmack

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 35 invoked from network); 18 Dec 2001 13:32:28 -0000
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 18 Dec 2001 13:32:28 -0000
Received: (qmail 5294 invoked by uid 50005); 18 Dec 2001 13:32:19 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4176. . Clean. Processed in 1.357064 secs); 18 Dec 2001 13:32:19 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 18 Dec 2001 13:32:17 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id FAA32068; Tue, 18 Dec 2001 05:28:17 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 104179 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 18 Dec 2001 13:24:17          +0000
Received: from cablecom.laribay.net (cablecom.laribay.net [66.20.57.4]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id FAA32042 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 18 Dec 2001 05:24:16 -0800
Received: from billbull (dial106.laribay.net [66.20.57.106]) by          cablecom.laribay.net (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id HAA24679 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 18 Dec 2001 07:08:31 -0600 (CST)          (envelope-from bpbullock@laribay.net)
References:  <000301c1878c$cb802a30$0200a8c0@cmngga.adelphia.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <001701c187c7$75d639e0$6a391442@billbull>
Date:         Tue, 18 Dec 2001 07:25:26 -0600
Reply-To: "Bill Bullock" <bpbullock@LARIBAY.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Bill Bullock" <bpbullock@LARIBAY.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Kn calculation
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

    I like John Bolen's site at
http://members.home.com/tripoli-oklahoma/nozzle.htm for quick nozzle
calculations. You can then go from there to refine.
    Respectfully,
Bill
----- Original Message -----
From: Jeff Grady <jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 12:25 AM
Subject: [AR] Kn calculation


> I remember seeing a web page that calculated Kn values based on user input
> some time ago and did not bookmark it...Anyone have a link to it?
>
> JG
>
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 9667 invoked from network); 18 Dec 2001 14:50:51 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 18 Dec 2001 14:50:51 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 18197 invoked by uid 50005); 18 Dec 2001 14:50:42 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4175. . Clean. Processed in 0.390742 secs); 18 Dec 2001 14:50:42 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 18 Dec 2001 14:50:41 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA32561; Tue, 18 Dec 2001 06:46:50 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 104223 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 18 Dec 2001 14:45:25          +0000
Received: from mail1.murraystate.edu (mail1.murraystate.edu [216.249.159.50])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id GAA32542 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Tue, 18 Dec 2001 06:45:24 -0800
Received: from boothcomputer.murraystate.edu (216.249.150.117) by          mail1.murraystate.edu (NPlex 5.5.031) id 3C12217900042557 for          AROCKET@itc.uci.edu; Tue, 18 Dec 2001 08:42:32 -0600
X-Sender: terry.mccreary@murraystate.edu
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <5.1.0.14.0.20011218084231.00a48520@murraystate.edu>
Date:         Tue, 18 Dec 2001 08:53:11 -0600
Reply-To: "Terry McCreary" <terry.mccreary@MURRAYSTATE.EDU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Terry McCreary" <terry.mccreary@MURRAYSTATE.EDU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Kn calculation
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <000301c1878c$cb802a30$0200a8c0@cmngga.adelphia.net>

At 01:25 AM 12/18/01 -0500, you wrote:
>I remember seeing a web page that calculated Kn values based on user input
>some time ago and did not bookmark it...Anyone have a link to it?
>
>JG

Jeff and all y'all:

PROPEL 2.0 is a spreadsheet (actually several) that calculates Kn for BATES
solids, models (roughly) chamber pressure/thrust/etc. during a burn,
calculates a new batch using grain sizes and percentages from old batch,
determines amount of curative for HTPB, and a few other odds n ends.  It
should still be on the Arocket site; though I just tried www.arocket.net
and the site didn't seem to like me; something about "connection refused"
or some such.

Propel requires Excel or Quattro Pro.  It is free.  It has absolutely no
warranty.  It may not be used for commercial purposes.  If I find anyone
trying to use it for any commercial purpose whatever, verily I shall be on
you like ugly on an ape.**

P'rfesser
**Colloquialism is from male parent.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 21304 invoked from network); 18 Dec 2001 16:49:24 -0000
Received: from smtph.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.88]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 18 Dec 2001 16:49:24 -0000
Received: (qmail 5688 invoked by uid 50005); 18 Dec 2001 16:35:19 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtph with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4176. . Clean. Processed in 0.624768 secs); 18 Dec 2001 16:35:19 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtph.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 18 Dec 2001 16:35:18 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA00322; Tue, 18 Dec 2001 07:54:34 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 104251 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 18 Dec 2001 15:53:07          +0000
Received: from cablecom.laribay.net (cablecom.laribay.net [66.20.57.4]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA00306 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 18 Dec 2001 07:53:07 -0800
Received: from billbull (dial107.laribay.net [66.20.57.107]) by          cablecom.laribay.net (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id JAA26245 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 18 Dec 2001 09:37:26 -0600 (CST)          (envelope-from bpbullock@laribay.net)
References:  <5.1.0.14.0.20011218084231.00a48520@murraystate.edu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <00b001c187dc$43d6f3c0$6a391442@billbull>
Date:         Tue, 18 Dec 2001 09:54:23 -0600
Reply-To: "Bill Bullock" <bpbullock@LARIBAY.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Bill Bullock" <bpbullock@LARIBAY.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Kn calculation
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

----- Original Message -----
From: Terry McCreary <terry.mccreary@MURRAYSTATE.EDU>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 8:53 AM
Subject: Re: [AR] Kn calculation


> At 01:25 AM 12/18/01 -0500, you wrote:
> >I remember seeing a web page that calculated Kn values based on user
input
> >some time ago and did not bookmark it...Anyone have a link to it?
> >
> >JG
>
> Jeff and all y'all:
>
> PROPEL 2.0 is a spreadsheet (actually several) that calculates Kn for
BATES
> solids, models (roughly) chamber pressure/thrust/etc. during a burn,
> calculates a new batch using grain sizes and percentages from old batch,
> determines amount of curative for HTPB, and a few other odds n ends.  It
> should still be on the Arocket site; though I just tried www.arocket.net
> and the site didn't seem to like me; something about "connection refused"
> or some such.
>
> Propel requires Excel or Quattro Pro.  It is free.  It has absolutely no
> warranty.  It may not be used for commercial purposes.  If I find anyone
> trying to use it for any commercial purpose whatever, verily I shall be on
> you like ugly on an ape.**
>
> P'rfesser
> **Colloquialism is from male parent.
******
Terry:
    Try http://arocket.mid-south.net/software/download/ . Sorry I forgot
about yours. Bad day.
Bill
PS: Is it politically correct to reference the ugliness of apes? And is
colloqualism contageous, genetic or do you get it from environmental
factors? Does it hurt much?

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 12987 invoked from network); 18 Dec 2001 18:39:33 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 18 Dec 2001 18:39:33 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 8287 invoked by uid 50005); 18 Dec 2001 18:39:24 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4176. . Clean. Processed in 4.877041 secs); 18 Dec 2001 18:39:24 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 18 Dec 2001 18:39:17 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA00861; Tue, 18 Dec 2001 10:09:44 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 104291 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 18 Dec 2001 18:08:17          +0000
Received: from po4.glue.umd.edu (po4.glue.umd.edu [128.8.10.124]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA00846 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 18 Dec 2001 10:08:16 -0800
Received: from z.glue.umd.edu (IDENT:root@z.glue.umd.edu [128.8.10.71]) by          po4.glue.umd.edu (8.10.1/8.10.1) with ESMTP id fBII8F613938 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 18 Dec 2001 13:08:15 -0500 (EST)
Received: from z.glue.umd.edu (IDENT:sendmail@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by          z.glue.umd.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id NAA04412 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 18 Dec 2001 13:08:15 -0500 (EST)
Received: from localhost (acase@localhost) by z.glue.umd.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with          ESMTP id NAA04405 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 18 Dec 2001          13:08:14 -0500 (EST)
X-Authentication-Warning: z.glue.umd.edu: acase owned process doing -bs
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.GSO.4.21.0112181257001.2204-100000@z.glue.umd.edu>
Date:         Tue, 18 Dec 2001 13:08:14 -0500
Reply-To: "Andrew Case" <acase@GLUE.UMD.EDU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Andrew Case" <acase@GLUE.UMD.EDU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] intentionally bad fuels
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1011217234804.16003C-100000@spsystems.net>

On Mon, 17 Dec 2001, Henry Spencer wrote:

> You could always just add a separate water tank, at the cost of an
> annoying increase in complexity.

I was just thinking that simple dilution with something inert might
do the trick - but how about using the pressurant? If you're
pressurizing the tanks to constant pressure anyway you've already
got separate plumbing and a separate tank. You could simply make the
pressurant tank larger, add a feed to the combustion chamber, and
you're off. I assume you'd use helium, for best impact on Isp, but
helium tanks tend to be bulky, so this probably wouldn't work out
well unless you were doing only a very little dilution and taking
advantage of tricks like injecting only near the walls. Unfortunately
the heat capacity of helium sucks, so I guess this idea is probably
DOA. Still, I thought I'd mention it on the off chance it triggers
something in somebody else's mind...

......Andrew

Andrew Case                             |
acase@plasma.umd.edu                    |
Institute for Plasma Research           |
University of Maryland, College Park    |

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 3275 invoked from network); 18 Dec 2001 18:58:38 -0000
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 18 Dec 2001 18:58:38 -0000
Received: (qmail 29466 invoked by uid 50005); 18 Dec 2001 18:58:29 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4175. . Clean. Processed in 0.380017 secs); 18 Dec 2001 18:58:29 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 18 Dec 2001 18:58:29 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA01145; Tue, 18 Dec 2001 10:52:14 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 104332 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 18 Dec 2001 18:50:50          +0000
Received: from pvt.trustmarkins.com (ns.trustmarkins.com [206.31.28.1]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id KAA01129 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 18 Dec 2001 10:50:49 -0800
Received: from [10.1.1.78] by pvt.trustmarkins.com (IBM OS/2 SENDMAIL VERSION          1.3.14/2.12um) id AA0096; Tue, 18 Dec 01 12:49:33 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0E83_01C56B69.5D04F030"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook CWS, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <568DED0FEB35D74880B7EF1B53184DF801C814F3@CH1-TRSTMRK-EV1.trustmark.mail>
Date:         Tue, 18 Dec 2001 12:36:25 -0600
Reply-To: "Peter von Tresckow" <vontresc@CALCON.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Peter von Tresckow" <vontresc@CALCON.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] OT - Low Tech shuttle equipment
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <3C1DF7A8.DE1843F3@sfcc.net>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0E83_01C56B69.5D04F030
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit



-----Original Message-----
From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU]On
Behalf Of James Yawn
Sent: Monday, December 17, 2001 7:48 AM
To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
Subject: Re: [AR] OT - Low Tech shuttle equipment


William Chops Westfield wrote:

> Similarly, I've been attracted to those
> keyboards with the built-in calculators - something that is superficially
> ridiculous...
>
> BillW

Heck I have one of those in my flight bag, and I use the thing in my IFR
flight training/flights. Ironically enough you can buy the thing for less
than $10 a wal mart, but if you buy it from Sporty's (pilot supplies) it
magically costs $20 (same timer).

Peter von Tresckow

------=_NextPart_000_0E83_01C56B69.5D04F030
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 3.2//EN">
<HTML>
<HEAD>
<META HTTP-EQUIV=3D"Content-Type" CONTENT=3D"text/html; =
charset=3DWindows-1252">
<META NAME=3D"Generator" CONTENT=3D"MS Exchange Server version =
6.0.4712.0">
<TITLE>RE: [AR] OT - Low Tech shuttle equipment</TITLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY>
<!-- Converted from text/plain format -->
<BR>
<BR>

<P><FONT SIZE=3D2>-----Original Message-----</FONT>

<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [<A =
HREF=3D"mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU">mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU</A>]On</FO=
NT>

<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>Behalf Of James Yawn</FONT>

<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>Sent: Monday, December 17, 2001 7:48 AM</FONT>

<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU</FONT>

<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>Subject: Re: [AR] OT - Low Tech shuttle =
equipment</FONT>
</P>
<BR>

<P><FONT SIZE=3D2>William Chops Westfield wrote:</FONT>
</P>

<P><FONT SIZE=3D2>&gt; Similarly, I've been attracted to those</FONT>

<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>&gt; keyboards with the built-in calculators - =
something that is superficially</FONT>

<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>&gt; ridiculous...</FONT>

<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>&gt;</FONT>

<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>&gt; BillW</FONT>
</P>

<P><FONT SIZE=3D2>Heck I have one of those in my flight bag, and I use =
the thing in my IFR flight training/flights. Ironically enough you can =
buy the thing for less than $10 a wal mart, but if you buy it from =
Sporty's (pilot supplies) it magically costs $20 (same =
timer).</FONT></P>

<P><FONT SIZE=3D2>&nbsp;</FONT>

<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>Peter von Tresckow</FONT>
</P>

</BODY>
</HTML>
------=_NextPart_000_0E83_01C56B69.5D04F030--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 28127 invoked from network); 18 Dec 2001 20:41:18 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 18 Dec 2001 20:41:18 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 29204 invoked by uid 50005); 18 Dec 2001 20:41:09 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4176. . Clean. Processed in 1.270252 secs); 18 Dec 2001 20:41:09 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 18 Dec 2001 20:41:08 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA01469; Tue, 18 Dec 2001 11:41:50 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 104383 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 18 Dec 2001 19:40:21          +0000
Received: from idsoftware.com (predator.idsoftware.com [192.246.40.34]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA01454 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Tue, 18 Dec 2001 11:40:21 -0800
Received: from [192.246.40.129] (account johnc HELO lightning.idsoftware.com)          by idsoftware.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 3.4.7) with ESMTP id 19243          for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 18 Dec 2001 13:40:20 -0600
X-Sender: johnc@mail.idsoftware.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.1
References: <4.3.1.2.20011217205114.03616a20@mail.idsoftware.com>            <4.3.1.2.20011217205114.03616a20@mail.idsoftware.com>            <4.3.1.2.20011217205114.03616a20@mail.idsoftware.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <4.3.1.2.20011218132451.03609658@mail.idsoftware.com>
Date:         Tue, 18 Dec 2001 13:38:16 -0600
Reply-To: "John Carmack" <johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Carmack" <johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] intentionally bad fuels
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC8 22>

At 09:27 AM 12/18/2001 +0000, you wrote:
>Can you elaborate more on why you're considering a biprop configuration? To
>me, the advantages of a HTP hybrid system heavily outweigh the potential
>advantages of a HTP biprop from a development cost and complexity
>perspective if what's been reported about HTP hybrids is true? To me, the
>possible "passive" (so to speak) film cooling options for hybrid systems
>seems degrees of magnitude easier to develop than the forced plumbing
>required for biprop film cooling or regen cooling, or am I missing
>something?
>
>Troy.

Yes, peroxide hybrids are basically as easy as expected -- we lit a couple
without hardly trying, and our "reference design" for big vehicles is still
a big hybrid.  However, we are still looking into other options.

Biprops do have some advantages for high flight rate systems, because you
can just connect the fill cart and tank it back up for another flight
without having to take anything apart.  In theory, reliability should also
be able to be made higher, because a hybrid will always have an untested
grain in each flight, while liquid fuel can be assumed to be completely
repeatable.  A biprop can also have a more flexible testing schedule,
because you can make lots of short firings without changing conditions.  In
some applications, the long, thin hybrid grain can also be a packaging
problem.  At final optimization time, a biprop can also give a bit more
performance, but that isn't what I am considering here.

While we often discuss various active cooling options, I'm not seriously
considering them for primary flight systems at the moment.  It may be
arguable that if you could have a completely reusable and passively cooled
biprop by using a low performance fuel, that the above benefits might
outweigh the loss of performance versus a film-cooled hybrid.

John Carmack

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 5700 invoked from network); 18 Dec 2001 20:42:55 -0000
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 18 Dec 2001 20:42:55 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 31332 invoked by uid 50005); 18 Dec 2001 20:42:46 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4175. . Clean. Processed in 0.402166 secs); 18 Dec 2001 20:42:46 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 18 Dec 2001 20:42:45 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA01715; Tue, 18 Dec 2001 12:20:17 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 104422 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 18 Dec 2001 20:18:52          +0000
Received: from fcexgw02.efi.com (ns3.efi.com [192.68.228.85] (may be forged))          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id MAA01651 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 18 Dec 2001 12:08:52 -0800
Received: from 10.10.12.104 by fcexgw02.efi.com (InterScan E-Mail VirusWall          NT); Tue, 18 Dec 2001 12:08:25 -0800
Received: from earthlink.net (peroxide.efi.com [10.10.89.46]) by          EX-IMC3-CORP.efi.com with SMTP (Microsoft Exchange Internet Mail          Service Version 5.5.2653.13) id Y357FFYH; Tue, 18 Dec 2001 12:08:54          -0800
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.14-5.0 i686)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <4.3.1.2.20011217205114.03616a20@mail.idsoftware.com>            <4.3.1.2.20011217205114.03616a20@mail.idsoftware.com>            <4.3.1.2.20011217205114.03616a20@mail.idsoftware.com>            <4.3.1.2.20011218132451.03609658@mail.idsoftware.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3C1FA269.8A7A602D@earthlink.net>
Date:         Tue, 18 Dec 2001 12:09:13 -0800
Reply-To: "David Weinshenker" <daze39@EARTHLINK.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "David Weinshenker" <daze39@EARTHLINK.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] intentionally bad fuels
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

John Carmack wrote:
> While we often discuss various active cooling options, I'm not seriously
> considering them for primary flight systems at the moment.  It may be
> arguable that if you could have a completely reusable and passively cooled
> biprop by using a low performance fuel, that the above benefits might
> outweigh the loss of performance versus a film-cooled hybrid.

With a precatalyzing peroxide engine, you may be able to operate at a reduced
fuel flow for an uncooled engine - chemically correct mixture is something like
7:1 O/F for peroxide/hydrocarbon... if you run at something like 10:1 or 20:1 -
i.e., inject a small amount of fuel but not enough to react with all the available
oxygen - you may be to get a moderate performance increase (relative to the same
peroxide flow in a monoprop) but a lower temperature than a "fully fueled" biprop.

That way you don't need a "bad" fuel, you just inject less of it...

-dave w

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 340 invoked from network); 18 Dec 2001 20:55:38 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 18 Dec 2001 20:55:38 -0000
Received: (qmail 32059 invoked by uid 50005); 18 Dec 2001 20:55:29 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4176. . Clean. Processed in 0.820004 secs); 18 Dec 2001 20:55:29 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 18 Dec 2001 20:55:27 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA01851; Tue, 18 Dec 2001 12:44:15 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 104456 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 18 Dec 2001 20:42:49          +0000
Received: from mercury.Sun.COM (mercury.Sun.COM [192.9.25.1]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA01835 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue,          18 Dec 2001 12:42:49 -0800
Received: from pastene.East.Sun.COM ([129.148.183.32]) by mercury.Sun.COM          (8.9.3+Sun/8.9.3) with ESMTP id MAA23231 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>;          Tue, 18 Dec 2001 12:42:48 -0800 (PST)
Received: from chopin (chopin [129.148.183.180]) by pastene.East.Sun.COM          (8.9.3+Sun/8.9.3/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with SMTP id PAA15440; Tue, 18 Dec          2001 15:42:47 -0500 (EST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: MULTIPART/mixed;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0E87_01C56B69.5D10D710"
X-Mailer: dtmail 1.3.0 @(#)CDE Version 1.3.5 SunOS 5.7 sun4u sparc
Message-ID:  <200112182042.PAA15440@pastene.East.Sun.COM>
Date:         Tue, 18 Dec 2001 15:42:46 -0500
Reply-To: "Peter Finch - High End Server Systems" <Peter.Finch@SUN.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Peter Finch - High End Server Systems" <Peter.Finch@SUN.COM>
Subject:      [AR] Cooling hybrids: was: Re: [AR] intentionally bad fuels
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0E87_01C56B69.5D10D710
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Type: TEXT/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-MD5: bD/QIPUvRDnvtVesVKlYKw==



Have you considered cooling just the hybrid's throat regeneratively with
the hydrogen peroxide?

It seems like you could make a mechanically simple cooling scheme if the
throat was all you had to worry about.  The combustion chamber could be
a cylinder with the hybrid grain upstream of a welded-in hollow throat.
The combustion chamber is just a pipe, and the throat could be made
pretty easily on a lathe.  It might be a bit of a pain to weld the
throat inside the chamber, but it doesn't seem ridiculously hard,
particularly since you'll need a removable top to the chamber to
facilitate replacing the fuel grain.  You could tap an inlet and outlet
on each side and run the H2O2 through it.


I included an extremely small (8k) attachment to illustrate.

There would be some issues you'd have to deal with:

1) You'd want to avoid gas bubbles in the coolant passage, lest you
develop uncooled spots.

2) You'd want to make sure you didn't have too much pressure drop
through the coolant passage.

3) You'd need to worry about heat soak to residule H2O2, and probably
have a purge mechanism.  And you'd want to make sure your main
propellant valve was upstream of the throat.


There are several positive features of this approach:

1) For development you could push water through instead of peroxide.

2) You wouldn't have to deliberatly keep performance low.

3) It's simple.

4) The H2O2 will arrive at the catalyst warm.

5) With such a large mass flux of oxidizer, you ought to have ample
cooling.

6) There'd be little need for futzing with exotic materials.. I'm not
sure whether aluminum would work, but I bet something softer than
molybdenum would.

-Peter

> X-Sender: johnc@mail.idsoftware.com
> Mime-Version: 1.0
> Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2001 21:09:52 -0600
> From: John Carmack <johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM>
> Subject: [AR] intentionally bad fuels
> To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
>
> If our tests with coated moly nozzles work out for the hybrid, it may
be
> interesting to look into the options for an uncooled biprop to get the
> operability benefits over hybrids.
>
> It looks like a coated moly chamber can probably be used to around
3000 deg
> F (iridium / rhenium would be good to 4000 deg F).  Peroxide / PE
hybrids
> have a 4000 deg chamber temperature, but we are running the grain all
the
> way down to the nozzle, so we should have significant fuel film
cooling.
>
> A biprop might also be designed with sufficient fuel cooling, but you
would
> probably explode a bunch of motors trying to get it right.  A
potentially
> interesting option would be to choose a fuel combination that stayed
under
> 3000 deg F.
>
> Monoprop peroxide has about 1400 deg F / 1033 deg K temperature and
150
> (standard condition) Isp.  If you had roughly the same gas properties,
an
> engine operating at 3000 deg F / 1921 deg K would have an Isp of 204.
Not
> all that impressive, but it might still be worth doing.
>
> A sufficiently watered alcohol would probably do the job, but I really
want
> to avoid miscable propellents, and the water might prevent it from
igniting.
>
> Any other thoughts?  What inert substances are soluble in
hydrocarbons?
>
> John Carmack

--
Peter Finch, peter.finch@east.sun.com
Sun Microsystems, Inc. http://www.sun.com

------=_NextPart_000_0E87_01C56B69.5D10D710
Content-Type: APPLICATION/pdf;
	name="hybrid.pdf"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
Content-Description: hybrid.pdf
Content-MD5: JiWNtuhtpwD9rKMvUwOHsQ==

JVBERi0xLjIKJeLjz9MNCjEgMCBvYmoKPDwKL1Byb2R1Y2VyIChBY3JvYmF0
IERpc3RpbGxlciBDb21tYW5kIDMuMDEgZm9yIFNvbGFyaXMgMi4zIGFuZCBs
YXRlciBcKFNQQVJDXCkpCi9UaXRsZSAoaHlicmlkKQovQ3JlYXRvciAoRnJh
bWVNYWtlciA1LjUuNi4pCi9Nb2REYXRlIChEOjIwMDExMjE4MTUyMTIwKQov
Q3JlYXRpb25EYXRlIChEOjIwMDEwNDI3MTY1OTA3KQo+PgplbmRvYmoKMyAw
IG9iago8PAovRCBbMiAwIFIgL1hZWiBudWxsIG51bGwgbnVsbF0KPj4KZW5k
b2JqCjQgMCBvYmoKPDwKL0QgWzIgMCBSIC9YWVogbnVsbCBudWxsIG51bGxd
Cj4+CmVuZG9iago1IDAgb2JqCjw8Ci9JIDw8Ci9UaXRsZSAoQSkKPj4KL0Yg
NiAwIFIKPj4KZW5kb2JqCjggMCBvYmoKPDwKL0QgWzIgMCBSIC9YWVogNDgg
NTkzIG51bGxdCj4+CmVuZG9iago5IDAgb2JqCjw8Ci9MZW5ndGggNDk2Ci9G
aWx0ZXIgL0ZsYXRlRGVjb2RlCj4+CnN0cmVhbQ0KSIlsUk1P40AMvc+v8DEg
zTAfSSaREAf2owhptQdyAw4hTUu606RqU9jur1/b06hd2EMzsp+f/fxcA0tx
NXswsNwJAx0IDRpyY8GXFratWGBiJizcY3oFWuXwDk4VOfyAx2cNc2HKAlyZ
KpeCtyBNmhLt9lJYk6ncgdO5shmsqVAZBzbDJhYC4gx8xJ21KiM4M8pH2HmE
bV5SHdH9hBv3CSd6bO/1sdfn1gR5TNkzLMZBPIjbSlx9t2CgWghDdmjAx0ad
LuOnWqMvS/xVDX3eRXJ3eNl2c5ht666/qFbiWzVtmOqUJDq2Q2Ir9MdS3rET
hudLy7UIsYCzuWmpXAEp9io8zU3u7E8LTT1C3c+h61dtMw7baSTNwoNoHxf3
5SkMjLLl+ri7L89ixItjHA1NpyAidLyyJMkRPMXho2hjXDye+Ud014O8IaW4
c4q6pGYvv4pE3gBXDPsRxuG/28kTqfDMekwW2wtTJMMa1uT6c3WPx5BGadTM
+CbimzaEuh/hrQ5vLZdVlyKhAWPd/2JBnpQYo5xlanIt4cswBJi3zbDeDLt2
zgLl0IcD/Bn6llhkW4anmwQxq951/RKV7/ahHpH2coDFvg2wnP4Zks6ONM8P
60Re9Rq14uYNDo5E9uTJOb//zbLxwn8FGACwD9ekCmVuZHN0cmVhbQplbmRv
YmoKMTAgMCBvYmoKPDwKL1Byb2NTZXQgWy9QREYgL1RleHQgXQovRm9udCA8
PAovRjIgMTEgMCBSCj4+Ci9FeHRHU3RhdGUgPDwKL0dTMSAxMiAwIFIKPj4K
Pj4KZW5kb2JqCjE1IDAgb2JqCjw8Ci9EIFsxNCAwIFIgL1hZWiBudWxsIG51
bGwgbnVsbF0KPj4KZW5kb2JqCjE2IDAgb2JqCjw8Ci9EIFsxNCAwIFIgL1hZ
WiBudWxsIG51bGwgbnVsbF0KPj4KZW5kb2JqCjcgMCBvYmoKPDwKL1AgMiAw
IFIKL1IgWzQ1IDEzNSA1NjcgNDc1XQovViA2IDAgUgovTiAxNyAwIFIKPj4K
ZW5kb2JqCjE4IDAgb2JqCjw8Ci9EIFsxNCAwIFIgL1hZWiA0OCAxMTggbnVs
bF0KPj4KZW5kb2JqCjE5IDAgb2JqCjw8Ci9EIFsxNCAwIFIgL1hZWiA0OCA3
MDAgbnVsbF0KPj4KZW5kb2JqCjIwIDAgb2JqCjw8Ci9EIFsxNCAwIFIgL1hZ
WiAxNzkgMTA1IG51bGxdCj4+CmVuZG9iagoyMSAwIG9iago8PAovTGVuZ3Ro
IDMyOAovRmlsdGVyIC9GbGF0ZURlY29kZQo+PgpzdHJlYW0NCkiJbJBba8Iw
FMffz6c4j+mgaU7aNMked5M5NgTDNnA+iNZSUTuqQ/btd3qZyNhLafLLOf8L
YQnJaEpYHoCwQlCoMCeN1mtsCljDTYDkQSNhWIPHFns0GZJy0mLYdQOETQlK
Kn60hJmISekopoy0FW+3j/E7H7wRrxERiaKp1hF5US0Xx6re9yhEXovicOxP
k+1iuP9INUXzMGYLWW8hZRlrHYuGOxCkE3KJoihs4D6wlxFoHDPcoJJpjidM
pcvxGWdzhStg37k1uANjXPe3hSnHLoGc4UQkdYa6DZZjTFaaroGrvoK81+dq
usTcCM/4tB3pWuAC2vT8OYGYfu1x0tSfTVUcF833NeJLUaziUMdP+/p0djs0
19riTWwhk56leakdpFvknFSXzF0yLe1/jJAudiuZ0e8j/Wd5d3tmNKAfAQYA
jJh0LQplbmRzdHJlYW0KZW5kb2JqCjIyIDAgb2JqCjw8Ci9Qcm9jU2V0IFsv
UERGIC9UZXh0IF0KL0ZvbnQgPDwKL0YyIDExIDAgUgovRjQgMjMgMCBSCi9G
NiAyNCAwIFIKPj4KL0V4dEdTdGF0ZSA8PAovR1MxIDEyIDAgUgo+Pgo+Pgpl
bmRvYmoKMjUgMCBvYmoKPDwKL1R5cGUgL0hhbGZ0b25lCi9IYWxmdG9uZVR5
cGUgMQovSGFsZnRvbmVOYW1lIChEZWZhdWx0KQovRnJlcXVlbmN5IDYwCi9B
bmdsZSA0NQovU3BvdEZ1bmN0aW9uIC9Sb3VuZAo+PgplbmRvYmoKMTIgMCBv
YmoKPDwKL1R5cGUgL0V4dEdTdGF0ZQovU0EgZmFsc2UKL09QIGZhbHNlCi9I
VCAvRGVmYXVsdAo+PgplbmRvYmoKMjYgMCBvYmoKPDwKL1R5cGUgL0ZvbnRE
ZXNjcmlwdG9yCi9Bc2NlbnQgNzEyCi9DYXBIZWlnaHQgNzE1Ci9EZXNjZW50
IC0yMzIKL0ZsYWdzIDM0Ci9Gb250QkJveCBbLTE2NiAtMjgzIDEwMjEgOTI3
XQovRm9udE5hbWUgL1BhbGF0aW5vLVJvbWFuCi9JdGFsaWNBbmdsZSAwCi9T
dGVtViA4NAovWEhlaWdodCA0NzIKPj4KZW5kb2JqCjI3IDAgb2JqCjw8Ci9U
eXBlIC9Gb250RGVzY3JpcHRvcgovQXNjZW50IDcxMgovQ2FwSGVpZ2h0IDcx
MgovRGVzY2VudCAtMjMyCi9GbGFncyA5OAovRm9udEJCb3ggWy0xNzAgLTI3
NiAxMDEwIDkxOF0KL0ZvbnROYW1lIC9QYWxhdGluby1JdGFsaWMKL0l0YWxp
Y0FuZ2xlIC0xMAovU3RlbVYgMAovWEhlaWdodCA0NzIKPj4KZW5kb2JqCjI4
IDAgb2JqCjw8Ci9UeXBlIC9Gb250RGVzY3JpcHRvcgovQXNjZW50IDcxMgov
Q2FwSGVpZ2h0IDcxMgovRGVzY2VudCAtMjMyCi9GbGFncyAyNjIxNzgKL0Zv
bnRCQm94IFstMTUyIC0yNjYgMTAwMCA5MjRdCi9Gb250TmFtZSAvUGFsYXRp
bm8tQm9sZAovSXRhbGljQW5nbGUgMAovU3RlbVYgMTIyCi9YSGVpZ2h0IDQ3
Mgo+PgplbmRvYmoKMTEgMCBvYmoKPDwKL1R5cGUgL0ZvbnQKL1N1YnR5cGUg
L1R5cGUxCi9OYW1lIC9GMgovRmlyc3RDaGFyIDMyCi9MYXN0Q2hhciAyNTUK
L1dpZHRocyBbMjUwIDI3OCAzNzEgNTAwIDUwMCA4NDAgNzc4IDIwOCAzMzMg
MzMzIDM4OSA2MDYgMjUwIDMzMyAyNTAgNjA2IAo1MDAgNTAwIDUwMCA1MDAg
NTAwIDUwMCA1MDAgNTAwIDUwMCA1MDAgMjUwIDI1MCA2MDYgNjA2IDYwNiA0
NDQgCjc0NyA3NzggNjExIDcwOSA3NzQgNjExIDU1NiA3NjMgODMyIDMzNyAz
MzMgNzI2IDYxMSA5NDYgODMxIDc4NiAKNjA0IDc4NiA2NjggNTI1IDYxMyA3
NzggNzIyIDEwMDAgNjY3IDY2NyA2NjcgMzMzIDYwNiAzMzMgNjA2IDUwMCAK
MzMzIDUwMCA1NTMgNDQ0IDYxMSA0NzkgMzMzIDU1NiA1ODIgMjkxIDIzNCA1
NTYgMjkxIDg4MyA1ODIgNTQ2IAo2MDEgNTYwIDM5NSA0MjQgMzI2IDYwMyA1
NjUgODM0IDUxNiA1NTYgNTAwIDMzMyA2MDYgMzMzIDYwNiAyNTAgCjc3OCA3
NzggNzA5IDYxMSA4MzEgNzg2IDc3OCA1MDAgNTAwIDUwMCA1MDAgNTAwIDUw
MCA0NDQgNDc5IDQ3OSAKNDc5IDQ3OSAyODcgMjg3IDI4NyAyODcgNTgyIDU0
NiA1NDYgNTQ2IDU0NiA1NDYgNjAzIDYwMyA2MDMgNjAzIAo1MDAgMjUwIDUw
MCA1MDAgNTAwIDYwNiA2MjggNTU2IDc0NyA3NDcgOTc5IDMzMyAzMzMgMjUw
IDk0NCA4MzMgCjI1MCAyNTAgMjUwIDI1MCA1MDAgMjUwIDI1MCAyNTAgMjUw
IDI1MCAyNTAgMzMzIDMzMyAyNTAgNzU4IDU1NiAKNDQ0IDI3OCA2MDYgMjUw
IDUwMCAyNTAgMjUwIDUwMCA1MDAgMTAwMCAyNTAgNzc4IDc3OCA3ODYgOTk4
IDgyNyAKNTAwIDEwMDAgNTAwIDUwMCAyNzggMjc4IDI1MCAyNTAgNTU2IDY2
NyAxNjcgNTAwIDMzMSAzMzEgNjA1IDYwOCAKNTAwIDI1MCAyNzggNTAwIDEx
NDQgNzc4IDYxMSA3NzggNjExIDYxMSAzMzcgMzM3IDMzNyAzMzcgNzg2IDc4
NiAKMjUwIDc4NiA3NzggNzc4IDc3OCAyODcgMzMzIDMzMyAzMzMgMzMzIDI1
MCAzMzMgMzMzIDM4MCAzMTMgMzMzIApdCi9FbmNvZGluZyAyOSAwIFIKL0Jh
c2VGb250IC9QYWxhdGluby1Sb21hbgovRm9udERlc2NyaXB0b3IgMjYgMCBS
Cj4+CmVuZG9iagoyMyAwIG9iago8PAovVHlwZSAvRm9udAovU3VidHlwZSAv
VHlwZTEKL05hbWUgL0Y0Ci9GaXJzdENoYXIgMzIKL0xhc3RDaGFyIDI1NQov
V2lkdGhzIFsyNTAgMzMzIDUwMCA1MDAgNTAwIDg4OSA3NzggMzMzIDMzMyAz
MzMgMzg5IDYwNiAyNTAgMzMzIDI1MCAyOTYgCjUwMCA1MDAgNTAwIDUwMCA1
MDAgNTAwIDUwMCA1MDAgNTAwIDUwMCAyNTAgMjUwIDYwNiA2MDYgNjA2IDUw
MCAKNzQ3IDcyMiA2MTEgNjY3IDc3OCA2MTEgNTU2IDcyMiA3NzggMzMzIDMz
MyA2NjcgNTU2IDk0NCA3NzggNzc4IAo2MTEgNzc4IDY2NyA1NTYgNjExIDc3
OCA3MjIgOTQ0IDcyMiA2NjcgNjY3IDMzMyA2MDYgMzMzIDYwNiA1MDAgCjMz
MyA0NDQgNDYzIDQwNyA1MDAgMzg5IDI3OCA1MDAgNTAwIDI3OCAyNzggNDQ0
IDI3OCA3NzggNTU2IDQ0NCAKNTAwIDQ2MyAzODkgMzg5IDMzMyA1NTYgNTAw
IDcyMiA1MDAgNTAwIDQ0NCAzMzMgNjA2IDMzMyA2MDYgMjUwIAo3MjIgNzIy
IDY2NyA2MTEgNzc4IDc3OCA3NzggNDQ0IDQ0NCA0NDQgNDQ0IDQ0NCA0NDQg
NDA3IDM4OSAzODkgCjM4OSAzODkgMjc4IDI3OCAyNzggMjc4IDU1NiA0NDQg
NDQ0IDQ0NCA0NDQgNDQ0IDU1NiA1NTYgNTU2IDU1NiAKNTAwIDI1MCA1MDAg
NTAwIDUwMCA1MDAgNTAwIDUwMCA3NDcgNzQ3IDEwMDAgMzMzIDMzMyAyNTAg
OTQxIDc3OCAKMjUwIDI1MCAyNTAgMjUwIDUwMCAyNTAgMjUwIDI1MCAyNTAg
MjUwIDI1MCAzMzMgMzMzIDI1MCA2MzggNDQ0IAo1MDAgMzMzIDYwNiAyNTAg
NTAwIDI1MCAyNTAgNTAwIDUwMCAxMDAwIDI1MCA3MjIgNzIyIDc3OCAxMDI4
IDY2OSAKNTAwIDEwMDAgNTAwIDUwMCAyNzggMjc4IDI1MCAyNTAgNTAwIDY2
NyAxNjcgNTAwIDMzMyAzMzMgNTI4IDU0NSAKNTAwIDI1MCAyNzggNTAwIDEw
MDAgNzIyIDYxMSA3MjIgNjExIDYxMSAzMzMgMzMzIDMzMyAzMzMgNzc4IDc3
OCAKMjUwIDc3OCA3NzggNzc4IDc3OCAyNzggMzMzIDMzMyAzMzMgMzMzIDMz
MyAzMzMgMzMzIDMzMyAzMzMgMzMzIApdCi9FbmNvZGluZyAyOSAwIFIKL0Jh
c2VGb250IC9QYWxhdGluby1JdGFsaWMKL0ZvbnREZXNjcmlwdG9yIDI3IDAg
Ugo+PgplbmRvYmoKMjQgMCBvYmoKPDwKL1R5cGUgL0ZvbnQKL1N1YnR5cGUg
L1R5cGUxCi9OYW1lIC9GNgovRmlyc3RDaGFyIDMyCi9MYXN0Q2hhciAyNTUK
L1dpZHRocyBbMjUwIDI3OCA0MDIgNTAwIDUwMCA4ODkgODMzIDIyNyAzMzMg
MzMzIDQ0NCA2MDYgMjUwIDMzMyAyNTAgMjk2IAo1MDAgNTAwIDUwMCA1MDAg
NTAwIDUwMCA1MDAgNTAwIDUwMCA1MDAgMjUwIDI1MCA2MDYgNjA2IDYwNiA0
NDQgCjc0NyA3NzggNjY3IDcyMiA4MzMgNjExIDU1NiA4MzMgODMzIDM4OSAz
ODkgNzc4IDYxMSAxMDAwIDgzMyA4MzMgCjYxMSA4MzMgNzIyIDYxMSA2Njcg
Nzc4IDc3OCAxMDAwIDY2NyA2NjcgNjY3IDMzMyA2MDYgMzMzIDYwNiA1MDAg
CjMzMyA1MDAgNjExIDQ0NCA2MTEgNTAwIDM4OSA1NTYgNjExIDMzMyAzMzMg
NjExIDMzMyA4ODkgNjExIDU1NiAKNjExIDYxMSAzODkgNDQ0IDMzMyA2MTEg
NTU2IDgzMyA1MDAgNTU2IDUwMCAzMTAgNjA2IDMxMCA2MDYgMjUwIAo3Nzgg
Nzc4IDcyMiA2MTEgODMzIDgzMyA3NzggNTAwIDUwMCA1MDAgNTAwIDUwMCA1
MDAgNDQ0IDUwMCA1MDAgCjUwMCA1MDAgMzMzIDMzMyAzMzMgMzMzIDYxMSA1
NTYgNTU2IDU1NiA1NTYgNTU2IDYxMSA2MTEgNjExIDYxMSAKNTAwIDI1MCA1
MDAgNTAwIDUwMCA2MDYgNjQxIDYxMSA3NDcgNzQ3IDk5OCAzMzMgMzMzIDI1
MCAxMDAwIDgzMyAKMjUwIDI1MCAyNTAgMjUwIDUwMCAyNTAgMjUwIDI1MCAy
NTAgMjUwIDI1MCA0MzggNDg4IDI1MCA3NzggNTU2IAo0NDQgMjc4IDYwNiAy
NTAgNTAwIDI1MCAyNTAgNTAwIDUwMCAxMDAwIDI1MCA3NzggNzc4IDgzMyAx
MDAwIDgzMyAKNTAwIDEwMDAgNTAwIDUwMCAyNzggMjc4IDI1MCAyNTAgNTU2
IDY2NyAxNjcgNTAwIDM4OSAzODkgNjExIDYxMSAKNTAwIDI1MCAzMzMgNTAw
IDEwMDAgNzc4IDYxMSA3NzggNjExIDYxMSAzODkgMzg5IDM4OSAzODkgODMz
IDgzMyAKMjUwIDgzMyA3NzggNzc4IDc3OCAzMzMgMzMzIDMzMyAzMzMgMzMz
IDMzMyAzMzMgMzMzIDMzMyAzMzMgMzMzIApdCi9FbmNvZGluZyAyOSAwIFIK
L0Jhc2VGb250IC9QYWxhdGluby1Cb2xkCi9Gb250RGVzY3JpcHRvciAyOCAw
IFIKPj4KZW5kb2JqCjI5IDAgb2JqCjw8Ci9UeXBlIC9FbmNvZGluZwovRGlm
ZmVyZW5jZXMgWyAzOS9xdW90ZXNpbmdsZSA5Ni9ncmF2ZSAxMjgvQWRpZXJl
c2lzL0FyaW5nL0NjZWRpbGxhL0VhY3V0ZS9OdGlsZGUvT2RpZXJlc2lzCi9V
ZGllcmVzaXMvYWFjdXRlL2FncmF2ZS9hY2lyY3VtZmxleC9hZGllcmVzaXMv
YXRpbGRlL2FyaW5nL2NjZWRpbGxhCi9lYWN1dGUvZWdyYXZlL2VjaXJjdW1m
bGV4L2VkaWVyZXNpcy9pYWN1dGUvaWdyYXZlL2ljaXJjdW1mbGV4L2lkaWVy
ZXNpcwovbnRpbGRlL29hY3V0ZS9vZ3JhdmUvb2NpcmN1bWZsZXgvb2RpZXJl
c2lzL290aWxkZS91YWN1dGUvdWdyYXZlCi91Y2lyY3VtZmxleC91ZGllcmVz
aXMvZGFnZ2VyLy5ub3RkZWYgMTY0L3NlY3Rpb24vYnVsbGV0L3BhcmFncmFw
aC9nZXJtYW5kYmxzCi9yZWdpc3RlcmVkL2NvcHlyaWdodC90cmFkZW1hcmsv
YWN1dGUvZGllcmVzaXMvLm5vdGRlZi9BRS9Pc2xhc2gKIDE3Ny8ubm90ZGVm
Ly5ub3RkZWYvLm5vdGRlZi95ZW4gMTgyLy5ub3RkZWYvLm5vdGRlZi8ubm90
ZGVmLy5ub3RkZWYKLy5ub3RkZWYvb3JkZmVtaW5pbmUvb3JkbWFzY3VsaW5l
Ly5ub3RkZWYvYWUvb3NsYXNoL3F1ZXN0aW9uZG93bi9leGNsYW1kb3duCi9s
b2dpY2Fsbm90Ly5ub3RkZWYvZmxvcmluLy5ub3RkZWYvLm5vdGRlZi9ndWls
bGVtb3RsZWZ0L2d1aWxsZW1vdHJpZ2h0L2VsbGlwc2lzCi8ubm90ZGVmL0Fn
cmF2ZS9BdGlsZGUvT3RpbGRlL09FL29lL2VuZGFzaC9lbWRhc2gKL3F1b3Rl
ZGJsbGVmdC9xdW90ZWRibHJpZ2h0L3F1b3RlbGVmdC9xdW90ZXJpZ2h0IDIx
Ni95ZGllcmVzaXMvWWRpZXJlc2lzL2ZyYWN0aW9uL2N1cnJlbmN5Ci9ndWls
c2luZ2xsZWZ0L2d1aWxzaW5nbHJpZ2h0L2ZpL2ZsL2RhZ2dlcmRibC9wZXJp
b2RjZW50ZXJlZC9xdW90ZXNpbmdsYmFzZS9xdW90ZWRibGJhc2UKL3BlcnRo
b3VzYW5kL0FjaXJjdW1mbGV4L0VjaXJjdW1mbGV4L0FhY3V0ZS9FZGllcmVz
aXMvRWdyYXZlL0lhY3V0ZS9JY2lyY3VtZmxleAovSWRpZXJlc2lzL0lncmF2
ZS9PYWN1dGUvT2NpcmN1bWZsZXggMjQxL09ncmF2ZS9VYWN1dGUvVWNpcmN1
bWZsZXgvVWdyYXZlCiAyNDYvY2lyY3VtZmxleC90aWxkZS9tYWNyb24vYnJl
dmUvZG90YWNjZW50L3JpbmcvY2VkaWxsYS9odW5nYXJ1bWxhdXQKL29nb25l
ay9jYXJvbgpdCj4+CmVuZG9iagoyIDAgb2JqCjw8Ci9UeXBlIC9QYWdlCi9Q
YXJlbnQgMTMgMCBSCi9SZXNvdXJjZXMgMTAgMCBSCi9Db250ZW50cyA5IDAg
UgovQ3JvcEJveCBbMCA3MiA2MTIgNzIwXQovQiBbNiAwIFIgNyAwIFJdCj4+
CmVuZG9iagoxNCAwIG9iago8PAovVHlwZSAvUGFnZQovUGFyZW50IDEzIDAg
UgovUmVzb3VyY2VzIDIyIDAgUgovQ29udGVudHMgMjEgMCBSCi9Dcm9wQm94
IFswIDcyIDYxMiA3MjBdCi9CIFsxNyAwIFJdCj4+CmVuZG9iagoxMyAwIG9i
ago8PAovVHlwZSAvUGFnZXMKL0tpZHMgWzIgMCBSIDE0IDAgUl0KL0NvdW50
IDIKL01lZGlhQm94IFswIDAgNjEyIDc5Ml0KPj4KZW5kb2JqCjE3IDAgb2Jq
Cjw8Ci9QIDE0IDAgUgovUiBbNDUgMTM1IDU2NyA2NTddCi9WIDcgMCBSCi9O
IDYgMCBSCj4+CmVuZG9iago2IDAgb2JqCjw8Ci9UIDUgMCBSCi9QIDIgMCBS
Ci9SIFs0NSA0ODggNTY3IDU5OF0KL1YgMTcgMCBSCi9OIDcgMCBSCj4+CmVu
ZG9iagozMCAwIG9iagpbIDUgMCBSIF0KZW5kb2JqCjMxIDAgb2JqCjw8Ci9O
YW1lcyBbKEYpIDQgMCBSIChHMTMxOSkgMTggMCBSIChHMzI3MDgpIDggMCBS
IChHNTIxKSAxOSAwIFIgKEc1MjUpIDIwIDAgUiAoTCkgMTYgMCBSIChQLjEw
MSkgMyAwIFIgKFAuMTAyKSAxNSAwIFJdCj4+CmVuZG9iagozMiAwIG9iago8
PAovRGVzdHMgMzEgMCBSCj4+CmVuZG9iagozMyAwIG9iago8PAovVHlwZSAv
Q2F0YWxvZwovUGFnZXMgMTMgMCBSCi9UaHJlYWRzIDMwIDAgUgovTmFtZXMg
MzIgMCBSCj4+CmVuZG9iagp4cmVmCjAgMzQKMDAwMDAwMDAwMCA2NTUzNSBm
IAowMDAwMDAwMDE2IDAwMDAwIG4gCjAwMDAwMDcxMzAgMDAwMDAgbiAKMDAw
MDAwMDIyMiAwMDAwMCBuIAowMDAwMDAwMjc0IDAwMDAwIG4gCjAwMDAwMDAz
MjYgMDAwMDAgbiAKMDAwMDAwNzUzMiAwMDAwMCBuIAowMDAwMDAxMTk4IDAw
MDAwIG4gCjAwMDAwMDAzNzYgMDAwMDAgbiAKMDAwMDAwMDQyNSAwMDAwMCBu
IAowMDAwMDAwOTkzIDAwMDAwIG4gCjAwMDAwMDI3MTIgMDAwMDAgbiAKMDAw
MDAwMjA2NCAwMDAwMCBuIAowMDAwMDA3MzczIDAwMDAwIG4gCjAwMDAwMDcy
NTMgMDAwMDAgbiAKMDAwMDAwMTA5MCAwMDAwMCBuIAowMDAwMDAxMTQ0IDAw
MDAwIG4gCjAwMDAwMDc0NjIgMDAwMDAgbiAKMDAwMDAwMTI2NyAwMDAwMCBu
IAowMDAwMDAxMzE4IDAwMDAwIG4gCjAwMDAwMDEzNjkgMDAwMDAgbiAKMDAw
MDAwMTQyMSAwMDAwMCBuIAowMDAwMDAxODIyIDAwMDAwIG4gCjAwMDAwMDM3
OTEgMDAwMDAgbiAKMDAwMDAwNDg3MiAwMDAwMCBuIAowMDAwMDAxOTQxIDAw
MDAwIG4gCjAwMDAwMDIxMzYgMDAwMDAgbiAKMDAwMDAwMjMyNiAwMDAwMCBu
IAowMDAwMDAyNTE4IDAwMDAwIG4gCjAwMDAwMDU5NTMgMDAwMDAgbiAKMDAw
MDAwNzYxMCAwMDAwMCBuIAowMDAwMDA3NjM2IDAwMDAwIG4gCjAwMDAwMDc3
NzUgMDAwMDAgbiAKMDAwMDAwNzgxMSAwMDAwMCBuIAp0cmFpbGVyCjw8Ci9T
aXplIDM0Ci9Sb290IDMzIDAgUgovSW5mbyAxIDAgUgovSUQgWzxkNDc1Zjlm
Y2RiNzUzNWJhNWJjNjhkOTkwY2JiNmZlOD48ZDQ3NWY5ZmNkYjc1MzViYTVi
YzY4ZDk5MGNiYjZmZTg+XQo+PgpzdGFydHhyZWYKNzg5MgolJUVPRgo=

------=_NextPart_000_0E87_01C56B69.5D10D710--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 14432 invoked from network); 18 Dec 2001 21:55:30 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 18 Dec 2001 21:55:30 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 11056 invoked by uid 50005); 18 Dec 2001 21:55:22 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4175. . Clean. Processed in 0.376495 secs); 18 Dec 2001 21:55:22 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 18 Dec 2001 21:55:21 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA02169; Tue, 18 Dec 2001 13:52:32 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 104510 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 18 Dec 2001 21:51:02          +0000
Received: from mercury.Sun.COM (mercury.Sun.COM [192.9.25.1]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA02152 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue,          18 Dec 2001 13:51:01 -0800
Received: from pastene.East.Sun.COM ([129.148.183.32]) by mercury.Sun.COM          (8.9.3+Sun/8.9.3) with ESMTP id NAA19961 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>;          Tue, 18 Dec 2001 13:51:00 -0800 (PST)
Received: from chopin (chopin [129.148.183.180]) by pastene.East.Sun.COM          (8.9.3+Sun/8.9.3/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with SMTP id QAA17260; Tue, 18 Dec          2001 16:50:58 -0500 (EST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-MD5: DfNBlD0ku7K3M6ujC6AGOg==
X-Mailer: dtmail 1.3.0 @(#)CDE Version 1.3.5 SunOS 5.7 sun4u sparc
Message-ID:  <200112182150.QAA17260@pastene.East.Sun.COM>
Date:         Tue, 18 Dec 2001 16:50:58 -0500
Reply-To: "Peter Finch - High End Server Systems" <Peter.Finch@SUN.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Peter Finch - High End Server Systems" <Peter.Finch@SUN.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Cooling hybrids: was: Re: [AR] intentionally bad fuels
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Sorry about page two of that attachment.. framemaker's doing something I
can't explain again.  The hybrid doc is not Sun Proprietary, and has
nothing to do with Sun other than that it was scribbled at work after
lunch.  Please disregard the accidental inclusion of an ancient company
document footer. (Frame updated the date)

Jeepers, a guy tries to stop being a lurker and one thing after another
gets in the way.

--
Peter Finch, peter.finch@east.sun.com
Sun Microsystems, Inc. http://www.sun.com

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 23117 invoked from network); 18 Dec 2001 22:39:18 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.105]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 18 Dec 2001 22:39:18 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 25172 invoked by uid 50005); 18 Dec 2001 22:39:09 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpy with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4176. . Clean. Processed in 2.884092 secs); 18 Dec 2001 22:39:09 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 18 Dec 2001 22:39:05 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA02408; Tue, 18 Dec 2001 14:33:23 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 104549 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 18 Dec 2001 22:31:58          +0000
Received: from idsoftware.com (predator.idsoftware.com [192.246.40.34]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA02388 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Tue, 18 Dec 2001 14:31:58 -0800
Received: from [192.246.40.129] (account johnc HELO lightning.idsoftware.com)          by idsoftware.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 3.4.7) with ESMTP id 19573          for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 18 Dec 2001 16:31:57 -0600
X-Sender: johnc@mail.idsoftware.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <4.3.1.2.20011218162612.012d88c8@mail.idsoftware.com>
Date:         Tue, 18 Dec 2001 16:29:54 -0600
Reply-To: "John Carmack" <johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Carmack" <johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Cooling hybrids: was: Re: [AR] intentionally bad fuels
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <200112182042.PAA15440@pastene.East.Sun.COM>

>
>Have you considered cooling just the hybrid's throat regeneratively with
>the hydrogen peroxide?

Yes, there was a report in one of the H2O2 conference papers that a very
crude cooled throat worked the very first time, so we take it to be pretty
straightforward.

It becomes a bit of a mess on large systems, where the hybrid grain might
be six feet long.  Adding twelve feet of piping is a pretty significant
pressure drop for a pressure fed engine.

As you mentioned, there is also the heat soak issue, which is a bigger
problem with long pipes, because a little bit of peroxide cooking off by
the nozzle could push a considerable volume of peroxide into the engine
when you aren't expecting it.

John Carmack

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 6110 invoked from network); 18 Dec 2001 22:57:26 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 18 Dec 2001 22:57:26 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 9450 invoked by uid 50005); 18 Dec 2001 22:57:17 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4176. . Clean. Processed in 5.036002 secs); 18 Dec 2001 22:57:17 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 18 Dec 2001 22:57:11 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA02484; Tue, 18 Dec 2001 14:51:48 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 104560 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 18 Dec 2001 22:51:45          +0000
Received: from ns.vanguard.com (ns.VANGUARD.COM [192.175.173.31]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA02470 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 18 Dec 2001 14:51:45 -0800
Received: from eagle1.vanguard.com (eagle1.VANGUARD.COM [192.175.141.70]) by          ns.vanguard.com (Switch-2.2.0/Switch-2.2.0) with ESMTP id          fBIMoIN06924 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 18 Dec 2001 17:50:18          -0500 (EST)
Received: from vgi4mail.vanguard.com (vgi4mail.vanguard.com [10.254.65.16]) by          eagle1.vanguard.com (Switch-2.2.0/Switch-2.2.0) with SMTP id          fBIMph516219 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 18 Dec 2001 17:51:43          -0500 (EST)
Received: by vgi4mail.vanguard.com(Lotus SMTP MTA v4.6.6  (890.1 7-16-1999))           id 85256B26.007D9347 ; Tue, 18 Dec 2001 17:51:37 -0500
X-Lotus-FromDomain: VGINOTES
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Disposition: inline
Message-ID:  <85256B26.007D9219.00@vgi4mail.vanguard.com>
Date:         Tue, 18 Dec 2001 17:51:36 -0500
Reply-To: <Waysie_Atkins@VANGUARD.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <Waysie_Atkins@VANGUARD.COM>
Subject:      [AR] Sure would be nice if....
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Perhaps this a hopeless cause, but it sure would be nice if NASA did a few
things to help small groups become successful in developing am/ex rockets
programs and X type vehicles.

One big one that comes to mind is the 7,500 sq ft parafoil that was developed
for the X-38.  It should be available for sell to groups/projects at a
production costs plus a fair profit-  NOT to include development costs.  After
all its development has been paid for by X-38 funding, so that's money already
down the drain- no reason to look to recoup it here.    The contractor would
make and sell as a "off the shelve " type product and bag a per unit profit.
Seems to me to be an excellent recovery method, would increase the experience of
the chute (the more its used the more we'll know about it) and would put a X
type group much closer to an actual launch.  And of course it would not prevent
other recover devices for those who feel it is not suitable.   Would not "cost"
NASA a thing to let it out to the X/AM/EX crowd.  (We got hand held calculators
from Apollo, why not 7500 sq ft parasails from the X-38 program)

Or what about the 3 Sigma calcs?  Surely they have a program that does this.
Let the little guy have it.  Its already paid for. ( Actually I'm suprised that
it's only 3 sigma- 6 Sigma is the all the rage in quality control these days.)

I have *heard* stories of NASA centers helping with wind tunnel time, etc  for
small groups.  Perhaps this could be an extension of the same philosophy.  I'm
sure ya'll can come up with other possibilities along these lines.   The real
question is however, any chance of this actually happening before our sun swells
beyond the orbit of Jupiter??


Respectfully,

Waysie

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 26440 invoked from network); 19 Dec 2001 01:59:29 -0000
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 19 Dec 2001 01:59:29 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 23947 invoked by uid 50005); 19 Dec 2001 01:59:20 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4176. . Clean. Processed in 2.754568 secs); 19 Dec 2001 01:59:20 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 19 Dec 2001 01:59:16 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA03111; Tue, 18 Dec 2001 17:55:27 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 104626 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 19 Dec 2001 01:54:54          +0000
Received: from rhenium (rhenium.btinternet.com [194.73.73.93]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA03093 for <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Tue,          18 Dec 2001 17:54:53 -0800
Received: from host217-39-11-46.in-addr.btopenworld.com ([217.39.11.46]          helo=tesco.net) by rhenium with esmtp (Exim 3.22 #8) id          16GVwY-0000Xb-00; Wed, 19 Dec 2001 01:54:50 +0000
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Win98; en-US; rv:0.9.4) Gecko/20011128            Netscape6/6.2.1
X-Accept-Language: en,en-GB,en-US
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <Pine.BSI.3.91.1011217140835.7263L-100000@spsystems.net>            <3C1E5124.3E3FAD1@earthlink.net>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3C1FF37C.9010700@tesco.net>
Date:         Wed, 19 Dec 2001 01:55:08 +0000
Reply-To: "Ian Woollard" <ian.woollard@TESCO.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Ian Woollard" <ian.woollard@TESCO.NET>
Subject:      [AR] Space Elevator was: Re: [AR] carbon fiber reality check
Comments: To: David Weinshenker <daze39@EARTHLINK.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

On a somewhat related subject.

There's a paper http://www.niac.usra.edu/studies/ about some
estimates for a space elevator by Bradly Carl Edwards. He seems to
be implying that he thinks a space elevator can be built with
existing materials for about $40 billion. If his paper stands
up I think it might be wise to give up on launch vehicles.
Anyway, he seems to think a ribbon is practical. That would be
remarkable; but I'm a little skeptical until I see the macroscopic
properties of the fiber atleast. Then there's 'just' the
engineering to do.


> Hmmm... how does carbon fiber behave in fabrication - is it pretty much a solid
> cylindrical "string", or does it act more like a "yarn" of loose untwisted
> filaments that could be spread out into a "ribbon" as it was wound on a structure?
>
> -dave w

--
- Ian Woollard (ian.woollard@tesco.net)

"Is a planetary surface the right place for an expanding
technological civilization?"
- Gerard O'Neill

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 13826 invoked from network); 19 Dec 2001 03:54:42 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 19 Dec 2001 03:54:42 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: (qmail 32100 invoked by uid 50005); 19 Dec 2001 03:54:33 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4176. . Clean. Processed in 4.687021 secs); 19 Dec 2001 03:54:33 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 19 Dec 2001 03:54:27 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA03823; Tue, 18 Dec 2001 19:49:32 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 104672 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 19 Dec 2001 03:49:21          +0000
Received: from cisco.com (cypher.cisco.com [171.69.11.18]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA03809 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue,          18 Dec 2001 19:49:21 -0800
Received: (from billw@localhost) by cisco.com (8.8.8/2.6/Cisco List          Logging/8.8.8) id TAA20378; Tue, 18 Dec 2001 19:48:48 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID:  <CMM.0.90.4.1008733728.billw@cypher>
Date:         Tue, 18 Dec 2001 19:48:48 PST
Reply-To: "Bill Westfield" <billw@cisco.com>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "William Chops Westfield" <billw@cisco.com>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Space Elevator was: Re: [AR] carbon fiber reality check
Comments: To: Ian Woollard <ian.woollard@TESCO.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  Your message of Wed, 19 Dec 2001 01:55:08 +0000

>> Then there's 'just' the engineering to do.

Optimist.  I bet the poltical and regulatory issues surrounding a PERMANENT
structure that reaches into space would make amateur rocketry look like
"stomp rockets" in comparison...

BillW


From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 13882 invoked from network); 19 Dec 2001 03:54:43 -0000
Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.85]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 19 Dec 2001 03:54:43 -0000
Received: (qmail 16425 invoked by uid 50005); 19 Dec 2001 03:54:34 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpe with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4176. . Clean. Processed in 1.887214 secs); 19 Dec 2001 03:54:34 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 19 Dec 2001 03:54:31 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA03875; Tue, 18 Dec 2001 19:52:39 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 104687 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 19 Dec 2001 03:52:38          +0000
Received: from castor.ridgenet.net (IDENT:root@castor.ridgenet.net          [199.120.150.29]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA03861          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 18 Dec 2001 19:52:37 -0800
Received: from kristinscomp (pm065.ridgenet.net [204.154.246.65]) by          castor.ridgenet.net (8.11.0/8.11.0) with SMTP id fBJ3snb21658; Tue,          18 Dec 2001 19:54:50 -0800
References:  <85256B26.007D9219.00@vgi4mail.vanguard.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <000b01c18840$b832b560$1b30fea9@kristinscomp>
Date:         Tue, 18 Dec 2001 19:53:01 -0800
Reply-To: "Kristin & David Hall" <thehalls@RIDGENET.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Kristin & David Hall" <thehalls@RIDGENET.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Sure would be nice if....
Comments: To: Waysie_Atkins@VANGUARD.COM
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

> One big one that comes to mind is the 7,500 sq ft parafoil that was
developed
> for the X-38.  It should be available for sell to groups/projects at a
> production costs plus a fair profit-  NOT to include development costs.
After

Correct me if I misunderstood, but it sounds like you're advocating NASA
going into production of the parafoil.  This is illegal.  You could,
however, reasonably ask that they license the design.  This they could do
*IF* the were not partnering with private industry.  If they were
partnering, then their partner probably has the production rights to
civilian sales, in which case you need to be talking to Lockheed (or
whoever), not NASA.

> other recover devices for those who feel it is not suitable.   Would not
"cost"
> NASA a thing to let it out to the X/AM/EX crowd.  (We got hand held
calculators

See comments on partnering.  It may not cost them anything, but it may very
well be a breach of contract.

> Or what about the 3 Sigma calcs?  Surely they have a program that does
this.
> Let the little guy have it.  Its already paid for. ( Actually I'm suprised
that

Most likely illegal.  There are companies out there that have such products
for sale if you've got the money.  It is illegal for the gov't to take
business away from private industry without proper justification (and "every
Tom/Dick/Harry can't afford the going rate!" is not what they would consider
proper justification).  For NASA to release they're codes would be for NASA
to drive some private companies out of business - illegal as all hell.

> I have *heard* stories of NASA centers helping with wind tunnel time, etc
for
> small groups.  Perhaps this could be an extension of the same philosophy.
I'm

Usually done as a publicity stunt and usually because somebody in that small
group has some powerful connections.  In the current budgetary environment,
however, it is become very rare for such donation of facility time.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 10929 invoked from network); 19 Dec 2001 05:01:57 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 19 Dec 2001 05:01:57 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 14299 invoked by uid 50005); 19 Dec 2001 05:01:47 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4176. . Clean. Processed in 5.034623 secs); 19 Dec 2001 05:01:47 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 19 Dec 2001 05:01:41 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA04162; Tue, 18 Dec 2001 20:59:57 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 104729 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 19 Dec 2001 04:59:47          +0000
Received: from rwcrmhc52.attbi.com (rwcrmhc52.attbi.com [216.148.227.88]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA04148 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 18 Dec 2001 20:59:47 -0800
Received: from c1649002-a.earthlink.net ([12.232.75.28]) by rwcrmhc52.attbi.com          (InterMail vM.4.01.03.27 201-229-121-127-20010626) with ESMTP id          <20011219045915.DWEL6450.rwcrmhc52.attbi.com@c1649002-a.earthlink.net>; Wed, 19 Dec 2001 04:59:15          +0000
X-Sender: forkbomb@mail.earthlink.net
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.0.2
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <5.0.2.1.0.20011218204648.01d5aa10@mail.earthlink.net>
Date:         Tue, 18 Dec 2001 20:59:20 -0800
Reply-To: "Pierce Nichols" <forkbomb@EARTHLINK.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Pierce Nichols" <forkbomb@EARTHLINK.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Cooling hybrids: was: Re: [AR] intentionally bad fuels
Comments: To: Peter Finch - High End Server Systems <Peter.Finch@Sun.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <200112182042.PAA15440@pastene.East.Sun.COM>

At 03:42 PM 12/18/2001 -0500, Peter Finch - High End Server Systems wrote:
>Content-Type: TEXT/plain; charset=us-ascii
>Content-MD5: bD/QIPUvRDnvtVesVKlYKw==
>
>
>
>Have you considered cooling just the hybrid's throat regeneratively with
>the hydrogen peroxide?
>
>It seems like you could make a mechanically simple cooling scheme if the
>throat was all you had to worry about.  The combustion chamber could be
>a cylinder with the hybrid grain upstream of a welded-in hollow throat.
>The combustion chamber is just a pipe, and the throat could be made
>pretty easily on a lathe.  It might be a bit of a pain to weld the
>throat inside the chamber, but it doesn't seem ridiculously hard,
>particularly since you'll need a removable top to the chamber to
>facilitate replacing the fuel grain.  You could tap an inlet and outlet
>on each side and run the H2O2 through it.


         You could take this approach without welding. You would need a
machined shoulder in the tube, and a threaded closure to put pressure on
the throat to seal it top and bottom. There are several options for
gaskets, but soft aluminum wire seems like it might be the best. Overall,
it sounds pretty solid to me. This technique would also work well for a
biprop, btw. It might be worthwhile to have the throats spun rather than
machining them from bar stock. Especially if you are using a material like
stainless steel, which is a bitch to machine.


>There would be some issues you'd have to deal with:
>
>1) You'd want to avoid gas bubbles in the coolant passage, lest you
>develop uncooled spots.


         I don't think that's a problem with a coolant passage this
large... your flow velocity should be too low to cavitate.


>2) You'd want to make sure you didn't have too much pressure drop
>through the coolant passage.


         Always an issue; ultimately it needs to be resolved through
testing. Keep in mind that the hot-flow pressure drop is lower than the
cold-flow pressure drop, because the heat adds energy to the flow. Also,
the slow flow velocity in the cooling jacket should keep the pressure drop
down, since pressure drop goes as the square of flow velocity.


>3) You'd need to worry about heat soak to residule H2O2, and probably
>have a purge mechanism.  And you'd want to make sure your main
>propellant valve was upstream of the throat.


         Not as much as you would think. If you dump the hot peroxide from
the cooling passage directly through the injector, any decomposition
products from heat soak should just vent through the injectors. Also, if
you go with pressure fed engines, and burn the whole slug of propellant in
one go, the residual pressure will automatically purge your coolant
passages on shutdown.


>There are several positive features of this approach:
>
>1) For development you could push water through instead of peroxide.


         True of any regen system.


>2) You wouldn't have to deliberatly keep performance low.
>
>3) It's simple.
>
>4) The H2O2 will arrive at the catalyst warm.


         These three are huge. One caveat -- you will still have to start
the motor with cold peroxide.


>5) With such a large mass flux of oxidizer, you ought to have ample
>cooling.


         One of the big advantages of peroxide as an oxidizer, IMO.


>6) There'd be little need for futzing with exotic materials.. I'm not
>sure whether aluminum would work, but I bet something softer than
>molybdenum would.


         Aluminum is such a good conductor of heat that it probably will
work, IMO. If not, stainless steel is not nearly as hard to work or as
expensive and moly, and will almost certainly work.

         -p


Mars or Bust!
www.marssociety.com

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 28451 invoked from network); 19 Dec 2001 05:07:53 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 19 Dec 2001 05:07:53 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 28576 invoked by uid 50005); 19 Dec 2001 05:07:44 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpa with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4176. . Clean. Processed in 0.345555 secs); 19 Dec 2001 05:07:44 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 19 Dec 2001 05:07:44 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA04242; Tue, 18 Dec 2001 21:05:47 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 104749 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 19 Dec 2001 05:05:45          +0000
Received: from rwcrmhc53.attbi.com (rwcrmhc53.attbi.com [204.127.198.39]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA04228 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 18 Dec 2001 21:05:45 -0800
Received: from c1649002-a.earthlink.net ([12.232.75.28]) by rwcrmhc53.attbi.com          (InterMail vM.4.01.03.27 201-229-121-127-20010626) with ESMTP id          <20011219050515.DWCS20122.rwcrmhc53.attbi.com@c1649002-a.earthlink.net>; Wed, 19 Dec 2001 05:05:15          +0000
X-Sender: forkbomb@mail.earthlink.net
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.0.2
References: <85256B26.007D9219.00@vgi4mail.vanguard.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <5.0.2.1.0.20011218210234.04d16008@mail.earthlink.net>
Date:         Tue, 18 Dec 2001 21:05:19 -0800
Reply-To: "Pierce Nichols" <forkbomb@EARTHLINK.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Pierce Nichols" <forkbomb@EARTHLINK.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Sure would be nice if....
Comments: To: Kristin & David Hall <thehalls@RIDGENET.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <000b01c18840$b832b560$1b30fea9@kristinscomp>

At 07:53 PM 12/18/2001 -0800, Kristin & David Hall wrote:


>Most likely illegal.  There are companies out there that have such products
>for sale if you've got the money.  It is illegal for the gov't to take
>business away from private industry without proper justification (and "every
>Tom/Dick/Harry can't afford the going rate!" is not what they would consider
>proper justification).  For NASA to release they're codes would be for NASA
>to drive some private companies out of business - illegal as all hell.


         So you are saying that the government cannot release code it has
developed as open source if it would compete with a private concern? That's
simply not true -- large parts of NetBSD's tape library support system and
large-scale file management code were written by NASA programmers and
subsequently released as part of NetBSD (a free UNIX) under the BSD license
(an open source license). This despite the fact that a number of companies
do quite a good business providing software with similar functionality.

         -p


Mars or Bust!
www.marssociety.com

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 343 invoked from network); 19 Dec 2001 05:52:00 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 19 Dec 2001 05:52:00 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 11426 invoked by uid 50005); 19 Dec 2001 05:51:50 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4176. . Clean. Processed in 2.540896 secs); 19 Dec 2001 05:51:50 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 19 Dec 2001 05:51:47 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA04416; Tue, 18 Dec 2001 21:47:29 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 104781 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 19 Dec 2001 05:47:25          +0000
Received: from idsoftware.com (predator.idsoftware.com [192.246.40.34]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA04402 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Tue, 18 Dec 2001 21:47:25 -0800
Received: from [192.246.40.129] (account johnc HELO lightning.idsoftware.com)          by idsoftware.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 3.4.7) with ESMTP id 20008          for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 18 Dec 2001 23:47:24 -0600
X-Sender: johnc@mail.idsoftware.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.1
References: <200112182042.PAA15440@pastene.East.Sun.COM>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <4.3.1.2.20011218233845.0363bb20@mail.idsoftware.com>
Date:         Tue, 18 Dec 2001 23:45:20 -0600
Reply-To: "John Carmack" <johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Carmack" <johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Cooling hybrids: was: Re: [AR] intentionally bad fuels
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <5.0.2.1.0.20011218204648.01d5aa10@mail.earthlink.net>

>
>>There would be some issues you'd have to deal with:
>>
>>1) You'd want to avoid gas bubbles in the coolant passage, lest you
>>develop uncooled spots.
>
>
>         I don't think that's a problem with a coolant passage this
>large... your flow velocity should be too low to cavitate.

Too slow of a coolant velocity can let the coolant near the surface boil.


>>3) You'd need to worry about heat soak to residule H2O2, and probably
>>have a purge mechanism.  And you'd want to make sure your main
>>propellant valve was upstream of the throat.
>
>
>         Not as much as you would think. If you dump the hot peroxide from
>the cooling passage directly through the injector, any decomposition
>products from heat soak should just vent through the injectors. Also, if
>you go with pressure fed engines, and burn the whole slug of propellant in
>one go, the residual pressure will automatically purge your coolant
>passages on shutdown.

Yes, but the issue is when you don't burn everything in one
activation.  The ability to stop and restart is one of the prime benefits
of liquids over solids.  We have had lots of times when we fired everything
up, then paused to figure something out, then continued firing.


>>6) There'd be little need for futzing with exotic materials.. I'm not
>>sure whether aluminum would work, but I bet something softer than
>>molybdenum would.
>
>
>         Aluminum is such a good conductor of heat that it probably will
>work, IMO. If not, stainless steel is not nearly as hard to work or as
>expensive and moly, and will almost certainly work.
>
>         -p

If we ever do work on an actively cooled system, we will probably do it
with aluminum, because we can do some initial testing with monoprop
peroxide, which will melt uncooled aluminum.  Henry has mentioned that a
commercial flight engine has used aluminum, so it should scale just fine.

BTW, I got my quote for the TZM moly bar stock -- $44 / pound, and the bar
of 2.75" by 12" that I am buying weighs 26 pounds...  We should be able to
make four test nozzles out of that.  We are going to try platinum plating
first.

John Carmack

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 20736 invoked from network); 19 Dec 2001 06:31:35 -0000
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 19 Dec 2001 06:31:35 -0000
Received: (qmail 11453 invoked by uid 50005); 19 Dec 2001 06:31:26 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4175. . Clean. Processed in 0.318799 secs); 19 Dec 2001 06:31:26 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 19 Dec 2001 06:31:26 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA04642; Tue, 18 Dec 2001 22:26:48 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 104810 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 19 Dec 2001 06:26:38          +0000
Received: from castor.ridgenet.net (IDENT:root@castor.ridgenet.net          [199.120.150.29]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA04628          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 18 Dec 2001 22:26:38 -0800
Received: from kristinscomp (pm175.ridgenet.net [204.154.246.175]) by          castor.ridgenet.net (8.11.0/8.11.0) with SMTP id fBJ6T2b07050; Tue,          18 Dec 2001 22:29:03 -0800
References: <85256B26.007D9219.00@vgi4mail.vanguard.com>            <5.0.2.1.0.20011218210234.04d16008@mail.earthlink.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <001301c18856$43983ca0$1b30fea9@kristinscomp>
Date:         Tue, 18 Dec 2001 22:27:40 -0800
Reply-To: "Kristin & David Hall" <thehalls@RIDGENET.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Kristin & David Hall" <thehalls@RIDGENET.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Sure would be nice if....
Comments: To: Pierce Nichols <forkbomb@earthlink.net>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

> >Most likely illegal.  There are companies out there that have such
products
> >for sale if you've got the money.  It is illegal for the gov't to take

>          So you are saying that the government cannot release code it has
> developed as open source if it would compete with a private concern?
That's
> simply not true -- large parts of NetBSD's tape library support system and

ACK!  Quite right.  They can release it, but they can not sell it, THAT is
illegal.  I had a bit of a brainfart as we are always running into the "you
can't compete with industry" BS at the office - but then we're not talking
charity.

There is another issue, however, one that I purposely neglected in the first
post.  One of "critical technology control".  Most (read:  all that I've
ever seen) sim codes developed by the gov't for rockets are classified as
critical technology and thus have distribution controls placed on them.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 3068 invoked from network); 19 Dec 2001 07:17:22 -0000
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 19 Dec 2001 07:17:22 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 22266 invoked by uid 50005); 19 Dec 2001 07:17:14 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4175. . Clean. Processed in 2.126474 secs); 19 Dec 2001 07:17:14 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 19 Dec 2001 07:17:11 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA04819; Tue, 18 Dec 2001 23:15:24 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 104833 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 19 Dec 2001 07:15:16          +0000
Received: from pintail.mail.pas.earthlink.net (pintail.mail.pas.earthlink.net          [207.217.120.122]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id          XAA04779 for <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Tue, 18 Dec 2001 23:05:16 -0800
Received: from dialup-209.247.138.196.dial1.sanjose1.level3.net          ([209.247.138.196] helo=earthlink.net) by          pintail.mail.pas.earthlink.net with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id          16Gamx-00014C-00; Tue, 18 Dec 2001 23:05:15 -0800
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.75 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.16-22 i686)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <85256B26.007D9219.00@vgi4mail.vanguard.com>            <5.0.2.1.0.20011218210234.04d16008@mail.earthlink.net>            <001301c18856$43983ca0$1b30fea9@kristinscomp>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3C203C56.7D557663@earthlink.net>
Date:         Tue, 18 Dec 2001 23:05:58 -0800
Reply-To: "David Weinshenker" <daze39@EARTHLINK.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "David Weinshenker" <daze39@EARTHLINK.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Sure would be nice if....
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Kristin & David Hall wrote:
> > > Most likely illegal.  There are companies out there
> > > that have such products for sale if you've got the
> > > money.  It is illegal for the gov't to take

> >          So you are saying that the government cannot
> > release code it has developed as open source if it would
> > compete with a private concern?
> > That's simply not true -- large parts of NetBSD's
> > tape library support system and

> ACK!  Quite right.  They can release it, but they can not sell it,
> THAT is illegal.  I had a bit of a brainfart as we are always
> running into the "you can't compete with industry" BS at the
> office - but then we're not talking charity.
>
> There is another issue, however, one that I purposely neglected
> in the first post.  One of "critical technology control".  Most
> (read:  all that I've ever seen) sim codes developed by the gov't
> for rockets are classified as critical technology and thus have
> distribution controls placed on them.

Presumably "critical" to maintaining a monopoly on "rockets-as-
military-technology", and therefore not to be generally known?

Yet simultaneously, they're concerned to protect the ability
of a private software developer to market such a product?

Or would independently-written sim code be considered
"critical technology" and therefore subject to such
restrictions also?

-dave w

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 6555 invoked from network); 19 Dec 2001 08:59:06 -0000
Received: from smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.105]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 19 Dec 2001 08:59:06 -0000
Received: (qmail 8086 invoked by uid 50005); 19 Dec 2001 07:32:31 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpy with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4176. . Clean. Processed in 4.198131 secs); 19 Dec 2001 07:32:31 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 19 Dec 2001 07:32:25 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA04895; Tue, 18 Dec 2001 23:30:38 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 104848 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 19 Dec 2001 07:30:31          +0000
Received: from castor.ridgenet.net (IDENT:root@castor.ridgenet.net          [199.120.150.29]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA04881          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 18 Dec 2001 23:30:31 -0800
Received: from kristinscomp (pm175.ridgenet.net [204.154.246.175]) by          castor.ridgenet.net (8.11.0/8.11.0) with SMTP id fBJ7Wsb13513; Tue,          18 Dec 2001 23:32:54 -0800
References: <85256B26.007D9219.00@vgi4mail.vanguard.com>                      <5.0.2.1.0.20011218210234.04d16008@mail.earthlink.net>                      <001301c18856$43983ca0$1b30fea9@kristinscomp>             <3C203C56.7D557663@earthlink.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <000f01c1885f$2f5736c0$1b30fea9@kristinscomp>
Date:         Tue, 18 Dec 2001 23:31:32 -0800
Reply-To: "Kristin & David Hall" <thehalls@RIDGENET.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Kristin & David Hall" <thehalls@RIDGENET.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Sure would be nice if....
Comments: To: David Weinshenker <daze39@EARTHLINK.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

> > There is another issue, however, one that I purposely neglected
> > in the first post.  One of "critical technology control".  Most
> > (read:  all that I've ever seen) sim codes developed by the gov't
> > for rockets are classified as critical technology and thus have
> > distribution controls placed on them.
>
> Presumably "critical" to maintaining a monopoly on "rockets-as-
> military-technology", and therefore not to be generally known?

Critical as in, "a required technology for advanced weapons development".
True, there are other sources, but the attitude is that we will not give
them the rope with which they will hang us.  Yes, they will probably still
get rope, but at least it won't (in theory) be our rope.

> Yet simultaneously, they're concerned to protect the ability
> of a private software developer to market such a product?

Not just that product - ANY product.  It's a matter of law, not a simple
policy decision by some guy in an office somewhere.

> Or would independently-written sim code be considered
> "critical technology" and therefore subject to such
> restrictions also?

If it is of sufficient sophistication, yes.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 5914 invoked from network); 19 Dec 2001 15:16:57 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtph.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.88]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 19 Dec 2001 15:16:57 -0000
Received: (qmail 17497 invoked by uid 50005); 19 Dec 2001 15:03:02 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtph with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4176. . Clean. Processed in 0.558952 secs); 19 Dec 2001 15:03:02 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtph.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 19 Dec 2001 15:03:01 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA06049; Wed, 19 Dec 2001 07:12:58 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 104884 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 19 Dec 2001 15:12:38          +0000
Received: from spsystems.net (spsystems.net [209.47.149.227]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA06035 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Wed,          19 Dec 2001 07:12:37 -0800
Received: (from henry@localhost) by spsystems.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id KAA13920;          Wed, 19 Dec 2001 10:12:05 -0500 (EST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1011219090432.12173C-100000@spsystems.net>
Date:         Wed, 19 Dec 2001 10:12:05 -0500
Reply-To: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Sure would be nice if....
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <3C203C56.7D557663@earthlink.net>

On Tue, 18 Dec 2001, David Weinshenker wrote:
> > ...sim codes developed by the gov't
> > for rockets are classified as critical technology and thus have
> > distribution controls placed on them.
>
> Presumably "critical" to maintaining a monopoly on "rockets-as-
> military-technology", and therefore not to be generally known?

The theory is that keeping those programs under wraps will slow the spread
of ballistic-missile technology to potentially-hostile nations.

There is some justice in this.  Some.  But as I've noted before, there are
people in the US government who think the Russians wouldn't know the sky
was blue, had they not stolen the knowledge from the US.  The legitimate
concerns tend to be taken much farther than can be rationally justified,
to the point of putting senseless restrictions on things which are not all
that hard for enemies to duplicate, inconveniencing legitimate potential
users (who often lack the resources a rogue government could bring to
bear) for the sake of illusory improvements in security.

The unwritten assumption that rockets are basically a government monopoly
encourages this over-zealous attitude -- if nobody else has a legitimate
use for the things, only the bad guys are being inconvenienced -- but is
probably not in itself a major motivation.  *Most* of the people who write
and enforce these rules are not evil, just misguided.

> Or would independently-written sim code be considered
> "critical technology" and therefore subject to such
> restrictions also?

Yes and no.  The US government has no legal power to suppress distribution
of an independently-written product, thanks to Freedom Of Speech and
Freedom Of The Press.  (The guys writing simulations for the government
have given up their rights by explicit agreement, e.g. applying for a
security clearance includes agreeing to observe the government's rules.)

The one snag comes when distribution starts to (potentially) cross
borders, because when it comes to exports, the US government does think it
has the power to impose restrictions, and it interprets "speech" and "the
press" very narrowly -- program source is not considered speech and online
distribution is not considered the press.  (Court challenges to this
stupidity are still working their way up toward the Supreme Court.)

If you publish your source code in a book, on paper, you can export *that*
freely, but putting it up for FTP access is different.  (This has led to
a few interesting books, with source code printed in a font optimized for
OCR scanning, including checksums on each line for mechanized verification
of the scans...)

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 12290 invoked from network); 19 Dec 2001 15:49:22 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 19 Dec 2001 15:49:22 -0000
Received: (qmail 29651 invoked by uid 50005); 19 Dec 2001 15:49:31 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4175. . Clean. Processed in 0.60007 secs); 19 Dec 2001 15:49:31 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 19 Dec 2001 15:49:30 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA06101; Wed, 19 Dec 2001 07:19:13 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 104899 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 19 Dec 2001 15:19:11          +0000
Received: from spsystems.net (spsystems.net [209.47.149.227]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA06087 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Wed,          19 Dec 2001 07:19:10 -0800
Received: (from henry@localhost) by spsystems.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id KAA14080;          Wed, 19 Dec 2001 10:18:39 -0500 (EST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1011219101704.12173D-100000@spsystems.net>
Date:         Wed, 19 Dec 2001 10:18:39 -0500
Reply-To: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] intentionally bad fuels
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <Pine.GSO.4.21.0112181257001.2204-100000@z.glue.umd.edu>

On Tue, 18 Dec 2001, Andrew Case wrote:
> > You could always just add a separate water tank, at the cost of an
> > annoying increase in complexity.
>
> I was just thinking that simple dilution with something inert might
> do the trick - but how about using the pressurant?

The mass of the gas will be relatively small compared to the liquid, so
I don't think it will cool things down very much.  And there is a general
belief (although based on limited evidence) that gas bubbles in propellant
are seriously bad for combustion stability.

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 8389 invoked from network); 19 Dec 2001 15:56:16 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 19 Dec 2001 15:56:16 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 12099 invoked by uid 50005); 19 Dec 2001 15:56:25 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4176. . Clean. Processed in 0.695358 secs); 19 Dec 2001 15:56:25 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 19 Dec 2001 15:56:24 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA06144; Wed, 19 Dec 2001 07:22:37 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 104910 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 19 Dec 2001 15:22:36          +0000
Received: from po3.glue.umd.edu (po3.glue.umd.edu [128.8.10.123]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA06130 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 19 Dec 2001 07:22:35 -0800
Received: from z.glue.umd.edu (IDENT:root@z.glue.umd.edu [128.8.10.71]) by          po3.glue.umd.edu (8.10.1/8.10.1) with ESMTP id fBJFMY911801 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 19 Dec 2001 10:22:35 -0500 (EST)
Received: from z.glue.umd.edu (IDENT:sendmail@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by          z.glue.umd.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id KAA19336 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 19 Dec 2001 10:22:34 -0500 (EST)
Received: from localhost (acase@localhost) by z.glue.umd.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with          ESMTP id KAA19332 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 19 Dec 2001          10:22:34 -0500 (EST)
X-Authentication-Warning: z.glue.umd.edu: acase owned process doing -bs
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.GSO.4.21.0112190958480.15633-100000@z.glue.umd.edu>
Date:         Wed, 19 Dec 2001 10:22:34 -0500
Reply-To: "Andrew Case" <acase@GLUE.UMD.EDU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Andrew Case" <acase@GLUE.UMD.EDU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Cooling hybrids: was: Re: [AR] intentionally bad fuels
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <5.0.2.1.0.20011218204648.01d5aa10@mail.earthlink.net>

On Tue, 18 Dec 2001, Pierce Nichols wrote:

> It might be worthwhile to have the throats spun rather than
> machining them from bar stock. Especially if you are using a material like
> stainless steel, which is a bitch to machine.

I'm not sure how much of a PITA it is to spin (something I'd like to
try but haven't yet had the chance), but machining stainless isn't too
bad in my experience. You have to pay careful attention to speeds and
feeds, use carbide tooling, lots of coolant (flood is best), and watch
out for the fact that the chips are razor sharp. *But* if you're careful
and attentive, and take the time to set up beforehand, it's possible to
get truly gorgeous results. The main problem is that SS doesn't forgive
even minor errors the way aluminum or brass does. One thing not  mentioned
in handbooks and the like that I learned from an old hand is to keep a
pair of long nosed pliers handy - if the chip starts getting long, reach
in and break it off with the pliers. Never, ever touch the chip with your
hand. My only lost time injury in the shop occured when I was machining SS
and the chip got long enough to reach down to the point where it looked
like it might wrap around the handle on the apron - just as I went to
flick it out of the way it wrapped around the chuck, whipping the end of
the chip across my finger. Nasty cut, but it could easily have been an
amputation. It was a stupid thing to do, even if I'd been working with
aluminum, but stainless doesn't forgive stupidity. Treat it with respect,
though, and you can get results that are well worth it. I really love
working with stainless for precisely this reason - it's tricky enough
to be interesting and the results of success are well worth the effort.

......Andrew

Andrew Case                             |
acase@plasma.umd.edu                    |
Institute for Plasma Research           |
University of Maryland, College Park    |

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 23556 invoked from network); 19 Dec 2001 16:07:45 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.105]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 19 Dec 2001 16:07:45 -0000
Received: (qmail 22020 invoked by uid 50005); 19 Dec 2001 16:07:54 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpy with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4176. . Clean. Processed in 0.998751 secs); 19 Dec 2001 16:07:54 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 19 Dec 2001 16:07:52 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA06242; Wed, 19 Dec 2001 07:45:06 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 104927 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 19 Dec 2001 15:45:03          +0000
Received: from spsystems.net (spsystems.net [209.47.149.227]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA06228 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Wed,          19 Dec 2001 07:45:03 -0800
Received: (from henry@localhost) by spsystems.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id KAA14640;          Wed, 19 Dec 2001 10:44:31 -0500 (EST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1011219104102.12173F-100000@spsystems.net>
Date:         Wed, 19 Dec 2001 10:44:31 -0500
Reply-To: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] OT - Low Tech shuttle equipment
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <000001c1879b$80018b30$0200a8c0@cmngga.adelphia.net>

On Tue, 18 Dec 2001, Jeff Grady wrote:
> >>They can't go *completely* through the back door, because NASA does want
> >>to test cabin gear for a few potential problems like outgassing.
>
> OK, what happens if you fart in your EVA suit?

Alas, NASA couldn't find any astronauts with zero outgassing... :-)

The suits, like the cabins, have air filters which are supposed to take
out any minor contaminants.  The concern is partly to limit the load on
those filters, and partly to avoid contaminants which they don't take out
very effectively.

(The filters are not perfect.  Reportedly, you don't want to enter the
shuttle cabin after a flight until it's been aired out a bit.)

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 1938 invoked from network); 19 Dec 2001 16:17:35 -0000
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 19 Dec 2001 16:17:35 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 927 invoked by uid 50005); 19 Dec 2001 16:17:45 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4176. . Clean. Processed in 0.402206 secs); 19 Dec 2001 16:17:45 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 19 Dec 2001 16:17:44 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA06389; Wed, 19 Dec 2001 08:11:25 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 104947 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 19 Dec 2001 16:11:23          +0000
Received: from ll.mit.edu (LLMAIL.LL.MIT.EDU [129.55.12.40]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA06375 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed,          19 Dec 2001 08:11:23 -0800
Received: (from smtp@localhost) by ll.mit.edu (8.11.3/8.8.8) id fBJGBLp22107;          Wed, 19 Dec 2001 11:11:21 -0500 (EST)
Received: from UNKNOWN(            ),          claiming to be "ll.mit.edu" via SMTP by llmail,          id smtpdAAAQbaaBQ; Wed Dec 19 11:11:16 2001
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.76 [en]C-CCK-MCD MITLL  (WinNT; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <Pine.BSI.3.91.1011219090432.12173C-100000@spsystems.net>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3C20BBE8.637B7740@ll.mit.edu>
Date:         Wed, 19 Dec 2001 11:10:16 -0500
Reply-To: "Robert Galejs" <galejs@LL.MIT.EDU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Robert Galejs" <galejs@LL.MIT.EDU>
Organization: MIT Lincoln Laboratory
Subject:      Re: [AR] Sure would be nice if....
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Henry Spencer wrote:
>
> On Tue, 18 Dec 2001, David Weinshenker wrote:

> > Or would independently-written sim code be considered
> > "critical technology" and therefore subject to such
> > restrictions also?
>
> Yes and no.  The US government has no legal power to suppress distribution
> of an independently-written product, thanks to Freedom Of Speech and
> Freedom Of The Press.  (The guys writing simulations for the government
> have given up their rights by explicit agreement, e.g. applying for a
> security clearance includes agreeing to observe the government's rules.)

I'm not so sure about that.  Wasn't there a thesis written a few years
ago
(from Princeton, I believe) that detailed how to construct a nuclear
weapon?  I heard that the thesis was classified by the government to
prevent its distribution.

- Robert Galejs

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 24952 invoked from network); 19 Dec 2001 16:46:52 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 19 Dec 2001 16:46:52 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 7977 invoked by uid 50005); 19 Dec 2001 16:47:01 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4176. . Clean. Processed in 0.354317 secs); 19 Dec 2001 16:47:01 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 19 Dec 2001 16:47:01 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA06495; Wed, 19 Dec 2001 08:31:00 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 104966 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 19 Dec 2001 16:30:51          +0000
Received: from mercury.Sun.COM (mercury.Sun.COM [192.9.25.1]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA06481 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed,          19 Dec 2001 08:30:51 -0800
Received: from pastene.East.Sun.COM ([129.148.183.32]) by mercury.Sun.COM          (8.9.3+Sun/8.9.3) with ESMTP id IAA01853 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>;          Wed, 19 Dec 2001 08:30:45 -0800 (PST)
Received: from chopin (chopin [129.148.183.180]) by pastene.East.Sun.COM          (8.9.3+Sun/8.9.3/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with SMTP id LAA28035; Wed, 19 Dec          2001 11:30:44 -0500 (EST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-MD5: avnE/xhhQSNkXjEJAAzEbA==
X-Mailer: dtmail 1.3.0 @(#)CDE Version 1.3.5 SunOS 5.7 sun4u sparc
Message-ID:  <200112191630.LAA28035@pastene.East.Sun.COM>
Date:         Wed, 19 Dec 2001 11:30:44 -0500
Reply-To: "Peter Finch - High End Server Systems" <Peter.Finch@SUN.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Peter Finch - High End Server Systems" <Peter.Finch@SUN.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Cooling hybrids: was: Re: [AR] intentionally bad fuels
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

> X-Sender: forkbomb@mail.earthlink.net
> Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2001 20:59:20 -0800
> To: Peter Finch - High End Server Systems <Peter.Finch@sun.com>,
AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
> From: Pierce Nichols <forkbomb@earthlink.net>
> Subject: Re: [AR] Cooling hybrids: was: Re: [AR] intentionally bad fuels
> Mime-Version: 1.0
>
> At 03:42 PM 12/18/2001 -0500, Peter Finch - High End Server Systems wrote:
> >Content-Type: TEXT/plain; charset=us-ascii
> >Content-MD5: bD/QIPUvRDnvtVesVKlYKw==
> >
> >1) You'd want to avoid gas bubbles in the coolant passage, lest you
> >develop uncooled spots.
>
>
>          I don't think that's a problem with a coolant passage this
> large... your flow velocity should be too low to cavitate.

I was really thinking of the problem of leaving bubbles trapped in the system
when you first flood it with peroxide.  Maybe this is not a problem and they'd
simply be entrained in the peroxide flow.

There are the normal fluid flow problems with regenerative cooling, but I
figured they'd be overwhelmed by the large flow of a good coolant and the need
to cool a smaller heat flux than that of the entire chamber.

--
Peter Finch, peter.finch@east.sun.com
Sun Microsystems, Inc. http://www.sun.com
voice: (781) 442-2219 fax: (781) 442-1646

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 26799 invoked from network); 19 Dec 2001 17:02:11 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 19 Dec 2001 17:02:11 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 25017 invoked by uid 50005); 19 Dec 2001 17:02:20 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4176. . Clean. Processed in 1.27176 secs); 19 Dec 2001 17:02:20 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 19 Dec 2001 17:02:19 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA06576; Wed, 19 Dec 2001 08:40:17 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 104981 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 19 Dec 2001 16:40:16          +0000
Received: from mercury.Sun.COM (mercury.Sun.COM [192.9.25.1]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA06562 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed,          19 Dec 2001 08:40:16 -0800
Received: from pastene.East.Sun.COM ([129.148.183.32]) by mercury.Sun.COM          (8.9.3+Sun/8.9.3) with ESMTP id IAA25122 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>;          Wed, 19 Dec 2001 08:39:00 -0800 (PST)
Received: from chopin (chopin [129.148.183.180]) by pastene.East.Sun.COM          (8.9.3+Sun/8.9.3/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with SMTP id LAA27714; Wed, 19 Dec          2001 11:18:01 -0500 (EST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-MD5: F0dEjgTvndPecRo9PO0DBg==
X-Mailer: dtmail 1.3.0 @(#)CDE Version 1.3.5 SunOS 5.7 sun4u sparc
Message-ID:  <200112191618.LAA27714@pastene.East.Sun.COM>
Date:         Wed, 19 Dec 2001 11:18:01 -0500
Reply-To: "Peter Finch - High End Server Systems" <Peter.Finch@SUN.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Peter Finch - High End Server Systems" <Peter.Finch@SUN.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Cooling hybrids: was: Re: [AR] intentionally bad fuels
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

> X-Sender: johnc@mail.idsoftware.com
> Mime-Version: 1.0
> Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2001 16:29:54 -0600
> From: John Carmack <johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM>
> Subject: Re: [AR] Cooling hybrids: was: Re: [AR] intentionally bad fuels
> To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
>
> >
> >Have you considered cooling just the hybrid's throat regeneratively with
> >the hydrogen peroxide?
>
> Yes, there was a report in one of the H2O2 conference papers that a very
> crude cooled throat worked the very first time, so we take it to be pretty
> straightforward.
>
> It becomes a bit of a mess on large systems, where the hybrid grain might
> be six feet long.  Adding twelve feet of piping is a pretty significant
> pressure drop for a pressure fed engine.

It isn't strictly necessary for the H2O2 tank to sit atop the fuel grain.  The
tank could be concentric on the grain, or you could array seperate oxidizer
tanks around a central fuel grain.  That would mean only six feet of pipe, from
the throat to the injector, which is some improvement.  But I agree that this
is definatly an issue.

As a side benefit, with the alternate configuration you'd get a shorter, fatter
vehicle.  As I understand your current control system, you'd benefit from a
smaller moment of inertia.

> As you mentioned, there is also the heat soak issue, which is a bigger
> problem with long pipes, because a little bit of peroxide cooking off by
> the nozzle could push a considerable volume of peroxide into the engine
> when you aren't expecting it.

You'd almost certainly want a purge mechanism.  It would take longer to turn
off the engine, but if you're only doing this a lot in development tests, is it
that big a deal?  It's probably a good idea to have the ability to purge
downstream of your main propellant valve anyway, if only to burp any leftover
peroxide from the system before playing with it.

In the real craft you might want to use the engine for takeoff _and_ landing.
I suspect you'd do that by running the engine continuously for take-off,
turning it off once for whatever mid-course coasting you want to do, and then
reigniting it for landing and turning it off on touch down.  That would mean
only two expected on-off cycles, and only two expected purges.  You might want
to throttle during takeoff and landing, but I can't imagine you'd want to turn
the engine off during either maneuver.

-Peter

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 3196 invoked from network); 19 Dec 2001 17:32:27 -0000
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 19 Dec 2001 17:32:27 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 19147 invoked by uid 50005); 19 Dec 2001 17:32:37 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4176. . Clean. Processed in 1.171421 secs); 19 Dec 2001 17:32:37 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 19 Dec 2001 17:32:35 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA06672; Wed, 19 Dec 2001 08:58:49 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 104994 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 19 Dec 2001 16:58:46          +0000
Received: from femail17.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail17.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.0.95.144]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA06658          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 19 Dec 2001 08:58:46 -0800
Received: from home.com ([24.13.246.32]) by femail17.sdc1.sfba.home.com          (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20 201-229-121-120-20010223) with ESMTP id          <20011219165846.UNYK24065.femail17.sdc1.sfba.home.com@home.com> for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 19 Dec 2001 08:58:46 -0800
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.77 [en] (Win98; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <200112160354.TAA17831@itc.uci.edu>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3C20C765.286DACB4@home.com>
Date:         Wed, 19 Dec 2001 11:59:17 -0500
Reply-To: "Alex Fraser" <beatnic@HOME.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Alex Fraser" <beatnic@HOME.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] rader/laser altimeters
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

I have attached a laser pointer to a  telescopic site. If you zero it in at 10'
it will be below the cross hairs at 5' and above at 15'. If you used a different
lens, holes and light detectors, at least you would get a simple on/off "way too
low" indicator. Aren't their parts like these in laser printers?

Jeff Hove wrote:

> David Weinshenker wrote:
> ...
> > Hmmm... use a laser to make a known spot on the ground (perhaps with a
> > precoded modulation to make it easier to pick out of a low-S/N return)
> > and then use a pair of spaced video cameras to image it. From the parallax
> > between the images, compute where the ground is.
> ...
>
> A friend of mine made a nice single-camera laser distancing system for
> his robot using just the parallax between the video camera and laser.
>   http://www.tcrobots.org/members/jsamp.htm  (see the robot named "Mars
> 1")
>
> The laser is below the camera a set distance and pointed slightly
> upwards to project a horizontal line on the walls/objects in front of
> the robot.  He used a cylindrical lens to spread the beam into a line.
> The camera points forward.  The farther away the wall or object is, the
> higher the laser line appears in the video image.  The laser cycles at
> 30hz in synch with the alternating video frames.  Thus in any given pair
> of images, one image contains the laser line, and one doesn't.  It is
> then fairly simple to subtract the two images and you're left with only
> the line.  Then measure how high the line is in the frame and calculate
> the distance.
>
> This system works very well for relatively slow speeds where not much
> changes between video frames.  It also requires the laser to be fairly
> bright in contrast to the ambient light, though this issue could be
> resolved with appropriate filters.
>
> I don't know how well this would work on a flying vehicle looking down
> at uneven ground, but it was very good for ground-based robot obstacle
> avoidance.  The Mars Rover used something similar.
>
> -Jeff Hove

--
<<***********************************>>
~~~~~~~~ Alex Fraser  N3DER ~~~~~~~~~~~
--------- beatnic@home.com ------------
~~~~ http://members.home.com/beatnic ~~
>>***********************************<<

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 29036 invoked from network); 19 Dec 2001 17:53:27 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 19 Dec 2001 17:53:27 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 4634 invoked by uid 50005); 19 Dec 2001 17:53:36 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpf with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4176. . Clean. Processed in 0.542808 secs); 19 Dec 2001 17:53:36 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 19 Dec 2001 17:53:35 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA06775; Wed, 19 Dec 2001 09:11:44 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 105015 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 19 Dec 2001 17:11:41          +0000
Received: from po3.glue.umd.edu (po3.glue.umd.edu [128.8.10.123]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA06761 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 19 Dec 2001 09:11:41 -0800
Received: from z.glue.umd.edu (IDENT:root@z.glue.umd.edu [128.8.10.71]) by          po3.glue.umd.edu (8.10.1/8.10.1) with ESMTP id fBJHBeQ16832 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 19 Dec 2001 12:11:40 -0500 (EST)
Received: from z.glue.umd.edu (IDENT:sendmail@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by          z.glue.umd.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id MAA01654 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 19 Dec 2001 12:11:39 -0500 (EST)
Received: from localhost (acase@localhost) by z.glue.umd.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with          ESMTP id MAA01650 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 19 Dec 2001          12:11:39 -0500 (EST)
X-Authentication-Warning: z.glue.umd.edu: acase owned process doing -bs
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.GSO.4.21.0112191158020.29553-100000@z.glue.umd.edu>
Date:         Wed, 19 Dec 2001 12:11:39 -0500
Reply-To: "Andrew Case" <acase@GLUE.UMD.EDU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Andrew Case" <acase@GLUE.UMD.EDU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] intentionally bad fuels
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1011219101704.12173D-100000@spsystems.net>

On Wed, 19 Dec 2001, Henry Spencer wrote:

> On Tue, 18 Dec 2001, Andrew Case wrote:
> > > You could always just add a separate water tank, at the cost of an
> > > annoying increase in complexity.
> >
> > I was just thinking that simple dilution with something inert might
> > do the trick - but how about using the pressurant?
>
> The mass of the gas will be relatively small compared to the liquid, so
> I don't think it will cool things down very much.  And there is a general
> belief (although based on limited evidence) that gas bubbles in propellant
> are seriously bad for combustion stability.

I guess I wasn't clear enough in my original outline of this (admittedly
not very good) idea - I'm suggesting a separate line from the pressurant
tank to the combustion chamber. I also assume that the gas would be
injected in a ring right at the walls where it would do the most good,
rather than try to mix in with the propellant.

In the end of the day it's probably easiest to just run really, really
fuel rich.

......Andrew

Andrew Case                             |
acase@plasma.umd.edu                    |
Institute for Plasma Research           |
University of Maryland, College Park    |

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 15527 invoked from network); 19 Dec 2001 17:57:26 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 19 Dec 2001 17:57:26 -0000
Received: (qmail 17603 invoked by uid 50005); 19 Dec 2001 17:57:36 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4176. . Clean. Processed in 0.360137 secs); 19 Dec 2001 17:57:36 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 19 Dec 2001 17:57:35 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA06990; Wed, 19 Dec 2001 09:39:01 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 105033 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 19 Dec 2001 17:38:13          +0000
Received: from spsystems.net (spsystems.net [209.47.149.227]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA06970 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Wed,          19 Dec 2001 09:38:12 -0800
Received: (from henry@localhost) by spsystems.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id MAA15764;          Wed, 19 Dec 2001 12:37:40 -0500 (EST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1011219122737.15556A-100000@spsystems.net>
Date:         Wed, 19 Dec 2001 12:37:39 -0500
Reply-To: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Sure would be nice if....
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <3C20BBE8.637B7740@ll.mit.edu>

On Wed, 19 Dec 2001, Robert Galejs wrote:
> > Yes and no.  The US government has no legal power to suppress distribution
> > of an independently-written product, thanks to Freedom Of Speech and
> > Freedom Of The Press.  (The guys writing simulations for the government
> > have given up their rights by explicit agreement...
>
> I'm not so sure about that.  Wasn't there a thesis written a few years ago
> (from Princeton, I believe) that detailed how to construct a nuclear
> weapon?  I heard that the thesis was classified by the government...

Nuclear weapons are a bizarre special case.  There is a 1940s law which
says that *all* information about nuclear weapons, however derived, is
"born classified" -- it is classified unless explicitly declassified by
the government.  This is almost certainly unconstitutional, but the law's
intimidation value is high enough that when a defendant looks sufficiently
well funded and sufficiently determined to push a case to the Supreme
Court, the government drops the case rather than see the law overturned.
(For example, the notorious Progressive case ended that way.)

This does *not* apply to any other topic.  Notably, neither rocketry nor
cryptography is covered by such a law.

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 21157 invoked from network); 19 Dec 2001 17:58:49 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.105]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 19 Dec 2001 17:58:49 -0000
Received: (qmail 14331 invoked by uid 50005); 19 Dec 2001 17:58:58 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpy with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4176. . Clean. Processed in 1.964862 secs); 19 Dec 2001 17:58:58 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 19 Dec 2001 17:58:55 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA07074; Wed, 19 Dec 2001 09:43:04 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 105049 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 19 Dec 2001 17:43:03          +0000
Received: from spsystems.net (spsystems.net [209.47.149.227]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA07047 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Wed,          19 Dec 2001 09:42:42 -0800
Received: (from henry@localhost) by spsystems.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id MAA15849;          Wed, 19 Dec 2001 12:42:10 -0500 (EST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1011219124107.15556B-100000@spsystems.net>
Date:         Wed, 19 Dec 2001 12:42:10 -0500
Reply-To: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Cooling hybrids: was: Re: [AR] intentionally bad fuels
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <200112191630.LAA28035@pastene.East.Sun.COM>

On Wed, 19 Dec 2001, Peter Finch - High End Server Systems wrote:
> There are the normal fluid flow problems with regenerative cooling, but I
> figured they'd be overwhelmed by the large flow of a good coolant and the need
> to cool a smaller heat flux than that of the entire chamber.

The throat is, actually, a large fraction of the total heat flux in most
liquid-fuel designs.

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 19467 invoked from network); 19 Dec 2001 19:23:01 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 19 Dec 2001 19:23:01 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 26321 invoked by uid 50005); 19 Dec 2001 19:23:11 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpf with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4176. . Clean. Processed in 0.380633 secs); 19 Dec 2001 19:23:11 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 19 Dec 2001 19:23:10 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA07384; Wed, 19 Dec 2001 11:04:13 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 105084 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 19 Dec 2001 19:04:07          +0000
Received: from patan.sun.com (patan.Sun.COM [192.18.98.43]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA07370 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed,          19 Dec 2001 11:04:07 -0800
Received: from pastene.East.Sun.COM ([129.148.183.32]) by patan.sun.com          (8.9.3+Sun/8.9.3) with ESMTP id MAA17075 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>;          Wed, 19 Dec 2001 12:03:48 -0700 (MST)
Received: from chopin (chopin [129.148.183.180]) by pastene.East.Sun.COM          (8.9.3+Sun/8.9.3/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with SMTP id OAA02174; Wed, 19 Dec          2001 14:04:05 -0500 (EST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-MD5: f0myX8hFtsMoyyvfbueOhw==
X-Mailer: dtmail 1.3.0 @(#)CDE Version 1.3.5 SunOS 5.7 sun4u sparc
Message-ID:  <200112191904.OAA02174@pastene.East.Sun.COM>
Date:         Wed, 19 Dec 2001 14:04:05 -0500
Reply-To: "Peter Finch - High End Server Systems" <Peter.Finch@SUN.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Peter Finch - High End Server Systems" <Peter.Finch@SUN.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Cooling hybrids: was: Re: [AR] intentionally bad fuels
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

> MIME-Version: 1.0
> Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 12:42:10 -0500
> From: Henry Spencer <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
> Subject: Re: [AR] Cooling hybrids: was: Re: [AR] intentionally bad fuels
> To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
>
> On Wed, 19 Dec 2001, Peter Finch - High End Server Systems wrote:
> > There are the normal fluid flow problems with regenerative cooling, but I
> > figured they'd be overwhelmed by the large flow of a good coolant and the
need
> > to cool a smaller heat flux than that of the entire chamber.
>
> The throat is, actually, a large fraction of the total heat flux in most
> liquid-fuel designs.

I realize there's probably no general rule, but do you have an idea what
fraction?

I mean, if it's 80% of the heat flux, that's still substantially less cooling
than 100%.  I only meant to indicate that there was less heat flux through the
throat than through the throat _and_ the rest of the chamber.

-Peter

>
>                                                           Henry Spencer
>                                                        henry@spsystems.net

--
Peter Finch, peter.finch@sun.com

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 24309 invoked from network); 19 Dec 2001 19:45:22 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 19 Dec 2001 19:45:22 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 17493 invoked by uid 50005); 19 Dec 2001 19:45:31 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4176. . Clean. Processed in 0.725043 secs); 19 Dec 2001 19:45:31 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 19 Dec 2001 19:45:30 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA07708; Wed, 19 Dec 2001 11:42:28 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 105129 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 19 Dec 2001 19:42:16          +0000
Received: from smtp003pub.verizon.net (smtp003pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.182])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA07693 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 19 Dec 2001 11:42:16 -0800
Received: from [63.15.204.212] (1Cust123.tnt1.rancho-cucamonga.ca.da.uu.net          [63.24.225.123]) by smtp003pub.verizon.net  with ESMTP for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; id fBJJffw12241 Wed, 19 Dec 2001 13:41:41          -0600 (CST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: GTE/01rocket@mail.gte.net
References: <200112191618.LAA27714@pastene.East.Sun.COM>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <a05100312b8469cc29224@[63.15.204.212]>
Date:         Wed, 19 Dec 2001 11:41:42 -0800
Reply-To: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Cooling hybrids: was: Re: [AR] intentionally bad fuels
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <200112191618.LAA27714@pastene.East.Sun.COM>

>As a side benefit, with the alternate configuration you'd get a
>shorter, fatter
>vehicle.  As I understand your current control system, you'd benefit from a
>smaller moment of inertia.

It would increase CDA (drag) and lower the dynamic stability alot
even though a control system only wants a small amount of steer
capability for orbital injections.  These are not tactical missiles.

Bad.

The only other "benefit" of short fat rockets is structural
integrity, but I assume your designs and materials are only as
marginal as needed and not more than that no matter the vehicle shape.

And related to another post claiming a liquid is effectively batch to
batch QC and a hybrid grain needs part to part QC and is *therefore
less reliable*, let me point out that unless the fuel grain fails to
insulate, then any minor imperfections are likely a feature
increasing net regression or fuel feed rate without penalties in
reliability.  It would be silly for example to x-ray a hybrid fuel
grain, discover 10 1/8" bubbles from the casting process and reject
the grain.  It simply does not matter.

Jerry



--
Jerry Irvine, Box 1242, Claremont, California USA
Opinion, the whole thing. <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
Bring common sense back to rocketry administration.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 14922 invoked from network); 19 Dec 2001 20:10:23 -0000
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 19 Dec 2001 20:10:23 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 15799 invoked by uid 50005); 19 Dec 2001 20:10:33 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4175. . Clean. Processed in 0.357329 secs); 19 Dec 2001 20:10:33 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 19 Dec 2001 20:10:32 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA07637; Wed, 19 Dec 2001 11:36:31 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 105108 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 19 Dec 2001 19:36:29          +0000
Received: from mail.aros.net (mail.aros.net [207.173.16.20]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA07623 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Wed,          19 Dec 2001 11:36:29 -0800
Received: from biomicro.com (cust-208-187-122-40.bbsc.net [208.187.122.40]) by          mail.aros.net (8.11.6/8.9.3) with ESMTP id fBJJaSY72704 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Wed, 19 Dec 2001 12:36:28 -0700 (MST)
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.77 [en] (Win98; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <Pine.BSI.3.91.1011219090432.12173C-100000@spsystems.net>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3C20E637.3C5DF3DF@biomicro.com>
Date:         Wed, 19 Dec 2001 12:10:48 -0700
Reply-To: "Mark K. Spute" <mks@BIOMICRO.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Mark K. Spute" <mks@BIOMICRO.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Sure would be nice if....
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Okay.  So we *might* not be able to get such code from gov't sources, or
publish it via internet.  However Henry made a good if subtle point.  The U.S.
military/space program can't be the only one in the whole world that has such
software available.  What if we bought/licensed/begged suitable software from
the Russians, Chinese, Indians, Pakistani's, Taiwanese, Japanese, French,
Germans, whoever.  There must be something out there that will do the job,
doesn't cost as much as the national budget of several small latin-american
countries, and doesn't come with U.S. export restrictions on it.

Henry Spencer wrote:

> On Tue, 18 Dec 2001, David Weinshenker wrote:
> > > ...sim codes developed by the gov't
> > > for rockets are classified as critical technology and thus have
> > > distribution controls placed on them.
> >
> > Presumably "critical" to maintaining a monopoly on "rockets-as-
> > military-technology", and therefore not to be generally known?
>
> The theory is that keeping those programs under wraps will slow the spread
> of ballistic-missile technology to potentially-hostile nations.

[snip of related stuff]

> The one snag comes when distribution starts to (potentially) cross
> borders, because when it comes to exports, the US government does think it
> has the power to impose restrictions, and it interprets "speech" and "the
> press" very narrowly -- program source is not considered speech and online
> distribution is not considered the press.  (Court challenges to this
> stupidity are still working their way up toward the Supreme Court.)

--
Mark K. Spute
Senior Research Engineer
BioMicro Systems Inc.
1.801.256.1906  (phone)
1.801.256.1901  (fax)

KD7IWE,  RRS, hopeful future Stolly owner

"It is difficult to say what is impossible, for the dream of yesterday is the
hope of today and the reality of tomorrow."
     Dr. Robert H. Goddard

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 594 invoked from network); 19 Dec 2001 20:13:54 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 19 Dec 2001 20:13:54 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 2628 invoked by uid 50005); 19 Dec 2001 20:14:04 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpf with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4176. . Clean. Processed in 0.316694 secs); 19 Dec 2001 20:14:04 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 19 Dec 2001 20:14:03 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA07774; Wed, 19 Dec 2001 11:59:42 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 105140 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 19 Dec 2001 19:59:40          +0000
Received: from smtp003pub.verizon.net (smtp003pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.182])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA07760 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 19 Dec 2001 11:59:39 -0800
Received: from [63.15.204.212] (1Cust123.tnt1.rancho-cucamonga.ca.da.uu.net          [63.24.225.123]) by smtp003pub.verizon.net  with ESMTP for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; id fBJJx7w22205 Wed, 19 Dec 2001 13:59:07          -0600 (CST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: GTE/01rocket@mail.gte.net
References: <Pine.BSI.3.91.1011219090432.12173C-100000@spsystems.net>            <3C20E637.3C5DF3DF@biomicro.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <a05100313b846a0666ce0@[63.15.204.212]>
Date:         Wed, 19 Dec 2001 11:59:04 -0800
Reply-To: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Sure would be nice if....
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <3C20E637.3C5DF3DF@biomicro.com>

>Okay.  So we *might* not be able to get such code from gov't sources, or
>publish it via internet.  However Henry made a good if subtle point.  The U.S.
>military/space program can't be the only one in the whole world that has such
>software available.  What if we bought/licensed/begged suitable software from
>the Russians, Chinese, Indians, Pakistani's, Taiwanese, Japanese, French,
>Germans, whoever.  There must be something out there that will do the job,
>doesn't cost as much as the national budget of several small latin-american
>countries, and doesn't come with U.S. export restrictions on it.

A viable alternative to that would be to ask Hall to post a portion
of the code or even block diagrams and equations to his program for
those elements that are NOT the rocket performance code itself, but
the 3 sigma and dispersion stuff, so other people can plug in their
own modules.  I think one solution is for this group to publish 3-6
kludges that are run comparatively on similar input data and give
different output data.  Eventually a consensus will develop which
code sucks and which rules and some hierarchy.

I have published my Mach 10 code to the net but not the trajectory
version or the 3 sigma or dispersion kludges I have tried.  At some
point even if a collective effort does not form, at least several
independent efforts will slowly crawl out of the darkness.

I believe darkness is the goal of FAA/AST to discourage rockets
without appearing to discourage rockets.

I have the feeling Hall will sell as many copies as there are arocket
members and a second program even if "in direct competition" is also
likely to sell just as many copies because those needing to calculate
this, have at least enough money to trivially buy several pieces of
$200 software.

Jerry

--
Jerry Irvine, Box 1242, Claremont, California USA
Opinion, the whole thing. <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
Bring common sense back to rocketry administration.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 11722 invoked from network); 19 Dec 2001 20:16:21 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 19 Dec 2001 20:16:21 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 5529 invoked by uid 50005); 19 Dec 2001 20:16:31 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4176. . Clean. Processed in 0.771231 secs); 19 Dec 2001 20:16:31 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 19 Dec 2001 20:16:30 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA07595; Wed, 19 Dec 2001 11:33:21 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 105097 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 19 Dec 2001 19:33:15          +0000
Received: from ns.vanguard.com (ns.VANGUARD.COM [192.175.173.31]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA07581 for          <ARocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 19 Dec 2001 11:33:14 -0800
Received: from eagle1.vanguard.com (eagle1.VANGUARD.COM [192.175.141.70]) by          ns.vanguard.com (Switch-2.2.0/Switch-2.2.0) with ESMTP id          fBJJVjN06916 for <ARocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 19 Dec 2001 14:31:45          -0500 (EST)
Received: from vgi4mail.vanguard.com (vgi4mail.vanguard.com [10.254.65.16]) by          eagle1.vanguard.com (Switch-2.2.0/Switch-2.2.0) with SMTP id          fBJJXCM09650 for <ARocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 19 Dec 2001 14:33:12          -0500 (EST)
Received: by vgi4mail.vanguard.com(Lotus SMTP MTA v4.6.6  (890.1 7-16-1999))           id 85256B27.006B688B ; Wed, 19 Dec 2001 14:33:11 -0500
X-Lotus-FromDomain: VGINOTES
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Disposition: inline
Message-ID:  <85256B27.006B67E5.00@vgi4mail.vanguard.com>
Date:         Wed, 19 Dec 2001 14:33:07 -0500
Reply-To: <Waysie_Atkins@VANGUARD.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <Waysie_Atkins@VANGUARD.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Sure would be nice if......
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

I'm not advocating NASA go into production of particular product but rather that
we the taxpayers should receive the most of the tax dollars they have spent.
Primarily my concern is the development of space and civilian/commercial access
to it.   We've pumped plenty of money into NASA and they have done amazing and
incredible things on our behalf.  I think however that most here would agree
that NASA is not equipped nor designed to accomplish the above concern.  They
are great at exploring the solar system and advancing the "state of the art
technology"  but putting people and/or cargo into space at lower cost in the
near future is not in the hat for them.  Good chance their 3rd generation
technology will do awesome things, but that is hundreds of billions of dollars
and many decades away.  My thinking is that X/AM/EX types can make great inroads
at reasonable launch costs by pairing well understood propulsion technology with
state of the art electronic systems (the bang for the buck these days is
incredible compared to Apollo era stuff) within a non-government controlled
development and application environment.   (Note the definite need for tweaking
some of the current regs and restrictions for this)

NASA has spent lots of our money developing products and technologies which are
not in use or are in limited use (the future of the X-38 is unclear at a
minimum, dead at worst).   My basic idea is that X/AM/EX be allowed some access
here.  Not looking to put anybody out of business here, but rather fill a niche.
The gov't pays for the development of the device.  If the gov't/NASA developed
it in house then they would license it to a manufacture- not looking to recoup
development costs, but rather to lend a hand to the goal of space access.  If
they had paid a contractor to develop it, then the contractor should have earned
their costs and profits within the development contract leaving gov't/NASA with
the rights to the product/device to proceed as above.

As no X-Group seems well funded enough to develop their own 7500 sq. ft
parafoil, then no business is lost to potential private companies and the
recoverless X-Group has one less obstacle to success- and all other X-Groups
would have access to it as well.  It would enable and foster competition.  It
might be the difference between having a successful X contender or not.

There is such a large gap between the 'Big Boys' and the X/AM/EX crowd, both in
terms of capability and target markets, that one cannot make a reasonable case
that there is any threat to the big players  An obvious concern is that over
time, if the X/AM/EX'ers are vastly successful and the 'Big Boys' decide to
target the same market (which they don't currently seem to do) then further
changes might be required to 'level the playing field".   The likelihood of this
occurring soon is nonexistent, years and years from now- possibly (hopefully

Ford built the cars, but gov'ts paid to build the roads.   Without roads, then
paved roads, then interstate highways were would the auto industry be today?
This is a bit different but some of the philosophy is the same.

No doubt there are some issues here that I am not familiar with, not being in
the industry.  Mr. Hall has been kind enough to point out some potential
pitfalls and/or legal hurdles.  Please take note that I do not propose breaking
laws or harming for profit companies.  Rather I would like to put forward the
general concept for discussion, and hopefully it will lead us to determining the
potential benefits and what needs to be changed in order for it to happen (i.e.
change in regs, laws, attitude etc.   I suspect that there things other than the
parafoil and 3-Sigma to which this would be applicable.

Respectfully,
 Waysie Atkins

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 12225 invoked from network); 19 Dec 2001 21:21:59 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 19 Dec 2001 21:21:59 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 7111 invoked by uid 50005); 19 Dec 2001 21:22:08 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpa with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4176. . Clean. Processed in 1.245761 secs); 19 Dec 2001 21:22:08 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 19 Dec 2001 21:22:06 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA08106; Wed, 19 Dec 2001 13:01:43 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 105195 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 19 Dec 2001 21:01:38          +0000
Received: from mercury.Sun.COM (mercury.Sun.COM [192.9.25.1]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA08092 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed,          19 Dec 2001 13:01:38 -0800
Received: from pastene.East.Sun.COM ([129.148.183.32]) by mercury.Sun.COM          (8.9.3+Sun/8.9.3) with ESMTP id NAA12107 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>;          Wed, 19 Dec 2001 13:01:37 -0800 (PST)
Received: from chopin (chopin [129.148.183.180]) by pastene.East.Sun.COM          (8.9.3+Sun/8.9.3/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with SMTP id QAA05145; Wed, 19 Dec          2001 16:01:35 -0500 (EST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-MD5: NAeSsQDpf8r5lCeDod1RBQ==
X-Mailer: dtmail 1.3.0 @(#)CDE Version 1.3.5 SunOS 5.7 sun4u sparc
Message-ID:  <200112192101.QAA05145@pastene.East.Sun.COM>
Date:         Wed, 19 Dec 2001 16:01:35 -0500
Reply-To: "Peter Finch - High End Server Systems" <Peter.Finch@SUN.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Peter Finch - High End Server Systems" <Peter.Finch@SUN.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Cooling hybrids: was: Re: [AR] intentionally bad fuels
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

If you have guidance, don't you want as close to neutral stability as
possible?  So as to lower the necessary control effort?  That is,
wouldn't you want the CP and CG at the same point so there'd be minimal
aerodynamic tendency to counter your control actions?  Historically, the
A-3 suffered from being too stable for the control system to overcome,
and the A-4 could have delivered more payload if it had less fin.
Modern launch vehicles are finless for this reason.

There's an obvious control system failure case to think about -
particularly if there's a man on the thing - but I'd still think you'd
want to minimize the margin in an optimized system (which we may not be
talking about) since it's a direct trade off for control system power.

Clearly drag is an issue.  Maybe it's paramount for a mostly-atmospheric
vehicle.

I defer to experience on the structural issues.  Seems like it'd be
easier to make a short fat rocket stiff from buckling or springy
motions, but it would be more complicated than just a column in
compression, with shear loads between tanks and all that.  It might very
well wind up heavier, particularly since it's likely to need an
aerodynamic covering.

Like I said, I'm not Mr. Experience here, but the idea of a stubby
rocket doesn't seem immediately bad.  Particularly for an X-prizeish
gas-jet controlled system.

-Peter

> Mime-Version: 1.0
> X-Sender: GTE/01rocket@mail.gte.net
> Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 11:41:42 -0800
> From: Jerry Irvine <01rocket@GTE.NET>
> Subject: Re: [AR] Cooling hybrids: was: Re: [AR] intentionally bad
fuels
> To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
>
> >As a side benefit, with the alternate configuration you'd get a
> >shorter, fatter
> >vehicle.  As I understand your current control system, you'd benefit
from a
> >smaller moment of inertia.
>
> It would increase CDA (drag) and lower the dynamic stability alot
> even though a control system only wants a small amount of steer
> capability for orbital injections.  These are not tactical missiles.
>
> Bad.
>
> The only other "benefit" of short fat rockets is structural
> integrity, but I assume your designs and materials are only as
> marginal as needed and not more than that no matter the vehicle shape.
>
> And related to another post claiming a liquid is effectively batch to
> batch QC and a hybrid grain needs part to part QC and is *therefore
> less reliable*, let me point out that unless the fuel grain fails to
> insulate, then any minor imperfections are likely a feature
> increasing net regression or fuel feed rate without penalties in
> reliability.  It would be silly for example to x-ray a hybrid fuel
> grain, discover 10 1/8" bubbles from the casting process and reject
> the grain.  It simply does not matter.
>
> Jerry
>
>
>
> --
> Jerry Irvine, Box 1242, Claremont, California USA
> Opinion, the whole thing. <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
> Bring common sense back to rocketry administration.

--
Peter Finch, peter.finch@sun.com

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 20891 invoked from network); 19 Dec 2001 22:14:07 -0000
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 19 Dec 2001 22:14:07 -0000
Received: (qmail 17679 invoked by uid 50005); 19 Dec 2001 22:14:16 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4176. . Clean. Processed in 13.836701 secs); 19 Dec 2001 22:14:16 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 19 Dec 2001 22:13:56 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA08464; Wed, 19 Dec 2001 14:10:45 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 105242 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 19 Dec 2001 22:10:35          +0000
Received: from mta08.mail.mel.aone.net.au (mta08.mail.au.uu.net [203.2.192.89])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA08450 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 19 Dec 2001 14:10:34 -0800
Received: from unknown ([63.34.214.114]) by mta08.mail.mel.aone.net.au with          SMTP id <20011219221032.GENG4149.mta08.mail.mel.aone.net.au@unknown>          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 20 Dec 2001 09:10:32 +1100
References: Conversation <200112182042.PAA15440@pastene.East.Sun.COM> with last            message <4.3.1.2.20011218233845.0363bb20@mail.idsoftware.com>
Priority: Normal
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Priority: 3
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	X-MAPIextension=.TXT;
	charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>
Date:         Wed, 19 Dec 2001 22:10:35 +0000
Reply-To: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Cooling hybrids: was: Re: [AR] intentionally bad fuels
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <4.3.1.2.20011218233845.0363bb20@mail.idsoftware.com>

> Yes, but the issue is when you don't burn everything in one
> activation.  The ability to stop and restart is one of the prime benefits
> of liquids over solids.  We have had lots of times when we fired
everything
> up, then paused to figure something out, then continued firing.

A prime benefit for a manoeuvring system this is. Stop-starting engines is
generally considered a very inefficient process and should be minimised as
much as possible especially for large motors. It's no coincidence the very
fast and reactive hypergolics rule this domain.

Troy.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 15283 invoked from network); 19 Dec 2001 22:33:05 -0000
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 19 Dec 2001 22:33:05 -0000
Received: (qmail 16920 invoked by uid 50005); 19 Dec 2001 22:33:11 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4176. . Clean. Processed in 13.862811 secs); 19 Dec 2001 22:33:11 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 19 Dec 2001 22:32:54 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA08266; Wed, 19 Dec 2001 13:38:08 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 105214 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 19 Dec 2001 21:38:04          +0000
Received: from mta08.mail.mel.aone.net.au (mta08.mail.au.uu.net [203.2.192.89])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA08252 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 19 Dec 2001 13:38:04 -0800
Received: from unknown ([63.34.214.238]) by mta08.mail.mel.aone.net.au with          SMTP id <20011219213801.FQJB4149.mta08.mail.mel.aone.net.au@unknown>          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 20 Dec 2001 08:38:01 +1100
References: Conversation <5.0.2.1.0.20011218204648.01d5aa10@mail.earthlink.net>            with last message            <Pine.GSO.4.21.0112190958480.15633-100000@z.glue.umd.edu>
Priority: Normal
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Priority: 3
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	X-MAPIextension=.TXT;
	charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>
Date:         Wed, 19 Dec 2001 21:38:04 +0000
Reply-To: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Cooling hybrids: was: Re: [AR] intentionally bad fuels
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <Pine.GSO.4.21.0112190958480.15633-100000@z.glue.umd.edu>

----------
> On Tue, 18 Dec 2001, Pierce Nichols wrote:
>
> > It might be worthwhile to have the throats spun rather than
> > machining them from bar stock. Especially if you are using a material
like
> > stainless steel, which is a bitch to machine.
>
> I'm not sure how much of a PITA it is to spin (something I'd like to
> try but haven't yet had the chance),

Standard austenitic stainless spins quite well given the right gear as long
as you're not trying to go too tight on the radius.

 but machining stainless isn't too
> bad in my experience. You have to pay careful attention to speeds and
> feeds, use carbide tooling, lots of coolant (flood is best), and watch
> out for the fact that the chips are razor sharp.

You can machine your standard 18-8 stainless steels with HSS quite easily
also if you use a solid lathe & bits (3/8" as a minimum). As long as
everything's big and solid, it will machine well. The story changes
somewhat for the higher grades. Actually, the machinability of SS is pretty
much inversely proportional to the materials corrosion resistance.

Troy.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 23271 invoked from network); 19 Dec 2001 22:35:51 -0000
Received: from smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.105]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 19 Dec 2001 22:35:51 -0000
Received: (qmail 16546 invoked by uid 50005); 19 Dec 2001 22:36:00 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpy with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4176. . Clean. Processed in 9.772824 secs); 19 Dec 2001 22:36:00 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 19 Dec 2001 22:35:45 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA08558; Wed, 19 Dec 2001 14:33:15 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 105257 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 19 Dec 2001 22:33:12          +0000
Received: from mta08.mail.mel.aone.net.au (mta08.mail.au.uu.net [203.2.192.89])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA08544 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 19 Dec 2001 14:33:10 -0800
Received: from unknown ([63.34.221.42]) by mta08.mail.mel.aone.net.au with SMTP          id <20011219223303.GQDC4149.mta08.mail.mel.aone.net.au@unknown> for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 20 Dec 2001 09:33:03 +1100
References: Conversation            <Pine.GSO.4.21.0112181257001.2204-100000@z.glue.umd.edu> with last            message <Pine.BSI.3.91.1011219101704.12173D-100000@spsystems.net>
Priority: Normal
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Priority: 3
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	X-MAPIextension=.TXT;
	charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>
Date:         Wed, 19 Dec 2001 22:33:12 +0000
Reply-To: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] intentionally bad fuels
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1011219101704.12173D-100000@spsystems.net>

> I don't think it will cool things down very much.  And there is a general
> belief (although based on limited evidence) that gas bubbles in propellant
> are seriously bad for combustion stability.

Certainly true for many biprops (don't know about H2O2 biprops though) and
is quite often less of a concern for hybrids from the limited info that I
have.

Troy.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 12420 invoked from network); 19 Dec 2001 23:40:06 -0000
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 19 Dec 2001 23:40:06 -0000
Received: (qmail 13260 invoked by uid 50005); 19 Dec 2001 23:40:15 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4176. . Clean. Processed in 1.51256 secs); 19 Dec 2001 23:40:15 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 19 Dec 2001 23:40:13 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA08842; Wed, 19 Dec 2001 15:25:56 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 105317 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 19 Dec 2001 23:25:54          +0000
Received: from mta08.mail.mel.aone.net.au (mta08.mail.au.uu.net [203.2.192.89])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA08827 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 19 Dec 2001 15:25:49 -0800
Received: from unknown ([63.34.220.223]) by mta08.mail.mel.aone.net.au with          SMTP id <20011219232546.UMA10340.mta08.mail.mel.aone.net.au@unknown>          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 20 Dec 2001 10:25:46 +1100
Priority: Normal
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Priority: 3
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	X-MAPIextension=.TXT;
	charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>
Date:         Wed, 19 Dec 2001 23:25:54 +0000
Reply-To: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Cooling hybrids: was: Re: [AR] intentionally bad fuels
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <Pine.GSO.4.21.0112191758210.29037-100000@y.glue.umd.edu>

316 & 304 do fall into the 18-8 basket.

Troy.

----------
> On Wed, 19 Dec 2001, Troy Prideaux wrote:
>
> > You can machine your standard 18-8 stainless steels with HSS quite
easily
> > also if you use a solid lathe & bits (3/8" as a minimum). As long as
> > everything's big and solid, it will machine well. The story changes
> > somewhat for the higher grades. Actually, the machinability of SS is
pretty
> > much inversely proportional to the materials corrosion resistance.
>
> Interesting. My only experience is 316 and 304, so my picture may be
> somewhat bleaker than it should be.
>
> ......Andrew
>
> Andrew Case                             |
> acase@plasma.umd.edu                    |
> Institute for Plasma Research           |
> University of Maryland, College Park    |

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 2182 invoked from network); 19 Dec 2001 23:49:57 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 19 Dec 2001 23:49:57 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 17730 invoked by uid 50005); 19 Dec 2001 23:50:06 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4175. . Clean. Processed in 0.336404 secs); 19 Dec 2001 23:50:06 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 19 Dec 2001 23:50:06 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA08768; Wed, 19 Dec 2001 15:13:39 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 105301 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 19 Dec 2001 23:13:31          +0000
Received: from po4.glue.umd.edu (po4.glue.umd.edu [128.8.10.124]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA08754 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 19 Dec 2001 15:13:30 -0800
Received: from y.glue.umd.edu (IDENT:root@y.glue.umd.edu [128.8.10.68]) by          po4.glue.umd.edu (8.10.1/8.10.1) with ESMTP id fBJNDTK08139 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 19 Dec 2001 18:13:29 -0500 (EST)
Received: from y.glue.umd.edu (IDENT:sendmail@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by          y.glue.umd.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id SAA29931 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 19 Dec 2001 18:13:29 -0500 (EST)
Received: from localhost (acase@localhost) by y.glue.umd.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with          ESMTP id SAA29927 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 19 Dec 2001          18:13:29 -0500 (EST)
X-Authentication-Warning: y.glue.umd.edu: acase owned process doing -bs
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.GSO.4.21.0112191758210.29037-100000@y.glue.umd.edu>
Date:         Wed, 19 Dec 2001 18:13:29 -0500
Reply-To: "Andrew Case" <acase@GLUE.UMD.EDU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Andrew Case" <acase@GLUE.UMD.EDU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Cooling hybrids: was: Re: [AR] intentionally bad fuels
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>

On Wed, 19 Dec 2001, Troy Prideaux wrote:

> You can machine your standard 18-8 stainless steels with HSS quite easily
> also if you use a solid lathe & bits (3/8" as a minimum). As long as
> everything's big and solid, it will machine well. The story changes
> somewhat for the higher grades. Actually, the machinability of SS is pretty
> much inversely proportional to the materials corrosion resistance.

Interesting. My only experience is 316 and 304, so my picture may be
somewhat bleaker than it should be.

......Andrew

Andrew Case                             |
acase@plasma.umd.edu                    |
Institute for Plasma Research           |
University of Maryland, College Park    |

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 16774 invoked from network); 19 Dec 2001 23:58:50 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 19 Dec 2001 23:58:50 -0000
Received: (qmail 16579 invoked by uid 50005); 19 Dec 2001 23:58:59 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4176. . Clean. Processed in 0.547456 secs); 19 Dec 2001 23:58:59 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 19 Dec 2001 23:58:58 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA08612; Wed, 19 Dec 2001 14:40:36 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 105268 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 19 Dec 2001 22:40:34          +0000
Received: from mta02.mail.mel.aone.net.au (mta02.mail.au.uu.net [203.2.192.82])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA08598 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 19 Dec 2001 14:40:34 -0800
Received: from unknown ([63.34.212.199]) by mta02.mail.mel.aone.net.au with          SMTP id <20011219224028.CWLK20673.mta02.mail.mel.aone.net.au@unknown>          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 20 Dec 2001 09:40:28 +1100
References: Conversation <200112191618.LAA27714@pastene.East.Sun.COM> with last            message <200112191618.LAA27714@pastene.East.Sun.COM>
Priority: Normal
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Priority: 3
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	X-MAPIextension=.TXT;
	charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>
Date:         Wed, 19 Dec 2001 22:40:34 +0000
Reply-To: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Cooling hybrids: was: Re: [AR] intentionally bad fuels
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <200112191618.LAA27714@pastene.East.Sun.COM>

----------
> > X-Sender: johnc@mail.idsoftware.com
> > Mime-Version: 1.0
> > Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2001 16:29:54 -0600
> > From: John Carmack <johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM>
> > Subject: Re: [AR] Cooling hybrids: was: Re: [AR] intentionally bad fuels
> > To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
> >
> > >
> > >Have you considered cooling just the hybrid's throat regeneratively
with
> > >the hydrogen peroxide?
> >
> > Yes, there was a report in one of the H2O2 conference papers that a very
> > crude cooled throat worked the very first time, so we take it to be
pretty
> > straightforward.
> >
> > It becomes a bit of a mess on large systems, where the hybrid grain
might
> > be six feet long.  Adding twelve feet of piping is a pretty significant
> > pressure drop for a pressure fed engine.
>
> It isn't strictly necessary for the H2O2 tank to sit atop the fuel grain.
 The
> tank could be concentric on the grain, or you could array seperate
oxidizer
> tanks around a central fuel grain.  That would mean only six feet of pipe,
> from
> the throat to the injector, which is some improvement.  But I agree that
this
> is definatly an issue.

 I don't know much about the decomposition process of H2O2 but isn't it
ultimately an exothermic process and prone to runaway? If so, it's not the
sort of process you want occurring in your cooling or tankage system I
would have thought?

Troy.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 23838 invoked from network); 20 Dec 2001 01:36:09 -0000
Received: from smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.105]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 20 Dec 2001 01:36:09 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 11614 invoked by uid 50005); 20 Dec 2001 01:36:18 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpy with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4176. . Clean. Processed in 2.274009 secs); 20 Dec 2001 01:36:18 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 20 Dec 2001 01:36:15 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA09291; Wed, 19 Dec 2001 17:31:33 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 105372 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 20 Dec 2001 01:30:27          +0000
Received: from sys32.hou.wt.net (sys32.hou.wt.net [205.230.159.32]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA09276 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 19 Dec 2001 17:30:26 -0800
Received: from localhost (216-119-138-138.ipset18.wt.net [216.119.138.138]) by          sys32.hou.wt.net (8.9.1/8.9.1) with ESMTP id TAA25201; Wed, 19 Dec          2001 19:30:31 -0600 (CST)
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="US-ASCII"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.475)
Message-ID:  <235EA74B-F4E9-11D5-A97A-0050E43A5105@netaxs.com>
Date:         Wed, 19 Dec 2001 19:30:23 -0600
Reply-To: "Don McCorvey" <dlm3@NETAXS.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Don McCorvey" <dlm3@NETAXS.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Sure would be nice if......
Comments: To: Waysie_Atkins@VANGUARD.COM
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <85256B27.006B67E5.00@vgi4mail.vanguard.com>

Not always.

Depending upon how the contract is written, the contractor may or may
not have the license to the design when it is complete. If something is
developed on the contractor's nickel and sold to the government,
recouping the development cost as part of the per-vehicle price tag,
then the contractor has the license to market the design. HOWEVER, if
the government, by contract, pays for the development of an item, then
the government OWNS it and can dispose of it as it wishes - whether the
contractor may license the design is up to the government.

Don McCorvey

On Wednesday, December 19, 2001, at 01:33  PM,
Waysie_Atkins@VANGUARD.COM wrote:

> NASA has spent lots of our money developing products and technologies
> which are
> not in use or are in limited use (the future of the X-38 is unclear at a
> minimum, dead at worst).   My basic idea is that X/AM/EX be allowed
> some access
> here.  Not looking to put anybody out of business here, but rather fill
> a niche.
> The gov't pays for the development of the device.  If the gov't/NASA
> developed
> it in house then they would license it to a manufacture- not looking to
> recoup
> development costs, but rather to lend a hand to the goal of space
> access.  If
> they had paid a contractor to develop it, then the contractor should
> have earned
> their costs and profits within the development contract leaving
> gov't/NASA with
> the rights to the product/device to proceed as above.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 15729 invoked from network); 20 Dec 2001 02:03:11 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 20 Dec 2001 02:03:11 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 28916 invoked by uid 50005); 20 Dec 2001 02:03:20 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpb with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4176. . Clean. Processed in 2.007277 secs); 20 Dec 2001 02:03:20 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 20 Dec 2001 02:03:17 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA09455; Wed, 19 Dec 2001 18:01:37 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 105393 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 20 Dec 2001 02:01:34          +0000
Received: from rhenium (rhenium.btinternet.com [194.73.73.93]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA09441 for <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Wed,          19 Dec 2001 18:01:33 -0800
Received: from host217-39-7-176.in-addr.btopenworld.com ([217.39.7.176]          helo=tesco.net) by rhenium with esmtp (Exim 3.22 #8) id          16GsWX-0003ul-00; Thu, 20 Dec 2001 02:01:29 +0000
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Win98; en-US; rv:0.9.4) Gecko/20011128            Netscape6/6.2.1
X-Accept-Language: en,en-GB,en-US
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <CMM.0.90.4.1008733728.billw@cypher>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3C21468D.2010305@tesco.net>
Date:         Thu, 20 Dec 2001 02:01:49 +0000
Reply-To: "Ian Woollard" <ian.woollard@TESCO.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Ian Woollard" <ian.woollard@TESCO.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Space Elevator was: Re: [AR] carbon fiber reality check
Comments: To: Bill Westfield <billw@cisco.com>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

William Chops Westfield wrote:

>>>Then there's 'just' the engineering to do.
>>>
>
> Optimist.  I bet the poltical and regulatory issues surrounding a PERMANENT
> structure that reaches into space would make amateur rocketry look like
> "stomp rockets" in comparison...


No, I covered that, that's just political engineering ;-)

The nice thing about this stuff is that it would put $40 billion
worth of work into politicians voting districts. And once the first
one is up- everyone wants one.

The biggest problem would be that the politicians aren't likely to
make it to the end of the project (if they do fine; they'll look
very good on it). Otherwise, provided you avoid getting the project
named after the first politician's name or something stupid, and
then when the second group of politicians come in, you get them to
make a big song and dance about how underfunded it had been, and
get them to increase the budget slightly (the spending usually
needs to go up towards the middle of the project anyway due to the
natural ramping that occurs); but if you don't get it you can slow
the project down slightly.

The plan shows it being built offshort- and unlike rocketry, it is
harder to use this technology for ICBMs; but I'm sure someone will
think of a way eventually. It's much more of a civil engineering
project. Do we have to involve the FAA? ;-) Stick a light on top;
[96000km high] or whatever the regs say; it'd be ok. ;-)


> BillW


--
- Ian Woollard (ian.woollard@tesco.net)

"Is a planetary surface the right place for an expanding
technological civilization?"
- Gerard O'Neill

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 18133 invoked from network); 20 Dec 2001 04:27:38 -0000
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 20 Dec 2001 04:27:38 -0000
Received: (qmail 15286 invoked by uid 50005); 20 Dec 2001 04:27:47 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4176. . Clean. Processed in 0.800211 secs); 20 Dec 2001 04:27:47 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 20 Dec 2001 04:27:46 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA09929; Wed, 19 Dec 2001 20:26:25 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 105424 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 20 Dec 2001 04:26:15          +0000
Received: from smtprelay7.dc2.adelphia.net (smtprelay7.dc2.adelphia.net          [64.8.50.39]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA09915 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 19 Dec 2001 20:26:14 -0800
Received: from jlgrady ([24.53.101.238]) by smtprelay7.dc2.adelphia.net          (Netscape Messaging Server 4.15) with SMTP id GOMKAU00.4HE for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 19 Dec 2001 23:25:42 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook CWS, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
Importance: Normal
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <000001c1890e$b0f9e880$0200a8c0@cmngga.adelphia.net>
Date:         Wed, 19 Dec 2001 23:27:52 -0500
Reply-To: "Jeff Grady" <jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jeff Grady" <jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET>
Subject:      [AR] Epoxy motor fuels and burn rate
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

I have been tinkering with "plain-ole-2-part" epoxy as a fuel/binder. I have
a composition that consistently hits 1.6mm/sec burn rate. It's AP/AL/EPOXY
ratios are 70/15/15. I know this is on the low side, but how does this burn
rate compare to composite fuels (containing AP/AL) you guys make?

Jeff

P.S. My wife bought Sutton's Rocket Propulsion Elements for me as a
Christmas present and gave it to me today...GREAT BOOK!

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 21294 invoked from network); 20 Dec 2001 04:28:38 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtph.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.88]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 20 Dec 2001 04:28:38 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 2326 invoked by uid 50005); 20 Dec 2001 04:14:39 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtph with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4176. . Clean. Processed in 0.616155 secs); 20 Dec 2001 04:14:39 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtph.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 20 Dec 2001 04:14:37 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA09964; Wed, 19 Dec 2001 20:27:22 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 105435 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 20 Dec 2001 04:27:20          +0000
Received: from bailey.dscga.com (bailey.neonym.net [198.78.11.130]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA09950 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 19 Dec 2001 20:27:19 -0800
Received: from bailey.dscga.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by bailey.dscga.com          (8.12.1/8.12.1) with ESMTP id fBK4NGij012649; Wed, 19 Dec 2001          23:23:16 -0500 (EST)
Received: (from michael@localhost) by bailey.dscga.com (8.12.1/8.12.1/Submit)          id fBK4NF9Q012648; Wed, 19 Dec 2001 23:23:15 -0500 (EST)
References: <OF39FF5B6C.4102BD93-ON87256B21.00585E3E@mtroyal.ab.ca>            <a0510031bb83e909b67dc@[63.24.225.213]>            <3C18D7E4.1CC9D49D@biomicro.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Disposition: inline
User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.22.1i
Message-ID:  <20011219232315.A12644@bailey.dscga.com>
Date:         Wed, 19 Dec 2001 23:23:15 -0500
Reply-To: "Michael Mealling" <michael@NEONYM.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Michael Mealling" <michael@NEONYM.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Procedures needed
Comments: To: "Mark K. Spute" <mks@BIOMICRO.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <3C18D7E4.1CC9D49D@biomicro.com>

On Thu, Dec 13, 2001 at 09:31:32AM -0700, Mark K. Spute wrote:
> I apologize for the cross post, but I think Jerry has hit on something
> here and I wanted the arocket folks to have a shot at this too.
>
> I think we need someone or someones to write a program that can be placed
> in the public domain to calculate 3 sigma dispersion patterns.  The FAA
> mandates it for launch permits, but does not (to my knowledge) tell you
> where you may have such an analysis done.  One assumes that some
> government contractor somewhere will do it for you for some nominal sum,
> followed by lots of zeros.  It amounts to government mandated support of
> the big aerospace industries, a fact undoubtedly not lost on the
> industry's well paid lobbiests.  We need to short circuit this attempt to
> monopolize the launch industry by a writing some very good, public domain
> software.
>
> Unfortunately, my programming skills are rudimentary at best.
>
> Anyone feel up to the job?

I've got an organization that might be up to the job if I can find some
details. I don't want to get into any details until I can get them some
idea of the scope of what they might be committing to...

-MM

> Jerry Irvine wrote:
> > In the short term one of the leading causes of long launch
> > applications is the need to calculate 3 sigma dispersion for the
> > rocket, impact hazard analysis and other such calculation and
> > statistical intense issues.
> >
> > One of the efforts should be to create a facility or program to
> > calculate these for club member launches so launch permits can
> > actually happen in less than 3 years.

--
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Michael Mealling        |      Vote Libertarian!       | urn:pin:1
michael@neonym.net      |                              | http://www.neonym.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 16051 invoked from network); 20 Dec 2001 05:14:58 -0000
Received: from smtph.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.88]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 20 Dec 2001 05:14:58 -0000
Received: (qmail 25714 invoked by uid 50005); 20 Dec 2001 05:00:58 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtph with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4176. . Clean. Processed in 0.579091 secs); 20 Dec 2001 05:00:58 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtph.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 20 Dec 2001 05:00:57 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA10235; Wed, 19 Dec 2001 21:11:33 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 105468 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 20 Dec 2001 05:11:30          +0000
Received: from smtprelay7.dc2.adelphia.net (smtprelay7.dc2.adelphia.net          [64.8.50.39]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA10221 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 19 Dec 2001 21:11:29 -0800
Received: from jlgrady ([24.53.101.238]) by smtprelay7.dc2.adelphia.net          (Netscape Messaging Server 4.15) with SMTP id GOMMEA00.AWM for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 20 Dec 2001 00:10:58 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook CWS, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <000001c18915$034c5fe0$0200a8c0@cmngga.adelphia.net>
Date:         Thu, 20 Dec 2001 00:13:08 -0500
Reply-To: "Jeff Grady" <jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jeff Grady" <jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Procedures needed
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <20011219232315.A12644@bailey.dscga.com>

Search on sigma dispersion returned this page:

http://ast.faa.gov/contest/attach_2.htm


On Thu, Dec 13, 2001 at 09:31:32AM -0700, Mark K. Spute wrote:
> I apologize for the cross post, but I think Jerry has hit on something
> here and I wanted the arocket folks to have a shot at this too.
>
> I think we need someone or someones to write a program that can be placed
> in the public domain to calculate 3 sigma dispersion patterns.  The FAA
> mandates it for launch permits, but does not (to my knowledge) tell you
> where you may have such an analysis done.  One assumes that some
> government contractor somewhere will do it for you for some nominal sum,
> followed by lots of zeros.  It amounts to government mandated support of
> the big aerospace industries, a fact undoubtedly not lost on the
> industry's well paid lobbiests.  We need to short circuit this attempt to
> monopolize the launch industry by a writing some very good, public domain
> software.
>
> Unfortunately, my programming skills are rudimentary at best.
>
> Anyone feel up to the job?

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 2985 invoked from network); 20 Dec 2001 05:21:11 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 20 Dec 2001 05:21:11 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 11707 invoked by uid 50005); 20 Dec 2001 05:21:19 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4176. . Clean. Processed in 7.163724 secs); 20 Dec 2001 05:21:19 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 20 Dec 2001 05:21:09 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA10289; Wed, 19 Dec 2001 21:19:19 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 105483 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 20 Dec 2001 05:19:18          +0000
Received: from smtp005pub.verizon.net (smtp005pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.184])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA10275 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 19 Dec 2001 21:19:17 -0800
Received: from [63.24.225.217] (1Cust217.tnt1.rancho-cucamonga.ca.da.uu.net          [63.24.225.217]) by smtp005pub.verizon.net  with ESMTP for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; id fBK5IjS14048 Wed, 19 Dec 2001 23:18:46          -0600 (CST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: GTE/01rocket@mail.gte.net
References: <000001c1890e$b0f9e880$0200a8c0@cmngga.adelphia.net>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <a05100301b84724f986f8@[63.24.225.217]>
Date:         Wed, 19 Dec 2001 21:18:44 -0800
Reply-To: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Epoxy motor fuels and burn rate
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <000001c1890e$b0f9e880$0200a8c0@cmngga.adelphia.net>

>I have been tinkering with "plain-ole-2-part" epoxy as a fuel/binder. I have
>a composition that consistently hits 1.6mm/sec burn rate. It's AP/AL/EPOXY
>ratios are 70/15/15. I know this is on the low side, but how does this burn
>rate compare to composite fuels (containing AP/AL) you guys make?


A fairly typical range is 0.15-0.60 ips.

Jerry


>Jeff
>
>P.S. My wife bought Sutton's Rocket Propulsion Elements for me as a
>Christmas present and gave it to me today...GREAT BOOK!


--
Jerry Irvine, Box 1242, Claremont, California USA
Opinion, the whole thing. <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
Bring common sense back to rocketry administration.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 10305 invoked from network); 20 Dec 2001 06:44:22 -0000
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 20 Dec 2001 06:44:22 -0000
Received: (qmail 25495 invoked by uid 50005); 20 Dec 2001 06:44:31 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4176. . Clean. Processed in 3.010425 secs); 20 Dec 2001 06:44:31 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 20 Dec 2001 06:44:26 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA10509; Wed, 19 Dec 2001 22:37:51 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 105499 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 20 Dec 2001 06:37:41          +0000
Received: from castor.ridgenet.net (IDENT:root@castor.ridgenet.net          [199.120.150.29]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA10495          for <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Wed, 19 Dec 2001 22:37:41 -0800
Received: from kristinscomp (pm011.ridgenet.net [204.154.246.11]) by          castor.ridgenet.net (8.11.0/8.11.0) with SMTP id fBK6dpb12041; Wed,          19 Dec 2001 22:39:51 -0800
References: <Pine.BSI.3.91.1011219090432.12173C-100000@spsystems.net>                      <3C20E637.3C5DF3DF@biomicro.com>             <a05100313b846a0666ce0@[63.15.204.212]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <006901c18920$f3756380$1b30fea9@kristinscomp>
Date:         Wed, 19 Dec 2001 22:37:48 -0800
Reply-To: "Kristin & David Hall" <thehalls@RIDGENET.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Kristin & David Hall" <thehalls@RIDGENET.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Sure would be nice if....
Comments: To: Jerry Irvine <01rocket@GTE.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

> A viable alternative to that would be to ask Hall to post a portion
> of the code or even block diagrams and equations to his program for
> those elements that are NOT the rocket performance code itself, but
> the 3 sigma and dispersion stuff, so other people can plug in their
> own modules.  I think one solution is for this group to publish 3-6
> kludges that are run comparatively on similar input data and give
> different output data.  Eventually a consensus will develop which
> code sucks and which rules and some hierarchy.

Dunno if that would work.  I've integrated the dispersion stuff into the
very fabric of the 6DOF.  It's not as simple as a "plug in" module.  Keep in
mind the dispersion module needs to be able to "poke and prod" the brains of
the 6DOF to throw in things like ignition failures and the like - something
the typical 6DOF architecture isn't set up for.  I'm not saying that the
typical 6DOF couldn't be modified, just saying that it most likely isn't as
easy as "plug and chug".

Since we're on the topic of distribution, yeah, I'll be selling it, but I've
no doubt that Uncle Sam will classify it as "export controlled".

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 23956 invoked from network); 20 Dec 2001 07:55:43 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.105]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 20 Dec 2001 07:55:43 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: (qmail 1380 invoked by uid 50005); 20 Dec 2001 07:55:52 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpy with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4176. . Clean. Processed in 1.184491 secs); 20 Dec 2001 07:55:52 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 20 Dec 2001 07:55:51 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA10895; Wed, 19 Dec 2001 23:54:18 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 105532 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 20 Dec 2001 07:54:09          +0000
Received: from cisco.com (cypher.cisco.com [171.69.11.18]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA10881 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed,          19 Dec 2001 23:54:08 -0800
Received: (from billw@localhost) by cisco.com (8.8.8/2.6/Cisco List          Logging/8.8.8) id XAA02287 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 19 Dec 2001          23:53:38 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID:  <CMM.0.90.4.1008834818.billw@cypher>
Date:         Wed, 19 Dec 2001 23:53:38 PST
Reply-To: "Bill Westfield" <billw@cisco.com>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "William Chops Westfield" <billw@cisco.com>
Subject:      [AR] odd grain geometries...
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

thinking about what is easy to DO, rather than what is easy to calculate...

What kind of burn profile would you get, do you think, if you start drilling
holes perpendicular to the central axis of a typical core-burning segment?
Does that grain-geometry program handle non-radially-symetric configurations
like this?

Thanks
Bill W


From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 8870 invoked from network); 20 Dec 2001 09:21:48 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 20 Dec 2001 09:21:48 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: (qmail 3087 invoked by uid 50005); 20 Dec 2001 09:21:57 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4176. . Clean. Processed in 2.89259 secs); 20 Dec 2001 09:21:57 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 20 Dec 2001 09:21:53 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id BAA11176; Thu, 20 Dec 2001 01:18:54 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 105559 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 20 Dec 2001 09:18:44          +0000
Received: from localhost (rcalkins@localhost) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with          ESMTP id BAA11162 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Thu, 20 Dec 2001          01:18:44 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.LNX.4.10.10112200040160.11038-100000@itc.uci.edu>
Date:         Thu, 20 Dec 2001 01:18:44 -0800
Reply-To: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
Subject:      [AR] Entonox and N2O/O2 blends
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

It's true I've burned tons of liquid oxygen in rocket motors, but the last
several months have seen me change my philosophy towards nitrous oxide as
a generally recommended amateur oxidizer.

This change has mainly been because of the scale of the typical large
amateur project is too small to provide real performance benefit with LOx
when the additional pressurization tankage and regulation is taken into
account.  The cost factor doesn't seem to be a significant fraction at
typical amateur N-s requirements.  A gas generator system would probably
tip the balance back to favor LOx, should somebody make it work on an
amateur level.

The area I have been looking at is the pressure tailoff of the nitrous
oxide "self-pressurization", due to bulk cooling resulting from
evaporation as the propellant tank empties.  Since I'm especially
interested in long burn hybrids, this is a significant performance hit.
One thing I've seen in web research is a common analgesic, Entonox.  This
is nitrous oxide gas in solution with oxygen gas, at a 50:50 ratio and
seems to be popular outside the US.  As a gas, it is unsuitable for
practical rocketry, but it got me thinking...

How about dissolved oxygen gas in liquid nitrous oxide?  Since the
solubility of a liquid drops with temperature, this would reduce the
tail-off effect of nitrous hybrids as the GOx came out of solution.
Assuming you could get the concentrations up, it would also aid ignition.
If you designed your injector to account for the effervescent fluid, it
would likely improve performance, at least in hybrids.

What is needed at this point are N2O/O2 solubility/temperature curves at a
few pressures, say 400, 600 and 800 psi.  Is there anybody sufficiently
schooled in PChem to tackle this work?  If not, I'd sure appreciate some
guidelines on how to tackle this problem.

Lacking that, would another dissolved pressurant be superior on a
cost/performance basis?



Ad Astra per aspera,

Ray

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 29700 invoked from network); 20 Dec 2001 09:40:55 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 20 Dec 2001 09:40:55 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: (qmail 18572 invoked by uid 50005); 20 Dec 2001 09:41:04 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4176. . Clean. Processed in 0.414889 secs); 20 Dec 2001 09:41:04 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 20 Dec 2001 09:41:04 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id BAA11279; Thu, 20 Dec 2001 01:39:49 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 105577 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 20 Dec 2001 09:39:46          +0000
Received: from localhost (rcalkins@localhost) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with          ESMTP id BAA11265 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Thu, 20 Dec 2001          01:39:46 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.LNX.4.10.10112041255390.21687-100000@itc.uci.edu>
Date:         Thu, 20 Dec 2001 01:39:45 -0800
Reply-To: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
Subject:      [AR] Al Alloy ID?
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Here's another one...

I know there are common "Spark Tests"
(http://shopswarf.orcon.net.nz/spark.html) for determining steel alloys.
These tests allow alloy ID with no sophisticated hardware, just a common
bench grinder.

I've now got access to a fairly large supply of cheap aluminum irrigation
tubing, in 3" and 2" OD.  Is there any quick and dirty method of figuring
the alloy without resorting to metalography?  I know irrigation tubing
used to be 6061.  A quick web search shows the newer alloys are likely to
be 3003.  Any easy way to tell the difference?

TIA,

Ray

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 11253 invoked from network); 20 Dec 2001 09:55:15 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 20 Dec 2001 09:55:15 -0000
Received: (qmail 25660 invoked by uid 50005); 20 Dec 2001 09:55:25 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4176. . Clean. Processed in 0.724585 secs); 20 Dec 2001 09:55:25 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 20 Dec 2001 09:55:24 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id BAA11365; Thu, 20 Dec 2001 01:54:16 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 105592 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 20 Dec 2001 09:54:12          +0000
Received: from localhost (rcalkins@localhost) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with          ESMTP id BAA11351; Thu, 20 Dec 2001 01:54:11 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.LNX.4.10.10112200142534.11140-100000@itc.uci.edu>
Date:         Thu, 20 Dec 2001 01:54:11 -0800
Reply-To: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Space Elevator was: Re: [AR] carbon fiber reality check
Comments: To: William Chops Westfield <billw@cisco.com>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <CMM.0.90.4.1008733728.billw@cypher>

Maybe I didn't look at this option at the required resolution, but I
remember reading an article in Analog Magazine about 8 years ago that
showed it couldn't be done with present materials, pure diamond included.
Perhaps this didn't include a lot of other factors, like miles-high base
stations carying some of the load, active materials providing lift to the
beanstalk, etc...

Please correct me if I'm wrong.

Ray

On Tue, 18 Dec 2001, William Chops Westfield wrote:

> >> Then there's 'just' the engineering to do.
>
> Optimist.  I bet the poltical and regulatory issues surrounding a PERMANENT
> structure that reaches into space would make amateur rocketry look like
> "stomp rockets" in comparison...
>
> BillW
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 6484 invoked from network); 20 Dec 2001 10:14:17 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 20 Dec 2001 10:14:17 -0000
Received: (qmail 13411 invoked by uid 50005); 20 Dec 2001 10:14:26 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4176. . Clean. Processed in 0.550612 secs); 20 Dec 2001 10:14:26 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 20 Dec 2001 10:14:25 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id CAA11458; Thu, 20 Dec 2001 02:13:07 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 105611 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 20 Dec 2001 10:13:05          +0000
Received: from localhost (rcalkins@localhost) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with          ESMTP id CAA11444; Thu, 20 Dec 2001 02:13:04 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.LNX.4.10.10112200204380.11346-100000@itc.uci.edu>
Date:         Thu, 20 Dec 2001 02:13:03 -0800
Reply-To: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Procedures needed
Comments: To: Michael Mealling <michael@neonym.net>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <20011219232315.A12644@bailey.dscga.com>

> I've got an organization that might be up to the job if I can find some
> details. I don't want to get into any details until I can get them some
> idea of the scope of what they might be committing to...

Aye, there's the rub.  Nobody seems to actually know what the scope is.
Does it require a full-on FEA of the vehicle and atmosphere for
dispersion?  That seems to be worst case to me, but maybe I'm missing
something.  Even if it does require a complete FEA of vehicle and
environment, that doesn't seem terribly difficult, given computing power
of today's machines.

I've been reading "A First Course in the Finite Element Method", and it
seems to be nothing more advanced than matrix algebra is required.  As
always, I invite corrections, etc.


Ray

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 19793 invoked from network); 20 Dec 2001 10:30:21 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.105]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 20 Dec 2001 10:30:21 -0000
Received: (qmail 9761 invoked by uid 50005); 20 Dec 2001 10:30:31 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpy with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4176. . Clean. Processed in 0.55107 secs); 20 Dec 2001 10:30:31 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 20 Dec 2001 10:30:30 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id CAA11540; Thu, 20 Dec 2001 02:29:08 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 105630 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 20 Dec 2001 10:29:02          +0000
Received: from localhost (rcalkins@localhost) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with          ESMTP id CAA11526; Thu, 20 Dec 2001 02:29:00 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.LNX.4.10.10112200218050.11346-100000@itc.uci.edu>
Date:         Thu, 20 Dec 2001 02:29:00 -0800
Reply-To: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Procedures needed
Comments: To: Jerry Irvine <01rocket@GTE.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <a05100332b84090f9e965@[63.24.225.213]>

> You know what happens when a rocket actually hits something?  Ask the
> folks at Woomera.  They had one land in a grocery store parking lot.
>
> Rockets are essentially harmless in practice, even big ones.

I beg to differ, Jerry.  There's an infamous photo in the WSPG/WSMR photo
archives, showing a 20 meter crater from a V-2 flight test.  No warhead
was present.  Something in the scale of a V-2 isn't very far from the
current state of the art for amateur rocketry.  I can't find the photo
online, but if you want to calculate it for yourself, here's a link to a
reasonable mathematical approach -
http://www.worldforchrist.org/races/rockets/why/impact.htm I'll keep
looking for the photo, and personally scan it when I find it.

Fact is, a tonne of supersonic mass has a fair amount of kinetic energy.
Enough to level the average multi-story building.  I suspect your Woomera
anecdote was either a small rocket or not under power any place near the
point of impact.  I'd apprecate any hard data you have on the matter to
provide a real world model.

Ray

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 28313 invoked from network); 20 Dec 2001 14:14:21 -0000
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 20 Dec 2001 14:14:21 -0000
Received: (qmail 16162 invoked by uid 50005); 20 Dec 2001 14:14:30 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4176. . Clean. Processed in 2.731473 secs); 20 Dec 2001 14:14:30 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 20 Dec 2001 14:14:26 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA12291; Thu, 20 Dec 2001 06:11:44 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 105732 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 20 Dec 2001 14:11:28          +0000
Received: from c002.snv.cp.net (c002-h021.c002.snv.cp.net [209.228.32.185]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id GAA12275 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 20 Dec 2001 06:11:27 -0800
Received: (cpmta 15885 invoked from network); 20 Dec 2001 06:10:56 -0800
Received: from 67.201.74.56 (HELO default) by smtp.peoplepc.com          (209.228.32.185) with SMTP; 20 Dec 2001 06:10:56 -0800
X-Sent: 20 Dec 2001 14:10:56 GMT
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0E8A_01C56B69.5D61DD40"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <003201c18962$92e89180$384ac943@default>
Date:         Thu, 20 Dec 2001 09:28:14 -0500
Reply-To: "David Muesing" <dmuesing@PEOPLEPC.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "David Muesing" <dmuesing@PEOPLEPC.COM>
Subject:      [AR] Testing for 6061-T6 in the Scrapyard
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0E8A_01C56B69.5D61DD40
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Is there a good way of testing for 6061-T6 in the scrapyard?

Most AL out there is not marked.

Thanks!

Dave

------=_NextPart_000_0E8A_01C56B69.5D61DD40
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Diso-8859-1">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 6.00.2600.0" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=3DOCRA color=3D#0000ff>Is there a good way of testing =
for 6061-T6 in=20
the scrapyard?</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DOCRA color=3D#0000ff></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DOCRA color=3D#0000ff>Most AL out there is not =
marked.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DOCRA color=3D#0000ff></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DOCRA color=3D#0000ff>Thanks!</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DOCRA color=3D#0000ff></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DOCRA color=3D#0000ff>Dave</FONT></DIV></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0E8A_01C56B69.5D61DD40--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 14965 invoked from network); 20 Dec 2001 14:48:09 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.105]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 20 Dec 2001 14:48:09 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 16545 invoked by uid 50005); 20 Dec 2001 14:48:18 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpy with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4176. . Clean. Processed in 1.281766 secs); 20 Dec 2001 14:48:18 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 20 Dec 2001 14:48:16 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA12555; Thu, 20 Dec 2001 06:42:47 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 105819 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 20 Dec 2001 14:42:40          +0000
Received: from bailey.dscga.com (bailey.neonym.net [198.78.11.130]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA12540; Thu, 20 Dec 2001          06:42:39 -0800
Received: from bailey.dscga.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by bailey.dscga.com          (8.12.1/8.12.1) with ESMTP id fBKEcaij013663; Thu, 20 Dec 2001          09:38:36 -0500 (EST)
Received: (from michael@localhost) by bailey.dscga.com (8.12.1/8.12.1/Submit)          id fBKEcanA013662; Thu, 20 Dec 2001 09:38:36 -0500 (EST)
References: <20011219232315.A12644@bailey.dscga.com>            <Pine.LNX.4.10.10112200204380.11346-100000@itc.uci.edu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Disposition: inline
User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.22.1i
Message-ID:  <20011220093835.C12644@bailey.dscga.com>
Date:         Thu, 20 Dec 2001 09:38:35 -0500
Reply-To: "Michael Mealling" <michael@NEONYM.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Michael Mealling" <michael@NEONYM.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Procedures needed
Comments: To: Ray Calkins <rcalkins@ITC.UCI.EDU>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <Pine.LNX.4.10.10112200204380.11346-100000@itc.uci.edu>

On Thu, Dec 20, 2001 at 02:13:03AM -0800, Ray Calkins wrote:
> > I've got an organization that might be up to the job if I can find some
> > details. I don't want to get into any details until I can get them some
> > idea of the scope of what they might be committing to...
>
> Aye, there's the rub.  Nobody seems to actually know what the scope is.
> Does it require a full-on FEA of the vehicle and atmosphere for
> dispersion?  That seems to be worst case to me, but maybe I'm missing
> something.  Even if it does require a complete FEA of vehicle and
> environment, that doesn't seem terribly difficult, given computing power
> of today's machines.

Maybe a call to the FAA might be warranted?

-MM

--
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Michael Mealling        |      Vote Libertarian!       | urn:pin:1
michael@neonym.net      |                              | http://www.neonym.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 20211 invoked from network); 20 Dec 2001 15:04:56 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 20 Dec 2001 15:04:56 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 29413 invoked by uid 50005); 20 Dec 2001 15:05:05 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4176. . Clean. Processed in 0.665614 secs); 20 Dec 2001 15:05:05 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 20 Dec 2001 15:05:05 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA12599; Thu, 20 Dec 2001 06:48:56 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 105830 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 20 Dec 2001 14:48:55          +0000
Received: from bailey.dscga.com (bailey.neonym.net [198.78.11.130]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA12584; Thu, 20 Dec 2001          06:48:54 -0800
Received: from bailey.dscga.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by bailey.dscga.com          (8.12.1/8.12.1) with ESMTP id fBKEipij013679; Thu, 20 Dec 2001          09:44:51 -0500 (EST)
Received: (from michael@localhost) by bailey.dscga.com (8.12.1/8.12.1/Submit)          id fBKEip7A013678; Thu, 20 Dec 2001 09:44:51 -0500 (EST)
References: <20011219232315.A12644@bailey.dscga.com>            <Pine.LNX.4.10.10112200204380.11346-100000@itc.uci.edu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Disposition: inline
User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.22.1i
Message-ID:  <20011220094450.D12644@bailey.dscga.com>
Date:         Thu, 20 Dec 2001 09:44:50 -0500
Reply-To: "Michael Mealling" <michael@NEONYM.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Michael Mealling" <michael@NEONYM.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Procedures needed
Comments: To: Ray Calkins <rcalkins@ITC.UCI.EDU>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <Pine.LNX.4.10.10112200204380.11346-100000@itc.uci.edu>

On Thu, Dec 20, 2001 at 02:13:03AM -0800, Ray Calkins wrote:
> > I've got an organization that might be up to the job if I can find some
> > details. I don't want to get into any details until I can get them some
> > idea of the scope of what they might be committing to...
>
> Aye, there's the rub.  Nobody seems to actually know what the scope is.
> Does it require a full-on FEA of the vehicle and atmosphere for
> dispersion?  That seems to be worst case to me, but maybe I'm missing
> something.  Even if it does require a complete FEA of vehicle and
> environment, that doesn't seem terribly difficult, given computing power
> of today's machines.

Ok, I found this:

http://ast.faa.gov/contest/sag_uslv.htm

And Attachment #1 seems the most relevant. The question I have is:
Is this the right set of regulations to be using?

-MM

--
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Michael Mealling        |      Vote Libertarian!       | urn:pin:1
michael@neonym.net      |                              | http://www.neonym.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 26344 invoked from network); 20 Dec 2001 16:59:27 -0000
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 20 Dec 2001 16:59:27 -0000
Received: (qmail 32186 invoked by uid 50005); 20 Dec 2001 16:59:36 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4176. . Clean. Processed in 1.128773 secs); 20 Dec 2001 16:59:36 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 20 Dec 2001 16:59:35 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA12965; Thu, 20 Dec 2001 08:42:36 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 105861 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 20 Dec 2001 16:42:25          +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (oe34.law12.hotmail.com [64.4.18.91]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA12949 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Thu,          20 Dec 2001 08:42:25 -0800
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Thu,          20 Dec 2001 08:30:28 -0800
X-Originating-IP: [24.92.128.69]
References:  <Pine.LNX.4.10.10112041255390.21687-100000@itc.uci.edu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 20 Dec 2001 16:30:28.0661 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[A2AD8650:01C18973]
Message-ID:  <OE34C3EIE73MRc3b2qY0000201d@hotmail.com>
Date:         Thu, 20 Dec 2001 10:29:47 -0600
Reply-To: "Mark Kruep" <mkruep@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Mark Kruep" <mkruep@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Al Alloy ID?
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Easy? Haha....No. No such luck. Aluminum is nearly impossible to identify
even with the proper tools. The easiest way is 1st, hope the crap has an
alloy label on it, 2nd, know which manufacturer made it and look for any
color codes on it then cross reference with the manufacturer. I'm doubting
either is possible here.

If you have access to a university close by, go talk to the chem. teacher.
Certain chemicals placed on testing paper and then applied to the metal will
give results. Basically, it's like a litmus test for metals. If say copper
is present, the paper may turn red depending on the % content. It is not
exact either since every alloy will have trace elements, but it should
narrow it down though. You should have manganese in it for 3003, or it
should have magnesium and silicon in it for 6061.

Alot of schools will also have either a Rockwell or Brinell Hardness tester
too(even vocational schools sometimes have these). A monkey could run one of
those with 2 minutes of instruction so it falls under the "easy" category if
you can gain access to one. If you get a reading over say 80 Brinell (~50
Rockwell B), it's 6061-T6. If it's untempered, there are almost no
differences in their physical properties anyway. So, if you get a Brinell
reading around 30, it's untempered and it doesn't matter. If it's closer to
50, most likely to be a tempered 3003. Between 80-100, it's 6061-T6 (most
likely).

Lastly, the 6061 should allow more elongation under loading and be alot
stronger. Go get a control piece of 3003 and 6061 and smash, break, pull,
crush whatever each of them while carefully observing how much force is
required (put it in a vise). Then do the same to a piece of material in
question and compare. Make sure the tests are similar though. Using flat
sheet for the control and tube for the unknown will not be a good
comparison. This isn't exactly scientific, but it should get you in the
right ballpark. A SWAG anyway.

Mark
----- Original Message -----
From: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Thursday, December 20, 2001 3:39 AM
Subject: [AR] Al Alloy ID?


> Here's another one...
>
> I know there are common "Spark Tests"
> (http://shopswarf.orcon.net.nz/spark.html) for determining steel alloys.
> These tests allow alloy ID with no sophisticated hardware, just a common
> bench grinder.
>
> I've now got access to a fairly large supply of cheap aluminum irrigation
> tubing, in 3" and 2" OD.  Is there any quick and dirty method of figuring
> the alloy without resorting to metalography?  I know irrigation tubing
> used to be 6061.  A quick web search shows the newer alloys are likely to
> be 3003.  Any easy way to tell the difference?
>
> TIA,
>
> Ray
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 13467 invoked from network); 20 Dec 2001 17:31:02 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.105]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 20 Dec 2001 17:31:02 -0000
Received: (qmail 8162 invoked by uid 50005); 20 Dec 2001 17:31:11 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpy with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4176. . Clean. Processed in 1.457626 secs); 20 Dec 2001 17:31:11 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 20 Dec 2001 17:31:09 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA13061; Thu, 20 Dec 2001 09:04:06 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 105875 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 20 Dec 2001 17:04:03          +0000
Received: from spsystems.net (spsystems.net [209.47.149.227]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA13047 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Thu,          20 Dec 2001 09:04:02 -0800
Received: (from henry@localhost) by spsystems.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id MAA04361;          Thu, 20 Dec 2001 12:03:23 -0500 (EST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1011220115840.4274A-100000@spsystems.net>
Date:         Thu, 20 Dec 2001 12:03:22 -0500
Reply-To: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Space Elevator was: Re: [AR] carbon fiber reality check
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <3C21468D.2010305@tesco.net>

On Thu, 20 Dec 2001, Ian Woollard wrote:
> The nice thing about this stuff is that it would put $40 billion
> worth of work into politicians voting districts. And once the first
> one is up- everyone wants one.

There is a small problem.  Much the most straightforward way to build a
space elevator requires that its base be on the equator.  There are no
US congressional districts there.

> The plan shows it being built offshort- and unlike rocketry, it is
> harder to use this technology for ICBMs; but I'm sure someone will
> think of a way eventually. It's much more of a civil engineering
> project. Do we have to involve the FAA? ;-)

Alas, it is *very* unlikely that you'll be able to build something like
this working entirely from the ground.  So they may (or may not) have
jurisdiction over the final elevator, but they most certainly have it over
a lot of the construction work.

> Stick a light on top;
> [96000km high] or whatever the regs say; it'd be ok. ;-)

Note another complication:  with only minor exceptions, all LEO satellite
(and space-junk) orbits will eventually intersect the elevator.

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 27937 invoked from network); 20 Dec 2001 17:48:39 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 20 Dec 2001 17:48:39 -0000
Received: (qmail 1314 invoked by uid 50005); 20 Dec 2001 17:48:49 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4176. . Clean. Processed in 1.009943 secs); 20 Dec 2001 17:48:49 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 20 Dec 2001 17:48:47 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA13211; Thu, 20 Dec 2001 09:25:29 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 105903 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 20 Dec 2001 17:25:28          +0000
Received: from spsystems.net (spsystems.net [209.47.149.227]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA13197 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Thu,          20 Dec 2001 09:25:27 -0800
Received: (from henry@localhost) by spsystems.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id MAA04667;          Thu, 20 Dec 2001 12:24:48 -0500 (EST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1011220122109.4274E-100000@spsystems.net>
Date:         Thu, 20 Dec 2001 12:24:47 -0500
Reply-To: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Space Elevator was: Re: [AR] carbon fiber reality check
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <Pine.LNX.4.10.10112200142534.11140-100000@itc.uci.edu>

On Thu, 20 Dec 2001, Ray Calkins wrote:
> Maybe I didn't look at this option at the required resolution, but I
> remember reading an article in Analog Magazine about 8 years ago that
> showed it couldn't be done with present materials, pure diamond included.
> Perhaps this didn't include a lot of other factors, like miles-high base
> stations carying some of the load, active materials providing lift to the
> beanstalk, etc...

Doing a *straight* beanstalk is infeasible with current or even plausible
future materials.  But a straight beanstalk is a bad design:  it puts a
lot of unnecessary mass into the lower parts, which don't have to be all
that strong.

Doing a *tapered* beanstalk is feasible, in principle, with quite ordinary
materials.  But the taper ratio is hideously impractical.  With plausible
near-future materials, the taper ratio comes down to something reasonable.
Then it becomes just an enormous engineering project.

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 7834 invoked from network); 20 Dec 2001 18:11:56 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 20 Dec 2001 18:11:56 -0000
Received: (qmail 30486 invoked by uid 50005); 20 Dec 2001 18:12:05 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4176. . Clean. Processed in 2.747145 secs); 20 Dec 2001 18:12:05 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 20 Dec 2001 18:12:01 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA13328; Thu, 20 Dec 2001 09:40:30 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 105929 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 20 Dec 2001 17:40:28          +0000
Received: from imo-r07.mx.aol.com (imo-r07.mx.aol.com [152.163.225.103]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA13313 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Thu, 20 Dec 2001 09:40:27 -0800
Received: from MONTMACH@aol.com by imo-r07.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v31_r1.9.) id          w.134.68bcbb9 (24899) for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Thu, 20 Dec 2001          12:40:21 -0500 (EST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0E8D_01C56B69.5D644E40"
X-Mailer: AOL 6.0 for Windows US sub 10556
Message-ID:  <134.68bcbb9.29537c81@aol.com>
Date:         Thu, 20 Dec 2001 12:40:17 EST
Reply-To: <MONTMACH@AOL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <MONTMACH@AOL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Entonox and N2O/O2 blends
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0E8D_01C56B69.5D644E40
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

 Ray wrote


> It's true I've burned tons of liquid oxygen in rocket motors, but the last
> several months have seen me change my philosophy towards nitrous oxide as
> a generally recommended amateur oxidizer.
>
   Welcome to the "Dark Side" Ray . : )

  Dave



------=_NextPart_000_0E8D_01C56B69.5D644E40
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<HTML><FONT FACE=arial,helvetica><FONT  SIZE=2> Ray wrote
<BR>
<BR>
<BR><BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE style="BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px">It's true I've burned tons of liquid oxygen in rocket motors, but the last
<BR>several months have seen me change my philosophy towards nitrous oxide as
<BR>a generally recommended amateur oxidizer.
<BR></BLOCKQUOTE>
<BR> &nbsp;&nbsp;Welcome to the "Dark Side" Ray . : )
<BR>
<BR> &nbsp;Dave
<BR>
<BR></FONT></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0E8D_01C56B69.5D644E40--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 18740 invoked from network); 20 Dec 2001 18:14:37 -0000
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 20 Dec 2001 18:14:37 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 1080 invoked by uid 50005); 20 Dec 2001 18:14:47 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4176. . Clean. Processed in 1.403862 secs); 20 Dec 2001 18:14:47 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 20 Dec 2001 18:14:45 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA13161; Thu, 20 Dec 2001 09:23:13 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 105888 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 20 Dec 2001 17:23:06          +0000
Received: from mail.aros.net (mail.aros.net [207.173.16.20]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA13147 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Thu,          20 Dec 2001 09:23:06 -0800
Received: from biomicro.com (cust-208-187-122-40.bbsc.net [208.187.122.40]) by          mail.aros.net (8.11.6/8.9.3) with ESMTP id fBKHN5267256 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Thu, 20 Dec 2001 10:23:05 -0700 (MST)
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.77 [en] (Win98; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <CMM.0.90.4.1008834818.billw@cypher>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3C22154F.1EB55411@biomicro.com>
Date:         Thu, 20 Dec 2001 09:43:59 -0700
Reply-To: "Mark K. Spute" <mks@BIOMICRO.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Mark K. Spute" <mks@BIOMICRO.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] odd grain geometries...
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Okay, here's something I came up with.  Now I don't normally do hybrids, but
this design has some possibilities that I might be encouraged to experiment
with.

Has anyone, for any reason, ever worked with a hybrid grain which had an annular
slot rather than a central core?  Picture two concentric circular grains, the
inner one solid, with a gap between them.


--
Mark K. Spute
Senior Research Engineer
BioMicro Systems Inc.
1.801.256.1906  (phone)
1.801.256.1901  (fax)

KD7IWE,  RRS, hopeful future Stolly owner

"It is difficult to say what is impossible, for the dream of yesterday is the
hope of today and the reality of tomorrow."
     Dr. Robert H. Goddard

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 26340 invoked from network); 20 Dec 2001 18:44:46 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 20 Dec 2001 18:44:46 -0000
Received: (qmail 11099 invoked by uid 50005); 20 Dec 2001 18:44:56 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4175. . Clean. Processed in 0.335884 secs); 20 Dec 2001 18:44:56 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 20 Dec 2001 18:44:55 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA13237; Thu, 20 Dec 2001 09:28:03 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 105910 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 20 Dec 2001 17:28:02          +0000
Received: from imo-r02.mx.aol.com (imo-r02.mx.aol.com [152.163.225.98]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA13222 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Thu, 20 Dec 2001 09:28:02 -0800
Received: from MONTMACH@aol.com by imo-r02.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v31_r1.9.) id          w.177.11684c8 (24899) for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Thu, 20 Dec 2001          12:27:56 -0500 (EST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0E92_01C56B69.5D644E40"
X-Mailer: AOL 6.0 for Windows US sub 10556
Message-ID:  <177.11684c8.29537999@aol.com>
Date:         Thu, 20 Dec 2001 12:27:53 EST
Reply-To: <MONTMACH@AOL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <MONTMACH@AOL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Testing for 6061-T6 in the Scrapyard
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0E92_01C56B69.5D644E40
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Dave wrote:

> Is there a good way of testing for 6061-T6 in the scrapyard?
>
> Most AL out there is not marked.
>
>

The way I do it is to take a known piece - let's say 6061-T6 - and whack it
onto the corner of the unknown piece.  If you then wind up with the same size
nick on both pieces you probably have material with the same hardness.  I
learned this method the hard way, years ago I bought a piece of aluminum that
turned out to be 6061-T0.  It was soft and gummy as crap to machine.  When I
whacked this material with a piece of T6 it left a humongous nick on the
softer aluminum (there was no nick on the T6).
Dave

------=_NextPart_000_0E92_01C56B69.5D644E40
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<HTML><FONT FACE=arial,helvetica><FONT  SIZE=2>Dave wrote:
<BR>
<BR></FONT><FONT  COLOR="#0000ff" SIZE=2 FAMILY="SANSSERIF" FACE="Arial" LANG="0"><BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE style="BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px">Is there a good way of testing for 6061-T6 in the scrapyard?</FONT><FONT  COLOR="#000000" SIZE=2 FAMILY="SANSSERIF" FACE="Arial" LANG="0">
<BR>
<BR></FONT><FONT  COLOR="#0000ff" SIZE=2 FAMILY="SANSSERIF" FACE="Arial" LANG="0">Most AL out there is not marked.</FONT><FONT  COLOR="#000000" SIZE=2 FAMILY="SANSSERIF" FACE="Arial" LANG="0">
<BR>
<BR></BLOCKQUOTE>
<BR>
<BR>The way I do it is to take a known piece - let's say 6061-T6 - and whack it onto the corner of the unknown piece. &nbsp;If you then wind up with the same size nick on both pieces you probably have material with the same hardness. &nbsp;I learned this method the hard way, years ago I bought a piece of aluminum that turned out to be 6061-T0. &nbsp;It was soft and gummy as crap to machine. &nbsp;When I whacked this material with a piece of T6 it left a humongous nick on the softer aluminum (there was no nick on the T6).
<BR>Dave</FONT></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0E92_01C56B69.5D644E40--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 22301 invoked from network); 20 Dec 2001 19:48:12 -0000
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 20 Dec 2001 19:48:12 -0000
Received: (qmail 9240 invoked by uid 50005); 20 Dec 2001 19:48:22 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4176. . Clean. Processed in 4.581255 secs); 20 Dec 2001 19:48:22 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 20 Dec 2001 19:48:16 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA13818; Thu, 20 Dec 2001 11:30:33 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 105987 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 20 Dec 2001 19:30:31          +0000
Received: from albatrossII.wgn.net ([208.179.155.112]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA13804 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu,          20 Dec 2001 11:30:31 -0800
Received: from cronos ([208.186.191.53]) by albatrossII.wgn.net (8.11.2/8.11.0)          with SMTP id fBKKb0I13704 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 20 Dec 2001          12:37:00 -0800
References:  <177.11684c8.29537999@aol.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0E97_01C56B69.5D6DC420"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <000d01c1898c$c1eac5a0$0f5ca8c0@cronos>
Date:         Thu, 20 Dec 2001 11:28:20 -0800
Reply-To: "Wedge Oldham" <wedge@WESTWORLD.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Wedge Oldham" <wedge@WESTWORLD.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Testing for 6061-T6 in the Scrapyard
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0E97_01C56B69.5D6DC420
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

This may fit into this thread somewhat.
I flew an Aerotech M1550 RELINE motor a while back that resulted in a =
CATO. The nozzle blew out, along with three of the five grains. The =
other two grains stayed in the case, and due to zero chamber pressure =
burned for quite a long time. Spectacular to watch, but kinda rough on =
the rocket.

My question is what have I done to the temper of the case & the aft =
closure. How can I verify the integrity of the hardware. My problem is I =
borrowed the hardware from a friend, and don't wanna return it in a =
questionable state. I also don't wanna pay for addition hardware if it's =
not needed.
Wedge Oldham
http://NikeProject.com

  ----- Original Message -----=20
  From: MONTMACH@AOL.COM=20
  To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU=20
  Sent: 20 December, 2001 9:27 AM
  Subject: Re: [AR] Testing for 6061-T6 in the Scrapyard


  Dave wrote:=20


    Is there a good way of testing for 6061-T6 in the scrapyard?=20

    Most AL out there is not marked.=20




  The way I do it is to take a known piece - let's say 6061-T6 - and =
whack it onto the corner of the unknown piece.  If you then wind up with =
the same size nick on both pieces you probably have material with the =
same hardness.  I learned this method the hard way, years ago I bought a =
piece of aluminum that turned out to be 6061-T0.  It was soft and gummy =
as crap to machine.  When I whacked this material with a piece of T6 it =
left a humongous nick on the softer aluminum (there was no nick on the =
T6).=20
  Dave=20

------=_NextPart_000_0E97_01C56B69.5D6DC420
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Diso-8859-1">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 5.50.4134.100" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>This may fit into this thread=20
somewhat.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>I flew an Aerotech M1550 RELINE motor a =
while back=20
that resulted in a CATO. The nozzle blew out, along with three of the =
five=20
grains. The other two grains stayed in the case, and due to zero chamber =

pressure burned for quite a long time. Spectacular to watch, but kinda =
rough on=20
the rocket.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>My question is what have I done to the =
temper of=20
the case &amp; the aft closure. How can I verify the integrity of the =
hardware.=20
My problem is I borrowed the hardware from a friend, and don't wanna =
return it=20
in a questionable state. I also don't wanna pay for addition hardware if =
it's=20
not needed.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Wedge Oldham</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2><A=20
href=3D"http://NikeProject.com">http://NikeProject.com</A></FONT></DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE=20
style=3D"PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; =
BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
  <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial">----- Original Message ----- </DIV>
  <DIV=20
  style=3D"BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; FONT: 10pt arial; font-color: =
black"><B>From:</B>=20
  <A title=3DMONTMACH@AOL.COM =
href=3D"mailto:MONTMACH@AOL.COM">MONTMACH@AOL.COM</A>=20
  </DIV>
  <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A =
title=3DAROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU=20
  href=3D"mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU">AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU</A> </DIV>
  <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> 20 December, 2001 9:27 =
AM</DIV>
  <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> Re: [AR] Testing for =
6061-T6 in=20
  the Scrapyard</DIV>
  <DIV><BR></DIV><FONT face=3Darial,helvetica><FONT size=3D2>Dave wrote: =

  <BR><BR></FONT><FONT lang=3D0 face=3DArial color=3D#0000ff size=3D2=20
FAMILY=3D"SANSSERIF">
  <BLOCKQUOTE=20
  style=3D"PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px =
solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px"=20
  TYPE=3D"CITE">Is there a good way of testing for 6061-T6 in the=20
    scrapyard?</FONT><FONT lang=3D0 face=3DArial color=3D#000000 =
size=3D2=20
    FAMILY=3D"SANSSERIF"> <BR><BR></FONT><FONT lang=3D0 face=3DArial =
color=3D#0000ff=20
    size=3D2 FAMILY=3D"SANSSERIF">Most AL out there is not =
marked.</FONT><FONT=20
    lang=3D0 face=3DArial color=3D#000000 size=3D2 FAMILY=3D"SANSSERIF"> =

  <BR><BR></BLOCKQUOTE><BR><BR>The way I do it is to take a known piece =
- let's=20
  say 6061-T6 - and whack it onto the corner of the unknown piece. =
&nbsp;If you=20
  then wind up with the same size nick on both pieces you probably have =
material=20
  with the same hardness. &nbsp;I learned this method the hard way, =
years ago I=20
  bought a piece of aluminum that turned out to be 6061-T0. &nbsp;It was =
soft=20
  and gummy as crap to machine. &nbsp;When I whacked this material with =
a piece=20
  of T6 it left a humongous nick on the softer aluminum (there was no =
nick on=20
  the T6). <BR>Dave</FONT> </FONT></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0E97_01C56B69.5D6DC420--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 9325 invoked from network); 20 Dec 2001 20:21:02 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 20 Dec 2001 20:21:02 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 17586 invoked by uid 50005); 20 Dec 2001 20:21:10 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpf with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4176. . Clean. Processed in 0.523683 secs); 20 Dec 2001 20:21:10 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 20 Dec 2001 20:21:09 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA13774; Thu, 20 Dec 2001 11:27:47 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 105976 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 20 Dec 2001 19:27:44          +0000
Received: from out001pub.verizon.net (out001pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.101])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA13760 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 20 Dec 2001 11:27:43 -0800
Received: from [63.24.225.217] (1Cust251.tnt1.rancho-cucamonga.ca.da.uu.net          [63.24.225.251]) by out001pub.verizon.net  with ESMTP for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; id fBKJR3Gs028430 Thu, 20 Dec 2001 13:27:06          -0600 (CST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: GTE/01rocket@mail.gte.net
References: <CMM.0.90.4.1008834818.billw@cypher>            <3C22154F.1EB55411@biomicro.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <a0510030ab847e9155e38@[63.24.225.217]>
Date:         Thu, 20 Dec 2001 11:17:12 -0800
Reply-To: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] odd grain geometries...
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <3C22154F.1EB55411@biomicro.com>

>Okay, here's something I came up with.  Now I don't normally do hybrids, but
>this design has some possibilities that I might be encouraged to experiment
>with.
>
>Has anyone, for any reason, ever worked with a hybrid grain which
>had an annular
>slot rather than a central core?  Picture two concentric circular grains, the
>inner one solid, with a gap between them.


This is typically called "rod and tube". (RAT)

I have made solids that way.  No reason why it would not be possible
with a hybrid.  It would require an annular injector. The rod is
typically hooked very firmly to the bulkhead.

I have also made variants on this design with star shapes on both
faces.  This might be very suitable for a hybrid and I have the
machines and materials to do it.

It takes a bit of labor :)

Jerry

>
>
>--
>Mark K. Spute
>Senior Research Engineer
>BioMicro Systems Inc.
>1.801.256.1906  (phone)
>1.801.256.1901  (fax)
>
>KD7IWE,  RRS, hopeful future Stolly owner
>
>"It is difficult to say what is impossible, for the dream of yesterday is the
>hope of today and the reality of tomorrow."
>      Dr. Robert H. Goddard


--
Jerry Irvine, Box 1242, Claremont, California USA
Opinion, the whole thing. <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
Bring common sense back to rocketry administration.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 27856 invoked from network); 20 Dec 2001 20:25:26 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.105]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 20 Dec 2001 20:25:26 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 27345 invoked by uid 50005); 20 Dec 2001 20:25:34 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpy with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4176. . Clean. Processed in 6.250003 secs); 20 Dec 2001 20:25:34 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 20 Dec 2001 20:25:26 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA13671; Thu, 20 Dec 2001 11:08:48 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 105965 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 20 Dec 2001 19:08:38          +0000
Received: from smtp002pub.verizon.net (smtp002pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.181])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA13657 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 20 Dec 2001 11:08:37 -0800
Received: from [63.24.225.217] ([63.24.225.251]) by smtp002pub.verizon.net           with ESMTP for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; id fBKJ86P25963 Thu, 20 Dec          2001 13:08:06 -0600 (CST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: GTE/01rocket@mail.gte.net
References: <Pine.LNX.4.10.10112041255390.21687-100000@itc.uci.edu>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <a05100307b847e73fefde@[63.24.225.217]>
Date:         Thu, 20 Dec 2001 11:07:50 -0800
Reply-To: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Al Alloy ID?
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <Pine.LNX.4.10.10112041255390.21687-100000@itc.uci.edu>

>Here's another one...
>
>I know there are common "Spark Tests"
>(http://shopswarf.orcon.net.nz/spark.html) for determining steel alloys.
>These tests allow alloy ID with no sophisticated hardware, just a common
>bench grinder.
>
>I've now got access to a fairly large supply of cheap aluminum irrigation
>tubing, in 3" and 2" OD.  Is there any quick and dirty method of figuring
>the alloy without resorting to metalography?  I know irrigation tubing
>used to be 6061.  A quick web search shows the newer alloys are likely to
>be 3003.  Any easy way to tell the difference?


Pounding it to hear resonance can detect hardness.  I have seen guys
bang one part against another to test hardness.  I suspect they know
what they are looking for :)

Jerry


>
>TIA,
>
>Ray


--
Jerry Irvine, Box 1242, Claremont, California USA
Opinion, the whole thing. <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
Bring common sense back to rocketry administration.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 26570 invoked from network); 20 Dec 2001 21:13:52 -0000
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 20 Dec 2001 21:13:52 -0000
Received: (qmail 17894 invoked by uid 50005); 20 Dec 2001 21:14:00 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4176. . Clean. Processed in 5.554432 secs); 20 Dec 2001 21:14:00 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 20 Dec 2001 21:13:53 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA13979; Thu, 20 Dec 2001 12:08:19 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 106002 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 20 Dec 2001 20:08:15          +0000
Received: from rwcrmhc51.attbi.com (rwcrmhc51.attbi.com [204.127.198.38]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA13900 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 20 Dec 2001 11:58:13 -0800
Received: from officenew ([12.229.36.176]) by rwcrmhc51.attbi.com (InterMail          vM.4.01.03.27 201-229-121-127-20010626) with SMTP id          <20011220195742.GRVA19716.rwcrmhc51.attbi.com@officenew>; Thu, 20 Dec          2001 19:57:42 +0000
References:  <177.11684c8.29537999@aol.com>              <000d01c1898c$c1eac5a0$0f5ca8c0@cronos>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0E9A_01C56B69.5D703520"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2462.0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <000b01c18990$96177460$8300a8c0@attbi.com>
Date:         Thu, 20 Dec 2001 11:57:42 -0800
Reply-To: "Tomm Aldridge" <taldridge@ATTBI.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Tomm Aldridge" <taldridge@ATTBI.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Testing for 6061-T6 in the Scrapyard
Comments: To: Wedge Oldham <wedge@WESTWORLD.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0E9A_01C56B69.5D703520
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

When in doubt, toss it out!  I would advise against putting your =
friendship at risk for the cost of the casing.

Tomm
  ----- Original Message -----=20
  From: Wedge Oldham=20
  To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU=20
  Sent: Thursday, December 20, 2001 11:28 AM
  Subject: Re: [AR] Testing for 6061-T6 in the Scrapyard


  This may fit into this thread somewhat.
  I flew an Aerotech M1550 RELINE motor a while back that resulted in a =
CATO. The nozzle blew out, along with three of the five grains. The =
other two grains stayed in the case, and due to zero chamber pressure =
burned for quite a long time. Spectacular to watch, but kinda rough on =
the rocket.

  My question is what have I done to the temper of the case & the aft =
closure. How can I verify the integrity of the hardware. My problem is I =
borrowed the hardware from a friend, and don't wanna return it in a =
questionable state. I also don't wanna pay for addition hardware if it's =
not needed.
  Wedge Oldham
  http://NikeProject.com

    ----- Original Message -----=20
    From: MONTMACH@AOL.COM=20
    To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU=20
    Sent: 20 December, 2001 9:27 AM
    Subject: Re: [AR] Testing for 6061-T6 in the Scrapyard


    Dave wrote:=20


      Is there a good way of testing for 6061-T6 in the scrapyard?=20

      Most AL out there is not marked.=20




    The way I do it is to take a known piece - let's say 6061-T6 - and =
whack it onto the corner of the unknown piece.  If you then wind up with =
the same size nick on both pieces you probably have material with the =
same hardness.  I learned this method the hard way, years ago I bought a =
piece of aluminum that turned out to be 6061-T0.  It was soft and gummy =
as crap to machine.  When I whacked this material with a piece of T6 it =
left a humongous nick on the softer aluminum (there was no nick on the =
T6).=20
    Dave=20

------=_NextPart_000_0E9A_01C56B69.5D703520
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Diso-8859-1">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 6.00.2462.0" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>When in doubt, toss it out!&nbsp; I =
would advise=20
against putting your friendship at risk for the cost of the =
casing.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Tomm</FONT></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE dir=3Dltr=20
style=3D"PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; =
BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
  <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial">----- Original Message ----- </DIV>
  <DIV=20
  style=3D"BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; FONT: 10pt arial; font-color: =
black"><B>From:</B>=20
  <A title=3Dwedge@WESTWORLD.COM =
href=3D"mailto:wedge@WESTWORLD.COM">Wedge=20
  Oldham</A> </DIV>
  <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A =
title=3DAROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU=20
  href=3D"mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU">AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU</A> </DIV>
  <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> Thursday, December 20, =
2001 11:28=20
  AM</DIV>
  <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> Re: [AR] Testing for =
6061-T6 in=20
  the Scrapyard</DIV>
  <DIV><BR></DIV>
  <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>This may fit into this thread=20
  somewhat.</FONT></DIV>
  <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>I flew an Aerotech M1550 RELINE motor =
a while=20
  back that resulted in a CATO. The nozzle blew out, along with three of =
the=20
  five grains. The other two grains stayed in the case, and due to zero =
chamber=20
  pressure burned for quite a long time. Spectacular to watch, but kinda =
rough=20
  on the rocket.</FONT></DIV>
  <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
  <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>My question is what have I done to =
the temper of=20
  the case &amp; the aft closure. How can I verify the integrity of the=20
  hardware. My problem is I borrowed the hardware from a friend, and =
don't wanna=20
  return it in a questionable state. I also don't wanna pay for addition =

  hardware if it's not needed.</FONT></DIV>
  <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Wedge Oldham</FONT></DIV>
  <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2><A=20
  =
href=3D"http://NikeProject.com">http://NikeProject.com</A></FONT></DIV>
  <DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
  <BLOCKQUOTE=20
  style=3D"PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; =
BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
    <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial">----- Original Message ----- </DIV>
    <DIV=20
    style=3D"BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; FONT: 10pt arial; font-color: =
black"><B>From:</B>=20
    <A title=3DMONTMACH@AOL.COM=20
    href=3D"mailto:MONTMACH@AOL.COM">MONTMACH@AOL.COM</A> </DIV>
    <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A =
title=3DAROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU=20
    href=3D"mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU">AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU</A> </DIV>
    <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> 20 December, 2001 9:27 =
AM</DIV>
    <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> Re: [AR] Testing for =
6061-T6=20
    in the Scrapyard</DIV>
    <DIV><BR></DIV><FONT face=3Darial,helvetica><FONT size=3D2>Dave =
wrote:=20
    <BR><BR></FONT><FONT lang=3D0 face=3DArial color=3D#0000ff size=3D2=20
    FAMILY=3D"SANSSERIF">
    <BLOCKQUOTE=20
    style=3D"PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff =
2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px"=20
    TYPE=3D"CITE">Is there a good way of testing for 6061-T6 in the=20
      scrapyard?</FONT><FONT lang=3D0 face=3DArial color=3D#000000 =
size=3D2=20
      FAMILY=3D"SANSSERIF"> <BR><BR></FONT><FONT lang=3D0 face=3DArial =
color=3D#0000ff=20
      size=3D2 FAMILY=3D"SANSSERIF">Most AL out there is not =
marked.</FONT><FONT=20
      lang=3D0 face=3DArial color=3D#000000 size=3D2 =
FAMILY=3D"SANSSERIF">=20
    <BR><BR></BLOCKQUOTE><BR><BR>The way I do it is to take a known =
piece -=20
    let's say 6061-T6 - and whack it onto the corner of the unknown =
piece.=20
    &nbsp;If you then wind up with the same size nick on both pieces you =

    probably have material with the same hardness. &nbsp;I learned this =
method=20
    the hard way, years ago I bought a piece of aluminum that turned out =
to be=20
    6061-T0. &nbsp;It was soft and gummy as crap to machine. &nbsp;When =
I=20
    whacked this material with a piece of T6 it left a humongous nick on =
the=20
    softer aluminum (there was no nick on the T6). <BR>Dave</FONT>=20
  </FONT></BLOCKQUOTE></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0E9A_01C56B69.5D703520--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 18449 invoked from network); 20 Dec 2001 22:00:59 -0000
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 20 Dec 2001 22:00:59 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 11184 invoked by uid 50005); 20 Dec 2001 22:01:07 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4176. . Clean. Processed in 5.426532 secs); 20 Dec 2001 22:01:07 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 20 Dec 2001 22:01:00 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA14460; Thu, 20 Dec 2001 13:40:59 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 106097 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 20 Dec 2001 21:40:52          +0000
Received: from mplspop6.mpls.uswest.net (mplspop6.mpls.uswest.net          [204.147.80.9]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id NAA14446          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 20 Dec 2001 13:40:51 -0800
Received: (qmail 32534 invoked from network); 20 Dec 2001 21:40:51 -0000
Received: from wdskppp28.mpls.uswest.net (HELO qwest.net) (63.226.148.28) by          mplspop6.mpls.uswest.net with SMTP; 20 Dec 2001 21:40:51 -0000
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.76 [en] (WinNT; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <177.11684c8.29537999@aol.com>            <000d01c1898c$c1eac5a0$0f5ca8c0@cronos>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3C225B00.C1791630@qwest.net>
Date:         Thu, 20 Dec 2001 15:41:20 -0600
Reply-To: "Jeff Hove" <jhove1@QWEST.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jeff Hove" <jhove1@QWEST.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Testing for 6061-T6 in the Scrapyard
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Wedge Oldham wrote:
...
> I flew an Aerotech M1550 RELINE motor a while back that resulted in a CATO.
> The nozzle blew out, along with three of the five grains.
> The other two grains stayed in the case, and due to zero chamber pressure
> burned for quite a long time. Spectacular to watch, but kinda rough on the rocket.
>
> My question is what have I done to the temper of the case & the aft closure.
> How can I verify the integrity of the hardware.
...

Have you asked Aerotech?  I'm sure they've had to deal with this type of
problem before.
They might have ways of inspecting the casing, or may even exchange it
for a new casing under warranty if they can't prove that it is still ok.

Your friend probably wouldn't be too upset to get a
factory-reconditioned or even brand new motor.

-Jeff Hove

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 22293 invoked from network); 20 Dec 2001 22:01:45 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 20 Dec 2001 22:01:45 -0000
Received: (qmail 23095 invoked by uid 50005); 20 Dec 2001 22:01:53 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4176. . Clean. Processed in 8.178822 secs); 20 Dec 2001 22:01:53 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 20 Dec 2001 22:01:42 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA14278; Thu, 20 Dec 2001 13:06:12 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 106070 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 20 Dec 2001 21:06:03          +0000
Received: from strauss.udel.edu (tproseus@strauss.udel.edu [128.175.13.74]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA14264 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 20 Dec 2001 13:06:02 -0800
Received: from localhost (tproseus@localhost) by strauss.udel.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3)          with ESMTP id QAA09464; Thu, 20 Dec 2001 16:06:00 -0500 (EST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.SOL.4.31.0112201557580.8327-100000@strauss.udel.edu>
Date:         Thu, 20 Dec 2001 16:06:00 -0500
Reply-To: "Timothy E Proseus" <tproseus@UDEL.EDU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Timothy E Proseus" <tproseus@UDEL.EDU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Testing for 6061-T6 in the Scrapyard
Comments: To: Wedge Oldham <wedge@WESTWORLD.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <000d01c1898c$c1eac5a0$0f5ca8c0@cronos>

I would expect that if the hardware was damaged due to a CATO not only
should the company replace the reload but they ought to also replace the
hardware.  If that's dreaming, well one thing I know about Dr. Rocket
hardware (the red ones) is that when they encounter excessive heat (I
assume damaging levels) the red tends to turn a weird yellow.  I saw an
antimony propellant heat one to that point and I've seen another one do
that a couple years ago.  I realize that's just the dye changing, but I
wouldn't use those cases for anything again.  Maybe yours is the black AT
one?

I guess yours didn't do something that drastic.  Whatever happens
though you better tell your friend about it if you want him to
remain a friend! :)

Ted

http://copland.udel.edu/~tproseus
http://www.dreamwater.net/biz/rocketchutes/parachutes.html


+'^'+.,.+'^'+.,.+'^'+.,.+'^'+.,.+'^'+.,.+'^'+.,.+'^'+.,.+'^'+.,.+'^'+.,.+

                                Ted Proseus

                             Research Associate
                 Plant Biochemistry/Biophysics Laboratory
              University of Delaware, College of Marine Studies
                           Lab/Office: 302-645-4022

+'^'+.,.+'^'+.,.+'^'+.,.+'^'+.,.+'^'+.,.+'^'+.,.+'^'+.,.+'^'+.,.+'^'+.,.+

On Thu, 20 Dec 2001, Wedge Oldham wrote:

> This may fit into this thread somewhat.
> I flew an Aerotech M1550 RELINE motor a while back that resulted in a CATO. The nozzle blew out, along with three of the five grains. The other two grains stayed in the case, and due to zero chamber pressure burned for quite a long time. Spectacular to watch, but kinda rough on the rocket.
>
> My question is what have I done to the temper of the case & the aft closure. How can I verify the integrity of the hardware. My problem is I borrowed the hardware from a friend, and don't wanna return it in a questionable state. I also don't wanna pay for addition hardware if it's not needed.
> Wedge Oldham
> http://NikeProject.com
>
>   ----- Original Message -----
>   From: MONTMACH@AOL.COM
>   To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
>   Sent: 20 December, 2001 9:27 AM
>   Subject: Re: [AR] Testing for 6061-T6 in the Scrapyard
>
>
>   Dave wrote:
>
>
>     Is there a good way of testing for 6061-T6 in the scrapyard?
>
>     Most AL out there is not marked.
>
>
>
>
>   The way I do it is to take a known piece - let's say 6061-T6 - and whack it onto the corner of the unknown piece.  If you then wind up with the same size nick on both pieces you probably have material with the same hardness.  I learned this method the hard way, years ago I bought a piece of aluminum that turned out to be 6061-T0.  It was soft and gummy as crap to machine.  When I whacked this material with a piece of T6 it left a humongous nick on the softer aluminum (there was no nick on the T6).
>   Dave
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 2066 invoked from network); 20 Dec 2001 22:12:14 -0000
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 20 Dec 2001 22:12:14 -0000
Received: (qmail 31920 invoked by uid 50005); 20 Dec 2001 22:12:23 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4175. . Clean. Processed in 0.965773 secs); 20 Dec 2001 22:12:23 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 20 Dec 2001 22:12:22 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA14504; Thu, 20 Dec 2001 13:42:08 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 106112 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 20 Dec 2001 21:42:07          +0000
Received: from bones.efg-waco.com (64-217-63-12.ded.swbell.net [64.217.63.12])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA14490 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 20 Dec 2001 13:42:06 -0800
Received: from 18barnett (64-217-56-93.ded.swbell.net [64.217.56.93]) by          bones.efg-waco.com (8.11.6/8.11.2) with SMTP id fBKMa4n15330 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 20 Dec 2001 16:36:05 -0600
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook CWS, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <003101c1899d$f15784c0$5d38d940@escher.efgwaco.com>
Date:         Thu, 20 Dec 2001 15:33:16 -0600
Reply-To: "Charles Barnett" <cbarnett@TEXNET.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Charles Barnett" <cbarnett@TEXNET.NET>
Subject:      [AR] Damaged casings
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <Pine.SOL.4.31.0112201557580.8327-100000@strauss.udel.edu>

>Behalf Of Timothy E Proseus
>
>...
> hardware.  If that's dreaming, well one thing I know about
> Dr. Rocket hardware (the red ones) is that when they
> encounter excessive heat (I assume damaging levels) the red
> tends to turn a weird yellow.  I saw an antimony propellant
> heat one to that point and I've seen another one do that a
> couple years ago.  I realize that's just the dye changing,
> but I wouldn't use those cases for anything again.
>
I would be interested in hearing from anyone considering
throwing away such casings.  A friend has the means to
test them and has the need for some to use for some more
experimental cases.  He would pay shipping plus a little
bit and hope that they would test out as usable after being
shortened if necessary etc.

Charles

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 12551 invoked from network); 20 Dec 2001 23:00:30 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.105]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 20 Dec 2001 23:00:30 -0000
Received: (qmail 24862 invoked by uid 50005); 20 Dec 2001 23:00:39 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpy with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4176. . Clean. Processed in 9.268954 secs); 20 Dec 2001 23:00:39 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 20 Dec 2001 23:00:27 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA14912; Thu, 20 Dec 2001 14:43:29 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 106181 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 20 Dec 2001 22:43:23          +0000
Received: from spsystems.net (spsystems.net [209.47.149.227]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA14898 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Thu,          20 Dec 2001 14:43:22 -0800
Received: (from henry@localhost) by spsystems.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id RAA07978;          Thu, 20 Dec 2001 17:42:41 -0500 (EST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1011220173913.7777A-100000@spsystems.net>
Date:         Thu, 20 Dec 2001 17:42:40 -0500
Reply-To: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Sure would be nice if....
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <3C20E637.3C5DF3DF@biomicro.com>

On Wed, 19 Dec 2001, Mark K. Spute wrote:
> ...What if we bought/licensed/begged suitable software from
> the Russians, Chinese, Indians, Pakistani's, Taiwanese, Japanese, French,
> Germans, whoever...

Most of the Western nations (which for this purpose, includes Japan and
probably Taiwan) are in general agreement on the desirability of
discouraging ballistic-missile development.  However, most of the others
interpret the rules more sensibly than the US does.  (For example, Canada's
export rules contain a blanket exemption for public-domain software, with
a footnote to the effect that a copyright doesn't compromise such status.)

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 14836 invoked from network); 21 Dec 2001 00:38:20 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 21 Dec 2001 00:38:20 -0000
Received: (qmail 22888 invoked by uid 50005); 21 Dec 2001 00:38:29 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpc with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4176. . Clean. Processed in 0.96944 secs); 21 Dec 2001 00:38:29 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 21 Dec 2001 00:38:27 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA15237; Thu, 20 Dec 2001 16:19:13 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 106215 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 21 Dec 2001 00:19:04          +0000
Received: from mta02.mail.mel.aone.net.au (mta02.mail.au.uu.net [203.2.192.82])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA15223 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 20 Dec 2001 16:19:03 -0800
Received: from unknown ([63.34.220.42]) by mta02.mail.mel.aone.net.au with SMTP          id <20011221001901.EQOA10690.mta02.mail.mel.aone.net.au@unknown> for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 21 Dec 2001 11:19:01 +1100
References: Conversation            <Pine.LNX.4.10.10112041255390.21687-100000@itc.uci.edu> with last            message <Pine.LNX.4.10.10112041255390.21687-100000@itc.uci.edu>
Priority: Normal
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Priority: 3
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	X-MAPIextension=.TXT;
	charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>
Date:         Fri, 21 Dec 2001 00:19:04 +0000
Reply-To: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Al Alloy ID?
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <Pine.LNX.4.10.10112041255390.21687-100000@itc.uci.edu>

Chuck it up on the lathe and machine a bit. If it machines well and comes
off in brittle flakes or reasonably *clean* brittle swarf or is easy to
achieve a good finish with, then you have a good hard grade of alloy. If
it's hard to machine and comes off in long *soft* strands and is difficult
to obtain a good clean finish with, you have junk.

Troy.

----------
> Here's another one...
>
> I know there are common "Spark Tests"
> (http://shopswarf.orcon.net.nz/spark.html) for determining steel alloys.
> These tests allow alloy ID with no sophisticated hardware, just a common
> bench grinder.
>
> I've now got access to a fairly large supply of cheap aluminum irrigation
> tubing, in 3" and 2" OD.  Is there any quick and dirty method of figuring
> the alloy without resorting to metalography?  I know irrigation tubing
> used to be 6061.  A quick web search shows the newer alloys are likely to
> be 3003.  Any easy way to tell the difference?
>
> TIA,
>
> Ray
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 22123 invoked from network); 21 Dec 2001 00:40:08 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 21 Dec 2001 00:40:08 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 751 invoked by uid 50005); 21 Dec 2001 00:40:18 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4175. . Clean. Processed in 0.369548 secs); 21 Dec 2001 00:40:18 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 21 Dec 2001 00:40:17 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA15285; Thu, 20 Dec 2001 16:25:16 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 106226 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 21 Dec 2001 00:25:15          +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (f53.law14.hotmail.com [64.4.21.53]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA15271 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu,          20 Dec 2001 16:25:14 -0800
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Thu,          20 Dec 2001 16:24:44 -0800
Received: from 206.216.232.110 by lw14fd.law14.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Fri,          21 Dec 2001 00:24:44 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [206.216.232.110]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 21 Dec 2001 00:24:44.0673 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[E3C85F10:01C189B5]
Message-ID:  <F53DZWJVcgucZTBnOw80000874a@hotmail.com>
Date:         Fri, 21 Dec 2001 00:24:44 +0000
Reply-To: "Matt Faulkner" <mattfaulkner9@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Matt Faulkner" <mattfaulkner9@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      [AR] Al grinding test
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

I don't think the sparks from grinding aluminum alloys would be a useful
indicator, since whenever I grind any type of Al, I only get a few sparks,
not enough for analysis.

What about measuring density by calculating weight vs. water displacement?
The density might help identify the alloy.


_________________________________________________________________
MSN Photos is the easiest way to share and print your photos:
http://photos.msn.com/support/worldwide.aspx

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 403 invoked from network); 21 Dec 2001 00:49:51 -0000
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 21 Dec 2001 00:49:51 -0000
Received: (qmail 25498 invoked by uid 50005); 21 Dec 2001 00:50:00 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4176. . Clean. Processed in 8.605432 secs); 21 Dec 2001 00:50:00 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 21 Dec 2001 00:49:49 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA15389; Thu, 20 Dec 2001 16:44:25 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 106240 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 21 Dec 2001 00:43:34          +0000
Received: from castor.ridgenet.net (IDENT:root@castor.ridgenet.net          [199.120.150.29]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA15375          for <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Thu, 20 Dec 2001 16:43:33 -0800
Received: from kristinscomp (pm140.ridgenet.net [204.154.246.140]) by          castor.ridgenet.net (8.11.0/8.11.0) with SMTP id fBL0jfb22733; Thu,          20 Dec 2001 16:45:41 -0800
References: <Pine.BSI.3.91.1011219090432.12173C-100000@spsystems.net>            <3C20E637.3C5DF3DF@biomicro.com>            <a05100313b846a0666ce0@[63.15.204.212]>            <006901c18920$f3756380$1b30fea9@kristinscomp>            <20011220100006.E12644@bailey.dscga.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <003201c189b8$a61a1700$1b30fea9@kristinscomp>
Date:         Thu, 20 Dec 2001 16:44:28 -0800
Reply-To: "Kristin & David Hall" <thehalls@RIDGENET.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Kristin & David Hall" <thehalls@RIDGENET.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Sure would be nice if....
Comments: To: Michael Mealling <michael@neonym.net>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

> Is 6DOF written to handle most of the requirements listed in
> http://ast.faa.gov/contest/sag_uslv.htm ?

Yes, and more.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 10397 invoked from network); 21 Dec 2001 01:41:38 -0000
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 21 Dec 2001 01:41:38 -0000
Received: (qmail 15981 invoked by uid 50005); 21 Dec 2001 01:41:47 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4176. . Clean. Processed in 2.186455 secs); 21 Dec 2001 01:41:47 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 21 Dec 2001 01:41:44 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA15672; Thu, 20 Dec 2001 17:37:25 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 106310 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 21 Dec 2001 01:37:19          +0000
Received: from trueband.net (director.trueband.net [216.163.120.8]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id RAA15658 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 20 Dec 2001 17:37:19 -0800
Received: (qmail 1835 invoked by uid 1006); 21 Dec 2001 01:37:18 -0000
Received: from foy@wfeca.net by rs0 with qmail-scanner-0.96 (uvscan:          v4.1.40/v4121. . Clean. Processed in 1.200081 secs); 21 Dec 2001          01:37:18 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO l9l3e3) (12.21.155.1) by -v with SMTP; 21 Dec 2001          01:37:17 -0000
References:  <177.11684c8.29537999@aol.com>              <000d01c1898c$c1eac5a0$0f5ca8c0@cronos>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0E9D_01C56B69.5D85B8F0"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <003001c189be$eee71e00$019b150c@l9l3e3>
Date:         Thu, 20 Dec 2001 19:29:27 -0600
Reply-To: "foy" <foy@WFECA.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "foy" <foy@WFECA.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Testing for 6061-T6 in the Scrapyard
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0E9D_01C56B69.5D85B8F0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

         Al will lose start losing temper at about 350-400F and it =
doesn't come back after it cools.     Foy
  ----- Original Message -----=20
  From: Wedge Oldham=20
  To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU=20
  Sent: Thursday, December 20, 2001 1:28 PM
  Subject: Re: [AR] Testing for 6061-T6 in the Scrapyard


  This may fit into this thread somewhat.
  I flew an Aerotech M1550 RELINE motor a while back that resulted in a =
CATO. The nozzle blew out, along with three of the five grains. The =
other two grains stayed in the case, and due to zero chamber pressure =
burned for quite a long time. Spectacular to watch, but kinda rough on =
the rocket.

  My question is what have I done to the temper of the case & the aft =
closure. How can I verify the integrity of the hardware. My problem is I =
borrowed the hardware from a friend, and don't wanna return it in a =
questionable state. I also don't wanna pay for addition hardware if it's =
not needed.
  Wedge Oldham
  http://NikeProject.com

------=_NextPart_000_0E9D_01C56B69.5D85B8F0
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Diso-8859-1">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 5.50.4134.600" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial =
size=3D2>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Al=20
will lose start losing temper at about 350-400F and it doesn't come back =
after=20
it cools.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Foy</FONT></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE dir=3Dltr=20
style=3D"PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; =
BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
  <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial">----- Original Message ----- </DIV>
  <DIV=20
  style=3D"BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; FONT: 10pt arial; font-color: =
black"><B>From:</B>=20
  <A title=3Dwedge@WESTWORLD.COM =
href=3D"mailto:wedge@WESTWORLD.COM">Wedge=20
  Oldham</A> </DIV>
  <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A =
title=3DAROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU=20
  href=3D"mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU">AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU</A> </DIV>
  <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> Thursday, December 20, =
2001 1:28=20
  PM</DIV>
  <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> Re: [AR] Testing for =
6061-T6 in=20
  the Scrapyard</DIV>
  <DIV><BR></DIV>
  <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>This may fit into this thread=20
  somewhat.</FONT></DIV>
  <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>I flew an Aerotech M1550 RELINE motor =
a while=20
  back that resulted in a CATO. The nozzle blew out, along with three of =
the=20
  five grains. The other two grains stayed in the case, and due to zero =
chamber=20
  pressure burned for quite a long time. Spectacular to watch, but kinda =
rough=20
  on the rocket.</FONT></DIV>
  <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
  <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>My question is what have I done to =
the temper of=20
  the case &amp; the aft closure. How can I verify the integrity of the=20
  hardware. My problem is I borrowed the hardware from a friend, and =
don't wanna=20
  return it in a questionable state. I also don't wanna pay for addition =

  hardware if it's not needed.</FONT></DIV>
  <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Wedge Oldham</FONT></DIV>
  <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2><A=20
  =
href=3D"http://NikeProject.com">http://NikeProject.com</A></FONT></DIV></=
BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0E9D_01C56B69.5D85B8F0--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 7948 invoked from network); 21 Dec 2001 03:50:57 -0000
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 21 Dec 2001 03:50:57 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 6868 invoked by uid 50005); 21 Dec 2001 03:51:06 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4176. . Clean. Processed in 1.615704 secs); 21 Dec 2001 03:51:06 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 21 Dec 2001 03:51:03 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA16067; Thu, 20 Dec 2001 19:36:03 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 106347 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 21 Dec 2001 03:35:53          +0000
Received: from carbon.btinternet.com (carbon.btinternet.com [194.73.73.92]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA16053 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Thu, 20 Dec 2001 19:35:52 -0800
Received: from host217-39-2-64.in-addr.btopenworld.com ([217.39.2.64]          helo=tesco.net) by carbon.btinternet.com with esmtp (Exim 3.22 #8) id          16HGSn-0003QY-00; Fri, 21 Dec 2001 03:35:13 +0000
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Win98; en-US; rv:0.9.4) Gecko/20011128            Netscape6/6.2.1
X-Accept-Language: en,en-GB,en-US
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <Pine.BSI.3.91.1011220115840.4274A-100000@spsystems.net>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3C22ADFF.3010703@tesco.net>
Date:         Fri, 21 Dec 2001 03:35:27 +0000
Reply-To: "Ian Woollard" <ian.woollard@TESCO.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Ian Woollard" <ian.woollard@TESCO.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Space Elevator was: Re: [AR] carbon fiber reality check
Comments: To: Henry Spencer <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Ok, I did some more checking- it isn't possible right now in fact-
there are nanotubes in existence that have just about the tensile
strength for a practical tether although with no safety factor.

However, when you try to glue, splice or otherwise join them
together the strength comes down by a factor of ~10 to about Kevlar
strength which makes it impractical.

Henry Spencer wrote:

> On Thu, 20 Dec 2001, Ian Woollard wrote:
>
>>The nice thing about this stuff is that it would put $40 billion
>>worth of work into politicians voting districts. And once the first
>>one is up- everyone wants one.
>>
>
> There is a small problem.  Much the most straightforward way to build a
> space elevator requires that its base be on the equator.  There are no
> US congressional districts there.


Probably not important. The place where you do the manufacturing is
distinct from the place you build, that's true even with the Space
Shuttle.


> Note another complication:  with only minor exceptions, all LEO satellite
> (and space-junk) orbits will eventually intersect the elevator.


This is an important consideration.

For large objects, a tether can be moved to a reasonable degree by
using resonance effects and/or magnetic effects. Impacts can be
entirely avoided where they are predictable.

The paper suggest using a tape shape rather than a circular
cross-section because it is less likely to be cut by small pieces
of junk- and most junk is very small. Hoy Tether type constructs
were mentioned in the paper too.

The plan in the paper is you build one cable, and then immediately
start building the next, using the first. Provided you are
reasonably lucky you'd have many up before the first fails (at
worst.) Subsequent tethers are much cheaper than the first.

Although a fixed tether is a relatively big target, in general I'm
pretty sure it does not generate space junk. Presumably, spalling
is caused by the explosion of the struck object. If the exploding
object is in orbit, its fragments are likely to be as well. Because
this tether is not in orbit at LEO, the elevator tends to remove
rather than exacerbate space junk.

This is in addition to the fact that there would not be as many
spent boosters around... and many satellites may end up occupying
higher orbital slots where space junk would be less of an issue.


>                                                           Henry Spencer
>                                                        henry@spsystems.net

--
- Ian Woollard (ian.woollard@tesco.net)

"Is a planetary surface the right place for an expanding
technological civilization?"
- Gerard O'Neill

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 4560 invoked from network); 21 Dec 2001 05:08:30 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtph.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.88]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 21 Dec 2001 05:08:30 -0000
Received: (qmail 28652 invoked by uid 50005); 21 Dec 2001 04:54:22 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtph with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4176. . Clean. Processed in 0.380112 secs); 21 Dec 2001 04:54:22 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtph.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 21 Dec 2001 04:54:22 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA16434; Thu, 20 Dec 2001 21:04:11 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 106393 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 21 Dec 2001 05:04:04          +0000
Received: from www.rocketry.org          (root@phnx3UBR5-4-hfc-0251-d17d1591.rdc1.az.coxatwork.com          [209.125.21.145]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA16420          for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Thu, 20 Dec 2001 21:04:03 -0800
Received: from localhost (tim@localhost) by www.rocketry.org (8.11.4/8.11.4)          with ESMTP id fBL50LU28996 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Thu, 20 Dec          2001 22:00:21 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.LNX.4.33.0112202155210.28991-100000@www.rocketry.org>
Date:         Thu, 20 Dec 2001 22:00:21 -0700
Reply-To: "T.J. Patterson" <tim@ROCKETRY.ORG>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "T.J. Patterson" <tim@ROCKETRY.ORG>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Space Elevator was: Re: [AR] carbon fiber reality check
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <3C22ADFF.3010703@tesco.net>

> > Note another complication:  with only minor exceptions, all LEO satellite
> > (and space-junk) orbits will eventually intersect the elevator.
>
> This is an important consideration.
>
> For large objects, a tether can be moved to a reasonable degree by
> using resonance effects and/or magnetic effects. Impacts can be
> entirely avoided where they are predictable.
> worst.) Subsequent tethers are much cheaper than the first.
>
> Although a fixed tether is a relatively big target, in general I'm
> pretty sure it does not generate space junk. Presumably, spalling
> is caused by the explosion of the struck object. If the exploding
> object is in orbit, its fragments are likely to be as well. Because
> this tether is not in orbit at LEO, the elevator tends to remove
> rather than exacerbate space junk.

Seems to me that it might also be a huge target for terrorists or loonies.
If weirdos will fly a large plane into a skyscraper, this might be an even
more attractive target. Not sure how one would insure security on an
elevator reaching tens or hundreds of miles high to space..

Weather in the atmosphere might also be a big risk. High winds and
tropical storms could also raise heck with something like this..

T.J. Patterson
tim@rocketry.org
http://www.rocketry.org

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 12799 invoked from network); 21 Dec 2001 06:51:33 -0000
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 21 Dec 2001 06:51:33 -0000
Received: (qmail 4925 invoked by uid 50005); 21 Dec 2001 06:51:43 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4176. . Clean. Processed in 0.293726 secs); 21 Dec 2001 06:51:43 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 21 Dec 2001 06:51:42 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA16868; Thu, 20 Dec 2001 22:36:57 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 106416 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 21 Dec 2001 06:36:50          +0000
Received: from fep3-orange.clear.net.nz (fep3-orange.clear.net.nz          [203.97.32.3]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA16850          for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Thu, 20 Dec 2001 22:36:49 -0800
Received: from mkbs (203-167-158-17.dialup.clear.net.nz [203.167.158.17]) by          fep3-orange.clear.net.nz (1.5/1.8) with SMTP id TAA02262; Fri, 21 Dec          2001 19:36:41 +1300 (NZDT)
References: Conversation                       <Pine.LNX.4.10.10112041255390.21687-100000@itc.uci.edu> with last              message <Pine.LNX.4.10.10112041255390.21687-100000@itc.uci.edu>             <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <00b601c189ea$4b720240$0700a8c0@mkbs>
Date:         Fri, 21 Dec 2001 19:35:12 +1300
Reply-To: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Organization: Applied Technology
Subject:      Re: [AR] Al Alloy ID?
Comments: To: Troy Prideaux <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Wouldn't it be :"reasonably" easy to retemper the case?

Starting with the assumption that it may or may not have been detempered,
you would need to give it a heat profile that guaranteed its return to
standard grade and then retemper it from scratch.

If Troy's test indicated loss of temper you could start the above process
half way through.

Or is this too hard or impractical?



      Russell McMahon
_____________________________


> Chuck it up on the lathe and machine a bit. If it machines well and comes
> off in brittle flakes or reasonably *clean* brittle swarf or is easy to
> achieve a good finish with, then you have a good hard grade of alloy. If
> it's hard to machine and comes off in long *soft* strands and is difficult
> to obtain a good clean finish with, you have junk.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 17307 invoked from network); 21 Dec 2001 06:53:24 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 21 Dec 2001 06:53:24 -0000
Received: (qmail 21602 invoked by uid 50005); 21 Dec 2001 06:53:34 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpb with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4176. . Clean. Processed in 0.347437 secs); 21 Dec 2001 06:53:34 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 21 Dec 2001 06:53:33 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA16898; Thu, 20 Dec 2001 22:38:30 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 106423 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 21 Dec 2001 06:38:28          +0000
Received: from fep3-orange.clear.net.nz (fep3-orange.clear.net.nz          [203.97.32.3]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA16861          for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Thu, 20 Dec 2001 22:36:54 -0800
Received: from mkbs (203-167-158-17.dialup.clear.net.nz [203.167.158.17]) by          fep3-orange.clear.net.nz (1.5/1.8) with SMTP id TAA02288; Fri, 21 Dec          2001 19:36:43 +1300 (NZDT)
References:  <Pine.LNX.4.33.0112202155210.28991-100000@www.rocketry.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <00b701c189ea$4efadae0$0700a8c0@mkbs>
Date:         Fri, 21 Dec 2001 19:39:09 +1300
Reply-To: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Organization: Applied Technology
Subject:      Re: [AR] Space Elevator was: Re: [AR] carbon fiber reality check
Comments: To: "T.J. Patterson" <tim@ROCKETRY.ORG>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

> Seems to me that it might also be a huge target for terrorists or loonies.
> If weirdos will fly a large plane into a skyscraper, this might be an even
> more attractive target. Not sure how one would insure security on an
> elevator reaching tens or hundreds of miles high to space..
>
> Weather in the atmosphere might also be a big risk. High winds and
> tropical storms could also raise heck with something like this..


Read Kim Stanley Robinson's brilliant "Red Mars" and "Green Mars" (and not
quite so brilliant "Blue Mars" for a reasonably detailed examination of how
to protect one from terrorists properly and improperly. (And an interesting
examination of what happens when you get it wrong!)

Red Mars is worth reading for its own sake if you have any interest in Mars
or crystal ball gazing about the future of applied science generally.




    Russell McMahon

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 25775 invoked from network); 21 Dec 2001 07:48:47 -0000
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 21 Dec 2001 07:48:47 -0000
Received: (qmail 30957 invoked by uid 50005); 21 Dec 2001 07:48:56 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4175. . Clean. Processed in 0.324622 secs); 21 Dec 2001 07:48:56 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 21 Dec 2001 07:48:56 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA17178; Thu, 20 Dec 2001 23:32:38 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 106459 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 21 Dec 2001 07:32:32          +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (oe34.law12.hotmail.com [64.4.18.91]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA17163 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Thu,          20 Dec 2001 23:32:32 -0800
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Thu,          20 Dec 2001 23:32:02 -0800
X-Originating-IP: [24.92.128.69]
References: Conversation                       <Pine.LNX.4.10.10112041255390.21687-100000@itc.uci.edu> with last              message <Pine.LNX.4.10.10112041255390.21687-100000@itc.uci.edu>                <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>             <00b601c189ea$4b720240$0700a8c0@mkbs>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 21 Dec 2001 07:32:02.0390 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[950D8760:01C189F1]
Message-ID:  <OE34wAw2bE3UobGRuLB000026c9@hotmail.com>
Date:         Fri, 21 Dec 2001 01:31:15 -0600
Reply-To: "Mark Kruep" <mkruep@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Mark Kruep" <mkruep@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Al Alloy ID?
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

For 6061-T6 temper: Heat to around 750 degrees F and Hold it for eight
hours. Then, decrease 50 degrees per half hour until reaching 500 degrees.
Turn off the furnace and let the casing cool to room temp. This should
anneal the casing (or close enough for our purposes). I was advised to
anneal before heat treating to make sure you relieve any unwanted residual
stresses in the metal in case anyone is wondering why I'm suggesting
annealing.

Reheat the casing to 925 degrees F for 30 minutes. Get a BIG bucket of water
ready in the mean time. After 30 minutes, remove it from the furnace and
quench it in the water as quickly as possible (ideally instantaneously).
Make sure you keep moving the casing and stirring it for a few seconds. In
you don't, the heat will create a boundary layer of hot water around the
casing and it won't be quenched fast enough or properly. If there is more
than one casing involved, make sure you dry off your tongs or whatever
you're using or the little water droplets will cause localized quenching and
internal stresses in the metal.

Now, it's heat treated. Time for the artificial age hardening part. Put it
back in a furnace at 375 degrees F for 8 hours. It can then air cool from
there. Volia, 6061-T6 aluminum (or there abouts...only a professional mill
will ever get it close to precise).

The biggest problem here is obviously getting the high temperatures and
sustaining them. The heat must also be pretty accurate and constant. You are
getting real close to the melting point of 6061 at over 900 degrees so if
you can't maintain the temperature accurately, don't try it. I had brought
this up on another egroup a while back, but no one was interested. I thought
it would be a great way to reuse casings on long burn motors.

You could take an ordinary propane gas grill and add some ceramic insulation
(an oversimplification I know) and get the heat plenty high (propane will
burn at around ~2700 degrees so it gets plenty hot). You would need to get
an accurate thermostat like the laser type units but higher temp. I figure
for around $400 you could make a homemade furnace capable of doing Al heat
treating, which would be capable of doing several casings up to say 3 feet
in length. A bit much cost wise for an individual, but if you could get a
small group of people interested it would surely be worth the effort. I
discussed this with my Metallurgy instructor a while back and he said in
theory my idea should work fine. It will not be anodizing friendly though.
This is all based on theory though so if someone with more practical
experience wants to weigh in, by all means do so.

Mark


----- Original Message -----
From: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Friday, December 21, 2001 12:35 AM
Subject: Re: [AR] Al Alloy ID?


> Wouldn't it be :"reasonably" easy to retemper the case?
>
> Starting with the assumption that it may or may not have been detempered,
> you would need to give it a heat profile that guaranteed its return to
> standard grade and then retemper it from scratch.
>
> If Troy's test indicated loss of temper you could start the above process
> half way through.
>
> Or is this too hard or impractical?
>
>
>
>       Russell McMahon
> _____________________________
>
>
> > Chuck it up on the lathe and machine a bit. If it machines well and
comes
> > off in brittle flakes or reasonably *clean* brittle swarf or is easy to
> > achieve a good finish with, then you have a good hard grade of alloy. If
> > it's hard to machine and comes off in long *soft* strands and is
difficult
> > to obtain a good clean finish with, you have junk.
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 19756 invoked from network); 21 Dec 2001 11:56:56 -0000
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 21 Dec 2001 11:56:56 -0000
Received: (qmail 27221 invoked by uid 50005); 21 Dec 2001 11:57:05 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4175. . Clean. Processed in 0.605563 secs); 21 Dec 2001 11:57:05 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 21 Dec 2001 11:57:04 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id DAA17884; Fri, 21 Dec 2001 03:42:09 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 106529 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 21 Dec 2001 11:42:02          +0000
Received: from noralf.uib.no (noralf.uib.no [129.177.30.12]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id DAA17870 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Fri,          21 Dec 2001 03:42:01 -0800
Received: from malurt.uib.no [129.177.30.50] by noralf.uib.no with esmtp (Exim          3.16) id 16HO2r-0003Vu-00; Fri, 21 Dec 2001 12:40:57 +0100
Received: from nobody by malurt.uib.no with local (Exim 3.16) id          16HO2w-0004rg-00; Fri, 21 Dec 2001 12:41:02 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
User-Agent: IMP/PHP IMAP webmail program 2.2.1/UIB-1f3a
X-Sent-Through: webmail.uib.no
X-User-Agent: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 5.0; Windows 98) Opera 5.12  [no-bm]
X-Originating-IP: 148.122.31.92
X-checked-clean: by exiscan on noralf
X-Scanner: 3ed1459f3c14f357c96166e83fdb76a5 http://tjinfo.uib.no/virus.html
Message-ID:  <1008934862.3c231fce07f90@webmail.uib.no>
Date:         Fri, 21 Dec 2001 12:41:02 +0100
Reply-To: <Emil.Johnsen@STUDENT.UIB.NO>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <Emil.Johnsen@STUDENT.UIB.NO>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Space Elevator was: Re: [AR] carbon fiber...
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

The center of gravity of a space elevator needs to be in geo stationary orbit. The cable needs to be atleast 36500km long, much longer unless it is connected to a massive object just outside GSO. This means that the cable must be constructed in space, constantly maintaining the orbit.

If the cable should fall it would wrap itself around the equator 1-2 times, depending on the design. The impact speed would be significant (several km per second), particularly for the upper parts of the cable. Clearly damage would be very significant if the elevator were to come down.

The area surounding the cable would need to be very carefully protected and a system to intercept any aircraft or missile.

Confidence in the materials and technology used to construct the cable would need to be very high, considering the concequence of a failure. Experimental or unproven technology could not be used.

Constructing the elevator would require substantial orbital manufacturing capapbility and a source of materials in space, as it would most likely not be realistic to launch the required materials from the surface of the Earth. In other words asteroid mining would be a prequisite for the construction of a space elevator.

By the time these factors are in place, it is likely to be a need for a space elevator on Mars. I think this is likely to be built first because the elevator would be shorter and less demanding and the consequence of failure would be significantly reduced. The required confidence in space elevator technology to build one on Eearth could be established first with the succesful construction and operation of a space elevator on Mars.


--
Emil

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 10907 invoked from network); 21 Dec 2001 12:38:17 -0000
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 21 Dec 2001 12:38:17 -0000
Received: (qmail 22987 invoked by uid 50005); 21 Dec 2001 12:38:26 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4176. . Clean. Processed in 3.245343 secs); 21 Dec 2001 12:38:26 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 21 Dec 2001 12:38:20 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id EAA18093; Fri, 21 Dec 2001 04:23:16 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 106540 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 21 Dec 2001 12:23:12          +0000
Received: from mta02.mail.mel.aone.net.au (mta02.mail.au.uu.net [203.2.192.82])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id EAA18078 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 21 Dec 2001 04:23:11 -0800
Received: from win2pk ([63.34.210.222]) by mta02.mail.mel.aone.net.au with SMTP          id <20011221122308.CJLA21200.mta02.mail.mel.aone.net.au@win2pk> for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 21 Dec 2001 23:23:08 +1100
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
Importance: Normal
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <NEBBJIGOELOLIBCCPKDCEEEBCCAA.geordi@c031.aone.net.au>
Date:         Fri, 21 Dec 2001 23:54:04 +1100
Reply-To: "Troy Prideaux" <geordi@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Troy Prideaux" <geordi@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Al Alloy ID?
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <00b601c189ea$4b720240$0700a8c0@mkbs>

>
>Wouldn't it be :"reasonably" easy to retemper the case?
>
>Starting with the assumption that it may or may not have been detempered,
>you would need to give it a heat profile that guaranteed its return to
>standard grade and then retemper it from scratch.
>
>If Troy's test indicated loss of temper you could start the above process
>half way through.

It may indicate a substantial loss in *temper* but only the very trained eye
*may* notice the difference between 6061 T4 & 6061 T6 using this technique.

Troy.

>
>Or is this too hard or impractical?
>
>
>
>      Russell McMahon
>_____________________________
>
>
>> Chuck it up on the lathe and machine a bit. If it machines well and comes
>> off in brittle flakes or reasonably *clean* brittle swarf or is easy to
>> achieve a good finish with, then you have a good hard grade of alloy. If
>> it's hard to machine and comes off in long *soft* strands and is
>difficult
>> to obtain a good clean finish with, you have junk.
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 12518 invoked from network); 21 Dec 2001 13:44:37 -0000
Received: from smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.105]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 21 Dec 2001 13:44:37 -0000
Received: (qmail 20483 invoked by uid 50005); 21 Dec 2001 13:44:46 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpy with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4176. . Clean. Processed in 0.296902 secs); 21 Dec 2001 13:44:46 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 21 Dec 2001 13:44:46 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id FAA18275; Fri, 21 Dec 2001 05:24:54 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 106559 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 21 Dec 2001 13:24:44          +0000
Received: from fep4-orange.clear.net.nz (fep4-orange.clear.net.nz          [203.97.32.4]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id FAA18261          for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Fri, 21 Dec 2001 05:24:43 -0800
Received: from mkbs (203-167-148-230.dialup.clear.net.nz [203.167.148.230]) by          fep4-orange.clear.net.nz (1.5/1.7) with SMTP id CAA04759; Sat, 22 Dec          2001 02:24:36 +1300 (NZDT)
References:  <1008934862.3c231fce07f90@webmail.uib.no>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="Windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <018f01c18a23$480ec320$0700a8c0@mkbs>
Date:         Sat, 22 Dec 2001 02:23:28 +1300
Reply-To: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Organization: Applied Technology
Subject:      Re: [AR] Space Elevator was: Re: [AR] carbon fiber...
Comments: To: Emil.Johnsen@STUDENT.UIB.NO
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

> By the time these factors are in place, it is likely to be a need for a
space elevator on Mars. I think this is likely to be built first because the
elevator would be shorter and less demanding and the consequence of failure
would be significantly reduced. The required confidence in space elevator
technology to build one on Eearth could be established first with the
succesful construction and operation of a space elevator on Mars.

Martian elevator is arguably more demanding due to the need for it to
"dance" in synchronism with Phobos & Deimos (or else) which insist on
sharing equator with the elevator. See "Red Mars" for a discussion of this.




        Russell McMahon

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 25780 invoked from network); 21 Dec 2001 15:41:06 -0000
Received: from smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.105]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 21 Dec 2001 15:41:06 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 15485 invoked by uid 50005); 21 Dec 2001 15:41:15 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpy with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4176. . Clean. Processed in 1.740653 secs); 21 Dec 2001 15:41:15 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 21 Dec 2001 15:41:13 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA18599; Fri, 21 Dec 2001 07:11:48 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 106597 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 21 Dec 2001 15:11:42          +0000
Received: from stud.uni-goettingen.de (root@s2.stud.uni-goettingen.de          [134.76.60.22]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA18585          for <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Fri, 21 Dec 2001 07:11:42 -0800
Received: from router.atw.stud.uni-goettingen.de ([134.76.62.65]          helo=stud.uni-goettingen.de) by stud.uni-goettingen.de with esmtp          (Exim 2.12 #8) id 16HRKk-0002FN-00 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 21          Dec 2001 16:11:38 +0100
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [de] (Win98; I)
X-Accept-Language: de
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: Conversation            <Pine.LNX.4.10.10112041255390.21687-100000@itc.uci.edu> with last            message <Pine.LNX.4.10.10112041255390.21687-100000@itc.uci.edu>            <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3C2351C1.41CADA13@stud.uni-goettingen.de>
Date:         Fri, 21 Dec 2001 16:14:10 +0100
Reply-To: "Thomas Engelhardt" <tengelh@STUD.UNI-GOETTINGEN.DE>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Thomas Engelhardt" <tengelh@STUD.UNI-GOETTINGEN.DE>
Organization: =?iso-8859-1?Q?Rocket_Research_G=F6ttingen_=28RRG=29?=
Subject:      Re: [AR] Al Alloy ID?
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Troy Prideaux schrieb:

> Chuck it up on the lathe and machine a bit. If it machines well and comes
> off in brittle flakes or reasonably *clean* brittle swarf or is easy to
> achieve a good finish with, then you have a good hard grade of alloy. If
> it's hard to machine and comes off in long *soft* strands and is difficult
> to obtain a good clean finish with, you have junk.

Well, the AlMgSi 0,5 (or T6061) machines really hard, and releases long
strands.
Another variety called AlCuMgPb gives the little flakes, but is too expensive
and not tough enough for things like thrust chambers. It makes for good
injectors though.
No difference in finish though, check out
http://www.liquid-propulsion.de/L400.htm  Injectors and nozzle retainer are
AlCuMgPb, thrust chamber is T6061.

Cheers,

Tom

>
>
> Troy.
>
> ----------
> > Here's another one...
> >
> > I know there are common "Spark Tests"
> > (http://shopswarf.orcon.net.nz/spark.html) for determining steel alloys.
> > These tests allow alloy ID with no sophisticated hardware, just a common
> > bench grinder.
> >
> > I've now got access to a fairly large supply of cheap aluminum irrigation
> > tubing, in 3" and 2" OD.  Is there any quick and dirty method of figuring
> > the alloy without resorting to metalography?  I know irrigation tubing
> > used to be 6061.  A quick web search shows the newer alloys are likely to
> > be 3003.  Any easy way to tell the difference?
> >
> > TIA,
> >
> > Ray
> >

--
Atheism is a non-prophet organization.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 5491 invoked from network); 21 Dec 2001 22:30:13 -0000
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 21 Dec 2001 22:30:13 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 12662 invoked by uid 50005); 21 Dec 2001 22:30:23 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4176. . Clean. Processed in 1.704136 secs); 21 Dec 2001 22:30:23 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 21 Dec 2001 22:30:20 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA20060; Fri, 21 Dec 2001 14:28:37 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 106725 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 21 Dec 2001 22:28:25          +0000
Received: from relay02.roc.frontiernet.net (alteon01c.roc.frontiernet.net          [66.133.130.233]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id OAA20046          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 21 Dec 2001 14:28:25 -0800
Received: (qmail 10456 invoked from network); 21 Dec 2001 22:27:51 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO frontiernet.net) ([64.211.177.81])          (envelope-sender <tbinford@frontiernet.net>) by 0 (qmail-ldap-1.03)          with SMTP for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; 21 Dec 2001 22:27:51 -0000
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.74 [en] (Win98; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3C211657.42E8BC1E@frontiernet.net>
Date:         Wed, 19 Dec 2001 17:36:07 -0500
Reply-To: <tbinford@frontiernet.net>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Tom Binford" <tbinford@frontiernet.net>
Subject:      [AR] Initial test, D40
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

I just test fired 3 new D40 motors. These are 1/2" diameter reloadable
in aluminum casings. Burn is very quick, less than 1/2 second. Since
these were just preliminary tests, all the real data I got is that they
worked. Propellant is 55-30zn, 4 BATES grains .395 x .156 x 1" and a
solid grain 3/4" long for delay (about 13 seconds). Next step is to put
some on the test stand which I hope to do in the next week or so.

These are very aggressive little motors and one will easilly take a
minimum diameter rocket supersonic.

Tom

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 20835 invoked from network); 22 Dec 2001 00:22:09 -0000
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 22 Dec 2001 00:22:09 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 31939 invoked by uid 50005); 22 Dec 2001 00:22:19 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4176. . Clean. Processed in 4.138552 secs); 22 Dec 2001 00:22:19 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 22 Dec 2001 00:22:13 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA20540; Fri, 21 Dec 2001 16:20:28 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 106787 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 22 Dec 2001 00:20:19          +0000
Received: from dns2.seanet.com (dns2.seanet.com [199.181.164.2]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA20526 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri,          21 Dec 2001 16:20:19 -0800
Received: from seanet.com (ssstolt.seanet.com [204.182.68.23]) by          dns2.seanet.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id fBM0KHs23406 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 21 Dec 2001 16:20:18 -0800 (PST)
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.73 [en] (Win98; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <Pine.LNX.4.10.10112041255390.21687-100000@itc.uci.edu>            <OE34C3EIE73MRc3b2qY0000201d@hotmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3C23D13E.DFF782B8@seanet.com>
Date:         Fri, 21 Dec 2001 16:18:06 -0800
Reply-To: "Sherwood Stolt" <ssstolt@SEANET.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Sherwood Stolt" <ssstolt@SEANET.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Al Alloy ID?
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

If you are testing a sample of a large quantity then it seems
like the best choice would be to hydro test to failure.  You
should see the actual yeild strength, ultimate strength and
yeild to failure.  I am assuming you would use very secure
end closure or maybe a steel rod connecting the ends to
make sure the case ruptures rather than the end closures
coming off.

While we are on the subject is T-6 still ductile enough
to be considered safer than steel?  The 10% yeild to
failure sounds as brittle as steel.  The Boeing Surplus
Center has mostly 6061 T-4 which is a little less strong
but has 22% yeild to failure.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 24650 invoked from network); 22 Dec 2001 01:54:02 -0000
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 22 Dec 2001 01:54:02 -0000
Received: (qmail 22329 invoked by uid 50005); 22 Dec 2001 01:54:11 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4176. . Clean. Processed in 5.362049 secs); 22 Dec 2001 01:54:11 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 22 Dec 2001 01:54:03 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA20897; Fri, 21 Dec 2001 17:52:11 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 106840 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 22 Dec 2001 01:51:45          +0000
Received: from mta05.mail.mel.aone.net.au (mta05.mail.au.uu.net [203.2.192.85])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA20882 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 21 Dec 2001 17:51:45 -0800
Received: from unknown ([63.34.212.170]) by mta05.mail.mel.aone.net.au with          SMTP id <20011222015140.YVTM395.mta05.mail.mel.aone.net.au@unknown>          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 22 Dec 2001 12:51:40 +1100
References: Conversation            <Pine.LNX.4.10.10112041255390.21687-100000@itc.uci.edu> with last            message <3C2351C1.41CADA13@stud.uni-goettingen.de>
Priority: Normal
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Priority: 3
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	X-MAPIextension=.TXT;
	charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>
Date:         Sat, 22 Dec 2001 01:51:45 +0000
Reply-To: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Al Alloy ID?
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <3C2351C1.41CADA13@stud.uni-goettingen.de>

----------
> Troy Prideaux schrieb:
>
> > Chuck it up on the lathe and machine a bit. If it machines well and
comes
> > off in brittle flakes or reasonably *clean* brittle swarf or is easy to
> > achieve a good finish with, then you have a good hard grade of alloy. If
> > it's hard to machine and comes off in long *soft* strands and is
difficult
> > to obtain a good clean finish with, you have junk.
>
> Well, the AlMgSi 0,5 (or T6061) machines really hard, and releases long
> strands.

Often true (depending on the depth of cut in many cases but there's a
noticeable difference between these strands and junk strands. They're a lot
cleaner.

> Another variety called AlCuMgPb gives the little flakes, but is too
expensive

2xxx series Al alloy contains Cu as its major alloying component (hence the
"2") and does give little flakes when machined. Most common varieties are
those around the 2011 grades sold as machinable grade bar. Most, if not all
the 2xxx series alloys are suitable for high strength applications and
normally possess yield strengths of >240Mpa (on a par or above 6061 T6). So
I don't know which grade you refer to but it must be one of the very
obscure ones?

Troy.

> and not tough enough for things like thrust chambers. It makes for good
> injectors though.
> No difference in finish though, check out
> http://www.liquid-propulsion.de/L400.htm  Injectors and nozzle retainer
are
> AlCuMgPb, thrust chamber is T6061.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Tom
>
> >
> >
> > Troy.
> >
> > ----------
> > > Here's another one...
> > >
> > > I know there are common "Spark Tests"
> > > (http://shopswarf.orcon.net.nz/spark.html) for determining steel
alloys.
> > > These tests allow alloy ID with no sophisticated hardware, just a
common
> > > bench grinder.
> > >
> > > I've now got access to a fairly large supply of cheap aluminum
irrigation
> > > tubing, in 3" and 2" OD.  Is there any quick and dirty method of
figuring
> > > the alloy without resorting to metalography?  I know irrigation tubing
> > > used to be 6061.  A quick web search shows the newer alloys are
likely to
> > > be 3003.  Any easy way to tell the difference?
> > >
> > > TIA,
> > >
> > > Ray
> > >
>
> --
> Atheism is a non-prophet organization.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 14753 invoked from network); 22 Dec 2001 03:07:38 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 22 Dec 2001 03:07:38 -0000
Received: (qmail 10855 invoked by uid 50005); 22 Dec 2001 03:07:47 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4176. . Clean. Processed in 2.146865 secs); 22 Dec 2001 03:07:47 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 22 Dec 2001 03:07:44 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA21112; Fri, 21 Dec 2001 18:51:58 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 106875 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 22 Dec 2001 02:51:49          +0000
Received: from imo-d01.mx.aol.com (imo-d01.mx.aol.com [205.188.157.33]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA21098 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Fri, 21 Dec 2001 18:51:48 -0800
Received: from JMKrell@aol.com by imo-d01.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v31_r1.9.) id          w.7b.20566fa7 (3699); Fri, 21 Dec 2001 21:51:07 -0500 (EST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0EA0_01C56B69.5D9D86B0"
X-Mailer: AOL 6.0 for Windows US sub 10552
Message-ID:  <7b.20566fa7.29554f1b@aol.com>
Date:         Fri, 21 Dec 2001 21:51:07 EST
Reply-To: <JMKrell@AOL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <JMKrell@AOL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] odd grain geometries...
Comments: cc: mks@biomicro.com
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0EA0_01C56B69.5D9D86B0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

"Has anyone, for any reason, ever worked with a hybrid grain which had an
annular
slot rather than a central core?  Picture two concentric circular grains, the
inner one solid, with a gap between them."

The University of Redlands built such a hybrid back in the '70's. The head of
the Engineering Department was a hands on engineer. Every year the senior
engineering students worked on a group project. The university produced a
documentary movie on each project, that should be available from the
university.

The injector used pairs of impingement streams in a grove ring IIRC. The
oxidizer was self pressurized LOX.

John Krell
PlasmaJet


------=_NextPart_000_0EA0_01C56B69.5D9D86B0
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<HTML><FONT FACE=arial,helvetica><FONT  SIZE=2>"Has anyone, for any reason, ever worked with a hybrid grain which had an annular
<BR>slot rather than a central core? &nbsp;Picture two concentric circular grains, the
<BR>inner one solid, with a gap between them."
<BR>
<BR>The University of Redlands built such a hybrid back in the '70's. The head of the Engineering Department was a hands on engineer. Every year the senior engineering students worked on a group project. The university produced a documentary movie on each project, that should be available from the university.
<BR>
<BR>The injector used pairs of impingement streams in a grove ring IIRC. The oxidizer was self pressurized LOX. &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;
<BR>
<BR>John Krell
<BR>PlasmaJet
<BR></FONT></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0EA0_01C56B69.5D9D86B0--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 16581 invoked from network); 22 Dec 2001 03:28:45 -0000
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 22 Dec 2001 03:28:45 -0000
Received: (qmail 2289 invoked by uid 50005); 22 Dec 2001 03:28:55 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4176. . Clean. Processed in 1.671233 secs); 22 Dec 2001 03:28:55 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 22 Dec 2001 03:28:53 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA21234; Fri, 21 Dec 2001 19:27:24 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 106896 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 22 Dec 2001 03:27:06          +0000
Received: from smtprelay7.dc2.adelphia.net (smtprelay7.dc2.adelphia.net          [64.8.50.39]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA21216 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 21 Dec 2001 19:27:05 -0800
Received: from jlgrady ([24.53.101.238]) by smtprelay7.dc2.adelphia.net          (Netscape Messaging Server 4.15) with SMTP id GOQ6W900.PXF; Fri, 21          Dec 2001 22:26:33 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0EA5_01C56B69.5D9D86B0"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook CWS, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
Importance: Normal
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <000201c18a98$b6a20ca0$0200a8c0@cmngga.adelphia.net>
Date:         Fri, 21 Dec 2001 22:28:24 -0500
Reply-To: "Jeff Grady" <jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jeff Grady" <jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] odd grain geometries...
Comments: To: JMKrell@AOL.COM
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <7b.20566fa7.29554f1b@aol.com>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0EA5_01C56B69.5D9D86B0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

How is the inner core supported? What keeps it from eroding into large
chunks?

Just curious...

JG
  -----Original Message-----
  From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@itc.uci.edu]On
Behalf Of JMKrell@AOL.COM
  Sent: Friday, December 21, 2001 9:51 PM
  To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
  Subject: Re: [AR] odd grain geometries...


  "Has anyone, for any reason, ever worked with a hybrid grain which had an
annular
  slot rather than a central core?  Picture two concentric circular grains,
the
  inner one solid, with a gap between them."

  The University of Redlands built such a hybrid back in the '70's. The head
of the Engineering Department was a hands on engineer. Every year the senior
engineering students worked on a group project. The university produced a
documentary movie on each project, that should be available from the
university.

  The injector used pairs of impingement streams in a grove ring IIRC. The
oxidizer was self pressurized LOX.

  John Krell
  PlasmaJet


------=_NextPart_000_0EA5_01C56B69.5D9D86B0
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META HTTP-EQUIV=3D"Content-Type" CONTENT=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Diso-8859-1">


<META content=3D"MSHTML 5.50.4807.2300" name=3DGENERATOR></HEAD>
<BODY>
<DIV><SPAN class=3D653222703-22122001><FONT face=3DArial color=3D#0000ff =
size=3D2>How is=20
the inner core supported? What keeps it from eroding into large=20
chunks?</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=3D653222703-22122001><FONT face=3DArial color=3D#0000ff =

size=3D2></FONT></SPAN>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=3D653222703-22122001><FONT face=3DArial color=3D#0000ff =
size=3D2>Just=20
curious...</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=3D653222703-22122001></SPAN>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=3D653222703-22122001><FONT face=3DArial color=3D#0000ff =

size=3D2>JG</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE>
  <DIV class=3DOutlookMessageHeader dir=3Dltr align=3Dleft><FONT =
face=3DTahoma=20
  size=3D2>-----Original Message-----<BR><B>From:</B> Amateur Rocketry =
discussion=20
  list [mailto:AROCKET@itc.uci.edu]<B>On Behalf Of=20
  </B>JMKrell@AOL.COM<BR><B>Sent:</B> Friday, December 21, 2001 9:51=20
  PM<BR><B>To:</B> AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU<BR><B>Subject:</B> Re: [AR] odd =
grain=20
  geometries...<BR><BR></FONT></DIV><FONT face=3Darial,helvetica><FONT =
size=3D2>"Has=20
  anyone, for any reason, ever worked with a hybrid grain which had an =
annular=20
  <BR>slot rather than a central core? &nbsp;Picture two concentric =
circular=20
  grains, the <BR>inner one solid, with a gap between them." <BR><BR>The =

  University of Redlands built such a hybrid back in the '70's. The head =
of the=20
  Engineering Department was a hands on engineer. Every year the senior=20
  engineering students worked on a group project. The university =
produced a=20
  documentary movie on each project, that should be available from the=20
  university. <BR><BR>The injector used pairs of impingement streams in =
a grove=20
  ring IIRC. The oxidizer was self pressurized LOX. &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;=20
  <BR><BR>John Krell <BR>PlasmaJet =
<BR></BLOCKQUOTE></FONT></FONT></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0EA5_01C56B69.5D9D86B0--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 12256 invoked from network); 22 Dec 2001 05:05:15 -0000
Received: from smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.105]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 22 Dec 2001 05:05:15 -0000
Received: (qmail 13983 invoked by uid 50005); 22 Dec 2001 05:05:24 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpy with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4176. . Clean. Processed in 4.438891 secs); 22 Dec 2001 05:05:24 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 22 Dec 2001 05:05:18 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA21598; Fri, 21 Dec 2001 21:03:42 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 106957 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 22 Dec 2001 05:03:27          +0000
Received: from cablecom.laribay.net (cablecom.laribay.net [66.20.57.4]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA21583 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 21 Dec 2001 21:03:26 -0800
Received: from billbull (dial092.laribay.net [66.20.57.92]) by          cablecom.laribay.net (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id WAA02093 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 21 Dec 2001 22:48:01 -0600 (CST)          (envelope-from bpbullock@laribay.net)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <005601c18aa6$338bf8e0$5c391442@billbull>
Date:         Fri, 21 Dec 2001 23:04:55 -0600
Reply-To: "Bill Bullock" <bpbullock@LARIBAY.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Bill Bullock" <bpbullock@LARIBAY.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Titanium Tube
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

    I have some sections of Titanium tube on the way. Anyone out there want
to help educate an old man who has never turned any of this stuff? I could
use some borrowed experience from someone.
    Respectfully,
Bill
PS: If my supplier can get any larger diameter stuff anyone besides me and
foy interested?

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 5884 invoked from network); 22 Dec 2001 06:13:04 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 22 Dec 2001 06:13:04 -0000
Received: (qmail 24775 invoked by uid 50005); 22 Dec 2001 06:13:13 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4176. . Clean. Processed in 0.56549 secs); 22 Dec 2001 06:13:13 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 22 Dec 2001 06:13:13 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA21949; Fri, 21 Dec 2001 22:11:39 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 107002 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 22 Dec 2001 06:11:24          +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (oe18.law12.hotmail.com [64.4.18.122]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA21935 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Fri, 21 Dec 2001 22:11:24 -0800
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Fri,          21 Dec 2001 22:10:54 -0800
X-Originating-IP: [24.92.128.69]
References:  <005601c18aa6$338bf8e0$5c391442@billbull>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 22 Dec 2001 06:10:54.0288 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[69D9DD00:01C18AAF]
Message-ID:  <OE18lJ1hu3TS1NcY6Wm00002519@hotmail.com>
Date:         Sat, 22 Dec 2001 00:10:02 -0600
Reply-To: "Mark Kruep" <mkruep@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Mark Kruep" <mkruep@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Titanium Tube
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

My LIMITED experience is to treat it as though it was a hardened steel or a
stainless steel and then reduce your cutting speed between 15-20%. No cuts
over .020" unless you have access to a real good milling center that can
handle it. What little I have done with it, my experience is rough cuts
aren't super hard to do, but regular ole' tool steel has a hard time getting
a nice finish on it. I am far from an authority on this subject though.

Mark

----- Original Message -----
From: "Bill Bullock" <bpbullock@LARIBAY.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Friday, December 21, 2001 11:04 PM
Subject: Re: [AR] Titanium Tube


>     I have some sections of Titanium tube on the way. Anyone out there
want
> to help educate an old man who has never turned any of this stuff? I could
> use some borrowed experience from someone.
>     Respectfully,
> Bill
> PS: If my supplier can get any larger diameter stuff anyone besides me and
> foy interested?
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 8825 invoked from network); 22 Dec 2001 11:43:43 -0000
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 22 Dec 2001 11:43:43 -0000
Received: (qmail 19928 invoked by uid 50005); 22 Dec 2001 11:43:53 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpf with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4176. . Clean. Processed in 0.978329 secs); 22 Dec 2001 11:43:53 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 22 Dec 2001 11:43:51 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id DAA23046; Sat, 22 Dec 2001 03:42:39 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 107101 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 22 Dec 2001 11:42:35          +0000
Received: from fep3-orange.clear.net.nz (fep3-orange.clear.net.nz          [203.97.32.3]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id DAA23032          for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Sat, 22 Dec 2001 03:42:34 -0800
Received: from mkbs (203-167-156-177.dialup.clear.net.nz [203.167.156.177]) by          fep3-orange.clear.net.nz (1.5/1.8) with SMTP id AAA02687; Sun, 23 Dec          2001 00:42:28 +1300 (NZDT)
References:  <005601c18aa6$338bf8e0$5c391442@billbull>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <029b01c18ade$2fe69d20$0700a8c0@mkbs>
Date:         Sun, 23 Dec 2001 00:45:18 +1300
Reply-To: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Organization: Applied Technology
Subject:      Re: [AR] Titanium Tube
Comments: To: Bill Bullock <bpbullock@LARIBAY.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

> I have some sections of Titanium tube on the way. Anyone out there want
> to help educate an old man who has never turned any of this stuff? I could
> use some borrowed experience from someone.

I have NO practical experience with it at all - but I assume they you are
sufficiently aware of its notch sensitivity and consequent great dislike to
unbalanced stress raisers of any sort. Many of the top motocross bikes of
the early 1970's were Titanium framed and very very light. They also used to
break in pieces, literally, in mid air after a rock or similar had pinged
the frame that someone had carefully welded to be stress free (or at least
stress balanced).




      Russell McMahon
_____________________________

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 23619 invoked from network); 22 Dec 2001 16:37:32 -0000
Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.86]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 22 Dec 2001 16:37:32 -0000
Received: (qmail 22497 invoked by uid 50005); 22 Dec 2001 16:37:42 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpf with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4176. . Clean. Processed in 0.36491 secs); 22 Dec 2001 16:37:42 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 22 Dec 2001 16:37:41 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA23808; Sat, 22 Dec 2001 08:36:15 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 107129 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 22 Dec 2001 16:36:06          +0000
Received: from cablecom.laribay.net (cablecom.laribay.net [66.20.57.4]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA23794 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 22 Dec 2001 08:36:06 -0800
Received: from billbull (dial112.laribay.net [66.20.57.112]) by          cablecom.laribay.net (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id KAA10215 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 22 Dec 2001 10:20:39 -0600 (CST)          (envelope-from bpbullock@laribay.net)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <00a701c18b06$f7d858a0$70391442@billbull>
Date:         Sat, 22 Dec 2001 10:37:37 -0600
Reply-To: "Bill Bullock" <bpbullock@LARIBAY.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Bill Bullock" <bpbullock@LARIBAY.NET>
Subject:      [AR] Re Titanium Tube
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

    Thanks all for the responses on-  and off-list. These particular tubes
are 1.50" O.D. and have a wall thickness of 0.058" and are
aerospace/aeronautical quality. With these dimensions they can be cut and
threaded for direct AeroTech/Dr. Rocket 38mm casing replacements.
    Lately I have been machining a small "relief groove" down the sides of
my steel casings in order to induce them to fail where and in what manner I
dictate instead of allowing them to fragment like most steel casings are
prone to do. I would take it that this "stress concentrator" will not be a
good idea on the titanium. (Please someone comment on this last.)
    Respectfully,
Bill

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 27231 invoked from network); 23 Dec 2001 03:03:04 -0000
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 23 Dec 2001 03:03:04 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 16718 invoked by uid 50005); 23 Dec 2001 03:03:14 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4176. . Clean. Processed in 1.185013 secs); 23 Dec 2001 03:03:14 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 23 Dec 2001 03:03:12 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA25625; Sat, 22 Dec 2001 19:01:09 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 107263 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 23 Dec 2001 03:00:39          +0000
Received: from dns2.seanet.com (dns2.seanet.com [199.181.164.2]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA25608 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat,          22 Dec 2001 19:00:39 -0800
Received: from seanet.com (ssstolt.seanet.com [204.182.68.23]) by          dns2.seanet.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id fBN30cs05114 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 22 Dec 2001 19:00:38 -0800 (PST)
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.73 [en] (Win98; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <Pine.LNX.4.10.10112200040160.11038-100000@itc.uci.edu>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3C254843.966F6956@seanet.com>
Date:         Sat, 22 Dec 2001 18:58:12 -0800
Reply-To: "Sherwood Stolt" <ssstolt@SEANET.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Sherwood Stolt" <ssstolt@SEANET.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Entonox and N2O/O2 blends
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

I would have to see it to believe it.  Seems like it would take
a lot of gas to fill the tank at the operating pressure and most
solubilities are lower than the gas they are in equilibrium with.
Also its the temperature drop that causes the pressure to
drop.  If you want the pressure to stay up then you can't
allow much temperature drop.  What you need is some sort
of chemical reaction that releases heat or gas, maybe some
of that stuff that produces foam when mixed.  I wonder if
there are any such chemical reactions that stop at some
maximum pressure so that you could not get a run away.

Ray Calkins wrote:
...

> How about dissolved oxygen gas in liquid nitrous oxide?  Since the
> solubility of a liquid drops with temperature, this would reduce the
> tail-off effect of nitrous hybrids as the GOx came out of solution.
> Assuming you could get the concentrations up, it would also aid ignition.
> If you designed your injector to account for the effervescent fluid, it
> would likely improve performance, at least in hybrids.
>
> What is needed at this point are N2O/O2 solubility/temperature curves at a
> few pressures, say 400, 600 and 800 psi.  Is there anybody sufficiently
> schooled in PChem to tackle this work?  If not, I'd sure appreciate some
> guidelines on how to tackle this problem.
>
> Lacking that, would another dissolved pressurant be superior on a
> cost/performance basis?
>
> Ad Astra per aspera,
>
> Ray

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 4269 invoked from network); 23 Dec 2001 04:34:34 -0000
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 23 Dec 2001 04:34:34 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 7026 invoked by uid 50005); 23 Dec 2001 04:34:43 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4176. . Clean. Processed in 6.313741 secs); 23 Dec 2001 04:34:43 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 23 Dec 2001 04:34:34 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA26073; Sat, 22 Dec 2001 20:33:06 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 107323 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 23 Dec 2001 04:33:00          +0000
Received: from mta1.snet.net (mta1.snet.net [204.60.203.70]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA26059 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat,          22 Dec 2001 20:33:00 -0800
Received: from snet.net (26.68.252.64.snet.net [64.252.68.26] (may be forged))          by mta1.snet.net (8.12.1/8.12.1/SNET-smtp-1.1/D-1.1/O-1.1) with ESMTP          id fBN4Vm1u028860 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 22 Dec 2001          23:31:48 -0500 (EST)
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.75 [en] (Win98; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <177.11684c8.29537999@aol.com>            <000d01c1898c$c1eac5a0$0f5ca8c0@cronos>            <003001c189be$eee71e00$019b150c@l9l3e3>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0EA9_01C56B69.5DA96D90"
Message-ID:  <3C2560C7.291DF2EF@snet.net>
Date:         Sat, 22 Dec 2001 23:42:47 -0500
Reply-To: "Blake Mantel" <BMantel@SNET.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Blake Mantel" <BMantel@SNET.NET>
Organization: done through the use of very fuzzy logic!
Subject:      Re: [AR] Testing for 6061-T6 in the Scrapyard
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0EA9_01C56B69.5DA96D90
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

foy wrote:

>          Al will lose start losing temper at about 350-400F and it doesn't
> come back after it cools.     Foy

Sorry Foy but that is not correct.

One can even fully anneal 6061 to a T0 condition by heating it carefully. Take
an oxy-actylene torch and "smoke" the surface black with an acetylene only
flame. Then heat it slowly with a neutral flame until the carbon disappears.
Plunge immediately into cold water to keep it soft. (the opposite of steels!)

The 6061 if left alone for a few months will slowly regain hardness to a T4
condition at normal temperatures. It can be brought to a T6 condition by heating
to 900F for 4 hours or so.

Good Luck,
Blake
--
CUM CATAPULTAE PROSCRIPTAE ERUNT TUM SOLI PROSCRIPTI CATAPULTAS HABEBUNT.
(When catapults are outlawed, only outlaws will have catapults....)
Triumph Tiger Motorcycle page at: http://pages.cthome.net/bmantel/


------=_NextPart_000_0EA9_01C56B69.5DA96D90
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<!doctype html public "-//w3c//dtd html 4.0 transitional//en">
<html>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
foy wrote:
<blockquote TYPE=CITE><style></style>
<font face="Arial"><font size=-1>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;
Al will lose start losing temper at about 350-400F and it doesn't come
back after it cools.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Foy</font></font></blockquote>
Sorry Foy but that is not correct.
<p>One can even fully anneal 6061 to a T0 condition by heating it carefully.
Take an oxy-actylene torch and "smoke" the surface black with an acetylene
only flame. Then heat it slowly with a neutral flame until the carbon disappears.
Plunge immediately into cold water to keep it soft. (the opposite of steels!)
<p>The 6061 if left alone for a few months will slowly regain hardness
to a T4 condition at normal temperatures. It can be brought to a T6 condition
by heating to 900F for 4 hours or so.
<p>Good Luck,
<br>Blake
<br>--
<br>CUM CATAPULTAE PROSCRIPTAE ERUNT TUM SOLI PROSCRIPTI CATAPULTAS HABEBUNT.
<br>(When catapults are outlawed, only outlaws will have catapults....)
<br>Triumph Tiger Motorcycle page at: <A HREF="http://pages.cthome.net/bmantel/">http://pages.cthome.net/bmantel/</A>
<br>&nbsp;
</body>
</html>

------=_NextPart_000_0EA9_01C56B69.5DA96D90--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 21979 invoked from network); 23 Dec 2001 04:42:28 -0000
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 23 Dec 2001 04:42:28 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 15537 invoked by uid 50005); 23 Dec 2001 04:42:38 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4176. . Clean. Processed in 0.797536 secs); 23 Dec 2001 04:42:38 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 23 Dec 2001 04:42:37 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA26123; Sat, 22 Dec 2001 20:41:23 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 107334 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 23 Dec 2001 04:41:21          +0000
Received: from mta1.snet.net (mta1.snet.net [204.60.203.70]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA26109 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat,          22 Dec 2001 20:41:20 -0800
Received: from snet.net (26.68.252.64.snet.net [64.252.68.26] (may be forged))          by mta1.snet.net (8.12.1/8.12.1/SNET-smtp-1.1/D-1.1/O-1.1) with ESMTP          id fBN4e91u001071 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 22 Dec 2001          23:40:09 -0500 (EST)
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.75 [en] (Win98; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: Conversation            <Pine.LNX.4.10.10112041255390.21687-100000@itc.uci.edu> with last            message <Pine.LNX.4.10.10112041255390.21687-100000@itc.uci.edu>            <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>            <00b601c189ea$4b720240$0700a8c0@mkbs>            <OE34wAw2bE3UobGRuLB000026c9@hotmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3C2562BD.375E43A4@snet.net>
Date:         Sat, 22 Dec 2001 23:51:09 -0500
Reply-To: "Blake Mantel" <BMantel@SNET.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Blake Mantel" <BMantel@SNET.NET>
Organization: done through the use of very fuzzy logic!
Subject:      Re: [AR] Al Alloy ID?
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Mark Kruep wrote:

Now, it's heat treated. Time for the artificial age hardening part. Put it

> back in a furnace at 375 degrees F for 8 hours. It can then air cool from
> there. Volia, 6061-T6 aluminum (or there abouts...only a professional mill
> will ever get it close to precise).
> Mark

Opps that's right! I did take my materials course a few years ago..... ;(
Blake
--
CUM CATAPULTAE PROSCRIPTAE ERUNT TUM SOLI PROSCRIPTI CATAPULTAS HABEBUNT.
(When catapults are outlawed, only outlaws will have catapults....)
Triumph Tiger Motorcycle page at: http://pages.cthome.net/bmantel/

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 24729 invoked from network); 23 Dec 2001 06:05:32 -0000
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 23 Dec 2001 06:05:32 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 19962 invoked by uid 50005); 23 Dec 2001 06:05:41 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4176. . Clean. Processed in 0.681244 secs); 23 Dec 2001 06:05:41 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 23 Dec 2001 06:05:40 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA26453; Sat, 22 Dec 2001 22:04:17 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 107369 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 23 Dec 2001 06:04:04          +0000
Received: from avocet.prod.itd.earthlink.net (avocet.mail.pas.earthlink.net          [207.217.120.50]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA26394          for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Sat, 22 Dec 2001 21:54:03 -0800
Received: from dialup-209.244.107.49.dial1.sanjose1.level3.net          ([209.244.107.49] helo=earthlink.net) by          avocet.prod.itd.earthlink.net with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id          16I1aE-0001ct-00; Sat, 22 Dec 2001 21:54:02 -0800
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.75 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.16-22 i686)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3C2571A5.D768DE74@earthlink.net>
Date:         Sat, 22 Dec 2001 21:54:45 -0800
Reply-To: "David Weinshenker" <daze39@EARTHLINK.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "David Weinshenker" <daze39@EARTHLINK.NET>
Subject:      [AR] diethylcyclohexane: mystery hydrocarbon fuel??
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

In "Ignition!", J. Clark metions diethylcyclohexane as a potential
fuel for oxygen motors - some tests at Rocketdyne showed it to be
superior to RP-1, but it never made it into an actual rocket for
historical, more than technical, reasons.

Clark describes it as "not a pure compound, but a highly
reproducible mixture of isomers, and easy to come by"...

I've been doing a bit of poking around on the net, punching
"diethylcyclohexane" into the search field of any
promising-looking chemical company website, and drawing
a total blank... I haven't been able to find any listing of
it as a product _anywhere_, or even an MSDS!!

(I didn't have any trouble (just out of curiosity!) one or
two potential sources, and at least one MSDS, for UDMH
(unsymmetrical dimethyl hydrazine - a popular hypergolic
fuel in military & space applications) - the hazard
thresholds for air concentration exposure seem to be only
2-10x tighter than the 1ppm limit for peroxide! :o )

Anyhow _all_ I've been able to find so far is a listing of a few
physical properties, a CAS number (1331-43-7), and a "toxicicity
survey" that suggested that toxicity was unlikely to be a problem
unless your application was as a beverage for rodents... (Yes, if
you make a 1kg rat drink 1800mg or so of it, you _do_ have half
a chance of poisoning the rat...)

Other than that, absolutely nothing... I'm puzzled to the point
of getting really curious!

Can anybody point me to a _really_
generic chemical industry search site?

-dave w

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 6957 invoked from network); 23 Dec 2001 07:15:04 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 23 Dec 2001 07:15:04 -0000
Received: (qmail 28152 invoked by uid 50005); 23 Dec 2001 07:15:14 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpa with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4176. . Clean. Processed in 0.37055 secs); 23 Dec 2001 07:15:14 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 23 Dec 2001 07:15:13 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA26679; Sat, 22 Dec 2001 23:13:56 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 107410 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 23 Dec 2001 07:12:26          +0000
Received: from rwcrmhc52.attbi.com (rwcrmhc52.attbi.com [216.148.227.88]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA26663 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 22 Dec 2001 23:12:26 -0800
Received: from officenew ([12.229.36.176]) by rwcrmhc52.attbi.com (InterMail          vM.4.01.03.27 201-229-121-127-20010626) with SMTP id          <20011223071155.YZZW6450.rwcrmhc52.attbi.com@officenew> for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 23 Dec 2001 07:11:55 +0000
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0EAE_01C56B69.5DABDE90"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2462.0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <00e901c18b81$1aa138a0$8300a8c0@attbi.com>
Date:         Sat, 22 Dec 2001 23:11:55 -0800
Reply-To: "Tomm Aldridge" <taldridge@ATTBI.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Tomm Aldridge" <taldridge@ATTBI.COM>
Subject:      [AR] Lathe help needed
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0EAE_01C56B69.5DABDE90
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

All,

I am having an extremely difficult time finding a stepped pulley for my =
6" Atlas lathe motor (5/8" keyed shaft).  the belt that fits the Atlas =
gear cluster drive pulley is very small, a 4L I believe, and I cannot =
find a motor pulley anywhere.  None at McMaster-Carr even!

Ideas or sources would be most welcome.

Tomm

------=_NextPart_000_0EAE_01C56B69.5DABDE90
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Diso-8859-1">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 6.00.2462.0" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>All,</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>I am having an extremely difficult time =
finding a=20
stepped pulley for my 6" Atlas lathe motor (5/8" keyed shaft).&nbsp; the =
belt=20
that fits the Atlas gear cluster drive pulley is very small, a 4L I =
believe, and=20
I cannot find a motor pulley anywhere.&nbsp; None at McMaster-Carr=20
even!</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Ideas or sources would be most=20
welcome.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Tomm</FONT></DIV></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0EAE_01C56B69.5DABDE90--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 9563 invoked from network); 23 Dec 2001 08:22:57 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 23 Dec 2001 08:22:57 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 20216 invoked by uid 50005); 23 Dec 2001 08:23:06 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4176. . Clean. Processed in 1.101944 secs); 23 Dec 2001 08:23:06 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 23 Dec 2001 08:23:05 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA26936; Sun, 23 Dec 2001 00:21:34 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 107447 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 23 Dec 2001 08:20:04          +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (f233.law8.hotmail.com [216.33.241.233]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA26920 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 23 Dec 2001 00:20:04 -0800
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Sun,          23 Dec 2001 00:19:34 -0800
Received: from 66.1.107.21 by lw8fd.law8.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Sun, 23 Dec          2001 08:19:33 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [66.1.107.21]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 23 Dec 2001 08:19:34.0018 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[8D94EE20:01C18B8A]
Message-ID:  <F233JJXFhLWCACNTfkQ0000a901@hotmail.com>
Date:         Sun, 23 Dec 2001 08:19:33 +0000
Reply-To: "Bryan Flynt" <b_flynt@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Bryan Flynt" <b_flynt@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Re Titanium Tube
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

<html><div style='background-color:'><DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt">Just a heads up on making those threaded closer for the Aerotech type case.<SPAN style="mso-spacerun: yes">&nbsp; </SPAN>Screwing two Titanium pieces together has a nasty problem of seizing.<SPAN style="mso-spacerun: yes">&nbsp; </SPAN>Im not sure what it is about the metal that causes this but this has been my experience.<SPAN style="mso-spacerun: yes">&nbsp; </SPAN>After I successfully seized a Ti bolt into a Ti part I ran across some literature that recommended Steel bolts for Ti parts.<SPAN style="mso-spacerun: yes">&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; </SPAN>They make grease that is specifically formulated (appears to have powdered metal in it) to help prevent the problem but you still have to be very careful.</P>
<P class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt">&nbsp;<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" /><o:p></o:p></P>
<P class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt">Another thing to think about:<SPAN style="mso-spacerun: yes">&nbsp; </SPAN>If your planning to make the closers out of steel or Aluminum are the heat expansion properties of the metals close to the same.<SPAN style="mso-spacerun: yes">&nbsp; </SPAN>If not you might be having some problems with the threads meshing under elevated temps.</P>
<P class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt">&nbsp;<o:p></o:p></P>
<P class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt">Just some ideas,</P>
<P class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt">Bryan Flynt<SPAN style="mso-spacerun: yes">&nbsp; </SPAN></P>
<P><BR><BR></P></DIV>
<DIV></DIV><BR><BR><BR>
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>&gt;From: Bill Bullock <BPBULLOCK@LARIBAY.NET>
<DIV></DIV>&gt;Reply-To: Bill Bullock <BPBULLOCK@LARIBAY.NET>
<DIV></DIV>&gt;To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
<DIV></DIV>&gt;Subject: [AR] Re Titanium Tube
<DIV></DIV>&gt;Date: Sat, 22 Dec 2001 10:37:37 -0600
<DIV></DIV>&gt;
<DIV></DIV>&gt; Thanks all for the responses on- and off-list. These particular tubes
<DIV></DIV>&gt;are 1.50" O.D. and have a wall thickness of 0.058" and are
<DIV></DIV>&gt;aerospace/aeronautical quality. With these dimensions they can be cut and
<DIV></DIV>&gt;threaded for direct AeroTech/Dr. Rocket 38mm casing replacements.
<DIV></DIV>&gt; Lately I have been machining a small "relief groove" down the sides of
<DIV></DIV>&gt;my steel casings in order to induce them to fail where and in what manner I
<DIV></DIV>&gt;dictate instead of allowing them to fragment like most steel casings are
<DIV></DIV>&gt;prone to do. I would take it that this "stress concentrator" will not be a
<DIV></DIV>&gt;good idea on the titanium. (Please someone comment on this last.)
<DIV></DIV>&gt; Respectfully,
<DIV></DIV>&gt;Bill
<DIV></DIV></div><br clear=all><hr>Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: <a href='http://go.msn.com/bql/hmtag2_etl_EN.asp'>Click Here</a><br></html>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 23342 invoked from network); 23 Dec 2001 10:16:23 -0000
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 23 Dec 2001 10:16:23 -0000
Received: (qmail 24613 invoked by uid 50005); 23 Dec 2001 10:16:32 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4176. . Clean. Processed in 4.063778 secs); 23 Dec 2001 10:16:32 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 23 Dec 2001 10:16:27 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id CAA27302; Sun, 23 Dec 2001 02:01:59 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 107511 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 23 Dec 2001 10:00:29          +0000
Received: from cablecom.laribay.net (cablecom.laribay.net [66.20.57.4]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id CAA27283 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 23 Dec 2001 02:00:28 -0800
Received: from billbull (dial109.laribay.net [66.20.57.109]) by          cablecom.laribay.net (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id DAA18640 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 23 Dec 2001 03:44:59 -0600 (CST)          (envelope-from bpbullock@laribay.net)
References:  <F233JJXFhLWCACNTfkQ0000a901@hotmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <000a01c18b98$dda73fe0$6d391442@billbull>
Date:         Sun, 23 Dec 2001 04:01:59 -0600
Reply-To: "Bill Bullock" <bpbullock@LARIBAY.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Bill Bullock" <bpbullock@LARIBAY.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Re Titanium Tube
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Bryan:
    Good points. One of my concerns with using aluminum insert holders for
the ceramic matrix nozzles was the differential in thermal expansion. But I
have found that steel and the ceramic inserts have almost the exact
expansion ratio and would probably work better together.
    On the thread sealant, I started using a VHT (Very High Temp.)
powdered-nickel blend several years ago after the powdered bronze
formulation I had been using started "cooking out" of the threads in some
cases and becoming prone to siezing. One of the combinations this newer
material lists is Ti/Ti joints up to 1400 deg. F. if memory serves. But
until you mentioned it I had not yet considered that particular problem.
Thanks very much for the heads-up on it.
    Yours,
Bill
  ----- Original Message -----
  From: Bryan Flynt
  To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
  Sent: Sunday, December 23, 2001 2:19 AM
  Subject: Re: [AR] Re Titanium Tube


  Just a heads up on making those threaded closer for the Aerotech type
case.  Screwing two Titanium pieces together has a nasty problem of seizing.
I'm not sure what it is about the metal that causes this but this has been
my experience.  After I successfully seized a Ti bolt into a Ti part I ran
across some literature that recommended Steel bolts for Ti parts.     They
make grease that is specifically formulated (appears to have powdered metal
in it) to help prevent the problem but you still have to be very careful.



  Another thing to think about:  If your planning to make the closers out of
steel or Aluminum are the heat expansion properties of the metals close to
the same.  If not you might be having some problems with the threads meshing
under elevated temps.



  Just some ideas,

  Bryan Flynt









  >From: Bill Bullock
  >Reply-To: Bill Bullock
  >To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
  >Subject: [AR] Re Titanium Tube
  >Date: Sat, 22 Dec 2001 10:37:37 -0600
  >
  > Thanks all for the responses on- and off-list. These particular tubes
  >are 1.50" O.D. and have a wall thickness of 0.058" and are
  >aerospace/aeronautical quality. With these dimensions they can be cut and
  >threaded for direct AeroTech/Dr. Rocket 38mm casing replacements.
  > Lately I have been machining a small "relief groove" down the sides of
  >my steel casings in order to induce them to fail where and in what manner
I
  >dictate instead of allowing them to fragment like most steel casings are
  >prone to do. I would take it that this "stress concentrator" will not be
a
  >good idea on the titanium. (Please someone comment on this last.)
  > Respectfully,
  >Bill


----------------------------------------------------------------------------
--
  Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: Click Here

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 28676 invoked from network); 23 Dec 2001 16:56:05 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 23 Dec 2001 16:56:05 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 15512 invoked by uid 50005); 23 Dec 2001 16:56:14 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpa with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4176. . Clean. Processed in 0.480441 secs); 23 Dec 2001 16:56:14 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 23 Dec 2001 16:56:14 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA28762; Sun, 23 Dec 2001 08:37:26 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 107592 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 23 Dec 2001 16:35:54          +0000
Received: from mail1.murraystate.edu (mail1.murraystate.edu [216.249.159.50])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id IAA28746 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Sun, 23 Dec 2001 08:35:54 -0800
Received: from boothcomputer.murraystate.edu (216.249.158.10) by          mail1.murraystate.edu (NPlex 5.5.031) id 3C12217900063302 for          AROCKET@itc.uci.edu; Sun, 23 Dec 2001 10:33:02 -0600
X-Sender: terry.mccreary@murraystate.edu
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <5.1.0.14.0.20011223052608.00a60ec0@murraystate.edu>
Date:         Sun, 23 Dec 2001 10:35:42 -0600
Reply-To: "Terry McCreary" <terry.mccreary@MURRAYSTATE.EDU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Terry McCreary" <terry.mccreary@MURRAYSTATE.EDU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Lathe help needed
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <00e901c18b81$1aa138a0$8300a8c0@attbi.com>

At 11:11 PM 12/22/01 -0800, you wrote:
>All,
>
>I am having an extremely difficult time finding a stepped pulley for my 6"
>Atlas lathe motor (5/8" keyed shaft).  the belt that fits the Atlas gear
>cluster drive pulley is very small, a 4L I believe, and I cannot find a
>motor pulley anywhere.  None at McMaster-Carr even!
>
>Ideas or sources would be most welcome.
>
>Tomm

Hi Tomm:

A 4L belt is 1/2" wide by 5/16" thick.  Wholesale Tool sells Chicago
stepped pulleys for 1/2" wide by 11/32" belts; close enough for guvmint
work.  2, 3, or 4 steps in various diameters.  The most expensive is the
2-3-4-5" pulley, $14.70.  All come in 5/8" bore and 1/2"; most also come in
3/4".  I've got the catalog in front of me.  Tell me what diameters you
need and I'll see if they have it.  Minimum order $25, so pick up a set of
tool bits, a few HSS taps**, or a countersink for nozzle-making while yer
at it.

P'rfesser
**The difference between a ground HSS taper tap (1/4x20 is $1.54) and a
cheap carbon-steel plug tap from the hardware store is like day and night.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 2182 invoked from network); 23 Dec 2001 18:21:59 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 23 Dec 2001 18:21:59 -0000
Received: (qmail 23521 invoked by uid 50005); 23 Dec 2001 18:22:09 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpa with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4176. . Clean. Processed in 0.355308 secs); 23 Dec 2001 18:22:09 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 23 Dec 2001 18:22:08 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA29109; Sun, 23 Dec 2001 10:20:44 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 107629 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 23 Dec 2001 18:19:17          +0000
Received: from fep15-svc.tin.it (mta15-acc.tin.it [212.216.176.46]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA29052 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 23 Dec 2001 10:09:16 -0800
Received: from p3-800 ([212.171.12.10]) by fep15-svc.tin.it (InterMail          vM.4.01.03.13 201-229-121-113) with SMTP id          <20011223180854.TRQQ10540.fep15-svc.tin.it@p3-800> for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 23 Dec 2001 19:08:54 +0100
X-Sender: tasknet@mail.tin.it
X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.2
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <20011223180854.TRQQ10540.fep15-svc.tin.it@p3-800>
Date:         Sun, 23 Dec 2001 19:08:55 +0100
Reply-To: "Eugenio" <tasknet@TIN.IT>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Eugenio" <tasknet@TIN.IT>
Subject:      [AR] Vulcan 400 hybrid motor
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Dear friends rocketeer, I'm Eugene from Italy, this is my first message.
I have designed a 400 Nw hybrid motor with good performances and very reliable.
For information see here:  http://members.xoom.it/laserist/index.htm

Thanks and Merry Christmas to all.

Eugene.


Eugenio Cosolo


Forum dedicato ai motori ibridi per missili : http://groups.yahoo.com/group/hre
Personal web : http://members.xoom.it/laserist/index.htm

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 6985 invoked from network); 23 Dec 2001 18:46:51 -0000
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 23 Dec 2001 18:46:51 -0000
Received: (qmail 5498 invoked by uid 50005); 23 Dec 2001 18:47:01 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4176. . Clean. Processed in 1.501877 secs); 23 Dec 2001 18:47:01 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 23 Dec 2001 18:46:59 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA29274; Sun, 23 Dec 2001 10:45:45 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 107677 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 23 Dec 2001 18:44:22          +0000
Received: from mail.icehouse.net (mail.icehouse.net [204.203.53.2]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id KAA29256 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 23 Dec 2001 10:44:22 -0800
Received: (qmail 59577 invoked by uid 10000); 23 Dec 2001 18:43:52 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO fuckms) ([204.203.54.120]) (envelope-sender          <airdale@icehouse.net>) by mail.icehouse.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with          SMTP for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; 23 Dec 2001 18:43:52 -0000
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook CWS, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <000201c18be1$ccb83010$7836cbcc@fuckms>
Date:         Sun, 23 Dec 2001 10:44:03 -0800
Reply-To: <airdale@icehouse.net>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Airdale" <airdale@icehouse.net>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Titanium tube
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Titanium pieces together has a nasty problem of seizing: A cure for this
proplem is using Milk of Magnesia by Phillips unflavored this worked very
well in the hot section of GE T58-10 tubroshaft engines A NOTE of Cauntion
the bolts use in the hot section Were NOT TI but Inconel if memory serves
me, however the Turkey feathers on the SR-71 engine hinge points were TI

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 26264 invoked from network); 24 Dec 2001 02:36:21 -0000
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 24 Dec 2001 02:36:21 -0000
Received: (qmail 10177 invoked by uid 50005); 24 Dec 2001 02:36:30 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4175. . Clean. Processed in 2.00654 secs); 24 Dec 2001 02:36:30 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 24 Dec 2001 02:36:28 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA30803; Sun, 23 Dec 2001 18:33:26 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 107823 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 24 Dec 2001 02:31:42          +0000
Received: from fep4-orange.clear.net.nz (fep4-orange.clear.net.nz          [203.97.32.4]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA30783          for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Sun, 23 Dec 2001 18:31:41 -0800
Received: from mkbs (203-167-157-143.dialup.clear.net.nz [203.167.157.143]) by          fep4-orange.clear.net.nz (1.5/1.7) with SMTP id PAA18426; Mon, 24 Dec          2001 15:31:36 +1300 (NZDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="Windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <005201c18c23$91012580$0700a8c0@mkbs>
Date:         Mon, 24 Dec 2001 13:52:53 +1300
Reply-To: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Organization: Applied Technology
Subject:      [AR] Woomera launch
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

I don't know if Peter is still on this list (he was last April) but this
post from the PICList will be of interest to some here.


            RM

________________________________________________________

Hi,
I am building a new type of accelerometer which shall be tested at Woomera
Spaceport (the old historic launch site in South Australia) around July, on
a MK4 or MK15 (Zuni) rocket.  For simplicity, I want to base my electronics
on a PIC chip and EEprom, but i don't have much experience with PIC's yet.
If anyone out there who knows PIC's well would like to help, it will be a
great and challenging project, and a chance to really put the chips to the
test (I need them to log large quantities of info from ADC's in the
~2seconds the rocket goes up... thousands of feet at around 60g (~580m/s/s!)
If I could, I would like to be able to have practical help if someone lives
locally (Sydney) but I'll be keeping this list posted as to any problems,
anything we find about PIC's under such harch environments, and eventually
the schematic for the thing [if Kistler Aerospace, who run this thing, will
let me :-)].  Any help from any PICers anywhere would be appreciated, though
you might want to email me personly to avoid clogging up the list...
peterar_83@hotmail.com
Happy PICn all,
Peter




_________________________________________________________________
Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: http://mobile.msn.com

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: PICList Posts must start with ONE topic:
[PIC]:,[SX]:,[AVR]: ->uP ONLY! [EE]:,[OT]: ->Other [BUY]:,[AD]: ->Ads

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 28974 invoked from network); 24 Dec 2001 02:37:17 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.105]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 24 Dec 2001 02:37:17 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: (qmail 22645 invoked by uid 50005); 24 Dec 2001 02:37:26 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpy with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4176. . Clean. Processed in 1.267311 secs); 24 Dec 2001 02:37:26 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 24 Dec 2001 02:37:24 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA30833; Sun, 23 Dec 2001 18:35:10 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 107830 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 24 Dec 2001 02:33:49          +0000
Received: from wrench.toolcity.net (root@wrench.toolcity.net [208.0.188.2]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA30796 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 23 Dec 2001 18:33:14 -0800
Received: from [208.22.189.148]          (dap-208-22-189-148.meadville-tnt-0.pa.toolcity.net [208.22.189.148])          by wrench.toolcity.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id VAA09972; Sun, 23          Dec 2001 21:33:10 -0500 (EST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <v01510100b84c4e2f5079@[63.169.102.13]>
Date:         Sun, 23 Dec 2001 21:35:54 -0600
Reply-To: "al bradley" <abradley@TOOLCITY.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "al bradley" <abradley@TOOLCITY.NET>
Subject:      [AR] Heartfelt Thanks
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

To the arocket list founder:

To the many fine folks and the discussions they bring to the arocket list,

For their open-minds in groping/coping with the materials of these times,

For the help I have witnessed in pursuing math equations in the study of
rocketry and the equations of the things of everyday life,

For those who have helped me dig a bit further into the parts of
electronics and chemistry that I had not been exposed to:

God Bless and Keep You All!

Happy Holidays,
al bradley


------------------------------------------------------------------
Can you live Life with this?: "Unless there is a law, an agreement, or a
long-standing custom, No one `Deserves' Anything -- Either Good or Bad!"

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 2355 invoked from network); 24 Dec 2001 04:14:09 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 24 Dec 2001 04:14:09 -0000
Received: (qmail 21632 invoked by uid 50005); 24 Dec 2001 04:14:19 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpd with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4176. . Clean. Processed in 0.463271 secs); 24 Dec 2001 04:14:19 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 24 Dec 2001 04:14:19 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA31127; Sun, 23 Dec 2001 20:10:38 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 107860 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 24 Dec 2001 04:08:59          +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (oe56.law12.hotmail.com [64.4.18.191]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA31107 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Sun, 23 Dec 2001 20:08:59 -0800
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Sun,          23 Dec 2001 20:08:28 -0800
X-Originating-IP: [24.92.128.69]
References:  <000201c18be1$ccb83010$7836cbcc@fuckms>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 24 Dec 2001 04:08:28.0972 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[A48716C0:01C18C30]
Message-ID:  <OE56tzAktCTF2WrbKeH00007613@hotmail.com>
Date:         Sun, 23 Dec 2001 22:04:38 -0600
Reply-To: "Mark Kruep" <mkruep@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Mark Kruep" <mkruep@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Titanium tube
Comments: cc: Bill Bullock <bpbullock@LARIBAY.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Titanium is a quite reactive metal with alot of weird characteristics. It is
so reactive that a special crucible must be used just to melt the stuff.
They use a water cooled copper crucible, which creates a boundary layer of
solid Ti between the liquid Ti and the Cu. Once solid, it creates oxides
that give it its corrosion resistance (quite similarly to aluminum).

 Another thing that one has to keep in mind is that Ti is allotropic (like
steel). It will go through a phase change and actually reorganize itself
into a new crystalline structure at certain temperatures. For our purposes
the magic temperature is 1616 degrees F. That may seem plenty high, but in
an insufficiently insulated/cooled or very long burn motor, this could
become a serious issue. I had heard some rumor that the WTC may have fallen
because the steel reached its particular allotropy temperature range and
changed structure (which translates into impossible to design for). There is
both a volume and a strength change when this occurs. Like I said, Titanium
will do the same thing, but it will be at a different temperature (1616 deg.
F).

If you have difficulty understanding all this, you will only need 2-3 years
of schooling to become an expert (which I am not). Here's some links for
titanium info such as heat treating and comparisons of Ti to other common
structural metals & a quick summary of what heat treating of steel is, which
is for the most part similar to other metals (an exception or 2). If you are
really bored, you can drop $120 for a copy of "Engineering Materials & Their
Applications" 4th Edition by Flinn/Trojan published by John Wiley and Sons.
It's a good book to learn the basics of metals, ceramics, and composites.
Most technical universities will also have a library with volumes upon
volumes of books related to heat treating and specific processes. ANSI's web
site may also be of some assistance. Enjoy!


http://www.deutschetitan.de/eng/profi/kb6.html
http://www.deutschetitan.de/eng/material/titanium-compared.html
http://www.deutschetitan.de/eng/material/properties.html
http://www.deutschetitan.de/eng/material/pure-or-alloyed.html
http://users.erols.com/bcarpent/swht/process.html


Mark


----- Original Message -----
From: "Airdale" <airdale@ICEHOUSE.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Sunday, December 23, 2001 12:44 PM
Subject: Re: [AR] Titanium tube


> Titanium pieces together has a nasty problem of seizing: A cure for this
> proplem is using Milk of Magnesia by Phillips unflavored this worked very
> well in the hot section of GE T58-10 tubroshaft engines A NOTE of Cauntion
> the bolts use in the hot section Were NOT TI but Inconel if memory serves
> me, however the Turkey feathers on the SR-71 engine hinge points were TI
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 1805 invoked from network); 24 Dec 2001 12:42:02 -0000
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 24 Dec 2001 12:42:02 -0000
Received: (qmail 26556 invoked by uid 50005); 24 Dec 2001 12:42:11 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4176. . Clean. Processed in 5.914551 secs); 24 Dec 2001 12:42:12 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 24 Dec 2001 12:42:04 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id EAA00360; Mon, 24 Dec 2001 04:39:22 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 108082 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 24 Dec 2001 12:37:48          +0000
Received: from fep4-orange.clear.net.nz (fep4-orange.clear.net.nz          [203.97.32.4]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id EAA00342          for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Mon, 24 Dec 2001 04:37:47 -0800
Received: from mkbs (203-167-148-237.dialup.clear.net.nz [203.167.148.237]) by          fep4-orange.clear.net.nz (1.5/1.7) with SMTP id BAA21999; Tue, 25 Dec          2001 01:37:41 +1300 (NZDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="Windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <008901c18c78$3e472a60$0700a8c0@mkbs>
Date:         Tue, 25 Dec 2001 01:40:55 +1300
Reply-To: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Organization: Applied Technology
Subject:      [AR] [OT]: Christmas greetings from the beginning of time.
Comments: To: PIC List <PICLIST@MITVMA.MIT.EDU>,          Water Rockets <water-rockets@lists.osa.com.au>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

For 49 hours it will be Christmas somewhere on earth!. **

So - here's a hope that it will be a time of peace on earth and goodwill to
all mankind, unlikely as the prospect may seem.
Whatever you think of Christmas, here's hoping that it will be a time of
special blessing to you and your family and friends.

And, as Tiny Tim * observed "God bless us, every one"




                Russell McMahon

__________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________


* Tiny Tim - not the singer of the same name but Charles Dickens character
from his novel "A Christmas Carol", written in inly 6 weeks in November
1843. This story resulted in a substantial improvement in the child
employment laws and a rekindling of the observation of Christmas.

Commentary

        http://humwww.ucsc.edu/dickens/DEA/ACC/december.1843.html.

For a free copy of this story, and hundreds of others see -

        http://promo.net/pg/
_______________

**
(Get a world globe and think about it if this seems unlikely)(Remember that
we here in New Zealand at the beginning of all new days have 1 hours
daylight saving).

(actually 48 now, Its 1am here.)

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 22558 invoked from network); 24 Dec 2001 14:15:07 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 24 Dec 2001 14:15:07 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: (qmail 25053 invoked by uid 50005); 24 Dec 2001 14:15:17 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4175. . Clean. Processed in 0.38047 secs); 24 Dec 2001 14:15:17 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 24 Dec 2001 14:15:16 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA00628; Mon, 24 Dec 2001 06:12:41 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 108103 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 24 Dec 2001 14:12:31          +0000
Received: from wrench.toolcity.net (root@wrench.toolcity.net [208.0.188.2]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA00613 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 24 Dec 2001 06:12:30 -0800
Received: from [208.22.189.8] (dap-208-22-189-8.meadville-tnt-0.pa.toolcity.net          [208.22.189.8]) by wrench.toolcity.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id          JAA03907 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 24 Dec 2001 09:12:26 -0500          (EST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <v01510100b84cf4b11973@[208.22.189.250]>
Date:         Mon, 24 Dec 2001 09:15:10 -0600
Reply-To: "al bradley" <abradley@TOOLCITY.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "al bradley" <abradley@TOOLCITY.NET>
Subject:      [AR] COE's
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Does anyone on the list with a knowledge of Coefficients of Expansion of
brass and cast iron have an idea if this yarn could be factual or just
something someone made up to impress others?


>"CANNON BALLS"...
>In the heyday of sailing ships, all war ships and many freighters
>carried iron cannons. Those cannon fired round iron cannon balls. It was
>
>necessary to keep a good supply near the cannon, but prevent them from
>rolling about the deck. The best storage method devised was a square based
>pyramid with one ball on top, resting on four resting on nine which rested on
>sixteen. Thus, a supply of thirty cannon balls could be stacked in a
>small area right next to the cannon. There was only one problem - how to
>prevent the bottom layer from sliding/rolling from under the others. The
>solution was a metal plate called a, "Monkey," with sixteen round
>indentations. If this
>plate was made of iron, the iron balls would quickly rust to it. The
>solution to the rusting problem was to make, "Brass Monkeys."
>Few landlubbers realize that brass contracts much more and much faster
>than iron when chilled. Consequently, when the temperature dropped too
>far, the brass indentations would shrink so much that the cannon balls
>would come right off the monkey. Thus, it was quite literally, "Cold
>enough to freeze the balls off a brass monkey!" {And all this time, you
>have had dirty thoughts, haven't you?}

------------------------------------------------------------------
Can you live Life with this?: "Unless there is a law, an agreement, or a
long-standing custom, No one `Deserves' Anything -- Either Good or Bad!"

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 16030 invoked from network); 24 Dec 2001 21:17:11 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpv.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.110]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 24 Dec 2001 21:17:11 -0000
Received: (qmail 20242 invoked by uid 50005); 24 Dec 2001 21:08:55 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpv with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4177. . Clean. Processed in 0.391631 secs); 24 Dec 2001 21:08:55 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpv.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 24 Dec 2001 21:08:55 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA02068; Mon, 24 Dec 2001 13:02:41 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 108242 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 24 Dec 2001 21:02:19          +0000
Received: from spsystems.net (spsystems.net [209.47.149.227]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA02050 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Mon,          24 Dec 2001 13:02:19 -0800
Received: (from henry@localhost) by spsystems.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id QAA18172;          Mon, 24 Dec 2001 16:01:35 -0500 (EST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1011224155537.17974C-100000@spsystems.net>
Date:         Mon, 24 Dec 2001 16:01:35 -0500
Reply-To: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] COE's
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <v01510100b84cf4b11973@[208.22.189.250]>

On Mon, 24 Dec 2001, al bradley wrote:
> Does anyone on the list with a knowledge of Coefficients of Expansion of
> brass and cast iron have an idea if this yarn could be factual or just
> something someone made up to impress others?

I would be skeptical in general.  The OED (old edition -- I don't have the
new edition) records no such usage of "monkey".  And I would think that a
wooden frame -- lighter, cheaper, easier to make, more easily repaired --
would be far more likely to be used for such a purpose than brass or
bronze.  ("Brass" used to be a very generic term which often covered
alloys we would now call bronze.)

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 19596 invoked from network); 26 Dec 2001 21:10:35 -0000
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 26 Dec 2001 21:10:35 -0000
Received: (qmail 21971 invoked by uid 50005); 26 Dec 2001 21:10:45 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4177. . Clean. Processed in 3.05436 secs); 26 Dec 2001 21:10:45 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 26 Dec 2001 21:10:41 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA11233; Wed, 26 Dec 2001 12:58:23 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 108960 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 26 Dec 2001 20:57:25          +0000
Received: from mail001.syd.optusnet.com.au (mail001.syd.optusnet.com.au          [203.2.75.244]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA11211          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 26 Dec 2001 12:57:24 -0800
Received: from ballbuster (blaax3-069.dialup.optusnet.com.au [210.49.128.69])          by mail001.syd.optusnet.com.au (8.11.1/8.11.1) with SMTP id          fBQKup610894 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 27 Dec 2001 07:56:51          +1100
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
Importance: Normal
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <NJEEJAOGEMKNPMLLEONAIEIHCDAA.strudwicke@optusnet.com.au>
Date:         Thu, 27 Dec 2001 07:55:45 +1100
Reply-To: "craig strudwicke" <strudwicke@OPTUSNET.COM.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "craig strudwicke" <strudwicke@OPTUSNET.COM.AU>
Subject:      [AR] Desireable Graphite qualities
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Hi all,

Does anyone out have a good understanding of the desireable qualities of
graphite when using it as a nozzle material ?

As I understand it, higher density equates to better quality. Are there
crystal/other structural properties that are significant ?

regards,

Craig

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 28839 invoked from network); 26 Dec 2001 21:29:53 -0000
Received: from smtpv.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.110]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 26 Dec 2001 21:29:53 -0000
Received: (qmail 30485 invoked by uid 50005); 26 Dec 2001 21:21:22 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpv with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4177. . Clean. Processed in 2.718271 secs); 26 Dec 2001 21:21:22 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpv.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 26 Dec 2001 21:21:17 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA11455; Wed, 26 Dec 2001 13:28:05 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 108985 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 26 Dec 2001 21:28:01          +0000
Received: from cablecom.laribay.net (cablecom.laribay.net [66.20.57.4]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA11441 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 26 Dec 2001 13:28:00 -0800
Received: from billbull (dial086.laribay.net [66.20.57.86]) by          cablecom.laribay.net (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id PAA04464 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 26 Dec 2001 15:12:21 -0600 (CST)          (envelope-from bpbullock@laribay.net)
References:  <NJEEJAOGEMKNPMLLEONAIEIHCDAA.strudwicke@optusnet.com.au>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <002e01c18e54$661f2a00$56391442@billbull>
Date:         Wed, 26 Dec 2001 15:29:27 -0600
Reply-To: "Bill Bullock" <bpbullock@LARIBAY.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Bill Bullock" <bpbullock@LARIBAY.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Desireable Graphite qualities
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Craig:
    Not being an expert by any means, but my understanding is that the
extremely fine-grained graphite will crack much more readily during firing
than the "lesser" grades . I do know that I got a few bricks of the stuff
Foy found in Florida and have made and fired two nozzle inserts so far and
they have held up quite well...no cracks or apparent ablation so far. Very
reasonable price for a 2 7/8" X 2 7/8" X 12" block compared to what I had
paid elsewhere for scrap rods and etc..
    If you get some of this and want some smaller nozzles you can "re-saw"
it into smaller sticks. For larger nozzles you can use it "whole". I
quartered one brick and am making inserts for a set of machined aluminum
29mm and 38mm nozzle insert holders for some custom-made test casings.
    Sorry to be no more help than this.
Bill
PS: If you turn this stuff on a lathe be sure to set up a vacuum cleaner to
suck the graphite dust up or use the re-circulation fluid to wash it down.
You will have some larger chips flying off the material but they will fall
to the floor and can be swept up. Save this stuff for experimentation in
propellant blends.
----- Original Message -----
From: craig strudwicke <strudwicke@OPTUSNET.COM.AU>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Wednesday, December 26, 2001 2:55 PM
Subject: [AR] Desireable Graphite qualities


> Hi all,
>
> Does anyone out have a good understanding of the desireable qualities of
> graphite when using it as a nozzle material ?
>
> As I understand it, higher density equates to better quality. Are there
> crystal/other structural properties that are significant ?
>
> regards,
>
> Craig
>
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 14466 invoked from network); 26 Dec 2001 23:20:50 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 26 Dec 2001 23:20:50 -0000
Received: (qmail 11705 invoked by uid 50005); 26 Dec 2001 23:21:00 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4177. . Clean. Processed in 3.258585 secs); 26 Dec 2001 23:21:00 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 26 Dec 2001 23:20:56 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA12019; Wed, 26 Dec 2001 15:18:13 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 109039 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 26 Dec 2001 23:18:03          +0000
Received: from spsystems.net (spsystems.net [209.47.149.227]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA12005 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Wed,          26 Dec 2001 15:18:02 -0800
Received: (from henry@localhost) by spsystems.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id SAA29453;          Wed, 26 Dec 2001 18:17:28 -0500 (EST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1011226181242.29022B-100000@spsystems.net>
Date:         Wed, 26 Dec 2001 18:17:28 -0500
Reply-To: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Cooling hybrids: was: Re: [AR] intentionally bad fuels
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <200112192101.QAA05145@pastene.East.Sun.COM>

On Wed, 19 Dec 2001, Peter Finch - High End Server Systems wrote:
> If you have guidance, don't you want as close to neutral stability as
> possible?  So as to lower the necessary control effort?

Well, yes and no and kind of.  In principle this is a sound idea.  In
practice, it's hard to arrange, because both the CP and the CG *move* as
the rocket accelerates and burns fuel.  Moreover, one thing that control
systems tend to strongly dislike is having stability wander back and forth
across the neutral point, between stable and unstable.

> ...and the A-4 could have delivered more payload if it had less fin.
> Modern launch vehicles are finless for this reason.

Actually, modern launch vehicles tend to be highly unstable, making the
control system sweat fairly hard.

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 9081 invoked from network); 26 Dec 2001 23:46:34 -0000
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 26 Dec 2001 23:46:34 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 3970 invoked by uid 50005); 26 Dec 2001 23:46:43 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4177. . Clean. Processed in 1.489394 secs); 26 Dec 2001 23:46:43 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 26 Dec 2001 23:46:41 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA12094; Wed, 26 Dec 2001 15:38:53 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 109050 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 26 Dec 2001 23:38:50          +0000
Received: from sm14.texas.rr.com (sm14.texas.rr.com [24.93.35.41]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA12080 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 26 Dec 2001 15:38:49 -0800
Received: from localhost (cs6669133-229.houston.rr.com [66.69.133.229]) by          sm14.texas.rr.com (8.12.0.Beta16/8.12.0.Beta16) with ESMTP id          fBQNdZu3013804; Wed, 26 Dec 2001 17:39:35 -0600
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="US-ASCII"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.475)
Message-ID:  <B41588AB-FA59-11D5-97D4-0050E43A5105@netaxs.com>
Date:         Wed, 26 Dec 2001 17:38:45 -0600
Reply-To: "Don McCorvey" <dlm3@NETAXS.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Don McCorvey" <dlm3@NETAXS.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Cooling hybrids: was: Re: [AR] intentionally bad fuels
Comments: To: Henry Spencer <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1011226181242.29022B-100000@spsystems.net>

On Wednesday, December 26, 2001, at 05:17  PM, Henry Spencer wrote:
>
>> ...and the A-4 could have delivered more payload if it had less fin.
>> Modern launch vehicles are finless for this reason.
>
> Actually, modern launch vehicles tend to be highly unstable, making the
> control system sweat fairly hard.
>

But modern flight control systems have the sensor, computing, and
actuation bandwidth to deal with it, allowing lighter, simpler (in some
respects), more stable vehicles.

Don McCorvey

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 5962 invoked from network); 26 Dec 2001 23:55:06 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpv.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.110]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 26 Dec 2001 23:55:06 -0000
Received: (qmail 28189 invoked by uid 50005); 26 Dec 2001 23:46:12 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpv with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4177. . Clean. Processed in 3.377927 secs); 26 Dec 2001 23:46:12 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpv.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 26 Dec 2001 23:46:07 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA12155; Wed, 26 Dec 2001 15:53:00 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 109061 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 26 Dec 2001 23:52:57          +0000
Received: from spsystems.net (spsystems.net [209.47.149.227]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA12141 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Wed,          26 Dec 2001 15:52:56 -0800
Received: (from henry@localhost) by spsystems.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id SAA29970;          Wed, 26 Dec 2001 18:52:22 -0500 (EST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1011226184517.29672A-100000@spsystems.net>
Date:         Wed, 26 Dec 2001 18:52:22 -0500
Reply-To: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Cooling hybrids: was: Re: [AR] intentionally bad fuels
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <B41588AB-FA59-11D5-97D4-0050E43A5105@netaxs.com>

On Wed, 26 Dec 2001, Don McCorvey wrote:
> > Actually, modern launch vehicles tend to be highly unstable, making the
> > control system sweat fairly hard.
>
> But modern flight control systems have the sensor, computing, and
> actuation bandwidth to deal with it, allowing lighter, simpler (in some
> respects), more stable vehicles.

You can find people who will argue with you about whether this is really a
good idea, especially if you want low loss rates and you care about
development cost.  The development and verification costs of those control
systems are *extremely* high, because even the most minor failures tend to
result in vehicle loss.  The redundant sensors, actuators, and wiring are
also a not-inconsiderable mass and complexity penalty.  The improvements
are not free.

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 27262 invoked from network); 27 Dec 2001 03:45:21 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 27 Dec 2001 03:45:21 -0000
Received: (qmail 32114 invoked by uid 50005); 27 Dec 2001 03:45:31 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4177. . Clean. Processed in 0.337964 secs); 27 Dec 2001 03:45:31 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 27 Dec 2001 03:45:31 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA12881; Wed, 26 Dec 2001 19:42:08 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 109144 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 27 Dec 2001 03:41:17          +0000
Received: from imo-m09.mx.aol.com (imo-m09.mx.aol.com [64.12.136.164]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA12865 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Wed, 26 Dec 2001 19:41:16 -0800
Received: from Sociald84@aol.com by imo-m09.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v31_r1.9.) id          w.a4.1e911c78 (4595) for <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Wed, 26 Dec 2001          22:40:44 -0500 (EST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0EB1_01C56B69.5DC3AC50"
X-Mailer: AOL 6.0 for Windows US sub 10552
Message-ID:  <a4.1e911c78.295bf23b@aol.com>
Date:         Wed, 26 Dec 2001 22:40:43 EST
Reply-To: <Sociald84@AOL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <Sociald84@AOL.COM>
Subject:      [AR] Lathe
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0EB1_01C56B69.5DC3AC50
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Hey everyone,

Santa was very generous to me this year. My parents got me a 7" x 10" mini
lathe from harbor freight. Now I can finally start to get some of my rockets
out of the design phase. Which brings me to another question I had. For
hydrostatically testing a tank what all is required?  I know that something
to pump the water in with and something to measure the pressure with are
required, but what i really need to know is how to set everything up. The
tank design is very simple, its just a tube with two bolt on bulkheads, I was
going to make one bulkhead just for testing. And the testing would also be
used to evaluate the bulkheads them selves, and how well they seal. I don't
know what I'll use for a pump to get the water into the tank but I think I'll
just use two 1/4" NPT compression fittings on the bulkhead. On will hook up
to some sort of manual pump the other to some sort of pressure gauge. (which
brings up another question) With that type of set up will I have to make some
correction calculations for the pressure, or will the gauge reading be close
to accurate? And one more thing, where could I find a descent pressure gauge
that will read up to about 1500PSI for a good price?

Thanks

Mark

------=_NextPart_000_0EB1_01C56B69.5DC3AC50
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<HTML><FONT FACE=arial,helvetica><FONT  SIZE=2>Hey everyone,
<BR>
<BR>Santa was very generous to me this year. My parents got me a 7" x 10" mini lathe from harbor freight. Now I can finally start to get some of my rockets out of the design phase. Which brings me to another question I had. For hydrostatically testing a tank what all is required? &nbsp;I know that something to pump the water in with and something to measure the pressure with are required, but what i really need to know is how to set everything up. The tank design is very simple, its just a tube with two bolt on bulkheads, I was going to make one bulkhead just for testing. And the testing would also be used to evaluate the bulkheads them selves, and how well they seal. I don't know what I'll use for a pump to get the water into the tank but I think I'll just use two 1/4" NPT compression fittings on the bulkhead. On will hook up to some sort of manual pump the other to some sort of pressure gauge. (which brings up another question) With that type of set up will I have to   o make so!
me correction calculations for the pressure, or will the gauge reading be close to accurate? And one more thing, where could I find a descent pressure gauge that will read up to about 1500PSI for a good price?
<BR>
<BR>Thanks
<BR>
<BR>Mark</FONT></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0EB1_01C56B69.5DC3AC50--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 11465 invoked from network); 27 Dec 2001 04:45:58 -0000
Received: from smtpv.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.110]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 27 Dec 2001 04:45:58 -0000
Received: (qmail 22129 invoked by uid 50005); 27 Dec 2001 04:37:24 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpv with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4177. . Clean. Processed in 0.837531 secs); 27 Dec 2001 04:37:24 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpv.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 27 Dec 2001 04:37:23 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA13125; Wed, 26 Dec 2001 20:43:01 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 109186 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 27 Dec 2001 04:42:48          +0000
Received: from cablecom.laribay.net (cablecom.laribay.net [66.20.57.4]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA13111 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 26 Dec 2001 20:42:48 -0800
Received: from billbull (dial070.laribay.net [66.20.57.70]) by          cablecom.laribay.net (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id WAA08506 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 26 Dec 2001 22:27:18 -0600 (CST)          (envelope-from bpbullock@laribay.net)
References:  <a4.1e911c78.295bf23b@aol.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <004701c18e91$29c89d60$46391442@billbull>
Date:         Wed, 26 Dec 2001 22:44:25 -0600
Reply-To: "Bill Bullock" <bpbullock@LARIBAY.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Bill Bullock" <bpbullock@LARIBAY.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Lathe
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Mark:
    Try http://www.gaugestore.com/ for precision pressure gauges, pressure
transducers, etc... I ahve seen pressure gauges that go up to 10,000 psi
used every day in the oilfield and know there are some standard gauges that
go up to 25,000 psi out there. Try to get one that you can use mostly the
mid-range section as that is where a pressure gauge is usuallt the most
accurate. Scientific gauges are much more precise and accurate.
    For a pump, try machine shops, body shops and etc...looking for a
"Porta-Power Pump". These are pump units which are used to pressure up on
various hydraulic cylinders and jack bodies which are interchangable in the
system. The one I presently use will go to 5000 psi and I use it on the
80-ton press.  They are rated at various maximum pressures so look for the
highest capability you can find. If the seals leak then bargain the price
down...seals are much cheaper than steel and easy to replace. If the unit
has compression seals (using packing) get in contact with me and I will send
you some Teflon packing material. I keep 1/4" - 3/4" on hand as well as
Grafoil Graphite High-Temp packing. I also have quite a bit of graphite
impregnated "string" packing which can be un-raveled and the individual
strings used in packing glands as small as 1/64th" clearence.
    A good test medium is hydraulic oil which can be had cheaply from
Wal-Mart...get "Tractor Hydraulic Oil". I bought 5 gallons for my big press
last week for, if I remember correctly, $17.00. But they should have quarts
and half-gallons or full gallons.. This is much easier on the P-O-P seals
than water.
    The bulkhead design is OK as far as I am concerned. I have mad them in
the machine shop that will hold 25000 psi or better. We have complete sets
of high-tesy flange bolts up to 2-3/4" diameter and steel up to 6+" thich
for this. If you get it right it will hold. 1500 psi does not take all that
much steel.
    As usual, if there is any way I can help just let me know.
    Yours,
Bill
  ----- Original Message -----
  From: Sociald84@AOL.COM
  To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
  Sent: Wednesday, December 26, 2001 9:40 PM
  Subject: [AR] Lathe


  Hey everyone,

  Santa was very generous to me this year. My parents got me a 7" x 10" mini
lathe from harbor freight. Now I can finally start to get some of my rockets
out of the design phase. Which brings me to another question I had. For
hydrostatically testing a tank what all is required?  I know that something
to pump the water in with and something to measure the pressure with are
required, but what i really need to know is how to set everything up. The
tank design is very simple, its just a tube with two bolt on bulkheads, I
was going to make one bulkhead just for testing. And the testing would also
be used to evaluate the bulkheads them selves, and how well they seal. I
don't know what I'll use for a pump to get the water into the tank but I
think I'll just use two 1/4" NPT compression fittings on the bulkhead. On
will hook up to some sort of manual pump the other to some sort of pressure
gauge. (which brings up another question) With that type of set up will I
have to make so! me correction calculations for the pressure, or will the
gauge reading be close to accurate? And one more thing, where could I find a
descent pressure gauge that will read up to about 1500PSI for a good price?

  Thanks

  Mark

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 8324 invoked from network); 27 Dec 2001 16:50:02 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.105]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 27 Dec 2001 16:50:02 -0000
Received: (qmail 15607 invoked by uid 50005); 27 Dec 2001 16:50:12 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpy with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4177. . Clean. Processed in 2.589534 secs); 27 Dec 2001 16:50:12 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 27 Dec 2001 16:50:08 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA15613; Thu, 27 Dec 2001 08:35:08 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 109284 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 27 Dec 2001 16:34:52          +0000
Received: from imo-m01.mx.aol.com (imo-m01.mx.aol.com [64.12.136.4]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA15596 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Thu, 27 Dec 2001 08:34:52 -0800
Received: from MONTMACH@aol.com by imo-m01.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v31_r1.9.) id          w.186.1195e8a (661) for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Thu, 27 Dec 2001          11:34:19 -0500 (EST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0EB6_01C56B69.5DCD2230"
X-Mailer: AOL 6.0 for Windows US sub 10556
Message-ID:  <186.1195e8a.295ca78b@aol.com>
Date:         Thu, 27 Dec 2001 11:34:19 EST
Reply-To: <MONTMACH@AOL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <MONTMACH@AOL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Lathe
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0EB6_01C56B69.5DCD2230
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

. Which brings me to another question I had. For hydrostatically testing a
tank what all is required?

At RATTworks we use a hydrostatic tester (purchased at McMaster Carr, P.N.
4170K2) that goes up to 3000 psi.  The cost was $205.  It's simple to use;
you just hook it up to a water hose, fill your motor with water, and if you
have the right connections it's a piece of cake.  You will need to make an
NPT threaded bulkhead, though.  We have it down to where we can test a 29 mm
motor in two minutes.  Time is money!
Dave

------=_NextPart_000_0EB6_01C56B69.5DCD2230
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<HTML><FONT FACE=arial,helvetica><FONT  SIZE=2>. Which brings me to another question I had. For hydrostatically testing a tank what all is required? &nbsp;</BLOCKQUOTE>
<BR>
<BR>At RATTworks we use a hydrostatic tester (purchased at McMaster Carr, P.N. 4170K2) that goes up to 3000 psi. &nbsp;The cost was $205. &nbsp;It's simple to use; you just hook it up to a water hose, fill your motor with water, and if you have the right connections it's a piece of cake. &nbsp;You will need to make an NPT threaded bulkhead, though. &nbsp;We have it down to where we can test a 29 mm motor in two minutes. &nbsp;Time is money!
<BR>Dave</FONT></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0EB6_01C56B69.5DCD2230--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 16534 invoked from network); 27 Dec 2001 17:34:42 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 27 Dec 2001 17:34:42 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 10476 invoked by uid 50005); 27 Dec 2001 17:34:52 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4177. . Clean. Processed in 1.522077 secs); 27 Dec 2001 17:34:52 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 27 Dec 2001 17:34:51 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA15799; Thu, 27 Dec 2001 09:18:38 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 109309 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 27 Dec 2001 17:18:34          +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (f116.law8.hotmail.com [216.33.241.116]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA15785 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 27 Dec 2001 09:18:34 -0800
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Thu,          27 Dec 2001 09:18:04 -0800
Received: from 165.127.249.69 by lw8fd.law8.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Thu, 27          Dec 2001 17:18:04 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [165.127.249.69]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 27 Dec 2001 17:18:04.0496 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[71C79D00:01C18EFA]
Message-ID:  <F1162NqFJ3sl3xbYiMC0000ceee@hotmail.com>
Date:         Thu, 27 Dec 2001 17:18:04 +0000
Reply-To: "Bryan Flynt" <b_flynt@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Bryan Flynt" <b_flynt@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Lathe
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

<html><div style='background-color:'><DIV>
<P>I read about someone using a grease gun loaded with honey to hydro test things.&nbsp; You can load the part up with water (to save honey/money) then attach the grease gun with honey and pump away.</P>
<P>Grainger has grease guns that go all the&nbsp;way up to 10,000 PSI for&nbsp;&lt;$40.&nbsp; Although there is always something to be said for a device specificaly made for hydro testing such as mentioned below.</P>
<P>Bryan Flynt<BR><BR></P></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>&gt;From: MONTMACH@AOL.COM
<DIV></DIV>&gt;Reply-To: MONTMACH@AOL.COM
<DIV></DIV>&gt;To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
<DIV></DIV>&gt;Subject: Re: [AR] Lathe
<DIV></DIV>&gt;Date: Thu, 27 Dec 2001 11:34:19 EST
<DIV></DIV>&gt;
<DIV></DIV>&gt;. Which brings me to another question I had. For hydrostatically testing a
<DIV></DIV>&gt;tank what all is required?
<DIV></DIV>&gt;
<DIV></DIV>&gt;At RATTworks we use a hydrostatic tester (purchased at McMaster Carr, P.N.
<DIV></DIV>&gt;4170K2) that goes up to 3000 psi. The cost was $205. It's simple to use;
<DIV></DIV>&gt;you just hook it up to a water hose, fill your motor with water, and if you
<DIV></DIV>&gt;have the right connections it's a piece of cake. You will need to make an
<DIV></DIV>&gt;NPT threaded bulkhead, though. We have it down to where we can test a 29 mm
<DIV></DIV>&gt;motor in two minutes. Time is money!
<DIV></DIV>&gt;Dave
<DIV></DIV></div><br clear=all><hr>MSN Photos is the easiest way to share and print your photos: <a href='http://go.msn.com/bql/hmtag3_etl_EN.asp'>Click Here</a><br></html>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 11707 invoked from network); 27 Dec 2001 17:58:05 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 27 Dec 2001 17:58:05 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 4000 invoked by uid 50005); 27 Dec 2001 17:58:14 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4177. . Clean. Processed in 3.005407 secs); 27 Dec 2001 17:58:14 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 27 Dec 2001 17:58:10 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA15993; Thu, 27 Dec 2001 09:56:22 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 109344 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 27 Dec 2001 17:56:08          +0000
Received: from bailey.dscga.com (bailey.neonym.net [198.78.11.130]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA15979 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Thu, 27 Dec 2001 09:56:07 -0800
Received: from bailey.dscga.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by bailey.dscga.com          (8.12.1/8.12.1) with ESMTP id fBRH0Wij023646 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Thu, 27 Dec 2001 12:00:32 -0500 (EST)
Received: (from michael@localhost) by bailey.dscga.com (8.12.1/8.12.1/Submit)          id fBRH0Vw2023645 for arocket@itc.uci.edu; Thu, 27 Dec 2001 12:00:31          -0500 (EST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Disposition: inline
User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.22.1i
Message-ID:  <20011227120031.I15900@bailey.dscga.com>
Date:         Thu, 27 Dec 2001 12:00:31 -0500
Reply-To: "Michael Mealling" <michael@NEONYM.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Michael Mealling" <michael@NEONYM.NET>
Subject:      [AR] tasks that need to be done?
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Me again,
  The recent discussion of a need for something to do dispersion analysis
got me curious if there was some other resources (software or otherwise)
that the community could benifit from?

-MM

--
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Michael Mealling        |      Vote Libertarian!       | urn:pin:1
michael@neonym.net      |                              | http://www.neonym.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 2698 invoked from network); 27 Dec 2001 18:54:45 -0000
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 27 Dec 2001 18:54:45 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 8316 invoked by uid 50005); 27 Dec 2001 18:54:54 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4177. . Clean. Processed in 5.179159 secs); 27 Dec 2001 18:54:54 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 27 Dec 2001 18:54:47 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA16333; Thu, 27 Dec 2001 10:52:13 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 109375 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 27 Dec 2001 18:52:09          +0000
Received: from mclean.mail.mindspring.net (mclean.mail.mindspring.net          [207.69.200.57]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA16319          for <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Thu, 27 Dec 2001 10:52:08 -0800
Received: from sdn-ar-007casfrmp021.dialsprint.net ([158.252.214.23]          helo=mindspring.com) by mclean.mail.mindspring.net with esmtp (Exim          3.33 #1) id 16JfdK-0000R3-00; Thu, 27 Dec 2001 13:52:03 -0500
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 (Macintosh; U; PPC)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <a4.1e911c78.295bf23b@aol.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3C2B6DB7.5C243981@mindspring.com>
Date:         Thu, 27 Dec 2001 10:51:38 -0800
Reply-To: "Alan Shinn" <alshinn@MINDSPRING.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Alan Shinn" <alshinn@MINDSPRING.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Lathe
Comments: To: Sociald84@AOL.COM
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Mark,
C&H Sales 800-325-9465 has several gauges with nice prices and then some
with calibration certificates with not-so-nice prices -  examples -
#PG9400, 0-3000 psi, 2 3/8" face, $8.95, no cert.,, #HG955515, 3000 psi,
6" face, $150.00, cert
Someone already mentioned a grease gun for the pump - probably should be
the pump type. A small hydraulic car jack should be in the right
pressure range, you could perhaps convert the pump on one. Of coarse,
water will cause rust (is this why they use honey or is it for the
viscosity?) so you have to take the pump apart and dry and oil it
between times if you use water. A thought about honey, -- Karo syrup is cheaper.

Sociald84@AOL.COM wrote:
>
> Hey everyone,
>
> Santa was very generous to me this year. My parents got me a 7" x 10"
> mini lathe from harbor freight. Now I can finally start to get some of
> my rockets out of the design phase. Which brings me to another
> question I had. For hydrostatically testing a tank what all is
> required?  I know that something to pump the water in with and
> something to measure the pressure with are required, but what i really
> need to know is how to set everything up. The tank design is very
> simple, its just a tube with two bolt on bulkheads, I was going to
> make one bulkhead just for testing. And the testing would also be used
> to evaluate the bulkheads them selves, and how well they seal. I don't
> know what I'll use for a pump to get the water into the tank but I
> think I'll just use two 1/4" NPT compression fittings on the bulkhead.
> On will hook up to some sort of manual pump the other to some sort of
> pressure gauge. (which brings up another question) With that type of
> set up will I have to make so! me correction calculations for the
> pressure, or will the gauge reading be close to accurate? And one more
> thing, where could I find a descent pressure gauge that will read up
> to about 1500PSI for a good price?
>
> Thanks
>
> Mark

--
Looking forward:
Alan Shinn


Experience the
beginnings of microscopy.
Make your own replica
of one of Antony van Leeuwenhoek's microscopes.
visit    http://www.mindspring.com/~alshinn/

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 3073 invoked from network); 27 Dec 2001 18:54:51 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 27 Dec 2001 18:54:51 -0000
Received: (qmail 12845 invoked by uid 50005); 27 Dec 2001 18:55:01 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4177. . Clean. Processed in 6.795699 secs); 27 Dec 2001 18:55:01 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 27 Dec 2001 18:54:52 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA16380; Thu, 27 Dec 2001 10:53:15 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 109386 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 27 Dec 2001 18:53:13          +0000
Received: from spsystems.net (spsystems.net [209.47.149.227]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA16366 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Thu,          27 Dec 2001 10:53:13 -0800
Received: (from henry@localhost) by spsystems.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id NAA14253;          Thu, 27 Dec 2001 13:52:33 -0500 (EST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1011227135054.14179B-100000@spsystems.net>
Date:         Thu, 27 Dec 2001 13:52:33 -0500
Reply-To: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Lathe
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <F1162NqFJ3sl3xbYiMC0000ceee@hotmail.com>

On Thu, 27 Dec 2001, Bryan Flynt wrote:
> I read about someone using a grease gun loaded with honey to hydro
> test things.  You can load the part up with water (to save
> honey/money) then attach the grease gun with honey and pump away.

The reason to use honey, incidentally, is that it has much the same
mechanical properties as grease, but can be cleaned up with water rather
than needing solvents.

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 25746 invoked from network); 27 Dec 2001 19:49:46 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.105]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 27 Dec 2001 19:49:46 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 24471 invoked by uid 50005); 27 Dec 2001 19:49:56 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpy with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4177. . Clean. Processed in 1.941577 secs); 27 Dec 2001 19:49:56 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 27 Dec 2001 19:49:54 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA17040; Thu, 27 Dec 2001 11:34:53 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 109436 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 27 Dec 2001 19:34:43          +0000
Received: from out006pub.verizon.net (out006pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.106])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA17026 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 27 Dec 2001 11:34:43 -0800
Received: from [63.24.225.142] (1Cust65.tnt1.rancho-cucamonga.ca.da.uu.net          [63.24.225.65]) by out006pub.verizon.net  with ESMTP for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; id fBRJY7u18039 Thu, 27 Dec 2001 13:34:07          -0600 (CST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: GTE/01rocket@mail.gte.net
References: <Pine.BSI.3.91.1011227135054.14179B-100000@spsystems.net>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <a0510030cb8512812b471@[63.24.225.142]>
Date:         Thu, 27 Dec 2001 11:34:10 -0800
Reply-To: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Lathe
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1011227135054.14179B-100000@spsystems.net>

>On Thu, 27 Dec 2001, Bryan Flynt wrote:
>>  I read about someone using a grease gun loaded with honey to hydro
>>  test things.  You can load the part up with water (to save
>>  honey/money) then attach the grease gun with honey and pump away.
>
>The reason to use honey, incidentally, is that it has much the same
>mechanical properties as grease, but can be cleaned up with water rather
>than needing solvents.
>
>                                                           Henry Spencer
>                                                        henry@spsystems.net

I wonder if the bees understand the distinction.

Jerry

--
Jerry Irvine, Box 1242, Claremont, California USA
Opinion, the whole thing. <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
Bring common sense back to rocketry administration.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 28033 invoked from network); 27 Dec 2001 20:22:49 -0000
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 27 Dec 2001 20:22:49 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 16717 invoked by uid 50005); 27 Dec 2001 20:22:59 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4177. . Clean. Processed in 5.722868 secs); 27 Dec 2001 20:22:59 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 27 Dec 2001 20:22:52 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA17309; Thu, 27 Dec 2001 12:19:52 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 109477 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 27 Dec 2001 20:19:48          +0000
Received: from sm13.texas.rr.com (sm13.texas.rr.com [24.93.35.40]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA17295 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 27 Dec 2001 12:19:47 -0800
Received: from localhost (cs6669133-229.houston.rr.com [66.69.133.229]) by          sm13.texas.rr.com (8.12.0.Beta16/8.12.0.Beta16) with ESMTP id          fBRKLAma003081; Thu, 27 Dec 2001 14:21:11 -0600
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="US-ASCII"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.475)
Message-ID:  <108162E7-FB07-11D5-97D4-0050E43A5105@netaxs.com>
Date:         Thu, 27 Dec 2001 14:19:43 -0600
Reply-To: "Don McCorvey" <dlm3@NETAXS.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Don McCorvey" <dlm3@NETAXS.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Fly-by-wire economics was: Cooling hybrids
Comments: To: Henry Spencer <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1011226184517.29672A-100000@spsystems.net>

On Wednesday, December 26, 2001, at 05:52  PM, Henry Spencer wrote:

> On Wed, 26 Dec 2001, Don McCorvey wrote:
>>> Actually, modern launch vehicles tend to be highly unstable, making
>>> the
>>> control system sweat fairly hard.
>>
>> But modern flight control systems have the sensor, computing, and
>> actuation bandwidth to deal with it, allowing lighter, simpler (in some
>> respects), more stable vehicles.
>
> You can find people who will argue with you about whether this is
> really a
> good idea, especially if you want low loss rates and you care about
> development cost.  The development and verification costs of those
> control
> systems are *extremely* high, because even the most minor failures tend
> to
> result in vehicle loss.  The redundant sensors, actuators, and wiring
> are
> also a not-inconsiderable mass and complexity penalty.  The improvements
> are not free.

No they're not. But with the advent of commercial applications of
fly-by-wire, there is growing maturity in the technology which helps
reduce that up-front cost - more re-use of elements and methodologies
that have worked well, even if they're still proprietary designs. The
electronics and actuation systems are becoming less of an issue as more
successful systems are fielded, validating the methodologies used to
design them. As that happens, more effort is being focused on the
functional requirements for a particular vehicle. The differences
between FBW and fly-by-pushrod systems are in that sense becoming fewer
to the point where the difference in development and verification costs
will eventually vanish.

As for redundancy and mass penalties, most recent FBW systems were
developed because mechanical systems of similar capability were so
complex and heavy that FBW was the preferred option.

Don McCorvey
Houston, Tx

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 7201 invoked from network); 27 Dec 2001 21:07:35 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 27 Dec 2001 21:07:35 -0000
Received: (qmail 20047 invoked by uid 50005); 27 Dec 2001 21:07:46 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4177. . Clean. Processed in 0.790438 secs); 27 Dec 2001 21:07:46 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 27 Dec 2001 21:07:45 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA17499; Thu, 27 Dec 2001 13:05:20 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 109504 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 27 Dec 2001 21:04:41          +0000
Received: from spsystems.net (spsystems.net [209.47.149.227]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA17482 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Thu,          27 Dec 2001 13:04:41 -0800
Received: (from henry@localhost) by spsystems.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id QAA15601;          Thu, 27 Dec 2001 16:04:00 -0500 (EST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1011227154026.15211B-100000@spsystems.net>
Date:         Thu, 27 Dec 2001 16:03:59 -0500
Reply-To: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Fly-by-wire economics was: Cooling hybrids
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <108162E7-FB07-11D5-97D4-0050E43A5105@netaxs.com>

On Thu, 27 Dec 2001, Don McCorvey wrote:
> ...The differences
> between FBW and fly-by-pushrod systems are in that sense becoming fewer
> to the point where the difference in development and verification costs
> will eventually vanish.

I think it's important to separate two issues:  electrical actuation, and
artificial stability.

Particularly for rockets, electrical actuation is very old news, and there
is no reason for it to be significantly more of a problem than mechanical
actuation.  Even aerodynamically-stable rockets are "fly by wire" in this
sense of the term.

Artificial stability is what I was really addressing.  It makes the system
simultaneously a good deal more complex and much more critical.  A small
error in the control system now probably means loss of vehicle, whereas in
a stable vehicle it might just mean more wear and tear on the controls, or
small steering errors for the guidance system to take out.  Moreover, it
has ramifications elsewhere, e.g. it strongly drives the required speed
and authority of the thrust-vectoring system.

As Jeff Greason put it at Space Access last spring:  "If the nose wants to
point forward, that's 80% of the problem solved."  Even just having the
nose not care which way it points is a huge improvement on having it
wanting to point the wrong way.

Don is correct in saying that such systems are becoming more routine in
commercial applications, but little of the technology behind them is
readily available to amateurs (or indeed to anybody who lacks seriously
deep pockets).  It's almost all highly proprietary, as you would expect
for a difficult technology with substantial benefits.

My own opinion?  I used to think this a non-issue.  Not any more.  While I
wouldn't automatically consider aerodynamic stability mandatory, it has
real benefits, especially for high-reliability systems with small
development budgets.

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 672 invoked from network); 27 Dec 2001 21:21:34 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpv.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.110]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 27 Dec 2001 21:21:34 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 4992 invoked by uid 50005); 27 Dec 2001 20:59:18 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpv with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4177. . Clean. Processed in 7.56082 secs); 27 Dec 2001 20:59:18 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpv.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 27 Dec 2001 20:59:07 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA17526; Thu, 27 Dec 2001 13:05:56 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 109511 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 27 Dec 2001 21:05:40          +0000
Received: from idsoftware.com (predator.idsoftware.com [192.246.40.34]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA17508 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Thu, 27 Dec 2001 13:05:40 -0800
Received: from [192.246.40.129] (account johnc HELO lightning.idsoftware.com)          by idsoftware.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 3.4.7) with ESMTP id 29999          for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 27 Dec 2001 15:05:39 -0600
X-Sender: johnc@mail.idsoftware.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.1
References: <Pine.BSI.3.91.1011226184517.29672A-100000@spsystems.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <4.3.1.2.20011227145934.037e42e0@mail.idsoftware.com>
Date:         Thu, 27 Dec 2001 15:03:35 -0600
Reply-To: "John Carmack" <johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Carmack" <johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Fly-by-wire economics was: Cooling hybrids
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <108162E7-FB07-11D5-97D4-0050E43A5105@netaxs.com>

>
>No they're not. But with the advent of commercial applications of
>fly-by-wire, there is growing maturity in the technology which helps
>reduce that up-front cost - more re-use of elements and methodologies
>that have worked well, even if they're still proprietary designs. The
>electronics and actuation systems are becoming less of an issue as more
>successful systems are fielded, validating the methodologies used to
>design them. As that happens, more effort is being focused on the
>functional requirements for a particular vehicle. The differences
>between FBW and fly-by-pushrod systems are in that sense becoming fewer
>to the point where the difference in development and verification costs
>will eventually vanish.

FBW vs fly-by-pushrod is a separate argument from fly-unstable.

I am a big believer in computer control, but if I am going to be in
something flying straight up at mach 4 or so, I would much much much rather
have it be naturally stable and follow a more or less predictable path in
the event of a control system failure, as opposed to immediately swapping
ends and breaking apart.

A hover is obviously unstable, but a failure there is less of a problem
than a high speed failure.

John Carmack

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 21228 invoked from network); 27 Dec 2001 21:35:31 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.105]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 27 Dec 2001 21:35:31 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: (qmail 18988 invoked by uid 50005); 27 Dec 2001 21:35:41 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpy with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4177. . Clean. Processed in 8.912222 secs); 27 Dec 2001 21:35:41 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 27 Dec 2001 21:35:29 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA17683; Thu, 27 Dec 2001 13:33:17 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 109537 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 27 Dec 2001 21:33:09          +0000
Received: from wrench.toolcity.net (root@wrench.toolcity.net [208.0.188.2]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA17669 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 27 Dec 2001 13:33:09 -0800
Received: from [208.22.189.206]          (dap-208-22-189-206.meadville-tnt-0.pa.toolcity.net [208.22.189.206])          by wrench.toolcity.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id QAA20258; Thu, 27          Dec 2001 16:33:04 -0500 (EST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <v01510100b8514cd694f8@[208.22.189.162]>
Date:         Thu, 27 Dec 2001 16:35:50 -0600
Reply-To: "al bradley" <abradley@TOOLCITY.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "al bradley" <abradley@TOOLCITY.NET>
Subject:      [AR] odd phenomenon -- gravitational reduction -- ??
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

On a  recent TV program dealing with ML (Magnetic Levitation) and related
such effects there was a short segment in which a spinning top weighed less
that a stationary top?

If this were true, and there was a sensor(s) capable of registering it,
then a gyroscope might exhibit other forces than precession and recession??

It was not thought to be an aerodynamic side effect.

Astounded (or misled?)
al bradley

------------------------------------------------------------------
Can you live Life with this?: "Unless there is a law, an agreement, or a
long-standing custom, No one `Deserves' Anything -- Either Good or Bad!"

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 17938 invoked from network); 27 Dec 2001 22:06:28 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 27 Dec 2001 22:06:28 -0000
Received: (qmail 10577 invoked by uid 50005); 27 Dec 2001 22:06:37 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4177. . Clean. Processed in 5.778638 secs); 27 Dec 2001 22:06:37 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 27 Dec 2001 22:06:29 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA17873; Thu, 27 Dec 2001 14:02:45 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 109562 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 27 Dec 2001 22:02:33          +0000
Received: from spsystems.net (spsystems.net [209.47.149.227]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA17859 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Thu,          27 Dec 2001 14:02:32 -0800
Received: (from henry@localhost) by spsystems.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id RAA16355;          Thu, 27 Dec 2001 17:01:51 -0500 (EST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1011227165902.16316A-100000@spsystems.net>
Date:         Thu, 27 Dec 2001 17:01:51 -0500
Reply-To: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] odd phenomenon -- gravitational reduction -- ??
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <v01510100b8514cd694f8@[208.22.189.162]>

On Thu, 27 Dec 2001, al bradley wrote:
> On a  recent TV program dealing with ML (Magnetic Levitation) and related
> such effects there was a short segment in which a spinning top weighed less
> that a stationary top?
> If this were true, and there was a sensor(s) capable of registering it,
> then a gyroscope might exhibit other forces than precession and recession??

There have been many claims of this sort of thing, all eventually proved
false on close examination.  The forces induced by a gyroscope are complex
and sometimes counterintuitive, but well understood.

NASA's breakthrough-propulsion program is exploring a few more-obscure
possible anomalies which have a small chance of actually leading
somewhere.

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 12199 invoked from network); 27 Dec 2001 23:58:54 -0000
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 27 Dec 2001 23:58:54 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 23740 invoked by uid 50005); 27 Dec 2001 23:59:04 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4177. . Clean. Processed in 1.208184 secs); 27 Dec 2001 23:59:04 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 27 Dec 2001 23:59:03 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA18306; Thu, 27 Dec 2001 15:56:30 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 109638 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 27 Dec 2001 23:56:16          +0000
Received: from sm10.texas.rr.com (sm10.texas.rr.com [24.93.35.222]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA18292 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 27 Dec 2001 15:56:15 -0800
Received: from localhost (cs6669133-229.houston.rr.com [66.69.133.229]) by          sm10.texas.rr.com (8.12.0.Beta16/8.12.0.Beta16) with ESMTP id          fBRNuCe5006386; Thu, 27 Dec 2001 17:56:13 -0600
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="US-ASCII"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.475)
Message-ID:  <4E18C762-FB25-11D5-A4F5-0050E43A5105@netaxs.com>
Date:         Thu, 27 Dec 2001 17:56:11 -0600
Reply-To: "Don McCorvey" <dlm3@NETAXS.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Don McCorvey" <dlm3@NETAXS.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Fly-by-wire economics was: Cooling hybrids
Comments: To: Henry Spencer <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1011227154026.15211B-100000@spsystems.net>

On Thursday, December 27, 2001, at 03:03  PM, Henry Spencer wrote:

> On Thu, 27 Dec 2001, Don McCorvey wrote:
>> ...The differences
>> between FBW and fly-by-pushrod systems are in that sense becoming fewer
>> to the point where the difference in development and verification costs
>> will eventually vanish.
>
> I think it's important to separate two issues:  electrical actuation,
> and
> artificial stability.

(...)
>
> Artificial stability is what I was really addressing.  It makes the
> system
> simultaneously a good deal more complex and much more critical.  A small
> error in the control system now probably means loss of vehicle, whereas
> in
> a stable vehicle it might just mean more wear and tear on the controls,
> or
> small steering errors for the guidance system to take out.  Moreover, it
> has ramifications elsewhere, e.g. it strongly drives the required speed
> and authority of the thrust-vectoring system.
>
(...)
>
> My own opinion?  I used to think this a non-issue.  Not any more.
> While I
> wouldn't automatically consider aerodynamic stability mandatory, it has
> real benefits, especially for high-reliability systems with small
> development budgets.
>
>
I won't disagree with your position - if you can get aerodynamic
stability and meet your overall performance requirements, that's far and
away the simplest solution.

My association of FBW and stability is based on the fact that FBPR
systems, usually manned (helicopters), achieve stability and attitude
control using a carbon-based computer and bioelectric actuators, aka,
the pilot. Only a few add stability augmentation (e.g., CH-46, CH-47,
UH-60) on top of the core mechanical controls. FBW has allowed highly
unstable systems to be fielded (e.g. F-117, soon RAH-66) without
requiring significantly higher pilot ability/training requirements.

This is obviously not the case with pure rockets - where the norm is not
to have humans aboard (unlike the rest of aviation). What got me
interested in this conversation in the first place was the observation
that the CG of a rocket moves with fuel consumption - far faster than it
does in other vehicles, requiring timely control response. FBW offers a
lightweight solution, if not an inexpensive one, to provide artificial
stability.

Aerodynamic stability may well be a difficult criterion to meet (again,
e.g. F-117) while meeting other criteria necessary for flight. If you
can trade aerodynamic stability for some other criteria, such as weight,
thermal protection et al, as may be required to get a practical manned
vehicle, compensating with software, rate sensors, and actuation/TVC can
provide a solution.

I'll grant that if you have a minescule budget, you're going to require
aerodynamic stability - it's cheap and straightforward. But if you have
an inherently unstable vehicle because of other issues, stability
augmentation via FBW is becoming a more viable solution.

Don McCorvey
Houston, Tx

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 21487 invoked from network); 28 Dec 2001 00:37:48 -0000
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 28 Dec 2001 00:37:48 -0000
Received: (qmail 21918 invoked by uid 50005); 28 Dec 2001 00:37:57 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4177. . Clean. Processed in 6.571237 secs); 28 Dec 2001 00:37:57 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 28 Dec 2001 00:37:49 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA18468; Thu, 27 Dec 2001 16:35:40 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 109668 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 28 Dec 2001 00:35:31          +0000
Received: from mail.trib.com (mail.trib.com [12.10.158.17]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA18454 for <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Thu,          27 Dec 2001 16:35:31 -0800
Received: from [63.229.150.100] (HELO hppav) by mail.trib.com (CommuniGate Pro          SMTP 3.4.6) with SMTP id 64931799 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 27          Dec 2001 17:35:30 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <NKEHJAOOKBPGIKOOPDEFGECDCEAA.jwckman@space-rockets.com>
Date:         Thu, 27 Dec 2001 17:34:10 -0700
Reply-To: "John Wickman" <jwckman@SPACE-ROCKETS.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Wickman" <jwckman@SPACE-ROCKETS.COM>
Subject:      [AR] propep on Microsoft XL system?
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Anyone run the old propep program on the new Microsoft XL operating system,
yet?  Since it was written in DOS, I was wondering if it ran ok.  I don't
have the new system and I heard that it does not suport DOS which was what
propep was compiled in.

John Wickman

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 28654 invoked from network); 28 Dec 2001 00:39:57 -0000
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 28 Dec 2001 00:39:57 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 24324 invoked by uid 50005); 28 Dec 2001 00:40:07 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4177. . Clean. Processed in 6.128471 secs); 28 Dec 2001 00:40:07 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 28 Dec 2001 00:39:59 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA18508; Thu, 27 Dec 2001 16:37:56 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 109679 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 28 Dec 2001 00:37:50          +0000
Received: from sm10.texas.rr.com (sm10.texas.rr.com [24.93.35.222]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA18494 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 27 Dec 2001 16:37:50 -0800
Received: from localhost (cs6669133-229.houston.rr.com [66.69.133.229]) by          sm10.texas.rr.com (8.12.0.Beta16/8.12.0.Beta16) with ESMTP id          fBS0bbe5025513; Thu, 27 Dec 2001 18:37:38 -0600
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="US-ASCII"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.475)
Message-ID:  <1726971E-FB2B-11D5-A4F5-0050E43A5105@netaxs.com>
Date:         Thu, 27 Dec 2001 18:37:36 -0600
Reply-To: "Don McCorvey" <dlm3@NETAXS.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Don McCorvey" <dlm3@NETAXS.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Fly-by-wire economics was: Cooling hybrids
Comments: To: John Carmack <johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <4.3.1.2.20011227145934.037e42e0@mail.idsoftware.com>

On Thursday, December 27, 2001, at 03:03  PM, John Carmack wrote:
>
> FBW vs fly-by-pushrod is a separate argument from fly-unstable.
>

Granted - but I don't separate out stability from flight control - I may
be alone in this view, but designing a system which does not achieve
static and dynamic stability isn't worth much from a handling qualities
perspective (manned, obviously). My idea of a good flight control system
is one that allows a helicopter to fly like a 747. If you have such
stability, everything else is a lot easier to do.

You can, of course, separate out these functions for unmanned vehicles,
but IMHO, there's not much to be gained other than increased complexity,
weight, and cost.

> I am a big believer in computer control, but if I am going to be in
> something flying straight up at mach 4 or so, I would much much much
> rather
> have it be naturally stable and follow a more or less predictable path
> in
> the event of a control system failure, as opposed to immediately
> swapping
> ends and breaking apart.

No argument there. Personally, I just want to have control systems that
don't fail. Life is a lot easier that way...

> A hover is obviously unstable, but a failure there is less of a problem
> than a high speed failure.

Depending upon the hover altitude...

Don McCorvey

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 11648 invoked from network); 28 Dec 2001 01:10:35 -0000
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 28 Dec 2001 01:10:35 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 19619 invoked by uid 50005); 28 Dec 2001 01:10:44 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4177. . Clean. Processed in 12.140372 secs); 28 Dec 2001 01:10:44 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 28 Dec 2001 01:10:28 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA18648; Thu, 27 Dec 2001 17:07:32 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 109704 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 28 Dec 2001 01:07:22          +0000
Received: from nt2000s2.dgmicro.com (cn815472-c.newcas1.de.home.com          [24.40.74.93]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA18630          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 27 Dec 2001 17:07:22 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
content-class: urn:content-classes:message
X-MS-Has-Attach: 
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: 
Thread-Topic:      [AR] propep on Microsoft XL system?
Thread-Index: AcGPOGaPU67gj7j+R++1ftBU6sWAGgAA3SBw
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by itc.uci.edu id RAA18631
Message-ID:  <C0F7BF4DCEC1D2479A01031347184DCD02FFB6@nt2000s2.dgmicro.com>
Date:         Thu, 27 Dec 2001 20:06:51 -0500
Reply-To: "Darren Wright" <dwright@D2-TECH.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Darren Wright" <dwright@D2-TECH.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] propep on Microsoft XL system?
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Works ok for me running XP under Vmware....

-Darren
Ozark Propulsion Labs
http://www.dgmicro.com/opl


> -----Original Message-----
> From: John Wickman [mailto:jwckman@SPACE-ROCKETS.COM]
> Sent: Thursday, December 27, 2001 7:34 PM
> To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
> Subject: [AR] propep on Microsoft XL system?
>
>
> Anyone run the old propep program on the new Microsoft XL
> operating system, yet?  Since it was written in DOS, I was
> wondering if it ran ok.  I don't have the new system and I
> heard that it does not suport DOS which was what propep was
> compiled in.
>
> John Wickman
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 14196 invoked from network); 28 Dec 2001 03:51:31 -0000
Received: from smtpv.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.110]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 28 Dec 2001 03:51:31 -0000
Received: (qmail 19658 invoked by uid 50005); 28 Dec 2001 03:42:49 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpv with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4177. . Clean. Processed in 4.619403 secs); 28 Dec 2001 03:42:49 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpv.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 28 Dec 2001 03:42:43 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA19266; Thu, 27 Dec 2001 19:49:06 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 109790 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 28 Dec 2001 03:48:49          +0000
Received: from castor.ridgenet.net (IDENT:root@castor.ridgenet.net          [199.120.150.29]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA19251          for <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Thu, 27 Dec 2001 19:48:49 -0800
Received: from kristinscomp (pm202.ridgenet.net [204.154.246.202]) by          castor.ridgenet.net (8.11.0/8.11.0) with SMTP id fBS3oWb30380 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Thu, 27 Dec 2001 19:50:32 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <003501c18f52$ae617f80$1b30fea9@kristinscomp>
Date:         Thu, 27 Dec 2001 19:49:40 -0800
Reply-To: "Kristin & David Hall" <thehalls@RIDGENET.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Kristin & David Hall" <thehalls@RIDGENET.NET>
Subject:      [AR] Dispersion Analysis Software Update
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Sorry to waste bandwidth with this but it caters to my personality and how I
motivate myself.  (More to the point, by making my work pseudo public I find
it easier to put my nose to the grindstone as I feel a certain obligation to
live up to my claims whereas I feel no obligation to finish a project I'm
doing simply for myself.).

A few moments ago I "flew" my first rocket on the 6DOF.  Nothing too
exciting, I didn't even let it fly to burnout.  But I did prove to myself
that most of the kernal is working.  Yes, there's still a lot of work to go,
but I'm ahead of schedule.  I didn't expect to be at this point till late
January.  At the current rate, the full blown kernal will be up and
operational by mid-February.  That will leave me with the user-interface to
write (IE, GUI for Windoze).  How long will that take?  Beats me, first step
on that will be to learn Visual Basic, but the interface should be pretty
basic stuff so I can't imagine it will take *TOO* long.  After that, the
user's manual (call it 8 weeks) and voila!


OBRockets:  I got my kid an "Air Burst Rocket" for Christmas.  Absolutely
COOL toy.  Seriously one of the first unique toys I've ever purchased that
was easy to use, well made, and did everything the manufacturer said it
would.  Cool stuff.  If you've a small kid who wants his own rockets but is
too young to play with combustion products, I highly recommend....
http://www.x-zylo.com
And no, I'm not affiliated, I just seriously had a ball with the thing (and
so did the other kids)!

--
Dave and/or Kristin Hall

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 10953 invoked from network); 28 Dec 2001 04:11:43 -0000
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 28 Dec 2001 04:11:43 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 24442 invoked by uid 50005); 28 Dec 2001 04:11:53 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4177. . Clean. Processed in 2.277508 secs); 28 Dec 2001 04:11:53 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 28 Dec 2001 04:11:50 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA19365; Thu, 27 Dec 2001 20:08:16 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 109805 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 28 Dec 2001 04:08:08          +0000
Received: from vmmr1.verisignmail.com (vmmr1.verisignmail.com          [216.168.230.137]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id          UAA19351 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Thu, 27 Dec 2001 20:08:08 -0800
Received: from vmms1.verisignmail.com (vmms1.verisignmail.com [10.166.0.138])          by vmmr1.verisignmail.com (Mirapoint) with ESMTP id ABH39819; Thu, 27          Dec 2001 23:07:37 -0500 (EST)
Received: from vmms1.verisignmail.com (localhost.verisignmail.com [127.0.0.1])          by vmms1.verisignmail.com (Mirapoint) with SMTP id AGP49063 (AUTH          mpoulton@mtptech.com); Thu, 27 Dec 2001 23:07:35 -0500 (EST)
Received: from 24.7.34.104 by vmms1.verisignmail.com with HTTP/1.1; Thu, 27 Dec          2001 23:09:16 -0500
X-Mailer: Mirapoint Webmail Direct 2.9.2.1
Message-ID:  <200112280407.AGP49063@vmms1.verisignmail.com>
Date:         Thu, 27 Dec 2001 23:09:16 -0500
Reply-To: <mpoulton@MTPTECH.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Mike Poulton" <mpoulton@MTPTECH.COM>
Subject:      [AR] silicone oils and biprop cooling
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Somewhere (maybe on this list), I remeber hearing about
people dissolving high MW silicone oils (PDMS, etc.)in fuels
for bipropellant rockets to improve cooling.  The idea was
that molten silica would coat hotspots on the chamber wall
and reduce heat flux.  IIRC, 20% reduction in total heat
flux was obtained.  Anyone have any info on this?  It might
be cool to try.  Also, I have found that dissolving boric
acid in ethanol (or methanol) produces more than just a
pretty green flame -- it deposits molten boric acid (and
possibly some other glasslike chemicals) on objects placed
in the flame.  Could this have the same effect as silicone
oils, which are not alcohol-soluble?
Mike Poulton
MTP Technologies
KC0LLX


From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 21202 invoked from network); 28 Dec 2001 04:39:22 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 28 Dec 2001 04:39:22 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 27987 invoked by uid 50005); 28 Dec 2001 04:39:32 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4177. . Clean. Processed in 3.261522 secs); 28 Dec 2001 04:39:32 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 28 Dec 2001 04:39:27 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA19487; Thu, 27 Dec 2001 20:37:16 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 109828 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 28 Dec 2001 04:37:07          +0000
Received: from pop008pub.verizon.net ([206.46.170.235]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA19473 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu,          27 Dec 2001 20:37:07 -0800
Received: from [63.24.225.142] (1Cust156.tnt2.rancho-cucamonga.ca.da.uu.net          [63.15.225.156]) by pop008pub.verizon.net  with ESMTP for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; id fBS4aWcP012704 Thu, 27 Dec 2001 22:36:33          -0600 (CST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: GTE/01rocket@mail.gte.net
References: <v01510100b8514cd694f8@[208.22.189.162]>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <a0510030fb851a707dbf7@[63.24.225.142]>
Date:         Thu, 27 Dec 2001 20:36:45 -0800
Reply-To: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] odd phenomenon -- gravitational reduction -- ??
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <v01510100b8514cd694f8@[208.22.189.162]>

>On a  recent TV program dealing with ML (Magnetic Levitation) and related
>such effects there was a short segment in which a spinning top weighed less
>that a stationary top?
>
>If this were true, and there was a sensor(s) capable of registering it,
>then a gyroscope might exhibit other forces than precession and recession??


Aerodynamic lift?
Ground effect?
Centripital force translating some of the vertical moments to
horizontal losses?


>
>It was not thought to be an aerodynamic side effect.
>
>Astounded (or misled?)
>al bradley
>
>------------------------------------------------------------------
>Can you live Life with this?: "Unless there is a law, an agreement, or a
>long-standing custom, No one `Deserves' Anything -- Either Good or Bad!"


--
Jerry Irvine, Box 1242, Claremont, California USA
Opinion, the whole thing. <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
Bring common sense back to rocketry administration.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 2037 invoked from network); 28 Dec 2001 05:19:11 -0000
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 28 Dec 2001 05:19:11 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 8185 invoked by uid 50005); 28 Dec 2001 05:19:21 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4177. . Clean. Processed in 4.683803 secs); 28 Dec 2001 05:19:21 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 28 Dec 2001 05:19:15 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA19781; Thu, 27 Dec 2001 21:16:06 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 109873 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 28 Dec 2001 05:15:56          +0000
Received: from hawk.prod.itd.earthlink.net (hawk.mail.pas.earthlink.net          [207.217.120.22]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA19678          for <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Thu, 27 Dec 2001 21:05:55 -0800
Received: from dialup-209.247.142.48.dial1.sanjose1.level3.net          ([209.247.142.48] helo=earthlink.net) by hawk.prod.itd.earthlink.net          with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 16JpDO-00073j-00; Thu, 27 Dec 2001          21:05:54 -0800
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.75 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.16-22 i686)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <200112280407.AGP49063@vmms1.verisignmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3C2BFDEF.3EF0467C@earthlink.net>
Date:         Thu, 27 Dec 2001 21:06:55 -0800
Reply-To: "David Weinshenker" <daze39@EARTHLINK.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "David Weinshenker" <daze39@EARTHLINK.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] silicone oils and biprop cooling
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Mike Poulton wrote:
>
> Somewhere (maybe on this list), I remeber hearing about
> people dissolving high MW silicone oils (PDMS, etc.)in fuels
> for bipropellant rockets to improve cooling.  The idea was
> that molten silica would coat hotspots on the chamber wall
> and reduce heat flux.  IIRC, 20% reduction in total heat
> flux was obtained.  Anyone have any info on this?  It might
> be cool to try.  Also, I have found that dissolving boric
> acid in ethanol (or methanol) produces more than just a
> pretty green flame -- it deposits molten boric acid (and
> possibly some other glasslike chemicals) on objects placed
> in the flame.  Could this have the same effect as silicone
> oils, which are not alcohol-soluble?
> Mike Poulton
> MTP Technologies
> KC0LLX

According to John Clark in "Ignition!" (pp. 105-106), some
experimenters working at GE and Reaction Motors in 1948-1951
got fairly impressive results with such additives: 10% ethyl
silicate in methyl alcohol (burned with LOX) had this effect,
as did 1% silicone oil in isopropyl alcohol (the latter
reportedly reduced heat flux by 45%, and was used in the
first stage of the Vanguard rocket). Ethyl silicate in ethyl
alcohol also worked, as did ethyl silicate in ammonia (5%
concentration reduced heat flux 60%).

There is no mention, in Clark's brief account, of any solubility
issues... ethyl silicate sounds like it might be more soluble
in various fuels than heavy silicone oil; perhaps the
"GE silicone oil" was a low-miolecular -weight type that
was soluble to 1% in alcohol?

The technique seems to have fallen out of use for large
LOX/fuel motors these days... is this simply a matter of
improved "mixture gradient" injector layouts (which give
a curtain of lower-temperature, fuel-rich, mixture near the
walls) eliminating the need for such tricks in more recent
engine designs???

-dave w

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 17157 invoked from network); 28 Dec 2001 05:25:28 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 28 Dec 2001 05:25:28 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 4381 invoked by uid 50005); 28 Dec 2001 05:25:38 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4177. . Clean. Processed in 8.528936 secs); 28 Dec 2001 05:25:38 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 28 Dec 2001 05:25:28 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA19723; Thu, 27 Dec 2001 21:08:49 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 109878 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 28 Dec 2001 05:08:31          +0000
Received: from idsoftware.com (predator.idsoftware.com [192.246.40.34]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA19708 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Thu, 27 Dec 2001 21:08:31 -0800
Received: from [192.246.40.144] (account johnc HELO pluto.idsoftware.com) by          idsoftware.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 3.4.7) with ESMTP id 30277 for          AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 27 Dec 2001 23:08:30 -0600
X-Sender: johnc@mail.idsoftware.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <4.3.1.2.20011227232249.03690d00@mail.idsoftware.com>
Date:         Thu, 27 Dec 2001 23:25:07 -0600
Reply-To: "John Carmack" <johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Carmack" <johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] silicone oils and biprop cooling
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <4.3.1.2.20010405034301.03f6a6a8@mail.idsoftware.com>

At 11:09 PM 12/27/2001 -0500, you wrote:
>Somewhere (maybe on this list), I remeber hearing about
>people dissolving high MW silicone oils (PDMS, etc.)in fuels



At 03:52 AM 4/5/2001 -0500, John Carmack wrote:
>I am re-reading "Ignition!" now that I have a little more context to fit
>everything in, and I saw something that caught my eye:
>
>On p105-106, it talks about how adding 1% of silicone oil to isopropanol
>reduced the heat flux to the chamber walls in LOX motors by 45% by
>continuously depositing a constantly ablating layer on the chamber surfaces.
>
>It was apparently used in the Vanguard first stage motors.  Are any of the
>amateur LOX engines using similar additives?  45% is a pretty big number,
>and 60% with a different combination in ammonia was also mentioned.
>
>Possibly interesting in concert with the thin plated ultra-low pressure
>high altitude motors that were discussed a while back, giving more margin
>for pure radiative cooling.
>
>John Carmack

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 26726 invoked from network); 28 Dec 2001 08:03:44 -0000
Received: from smtpv.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.110]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 28 Dec 2001 08:03:44 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 30901 invoked by uid 50005); 28 Dec 2001 07:55:01 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpv with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4177. . Clean. Processed in 4.322546 secs); 28 Dec 2001 07:55:02 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpv.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 28 Dec 2001 07:54:54 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA20447; Thu, 27 Dec 2001 23:35:15 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 109935 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 28 Dec 2001 07:33:35          +0000
Received: from smtp6.mindspring.com (smtp6.mindspring.com [207.69.200.110]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA20421 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Thu, 27 Dec 2001 23:33:34 -0800
Received: from sdn-ar-018casfrmp186.dialsprint.net ([158.252.222.188]          helo=mindspring.com) by smtp6.mindspring.com with esmtp (Exim 3.33          #1) id 16JrVd-0005Z7-00; Fri, 28 Dec 2001 02:32:54 -0500
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 (Macintosh; U; PPC)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <Pine.BSI.3.91.1011227165902.16316A-100000@spsystems.net>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3C2C200E.F1140477@mindspring.com>
Date:         Thu, 27 Dec 2001 23:32:33 -0800
Reply-To: "Alan Shinn" <alshinn@MINDSPRING.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Alan Shinn" <alshinn@MINDSPRING.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] odd phenomenon -- gravitational reduction -- ??
Comments: To: Henry Spencer <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Henry,
So what *is* NASA looking at in the way of "breakthrough-propulsion"?
And on the subject, what the heck was the electrical cable experiment
(the one that broke)? Were they trying to generate electricity
(decelerate) or use electricity to produce thrust, or what? And if so,
how?
So,-- if you want levitation, check out my web site - somewhere  - there
are cool pics and links etc. for diamagneticaly stabilized static
magnetic levitation.
Looking forward:

Alan Shinn


Experience the
beginnings of microscopy.
Make your own replica
of one of Antony van Leeuwenhoek's microscopes.
visit    http://www.mindspring.com/~alshinn/


Henry Spencer wrote:
>
> On Thu, 27 Dec 2001, al bradley wrote:
> > On a  recent TV program dealing with ML (Magnetic Levitation) and related
> > such effects there was a short segment in which a spinning top weighed less
> > that a stationary top?
> > If this were true, and there was a sensor(s) capable of registering it,
> > then a gyroscope might exhibit other forces than precession and recession??
>
> There have been many claims of this sort of thing, all eventually proved
> false on close examination.  The forces induced by a gyroscope are complex
> and sometimes counterintuitive, but well understood.
>
> NASA's breakthrough-propulsion program is exploring a few more-obscure
> possible anomalies which have a small chance of actually leading
> somewhere.
>
>                                                           Henry Spencer
>                                                        henry@spsystems.net

--
Looking forward:
Alan Shinn


Experience the
beginnings of microscopy.
Make your own replica
of one of Antony van Leeuwenhoek's microscopes.
visit    http://www.mindspring.com/~alshinn/

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 22342 invoked from network); 28 Dec 2001 15:53:54 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpv.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.110]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 28 Dec 2001 15:53:54 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 21713 invoked by uid 50005); 28 Dec 2001 15:45:09 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpv with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4177. . Clean. Processed in 4.895613 secs); 28 Dec 2001 15:45:09 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpv.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 28 Dec 2001 15:45:01 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA21889; Fri, 28 Dec 2001 07:51:28 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 110074 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 28 Dec 2001 15:51:15          +0000
Received: from pop007pub.verizon.net ([206.46.170.234]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA21874 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri,          28 Dec 2001 07:51:15 -0800
Received: from [63.24.225.142] (1Cust46.tnt1.rancho-cucamonga.ca.da.uu.net          [63.24.225.46]) by pop007pub.verizon.net  with ESMTP for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; id fBSFof5Y008463 Fri, 28 Dec 2001 09:50:42          -0600 (CST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: GTE/01rocket@mail.gte.net
References: <003501c18f52$ae617f80$1b30fea9@kristinscomp>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <a05100311b85244d187fd@[63.24.225.142]>
Date:         Fri, 28 Dec 2001 07:50:50 -0800
Reply-To: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jerry Irvine" <01rocket@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Dispersion Analysis Software Update
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <003501c18f52$ae617f80$1b30fea9@kristinscomp>

>A few moments ago I "flew" my first rocket on the 6DOF.  Nothing too
>exciting, I didn't even let it fly to burnout.

Sweet!  Some day a few of us will actually be able to complete a
launch application in under 3 years!

Jerry

>Dave and/or Kristin Hall

"Bonsai programmer"
:)

--
Jerry Irvine, Box 1242, Claremont, California USA
Opinion, the whole thing. <mail to:01rocket@gte.net>
Bring common sense back to rocketry administration.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 27306 invoked from network); 28 Dec 2001 16:30:23 -0000
Received: from smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.105]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 28 Dec 2001 16:30:23 -0000
Received: (qmail 18201 invoked by uid 50005); 28 Dec 2001 16:30:32 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpy with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4177. . Clean. Processed in 4.740373 secs); 28 Dec 2001 16:30:32 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 28 Dec 2001 16:30:26 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA22190; Fri, 28 Dec 2001 08:27:55 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 110143 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 28 Dec 2001 16:27:49          +0000
Received: from mail.trib.com (mail.trib.com [12.10.158.17]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA22176 for <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Fri,          28 Dec 2001 08:27:49 -0800
Received: from [63.229.150.238] (HELO hppav) by mail.trib.com (CommuniGate Pro          SMTP 3.4.6) with SMTP id 65005296; Fri, 28 Dec 2001 09:27:48 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <NKEHJAOOKBPGIKOOPDEFOECGCEAA.jwckman@space-rockets.com>
Date:         Fri, 28 Dec 2001 09:26:27 -0700
Reply-To: "John Wickman" <jwckman@SPACE-ROCKETS.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Wickman" <jwckman@SPACE-ROCKETS.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] propep on Microsoft XL system?
Comments: To: Darren Wright <dwright@D2-TECH.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <C0F7BF4DCEC1D2479A01031347184DCD02FFB6@nt2000s2.dgmicro.com>

Thanks for letting me know.  I have some other old DOS programs and I was
worried that upgrading may make them unusable.

As someone pointed out to me its Windows XP operating system.  I wonder what
the XP means.

John Wickman


-----Original Message-----
From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@itc.uci.edu]On
Behalf Of Darren Wright
Sent: Thursday, December 27, 2001 6:07 PM
To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
Subject: Re: [AR] propep on Microsoft XL system?


Works ok for me running XP under Vmware....

-Darren
Ozark Propulsion Labs
http://www.dgmicro.com/opl


> -----Original Message-----
> From: John Wickman [mailto:jwckman@SPACE-ROCKETS.COM]
> Sent: Thursday, December 27, 2001 7:34 PM
> To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
> Subject: [AR] propep on Microsoft XL system?
>
>
> Anyone run the old propep program on the new Microsoft XL
> operating system, yet?  Since it was written in DOS, I was
> wondering if it ran ok.  I don't have the new system and I
> heard that it does not suport DOS which was what propep was
> compiled in.
>
> John Wickman
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 5106 invoked from network); 28 Dec 2001 17:41:33 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 28 Dec 2001 17:41:33 -0000
Received: (qmail 12435 invoked by uid 50005); 28 Dec 2001 17:41:43 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4177. . Clean. Processed in 1.270196 secs); 28 Dec 2001 17:41:43 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 28 Dec 2001 17:41:42 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA22466; Fri, 28 Dec 2001 09:24:21 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 110187 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 28 Dec 2001 17:22:37          +0000
Received: from spsystems.net (spsystems.net [209.47.149.227]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA22447 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Fri,          28 Dec 2001 09:22:37 -0800
Received: (from henry@localhost) by spsystems.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id MAA29481;          Fri, 28 Dec 2001 12:22:04 -0500 (EST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1011228122029.29263D-100000@spsystems.net>
Date:         Fri, 28 Dec 2001 12:22:04 -0500
Reply-To: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] silicone oils and biprop cooling
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <200112280407.AGP49063@vmms1.verisignmail.com>

On Thu, 27 Dec 2001, Mike Poulton wrote:
> ...Also, I have found that dissolving boric
> acid in ethanol (or methanol) produces more than just a
> pretty green flame -- it deposits molten boric acid (and
> possibly some other glasslike chemicals) on objects placed
> in the flame.  Could this have the same effect as silicone
> oils, which are not alcohol-soluble?

It is at least plausible.  Boron-based fuels are notorious for depositing
B2O3 layers on everything (which was one reason why they fell out of favor).
How much insulating effect they have is something that would have to be
determined by experiment.

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 23224 invoked from network); 28 Dec 2001 17:46:51 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.105]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 28 Dec 2001 17:46:51 -0000
Received: (qmail 7999 invoked by uid 50005); 28 Dec 2001 17:47:01 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpy with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4177. . Clean. Processed in 8.627432 secs); 28 Dec 2001 17:47:01 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 28 Dec 2001 17:46:49 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA22518; Fri, 28 Dec 2001 09:30:28 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 110198 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 28 Dec 2001 17:29:01          +0000
Received: from spsystems.net (spsystems.net [209.47.149.227]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA22490 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Fri,          28 Dec 2001 09:29:00 -0800
Received: (from henry@localhost) by spsystems.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id MAA29491;          Fri, 28 Dec 2001 12:28:28 -0500 (EST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1011228122233.29263E-100000@spsystems.net>
Date:         Fri, 28 Dec 2001 12:28:28 -0500
Reply-To: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] silicone oils and biprop cooling
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <3C2BFDEF.3EF0467C@earthlink.net>

On Thu, 27 Dec 2001, David Weinshenker wrote:
> The technique seems to have fallen out of use for large
> LOX/fuel motors these days... is this simply a matter of
> improved "mixture gradient" injector layouts (which give
> a curtain of lower-temperature, fuel-rich, mixture near the
> walls) eliminating the need for such tricks in more recent
> engine designs???

I wouldn't be surprised if it was basically a historical accident.  There
have been very few lines of development of large rocket engines, and an
innovation which didn't happen to get established in one of them wouldn't
look "mainstream" regardless of its merits.

(For example, almost all US LOX/kerosene engines, including even the F-1,
belong to Rocketdyne's Navaho family.  The few exceptions were mostly from
Aerojet.  A technique that neither of those two design groups happened to
adopt would essentially disappear from US large-engine history.)

There is some bias away from fuel additives simply because they make the
fuel more expensive and complicate monitoring of its composition.  So an
engine project which didn't happen to need them might well be reluctant
to adopt them.

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 10208 invoked from network); 28 Dec 2001 17:51:53 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpv.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.110]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 28 Dec 2001 17:51:53 -0000
Received: (qmail 22992 invoked by uid 50005); 28 Dec 2001 17:43:07 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpv with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4177. . Clean. Processed in 6.214763 secs); 28 Dec 2001 17:43:07 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpv.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 28 Dec 2001 17:42:58 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA22597; Fri, 28 Dec 2001 09:48:56 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 110214 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 28 Dec 2001 17:47:37          +0000
Received: from spsystems.net (spsystems.net [209.47.149.227]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA22576 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Fri,          28 Dec 2001 09:47:36 -0800
Received: (from henry@localhost) by spsystems.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id MAA29750;          Fri, 28 Dec 2001 12:47:04 -0500 (EST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1011228123220.29263F-100000@spsystems.net>
Date:         Fri, 28 Dec 2001 12:47:03 -0500
Reply-To: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] odd phenomenon -- gravitational reduction -- ??
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <3C2C200E.F1140477@mindspring.com>

On Thu, 27 Dec 2001, Alan Shinn wrote:
> So what *is* NASA looking at in the way of "breakthrough-propulsion"?

Check out http://www.lerc.nasa.gov/WWW/bpp/ (I think that address still
works) for the breakthrough-propulsion project.  Last I heard, the one-
sentence summary was that they award small grants for exploring variant
theories of physics and reported gravitational oddities.  This is a
serious (although small) effort; they spend a lot of time and trouble
filtering out the crackpots.

> And on the subject, what the heck was the electrical cable experiment
> (the one that broke)? Were they trying to generate electricity
> (decelerate) or use electricity to produce thrust, or what? And if so,
> how?

They were just trying to explore the physics of conducting tethers in LEO.
Neither power generation nor propulsion was an objective, although later
follow-ons might have tried either.

The fundamental physics of running a current through a tether are well
understood:  it's an electric motor/generator, with the circuit completed
through the surrounding plasma.  Put energy in, and you push the tether
forward.  Take energy out, and you create a drag -- the energy is coming
out of your orbital kinetic energy.

The technology has promise, although it would be good to have the physics
of real systems (notably the interactions with Earth's magnetosphere)
explored in more detail, so people could design operational systems more
confidently.  Much is still unknown or unclear; for example, the voltage
generated by TSS-1 was higher than expected and nobody's sure why.

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 18752 invoked from network); 28 Dec 2001 18:21:15 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 28 Dec 2001 18:21:15 -0000
Received: (qmail 4370 invoked by uid 50005); 28 Dec 2001 18:21:24 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4177. . Clean. Processed in 5.097572 secs); 28 Dec 2001 18:21:24 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 28 Dec 2001 18:21:16 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA22787; Fri, 28 Dec 2001 10:16:42 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 110247 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 28 Dec 2001 18:16:30          +0000
Received: from spsystems.net (spsystems.net [209.47.149.227]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA22772 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Fri,          28 Dec 2001 10:16:29 -0800
Received: (from henry@localhost) by spsystems.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id NAA00164;          Fri, 28 Dec 2001 13:15:57 -0500 (EST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1011228124818.29263G-100000@spsystems.net>
Date:         Fri, 28 Dec 2001 13:15:56 -0500
Reply-To: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] silicone oils and biprop cooling
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1011228122233.29263E-100000@spsystems.net>

I wrote:
> (For example, almost all US LOX/kerosene engines, including even the F-1,
> belong to Rocketdyne's Navaho family.  The few exceptions were mostly from
> Aerojet.  A technique that neither of those two design groups happened to
> adopt would essentially disappear from US large-engine history.)

To elaborate a bit on this...  It's important to understand that current
rocket systems are in no way optimal, nor were many possible variations of
the technology even properly investigated.

The designers of the original missile engines were in a big hurry and used
the first approaches which seemed to work acceptably, and their successors
likewise had deadlines to meet and were under pressure not to deviate
unnecessarily from proven formulas.  In the 60s there was a brief burst of
exploration of alternatives, but that ground to a halt when most of NASA's
long-term plans evaporated in the 1967-8 budget wars.

Since then there has been very nearly zero funding for innovative ideas in
propulsion, especially for exploring such ideas on a scale sufficiently
large to make a convincing case for them (or to convincingly establish
that they are not worthwhile).

So the mere fact that an idea was explored briefly in the 50s or 60s but
hasn't been seen since tells you nothing about its merits or lack thereof.

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 14982 invoked from network); 28 Dec 2001 19:22:03 -0000
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 28 Dec 2001 19:22:03 -0000
Received: (qmail 4042 invoked by uid 50005); 28 Dec 2001 19:22:13 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4177. . Clean. Processed in 1.427262 secs); 28 Dec 2001 19:22:13 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 28 Dec 2001 19:22:11 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA23218; Fri, 28 Dec 2001 11:18:56 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 110333 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 28 Dec 2001 19:18:44          +0000
Received: from smtprelay8.dc2.adelphia.net (smtprelay8.dc2.adelphia.net          [64.8.50.40]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA23204 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 28 Dec 2001 11:18:43 -0800
Received: from jlgrady ([24.53.101.238]) by smtprelay8.dc2.adelphia.net          (Netscape Messaging Server 4.15) with SMTP id GP2IYC00.00G for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 28 Dec 2001 14:18:12 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook CWS, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <000001c18fd4$be5b0780$0200a8c0@cmngga.adelphia.net>
Date:         Fri, 28 Dec 2001 14:20:42 -0500
Reply-To: "Jeff Grady" <jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jeff Grady" <jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] propep on Microsoft XL system?
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <NKEHJAOOKBPGIKOOPDEFOECGCEAA.jwckman@space-rockets.com>

John Wickman wrote:

<snip>

As someone pointed out to me its Windows XP operating system.  I wonder what
the XP means.

<unsnip>

Microsoft has already announced a security hole in XP, soooooo:

Xtremely Problematic??
Xtremely Proud??

or just: Xcellent Profits (at 199.00 a pop)??

NT stood for New Technology...I'm still running NT 4.0 today and with the
exception of USB support, I see no reason to change anytime soon....

JG

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 11125 invoked from network); 28 Dec 2001 19:29:00 -0000
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 28 Dec 2001 19:29:00 -0000
Received: (qmail 15993 invoked by uid 50005); 28 Dec 2001 19:29:10 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4177. . Clean. Processed in 3.068128 secs); 28 Dec 2001 19:29:10 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 28 Dec 2001 19:29:06 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA23287; Fri, 28 Dec 2001 11:26:19 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 110348 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 28 Dec 2001 19:26:12          +0000
Received: from smtprelay8.dc2.adelphia.net (smtprelay8.dc2.adelphia.net          [64.8.50.40]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA23273 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 28 Dec 2001 11:26:11 -0800
Received: from jlgrady ([24.53.101.238]) by smtprelay8.dc2.adelphia.net          (Netscape Messaging Server 4.15) with SMTP id GP2JAQ00.252 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 28 Dec 2001 14:25:38 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook CWS, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <000101c18fd5$c86b5d50$0200a8c0@cmngga.adelphia.net>
Date:         Fri, 28 Dec 2001 14:28:09 -0500
Reply-To: "Jeff Grady" <jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jeff Grady" <jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET>
Subject:      [AR] AIAA Subscribers?
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Anyone subscribe to AIAA on-line? Is it worth the cost? On a scale of 1-10,
10 being Excellent, how would you rate the publication?

Jeff

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 16025 invoked from network); 28 Dec 2001 20:52:10 -0000
Received: from smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.105]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 28 Dec 2001 20:52:10 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 23092 invoked by uid 50005); 28 Dec 2001 20:52:19 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpy with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4177. . Clean. Processed in 5.421942 secs); 28 Dec 2001 20:52:19 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 28 Dec 2001 20:52:12 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA23581; Fri, 28 Dec 2001 12:34:28 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 110389 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 28 Dec 2001 20:34:17          +0000
Received: from nt2000s2.dgmicro.com (cn815472-c.newcas1.de.home.com          [24.40.74.93]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA23567          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 28 Dec 2001 12:34:17 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
content-class: urn:content-classes:message
X-MS-Has-Attach: 
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: 
Thread-Topic:      Re: [AR] reflections on AT fire
Thread-Index: AcFaDIegtizsBUBcQoi1qEsLH8pvlA10j1OA
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by itc.uci.edu id MAA23568
Message-ID:  <C0F7BF4DCEC1D2479A01031347184DCD02FFBB@nt2000s2.dgmicro.com>
Date:         Fri, 28 Dec 2001 15:33:46 -0500
Reply-To: "Darren Wright" <dwright@D2-TECH.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Darren Wright" <dwright@D2-TECH.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] reflections on AT fire
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

I'm pretty sure that WL uses some combo of Mg and Al.  I also belive
that BT used Mg, but I may be mistaken....my Ballistic Blue sure looks
like BT...but my ISP is higher ::GRIN::

-Darren
Ozark Propulsion Labs
http://www.dgmicro.com/opl


> -----Original Message-----
> From: William Chops Westfield [mailto:billw@CISCO.COM]
> Sent: Sunday, October 21, 2001 4:41 AM
> To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
> Subject: Re: [AR] reflections on AT fire
>
>
> So which Aerotech propellants use Mg, anyway?  I was under
> the impression that they were primarilly users of Al and Zn...
>
> BillW
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 15923 invoked from network); 28 Dec 2001 21:00:41 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 28 Dec 2001 21:00:41 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 12919 invoked by uid 50005); 28 Dec 2001 21:00:51 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4177. . Clean. Processed in 3.236539 secs); 28 Dec 2001 21:00:51 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 28 Dec 2001 21:00:46 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA23708; Fri, 28 Dec 2001 12:57:35 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 110416 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 28 Dec 2001 20:57:23          +0000
Received: from idsoftware.com (predator.idsoftware.com [192.246.40.34]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA23694 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Fri, 28 Dec 2001 12:57:22 -0800
Received: from [192.246.40.129] (account johnc HELO lightning.idsoftware.com)          by idsoftware.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 3.4.7) with ESMTP id 30994          for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 28 Dec 2001 14:57:21 -0600
X-Sender: johnc@mail.idsoftware.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.1
References: <Pine.BSI.3.91.1011228122233.29263E-100000@spsystems.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <4.3.1.2.20011228145237.03429b10@mail.idsoftware.com>
Date:         Fri, 28 Dec 2001 14:55:17 -0600
Reply-To: "John Carmack" <johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Carmack" <johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] silicone oils and biprop cooling
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1011228124818.29263G-100000@spsystems.net>

Speaking of cooling, I was shocked to read last night that the Arianne I-IV
rockets, the most successful commercial launchers, carry tons of water in
separate tanks to cool their nitrogen tetroxide / hydrazine engines!

We had talked about lugging water for cooling in some of our designs, but
we were looking down on it as maybe too lame for even our relatively low
performance needs.

John Carmack

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 22219 invoked from network); 29 Dec 2001 00:55:29 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 29 Dec 2001 00:55:29 -0000
Received: (qmail 8758 invoked by uid 50005); 29 Dec 2001 00:55:39 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4177. . Clean. Processed in 0.37635 secs); 29 Dec 2001 00:55:39 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 29 Dec 2001 00:55:39 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA24819; Fri, 28 Dec 2001 16:52:39 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 110617 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 29 Dec 2001 00:52:23          +0000
Received: from spsystems.net (spsystems.net [209.47.149.227]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA24805 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Fri,          28 Dec 2001 16:52:22 -0800
Received: (from henry@localhost) by spsystems.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id TAA04409;          Fri, 28 Dec 2001 19:51:48 -0500 (EST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1011228194154.4217A-100000@spsystems.net>
Date:         Fri, 28 Dec 2001 19:51:47 -0500
Reply-To: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] silicone oils and biprop cooling
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <4.3.1.2.20011228145237.03429b10@mail.idsoftware.com>

On Fri, 28 Dec 2001, John Carmack wrote:
> Speaking of cooling, I was shocked to read last night that the Arianne I-IV
> rockets, the most successful commercial launchers, carry tons of water in
> separate tanks to cool their nitrogen tetroxide / hydrazine engines!

Not exactly...  Their engines are mostly film-cooled.  N2O4/UDMH engines
generally don't run as hot as LOX-based systems, and can sometimes get
away with this.  (This also shows the independent design heritage; a US
engine of that size with those propellants would differ in several ways,
including regenerative cooling.)

They do use cooling water for a few purposes.  Most prominently, instead
of running their gas generator at a skewed mixture ratio to keep turbine
temperatures down, they run it at the main-engine ratio but inject water
into the exhaust.  Then they tap off some of the spent turbine gas and
inject some more water, to cool it further, for use as pressurant.
Finally, some of the pump bearings are water-cooled.

Turner's "Rocket and Spacecraft Propulsion" has a full plumbing diagram of
the Viking engine system, which is worth studying.  (The book as a whole
is a bit lightweight and probably not worth buying, given its high price,
but it has some interesting tidbits.)

> We had talked about lugging water for cooling in some of our designs, but
> we were looking down on it as maybe too lame for even our relatively low
> performance needs.

I wouldn't dismiss the idea without running numbers.  Water is a really
amazingly good coolant.

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 1986 invoked from network); 29 Dec 2001 08:28:10 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 29 Dec 2001 08:28:10 -0000
Received: (qmail 10154 invoked by uid 50005); 29 Dec 2001 08:28:20 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4177. . Clean. Processed in 7.246736 secs); 29 Dec 2001 08:28:20 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 29 Dec 2001 08:28:11 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA27433; Sat, 29 Dec 2001 00:23:31 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 111066 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 29 Dec 2001 08:23:07          +0000
Received: from imo-m05.mx.aol.com (imo-m05.mx.aol.com [64.12.136.8]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA27419 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Sat, 29 Dec 2001 00:23:06 -0800
Received: from Sociald84@aol.com by imo-m05.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v31_r1.9.) id          w.18c.12b3357 (17526) for <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Sat, 29 Dec 2001          03:22:31 -0500 (EST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0EBB_01C56B69.5E019FB0"
X-Mailer: AOL 6.0 for Windows US sub 10552
Message-ID:  <18c.12b3357.295ed747@aol.com>
Date:         Sat, 29 Dec 2001 03:22:31 EST
Reply-To: <Sociald84@AOL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <Sociald84@AOL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] silicone oils and biprop cooling
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0EBB_01C56B69.5E019FB0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Is silicone oil something that is available to the average amatuer or easy to
get. What are other names for silicon oil, is there and specific type
mentioined in the texts, and if it is available to the amateur where would
you get it?
The quotes only mentioned use with LOX, would there be compatability issues
with other oxidizers such as NOX? Or would you see a big decrease in it's
effectiveness?

Mark

------=_NextPart_000_0EBB_01C56B69.5E019FB0
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<HTML><FONT FACE=arial,helvetica><FONT  SIZE=2>Is silicone oil something that is available to the average amatuer or easy to get. What are other names for silicon oil, is there and specific type mentioined in the texts, and if it is available to the amateur where would you get it?
<BR>The quotes only mentioned use with LOX, would there be compatability issues with other oxidizers such as NOX? Or would you see a big decrease in it's effectiveness?
<BR>
<BR>Mark</FONT></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0EBB_01C56B69.5E019FB0--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 15649 invoked from network); 29 Dec 2001 09:48:00 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 29 Dec 2001 09:48:00 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: (qmail 22302 invoked by uid 50005); 29 Dec 2001 09:48:10 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4177. . Clean. Processed in 2.765392 secs); 29 Dec 2001 09:48:10 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 29 Dec 2001 09:48:06 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id BAA27701; Sat, 29 Dec 2001 01:45:57 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 111081 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 29 Dec 2001 09:45:39          +0000
Received: from cisco.com (cypher.cisco.com [171.69.11.18]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id BAA27681 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat,          29 Dec 2001 01:45:39 -0800
Received: (from billw@localhost) by cisco.com (8.8.8/2.6/Cisco List          Logging/8.8.8) id BAA08414; Sat, 29 Dec 2001 01:45:08 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID:  <CMM.0.90.4.1009619108.billw@cypher>
Date:         Sat, 29 Dec 2001 01:45:08 PST
Reply-To: "Bill Westfield" <billw@cisco.com>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "William Chops Westfield" <billw@cisco.com>
Subject:      Re: [AR] silicone oils and biprop cooling
Comments: To: Sociald84@AOL.COM
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  Your message of Sat, 29 Dec 2001 03:22:31 EST

    Is silicone oil something that is available to the average amatuer or
    easy to get. What are other names for silicon oil, is there and
    specific type mentioined in the texts, and if it is available to the
    amateur where would you get it?

An assortment of silicone oils (polydimethyl siloxane, IIRC) are available
at business supply stores as "fuser oil" for copy machines.  I have some
discarded xerox cartidges from work with very THICK (high MW, presumably)
PDMS in them, and I've seen bottles of thinner material...

BillW


From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 29379 invoked from network); 29 Dec 2001 14:20:33 -0000
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 29 Dec 2001 14:20:33 -0000
Received: (qmail 28282 invoked by uid 50005); 29 Dec 2001 14:20:43 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4177. . Clean. Processed in 0.896814 secs); 29 Dec 2001 14:20:43 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 29 Dec 2001 14:20:42 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA28491; Sat, 29 Dec 2001 06:07:34 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 111133 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 29 Dec 2001 14:07:12          +0000
Received: from syd-mro1.austar.net.au (syd-mro1.austar.net.au [203.22.15.135])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA28477 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 29 Dec 2001 06:07:11 -0800
Received: from syd-msw1.austar.net.au (syd-msw1-i.austar.net.au          [172.22.91.136]) by syd-mro1.austar.net.au (Mirapoint) with ESMTP id          AKU26240; Sun, 30 Dec 2001 00:06:22 +1000 (EST)
Received: from l5o5d6 (cpe-202-10-159-153.mer.austar.net.au [202.10.159.153])          by syd-msw1.austar.net.au (Mirapoint) with SMTP id ABG54910; Sun, 30          Dec 2001 00:11:18 +1000 (EST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.3110.1
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <000301c18fa9$21e22bc0$999f0aca@l5o5d6>
Date:         Sat, 29 Dec 2001 01:06:39 +1100
Reply-To: "Allan" <fountain01@AUSTARNET.COM.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Allan" <fountain01@AUSTARNET.COM.AU>
Subject:      [AR] induction heating
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Hi
Has anyone ran across any sites that give a more expansive explanation on
induction heating design and or circuits.
Im looking for a basic grounding on the subject that will give me more of an
idea of what  books I need to purchase.
I was hoping to design something single phase or at the most from a  3 phase
single outlet supply to melt small amounts of exotic metals and alloys for a
variety of purposes like inserts , sputtering, etc I can imagine lots of
uses in fact .
Though Im starting to think a design using  carbon arc melting  with vacuum
might be more attainable it seems like one of the dark arts and I seem to be
mostly running into advertising on the net instead of any real information
on induction heating.
Regards
Allan Jensen
fountain01@austarnet.com.au

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 12534 invoked from network); 29 Dec 2001 14:53:49 -0000
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 29 Dec 2001 14:53:49 -0000
Received: (qmail 19387 invoked by uid 50005); 29 Dec 2001 14:53:59 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4177. . Clean. Processed in 0.338973 secs); 29 Dec 2001 14:53:59 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 29 Dec 2001 14:53:59 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA28602; Sat, 29 Dec 2001 06:38:42 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 111152 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 29 Dec 2001 14:38:39          +0000
Received: from cesaroni.net ([204.101.26.130]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7)          with ESMTP id GAA28588 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 29 Dec 2001          06:38:38 -0800
Received: from Anthony by cesaroni.net with SMTP (MDaemon.v2.8.7.0.R) for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 29 Dec 2001 09:33:08 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 8.5, Build 4.71.2173.0
Importance: Normal
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
X-MDaemon-Deliver-To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
X-Return-Path: ACesaroni@cesaroni.net
Message-ID:  <000e01c19076$9cf495a0$1b0101c0@Anthony>
Date:         Sat, 29 Dec 2001 09:39:25 -0500
Reply-To: "Anthony Cesaroni" <ACesaroni@cesaroni.net>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Anthony Cesaroni" <ACesaroni@cesaroni.net>
Subject:      Re: [AR] induction heating
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <000301c18fa9$21e22bc0$999f0aca@l5o5d6>

Allan,

Elements of Induction Heating. Design, Control, and Applications. S. Zinn
and S.L. Semiatin. ASM and EPRI. ISBN 0-87170-308-4.

The book is a "must read" if you plan doing any work in this area.

Anthony.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@itc.uci.edu]On
> Behalf Of Allan
> Sent: Friday, December 28, 2001 9:07 AM
> To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
> Subject: induction heating
>
>
> Hi
> Has anyone ran across any sites that give a more expansive explanation on
> induction heating design and or circuits.
> Im looking for a basic grounding on the subject that will give me
> more of an
> idea of what  books I need to purchase.
> I was hoping to design something single phase or at the most from
> a  3 phase
> single outlet supply to melt small amounts of exotic metals and
> alloys for a
> variety of purposes like inserts , sputtering, etc I can imagine lots of
> uses in fact .
> Though Im starting to think a design using  carbon arc melting
> with vacuum
> might be more attainable it seems like one of the dark arts and I
> seem to be
> mostly running into advertising on the net instead of any real information
> on induction heating.
> Regards
> Allan Jensen
> fountain01@austarnet.com.au
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 12639 invoked from network); 29 Dec 2001 15:12:30 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.105]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 29 Dec 2001 15:12:30 -0000
Received: (qmail 7179 invoked by uid 50005); 29 Dec 2001 15:12:40 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpy with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4177. . Clean. Processed in 7.245469 secs); 29 Dec 2001 15:12:40 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 29 Dec 2001 15:12:31 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA28699; Sat, 29 Dec 2001 06:56:13 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 111172 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 29 Dec 2001 14:56:10          +0000
Received: from spsystems.net (spsystems.net [209.47.149.227]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA28685 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Sat,          29 Dec 2001 06:56:10 -0800
Received: (from henry@localhost) by spsystems.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id JAA15249;          Sat, 29 Dec 2001 09:55:31 -0500 (EST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1011229095409.15025B-100000@spsystems.net>
Date:         Sat, 29 Dec 2001 09:55:31 -0500
Reply-To: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] silicone oils and biprop cooling
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <18c.12b3357.295ed747@aol.com>

On Sat, 29 Dec 2001 Sociald84@AOL.COM wrote:
> Is silicone oil something that is available to the average amatuer or easy to
> get...

Yes, some kinds, but unfortunately "silicone oil" is a very generic term,
and the Clark book isn't specific about exactly what type was used.  Mind
you, it probably doesn't matter a whole lot.

> The quotes only mentioned use with LOX, would there be compatability issues
> with other oxidizers such as NOX? Or would you see a big decrease in it's
> effectiveness?

At first glance, it shouldn't make a lot of difference.

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 25243 invoked from network); 29 Dec 2001 17:05:56 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.105]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 29 Dec 2001 17:05:56 -0000
Received: (qmail 2796 invoked by uid 50005); 29 Dec 2001 17:06:06 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpy with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4177. . Clean. Processed in 1.829789 secs); 29 Dec 2001 17:06:06 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 29 Dec 2001 17:06:03 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA29162; Sat, 29 Dec 2001 09:03:55 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 111271 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 29 Dec 2001 17:03:49          +0000
Received: from imo-d07.mx.aol.com (imo-d07.mx.aol.com [205.188.157.39]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA29147 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Sat, 29 Dec 2001 09:03:48 -0800
Received: from MilburnMNK@aol.com by imo-d07.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v31_r1.9.) id          w.47.15bbf073 (4446) for <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Sat, 29 Dec 2001          12:03:16 -0500 (EST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0EC0_01C56B69.5E0B3CA0"
X-Mailer: AOL 6.0 for Windows XP US sub 50
Message-ID:  <47.15bbf073.295f5154@aol.com>
Date:         Sat, 29 Dec 2001 12:03:16 EST
Reply-To: <MilburnMNK@AOL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <MilburnMNK@AOL.COM>
Subject:      [AR] Magnesium Powder
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0EC0_01C56B69.5E0B3CA0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

With the recent tightening of supply in the AP market I was interested to
read of a new source (www.ssaerospace.com) for PSAN (phase stabilized
ammonium nitrate) and dug out all my old references on AN based motors. One
of the few drawbacks that I can see at the moment is the price and
availability (shippability?) of magnesium powder. Anyone got a good
(inexpensive and reliable!) source for magnesium and what gives with the
shipping restrictions I saw on Fire-Fox and Skylighter??

Thanks - Neil M

------=_NextPart_000_0EC0_01C56B69.5E0B3CA0
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<HTML><FONT FACE=arial,helvetica><FONT  SIZE=2>With the recent tightening of supply in the AP market I was interested to read of a new source (www.ssaerospace.com) for PSAN (phase stabilized ammonium nitrate) and dug out all my old references on AN based motors. One of the few drawbacks that I can see at the moment is the price and availability (shippability?) of magnesium powder. Anyone got a good (inexpensive and reliable!) source for magnesium and what gives with the shipping restrictions I saw on Fire-Fox and Skylighter??
<BR>
<BR>Thanks - Neil M</FONT></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0EC0_01C56B69.5E0B3CA0--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 4796 invoked from network); 29 Dec 2001 18:04:57 -0000
Received: from smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.105]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 29 Dec 2001 18:04:57 -0000
Received: (qmail 2472 invoked by uid 50005); 29 Dec 2001 18:05:06 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpy with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4177. . Clean. Processed in 7.853532 secs); 29 Dec 2001 18:05:06 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 29 Dec 2001 18:04:55 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA29560; Sat, 29 Dec 2001 10:02:35 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 111405 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 29 Dec 2001 18:02:30          +0000
Received: from mail.trib.com (mail.trib.com [12.10.158.17]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA29546 for <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Sat,          29 Dec 2001 10:02:29 -0800
Received: from [63.229.150.174] (HELO hppav) by mail.trib.com (CommuniGate Pro          SMTP 3.4.6) with SMTP id 65131719; Sat, 29 Dec 2001 11:02:28 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0EC5_01C56B69.5E0B3CA0"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <NKEHJAOOKBPGIKOOPDEFCECLCEAA.jwckman@space-rockets.com>
Date:         Sat, 29 Dec 2001 11:01:06 -0700
Reply-To: "John Wickman" <jwckman@SPACE-ROCKETS.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Wickman" <jwckman@SPACE-ROCKETS.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Magnesium Powder
Comments: To: MilburnMNK@AOL.COM
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <47.15bbf073.295f5154@aol.com>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0EC5_01C56B69.5E0B3CA0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Neil,

Try www.pyrotek.org for the magnesium.

John Wickman


  -----Original Message-----
  From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@itc.uci.edu]On
Behalf Of MilburnMNK@AOL.COM
  Sent: Saturday, December 29, 2001 10:03 AM
  To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
  Subject: [AR] Magnesium Powder


  With the recent tightening of supply in the AP market I was interested to
read of a new source (www.ssaerospace.com) for PSAN (phase stabilized
ammonium nitrate) and dug out all my old references on AN based motors. One
of the few drawbacks that I can see at the moment is the price and
availability (shippability?) of magnesium powder. Anyone got a good
(inexpensive and reliable!) source for magnesium and what gives with the
shipping restrictions I saw on Fire-Fox and Skylighter??

  Thanks - Neil M

------=_NextPart_000_0EC5_01C56B69.5E0B3CA0
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Dus-ascii">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 5.50.4611.1300" name=3DGENERATOR></HEAD>
<BODY>
<DIV><SPAN class=3D070085817-29122001><FONT face=3DArial color=3D#0000ff =

size=3D2>Neil,</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=3D070085817-29122001><FONT face=3DArial color=3D#0000ff =

size=3D2></FONT></SPAN>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=3D070085817-29122001><FONT face=3DArial color=3D#0000ff =
size=3D2>Try <A=20
href=3D"http://www.pyrotek.org">www.pyrotek.org</A> for the=20
magnesium.</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=3D070085817-29122001><FONT face=3DArial color=3D#0000ff =

size=3D2></FONT></SPAN>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=3D070085817-29122001><FONT face=3DArial color=3D#0000ff =
size=3D2>John=20
Wickman</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=3D070085817-29122001></SPAN>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=3D070085817-29122001><FONT face=3DArial color=3D#0000ff =

size=3D2></FONT></SPAN>&nbsp;</DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE>
  <DIV class=3DOutlookMessageHeader dir=3Dltr align=3Dleft><FONT =
face=3DTahoma=20
  size=3D2>-----Original Message-----<BR><B>From:</B> Amateur Rocketry =
discussion=20
  list [mailto:AROCKET@itc.uci.edu]<B>On Behalf Of=20
  </B>MilburnMNK@AOL.COM<BR><B>Sent:</B> Saturday, December 29, 2001 =
10:03=20
  AM<BR><B>To:</B> AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU<BR><B>Subject:</B> [AR] Magnesium =

  Powder<BR><BR></FONT></DIV><FONT face=3Darial,helvetica><FONT =
size=3D2>With the=20
  recent tightening of supply in the AP market I was interested to read =
of a new=20
  source (www.ssaerospace.com) for PSAN (phase stabilized ammonium =
nitrate) and=20
  dug out all my old references on AN based motors. One of the few =
drawbacks=20
  that I can see at the moment is the price and availability =
(shippability?) of=20
  magnesium powder. Anyone got a good (inexpensive and reliable!) source =
for=20
  magnesium and what gives with the shipping restrictions I saw on =
Fire-Fox and=20
  Skylighter?? <BR><BR>Thanks - Neil M</FONT> =
</FONT></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0EC5_01C56B69.5E0B3CA0--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 25588 invoked from network); 29 Dec 2001 20:19:08 -0000
Received: from smtpv.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.110]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 29 Dec 2001 20:19:08 -0000
Received: (qmail 7425 invoked by uid 50005); 29 Dec 2001 20:10:14 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpv with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4177. . Clean. Processed in 5.090095 secs); 29 Dec 2001 20:10:14 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpv.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 29 Dec 2001 20:10:06 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA30092; Sat, 29 Dec 2001 12:17:23 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 111466 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 29 Dec 2001 20:17:12          +0000
Received: from cablecom.laribay.net (cablecom.laribay.net [66.20.57.4]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA30078 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 29 Dec 2001 12:17:12 -0800
Received: from billbull (dial065.laribay.net [66.20.57.65]) by          cablecom.laribay.net (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id OAA15399 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 29 Dec 2001 14:01:34 -0600 (CST)          (envelope-from bpbullock@laribay.net)
References:  <000301c18fa9$21e22bc0$999f0aca@l5o5d6>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <008401c190a6$0a3c9d40$67391442@billbull>
Date:         Sat, 29 Dec 2001 14:18:34 -0600
Reply-To: "Bill Bullock" <bpbullock@LARIBAY.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Bill Bullock" <bpbullock@LARIBAY.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] induction heating
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Allan:
    A good source for just about any engineering data is
www.engineeringbookstore.com . I found a source for the Elements for
Induction Heating: Design, Control, and Applications - for U.S. $173.00 each
at
http://www.engineeringbookstore.com/smeb/HeatTreating/Elements.htm on this
site.
    They list several books on heat treating, annealing and etc... Hope it
helps some. I will look for another site with technical data and let you
know if I find something. I may already have something interesting
bookmarked.
Bill
----- Original Message -----
From: Allan <fountain01@AUSTARNET.COM.AU>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Friday, December 28, 2001 8:06 AM
Subject: [AR] induction heating


> Hi
> Has anyone ran across any sites that give a more expansive explanation on
> induction heating design and or circuits.
> Im looking for a basic grounding on the subject that will give me more of
an
> idea of what  books I need to purchase.
> I was hoping to design something single phase or at the most from a  3
phase
> single outlet supply to melt small amounts of exotic metals and alloys for
a
> variety of purposes like inserts , sputtering, etc I can imagine lots of
> uses in fact .
> Though Im starting to think a design using  carbon arc melting  with
vacuum
> might be more attainable it seems like one of the dark arts and I seem to
be
> mostly running into advertising on the net instead of any real information
> on induction heating.
> Regards
> Allan Jensen
> fountain01@austarnet.com.au
>
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 9367 invoked from network); 30 Dec 2001 00:46:28 -0000
Received: from smtpv.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.110]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 30 Dec 2001 00:46:28 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 28149 invoked by uid 50005); 30 Dec 2001 00:37:33 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpv with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4177. . Clean. Processed in 7.344609 secs); 30 Dec 2001 00:37:33 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpv.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 30 Dec 2001 00:37:23 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA31146; Sat, 29 Dec 2001 16:44:18 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 111638 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 30 Dec 2001 00:42:44          +0000
Received: from dns2.seanet.com (dns2.seanet.com [199.181.164.2]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA31130 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Sat,          29 Dec 2001 16:42:44 -0800
Received: from seanet.com (ssstolt.seanet.com [204.182.68.23]) by          dns2.seanet.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id fBU0ggs26059 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Sat, 29 Dec 2001 16:42:42 -0800 (PST)
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.73 [en] (Win98; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <200112280407.AGP49063@vmms1.verisignmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3C2E6297.AF2626C4@seanet.com>
Date:         Sat, 29 Dec 2001 16:40:56 -0800
Reply-To: "Sherwood Stolt" <ssstolt@SEANET.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Sherwood Stolt" <ssstolt@SEANET.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] silicone oils and biprop cooling
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

I don't understand the advantage of this.  Why not just coat
the surfaces ahead of time?  I assume fiberglass works in
some nozzle pieces for the same reason.

Mike Poulton wrote:

> Somewhere (maybe on this list), I remeber hearing about
> people dissolving high MW silicone oils (PDMS, etc.)in fuels
> for bipropellant rockets to improve cooling.  The idea was
> that molten silica would coat hotspots on the chamber wall
> and reduce heat flux.  IIRC, 20% reduction in total heat
> flux was obtained.  Anyone have any info on this?  It might
> be cool to try.  Also, I have found that dissolving boric
> acid in ethanol (or methanol) produces more than just a
> pretty green flame -- it deposits molten boric acid (and
> possibly some other glasslike chemicals) on objects placed
> in the flame.  Could this have the same effect as silicone
> oils, which are not alcohol-soluble?
> Mike Poulton
> MTP Technologies
> KC0LLX

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 1137 invoked from network); 30 Dec 2001 02:16:47 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpv.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.110]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 30 Dec 2001 02:16:47 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 28638 invoked by uid 50005); 30 Dec 2001 02:07:51 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpv with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4177. . Clean. Processed in 4.504749 secs); 30 Dec 2001 02:07:51 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpv.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 30 Dec 2001 02:07:44 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA31438; Sat, 29 Dec 2001 18:13:30 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 111675 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 30 Dec 2001 02:12:02          +0000
Received: from idsoftware.com (predator.idsoftware.com [192.246.40.34]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA31423 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Sat, 29 Dec 2001 18:12:02 -0800
Received: from [192.246.40.144] (account johnc HELO pluto.idsoftware.com) by          idsoftware.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 3.4.7) with ESMTP id 32052 for          AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 29 Dec 2001 20:12:01 -0600
X-Sender: johnc@mail.idsoftware.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.1
References: <200112280407.AGP49063@vmms1.verisignmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <4.3.1.2.20011229202639.033debd8@mail.idsoftware.com>
Date:         Sat, 29 Dec 2001 20:27:42 -0600
Reply-To: "John Carmack" <johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Carmack" <johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] silicone oils and biprop cooling
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <3C2E6297.AF2626C4@seanet.com>

At 04:40 PM 12/29/2001 -0800, you wrote:
>I don't understand the advantage of this.  Why not just coat
>the surfaces ahead of time?  I assume fiberglass works in
>some nozzle pieces for the same reason.

The idea is that because it is in the fuel, it is constantly and
automatically re-deposited, which would allow longer burns and reusability.

John Carmack

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 17790 invoked from network); 30 Dec 2001 02:22:20 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.105]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 30 Dec 2001 02:22:20 -0000
Received: (qmail 23791 invoked by uid 50005); 30 Dec 2001 02:22:30 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpy with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4177. . Clean. Processed in 1.642798 secs); 30 Dec 2001 02:22:30 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 30 Dec 2001 02:22:28 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA31487; Sat, 29 Dec 2001 18:20:44 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 111686 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 30 Dec 2001 02:19:59          +0000
Received: from spsystems.net (spsystems.net [209.47.149.227]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA31468 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Sat,          29 Dec 2001 18:19:59 -0800
Received: (from henry@localhost) by spsystems.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id VAA20874;          Sat, 29 Dec 2001 21:19:17 -0500 (EST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1011229211208.20810A-100000@spsystems.net>
Date:         Sat, 29 Dec 2001 21:19:16 -0500
Reply-To: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] silicone oils and biprop cooling
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <3C2E6297.AF2626C4@seanet.com>

On Sat, 29 Dec 2001, Sherwood Stolt wrote:
> I don't understand the advantage of this.  Why not just coat
> the surfaces ahead of time? ...

The advantage of "thermal barrier" additives for fuel is that the coating
is self-renewing and doesn't crack.  Solid pre-coated insulators have been
tried, but except for ablative ones, it is extremely difficult to keep
them intact and well-bonded to the chamber wall, given the thermal and
mechanical stresses involved.

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 16051 invoked from network); 30 Dec 2001 07:43:36 -0000
Received: from smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.105]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 30 Dec 2001 07:43:36 -0000
Received: (qmail 24261 invoked by uid 50005); 30 Dec 2001 07:43:46 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpy with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4177. . Clean. Processed in 3.693632 secs); 30 Dec 2001 07:43:46 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 30 Dec 2001 07:43:40 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA00514; Sat, 29 Dec 2001 23:41:44 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 111829 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 30 Dec 2001 07:40:04          +0000
Received: from mail016.syd.optusnet.com.au (mail016.syd.optusnet.com.au          [203.2.75.176]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA00497          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 29 Dec 2001 23:40:03 -0800
Received: from co3064723a (c26172.farfl1.nsw.optusnet.com.au [203.164.57.209])          by mail016.syd.optusnet.com.au (8.11.1/8.11.1) with SMTP id          fBU7dWc12156 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 30 Dec 2001 18:39:32          +1100
References: <4.3.1.2.20011214225328.03684fb8@mail.idsoftware.com>             <4.3.1.2.20011215011116.0362b7a8@mail.idsoftware.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <000f01c19105$6f4436d0$0100a8c0@co3064723a>
Date:         Sun, 30 Dec 2001 18:41:46 +1100
Reply-To: "Jake Anderson" <grooveee@OPTUSHOME.COM.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jake Anderson" <grooveee@OPTUSHOME.COM.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] rader/laser altimeters
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

has anybody looked at focus based altimeter/range finder setups?
similar to the type SLR camera's use
I don't know of the specifics but I'm pretty sure they can be had for rifle
scopes etc

<lots of snippage>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Content-ID: <Pine.BSI.3.91.1011230142000.3238F@spsystems.net>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 5241 invoked from network); 30 Dec 2001 19:25:37 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpv.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.110]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 30 Dec 2001 19:25:37 -0000
Received: (qmail 20824 invoked by uid 50005); 30 Dec 2001 19:16:36 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpv with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4177. . Clean. Processed in 5.437229 secs); 30 Dec 2001 19:16:36 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpv.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 30 Dec 2001 19:16:29 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA02512; Sun, 30 Dec 2001 11:23:43 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 111927 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 30 Dec 2001 19:22:10          +0000
Received: from spsystems.net (spsystems.net [209.47.149.227]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA02496 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Sun,          30 Dec 2001 11:22:09 -0800
Received: (from henry@localhost) by spsystems.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id OAA04275;          Sun, 30 Dec 2001 14:21:22 -0500 (EST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1011230142000.3238D-100000@spsystems.net>
Date:         Sun, 30 Dec 2001 14:21:21 -0500
Reply-To: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] silicone oils and biprop cooling
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

A friend (who may have intended to reply to Arocket, but appears to have
sent only to me, so I'll leave his name off) commented:

"A number of synthetic lubricants used in motorcycles are silicone based,
most notably front fork oil, available in various weights."

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net
From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 18172 invoked from network); 31 Dec 2001 13:22:05 -0000
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 31 Dec 2001 13:22:05 -0000
Received: (qmail 26573 invoked by uid 50005); 31 Dec 2001 13:22:15 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4177. . Clean. Processed in 5.735409 secs); 31 Dec 2001 13:22:15 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 31 Dec 2001 13:22:06 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id FAA06418; Mon, 31 Dec 2001 05:05:03 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 112032 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 31 Dec 2001 13:03:02          +0000
Received: from syd-mro1.austar.net.au (syd-mro1.austar.net.au [203.22.15.135])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id FAA06394 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 31 Dec 2001 05:03:01 -0800
Received: from syd-msw1.austar.net.au (syd-msw1-i.austar.net.au          [172.22.91.136]) by syd-mro1.austar.net.au (Mirapoint) with ESMTP id          AKV05996; Mon, 31 Dec 2001 23:01:50 +1000 (EST)
Received: from l5o5d6 (cpe-202-10-159-131.mer.austar.net.au [202.10.159.131])          by syd-msw1.austar.net.au (Mirapoint) with SMTP id ABG90282; Mon, 31          Dec 2001 23:07:13 +1000 (EST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.3110.1
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <001501c19132$6ed61240$839f0aca@l5o5d6>
Date:         Mon, 31 Dec 2001 00:03:44 +1100
Reply-To: "Allan" <fountain01@AUSTARNET.COM.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Allan" <fountain01@AUSTARNET.COM.AU>
Subject:      [AR] Induction heating
Comments: cc: Bill Bullock <bpbullock@LARIBAY.NET>,          Anthony Cesaroni <ACesaroni@cesaroni.net>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Hi All
Thanks Bill Bullock and  Anthony Cesaroni for your suggestions, with two
reccomendsations for the same book it must say something. I will source that
title in the new year, I also found a few titles on Abe books that seem
interesting as well.
Hopefully when im up to speed on the area I will post my research , and any
designs for comment.
Subject to safety concerns working with high frequency ideally I hope for
something capable of melting a kilogram +- of metals and investment casting
ability.
Thanks again for your help.
Regards
All the best
Allan Jensen

fountain@austarnet.com.au

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 8556 invoked from network); 31 Dec 2001 22:36:54 -0000
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 31 Dec 2001 22:36:54 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 18490 invoked by uid 50005); 31 Dec 2001 22:37:05 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4178. . Clean. Processed in 0.503763 secs); 31 Dec 2001 22:37:05 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 31 Dec 2001 22:37:04 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA08001; Mon, 31 Dec 2001 14:34:54 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 112123 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 31 Dec 2001 22:34:39          +0000
Received: from grucom2.gru.net (grucom2.gru.net [209.251.129.7]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA07987 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon,          31 Dec 2001 14:34:39 -0800
Received: from [209.251.151.99] by grucom2.sfcc.net (NTMail          7.00.0022/NU4112.00.db1c8a4b) with ESMTP id yltfsaaa for          AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 31 Dec 2001 17:34:32 -0500
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.78 [en] (Win95; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3C30E805.D5885505@sfcc.net>
Date:         Mon, 31 Dec 2001 17:34:46 -0500
Reply-To: "James Yawn" <jyawn@SFCC.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "James Yawn" <jyawn@SFCC.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Alternatives to digital test stand
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

More rocketry silliness, but perhaps of some use:  I have modified the
"flying 2x4" to create a more streamlined and stable airframe and am
getting more consistent data.  More accurate data?  Well I don't know
yet, and submit some of these flights for your critique.

The rambling, verbose web page is at:

http://www.geocities.com/jyawn51/4x4/4x4.htm

Please let me know if the GeoCities site doesn't work for you - I just
got it out there and have not yet tested every bit, although at a quick
glance it all seemed functional.

More importantly, please feel free to inform me of any errors I might be
making in the measurements or calculations.  This data collection
business is new to me.  Surely it will be awhile before I get it right.

Again, I have no delusions that this technique is a replacement for the
instrumented test-stand, but I believe that it can yield useful data for
comparison with static test results.  And it sure is fun to watch these
big klunky things go up and come down.

Respectfully submitted,
Jimmy Yawn
jyawn@sfcc.net

p.s.  Happy New Year!

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 23216 invoked from network); 31 Dec 2001 22:51:24 -0000
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 31 Dec 2001 22:51:24 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 8301 invoked by uid 50005); 31 Dec 2001 22:51:34 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4178. . Clean. Processed in 2.002467 secs); 31 Dec 2001 22:51:34 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 31 Dec 2001 22:51:32 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA08033; Mon, 31 Dec 2001 14:35:17 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 112132 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 31 Dec 2001 22:35:16          +0000
Received: from dns2.seanet.com (dns2.seanet.com [199.181.164.2]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA08010 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Mon,          31 Dec 2001 14:35:02 -0800
Received: from seanet.com (ssstolt.seanet.com [204.182.68.23]) by          dns2.seanet.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id fBVMZ0s11050 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Mon, 31 Dec 2001 14:35:00 -0800 (PST)
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.73 [en] (Win98; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <Pine.BSI.3.91.1011229211208.20810A-100000@spsystems.net>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3C30E785.FD3E1BFC@seanet.com>
Date:         Mon, 31 Dec 2001 14:32:37 -0800
Reply-To: "Sherwood Stolt" <ssstolt@SEANET.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Sherwood Stolt" <ssstolt@SEANET.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] silicone oils and biprop cooling
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Could this be used to reduce the erosion of an uncooled
graphite nozzle in a long burn time motor to zero?

Would it be best to start with a coated surface?

If it was a hybrid, could you put silica powder in an ablative
solid layer on the nozzle inlet to protect the nozzle?

Henry Spencer wrote:

> On Sat, 29 Dec 2001, Sherwood Stolt wrote:
> > I don't understand the advantage of this.  Why not just coat
> > the surfaces ahead of time? ...
>
> The advantage of "thermal barrier" additives for fuel is that the coating
> is self-renewing and doesn't crack.  Solid pre-coated insulators have been
> tried, but except for ablative ones, it is extremely difficult to keep
> them intact and well-bonded to the chamber wall, given the thermal and
> mechanical stresses involved.
>
>                                                           Henry Spencer
>                                                        henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 25989 invoked from network); 31 Dec 2001 23:01:16 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 31 Dec 2001 23:01:16 -0000
Received: (qmail 24898 invoked by uid 50005); 31 Dec 2001 23:01:27 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4178. . Clean. Processed in 0.553067 secs); 31 Dec 2001 23:01:27 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 31 Dec 2001 23:01:26 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA08165; Mon, 31 Dec 2001 14:59:47 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 112145 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 31 Dec 2001 22:59:44          +0000
Received: from spsystems.net (spsystems.net [209.47.149.227]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA08151 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Mon,          31 Dec 2001 14:59:43 -0800
Received: (from henry@localhost) by spsystems.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id RAA02207;          Mon, 31 Dec 2001 17:59:09 -0500 (EST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1011231175150.2168A-100000@spsystems.net>
Date:         Mon, 31 Dec 2001 17:59:09 -0500
Reply-To: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] silicone oils and biprop cooling
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <3C30E785.FD3E1BFC@seanet.com>

On Mon, 31 Dec 2001, Sherwood Stolt wrote:
> > The advantage of "thermal barrier" additives for fuel is that the coating
> > is self-renewing and doesn't crack...
>
> Could this be used to reduce the erosion of an uncooled
> graphite nozzle in a long burn time motor to zero?

It's at least conceivable.  Much depends on details.  You'd have to think
about questions like whether the barrier will react with the graphite.
(All kinds of fun things happen at those temperatures.)

> Would it be best to start with a coated surface?

I don't think anybody really knows.

> If it was a hybrid, could you put silica powder in an ablative
> solid layer on the nozzle inlet to protect the nozzle?

Maybe the nozzle throat.  I'm not sure how well it would work for the
nozzle as a whole.

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 919 invoked from network); 1 Jan 2002 04:28:11 -0000
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 1 Jan 2002 04:28:11 -0000
Received: (qmail 29836 invoked by uid 50005); 1 Jan 2002 04:28:22 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4178. . Clean. Processed in 3.188788 secs); 01 Jan 2002 04:28:22 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 1 Jan 2002 04:28:17 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA09307; Mon, 31 Dec 2001 20:26:13 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 112259 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 1 Jan 2002 04:26:02          +0000
Received: from smtprelay7.dc2.adelphia.net (smtprelay7.dc2.adelphia.net          [64.8.50.39]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA09288 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 31 Dec 2001 20:26:00 -0800
Received: from jlgrady ([24.53.101.238]) by smtprelay7.dc2.adelphia.net          (Netscape Messaging Server 4.15) with SMTP id GP8SAG00.LPD for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 31 Dec 2001 23:25:28 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook CWS, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
Importance: Normal
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <000001c1927c$b7db3100$0200a8c0@cmngga.adelphia.net>
Date:         Mon, 31 Dec 2001 23:28:08 -0500
Reply-To: "Jeff Grady" <jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jeff Grady" <jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Alternatives to digital test stand
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <3C30E805.D5885505@sfcc.net>

Jimmy,

        I couldn't quite picture a 2x4 rocket until I saw your web page...I'm still
chuckling at that! But great (cheap) idea! I think I'll get the chop saw out
and make a couple of those to test my epoxy motors...

BTW, did you make the nozzle for this motor? If so, do you explain that
somewhere on your site?

Jeff

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0011
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 12949 invoked from network); 1 Jan 2002 04:50:18 -0000
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 1 Jan 2002 04:50:18 -0000
Received: (qmail 30266 invoked by uid 50005); 1 Jan 2002 04:50:29 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4178. . Clean. Processed in 0.355834 secs); 01 Jan 2002 04:50:29 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 1 Jan 2002 04:50:29 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA09458; Mon, 31 Dec 2001 20:48:49 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 112282 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 1 Jan 2002 04:48:44          +0000
Received: from cablecom.laribay.net (cablecom.laribay.net [66.20.57.4]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA09444 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 31 Dec 2001 20:48:44 -0800
Received: from billbull (dial081.laribay.net [66.20.57.81]) by          cablecom.laribay.net (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id WAA06968 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 31 Dec 2001 22:33:10 -0600 (CST)          (envelope-from bpbullock@laribay.net)
References:  <000001c1927c$b7db3100$0200a8c0@cmngga.adelphia.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <008601c1927f$d3f5fca0$51391442@billbull>
Date:         Mon, 31 Dec 2001 22:50:24 -0600
Reply-To: "Bill Bullock" <bpbullock@LARIBAY.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Bill Bullock" <bpbullock@LARIBAY.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Alternatives to digital test stand
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Jimmy:
    If you think it would help the flight dynamics of the new design I have
some 150+-year old Bald Cypress 2 X 4's that has about 80 growth rings per
inch I would donate...light as a feather and strong as Ironwood. After all,
one can never become too technical in such matters...
Bill
PS: What's a good treatment for splitting sides resulting from excessive
laughter???
----- Original Message -----
From: Jeff Grady <jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Monday, December 31, 2001 10:28 PM
Subject: Re: [AR] Alternatives to digital test stand


> Jimmy,
>
>         I couldn't quite picture a 2x4 rocket until I saw your web
page...I'm still
> chuckling at that! But great (cheap) idea! I think I'll get the chop saw
out
> and make a couple of those to test my epoxy motors...
>
> BTW, did you make the nozzle for this motor? If so, do you explain that
> somewhere on your site?
>
> Jeff
>
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 9799 invoked from network); 1 Jan 2002 06:59:14 -0000
Received: from smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.105]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 1 Jan 2002 06:59:14 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 26637 invoked by uid 50005); 1 Jan 2002 06:59:24 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpy with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4178. . Clean. Processed in 1.23408 secs); 01 Jan 2002 06:59:24 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 1 Jan 2002 06:59:22 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA10094; Mon, 31 Dec 2001 22:57:39 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 112366 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 1 Jan 2002 06:57:37          +0000
Received: from relay02.roc.frontiernet.net (alteon01c.roc.frontiernet.net          [66.133.130.233]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id WAA10080          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 31 Dec 2001 22:57:36 -0800
Received: (qmail 24578 invoked from network); 1 Jan 2002 06:57:03 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO frontiernet.net) ([64.208.224.138])          (envelope-sender <tbinford@frontiernet.net>) by 0 (qmail-ldap-1.03)          with SMTP for <skrall@whro.org>; 1 Jan 2002 06:57:03 -0000
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.74 [en] (Win98; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <000f01c19282$2ee41d70$82840540@skrall>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3C2EBCB5.4D298E13@frontiernet.net>
Date:         Sun, 30 Dec 2001 02:05:25 -0500
Reply-To: <tbinford@frontiernet.net>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Tom Binford" <tbinford@frontiernet.net>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Pourable Propellants
Comments: To: "skrall@whro.org" <skrall@whro.org>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

My 68-10 propellant is pourable when vacuum mixed, not if mixed in air.

AP 200u    51
AP -90u    17
Al 5u      10
HTPB R45   12
DOA         6.5
Tepanol      .5
Iso 143     2

Mix all except the 200u AP in air. Put in mixer and add the rest of the
AP. Mix for at least 25 minutes under vacuum (I get about 28" Hg). The
propellant will pour into tubes 38mm and larger, more difficult and lots
slower in smaller tubes. It will still pour in but trapped bubbles won't
surface in small tubes.

I last used this propellant in a 6" P motor that I static fired in
November.

Tom

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 8011 invoked from network); 24 Nov 2001 21:05:33 -0000
Received: from smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.105]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 24 Nov 2001 21:05:33 -0000
Received: (qmail 2827 invoked by uid 50005); 24 Nov 2001 21:05:25 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpy with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4171. . Clean. Processed in 0.947838 secs); 24 Nov 2001 21:05:25 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 24 Nov 2001 21:05:23 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA20173; Sat, 24 Nov 2001 12:58:55 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 86004 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 24 Nov 2001 20:58:41          +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (oe52.law12.hotmail.com [64.4.18.41]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA20158 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Sat,          24 Nov 2001 12:58:40 -0800
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Sat,          24 Nov 2001 12:58:10 -0800
X-Originating-IP: [24.92.128.69]
References:  <20011124195514.96165.qmail@web21106.mail.yahoo.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 24 Nov 2001 20:58:10.0658 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[B9A24420:01C1752A]
Message-ID:  <OE52H67yRLVbNDN4Cxp0000bbe2@hotmail.com>
Date:         Sat, 24 Nov 2001 14:56:48 -0600
Reply-To: "Mark Kruep" <mkruep@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Mark Kruep" <mkruep@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Epoxy based propellant
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

I'm rather curious about something in these epoxy propellants. I have seen
some rather energetic kick offs in epoxy before (started a fire). How close
does this stuff come to auto-ignition when mixed in big slugs? I have had
epoxy reach several hundred degrees before if confined in large quantities
(i.e. casting tubes). Doesn't AP auto ignite/decompose around 250 degrees F?

Mark
----- Original Message -----
From: "flint hapirat" <flinthapirat@YAHOO.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Saturday, November 24, 2001 1:55 PM
Subject: [AR] Epoxy based propellant


> Thanks guys - for all the help.
> I intend to try these out soon - I have several epoxy
> brands already at home and I'll mix them first.. and
> then try some more. I also have a number of an epoxy
> expert - I'll call him and ask for the most Al/Mg rich
> epoxy available.
> I'm not too bothered (actually, none at all) about the
> reaction between AP and epoxy - since I don't have,
> and can't get my hands on AP. I'll use KN.
>
> Thanks for the info.
> I'm more then interested in your results - if you are
> still working on it - especially epoxy specific brands
> and motor info.
>
> Regards,
> Flint
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Yahoo! GeoCities - quick and easy web site hosting, just $8.95/month.
> http://geocities.yahoo.com/ps/info1
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 7511 invoked from network); 24 Nov 2001 21:16:42 -0000
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 24 Nov 2001 21:16:42 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 15456 invoked by uid 50005); 24 Nov 2001 21:16:34 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4171. . Clean. Processed in 0.363402 secs); 24 Nov 2001 21:16:34 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 24 Nov 2001 21:16:33 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA20243; Sat, 24 Nov 2001 13:15:04 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 86011 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 24 Nov 2001 21:15:01          +0000
Received: from imo-r10.mx.aol.com (imo-r10.mx.aol.com [152.163.225.106]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA20229 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Sat, 24 Nov 2001 13:15:01 -0800
Received: from Ricanakk@aol.com by imo-r10.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v31_r1.9.) id          r.161.472a3a8 (2523); Sat, 24 Nov 2001 16:14:51 -0500 (EST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="UTF-8"
Content-Language: en
X-Mailer: AOL 5.0 for Windows sub 108
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by itc.uci.edu id NAA20230
Message-ID:  <161.472a3a8.293167cb@aol.com>
Date:         Sat, 24 Nov 2001 16:14:51 EST
Reply-To: <Ricanakk@AOL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <Ricanakk@AOL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Epoxy based propellant
Comments: To: flinthapirat@yahoo.com
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

In a message dated 01/11/23 09:08:17 Eastern Standard Time,
flinthapirat@YAHOO.COM writes:

<< I've seen some mails regarding a metal epoxy
 propellant
 someone here is developping...
 I can't find it anymore as my server erased it but I'm
 interested in the results:
 What kind of epoxy glues did you use?
 What are the ratios (with nitrates/perchlorates etc.)
 of fuel/epoxy
 and all other related info >>

Hello Flint,
I've recently put a lot of effort into developing a KN/epoxy based
propellant. The results were initially promising.
The formulation I settled upon was

KN 67%
Aluminum 8% (West System)
Ferric oxide 1%
Epoxy 24% (West system)

The physical properties of the uncured propellant was putty-like, very
workable, and formed excellent grains, with no apparent porosity (examined
under 30x). The elastic modulus was measured to be 600,000 psi...similar to
acrylic. Didn't measure tensile strength, but indications were that it was
quite high (>1000 psi).

Characteristic velocity (cee-star) was measured and found to be quite good,
at about 3550 fps (1075 m/s), which is about 15% higher than the sugar
propellants.

Burn rate was measured at various levels of elevated pressure in my strand
burner. At 1000 psi, the rate was 6.5 mm/sec, for example, which is a decent
burn rate. The relationship of burn rate to pressure was found to follow the
St.Robert model very closely. Now for the 'not-so-good' news. The pressure
exponent was found to be high, at n=0.85.  Not a problem in itself, but….

Three static motor firings were conducted with this formulation, the largest
containing a single grain of about 700 grams. All three had the same
disappointing result. For example, the latter motor 'should' have had, based
on my simulation,  a burn time of just over 1 second. It burned for 8
seconds, this was despite a pyrogen (rocket motor) ignition system and a
coating of KN/charcoal/isop.alcohol slurry to aid ignition.  Developed very
little chamber pressure (max 50 psi).

What was the explanation? My conclusion is that the high pressure exponent is
largely the cause. A propellant with  a low pressure exponent has an initial
*sharp rise in slope* on the burn rate vs pressure curve. As the exponent
increases, the curve becomes more linearized (n=1 is a straight line), with a
less sensitivity of burn rate to pressure at the low pressure regime. So
despite the decent burn rate at high pressure, the motor could not develop
the pressure to get into this regime, as the burn rate was so sluggish at low
pressure.

What is the solution? To find a burn rate enhancer (or whatever) to increase
the burn rate (essential, since KN/epoxy by itself burns too slow, even under
pressure, to be practical), but with a resulting pressure exponent that is
much lower than the n=.85 of this formulation.

Personally, I've shelved my work on the KN/epoxy propellant for the time
being, to concentrate on other projects (Cirrus Two, etc). but if anyone
would like some of the technical data that I've accumulated so far, send me
an email. Eventually this will all be posted on my web site, but this will by
many months from now.
cheers
Richard Nakka

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 18509 invoked from network); 24 Nov 2001 21:20:58 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 24 Nov 2001 21:20:58 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: (qmail 26664 invoked by uid 50005); 24 Nov 2001 21:20:50 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4171. . Clean. Processed in 0.356065 secs); 24 Nov 2001 21:20:50 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 24 Nov 2001 21:20:50 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA20282; Sat, 24 Nov 2001 13:19:26 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 86022 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 24 Nov 2001 21:19:25          +0000
Received: from cisco.com (cypher.cisco.com [171.69.11.18]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA20268 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat,          24 Nov 2001 13:19:24 -0800
Received: (from billw@localhost) by cisco.com (8.8.8/2.6/Cisco List          Logging/8.8.8) id NAA18792; Sat, 24 Nov 2001 13:18:53 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID:  <CMM.0.90.4.1006636732.billw@cypher>
Date:         Sat, 24 Nov 2001 13:18:52 PST
Reply-To: "Bill Westfield" <billw@cisco.com>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "William Chops Westfield" <billw@cisco.com>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Epoxy based propellant
Comments: To: "skrall@whro.org" <skrall@whro.org>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  Your message of Sat, 24 Nov 2001 01:44:16 -0500

    Just a safety note here.  AP is not considered generally safe when
    used with epoxy as it reacts with epoxy, producing a ammonia odor.

The "ammonia odor" is a well-known danger sign when mixing certain
pyrotechnics compositions, particularly those containing nitrates.  The
nitrate + metal + whatever --> ammonia reaction is exothermic and very prone
to runaway, and the smell usually means that you should IMMEDIATELY quench
your composition in large quantities of water, lest your bowl of star
composition ignite in your face and cause serious burns, as it has done
to more than a few amateur fireworks makers.

The ammonia smell from AP/Epoxy seems to be due to an entirely different
reaction, and I didn't notice any self-heating the the very small batches
that I've experimented with, but it is enough to make one very nervous!

BillW


From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 26700 invoked from network); 24 Nov 2001 21:24:01 -0000
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 24 Nov 2001 21:24:01 -0000
Received: (qmail 31243 invoked by uid 50005); 24 Nov 2001 21:23:53 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4171. . Clean. Processed in 0.218547 secs); 24 Nov 2001 21:23:53 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 24 Nov 2001 21:23:52 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA20320; Sat, 24 Nov 2001 13:22:31 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 86029 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 24 Nov 2001 21:22:29          +0000
Received: from cesaroni.net ([204.101.26.130]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7)          with ESMTP id NAA20306 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 24 Nov 2001          13:22:28 -0800
Received: from Anthony by cesaroni.net with SMTP (MDaemon.v2.8.7.0.R) for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 24 Nov 2001 16:19:30 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 8.5, Build 4.71.2173.0
Importance: Normal
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
X-MDaemon-Deliver-To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
X-Return-Path: ACesaroni@cesaroni.net
Message-ID:  <002201c1752a$4d2f3460$1b0101c0@Anthony>
Date:         Sat, 24 Nov 2001 15:55:08 -0500
Reply-To: "Anthony Cesaroni" <ACesaroni@cesaroni.net>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Anthony Cesaroni" <ACesaroni@cesaroni.net>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Epoxy based propellant
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <OE52H67yRLVbNDN4Cxp0000bbe2@hotmail.com>

A good observation. Although AP can and is processed at 225~250 F in some
less than common applications. These are normally not exothermic conditions
with Plastisol as being at least one exemption. Exothermic epoxy reactions,
especially those associated with high mass and aggressive cure formulations
can auto-ignite even on their own without oxidizer. Any condition above 300
F can get you in to problems in a hurry depending on the formulation. Most
standard and I use the term standard, HTPB/AP formulations have an
auto-ignition temperature in excess of 500 F. I saw a recent post here that
had a composite formulation which included sulfur. That's not standard for
most composite propellants but is used extensively other compositions to
reduce the auto-ignition temperature. Things to keep in mind.

Anthony.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@itc.uci.edu]On
> Behalf Of Mark Kruep
> Sent: Saturday, November 24, 2001 3:57 PM
> To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
> Subject: Re: Epoxy based propellant
>
>
> I'm rather curious about something in these epoxy propellants. I have seen
> some rather energetic kick offs in epoxy before (started a fire).
> How close
> does this stuff come to auto-ignition when mixed in big slugs? I have had
> epoxy reach several hundred degrees before if confined in large quantities
> (i.e. casting tubes). Doesn't AP auto ignite/decompose around 250
> degrees F?
>
> Mark
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "flint hapirat" <flinthapirat@YAHOO.COM>
> To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
> Sent: Saturday, November 24, 2001 1:55 PM
> Subject: [AR] Epoxy based propellant
>
>
> > Thanks guys - for all the help.
> > I intend to try these out soon - I have several epoxy
> > brands already at home and I'll mix them first.. and
> > then try some more. I also have a number of an epoxy
> > expert - I'll call him and ask for the most Al/Mg rich
> > epoxy available.
> > I'm not too bothered (actually, none at all) about the
> > reaction between AP and epoxy - since I don't have,
> > and can't get my hands on AP. I'll use KN.
> >
> > Thanks for the info.
> > I'm more then interested in your results - if you are
> > still working on it - especially epoxy specific brands
> > and motor info.
> >
> > Regards,
> > Flint
> >
> > __________________________________________________
> > Do You Yahoo!?
> > Yahoo! GeoCities - quick and easy web site hosting, just $8.95/month.
> > http://geocities.yahoo.com/ps/info1
> >
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 1438 invoked from network); 24 Nov 2001 23:03:32 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpv.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.110]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 24 Nov 2001 23:03:32 -0000
Received: (qmail 18621 invoked by uid 50005); 24 Nov 2001 22:58:50 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpv with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4171. . Clean. Processed in 0.738631 secs); 24 Nov 2001 22:58:50 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpv.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 24 Nov 2001 22:58:48 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA20727; Sat, 24 Nov 2001 14:55:50 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 86099 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 24 Nov 2001 22:55:44          +0000
Received: from localhost (rcalkins@localhost) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with          ESMTP id OAA20713; Sat, 24 Nov 2001 14:55:43 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.LNX.4.10.10111241453210.20385-100000@itc.uci.edu>
Date:         Sat, 24 Nov 2001 14:55:43 -0800
Reply-To: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
Subject:      Re: [AR] New Superpower Space Race Brewing?
Comments: To: Jim Bowery <jabowery@wwc.com>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <013001c174a6$3ea86120$4b4883d0@atlantis>

Hi Jim,

On Fri, 23 Nov 2001, Jim Bowery wrote:

> If the Chinese have leadership that is wise enough to know what to do
> with their young men, as it appears they might, the West should thank
> their lucky stars for such greatness in their adversaries and meet the
> Chinese with a response that is an equally positive and uniquely
> Western.

That is so well put.  I only hope for equally enlightened leadership here
in the west.  So far, I haven't seen anything very impressive along those
lines.

Ray

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 7101 invoked from network); 24 Nov 2001 23:53:55 -0000
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 24 Nov 2001 23:53:55 -0000
Received: (qmail 10155 invoked by uid 50005); 24 Nov 2001 23:53:47 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4171. . Clean. Processed in 0.528209 secs); 24 Nov 2001 23:53:47 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 24 Nov 2001 23:53:46 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA20972; Sat, 24 Nov 2001 15:52:15 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 86137 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 24 Nov 2001 23:52:10          +0000
Received: from mta05.mail.mel.aone.net.au (mta05.mail.au.uu.net [203.2.192.85])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA20958 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 24 Nov 2001 15:52:09 -0800
Received: from unknown ([63.34.220.20]) by mta05.mail.mel.aone.net.au with SMTP          id <20011124235207.WDJR5040.mta05.mail.mel.aone.net.au@unknown> for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 25 Nov 2001 10:52:07 +1100
References: Conversation <OE52H67yRLVbNDN4Cxp0000bbe2@hotmail.com> with last            message <002201c1752a$4d2f3460$1b0101c0@Anthony>
Priority: Normal
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Priority: 3
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	X-MAPIextension=.TXT;
	charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>
Date:         Sat, 24 Nov 2001 23:52:10 +0000
Reply-To: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Epoxy based propellant
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <002201c1752a$4d2f3460$1b0101c0@Anthony>

> had a composite formulation which included sulfur. That's not standard for
> most composite propellants but is used extensively other compositions to
> reduce the auto-ignition temperature.

Obviously not in xClO3 compositions:-)

Troy.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 3326 invoked from network); 25 Nov 2001 00:16:17 -0000
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 25 Nov 2001 00:16:17 -0000
Received: (qmail 10188 invoked by uid 50005); 25 Nov 2001 00:16:09 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4171. . Clean. Processed in 2.13781 secs); 25 Nov 2001 00:16:09 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 25 Nov 2001 00:16:05 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA21054; Sat, 24 Nov 2001 16:14:40 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 86147 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 25 Nov 2001 00:14:35          +0000
Received: from mta03.mail.mel.aone.net.au (mta03.mail.au.uu.net [203.2.192.83])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA21040 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 24 Nov 2001 16:14:34 -0800
Received: from unknown ([63.34.212.17]) by mta03.mail.mel.aone.net.au with SMTP          id <20011125001432.ZSEB17198.mta03.mail.mel.aone.net.au@unknown> for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 25 Nov 2001 11:14:32 +1100
References: Conversation <CMM.0.90.4.1006636732.billw@cypher> with last message            <CMM.0.90.4.1006636732.billw@cypher>
Priority: Normal
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Priority: 3
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	X-MAPIextension=.TXT;
	charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>
Date:         Sun, 25 Nov 2001 00:14:35 +0000
Reply-To: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Epoxy based propellant
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <CMM.0.90.4.1006636732.billw@cypher>

> The ammonia smell from AP/Epoxy seems to be due to an entirely different
> reaction,

As David mentioned, it's a reaction with the active amine groups of the
curative and part of the perchlorate ion.


and I didn't notice any self-heating the the very small batches
> that I've experimented with, but it is enough to make one very nervous!

The heat liberation is primarily a result of the phase transition of the
curing process but the chemical reactions of the active groups at work can
also play their part, depending on the make up. As mentioned earlier, fast
cures will not only liberate the heat faster and in greater measure, they
will also catalyse the process often creating a snowballing effect. This is
often realised in large single mass quantities especially when the epoxy
density (re: lack of inert fillers) is also high.

Troy.

>
> BillW

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 12731 invoked from network); 25 Nov 2001 00:20:08 -0000
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 25 Nov 2001 00:20:08 -0000
Received: (qmail 22399 invoked by uid 50005); 25 Nov 2001 00:20:00 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4171. . Clean. Processed in 0.192817 secs); 25 Nov 2001 00:20:00 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 25 Nov 2001 00:20:00 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA21096; Sat, 24 Nov 2001 16:18:25 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 86158 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 25 Nov 2001 00:18:23          +0000
Received: from mta01.mail.mel.aone.net.au (mta01.mail.au.uu.net [203.2.192.81])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA21082 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 24 Nov 2001 16:18:23 -0800
Received: from unknown ([63.34.212.17]) by mta01.mail.mel.aone.net.au with SMTP          id <20011125001821.HNN11589.mta01.mail.mel.aone.net.au@unknown> for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 25 Nov 2001 11:18:21 +1100
References: Conversation <OE52H67yRLVbNDN4Cxp0000bbe2@hotmail.com> with last            message            <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>
Priority: Normal
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Priority: 3
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	X-MAPIextension=.TXT;
	charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>
Date:         Sun, 25 Nov 2001 00:18:23 +0000
Reply-To: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Epoxy based propellant
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

----------
> > had a composite formulation which included sulfur. That's not standard
for
> > most composite propellants but is used extensively other compositions to
> > reduce the auto-ignition temperature.
>
> Obviously not in xClO3 compositions:-)

Duh, I read it as increase not reduce..sorry.

Troy.

>
> Troy.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 13773 invoked from network); 25 Nov 2001 00:32:00 -0000
Received: from smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.105]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 25 Nov 2001 00:32:00 -0000
Received: (qmail 5657 invoked by uid 50005); 25 Nov 2001 00:31:52 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpy with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4171. . Clean. Processed in 0.924996 secs); 25 Nov 2001 00:31:52 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 25 Nov 2001 00:31:51 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA21198; Sat, 24 Nov 2001 16:30:26 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 86182 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 25 Nov 2001 00:30:24          +0000
Received: from femail10.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail10.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.0.95.106]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA21173          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 24 Nov 2001 16:30:21 -0800
Received: from c380563b ([65.13.226.101]) by femail10.sdc1.sfba.home.com          (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20 201-229-121-120-20010223) with SMTP id          <20011125003020.FLCT21607.femail10.sdc1.sfba.home.com@c380563b>; Sat,          24 Nov 2001 16:30:20 -0800
References:  <v01510101b8250f28b469@[208.22.189.137]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <003301c17548$a61873c0$0401a8c0@lakwod3.co.home.com>
Date:         Sat, 24 Nov 2001 17:32:19 -0700
Reply-To: "Gary Snyder" <redyns@IX.NETCOM.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Gary Snyder" <redyns@IX.NETCOM.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] electronics part -- almost off-topic
Comments: To: al bradley <abradley@TOOLCITY.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

LM350T  Radio Shack RSU-11481397 ($6.99)
[Adjustable 1.3 to 33V DC TO-220 case]
Rat shack has to order these but if you are in
denver or texas (?) the radioshack.com
(previously TechAmerica) is where they come from

Digikey is better but they have a $5 service charge for
orders of < $25. Also I think shipping as RS is free.

gar.

----- Original Message -----
From: al bradley <abradley@TOOLCITY.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Saturday, November 24, 2001 1:53 AM
Subject: [AR] electronics part -- almost off-topic


> Do any of our electronics buffs on the list have a catalog and address in
> the US where I can find an adjustable voltage regulator (or its direct
> replacement only) listed as a 350T? Just need one, volume dealers not
> suitable. <grin>
>
> thanks for any help! answer me off-list.
> al bradley
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------
> Can you live Life with this?: "Unless there is a law, an agreement, or a
> long-standing custom, No one `Deserves' Anything -- Either Good or Bad!"

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 20819 invoked from network); 25 Nov 2001 01:31:49 -0000
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 25 Nov 2001 01:31:49 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 8706 invoked by uid 50005); 25 Nov 2001 01:31:41 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4171. . Clean. Processed in 0.149105 secs); 25 Nov 2001 01:31:41 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 25 Nov 2001 01:31:41 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA21434; Sat, 24 Nov 2001 17:30:07 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 86221 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 25 Nov 2001 01:29:57          +0000
Received: from smtp04.roc.frontiernet.net (alteon01e.roc.frontiernet.net          [66.133.130.235]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id RAA21415          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 24 Nov 2001 17:29:56 -0800
Received: (qmail 29019 invoked from network); 25 Nov 2001 01:29:25 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO frontiernet.net) ([64.208.224.122])          (envelope-sender <tbinford@frontiernet.net>) by 0 (qmail-ldap-1.03)          with SMTP for <abradley@TOOLCITY.NET>; 25 Nov 2001 01:29:25 -0000
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.74 [en] (Win98; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <v01510101b8250f28b469@[208.22.189.137]>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3BFDA832.B8A956FC@frontiernet.net>
Date:         Thu, 22 Nov 2001 20:36:50 -0500
Reply-To: <tbinford@frontiernet.net>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Tom Binford" <tbinford@frontiernet.net>
Subject:      Re: [AR] electronics part -- almost off-topic
Comments: To: al bradley <abradley@TOOLCITY.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

al bradley wrote:
>
> Do any of our electronics buffs on the list have a catalog and address in
> the US where I can find an adjustable voltage regulator (or its direct
> replacement only) listed as a 350T? Just need one, volume dealers not
> suitable. <grin>
>
> thanks for any help! answer me off-list.
> al bradley
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------
> Can you live Life with this?: "Unless there is a law, an agreement, or a
> long-standing custom, No one `Deserves' Anything -- Either Good or Bad!"

Here's a link to LM350 info, you can even get samples.

http://www.national.com/pf/LM/LM350.html

Tom

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 17165 invoked from network); 25 Nov 2001 04:53:20 -0000
Received: from smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.105]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 25 Nov 2001 04:53:20 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 12371 invoked by uid 50005); 25 Nov 2001 04:53:12 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpy with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4171. . Clean. Processed in 0.951372 secs); 25 Nov 2001 04:53:12 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 25 Nov 2001 04:53:09 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA22230; Sat, 24 Nov 2001 20:50:27 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 86342 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 25 Nov 2001 04:50:19          +0000
Received: from grucom2.gru.net (grucom2.gru.net [209.251.129.7]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA22216 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat,          24 Nov 2001 20:50:18 -0800
Received: from [209.251.151.231] by grucom2.sfcc.net (NTMail          7.00.0022/NU4112.00.db1c8a4b) with ESMTP id wjyopaaa for          AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 24 Nov 2001 23:50:17 -0500
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (Win95; I)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <200111230712.XAA12342@itc.uci.edu> <3BFFAC86.D2C3A12D@home.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3C00795B.220DC67E@sfcc.net>
Date:         Sat, 24 Nov 2001 23:53:48 -0500
Reply-To: "James Yawn" <jyawn@SFCC.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "James Yawn" <jyawn@SFCC.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Non-digital test stand
Comments: To: Alex Fraser <beatnic@HOME.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Alex:  Thanks for the encouragement.  I may not get any good data from these tests,
but it sure is fun to watch a 2x4 lumbering into the air!

Jimmy Yawn
jyawn@sfcc.net

Alex Fraser wrote:

> Absolutely beautiful! Science should be fun and this is definitely science fun.
> Thanks for taking the time to document, the page was great.
>
> James Yawn wrote:
>
> > I have been playing with another alternative to the digital recorder.  It
> > involves attaching an engine to a large weight, firing it upward, and
> > recording the flight with a camcorder.
> >
> > Currently I am using an 8-foot 2x4 for my "stabilizer" and lifting it with
> > This test is illustrated with too many pictures and bad jokes at:
> > http://www.angelfire.com/apes/jyawn/2x4/index.htm
> >

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 8683 invoked from network); 25 Nov 2001 10:36:05 -0000
Received: from smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.105]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 25 Nov 2001 10:36:05 -0000
Received: (qmail 23403 invoked by uid 50005); 25 Nov 2001 10:35:57 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpy with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4171. . Clean. Processed in 0.225107 secs); 25 Nov 2001 10:35:57 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 25 Nov 2001 10:35:57 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id CAA23284; Sun, 25 Nov 2001 02:33:51 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 86489 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 25 Nov 2001 10:33:36          +0000
Received: from mail011.syd.optusnet.com.au (mail011.syd.optusnet.com.au          [203.2.75.173]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id CAA23270          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 25 Nov 2001 02:33:35 -0800
Received: from jack (wagax4-171.dialup.optusnet.com.au [198.142.146.171]) by          mail011.syd.optusnet.com.au (8.11.1/8.11.1) with SMTP id fAPAX3X23967          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 25 Nov 2001 21:33:03 +1100
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0DFD_01C56B69.59CC0C50"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <000c01c1759c$a6933de0$ab928ec6@jack>
Date:         Sun, 25 Nov 2001 21:33:39 +1100
Reply-To: "Jack" <jack_36@OPTUSNET.COM.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jack" <jack_36@OPTUSNET.COM.AU>
Subject:      [AR] cheap data aquisition
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0DFD_01C56B69.59CC0C50
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

just a thought,
what about using a spring with a rod through its centre with the rod =
connected to a slide potentiometer and use the joystick port for input =
to the computer. the common audio slide pots are only 10k ohm as to a =
joystick being 100k, but this might be enough.=20
what do yous recken?

          ..Jack..

------=_NextPart_000_0DFD_01C56B69.59CC0C50
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META content=3D"text/html; charset=3Diso-8859-1" =
http-equiv=3DContent-Type>
<META content=3D"MSHTML 5.00.2614.3500" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial>just a thought,</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial>what about using a spring with a rod through its =
centre=20
with the rod connected to a slide potentiometer and use the joystick =
port for=20
input to the computer. the common audio slide pots are only 10k ohm as =
to a=20
joystick being 100k, but this might be enough. </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial>what do yous recken?</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial><BR></FONT><FONT=20
face=3DArial>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;=20
..Jack..</FONT></DIV></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0DFD_01C56B69.59CC0C50--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 19295 invoked from network); 25 Nov 2001 12:29:01 -0000
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 25 Nov 2001 12:29:01 -0000
Received: (qmail 2846 invoked by uid 50005); 25 Nov 2001 12:28:53 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4171. . Clean. Processed in 2.788584 secs); 25 Nov 2001 12:28:53 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 25 Nov 2001 12:28:48 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id EAA23823; Sun, 25 Nov 2001 04:27:10 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 86523 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 25 Nov 2001 12:27:05          +0000
Received: from mail018.syd.optusnet.com.au (mail018.syd.optusnet.com.au          [203.2.75.177]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id EAA23808          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 25 Nov 2001 04:27:04 -0800
Received: from ballbuster (blaax1-023.dialup.optusnet.com.au [210.49.116.23])          by mail018.syd.optusnet.com.au (8.11.1/8.11.1) with SMTP id          fAPCQWF20793; Sun, 25 Nov 2001 23:26:32 +1100
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0E00_01C56B69.59CC0C50"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <NJEEJAOGEMKNPMLLEONAOEAOCDAA.strudwicke@optusnet.com.au>
Date:         Sun, 25 Nov 2001 23:25:44 +1100
Reply-To: "craig strudwicke" <strudwicke@OPTUSNET.COM.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "craig strudwicke" <strudwicke@OPTUSNET.COM.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] cheap data aquisition
Comments: To: Jack <jack_36@optusnet.com.au>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <000c01c1759c$a6933de0$ab928ec6@jack>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0E00_01C56B69.59CC0C50
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Might be OK. Only downside might be resolution (8bit) and conversion time.
If these are acceptable then it would be cool.

Another idea, what about sound card line in or Mic input ? Much higher
acquisition rates possible and high resolution too !

Craig
  -----Original Message-----
  From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU]On
Behalf Of Jack
  Sent: Sunday, 25 November 2001 9:34 PM
  To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
  Subject: [AR] cheap data aquisition


  just a thought,
  what about using a spring with a rod through its centre with the rod
connected to a slide potentiometer and use the joystick port for input to
the computer. the common audio slide pots are only 10k ohm as to a joystick
being 100k, but this might be enough.
  what do yous recken?

            ..Jack..

------=_NextPart_000_0E00_01C56B69.59CC0C50
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Diso-8859-1">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 5.50.4522.1800" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=3D862282312-25112001><FONT face=3DArial color=3D#0000ff =
size=3D2>Might=20
be OK. Only downside might be resolution (8bit) and conversion time. If =
these=20
are acceptable then it would be cool.</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=3D862282312-25112001><FONT face=3DArial color=3D#0000ff =

size=3D2></FONT></SPAN>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=3D862282312-25112001><FONT face=3DArial color=3D#0000ff =

size=3D2>Another idea, what about sound card line in or Mic input ? Much =
higher=20
acquisition rates possible and high resolution too !</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=3D862282312-25112001><FONT face=3DArial color=3D#0000ff =

size=3D2></FONT></SPAN>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=3D862282312-25112001><FONT face=3DArial color=3D#0000ff =

size=3D2>Craig</FONT></SPAN></DIV></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE dir=3Dltr style=3D"MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
  <DIV class=3DOutlookMessageHeader dir=3Dltr align=3Dleft><FONT =
face=3DTahoma=20
  size=3D2>-----Original Message-----<BR><B>From:</B> Amateur Rocketry =
discussion=20
  list [mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU]<B>On Behalf Of =
</B>Jack<BR><B>Sent:</B>=20
  Sunday, 25 November 2001 9:34 PM<BR><B>To:</B>=20
  AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU<BR><B>Subject:</B> [AR] cheap data=20
  aquisition<BR><BR></FONT></DIV>
  <DIV><FONT face=3DArial>just a thought,</FONT></DIV>
  <DIV><FONT face=3DArial>what about using a spring with a rod through =
its centre=20
  with the rod connected to a slide potentiometer and use the joystick =
port for=20
  input to the computer. the common audio slide pots are only 10k ohm as =
to a=20
  joystick being 100k, but this might be enough. </FONT></DIV>
  <DIV><FONT face=3DArial>what do yous recken?</FONT></DIV>
  <DIV><FONT face=3DArial><BR></FONT><FONT=20
  face=3DArial>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;=20
  ..Jack..</FONT></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0E00_01C56B69.59CC0C50--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 5031 invoked from network); 25 Nov 2001 17:06:03 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 25 Nov 2001 17:06:03 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: (qmail 3378 invoked by uid 50005); 25 Nov 2001 17:05:55 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4171. . Clean. Processed in 0.594099 secs); 25 Nov 2001 17:05:55 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 25 Nov 2001 17:05:54 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA24783; Sun, 25 Nov 2001 09:02:52 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 86607 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 25 Nov 2001 17:02:40          +0000
Received: from localhost (dmccue@localhost) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with          ESMTP id JAA24769 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 25 Nov 2001          09:02:40 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.LNX.4.10.10111250838280.24655-100000@itc.uci.edu>
Date:         Sun, 25 Nov 2001 09:02:40 -0800
Reply-To: "David J. McCue" <dmccue@itc.uci.edu>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "David J. McCue" <dmccue@itc.uci.edu>
Subject:      Re: [AR] cheap data aquisition
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <NJEEJAOGEMKNPMLLEONAOEAOCDAA.strudwicke@optusnet.com.au>

On Sun, 25 Nov 2001, craig strudwicke wrote:

[snip]
>
> Another idea, what about sound card line in or Mic input ? Much higher
> acquisition rates possible and high resolution too !
>
> Craig

Alas, a sound card cannot record signals that change slowly. If you hooked
your load cell to the input of a sound card, you would see the change of
force at the start of a motor burn and the drop in force at the end, but
all the data in the middle would be lost. In other words, your dataset
would consist of a positive pulse at the start of the burn and a negative
pulse at the end.

The difference between a sound card and an A to D board comes down to the
fact that the A to D board has a response down to DC, whereas the sound
card will not record signals that are below about 20 Hz.

I have given thought to schemes that would allow one to use a sound card
in this role, by modulating the data we want on a sound carrier, but the
availability of the relatively inexpensive DI-151RS A to D unit from Dataq
is such an easy alternative to all that effort. 12 bits resolution for 99
bucks! Even cheaper if you borrow a friend's unit! (Hi, Wayne!)

-Dave McCue

For the curious: http://www.dataq.com/ - look at the starter kits page -

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 17489 invoked from network); 25 Nov 2001 19:36:10 -0000
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 25 Nov 2001 19:36:10 -0000
Received: (qmail 9541 invoked by uid 50005); 25 Nov 2001 19:36:02 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4171. . Clean. Processed in 0.496458 secs); 25 Nov 2001 19:36:02 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 25 Nov 2001 19:36:01 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA25209; Sun, 25 Nov 2001 11:34:06 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 86654 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 25 Nov 2001 19:34:05          +0000
Received: from mail006.syd.optusnet.com.au (mail006.syd.optusnet.com.au          [203.2.75.230]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA25194;          Sun, 25 Nov 2001 11:34:04 -0800
Received: from ballbuster (blaax1-214.dialup.optusnet.com.au [210.49.116.214])          by mail006.syd.optusnet.com.au (8.11.1/8.11.1) with SMTP id          fAPJXV230872; Mon, 26 Nov 2001 06:33:32 +1100
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <NJEEJAOGEMKNPMLLEONAKEAPCDAA.strudwicke@optusnet.com.au>
Date:         Mon, 26 Nov 2001 06:32:45 +1100
Reply-To: "craig strudwicke" <strudwicke@OPTUSNET.COM.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "craig strudwicke" <strudwicke@OPTUSNET.COM.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] cheap data aquisition
Comments: To: "David J. McCue" <dmccue@ITC.UCI.EDU>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <Pine.LNX.4.10.10111250838280.24655-100000@itc.uci.edu>

Could use a V to F chip.....

Craig

-----Original Message-----
From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU]On
Behalf Of David J. McCue
Sent: Monday, 26 November 2001 4:03 AM
To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
Subject: Re: [AR] cheap data aquisition


On Sun, 25 Nov 2001, craig strudwicke wrote:

[snip]
>
> Another idea, what about sound card line in or Mic input ? Much higher
> acquisition rates possible and high resolution too !
>
> Craig

Alas, a sound card cannot record signals that change slowly. If you hooked
your load cell to the input of a sound card, you would see the change of
force at the start of a motor burn and the drop in force at the end, but
all the data in the middle would be lost. In other words, your dataset
would consist of a positive pulse at the start of the burn and a negative
pulse at the end.

The difference between a sound card and an A to D board comes down to the
fact that the A to D board has a response down to DC, whereas the sound
card will not record signals that are below about 20 Hz.

I have given thought to schemes that would allow one to use a sound card
in this role, by modulating the data we want on a sound carrier, but the
availability of the relatively inexpensive DI-151RS A to D unit from Dataq
is such an easy alternative to all that effort. 12 bits resolution for 99
bucks! Even cheaper if you borrow a friend's unit! (Hi, Wayne!)

-Dave McCue

For the curious: http://www.dataq.com/ - look at the starter kits page -

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 23450 invoked from network); 25 Nov 2001 19:49:19 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 25 Nov 2001 19:49:19 -0000
Received: (qmail 12650 invoked by uid 50005); 25 Nov 2001 19:49:11 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4171. . Clean. Processed in 0.539826 secs); 25 Nov 2001 19:49:11 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 25 Nov 2001 19:49:10 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA25183; Sun, 25 Nov 2001 11:31:40 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 86647 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 25 Nov 2001 19:31:21          +0000
Received: from imo-r05.mx.aol.com (imo-r05.mx.aol.com [152.163.225.101]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA25169 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Sun, 25 Nov 2001 11:31:21 -0800
Received: from JMKrell@aol.com by imo-r05.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v31_r1.9.) id          w.157.49756d6 (4381) for <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Sun, 25 Nov 2001          14:31:12 -0500 (EST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0E04_01C56B69.59CC0C50"
X-Mailer: AOL 6.0 for Windows US sub 10540
Message-ID:  <157.49756d6.2932a0ff@aol.com>
Date:         Sun, 25 Nov 2001 14:31:11 EST
Reply-To: <JMKrell@AOL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <JMKrell@AOL.COM>
Subject:      [AR] (no subject)
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0E04_01C56B69.59CC0C50
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit


"Alas, a sound card cannot record signals that change slowly. If you hooked
your load cell to the input of a sound card, you would see the change of
force at the start of a motor burn and the drop in force at the end, but
all the data in the middle would be lost."

True, but using a simple 555 circuit with the load cell to generate a 2 kHz
to 8 kHz signal, which can be recorded on a cassette tape recorder, makes a
very simple and inexpensive portable data acquisition system. This was my
first thrust data acquisition system. I used the tape input on my "old" Apple
II in-place-of a sound card. The Apple II's frequency resolution ranged from
20 Hz to 72 kHz using an assembly program I wrote. It is best to use a
calibration tone before and after each test. When computers were expensive
and not very portable, this was one of the ways used to protect your valuable
equipment. There are programs, that are downloadable from the Internet, for
PC's that use the sound card to decode and analyze recorded data.

Today, I use all digital systems using old cheap laptops for ground tests and
PIC microcontrollers for flight data recording. Check corporate MIS or IT
departments, they usually have old outdated laptops around that they will
give away or sell for under $100. I picked up 7 laptops free this way. Be
prepared to do a little repairing on the laptops, mostly gluing broken cases.


John Krell



------=_NextPart_000_0E04_01C56B69.59CC0C50
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<HTML><FONT FACE=arial,helvetica><FONT  SIZE=2>
<BR>"Alas, a sound card cannot record signals that change slowly. If you hooked
<BR>your load cell to the input of a sound card, you would see the change of
<BR>force at the start of a motor burn and the drop in force at the end, but
<BR>all the data in the middle would be lost."
<BR>
<BR>True, but using a simple 555 circuit with the load cell to generate a 2 kHz to 8 kHz signal, which can be recorded on a cassette tape recorder, makes a very simple and inexpensive portable data acquisition system. This was my first thrust data acquisition system. I used the tape input on my "old" Apple II in-place-of a sound card. The Apple II's frequency resolution ranged from 20 Hz to 72 kHz using an assembly program I wrote. It is best to use a calibration tone before and after each test. When computers we  were expensive and not very portable, this was one of the ways used to protect your valuable equipment. There are programs, that are downloadable from the Internet, for PC's that use the sound card to decode and analyze recorded data. &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;
<BR>
<BR>Today, I use all digital systems using old cheap laptops for ground tests and PIC microcontrollers for flight data recording. Check corporate MIS or IT departments, they usually have old outdated laptops around that they will give away or sell for under $100. I picked up 7 laptops free this way. Be prepared to do a little repairing on the laptops, mostly gluing broken cases. &nbsp;
<BR>
<BR>John Krell
<BR>
<BR></FONT></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0E04_01C56B69.59CC0C50--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 5925 invoked from network); 25 Nov 2001 20:52:27 -0000
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 25 Nov 2001 20:52:27 -0000
Received: (qmail 2850 invoked by uid 50005); 25 Nov 2001 20:52:19 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4171. . Clean. Processed in 1.356517 secs); 25 Nov 2001 20:52:19 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 25 Nov 2001 20:52:16 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA25411; Sun, 25 Nov 2001 12:49:59 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 86661 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 25 Nov 2001 20:49:47          +0000
Received: from c007.snv.cp.net (c007-h000.c007.snv.cp.net [209.228.33.206]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id MAA25372 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 25 Nov 2001 12:39:47 -0800
Received: (cpmta 26773 invoked from network); 25 Nov 2001 12:39:16 -0800
Received: from 64.194.110.117 (HELO dell) by smtp.telocity.com (209.228.33.206)          with SMTP; 25 Nov 2001 12:39:16 -0800
X-Sent: 25 Nov 2001 20:39:16 GMT
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0E09_01C56B69.59CC0C50"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2919.6700
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <000e01c175f1$577220f0$756ec240@dell>
Date:         Sun, 25 Nov 2001 14:39:55 -0600
Reply-To: "Dane Smalley" <gdsmalley@TELOCITY.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Dane Smalley" <gdsmalley@TELOCITY.COM>
Subject:      [AR]
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0E09_01C56B69.59CC0C50
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

unsubscribe

------=_NextPart_000_0E09_01C56B69.59CC0C50
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META content=3D"text/html; charset=3Diso-8859-1" =
http-equiv=3DContent-Type>
<META content=3D"MSHTML 5.00.2920.0" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>unsubscribe</FONT></DIV></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0E09_01C56B69.59CC0C50--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 21128 invoked from network); 25 Nov 2001 23:06:44 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpv.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.110]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 25 Nov 2001 23:06:44 -0000
Received: (qmail 379 invoked by uid 50005); 25 Nov 2001 23:01:52 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpv with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4171. . Clean. Processed in 1.380384 secs); 25 Nov 2001 23:01:53 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpv.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 25 Nov 2001 23:01:50 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA25911; Sun, 25 Nov 2001 15:04:12 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 86706 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 25 Nov 2001 23:03:57          +0000
Received: from localhost (dmccue@localhost) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with          ESMTP id PAA25896; Sun, 25 Nov 2001 15:03:55 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.LNX.4.10.10111251430050.25561-100000@itc.uci.edu>
Date:         Sun, 25 Nov 2001 15:03:55 -0800
Reply-To: "David J. McCue" <dmccue@itc.uci.edu>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "David J. McCue" <dmccue@itc.uci.edu>
Subject:      Re: [AR] cheap data aquisition
Comments: To: craig strudwicke <strudwicke@optusnet.com.au>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <NJEEJAOGEMKNPMLLEONAKEAPCDAA.strudwicke@optusnet.com.au>

On Mon, 26 Nov 2001, craig strudwicke wrote:

> Could use a V to F chip.....
>
> Craig

Oh yes, that part is easy! The more difficult part is finding an elegant
(read: cheap and easy) way to interpret the data one would collect. If
someone else is willing to code that aspect of the problem, I can supply
the design for the hardware component.

On a similar matter, a friend challanged me to come up with a device that
would give an indication of when an N2O hybrid motor is full and "only
cost a few bucks." The El Cheapo result is a circuit that is based on the
good old 555 chip used as an oscillator who's frequency is based on the
temperature of a two-dollar thermistor from Radio Shack. The whole thing
fits in a junk bin computer speaker, with a cable to the thermistor.

The intended use is to place the remote thermistor near the vent of the
motor and wait for the pitch of the audio to drop. When the pitch goes
from a tone to a low buzz, that means that liquid N2O is spitting on the
thermistor, and it's time to push the GO button. I cobbled the silly thing
together last Friday evening and we'll test it at a launch next week.
Cost: under six dollars--

-Dave Mc

>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU]On
> Behalf Of David J. McCue
> Sent: Monday, 26 November 2001 4:03 AM
> To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
> Subject: Re: [AR] cheap data aquisition
>
>
> On Sun, 25 Nov 2001, craig strudwicke wrote:
>
> [snip]
> >
> > Another idea, what about sound card line in or Mic input ? Much higher
> > acquisition rates possible and high resolution too !
> >
> > Craig
>
> Alas, a sound card cannot record signals that change slowly. If you hooked
> your load cell to the input of a sound card, you would see the change of
> force at the start of a motor burn and the drop in force at the end, but
> all the data in the middle would be lost. In other words, your dataset
> would consist of a positive pulse at the start of the burn and a negative
> pulse at the end.
>
> The difference between a sound card and an A to D board comes down to the
> fact that the A to D board has a response down to DC, whereas the sound
> card will not record signals that are below about 20 Hz.
>
> I have given thought to schemes that would allow one to use a sound card
> in this role, by modulating the data we want on a sound carrier, but the
> availability of the relatively inexpensive DI-151RS A to D unit from Dataq
> is such an easy alternative to all that effort. 12 bits resolution for 99
> bucks! Even cheaper if you borrow a friend's unit! (Hi, Wayne!)
>
> -Dave McCue
>
> For the curious: http://www.dataq.com/ - look at the starter kits page -
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 28961 invoked from network); 25 Nov 2001 23:20:59 -0000
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 25 Nov 2001 23:20:59 -0000
X-Priority: 3
Received: (qmail 7874 invoked by uid 50005); 25 Nov 2001 23:20:51 -0000
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4171. . Clean. Processed in 0.154779 secs); 25 Nov 2001 23:20:51 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 25 Nov 2001 23:20:51 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA26001; Sun, 25 Nov 2001 15:17:50 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 86719 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 25 Nov 2001 23:17:48          +0000
Received: from nt2000s2.dgmicro.com (cn815472-c.newcas1.de.home.com          [24.40.74.93]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA25987          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 25 Nov 2001 15:17:47 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
content-class: urn:content-classes:message
X-MS-Has-Attach: 
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: 
Thread-Topic: L3300 Casing grain design.
Thread-Index: AcF18wEr2EkFK2IGR0yI9iDYnSyjVQAElEeQ
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by itc.uci.edu id PAA25988
Message-ID:  <C0F7BF4DCEC1D2479A01031347184DCD388B@nt2000s2.dgmicro.com>
Date:         Sun, 25 Nov 2001 18:17:16 -0500
Reply-To: "Darren Wright" <dwright@D2-TECH.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Darren Wright" <dwright@D2-TECH.COM>
Subject:      [AR] L3300 Casing grain design.
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Ok now that I've conquered the quite ignorant 2550 casing, I'm making a
load for the APS 3300 casing. I've got some design issues that I would
like some advice on:

Since the length is SO long, I knew Kn was going to be an issue.  The
nozzle is 0.73in fixed.  Propellant is ~ 36in x 1.77 wide. That's what I
want to go with.  I wanted to minimize the Kn so that I can run a faster
propellant, not just red.

so I tried this:

1. 6 x 6in grains x .833 core = Kn 275-396.  (hmm seems progressive and
too high. like the 2550 I know this is the dimensions that APS used.)

2. 4 x 9in grains x 0.833 core = Kn 257-421. (NOT!)

3. 9 x 4in grains x 0.833 core = Kn 302-362 (NOT BAD!  Still a bit high)

4. 9 x 4in grains, top 6 0.833 core bottom 3 1.0in core = Kn 313-368
(not much better, less propellant)


The 2550 case peaks out at about 398 or so.....I think this case can
handle that.

Is there any reason not to go for #3?  Will the higher Kn in the
beginning cause any problems?  I don't think so.  I regularly run 6x4in
grains in the 2550 casing.  The curve is MUCH flatter.

-Darren

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 13050 invoked from network); 25 Nov 2001 23:36:32 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 25 Nov 2001 23:36:32 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: (qmail 2962 invoked by uid 50005); 25 Nov 2001 23:36:24 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4171. . Clean. Processed in 0.461096 secs); 25 Nov 2001 23:36:24 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 25 Nov 2001 23:36:24 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA26065; Sun, 25 Nov 2001 15:34:12 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 86729 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 25 Nov 2001 23:34:04          +0000
Received: from cisco.com (cypher.cisco.com [171.69.11.18]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA26050; Sun, 25 Nov 2001 15:34:04 -0800
Received: (from billw@localhost) by cisco.com (8.8.8/2.6/Cisco List          Logging/8.8.8) id PAA21710; Sun, 25 Nov 2001 15:33:34 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID:  <CMM.0.90.4.1006731213.billw@cypher>
Date:         Sun, 25 Nov 2001 15:33:33 PST
Reply-To: "Bill Westfield" <billw@cisco.com>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "William Chops Westfield" <billw@cisco.com>
Subject:      Re: [AR] cheap data aquisition
Comments: To: "David J. McCue" <dmccue@ITC.UCI.EDU>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  Your message of Sun, 25 Nov 2001 15:03:55 -0800

    Oh yes, that part is easy! The more difficult part is finding an elegant
    (read: cheap and easy) way to interpret the data one would collect. If
    someone else is willing to code that aspect of the problem, I can supply
    the design for the hardware component.

This, of course, is the big advantage of using an off-the-shelf data
acquisition system, rather than putting your own hardware together.
Typically, you DAS will come with enough software to produce you a list of
ascii data values, and once you have that, you can manipulate them into
plots, graphics, statistics programs, and so on using "standard"
spreadsheet software and such.  In a lot of ways, paying for a commercial
DAS is more valuable for the purpose of getting this little bit of "shim"
software than it is for the hardwre itself, since this sort of thing is
usually "annoying" to write for modern operating systems.

It's like... Designing your own hardware isn't so bad.  Doing your own math
isn't so bad.  CONNECTING the hardware to the math is a PITA...

BillW


From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 26585 invoked from network); 26 Nov 2001 00:34:06 -0000
Received: from smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.109]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 26 Nov 2001 00:34:06 -0000
Received: (qmail 20280 invoked by uid 50005); 26 Nov 2001 00:33:58 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpw with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4171. . Clean. Processed in 0.247091 secs); 26 Nov 2001 00:33:58 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpw.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 26 Nov 2001 00:33:57 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA26234; Sun, 25 Nov 2001 16:31:57 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 86745 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 26 Nov 2001 00:31:49          +0000
Received: from mta05.mail.mel.aone.net.au (mta05.mail.au.uu.net [203.2.192.85])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA26220 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 25 Nov 2001 16:31:47 -0800
Received: from unknown ([63.34.220.241]) by mta05.mail.mel.aone.net.au with          SMTP id <20011126003046.CXHI12677.mta05.mail.mel.aone.net.au@unknown>          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 26 Nov 2001 11:30:46 +1100
References: Conversation            <C0F7BF4DCEC1D2479A01031347184DCD388B@nt2000s2.dgmicro.com> with            last message            <C0F7BF4DCEC1D2479A01031347184DCD388B@nt2000s2.dgmicro.com>
Priority: Normal
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Priority: 3
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	X-MAPIextension=.TXT;
	charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>
Date:         Mon, 26 Nov 2001 00:31:49 +0000
Reply-To: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] L3300 Casing grain design.
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <C0F7BF4DCEC1D2479A01031347184DCD388B@nt2000s2.dgmicro.com>

Well, I haven't run the sims for these options but when designing long
motors there's 2 principal *theoretical* elements foremost in my mind to
avoid over pressurization with unrestricted geometries. (1) is the maximum
theoretical Kn ratio (for a given propellant) expected and (2) is the
likelihood and magnitude of an erosive burning spike. Regressive burn
profiles are generally least desirable in long motors that maybe
susceptible to erosive burning spikes and are likely to be less efficient
for such motors. I really need to do the sims to make any reasonable
judgement which I can't do right now.

Troy.

----------
> Ok now that I've conquered the quite ignorant 2550 casing, I'm making a
> load for the APS 3300 casing. I've got some design issues that I would
> like some advice on:
>
> Since the length is SO long, I knew Kn was going to be an issue.  The
> nozzle is 0.73in fixed.  Propellant is ~ 36in x 1.77 wide. That's what I
> want to go with.  I wanted to minimize the Kn so that I can run a faster
> propellant, not just red.
>
> so I tried this:
>
> 1. 6 x 6in grains x .833 core = Kn 275-396.  (hmm seems progressive and
> too high. like the 2550 I know this is the dimensions that APS used.)
>
> 2. 4 x 9in grains x 0.833 core = Kn 257-421. (NOT!)
>
> 3. 9 x 4in grains x 0.833 core = Kn 302-362 (NOT BAD!  Still a bit high)
>
> 4. 9 x 4in grains, top 6 0.833 core bottom 3 1.0in core = Kn 313-368
> (not much better, less propellant)
>
>
> The 2550 case peaks out at about 398 or so.....I think this case can
> handle that.
>
> Is there any reason not to go for #3?  Will the higher Kn in the
> beginning cause any problems?  I don't think so.  I regularly run 6x4in
> grains in the 2550 casing.  The curve is MUCH flatter.
>
> -Darren

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 3289 invoked from network); 26 Nov 2001 02:14:30 -0000
Received: from smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.105]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 26 Nov 2001 02:14:30 -0000
Received: (qmail 8657 invoked by uid 50005); 26 Nov 2001 02:14:22 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpy with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4171. . Clean. Processed in 0.402564 secs); 26 Nov 2001 02:14:22 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpy.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 26 Nov 2001 02:14:21 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA26589; Sun, 25 Nov 2001 18:11:18 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 86777 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 26 Nov 2001 02:11:12          +0000
Received: from mail5.nc.rr.com (fe5.southeast.rr.com [24.93.67.52]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA26575 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Sun, 25 Nov 2001 18:11:12 -0800
Received: from freddy ([24.162.230.106]) by mail5.nc.rr.com  with Microsoft          SMTPSVC(5.5.1877.687.68); Sun, 25 Nov 2001 21:11:10 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <NBEJKDFBFOEFALBMBCDPAEFBCFAA.jtaylor@nc.rr.com>
Date:         Sun, 25 Nov 2001 21:14:23 -0500
Reply-To: "Jeff Taylor" <jtaylor@NC.RR.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jeff Taylor" <jtaylor@NC.RR.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] L3300 Casing grain design.
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <C0F7BF4DCEC1D2479A01031347184DCD388B@nt2000s2.dgmicro.com>

Tough one Darren, I doubt that there is a magic geometry that will let you
run your faster propellants.  With a slow propellant, you can run a
progressive grain geometry (like the 6 x 6) counting on erosive burning to
increase the initial thrust and flatten out the curve.  By the way, why is
the nozzle fixed at .73" ?   It seems that your problem would be a bit
easier if you could open it up a bit.

- Jeff Taylor



>Subject: [AR] L3300 Casing grain design.
>
>
>Ok now that I've conquered the quite ignorant 2550 casing, I'm making a
>load for the APS 3300 casing. I've got some design issues that I would
>like some advice on:
>
>Since the length is SO long, I knew Kn was going to be an issue.  The
>nozzle is 0.73in fixed.  Propellant is ~ 36in x 1.77 wide. That's what I
>want to go with.  I wanted to minimize the Kn so that I can run a faster
>propellant, not just red.
>
>so I tried this:
>
>1. 6 x 6in grains x .833 core = Kn 275-396.  (hmm seems progressive and
>too high. like the 2550 I know this is the dimensions that APS used.)
>
>2. 4 x 9in grains x 0.833 core = Kn 257-421. (NOT!)
>
>3. 9 x 4in grains x 0.833 core = Kn 302-362 (NOT BAD!  Still a bit high)
>
>4. 9 x 4in grains, top 6 0.833 core bottom 3 1.0in core = Kn 313-368
>(not much better, less propellant)
>
>
>The 2550 case peaks out at about 398 or so.....I think this case can
>handle that.
>
>Is there any reason not to go for #3?  Will the higher Kn in the
>beginning cause any problems?  I don't think so.  I regularly run 6x4in
>grains in the 2550 casing.  The curve is MUCH flatter.
>
>-Darren

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 2733 invoked from network); 26 Nov 2001 03:15:40 -0000
Received: from smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.104]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 26 Nov 2001 03:15:40 -0000
Received: (qmail 18090 invoked by uid 50005); 26 Nov 2001 03:15:32 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpz with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4171. . Clean. Processed in 0.161025 secs); 26 Nov 2001 03:15:32 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpz.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 26 Nov 2001 03:15:31 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA26799; Sun, 25 Nov 2001 19:13:34 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 86796 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 26 Nov 2001 03:13:29          +0000
Received: from nt2000s2.dgmicro.com (cn815472-c.newcas1.de.home.com          [24.40.74.93]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA26785          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 25 Nov 2001 19:13:29 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
content-class: urn:content-classes:message
X-MS-Has-Attach: 
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: 
Thread-Topic:      Re: [AR] L3300 Casing grain design.
Thread-Index: AcF2EjCP0CjpP118RF6ZrW4KpWIYJQAFeFbA
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by itc.uci.edu id TAA26786
Message-ID:  <C0F7BF4DCEC1D2479A01031347184DCD02FED2@nt2000s2.dgmicro.com>
Date:         Sun, 25 Nov 2001 22:12:58 -0500
Reply-To: "Darren Wright" <dwright@D2-TECH.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Darren Wright" <dwright@D2-TECH.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] L3300 Casing grain design.
Comments: To: Troy Prideaux <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Agreed..


That's why I've chosen the grain designs that I did.

If I make the bottom grains larger, the erosivness should
decrease....but I don't think it's going to be that erosive anyway.

-Darren


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Troy Prideaux [mailto:GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU]
> Sent: Sunday, November 25, 2001 7:32 PM
> To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
> Subject: Re: [AR] L3300 Casing grain design.
>
>
> Well, I haven't run the sims for these options but when
> designing long motors there's 2 principal *theoretical*
> elements foremost in my mind to avoid over pressurization
> with unrestricted geometries. (1) is the maximum theoretical
> Kn ratio (for a given propellant) expected and (2) is the
> likelihood and magnitude of an erosive burning spike.
> Regressive burn profiles are generally least desirable in
> long motors that maybe susceptible to erosive burning spikes
> and are likely to be less efficient for such motors. I really
> need to do the sims to make any reasonable judgement which I
> can't do right now.
>
> Troy.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 15718 invoked from network); 26 Nov 2001 11:18:31 -0000
Received: from smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.87]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 26 Nov 2001 11:18:31 -0000
Received: (qmail 1106 invoked by uid 50005); 26 Nov 2001 11:18:22 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpg with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4171. . Clean. Processed in 0.298841 secs); 26 Nov 2001 11:18:22 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpg.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 26 Nov 2001 11:18:22 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id DAA28105; Mon, 26 Nov 2001 03:02:51 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 86960 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 26 Nov 2001 11:02:39          +0000
Received: from fep3-orange.clear.net.nz (fep3-orange.clear.net.nz          [203.97.32.3]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id DAA28090          for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Mon, 26 Nov 2001 03:02:39 -0800
Received: from mkbs (203-167-157-241.dialup.clear.net.nz [203.167.157.241]) by          fep3-orange.clear.net.nz (1.5/1.8) with SMTP id AAA02681; Tue, 27 Nov          2001 00:02:36 +1300 (NZDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="Windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <010601c1766a$2b99df80$0700a8c0@mkbs>
Date:         Tue, 27 Nov 2001 00:04:47 +1300
Reply-To: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Organization: Applied Technology
Subject:      [AR] Starchaser X-Prize reaches 5000 feet, so far ...
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

He's at it again ...

        http://www.cnn.com/2001/TECH/space/11/22/rocket.test/index.html



________________________________________________


CNN) -- After sending a prototype a mile into the sky on Thursday, an
amateur rocket builder said he expects to win a $10 million prize to launch
the first private astronaut team into space.

The rocket soared during the morning flight to 5,000 feet (1,520 meters)
over a mud flat expanse near Manchester in Northwest England early in the
morning.

Known as Nova, the reusable launch vehicle landed with the assistance of two
parachutes. Many parts were recovered intact, according to Nova designer
Steven Bennett. They will be refurbished and the 33-foot (11-meter) rocket
will fly again within months.

There were some minor glitches. A third parachute became tangled and the
1,643-lb (740-kilogram) rocket was supposed to reach 6,000 feet. But overall
Bennett was pleased with the test, which had been postponed after the
September 11 terror attacks in the United States.

"It went very well. It was a real good flight," said Bennett. "We got pieces
back so we're happy. We're going to launch it again."

Bennett, an engineering professor at the University of Salford, expects to
ride one of his rockets in 2002. The founder of Starchasers Industries,
which builds his prototypes, Bennett has already overseen a dozen test
flights in his quest for the X-prize.

The U.S.-based contest will handsomely reward the first team to send and
return a three-person crew safely into suborbital flight, about 63 miles
high (101 kilometers), in the same vehicle twice within two weeks.

To help raise funds, Bennett is selling seats for his ambitious project. The
price could reach as high as $650,000 (US). For those with smaller travel
budgets, the enterprising rocket man offers a lottery. One lucky winner can
join the sky-high odyssey for a fraction of the cost.

The task is certainly a daunting one, especially considering it must be done
without the assistance of governments. What does his spouse think of the
idea of Bennett cavorting on the edge of space?

"My wife doesn't think I'm crazy. She wants to go," he said.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 22015 invoked from network); 26 Nov 2001 12:39:06 -0000
Received: from smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.108]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 26 Nov 2001 12:39:06 -0000
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 1103 invoked by uid 50005); 26 Nov 2001 12:38:58 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU by smtpx with qmail-scanner-1.00 (uvscan: v4.1.40/v4171. . Clean. Processed in 0.205207 secs); 26 Nov 2001 12:38:58 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpx.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 26 Nov 2001 12:38:58 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id EAA28396; Mon, 26 Nov 2001 04:24:05 -0800
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 86973 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 26 Nov 2001 12:23:59          +0000
Received: from mta06.mail.mel.aone.net.au (mta06.mail.au.uu.net [203.2.192.87])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id EAA28380 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 26 Nov 2001 04:23:58 -0800
Received: from [127.0.0.1] by mta06.mail.mel.aone.net.au with SMTP id          <20011126122356.BYLU28497.mta06.mail.mel.aone.net.au@[127.0.0.1]> for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 26 Nov 2001 23:23:56 +1100
X-Priority: 3
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <20011126122356.BYLU28497.mta06.mail.mel.aone.net.au@[127.0.0.1]>
Date:         Mon, 26 Nov 2001 23:23:55 +1100
Reply-To: <tomjan@OZEMAIL.COM.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <tomjan@OZEMAIL.COM.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Starchaser X-Prize reaches 5000 feet, so far ...
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Yep, saw this launch on the news, quite impressive, I think he'll get there.

Thomas.
>
> From: Russell McMahon <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
> Subject: [AR] Starchaser X-Prize reaches 5000 feet, so far ...
> Date: 27/11/2001 0:04:47
> To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
>
> He's at it again ...
>
>         http://www.cnn.com/2001/TECH/space/11/22/rocket.test/index.html
>
>
>
> ________________________________________________
>
>
> CNN) -- After sending a prototype a mile into the sky on Thursday, an
> amateur rocket builder said he expects to win a $10 million prize to launch
> the first private astronaut team into space.
>
> The rocket soared during the morning flight to 5,000 feet (1,520 meters)
> over a mud flat expanse near Manchester in Northwest England early in the
> morning.
>
> Known as Nova, the reusable launch vehicle landed with the assistance of two
> parachutes. Many parts were recovered intact, according to Nova designer
> Steven Bennett. They will be refurbished and the 33-foot (11-meter) rocket
> will fly again within months.
>
> There were some minor glitches. A third parachute became tangled and the
> 1,643-lb (740-kilogram) rocket was supposed to reach 6,000 feet. But overall
> Bennett was pleased with the test, which had been postponed after the
> September 11 terror attacks in the United States.
>
> "It went very well. It was a real good flight," said Bennett. "We got pieces
> back so we're happy. We're going to launch it again."
>
> Bennett, an engineering professor at the University of Salford, expects to
> ride one of his rockets in 2002. The founder of Starchasers Industries,
> which builds his prototypes, Bennett has already overseen a dozen test
> flights in his quest for the X-prize.
>
> The U.S.-based contest will handsomely reward the first team to send and
> return a three-person crew safely into suborbital flight, about 63 miles
> high (101 kilometers), in the same vehicle twice within two weeks.
>
> To help raise funds, Bennett is selling seats for his ambitious project. The
> price could reach as high as $650,000 (US). For those with smaller travel
> budgets, the enterprising rocket man offers a lottery. One lucky winner can
> join the sky-high odyssey for a fraction of the cost.
>
> The task is certainly a daunting one, especially considering it must be done
> without the assistance of governments. What does his spouse think of the
> idea of Bennett cavorting on the edge of space?
>
> "My wife doesn't think I'm crazy. She wants to go," he said.
>

This message was sent through MyMail http://www.mymail.com.au

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 18801 invoked from network); 18 Aug 2002 05:53:37 -0000
Received: from smtpj.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.90]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 18 Aug 2002 05:53:37 -0000
Delivered-To: CLUSTERHOST smtpj.ha-net.ptd.net baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 6800 invoked by uid 50005); 18 Aug 2002 05:48:17 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM by smtpj.ha-net.ptd.net by uid 50002 with qmail-scanner-1.11 (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4217. spamassassin: 2.20. . Clear:SA:0(2.3/5.0):. Processed in 0.682195 secs); 18 Aug 2002 05:48:17 -0000
Received: from home.ease.lsoft.com ([209.119.1.31]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>)          by smtpj.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 18 Aug 2002 05:48:16 -0000
Received: from home (home.ease.lsoft.com) by home.ease.lsoft.com (LSMTP for Windows NT v1.1b) with SMTP id <1.FFF093DD@home.ease.lsoft.com>; 18 Aug 2002 1:53:57 -0400
Received: from HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM by HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM (LISTSERV-TCP/IP          release 1.8e) with spool id 78315362 for AROCKET@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM;          Sun, 18 Aug 2002 01:53:57 -0400
Received: from pd3mo1so.prod.shaw.ca (shawidc-mo1.cg.shawcable.net) by          home.ease.lsoft.com (LSMTP for Windows NT v1.1b) with SMTP id          <15.FFDC0B6A@home.ease.lsoft.com>; 18 Aug 2002 1:53:56 -0400
Received: from pd2mr4so.prod.shaw.ca (pd2mr4so-ser.prod.shaw.ca [10.0.141.107])          by l-daemon (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.1 HotFix 0.8 (built May 12          2002)) with ESMTP id <0H10000LZYS8T7@l-daemon> for          AROCKET@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM; Sat, 17 Aug 2002 23:48:08 -0600 (MDT)
Received: from pn2ml1so.prod.shaw.ca (pn2ml1so-qfe0.prod.shaw.ca          [10.0.121.145]) by l-daemon (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.1 HotFix 0.8          (built May 12 2002)) with ESMTP id <0H10005GMYS8QX@l-daemon> for          AROCKET@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM; Sat, 17 Aug 2002 23:48:08 -0600 (MDT)
Received: from jamie (h24-80-207-166.gv.shawcable.net [24.80.207.166]) by          l-daemon (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.1 HotFix 0.8 (built May 12          2002)) with SMTP id <0H100090KYS650@l-daemon> for          AROCKET@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM; Sat, 17 Aug 2002 23:48:08 -0600 (MDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Message-ID: <000701c127a8$977fab00$a6cf5018@gv.shawcable.net>
Date: Fri, 17 Aug 2001 22:42:38 -0700
Reply-To: "Jamie Morken" <jmorken@SHAW.CA>
Sender: "Amateur rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From: "Jamie Morken" <jmorken@SHAW.CA>
Subject: [AR] charge pump IC's
To: <AROCKET@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Precedence: list
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=2.3 required=5.0 tests=DATE_IN_FUTURE version=2.20
X-Spam-Level: **

Hi all,
Does anyone know of a good charge pump IC (V+6 to V+12)?
I am building a couple H-bridges for motor control and the max622/623
isnt available at digikey.

cheers,
Jamie

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 20072 invoked from network); 13 Dec 2002 02:12:50 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpv.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.110]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mailb.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 13 Dec 2002 02:12:50 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Delivered-To: CLUSTERHOST smtpv.ha-net.ptd.net baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: (qmail 14913 invoked by uid 50005); 13 Dec 2002 02:12:30 -0000
Received: from owner-arocket@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM by smtpv.ha-net.ptd.net by uid 50002 with qmail-scanner-1.15  (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4236. spamassassin: 2.43.  Clear:SA:0(1.5/5.0):.  Processed in 0.201605 secs); 13 Dec 2002 02:12:30 -0000
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=1.5 required=5.0
Received: from home.ease.lsoft.com ([209.119.1.31]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>)          by smtpv.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 13 Dec 2002 02:12:29 -0000
Received: from home (home.ease.lsoft.com) by home.ease.lsoft.com (LSMTP for Windows NT v1.1b) with SMTP id <5.002E14B7@home.ease.lsoft.com>; Thu, 12 Dec 2002 21:12:29 -0500
Received: from HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM by HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM (LISTSERV-TCP/IP          release 1.8e) with spool id 83083885 for AROCKET@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM;          Thu, 12 Dec 2002 21:12:29 -0500
Received: from hades.usol.com by home.ease.lsoft.com (LSMTP for Windows NT          v1.1b) with SMTP id <3.FD613E19@home.ease.lsoft.com>; Thu, 12 Dec          2002 21:12:29 -0500
Received: from fredflin (pm15-8.usol.com [64.18.239.72]) by hades.usol.com          (8.11.6/8.11.6) with SMTP id gBD2CQW24614 for          <AROCKET@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>; Thu, 12 Dec 2002 21:12:26 -0500
X-Sender: mycrump@pop3.usol.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.5 (32)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <3.0.5.32.20011212211036.00802ac0@pop3.usol.com>
Date:         Wed, 12 Dec 2001 21:10:36 -0500
Reply-To: "Daryl P. Dacko" <mycrump@USOL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From: "Daryl P. Dacko" <mycrump@USOL.COM>
Subject: Re: [AR] DATAQ Questions
To: <AROCKET@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
In-Reply-To:  <0B3A2A4BB033D411878900508BA5404E017816BE@exchange1.landaco              rp.com>
Precedence: list

At 09:21 AM 12/12/02 -0800, you wrote:
>How did you change the DAQ to go to 0-5 volts?  Was it a simple change?
>

Go to:

http://www.dataq.com/misc/serialextra/di-194r.gif

You need to clip some resistors on the board, to change the range from +/-10V
to 0 to +10 V or 0 to +5 V.

There is lots of very good info on this site too.

I need to send a signal a fair distance, so I converted my preamp so send out
0 to 20 mA, which is converted to a voltage by a 250 ohm resistor across
the input to the DataQ system.

It's pretty importent to have clean power to the Dataq unit too, at 12 bit
resolution, +/- 1 bit is only .001 volt... (at 0 to 5V range)

Just yell if you have any questions.

Daryl

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0001
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <arocket-bounces@exrocketry.net>
Delivered-To: john@baumanfamily.com
Received: (qmail 16428 invoked from network); 12 Jun 2004 19:35:57 -0000
Received: from smtp11.mailnet.ptd.net ([204.186.29.6])          (envelope-sender <>)          by mailc.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 12 Jun 2004 19:35:57 -0000
Delivered-To: CLUSTERHOST smtp11.mailnet.ptd.net john@baumanfamily.com
Received: (qmail 3910 invoked by uid 50005); 12 Jun 2004 19:35:57 -0000
Received: from arocket-bounces@exrocketry.net by smtp11.mailnet.ptd.net by uid 50002 with qmail-scanner-1.20  (uvscan: v4.2.40/v4364. spamassassin: 2.61.  Clear:RC:0(207.36.180.33):SA:0(1.8/5.0):.  Processed in 0.255215 secs); 12 Jun 2004 19:35:57 -0000
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=1.8 required=5.0
Received: from mail.exrocketry.net ([207.36.180.33])          (envelope-sender <arocket-bounces@exrocketry.net>)          by smtp11.mailnet.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <john@baumanfamily.com>; 12 Jun 2004 19:35:57 -0000
Received: from mail.exrocketry.net (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by mail.exrocketry.net (8.12.8/8.12.8) with ESMTP id i5CJXE4r026593; Sat, 12 Jun 2004 12:33:56 -0700
Received: from poros.telenet-ops.be (poros.telenet-ops.be [195.130.132.44]) by mail.exrocketry.net (8.12.8/8.12.8) with ESMTP id i5CJXC4p026590 for <Arocket@exrocketry.net>; Sat, 12 Jun 2004 12:33:13 -0700
Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by poros.telenet-ops.be (Postfix) with SMTP id 4685B36824C for <Arocket@exrocketry.net>; Sat, 12 Jun 2004 21:33:42 +0200 (MEST)
Received: from a013518 (D5E0AD98.kabel.telenet.be [213.224.173.152]) by poros.telenet-ops.be (Postfix) with SMTP id 7D7CD368212 for <Arocket@exrocketry.net>; Sat, 12 Jun 2004 21:33:41 +0200 (MEST)
Message-ID: <001001bf65ab$46c08ba0$98ade0d5@pandora.be>
From: "john dom" <john.dom@pandora.be>
To: <Arocket@exrocketry.net>
References: <cafkq9$94f$1@sea.gmane.org>
Date: Sun, 23 Jan 2000 15:08:08 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Subject: [AR] Re: [ERPS] Tip nozzle paradox
X-BeenThere: arocket@exrocketry.net
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1
Precedence: list
Reply-To: "john dom" <john.dom@pandora.be>
List-Id: amateur rocketry discussion <arocket.exrocketry.net>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://exrocketry.net/mailman/listinfo/arocket>,<mailto:arocket-request@exrocketry.net?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://exrocketry.net/mailman/private/arocket>
list-post: <mailto:arocket@exrocketry.net>
List-Help: <mailto:arocket-request@exrocketry.net?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://exrocketry.net/mailman/listinfo/arocket>,<mailto:arocket-request@exrocketry.net?subject=subscribe>
Sender: <arocket-bounces@exrocketry.net>
Errors-To: arocket-bounces@exrocketry.net

This is an old pain popping up on AR now and then without convincing
conclusions.
It reminds me of looking at footage of the mighty exhaust flame of the
Shuttle SRB's and hearing people say there's not much energy left in that,
the gasses have mostly cooled down really, done their push-up work inside
the engine! What a waste I keep thinking...looking at the heat content of
those flames.

JD

----- Original Message -----
From: "Ian Woollard" <erps@wolfkeeper.plus.com>
To: <erps-list@lists.erps.org>
Sent: Saturday, June 12, 2004 8:16 PM
Subject: [ERPS] Tip nozzle paradox


> Whilst mulling over the mechanics of rocket tipped rotors I came up with
> the following paradox.
>
> Consider a low ISP rocket, say 20 seconds; mounted on an arm pivoting on
> a central spindle. The propellent enters the rocket along a tube up the
> central spindle, goes through a frictionless coupling and then follows
> the tube along to the rocket tip.
>
> The rocket is oriented so that the exhaust points at 90 degrees to the
> rotation axis.
>
> Now from momentum considerations you can show that the tip speed should
> be equal to the exhaust velocity- in this case ~200 m/s (fuel has to be
> accelerated up to the tip and then leaves it at ~200m/s. Clearly the
> momentum balances when the tip goes at 200m/s.)
>
> However this implies that the exhaust leaves the nozzle and stops; and
> hence has no energy, and hardly any heat, (rockets are typically 90%
> efficient at turning hot gas into moving gas, so the exhaust gas is
> relatively cool).
>
> And yet the rocket clearly isn't accelerating and we have burnt all this
> fuel, which has liberated energy. Conservation of energy is the law!
>
> Assuming there is no air drag or other friction; where has the fuel
> energy gone?
>
> Winner gets 1kg of wishalloy.
>
> "Lisa, in this house we *obey* the laws of thermodynamics" - H. Simpson
>
> _______________________________________________
> ERPS-list mailing list
> ERPS-list@lists.erps.org
> http://lists.erps.org/mailman/listinfo/erps-list
>

_______________________________________________
aRocket@exrocketry.net
http://exrocketry.net/mailman/listinfo/arocket

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 18564 invoked from network); 30 Jun 2001 00:43:08 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 30 Jun 2001 00:43:08 -0000
Received: (qmail 3281 invoked from network); 30 Jun 2001 00:44:16 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 30 Jun 2001 00:44:16 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA16323; Fri, 29 Jun 2001 17:38:47 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 68095 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 30 Jun 2001 00:38:42          +0000
Received: from smtp08.phx.gblx.net (smtp08.phx.gblx.net [64.211.219.57]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA16306 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 29 Jun 2001 17:38:42 -0700
Received: (from daemon@localhost) by smtp08.phx.gblx.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id          RAA237248; Fri, 29 Jun 2001 17:38:32 -0700
Received: from 64-208-236-204.nas1.TBR.gblx.net(64.208.236.204),          claiming to be "7kvk901" via SMTP by smtp08.phx.gblx.net,          id smtpdPk65Ma; Fri Jun 29 17:37:09 2001
References:  <200106250313.UAA12881@itc.uci.edu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <00d301c100fd$5373abe0$57ecd040@7kvk901>
Date:         Fri, 29 Jun 2001 20:40:03 -0400
Reply-To: "Tom Binford" <tbinford@FRONTIERNET.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Tom Binford" <tbinford@FRONTIERNET.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Calculating multiple throat Medusa nozzle
Comments: To: Joe Perez <rocketman6965@AOL.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

You can use any combination of throats that have the same total area as the
desired single throat. For the size you mention, I'd use 1/3 of the area in
the center, and the other 2/3 spread among the remaining 6. (In this case,
.360 center, 6 x .208 outers.)  For smaller throat areas, I usually use
center and 3 outer, the center having 1/2 the total area. Very small throats
just use the center hole.

High speed drills are adaquate for drilling the throats out. They will drill
very close (within .001") to their rated diameter.

Tom

----- Original Message -----
From: "Joe Perez" <rocketman6965@AOL.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Sunday, June 24, 2001 11:13 PM
Subject: [AR] Calculating multiple throat Medusa nozzle


> Hi Y'all,
> I have a formula that requires me to use a larger throat than the
> standard .313 nozzle from RCS.  I need a .625 throat.  The Medusa has a
.192
> center and six plugged .125's.  Can I use 2 of 6 or 3 of 6 throats?  How
do
> you attain the correct throat size?
> Thanks.
>
> Joe
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 19952 invoked from network); 30 Jun 2001 00:43:28 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 30 Jun 2001 00:43:28 -0000
Received: (qmail 3440 invoked from network); 30 Jun 2001 00:44:35 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 30 Jun 2001 00:44:35 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA16252; Fri, 29 Jun 2001 17:27:47 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 68080 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 30 Jun 2001 00:27:46          +0000
Received: from albatross.wgn.net (www.wgn.net [64.14.252.81] (may be forged))          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA16235 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 29 Jun 2001 17:27:45 -0700
Received: from hogwild (sc-66-74-70-20.socal.rr.com [66.74.70.20]) by          albatross.wgn.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id RAA20059 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 29 Jun 2001 17:28:24 -0700
References:  <2DCA36C44BF3D211917F0008C7C9C9DD067ECEE4@ntexchange06.micron.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <020501c100fb$4289c140$14464a42@socal.rr.com>
Date:         Fri, 29 Jun 2001 17:26:09 -0700
Reply-To: "Wedge Oldham" <wedge@WESTWORLD.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Wedge Oldham" <wedge@WESTWORLD.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] sub launch
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Only the subs carrying the Regulas missile had to surface to fire....but
that's a whole 'nother story.

Wedge Oldham
http://NikeProject.com
----- Original Message -----
From: "gacrowell" <gacrowell@MICRON.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Friday, June 29, 2001 5:22 PM
Subject: Re: [AR] sub launch


> Can they launch from the surface?
>
> There was an idiotic TV movie on a few weeks ago (the name of which I have
> thankfully forgot), about a Russian sub accident.  In it they seemed to
have
> the idea that the sub had to surface to fire.  And, if it submerged while
a
> missile hatch was open, it would flood the sub.
>
> GC

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 6737 invoked from network); 30 Jun 2001 01:30:06 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 30 Jun 2001 01:30:06 -0000
Received: (qmail 12071 invoked from network); 30 Jun 2001 01:31:14 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 30 Jun 2001 01:31:14 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA16559; Fri, 29 Jun 2001 18:13:52 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 68139 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 30 Jun 2001 01:13:47          +0000
Received: from smtp08.phx.gblx.net (smtp08.phx.gblx.net [64.211.219.57]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA16542 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 29 Jun 2001 18:13:46 -0700
Received: (from daemon@localhost) by smtp08.phx.gblx.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id          SAA444170; Fri, 29 Jun 2001 18:13:42 -0700
Received: from 64-208-224-135.nas2.TBR.gblx.net(64.208.224.135),          claiming to be "7kvk901" via SMTP by smtp08.phx.gblx.net,          id smtpdjIqU7a; Fri Jun 29 18:13:34 2001
References:  <F225hHnKZ1nSIzM4mZD0001a17d@hotmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <019f01c10102$69f04180$57ecd040@7kvk901>
Date:         Fri, 29 Jun 2001 21:17:17 -0400
Reply-To: "Tom Binford" <tbinford@FRONTIERNET.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Tom Binford" <tbinford@FRONTIERNET.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] New Book about Solid Propellants
Comments: To: CalPoly RADES <cp_rades@HOTMAIL.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

----- Original Message -----
From: "CalPoly RADES" <cp_rades@HOTMAIL.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Tuesday, June 26, 2001 9:19 PM
Subject: Re: [AR] New Book about Solid Propellants


> Bruno,
> Do you know the publish date and possibly one of the authors names?  Our
> first multi-campus search engine couldn't find it by ISBN and the second
one
> needs the above info.  Assuming the above info is found I should be able
to
> have it by friday.

ISBN 1-56347-442-5
It's Volume 185 of AIAA's Progress in Astronautics and Aeronautics series.
You can order it from AIAA's site, http://www.aiaa.org

Tom

> Thanks,
> Dale Herzog,
> Cal Poly Rocketeers
>
>
>
> >From: Bruno Berger Reply-To: Bruno Berger To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
Subject:
> >[AR] New Book about Solid Propellants Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2001 22:24:43
+0200
> >
> >AIAA announced a new book "Solid Propellant Chemistry, Combustion and
Motor
> >Interior Ballistics", 990 pages, ISBN 1-56347-442-5, 100$ (for AIAA
Members
> >75$)
> >
> >Have anybody already bought that book? How is it? Thanks
> >
> >Bruno
> _________________________________________________________________
> Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 23213 invoked from network); 30 Jun 2001 01:33:54 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 30 Jun 2001 01:33:54 -0000
Received: (qmail 9115 invoked from network); 30 Jun 2001 01:34:53 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 30 Jun 2001 01:34:53 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA16471; Fri, 29 Jun 2001 18:04:36 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 68118 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 30 Jun 2001 01:04:32          +0000
Received: from smtp08.phx.gblx.net (smtp08.phx.gblx.net [64.211.219.57]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA16454 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 29 Jun 2001 18:04:32 -0700
Received: (from daemon@localhost) by smtp08.phx.gblx.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id          SAA205186; Fri, 29 Jun 2001 18:04:27 -0700
Received: from 64-208-224-135.nas2.TBR.gblx.net(64.208.224.135),          claiming to be "7kvk901" via SMTP by smtp08.phx.gblx.net,          id smtpdXBR5Ma; Fri Jun 29 18:03:52 2001
References: <379C12B5.4D432DD7@usa.net>  <3B38EF8B.1470B320@spl.ch>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <017801c10101$0ed1a560$57ecd040@7kvk901>
Date:         Fri, 29 Jun 2001 21:07:01 -0400
Reply-To: "Tom Binford" <tbinford@FRONTIERNET.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Tom Binford" <tbinford@FRONTIERNET.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] New Book about Solid Propellants
Comments: To: Bruno Berger <bruno.berger@SPL.CH>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

----- Original Message -----
From: "Bruno Berger" <bruno.berger@SPL.CH>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Tuesday, June 26, 2001 4:24 PM
Subject: [AR] New Book about Solid Propellants


> AIAA announced a new book "Solid Propellant Chemistry, Combustion and
Motor
> Interior Ballistics", 990 pages, ISBN 1-56347-442-5, 100$ (for AIAA
Members
> 75$)
>
> Have anybody already bought that book? How is it?
> Thanks

Have it. Heavy on theory, not much practical for the amateur. Much of it
concerns advanced experimental energetic materials and class 1.1 explosives.
It is a collection of papers, similar to the Journal Of Propulsion and
Power.
The first section concerns propellant chemistry, synthesis, and formulation
and it concentrates on nitramines and azide polymers. Most of the articles
concern the combustion of these materials, you have to go to the references
for synthesis and experimental procedure in most cases.  IMO, the most
interesting papers are 1.7, Advances In Solid Propellant Formulations and
1.9, Hazards Associated With Solid Propellants.
The second section concerns chemical kinetics and combustion of these
energetic materials, mostly of the pure substances.
The third section covers motor interior ballistics, covering instabilities
and 2 phase flow.

I find the book very interesting, but I don't see much that I can
incorporate into my motors except wishing I had sources for some of the
materials. (I wouldn't mind the computer power and software to do complete
firing simulations though.)

Tom

>
> Bruno
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 13497 invoked from network); 30 Jun 2001 02:00:34 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 30 Jun 2001 02:00:34 -0000
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 19430 invoked from network); 30 Jun 2001 02:01:32 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 30 Jun 2001 02:01:32 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA16501; Fri, 29 Jun 2001 18:06:19 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 68126 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 30 Jun 2001 01:06:18          +0000
Received: from copland.udel.edu (copland.udel.edu [128.175.13.92]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA16484 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 29 Jun 2001 18:06:17 -0700
Received: from localhost (tproseus@localhost) by copland.udel.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3)          with ESMTP id VAA19277; Fri, 29 Jun 2001 21:06:09 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.SOL.4.31.0106292102290.17076-100000@copland.udel.edu>
Date:         Fri, 29 Jun 2001 21:06:09 -0400
Reply-To: "Timothy E Proseus" <tproseus@UDEL.EDU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Timothy E Proseus" <tproseus@UDEL.EDU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Proppellant oops question
Comments: To: Greg Deputy <greg@blastzone.com>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <NDBBIBAMIMKJPANDCAHGEELFENAA.greg@blastzone.com>

I bet you'll be fine just scraping it out and remixing.  I packed a couple
38mm sticks with NO curative (DOH!!) and did that.  I don't have much
experience yet but I would guess that after this much time it probably
isn't going to set up on you in the short time it will take to correct the
problem.

Ted P.

http://copland.udel.edu/~tproseus
http://www.dreamwater.net/biz/rocketchutes/parachutes.html


+'^'+.,.+'^'+.,.+'^'+.,.+'^'+.,.+'^'+.,.+'^'+.,.+'^'+.,.+'^'+.,.+'^'+.,.+

                                Ted Proseus

                             Research Associate
                 Plant Biochemistry/Biophysics Laboratory
              University of Delaware, College of Marine Studies
                           Lab/Office: 302-645-4022

+'^'+.,.+'^'+.,.+'^'+.,.+'^'+.,.+'^'+.,.+'^'+.,.+'^'+.,.+'^'+.,.+'^'+.,.+

On Fri, 29 Jun 2001, Greg Deputy wrote:

> I mixed up a 1800g batch of AP based propellant yesterday, and made a small
> error.  The formula I'm using calls for 2% MDI, 36g in this case.  I used
> 2g....  Anyways, I now have a bunch of tubes packed with this mud, would it
> be worth the time to remix and add the remaining 34g of curative, or am I
> going to end up with something questionable?
>
> This is an 83% solids propellant that is packed, not poured, and is the same
> consistency now as it was when it was packed last night, as far as i can
> tell.
>
> Any words of wisdom would be appreciated.
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 2068 invoked from network); 30 Jun 2001 02:12:23 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 30 Jun 2001 02:12:23 -0000
Received: (qmail 23947 invoked from network); 30 Jun 2001 02:13:21 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 30 Jun 2001 02:13:21 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA16759; Fri, 29 Jun 2001 18:47:35 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 68154 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 30 Jun 2001 01:47:29          +0000
Received: from smtp08.phx.gblx.net (smtp08.phx.gblx.net [64.211.219.57]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA16742 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 29 Jun 2001 18:47:28 -0700
Received: (from daemon@localhost) by smtp08.phx.gblx.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id          SAA598670; Fri, 29 Jun 2001 18:47:23 -0700
Received: from 64-208-224-135.nas2.TBR.gblx.net(64.208.224.135),          claiming to be "7kvk901" via SMTP by smtp08.phx.gblx.net,          id smtpdztDkya; Fri Jun 29 18:47:11 2001
References: Conversation <F178CHOzyfyz5b6KZmc0001f136@hotmail.com> with last               message <F178CHOzyfyz5b6KZmc0001f136@hotmail.com>             <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <027e01c10107$1beb7860$57ecd040@7kvk901>
Date:         Fri, 29 Jun 2001 21:50:50 -0400
Reply-To: "Tom Binford" <tbinford@FRONTIERNET.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Tom Binford" <tbinford@FRONTIERNET.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] nitrates oops
Comments: To: Troy Prideaux <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

----- Original Message -----
From: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Friday, June 29, 2001 9:58 AM
Subject: Re: [AR] nitrates oops


> >
> > TNT or RDX end groups R-NO2 with 2 O's definitely a nitrocompound. No
> > hydroxyl was involved
>
> ummm, RDX is very interesting to me because it contains NN02 bonds which
> raises a question that I've been pondering since the NO2ClO4 thread: if
> it's possible to synthesize N02Cl04 (nitronium perchlorate) why is it not
> possible to synthesize N02N03 or is it?

You can synthesize N2O5 by passing N2O4 vapor through a reaction chamber
containing ozone. The result is trapped at dry ice temperature and stored at
this temperature. It is a solid at room temperature but decomposes with a
half life of about 20 minutes at 25 degC. Lots more info in the book
"Nitration Recent Laboratory and Industrial Developments" ISBN
0-8412-3393-4.
It also tells of the uses of N2O5 like selective nitration of HTPB.

Tom

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 14439 invoked from network); 30 Jun 2001 02:15:16 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 30 Jun 2001 02:15:16 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 21055 invoked from network); 30 Jun 2001 02:16:25 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 30 Jun 2001 02:16:25 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA16910; Fri, 29 Jun 2001 19:12:38 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 68182 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 30 Jun 2001 02:12:36          +0000
Received: from snipe.mail.pas.earthlink.net (snipe.mail.pas.earthlink.net          [207.217.120.62]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA16893          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 29 Jun 2001 19:12:35 -0700
Received: from sprintmail.com (PPPa52-ResaleSantaClarita2-3R7178.dialinx.net          [4.54.101.49]) by snipe.mail.pas.earthlink.net (EL-8_9_3_3/8.9.3)          with ESMTP id TAA21443; Fri, 29 Jun 2001 19:12:32 -0700 (PDT)
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.74 [en] (Win98; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <F36suZ2K4xDh9vXsFFs0000203b@hotmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B3D3611.58E8DB2B@sprintmail.com>
Date:         Fri, 29 Jun 2001 19:14:41 -0700
Reply-To: "Anthony Colette" <Rockitman@SPRINTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Anthony Colette" <Rockitman@SPRINTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] nitronium compounds
Comments: To: John Dom <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Nitrogen Pentoxide.  It's not an uncommon chemical in the explosives
industry.  It is a superior nitrating agent because it does not require
elevated temperatures, extreme concentrations and does not require desiccants
like H2SO4.  More importantly, it is much less likely to oxidize organic
reactants than HNO3.  Therefore yield is much higher.

The third stage nitration of stillbene, benzenetriamine or toluene with
Nitrogen Pentoxide is much easier.
With heat addition, 4th, 5th and even 6th stage nitration of benzene is
possible with N2O5.

>  if
> >it's possible to synthesize N02Cl04 (nitronium perchlorate) why is it not
> >possible to synthesize N02N03 or is it?

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 24372 invoked from network); 30 Jun 2001 02:32:38 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 30 Jun 2001 02:32:38 -0000
Received: (qmail 13081 invoked from network); 30 Jun 2001 02:33:35 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 30 Jun 2001 02:33:35 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA17023; Fri, 29 Jun 2001 19:25:14 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 68202 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 30 Jun 2001 02:25:11          +0000
Received: from mta05.mail.mel.aone.net.au (mta05.mail.au.uu.net [203.2.192.85])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA17006 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 29 Jun 2001 19:25:10 -0700
Received: from unknown ([63.60.249.135]) by mta05.mail.mel.aone.net.au with          SMTP id <20010630022507.HZNY28112.mta05.mail.mel.aone.net.au@unknown>          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 30 Jun 2001 12:25:07 +1000
References: Conversation <F36suZ2K4xDh9vXsFFs0000203b@hotmail.com> with last            message <3B3D3611.58E8DB2B@sprintmail.com>
Priority: Normal
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Priority: 3
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	X-MAPIextension=.TXT;
	charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>
Date:         Sat, 30 Jun 2001 02:25:11 +0000
Reply-To: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] nitronium compounds
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <3B3D3611.58E8DB2B@sprintmail.com>

NOTE: the question was in regards to Nitronium Nitrate N02N03 not Nitrogen
Pentoxide N205.

Troy.

----------
> Nitrogen Pentoxide.  It's not an uncommon chemical in the explosives
> industry.  It is a superior nitrating agent because it does not require
> elevated temperatures, extreme concentrations and does not require
desiccants
> like H2SO4.  More importantly, it is much less likely to oxidize organic
> reactants than HNO3.  Therefore yield is much higher.
>
> The third stage nitration of stillbene, benzenetriamine or toluene with
> Nitrogen Pentoxide is much easier.
> With heat addition, 4th, 5th and even 6th stage nitration of benzene is
> possible with N2O5.
>
> >  if
> > >it's possible to synthesize N02Cl04 (nitronium perchlorate) why is it
not
> > >possible to synthesize N02N03 or is it?

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 9545 invoked from network); 30 Jun 2001 02:36:26 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 30 Jun 2001 02:36:26 -0000
Received: (qmail 2223 invoked from network); 30 Jun 2001 02:37:24 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 30 Jun 2001 02:37:24 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA16981; Fri, 29 Jun 2001 19:20:51 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 68192 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 30 Jun 2001 02:20:48          +0000
Received: from mta01.mail.mel.aone.net.au (mta01.mail.au.uu.net [203.2.192.81])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA16964 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 29 Jun 2001 19:20:46 -0700
Received: from unknown ([63.60.249.135]) by mta01.mail.mel.aone.net.au with          SMTP id <20010630022044.RBWW18810.mta01.mail.mel.aone.net.au@unknown>          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 30 Jun 2001 12:20:44 +1000
References: Conversation <006b01c100b0$c4a9f000$f951153f@default> with last            message <006b01c100b0$c4a9f000$f951153f@default>
Priority: Normal
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Priority: 3
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	X-MAPIextension=.TXT;
	charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>
Date:         Sat, 30 Jun 2001 02:20:48 +0000
Reply-To: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Water in Solid Propellant
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <006b01c100b0$c4a9f000$f951153f@default>

More water in the final propellant does: (1)reduce burn rate and *CAN* in
some cases increase Isp (such has been reported but I've no direct first
hand experience ie. I wasn't *measuring* performance back then), depending
on how much is added.

Troy.

----------
> Hello Group,
>
> Sounds like some of us are using a little water in our candy propellant
> processing phase. Let's say that the finished product has 2% water in it.
> Besides displacing actual propellant, what would be the other effects,
slower
> burn, lower Isp, ? Could it be of benefit in some ways?
>
> Thank you for your comments!
>
> Dave Muesing
> Yorktown, VA, USA
>
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 11419 invoked from network); 30 Jun 2001 02:36:53 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 30 Jun 2001 02:36:53 -0000
Received: (qmail 14602 invoked from network); 30 Jun 2001 02:37:50 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 30 Jun 2001 02:37:50 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA16872; Fri, 29 Jun 2001 19:06:51 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 68174 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 30 Jun 2001 02:06:49          +0000
Received: from mta04.mail.mel.aone.net.au (mta04.mail.au.uu.net [203.2.192.84])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA16855 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 29 Jun 2001 19:06:48 -0700
Received: from unknown ([63.60.247.197]) by mta04.mail.mel.aone.net.au with          SMTP id <20010630020644.FBLI12944.mta04.mail.mel.aone.net.au@unknown>          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 30 Jun 2001 12:06:44 +1000
References: Conversation <NDBBIBAMIMKJPANDCAHGEELFENAA.greg@blastzone.com> with            last message <NDBBIBAMIMKJPANDCAHGEELFENAA.greg@blastzone.com>
Priority: Normal
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Priority: 3
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	X-MAPIextension=.TXT;
	charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>
Date:         Sat, 30 Jun 2001 02:06:49 +0000
Reply-To: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Proppellant oops question
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <NDBBIBAMIMKJPANDCAHGEELFENAA.greg@blastzone.com>

No problem here adding the additional curative and recasting. 2 things to
check for though are (1) propellant density & (2) whether all of the
propellant completely cures. If the propellant density is basically the
same as what was to be expected, then that's good. If the final product
never quite cures then seriously consider writing it off. Obviously a
general visual inspection also may help your decision.

Some of our composite propellants (non-HTPB based PU based systems)
actually require a premix of binder + curative before general processing
and a final amount curative is added.

Troy.

----------
> I mixed up a 1800g batch of AP based propellant yesterday, and made a
small
> error.  The formula I'm using calls for 2% MDI, 36g in this case.  I used
> 2g....  Anyways, I now have a bunch of tubes packed with this mud, would
it
> be worth the time to remix and add the remaining 34g of curative, or am I
> going to end up with something questionable?
>
> This is an 83% solids propellant that is packed, not poured, and is the
same
> consistency now as it was when it was packed last night, as far as i can
> tell.
>
> Any words of wisdom would be appreciated.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 7899 invoked from network); 30 Jun 2001 02:43:20 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 30 Jun 2001 02:43:20 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA16837; Fri, 29 Jun 2001 19:01:47 -0700
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 68166 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 30 Jun 2001 02:01:45          +0000
Received: from mta02.mail.mel.aone.net.au (mta02.mail.au.uu.net [203.2.192.82])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA16820 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 29 Jun 2001 19:01:44 -0700
Received: from unknown ([63.60.247.197]) by mta02.mail.mel.aone.net.au with          SMTP id <20010630020140.PXBZ8316.mta02.mail.mel.aone.net.au@unknown>          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 30 Jun 2001 12:01:40 +1000
References: Conversation <F178CHOzyfyz5b6KZmc0001f136@hotmail.com> with last            message <027e01c10107$1beb7860$57ecd040@7kvk901>
Priority: Normal
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Priority: 3
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	X-MAPIextension=.TXT;
	charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>
Date:         Sat, 30 Jun 2001 02:01:45 +0000
Reply-To: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] nitrates oops
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <027e01c10107$1beb7860$57ecd040@7kvk901>

Yep, that's (using N2O5) is one of the old methods for synthesizing NP.

Troy.

----------
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
> To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
> Sent: Friday, June 29, 2001 9:58 AM
> Subject: Re: [AR] nitrates oops
>
>
> > >
> > > TNT or RDX end groups R-NO2 with 2 O's definitely a nitrocompound. No
> > > hydroxyl was involved
> >
> > ummm, RDX is very interesting to me because it contains NN02 bonds which
> > raises a question that I've been pondering since the NO2ClO4 thread: if
> > it's possible to synthesize N02Cl04 (nitronium perchlorate) why is it
not
> > possible to synthesize N02N03 or is it?
>
> You can synthesize N2O5 by passing N2O4 vapor through a reaction chamber
> containing ozone. The result is trapped at dry ice temperature and stored
at
> this temperature. It is a solid at room temperature but decomposes with a
> half life of about 20 minutes at 25 degC. Lots more info in the book
> "Nitration Recent Laboratory and Industrial Developments" ISBN
> 0-8412-3393-4.
> It also tells of the uses of N2O5 like selective nitration of HTPB.
>
> Tom
>
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 13125 invoked from network); 30 Jun 2001 02:44:33 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 30 Jun 2001 02:44:33 -0000
Received: (qmail 17956 invoked from network); 30 Jun 2001 02:45:30 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 30 Jun 2001 02:45:30 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA17085; Fri, 29 Jun 2001 19:35:17 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 68214 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 30 Jun 2001 02:35:11          +0000
Received: from mta04.mail.mel.aone.net.au (mta04.mail.au.uu.net [203.2.192.84])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA17067 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 29 Jun 2001 19:35:10 -0700
Received: from unknown ([63.34.220.216]) by mta04.mail.mel.aone.net.au with          SMTP id <20010630023507.FHLP12944.mta04.mail.mel.aone.net.au@unknown>          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 30 Jun 2001 12:35:07 +1000
References: Conversation <F36suZ2K4xDh9vXsFFs0000203b@hotmail.com> with last            message            <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>
Priority: Normal
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Priority: 3
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	X-MAPIextension=.TXT;
	charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>
Date:         Sat, 30 Jun 2001 02:35:11 +0000
Reply-To: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] nitronium compounds
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

----------
> NOTE: the question was in regards to Nitronium Nitrate N02N03 not Nitrogen
> Pentoxide N205.

or more correctly pronounced Dinitrogen Pentoxide:-)

Troy.

>
> Troy.
>
> ----------
> > Nitrogen Pentoxide.  It's not an uncommon chemical in the explosives
> > industry.  It is a superior nitrating agent because it does not require
> > elevated temperatures, extreme concentrations and does not require
> desiccants
> > like H2SO4.  More importantly, it is much less likely to oxidize organic
> > reactants than HNO3.  Therefore yield is much higher.
> >
> > The third stage nitration of stillbene, benzenetriamine or toluene with
> > Nitrogen Pentoxide is much easier.
> > With heat addition, 4th, 5th and even 6th stage nitration of benzene is
> > possible with N2O5.
> >
> > >  if
> > > >it's possible to synthesize N02Cl04 (nitronium perchlorate) why is it
> not
> > > >possible to synthesize N02N03 or is it?

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 20977 invoked from network); 30 Jun 2001 03:01:13 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 30 Jun 2001 03:01:13 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 34 invoked from network); 30 Jun 2001 03:02:21 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 30 Jun 2001 03:02:21 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA17178; Fri, 29 Jun 2001 19:52:44 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 68232 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 30 Jun 2001 02:52:36          +0000
Received: from hawk.mail.pas.earthlink.net (hawk.mail.pas.earthlink.net          [207.217.120.22]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA17161          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 29 Jun 2001 19:52:35 -0700
Received: from sprintmail.com (PPPa52-ResaleSantaClarita2-3R7178.dialinx.net          [4.54.101.49]) by hawk.mail.pas.earthlink.net (EL-8_9_3_3/8.9.3) with          ESMTP id TAA02400; Fri, 29 Jun 2001 19:52:29 -0700 (PDT)
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.74 [en] (Win98; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: Conversation <F36suZ2K4xDh9vXsFFs0000203b@hotmail.com> with last            message <3B3D3611.58E8DB2B@sprintmail.com>            <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B3D3F6E.76F9EC8D@sprintmail.com>
Date:         Fri, 29 Jun 2001 19:54:38 -0700
Reply-To: "Anthony Colette" <Rockitman@SPRINTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Anthony Colette" <Rockitman@SPRINTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] nitronium compounds
Comments: To: Troy Prideaux <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Nitronium Nitrate is Nitrogen Pentoxide.  It is the anhydride of HNO3.

O2N-O-NO2

> NOTE: the question was in regards to Nitronium Nitrate N02N03 not Nitrogen
> Pentoxide N205.
>
> Troy.
>
> ----------
> > Nitrogen Pentoxide.  It's not an uncommon chemical in the explosives
> > industry.  It is a superior nitrating agent because it does not require
> > elevated temperatures, extreme concentrations and does not require
> desiccants
> > like H2SO4.  More importantly, it is much less likely to oxidize organic
> > reactants than HNO3.  Therefore yield is much higher.
> >
> > The third stage nitration of stillbene, benzenetriamine or toluene with
> > Nitrogen Pentoxide is much easier.
> > With heat addition, 4th, 5th and even 6th stage nitration of benzene is
> > possible with N2O5.
> >
> > >  if
> > > >it's possible to synthesize N02Cl04 (nitronium perchlorate) why is it
> not
> > > >possible to synthesize N02N03 or is it?

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 6174 invoked from network); 30 Jun 2001 03:05:02 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 30 Jun 2001 03:05:02 -0000
Received: (qmail 1083 invoked from network); 30 Jun 2001 03:06:10 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 30 Jun 2001 03:06:10 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA17255; Fri, 29 Jun 2001 20:02:38 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 68249 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 30 Jun 2001 03:02:36          +0000
Received: from spsystems.net (spsystems.net [209.47.149.227]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA17238 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Fri,          29 Jun 2001 20:02:35 -0700
Received: (from henry@localhost) by spsystems.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id XAA01908;          Fri, 29 Jun 2001 23:01:59 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010629230015.1801A-100000@spsystems.net>
Date:         Fri, 29 Jun 2001 23:01:59 -0400
Reply-To: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] sub launch
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <NDBBIBAMIMKJPANDCAHGEELIENAA.greg@blastzone.com>

On Fri, 29 Jun 2001, Greg Deputy wrote:
> > ...The timing of the hatch closing is very exact. The hatch closes at a
> > speed that allows enough water to enter the missile tube that
> > exactly equals the weight of the missile...
>
> I wonder if this was ever tested?

Undoubtedly.  If nothing else, the USN does missile tests from operational
subs (submerged) quite routinely.  They are generally much more insistent
on live testing of operational systems than the USAF ICBM people.

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 23066 invoked from network); 30 Jun 2001 05:49:31 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 30 Jun 2001 05:49:31 -0000
Received: (qmail 23267 invoked from network); 30 Jun 2001 05:50:26 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 30 Jun 2001 05:50:26 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA17666; Fri, 29 Jun 2001 22:42:14 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 68274 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 30 Jun 2001 05:42:01          +0000
Received: from femail22.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail22.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.0.95.147]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA17649          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 29 Jun 2001 22:42:01 -0700
Received: from cc334751a ([65.13.214.65]) by femail22.sdc1.sfba.home.com          (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20 201-229-121-120-20010223) with SMTP id          <20010630054155.PTQP18266.femail22.sdc1.sfba.home.com@cc334751a>;          Fri, 29 Jun 2001 22:41:55 -0700
References:  <200106250313.UAA12881@itc.uci.edu>              <00d301c100fd$5373abe0$57ecd040@7kvk901>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2462.0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <04c101c10127$70ab2060$6401a8c0@home.com>
Date:         Fri, 29 Jun 2001 23:42:24 -0600
Reply-To: "Brian Kosko" <bkosko1@HOME.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Brian Kosko" <bkosko1@HOME.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Calculating multiple throat Medusa nozzle
Comments: To: Tom Binford <tbinford@FRONTIERNET.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Be sure not to make the center hole too large. We did one at 0.375 inch (
ah, it seemed like a good idea at the time). The nozzle fractured when we
fired it, about the only 54mm I can remember doing that. When in doubt,
spread'em out (new Aerotech jingle?).

                                                                Brian

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 28658 invoked from network); 30 Jun 2001 09:08:52 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 30 Jun 2001 09:08:52 -0000
Received: (qmail 3350 invoked from network); 30 Jun 2001 09:09:50 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 30 Jun 2001 09:09:50 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id CAA18166; Sat, 30 Jun 2001 02:00:53 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 68311 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 30 Jun 2001 09:00:39          +0000
Received: from mta04.mail.mel.aone.net.au (mta04.mail.au.uu.net [203.2.192.84])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id CAA18149 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 30 Jun 2001 02:00:38 -0700
Received: from unknown ([63.34.214.11]) by mta04.mail.mel.aone.net.au with SMTP          id <20010630090036.IVLM12944.mta04.mail.mel.aone.net.au@unknown> for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 30 Jun 2001 19:00:36 +1000
References: Conversation <F36suZ2K4xDh9vXsFFs0000203b@hotmail.com> with last            message <3B3D3F6E.76F9EC8D@sprintmail.com>
Priority: Normal
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Priority: 3
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	X-MAPIextension=.TXT;
	charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>
Date:         Sat, 30 Jun 2001 09:00:39 +0000
Reply-To: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] nitronium compounds
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <3B3D3F6E.76F9EC8D@sprintmail.com>

I thought it contained a double Nitrogen bonding but, I'll go along with
that.

Ta,

Troy.

----------
>
> Nitronium Nitrate is Nitrogen Pentoxide.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 4745 invoked from network); 30 Jun 2001 12:07:48 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 30 Jun 2001 12:07:48 -0000
X-Priority: 3
Received: (qmail 217 invoked from network); 30 Jun 2001 12:08:47 -0000
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 30 Jun 2001 12:08:47 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id EAA18668; Sat, 30 Jun 2001 04:56:37 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 68341 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 30 Jun 2001 11:56:21          +0000
Received: from zcars0m9.ca.nortel.com (h157s242a129n47.user.nortelnetworks.com          [47.129.242.157]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id EAA18651          for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Sat, 30 Jun 2001 04:56:20 -0700
Received: from zcars04f.ca.nortel.com (zcars04f.ca.nortel.com [47.129.242.57])          by zcars0m9.ca.nortel.com (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f5UBtK027302          for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Sat, 30 Jun 2001 07:55:20 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from rftzy232.ca.nortel.com by zcars04f.ca.nortel.com; Sat, 30 Jun          2001 07:55:16 -0400
Received: from nortelnetworks.com (acart12v.ca.nortel.com [47.129.8.138]) by          rftzy232.ca.nortel.com with SMTP (Microsoft Exchange Internet Mail          Service Version 5.5.2653.13) id NKPLZXLJ; Sat, 30 Jun 2001 07:50:49          -0400
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.77 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.19 i686)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Orig: <mleech@nortelnetworks.com>
Message-ID:  <3B3DBE05.B9E1B009@nortelnetworks.com>
Date:         Sat, 30 Jun 2001 07:54:45 -0400
Reply-To: "Marcus Leech" <mleech@NORTELNETWORKS.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Marcus Leech" <mleech@NORTELNETWORKS.COM>
Organization: Nortel Networks: Information Systems
Subject:      [AR] 22mm hybrid motor flies!
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Last night, just before sunset, I flew my 22mm hybrid "G"
motor--calculated to be about
  100NS total impulse, and about 45N average.  I flew this in my
newly-repaired
  "Drag Queen II", which had suffered from my stupidity about 1 month
ago in a
  previous attempt to fly the 22mm hybrid.

The purpose of the flight was to test the viability of a new fuel
choice--
  Black Polypropylene; the theory being that the black colour would help
to
  increase surface heat absorption, and thus improve regression.  I'm
going to static
  fire a rather larger motor this weekend using the same fuel, but I
just *had* to
  fly it in my "baby" motor.  The minor test was the use of a nylon vent
fitting, rather
  than the much heavier brass ones I've been using--it's a saving of
about 18g--which for
  a "G" sized motor/rocket isn't a big deal, but I've got a 'D'-sized
version of
  the motor as well.

The weather last night was hot and hazy--the sky had a light haze to it,
perhaps 1000ft
  up.  The motor filled quickly, the vent fitting working just fine
without any hint
  of it going "boom".  When I pressed the firing button, the motor came
up to pressure
  in under 1 second, and loudly and with great authority, lifted the
1kg, 4.2cm rocket
  off the pad and straight up into the haze layer, never to be seen
again.  I heard the
  recovery system deploy (I was using a Galejs M.A.D.), but never saw it
after the
  aliens operating the black hole up there stole my rocket...

I'm going to go look for it today in better light

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 11103 invoked from network); 30 Jun 2001 12:09:33 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 30 Jun 2001 12:09:33 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 6624 invoked from network); 30 Jun 2001 12:10:41 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 30 Jun 2001 12:10:41 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id FAA18730; Sat, 30 Jun 2001 05:04:18 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 68355 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 30 Jun 2001 12:04:15          +0000
Received: from smtp6ve.mailsrvcs.net (smtp6vepub.gte.net [206.46.170.27]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id FAA18713 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 30 Jun 2001 05:04:15 -0700
Received: from me-513q3sc0zun0.pengar.com          (adsl-64-223-147-218.mannh.adsl.bellatlantic.net [64.223.147.218]) by          smtp6ve.mailsrvcs.net (8.9.1/8.9.1) with ESMTP id MAA36836185 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 30 Jun 2001 12:03:43 GMT
X-Sender: seth-pc@hobbiton.shire.net
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
References: <NDBBIBAMIMKJPANDCAHGEELIENAA.greg@blastzone.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <5.1.0.14.0.20010630080632.021b7c18@hobbiton.shire.net>
Date:         Sat, 30 Jun 2001 08:07:54 -0400
Reply-To: "Seth Leigh" <seth@PENGAR.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Seth Leigh" <seth@PENGAR.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] sub launch
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010629230015.1801A-100000@spsystems.net>

I know many of you list posters are in the know about a lot more than I
would imagine, so can anyone answer me this?

What kind of process is there for notifying the Russkies and the Chinese
and anyone else who would care that a missile launch will be done, and that
it will just be a test?  Is this the kind of thing that requires a set
schedule, agreed far in advance?

Seth



At 11:01 PM 6/29/2001, Henry Spencer wrote:
>On Fri, 29 Jun 2001, Greg Deputy wrote:
> > > ...The timing of the hatch closing is very exact. The hatch closes at a
> > > speed that allows enough water to enter the missile tube that
> > > exactly equals the weight of the missile...
> >
> > I wonder if this was ever tested?
>
>Undoubtedly.  If nothing else, the USN does missile tests from operational
>subs (submerged) quite routinely.  They are generally much more insistent
>on live testing of operational systems than the USAF ICBM people.
>
>                                                           Henry Spencer
>                                                        henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 4046 invoked from network); 30 Jun 2001 12:38:14 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 30 Jun 2001 12:38:14 -0000
Received: (qmail 5016 invoked from network); 30 Jun 2001 12:39:13 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 30 Jun 2001 12:39:13 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id FAA18836; Sat, 30 Jun 2001 05:35:43 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 68369 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 30 Jun 2001 12:35:36          +0000
Received: from pmail0-se0.x-stream.se (pdbs1-se0.libertysurf.se [212.139.0.5])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id FAA18819 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 30 Jun 2001 05:35:35 -0700
Received: (qmail 8253 invoked from network); 30 Jun 2001 12:35:56 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO eleanorii) (212.139.12.129) by smtp.libertysurf.se          with SMTP; 30 Jun 2001 12:35:56 -0000
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_09B5_01C56B69.3F922E50"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <001401c10168$32ae8810$0201a8c0@eleanor.intra>
Date:         Sat, 30 Jun 2001 14:24:32 +0100
Reply-To: "Carsten Glans" <cag@LIBERTYSURF.SE>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Carsten Glans" <cag@LIBERTYSURF.SE>
Subject:      [AR] Change of email address
Comments: To: cag@hotmail.com
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_09B5_01C56B69.3F922E50
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Hi all!

I just want to say that this email address will end to work today and =
you could use my other address while im looking for a new service =
provider with pop3/imap access.

Email: cag@hotmail.com
Web: http://www.min-sajt.com/cag


Best regards

Carsten Glans



------=_NextPart_000_09B5_01C56B69.3F922E50
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Diso-8859-1">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 5.50.4616.200" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Hi all!</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>I just want to say that this email =
address will end=20
to work today and you could use my other address while im looking for a =
new=20
service provider with pop3/imap access.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Email: <A=20
href=3D"mailto:cag@hotmail.com">cag@hotmail.com</A></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Web: <A=20
href=3D"http://www.min-sajt.com/cag">http://www.min-sajt.com/cag</A></FON=
T></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Best regards</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Carsten Glans</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_09B5_01C56B69.3F922E50--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 18874 invoked from network); 30 Jun 2001 15:18:19 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 30 Jun 2001 15:18:19 -0000
Received: (qmail 13523 invoked from network); 30 Jun 2001 15:19:28 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 30 Jun 2001 15:19:28 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA19247; Sat, 30 Jun 2001 08:10:34 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 68409 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 30 Jun 2001 15:10:23          +0000
Received: from mailhost0.trib.com (mailhost0.trib.com [63.229.150.3]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA19230 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Sat, 30 Jun 2001 08:10:22 -0700
Received: from mail.trib.com (imail.trib.com [63.229.150.9]) by          mailhost0.trib.com (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f5UFAKx68608; Sat,          30 Jun 2001 09:10:20 -0600 (MDT) (envelope-from          jwckman@space-rockets.com)
Received: from [63.229.150.186] (HELO hppav) by mail.trib.com (CommuniGate Pro          SMTP 3.4.6) with SMTP id 37868601; Sat, 30 Jun 2001 09:10:19 -0600
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <NKEHJAOOKBPGIKOOPDEFGEHMCAAA.jwckman@space-rockets.com>
Date:         Sat, 30 Jun 2001 09:09:02 -0600
Reply-To: "John Wickman" <jwckman@SPACE-ROCKETS.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Wickman" <jwckman@SPACE-ROCKETS.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Proppellant oops question
Comments: To: greg@blastzone.com
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <NDBBIBAMIMKJPANDCAHGEELFENAA.greg@blastzone.com>

Greg,

I once salvaged a batch of R20LM binder - PSAN propellant when I added only
0.12 Mondur MR instead of 0.19 Mondur MR (0.19 times binder weight).   This
was done within an hour or so and the propellant had already been loaded
into cartridges.  I realized after casting that I had forgotten to adjust
the curing agent amount.   Happens to all of us.

Anyway, I scraped it out of the cartridges, added the additional amount and
was able to salvage it.   It may be too late now, but if it has not set up
on you and is still mixable, I would give it a try.

John Wickman


-----Original Message-----
From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@itc.uci.edu]On
Behalf Of Greg Deputy
Sent: Friday, June 29, 2001 4:35 PM
To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
Subject: [AR] Proppellant oops question


I mixed up a 1800g batch of AP based propellant yesterday, and made a small
error.  The formula I'm using calls for 2% MDI, 36g in this case.  I used
2g....  Anyways, I now have a bunch of tubes packed with this mud, would it
be worth the time to remix and add the remaining 34g of curative, or am I
going to end up with something questionable?

This is an 83% solids propellant that is packed, not poured, and is the same
consistency now as it was when it was packed last night, as far as i can
tell.

Any words of wisdom would be appreciated.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 11548 invoked from network); 30 Jun 2001 15:32:06 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 30 Jun 2001 15:32:06 -0000
Received: (qmail 20149 invoked from network); 30 Jun 2001 15:33:04 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 30 Jun 2001 15:33:04 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA19324; Sat, 30 Jun 2001 08:26:18 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 68423 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 30 Jun 2001 15:26:14          +0000
Received: from dune.gnc.net (root@dune.gnc.net [207.203.72.4]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA19307 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat,          30 Jun 2001 08:26:13 -0700
Received: from beowulf (sw2-5.gnc.net [207.203.72.85]) by dune.gnc.net          (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id LAA13768 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat,          30 Jun 2001 11:26:12 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
Importance: Normal
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <LPBBKJMJEOFKAMFJJNNHKEFMCFAA.landofgrey@gnc.net>
Date:         Sat, 30 Jun 2001 11:25:23 -0400
Reply-To: <landofgrey@gnc.net>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Matthew Travis" <landofgrey@gnc.net>
Subject:      Re: [AR] 01-44 X-38 free-flight tests resume NTE
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <LPBBKJMJEOFKAMFJJNNHCEFDCFAA.landofgrey@gnc.net>

Here is something Florida Today has said about the X-38:

"On June 22, NASA and the president's Office of Management and Budget agreed
to earmark $40 million - money NASA was able to carve out from 2002 and 2003
budget projections - to sustain the X-38 program and environmental systems
for the living module. They have not yet decided how to split that money,
Rothenberg said.

The X-38 is an experimental aircraft that was to be carried into space by
the shuttle and return on its own to Earth." - Florida Today, June 30, 2001

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 22426 invoked from network); 30 Jun 2001 17:50:47 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 30 Jun 2001 17:50:47 -0000
Received: (qmail 11763 invoked from network); 30 Jun 2001 17:51:46 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 30 Jun 2001 17:51:46 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA19938; Sat, 30 Jun 2001 10:48:02 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 68474 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 30 Jun 2001 17:47:49          +0000
Received: from conint.consumersinterest.com (consumersinterest.com          [207.195.143.118] (may be forged)) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with          ESMTP id KAA19921 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 30 Jun 2001          10:47:48 -0700
Received: from greg [208.187.15.161] by conint.consumersinterest.com          (SMTPD32-6.04) id A3DDAC50084; Sat, 30 Jun 2001 11:01:01 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <NDBBIBAMIMKJPANDCAHGAEMGENAA.greg@blastzone.com>
Date:         Sat, 30 Jun 2001 10:57:45 -0700
Reply-To: <greg@blastzone.com>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Greg Deputy" <greg@blastzone.com>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Proppellant oops question
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <NKEHJAOOKBPGIKOOPDEFGEHMCAAA.jwckman@space-rockets.com>

Thanks to all for the suggestions on my propellant oops.  I scraped the goop
out last night, mixed in the curatives, and re-packed.  This morning its all
cured up as would be expected.  I'll be checking density and such, but looks
good.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@itc.uci.edu]On
> Behalf Of John Wickman
> Sent: Saturday, June 30, 2001 8:09 AM
> To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
> Subject: Re: [AR] Proppellant oops question
>
>
> Greg,
>
> I once salvaged a batch of R20LM binder - PSAN propellant when I
> added only
> 0.12 Mondur MR instead of 0.19 Mondur MR (0.19 times binder
> weight).   This
> was done within an hour or so and the propellant had already been loaded
> into cartridges.  I realized after casting that I had forgotten to adjust
> the curing agent amount.   Happens to all of us.
>
> Anyway, I scraped it out of the cartridges, added the additional
> amount and
> was able to salvage it.   It may be too late now, but if it has not set up
> on you and is still mixable, I would give it a try.
>
> John Wickman
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@itc.uci.edu]On
> Behalf Of Greg Deputy
> Sent: Friday, June 29, 2001 4:35 PM
> To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
> Subject: [AR] Proppellant oops question
>
>
> I mixed up a 1800g batch of AP based propellant yesterday, and
> made a small
> error.  The formula I'm using calls for 2% MDI, 36g in this case.  I used
> 2g....  Anyways, I now have a bunch of tubes packed with this
> mud, would it
> be worth the time to remix and add the remaining 34g of curative, or am I
> going to end up with something questionable?
>
> This is an 83% solids propellant that is packed, not poured, and
> is the same
> consistency now as it was when it was packed last night, as far as i can
> tell.
>
> Any words of wisdom would be appreciated.
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 23833 invoked from network); 30 Jun 2001 21:59:21 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 30 Jun 2001 21:59:21 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 19561 invoked from network); 30 Jun 2001 22:00:31 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 30 Jun 2001 22:00:31 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA20623; Sat, 30 Jun 2001 14:56:15 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 68541 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 30 Jun 2001 21:55:59          +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (f13.law3.hotmail.com [209.185.241.13]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA20606 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Sat, 30 Jun 2001 14:55:59 -0700
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Sat,          30 Jun 2001 14:55:28 -0700
Received: from 213.224.83.174 by lw3fd.law3.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Sat, 30          Jun 2001 21:55:28 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [213.224.83.174]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 30 Jun 2001 21:55:28.0972 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[604E18C0:01C101AF]
Message-ID:  <F13KpjE5aHaZVrDs9aA000032b0@hotmail.com>
Date:         Sat, 30 Jun 2001 21:55:59 +0000
Reply-To: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] nitronium compounds
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

nitronium cation NO2+, more reaction eqs;

http://artsandscience2.concordia.ca/facstaff/a-c/bird/c242/notes_ch16-cwp.html

jd


>From: Troy Prideaux <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
>Reply-To: Troy Prideaux <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
>To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
>Subject: Re: [AR] nitronium compounds
>Date: Sat, 30 Jun 2001 09:00:39 +0000
>
>I thought it contained a double Nitrogen bonding but, I'll go along with
>that.
>
>Ta,
>
>Troy.
>
>----------
> >
> > Nitronium Nitrate is Nitrogen Pentoxide.

_________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 16172 invoked from network); 1 Jul 2001 04:24:44 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 1 Jul 2001 04:24:44 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 28612 invoked from network); 1 Jul 2001 04:25:54 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 1 Jul 2001 04:25:54 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA21545; Sat, 30 Jun 2001 21:09:46 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 68607 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 1 Jul 2001 04:09:22 +0000
Received: from iron.carolina.net (iron.carolina.net [208.170.147.84]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA21527 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Sat, 30 Jun 2001 21:09:22 -0700
Received: from ac.net (unverified [206.100.51.194]) by iron.carolina.net          (Vircom SMTPRS 4.5.188) with ESMTP id <B0002571742@iron.carolina.net>          for <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Sun, 1 Jul 2001 00:24:06 -0400
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Win 9x 4.90; en-US; m18) Gecko/20001108            Netscape6/6.0
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B3EA263.4050007@ac.net>
Date:         Sun, 1 Jul 2001 00:09:07 -0400
Reply-To: "Bill Shamblin" <wshamblin@AC.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Bill Shamblin" <wshamblin@AC.NET>
Subject:      [AR] Increasing propellant density
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Hi all,
   I just had what may be a silly idea. Has anyone tried centrifuging
APCP? This would be done after packing in the casting tube, but before
it has a chance to cure. I can see that it would waste some binder/fuel,
and it could separate some of the components, but it ought to be
possible to work out a procedure that gives a greater density without
going too far. Just how high can you go in density before you start
losing performance? A side benefit might be that it would degas the
propellant, as well.
   Hey, it was just a thought...
Regs! Bill KU4QB TRA#07455 L2

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 8612 invoked from network); 1 Jul 2001 05:07:51 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 1 Jul 2001 05:07:51 -0000
Received: (qmail 9284 invoked from network); 1 Jul 2001 05:08:53 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 1 Jul 2001 05:08:53 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA21703; Sat, 30 Jun 2001 22:04:42 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 68623 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 1 Jul 2001 05:04:35 +0000
Received: from mta01.mail.mel.aone.net.au (mta01.mail.au.uu.net [203.2.192.81])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA21686 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 30 Jun 2001 22:04:34 -0700
Received: from unknown ([63.34.210.218]) by mta01.mail.mel.aone.net.au with          SMTP id <20010701050425.BYBQ18810.mta01.mail.mel.aone.net.au@unknown>          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 1 Jul 2001 15:04:25 +1000
References: Conversation <3B3EA263.4050007@ac.net> with last message            <3B3EA263.4050007@ac.net>
Priority: Normal
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Priority: 3
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	X-MAPIextension=.TXT;
	charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>
Date:         Sun, 1 Jul 2001 05:04:35 +0000
Reply-To: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Increasing propellant density
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <3B3EA263.4050007@ac.net>

Repeating the reply (to Jay) I gave on this list about 1 month ago:

"Thought about it for many years and it should work providing the viscosity
and density uniformity of the mix is just right however ie. too dry and the
gases won't be removed, too wet and there's likely to be a separation of
materials if densities vary by any considerable margin ie. zinc vs R45; in
this case the zinc may make its way to the base (outside in terms of
centrifuges) of the casting tube and the r45 towards the top (inside). This
may not present a problem but might provide enough inconsistency to concern
me. However, I believe the chances of the process actually working
(achieving higher densities than you were) is reasonably high and I'd
recommend you give it a go."

----------
> Hi all,
>    I just had what may be a silly idea. Has anyone tried centrifuging
> APCP? This would be done after packing in the casting tube, but before
> it has a chance to cure. I can see that it would waste some binder/fuel,
> and it could separate some of the components, but it ought to be
> possible to work out a procedure that gives a greater density without
> going too far. Just how high can you go in density before you start
> losing performance?

You don't lose performance, you gain, that's providing you're using the
same ingredients, same propellant.


 A side benefit might be that it would degas the
> propellant, as well.

That's not the "side benefit", it's the entire reason for centrifuging it!

Troy.

>    Hey, it was just a thought...
> Regs! Bill KU4QB TRA#07455 L2

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 17220 invoked from network); 1 Jul 2001 06:16:35 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 1 Jul 2001 06:16:35 -0000
Received: (qmail 15912 invoked from network); 1 Jul 2001 06:17:46 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 1 Jul 2001 06:17:46 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA21963; Sat, 30 Jun 2001 23:13:26 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 68645 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 1 Jul 2001 06:13:13 +0000
Received: from femail3.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail3.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.0.95.83]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA21945 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 30 Jun 2001 23:13:13 -0700
Received: from ghartunglaptop ([24.255.146.25]) by femail3.sdc1.sfba.home.com          (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20 201-229-121-120-20010223) with SMTP id          <20010701061303.PXHI1621.femail3.sdc1.sfba.home.com@ghartunglaptop>          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 30 Jun 2001 23:13:03 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <GGEIJGNNFHFPEBENACBAKEPGCEAA.ghartung13@home.com>
Date:         Sun, 1 Jul 2001 00:12:17 -0600
Reply-To: "Greg Hartung" <ghartung13@HOME.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Greg Hartung" <ghartung13@HOME.COM>
Subject:      [AR] calculating flow
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

   I am looking for a simple way to calculate the flow of nitrous in a line.
I have flipped thru a few fluid dynamics books, but everything seems to
indicate I need to know 9million things about the fluid:  velocity,
friction, Reynolds, pressure drop, etc.  (If I knew the velocity, I'd
already be done).  Any simplifications?

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 16927 invoked from network); 1 Jul 2001 07:13:40 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 1 Jul 2001 07:13:40 -0000
Received: (qmail 26554 invoked from network); 1 Jul 2001 07:14:42 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 1 Jul 2001 07:14:42 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA22158; Sun, 1 Jul 2001 00:10:50 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 68665 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 1 Jul 2001 07:10:43 +0000
Received: from blount.mail.mindspring.net (blount.mail.mindspring.net          [207.69.200.226]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA22141          for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Sun, 1 Jul 2001 00:10:42 -0700
Received: from pavilion (user-33qt88p.dialup.mindspring.com [199.174.161.25])          by blount.mail.mindspring.net (8.9.3/8.8.5) with SMTP id DAA02181 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Sun, 1 Jul 2001 03:10:40 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="Windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <000b01c101fd$66eac4a0$19a1aec7@pavilion>
Date:         Sun, 1 Jul 2001 02:13:58 -0500
Reply-To: "Michael Dilsaver" <michaeldilsaver@MINDSPRING.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Michael Dilsaver" <michaeldilsaver@MINDSPRING.COM>
Subject:      [AR] Another "Rocket Guy"
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

The headline says it all.  At least he's got the fins on the right end.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/sci/tech/newsid_1407000/1407210.stm

Mike Dilsaver

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 24901 invoked from network); 1 Jul 2001 07:25:52 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 1 Jul 2001 07:25:52 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 26914 invoked from network); 1 Jul 2001 07:27:03 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 1 Jul 2001 07:27:03 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA22239; Sun, 1 Jul 2001 00:17:28 -0700
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 68684 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 1 Jul 2001 07:17:24 +0000
Received: from zianet.com (mail.zianet.com [204.134.124.201]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id AAA22221 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 1          Jul 2001 00:17:23 -0700
Received: (qmail 20791 invoked by alias); 1 Jul 2001 04:32:06 -0000
Delivered-To: alias-outgoing-AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU@outgoing
Received: (qmail 20752 invoked by uid 0); 1 Jul 2001 04:32:05 -0000
Received: from lc0842.zianet.com (HELO dburnam) (216.234.196.73) by zianet.com          with SMTP; 1 Jul 2001 04:32:05 -0000
X-Sender: dburnam@zianet.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.5 (32)
References: <NDBBIBAMIMKJPANDCAHGEELIENAA.greg@blastzone.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <3.0.5.32.20010630223638.00914480@zianet.com>
Date:         Sat, 30 Jun 2001 22:36:38 -0600
Reply-To: <dburnam@ZIANET.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <dburnam@ZIANET.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] sub launch
Comments: To: Henry Spencer <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010629230015.1801A-100000@spsystems.net>

At 11:01 PM 6/29/01 -0400, Henry Spencer wrote:
>On Fri, 29 Jun 2001, Greg Deputy wrote:
>> > ...The timing of the hatch closing is very exact. The hatch closes at a
>> > speed that allows enough water to enter the missile tube that
>> > exactly equals the weight of the missile...
>>
>> I wonder if this was ever tested?
>
>Undoubtedly.  If nothing else, the USN does missile tests from operational
>subs (submerged) quite routinely.  They are generally much more insistent
>on live testing of operational systems than the USAF ICBM people.
>
>                                                          Henry Spencer
>                                                     henry@spsystems.net
>
>
Can't launch north cause someone will think they're the target and can't
launch east or south or west because some population center or another gets
nervous about dropping a small stage or two.  Even the tethered launch in
the 1960's had many nervous.

Denzil

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 24901 invoked from network); 1 Jul 2001 10:43:18 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 1 Jul 2001 10:43:18 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 27861 invoked from network); 1 Jul 2001 10:44:20 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 1 Jul 2001 10:44:20 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id DAA22720; Sun, 1 Jul 2001 03:39:24 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 68713 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 1 Jul 2001 10:39:09 +0000
Received: from iron.carolina.net (iron.carolina.net [208.170.147.84]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id DAA22703 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Sun, 1 Jul 2001 03:39:08 -0700
Received: from ac.net (unverified [206.100.51.51]) by iron.carolina.net (Vircom          SMTPRS 4.5.188) with ESMTP id <B0002572864@iron.carolina.net>; Sun, 1          Jul 2001 06:53:51 -0400
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Win 9x 4.90; en-US; m18) Gecko/20001108            Netscape6/6.0
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: Conversation <3B3EA263.4050007@ac.net> with last message            <3B3EA263.4050007@ac.net>            <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B3EFDC9.5020904@ac.net>
Date:         Sun, 1 Jul 2001 06:39:05 -0400
Reply-To: "Bill Shamblin" <wshamblin@AC.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Bill Shamblin" <wshamblin@AC.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Increasing propellant density
Comments: To: Troy Prideaux <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Thanks Troy. I musta missed that one somehow. ;-}
Bill

Troy Prideaux wrote:

> Repeating the reply (to Jay) I gave on this list about 1 month ago:

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 16563 invoked from network); 1 Jul 2001 15:55:30 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 1 Jul 2001 15:55:30 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: (qmail 17660 invoked from network); 1 Jul 2001 15:56:43 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 1 Jul 2001 15:56:43 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA23900; Sun, 1 Jul 2001 08:50:23 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 68771 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 1 Jul 2001 15:50:13 +0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA23880; Sun, 1 Jul 2001 08:50:12 -0700
Message-ID:  <200107011550.IAA23880@itc.uci.edu>
Date:         Sun, 1 Jul 2001 15:50:12 +0000
Reply-To: "Joe Perez" <rocketman6965@AOL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Joe Perez" <rocketman6965@AOL.COM>
Subject:      [AR] Mondur-IPDI Mix
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Hi, all.  I have mixed 2 batches of AP using IPDI as the curative.  In both
cases the mixture was beautiful, degassed properly, pourable, etc,etc...
The problem started when I added the light to kick the cure.  It oozed out
and upon inspection found alot of voids in the grains.  I mixed another
batch using 16.3%R45 and 2.1% curative(50/50 Mondur/IPDI).  The bottom of
the rains are sealed with a caplug around electrical tape and the top has a
paper towel to catcg moisture and still allow venting.  It has been 3 days
at room temperature and it is only tacky with a soft feel at the bottom of
the grain.  Will this eventually cure?  I need to have usable grains by
July 29.  Should I give it a little heat?  Say, a 100 Watt bulb maybe?  Any
advice with this mixture would be most appreciated.

Joe


From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 20204 invoked from network); 1 Jul 2001 16:28:11 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 1 Jul 2001 16:28:11 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 13749 invoked from network); 1 Jul 2001 16:29:06 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 1 Jul 2001 16:29:06 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA24064; Sun, 1 Jul 2001 09:25:12 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 68796 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 1 Jul 2001 16:25:09 +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (f56.law3.hotmail.com [209.185.241.56]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA24047 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Sun, 1 Jul 2001 09:25:09 -0700
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Sun,          1 Jul 2001 09:24:39 -0700
Received: from 213.224.83.142 by lw3fd.law3.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Sun, 01          Jul 2001 16:24:38 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [213.224.83.142]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 01 Jul 2001 16:24:39.0032 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[533B5F80:01C1024A]
Message-ID:  <F56M3SOlbpH71yEXUIE000037f6@hotmail.com>
Date:         Sun, 1 Jul 2001 16:25:09 +0000
Reply-To: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      [AR] sub launch
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Reconsidering the info I got from yhis list, SSBNs are launched by
compressed gas from the sub tube at max depth 70 m or 7 bars on the missile
hull at exit.
For the missile that is a lot of water to ascend through until surfacing.
Question remains: how can it pop out of the sea with a specific gravity most
probably greater than seawater? So there must be some upward propulsion
system at work between sub tube and sea surface?

jd
_________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 25939 invoked from network); 1 Jul 2001 16:46:00 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 1 Jul 2001 16:46:00 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 21286 invoked from network); 1 Jul 2001 16:47:02 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 1 Jul 2001 16:47:02 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA24112; Sun, 1 Jul 2001 09:29:52 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 68808 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 1 Jul 2001 16:29:51 +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (f43.law3.hotmail.com [209.185.241.43]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA24095 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Sun, 1 Jul 2001 09:29:51 -0700
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Sun,          1 Jul 2001 09:29:21 -0700
Received: from 213.224.83.142 by lw3fd.law3.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Sun, 01          Jul 2001 16:29:20 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [213.224.83.142]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 01 Jul 2001 16:29:21.0167 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[FB65C1F0:01C1024A]
Message-ID:  <F43ZjfNLnlyg35sQtgT00003715@hotmail.com>
Date:         Sun, 1 Jul 2001 16:29:51 +0000
Reply-To: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Another "Rocket Guy"
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

MD wrote:

>  At least he's got the fins on the right end.

I always wonder why I love such beautifully sardonic statements.

jd
_________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 19986 invoked from network); 1 Jul 2001 21:12:17 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 1 Jul 2001 21:12:17 -0000
Received: (qmail 18745 invoked from network); 1 Jul 2001 21:13:29 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 1 Jul 2001 21:13:29 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA24969; Sun, 1 Jul 2001 14:09:06 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 68867 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 1 Jul 2001 21:09:00 +0000
Received: from conint.consumersinterest.com (consumersinterest.com          [207.195.143.118] (may be forged)) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with          ESMTP id OAA24952 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 1 Jul 2001 14:08:59          -0700
Received: from greg [208.187.15.144] by conint.consumersinterest.com          (SMTPD32-6.04) id A486F4F0124; Sun, 01 Jul 2001 14:22:14 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <NDBBIBAMIMKJPANDCAHGGENAENAA.greg@blastzone.com>
Date:         Sun, 1 Jul 2001 14:19:03 -0700
Reply-To: <greg@blastzone.com>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Greg Deputy" <greg@blastzone.com>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Increasing propellant density
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <3B3EA263.4050007@ac.net>

Similiar thought...would compressing the propellant be a viable way to
increase density?  For example, put your cardboard casting tube in a metal
sleve, and have a 'piston' sort of arrangment that fits inside.  After
packing/pouring your propellant, slide in the piston and apply pressure to
compress the propellant.  Leaving it that way until it cures.  Yeah?  No?

BTW, what kind of percentage of threoretical density is considered 'good'?
80%?  95%?  95.5%?

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@itc.uci.edu]On
> Behalf Of Bill Shamblin
> Sent: Saturday, June 30, 2001 9:09 PM
> To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
> Subject: [AR] Increasing propellant density
>
>
> Hi all,
>    I just had what may be a silly idea. Has anyone tried centrifuging
> APCP? This would be done after packing in the casting tube, but before
> it has a chance to cure. I can see that it would waste some binder/fuel,
> and it could separate some of the components, but it ought to be
> possible to work out a procedure that gives a greater density without
> going too far. Just how high can you go in density before you start
> losing performance? A side benefit might be that it would degas the
> propellant, as well.
>    Hey, it was just a thought...
> Regs! Bill KU4QB TRA#07455 L2
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 5091 invoked from network); 1 Jul 2001 21:33:41 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 1 Jul 2001 21:33:42 -0000
Received: (qmail 5020 invoked from network); 1 Jul 2001 21:34:43 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 1 Jul 2001 21:34:43 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA25009; Sun, 1 Jul 2001 14:11:28 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 68877 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 1 Jul 2001 21:11:27 +0000
Received: from femail22.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail22.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.0.95.147]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA24992          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 1 Jul 2001 14:11:27 -0700
Received: from cc334751a ([65.13.214.65]) by femail22.sdc1.sfba.home.com          (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20 201-229-121-120-20010223) with SMTP id          <20010701211121.GJQU18266.femail22.sdc1.sfba.home.com@cc334751a>;          Sun, 1 Jul 2001 14:11:21 -0700
References:  <200107011550.IAA23880@itc.uci.edu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2462.0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <005801c10272$8c381ee0$6401a8c0@home.com>
Date:         Sun, 1 Jul 2001 15:12:33 -0600
Reply-To: "Brian Kosko" <bkosko1@HOME.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Brian Kosko" <bkosko1@HOME.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Mondur-IPDI Mix
Comments: To: Joe Perez <rocketman6965@AOL.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Joe,

A couple of things. IPDI doesn't cure at room temp, it needs heat. It also
seems like you could use more curative. In our 85% solids we use 11% HTPB
and 2% curative( a mix of 1.5% 143L and 0.5% IPDI). We get a good cure at
room temp this way.

Hope it helps. By the way, the mixer works great!

                                                            Brian

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 10967 invoked from network); 1 Jul 2001 21:35:20 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 1 Jul 2001 21:35:20 -0000
Received: (qmail 5423 invoked from network); 1 Jul 2001 21:36:23 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 1 Jul 2001 21:36:23 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA25117; Sun, 1 Jul 2001 14:32:45 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 68898 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 1 Jul 2001 21:32:44 +0000
Received: from spsystems.net (spsystems.net [209.47.149.227]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA25095 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Sun,          1 Jul 2001 14:32:42 -0700
Received: (from henry@localhost) by spsystems.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id RAA00525;          Sun, 1 Jul 2001 17:31:53 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010701172754.480B-100000@spsystems.net>
Date:         Sun, 1 Jul 2001 17:31:53 -0400
Reply-To: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] sub launch
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <3.0.5.32.20010630223638.00914480@zianet.com>

On Sat, 30 Jun 2001 dburnam@ZIANET.COM wrote:
> >Undoubtedly.  If nothing else, the USN does missile tests from operational
> >subs (submerged) quite routinely.  They are generally much more insistent
> >on live testing of operational systems than the USAF ICBM people.
>
> Can't launch north cause someone will think they're the target and can't
> launch east or south or west because some population center or another gets
> nervous about dropping a small stage or two...

And can't test from operational-type silos at Vandenberg because attempts
to do so hit a string of irrelevant snags, and the USAF got tired of
trying and... gave up on it!  (They test ICBMs from Vandenberg all the
time, but they use special test silos, which are not representative of the
operational ones.)

Granted that it's easier for the USN to test with operational hardware --
just send the sub down to the Cape -- they also made much more of a point
of it.

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 16064 invoked from network); 1 Jul 2001 21:36:47 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 1 Jul 2001 21:36:47 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 3399 invoked from network); 1 Jul 2001 21:37:48 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 1 Jul 2001 21:37:48 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA25094; Sun, 1 Jul 2001 14:32:42 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 68890 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 1 Jul 2001 21:32:35 +0000
Received: from smtp09.phx.gblx.net (smtp09.phx.gblx.net [64.211.219.58]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA25077 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 1 Jul 2001 14:32:35 -0700
Received: (from daemon@localhost) by smtp09.phx.gblx.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id          OAA16108; Sun, 1 Jul 2001 14:32:31 -0700
Received: from 64-208-225-67.nas3.TBR.gblx.net(64.208.225.67),          claiming to be "frontiernet.net" via SMTP by smtp09.phx.gblx.net,          id smtpdvzot7a; Sun Jul  1 14:32:21 2001
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.74 [en] (Win98; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <NDBBIBAMIMKJPANDCAHGGENAENAA.greg@blastzone.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B3F9795.A36D7589@frontiernet.net>
Date:         Sun, 1 Jul 2001 17:35:17 -0400
Reply-To: <tbinford@frontiernet.net>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Tom Binford" <tbinford@frontiernet.net>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Increasing propellant density
Comments: To: greg@blastzone.com
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Greg Deputy wrote:
>
> Similiar thought...would compressing the propellant be a viable way to
> increase density?  For example, put your cardboard casting tube in a metal
> sleve, and have a 'piston' sort of arrangment that fits inside.  After
> packing/pouring your propellant, slide in the piston and apply pressure to
> compress the propellant.  Leaving it that way until it cures.  Yeah?  No?

You'll have gas under pressure in your propellant, probably not a good
idea.

>
> BTW, what kind of percentage of threoretical density is considered 'good'?
> 80%?  95%?  95.5%?

I get 92-93% with no degassing and peanut butter consistency.
With vacuum mixing and peanut butter constancy propellant I get about
97% and with pourable propellant and vacuum mixing, I get 99%.
All these propellants work in 98 mm motors (the largest I've tried with
these propellants).

Tom

>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 27108 invoked from network); 1 Jul 2001 22:46:06 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 1 Jul 2001 22:46:06 -0000
Received: (qmail 26730 invoked from network); 1 Jul 2001 22:47:06 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 1 Jul 2001 22:47:06 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA25369; Sun, 1 Jul 2001 15:43:45 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 68917 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 1 Jul 2001 22:43:15 +0000
Received: from mta04.mail.mel.aone.net.au (mta04.mail.au.uu.net [203.2.192.84])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA25347 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 1 Jul 2001 15:43:14 -0700
Received: from unknown ([63.34.216.96]) by mta04.mail.mel.aone.net.au with SMTP          id <20010701224311.YLLN12944.mta04.mail.mel.aone.net.au@unknown>;          Mon, 2 Jul 2001 08:43:11 +1000
References: Conversation <200107011550.IAA23880@itc.uci.edu> with last message            <005801c10272$8c381ee0$6401a8c0@home.com>
Priority: Normal
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Priority: 3
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	X-MAPIextension=.TXT;
	charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>
Date:         Sun, 1 Jul 2001 22:43:15 +0000
Reply-To: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Mondur-IPDI Mix
Comments: To: Brian Kosko <bkosko1@HOME.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <005801c10272$8c381ee0$6401a8c0@home.com>

----------
> Joe,
>
> A couple of things. IPDI doesn't cure at room temp, it needs heat.

Like I've said before, IPDI *WILL* cure @ room temp, just very slowly. Yes,
I've done it!!! The process can be dramatically accelerated with the
addition of a powerful catalyst such as DD or more mildly with heat.

Troy.

 It also
> seems like you could use more curative. In our 85% solids we use 11% HTPB
> and 2% curative( a mix of 1.5% 143L and 0.5% IPDI). We get a good cure at
> room temp this way.
>
> Hope it helps. By the way, the mixer works great!
>
>                                                             Brian

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 28437 invoked from network); 1 Jul 2001 22:46:28 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 1 Jul 2001 22:46:28 -0000
Received: (qmail 4319 invoked from network); 1 Jul 2001 22:47:41 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 1 Jul 2001 22:47:41 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA25389; Sun, 1 Jul 2001 15:44:12 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 68925 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 1 Jul 2001 22:44:11 +0000
Received: from mta02.mail.mel.aone.net.au (mta02.mail.au.uu.net [203.2.192.82])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA25361 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 1 Jul 2001 15:43:22 -0700
Received: from unknown ([63.34.216.96]) by mta02.mail.mel.aone.net.au with SMTP          id <20010701224319.IXKB8316.mta02.mail.mel.aone.net.au@unknown> for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 2 Jul 2001 08:43:19 +1000
References: Conversation <200107011550.IAA23880@itc.uci.edu> with last message            <200107011550.IAA23880@itc.uci.edu>
Priority: Normal
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Priority: 3
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	X-MAPIextension=.TXT;
	charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>
Date:         Sun, 1 Jul 2001 22:44:11 +0000
Reply-To: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Mondur-IPDI Mix
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <200107011550.IAA23880@itc.uci.edu>

Joe, sounds like you've got some moisture somewhere in your propellant (re:
foaming up). Not sure what Mondur is? (obviously an isocyanate). As Brian
mentioned you may require more curative, depending on what Mondur is.
There's enough there for straight IPDI (if your propellant doesn't contain
any other HO terminated ingredients) but the Mondur may have a lower
isocyanate value than generic IPDI. Heat will accelerate the curing process
but will increase the foaming.


Troy.

----------
>
> Hi, all.  I have mixed 2 batches of AP using IPDI as the curative.  In
both
> cases the mixture was beautiful, degassed properly, pourable, etc,etc...
> The problem started when I added the light to kick the cure.  It oozed out
> and upon inspection found alot of voids in the grains.  I mixed another
> batch using 16.3%R45 and 2.1% curative(50/50 Mondur/IPDI).  The bottom of
> the rains are sealed with a caplug around electrical tape and the top has
a
> paper towel to catcg moisture and still allow venting.  It has been 3 days
> at room temperature and it is only tacky with a soft feel at the bottom of
> the grain.  Will this eventually cure?  I need to have usable grains by
> July 29.  Should I give it a little heat?  Say, a 100 Watt bulb maybe?
Any
> advice with this mixture would be most appreciated.
>
> Joe
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 16858 invoked from network); 2 Jul 2001 01:04:58 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 2 Jul 2001 01:04:58 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: (qmail 17713 invoked from network); 2 Jul 2001 01:05:50 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 2 Jul 2001 01:05:50 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA25940; Sun, 1 Jul 2001 18:02:37 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 68966 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 2 Jul 2001 01:02:26 +0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA25919; Sun, 1 Jul 2001 18:02:25 -0700
Message-ID:  <200107020102.SAA25919@itc.uci.edu>
Date:         Mon, 2 Jul 2001 01:02:25 +0000
Reply-To: "Joe Perez" <rocketman6965@AOL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Joe Perez" <rocketman6965@AOL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Mondur-IPDI Mix
Comments: To: bkosko1@HOME.COM
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Hey Brian,

Yeah the mixer does indeed work great.  I wish my process was as good as
the mixer.  I am getting close though.  Today after 5 days at room temp, I
opened up a little of the 29mm and it IS curing.  I guess you don't pour
little stuff like 29mm.  The 54mm grain poured smoothly, but when I got to
the 29mm it started setting and I had to spoon in the rest causing a air
pocket at the top.  I plan to pour 38mm and above from now on starting with
the 38's first and then the 54's.
If I add more mondur(HDI),say,70-30, would I decrease pot life and cure
time?

Joe


From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 10494 invoked from network); 2 Jul 2001 01:11:02 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 2 Jul 2001 01:11:02 -0000
Received: (qmail 20310 invoked from network); 2 Jul 2001 01:12:01 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 2 Jul 2001 01:12:01 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA26024; Sun, 1 Jul 2001 18:09:15 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 68982 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 2 Jul 2001 01:09:13 +0000
Received: from mta01.mail.mel.aone.net.au (mta01.mail.au.uu.net [203.2.192.81])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA26007 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 1 Jul 2001 18:09:08 -0700
Received: from unknown ([63.34.210.48]) by mta01.mail.mel.aone.net.au with SMTP          id <20010702010855.MSKW18810.mta01.mail.mel.aone.net.au@unknown> for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 2 Jul 2001 11:08:55 +1000
References: Conversation <3B3EA263.4050007@ac.net> with last message            <NDBBIBAMIMKJPANDCAHGGENAENAA.greg@blastzone.com>
Priority: Normal
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Priority: 3
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	X-MAPIextension=.TXT;
	charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>
Date:         Mon, 2 Jul 2001 01:09:13 +0000
Reply-To: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Increasing propellant density
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <NDBBIBAMIMKJPANDCAHGGENAENAA.greg@blastzone.com>

----------
> Similiar thought...would compressing the propellant be a viable way to
> increase density?  For example, put your cardboard casting tube in a metal
> sleve, and have a 'piston' sort of arrangment that fits inside.  After
> packing/pouring your propellant, slide in the piston and apply pressure to
> compress the propellant.  Leaving it that way until it cures.  Yeah?  No?

Depends, it won't remove casting voids so they will still be there, just in
a compressed state until you remove the pressure. It *may* (as in, it may
not too) reduce the volatility of the mix if volatile ingredients are
included. It *may* suppress the creation of CO2 gasses from NCO-H2O
reactions although highly unlikely from an intuitive viewpoint.


>
> BTW, what kind of percentage of threoretical density is considered 'good'?
> 80%?  95%?  95.5%?

 >97% , depending what you're application is of course.

Troy.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 7346 invoked from network); 2 Jul 2001 01:17:36 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 2 Jul 2001 01:17:36 -0000
X-Priority: 3
Received: (qmail 23866 invoked from network); 2 Jul 2001 01:18:35 -0000
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 2 Jul 2001 01:18:35 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA26082; Sun, 1 Jul 2001 18:13:57 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 68997 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 2 Jul 2001 01:13:53 +0000
Received: from m1.jersey.juno.com (m1.jersey.juno.com [64.136.16.64]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA26065 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 1 Jul 2001 18:13:52 -0700
Received: from cookie.juno.com by cookie.juno.com for          <"H3WK6e6N+bsCVJQMHM9sZJG7AJ2QCOqzUA3K60cwlbQO0XIRG4+cPw==">
Received: (from kc2csh@juno.com) by m1.jersey.juno.com (queuemail) id F9A92QM7;          Sun, 01 Jul 2001 21:13:15 EDT
X-Mailer: Juno 4.0.11
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Juno-Line-Breaks: 3-8,10-60
X-Juno-Att: 0
X-Juno-RefParts: 0
Message-ID:  <20010701.211806.-3976501.0.kc2csh@juno.com>
Date:         Sun, 1 Jul 2001 21:18:04 -0400
Reply-To: <kc2csh@JUNO.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <kc2csh@JUNO.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Increasing propellant density
Comments: To: GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

  Trying to work through how you would change the formulation so that the
inevitable separation would work to your benefit.  Assumption is that you
will take some portion of the top and perhaps also the bottom off
mechanically and discard it as waste.
  Assumption is hing G force sustained throughout the entire cure.
  Too many posibilities, too little time, little progress

        Jay

On Sun, 1 Jul 2001 05:04:35 +0000 Troy Prideaux <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
writes:
> Repeating the reply (to Jay) I gave on this list about 1 month ago:
>
> "Thought about it for many years and it should work providing the
> viscosity
> and density uniformity of the mix is just right however ie. too dry
> and the
> gases won't be removed, too wet and there's likely to be a
> separation of
> materials if densities vary by any considerable margin ie. zinc vs
> R45; in
> this case the zinc may make its way to the base (outside in terms of
> centrifuges) of the casting tube and the r45 towards the top
> (inside). This
> may not present a problem but might provide enough inconsistency to
> concern
> me. However, I believe the chances of the process actually working
> (achieving higher densities than you were) is reasonably high and
> I'd
> recommend you give it a go."
>
> ----------
> > Hi all,
> >    I just had what may be a silly idea. Has anyone tried
> centrifuging
> > APCP? This would be done after packing in the casting tube, but
> before
> > it has a chance to cure. I can see that it would waste some
> binder/fuel,
> > and it could separate some of the components, but it ought to be
> > possible to work out a procedure that gives a greater density
> without
> > going too far. Just how high can you go in density before you
> start
> > losing performance?
>
> You don't lose performance, you gain, that's providing you're using
> the
> same ingredients, same propellant.
>
>
>  A side benefit might be that it would degas the
> > propellant, as well.
>
> That's not the "side benefit", it's the entire reason for
> centrifuging it!
>
> Troy.
>
> >    Hey, it was just a thought...
> > Regs! Bill KU4QB TRA#07455 L2

________________________________________________________________
GET INTERNET ACCESS FROM JUNO!
Juno offers FREE or PREMIUM Internet access for less!
Join Juno today!  For your FREE software, visit:
http://dl.www.juno.com/get/tagj.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 24080 invoked from network); 2 Jul 2001 01:52:40 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 2 Jul 2001 01:52:40 -0000
Received: (qmail 8233 invoked from network); 2 Jul 2001 01:53:52 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 2 Jul 2001 01:53:52 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA26217; Sun, 1 Jul 2001 18:43:05 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 69022 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 2 Jul 2001 01:42:57 +0000
Received: from cablecom.laribay.net (cablecom.laribay.net [66.20.57.4]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA26200 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 1 Jul 2001 18:42:56 -0700
Received: from billbull (dial071.laribay.net [66.20.57.71]) by          cablecom.laribay.net (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id UAA20379 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 1 Jul 2001 20:27:32 -0500 (CDT)          (envelope-from bpbullock@laribay.net)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_09B8_01C56B69.3FAC4600"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <004501c10298$53945880$47391442@billbull>
Date:         Sun, 1 Jul 2001 20:42:38 -0500
Reply-To: "Bill Bullock" <bpbullock@LARIBAY.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Bill Bullock" <bpbullock@LARIBAY.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Increasing Propellent Density
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_09B8_01C56B69.3FAC4600
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

    I am a new member and do not intend to intrude, but have any of you =
ever tried a variable-speed centrifuge with a sample heater controlled =
by a rheostat? I have one that is about 30-35 years old and it works =
fine for such like. I have never used it for anything over about a 1.5"  =
OD grain but it looks to me like you could build one for any size motor =
you desire.  Mine will run from about 0.5rpm to over 3,400rpm and the =
heater will go from 65 deg F. to over 185 deg. F.   I can cast 4 grains =
at a time. (Being 62 years old and seriously in this stuff since 1950-51 =
I guess I am pretty well stuck with non-metric. Sorry 'bout that, =
Folks!)
Bill

------=_NextPart_000_09B8_01C56B69.3FAC4600
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META content=3D"text/html; charset=3Diso-8859-1" =
http-equiv=3DContent-Type>
<META content=3D"MSHTML 5.00.2614.3500" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><STRONG><FONT size=3D2>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; I am a new member and do =
not intend=20
to intrude, but have any of you ever tried a variable-speed centrifuge =
with a=20
sample heater controlled by a rheostat? I have one that is about 30-35 =
years old=20
and it works fine for such like. I have never used it for anything over =
about a=20
1.5"&nbsp; OD grain but it looks to me like you could build one for any =
size=20
motor you desire.&nbsp; Mine will run from about 0.5rpm to over 3,400rpm =
and the=20
heater will go from 65 deg F. to over 185 deg. F.&nbsp;&nbsp; I can cast =
4=20
grains at a time. (Being 62 years old and seriously in this stuff since =
1950-51=20
I guess I am pretty well stuck with non-metric. Sorry 'bout that,=20
Folks!)</FONT></STRONG></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=3D2><STRONG>Bill</STRONG></FONT></DIV></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_09B8_01C56B69.3FAC4600--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 5296 invoked from network); 2 Jul 2001 12:47:22 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 2 Jul 2001 12:47:22 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 28366 invoked from network); 2 Jul 2001 12:48:26 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 2 Jul 2001 12:48:26 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id FAA28094; Mon, 2 Jul 2001 05:42:07 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 69155 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 2 Jul 2001 12:41:43 +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (f207.law15.hotmail.com [64.4.23.207]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id FAA28077 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Mon, 2 Jul 2001 05:41:43 -0700
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Mon,          2 Jul 2001 05:41:12 -0700
Received: from 193.121.251.246 by lw15fd.law15.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Mon,          02 Jul 2001 12:41:12 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [193.121.251.246]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 02 Jul 2001 12:41:12.0869 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[46F2FD50:01C102F4]
Message-ID:  <F207mQz4lDPHpNwqeq500005979@hotmail.com>
Date:         Mon, 2 Jul 2001 12:41:43 +0000
Reply-To: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      [AR] flame color
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Those members who needed flame coloring compositions are in luck, PDF:


- Chemistry of Firework Colors
What goes into making the colors of fireworks? Learn about the mechanisms of
color production and the chemicals that are used.

http://chemistry.about.com/science/chemistry/library/weekly/aa062701a.htm

- Fireworks & Pyrotechnics
Need more firework chemistry? Look here for cool websites on making your own
fireworks, firework safety, pyrotechnic journals, firework clubs, and
pyrotechnic science.

http://chemistry.about.com/science/chemistry/cs/fireworks/index.htm


_________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 29906 invoked from network); 2 Jul 2001 15:51:51 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 2 Jul 2001 15:51:51 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 18215 invoked from network); 2 Jul 2001 15:52:56 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 2 Jul 2001 15:52:56 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA28668; Mon, 2 Jul 2001 08:33:09 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 69187 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 2 Jul 2001 15:32:58 +0000
Received: from mail1.murraystate.edu (mail1.murraystate.edu [216.249.159.50])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id IAA28651 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 2 Jul 2001 08:32:57 -0700
Received: from jjcomputer.murraystate.edu (216.249.150.92) by          mail1.murraystate.edu (NPlex 5.5.031) id 3B2AA23500046B43 for          AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 2 Jul 2001 10:31:07 -0500
X-Sender: terry.mccreary@mail.murraystate.edu
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
References: <NDBBIBAMIMKJPANDCAHGGENAENAA.greg@blastzone.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <5.1.0.14.0.20010702102837.02512ae0@mail.murraystate.edu>
Date:         Mon, 2 Jul 2001 10:36:33 -0500
Reply-To: "Terry McCreary" <terry.mccreary@MURRAYSTATE.EDU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Terry McCreary" <terry.mccreary@MURRAYSTATE.EDU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Increasing propellant density
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <3B3F9795.A36D7589@frontiernet.net>

At 05:35 PM 7/1/01 -0400, Tom Binford wrote:
>Greg Deputy wrote:
>
> > BTW, what kind of percentage of threoretical density is considered 'good'?
> > 80%?  95%?  95.5%?
>
>I get 92-93% with no degassing and peanut butter consistency.
>With vacuum mixing and peanut butter constancy propellant I get about
>97% and with pourable propellant and vacuum mixing, I get 99%.
>All these propellants work in 98 mm motors (the largest I've tried with
>these propellants).
>
>Tom


That's about the same as what I get.  Important:  the theoretical density
obtained from Propep can vary widely depending on the binder and
ingredients selected.  For example, the "R45M" entry lists a density of
0.0433 lb/in^3, which is quite a bit higher than the density of any R45
I've used (about 0.033-0.034 lb/in^3)  Using this higher entry Propep would
calculate a density higher than could possibly be obtained.

P'rfesser

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 13232 invoked from network); 3 Jul 2001 02:58:26 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 3 Jul 2001 02:58:26 -0000
Received: (qmail 15073 invoked from network); 3 Jul 2001 02:59:39 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 3 Jul 2001 02:59:39 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA31309; Mon, 2 Jul 2001 19:43:49 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 69503 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 3 Jul 2001 02:43:16 +0000
Received: from femail22.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail22.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.0.95.147]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA31291          for <arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 2 Jul 2001 19:43:16 -0700
Received: from cc334751a ([65.13.214.65]) by femail22.sdc1.sfba.home.com          (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20 201-229-121-120-20010223) with SMTP id          <20010703024309.BKT6286.femail22.sdc1.sfba.home.com@cc334751a> for          <arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 2 Jul 2001 19:43:09 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_09BB_01C56B69.3FAC4600"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2462.0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <011601c1036a$07704720$6401a8c0@home.com>
Date:         Mon, 2 Jul 2001 20:44:06 -0600
Reply-To: "Brian Kosko" <bkosko1@HOME.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Brian Kosko" <bkosko1@HOME.COM>
Subject:      [AR] A couple of nitrous questions
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_09BB_01C56B69.3FAC4600
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

No I haven't become a traitor to the solid fuel cause; one of my =
non-arocket rocket buddies asked me these!

What is:

1. Decomposition temp for nitrous?

2. What is the heat of decomposition (preferably in btu/lb; danged =
Americans)?

3. What is the heat of vaporization (preferably btu type)?

Thanks so much!

                                                                    =
Brian

------=_NextPart_000_09BB_01C56B69.3FAC4600
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Diso-8859-1">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 6.00.2462.0" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>No I haven't become a traitor to the =
solid fuel=20
cause; one of my non-arocket rocket buddies asked me these!</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>What is:</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>1. Decomposition temp for =
nitrous?</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>2. What is the heat of decomposition =
(preferably in=20
btu/lb; danged Americans)?</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>3. What is the heat of vaporization =
(preferably btu=20
type)?</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Thanks so much!</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;=20
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; =
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;=20
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; =
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;=20
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; =
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;=20
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;=20
Brian</FONT></DIV></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_09BB_01C56B69.3FAC4600--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 6861 invoked from network); 3 Jul 2001 04:42:24 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 3 Jul 2001 04:42:24 -0000
Received: (qmail 23667 invoked from network); 3 Jul 2001 04:43:28 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 3 Jul 2001 04:43:28 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA31764; Mon, 2 Jul 2001 21:30:48 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 69563 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 3 Jul 2001 04:30:36 +0000
Received: from web9301.mail.yahoo.com (web9301.mail.yahoo.com [216.136.129.50])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id VAA31746 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 2 Jul 2001 21:30:36 -0700
Received: from [210.120.192.30] by web9301.mail.yahoo.com; Tue, 03 Jul 2001          05:30:35 BST
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <20010703043035.4281.qmail@web9301.mail.yahoo.com>
Date:         Tue, 3 Jul 2001 05:30:35 +0100
Reply-To: "Sean Baxendell" <baxendell25@YAHOO.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Sean Baxendell" <baxendell25@YAHOO.COM>
Subject:      [AR] Portable Data Acquisition Devices
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

I've been looking at the various devices which allow
the Palm PDA to be used to record sampled data from a
load cell.  I'm also considering writing something on
the palm, though its been years since I touched the C
language.

It seems all the present devices for the Palm have a
sampling rate which is quite low, i.e., about 20 Hz is
the maximum I've seen.  I think its possile to record
higher rates, but a real time waveform display may eat
the processing power of the small Dragonball CPU.

My question to those who have recorded real rocket
thrust data is what is the lowest sampling rate you
would consider acceptable?  In other words what
sampling rate would be required to pick up features
such as spikes in the thrust curve of a small hybrid
motor?  My guess is 50 Hz....


Regards
Sean

____________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free @yahoo.co.uk address at http://mail.yahoo.co.uk
or your free @yahoo.ie address at http://mail.yahoo.ie

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 4891 invoked from network); 3 Jul 2001 05:28:52 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 3 Jul 2001 05:28:52 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 29427 invoked from network); 3 Jul 2001 05:29:57 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 3 Jul 2001 05:29:57 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA32067; Mon, 2 Jul 2001 22:23:49 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 69600 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 3 Jul 2001 05:23:46 +0000
Received: from sys27.hou.wt.net (sys27.hou.wt.net [205.230.159.27]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA32050 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 2 Jul 2001 22:23:46 -0700
Received: from localhost (216-119-138-159.ipset18.wt.net [216.119.138.159]) by          sys27.hou.wt.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id AAA67561 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 3 Jul 2001 00:23:37 -0500 (CDT)
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.388)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <200107030523.AAA67561@sys27.hou.wt.net>
Date:         Tue, 3 Jul 2001 00:23:46 -0500
Reply-To: "Donald McCorvey" <dlm3@NETAXS.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Donald McCorvey" <dlm3@NETAXS.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Portable Data Acquisition Devices
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <20010703043035.4281.qmail@web9301.mail.yahoo.com>

What you want is to have a device which does the sampling and data
storage at high rates on a separate component, using the PDA solely as a
display device - that way you avoid the entire sample/display rate
issue. You store high rate data in a local memory, sending out maybe
1/10th of it to the PDA for display.

I'd imagine you could hack together a microcontroller with a built-in
A/D converter, and some serial EEPROM for a relatively small
investment - if you already have the tools, that is.

On the other hand, you could build or buy a signal conditioner and then
plug the signal into the microphone input of a PC, using a freeware
oscilloscope program to look at or capture the data. Not as handy as a
PDA, but if you're doing static testing, who cares ?

But to be quite honest, if you're trying to do some sort of data
analysis, you'd likely be better off with a piece of solid test
equipment like a portable digital storage oscilloscope.  Tektronix makes
several I can think of, none cheap, of course (they say "Tektronix" on
them, therefore...), but well made and powerful. They're worth their
weight in gold - which is only a little more than what they cost - for
doing anything where you have high rate signals you're trying to better
understand.

        http://www.tek.com/Measurement/Products/catalog/tds200/eng/

The other alternative is a high-speed strip chart recorder - the
Rolls-Royce of which being those from Astro-Med. They have various
portable, highly-expensive, highly capable recorders which can handle up
to 32 channels at high rates. Some allow you to communicate with your PC
via Ethernet and view its output in non-real-time.

As an example:

        http://www.astro-med.com/recorders/d16u.html

With either instrument, you might be able to pick up an older one used
or rent a new one on a short-term lease.

FYI: high-rate analysis of the behavior of the SSMEs in recent years has
revealed activity in excess of 100Hz that had gone unnoticed previously.
I'd think you'd want ten times your highest expected frequency just so
you get adequate sampling of the data, e.g., 1KHz or more.

Don McCorvey
Houston, Tx

On Monday, July 2, 2001, at 11:30 PM, Sean Baxendell wrote:

> I've been looking at the various devices which allow
> the Palm PDA to be used to record sampled data from a
> load cell.  I'm also considering writing something on
> the palm, though its been years since I touched the C
> language.
>
> It seems all the present devices for the Palm have a
> sampling rate which is quite low, i.e., about 20 Hz is
> the maximum I've seen.  I think its possile to record
> higher rates, but a real time waveform display may eat
> the processing power of the small Dragonball CPU.
>
> My question to those who have recorded real rocket
> thrust data is what is the lowest sampling rate you
> would consider acceptable?  In other words what
> sampling rate would be required to pick up features
> such as spikes in the thrust curve of a small hybrid
> motor?  My guess is 50 Hz....
>
>
> Regards
> Sean
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Get your free @yahoo.co.uk address at http://mail.yahoo.co.uk
> or your free @yahoo.ie address at http://mail.yahoo.ie
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 5888 invoked from network); 3 Jul 2001 06:29:42 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 3 Jul 2001 06:29:42 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 23866 invoked from network); 3 Jul 2001 06:30:21 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 3 Jul 2001 06:30:21 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA32269; Mon, 2 Jul 2001 23:27:14 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 69626 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 3 Jul 2001 06:27:06 +0000
Received: from web9301.mail.yahoo.com (web9301.mail.yahoo.com [216.136.129.50])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id XAA32252 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 2 Jul 2001 23:27:06 -0700
Received: from [210.120.192.163] by web9301.mail.yahoo.com; Tue, 03 Jul 2001          07:27:05 BST
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <20010703062705.11981.qmail@web9301.mail.yahoo.com>
Date:         Tue, 3 Jul 2001 07:27:05 +0100
Reply-To: "Sean Baxendell" <baxendell25@YAHOO.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Sean Baxendell" <baxendell25@YAHOO.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Portable Data Acquisition Devices
Comments: cc: Donald McCorvey <dlm3@NETAXS.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <200107030523.AAA67561@sys27.hou.wt.net>

Hi Don,

Thanks for your reply.

Having an external microcontroller sample the data at
high speed and send 1/10 of it to the PDA is something
I had thought of.  It is probably the only way to get
high sample rates and a real time display.  However,
it means I have to make two programs now instead of
one   :-).

The reason I wanted to use a PDA is because I have to
lug all my rocket gear with me every time I go for
testing, so even a light laptop computer is still a
burden.  Since I don't need a laptop for anything but
thrust recording, its seems a waste to spend $2000+
for that.

Your comments on the sampling rate are noted.  Thanks.
 It seems higher is better.

Meanwhile, I believe that recording data on the palm
at a sample rate of 240 Hz (which is the sample rate
of the DataQ DI-151RS) is quite possible.  Its just
that it might be difficult to generate a real time
display at that sample rate.  Oh well, can't have
everything.  Of course, if I use the DI-151RS, I will
need to make another power supply (not sure if 9V is
enough to run it yet... it gets 10V from the RS232
port when connected to a PC - anyone have a full
circuit diagram?)

I dont plan to do any particular analysis of the data
on the Palm.  Just to see a rough graph, basically
proof that the data was recorded.  Analysis would be
done later after transfering the data to a PC.


Regards
Sean


 --- Donald McCorvey <dlm3@NETAXS.COM> wrote: > What
you want is to have a device which does the
> sampling and data
> storage at high rates on a separate component, using
> the PDA solely as a
> display device - that way you avoid the entire
> sample/display rate
> issue. You store high rate data in a local memory,
> sending out maybe
> 1/10th of it to the PDA for display.
>
> I'd imagine you could hack together a
> microcontroller with a built-in
> A/D converter, and some serial EEPROM for a
> relatively small
> investment - if you already have the tools, that is.
>
> On the other hand, you could build or buy a signal
> conditioner and then
> plug the signal into the microphone input of a PC,
> using a freeware
> oscilloscope program to look at or capture the data.
> Not as handy as a
> PDA, but if you're doing static testing, who cares ?
>
> But to be quite honest, if you're trying to do some
> sort of data
> analysis, you'd likely be better off with a piece of
> solid test
> equipment like a portable digital storage
> oscilloscope.  Tektronix makes
> several I can think of, none cheap, of course (they
> say "Tektronix" on
> them, therefore...), but well made and powerful.
> They're worth their
> weight in gold - which is only a little more than
> what they cost - for
> doing anything where you have high rate signals
> you're trying to better
> understand.
>
>
>
http://www.tek.com/Measurement/Products/catalog/tds200/eng/
>
> The other alternative is a high-speed strip chart
> recorder - the
> Rolls-Royce of which being those from Astro-Med.
> They have various
> portable, highly-expensive, highly capable recorders
> which can handle up
> to 32 channels at high rates. Some allow you to
> communicate with your PC
> via Ethernet and view its output in non-real-time.
>
> As an example:
>
>         http://www.astro-med.com/recorders/d16u.html
>
> With either instrument, you might be able to pick up
> an older one used
> or rent a new one on a short-term lease.
>
> FYI: high-rate analysis of the behavior of the SSMEs
> in recent years has
> revealed activity in excess of 100Hz that had gone
> unnoticed previously.
> I'd think you'd want ten times your highest expected
> frequency just so
> you get adequate sampling of the data, e.g., 1KHz or
> more.
>
> Don McCorvey
> Houston, Tx
>
> On Monday, July 2, 2001, at 11:30 PM, Sean Baxendell
> wrote:
>
> > I've been looking at the various devices which
> allow
> > the Palm PDA to be used to record sampled data
> from a
> > load cell.  I'm also considering writing something
> on
> > the palm, though its been years since I touched
> the C
> > language.
> >
> > It seems all the present devices for the Palm have
> a
> > sampling rate which is quite low, i.e., about 20
> Hz is
> > the maximum I've seen.  I think its possile to
> record
> > higher rates, but a real time waveform display may
> eat
> > the processing power of the small Dragonball CPU.
> >
> > My question to those who have recorded real rocket
> > thrust data is what is the lowest sampling rate
> you
> > would consider acceptable?  In other words what
> > sampling rate would be required to pick up
> features
> > such as spikes in the thrust curve of a small
> hybrid
> > motor?  My guess is 50 Hz....
> >
> >
> > Regards
> > Sean
> >
> >
>
____________________________________________________________
> > Do You Yahoo!?
> > Get your free @yahoo.co.uk address at
> http://mail.yahoo.co.uk
> > or your free @yahoo.ie address at
> http://mail.yahoo.ie
> >

____________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free @yahoo.co.uk address at http://mail.yahoo.co.uk
or your free @yahoo.ie address at http://mail.yahoo.ie

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 27394 invoked from network); 3 Jul 2001 07:14:29 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 3 Jul 2001 07:14:29 -0000
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 11633 invoked from network); 3 Jul 2001 07:15:35 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 3 Jul 2001 07:15:35 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA32504; Tue, 3 Jul 2001 00:11:51 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 69671 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 3 Jul 2001 07:11:49 +0000
Received: from femail17.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail17.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.0.95.144]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA32487          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 3 Jul 2001 00:11:49 -0700
Received: from c396957-b.home.net ([24.17.249.10]) by          femail17.sdc1.sfba.home.com (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20          201-229-121-120-20010223) with ESMTP id          <20010703071143.LRUD22670.femail17.sdc1.sfba.home.com@c396957-b.home.net> for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 3          Jul 2001 00:11:43 -0700
X-Sender: spiegl@mail
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <5.1.0.14.2.20010703020510.00ae4568@mail>
Date:         Tue, 3 Jul 2001 02:11:41 -0500
Reply-To: "Mark C Spiegl" <spiegl@HOME.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Mark C Spiegl" <spiegl@HOME.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Increasing propellant density
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

I think I have to respectfully disagree with some of the opinions on
centrifuge casting.


The good:
Centrifuging actually works quite well. The excess binder and ureas
migrate towards the center, while the propellant moves towards the
outside. So fill your centrifuge tube with propellant; centrifuge; and
machine-out the center goo when done.  This leaves a very high packing
density and is an effective way to remove casting voids w/o vacuum.


The bad:
First, you need a somewhat pourable propellant. 2), the centrifuge
speed needs to be high. We modified the pulleys on a wood lathe and
got the speed up around 7k-10k rpm. At these speeds your parts need to
be machined to "reasonable" accuracy or the whole assembly will...
uh.. disassemble. :/  Even with reasonably good parts the wood lathe
tended to bounce across the floor and generate a bit too much heat for
comfort. Finally, you need to centrifuge during about 1/2 the cure
cycle. So you either need a fast curing propellant (difficult to work)
or a very good centrifuge (difficult to make). Personally, many many
hours on a high speed, heat generating, centrifuge makes me uneasy.


Conclusion:
Works well. In the end, is centrifuging easier than the old standard
vacuum processing? Probably not. Just a different set of problems to
solve. I think propellant density maybe is a little better with the
centrifuge.


Unrelated comments:
I learned similar tricks when working at Amoco Polymers. Amoco had
nothing to do with propellant manufacture, but they routinely
outgassed their plastics with big 4ft diameter rotating drums in a
continuous feed process.  (might be patented)


--Mark "wish my tumor would stop itching"   {Ooo tasteless Amoco joke}

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 7150 invoked from network); 3 Jul 2001 07:24:42 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 3 Jul 2001 07:24:42 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: (qmail 15863 invoked from network); 3 Jul 2001 07:25:48 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 3 Jul 2001 07:25:48 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA32463; Tue, 3 Jul 2001 00:04:08 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 69663 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 3 Jul 2001 07:04:05 +0000
Received: from wrench.toolcity.net (root@wrench.toolcity.net [208.0.188.2]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA32446 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 3 Jul 2001 00:04:04 -0700
Received: from [208.22.189.162]          (dap-208-22-189-162.meadville-tnt-0.pa.toolcity.net [208.22.189.162])          by wrench.toolcity.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id DAA04921; Tue, 3          Jul 2001 03:03:59 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <v01510100b767221edd58@[63.169.101.112]>
Date:         Tue, 3 Jul 2001 03:06:16 -0500
Reply-To: "al bradley" <abradley@TOOLCITY.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "al bradley" <abradley@TOOLCITY.NET>
Subject:      [AR] milling revisited
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Well here's another unlikely topic:

But not necessarily for those who are unconcerned with how they mix dry
ingredients.

In the past I built a ball-mill and used it to mill individual elements and
compounds as well as mix-milling several such things together. I didn't
always get the optimum results I expected on burn tests.

While newly researching historical black powder manufacture I discovered
that a *wetted* mix of the ingredients (in an intermediate stage of
manufacture) was milled by a "rolling wheel-mill". This mill had a vertical
shafted iron/steel wheel whose face was in the horizontal plane.

Engaging this, from above, was a horizontal shafted iron wheel running at
strong pressure against the lower wheel. Cited was the observation that the
mixture passing between these wheels was not only crushed but "smeared
together" in a way that a ball-mill could not readily reproduce. This
effect was manifested clear on through the pressing stage, drying stage,
and the corning stage so that microscopic examination revealed particles of
sulfur and charcoal encased within the crystalline structure of KNO3! And
supposedly this was where the term "glazing" in black powder manufacture
originated, and not some factory process of coating with graphite!

1. Does this sound reasonable?

2. Could an amateur duplicate this process in a less machinery-complex way?
Particularly if the final product was for parachute ejection.

This may be a clue why the "blowing charge" (for parachutes in my testing)
made from home-grown "meal powder" never approaches the quality of that
loaded with FFFF factory black powder!

Thoughts and ideas?
al bradley

------------------------------------------------------------------
Can you live Life with this?: "Unless there is a law, an agreement, or a
long-standing custom, No one `Deserves' Anything -- Either Good or Bad!"

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 19408 invoked from network); 3 Jul 2001 07:28:07 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 3 Jul 2001 07:28:07 -0000
Received: (qmail 29991 invoked from network); 3 Jul 2001 07:29:11 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 3 Jul 2001 07:29:11 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA32587; Tue, 3 Jul 2001 00:26:04 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 69687 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 3 Jul 2001 07:26:02 +0000
Received: from tcsnpop1.tcsn.uswest.net (tcsnpop1.tcsn.uswest.net          [207.108.112.1]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id AAA32570          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 3 Jul 2001 00:26:02 -0700
Received: (qmail 67992 invoked by alias); 3 Jul 2001 07:26:00 -0000
Delivered-To: fixup-AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU@fixme
Received: (qmail 67952 invoked by uid 0); 3 Jul 2001 07:25:58 -0000
Received: from cpe-24-221-155-19.az.sprintbbd.net (HELO tus20054)          (24.221.155.19) by tcsnpop1.tcsn.uswest.net with SMTP; 3 Jul 2001          07:25:58 -0000
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0)
Importance: Normal
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <NEBBLMGNCMMGBANIEOEHCEICCHAA.jmrosson@uswest.net>
Date:         Tue, 3 Jul 2001 00:25:59 -0700
Reply-To: <jmrosson@USWEST.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <jmrosson@USWEST.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] milling revisited
Comments: To: al bradley <abradley@TOOLCITY.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <v01510100b767221edd58@[63.169.101.112]>

Additional proof in support of your wet milling can be found in

"Chemistry of Powder and Explosives" by Tenney L. Davis.
My unknown edition, is a republished copy is from
ANGRIFF PRESS,
Box 2726 Hollywood, CA 90078
ISBN 0913022-00-4
Skylighter used to carry it in inventory
Published in 1943.

It has 30 pages that covers a large amount of history on BP.
There are other chapters on smokeless powders and "glazing" compound
evolution.

Get a copy if you want to work with BP and other powders.  It will answer
most all your BP/meal questions and then some.  It has also does a nice job
on the history of explosives, it covers bits and pieces back to the 8th
century. It is sort of a 1940's scientific history and "how to" book.

Best Regards....

#->-----Original Message-----
#->From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@itc.uci.edu]On
#->Behalf Of al bradley
#->Sent: Tuesday, July 03, 2001 1:06 AM
#->To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
#->Subject: [AR] milling revisited
#->
#->
#->Well here's another unlikely topic:
#->
#->But not necessarily for those who are unconcerned with how they mix dry
#->ingredients.
#->
#->In the past I built a ball-mill and used it to mill individual
#->elements and
#->compounds as well as mix-milling several such things together. I didn't
#->always get the optimum results I expected on burn tests.
#->
#->While newly researching historical black powder manufacture I discovered
#->that a *wetted* mix of the ingredients (in an intermediate stage of
#->manufacture) was milled by a "rolling wheel-mill". This mill had
#->a vertical
#->shafted iron/steel wheel whose face was in the horizontal plane.
#->
#->Engaging this, from above, was a horizontal shafted iron wheel running at
#->strong pressure against the lower wheel. Cited was the
#->observation that the
#->mixture passing between these wheels was not only crushed but "smeared
#->together" in a way that a ball-mill could not readily reproduce. This
#->effect was manifested clear on through the pressing stage, drying stage,
#->and the corning stage so that microscopic examination revealed
#->particles of
#->sulfur and charcoal encased within the crystalline structure of KNO3! And
#->supposedly this was where the term "glazing" in black powder manufacture
#->originated, and not some factory process of coating with graphite!
#->
#->1. Does this sound reasonable?
#->
#->2. Could an amateur duplicate this process in a less
#->machinery-complex way?
#->Particularly if the final product was for parachute ejection.
#->
#->This may be a clue why the "blowing charge" (for parachutes in
#->my testing)
#->made from home-grown "meal powder" never approaches the quality of that
#->loaded with FFFF factory black powder!
#->
#->Thoughts and ideas?
#->al bradley
#->
#->------------------------------------------------------------------
#->Can you live Life with this?: "Unless there is a law, an agreement, or a
#->long-standing custom, No one `Deserves' Anything -- Either Good or Bad!"
#->

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 2583 invoked from network); 3 Jul 2001 07:47:27 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 3 Jul 2001 07:47:27 -0000
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 23788 invoked from network); 3 Jul 2001 07:48:33 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 3 Jul 2001 07:48:33 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA32553; Tue, 3 Jul 2001 00:20:33 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 69679 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 3 Jul 2001 07:20:27 +0000
Received: from femail17.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail17.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.0.95.144]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA32536          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 3 Jul 2001 00:20:27 -0700
Received: from c396957-b.home.net ([24.17.249.10]) by          femail17.sdc1.sfba.home.com (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20          201-229-121-120-20010223) with ESMTP id          <20010703072020.MACB22670.femail17.sdc1.sfba.home.com@c396957-b.home.net> for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 3          Jul 2001 00:20:20 -0700
X-Sender: spiegl@mail
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <5.1.0.14.2.20010703021853.00ac3bf0@mail>
Date:         Tue, 3 Jul 2001 02:20:18 -0500
Reply-To: "Mark C Spiegl" <spiegl@HOME.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Mark C Spiegl" <spiegl@HOME.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Increasing propellant density
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

On a somewhat related note, I know that ultrasonic outgassing is done
professionally with certain polymers and emulsions. I don't know much
about how ultrasonic outgassing works, however.

Anyone?

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 18384 invoked from network); 3 Jul 2001 09:51:32 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 3 Jul 2001 09:51:32 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 15243 invoked from network); 3 Jul 2001 09:52:37 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 3 Jul 2001 09:52:37 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id CAA00616; Tue, 3 Jul 2001 02:31:46 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 69716 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 3 Jul 2001 09:31:40 +0000
Received: from idsoftware.com (predator.idsoftware.com [192.246.40.34]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id CAA00592 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Tue, 3 Jul 2001 02:31:39 -0700
Received: from [192.246.40.144] (account johnc HELO pluto.idsoftware.com) by          idsoftware.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 3.4.6) with ESMTP id 271264 for          AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 03 Jul 2001 04:30:55 -0500
X-Sender: johnc@mail.idsoftware.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.1
References: <200107030523.AAA67561@sys27.hou.wt.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <4.3.1.2.20010703043640.037ad458@mail.idsoftware.com>
Date:         Tue, 3 Jul 2001 04:42:33 -0500
Reply-To: "John Carmack" <johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Carmack" <johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Portable Data Acquisition Devices
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <20010703062705.11981.qmail@web9301.mail.yahoo.com>

>
>Meanwhile, I believe that recording data on the palm
>at a sample rate of 240 Hz (which is the sample rate
>of the DataQ DI-151RS) is quite possible.  Its just
>that it might be difficult to generate a real time
>display at that sample rate.  Oh well, can't have

I am quite happy with 240 hz sampling (or 120 when reading both channels)
for our testing.  We sometimes have some combustion variations around 40
hz, and you can zoom way in and see nice little sine waves in the thrust data.


>everything.  Of course, if I use the DI-151RS, I will
>need to make another power supply (not sure if 9V is
>enough to run it yet... it gets 10V from the RS232
>port when connected to a PC - anyone have a full
>circuit diagram?)

There isn't actually a "power" pin on RS232.  Devices that need power
require the driver software to turn on one of the signal pins, like RTS or
DTR, and the device leeches some current from there.  If you look at my
code for opening the DI-151RS, it will tell you which signals need to be on
to power it.

John Carmack

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 23738 invoked from network); 3 Jul 2001 14:15:17 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 3 Jul 2001 14:15:17 -0000
Received: (qmail 4449 invoked from network); 3 Jul 2001 14:16:12 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 3 Jul 2001 14:16:12 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA01368; Tue, 3 Jul 2001 06:56:57 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 69741 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 3 Jul 2001 13:56:40 +0000
Received: from cablecom.laribay.net (cablecom.laribay.net [66.20.57.4]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA01350 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 3 Jul 2001 06:56:39 -0700
Received: from billbull (dial065.laribay.net [66.20.57.65]) by          cablecom.laribay.net (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id IAA07575 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 3 Jul 2001 08:41:10 -0500 (CDT)          (envelope-from bpbullock@laribay.net)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_09BE_01C56B69.3FC43AD0"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <001101c103c7$ff26e980$41391442@billbull>
Date:         Tue, 3 Jul 2001 08:56:23 -0500
Reply-To: "Bill Bullock" <bpbullock@LARIBAY.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Bill Bullock" <bpbullock@LARIBAY.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Ultrasonic Degassing
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_09BE_01C56B69.3FC43AD0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

http://www.vniitvch.spb.ru/english/usound/degas.htm
http://www.iciklea.com/refrigeration/klea/products/techlit16.htm#degass
    In particular the language:
"Vacuum degassing=20
    For the determination of RI only a small volume of lubricant is =
required, therefore degassing the sample with a vacuum pump is =
relatively easy and is the preferred method if only a few samples are to =
be tested.=20
    A small (approx 2 - 3ml) sample of lubricant should be placed in a =
suitable container fitted with a two way tap to allow connection of the =
vacuum line. A Pyrex boiling tube with quick-fit neck and the =
appropriate tap fitting is ideal. The vacuum pump is then connected and =
switched on - the dissolved gas will 'bubble' from the lubricant - =
shaking the tube gently during evacuation helps the process. Degassing =
is complete when bubbling has stopped - this should take only a few =
minutes.=20
ULTRASONIC DEGASSING: (emphasis added)
    Ultrasonic degassing is suitable for any number of samples but, due =
to the longer time taken is better used when several samples require =
degassing at the same time.=20
    2 - 3ml samples of the lubricant(s) to be degassed should be placed =
in suitable containers with loose fitting closures. The containers =
should then be placed in an ultrasonic bath containing an inch or so of =
water (If test or boiling tubes are used, they should be supported in a =
rack or placed in a beaker). The ultrasonic bath is then switched in and =
the ultrasound waves will cause the dissolved gas to be freed from the =
samples. Once again degassing is complete when bubbling has stopped - =
this may take 1-2 hours. "

http://www.ansell-edmont.com/ce/content_headlines1.asp Pertainig to =
ultrasonic degassing of test samples
    "After 10 minutes of oscillation, considerable air in the form of =
tiny bubbles can be entrained into the liquid. Liquid particle counters =
(LPCs) typically count air bubbles as if they are particles. Thus, a =
procedure had to be developed to degas the resulting suspension. Two =
different procedures for degassing are available. One uses ultrasonic =
degassing. The beaker containing the suspension is immersed in an =
ultrasonic tank. The power to the tank is pulsed on and off rapidly. =
This procedure is repeated 10 to 20 times until the suspension no longer =
effervesces. An alternative procedure allows the suspension to stand, =
undisturbed, for 20 minutes. The 20-minute stand results typically in a =
5x to 10x reduction in particle count versus ultrasonic degassing. =
Following degassing the suspension is counted using an LPC; current =
practice is to count using a 0.5 um-resolution particle counter."
    Personally I find it effective to place samples in a vacuum chamber =
and use the ultrasonic degassification technique there under vacuum.
Bill



------=_NextPart_000_09BE_01C56B69.3FC43AD0
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META content=3D"text/html; charset=3Diso-8859-1" =
http-equiv=3DContent-Type>
<META content=3D"MSHTML 5.00.2614.3500" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><STRONG><FONT size=3D2><A=20
href=3D"http://www.vniitvch.spb.ru/english/usound/degas.htm">http://www.v=
niitvch.spb.ru/english/usound/degas.htm</A></FONT></STRONG></DIV>
<DIV><STRONG><FONT size=3D2><A=20
href=3D"http://www.iciklea.com/refrigeration/klea/products/techlit16.htm#=
degass">http://www.iciklea.com/refrigeration/klea/products/techlit16.htm#=
degass</A></FONT></STRONG></DIV>
<DIV><STRONG><FONT size=3D2>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; In particular the=20
language:</FONT></STRONG></DIV>
<DIV><STRONG><FONT size=3D2><B>"Vacuum degassing</B> =
<BR>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; For=20
the determination of RI only a small volume of lubricant is required, =
therefore=20
degassing the sample with a vacuum pump is relatively easy and is the =
preferred=20
method if only a few samples are to be tested. <BR>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; A =
small=20
(approx 2 - 3ml) sample of lubricant should be placed in a suitable =
container=20
fitted with a two way tap to allow connection of the vacuum line. A =
Pyrex=20
boiling tube with quick-fit neck and the appropriate tap fitting is =
ideal. The=20
vacuum pump is then connected and switched on - the dissolved gas will =
'bubble'=20
from the lubricant - shaking the tube gently during evacuation helps the =

process. Degassing is complete when bubbling has stopped - this should =
take only=20
a few minutes.&nbsp;</FONT></STRONG></DIV>
<DIV><STRONG><FONT size=3D2><EM><U>ULTRASONIC DEGASSING: (emphasis=20
added)</U></EM></FONT></STRONG><STRONG><FONT =
size=3D2><BR>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;=20
Ultrasonic degassing is suitable for any number of samples but, due to =
the=20
longer time taken is better used when several samples require degassing =
at the=20
same time.&nbsp;<BR>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; 2 - 3ml samples of the =
lubricant(s) to be=20
degassed should be placed in suitable containers with loose fitting =
closures.=20
The containers should then be placed in an ultrasonic bath containing an =
inch or=20
so of water (If test or boiling tubes are used, they should be supported =
in a=20
rack or placed in a beaker). The ultrasonic bath is then switched in and =
the=20
ultrasound waves will cause the dissolved gas to be freed from the =
samples. Once=20
again degassing is complete when bubbling has stopped - this may take =
1-2 hours.=20
"</FONT></STRONG></DIV>
<DIV><STRONG><FONT size=3D2></FONT></STRONG>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><STRONG><FONT size=3D2><A=20
href=3D"http://www.ansell-edmont.com/ce/content_headlines1.asp">http://ww=
w.ansell-edmont.com/ce/content_headlines1.asp</A>&nbsp;Pertainig=20
to ultrasonic degassing of test samples</FONT></STRONG></DIV>
<DIV><STRONG><FONT size=3D2>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; "After 10 minutes of =
oscillation,=20
considerable air in the form of tiny bubbles can be entrained into the =
liquid.=20
Liquid particle counters (LPCs) typically count air bubbles as if they =
are=20
particles. Thus, a procedure had to be developed to degas the resulting=20
suspension. Two different procedures for degassing are available. One =
uses=20
ultrasonic degassing. The beaker containing the suspension is immersed =
in an=20
ultrasonic tank. The power to the tank is pulsed on and off rapidly. =
This=20
procedure is repeated 10 to 20 times until the suspension no longer =
effervesces.=20
An alternative procedure allows the suspension to stand, undisturbed, =
for 20=20
minutes. The 20-minute stand results typically in a 5x to 10x reduction =
in=20
particle count versus ultrasonic degassing. Following degassing the =
suspension=20
is counted using an LPC; current practice is to count using a 0.5 =
um-resolution=20
particle counter."</FONT></STRONG></DIV>
<DIV><STRONG><FONT size=3D2>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Personally I find it =
effective to=20
place samples in a vacuum chamber and use the ultrasonic degassification =

technique there under vacuum.</FONT></STRONG></DIV>
<DIV><STRONG><FONT =
size=3D2>Bill<BR><BR></DIV></FONT></STRONG></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_09BE_01C56B69.3FC43AD0--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 6554 invoked from network); 3 Jul 2001 14:46:10 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 3 Jul 2001 14:46:10 -0000
Received: (qmail 11798 invoked from network); 3 Jul 2001 14:47:09 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 3 Jul 2001 14:47:09 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA01553; Tue, 3 Jul 2001 07:42:05 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 69759 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 3 Jul 2001 14:41:59 +0000
Received: from cablecom.laribay.net (cablecom.laribay.net [66.20.57.4]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA01536 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 3 Jul 2001 07:41:59 -0700
Received: from billbull (dial065.laribay.net [66.20.57.65]) by          cablecom.laribay.net (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id JAA07939 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 3 Jul 2001 09:26:09 -0500 (CDT)          (envelope-from bpbullock@laribay.net)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_09C1_01C56B69.3FC43AD0"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <007e01c103ce$48127500$41391442@billbull>
Date:         Tue, 3 Jul 2001 09:41:23 -0500
Reply-To: "Bill Bullock" <bpbullock@LARIBAY.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Bill Bullock" <bpbullock@LARIBAY.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Fonts
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_09C1_01C56B69.3FC43AD0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Seth:
    Sorry about that. I am nearly blind and have to use them for myself =
so I can read what I have written in my work. But I will try to remember =
to refrain in the future.
Bill

------=_NextPart_000_09C1_01C56B69.3FC43AD0
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META content=3D"text/html; charset=3Diso-8859-1" =
http-equiv=3DContent-Type>
<META content=3D"MSHTML 5.00.2614.3500" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT size=3D2>Seth:</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=3D2>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Sorry about that. I am nearly =
blind and=20
have to use them for myself so I can read what I have written in my =
work. But I=20
will try to remember to refrain in the future.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=3D2>Bill</FONT></DIV></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_09C1_01C56B69.3FC43AD0--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 9541 invoked from network); 3 Jul 2001 17:38:56 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 3 Jul 2001 17:38:56 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: (qmail 26313 invoked from network); 3 Jul 2001 17:40:01 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 3 Jul 2001 17:40:01 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA02942; Tue, 3 Jul 2001 10:20:36 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 69910 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 3 Jul 2001 17:20:29 +0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA02922 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue,          3 Jul 2001 10:20:29 -0700
Message-ID:  <200107031720.KAA02922@itc.uci.edu>
Date:         Tue, 3 Jul 2001 17:20:29 +0000
Reply-To: "Joe Perez" <rocketman6965@AOL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Joe Perez" <rocketman6965@AOL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Mondur-IPDI Mix
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Hi All,

Just wanted to let you know I have perfectly cured grains.  Cut them into
4" grains and the excess cross sectioned for inspection.  It is a perfect
eraser consistency with much elasticity.  The 5% aluminum together with
Copper Oxide gives it a dark jewel-like quality which does not flake off to
the touch due to the Tepanol used in the mix.
This forum has really given me the tools to do what I have done.  Now, if
it only flys without CATO. (LOL)

Joe


From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 16371 invoked from network); 3 Jul 2001 18:08:48 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 3 Jul 2001 18:08:48 -0000
Received: (qmail 8209 invoked from network); 3 Jul 2001 18:09:49 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 3 Jul 2001 18:09:49 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA03063; Tue, 3 Jul 2001 10:47:15 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 69923 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 3 Jul 2001 17:47:13 +0000
Received: from femail22.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail22.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.0.95.147]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA03046          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 3 Jul 2001 10:47:13 -0700
Received: from cc334751a ([65.13.214.65]) by femail22.sdc1.sfba.home.com          (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20 201-229-121-120-20010223) with SMTP id          <20010703174707.ZVIE6286.femail22.sdc1.sfba.home.com@cc334751a>; Tue,          3 Jul 2001 10:47:07 -0700
References:  <200107031720.KAA02922@itc.uci.edu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2462.0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <006601c103e8$42c53140$6401a8c0@home.com>
Date:         Tue, 3 Jul 2001 11:47:42 -0600
Reply-To: "Brian Kosko" <bkosko1@HOME.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Brian Kosko" <bkosko1@HOME.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Mondur-IPDI Mix
Comments: To: Joe Perez <rocketman6965@AOL.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Joe,

Glad to hear it! Be generous with those nozzle throats at first. Our hottest
propellants have all been stuff catalyzed by CuO. It seems to boost the burn
rate by raising the pressure exponent. We've gotten some 'n' values in the
0.45 to 0.50 range; along with our most spectacular cato's.

                                                                    Brian

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 16804 invoked from network); 3 Jul 2001 19:05:20 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 3 Jul 2001 19:05:20 -0000
Received: (qmail 28100 invoked from network); 3 Jul 2001 19:06:26 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 3 Jul 2001 19:06:26 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA03207; Tue, 3 Jul 2001 11:17:19 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 69945 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 3 Jul 2001 18:17:17 +0000
Received: from tomts14-srv.bellnexxia.net (tomts14.bellnexxia.net          [209.226.175.35]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA03190          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 3 Jul 2001 11:17:16 -0700
Received: from station1 ([64.228.153.177]) by tomts14-srv.bellnexxia.net          (InterMail vM.4.01.03.16 201-229-121-116-20010115) with SMTP id          <20010703181646.XTQQ2764.tomts14-srv.bellnexxia.net@station1> for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 3 Jul 2001 14:16:46 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_09C4_01C56B69.3FC43AD0"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <NFBBKADEMLBLIEKNLLEPEEIICCAA.bfeeney@davinciproject.com>
Date:         Tue, 3 Jul 2001 14:16:43 -0500
Reply-To: "Brian Feeney" <bfeeney@DAVINCIPROJECT.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Brian Feeney" <bfeeney@DAVINCIPROJECT.COM>
Subject:      [AR] ISAS VTVL link
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <007e01c103ce$48127500$41391442@billbull>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_09C4_01C56B69.3FC43AD0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

This is a link to the ISAS Japanese site that shows a lot more Pics,
internal, schematics of the recently test launched VTVL vehicle. All of it
is in Japanese. They don't seam to have an English version yet. I found it
by going to the Japanese version of the ISAS site. Worth a look and if
anyone wants to translate ...

http://www.isas.ac.jp/dtc/saisiyo/saisiyo.html
Cheers,
Brian
------------------
Brian Feeney
The da Vinci Project
65 Carl Hall Road,Downsview Park,
Toronto, Ontario, Canada, M3K 2B6
tel: 416.631.6540
bfeeney@davinciproject.com
http://www.davinciproject.com


------=_NextPart_000_09C4_01C56B69.3FC43AD0
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META content=3D"text/html; charset=3Diso-8859-1" =
http-equiv=3DContent-Type>
<META content=3D"MSHTML 5.00.2314.1000" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT color=3D#0000ff face=3DArial size=3D2><SPAN =
class=3D060340819-03072001>This=20
is a link to the ISAS Japanese site that shows a lot more Pics, =
internal,=20
schematics of the recently test launched VTVL vehicle. All of it is in =
Japanese.=20
They don't seam to have an English version yet. I found it by going to =
the=20
Japanese version of the ISAS site. Worth a look and if anyone wants to =
translate=20
...</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=3D#0000ff face=3DArial size=3D2><SPAN=20
class=3D060340819-03072001></SPAN></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=3D#0000ff face=3DArial size=3D2><SPAN =
class=3D060340819-03072001><A=20
href=3D"http://www.isas.ac.jp/dtc/saisiyo/saisiyo.html">http://www.isas.a=
c.jp/dtc/saisiyo/saisiyo.html</A></SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=3D#0000ff face=3DArial size=3D2><SPAN =
class=3D060340819-03072001>
<P><FONT size=3D2>Cheers,<BR>Brian<BR>------------------<BR>Brian =
Feeney<BR>The da=20
Vinci Project<BR>65 Carl Hall Road,Downsview Park,<BR>Toronto, Ontario, =
Canada,=20
M3K 2B6<BR>tel: 416.631.6540<BR>bfeeney@davinciproject.com<BR><A=20
href=3D"http://www.davinciproject.com/"=20
target=3D_blank>http://www.davinciproject.com</A></FONT>=20
</P></SPAN></FONT></DIV></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_09C4_01C56B69.3FC43AD0--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 12660 invoked from network); 3 Jul 2001 19:11:12 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 3 Jul 2001 19:11:12 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 10990 invoked from network); 3 Jul 2001 19:12:17 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 3 Jul 2001 19:12:17 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA03479; Tue, 3 Jul 2001 11:59:10 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 69978 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 3 Jul 2001 18:59:09 +0000
Received: from imo-d05.mx.aol.com (imo-d05.mx.aol.com [205.188.157.37]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA03462 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Tue, 3 Jul 2001 11:59:08 -0700
Received: from Sociald84@aol.com by imo-d05.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v30.22.) id          4.33.1754aa9e (4008); Tue, 3 Jul 2001 14:58:34 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: AOL 5.0 for Windows sub 138
Message-ID:  <33.1754aa9e.28736fd9@aol.com>
Date:         Tue, 3 Jul 2001 14:58:33 EDT
Reply-To: <Sociald84@AOL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <Sociald84@AOL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Increasing propellant density
Comments: To: spiegl@home.net
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

I have an idea which may or may not work to reduce the amount of waisted
propellant. Once the propellant has been poured into the tube centrifuge with
the bottom side out for about 1/3 of the curing time. Pull it out of the
centrifuge cut off the excess of tubing turn it around so the top is pointed
out and spin it up till its fully cured. It MAY undo all the work that has
already been done but it may just balance out the mix.

Mark

In a message dated 7/3/01 1:12:51 AM Mountain Daylight Time, spiegl@HOME.NET
writes:

> I think I have to respectfully disagree with some of the opinions on
>  centrifuge casting.
>
>
>  The good:
>  Centrifuging actually works quite well. The excess binder and ureas
>  migrate towards the center, while the propellant moves towards the
>  outside. So fill your centrifuge tube with propellant; centrifuge; and
>  machine-out the center goo when done.  This leaves a very high packing
>  density and is an effective way to remove casting voids w/o vacuum.
>
>
>  The bad:
>  First, you need a somewhat pourable propellant. 2), the centrifuge
>  speed needs to be high. We modified the pulleys on a wood lathe and
>  got the speed up around 7k-10k rpm. At these speeds your parts need to
>  be machined to "reasonable" accuracy or the whole assembly will...
>  uh.. disassemble. :/  Even with reasonably good parts the wood lathe
>  tended to bounce across the floor and generate a bit too much heat for
>  comfort. Finally, you need to centrifuge during about 1/2 the cure
>  cycle. So you either need a fast curing propellant (difficult to work)
>  or a very good centrifuge (difficult to make). Personally, many many
>  hours on a high speed, heat generating, centrifuge makes me uneasy.
>
>
>  Conclusion:
>  Works well. In the end, is centrifuging easier than the old standard
>  vacuum processing? Probably not. Just a different set of problems to
>  solve. I think propellant density maybe is a little better with the
>  centrifuge.
>
>
>  Unrelated comments:
>  I learned similar tricks when working at Amoco Polymers. Amoco had
>  nothing to do with propellant manufacture, but they routinely
>  outgassed their plastics with big 4ft diameter rotating drums in a
>  continuous feed process.  (might be patented)

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 12843 invoked from network); 3 Jul 2001 19:11:14 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 3 Jul 2001 19:11:14 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 6028 invoked from network); 3 Jul 2001 19:12:30 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 3 Jul 2001 19:12:30 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA03524; Tue, 3 Jul 2001 12:01:23 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 69986 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 3 Jul 2001 19:01:22 +0000
Received: from imo-m08.mx.aol.com (imo-m08.mx.aol.com [64.12.136.163]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA03507 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Tue, 3 Jul 2001 12:01:22 -0700
Received: from Sociald84@aol.com by imo-m08.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v30.22.) id          4.65.16ab4a9d (4008); Tue, 3 Jul 2001 15:00:46 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: AOL 5.0 for Windows sub 138
Message-ID:  <65.16ab4a9d.2873705e@aol.com>
Date:         Tue, 3 Jul 2001 15:00:46 EDT
Reply-To: <Sociald84@AOL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <Sociald84@AOL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Increasing propellant density
Comments: To: spiegl@home.net
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

In a message dated 7/3/01 1:21:41 AM Mountain Daylight Time, spiegl@HOME.NET
writes:

> On a somewhat related note, I know that ultrasonic outgassing is done
>  professionally with certain polymers and emulsions. I don't know much
>  about how ultrasonic outgassing works, however.
>
>  Anyone?
>

In jewelry a small ultrasonic machine is used to clean the buffing compound
off jewelry after buffing. I'm sure a small used ultrasonic cleaner could
relatively cheaply be bought and tested. They do however use a fluid to
transfer the shock so I don't know how well that would work.

 Mark

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 19016 invoked from network); 3 Jul 2001 19:12:37 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 3 Jul 2001 19:12:37 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 1200 invoked from network); 3 Jul 2001 19:13:31 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 3 Jul 2001 19:13:31 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA03409; Tue, 3 Jul 2001 11:53:54 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 69970 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 3 Jul 2001 18:53:49 +0000
Received: from imo-r06.mx.aol.com (imo-r06.mx.aol.com [152.163.225.102]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA03392 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Tue, 3 Jul 2001 11:53:48 -0700
Received: from Sociald84@aol.com by imo-r06.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v30.22.) id          d.e.f17449c (4008); Tue, 3 Jul 2001 14:53:44 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: AOL 5.0 for Windows sub 138
Message-ID:  <e.f17449c.28736eb8@aol.com>
Date:         Tue, 3 Jul 2001 14:53:44 EDT
Reply-To: <Sociald84@AOL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <Sociald84@AOL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] milling revisited
Comments: To: abradley@toolcity.net
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Just a few points I thought I should make:

1. You should probably switch to a larger grain sized black powder for
parachute use, as the finer powders are really meant for small diameter high
pressure aplications.

2. Depending on you deffinition of meal powder also called green meal, you
should easily be able to turn that into a very good very consistant black
powder with the use of a ball mill and a hydraulic press.
    a. you can buy a small 6 ton hydraulic press from Harbor Freight for
about $70   U.S.
http://www.harborfreight.com/cpi/taf/Displayitem.taf?itemnumber=32879
    b. If you don't already have a ball mill (which is seems like you do
however) one    can easily be made with a variable speed motor and some PVC
pipe.
    http://www.ctel.net/~dwilliams/index.html
    c. then you need a powder die, same link as above, with which you press
the     powder to the proper density, then you just need some good screens
and     something to break the powder up. you'll need 6 screens to accurately
size the 4  powder sizes.
    d. and if your realy into consistency, you can make a burn rate tester
(same   link) to test batch to batch consistency.

2. I don't remember where I have it saved but somewhere i have a link to a
website discribing the technique used by GOEX to make their black powder and
if I remeber correctly they no longer use the smearing technique as they have
discovered that a very comparable product could be made with far less tooling
and time.

3. Graphite coating of black powder is just done to improve it's flow
characteristics through a powder measer.

4. Wow, all of my pyrotechnics knowledge really helps with rocketry! By the
way you can get descent black powder with out a press, but not without a ball
mill.

Mark

In a message dated 7/3/01 1:04:56 AM Mountain Daylight Time,
abradley@TOOLCITY.NET writes:

> Well here's another unlikely topic:
>
>  But not necessarily for those who are unconcerned with how they mix dry
>  ingredients.
>
>  In the past I built a ball-mill and used it to mill individual elements and
>  compounds as well as mix-milling several such things together. I didn't
>  always get the optimum results I expected on burn tests.
>
>  While newly researching historical black powder manufacture I discovered
>  that a *wetted* mix of the ingredients (in an intermediate stage of
>  manufacture) was milled by a "rolling wheel-mill". This mill had a vertical
>  shafted iron/steel wheel whose face was in the horizontal plane.
>
>  Engaging this, from above, was a horizontal shafted iron wheel running at
>  strong pressure against the lower wheel. Cited was the observation that the
>  mixture passing between these wheels was not only crushed but "smeared
>  together" in a way that a ball-mill could not readily reproduce. This
>  effect was manifested clear on through the pressing stage, drying stage,
>  and the corning stage so that microscopic examination revealed particles of
>  sulfur and charcoal encased within the crystalline structure of KNO3! And
>  supposedly this was where the term "glazing" in black powder manufacture
>  originated, and not some factory process of coating with graphite!
>
>  1. Does this sound reasonable?
>
>  2. Could an amateur duplicate this process in a less machinery-complex way?
>  Particularly if the final product was for parachute ejection.
>
>  This may be a clue why the "blowing charge" (for parachutes in my testing)
>  made from home-grown "meal powder" never approaches the quality of that
>  loaded with FFFF factory black powder!
>
>  Thoughts and ideas?
>  al bradley
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 3365 invoked from network); 3 Jul 2001 19:15:48 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 3 Jul 2001 19:15:48 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 13070 invoked from network); 3 Jul 2001 19:16:54 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 3 Jul 2001 19:16:54 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA03281; Tue, 3 Jul 2001 11:32:47 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 69957 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 3 Jul 2001 18:32:35 +0000
Received: from imo-m02.mx.aol.com (imo-m02.mx.aol.com [64.12.136.5]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA03259 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Tue, 3 Jul 2001 11:32:34 -0700
Received: from Sociald84@aol.com by imo-m02.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v30.22.) id          y.122.12c5799 (4008); Tue, 3 Jul 2001 14:32:17 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: AOL 5.0 for Windows sub 138
Message-ID:  <122.12c5799.287369b0@aol.com>
Date:         Tue, 3 Jul 2001 14:32:16 EDT
Reply-To: <Sociald84@AOL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <Sociald84@AOL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Increasing propellant density
Comments: To: GEORDI@c031.aone.net.au
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Hey everyone,

I have a thought, i don't exactly know very much about solids but I don't see
any reason this shouldn't work. Some of these ideas have been mentioned
already, but I think this might simplify operation, and also make for a good
cure.

 How about making a metal sleeve inside of which the casting tubes would fit.
fit some type of end cap to it on one end on the other end machine the OD to
a very smooth finish and fit some type of plastic with a 1 way valve in the
middle of it. Tape down the plastic with electrical tape, and apply a vaccuum
to the propellant via the valve. After the propellant has been allowed to
partially cure remove the vaccuum, and place the casting fixture in a
hydraulic press, apply pressure via a piston and lock the press in place
until the cure is complete.

Mark


In a message dated 7/1/01 7:10:00 PM Mountain Daylight Time,
GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU writes:

> > Similiar thought...would compressing the propellant be a viable way to
>  > increase density?  For example, put your cardboard casting tube in a
metal
>  > sleve, and have a 'piston' sort of arrangment that fits inside.  After
>  > packing/pouring your propellant, slide in the piston and apply pressure
to
>  > compress the propellant.  Leaving it that way until it cures.  Yeah?  No?
>
>  Depends, it won't remove casting voids so they will still be there, just in
>  a compressed state until you remove the pressure. It *may* (as in, it may
>  not too) reduce the volatility of the mix if volatile ingredients are
>  included. It *may* suppress the creation of CO2 gasses from NCO-H2O
>  reactions although highly unlikely from an intuitive viewpoint.
>
>
>  >
>  > BTW, what kind of percentage of threoretical density is considered
'good'?
>  > 80%?  95%?  95.5%?
>
>   >97% , depending what you're application is of course.
>
>  Troy.
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 15167 invoked from network); 3 Jul 2001 19:18:42 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 3 Jul 2001 19:18:42 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 7434 invoked from network); 3 Jul 2001 19:19:59 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 3 Jul 2001 19:19:59 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA03616; Tue, 3 Jul 2001 12:12:26 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 70004 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 3 Jul 2001 19:12:20 +0000
Received: from zcars0m9.ca.nortel.com (h157s242a129n47.user.nortelnetworks.com          [47.129.242.157]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA03599          for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Tue, 3 Jul 2001 12:12:20 -0700
Received: from zcars04f.ca.nortel.com (zcars04f.ca.nortel.com [47.129.242.57])          by zcars0m9.ca.nortel.com (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f63JBX001506          for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Tue, 3 Jul 2001 15:11:33 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from rftzy232.ca.nortel.com by zcars04f.ca.nortel.com; Tue, 3 Jul          2001 15:11:31 -0400
Received: from NORTELNETWORKS.COM (wftzh00e.ca.nortel.com [47.130.116.9]) by          rftzy232.ca.nortel.com with SMTP (Microsoft Exchange Internet Mail          Service Version 5.5.2653.13) id NKPLZZLN; Tue, 3 Jul 2001 15:07:04          -0400
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.73C-CCK-MCD [en] (X11; U; HP-UX B.10.20 9000/785)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Orig: <mleech@NORTELNETWORKS.COM>
Message-ID:  <3B4218F1.A07236B2@NORTELNETWORKS.COM>
Date:         Tue, 3 Jul 2001 15:11:45 -0400
Reply-To: "Marcus Leech" <mleech@NORTELNETWORKS.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Marcus Leech" <mleech@NORTELNETWORKS.COM>
Subject:      [AR] iso-moulded graphite and thermal shock
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

I've recently upgraded my nozzle material to an iso-moulded graphite, very
  high density (1.85), small particle size (5u) material.  I was using a
  lower-density extruded material.  I switched to the higher density stuff
  because the softer material was more subject to damage during normal
  handling, although it showed little tendency to erode or otherwise
  degrade due to normal motor operations.

What I've discovered (after having already bought several hundred bucks
  worth of the higher grade material), is that this much harder, higher-density
  material is profoundly sensitive to thermal shock on motor startup.  Four out
  of five startups with nozzles made from this new material have resulted in
  most, or all, of the divergent section of the nozzle fracturing off.
  Grumble.

There are two avenues I'm persuing. One of which is to stick with the
  "better" material, and change the nozzle design.  The other is to
  downgrade to a softer grade of graphite, and live with the largely-cosmetic
  mechanical fragility problems.

The material I'm having problems with is Morgan XG-4000 iso-moulded.
  I've spoken with them, and they're sending me a sample of some
  XG-2000, which is still iso-moulded, but somewhat softer than
  XG-4000.

My "production" nozzles for the Propulsion Polymers I140 motors were made
  with a relatively soft surplus graphite (from Aerocon).  They don't seem
  to suffer during motor operation, but they do tend to chip and spall
  quite easily from normal handling.  I suppose that if I could make
  nozzles cheap enough, I'd just include one with every reload kit, but
  I'd much rather have something that'll last the way (for example) Kosdon
  nozzles last.

--
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Marcus Leech                             Mail:   Dept 8M70, MS 012, FITZ
Advisor                                  Phone: (ESN) 393-9145  +1 613 763 9145
Security Architecture and Planning       Fax:   (ESN) 393-9435  +1 613 763 9435
Nortel Networks                          mleech@nortelnetworks.com
-----------------Expressed opinions are my own, not my employer's------

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 23094 invoked from network); 3 Jul 2001 19:34:41 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 3 Jul 2001 19:34:41 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 11328 invoked from network); 3 Jul 2001 19:35:57 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 3 Jul 2001 19:35:57 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA03788; Tue, 3 Jul 2001 12:27:35 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 70049 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 3 Jul 2001 19:27:32 +0000
Received: from imo-m07.mx.aol.com (imo-m07.mx.aol.com [64.12.136.162]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA03771 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Tue, 3 Jul 2001 12:27:31 -0700
Received: from Sociald84@aol.com by imo-m07.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v30.22.) id          d.84.1837768d (4008); Tue, 3 Jul 2001 15:27:00 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: AOL 5.0 for Windows sub 138
Message-ID:  <84.1837768d.28737684@aol.com>
Date:         Tue, 3 Jul 2001 15:27:00 EDT
Reply-To: <Sociald84@AOL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <Sociald84@AOL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] iso-moulded graphite and thermal shock
Comments: To: mleech@nortelnetworks.com
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Marcus,

I know this is a bit more work but how about macining the nozzle OD a little
smaller than needed, and coating it with some type of fiberglass resin or
epoxy. You'd have to machine it again to assure proper fit, but i think that
would be very helpful with chipping.

Mark

In a message dated 7/3/01 1:13:52 PM Mountain Daylight Time,
mleech@NORTELNETWORKS.COM writes:

> I've recently upgraded my nozzle material to an iso-moulded graphite, very
>    high density (1.85), small particle size (5u) material.  I was using a
>    lower-density extruded material.  I switched to the higher density stuff
>    because the softer material was more subject to damage during normal
>    handling, although it showed little tendency to erode or otherwise
>    degrade due to normal motor operations.
>
>  What I've discovered (after having already bought several hundred bucks
>    worth of the higher grade material), is that this much harder, higher-
> density
>    material is profoundly sensitive to thermal shock on motor startup.
Four
> out
>    of five startups with nozzles made from this new material have resulted
in
>    most, or all, of the divergent section of the nozzle fracturing off.
>    Grumble.
>
>  There are two avenues I'm persuing. One of which is to stick with the
>    "better" material, and change the nozzle design.  The other is to
>    downgrade to a softer grade of graphite, and live with the largely-
> cosmetic
>    mechanical fragility problems.
>
>  The material I'm having problems with is Morgan XG-4000 iso-moulded.
>    I've spoken with them, and they're sending me a sample of some
>    XG-2000, which is still iso-moulded, but somewhat softer than
>    XG-4000.
>
>  My "production" nozzles for the Propulsion Polymers I140 motors were made
>    with a relatively soft surplus graphite (from Aerocon).  They don't seem
>    to suffer during motor operation, but they do tend to chip and spall
>    quite easily from normal handling.  I suppose that if I could make
>    nozzles cheap enough, I'd just include one with every reload kit, but
>    I'd much rather have something that'll last the way (for example) Kosdon
>    nozzles last.
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 26238 invoked from network); 3 Jul 2001 20:05:46 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 3 Jul 2001 20:05:46 -0000
Received: (qmail 3247 invoked from network); 3 Jul 2001 20:06:52 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 3 Jul 2001 20:06:52 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA03902; Tue, 3 Jul 2001 12:42:12 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 70077 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 3 Jul 2001 19:41:57 +0000
Received: from femail22.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail22.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.0.95.147]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA03885          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 3 Jul 2001 12:41:56 -0700
Received: from cc334751a ([65.13.214.65]) by femail22.sdc1.sfba.home.com          (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20 201-229-121-120-20010223) with SMTP id          <20010703194151.EBML6286.femail22.sdc1.sfba.home.com@cc334751a>; Tue,          3 Jul 2001 12:41:51 -0700
References:  <3B4218F1.A07236B2@NORTELNETWORKS.COM>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2462.0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <008d01c103f8$478425a0$6401a8c0@home.com>
Date:         Tue, 3 Jul 2001 13:42:22 -0600
Reply-To: "Brian Kosko" <bkosko1@HOME.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Brian Kosko" <bkosko1@HOME.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] iso-moulded graphite and thermal shock
Comments: To: Marcus Leech <mleech@NORTELNETWORKS.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Marcus,

Sorry to hear about that. Unfortunately we experienced the same problem; and
not with just our own nozzles. We had an Ellis Mountain nozzle fracture the
same way.

We've decided a couple of things. Pure graphite nozzles on larger motors
(say 75mm and above) are just asking for trouble. And not just because of
cracking; the larger motors put a lot of heat through nozzle which then gets
passed on to the case. Our 75mm motors with pure graphite nozzles have
gotten really, really hot. In comparison, some 98mm motors using Aerotech's
phenolic nozzle and our improved grain sealing were barely warm to the
touch.

On smaller motors, graphite nozzles that are just one 'chunk' ,ala Kosdon or
our own John Lyngdal, seem to work fine. The graphite nozzles just don't
seem to like having that shoulder put on.


Brian
----- Original Message -----
From: "Marcus Leech" <mleech@NORTELNETWORKS.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Tuesday, July 03, 2001 1:11 PM
Subject: [AR] iso-moulded graphite and thermal shock


> I've recently upgraded my nozzle material to an iso-moulded graphite, very
>   high density (1.85), small particle size (5u) material.  I was using a
>   lower-density extruded material.  I switched to the higher density stuff
>   because the softer material was more subject to damage during normal
>   handling, although it showed little tendency to erode or otherwise
>   degrade due to normal motor operations.
>
> What I've discovered (after having already bought several hundred bucks
>   worth of the higher grade material), is that this much harder,
higher-density
>   material is profoundly sensitive to thermal shock on motor startup.
Four out
>   of five startups with nozzles made from this new material have resulted
in
>   most, or all, of the divergent section of the nozzle fracturing off.
>   Grumble.
>
> There are two avenues I'm persuing. One of which is to stick with the
>   "better" material, and change the nozzle design.  The other is to
>   downgrade to a softer grade of graphite, and live with the
largely-cosmetic
>   mechanical fragility problems.
>
> The material I'm having problems with is Morgan XG-4000 iso-moulded.
>   I've spoken with them, and they're sending me a sample of some
>   XG-2000, which is still iso-moulded, but somewhat softer than
>   XG-4000.
>
> My "production" nozzles for the Propulsion Polymers I140 motors were made
>   with a relatively soft surplus graphite (from Aerocon).  They don't seem
>   to suffer during motor operation, but they do tend to chip and spall
>   quite easily from normal handling.  I suppose that if I could make
>   nozzles cheap enough, I'd just include one with every reload kit, but
>   I'd much rather have something that'll last the way (for example) Kosdon
>   nozzles last.
>
> --
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> Marcus Leech                             Mail:   Dept 8M70, MS 012, FITZ
> Advisor                                  Phone: (ESN) 393-9145  +1 613 763
9145
> Security Architecture and Planning       Fax:   (ESN) 393-9435  +1 613 763
9435
> Nortel Networks                          mleech@nortelnetworks.com
> -----------------Expressed opinions are my own, not my employer's------

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 18239 invoked from network); 3 Jul 2001 20:18:21 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 3 Jul 2001 20:18:21 -0000
Received: (qmail 163 invoked from network); 3 Jul 2001 20:19:27 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 3 Jul 2001 20:19:27 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA04040; Tue, 3 Jul 2001 13:14:35 -0700
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 70099 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 3 Jul 2001 20:14:29 +0000
Received: from zcars0m9.ca.nortel.com (h157s242a129n47.user.nortelnetworks.com          [47.129.242.157]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA04023          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 3 Jul 2001 13:14:29 -0700
Received: from zcars04f.ca.nortel.com (zcars04f.ca.nortel.com [47.129.242.57])          by zcars0m9.ca.nortel.com (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f63KDh010846          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 3 Jul 2001 16:13:43 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from rftzy232.ca.nortel.com by zcars04f.ca.nortel.com; Tue, 3 Jul          2001 16:13:43 -0400
Received: from NORTELNETWORKS.COM (wftzh00e.ca.nortel.com [47.130.116.9]) by          rftzy232.ca.nortel.com with SMTP (Microsoft Exchange Internet Mail          Service Version 5.5.2653.13) id NKPLZZP2; Tue, 3 Jul 2001 16:09:16          -0400
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.73C-CCK-MCD [en] (X11; U; HP-UX B.10.20 9000/785)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <3B4218F1.A07236B2@NORTELNETWORKS.COM>            <008d01c103f8$478425a0$6401a8c0@home.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Orig: <mleech@NORTELNETWORKS.COM>
Message-ID:  <3B422785.E56FCEAB@NORTELNETWORKS.COM>
Date:         Tue, 3 Jul 2001 16:13:57 -0400
Reply-To: "Marcus Leech" <mleech@NORTELNETWORKS.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Marcus Leech" <mleech@NORTELNETWORKS.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] iso-moulded graphite and thermal shock
Comments: To: Brian Kosko <bkosko1@home.com>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Brian Kosko wrote:
>
> On smaller motors, graphite nozzles that are just one 'chunk' ,ala Kosdon or
> our own John Lyngdal, seem to work fine. The graphite nozzles just don't
> seem to like having that shoulder put on.
>
I've heard that before, but never experienced a problem with the various
  softer grades of graphite that I've been using, including on 54mm motors.
  My nozzles generally have two shoulders--the convergent section generally
  protrudes inside the hybrid grain by 0.4375-0.625", depending on the size
  of the motor, and another for the divergent section, protruding through
  the nozzle-end closure.  Until I switched to the very high density,
  high-quality graphite, I didn't see even a *hint* of a problem.  It could
  be a simple matter of a combination of thermal shock, and stress-concentration
  at the corners of the shoulders; in a softer material, the corners aren't
  really sharp, so the stress concentration is somewhat more diffuse.  In
  a softer material, the structure isn't quite so brittle, and so is able to
  flex somewhat under thermal shock.

Graphite is an excellent conductor of heat, at least at high temperatures, so
  any direct contact between the nozzle and the case is asking for trouble
  in large motors.  For my 54mm and larger motors, the nozzle is insulated
  from the casing with a paper liner, and there's a G10 washer that insulates
  it from the nozzle-end closure/snap-ring.  For the smaller (38mm, 22mm)
  motors, with quite short burn times (under 5 seconds), the casing gets hot
  for sure, but not enough to worry about--so I don't bother with fancy
  insulation arrangements.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Marcus Leech                             Mail:   Dept 8M70, MS 012, FITZ
Advisor                                  Phone: (ESN) 393-9145  +1 613 763 9145
Security Architecture and Planning       Fax:   (ESN) 393-9435  +1 613 763 9435
Nortel Networks                          mleech@nortelnetworks.com
-----------------Expressed opinions are my own, not my employer's------

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 17275 invoked from network); 3 Jul 2001 21:06:56 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 3 Jul 2001 21:06:56 -0000
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 412 invoked from network); 3 Jul 2001 21:08:01 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 3 Jul 2001 21:08:01 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA04211; Tue, 3 Jul 2001 14:03:43 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 70122 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 3 Jul 2001 21:03:29 +0000
Received: from idsoftware.com (predator.idsoftware.com [192.246.40.34]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA04194 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Tue, 3 Jul 2001 14:03:29 -0700
Received: from [192.246.40.129] (account johnc HELO lightning.idsoftware.com)          by idsoftware.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 3.4.6) with ESMTP id 271729          for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 03 Jul 2001 16:02:45 -0500
X-Sender: johnc@mail.idsoftware.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <4.3.1.2.20010703153247.0328ba38@mail.idsoftware.com>
Date:         Tue, 3 Jul 2001 16:02:38 -0500
Reply-To: "John Carmack" <johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Carmack" <johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM>
Subject:      [AR] engine research
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

I am interested in collecting some new hybrid motor data.

I am interested in long burning (60+ second) polyethylene hyrbids.  While I
am looking towards large (thousands of pounds of thrust) hydrogen peroxide
hybrids, I think a lot of useful experience and data can be gained with
conveniently sized nitrous motors.

If any of the experienced hybrid builders out there would like to undertake
a rigorous testing program, I would be willing to cover all the expenses in
exchange for a detailed web site covering the work and results.  Richard
Nakka's excellent candy work would be the benchmark -- detailed
construction notes, pictures, data graphs, post fire analysis, and
interpretations of the results.

What L/D ratios work well?

How do graphite and phenolic nozzles hold up under the long burns?  Do any
other conventional construction methods (snap rings, etc) fail under the
extended burn time?

PE grains have been reported to slump.  Is that a problem?  What kinds of
supports work?

I would imagine it would take a dozen or so small motor firings to reach
the various conclusions, then I would be interested in seeing at least one
step of scale-up.


Anyone interested?

John Carmack

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 6284 invoked from network); 3 Jul 2001 21:19:00 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 3 Jul 2001 21:19:00 -0000
X-Priority: 3
Received: (qmail 26608 invoked from network); 3 Jul 2001 21:20:03 -0000
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 3 Jul 2001 21:20:03 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA04268; Tue, 3 Jul 2001 14:16:06 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 70130 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 3 Jul 2001 21:16:05 +0000
Received: from m1.jersey.juno.com (m1.jersey.juno.com [64.136.16.64]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA04251 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 3 Jul 2001 14:16:04 -0700
Received: from cookie.juno.com by cookie.juno.com for          <"H3WK6e6N+bsCVJQMHM9sZAYqFByfpqG0+7X76aoq2u/DyT4dfqkNjw==">
Received: (from kc2csh@juno.com) by m1.jersey.juno.com (queuemail) id F9FY9BQA;          Tue, 03 Jul 2001 17:15:46 EDT
X-Mailer: Juno 4.0.11
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Juno-Line-Breaks: 2-52
X-Juno-Att: 0
X-Juno-RefParts: 0
Message-ID:  <20010703.171954.-4028513.0.kc2csh@juno.com>
Date:         Tue, 3 Jul 2001 17:19:48 -0400
Reply-To: <kc2csh@JUNO.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <kc2csh@JUNO.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Increasing propellant density
Comments: To: spiegl@HOME.NET
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

  We're thinking of a different method.  You are thinking of spinning the
tube as the axle of a wheel.  I'm talking about spinning to tube as the
outer end of the spoke of a wheel.

                       Jay

On Tue, 3 Jul 2001 02:11:41 -0500 Mark C Spiegl <spiegl@HOME.NET> writes:
> I think I have to respectfully disagree with some of the opinions on
> centrifuge casting.
>
>
> The good:
> Centrifuging actually works quite well. The excess binder and ureas
> migrate towards the center, while the propellant moves towards the
> outside. So fill your centrifuge tube with propellant; centrifuge;
> and
> machine-out the center goo when done.  This leaves a very high
> packing
> density and is an effective way to remove casting voids w/o vacuum.
>
>
> The bad:
> First, you need a somewhat pourable propellant. 2), the centrifuge
> speed needs to be high. We modified the pulleys on a wood lathe and
> got the speed up around 7k-10k rpm. At these speeds your parts need
> to
> be machined to "reasonable" accuracy or the whole assembly will...
> uh.. disassemble. :/  Even with reasonably good parts the wood lathe
> tended to bounce across the floor and generate a bit too much heat
> for
> comfort. Finally, you need to centrifuge during about 1/2 the cure
> cycle. So you either need a fast curing propellant (difficult to
> work)
> or a very good centrifuge (difficult to make). Personally, many many
> hours on a high speed, heat generating, centrifuge makes me uneasy.
>
>
> Conclusion:
> Works well. In the end, is centrifuging easier than the old standard
> vacuum processing? Probably not. Just a different set of problems to
> solve. I think propellant density maybe is a little better with the
> centrifuge.
>
>
> Unrelated comments:
> I learned similar tricks when working at Amoco Polymers. Amoco had
> nothing to do with propellant manufacture, but they routinely
> outgassed their plastics with big 4ft diameter rotating drums in a
> continuous feed process.  (might be patented)
>
>
> --Mark "wish my tumor would stop itching"   {Ooo tasteless Amoco
> joke}

________________________________________________________________
GET INTERNET ACCESS FROM JUNO!
Juno offers FREE or PREMIUM Internet access for less!
Join Juno today!  For your FREE software, visit:
http://dl.www.juno.com/get/tagj.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 14127 invoked from network); 3 Jul 2001 21:42:37 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 3 Jul 2001 21:42:37 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 13372 invoked from network); 3 Jul 2001 21:43:43 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 3 Jul 2001 21:43:43 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA04316; Tue, 3 Jul 2001 14:26:45 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 70138 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 3 Jul 2001 21:26:39 +0000
Received: from brighton.legacywireless.com (legacywireless.com [208.187.126.2])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA04299 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Tue, 3 Jul 2001 14:26:39 -0700
Received: from [208.187.122.40] by brighton.cogolink.com (NTMail          5.00.0010/NY4701.00.0f189dc1) with ESMTP id qlusnaaa for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Tue, 3 Jul 2001 15:34:59 -0600
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.77 [en] (Win98; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <NFBBKADEMLBLIEKNLLEPEEIICCAA.bfeeney@davinciproject.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Message-ID:  <3B41881D.66ACD1F9@biomicro.com>
Date:         Tue, 3 Jul 2001 02:53:49 -0600
Reply-To: "Mark K. Spute" <mks@BIOMICRO.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Mark K. Spute" <mks@BIOMICRO.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] ISAS VTVL link
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Translation (by Babel Fish) is below:

Brian Feeney wrote:

> This is a link to the ISAS Japanese site that shows a lot more Pics,
> internal, schematics of the recently test launched VTVL vehicle. All
> of it is in Japanese. They don't seam to have an English version yet.
> I found it by going to the Japanese version of the ISAS site. Worth a
> look and if anyone wants to translate
> ...http://www.isas.ac.jp/dtc/saisiyo/saisiyo.html

Information of reuse rocket experiment
2001/06/25 renewal

Reuse rocket experimental aircraft * 2nd taking off and landing
experimental announcement sentence

June 25 of 2001 day

Rocket experimental group

It was done as fundamental experiment of the space transportation system
whose complete reuse is possible " reuse rocket experimental aircraft *
2nd taking off and landing experiment (RVT-6)", the 1st taking off and
landing experiment which was done in the year before last and last year
it came and it continued to the engine quality test which was done, it
was started from June 9th in the Noshiro rocket experimental place, such
as engine combustion with flight form and functional verification and
taking off and landing flight of the fuselage system tested
consecutively and it ended with this day. At this time, the taking off
and landing experiment of 3 times which are planned was executed,
concerning the quality of control and the engine of flight technology
for repetition flight of the rocket which aims toward the acquisition
and reuse of the various data was acquired.
It repeats this experiment, as a part of research in order to make the
round trip to outer space easy, being something which aims toward the
verification of function for establishment of technology for system
construction of the rocket missile whose flight is possible and taking
off and landing flight, the truth being something which is administered
with the accumulation of the engineering technology regarding taking off
and landing and safely and easily to repeat the system design method et
cetera uses the rocket engine in order which to fly as a purpose, it
does.
With the latest experiment take-off climb to the highest high-level 22m,
and it landed acording to the data which is acquired with consecutive
experiment, as for structure of the fuselage which supposes taking off
and landing and efficiency of the engine and navigation induction
control facility for taking off and landing it was verified that it has
the efficiency of according to plan. In addition concerning the
repetition flight use of the rocket system of the reuse type which
differs from the former expendable launch vehicle it could obtain many
knowledge, purpose of expectation it was possible to reach.  The related
systems and the beach which cooperate at the time of the execution of
the latest experiment shallow we
appreciate in cooperation of the people of the local end which begins
interior of a country Ku.

> > > > > Experimental summary

< June 25th (month) 3rd taking off and landing experiment >

The Space Science Laboratory, June 25th of 2001 (month) o'clock of 6 14
minutes, at the Noshiro rocket experimental place, did the taking off
and landing experiment of the reuse rocket experimental aircraft. Flight
being normal, the highest high-level approximately 22m, after the flight
of approximately 13 seconds, landed according to plan.

> > > It launches, the scene with animated picture (the 604k)

(Reference) to look at animated picture, the quicktime is necessary.  As
for quicktime download sight this way

< June 23rd (Saturday) 2nd taking off and landing experiment >

The Space Science Laboratory, June 23rd of 2001 (the Saturday) o'clock
of 16 45 minutes, at the Noshiro rocket experimental place, did the
taking off and landing experiment of the reuse rocket experimental
aircraft. Flight being normal, the highest high-level approximately 9m,
after the flight of approximately 10 seconds, landed according to plan.

< June 22nd (gold) 1st taking off and landing experiment >

The Space Science Laboratory, June 22nd of 2001 (the gold) o'clock of 16
08 minutes, at the Noshiro rocket experimental place, did the taking off
and landing experiment of the reuse rocket experimental aircraft. Flight
being normal, the highest high-level approximately 9m, after the flight
of approximately 10 seconds, landed according to plan.

> > > It launches, the scene with animated picture (the 656k)

Static image of > > > > launch

< Captive firing test June 18th (month) >

The Space Science Laboratory, June 18th of 2001 o'clock of 16 at 36
minute Noshiro rocket experimental places, did the captive firing test
of the reuse rocket experimental aircraft, acquired the data of
expectation. Preparation of continuation and taking off and landing
experiment is advanced.

Circumstances of < preparation (Noshiro) >

< Reporting release (Noshiro) >

Circumstances of < preparation (Sagamihara) >

Reuse rocket experimental aircraft ? 2nd taking off and landing
experiment (RVT-6) program outline June of 2001 Education scientific
economical Space Science Laboratory

1. Experimental summary
At the Space Science Laboratory, it repeats as research of the future
space transportation system flight roughly classifying Ro of possible
complete reuse type in the space transportation system where the
complete reuse to which actualization is expected in the near future is
possible, Efficiency improvement of ? propulsion engine Light weight
conversion of ? fuselage structure / material It withstands ? reuse the
system construction method which
It assumes and so on is the key of the actualization, but presently it
has dealt with of  research, in the " complete reuse rocket ",  as a
preliminary test stage of the rocket where this complete reuse of these
is possible, Necessity for altitude control and the landing induction by
the ? rocket engine is technology It regards the construction and use of
the propulsion system because ? efficient reuse is actualized technology
Acquisition of two technical themes uses the small-sized liquid oxygen
liquid hydrogen rocket engine for main purpose, the reuse rocket
experiment

2. which Experimental operating procedure
Experiment does on vacuum combustion test ridge sea side inside the
Space Science Laboratory Noshiro rocket experimental place. With latest
experiment  you watch for safety at the time of ????? taking off and
landing experiment, when it is abnormal, you stop flight with the camera
which is arranged on the ground,

3. Experimental execution patsy
Hiroki Matsuo education scientific economical space scientific research
chief
(Kanagawa prefecture Sagamihara city Tano stand 3-1-1 TEL042-759-3911
(generation))

4. Experimental chief
Education scientific economical Space Science Laboratory professor rice
plant valley ? sentence

5. Experimental place
Education scientific economical Space Science Laboratory Noshiro rocket
experimental place (Akita prefecture Noshiro city it is shallow
Nishiyama 1 TEL0185-52-7123 under the inside letter (generation)) [
North latitude 4009 ' 52 ", east longitude 13959 ' 36 " ]

6. Experimental job period
June 9th of 2001 (Saturday) - June 23rd (Saturday)

Combustion test and execution due date of taking off and landing
experiment make the following day and time.
June 16th of 2001 (Saturday) captive firing test
June 18th of 2001 (month) taking off and landing experiment
June 20th of 2001 (water) taking off and landing experiment
June 22nd of 2001 (gold) taking off and landing experiment
Experimental period and experimental due date are times when it modifies
with the weather other reasons.

7. Setting of precaution area
The experimental day for danger prevention, beforehand as in the
following figure, provides precaution area.

In the forefront of the > > > page it returns


Okay, Not the best translation in the world, but it makes it a little
more understandable.  Besides, what do you expect with a fish stuck in
your ear?

--
Mark K. Spute
Senior Research Engineer
BioMicro Systems Inc.

KD7IWE,  RRS

"It is difficult to say what is impossible, for the dream of yesterday
is the hope of today and the reality of tomorrow."
     Dr. Robert H. Goddard

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 9001 invoked from network); 3 Jul 2001 23:07:59 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 3 Jul 2001 23:07:59 -0000
Received: (qmail 29314 invoked from network); 3 Jul 2001 23:09:17 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 3 Jul 2001 23:09:17 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA04628; Tue, 3 Jul 2001 15:52:19 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 70177 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 3 Jul 2001 22:52:19 +0000
Received: from mta05.mail.mel.aone.net.au (mta05.mail.au.uu.net [203.2.192.85])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA04606 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 3 Jul 2001 15:52:14 -0700
Received: from unknown ([63.34.220.42]) by mta05.mail.mel.aone.net.au with SMTP          id <20010703225209.MNHF28112.mta05.mail.mel.aone.net.au@unknown>;          Wed, 4 Jul 2001 08:52:09 +1000
References: Conversation <122.12c5799.287369b0@aol.com> with last message            <122.12c5799.287369b0@aol.com>
Priority: Normal
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Priority: 3
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	X-MAPIextension=.TXT;
	charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>
Date:         Tue, 3 Jul 2001 22:52:19 +0000
Reply-To: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Increasing propellant density
Comments: To: Mark <Sociald84@AOL.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <122.12c5799.287369b0@aol.com>

Mark, there maybe a general problem with the propellants the system would
be designed for though ie. when you apply the vacuum, the propellant
generally foams up (depending on how much vacuum you pull). The mix can
often become quite porous and stiffer during this process. Often (with high
solids propellants) the AP will soak up moisture during the release of the
vacuum. Air also fills up the tiny voids created by the vacuum when the vac
is released which might produce a few problems as mentioned earlier.
Obvious answer: do the entire process under vac! That's what Stephen Holden
is attempting to do with a very similar idea but involving a sealed piston
for his AN (generally drier then AP) propellants.

Troy.

----------
> Hey everyone,
>
> I have a thought, i don't exactly know very much about solids but I don't
see
> any reason this shouldn't work. Some of these ideas have been mentioned
> already, but I think this might simplify operation, and also make for a
good
> cure.
>
>  How about making a metal sleeve inside of which the casting tubes would
fit.
> fit some type of end cap to it on one end on the other end machine the OD
to
> a very smooth finish and fit some type of plastic with a 1 way valve in
the
> middle of it. Tape down the plastic with electrical tape, and apply a
vaccuum
> to the propellant via the valve. After the propellant has been allowed to
> partially cure remove the vaccuum, and place the casting fixture in a
> hydraulic press, apply pressure via a piston and lock the press in place
> until the cure is complete.
>
> Mark
>
>
> In a message dated 7/1/01 7:10:00 PM Mountain Daylight Time,
> GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU writes:
>
> > > Similiar thought...would compressing the propellant be a viable way to
> >  > increase density?  For example, put your cardboard casting tube in a
> metal
> >  > sleve, and have a 'piston' sort of arrangment that fits inside.
After
> >  > packing/pouring your propellant, slide in the piston and apply
pressure
> to
> >  > compress the propellant.  Leaving it that way until it cures.  Yeah?
 No?
> >
> >  Depends, it won't remove casting voids so they will still be there,
just in
> >  a compressed state until you remove the pressure. It *may* (as in, it
may
> >  not too) reduce the volatility of the mix if volatile ingredients are
> >  included. It *may* suppress the creation of CO2 gasses from NCO-H2O
> >  reactions although highly unlikely from an intuitive viewpoint.
> >
> >
> >  >
> >  > BTW, what kind of percentage of threoretical density is considered
> 'good'?
> >  > 80%?  95%?  95.5%?
> >
> >   >97% , depending what you're application is of course.
> >
> >  Troy.
> >

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 2313 invoked from network); 3 Jul 2001 23:13:28 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 3 Jul 2001 23:13:28 -0000
Received: (qmail 19812 invoked from network); 3 Jul 2001 23:14:35 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 3 Jul 2001 23:14:35 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA04605; Tue, 3 Jul 2001 15:52:13 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 70169 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 3 Jul 2001 22:52:04 +0000
Received: from mta01.mail.mel.aone.net.au (mta01.mail.au.uu.net [203.2.192.81])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA04587 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 3 Jul 2001 15:52:03 -0700
Received: from unknown ([63.34.220.42]) by mta01.mail.mel.aone.net.au with SMTP          id <20010703225159.ZTFL18810.mta01.mail.mel.aone.net.au@unknown>;          Wed, 4 Jul 2001 08:51:59 +1000
References: Conversation <20010703.171954.-4028513.0.kc2csh@juno.com> with last            message <20010703.171954.-4028513.0.kc2csh@juno.com>
Priority: Normal
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Priority: 3
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	X-MAPIextension=.TXT;
	charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>
Date:         Tue, 3 Jul 2001 22:52:04 +0000
Reply-To: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Increasing propellant density
Comments: To: kc2csh <kc2csh@JUNO.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <20010703.171954.-4028513.0.kc2csh@juno.com>

Yep, likewise. I've never considered spinning it axially but I feel the
idea may have some merit. Interesting.

Troy.

----------
>   We're thinking of a different method.  You are thinking of spinning the
> tube as the axle of a wheel.  I'm talking about spinning to tube as the
> outer end of the spoke of a wheel.
>
>                        Jay
>
> On Tue, 3 Jul 2001 02:11:41 -0500 Mark C Spiegl <spiegl@HOME.NET> writes:
> > I think I have to respectfully disagree with some of the opinions on
> > centrifuge casting.
> >
> >
> > The good:
> > Centrifuging actually works quite well. The excess binder and ureas
> > migrate towards the center, while the propellant moves towards the
> > outside. So fill your centrifuge tube with propellant; centrifuge;
> > and
> > machine-out the center goo when done.  This leaves a very high
> > packing
> > density and is an effective way to remove casting voids w/o vacuum.
> >
> >
> > The bad:
> > First, you need a somewhat pourable propellant. 2), the centrifuge
> > speed needs to be high. We modified the pulleys on a wood lathe and
> > got the speed up around 7k-10k rpm. At these speeds your parts need
> > to
> > be machined to "reasonable" accuracy or the whole assembly will...
> > uh.. disassemble. :/  Even with reasonably good parts the wood lathe
> > tended to bounce across the floor and generate a bit too much heat
> > for
> > comfort. Finally, you need to centrifuge during about 1/2 the cure
> > cycle. So you either need a fast curing propellant (difficult to
> > work)
> > or a very good centrifuge (difficult to make). Personally, many many
> > hours on a high speed, heat generating, centrifuge makes me uneasy.
> >
> >
> > Conclusion:
> > Works well. In the end, is centrifuging easier than the old standard
> > vacuum processing? Probably not. Just a different set of problems to
> > solve. I think propellant density maybe is a little better with the
> > centrifuge.
> >
> >
> > Unrelated comments:
> > I learned similar tricks when working at Amoco Polymers. Amoco had
> > nothing to do with propellant manufacture, but they routinely
> > outgassed their plastics with big 4ft diameter rotating drums in a
> > continuous feed process.  (might be patented)
> >
> >
> > --Mark "wish my tumor would stop itching"   {Ooo tasteless Amoco
> > joke}
>
> ________________________________________________________________
> GET INTERNET ACCESS FROM JUNO!
> Juno offers FREE or PREMIUM Internet access for less!
> Join Juno today!  For your FREE software, visit:
> http://dl.www.juno.com/get/tagj.
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 5702 invoked from network); 3 Jul 2001 23:14:22 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 3 Jul 2001 23:14:22 -0000
Received: (qmail 20216 invoked from network); 3 Jul 2001 23:15:23 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 3 Jul 2001 23:15:23 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA04694; Tue, 3 Jul 2001 15:53:49 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 70194 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 3 Jul 2001 22:53:47 +0000
Received: from femail22.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail22.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.0.95.147]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA04672          for <arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 3 Jul 2001 15:53:45 -0700
Received: from cc334751a ([65.13.214.65]) by femail22.sdc1.sfba.home.com          (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20 201-229-121-120-20010223) with SMTP id          <20010703225339.KZFB6286.femail22.sdc1.sfba.home.com@cc334751a> for          <arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 3 Jul 2001 15:53:39 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_09C8_01C56B69.3FE57E70"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2462.0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <00cd01c10413$0e29e180$6401a8c0@home.com>
Date:         Tue, 3 Jul 2001 16:54:02 -0600
Reply-To: "Brian Kosko" <bkosko1@HOME.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Brian Kosko" <bkosko1@HOME.COM>
Subject:      [AR] New Solid Propellant Book/ Class 1.1 vs 1.3 Dangers
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_09C8_01C56B69.3FE57E70
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

All of us who make solid propellant would do well to read Chapter 1.9, =
Hazards Associated with Solid Propellants in the AIAA book everyone =
mentioned a while back. I found going over the 'processing' accidents =
very illuminating, as well as disturbing. The thing that leapt out at me =
was how FEW accidents involved 1.1 stuff, and how MANY were with good =
old AP composite propellant!!

I tabulated the results for 35 'processing' type accidents from 1972 to =
1999, the era of modern composite propellants. By processing I mean =
actions we could inflict on our own propellants: mixing, cutting, =
dropping, etc. Of the 35 only 5 involved 1.1 materials. Of those 5, =
three were composite propellants that had either ferrocene or catocene. =
Most likely the ferrocene or catocene was the culprit in those three. =
And one case was making airbags with RDX, not really a propellant case. =
The one case of detonation of a 1.1 class propellant was caused by a =
dome failure during a static test. So there were NO 'processing' =
accidents attributable to Class 1.1 stuff in propellant.

On the other hand..... Composite propellants are good insulators and =
therefore can have trouble with ESD. This included two cases of =
'flaring' while extracting the mandrel from the 1st stage MX motor (with =
96,000 lbs of propellant!) with one motor actually igniting. Another =
deadly, spectacular ESD ignition involved an operational Pershing =
missile. You know the one, theatre-level nuke, formerly deployed by NATO =
in Europe. It lit during removal from its storage container killing =
three. Composites also burn well at atmospheric pressure unlike a lot of =
doublebase propellants. Finally, APCP catalyzed with any of the =
ferrocene family (ferrocene, catocene, n-butylferrocene) of burn rate =
catalysts is extremely sensitive to shock and friction. They accounted =
for 16/28 accidents in the 80's including over a dozen deaths.

In the realm of normal processing, both sawing and mixing were the =
source of numerous accidents. I found it very disconcerting that such a =
fundamental process as mixing could still be the source of so many =
accidental ignitions. With ferrocene, or especially catocene; just about =
anything seems to be a possible source for inadvertant ignition. This =
included dropping, cutting with an Exacto, impact with a bronze hammer, =
hand tools, touching the propellant with a rod coated in mineral =
spirits, and machining. Also interesting was the lack of data. The other =
accidents had who did them along with main propellant data. These all =
just said mid-80's and catocene propellant.

The other two main failure modes were hydromining and whacking. =
Hydromining is the more environmentally friendly way to demil missiles. =
The description sounds like just hosing propellant out with high =
pressure water. Unfortunately it doesn't seem to be that safe; it =
accounted for five of the accidents via accidental ignition. This =
included an SS-24 2nd stage igniting and then 'flying' through the =
facility cafeteria. Guess that was some daily special. That also was =
some 'hot' propellant. It had AP/HMX/Al/ADN/Ferrocene; now that's some =
serious Isp solid propellant. 'Whacking' includes dropping/smacking big =
motors on hard objects. There were two cases of accidental motor =
ignition by this method. One was caused by a crane failure and one by =
dropping the motor 18 inches onto pavement.

I'm certainly going to reevaluate how we operate and make sure we have =
good 'oh shit' procedures worked out. I encourage all of you to read =
that part of the book.

                                                                         =
   Brian

------=_NextPart_000_09C8_01C56B69.3FE57E70
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Diso-8859-1">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 6.00.2462.0" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>All of us who make solid propellant =
would do well=20
to read Chapter 1.9, Hazards Associated with Solid Propellants in the =
AIAA book=20
everyone mentioned a while back. I found going over the 'processing' =
accidents=20
very illuminating, as well as disturbing. The thing that leapt out at me =
was how=20
FEW accidents involved 1.1 stuff, and how MANY were with good old AP =
composite=20
propellant!!</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>I tabulated the results for 35 =
'processing' type=20
accidents from 1972 to 1999, the era of modern composite propellants. By =

processing I mean actions we could inflict on our own propellants: =
mixing,=20
cutting, dropping, etc. Of the 35 only 5 involved 1.1 materials. Of =
those 5,=20
three were composite propellants that had either ferrocene or catocene. =
Most=20
likely the ferrocene or catocene was the culprit in those three. And one =
case=20
was making airbags with RDX, not really a propellant case. The one case =
of=20
detonation of a 1.1 class propellant was caused by a dome failure during =
a=20
static test. So there were NO 'processing' accidents attributable to =
Class 1.1=20
stuff in propellant.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>On the other hand..... Composite =
propellants are=20
good insulators and therefore can have trouble with ESD. This included =
two cases=20
of 'flaring' while extracting the mandrel from the 1st stage MX motor =
(with=20
96,000 lbs of propellant!) with one motor actually =
igniting.&nbsp;Another=20
deadly, spectacular ESD ignition involved an operational Pershing =
missile. You=20
know the one, theatre-level nuke, formerly deployed by NATO in =
Europe.&nbsp;It=20
lit during removal from its storage container killing three. Composites =
also=20
burn well at atmospheric pressure unlike a lot of doublebase =
propellants.=20
Finally, APCP catalyzed with any of the ferrocene family (ferrocene, =
catocene,=20
n-butylferrocene) of burn rate catalysts&nbsp;is extremely sensitive to =
shock=20
and friction. They accounted for 16/28 accidents in the 80's including =
over a=20
dozen deaths.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>In the realm of normal processing, both =
sawing and=20
mixing were the source of numerous accidents. I found it very =
disconcerting that=20
such a fundamental process as mixing could still be the source of so =
many=20
accidental ignitions. With ferrocene, or especially catocene; just about =

anything seems to be a possible source for inadvertant ignition. This =
included=20
dropping, cutting with an Exacto, impact with a bronze hammer, hand =
tools,=20
touching the propellant with a rod coated in mineral spirits,&nbsp;and=20
machining. Also interesting was the lack of data. The other accidents =
had who=20
did them along with main propellant data. These all just said mid-80's =
and=20
catocene propellant.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>The other two main failure modes were =
hydromining=20
and whacking. Hydromining is the more environmentally friendly way to =
demil=20
missiles. The description sounds like just hosing propellant out with =
high=20
pressure water. Unfortunately it doesn't seem to be that safe; it =
accounted for=20
five of the accidents via accidental ignition. This included an SS-24 =
2nd stage=20
igniting and then 'flying' through the facility cafeteria.&nbsp;Guess =
that was=20
some daily special. That also was some 'hot' propellant. It had=20
AP/HMX/Al/ADN/Ferrocene; now that's some serious Isp solid=20
propellant.&nbsp;'Whacking' includes dropping/smacking big motors on =
hard=20
objects. There were two cases of accidental motor ignition by this =
method. One=20
was caused by a crane failure and one by dropping the motor 18 inches =
onto=20
pavement.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>I'm certainly going to reevaluate how =
we operate=20
and make sure we have good 'oh shit' procedures worked out. I encourage =
all of=20
you to read that part of the book.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;=20
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; =
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;=20
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; =
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;=20
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; =
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;=20
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; =
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;=20
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Brian</FONT></DIV></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_09C8_01C56B69.3FE57E70--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 24141 invoked from network); 3 Jul 2001 23:18:36 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 3 Jul 2001 23:18:36 -0000
Received: (qmail 1397 invoked from network); 3 Jul 2001 23:19:53 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 3 Jul 2001 23:19:53 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA04800; Tue, 3 Jul 2001 16:02:00 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 70212 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 3 Jul 2001 23:01:22 +0000
Received: from mta01.mail.mel.aone.net.au (mta01.mail.au.uu.net [203.2.192.81])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA04781 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 3 Jul 2001 16:01:21 -0700
Received: from unknown ([63.34.220.42]) by mta01.mail.mel.aone.net.au with SMTP          id <20010703230117.ZWDH18810.mta01.mail.mel.aone.net.au@unknown> for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 4 Jul 2001 09:01:17 +1000
References: Conversation <3B4218F1.A07236B2@NORTELNETWORKS.COM> with last            message <3B422785.E56FCEAB@NORTELNETWORKS.COM>
Priority: Normal
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Priority: 3
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	X-MAPIextension=.TXT;
	charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>
Date:         Tue, 3 Jul 2001 23:01:22 +0000
Reply-To: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] iso-moulded graphite and thermal shock
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <3B422785.E56FCEAB@NORTELNETWORKS.COM>

----------
> Brian Kosko wrote:
> >
> > On smaller motors, graphite nozzles that are just one 'chunk' ,ala
Kosdon or
> > our own John Lyngdal, seem to work fine. The graphite nozzles just don't
> > seem to like having that shoulder put on.
> >
> I've heard that before,

Have you now, we've been though this thread before on this very list and 1
particular list member suggested to go with the 'chunk' idea to solve the
shoulder cracking problem. Can you remember who it was? I'll give you a
clue, his initials are ML :-)

Troy.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 26252 invoked from network); 3 Jul 2001 23:40:34 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 3 Jul 2001 23:40:34 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 20752 invoked from network); 3 Jul 2001 23:41:38 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 3 Jul 2001 23:41:38 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA04910; Tue, 3 Jul 2001 16:37:41 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 70225 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 3 Jul 2001 23:37:31 +0000
Received: from brighton.legacywireless.com (legacywireless.com [208.187.126.2])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA04893 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Tue, 3 Jul 2001 16:37:31 -0700
Received: from [208.187.122.40] by brighton.cogolink.com (NTMail          5.00.0010/NY4701.00.0f189dc1) with ESMTP id tlwsnaaa for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Tue, 3 Jul 2001 17:45:34 -0600
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.77 [en] (Win98; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <NFBBKADEMLBLIEKNLLEPMEIMCCAA.bfeeney@davinciproject.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Message-ID:  <3B41A6B8.EF98643D@biomicro.com>
Date:         Tue, 3 Jul 2001 05:04:24 -0600
Reply-To: "Mark K. Spute" <mks@BIOMICRO.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Mark K. Spute" <mks@BIOMICRO.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] ISAS VTVL link
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Ran it through the Babel Fish translator on AltaVista.  Had to get creative
though to do it.  I copied the html to a geocities webpage to store it on and
then translated it from there.

Brian Feeney wrote:

> Many thanx for the translation Mark. Did you put this through a translation
> software? Which one?
>
> Cheers,
> Brian
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU]On
> Behalf Of Mark K. Spute
> Sent: Tuesday, July 03, 2001 3:54 AM
> To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
> Subject: Re: [AR] ISAS VTVL link
>
> Translation (by Babel Fish) is below:
>
> Brian Feeney wrote:
>
> > This is a link to the ISAS Japanese site that shows a lot more Pics,
> > internal, schematics of the recently test launched VTVL vehicle. All
> > of it is in Japanese. They don't seam to have an English version yet.
> > I found it by going to the Japanese version of the ISAS site. Worth a
> > look and if anyone wants to translate
> > ...http://www.isas.ac.jp/dtc/saisiyo/saisiyo.html
>
> Information of reuse rocket experiment
> 2001/06/25 renewal
>
> Reuse rocket experimental aircraft * 2nd taking off and landing
> experimental announcement sentence
>
> June 25 of 2001 day
>
> Rocket experimental group
>
> It was done as fundamental experiment of the space transportation system
> whose complete reuse is possible " reuse rocket experimental aircraft *
> 2nd taking off and landing experiment (RVT-6)", the 1st taking off and
> landing experiment which was done in the year before last and last year
> it came and it continued to the engine quality test which was done, it
> was started from June 9th in the Noshiro rocket experimental place, such
> as engine combustion with flight form and functional verification and
> taking off and landing flight of the fuselage system tested
> consecutively and it ended with this day. At this time, the taking off
> and landing experiment of 3 times which are planned was executed,
> concerning the quality of control and the engine of flight technology
> for repetition flight of the rocket which aims toward the acquisition
> and reuse of the various data was acquired.
> It repeats this experiment, as a part of research in order to make the
> round trip to outer space easy, being something which aims toward the
> verification of function for establishment of technology for system
> construction of the rocket missile whose flight is possible and taking
> off and landing flight, the truth being something which is administered
> with the accumulation of the engineering technology regarding taking off
> and landing and safely and easily to repeat the system design method et
> cetera uses the rocket engine in order which to fly as a purpose, it
> does.
> With the latest experiment take-off climb to the highest high-level 22m,
> and it landed acording to the data which is acquired with consecutive
> experiment, as for structure of the fuselage which supposes taking off
> and landing and efficiency of the engine and navigation induction
> control facility for taking off and landing it was verified that it has
> the efficiency of according to plan. In addition concerning the
> repetition flight use of the rocket system of the reuse type which
> differs from the former expendable launch vehicle it could obtain many
> knowledge, purpose of expectation it was possible to reach.  The related
> systems and the beach which cooperate at the time of the execution of
> the latest experiment shallow we
> appreciate in cooperation of the people of the local end which begins
> interior of a country Ku.
>
> > > > > > Experimental summary
>
> < June 25th (month) 3rd taking off and landing experiment >
>
> The Space Science Laboratory, June 25th of 2001 (month) o'clock of 6 14
> minutes, at the Noshiro rocket experimental place, did the taking off
> and landing experiment of the reuse rocket experimental aircraft. Flight
> being normal, the highest high-level approximately 22m, after the flight
> of approximately 13 seconds, landed according to plan.
>
> > > > It launches, the scene with animated picture (the 604k)
>
> (Reference) to look at animated picture, the quicktime is necessary.  As
> for quicktime download sight this way
>
> < June 23rd (Saturday) 2nd taking off and landing experiment >
>
> The Space Science Laboratory, June 23rd of 2001 (the Saturday) o'clock
> of 16 45 minutes, at the Noshiro rocket experimental place, did the
> taking off and landing experiment of the reuse rocket experimental
> aircraft. Flight being normal, the highest high-level approximately 9m,
> after the flight of approximately 10 seconds, landed according to plan.
>
> < June 22nd (gold) 1st taking off and landing experiment >
>
> The Space Science Laboratory, June 22nd of 2001 (the gold) o'clock of 16
> 08 minutes, at the Noshiro rocket experimental place, did the taking off
> and landing experiment of the reuse rocket experimental aircraft. Flight
> being normal, the highest high-level approximately 9m, after the flight
> of approximately 10 seconds, landed according to plan.
>
> > > > It launches, the scene with animated picture (the 656k)
>
> Static image of > > > > launch
>
> < Captive firing test June 18th (month) >
>
> The Space Science Laboratory, June 18th of 2001 o'clock of 16 at 36
> minute Noshiro rocket experimental places, did the captive firing test
> of the reuse rocket experimental aircraft, acquired the data of
> expectation. Preparation of continuation and taking off and landing
> experiment is advanced.
>
> Circumstances of < preparation (Noshiro) >
>
> < Reporting release (Noshiro) >
>
> Circumstances of < preparation (Sagamihara) >
>
> Reuse rocket experimental aircraft ? 2nd taking off and landing
> experiment (RVT-6) program outline June of 2001 Education scientific
> economical Space Science Laboratory
>
> 1. Experimental summary
> At the Space Science Laboratory, it repeats as research of the future
> space transportation system flight roughly classifying Ro of possible
> complete reuse type in the space transportation system where the
> complete reuse to which actualization is expected in the near future is
> possible, Efficiency improvement of ? propulsion engine Light weight
> conversion of ? fuselage structure / material It withstands ? reuse the
> system construction method which
> It assumes and so on is the key of the actualization, but presently it
> has dealt with of  research, in the " complete reuse rocket ",  as a
> preliminary test stage of the rocket where this complete reuse of these
> is possible, Necessity for altitude control and the landing induction by
> the ? rocket engine is technology It regards the construction and use of
> the propulsion system because ? efficient reuse is actualized technology
> Acquisition of two technical themes uses the small-sized liquid oxygen
> liquid hydrogen rocket engine for main purpose, the reuse rocket
> experiment
>
> 2. which Experimental operating procedure
> Experiment does on vacuum combustion test ridge sea side inside the
> Space Science Laboratory Noshiro rocket experimental place. With latest
> experiment  you watch for safety at the time of ????? taking off and
> landing experiment, when it is abnormal, you stop flight with the camera
> which is arranged on the ground,
>
> 3. Experimental execution patsy
> Hiroki Matsuo education scientific economical space scientific research
> chief
> (Kanagawa prefecture Sagamihara city Tano stand 3-1-1 TEL042-759-3911
> (generation))
>
> 4. Experimental chief
> Education scientific economical Space Science Laboratory professor rice
> plant valley ? sentence
>
> 5. Experimental place
> Education scientific economical Space Science Laboratory Noshiro rocket
> experimental place (Akita prefecture Noshiro city it is shallow
> Nishiyama 1 TEL0185-52-7123 under the inside letter (generation)) [
> North latitude 4009 ' 52 ", east longitude 13959 ' 36 " ]
>
> 6. Experimental job period
> June 9th of 2001 (Saturday) - June 23rd (Saturday)
>
> Combustion test and execution due date of taking off and landing
> experiment make the following day and time.
> June 16th of 2001 (Saturday) captive firing test
> June 18th of 2001 (month) taking off and landing experiment
> June 20th of 2001 (water) taking off and landing experiment
> June 22nd of 2001 (gold) taking off and landing experiment
> Experimental period and experimental due date are times when it modifies
> with the weather other reasons.
>
> 7. Setting of precaution area
> The experimental day for danger prevention, beforehand as in the
> following figure, provides precaution area.
>
> In the forefront of the > > > page it returns
>
> Okay, Not the best translation in the world, but it makes it a little
> more understandable.  Besides, what do you expect with a fish stuck in
> your ear?
>
> --
> Mark K. Spute
> Senior Research Engineer
> BioMicro Systems Inc.
>
> KD7IWE,  RRS
>
> "It is difficult to say what is impossible, for the dream of yesterday
> is the hope of today and the reality of tomorrow."
>      Dr. Robert H. Goddard

--
Mark K. Spute
Senior Research Engineer
BioMicro Systems Inc.

KD7IWE,  RRS

"It is difficult to say what is impossible, for the dream of yesterday is the
hope of today and the reality of tomorrow."
     Dr. Robert H. Goddard

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 24093 invoked from network); 4 Jul 2001 04:52:09 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 4 Jul 2001 04:52:09 -0000
Received: (qmail 6983 invoked from network); 4 Jul 2001 04:53:15 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 4 Jul 2001 04:53:15 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA05846; Tue, 3 Jul 2001 21:40:17 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 70295 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 4 Jul 2001 04:40:12 +0000
Received: from wrench.toolcity.net (root@wrench.toolcity.net [208.0.188.2]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA05829 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 3 Jul 2001 21:40:11 -0700
Received: from [208.22.189.83]          (dap-208-22-189-83.meadville-tnt-0.pa.toolcity.net [208.22.189.83])          by wrench.toolcity.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id AAA02278; Wed, 4          Jul 2001 00:40:05 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <v01510100b76857e44c91@[208.22.189.162]>
Date:         Wed, 4 Jul 2001 00:42:22 -0500
Reply-To: "al bradley" <abradley@TOOLCITY.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "al bradley" <abradley@TOOLCITY.NET>
Subject:      [AR] 2Re: [AR] milling revisited
Comments: To: Sociald84@AOL.COM
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

>Just a few points I thought I should make:
>
>1. You should probably switch to a larger grain sized black powder for
>parachute use, as the finer powders are really meant for small diameter high
>pressure aplications.
>
>2. Depending on you deffinition of meal powder also called green meal, you
>should easily be able to turn that into a very good very consistant black
>powder with the use of a ball mill and a hydraulic press.
>    a. you can buy a small 6 ton hydraulic press from Harbor Freight for
>about $70   U.S.
>http://www.harborfreight.com/cpi/taf/Displayitem.taf?itemnumber=32879
>    b. If you don't already have a ball mill (which is seems like you do
>however) one    can easily be made with a variable speed motor and some PVC
>pipe.
>    http://www.ctel.net/~dwilliams/index.html
>    c. then you need a powder die, same link as above, with which you press
>the     powder to the proper density, then you just need some good screens
>and     something to break the powder up. you'll need 6 screens to accurately
>size the 4  powder sizes.
>    d. and if your realy into consistency, you can make a burn rate tester
>(same   link) to test batch to batch consistency.

snip . . .

------------------------------
Hi Mark,
Thanks for your comments. As a matter of interest I already have and use a
ball mill, press frame, 6-ton hydraulic jack and pressing dies. These are
based on the web page of pyrotechnician Dan Williams, whose powder seems to
be much faster than mine. His reply was based on the purity of charcoal
when I reached him recently. Might be, I make my own charcoal. Charcoal
purity testing methods don't offer much from search engines inquiries, but
there is some.

What has been your personal experience in reproducing this process,
building ball mills, and pressing dies?  Thanks for the mention of GOEX, I
will look up their page soon.

best regards,
al bradley





------------------------------------------------------------------
Can you live Life with this?: "Unless there is a law, an agreement, or a
long-standing custom, No one `Deserves' Anything -- Either Good or Bad!"

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 2844 invoked from network); 4 Jul 2001 05:35:02 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 4 Jul 2001 05:35:02 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 15444 invoked from network); 4 Jul 2001 05:36:21 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 4 Jul 2001 05:36:21 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA06053; Tue, 3 Jul 2001 22:29:22 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 70323 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 4 Jul 2001 05:29:20 +0000
Received: from albatross.prod.itd.earthlink.net          (albatross.mail.pas.earthlink.net [207.217.120.120]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA06036 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue,          3 Jul 2001 22:29:20 -0700
Received: from sprintmail.com (PPPa46-ResaleSantaClarita2-3R7178.dialinx.net          [4.54.101.43]) by albatross.prod.itd.earthlink.net (EL-8_9_3_3/8.9.3)          with ESMTP id WAA03588 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 3 Jul 2001          22:29:18 -0700 (PDT)
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.74 [en] (Win98; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B41FC62.84F6340D@sprintmail.com>
Date:         Tue, 3 Jul 2001 10:09:54 -0700
Reply-To: "Anthony Colette" <Rockitman@SPRINTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Anthony Colette" <Rockitman@SPRINTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      [AR] 2001 JPC
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Is anyone here going to the 2001 JPC?

I will be at the awards ceremony next Wednesday.  The AIAA has chosen
Carl Stechman and I to receive  "Best Paper and Presentation at the 2000
JPC."

Other than that, I will be wandering in and out of the air breathing and
electric propulsion conferences.

See you there,
Tony

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 4365 invoked from network); 4 Jul 2001 07:09:54 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 4 Jul 2001 07:09:54 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 1200 invoked from network); 4 Jul 2001 07:11:02 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 4 Jul 2001 07:11:02 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA06354; Wed, 4 Jul 2001 00:06:06 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 70355 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 4 Jul 2001 07:05:49 +0000
Received: from femail19.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail19.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.0.95.128]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA06335          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 4 Jul 2001 00:05:49 -0700
Received: from c396957-b.home.net ([24.17.249.10]) by          femail19.sdc1.sfba.home.com (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20          201-229-121-120-20010223) with ESMTP id          <20010704070544.XUMI22728.femail19.sdc1.sfba.home.com@c396957-b.home.net> for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 4          Jul 2001 00:05:44 -0700
X-Sender: spiegl@mail (Unverified)
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
References: <122.12c5799.287369b0@aol.com> <122.12c5799.287369b0@aol.com>            <122.12c5799.287369b0@aol.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <5.1.0.14.2.20010704020218.00b2d180@mail>
Date:         Wed, 4 Jul 2001 02:05:44 -0500
Reply-To: "Mark C Spiegl" <spiegl@HOME.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Mark C Spiegl" <spiegl@HOME.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Increasing propellant density
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC8 22>

> Yep, likewise. I've never considered spinning it axially but I feel the
> idea may have some merit. Interesting.


Exactamundo...

And as you can see, with a grain 4" in diameter (largish by amateur
standards) you only have a 2" radius spinning on the centrifuge. This
is why you need a lot of RPMs to get the benefit of the centrifuge
action.  An 18" diameter grain wouldn't need to spin terribly fast.

When it works right; it works very well. At the end of the centrifuge
process, the centers of the grains are hollow and you can actually see
a dark band in the end of the grain where the goo ends and the
propellant begins. Of course if your making bates grains, it is
intuitive to put multiple grains into an outer tube and centrifuge
many at once. Very consistent results.


--MCS

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 7944 invoked from network); 4 Jul 2001 09:11:07 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 4 Jul 2001 09:11:07 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 23107 invoked from network); 4 Jul 2001 09:06:51 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 4 Jul 2001 09:06:51 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id BAA06531; Wed, 4 Jul 2001 01:09:33 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 70375 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 4 Jul 2001 08:09:26 +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (f5.law15.hotmail.com [64.4.23.5]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id BAA06514 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Wed,          4 Jul 2001 01:09:26 -0700
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Wed,          4 Jul 2001 01:08:56 -0700
Received: from 193.121.251.246 by lw15fd.law15.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Wed,          04 Jul 2001 08:08:55 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [193.121.251.246]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 04 Jul 2001 08:08:56.0302 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[926C30E0:01C10460]
Message-ID:  <F5FutJLtosJ3Ih7jtrS0000f1c2@hotmail.com>
Date:         Wed, 4 Jul 2001 08:09:26 +0000
Reply-To: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] ISAS VTVL link
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Great pics. I previously mailed a pic of the craft without the conical
fuselage.
Propellants are LH2/LOX. I wonder if this has anything to do with the SSTO
Kawasaki passenger shuttle (which 'll have many more motors).

jd


>From: "Mark K. Spute" <mks@BIOMICRO.COM>
>Reply-To: "Mark K. Spute" <mks@BIOMICRO.COM>
>To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
>Subject: Re: [AR] ISAS VTVL link
>Date: Tue, 3 Jul 2001 02:53:49 -0600
>
>Translation (by Babel Fish) is below:
>
>Brian Feeney wrote:
>
> > This is a link to the ISAS Japanese site that shows a lot more Pics,
> > internal, schematics of the recently test launched VTVL vehicle. All
> > of it is in Japanese. They don't seam to have an English version yet.
> > I found it by going to the Japanese version of the ISAS site. Worth a
> > look and if anyone wants to translate
> > ...http://www.isas.ac.jp/dtc/saisiyo/saisiyo.html
>
>Information of reuse rocket experiment
>2001/06/25 renewal
>
>Reuse rocket experimental aircraft * 2nd taking off and landing
>experimental announcement sentence
>
>June 25 of 2001 day
>
>Rocket experimental group
>
>It was done as fundamental experiment of the space transportation system
>whose complete reuse is possible " reuse rocket experimental aircraft *
>2nd taking off and landing experiment (RVT-6)", the 1st taking off and
>landing experiment which was done in the year before last and last year
>it came and it continued to the engine quality test which was done, it
>was started from June 9th in the Noshiro rocket experimental place, such
>as engine combustion with flight form and functional verification and
>taking off and landing flight of the fuselage system tested
>consecutively and it ended with this day. At this time, the taking off
>and landing experiment of 3 times which are planned was executed,
>concerning the quality of control and the engine of flight technology
>for repetition flight of the rocket which aims toward the acquisition
>and reuse of the various data was acquired.
>It repeats this experiment, as a part of research in order to make the
>round trip to outer space easy, being something which aims toward the
>verification of function for establishment of technology for system
>construction of the rocket missile whose flight is possible and taking
>off and landing flight, the truth being something which is administered
>with the accumulation of the engineering technology regarding taking off
>and landing and safely and easily to repeat the system design method et
>cetera uses the rocket engine in order which to fly as a purpose, it
>does.
>With the latest experiment take-off climb to the highest high-level 22m,
>and it landed acording to the data which is acquired with consecutive
>experiment, as for structure of the fuselage which supposes taking off
>and landing and efficiency of the engine and navigation induction
>control facility for taking off and landing it was verified that it has
>the efficiency of according to plan. In addition concerning the
>repetition flight use of the rocket system of the reuse type which
>differs from the former expendable launch vehicle it could obtain many
>knowledge, purpose of expectation it was possible to reach.  The related
>systems and the beach which cooperate at the time of the execution of
>the latest experiment shallow we
>appreciate in cooperation of the people of the local end which begins
>interior of a country Ku.
>
> > > > > > Experimental summary
>
>< June 25th (month) 3rd taking off and landing experiment >
>
>The Space Science Laboratory, June 25th of 2001 (month) o'clock of 6 14
>minutes, at the Noshiro rocket experimental place, did the taking off
>and landing experiment of the reuse rocket experimental aircraft. Flight
>being normal, the highest high-level approximately 22m, after the flight
>of approximately 13 seconds, landed according to plan.
>
> > > > It launches, the scene with animated picture (the 604k)
>
>(Reference) to look at animated picture, the quicktime is necessary.  As
>for quicktime download sight this way
>
>< June 23rd (Saturday) 2nd taking off and landing experiment >
>
>The Space Science Laboratory, June 23rd of 2001 (the Saturday) o'clock
>of 16 45 minutes, at the Noshiro rocket experimental place, did the
>taking off and landing experiment of the reuse rocket experimental
>aircraft. Flight being normal, the highest high-level approximately 9m,
>after the flight of approximately 10 seconds, landed according to plan.
>
>< June 22nd (gold) 1st taking off and landing experiment >
>
>The Space Science Laboratory, June 22nd of 2001 (the gold) o'clock of 16
>08 minutes, at the Noshiro rocket experimental place, did the taking off
>and landing experiment of the reuse rocket experimental aircraft. Flight
>being normal, the highest high-level approximately 9m, after the flight
>of approximately 10 seconds, landed according to plan.
>
> > > > It launches, the scene with animated picture (the 656k)
>
>Static image of > > > > launch
>
>< Captive firing test June 18th (month) >
>
>The Space Science Laboratory, June 18th of 2001 o'clock of 16 at 36
>minute Noshiro rocket experimental places, did the captive firing test
>of the reuse rocket experimental aircraft, acquired the data of
>expectation. Preparation of continuation and taking off and landing
>experiment is advanced.
>
>Circumstances of < preparation (Noshiro) >
>
>< Reporting release (Noshiro) >
>
>Circumstances of < preparation (Sagamihara) >
>
>Reuse rocket experimental aircraft ? 2nd taking off and landing
>experiment (RVT-6) program outline June of 2001 Education scientific
>economical Space Science Laboratory
>
>1. Experimental summary
>At the Space Science Laboratory, it repeats as research of the future
>space transportation system flight roughly classifying Ro of possible
>complete reuse type in the space transportation system where the
>complete reuse to which actualization is expected in the near future is
>possible, Efficiency improvement of ? propulsion engine Light weight
>conversion of ? fuselage structure / material It withstands ? reuse the
>system construction method which
>It assumes and so on is the key of the actualization, but presently it
>has dealt with of  research, in the " complete reuse rocket ",  as a
>preliminary test stage of the rocket where this complete reuse of these
>is possible, Necessity for altitude control and the landing induction by
>the ? rocket engine is technology It regards the construction and use of
>the propulsion system because ? efficient reuse is actualized technology
>Acquisition of two technical themes uses the small-sized liquid oxygen
>liquid hydrogen rocket engine for main purpose, the reuse rocket
>experiment
>
>2. which Experimental operating procedure
>Experiment does on vacuum combustion test ridge sea side inside the
>Space Science Laboratory Noshiro rocket experimental place. With latest
>experiment  you watch for safety at the time of ????? taking off and
>landing experiment, when it is abnormal, you stop flight with the camera
>which is arranged on the ground,
>
>3. Experimental execution patsy
>Hiroki Matsuo education scientific economical space scientific research
>chief
>(Kanagawa prefecture Sagamihara city Tano stand 3-1-1 TEL042-759-3911
>(generation))
>
>4. Experimental chief
>Education scientific economical Space Science Laboratory professor rice
>plant valley ? sentence
>
>5. Experimental place
>Education scientific economical Space Science Laboratory Noshiro rocket
>experimental place (Akita prefecture Noshiro city it is shallow
>Nishiyama 1 TEL0185-52-7123 under the inside letter (generation)) [
>North latitude 4009 ' 52 ", east longitude 13959 ' 36 " ]
>
>6. Experimental job period
>June 9th of 2001 (Saturday) - June 23rd (Saturday)
>
>Combustion test and execution due date of taking off and landing
>experiment make the following day and time.
>June 16th of 2001 (Saturday) captive firing test
>June 18th of 2001 (month) taking off and landing experiment
>June 20th of 2001 (water) taking off and landing experiment
>June 22nd of 2001 (gold) taking off and landing experiment
>Experimental period and experimental due date are times when it modifies
>with the weather other reasons.
>
>7. Setting of precaution area
>The experimental day for danger prevention, beforehand as in the
>following figure, provides precaution area.
>
>In the forefront of the > > > page it returns
>
>
>Okay, Not the best translation in the world, but it makes it a little
>more understandable.  Besides, what do you expect with a fish stuck in
>your ear?
>
>--
>Mark K. Spute
>Senior Research Engineer
>BioMicro Systems Inc.
>
>KD7IWE,  RRS
>
>"It is difficult to say what is impossible, for the dream of yesterday
>is the hope of today and the reality of tomorrow."
>      Dr. Robert H. Goddard

_________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 11180 invoked from network); 4 Jul 2001 15:35:31 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 4 Jul 2001 15:35:31 -0000
Received: (qmail 28711 invoked from network); 4 Jul 2001 15:36:39 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 4 Jul 2001 15:36:39 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA07752; Wed, 4 Jul 2001 08:33:49 -0700
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 70462 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 4 Jul 2001 15:33:34 +0000
Received: from zcars0m9.ca.nortel.com (h157s242a129n47.user.nortelnetworks.com          [47.129.242.157]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA07735          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 4 Jul 2001 08:33:33 -0700
Received: from zcars04e.ca.nortel.com (zcars04e.ca.nortel.com [47.129.242.56])          by zcars0m9.ca.nortel.com (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f64FWfb04481          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 4 Jul 2001 11:32:41 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from rftzy232.ca.nortel.com by zcars04e.ca.nortel.com; Wed, 4 Jul          2001 11:32:35 -0400
Received: from NORTELNETWORKS.COM (wftzh00e.ca.nortel.com [47.130.116.9]) by          rftzy232.ca.nortel.com with SMTP (Microsoft Exchange Internet Mail          Service Version 5.5.2653.13) id NKPLZ5FG; Wed, 4 Jul 2001 11:28:06          -0400
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.73C-CCK-MCD [en] (X11; U; HP-UX B.10.20 9000/785)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: Conversation <3B4218F1.A07236B2@NORTELNETWORKS.COM> with last            message <3B422785.E56FCEAB@NORTELNETWORKS.COM>            <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Orig: <mleech@NORTELNETWORKS.COM>
Message-ID:  <3B433720.901EC03C@NORTELNETWORKS.COM>
Date:         Wed, 4 Jul 2001 11:32:48 -0400
Reply-To: "Marcus Leech" <mleech@NORTELNETWORKS.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Marcus Leech" <mleech@NORTELNETWORKS.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] iso-moulded graphite and thermal shock
Comments: To: Troy Prideaux <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Troy Prideaux wrote:

>
> Have you now, we've been though this thread before on this very list and 1
> particular list member suggested to go with the 'chunk' idea to solve the
> shoulder cracking problem. Can you remember who it was? I'll give you a
> clue, his initials are ML :-)
>
Blush.

My "single chunk" nozzles are what I use for my solid composite work--sealing
  between the propellant and nozzle isn't particularly important in the
  designs that I use.

For my hybrids, however, the sealing arrangement between the fuel grain and
  the nozzle is such that at least one shoulder is required.  I've never had
  a problem with this, until I switched to the very hard, high density,
  high price, iso-moulded graphite.

One of the thoughts I had was that if I put an 'O' ring around the divergent
  section "nose" that projects through the nozzle-end closure, that might help
  to spread the stress out enough that this problem will disappear.
  With a metallic end closure nicely nestled into the corner of the
  divergent shoulder, there's likely a very high stress in that corner.
  An 'O' ring might help here.  I'll give it a try next time I'm at the
  test stand.

--
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Marcus Leech                             Mail:   Dept 8M70, MS 012, FITZ
Advisor                                  Phone: (ESN) 393-9145  +1 613 763 9145
Security Architecture and Planning       Fax:   (ESN) 393-9435  +1 613 763 9435
Nortel Networks                          mleech@nortelnetworks.com
-----------------Expressed opinions are my own, not my employer's------

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 19747 invoked from network); 4 Jul 2001 20:48:29 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 4 Jul 2001 20:48:29 -0000
X-Priority: 3
Received: (qmail 99 invoked from network); 4 Jul 2001 20:49:36 -0000
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 4 Jul 2001 20:49:36 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA08648; Wed, 4 Jul 2001 13:46:57 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 70529 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 4 Jul 2001 20:46:50 +0000
Received: from cyclone.comcen.com.au (cyclone.comcen.com.au [203.23.236.100])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA08630 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 4 Jul 2001 13:46:49 -0700
Received: (from nobody@localhost) by cyclone.comcen.com.au (8.11.1/8.11.1) id          f64Kkg246965; Thu, 5 Jul 2001 06:46:42 +1000 (EST) (envelope-from          pkelly@comcen.com.au)
X-Authentication-Warning: cyclone.comcen.com.au: nobody set sender to                         pkelly@comcen.com.au using -f
References: Conversation <3B4218F1.A07236B2@NORTELNETWORKS.COM> with last                  message <3B422785.E56FCEAB@NORTELNETWORKS.COM>                       <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>            <3B433720.901EC03C@NORTELNETWORKS.COM>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
User-Agent: IMP/PHP IMAP webmail program 2.2.3
X-Originating-IP: 203.2.125.3
Message-ID:  <994279602.3b4380b2c5117@webmail.comcen.com.au>
Date:         Thu, 5 Jul 2001 06:46:42 +1000
Reply-To: "Paul Kelly" <pkelly@COMCEN.COM.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Paul Kelly" <pkelly@COMCEN.COM.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] iso-moulded graphite and thermal shock
Comments: To: Marcus Leech <mleech@NORTELNETWORKS.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <3B433720.901EC03C@NORTELNETWORKS.COM>

I've taken to turning a stress relief groove (0.5-1mm deep) at the shoulder. I
haven't had a failure since then but ,I too, have been using softer grades of
graphite for a while. I got some hard stuff the other day, I'll do a test.

PK


Quoting Marcus Leech <mleech@NORTELNETWORKS.COM>:

> Troy Prideaux wrote:
>
> >
> > Have you now, we've been though this thread before on this very list
> and 1
> > particular list member suggested to go with the 'chunk' idea to solve
> the
> > shoulder cracking problem. Can you remember who it was? I'll give you
> a
> > clue, his initials are ML :-)
> >
> Blush.
>
> My "single chunk" nozzles are what I use for my solid composite
> work--sealing
>   between the propellant and nozzle isn't particularly important in the
>   designs that I use.
>
> For my hybrids, however, the sealing arrangement between the fuel grain
> and
>   the nozzle is such that at least one shoulder is required.  I've never
> had
>   a problem with this, until I switched to the very hard, high density,
>   high price, iso-moulded graphite.
>
> One of the thoughts I had was that if I put an 'O' ring around the
> divergent
>   section "nose" that projects through the nozzle-end closure, that
> might help
>   to spread the stress out enough that this problem will disappear.
>   With a metallic end closure nicely nestled into the corner of the
>   divergent shoulder, there's likely a very high stress in that corner.
>   An 'O' ring might help here.  I'll give it a try next time I'm at the
>   test stand.
>
> --
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> Marcus Leech                             Mail:   Dept 8M70, MS 012,
> FITZ
> Advisor                                  Phone: (ESN) 393-9145  +1 613
> 763 9145
> Security Architecture and Planning       Fax:   (ESN) 393-9435  +1 613
> 763 9435
> Nortel Networks                          mleech@nortelnetworks.com
> -----------------Expressed opinions are my own, not my employer's------
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 28508 invoked from network); 4 Jul 2001 22:21:53 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 4 Jul 2001 22:21:53 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: (qmail 18784 invoked from network); 4 Jul 2001 22:22:45 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 4 Jul 2001 22:22:45 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA08952; Wed, 4 Jul 2001 15:20:41 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 70558 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 4 Jul 2001 22:20:40 +0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA08932; Wed, 4 Jul 2001 15:20:36 -0700
Message-ID:  <200107042220.PAA08932@itc.uci.edu>
Date:         Wed, 4 Jul 2001 22:20:36 +0000
Reply-To: "Joe Perez" <rocketman6965@AOL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Joe Perez" <rocketman6965@AOL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Mondur-IPDI Mix
Comments: To: bkosko1@HOME.COM
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Hey Brian,

I plan to mix only 72% AP with a 40-20-12 ratio of 200-90-400 respectively.
Along with 5% 400 Mag and 1.3% CuO the rest is binder, plasticizer,tepanol,
and curative.  My last batch I weighed out wrong.  I planned the same
except in my haste (bad word when mixing propellant), I ended up weighing
out more AP 400 for a 32-20-20 ratio of 200-90-400 respectively.  This
mixture gave me a .055 density.  I plan to put this in a 3 grain bates
design 4" each with a .484 nozzle in a Kosdon 1400ns case.  I'm pretty sure
it will handle the "mistake batch".  It burns alot slower than the stuff I
made with 1000 mag.  Do you think it will handle the 40-20-12 batch, or
should I go to a C-slot design.  I can rout a .5 x .5 slot in the grain.  I
am already doing that for my 2550ns case with a 24" grain.
Let me know please.

Joe


From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 29281 invoked from network); 4 Jul 2001 22:22:07 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 4 Jul 2001 22:22:07 -0000
Received: (qmail 28837 invoked from network); 4 Jul 2001 22:23:16 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 4 Jul 2001 22:23:16 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA08914; Wed, 4 Jul 2001 15:20:24 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 70549 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 4 Jul 2001 22:20:19 +0000
Received: from mta01.mail.mel.aone.net.au (mta01.mail.au.uu.net [203.2.192.81])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA08896 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 4 Jul 2001 15:20:18 -0700
Received: from unknown ([63.34.212.25]) by mta01.mail.mel.aone.net.au with SMTP          id <20010704222014.UVAM18810.mta01.mail.mel.aone.net.au@unknown>;          Thu, 5 Jul 2001 08:20:14 +1000
References: Conversation <122.12c5799.287369b0@aol.com> with last message            <5.1.0.14.2.20010704020218.00b2d180@mail>
Priority: Normal
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Priority: 3
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	X-MAPIextension=.TXT;
	charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>
Date:         Wed, 4 Jul 2001 22:20:19 +0000
Reply-To: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Increasing propellant density
Comments: To: Mark C Spiegl <spiegl@HOME.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <5.1.0.14.2.20010704020218.00b2d180@mail>

Just a coupla questions:
 Have you noticed a change in either or both burn rate and gas generation
between the start and end of the burn? Have you noticed a somewhat sluggish
ignition?


As I previously mentioned, it maybe possible with motors of medium to high
metal loadings to lose a little efficiency from metal agglomeration towards
the end of burn depending on a few factors of course.

Geez, sounds like the perfect process for casting large candy grains does
it not?

Troy.



----------
> > Yep, likewise. I've never considered spinning it axially but I feel the
> > idea may have some merit. Interesting.
>
>
> Exactamundo...
>
> And as you can see, with a grain 4" in diameter (largish by amateur
> standards) you only have a 2" radius spinning on the centrifuge. This
> is why you need a lot of RPMs to get the benefit of the centrifuge
> action.  An 18" diameter grain wouldn't need to spin terribly fast.
>
> When it works right; it works very well. At the end of the centrifuge
> process, the centers of the grains are hollow and you can actually see
> a dark band in the end of the grain where the goo ends and the
> propellant begins. Of course if your making bates grains, it is
> intuitive to put multiple grains into an outer tube and centrifuge
> many at once. Very consistent results.
>
>
> --MCS

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 10970 invoked from network); 5 Jul 2001 15:27:23 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 5 Jul 2001 15:27:23 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 4374 invoked from network); 5 Jul 2001 15:28:34 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 5 Jul 2001 15:28:34 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA11593; Thu, 5 Jul 2001 08:06:35 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 70671 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 5 Jul 2001 15:05:17 +0000
Received: from mail1.murraystate.edu (mail1.murraystate.edu [216.249.159.50])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id HAA11450 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 5 Jul 2001 07:52:27 -0700
Received: from jjcomputer.murraystate.edu (216.249.158.68) by          mail1.murraystate.edu (NPlex 5.5.031) id 3B2AA235000534AB for          AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 5 Jul 2001 09:50:33 -0500
X-Sender: terry.mccreary@mail.murraystate.edu
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <5.1.0.14.0.20010701062503.00acc980@mail.murraystate.edu>
Date:         Thu, 5 Jul 2001 09:55:26 -0500
Reply-To: "Terry McCreary" <terry.mccreary@MURRAYSTATE.EDU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Terry McCreary" <terry.mccreary@MURRAYSTATE.EDU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Increasing propellant density
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <3B3EA263.4050007@ac.net>

At 12:09 AM 7/1/01 -0400, you wrote:
>Hi all,
>   I just had what may be a silly idea. Has anyone tried centrifuging
>APCP? This would be done after packing in the casting tube, but before
>it has a chance to cure. I can see that it would waste some binder/fuel,
>and it could separate some of the components, but it ought to be
>possible to work out a procedure that gives a greater density without
>going too far. Just how high can you go in density before you start
>losing performance? A side benefit might be that it would degas the
>propellant, as well.
>   Hey, it was just a thought...

Thinks are a good thing...

As Troy mentioned, centrifugation should work.  Related items:

-All other things being equal, higher density means higher performance (Isp).

-The casting tube must be carefully supported so that it does not
split.  I've split casting tubes merely from packing the propellant too
hard.  This is Very Not Fun.

-The density can be increased only to a point.  Consider a 300 mL glass
full to the top with 2 kg lead shot.  Add water just to cover; say the
water weighs 100 g. The mixture has a density of 2100 g/300 mL = 7
g/mL.  The density can't be increased beyond this.

The maximum density will be that reached when the solids are packed as
tightly as possible and just covered with liquid.  The exact density
obtainable will depend on particle size distribution and the densities of
the individual solids.  In practice, if the propellant is already fairly
high in solids, the increase in density obtained by centrifuging is likely
to be quite small.

P'rfesser

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 5690 invoked from network); 5 Jul 2001 18:53:47 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 5 Jul 2001 18:53:47 -0000
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 18107 invoked from network); 5 Jul 2001 18:54:56 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 5 Jul 2001 18:54:56 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA12550; Thu, 5 Jul 2001 11:51:21 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 70817 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 5 Jul 2001 18:51:13 +0000
Received: from mhs.swan.ac.uk (mhs.swan.ac.uk [137.44.1.33]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA12533 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Thu,          5 Jul 2001 11:51:12 -0700
Received: from ccs-mail1.singleton.swan.ac.uk ([137.44.41.18]) by          mhs.swan.ac.uk with esmtp (Exim 3.30 #1) id 15IE64-0007mh-00 for          arocket@itc.uci.edu; Thu, 05 Jul 2001 19:43:28 +0100
Received: by ccs-mail1.singleton.swan.ac.uk with Internet Mail Service          (5.5.2653.19) id <MWTAWDLW>; Thu, 5 Jul 2001 19:53:32 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19)
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Message-ID:  <2F969DBFC2E0824DAA17A7BE6B84EA6501BC5D5D@ccs-mail1.singleton.swan.ac.uk>
Date:         Thu, 5 Jul 2001 19:53:32 +0100
Reply-To: "PADFIELD J. \(129275\)" <129275@SWANSEA.AC.UK>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "PADFIELD J. \(129275\)" <129275@SWANSEA.AC.UK>
Subject:      [AR] 5th Edition of Sutton
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Hi,
Can anyone comment on the 5th Edition of Rocket Propulsion Elements, by GP
Sutton. I'm considering picking up a second hand copy for $50.
Thanks, James.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 3135 invoked from network); 5 Jul 2001 19:36:49 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 5 Jul 2001 19:36:49 -0000
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 15887 invoked from network); 5 Jul 2001 19:38:12 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 5 Jul 2001 19:38:12 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA12711; Thu, 5 Jul 2001 12:32:30 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 70831 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 5 Jul 2001 19:32:27 +0000
Received: from spsystems.net (spsystems.net [209.47.149.227]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA12694 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Thu,          5 Jul 2001 12:32:26 -0700
Received: (from henry@localhost) by spsystems.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id PAA13900;          Thu, 5 Jul 2001 15:31:27 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010705152348.12562D-100000@spsystems.net>
Date:         Thu, 5 Jul 2001 15:31:26 -0400
Reply-To: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] 5th Edition of Sutton
Comments: cc: "PADFIELD J. (129275)" <129275@SWANSEA.AC.UK>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <2F969DBFC2E0824DAA17A7BE6B84EA6501BC5D5D@ccs-mail1.singleton.swan.ac.uk>

On Thu, 5 Jul 2001, PADFIELD J. (129275) wrote:
> Can anyone comment on the 5th Edition of Rocket Propulsion Elements, by GP
> Sutton. I'm considering picking up a second hand copy for $50.

*UNDER NO CIRCUMSTANCES* spend that much money on the 5th edition.  It's
the slim little dumbed-down one.  You can find the 4th, which was better,
for less money than that.  The 6th -- a large improvement on the 5th --
would be worth that much.  (The 4th and 6th are each twice the thickness
of the 5th.)  The 7th, which is current, is probably the best, but it's
up around $125.

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 2876 invoked from network); 5 Jul 2001 19:51:34 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 5 Jul 2001 19:51:34 -0000
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 18948 invoked from network); 5 Jul 2001 19:52:56 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 5 Jul 2001 19:52:56 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA12768; Thu, 5 Jul 2001 12:44:24 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 70840 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 5 Jul 2001 19:44:19 +0000
Received: from mhs.swan.ac.uk (mhs.swan.ac.uk [137.44.1.33]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA12751 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Thu,          5 Jul 2001 12:44:18 -0700
Received: from ccs-mail1.singleton.swan.ac.uk ([137.44.41.18]) by          mhs.swan.ac.uk with esmtp (Exim 3.30 #1) id 15IEvT-0000I8-00 for          arocket@itc.uci.edu; Thu, 05 Jul 2001 20:36:35 +0100
Received: by ccs-mail1.singleton.swan.ac.uk with Internet Mail Service          (5.5.2653.19) id <MWTAWD3T>; Thu, 5 Jul 2001 20:46:39 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19)
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Message-ID:  <2F969DBFC2E0824DAA17A7BE6B84EA6501BC5D5E@ccs-mail1.singleton.swan.ac.uk>
Date:         Thu, 5 Jul 2001 20:46:38 +0100
Reply-To: "PADFIELD J. \(129275\)" <129275@SWANSEA.AC.UK>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "PADFIELD J. \(129275\)" <129275@SWANSEA.AC.UK>
Subject:      [AR]
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Thanks Henry, I appreciate that. If I see the 6th at a decent price I'll
pick myself up a copy. One day, when I get out of university and get myself
a job I'll get myself the 7th edition.
Ta, James.

On Thu, 5 Jul 2001, PADFIELD J. (129275) wrote:
> Can anyone comment on the 5th Edition of Rocket Propulsion Elements, by GP
> Sutton. I'm considering picking up a second hand copy for $50.

*UNDER NO CIRCUMSTANCES* spend that much money on the 5th edition.  It's
the slim little dumbed-down one.  You can find the 4th, which was better,
for less money than that.  The 6th -- a large improvement on the 5th --
would be worth that much.  (The 4th and 6th are each twice the thickness
of the 5th.)  The 7th, which is current, is probably the best, but it's
up around $125.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 3399 invoked from network); 5 Jul 2001 19:51:41 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 5 Jul 2001 19:51:41 -0000
Received: (qmail 18987 invoked from network); 5 Jul 2001 19:53:04 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 5 Jul 2001 19:53:04 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA12806; Thu, 5 Jul 2001 12:48:50 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 70839 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 5 Jul 2001 19:48:49 +0000
Received: from econophone.ch (mail.econophone.ch [195.129.112.100]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA12735 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Thu, 5 Jul 2001 12:38:48 -0700
Received: (from smtpuser@localhost) by econophone.ch (8.9.1/8.9.0/csId$) id          VAA24773 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Thu, 5 Jul 2001 21:38:46 +0200          (MET DST)
Received: from UNKNOWN(212.53.104.225),          claiming to be "PC233" via SMTP by econophone.ch,          id smtpdAAAzRaOwW; Thu Jul  5 21:38:36 2001
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_09CB_01C56B69.3FFFBD30"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2462.0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <001b01c10589$f13a1ae0$2101a8c0@PC233>
Date:         Thu, 5 Jul 2001 21:37:35 +0200
Reply-To: "Veya" <veya@BLUEWIN.CH>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Veya" <veya@BLUEWIN.CH>
Subject:      Re: [AR] [ar] 5th edition of sutton
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_09CB_01C56B69.3FFFBD30
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

amazon sells the 7th edition for 99$.
it cost 26$ less than the 6th.

Jonas Veya

------=_NextPart_000_09CB_01C56B69.3FFFBD30
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Diso-8859-1">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 6.00.2462.0" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>amazon sells the 7th edition for =
99$.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>it cost 26$ less than the =
6th.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Jonas Veya</FONT></DIV></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_09CB_01C56B69.3FFFBD30--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 28989 invoked from network); 5 Jul 2001 20:04:42 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 5 Jul 2001 20:04:42 -0000
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 18495 invoked from network); 5 Jul 2001 20:05:50 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 5 Jul 2001 20:05:50 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA12913; Thu, 5 Jul 2001 13:01:29 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 70871 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 5 Jul 2001 20:01:21 +0000
Received: from idsoftware.com (predator.idsoftware.com [192.246.40.34]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA12896 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Thu, 5 Jul 2001 13:01:21 -0700
Received: from [192.246.40.129] (account johnc HELO lightning.idsoftware.com)          by idsoftware.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 3.4.6) with ESMTP id 272896          for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 05 Jul 2001 15:00:37 -0500
X-Sender: johnc@mail.idsoftware.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <4.3.1.2.20010705144359.03e52008@mail.idsoftware.com>
Date:         Thu, 5 Jul 2001 15:00:29 -0500
Reply-To: "John Carmack" <johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Carmack" <johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM>
Subject:      [AR] inertial navigation
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Does anyone know the specifics of the rate / G ranges and bits of precision
used in launch vehicle inertial navigation units?

I implemented a basic inertial navigation system with our fiber optic gyros
and accelerometers, but it loses its mind pretty damn quick.

Our gyros are in roughly +/- 100 degrees / second, and the accelerometer is
+/- 4G.

The random drift from bias changes is less than a degree a minute and 0.1
m/s a minute, but once you involve the gravity vector, any small drift in
angles, bias, or scale will rapidly cause a sizable velocity increase.

I thought getting 15 reasonable seconds would be straightforward, but it
looks like I am going to have to sweat over that a little.

I am probably going to need to take more steps to clean up our A/D, because
even with a new power supply there is a fair amount of noise.  Having the
signals go to a terminal strip, then to a breakout board, then through a
ribbon cable before getting to the A/D board is probably a good chunk of
it.  I will probably make a new shielded cable that is as direct as
possible.  In the next revision of all of our electronics, I may move to a
completely separate A/D box, instead of integrating it on the noisy PC104
stack.

John Carmack

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 28886 invoked from network); 5 Jul 2001 20:57:05 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 5 Jul 2001 20:57:05 -0000
X-Priority: 3
Received: (qmail 29965 invoked from network); 5 Jul 2001 20:57:58 -0000
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 5 Jul 2001 20:57:58 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA13143; Thu, 5 Jul 2001 13:55:20 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 70885 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 5 Jul 2001 20:55:16 +0000
Received: from m1.jersey.juno.com (m1.jersey.juno.com [64.136.16.64]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA13126 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 5 Jul 2001 13:55:15 -0700
Received: from cookie.juno.com by cookie.juno.com for          <"H3WK6e6N+bsCVJQMHM9sZLy88rllnq/JZCYk1OcRHLwdv5vAd0BBgA==">
Received: (from kc2csh@juno.com) by m1.jersey.juno.com (queuemail) id F9L4TXTZ;          Thu, 05 Jul 2001 16:54:34 EDT
X-Mailer: Juno 4.0.11
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Juno-Line-Breaks: 0-11,13-15
X-Juno-Att: 0
X-Juno-RefParts: 0
Message-ID:  <20010705.165837.-3889279.0.kc2csh@juno.com>
Date:         Thu, 5 Jul 2001 16:57:33 -0400
Reply-To: <kc2csh@JUNO.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <kc2csh@JUNO.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] 5th Edition of Sutton
Comments: To: henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

 The 7th, which is current, is probably the best, but
> it's up around $125.
>
                $87.50 sepcial ordered through the local college
                bookstore, including shipping to my door.

                                                       Jay



>                                                           Henry
Spencer
>
> henry@spsystems.net

________________________________________________________________
GET INTERNET ACCESS FROM JUNO!
Juno offers FREE or PREMIUM Internet access for less!
Join Juno today!  For your FREE software, visit:
http://dl.www.juno.com/get/tagj.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 17041 invoked from network); 5 Jul 2001 21:38:57 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 5 Jul 2001 21:38:57 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 26088 invoked from network); 5 Jul 2001 21:40:08 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 5 Jul 2001 21:40:08 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA13312; Thu, 5 Jul 2001 14:36:33 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 70907 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 5 Jul 2001 21:36:24 +0000
Received: from pan.ch.intel.com (chfdns01.ch.intel.com [143.182.246.24]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA13295 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 5 Jul 2001 14:36:24 -0700
Received: from snmeng1.rr.intel.com (snmeng1.rr.intel.com [128.215.231.11]) by          pan.ch.intel.com (8.9.1a+p1/8.9.1/d: relay.m4,v 1.40 2001/06/06          21:14:49 root Exp $) with ESMTP id VAA19145; Thu, 5 Jul 2001 21:36:19          GMT
Received: from snmeng30.rr.intel.com (snmeng30.rr.intel.com [128.215.52.76]) by          snmeng1.rr.intel.com (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id PAA05315; Thu, 5          Jul 2001 15:33:30 -0600 (MDT)
Received: from snmeng30.rr.intel.com (snmeng30.rr.intel.com [128.215.52.76]) by          snmeng30.rr.intel.com (8.9.1a/8.9.1/d: client.m4,v 1.3 1998/09/29          16:36:11 sedayao Exp sedayao $) with SMTP id PAA14467; Thu, 5 Jul          2001 15:33:27 -0600 (MDT)
X-Mailer: dtmail 1.2.1 CDE Version 1.2.1 SunOS 5.6 sun4m sparc
X-Sun-Text-Type: ascii
Message-ID:  <200107052133.PAA14467@snmeng30.rr.intel.com>
Date:         Thu, 5 Jul 2001 15:33:27 -0600
Reply-To: "Ray Calkins 100660207" <rcalkins@SNMENG1.RR.INTEL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Ray Calkins 100660207" <rcalkins@SNMENG1.RR.INTEL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Increasing propellant density
Comments: To: GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

> Geez, sounds like the perfect process for casting large candy grains does
> it not?
Maybe.  The standard process for casting candy grains uses powdered KNO3
suspended in molten sugar.  This process would separate them out.  But, with Mr.
Yawn's recrystalization process, you have a molten slurry that is fairly
homogenous, and somewhat difficult to handle otherwise.  It looks very
promising.

Ray Calkins
rcalkins@snmeng1.rr.intel.com           raymond.calkins@intel.com
"My opinions are my own, and do not reflect those of my employer."


From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 10802 invoked from network); 5 Jul 2001 22:15:07 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 5 Jul 2001 22:15:07 -0000
Received: (qmail 11075 invoked from network); 5 Jul 2001 22:15:58 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 5 Jul 2001 22:15:58 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA13470; Thu, 5 Jul 2001 15:13:22 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 70925 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 5 Jul 2001 22:13:16 +0000
Received: from mta01.mail.mel.aone.net.au (mta01.mail.au.uu.net [203.2.192.81])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA13453 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 5 Jul 2001 15:13:15 -0700
Received: from unknown ([63.34.220.241]) by mta01.mail.mel.aone.net.au with          SMTP id <20010705221312.MJRQ18810.mta01.mail.mel.aone.net.au@unknown>          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 6 Jul 2001 08:13:12 +1000
References: Conversation <200107052133.PAA14467@snmeng30.rr.intel.com> with            last message <200107052133.PAA14467@snmeng30.rr.intel.com>
Priority: Normal
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Priority: 3
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	X-MAPIextension=.TXT;
	charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>
Date:         Thu, 5 Jul 2001 22:13:16 +0000
Reply-To: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Increasing propellant density
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <200107052133.PAA14467@snmeng30.rr.intel.com>

----------
>
> > Geez, sounds like the perfect process for casting large candy grains
does
> > it not?
> Maybe.  The standard process for casting candy grains uses powdered KNO3
> suspended in molten sugar.  This process would separate them out.

That depends on a few factors, but I was thinking more in terms of
mechanical properties and shrinkage problems with larger grains.

Troy.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 23426 invoked from network); 6 Jul 2001 00:10:09 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 6 Jul 2001 00:10:09 -0000
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 29629 invoked from network); 6 Jul 2001 00:11:20 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 6 Jul 2001 00:11:20 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA13829; Thu, 5 Jul 2001 16:52:35 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 70970 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 5 Jul 2001 23:51:51 +0000
Received: from web10505.mail.yahoo.com (web10505.mail.yahoo.com          [216.136.130.155]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id QAA13807          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 5 Jul 2001 16:51:51 -0700
Received: from [129.219.29.38] by web10505.mail.yahoo.com via HTTP; Thu, 05 Jul          2001 16:51:51 PDT
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <20010705235151.76785.qmail@web10505.mail.yahoo.com>
Date:         Thu, 5 Jul 2001 16:51:51 -0700
Reply-To: "Justin Pucci" <drrockit5150@YAHOO.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Justin Pucci" <drrockit5150@YAHOO.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] 2001 JPC
Comments: To: Anthony Colette <Rockitman@SPRINTMAIL.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <3B41FC62.84F6340D@sprintmail.com>

Tony,

I will be attending the conference as well.  I'll
probably be around the hybrid and liquid stuff the
most.  Maybe I'll see you there!

-->Justin

--- Anthony Colette <Rockitman@SPRINTMAIL.COM> wrote:
> Is anyone here going to the 2001 JPC?
>
> I will be at the awards ceremony next Wednesday.
> The AIAA has chosen
> Carl Stechman and I to receive  "Best Paper and
> Presentation at the 2000
> JPC."
>
> Other than that, I will be wandering in and out of
> the air breathing and
> electric propulsion conferences.
>
> See you there,
> Tony


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail
http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 351 invoked from network); 6 Jul 2001 00:40:13 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 6 Jul 2001 00:40:13 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: (qmail 25379 invoked from network); 6 Jul 2001 00:41:35 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 6 Jul 2001 00:41:35 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA14044; Thu, 5 Jul 2001 17:37:46 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 70994 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 6 Jul 2001 00:37:36 +0000
Received: from cisco.com (cypher.cisco.com [171.69.11.18]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA14027 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu,          5 Jul 2001 17:37:36 -0700
Received: (from billw@localhost) by cisco.com (8.8.8/2.6/Cisco List          Logging/8.8.8) id RAA17807; Thu, 5 Jul 2001 17:36:59 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID:  <CMM.0.90.4.994379819.billw@cypher>
Date:         Thu, 5 Jul 2001 17:36:59 PDT
Reply-To: "Bill Westfield" <billw@cisco.com>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "William Chops Westfield" <billw@cisco.com>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Portable data acquisition with PDA's/palm devices
Comments: To: Philski <phil@NETWURX.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  Your message of Thu, 28 Jun 2001 18:22:15 -0500

>> granted, you'd have to write a program to interpret the data on the Palm :-)

Fortunately, there are some free development environments for the Palm...

BillW


From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 10782 invoked from network); 6 Jul 2001 00:42:47 -0000
X-Priority: 3
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 6 Jul 2001 00:42:47 -0000
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 22868 invoked from network); 6 Jul 2001 00:43:41 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 6 Jul 2001 00:43:41 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA14092; Thu, 5 Jul 2001 17:41:33 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 71004 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 6 Jul 2001 00:41:32 +0000
Received: from sys27.hou.wt.net ([205.230.159.27]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7)          with ESMTP id RAA14075 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 5 Jul 2001          17:41:31 -0700
Received: from localhost (216-119-130-157.ipset10.wt.net [216.119.130.157]) by          sys27.hou.wt.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id TAA24089 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 5 Jul 2001 19:41:23 -0500 (CDT)
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_09CE_01C56B69.4012D000"
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.388)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID:  <200107060041.TAA24089@sys27.hou.wt.net>
Date:         Thu, 5 Jul 2001 19:41:31 -0500
Reply-To: "Donald McCorvey" <dlm3@NETAXS.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Donald McCorvey" <dlm3@NETAXS.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] inertial navigation
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <4.3.1.2.20010705144359.03e52008@mail.idsoftware.com>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_09CE_01C56B69.4012D000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1"

John,

Check out the spec on Honeywell's Miniature Inertial Measurement unit =
at:

        =
http://content.honeywell.com/space/products/default.asp?target=3Dinertial

They have a product brochure which lists sensor performance as:

                                        Gyro                    Accel
                                        ------                  -------

Range                           =B1375 deg/sec  =B125g
Bias (1 sigma)                  <0.05 deg/hr    <100=B5g
ARW(1 sigma)                    <0.01 deg/DHr
Scale factor (1sigma)   <5 ppm          <175 ppm
IA Alignment(1 sigma)   <25 arc-sec     <70=B5rad


FWIW: practical A/D resolution is usually going to be 12 bits. You can=20=

buy 16 bit converters, but the extra 4 bits may well be nothing more=20
than noise unless you have a quiet board.

As to your noise problems: keep distances short. Anything greater than=20=

an inch invites noise (it's called an 'antenna' <grin>). Shielding=20
usually doesn't help much. Good wiring design will. If you do add=20
shields, make sure they are tied to ground at only ONE end of the=20
shield, otherwise you're introducing a ground loop which will create=20
circulating currents which will get in your signal wiring.

Better still, get boards made which incorporate your sensors and have as=20=

short a distance between them and the A/D as possible.

But your problem is not in your 'noisy' PC-104 board. Digital and analog=20=

can coexist just fine - but don't let them share grounds or have sneak=20=

ground loops. Make sure that the digital side and analog side connect=20
only through your A/D and D/A chips and nowhere else. Electrical=20
isolation is everything. Physical isolation, on the other hand is of=20
limited value - you should be filtering out high frequency noise (like=20=

clocks and processor noise) with your anti-alias filters anyway.

Good luck!

Don McCorvey
Houston, Tx.

On Thursday, July 5, 2001, at 03:00 PM, John Carmack wrote:

> Does anyone know the specifics of the rate / G ranges and bits of=20
> precision
> used in launch vehicle inertial navigation units?
>
> I implemented a basic inertial navigation system with our fiber optic=20=

> gyros
> and accelerometers, but it loses its mind pretty damn quick.
>
> Our gyros are in roughly +/- 100 degrees / second, and the=20
> accelerometer is
> +/- 4G.
>
> The random drift from bias changes is less than a degree a minute and=20=

> 0.1
> m/s a minute, but once you involve the gravity vector, any small drift=20=

> in
> angles, bias, or scale will rapidly cause a sizable velocity increase.
>
> I thought getting 15 reasonable seconds would be straightforward, but =
it
> looks like I am going to have to sweat over that a little.
>
> I am probably going to need to take more steps to clean up our A/D,=20
> because
> even with a new power supply there is a fair amount of noise.  Having=20=

> the
> signals go to a terminal strip, then to a breakout board, then through =
a
> ribbon cable before getting to the A/D board is probably a good chunk =
of
> it.  I will probably make a new shielded cable that is as direct as
> possible.  In the next revision of all of our electronics, I may move=20=

> to a
> completely separate A/D box, instead of integrating it on the noisy=20
> PC104
> stack.
>
> John Carmack
>

------=_NextPart_000_09CE_01C56B69.4012D000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Type: text/enriched;
	charset="iso-8859-1"

John,


Check out the spec on Honeywell's Miniature Inertial Measurement unit
at:


        =
http://content.honeywell.com/space/products/default.asp?target=3Dinertial


They have a product brochure which lists sensor performance as:


                                        Gyro                    Accel

                                        ------                  -------


Range                           =B1375 deg/sec  =B125g

Bias (1 sigma)                  <<0.05 deg/hr   <<100=B5g

ARW(1 sigma)                    <<0.01 deg/DHr

Scale factor (1sigma)   <<5 ppm         <<175 ppm

IA Alignment(1 sigma)   <<25 arc-sec    <<70=B5rad



FWIW: practical A/D resolution is usually going to be 12 bits. You can
buy 16 bit converters, but the extra 4 bits may well be nothing more
than noise unless you have a quiet board.


As to your noise problems: keep distances short. Anything greater than
an inch invites noise (it's called an 'antenna' <<grin>). Shielding
usually doesn't help much. Good wiring design will. If you do add
shields, make sure they are tied to ground at only ONE end of the
shield, otherwise you're introducing a ground loop which will create
circulating currents which <italic>will</italic> get in your signal
wiring.


Better still, get boards made which incorporate your sensors and have
as short a distance between them and the A/D as possible.=20


But your problem is not in your 'noisy' PC-104 board. Digital and
analog can coexist just fine - but don't let them share grounds or
have sneak ground loops. Make sure that the digital side and analog
side connect only through your A/D and D/A chips and nowhere else.
Electrical isolation is everything. Physical isolation, on the other
hand is of limited value - you should be filtering out high frequency
noise (like clocks and processor noise) with your anti-alias filters
anyway.


Good luck!


Don McCorvey

Houston, Tx.


On Thursday, July 5, 2001, at 03:00 PM, John Carmack wrote:


<excerpt>Does anyone know the specifics of the rate / G ranges and
bits of precision

used in launch vehicle inertial navigation units?


I implemented a basic inertial navigation system with our fiber optic
gyros

and accelerometers, but it loses its mind pretty damn quick.


Our gyros are in roughly +/- 100 degrees / second, and the
accelerometer is

+/- 4G.


The random drift from bias changes is less than a degree a minute and
0.1

m/s a minute, but once you involve the gravity vector, any small drift
in

angles, bias, or scale will rapidly cause a sizable velocity increase.


I thought getting 15 reasonable seconds would be straightforward, but
it

looks like I am going to have to sweat over that a little.


I am probably going to need to take more steps to clean up our A/D,
because

even with a new power supply there is a fair amount of noise.  Having
the

signals go to a terminal strip, then to a breakout board, then through a

ribbon cable before getting to the A/D board is probably a good chunk
of

it.  I will probably make a new shielded cable that is as direct as

possible.  In the next revision of all of our electronics, I may move
to a

completely separate A/D box, instead of integrating it on the noisy
PC104

stack.


John Carmack


</excerpt>=

------=_NextPart_000_09CE_01C56B69.4012D000--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 27135 invoked from network); 6 Jul 2001 01:15:28 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 6 Jul 2001 01:15:28 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 23231 invoked from network); 6 Jul 2001 01:16:38 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 6 Jul 2001 01:16:38 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA14241; Thu, 5 Jul 2001 18:13:39 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 71018 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 6 Jul 2001 01:13:35 +0000
Received: from idsoftware.com (predator.idsoftware.com [192.246.40.34]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA14224 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Thu, 5 Jul 2001 18:13:35 -0700
Received: from [192.246.40.129] (account johnc HELO lightning.idsoftware.com)          by idsoftware.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 3.4.6) with ESMTP id 273110          for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 05 Jul 2001 20:12:51 -0500
X-Sender: johnc@mail.idsoftware.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.1
References: <4.3.1.2.20010705144359.03e52008@mail.idsoftware.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_09D1_01C56B69.401C6CF0"
Message-ID:  <4.3.1.2.20010705200705.03f039d0@mail.idsoftware.com>
Date:         Thu, 5 Jul 2001 20:12:42 -0500
Reply-To: "John Carmack" <johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Carmack" <johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] inertial navigation
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <200107060041.TAA24089@sys27.hou.wt.net>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_09D1_01C56B69.401C6CF0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

At 07:41 PM 7/5/2001 -0500, you wrote:
>John,
>
>Check out the spec on Honeywell's Miniature Inertial Measurement unit at:
>
>=20
><http://content.honeywell.com/space/products/default.asp?target=3Dinertial>=
http://content.honeywell.com/space/products/default.asp?target=3Dinertial=20
>
>
>They have a product brochure which lists sensor performance as:
>
>                                         Gyro                    Accel
>                                         ------                  -------
>
>Range                           =B1375 deg/sec  =B125g
>Bias (1 sigma)                  <0.05 deg/hr   <100=B5g
>ARW(1 sigma)                    <0.01 deg/DHr
>Scale factor (1sigma)   <5 ppm         <175 ppm
>IA Alignment(1 sigma)   <25 arc-sec    <70=B5rad
>

0.05 deg/hr bias stability is certainly a lot better than the KVH 2 to 4=20
deg/hr KVH quotes...  I wonder if that is due to any inherent superiority=20
of ring laser gyros over fiber optic gyros, or if it just a matter of=20
vastly higher spec parts and assembly.

I wonder how much they charge for those big (70 pounds!) boxes...

John Carmack


------=_NextPart_000_09D1_01C56B69.401C6CF0
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<html>
At 07:41 PM 7/5/2001 -0500, you wrote:<br>
<blockquote type=3Dcite cite>John, <br>
<br>
Check out the spec on Honeywell's Miniature Inertial Measurement unit at:
<br>
<br>
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;
<a href=3D"http://content.honeywell.com/space/products/default.asp?target=3D=
inertial">http://content.honeywell.com/space/products/default.asp?target=3Di=
nertial</a>
<br>
<br>
They have a product brochure which lists sensor performance as: <br>
<br>
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbs=
p;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&n=
bsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;=
&nbsp;=
 Gyro&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp=
;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Accel <br>
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbs=
p;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&n=
bsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;=
&nbsp;=
 ------&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nb=
sp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; ------- <br>
<br>
Range&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp=
;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nb=
sp;&nbsp; =B1375 deg/sec&nbsp; =B125g <br>
Bias (1=
 sigma)&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nb=
sp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; &lt;0.05 deg/hr&nbsp;&nbsp; &lt;100=B5g=
 <br>
ARW(1=
 sigma)&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nb=
sp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; &lt;0.01 deg/DHr <br>
Scale factor (1sigma)&nbsp;&nbsp; &lt;5=
 ppm&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; &lt;175 ppm <br>
IA Alignment(1 sigma)&nbsp;&nbsp; &lt;25 arc-sec&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;=
 &lt;70=B5rad <br>
<br>
</blockquote><br>
0.05 deg/hr bias stability is certainly a lot better than the KVH 2 to 4=
 deg/hr KVH quotes...&nbsp; I wonder if that is due to any inherent=
 superiority of ring laser gyros over fiber optic gyros, or if it just a=
 matter of vastly higher spec parts and assembly.<br>
<br>
I wonder how much they charge for those big (70 pounds!) boxes...<br>
<br>
John Carmack<br>
<br>
</html>

------=_NextPart_000_09D1_01C56B69.401C6CF0--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 23561 invoked from network); 6 Jul 2001 02:05:36 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 6 Jul 2001 02:05:36 -0000
Received: (qmail 1366 invoked from network); 6 Jul 2001 02:06:28 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 6 Jul 2001 02:06:28 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA14411; Thu, 5 Jul 2001 19:04:02 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 71041 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 6 Jul 2001 02:03:53 +0000
Received: from spsystems.net (spsystems.net [209.47.149.227]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA14394 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Thu,          5 Jul 2001 19:03:52 -0700
Received: (from henry@localhost) by spsystems.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id WAA19643;          Thu, 5 Jul 2001 22:02:34 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010705220100.19560A-100000@spsystems.net>
Date:         Thu, 5 Jul 2001 22:02:34 -0400
Reply-To: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] inertial navigation
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <4.3.1.2.20010705200705.03f039d0@mail.idsoftware.com>

On Thu, 5 Jul 2001, John Carmack wrote:
> 0.05 deg/hr bias stability is certainly a lot better than the KVH 2 to 4
> deg/hr KVH quotes...  I wonder if that is due to any inherent superiority
> of ring laser gyros over fiber optic gyros, or if it just a matter of
> vastly higher spec parts and assembly.

Fiber gyros are newer, and the technology is less mature... but most of
the difference is probably just a matter of spending lots more money on
materials and manufacturing.

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 8496 invoked from network); 6 Jul 2001 07:13:44 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 6 Jul 2001 07:13:44 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 29724 invoked from network); 6 Jul 2001 07:14:48 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 6 Jul 2001 07:14:48 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA16231; Thu, 5 Jul 2001 23:57:44 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 71537 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 6 Jul 2001 06:57:38 +0000
Received: from femail18.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail18.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.0.95.145]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA16214          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 5 Jul 2001 23:57:38 -0700
Received: from c396957-b.home.net ([24.17.249.10]) by          femail18.sdc1.sfba.home.com (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20          201-229-121-120-20010223) with ESMTP id          <20010706065732.BYXQ20657.femail18.sdc1.sfba.home.com@c396957-b.home.net> for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 5          Jul 2001 23:57:32 -0700
X-Sender: spiegl@mail
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
References: <5.1.0.14.2.20010704020218.00b2d180@mail>            <122.12c5799.287369b0@aol.com>            <5.1.0.14.2.20010704020218.00b2d180@mail>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <5.1.0.14.2.20010706015019.00a69f00@mail>
Date:         Fri, 6 Jul 2001 01:57:34 -0500
Reply-To: "Mark C Spiegl" <spiegl@HOME.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Mark C Spiegl" <spiegl@HOME.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Increasing propellant density
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC8 22>

> P'rfesser writes:
> The maximum density will be that reached when the solids are packed as
> tightly as possible and just covered with liquid.  The exact density
> obtainable will depend on particle size distribution and the densities of
> the individual solids.  In practice, if the propellant is already fairly
> high in solids, the increase in density obtained by centrifuging is likely
> to be quite small.

This is true.

However... (there's always one :) excess binder and other crapola
migrate towards the center and then are machined out. So in this
example add an extra 2" of water to a suspension of lead-shot. The
centrifuge separates the water and the machining removes the water.
Not a perfect example but you get the picture.

Keep in mind that a centerfuge is an effective degaser.



> Troy Prideaux writes:
> Have you noticed a change in either or both burn rate and gas generation
> between the start and end of the burn? Have you noticed a somewhat sluggish
> ignition?


Realistically no difference. Theoretically the outer bands should be
slightly higher solid loadings.

Ignition characteristics seem to depend on chemistry, not processing
method.  Remember the cores are machined so they are nice and rough
with many local ignition points. Using ClO3 chemistry instead of AP
chemistry makes the grains darn near impossible to light regardless of
processing method, for example.


--MCS

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 5766 invoked from network); 6 Jul 2001 09:33:23 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 6 Jul 2001 09:33:23 -0000
Received: (qmail 4338 invoked from network); 6 Jul 2001 09:34:17 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 6 Jul 2001 09:34:17 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id CAA16797; Fri, 6 Jul 2001 02:31:38 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 71639 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 6 Jul 2001 09:31:32 +0000
Received: from mta04.mail.mel.aone.net.au (mta04.mail.au.uu.net [203.2.192.84])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id CAA16780 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 6 Jul 2001 02:31:31 -0700
Received: from win2pk ([63.34.216.132]) by mta04.mail.mel.aone.net.au with SMTP          id <20010706093128.GBMF12944.mta04.mail.mel.aone.net.au@win2pk> for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 6 Jul 2001 19:31:28 +1000
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
Importance: Normal
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <NEBBJIGOELOLIBCCPKDCCEJICBAA.geordi@c031.aone.net.au>
Date:         Fri, 6 Jul 2001 19:50:24 +1000
Reply-To: "Troy Prideaux" <geordi@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Troy Prideaux" <geordi@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Increasing propellant density
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <5.1.0.14.2.20010706015019.00a69f00@mail>

>> Troy Prideaux writes:
>> Have you noticed a change in either or both burn rate and gas generation
>> between the start and end of the burn? Have you noticed a
>somewhat sluggish
>> ignition?
>
>
>Realistically no difference. Theoretically the outer bands should be
>slightly higher solid loadings.
>
>Ignition characteristics seem to depend on chemistry, not processing
>method.  Remember the cores are machined so they are nice and rough
>with many local ignition points. Using ClO3 chemistry instead of AP
>chemistry makes the grains darn near impossible to light regardless of
>processing method, for example.

I am referring to chemical composition here ie. more non energetic binder
(generally) = cooler propellant and generally means more energy to activate
especially with AP composite propellants. I can see there not being much
difference between the inside and outside if a reasonable sized core was
drilled out, but some people choose to push their propellant loadings to the
upper limits and may notice more of a difference. It all comes down to
performance and reliability in the end, which are the two reasons for
adopting such a system in the first place yes? Point being that if you were
to end up with a very "hot" mix towards the final stages of the burn and a
more sluggish mix at the start, you'd have to adjust your Kn ratio to suit
the maximum pressure expected either by tailoring the grain geometry (to be
slightly regressive) or adopting an ablative type nozzle to suit. This isn't
a problem at all but it's worth bringing these issues out in the open if
such measures are required and if interest for the idea is growing.

Troy.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 18749 invoked from network); 6 Jul 2001 18:26:00 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 6 Jul 2001 18:26:00 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 12021 invoked from network); 6 Jul 2001 18:27:25 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 6 Jul 2001 18:27:25 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA18520; Fri, 6 Jul 2001 11:23:04 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 71812 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 6 Jul 2001 18:22:48 +0000
Received: from mailhost0.trib.com (mailhost0.trib.com [63.229.150.3]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA18503 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Fri, 6 Jul 2001 11:22:48 -0700
Received: from mail.trib.com (mail.trib.com [12.10.158.17]) by          mailhost0.trib.com (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f66IMhx99371; Fri, 6          Jul 2001 12:22:45 -0600 (MDT) (envelope-from          jwckman@space-rockets.com)
Received: from [63.229.150.200] (HELO space-rockets.com) by mail.trib.com          (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 3.4.6) with ESMTP id 38421921; Fri, 06 Jul 2001          12:22:41 -0600
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.5 [en] (Win95; I)
X-Accept-Language: en,pdf
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <5.1.0.14.0.20010701062503.00acc980@mail.murraystate.edu>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B460187.C9C79354@space-rockets.com>
Date:         Fri, 6 Jul 2001 12:20:57 -0600
Reply-To: <jwckman@SPACE-ROCKETS.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John H. Wickman" <jwckman@SPACE-ROCKETS.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Increasing propellant density
Comments: To: Terry McCreary <terry.mccreary@murraystate.edu>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

>>>>-All other things being equal, higher density means
higher performance (Isp).<<<

No, Isp is not changed by a change in density of the
propellant.

Isp is a function of C* of the chamber and nozzle
coefficient.

John Wickman

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 23435 invoked from network); 6 Jul 2001 19:43:23 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 6 Jul 2001 19:43:23 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 5717 invoked from network); 6 Jul 2001 19:44:16 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 6 Jul 2001 19:44:16 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA18832; Fri, 6 Jul 2001 12:17:50 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 71859 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 6 Jul 2001 19:17:48 +0000
Received: from mail1.murraystate.edu (mail1.murraystate.edu [216.249.159.50])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id MAA18815 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 6 Jul 2001 12:17:47 -0700
Received: from jjcomputer.murraystate.edu (216.249.150.92) by          mail1.murraystate.edu (NPlex 5.5.031) id 3B2AA23500059233 for          AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 6 Jul 2001 14:15:48 -0500
X-Sender: terry.mccreary@mail.murraystate.edu
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
References: <5.1.0.14.0.20010701062503.00acc980@mail.murraystate.edu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <5.1.0.14.0.20010706141734.024f0a20@mail.murraystate.edu>
Date:         Fri, 6 Jul 2001 14:21:41 -0500
Reply-To: "Terry McCreary" <terry.mccreary@MURRAYSTATE.EDU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Terry McCreary" <terry.mccreary@MURRAYSTATE.EDU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Increasing propellant density
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <3B460187.C9C79354@space-rockets.com>

At 12:20 PM 7/6/01 -0600, you wrote:
> >>>>-All other things being equal, higher density means
>higher performance (Isp).<<<
>
>No, Isp is not changed by a change in density of the
>propellant.
>
>Isp is a function of C* of the chamber and nozzle
>coefficient.
>
>John Wickman

Whups!  My bad.  You and Troy are absolutely correct.

In a practical sense, the delivered impulse for a higher density propellant
will be greater than that of the same type of propellant at a lower
density, simply because there is a greater mass of propellant in a given
volume.   But as Troy noted, that's a description of density Isp and not Isp.

P'rfesser

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 25382 invoked from network); 7 Jul 2001 02:54:46 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 7 Jul 2001 02:54:46 -0000
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 11968 invoked from network); 7 Jul 2001 02:55:42 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 7 Jul 2001 02:55:42 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA20450; Fri, 6 Jul 2001 19:50:24 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 72000 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 7 Jul 2001 02:49:55 +0000
Received: from gull.mail.pas.earthlink.net (gull.mail.pas.earthlink.net          [207.217.121.85]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA20427          for <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Fri, 6 Jul 2001 19:49:55 -0700
Received: from m0a2q0.earthlink.net          (pool0239.cvx25-bradley.dialup.earthlink.net [209.179.216.239]) by          gull.mail.pas.earthlink.net (EL-8_9_3_3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id TAA02871          for <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Fri, 6 Jul 2001 19:48:29 -0700 (PDT)
X-Sender: apendragn@mail.earthlink.net
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <4.3.1.1.20010706194812.022bf1a0@mail.earthlink.net>
Date:         Fri, 6 Jul 2001 19:49:23 -0700
Reply-To: "Arthur Ed LeBouthillier" <apendragn@EARTHLINK.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Arthur Ed LeBouthillier" <apendragn@EARTHLINK.NET>
Subject:      [AR] Baikal/Angara
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

If anyone else is interested, I found the following site with
pictures and description of the Khrunichev Baikal/Angara
rocket:

        http://www.russianspaceweb.com/angara.html

Cheers,
Art Ed LeBouthillier

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 15913 invoked from network); 7 Jul 2001 07:42:20 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 7 Jul 2001 07:42:20 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 8849 invoked from network); 7 Jul 2001 07:43:34 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 7 Jul 2001 07:43:34 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA21425; Sat, 7 Jul 2001 00:37:43 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 72102 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 7 Jul 2001 07:37:07 +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (f99.law3.hotmail.com [209.185.241.99]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA21407 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Sat, 7 Jul 2001 00:37:07 -0700
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Sat,          7 Jul 2001 00:36:36 -0700
Received: from 213.224.83.46 by lw3fd.law3.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Sat, 07          Jul 2001 07:36:36 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [213.224.83.46]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 07 Jul 2001 07:36:36.0806 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[8DA1D660:01C106B7]
Message-ID:  <F99xc1o8yfogkJXrRjb00006cd3@hotmail.com>
Date:         Sat, 7 Jul 2001 07:37:07 +0000
Reply-To: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Baikal/Angara
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

yep, saw that winged contraption displayed on a pylon pointing skyward in Le
Bourget a few weeks ago; great originality in design like your url says:

The Baikal booster stage would be also equipped with an air-breathing jet
engine fitted in the nose section of the rocket, which would provide a
powered horizontal landing of the vehicle on the runway. Thanks to the
air-breathing engine, the Baikal's return to Earth would look much more
similar to the regular aircraft than to the US Space
Shuttle or Russian Buran, which both rely entirely on the aerodynamic
gliding and have only one opportunity for landing. Baikal's jet engine would
be fueled by kerosene from the same tanks, which feed the vehicle's main
rocket engine during the takeoff.

Maybe a wedding between amateur rocketeers and airplane modellers is in the
offing once the rocketeers give up on chutes...and use an empty road as an
airstrip. A bit too complex I guess.

jd

                 By 2001, Khrunichev built 4 full-scale mockups of the
Baikal stage, which were tested in wind tunnels of the Central
                 Aero- and Hydrodynamics Institute, TsAGI, at speeds 0.5 -
10 Mach (or speed of sound).



>From: Arthur Ed LeBouthillier <apendragn@EARTHLINK.NET>
>Reply-To: Arthur Ed LeBouthillier <apendragn@EARTHLINK.NET>
>To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
>Subject: [AR] Baikal/Angara
>Date: Fri, 6 Jul 2001 19:49:23 -0700
>
>If anyone else is interested, I found the following site with
>pictures and description of the Khrunichev Baikal/Angara
>rocket:
>
>        http://www.russianspaceweb.com/angara.html
>
>Cheers,
>Art Ed LeBouthillier

_________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 21907 invoked from network); 7 Jul 2001 21:45:46 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 7 Jul 2001 21:45:46 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 21722 invoked from network); 7 Jul 2001 21:46:41 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 7 Jul 2001 21:46:41 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA23565; Sat, 7 Jul 2001 14:43:35 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 72182 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 7 Jul 2001 21:43:16 +0000
Received: from falcon.mail.pas.earthlink.net (falcon.mail.pas.earthlink.net          [207.217.120.74]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA23547          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 7 Jul 2001 14:43:16 -0700
Received: from m0a2q0.earthlink.net          (pool0359.cvx38-bradley.dialup.earthlink.net [216.244.31.104]) by          falcon.mail.pas.earthlink.net (EL-8_9_3_3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id          OAA15391 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 7 Jul 2001 14:43:15 -0700          (PDT)
X-Sender: apendragn@mail.earthlink.net
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <4.3.1.1.20010707144302.022e9560@mail.earthlink.net>
Date:         Sat, 7 Jul 2001 14:44:20 -0700
Reply-To: "Arthur Ed LeBouthillier" <apendragn@EARTHLINK.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Arthur Ed LeBouthillier" <apendragn@EARTHLINK.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Baikal/Angara
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <F99xc1o8yfogkJXrRjb00006cd3@hotmail.com>

Two similar, U.S., efforts can be seen at:

        http://www.starbooster.com/

and

        http://www.calpolyspacesystems.com/index.html

Cheers,
Art Ed LeBouthillier

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 6860 invoked from network); 7 Jul 2001 22:39:29 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 7 Jul 2001 22:39:29 -0000
Received: (qmail 7014 invoked from network); 7 Jul 2001 22:39:12 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 7 Jul 2001 22:39:12 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA23709; Sat, 7 Jul 2001 15:35:51 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 72192 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 7 Jul 2001 22:35:44 +0000
Received: from mailhost0.trib.com (mailhost0.trib.com [63.229.150.3]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA23692 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Sat, 7 Jul 2001 15:35:44 -0700
Received: from mail.trib.com (mail.trib.com [12.10.158.17]) by          mailhost0.trib.com (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f67MZgx05637; Sat, 7          Jul 2001 16:35:42 -0600 (MDT) (envelope-from          jwckman@space-rockets.com)
Received: from [63.229.150.185] (HELO hppav) by mail.trib.com (CommuniGate Pro          SMTP 3.4.6) with SMTP id 38508784; Sat, 07 Jul 2001 16:35:41 -0600
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
Importance: Normal
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <NKEHJAOOKBPGIKOOPDEFEEIOCAAA.jwckman@space-rockets.com>
Date:         Sat, 7 Jul 2001 16:34:19 -0600
Reply-To: "John Wickman" <jwckman@SPACE-ROCKETS.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Wickman" <jwckman@SPACE-ROCKETS.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] calculating flow
Comments: To: Greg Hartung <ghartung13@home.com>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <GGEIJGNNFHFPEBENACBAKEPGCEAA.ghartung13@home.com>

Do you have instrumentation to measure the pressure in the line?  If so, you
could make an orifice volume flow meter by meauring the pressure in the line
upstream and downstream of the orifice.

John Wickman


-----Original Message-----
From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@itc.uci.edu]On
Behalf Of Greg Hartung
Sent: Sunday, July 01, 2001 12:12 AM
To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
Subject: [AR] calculating flow


   I am looking for a simple way to calculate the flow of nitrous in a line.
I have flipped thru a few fluid dynamics books, but everything seems to
indicate I need to know 9million things about the fluid:  velocity,
friction, Reynolds, pressure drop, etc.  (If I knew the velocity, I'd
already be done).  Any simplifications?

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 24901 invoked from network); 8 Jul 2001 01:21:57 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 8 Jul 2001 01:21:57 -0000
Received: (qmail 23472 invoked from network); 8 Jul 2001 01:22:52 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 8 Jul 2001 01:22:52 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA24232; Sat, 7 Jul 2001 18:20:23 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 72243 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 8 Jul 2001 01:20:18 +0000
Received: from corlabs (24-216-244-100.hsacorp.net [24.216.244.100]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA24214 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Sat, 7 Jul 2001 18:20:17 -0700
Received: from [192.168.0.11] by corlabs (ArGoSoft Mail Server Plus,          Version 1.3 (1.3.0.1)); Sat, 7 Jul 2001 20:42:43 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook CWS, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <001601c1074c$faf20b00$0b00a8c0@star>
Date:         Sat, 7 Jul 2001 20:26:14 -0500
Reply-To: "Carl A. Blood" <cablood@CORLABS.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Carl A. Blood" <cablood@CORLABS.COM>
Subject:      [AR]
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Ray,

I got this ---------->


The DNS error occured while relaying the mail to
the following recipients:
rcalkins@snmeng1.rr.intel.com
Domain server failure
<---


When I sent this ---------------->
Ray,

What time frame were you looking at for the tests?

Carl

<-------
Thanks
Carl

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 429 invoked from network); 8 Jul 2001 02:12:15 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 8 Jul 2001 02:12:15 -0000
Received: (qmail 830 invoked from network); 8 Jul 2001 02:13:42 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 8 Jul 2001 02:13:42 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA24414; Sat, 7 Jul 2001 19:09:19 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 72264 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 8 Jul 2001 02:09:16 +0000
Received: from localhost (rcalkins@localhost) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with          ESMTP id SAA24361; Sat, 7 Jul 2001 18:59:13 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.LNX.4.10.10107071852310.24333-100000@itc.uci.edu>
Date:         Sat, 7 Jul 2001 18:59:13 -0700
Reply-To: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
Subject:      Re: [AR]
Comments: To: "Carl A. Blood" <cablood@CORLABS.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <001601c1074c$faf20b00$0b00a8c0@star>

On Sat, 7 Jul 2001, Carl A. Blood wrote:

> Ray,
>
> I got this ---------->
>
>
> The DNS error occured while relaying the mail to
> the following recipients:
> rcalkins@snmeng1.rr.intel.com
> Domain server failure
> <---
Hmm, don't know about the failure, sometimes it works, sometimes it
doesn't...

> What time frame were you looking at for the tests?
Probably in a couple of months, say the end of September, but I can
stretch it to accomodate you if needed.  What is your development schedule
like?

Thanks,

Ray

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 14037 invoked from network); 8 Jul 2001 03:49:45 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 8 Jul 2001 03:49:45 -0000
Received: (qmail 1720 invoked from network); 8 Jul 2001 03:50:59 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 8 Jul 2001 03:50:59 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA24753; Sat, 7 Jul 2001 20:48:17 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 72290 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 8 Jul 2001 03:48:08 +0000
Received: from localhost (dmccue@localhost) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with          ESMTP id UAA24734; Sat, 7 Jul 2001 20:48:07 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.LNX.4.10.10107072042400.24690-100000@itc.uci.edu>
Date:         Sat, 7 Jul 2001 20:48:07 -0700
Reply-To: "David J. McCue" <dmccue@itc.uci.edu>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "David J. McCue" <dmccue@itc.uci.edu>
Subject:      Re: [AR]
Comments: To: Ray Calkins <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <Pine.LNX.4.10.10107071852310.24333-100000@itc.uci.edu>

FYI, list mail addressed to Ray is sometimes being delayed by DNS lookup
problems as well. At any given time this is happening to two or three
people. List messages *will* eventually get there, can't speak for the
persistance of your mail servers.

OBRocketContent: Anyone using anything other than black powder or Pyrodex
for ejection charges? (I know, we don't need no steenking recovery, this
is Amateur Rocketry!)

-Dave McCue, your humble servant--

On Sat, 7 Jul 2001, Ray Calkins wrote:

> On Sat, 7 Jul 2001, Carl A. Blood wrote:
>
> > Ray,
> >
> > I got this ---------->
> >
> >
> > The DNS error occured while relaying the mail to
> > the following recipients:
> > rcalkins@snmeng1.rr.intel.com
> > Domain server failure
> > <---
> Hmm, don't know about the failure, sometimes it works, sometimes it
> doesn't...
>
> > What time frame were you looking at for the tests?
> Probably in a couple of months, say the end of September, but I can
> stretch it to accomodate you if needed.  What is your development schedule
> like?
>
> Thanks,
>
> Ray
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 7015 invoked from network); 8 Jul 2001 04:32:17 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 8 Jul 2001 04:32:17 -0000
Received: (qmail 16661 invoked from network); 8 Jul 2001 04:33:44 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 8 Jul 2001 04:33:44 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA25009; Sat, 7 Jul 2001 21:27:37 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 72317 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 8 Jul 2001 04:27:31 +0000
Received: from dune.gnc.net (root@dune.gnc.net [207.203.72.4]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA24992 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat,          7 Jul 2001 21:27:30 -0700
Received: from beowulf (sw2-34.gnc.net [207.203.72.114]) by dune.gnc.net          (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id AAA32200 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 8          Jul 2001 00:27:39 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
Importance: Normal
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <LPBBKJMJEOFKAMFJJNNHOEHFCFAA.landofgrey@gnc.net>
Date:         Sun, 8 Jul 2001 00:27:33 -0400
Reply-To: <landofgrey@gnc.net>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Matthew Travis" <landofgrey@gnc.net>
Subject:      Re: [AR]
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <Pine.LNX.4.10.10107072042400.24690-100000@itc.uci.edu>

Most outgoing mail servers will try to send an email repeatedly over time
before giving up. Common is to try to send it immediately, after 4 or 5
hours, after 12 hours or 24 hours, and then once a day for several days
waiting for a confirmation of receipt on the other end before giving up. Of
course, a complete moron of a sysadmin, the kind who has an MBA instead of a
CS degree, might configure the service to try once and then give up without
notice.

Matt

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU]On
> Behalf Of David J. McCue
> Sent: Saturday, July 07, 2001 11:48 PM
> To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
> Subject: Re: [AR]
>
>
> FYI, list mail addressed to Ray is sometimes being delayed by DNS lookup
> problems as well. At any given time this is happening to two or three
> people. List messages *will* eventually get there, can't speak for the
> persistance of your mail servers.
>
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 5933 invoked from network); 8 Jul 2001 05:06:51 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 8 Jul 2001 05:06:51 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 22359 invoked from network); 8 Jul 2001 05:08:18 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 8 Jul 2001 05:08:18 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA25154; Sat, 7 Jul 2001 22:04:17 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 72326 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 8 Jul 2001 05:04:11 +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (f116.law3.hotmail.com [209.185.241.116]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA25137 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Sat, 7 Jul 2001 22:04:11 -0700
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Sat,          7 Jul 2001 22:03:41 -0700
Received: from 213.224.83.46 by lw3fd.law3.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Sun, 08          Jul 2001 05:03:41 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [213.224.83.46]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 08 Jul 2001 05:03:41.0610 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[5B33C8A0:01C1076B]
Message-ID:  <F1166L082lTXGbfvYRu0000bb2b@hotmail.com>
Date:         Sun, 8 Jul 2001 05:04:11 +0000
Reply-To: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Baikal/Angara
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

In fact the Snger (thirties!) rocket bi-plane concept is similar, though
apparently forgotten.

IIRC the Snger was designed to take off using a sled & land using ordinary
runways.

Ideal 'd be a spacecraft which could *take off from ordinary runways*
without having to rely on fancy sleds or fancy vertical launch facilities.
Talking reducing costs.

I further found this, browsing the subject:

Hallion, Richard P. "The Path to Space Shuttle: The Evolution of Lifting
Reentry Technology." Journal of the British Interplanetary Society. 30
(December 1983): 523-41.  This is a shortened version of Hallion's 1983
monograph by the same title.  It describes and shows the evolution of the
reusable spacecraft concept, emphasizing the work of Eugen Sanger, the
lifting body studies, and the technological breakthroughs that allowed the
Shuttle to be built.  It is an especially important article because it shows
how the technological problems solved in one program were incorporated into
the
beginnings of the next attempt.

Hallion, Richard P. "The Space Shuttle's Family Tree." Air & Space.
April-May 1991, pp. 44-46.  This short article, taken from Hallion's
discussion of the early history of the Shuttle published in The Hypersonic
Revolution, deals with hundreds of paper studies, experiments, and a handful
of aircraft that actually flew and were the antecedents of the Shuttle. It
traces the general design of
the Shuttle from lifting body technology to the actual configuration that
was built and launched in 1981.

http://www.friends-partners.org/mwade/stages/sanrsled.htm
http://www.friends-partners.org/mwade/stages/sanerii1.htm
http://www.friends-partners.org/mwade/stages/sanerii2.htm

JD




>From: Arthur Ed LeBouthillier <apendragn@EARTHLINK.NET>
>Reply-To: Arthur Ed LeBouthillier <apendragn@EARTHLINK.NET>
>To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
>Subject: Re: [AR] Baikal/Angara
>Date: Sat, 7 Jul 2001 14:44:20 -0700
>
>Two similar, U.S., efforts can be seen at:
>
>        http://www.starbooster.com/
>
>and
>
>        http://www.calpolyspacesystems.com/index.html
>
>Cheers,
>Art Ed LeBouthillier

_________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 22808 invoked from network); 8 Jul 2001 06:33:01 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 8 Jul 2001 06:33:01 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 13097 invoked from network); 8 Jul 2001 06:32:12 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 8 Jul 2001 06:32:12 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA25397; Sat, 7 Jul 2001 23:24:04 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 72349 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 8 Jul 2001 06:23:47 +0000
Received: from idsoftware.com (predator.idsoftware.com [192.246.40.34]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA25380 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Sat, 7 Jul 2001 23:23:47 -0700
Received: from [192.246.40.144] (account johnc HELO pluto.idsoftware.com) by          idsoftware.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 3.4.6) with ESMTP id 274532 for          AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 08 Jul 2001 01:23:03 -0500
X-Sender: johnc@mail.idsoftware.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by itc.uci.edu id XAA25381
Message-ID:  <4.3.1.2.20010708013330.03bd2b18@mail.idsoftware.com>
Date:         Sun, 8 Jul 2001 01:34:53 -0500
Reply-To: "John Carmack" <johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Carmack" <johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Baikal/Angara
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <F1166L082lTXGbfvYRu0000bb2b@hotmail.com>

At 05:04 AM 7/8/2001 +0000, you wrote:
>In fact the Snger (thirties!) rocket bi-plane concept is similar, though
>apparently forgotten.
>
>IIRC the Snger was designed to take off using a sled & land using ordinary
>runways.
>
>Ideal 'd be a spacecraft which could *take off from ordinary runways*
>without having to rely on fancy sleds or fancy vertical launch facilities.
>Talking reducing costs.

What's fancy about vertical launch facilities?  Any old pad of concrete
should do...

John Carmack

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 11779 invoked from network); 8 Jul 2001 09:38:21 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 8 Jul 2001 09:38:21 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 4943 invoked from network); 8 Jul 2001 09:38:13 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 8 Jul 2001 09:38:13 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id CAA25873; Sun, 8 Jul 2001 02:33:48 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 72387 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 8 Jul 2001 09:33:23 +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (f50.law3.hotmail.com [209.185.241.50]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id CAA25854 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Sun, 8 Jul 2001 02:33:23 -0700
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Sun,          8 Jul 2001 02:32:53 -0700
Received: from 213.224.83.142 by lw3fd.law3.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Sun, 08          Jul 2001 09:32:53 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [213.224.83.142]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 08 Jul 2001 09:32:53.0209 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[F64E3490:01C10790]
Message-ID:  <F50twBP8xidGVwPGxge0000bb7d@hotmail.com>
Date:         Sun, 8 Jul 2001 09:33:23 +0000
Reply-To: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Baikal/Angara
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

JC wrote:

>What's fancy about vertical launch facilities?  Any old pad of concrete
>should do...

I had Shuttle size launch pads in mind, as the subject is latest large 1st
stage/booster recovery tech; Saturn V type, water avalanche cooled.

Unless you refer to the (dead duck) DC-X kind which required only hardened
soil, such pads and surrounding facilities are very costly to build. I could
imagine they cost as much as a medium sized airport. I remember the price
tag of a crawler from the VAB to the pad...

JD
_________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 11095 invoked from network); 8 Jul 2001 23:33:48 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 8 Jul 2001 23:33:48 -0000
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 20522 invoked from network); 8 Jul 2001 23:23:38 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 8 Jul 2001 23:23:38 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA28507; Sun, 8 Jul 2001 16:19:32 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 72581 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 8 Jul 2001 23:19:21 +0000
Received: from idsoftware.com (predator.idsoftware.com [192.246.40.34]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA28485 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Sun, 8 Jul 2001 16:19:21 -0700
Received: from [192.246.40.144] (account johnc HELO pluto.idsoftware.com) by          idsoftware.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 3.4.6) with ESMTP id 274804 for          AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 08 Jul 2001 18:18:36 -0500
X-Sender: johnc@mail.idsoftware.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <4.3.1.2.20010708182935.06f10008@mail.idsoftware.com>
Date:         Sun, 8 Jul 2001 18:30:29 -0500
Reply-To: "John Carmack" <johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Carmack" <johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM>
Subject:      [AR] Armadillo flight tests
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

http://www.armadilloaerospace.com/Updates/jul7_01.htm

John Carmack

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 24181 invoked from network); 9 Jul 2001 00:28:28 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 9 Jul 2001 00:28:28 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 29610 invoked from network); 9 Jul 2001 00:29:57 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 9 Jul 2001 00:29:57 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA28817; Sun, 8 Jul 2001 17:26:09 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 72634 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 9 Jul 2001 00:26:04 +0000
Received: from idsoftware.com (predator.idsoftware.com [192.246.40.34]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA28800 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Sun, 8 Jul 2001 17:26:03 -0700
Received: from [192.246.40.144] (account johnc HELO pluto.idsoftware.com) by          idsoftware.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 3.4.6) with ESMTP id 274833 for          AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 08 Jul 2001 19:25:19 -0500
X-Sender: johnc@mail.idsoftware.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <4.3.1.2.20010708183737.06f60d90@mail.idsoftware.com>
Date:         Sun, 8 Jul 2001 19:37:11 -0500
Reply-To: "John Carmack" <johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Carmack" <johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Baikal/Angara
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <F50twBP8xidGVwPGxge0000bb7d@hotmail.com>

At 09:33 AM 7/8/2001 +0000, you wrote:
>JC wrote:
>
>>What's fancy about vertical launch facilities?  Any old pad of concrete
>>should do...
>
>I had Shuttle size launch pads in mind, as the subject is latest large 1st
>stage/booster recovery tech; Saturn V type, water avalanche cooled.

Ah, I had DC-X style pads in mind, since you mentioned future sled launched
vehicles.

There are a lot of things working against an HTHL rocket, which is why
there is always some other factor involved -- sled launch, tow launch, or
aerial refueling.

Loiter and multiple landing tries with jets would be great, but the mass
and complexity are pretty significant.

Everyone seems to be scared of powered vertical landings, but I really
don't see why it is any scarier than a dead-stick glide landing, except for
the time scale.

John Carmack

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 17227 invoked from network); 9 Jul 2001 02:01:26 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 9 Jul 2001 02:01:26 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 19430 invoked from network); 9 Jul 2001 02:02:44 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 9 Jul 2001 02:02:44 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA29026; Sun, 8 Jul 2001 18:49:56 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 72651 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 9 Jul 2001 01:49:39 +0000
Received: from femail4.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail4.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.0.95.84]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA29008 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 8 Jul 2001 18:49:39 -0700
Received: from c1649002-a.earthlink.net ([24.20.95.67]) by          femail4.sdc1.sfba.home.com (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20          201-229-121-120-20010223) with ESMTP id          <20010709014930.VZSD9548.femail4.sdc1.sfba.home.com@c1649002-a.earthlink.net> for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun,          8 Jul 2001 18:49:30 -0700
X-Sender: forkbomb@mail.earthlink.net
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.0.2
References: <F50twBP8xidGVwPGxge0000bb7d@hotmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <5.0.2.1.0.20010708181819.00a93758@mail.earthlink.net>
Date:         Sun, 8 Jul 2001 18:49:16 -0700
Reply-To: "Pierce Nichols" <forkbomb@EARTHLINK.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Pierce Nichols" <forkbomb@EARTHLINK.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Baikal/Angara
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <4.3.1.2.20010708183737.06f60d90@mail.idsoftware.com>

At 07:37 PM 7/8/2001 -0500, John Carmack wrote:


>Everyone seems to be scared of powered vertical landings, but I really
>don't see why it is any scarier than a dead-stick glide landing, except for
>the time scale.

         Dead-stick landings are, in practice, not especially problematic.
They are routine for glider pilots and emergency dead-stick landings in
powered aircraft are usually survivable assuming that there is a decently
flat place in which to set the aircraft down and the pilot remembers to fly
the airplane instead of panicking. Powered vertical landings are a
different story.
         In any powered vertical landing (this applies to helicopters as
well), there is a 'dead man' zone that the vehicle *must* pass through.
This is the zone between the ground and the minimum altitude at which there
exists a safe abort, such as a parachute system (for a rocket VTVL) or
successful autorotation (helicopter). You have to pass through this zone on
every landing. This is part of the reason that helicopters are more
dangerous in practice than fixed wing aircraft and why helicopter crashes
are much more often fatal than airplane crashes.
         That said, I still prefer the VTVL for an SSTO, due to the
powerful weight and cost advantages. The dead man zone is not an
insurmountable problem, especially for a BETA-type SSTO, with a ring of a
large number of small engines around a plug nozzle. If you have a lot of
small engines, you can afford to have one (or more) engine failures in that
zone and still land safely.

         -p


Mars or Bust!
www.marssociety.com

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 22683 invoked from network); 9 Jul 2001 02:17:46 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 9 Jul 2001 02:17:46 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 8950 invoked from network); 9 Jul 2001 02:18:39 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 9 Jul 2001 02:18:39 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA29126; Sun, 8 Jul 2001 19:14:32 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 72665 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 9 Jul 2001 02:14:26 +0000
Received: from inet03.citec.qld.gov.au (firewall-user@inet03.citec.qld.gov.au          [203.5.10.10]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA29108          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 8 Jul 2001 19:14:13 -0700
Received: by inet03.citec.qld.gov.au; id MAA05311; Mon, 9 Jul 2001 12:14:09          +1000 (EST)
Received: from pcux.citec.com.au(pcux.citec.qld.gov.au 147.132.17.12) by          inet03.citec.qld.gov.au via smap (V2.0) id xma005162; Mon, 9 Jul 01          12:14:02 +1000
Received: from CITEC-Message_Server by pcux.citec.com.au with Novell_GroupWise;          Mon, 09 Jul 2001 12:13:56 +1000
X-Mailer: Novell GroupWise 5.5.4
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by itc.uci.edu id TAA29109
Message-ID:  <sb49a004.063@pcux.citec.com.au>
Date:         Mon, 9 Jul 2001 12:13:35 +1000
Reply-To: "Des Bromilow" <Des.Bromilow@CITEC.COM.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Des Bromilow" <Des.Bromilow@CITEC.COM.AU>
Subject:      [AR] Chem storage Q's
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Hi all,


just really getting started in this.

I'm getting 20 Kg of KNO3 on the weekend, but I don't know how to store it safely

I have other chemicals stored at the flat, all in sealed plastic bags, and then inside stackable plastic containers.

I intend making my own ignitors, a few dip mixes to improve ignitors, and some candy propellant to use as pyrovalve material in my hybrids.

How do others store their KNO3?

Similar question on Mg... I have a reasonable quantity of Mg shavings and chips (from practicing using my lathe)

How should these best be stored?

Thanks,
Des

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 14470 invoked from network); 9 Jul 2001 02:37:44 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 9 Jul 2001 02:37:44 -0000
Received: (qmail 19828 invoked from network); 9 Jul 2001 02:39:01 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 9 Jul 2001 02:39:01 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA29217; Sun, 8 Jul 2001 19:32:37 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 72682 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 9 Jul 2001 02:32:30 +0000
Received: from spsystems.net (spsystems.net [209.47.149.227]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA29199 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Sun,          8 Jul 2001 19:32:30 -0700
Received: (from henry@localhost) by spsystems.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id WAA14639;          Sun, 8 Jul 2001 22:31:40 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010708222642.14614A-100000@spsystems.net>
Date:         Sun, 8 Jul 2001 22:31:39 -0400
Reply-To: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Baikal/Angara
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <5.0.2.1.0.20010708181819.00a93758@mail.earthlink.net>

On Sun, 8 Jul 2001, Pierce Nichols wrote:
>          Dead-stick landings are, in practice, not especially problematic.
> They are routine for glider pilots and emergency dead-stick landings in
> powered aircraft are usually survivable assuming that there is a decently
> flat place in which to set the aircraft down and the pilot remembers to fly
> the airplane instead of panicking.

And it's daytime, and the weather is good.

> ...This is part of the reason that helicopters are more
> dangerous in practice than fixed wing aircraft and why helicopter crashes
> are much more often fatal than airplane crashes.

A contributing factor, also, is the near-total impracticality of fitting
helicopters with useful escape systems.  There is no "dead man" zone (at
least not of altitudes alone) for a modern ejection seat, if it doesn't
have to pass through a rotor disk...

>          That said, I still prefer the VTVL for an SSTO, due to the
> powerful weight and cost advantages. The dead man zone is not an
> insurmountable problem, especially for a BETA-type SSTO, with a ring of a
> large number of small engines around a plug nozzle. If you have a lot of
> small engines, you can afford to have one (or more) engine failures in that
> zone and still land safely.

Also, it is not inconceivable for a crash of a VTVL SSTO -- which will be
mostly empty tanks, very light and easily crushable -- to be survivable
even if the vehicle is a writeoff.

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 17974 invoked from network); 9 Jul 2001 02:54:05 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 9 Jul 2001 02:54:05 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 29079 invoked from network); 9 Jul 2001 02:53:27 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 9 Jul 2001 02:53:27 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA29272; Sun, 8 Jul 2001 19:44:36 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 72690 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 9 Jul 2001 02:44:35 +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (f76.law9.hotmail.com [64.4.9.76]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA29255 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun,          8 Jul 2001 19:44:33 -0700
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Sun,          8 Jul 2001 19:44:03 -0700
Received: from 216.10.164.33 by lw9fd.law9.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Mon, 09          Jul 2001 02:44:03 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [216.10.164.33]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 09 Jul 2001 02:44:03.0252 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[03B98F40:01C10821]
Message-ID:  <F763sL0YiLj3mpxffLQ00005ce6@hotmail.com>
Date:         Mon, 9 Jul 2001 02:44:35 +0000
Reply-To: "Jamie Finch" <jamie_28560@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jamie Finch" <jamie_28560@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Chem storage Q's
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

    I have no idea on the KNO3 but you want to keep the mg away from
anything that could catch fire as it will make an interesting show should it
burn.  And speaking as a Fire Fighter I would say the local fire dept. would
like to see it in a fire resistant box.  You can pick them up in industrial
mags. at a reasonable price and it will prove invaluable should something go
wrong with a mix or something and things start to burn.


>From: Des Bromilow <Des.Bromilow@CITEC.COM.AU>
>Reply-To: Des Bromilow <Des.Bromilow@CITEC.COM.AU>
>To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
>Subject: [AR] Chem storage Q's
>Date: Mon, 9 Jul 2001 12:13:35 +1000
>
>Hi all,
>
>
>just really getting started in this.
>
>I'm getting 20 Kg of KNO3 on the weekend, but I don't know how to store it
>safely
>
>I have other chemicals stored at the flat, all in sealed plastic bags, and
>then inside stackable plastic containers.
>
>I intend making my own ignitors, a few dip mixes to improve ignitors, and
>some candy propellant to use as pyrovalve material in my hybrids.
>
>How do others store their KNO3?
>
>Similar question on Mg... I have a reasonable quantity of Mg shavings and
>chips (from practicing using my lathe)
>
>How should these best be stored?
>
>Thanks,
>Des

_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 12121 invoked from network); 9 Jul 2001 03:08:21 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 9 Jul 2001 03:08:21 -0000
Received: (qmail 7849 invoked from network); 9 Jul 2001 03:09:51 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 9 Jul 2001 03:09:51 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA29410; Sun, 8 Jul 2001 20:05:14 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 72710 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 9 Jul 2001 03:05:12 +0000
Received: from mta05.mail.mel.aone.net.au (mta05.mail.au.uu.net [203.2.192.85])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA29393 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 8 Jul 2001 20:05:11 -0700
Received: from unknown ([63.34.220.244]) by mta05.mail.mel.aone.net.au with          SMTP id <20010709030508.UXZK28112.mta05.mail.mel.aone.net.au@unknown>          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 9 Jul 2001 13:05:08 +1000
References: Conversation <F50twBP8xidGVwPGxge0000bb7d@hotmail.com> with last            message <5.0.2.1.0.20010708181819.00a93758@mail.earthlink.net>
Priority: Normal
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Priority: 3
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	X-MAPIextension=.TXT;
	charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>
Date:         Mon, 9 Jul 2001 03:05:12 +0000
Reply-To: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Baikal/Angara
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <5.0.2.1.0.20010708181819.00a93758@mail.earthlink.net>

>          That said, I still prefer the VTVL for an SSTO, due to the
> powerful weight and cost advantages.

I'd imagine that would depend on the cleverness of the design yeah? You'd
really need to use as much aerodynamic and free O2 assistance (from the
atmosphere) to avoid heavy propellant penalties, unless there's something
I'm missing - which is quite possible on this subject.

Troy.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 13895 invoked from network); 9 Jul 2001 03:08:49 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 9 Jul 2001 03:08:49 -0000
X-Priority: 3
Received: (qmail 14995 invoked from network); 9 Jul 2001 03:09:45 -0000
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 9 Jul 2001 03:09:45 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA29374; Sun, 8 Jul 2001 20:01:28 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 72702 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 9 Jul 2001 03:01:24 +0000
Received: from inet03.citec.qld.gov.au (firewall-user@inet03.citec.qld.gov.au          [203.5.10.10]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA29357          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 8 Jul 2001 20:01:23 -0700
Received: by inet03.citec.qld.gov.au; id NAA22154; Mon, 9 Jul 2001 13:01:21          +1000 (EST)
Received: from pcux.citec.com.au(pcux.citec.qld.gov.au 147.132.17.12) by          inet03.citec.qld.gov.au via smap (V2.0) id xma021939; Mon, 9 Jul 01          13:01:13 +1000
Received: from CITEC-Message_Server by pcux.citec.com.au with Novell_GroupWise;          Mon, 09 Jul 2001 13:01:07 +1000
X-Mailer: Novell GroupWise 5.5.4
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by itc.uci.edu id UAA29358
Message-ID:  <sb49ab13.089@pcux.citec.com.au>
Date:         Mon, 9 Jul 2001 13:00:54 +1000
Reply-To: "Des Bromilow" <Des.Bromilow@CITEC.COM.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Des Bromilow" <Des.Bromilow@CITEC.COM.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Chem storage Q's
Comments: To: jamie_28560@HOTMAIL.COM
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Based on what you're saying here... ditto for the 15um Al?

Des

>>> Jamie Finch <jamie_28560@HOTMAIL.COM> 9/07/01 12:44:35 pm >>>
    I have no idea on the KNO3 but you want to keep the mg away from
anything that could catch fire as it will make an interesting show should it
burn.  And speaking as a Fire Fighter I would say the local fire dept. would
like to see it in a fire resistant box.  You can pick them up in industrial
mags. at a reasonable price and it will prove invaluable should something go
wrong with a mix or something and things start to burn.


>From: Des Bromilow <Des.Bromilow@CITEC.COM.AU>
>Reply-To: Des Bromilow <Des.Bromilow@CITEC.COM.AU>
>To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
>Subject: [AR] Chem storage Q's
>Date: Mon, 9 Jul 2001 12:13:35 +1000
>
>Hi all,
>
>
>just really getting started in this.
>
>I'm getting 20 Kg of KNO3 on the weekend, but I don't know how to store it
>safely
>
>I have other chemicals stored at the flat, all in sealed plastic bags, and
>then inside stackable plastic containers.
>
>I intend making my own ignitors, a few dip mixes to improve ignitors, and
>some candy propellant to use as pyrovalve material in my hybrids.
>
>How do others store their KNO3?
>
>Similar question on Mg... I have a reasonable quantity of Mg shavings and
>chips (from practicing using my lathe)
>
>How should these best be stored?
>
>Thanks,
>Des

_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 19600 invoked from network); 9 Jul 2001 03:18:24 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 9 Jul 2001 03:18:24 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 10977 invoked from network); 9 Jul 2001 03:19:53 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 9 Jul 2001 03:19:53 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA29455; Sun, 8 Jul 2001 20:11:14 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 72718 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 9 Jul 2001 03:11:09 +0000
Received: from femail2.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail2.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.0.95.82]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA29438 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 8 Jul 2001 20:11:09 -0700
Received: from c1649002-a.earthlink.net ([24.20.95.67]) by          femail2.sdc1.sfba.home.com (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20          201-229-121-120-20010223) with ESMTP id          <20010709031100.YJRA12285.femail2.sdc1.sfba.home.com@c1649002-a.earthlink.net> for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>;          Sun, 8 Jul 2001 20:11:00 -0700
X-Sender: forkbomb@mail.earthlink.net
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.0.2
References: <5.0.2.1.0.20010708181819.00a93758@mail.earthlink.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <5.0.2.1.0.20010708195612.00b00410@mail.earthlink.net>
Date:         Sun, 8 Jul 2001 20:10:54 -0700
Reply-To: "Pierce Nichols" <forkbomb@EARTHLINK.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Pierce Nichols" <forkbomb@EARTHLINK.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Baikal/Angara
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010708222642.14614A-100000@spsystems.net>

At 10:31 PM 7/8/2001 -0400, Henry Spencer wrote:
>On Sun, 8 Jul 2001, Pierce Nichols wrote:
> >          Dead-stick landings are, in practice, not especially problematic.
> > They are routine for glider pilots and emergency dead-stick landings in
> > powered aircraft are usually survivable assuming that there is a decently
> > flat place in which to set the aircraft down and the pilot remembers to fly
> > the airplane instead of panicking.
>
>And it's daytime, and the weather is good.


         Well, assuming your return to Earth is voluntary and under
control, you can make these happen :). Nonetheless, pilots do make
successful dead-stick landings under less than ideal conditions (including
IMC) on a sufficiently regular basis that it may reasonably be considered
for early-generation space transport systems.
         That said, I like the way the Baikal does it -- especially the
enormous cross-range capability.


> >          That said, I still prefer the VTVL for an SSTO, due to the
> > powerful weight and cost advantages. The dead man zone is not an
> > insurmountable problem, especially for a BETA-type SSTO, with a ring of a
> > large number of small engines around a plug nozzle. If you have a lot of
> > small engines, you can afford to have one (or more) engine failures in that
> > zone and still land safely.
>
>Also, it is not inconceivable for a crash of a VTVL SSTO -- which will be
>mostly empty tanks, very light and easily crushable -- to be survivable
>even if the vehicle is a writeoff.


         What about the risk of fire and explosion? There is going to be a
certain amount of fuel and oxidizer left in the tanks, and it will be
partially atomized and likely mixed to some extent by the destruction of
the tanks upon impact. There's also plenty of sparks around, from the
failure of various metal components and their impact upon the landing
surface. It seems to me that a serious explosion is a near certainty.

         -p


Mars or Bust!
www.marssociety.com

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 7583 invoked from network); 9 Jul 2001 03:23:12 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 9 Jul 2001 03:23:12 -0000
Received: (qmail 12430 invoked from network); 9 Jul 2001 03:24:38 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 9 Jul 2001 03:24:38 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA29525; Sun, 8 Jul 2001 20:21:10 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 72730 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 9 Jul 2001 03:21:04 +0000
Received: from corlabs (24-216-244-100.hsacorp.net [24.216.244.100]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA29508 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Sun, 8 Jul 2001 20:21:03 -0700
Received: from [192.168.0.11] by corlabs (ArGoSoft Mail Server Plus,          Version 1.3 (1.3.0.1)); Sun, 8 Jul 2001 22:43:08 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook CWS, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <001801c10826$fcf48fb0$0b00a8c0@star>
Date:         Sun, 8 Jul 2001 22:26:46 -0500
Reply-To: "Carl A. Blood" <cablood@CORLABS.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Carl A. Blood" <cablood@CORLABS.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Chem storage Q's
Comments: To: Des Bromilow <Des.Bromilow@CITEC.COM.AU>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <sb49a004.063@pcux.citec.com.au>

Des,

Here are some helpful hints:

1) Keep your oxidizers separate from your fuels.
2) We store our Mg in new epoxy coated paint cans. Then we seal the cans
inside large Ziploc bags with desiccant packs inside. With the Ziploc taped
shut. Moisture and Mg makes for a considerable amount of unwanted heat! (we
have tested this)
3) Plastic containers are porous and should be checked every so often.
4) Ammonium nitrate, potassium nitrate, etc. are hydroscopic (suck up water)
so store them in sealed or double sealed containers. When mixing them with
other chems consider their ability to suck up water. Remember sulfur and
water make sulfuric acid, Mg and water gets hot.
5) As mentioned a box for each type is good, one for oxidizers, one for
fuels, and one for competed motors is good.
6) Seal up in a vac bag if possible your completed motors.
7) Keep good records of your formulations and usage of the chems. That way
you can always go back and find out what went wrong.
8) We also keep some chemicals in plastic bags sealed in paint cans. Usually
the more corrosive ones.
9) Moisture levels in your working environment are important. To hi and you
can get poor results and hot Mg and to low can give you static discharges
that can make most dry mixes go boom.
10) Avoid dry mixes and open flames.
11) Remember motors that have commentators spark and can ignite dry Mg
dust....BOOM.
12) We wear wrist straps in the dry measure and mixing stages to prevent
static discharges. They are real and don't have to be visible or crackly to
ignite chem dust in the air.


I hope some of this can help keep you safe and alive.

Carl

-----Original Message-----
From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@itc.uci.edu]On
Behalf Of Des Bromilow
Sent: Sunday, July 08, 2001 9:14 PM
To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
Subject: [AR] Chem storage Q's


Hi all,


just really getting started in this.

I'm getting 20 Kg of KNO3 on the weekend, but I don't know how to store it
safely

I have other chemicals stored at the flat, all in sealed plastic bags, and
then inside stackable plastic containers.

I intend making my own ignitors, a few dip mixes to improve ignitors, and
some candy propellant to use as pyrovalve material in my hybrids.

How do others store their KNO3?

Similar question on Mg... I have a reasonable quantity of Mg shavings and
chips (from practicing using my lathe)

How should these best be stored?

Thanks,
Des

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 3295 invoked from network); 9 Jul 2001 03:56:37 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 9 Jul 2001 03:56:37 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 3924 invoked from network); 9 Jul 2001 03:57:35 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 9 Jul 2001 03:57:35 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA29620; Sun, 8 Jul 2001 20:49:39 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 72743 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 9 Jul 2001 03:49:33 +0000
Received: from femail4.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail4.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.0.95.84]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA29603 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 8 Jul 2001 20:49:32 -0700
Received: from c1649002-a.earthlink.net ([24.20.95.67]) by          femail4.sdc1.sfba.home.com (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20          201-229-121-120-20010223) with ESMTP id          <20010709034927.ZUOV9548.femail4.sdc1.sfba.home.com@c1649002-a.earthlink.net> for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun,          8 Jul 2001 20:49:27 -0700
X-Sender: forkbomb@mail.earthlink.net
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.0.2
References: <5.0.2.1.0.20010708181819.00a93758@mail.earthlink.net>            <F50twBP8xidGVwPGxge0000bb7d@hotmail.com>            <5.0.2.1.0.20010708181819.00a93758@mail.earthlink.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <5.0.2.1.0.20010708201206.02a24be8@mail.earthlink.net>
Date:         Sun, 8 Jul 2001 20:49:21 -0700
Reply-To: "Pierce Nichols" <forkbomb@EARTHLINK.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Pierce Nichols" <forkbomb@EARTHLINK.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Baikal/Angara
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC8 22>

At 03:05 AM 7/9/2001 +0000, Troy Prideaux wrote:
> >          That said, I still prefer the VTVL for an SSTO, due to the
> > powerful weight and cost advantages.
>
>I'd imagine that would depend on the cleverness of the design yeah? You'd
>really need to use as much aerodynamic and free O2 assistance (from the
>atmosphere) to avoid heavy propellant penalties, unless there's something
>I'm missing - which is quite possible on this subject.


         My thoughts on the subject of atmospheric assistance during ascent
go back and forth. First, that assistance is *NOT* free. It's expensive in
terms of drag, structural mass (and therefore structural cost), and most
especially engineering dollars. The aerodynamics of pure VTVL, pure rocket
launch systems are dead simple compared to the aerodynamics involved with
wings and/or inlets (not to say they are trivial, but they are orders of
magnitude simpler). In addition, an optimized vertical ascent trajectory
spends a very short amount of time in the atmosphere -- most of its flight
to orbit is spent above the region of continuum flow. While a trajectory
optimized for the particular combination of lifting surfaces and/or
air-breathing propulsion is certainly possible, it would take a great deal
of skull sweat to work it out.
         However, pure chemical rockets are themselves extremely limited.
The highest performance chemical rocket motor ever made, the SSME, only has
a vacuum Isp of 455 seconds. The BETA concept does that a little bit
better, at 470 seconds, by using a large number of small nozzles set around
a plug in the base. And both of these use LOX/LH2, with its notorious
density and handling problems. The highest performance dense propellant
combination is probably LOX/methane; however the best vacuum Isp with this
combination is somewhere around 380 seconds. This translates into steep
mass fraction requirements and large vehicles to launch modest amounts of
payload. Due to exponential nature of the rocket equation, it would appear
that, all other things being equal, the best advances in materials pale in
performance benefit next to even modest improvements in average effective
Isp. Air-breathing propulsion is the most obvious way to do this; reducing
gravity losses by the use of aerodynamic lift is another. The devil is in
the details here -- efficient inlets across a broad speed range appear to
demand variable geometry (and an enormous amount of engineering), and
aerodynamic lift across the required speed range is not a simple proposition.
         This is a rough snapshot of my thinking on the tradeoffs between
pure rockets and other species of advanced spacecraft. I'm curious what
yours is.

         -p



Mars or Bust!
www.marssociety.com

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 20212 invoked from network); 9 Jul 2001 04:27:54 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 9 Jul 2001 04:27:54 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 26309 invoked from network); 9 Jul 2001 04:28:00 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 9 Jul 2001 04:28:00 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA29887; Sun, 8 Jul 2001 21:22:11 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 72780 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 9 Jul 2001 04:22:05 +0000
Received: from imo-d06.mx.aol.com (imo-d06.mx.aol.com [205.188.157.38]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA29870 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Sun, 8 Jul 2001 21:22:04 -0700
Received: from Sociald84@aol.com by imo-d06.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v30.22.) id          f.1e.183e5891 (17236); Mon, 9 Jul 2001 00:17:24 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: AOL 5.0 for Windows sub 138
Message-ID:  <1e.183e5891.287a8a54@aol.com>
Date:         Mon, 9 Jul 2001 00:17:24 EDT
Reply-To: <Sociald84@AOL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <Sociald84@AOL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Baikal/Angara
Comments: To: forkbomb@earthlink.net
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

In a message dated 7/8/01 9:11:53 PM Mountain Daylight Time,
forkbomb@EARTHLINK.NET writes:

>          Well, assuming your return to Earth is voluntary and under
>  control, you can make these happen :). Nonetheless, pilots do make
>  successful dead-stick landings under less than ideal conditions (including
>  IMC) on a sufficiently regular basis that it may reasonably be considered
>  for early-generation space transport systems.
>           That said, I like the way the Baikal does it -- especially the
>  enormous cross-range capability.
>
>
What is a dead stick landing?

Mark

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 4309 invoked from network); 9 Jul 2001 04:40:15 -0000
X-Priority: 3
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 9 Jul 2001 04:40:15 -0000
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 7582 invoked from network); 9 Jul 2001 04:40:57 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 9 Jul 2001 04:40:57 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA29999; Sun, 8 Jul 2001 21:33:36 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 72808 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 9 Jul 2001 04:33:35 +0000
Received: from sys32.hou.wt.net (sys32.hou.wt.net [205.230.159.32]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA29982 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 8 Jul 2001 21:33:35 -0700
Received: from localhost (216-119-130-140.ipset10.wt.net [216.119.130.140]) by          sys32.hou.wt.net (8.9.1/8.9.1) with ESMTP id XAA00439 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 8 Jul 2001 23:33:42 -0500 (CDT)
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_09D4_01C56B69.40474D80"
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.388)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID:  <200107090433.XAA00439@sys32.hou.wt.net>
Date:         Sun, 8 Jul 2001 23:33:31 -0500
Reply-To: "Donald McCorvey" <dlm3@NETAXS.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Donald McCorvey" <dlm3@NETAXS.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Baikal/Angara
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <1e.183e5891.287a8a54@aol.com>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_09D4_01C56B69.40474D80
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"

It is an unpowered, gliding landing, usually in a vehicle which is meant
to fly under power...

The Space Shuttle does this all the time since it has nothing capable of
producing significant thrust on the way down...  And the weather has to
be perfect or they don't try it.

Don McCorvey

On Sunday, July 8, 2001, at 11:17 PM, Sociald84@AOL.COM wrote:

> In a message dated 7/8/01 9:11:53 PM Mountain Daylight Time,
> forkbomb@EARTHLINK.NET writes:

> What is a dead stick landing?
>
> Mark
>

------=_NextPart_000_09D4_01C56B69.40474D80
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Type: text/enriched;
	charset="us-ascii"

It is an unpowered, gliding landing, usually in a vehicle which is
meant to fly under power...


The Space Shuttle does this all the time since it has nothing capable
of producing significant thrust on the way down...  And the weather
has to be perfect or they don't try it.


Don McCorvey


On Sunday, July 8, 2001, at 11:17 PM, Sociald84@AOL.COM wrote:


<excerpt>In a message dated 7/8/01 9:11:53 PM Mountain Daylight Time,

forkbomb@EARTHLINK.NET writes:

</excerpt><color><param>0000,63D6,124D</param>

</color><excerpt>What is a dead stick landing?


Mark


</excerpt>
------=_NextPart_000_09D4_01C56B69.40474D80--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 621 invoked from network); 9 Jul 2001 04:47:07 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 9 Jul 2001 04:47:07 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 28545 invoked from network); 9 Jul 2001 04:44:59 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 9 Jul 2001 04:44:59 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA29942; Sun, 8 Jul 2001 21:28:50 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 72795 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 9 Jul 2001 04:28:45 +0000
Received: from femail4.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail4.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.0.95.84]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA29925 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 8 Jul 2001 21:28:45 -0700
Received: from c1649002-a.earthlink.net ([24.20.95.67]) by          femail4.sdc1.sfba.home.com (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20          201-229-121-120-20010223) with ESMTP id          <20010709042839.BBSY9548.femail4.sdc1.sfba.home.com@c1649002-a.earthlink.net>; Sun, 8 Jul 2001 21:28:39          -0700
X-Sender: forkbomb@mail.earthlink.net
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.0.2
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <5.0.2.1.0.20010708212737.00b0c740@mail.earthlink.net>
Date:         Sun, 8 Jul 2001 21:28:33 -0700
Reply-To: "Pierce Nichols" <forkbomb@EARTHLINK.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Pierce Nichols" <forkbomb@EARTHLINK.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Baikal/Angara
Comments: To: Sociald84@AOL.COM
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <1e.183e5891.287a8a54@aol.com>

At 12:17 AM 7/9/2001 -0400, Sociald84@AOL.COM wrote:
>In a message dated 7/8/01 9:11:53 PM Mountain Daylight Time,
>forkbomb@EARTHLINK.NET writes:
>
> >          Well, assuming your return to Earth is voluntary and under
> >  control, you can make these happen :). Nonetheless, pilots do make
> >  successful dead-stick landings under less than ideal conditions (including
> >  IMC) on a sufficiently regular basis that it may reasonably be considered
> >  for early-generation space transport systems.
> >           That said, I like the way the Baikal does it -- especially the
> >  enormous cross-range capability.
> >
> >
>What is a dead stick landing?


         An unpowered landing, for instance in a glider or in an aircraft
that has lost power for some reason.

         -p


Mars or Bust!
www.marssociety.com

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 3081 invoked from network); 9 Jul 2001 04:47:41 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 9 Jul 2001 04:47:41 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 1998 invoked from network); 9 Jul 2001 04:49:11 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 9 Jul 2001 04:49:11 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA30070; Sun, 8 Jul 2001 21:45:23 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 72816 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 9 Jul 2001 04:45:21 +0000
Received: from falcon.mail.pas.earthlink.net (falcon.mail.pas.earthlink.net          [207.217.120.74]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA30018          for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Sun, 8 Jul 2001 21:35:21 -0700
Received: from earthlink.net (dialup-209.245.134.125.Dial1.SanJose1.Level3.net          [209.245.134.125]) by falcon.mail.pas.earthlink.net          (EL-8_9_3_3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id VAA09901; Sun, 8 Jul 2001 21:35:19          -0700 (PDT)
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.75 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.16-22 i686)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <1e.183e5891.287a8a54@aol.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B493596.9B06C2C4@earthlink.net>
Date:         Sun, 8 Jul 2001 21:39:50 -0700
Reply-To: "David Weinshenker" <daze39@EARTHLINK.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "David Weinshenker" <daze39@EARTHLINK.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Baikal/Angara
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Sociald84@AOL.COM wrote:
> What is a dead stick landing?

Landing an aerodynamic-lift vehicle in an unpowered glide.
(Normal operating procedure for a sailplane or a shuttle
orbiter; possible contingency mode in case of engine
failure in a powered airplane.)

-dave w

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 205 invoked from network); 9 Jul 2001 05:12:36 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 9 Jul 2001 05:12:36 -0000
Received: (qmail 8434 invoked from network); 9 Jul 2001 05:14:07 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 9 Jul 2001 05:14:07 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA30173; Sun, 8 Jul 2001 22:10:59 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 72833 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 9 Jul 2001 05:10:51 +0000
Received: from mta05.mail.mel.aone.net.au (mta05.mail.au.uu.net [203.2.192.85])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA30156 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 8 Jul 2001 22:10:50 -0700
Received: from unknown ([63.60.249.48]) by mta05.mail.mel.aone.net.au with SMTP          id <20010709051047.XJKY28112.mta05.mail.mel.aone.net.au@unknown> for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 9 Jul 2001 15:10:47 +1000
References: Conversation <5.0.2.1.0.20010708181819.00a93758@mail.earthlink.net>            with last message            <5.0.2.1.0.20010708201206.02a24be8@mail.earthlink.net>
Priority: Normal
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Priority: 3
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	X-MAPIextension=.TXT;
	charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>
Date:         Mon, 9 Jul 2001 05:10:51 +0000
Reply-To: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Baikal/Angara
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <5.0.2.1.0.20010708201206.02a24be8@mail.earthlink.net>

>          However, pure chemical rockets are themselves extremely limited.
> The highest performance chemical rocket motor ever made, the SSME, only
has
> a vacuum Isp of 455 seconds. The BETA concept does that a little bit
> better, at 470 seconds, by using a large number of small nozzles set
around
> a plug in the base. And both of these use LOX/LH2, with its notorious
> density and handling problems. The highest performance dense propellant
> combination is probably LOX/methane; however the best vacuum Isp with this
> combination is somewhere around 380 seconds.

Haven't done the numbers but I would suspect it would be a H+ Li / F
combination in terms of dIsp.

>          This is a rough snapshot of my thinking on the tradeoffs between
> pure rockets and other species of advanced spacecraft. I'm curious what
> yours is.

Not something I've thought much about.
 If you were to carry all your propellant onboard there's no doubt (in my
mind) you'd want to go for max Isp for at least the landing propellant ie.
LOX/H2 would be perfect from a performance & mass penalty viewpoint but
maybe difficult to carry for long duration's. Density is less of an issue
here (re: landing propellant) as it's this *propellant* that (I suspect)
provides most of the dead weight mass penalty for virtually the entire
duration of the mission.
 People have suggested some great ideas regarding helicopter style rotor
blades powered by ramjets on their tips which seems like a good idea on the
surface at least. Roton's idea seemed quite clever although I don't know
whether there was any attempt to use free atmospheric O2 (Henry will know).
 Either way, you're right about the massive amount of engineering involved
sorting out the details especially.

Not really my area of interest or expertise though,

Troy.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 13727 invoked from network); 9 Jul 2001 06:08:10 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 9 Jul 2001 06:08:10 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 17373 invoked from network); 9 Jul 2001 06:09:27 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 9 Jul 2001 06:09:27 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA30390; Sun, 8 Jul 2001 23:06:27 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 72869 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 9 Jul 2001 06:06:21 +0000
Received: from femail2.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail2.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.0.95.82]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA30373 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 8 Jul 2001 23:06:20 -0700
Received: from c1649002-a.earthlink.net ([24.20.95.67]) by          femail2.sdc1.sfba.home.com (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20          201-229-121-120-20010223) with ESMTP id          <20010709060613.ESNG12285.femail2.sdc1.sfba.home.com@c1649002-a.earthlink.net> for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>;          Sun, 8 Jul 2001 23:06:13 -0700
X-Sender: forkbomb@mail.earthlink.net
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.0.2
References: <5.0.2.1.0.20010708201206.02a24be8@mail.earthlink.net>            <5.0.2.1.0.20010708181819.00a93758@mail.earthlink.net>            <5.0.2.1.0.20010708201206.02a24be8@mail.earthlink.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <5.0.2.1.0.20010708223652.02a4a6b0@mail.earthlink.net>
Date:         Sun, 8 Jul 2001 23:06:08 -0700
Reply-To: "Pierce Nichols" <forkbomb@EARTHLINK.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Pierce Nichols" <forkbomb@EARTHLINK.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Baikal/Angara
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC8 22>

At 05:10 AM 7/9/2001 +0000, Troy Prideaux wrote:
> >          However, pure chemical rockets are themselves extremely limited.
> > The highest performance chemical rocket motor ever made, the SSME, only
>has
> > a vacuum Isp of 455 seconds. The BETA concept does that a little bit
> > better, at 470 seconds, by using a large number of small nozzles set
>around
> > a plug in the base. And both of these use LOX/LH2, with its notorious
> > density and handling problems. The highest performance dense propellant
> > combination is probably LOX/methane; however the best vacuum Isp with this
> > combination is somewhere around 380 seconds.
>
>Haven't done the numbers but I would suspect it would be a H+ Li / F
>combination in terms of dIsp.


         I've discounted most of the serious exotics due to the handling
and environmental problems. The costs that those problems impose will
almost certainly erase any advantages that they have. That's if you can do
it in the atmosphere at all, given the current political and regulatory
environment. I'm also a bit of an environmentalist myself, and *I* don't
like the environmental consequences of propellant combinations like that.


>Not something I've thought much about.
>  If you were to carry all your propellant onboard there's no doubt (in my
>mind) you'd want to go for max Isp for at least the landing propellant ie.
>LOX/H2 would be perfect from a performance & mass penalty viewpoint but
>maybe difficult to carry for long duration's. Density is less of an issue
>here (re: landing propellant) as it's this *propellant* that (I suspect)
>provides most of the dead weight mass penalty for virtually the entire
>duration of the mission.


         Different propellants for landing and ascent makes no sense --
it's the ascent phase where most of the propellant is burned and where
improvements in Isp have the most salutary effect. Having two different
propellant combos just increases your development cost and your plumbing,
as well as adding yet another point of failure.


>  People have suggested some great ideas regarding helicopter style rotor
>blades powered by ramjets on their tips which seems like a good idea on the
>surface at least. Roton's idea seemed quite clever although I don't know
>whether there was any attempt to use free atmospheric O2 (Henry will know).


         I believe the original Roton concept used ramjets or pressure jets
for liftoff and landing. However, it doesn't address the major issues; it's
useful only in the subsonic regime and it adds a whole lot of mass.

         -p


Mars or Bust!
www.marssociety.com

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 12783 invoked from network); 9 Jul 2001 10:05:55 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 9 Jul 2001 10:05:55 -0000
Received: (qmail 2372 invoked from network); 9 Jul 2001 10:07:26 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 9 Jul 2001 10:07:26 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id DAA31183; Mon, 9 Jul 2001 03:02:30 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 72987 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 9 Jul 2001 10:00:48 +0000
Received: from mta05.mail.mel.aone.net.au (mta05.mail.au.uu.net [203.2.192.85])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id DAA31163 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 9 Jul 2001 03:00:47 -0700
Received: from unknown ([63.34.220.19]) by mta05.mail.mel.aone.net.au with SMTP          id <20010709100043.CLFF28112.mta05.mail.mel.aone.net.au@unknown> for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 9 Jul 2001 20:00:43 +1000
References: Conversation <5.0.2.1.0.20010708201206.02a24be8@mail.earthlink.net>            with last message            <5.0.2.1.0.20010708223652.02a4a6b0@mail.earthlink.net>
Priority: Normal
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Priority: 3
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	X-MAPIextension=.TXT;
	charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>
Date:         Mon, 9 Jul 2001 10:00:48 +0000
Reply-To: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Baikal/Angara
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <5.0.2.1.0.20010708223652.02a4a6b0@mail.earthlink.net>

> >Not something I've thought much about.
> >  If you were to carry all your propellant onboard there's no doubt (in
my
> >mind) you'd want to go for max Isp for at least the landing propellant
ie.
> >LOX/H2 would be perfect from a performance & mass penalty viewpoint but
> >maybe difficult to carry for long duration's. Density is less of an issue
> >here (re: landing propellant) as it's this *propellant* that (I suspect)
> >provides most of the dead weight mass penalty for virtually the entire
> >duration of the mission.
>
>
>          Different propellants for landing and ascent makes no sense --
> it's the ascent phase where most of the propellant is burned and where
> improvements in Isp have the most salutary effect. Having two different
> propellant combos just increases your development cost and your plumbing,
> as well as adding yet another point of failure.

That may well be true although we can often surprise ourselves with clever
design:-) But note: I didn't state there had to be 2 different systems for
launch and landing, the point I was trying to make (and didn't do a very
good of) was that in normal circumstances ie getting a vehicle into orbit,
there's a fine line between using a propellant with good density and
reasonable Isp v's a propellant with great Isp but low density (which are
normally more expensive) for booster applications. But with VTVL SSTO
systems the choice seems easy, that is, to go with the High Isp propellant.
No questions asked. You'll probably still finish up with multiple
propulsion systems anyhow (re: OMS systems etc) but you'll probably be
surprised at how much propellant is required from de-orbit to a successful
vertical landing if the systems relied exclusively on onboard propellant.
That can be a lot of dead weight to launch, manoeuvre, de-orbit and control
most of the decent with.

Troy.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 17800 invoked from network); 9 Jul 2001 10:25:15 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 9 Jul 2001 10:25:15 -0000
Received: (qmail 10476 invoked from network); 9 Jul 2001 10:26:31 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 9 Jul 2001 10:26:31 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id DAA31268; Mon, 9 Jul 2001 03:23:31 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 73001 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 9 Jul 2001 10:22:08 +0000
Received: from fep3-orange.clear.net.nz (fep3-orange.clear.net.nz          [203.97.32.3]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id DAA31250          for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Mon, 9 Jul 2001 03:22:08 -0700
Received: from mkbs (203-167-161-242.dialup.clear.net.nz [203.167.161.242]) by          fep3-orange.clear.net.nz (1.5/1.8) with SMTP id WAA26020; Mon, 9 Jul          2001 22:22:03 +1200 (NZST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="Windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <010801c10861$113dd780$0100a8c0@mkbs>
Date:         Mon, 9 Jul 2001 15:06:08 +1200
Reply-To: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Organization: Applied Technology
Subject:      [AR] Fw: Jonathan's Space Report, No. 455
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

One of a series of 100 things you can do with a  200mm square (8" a side) 10
kg satellite.
(Se Aprizestar below)



RM

__________________________________________________________



Jonathan's Space Report
No. 455                                           2001 Jun 28, Cambridge, MA
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
---
Sender: owner-jsr@head-cfa.harvard.edu
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: jmcdowell@head-cfa.harvard.edu

Shuttle and Station
--------------------

Atlantis is now on the launch pad, being prepared for a July launch
to the Station.

The payload bay of STS-104 contains the Airlock and two Spacelab
Pallets each with a pair of high pressure gas tanks for attaching
to the airlock exterior. I believe an IMAX camera is also
in the cargo bay although the press kit doesn't mention it.
Total Orbiter launch mass is reported by the press kit as 117127 kg.
Current Station mass (including Soyuz and Progress) is 120470 kg.

                                                            Mass/kg
Bay 1-2   Orbiter Docking System/External Airlock            1800
          3 EMU spacesuits?                                   360?
Bay 4-5?  Spacelab Pallet (Fwd)   O2-1/O2-2 oxygen tanks     2500
Bay 6-7?  Spacelab Pallet (Aft)   N2-1/N2-2 nitrogen tanks   2500
Bay 8-12? Station Joint Airlock                              6064
          Adapter beam with IMAX Cargo Bay Camera             238
Sill      RMS arm                                             410
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                      Total 13872 kg?

STS-104 commander is Steven Lindsey, a member of the 1994 group who was
pilot on STS-87 and STS-95. Pilot is Charles Hobaugh,  who becomes the
fourth pilot of the 1996 group to fly. Mission specialists are Janet
Kavandi (STS-91,STS-99) and spacewalkers Michael Gernhardt
(STS-69/83/94) and James Reilly (STS-89).  They will install the Airlock
onto the Unity module, and then put the oxygen and nitrogen tanks onto
the airlock exterior.

Recent Launches
---------------

A new report gives the Kosmos-2378 launch time as 1508 UTC, not 1512 UTC.

Astra 2C was launched on Jun 16 by International Launch Services on a
Krunichev Proton-K with an Energiya Blok DM3 upper stage. The Boeing
601HP satellite will broadcast Ku-band television programming to Europe
for SES (Societe Europeene des Satellites, Luxembourg). Dry mass of the
satellite is probably around 2000 kg.

International Launch Services carried out its second launch in a few
days on Jun 19, this time with Atlas IIAS serial AC-156 from Cape
Canaveral. The payload was the ICO-2 satellite for New ICO (formerly ICO
Global Communications), which will provide mobile communications and
data/internet services at S-band, supporting 4500 simultaneous calls.
The Boeing BSS-601M satellite is similar to the standard geostationary
601 model except that it omits the R-4D apogee engine and associated
fuel, and has a larger payload section. Launch mass is 2700 kg; dry mass
is probably around 2200-2400 kg with the remainder being stationkeeping
fuel.  New ICO is based in London, so the satellite will presumably be
registered with the UN by the UK government.

The AC-156 launch vehicle's Centaur stage reached a 167 x 10099 km x 44.6
deg transfer orbit 10 minutes after launch. A second burn 1.5hr later
put ICO-2 into a circular 10100 km orbit. The first ICO satellite
was launched in Mar 2000 but failed to reach orbit. The new satellite
will be used for testing out the ICO system before the remaining
satellites are launched. Unlike the Iridium and Globalstar constellations,
ICO uses a small number of large satellites.


The two 10 kg Saudi Arabian amateur satellites, Saudisat 1A/1B, were
launched by Dnepr in Sep 2000. Their amateur radio payloads,
Saudi-OSCAR-41 and Saudi-OSCAR-42, have apparently not yet entered
service (although reportedly have been checked out successfully).
Although not announced at the time of launch, these satellites have a
secondary commercial payload. Aprize Satellite of Fairfax, Virginia has
a 400 MHz UHF Aprizestar commercial satellite location payload on each
of the satellites, which will enter operation when Aprize completes
financing and developed of user equipment. They will be used as
pathfinders for a planned network of asset location satellites (for
instance, relaying data from transmitters on shipping containers). These
0.2m-cube, 10 kg satellites will be built by SpaceQuest (Aprize's parent
company) in Fairfax, but the Saudi satellites were built by and are
owned by King Abdulaziz City for Science and Technology. (The article in
this week's Space News was a bit misleading,  so I thought I would
clarify the situation - thanks to Aprize CEO D. Lorenzini for some of
this info).




Table of Recent Launches
-----------------------

Date UT       Name            Launch Vehicle  Site            Mission
INTL.

DES.

May  8 2210   XM-1 Roll         Zenit-3SL      Odyssey, Pacific S-band radio
18A
May 15 0111   PAS 10            Proton-K/DM3   Baykonur LC81/23 C/Ku video
19A
May 18 1745   GeoLITE           Delta 7925     Canaveral SLC17B Laser/UHF
20A
May 20 2233   Progress M1-6     Soyuz-FG       Baykonur LC1     Cargo
21A
May 29 1755   Kosmos-2377       Soyuz-U        Plesetsk LC43/4  Recon
22A
Jun  8 1508   Kosmos-2378       Kosmos-3M      Plesetsk LC132   Navsat
23A
Jun  9 0645   Intelsat 901      Ariane 44L     Kourou ELA2      C/Ku telecom
24A
Jun 16 0149   Astra 2C          Proton-K/DM3   Baykonur LC81/23 Ku video
25A
Jun 19 0441   ICO-2             Atlas IIAS     Canaveral SLC36B C/S
phone/data 26A

Current Shuttle Processing Status
_________________________________

Orbiters               Location   Mission    Launch Due

OV-102 Columbia        VAB Bay 4     STS-109 2002 Jan 17  HST SM-3B
OV-103 Discovery       VAB Bay 3     STS-105 2001 Aug?    ISS 7A.1
OV-104 Atlantis        LC39B         STS-104 2001 Jul 12  ISS 7A
OV-105 Endeavour       OPF Bay 1     STS-108 2001 Nov 29  ISS UF-1

.-------------------------------------------------------------------------.
|  Jonathan McDowell                 |  phone : (617) 495-7176            |
|  Harvard-Smithsonian Center for    |                                    |
|   Astrophysics                     |                                    |
|  60 Garden St, MS6                 |                                    |
|  Cambridge MA 02138                |  inter : jcm@cfa.harvard.edu       |
|  USA                               |          jmcdowell@cfa.harvard.edu |
|                                                                         |
| JSR: http://hea-www.harvard.edu/~jcm/space/jsr/jsr.html                 |
| Back issues:  http://hea-www.harvard.edu/~jcm/space/jsr/back            |
| Subscribe/unsub: mail majordomo@head-cfa.harvard.edu, (un)subscribe jsr |
'-------------------------------------------------------------------------'

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 13447 invoked from network); 9 Jul 2001 13:02:33 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 9 Jul 2001 13:02:33 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 15667 invoked from network); 9 Jul 2001 13:03:31 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 9 Jul 2001 13:03:31 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id FAA31719; Mon, 9 Jul 2001 05:57:53 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 73014 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 9 Jul 2001 12:57:38 +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (f17.law15.hotmail.com [64.4.23.17]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id FAA31701 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Mon,          9 Jul 2001 05:57:38 -0700
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Mon,          9 Jul 2001 05:57:08 -0700
Received: from 193.121.251.246 by lw15fd.law15.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Mon,          09 Jul 2001 12:57:07 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [193.121.251.246]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 09 Jul 2001 12:57:08.0046 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[A92BAEE0:01C10876]
Message-ID:  <F17nSYe4nhrKtzcbLDi00012a93@hotmail.com>
Date:         Mon, 9 Jul 2001 12:57:38 +0000
Reply-To: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Baikal/Angara
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

>>I'd imagine that would depend on the cleverness of the design yeah? You'd
>>really need to use as much aerodynamic and free O2 assistance (from the
>>atmosphere) to avoid heavy propellant penalties, unless there's something
>>I'm missing - which is quite possible on this subject.

I keep being stunned by the fact nobody ever presented an upscaled Harrier
as a first stage for a space launch. It has never been done with turbo's
although I can see no reason why it cannot be, to say 10 miles up.

JD
_________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 26943 invoked from network); 9 Jul 2001 13:12:22 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 9 Jul 2001 13:12:22 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 22802 invoked from network); 9 Jul 2001 13:13:20 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 9 Jul 2001 13:13:20 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA31777; Mon, 9 Jul 2001 06:05:43 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 73022 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 9 Jul 2001 13:05:41 +0000
Received: from stud.uni-goettingen.de (root@s2.stud.uni-goettingen.de          [134.76.60.22]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA31760          for <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Mon, 9 Jul 2001 06:05:41 -0700
Received: from router.atw.stud.uni-goettingen.de ([134.76.62.65]          helo=stud.uni-goettingen.de) by stud.uni-goettingen.de with esmtp          (Exim 2.12 #8) id 15JajF-0007wv-00 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 9          Jul 2001 15:05:33 +0200
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [de] (Win98; I)
X-Accept-Language: de
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Message-ID:  <3B49ABA1.C961F0A1@stud.uni-goettingen.de>
Date:         Mon, 9 Jul 2001 15:03:30 +0200
Reply-To: "Thomas Engelhardt" <tengelh@STUD.UNI-GOETTINGEN.DE>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Thomas Engelhardt" <tengelh@STUD.UNI-GOETTINGEN.DE>
Organization: =?iso-8859-1?Q?Rocket_Research_G=F6ttingen_=28RRG=29?=
Subject:      [AR] PROPEP/GUIPEP question
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Hello group,

I'm having diffculties with PROPEP: whenever it calculates the results
for candy propellant (65/35 O/F KNO3/Sorbitol), the calculated Isp is no
higher than 114s at 800 PSI chamber pressure, 14.7 PSI ambient pressure
and a propellant temperature of 300 K.
However, searching the web (and especially Richard Nakka's page), I
found out that the ideal Isp should be at 164 s...

What am I doing wrong?

Tom

--
Atheism is a non-prophet organization.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 13482 invoked from network); 9 Jul 2001 13:44:17 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 9 Jul 2001 13:44:17 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 27515 invoked from network); 9 Jul 2001 13:45:36 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 9 Jul 2001 13:45:36 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA31890; Mon, 9 Jul 2001 06:41:53 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 73033 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 9 Jul 2001 13:41:48 +0000
Received: from pvt.trustmarkins.com (ns.trustmarkins.com [206.31.28.1]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id GAA31873 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Mon, 9 Jul 2001 06:41:47 -0700
Received: from [10.1.1.78] by pvt.trustmarkins.com (IBM OS/2 SENDMAIL VERSION          1.3.14/2.12um) id AA0144; Mon, 09 Jul 01 08:41:57 -0400
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.77 [en] (WinNT; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <F50twBP8xidGVwPGxge0000bb7d@hotmail.com>            <5.0.2.1.0.20010708181819.00a93758@mail.earthlink.net>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B49B499.3E898862@calcon.net>
Date:         Mon, 9 Jul 2001 08:41:45 -0500
Reply-To: "Peter von Tresckow" <vontresc@CALCON.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Peter von Tresckow" <vontresc@CALCON.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Baikal/Angara
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

I have been reading this discussion with much interest, but I was wondering what
the tradeoff in mass between wings or other aerosurfaces, and the extra
propellant required for the vtvl is. This has always intruiged me and noone has
ever brought the question of how much fuel must be taken to orbit for the
landing in a VTVL spacecraft

Peter von Tresckow

Pierce Nichols wrote:

> At 07:37 PM 7/8/2001 -0500, John Carmack wrote:
>
> >Everyone seems to be scared of powered vertical landings, but I really
> >don't see why it is any scarier than a dead-stick glide landing, except for
> >the time scale.
>
>          Dead-stick landings are, in practice, not especially problematic.
> They are routine for glider pilots and emergency dead-stick landings in
> powered aircraft are usually survivable assuming that there is a decently
> flat place in which to set the aircraft down and the pilot remembers to fly
> the airplane instead of panicking. Powered vertical landings are a
> different story.
>          In any powered vertical landing (this applies to helicopters as
> well), there is a 'dead man' zone that the vehicle *must* pass through.
> This is the zone between the ground and the minimum altitude at which there
> exists a safe abort, such as a parachute system (for a rocket VTVL) or
> successful autorotation (helicopter). You have to pass through this zone on
> every landing. This is part of the reason that helicopters are more
> dangerous in practice than fixed wing aircraft and why helicopter crashes
> are much more often fatal than airplane crashes.
>          That said, I still prefer the VTVL for an SSTO, due to the
> powerful weight and cost advantages. The dead man zone is not an
> insurmountable problem, especially for a BETA-type SSTO, with a ring of a
> large number of small engines around a plug nozzle. If you have a lot of
> small engines, you can afford to have one (or more) engine failures in that
> zone and still land safely.
>
>          -p
>
> Mars or Bust!
> www.marssociety.com

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 9168 invoked from network); 9 Jul 2001 14:24:41 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 9 Jul 2001 14:24:41 -0000
Received: (qmail 16338 invoked from network); 9 Jul 2001 14:25:55 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 9 Jul 2001 14:25:55 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA32044; Mon, 9 Jul 2001 07:21:41 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 73055 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 9 Jul 2001 14:21:36 +0000
Received: from spsystems.net (spsystems.net [209.47.149.227]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA32027 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Mon,          9 Jul 2001 07:21:36 -0700
Received: (from henry@localhost) by spsystems.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id KAA23908;          Mon, 9 Jul 2001 10:21:04 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010709102020.23802C-100000@spsystems.net>
Date:         Mon, 9 Jul 2001 10:21:04 -0400
Reply-To: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Baikal/Angara
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <F17nSYe4nhrKtzcbLDi00012a93@hotmail.com>

On Mon, 9 Jul 2001, John Dom wrote:
> I keep being stunned by the fact nobody ever presented an upscaled Harrier
> as a first stage for a space launch. It has never been done with turbo's
> although I can see no reason why it cannot be, to say 10 miles up.

People have proposed turbojets as strap-ons, but so far nobody's built
anything along those lines.

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 2111 invoked from network); 9 Jul 2001 14:37:11 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 9 Jul 2001 14:37:11 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 9135 invoked from network); 9 Jul 2001 14:38:43 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 9 Jul 2001 14:38:43 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA32130; Mon, 9 Jul 2001 07:34:14 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 73075 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 9 Jul 2001 14:34:09 +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (f14.law15.hotmail.com [64.4.23.14]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA32113 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Mon,          9 Jul 2001 07:34:09 -0700
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Mon,          9 Jul 2001 07:33:39 -0700
Received: from 193.121.251.246 by lw15fd.law15.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Mon,          09 Jul 2001 14:33:38 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [193.121.251.246]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 09 Jul 2001 14:33:39.0224 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[24FB5180:01C10884]
Message-ID:  <F14VyLridnGiAw8HQEU00006db7@hotmail.com>
Date:         Mon, 9 Jul 2001 14:34:09 +0000
Reply-To: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Baikal/Angara
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

PvT wrote:


>This has always intruiged me and noone has
>ever brought the question of how much fuel must be taken to orbit for the
>landing in a VTVL spacecraft

Interesting observation. Seems to make the matter even more difficult to
realize.

JD

_________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 12718 invoked from network); 9 Jul 2001 15:08:54 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 9 Jul 2001 15:08:54 -0000
Received: (qmail 5227 invoked from network); 9 Jul 2001 15:10:13 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 9 Jul 2001 15:10:13 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA32310; Mon, 9 Jul 2001 08:06:43 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 73112 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 9 Jul 2001 15:06:42 +0000
Received: from spsystems.net (spsystems.net [209.47.149.227]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA32278 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Mon,          9 Jul 2001 08:06:31 -0700
Received: (from henry@localhost) by spsystems.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id KAA24464;          Mon, 9 Jul 2001 10:53:48 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010709104929.24320A-100000@spsystems.net>
Date:         Mon, 9 Jul 2001 10:53:48 -0400
Reply-To: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Baikal/Angara
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <3B49B499.3E898862@calcon.net>

On Mon, 9 Jul 2001, Peter von Tresckow wrote:
> I have been reading this discussion with much interest, but I was
> wondering what the tradeoff in mass between wings or other
> aerosurfaces, and the extra propellant required for the vtvl is.

Well, the fast answer is, "it's debatable".  Part of the reason why it's
debatable is that there is no agreement on the size of the appropriate
safety margins, or the assumptions made about weather etc.  (Wings look
rather less competitive if the underlying assumptions are pessimistic
enough to require go-around capability, for retrying a botched runway
approach -- a problem VTVLs basically do not have.)

> This has always intruiged me and noone has
> ever brought the question of how much fuel must be taken to orbit for the
> landing in a VTVL spacecraft

Again, much depends on how conservative you are.  It need not be a lot,
if you are willing to make optimistic assumptions.

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 10149 invoked from network); 9 Jul 2001 15:22:13 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 9 Jul 2001 15:22:13 -0000
Received: (qmail 10440 invoked from network); 9 Jul 2001 15:23:28 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 9 Jul 2001 15:23:28 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA32289; Mon, 9 Jul 2001 08:06:34 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 73104 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 9 Jul 2001 15:06:30 +0000
Received: from spsystems.net (spsystems.net [209.47.149.227]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA32269 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Mon,          9 Jul 2001 08:06:30 -0700
Received: (from henry@localhost) by spsystems.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id KAA24503;          Mon, 9 Jul 2001 10:59:33 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010709105706.24320B-100000@spsystems.net>
Date:         Mon, 9 Jul 2001 10:59:32 -0400
Reply-To: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Baikal/Angara
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <5.0.2.1.0.20010708195612.00b00410@mail.earthlink.net>

On Sun, 8 Jul 2001, Pierce Nichols wrote:
> >Also, it is not inconceivable for a crash of a VTVL SSTO -- which will be
> >mostly empty tanks, very light and easily crushable -- to be survivable
> >even if the vehicle is a writeoff.
>
>          What about the risk of fire and explosion? There is going to be a
> certain amount of fuel and oxidizer left in the tanks...

"Survivable" doesn't mean it's not scary and dangerous.

> ...and it will be
> partially atomized and likely mixed to some extent by the destruction of
> the tanks upon impact. There's also plenty of sparks around, from the
> failure of various metal components and their impact upon the landing
> surface. It seems to me that a serious explosion is a near certainty.

Fire, quite likely, but some attention to this in the design should be
able to make the probability of an explosion quite low, especially if the
landing propellants are in tanks separate from the main ascent tanks
(which is a fairly common feature of such designs).

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 2737 invoked from network); 9 Jul 2001 16:16:08 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 9 Jul 2001 16:16:08 -0000
Received: (qmail 5933 invoked from network); 9 Jul 2001 16:17:06 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 9 Jul 2001 16:17:06 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA32679; Mon, 9 Jul 2001 09:13:53 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 73158 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 9 Jul 2001 16:13:43 +0000
Received: from spsystems.net (spsystems.net [209.47.149.227]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA32662 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Mon,          9 Jul 2001 09:13:43 -0700
Received: (from henry@localhost) by spsystems.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id MAA25250;          Mon, 9 Jul 2001 12:12:03 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010709114820.24845A-100000@spsystems.net>
Date:         Mon, 9 Jul 2001 12:12:03 -0400
Reply-To: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Baikal/Angara
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <5.0.2.1.0.20010708201206.02a24be8@mail.earthlink.net>

On Sun, 8 Jul 2001, Pierce Nichols wrote:
>          However, pure chemical rockets are themselves extremely limited.
> The highest performance chemical rocket motor ever made, the SSME, only has
> a vacuum Isp of 455 seconds.

The RL10 variant used in the upper stages of the new Deltas has a vacuum
Isp of 463s.

Still higher-performance systems have been built, especially upper-stage
engines intended for use in vacuum only, although I believe none has
entered operational service.  The record for a chemical rocket engine is
541s, for LF2/LLi/LH2 with a high-expansion nozzle.

> ...The highest performance dense propellant
> combination is probably LOX/methane...

That's arguable.  Most of the other light hydrocarbons perform about as
well in the engine, and they generally have slightly lower dry mass
because they're denser than methane.  The optimum seems to be around
propane, although it varies a bit depending on whose assumptions you
adopt.  (Also, it's a very shallow optimum.)

> ...is somewhere around 380 seconds. This translates into steep
> mass fraction requirements and large vehicles to launch modest amounts of
> payload.

Not necessarily.  The key thing to realize is that denser fuels make high
fuel fractions easier to achieve.  The Titan II first stage is 96.7%
propellant at launch.  And it was flying in 1961.  (Modeling consistently
says that, depending on your exact assumptions about the nose fairing,
that stage could deliver 0.5-1t of payload into orbit all by itself.  One
problem:  its engines are too powerful (!) and are not throttlable.)

> ...all other things being equal, the best advances in materials pale in
> performance benefit next to even modest improvements in average effective
> Isp. Air-breathing propulsion is the most obvious way to do this; reducing
> gravity losses by the use of aerodynamic lift is another. The devil is in
> the details here -- efficient inlets across a broad speed range appear to
> demand variable geometry (and an enormous amount of engineering), and
> aerodynamic lift across the required speed range is not a simple proposition.

Quite so.  That innocuous little phrase "all other things being equal"
hides a multitude of sins.  All other things are *not* equal when you
start talking about airbreathing propulsion or lifting ascent.  Suddenly
your dry mass starts to climb spectacularly, and that can easily wipe out
all the performance gains.

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 26567 invoked from network); 9 Jul 2001 16:28:38 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 9 Jul 2001 16:28:38 -0000
Received: (qmail 3745 invoked from network); 9 Jul 2001 16:30:08 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 9 Jul 2001 16:30:08 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA32758; Mon, 9 Jul 2001 09:26:41 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 73171 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 9 Jul 2001 16:26:40 +0000
Received: from spsystems.net (spsystems.net [209.47.149.227]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA32741 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Mon,          9 Jul 2001 09:26:39 -0700
Received: (from henry@localhost) by spsystems.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id MAA25435;          Mon, 9 Jul 2001 12:26:07 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010709121219.24845B-100000@spsystems.net>
Date:         Mon, 9 Jul 2001 12:26:04 -0400
Reply-To: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Baikal/Angara
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>

On Mon, 9 Jul 2001, Troy Prideaux wrote:
> Haven't done the numbers but I would suspect it would be a H+ Li / F
> combination in terms of dIsp.

Alas, even setting aside the handling problems of liquid lithium and
fluorine, that combination has outstandingly *bad* vehicle performance,
because the LH2 is so bulky.  Jeff Greason tells me that when you model
vehicle performance, instead of letting yourself be blinded by Isp, you
find that for LEO launch, it's actually inferior to LOX/LH2... despite
having an Isp advantage of nearly 100s!

>  If you were to carry all your propellant onboard there's no doubt (in my
> mind) you'd want to go for max Isp for at least the landing propellant ie.
> LOX/H2 would be perfect from a performance & mass penalty viewpoint but
> maybe difficult to carry for long duration's.

Careful here.  You have to think in terms of *vehicle performance*, not
just Isp.  The mass of the LH2 tanks and pumps counts against orbited mass
too, and once you start thinking about that, it's by no means clear that
LH2 has any advantage at all.

> Density is less of an issue
> here (re: landing propellant) as it's this *propellant* that (I suspect)
> provides most of the dead weight mass penalty for virtually the entire
> duration of the mission.

There is no particular reason why density would be less important here;
pressure-vessel wall mass scales linearly with content mass, and problems
with insulation get worse for small tanks.

> ...Roton's idea seemed quite clever although I don't know
> whether there was any attempt to use free atmospheric O2 (Henry will know).

None; Roton was a pure rocket, except for the aerodynamic lift provided by
the blades.  That "free" atmospheric O2 usually ends up costing you rather
more than LOX.

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 826 invoked from network); 9 Jul 2001 16:29:34 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 9 Jul 2001 16:29:34 -0000
Received: (qmail 10364 invoked from network); 9 Jul 2001 16:30:53 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 9 Jul 2001 16:30:53 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA00320; Mon, 9 Jul 2001 09:27:37 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 73179 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 9 Jul 2001 16:27:37 +0000
Received: from spsystems.net (spsystems.net [209.47.149.227]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA00302 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Mon,          9 Jul 2001 09:27:36 -0700
Received: (from henry@localhost) by spsystems.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id MAA25443;          Mon, 9 Jul 2001 12:27:04 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010709122626.24845C-100000@spsystems.net>
Date:         Mon, 9 Jul 2001 12:27:03 -0400
Reply-To: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Baikal/Angara
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <5.0.2.1.0.20010708223652.02a4a6b0@mail.earthlink.net>

On Sun, 8 Jul 2001, Pierce Nichols wrote:
>          I believe the original Roton concept used ramjets or pressure jets
> for liftoff and landing.

No, even the original Roton used only rocket power for its rotor.  Jets
didn't pay for themselves.

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 17718 invoked from network); 9 Jul 2001 16:39:56 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 9 Jul 2001 16:39:56 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 16620 invoked from network); 9 Jul 2001 16:40:35 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 9 Jul 2001 16:40:35 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA00397; Mon, 9 Jul 2001 09:37:36 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 73187 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 9 Jul 2001 16:37:34 +0000
Received: from femail1.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail1.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.0.95.81]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA00379 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 9 Jul 2001 09:37:34 -0700
Received: from c1649002-a.earthlink.net ([24.20.95.67]) by          femail1.sdc1.sfba.home.com (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20          201-229-121-120-20010223) with ESMTP id          <20010709163728.GOLB26599.femail1.sdc1.sfba.home.com@c1649002-a.earthlink.net> for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>;          Mon, 9 Jul 2001 09:37:28 -0700
X-Sender: forkbomb@mail.earthlink.net
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.0.2
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <5.0.2.1.0.20010709093419.02a47be0@mail.earthlink.net>
Date:         Mon, 9 Jul 2001 09:37:23 -0700
Reply-To: "Pierce Nichols" <forkbomb@EARTHLINK.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Pierce Nichols" <forkbomb@EARTHLINK.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Baikal/Angara
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <F17nSYe4nhrKtzcbLDi00012a93@hotmail.com>

At 12:57 PM 7/9/2001 +0000, John Dom wrote:
>>>I'd imagine that would depend on the cleverness of the design yeah? You'd
>>>really need to use as much aerodynamic and free O2 assistance (from the
>>>atmosphere) to avoid heavy propellant penalties, unless there's something
>>>I'm missing - which is quite possible on this subject.
>
>I keep being stunned by the fact nobody ever presented an upscaled Harrier
>as a first stage for a space launch. It has never been done with turbo's
>although I can see no reason why it cannot be, to say 10 miles up.


         It has been proposed, by a number of people. It's fiendishly
expensive though -- jet engines have poor power to weight compared to
rockets. You'd need a large number of high-performance engines. If you are
going to use a turbine first stage, you might as well save yourself some
gas money and take off horizontally. And then you've essentially got a much
larger version of Pegasus.

         -p


Mars or Bust!
www.marssociety.com

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 801 invoked from network); 9 Jul 2001 16:42:56 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 9 Jul 2001 16:42:56 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 6352 invoked from network); 9 Jul 2001 16:44:25 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 9 Jul 2001 16:44:25 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA00439; Mon, 9 Jul 2001 09:39:56 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 73195 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 9 Jul 2001 16:39:55 +0000
Received: from femail1.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail1.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.0.95.81]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA00421 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 9 Jul 2001 09:39:55 -0700
Received: from c1649002-a.earthlink.net ([24.20.95.67]) by          femail1.sdc1.sfba.home.com (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20          201-229-121-120-20010223) with ESMTP id          <20010709163949.GQZT26599.femail1.sdc1.sfba.home.com@c1649002-a.earthlink.net> for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>;          Mon, 9 Jul 2001 09:39:49 -0700
X-Sender: forkbomb@mail.earthlink.net
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.0.2
References: <5.0.2.1.0.20010708223652.02a4a6b0@mail.earthlink.net>            <5.0.2.1.0.20010708201206.02a24be8@mail.earthlink.net>            <5.0.2.1.0.20010708223652.02a4a6b0@mail.earthlink.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <5.0.2.1.0.20010709084344.00abf238@mail.earthlink.net>
Date:         Mon, 9 Jul 2001 09:39:44 -0700
Reply-To: "Pierce Nichols" <forkbomb@EARTHLINK.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Pierce Nichols" <forkbomb@EARTHLINK.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Baikal/Angara
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC8 22>

At 10:00 AM 7/9/2001 +0000, Troy Prideaux wrote:
>That may well be true although we can often surprise ourselves with clever
>design:-) But note: I didn't state there had to be 2 different systems for
>launch and landing, the point I was trying to make (and didn't do a very
>good of) was that in normal circumstances ie getting a vehicle into orbit,
>there's a fine line between using a propellant with good density and
>reasonable Isp v's a propellant with great Isp but low density (which are
>normally more expensive) for booster applications. But with VTVL SSTO
>systems the choice seems easy, that is, to go with the High Isp propellant.


         Seems so, but not necessarily -- the weight and drag penalties
from the enormous tanks required may cancel out the benefits. The weight
penalty translates into substantial extra engineering cost in trying to
overcome it and you end up with a less robust vehicle. Propellant is also
much more expensive and difficult to handle. The operational model that I
have in mind is the classic airliner-like operation. This changes the cost
structure substantially, and increases the penalty for difficult
operational issues. LH2 is also fiendishly expensive -- during the 1980s
NASA was paying north of $3/kg.


>No questions asked. You'll probably still finish up with multiple
>propulsion systems anyhow (re: OMS systems etc) but you'll probably be
>surprised at how much propellant is required from de-orbit to a successful
>vertical landing if the systems relied exclusively on onboard propellant.
>That can be a lot of dead weight to launch, manoeuvre, de-orbit and control
>most of the decent with.


         Well, the BETA team (I'm not obsessed, I swear!) published an
analysis of the delta-V requirements for a VTVL SSTO in their
final  report. It's available on
http://www.spacefuture.com/archive/beta_a_single_stage_reusable_ballistic_space_shuttle_concept.shtml.
I've reproduced it here:

1. Orbital Velocity:            7,314 to 7,774 m/s
2. Gravity Losses:                       1,350 m/s
3. Drag Losses:            400  to   800 m/s
4. Orbital maneuvers (assumption)              76 m/s
                                 ==============
Ascent:                    9,140 to 10,000 m/s
                                 ==============
5. Deorbit Impulse:                 50 to     100 m/s
6. Range dispersion correction:     10 to     120 m/s
7. Brake Impulse:                   60 to       80 m/s
8. Reserve for Hovering:            80 to     100 m/s
                                 ==============
Total Delta-V:                  9,340 to 10,400 m/s

         As you can see, landing delta-V requirements are quite small,
comparatively. It should be noted that BETA was unmanned; the hovering
reserve for a manned vehicle would be higher. These numbers are for a
traditional, optimized vertical ascent. This keeps the drag relatively low;
it could be lower with denser propellants. Gravity losses are a killer --
the only solution there would be a higher ascent acceleration, at least if
you want to stay vertical. With denser propellants, it is conceivable that
an X-15 style spaceplane could lower that number significantly, at the cost
of a larger drag penalty.

         -p


Mars or Bust!
www.marssociety.com

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 9652 invoked from network); 9 Jul 2001 17:04:59 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 9 Jul 2001 17:04:59 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 28554 invoked from network); 9 Jul 2001 17:06:17 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 9 Jul 2001 17:06:17 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA00543; Mon, 9 Jul 2001 10:02:44 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 73207 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 9 Jul 2001 17:02:41 +0000
Received: from femail1.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail1.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.0.95.81]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA00526 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 9 Jul 2001 10:02:41 -0700
Received: from c1649002-a.earthlink.net ([24.20.95.67]) by          femail1.sdc1.sfba.home.com (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20          201-229-121-120-20010223) with ESMTP id          <20010709170235.HOXH26599.femail1.sdc1.sfba.home.com@c1649002-a.earthlink.net> for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>;          Mon, 9 Jul 2001 10:02:35 -0700
X-Sender: forkbomb@mail.earthlink.net
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.0.2
References: <5.0.2.1.0.20010708201206.02a24be8@mail.earthlink.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <5.0.2.1.0.20010709095904.02a65b80@mail.earthlink.net>
Date:         Mon, 9 Jul 2001 10:02:30 -0700
Reply-To: "Pierce Nichols" <forkbomb@EARTHLINK.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Pierce Nichols" <forkbomb@EARTHLINK.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Baikal/Angara
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010709114820.24845A-100000@spsystems.net>

At 12:12 PM 7/9/2001 -0400, Henry Spencer wrote:
>On Sun, 8 Jul 2001, Pierce Nichols wrote:
> >          However, pure chemical rockets are themselves extremely limited.
> > The highest performance chemical rocket motor ever made, the SSME, only has
> > a vacuum Isp of 455 seconds.
>
>The RL10 variant used in the upper stages of the new Deltas has a vacuum
>Isp of 463s.


         That's an upper stage engine... and therefore a non-starter for an
SSTO. I should have qualified that statement.

 >That's arguable.  Most of the other light hydrocarbons perform about as
>well in the engine, and they generally have slightly lower dry mass
>because they're denser than methane.  The optimum seems to be around
>propane, although it varies a bit depending on whose assumptions you
>adopt.  (Also, it's a very shallow optimum.)


         I have seen proposals for using sub-cooled propane (to about the
temperature of LOX). Propane at NBP has vapor pressure problems that
require heavy tankage. Propane is also probably easier to get in large
quantities.


> > ...all other things being equal, the best advances in materials pale in
> > performance benefit next to even modest improvements in average effective
> > Isp. Air-breathing propulsion is the most obvious way to do this; reducing
> > gravity losses by the use of aerodynamic lift is another. The devil is in
> > the details here -- efficient inlets across a broad speed range appear to
> > demand variable geometry (and an enormous amount of engineering), and
> > aerodynamic lift across the required speed range is not a simple
> proposition.
>
>Quite so.  That innocuous little phrase "all other things being equal"
>hides a multitude of sins.  All other things are *not* equal when you
>start talking about airbreathing propulsion or lifting ascent.  Suddenly
>your dry mass starts to climb spectacularly, and that can easily wipe out
>all the performance gains.


         True -- I was trying to present the argument in my mind for
examining lifting ascents and airbreathing propulsion :).

         -p


Mars or Bust!
www.marssociety.com

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 15798 invoked from network); 9 Jul 2001 17:40:51 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 9 Jul 2001 17:40:51 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 21522 invoked from network); 9 Jul 2001 17:41:48 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 9 Jul 2001 17:41:48 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA00760; Mon, 9 Jul 2001 10:35:43 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 73239 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 9 Jul 2001 17:35:33 +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (f147.law3.hotmail.com [209.185.241.147]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA00738 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Mon, 9 Jul 2001 10:35:32 -0700
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Mon,          9 Jul 2001 10:35:02 -0700
Received: from 213.224.83.150 by lw3fd.law3.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Mon, 09          Jul 2001 17:35:02 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [213.224.83.150]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 09 Jul 2001 17:35:02.0652 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[7C02A3C0:01C1089D]
Message-ID:  <F147azUSxvjPkQTGpao0000bdb8@hotmail.com>
Date:         Mon, 9 Jul 2001 17:35:33 +0000
Reply-To: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Baikal/Angara
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

PN wrote:



>>I keep being stunned by the fact nobody ever presented an upscaled Harrier
>>as a first stage for a space launch. It has never been done with turbo's
>>although I can see no reason why it cannot be, to say 10 miles up.
>
>
>         It has been proposed, by a number of people. It's fiendishly
>expensive though -- jet engines have poor power to weight compared to
>rockets. You'd need a large number of high-performance engines. If you are
>going to use a turbine first stage, you might as well save yourself some
>gas money and take off horizontally. And then you've essentially got a much
>larger version of Pegasus.

Pegasus is indeed a small rocket. The fact atmospheric O2 is used and the
long standing performance of turbo's is a fact. Perhapt the size of such
contraption for such a limited purpose compared to commercial airliners or
military jets produced in mass numbers makes such approach unrealistic. I
said, perhaps.

jd
_________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 12399 invoked from network); 9 Jul 2001 17:53:17 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 9 Jul 2001 17:53:17 -0000
Received: (qmail 17542 invoked from network); 9 Jul 2001 17:54:48 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 9 Jul 2001 17:54:48 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA00882; Mon, 9 Jul 2001 10:50:13 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 73266 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 9 Jul 2001 17:50:11 +0000
Received: from spsystems.net (spsystems.net [209.47.149.227]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA00865 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Mon,          9 Jul 2001 10:50:10 -0700
Received: (from henry@localhost) by spsystems.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id NAA26905;          Mon, 9 Jul 2001 13:49:38 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010709134335.26402A-100000@spsystems.net>
Date:         Mon, 9 Jul 2001 13:49:37 -0400
Reply-To: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Baikal/Angara
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <F147azUSxvjPkQTGpao0000bdb8@hotmail.com>

On Mon, 9 Jul 2001, John Dom wrote:
> I keep being stunned by the fact nobody ever presented an upscaled Harrier
> as a first stage for a space launch. It has never been done with turbo's
> although I can see no reason why it cannot be, to say 10 miles up.

Depends on what you want to do.

Remember, the Harrier is a conventional wing-supported aircraft with an
unusual takeoff/landing method.  For space launch, it has no particular
advantages over a conventional aircraft.  Indeed, there are considerable
disadvantages, mostly notably the fact that much larger conventional
aircraft are off-the-shelf items.

If you're thinking of doing vertical ascent and acceleration, to serious
speeds and altitudes, on engine power alone, that is not a Harrier.  And
while that idea is credible, the next question to ask is whether you
really want to use airbreathing engines for it.  For rapid acceleration
over a wide range of speeds, rockets generally look better.  See, for
example, the Launch Assist Platform in Kistler's original almost-SSTO
concept.

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 24320 invoked from network); 9 Jul 2001 18:58:46 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 9 Jul 2001 18:58:46 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 11128 invoked from network); 9 Jul 2001 19:00:04 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 9 Jul 2001 19:00:04 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA01191; Mon, 9 Jul 2001 11:50:10 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 73306 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 9 Jul 2001 18:49:55 +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (f68.law3.hotmail.com [209.185.241.68]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA01169 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Mon, 9 Jul 2001 11:49:55 -0700
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Mon,          9 Jul 2001 11:49:25 -0700
Received: from 213.224.83.134 by lw3fd.law3.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Mon, 09          Jul 2001 18:49:25 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [213.224.83.134]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 09 Jul 2001 18:49:25.0511 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[E014E170:01C108A7]
Message-ID:  <F68X5V3GykBbKP7Ie8t0000497d@hotmail.com>
Date:         Mon, 9 Jul 2001 18:49:55 +0000
Reply-To: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Baikal/Angara
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

HS wrote:

>Depends on what you want to do. Remember, the Harrier is a conventional
>wing-supported aircraft with an
>unusual takeoff/landing method.

At the moment of lift-off/landing the wings do not matter much I guess.

>For space launch, it has no particular
>advantages over a conventional aircraft.

It does; needs no runway, main point if we compare with DC-X advantages and
real space-capable future "jets".
Futhermore I think it'd be silly to ignore Harrier style landing capability
using turbo's instead of using rocket power for such craft.
The biprop explosion remark at crach landings; safer with only fuel and no
oxidizer present at this stage indeed.

Remember, for the LEM simulator a turbo-powered flying bedstead was used,
not a rocket ascend/descent vehicle. This should teach us something.
I always found it silly Dan Dare (probably unknown pulp figure to non-Brits)
took off from a ramp in the fifties once the Harrier was there. The Me-163:
great, but silly for the same reason.

>over a wide range of speeds, rockets generally look better.  See, for
>example, the Launch Assist Platform in Kistler's original almost-SSTO
>concept.

I only heard of the name. I'll have to browse on this.

JD
_________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 645 invoked from network); 9 Jul 2001 19:07:13 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 9 Jul 2001 19:07:13 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 29535 invoked from network); 9 Jul 2001 19:08:27 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 9 Jul 2001 19:08:27 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA01271; Mon, 9 Jul 2001 12:04:25 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 73319 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 9 Jul 2001 19:04:23 +0000
Received: from femail2.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail2.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.0.95.82]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA01254 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 9 Jul 2001 12:04:23 -0700
Received: from c1649002-a.earthlink.net ([24.20.95.67]) by          femail2.sdc1.sfba.home.com (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20          201-229-121-120-20010223) with ESMTP id          <20010709190417.JNCY12285.femail2.sdc1.sfba.home.com@c1649002-a.earthlink.net> for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>;          Mon, 9 Jul 2001 12:04:17 -0700
X-Sender: forkbomb@mail.earthlink.net
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.0.2
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <5.0.2.1.0.20010709115924.02a68870@mail.earthlink.net>
Date:         Mon, 9 Jul 2001 12:04:12 -0700
Reply-To: "Pierce Nichols" <forkbomb@EARTHLINK.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Pierce Nichols" <forkbomb@EARTHLINK.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Baikal/Angara
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <F68X5V3GykBbKP7Ie8t0000497d@hotmail.com>

At 06:49 PM 7/9/2001 +0000, John Dom wrote:

>It does; needs no runway, main point if we compare with DC-X advantages and
>real space-capable future "jets".


         Runways, even very long ones, are not exactly hard to come by :).
I'd consider it a wash given the existing infrastructure available. You
might have an easier time licensing a HTHL for operation near populated
areas and from existing commercial airports.


>Futhermore I think it'd be silly to ignore Harrier style landing capability
>using turbo's instead of using rocket power for such craft.
>The biprop explosion remark at crach landings; safer with only fuel and no
>oxidizer present at this stage indeed.


         Actually, there will always be a small amount of oxidizer left
unusable in the tanks unless you use a flush cycle. Also, turbos are not light.


>Remember, for the LEM simulator a turbo-powered flying bedstead was used,
>not a rocket ascend/descent vehicle. This should teach us something.
>I always found it silly Dan Dare (probably unknown pulp figure to non-Brits)
>took off from a ramp in the fifties once the Harrier was there. The Me-163:
>great, but silly for the same reason.


         The LEM simulator, IIRC, used the turbojet to simulate lunar
gravity, i.e. it supported 5/6ths of the mass of the flying bedstead and
rockets supported the rest, so the simulator would have the same response
profile as the real LEM.

         -p


Mars or Bust!
www.marssociety.com

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 23268 invoked from network); 9 Jul 2001 19:12:23 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 9 Jul 2001 19:12:23 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 15923 invoked from network); 9 Jul 2001 19:13:41 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 9 Jul 2001 19:13:41 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA01325; Mon, 9 Jul 2001 12:08:36 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 73335 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 9 Jul 2001 19:08:35 +0000
Received: from pvt.trustmarkins.com (ns.trustmarkins.com [206.31.28.1]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id MAA01308 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Mon, 9 Jul 2001 12:08:34 -0700
Received: from [10.1.1.78] by pvt.trustmarkins.com (IBM OS/2 SENDMAIL VERSION          1.3.14/2.12um) id AA0169; Mon, 09 Jul 01 14:08:45 -0400
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.77 [en] (WinNT; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010709104929.24320A-100000@spsystems.net>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B4A012F.1852759A@calcon.net>
Date:         Mon, 9 Jul 2001 14:08:32 -0500
Reply-To: "Peter von Tresckow" <vontresc@CALCON.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Peter von Tresckow" <vontresc@CALCON.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Baikal/Angara
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Ok I admit that the VTVL SSTO has an advantage in that the landing method does
not involve any extra weight, but it also has some severe disadvantages, the
main ones being that you cannot deadstick the VTVL craft in and that flight
control for the vtvl craft would be much more complex. Aside from that wings
don't offer much of an advantage as long as they are heavier than the required
fuel for landing the craft. Which brings me back to my point I raised earlier.
Just how much fuel would be required to land in this configuration, and how
would it compare to wings/rotors etc as far as winged reentry modes are
concerned.
Henry Spencer wrote:

> On Mon, 9 Jul 2001, Peter von Tresckow wrote:
> > I have been reading this discussion with much interest, but I was
> > wondering what the tradeoff in mass between wings or other
> > aerosurfaces, and the extra propellant required for the vtvl is.
>
> Well, the fast answer is, "it's debatable".  Part of the reason why it's
> debatable is that there is no agreement on the size of the appropriate
> safety margins, or the assumptions made about weather etc.  (Wings look
> rather less competitive if the underlying assumptions are pessimistic
> enough to require go-around capability, for retrying a botched runway
> approach -- a problem VTVLs basically do not have.)
>
> > This has always intruiged me and noone has
> > ever brought the question of how much fuel must be taken to orbit for the
> > landing in a VTVL spacecraft
>
> Again, much depends on how conservative you are.  It need not be a lot,
> if you are willing to make optimistic assumptions.
>
>                                                           Henry Spencer
>                                                        henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 2847 invoked from network); 9 Jul 2001 19:41:55 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 9 Jul 2001 19:41:55 -0000
Received: (qmail 5328 invoked from network); 9 Jul 2001 19:43:27 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 9 Jul 2001 19:43:27 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA01445; Mon, 9 Jul 2001 12:37:17 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 73345 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 9 Jul 2001 19:37:12 +0000
Received: from albatross.wgn.net (www.wgn.net [64.14.252.81] (may be forged))          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA01426 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 9 Jul 2001 12:37:07 -0700
Received: from cronos (eli-208-187-17-108.wgn.net [208.187.17.108]) by          albatross.wgn.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id MAA10593 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 9 Jul 2001 12:38:38 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_09D9_01C56B69.406FE420"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <03bb01c108ae$a93159c0$c36122c0@cronos>
Date:         Mon, 9 Jul 2001 12:37:58 -0700
Reply-To: "Wedge Oldham" <wedge@WESTWORLD.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Wedge Oldham" <wedge@WESTWORLD.COM>
Subject:      [AR] Ions & Radio Control
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_09D9_01C56B69.406FE420
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Here's a question for the group.

I'm building a large project using commercial (Aerotech) motors. I have =
an R/C system as a backup for drogue & main deployment.=20

With an AP motor isn't the exhaust mostly ions, and won't these same =
ions interfere with R/C control?

I remember reading somewhere in "Ignition" about just this problem.

Wedge Oldham
http://NikeProject.com
Only those who risk going too far,=20
will ever know how far they can go.




------=_NextPart_000_09D9_01C56B69.406FE420
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Diso-8859-1">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 5.50.4134.100" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Here's a question for the =
group.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>I'm building a large project using=20
commercial&nbsp;(Aerotech) motors. I have an R/C system as a backup for =
drogue=20
&amp; main deployment. </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>With an AP motor isn't the exhaust =
mostly ions, and=20
won't these same ions interfere with R/C control?</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>I remember reading somewhere in =
"Ignition" about=20
just this problem.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Wedge Oldham<BR><A=20
href=3D"http://NikeProject.com">http://NikeProject.com</A><BR>Only those =
who risk=20
going too far, <BR>will ever know how far they can go.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2><BR></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_09D9_01C56B69.406FE420--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 5819 invoked from network); 9 Jul 2001 20:03:09 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 9 Jul 2001 20:03:09 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 11075 invoked from network); 9 Jul 2001 20:04:36 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 9 Jul 2001 20:04:36 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA01530; Mon, 9 Jul 2001 12:55:11 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 73353 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 9 Jul 2001 19:55:02 +0000
Received: from idsoftware.com (predator.idsoftware.com [192.246.40.34]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA01513 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Mon, 9 Jul 2001 12:55:02 -0700
Received: from [192.246.40.129] (account johnc HELO lightning.idsoftware.com)          by idsoftware.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 3.4.6) with ESMTP id 275437          for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 09 Jul 2001 14:54:18 -0500
X-Sender: johnc@mail.idsoftware.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.1
References: <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010709104929.24320A-100000@spsystems.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <4.3.1.2.20010709144300.0352ee48@mail.idsoftware.com>
Date:         Mon, 9 Jul 2001 14:53:53 -0500
Reply-To: "John Carmack" <johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Carmack" <johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Baikal/Angara
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <3B4A012F.1852759A@calcon.net>

At 02:08 PM 7/9/2001 -0500, you wrote:
>Ok I admit that the VTVL SSTO has an advantage in that the landing method does
>not involve any extra weight, but it also has some severe disadvantages, the
>main ones being that you cannot deadstick the VTVL craft in and that flight
>control for the vtvl craft would be much more complex.

If you screw up a dead stick landing, you crash.

If your landing computer screws up a VTVL landing, you crash. (probably
harder, admittedly)

You wouldn't want to fly a VTVL manually.  Check the flight simulators at
www.armadilloaerospace.com for examples.  With a lot of practice, it is
possible to manually maintain attitude control and land (which is what the
Bell rocket packs required), but a little bit of computer control just
makes things so much easier.

The VTVL fear seems to involve something just not working, like the engine
or landing computer, but a rocket plane isn't going to be like a sail plane
-- it is going to be quite dependent on electrical and hydraulic systems to
"dead stick" land.

The only real worry is the engine restart.  If a rocket engine can be made
as reliable as, say, a hydraulic power system (that may be asking a lot),
then the concern should be at the same level.

John Carmack

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 26094 invoked from network); 9 Jul 2001 20:07:37 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 9 Jul 2001 20:07:37 -0000
Received: (qmail 12244 invoked from network); 9 Jul 2001 20:09:07 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 9 Jul 2001 20:09:07 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA01579; Mon, 9 Jul 2001 13:05:00 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 73361 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 9 Jul 2001 20:04:57 +0000
Received: from spsystems.net (spsystems.net [209.47.149.227]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA01562 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Mon,          9 Jul 2001 13:04:56 -0700
Received: (from henry@localhost) by spsystems.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id QAA28230;          Mon, 9 Jul 2001 16:04:23 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010709154842.27964A-100000@spsystems.net>
Date:         Mon, 9 Jul 2001 16:04:23 -0400
Reply-To: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Baikal/Angara
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <F68X5V3GykBbKP7Ie8t0000497d@hotmail.com>

On Mon, 9 Jul 2001, John Dom wrote:
> >Depends on what you want to do. Remember, the Harrier is a conventional
> >wing-supported aircraft with an unusual takeoff/landing method.
>
> At the moment of lift-off/landing the wings do not matter much I guess.

For a vertical takeoff/landing, no.  But Harriers actually prefer to make
rolling takeoffs, because they can carry heavier loads by sharing the
weight between the wings and the engine.

> >For space launch, it has no particular
> >advantages over a conventional aircraft.
>
> It does; needs no runway...

But why is this a significant advantage for space launch?  You will need
infrastructure to support a launcher, so requiring that it include a
runway does not seem harsh.  Note that VTOL capability in a jet imposes
significant design constraints and payload penalties; it is not free.

> Futhermore I think it'd be silly to ignore Harrier style landing capability
> using turbo's instead of using rocket power for such craft.

Airbreathing lift engines purely as a landing method are a separate issue,
and potentially a workable idea.  It's been proposed.

> The biprop explosion remark at crach landings; safer with only fuel and no
> oxidizer present at this stage indeed.

Doubtful, actually.  Remember that the air can supply oxygen; it's the
fuel that's dangerous, not the oxidizer.

> Remember, for the LEM simulator a turbo-powered flying bedstead was used,
> not a rocket ascend/descent vehicle. This should teach us something.

Yes:  that simulators and actual flight vehicles are different things. :-)
The LLRV/LLTVs used a jet engine primarily to cancel out 5/6 of Earth's
gravity, to simulate the lunar environment.  Their "real" propulsion, used
for the actual practice 1/6G landing approaches, was rockets.

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 7944 invoked from network); 9 Jul 2001 20:17:02 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 9 Jul 2001 20:17:02 -0000
Received: (qmail 9061 invoked from network); 9 Jul 2001 20:18:18 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 9 Jul 2001 20:18:18 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA01628; Mon, 9 Jul 2001 13:11:19 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 73369 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 9 Jul 2001 20:11:12 +0000
Received: from spsystems.net (spsystems.net [209.47.149.227]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA01611 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Mon,          9 Jul 2001 13:11:12 -0700
Received: (from henry@localhost) by spsystems.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id QAA28406;          Mon, 9 Jul 2001 16:10:38 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010709160718.27964C-100000@spsystems.net>
Date:         Mon, 9 Jul 2001 16:10:38 -0400
Reply-To: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Ions & Radio Control
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <03bb01c108ae$a93159c0$c36122c0@cronos>

On Mon, 9 Jul 2001, Wedge Oldham wrote:
> I'm building a large project using commercial (Aerotech) motors. I have
> an R/C system as a backup for drogue & main deployment.
> With an AP motor isn't the exhaust mostly ions, and won't these same
> ions interfere with R/C control?

No chemical rocket engine has an exhaust that's mostly ions.  Some have an
exhaust that has a *little* ionization in it, usually due to easily-
ionized fuel impurities like sodium.  This can cause some difficulties for
radio communication during the engine burn, in cases where the ground
antennas are almost precisely behind the rocket.

Unless your project is something very unusual, you will not be worried
about parachute deployment until after engine cutoff, so this should not
be an issue.

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 8508 invoked from network); 9 Jul 2001 20:23:56 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 9 Jul 2001 20:23:56 -0000
Received: (qmail 15343 invoked from network); 9 Jul 2001 20:25:27 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 9 Jul 2001 20:25:27 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA01721; Mon, 9 Jul 2001 13:21:43 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 73389 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 9 Jul 2001 20:21:42 +0000
Received: from spsystems.net (spsystems.net [209.47.149.227]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA01704 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Mon,          9 Jul 2001 13:21:41 -0700
Received: (from henry@localhost) by spsystems.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id QAA28459;          Mon, 9 Jul 2001 16:21:08 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010709161133.27964D-100000@spsystems.net>
Date:         Mon, 9 Jul 2001 16:21:08 -0400
Reply-To: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Baikal/Angara
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <3B4A012F.1852759A@calcon.net>

On Mon, 9 Jul 2001, Peter von Tresckow wrote:
> Ok I admit that the VTVL SSTO has an advantage in that the landing method does
> not involve any extra weight...

Well, apart from the fuel needed.  Unless you end up needing separate
landing engines, that is...

> but it also has some severe disadvantages, the
> main ones being that you cannot deadstick the VTVL craft in...

As John has already noted, spaceworthy HTHLs will not be easy to land
after a major systems failure either, since their flight control is likely
to depend fairly heavily on hydraulics or electronics or both.

The real counterpart of a VTVL deadstick landing is a glide-landing HTHL
hitting a thunderstorm downdraft.  The nasty crunch at the end is just as
loud.  VTVLs rely on being able to restart their engines; HTHLs rely on
the atmosphere behaving itself.  The former seems more amenable to
engineering solution than the latter, unless we are talking about
experimental vehicles which can afford to just wait for perfect weather.
(Operational spaceships will have to be more robust than that.)

> and that flight control for the vtvl craft would be much more complex.

Doesn't necessarily follow.

> ...Which brings me back to my point I raised earlier.
> Just how much fuel would be required to land in this configuration, and how
> would it compare to wings/rotors etc as far as winged reentry modes are
> concerned.

Again, the answer is:  it depends.  Given some assumptions about terminal
velocity and required hover time, it's fairly easy to compute the fuel
required for the vertical landing.  But figuring out how much wings etc.
weigh is a lot harder.  You can make the comparison go either way,
depending on what assumptions you use.

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 14397 invoked from network); 9 Jul 2001 20:25:23 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 9 Jul 2001 20:25:23 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 29068 invoked from network); 9 Jul 2001 20:26:40 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 9 Jul 2001 20:26:40 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA01683; Mon, 9 Jul 2001 13:18:29 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 73381 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 9 Jul 2001 20:18:24 +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (f30.law3.hotmail.com [209.185.241.30]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA01666 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Mon, 9 Jul 2001 13:18:24 -0700
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Mon,          9 Jul 2001 13:17:53 -0700
Received: from 213.224.83.134 by lw3fd.law3.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Mon, 09          Jul 2001 20:17:53 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [213.224.83.134]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 09 Jul 2001 20:17:53.0997 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[3C2F8FD0:01C108B4]
Message-ID:  <F30xW1cRmcW0drTgwym0000d837@hotmail.com>
Date:         Mon, 9 Jul 2001 20:18:24 +0000
Reply-To: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Baikal/Angara
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

PN wrote:

>         The LEM simulator, IIRC, used the turbojet to simulate lunar
>gravity, i.e. it supported 5/6ths of the mass of the flying bedstead and
>rockets supported the rest, so the simulator would have the same response
>profile as the real LEM.

Did not see any rocket engines on the pic where the simulator was flying a
few miles above an AFB, Dryden IIRC.

jd
_________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 21855 invoked from network); 9 Jul 2001 20:34:11 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 9 Jul 2001 20:34:11 -0000
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 2154 invoked from network); 9 Jul 2001 20:35:28 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 9 Jul 2001 20:35:28 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA01822; Mon, 9 Jul 2001 13:31:14 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 73413 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 9 Jul 2001 20:31:13 +0000
Received: from idsoftware.com (predator.idsoftware.com [192.246.40.34]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA01805 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Mon, 9 Jul 2001 13:31:13 -0700
Received: from [192.246.40.129] (account johnc HELO lightning.idsoftware.com)          by idsoftware.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 3.4.6) with ESMTP id 275465          for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 09 Jul 2001 15:30:29 -0500
X-Sender: johnc@mail.idsoftware.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <4.3.1.2.20010709142714.0343a008@mail.idsoftware.com>
Date:         Mon, 9 Jul 2001 15:30:08 -0500
Reply-To: "John Carmack" <johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Carmack" <johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM>
Subject:      [AR] vehicle configurations (was Re:[AR] Baikal/Angara)
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Launch vehicle configuration debates should have an explicit discussion
about the circumstances that a given configuration is argued to be superior in.

In most cases, the assumption is something like "What is the best possible
configuration of currently feasible technology for a launch
vehicle?".  This is basically asking what type of vehicle we would like to
have, not what would make sense to develop.

Many people will say, with figures to back them up, that it doesn't make
sense to develop any new launch vehicle at all today, given that we have
overcapacity, and that the market is predicted to be relatively inelastic
over the first order of magnitude of cost reduction.

This is arguably true with development expenses running to a billion
dollars or more for many systems, but likely changes when low development
cost is targeted as a primary engineering factor.

When prices get to a small multiple of propellant cost, and if the market
does actually grow along optimistic projections, then there will be proper
justification to start adding additional complexity and longer development
times to eke out additional cost effectiveness or new capabilities.

I favor an extremely simple TSTO with a reusable VTVL booster stage.

TSTO allows you to use pressure fed engines.  The advances in pressure
vessels, both in terms of cost and mass, have been much greater than the
advances in large scale turbo pumps, due at least partially to commercial
use.  The part count reduction is obvious, and I think it would be hard to
argue that it wouldn't be more reliable.  The engine restart for landing is
also a lot less of a worry with simpler engines.

The mechanical aspects of a VTVL are a proper subset of a HTHL.  You need
larger attitude control engines than you would if you used aerosurfaces for
control in the atmosphere, but you don't need any more than you would need
for control outside the atmosphere in any other vehicle.  All of the other
goop that makes up a plane is just extra work.

John Carmack

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 3540 invoked from network); 9 Jul 2001 20:36:49 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 9 Jul 2001 20:36:49 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 3268 invoked from network); 9 Jul 2001 20:38:06 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 9 Jul 2001 20:38:06 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA01788; Mon, 9 Jul 2001 13:28:58 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 73405 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 9 Jul 2001 20:28:57 +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (f43.law3.hotmail.com [209.185.241.43]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA01771 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Mon, 9 Jul 2001 13:28:56 -0700
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Mon,          9 Jul 2001 13:28:26 -0700
Received: from 213.224.83.134 by lw3fd.law3.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Mon, 09          Jul 2001 20:28:26 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [213.224.83.134]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 09 Jul 2001 20:28:26.0667 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[B54957B0:01C108B5]
Message-ID:  <F439kD9zWyHtw9snfLE0000d6c1@hotmail.com>
Date:         Mon, 9 Jul 2001 20:28:57 +0000
Reply-To: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Baikal/Angara
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

PvT said:

>Which brings me back to my point I raised earlier.
>Just how much fuel would be required to land in this configuration, and how
>would it compare to wings/rotors etc as far as winged reentry modes are
>concerned.


A tiny one man helicopter can fly several miles using HP monoprop (Firebird
for instace) whereas the same amount HP in a rocket engine enables one man
only to jump a stadion at best with the same amount. To give precise numbers
is difficult (certainly for this one); like asking what is the Isp of a
chopper or of a car.

jd
_________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 19720 invoked from network); 9 Jul 2001 20:40:32 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 9 Jul 2001 20:40:32 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 17153 invoked from network); 9 Jul 2001 20:41:50 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 9 Jul 2001 20:41:50 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA01864; Mon, 9 Jul 2001 13:34:45 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 73421 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 9 Jul 2001 20:34:44 +0000
Received: from femail2.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail2.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.0.95.82]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA01847 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 9 Jul 2001 13:34:43 -0700
Received: from c1649002-a.earthlink.net ([24.20.95.67]) by          femail2.sdc1.sfba.home.com (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20          201-229-121-120-20010223) with ESMTP id          <20010709203436.NXBQ12285.femail2.sdc1.sfba.home.com@c1649002-a.earthlink.net> for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>;          Mon, 9 Jul 2001 13:34:36 -0700
X-Sender: forkbomb@mail.earthlink.net
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.0.2
References: <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010709104929.24320A-100000@spsystems.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <5.0.2.1.0.20010709132006.00aa3390@mail.earthlink.net>
Date:         Mon, 9 Jul 2001 13:34:31 -0700
Reply-To: "Pierce Nichols" <forkbomb@EARTHLINK.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Pierce Nichols" <forkbomb@EARTHLINK.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Baikal/Angara
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <3B4A012F.1852759A@calcon.net>

At 02:08 PM 7/9/2001 -0500, Peter von Tresckow wrote:
>Ok I admit that the VTVL SSTO has an advantage in that the landing method does
>not involve any extra weight, but it also has some severe disadvantages, the
>main ones being that you cannot deadstick the VTVL craft in


         I've thought about this issue a whole lot, and come to the
conclusion that ballistic parachutes are probably an adequate backup. I've
also thought about using them as a primary landing system, and having the
craft fire its rockets just before landing, as the pilots flares the
parachute(s), in order to kill cross-range speed and vertical velocity.


>and that flight
>control for the vtvl craft would be much more complex.


         I don't believe so. I think a VTVL control system may actually be
*simpler*. A fly-by-wire rate control system is probably a requirement of a
winged re-entry vehicle, due to the enormous speed range involved (high
hypersonic to subsonic). What this means is that a given control deflection
generates a fixed rotation in the aircraft, regardless of speed. This turns
out to be really tricky to do.
         On the other hand, John Carmack has produced, in a remarkably
short time, a rocket vehicle capable of stable hovering, with combined
computerized and human control. I know that this is not a one to one
comparison, since that system requires human control for translational
control and the system is prone to losing its mind if bumped too hard.
These are solved problems in the larger engineering world; I think they are
simpler problems to solve than the problems inherent in an aerodynamic rate
system.


>  Aside from that wings
>don't offer much of an advantage as long as they are heavier than the required
>fuel for landing the craft.


         It's not just the weight; it's also the engineering dollars
required. Engineering dollars are the most expensive kind, since they must
be spent before the vehicle generates a penny of revenue.


>Which brings me back to my point I raised earlier.
>Just how much fuel would be required to land in this configuration, and how
>would it compare to wings/rotors etc as far as winged reentry modes are
>concerned.


         See my earlier post using the BETA numbers. For an unmanned
vehicle, including maneuvering and hover reserves, it's 200-400 m/s delta-V
(including de-orbit burn); a manned vehicle with appropriate safety
reserves is probably 400-600 km/s.

         -p


Mars or Bust!
www.marssociety.com

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 20646 invoked from network); 9 Jul 2001 20:40:44 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 9 Jul 2001 20:40:44 -0000
Received: (qmail 17208 invoked from network); 9 Jul 2001 20:42:02 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 9 Jul 2001 20:42:02 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA01916; Mon, 9 Jul 2001 13:38:07 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 73433 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 9 Jul 2001 20:38:06 +0000
Received: from spock.alohanet.com (spock.alohanet.com [209.31.4.252]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA01899 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Mon, 9 Jul 2001 13:38:05 -0700
Received: from NATE2 (NATE2.alohanet.com [192.168.233.104]) by          spock.alohanet.com (Post.Office MTA v3.5.2 release 221 ID#          0-55447U100L2S100V35) with SMTP id com for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>;          Mon, 9 Jul 2001 13:37:30 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_09DC_01C56B69.407E14F0"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <002201c108b7$58ab1910$68e9a8c0@NATE2>
Date:         Mon, 9 Jul 2001 13:40:10 -0700
Reply-To: "Nathan Hays" <nhays@ALOHANET.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Nathan Hays" <nhays@ALOHANET.COM>
Subject:      [AR] Ignition
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_09DC_01C56B69.407E14F0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Well, my birdthday just came and went.  Imagine my joy to unwrap =
"Ignition" by Kevin Anderson and Doug Beason, the whole family beaming =
at having ordered their first internet book.  Didn't have the heart to =
tell 'em it was the wrong book.....

- Nate




------=_NextPart_000_09DC_01C56B69.407E14F0
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META content=3D"text/html; charset=3Diso-8859-1" =
http-equiv=3DContent-Type>
<META content=3D"MSHTML 5.00.3103.1000" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Well, my birdthday just came and =
went.&nbsp;=20
Imagine my joy to unwrap "Ignition" by Kevin Anderson and Doug =
Beason,&nbsp;the=20
whole family beaming at having ordered their first internet book.&nbsp; =
Didn't=20
have the heart to tell 'em it was the wrong book.....</FONT></DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>- Nate</FONT></DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_09DC_01C56B69.407E14F0--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 2333 invoked from network); 9 Jul 2001 20:43:19 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 9 Jul 2001 20:43:19 -0000
Received: (qmail 5759 invoked from network); 9 Jul 2001 20:44:35 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 9 Jul 2001 20:44:35 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA01995; Mon, 9 Jul 2001 13:41:15 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 73449 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 9 Jul 2001 20:41:14 +0000
Received: from spsystems.net (spsystems.net [209.47.149.227]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA01978 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Mon,          9 Jul 2001 13:41:13 -0700
Received: (from henry@localhost) by spsystems.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id QAA28674;          Mon, 9 Jul 2001 16:40:39 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010709163952.27964F-100000@spsystems.net>
Date:         Mon, 9 Jul 2001 16:40:39 -0400
Reply-To: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Baikal/Angara
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <F30xW1cRmcW0drTgwym0000d837@hotmail.com>

On Mon, 9 Jul 2001, John Dom wrote:
> >         The LEM simulator, IIRC, used the turbojet to simulate lunar
> >gravity, i.e. it supported 5/6ths of the mass of the flying bedstead and
> >rockets supported the rest...
>
> Did not see any rocket engines on the pic where the simulator was flying a
> few miles above an AFB, Dryden IIRC.

They weren't conspicuous (and they weren't used on familiarization flights,
where the pilot was not actually attempting a simulated lunar landing),
but they were there.

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 13763 invoked from network); 9 Jul 2001 20:52:44 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 9 Jul 2001 20:52:44 -0000
Received: (qmail 22104 invoked from network); 9 Jul 2001 20:54:15 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 9 Jul 2001 20:54:15 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA02055; Mon, 9 Jul 2001 13:49:04 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 73459 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 9 Jul 2001 20:49:02 +0000
Received: from spsystems.net (spsystems.net [209.47.149.227]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA02038 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Mon,          9 Jul 2001 13:49:01 -0700
Received: (from henry@localhost) by spsystems.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id QAA28796;          Mon, 9 Jul 2001 16:48:27 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010709164704.27964I-100000@spsystems.net>
Date:         Mon, 9 Jul 2001 16:48:27 -0400
Reply-To: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Baikal/Angara
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <5.0.2.1.0.20010709132006.00aa3390@mail.earthlink.net>

On Mon, 9 Jul 2001, Pierce Nichols wrote:
>          I've thought about this issue a whole lot, and come to the
> conclusion that ballistic parachutes are probably an adequate backup. I've
> also thought about using them as a primary landing system, and having the
> craft fire its rockets just before landing, as the pilots flares the
> parachute(s), in order to kill cross-range speed and vertical velocity.

More generally, one area that has been somewhat neglected is combination
landing systems, e.g. VTVL rocket landing assisted by a deployable drag
device.  The drag device may be helpful during reentry too, if it's
heat-resistant.

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 26971 invoked from network); 9 Jul 2001 21:09:39 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 9 Jul 2001 21:09:39 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 12393 invoked from network); 9 Jul 2001 21:09:41 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 9 Jul 2001 21:09:41 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA02145; Mon, 9 Jul 2001 14:05:56 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 73471 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 9 Jul 2001 21:05:46 +0000
Received: from idsoftware.com (predator.idsoftware.com [192.246.40.34]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA02128 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Mon, 9 Jul 2001 14:05:46 -0700
Received: from [192.246.40.129] (account johnc HELO lightning.idsoftware.com)          by idsoftware.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 3.4.6) with ESMTP id 275505          for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 09 Jul 2001 16:05:02 -0500
X-Sender: johnc@mail.idsoftware.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.1
References: <3B4A012F.1852759A@calcon.net>            <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010709104929.24320A-100000@spsystems.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <4.3.1.2.20010709160049.03476f00@mail.idsoftware.com>
Date:         Mon, 9 Jul 2001 16:04:53 -0500
Reply-To: "John Carmack" <johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Carmack" <johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Baikal/Angara
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <5.0.2.1.0.20010709132006.00aa3390@mail.earthlink.net>

>
>>and that flight
>>control for the vtvl craft would be much more complex.
>
>
>         I don't believe so. I think a VTVL control system may actually be
>*simpler*. A fly-by-wire rate control system is probably a requirement of a
>winged re-entry vehicle, due to the enormous speed range involved (high
>hypersonic to subsonic). What this means is that a given control deflection
>generates a fixed rotation in the aircraft, regardless of speed. This turns
>out to be really tricky to do.
>         On the other hand, John Carmack has produced, in a remarkably
>short time, a rocket vehicle capable of stable hovering, with combined
>computerized and human control. I know that this is not a one to one
>comparison, since that system requires human control for translational
>control and the system is prone to losing its mind if bumped too hard.
>These are solved problems in the larger engineering world; I think they are
>simpler problems to solve than the problems inherent in an aerodynamic rate
>system.

The bump problem is solved now, by virtue of having fiber optic gyros
instead of micromachined  gyros.  Unfortunately, they cost more than the
rest of the vehicle put together ($1500 per gyro axis).

Once I get all our A/D signals working precisely enough for a credible
inertial system, I will be getting computer controlled hovering and
translation in.

John Carmack

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 17103 invoked from network); 9 Jul 2001 21:14:12 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 9 Jul 2001 21:14:12 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 18265 invoked from network); 9 Jul 2001 21:15:30 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 9 Jul 2001 21:15:30 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA02184; Mon, 9 Jul 2001 14:10:38 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 73479 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 9 Jul 2001 21:10:37 +0000
Received: from proxy4.ba.best.com (root@proxy4.ba.best.com [206.184.139.15]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA02166 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Mon, 9 Jul 2001 14:10:37 -0700
Received: from [10.0.0.2] (snvadslgw2poold155.snjs.uswestqwest.net          [168.103.213.155]) by proxy4.ba.best.com (8.9.3/8.9.2/best.out) with          ESMTP id OAA23579 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Mon, 9 Jul 2001 14:09:04          -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Sender:  (Unverified)
References: <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010709164704.27964I-100000@spsystems.net>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <v04210112b76fcb290065@[10.0.0.2]>
Date:         Mon, 9 Jul 2001 14:08:31 -0700
Reply-To: "bob fortune" <bob@FORTUNEPAINT.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "bob fortune" <bob@FORTUNEPAINT.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Baikal/Angara
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010709164704.27964I-100000@spsystems.net>

>Hernry wrote:
>
>More generally, one area that has been somewhat neglected is combination
>landing systems, e.g. VTVL rocket landing assisted by a deployable drag
>device.  The drag device may be helpful during reentry too, if it's
>heat-resistant.

Absolutely.  I really don't understand the reason to carry all that
propellant mass and hardware with you unless you are landing on the
moon, or Mars, or a comet, or some place without an atmosphere to
speak of.

Parachute science being what it is can produce chutes that deploy
reliably out to 4 9's - witness all soviet manned flights, Mercury,
Gemini, and Apollo.  Not only are they predictable, relatively
simple, intelligent, http://www.pia.com/fxc/apadsovr.htm (click me),
and fairly light in weight but also reusable!

A couple jettisonable high speed drogues would take care of re-entry
issues and one large steerable chute - that can flare itself to a
couple of feet per second - would take care of a lot of problems.

But the VTVL stuff is supremely cool, it has that amazing wow factor
that appeals to most of us.

Bob

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 23352 invoked from network); 9 Jul 2001 21:29:21 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 9 Jul 2001 21:29:21 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 6855 invoked from network); 9 Jul 2001 21:30:40 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 9 Jul 2001 21:30:40 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA02244; Mon, 9 Jul 2001 14:26:49 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 73487 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 9 Jul 2001 21:26:45 +0000
Received: from femail4.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail4.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.0.95.84]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA02227 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 9 Jul 2001 14:26:45 -0700
Received: from c1649002-a.earthlink.net ([24.20.95.67]) by          femail4.sdc1.sfba.home.com (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20          201-229-121-120-20010223) with ESMTP id          <20010709212640.KGPB9548.femail4.sdc1.sfba.home.com@c1649002-a.earthlink.net> for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon,          9 Jul 2001 14:26:40 -0700
X-Sender: forkbomb@mail.earthlink.net
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.0.2
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <5.0.2.1.0.20010709140408.02a9b560@mail.earthlink.net>
Date:         Mon, 9 Jul 2001 14:26:36 -0700
Reply-To: "Pierce Nichols" <forkbomb@EARTHLINK.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Pierce Nichols" <forkbomb@EARTHLINK.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] vehicle configurations (was Re:[AR] Baikal/Angara)
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <4.3.1.2.20010709142714.0343a008@mail.idsoftware.com>

At 03:30 PM 7/9/2001 -0500, John Carmack wrote:
>Launch vehicle configuration debates should have an explicit discussion
>about the circumstances that a given configuration is argued to be
>superior in.
>
>In most cases, the assumption is something like "What is the best possible
>configuration of currently feasible technology for a launch
>vehicle?".  This is basically asking what type of vehicle we would like to
>have, not what would make sense to develop.


         I try to answer the latter question in my own thinking on the
matter. I catch myself answering the former all too often :).


>This is arguably true with development expenses running to a billion
>dollars or more for many systems, but likely changes when low development
>cost is targeted as a primary engineering factor.


         Since development cost is far and away the biggest expense
(especially when you factor in real world issues like interest and
opportunity cost), that makes sense.


>I favor an extremely simple TSTO with a reusable VTVL booster stage.


         I am with you there.


>TSTO allows you to use pressure fed engines.  The advances in pressure
>vessels, both in terms of cost and mass, have been much greater than the
>advances in large scale turbo pumps, due at least partially to commercial
>use.  The part count reduction is obvious, and I think it would be hard to
>argue that it wouldn't be more reliable.  The engine restart for landing is
>also a lot less of a worry with simpler engines.


         There's one and only one problem here -- namely, that you're going
to have to develop the engines yourself. Developing engines is hard, and
gets harder the bigger the engine is. This is one of the reasons I've
become so captivated with BETA since I first read about it -- the engines
are relatively small (and therefore cheaper to develop) and there are a lot
of them, which reduces the amount of trouble one engine failure can cause.
It also reduces the throttle range required of any single engine.
         Do you envision the upper stage as a reusable orbiter or as
expendable? Would it be possible to use an existing upper stage instead of
developing a new one? I'm thinking of as many ways as possible to use
existing flight-proven hardware as possible. I've done some thinking about
a reusable upper-stage orbiter with an expendable payload shroud, and ocean
splash-down recovery -- could be cheap and easy to operate.


>The mechanical aspects of a VTVL are a proper subset of a HTHL.  You need
>larger attitude control engines than you would if you used aerosurfaces for
>control in the atmosphere, but you don't need any more than you would need
>for control outside the atmosphere in any other vehicle.  All of the other
>goop that makes up a plane is just extra work.


         This is most likely correct. It might help to have aero-flaps for
re-entry/atmospheric flight control, ala DC-X, but this is a rather
involved engineering question.

         -p


Mars or Bust!
www.marssociety.com

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 17309 invoked from network); 9 Jul 2001 21:34:56 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 9 Jul 2001 21:34:56 -0000
Received: (qmail 10 invoked from network); 9 Jul 2001 21:36:28 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 9 Jul 2001 21:36:28 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA02278; Mon, 9 Jul 2001 14:31:17 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 73495 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 9 Jul 2001 21:31:16 +0000
Received: from fep3-orange.clear.net.nz (fep3-orange.clear.net.nz          [203.97.32.3]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA02261          for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Mon, 9 Jul 2001 14:31:15 -0700
Received: from mkbs (203-167-162-135.dialup.clear.net.nz [203.167.162.135]) by          fep3-orange.clear.net.nz (1.5/1.8) with SMTP id JAA04131; Tue, 10 Jul          2001 09:31:11 +1200 (NZST)
References:  <sb49a004.063@pcux.citec.com.au>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <000201c108be$8af672a0$0100a8c0@mkbs>
Date:         Mon, 9 Jul 2001 23:04:24 +1200
Reply-To: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Organization: Applied Technology
Subject:      Re: [AR] Chem storage Q's
Comments: To: Des Bromilow <Des.Bromilow@CITEC.COM.AU>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

I'll let others answer the general storage questions BUT do consider the
aspect of electrostatic ignition of suitably sensitive compounds. Some
plastics will accentuate this risk. Electrostatic ignition does occur and is
the cause of a few fatalities annually. While KNO3 propellants have rather
low ignition sensitivity, Murphy says that something which refuses to light
with a blow torch when you want it to, will light with the smallest whisper
of ESD spark when you really really hope that it won't. Most danger probably
comes from propellant dust etc with very small particle sizes. I've never
heard of a candy propellant being electrostatically ignited. I've played
with other material that most certainly could have been. Others may have
practical tales to tell about this.

Mg must not be allowed access to dampness!!!

Check your insurance position.



RM



> just really getting started in this.
>
> I'm getting 20 Kg of KNO3 on the weekend, but I don't know how to store it
safely
>
> I have other chemicals stored at the flat, all in sealed plastic bags, and
then inside stackable plastic containers.
>
> I intend making my own ignitors, a few dip mixes to improve ignitors, and
some candy propellant to use as pyrovalve material in my hybrids.
>
> How do others store their KNO3?
>
> Similar question on Mg... I have a reasonable quantity of Mg shavings and
chips (from practicing using my lathe)
>
> How should these best be stored?
>
> Thanks,
> Des
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 24726 invoked from network); 9 Jul 2001 21:36:39 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 9 Jul 2001 21:36:39 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 26198 invoked from network); 9 Jul 2001 21:37:56 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 9 Jul 2001 21:37:56 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA02312; Mon, 9 Jul 2001 14:34:29 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 73503 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 9 Jul 2001 21:34:27 +0000
Received: from femail4.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail4.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.0.95.84]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA02295 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 9 Jul 2001 14:34:27 -0700
Received: from c1649002-a.earthlink.net ([24.20.95.67]) by          femail4.sdc1.sfba.home.com (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20          201-229-121-120-20010223) with ESMTP id          <20010709213421.KPTS9548.femail4.sdc1.sfba.home.com@c1649002-a.earthlink.net>; Mon, 9 Jul 2001 14:34:21          -0700
X-Sender: forkbomb@mail.earthlink.net
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.0.2
References: <5.0.2.1.0.20010709132006.00aa3390@mail.earthlink.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <5.0.2.1.0.20010709142705.02a483c0@mail.earthlink.net>
Date:         Mon, 9 Jul 2001 14:34:17 -0700
Reply-To: "Pierce Nichols" <forkbomb@EARTHLINK.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Pierce Nichols" <forkbomb@EARTHLINK.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Baikal/Angara
Comments: To: Henry Spencer <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010709164704.27964I-100000@spsystems.net>

At 04:48 PM 7/9/2001 -0400, Henry Spencer wrote:
>On Mon, 9 Jul 2001, Pierce Nichols wrote:
> >          I've thought about this issue a whole lot, and come to the
> > conclusion that ballistic parachutes are probably an adequate backup. I've
> > also thought about using them as a primary landing system, and having the
> > craft fire its rockets just before landing, as the pilots flares the
> > parachute(s), in order to kill cross-range speed and vertical velocity.
>
>More generally, one area that has been somewhat neglected is combination
>landing systems, e.g. VTVL rocket landing assisted by a deployable drag
>device.  The drag device may be helpful during reentry too, if it's
>heat-resistant.


         My thoughts have focused on conventional subsonic parachutes
rather than exotica like ballutes and supersonic parachutes. Depending on
the shape of the empty vehicles, its terminal velocity in the lower
atmosphere may be subsonic (it is, after all, a large, mostly empty shell
at that point), in which case the system can be much, much simpler. A
multiple round canopy cloverleaf arrangement, ala Apollo, has a L/D around
2. A parafoil would be trickier since I believe it would have to be larger
than the largest ever used in practice, and I have never heard of a
multiple-canopy parafoil system.

         -p


Mars or Bust!
www.marssociety.com

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 26047 invoked from network); 9 Jul 2001 21:43:37 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 9 Jul 2001 21:43:37 -0000
Received: (qmail 29113 invoked from network); 9 Jul 2001 21:44:54 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 9 Jul 2001 21:44:54 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA02370; Mon, 9 Jul 2001 14:41:54 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 73515 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 9 Jul 2001 21:41:48 +0000
Received: from tomts13-srv.bellnexxia.net (tomts13.bellnexxia.net          [209.226.175.34]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA02353          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 9 Jul 2001 14:41:48 -0700
Received: from station1 ([64.228.153.177]) by tomts13-srv.bellnexxia.net          (InterMail vM.4.01.03.16 201-229-121-116-20010115) with SMTP id          <20010709214117.YYBK7196.tomts13-srv.bellnexxia.net@station1> for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 9 Jul 2001 17:41:17 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
Importance: Normal
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <NFBBKADEMLBLIEKNLLEPEELACCAA.bfeeney@davinciproject.com>
Date:         Mon, 9 Jul 2001 17:41:16 -0500
Reply-To: "Brian Feeney" <bfeeney@DAVINCIPROJECT.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Brian Feeney" <bfeeney@DAVINCIPROJECT.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Baikal/Angara
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010709163952.27964F-100000@spsystems.net>

Just a little alternative perspective on landing. The da Vinci Project's sub
orbital rocket is using a ballute for reentry and a GPS guided parafoil to
land. When one considers alternative systems there must be an advantage to
take on a more complex means of controlled flight to and including the
landing be it powered vertical landing or horizontal runway landing.

The da Vinci rockets landing weight is 2,950 lbs. (2,250 empty plus
returnable payload *people* at 700 lbs).

The ballutes weight is 150 lbs - max Dynamic Pressure of 15 psi at 1.4 km /
sec reentry vel. Max thermal load is 980 C at 35 km altitude. Sub orbital
rockets have the unique challenge of the rate of increase into denser air as
opposed to their LEO cousins that can bleed speed off at higher altitudes.

The parafoil's weight is 150 lbs including the automated GPS waypoint
programmable flight controller - servos and all with full manual side stick
back up in the cockpit and on the ground. At a deployment height of 7,650
meters (about 25,000 feet) we have a still air cross range in any direction
of 25 km (total 50 Km dia target landing zone). The system is capable of
very precise landings.

Our ballute provides an existing airbag so no landing gear.

An additional ballistic aeroconcial parachute as a backup weighs in at 75
lbs. That's roughly 13% of the landing weight for reentry and controlled
touchdown with some redundancy.

A CJ610 turbojet engine (3,000 lbs of thrust) would be needed in our case to
effect a powered landing. It weighs about 400 lbs, plus fuel to land and
more fuel to effect some cross range capability.

Perhaps a more optimum idea may be a ballute such as ours that has the
passive static stability of its conical shape (no flying inputs) plus the
added design advantage of the parafoil which allows directional control and
range in a statically stable configuration. Yes parachutes are old and no
one really wants to see them in *future* space vehicle concepts, however
they are very reliable, light weight, reusable, very inexpensive and if you
get out the design pen you just maybe able to come up with a hybrid approach
that beats all. Nasa is looking at inflatable wings to create the lifting
body shape.

For those of you that don't mind a bit of a bounce our terminal velocity of
the ballute only is 20 m / sec.

Cheers,
Brian
------------------
Brian Feeney
The da Vinci Project
65 Carl Hall Road,Downsview Park,
Toronto, Ontario, Canada, M3K 2B6
tel: 416.631.6540
bfeeney@davinciproject.com
http://www.davinciproject.com

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 24041 invoked from network); 9 Jul 2001 21:49:52 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 9 Jul 2001 21:49:52 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 6958 invoked from network); 9 Jul 2001 21:50:51 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 9 Jul 2001 21:50:51 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA02414; Mon, 9 Jul 2001 14:48:12 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 73523 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 9 Jul 2001 21:48:11 +0000
Received: from femail2.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail2.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.0.95.82]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA02397 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 9 Jul 2001 14:48:11 -0700
Received: from c1649002-a.earthlink.net ([24.20.95.67]) by          femail2.sdc1.sfba.home.com (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20          201-229-121-120-20010223) with ESMTP id          <20010709214805.RVGA12285.femail2.sdc1.sfba.home.com@c1649002-a.earthlink.net> for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>;          Mon, 9 Jul 2001 14:48:05 -0700
X-Sender: forkbomb@mail.earthlink.net
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.0.2
References: <5.0.2.1.0.20010709132006.00aa3390@mail.earthlink.net>            <3B4A012F.1852759A@calcon.net>            <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010709104929.24320A-100000@spsystems.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <5.0.2.1.0.20010709143520.00aa7d90@mail.earthlink.net>
Date:         Mon, 9 Jul 2001 14:48:00 -0700
Reply-To: "Pierce Nichols" <forkbomb@EARTHLINK.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Pierce Nichols" <forkbomb@EARTHLINK.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Baikal/Angara
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <4.3.1.2.20010709160049.03476f00@mail.idsoftware.com>

At 04:04 PM 7/9/2001 -0500, John Carmack wrote:

>Once I get all our A/D signals working precisely enough for a credible
>inertial system, I will be getting computer controlled hovering and
>translation in.


         If I understand correctly from your updates and discussions online
of the system, your A/D chips are mounted some distance away from the
gyros. Have you thought about mounting the A/D chips on their own boards
directly attached to the gyros they service? That makes your analog lines
very short. You can shield the entire unit pretty easily -- put it in a
grounded

When I was in college, I worked in the plasma physics lab, which was an
extremely noisy electrical environment, especially with the tokamak
running. We dealt with the problem by mounting combined filters and preamps
as close as possible to the instruments. This usually meant in a grounded
copper box right next to the vacuum chamber. We didn't mount the A/D
converters there because they were rack-mounted in CAMAC crates (inside
shielded racks blah blah blah) -- we would have if we could have :). For
photomultipliers, we did that one better and attached the preamp circuitry
directly to the back of the tube.

         -p


Mars or Bust!
www.marssociety.com

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 13738 invoked from network); 9 Jul 2001 23:14:23 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 9 Jul 2001 23:14:23 -0000
Received: (qmail 7061 invoked from network); 9 Jul 2001 23:15:41 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 9 Jul 2001 23:15:41 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA02790; Mon, 9 Jul 2001 16:01:31 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 73578 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 9 Jul 2001 22:59:29 +0000
Received: from mta05.mail.mel.aone.net.au (mta05.mail.au.uu.net [203.2.192.85])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA02760 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 9 Jul 2001 15:59:28 -0700
Received: from unknown ([63.34.214.8]) by mta05.mail.mel.aone.net.au with SMTP          id <20010709225919.KDKN28112.mta05.mail.mel.aone.net.au@unknown>;          Tue, 10 Jul 2001 08:59:19 +1000
References: Conversation <03bb01c108ae$a93159c0$c36122c0@cronos> with last            message <03bb01c108ae$a93159c0$c36122c0@cronos>
Priority: Normal
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Priority: 3
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	X-MAPIextension=.TXT;
	charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>
Date:         Mon, 9 Jul 2001 22:59:29 +0000
Reply-To: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Ions & Radio Control
Comments: To: Wedge Oldham <wedge@WESTWORLD.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <03bb01c108ae$a93159c0$c36122c0@cronos>

Most of the exhaust from a rocket is comprised of ionic compounds ie. high
internal energy liberation = quite stable products = ionic compounds
(products). I can't see these "products" in themselves producing much of a
problem but the process (ie. the reactions) which take place in the motor
will produce a lot of electromagnetic noise.

Troy.

----------
> Here's a question for the group.
>
> I'm building a large project using commercial (Aerotech) motors. I have
an R/C
> system as a backup for drogue & main deployment.
>
> With an AP motor isn't the exhaust mostly ions, and won't these same ions
> interfere with R/C control?
>
> I remember reading somewhere in "Ignition" about just this problem.
>
> Wedge Oldham
> http://NikeProject.com
> Only those who risk going too far,
> will ever know how far they can go.
>
>
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 1205 invoked from network); 9 Jul 2001 23:31:46 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 9 Jul 2001 23:31:46 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 29944 invoked from network); 9 Jul 2001 23:33:04 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 9 Jul 2001 23:33:04 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA02924; Mon, 9 Jul 2001 16:27:49 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 73606 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 9 Jul 2001 23:27:36 +0000
Received: from fw1-bv.tek.com (fw1-bv.tek.com [192.65.40.16]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA02906 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon,          9 Jul 2001 16:27:36 -0700
Received: from fw1-bv.tek.com (root@localhost) by fw1-bv.tek.com with ESMTP id          f69NR5X19911 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 9 Jul 2001 16:27:05          -0700 (PDT)
Received: from tektronix.tek.com (tektronix.tek.com [128.181.6.43]) by          fw1-bv.tek.com with ESMTP id f69NR5t19900 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>;          Mon, 9 Jul 2001 16:27:05 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from us-bv-u07.bv.tek.com (webshield.tek.com [128.181.2.130]) by          tektronix.tek.com (8.9.3+Sun/8.9.3) with SMTP id QAA20812 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 9 Jul 2001 16:26:59 -0700 (PDT)
Received: FROM us-bv-m01.bv.tek.com BY us-bv-u07.bv.tek.com ; Mon Jul 09          16:26:04 2001 -0700
Received: by us-bv-m01.bv.tek.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2448.0) id          <3CM34R6H>; Mon, 9 Jul 2001 16:26:03 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2448.0)
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Message-ID:  <5832AFF5FC75D411844300508BC216B70A273F@us-bv-m07.bv.tek.com>
Date:         Mon, 9 Jul 2001 16:26:01 -0700
Reply-To: <john.w.lyngdal@EXGATE.TEK.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <john.w.lyngdal@EXGATE.TEK.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Ions & Radio Control
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

I haven't read my copy of Ignition for over a decade. I seem to recall that
the interference problems affecting RF control of missals was caused by
group 1A elements like those found in sodium and potassium based oxidizers,
back in the days before AP.

        John

-----Original Message-----
From: Troy Prideaux [mailto:GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU]
Sent: Monday, July 09, 2001 3:59 PM
To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
Subject: Re: [AR] Ions & Radio Control


Most of the exhaust from a rocket is comprised of ionic compounds ie. high
internal energy liberation = quite stable products = ionic compounds
(products). I can't see these "products" in themselves producing much of a
problem but the process (ie. the reactions) which take place in the motor
will produce a lot of electromagnetic noise.

Troy.

----------
> Here's a question for the group.
>
> I'm building a large project using commercial (Aerotech) motors. I have
an R/C
> system as a backup for drogue & main deployment.
>
> With an AP motor isn't the exhaust mostly ions, and won't these same ions
> interfere with R/C control?
>
> I remember reading somewhere in "Ignition" about just this problem.
>
> Wedge Oldham
> http://NikeProject.com
> Only those who risk going too far,
> will ever know how far they can go.
>
>
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 12468 invoked from network); 10 Jul 2001 02:39:45 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 10 Jul 2001 02:39:45 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 2096 invoked from network); 10 Jul 2001 02:41:03 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 10 Jul 2001 02:41:03 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA03649; Mon, 9 Jul 2001 19:33:17 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 73651 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 10 Jul 2001 02:33:06          +0000
Received: from femail4.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail4.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.0.95.84]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA03628 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 9 Jul 2001 19:33:06 -0700
Received: from c1649002-a.earthlink.net ([24.20.95.67]) by          femail4.sdc1.sfba.home.com (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20          201-229-121-120-20010223) with ESMTP id          <20010710023300.VCGB9548.femail4.sdc1.sfba.home.com@c1649002-a.earthlink.net>; Mon, 9 Jul 2001 19:33:00          -0700
X-Sender: forkbomb@mail.earthlink.net (Unverified)
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.0.2
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <5.0.2.1.0.20010709185850.02a713e8@mail.earthlink.net>
Date:         Mon, 9 Jul 2001 19:09:14 -0700
Reply-To: "Pierce Nichols" <forkbomb@EARTHLINK.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Pierce Nichols" <forkbomb@EARTHLINK.NET>
Subject:      [AR] [OT] small machine tools
Comments: To: erps-list@LunaCity.com
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Folks:

         I'm thinking of getting a small metalworking lathe to learn
machining and make smaller rocket motors on. I've been looking at the
Sherline 4000 lathe. Does anyone here have any experience with the
Sherline, good bad or indifferent? Any competitors I might want to look at?
I've also looked at the Smithy Midas 1220. It's much more expensive, but
it's a 3-in-1 instead of just a lathe.

         -p


Mars or Bust!
www.marssociety.com

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 25720 invoked from network); 10 Jul 2001 04:01:28 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 10 Jul 2001 04:01:28 -0000
X-Priority: 3
Received: (qmail 20129 invoked from network); 10 Jul 2001 04:02:48 -0000
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 10 Jul 2001 04:02:48 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA03875; Mon, 9 Jul 2001 20:31:21 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 73681 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 10 Jul 2001 03:31:15          +0000
Received: from inet03.citec.qld.gov.au (firewall-user@inet03.citec.qld.gov.au          [203.5.10.10]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA03858          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 9 Jul 2001 20:31:14 -0700
Received: by inet03.citec.qld.gov.au; id NAA28384; Tue, 10 Jul 2001 13:31:08          +1000 (EST)
Received: from pcux.citec.com.au(pcux.citec.qld.gov.au 147.132.17.12) by          inet03.citec.qld.gov.au via smap (V2.0) id xma027348; Tue, 10 Jul 01          13:30:32 +1000
Received: from CITEC-Message_Server by pcux.citec.com.au with Novell_GroupWise;          Tue, 10 Jul 2001 13:30:09 +1000
X-Mailer: Novell GroupWise 5.5.4
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by itc.uci.edu id UAA03859
Message-ID:  <sb4b0361.042@pcux.citec.com.au>
Date:         Tue, 10 Jul 2001 13:29:41 +1000
Reply-To: "Des Bromilow" <Des.Bromilow@CITEC.COM.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Des Bromilow" <Des.Bromilow@CITEC.COM.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] [OT] small machine tools
Comments: To: forkbomb@EARTHLINK.NET
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

I got a Taig lathe , mainly due the cost, the amount of space I had, and the rigidity of the tool (all metal, very "industrial")
the accessories are inexpensive, and I can give you the contact for a US dealer who sells at 15% under rrp

hth,
des

>>> Pierce Nichols <forkbomb@EARTHLINK.NET> 10/07/01 12:09:14 pm >>>
Folks:

         I'm thinking of getting a small metalworking lathe to learn
machining and make smaller rocket motors on. I've been looking at the
Sherline 4000 lathe. Does anyone here have any experience with the
Sherline, good bad or indifferent? Any competitors I might want to look at?
I've also looked at the Smithy Midas 1220. It's much more expensive, but
it's a 3-in-1 instead of just a lathe.

         -p


Mars or Bust!
www.marssociety.com

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 25470 invoked from network); 10 Jul 2001 04:43:40 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 10 Jul 2001 04:43:40 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 13295 invoked from network); 10 Jul 2001 04:42:22 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 10 Jul 2001 04:42:22 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA04146; Mon, 9 Jul 2001 21:27:40 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 73704 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 10 Jul 2001 04:27:27          +0000
Received: from idsoftware.com (predator.idsoftware.com [192.246.40.34]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA04129 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Mon, 9 Jul 2001 21:27:26 -0700
Received: from [192.246.40.129] (account johnc HELO lightning.idsoftware.com)          by idsoftware.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 3.4.6) with ESMTP id 275788          for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 09 Jul 2001 23:26:43 -0500
X-Sender: johnc@mail.idsoftware.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.1
References: <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010709163952.27964F-100000@spsystems.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <4.3.1.2.20010709230753.0346ab60@mail.idsoftware.com>
Date:         Mon, 9 Jul 2001 23:26:33 -0500
Reply-To: "John Carmack" <johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Carmack" <johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Baikal/Angara
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <NFBBKADEMLBLIEKNLLEPEELACCAA.bfeeney@davinciproject.com>

>
>An additional ballistic aeroconcial parachute as a backup weighs in at 75
>lbs. That's roughly 13% of the landing weight for reentry and controlled
>touchdown with some redundancy.

Thanks, those were very nice numbers to see.

I think you are probably making the right call overall, but if you could
use your existing engines, killing 20 m/s of terminal velocity with a 3000
lb vehicle would take less than 30 lbs of propellant, even at only 200 Isp.

Getting the steering benefits of a parafoil in addition to just killing the
velocity might take a lot more propellant in a powered VL mode.

John Carmack

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 23909 invoked from network); 10 Jul 2001 05:05:24 -0000
X-Priority: 3
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 10 Jul 2001 05:05:24 -0000
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 9445 invoked from network); 10 Jul 2001 05:06:42 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 10 Jul 2001 05:06:42 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA04287; Mon, 9 Jul 2001 21:58:30 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 73712 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 10 Jul 2001 04:58:27          +0000
Received: from imo-r05.mx.aol.com (imo-r05.mx.aol.com [152.163.225.101]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA04198 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Mon, 9 Jul 2001 21:48:26 -0700
Received: from OhioChase@aol.com by imo-r05.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v30.22.) id          w.4d.e0518d3 (3940) for <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Tue, 10 Jul 2001          00:48:23 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: AOL 5.0 for Windows sub 138
Message-ID:  <4d.e0518d3.287be316@aol.com>
Date:         Tue, 10 Jul 2001 00:48:22 EDT
Reply-To: <OhioChase@AOL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <OhioChase@AOL.COM>
Subject:      [AR] Looking for Data
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Does anyone have the thrust curve data for Kosdon' s M3200?

Appreciate any help.

Thanks.

Kent Newman

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 5236 invoked from network); 10 Jul 2001 07:38:27 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 10 Jul 2001 07:38:27 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 24227 invoked from network); 10 Jul 2001 07:39:44 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 10 Jul 2001 07:39:44 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA04716; Tue, 10 Jul 2001 00:23:06 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 73771 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 10 Jul 2001 07:21:40          +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (f48.law15.hotmail.com [64.4.23.48]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA04697 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Tue,          10 Jul 2001 00:21:39 -0700
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Tue,          10 Jul 2001 00:21:09 -0700
Received: from 193.121.251.246 by lw15fd.law15.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Tue,          10 Jul 2001 07:21:09 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [193.121.251.246]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 10 Jul 2001 07:21:09.0697 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[E4457B10:01C10910]
Message-ID:  <F48voGdKO8FNpyLAPDV0000395a@hotmail.com>
Date:         Tue, 10 Jul 2001 07:21:40 +0000
Reply-To: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Baikal/Angara
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

HS wrote:

> > >For space launch, it (Harrier) has no particular
> > >advantages over a conventional aircraft.
> >
> > It does; needs no runway...
>
>But why is this a significant advantage for space launch?  You will need
>infrastructure to support a launcher, so requiring that it include a
>runway does not seem harsh.  Note that VTOL capability in a jet imposes
>significant design constraints and payload penalties; it is not free.

Sure. But I was thinking of future spacecraft not requiring such
infrastructures. The true (albeit now with a bit silly look) spacecraft from
the minds of early SF writers are still something I'd go for.

jd
_________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 11613 invoked from network); 10 Jul 2001 08:24:06 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 10 Jul 2001 08:24:06 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 27694 invoked from network); 10 Jul 2001 08:25:27 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 10 Jul 2001 08:25:27 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id BAA04888; Tue, 10 Jul 2001 01:18:36 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 73793 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 10 Jul 2001 08:17:14          +0000
Received: from idsoftware.com (predator.idsoftware.com [192.246.40.34]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id BAA04870 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Tue, 10 Jul 2001 01:17:13 -0700
Received: from [192.246.40.144] (account johnc HELO pluto.idsoftware.com) by          idsoftware.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 3.4.6) with ESMTP id 275860 for          AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 10 Jul 2001 03:16:29 -0500
X-Sender: johnc@mail.idsoftware.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <4.3.1.2.20010710032710.03bc8e90@mail.idsoftware.com>
Date:         Tue, 10 Jul 2001 03:28:25 -0500
Reply-To: "John Carmack" <johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Carmack" <johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] vehicle configurations (was Re:[AR] Baikal/Angara)
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <F24uEhjJ8uT6Ssuot0O000005e8@hotmail.com>

At 07:10 AM 7/10/2001 +0000, you wrote:
>TSTO? What does that stand for?
>
>thanks,
>
>jd

Two Stage To Orbit, as opposed to SSTO.

I suppose that means there isn't a good acronym for Three Stage To Orbit... :-)

John Carmack

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 8622 invoked from network); 10 Jul 2001 09:00:02 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 10 Jul 2001 09:00:02 -0000
Received: (qmail 16910 invoked from network); 10 Jul 2001 09:01:22 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 10 Jul 2001 09:01:22 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id BAA04985; Tue, 10 Jul 2001 01:44:37 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 73805 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 10 Jul 2001 08:43:08          +0000
Received: from mailsys01.intnet.net (antares.intnet.net [198.252.32.143]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id BAA04939 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Tue, 10 Jul 2001 01:33:07 -0700
Received: from [206.112.104.146] (HELO baldrson) by mailsys01.intnet.net          (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 3.3.2) with SMTP id 11111818; Tue, 10 Jul 2001          04:32:01 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 8.5, Build 4.71.2173.0
Importance: Normal
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <000101c1091a$effcb400$926870ce@mshome.net>
Date:         Tue, 10 Jul 2001 01:33:04 -0700
Reply-To: "Jim Bowery" <jabowery@WWC.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jim Bowery" <jabowery@WWC.COM>
Subject:      [AR] TSTO
Comments: To: John Carmack <johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <4.3.1.2.20010710032710.03bc8e90@mail.idsoftware.com>

> -----Original Message-----
> Behalf Of John Carmack
> Two Stage To Orbit, as opposed to SSTO.
>
> I suppose that means there isn't a good acronym for Three Stage
> To Orbit... :-)

Well, according to Bob Truax, a 2 stage optimum is arrived at in study after
study, so maybe its just as well.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 7249 invoked from network); 10 Jul 2001 12:00:07 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 10 Jul 2001 12:00:07 -0000
Received: (qmail 21107 invoked from network); 10 Jul 2001 12:01:39 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 10 Jul 2001 12:01:39 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id EAA05943; Tue, 10 Jul 2001 04:50:35 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 74083 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 10 Jul 2001 11:49:04          +0000
Received: from fep3-orange.clear.net.nz (fep3-orange.clear.net.nz          [203.97.32.3]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id EAA05912          for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Tue, 10 Jul 2001 04:49:03 -0700
Received: from mkbs (d2-u54.acld.clear.net.nz [203.97.48.118]) by          fep3-orange.clear.net.nz (1.5/1.8) with SMTP id XAA12408; Tue, 10 Jul          2001 23:49:01 +1200 (NZST)
References:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010709105706.24320B-100000@spsystems.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <03c801c10936$620a2300$0100a8c0@mkbs>
Date:         Tue, 10 Jul 2001 22:07:20 +1200
Reply-To: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Organization: Applied Technology
Subject:      Re: [AR] Baikal/Angara
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

> On Sun, 8 Jul 2001, Pierce Nichols wrote:
> > >Also, it is not inconceivable for a crash of a VTVL SSTO -- which will
be
> > >mostly empty tanks, very light and easily crushable -- to be survivable
> > >even if the vehicle is a writeoff.
> >
> >          What about the risk of fire and explosion? There is going to be
a
> > certain amount of fuel and oxidizer left in the tanks...
>
> "Survivable" doesn't mean it's not scary and dangerous.
>
> > ...and it will be
> > partially atomized and likely mixed to some extent by the destruction of
> > the tanks upon impact. There's also plenty of sparks around, from the
> > failure of various metal components and their impact upon the landing
> > surface. It seems to me that a serious explosion is a near certainty.


If you've never seen it look for the movie footage of Scott Crossfields
experience while static testing an X15 which CATO'd big time..
His suitably laconic subsequent comment was "loudest sound I ever heard" - I
felt certain that he must have died when I saw trhe footage. Modern
materials are well ahead of what they had then. Fire, although not
desirable, is well survivable if structural integrity can be maintained.



            Russell McMahon

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 11552 invoked from network); 10 Jul 2001 12:01:07 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 10 Jul 2001 12:01:07 -0000
Received: (qmail 20514 invoked from network); 10 Jul 2001 12:00:16 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 10 Jul 2001 12:00:16 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id EAA05969; Tue, 10 Jul 2001 04:52:03 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 74091 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 10 Jul 2001 11:50:42          +0000
Received: from fep3-orange.clear.net.nz (fep3-orange.clear.net.nz          [203.97.32.3]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id EAA05926          for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Tue, 10 Jul 2001 04:49:10 -0700
Received: from mkbs (d2-u54.acld.clear.net.nz [203.97.48.118]) by          fep3-orange.clear.net.nz (1.5/1.8) with SMTP id XAA12414; Tue, 10 Jul          2001 23:49:02 +1200 (NZST)
References: <F50twBP8xidGVwPGxge0000bb7d@hotmail.com>                       <5.0.2.1.0.20010708181819.00a93758@mail.earthlink.net>             <3B49B499.3E898862@calcon.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <03c901c10936$633842c0$0100a8c0@mkbs>
Date:         Tue, 10 Jul 2001 22:38:01 +1200
Reply-To: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Organization: Applied Technology
Subject:      Re: [AR] Baikal/Angara
Comments: To: Peter von Tresckow <vontresc@CALCON.NET>
Comments: cc: Henry Spencer <henry@spsystems.net>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

> I have been reading this discussion with much interest, but I was
wondering what
> the tradeoff in mass between wings or other aerosurfaces, and the extra
> propellant required for the vtvl is. This has always intruiged me and
noone has
> ever brought the question of how much fuel must be taken to orbit for the
> landing in a VTVL spacecraft

        Henry MAY want to critique the general
        assumptions here (but maybe not :-))

You can easily enough figure out the absolute minimum amount required and go
from there. Any requirement for factors of safety and manoeuvring and hover
are likely to increase this figure greatly. People seem to want to allow for
this sort of thing.

Someone else noted that low atmosphere terminal velocity for a SSTO should
be subsonic and this seems a fairly reasonable assumption.
(It would be hard to make a large blunt hollow thing that fell
supersonically).
Say we want to scrub off 300 m/s.
Imagine we have a delivered Isp of 250.
Digging out yet again the ubiquitous rocket equation -
(g = 10   - landing by (in?) Lake Asphaltitas)(Israeli space program?)

            dV = Isp.g.ln(Mr)         - here we go again.

Rearranging, ln(Mr) = dV/(Isp.g)
and Mr = e^(dV/Isp/g)
Mr =  e^(300/250/10) = 1.13
1/1.13 =~ 0.88

ie we want about (1-0.88) = 12% fuel to JUST STOP if we fire the engines at
just the right time.
Say we allow 30% to provide rather more margin
dV from this is about 900 m/s or about 3 times what we need as an absolute
minimum.

Having a MUCH more energetic propellant will help the mass requirement but
reliability would be nice in this application, throttlability is liable to
be highly desirable (unless you are a Motie) and having to carry Hydrogen to
orbit and back is liable to make you very unpopular with people who want to
fit other stuff inside that aeroshell.

If we assume that the empty SSTO weighs about 3% of the launch mass then
this 30% of final re-entry mass represents .
0.3 * 3% = about 1% of launch mass. Sounds good but do note the large volume
requirement within the SSTO proper.
Typical rocket overall SGs happen to be close to 1 so this represents about
30% of the final vehicle volume. (It better not be Hydrogen! or that will be
closer to 100%)

Arguably aiming at a return vehicle that weighs only 3% of launch mass is
very challenging - it certainly is by modern standards.  As the payload
capacity of modern launchers is typically in the 3% to 6% of launch mass
range (from memory, by all means point out exceptions) then after allowing
for a payload we are going to have to hope to get the vehicle proper down
into this range.

An SSTO with an "all up return mass including recovery fuel" of 10% of
launch mass will have 30% x 10% = 3% of launch mass as recovery fuel. This
doesn't sound much but represents around half the payload capacity in a
throwaway launcher. We are going to pay for the VTVL Flash Gordon design and
the tradeoff had better be in terms of reusability and turnaround.


regards


            Russell McMahon

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 14672 invoked from network); 10 Jul 2001 15:11:37 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 10 Jul 2001 15:11:37 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 16757 invoked from network); 10 Jul 2001 15:11:29 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 10 Jul 2001 15:11:29 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA06448; Tue, 10 Jul 2001 07:54:39 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 74124 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 10 Jul 2001 14:54:27          +0000
Received: from lekstutis.com (emu.webminders.com [209.176.27.130]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA06431 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 10 Jul 2001 07:54:27 -0700
Received: from Lekstutis.com [12.34.119.107] by lekstutis.com with ESMTP          (SMTPD32-5.05) id AB21B78A0232; Tue, 10 Jul 2001 11:11:29 -0400
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.75 [en] (WinNT; U)
X-Accept-Language: en,pdf
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <5.0.2.1.0.20010709185850.02a713e8@mail.earthlink.net>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B4B1720.699FD941@Lekstutis.com>
Date:         Tue, 10 Jul 2001 10:54:24 -0400
Reply-To: "Arthur J. Lekstutis" <Artie@LEKSTUTIS.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Arthur J. Lekstutis" <Artie@LEKSTUTIS.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] [OT] small machine tools
Comments: To: Pierce Nichols <forkbomb@EARTHLINK.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Hi,

I use a Central Machines 7x10 mini lathe, picked up from Harbor Freight.
Inexpensive, small but sturdy. Accessories inexpensive too.

It is VERY small.

Some Harbor Freight links:
  http://www.harborfreight.com/cpi/taf/Displayitem.taf?itemnumber=33684
  http://www.harborfreight.com/cpi/taf/Displayitem.taf?itemnumber=39931
  http://www.harborfreight.com/cpi/taf/Displayitem.taf?itemnumber=43579
  http://www.harborfreight.com/cpi/taf/Displayitem.taf?itemnumber=43580
  http://www.harborfreight.com/cpi/taf/Displayitem.taf?itemnumber=42340
  http://www.harborfreight.com/cpi/taf/Displayitem.taf?itemnumber=43582
  http://www.harborfreight.com/cpi/taf/Displayitem.taf?itemnumber=43581
  http://www.harborfreight.com/cpi/taf/Displayitem.taf?itemnumber=42806

Good mini-lathe link:
  http://www.mini-lathe.com/
  http://groups.yahoo.com/group/7x10minilathe/

Later,
Artie Lekstutis


Pierce Nichols wrote:
>
> Folks:
>
>          I'm thinking of getting a small metalworking lathe to learn
> machining and make smaller rocket motors on. I've been looking at the
> Sherline 4000 lathe. Does anyone here have any experience with the
> Sherline, good bad or indifferent? Any competitors I might want to look at?
> I've also looked at the Smithy Midas 1220. It's much more expensive, but
> it's a 3-in-1 instead of just a lathe.
>
>          -p
>
> Mars or Bust!
> www.marssociety.com

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 12298 invoked from network); 10 Jul 2001 16:46:28 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 10 Jul 2001 16:46:28 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 8024 invoked from network); 10 Jul 2001 16:43:43 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 10 Jul 2001 16:43:43 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA06778; Tue, 10 Jul 2001 09:25:54 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 74141 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 10 Jul 2001 16:25:48          +0000
Received: from mail.aros.net (mail.aros.net [207.173.16.20]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA06761 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Tue,          10 Jul 2001 09:25:48 -0700
Received: from biomicro.com ([208.187.122.40]) by mail.aros.net (8.11.3/8.9.3)          with ESMTP id f6AGPlX66001 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Tue, 10 Jul          2001 10:25:47 -0600 (MDT)
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.77 [en] (Win98; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <4.3.1.2.20010710032710.03bc8e90@mail.idsoftware.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B4B2CCF.5303D734@biomicro.com>
Date:         Tue, 10 Jul 2001 10:26:55 -0600
Reply-To: "Mark K. Spute" <mks@BIOMICRO.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Mark K. Spute" <mks@BIOMICRO.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] vehicle configurations (was Re:[AR] Baikal/Angara)
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

John Carmack wrote:

> At 07:10 AM 7/10/2001 +0000, you wrote:
> >TSTO? What does that stand for?
> >
> >thanks,
> >
> >jd
>
> Two Stage To Orbit, as opposed to SSTO.
>
> I suppose that means there isn't a good acronym for Three Stage To Orbit... :-)

Hmmmm . . .
3STO ?   :p


--
Mark K. Spute
Senior Research Engineer
BioMicro Systems Inc.

KD7IWE,  RRS

"It is difficult to say what is impossible, for the dream of yesterday is the hope
of today and the reality of tomorrow."
     Dr. Robert H. Goddard

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 13563 invoked from network); 10 Jul 2001 17:27:45 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 10 Jul 2001 17:27:45 -0000
Received: (qmail 18505 invoked from network); 10 Jul 2001 17:28:56 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 10 Jul 2001 17:28:56 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA06977; Tue, 10 Jul 2001 10:07:42 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 74169 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 10 Jul 2001 17:06:28          +0000
Received: from spsystems.net (spsystems.net [209.47.149.227]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA06951 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Tue,          10 Jul 2001 10:06:27 -0700
Received: (from henry@localhost) by spsystems.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id MAA13149;          Tue, 10 Jul 2001 12:37:20 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010710122300.12590D-100000@spsystems.net>
Date:         Tue, 10 Jul 2001 12:37:20 -0400
Reply-To: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Baikal/Angara
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <03c901c10936$633842c0$0100a8c0@mkbs>

On Tue, 10 Jul 2001, Russell McMahon wrote:
> Say we want to scrub off 300 m/s.

That's still rather high.  Boeing's estimate, some years ago, was a
terminal velocity of 225mi/h = roughly 110m/s, requiring 7s of
deceleration at 2.5G.  They also budgeted for 7s of hover time.
That was a manned vehicle.

(Bear in mind that operational vertical landers, like Harriers, do not --
except in airshows -- decelerate to a hover high in the air and then
slowly descend like a balloon.  They decelerate during descent, reaching
hover only just before touchdown, at an altitude just high enough to
provide a safety margin against sloppy piloting or unexpected downdrafts.
So 7s of hover is actually a long time.)

To my mind, the big question for such a system is whether you can reliably
reach your intended landing area.  Correcting substantial position errors
while in hover is very costly in time and fuel; there is a very high
payoff for being in pretty much the right place before you light the
engines.  A blunt body has very little maneuverability once speed falls
below hypersonic, so a simple VTVL has to think a long way ahead and crank
in corrections during reentry for things like high-altitude winds in the
landing area.  One attraction of adding a drag device is that it may add
enough low-speed maneuverability to make descent navigation less critical.

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 14123 invoked from network); 10 Jul 2001 18:02:01 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 10 Jul 2001 18:02:01 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 28975 invoked from network); 10 Jul 2001 18:03:19 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 10 Jul 2001 18:03:19 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA07105; Tue, 10 Jul 2001 10:41:59 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 74184 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 10 Jul 2001 17:41:53          +0000
Received: from adobe.com (smtp-relay-1.adobe.com [192.150.11.1]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA07088 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue,          10 Jul 2001 10:41:53 -0700
Received: from inner-relay-2.corp.adobe.com ([153.32.1.52]) by adobe.com          (1.0.0/8.11.4) with ESMTP id f6AHfdM03345 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>;          Tue, 10 Jul 2001 10:41:39 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mailsj-v1.corp.adobe.com (mailsj-dev.corp.adobe.com          [153.32.1.192]) by inner-relay-2.corp.adobe.com (8.11.4/8.11.4) with          ESMTP id f6AHfCu07099 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 10 Jul 2001          10:41:12 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from sronald.earthlink.net ([153.32.63.111]) by          mailsj-v1.corp.adobe.com (Netscape Messaging Server 4.15) with ESMTP          id GG9QGT00.Q05 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 10 Jul 2001 10:41:17          -0700
X-Sender: forkbomb@mail.earthlink.net
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
References: <F24uEhjJ8uT6Ssuot0O000005e8@hotmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <5.1.0.14.0.20010710104226.029a7090@mail.earthlink.net>
Date:         Tue, 10 Jul 2001 10:42:38 -0700
Reply-To: <forkbomb@EARTHLINK.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Pierce Nichols" <forkbomb@EARTHLINK.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] vehicle configurations (was Re:[AR] Baikal/Angara)
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <4.3.1.2.20010710032710.03bc8e90@mail.idsoftware.com>

At 03:28 AM 7/10/01 -0500, John Carmack wrote:
>At 07:10 AM 7/10/2001 +0000, you wrote:
>>TSTO? What does that stand for?
>>
>>thanks,
>>
>>jd
>
>Two Stage To Orbit, as opposed to SSTO.
>
>I suppose that means there isn't a good acronym for Three Stage To
>Orbit... :-)

         ThSTO?

         -p

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 9964 invoked from network); 10 Jul 2001 18:22:07 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 10 Jul 2001 18:22:07 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 13474 invoked from network); 10 Jul 2001 18:23:28 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 10 Jul 2001 18:23:28 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA07232; Tue, 10 Jul 2001 11:01:28 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 74196 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 10 Jul 2001 18:01:21          +0000
Received: from adobe.com (smtp-relay-2.adobe.com [192.150.11.2]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA07215 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue,          10 Jul 2001 11:01:21 -0700
Received: from inner-relay-2.corp.adobe.com ([153.32.1.52]) by adobe.com          (1.0.0/8.11.4) with ESMTP id f6AI0gg01091 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>;          Tue, 10 Jul 2001 11:00:42 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mailsj-v1.corp.adobe.com (mailsj-dev.corp.adobe.com          [153.32.1.192]) by inner-relay-2.corp.adobe.com (8.11.4/8.11.4) with          ESMTP id f6AI0eu10162 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 10 Jul 2001          11:00:40 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from sronald.earthlink.net ([153.32.63.111]) by          mailsj-v1.corp.adobe.com (Netscape Messaging Server 4.15) with ESMTP          id GG9RD900.25T for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 10 Jul 2001 11:00:45          -0700
X-Sender: forkbomb@mail.earthlink.net
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
References: <F50twBP8xidGVwPGxge0000bb7d@hotmail.com>            <5.0.2.1.0.20010708181819.00a93758@mail.earthlink.net>            <3B49B499.3E898862@calcon.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <5.1.0.14.0.20010710104942.029a09f0@mail.earthlink.net>
Date:         Tue, 10 Jul 2001 11:02:06 -0700
Reply-To: <forkbomb@EARTHLINK.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Pierce Nichols" <forkbomb@EARTHLINK.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Baikal/Angara
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <03c901c10936$633842c0$0100a8c0@mkbs>

At 10:38 PM 7/10/01 +1200, Russell McMahon wrote:
>Someone else noted that low atmosphere terminal velocity for a SSTO should
>be subsonic and this seems a fairly reasonable assumption.
>(It would be hard to make a large blunt hollow thing that fell
>supersonically).
>Say we want to scrub off 300 m/s.


         That's transonic where I come from! I think a better estimate of
terminal velocity of a typical large blunt and empty  SSTO is more like 90
m/s (~200 mph). The reason is because the ballistic coefficient is likely
so low -- probably not that much higher than a free-falling human (terminal
velocity ~120 mph). It's better streamlined, so the terminal velocity is
probably higher.


>Imagine we have a delivered Isp of 250.
>Digging out yet again the ubiquitous rocket equation -
>(g = 10   - landing by (in?) Lake Asphaltitas)(Israeli space program?)
>
>             dV = Isp.g.ln(Mr)         - here we go again.
>
>Rearranging, ln(Mr) = dV/(Isp.g)
>and Mr = e^(dV/Isp/g)
>Mr =  e^(300/250/10) = 1.13
>1/1.13 =~ 0.88


         To kill 90 m/s, it's more like 0.96... a much different story!


>An SSTO with an "all up return mass including recovery fuel" of 10% of
>launch mass will have 30% x 10% = 3% of launch mass as recovery fuel. This
>doesn't sound much but represents around half the payload capacity in a
>throwaway launcher. We are going to pay for the VTVL Flash Gordon design and
>the tradeoff had better be in terms of reusability and turnaround.


         I think a first-generation SSTO should have parachute recovery.
Re-usable parachutes are well known technology and very reliable. It
appears to me that the flight rate will likely be low enough so the
additional trouble of inspecting and re-packing the chutes will not be
prohibitive. You can also have multiple chute packs per craft, and just
change out the pack for a new one.

         -p

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 25380 invoked from network); 10 Jul 2001 18:32:36 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 10 Jul 2001 18:32:36 -0000
Received: (qmail 17340 invoked from network); 10 Jul 2001 18:33:57 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 10 Jul 2001 18:33:57 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA07400; Tue, 10 Jul 2001 11:15:20 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 74204 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 10 Jul 2001 18:15:17          +0000
Received: from tomts8-srv.bellnexxia.net (tomts8.bellnexxia.net          [209.226.175.52]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA07383          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 10 Jul 2001 11:15:17 -0700
Received: from station1 ([216.209.40.84]) by tomts8-srv.bellnexxia.net          (InterMail vM.4.01.03.16 201-229-121-116-20010115) with SMTP id          <20010710181202.ISNZ3306.tomts8-srv.bellnexxia.net@station1>; Tue, 10          Jul 2001 14:12:02 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <NFBBKADEMLBLIEKNLLEPCELJCCAA.bfeeney@davinciproject.com>
Date:         Tue, 10 Jul 2001 14:12:01 -0500
Reply-To: "Brian Feeney" <bfeeney@DAVINCIPROJECT.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Brian Feeney" <bfeeney@DAVINCIPROJECT.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Baikal/Angara
Comments: To: John Carmack <johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <4.3.1.2.20010709230753.0346ab60@mail.idsoftware.com>

>I think you are probably making the right call overall, but if you could
>use your existing engines, killing 20 m/s of terminal velocity with a 3000
>lb vehicle would take less than 30 lbs of propellant, even at only 200 Isp.

We are not able to restart these particular engines. Also the base ballute
is in the way having been deployed to protect the engines, form the leading
edge of a classic blunt nose reentry cone and provide the landing air bag.

>Getting the steering benefits of a parafoil in addition to just killing the
>velocity might take a lot more propellant in a powered VL mode.

The parafoil is necessary to make sure we land within a 10 mile dia area (X
Prize rule not yet published). With that weight and system already paid for
so to speak it makes very little sense to have any powered breaking. It
would add additional complexity and cost with no benefit.

Cheers,
Brian

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 1985 invoked from network); 10 Jul 2001 19:50:05 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 10 Jul 2001 19:50:05 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: (qmail 14728 invoked from network); 10 Jul 2001 19:51:25 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 10 Jul 2001 19:51:25 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA07762; Tue, 10 Jul 2001 12:31:22 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 74249 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 10 Jul 2001 19:31:15          +0000
Received: from wrench.toolcity.net (root@wrench.toolcity.net [208.0.188.2]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA07745 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 10 Jul 2001 12:31:14 -0700
Received: from [208.22.189.159]          (dap-208-22-189-159.meadville-tnt-0.pa.toolcity.net [208.22.189.159])          by wrench.toolcity.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id PAA12616 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 10 Jul 2001 15:31:10 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <v01510100b77115be5e70@[208.22.189.146]>
Date:         Tue, 10 Jul 2001 15:33:28 -0500
Reply-To: "al bradley" <abradley@TOOLCITY.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "al bradley" <abradley@TOOLCITY.NET>
Subject:      [AR] acronyms-- the curse of our times -- was -- 3Re: [AR] vehicle              configurations (was Re:[AR] Baikal/Angara)
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

>At 03:28 AM 7/10/01 -0500, John Carmack wrote:
>>At 07:10 AM 7/10/2001 +0000, you wrote:
>>>TSTO? What does that stand for?
>>>
>>>thanks,
>>>
>>>jd
>>
>>Two Stage To Orbit, as opposed to SSTO.
>>
>>I suppose that means there isn't a good acronym for Three Stage To
>>Orbit... :-)
>
>         ThSTO?
>
>         -p
----------------------------
Don't make acronyms any harder than they are now!

3STO!

:-)
al bradley

------------------------------------------------------------------
Can you live Life with this?: "Unless there is a law, an agreement, or a
long-standing custom, No one `Deserves' Anything -- Either Good or Bad!"

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 29659 invoked from network); 10 Jul 2001 20:10:51 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 10 Jul 2001 20:10:51 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 12406 invoked from network); 10 Jul 2001 20:12:05 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 10 Jul 2001 20:12:05 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA07868; Tue, 10 Jul 2001 12:55:23 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 74261 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 10 Jul 2001 19:54:57          +0000
Received: from EX-IMC3-CORP.efi.com (192-68-228-4.efi.com [192.68.228.4]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA07810 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 10 Jul 2001 12:44:56 -0700
Received: from earthlink.net (peroxide.efi.com [10.10.89.46]) by          EX-IMC3-CORP.efi.com with SMTP (Microsoft Exchange Internet Mail          Service Version 5.5.2653.13) id N78P1A9V; Tue, 10 Jul 2001 12:44:21          -0700
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.14-5.0 i686)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <v01510100b77115be5e70@[208.22.189.146]>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B4B5B71.862FD33E@earthlink.net>
Date:         Tue, 10 Jul 2001 12:45:53 -0700
Reply-To: "David Weinshenker" <daze39@EARTHLINK.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "David Weinshenker" <daze39@EARTHLINK.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] acronyms-- the curse of our times -- was -- 3Re: [AR]              vehicleconfigurations (was Re:[AR] Baikal/Angara)
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

al bradley wrote:
> > At 03:28 AM 7/10/01 -0500, John Carmack wrote:
> > >At 07:10 AM 7/10/2001 +0000, you wrote:
> > > >TSTO? What does that stand for?
> > > Two Stage To Orbit, as opposed to SSTO.
> > > I suppose that means there isn't a good acronym for Three Stage To
> > > Orbit... :-)
> >         ThSTO?
> Don't make acronyms any harder than they are now!
> 3STO!

Hmm... is there a single letter in the Russian alphabet
that transliterates to "th"? I suppose one could use a
Greek "theta" but Russian lettering seems more appropriate
to rocketry somehow!

-dave w

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 28051 invoked from network); 10 Jul 2001 21:26:42 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 10 Jul 2001 21:26:42 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 5312 invoked from network); 10 Jul 2001 21:28:15 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 10 Jul 2001 21:28:15 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA08335; Tue, 10 Jul 2001 14:06:58 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 74337 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 10 Jul 2001 21:06:52          +0000
Received: from spsystems.net (spsystems.net [209.47.149.227]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA08318 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Tue,          10 Jul 2001 14:06:52 -0700
Received: (from henry@localhost) by spsystems.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id RAA16702;          Tue, 10 Jul 2001 17:04:36 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from QUOTED-PRINTABLE to 8bit by itc.uci.edu id OAA08319
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010710165411.15523J-100000@spsystems.net>
Date:         Tue, 10 Jul 2001 17:04:36 -0400
Reply-To: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] acronyms-- the curse of our times -- was -- 3Re: [AR]              vehicleconfigurations (was Re:[AR] Baikal/Angara)
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <3B4B5B71.862FD33E@earthlink.net>

On Tue, 10 Jul 2001, David Weinshenker wrote:
> > 3STO!
>
> Hmm... is there a single letter in the Russian alphabet
> that transliterates to "th"?

Nope, it's a sound they don't have.  Sh, ch, zh, even shch, yes, but not th.

However, there is a former English letter -- thorn (, if your screen does
Latin-1 or Unicode) -- which stood for "th".  It's not used in modern
English, but there are still remnants of it here and there; in particular,
in pseudo-old-English phrases like "Ye Olde Pub", the first word is
properly pronounced "the", because printers substituted Y for  in archaic
texts after type fonts stopped including thorn.

But I think it'll be an uphill struggle to convince people to type STO.

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 2206 invoked from network); 10 Jul 2001 23:37:36 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 10 Jul 2001 23:37:36 -0000
Received: (qmail 707 invoked from network); 10 Jul 2001 23:38:33 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 10 Jul 2001 23:38:33 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA08928; Tue, 10 Jul 2001 16:24:26 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 74407 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 10 Jul 2001 23:23:45          +0000
Received: from fep3-orange.clear.net.nz (fep3-orange.clear.net.nz          [203.97.32.3]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA08910          for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Tue, 10 Jul 2001 16:23:43 -0700
Received: from mkbs (203-167-156-223.dialup.clear.net.nz [203.167.156.223]) by          fep3-orange.clear.net.nz (1.5/1.8) with SMTP id LAA25429; Wed, 11 Jul          2001 11:23:34 +1200 (NZST)
References:  <F68X5V3GykBbKP7Ie8t0000497d@hotmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="Windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <055c01c10997$698637c0$0100a8c0@mkbs>
Date:         Wed, 11 Jul 2001 10:52:19 +1200
Reply-To: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Organization: Applied Technology
Subject:      Re: [AR] Baikal/Angara
Comments: To: John Dom <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

> Remember, for the LEM simulator a turbo-powered flying bedstead was used,
> not a rocket ascend/descent vehicle. This should teach us something.
> I always found it silly Dan Dare (probably unknown pulp figure to
non-Brits)
> took off from a ramp in the fifties once the Harrier was there. The
Me-163:
> great, but silly for the same reason.


Unfortunately, runways make a vast difference. Even a small ramp at the end
of the takeoff roll helps immensely.

Note that for the Harrier, "jump" takeoff is an expensive option in terms of
mission capability.
That's why they use the "ski jumps" on the short deck Harrier launchers and
a Harrier will use a runway in real life if available.
Vertical takeoff severely impacts both payload and mission duration - but
it's great fun to watch a Harrier fall into the sky which makes up for it
all :-). Bring earmuffs though.

1.    When a full runway is available a Harrier has LESS
payload/range/duration capability than a comparable conventional aircraft.

For a 1.1 tonne payload -
Comparative ranges
Runway length in feet
DNF = did not fly :-)
Runway / Range Harrier / Range conventional
0 / 60 / DNF
2000 / 160 / DNF
4000 / 160/ 100
6000 / 160 / 180

Anything over 2000 feet doesn't help the Harrier.
4000 runway allows superior conventional superiority.

Note the severe restriction in range for a pure jump takeoff.

2. Adding a "skijump" makes a substantial difference

600 foot roll, no ski jump = 10,000lb payload
600 foot roll with skijump = 13,000 lb payload
200 foot roll with ski jump = 10,000 lb payload.



                Russell McMahon

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 14975 invoked from network); 11 Jul 2001 00:07:42 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 11 Jul 2001 00:07:42 -0000
Received: (qmail 15244 invoked from network); 11 Jul 2001 00:08:41 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 11 Jul 2001 00:08:41 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA09091; Tue, 10 Jul 2001 17:03:00 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 74430 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 11 Jul 2001 00:02:54          +0000
Received: from spsystems.net (spsystems.net [209.47.149.227]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA09074 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Tue,          10 Jul 2001 17:02:53 -0700
Received: (from henry@localhost) by spsystems.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id UAA18915;          Tue, 10 Jul 2001 20:02:11 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010710195355.18412D-100000@spsystems.net>
Date:         Tue, 10 Jul 2001 20:02:11 -0400
Reply-To: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Baikal/Angara
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <055c01c10997$698637c0$0100a8c0@mkbs>

On Wed, 11 Jul 2001, Russell McMahon wrote:
> 1.    When a full runway is available a Harrier has LESS
> payload/range/duration capability than a comparable conventional aircraft.

Last time I looked, the Harrier was fairly evenly matched against the
closest match in size -- the A-4 Skyhawk -- with early Harriers comparable
to early Skyhawks and late-model Harriers comparable to late-model
Skyhawks.  Not exactly the same, but pretty close.  But the Harrier is
considerably more expensive and uses rather more aggressive technology,
e.g. carbon-fiber structures in the late-model Harriers.

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 20096 invoked from network); 11 Jul 2001 02:17:05 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 11 Jul 2001 02:17:05 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 14333 invoked from network); 11 Jul 2001 02:18:38 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 11 Jul 2001 02:18:38 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA09575; Tue, 10 Jul 2001 19:03:23 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 74468 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 11 Jul 2001 02:03:17          +0000
Received: from m1.jersey.juno.com (m1.jersey.juno.com [64.136.16.64]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA09558 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 10 Jul 2001 19:03:17 -0700
Received: from cookie.juno.com by cookie.juno.com for          <"H3WK6e6N+bsCVJQMHM9sZH5wzLoTqKj9tJ1wqKQrZP4MQc8a9Q+bdQ==">
Received: (from kc2csh@juno.com) by m1.jersey.juno.com (queuemail) id F92JFWSW;          Tue, 10 Jul 2001 22:02:48 EDT
X-Mailer: Juno 4.0.11
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Juno-Line-Breaks: 1-2,4,6-11,13,20,33,43,49-50
X-Juno-Att: 0
X-Juno-RefParts: 0
Message-ID:  <20010710.220654.-4077077.2.kc2csh@juno.com>
Date:         Tue, 10 Jul 2001 22:06:46 -0400
Reply-To: <kc2csh@JUNO.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <kc2csh@JUNO.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Baikal/Angara
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

On Mon, 9 Jul 2001 13:49:37 -0400 Henry Spencer <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
writes:
> On Mon, 9 Jul 2001, John Dom wrote:
> > I keep being stunned by the fact nobody ever presented an upscaled
Harrier
> > as a first stage for a space launch. It has never been done with
turbo's
> > although I can see no reason why it cannot be, to say 10 miles up.
>
> Depends on what you want to do.
>

  As you can probably tell from earlier posts, air breathing first stages
are of great interest to me.
  I've discovered a line of very brief but intense effort now largely
obscured on that concept during 1957-9.  It was abandoned in favor of big
ICBMs because everyone recognized that the development schedule involved
would be far longer, and far too long for the political demands of the
time.  However, the concept seems fundamentally sound.  When you look at
the numbers involved today, its hard to believe why nobody has revived it
and worked out the problems, which admittedly are substantial.
  In brief, the concept at that time was a "first stage" that was
basically a special purpose conventional aircraft.  Its special and sole
purpose was to be a launch platform.  It involved a large rather
conventional for the period military aircraft.  It involved an externally
belly mounted second stage that was a rather conventional rocket.  It
required very long runways to take off, and even at that was so heavy
that it would take off with just enough fuel to be able to reach midair
refueling.  The sole purpose of the aircraft was to hit the then limits
of speed and altitude for conventional military aircraft with a payload;
about 12 mines and mach 2+.  At that point the belly mounted rocket, the
sige of a full size ICBM, would be airlaunched, and the aircraft would
return, make a conventional runway landing, and do it all over again and
again and again.
  The era of B-58, B-70, SST and similar aircraft that were to be the
basis for the specialized launch platforms required to take something
that heavy to that kind of speed and altitude ended about 30 years ago,
and that is perhaps why this was never revived, there is no launch
platform.  If you compare the launch numbers based upon 40k ft and mach
0.8, its not really the same game as 70k ft and mach 2.5.  The first
arguably is a why bother; the second gets interesting in terms of how
much it can reduce the size of any given launch vehicle compared to a
conventional sealevel verticle rocket launch and the potential to reduce
launch costs.
  The jet engine technology available now would seem to make for a far
more compelling case than could have been made in the 1950s.  Similarly,
the technology available for the second stage would similarly seem to
present a more compelling case than in the 1950s.  For whatever reason,
this approach seems to have absolutely no constituancy, and only minimal
pockets of awareness, no less interest.

        Jay

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 930 invoked from network); 11 Jul 2001 02:33:05 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 11 Jul 2001 02:33:05 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 18235 invoked from network); 11 Jul 2001 02:34:27 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 11 Jul 2001 02:34:27 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA09698; Tue, 10 Jul 2001 19:30:50 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 74478 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 11 Jul 2001 02:30:42          +0000
Received: from smtp7ve.mailsrvcs.net (smtp7vepub.gte.net [206.46.170.28]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA09680 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 10 Jul 2001 19:30:42 -0700
Received: from me-513q3sc0zun0.pengar.com          (adsl-64-223-147-206.mannh.adsl.bellatlantic.net [64.223.147.206]) by          smtp7ve.mailsrvcs.net (8.9.1/8.9.1) with ESMTP id CAA42517540 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 11 Jul 2001 02:30:11 GMT
X-Sender: seth-pc@hobbiton.shire.net
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
References: <4.3.1.2.20010710032710.03bc8e90@mail.idsoftware.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <5.1.0.14.0.20010710223259.02af2a48@hobbiton.shire.net>
Date:         Tue, 10 Jul 2001 22:34:40 -0400
Reply-To: "Seth Leigh" <seth@PENGAR.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Seth Leigh" <seth@PENGAR.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] vehicle configurations (was Re:[AR] Baikal/Angara)
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <3B4B2CCF.5303D734@biomicro.com>

At 12:26 PM 7/10/2001, Mark K. Spute wrote:
>John Carmack wrote:
>
> > At 07:10 AM 7/10/2001 +0000, you wrote:
> > >TSTO? What does that stand for?
> > >
> > >thanks,
> > >
> > >jd
> >
> > Two Stage To Orbit, as opposed to SSTO.
> >
> > I suppose that means there isn't a good acronym for Three Stage To
> Orbit... :-)
>
>Hmmmm . . .
>3STO ?   :p

Or, for those up and coming script kiddie haxorz punks who eventually will
grow up to be rocket scientists, E$70.  ;-)

Seth

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 19828 invoked from network); 11 Jul 2001 03:39:51 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 11 Jul 2001 03:39:51 -0000
Received: (qmail 2959 invoked from network); 11 Jul 2001 03:40:41 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 11 Jul 2001 03:40:41 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA09903; Tue, 10 Jul 2001 20:37:47 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 74493 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 11 Jul 2001 03:37:42          +0000
Received: from fep3-orange.clear.net.nz (fep3-orange.clear.net.nz          [203.97.32.3]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA09886          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 10 Jul 2001 20:37:41 -0700
Received: from mkbs (203-167-161-6.dialup.clear.net.nz [203.167.161.6]) by          fep3-orange.clear.net.nz (1.5/1.8) with SMTP id PAA27829; Wed, 11 Jul          2001 15:36:56 +1200 (NZST)
References:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010710195355.18412D-100000@spsystems.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <064801c109ba$d5664160$0100a8c0@mkbs>
Date:         Wed, 11 Jul 2001 15:31:11 +1200
Reply-To: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Organization: Applied Technology
Subject:      Re: [AR] Baikal/Angara
Comments: To: Henry Spencer <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

> On Wed, 11 Jul 2001, Russell McMahon wrote:
> > 1.    When a full runway is available a Harrier has LESS
> > payload/range/duration capability than a comparable conventional
aircraft.
>
> Last time I looked, the Harrier was fairly evenly matched against the
> closest match in size -- the A-4 Skyhawk -- with early Harriers comparable
> to early Skyhawks and late-model Harriers comparable to late-model
> Skyhawks.  Not exactly the same, but pretty close.  But the Harrier is
> considerably more expensive and uses rather more aggressive technology,
> e.g. carbon-fiber structures in the late-model Harriers.


Information on Harrier capabilities was garnered from "Information Fact
File, Modern Fighting Aircraft, Harrier", a Salamander Books 64 page A3ish
sized book entirely on Harrier. There is a a series of which I have 6 (via a
bookfair). Quite a nice series of books - in 64 pages you get past just the
photos and basic intro into a certain amount of technical detail.  Doesn't
make them right of course. It makes sense that for a given level of
technology a VTOL would be at some degree of payload disadvantage due to the
additional specialist additions required to provide the VTOL capability.

The NZ airforce "strike" capability is entirely Skyhawks but by the end of
the year we intend to replace them with nothing. Apparently makes sense to
our far seeing political leaders. At least people will no longer be able to
say that we a have a 3rd world class airforce :-).

We have a few Orions which will reportedly be upgraded to having missile
firing capabilities. They were lucky to escape the chop too as the Prime
Minister considered that 30 years of not sinking any submarines demonstrated
their uselessness. She isn't at all keen on such things.



    Russell McMahon

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 20 invoked from network); 11 Jul 2001 04:47:56 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 11 Jul 2001 04:47:56 -0000
Received: (qmail 18518 invoked from network); 11 Jul 2001 04:49:30 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 11 Jul 2001 04:49:30 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA10112; Tue, 10 Jul 2001 21:45:45 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 74509 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 11 Jul 2001 04:45:35          +0000
Received: from odyssey.rlpotter.com (IDENT:root@[204.131.176.254]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA10095 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 10 Jul 2001 21:45:34 -0700
Received: from Jane (jane.rlpotter.com [204.131.176.34]) by          odyssey.rlpotter.com (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id VAA21997 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 10 Jul 2001 21:57:34 -0600
References:  <993733822.3b3b2cbe24f52@webmail.uib.no>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <015301c109c5$4befd260$22b083cc@rlpotter.com>
Date:         Tue, 10 Jul 2001 22:52:32 -0600
Reply-To: "Ryan" <ryan@RLPOTTER.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Ryan" <ryan@RLPOTTER.COM>
Subject:      [AR] HTPB Suppliers
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Does anyone have a list of domestic (USA) suppliers of HTPB that are good?
I've found a few suppliers so far, but one is in China and wants $11 per kg
for it, and the other is in the UK (i think?).  One in NY sold industrial
grade HTPB for $1.40 per pound, but I don't have enough experience yet to
know if that will work out good or not.  The shipping might be high, too, on
a 50 gal drum.  I live in Colorado, if that helps.   :)

Thanks in advance.
Ryan

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 6414 invoked from network); 11 Jul 2001 05:33:07 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 11 Jul 2001 05:33:07 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 19907 invoked from network); 11 Jul 2001 05:34:08 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 11 Jul 2001 05:34:08 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA10232; Tue, 10 Jul 2001 22:22:57 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 74517 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 11 Jul 2001 05:22:54          +0000
Received: from femail2.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail2.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.0.95.82]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA10215 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 10 Jul 2001 22:22:54 -0700
Received: from c1649002-a.earthlink.net ([24.20.95.67]) by          femail2.sdc1.sfba.home.com (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20          201-229-121-120-20010223) with ESMTP id          <20010711052247.TBYB18257.femail2.sdc1.sfba.home.com@c1649002-a.earthlink.net> for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>;          Tue, 10 Jul 2001 22:22:47 -0700
X-Sender: forkbomb@mail.earthlink.net
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.0.2
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <5.0.2.1.0.20010710220355.00a95b50@mail.earthlink.net>
Date:         Tue, 10 Jul 2001 22:22:42 -0700
Reply-To: "Pierce Nichols" <forkbomb@EARTHLINK.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Pierce Nichols" <forkbomb@EARTHLINK.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Baikal/Angara
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <20010710.220654.-4077077.2.kc2csh@juno.com>

At 10:06 PM 7/10/2001 -0400, kc2csh@JUNO.COM wrote:
>On Mon, 9 Jul 2001 13:49:37 -0400 Henry Spencer <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
>writes:
> > On Mon, 9 Jul 2001, John Dom wrote:
> > > I keep being stunned by the fact nobody ever presented an upscaled
>Harrier
> > > as a first stage for a space launch. It has never been done with
>turbo's
> > > although I can see no reason why it cannot be, to say 10 miles up.
> >
> > Depends on what you want to do.
> >
>
>   As you can probably tell from earlier posts, air breathing first stages
>are of great interest to me.
>   I've discovered a line of very brief but intense effort now largely
>obscured on that concept during 1957-9.  It was abandoned in favor of big
>ICBMs because everyone recognized that the development schedule involved
>would be far longer, and far too long for the political demands of the
>time.


         The demands of private investors are more exacting than the
political and military demands of the height of the Cold War. The
government was willing to throw an essentially infinite amount of money at
the problem. No private investor will ever be.


>  However, the concept seems fundamentally sound.  When you look at
>the numbers involved today, its hard to believe why nobody has revived it
>and worked out the problems, which admittedly are substantial.


         The question is not whether or not it is technologically feasible;
it probably is. The question is whether it can accomplish the task at hand
(space launch) for less total cost (that includes development!) than
competing methods. I would say the answer is almost certainly no. It
reminds me of a line from my old Call of Cthulu game: "I don't have to be
faster than that eldritch horror; I just have to be faster than YOU." Also
keep in mind Carmack's comments of this past weekend discussing the
difference between what is possible to develop and what is sensible to develop.


>   In brief, the concept at that time was a "first stage" that was
>basically a special purpose conventional aircraft.  Its special and sole
>purpose was to be a launch platform.  It involved a large rather
>conventional for the period military aircraft.  It involved an externally
>belly mounted second stage that was a rather conventional rocket.  It
>required very long runways to take off, and even at that was so heavy
>that it would take off with just enough fuel to be able to reach midair
>refueling.  The sole purpose of the aircraft was to hit the then limits
>of speed and altitude for conventional military aircraft with a payload;
>about 12 mines and mach 2+.  At that point the belly mounted rocket, the
>sige of a full size ICBM, would be airlaunched, and the aircraft would
>return, make a conventional runway landing, and do it all over again and
>again and again.


         There are so many tough engineering problems there I don't even
know where to begin. How about supersonic seperation? How about that big
Mach 2 cargo carrier? That's just the start!

>   The jet engine technology available now would seem to make for a far
>more compelling case than could have been made in the 1950s.  Similarly,
>the technology available for the second stage would similarly seem to
>present a more compelling case than in the 1950s.  For whatever reason,
>this approach seems to have absolutely no constituancy, and only minimal
>pockets of awareness, no less interest.


         That's not necessarily true as you think it is. Most of the jet
turbine engine development in the past couple of decades has been focused
on large turbofans, for highly efficient sub-sonic flight. The pinnacle of
high speed jet turbine development is still the SR-71/A-12's J58
turboramjet engines. And those were available in the 1957-59 timeframe --
the A-12 was already flying for the CIA then (according to "Body of
Secrets", by James Bamford).

         -p


Mars or Bust!
www.marssociety.com

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 16737 invoked from network); 11 Jul 2001 12:44:27 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 11 Jul 2001 12:44:27 -0000
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 16792 invoked from network); 11 Jul 2001 12:45:50 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 11 Jul 2001 12:45:50 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id FAA11271; Wed, 11 Jul 2001 05:32:28 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 74552 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 11 Jul 2001 12:32:21          +0000
Received: from mhs.swan.ac.uk (mhs.swan.ac.uk [137.44.1.33]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id FAA11253 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Wed,          11 Jul 2001 05:32:20 -0700
Received: from ccs-mail1.singleton.swan.ac.uk ([137.44.41.18]) by          mhs.swan.ac.uk with esmtp (Exim 3.30 #1) id 15KJ2c-0004Uh-00 for          arocket@itc.uci.edu; Wed, 11 Jul 2001 13:24:30 +0100
Received: by ccs-mail1.singleton.swan.ac.uk with Internet Mail Service          (5.5.2653.19) id <MWTAWLSH>; Wed, 11 Jul 2001 13:34:51 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19)
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Message-ID:  <2F969DBFC2E0824DAA17A7BE6B84EA6501BC5D5F@ccs-mail1.singleton.swan.ac.uk>
Date:         Wed, 11 Jul 2001 13:34:47 +0100
Reply-To: "PADFIELD J. \(129275\)" <129275@SWANSEA.AC.UK>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "PADFIELD J. \(129275\)" <129275@SWANSEA.AC.UK>
Subject:      [AR] HTPB Suppliers
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Ryan,
Don't know about US suppliers (have you tried Firefox?) but would you mind
sharing your UK source with me? I (and another guy) have looked for HTPB in
the UK without alot of luck (mind you I didn't look too hard, I've settled
for PVC for my first hybrid).
Thanks, James.


>Does anyone have a list of domestic (USA) suppliers of HTPB that are good?
I've found a few suppliers so far, but one is in China and wants $11 per kg
for it, and the other is in the UK (i think?).  One in NY sold industrial
grade HTPB for $1.40 per pound, but I don't have enough experience yet to
know if that will work out good or not.  The shipping might be high, too, on
a 50 gal drum.  I live in Colorado, if that helps.   :)

>Thanks in advance.
>Ryan

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 8959 invoked from network); 11 Jul 2001 13:46:53 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 11 Jul 2001 13:46:53 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 14097 invoked from network); 11 Jul 2001 13:48:11 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 11 Jul 2001 13:48:11 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA11513; Wed, 11 Jul 2001 06:44:24 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 74571 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 11 Jul 2001 13:44:19          +0000
Received: from smtp6ve.mailsrvcs.net (smtp6vepub.gte.net [206.46.170.27]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA11496 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 11 Jul 2001 06:44:18 -0700
Received: from me-513q3sc0zun0.pengar.com          (adsl-64-223-147-206.mannh.adsl.bellatlantic.net [64.223.147.206]) by          smtp6ve.mailsrvcs.net (8.9.1/8.9.1) with ESMTP id NAA40339099 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 11 Jul 2001 13:43:47 GMT
X-Sender: seth-pc@hobbiton.shire.net
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
References: <F50twBP8xidGVwPGxge0000bb7d@hotmail.com>            <5.0.2.1.0.20010708181819.00a93758@mail.earthlink.net>            <3B49B499.3E898862@calcon.net>            <5.1.0.14.0.20010710104942.029a09f0@mail.earthlink.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by itc.uci.edu id GAA11497
Message-ID:  <5.1.0.14.0.20010711094703.02b896d8@hobbiton.shire.net>
Date:         Wed, 11 Jul 2001 09:48:16 -0400
Reply-To: "Seth Leigh" <seth@PENGAR.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Seth Leigh" <seth@PENGAR.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Baikal/Angara
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <006a01c109f7$c7b6c2a0$0100a8c0@mkbs>

At 05:51 AM 7/11/2001, Russell McMahon wrote:
>Use ye olde faithful (and only somewhat wrong) Drag = 0.5 x density x Area x
>Cd x Velocity ^ 2.

Don't you mean e old faithful?

Seth

ps: sorry I couldn't help it.  ;-)

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 12430 invoked from network); 11 Jul 2001 13:55:10 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 11 Jul 2001 13:55:10 -0000
Received: (qmail 26074 invoked from network); 11 Jul 2001 13:56:44 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 11 Jul 2001 13:56:44 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA11561; Wed, 11 Jul 2001 06:53:12 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 74579 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 11 Jul 2001 13:53:11          +0000
Received: from spsystems.net (spsystems.net [209.47.149.227]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA11544 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Wed,          11 Jul 2001 06:53:10 -0700
Received: (from henry@localhost) by spsystems.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id JAA01303;          Wed, 11 Jul 2001 09:52:39 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010711094409.29658B-100000@spsystems.net>
Date:         Wed, 11 Jul 2001 09:52:38 -0400
Reply-To: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Baikal/Angara
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <20010710.220654.-4077077.2.kc2csh@juno.com>

On Tue, 10 Jul 2001 kc2csh@JUNO.COM wrote:
>   The jet engine technology available now would seem to make for a far
> more compelling case than could have been made in the 1950s.  Similarly,
> the technology available for the second stage would similarly seem to
> present a more compelling case than in the 1950s.  For whatever reason,
> this approach seems to have absolutely no constituancy, and only minimal
> pockets of awareness, no less interest.

I would say a large part of the lack of interest is simply because
building big supersonic aircraft, and engines for them, is *expensive*.
Supersonic aircraft development is *hard*.  If all you want is to rapidly
boost something to high speed and altitude, a rocket stage does that just
as well, if not better, and poses far fewer development difficulties.
Even making it recoverable is much easier than turning it into a jet
aircraft:  there are far fewer interactions between propulsion, structure,
and aerodynamics, and you can reconfigure it drastically for return and
landing rather than having to do everything with the same hardware.

"...first the mission needs must be identified.  This does not mean
ceasing to examine vehicle capabilities.  It does mean avoiding the
interpretation of vehicle capabilities as mission needs."

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 24870 invoked from network); 11 Jul 2001 15:22:40 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 11 Jul 2001 15:22:40 -0000
Received: (qmail 19963 invoked from network); 11 Jul 2001 15:24:15 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 11 Jul 2001 15:24:15 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA11863; Wed, 11 Jul 2001 08:18:59 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 74613 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 11 Jul 2001 15:18:43          +0000
Received: from mailhost0.trib.com (mailhost0.trib.com [63.229.150.3]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA11845 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Wed, 11 Jul 2001 08:18:43 -0700
Received: from mail.trib.com (mail.trib.com [12.10.158.17]) by          mailhost0.trib.com (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f6BFIeC85825; Wed,          11 Jul 2001 09:18:40 -0600 (MDT) (envelope-from          jwckman@space-rockets.com)
Received: from [63.229.150.201] (HELO hppav) by mail.trib.com (CommuniGate Pro          SMTP 3.4.6) with SMTP id 38841045; Wed, 11 Jul 2001 09:18:36 -0600
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <NKEHJAOOKBPGIKOOPDEFAEJLCAAA.jwckman@space-rockets.com>
Date:         Wed, 11 Jul 2001 09:17:13 -0600
Reply-To: "John Wickman" <jwckman@SPACE-ROCKETS.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Wickman" <jwckman@SPACE-ROCKETS.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] HTPB Suppliers
Comments: To: Ryan <ryan@rlpotter.com>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <015301c109c5$4befd260$22b083cc@rlpotter.com>

Ryan,

If the industrial grade is R45HT or R45HT-LO, it will work out fine as I
have used it many times.  That is also a good price for the R45HT.  I am
currently using R20LM and in may opinion makes an even better propellant,
incredibly flexible.   Also, R20LM has about half the viscosity of R45.  It
makes mixing a lot easier.

John Wickman

www.space-rockets.com


-----Original Message-----
From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@itc.uci.edu]On
Behalf Of Ryan
Sent: Tuesday, July 10, 2001 10:53 PM
To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
Subject: [AR] HTPB Suppliers


Does anyone have a list of domestic (USA) suppliers of HTPB that are good?
I've found a few suppliers so far, but one is in China and wants $11 per kg
for it, and the other is in the UK (i think?).  One in NY sold industrial
grade HTPB for $1.40 per pound, but I don't have enough experience yet to
know if that will work out good or not.  The shipping might be high, too, on
a 50 gal drum.  I live in Colorado, if that helps.   :)

Thanks in advance.
Ryan

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 21968 invoked from network); 11 Jul 2001 21:43:04 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 11 Jul 2001 21:43:04 -0000
Received: (qmail 29449 invoked from network); 11 Jul 2001 21:22:06 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 11 Jul 2001 21:22:06 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA13402; Wed, 11 Jul 2001 14:14:35 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 74829 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 11 Jul 2001 21:14:24          +0000
Received: from mailsys01.intnet.net (antares.IntNet.net [198.252.32.143]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA13385 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Wed, 11 Jul 2001 14:14:23 -0700
Received: from [206.112.110.194] (HELO baldrson) by mailsys01.intnet.net          (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 3.3.2) with SMTP id 11213647; Wed, 11 Jul 2001          17:13:15 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 8.5, Build 4.71.2173.0
Importance: Normal
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <000c01c10a4e$6dd09e80$0100a8c0@mshome.net>
Date:         Wed, 11 Jul 2001 14:14:10 -0700
Reply-To: "Jim Bowery" <jabowery@WWC.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jim Bowery" <jabowery@WWC.COM>
Subject:      [AR] Japanese Amateurs Assist Govt. Prototype
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

See the movie at:
http://www.isas.ac.jp/dtc/saisiyo/0625rvt6-42.mov

"According to Space News, the vertical-takeoff-vertical-landing vehicle was
built on an annual budget of $400k and assisted by volunteers from the Japan
Rocket Society."
http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=01/07/11/1613255

PS: To avoid any confusion, I'm not here advocating that Americans do things
the way the Japanese do them.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 14117 invoked from network); 12 Jul 2001 00:41:17 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 12 Jul 2001 00:41:17 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 16379 invoked from network); 12 Jul 2001 00:42:36 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 12 Jul 2001 00:42:36 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA14189; Wed, 11 Jul 2001 17:37:33 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 74913 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 12 Jul 2001 00:36:51          +0000
Received: from pan.ch.intel.com (chfdns01.ch.intel.com [143.182.246.24]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA14170; Wed, 11 Jul 2001          17:36:51 -0700
Received: from snmeng1.rr.intel.com (snmeng1.rr.intel.com [128.215.231.11]) by          pan.ch.intel.com (8.9.1a+p1/8.9.1/d: relay.m4,v 1.41 2001/07/09          21:06:22 root Exp $) with ESMTP id AAA06412; Thu, 12 Jul 2001          00:36:40 GMT
Received: from snmeng30.rr.intel.com (snmeng30.rr.intel.com [128.215.52.76]) by          snmeng1.rr.intel.com (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id SAA15913; Wed, 11          Jul 2001 18:33:53 -0600 (MDT)
Received: from snmeng30.rr.intel.com (snmeng30.rr.intel.com [128.215.52.76]) by          snmeng30.rr.intel.com (8.9.1a/8.9.1/d: client.m4,v 1.3 1998/09/29          16:36:11 sedayao Exp sedayao $) with SMTP id SAA16331; Wed, 11 Jul          2001 18:33:49 -0600 (MDT)
X-Mailer: dtmail 1.2.1 CDE Version 1.2.1 SunOS 5.6 sun4m sparc
X-Sun-Text-Type: ascii
Message-ID:  <200107120033.SAA16331@snmeng30.rr.intel.com>
Date:         Wed, 11 Jul 2001 18:33:49 -0600
Reply-To: "Ray Calkins 100660207" <rcalkins@SNMENG1.RR.INTEL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Ray Calkins 100660207" <rcalkins@SNMENG1.RR.INTEL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Non-black powder ejection
Comments: To: dmccue@ITC.UCI.EDU
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

> OBRocketContent: Anyone using anything other than black powder or Pyrodex
> for ejection charges? (I know, we don't need no steenking recovery, this
> is Amateur Rocketry!)

Yes, when Richard Nakka flew his beautiful rocket at aRocket1, he used sugar
propellant for his ejection charges.  I'll probably explore this technique as
well.  It tends to burn slower and cooler than black powder.

Ray Calkins
rcalkins@snmeng1.rr.intel.com           raymond.calkins@intel.com
"My opinions are my own, and do not reflect those of my employer."


From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 6398 invoked from network); 12 Jul 2001 00:46:10 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 12 Jul 2001 00:46:10 -0000
Received: (qmail 19109 invoked from network); 12 Jul 2001 00:47:32 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 12 Jul 2001 00:47:32 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA14243; Wed, 11 Jul 2001 17:41:39 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 74921 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 12 Jul 2001 00:41:38          +0000
Received: from fep4-orange.clear.net.nz (fep4-orange.clear.net.nz          [203.97.32.4]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA14226          for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Wed, 11 Jul 2001 17:41:37 -0700
Received: from mkbs (203-167-162-130.dialup.clear.net.nz [203.167.162.130]) by          fep4-orange.clear.net.nz (1.5/1.7) with SMTP id MAA23730; Thu, 12 Jul          2001 12:41:29 +1200 (NZST)
References:  <001901c109a9$1636d5e0$0cc41d18@torment.ce.mediaone.net>                       <001301c10952$d6f5b640$220bf6cd@main>              <008f01c10a59$f53bf940$e340073e@home>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <025301c10a6b$762e2a80$0100a8c0@mkbs>
Date:         Thu, 12 Jul 2001 12:36:49 +1200
Reply-To: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Organization: Applied Technology
Subject:      Re: [AR] [EE]: Decapsulation
Comments: To: Carl Bulger <carl.bulger@btinternet.com>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

> When decapsulating a PIC, why is Hot Fuming Nitric acid used instead of
just
> Hot Nitric acid?
>
> Does heated Fuming Nitric react with the encapsulation packaging in some
way
> that heated Nitric does not? I'm just confused at to the mechanics of the
> decapsulation.

>From memory, Red Fuming Nitric Acid has some dissolved Nitrogen Pentoxide
(N2O5?) which increases its general efficacy. Also makes it more effective
as a rocket fuel (actually oxidiser), for what it's worth. Pure Nitric Acid
will also "fume" in an open container due to interactions (not "reaction"
per se) with water content in air.



        Russell McMahon

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 23226 invoked from network); 12 Jul 2001 01:22:20 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 12 Jul 2001 01:22:20 -0000
Received: (qmail 9715 invoked from network); 12 Jul 2001 01:23:41 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 12 Jul 2001 01:23:41 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA14453; Wed, 11 Jul 2001 18:20:39 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 74938 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 12 Jul 2001 01:20:37          +0000
Received: from spsystems.net (spsystems.net [209.47.149.227]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA14436 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Wed,          11 Jul 2001 18:20:36 -0700
Received: (from henry@localhost) by spsystems.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id VAA11873;          Wed, 11 Jul 2001 21:20:01 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010711211440.11804A-100000@spsystems.net>
Date:         Wed, 11 Jul 2001 21:20:01 -0400
Reply-To: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] [EE]: Decapsulation
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <025301c10a6b$762e2a80$0100a8c0@mkbs>

On Thu, 12 Jul 2001, Russell McMahon wrote:
> From memory, Red Fuming Nitric Acid has some dissolved Nitrogen Pentoxide
> (N2O5?) ...

Nitrogen dioxide (NO2), actually.  (Pure NO2 dimerizes readily to form
N2O4, nitrogen tetroxide, which is used as an oxidizer all by itself.)
NO2 gas is reddish, hence Red Fuming Nitric Acid.

There are actually all kinds of other things in RFNA in small amounts --
it's quite a complex substance -- but nitric acid and NO2 are the only
things that are deliberately *put* in there.

> which increases its general efficacy.

Yes, it's noticeably more aggressive than straight nitric acid.  If you're
trying to decapsulate plastic-packaged ICs, you need something horribly
aggressive, because the epoxy used for packaging them is pretty close to
chemically inert.

> Pure Nitric Acid
> will also "fume" in an open container due to interactions (not "reaction"
> per se) with water content in air.

Hence it's known as White Fuming Nitric Acid.  Also of note is that WFNA
spontaneously becomes slightly-diluted RFNA -- HNO3 slowly reacts with
itself in complicated ways and produces NO2, water, and oxygen gas (which
bubbles or diffuses out).

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 17235 invoked from network); 12 Jul 2001 07:11:10 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 12 Jul 2001 07:11:10 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 19277 invoked from network); 12 Jul 2001 07:12:47 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 12 Jul 2001 07:12:47 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA15555; Thu, 12 Jul 2001 00:08:18 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 75021 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 12 Jul 2001 07:08:07          +0000
Received: from stud.uni-goettingen.de (root@s2.stud.uni-goettingen.de          [134.76.60.22]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA15538          for <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Thu, 12 Jul 2001 00:08:06 -0700
Received: from router.atw.stud.uni-goettingen.de ([134.76.62.65]          helo=stud.uni-goettingen.de) by stud.uni-goettingen.de with esmtp          (Exim 2.12 #8) id 15KaZw-00046a-00 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 12          Jul 2001 09:08:04 +0200
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [de] (Win98; I)
X-Accept-Language: de
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B4D4D33.2CAFE1F4@stud.uni-goettingen.de>
Date:         Thu, 12 Jul 2001 09:09:40 +0200
Reply-To: "Thomas Engelhardt" <tengelh@STUD.UNI-GOETTINGEN.DE>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Thomas Engelhardt" <tengelh@STUD.UNI-GOETTINGEN.DE>
Organization: =?iso-8859-1?Q?Rocket_Research_G=F6ttingen_=28RRG=29?=
Subject:      Re: [AR] Non-black powder ejection
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

> OBRocketContent: Anyone using anything other than black powder or
Pyrodex
> for ejection charges? (I know, we don't need no steenking recovery,
this
> is Amateur Rocketry!)

In Germany, there's a recent to use nitrocellulose wadding instead of
BP. That wadding is not regulated, sold to persons over 18 and doesn't
cost as much as BP, and burns much cleaner and cooler.
The only drawback is, you have to dry it before use (it comes wet in
100g packs from magician's accessoire stores) and you'd have to
calculate the amount of gas generated by 1g.
Other than that, only advantages...:-).

Tom

--
Atheism is a non-prophet organization.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 1827 invoked from network); 12 Jul 2001 14:26:47 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 12 Jul 2001 14:26:47 -0000
Received: (qmail 19007 invoked from network); 12 Jul 2001 14:28:25 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 12 Jul 2001 14:28:25 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA17128; Thu, 12 Jul 2001 07:24:02 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 75084 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 12 Jul 2001 14:23:53          +0000
Received: from odyssey.rlpotter.com (IDENT:root@[204.131.176.254]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA17110 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 12 Jul 2001 07:23:52 -0700
Received: from Jane (jane.rlpotter.com [204.131.176.34]) by          odyssey.rlpotter.com (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id HAA04706; Thu, 12 Jul          2001 07:36:04 -0600
References:  <NKEHJAOOKBPGIKOOPDEFAEJLCAAA.jwckman@space-rockets.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <007d01c10adf$3f8eea40$22b083cc@rlpotter.com>
Date:         Thu, 12 Jul 2001 08:30:50 -0600
Reply-To: "Ryan" <ryan@RLPOTTER.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Ryan" <ryan@RLPOTTER.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] HTPB Suppliers
Comments: cc: jwckman@SPACE-ROCKETS.COM
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

John,

Does the R20LM work out better because of the handling properties, or
because of the engine performance,  .. or both?  What about price...
comparable between R45HT and R20LM?

Ryan


----- Original Message -----
From: "John Wickman" <jwckman@SPACE-ROCKETS.COM>


> Ryan,
>
> If the industrial grade is R45HT or R45HT-LO, it will work out fine as I
> have used it many times.  That is also a good price for the R45HT.  I am
> currently using R20LM and in may opinion makes an even better propellant,
> incredibly flexible.   Also, R20LM has about half the viscosity of R45.
It
> makes mixing a lot easier.
>
> John Wickman
>
> www.space-rockets.com
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@itc.uci.edu]On
> Behalf Of Ryan
> Sent: Tuesday, July 10, 2001 10:53 PM
> To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
> Subject: [AR] HTPB Suppliers
>
>
> Does anyone have a list of domestic (USA) suppliers of HTPB that are good?
> I've found a few suppliers so far, but one is in China and wants $11 per
kg
> for it, and the other is in the UK (i think?).  One in NY sold industrial
> grade HTPB for $1.40 per pound, but I don't have enough experience yet to
> know if that will work out good or not.  The shipping might be high, too,
on
> a 50 gal drum.  I live in Colorado, if that helps.   :)
>
> Thanks in advance.
> Ryan

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 12386 invoked from network); 12 Jul 2001 16:16:41 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 12 Jul 2001 16:16:41 -0000
Received: (qmail 11473 invoked from network); 12 Jul 2001 16:18:04 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 12 Jul 2001 16:18:04 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA17454; Thu, 12 Jul 2001 09:08:24 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 75110 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 12 Jul 2001 16:07:33          +0000
Received: from mailhost0.trib.com (mailhost0.trib.com [63.229.150.3]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA17435 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Thu, 12 Jul 2001 09:07:32 -0700
Received: from mail.trib.com (mail.trib.com [12.10.158.17]) by          mailhost0.trib.com (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f6CG6HC87971; Thu,          12 Jul 2001 10:07:29 -0600 (MDT) (envelope-from          jwckman@space-rockets.com)
Received: from [63.229.150.166] (HELO hppav) by mail.trib.com (CommuniGate Pro          SMTP 3.4.6) with SMTP id 38960499; Thu, 12 Jul 2001 10:06:16 -0600
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <NKEHJAOOKBPGIKOOPDEFEEJNCAAA.jwckman@space-rockets.com>
Date:         Thu, 12 Jul 2001 10:04:53 -0600
Reply-To: "John Wickman" <jwckman@SPACE-ROCKETS.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Wickman" <jwckman@SPACE-ROCKETS.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] HTPB Suppliers
Comments: To: Ryan <ryan@rlpotter.com>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <007d01c10adf$3f8eea40$22b083cc@rlpotter.com>

It is both.   It is easier to mix plus I have seen a little bit higher burn
rate than with the R45, about 10% higher.   The price is about a dollar a
pound more than the R45HT.

John Wickman


-----Original Message-----
From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@itc.uci.edu]On
Behalf Of Ryan
Sent: Thursday, July 12, 2001 8:31 AM
To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
Subject: Re: [AR] HTPB Suppliers


John,

Does the R20LM work out better because of the handling properties, or
because of the engine performance,  .. or both?  What about price...
comparable between R45HT and R20LM?

Ryan


----- Original Message -----
From: "John Wickman" <jwckman@SPACE-ROCKETS.COM>


> Ryan,
>
> If the industrial grade is R45HT or R45HT-LO, it will work out fine as I
> have used it many times.  That is also a good price for the R45HT.  I am
> currently using R20LM and in may opinion makes an even better propellant,
> incredibly flexible.   Also, R20LM has about half the viscosity of R45.
It
> makes mixing a lot easier.
>
> John Wickman
>
> www.space-rockets.com
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@itc.uci.edu]On
> Behalf Of Ryan
> Sent: Tuesday, July 10, 2001 10:53 PM
> To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
> Subject: [AR] HTPB Suppliers
>
>
> Does anyone have a list of domestic (USA) suppliers of HTPB that are good?
> I've found a few suppliers so far, but one is in China and wants $11 per
kg
> for it, and the other is in the UK (i think?).  One in NY sold industrial
> grade HTPB for $1.40 per pound, but I don't have enough experience yet to
> know if that will work out good or not.  The shipping might be high, too,
on
> a 50 gal drum.  I live in Colorado, if that helps.   :)
>
> Thanks in advance.
> Ryan

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 28363 invoked from network); 12 Jul 2001 18:18:59 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 12 Jul 2001 18:18:59 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 5136 invoked from network); 12 Jul 2001 18:20:22 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 12 Jul 2001 18:20:22 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA17845; Thu, 12 Jul 2001 11:13:03 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 75124 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 12 Jul 2001 18:12:56          +0000
Received: from mail.aros.net (mail.aros.net [207.173.16.20]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA17826 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Thu,          12 Jul 2001 11:12:56 -0700
Received: from biomicro.com ([208.187.122.40]) by mail.aros.net (8.11.3/8.9.3)          with ESMTP id f6CICtV86865 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Thu, 12 Jul          2001 12:12:55 -0600 (MDT)
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.77 [en] (Win98; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B4DE92E.F179AB4D@biomicro.com>
Date:         Thu, 12 Jul 2001 12:15:10 -0600
Reply-To: "Mark K. Spute" <mks@BIOMICRO.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Mark K. Spute" <mks@BIOMICRO.COM>
Subject:      [AR] SpacePort Utah
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

The "Wah-Wah Valley Interlocal Cooperation Entity" (I'm not kidding) has
applied to the FAA to build a "Spaceport" in western Utah.  The State of
Utah has provided funding to help with the Environmental Impact and
Safety studies.  This spaceport was originally intended to support the
X-33/VentureStar.  Since the cancellation of that program, the
application has been on hold, pending the DoD possibly picking up the
X-33 program and continuing it.

I have been asked to speak to the Wah-Wah Valley Interlocal Cooperation
Entity (WWVICE) on Monday the 16th of July regarding the needs and
interests of the Amateur Rocket community and how we could help, as well
as what our needs are.

This is a general call for help, suggestions, and pertinent information
that could secure access to an incredible potential launch site.  Please
help me figure out what I am going to say to these people to get them to
work with the Amateur Rocketry community to realize a dream of a
non-government controlled spaceport/launch site open to all rocketeers
regardless of the size of vehicle they are launching.

Help!!

Thanks.

--
Mark K. Spute
Senior Research Engineer
BioMicro Systems Inc.

KD7IWE,  RRS

"It is difficult to say what is impossible, for the dream of yesterday
is the hope of today and the reality of tomorrow."
     Dr. Robert H. Goddard

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 23575 invoked from network); 12 Jul 2001 21:32:52 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 12 Jul 2001 21:32:52 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 18477 invoked from network); 12 Jul 2001 21:33:56 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 12 Jul 2001 21:33:56 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA18553; Thu, 12 Jul 2001 14:26:32 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 75172 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 12 Jul 2001 21:26:25          +0000
Received: from m5.boston.juno.com (m5.boston.juno.com [64.136.24.68]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA18536 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Thu, 12 Jul 2001 14:26:24 -0700
Received: from cookie.juno.com by cookie.juno.com for          <"r2Fo8hpwT0kn33UwylHELBRjLQZrEvF1/1uqbYFCYdu7GSlOGgYEYA==">
Received: (from icantdecide@juno.com) by m5.boston.juno.com (queuemail) id          F967C9NN; Thu, 12 Jul 2001 17:25:18 EDT
X-Mailer: Juno 4.0.9
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Juno-Line-Breaks: 0-1,9-29
X-Juno-Att: 0
X-Juno-RefParts: 0
Message-ID:  <20010704.142947.-134941.0.icantdecide@juno.com>
Date:         Wed, 4 Jul 2001 14:29:14 -0700
Reply-To: "James G Selin" <icantdecide@JUNO.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "James G Selin" <icantdecide@JUNO.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] CERAMICS
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Waysie,

I just noticed that you typed below "electrically conductive" for that
zircon castable ceramic. Was this a typo? If not where can I get more
info? With the right info you could cast in place ceramic heating
elements into furnace walls. Best of all, its max temp is so high that
you could operate the furnace at serious temperatures. Heres hoping for
the resistance to fall within a usable range! Too bad it's so pricey...
maybe graphite powder could be mixed into a standard castable to create a
conductive mix. That may be a cheaper route.

Best Regards,
Jim Selin


On Wed, 20 Jun 2001 12:55:51 -0400 Waysie_Atkins@VANGUARD.COM writes:
> Ceramics seem to offer enough hope to be worth investigating.  I've
> done a
> little ceramic work myself.  Mostly for fun with my young son.  A
> buddy of mine
> has a kiln (his wife's actually) and I have access to it.
> McMaster-Carr lists
> Zirconium Oxide castable ceramics at $114.45 per 10lb bag.  Rated
> -200 to 4000
> degrees F, 10% porosity, did not detail  thermal conductivity,
> electrically
> conductive, .14 lbs/cu. in., 4000 psi compressive strength and 1200
> flexural.
> (seems to get heavier as temp rating increases)
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 20691 invoked from network); 12 Jul 2001 22:18:44 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 12 Jul 2001 22:18:44 -0000
Received: (qmail 27348 invoked from network); 12 Jul 2001 22:20:23 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 12 Jul 2001 22:20:23 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA18942; Thu, 12 Jul 2001 15:15:08 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 75184 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 12 Jul 2001 22:15:00          +0000
Received: from spsystems.net (spsystems.net [209.47.149.227]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA18921 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Thu,          12 Jul 2001 15:14:59 -0700
Received: (from henry@localhost) by spsystems.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id SAA27609;          Thu, 12 Jul 2001 18:14:18 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010712181240.27587B-100000@spsystems.net>
Date:         Thu, 12 Jul 2001 18:14:18 -0400
Reply-To: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] CERAMICS
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <20010704.142947.-134941.0.icantdecide@juno.com>

On Wed, 4 Jul 2001, James G Selin wrote:
> Waysie,
> I just noticed that you typed below "electrically conductive" for that
> zircon castable ceramic. Was this a typo?

Zirconia and several other oxide ceramics are moderately electrically
conductive...  the oxygen ions become mobile at high temperatures.  But
note that they're conductive only when very hot.  At room temperature they
are insulators.

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 16884 invoked from network); 12 Jul 2001 22:44:59 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 12 Jul 2001 22:44:59 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 8785 invoked from network); 12 Jul 2001 22:45:29 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 12 Jul 2001 22:45:29 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA19029; Thu, 12 Jul 2001 15:42:37 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 75192 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 12 Jul 2001 22:42:31          +0000
Received: from c000.snv.cp.net (c000-h002.c000.snv.cp.net [209.228.32.66]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id PAA19012 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 12 Jul 2001 15:42:31 -0700
Received: (cpmta 25909 invoked from network); 12 Jul 2001 15:41:58 -0700
Received: from ws.esrange.ssc.se (HELO hamburg) (192.150.75.174) by          smtp.wallner.com (209.228.32.66) with SMTP; 12 Jul 2001 15:41:58 -0700
X-Sent: 12 Jul 2001 22:41:58 GMT
Received: by localhost with Microsoft MAPI; Fri, 13 Jul 2001 00:43:29 +0200
X-Mailer: Microsoft Internet-e-post/MAPI - 8.0.0.4211
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <11D22206E5A2D1118F4E00805FBBF1E6015E9AB2@villint.esrange.ssc.se>
Date:         Fri, 13 Jul 2001 00:41:54 +0200
Reply-To: <trinity@hem.passagen.se>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Mattias Wallner" <trinity@hem.passagen.se>
Subject:      [AR] List of Aerospace companies in the US (World even...)
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Hi everyone. I was wondering if someone knows if there is a list of
companies in the Aerospace industry in the US or other countries as well
(On the net or home compiled... I'm not picky). If so it would be a great
help to me!
Thanks in advance!

-- Mattias --

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 43 invoked from network); 12 Jul 2001 23:41:21 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 12 Jul 2001 23:41:21 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 24287 invoked from network); 12 Jul 2001 23:42:47 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 12 Jul 2001 23:42:47 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA19198; Thu, 12 Jul 2001 16:24:54 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 75209 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 12 Jul 2001 23:24:08          +0000
Received: from smtp01.roc.gblx.net (smtp01.roc.gblx.net [209.130.222.196]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA19180 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 12 Jul 2001 16:23:57 -0700
Received: (from daemon@localhost) by smtp01.roc.gblx.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id          TAA66552; Thu, 12 Jul 2001 19:23:06 -0400
Received: from 64-208-236-204.nas1.TBR.gblx.net(64.208.236.204),          claiming to be "frontiernet.net" via SMTP by smtp01.roc.gblx.net,          id smtpdJTheEa; Thu Jul 12 19:22:55 2001
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.74 [en] (Win98; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <11D22206E5A2D1118F4E00805FBBF1E6015E9AB2@villint.esrange.ssc.se>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B4E3241.34C1C60A@frontiernet.net>
Date:         Thu, 12 Jul 2001 19:26:57 -0400
Reply-To: <tbinford@frontiernet.net>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Tom Binford" <tbinford@frontiernet.net>
Subject:      Re: [AR] List of Aerospace companies in the US (World even...)
Comments: To: "trinity@hem.passagen.se" <trinity@hem.passagen.se>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Mattias Wallner wrote:
>
> Hi everyone. I was wondering if someone knows if there is a list of
> companies in the Aerospace industry in the US or other countries as well
> (On the net or home compiled... I'm not picky). If so it would be a great
> help to me!
> Thanks in advance!
>
> -- Mattias --

Have you tried searching for the products or services you want at
http://www.thomasregister.com ?  It's mostly US companies, most
companies of any size are listed.

Tom

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 13611 invoked from network); 13 Jul 2001 01:26:33 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 13 Jul 2001 01:26:33 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 9772 invoked from network); 13 Jul 2001 01:27:20 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 13 Jul 2001 01:27:20 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA19578; Thu, 12 Jul 2001 18:23:01 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 75229 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 13 Jul 2001 01:22:42          +0000
Received: from pan.ch.intel.com (chfdns01.ch.intel.com [143.182.246.24]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA19561 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 12 Jul 2001 18:22:42 -0700
Received: from snmeng1.rr.intel.com (snmeng1.rr.intel.com [128.215.231.11]) by          pan.ch.intel.com (8.9.1a+p1/8.9.1/d: relay.m4,v 1.41 2001/07/09          21:06:22 root Exp $) with ESMTP id BAA06317; Fri, 13 Jul 2001          01:22:40 GMT
Received: from snmeng30.rr.intel.com (snmeng30.rr.intel.com [128.215.52.76]) by          snmeng1.rr.intel.com (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id TAA25522; Thu, 12          Jul 2001 19:19:54 -0600 (MDT)
Received: from snmeng30.rr.intel.com (snmeng30.rr.intel.com [128.215.52.76]) by          snmeng30.rr.intel.com (8.9.1a/8.9.1/d: client.m4,v 1.3 1998/09/29          16:36:11 sedayao Exp sedayao $) with SMTP id TAA16477; Thu, 12 Jul          2001 19:19:49 -0600 (MDT)
X-Mailer: dtmail 1.2.1 CDE Version 1.2.1 SunOS 5.6 sun4m sparc
X-Sun-Text-Type: ascii
Message-ID:  <200107130119.TAA16477@snmeng30.rr.intel.com>
Date:         Thu, 12 Jul 2001 19:19:49 -0600
Reply-To: "Ray Calkins 100660207" <rcalkins@SNMENG1.RR.INTEL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Ray Calkins 100660207" <rcalkins@SNMENG1.RR.INTEL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] SpacePort Utah
Comments: To: mks@BIOMICRO.COM
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Hello Mark:

Congratulations on the good work in this area!  Such a facility will
be invaluable to the amateur rocketry community.  I will do everything
I can to assist you in this endeavor.

> I have been asked to speak to the Wah-Wah Valley Interlocal Cooperation
> Entity (WWVICE) on Monday the 16th of July regarding the needs and
> interests of the Amateur Rocket community and how we could help, as well
> as what our needs are.

Mostly, I have lots of questions, but I will be contacting you off
list to work out a few ideas on how to approach this.  As far as I
see, amateur rocketry would greatly stimulate the local and state
economy, just ask Bruno at Black Rock...  I would be interested in
building test infrastructure.  Bunkers, static test sites, workshops,
roads, etc...  This type of infrastructure will bring commercial
concerns into the site later, and the positive media attention will do
wonders for the image of the state.  Certainly it will stimulate
interest in science and engineering in the state.  I am sure that many
amateurs would be interested in giving presentations at the local
schools.

One thing that would be nice would be controlled airspace.  Controlled
airspace would allow flights with little more than a phone call to
FAA, greatly speeding development by allowing flexible flight
schedules and creating an environment where experimenters could tweak
and refly shortly after reviewing previous flight data and refueling.
This alone would be invaluable.

What launch altitudes will be allowed?  Many amateurs are pushing
towards orbit, but have been limited in the past by lack of a suitable
range.  What IS the proposed physical size of the range?  Will flight
termination systems will be required?  Will footprint evacuations be
required?  Are there tracking facilities or plans for these in the
future?  Will high bandwidth be availible at a reasonable rate at the
rangehead?  This is again something that amateurs could assist in.
Additionally, I'm sure many of us would be delighted to help wire area
schools and help set up computer labs and more.

Is the launch range private, public or mixed lands?  Is there a
possibility for us to build static test stands, workshops, tankage
(cryo, HTP, etc...)  and such?  Who would retain ownership of these
structures?  How about the possiblity of financial support in the form
of matching funds?  All weather roads to the rangehead?  Roads into
recovery area?  Nearby landing strip, rail shipping possible?  What
propellants will the EIS allow/disallow?  Water and electricty at the
rangehead?  What about local firehouse support?

What about the time when amateurs begin to go commercial?  How will
this change the nature of the range?  Will amateurs still be allowed
on the range?

Liability insurance?  What will the state require?  Will they assist
in valuing private assets that could be threatened?  Does a detailed
weather set exist for the area?

Is there a sizable city relatively close where fittings, tools, LOx,
and other provisions could be obtained?  What about nearby hotels,
hardware stores, eateries?

> This is a general call for help, suggestions, and pertinent information
> that could secure access to an incredible potential launch site.  Please
> help me figure out what I am going to say to these people to get them to
> work with the Amateur Rocketry community to realize a dream of a
> non-government controlled spaceport/launch site open to all rocketeers
> regardless of the size of vehicle they are launching.

I share this dream Mark.  Let's pool our efforts.  Here in NM, a
similar situation exists.  I will be presenting a similar pitch next
month.  I think it likely that amateur rocketry will benefit if we get
them in competition with each other.  Certainly with such ranges,
cheap access to space will be greatly accelerated.

I suggest we work to arrange a test case at each site.  Once the first
test is successfully demonstrated, the rest should be much easier.
Are there any volunteers to fly a rocket at a new test site or two?


Ray Calkins rcalkins@snmeng1.rr.intel.com raymond.calkins@intel.com
"My opinions are my own, and do not reflect those of my employer."


From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 1095 invoked from network); 13 Jul 2001 01:37:29 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 13 Jul 2001 01:37:29 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 14135 invoked from network); 13 Jul 2001 01:37:45 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 13 Jul 2001 01:37:45 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA19661; Thu, 12 Jul 2001 18:34:39 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 75241 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 13 Jul 2001 01:34:28          +0000
Received: from clio.sc.intel.com (scfdns01.sc.intel.com [143.183.152.25]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA19644 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 12 Jul 2001 18:34:28 -0700
Received: from snmeng1.rr.intel.com (snmeng1.rr.intel.com [128.215.231.11]) by          clio.sc.intel.com (8.9.1a+p1/8.9.1/d: relay.m4,v 1.41 2001/07/09          21:06:22 root Exp $) with ESMTP id BAA19507; Fri, 13 Jul 2001          01:33:57 GMT
Received: from snmeng30.rr.intel.com (snmeng30.rr.intel.com [128.215.52.76]) by          snmeng1.rr.intel.com (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id TAA25582; Thu, 12          Jul 2001 19:31:10 -0600 (MDT)
Received: from snmeng30.rr.intel.com (snmeng30.rr.intel.com [128.215.52.76]) by          snmeng30.rr.intel.com (8.9.1a/8.9.1/d: client.m4,v 1.3 1998/09/29          16:36:11 sedayao Exp sedayao $) with SMTP id TAA28899; Thu, 12 Jul          2001 19:31:05 -0600 (MDT)
X-Mailer: dtmail 1.2.1 CDE Version 1.2.1 SunOS 5.6 sun4m sparc
X-Sun-Text-Type: ascii
Message-ID:  <200107130131.TAA28899@snmeng30.rr.intel.com>
Date:         Thu, 12 Jul 2001 19:31:05 -0600
Reply-To: "Ray Calkins 100660207" <rcalkins@SNMENG1.RR.INTEL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Ray Calkins 100660207" <rcalkins@SNMENG1.RR.INTEL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] List of Aerospace companies in the US (World even...)
Comments: To: trinity@hem.passagen.se
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

> Hi everyone. I was wondering if someone knows if there is a list of
> companies in the Aerospace industry in the US or other countries as well
> (On the net or home compiled... I'm not picky). If so it would be a great
> help to me!
Gotta ask what this if for...

Anyway, here are a couple of lists that are fairly inclusive...

http://www.hoovers.com/industry/snapshot/companies/1,3516,3,00.html
http://biz.yahoo.com/p/_capgds-airdef.html

I've got an industry guidebook in storage, I'll pick up the title/publisher this weekend.

Ray Calkins
rcalkins@snmeng1.rr.intel.com           raymond.calkins@intel.com
"My opinions are my own, and do not reflect those of my employer."


From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 19338 invoked from network); 13 Jul 2001 02:49:23 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 13 Jul 2001 02:49:23 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 22118 invoked from network); 13 Jul 2001 02:50:46 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 13 Jul 2001 02:50:46 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA20119; Thu, 12 Jul 2001 19:46:51 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 75390 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 13 Jul 2001 02:46:40          +0000
Received: from idsoftware.com (predator.idsoftware.com [192.246.40.34]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA20102 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Thu, 12 Jul 2001 19:46:40 -0700
Received: from [192.246.40.129] (account johnc HELO lightning.idsoftware.com)          by idsoftware.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 3.4.6) with ESMTP id 278433          for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 12 Jul 2001 21:45:56 -0500
X-Sender: johnc@mail.idsoftware.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <4.3.1.2.20010712214238.03507ee8@mail.idsoftware.com>
Date:         Thu, 12 Jul 2001 21:45:45 -0500
Reply-To: "John Carmack" <johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Carmack" <johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] SpacePort Utah
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <200107130119.TAA16477@snmeng30.rr.intel.com>

At 07:19 PM 7/12/2001 -0600, you wrote:
>Hello Mark:
>
>Congratulations on the good work in this area!  Such a facility will
>be invaluable to the amateur rocketry community.  I will do everything
>I can to assist you in this endeavor.
>
> > I have been asked to speak to the Wah-Wah Valley Interlocal Cooperation
> > Entity (WWVICE) on Monday the 16th of July regarding the needs and
> > interests of the Amateur Rocket community and how we could help, as well
> > as what our needs are.
>
>Mostly, I have lots of questions, but I will be contacting you off
>list to work out a few ideas on how to approach this.  As far as I
>see, amateur rocketry would greatly stimulate the local and state
>economy, just ask Bruno at Black Rock...

That is probably overstating the case to the point of being misleading.


One other point to at least think about is how manned rocket flights fit
in.  There isn't a whole lot of activity there, but at least the various
X-Prize teams and my team are working towards that.

John Carmack

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 8996 invoked from network); 13 Jul 2001 03:08:33 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 13 Jul 2001 03:08:33 -0000
Received: (qmail 29254 invoked from network); 13 Jul 2001 03:09:57 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 13 Jul 2001 03:09:57 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA20297; Thu, 12 Jul 2001 20:04:56 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 75448 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 13 Jul 2001 03:04:49          +0000
Received: from corlabs (24-216-244-100.hsacorp.net [24.216.244.100]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA20280 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Thu, 12 Jul 2001 20:04:48 -0700
Received: from [192.168.0.11] by corlabs (ArGoSoft Mail Server Plus,          Version 1.3 (1.3.0.1)); Thu, 12 Jul 2001 22:27:30 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook CWS, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <009d01c10b49$674926d0$0b00a8c0@star>
Date:         Thu, 12 Jul 2001 22:10:43 -0500
Reply-To: "Carl A. Blood" <cablood@CORLABS.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Carl A. Blood" <cablood@CORLABS.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] SpacePort Utah
Comments: To: Ray Calkins 100660207 <rcalkins@snmeng1.rr.intel.com>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <200107130119.TAA16477@snmeng30.rr.intel.com>

Ray, You said "Are there any volunteers to fly a rocket at a new test site
or two?"
I say "How big and how far"
Carl

-----Original Message-----
From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@itc.uci.edu]On
Behalf Of Ray Calkins 100660207
Sent: Thursday, July 12, 2001 8:20 PM
To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
Subject: Re: [AR] SpacePort Utah


Hello Mark:

Congratulations on the good work in this area!  Such a facility will
be invaluable to the amateur rocketry community.  I will do everything
I can to assist you in this endeavor.

> I have been asked to speak to the Wah-Wah Valley Interlocal Cooperation
> Entity (WWVICE) on Monday the 16th of July regarding the needs and
> interests of the Amateur Rocket community and how we could help, as well
> as what our needs are.

Mostly, I have lots of questions, but I will be contacting you off
list to work out a few ideas on how to approach this.  As far as I
see, amateur rocketry would greatly stimulate the local and state
economy, just ask Bruno at Black Rock...  I would be interested in
building test infrastructure.  Bunkers, static test sites, workshops,
roads, etc...  This type of infrastructure will bring commercial
concerns into the site later, and the positive media attention will do
wonders for the image of the state.  Certainly it will stimulate
interest in science and engineering in the state.  I am sure that many
amateurs would be interested in giving presentations at the local
schools.

One thing that would be nice would be controlled airspace.  Controlled
airspace would allow flights with little more than a phone call to
FAA, greatly speeding development by allowing flexible flight
schedules and creating an environment where experimenters could tweak
and refly shortly after reviewing previous flight data and refueling.
This alone would be invaluable.

What launch altitudes will be allowed?  Many amateurs are pushing
towards orbit, but have been limited in the past by lack of a suitable
range.  What IS the proposed physical size of the range?  Will flight
termination systems will be required?  Will footprint evacuations be
required?  Are there tracking facilities or plans for these in the
future?  Will high bandwidth be availible at a reasonable rate at the
rangehead?  This is again something that amateurs could assist in.
Additionally, I'm sure many of us would be delighted to help wire area
schools and help set up computer labs and more.

Is the launch range private, public or mixed lands?  Is there a
possibility for us to build static test stands, workshops, tankage
(cryo, HTP, etc...)  and such?  Who would retain ownership of these
structures?  How about the possiblity of financial support in the form
of matching funds?  All weather roads to the rangehead?  Roads into
recovery area?  Nearby landing strip, rail shipping possible?  What
propellants will the EIS allow/disallow?  Water and electricty at the
rangehead?  What about local firehouse support?

What about the time when amateurs begin to go commercial?  How will
this change the nature of the range?  Will amateurs still be allowed
on the range?

Liability insurance?  What will the state require?  Will they assist
in valuing private assets that could be threatened?  Does a detailed
weather set exist for the area?

Is there a sizable city relatively close where fittings, tools, LOx,
and other provisions could be obtained?  What about nearby hotels,
hardware stores, eateries?

> This is a general call for help, suggestions, and pertinent information
> that could secure access to an incredible potential launch site.  Please
> help me figure out what I am going to say to these people to get them to
> work with the Amateur Rocketry community to realize a dream of a
> non-government controlled spaceport/launch site open to all rocketeers
> regardless of the size of vehicle they are launching.

I share this dream Mark.  Let's pool our efforts.  Here in NM, a
similar situation exists.  I will be presenting a similar pitch next
month.  I think it likely that amateur rocketry will benefit if we get
them in competition with each other.  Certainly with such ranges,
cheap access to space will be greatly accelerated.

I suggest we work to arrange a test case at each site.  Once the first
test is successfully demonstrated, the rest should be much easier.
Are there any volunteers to fly a rocket at a new test site or two?


Ray Calkins rcalkins@snmeng1.rr.intel.com raymond.calkins@intel.com
"My opinions are my own, and do not reflect those of my employer."

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 10623 invoked from network); 13 Jul 2001 03:50:52 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 13 Jul 2001 03:50:52 -0000
Received: (qmail 9394 invoked from network); 13 Jul 2001 03:51:56 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 13 Jul 2001 03:51:56 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA20568; Thu, 12 Jul 2001 20:47:30 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 75546 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 13 Jul 2001 03:47:18          +0000
Received: from wrench.toolcity.net (root@wrench.toolcity.net [208.0.188.2]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA20551 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 12 Jul 2001 20:47:17 -0700
Received: from [63.169.101.65]          (dap-63-169-101-65.meadville-tnt-1.pa.toolcity.net [63.169.101.65])          by wrench.toolcity.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id XAA10575; Thu, 12          Jul 2001 23:47:10 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <v01510100b774224417f7@[208.11.233.176]>
Date:         Thu, 12 Jul 2001 23:49:30 -0500
Reply-To: "al bradley" <abradley@TOOLCITY.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "al bradley" <abradley@TOOLCITY.NET>
Subject:      [AR] 2Re: [AR] CERAMICS
Comments: To: icantdecide@JUNO.COM
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

see below -- ab

>Waysie,
>
>I just noticed that you typed below "electrically conductive" for that
>zircon castable ceramic. Was this a typo? If not where can I get more
>info? With the right info you could cast in place ceramic heating
>elements into furnace walls. Best of all, its max temp is so high that
>you could operate the furnace at serious temperatures. Heres hoping for
>the resistance to fall within a usable range! Too bad it's so pricey...
>maybe graphite powder could be mixed into a standard castable to create a
>conductive mix. That may be a cheaper route.
>
>Best Regards,
>Jim Selin
>
>
>On Wed, 20 Jun 2001 12:55:51 -0400 Waysie_Atkins@VANGUARD.COM writes:
>> Ceramics seem to offer enough hope to be worth investigating.  I've
>> done a
>> little ceramic work myself.  Mostly for fun with my young son.  A
>> buddy of mine
>> has a kiln (his wife's actually) and I have access to it.
>> McMaster-Carr lists
>> Zirconium Oxide castable ceramics at $114.45 per 10lb bag.  Rated
>> -200 to 4000
>> degrees F, 10% porosity, did not detail  thermal conductivity,
>> electrically
>> conductive, .14 lbs/cu. in., 4000 psi compressive strength and 1200
>> flexural.
>> (seems to get heavier as temp rating increases)
------------------
>> Waysie,
>> I just noticed that you typed below "electrically conductive" for that
>> zircon castable ceramic. Was this a typo?
>
>Zirconia and several other oxide ceramics are moderately electrically
>conductive...  the oxygen ions become mobile at high temperatures.  But
>note that they're conductive only when very hot.  At room temperature they
>are insulators.
>
>                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                           henry@spsystems.net
-------------------
FOR WHAT IT'S WORTH:
A couple of years ago on this list I suggested that for short-burn
amateur-nozzles pyrex glass might well fill the bill. The idea was quickly
shot down with the indictment that thermal shock would work against it.
Maybe so. but let me give some characteristics I have noted in art-glass
work, and possibly ceramics.

In glass, the thermal conductivity in general is so low that a glass worker
may comfortably hold a piece of glass within 2 or 3 inches of where a flame
is melting the other end of the glass into a piece of deco-art. 1400
degrees F. would be common differential.

In ceramics there is no such analogy. Form, shape and glaze are done
"cold". Next fired in a kiln where the fusing temps are run up and
finishing temps are run down in rather a linear fashion. Common up-and-down
temp times may run 24-36 hours till "done".

With flame-worked glass finished in a kiln or "oven" the "slide-down" temps
are held through a timed resting stage, a timed annealing stage, and a
timed final cool-down stage till room temperature is reached. Maybe up to 2
days depending on the mass of the piece. These timed stages may have heat
added/maintained to agree with the characteristics of the glass.

These aspects agree with my original theory that for amateur glass or
ceramic nozzles in many cases, the burn would be done with before thermal
shock could occur.

Glass and ceramic nozzles are within the capacities of many amateurs. And
yes, for short amateur burns, ceramic or glass nozzles probably will never
yield to thermal shock until some seconds after the burn is over. But until
you make test-stand provision to measure this reaction you may never know
until it is too late to redirect your efforts.

Graphite and graphite/phenol still look the best of all to me.

respectfully,
al bradley

------------------------------------------------------------------
Can you live Life with this?: "Unless there is a law, an agreement, or a
long-standing custom, No one `Deserves' Anything -- Either Good or Bad!"

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 15682 invoked from network); 13 Jul 2001 07:17:50 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 13 Jul 2001 07:17:50 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 14119 invoked from network); 13 Jul 2001 07:19:17 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 13 Jul 2001 07:19:17 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA21898; Fri, 13 Jul 2001 00:02:09 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 75984 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 13 Jul 2001 07:01:58          +0000
Received: from femail18.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail18.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.0.95.145]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA21880          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 13 Jul 2001 00:01:58 -0700
Received: from c396957-b.home.net ([24.17.249.10]) by          femail18.sdc1.sfba.home.com (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20          201-229-121-120-20010223) with ESMTP id          <20010713070151.YMFJ20080.femail18.sdc1.sfba.home.com@c396957-b.home.net> for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 13          Jul 2001 00:01:51 -0700
X-Sender: spiegl@mail
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
References: <20010704.142947.-134941.0.icantdecide@juno.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <5.1.0.14.2.20010713015647.00ab8f28@mail>
Date:         Fri, 13 Jul 2001 02:01:57 -0500
Reply-To: "Mark C Spiegl" <spiegl@HOME.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Mark C Spiegl" <spiegl@HOME.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] CERAMICS
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010712181240.27587B-100000@spsystems.net>

As a probably irrelevant datapoint, we tried ceramic coated
aluminum nozzles.

The ceramics didn't hold-up very well in the nozzle throat. The ceramic
deteriorated and blew out in chunks.... which exposed the aluminum....
which exposed the rest of the motor to high temps....  and the rest is
history.

(The nozzles were professionally coated by Jet-Hot ceramics)

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 29014 invoked from network); 13 Jul 2001 08:39:36 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 13 Jul 2001 08:39:36 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 10319 invoked from network); 13 Jul 2001 08:40:42 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 13 Jul 2001 08:40:42 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id BAA22153; Fri, 13 Jul 2001 01:37:52 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 76014 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 13 Jul 2001 08:37:42          +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (f26.law15.hotmail.com [64.4.23.26]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id BAA22136 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Fri,          13 Jul 2001 01:37:42 -0700
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Fri,          13 Jul 2001 01:37:12 -0700
Received: from 193.121.251.246 by lw15fd.law15.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Fri,          13 Jul 2001 08:37:11 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [193.121.251.246]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 13 Jul 2001 08:37:12.0234 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[02FEA0A0:01C10B77]
Message-ID:  <F26IiGXix4A2DreBBsQ00019899@hotmail.com>
Date:         Fri, 13 Jul 2001 08:37:42 +0000
Reply-To: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] CERAMICS
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

MS wrote:

>The ceramics didn't hold-up very well in the nozzle throat. The ceramic
>deteriorated and blew out in chunks.... which exposed the aluminum....

I'd rather cast my nozzle in an Al retainer than coat an Al nozzle. Perhaps
having a metal skeleton (metal or glass fibres) inside the ceramics could
provide structural strength for larger diameters.

Or use rods (lathe) of machinable ceramics like Corning's Macor:

http://www.boedeker.com/macor_p.htm

or Cotronics products like:

http://www.cotronicscorp.thomasregister.com/olc/cotronicscorp/home.htm


jd
_________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 9001 invoked from network); 13 Jul 2001 13:12:36 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 13 Jul 2001 13:12:36 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 7891 invoked from network); 13 Jul 2001 13:13:59 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 13 Jul 2001 13:13:59 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA22942; Fri, 13 Jul 2001 06:10:20 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 76052 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 13 Jul 2001 13:10:04          +0000
Received: from smtp4ve.mailsrvcs.net (smtp4vepub.gte.net [206.46.170.25]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA22924 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 13 Jul 2001 06:10:03 -0700
Received: from me-513q3sc0zun0.pengar.com          (adsl-64-223-147-206.mannh.adsl.bellatlantic.net [64.223.147.206]) by          smtp4ve.mailsrvcs.net (8.9.1/8.9.1) with ESMTP id NAA53778326 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 13 Jul 2001 13:09:32 GMT
X-Sender: seth-pc@hobbiton.shire.net
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <5.1.0.14.0.20010713091008.02b6caf8@hobbiton.shire.net>
Date:         Fri, 13 Jul 2001 09:14:04 -0400
Reply-To: "Seth Leigh" <seth@PENGAR.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Seth Leigh" <seth@PENGAR.COM>
Subject:      [AR] Ariane rocket fails to reach geosynchronous orbit
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <F26IiGXix4A2DreBBsQ00019899@hotmail.com>

Just read this this morning.  I wonder what they plan to do to "put our
satellite in a secure orbit"?  It was supposed to be geosynchronous, but
they didn't make it that high.  So now they will have it changed to
non-geosynchronous?  They *must* have lost a tremendous amount of the value
of the satellite.  It was an $850 million bird.  OUCH.


A statement by Jean-Marie Luton, chairman of the French-based Arianespace
rocket company said: "Arianespace Flight 142 placed its dual satellite
payload in a lower than desired orbit following a problem with the
launcher's upper stage.

"After a good flight of the solid boosters and core cryogenic stage, there
was a problem with the upper stage and the desired orbit was not attained."

Artemis Mission Director Gotthard Oppenhauser said that by deploying the
satellite's solar panels the spacecraft could be shifted into a better orbit.

"We think we will be able to save its life expectancy," he said.
As well as the Artemis, the Ariane was carrying a Japanese BSAT-2B
satellite, for direct broadcast television.

Luton expressed "regrets to our clients" and said an investigation had
already begun.

European Space Agency officials are optimistic that the orbit could be
corrected.
"We will attempt to place our satellite in a secure position," Claudio
Mastracci, ESA Applications Director, told reporters.


Both satellites were launched from French Guiana on board Western Europe's
new generation Ariane-5 rocket.

Eight of Ariane's 141 missions have failed since the Ariane programme began
in 1979.

Thursday's flight was the first time an Ariane rocket had malfunctioned
since Ariane-5's maiden test flight exploded 37 seconds after launch in 1996.

The next scheduled launch of a European rocket is due on August 23, when an
Ariane 4 will carry an Intelsat-902 telecoms satellite into space.

Arianespace, the commercial arm of the 13-nation ESA, has orders to launch
a total of 46 satellites for the International Space Station in comming years.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 10438 invoked from network); 13 Jul 2001 13:26:26 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 13 Jul 2001 13:26:26 -0000
X-Priority: 3
Received: (qmail 11344 invoked from network); 13 Jul 2001 13:27:50 -0000
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 13 Jul 2001 13:27:50 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA22968; Fri, 13 Jul 2001 06:11:14 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 76060 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 13 Jul 2001 13:11:08          +0000
Received: from m1.jersey.juno.com (m1.jersey.juno.com [64.136.16.64]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA22950 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 13 Jul 2001 06:11:07 -0700
Received: from cookie.juno.com by cookie.juno.com for          <"H3WK6e6N+bsCVJQMHM9sZNqM//tNQRhg1ZGHTl6/tbrIHjV+Z5aieA==">
Received: (from kc2csh@juno.com) by m1.jersey.juno.com (queuemail) id F98VGR7F;          Fri, 13 Jul 2001 09:10:57 EDT
X-Mailer: Juno 4.0.11
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Juno-Line-Breaks: 11-14,16-61
X-Juno-Att: 0
X-Juno-RefParts: 0
Message-ID:  <20010713.091544.-4093503.0.kc2csh@juno.com>
Date:         Fri, 13 Jul 2001 09:15:34 -0400
Reply-To: <kc2csh@JUNO.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <kc2csh@JUNO.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] SpacePort Utah
Comments: To: mks@BIOMICRO.COM
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

  You may want to make a point of how important it is to have favorable
state laws on a wide variety of issues to support this.  I'm sure
everyone has thought of the need to address explosives licensing, but
what about things like personal injury liability.  For a model of how to
address that, look at what Virginia did when they wanted to encourage the
development of commuter rail.  Also, look into what issues relate to
gaining physical control over the launch site during an actual launch,
i.e., can you close down and clear any local roadways that may be within
the potential impact zones, or for that matter can you even effectively
keep the curious out of the actual launch area.  Many issues, all easy or
impossible depending on state law, can be addressed as a package in a
state bill to authorize and support the spaceport.

      Jay

On Thu, 12 Jul 2001 12:15:10 -0600 "Mark K. Spute" <mks@BIOMICRO.COM>
writes:
> The "Wah-Wah Valley Interlocal Cooperation Entity" (I'm not kidding)
> has
> applied to the FAA to build a "Spaceport" in western Utah.  The
> State of
> Utah has provided funding to help with the Environmental Impact and
> Safety studies.  This spaceport was originally intended to support
> the
> X-33/VentureStar.  Since the cancellation of that program, the
> application has been on hold, pending the DoD possibly picking up
> the
> X-33 program and continuing it.
>
> I have been asked to speak to the Wah-Wah Valley Interlocal
> Cooperation
> Entity (WWVICE) on Monday the 16th of July regarding the needs and
> interests of the Amateur Rocket community and how we could help, as
> well
> as what our needs are.
>
> This is a general call for help, suggestions, and pertinent
> information
> that could secure access to an incredible potential launch site.
> Please
> help me figure out what I am going to say to these people to get
> them to
> work with the Amateur Rocketry community to realize a dream of a
> non-government controlled spaceport/launch site open to all
> rocketeers
> regardless of the size of vehicle they are launching.
>
> Help!!
>
> Thanks.
>
> --
> Mark K. Spute
> Senior Research Engineer
> BioMicro Systems Inc.
>
> KD7IWE,  RRS
>
> "It is difficult to say what is impossible, for the dream of
> yesterday
> is the hope of today and the reality of tomorrow."
>      Dr. Robert H. Goddard

________________________________________________________________
GET INTERNET ACCESS FROM JUNO!
Juno offers FREE or PREMIUM Internet access for less!
Join Juno today!  For your FREE software, visit:
http://dl.www.juno.com/get/tagj.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 14883 invoked from network); 13 Jul 2001 13:34:10 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 13 Jul 2001 13:34:10 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 13306 invoked from network); 13 Jul 2001 13:35:14 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 13 Jul 2001 13:35:14 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA23041; Fri, 13 Jul 2001 06:31:24 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 76068 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 13 Jul 2001 13:31:17          +0000
Received: from ns.vanguard.com (ns.VANGUARD.COM [192.175.173.31]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA23024 for          <ARocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 13 Jul 2001 06:31:17 -0700
Received: from eagle1.vanguard.com (eagle1.VANGUARD.COM [192.175.133.75]) by          ns.vanguard.com (Switch-2.1.0/Switch-2.1.0) with ESMTP id          f6DDVFX24085 for <ARocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 13 Jul 2001 09:31:15          -0400 (EDT)
Received: from vgi4mail.vanguard.com (vgi4mail.vanguard.com [10.254.65.16]) by          eagle1.vanguard.com (Switch-2.1.3/Switch-2.1.0) with SMTP id          f6DDVD103165 for <ARocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 13 Jul 2001 09:31:13          -0400 (EDT)
Received: by vgi4mail.vanguard.com(Lotus SMTP MTA v4.6.6  (890.1 7-16-1999))           id 85256A88.004A9292 ; Fri, 13 Jul 2001 09:34:31 -0400
X-Lotus-FromDomain: VGINOTES
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Disposition: inline
Message-ID:  <85256A88.0049C8C6.00@vgi4mail.vanguard.com>
Date:         Fri, 13 Jul 2001 09:22:35 -0400
Reply-To: <Waysie_Atkins@VANGUARD.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <Waysie_Atkins@VANGUARD.COM>
Subject:      [AR] AR:Ceramics
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

<I just noticed that you typed below "electrically conductive" for that
<zircon castable ceramic. Was this a typo? If not where can I get more
<info?

I found it at  http://www.mcmaster.com/   .   From the home page click on
ceramics under the materials heading
on the right.   They have a number of different types of ceramics and a couple
of ways to view the info.  Clicking on web pages on the upper
right downloads a comparison in Adobe.   IIRC they had less expensive ones, I
mentioned this one as it had the highest temp rating of those listed.


It was not a typo, though on some ceramics they were more specific on the
conductivity.


Have a Great Day!

Waysie

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 16132 invoked from network); 13 Jul 2001 14:07:26 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 13 Jul 2001 14:07:26 -0000
Received: (qmail 27853 invoked from network); 13 Jul 2001 14:08:50 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 13 Jul 2001 14:08:50 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA23148; Fri, 13 Jul 2001 07:05:01 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 76077 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 13 Jul 2001 14:04:54          +0000
Received: from spsystems.net (spsystems.net [209.47.149.227]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA23128 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Fri,          13 Jul 2001 07:04:53 -0700
Received: (from henry@localhost) by spsystems.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id KAA09094;          Fri, 13 Jul 2001 10:04:21 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010713095736.8813A-100000@spsystems.net>
Date:         Fri, 13 Jul 2001 10:04:21 -0400
Reply-To: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Ariane rocket fails to reach geosynchronous orbit
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <5.1.0.14.0.20010713091008.02b6caf8@hobbiton.shire.net>

On Fri, 13 Jul 2001, Seth Leigh wrote:
> Just read this this morning.  I wonder what they plan to do to "put our
> satellite in a secure orbit"?  It was supposed to be geosynchronous, but
> they didn't make it that high.  So now they will have it changed to
> non-geosynchronous?

Remember that geostationary satellites normally carry quite a bit of fuel
for stationkeeping.  By accepting a reduced on-station life, some of that
can be used to boost the satellite up after a launcher shortfall.  This
has been done a number of times before.

In the case of Artemis, they may not even have to reduce its working life,
because it's carrying both a fair bit of chemical fuel and an experimental
ion-propulsion system.  If they simply decide that the ion propulsion is
now mission-critical instead of just an experiment, they can use most of
the chemical fuel for boost.

To think that Artemis was shifted from H-IIA to Ariane 5 because they
decided they didn't trust the H-IIA...

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 14662 invoked from network); 13 Jul 2001 14:49:11 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 13 Jul 2001 14:49:11 -0000
Received: (qmail 2060 invoked from network); 13 Jul 2001 14:50:52 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 13 Jul 2001 14:50:52 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA23219; Fri, 13 Jul 2001 07:24:56 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 76088 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 13 Jul 2001 14:24:43          +0000
Received: from dune.gnc.net (root@dune.gnc.net [207.203.72.4]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA23202 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri,          13 Jul 2001 07:24:42 -0700
Received: from beowulf (sw2-20.gnc.net [207.203.72.100]) by dune.gnc.net          (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id KAA13185 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri,          13 Jul 2001 10:24:40 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
Importance: Normal
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <LPBBKJMJEOFKAMFJJNNHCEJACFAA.landofgrey@gnc.net>
Date:         Fri, 13 Jul 2001 10:24:30 -0400
Reply-To: <landofgrey@gnc.net>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Matthew Travis" <landofgrey@gnc.net>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Ariane rocket fails to reach geosynchronous orbit
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <5.1.0.14.0.20010713091008.02b6caf8@hobbiton.shire.net>

The Ariane wasn't supposed to put the spacecraft into a geosynchronous
orbit. Like most launchers, it was supposed to put the craft intoa
geosynchronous transfer orbit. the intended perigee was about 800km and the
intended apogee abotu 36,000 km. Other motors would then change the orbit to
a geosynchronous one. However, the achieved perigee was only 600km and the
apogee 17,500 km. It's unclear if the thrusters have enough energy to raise
the orbit sufficiently without reducing the on-orbit lifetime too much. The
ion engine on Artemis may or may not be helpful since, while it could raise
the orbit, it might take too long, but since it can be used for on-orbit
stationkeeping, the chemical thrusters can be used for raiising the orbit. A
further problem, which may make both the comsat and the TV broadcast
satellite write-offs as far as the insurance company is concerned is the
fact that their orbits are not eqauatorial now, but rather, inclined 2.9
degrees to the equator. That much inclination is difficult to compensate for
with the ground stations, and renders the BSAT direct-to-home TV satellite
completely useless since cheap (i.e. crappy) home direct-to-home dishes
physically cannot track an inclined spacecraft. It also takes a huge amount
of energy to effect an orbital plane change and is likely not an option
using the onboard thrusters alone.

That much aside, the satellites themselves are healthy, so there's hope. And
remember, in 1983 the IUS failed and left TDRS-1 in a similar kind of low
orbit. Most people wrote it off as a loss. But many thruster firings and
about a year later, it was in a geosynchronous orbit happily doing its job.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU]On
> Behalf Of Seth Leigh
> Sent: Friday, July 13, 2001 9:14 AM
> To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
> Subject: [AR] Ariane rocket fails to reach geosynchronous orbit
>
>
> Just read this this morning.  I wonder what they plan to do to "put our
> satellite in a secure orbit"?  It was supposed to be geosynchronous, but
> they didn't make it that high.  So now they will have it changed to
> non-geosynchronous?  They *must* have lost a tremendous amount of
> the value
> of the satellite.  It was an $850 million bird.  OUCH.
>
>
> A statement by Jean-Marie Luton, chairman of the French-based Arianespace
> rocket company said: "Arianespace Flight 142 placed its dual satellite
> payload in a lower than desired orbit following a problem with the
> launcher's upper stage.
>
> "After a good flight of the solid boosters and core cryogenic stage, there
> was a problem with the upper stage and the desired orbit was not
> attained."
>
> Artemis Mission Director Gotthard Oppenhauser said that by deploying the
> satellite's solar panels the spacecraft could be shifted into a
> better orbit.
>
> "We think we will be able to save its life expectancy," he said.
> As well as the Artemis, the Ariane was carrying a Japanese BSAT-2B
> satellite, for direct broadcast television.
>
> Luton expressed "regrets to our clients" and said an investigation had
> already begun.
>
> European Space Agency officials are optimistic that the orbit could be
> corrected.
> "We will attempt to place our satellite in a secure position," Claudio
> Mastracci, ESA Applications Director, told reporters.
>
>
> Both satellites were launched from French Guiana on board Western Europe's
> new generation Ariane-5 rocket.
>
> Eight of Ariane's 141 missions have failed since the Ariane
> programme began
> in 1979.
>
> Thursday's flight was the first time an Ariane rocket had malfunctioned
> since Ariane-5's maiden test flight exploded 37 seconds after
> launch in 1996.
>
> The next scheduled launch of a European rocket is due on August
> 23, when an
> Ariane 4 will carry an Intelsat-902 telecoms satellite into space.
>
> Arianespace, the commercial arm of the 13-nation ESA, has orders to launch
> a total of 46 satellites for the International Space Station in
> comming years.
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 11725 invoked from network); 13 Jul 2001 15:09:37 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 13 Jul 2001 15:09:37 -0000
Received: (qmail 24788 invoked from network); 13 Jul 2001 15:11:04 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 13 Jul 2001 15:11:04 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA23339; Fri, 13 Jul 2001 07:53:55 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 76104 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 13 Jul 2001 14:53:53          +0000
Received: from dune.gnc.net (root@dune.gnc.net [207.203.72.4]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA23322 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri,          13 Jul 2001 07:53:52 -0700
Received: from beowulf (sw2-20.gnc.net [207.203.72.100]) by dune.gnc.net          (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id KAA13973 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri,          13 Jul 2001 10:53:51 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
Importance: Normal
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <LPBBKJMJEOFKAMFJJNNHMEJACFAA.landofgrey@gnc.net>
Date:         Fri, 13 Jul 2001 10:53:36 -0400
Reply-To: <landofgrey@gnc.net>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Matthew Travis" <landofgrey@gnc.net>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Ariane rocket fails to reach geosynchronous orbit
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <LPBBKJMJEOFKAMFJJNNHCEJACFAA.landofgrey@gnc.net>

I forgot to mention that the intended inclincation was supposed to be 2
degrees. The 0.9 degree difference may make it nearly impossible for the
direct to home dishes to maintain adequate signal quality. The other
comsat's groundstations can probably make up for the increased inclination.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU]On
> Behalf Of Matthew Travis
> Sent: Friday, July 13, 2001 10:25 AM
> To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
> Subject: Re: [AR] Ariane rocket fails to reach geosynchronous orbit
>
>
> The Ariane wasn't supposed to put the spacecraft into a geosynchronous
> orbit. Like most launchers, it was supposed to put the craft intoa
> geosynchronous transfer orbit. the intended perigee was about
> 800km and the
> intended apogee abotu 36,000 km. Other motors would then change
> the orbit to
> a geosynchronous one. However, the achieved perigee was only 600km and the
> apogee 17,500 km. It's unclear if the thrusters have enough
> energy to raise
> the orbit sufficiently without reducing the on-orbit lifetime too
> much. The
> ion engine on Artemis may or may not be helpful since, while it
> could raise
> the orbit, it might take too long, but since it can be used for on-orbit
> stationkeeping, the chemical thrusters can be used for raiising
> the orbit. A
> further problem, which may make both the comsat and the TV broadcast
> satellite write-offs as far as the insurance company is concerned is the
> fact that their orbits are not eqauatorial now, but rather, inclined 2.9
> degrees to the equator. That much inclination is difficult to
> compensate for
> with the ground stations, and renders the BSAT direct-to-home TV satellite
> completely useless since cheap (i.e. crappy) home direct-to-home dishes
> physically cannot track an inclined spacecraft. It also takes a
> huge amount
> of energy to effect an orbital plane change and is likely not an option
> using the onboard thrusters alone.
>
> That much aside, the satellites themselves are healthy, so
> there's hope. And
> remember, in 1983 the IUS failed and left TDRS-1 in a similar kind of low
> orbit. Most people wrote it off as a loss. But many thruster firings and
> about a year later, it was in a geosynchronous orbit happily
> doing its job.
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU]On
> > Behalf Of Seth Leigh
> > Sent: Friday, July 13, 2001 9:14 AM
> > To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
> > Subject: [AR] Ariane rocket fails to reach geosynchronous orbit
> >
> >
> > Just read this this morning.  I wonder what they plan to do to "put our
> > satellite in a secure orbit"?  It was supposed to be geosynchronous, but
> > they didn't make it that high.  So now they will have it changed to
> > non-geosynchronous?  They *must* have lost a tremendous amount of
> > the value
> > of the satellite.  It was an $850 million bird.  OUCH.
> >
> >
> > A statement by Jean-Marie Luton, chairman of the French-based
> Arianespace
> > rocket company said: "Arianespace Flight 142 placed its dual satellite
> > payload in a lower than desired orbit following a problem with the
> > launcher's upper stage.
> >
> > "After a good flight of the solid boosters and core cryogenic
> stage, there
> > was a problem with the upper stage and the desired orbit was not
> > attained."
> >
> > Artemis Mission Director Gotthard Oppenhauser said that by deploying the
> > satellite's solar panels the spacecraft could be shifted into a
> > better orbit.
> >
> > "We think we will be able to save its life expectancy," he said.
> > As well as the Artemis, the Ariane was carrying a Japanese BSAT-2B
> > satellite, for direct broadcast television.
> >
> > Luton expressed "regrets to our clients" and said an investigation had
> > already begun.
> >
> > European Space Agency officials are optimistic that the orbit could be
> > corrected.
> > "We will attempt to place our satellite in a secure position," Claudio
> > Mastracci, ESA Applications Director, told reporters.
> >
> >
> > Both satellites were launched from French Guiana on board
> Western Europe's
> > new generation Ariane-5 rocket.
> >
> > Eight of Ariane's 141 missions have failed since the Ariane
> > programme began
> > in 1979.
> >
> > Thursday's flight was the first time an Ariane rocket had malfunctioned
> > since Ariane-5's maiden test flight exploded 37 seconds after
> > launch in 1996.
> >
> > The next scheduled launch of a European rocket is due on August
> > 23, when an
> > Ariane 4 will carry an Intelsat-902 telecoms satellite into space.
> >
> > Arianespace, the commercial arm of the 13-nation ESA, has
> orders to launch
> > a total of 46 satellites for the International Space Station in
> > comming years.
> >
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 9450 invoked from network); 13 Jul 2001 15:22:36 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 13 Jul 2001 15:22:36 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 15333 invoked from network); 13 Jul 2001 15:23:41 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 13 Jul 2001 15:23:41 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA23379; Fri, 13 Jul 2001 07:59:50 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 76112 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 13 Jul 2001 14:59:45          +0000
Received: from ns.vanguard.com (ns.VANGUARD.COM [192.175.173.31]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA23362 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 13 Jul 2001 07:59:45 -0700
Received: from eagle1.vanguard.com (eagle1.VANGUARD.COM [192.175.133.75]) by          ns.vanguard.com (Switch-2.1.0/Switch-2.1.0) with ESMTP id          f6DExhX00939 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 13 Jul 2001 10:59:43          -0400 (EDT)
Received: from vgi4mail.vanguard.com (vgi4mail.vanguard.com [10.254.65.16]) by          eagle1.vanguard.com (Switch-2.1.3/Switch-2.1.0) with SMTP id          f6DExf111926 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 13 Jul 2001 10:59:41          -0400 (EDT)
Received: by vgi4mail.vanguard.com(Lotus SMTP MTA v4.6.6  (890.1 7-16-1999))           id 85256A88.0052AC38 ; Fri, 13 Jul 2001 11:03:00 -0400
X-Lotus-FromDomain: VGINOTES
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Disposition: inline
Message-ID:  <85256A88.00519B90.00@vgi4mail.vanguard.com>
Date:         Fri, 13 Jul 2001 10:48:01 -0400
Reply-To: <Waysie_Atkins@VANGUARD.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <Waysie_Atkins@VANGUARD.COM>
Subject:      [AR] AR: CERAMICS
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

<Graphite and graphite/phenol still look the best of all to me.
<
<respectfully,
<al bradley


What exactly is phenolic?  I have some tubes made of it but what is it like
before?   Is it a liquid, a glue?  How does one use phenolic and graphite.  The
comments I've seen hear and elsewhere definitely make it sound good, definitely
something I'd lke to try if feasible.


Waysie

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 18381 invoked from network); 13 Jul 2001 15:31:34 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 13 Jul 2001 15:31:34 -0000
Received: (qmail 1610 invoked from network); 13 Jul 2001 15:32:53 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 13 Jul 2001 15:32:53 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA23526; Fri, 13 Jul 2001 08:15:48 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 76143 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 13 Jul 2001 15:14:28          +0000
Received: from spsystems.net (spsystems.net [209.47.149.227]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA23505 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Fri,          13 Jul 2001 08:14:27 -0700
Received: (from henry@localhost) by spsystems.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id LAA10480;          Fri, 13 Jul 2001 11:13:55 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010713111103.8813D-100000@spsystems.net>
Date:         Fri, 13 Jul 2001 11:13:55 -0400
Reply-To: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Ariane rocket fails to reach geosynchronous orbit
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <LPBBKJMJEOFKAMFJJNNHCEJACFAA.landofgrey@gnc.net>

On Fri, 13 Jul 2001, Matthew Travis wrote:
> A further problem, which may make both the comsat and the TV broadcast
> satellite write-offs as far as the insurance company is concerned is the
> fact that their orbits are not eqauatorial now, but rather, inclined 2.9
> degrees to the equator. That much inclination is difficult to compensate for
> with the ground stations... It also takes a huge amount
> of energy to effect an orbital plane change and is likely not an option
> using the onboard thrusters alone.

While plane changes normally are rather expensive, bear in mind that if
either of those satellites is going to reach geostationary orbit, it's
going to have to do a *big* apogee burn to raise perigee.  (That would
have been a requirement even without the launcher shortfall.)  Doing small
plane changes as part of big in-plane maneuvers is essentially free.

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 25859 invoked from network); 13 Jul 2001 16:06:40 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 13 Jul 2001 16:06:40 -0000
Received: (qmail 16919 invoked from network); 13 Jul 2001 16:08:21 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 13 Jul 2001 16:08:21 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA23641; Fri, 13 Jul 2001 08:41:28 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 76161 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 13 Jul 2001 15:40:18          +0000
Received: from dune.gnc.net (root@dune.gnc.net [207.203.72.4]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA23623 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri,          13 Jul 2001 08:40:18 -0700
Received: from beowulf (sw2-20.gnc.net [207.203.72.100]) by dune.gnc.net          (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id LAA15172 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri,          13 Jul 2001 11:40:16 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
Importance: Normal
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <LPBBKJMJEOFKAMFJJNNHKEJBCFAA.landofgrey@gnc.net>
Date:         Fri, 13 Jul 2001 11:39:56 -0400
Reply-To: <landofgrey@gnc.net>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Matthew Travis" <landofgrey@gnc.net>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Ariane rocket fails to reach geosynchronous orbit
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010713111103.8813D-100000@spsystems.net>

That's true. I'm being hypothetical here, and likely contriving a situation
that doesn't exist like it would if the satellites ended up with something
like a 15 degree inclination. There wouldn't likely be much of a concern to
make a small plan change when transitioning from the planned GTO into GEO.
But, since the satellites didn't reach the planned GTO, in fact, fell short
by about 50%, it makes it more difficult to accomodate a plane change. It is
likely that a series of many small burns will be necessary instead of or in
addition to one large apogee burn. Plane change maneuvers are less effective
with small burns (some people would disagree), although Gemini proved the
feasibility. Matters are complicated by the fact that the apogee has to be
raised. In a normal GTO, the apogee is already rather close to the GTO
apogee and so more energy goes into raising the perigee. It's easier to
correct the inclination when raising the perigee. This is the most efficient
transfer orbit, as Hohmann (sp? I'm terrible with names) showed. With these
satellites, a huge increase in the apogee is also needed, and that will take
even more energy. In reality, depending on the satellite and ground station,
the inclination deviation may be of little consequence, since most ground
stations are well within the circle of greatest signal strength anyway and a
little off won't hurt them. My point was that, if it's necessary, it may not
be practical in this situation. In fact, I can't think of a single time that
something like this has happened that the satellite was rescued by raising
the orbit and changing the plane. Of course, that may just as well be due to
the fact that the aerospace press focuses on the raising of the low orbit
and may just not care about the plane thing. Maybe it's been done many times
before. Oh, what do I know anyway. My experience with satops is limited to
preparing launch vehicles to launch them, not what to do with them after
launch. I thought my orbital mechanics classes were the most boring of all
in college. More like sleeping mechanics. And my experience in AMSAT is
still rather limited. A shame too. The Phase 3D integration lab is only a 40
minute drive from my house, but I didn't move here until after it was
shipped to Korou, so I never had a chance to participate. I have terrible
timing.

none of this has anything to do with amateur rocketry. oops. sorry.


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU]On
> Behalf Of Henry Spencer
>
> While plane changes normally are rather expensive, bear in mind that if
> either of those satellites is going to reach geostationary orbit, it's
> going to have to do a *big* apogee burn to raise perigee.  (That would
> have been a requirement even without the launcher shortfall.)  Doing small
> plane changes as part of big in-plane maneuvers is essentially free.
>
>                                                           Henry Spencer
>                                                        henry@spsystems.net
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 1491 invoked from network); 13 Jul 2001 16:47:56 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 13 Jul 2001 16:47:56 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 2444 invoked from network); 13 Jul 2001 16:49:24 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 13 Jul 2001 16:49:24 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA23779; Fri, 13 Jul 2001 09:23:12 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 76177 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 13 Jul 2001 16:22:31          +0000
Received: from ns.vanguard.com (ns.VANGUARD.COM [192.175.173.31]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA23761 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 13 Jul 2001 09:22:31 -0700
Received: from eagle1.vanguard.com (eagle1.VANGUARD.COM [192.175.133.75]) by          ns.vanguard.com (Switch-2.1.0/Switch-2.1.0) with ESMTP id          f6DGMUX03912 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 13 Jul 2001 12:22:30          -0400 (EDT)
Received: from vgi4mail.vanguard.com (vgi4mail.vanguard.com [10.254.65.16]) by          eagle1.vanguard.com (Switch-2.1.3/Switch-2.1.0) with SMTP id          f6DGMS116339 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 13 Jul 2001 12:22:28          -0400 (EDT)
Received: by vgi4mail.vanguard.com(Lotus SMTP MTA v4.6.6  (890.1 7-16-1999))           id 85256A88.005A40BA ; Fri, 13 Jul 2001 12:25:48 -0400
X-Lotus-FromDomain: VGINOTES
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Disposition: inline
Message-ID:  <85256A88.0059B597.00@vgi4mail.vanguard.com>
Date:         Fri, 13 Jul 2001 12:16:31 -0400
Reply-To: <Waysie_Atkins@VANGUARD.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <Waysie_Atkins@VANGUARD.COM>
Subject:      [AR] Vehicle configurations
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

<   I've thought about this issue a whole lot, and come to the
<conclusion that ballistic parachutes are probably an adequate backup.


Personally, I don't see why you wouldn't just use them as the primary recovery
method.  Lighter than wings, no fuel required, very reliable, backups are easy
and light weight, they are steerable (combined with guided ballistic reentry
prior to chute deployment you could probably land at your takeoff site if
sub-orbital),.   They would withstand any weather conditions you'd actually be
willing to launch/land in(esp sub-orbital where there's not enough time for the
weather to change) and can provide a soft touch down.  You could even add a
conventional engine if you wanted to give it 'hover' time and multiple landing
attempts (though probably not neccessary given the low landing speeds) or
additional ground range.  And they don't seriously affect your overall design
like wings or rotors. Not to mention that they have a long history of successful
use, not much new that needs to be devoloped.

IMHO,

Waysie

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 2719 invoked from network); 13 Jul 2001 17:14:36 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 13 Jul 2001 17:14:36 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 15643 invoked from network); 13 Jul 2001 17:15:11 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 13 Jul 2001 17:15:11 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA23994; Fri, 13 Jul 2001 10:11:27 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 76209 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 13 Jul 2001 17:09:20          +0000
Received: from ns.vanguard.com (ns.VANGUARD.COM [192.175.173.31]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA23970 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 13 Jul 2001 10:09:19 -0700
Received: from eagle1.vanguard.com (eagle1.VANGUARD.COM [192.175.133.75]) by          ns.vanguard.com (Switch-2.1.0/Switch-2.1.0) with ESMTP id          f6DH9IX18063 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 13 Jul 2001 13:09:18          -0400 (EDT)
Received: from vgi4mail.vanguard.com (vgi4mail.vanguard.com [10.254.65.16]) by          eagle1.vanguard.com (Switch-2.1.3/Switch-2.1.0) with SMTP id          f6DH9H101748 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 13 Jul 2001 13:09:17          -0400 (EDT)
Received: by vgi4mail.vanguard.com(Lotus SMTP MTA v4.6.6  (890.1 7-16-1999))           id 85256A88.005E8834 ; Fri, 13 Jul 2001 13:12:32 -0400
X-Lotus-FromDomain: VGINOTES
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Disposition: inline
Message-ID:  <85256A88.005D7D7C.00@vgi4mail.vanguard.com>
Date:         Fri, 13 Jul 2001 12:57:48 -0400
Reply-To: <Waysie_Atkins@VANGUARD.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <Waysie_Atkins@VANGUARD.COM>
Subject:      [AR] BALLUTES- BRIAN FEENEY
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Brian, can I take it from your exerpt below that your ballute opens from the aft
end of the vehicle as it re-enters aft first, and is somehow fixed to that end
of the craft, or am I misanalyzing the statement?

>Our ballute provides an existing airbag so no landing gear.


Thanks,

Waysie

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 15437 invoked from network); 13 Jul 2001 17:58:13 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 13 Jul 2001 17:58:13 -0000
Received: (qmail 7042 invoked from network); 13 Jul 2001 17:59:53 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 13 Jul 2001 17:59:53 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA24253; Fri, 13 Jul 2001 10:44:24 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 76233 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 13 Jul 2001 17:43:00          +0000
Received: from tomts7-srv.bellnexxia.net (tomts7.bellnexxia.net          [209.226.175.40]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA24234          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 13 Jul 2001 10:43:00 -0700
Received: from station1 ([216.209.40.84]) by tomts7-srv.bellnexxia.net          (InterMail vM.4.01.03.16 201-229-121-116-20010115) with SMTP id          <20010713173830.VMKG6125.tomts7-srv.bellnexxia.net@station1>; Fri, 13          Jul 2001 13:38:30 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
Importance: Normal
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <NFBBKADEMLBLIEKNLLEPOEMPCCAA.bfeeney@davinciproject.com>
Date:         Fri, 13 Jul 2001 13:38:29 -0500
Reply-To: "Brian Feeney" <bfeeney@DAVINCIPROJECT.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Brian Feeney" <bfeeney@DAVINCIPROJECT.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] BALLUTES- BRIAN FEENEY
Comments: To: Waysie_Atkins@VANGUARD.COM
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <85256A88.005D7D7C.00@vgi4mail.vanguard.com>

>Brian, can I take it from your exerpt below that your ballute opens from
the aft
>end of the vehicle as it re-enters aft first, and is somehow fixed to that
end
>of the craft, or am I misanalyzing the statement?

>>Our ballute provides an existing airbag so no landing gear.

Yes you are correct. There are actually 2 parts to the ballute.

The first and main large conical section inflates from the base up and
around the rocket. The second ballute section inflates using a half
hemisphere unfolding technique to clamshell around, over, the engines. It
inflates to a higher pressure and presses up against a flat area on the base
of the rocket. It is a double wall and derives its shape from the gore or
sectional cuts of the cone.

Cheers,
Brian
------------------
Brian Feeney
The da Vinci Project
65 Carl Hall Road,Downsview Park,
Toronto, Ontario, Canada, M3K 2B6
tel: 416.631.6540
bfeeney@davinciproject.com
http://www.davinciproject.com

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 20382 invoked from network); 13 Jul 2001 18:32:57 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 13 Jul 2001 18:32:57 -0000
Received: (qmail 12113 invoked from network); 13 Jul 2001 18:34:23 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 13 Jul 2001 18:34:23 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA24397; Fri, 13 Jul 2001 11:28:03 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 76251 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 13 Jul 2001 18:27:51          +0000
Received: from spsystems.net (spsystems.net [209.47.149.227]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA24380 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Fri,          13 Jul 2001 11:27:50 -0700
Received: (from henry@localhost) by spsystems.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id OAA12566;          Fri, 13 Jul 2001 14:27:05 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010713141920.11275B-100000@spsystems.net>
Date:         Fri, 13 Jul 2001 14:27:04 -0400
Reply-To: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Ariane rocket fails to reach geosynchronous orbit
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <LPBBKJMJEOFKAMFJJNNHKEJBCFAA.landofgrey@gnc.net>

On Fri, 13 Jul 2001, Matthew Travis wrote:
> But, since the satellites didn't reach the planned GTO, in fact, fell short
> by about 50%, it makes it more difficult to accomodate a plane change.

Not really, except insofar as they may have trouble reaching GSO at all.

> It is
> likely that a series of many small burns will be necessary instead of or in
> addition to one large apogee burn. Plane change maneuvers are less effective
> with small burns...

No, not if you do each of N small burns as 1/Nth of the large burn.  You
can piggyback a small inclination change on a big energy change just as
effectively that way as with one large burn.  (In fact, spacecraft with
liquid-fuel apogee motors usually do multiple burns rather than a single
large burn; I was oversimplifying.)

> ...With these
> satellites, a huge increase in the apogee is also needed, and that will take
> even more energy.

Yes, but that mostly affects whether they can reach GSO at all.  If they
can raise apogee to a normal GTO, and still have enough fuel left over to
do the normal GTO-to-GSO perigee raising, then the plane change goes in as
part of the perigee raising just as it normally would.  *Assuming* that
they can reach GSO at all, they have no more difficulty with the plane
change than they would have had if everything had gone perfectly.

> ...In fact, I can't think of a single time that
> something like this has happened that the satellite was rescued by raising
> the orbit and changing the plane.

Sure it has.  This sort of shortfall-plus-recovery has happened several
times to launches from the Cape, which *all* have to do a *big* plane
change as part of their perigee raising.  As folks have already noted,
TDRS-1 is an obvious example.

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 20213 invoked from network); 13 Jul 2001 19:12:06 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 13 Jul 2001 19:12:06 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 29966 invoked from network); 13 Jul 2001 19:13:32 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 13 Jul 2001 19:13:32 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA24605; Fri, 13 Jul 2001 12:09:56 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 76275 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 13 Jul 2001 19:09:53          +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (f69.law3.hotmail.com [209.185.241.69]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA24588 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Fri, 13 Jul 2001 12:09:52 -0700
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Fri,          13 Jul 2001 12:09:22 -0700
Received: from 213.224.83.102 by lw3fd.law3.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Fri, 13          Jul 2001 19:09:22 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [213.224.83.102]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 13 Jul 2001 19:09:22.0596 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[53408E40:01C10BCF]
Message-ID:  <F696h8U4K2TMdaoIIC000011891@hotmail.com>
Date:         Fri, 13 Jul 2001 19:09:53 +0000
Reply-To: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] [EE]: Decapsulation
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

The nitric acid 'll dissolve the circuit & component metals inside the
capsule. What am I missing? Gold recuperation?

There are agressive organic solvent combinations for sale which can dissolve
the polymer of IC's for instance. Without destroying the chip? Dunno. I
tried such liquids years ago trying to assemble tiny circuits with the chips
but it took too long_I soon lost interest.

jd
_________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 21732 invoked from network); 13 Jul 2001 19:18:57 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 13 Jul 2001 19:18:57 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 4668 invoked from network); 13 Jul 2001 19:20:16 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 13 Jul 2001 19:20:16 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA24747; Fri, 13 Jul 2001 12:16:43 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 76283 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 13 Jul 2001 19:16:34          +0000
Received: from ns.vanguard.com (ns.VANGUARD.COM [192.175.173.31]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA24729 for          <ARocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 13 Jul 2001 12:16:34 -0700
Received: from eagle1.vanguard.com (eagle1.VANGUARD.COM [192.175.133.75]) by          ns.vanguard.com (Switch-2.1.0/Switch-2.1.0) with ESMTP id          f6DJGXX01343 for <ARocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 13 Jul 2001 15:16:33          -0400 (EDT)
Received: from vgi4mail.vanguard.com (vgi4mail.vanguard.com [10.254.65.16]) by          eagle1.vanguard.com (Switch-2.1.3/Switch-2.1.0) with SMTP id          f6DJGW118898 for <ARocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 13 Jul 2001 15:16:32          -0400 (EDT)
Received: by vgi4mail.vanguard.com(Lotus SMTP MTA v4.6.6  (890.1 7-16-1999))           id 85256A88.006A305C ; Fri, 13 Jul 2001 15:19:51 -0400
X-Lotus-FromDomain: VGINOTES
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Disposition: inline
Message-ID:  <85256A88.006A0671.00@vgi4mail.vanguard.com>
Date:         Fri, 13 Jul 2001 15:14:42 -0400
Reply-To: <Waysie_Atkins@VANGUARD.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <Waysie_Atkins@VANGUARD.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Baikal/Angara
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

can almost imagine surviving a spacesuited re-entry riding your heat shield
alone - if you can but keep it stable ! :-)

Has the makings of a nice new extreme sport!


Something I've thought of ever since reading of Joseph Kittinger's experiments
and jumps.   Seems to me orbital jumps would have too much speed too lose, but
to bail from a balloon or s/o vehicle...............

(perhaps a sucessor to the X-38?  ;-)



Waysie

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 27343 invoked from network); 13 Jul 2001 19:20:08 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 13 Jul 2001 19:20:08 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 9734 invoked from network); 13 Jul 2001 19:21:34 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 13 Jul 2001 19:21:34 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA24809; Fri, 13 Jul 2001 12:18:17 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 76291 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 13 Jul 2001 19:18:16          +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (f103.law3.hotmail.com [209.185.241.103]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA24792 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Fri, 13 Jul 2001 12:18:16 -0700
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Fri,          13 Jul 2001 12:17:45 -0700
Received: from 213.224.83.102 by lw3fd.law3.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Fri, 13          Jul 2001 19:17:45 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [213.224.83.102]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 13 Jul 2001 19:17:45.0964 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[7F486AC0:01C10BD0]
Message-ID:  <F103mWkXn4jaqFmsJrj00013884@hotmail.com>
Date:         Fri, 13 Jul 2001 19:18:16 +0000
Reply-To: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Japanese Amateurs Assist Govt. Prototype
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Could not download the movie so far but the sound of the LH2/LOX engine was
nasty. Very high pressure noise. Yes I saw the pic of the ISAS cone thing as
emailed previously.

jd

>From: Jim Bowery <jabowery@WWC.COM>
>Reply-To: Jim Bowery <jabowery@WWC.COM>
>To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
>Subject: [AR] Japanese Amateurs Assist Govt. Prototype
>Date: Wed, 11 Jul 2001 14:14:10 -0700
>
>See the movie at:
>http://www.isas.ac.jp/dtc/saisiyo/0625rvt6-42.mov
>
>"According to Space News, the vertical-takeoff-vertical-landing vehicle was
>built on an annual budget of $400k and assisted by volunteers from the
>Japan
>Rocket Society."
>http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=01/07/11/1613255
>
>PS: To avoid any confusion, I'm not here advocating that Americans do
>things
>the way the Japanese do them.

_________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 29500 invoked from network); 13 Jul 2001 19:53:13 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 13 Jul 2001 19:53:13 -0000
Received: (qmail 3052 invoked from network); 13 Jul 2001 19:54:53 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 13 Jul 2001 19:54:53 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA25026; Fri, 13 Jul 2001 12:50:53 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 76311 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 13 Jul 2001 19:50:46          +0000
Received: from tomts8-srv.bellnexxia.net (tomts8.bellnexxia.net          [209.226.175.52]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA25009          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 13 Jul 2001 12:50:46 -0700
Received: from station1 ([216.209.40.84]) by tomts8-srv.bellnexxia.net          (InterMail vM.4.01.03.16 201-229-121-116-20010115) with SMTP id          <20010713195015.WUZQ3306.tomts8-srv.bellnexxia.net@station1>; Fri, 13          Jul 2001 15:50:15 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
Importance: Normal
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <NFBBKADEMLBLIEKNLLEPOENBCCAA.bfeeney@davinciproject.com>
Date:         Fri, 13 Jul 2001 15:50:14 -0500
Reply-To: "Brian Feeney" <bfeeney@DAVINCIPROJECT.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Brian Feeney" <bfeeney@DAVINCIPROJECT.COM>
Subject:      [AR] ballutes and space jumps
Comments: To: Waysie_Atkins@VANGUARD.COM
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <85256A88.006A0671.00@vgi4mail.vanguard.com>

Using ballutes and other forms of protection to bring space suited
astronauts in from orbital velocity is not a new idea. In fact it's been
explored in some detail, most notably in the 60's and early 70's. It is
doable. The other Canadian Team in the X Prize Competition, the Canadian
Arrow  http://www.canadianarrow.com  has a V2 rocket (reengineered) that
they want to build. They've actually put a full scale mock-up on the local
air show circuit, Pics on their site. They want to pursue the space jump
market from 100 kms altitude.

There are currently 4 teams from around the world, one of them Canadian that
are attempting to break Kittinger's record with jumps from a balloon at
130,000 feet.

Cheers,
Brian
------------------
Brian Feeney
The da Vinci Project
65 Carl Hall Road,Downsview Park,
Toronto, Ontario, Canada, M3K 2B6
tel: 416.631.6540
bfeeney@davinciproject.com
http://www.davinciproject.com

-----Original Message-----
From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU]On
Behalf Of Waysie_Atkins@VANGUARD.COM
Sent: Friday, July 13, 2001 2:15 PM
To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
Subject: Re: [AR] Baikal/Angara



can almost imagine surviving a spacesuited re-entry riding your heat shield
alone - if you can but keep it stable ! :-)

Has the makings of a nice new extreme sport!


Something I've thought of ever since reading of Joseph Kittinger's
experiments
and jumps.   Seems to me orbital jumps would have too much speed too lose,
but
to bail from a balloon or s/o vehicle...............

(perhaps a sucessor to the X-38?  ;-)



Waysie

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 24599 invoked from network); 13 Jul 2001 19:58:43 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 13 Jul 2001 19:58:43 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 26306 invoked from network); 13 Jul 2001 20:00:09 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 13 Jul 2001 20:00:09 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA25087; Fri, 13 Jul 2001 12:56:42 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 76322 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 13 Jul 2001 19:56:40          +0000
Received: from ns.vanguard.com (ns.VANGUARD.COM [192.175.173.31]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA25070 for          <arocket@ITC.uci.edu>; Fri, 13 Jul 2001 12:56:40 -0700
Received: from eagle1.vanguard.com (eagle1.VANGUARD.COM [192.175.133.75]) by          ns.vanguard.com (Switch-2.1.0/Switch-2.1.0) with ESMTP id          f6DJucX13413 for <arocket@ITC.uci.edu>; Fri, 13 Jul 2001 15:56:39          -0400 (EDT)
Received: from vgi4mail.vanguard.com (vgi4mail.vanguard.com [10.254.65.16]) by          eagle1.vanguard.com (Switch-2.1.3/Switch-2.1.0) with SMTP id          f6DJua101672 for <arocket@ITC.uci.edu>; Fri, 13 Jul 2001 15:56:37          -0400 (EDT)
Received: by vgi4mail.vanguard.com(Lotus SMTP MTA v4.6.6  (890.1 7-16-1999))           id 85256A88.006DDB6A ; Fri, 13 Jul 2001 15:59:55 -0400
X-Lotus-FromDomain: VGINOTES
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Disposition: inline
Message-ID:  <85256A88.006CFA2A.00@vgi4mail.vanguard.com>
Date:         Fri, 13 Jul 2001 15:46:55 -0400
Reply-To: <Waysie_Atkins@VANGUARD.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <Waysie_Atkins@VANGUARD.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] CERAMICS
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

<http://www.boedeker.com/macor_p.htm
<
<or Cotronics products like:
<
<http://www.cotronicscorp.thomasregister.com/olc/cotronicscorp/home.htm
<
<
<jd



Great Links!!!!!
esp Cotroniics


Many thanks

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 20972 invoked from network); 13 Jul 2001 20:11:06 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 13 Jul 2001 20:11:06 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 3024 invoked from network); 13 Jul 2001 20:12:28 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 13 Jul 2001 20:12:28 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA25151; Fri, 13 Jul 2001 13:08:39 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 76330 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 13 Jul 2001 20:08:32          +0000
Received: from femail19.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail19.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.0.95.128]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA25132          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 13 Jul 2001 13:08:32 -0700
Received: from c396957-b.home.net ([24.17.249.10]) by          femail19.sdc1.sfba.home.com (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20          201-229-121-120-20010223) with ESMTP id          <20010713200831.GILB27041.femail19.sdc1.sfba.home.com@c396957-b.home.net> for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 13          Jul 2001 13:08:31 -0700
X-Sender: spiegl@mail
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <5.1.0.14.2.20010713150246.00ac6d38@mail>
Date:         Fri, 13 Jul 2001 15:08:38 -0500
Reply-To: "Mark C Spiegl" <spiegl@HOME.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Mark C Spiegl" <spiegl@HOME.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] CERAMICS
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <F26IiGXix4A2DreBBsQ00019899@hotmail.com>

> I'd rather cast my nozzle in an Al retainer than coat an Al nozzle. Perhaps
> having a metal skeleton (metal or glass fibres) inside the ceramics could
> provide structural strength for larger diameters.

My personal favorite is 3xx Stainless Steel nozzles. You just have to
thread the SS, the motor case, and screw the two together. No O-rings or
anything are needed. Just screw the parts together. Shezam. We used to use
a wrap of plumbers Teflon tape just for luck, but I'm not sure it was
needed.

I'm not an expert here, but I speculate that SS has enough thermal
hysteresis that it doesn't get failure-level hot in short burn time
motors. Yes it gets hot.. but not TOO hot.

And naturally :) you put the threads on the outside of the motor case so
that when the parts do heat, they expand _into_ the SS nozzle and the
part-fit actually tightens. Cases of any length can be cut on a small
lathe this way.

Of course Tripoli-X will have a cow if they see your 10lb SS nozzle. :(
Just remember to put enough tape on the ass-end of the rocket to keep
your secret. Ooooo... Tch tch...

The real downside is that scavenge graphite is dirt cheap right now; SS is
very expensive in comparison to the point of being almost stupid to use.

This sounds silly, but don't ignore the hardwoods either. Certainly they
have problems, but they work better than common sense would tell.
Cheap and dirty in a pinch.


--MCS

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 29007 invoked from network); 13 Jul 2001 20:19:36 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 13 Jul 2001 20:19:36 -0000
Received: (qmail 9442 invoked from network); 13 Jul 2001 20:21:16 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 13 Jul 2001 20:21:16 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA25206; Fri, 13 Jul 2001 13:16:24 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 76342 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 13 Jul 2001 20:16:22          +0000
Received: from tomts14-srv.bellnexxia.net (tomts14.bellnexxia.net          [209.226.175.35]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA25189          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 13 Jul 2001 13:16:22 -0700
Received: from station1 ([216.209.40.84]) by tomts14-srv.bellnexxia.net          (InterMail vM.4.01.03.16 201-229-121-116-20010115) with SMTP id          <20010713201551.BLUZ1268.tomts14-srv.bellnexxia.net@station1> for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 13 Jul 2001 16:15:51 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
Importance: Normal
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <NFBBKADEMLBLIEKNLLEPIENCCCAA.bfeeney@davinciproject.com>
Date:         Fri, 13 Jul 2001 16:15:51 -0500
Reply-To: "Brian Feeney" <bfeeney@DAVINCIPROJECT.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Brian Feeney" <bfeeney@DAVINCIPROJECT.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] ballutes and space jumps
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <NFBBKADEMLBLIEKNLLEPOENBCCAA.bfeeney@davinciproject.com>

Let me correct myself. Michelle Fournier is from France and plans to attempt
his jump in Canada.

>There are currently 4 teams from around the world, one of them Canadian
that
>are attempting to break Kittinger's record with jumps from a balloon at
>130,000 feet.

Cheers,
Brian

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 15486 invoked from network); 13 Jul 2001 20:43:48 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 13 Jul 2001 20:43:48 -0000
Received: (qmail 26477 invoked from network); 13 Jul 2001 20:44:30 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 13 Jul 2001 20:44:30 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA25287; Fri, 13 Jul 2001 13:39:51 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 76354 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 13 Jul 2001 20:39:48          +0000
Received: from dune.gnc.net (root@dune.gnc.net [207.203.72.4]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA25270 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri,          13 Jul 2001 13:39:48 -0700
Received: from beowulf (sw2-2.gnc.net [207.203.72.82]) by dune.gnc.net          (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id QAA22381 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri,          13 Jul 2001 16:39:48 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
Importance: Normal
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <LPBBKJMJEOFKAMFJJNNHEEJECFAA.landofgrey@gnc.net>
Date:         Fri, 13 Jul 2001 16:39:51 -0400
Reply-To: <landofgrey@gnc.net>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Matthew Travis" <landofgrey@gnc.net>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Ariane rocket fails to reach geosynchronous orbit
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010713141920.11275B-100000@spsystems.net>

Working at the Cape, I would think I'd be able to recall, but, the fact is,
who the heck would care to remember such minutiae. Plane changes during
orbital insertion are common with launches from the Eastern Range. Every
comsat has to perform one. And every one of the few number of polar
spacecraft has had to dogleg around the peninsula. And every planetary and
deep space probe has to do so as well. I would assume, taking TDRS-1 as an
example, that, since a plane change is part of the overall insertion
process, that if the orbital insertion fell short, the satellite would also
likely be left out of plane somewhat. But that depends on when the plane
change took place vs. the failure. I just don't remember specifically it
being done after a failure. I wassn't trying to say it hasn't been done.

Matt

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU]On
> Behalf Of Henry Spencer
> Sent: Friday, July 13, 2001 2:27 PM
> To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
> Subject: Re: [AR] Ariane rocket fails to reach geosynchronous orbit
>
> Sure it has.  This sort of shortfall-plus-recovery has happened several
> times to launches from the Cape, which *all* have to do a *big* plane
> change as part of their perigee raising.  As folks have already noted,
> TDRS-1 is an obvious example.
>
>                                                           Henry Spencer
>                                                        henry@spsystems.net
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 26004 invoked from network); 13 Jul 2001 21:46:31 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 13 Jul 2001 21:46:31 -0000
Received: (qmail 16034 invoked from network); 13 Jul 2001 21:47:42 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 13 Jul 2001 21:47:42 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA25510; Fri, 13 Jul 2001 14:29:44 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 76387 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 13 Jul 2001 21:29:39          +0000
Received: from dune.gnc.net (root@dune.gnc.net [207.203.72.4]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA25493 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri,          13 Jul 2001 14:29:38 -0700
Received: from beowulf (sw2-2.gnc.net [207.203.72.82]) by dune.gnc.net          (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id RAA23701 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri,          13 Jul 2001 17:29:38 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
Importance: Normal
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <LPBBKJMJEOFKAMFJJNNHAEJFCFAA.landofgrey@gnc.net>
Date:         Fri, 13 Jul 2001 17:29:40 -0400
Reply-To: <landofgrey@gnc.net>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Matthew Travis" <landofgrey@gnc.net>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Ariane rocket fails to reach geosynchronous orbit
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010713141920.11275B-100000@spsystems.net>

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU]On
> Behalf Of Henry Spencer
> Sent: Friday, July 13, 2001 2:27 PM
> To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
> Subject: Re: [AR] Ariane rocket fails to reach geosynchronous orbit

> Not really, except insofar as they may have trouble reaching GSO at all.

It makes it more difficult for precisely the same reason that they may not
be able to get to geoynch at all. Perhaps I should have said
"fuel-intensive". Same difference.

> No, not if you do each of N small burns as 1/Nth of the large burn.  You
> can piggyback a small inclination change on a big energy change just as
> effectively that way as with one large burn.  (In fact, spacecraft with
> liquid-fuel apogee motors usually do multiple burns rather than a single
> large burn; I was oversimplifying.)

In theory, you're right. The theoretical energy requirements are the same.
In practice, you end up using significantly more fuel. In the real world,
Inefficiencies and losses compound more greatly, as well as guidance error
factors. Additionally, for a geosynch orbit, added inclination causes
oribtal drift (apparent drift over the ground track). Not only does there
need to be a plane change maneuver, but that drift may need to be made up
for. Obviously, this is a problem that gets worse with time and another
reason why simply piggybacking small plane changes over a number of burns
costs more than making the adjustment all at once. This is made more
complicated by the fact that the preferred location (in the orbit) for a
plane change maneuver may or may not be at the same location as for an
altitude changing burn, though that is something that can be adjusted.

The IUS, as well as PAM-D present their own complications in that they are
solid-fueled. The IUS performs  only two burns. There's much less
flexibility there than with something such as the Centaur.

Some kick motors may not be able to do a plane change at all, since they may
not be able to do thrust vectoring. Then the spacecraft would need to be
re-oriented in such a way that the firing of the kick motor effects the
change, but if the eccentricity is too great, this may not be possible, due
to sun angles and solar array orientation. This may require waiting until
the Earth revolved around the Sun so that the satellite can be pointed and
still maintain an acceptable angle. Or it may just require timing the
burn(s) in such a way that they occur at a place in the orbit where the
angle will be acceptable. Unfortunately, the sateelite may not have enough
of a lifetime for drawing out the maneuvers that way.

> Yes, but that mostly affects whether they can reach GSO at all.  If they
> can raise apogee to a normal GTO, and still have enough fuel left over to
> do the normal GTO-to-GSO perigee raising, then the plane change goes in as
> part of the perigee raising just as it normally would.  *Assuming* that
> they can reach GSO at all, they have no more difficulty with the plane
> change than they would have had if everything had gone perfectly.

That was part of my point. they may *not* have the fuel to get to geosynch
at all. Or they may have neough to get to geosynch but not do all/any of the
plane change. On a purely hypothetical (theoretical? whatever) note, we are
assuming that the plane change was part of the normal plan anyway.
Obviously, a plane change maneuver was part of the original plan in this
case. However, if the original orbital inclination is less than the
achieved, and the desired is geosynch, then a plane change maneuver beyond
what was already budgeted for would be required. In fact, this happened just
this year, and the satellite was written off. It was written off for a
number of reasons, but basically, the satellite was in a useless orbit that
couldn't be completely corrected.

>
> > ...In fact, I can't think of a single time that
> > something like this has happened that the satellite was rescued
> by raising
> > the orbit and changing the plane.
>
> Sure it has.  This sort of shortfall-plus-recovery has happened several
> times to launches from the Cape, which *all* have to do a *big* plane
> change as part of their perigee raising.  As folks have already noted,
> TDRS-1 is an obvious example.

What you say is obviously correct. I just can't think of any specifics (such
and such spacecraft required x amount of plane change, etc.) and so didn't
want to try pulling something out of the air. I'm not much for trivia. I had
my hands on the station airlock before it went to the pad and took pictures
from the white room to discovery. I was in a conference in the Complex 14
blockhouse (it was converted to a conference room). And I volunteer at the
Air Force Space Museum. I work every day with the present and future and
have little time or desire learn much historical minutiae. What I do have a
passion for is the history of the space coast and early days at the Cape.
But that's not about satellites, orbital mechanics and the like; it's more
about people and culture. If I do need to know something, I can go to the
KSC archives and look it up. Funny thing, I rarely need to go there.

One case I know of, after actually thinking about it, is the Intelsat
rescued by Endeavour about 10 years ago. Also, the other shuttle-based
comsat rescues. However, these are unique in that they got fitted with new
kick motors. Doing a plane change was not unreasonable. I do know that the
hughes satellites rescued in 1985 could not have made it to geosynch and
made a plane change and still had enough fuel to perform on orbit
sufficiently long.

Matt

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 5964 invoked from network); 13 Jul 2001 21:48:42 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 13 Jul 2001 21:48:42 -0000
Received: (qmail 17238 invoked from network); 13 Jul 2001 21:50:09 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 13 Jul 2001 21:50:09 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA25620; Fri, 13 Jul 2001 14:44:59 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 76401 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 13 Jul 2001 21:44:51          +0000
Received: from dune.gnc.net (root@dune.gnc.net [207.203.72.4]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA25603 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri,          13 Jul 2001 14:44:51 -0700
Received: from beowulf (sw2-2.gnc.net [207.203.72.82]) by dune.gnc.net          (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id RAA24022 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri,          13 Jul 2001 17:44:51 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
Importance: Normal
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <LPBBKJMJEOFKAMFJJNNHIEJFCFAA.landofgrey@gnc.net>
Date:         Fri, 13 Jul 2001 17:44:53 -0400
Reply-To: <landofgrey@gnc.net>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Matthew Travis" <landofgrey@gnc.net>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Ariane rocket fails to reach geosynchronous orbit              (UPDATE)
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010713141920.11275B-100000@spsystems.net>

This is from Orbital Report:

"Arianespace's seventh Ariane 5G launch suffered from low thrust on its
upper stage resulting in its dual payload being injected in a lower orbit
than intended. According to preliminary analysis of telemetry recordings,
the flight was nominal until the ignition of the Astrium-built EPS storable
propellant upper stage. The pressure-fed Aestus engine only provided some
80% of its planned 29-kN thrust. Although the onboard computer tried to
compensate for the low performance, the stage eventually shutdown on its
own, 80 seconds earlier than planned, presumably upon depletion of one of
its hypergolic propellants. The two satellites were thus released into a 592
x 17,528 km orbit, inclined 2.9? instead of the targeted 858 x 35,853 km
geostationary transfer orbit with a 2? inclination. An independent
investigation board will be named on July 16 and is expected to release a
preliminay report by early August.

Meanwhile, the two customers for this flight, the European Space Agency and
Orbital Sciences Corp., are studying recovery plans for their satellites.
ESA's Artemis, which incorporates both a chemical bipropellant propulsion
system (Astrium GmbH 400-kN S400 thruster and 1,538 kg of propellant) and an
experimental ion propulsion system (Astrium Ltd. EITA and Astrium GmbH RITA
thrusters), is likely to be able to reach geostationary orbit. However,
several plans for 'alternative' missions from lower orbits are also under
study. OSC is more concerned by the fate of the BSAT-2b satellite it had to
deliver in orbit to Broadcasting satellite Corp. of Japan (B-SAT). According
to J. R. Thompson, Orbital's president & COO, it is not sure yet that the
satellite, which incorporates a Thiokol Star 30 solid kick motor, can reach
the geostationary orbit and still have enough propellant left for any
"meaningful lifetime." The insurance coverage for Artemis is reportedly
worth a mere US$48 million, mostly for its commercial L-band payload, while
BSAT-2b was insured for US$63 million.

Editor's note: Although the analysis of the telemetry readings have not
confirmed this scenario, it is considered likely that the EPS upper stage
suffered a propellant leak."

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 24301 invoked from network); 14 Jul 2001 00:10:02 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 14 Jul 2001 00:10:01 -0000
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 7275 invoked from network); 14 Jul 2001 00:11:20 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 14 Jul 2001 00:11:20 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA26469; Fri, 13 Jul 2001 17:04:40 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 76545 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 14 Jul 2001 00:03:55          +0000
Received: from web10501.mail.yahoo.com (web10501.mail.yahoo.com          [216.136.130.151]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id RAA26451          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 13 Jul 2001 17:03:54 -0700
Received: from [129.219.71.88] by web10501.mail.yahoo.com via HTTP; Fri, 13 Jul          2001 17:03:54 PDT
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <20010714000354.29683.qmail@web10501.mail.yahoo.com>
Date:         Fri, 13 Jul 2001 17:03:54 -0700
Reply-To: "Justin Pucci" <drrockit5150@YAHOO.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Justin Pucci" <drrockit5150@YAHOO.COM>
Subject:      [AR] 2001 JPC
Comments: To: Sean Baxendell <baxendell25@yahoo.com>,          Mark Clark <markclark2@mindspring.com>,          Chad Vincent Drago <drago@u.arizona.edu>,          John Paul Valente <FilmMakerJV@aol.com>,          Ron Zeppin <zipper@extremezone.com>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <004601c1064c$91bf5080$476e4a3d@athlon>

Hey guys,

Well, I just got back from the AIAA Joint Propulsion
Conference with lots of cool pics.  As requested by a
couple of you, I have posted them on my website rather
than bogging everyone down with attachments.  Let me
know what you think...and if it takes to long to load.

<www.public.asu.edu/~jpucci>

Go to the JPC2001 link on my main page.  Enjoy!!!

-->Justin Pucci

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail
http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 13880 invoked from network); 14 Jul 2001 00:27:51 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 14 Jul 2001 00:27:51 -0000
X-Priority: 3
Received: (qmail 15836 invoked from network); 14 Jul 2001 00:29:18 -0000
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 14 Jul 2001 00:29:18 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA26545; Fri, 13 Jul 2001 17:20:51 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 76558 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 14 Jul 2001 00:20:35          +0000
Received: from m1.jersey.juno.com (m1.jersey.juno.com [64.136.16.64]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA26528 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 13 Jul 2001 17:20:35 -0700
Received: from cookie.juno.com by cookie.juno.com for          <"H3WK6e6N+bsCVJQMHM9sZNGpNdVMMOpEofWA1r8X4zC5cG7g9fbWyA==">
Received: (from kc2csh@juno.com) by m1.jersey.juno.com (queuemail) id F993R5TR;          Fri, 13 Jul 2001 20:20:09 EDT
X-Mailer: Juno 4.0.11
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Juno-Line-Breaks: 0-2,4,6-10,15,22,30,33,38-40
X-Juno-Att: 0
X-Juno-RefParts: 0
Message-ID:  <20010713.202506.-3891241.1.kc2csh@juno.com>
Date:         Fri, 13 Jul 2001 20:18:03 -0400
Reply-To: <kc2csh@JUNO.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <kc2csh@JUNO.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Baikal/Angara
Comments: To: Azt28@aol.com
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

On Fri, 13 Jul 2001 12:30:36 EDT Azt28@aol.com writes:
> Jay,
>
> Do you think amateurs could build a ramjet powered aircraft? If yes,
how
> large? May be it could first be accelerated by a buch of sugar
boosters?
>
> Yvan Bozzonetti.
> azt28@aol.com
>
  My knowledge of ramjets is near zero, but off the shelf small turbos;
jet, prop, and fan; are fairly easily available to the R/c and
homebuilt/kitplane aviation markets, and that can certainly be used as a
foundation.  Building such engines I would put well beyond a realistic
amateur project.
  The basic premise is simply that to the extent that you can use
durable, air breathing engines and wings to overcome drag, gravity loss,
and etc., and impart some velocity, it makes for a substantially more
efficient means of getting payload repeatedly to the desired place if
that  place is orbit or beyond.  If you are simply looking for an up/down
flight, the benefits are less since part of the benefit is horizontal
velocity.
  There are many issues to be overcome in the R/c and kit areas, and
basically nobody has persued it much.  Velocities tend to be pretty low.
However, 30k ft altitude and 220 kts for a launch platform that could
then launch a 3-500 lb rocket seems to be something fairly easily
obtainable by amateurs by simply taking an off the shelf kitplane, making
minor mods, and converting to R/c.  If you'll settle for a 13k and
120knts jumpoff the options are within the scope of a 1 man, part time
project.
  Financially, its not as bad as you would think.  Kitplanes are not
cheap, but you are leaving out most of the expensive stuff, like
accomidation for humans and much of the pilot electronics.
  To some extent you are exploring virgin terratory with the
aircraft/rocket combo in an amateur environment in that you are making a
basic problem, a place to fly, even more complex because you now need a
site that will accomidate an aircraft, and places that do that, like
airports, are unlikely to be very receptive to this particular use.
  Its not something for the faint of heart to persue.

        Jay
________________________________________________________________
GET INTERNET ACCESS FROM JUNO!
Juno offers FREE or PREMIUM Internet access for less!
Join Juno today!  For your FREE software, visit:
http://dl.www.juno.com/get/tagj.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 5639 invoked from network); 14 Jul 2001 03:11:21 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 14 Jul 2001 03:11:21 -0000
Received: (qmail 25533 invoked from network); 14 Jul 2001 03:12:48 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 14 Jul 2001 03:12:48 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA27146; Fri, 13 Jul 2001 20:07:47 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 76614 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 14 Jul 2001 03:07:08          +0000
Received: from femail21.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail21.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.0.95.146]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA27128          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 13 Jul 2001 20:07:08 -0700
Received: from cc334751a ([65.13.214.65]) by femail21.sdc1.sfba.home.com          (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20 201-229-121-120-20010223) with SMTP id          <20010714030701.SILS552.femail21.sdc1.sfba.home.com@cc334751a>; Fri,          13 Jul 2001 20:07:01 -0700
References:  <20010714000354.29683.qmail@web10501.mail.yahoo.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2462.0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <014b01c10c11$eb555520$6401a8c0@home.com>
Date:         Fri, 13 Jul 2001 21:06:03 -0600
Reply-To: "Brian Kosko" <bkosko1@HOME.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Brian Kosko" <bkosko1@HOME.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] 2001 JPC
Comments: To: Justin Pucci <drrockit5150@YAHOO.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Justin,

Any good stuff on solid propellants? I'm an ASU guy myself, though a while
ago. I got my first taste of the Sonoran desert while blowing up stuff in
Yuma. My Army job was to test land mines! I liked the desert so much I went
to ASU after I got out.

We still get to the Phoenix area a lot. I'll look you up next time.

                                                                    Brian

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 24886 invoked from network); 14 Jul 2001 04:07:53 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 14 Jul 2001 04:07:53 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 13045 invoked from network); 14 Jul 2001 04:09:18 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 14 Jul 2001 04:09:18 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA27474; Fri, 13 Jul 2001 21:06:01 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 76665 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 14 Jul 2001 04:05:59          +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (f81.law3.hotmail.com [209.185.241.81]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA27457 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Fri, 13 Jul 2001 21:05:59 -0700
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Fri,          13 Jul 2001 21:05:28 -0700
Received: from 213.224.83.134 by lw3fd.law3.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Sat, 14          Jul 2001 04:05:28 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [213.224.83.134]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 14 Jul 2001 04:05:28.0779 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[37CA91B0:01C10C1A]
Message-ID:  <F811XvpFVjCRGryWtII00001dfd@hotmail.com>
Date:         Sat, 14 Jul 2001 04:05:59 +0000
Reply-To: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] 2001 JPC
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Boy, what great Vulcain 2 pics! Such detail is certainly not shown to public
in Vernon (near Paris) where they are manufactured. Seems the
resonator/injector is made of copper. Thanks.

jd


>From: Justin Pucci <drrockit5150@YAHOO.COM>
>Reply-To: Justin Pucci <drrockit5150@YAHOO.COM>
>To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
>Subject: [AR] 2001 JPC
>Date: Fri, 13 Jul 2001 17:03:54 -0700
>
>Hey guys,
>
>Well, I just got back from the AIAA Joint Propulsion
>Conference with lots of cool pics.  As requested by a
>couple of you, I have posted them on my website rather
>than bogging everyone down with attachments.  Let me
>know what you think...and if it takes to long to load.
>
><www.public.asu.edu/~jpucci>
>
>Go to the JPC2001 link on my main page.  Enjoy!!!
>
>-->Justin Pucci
>
>__________________________________________________
>Do You Yahoo!?
>Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail
>http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/

_________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 5805 invoked from network); 14 Jul 2001 04:18:13 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 14 Jul 2001 04:18:13 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 26379 invoked from network); 14 Jul 2001 04:19:19 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 14 Jul 2001 04:19:19 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA27527; Fri, 13 Jul 2001 21:14:14 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 76677 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 14 Jul 2001 04:14:07          +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (f140.law3.hotmail.com [209.185.241.140]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA27510 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Fri, 13 Jul 2001 21:14:07 -0700
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Fri,          13 Jul 2001 21:13:36 -0700
Received: from 213.224.83.134 by lw3fd.law3.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Sat, 14          Jul 2001 04:13:36 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [213.224.83.134]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 14 Jul 2001 04:13:36.0966 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[5AC5FE60:01C10C1B]
Message-ID:  <F140jY2ajJWCfgYu72C00008faf@hotmail.com>
Date:         Sat, 14 Jul 2001 04:14:07 +0000
Reply-To: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] ballutes and space jumps
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

BTW how high can a balloon go?

jd


>From: Brian Feeney <bfeeney@DAVINCIPROJECT.COM>
>Reply-To: Brian Feeney <bfeeney@DAVINCIPROJECT.COM>
>To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
>Subject: Re: [AR] ballutes and space jumps
>Date: Fri, 13 Jul 2001 16:15:51 -0500
>
>Let me correct myself. Michelle Fournier is from France and plans to
>attempt
>his jump in Canada.
>
> >There are currently 4 teams from around the world, one of them Canadian
>that
> >are attempting to break Kittinger's record with jumps from a balloon at
> >130,000 feet.
>
>Cheers,
>Brian

_________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 1636 invoked from network); 14 Jul 2001 04:24:49 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 14 Jul 2001 04:24:49 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 19039 invoked from network); 14 Jul 2001 04:26:15 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 14 Jul 2001 04:26:15 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA27576; Fri, 13 Jul 2001 21:22:32 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 76685 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 14 Jul 2001 04:21:43          +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (f27.law3.hotmail.com [209.185.241.27]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA27557 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Fri, 13 Jul 2001 21:21:42 -0700
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Fri,          13 Jul 2001 21:21:12 -0700
Received: from 213.224.83.27 by lw3fd.law3.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Sat, 14          Jul 2001 04:21:12 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [213.224.83.27]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 14 Jul 2001 04:21:12.0388 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[6A39E040:01C10C1C]
Message-ID:  <F27q7dg9ZD7G3Lbc1At00004093@hotmail.com>
Date:         Sat, 14 Jul 2001 04:21:43 +0000
Reply-To: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] CERAMICS
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Sure true all that. I just put in my 2c about what I heard about ceramics.
Guess such are intesting for tiny solid motors.
I could imagine a Macor nozzle to crack after very long burns. But since its
larger heat capacity such is unlikely to happen as, like you state burn
times are usually short.

jd


>From: Mark C Spiegl <spiegl@HOME.NET>
>Reply-To: Mark C Spiegl <spiegl@HOME.NET>
>To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
>Subject: Re: [AR] CERAMICS
>Date: Fri, 13 Jul 2001 15:08:38 -0500
>
> > I'd rather cast my nozzle in an Al retainer than coat an Al nozzle.
>Perhaps
> > having a metal skeleton (metal or glass fibres) inside the ceramics
>could
> > provide structural strength for larger diameters.
>
>My personal favorite is 3xx Stainless Steel nozzles. You just have to
>thread the SS, the motor case, and screw the two together. No O-rings or
>anything are needed. Just screw the parts together. Shezam. We used to use
>a wrap of plumbers Teflon tape just for luck, but I'm not sure it was
>needed.
>
>I'm not an expert here, but I speculate that SS has enough thermal
>hysteresis that it doesn't get failure-level hot in short burn time
>motors. Yes it gets hot.. but not TOO hot.
>
>And naturally :) you put the threads on the outside of the motor case so
>that when the parts do heat, they expand _into_ the SS nozzle and the
>part-fit actually tightens. Cases of any length can be cut on a small
>lathe this way.
>
>Of course Tripoli-X will have a cow if they see your 10lb SS nozzle. :(
>Just remember to put enough tape on the ass-end of the rocket to keep
>your secret. Ooooo... Tch tch...
>
>The real downside is that scavenge graphite is dirt cheap right now; SS is
>very expensive in comparison to the point of being almost stupid to use.
>
>This sounds silly, but don't ignore the hardwoods either. Certainly they
>have problems, but they work better than common sense would tell.
>Cheap and dirty in a pinch.
>
>
>--MCS

_________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 7467 invoked from network); 14 Jul 2001 05:19:45 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 14 Jul 2001 05:19:45 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 15748 invoked from network); 14 Jul 2001 05:21:13 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 14 Jul 2001 05:21:13 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA27834; Fri, 13 Jul 2001 22:17:33 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 76717 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 14 Jul 2001 05:17:22          +0000
Received: from cyclone.comcen.com.au (cyclone.comcen.com.au [203.23.236.100])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA27816 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Fri, 13 Jul 2001 22:17:11 -0700
Received: (from nobody@localhost) by cyclone.comcen.com.au (8.11.1/8.11.1) id          f6E5GxV80569 for arocket@itc.uci.edu; Sat, 14 Jul 2001 15:16:59 +1000          (EST) (envelope-from pkelly@comcen.com.au)
X-Authentication-Warning: cyclone.comcen.com.au: nobody set sender to                         pkelly@comcen.com.au using -f
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
User-Agent: IMP/PHP IMAP webmail program 2.2.3
X-Originating-IP: 203.2.125.3
Message-ID:  <995087819.3b4fd5cbd0461@webmail.comcen.com.au>
Date:         Sat, 14 Jul 2001 15:16:59 +1000
Reply-To: "Paul Kelly" <pkelly@COMCEN.COM.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Paul Kelly" <pkelly@COMCEN.COM.AU>
Subject:      [AR] Rail length
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Apart from transportation issues. Can anyone think of any exceptions to
the "Longer is better" rule as applied to rails/towers for statically stable
rockets?

TA


PK

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 3075 invoked from network); 14 Jul 2001 05:33:21 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 14 Jul 2001 05:33:21 -0000
Received: (qmail 9988 invoked from network); 14 Jul 2001 05:34:47 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 14 Jul 2001 05:34:47 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA27908; Fri, 13 Jul 2001 22:31:19 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 76729 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 14 Jul 2001 05:31:14          +0000
Received: from albatross.wgn.net (www.wgn.net [64.14.252.81] (may be forged))          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA27890 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 13 Jul 2001 22:31:14 -0700
Received: from hogwild (sc-66-74-70-20.socal.rr.com [66.74.70.20]) by          albatross.wgn.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id WAA25167; Fri, 13 Jul          2001 22:32:40 -0700
References:  <995087819.3b4fd5cbd0461@webmail.comcen.com.au>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <035801c10c25$13080320$14464a42@socal.rr.com>
Date:         Fri, 13 Jul 2001 22:23:10 -0700
Reply-To: "Wedge Oldham" <wedge@WESTWORLD.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Wedge Oldham" <wedge@WESTWORLD.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Rail length
Comments: To: Paul Kelly <pkelly@COMCEN.COM.AU>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

I've seen rail buttons gall & bind. Longer rails would increase this
possiblity. That being said here's some shots of the rail that I'll be using
at LDRS.

http://www.nikeproject.com/Launcher/launcher.html

Wedge Oldham
http://NikeProject.com
----- Original Message -----
From: "Paul Kelly" <pkelly@COMCEN.COM.AU>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Friday, July 13, 2001 10:16 PM
Subject: [AR] Rail length


> Apart from transportation issues. Can anyone think of any exceptions to
> the "Longer is better" rule as applied to rails/towers for statically
stable
> rockets?
>
> TA
>
>
> PK

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 3606 invoked from network); 14 Jul 2001 08:54:31 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 14 Jul 2001 08:54:31 -0000
Received: (qmail 21249 invoked from network); 14 Jul 2001 08:55:38 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 14 Jul 2001 08:55:38 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id BAA28428; Sat, 14 Jul 2001 01:49:27 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 76771 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 14 Jul 2001 08:49:20          +0000
Received: from fep4-orange.clear.net.nz (fep4-orange.clear.net.nz          [203.97.32.4]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id BAA28411          for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Sat, 14 Jul 2001 01:49:19 -0700
Received: from mkbs (203-167-161-54.dialup.clear.net.nz [203.167.161.54]) by          fep4-orange.clear.net.nz (1.5/1.7) with SMTP id UAA26088; Sat, 14 Jul          2001 20:49:13 +1200 (NZST)
References:  <5.1.0.14.2.20010713150246.00ac6d38@mail>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <00a201c10c41$f5077a00$0100a8c0@mkbs>
Date:         Sat, 14 Jul 2001 17:48:10 +1200
Reply-To: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Organization: Applied Technology
Subject:      Re: [AR] CERAMICS
Comments: To: Mark C Spiegl <spiegl@HOME.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

> This sounds silly, but don't ignore the hardwoods either. Certainly they
> have problems, but they work better than common sense would tell.
> Cheap and dirty in a pinch.


Have you any examples of people using hardwood?

I have heard that Russia used Lignum Vitae in some "real world" applications
but have never seen any hard information on this.


    Russell McMahon

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 16858 invoked from network); 14 Jul 2001 09:45:10 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 14 Jul 2001 09:45:10 -0000
Received: (qmail 18808 invoked from network); 14 Jul 2001 09:46:39 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 14 Jul 2001 09:46:39 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id CAA28582; Sat, 14 Jul 2001 02:42:07 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 76787 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 14 Jul 2001 09:42:04          +0000
Received: from femail16.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail16.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.0.95.143]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id CAA28565          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 14 Jul 2001 02:42:04 -0700
Received: from hal2001 ([24.77.53.16]) by femail16.sdc1.sfba.home.com          (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20 201-229-121-120-20010223) with SMTP id          <20010714094204.SJGL11004.femail16.sdc1.sfba.home.com@hal2001>; Sat,          14 Jul 2001 02:42:04 -0700
References:  <5.1.0.14.2.20010713150246.00ac6d38@mail>              <00a201c10c41$f5077a00$0100a8c0@mkbs>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <001701c10c48$26cf8f40$0400a8c0@hatjs>
Date:         Sat, 14 Jul 2001 02:34:16 -0700
Reply-To: "Jamie Morken" <jmorken@HOME.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jamie Morken" <jmorken@HOME.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] CERAMICS
Comments: To: Russell McMahon <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

> Have you any examples of people using hardwood?
>
> I have heard that Russia used Lignum Vitae in some "real world"
applications
> but have never seen any hard information on this.

In some "non-real world (amateur) applications" we use hardwood for our
nozzles.
We use solid maple and lathe it into a simple convergent/divergent nozzle
with oring grooves.
The diameter of the nozzles are about 2.5" I think.
We use a washer and a snap-ring to retain this in a steel casing.  We did
about 6 tests so far with this type of nozzle
and never had any oring leakage or other problems, nozzle erosion was always
about the same
(the diameter of nozzle approximately doubled)

For larger wood nozzles we are going to experiment with laminated oak plate
(plates perpendicular to the motor axis) as the cost of a solid piece of oak
or maple is too expensive.  We have used laminated oak (4 or 5 square plates
glued together with carpenters white glue and then lathed down to size) for
the 2.5" diameter motors but the results weren't as good as the solid maple.
We had some nozzles that cracked and some that had oring leakage.

These nozzles are obviously only one-time use though, which is a pretty big
drawback compared to graphite for a rocket motor! :)  Also I don't know how
well they would perform with HTPB/AP propellant as we only used KNO3/icing
sugar.

We soaked one nozzle in sodium silicate for a week and let it "dry" and then
used this but the ablation was about the same as the other nozzles.  Maybe
there is some way to change the erosion characteristics?

best regards,
Jamie

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 9669 invoked from network); 14 Jul 2001 12:31:06 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 14 Jul 2001 12:31:06 -0000
Received: (qmail 16534 invoked from network); 14 Jul 2001 12:32:11 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 14 Jul 2001 12:32:11 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id FAA29151; Sat, 14 Jul 2001 05:29:09 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 76821 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 14 Jul 2001 12:28:57          +0000
Received: from fep4-orange.clear.net.nz (fep4-orange.clear.net.nz          [203.97.32.4]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id FAA29134          for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Sat, 14 Jul 2001 05:28:56 -0700
Received: from mkbs (203-167-160-47.dialup.clear.net.nz [203.167.160.47]) by          fep4-orange.clear.net.nz (1.5/1.7) with SMTP id AAA00865; Sun, 15 Jul          2001 00:28:51 +1200 (NZST)
References:  <LPBBKJMJEOFKAMFJJNNHIEJFCFAA.landofgrey@gnc.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <01ca01c10c60$a37f30a0$0100a8c0@mkbs>
Date:         Sun, 15 Jul 2001 00:28:40 +1200
Reply-To: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Organization: Applied Technology
Subject:      Re: [AR] Ariane rocket fails to reach geosynchronous orbit              (UPDATE)
Comments: To: landofgrey@gnc.net
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

> This is from Orbital Report:
>
> "Arianespace's seventh Ariane 5G launch suffered from low thrust on its
> upper stage resulting in its dual payload being injected in a lower orbit
> than intended. According to preliminary analysis of telemetry recordings,
> the flight was nominal until the ignition of the Astrium-built EPS
storable
> propellant upper stage. The pressure-fed Aestus engine only provided some
> 80% of its planned 29-kN thrust.

> Although the onboard computer tried to
> compensate for the low performance, the stage eventually shutdown on its
> own, 80 seconds earlier than planned, presumably upon depletion of one of
> its hypergolic propellants.

> Editor's note: Although the analysis of the telemetry readings have not
> confirmed this scenario, it is considered likely that the EPS upper stage
> suffered a propellant leak."


This sounds confused.
The 29   kN is clearly thrust as stated, not total impulse.
Loss of fuel should not lead to lack of thrust per se but instead loss of
gross impulse.
A pressurising gas leak would sound like a better guess with shutdown
perhaps when the system could not operate stably at the available pressure.

Note use of pressure feed as discussed recently for pure vacuum operation
stage. They say "hypergolic prope    llants" but don't say what is used.


        Russell McMahon

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 9625 invoked from network); 14 Jul 2001 14:33:00 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 14 Jul 2001 14:33:00 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 12895 invoked from network); 14 Jul 2001 14:34:27 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 14 Jul 2001 14:34:27 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA29486; Sat, 14 Jul 2001 07:30:56 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 76856 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 14 Jul 2001 14:30:45          +0000
Received: from femail19.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail19.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.0.95.128]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA29469          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 14 Jul 2001 07:30:44 -0700
Received: from home.com ([24.22.71.82]) by femail19.sdc1.sfba.home.com          (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20 201-229-121-120-20010223) with ESMTP id          <20010714143044.VJZZ27041.femail19.sdc1.sfba.home.com@home.com> for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 14 Jul 2001 07:30:44 -0700
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.75 [en] (Win98; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <3B4D4D33.2CAFE1F4@stud.uni-goettingen.de>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B5057CE.F5BFFD52@home.com>
Date:         Sat, 14 Jul 2001 10:31:42 -0400
Reply-To: "Mark Simpson" <mark.simpson@HOME.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Mark Simpson" <mark.simpson@HOME.COM>
Subject:      [AR] FTBOD Flies
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

A while back, I solicited suggestions for what to use for a primary
recovery device for an L3 attempt using an orange traffic barrel.  Well,
the Flying Traffic Barrel of Death (FTBOD) flew last Sunday at
NYPOWER2001.  I wound up using a G-Wiz Deluxe Accelerometer for primary
and a Missile Works WRC2 R/C Unit for back-up.  I had hoped to use a
magnetic apogee detector for primary, but I couldn't guarantee the launch
holders that it would be 100% reliable around a large metal mass such as
the away cell.  (I have since learned that it wouldn't have been a problem
from RG)
The WRC2 came in handy as the accelerometer's charge failed to deploy the
twin R14 chutes.  A second after the first charge, I punched the R/C
button and both chutes deployed.  Unfortunately, two R14's are too small
for a 70 pound rocket with a sensitive ring fin, but I knew that prior to
the flight and took the risk of breaking it anyway.  I was more interested
in the flight, than an L3 cert.
There are a few videos of the flight on the web. Their locations, for
those interested in seeing the first flying traffic barrel ever, are:

www.napas.net/ftbod.html
 http://eodrrd.jeol.com:2000/rockets/NYPower/

Total weight on the pad ~75-80 pounds
Motor: AT M2400T
Recovery: 2 R14 chutes (hard landing)

Mark Simpson

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 18872 invoked from network); 14 Jul 2001 15:03:07 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 14 Jul 2001 15:03:07 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 7444 invoked from network); 14 Jul 2001 15:04:36 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 14 Jul 2001 15:04:36 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA29549; Sat, 14 Jul 2001 07:47:33 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 76866 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 14 Jul 2001 14:47:31          +0000
Received: from smtp5ve.mailsrvcs.net (smtp5vepub.gte.net [206.46.170.26]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA29532 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 14 Jul 2001 07:47:30 -0700
Received: from me-513q3sc0zun0.pengar.com          (adsl-64-223-147-206.mannh.adsl.bellatlantic.net [64.223.147.206]) by          smtp5ve.mailsrvcs.net (8.9.1/8.9.1) with ESMTP id OAA26932257 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 14 Jul 2001 14:46:59 GMT
X-Sender: seth-pc@hobbiton.shire.net
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
References: <LPBBKJMJEOFKAMFJJNNHIEJFCFAA.landofgrey@gnc.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <5.1.0.14.0.20010714105027.02af1200@hobbiton.shire.net>
Date:         Sat, 14 Jul 2001 10:51:33 -0400
Reply-To: "Seth Leigh" <seth@PENGAR.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Seth Leigh" <seth@PENGAR.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Ariane rocket fails to reach geosynchronous orbit              (UPDATE)
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <01ca01c10c60$a37f30a0$0100a8c0@mkbs>

At 08:28 AM 7/14/2001, Russell McMahon wrote:
> > This is from Orbital Report:
>
> > Editor's note: Although the analysis of the telemetry readings have not
> > confirmed this scenario, it is considered likely that the EPS upper stage
> > suffered a propellant leak."
>
>This sounds confused.
>The 29   kN is clearly thrust as stated, not total impulse.
>Loss of fuel should not lead to lack of thrust per se but instead loss of
>gross impulse.


Unless the fuel were being lost on the way to the combustion chamber.

Seth

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 16256 invoked from network); 14 Jul 2001 15:24:22 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 14 Jul 2001 15:24:22 -0000
Received: (qmail 7520 invoked from network); 14 Jul 2001 15:25:28 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 14 Jul 2001 15:25:28 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA29650; Sat, 14 Jul 2001 08:07:19 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 76883 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 14 Jul 2001 15:07:16          +0000
Received: from wrench.toolcity.net (root@wrench.toolcity.net [208.0.188.2]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA29632 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 14 Jul 2001 08:07:16 -0700
Received: from [208.22.189.102]          (dap-208-22-189-102.meadville-tnt-0.pa.toolcity.net [208.22.189.102])          by wrench.toolcity.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id LAA13539; Sat, 14          Jul 2001 11:07:10 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <v01510100b7761854878c@[208.22.189.238]>
Date:         Sat, 14 Jul 2001 11:09:28 -0500
Reply-To: "al bradley" <abradley@TOOLCITY.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "al bradley" <abradley@TOOLCITY.NET>
Subject:      [AR] 2Re: [AR] CERAMICS
Comments: To: Jamie Morken <jmorken@HOME.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Seems to me that the same amount of work to turn a wood nozzle would be
well applied to turning a nozzle mold out of wood for a number of cast
nozzles.

I am always surprised that there has not been more work done with this,
using pourable-castable materials such as "dental stone" which  is strong
and hard and will withstand the heat of applications such as pressing
molten glass into the molds for art-glass work. Also, IIRC Firefox has a
castable graphite. Has anyone used this successfully?

Also, while on the subject of molds it may be worthwhile to remember that
fireworks manufacturers long used rammed dampened clay for their nozzles. I
don't know if that has been supplanted by more modern materials for their
pyrotechnics?

Perhaps the trickiest part of cast nozzles is creating the groove for the
"O-ring" to seal the nozzle-to-case joint.

best regards,
al bradley

--------------------------
>In some "non-real world (amateur) applications" we use hardwood for our
>nozzles.
>We use solid maple and lathe it into a simple convergent/divergent nozzle
>with oring grooves.
>The diameter of the nozzles are about 2.5" I think.
>We use a washer and a snap-ring to retain this in a steel casing.  We did
>about 6 tests so far with this type of nozzle
>and never had any oring leakage or other problems, nozzle erosion was always
>about the same
>(the diameter of nozzle approximately doubled)
>
>For larger wood nozzles we are going to experiment with laminated oak plate
>(plates perpendicular to the motor axis) as the cost of a solid piece of oak
>or maple is too expensive.  We have used laminated oak (4 or 5 square plates
>glued together with carpenters white glue and then lathed down to size) for
>the 2.5" diameter motors but the results weren't as good as the solid maple.
>We had some nozzles that cracked and some that had oring leakage.
>
>These nozzles are obviously only one-time use though, which is a pretty big
>drawback compared to graphite for a rocket motor! :)  Also I don't know how
>well they would perform with HTPB/AP propellant as we only used KNO3/icing
>sugar.
>
>We soaked one nozzle in sodium silicate for a week and let it "dry" and then
>used this but the ablation was about the same as the other nozzles.  Maybe
>there is some way to change the erosion characteristics?
>
>best regards,
>Jamie

------------------------------------------------------------------
Can you live Life with this?: "Unless there is a law, an agreement, or a
long-standing custom, No one `Deserves' Anything -- Either Good or Bad!"

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 26834 invoked from network); 14 Jul 2001 15:34:17 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 14 Jul 2001 15:34:17 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 17393 invoked from network); 14 Jul 2001 15:35:59 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 14 Jul 2001 15:35:59 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA29726; Sat, 14 Jul 2001 08:18:18 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 76900 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 14 Jul 2001 15:18:16          +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (f134.law3.hotmail.com [209.185.241.134]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA29709 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Sat, 14 Jul 2001 08:18:16 -0700
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Sat,          14 Jul 2001 08:17:46 -0700
Received: from 213.224.83.38 by lw3fd.law3.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Sat, 14          Jul 2001 15:17:46 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [213.224.83.38]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 14 Jul 2001 15:17:46.0467 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[22ED4B30:01C10C78]
Message-ID:  <F134h29cM3oryKFRJrz00013023@hotmail.com>
Date:         Sat, 14 Jul 2001 15:18:16 +0000
Reply-To: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Ariane rocket fails to reach geosynchronous orbit              (UPDATE)
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

RMcM wrote:

>...They say "hypergolic propellants" but don't say what is used.

NTO & diamines I'd say, what else?

jd
_________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 3568 invoked from network); 14 Jul 2001 18:26:10 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 14 Jul 2001 18:26:10 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 25830 invoked from network); 14 Jul 2001 18:27:54 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 14 Jul 2001 18:27:54 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA30303; Sat, 14 Jul 2001 11:12:04 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 76969 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 14 Jul 2001 18:11:57          +0000
Received: from dns2.seanet.com (dns2.seanet.com [199.181.164.2]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA30286 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Sat,          14 Jul 2001 11:11:56 -0700
Received: from seanet.com (ssstolt.seanet.com [204.182.68.23]) by          dns2.seanet.com (8.11.3/8.11.2) with ESMTP id f6EIBtQ15518 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Sat, 14 Jul 2001 11:11:55 -0700 (PDT)
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.73 [en] (Win98; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B5089F3.23B7A20F@seanet.com>
Date:         Sat, 14 Jul 2001 11:05:39 -0700
Reply-To: "Sherwood Stolt" <ssstolt@SEANET.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Sherwood Stolt" <ssstolt@SEANET.COM>
Subject:      [AR] CPIA evaluated GUIPEP
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

CPIA evaluated some SW and seems to think GUIPEP is accurate.

http://www.cpia.jhu.edu/Bulletin/PDFFiles/july01bulletin.pdf

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 4909 invoked from network); 14 Jul 2001 18:26:31 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 14 Jul 2001 18:26:31 -0000
Received: (qmail 3612 invoked from network); 14 Jul 2001 18:27:59 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 14 Jul 2001 18:27:59 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA30346; Sat, 14 Jul 2001 11:19:32 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 76977 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 14 Jul 2001 18:19:29          +0000
Received: from dune.gnc.net (root@dune.gnc.net [207.203.72.4]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA30329 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat,          14 Jul 2001 11:19:28 -0700
Received: from beowulf (sw2-13.gnc.net [207.203.72.93]) by dune.gnc.net          (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id OAA09363 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat,          14 Jul 2001 14:19:28 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
Importance: Normal
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <LPBBKJMJEOFKAMFJJNNHKEJKCFAA.landofgrey@gnc.net>
Date:         Sat, 14 Jul 2001 14:19:29 -0400
Reply-To: <landofgrey@gnc.net>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Matthew Travis" <landofgrey@gnc.net>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Ariane rocket fails to reach geosynchronous orbit              (UPDATE)
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <01ca01c10c60$a37f30a0$0100a8c0@mkbs>

If the fuel were lost and then pressure regained prior to ignition, then
there would have been a case where the thrust would have been able to be
maintained, but the burn time reduce. Also, if the system could compensate
for the loss of pressure due to the leak, then it would be able to maintain
is rated thrust, but have a shortened burn time. This would not be the case,
though, if the leak were so bad that that feed system couldn't compensate
completely for the loss of pressure. Possibly there was a leak in a feed
line that occurred or only surfaced after the system was pressurized for
ignition, which would not be detected pre-flight. In this case, the nominal
pressure level would not be sufficient to force enough propellant to the
engine, since some would escape through the leak. The system would likely
then increase the flow rate to try to raise the thrust, causing even more
propellant to leak out, and possibly even making the leak worse, while still
not achieving full thrust. The end result would be a loss of thrust as well
as a premature shutdown.

But then again, I'm not an Arianespace engineer.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU]On
> Behalf Of Russell McMahon
> Sent: Saturday, July 14, 2001 8:29 AM
> To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
> Subject: Re: [AR] Ariane rocket fails to reach geosynchronous orbit
> (UPDATE)
>
>
> > This is from Orbital Report:
> >
> > "Arianespace's seventh Ariane 5G launch suffered from low thrust on its
> > upper stage resulting in its dual payload being injected in a
> lower orbit
> > than intended. According to preliminary analysis of telemetry
> recordings,
> > the flight was nominal until the ignition of the Astrium-built EPS
> storable
> > propellant upper stage. The pressure-fed Aestus engine only
> provided some
> > 80% of its planned 29-kN thrust.
>
> > Although the onboard computer tried to
> > compensate for the low performance, the stage eventually shutdown on its
> > own, 80 seconds earlier than planned, presumably upon depletion
> of one of
> > its hypergolic propellants.
>
> > Editor's note: Although the analysis of the telemetry readings have not
> > confirmed this scenario, it is considered likely that the EPS
> upper stage
> > suffered a propellant leak."
>
>
> This sounds confused.
> The 29   kN is clearly thrust as stated, not total impulse.
> Loss of fuel should not lead to lack of thrust per se but instead loss of
> gross impulse.
> A pressurising gas leak would sound like a better guess with shutdown
> perhaps when the system could not operate stably at the available
> pressure.
>
> Note use of pressure feed as discussed recently for pure vacuum operation
> stage. They say "hypergolic prope    llants" but don't say what is used.
>
>
>         Russell McMahon
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 14654 invoked from network); 14 Jul 2001 23:57:08 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 14 Jul 2001 23:57:08 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 20537 invoked from network); 14 Jul 2001 23:58:37 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 14 Jul 2001 23:58:37 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA31522; Sat, 14 Jul 2001 16:41:59 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 77115 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 14 Jul 2001 23:41:47          +0000
Received: from smtp7ve.mailsrvcs.net (smtp7vepub.gte.net [206.46.170.28]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA31505 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 14 Jul 2001 16:41:47 -0700
Received: from me-513q3sc0zun0.pengar.com          (adsl-64-223-147-206.mannh.adsl.bellatlantic.net [64.223.147.206]) by          smtp7ve.mailsrvcs.net (8.9.1/8.9.1) with ESMTP id XAA43276509 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 14 Jul 2001 23:41:16 GMT
X-Sender: seth-pc@hobbiton.shire.net
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <5.1.0.14.0.20010714193953.02af6948@hobbiton.shire.net>
Date:         Sat, 14 Jul 2001 19:45:50 -0400
Reply-To: "Seth Leigh" <seth@PENGAR.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Seth Leigh" <seth@PENGAR.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] 2Re: [AR] CERAMICS
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <v01510100b7761854878c@[208.22.189.238]>

At 12:09 PM 7/14/2001, al bradley wrote:
>Perhaps the trickiest part of cast nozzles is creating the groove for the
>"O-ring" to seal the nozzle-to-case joint.
>
>best regards,
>al bradley

Actually, if you want to see exactly how such moulds are made, go find a
mould for cast lead hollow-point pistol bullets.  Getting the o-ring groove
is exactly the same need as getting the lubricant grooves in cast
bullets.  In that case you just use a two-part mould.  For hollow-ponts
(which most people don't bother casting, if for no other reason than that
the particular uses to which people put cast lead bullets, ie: inexpensive
plinking ammo usually, hollow-points simply aren't worth the trouble) they
use some sort of insert into the mould, making essentially a three-part
mould consisting of two halves and a central insert.

For a converging/diverging nozzle you'd need two inserts, but I'm sure
somebody's solved that problem before.  If nothing else you could have a
side pouring mould and have your sprues on the side of the nozzle, where
they would have to be finished off the final cast nozzle.

Seth

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 15782 invoked from network); 15 Jul 2001 01:56:53 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 15 Jul 2001 01:56:53 -0000
Received: (qmail 16081 invoked from network); 15 Jul 2001 01:58:00 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 15 Jul 2001 01:58:00 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA31923; Sat, 14 Jul 2001 18:41:33 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 77136 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 15 Jul 2001 01:41:27          +0000
Received: from wrench.toolcity.net (root@wrench.toolcity.net [208.0.188.2]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA31906 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 14 Jul 2001 18:41:26 -0700
Received: from [63.169.102.240]          (dap-63-169-102-240.meadville-tnt-1.pa.toolcity.net [63.169.102.240])          by wrench.toolcity.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id VAA19621; Sat, 14          Jul 2001 21:41:20 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <v01510100b776a6203b38@[208.22.189.102]>
Date:         Sat, 14 Jul 2001 21:43:39 -0500
Reply-To: "al bradley" <abradley@TOOLCITY.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "al bradley" <abradley@TOOLCITY.NET>
Subject:      [AR] Cast Nozzle Molds -- Was -- Re: [AR] 2Re: [AR] CERAMICS
Comments: To: Seth Leigh <seth@PENGAR.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Hi Seth,
Your analogy to casting bullets got my memory working back to when I cast
wadcutter bullets. I had never thought about hinged mold halves for
nozzles, but it does make good sense now that I am reminded of it.

Prior to owning a lathe I had experimented with a rather crude wooden core
to cast RockHard Water Putty directly into the bottom of a PVC tube motor
case. It didn't work too badly although I didn't provide for a converging
cone at that time. The fit was so good that I didn't need O-rings as the
Water Putty expands slightly upon setting up.

My projected use of DS (Dental Stone) in view of your suggestions may put
me back to looking at cast nozzles again in the smaller rockets. I am
pretty sure it will not erode like the Water Putty did. It also does expand
slightly while hardening, which necessitates a somewhat thicker mold
release compound -- perhaps brushed-on paraffin. DS does start to set up
right away after mixing which means it has to be poured pronto and agitated
down into the mold

My last nozzle was turned out of cold-rolled steel, heavy, and
time-consuming enough that one hates to lose them. Graphite would be OK but
in the location I have my lathe I don't want this powdery residue floating
around. So, thanks much for your thoughts on the molds.

best regards,
al bradley
-------------------




>At 12:09 PM 7/14/2001, al bradley wrote:
>>Perhaps the trickiest part of cast nozzles is creating the groove for the
>>"O-ring" to seal the nozzle-to-case joint.
>>
>>best regards,
>>al bradley
>
>Actually, if you want to see exactly how such moulds are made, go find a
>mould for cast lead hollow-point pistol bullets.  Getting the o-ring groove
>is exactly the same need as getting the lubricant grooves in cast
>bullets.  In that case you just use a two-part mould.  For hollow-ponts
>(which most people don't bother casting, if for no other reason than that
>the particular uses to which people put cast lead bullets, ie: inexpensive
>plinking ammo usually, hollow-points simply aren't worth the trouble) they
>use some sort of insert into the mould, making essentially a three-part
>mould consisting of two halves and a central insert.
>
>For a converging/diverging nozzle you'd need two inserts, but I'm sure
>somebody's solved that problem before.  If nothing else you could have a
>side pouring mould and have your sprues on the side of the nozzle, where
>they would have to be finished off the final cast nozzle.
>
>Seth

------------------------------------------------------------------
Can you live Life with this?: "Unless there is a law, an agreement, or a
long-standing custom, No one `Deserves' Anything -- Either Good or Bad!"

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 19491 invoked from network); 15 Jul 2001 04:02:51 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 15 Jul 2001 04:02:51 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 24428 invoked from network); 15 Jul 2001 04:04:36 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 15 Jul 2001 04:04:36 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA32308; Sat, 14 Jul 2001 20:59:32 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 77173 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 15 Jul 2001 03:57:51          +0000
Received: from grucom2.gru.net (grucom2.gru.net [209.251.129.7]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA32289 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat,          14 Jul 2001 20:57:51 -0700
Received: from [209.251.150.184] by grucom2.sfcc.net (NTMail          6.03.0009/NU4112.00.db1c8a4b) with ESMTP id djrcgaaa for          AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 14 Jul 2001 23:57:50 -0400
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (Win95; I)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <3B4D4D33.2CAFE1F4@stud.uni-goettingen.de>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B5114FC.968F7160@sfcc.net>
Date:         Sat, 14 Jul 2001 23:58:52 -0400
Reply-To: "James Yawn" <jyawn@SFCC.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "James Yawn" <jyawn@SFCC.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Non-black powder ejection
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This post led me to wonder how smokeless gunpowder might work as an
ejection charge.  It seems likely that some of you have tried this, but I
hadn't and so contrived a quick and dirty static test.

I found an old Estes model that a friend had built, poorly enough that I
wouldn't launch it but it looked like a rocket so I could never bear to
throw it out.  I don't recall the model name, but the body tube is 1-5/8
inch diameter x 26 inches long, and has a lightweight plastic nose-cone.

I wrapped 1 gram of Red Dot (fast-burning shotgun powder from Hercules) in
tissue paper, added a fuse and tied it with thread.  This was inserted
just forward of the engine mount, and the engine hole plugged tightly with
a wooden dowel.  When the Red Dot ignited the nose cone popped off easily.

I tried a second test, same as above but packing an old rag in the tube to
simulate a parachute.  The rag shot out just fine.  So I decided to test
it to failure, and put several rags in the tube.  They were packed so
tightly that the tube bulged out a bit.  I was sure that it would blow out
the engine-mount, but the big wad sailed out smoothly.  I failed to
achieve failure.

Most impressive is the gentle assertiveness of these charges - none of the
sharp kick of black powder, but no difficulty in moving the load either.
I am sure a gram of BP would have burst the tube in the last test.  Maybe
I'll try that tomorrow  :)

Also intriguing is that smokeless powders come in a range of
burning-rates, perhaps adaptable to different ejection situations.

Is this old hat?  I can't imagine that I am the first.

Jimmy Yawn


> Anyone using anything other than black powder or Pyrodex  for ejection
> charges?
>

>
> In Germany, there's a recent to use nitrocellulose wadding instead of
> BP.
>
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 26412 invoked from network); 15 Jul 2001 05:49:23 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 15 Jul 2001 05:49:23 -0000
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 13321 invoked from network); 15 Jul 2001 05:51:08 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 15 Jul 2001 05:51:08 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA32715; Sat, 14 Jul 2001 22:43:29 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 77192 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 15 Jul 2001 05:42:05          +0000
Received: from web10507.mail.yahoo.com (web10507.mail.yahoo.com          [216.136.130.157]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id WAA32696          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 14 Jul 2001 22:42:04 -0700
Received: from [64.154.140.181] by web10507.mail.yahoo.com via HTTP; Sat, 14          Jul 2001 22:42:04 PDT
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <20010715054204.31721.qmail@web10507.mail.yahoo.com>
Date:         Sat, 14 Jul 2001 22:42:04 -0700
Reply-To: "Justin Pucci" <drrockit5150@YAHOO.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Justin Pucci" <drrockit5150@YAHOO.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] 2001 JPC
Comments: To: Brian Kosko <bkosko1@home.com>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <014b01c10c11$eb555520$6401a8c0@home.com>

Brian,

I actually didn't attend any of the sessions on solid
propellants.  However, there were a lot of solids
sessions so I'm assuming that there were some good
ones.  But...I did get to tour the ATK/Thiokol
facilities and see the huge shuttle solid rocket
boosters get refurbished and the filiment winding for
smaller titan motors.  Whoa!!!  It was absolutely
amazing!  It was like I was in "Jack and the Bean
Stalk" all of the components looked familiar, just
REALLY BIG!!!  Let me know when you come back through
Phoenix!

-->Justin


--- Brian Kosko <bkosko1@home.com> wrote:
> Justin,
>
> Any good stuff on solid propellants? I'm an ASU guy
> myself, though a while
> ago. I got my first taste of the Sonoran desert
> while blowing up stuff in
> Yuma. My Army job was to test land mines! I liked
> the desert so much I went
> to ASU after I got out.
>
> We still get to the Phoenix area a lot. I'll look
> you up next time.
>
>
>                Brian
>


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail
http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 15646 invoked from network); 15 Jul 2001 09:45:41 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 15 Jul 2001 09:45:41 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 19632 invoked from network); 15 Jul 2001 09:47:12 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 15 Jul 2001 09:47:12 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id CAA00874; Sun, 15 Jul 2001 02:43:33 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 77220 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 15 Jul 2001 09:42:00          +0000
Received: from c009.snv.cp.net (c009-h013.c009.snv.cp.net [209.228.34.126]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id CAA00834 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 15 Jul 2001 02:32:00 -0700
Received: (cpmta 6809 invoked from network); 15 Jul 2001 02:31:29 -0700
X-Sent: 15 Jul 2001 09:31:29 GMT
Received: from [210.214.147.163] by mail.123india.com with HTTP; 15 Jul 2001          02:31:29 PDT
Content-Type: multipart/mixed;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_09DF_01C56B69.41335B30"
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Web Mail 3.9.3.5
X-Sent-From: pjur@123india.com
Message-ID:  <20010715093129.6808.cpmta@c009.snv.cp.net>
Date:         Sun, 15 Jul 2001 02:31:29 -0700
Reply-To: <pjur@123INDIA.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Philip D'Souza" <pjur@123INDIA.COM>
Subject:      [AR] Principle of equivalence
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_09DF_01C56B69.41335B30
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Disposition: inline

The principle of equivalence on which Einsteins theory of Gravitation is based says that an observer cannot distinguish between gravitational force and inertial force. That is to say if you are standing in a lift which is accelerating up you really can't tell whether the force you experience is due to gravity or due to the tug of the lift which is an inertial force. However I feel that inertial forces travel through material bodies at the speed of sound whereas gravitational forces travel at the speed of light so should be distinguishable. I have attached a short paper in Word 2000 which contains a numerical error but is otherwise quite readable.


______________________________________________________
123India.com - India's Premier Portal
Get your Free Email Account at http://www.123india.com



------=_NextPart_000_09DF_01C56B69.41335B30
Content-Type: application/msword;
	name="Dr. Philip - Accelerometer.doc"
Content-Disposition: attachment;
	filename="Dr. Philip - Accelerometer.doc"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
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------=_NextPart_000_09DF_01C56B69.41335B30--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 19686 invoked from network); 15 Jul 2001 10:11:51 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 15 Jul 2001 10:11:51 -0000
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 4080 invoked from network); 15 Jul 2001 10:13:23 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 15 Jul 2001 10:13:23 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id DAA00970; Sun, 15 Jul 2001 03:09:26 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 77236 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 15 Jul 2001 10:08:00          +0000
Received: from idsoftware.com (predator.idsoftware.com [192.246.40.34]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id DAA00951 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Sun, 15 Jul 2001 03:07:59 -0700
Received: from [192.246.40.144] (account johnc HELO pluto.idsoftware.com) by          idsoftware.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 3.4.6) with ESMTP id 279686 for          AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 15 Jul 2001 05:07:15 -0500
X-Sender: johnc@mail.idsoftware.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <4.3.1.2.20010715051103.02c04990@mail.idsoftware.com>
Date:         Sun, 15 Jul 2001 05:19:08 -0500
Reply-To: "John Carmack" <johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Carmack" <johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM>
Subject:      [AR] commercial filament winders
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Does anyone know any commercial filament winding shops that might be
interested in working on some rather large (4'+ diameter) rocketry projects?

I sent email to Advanced Composites, Lincoln Composites, and Amalga
Composites, but none of them responded.

I'm sure I could go to Scaled Composites, but I want to try industrial
sources before aerospace sources.

John Carmack

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 17207 invoked from network); 15 Jul 2001 10:27:48 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 15 Jul 2001 10:27:48 -0000
Received: (qmail 24514 invoked from network); 15 Jul 2001 10:28:56 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 15 Jul 2001 10:28:56 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id DAA01045; Sun, 15 Jul 2001 03:26:21 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 77244 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 15 Jul 2001 10:24:59          +0000
Received: from femail17.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail17.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.0.95.144]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id DAA01024          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 15 Jul 2001 03:24:59 -0700
Received: from hal2001 ([24.77.53.16]) by femail17.sdc1.sfba.home.com          (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20 201-229-121-120-20010223) with SMTP id          <20010715102449.UFUK9865.femail17.sdc1.sfba.home.com@hal2001>; Sun,          15 Jul 2001 03:24:49 -0700
References:  <20010715093129.6808.cpmta@c009.snv.cp.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <001701c10d17$4aaf5ce0$0400a8c0@hatjs>
Date:         Sun, 15 Jul 2001 03:17:02 -0700
Reply-To: "Jamie Morken" <jmorken@HOME.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jamie Morken" <jmorken@HOME.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Principle of equivalence
Comments: To: pjur@123INDIA.COM
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Hi Philip,

Interesting paper!  I agree that *changes in* inertial forces would travel
at the speed of sound.  Maybe this is wrong?  I guess the principle of
equivalence holds only when m/s^3 (change in acceleration) is a constant?

best regards,
Jamie

----- Original Message -----
From: Philip D'Souza <pjur@123INDIA.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Sunday, July 15, 2001 2:31 AM
Subject: [AR] Principle of equivalence


> The principle of equivalence on which Einsteins theory of Gravitation is
based says that an observer cannot distinguish between gravitational force
and inertial force. That is to say if you are standing in a lift which is
accelerating up you really can't tell whether the force you experience is
due to gravity or due to the tug of the lift which is an inertial force.
However I feel that inertial forces travel through material bodies at the
speed of sound whereas gravitational forces travel at the speed of light so
should be distinguishable. I have attached a short paper in Word 2000 which
contains a numerical error but is otherwise quite readable.
>
>
> ______________________________________________________
> 123India.com - India's Premier Portal
> Get your Free Email Account at http://www.123india.com
>
>
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 15746 invoked from network); 15 Jul 2001 12:04:29 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 15 Jul 2001 12:04:29 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 23287 invoked from network); 15 Jul 2001 12:06:01 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 15 Jul 2001 12:06:01 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id FAA01527; Sun, 15 Jul 2001 05:02:53 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 77260 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 15 Jul 2001 12:01:27          +0000
Received: from cicero2.cybercity.dk (cicero2.cybercity.dk [212.242.40.53]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id FAA01508 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 15 Jul 2001 05:01:26 -0700
Received: from usr02.cybercity.dk (usr02.cybercity.dk [212.242.40.82]) by          cicero2.cybercity.dk (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3448B10000F for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 15 Jul 2001 14:01:25 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from vip.cybercity.dk ([217.157.69.194]) by usr02.cybercity.dk          (8.11.2/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f6FC1MZ49553 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>;          Sun, 15 Jul 2001 14:01:23 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from          hot@vip.cybercity.dk)
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.75 [en] (Win95; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <v01510100b776a6203b38@[208.22.189.102]>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B51880F.C1127204@vip.cybercity.dk>
Date:         Sun, 15 Jul 2001 14:09:51 +0200
Reply-To: "Hans Olaf Toft" <hot@VIP.CYBERCITY.DK>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Hans Olaf Toft" <hot@VIP.CYBERCITY.DK>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Cast Nozzle Molds -- Was -- Re: [AR] 2Re: [AR] CERAMICS
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Does anyone know what the "RockHard Water Putty" or the "Durhams Water Putty"
consists of? - is it a plaster of Paris derivative???

Hans Olaf Toft

al bradley wrote:

> Hi Seth,
> Your analogy to casting bullets got my memory working back to when I cast
> wadcutter bullets. I had never thought about hinged mold halves for
> nozzles, but it does make good sense now that I am reminded of it.
>
> Prior to owning a lathe I had experimented with a rather crude wooden core
> to cast RockHard Water Putty directly into the bottom of a PVC tube motor
> case. It didn't work too badly although I didn't provide for a converging
> cone at that time. The fit was so good that I didn't need O-rings as the
> Water Putty expands slightly upon setting up.
>
> My projected use of DS (Dental Stone) in view of your suggestions may put
> me back to looking at cast nozzles again in the smaller rockets. I am
> pretty sure it will not erode like the Water Putty did. It also does expand
> slightly while hardening, which necessitates a somewhat thicker mold
> release compound -- perhaps brushed-on paraffin. DS does start to set up
> right away after mixing which means it has to be poured pronto and agitated
> down into the mold
>
> My last nozzle was turned out of cold-rolled steel, heavy, and
> time-consuming enough that one hates to lose them. Graphite would be OK but
> in the location I have my lathe I don't want this powdery residue floating
> around. So, thanks much for your thoughts on the molds.
>
> best regards,
> al bradley
> -------------------
>
> >At 12:09 PM 7/14/2001, al bradley wrote:
> >>Perhaps the trickiest part of cast nozzles is creating the groove for the
> >>"O-ring" to seal the nozzle-to-case joint.
> >>
> >>best regards,
> >>al bradley
> >
> >Actually, if you want to see exactly how such moulds are made, go find a
> >mould for cast lead hollow-point pistol bullets.  Getting the o-ring groove
> >is exactly the same need as getting the lubricant grooves in cast
> >bullets.  In that case you just use a two-part mould.  For hollow-ponts
> >(which most people don't bother casting, if for no other reason than that
> >the particular uses to which people put cast lead bullets, ie: inexpensive
> >plinking ammo usually, hollow-points simply aren't worth the trouble) they
> >use some sort of insert into the mould, making essentially a three-part
> >mould consisting of two halves and a central insert.
> >
> >For a converging/diverging nozzle you'd need two inserts, but I'm sure
> >somebody's solved that problem before.  If nothing else you could have a
> >side pouring mould and have your sprues on the side of the nozzle, where
> >they would have to be finished off the final cast nozzle.
> >
> >Seth
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------
> Can you live Life with this?: "Unless there is a law, an agreement, or a
> long-standing custom, No one `Deserves' Anything -- Either Good or Bad!"

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 8268 invoked from network); 15 Jul 2001 15:27:55 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 15 Jul 2001 15:27:55 -0000
Received: (qmail 28665 invoked from network); 15 Jul 2001 15:29:40 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 15 Jul 2001 15:29:40 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA02040; Sun, 15 Jul 2001 08:23:40 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 77296 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 15 Jul 2001 15:22:12          +0000
Received: from dune.gnc.net (root@dune.gnc.net [207.203.72.4]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA02021 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun,          15 Jul 2001 08:22:11 -0700
Received: from beowulf (sw2-34.gnc.net [207.203.72.114]) by dune.gnc.net          (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id LAA26113 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun,          15 Jul 2001 11:22:11 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <LPBBKJMJEOFKAMFJJNNHAEJNCFAA.landofgrey@gnc.net>
Date:         Sun, 15 Jul 2001 11:22:13 -0400
Reply-To: <landofgrey@gnc.net>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Matthew Travis" <landofgrey@gnc.net>
Subject:      Re: [AR] CPIA evaluated GUIPEP
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <3B5089F3.23B7A20F@seanet.com>

This may be the first time many on the list have seen actual evaluation
numbers for its accuracy. Good to see.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU]On
> Behalf Of Sherwood Stolt
> Sent: Saturday, July 14, 2001 2:06 PM
> To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
> Subject: [AR] CPIA evaluated GUIPEP
>
>
> CPIA evaluated some SW and seems to think GUIPEP is accurate.
>
> http://www.cpia.jhu.edu/Bulletin/PDFFiles/july01bulletin.pdf
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 21414 invoked from network); 15 Jul 2001 16:53:48 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 15 Jul 2001 16:53:48 -0000
Received: (qmail 16071 invoked from network); 15 Jul 2001 16:55:33 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 15 Jul 2001 16:55:33 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA02278; Sun, 15 Jul 2001 09:49:40 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 77316 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 15 Jul 2001 16:48:08          +0000
Received: from spsystems.net (spsystems.net [209.47.149.227]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA02259 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Sun,          15 Jul 2001 09:48:08 -0700
Received: (from henry@localhost) by spsystems.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id MAA14082;          Sun, 15 Jul 2001 12:44:21 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010715120750.13744A-100000@spsystems.net>
Date:         Sun, 15 Jul 2001 12:44:21 -0400
Reply-To: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Principle of equivalence
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <20010715093129.6808.cpmta@c009.snv.cp.net>

On Sun, 15 Jul 2001, Philip D'Souza wrote:
>However I feel that inertial forces travel through material bodies at
>the speed of sound whereas gravitational forces travel at the speed of
>light so should be distinguishable.

No.  If you jump off a chair, then as you hit the floor, the floor's
resistance to your continued fall propagates up through your body at the
speed of sound.  Exactly the same as being in a suddenly-starting
elevator.  The principle of equivalence holds.

Gravitational "forces" do not travel at the speed of light.  The key to
understanding the principle of equivalence is that there *are* *no*
"gravitational forces".  Things do not fall because Earth is applying a
force to them; things fall because Earth's mass curves the local
space-time, and in that curved space-time, a downward fall is as close as
they can come to traveling in a straight line at uniform velocity.

The "force" of gravity is like the centrifugal "force" of rotation, a
fictitious force introduced by an inappropriate choice of coordinate
system -- it may be a convenient fiction for purposes of calculation, but
it does not really exist.  It's an artifact of our perverse insistence on
applying Euclidean geometry to subtly but seriously non-Euclidean
space-time.  (As with trying to draw a map of the Earth on flat paper, it
seems attractive at first glance but all sorts of distortions creep in.)

This can actually be shown quite easily.  Light takes about 9min to go
from the Sun to the Earth.  If gravity was a force traveling at the speed
of light, it would incur the same delay... and if you introduce such a
delay into celestial mechanics, you find that planetary orbits would not
be stable.  For its orbit to be stable, Earth must be "attracted" to the
instantaneous position of the Sun, not its apparent position after a
speed-of-light lag.  (Caution, I oversimplify a bit for clarity.)  But
the curvature of space-time caused by the Sun's mass does not have to
propagate from the Sun; it's a fixed feature of local geometry, like a
bend in a road, not a propagating force.

(What propagates at the speed of light are *changes* in the geometry.
That's what gravity waves are.)

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 23507 invoked from network); 15 Jul 2001 17:09:15 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 15 Jul 2001 17:09:15 -0000
Received: (qmail 26524 invoked from network); 15 Jul 2001 17:10:46 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 15 Jul 2001 17:10:46 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA02367; Sun, 15 Jul 2001 10:07:46 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 77329 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 15 Jul 2001 17:06:23          +0000
Received: from yellowdog.featuretech.com ([63.121.63.69]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA02344 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun,          15 Jul 2001 10:06:22 -0700
Received: from duncan (sdsl-64-139-32-247.dsl.sjc.megapath.net [64.139.32.247])          by yellowdog.featuretech.com with SMTP (Microsoft Exchange Internet          Mail Service Version 5.5.2448.0) id N9SJRJ0G; Sun, 15 Jul 2001          10:17:48 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <NEBBLECGKLLOLFCCBNPEMENGDAAA.duncan@transim.com>
Date:         Sun, 15 Jul 2001 10:06:10 -0700
Reply-To: "Duncan McDonald" <duncan@TRANSIM.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Duncan McDonald" <duncan@TRANSIM.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] commercial filament winders
Comments: To: John Carmack <johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <4.3.1.2.20010715051103.02c04990@mail.idsoftware.com>

John,

You might try Composite Solutions in Utah. They do a lot of filiment wound
pressure vessel work (http://www.composite-solutions.com/). And if you don't
get an answer from sales, their president has his email address on the
website! A bit of a stretch but perhaps worth a shot is to contact Barry
Berenberg (composite.guide@about.com), the moderator for the composites
section of About.com. Barry is a composites manufacturing engineer at the
composite structures lab at the Air Force Research Laboratory (AFRL) in
Albuquerque and has been quite willing to answer my off-the-wall questions.

Duncan


-----Original Message-----
From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@itc.uci.edu]On
Behalf Of John Carmack
Sent: Sunday, July 15, 2001 3:19 AM
To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
Subject: [AR] commercial filament winders


Does anyone know any commercial filament winding shops that might be
interested in working on some rather large (4'+ diameter) rocketry projects?

I sent email to Advanced Composites, Lincoln Composites, and Amalga
Composites, but none of them responded.

I'm sure I could go to Scaled Composites, but I want to try industrial
sources before aerospace sources.

John Carmack

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 1637 invoked from network); 15 Jul 2001 17:11:10 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 15 Jul 2001 17:11:10 -0000
Received: (qmail 19717 invoked from network); 15 Jul 2001 17:12:55 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 15 Jul 2001 17:12:55 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA02388; Sun, 15 Jul 2001 10:09:09 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 77337 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 15 Jul 2001 17:07:48          +0000
Received: from proxy4.ba.best.com (root@proxy4.ba.best.com [206.184.139.15]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA02362 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Sun, 15 Jul 2001 10:07:18 -0700
Received: from [10.0.0.2] (snvadslgw2poold155.snjs.uswestqwest.net          [168.103.213.155]) by proxy4.ba.best.com (8.9.3/8.9.2/best.out) with          ESMTP id KAA21338 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Sun, 15 Jul 2001          10:06:20 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Sender:  (Unverified)
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <v04210102b7777dcf9865@[10.0.0.2]>
Date:         Sun, 15 Jul 2001 10:05:26 -0700
Reply-To: "bob fortune" <bob@FORTUNEPAINT.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "bob fortune" <bob@FORTUNEPAINT.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] commercial filament winders
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

>Does anyone know any commercial filament winding shops that might be
>interested in working on some rather large (4'+ diameter) rocketry projects?
>
>I sent email to Advanced Composites, Lincoln Composites, and Amalga
>Composites, but none of them responded.
>
>I'm sure I could go to Scaled Composites, but I want to try industrial
>sources before aerospace sources.
>
>John Carmack

Hey John,

Try Anthony Cesaroni of CTI .  He's very rocket friendly and does the
Pro38 and Hypertek HPR stuff along with his military and civilian
contracts.  Cool guy.  ACesaroni@cesaroni.net

Bob

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 27260 invoked from network); 15 Jul 2001 17:24:55 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 15 Jul 2001 17:24:55 -0000
Received: (qmail 3325 invoked from network); 15 Jul 2001 17:26:27 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 15 Jul 2001 17:26:27 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA02483; Sun, 15 Jul 2001 10:23:09 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 77350 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 15 Jul 2001 17:21:44          +0000
Received: from caladan.highertech.net (root@uucp.highertech.net          [209.140.48.10]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA02434          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 15 Jul 2001 10:11:43 -0700
Received: from CC422150A (cc422150-a.hntsvlle1.al.home.com [24.12.220.148]) by          caladan.highertech.net (8.8.6/8.8.6) with SMTP id LAA23221 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 15 Jul 2001 11:25:59 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <NEBBIGIKMLJPFBKGJFBEEEPDCDAA.camper79@chattanooga.net>
Date:         Sun, 15 Jul 2001 12:11:37 -0500
Reply-To: "Shane Smith" <camper79@CHATTANOOGA.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Shane Smith" <camper79@CHATTANOOGA.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] commercial filament winders
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <4.3.1.2.20010715051103.02c04990@mail.idsoftware.com>

Try http://www.nvf.com/ They do a lot of composite work for Cesaroni.

Shane Smith

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU]On
> Behalf Of John Carmack
> Sent: Sunday, July 15, 2001 5:19 AM
> To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
> Subject: [AR] commercial filament winders
>
>
> Does anyone know any commercial filament winding shops that might be
> interested in working on some rather large (4'+ diameter)
> rocketry projects?
>
> I sent email to Advanced Composites, Lincoln Composites, and Amalga
> Composites, but none of them responded.
>
> I'm sure I could go to Scaled Composites, but I want to try industrial
> sources before aerospace sources.
>
> John Carmack

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 11271 invoked from network); 15 Jul 2001 18:06:05 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 15 Jul 2001 18:06:05 -0000
Received: (qmail 8205 invoked from network); 15 Jul 2001 18:07:36 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 15 Jul 2001 18:07:36 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA02607; Sun, 15 Jul 2001 11:04:04 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 77362 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 15 Jul 2001 18:02:25          +0000
Received: from wrench.toolcity.net (root@wrench.toolcity.net [208.0.188.2]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA02588 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 15 Jul 2001 11:02:25 -0700
Received: from [208.22.189.6] (dap-208-22-189-6.meadville-tnt-0.pa.toolcity.net          [208.22.189.6]) by wrench.toolcity.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id          OAA05362; Sun, 15 Jul 2001 14:01:39 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <v01510100b7778fe99b54@[63.169.102.240]>
Date:         Sun, 15 Jul 2001 14:03:58 -0500
Reply-To: "al bradley" <abradley@TOOLCITY.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "al bradley" <abradley@TOOLCITY.NET>
Subject:      [AR] 2"Road Service Needed" was--Re: [AR] Principle of equivalence
Comments: To: Henry Spencer <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Henry, I am sure that all you say is correct. The problem I found, in my
personal orbit, was that my abstract reasoner suddenly broke down. I think
I must put out a 911 call to find a service facility. :-)  :-)

thanks, I think :-)
al bradley

----------------------
snip . . .

>The "force" of gravity is like the centrifugal "force" of rotation, a
>fictitious force introduced by an inappropriate choice of coordinate
>system -- it may be a convenient fiction for purposes of calculation, but
>it does not really exist.  It's an artifact of our perverse insistence on
>applying Euclidean geometry to subtly but seriously non-Euclidean
>space-time.  (As with trying to draw a map of the Earth on flat paper, it
>seems attractive at first glance but all sorts of distortions creep in.)
>
>This can actually be shown quite easily.  Light takes about 9min to go
>from the Sun to the Earth.  If gravity was a force traveling at the speed
>of light, it would incur the same delay... and if you introduce such a
>delay into celestial mechanics, you find that planetary orbits would not
>be stable.  For its orbit to be stable, Earth must be "attracted" to the
>instantaneous position of the Sun, not its apparent position after a
>speed-of-light lag.  (Caution, I oversimplify a bit for clarity.)  But
>the curvature of space-time caused by the Sun's mass does not have to
>propagate from the Sun; it's a fixed feature of local geometry, like a
>bend in a road, not a propagating force.
>
>(What propagates at the speed of light are *changes* in the geometry.
>That's what gravity waves are.)
>
>                                                          Henry Spencer
>                                                       henry@spsystems.net

------------------------------------------------------------------
Can you live Life with this?: "Unless there is a law, an agreement, or a
long-standing custom, No one `Deserves' Anything -- Either Good or Bad!"

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 11851 invoked from network); 15 Jul 2001 18:21:06 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 15 Jul 2001 18:21:06 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 10770 invoked from network); 15 Jul 2001 18:22:38 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 15 Jul 2001 18:22:38 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA02702; Sun, 15 Jul 2001 11:17:46 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 77380 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 15 Jul 2001 18:16:25          +0000
Received: from smtp10.atl.mindspring.net (smtp10.atl.mindspring.net          [207.69.200.246]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA02681          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 15 Jul 2001 11:16:25 -0700
Received: from mindspring.com (sdn-ar-004casfrMP131.dialsprint.net          [158.252.211.133]) by smtp10.atl.mindspring.net (8.9.3/8.8.5) with          ESMTP id OAA13530; Sun, 15 Jul 2001 14:16:19 -0400 (EDT)
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 (Macintosh; U; PPC)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20010715093129.6808.cpmta@c009.snv.cp.net>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B51DF22.75DB1F3D@mindspring.com>
Date:         Sun, 15 Jul 2001 11:21:26 -0700
Reply-To: "Alan Shinn" <alshinn@MINDSPRING.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Alan Shinn" <alshinn@MINDSPRING.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Principle of equivalence
Comments: To: pjur@123INDIA.COM
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Also, an object in a gravitational field will experience tidal forces,
an accelerating object won't.

Philip D'Souza wrote:
>
> The principle of equivalence on which Einsteins theory of Gravitation is based says that an observer cannot distinguish between gravitational force and inertial force. That is to say if you are standing in a lift which is accelerating up you really can't tell whether the force you experience is due to gravity or due to the tug of the lift which is an inertial force. However I feel that inertial forces travel through material bodies at the speed of sound whereas gravitational forces travel at the speed of light so should be distinguishable. I have attached a short paper in Word 2000 which contains a numerical error but is otherwise quite readable.
>
> ______________________________________________________
> 123India.com - India's Premier Portal
> Get your Free Email Account at http://www.123india.com
>
>   ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>                                      Name: Dr. Philip - Accelerometer.doc
>    Dr. Philip - Accelerometer.doc    Type: Microsoft Word Document (application/msword)
>                                  Encoding: base64

--
Looking forward:
Alan Shinn


Experience the
beginnings of microscopy.
Make your own replica
of one of Antony van Leeuwenhoek's microscopes.
visit    http://www.mindspring.com/~alshinn/

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 9919 invoked from network); 15 Jul 2001 18:28:06 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 15 Jul 2001 18:28:06 -0000
Received: (qmail 675 invoked from network); 15 Jul 2001 18:29:52 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 15 Jul 2001 18:29:52 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA02665; Sun, 15 Jul 2001 11:14:58 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 77372 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 15 Jul 2001 18:13:30          +0000
Received: from wrench.toolcity.net (root@wrench.toolcity.net [208.0.188.2]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA02647 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 15 Jul 2001 11:13:29 -0700
Received: from [63.169.101.20]          (dap-63-169-101-20.meadville-tnt-1.pa.toolcity.net [63.169.101.20])          by wrench.toolcity.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id OAA07762; Sun, 15          Jul 2001 14:13:23 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <v01510101b77794c2bed7@[63.169.102.240]>
Date:         Sun, 15 Jul 2001 14:15:42 -0500
Reply-To: "al bradley" <abradley@TOOLCITY.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "al bradley" <abradley@TOOLCITY.NET>
Subject:      [AR] 3Re: [AR] Cast Nozzle Molds -- Was -- Re: [AR] 2Re: [AR]              CERAMICS
Comments: To: Hans Olaf Toft <hot@VIP.CYBERCITY.DK>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

>Does anyone know what the "RockHard Water Putty" or the "Durhams Water Putty"
>consists of? - is it a plaster of Paris derivative???
>
>Hans Olaf Toft
>
Durhams Rockhard Water Putty is a fine-grained, rather hard substance that
comes in a powder form to be mixed with water and is often used by
woodworkers as a filler in nail holes and around some joints. It is often
used by beginning rocketeers to make their nozzles. It does erode some by
motor gases through the throat. It is sold in the USA, perhaps under
another name in Denmark.

You might be interested in what we call "dental stone". Here, in the US,
whan a patient requires artificial teeth the first impression is made in a
wax-setting material in the mouth. From this a second casting is made in
dental stone. I am sure that Danish dentists have something like this, but
it not Plaster of Paris, it is much harder and far more heat resistant.
Dental stone hardens by reaction, not by drying. Both the Water Putty and
Dental Stone do not shrink upon setup, but expand very slightly! I cannot
say that Dental stone may or may not make a reusable nozzle, but I think
that it will erode much less than the Water Putty and will give you a
source of inexpensive, easily-replaceable nozzles.

sincerely,
al bradley

------------------------------------------------------------------
Can you live Life with this?: "Unless there is a law, an agreement, or a
long-standing custom, No one `Deserves' Anything -- Either Good or Bad!"

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 5561 invoked from network); 15 Jul 2001 18:41:52 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 15 Jul 2001 18:41:52 -0000
Received: (qmail 2987 invoked from network); 15 Jul 2001 18:43:39 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 15 Jul 2001 18:43:39 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA02783; Sun, 15 Jul 2001 11:36:28 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 77388 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 15 Jul 2001 18:35:01          +0000
Received: from localhost (rcalkins@localhost) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with          ESMTP id LAA02760; Sun, 15 Jul 2001 11:34:59 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.LNX.4.10.10107151132240.2754-100000@itc.uci.edu>
Date:         Sun, 15 Jul 2001 11:34:58 -0700
Reply-To: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
Subject:      Re: [AR] 3Re: [AR] Cast Nozzle Molds -- Was -- Re: [AR] 2Re: [AR]              CERAMICS
Comments: To: al bradley <abradley@TOOLCITY.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <v01510101b77794c2bed7@[63.169.102.240]>

> >Does anyone know what the "RockHard Water Putty" or the "Durhams Water Putty"
> >consists of? - is it a plaster of Paris derivative??
It _seems_ to be a mixture between plaster of paris and hardwood flour,
but I haven't seen a definitive answer yet.

Ray

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 6066 invoked from network); 15 Jul 2001 18:49:23 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 15 Jul 2001 18:49:23 -0000
Received: (qmail 6354 invoked from network); 15 Jul 2001 18:50:51 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 15 Jul 2001 18:50:51 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA02842; Sun, 15 Jul 2001 11:47:29 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 77400 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 15 Jul 2001 18:46:06          +0000
Received: from mailsys01.intnet.net (antares.intnet.net [198.252.32.143]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA02823 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Sun, 15 Jul 2001 11:46:06 -0700
Received: from [206.112.106.88] (HELO baldrson) by mailsys01.intnet.net          (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 3.3.2) with SMTP id 11439103; Sun, 15 Jul 2001          14:44:59 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 8.5, Build 4.71.2173.0
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <003101c10d5e$690e0d20$586a70ce@mshome.net>
Date:         Sun, 15 Jul 2001 11:46:08 -0700
Reply-To: "Jim Bowery" <jabowery@WWC.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jim Bowery" <jabowery@WWC.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] commercial filament winders
Comments: To: John Carmack <johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <4.3.1.2.20010715051103.02c04990@mail.idsoftware.com>

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@itc.uci.edu]On
> Behalf Of John Carmack
> Sent: Sunday, July 15, 2001 3:19 AM
> To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
> Subject: [AR] commercial filament winders
>
>
> Does anyone know any commercial filament winding shops that might be
> interested in working on some rather large (4'+ diameter)
> rocketry projects?

I don't recall the details but I know that Brunswick Corporation was a
contender for winding the pressure bottles for E'Prime Aerospace's carbon
filament rengineering of the Peacekeeper.  That was a bigger scale than you
had intended, but Brunswick has the virtue of being, primarily, a sporting
composites manufacturer.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 20950 invoked from network); 15 Jul 2001 18:53:06 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 15 Jul 2001 18:53:06 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 91 invoked from network); 15 Jul 2001 18:54:15 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 15 Jul 2001 18:54:15 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA02906; Sun, 15 Jul 2001 11:51:35 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 77416 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 15 Jul 2001 18:50:13          +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (f106.law3.hotmail.com [209.185.241.106]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA02880 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Sun, 15 Jul 2001 11:50:03 -0700
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Sun,          15 Jul 2001 11:49:33 -0700
Received: from 213.224.83.78 by lw3fd.law3.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Sun, 15          Jul 2001 18:49:33 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [213.224.83.78]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 15 Jul 2001 18:49:33.0326 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[E337DAE0:01C10D5E]
Message-ID:  <F106JbrzvsTDWWcuZcG0000c67f@hotmail.com>
Date:         Sun, 15 Jul 2001 18:50:13 +0000
Reply-To: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Principle of equivalence
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Actually, I do not believe there is a human on this planet who knows what
causes gravity. A.A. general rel. theory is just a theory, next come the
strings, next etc.. As this is wildly OT I just want to point out that
gravitons are theory; nobody demontrated their existence.

On topic 'd be a way to counter gravity without rocket motors. Alas,
earthmen, not yet.

jd

>From: Henry Spencer <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
>Reply-To: Henry Spencer <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
>To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
>Subject: Re: [AR] Principle of equivalence
>Date: Sun, 15 Jul 2001 12:44:21 -0400
>
>On Sun, 15 Jul 2001, Philip D'Souza wrote:
> >However I feel that inertial forces travel through material bodies at
> >the speed of sound whereas gravitational forces travel at the speed of
> >light so should be distinguishable.
>
>No.  If you jump off a chair, then as you hit the floor, the floor's
>resistance to your continued fall propagates up through your body at the
>speed of sound.  Exactly the same as being in a suddenly-starting
>elevator.  The principle of equivalence holds.
>
>Gravitational "forces" do not travel at the speed of light.  The key to
>understanding the principle of equivalence is that there *are* *no*
>"gravitational forces".  Things do not fall because Earth is applying a
>force to them; things fall because Earth's mass curves the local
>space-time, and in that curved space-time, a downward fall is as close as
>they can come to traveling in a straight line at uniform velocity.
>
>The "force" of gravity is like the centrifugal "force" of rotation, a
>fictitious force introduced by an inappropriate choice of coordinate
>system -- it may be a convenient fiction for purposes of calculation, but
>it does not really exist.  It's an artifact of our perverse insistence on
>applying Euclidean geometry to subtly but seriously non-Euclidean
>space-time.  (As with trying to draw a map of the Earth on flat paper, it
>seems attractive at first glance but all sorts of distortions creep in.)
>
>This can actually be shown quite easily.  Light takes about 9min to go
>from the Sun to the Earth.  If gravity was a force traveling at the speed
>of light, it would incur the same delay... and if you introduce such a
>delay into celestial mechanics, you find that planetary orbits would not
>be stable.  For its orbit to be stable, Earth must be "attracted" to the
>instantaneous position of the Sun, not its apparent position after a
>speed-of-light lag.  (Caution, I oversimplify a bit for clarity.)  But
>the curvature of space-time caused by the Sun's mass does not have to
>propagate from the Sun; it's a fixed feature of local geometry, like a
>bend in a road, not a propagating force.
>
>(What propagates at the speed of light are *changes* in the geometry.
>That's what gravity waves are.)
>
>                                                           Henry Spencer
>                                                        henry@spsystems.net

_________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 26059 invoked from network); 15 Jul 2001 18:54:24 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 15 Jul 2001 18:54:24 -0000
Received: (qmail 4742 invoked from network); 15 Jul 2001 18:56:10 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 15 Jul 2001 18:56:10 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA02884; Sun, 15 Jul 2001 11:50:12 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 77408 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 15 Jul 2001 18:48:51          +0000
Received: from spsystems.net (spsystems.net [209.47.149.227]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA02853 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Sun,          15 Jul 2001 11:48:50 -0700
Received: (from henry@localhost) by spsystems.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id OAA16580;          Sun, 15 Jul 2001 14:48:03 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010715143559.15469A-100000@spsystems.net>
Date:         Sun, 15 Jul 2001 14:48:02 -0400
Reply-To: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Principle of equivalence
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <3B51DF22.75DB1F3D@mindspring.com>

On Sun, 15 Jul 2001, Alan Shinn wrote:
> Also, an object in a gravitational field will experience tidal forces,
> an accelerating object won't.

The tidal forces can be arbitrarily small, however.  The principle of
equivalence doesn't say that you can't learn things from the shape of the
field; what it says is that there is nothing in the nature of the
(fictitious) force itself that lets you distinguish between the two cases.

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 16163 invoked from network); 15 Jul 2001 18:59:26 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 15 Jul 2001 18:59:26 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 5151 invoked from network); 15 Jul 2001 19:01:12 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 15 Jul 2001 19:01:12 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA02946; Sun, 15 Jul 2001 11:53:41 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 77424 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 15 Jul 2001 18:52:19          +0000
Received: from falcon.mail.pas.earthlink.net (falcon.mail.pas.earthlink.net          [207.217.120.74]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA02921          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 15 Jul 2001 11:52:19 -0700
Received: from sprintmail.com (PPPa15-ResaleSantaClarita2-3R7178.dialinx.net          [4.54.101.12]) by falcon.mail.pas.earthlink.net (EL-8_9_3_3/8.9.3)          with ESMTP id LAA02578; Sun, 15 Jul 2001 11:52:16 -0700 (PDT)
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.74 [en] (Win98; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <3B5089F3.23B7A20F@seanet.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B51391E.BDF25ABD@sprintmail.com>
Date:         Sat, 14 Jul 2001 23:33:02 -0700
Reply-To: "Anthony Colette" <Rockitman@SPRINTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Anthony Colette" <Rockitman@SPRINTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] CPIA evaluated GUIPEP
Comments: To: Sherwood Stolt <ssstolt@SEANET.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

How about a big hand and Congrats to Arthur Lekstutis the Land Shark!
For writing the GUI that makes PEP so universally versatile and usable.


> CPIA evaluated some SW and seems to think GUIPEP is accurate.
>
> http://www.cpia.jhu.edu/Bulletin/PDFFiles/july01bulletin.pdf

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 21442 invoked from network); 15 Jul 2001 19:15:34 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 15 Jul 2001 19:15:34 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 16002 invoked from network); 15 Jul 2001 19:16:08 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 15 Jul 2001 19:16:08 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA03041; Sun, 15 Jul 2001 12:12:49 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 77440 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 15 Jul 2001 19:11:10          +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (f147.law3.hotmail.com [209.185.241.147]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA03022 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Sun, 15 Jul 2001 12:11:10 -0700
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Sun,          15 Jul 2001 12:10:39 -0700
Received: from 213.224.83.78 by lw3fd.law3.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Sun, 15          Jul 2001 19:10:39 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [213.224.83.78]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 15 Jul 2001 19:10:39.0913 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[D629B190:01C10D61]
Message-ID:  <F1479Y7j8JHqzq7yBpU00013d27@hotmail.com>
Date:         Sun, 15 Jul 2001 19:11:10 +0000
Reply-To: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Principle of equivalence
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

>However I feel that inertial forces travel through material bodies at the
>speed of sound whereas gravitational forces travel at the speed of light so
>should be distinguishable.

As the speed of sound changes with the medium (5 times faster in water for
instance), this'd mean gravity's effect 'd be medium-dependent.
The speed of light also is medium dependent and nobody understands this as
yet. Yes, there are "theories" which say light travels a longer path in
water...

I thought all 'action at a distance' forces, real or er, misunderstood,
travel at the speed of light.

jd


_________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 9431 invoked from network); 15 Jul 2001 19:20:12 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 15 Jul 2001 19:20:12 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: (qmail 19278 invoked from network); 15 Jul 2001 19:21:41 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 15 Jul 2001 19:21:41 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA03076; Sun, 15 Jul 2001 12:18:16 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 77448 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 15 Jul 2001 19:16:55          +0000
Received: from cisco.com (cypher.cisco.com [171.69.11.18]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA03058 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun,          15 Jul 2001 12:16:55 -0700
Received: (from billw@localhost) by cisco.com (8.8.8/2.6/Cisco List          Logging/8.8.8) id MAA08609; Sun, 15 Jul 2001 12:16:23 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID:  <CMM.0.90.4.995224583.billw@cypher>
Date:         Sun, 15 Jul 2001 12:16:23 PDT
Reply-To: "Bill Westfield" <billw@cisco.com>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "William Chops Westfield" <billw@cisco.com>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Non-black powder ejection
Comments: To: James Yawn <jyawn@SFCC.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  Your message of Sat, 14 Jul 2001 23:58:52 -0400

One of the model rocketeers recently did some research on using smokeless
powder as rejection charges for a NAR R&D entry (I think.)

See http://www.alaska.net/~aleckson/rockets/smokless.html

BillW


From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 23491 invoked from network); 15 Jul 2001 20:08:37 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 15 Jul 2001 20:08:37 -0000
Received: (qmail 25245 invoked from network); 15 Jul 2001 20:10:09 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 15 Jul 2001 20:10:09 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA03269; Sun, 15 Jul 2001 13:06:36 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 77476 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 15 Jul 2001 20:05:11          +0000
Received: from spsystems.net (spsystems.net [209.47.149.227]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA03250 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Sun,          15 Jul 2001 13:05:11 -0700
Received: (from henry@localhost) by spsystems.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id QAA17188;          Sun, 15 Jul 2001 16:04:22 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010715155645.17117B-100000@spsystems.net>
Date:         Sun, 15 Jul 2001 16:04:22 -0400
Reply-To: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Principle of equivalence
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <F106JbrzvsTDWWcuZcG0000c67f@hotmail.com>

On Sun, 15 Jul 2001, John Dom wrote:
> Actually, I do not believe there is a human on this planet who knows what
> causes gravity. A.A. general rel. theory is just a theory...

There is broad consensus that general relativity cannot be the final word
on gravity, if only because reconciling it with quantum mechanics seems to
be impossible.  However, so many natural phenomena fit it so precisely
that it has to be a pretty close guess.

> ...As this is wildly OT I just want to point out that
> gravitons are theory; nobody demontrated their existence.

Broadly true; all current evidence for them is indirect.  Direct detection
would be comforting, and people are working on it.  And yes, this is rather
off-topic...

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 21946 invoked from network); 15 Jul 2001 20:30:28 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 15 Jul 2001 20:30:28 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 10135 invoked from network); 15 Jul 2001 20:31:59 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 15 Jul 2001 20:31:59 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA03338; Sun, 15 Jul 2001 13:29:00 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 77484 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 15 Jul 2001 20:27:35          +0000
Received: from cicero2.cybercity.dk (cicero2.cybercity.dk [212.242.40.53]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA03320 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 15 Jul 2001 13:27:35 -0700
Received: from usr00.cybercity.dk (usr00.cybercity.dk [212.242.40.34]) by          cicero2.cybercity.dk (Postfix) with ESMTP id BFB59FFF19; Sun, 15 Jul          2001 22:27:33 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from vip.cybercity.dk ([217.157.69.196]) by usr00.cybercity.dk          (8.11.2/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f6FKRW654910; Sun, 15 Jul 2001 22:27:32          +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from hot@vip.cybercity.dk)
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.75 [en] (Win95; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <v01510101b77794c2bed7@[63.169.102.240]>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B51FEB6.F71D6560@vip.cybercity.dk>
Date:         Sun, 15 Jul 2001 22:36:06 +0200
Reply-To: "Hans Olaf Toft" <hot@VIP.CYBERCITY.DK>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Hans Olaf Toft" <hot@VIP.CYBERCITY.DK>
Subject:      Re: [AR] 3Re: [AR] Cast Nozzle Molds -- Was -- Re: [AR] 2Re:              [AR]CERAMICS
Comments: To: al bradley <abradley@TOOLCITY.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

al bradley wrote:

> Durhams Rockhard Water Putty is a fine-grained, rather hard substance that
> comes in a powder form to be mixed with water and is often used by
> woodworkers as a filler in nail holes and around some joints. It is often
> used by beginning rocketeers to make their nozzles. It does erode some by
> motor gases through the throat. It is sold in the USA, perhaps under
> another name in Denmark.

We have a substance for that purpose called "Polyfyla" wich is based on plaster of
Paris - very likely to be a close relative of the "Durhams Water Putty.

> You might be interested in what we call "dental stone". Here, in the US,
> whan a patient requires artificial teeth the first impression is made in a
> wax-setting material in the mouth. From this a second casting is made in
> dental stone. I am sure that Danish dentists have something like this

... at least they can do the thing with the wax-setting material - not very
pleasant!

Recently a friend of mine suggested that Durhams water putty was based on
silicates and that this was the reason that it would be tough and heat resistant.
This has made me curious.

Hans

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 1617 invoked from network); 15 Jul 2001 21:25:46 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 15 Jul 2001 21:25:46 -0000
Received: (qmail 8396 invoked from network); 15 Jul 2001 21:27:17 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 15 Jul 2001 21:27:17 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA03569; Sun, 15 Jul 2001 14:19:14 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 77529 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 15 Jul 2001 21:17:50          +0000
Received: from johnson.mail.mindspring.net (johnson.mail.mindspring.net          [207.69.200.177]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA03547          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 15 Jul 2001 14:17:39 -0700
Received: from dadsoffice (ip117.leesburg4.va.pub-ip.psi.net [38.30.171.117])          by johnson.mail.mindspring.net (8.9.3/8.8.5) with SMTP id RAA28458;          Sun, 15 Jul 2001 17:13:41 -0400 (EDT)
References: <00ac01c0fd6e$a5894300$6401a8c0@tii500>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_09E2_01C56B69.41570FD0"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <003101c10d73$a1753de0$75ab1e26@dadsoffice>
Date:         Sun, 15 Jul 2001 17:17:32 -0400
Reply-To: "Jim Sutton" <iwqrha7kazmmt74001@sneakemail.com>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jim Sutton" <jim.sutton@MINDSPRING.COM>
Subject:      [AR] So how about some HTPB - R45 or R20LM - group purchase
Comments: To: Ben Russell <ben.russell@verizon.net>,          NC Rockets <nc-rockets@duke.edu>, Tony McAndrew <macs4@erols.com>,          Fred Highland <wwmfarm@fred.net>, Bill Mantell <roseandbil@toad.net>,          Mike Banz <m9bw990@ix.netcom.com>, Henry Oeser <hoeser@erols.com>,          Jonatham Rains <2jrains@compuserve.com>,          Dennis Sauer <Dennis.A.Sauer@MCI.com>,          Dave Weber <DSWROCKET2@aol.com>, Neil McGilvray <Neilm@toad.net>,          Bob Booker <kevsdad@toad.net>, Joe May <mayspace@udel.edu>,          Fr  Fred Wallace <winifred.e.wallace@boeing.com>,          Ivan Barnsley <ibarnsley@worldnet.att.net>,          Augie Gray <ASGJRG@aol.com>, Lester Sherman <lescon@fastol.com>,          Greg Kendig <RCKTFLYR@aol.com>, Mike Rudiger <AA549mike@aol.com>,          Bryan Slogick <bslogick@optonline.net>,          Nelson Wallace <nelsonwallace97@erols.com>,          Neil McGilvray <Neilroc@aol.com>, Norwood Truitt <netwrk@fast.net>,          Bill Schworer <schworer@cox.rr.com>, 
	         Greg Kendig <GregKendig@aol.com>,          Kathy Gilliand <kgilliand@yahoo.com>,          Tom McDonald <dercktdude@aol.com>, Dave Bullis <Nomoreotis@aol.com>,          Ted Proseus <tproseus@udel.edu>,          John Gourley <jgourley@worldnet.att.net>,          Frank Schneider <fschneider@micronelsafety.com>,          Andrew Weber <andy@all-systems.com>,          Jerome Craig <jcraig@winstar.com>, Kurt Lacko <uncrichie@home.com>,          Dave Crosby <dcros@magpage.com>,          "W.E.C.A. WALLACE" <WALLACEWE@olg.com>, John Kyte <jrkyte  te@aol.com>,          Ed Brun <edbrun@mdo.net>, Vince Leonardi <leonardi@omega.com>,          Jeff Potter <Jeff7457@netzero.net>,          Charlotte Potter <Char2392@netzero.net>,          Edward Miller <thunderhead@ihs2000.com>,          Jerry O'Sullivan <Erieagent@erols.com>,          JR and Dave Young <CBurke1552@aol.com>,          Jay Sessler <blue@worldnet.att.net>,          Jay Sessler <blastoff@optonline.net>,          Mark Henning <trumod
	elr@aol.com>,          Lloyd Gold <AUFAMILY@worldnet.att.net>,          Dustin Crabtree <varocketry@yahoo.com>,          Mike Reisinger <jreisin954@aol.com>, Kevin Quire <quirek@UU.NET>,          Phil Shughrue <shughrue@nfdc.net>,          Scott McCluskey <scott@varocketry.com>,          Lou Ballini <zephobby@aol.com>, Chris Brandt <pcbrandt@dmv.com>,          W & K Rumbley <rumb@dmv.com>, Alan Gorecki <adg@losch.net>,          Michael Henry <henrymd@erols.com>, Allen Hosner <The-Hoz@juno.com>,          David Morris <dmorris@shentel.net>,          Greg Parrish <Grego  gory_D_Parrish@MD.Northgrum.com>,          David Stoetzer <dstoetz@erols.com>,          Arthur Lekstutis <artie@lekstutis.com>,          George Smythe <jethawk@lekstutis.com>,          Will Adams <adams@dementia.org>, Ray Carlino <onilrac@aol.com>,          Jeff Davenport <jdcluster@nac.net>, Bob DeRosa <TAM166@aol.com>,          John Evans <EvansRacerX@aol.com>,          Walter Grossman <w.grossman@ieee.org>, Gary Meier <g
	ameier@aol.com>,          Scott Pearson <SBP@mindless.com>, William Poore <POOREWM@aol.com>,          Kenneth Potter <kpotter_7506@yahoo.com>,          Bill Rossi <bullpup@aol.com>, David Sloan <bddavids@patriotnet.com>,          Dick Stafford <rstaff@erols.com>, Tom Trancucci <ltankman@aol.com>,          Wayne Heizer <CalicoRkt@aol.com>, Kevin McGee <kdmcgee@erols.com>,          Fred Schumacher <daschu@mindspring.com>,          Jim Jannuzzo <jsquare@msn.com>,          Gregory Rumpf <greg_photo@hotmail.com>,          Robert Lussier <lussier@clark.net>, Rick Oasen <oasens@erols.com>,              Kevin Mitchell <cyclin@esva.net>, Randy Brust <RCBrustEE@aol.com>,          Mark Jenkins <Mark.R.Jenkins@CPMX.SAIC.COM>,          John Boatwright <boat@access.digex.net>,          Ben Russell <benrussell@erols.com>,          Doug Pratt <DPRATT@compuserve.com>, Doc Bevan <wbevan@juno.com>,          "James D. Miracle" <jim.miracle@netzero.net>,          Larry Rumbley <lrumbley@yahoo.com>, Jim Sanzo
	 <james_sanzo@dca.net>,          Scott Lissis <slissit@mindspring.com>,          James Szypula <jimszypula@rocketryonline.com>,          David Bathras <dbathras@hotmail.com>,          Ivan Galysh <galysh@juno.nrl.navy.mil>,          Tobin Miklas <bwisledgehammer@aol.com>,          Richard Hickok <rhhickok@aol.com>,          Bill Davidsion <BILLGSTRA@msn.com>, Gregg Frye <baddcadd@webtv.net>,          David Green <dtrocket@netzero.net>, Curtis Turner <cturner@penn.com>,          Thomas Thompson <thompsth@us.ibm.com>,          Patrick Sween <patrick_sween@hotmail.com>,          James Strauss <str03@mindspring.com>  m>,          Joe Soerrentino <sorrenti@vitetta.com>,          Joseph Ruzzi <ruzzi_j@bah.com>, John Ritz <tetrahed@netzero.com>,          Mitchell Pines <mitchell.pines@nyu.edu>,          Zoltan Phillips <lpz4@hotmail.com>,          Warren Pelton <warrenp@patriot.net>,          Eric Ohmit <ohmit@concentric.net>,          Joe Montemarano <jimihendrix4life@yahoo.com>,          Norm
	an Miller <nrmiller@aol.com>,          Elaine Miller <elainemiller@erols.com>,          Matt McKeown <mhm@cs.cmu.edu>, Kevin Kelly <kjkelly@pepco.com>,          Todd Harrison <typark86@hotmail.com>,          Sean Guilday <woosher1@ptd.net>, Mitch Guess <mguessdc@aol.com>,          Frank Giorgianni <fmg@warwick.net>, Lewis Garrow <thegman@erols.com>,          Thomas Frankowski <cleodog@buffnet.net>,          Tom Bahls <tombahls@aol.com>, Vaughn Dickerson <vohn1@juno.com>,          Frank Kiss <gemlab@aol.com>,          Brian & Vicki Bellerose <brianvicki@aol.com>,          Gary Singer <GSinger555@aol.com>, Sean McAndrew <seanmca79@home.  e.com>,          edrowe@whro.net, thunderflame@thunderflame.com,          jwckman@SPACE-ROCKETS.COM, varocketry@hotmail.com,          list@thunderflame.com, email@missileworks.com
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_09E2_01C56B69.41570FD0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

All motor builders:

So the group AP purchase is done.

NOW, how about some HTPB to put it all together - either R45 or R20LM.  =
I'd like to pick up 10 gallons or so.

Is there enough VA, MD, NJ & NC area interest to warrant looking in to =
buying a barrel and catalyst?

What do you think?

Jim Sutton
varocketry@hotmail.com




>From: John Wickman=20
>To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU=20
>Subject: Re: [AR] HTPB Suppliers=20
>Date: Thu, 12 Jul 2001 10:04:53 -0600=20
>=20
>It is both. It is easier to mix plus I have seen a little bit higher =
burn=20
>rate than with the R45, about 10% higher. The price is about a dollar a =

>pound more than the R45HT.=20
>=20
>John Wickman=20
>=20
>=20
>-----Original Message-----=20
>From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@itc.uci.edu]On=20
>Behalf Of Ryan=20
>Sent: Thursday, July 12, 2001 8:31 AM=20
>To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU=20
>Subject: Re: [AR] HTPB Suppliers=20
>=20
>=20
>John,=20
>=20
>Does the R20LM work out better because of the handling properties, or=20
>because of the engine performance, .. or both? What about price...=20
>comparable between R45HT and R20LM?=20
>=20
>Ryan=20
>=20
>=20
>----- Original Message -----=20
>From: "John Wickman"=20
>=20
>=20
> > Ryan,=20
> >=20
> > If the industrial grade is R45HT or R45HT-LO, it will work out fine =
as I=20
> > have used it many times. That is also a good price for the R45HT. I =
am=20
> > currently using R20LM and in may opinion makes an even better =
propellant,=20
> > incredibly flexible. Also, R20LM has about half the viscosity of =
R45.=20
>It=20
> > makes mixing a lot easier.=20
> >=20
> > John Wickman=20
> >=20
> > www.space-rockets.com=20
> >=20
> >=20
> > -----Original Message-----=20
> > From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list =
[mailto:AROCKET@itc.uci.edu]On=20
> > Behalf Of Ryan=20
> > Sent: Tuesday, July 10, 2001 10:53 PM=20
> > To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU=20
> > Subject: [AR] HTPB Suppliers=20
> >=20
> >=20
> > Does anyone have a list of domestic (USA) suppliers of HTPB that are =
good?=20
> > I've found a few suppliers so far, but one is in China and wants $11 =
per=20
>kg=20
> > for it, and the other is in the UK (i think?). One in NY sold =
industrial=20
> > grade HTPB for $1.40 per pound, but I don't have enough experience =
yet to=20
> > know if that will work out good or not. The shipping might be high, =
too,=20
>on=20
> > a 50 gal drum. I live in Colorado, if that helps. :)=20
> >=20
> > Thanks in advance.=20
> > Ryan=20

------=_NextPart_000_09E2_01C56B69.41570FD0
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Diso-8859-1">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 5.50.4207.2601" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial>All motor builders:</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial>So the group AP purchase is done.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial>NOW, how about some HTPB to put it all together =
- either=20
R45 or R20LM.&nbsp; I'd like to pick up 10 gallons or so.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial>Is there enough VA, MD, NJ&nbsp;&amp; NC area =
interest to=20
warrant looking in to buying a barrel and catalyst?</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial>What do you think?<BR><BR>Jim =
Sutton</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial><A=20
href=3D"mailto:varocketry@hotmail.com">varocketry@hotmail.com</A></FONT><=
/DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial><FONT face=3D"Times New Roman">&gt;From: John =
Wickman=20
<JWCKMAN@SPACE-ROCKETS.COM></FONT>
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>&gt;To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU=20
<DIV></DIV>&gt;Subject: Re: [AR] HTPB Suppliers=20
<DIV></DIV>&gt;Date: Thu, 12 Jul 2001 10:04:53 -0600=20
<DIV></DIV>&gt;=20
<DIV></DIV>&gt;It is both. It is easier to mix plus I have seen a little =
bit=20
higher burn=20
<DIV></DIV>&gt;rate than with the R45, about 10% higher. The price is =
about a=20
dollar a=20
<DIV></DIV>&gt;pound more than the R45HT.=20
<DIV></DIV>&gt;=20
<DIV></DIV>&gt;John Wickman=20
<DIV></DIV>&gt;=20
<DIV></DIV>&gt;=20
<DIV></DIV>&gt;-----Original Message-----=20
<DIV></DIV>&gt;From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list=20
[mailto:AROCKET@itc.uci.edu]On=20
<DIV></DIV>&gt;Behalf Of Ryan=20
<DIV></DIV>&gt;Sent: Thursday, July 12, 2001 8:31 AM=20
<DIV></DIV>&gt;To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU=20
<DIV></DIV>&gt;Subject: Re: [AR] HTPB Suppliers=20
<DIV></DIV>&gt;=20
<DIV></DIV>&gt;=20
<DIV></DIV>&gt;John,=20
<DIV></DIV>&gt;=20
<DIV></DIV>&gt;Does the R20LM work out better because of the handling=20
properties, or=20
<DIV></DIV>&gt;because of the engine performance, .. or both? What about =

price...=20
<DIV></DIV>&gt;comparable between R45HT and R20LM?=20
<DIV></DIV>&gt;=20
<DIV></DIV>&gt;Ryan=20
<DIV></DIV>&gt;=20
<DIV></DIV>&gt;=20
<DIV></DIV>&gt;----- Original Message -----=20
<DIV></DIV>&gt;From: "John Wickman" <JWCKMAN@SPACE-ROCKETS.COM>
<DIV></DIV>&gt;=20
<DIV></DIV>&gt;=20
<DIV></DIV>&gt; &gt; Ryan,=20
<DIV></DIV>&gt; &gt;=20
<DIV></DIV>&gt; &gt; If the industrial grade is R45HT or R45HT-LO, it =
will work=20
out fine as I=20
<DIV></DIV>&gt; &gt; have used it many times. That is also a good price =
for the=20
R45HT. I am=20
<DIV></DIV>&gt; &gt; currently using R20LM and in may opinion makes an =
even=20
better propellant,=20
<DIV></DIV>&gt; &gt; incredibly flexible. Also, R20LM has about half the =

viscosity of R45.=20
<DIV></DIV>&gt;It=20
<DIV></DIV>&gt; &gt; makes mixing a lot easier.=20
<DIV></DIV>&gt; &gt;=20
<DIV></DIV>&gt; &gt; John Wickman=20
<DIV></DIV>&gt; &gt;=20
<DIV></DIV>&gt; &gt; www.space-rockets.com=20
<DIV></DIV>&gt; &gt;=20
<DIV></DIV>&gt; &gt;=20
<DIV></DIV>&gt; &gt; -----Original Message-----=20
<DIV></DIV>&gt; &gt; From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list=20
[mailto:AROCKET@itc.uci.edu]On=20
<DIV></DIV>&gt; &gt; Behalf Of Ryan=20
<DIV></DIV>&gt; &gt; Sent: Tuesday, July 10, 2001 10:53 PM=20
<DIV></DIV>&gt; &gt; To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU=20
<DIV></DIV>&gt; &gt; Subject: [AR] HTPB Suppliers=20
<DIV></DIV>&gt; &gt;=20
<DIV></DIV>&gt; &gt;=20
<DIV></DIV>&gt; &gt; Does anyone have a list of domestic (USA) suppliers =
of HTPB=20
that are good?=20
<DIV></DIV>&gt; &gt; I've found a few suppliers so far, but one is in =
China and=20
wants $11 per=20
<DIV></DIV>&gt;kg=20
<DIV></DIV>&gt; &gt; for it, and the other is in the UK (i think?). One =
in NY=20
sold industrial=20
<DIV></DIV>&gt; &gt; grade HTPB for $1.40 per pound, but I don't have =
enough=20
experience yet to=20
<DIV></DIV>&gt; &gt; know if that will work out good or not. The =
shipping might=20
be high, too,=20
<DIV></DIV>&gt;on=20
<DIV></DIV>&gt; &gt; a 50 gal drum. I live in Colorado, if that helps. =
:)=20
<DIV></DIV>&gt; &gt;=20
<DIV></DIV>&gt; &gt; Thanks in advance.=20
<DIV></DIV>&gt; &gt; Ryan </FONT></DIV></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_09E2_01C56B69.41570FD0--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 28604 invoked from network); 16 Jul 2001 00:02:14 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 16 Jul 2001 00:02:14 -0000
Received: (qmail 8445 invoked from network); 16 Jul 2001 00:03:22 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 16 Jul 2001 00:03:22 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA04602; Sun, 15 Jul 2001 16:55:30 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 77699 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 15 Jul 2001 23:54:04          +0000
Received: from fep3-orange.clear.net.nz (fep3-orange.clear.net.nz          [203.97.32.3]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA04580          for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Sun, 15 Jul 2001 16:54:03 -0700
Received: from mkbs (203-167-161-136.dialup.clear.net.nz [203.167.161.136]) by          fep3-orange.clear.net.nz (1.5/1.8) with SMTP id LAA23378; Mon, 16 Jul          2001 11:53:14 +1200 (NZST)
References:  <F106JbrzvsTDWWcuZcG0000c67f@hotmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="Windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <00c301c10d89$7b5911c0$0100a8c0@mkbs>
Date:         Mon, 16 Jul 2001 11:10:45 +1200
Reply-To: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Organization: Applied Technology
Subject:      Re: [AR] Principle of equivalence
Comments: To: John Dom <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

> Actually, I do not believe there is a human on this planet who knows what
> causes gravity.

Obviously true as all anyone has ever done in any field is describe
"reality" as we see it
Rutherford said that everything except Physics was stamp collecting. What
the great man (a NZer incidentally) seemed to miss was that Physics was also
stamp collecting.

> A.A. general rel. theory is just a theory, next come the
> strings, next etc.. As this is wildly OT I just want to point out that
> gravitons are theory; nobody demontrated their existence.

> On topic 'd be a way to counter gravity without rocket motors. Alas,
> earthmen, not yet.

No, but we have "seen" it :-)
Latest observations (current as of about 6 weeks ago, due to be replaced by
updated observations next year no doubt) is that the dark matter and
standard matter content of the universe accounts for about AFAIR 55% of
total "stuff" and "dark energy" for about 35%. And while Black Holes suck,
Dark
Energy does the opposite and adds a net repulsive force to the universe.
What Einstein said was his greatest mistake, the cosmological constant,
appears (this month anyway) to be actually real and the system contains a
strong "antigravitational" component. Of course nobody has any idea what
"dark energy" is (gravitons are simple compared) but measurement says it
MUST be there. So much for measurement :-).

I wonder what the Isp of a dark energy powered rocket is? :-)



> >On Sun, 15 Jul 2001, Philip D'Souza wrote:
> > >However I feel that inertial forces travel through material bodies at
> > >the speed of sound whereas gravitational forces travel at the speed of
> > >light so should be distinguishable.

A static gravity field has a gradient whereas an inertial gravity field does
not (dangerous assertion).
While the two MAY not be distinguishable at a point, by measuring at two
points (preferably along the axis between the masses involved) the
difference (gradient) of a mass generated field can be easily observed.
Gravity gradient orbital orientation stabilisation is an example of this.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 27641 invoked from network); 16 Jul 2001 00:31:47 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 16 Jul 2001 00:31:47 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 219 invoked from network); 16 Jul 2001 00:33:18 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 16 Jul 2001 00:33:18 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA04752; Sun, 15 Jul 2001 17:25:19 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 77721 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 16 Jul 2001 00:23:57          +0000
Received: from smtp4ve.mailsrvcs.net (smtp4vepub.gte.net [206.46.170.25]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA04723 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 15 Jul 2001 17:23:56 -0700
Received: from me-513q3sc0zun0.pengar.com          (adsl-64-223-147-206.mannh.adsl.bellatlantic.net [64.223.147.206]) by          smtp4ve.mailsrvcs.net (8.9.1/8.9.1) with ESMTP id AAA54284997; Mon,          16 Jul 2001 00:23:22 GMT
X-Sender: seth-pc@hobbiton.shire.net
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
References: <Your message of Sat, 14 Jul 2001 23:58:52 -0400>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <5.1.0.14.0.20010715201136.02966ed0@hobbiton.shire.net>
Date:         Sun, 15 Jul 2001 20:27:58 -0400
Reply-To: "Seth Leigh" <seth@PENGAR.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Seth Leigh" <seth@PENGAR.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Non-black powder ejection
Comments: To: aleckson@alaska.net
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <CMM.0.90.4.995224583.billw@cypher>

Hi.  One of the members of the Amateur rocketry mailing list posted a link
to your website.  I am responding with a suggestion, and I thought I'd
include the ARocket list on the to: line so they'd be able to see my
suggestion.

You've reloaded ammo for a long time, so I'm sure you know what I mean when
I talk about Berdan primers.  For the benefit of the ARocket list, a Berdan
primed catridge has two fire holes in the case through which the flames
from the primer travel on their way into powder charge.  This is as opposed
to Boxer primed brass, where there is only one hole.

Anyhow, I am wondering how feasible it would be to just take some Berdan
primed brass to use as the containment chamber for a smokeless ejection
charge.  You could take some fired brass, say 7.63x39 russian ammo (this
cheap ammo is always berdan primed), cut the neck off so you have a
slightly tapered case with no neck maybe an inch or so long, and decap it
so you see the two holes in the primer pocket.  If these holes are two
small for your igniter wires to pass through then perhaps drill them out
slightly, but I think they might just work as is.

Anyhow, just put your igniter in from the open end of the case, sticking
the igniter wires in through the two Berdan primer holes and hence out the
back.  Now pour in your powder charge.  Next stuff in some tissue paper
until you are within a quarter inch of the end of the
case.  Flame-retardant tissue paper might or might not be needed.  Next
just fill the last quarter inch of the of case with hot-melt glue.  In
other words, where you had hot-melt glue on the back side of your ejection
chamber, I suggest putting it in the front end as a kind of stopper, in
place of the latex rubber of your design.

The igniter wires going through the Berdan primer pocket holes would
probably be a close enough fit that nothing special would need to be done
to seal the primer pocket, but if you were so inclined, a shot of hot-melt
glue or silicone RTV or somesuch would certainly do the trick.  If you can
get away with not sealing it at all, it just makes for that much less work
to reuse it.

The beauty of this approach is that:
a)  the fired cartridges can be found usually in large quantities at any
local firing range
b)  aside from cutting the neck and throat off of the end of the case,
which could be done with a hacksaw, a dremel-tool cutting wheel, or any
other low-tech cutting apparatus, no other machining need be performed, and
the neck and throat could be cut off and the rough edges smoothed off in
probably two to five minutes each.
c) they would be so easy to make that you could make dozens of them already
pre-loaded and ready to use.

If they weigh too much for some people's liking, you could always cut the
case head off at the extractor groove, thus removing a bit of metal and
hence weight.

This idea needs to be tested.  I haven't done it, I just thought of it
after reading your web page.

I believe the length of the 7.62x39 brass without neck or throat should be
long enough to allow the powder to burn sufficiently.  If that is not the
case you could always use berdan-primed .308 brass or somesuch.

I'd be interested in hearing your thoughts on this.  You might well be able
to just skip the hot-melt glue altogether and just use silicone RTV to seal
the open end.

Seth


At 03:16 PM 7/15/2001, William Chops Westfield wrote:
>One of the model rocketeers recently did some research on using smokeless
>powder as rejection charges for a NAR R&D entry (I think.)
>
>See http://www.alaska.net/~aleckson/rockets/smokless.html
>
>BillW

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 9810 invoked from network); 16 Jul 2001 00:34:48 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 16 Jul 2001 00:34:48 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 17308 invoked from network); 16 Jul 2001 00:36:21 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 16 Jul 2001 00:36:21 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA04824; Sun, 15 Jul 2001 17:28:25 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 77740 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 16 Jul 2001 00:27:04          +0000
Received: from smtp7ve.mailsrvcs.net (smtp7vepub.gte.net [206.46.170.28]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA04799 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 15 Jul 2001 17:27:04 -0700
Received: from me-513q3sc0zun0.pengar.com          (adsl-64-223-147-206.mannh.adsl.bellatlantic.net [64.223.147.206]) by          smtp7ve.mailsrvcs.net (8.9.1/8.9.1) with ESMTP id AAA43678039 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 16 Jul 2001 00:26:33 GMT
X-Sender: seth-pc@hobbiton.shire.net
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
References: <F106JbrzvsTDWWcuZcG0000c67f@hotmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <5.1.0.14.0.20010715202941.02ae9e30@hobbiton.shire.net>
Date:         Sun, 15 Jul 2001 20:31:09 -0400
Reply-To: "Seth Leigh" <seth@PENGAR.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Seth Leigh" <seth@PENGAR.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Principle of equivalence
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <00c301c10d89$7b5911c0$0100a8c0@mkbs>

At 07:10 PM 7/15/2001, Russell McMahon wrote:


>I wonder what the Isp of a dark energy powered rocket is? :-)

And what do you use to eject the recovery system, the Big Bang?

Seth

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 10396 invoked from network); 16 Jul 2001 00:42:18 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 16 Jul 2001 00:42:18 -0000
Received: (qmail 6461 invoked from network); 16 Jul 2001 00:43:48 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 16 Jul 2001 00:43:48 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA04950; Sun, 15 Jul 2001 17:35:47 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 77762 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 16 Jul 2001 00:34:26          +0000
Received: from fep3-orange.clear.net.nz (fep3-orange.clear.net.nz          [203.97.32.3]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA04927          for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Sun, 15 Jul 2001 17:34:25 -0700
Received: from mkbs (203-167-161-136.dialup.clear.net.nz [203.167.161.136]) by          fep3-orange.clear.net.nz (1.5/1.8) with SMTP id MAA07637; Mon, 16 Jul          2001 12:31:49 +1200 (NZST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="Windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <011a01c10d8e$f2ce2d80$0100a8c0@mkbs>
Date:         Mon, 16 Jul 2001 12:09:18 +1200
Reply-To: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Organization: Applied Technology
Subject:      [AR] [OT]: Free Antivirus Software
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Both of the following antivirus packages have received some favourable
comment and are available free for personal use (except in mainland Europe
for AVG)
The CA Antivirus software is now no longer available free.

If you do not have any antivirus software installed then or both of these
would be better than nothing. (No antivirus software is perfect - I
personally use Symantec / Norton antivirus which so far has worked well ).


1.    AVG Anitivirus
Well spoken of by some
Free for personal use EXCEPT in mainland Europe

    http://www.grisoft.com/html/us_downl.cfm


2.    FPROT
Free for personal use.

    http://www.complex.is/f-prot/Download.html

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 28741 invoked from network); 16 Jul 2001 00:54:10 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 16 Jul 2001 00:54:10 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: (qmail 11481 invoked from network); 16 Jul 2001 00:55:41 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 16 Jul 2001 00:55:41 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA05010; Sun, 15 Jul 2001 17:47:44 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 77774 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 16 Jul 2001 00:46:22          +0000
Received: from web11905.mail.yahoo.com (web11905.mail.yahoo.com          [216.136.172.189]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id RAA04966          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 15 Jul 2001 17:36:21 -0700
Received: from [63.109.83.162] by web11905.mail.yahoo.com via HTTP; Sun, 15 Jul          2001 17:36:19 PDT
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <20010716003619.92204.qmail@web11905.mail.yahoo.com>
Date:         Sun, 15 Jul 2001 17:36:19 -0700
Reply-To: "peter kuhns" <pkuhns@YAHOO.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "peter kuhns" <pkuhns@YAHOO.COM>
Subject:      [AR] Max Q Video -- a working copy (mpeg)?
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Does anyone have a copy of the Max Q launch in MPEG
format that they know works in Windows Media Player
versions 7 or 8?

The 12 Mb MPEG file on their web site at this address
just plain old doesn't work:

http://www.rocketry.com/Projects/Q%20Project/QLaunch/qlaunch.htm


Any help would be greatly appreciated!


-- Peter



__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail
http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 19950 invoked from network); 16 Jul 2001 00:59:23 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 16 Jul 2001 00:59:23 -0000
Received: (qmail 3068 invoked from network); 16 Jul 2001 01:00:31 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 16 Jul 2001 01:00:31 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA05053; Sun, 15 Jul 2001 17:51:27 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 77782 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 16 Jul 2001 00:50:06          +0000
Received: from wrench.toolcity.net (root@wrench.toolcity.net [208.0.188.2]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA05032 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 15 Jul 2001 17:50:05 -0700
Received: from [208.11.233.240]          (dap-208-11-233-240.meadville-tnt-0.pa.toolcity.net [208.11.233.240])          by wrench.toolcity.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id UAA29289; Sun, 15          Jul 2001 20:49:58 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <v01510100b777f506728d@[63.169.101.20]>
Date:         Sun, 15 Jul 2001 20:52:17 -0500
Reply-To: "al bradley" <abradley@TOOLCITY.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "al bradley" <abradley@TOOLCITY.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] 4Re: [AR] Cast Nozzle Molds -- Was -- Re: [AR] 2Re:              [AR]CERAMICS
Comments: To: Hans Olaf Toft <hot@VIP.CYBERCITY.DK>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

>We have a substance for that purpose called "Polyfyla" wich is based on
>plaster of
>Paris - very likely to be a close relative of the "Durhams Water Putty.

>Recently a friend of mine suggested that Durhams water putty was based on
>silicates and that this was the reason that it would be tough and heat
>resistant.
>This has made me curious.

I checked the label again. There is no mention of the ingredients but they
claim: "You can saw, chisel, sand, polish, color or mold it. Sticks and
stays put. Will not shrink. Fills cracks -- knot, nail and screw holes.
Permnanently adheres in wood, cement, plaster, tiles, composition and
stone. . . .  Indispensable to woodworkers, electricians, carpenters,
repairmen, housewifes, pattern makers, decorators floor finishers, cabinet
makers, painters, manual training schools, manufacturers, plumbers."

Doesn't sound close to Plaster of Paris. The label also says you can add
milk or vinegar to the material to slow the hardening.

>
>> You might be interested in what we call "dental stone". Here, in the US,
>> whan a patient requires artificial teeth the first impression is made in a
>> wax-setting material in the mouth. From this a second casting is made in
>> dental stone. I am sure that Danish dentists have something like this
>
>... at least they can do the thing with the wax-setting material - not very
>pleasant!

Oh, yes, the police use the dental stone often instead of Plaster of Paris
for making impressions of tire treads and footprints. I understand that
first they spray the depressions with women's hair spray, and when that
firms they then pour the dental stone into the impression. It hardens
rather rapidly. and doesn't seem to want to re-dissolve in water. Or at
least, the sample I soaked for 3 days didn't.

best regards,
al bradley

------------------------------------------------------------------
Can you live Life with this?: "Unless there is a law, an agreement, or a
long-standing custom, No one `Deserves' Anything -- Either Good or Bad!"

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 13509 invoked from network); 16 Jul 2001 01:12:39 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 16 Jul 2001 01:12:39 -0000
X-Priority: 3
Received: (qmail 20926 invoked from network); 16 Jul 2001 01:14:10 -0000
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 16 Jul 2001 01:14:10 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA05133; Sun, 15 Jul 2001 18:06:08 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 77795 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 16 Jul 2001 01:04:39          +0000
Received: from cyclone.comcen.com.au (cyclone.comcen.com.au [203.23.236.100])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA05109 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 15 Jul 2001 18:04:38 -0700
Received: (from nobody@localhost) by cyclone.comcen.com.au (8.11.1/8.11.1) id          f6G14Lq85301; Mon, 16 Jul 2001 11:04:21 +1000 (EST) (envelope-from          pkelly@comcen.com.au)
X-Authentication-Warning: cyclone.comcen.com.au: nobody set sender to                         pkelly@comcen.com.au using -f
References: <Your message of Sat, 14 Jul 2001 23:58:52 -0400>             <5.1.0.14.0.20010715201136.02966ed0@hobbiton.shire.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
User-Agent: IMP/PHP IMAP webmail program 2.2.3
X-Originating-IP: 203.2.125.3
Message-ID:  <995245461.3b523d9576d7d@webmail.comcen.com.au>
Date:         Mon, 16 Jul 2001 11:04:21 +1000
Reply-To: "Paul Kelly" <pkelly@COMCEN.COM.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Paul Kelly" <pkelly@COMCEN.COM.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Non-black powder ejection
Comments: To: Seth Leigh <seth@PENGAR.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <5.1.0.14.0.20010715201136.02966ed0@hobbiton.shire.net>

You've just made a cartridge that will fire a polyethylene slug at your
recovery gear at huge velocity.
Interesting to try the same containment tests, using the same aparatus but
first drawing a vacuum on the charge.
Sourcing BP is not a concern for a serious amateur, but deployment at altitude
is..

PK

> Hi.  One of the members of the Amateur rocketry mailing list posted a
> link
> to your website.  I am responding with a suggestion, and I thought I'd
> include the ARocket list on the to: line so they'd be able to see my
> suggestion.
>
> You've reloaded ammo for a long time, so I'm sure you know what I mean
> when
> I talk about Berdan primers.  For the benefit of the ARocket list, a
> Berdan
> primed catridge has two fire holes in the case through which the flames
> from the primer travel on their way into powder charge.  This is as
> opposed
> to Boxer primed brass, where there is only one hole.
>
> Anyhow, I am wondering how feasible it would be to just take some
> Berdan
> primed brass to use as the containment chamber for a smokeless ejection
> charge.  You could take some fired brass, say 7.63x39 russian ammo
> (this
> cheap ammo is always berdan primed), cut the neck off so you have a
> slightly tapered case with no neck maybe an inch or so long, and decap
> it
> so you see the two holes in the primer pocket.  If these holes are two
> small for your igniter wires to pass through then perhaps drill them
> out
> slightly, but I think they might just work as is.
>
> Anyhow, just put your igniter in from the open end of the case,
> sticking
> the igniter wires in through the two Berdan primer holes and hence out
> the
> back.  Now pour in your powder charge.  Next stuff in some tissue paper
> until you are within a quarter inch of the end of the
> case.  Flame-retardant tissue paper might or might not be needed.  Next
> just fill the last quarter inch of the of case with hot-melt glue.  In
> other words, where you had hot-melt glue on the back side of your
> ejection
> chamber, I suggest putting it in the front end as a kind of stopper, in
> place of the latex rubber of your design.
>
> The igniter wires going through the Berdan primer pocket holes would
> probably be a close enough fit that nothing special would need to be
> done
> to seal the primer pocket, but if you were so inclined, a shot of
> hot-melt
> glue or silicone RTV or somesuch would certainly do the trick.  If you
> can
> get away with not sealing it at all, it just makes for that much less
> work
> to reuse it.
>
> The beauty of this approach is that:
> a)  the fired cartridges can be found usually in large quantities at
> any
> local firing range
> b)  aside from cutting the neck and throat off of the end of the case,
> which could be done with a hacksaw, a dremel-tool cutting wheel, or any
> other low-tech cutting apparatus, no other machining need be performed,
> and
> the neck and throat could be cut off and the rough edges smoothed off
> in
> probably two to five minutes each.
> c) they would be so easy to make that you could make dozens of them
> already
> pre-loaded and ready to use.
>
> If they weigh too much for some people's liking, you could always cut
> the
> case head off at the extractor groove, thus removing a bit of metal and
> hence weight.
>
> This idea needs to be tested.  I haven't done it, I just thought of it
> after reading your web page.
>
> I believe the length of the 7.62x39 brass without neck or throat should
> be
> long enough to allow the powder to burn sufficiently.  If that is not
> the
> case you could always use berdan-primed .308 brass or somesuch.
>
> I'd be interested in hearing your thoughts on this.  You might well be
> able
> to just skip the hot-melt glue altogether and just use silicone RTV to
> seal
> the open end.
>
> Seth
>
>
> At 03:16 PM 7/15/2001, William Chops Westfield wrote:
> >One of the model rocketeers recently did some research on using
> smokeless
> >powder as rejection charges for a NAR R&D entry (I think.)
> >
> >See http://www.alaska.net/~aleckson/rockets/smokless.html
> >
> >BillW
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 20094 invoked from network); 16 Jul 2001 02:27:12 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 16 Jul 2001 02:27:12 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 11785 invoked from network); 16 Jul 2001 02:28:45 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 16 Jul 2001 02:28:45 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA05603; Sun, 15 Jul 2001 19:20:32 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 77842 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 16 Jul 2001 02:18:58          +0000
Received: from smtp7ve.mailsrvcs.net (smtp7vepub.gte.net [206.46.170.28]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA05575 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 15 Jul 2001 19:18:58 -0700
Received: from me-513q3sc0zun0.pengar.com          (adsl-64-223-147-206.mannh.adsl.bellatlantic.net [64.223.147.206]) by          smtp7ve.mailsrvcs.net (8.9.1/8.9.1) with ESMTP id CAA44377069 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 16 Jul 2001 02:18:26 GMT
X-Sender: seth-pc@hobbiton.shire.net
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
References: <5.1.0.14.0.20010715201136.02966ed0@hobbiton.shire.net> <Your            message of Sat, 14 Jul 2001 23:58:52 -0400>             <5.1.0.14.0.20010715201136.02966ed0@hobbiton.shire.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <5.1.0.14.0.20010715221023.02aa30f0@hobbiton.shire.net>
Date:         Sun, 15 Jul 2001 22:23:02 -0400
Reply-To: "Seth Leigh" <seth@PENGAR.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Seth Leigh" <seth@PENGAR.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Non-black powder ejection
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <995245461.3b523d9576d7d@webmail.comcen.com.au>

At 09:04 PM 7/15/2001, you wrote:
>You've just made a cartridge that will fire a polyethylene slug at your
>recovery gear at huge velocity.

I'm not convinced by your argument.  After all, the guy whose webpage I was
replying to was able to do it, albeit a bit differently, and it seems to
work well.  He used the latex just to maintain the pressure in the
combustion chamber long enough for all of the powder granules to ignite.  I
am suggesting that hot-melt glue or silicone RTV used as a plug in the end
of the piece of brass could be used for the same purpose, ie: to hold the
pressure in long enough for the powder to ignite completely.  The pressure
we are talking about here is not high enough to propel this small slug at
anything approaching "huge velocity".

This doesn't have to generate great pressure, just sufficient
pressure.  Once the plug exits the end of the cartridge case, the pressure
on the plug is released.  One quarter inch of travel (or less, it would
have to be determined experimentally just how much of a plug was actually
required to do the job) under moderate pressure is not exactly going to
make a speeding bullet out of a little chunk of silicone.  You only have to
have your plug hold the same pressure as the original author's
latex.  That's not all that much really.

I am going to arrange to test this.  I have a container of Hodgon Universal
Clays pistol powder that I think would do the trick nicely.  I can easily
obtain some Berdan-primed 7.62x39 brass from the local range.

Actually, the more I think of it, the better the idea gets.  If you get the
aluminum casings from CCI they are also berdan primed.  I'd think some
aluminum casings in .357 Magnum or .44 Magnum could be used to make
wonderful ejection chambers.

This idea deserves some experimentation.  Don't cast your doubts too
swiftly.  Remember that pistols use steel barrels several to many inches
long to hold the pressure in long enough to push out an extremely heavy (as
compared to a little silicone plug) projectile.  The pressures can't even
be compared to what we are aiming to achieve here.

Seth

> > Hi.  One of the members of the Amateur rocketry mailing list posted a
> > link
> > to your website.  I am responding with a suggestion, and I thought I'd
> > include the ARocket list on the to: line so they'd be able to see my
> > suggestion.
> >
> > You've reloaded ammo for a long time, so I'm sure you know what I mean
> > when
> > I talk about Berdan primers.  For the benefit of the ARocket list, a
> > Berdan
> > primed catridge has two fire holes in the case through which the flames
> > from the primer travel on their way into powder charge.  This is as
> > opposed
> > to Boxer primed brass, where there is only one hole.
> >
> > Anyhow, I am wondering how feasible it would be to just take some
> > Berdan
> > primed brass to use as the containment chamber for a smokeless ejection
> > charge.  You could take some fired brass, say 7.63x39 russian ammo
> > (this
> > cheap ammo is always berdan primed), cut the neck off so you have a
> > slightly tapered case with no neck maybe an inch or so long, and decap
> > it
> > so you see the two holes in the primer pocket.  If these holes are two
> > small for your igniter wires to pass through then perhaps drill them
> > out
> > slightly, but I think they might just work as is.
> >
> > Anyhow, just put your igniter in from the open end of the case,
> > sticking
> > the igniter wires in through the two Berdan primer holes and hence out
> > the
> > back.  Now pour in your powder charge.  Next stuff in some tissue paper
> > until you are within a quarter inch of the end of the
> > case.  Flame-retardant tissue paper might or might not be needed.  Next
> > just fill the last quarter inch of the of case with hot-melt glue.  In
> > other words, where you had hot-melt glue on the back side of your
> > ejection
> > chamber, I suggest putting it in the front end as a kind of stopper, in
> > place of the latex rubber of your design.
> >
> > The igniter wires going through the Berdan primer pocket holes would
> > probably be a close enough fit that nothing special would need to be
> > done
> > to seal the primer pocket, but if you were so inclined, a shot of
> > hot-melt
> > glue or silicone RTV or somesuch would certainly do the trick.  If you
> > can
> > get away with not sealing it at all, it just makes for that much less
> > work
> > to reuse it.
> >
> > The beauty of this approach is that:
> > a)  the fired cartridges can be found usually in large quantities at
> > any
> > local firing range
> > b)  aside from cutting the neck and throat off of the end of the case,
> > which could be done with a hacksaw, a dremel-tool cutting wheel, or any
> > other low-tech cutting apparatus, no other machining need be performed,
> > and
> > the neck and throat could be cut off and the rough edges smoothed off
> > in
> > probably two to five minutes each.
> > c) they would be so easy to make that you could make dozens of them
> > already
> > pre-loaded and ready to use.
> >
> > If they weigh too much for some people's liking, you could always cut
> > the
> > case head off at the extractor groove, thus removing a bit of metal and
> > hence weight.
> >
> > This idea needs to be tested.  I haven't done it, I just thought of it
> > after reading your web page.
> >
> > I believe the length of the 7.62x39 brass without neck or throat should
> > be
> > long enough to allow the powder to burn sufficiently.  If that is not
> > the
> > case you could always use berdan-primed .308 brass or somesuch.
> >
> > I'd be interested in hearing your thoughts on this.  You might well be
> > able
> > to just skip the hot-melt glue altogether and just use silicone RTV to
> > seal
> > the open end.
> >
> > Seth
> >
> >
> > At 03:16 PM 7/15/2001, William Chops Westfield wrote:
> > >One of the model rocketeers recently did some research on using
> > smokeless
> > >powder as rejection charges for a NAR R&D entry (I think.)
> > >
> > >See http://www.alaska.net/~aleckson/rockets/smokless.html
> > >
> > >BillW
> >

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 25118 invoked from network); 16 Jul 2001 02:35:48 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 16 Jul 2001 02:35:48 -0000
Received: (qmail 28856 invoked from network); 16 Jul 2001 02:37:18 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 16 Jul 2001 02:37:18 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA05658; Sun, 15 Jul 2001 19:29:13 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 77855 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 16 Jul 2001 02:27:46          +0000
Received: from mta01.mail.mel.aone.net.au (mta01.mail.au.uu.net [203.2.192.81])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA05640 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 15 Jul 2001 19:27:45 -0700
Received: from unknown ([63.60.247.42]) by mta01.mail.mel.aone.net.au with SMTP          id <20010716022742.EEJM18810.mta01.mail.mel.aone.net.au@unknown> for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 16 Jul 2001 12:27:42 +1000
References: Conversation            <5.1.0.14.0.20010715201136.02966ed0@hobbiton.shire.net> with last            message <995245461.3b523d9576d7d@webmail.comcen.com.au>
Priority: Normal
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Priority: 3
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	X-MAPIextension=.TXT;
	charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>
Date:         Mon, 16 Jul 2001 02:27:46 +0000
Reply-To: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Non-black powder ejection
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <995245461.3b523d9576d7d@webmail.comcen.com.au>

The ultimate chemical pyro ejection comp would probably be air + H.
Obviously this presents a few obvious problems so the ultimate pyro powder
for ejection would be a fast burning powder comprised of these elements: H,
O, N, with the least amount of carbon as possible (preferably none) to keep
temperatures down to a minimum. Hydrogen is the king for turning internal
heat energy into kinetic energy (endothermic process) and it obviously
needs to be oxidised for the fast process we're looking at. I can see how
an NC comp would kick arse over BP in terms of kinetic energy / heat
release and there's no doubt there are better comps around with
accessibility being the key factor.

Useful point, especially for those using plastics and other temperature
sensitive materials.

Troy.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 13425 invoked from network); 16 Jul 2001 02:47:37 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 16 Jul 2001 02:47:37 -0000
Received: (qmail 28107 invoked from network); 16 Jul 2001 02:48:40 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 16 Jul 2001 02:48:40 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA05760; Sun, 15 Jul 2001 19:40:52 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 77863 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 16 Jul 2001 02:39:30          +0000
Received: from mta04.mail.mel.aone.net.au (mta04.mail.au.uu.net [203.2.192.84])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA05732 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 15 Jul 2001 19:39:29 -0700
Received: from unknown ([63.60.247.42]) by mta04.mail.mel.aone.net.au with SMTP          id <20010716023927.OBDM12944.mta04.mail.mel.aone.net.au@unknown> for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 16 Jul 2001 12:39:27 +1000
References: Conversation <3B5089F3.23B7A20F@seanet.com> with last message            <3B5089F3.23B7A20F@seanet.com>
Priority: Normal
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Priority: 3
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	X-MAPIextension=.TXT;
	charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>
Date:         Mon, 16 Jul 2001 02:39:30 +0000
Reply-To: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] CPIA evaluated GUIPEP
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <3B5089F3.23B7A20F@seanet.com>

Depends on what composition you're using. Hot (close to Mil-spec)
propellants tend to be pretty close. Non standard propellants (AN based
propellants for example) can be quite off from my experience. Highly
metallised propellants can be varied, I don't know anyone that's achieved
the figures it's produced for N2O-HTPB?

Troy.

----------
> CPIA evaluated some SW and seems to think GUIPEP is accurate.
>
> http://www.cpia.jhu.edu/Bulletin/PDFFiles/july01bulletin.pdf
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 4556 invoked from network); 16 Jul 2001 03:00:36 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 16 Jul 2001 03:00:36 -0000
X-Priority: 3
Received: (qmail 2974 invoked from network); 16 Jul 2001 03:01:45 -0000
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 16 Jul 2001 03:01:45 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA05854; Sun, 15 Jul 2001 19:53:57 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 77881 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 16 Jul 2001 02:52:34          +0000
Received: from cyclone.comcen.com.au (cyclone.comcen.com.au [203.23.236.100])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA05836 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 15 Jul 2001 19:52:33 -0700
Received: (from nobody@localhost) by cyclone.comcen.com.au (8.11.1/8.11.1) id          f6G2qTb85613; Mon, 16 Jul 2001 12:52:29 +1000 (EST) (envelope-from          pkelly@comcen.com.au)
X-Authentication-Warning: cyclone.comcen.com.au: nobody set sender to                         pkelly@comcen.com.au using -f
References: <5.1.0.14.0.20010715201136.02966ed0@hobbiton.shire.net> <Your                  message of Sat, 14 Jul 2001 23:58:52 -0400>                         <5.1.0.14.0.20010715201136.02966ed0@hobbiton.shire.net>            <5.1.0.14.0.20010715221023.02aa30f0@hobbiton.shire.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
User-Agent: IMP/PHP IMAP webmail program 2.2.3
X-Originating-IP: 203.2.125.3
Message-ID:  <995251949.3b5256eddb929@webmail.comcen.com.au>
Date:         Mon, 16 Jul 2001 12:52:29 +1000
Reply-To: "Paul Kelly" <pkelly@COMCEN.COM.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Paul Kelly" <pkelly@COMCEN.COM.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Non-black powder ejection
Comments: To: Seth Leigh <seth@PENGAR.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <5.1.0.14.0.20010715221023.02aa30f0@hobbiton.shire.net>

Quoting Seth Leigh <seth@PENGAR.COM>:
Consider the dynamics of the two solutions.
As the gas expands the rubber diaphragm stretches, allowing a modest build up
of pressure untill it ruptures.

You are talking about taking a cartridge, and casting a slug of PE in the top.
The pressure will rise until the PE looses it's grip on the brass. At this
point you have a pressure vessle with a sliding projectile at one end. Much
like the application for which the cartridge was designed!

Hey, don't believe me. It sounds like you have the resources to try it. I'd be
keen to hear how many sheets of paper it would punch through.

> At 09:04 PM 7/15/2001, you wrote:
> >You've just made a cartridge that will fire a polyethylene slug at
> your
> >recovery gear at huge velocity.
>
> I'm not convinced by your argument.  After all, the guy whose webpage I
> was
> replying to was able to do it, albeit a bit differently, and it seems
> to
> work well.  He used the latex just to maintain the pressure in the
> combustion chamber long enough for all of the powder granules to ignite.
>  I
> am suggesting that hot-melt glue or silicone RTV used as a plug in the
> end
> of the piece of brass could be used for the same purpose, ie: to hold
> the
> pressure in long enough for the powder to ignite completely.  The
> pressure
> we are talking about here is not high enough to propel this small slug
> at
> anything approaching "huge velocity".
>
> This doesn't have to generate great pressure, just sufficient
> pressure.  Once the plug exits the end of the cartridge case, the
> pressure
> on the plug is released.  One quarter inch of travel (or less, it would
> have to be determined experimentally just how much of a plug was
> actually
> required to do the job) under moderate pressure is not exactly going to
> make a speeding bullet out of a little chunk of silicone.  You only have
> to
> have your plug hold the same pressure as the original author's
> latex.  That's not all that much really.
>
> I am going to arrange to test this.  I have a container of Hodgon
> Universal
> Clays pistol powder that I think would do the trick nicely.  I can
> easily
> obtain some Berdan-primed 7.62x39 brass from the local range.
>
> Actually, the more I think of it, the better the idea gets.  If you get
> the
> aluminum casings from CCI they are also berdan primed.  I'd think some
> aluminum casings in .357 Magnum or .44 Magnum could be used to make
> wonderful ejection chambers.
>
> This idea deserves some experimentation.  Don't cast your doubts too
> swiftly.  Remember that pistols use steel barrels several to many
> inches
> long to hold the pressure in long enough to push out an extremely heavy
> (as
> compared to a little silicone plug) projectile.  The pressures can't
> even
> be compared to what we are aiming to achieve here.
>
> Seth
>
> > > Hi.  One of the members of the Amateur rocketry mailing list posted
> a
> > > link
> > > to your website.  I am responding with a suggestion, and I thought
> I'd
> > > include the ARocket list on the to: line so they'd be able to see
> my
> > > suggestion.
> > >
> > > You've reloaded ammo for a long time, so I'm sure you know what I
> mean
> > > when
> > > I talk about Berdan primers.  For the benefit of the ARocket list,
> a
> > > Berdan
> > > primed catridge has two fire holes in the case through which the
> flames
> > > from the primer travel on their way into powder charge.  This is as
> > > opposed
> > > to Boxer primed brass, where there is only one hole.
> > >
> > > Anyhow, I am wondering how feasible it would be to just take some
> > > Berdan
> > > primed brass to use as the containment chamber for a smokeless
> ejection
> > > charge.  You could take some fired brass, say 7.63x39 russian ammo
> > > (this
> > > cheap ammo is always berdan primed), cut the neck off so you have a
> > > slightly tapered case with no neck maybe an inch or so long, and
> decap
> > > it
> > > so you see the two holes in the primer pocket.  If these holes are
> two
> > > small for your igniter wires to pass through then perhaps drill
> them
> > > out
> > > slightly, but I think they might just work as is.
> > >
> > > Anyhow, just put your igniter in from the open end of the case,
> > > sticking
> > > the igniter wires in through the two Berdan primer holes and hence
> out
> > > the
> > > back.  Now pour in your powder charge.  Next stuff in some tissue
> paper
> > > until you are within a quarter inch of the end of the
> > > case.  Flame-retardant tissue paper might or might not be needed.
> Next
> > > just fill the last quarter inch of the of case with hot-melt glue.
> In
> > > other words, where you had hot-melt glue on the back side of your
> > > ejection
> > > chamber, I suggest putting it in the front end as a kind of stopper,
> in
> > > place of the latex rubber of your design.
> > >
> > > The igniter wires going through the Berdan primer pocket holes
> would
> > > probably be a close enough fit that nothing special would need to
> be
> > > done
> > > to seal the primer pocket, but if you were so inclined, a shot of
> > > hot-melt
> > > glue or silicone RTV or somesuch would certainly do the trick.  If
> you
> > > can
> > > get away with not sealing it at all, it just makes for that much
> less
> > > work
> > > to reuse it.
> > >
> > > The beauty of this approach is that:
> > > a)  the fired cartridges can be found usually in large quantities
> at
> > > any
> > > local firing range
> > > b)  aside from cutting the neck and throat off of the end of the
> case,
> > > which could be done with a hacksaw, a dremel-tool cutting wheel, or
> any
> > > other low-tech cutting apparatus, no other machining need be
> performed,
> > > and
> > > the neck and throat could be cut off and the rough edges smoothed
> off
> > > in
> > > probably two to five minutes each.
> > > c) they would be so easy to make that you could make dozens of them
> > > already
> > > pre-loaded and ready to use.
> > >
> > > If they weigh too much for some people's liking, you could always
> cut
> > > the
> > > case head off at the extractor groove, thus removing a bit of metal
> and
> > > hence weight.
> > >
> > > This idea needs to be tested.  I haven't done it, I just thought of
> it
> > > after reading your web page.
> > >
> > > I believe the length of the 7.62x39 brass without neck or throat
> should
> > > be
> > > long enough to allow the powder to burn sufficiently.  If that is
> not
> > > the
> > > case you could always use berdan-primed .308 brass or somesuch.
> > >
> > > I'd be interested in hearing your thoughts on this.  You might well
> be
> > > able
> > > to just skip the hot-melt glue altogether and just use silicone RTV
> to
> > > seal
> > > the open end.
> > >
> > > Seth
> > >
> > >
> > > At 03:16 PM 7/15/2001, William Chops Westfield wrote:
> > > >One of the model rocketeers recently did some research on using
> > > smokeless
> > > >powder as rejection charges for a NAR R&D entry (I think.)
> > > >
> > > >See http://www.alaska.net/~aleckson/rockets/smokless.html
> > > >
> > > >BillW
> > >
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 18419 invoked from network); 16 Jul 2001 03:19:28 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 16 Jul 2001 03:19:28 -0000
Received: (qmail 16483 invoked from network); 16 Jul 2001 03:20:58 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 16 Jul 2001 03:20:58 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA05986; Sun, 15 Jul 2001 20:12:45 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 77904 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 16 Jul 2001 03:11:22          +0000
Received: from wrench.toolcity.net (root@wrench.toolcity.net [208.0.188.2]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA05967 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 15 Jul 2001 20:11:21 -0700
Received: from [208.11.233.240]          (dap-208-11-233-240.meadville-tnt-0.pa.toolcity.net [208.11.233.240])          by wrench.toolcity.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id XAA06138; Sun, 15          Jul 2001 23:11:14 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <v01510102b77813fbb889@[208.11.233.240]>
Date:         Sun, 15 Jul 2001 23:13:33 -0500
Reply-To: "al bradley" <abradley@TOOLCITY.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "al bradley" <abradley@TOOLCITY.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Non-black powder ejection
Comments: To: Seth Leigh <seth@PENGAR.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

> . . . He used the latex just to maintain the pressure in the
>combustion chamber long enough for all of the powder granules to ignite.  I
>am suggesting that hot-melt glue or silicone RTV used as a plug in the end
>of the piece of brass could be used for the same purpose, ie: to hold the
>pressure in long enough for the powder to ignite completely.  The pressure
>we are talking about here is not high enough to propel this small slug at
>anything approaching "huge velocity".

snip . . .

Maybe you don't even need hot-glue or RTV. I have done indoor pistol
practice using empty cartridges with just a new primer in the case. The
"bullet" was simply from a lukewarm paraffin block about 1/2" thick into
which the open end of the primed empty cartridge case was pressed.  As
rapidly as your proposed reaction with smokeless would occur I doubt if
there would even be time for the paraffin to even begin to soften. Those
wax slugs seemed to go down the pistol barrel just fine. They would
penetrate the targets enough to see where you had fired.

snip . . .

>This idea deserves some experimentation.  Don't cast your doubts too
>swiftly.  Remember that pistols use steel barrels several to many inches
>long to hold the pressure in long enough to push out an extremely heavy (as
>compared to a little silicone plug) projectile.  The pressures can't even
>be compared to what we are aiming to achieve here.
>

You need to consider that pistol powders are an extremely rapid powder. So
much so that in revolvers the full velocity and pressure is developed
within the length of the cylinder. Similar in automatics in that the
blowback discharge of gases within the receiver may be occuring before the
slug has left the end of the barrel.

Might be that a "slow-burning" rifle powder would be even softer in its effect.

Just some thoughts,
al bradley

------------------------------------------------------------------
Can you live Life with this?: "Unless there is a law, an agreement, or a
long-standing custom, No one `Deserves' Anything -- Either Good or Bad!"

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 4593 invoked from network); 16 Jul 2001 05:05:13 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 16 Jul 2001 05:05:13 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 15104 invoked from network); 16 Jul 2001 05:06:43 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 16 Jul 2001 05:06:43 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA06507; Sun, 15 Jul 2001 21:57:41 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 77918 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 16 Jul 2001 04:55:47          +0000
Received: from smtp4ve.mailsrvcs.net (smtp4vepub.gte.net [206.46.170.25]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA06077 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 15 Jul 2001 20:45:16 -0700
Received: from me-513q3sc0zun0.pengar.com          (adsl-64-223-147-206.mannh.adsl.bellatlantic.net [64.223.147.206]) by          smtp4ve.mailsrvcs.net (8.9.1/8.9.1) with ESMTP id DAA53326554; Mon,          16 Jul 2001 03:44:13 GMT
X-Sender: seth-pc@hobbiton.shire.net
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <5.1.0.14.0.20010715232522.02aed958@hobbiton.shire.net>
Date:         Sun, 15 Jul 2001 23:48:48 -0400
Reply-To: "Seth Leigh" <seth@PENGAR.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Seth Leigh" <seth@PENGAR.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Non-black powder ejection
Comments: To: al bradley <abradley@TOOLCITY.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <v01510102b77813fbb889@[208.11.233.240]>

At 12:13 AM 7/16/2001, you wrote:
>You need to consider that pistol powders are an extremely rapid powder. So
>much so that in revolvers the full velocity and pressure is developed
>within the length of the cylinder. Similar in automatics in that the
>blowback discharge of gases within the receiver may be occuring before the
>slug has left the end of the barrel.
>
>Might be that a "slow-burning" rifle powder would be even softer in its
>effect.

Indeed.  I have access to a good number of different powders of various
speeds, all the way from H1000 (wicked slow powder used in large magnum
rifle cases) down to AA#2.  Some of my powders got left behind in Utah, so
I am not sure what exactly made it out here to NH since I haven't reloaded
more than one caliber since I got here (.40 cal pistol), but I am sure that
I have enough of a selection of various speeds to satisfy the requirements
of this test.

I have fired 40 mm grenades from an M203 grenade launcher when I was in the
National Guard.  I looked very carefully at the inside of those 40 mm
grenade shells.  They were short, and with such a huge bore opening up (ie:
reducing pressure) so fast as the grenade moved down the barrel, they had
to find a good way to keep the pressure up.  The way they did it was to
have a little combustion chamber inside the shell.  It seems (at least as
far as I could tell) that all of the propellant was actually in this little
metal "bubble" for lack of a better word, which had some vent holes in the
side of it.  It seems the propellant would burn inside this little bubble
and vent its pressure out the holes into the rest of the shell.  As the
grenade moved up the bore, the propellant was still confined by this bubble
with its small vent holes, rather than having to fight the ever-expanding
volume of the shell casing plus bore volume, to keep the pressure up, and
hence allow the powder to burn efficiently and completely.

I am wondering how this principle could be used for rocketry.  Here is one
concept.

    1               2             3            4
____________________________
|:::::::::::::::XXXXX      O O O         ||
|++++++:::XXXXX      O O O         ||
|:::::::::::::::XXXXX___ O O O_____||

1 - base of the ejection device with igniter showing and smokeless powder
2 - a wad of some sort, perhaps some paper with a bit of RTV to "glue" it
in place
3 - the sides of the casing at this point have holes in them to vent the
pressure out
4 - the end of the casing closed off so that the RTV doesn't leave the
casing.  This could be
as simple as a little cap inserted 1/4" into the casing and held in place
with a cotter pin for easy
removal.

This is a bit more complicated than just a spent cartridge casing.  But
actually this could probably  be made from a spent cartridge casing, and it
needed be all that complex.  If you had an aluminum CCI Blazer .44 Magnum
casing, you could put in 5 grains of powder, put it a little plug, have
several small holes cut in the size for venting pressure, and just have two
holes cut across
from each other near the end of the case with a small pin used to catch the
wadding so it wouldn't leave the casing.  All of the pressure would vent
out the side, and the device would be easy to make and reusable, even to
the point of being refillable out in the field.

I'll have to go hunt the range for some aluminum .44 magnum casings.  If I
can't find any, I can probably find a brass .44 casing to use just to prove
the concept.

Seth

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 12360 invoked from network); 16 Jul 2001 05:07:12 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 16 Jul 2001 05:07:12 -0000
Received: (qmail 9862 invoked from network); 16 Jul 2001 05:08:59 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 16 Jul 2001 05:08:59 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA06529; Sun, 15 Jul 2001 21:59:50 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 77936 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 16 Jul 2001 04:58:29          +0000
Received: from albqpop1.albq.uswest.net (albqpop1.albq.uswest.net          [207.108.240.1]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id VAA06201          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 15 Jul 2001 21:23:00 -0700
Received: (qmail 61216 invoked by alias); 16 Jul 2001 04:22:29 -0000
Delivered-To: fixup-AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU@fixme
Received: (qmail 61205 invoked by uid 0); 16 Jul 2001 04:22:28 -0000
Received: from cc898542-a.prdise1.nm.home.com (HELO cc898542a) (65.7.151.152)          by albqpop1.albq.uswest.net with SMTP; 16 Jul 2001 04:22:28 -0000
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_09E5_01C56B69.4173BF90"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <005901c10daf$a6258840$0100a8c0@prdise1.nm.home.com>
Date:         Sun, 15 Jul 2001 22:27:39 -0600
Reply-To: "Pax" <darkspunge@USWEST.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Pax" <darkspunge@USWEST.NET>
Subject:      [AR] Mould release agents
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_09E5_01C56B69.4173BF90
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

What are the more common, best, and or cheapest mould release agents for =
epoxy. For using plastic moulds, or mandrels where you don't want the =
epoxy to be a permanent member of your tool.
Not looking for anything fancy, because my applications are not fancy =
yet.

Paxton

------=_NextPart_000_09E5_01C56B69.4173BF90
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Diso-8859-1">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 5.50.4522.1800" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>What are the more common, best, and or =
cheapest=20
mould release agents for epoxy. For using plastic moulds, or mandrels =
where you=20
don't want the epoxy to be a permanent member of your tool.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Not looking for anything fancy, because =
my=20
applications are not fancy yet.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Paxton</FONT></DIV></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_09E5_01C56B69.4173BF90--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 13875 invoked from network); 16 Jul 2001 05:07:37 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 16 Jul 2001 05:07:37 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 6875 invoked from network); 16 Jul 2001 05:09:01 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 16 Jul 2001 05:09:01 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA06561; Sun, 15 Jul 2001 22:01:12 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 77946 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 16 Jul 2001 04:59:51          +0000
Received: from grucom2.gru.net (grucom2.gru.net [209.251.129.7]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA06234 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun,          15 Jul 2001 21:27:03 -0700
Received: from [209.251.150.200] by grucom2.sfcc.net (NTMail          6.03.0009/NU4112.00.db1c8a4b) with ESMTP id deldgaaa for          AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 16 Jul 2001 00:26:57 -0400
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (Win95; I)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <v01510102b77813fbb889@[208.11.233.240]>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B526D4F.D2E59286@sfcc.net>
Date:         Mon, 16 Jul 2001 00:27:59 -0400
Reply-To: "James Yawn" <jyawn@SFCC.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "James Yawn" <jyawn@SFCC.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Non-black powder ejection
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Given the forcefulness of the ejection I witnessed in my simple test yesterday, I
would question whether pressure containment of a smokeless powder charge is
necessary, or even helpful.  The gram of Red Dot was contained only by one layer of
two-ply paper towel, yet had no trouble in ejecting a big wad packed in tight.  It
was more like a pneumatic device, less explosive than BP.  Trying to raise the SP
up to explosive pressures seems counterproductive to me.

Thanks for the idea about using Berdan-primed cartridges - I will experiment with
it, and look forward to hearing of yours. But if any of the problems mentioned so
far are manifest, I would try using the minimum plug needed to keep the powder in
place, perhaps one thickness of typing paper.  If more power is needed, I might
just use more powder, and let it burn slow.

Jimmy Yawn







al bradley wrote:

> > . . . He used the latex just to maintain the pressure in the
> >combustion chamber long enough for all of the powder granules to ignite.  I
> >am suggesting that hot-melt glue or silicone RTV used as a plug in the end
> >of the piece of brass could be used for the same purpose, ie: to hold the
> >pressure in long enough for the powder to ignite completely.  The pressure
> >we are talking about here is not high enough to propel this small slug at
> >anything approaching "huge velocity".
>
> snip . . .
>
> Maybe you don't even need hot-glue or RTV. I have done indoor pistol
> practice using empty cartridges with just a new primer in the case. The
> "bullet" was simply from a lukewarm paraffin block about 1/2" thick into
> which the open end of the primed empty cartridge case was pressed.  As
> rapidly as your proposed reaction with smokeless would occur I doubt if
> there would even be time for the paraffin to even begin to soften. Those
> wax slugs seemed to go down the pistol barrel just fine. They would
> penetrate the targets enough to see where you had fired.
>
> snip . . .
>
> >This idea deserves some experimentation.  Don't cast your doubts too
> >swiftly.  Remember that pistols use steel barrels several to many inches
> >long to hold the pressure in long enough to push out an extremely heavy (as
> >compared to a little silicone plug) projectile.  The pressures can't even
> >be compared to what we are aiming to achieve here.
> >
>
> You need to consider that pistol powders are an extremely rapid powder. So
> much so that in revolvers the full velocity and pressure is developed
> within the length of the cylinder. Similar in automatics in that the
> blowback discharge of gases within the receiver may be occuring before the
> slug has left the end of the barrel.
>
> Might be that a "slow-burning" rifle powder would be even softer in its effect.
>
> Just some thoughts,
> al bradley
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------
> Can you live Life with this?: "Unless there is a law, an agreement, or a
> long-standing custom, No one `Deserves' Anything -- Either Good or Bad!"

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 18841 invoked from network); 16 Jul 2001 05:24:52 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 16 Jul 2001 05:24:52 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 22708 invoked from network); 16 Jul 2001 05:23:01 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 16 Jul 2001 05:23:01 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA06675; Sun, 15 Jul 2001 22:14:14 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 78043 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 16 Jul 2001 05:12:52          +0000
Received: from smtp6ve.mailsrvcs.net (smtp6vepub.gte.net [206.46.170.27]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA06653 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 15 Jul 2001 22:12:52 -0700
Received: from me-513q3sc0zun0.pengar.com          (adsl-64-223-147-206.mannh.adsl.bellatlantic.net [64.223.147.206]) by          smtp6ve.mailsrvcs.net (8.9.1/8.9.1) with ESMTP id FAA41909068; Mon,          16 Jul 2001 05:12:17 GMT
X-Sender: seth-pc@hobbiton.shire.net
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <5.1.0.14.0.20010716011445.02b6f8c0@hobbiton.shire.net>
Date:         Mon, 16 Jul 2001 01:16:53 -0400
Reply-To: "Seth Leigh" <seth@PENGAR.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Seth Leigh" <seth@PENGAR.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Mould release agents
Comments: To: Pax <darkspunge@USWEST.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <005901c10daf$a6258840$0100a8c0@prdise1.nm.home.com>

I believe people use Carnauba wax.  They rub it on, buff it off, etc. many
times before casting.

There's probably some sprays you can use as well.  I recall for doing rifle
action glass bedding (using epoxy to make a very tight fit between the
rifle action and a wood or fiberglass stock) I bought this spray from
Brownells.  It seemed to do a good job and didn't seem to have had enough
thickness to have changed the dimensions in any noticeable way.

Seth


At 12:27 AM 7/16/2001, Pax wrote:
>What are the more common, best, and or cheapest mould release agents for
>epoxy. For using plastic moulds, or mandrels where you don't want the
>epoxy to be a permanent member of your tool.
>Not looking for anything fancy, because my applications are not fancy yet.
>
>Paxton

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 17999 invoked from network); 16 Jul 2001 05:32:28 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 16 Jul 2001 05:32:28 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 26825 invoked from network); 16 Jul 2001 05:33:58 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 16 Jul 2001 05:33:58 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA06750; Sun, 15 Jul 2001 22:25:47 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 78056 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 16 Jul 2001 05:24:25          +0000
Received: from smtp4ve.mailsrvcs.net (smtp4vepub.gte.net [206.46.170.25]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA06728 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 15 Jul 2001 22:24:24 -0700
Received: from me-513q3sc0zun0.pengar.com          (adsl-64-223-147-206.mannh.adsl.bellatlantic.net [64.223.147.206]) by          smtp4ve.mailsrvcs.net (8.9.1/8.9.1) with ESMTP id FAA53108793 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 16 Jul 2001 05:23:53 GMT
X-Sender: seth-pc@hobbiton.shire.net
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
References: <v01510102b77813fbb889@[208.11.233.240]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <5.1.0.14.0.20010716012601.02b5e2b8@hobbiton.shire.net>
Date:         Mon, 16 Jul 2001 01:28:30 -0400
Reply-To: "Seth Leigh" <seth@PENGAR.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Seth Leigh" <seth@PENGAR.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Non-black powder ejection
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <3B526D4F.D2E59286@sfcc.net>

At 12:27 AM 7/16/2001, James Yawn wrote:
>Given the forcefulness of the ejection I witnessed in my simple test
>yesterday, I
>would question whether pressure containment of a smokeless powder charge is
>necessary, or even helpful.  The gram of Red Dot was contained only by one
>layer of
>two-ply paper towel, yet had no trouble in ejecting a big wad packed in
>tight.  It
>was more like a pneumatic device, less explosive than BP.  Trying to raise
>the SP
>up to explosive pressures seems counterproductive to me.

Remember you used a whole gram of powder.  The guy on the web site is
working with 4.7 to 5 grains.  There are something like 15.4 grains to a
gram.  For those non reloaders out there a grain is a unit of weight with
7000 grains to a pound.  Powder charges for reloading ammo, as well as
bullet weights, are usually measured in the US in grains, and in most of
the rest of the world in grams.

Seth

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 22572 invoked from network); 16 Jul 2001 06:04:37 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 16 Jul 2001 06:04:37 -0000
Received: (qmail 23670 invoked from network); 16 Jul 2001 06:06:24 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 16 Jul 2001 06:06:24 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA06858; Sun, 15 Jul 2001 22:57:24 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 78069 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 16 Jul 2001 05:55:45          +0000
Received: from wrench.toolcity.net (root@wrench.toolcity.net [208.0.188.2]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA06840 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 15 Jul 2001 22:55:45 -0700
Received: from [208.11.233.240]          (dap-208-11-233-240.meadville-tnt-0.pa.toolcity.net [208.11.233.240])          by wrench.toolcity.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id BAA05304; Mon, 16          Jul 2001 01:55:39 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <v01510102b7783fd1051f@[208.11.233.240]>
Date:         Mon, 16 Jul 2001 01:57:59 -0500
Reply-To: "al bradley" <abradley@TOOLCITY.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "al bradley" <abradley@TOOLCITY.NET>
Subject:      [AR] 3Re: [AR] Non-black powder ejection
Comments: To: James Yawn <jyawn@SFCC.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

>Given the forcefulness of the ejection I witnessed in my simple test
>yesterday, I
>would question whether pressure containment of a smokeless powder charge is
>necessary, or even helpful.  The gram of Red Dot was contained only by one
>layer of
>two-ply paper towel, yet had no trouble in ejecting a big wad packed in
>tight.  It
>was more like a pneumatic device, less explosive than BP.  Trying to raise
>the SP
>up to explosive pressures seems counterproductive to me.
------------------
Interesting observations Jim.
Do you think it would have ejected a tightly wadded/packed parachute
without damage to the chute or the strings? Hope you do another experiment
with this as part of it.

best regards,
al bradley

------------------------------------------------------------------
Can you live Life with this?: "Unless there is a law, an agreement, or a
long-standing custom, No one `Deserves' Anything -- Either Good or Bad!"

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 2104 invoked from network); 16 Jul 2001 06:38:10 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 16 Jul 2001 06:38:10 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 9459 invoked from network); 16 Jul 2001 06:39:42 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 16 Jul 2001 06:39:42 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA07028; Sun, 15 Jul 2001 23:30:22 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 78104 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 16 Jul 2001 06:28:58          +0000
Received: from mail.alphalink.com.au (mail.alphalink.com.au [202.161.124.12])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA07004 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 15 Jul 2001 23:28:57 -0700
Received: from pop03-18-Melbourne.alphalink.com.au          (pop03-18-Melbourne.alphalink.com.au [10.10.10.3] (may be forged)) by          mail.alphalink.com.au (8.11.4/8.9.3) with SMTP id f6G6SlQ19715; Mon,          16 Jul 2001 16:28:49 +1000
X-Sender: brucej@pop.alphalink.com.au
X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.2
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <200107160628.f6G6SlQ19715@mail.alphalink.com.au>
Date:         Mon, 16 Jul 2001 16:28:49 +1000
Reply-To: "bruce johnson" <brucej@ALPHALINK.COM.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "bruce johnson" <brucej@ALPHALINK.COM.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] 3Re: [AR] Cast Nozzle Molds -- Was -- Re: [AR] 2Re:              [AR]CERAMICS
Comments: To: Hans Olaf Toft <hot@VIP.CYBERCITY.DK>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

you can make the water putty a little harder by adding "grog" to it



At 10:36 PM 15/07/01 +0200, Hans Olaf Toft wrote:
>al bradley wrote:
>
>> Durhams Rockhard Water Putty is a fine-grained, rather hard substance that
>> comes in a powder form to be mixed with water and is often used by
>> woodworkers as a filler in nail holes and around some joints. It is often
>> used by beginning rocketeers to make their nozzles. It does erode some by
>> motor gases through the throat. It is sold in the USA, perhaps under
>> another name in Denmark.
>
>We have a substance for that purpose called "Polyfyla" wich is based on
plaster of
>Paris - very likely to be a close relative of the "Durhams Water Putty.
>
>> You might be interested in what we call "dental stone". Here, in the US,
>> whan a patient requires artificial teeth the first impression is made in a
>> wax-setting material in the mouth. From this a second casting is made in
>> dental stone. I am sure that Danish dentists have something like this
>
>... at least they can do the thing with the wax-setting material - not very
>pleasant!
>
>Recently a friend of mine suggested that Durhams water putty was based on
>silicates and that this was the reason that it would be tough and heat
resistant.
>This has made me curious.
>
>Hans
>
>
Newton was wrong
In rocketry for every action there is an equal and opposite malfunction

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 15441 invoked from network); 16 Jul 2001 07:13:20 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 16 Jul 2001 07:13:20 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 11319 invoked from network); 16 Jul 2001 07:14:30 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 16 Jul 2001 07:14:30 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA07196; Mon, 16 Jul 2001 00:06:12 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 78144 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 16 Jul 2001 07:04:44          +0000
Received: from femail17.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail17.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.0.95.144]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA07175          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 16 Jul 2001 00:04:44 -0700
Received: from c396957-b.home.net ([24.17.249.10]) by          femail17.sdc1.sfba.home.com (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20          201-229-121-120-20010223) with ESMTP id          <20010716070431.BVKS19255.femail17.sdc1.sfba.home.com@c396957-b.home.net> for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 16          Jul 2001 00:04:31 -0700
X-Sender: spiegl@mail
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
References: <5.1.0.14.2.20010713150246.00ac6d38@mail>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <5.1.0.14.2.20010716020344.00ac12a8@mail>
Date:         Mon, 16 Jul 2001 02:04:32 -0500
Reply-To: "Mark C Spiegl" <spiegl@HOME.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Mark C Spiegl" <spiegl@HOME.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] CERAMICS
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <00a201c10c41$f5077a00$0100a8c0@mkbs>

> Have you any examples of people using hardwood?
>
>
> I have heard that Russia used Lignum Vitae in some "real world" applications
> but have never seen any hard information on this.
>

Sorry... I don't have any professional references to hardwood use... just
some personal experiences when nothing else was available on short notice.
Anyone???

I would expect a wooden nozzle to just plain burn-up. But, it is tougher
than you realize. Again, I admit hardwood is far from ideal, but it does
work in a pinch.  As a rough guess I would say hardwood erodes about the
same as an Aerotech plastic nozzle. Certainly not a Kosdon 20x'er, nor
would I want to use it in a long burn-time motor.


--MCS

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 21313 invoked from network); 16 Jul 2001 07:38:23 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 16 Jul 2001 07:38:23 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 14622 invoked from network); 16 Jul 2001 07:40:10 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 16 Jul 2001 07:40:10 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA07281; Mon, 16 Jul 2001 00:20:12 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 78164 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 16 Jul 2001 07:18:50          +0000
Received: from femail17.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail17.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.0.95.144]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA07258          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 16 Jul 2001 00:18:50 -0700
Received: from c396957-b.home.net ([24.17.249.10]) by          femail17.sdc1.sfba.home.com (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20          201-229-121-120-20010223) with ESMTP id          <20010716071844.AWC23117.femail17.sdc1.sfba.home.com@c396957-b.home.net> for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 16          Jul 2001 00:18:44 -0700
X-Sender: spiegl@mail
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <5.1.0.14.2.20010716020501.00ac5d58@mail>
Date:         Mon, 16 Jul 2001 02:18:46 -0500
Reply-To: "Mark C Spiegl" <spiegl@HOME.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Mark C Spiegl" <spiegl@HOME.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] CERAMICS
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <v01510100b7761854878c@[208.22.189.238]>

al bradley <abradley@TOOLCITY.NET> writes:

> Seems to me that the same amount of work to turn a wood nozzle would be
> well applied to turning a nozzle mold out of wood for a number of cast
> nozzles.

I guess we are all guilty of using the tools we are most comfortable
with. I admit I am woefully ignorant of casting methods and tend to
steer clear. I'm still ignorant of machining, but at least I stand a
50/50 chance of success. :/

IF you were to make a mold, I would guess that a carbon-carbon lay-up
would work much better than a true casting... but again I claim
ignorance.

> I am always surprised that there has not been more work done with this,
> using pourable-castable materials such as "dental stone" which is strong
> and hard and will withstand the heat of applications such as pressing
> molten glass into the molds for art-glass work. Also, IIRC Firefox has a
> castable graphite. Has anyone used this successfully?

Firefox nozzles are junk. (IMHO, no offence Gary)

If anyone remembers a now defunct company called RocketFlight, they
used cast clay nozzles. Their propellants were a high metal content
hybrid.  (by hybrid I mean hybrid black-powder/composite not N2O)


> Also, while on the subject of molds it may be worthwhile to remember that
> fireworks manufacturers long used rammed dampened clay for their nozzles. I
> don't know if that has been supplanted by more modern materials for their
> pyrotechnics?

Black-powder and candy propellants are a different beast than the high
metal, high solid loaded composites.


> Perhaps the trickiest part of cast nozzles is creating the groove for the
> "O-ring" to seal the nozzle-to-case joint.

Create O-ring-less (is that a word?) designs. I know it can be done
quite effectively in small motors, up to 3" at least. As one design
example, we used to generously smear the nozzle chunk with silicone
cement and use a retaining ring.


--MCS

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 17968 invoked from network); 16 Jul 2001 07:45:37 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 16 Jul 2001 07:45:37 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 2476 invoked from network); 16 Jul 2001 07:47:08 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 16 Jul 2001 07:47:08 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA07393; Mon, 16 Jul 2001 00:39:09 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 78174 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 16 Jul 2001 07:37:45          +0000
Received: from femail19.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail19.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.0.95.128]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA07375          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 16 Jul 2001 00:37:45 -0700
Received: from c396957-b.home.net ([24.17.249.10]) by          femail19.sdc1.sfba.home.com (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20          201-229-121-120-20010223) with ESMTP id          <20010716073742.NSG3814.femail19.sdc1.sfba.home.com@c396957-b.home.net> for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 16          Jul 2001 00:37:42 -0700
X-Sender: spiegl@mail
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <5.1.0.14.2.20010716023617.00a7d5e8@mail>
Date:         Mon, 16 Jul 2001 02:37:44 -0500
Reply-To: "Mark C Spiegl" <spiegl@HOME.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Mark C Spiegl" <spiegl@HOME.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] CERAMICS
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <v01510100b7761854878c@[208.22.189.238]>

al bradley <abradley@TOOLCITY.NET> writes:

> Seems to me that the same amount of work to turn a wood nozzle would be
> well applied to turning a nozzle mold out of wood for a number of cast
> nozzles.


I saw some (great) guys in Ohio using a phenolic-like nozzle in a
60sec burn time n,nnn lbf biprop motor.

The nozzle was a whomping big chunk of phenolic and looked like it had
some type of fiber reinforcement. I'm just guessing, but it seemed
like the nozzle may have been wrapped not cast. I didn't ask and they
didn't say.


--MCS

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 21486 invoked from network); 16 Jul 2001 07:54:49 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 16 Jul 2001 07:54:49 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 4407 invoked from network); 16 Jul 2001 07:56:20 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 16 Jul 2001 07:56:20 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA07436; Mon, 16 Jul 2001 00:46:59 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 78182 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 16 Jul 2001 07:45:38          +0000
Received: from cicero2.cybercity.dk (cicero2.cybercity.dk [212.242.40.53]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA07418 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 16 Jul 2001 00:45:37 -0700
Received: from usr04.cybercity.dk (usr04.cybercity.dk [212.242.40.36]) by          cicero2.cybercity.dk (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1B38510001F for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 16 Jul 2001 09:45:36 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from vip.cybercity.dk ([217.157.69.229]) by usr04.cybercity.dk          (8.11.2/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f6G7jZn41680 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>;          Mon, 16 Jul 2001 09:45:35 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from          hot@vip.cybercity.dk)
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.75 [en] (Win95; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <5.1.0.14.0.20010716011445.02b6f8c0@hobbiton.shire.net>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B529DA2.A1DB8B39@vip.cybercity.dk>
Date:         Mon, 16 Jul 2001 09:54:10 +0200
Reply-To: "Hans Olaf Toft" <hot@VIP.CYBERCITY.DK>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Hans Olaf Toft" <hot@VIP.CYBERCITY.DK>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Mould release agents
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

We are using "Turtle Wax" (wich includes Teflon particles) for our mandrels
(Nylon or PE). The last portion I bought was in a blue bottle.

Hans Olaf Toft

Seth Leigh wrote:

> I believe people use Carnauba wax.  They rub it on, buff it off, etc. many
> times before casting.
>
> There's probably some sprays you can use as well.  I recall for doing rifle
> action glass bedding (using epoxy to make a very tight fit between the
> rifle action and a wood or fiberglass stock) I bought this spray from
> Brownells.  It seemed to do a good job and didn't seem to have had enough
> thickness to have changed the dimensions in any noticeable way.
>
> Seth
>
> At 12:27 AM 7/16/2001, Pax wrote:
> >What are the more common, best, and or cheapest mould release agents for
> >epoxy. For using plastic moulds, or mandrels where you don't want the
> >epoxy to be a permanent member of your tool.
> >Not looking for anything fancy, because my applications are not fancy yet.
> >
> >Paxton

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 5875 invoked from network); 16 Jul 2001 10:29:44 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 16 Jul 2001 10:29:44 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 13619 invoked from network); 16 Jul 2001 10:31:14 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 16 Jul 2001 10:31:14 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id DAA08114; Mon, 16 Jul 2001 03:22:33 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 78272 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 16 Jul 2001 10:21:05          +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (f24.law15.hotmail.com [64.4.23.24]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id DAA08096 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Mon,          16 Jul 2001 03:21:04 -0700
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Mon,          16 Jul 2001 03:20:34 -0700
Received: from 193.121.251.246 by lw15fd.law15.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Mon,          16 Jul 2001 10:20:34 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [193.121.251.246]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 16 Jul 2001 10:20:34.0484 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[F3101F40:01C10DE0]
Message-ID:  <F24jBOh8s4KWiGtXsL10000002d@hotmail.com>
Date:         Mon, 16 Jul 2001 10:21:05 +0000
Reply-To: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Principle of equivalence
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

PD'S wrote:

>The principle of equivalence on which Einsteins theory of Gravitation is
>based says that an observer cannot distinguish between gravitational force
>and inertial force. That is to say if you are standing in a lift which is
>accelerating up you really can't tell whether the force you experience is
>due to gravity or due to the tug of the lift which is an inertial force.

>However I feel that inertial forces travel through material bodies at the
>speed of sound whereas gravitational forces travel at the speed of light so
>should be distinguishable.

S.O.S. propagation? I still wonder.

Problem is how such is measured; can you do this with your accelerometer,
measure deformation propagation speed?
What is your Abry-Perot measuring principle based on; interferometry I guess
but why does the frequency change with acceleration? Simply put: if you can
measure deformation propagation occurs at the S.O.S. (and if this assumption
is correct) then inertial forces are accelerating you and not gravity
fields.

Someone said earlier centrifugal forces are fictitious. Say that to someone
who has been sitting in a centrifuge! But maybe I did not understand the
remark context correctly.

I wonder why planets or satellites can achieve orbit. Is it not because of
their inertial acceleration component is equal but opposed to the
gravitational one? The motor delivered the inertial one.

In any case, the force produced by a rocket motor is purely inertial.
So inertial forces countering space-time deformations (gravity) to achieve
orbit...whoa.

jd
_________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 9314 invoked from network); 16 Jul 2001 11:11:26 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 16 Jul 2001 11:11:26 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 6921 invoked from network); 16 Jul 2001 11:12:35 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 16 Jul 2001 11:12:35 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id EAA08346; Mon, 16 Jul 2001 04:04:52 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 78292 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 16 Jul 2001 11:03:28          +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (f217.law15.hotmail.com [64.4.23.217]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id EAA08306 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Mon, 16 Jul 2001 04:03:28 -0700
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Mon,          16 Jul 2001 04:02:57 -0700
Received: from 193.121.251.246 by lw15fd.law15.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Mon,          16 Jul 2001 11:02:56 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [193.121.251.246]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 16 Jul 2001 11:02:57.0433 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[DEC75890:01C10DE6]
Message-ID:  <F217kjgJKVApwOLZCHu0000c5c5@hotmail.com>
Date:         Mon, 16 Jul 2001 11:03:28 +0000
Reply-To: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      [AR] inertial (artificial) gravity (was principle of equivalence)
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

In the fifties inhabited satellites where depicted as a rotating wheel.
I wonder why that principle of creating artificial gravity has been,
abandoned. Or are the inertial forces thus created requiring a too strong
(read: heavy) a station construction?

The thought experiment trying to realize what happens between the moment the
wheel is still not rotating and when it is, is startling.
When it is turning and you do not touch anything , in an inertially
accelerated environment, very unlike a in gravity field you still can float
in mid-air. Once you get hold of something every molecule get accelerated
and one is pressed to the wall and next can walk on it. Mind boggling.

jd
_________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 18928 invoked from network); 16 Jul 2001 11:44:46 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 16 Jul 2001 11:44:46 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 2766 invoked from network); 16 Jul 2001 11:46:18 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 16 Jul 2001 11:46:18 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id EAA08489; Mon, 16 Jul 2001 04:34:37 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 78324 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 16 Jul 2001 11:33:13          +0000
Received: from smtppop2pub.verizon.net (smtppop2pub.gte.net [206.46.170.21]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id EAA08470 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 16 Jul 2001 04:33:12 -0700
Received: from [63.10.189.144] (1Cust144.tnt2.hilo.hi.da.uu.net          [63.10.189.144]) by smtppop2pub.verizon.net  with ESMTP ; id          GAA5222286 Mon, 16 Jul 2001 06:32:49 -0500 (CDT)
X-Sender: ttocs@mail.gte.net
References: <v01510100b7761854878c@[208.22.189.238]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <l03130300b778807c6a28@[63.10.189.14]>
Date:         Mon, 16 Jul 2001 01:32:45 -1000
Reply-To: "Aaron Smith" <ttocs@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Aaron Smith" <ttocs@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] CERAMICS
Comments: To: Mark C Spiegl <spiegl@HOME.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <5.1.0.14.2.20010716020501.00ac5d58@mail>

<snip>

>
>Firefox nozzles are junk. (IMHO, no offence Gary)
>
>If anyone remembers a now defunct company called RocketFlight, they
>used cast clay nozzles. Their propellants were a high metal content
>hybrid.  (by hybrid I mean hybrid black-powder/composite not N2O)
>

I dunno if this is the right message to post this with, but it wasn't
enough to start a new thead.  What about a graphite nozzle with a tungsten
throat insert?  I remember the thread a while ago about using tunsten for
nozzles, but the general consencus was they would be too heavy and hard to
machine.  A simple insert would not require too much effort, and would be
rather light.

Or am I missing something?

<snip>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 13662 invoked from network); 16 Jul 2001 12:25:53 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 16 Jul 2001 12:25:53 -0000
Received: (qmail 11202 invoked from network); 16 Jul 2001 12:26:41 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 16 Jul 2001 12:26:41 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id FAA08662; Mon, 16 Jul 2001 05:18:50 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 78356 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 16 Jul 2001 12:17:27          +0000
Received: from fep4-orange.clear.net.nz (fep4-orange.clear.net.nz          [203.97.32.4]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id FAA08643          for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Mon, 16 Jul 2001 05:17:26 -0700
Received: from mkbs (203-167-160-109.dialup.clear.net.nz [203.167.160.109]) by          fep4-orange.clear.net.nz (1.5/1.7) with SMTP id AAA13525; Tue, 17 Jul          2001 00:17:21 +1200 (NZST)
References:  <F24jBOh8s4KWiGtXsL10000002d@hotmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="Windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <006901c10df1$5ee61160$0100a8c0@mkbs>
Date:         Tue, 17 Jul 2001 00:16:40 +1200
Reply-To: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Organization: Applied Technology
Subject:      Re: [AR] Principle of equivalence
Comments: To: John Dom <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

> Someone said earlier centrifugal forces are fictitious. Say that to
someone
> who has been sitting in a centrifuge! But maybe I did not understand the
> remark context correctly.
>
> I wonder why planets or satellites can achieve orbit. Is it not because of
> their inertial acceleration component is equal but opposed to the
> gravitational one? The motor delivered the inertial one.


The "real" force involved is based on Centripetal acceleration. Centrifugal
force is another way of looking at the same thing. It is generally not
considered "proper" to deal in centrifugal force. Arguably this is (flame
shields up) as much a conceit of the learned as a real distinction.



Russell McMahon

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 28471 invoked from network); 16 Jul 2001 12:29:13 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 16 Jul 2001 12:29:13 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 25387 invoked from network); 16 Jul 2001 12:30:43 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 16 Jul 2001 12:30:43 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id FAA08703; Mon, 16 Jul 2001 05:22:15 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 78364 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 16 Jul 2001 12:20:53          +0000
Received: from stud.uni-goettingen.de (root@s2.stud.uni-goettingen.de          [134.76.60.22]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id FAA08677          for <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Mon, 16 Jul 2001 05:20:53 -0700
Received: from router.atw.stud.uni-goettingen.de ([134.76.62.65]          helo=stud.uni-goettingen.de) by stud.uni-goettingen.de with esmtp          (Exim 2.12 #8) id 15M7Mn-0007zZ-00 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 16          Jul 2001 14:20:49 +0200
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [de] (Win98; I)
X-Accept-Language: de
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-RBL-Warning: (relays.orbs.org) MAIL BLOCKED; See http://www.e-scrub.com/orbs/
Message-ID:  <3B52DC4D.145DB38F@stud.uni-goettingen.de>
Date:         Mon, 16 Jul 2001 14:21:34 +0200
Reply-To: "Thomas Engelhardt" <tengelh@STUD.UNI-GOETTINGEN.DE>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Thomas Engelhardt" <tengelh@STUD.UNI-GOETTINGEN.DE>
Organization: =?iso-8859-1?Q?Rocket_Research_G=F6ttingen_=28RRG=29?=
Subject:      Re: [AR] CERAMICS
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

-------- Original Message --------
Betreff: Re: [AR] CERAMICS
Datum: Mon, 16 Jul 2001 01:32:45 -1000
Von: Aaron Smith <ttocs@GTE.NET>
Rckantwort: Aaron Smith <ttocs@GTE.NET>
An: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
Referenzen: <v01510100b7761854878c@[208.22.189.238]>

>I dunno if this is the right message to post this with, but it wasn't
>enough to start a new thead.  What about a graphite nozzle with a tungsten
>throat insert?  I remember the thread a while ago about using tunsten for
>nozzles, but the general consencus was they would be too heavy and hard to
>machine.  A simple insert would not require too much effort, and would be
>rather light.

>Or am I missing something?

>From what I know, tungsten is not very easily machinable, and it is very
expensive (at least over here).
What one could do is to buy tungsten powder, build a mold and sinter the
metal (very fancy casted nozzle). This would require a temperature over
3100 C and is most likely not feasable for amateurs. Maybe there's a
company out there that would fabricate 100-200 inserts for a reasonable
price...but IMHO tungsten is not the material for amateur rocketeers.

Cheers,

Tom

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 3349 invoked from network); 16 Jul 2001 12:50:49 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 16 Jul 2001 12:50:49 -0000
Received: (qmail 17582 invoked from network); 16 Jul 2001 12:52:20 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 16 Jul 2001 12:52:20 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id FAA08772; Mon, 16 Jul 2001 05:43:48 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 78372 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 16 Jul 2001 12:42:09          +0000
Received: from fep4-orange.clear.net.nz (fep4-orange.clear.net.nz          [203.97.32.4]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id FAA08753          for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Mon, 16 Jul 2001 05:42:08 -0700
Received: from mkbs (d2-u16.acld.clear.net.nz [203.97.48.80]) by          fep4-orange.clear.net.nz (1.5/1.7) with SMTP id AAA17526; Tue, 17 Jul          2001 00:41:59 +1200 (NZST)
References:  <F217kjgJKVApwOLZCHu0000c5c5@hotmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="Windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <009601c10df4$d0a2dc40$0100a8c0@mkbs>
Date:         Tue, 17 Jul 2001 00:40:06 +1200
Reply-To: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Organization: Applied Technology
Subject:      Re: [AR] inertial (artificial) gravity (was principle of              equivalence)
Comments: To: John Dom <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

> In the fifties inhabited satellites where depicted as a rotating wheel.
> I wonder why that principle of creating artificial gravity has been,
> abandoned. Or are the inertial forces thus created requiring a too strong
> (read: heavy) a station construction?

Not abandoned - just not yet desired.or of adequate perceived cost benefit.
ISS wants a microgravity environment for many aspects of the work..

A spinning station does not impose exceptionally large material requirements
at moderate sizes.
At small sizes the rotational changes are likely to be intolerable to people
due to inner ear reaction.
An interplanetary space shop will probably achieve an acceptable result more
economically by using cable" connectioof several modules which are spun
around the centre of mass. Long cables leads to minimisation of the brain
disturbing coriolis forces.  (Consider the result of pouring a liquid in a
small radius cyclinder which produces one g acceletion).

> The thought experiment trying to realize what happens between the moment
the
> wheel is still not rotating and when it is, is startling.

Many (probably almost all) writers who have described space stations with
rotationally produced gravity have failed to think it through thoroughly.
In an airless rotating wheel there is NO force on a person who is not
attached to the "floor" by magnetic boots or velcro or whatever.
Hovering a few mm "above" the surface one would find any radial "walls'
rushing towards you at rotational speed!. Once you had met the first wall
and slid outwards to the 'floor" you would experience full g :-).

In an air filled wheel the air will provide a driving force for "hovering
bodies". In a rim station (as most are depicted) rather than a full disk
there will be a relatively moe air pressure differential between "floor" and
"ceiling".. The ceiling rotates slower than the floor and this will lead to
some interesting circulation effects with the pressure differential.

Where the fun really begins is with very large rotated cylinders as in
Arthur C Clarke's Rama alien space ships. ACC is usually pretty good at
keeping up with the related physics but IMHO he blew it here rather
thoroughly (although I've never heard anyone else say so so I may be wrong
:-) ).
At first access the entry team entered along the axis of the rotating
cylinder. The cylinder is many kilometres across (10 or 20 can't recall).
Read the description and it is clear that he does not accound for the fact
that for a weightless spaceman not touching the surface there would be NO
gravity effects.

Down on the cyclinder surface you have air being moved at wall speed. As you
travel up radially to the centre the rotational speed of the air must
decrease to zero at the centre and the air density must vary markedly
between floors and axis. I suspect there would be massive ongoing storms and
vast energy losses quite inconsistent with an interstellar sub sub light
speed starship.

No matter, the first book at least was extremely good overall (according to
me and a few million other people :-) ).

> When it is turning and you do not touch anything , in an inertially
> accelerated environment, very unlike a in gravity field you still can
float
> in mid-air. Once you get hold of something every molecule get accelerated
> and one is pressed to the wall and next can walk on it. Mind boggling.

Correct - Very good. You should write SciFi! :-)



regards

                Russell McMahon

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 20972 invoked from network); 16 Jul 2001 13:15:13 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 16 Jul 2001 13:15:13 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 22550 invoked from network); 16 Jul 2001 13:16:21 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 16 Jul 2001 13:16:21 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA08889; Mon, 16 Jul 2001 06:07:59 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 78380 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 16 Jul 2001 13:06:37          +0000
Received: from smtp6ve.mailsrvcs.net (smtp6vepub.gte.net [206.46.170.27]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA08871 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 16 Jul 2001 06:06:36 -0700
Received: from me-513q3sc0zun0.pengar.com          (adsl-64-223-147-206.mannh.adsl.bellatlantic.net [64.223.147.206]) by          smtp6ve.mailsrvcs.net (8.9.1/8.9.1) with ESMTP id NAA42282712 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 16 Jul 2001 13:06:05 GMT
X-Sender: seth-pc@hobbiton.shire.net
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <5.1.0.14.0.20010716090854.0389b1c0@hobbiton.shire.net>
Date:         Mon, 16 Jul 2001 09:10:42 -0400
Reply-To: "Seth Leigh" <seth@PENGAR.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Seth Leigh" <seth@PENGAR.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Principle of equivalence
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <F24jBOh8s4KWiGtXsL10000002d@hotmail.com>

At 06:21 AM 7/16/2001, John Dom wrote:
In any case, the force produced by a rocket motor is purely inertial.
>So inertial forces countering space-time deformations (gravity) to achieve
>orbit...whoa.

This really explains why it's so hard to get out of bed in the
morning.  "Honey, I'd really like to get up and mow the lawn, but I'm
fighting deformations in the space-time continuum for Pete's sake!"

Seth

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 14114 invoked from network); 16 Jul 2001 15:20:59 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 16 Jul 2001 15:20:59 -0000
Received: (qmail 11422 invoked from network); 16 Jul 2001 15:22:30 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 16 Jul 2001 15:22:30 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA09364; Mon, 16 Jul 2001 08:18:07 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 78422 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 16 Jul 2001 15:17:53          +0000
Received: from spsystems.net (spsystems.net [209.47.149.227]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA09347 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Mon,          16 Jul 2001 08:17:52 -0700
Received: (from henry@localhost) by spsystems.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id LAA01311;          Mon, 16 Jul 2001 11:17:20 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010716103344.29942A-100000@spsystems.net>
Date:         Mon, 16 Jul 2001 11:17:20 -0400
Reply-To: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Principle of equivalence
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <F24jBOh8s4KWiGtXsL10000002d@hotmail.com>

On Mon, 16 Jul 2001, John Dom wrote:
> Someone said earlier centrifugal forces are fictitious. Say that to someone
> who has been sitting in a centrifuge! But maybe I did not understand the
> remark context correctly.

"Fictitious force" is a technical term with a precise meaning.  It's best
illustrated with a simpler example...

Suppose we put you in the equivalence principle's elevator cab, being
pulled through space (way out in intergalactic space where gravitational
effects are not significant) at a constant acceleration of 1G.  You walk
around; something is holding you to the floor.  You drop a pen; it falls
to the floor.  You measure its motion, determining that (ignoring air
drag) it accelerates at a constant rate.  You conclude that there must be
a force pulling it downward; let's call it the Dom force.  Experiments
reveal that the force is a constant for each object, exactly proportional
to a property of the object which we'll call its Dom mass.  The Dom mass
of an object seems to be exactly equal to its inertial mass -- what a
remarkable coincidence!  The result is that all objects fall at the same
acceleration when pulled downward by the Dom force.

However, let's look at the situation from a different point of view.  I'm
sitting on a handy asteroid as your elevator cab goes past.  I see you
release your pen.  It continues upward at a constant velocity, until the
floor of the accelerating elevator cab comes up and strikes it.  Ignoring
air drag, there are no forces acting on it.  None.  The Dom force does
not exist.

The equations of ordinary Newtonian dynamics apply only in an inertial
frame of reference -- that is, for a non-accelerating observer.  They can
be made to work for an accelerating observer only by adding one or more
fictitious forces, which do not really exist, but are fudge factors to
account for an inappropriate choice of observer.  In the case of a
constant linear acceleration, we have to add the Dom force.  In the case
of constant rotation, we need two fictitious forces:  the centrifugal
force, and the Coriolis force.  (If you want a demonstration of the
latter, turn your head suddenly in the centrifuge.  Warning:  have a barf
bag handy!  If you weren't dizzy before, you will be after trying this.)

And all this actually is relevant to rocketry, believe it or not.  To do
serious rocket dynamics, you have to be able to transform from one
coordinate frame to another, and examine the effects this has.  For
example, if you examine the dynamics of a rotating rocket, you find that
the presence of the exhaust jet tends to slow the rotation -- this is
called "jet damping" and is important to understanding the stability of
sizable rockets.  (See, for example, Cornelisse's "Rocket propulsion
and spaceflight dynamics", chapter 3, for a discussion of these issues.)

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 11750 invoked from network); 16 Jul 2001 15:53:59 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 16 Jul 2001 15:53:59 -0000
Received: (qmail 14723 invoked from network); 16 Jul 2001 15:55:32 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 16 Jul 2001 15:55:32 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA09500; Mon, 16 Jul 2001 08:50:54 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 78442 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 16 Jul 2001 15:50:48          +0000
Received: from spsystems.net (spsystems.net [209.47.149.227]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA09483 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Mon,          16 Jul 2001 08:50:47 -0700
Received: (from henry@localhost) by spsystems.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id LAA01568;          Mon, 16 Jul 2001 11:50:15 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010716114248.1495A-100000@spsystems.net>
Date:         Mon, 16 Jul 2001 11:50:15 -0400
Reply-To: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] inertial (artificial) gravity (was principle of              equivalence)
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <F217kjgJKVApwOLZCHu0000c5c5@hotmail.com>

On Mon, 16 Jul 2001, John Dom wrote:
> In the fifties inhabited satellites where depicted as a rotating wheel.
> I wonder why that principle of creating artificial gravity has been,
> abandoned. Or are the inertial forces thus created requiring a too strong
> (read: heavy) a station construction?

No, the structural requirements are not that big a deal.  Interest in it
faded when it became clear that free fall is not that hard to deal with
(after, for about 50% of people, some initial spacesickness), at least in
the short term.  Interest faded further when it became clear that the
radius of a rotating station needs to be *long* to avoid problems with
motion sickness due to rotation.  A further complication is that a lot of
the current scientific interest in manned space stations centers on
experiments which need free fall, so a rotating station would also need a
major non-rotating part, and the crew would have to go back and forth.

It will probably be done eventually, but nothing done so far needs it
badly enough to pay the price.

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 25166 invoked from network); 16 Jul 2001 16:10:03 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 16 Jul 2001 16:10:03 -0000
Received: (qmail 4879 invoked from network); 16 Jul 2001 16:11:50 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 16 Jul 2001 16:11:50 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA09599; Mon, 16 Jul 2001 09:06:13 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 78458 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 16 Jul 2001 16:06:11          +0000
Received: from spsystems.net (spsystems.net [209.47.149.227]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA09582 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Mon,          16 Jul 2001 09:06:10 -0700
Received: (from henry@localhost) by spsystems.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id MAA01926;          Mon, 16 Jul 2001 12:05:17 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010716120235.1495C-100000@spsystems.net>
Date:         Mon, 16 Jul 2001 12:05:17 -0400
Reply-To: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] inertial (artificial) gravity (was principle of              equivalence)
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <009601c10df4$d0a2dc40$0100a8c0@mkbs>

On Tue, 17 Jul 2001, Russell McMahon wrote:
> Where the fun really begins is with very large rotated cylinders as in
> Arthur C Clarke's Rama alien space ships. ACC is usually pretty good at
> keeping up with the related physics but IMHO he blew it here rather
> thoroughly (although I've never heard anyone else say so so I may be wrong
> :-) )...
> Down on the cyclinder surface you have air being moved at wall speed. As you
> travel up radially to the centre the rotational speed of the air must
> decrease to zero at the centre and the air density must vary markedly
> between floors and axis.

Coriolis effects would make life interesting, and I believe he does allude
to that here and there.  But there's no reason for there to be a big
difference in air density; density would differ rather less than for the
same change in altitude on Earth.  Rama's "surface" air pressure is mostly
due to the whole ship being a pressure vessel, not to its artificial
gravity.

> No matter, the first book at least was extremely good overall (according to
> me and a few million other people :-) ).

Agreed.

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 10783 invoked from network); 16 Jul 2001 16:13:33 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 16 Jul 2001 16:13:33 -0000
Received: (qmail 23123 invoked from network); 16 Jul 2001 16:15:07 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 16 Jul 2001 16:15:07 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA09542; Mon, 16 Jul 2001 08:55:02 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 78450 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 16 Jul 2001 15:55:01          +0000
Received: from yellowdog.featuretech.com ([63.121.63.69]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA09525 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon,          16 Jul 2001 08:55:01 -0700
Received: from duncan (sdsl-64-139-32-247.dsl.sjc.megapath.net [64.139.32.247])          by yellowdog.featuretech.com with SMTP (Microsoft Exchange Internet          Mail Service Version 5.5.2448.0) id N9SJRK19; Mon, 16 Jul 2001          09:06:31 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_09E8_01C56B69.4199E530"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <NEBBLECGKLLOLFCCBNPEOEOHDAAA.duncan@transim.com>
Date:         Mon, 16 Jul 2001 08:54:46 -0700
Reply-To: "Duncan McDonald" <duncan@TRANSIM.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Duncan McDonald" <duncan@TRANSIM.COM>
Subject:      [AR] Pyro charge at altitude (was Non-black powder ejection)
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_09E8_01C56B69.4199E530
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Interesting discussion on SP vs BP. One thing I've wondered about though is
ejection charges at high altitude. I don't know anything about the formulations
of black powder and smokeless powder. Do both require air to burn? If they
require air, do the burn rates change with altitude?

Duncan

------=_NextPart_000_09E8_01C56B69.4199E530
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META content=3D"text/html; charset=3Diso-8859-1" =
http-equiv=3DContent-Type>
<META content=3D"MSHTML 5.00.2919.6307" name=3DGENERATOR></HEAD>
<BODY>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial><SPAN class=3D500254615-16072001>Interesting =
discussion on=20
SP vs BP. One thing I've wondered about though is ejection charges at =
high=20
altitude. I don't know anything about the formulations of black powder =
and=20
smokeless powder. Do both require air to burn? If they require air, do =
the burn=20
rates change with altitude?</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial><SPAN =
class=3D500254615-16072001></SPAN></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial><SPAN=20
class=3D500254615-16072001>Duncan</SPAN></FONT></DIV></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_09E8_01C56B69.4199E530--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 28606 invoked from network); 16 Jul 2001 16:17:30 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 16 Jul 2001 16:17:30 -0000
Received: (qmail 6858 invoked from network); 16 Jul 2001 16:19:18 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 16 Jul 2001 16:19:18 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA09676; Mon, 16 Jul 2001 09:15:23 -0700
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 78474 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 16 Jul 2001 16:15:21          +0000
Received: from zcars0m9.ca.nortel.com (h157s242a129n47.user.nortelnetworks.com          [47.129.242.157]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA09659          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 16 Jul 2001 09:15:21 -0700
Received: from zcars04f.ca.nortel.com (zcars04f.ca.nortel.com [47.129.242.57])          by zcars0m9.ca.nortel.com (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f6GGES916504          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 16 Jul 2001 12:14:28 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from rftzy232.ca.nortel.com by zcars04f.ca.nortel.com; Mon, 16 Jul          2001 12:14:27 -0400
Received: from NORTELNETWORKS.COM (wftzh00e.ca.nortel.com [47.130.116.9]) by          rftzy232.ca.nortel.com with SMTP (Microsoft Exchange Internet Mail          Service Version 5.5.2653.13) id NKPL5GVN; Mon, 16 Jul 2001 12:09:48          -0400
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.73C-CCK-MCD [en] (X11; U; HP-UX B.10.20 9000/785)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <NEBBLECGKLLOLFCCBNPEOEOHDAAA.duncan@transim.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Orig: <mleech@NORTELNETWORKS.COM>
Message-ID:  <3B5312F0.F17A709A@NORTELNETWORKS.COM>
Date:         Mon, 16 Jul 2001 12:14:40 -0400
Reply-To: "Marcus Leech" <mleech@NORTELNETWORKS.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Marcus Leech" <mleech@NORTELNETWORKS.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Pyro charge at altitude (was Non-black powder ejection)
Comments: To: Duncan McDonald <duncan@TRANSIM.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Duncan McDonald wrote:
>
> Interesting discussion on SP vs BP. One thing I've wondered about though is ejection
> charges at high altitude. I don't know anything about the formulations of black powder
> and smokeless powder. Do both require air to burn? If they require air, do the burn
> rates change with altitude?
>
> Duncan
I don't know about SP, but the burnrate of BP is dependant on ambient
  temperature, and ambient pressure.  My understanding about
  blackpowder is that the burnrate at ambient, and the burnrate at a
  a few atmospheres is about the same, while substantially below atmospheric
  pressure, the burn rate drops off dramatically--anyone done any
  tests?

The person I contacted at David Florida labs here (they have one of the
  largest vacuum/temperature test chambers on the planet), declined my
  proposal to do some tests...

Neither BP nor SP require air to burn--they'd be pretty useless as propellants
  if they required air.

--
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Marcus Leech                             Mail:   Dept 8M70, MS 012, FITZ
Advisor                                  Phone: (ESN) 393-9145  +1 613 763 9145
Security Architecture and Planning       Fax:   (ESN) 393-9435  +1 613 763 9435
Nortel Networks                          mleech@nortelnetworks.com
-----------------Expressed opinions are my own, not my employer's------

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 21810 invoked from network); 16 Jul 2001 16:22:46 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 16 Jul 2001 16:22:46 -0000
Received: (qmail 7947 invoked from network); 16 Jul 2001 16:24:34 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 16 Jul 2001 16:24:34 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA09649; Mon, 16 Jul 2001 09:14:55 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 78466 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 16 Jul 2001 16:14:53          +0000
Received: from dune.gnc.net (root@dune.gnc.net [207.203.72.4]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA09632 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon,          16 Jul 2001 09:14:53 -0700
Received: from beowulf (sw2-33.gnc.net [207.203.72.113]) by dune.gnc.net          (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id MAA16465 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon,          16 Jul 2001 12:14:52 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <LPBBKJMJEOFKAMFJJNNHAEKFCFAA.landofgrey@gnc.net>
Date:         Mon, 16 Jul 2001 12:14:53 -0400
Reply-To: <landofgrey@gnc.net>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Matthew Travis" <landofgrey@gnc.net>
Subject:      Re: [AR] inertial (artificial) gravity (was principle of              equivalence)
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <F217kjgJKVApwOLZCHu0000c5c5@hotmail.com>

It's hard to do microgravity research in an articial gravity environment.
And astronomy and earth observation are difficult from a moving, i.e.
rotating, environment. simply orbiting is enough to deal with.

As late as the 1950's, some respected scientists still believed that humans
could not survive zero-gravity. They imagined such things as eyeballs
swelling up and exploding. It was thought that artifical gravity might be
necessary for survival. Later on, of course, we realized that it is not. Not
only that, but in many ways, it is preferable. It was certainly easier for
astronauts to load hundreds of pounds of lunar rocks in the 1/6 G Moon
environment than it woudl have been on Earth. Not to mention working with
heavy spacesuits.

A big driving factor in spacecraft design (and abandoning ideas such as
rotating wheel space stations) has nothing to do with space science, or
complex medical issues or anything "space age" at all. In fact, it is simple
engineering, cost, and scheduling. The creation of a space project has a lot
more to do with "plain old" construction and manufacturing (hammering,
welding, bending and cutting) than it has to do with "rocket science". When
you see what was required to launch Skylab, and when you look at what is
required to build Alpha, and then try to project what would be needed to
build a mile-wide all-enclosed rotating wheel. In spite of the fact that
some people incorrectly and unfairly have the impression that ISS was
designed to maximize cost and beneift contractors the most, the truth is
that, in the space program, the decision-making process has always tended to
favor the lowest-cost method of getting something done. Even the glorious,
money doesn't matter, Apollo program had to deal with that. That's part of
why plans for a LC-39C were scrapped. And in the mid-1960's, our favorite
government watchdog agency, the GAO audited NASA for a year in an effort to
force a redesign of the launch complex. GAO alleged that the mobile launcher
was unecessarily expensive and that $55 million per year would be saved by
building a traditional launch complex. GAO was finally assuaged and
persuaded to back off, but that kind of "oversight" has continued through
the years. And, for the record, NASA admitted that the mobile launcher
concept was only economically feasible for launch rates above 18 flights or
so per year, which they still, ha-ha-ha, had dreams of.

BTW, if anyone wants to buy a surplus Saturn V LUT swing-arm, we have one
available.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU]On
> Behalf Of John Dom
> Sent: Monday, July 16, 2001 7:03 AM
> To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
> Subject: [AR] inertial (artificial) gravity (was principle of
> equivalence)
>
>
> In the fifties inhabited satellites where depicted as a rotating wheel.
> I wonder why that principle of creating artificial gravity has been,
> abandoned. Or are the inertial forces thus created requiring a too strong
> (read: heavy) a station construction?
>
> The thought experiment trying to realize what happens between the
> moment the
> wheel is still not rotating and when it is, is startling.
> When it is turning and you do not touch anything , in an inertially
> accelerated environment, very unlike a in gravity field you still
> can float
> in mid-air. Once you get hold of something every molecule get accelerated
> and one is pressed to the wall and next can walk on it. Mind boggling.
>
> jd
> _________________________________________________________________________
> Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 4395 invoked from network); 16 Jul 2001 16:45:30 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 16 Jul 2001 16:45:30 -0000
Received: (qmail 18133 invoked from network); 16 Jul 2001 16:47:02 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 16 Jul 2001 16:47:02 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA09819; Mon, 16 Jul 2001 09:39:46 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 78508 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 16 Jul 2001 16:39:40          +0000
Received: from tsmtp3.ldap.isp (mailhost.teleline.es [195.235.113.141] (may be          forged)) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA09802 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 16 Jul 2001 09:39:39 -0700
Received: from casa ([212.7.58.46]) by tsmtp3.ldap.isp (Netscape Messaging          Server 4.15 tsmtp3 Jun  8 2001 14:53:09) with ESMTP id GGKRGA01.CF0          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 16 Jul 2001 18:36:10 +0200
References: <5.1.0.14.2.20010713150246.00ac6d38@mail>                        <00a201c10c41$f5077a00$0100a8c0@mkbs>            <001701c10c48$26cf8f40$0400a8c0@hatjs>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2919.6600
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <003e01c10d4c$beabf2e0$de5263d5@casa>
Date:         Sun, 15 Jul 2001 18:39:18 +0200
Reply-To: "javier.d" <javier.d@TELELINE.ES>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "javier.d" <javier.d@TELELINE.ES>
Subject:      Re: [AR] CERAMICS
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Nozzle insertion for amateur motor.

1.  Graphite insertion is the best option, is cheap and very easy to
machine.

2. phenolic insertion. Well here depend of your time and hardware.
I had made, 10% bakelite pure, 30% graphite powder and 60% Magnesium oxide.
This mixture was pressed by 2 tonnes hidraulic jack and heat in a oven to
200 C, you obtain a very hard pieze.

3. Epoxy-graphite or magnesium oxide or aluminum oxide. All material are
easy to find and "easy to make", for a good pieze you need a vacuumvesel.
beacuse the epoxy need less than 20% with a 15% you obtain a very high
viscosity.

4  We have used aluminum oxide putty mix with 20% graphite powder. The work
temperature exced the 2000C, in our motor ( see the urls ) not erode were
apreciated. This mixture is cheap, easy to work and is cured in a kichen
oven. It is not machinable erode your lathe. Only you need make a mold.

5 water putty or ruber cement or refractory cement, can be use for litlle
candy  motor

A pretty tungsten insertion was made for Bill Corbun in SOAR project

This is my experienc.

Javier d.


http://www.terra.es/personal/titanium/engines.htm
http://www.terra.es/personal/titanium/enginesa.htm

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 4810 invoked from network); 16 Jul 2001 17:52:15 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 16 Jul 2001 17:52:15 -0000
Received: (qmail 25497 invoked from network); 16 Jul 2001 17:50:17 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 16 Jul 2001 17:50:17 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA10176; Mon, 16 Jul 2001 10:41:39 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 78562 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 16 Jul 2001 17:41:27          +0000
Received: from femail22.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail22.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.0.95.147]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA10158          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 16 Jul 2001 10:41:27 -0700
Received: from cc334751a ([65.13.214.65]) by femail22.sdc1.sfba.home.com          (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20 201-229-121-120-20010223) with SMTP id          <20010716174121.THPA5657.femail22.sdc1.sfba.home.com@cc334751a>; Mon,          16 Jul 2001 10:41:21 -0700
References: <v01510100b7761854878c@[208.22.189.238]>             <l03130300b778807c6a28@[63.10.189.14]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2462.0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <025801c10e1e$8f411760$6401a8c0@home.com>
Date:         Mon, 16 Jul 2001 11:41:35 -0600
Reply-To: "Brian Kosko" <bkosko1@HOME.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Brian Kosko" <bkosko1@HOME.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] CERAMICS
Comments: To: Aaron Smith <ttocs@GTE.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Aaron,

One of the real rocket science books points out a couple of negatives in
using tungsten throat inserts. It's very susceptible to thermal cracking.
Small teflons washers are used to try to prevent this. It's fairly ductile
and can be extruded from the nozzle when hot. You need enough mass to be
able to support the tungsten adequately to prevent this. Tungsten also
contracts slightly when real hot giving you a decreased throat.

The ceramics sound interesting. Have any of you made and successfully fired
a ceramic nozzle for a relatively large motor ( 4 inches and up)? If so,
would you share the data?

                                                                Thanks,
                                                                Brian

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 25634 invoked from network); 16 Jul 2001 18:16:39 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 16 Jul 2001 18:16:39 -0000
Received: (qmail 22289 invoked from network); 16 Jul 2001 18:18:13 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 16 Jul 2001 18:18:13 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA10276; Mon, 16 Jul 2001 11:13:37 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 78570 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 16 Jul 2001 18:13:35          +0000
Received: from c002.snv.cp.net (c002-h001.c002.snv.cp.net [209.228.32.165]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id LAA10258 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 16 Jul 2001 11:13:35 -0700
Received: (cpmta 25440 invoked from network); 16 Jul 2001 11:13:03 -0700
Received: from 1Cust104.tnt2.williamsburg.va.da.uu.net (HELO default)          (63.21.81.104) by smtp.peoplepc.com (209.228.32.165) with SMTP; 16          Jul 2001 11:13:03 -0700
X-Sent: 16 Jul 2001 18:13:03 GMT
References: <5.1.0.14.0.20010716011445.02b6f8c0@hobbiton.shire.net>             <3B529DA2.A1DB8B39@vip.cybercity.dk>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <000d01c10e24$7f6dd340$6851153f@default>
Date:         Mon, 16 Jul 2001 14:24:02 -0400
Reply-To: "David Muesing" <dmuesing@PEOPLEPC.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "David Muesing" <dmuesing@PEOPLEPC.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Mould release agents
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

I have used Johnson's Paste Wax with West System epoxy with good results,
one heavy coat, then buff off.
You might get by with petroleum jelly too.

I had poor results with PTFE spray.

Dave Muesing
www.mrfiberglass.com


----- Original Message -----
From: "Hans Olaf Toft" <hot@VIP.CYBERCITY.DK>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Monday, July 16, 2001 3:54 AM
Subject: Re: [AR] Mould release agents


> We are using "Turtle Wax" (wich includes Teflon particles) for our
mandrels
> (Nylon or PE). The last portion I bought was in a blue bottle.
>
> Hans Olaf Toft
>
> Seth Leigh wrote:
>
> > I believe people use Carnauba wax.  They rub it on, buff it off, etc.
many
> > times before casting.
> >
> > There's probably some sprays you can use as well.  I recall for doing
rifle
> > action glass bedding (using epoxy to make a very tight fit between the
> > rifle action and a wood or fiberglass stock) I bought this spray from
> > Brownells.  It seemed to do a good job and didn't seem to have had
enough
> > thickness to have changed the dimensions in any noticeable way.
> >
> > Seth
> >
> > At 12:27 AM 7/16/2001, Pax wrote:
> > >What are the more common, best, and or cheapest mould release agents
for
> > >epoxy. For using plastic moulds, or mandrels where you don't want the
> > >epoxy to be a permanent member of your tool.
> > >Not looking for anything fancy, because my applications are not fancy
yet.
> > >
> > >Paxton
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 21638 invoked from network); 16 Jul 2001 18:35:23 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 16 Jul 2001 18:35:23 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 1994 invoked from network); 16 Jul 2001 18:36:52 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 16 Jul 2001 18:36:52 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA10341; Mon, 16 Jul 2001 11:31:15 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 78578 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 16 Jul 2001 18:29:01          +0000
Received: from smtppop1pub.verizon.net (smtppop1pub.gte.net [206.46.170.20]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA10317 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 16 Jul 2001 11:29:00 -0700
Received: from [63.10.201.113] (1Cust113.tnt3.hilo.hi.da.uu.net          [63.10.201.113]) by smtppop1pub.verizon.net  with ESMTP ; id          NAA141827024 Mon, 16 Jul 2001 13:28:17 -0500 (CDT)
X-Sender: ttocs@mail.gte.net
References: <F217kjgJKVApwOLZCHu0000c5c5@hotmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <l03130300b778e247a254@[63.10.189.144]>
Date:         Mon, 16 Jul 2001 08:27:46 -1000
Reply-To: "Aaron Smith" <ttocs@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Aaron Smith" <ttocs@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] inertial (artificial) gravity (was principle of              equivalence)
Comments: To: Russell McMahon <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <009601c10df4$d0a2dc40$0100a8c0@mkbs>

<snip>

>In an air filled wheel the air will provide a driving force for "hovering
>bodies". In a rim station (as most are depicted) rather than a full disk
>there will be a relatively moe air pressure differential between "floor" and
>"ceiling".. The ceiling rotates slower than the floor and this will lead to
>some interesting circulation effects with the pressure differential.

In a rotating torus space station, there is no "wind".  The atmosphere is
accelerated via drag and friction against the walls until it is moving at
the same velocity.

>
>Where the fun really begins is with very large rotated cylinders as in
>Arthur C Clarke's Rama alien space ships. ACC is usually pretty good at
>keeping up with the related physics but IMHO he blew it here rather
>thoroughly (although I've never heard anyone else say so so I may be wrong
>:-) ).
>At first access the entry team entered along the axis of the rotating
>cylinder. The cylinder is many kilometres across (10 or 20 can't recall).
>Read the description and it is clear that he does not accound for the fact
>that for a weightless spaceman not touching the surface there would be NO
>gravity effects.
>
>Down on the cyclinder surface you have air being moved at wall speed. As you
>travel up radially to the centre the rotational speed of the air must
>decrease to zero at the centre and the air density must vary markedly
>between floors and axis. I suspect there would be massive ongoing storms and
>vast energy losses quite inconsistent with an interstellar sub sub light
>speed starship.
>
>No matter, the first book at least was extremely good overall (according to
>me and a few million other people :-) ).
>
>> When it is turning and you do not touch anything , in an inertially
>> accelerated environment, very unlike a in gravity field you still can
>float
>> in mid-air. Once you get hold of something every molecule get accelerated
>> and one is pressed to the wall and next can walk on it. Mind boggling.
>
>Correct - Very good. You should write SciFi! :-)
>
>
>
>regards
>
>                Russell McMahon

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 8423 invoked from network); 16 Jul 2001 19:06:09 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 16 Jul 2001 19:06:09 -0000
Received: (qmail 10586 invoked from network); 16 Jul 2001 19:07:56 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 16 Jul 2001 19:07:56 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA10468; Mon, 16 Jul 2001 11:55:00 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 78598 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 16 Jul 2001 18:54:53          +0000
Received: from localhost (rcalkins@localhost) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with          ESMTP id LAA10449; Mon, 16 Jul 2001 11:54:47 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.LNX.4.10.10107161145350.9041-100000@itc.uci.edu>
Date:         Mon, 16 Jul 2001 11:54:47 -0700
Reply-To: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Mould release agents
Comments: To: Pax <darkspunge@USWEST.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <005901c10daf$a6258840$0100a8c0@prdise1.nm.home.com>

Hi Paxton:


The industry standard epoxy/polyester mold release is PVA, polyvinyl
alcohol.  After waxing the mold, brush or spray PVA on in thin coats
before you epoxy.  I've used it on complex molds 7 meters across with no
problems.  If you do stick, it is water soluble, so you are assured a good
release.

Here's one source:
http://www.aircraftspruce.com/catalog/cmpages/mold.php

Ray

On Sun, 15 Jul 2001, Pax wrote:

> What are the more common, best, and or cheapest mould release agents
> for epoxy. For using plastic moulds, or mandrels where you don't want
> the epoxy to be a permanent member of your tool. Not looking for
> anything fancy, because my applications are not fancy yet.
>
> Paxton
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 29003 invoked from network); 16 Jul 2001 19:36:49 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 16 Jul 2001 19:36:49 -0000
Received: (qmail 5758 invoked from network); 16 Jul 2001 19:38:24 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 16 Jul 2001 19:38:24 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA10658; Mon, 16 Jul 2001 12:33:38 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 78623 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 16 Jul 2001 19:33:23          +0000
Received: from localhost (rcalkins@localhost) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with          ESMTP id MAA10640; Mon, 16 Jul 2001 12:33:22 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.LNX.4.10.10107161228120.9041-100000@itc.uci.edu>
Date:         Mon, 16 Jul 2001 12:33:21 -0700
Reply-To: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Non-black powder ejection
Comments: To: Seth Leigh <seth@PENGAR.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <5.1.0.14.0.20010715201136.02966ed0@hobbiton.shire.net>

On Sun, 15 Jul 2001, Seth Leigh wrote:

> The igniter wires going through the Berdan primer pocket holes would
> probably be a close enough fit that nothing special would need to be done
> to seal the primer pocket, but if you were so inclined, a shot of hot-melt
> glue or silicone RTV or somesuch would certainly do the trick.

Remember, RTV uses fairly strong Acetic Acid to promote the cure, and is
likely to degrade your ignitor leads.  Stick with hot-melt or somesuch
other.  This is one place you want as much reliability as you can get.

Ray

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 21616 invoked from network); 16 Jul 2001 19:54:41 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 16 Jul 2001 19:54:41 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 16559 invoked from network); 16 Jul 2001 19:52:55 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 16 Jul 2001 19:52:55 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA10749; Mon, 16 Jul 2001 12:49:19 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 78636 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 16 Jul 2001 19:49:16          +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (f93.law3.hotmail.com [209.185.241.93]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA10732 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Mon, 16 Jul 2001 12:49:16 -0700
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Mon,          16 Jul 2001 12:48:46 -0700
Received: from 213.224.83.70 by lw3fd.law3.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Mon, 16          Jul 2001 19:48:45 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [213.224.83.70]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 16 Jul 2001 19:48:46.0003 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[53311830:01C10E30]
Message-ID:  <F93sebmspH2q6DqaJY40000d72d@hotmail.com>
Date:         Mon, 16 Jul 2001 19:49:16 +0000
Reply-To: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Principle of equivalence
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

HS wrote:

(The rest of the message has to sink since Coriolis effect and multiple
frames of reference dynamics are not so simple if the matter was studied er,
very long ago if at all)

Just this one question:

>Suppose we put you in ... an elevator cab, being pulled through space ...
>at a constant acceleration (a) ...You walk around; something (F) is holding
>you to the floor.

Sure F= m*a

>You drop a pen; it falls to the (linearly accelerated elevator) floor...

I suppose that is because the pen is not acted upon by the inertial
acceleration force, so it goes slower and falls. That is clear.

Now: what happens to the pen when I drop it in a rotating Rama cylinder when
I am standing on the inside wall of it? Will it drop or float? I guess it'll
float but it'll stay behind. While I rotate further, it'll not. Correct?

jd




  You measure its motion, determining that (ignoring air
>drag) it accelerates at a constant rate.  You conclude that there must be
>a force pulling it downward; let's call it the Dom force.  Experiments
>reveal that the force is a constant for each object, exactly proportional
>to a property of the object which we'll call its Dom mass.  The Dom mass
>of an object seems to be exactly equal to its inertial mass -- what a
>remarkable coincidence!  The result is that all objects fall at the same
>acceleration when pulled downward by the Dom force.
>
>However, let's look at the situation from a different point of view.  I'm
>sitting on a handy asteroid as your elevator cab goes past.  I see you
>release your pen.  It continues upward at a constant velocity, until the
>floor of the accelerating elevator cab comes up and strikes it.  Ignoring
>air drag, there are no forces acting on it.  None.  The Dom force does
>not exist.
>
>The equations of ordinary Newtonian dynamics apply only in an inertial
>frame of reference -- that is, for a non-accelerating observer.  They can
>be made to work for an accelerating observer only by adding one or more
>fictitious forces, which do not really exist, but are fudge factors to
>account for an inappropriate choice of observer.  In the case of a
>constant linear acceleration, we have to add the Dom force.  In the case
>of constant rotation, we need two fictitious forces:  the centrifugal
>force, and the Coriolis force.  (If you want a demonstration of the
>latter, turn your head suddenly in the centrifuge.  Warning:  have a barf
>bag handy!  If you weren't dizzy before, you will be after trying this.)
>
>And all this actually is relevant to rocketry, believe it or not.  To do
>serious rocket dynamics, you have to be able to transform from one
>coordinate frame to another, and examine the effects this has.  For
>example, if you examine the dynamics of a rotating rocket, you find that
>the presence of the exhaust jet tends to slow the rotation -- this is
>called "jet damping" and is important to understanding the stability of
>sizable rockets.  (See, for example, Cornelisse's "Rocket propulsion
>and spaceflight dynamics", chapter 3, for a discussion of these issues.)
>
>                                                           Henry Spencer
>                                                        henry@spsystems.net

_________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 14980 invoked from network); 16 Jul 2001 20:59:22 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 16 Jul 2001 20:59:22 -0000
Received: (qmail 15468 invoked from network); 16 Jul 2001 21:00:29 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 16 Jul 2001 21:00:29 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA10962; Mon, 16 Jul 2001 13:42:57 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 78646 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 16 Jul 2001 20:42:50          +0000
Received: from dune.gnc.net (root@dune.gnc.net [207.203.72.4]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA10944 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon,          16 Jul 2001 13:42:49 -0700
Received: from beowulf (sw2-8.gnc.net [207.203.72.88]) by dune.gnc.net          (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id QAA22576 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon,          16 Jul 2001 16:42:48 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <LPBBKJMJEOFKAMFJJNNHAEKJCFAA.landofgrey@gnc.net>
Date:         Mon, 16 Jul 2001 16:42:49 -0400
Reply-To: <landofgrey@gnc.net>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Matthew Travis" <landofgrey@gnc.net>
Subject:      Re: [AR] inertial (artificial) gravity (was principle of              equivalence)
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <l03130300b778e247a254@[63.10.189.144]>

Buliding on this...

The Earth rotates at some 1000MPH, give or take, at the equator. There is,
however, no 1000MPH wind at the equator. The wind is no more or less strong
than near the North Pole. Except when accouting for other environmental
factors which, in fact, do result in different wind characteristics.
However, the difference isn't due to the rotation of the Earth. The point
is, the atmosphere rotates *with* the Earth. The atmospheric envelope of the
planet, for this purpose, and due to gravity, can be considered a closed
sphere with the uppermost levels of the atmosphere at its outer edge. This
sphere rotates, from the core all the way out to the atmosphere. In a closed
wheel spacecraft, being environmentally closed, the atmosphere would move
right along with the wheel, mostly. The fact that there isn't solely linear
movement, but also tangential accelerations, doesn't matter. It doesn't
matter with the Earth's atmosphere either. The air is made up of particles
just as the spacecraft's structure. True, they are more fluid, but they
still exhibit the same tendencies of any particles. One the wheel is up an
spinning, the airwould settle into a steady state, of equal density
distribution (ignoring gravity effects). It is all about the frame of
reference. The wheel structure isn't moving *through* the air, like a plane
through the sky. The wheel moves *with* the air, like the surface of the
planet with the atmosphere. The same would hold true for, for example, a pen
dropped to the "floor". It would not tend to "fall behind" the person
dropping it. It would appear, within this frame of reference, to fall
straight to the floor.

It is true that much sci-fi literature oversimplifies things. That's okay.
It's fictional entertainment, not design criteria. In truth, "wheel" space
stations are highly impractical, from an basic construction standpoint, at
least for the foreseeable future. For example, and one thing that I have
never seen brought up in sci-fi, is balance. A spinning object will tend to
spin about its center of mass. A wheel shaped space station would have to be
nearly perfectly balanced *or* require constant attitude control thrusting,
or it would wobble as it spins (in reality the center of motion would not
wobble, but the ship would wobble around that center). That could make for
some headaches. So, those cool paintings and lithogrraphs and movies that
show partially-build wheel shaped space stations spinning happily... are
impossible. But it makes for pretty fiction. Some sci-fi authors, like
Arthur C. Clarke, have good in-depth technical knowledge. Others, most, do
not. But then, most scientists would make for poor literary artists.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU]On
> Behalf Of Aaron Smith
> Sent: Monday, July 16, 2001 2:28 PM
> To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
> Subject: Re: [AR] inertial (artificial) gravity (was principle of
> equivalence)
>
>
> <snip>
>
> >In an air filled wheel the air will provide a driving force for "hovering
> >bodies". In a rim station (as most are depicted) rather than a full disk
> >there will be a relatively moe air pressure differential between
> "floor" and
> >"ceiling".. The ceiling rotates slower than the floor and this
> will lead to
> >some interesting circulation effects with the pressure differential.
>
> In a rotating torus space station, there is no "wind".  The atmosphere is
> accelerated via drag and friction against the walls until it is moving at
> the same velocity.
>
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 3406 invoked from network); 16 Jul 2001 21:03:21 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 16 Jul 2001 21:03:21 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 17837 invoked from network); 16 Jul 2001 21:04:53 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 16 Jul 2001 21:04:53 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA11072; Mon, 16 Jul 2001 14:00:24 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 78660 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 16 Jul 2001 21:00:22          +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (f112.law3.hotmail.com [209.185.241.112]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA11055 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Mon, 16 Jul 2001 14:00:21 -0700
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Mon,          16 Jul 2001 13:59:51 -0700
Received: from 213.224.83.70 by lw3fd.law3.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Mon, 16          Jul 2001 20:59:51 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [213.224.83.70]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 16 Jul 2001 20:59:51.0508 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[41A18140:01C10E3A]
Message-ID:  <F112HGmCvoXM7e0C9gu000169d6@hotmail.com>
Date:         Mon, 16 Jul 2001 21:00:22 +0000
Reply-To: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] inertial (artificial) gravity (was principle of              equivalence)
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

MT wrote:

>...The same would hold true for, for example, a pen
>dropped to the "floor". It would not tend to "fall behind" the person
>dropping it. It would appear, within this frame of reference, to fall
>straight to the floor.

I wonder. Depends on the wheel station diameter I still tend to believe.
Earth is not an inertial but a gravitational setup with an enormous dia..

jd
_________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 21216 invoked from network); 16 Jul 2001 21:27:07 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 16 Jul 2001 21:27:07 -0000
Received: (qmail 21105 invoked from network); 16 Jul 2001 21:20:45 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 16 Jul 2001 21:20:45 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA11345; Mon, 16 Jul 2001 14:13:54 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 78677 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 16 Jul 2001 21:13:51          +0000
Received: from proxy2.ba.best.com (root@proxy2.ba.best.com [206.184.139.14]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA11326 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Mon, 16 Jul 2001 14:13:50 -0700
Received: from [10.0.0.2] (snvadslgw2poold155.snjs.uswestqwest.net          [168.103.213.155]) by proxy2.ba.best.com (8.9.3/8.9.2/best.out) with          ESMTP id OAA04663 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Mon, 16 Jul 2001          14:13:30 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Sender:  (Unverified)
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <v04210106b779171ef0c2@[10.0.0.2]>
Date:         Mon, 16 Jul 2001 15:12:51 -0700
Reply-To: "bob fortune" <bob@FORTUNEPAINT.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "bob fortune" <bob@FORTUNEPAINT.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Mould release agents
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Hey Ray and Paxton,

In my travels I've found something almost the opposite works best for
me.  A real clean mold with a coat of PVA on it then several coats of
carnuba wax is the berries.  If you PVA it each time it gets
expensive and messy since you have to remove the pva from the part
and reapply it to the mold.  If you wax the PVA then your chances of
getting a clean part go way up, the PVA is left intact and a light
buff with the waxing cloth gets you ready for the next part.  In case
it sticks the only thing
damaged is the PVA and not the mold - just clean off the PVA with
warm water and Dawn dishwashing liquid.

Bob

>Hi Paxton:
>
>
>The industry standard epoxy/polyester mold release is PVA, polyvinyl
>alcohol.  After waxing the mold, brush or spray PVA on in thin coats
>before you epoxy.  I've used it on complex molds 7 meters across with no
>problems.  If you do stick, it is water soluble, so you are assured a good
>release.
>
>Here's one source:
>http://www.aircraftspruce.com/catalog/cmpages/mold.php
>
>Ray
>
>On Sun, 15 Jul 2001, Pax wrote:
>
>> What are the more common, best, and or cheapest mould release agents
>> for epoxy. For using plastic moulds, or mandrels where you don't want
>> the epoxy to be a permanent member of your tool. Not looking for
>> anything fancy, because my applications are not fancy yet.
>>
>> Paxton
>>
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 6942 invoked from network); 16 Jul 2001 21:30:34 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 16 Jul 2001 21:30:34 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 9593 invoked from network); 16 Jul 2001 21:32:06 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 16 Jul 2001 21:32:06 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA11422; Mon, 16 Jul 2001 14:18:37 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 78691 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 16 Jul 2001 21:18:35          +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (f51.law3.hotmail.com [209.185.241.51]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA11405 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Mon, 16 Jul 2001 14:18:35 -0700
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Mon,          16 Jul 2001 14:18:05 -0700
Received: from 213.224.83.70 by lw3fd.law3.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Mon, 16          Jul 2001 21:18:05 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [213.224.83.70]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 16 Jul 2001 21:18:05.0267 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[CD8FE230:01C10E3C]
Message-ID:  <F51wJ47a33vWNkYThtA0000562c@hotmail.com>
Date:         Mon, 16 Jul 2001 21:18:35 +0000
Reply-To: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Principle of equivalence
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

CS wrote:

>The velocity of the pen is the same as your
>velocity and when the pen is released it assumes a straight line race
>from the point of release tangent to the position of release, thus the
>pen "drops" to the floor when actually the floor comes up to meet it.

I believe that. But that is not a straight line in front of your feet unless
the cylinder is miles in dia. And if you throw it inside a cylinder 20 miles
wide on a tower, it'll move down but away too.

jd

_________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 12170 invoked from network); 16 Jul 2001 21:51:54 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 16 Jul 2001 21:51:54 -0000
Received: (qmail 14540 invoked from network); 16 Jul 2001 21:53:42 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 16 Jul 2001 21:53:42 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA11573; Mon, 16 Jul 2001 14:40:35 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 78708 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 16 Jul 2001 21:40:27          +0000
Received: from tomts14-srv.bellnexxia.net (tomts14.bellnexxia.net          [209.226.175.35]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA11556          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 16 Jul 2001 14:40:26 -0700
Received: from station1 ([216.209.40.84]) by tomts14-srv.bellnexxia.net          (InterMail vM.4.01.03.16 201-229-121-116-20010115) with SMTP id          <20010716213955.LYXQ11181.tomts14-srv.bellnexxia.net@station1>; Mon,          16 Jul 2001 17:39:55 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
Importance: Normal
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <NFBBKADEMLBLIEKNLLEPIEOECCAA.bfeeney@davinciproject.com>
Date:         Mon, 16 Jul 2001 17:39:55 -0500
Reply-To: "Brian Feeney" <bfeeney@DAVINCIPROJECT.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Brian Feeney" <bfeeney@DAVINCIPROJECT.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] ballutes and space jumps
Comments: To: John Dom <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <F140jY2ajJWCfgYu72C00008faf@hotmail.com>

I believe the highest ever is in the 150,000 feet plus range. For practical
purposes most will not look over 130,000 feet. These balloons are getting
enormous and expensive for any decent payload in the 100,000 feet plus
category.

cheers,
Brian

John Dom wrote

>BTW how high can a balloon go?

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 4883 invoked from network); 16 Jul 2001 21:56:54 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 16 Jul 2001 21:56:54 -0000
Received: (qmail 20074 invoked from network); 16 Jul 2001 21:58:18 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 16 Jul 2001 21:58:18 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA11622; Mon, 16 Jul 2001 14:50:09 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 78707 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 16 Jul 2001 21:49:59          +0000
Received: from pike.rtlogic.com (firewall.rtlogic.com [206.247.196.122]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA11547 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 16 Jul 2001 14:39:58 -0700
Received: from RTLWS18 ([192.168.3.14]) by pike.rtlogic.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with          SMTP id PAA18189 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 16 Jul 2001 15:39:27          -0600
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0)
Importance: Normal
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <FGEJKGFBGDNDMLOJJDPOKEKFCDAA.punder@rtlogic.com>
Date:         Mon, 16 Jul 2001 15:40:36 -0600
Reply-To: "Patrick Underwood" <punder@RTLOGIC.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Patrick Underwood" <punder@RTLOGIC.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] inertial (artificial) gravity (was principle of              equivalence)
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <F112HGmCvoXM7e0C9gu000169d6@hotmail.com>

Actually it would not fall straight to the floor, it would curve a little
depending on the rotational radius and velocity.  Some papers on this stuff
are at www.spacefuture.com, although it seems to be down at the moment so I
can't get more specific than that.

Patrick



-----Original Message-----
From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU]On
Behalf Of John Dom
Sent: Monday, July 16, 2001 3:00 PM
To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
Subject: Re: [AR] inertial (artificial) gravity (was principle of
equivalence)


MT wrote:

>...The same would hold true for, for example, a pen
>dropped to the "floor". It would not tend to "fall behind" the person
>dropping it. It would appear, within this frame of reference, to fall
>straight to the floor.

I wonder. Depends on the wheel station diameter I still tend to believe.
Earth is not an inertial but a gravitational setup with an enormous dia..

jd
_________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 15810 invoked from network); 16 Jul 2001 22:32:12 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 16 Jul 2001 22:32:12 -0000
Received: (qmail 23368 invoked from network); 16 Jul 2001 22:33:45 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 16 Jul 2001 22:33:45 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA11769; Mon, 16 Jul 2001 15:22:33 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 78734 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 16 Jul 2001 22:22:31          +0000
Received: from dune.gnc.net (root@dune.gnc.net [207.203.72.4]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA11752 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon,          16 Jul 2001 15:22:30 -0700
Received: from beowulf (sw2-8.gnc.net [207.203.72.88]) by dune.gnc.net          (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id SAA24941; Mon, 16 Jul 2001 18:22:03 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <LPBBKJMJEOFKAMFJJNNHEEKKCFAA.landofgrey@gnc.net>
Date:         Mon, 16 Jul 2001 18:22:03 -0400
Reply-To: <landofgrey@gnc.net>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Matthew Travis" <landofgrey@gnc.net>
Subject:      Re: [AR] inertial (artificial) gravity (was principle of              equivalence)
Comments: To: Patrick Underwood <punder@RTLOGIC.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <FGEJKGFBGDNDMLOJJDPOKEKFCDAA.punder@rtlogic.com>

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU]On
> Behalf Of John Dom
> Sent: Monday, July 16, 2001 3:00 PM
> To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
> Subject: Re: [AR] inertial (artificial) gravity (was principle of
> equivalence)
>
>
> MT wrote:
>
> >...The same would hold true for, for example, a pen
> >dropped to the "floor". It would not tend to "fall behind" the person
> >dropping it. It would appear, within this frame of reference, to fall
> >straight to the floor.
>
> I wonder. Depends on the wheel station diameter I still tend to believe.
> Earth is not an inertial but a gravitational setup with an enormous dia..

I was hesitant to use Earth as an example since it is indeed both. The
atmosphere is contained within an envelope by gravity. However, the reason
it moves with the Earth instead of remaining stationary while the planet
moves through it has to do with more than just gravity. Actually, there are
a lot of factors,

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 22852 invoked from network); 16 Jul 2001 22:47:01 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 16 Jul 2001 22:47:01 -0000
Received: (qmail 835 invoked from network); 16 Jul 2001 22:48:32 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 16 Jul 2001 22:48:32 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA11817; Mon, 16 Jul 2001 15:31:05 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 78742 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 16 Jul 2001 22:31:04          +0000
Received: from spock.alohanet.com (spock.alohanet.com [209.31.4.252]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA11800 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Mon, 16 Jul 2001 15:31:03 -0700
Received: from NATE2 (spock.alohanet.com [209.31.4.252]) by spock.alohanet.com          (Post.Office MTA v3.5.2 release 221 ID# 0-55447U100L2S100V35) with          SMTP id com for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Mon, 16 Jul 2001 15:29:44 -0700
References:  <LPBBKJMJEOFKAMFJJNNHAEKJCFAA.landofgrey@gnc.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <012a01c10e47$47c7fc40$68e9a8c0@NATE2>
Date:         Mon, 16 Jul 2001 15:33:05 -0700
Reply-To: "Nathan Hays" <nhays@ALOHANET.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Nathan Hays" <nhays@ALOHANET.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] inertial (artificial) gravity
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

If a ball were to be thrown from the rim of a space wheel towards the hub,
the ball will not strike the hub. Instead, it will follow a straight path
from the imparted velocity vector.  The acceleration delivered to the ball
while being tossed is not a straight line, but an arc.

If one were to run around the perimeter as did Capt. Bowman in 2001, one
would feel different artificial gravity depending whether one runs with the
wheel or against it.  To see this, consider running as fast as the wheel is
turning but in the opposite direction.  You are now gliding along without
centripetal acceleration to give the sense of gravity.  If running the same
direction as the wheel with the same relative speed, one would feel twice
the gravity because your angular velocity would be double.

If, in trying these experiments, an astronaut were to lose his lunch at just
the right velocity, it would remain motionless while the wheel would rotate
around, bringing the back of the astronaut's head to bear on the floating
green globule.

- Nate

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 21443 invoked from network); 16 Jul 2001 22:59:51 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 16 Jul 2001 22:59:51 -0000
Received: (qmail 5041 invoked from network); 16 Jul 2001 23:01:22 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 16 Jul 2001 23:01:22 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA11862; Mon, 16 Jul 2001 15:38:24 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 78750 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 16 Jul 2001 22:38:22          +0000
Received: from dune.gnc.net (root@dune.gnc.net [207.203.72.4]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA11845 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon,          16 Jul 2001 15:38:21 -0700
Received: from beowulf (sw2-8.gnc.net [207.203.72.88]) by dune.gnc.net          (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id SAA25327 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon,          16 Jul 2001 18:38:22 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <LPBBKJMJEOFKAMFJJNNHAEKLCFAA.landofgrey@gnc.net>
Date:         Mon, 16 Jul 2001 18:38:21 -0400
Reply-To: <landofgrey@gnc.net>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Matthew Travis" <landofgrey@gnc.net>
Subject:      Re: [AR] inertial (artificial) gravity (was principle of              equivalence)
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <FGEJKGFBGDNDMLOJJDPOKEKFCDAA.punder@rtlogic.com>

Since I am no longer in a classroom, I have developed the nasty habit of not
being a-retentive when it comes to things like semantics and nth-degree
details. I'll just say that to be precise, I should have said "for all
practical purposes". but I have a disdain for splitting hairs and kept it,
as I tend to do with things, simple. But yeah, there would be some arcing.
As you mentioned, it depends on the radius and velocity. The greater the
radius, the greater the arcing. Actually, the greater the difference between
where the pen is dropped and where it lands combined with the radius and
velocity. The reason I didn't mention this is because I used the assumption
that the ratio of the difference to the entire radius would be sufficiently
small to negate that (i.e., a wheel shaped spacecraft where the diameter of
the "rim" of the wheel is a very small fraction of the radius of the wheel).
You know, the astronauts on the space station aren't really weightless, but
are really in semi-freefall and experience something less than .05 g. But we
still say they're weightless. Sometimes it's best to leave out some details
in order to bring out the essence of an argument. That, and laziness has its
place.


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU]On
> Behalf Of Patrick Underwood
> Sent: Monday, July 16, 2001 5:41 PM
> To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
> Subject: Re: [AR] inertial (artificial) gravity (was principle of
> equivalence)
>
>
> Actually it would not fall straight to the floor, it would curve a little
> depending on the rotational radius and velocity.  Some papers on
> this stuff
> are at www.spacefuture.com, although it seems to be down at the
> moment so I
> can't get more specific than that.
>
> Patrick
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 460 invoked from network); 16 Jul 2001 23:01:49 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 16 Jul 2001 23:01:49 -0000
Received: (qmail 28820 invoked from network); 16 Jul 2001 23:03:36 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 16 Jul 2001 23:03:36 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA11927; Mon, 16 Jul 2001 15:56:06 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 78758 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 16 Jul 2001 22:55:52          +0000
Received: from dune.gnc.net (root@dune.gnc.net [207.203.72.4]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA11910 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon,          16 Jul 2001 15:55:52 -0700
Received: from beowulf (sw2-8.gnc.net [207.203.72.88]) by dune.gnc.net          (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id SAA25709 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon,          16 Jul 2001 18:55:52 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <LPBBKJMJEOFKAMFJJNNHKEKLCFAA.landofgrey@gnc.net>
Date:         Mon, 16 Jul 2001 18:55:51 -0400
Reply-To: <landofgrey@gnc.net>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Matthew Travis" <landofgrey@gnc.net>
Subject:      Re: [AR] inertial (artificial) gravity
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <012a01c10e47$47c7fc40$68e9a8c0@NATE2>

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU]On
> Behalf Of Nathan Hays
> Sent: Monday, July 16, 2001 6:33 PM
> To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
> Subject: Re: [AR] inertial (artificial) gravity
>
>
> If a ball were to be thrown from the rim of a space wheel towards the hub,
> the ball will not strike the hub. Instead, it will follow a straight path
> from the imparted velocity vector.  The acceleration delivered to the ball
> while being tossed is not a straight line, but an arc.
>

Right. The example of the pen that I gave assumed that the pen was being
droped a small number of feet (say 10, room height) along the radius of a
wheel the size of that which one might envision for a space station (say, a
radius of a mile). Also, in any such spacecraft, it would likely have a
rather high angular velocity (compared to what?) In that scenario, the pen
would fall essentially, for all practical purposes, whatever, in a straight
line. Because as well all know, as an arc of a circle is made smaller, it
tends to resemble a line segment more and more. I didn't mention this  in my
previous argument because it really had nothing to do with the argument
about the hypothetical winds in a hypothetical space station, which was,
basically, that the air would move with the station with an immeasurable
amount of resistance, rather than the station moving through the air and
causing things like friction heating along the walls. However, it does point
out one thing. The Coriolis effect has to do with objects that are moving
(moving out of a frame of reference as observed within the frame). The
Coriolis effect does not *cause* motion; nor does it impede it. A flow of
air in the space station would experience Coriolis, but it would not be put
in motion or stopped from moving because of it.

> If one were to run around the perimeter as did Capt. Bowman in 2001, one
> would feel different artificial gravity depending whether one
> runs with the
> wheel or against it.  To see this, consider running as fast as
> the wheel is
> turning but in the opposite direction.  You are now gliding along without
> centripetal acceleration to give the sense of gravity.  If
> running the same
> direction as the wheel with the same relative speed, one would feel twice
> the gravity because your angular velocity would be double.

If you climbed a tree at a rate accelerating 32 ft/s^2, you'd feel twice as
heavy

>
> If, in trying these experiments, an astronaut were to lose his
> lunch at just
> the right velocity, it would remain motionless while the wheel
> would rotate

It would remain motionless in a wheel containing a vacuum instead of air.
The air would tend to push it forward a bit since the air would be moving.
(Here I go splitting hairs, which I hate doing)

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 17980 invoked from network); 16 Jul 2001 23:25:10 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 16 Jul 2001 23:25:10 -0000
Received: (qmail 10936 invoked from network); 16 Jul 2001 23:08:05 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 16 Jul 2001 23:08:05 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA11978; Mon, 16 Jul 2001 16:01:26 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 78771 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 16 Jul 2001 23:01:25          +0000
Received: from dune.gnc.net (root@dune.gnc.net [207.203.72.4]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA11961 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon,          16 Jul 2001 16:01:24 -0700
Received: from beowulf (sw2-8.gnc.net [207.203.72.88]) by dune.gnc.net          (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id TAA25808 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon,          16 Jul 2001 19:01:25 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <LPBBKJMJEOFKAMFJJNNHAEKMCFAA.landofgrey@gnc.net>
Date:         Mon, 16 Jul 2001 19:01:24 -0400
Reply-To: <landofgrey@gnc.net>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Matthew Travis" <landofgrey@gnc.net>
Subject:      Re: [AR] inertial (artificial) gravity
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <012a01c10e47$47c7fc40$68e9a8c0@NATE2>

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list
> Behalf Of Nathan Hays

<snip>

> If, in trying these experiments, an astronaut were to lose his
> lunch at just
> the right velocity, it would remain motionless while the wheel
> would rotate
> around, bringing the back of the astronaut's head to bear on the floating
> green globule.

I like the example of someone throwing up on the first accelerating downhill
of a rolelr coaster and the guy in back getting a facefull. Of course, air
resistance has a lot to do with it. Yuck.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 3545 invoked from network); 16 Jul 2001 23:48:21 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 16 Jul 2001 23:48:21 -0000
Received: (qmail 25817 invoked from network); 16 Jul 2001 23:49:55 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 16 Jul 2001 23:49:55 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA12224; Mon, 16 Jul 2001 16:38:10 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 78799 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 16 Jul 2001 23:37:09          +0000
Received: from pike.rtlogic.com (firewall.rtlogic.com [206.247.196.122]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA12206 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 16 Jul 2001 16:37:09 -0700
Received: from RTLWS18 ([192.168.3.14]) by pike.rtlogic.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with          SMTP id RAA20124 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 16 Jul 2001 17:36:37          -0600
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0)
Importance: Normal
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <FGEJKGFBGDNDMLOJJDPOOEKHCDAA.punder@rtlogic.com>
Date:         Mon, 16 Jul 2001 17:37:46 -0600
Reply-To: "Patrick Underwood" <punder@RTLOGIC.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Patrick Underwood" <punder@RTLOGIC.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] inertial (artificial) gravity (was principle of              equivalence)
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <LPBBKJMJEOFKAMFJJNNHAEKLCFAA.landofgrey@gnc.net>

I wasn't really trying to split hairs, perhaps I didn't read far back enough
in the thread.  Anyway, the author of these papers assumes smaller radii
than a mile (more realistic in the near(!) term) and has created some little
drawings showing how a "hop" of a foot or two would look under various
combinations of velocity and moment arm.  What he's trying to do is arrive
at a combination that results in the most comfortable environment given a
"realistic" radius.  Cites a lot of older papers too, and in those papers,
the researchers' results as to what constitutes a comfortable environment
are all over the place.  Not a whole lot to go on yet...

BTW, I disagree with other posters' idea that artificial gravity isn't
desirable for space stations.  Given that space-station stays of any length
of time result in some fairly nasty physiological deterioration, and that
these medical problems are almost certainly far more difficult to solve than
the 18th century engineering problem of creating rotational g, then the
engineering solution will certainly be used as soon as possible cost-wise.
Whenever that is, I bet a hunnerd bucks the various microgravity medical
problems will still be far from solution.

Patrick

-----Original Message-----
From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU]On
Behalf Of Matthew Travis
Sent: Monday, July 16, 2001 4:38 PM
To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
Subject: Re: [AR] inertial (artificial) gravity (was principle of
equivalence)


Since I am no longer in a classroom, I have developed the nasty habit of not
being a-retentive when it comes to things like semantics and nth-degree
details. I'll just say that to be precise, I should have said "for all
practical purposes". but I have a disdain for splitting hairs and kept it,
as I tend to do with things, simple. But yeah, there would be some arcing.
As you mentioned, it depends on the radius and velocity. The greater the
radius, the greater the arcing. Actually, the greater the difference between
where the pen is dropped and where it lands combined with the radius and
velocity. The reason I didn't mention this is because I used the assumption
that the ratio of the difference to the entire radius would be sufficiently
small to negate that (i.e., a wheel shaped spacecraft where the diameter of
the "rim" of the wheel is a very small fraction of the radius of the wheel).
You know, the astronauts on the space station aren't really weightless, but
are really in semi-freefall and experience something less than .05 g. But we
still say they're weightless. Sometimes it's best to leave out some details
in order to bring out the essence of an argument. That, and laziness has its
place.


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU]On
> Behalf Of Patrick Underwood
> Sent: Monday, July 16, 2001 5:41 PM
> To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
> Subject: Re: [AR] inertial (artificial) gravity (was principle of
> equivalence)
>
>
> Actually it would not fall straight to the floor, it would curve a little
> depending on the rotational radius and velocity.  Some papers on
> this stuff
> are at www.spacefuture.com, although it seems to be down at the
> moment so I
> can't get more specific than that.
>
> Patrick
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 1776 invoked from network); 17 Jul 2001 00:14:35 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 17 Jul 2001 00:14:35 -0000
Received: (qmail 6683 invoked from network); 17 Jul 2001 00:16:08 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 17 Jul 2001 00:16:08 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA12341; Mon, 16 Jul 2001 17:09:06 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 78811 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 17 Jul 2001 00:09:03          +0000
Received: from fep4-orange.clear.net.nz (fep4-orange.clear.net.nz          [203.97.32.4]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA12320          for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Mon, 16 Jul 2001 17:09:03 -0700
Received: from mkbs (203-167-162-34.dialup.clear.net.nz [203.167.162.34]) by          fep4-orange.clear.net.nz (1.5/1.7) with SMTP id MAA16437; Tue, 17 Jul          2001 12:08:57 +1200 (NZST)
References:  <F112HGmCvoXM7e0C9gu000169d6@hotmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="Windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <01cb01c10e54$c94ea220$0100a8c0@mkbs>
Date:         Tue, 17 Jul 2001 11:29:20 +1200
Reply-To: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Organization: Applied Technology
Subject:      Re: [AR] inertial (artificial) gravity (was principle of              equivalence)
Comments: To: John Dom <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

> MT wrote:
>
> >...The same would hold true for, for example, a pen
> >dropped to the "floor". It would not tend to "fall behind" the person
> >dropping it. It would appear, within this frame of reference, to fall
> >straight to the floor.
>
> I wonder. Depends on the wheel station diameter I still tend to believe.
> Earth is not an inertial but a gravitational setup with an enormous dia..


And we have very large Coriolis storms. We just don't usually think of them
that way. The term "hurricane" is more familiar.
Some believe that Jupiter's "great red spot" is a coriolis storm. If so, it
has characteristics unlike any we have had on earth. Apart from being
several times the size of earth itself it has continued to exist since first
being observed.



Russell McMahon

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 29621 invoked from network); 17 Jul 2001 00:20:46 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 17 Jul 2001 00:20:46 -0000
Received: (qmail 2058 invoked from network); 17 Jul 2001 00:21:28 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 17 Jul 2001 00:21:28 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA12411; Mon, 16 Jul 2001 17:17:25 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 78827 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 17 Jul 2001 00:17:20          +0000
Received: from dune.gnc.net (root@dune.gnc.net [207.203.72.4]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA12394 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon,          16 Jul 2001 17:17:20 -0700
Received: from beowulf (sw2-1.gnc.net [207.203.72.81]) by dune.gnc.net          (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id UAA27553 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon,          16 Jul 2001 20:17:20 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <LPBBKJMJEOFKAMFJJNNHOEKMCFAA.landofgrey@gnc.net>
Date:         Mon, 16 Jul 2001 20:17:16 -0400
Reply-To: <landofgrey@gnc.net>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Matthew Travis" <landofgrey@gnc.net>
Subject:      Re: [AR] inertial (artificial) gravity (was principle of              equivalence)
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <FGEJKGFBGDNDMLOJJDPOOEKHCDAA.punder@rtlogic.com>

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU]On
> Behalf Of Patrick Underwood
> Sent: Monday, July 16, 2001 7:38 PM
> To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
> Subject: Re: [AR] inertial (artificial) gravity (was principle of
> equivalence)
>
>
> I wasn't really trying to split hairs, perhaps I didn't read far
> back enough
Sorry, I'm too sensitive. It's because I'm left-handed.

> in the thread.  Anyway, the author of these papers assumes smaller radii
> than a mile (more realistic in the near(!) term) and has created
> some little
> drawings showing how a "hop" of a foot or two would look under various
> combinations of velocity and moment arm.  What he's trying to do is arrive
> at a combination that results in the most comfortable environment given a
> "realistic" radius.  Cites a lot of older papers too, and in those papers,
> the researchers' results as to what constitutes a comfortable environment
> are all over the place.  Not a whole lot to go on yet...

I was imagining huge Star Trek wheels and whatnot. I understand that for
smaller stations, the "features" magnify. I guess it's all hypothetical
musings, anyway, and one can come up with different scenarios to fit
whatever argument. I'm just under the impression that such a space station
would likely be huge anyway, anything too small and more "traditional"
designs would likely prevail IMHO.

>
> BTW, I disagree with other posters' idea that artificial gravity isn't
> desirable for space stations.  Given that space-station stays of
> any length
> of time result in some fairly nasty physiological deterioration, and that
> these medical problems are almost certainly far more difficult to
> solve than

>From what I understand (disclaimer: I may be wrong), the physiological
effects follow a sort of surve. That is, over the first few months, there
are significan changes to the body, but as time goes on the changes slow,
even stop, as the body fully acclimates to the environment. This is a normal
kind of process seen on Earth when species adapt to changing conditions. So
I think (my opinion here), that since we know from Mir that 12 month stays
in zero-g are manageable (a couple weeks or whatever of downtime after the
flight, but then an increasing level of funtional abilities), the same would
hold true for 2 or 3 years, since by 12 months, the physiological changes
have really slowed down. Again, I may be mistaken. Any doctors in the house?

In any case, the desirability of microgravity is dependent on the purpose of
the station. If the purpose is only to take people between Earth's gravity
and Mars' gravity, then it might be desirable to have some gravitational
force in effect for the trip in between. If the purpose of the station, like
ISS has been marketed, is to do microgravity research and production, then,
of course, a microgravity environment is desirable. Of course, you could
have a rotating station where the micro-g stuff is performed in the middle.
And there's another, non-quantifiable, factor. People like microgravity.

In reality, probably the main reason we don't give our spacecraft gravity is
rather non-technical. It has historicall been more cost-effective to *not*
create artificial gravity than it is to do so. And since the effects of
zero-g are not insurmountable, and in fact present less of a real problem
than many might think when reading the literature about calcium loss and all
that, it is easier and cheaper to not have artificial gravity. Also, calcium
loss is only a problem is you do not take the proper process to re-acclimate
to gravity later. And it's not a factor at all for someone who plan on
living the rest of lhis life in zero-g. And, really, when you get past the
intellectual curiosity about building a spacecraft with it, there is, at
this point anyway, no compelling reason to do it. That may, and probably
will, change in the future, but not anytime soon. Damn, I sound like a
beareaucrat :(

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 28206 invoked from network); 17 Jul 2001 00:27:28 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 17 Jul 2001 00:27:28 -0000
Received: (qmail 12192 invoked from network); 17 Jul 2001 00:29:02 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 17 Jul 2001 00:29:02 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA12361; Mon, 16 Jul 2001 17:09:19 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 78819 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 17 Jul 2001 00:09:18          +0000
Received: from fep4-orange.clear.net.nz (fep4-orange.clear.net.nz          [203.97.32.4]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA12328          for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Mon, 16 Jul 2001 17:09:04 -0700
Received: from mkbs (203-167-162-34.dialup.clear.net.nz [203.167.162.34]) by          fep4-orange.clear.net.nz (1.5/1.7) with SMTP id MAA16449; Tue, 17 Jul          2001 12:08:58 +1200 (NZST)
References: <F217kjgJKVApwOLZCHu0000c5c5@hotmail.com>             <l03130300b778e247a254@[63.10.189.144]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <01cc01c10e54$ca520860$0100a8c0@mkbs>
Date:         Tue, 17 Jul 2001 12:03:58 +1200
Reply-To: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Organization: Applied Technology
Subject:      Re: [AR] inertial (artificial) gravity (was principle of              equivalence)
Comments: To: Aaron Smith <ttocs@GTE.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

> >In an air filled wheel the air will provide a driving force for "hovering
> >bodies". In a rim station (as most are depicted) rather than a full disk
> >there will be a relatively moe air pressure differential between "floor"
and
> >"ceiling".. The ceiling rotates slower than the floor and this will lead
to
> >some interesting circulation effects with the pressure differential.

> In a rotating torus space station, there is no "wind".  The atmosphere is
> accelerated via drag and friction against the walls until it is moving at
> the same velocity.


The differences are subtle but real.
There is "wind" but it is travelling at ground speed.
The main point I was making was that the ONLY* force on a "stationary" body
introduced suddenly into the system "above" floor level would be caused by
the air which is rotating at station rotational velocity. On earth this
would not be so. The body will not tend to "fall" toward the "'floor" due to
the apparent gravity that a person standing on the floor will feel. The air
would act on such a "stationary" body and drive it tangentially to the
direction of motion. Looked on from an external non rotating frame of
reference it would describe a spiral (inexact term) path as its increasing
tangential component interacted with the air which, being in steady state,
would be describing a curved path. It would ultimately strike a floor (still
below full tangential speed) and be interacted with by friction forces (or,
more likely,  a radial wall) to bring it up to full tangential speed. (* -
assuming that true gravitational reactions between masses involved is
minimal).

On earth the force vector diagram would be considerably different. (Almost
incidentally, within the atmosphere gravity rapidly alters our velocity to
the point (terminal velocity) where we are rather tightly coupled to the air
which is rather tightly coupled to the planet.) At present there is in fact
a "gravitational" force on us due to rotation of our "space station" but it
is, of course, upwards as we are standing on the outside of the hull.

Lots of games can be played with the simple formulae

1   force from spinning = mV^2/r

& applying this to orbit

2            mV^2/r = mg
or        V = sqrt(mgr)

Applying 1. to space station earth we find that UPWARDS force per kilogram
at the equator
=    0.04N = about 4 grams or 0.4% of our mass.
ie people at the equator weigh about 0.4% less than Eskimos of equal mass
:-)

You can apply 2. to determine eg LEO velocity or the speed the planet would
need to rotate at for us to just be "weightless".

To play interesting games with your mind (maybe not Henry's mind) consider a
rotating space ship (about to go on an interstellar mission) from the
"stationary" plane of reference which it was in before it was "spun up". The
rotational "gravitational" forces on the occupants make intuitive sense. Now
take the same "rotating" station and place it at some location far far away
from earth with NO external plane of reference - consider it only from its
own internal frame of reference. The occupants will still happily feel the
same "gravity" forces and still stick to the floor as before. Now explain
why, without reference to external "fixed" frames of reference.




    Russell McMahon

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 10317 invoked from network); 17 Jul 2001 00:37:05 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 17 Jul 2001 00:37:05 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 29334 invoked from network); 17 Jul 2001 00:38:37 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 17 Jul 2001 00:38:37 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA12473; Mon, 16 Jul 2001 17:32:42 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 78835 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 17 Jul 2001 00:32:40          +0000
Received: from clio.sc.intel.com (scfdns01.sc.intel.com [143.183.152.25]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA12455 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 16 Jul 2001 17:32:40 -0700
Received: from snmeng1.rr.intel.com (snmeng1.rr.intel.com [128.215.231.11]) by          clio.sc.intel.com (8.9.1a+p1/8.9.1/d: relay.m4,v 1.41 2001/07/09          21:06:22 root Exp $) with ESMTP id AAA04777; Tue, 17 Jul 2001          00:32:09 GMT
Received: from snmeng30.rr.intel.com (snmeng30.rr.intel.com [128.215.52.76]) by          snmeng1.rr.intel.com (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id SAA29511; Mon, 16          Jul 2001 18:29:20 -0600 (MDT)
Received: from snmeng30.rr.intel.com (snmeng30.rr.intel.com [128.215.52.76]) by          snmeng30.rr.intel.com (8.9.1a/8.9.1/d: client.m4,v 1.3 1998/09/29          16:36:11 sedayao Exp sedayao $) with SMTP id SAA19519; Mon, 16 Jul          2001 18:29:16 -0600 (MDT)
X-Mailer: dtmail 1.2.1 CDE Version 1.2.1 SunOS 5.6 sun4m sparc
X-Sun-Text-Type: ascii
Message-ID:  <200107170029.SAA19519@snmeng30.rr.intel.com>
Date:         Mon, 16 Jul 2001 18:29:16 -0600
Reply-To: "Ray Calkins 100660207" <rcalkins@SNMENG1.RR.INTEL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Ray Calkins 100660207" <rcalkins@SNMENG1.RR.INTEL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Mould release agents
Comments: To: bob@FORTUNEPAINT.COM
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Hi Bob:

This sounds like it would work really well, I've gotta try this!  Thanks for the
tip! :-)

More PVA tips:
The secret to getting a good coating of PVA is a couple of light mist coats to
get it to stick without orangepeel, then a slightly heavier coat to wet out
everything and allow it to flow evenly without dusting.

I don't know how it's brushed on, sounds like a nightmare to me (the stuff dries
in seconds at this altitude).  I have dipped small parts with good success
though.

> A real clean mold with a coat of PVA on it then several coats of
> carnuba wax is the berries.  If you PVA it each time it gets
> expensive and messy since you have to remove the pva from the part
> and reapply it to the mold.  If you wax the PVA then your chances of
> getting a clean part go way up, the PVA is left intact and a light
> buff with the waxing cloth gets you ready for the next part.  In case
> it sticks the only thing
> damaged is the PVA and not the mold - just clean off the PVA with
> warm water and Dawn dishwashing liquid.

Ray Calkins
rcalkins@snmeng1.rr.intel.com           raymond.calkins@intel.com
"My opinions are my own, and do not reflect those of my employer."


From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 28601 invoked from network); 17 Jul 2001 00:48:00 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 17 Jul 2001 00:48:00 -0000
Received: (qmail 18946 invoked from network); 17 Jul 2001 00:49:08 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 17 Jul 2001 00:49:08 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA12553; Mon, 16 Jul 2001 17:40:48 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 78851 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 17 Jul 2001 00:40:41          +0000
Received: from dune.gnc.net (root@dune.gnc.net [207.203.72.4]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA12536 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon,          16 Jul 2001 17:40:40 -0700
Received: from beowulf (sw2-1.gnc.net [207.203.72.81]) by dune.gnc.net          (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id UAA28219 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon,          16 Jul 2001 20:40:41 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="Windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <LPBBKJMJEOFKAMFJJNNHEEKOCFAA.landofgrey@gnc.net>
Date:         Mon, 16 Jul 2001 20:40:37 -0400
Reply-To: <landofgrey@gnc.net>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Matthew Travis" <landofgrey@gnc.net>
Subject:      Re: [AR] inertial (artificial) gravity (was principle of              equivalence)
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <01cb01c10e54$c94ea220$0100a8c0@mkbs>

Good point. And the trade winds are due to Coriolis. If you look at a wind
map of the Earth, as you change latitude, the prevailing winds switch from
Easterly to Westerly, and back and forth, etc. That's all due to Coriolis
effect on the atmosphere rising at the Equator and sinking at the poles.
Well, at least that's what I was taught in high school 15 years ago.

Matt

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU]On
> Behalf Of Russell McMahon
> Sent: Monday, July 16, 2001 7:29 PM
> To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
> Subject: Re: [AR] inertial (artificial) gravity (was principle of
> equivalence)
>
> And we have very large Coriolis storms. We just don't usually
> think of them
> that way. The term "hurricane" is more familiar.
> Some believe that Jupiter's "great red spot" is a coriolis storm.
> If so, it
> has characteristics unlike any we have had on earth. Apart from being
> several times the size of earth itself it has continued to exist
> since first
> being observed.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 8247 invoked from network); 17 Jul 2001 00:50:05 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 17 Jul 2001 00:50:06 -0000
Received: (qmail 22427 invoked from network); 17 Jul 2001 00:51:38 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 17 Jul 2001 00:51:38 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA12509; Mon, 16 Jul 2001 17:37:34 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 78843 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 17 Jul 2001 00:37:32          +0000
Received: from dune.gnc.net (root@dune.gnc.net [207.203.72.4]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA12492 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon,          16 Jul 2001 17:37:32 -0700
Received: from beowulf (sw2-1.gnc.net [207.203.72.81]) by dune.gnc.net          (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id UAA28127 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon,          16 Jul 2001 20:37:32 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <LPBBKJMJEOFKAMFJJNNHOEKNCFAA.landofgrey@gnc.net>
Date:         Mon, 16 Jul 2001 20:37:28 -0400
Reply-To: <landofgrey@gnc.net>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Matthew Travis" <landofgrey@gnc.net>
Subject:      Re: [AR] inertial (artificial) gravity (was principle of              equivalence)
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <01cc01c10e54$ca520860$0100a8c0@mkbs>

It took a couple readings, but I understand now what you're saying. I should
learn not to try to absorb these posting when I'm *supposed* to be working
:)

I was musing this in my head. Note the abscence of equations or technical
specifics. Forgive me for lack of detail. On Earth, the gravity vector will
point to the same location, no matter where you are. In a rotating space
station, each point will have a different vector, each pointing in a
different direction outward from the rotating body. And the vector at each
point moves, channging direction as it does so. On Earth, the vectors move,
but always point to the same spot in the middle of the planet and always
move in unison with each other, giving the impression to someone on the
surface that gravity is constant. So, on Earth, I drop a pen and it falls
along the vector (to the approximate center of Earth). this also happens to
be the same point to which my gravitational force is pointing. In  a
rotating spcae station, this would not hold true. When I release the pen, it
will fall along the vector is had at the instant I release it (neglecting
air and other non-gravitational forces). From that point on, it travels
along the line delineated by that vector. However, the physical location at
which I released the pen will have a differently-pointing vector (until the
craft rotates 360 degrees). I also have a gravtitational force that changes
the location in 3-D space to where it is pointing. So now my gravity vector
is moving, but the one for the pen is not (in fact, it is gone).

So there are two differences from Earth. First, on Earth, gravity points to
the same location downward, no matter wherever you are. Second, on Earth the
gravtiational vectors, moving in 3-D space, always move in perfect relation
to each other. So, from the perspective of someone on Earth, gravity is
constant everywhere on the surface of the planet. On a rotating space
station, the force doesn't always point to the same point in 3-D space, but
changes as the rotation occurs. Also, in the case for the dropped pen, the
gravitational vectors are not moving in perfect unison with each other. I
guess I'll call it the problem of outwardly pointing gravity.


Matt

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU]On
> Behalf Of Russell McMahon
> Sent: Monday, July 16, 2001 8:04 PM
> To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
> Subject: Re: [AR] inertial (artificial) gravity (was principle of
> equivalence)
>
> The differences are subtle but real.
> There is "wind" but it is travelling at ground speed.
> The main point I was making was that the ONLY* force on a
> "stationary" body
> introduced suddenly into the system "above" floor level would be caused by
> the air which is rotating at station rotational velocity. On earth this
> would not be so. The body will not tend to "fall" toward the
> "'floor" due to
> the apparent gravity that a person standing on the floor will
> feel. The air
> would act on such a "stationary" body and drive it tangentially to the
> direction of motion. Looked on from an external non rotating frame of
> reference it would describe a spiral (inexact term) path as its increasing
> tangential component interacted with the air which, being in steady state,
> would be describing a curved path. It would ultimately strike a
> floor (still
> below full tangential speed) and be interacted with by friction
> forces (or,
> more likely,  a radial wall) to bring it up to full tangential speed. (* -
> assuming that true gravitational reactions between masses involved is
> minimal).
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 25570 invoked from network); 17 Jul 2001 03:04:07 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 17 Jul 2001 03:04:07 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 27301 invoked from network); 17 Jul 2001 03:05:39 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 17 Jul 2001 03:05:39 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA12848; Mon, 16 Jul 2001 19:34:12 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 78867 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 17 Jul 2001 02:34:02          +0000
Received: from smtp10.atl.mindspring.net (smtp10.atl.mindspring.net          [207.69.200.246]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id          TAA12830; Mon, 16 Jul 2001 19:34:01 -0700
Received: from mindspring.com (sdn-ar-009casfrMP040.dialsprint.net          [158.252.240.42]) by smtp10.atl.mindspring.net (8.9.3/8.8.5) with          ESMTP id WAA15465; Mon, 16 Jul 2001 22:33:59 -0400 (EDT)
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 (Macintosh; U; PPC)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <Pine.LNX.4.10.10107161228120.9041-100000@itc.uci.edu>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B53A545.20FA9E45@mindspring.com>
Date:         Mon, 16 Jul 2001 19:39:04 -0700
Reply-To: "Alan Shinn" <alshinn@MINDSPRING.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Alan Shinn" <alshinn@MINDSPRING.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Non-black powder ejection
Comments: To: Ray Calkins <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Some varieties don't use acetic acid perhaps the GE II (GE 2)?? The nose knows.

Ray Calkins wrote:
>
> On Sun, 15 Jul 2001, Seth Leigh wrote:
>
> > The igniter wires going through the Berdan primer pocket holes would
> > probably be a close enough fit that nothing special would need to be done
> > to seal the primer pocket, but if you were so inclined, a shot of hot-melt
> > glue or silicone RTV or somesuch would certainly do the trick.
>
> Remember, RTV uses fairly strong Acetic Acid to promote the cure, and is
> likely to degrade your ignitor leads.  Stick with hot-melt or somesuch
> other.  This is one place you want as much reliability as you can get.
>
> Ray

--
Looking forward:
Alan Shinn


Experience the
beginnings of microscopy.
Make your own replica
of one of Antony van Leeuwenhoek's microscopes.
visit    http://www.mindspring.com/~alshinn/

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 29773 invoked from network); 17 Jul 2001 03:25:45 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 17 Jul 2001 03:25:45 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 20404 invoked from network); 17 Jul 2001 03:27:20 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 17 Jul 2001 03:27:20 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA12905; Mon, 16 Jul 2001 19:36:58 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 78877 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 17 Jul 2001 02:36:56          +0000
Received: from smtp10.atl.mindspring.net (smtp10.atl.mindspring.net          [207.69.200.246]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA12888          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 16 Jul 2001 19:36:56 -0700
Received: from mindspring.com (sdn-ar-009casfrMP040.dialsprint.net          [158.252.240.42]) by smtp10.atl.mindspring.net (8.9.3/8.8.5) with          ESMTP id WAA08872; Mon, 16 Jul 2001 22:35:49 -0400 (EDT)
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 (Macintosh; U; PPC)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <F217kjgJKVApwOLZCHu0000c5c5@hotmail.com>            <l03130300b778e247a254@[63.10.189.144]>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B53A5B7.7DBBB03A@mindspring.com>
Date:         Mon, 16 Jul 2001 19:40:57 -0700
Reply-To: "Alan Shinn" <alshinn@MINDSPRING.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Alan Shinn" <alshinn@MINDSPRING.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] inertial (artificial) gravity (was principle              ofequivalence)
Comments: To: Aaron Smith <ttocs@GTE.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Does the air pick the speed of the "floor", or the "ceiling" of the
spinning torus?

Aaron Smith wrote:
>
> <snip>
>
> >In an air filled wheel the air will provide a driving force for "hovering
> >bodies". In a rim station (as most are depicted) rather than a full disk
> >there will be a relatively moe air pressure differential between "floor" and
> >"ceiling".. The ceiling rotates slower than the floor and this will lead to
> >some interesting circulation effects with the pressure differential.
>
> In a rotating torus space station, there is no "wind".  The atmosphere is
> accelerated via drag and friction against the walls until it is moving at
> the same velocity.
>
> >
> >Where the fun really begins is with very large rotated cylinders as in
> >Arthur C Clarke's Rama alien space ships. ACC is usually pretty good at
> >keeping up with the related physics but IMHO he blew it here rather
> >thoroughly (although I've never heard anyone else say so so I may be wrong
> >:-) ).
> >At first access the entry team entered along the axis of the rotating
> >cylinder. The cylinder is many kilometres across (10 or 20 can't recall).
> >Read the description and it is clear that he does not accound for the fact
> >that for a weightless spaceman not touching the surface there would be NO
> >gravity effects.
> >
> >Down on the cyclinder surface you have air being moved at wall speed. As you
> >travel up radially to the centre the rotational speed of the air must
> >decrease to zero at the centre and the air density must vary markedly
> >between floors and axis. I suspect there would be massive ongoing storms and
> >vast energy losses quite inconsistent with an interstellar sub sub light
> >speed starship.
> >
> >No matter, the first book at least was extremely good overall (according to
> >me and a few million other people :-) ).
> >
> >> When it is turning and you do not touch anything , in an inertially
> >> accelerated environment, very unlike a in gravity field you still can
> >float
> >> in mid-air. Once you get hold of something every molecule get accelerated
> >> and one is pressed to the wall and next can walk on it. Mind boggling.
> >
> >Correct - Very good. You should write SciFi! :-)
> >
> >
> >
> >regards
> >
> >                Russell McMahon

--
Looking forward:
Alan Shinn


Experience the
beginnings of microscopy.
Make your own replica
of one of Antony van Leeuwenhoek's microscopes.
visit    http://www.mindspring.com/~alshinn/

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 3640 invoked from network); 17 Jul 2001 04:21:39 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 17 Jul 2001 04:21:39 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 11515 invoked from network); 17 Jul 2001 04:23:13 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 17 Jul 2001 04:23:13 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA13297; Mon, 16 Jul 2001 21:18:42 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 78913 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 17 Jul 2001 04:18:34          +0000
Received: from sys27.hou.wt.net (sys27.hou.wt.net [205.230.159.27]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA13279 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 16 Jul 2001 21:18:34 -0700
Received: from localhost (216-119-138-157.ipset18.wt.net [216.119.138.157]) by          sys27.hou.wt.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id XAA81407 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 16 Jul 2001 23:18:26 -0500 (CDT)
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.388)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <200107170418.XAA81407@sys27.hou.wt.net>
Date:         Mon, 16 Jul 2001 23:18:37 -0500
Reply-To: "Donald McCorvey" <dlm3@NETAXS.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Donald McCorvey" <dlm3@NETAXS.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] inertial (artificial) gravity (was principle              ofequivalence)
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <3B53A5B7.7DBBB03A@mindspring.com>

The angular velocity of the floor and the ceiling is the same.

Once transients have settled out from starting the torus spinning,  the
air should reach a constant distribution (not density) and angular
velocity. Its radial speed, of course, will be dependent upon the
distance from the axis of rotation. This presumes you have laminar flow
over the walls of the torus so that you aren't introducing random
turbulence which never settles out.

If you add thermal disturbances or obstructions to the flow, the above
ceases to apply, since there probably isn't a completely steady-state
condition.

Don McCorvey
Houston, Tx

On Monday, July 16, 2001, at 09:40 PM, Alan Shinn wrote:

> Does the air pick the speed of the "floor", or the "ceiling" of the
> spinning torus?

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 3836 invoked from network); 17 Jul 2001 04:21:41 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 17 Jul 2001 04:21:41 -0000
Received: (qmail 26572 invoked from network); 17 Jul 2001 04:23:13 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 17 Jul 2001 04:23:13 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA13321; Mon, 16 Jul 2001 21:19:05 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 78921 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 17 Jul 2001 04:19:04          +0000
Received: from yellowdog.featuretech.com ([63.121.63.69]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA13299 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon,          16 Jul 2001 21:18:46 -0700
Received: from duncan (sdsl-64-139-32-247.dsl.sjc.megapath.net [64.139.32.247])          by yellowdog.featuretech.com with SMTP (Microsoft Exchange Internet          Mail Service Version 5.5.2448.0) id PBMTT67H; Mon, 16 Jul 2001          21:29:56 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <NEBBLECGKLLOLFCCBNPEGEPMDAAA.duncan@transim.com>
Date:         Mon, 16 Jul 2001 21:18:34 -0700
Reply-To: "Duncan McDonald" <duncan@TRANSIM.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Duncan McDonald" <duncan@TRANSIM.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Pyro charge at altitude (was Non-black powder ejection)
Comments: To: Marcus Leech <mleech@NORTELNETWORKS.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <3B5312F0.F17A709A@NORTELNETWORKS.COM>

>Neither BP nor SP require air to burn--they'd be pretty useless as
propellants
  if they required air.

So that scene in Armageddon where Steve Buscemi is firing the machine gun on
the asteroid isn't BS! The things I learn on ARocket. As you can tell I have
an underwhelming knowledge of propellants.

Duncan

-----Original Message-----
From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@itc.uci.edu]On
Behalf Of Marcus Leech
Sent: Monday, July 16, 2001 9:15 AM
To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
Subject: Re: [AR] Pyro charge at altitude (was Non-black powder
ejection)


Duncan McDonald wrote:
>
> Interesting discussion on SP vs BP. One thing I've wondered about though
is ejection
> charges at high altitude. I don't know anything about the formulations of
black powder
> and smokeless powder. Do both require air to burn? If they require air, do
the burn
> rates change with altitude?
>
> Duncan
I don't know about SP, but the burnrate of BP is dependant on ambient
  temperature, and ambient pressure.  My understanding about
  blackpowder is that the burnrate at ambient, and the burnrate at a
  a few atmospheres is about the same, while substantially below atmospheric
  pressure, the burn rate drops off dramatically--anyone done any
  tests?

The person I contacted at David Florida labs here (they have one of the
  largest vacuum/temperature test chambers on the planet), declined my
  proposal to do some tests...

Neither BP nor SP require air to burn--they'd be pretty useless as
propellants
  if they required air.

--
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Marcus Leech                             Mail:   Dept 8M70, MS 012, FITZ
Advisor                                  Phone: (ESN) 393-9145  +1 613 763
9145
Security Architecture and Planning       Fax:   (ESN) 393-9435  +1 613 763
9435
Nortel Networks                          mleech@nortelnetworks.com
-----------------Expressed opinions are my own, not my employer's------

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 6781 invoked from network); 17 Jul 2001 04:57:40 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 17 Jul 2001 04:57:40 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: (qmail 29836 invoked from network); 17 Jul 2001 04:59:13 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 17 Jul 2001 04:59:13 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA13445; Mon, 16 Jul 2001 21:55:32 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 78929 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 17 Jul 2001 04:55:28          +0000
Received: from cisco.com (cypher.cisco.com [171.69.11.18]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA13428 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon,          16 Jul 2001 21:55:28 -0700
Received: (from billw@localhost) by cisco.com (8.8.8/2.6/Cisco List          Logging/8.8.8) id VAA27527; Mon, 16 Jul 2001 21:54:56 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID:  <CMM.0.90.4.995345696.billw@cypher>
Date:         Mon, 16 Jul 2001 21:54:56 PDT
Reply-To: "Bill Westfield" <billw@cisco.com>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "William Chops Westfield" <billw@cisco.com>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Pyro charge at altitude (was Non-black powder ejection)
Comments: To: Duncan McDonald <duncan@TRANSIM.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  Your message of Mon, 16 Jul 2001 21:18:34 -0700

There is suspicion that Black powder does not burn well at low pressures,
even though it does not require oxygen to burn.  (I think a BP or SP firearm
would work just fine in vacuum, though.  Plenty of containment in the shell
and barrel...)

BillW


From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 7925 invoked from network); 17 Jul 2001 04:57:56 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 17 Jul 2001 04:57:56 -0000
Received: (qmail 14666 invoked from network); 17 Jul 2001 04:59:06 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 17 Jul 2001 04:59:06 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA13470; Mon, 16 Jul 2001 21:55:46 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 78937 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 17 Jul 2001 04:55:45          +0000
Received: from dune.gnc.net (root@dune.gnc.net [207.203.72.4]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA13447 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon,          16 Jul 2001 21:55:40 -0700
Received: from beowulf (sw2-31.gnc.net [207.203.72.111]) by dune.gnc.net          (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id AAA00860 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue,          17 Jul 2001 00:55:39 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
Importance: Normal
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <LPBBKJMJEOFKAMFJJNNHAELACFAA.landofgrey@gnc.net>
Date:         Tue, 17 Jul 2001 00:55:13 -0400
Reply-To: <landofgrey@gnc.net>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Matthew Travis" <landofgrey@gnc.net>
Subject:      Re: [AR] inertial (artificial) gravity (was principle              ofequivalence)
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <200107170418.XAA81407@sys27.hou.wt.net>

I said "angular vbelocity" when I meant "tangential velocity". Oops. Duh,
obviously the angular velocity has to be the same unless it's a stretchy
torus.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU]On
> Behalf Of Donald McCorvey
> Sent: Tuesday, July 17, 2001 12:19 AM
> To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
> Subject: Re: [AR] inertial (artificial) gravity (was principle
> ofequivalence)
>
>
> The angular velocity of the floor and the ceiling is the same.
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 24188 invoked from network); 17 Jul 2001 05:01:48 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 17 Jul 2001 05:01:48 -0000
Received: (qmail 1733 invoked from network); 17 Jul 2001 05:03:22 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 17 Jul 2001 05:03:22 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA13509; Mon, 16 Jul 2001 21:59:30 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 78945 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 17 Jul 2001 04:59:29          +0000
Received: from dune.gnc.net (root@dune.gnc.net [207.203.72.4]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA13492 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon,          16 Jul 2001 21:59:28 -0700
Received: from beowulf (sw2-31.gnc.net [207.203.72.111]) by dune.gnc.net          (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id AAA00934 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue,          17 Jul 2001 00:59:26 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
Importance: Normal
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <LPBBKJMJEOFKAMFJJNNHMELACFAA.landofgrey@gnc.net>
Date:         Tue, 17 Jul 2001 00:58:59 -0400
Reply-To: <landofgrey@gnc.net>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Matthew Travis" <landofgrey@gnc.net>
Subject:      Re: [AR] inertial (artificial) gravity (was principle              ofequivalence)
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <3B53A5B7.7DBBB03A@mindspring.com>

All this talk aside, one can see this stuff in effect at the circus. You
know, the motorcycle riding around inside a metal ring that is on a swingarm
going round and round while someone walks around the outside of it.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 9766 invoked from network); 17 Jul 2001 05:05:26 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 17 Jul 2001 05:05:26 -0000
Received: (qmail 16631 invoked from network); 17 Jul 2001 05:06:51 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 17 Jul 2001 05:06:51 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA13554; Mon, 16 Jul 2001 22:03:02 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 78953 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 17 Jul 2001 05:03:00          +0000
Received: from dune.gnc.net (root@dune.gnc.net [207.203.72.4]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA13537 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon,          16 Jul 2001 22:02:59 -0700
Received: from beowulf (sw2-31.gnc.net [207.203.72.111]) by dune.gnc.net          (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id BAA00992 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue,          17 Jul 2001 01:02:58 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
Importance: Normal
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <LPBBKJMJEOFKAMFJJNNHAELBCFAA.landofgrey@gnc.net>
Date:         Tue, 17 Jul 2001 01:02:30 -0400
Reply-To: <landofgrey@gnc.net>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Matthew Travis" <landofgrey@gnc.net>
Subject:      Re: [AR] inertial (artificial) gravity (was principle              ofequivalence)
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <200107170418.XAA81407@sys27.hou.wt.net>

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU]On
> Behalf Of Donald McCorvey

<snip>

> Once transients have settled out from starting the torus spinning,  the
> air should reach a constant distribution (not density) and angular
> velocity.

What do you suppose the density would be? I know of different hypotheses.

Matt

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 18105 invoked from network); 17 Jul 2001 05:27:31 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 17 Jul 2001 05:27:31 -0000
Received: (qmail 14831 invoked from network); 17 Jul 2001 05:29:19 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 17 Jul 2001 05:29:19 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA13664; Mon, 16 Jul 2001 22:24:08 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 78972 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 17 Jul 2001 05:24:04          +0000
Received: from spsystems.net (spsystems.net [209.47.149.227]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA13647 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Mon,          16 Jul 2001 22:24:03 -0700
Received: (from henry@localhost) by spsystems.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id BAA10915;          Tue, 17 Jul 2001 01:23:27 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010716203154.6239A-100000@spsystems.net>
Date:         Tue, 17 Jul 2001 01:23:27 -0400
Reply-To: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] inertial (artificial) gravity (was principle of              equivalence)
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <01cb01c10e54$c94ea220$0100a8c0@mkbs>

On Tue, 17 Jul 2001, Russell McMahon wrote:
> Some believe that Jupiter's "great red spot" is a coriolis storm. If so, it
> has characteristics unlike any we have had on earth. Apart from being
> several times the size of earth itself it has continued to exist since first
> being observed.

Lots of differences between Earth and Jupiter, not least being that
Jupiter is more or less a ball of gas/liquid, with any solid surface a
very long way down, compared to Earth where the atmosphere is a very thin
surface layer.  (There is/was a theory -- I'm not sure of its current
status -- that the overall banded structure of Jupiter's clouds is just
the tip of the iceberg, that the *whole planet* is a set of nested
rotating cylindrical layers of turbulent liquid, and that the visible
bands are just the ends of the cylinders.)  Seriously weird place.

Obligatory rocketry:  if you think orbital velocity here is annoyingly
high, it's a whole lot worse on Jupiter...  Going between the Galilean
moons is as difficult (if not as tedious) as going from planet to planet
in the inner solar system.

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 15537 invoked from network); 17 Jul 2001 06:07:30 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 17 Jul 2001 06:07:30 -0000
Received: (qmail 15073 invoked from network); 17 Jul 2001 06:08:41 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 17 Jul 2001 06:08:41 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA13782; Mon, 16 Jul 2001 23:05:23 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 78980 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 17 Jul 2001 06:05:20          +0000
Received: from dune.gnc.net (root@dune.gnc.net [207.203.72.4]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA13765 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon,          16 Jul 2001 23:05:20 -0700
Received: from beowulf (sw2-14.gnc.net [207.203.72.94]) by dune.gnc.net          (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id CAA01930 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue,          17 Jul 2001 02:05:18 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
Importance: Normal
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <LPBBKJMJEOFKAMFJJNNHGELCCFAA.landofgrey@gnc.net>
Date:         Tue, 17 Jul 2001 02:04:37 -0400
Reply-To: <landofgrey@gnc.net>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Matthew Travis" <landofgrey@gnc.net>
Subject:      Re: [AR] inertial (artificial) gravity (was principle of              equivalence)
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010716203154.6239A-100000@spsystems.net>

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU]On
> Behalf Of Henry Spencer

> Lots of differences between Earth and Jupiter, not least being that
> Jupiter is more or less a ball of gas/liquid, with any solid surface a
> very long way down, compared to Earth where the atmosphere is a very thin
> surface layer.  (There is/was a theory -- I'm not sure of its current
> status -- that the overall banded structure of Jupiter's clouds is just
> the tip of the iceberg, that the *whole planet* is a set of nested
> rotating cylindrical layers of turbulent liquid, and that the visible
> bands are just the ends of the cylinders.)  Seriously weird place.

That's an interesting theory. It would be interesting to send a bunch of
probes to look at its structure. The Galileo probe wasn't enough. But it did
show that Jupiter's has those bands at *least* a significant part of the way
to the "surface" (or whatever you want to call it), but that the bands don't
generally extend all the way down or up. More like a combination of banding
and layering. It showed more differention in the layers than many expected.
Rather than cylinders, I think one of the more popular hypotheses now is
that Jupiter resembles a structure more like you would get if you took a
ball, put a rubber band longitudinally around it, then another and another
etc. Nobody really knows though. One of the problems looking at Jupiter,
which is different from Earth, is that it has characteristics that also
resemble stars. Example, not all parts of it (not just the atmosphere
either, but also the goo that is the surface) rotate at the same velocity,
which does interesting things with the Coriolis effect. Of course, Jupiter
has a Coriolis effect, any rotating ball has it. But there are a lot of
other extreme conditions that I guess they kind of overwhelm it and make it
less apparent.

One thing that was noticed about Jupiter's storms is that a lot of them are
formed on the boundary between bands that are moving at different
velocities. Sort of like spinning a coin with two fingers. This can be
caused by winds that are exhibit the effects of the Coriolis effect, but may
also be caused for other reasons.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 6823 invoked from network); 17 Jul 2001 07:39:07 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 17 Jul 2001 07:39:07 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 16679 invoked from network); 17 Jul 2001 07:40:40 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 17 Jul 2001 07:40:40 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA14082; Tue, 17 Jul 2001 00:36:00 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 78997 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 17 Jul 2001 07:35:50          +0000
Received: from c009.snv.cp.net (c009-h010.c009.snv.cp.net [209.228.34.123]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id AAA14064 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Tue, 17 Jul 2001 00:35:49 -0700
Received: (cpmta 57 invoked from network); 17 Jul 2001 00:35:19 -0700
X-Sent: 17 Jul 2001 07:35:19 GMT
Received: from [210.214.147.18] by mail.123india.com with HTTP; 17 Jul 2001          00:35:18 PDT
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Disposition: inline
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Web Mail 3.9.3.5
X-Sent-From: pjur@123india.com
Message-ID:  <20010717073519.56.cpmta@c009.snv.cp.net>
Date:         Tue, 17 Jul 2001 00:35:19 -0700
Reply-To: <pjur@123INDIA.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Philip D'Souza" <pjur@123INDIA.COM>
Subject:      [AR] Equivalence-2
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

I have a few points to make
1)Inertial acceleration and gravity have different origins and may have distinguishing featuresuch as one travelling at the speed of sound and the other at the speed of light.
2)In my example there will be distortion: A) in the case of uniform acceleration a uniform compression B) in the case of varying accelerations a distortion which travels at the speed of sound but these do not affect the validity of my example.
3)Artificial gravity is really inertial force and may be distingiuished from real gravity by its speed of travel if it ever varys.


______________________________________________________
123India.com - India's Premier Portal
Get your Free Email Account at http://www.123india.com

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 25973 invoked from network); 17 Jul 2001 07:44:06 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 17 Jul 2001 07:44:06 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 19146 invoked from network); 17 Jul 2001 07:45:41 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 17 Jul 2001 07:45:41 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA14124; Tue, 17 Jul 2001 00:41:42 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 79005 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 17 Jul 2001 07:41:40          +0000
Received: from smtppop3pub.verizon.net (smtppop3pub.gte.net [206.46.170.22]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA14106 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 17 Jul 2001 00:41:39 -0700
Received: from [63.10.201.235] (1Cust235.tnt3.hilo.hi.da.uu.net          [63.10.201.235]) by smtppop3pub.verizon.net  with ESMTP ; id          CAA39881119 Tue, 17 Jul 2001 02:41:06 -0500 (CDT)
X-Sender: ttocs@mail.gte.net
References: <3B5312F0.F17A709A@NORTELNETWORKS.COM>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <l03130300b7799c715e67@[63.10.189.21]>
Date:         Mon, 16 Jul 2001 21:41:12 -1000
Reply-To: "Aaron Smith" <ttocs@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Aaron Smith" <ttocs@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Pyro charge at altitude (was Non-black powder ejection)
Comments: To: Duncan McDonald <duncan@TRANSIM.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <NEBBLECGKLLOLFCCBNPEGEPMDAAA.duncan@transim.com>

At 9:18 PM -0700 7/16/01, Duncan McDonald wrote:
>>Neither BP nor SP require air to burn--they'd be pretty useless as
>propellants
>  if they required air.
>
>So that scene in Armageddon where Steve Buscemi is firing the machine gun on
>the asteroid isn't BS!

But the rest of the movie is :-).

>The things I learn on ARocket. As you can tell I have
>an underwhelming knowledge of propellants.
>
>Duncan
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 18342 invoked from network); 17 Jul 2001 08:05:18 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 17 Jul 2001 08:05:18 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 25109 invoked from network); 17 Jul 2001 08:06:51 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 17 Jul 2001 08:06:51 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id BAA14261; Tue, 17 Jul 2001 01:01:24 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 79017 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 17 Jul 2001 08:01:22          +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (f94.law15.hotmail.com [64.4.23.94]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id BAA14244 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Tue,          17 Jul 2001 01:01:22 -0700
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Tue,          17 Jul 2001 01:00:51 -0700
Received: from 193.121.251.246 by lw15fd.law15.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Tue,          17 Jul 2001 08:00:51 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [193.121.251.246]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 17 Jul 2001 08:00:51.0482 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[98D147A0:01C10E96]
Message-ID:  <F94oHMwVN7miR9Oduto000073f0@hotmail.com>
Date:         Tue, 17 Jul 2001 08:01:22 +0000
Reply-To: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Equivalence-2
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

PD'S wrote:

>1)Inertial acceleration and gravity have different origins and may have
>distinguishing featuresuch as one travelling at the speed of sound and the
>other at the speed of light.

If I understood previous thread comments correctly the equivalence principle
holds only for lineair escalator acceleration. In rotating cylinders it 'd
be possible to discern if the attraction is gravitational, inertial or both
from the path an object (mass) 'd follow after it's release from a certain
hight inside the cylinder.

>3)Artificial gravity is really inertial force and may be distingiuished
>from real gravity by its speed of travel if it ever varys.

Have you been able to demonstrate inertial acceleration travels through an
object at the speed of sound in that particular object mass?

jd
_________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 20381 invoked from network); 17 Jul 2001 09:21:25 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 17 Jul 2001 09:21:25 -0000
Received: (qmail 21934 invoked from network); 17 Jul 2001 09:22:57 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 17 Jul 2001 09:22:57 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id CAA14523; Tue, 17 Jul 2001 02:18:43 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 79031 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 17 Jul 2001 09:18:36          +0000
Received: from fep4-orange.clear.net.nz (fep4-orange.clear.net.nz          [203.97.32.4]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id CAA14506          for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Tue, 17 Jul 2001 02:18:35 -0700
Received: from mkbs (203-167-163-76.dialup.clear.net.nz [203.167.163.76]) by          fep4-orange.clear.net.nz (1.5/1.7) with SMTP id VAA03381; Tue, 17 Jul          2001 21:18:31 +1200 (NZST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="Windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <021f01c10ea1$8ffb0200$0100a8c0@mkbs>
Date:         Tue, 17 Jul 2001 15:55:06 +1200
Reply-To: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Organization: Applied Technology
Subject:      [AR] Fw: Jonathan's Space Report, No. 456
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

At last we get to see if there really is an alien spacecraft in the L2 point
:-)
If not yet, if MAP works OK there will be one there shortly


RM

___________________________________________________.



 Jonathan's Space Report
No. 456                                          2001 Jul 15, Cambridge, MA
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
---
Sender: owner-jsr@head-cfa.harvard.edu
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: jmcdowell@head-cfa.harvard.edu

Shuttle and Station
--------------------

Orbiter OV-104 Atlantis was launched on Jul 12 from Kennedy Space Center
on mission STS-104. Launch was at 0903:59 UTC. Main engine cutoff and
external tank separation was at 0913 UTC.  Atlantis was then in an orbit
of around 59 x 235 km x 51.6 deg. The OMS-2 burn at 0942 UTC increased
velocity by 29m/s and raised the orbit to 157 x 235 km x 51.6 deg and
another burn at around 1240 UTC raised it further to 232 x 305 km.
Atlantis docked with the Station at 0308 UTC on Jul 14.

The main payload on STS-104 is the Joint Airlock, which has now been
named Quest. The Quest module was built by Boeing/Huntsville. It
consists of an Equipment Lock for storage and the actual airlock, called
the Crew Lock. The Crew Lock is based on the Shuttle airlock and may
have been built by Rockwell/Palmdale. The Equipment Lock was berthed
to the Unity module at one of the large-diameter CBM hatches.

Based on on-orbit video, my guesses last issue as to the payload bay
layout are about right; the IMAX camera appears to be on the starboard
sidewall in bay 3.

On Jul 15 astronauts Gernhardt and Reilly made the first spacewalk of
the mission. The airlock was depressurized at 0306 UTC and the hatch
opened at 0307 UTC. The astronauts removed thermal covers from Quest and
added handrails to it and to the O2/N2 tanks stored in the Spacelab
pallets. The Station SSRMS arm grappled Quest at 0449 UTC and unberthed
it from Atlantis at 0510 UTC, docking it to the Unity module at 0734
UTC. Quest was firmly bolted to Unity's +X CBM at 0740 UTC. The
astronauts returned to the airlock at 0853 UTC, closing the hatch
sometime around 0859 UTC and repressurized it at 0909 UTC, for a
duration of 6h03m (depress/repress), 5h52m (hatch open/close), or 5h59m
(NASA rule).


Recent Launches
---------------

NASA's Microwave Anisotropy Probe (MAP) was launched on Jun 30 at
1946:46 UTC. The Boeing Delta 7425-10 launch vehicle entered a 167 x 204
km x 28.8 deg parking orbit at 1958 UTC. At 2104 UTC the second stage
ignited again for a brief 4s burn raising the orbit to around 181 x 308
km; the third stage spun up and ignited at 2108 UTC, accelerating MAP to
a highly elliptical orbit of 182 x 292492 km x 28.7 deg. MAP will use
on-board fuel to tweak the orbit and make a lunar flyby at fourth apogee
on July 30 and arrive at the L2 point 1.5 million km from Earth
in about three months. From L2, MAP will observe the dark extragalactic
sky with differential microwave radiometers using two 1.5-meter
reflectors working at 22 to 90 GHz, and measure fluctuations in the
cosmic 3 Kelvin microwave background down to 35 microKelvin on scales of
down to 0.2 degrees. Ground based  experiments have recently provided
convincing evidence that the background fluctuations are consistent with
a model in which the total density of the universe is closely equal to
the critical density; MAP will refine and extend these observations. The
spacecraft has a dry mass of 768 kg and carries 72 kg of propellant; it
was built at NASA-Goddard, and the microwave instrument was built in
collaboration with Princeton University.

MAP is the second MIDEX mid-sized Explorer - the first was IMAGE,
which is studying the magnetosphere. The third MIDEX will be SWIFT,
for gamma ray burst studies, due for launch in two years.


Arianespace's Ariane 510 vehicle failed to reach its correct orbit on
Jul 12. The EAP solid boosters and EPC liquid hydrogen fuelled main
stage worked as planned and put the EPS upper stage in a marginal orbit,
probably with perigee just above zero although reported velocities near
EPC cutoff are lower than for previous missions. The EPS stage then
fired to increase velocity - but not by enough: instead of reaching an
858 x 35853 km orbit, only a 592 x 17528 km orbit was reached. The
Aestus engine failed to reach full thrust and cut off 1 min early.

The two satellites on Ariane 510 were the Artemis and BSAT-2b
communications satellites. The 3105 kg Artemis carries an Astrium S400
liquid apogee engine with 1538 kg of bipropellant feeding a 400N main
thruster as well as a set of 10N  RCS thrusters, and also carries four
20mN ion thrusters with 40 kg of xenon. The much simpler BSAT 2b
satellite, using Orbital's Star 1 bus with a launch mass of 1298 kg,
probably carries a Thiokol Star 30 solid apogee motor and a set of
stationkeeping thrusters with perhaps about 200 kg of fuel, which gives
it much less flexibility than Artemis in recovering its intended orbit.

Artemis is a European Space Agency satellite to test out new
communications technologies. It carries the Silex laser communications
experiment, an S-band inter-orbit link, a Ka-band data relay package, a
large L-band antenna for mobile services, and an L-band navigation
package. BSAT-2b is a television broadcast satellite for the Japanese
B-SAT company.

The US Air Force launched a Minuteman II ICBM from Vandenberg AFB at
0240 UTC on Jul 15; it flew a suborbital trajectory with an apogee of
around 1600 km and reentered near Kwajalein Atoll. The US Army launched
a two-stage Payload Launch Vehicle (PLV) from Meck Island to intercept
it at an altitude of 225 km.  The test was part of the NMD (National
Missile Defense) program, which apparently was  recently and tediously
renamed the Ground-Based Midcourse Defence Segment. The Boeing
Minuteman II has a M55E1 first stage, an SR19 second stage and a M57A1
third stage. The Lockheed Martin PLV consists of just the SR19 and M57A1
stages.


Table of Recent Launches
-----------------------

Date UT       Name            Launch Vehicle  Site            Mission
INTL.

DES.

Jun  8 1508   Kosmos-2378       Kosmos-3M      Plesetsk LC132   Navsat
23A
Jun  9 0645   Intelsat 901      Ariane 44L     Kourou ELA2      C/Ku telecom
24A
Jun 16 0149   Astra 2C          Proton-K/DM3   Baykonur LC81/23 Ku video
25A
Jun 19 0441   ICO-2             Atlas IIAS     Canaveral SLC36B C/S
phone/data 26A
Jun 30 1946   MAP               Delta 7425     Canaveral SLC17B Astronomy
27A
Jul 12 0904   Atlantis STS-104) Shuttle        Kennedy LC39B    Spaceship
28A
              Quest           )                                 Station
module
Jul 12 2158   Artemis   )       Ariane 5G      Kourou ELA3      Expt. comms
29A
              BSAT-2b   )                                       Ku video
29B

Current Shuttle Processing Status
_________________________________

Orbiters               Location   Mission    Launch Due

OV-102 Columbia        OPF Bay 3     STS-109 2002 Jan 17  HST SM-3B
OV-103 Discovery       LC39A         STS-105 2001 Aug  5  ISS 7A.1
OV-104 Atlantis        ISS           STS-104 2001 Jul 12  ISS 7A
OV-105 Endeavour       OPF Bay 1     STS-108 2001 Nov 29  ISS UF-1

.-------------------------------------------------------------------------.
|  Jonathan McDowell                 |  phone : (617) 495-7176            |
|  Harvard-Smithsonian Center for    |                                    |
|   Astrophysics                     |                                    |
|  60 Garden St, MS6                 |                                    |
|  Cambridge MA 02138                |  inter : jcm@cfa.harvard.edu       |
|  USA                               |          jmcdowell@cfa.harvard.edu |
|                                                                         |
| JSR: http://hea-www.harvard.edu/~jcm/space/jsr/jsr.html                 |
| Back issues:  http://hea-www.harvard.edu/~jcm/space/jsr/back            |
| Subscribe/unsub: mail majordomo@head-cfa.harvard.edu, (un)subscribe jsr |
'-------------------------------------------------------------------------'

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 14389 invoked from network); 17 Jul 2001 11:44:32 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 17 Jul 2001 11:44:32 -0000
Received: (qmail 22376 invoked from network); 17 Jul 2001 11:45:42 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 17 Jul 2001 11:45:42 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id EAA15047; Tue, 17 Jul 2001 04:42:29 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 79060 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 17 Jul 2001 11:42:28          +0000
Received: from mailgate3.cinetic.de (mailgate3.cinetic.de [212.227.116.80]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id EAA15025 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 17 Jul 2001 04:42:11 -0700
Received: from smtp.web.de (smtp01.web.de [194.45.170.210]) by          mailgate3.cinetic.de (8.11.2/8.11.2/SuSE Linux 8.11.0-0.4) with SMTP          id f6HBgBg23466 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 17 Jul 2001 13:42:11          +0200
Received: from olli by smtp.web.de with smtp (freemail 4.2.2.2 #11) id          m15MTEw-007oKtC; Tue, 17 Jul 2001 13:42 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2919.6700
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <00e701c10eb6$09208f10$0400a8c0@olli>
Date:         Tue, 17 Jul 2001 13:45:53 +0200
Reply-To: "Oliver Arend" <oarend@WEB.DE>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Oliver Arend" <oarend@WEB.DE>
Subject:      Re: [AR] inertial (artificial) gravity
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

> If you climbed a tree at a rate accelerating 32 ft/s^2, you'd feel twice
as
> heavy

I think you'd "feel" much more heavier than just twice your weight...

Oliver

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 17338 invoked from network); 17 Jul 2001 11:45:12 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 17 Jul 2001 11:45:12 -0000
Received: (qmail 22619 invoked from network); 17 Jul 2001 11:46:23 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 17 Jul 2001 11:46:23 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id EAA15023; Tue, 17 Jul 2001 04:42:05 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 79052 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 17 Jul 2001 11:41:46          +0000
Received: from mailgate3.cinetic.de (mailgate3.cinetic.de [212.227.116.80]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id EAA15005 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 17 Jul 2001 04:41:45 -0700
Received: from smtp.web.de (smtp01.web.de [194.45.170.210]) by          mailgate3.cinetic.de (8.11.2/8.11.2/SuSE Linux 8.11.0-0.4) with SMTP          id f6HBfig21957 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 17 Jul 2001 13:41:44          +0200
Received: from olli by smtp.web.de with smtp (freemail 4.2.2.2 #11) id          m15MTEV-007oJzC; Tue, 17 Jul 2001 13:41 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2919.6700
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <00df01c10eb5$f91cacc0$0400a8c0@olli>
Date:         Tue, 17 Jul 2001 13:45:26 +0200
Reply-To: "Oliver Arend" <oarend@WEB.DE>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Oliver Arend" <oarend@WEB.DE>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Equivalence - 2
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

> distinguishing featuresuch as one travelling at the speed of sound and the
other at the speed of light.

I'm still wondering how gravity is supposed to travel at the speed of light.
My guess would be gravity is just "there". It doesn't move. I mean if a body
would move, it's gravitational field would move right along, and not be
delayed on the far outside.

Put two objects orbiting around their center of gravity. They're a in terms
of speed of light distinguishable distance from each other, say a
light-minute. Then have some force distract the one object from it's orbit.
Say to the outside. Now does it take its gravity one whole minute to reach
the other object, which is still traveling, and then move this from its old
orbit? Or would it move immediately, since the center of gravity is moved
and hence the orbit has to change immediately? I think the latter...

Oliver

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 29412 invoked from network); 17 Jul 2001 14:32:49 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 17 Jul 2001 14:32:49 -0000
Received: (qmail 26815 invoked from network); 17 Jul 2001 14:33:59 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 17 Jul 2001 14:33:59 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA15583; Tue, 17 Jul 2001 07:28:06 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 79073 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 17 Jul 2001 14:27:59          +0000
Received: from Blastzone.com (consumersinterest.com [207.195.143.118] (may be          forged)) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA15566 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 17 Jul 2001 07:27:59 -0700
Received: from deputydog [131.107.3.84] by Blastzone.com with ESMTP          (SMTPD32-6.04) id AEA6670126; Tue, 17 Jul 2001 07:41:42 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_09EC_01C56B69.41E3BF70"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2462.0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <00d001c10ecc$acd238a0$730c379d@redmond.corp.microsoft.com>
Date:         Tue, 17 Jul 2001 07:27:57 -0700
Reply-To: "Greg Deputy" <greg@BLASTZONE.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Greg Deputy" <greg@BLASTZONE.COM>
Subject:      [AR] Fw: question on the ml200 s-beam loadcell
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_09EC_01C56B69.41E3BF70
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

RE: question on the ml200 s-beam loadcellI thought this was kind of =
interesting.  We've got a test stand set up with a 1klb Massload s-type =
load cell, and in thinking about how to protect the cell from damage in =
the event of a cato, asked the manufacturer what the max deflection was. =
 I was surprised how little it is.

----- Original Message -----=20
From: Gary Woo=20
To: 'greg@blastzone.com'=20
Sent: Tuesday, July 17, 2001 7:23 AM
Subject: RE: question on the ml200 s-beam loadcell


The maximum deflection on the Ml200-1k load cell is 0.01".=20

-----Original Message-----=20
From: belliot [mailto:bill1234@mobile.rogers.com]=20
Sent: Sunday, July 15, 2001 5:19 PM=20
To: gary@massload.com=20
Subject: Fw: question on the ml200 s-beam loadcell=20




-----Original Message-----=20
From: "Greg Deputy" <greg@blastzone.com>=20
Date: Thu, 12 Jul 2001 17:22:49 -0700=20
To: <bill@massload.com>=20
Subject: question on the ml200 s-beam loadcell=20

Can you tell me what the maximum flex in the 1000lb model is?  I'm using =
one=20
in a rocket motor test stand application, and i need to set up a stop to =
prevent it=20
from overload in the event of a motor failure.=20

Thanks=20


------=_NextPart_000_09EC_01C56B69.41E3BF70
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD><TITLE>RE: question on the ml200 s-beam loadcell</TITLE>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Diso-8859-1">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 6.00.2462.0" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>I thought this was kind of =
interesting.&nbsp; We've=20
got a test stand set up with a 1klb Massload s-type load cell, and in =
thinking=20
about how to protect the cell from damage in the event of a cato, asked =
the=20
manufacturer what the max deflection was.&nbsp; I was surprised how =
little it=20
is.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial">----- Original Message -----=20
<DIV style=3D"BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; font-color: black"><B>From:</B> <A=20
title=3DGary@massload.com href=3D"mailto:Gary@massload.com">Gary Woo</A> =
</DIV>
<DIV><B>To:</B> <A title=3Dgreg@blastzone.com=20
href=3D"mailto:'greg@blastzone.com'">'greg@blastzone.com'</A> </DIV>
<DIV><B>Sent:</B> Tuesday, July 17, 2001 7:23 AM</DIV>
<DIV><B>Subject:</B> RE: question on the ml200 s-beam =
loadcell</DIV></DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<P><FONT size=3D2>The maximum deflection on the Ml200-1k load cell is=20
0.01".</FONT> </P>
<P><FONT size=3D2>-----Original Message-----</FONT> <BR><FONT =
size=3D2>From: belliot=20
[<A=20
href=3D"mailto:bill1234@mobile.rogers.com">mailto:bill1234@mobile.rogers.=
com</A>]</FONT>=20
<BR><FONT size=3D2>Sent: Sunday, July 15, 2001 5:19 PM</FONT> <BR><FONT =
size=3D2>To:=20
<A href=3D"mailto:gary@massload.com">gary@massload.com</A></FONT> =
<BR><FONT=20
size=3D2>Subject: Fw: question on the ml200 s-beam loadcell</FONT> =
</P><BR><BR>
<P><FONT size=3D2>-----Original Message-----</FONT> <BR><FONT =
size=3D2>From: "Greg=20
Deputy" &lt;<A=20
href=3D"mailto:greg@blastzone.com">greg@blastzone.com</A>&gt;</FONT> =
<BR><FONT=20
size=3D2>Date: Thu, 12 Jul 2001 17:22:49 -0700</FONT> <BR><FONT =
size=3D2>To:=20
&lt;bill@massload.com&gt;</FONT> <BR><FONT size=3D2>Subject: question on =
the ml200=20
s-beam loadcell</FONT> </P>
<P><FONT size=3D2>Can you tell me what the maximum flex in the 1000lb =
model=20
is?&nbsp; I'm using one</FONT> <BR><FONT size=3D2>in a rocket motor test =
stand=20
application, and i need to set up a stop to prevent it</FONT> <BR><FONT=20
size=3D2>from overload in the event of a motor failure.</FONT> </P>
<P><FONT size=3D2>Thanks</FONT> </P></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_09EC_01C56B69.41E3BF70--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 10442 invoked from network); 17 Jul 2001 15:37:15 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 17 Jul 2001 15:37:15 -0000
Received: (qmail 24471 invoked from network); 17 Jul 2001 15:38:49 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 17 Jul 2001 15:38:49 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA15812; Tue, 17 Jul 2001 08:31:19 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 79089 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 17 Jul 2001 15:31:14          +0000
Received: from mail.cac.net (IDENT:root@mail.cac.net [209.44.14.13]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA15795 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 17 Jul 2001 08:31:13 -0700
Received: from jfackert.cac.net (tc2-29.cac.net [209.44.14.156]) by          mail.cac.net (Pro-8.9.3/Pro-8.9.3) with SMTP id LAA07556 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 17 Jul 2001 11:31:02 -0400
References:  <00df01c10eb5$f91cacc0$0400a8c0@olli>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2314.1300
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <04e201c10ed6$7edd3120$670e2cd1@cac.net>
Date:         Tue, 17 Jul 2001 11:38:11 -0400
Reply-To: "Jim Fackert" <jfackert@CAC.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jim Fackert" <jfackert@CAC.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Equivalence - 2
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Not to get further off topic, but...  if gravity is indiscernible from the
effects of acceleration, why can't we view gravity as a result of all matter
and "space" expanding at 1g acceleration? Everything grows and moves apart
at an accelerating rate when referenced from the "outside" of our reality,
which we are unable to experience.

I there any physical effect that would prove this conslusion or point of
view false?

I seem to remember a comic book (!!!) that tried to explain gravitation and
relativity according to this point of view...

Jim Fackert

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 12257 invoked from network); 17 Jul 2001 16:37:37 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 17 Jul 2001 16:37:37 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 29762 invoked from network); 17 Jul 2001 16:20:38 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 17 Jul 2001 16:20:38 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA16037; Tue, 17 Jul 2001 09:14:34 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 79110 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 17 Jul 2001 16:14:33          +0000
Received: from mail.valinux.com (mail@mail.valinux.com [198.186.202.175]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA15949 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Tue, 17 Jul 2001 09:04:32 -0700
Received: from [206.247.167.100] (helo=valinux.com) by mail.valinux.com with          asmtp (Cipher SSLv3:EXP1024-RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 3.31-VA-mm2 #1          (Debian)) id 15MXKX-0007kw-00; Tue, 17 Jul 2001 09:04:13 -0700
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.61 [en] (X11; I; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <00df01c10eb5$f91cacc0$0400a8c0@olli>            <04e201c10ed6$7edd3120$670e2cd1@cac.net>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B54627C.6D50A203@valinux.com>
Date:         Tue, 17 Jul 2001 10:06:20 -0600
Reply-To: "Keith Whitwell" <keithw@VALINUX.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Keith Whitwell" <keithw@VALINUX.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Equivalence - 2
Comments: To: Jim Fackert <jfackert@CAC.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Jim Fackert wrote:
>
> Not to get further off topic, but...  if gravity is indiscernible from the
> effects of acceleration, why can't we view gravity as a result of all matter
> and "space" expanding at 1g acceleration? Everything grows and moves apart
> at an accelerating rate when referenced from the "outside" of our reality,
> which we are unable to experience.

Maybe because gravity isn't 1g throughout the universe, or even over the
earth's surface, hence you'd have to have different rates of expansion at
different points in space, and there's not really any evidence for that...

Keith

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 26220 invoked from network); 17 Jul 2001 16:40:35 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 17 Jul 2001 16:40:35 -0000
Received: (qmail 5538 invoked from network); 17 Jul 2001 16:28:36 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 17 Jul 2001 16:28:36 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA16011; Tue, 17 Jul 2001 09:13:02 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 79118 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 17 Jul 2001 16:12:55          +0000
Received: from spsystems.net (spsystems.net [209.47.149.227]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA15994 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Tue,          17 Jul 2001 09:12:54 -0700
Received: (from henry@localhost) by spsystems.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id MAA17845;          Tue, 17 Jul 2001 12:12:13 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010717121114.17775A-100000@spsystems.net>
Date:         Tue, 17 Jul 2001 12:12:13 -0400
Reply-To: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Equivalence - 2
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <04e201c10ed6$7edd3120$670e2cd1@cac.net>

On Tue, 17 Jul 2001, Jim Fackert wrote:
> Not to get further off topic, but...  if gravity is indiscernible from the
> effects of acceleration, why can't we view gravity as a result of all matter
> and "space" expanding at 1g acceleration?

Because that only works for one planet.  The Martians would have to see it
as expanding at 0.38G.  And so forth.

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 8532 invoked from network); 17 Jul 2001 17:02:42 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 17 Jul 2001 17:02:42 -0000
Received: (qmail 21515 invoked from network); 17 Jul 2001 17:04:33 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 17 Jul 2001 17:04:33 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA16326; Tue, 17 Jul 2001 09:58:13 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 79158 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 17 Jul 2001 16:58:04          +0000
Received: from spock.alohanet.com (spock.alohanet.com [209.31.4.252]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA16309 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Tue, 17 Jul 2001 09:58:04 -0700
Received: from NATE2 (spock.alohanet.com [209.31.4.252]) by spock.alohanet.com          (Post.Office MTA v3.5.2 release 221 ID# 0-55447U100L2S100V35) with          SMTP id com for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Tue, 17 Jul 2001 09:56:45 -0700
References:  <00df01c10eb5$f91cacc0$0400a8c0@olli>              <04e201c10ed6$7edd3120$670e2cd1@cac.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <003301c10ee1$ed060630$68e9a8c0@NATE2>
Date:         Tue, 17 Jul 2001 10:00:04 -0700
Reply-To: "Nathan Hays" <nhays@ALOHANET.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Nathan Hays" <nhays@ALOHANET.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Equivalence - 2
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

The comic book was, "Gravity is the Fourth Dimension".  Collector's item.
Worth bucks, but not your noggin.


BTW, someone stated that the air in a torus spacecraft would not form
turbulent whorls (paraphrasing).  I think they would.  The air "wants" to
travel in a straight line, not the curved line around the torus.  Since
there is air being pushed by the floor, this leads to convection zones.

A really beautiful example of these effects, like the zones of Jupiter, is
on display at the Exploratorium here in San Francisco.  It consists of a 1m
glass sphere filled with fluid and fine reflective particles in suspension
(like silky shampoo).  As one rotates the sphere, all manner of patterns
arise from the subduction zones.  At different rotation rates, different
modes of fluid flow can observed, some finely detailed, others with large
features.  Every museum should have one of these displays.

- Nate

>
> I seem to remember a comic book (!!!) that tried to explain gravitation
and
> relativity according to this point of view...
>
> Jim Fackert
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 22093 invoked from network); 17 Jul 2001 17:18:49 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 17 Jul 2001 17:18:48 -0000
Received: (qmail 8955 invoked from network); 17 Jul 2001 17:20:23 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 17 Jul 2001 17:20:23 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA16410; Tue, 17 Jul 2001 10:14:13 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 79168 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 17 Jul 2001 17:14:09          +0000
Received: from spsystems.net (spsystems.net [209.47.149.227]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA16393 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Tue,          17 Jul 2001 10:14:09 -0700
Received: (from henry@localhost) by spsystems.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id NAA19084;          Tue, 17 Jul 2001 13:13:29 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010717131250.19059A-100000@spsystems.net>
Date:         Tue, 17 Jul 2001 13:13:29 -0400
Reply-To: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Equivalence-2
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <20010717073519.56.cpmta@c009.snv.cp.net>

On Tue, 17 Jul 2001, Philip D'Souza wrote:
> I have a few points to make
> 1)Inertial acceleration and gravity have different origins and may
> have distinguishing featuresuch as one travelling at the speed of sound
> and the other at the speed of light.

I think it's time to say:  please take this off the ARocket mailing list.
Try the sci.physics newsgroup instead.

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 18353 invoked from network); 17 Jul 2001 17:44:45 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 17 Jul 2001 17:44:45 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 26538 invoked from network); 17 Jul 2001 17:46:17 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 17 Jul 2001 17:46:17 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA16548; Tue, 17 Jul 2001 10:39:30 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 79179 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 17 Jul 2001 17:39:26          +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (f14.law3.hotmail.com [209.185.241.14]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA16531 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Tue, 17 Jul 2001 10:39:25 -0700
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Tue,          17 Jul 2001 10:38:55 -0700
Received: from 213.224.83.166 by lw3fd.law3.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Tue, 17          Jul 2001 17:38:55 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [213.224.83.166]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 17 Jul 2001 17:38:55.0527 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[5A1E8B70:01C10EE7]
Message-ID:  <F14AkxWnefxGZ2Lig41000180e9@hotmail.com>
Date:         Tue, 17 Jul 2001 17:39:26 +0000
Reply-To: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Equivalence-2
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

HS wrote:

>Try the sci.physics newsgroup instead.

Ah, another site of interest.

Funny nobody gives an opinion on my statement the equivalence principle does
not work for rotating cylinders. In the meantime, I and collegues have been
trying to figure out what happens if you drop a pencil not to the observer
outside (tangential path) the cylinder but to the one inside who drops the
pencil. While he rotates further the pencil may seem to drop vertically to
him... Not really OT since it concerns space travel.

Or is this a fireworks site?

A computer simulation might be handy for this theme.

jd
_________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 15760 invoked from network); 17 Jul 2001 18:17:05 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 17 Jul 2001 18:17:05 -0000
Received: (qmail 8054 invoked from network); 17 Jul 2001 18:18:55 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 17 Jul 2001 18:18:55 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA16766; Tue, 17 Jul 2001 11:10:51 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 79215 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 17 Jul 2001 18:10:45          +0000
Received: from pike.rtlogic.com (firewall.rtlogic.com [206.247.196.122]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA16748 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 17 Jul 2001 11:10:44 -0700
Received: from RTLWS18 ([192.168.3.14]) by pike.rtlogic.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with          SMTP id MAA02235 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 17 Jul 2001 12:10:13          -0600
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <FGEJKGFBGDNDMLOJJDPOOEKOCDAA.punder@rtlogic.com>
Date:         Tue, 17 Jul 2001 12:11:14 -0600
Reply-To: "Patrick Underwood" <punder@RTLOGIC.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Patrick Underwood" <punder@RTLOGIC.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Equivalence-2
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <F14AkxWnefxGZ2Lig41000180e9@hotmail.com>

Continuing this thread at the risk of being tossed off yet another mailing
list, :) here are the links to Theodore Hall's artificial gravity papers at
www.spacefuture.com:

http://www.spacefuture.com/archive/artificial_gravity_and_the_architecture_o
f_orbital_habitats.shtml

http://www.spacefuture.com/archive/the_architecture_of_artificial_gravity_th
eory_form_and_function_in_the_high_frontier.shtml

Patrick

-----Original Message-----
From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU]On
Behalf Of John Dom
Sent: Tuesday, July 17, 2001 11:39 AM
To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
Subject: Re: [AR] Equivalence-2


HS wrote:

>Try the sci.physics newsgroup instead.

Ah, another site of interest.

Funny nobody gives an opinion on my statement the equivalence principle does
not work for rotating cylinders. In the meantime, I and collegues have been
trying to figure out what happens if you drop a pencil not to the observer
outside (tangential path) the cylinder but to the one inside who drops the
pencil. While he rotates further the pencil may seem to drop vertically to
him... Not really OT since it concerns space travel.

Or is this a fireworks site?

A computer simulation might be handy for this theme.

jd
_________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 9340 invoked from network); 17 Jul 2001 18:22:08 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 17 Jul 2001 18:22:08 -0000
Received: (qmail 9523 invoked from network); 17 Jul 2001 18:23:59 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 17 Jul 2001 18:23:59 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA16820; Tue, 17 Jul 2001 11:18:33 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 79227 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 17 Jul 2001 18:18:28          +0000
Received: from spsystems.net (spsystems.net [209.47.149.227]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA16803 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Tue,          17 Jul 2001 11:18:28 -0700
Received: (from henry@localhost) by spsystems.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id OAA20270;          Tue, 17 Jul 2001 14:17:47 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010717140726.19059B-100000@spsystems.net>
Date:         Tue, 17 Jul 2001 14:17:47 -0400
Reply-To: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Subject:      [AR] falling pencils (was Re: [AR] Equivalence-2)
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <F14AkxWnefxGZ2Lig41000180e9@hotmail.com>

On Tue, 17 Jul 2001, John Dom wrote:
> Funny nobody gives an opinion on my statement the equivalence principle does
> not work for rotating cylinders.

Take it to sci.physics or private mail, or consult a relativity textbook,
please -- it's got *nothing* to do with rocketry or spaceflight.

> In the meantime, I and collegues have been
> trying to figure out what happens if you drop a pencil not to the observer
> outside (tangential path) the cylinder but to the one inside who drops the
> pencil. While he rotates further the pencil may seem to drop vertically to
> him... Not really OT since it concerns space travel.

Discussions of engineering, as opposed to the equivalence principle, are
at least more or less on topic.

As noted in one of my earlier comments, in a rotating reference frame, you
need *two* fictitious forces to patch up Newtonian dynamics well enough.
Centrifugal force would make the pencil fall straight outward, but the
Coriolis force makes its path curve antispinward.  The relative magnitudes
depend on details, because the two forces scale differently.  (Notably, a
manned habitat is going to have a long radius and a slow spin specifically
to minimize motion sickness caused by Coriolis forces.)

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 5667 invoked from network); 17 Jul 2001 18:27:57 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 17 Jul 2001 18:27:57 -0000
Received: (qmail 16674 invoked from network); 17 Jul 2001 18:29:29 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 17 Jul 2001 18:29:29 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA16904; Tue, 17 Jul 2001 11:25:22 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 79235 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 17 Jul 2001 18:25:20          +0000
Received: from femail21.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail21.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.0.95.146]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA16887          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 17 Jul 2001 11:25:20 -0700
Received: from cc334751a ([65.13.214.65]) by femail21.sdc1.sfba.home.com          (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20 201-229-121-120-20010223) with SMTP id          <20010717182506.HDC5427.femail21.sdc1.sfba.home.com@cc334751a>; Tue,          17 Jul 2001 11:25:06 -0700
References:  <00df01c10eb5$f91cacc0$0400a8c0@olli>                          <04e201c10ed6$7edd3120$670e2cd1@cac.net>              <003301c10ee1$ed060630$68e9a8c0@NATE2>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2462.0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <007201c10eed$c5968aa0$6401a8c0@home.com>
Date:         Tue, 17 Jul 2001 12:24:52 -0600
Reply-To: "Brian Kosko" <bkosko1@HOME.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Brian Kosko" <bkosko1@HOME.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Equivalence - 2  Enough please!
Comments: To: Nathan Hays <nhays@ALOHANET.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Guys,

I've patiently deleted a zillion messages on this subject. And at the end of
the day the apple will still fall. Could you either wrap it up or take it
somewhere else?

                                                                    Thanks,
                                                                    Brian

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 7269 invoked from network); 17 Jul 2001 22:27:31 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 17 Jul 2001 22:27:31 -0000
Received: (qmail 9365 invoked from network); 17 Jul 2001 22:29:21 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 17 Jul 2001 22:29:21 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA17966; Tue, 17 Jul 2001 15:21:56 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 79293 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 17 Jul 2001 22:21:50          +0000
Received: from spsystems.net (spsystems.net [209.47.149.227]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA17949 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Tue,          17 Jul 2001 15:21:49 -0700
Received: (from henry@localhost) by spsystems.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id SAA25224;          Tue, 17 Jul 2001 18:21:08 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010717181857.19059K-100000@spsystems.net>
Date:         Tue, 17 Jul 2001 18:21:07 -0400
Reply-To: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] inertial (artificial) gravity (was principle of              equivalence)
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <LPBBKJMJEOFKAMFJJNNHOEKMCFAA.landofgrey@gnc.net>

On Mon, 16 Jul 2001, Matthew Travis wrote:
> From what I understand (disclaimer: I may be wrong), the physiological
> effects follow a sort of surve. That is, over the first few months, there
> are significan changes to the body, but as time goes on the changes slow,
> even stop, as the body fully acclimates to the environment...

Unfortunately, not all changes slow down.  Notably, loss of minerals from
the bones apparently doesn't.  A lot of the small stuff is quite temporary,
but there are one or two longer-term problems which look serious.

> ...Also, calcium
> loss is only a problem is you do not take the proper process to re-acclimate
> to gravity later.

Unfortunately, not so -- calcium loss from the bones, in particular, seems
to be at least partly permanent, last I heard.

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 15303 invoked from network); 17 Jul 2001 23:01:26 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 17 Jul 2001 23:01:26 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 10317 invoked from network); 17 Jul 2001 23:02:54 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 17 Jul 2001 23:02:54 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA18143; Tue, 17 Jul 2001 15:58:38 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 79305 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 17 Jul 2001 22:58:30          +0000
Received: from gull.mail.pas.earthlink.net (gull.mail.pas.earthlink.net          [207.217.121.85]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA18090          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 17 Jul 2001 15:48:29 -0700
Received: from earthlink.net (dialup-209.245.137.230.Dial1.SanJose1.Level3.net          [209.245.137.230]) by gull.mail.pas.earthlink.net (EL-8_9_3_3/8.9.3)          with ESMTP id PAA18144 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 17 Jul 2001          15:48:28 -0700 (PDT)
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (Win98; I)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <v01510102b77813fbb889@[208.11.233.240]>            <5.1.0.14.0.20010716012601.02b5e2b8@hobbiton.shire.net>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B54C3C2.76D34414@earthlink.net>
Date:         Tue, 17 Jul 2001 16:01:22 -0700
Reply-To: <thomgaf@energyrs.com>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Thomas M. Mcgaffey" <energyrelease@EARTHLINK.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Non-black powder ejection
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Hi Seth,

I have used both Black Powder and Smokeless Powders for rocket
pyrotechnic devices and have experimented with other pyro mixes for
pressure generation.

One of the tests I did was to fire BP and SP in an AN814 bleeder fitting
(wires came out through drilled holes in the "Nut" end of the fitting)
leaving the threaded end open.  The AN fitting was placed in a 24" Dia.
plastic tube 30" long.  The top and bottom of the plastic tube were
closed off with 1/4" plywood.  When fired the BP charge fully burned and
didn't move the plywood top.  The SP when fired didn't burn fully and
left lots of unburned powder.  the charge in both cases was 2.0 grains.
The next test was almost the same except that I slipped 1/2 of a "gel"
cap into the open end of the AN fitting enclosing the powder charge.
The BP charge fired with a "POP" and the powder and gel cap were
consumed.  The SP charge fired with a "BANG" the powder was consumed but
the gel cap was not.  The gel cap hit the plywood top with enough force
to make it jump up a bit and leave an impression in the it where it
hit. Again the charge was 2.0 grains.

In my cable cutter (cuts 3/16 SS aircraft cable) I use a charge of 1.4
grains of pistol powder.  Smokeless powders develop a lot of pressure
when enclosed.

I have used plastic and nylon plugs as wad cutters (hand fitted not
pressed and crimped) for in door shooting with very lite loads.
These plastic bullets required a 3/4" plywood back stop to prevent
penetration.  Hell the primer a lone was enough to make them penetrate
1/4" plywood.

I look forward to hearing how your tests go.


Thom

--
Thomas M. McGaffey
Energy Release Systems
408-226-7502
thomgaf@energyrs.com

"The world needs dreamers and the world needs doers.
But above all, the world needs dreamers who do.  Don't
just entrust your hopes and wishes to the stars. Today,
begin learning the craft that will enable you to reach
for them."  -- Sarah Ban Breathnach


Seth Leigh wrote:
>
> At 12:27 AM 7/16/2001, James Yawn wrote:
> >Given the forcefulness of the ejection I witnessed in my simple test
> >yesterday, I
> >would question whether pressure containment of a smokeless powder charge is
> >necessary, or even helpful.  The gram of Red Dot was contained only by one
> >layer of
> >two-ply paper towel, yet had no trouble in ejecting a big wad packed in
> >tight.  It
> >was more like a pneumatic device, less explosive than BP.  Trying to raise
> >the SP
> >up to explosive pressures seems counterproductive to me.
>
> Remember you used a whole gram of powder.  The guy on the web site is
> working with 4.7 to 5 grains.  There are something like 15.4 grains to a
> gram.  For those non reloaders out there a grain is a unit of weight with
> 7000 grains to a pound.  Powder charges for reloading ammo, as well as
> bullet weights, are usually measured in the US in grains, and in most of
> the rest of the world in grams.
>
> Seth

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 16960 invoked from network); 17 Jul 2001 23:01:46 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 17 Jul 2001 23:01:46 -0000
Received: (qmail 4249 invoked from network); 17 Jul 2001 23:03:19 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 17 Jul 2001 23:03:19 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA18169; Tue, 17 Jul 2001 15:59:16 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 79313 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 17 Jul 2001 22:59:15          +0000
Received: from pike.rtlogic.com (firewall.rtlogic.com [206.247.196.122]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA18152 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 17 Jul 2001 15:59:14 -0700
Received: from RTLWS18 ([192.168.3.14]) by pike.rtlogic.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with          SMTP id QAA08890 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 17 Jul 2001 16:58:43          -0600
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <FGEJKGFBGDNDMLOJJDPOAELFCDAA.punder@rtlogic.com>
Date:         Tue, 17 Jul 2001 16:59:43 -0600
Reply-To: "Patrick Underwood" <punder@RTLOGIC.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Patrick Underwood" <punder@RTLOGIC.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] inertial (artificial) gravity (was principle of              equivalence)
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010717181857.19059K-100000@spsystems.net>

There is also the point that astronauts on long duration stays currently
exercise like mad for a good part of each day to minimize these effects.

Patrick

-----Original Message-----
From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU]On
Behalf Of Henry Spencer
Sent: Tuesday, July 17, 2001 4:21 PM
To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
Subject: Re: [AR] inertial (artificial) gravity (was principle of
equivalence)


On Mon, 16 Jul 2001, Matthew Travis wrote:
> From what I understand (disclaimer: I may be wrong), the physiological
> effects follow a sort of surve. That is, over the first few months, there
> are significan changes to the body, but as time goes on the changes slow,
> even stop, as the body fully acclimates to the environment...

Unfortunately, not all changes slow down.  Notably, loss of minerals from
the bones apparently doesn't.  A lot of the small stuff is quite temporary,
but there are one or two longer-term problems which look serious.

> ...Also, calcium
> loss is only a problem is you do not take the proper process to
re-acclimate
> to gravity later.

Unfortunately, not so -- calcium loss from the bones, in particular, seems
to be at least partly permanent, last I heard.

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 13572 invoked from network); 17 Jul 2001 23:20:25 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 17 Jul 2001 23:20:26 -0000
Received: (qmail 11807 invoked from network); 17 Jul 2001 23:21:35 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 17 Jul 2001 23:21:35 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA18274; Tue, 17 Jul 2001 16:18:05 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 79332 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 17 Jul 2001 23:18:03          +0000
Received: from dune.gnc.net (root@dune.gnc.net [207.203.72.4]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA18257 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue,          17 Jul 2001 16:18:02 -0700
Received: from beowulf (sw2-30.gnc.net [207.203.72.110]) by dune.gnc.net          (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id TAA23221 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue,          17 Jul 2001 19:18:03 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
Importance: Normal
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <LPBBKJMJEOFKAMFJJNNHAELICFAA.landofgrey@gnc.net>
Date:         Tue, 17 Jul 2001 19:18:03 -0400
Reply-To: <landofgrey@gnc.net>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Matthew Travis" <landofgrey@gnc.net>
Subject:      Re: [AR] inertial (artificial) gravity (was principle of              equivalence)
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <FGEJKGFBGDNDMLOJJDPOAELFCDAA.punder@rtlogic.com>

If you compare the amount and type of exercise that an astronaut engages in
daily in flight to the amount of exercise that an avid fitness "nut" goes
through daily, you will see that an astroanut doesn't really exercise that
much more than the average person who exercises at a gymn avidly. Example,
my aunt is a semi-professional physical fitness whatever-you-call-it and she
exercises a couple hours a day. The big difference is that people on Earth
don't *need* to exercise that much, whiile astronauts do. But still, it's
not fair to compare astronauts who exercise a lot even when they are not in
flight to the average joe-schmoe who doesn't exercise at all (typing is my
exercise). Another example, when I go surfing and swimming, I am usually at
it for a couple hours at least. The difference here, of course, is I don't
do it *every day*, though that would be fun. you know, some would argue that
the amount of exercise that astronauts engage in daily is actually about the
right amount of exercise for anyone even on Earth. Of course, I think
they're nuts :).

Matt

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU]On
> Behalf Of Patrick Underwood
> Sent: Tuesday, July 17, 2001 7:00 PM
> To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
> Subject: Re: [AR] inertial (artificial) gravity (was principle of
> equivalence)
>
>
> There is also the point that astronauts on long duration stays currently
> exercise like mad for a good part of each day to minimize these effects.
>
> Patrick
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 13934 invoked from network); 17 Jul 2001 23:33:38 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 17 Jul 2001 23:33:38 -0000
Received: (qmail 25167 invoked from network); 17 Jul 2001 23:35:14 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 17 Jul 2001 23:35:14 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA18392; Tue, 17 Jul 2001 16:30:34 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 79352 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 17 Jul 2001 23:30:24          +0000
Received: from yellowdog.featuretech.com ([63.121.63.69]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA18375 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue,          17 Jul 2001 16:30:23 -0700
Received: from duncan (sdsl-64-139-32-247.dsl.sjc.megapath.net [64.139.32.247])          by yellowdog.featuretech.com with SMTP (Microsoft Exchange Internet          Mail Service Version 5.5.2448.0) id PBMTT7JJ; Tue, 17 Jul 2001          16:41:36 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0)
Importance: Normal
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <NEBBLECGKLLOLFCCBNPEEEBNDBAA.duncan@transim.com>
Date:         Tue, 17 Jul 2001 16:30:08 -0700
Reply-To: "Duncan McDonald" <duncan@TRANSIM.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Duncan McDonald" <duncan@TRANSIM.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Non-black powder ejection
Comments: To: thomgaf@energyrs.com
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <3B54C3C2.76D34414@earthlink.net>

Thom,

Sounds like "light" containment of SP is sufficient to generate the pressure
required for complete combustion. That's consistent with what Scott Aleckson
reported on his website. However the pressures then generated sound like
they may propel the cap or wad at high enough speeds that they could damage
the parachute. Maybe what's needed is a closed end (screw on end?) charge
holder that vents to the sides. There is also the question of how SP
performs at altitude. Do you have any data there?

Duncan


-----Original Message-----
From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@itc.uci.edu]On
Behalf Of Thomas M. Mcgaffey
Sent: Tuesday, July 17, 2001 4:01 PM
To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
Subject: Re: [AR] Non-black powder ejection


Hi Seth,

I have used both Black Powder and Smokeless Powders for rocket
pyrotechnic devices and have experimented with other pyro mixes for
pressure generation.

One of the tests I did was to fire BP and SP in an AN814 bleeder fitting
(wires came out through drilled holes in the "Nut" end of the fitting)
leaving the threaded end open.  The AN fitting was placed in a 24" Dia.
plastic tube 30" long.  The top and bottom of the plastic tube were
closed off with 1/4" plywood.  When fired the BP charge fully burned and
didn't move the plywood top.  The SP when fired didn't burn fully and
left lots of unburned powder.  the charge in both cases was 2.0 grains.
The next test was almost the same except that I slipped 1/2 of a "gel"
cap into the open end of the AN fitting enclosing the powder charge.
The BP charge fired with a "POP" and the powder and gel cap were
consumed.  The SP charge fired with a "BANG" the powder was consumed but
the gel cap was not.  The gel cap hit the plywood top with enough force
to make it jump up a bit and leave an impression in the it where it
hit. Again the charge was 2.0 grains.

In my cable cutter (cuts 3/16 SS aircraft cable) I use a charge of 1.4
grains of pistol powder.  Smokeless powders develop a lot of pressure
when enclosed.

I have used plastic and nylon plugs as wad cutters (hand fitted not
pressed and crimped) for in door shooting with very lite loads.
These plastic bullets required a 3/4" plywood back stop to prevent
penetration.  Hell the primer a lone was enough to make them penetrate
1/4" plywood.

I look forward to hearing how your tests go.


Thom

--
Thomas M. McGaffey
Energy Release Systems
408-226-7502
thomgaf@energyrs.com

"The world needs dreamers and the world needs doers.
But above all, the world needs dreamers who do.  Don't
just entrust your hopes and wishes to the stars. Today,
begin learning the craft that will enable you to reach
for them."  -- Sarah Ban Breathnach


Seth Leigh wrote:
>
> At 12:27 AM 7/16/2001, James Yawn wrote:
> >Given the forcefulness of the ejection I witnessed in my simple test
> >yesterday, I
> >would question whether pressure containment of a smokeless powder charge
is
> >necessary, or even helpful.  The gram of Red Dot was contained only by
one
> >layer of
> >two-ply paper towel, yet had no trouble in ejecting a big wad packed in
> >tight.  It
> >was more like a pneumatic device, less explosive than BP.  Trying to
raise
> >the SP
> >up to explosive pressures seems counterproductive to me.
>
> Remember you used a whole gram of powder.  The guy on the web site is
> working with 4.7 to 5 grains.  There are something like 15.4 grains to a
> gram.  For those non reloaders out there a grain is a unit of weight with
> 7000 grains to a pound.  Powder charges for reloading ammo, as well as
> bullet weights, are usually measured in the US in grains, and in most of
> the rest of the world in grams.
>
> Seth

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 7411 invoked from network); 17 Jul 2001 23:51:54 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 17 Jul 2001 23:51:54 -0000
Received: (qmail 948 invoked from network); 17 Jul 2001 23:53:09 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 17 Jul 2001 23:53:09 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA18453; Tue, 17 Jul 2001 16:47:17 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 79360 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 17 Jul 2001 23:46:14          +0000
Received: from dune.gnc.net (root@dune.gnc.net [207.203.72.4]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA18435 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue,          17 Jul 2001 16:46:13 -0700
Received: from beowulf (sw2-30.gnc.net [207.203.72.110]) by dune.gnc.net          (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id TAA23888 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue,          17 Jul 2001 19:46:08 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
Importance: Normal
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <LPBBKJMJEOFKAMFJJNNHMELICFAA.landofgrey@gnc.net>
Date:         Tue, 17 Jul 2001 19:46:07 -0400
Reply-To: <landofgrey@gnc.net>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Matthew Travis" <landofgrey@gnc.net>
Subject:      Re: [AR] inertial (artificial) gravity (was principle of              equivalence)
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010717181857.19059K-100000@spsystems.net>

> From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU]On
> Behalf Of Henry Spencer
>
> Unfortunately, not all changes slow down.  Notably, loss of minerals from
> the bones apparently doesn't.  A lot of the small stuff is quite
> temporary,
> but there are one or two longer-term problems which look serious.
>

you're probably right and I won't disagree, as I'm not a medical doctor (I
don't think any of us are FWIR) and so am not qualified to claim statements
about medicine as being fact. From what I've heard and read, though, the
losses do, over the long-term, reach a more-or-less certain steady-state.
Not that losses don't continue to some degree for a very very long time.
Imagine the decay curve of a radioactive element. Of course, if a person
goes to space and doesn't exercise or do anything at all, the losses are
greater and for a longer period of time, but that applies to people on Earth
too. Obviously, calcium loss has to stop at some point or the bones would
disappear <=== oversimplification. In practical terms, the medical
"problems" of spaceflight appear more serious than perhaps (note I say
"perhaps") they really are. For example, the calcium loss of a cosmonaut
after a 380-day flight on Mir presented less difficulty than the average
sufferer of osteoperosis. Even if the loss was greater in quantity, the
problems it caused were minor in comparison to osteoperosis. No astronaut
has broken bones as a result of losing calcium during a spaceflight. So I'm
not solely talking about numbers, such and such percent of calcium is lost,
etc. but more so am adressing the practical effects of it.  That's about as
much as I'm able to talk about, not being a doctor. The closest I've been to
being a doctor was sharing a house with a neuro-surgeon during my
post-graduate sutdies.

Of course, astronauts exercise and eat and whatnot in such a way as to
minimize the effects of microgravity and ease the rehab process on Earth.
But that's not a matter of survival, or keeping from being paralyzed or
whatver. A lot of that is common sense. No-one in NASA has suggested (in the
recent past anyway), that if an astroanut spent a year in space without
exercising that it would kill him or that he would die when he got back to
Earth. the concern is that the rehabilitation on Earth would be more
difficult and that there could be lasting health problems. Even in this, I
say *could be*, because no astronaut has been in space for more than a few
months without doing exercises and things. So the myriad of supposed
problems that one might be tempted to say *will* happen are, in reality,
still only theoretical problems. No-one's been risky (stupid) enough to test
the theories by not living well during his spaceflight.


> > ...Also, calcium
> > loss is only a problem is you do not take the proper process to
> re-acclimate
> > to gravity later.
>
> Unfortunately, not so -- calcium loss from the bones, in particular, seems
> to be at least partly permanent, last I heard.

Some of the loss may well be permanent, though I haven't heard any hard
figures about that. I do know, ofr a fact, that osteoperosis and similar
patients have never been able to stop calcium loss completely or replace it
completely after it's been lost. My grandmother got two glistening new knees
because of this :). The disease stopped, but the calcium wass never able to
be completely replaced. But, if part of the process of re-acclimation
includes calcium replacement and rehabilitation, which it does, then then
most of the loss can be made up. This is according to what Yuri Usachev
said, anyway. He also said that 2 days after his last Mir flight he was
walking around and exerting himself normally and within one year his body
showed no after-effects of his flight. Perhaps he was oversimplifying it
somewhat for us non-doctors, but the essence of his statement is still
there. And that is, while medical scientists (BTW, some of the very same
people who claimed people couldn't swallow in zero-g) say all these things
about how terrible it would be to spend too much time in space, the reality,
once you step out of the fishbowl of a doctors single-minded and usually
over-reaching viewpoint, is different. History has shown that, for up to 1
year in space anyway, the ill-effects of spaceflight are more inconvenient
than dangerous, more temporary than permanent, and the changes that are
permanent don't present real-life problems that can't be adjusted for.

I would tend to agree that some changes are more or less permanent (not that
I know). I'm just saying that, in real life, it has never presented itself
as being as much of a problem as medical scientists have feared. Keep in
mind that they also tend to tailor their opinion, papers and reports toward
the most conservative analysis. It's "safer", professionally, for a doctor
to be over-cautious than not.

Anyway, is anyone here a medical doctor???

Matt

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 19632 invoked from network); 18 Jul 2001 00:07:58 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 18 Jul 2001 00:07:58 -0000
Received: (qmail 10151 invoked from network); 18 Jul 2001 00:09:30 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 18 Jul 2001 00:09:30 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA18558; Tue, 17 Jul 2001 17:05:00 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 79377 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 18 Jul 2001 00:04:50          +0000
Received: from dune.gnc.net (root@dune.gnc.net [207.203.72.4]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA18541 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue,          17 Jul 2001 17:04:49 -0700
Received: from beowulf (sw2-38.gnc.net [207.203.72.118]) by dune.gnc.net          (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id UAA24257 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue,          17 Jul 2001 20:04:50 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_09EF_01C56B69.41FB8D30"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
Importance: Normal
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <LPBBKJMJEOFKAMFJJNNHGELJCFAA.landofgrey@gnc.net>
Date:         Tue, 17 Jul 2001 20:04:50 -0400
Reply-To: <landofgrey@gnc.net>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Matthew Travis" <landofgrey@gnc.net>
Subject:      [AR] OT: Save the Rocket
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <LPBBKJMJEOFKAMFJJNNHMELICFAA.landofgrey@gnc.net>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_09EF_01C56B69.41FB8D30
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

I apologize if this post is too off-topic, but a group here (I am on the
list of volunteers) is trying to save a Titan I engineering test rocket that
has been a fixture outside a local high-school for 30 years. People have
been trying to save it for several years, and it has finally come down to
this. If a plan isn't found to restore it by the end of the year or so, it
is going to be recycled into hubcaps and car parts.

Matt
  Save the Titusville rocket
  A FLORIDA TODAY editorial
  New York City has the Statue of Liberty. ROCKET ONLINE
        To help save the rocket, go to: Web site:
www.geocities.com/saverocket E-mail: saverocket@cfl.rr.com

  San Francisco has the Golden Gate Bridge.

  Titusville has The Rocket.

  OK, that's probably not a fair comparison. But to many folks who live in
Titusville the aging, rusted Titan 1 that's parked in front of Titusville
High School means as much as Lady Liberty or California's magnificent
bridge.

  After all, city residents helped send the first astronauts into space,
launched men to the moon and dispatched spacecraft to other planets. And
they're still flying shuttles and building the International Space Station.

  It's all done with rockets, which makes the Titan a fitting symbol of the
exploration of space.

  Sadly, the 30-year-old rocket may be headed for the scrap heap. It's
literally falling apart, will cost $50,000 to restore, and the city doesn't
want to ante-up. Time is running out fast.

  To the rescue, maybe, has come Angie Sharkey.

  The 1984 graduate of Titusville High is leading a new fund-raising drive
to save the old Titan. Along with her husband, John, she has started a Web
site to raise cash, which could be pooled with $9,000 previously collected
by the Titusville Kiwanis Club.

  The rocket, says Sharkey, is inspirational proof that "we can all soar if
we work hard to fly."

  We'll second that, and wish her the best of luck.

  The rocket is a little piece of local history that deserves everyone's
support so it can shine again.


------=_NextPart_000_09EF_01C56B69.41FB8D30
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD><TITLE></TITLE>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Dus-ascii">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 5.50.4208.1700" name=3DGENERATOR></HEAD>
<BODY><FONT size=3D2>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial color=3D#0000ff>I apologize if this post is too =
off-topic,=20
but a group here (I am on the list of volunteers) is trying to save a =
Titan I=20
engineering test rocket that has been a fixture outside a local =
high-school for=20
30 years. People have been trying to save it for several years, and it =
has=20
finally come down to this. If a plan isn't found to restore it by the =
end of the=20
year or so, it is going to be recycled into hubcaps and car =
parts.</FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial color=3D#0000ff></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial color=3D#0000ff>Matt</FONT></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE>
  <H3>Save the Titusville rocket</H3></NEWS1;CP11>
  <H5>A FLORIDA TODAY editorial&nbsp;</H5>
  <P>New York City has the Statue of Liberty.=20
  <TABLE cellPadding=3D4 align=3Dright border=3D1>
    <TBODY>
    <TR>
      <TH width=3D180>ROCKET ONLINE&nbsp; </TH></TR>
    <TR>
      <TD width=3D180>
        <H5><FONT face=3Darial,helvetica>To help save the rocket, go to: =
Web site:=20
        <A=20
        =
href=3D"http://www.geocities.com/saverocket">www.geocities.com/saverocket=
</A>=20
        </FONT>E<FONT face=3Darial,helvetica>-mail:=20
        saverocket@cfl.rr.com</FONT></H5></TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>
  <P>San Francisco has the Golden Gate Bridge.=20
  <P>Titusville has The Rocket.=20
  <P>OK, that's probably not a fair comparison. But to many folks who =
live in=20
  Titusville the aging, rusted Titan 1 that's parked in front of =
Titusville High=20
  School means as much as Lady Liberty or California's magnificent =
bridge.=20
  <P>After all, city residents helped send the first astronauts into =
space,=20
  launched men to the moon and dispatched spacecraft to other planets. =
And=20
  they're still flying shuttles and building the International Space =
Station.=20
  <P>It's all done with rockets, which makes the Titan a fitting symbol =
of the=20
  exploration of space.=20
  <P>Sadly, the 30-year-old rocket may be headed for the scrap heap. =
It's=20
  literally falling apart, will cost $50,000 to restore, and the city =
doesn't=20
  want to ante-up. Time is running out fast.=20
  <P>To the rescue, maybe, has come Angie Sharkey.=20
  <P>The 1984 graduate of Titusville High is leading a new fund-raising =
drive to=20
  save the old Titan. Along with her husband, John, she has started a =
Web site=20
  to raise cash, which could be pooled with $9,000 previously collected =
by the=20
  Titusville Kiwanis Club.=20
  <P>The rocket, says Sharkey, is inspirational proof that "we can all =
soar if=20
  we work hard to fly."=20
  <P>We'll second that, and wish her the best of luck.=20
  <P>The rocket is a little piece of local history that deserves =
everyone's=20
  support so it can shine again. </P></BLOCKQUOTE></FONT></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_09EF_01C56B69.41FB8D30--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 10245 invoked from network); 18 Jul 2001 01:11:51 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 18 Jul 2001 01:11:51 -0000
Received: (qmail 8560 invoked from network); 18 Jul 2001 01:13:27 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 18 Jul 2001 01:13:27 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA18739; Tue, 17 Jul 2001 17:54:24 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 79387 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 18 Jul 2001 00:53:36          +0000
Received: from dune.gnc.net (root@dune.gnc.net [207.203.72.4]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA18721 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue,          17 Jul 2001 17:53:35 -0700
Received: from beowulf (sw2-38.gnc.net [207.203.72.118]) by dune.gnc.net          (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id UAA25239 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue,          17 Jul 2001 20:53:36 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_09F3_01C56B69.41FB8D30"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
Importance: Normal
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <LPBBKJMJEOFKAMFJJNNHMELJCFAA.landofgrey@gnc.net>
Date:         Tue, 17 Jul 2001 20:53:36 -0400
Reply-To: <landofgrey@gnc.net>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Matthew Travis" <landofgrey@gnc.net>
Subject:      [AR] Cesaroni DataCAD Thrust Software Released
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <LPBBKJMJEOFKAMFJJNNHGELJCFAA.landofgrey@gnc.net>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_09F3_01C56B69.41FB8D30
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Cesaroni Technology is pleased to announce the beta release of DataCAD(R)
THRUSTTM analysis software:


http://www.rocketryonline.com/Search/db_search.cgi?setup_file=News&submit_se
arch=yes&db_id=626

------=_NextPart_000_09F3_01C56B69.41FB8D30
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD><TITLE></TITLE>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Dus-ascii">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 5.50.4208.1700" name=3DGENERATOR></HEAD>
<BODY>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial><FONT size=3D2>Cesaroni Technology is pleased to =
announce=20
the beta release of DataCAD(R) THRUSTTM analysis software<SPAN=20
class=3D500015100-18072001>:</SPAN></FONT></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial><FONT size=3D2><SPAN=20
class=3D500015100-18072001></SPAN></FONT></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=3D2>&nbsp;<FONT face=3DArial color=3D#0000ff><A=20
href=3D"http://www.rocketryonline.com/Search/db_search.cgi?setup_file=3DN=
ews&amp;submit_search=3Dyes&amp;db_id=3D626">http://www.rocketryonline.co=
m/Search/db_search.cgi?setup_file=3DNews&amp;submit_search=3Dyes&amp;db_i=
d=3D626</A>=20
</FONT><FONT face=3DArial =
color=3D#0000ff></FONT></DIV></FONT></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_09F3_01C56B69.41FB8D30--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 1880 invoked from network); 18 Jul 2001 01:51:03 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 18 Jul 2001 01:51:03 -0000
Received: (qmail 21987 invoked from network); 18 Jul 2001 01:52:35 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 18 Jul 2001 01:52:35 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA18939; Tue, 17 Jul 2001 18:48:30 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 79404 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 18 Jul 2001 01:48:20          +0000
Received: from dune.gnc.net (root@dune.gnc.net [207.203.72.4]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA18922 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue,          17 Jul 2001 18:48:19 -0700
Received: from beowulf (sw2-38.gnc.net [207.203.72.118]) by dune.gnc.net          (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id VAA26504 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue,          17 Jul 2001 21:48:21 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
Importance: Normal
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <LPBBKJMJEOFKAMFJJNNHCELKCFAA.landofgrey@gnc.net>
Date:         Tue, 17 Jul 2001 21:48:20 -0400
Reply-To: <landofgrey@gnc.net>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Matthew Travis" <landofgrey@gnc.net>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Non-black powder ejection
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <3B526D4F.D2E59286@sfcc.net>

> Behalf Of James Yawn
> Sent: Monday, July 16, 2001 12:28 AM
>
> Given the forcefulness of the ejection I witnessed in my simple
> test yesterday, I
> would question whether pressure containment of a smokeless powder
> charge is
> necessary, or even helpful.  The gram of Red Dot was contained
> only by one layer of
> two-ply paper towel, yet had no trouble in ejecting a big wad
> packed in tight.  It
> was more like a pneumatic device, less explosive than BP.  Trying
> to raise the SP
> up to explosive pressures seems counterproductive to me.
>

You did use a significant bit of powder, though. I'm not sure one would want
to use that much anyway. Half that would probably be better, and then
containment might be nice. Perhaps you prefer to use to powder and not
contain it, but that goes against my own preferences. A gram seems like a
lot of powder to me.

Matt

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 26192 invoked from network); 18 Jul 2001 02:42:25 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 18 Jul 2001 02:42:25 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 15039 invoked from network); 18 Jul 2001 02:44:14 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 18 Jul 2001 02:44:14 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA19132; Tue, 17 Jul 2001 19:38:51 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 79418 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 18 Jul 2001 02:38:41          +0000
Received: from smtp4ve.mailsrvcs.net (smtp4vepub.gte.net [206.46.170.25]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA19114 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 17 Jul 2001 19:38:41 -0700
Received: from me-513q3sc0zun0.pengar.com          (adsl-64-223-147-206.mannh.adsl.bellatlantic.net [64.223.147.206]) by          smtp4ve.mailsrvcs.net (8.9.1/8.9.1) with ESMTP id CAA54504586; Wed,          18 Jul 2001 02:38:08 GMT
X-Sender: seth-pc@hobbiton.shire.net
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
References: <3B54C3C2.76D34414@earthlink.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <5.1.0.14.0.20010717223637.01c986a0@hobbiton.shire.net>
Date:         Tue, 17 Jul 2001 22:42:48 -0400
Reply-To: "Seth Leigh" <seth@PENGAR.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Seth Leigh" <seth@PENGAR.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Non-black powder ejection
Comments: To: Duncan McDonald <duncan@TRANSIM.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <NEBBLECGKLLOLFCCBNPEEEBNDBAA.duncan@transim.com>

Well I did go to the range and picked up some aluminum, berdan-primed .44
magnum brass, plus some .357 magnum and a few smaller pieces.  I've already
drilled it out the way I want, I just need some igniters so I can do my
tests.  I need to order some nichrome wire so I can make some igniters of
two kinds, the kind with nichrome wire, and the kind where the chemicals
mix at the end of two stripped wire ends itself conducts the
electricity.  I have a little kit for making igniters that I got from
Firefox, but it looks like I have to use it all up at once, so I want the
nichrome first.

Anyhow, my current idea, which I documented earlier on this list, is to
take a .44 magnum casing (one of the aluminum ones unless it turns out they
are too frail), put an igniter and some smokeless powder in at the bottom,
starting out with like 2 to 4 grains, and then put a small paper wad over
that.  Above the wad in the side of the case I have drilled out two rows of
1/16" diameter holes, about 14 or so in all.  Above that, near the end of
the case, I have drilled two larger holes across from each other.  Into
these two holes up top I will put a cotter pin, which will go across the
opening of the case and catch the paper wad so it doesn't blow out the end
of the case.  Hopefully I will get my two rings of holes to vent enough of
the pressure so that the cotter pin doesn't rip through the case wall
material, or else the wad material wiggle itself out between the case wall
and cotter pin.

I hope to have some nichrome wire within the next week if I can find some,
which I ought to be able to do searching the web.  Within a day or two
after having the nichrome wire I will have tried my experiment.

Seth


At 07:30 PM 7/17/2001, Duncan McDonald wrote:
>Thom,
>
>Sounds like "light" containment of SP is sufficient to generate the pressure
>required for complete combustion. That's consistent with what Scott Aleckson
>reported on his website. However the pressures then generated sound like
>they may propel the cap or wad at high enough speeds that they could damage
>the parachute. Maybe what's needed is a closed end (screw on end?) charge
>holder that vents to the sides. There is also the question of how SP
>performs at altitude. Do you have any data there?
>
>Duncan
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@itc.uci.edu]On
>Behalf Of Thomas M. Mcgaffey
>Sent: Tuesday, July 17, 2001 4:01 PM
>To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
>Subject: Re: [AR] Non-black powder ejection
>
>
>Hi Seth,
>
>I have used both Black Powder and Smokeless Powders for rocket
>pyrotechnic devices and have experimented with other pyro mixes for
>pressure generation.
>
>One of the tests I did was to fire BP and SP in an AN814 bleeder fitting
>(wires came out through drilled holes in the "Nut" end of the fitting)
>leaving the threaded end open.  The AN fitting was placed in a 24" Dia.
>plastic tube 30" long.  The top and bottom of the plastic tube were
>closed off with 1/4" plywood.  When fired the BP charge fully burned and
>didn't move the plywood top.  The SP when fired didn't burn fully and
>left lots of unburned powder.  the charge in both cases was 2.0 grains.
>The next test was almost the same except that I slipped 1/2 of a "gel"
>cap into the open end of the AN fitting enclosing the powder charge.
>The BP charge fired with a "POP" and the powder and gel cap were
>consumed.  The SP charge fired with a "BANG" the powder was consumed but
>the gel cap was not.  The gel cap hit the plywood top with enough force
>to make it jump up a bit and leave an impression in the it where it
>hit. Again the charge was 2.0 grains.
>
>In my cable cutter (cuts 3/16 SS aircraft cable) I use a charge of 1.4
>grains of pistol powder.  Smokeless powders develop a lot of pressure
>when enclosed.
>
>I have used plastic and nylon plugs as wad cutters (hand fitted not
>pressed and crimped) for in door shooting with very lite loads.
>These plastic bullets required a 3/4" plywood back stop to prevent
>penetration.  Hell the primer a lone was enough to make them penetrate
>1/4" plywood.
>
>I look forward to hearing how your tests go.
>
>
>Thom
>
>--
>Thomas M. McGaffey
>Energy Release Systems
>408-226-7502
>thomgaf@energyrs.com
>
>"The world needs dreamers and the world needs doers.
>But above all, the world needs dreamers who do.  Don't
>just entrust your hopes and wishes to the stars. Today,
>begin learning the craft that will enable you to reach
>for them."  -- Sarah Ban Breathnach
>
>
>Seth Leigh wrote:
> >
> > At 12:27 AM 7/16/2001, James Yawn wrote:
> > >Given the forcefulness of the ejection I witnessed in my simple test
> > >yesterday, I
> > >would question whether pressure containment of a smokeless powder charge
>is
> > >necessary, or even helpful.  The gram of Red Dot was contained only by
>one
> > >layer of
> > >two-ply paper towel, yet had no trouble in ejecting a big wad packed in
> > >tight.  It
> > >was more like a pneumatic device, less explosive than BP.  Trying to
>raise
> > >the SP
> > >up to explosive pressures seems counterproductive to me.
> >
> > Remember you used a whole gram of powder.  The guy on the web site is
> > working with 4.7 to 5 grains.  There are something like 15.4 grains to a
> > gram.  For those non reloaders out there a grain is a unit of weight with
> > 7000 grains to a pound.  Powder charges for reloading ammo, as well as
> > bullet weights, are usually measured in the US in grains, and in most of
> > the rest of the world in grams.
> >
> > Seth

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 19769 invoked from network); 18 Jul 2001 05:00:32 -0000
X-Priority: 3
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 18 Jul 2001 05:00:32 -0000
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 15168 invoked from network); 18 Jul 2001 05:02:24 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 18 Jul 2001 05:02:24 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA19626; Tue, 17 Jul 2001 21:57:51 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 79451 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 18 Jul 2001 04:57:44          +0000
Received: from sys27.hou.wt.net (sys27.hou.wt.net [205.230.159.27]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA19608 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 17 Jul 2001 21:57:43 -0700
Received: from localhost (216-119-130-98.ipset10.wt.net [216.119.130.98]) by          sys27.hou.wt.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id XAA85807 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 17 Jul 2001 23:57:35 -0500 (CDT)
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_09F7_01C56B69.42079B20"
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.388)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID:  <200107180457.XAA85807@sys27.hou.wt.net>
Date:         Tue, 17 Jul 2001 23:57:46 -0500
Reply-To: "Donald McCorvey" <dlm3@NETAXS.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Donald McCorvey" <dlm3@NETAXS.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] inertial (artificial) gravity (was principle              ofequivalence)
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <LPBBKJMJEOFKAMFJJNNHAELBCFAA.landofgrey@gnc.net>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_09F7_01C56B69.42079B20
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"

On Tuesday, July 17, 2001, at 12:02 AM, Matthew Travis wrote:

What do you suppose the density would be? I know of different hypotheses.

Matt


I can't say I've ever given it any thought, but here's an educated
guess...

The inertial moment of an air molecule is going to be proportional to
the square of its tangential velocity, i.e., to angular velocity and
radius from the axis of rotation. Since we're assuming no friction, no
real g-forces, and steady state conditions, it's relatively simple to
conclude that the distribution is exponentially denser at the outer rim
of the torus, the 'floor', than it is at the inner rim, the 'ceiling',
since each particle has more inertial force acting on it.

I expect it's not quite that simple. There is some force which acts on
air molecules to keep them separate from one another - whether that
force is electrostatic or something else, I don't recall, but the forces
will balance out such that the force on the air molecules is in
equilibirum with the force that repels them from one another, so rather
than bunching up together against the outer rim, the distribution will
be a combination of the inertial moment and the repulsive force which
might even be slightly linear looking since the repulsive force is
likely to be square law of some sort as well.

It might work out to be something like earth's atmosphere which is
somewhat linearly distributed at low altitudes because of thermals,
winds, water vapor and the like, then non-linearly distributed higher up.

Or maybe not. I'd have to dig out a half dozen textbooks to derive
anything other than a hand-waving answer.

Ideas anyone ?

Don McCorvey
Houston, Tx



------=_NextPart_000_09F7_01C56B69.42079B20
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Type: text/enriched;
	charset="us-ascii"

On Tuesday, July 17, 2001, at 12:02 AM, Matthew Travis wrote:

<color><param>0000,6363,1212</param>

</color><color><param>0000,0000,DEDE</param>What do you suppose the
density would be? I know of different hypotheses.


Matt

</color>


I can't say I've ever given it any thought, but here's an educated
guess...


The inertial moment of an air molecule is going to be proportional to
the square of its tangential velocity, i.e., to angular velocity and
radius from the axis of rotation. Since we're assuming no friction, no
real g-forces, and steady state conditions, it's relatively simple to
conclude that the distribution is exponentially denser at the outer
rim of the torus, the 'floor', than it is at the inner rim, the
'ceiling', since each particle has more inertial force acting on it.


I expect it's not quite that simple. There is some force which acts on
air molecules to keep them separate from one another - whether that
force is electrostatic or something else, I don't recall, but the
forces will balance out such that the force on the air molecules is in
equilibirum with the force that repels them from one another, so
rather than bunching up together against the outer rim, the
distribution will be a combination of the inertial moment and the
repulsive force which might even be slightly linear looking since the
repulsive force is likely to be square law of some sort as well.


It might work out to be something like earth's atmosphere which is
somewhat linearly distributed at low altitudes because of thermals,
winds, water vapor and the like, then non-linearly distributed higher
up.


Or maybe not. I'd have to dig out a half dozen textbooks to derive
anything other than a hand-waving answer.


Ideas anyone ?


Don McCorvey

Houston, Tx




------=_NextPart_000_09F7_01C56B69.42079B20--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 9883 invoked from network); 18 Jul 2001 05:19:46 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 18 Jul 2001 05:19:46 -0000
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 19158 invoked from network); 18 Jul 2001 05:21:37 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 18 Jul 2001 05:21:37 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA19701; Tue, 17 Jul 2001 22:15:31 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 79459 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 18 Jul 2001 05:15:29          +0000
Received: from mail.alphalink.com.au (mail.alphalink.com.au [202.161.124.12])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA19684 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 17 Jul 2001 22:15:28 -0700
Received: from pop07-18-Melbourne.alphalink.com.au          (pop07-18-Melbourne.alphalink.com.au [10.10.10.7] (may be forged)) by          mail.alphalink.com.au (8.11.4/8.9.3) with SMTP id f6I5FKq25017 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 18 Jul 2001 15:15:22 +1000
X-Sender: brucej@pop.alphalink.com.au
X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.2
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <200107180515.f6I5FKq25017@mail.alphalink.com.au>
Date:         Wed, 18 Jul 2001 15:15:22 +1000
Reply-To: "bruce johnson" <brucej@ALPHALINK.COM.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "bruce johnson" <brucej@ALPHALINK.COM.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] 3Re: [AR] Cast Nozzle Molds -- Was -- Re: [AR] 2Re:              [AR]CERAMICS
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

for those who asked "grog" is something you will find
if you go to your local hobby ceramic supply shop
it is crushed ceramic material that potters use to give their work texture
it looks like sand, it comes in fine medium and course
when added to the water putty it helps to fight erosion a bit
but it does make it a bit harder to drill


At 04:28 PM 16/07/01 +1000, bruce johnson wrote:
>you can make the water putty a little harder by adding "grog" to it
>
>
>
>At 10:36 PM 15/07/01 +0200, Hans Olaf Toft wrote:
>>al bradley wrote:
>>
>>> Durhams Rockhard Water Putty is a fine-grained, rather hard substance that
>>> comes in a powder form to be mixed with water and is often used by
>>> woodworkers as a filler in nail holes and around some joints. It is often
>>> used by beginning rocketeers to make their nozzles. It does erode some by
>>> motor gases through the throat. It is sold in the USA, perhaps under
>>> another name in Denmark.
>>
>>We have a substance for that purpose called "Polyfyla" wich is based on
>plaster of
>>Paris - very likely to be a close relative of the "Durhams Water Putty.
>>
>>> You might be interested in what we call "dental stone". Here, in the US,
>>> whan a patient requires artificial teeth the first impression is made in a
>>> wax-setting material in the mouth. From this a second casting is made in
>>> dental stone. I am sure that Danish dentists have something like this
>>
>>... at least they can do the thing with the wax-setting material - not very
>>pleasant!
>>
>>Recently a friend of mine suggested that Durhams water putty was based on
>>silicates and that this was the reason that it would be tough and heat
>resistant.
>>This has made me curious.
>>
>>Hans
>>
>>
>Newton was wrong
>In rocketry for every action there is an equal and opposite malfunction
>
>
Newton was wrong
In rocketry for every action there is an equal and opposite malfunction

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 25220 invoked from network); 18 Jul 2001 06:21:37 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 18 Jul 2001 06:21:37 -0000
Received: (qmail 27408 invoked from network); 18 Jul 2001 06:23:13 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 18 Jul 2001 06:23:13 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA19910; Tue, 17 Jul 2001 23:11:57 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 79485 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 18 Jul 2001 06:11:48          +0000
Received: from wrench.toolcity.net (root@wrench.toolcity.net [208.0.188.2]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA19892 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 17 Jul 2001 23:11:47 -0700
Received: from [63.169.101.188]          (dap-63-169-101-188.meadville-tnt-1.pa.toolcity.net [63.169.101.188])          by wrench.toolcity.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id CAA13538; Wed, 18          Jul 2001 02:11:33 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <v01510101b77ae1234509@[63.169.101.188]>
Date:         Wed, 18 Jul 2001 02:13:53 -0500
Reply-To: "al bradley" <abradley@TOOLCITY.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "al bradley" <abradley@TOOLCITY.NET>
Subject:      [AR] 2Binders for cast abrasives? Was --[AR] Cast Nozzle Molds --              Was              -- Re: [AR] 2RE [AR]CERAMICS
Comments: To: bruce johnson <brucej@ALPHALINK.COM.AU>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

>for those who asked "grog" is something you will find
>if you go to your local hobby ceramic supply shop
>it is crushed ceramic material that potters use to give their work texture
>it looks like sand, it comes in fine medium and course
>when added to the water putty it helps to fight erosion a bit
>but it does make it a bit harder to drill
>
>
>At 04:28 PM 16/07/01 +1000, bruce johnson wrote:
>>you can make the water putty a little harder by adding "grog" to it
>>

Grog, IIRC, is a form of silica?

Makes me wonder if we wanted to create a  casting from heat-resistant
materials that we might use silica sand, or further down the road, aluminum
oxide? So, barring heat+pressure, can we glue these materials together by
some other means? And stay within the general problems of
expansion/contraction of the finished product?

al bradley

------------------------------------------------------------------
Can you live Life with this?: "Unless there is a law, an agreement, or a
long-standing custom, No one `Deserves' Anything -- Either Good or Bad!"

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 24796 invoked from network); 18 Jul 2001 06:32:20 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 18 Jul 2001 06:32:20 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 25010 invoked from network); 18 Jul 2001 06:33:54 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 18 Jul 2001 06:33:54 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA20005; Tue, 17 Jul 2001 23:30:09 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 79493 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 18 Jul 2001 06:30:00          +0000
Received: from imo-r10.mx.aol.com (imo-r10.mx.aol.com [152.163.225.106]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA19983 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Tue, 17 Jul 2001 23:29:59 -0700
Received: from Sociald84@aol.com by imo-r10.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v31.7.) id          l.3e.e87ec90 (4453); Wed, 18 Jul 2001 02:29:54 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: AOL 5.0 for Windows sub 138
Message-ID:  <3e.e87ec90.288686e1@aol.com>
Date:         Wed, 18 Jul 2001 02:29:53 EDT
Reply-To: <Sociald84@AOL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <Sociald84@AOL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Non-black powder ejection
Comments: To: seth@pengar.com
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Just a few points Seth,

Latex and hotmelt glue are oh so very different. Latex would probably be a
liquid into which the neck of the case was dipped into and cured. This would
produce a burst disk type of containment. A hotmelt glue slug would produce a
projectile, as someone who has experimented with different shells and
different sealing methods I can say for certain that very high velocities can
be reached with hotmelt slugs. I took an old .32 and emptied the powder from
a few shells and made a hot melt glue bullet fired only by the primer of the
shell. The hotmelt bullets made their effect felt on a piece of cardboard
that I was shooting at.

Secondly if you've already got your hotmelt glue gun heated up their realy is
no benefit to using shell cases for an ejection can. Simply roll a piece of
grocery bag paper around an arrow shaft, insert the igniter and hotmelt it in
place. Fill the paper tube with your charge and either crimp or hot melt the
end closed. The charge will blow out the sides of the paper tube before
ejecting the hotmelt slugs. Also I think the most important factor of
ejection design is volume of gas, rather than pressure.  An instantaneous
release of 50ci of a gas at 5psi will blow out your chute if the volume into
which it expands is only 10ci.

One more point. Berdan primers are a bitch to knock out, thats why you find
so many Berdan primed shells at the range. People don't like to reload them.

Don't take this as a knock on cartridge casses. I think they are increadibly
usefull in amateur rocketry. Infact I even made a miniature ramjet from an
M-16 shell. I also think it's a good idea to use them for ejection cans but,
the plug is a bad idea. Also I think the aluminum .44 mag shells which also
are found in quantity at the range would be a better bet than the 7.62. OR
maybe a nickel plated shell would be nice to spruce up the recovery
compartment.

Mark



In a message dated 7/15/01 8:33:52 PM Mountain Daylight Time, seth@PENGAR.COM
writes:

> I'm not convinced by your argument.  After all, the guy whose webpage I was
>  replying to was able to do it, albeit a bit differently, and it seems to
>  work well.  He used the latex just to maintain the pressure in the
>  combustion chamber long enough for all of the powder granules to ignite.  I
>  am suggesting that hot-melt glue or silicone RTV used as a plug in the end
>  of the piece of brass could be used for the same purpose, ie: to hold the
>  pressure in long enough for the powder to ignite completely.  The pressure
>  we are talking about here is not high enough to propel this small slug at
>  anything approaching "huge velocity".
>
>  This doesn't have to generate great pressure, just sufficient
>  pressure.  Once the plug exits the end of the cartridge case, the pressure
>  on the plug is released.  One quarter inch of travel (or less, it would
>  have to be determined experimentally just how much of a plug was actually
>  required to do the job) under moderate pressure is not exactly going to
>  make a speeding bullet out of a little chunk of silicone.  You only have to
>  have your plug hold the same pressure as the original author's
>  latex.  That's not all that much really.
>
>  I am going to arrange to test this.  I have a container of Hodgon Universal
>  Clays pistol powder that I think would do the trick nicely.  I can easily
>  obtain some Berdan-primed 7.62x39 brass from the local range.
>
>  Actually, the more I think of it, the better the idea gets.  If you get the
>  aluminum casings from CCI they are also berdan primed.  I'd think some
>  aluminum casings in .357 Magnum or .44 Magnum could be used to make
>  wonderful ejection chambers.
>
>  This idea deserves some experimentation.  Don't cast your doubts too
>  swiftly.  Remember that pistols use steel barrels several to many inches
>  long to hold the pressure in long enough to push out an extremely heavy (as
>  compared to a little silicone plug) projectile.  The pressures can't even
>  be compared to what we are aiming to achieve here.
>
>  Seth

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 3447 invoked from network); 18 Jul 2001 06:58:09 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 18 Jul 2001 06:58:09 -0000
X-Priority: 3
Received: (qmail 14235 invoked from network); 18 Jul 2001 06:59:21 -0000
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 18 Jul 2001 06:59:21 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA20127; Tue, 17 Jul 2001 23:56:16 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 79516 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 18 Jul 2001 06:56:07          +0000
Received: from inet03.citec.qld.gov.au (firewall-user@inet03.citec.qld.gov.au          [203.5.10.10]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA20110          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 17 Jul 2001 23:56:05 -0700
Received: by inet03.citec.qld.gov.au; id QAA06869; Wed, 18 Jul 2001 16:56:03          +1000 (EST)
Received: from citec.com.au(pcux.citec.qld.gov.au 147.132.17.12) by          inet03.citec.qld.gov.au via smap (V2.0) id xma006752; Wed, 18 Jul 01          16:55:54 +1000
Received: from CITEC-Message_Server by citec.com.au with Novell_GroupWise; Wed,          18 Jul 2001 16:55:40 +1000
X-Mailer: Novell GroupWise 5.5.4
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by itc.uci.edu id XAA20111
Message-ID:  <sb55bf8c.082@citec.com.au>
Date:         Wed, 18 Jul 2001 16:55:34 +1000
Reply-To: "Des Bromilow" <Des.Bromilow@CITEC.COM.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Des Bromilow" <Des.Bromilow@CITEC.COM.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Non-black powder ejection
Comments: To: Sociald84@AOL.COM
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

You made a miniture ram jet using a .223 cartridge case?  That I'd like to see!! (plans etc?)

Des

>>> <Sociald84@AOL.COM> 18/07/01 4:29:53 pm >>>
Just a few points Seth,
<snip>
Don't take this as a knock on cartridge casses. I think they are increadibly
usefull in amateur rocketry. Infact I even made a miniature ramjet from an
M-16 shell. I also think it's a good idea to use them for ejection cans but,
the plug is a bad idea. Also I think the aluminum .44 mag shells which also
are found in quantity at the range would be a better bet than the 7.62. OR
maybe a nickel plated shell would be nice to spruce up the recovery
compartment.

Mark

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 28846 invoked from network); 18 Jul 2001 07:07:27 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 18 Jul 2001 07:07:27 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 17970 invoked from network); 18 Jul 2001 07:08:38 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 18 Jul 2001 07:08:38 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA20173; Wed, 18 Jul 2001 00:00:09 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 79527 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 18 Jul 2001 07:00:05          +0000
Received: from c009.snv.cp.net (c009-h001.c009.snv.cp.net [209.228.34.114]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id AAA20156 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Wed, 18 Jul 2001 00:00:04 -0700
Received: (cpmta 23922 invoked from network); 17 Jul 2001 23:59:33 -0700
X-Sent: 18 Jul 2001 06:59:33 GMT
Received: from [210.212.162.172] by mail.123india.com with HTTP; 17 Jul 2001          23:59:32 PDT
Content-Type: multipart/mixed;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_09FC_01C56B69.423736A0"
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Web Mail 3.9.3.5
X-Sent-From: pjur@123india.com
Message-ID:  <20010718065933.23921.cpmta@c009.snv.cp.net>
Date:         Tue, 17 Jul 2001 23:59:33 -0700
Reply-To: <pjur@123INDIA.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Philip D'Souza" <pjur@123INDIA.COM>
Subject:      [AR] dark secrets
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_09FC_01C56B69.423736A0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Disposition: inline

In the attachments are a gist of the secrets Wen Ho Lee passed to China. He was not Prosecuted


______________________________________________________
123India.com - India's Premier Portal
Get your Free Email Account at http://www.123india.com



------=_NextPart_000_09FC_01C56B69.423736A0
Content-Type: application/msword;
	name="Nuclear Bomb.doc"
Content-Disposition: attachment;
	filename="Nuclear Bomb.doc"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
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------=_NextPart_000_09FC_01C56B69.423736A0--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 969 invoked from network); 18 Jul 2001 09:33:26 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 18 Jul 2001 09:33:26 -0000
Received: (qmail 27721 invoked from network); 18 Jul 2001 09:35:00 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 18 Jul 2001 09:35:00 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id CAA20652; Wed, 18 Jul 2001 02:30:35 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 79564 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 18 Jul 2001 09:29:07          +0000
Received: from femail21.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail21.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.0.95.146]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id CAA20629          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 18 Jul 2001 02:29:07 -0700
Received: from hal2001 ([24.77.53.16]) by femail21.sdc1.sfba.home.com          (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20 201-229-121-120-20010223) with SMTP id          <20010718092900.IYHF5427.femail21.sdc1.sfba.home.com@hal2001> for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 18 Jul 2001 02:29:00 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <000f01c10f6a$fd63a300$0400a8c0@hatjs>
Date:         Wed, 18 Jul 2001 02:21:13 -0700
Reply-To: "Jamie Morken" <jmorken@HOME.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jamie Morken" <jmorken@HOME.COM>
Subject:      [AR] CRC codes
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Hi all,

Does anyone have a very codespace efficient implementation of a Cyclic
Redundancy Check (CRC) encode/decode function in C?  I need some type of
(any) codespace friendly frame check sequence to finish off my AX.25 hybrid
code that I've written for our rocket telemetry board.

I found one good site on the topic here but am not sure how to implement it
to create and check CRC:
http://www.rad.com/networks/1994/err_con/crc_how.htm

best regards,
Jamie

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 22603 invoked from network); 18 Jul 2001 12:51:00 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 18 Jul 2001 12:51:00 -0000
Received: (qmail 22716 invoked from network); 18 Jul 2001 12:52:52 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 18 Jul 2001 12:52:52 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id FAA21274; Wed, 18 Jul 2001 05:46:17 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 79612 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 18 Jul 2001 12:46:01          +0000
Received: from spsystems.net (spsystems.net [209.47.149.227]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id FAA21256 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Wed,          18 Jul 2001 05:46:00 -0700
Received: (from henry@localhost) by spsystems.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id IAA07027;          Wed, 18 Jul 2001 08:45:29 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: MULTIPART/MIXED;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_09FF_01C56B69.423736A0"
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010718084349.6832A-200000@spsystems.net>
Date:         Wed, 18 Jul 2001 08:45:29 -0400
Reply-To: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] CRC codes
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <000f01c10f6a$fd63a300$0400a8c0@hatjs>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_09FF_01C56B69.423736A0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"

On Wed, 18 Jul 2001, Jamie Morken wrote:
> Does anyone have a very codespace efficient implementation of a Cyclic
> Redundancy Check (CRC) encode/decode function in C?

Attached please find three (!), giving a tradeoff between speed and the
size of data tables.

I've sent this to the list because it may have some small degree of
general interest.

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net

------=_NextPart_000_09FF_01C56B69.423736A0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="us-ascii";
	name="ccitt.c"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
Content-ID: <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010718084529.6832B@spsystems.net>
Content-Description: 
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------=_NextPart_000_09FF_01C56B69.423736A0--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 27410 invoked from network); 18 Jul 2001 19:17:41 -0000
X-Priority: 3
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 18 Jul 2001 19:17:41 -0000
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 9831 invoked from network); 18 Jul 2001 19:19:15 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 18 Jul 2001 19:19:15 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA22840; Wed, 18 Jul 2001 11:49:39 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 79731 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 18 Jul 2001 18:49:26          +0000
Received: from imo-r03.mx.aol.com (imo-r03.mx.aol.com [152.163.225.99]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA22823 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Wed, 18 Jul 2001 11:49:21 -0700
Received: from Sociald84@aol.com by imo-r03.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v31.7.) id          i.32.17f4150e (4571); Wed, 18 Jul 2001 14:48:54 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/mixed;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0A02_01C56B69.42AE6270"
X-Mailer: AOL 5.0 for Windows sub 138
Message-ID:  <32.17f4150e.28873419@aol.com>
Date:         Wed, 18 Jul 2001 14:48:57 EDT
Reply-To: <Sociald84@AOL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <Sociald84@AOL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Non-black powder ejection
Comments: To: Des.Bromilow@citec.com.au
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0A02_01C56B69.42AE6270
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

In a message dated 7/18/01 12:57:20 AM Mountain Daylight Time,
Des.Bromilow@CITEC.COM.AU writes:

> You made a miniture ram jet using a .223 cartridge case?  That I'd like to
> see!! (plans etc?)
>
>  Des
>

The hardest part was not making the thing itself but finding a way ot get the
fuel into it at a descent rate. For the ramjet itself I chucked the shell
into my drill press and with a file ground off the excess material around the
primer so the end tapered down to the extractor groove. I opened up the
primer pocket to about 1/4" and drilled a 1/8" hole about a 1/4" from the end
of the case. I took a 1/16" ID brass tube and crimped the end so only a small
orifice remained inserted that into the hole so the orifice would spray the
fuel into the center of the shell.

I soldered the injector tube in place and made a fuel tank from a few film
cans. I hot melt glued some film cans and pieces of tubing together. One can,
the fuel tank had a tube coming out of the bottom for the fuel, the top of it
had a tube going into it from another can. The fuel can had some alcohol in
it and the other can which had a tube going all the way to the top had
vinegar in it. The top can was left open til I was ready to fire it, and then
I added some backing soda and caped it off. The baking soda and vinegar
reacted and the CO2 came through the tube into the alcohol and pressurized
the fuel tank. At that point the ramjet had already been hooked up to an air
compressor and had a big igniter in it. I hit the switch and it made a nice
hum and a huge flame for about 6 or 7 seconds until the fuel ran out.

I was prety cool but the fuel system didn't work that well.

I have attatched a drawing of it.

Mark

------=_NextPart_000_0A02_01C56B69.42AE6270
Content-Type: application/octet-stream;
	name="M-16ram.bmp"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
Content-Disposition: attachment;
	filename="M-16ram.bmp"

Qk2GJAQAAAAAADYAAAAoAAAA8AAAAHkBAAABABgAAAAAAFAkBADODgAA2A4AAAAAAAAAAAAA
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////AAAAAAAA////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////AAAAAAAAAAAA////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////AAAAAAAA////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////AAAAAAAAAAAA////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////AAAAAAAA////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////AAAAAAAA
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////AAAAAAAA////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////AAAAAAAA////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA////////////////////AAAAAAAA////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////AAAAAAAA////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////AAAAAAAA////////////////////
AAAAAAAA////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////AAAAAAAA////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
AAAA////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////AAAAAAAA////////////////////AAAAAAAA////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////AAAA////////
////////////////////////AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////AAAAAAAA////////////////////AAAAAAAA
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////AAAA////////////////////////AAAAAAAAAAAA////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////AAAA
AAAA////////////////////AAAAAAAA////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////AAAAAAAA////////////////////AAAAAAAA////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////AAAAAAAA////////////////////AAAAAAAA////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
AAAAAAAA////////////AAAA////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////AAAA////////////////////////
AAAA////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////AAAAAAAA////
////////////////AAAAAAAA////////////////////AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
////////////////////////////////////////////AAAA////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////AAAA////
////////////////////AAAA////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////AAAAAAAA////////////////////AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////AAAA////////////////////////AAAA////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////AAAAAAAA////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
AAAAAAAA////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////AAAAAAAA////////////////////////AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////AAAAAAAAAAAA////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////AAAA////////////AAAA
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////AAAA
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////AAAA////////////////////AAAA////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////AAAAAAAA////////////////////////AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////AAAA////////
////////////////AAAA////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////AAAA////////////////////
AAAA////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////AAAAAAAA////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////AAAA////////////////////////AAAA////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
AAAA////////////////////AAAA////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////AAAAAAAA////////////////////
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////AAAA////////////////////////
AAAA////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////AAAA////////////////////AAAA////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////AAAAAAAA////
////////////////AAAAAAAA////////////////////AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
////////////////////////////////////////////AAAA////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
AAAAAAAA////////////////////AAAAAAAA////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////AAAA////////////////////
AAAA////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////AAAAAAAA////////////////////AAAAAAAA////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA////////////AAAA
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////AAAA////////////////////////AAAAAAAAAAAA
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
AAAA////////////////////AAAA////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////AAAAAAAA////////////////////AAAAAAAA////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////AAAA////////
////////////////////////AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA////////////////////AAAA////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////AAAAAAAA////////////////////AAAAAAAA
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////AAAAAAAA////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////AAAAAAAA////////////////////
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////AAAAAAAA////////////
////////AAAAAAAA////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////AAAAAAAA////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////AAAA
AAAA////////////////////AAAAAAAA////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////AAAA
AAAA////////////////////AAAAAAAA////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////AAAAAAAA////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////AAAAAAAA////////////////////AAAAAAAA////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA////////////////////AAAAAAAA////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////AAAAAAAA////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////AAAAAAAA////////////////////
AAAAAAAA////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////AAAAAAAA////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
AAAAAAAAAAAA////////////////////////////////////////////////////////AAAA
AAAA////////////////////AAAAAAAA////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
AAAAAAAA////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////AAAAAAAAAAAA////////////////////////
////////////////////AAAAAAAA////////////////////AAAAAAAA////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////AAAAAAAA////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA////////////////////////AAAAAAAA////////////////////
AAAAAAAA////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////AAAAAAAA////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
AAAA////////////////////AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
AAAA////////////////////AAAA////////////////////AAAA////////////////////
AAAA////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////AAAA////////////////AAAA////////////////////
AAAA////////////////AAAA////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////AAAA////////////
AAAA////////////////////AAAA////////////AAAA////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////AAAA////////AAAA////////////////////AAAA////////AAAA////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////AAAA////AAAA////////////////////
AAAA////AAAA////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////AAAA
AAAA////////////////////AAAAAAAA////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////AAAA////////////////////AAAA////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////AAAA////////////////////
AAAA////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
AAAA////////////////////AAAA////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////AAAA////////////////////AAAA////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////AAAA////////////////////
AAAA////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
AAAA////////////////////AAAA////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////AAAA////////////////////AAAA////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////AAAA////////////////////
AAAA////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
AAAA////////////////////AAAA////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////AAAA////////////////////AAAA////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////AAAA////////////////////
AAAA////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
AAAA////////////////////AAAA////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////AAAA////////////////////AAAA////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////AAAA////////////////////
AAAA////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
AAAA////////////////////AAAA////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////AAAA////////////////////AAAA////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////AAAA////////////////////
AAAA////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
AAAA////////////////////AAAA////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////AAAA////////////////////AAAA////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////AAAA////////////////////
AAAA////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
AAAA////////////////////AAAA////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////AAAA////////////////////AAAA////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////AAAA////////////////////
AAAA////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
AAAA////////////////////AAAA////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////AAAA////////////////////AAAA////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////AAAA////////////////////
AAAA////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
AAAA////////////////////AAAA////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////AAAA////////////////////AAAA////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////AAAA////////////////////
AAAA////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
AAAA////////////////////AAAA////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////AAAA////////////////////AAAA////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////AAAA////////////////////
AAAA////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
AAAA////////////////////AAAA////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////AAAA////////////////////AAAA////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////AAAA////////////////////
AAAA////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
AAAA////////////////////AAAA////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////AAAA////////////////////AAAA////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////AAAA////////////////////
AAAA////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
AAAA////////////////////AAAA////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////AAAA////////////////////AAAA////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////AAAA////////////////////
AAAA////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
AAAA////////////////////AAAA////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////AAAA////////////////////AAAA////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////AAAA////////////////////
AAAA////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
AAAA////////////////////AAAA////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////AAAA////////////////////AAAA////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////AAAA////////////////////
AAAA////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
AAAA////////////////////AAAA////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////AAAA////////////////////AAAA////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////AAAA////////////////////
AAAA////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
AAAA////////////////////AAAA////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////AAAA////////////////////AAAA////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////AAAA////////////////////
AAAA////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
AAAA////////////////////AAAA////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////AAAA////////////////////AAAA////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////AAAA////////////////////
AAAA////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
AAAA////////////////////AAAA////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////AAAA////////////////////AAAA////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////AAAA////////////////////
AAAA////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
AAAA////////////////////AAAA////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////AAAAAAAA////////////////////AAAAAAAA////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////AAAA////AAAA////////////////////
AAAA////AAAA////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////AAAA////////
AAAA////////////////////AAAA////////AAAA////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////AAAA////////////AAAA////////////////////AAAA////////////AAAA////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////AAAA////////////////AAAA////////////////////
AAAA////////////////AAAA////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
AAAAAAAA////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////AAAA//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A
//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A
//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A
//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A
//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8AAAAA////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////AAAA
//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A
//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A
//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A
//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8AAAAA////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////AAAA//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A
//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A
//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A
//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A
//8AAAAA////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////AAAA//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A
//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A
//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A
//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A
//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8AAAAA////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////AAAA
//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A
//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A
//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A
//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8AAAAA////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////AAAA//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A
//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A
//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A
//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A
//8AAAAA////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////AAAA//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A
//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A
//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A
//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A
//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8AAAAA////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////AAAA
//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A
//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A
//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A
//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8AAAAA////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////AAAA//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A
//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A
//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A
//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A
//8AAAAA////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////AAAA//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A
//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A
//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A
//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A
//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8AAAAA////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////AAAA
//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A
//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A
//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A
//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8AAAAA////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////AAAA//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A
//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A
//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A
//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A
//8AAAAA////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////AAAA//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A
//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A
//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A
//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A
//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8AAAAA////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////AAAA
//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A
//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A
//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A
//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8AAAAA////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////AAAA//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A
//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A
//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A
//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A
//8AAAAA////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////AAAA//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A
//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A
//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A
//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A
//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8AAAAA////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////AAAA
//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A
//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A
//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A
//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8AAAAA////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////AAAA//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A
//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A
//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A
//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A
//8AAAAA////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////AAAA//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A
//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A
//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A
//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A
//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8AAAAA////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////AAAA
//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A
//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A
//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A
//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8AAAAA////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////AAAA//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A
//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A
//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A
//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A
//8AAAAA////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////AAAA//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A
//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A
//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A
//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A
//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8AAAAA////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////AAAA
//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A
//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A
//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A
//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8AAAAA////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////AAAA//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A
//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A
//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A
//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A
//8AAAAA////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////AAAA//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A
//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A
//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A
//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A
//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8AAAAA////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////AAAA
//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A
//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A
//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A
//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8AAAAA////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////AAAA//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A
//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A
//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A
//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A
//8AAAAA////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////AAAA//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A
//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A
//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A
//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A
//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8AAAAA////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////AAAA
//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A
//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A
//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A
//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8AAAAA////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////AAAA//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A
//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A
//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A
//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A
//8AAAAA////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////AAAA//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A
//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A
//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A
//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A
//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8AAAAA////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////AAAA
//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A
//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A
//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A
//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8AAAAA////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////AAAA//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A
//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A
//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A
//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A
//8AAAAA////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////AAAA//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A
//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A
//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A
//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A
//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8AAAAA////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////AAAA
//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A
//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A
//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A
//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8AAAAA////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////AAAA//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A
//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A
//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A
//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A
//8AAAAA////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////AAAA//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A
//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A
//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A
//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A
//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8AAAAA////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////AAAA
//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A
//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A
//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A
//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8AAAAA////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////AAAA//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A
//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A
//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A
//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A
//8AAAAA////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////AAAA//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A
//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A
//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A
//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A
//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8AAAAA////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////AAAA
//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A
//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A
//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A
//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8AAAAA////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////AAAA//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A
//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A
//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A
//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A
//8AAAAA////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////AAAA//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A
//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A
//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A
//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A
//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8AAAAA////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////AAAA
//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A
//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A
//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A
//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8AAAAA////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////AAAA//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A
//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A
//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A
//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A
//8AAAAA////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////AAAA//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A
//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A
//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A
//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A
//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8AAAAA////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////AAAA
//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A
//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A
//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A
//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8AAAAA////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////AAAA//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A
//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A
//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A
//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A
//8AAAAA////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////AAAA//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A
//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A
//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A
//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A
//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8AAAAA////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////AAAA
//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A
//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A
//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A
//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8AAAAA////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////AAAA//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A
//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A
//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A
//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A//8A
//8AAAAA////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////AAAA////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////AAAA////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////AAAA
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////AAAA////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////AAAA////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////AAAA////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////AAAA////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////AAAA////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////AAAA
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////AAAA////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////AAAA////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////AAAA////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////AAAA////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////AAAA////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////AAAA
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////AAAA////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////AAAA////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////AAAA////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////AAAA////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////AAAA////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////AAAA
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////AAAA////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////AAAA////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////AAAA////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////AAAA////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////AAAA////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////AAAA
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////AAAA////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////AAAA////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////AAAA////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////AAAA////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////AAAA////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////AAAA
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////AAAA////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////AAAA////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////AAAA////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////AAAA////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////AAAA////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////AAAA
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////AAAA////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////AAAA////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////AAAA////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////AAAA////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////AAAA////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////AAAA
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////AAAA////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////AAAA////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////AAAA////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////AAAA////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////AAAA////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////AAAA
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////AAAA////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////AAAA////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////AAAA////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////AAAA////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////AAAA////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////AAAA
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////AAAA////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////AAAA////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////AAAA////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////AAAA////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////AAAA////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////AAAA
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////AAAA////////////////////
AAAA////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////AAAA////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////AAAA////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
AAAA////////////////////AAAA////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////AAAA////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////AAAA////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////AAAA////////////////////AAAA////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////AAAA////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////AAAA
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////AAAA////////////////////
AAAA////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////AAAA////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////AAAA////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
AAAA////////////////////AAAA////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////AAAA////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////AAAA////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////AAAA////////////////////AAAA////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////AAAA////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////AAAA
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////AAAAAAAA////////////////////
AAAAAAAA////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////AAAA////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////AAAA////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////AAAA////
AAAA////////////////////AAAA////AAAA////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////AAAA////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////AAAA////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////AAAA////////AAAA////////////////////AAAA////////AAAA////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////AAAA////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////AAAA
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////AAAA////////////AAAA////////////////////
AAAA////////////AAAA////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////AAAA////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////AAAA////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////AAAA////////////////
AAAA////////////////////AAAA////////////////AAAA////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////AAAA////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA////////////////////AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////AAAA
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////AAAA////////////////////
AAAA////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////AAAA////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////AAAA////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
AAAA////////////////////AAAA////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////AAAA////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////AAAA////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////AAAA////////////////////AAAA////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////AAAA////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////AAAA
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////AAAA////////////////////
AAAA////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////AAAA////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////AAAA////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
AAAA////////////////////AAAA////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////AAAA////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////AAAA////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////AAAA////////////////////AAAA////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////AAAA////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////AAAA
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA////////////////////
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
AAAA////////////////////AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
AAAAAAAA////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////AAAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA
/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA
/wAAAAAA////////////////AAAA////////////////////AAAA////////////////AAAA
/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA
/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAAAAAA////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////AAAA
/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA
/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAAAAAA////////////AAAA////////////////////
AAAA////////////AAAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA
/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAAAAAA////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////AAAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA
/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAAAAAA////////
AAAA////////////////////AAAA////////AAAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA
/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA
/wAAAAAA////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////AAAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA
/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA
/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAAAAAA////AAAA////////////////////AAAA////AAAA/wAA/wAA/wAA
/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA
/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAAAAAA////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////AAAA
/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA
/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAAAAAAAAAA////////////////////
AAAAAAAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA
/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAAAAAA////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////AAAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA
/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA
AAAA////////////////////AAAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA
/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA
/wAAAAAA////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////AAAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA
/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA
/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAAAAAA////////////////////AAAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA
/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA
/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAAAAAA////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////AAAA
/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA
/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAAAAAA////////////////////
AAAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA
/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAAAAAA////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////AAAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA
/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA
AAAA////////////////////AAAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA
/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA
/wAAAAAA////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////AAAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA
/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA
/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAAAAAA////////////////////AAAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA
/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA
/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAAAAAA////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////AAAA
/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA
/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAAAAAA////////////////////
AAAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA
/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAAAAAA////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////AAAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA
/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA
AAAA////////////////////AAAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA
/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA
/wAAAAAA////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////AAAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA
/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA
/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAAAAAA////////////////////AAAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA
/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA
/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAAAAAA////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////AAAA
/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA
/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAAAAAA////////////////////
AAAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA
/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAAAAAA////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////AAAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA
/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA
AAAA////////////////////AAAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA
/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA
/wAAAAAA////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////AAAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA
/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA
/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAAAAAA////////////////////AAAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA
/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA
/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAAAAAA////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////AAAA
/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA
/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAAAAAA////////////////////
AAAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA
/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAAAAAA////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////AAAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA
/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA
AAAA////////////////////AAAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA
/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA
/wAAAAAA////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////AAAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA
/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA
/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAAAAAA////////////////////AAAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA
/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA
/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAAAAAA////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////AAAA
/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA
/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAAAAAA////////////////////
AAAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA
/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAAAAAA////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////AAAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA
/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA
AAAA////////////////////AAAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA
/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA
/wAAAAAA////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////AAAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA
/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA
/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAAAAAA////////////////////AAAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA
/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA
/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAAAAAA////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////AAAA
/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA
/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAAAAAA////////////////////
AAAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA
/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAAAAAA////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////AAAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA
/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA
AAAA////////////////////AAAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA
/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA
/wAAAAAA////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////AAAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA
/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA
/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAAAAAA////////////////////AAAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA
/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA
/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAAAAAA////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////AAAA
/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA
/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAAAAAA////////////////////
AAAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA
/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAAAAAA////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////AAAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA
/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA
AAAA////////////////////AAAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA
/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA
/wAAAAAA////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////AAAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA
/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA
/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAAAAAA////////////////////AAAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA
/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA
/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAAAAAA////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////AAAA
/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA
/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAAAAAA////////////////////
AAAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA
/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAAAAAA////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////AAAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA
/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA
AAAA////////////////////AAAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA
/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA
/wAAAAAA////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////AAAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA
/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA
/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAAAAAA////////////////////AAAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA
/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA
/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAAAAAA////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////AAAA
/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA
/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAAAAAA////////////////////
AAAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA
/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAAAAAA////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////AAAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA
/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA
AAAA////////////////////AAAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA
/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA
/wAAAAAA////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////AAAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA
/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA
/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAAAAAA////////////////////AAAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA
/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA
/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAAAAAA////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////AAAA
/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA
/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAAAAAA////////////////////
AAAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA
/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAAAAAA////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////AAAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA
/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA
AAAA////////////////////AAAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA
/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA
/wAAAAAA////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////AAAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA
/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA
/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAAAAAA////////////////////AAAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA
/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA
/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAAAAAA////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////AAAA
/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA
/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAAAAAA////////////////////
AAAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA
/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAAAAAA////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////AAAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA
/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA
AAAA////////////////////AAAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA
/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA
/wAAAAAA////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////AAAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA
/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA
/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAAAAAA////////////////////AAAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA
/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA
/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAAAAAA////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////AAAA
/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA
/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAAAAAA////////////////////
AAAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA
/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAAAAAA////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////AAAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA
/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA
AAAA////////////////////AAAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA
/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA
/wAAAAAA////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////AAAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA
/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA
/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAAAAAA////////////////////AAAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA
/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA
/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAAAAAA////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////AAAA
/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA
/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAAAAAA////////////////////
AAAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA
/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAAAAAA////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////AAAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA
/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA
AAAA////////////////////AAAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA
/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA
/wAAAAAA////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////AAAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA
/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA
/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAAAAAA////////////////////AAAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA
/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA
/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAAAAAA////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////AAAA
/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA
/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAAAAAA////////////////////
AAAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA
/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAA/wAAAAAA////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////AAAA////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
AAAA////////////////////AAAA////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////AAAA////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////AAAA////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////AAAA////////////////////AAAA////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////AAAA////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////AAAA
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////AAAA////////////////////
AAAA////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////AAAA////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////AAAA////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
AAAA////////////////////AAAA////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////AAAA////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////AAAA////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////AAAA////////////////////AAAA////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////AAAA////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////AAAA
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////AAAA////////////////////
AAAA////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////AAAA////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////AAAA////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
AAAA////////////////////AAAA////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////AAAA////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////AAAA////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////AAAA////////////////////AAAA////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////AAAA////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////AAAA
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////AAAA////////////////////
AAAA////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////AAAA////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////AAAA////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
AAAA////////////////////AAAA////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////AAAA////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////AAAA////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////AAAA////////////////////AAAA////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////AAAA////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////AAAA
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////AAAA////////////////////
AAAA////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////AAAA////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////AAAA////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
AAAA////////////////////AAAA////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////AAAA////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////AAAA////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////AAAA////////////////////AAAA////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////AAAA////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////AAAA
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////AAAA////////////////////
AAAA////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////AAAA////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////AAAA////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
AAAA////////////////////AAAA////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////AAAA////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////AAAA////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////AAAA////////////////////AAAA////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////AAAA////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////AAAA
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////AAAA////////////////////
AAAA////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////AAAA////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////AAAA////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
AAAA////////////////////AAAA////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////AAAA////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////AAAA////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////AAAA////////////////////AAAA////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////AAAA////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////AAAA
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////AAAA////////////////////
AAAA////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////AAAA////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////AAAA////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
AAAA////////////////////AAAA////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////AAAA////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////AAAA////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////AAAA////////////////////AAAA////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////AAAA////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////AAAA
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////AAAA////////////////////
AAAA////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////AAAA////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////AAAA////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
AAAA////////////////////AAAA////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////AAAA////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////AAAA////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////AAAA////////////////////AAAA////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////AAAA////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////AAAA
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////AAAA////////////////////
AAAA////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////AAAA////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////AAAA////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
AAAA////////////////////AAAA////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////AAAA////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////AAAA////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////AAAA////////////////////AAAA////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////AAAA////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////AAAA
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////AAAA////////////////////
AAAA////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////AAAA////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////AAAA////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
AAAA////////////////////AAAA////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////AAAA////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////AAAA////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////AAAA////////////////////AAAA////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////AAAA////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////AAAA
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////AAAA////////////////////
AAAA////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////AAAA////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////AAAA////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
AAAA////////////////////AAAA////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////AAAA////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////AAAA////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////AAAA////////////////////AAAA////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////AAAA////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////AAAA
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////AAAA////////////////////
AAAA////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////AAAA////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////AAAA////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
AAAA////////////////////AAAA////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////AAAA////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////AAAA////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////AAAA////////////////////AAAA////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////AAAA////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////AAAA
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////AAAA////////////////////
AAAA////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////AAAA////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////AAAA////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
AAAA////////////////////AAAA////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////AAAA////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////AAAA////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////AAAA////////////////////AAAA////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////AAAA////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////AAAA
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////AAAA////////////////////
AAAA////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////AAAA////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////AAAA////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
AAAA////////////////////AAAA////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////AAAA////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////AAAA////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////AAAA////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////AAAA
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////AAAA////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////AAAA////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////AAAA////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////AAAA
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////AAAA////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////AAAA////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////AAAA////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////AAAA////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////AAAA////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////AAAA
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////AAAA////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////AAAA////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////AAAA////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////AAAA////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////AAAA////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////AAAA
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////

------=_NextPart_000_0A02_01C56B69.42AE6270--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 20064 invoked from network); 18 Jul 2001 19:29:12 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 18 Jul 2001 19:29:12 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: (qmail 26775 invoked from network); 18 Jul 2001 19:30:48 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 18 Jul 2001 19:30:48 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA23025; Wed, 18 Jul 2001 12:26:23 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 79753 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 18 Jul 2001 19:26:19          +0000
Received: from cisco.com (cypher.cisco.com [171.69.11.18]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA23008 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed,          18 Jul 2001 12:26:18 -0700
Received: (from billw@localhost) by cisco.com (8.8.8/2.6/Cisco List          Logging/8.8.8) id MAA16908; Wed, 18 Jul 2001 12:25:47 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID:  <CMM.0.90.4.995484347.billw@cypher>
Date:         Wed, 18 Jul 2001 12:25:47 PDT
Reply-To: "Bill Westfield" <billw@cisco.com>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "William Chops Westfield" <billw@cisco.com>
Subject:      Re: [AR] CRC codes
Comments: To: Jamie Morken <jmorken@HOME.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  Your message of Wed, 18 Jul 2001 02:21:13 -0700

There are some example algorithms in the RFC describing async HDLC.
I'm not sure exactly what you mean by codespace-efficient - one common
implementation doesn't use much code, but it has a big data table (this
does byte-at-a-time CRC.)  Bit-at-a-time CRC generation doesn't use much
code or data space, but is quite slow, of course...

BillW


From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 11416 invoked from network); 18 Jul 2001 20:20:08 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 18 Jul 2001 20:20:08 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: (qmail 14658 invoked from network); 18 Jul 2001 20:21:22 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 18 Jul 2001 20:21:22 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA23147; Wed, 18 Jul 2001 13:03:01 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 79769 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 18 Jul 2001 20:02:53          +0000
Received: from web10502.mail.yahoo.com (web10502.mail.yahoo.com          [216.136.130.152]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id NAA23129          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 18 Jul 2001 13:02:53 -0700
Received: from [129.219.247.215] by web10502.mail.yahoo.com via HTTP; Wed, 18          Jul 2001 13:02:52 PDT
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <20010718200252.51376.qmail@web10502.mail.yahoo.com>
Date:         Wed, 18 Jul 2001 13:02:52 -0700
Reply-To: "Justin Pucci" <drrockit5150@YAHOO.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Justin Pucci" <drrockit5150@YAHOO.COM>
Subject:      [AR] : Nitrous/Polyethylene hybrid regression
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Hey guys,

Would you happen to know what the typical N2O/PE a and
n values are for hybrids?  Perhaps you know of an
official paper or book?  I have seen a=0.07 and n=0.65
however, I am not sure whether these are correct.  I
have gotten a=0.038 and n=~0.6 in the past, but I
would like someone else to share their experience if
possible.  Thanks!

-->Justin Pucci

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail
http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 6702 invoked from network); 18 Jul 2001 20:41:50 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 18 Jul 2001 20:41:50 -0000
Received: (qmail 29012 invoked from network); 18 Jul 2001 20:43:29 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 18 Jul 2001 20:43:29 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA23203; Wed, 18 Jul 2001 13:11:47 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 79781 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 18 Jul 2001 20:11:45          +0000
Received: from spsystems.net (spsystems.net [209.47.149.227]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA23186 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Wed,          18 Jul 2001 13:11:44 -0700
Received: (from henry@localhost) by spsystems.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id QAA13005;          Wed, 18 Jul 2001 16:11:11 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010718160721.11842G-100000@spsystems.net>
Date:         Wed, 18 Jul 2001 16:11:11 -0400
Reply-To: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] CRC codes
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <CMM.0.90.4.995484347.billw@cypher>

On Wed, 18 Jul 2001, William Chops Westfield wrote:
> ...Bit-at-a-time CRC generation doesn't use much
> code or data space, but is quite slow, of course...

The speed comparison is quite so simple any more.  Modern CPUs are getting
monstrously fast, and memory is not keeping up (not even close), and
caches can only do so much.  It is increasingly becoming worthwhile to
expend a lot of CPU cycles to avoid a cache miss.  I wouldn't be surprised
to see the bitwise CRC generation actually end up being faster...

Mind you, that class of CPU hasn't yet made its way into small systems
like flight computers, much.  But it's coming.

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 3388 invoked from network); 21 Jul 2001 00:32:40 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 21 Jul 2001 00:32:40 -0000
Received: (qmail 8049 invoked from network); 21 Jul 2001 00:34:22 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 21 Jul 2001 00:34:22 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA00777; Fri, 20 Jul 2001 17:28:38 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 79836 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 21 Jul 2001 00:28:37          +0000
Received: from dune.gnc.net (root@dune.gnc.net [207.203.72.4]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA24483 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed,          18 Jul 2001 16:01:24 -0700
Received: from beowulf (sw2-15.gnc.net [207.203.72.95]) by dune.gnc.net          (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id TAA20376 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed,          18 Jul 2001 19:01:25 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0A05_01C56B69.42B7FF60"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
Importance: Normal
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <LPBBKJMJEOFKAMFJJNNHGELOCFAA.landofgrey@gnc.net>
Date:         Wed, 18 Jul 2001 19:01:24 -0400
Reply-To: <landofgrey@gnc.net>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Matthew Travis" <landofgrey@gnc.net>
Subject:      Re: [AR] CRC codes (3 very good URL's)
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <000f01c10f6a$fd63a300$0400a8c0@hatjs>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0A05_01C56B69.42B7FF60
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Here are a few links to some CRC resources, The first link has VC++ course
code (yes, assembly or C would be better).


http://www.createwindow.com/programming/index.htm

http://www.repairfaq.org/filipg/LINK/F_crc_v3.html

http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/Research/SRG/bluebook/21/crc/crc.html






------=_NextPart_000_0A05_01C56B69.42B7FF60
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD><TITLE></TITLE>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Diso-8859-1">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 5.50.4208.1700" name=3DGENERATOR></HEAD>
<BODY>
<DIV><FONT size=3D2><FONT face=3DArial color=3D#0000ff>Here are a few =
links to some=20
CRC resources, The first link has VC++ course code (yes, assembly or C =
would be=20
better).</FONT></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=3D2><FONT face=3DArial color=3D#0000ff>&nbsp;</DIV>
<P><BR></FONT><A target=3D_blank=20
href=3D"http://www.createwindow.com/programming/index.htm">http://www.cre=
atewindow.com/programming/index.htm</A><BR></FONT><FONT=20
size=3D2><BR><FONT face=3DArial color=3D#0000ff><A=20
href=3D"http://www.repairfaq.org/filipg/LINK/F_crc_v3.html">http://www.re=
pairfaq.org/filipg/LINK/F_crc_v3.html</A><BR><BR><A=20
href=3D"http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/Research/SRG/bluebook/21/crc/crc.html">ht=
tp://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/Research/SRG/bluebook/21/crc/crc.html</A></FONT></F=
ONT></P>
<P><FONT face=3DArial color=3D#0000ff size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</P>
<P><FONT face=3DArial color=3D#0000ff =
size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</P></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0A05_01C56B69.42B7FF60--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 5854 invoked from network); 21 Jul 2001 00:33:27 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 21 Jul 2001 00:33:27 -0000
Received: (qmail 17737 invoked from network); 21 Jul 2001 00:35:07 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 21 Jul 2001 00:35:07 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA00810; Fri, 20 Jul 2001 17:30:04 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 79845 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 21 Jul 2001 00:30:00          +0000
Received: from mail2.rdc2.bc.home.com (mail2.rdc2.bc.home.com [24.2.10.85]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA24624 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 18 Jul 2001 16:48:00 -0700
Received: from orton ([24.66.135.27]) by mail2.rdc2.bc.home.com (InterMail          vM.4.01.03.20 201-229-121-120-20010223) with SMTP id          <20010718234754.HTNE15561.mail2.rdc2.bc.home.com@orton>; Wed, 18 Jul          2001 16:47:54 -0700
References:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010718160721.11842G-100000@spsystems.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <004e01c10fe4$4f60f940$1b874218@gv.shawcable.net>
Date:         Wed, 18 Jul 2001 16:49:39 -0700
Reply-To: "Jamie" <jmorken@HOME.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jamie" <jmorken@HOME.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] CRC codes
Comments: To: Henry Spencer <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Hi Henry,

Thanks for the code!  I think I'll implement the bit at a time approach -
I'll let you know if I can't figure it out! :)

best regards,
Jamie



----- Original Message -----
From: Henry Spencer <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Wednesday, July 18, 2001 1:11 PM
Subject: Re: [AR] CRC codes


> On Wed, 18 Jul 2001, William Chops Westfield wrote:
> > ...Bit-at-a-time CRC generation doesn't use much
> > code or data space, but is quite slow, of course...
>
> The speed comparison is quite so simple any more.  Modern CPUs are getting
> monstrously fast, and memory is not keeping up (not even close), and
> caches can only do so much.  It is increasingly becoming worthwhile to
> expend a lot of CPU cycles to avoid a cache miss.  I wouldn't be surprised
> to see the bitwise CRC generation actually end up being faster...
>
> Mind you, that class of CPU hasn't yet made its way into small systems
> like flight computers, much.  But it's coming.
>
>                                                           Henry Spencer
>                                                        henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 7734 invoked from network); 21 Jul 2001 00:34:06 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 21 Jul 2001 00:34:06 -0000
Received: (qmail 3698 invoked from network); 21 Jul 2001 00:35:22 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 21 Jul 2001 00:35:22 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA00749; Fri, 20 Jul 2001 17:26:39 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 79827 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 21 Jul 2001 00:26:10          +0000
Received: from dune.gnc.net (root@dune.gnc.net [207.203.72.4]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA24423 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed,          18 Jul 2001 15:58:18 -0700
Received: from beowulf (sw2-15.gnc.net [207.203.72.95]) by dune.gnc.net          (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id SAA20286 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed,          18 Jul 2001 18:57:44 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0A09_01C56B69.42F137D0"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
Importance: Normal
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <LPBBKJMJEOFKAMFJJNNHCELOCFAA.landofgrey@gnc.net>
Date:         Wed, 18 Jul 2001 18:57:15 -0400
Reply-To: <landofgrey@gnc.net>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Matthew Travis" <landofgrey@gnc.net>
Subject:      Re: [AR] CRC codes (Long Post)
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <000f01c10f6a$fd63a300$0400a8c0@hatjs>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0A09_01C56B69.42F137D0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Sorry for the length of this post
Matt

A PAINLESS GUIDE TO CRC ERROR DETECTION ALGORITHMS
==================================================
"Everything you wanted to know about CRC algorithms, but were afraid
to ask for fear that errors in your understanding might be detected."

Version : 3.
Date    : 19 August 1993.
Author  : Ross N. Williams.
Net     : ross@guest.adelaide.edu.au.
FTP     : ftp.adelaide.edu.au/pub/rocksoft/crc_v3.txt
Company : Rocksoft^tm Pty Ltd.
Snail   : 16 Lerwick Avenue, Hazelwood Park 5066, Australia.
Fax     : +61 8 373-4911 (c/- Internode Systems Pty Ltd).
Phone   : +61 8 379-9217 (10am to 10pm Adelaide Australia time).
Note    : "Rocksoft" is a trademark of Rocksoft Pty Ltd, Australia.
Status  : Copyright (C) Ross Williams, 1993. However, permission is
          granted to make and distribute verbatim copies of this
          document provided that this information block and copyright
          notice is included. Also, the C code modules included
          in this document are fully public domain.
Thanks  : Thanks to Jean-loup Gailly (jloup@chorus.fr) and Mark Adler
          (me@quest.jpl.nasa.gov) who both proof read this document
          and picked out lots of nits as well as some big fat bugs.

Table of Contents
-----------------
    Abstract
 1. Introduction: Error Detection
 2. The Need For Complexity
 3. The Basic Idea Behind CRC Algorithms
 4. Polynomical Arithmetic
 5. Binary Arithmetic with No Carries
 6. A Fully Worked Example
 7. Choosing A Poly
 8. A Straightforward CRC Implementation
 9. A Table-Driven Implementation
10. A Slightly Mangled Table-Driven Implementation
11. "Reflected" Table-Driven Implementations
12. "Reversed" Polys
13. Initial and Final Values
14. Defining Algorithms Absolutely
15. A Parameterized Model For CRC Algorithms
16. A Catalog of Parameter Sets for Standards
17. An Implementation of the Model Algorithm
18. Roll Your Own Table-Driven Implementation
19. Generating A Lookup Table
20. Summary
21. Corrections
 A. Glossary
 B. References
 C. References I Have Detected But Haven't Yet Sighted


Abstract
--------
This document explains CRCs (Cyclic Redundancy Codes) and their
table-driven implementations in full, precise detail. Much of the
literature on CRCs, and in particular on their table-driven
implementations, is a little obscure (or at least seems so to me).
This document is an attempt to provide a clear and simple no-nonsense
explanation of CRCs and to absolutely nail down every detail of the
operation of their high-speed implementations. In addition to this,
this document presents a parameterized model CRC algorithm called the
"Rocksoft^tm Model CRC Algorithm". The model algorithm can be
parameterized to behave like most of the CRC implementations around,
and so acts as a good reference for describing particular algorithms.
A low-speed implementation of the model CRC algorithm is provided in
the C programming language. Lastly there is a section giving two forms
of high-speed table driven implementations, and providing a program
that generates CRC lookup tables.


1. Introduction: Error Detection
--------------------------------
The aim of an error detection technique is to enable the receiver of a
message transmitted through a noisy (error-introducing) channel to
determine whether the message has been corrupted. To do this, the
transmitter constructs a value (called a checksum) that is a function
of the message, and appends it to the message. The receiver can then
use the same function to calculate the checksum of the received
message and compare it with the appended checksum to see if the
message was correctly received. For example, if we chose a checksum
function which was simply the sum of the bytes in the message mod 256
(i.e. modulo 256), then it might go something as follows. All numbers
are in decimal.

   Message                    :  6 23  4
   Message with checksum      :  6 23  4 33
   Message after transmission :  6 27  4 33

In the above, the second byte of the message was corrupted from 23 to
27 by the communications channel. However, the receiver can detect
this by comparing the transmitted checksum (33) with the computer
checksum of 37 (6 + 27 + 4). If the checksum itself is corrupted, a
correctly transmitted message might be incorrectly identified as a
corrupted one. However, this is a safe-side failure. A dangerous-side
failure occurs where the message and/or checksum is corrupted in a
manner that results in a transmission that is internally consistent.
Unfortunately, this possibility is completely unavoidable and the best
that can be done is to minimize its probability by increasing the
amount of information in the checksum (e.g. widening the checksum from
one byte to two bytes).

Other error detection techniques exist that involve performing complex
transformations on the message to inject it with redundant
information. However, this document addresses only CRC algorithms,
which fall into the class of error detection algorithms that leave the
data intact and append a checksum on the end. i.e.:

      <original intact message> <checksum>


2. The Need For Complexity
--------------------------
In the checksum example in the previous section, we saw how a
corrupted message was detected using a checksum algorithm that simply
sums the bytes in the message mod 256:

   Message                    :  6 23  4
   Message with checksum      :  6 23  4 33
   Message after transmission :  6 27  4 33

A problem with this algorithm is that it is too simple. If a number of
random corruptions occur, there is a 1 in 256 chance that they will
not be detected. For example:

   Message                    :  6 23  4
   Message with checksum      :  6 23  4 33
   Message after transmission :  8 20  5 33

To strengthen the checksum, we could change from an 8-bit register to
a 16-bit register (i.e. sum the bytes mod 65536 instead of mod 256) so
as to apparently reduce the probability of failure from 1/256 to
1/65536. While basically a good idea, it fails in this case because
the formula used is not sufficiently "random"; with a simple summing
formula, each incoming byte affects roughly only one byte of the
summing register no matter how wide it is. For example, in the second
example above, the summing register could be a Megabyte wide, and the
error would still go undetected. This problem can only be solved by
replacing the simple summing formula with a more sophisticated formula
that causes each incoming byte to have an effect on the entire
checksum register.

Thus, we see that at least two aspects are required to form a strong
checksum function:

   WIDTH: A register width wide enough to provide a low a-priori
          probability of failure (e.g. 32-bits gives a 1/2^32 chance
          of failure).

   CHAOS: A formula that gives each input byte the potential to change
          any number of bits in the register.

Note: The term "checksum" was presumably used to describe early
summing formulas, but has now taken on a more general meaning
encompassing more sophisticated algorithms such as the CRC ones. The
CRC algorithms to be described satisfy the second condition very well,
and can be configured to operate with a variety of checksum widths.


3. The Basic Idea Behind CRC Algorithms
---------------------------------------
Where might we go in our search for a more complex function than
summing? All sorts of schemes spring to mind. We could construct
tables using the digits of pi, or hash each incoming byte with all the
bytes in the register. We could even keep a large telephone book
on-line, and use each incoming byte combined with the register bytes
to index a new phone number which would be the next register value.
The possibilities are limitless.

However, we do not need to go so far; the next arithmetic step
suffices. While addition is clearly not strong enough to form an
effective checksum, it turns out that division is, so long as the
divisor is about as wide as the checksum register.

The basic idea of CRC algorithms is simply to treat the message as an
enormous binary number, to divide it by another fixed binary number,
and to make the remainder from this division the checksum. Upon
receipt of the message, the receiver can perform the same division and
compare the remainder with the "checksum" (transmitted remainder).

Example: Suppose the the message consisted of the two bytes (6,23) as
in the previous example. These can be considered to be the hexadecimal
number 0617 which can be considered to be the binary number
0000-0110-0001-0111. Suppose that we use a checksum register one-byte
wide and use a constant divisor of 1001, then the checksum is the
remainder after 0000-0110-0001-0111 is divided by 1001. While in this
case, this calculation could obviously be performed using common
garden variety 32-bit registers, in the general case this is messy. So
instead, we'll do the division using good-'ol long division which you
learnt in school (remember?). Except this time, it's in binary:

          ...0000010101101 = 00AD =  173 = QUOTIENT
         ____-___-___-___-
9= 1001 ) 0000011000010111 = 0617 = 1559 = DIVIDEND
DIVISOR   0000.,,....,.,,,
          ----.,,....,.,,,
           0000,,....,.,,,
           0000,,....,.,,,
           ----,,....,.,,,
            0001,....,.,,,
            0000,....,.,,,
            ----,....,.,,,
             0011....,.,,,
             0000....,.,,,
             ----....,.,,,
              0110...,.,,,
              0000...,.,,,
              ----...,.,,,
               1100..,.,,,
               1001..,.,,,
               ====..,.,,,
                0110.,.,,,
                0000.,.,,,
                ----.,.,,,
                 1100,.,,,
                 1001,.,,,
                 ====,.,,,
                  0111.,,,
                  0000.,,,
                  ----.,,,
                   1110,,,
                   1001,,,
                   ====,,,
                    1011,,
                    1001,,
                    ====,,
                     0101,
                     0000,
                     ----
                      1011
                      1001
                      ====
                      0010 = 02 = 2 = REMAINDER


In decimal this is "1559 divided by 9 is 173 with a remainder of 2".

Although the effect of each bit of the input message on the quotient
is not all that significant, the 4-bit remainder gets kicked about
quite a lot during the calculation, and if more bytes were added to
the message (dividend) it's value could change radically again very
quickly. This is why division works where addition doesn't.

In case you're wondering, using this 4-bit checksum the transmitted
message would look like this (in hexadecimal): 06172 (where the 0617
is the message and the 2 is the checksum). The receiver would divide
0617 by 9 and see whether the remainder was 2.


4. Polynomical Arithmetic
-------------------------
While the division scheme described in the previous section is very
very similar to the checksumming schemes called CRC schemes, the CRC
schemes are in fact a bit weirder, and we need to delve into some
strange number systems to understand them.

The word you will hear all the time when dealing with CRC algorithms
is the word "polynomial". A given CRC algorithm will be said to be
using a particular polynomial, and CRC algorithms in general are said
to be operating using polynomial arithmetic. What does this mean?

Instead of the divisor, dividend (message), quotient, and remainder
(as described in the previous section) being viewed as positive
integers, they are viewed as polynomials with binary coefficients.
This is done by treating each number as a bit-string whose bits are
the coefficients of a polynomial. For example, the ordinary number 23
(decimal) is 17 (hex) and 10111 binary and so it corresponds to the
polynomial:

   1*x^4 + 0*x^3 + 1*x^2 + 1*x^1 + 1*x^0

or, more simply:

   x^4 + x^2 + x^1 + x^0

Using this technique, the message, and the divisor can be represented
as polynomials and we can do all our arithmetic just as before, except
that now it's all cluttered up with Xs. For example, suppose we wanted
to multiply 1101 by 1011. We can do this simply by multiplying the
polynomials:

(x^3 + x^2 + x^0)(x^3 + x^1 + x^0)
= (x^6 + x^4 + x^3
 + x^5 + x^3 + x^2
 + x^3 + x^1 + x^0) = x^6 + x^5 + x^4 + 3*x^3 + x^2 + x^1 + x^0

At this point, to get the right answer, we have to pretend that x is 2
and propagate binary carries from the 3*x^3 yielding

   x^7 + x^3 + x^2 + x^1 + x^0

It's just like ordinary arithmetic except that the base is abstracted
and brought into all the calculations explicitly instead of being
there implicitly. So what's the point?

The point is that IF we pretend that we DON'T know what x is, we CAN'T
perform the carries. We don't know that 3*x^3 is the same as x^4 + x^3
because we don't know that x is 2. In this true polynomial arithmetic
the relationship between all the coefficients is unknown and so the
coefficients of each power effectively become strongly typed;
coefficients of x^2 are effectively of a different type to
coefficients of x^3.

With the coefficients of each power nicely isolated, mathematicians
came up with all sorts of different kinds of polynomial arithmetics
simply by changing the rules about how coefficients work. Of these
schemes, one in particular is relevant here, and that is a polynomial
arithmetic where the coefficients are calculated MOD 2 and there is no
carry; all coefficients must be either 0 or 1 and no carries are
calculated. This is called "polynomial arithmetic mod 2". Thus,
returning to the earlier example:

(x^3 + x^2 + x^0)(x^3 + x^1 + x^0)
= (x^6 + x^4 + x^3
 + x^5 + x^3 + x^2
 + x^3 + x^1 + x^0)
= x^6 + x^5 + x^4 + 3*x^3 + x^2 + x^1 + x^0

Under the other arithmetic, the 3*x^3 term was propagated using the
carry mechanism using the knowledge that x=2. Under "polynomial
arithmetic mod 2", we don't know what x is, there are no carries, and
all coefficients have to be calculated mod 2. Thus, the result
becomes:

= x^6 + x^5 + x^4 + x^3 + x^2 + x^1 + x^0

As Knuth [Knuth81] says (p.400):

   "The reader should note the similarity between polynomial
   arithmetic and multiple-precision arithmetic (Section 4.3.1), where
   the radix b is substituted for x. The chief difference is that the
   coefficient u_k of x^k in polynomial arithmetic bears little or no
   relation to its neighboring coefficients x^{k-1} [and x^{k+1}], so
   the idea of "carrying" from one place to another is absent. In fact
   polynomial arithmetic modulo b is essentially identical to multiple
   precision arithmetic with radix b, except that all carries are
   suppressed."

Thus polynomical arithmetic mod 2 is just binary arithmetic mod 2 with
no carries. While polynomials provide useful mathematical machinery in
more analytical approaches to CRC and error-correction algorithms, for
the purposes of exposition they provide no extra insight and some
encumbrance and have been discarded in the remainder of this document
in favour of direct manipulation of the arithmetical system with which
they are isomorphic: binary arithmetic with no carry.


5. Binary Arithmetic with No Carries
------------------------------------
Having dispensed with polynomials, we can focus on the real arithmetic
issue, which is that all the arithmetic performed during CRC
calculations is performed in binary with no carries. Often this is
called polynomial arithmetic, but as I have declared the rest of this
document a polynomial free zone, we'll have to call it CRC arithmetic
instead. As this arithmetic is a key part of CRC calculations, we'd
better get used to it. Here we go:

Adding two numbers in CRC arithmetic is the same as adding numbers in
ordinary binary arithmetic except there is no carry. This means that
each pair of corresponding bits determine the corresponding output bit
without reference to any other bit positions. For example:

        10011011
       +11001010
        --------
        01010001
        --------

There are only four cases for each bit position:

   0+0=0
   0+1=1
   1+0=1
   1+1=0  (no carry)

Subtraction is identical:

        10011011
       -11001010
        --------
        01010001
        --------

with

   0-0=0
   0-1=1  (wraparound)
   1-0=1
   1-1=0

In fact, both addition and subtraction in CRC arithmetic is equivalent
to the XOR operation, and the XOR operation is its own inverse. This
effectively reduces the operations of the first level of power
(addition, subtraction) to a single operation that is its own inverse.
This is a very convenient property of the arithmetic.

By collapsing of addition and subtraction, the arithmetic discards any
notion of magnitude beyond the power of its highest one bit. While it
seems clear that 1010 is greater than 10, it is no longer the case
that 1010 can be considered to be greater than 1001. To see this, note
that you can get from 1010 to 1001 by both adding and subtracting the
same quantity:

   1010 = 1010 + 0011
   1010 = 1010 - 0011

This makes nonsense of any notion of order.

Having defined addition, we can move to multiplication and division.
Multiplication is absolutely straightforward, being the sum of the
first number, shifted in accordance with the second number.

        1101
      x 1011
        ----
        1101
       1101.
      0000..
     1101...
     -------
     1111111  Note: The sum uses CRC addition
     -------

Division is a little messier as we need to know when "a number goes
into another number". To do this, we invoke the weak definition of
magnitude defined earlier: that X is greater than or equal to Y iff
the position of the highest 1 bit of X is the same or greater than the
position of the highest 1 bit of Y. Here's a fully worked division
(nicked from [Tanenbaum81]).

            1100001010
       _______________
10011 ) 11010110110000
        10011,,.,,....
        -----,,.,,....
         10011,.,,....
         10011,.,,....
         -----,.,,....
          00001.,,....
          00000.,,....
          -----.,,....
           00010,,....
           00000,,....
           -----,,....
            00101,....
            00000,....
            -----,....
             01011....
             00000....
             -----....
              10110...
              10011...
              -----...
               01010..
               00000..
               -----..
                10100.
                10011.
                -----.
                 01110
                 00000
                 -----
                  1110 = Remainder

That's really it. Before proceeding further, however, it's worth our
while playing with this arithmetic a bit to get used to it.

We've already played with addition and subtraction, noticing that they
are the same thing. Here, though, we should note that in this
arithmetic A+0=A and A-0=A. This obvious property is very useful
later.

In dealing with CRC multiplication and division, it's worth getting a
feel for the concepts of MULTIPLE and DIVISIBLE.

If a number A is a multiple of B then what this means in CRC
arithmetic is that it is possible to construct A from zero by XORing
in various shifts of B. For example, if A was 0111010110 and B was 11,
we could construct A from B as follows:

                  0111010110
                = .......11.
                + ....11....
                + ...11.....
                  .11.......

However, if A is 0111010111, it is not possible to construct it out of
various shifts of B (can you see why? - see later) so it is said to be
not divisible by B in CRC arithmetic.

Thus we see that CRC arithmetic is primarily about XORing particular
values at various shifting offsets.


6. A Fully Worked Example
-------------------------
Having defined CRC arithmetic, we can now frame a CRC calculation as
simply a division, because that's all it is! This section fills in the
details and gives an example.

To perform a CRC calculation, we need to choose a divisor. In maths
marketing speak the divisor is called the "generator polynomial" or
simply the "polynomial", and is a key parameter of any CRC algorithm.
It would probably be more friendly to call the divisor something else,
but the poly talk is so deeply ingrained in the field that it would
now be confusing to avoid it. As a compromise, we will refer to the
CRC polynomial as the "poly". Just think of this number as a sort of
parrot. "Hello poly!"

You can choose any poly and come up with a CRC algorithm. However,
some polys are better than others, and so it is wise to stick with the
tried an tested ones. A later section addresses this issue.

The width (position of the highest 1 bit) of the poly is very
important as it dominates the whole calculation. Typically, widths of
16 or 32 are chosen so as to simplify implementation on modern
computers. The width of a poly is the actual bit position of the
highest bit. For example, the width of 10011 is 4, not 5. For the
purposes of example, we will chose a poly of 10011 (of width W of 4).

Having chosen a poly, we can proceed with the calculation. This is
simply a division (in CRC arithmetic) of the message by the poly. The
only trick is that W zero bits are appended to the message before the
CRC is calculated. Thus we have:

   Original message                : 1101011011
   Poly                            :      10011
   Message after appending W zeros : 11010110110000

Now we simply divide the augmented message by the poly using CRC
arithmetic. This is the same division as before:

            1100001010 = Quotient (nobody cares about the quotient)
       _______________
10011 ) 11010110110000 = Augmented message (1101011011 + 0000)
=Poly  10011,,.,,....
        -----,,.,,....
         10011,.,,....
         10011,.,,....
         -----,.,,....
          00001.,,....
          00000.,,....
          -----.,,....
           00010,,....
           00000,,....
           -----,,....
            00101,....
            00000,....
            -----,....
             01011....
             00000....
             -----....
              10110...
              10011...
              -----...
               01010..
               00000..
               -----..
                10100.
                10011.
                -----.
                 01110
                 00000
                 -----
                  1110 = Remainder = THE CHECKSUM!!!!

The division yields a quotient, which we throw away, and a remainder,
which is the calculated checksum. This ends the calculation.

Usually, the checksum is then appended to the message and the result
transmitted. In this case the transmission would be: 11010110111110.

At the other end, the receiver can do one of two things:

   a. Separate the message and checksum. Calculate the checksum for
      the message (after appending W zeros) and compare the two
      checksums.

   b. Checksum the whole lot (without appending zeros) and see if it
      comes out as zero!

These two options are equivalent. However, in the next section, we
will be assuming option b because it is marginally mathematically
cleaner.

A summary of the operation of the class of CRC algorithms:

   1. Choose a width W, and a poly G (of width W).
   2. Append W zero bits to the message. Call this M'.
   3. Divide M' by G using CRC arithmetic. The remainder is the checksum.

That's all there is to it.

7. Choosing A Poly
------------------
Choosing a poly is somewhat of a black art and the reader is referred
to [Tanenbaum81] (p.130-132) which has a very clear discussion of this
issue. This section merely aims to put the fear of death into anyone
who so much as toys with the idea of making up their own poly. If you
don't care about why one poly might be better than another and just
want to find out about high-speed implementations, choose one of the
arithmetically sound polys listed at the end of this section and skip
to the next section.

First note that the transmitted message T is a multiple of the poly.
To see this, note that 1) the last W bits of T is the remainder after
dividing the augmented (by zeros remember) message by the poly, and 2)
addition is the same as subtraction so adding the remainder pushes the
value up to the next multiple. Now note that if the transmitted
message is corrupted in transmission that we will receive T+E where E
is an error vector (and + is CRC addition (i.e. XOR)). Upon receipt of
this message, the receiver divides T+E by G. As T mod G is 0, (T+E)
mod G = E mod G. Thus, the capacity of the poly we choose to catch
particular kinds of errors will be determined by the set of multiples
of G, for any corruption E that is a multiple of G will be undetected.
Our task then is to find classes of G whose multiples look as little
like the kind of line noise (that will be creating the corruptions) as
possible. So let's examine the kinds of line noise we can expect.

SINGLE BIT ERRORS: A single bit error means E=1000...0000. We can
ensure that this class of error is always detected by making sure that
G has at least two bits set to 1. Any multiple of G will be
constructed using shifting and adding and it is impossible to
construct a value with a single bit by shifting an adding a single
value with more than one bit set, as the two end bits will always
persist.

TWO-BIT ERRORS: To detect all errors of the form 100...000100...000
(i.e. E contains two 1 bits) choose a G that does not have multiples
that are 11, 101, 1001, 10001, 100001, etc. It is not clear to me how
one goes about doing this (I don't have the pure maths background),
but Tanenbaum assures us that such G do exist, and cites G with 1 bits
(15,14,1) turned on as an example of one G that won't divide anything
less than 1...1 where ... is 32767 zeros.

ERRORS WITH AN ODD NUMBER OF BITS: We can catch all corruptions where
E has an odd number of bits by choosing a G that has an even number of
bits. To see this, note that 1) CRC multiplication is simply XORing a
constant value into a register at various offsets, 2) XORing is simply
a bit-flip operation, and 3) if you XOR a value with an even number of
bits into a register, the oddness of the number of 1 bits in the
register remains invariant. Example: Starting with E=111, attempt to
flip all three bits to zero by the repeated application of XORing in
11 at one of the two offsets (i.e. "E=E XOR 011" and "E=E XOR 110")
This is nearly isomorphic to the "glass tumblers" party puzzle where
you challenge someone to flip three tumblers by the repeated
application of the operation of flipping any two. Most of the popular
CRC polys contain an even number of 1 bits. (Note: Tanenbaum states
more specifically that all errors with an odd number of bits can be
caught by making G a multiple of 11).

BURST ERRORS: A burst error looks like E=000...000111...11110000...00.
That is, E consists of all zeros except for a run of 1s somewhere
inside. This can be recast as E=(10000...00)(1111111...111) where
there are z zeros in the LEFT part and n ones in the RIGHT part. To
catch errors of this kind, we simply set the lowest bit of G to 1.
Doing this ensures that LEFT cannot be a factor of G. Then, so long as
G is wider than RIGHT, the error will be detected. See Tanenbaum for a
clearer explanation of this; I'm a little fuzzy on this one. Note:
Tanenbaum asserts that the probability of a burst of length greater
than W getting through is (0.5)^W.

That concludes the section on the fine art of selecting polys.

Some popular polys are:
16 bits: (16,12,5,0)                                [X25 standard]
         (16,15,2,0)                                ["CRC-16"]
32 bits: (32,26,23,22,16,12,11,10,8,7,5,4,2,1,0)    [Ethernet]


8. A Straightforward CRC Implementation
---------------------------------------
That's the end of the theory; now we turn to implementations. To start
with, we examine an absolutely straight-down-the-middle boring
straightforward low-speed implementation that doesn't use any speed
tricks at all. We'll then transform that program progessively until we
end up with the compact table-driven code we all know and love and
which some of us would like to understand.

To implement a CRC algorithm all we have to do is implement CRC
division. There are two reasons why we cannot simply use the divide
instruction of whatever machine we are on. The first is that we have
to do the divide in CRC arithmetic. The second is that the dividend
might be ten megabytes long, and todays processors do not have
registers that big.

So to implement CRC division, we have to feed the message through a
division register. At this point, we have to be absolutely precise
about the message data. In all the following examples the message will
be considered to be a stream of bytes (each of 8 bits) with bit 7 of
each byte being considered to be the most significant bit (MSB). The
bit stream formed from these bytes will be the bit stream with the MSB
(bit 7) of the first byte first, going down to bit 0 of the first
byte, and then the MSB of the second byte and so on.

With this in mind, we can sketch an implementation of the CRC
division. For the purposes of example, consider a poly with W=4 and
the poly=10111. Then, the perform the division, we need to use a 4-bit
register:

                  3   2   1   0   Bits
                +---+---+---+---+
       Pop! <-- |   |   |   |   | <----- Augmented message
                +---+---+---+---+

             1    0   1   1   1   = The Poly

(Reminder: The augmented message is the message followed by W zero bits.)

To perform the division perform the following:

   Load the register with zero bits.
   Augment the message by appending W zero bits to the end of it.
   While (more message bits)
      Begin
      Shift the register left by one bit, reading the next bit of the
         augmented message into register bit position 0.
      If (a 1 bit popped out of the register during step 3)
         Register = Register XOR Poly.
      End
   The register now contains the remainder.

(Note: In practice, the IF condition can be tested by testing the top
 bit of R before performing the shift.)

We will call this algorithm "SIMPLE".

This might look a bit messy, but all we are really doing is
"subtracting" various powers (i.e. shiftings) of the poly from the
message until there is nothing left but the remainder. Study the
manual examples of long division if you don't understand this.

It should be clear that the above algorithm will work for any width W.


9. A Table-Driven Implementation
--------------------------------
The SIMPLE algorithm above is a good starting point because it
corresponds directly to the theory presented so far, and because it is
so SIMPLE. However, because it operates at the bit level, it is rather
awkward to code (even in C), and inefficient to execute (it has to
loop once for each bit). To speed it up, we need to find a way to
enable the algorithm to process the message in units larger than one
bit. Candidate quantities are nibbles (4 bits), bytes (8 bits), words
(16 bits) and longwords (32 bits) and higher if we can achieve it. Of
these, 4 bits is best avoided because it does not correspond to a byte
boundary. At the very least, any speedup should allow us to operate at
byte boundaries, and in fact most of the table driven algorithms
operate a byte at a time.

For the purposes of discussion, let us switch from a 4-bit poly to a
32-bit one. Our register looks much the same, except the boxes
represent bytes instead of bits, and the Poly is 33 bits (one implicit
1 bit at the top and 32 "active" bits) (W=32).

                   3    2    1    0   Bytes
                +----+----+----+----+
       Pop! <-- |    |    |    |    | <----- Augmented message
                +----+----+----+----+

               1<------32 bits------>

The SIMPLE algorithm is still applicable. Let us examine what it does.
Imagine that the SIMPLE algorithm is in full swing and consider the
top 8 bits of the 32-bit register (byte 3) to have the values:

   t7 t6 t5 t4 t3 t2 t1 t0

In the next iteration of SIMPLE, t7 will determine whether the Poly
will be XORed into the entire register. If t7=1, this will happen,
otherwise it will not. Suppose that the top 8 bits of the poly are g7
g6.. g0, then after the next iteration, the top byte will be:

        t6 t5 t4 t3 t2 t1 t0 ??
+ t7 * (g7 g6 g5 g4 g3 g2 g1 g0)    [Reminder: + is XOR]

The NEW top bit (that will control what happens in the next iteration)
now has the value t6 + t7*g7. The important thing to notice here is
that from an informational point of view, all the information required
to calculate the NEW top bit was present in the top TWO bits of the
original top byte. Similarly, the NEXT top bit can be calculated in
advance SOLELY from the top THREE bits t7, t6, and t5. In fact, in
general, the value of the top bit in the register in k iterations can
be calculated from the top k bits of the register. Let us take this
for granted for a moment.

Consider for a moment that we use the top 8 bits of the register to
calculate the value of the top bit of the register during the next 8
iterations. Suppose that we drive the next 8 iterations using the
calculated values (which we could perhaps store in a single byte
register and shift out to pick off each bit). Then we note three
things:

   * The top byte of the register now doesn't matter. No matter how
     many times and at what offset the poly is XORed to the top 8
     bits, they will all be shifted out the right hand side during the
     next 8 iterations anyway.


   * The remaining bits will be shifted left one position and the
     rightmost byte of the register will be shifted in the next byte

   AND

   * While all this is going on, the register will be subjected to a
     series of XOR's in accordance with the bits of the pre-calculated
     control byte.

Now consider the effect of XORing in a constant value at various
offsets to a register. For example:

       0100010  Register
       ...0110  XOR this
       ..0110.  XOR this
       0110...  XOR this
       -------
       0011000
       -------

The point of this is that you can XOR constant values into a register
to your heart's delight, and in the end, there will exist a value
which when XORed in with the original register will have the same
effect as all the other XORs.

Perhaps you can see the solution now. Putting all the pieces together
we have an algorithm that goes like this:

   While (augmented message is not exhausted)
      Begin
      Examine the top byte of the register
      Calculate the control byte from the top byte of the register
      Sum all the Polys at various offsets that are to be XORed into
         the register in accordance with the control byte
      Shift the register left by one byte, reading a new message byte
         into the rightmost byte of the register
      XOR the summed polys to the register
      End

As it stands this is not much better than the SIMPLE algorithm.
However, it turns out that most of the calculation can be precomputed
and assembled into a table. As a result, the above algorithm can be
reduced to:

   While (augmented message is not exhaused)
      Begin
      Top = top_byte(Register);
      Register = (Register << 24) | next_augmessage_byte;
      Register = Register XOR precomputed_table[Top];
      End

There! If you understand this, you've grasped the main idea of
table-driven CRC algorithms. The above is a very efficient algorithm
requiring just a shift, and OR, an XOR, and a table lookup per byte.
Graphically, it looks like this:

                   3    2    1    0   Bytes
                +----+----+----+----+
         +-----<|    |    |    |    | <----- Augmented message
         |      +----+----+----+----+
         |                ^
         |                |
         |               XOR
         |                |
         |     0+----+----+----+----+       Algorithm
         v      +----+----+----+----+       ---------
         |      +----+----+----+----+       1. Shift the register left by
         |      +----+----+----+----+          one byte, reading in a new
         |      +----+----+----+----+          message byte.
         |      +----+----+----+----+       2. Use the top byte just rotated
         |      +----+----+----+----+          out of the register to index
         +----->+----+----+----+----+          the table of 256 32-bit
values.
                +----+----+----+----+       3. XOR the table value into the
                +----+----+----+----+          register.
                +----+----+----+----+       4. Goto 1 iff more augmented
                +----+----+----+----+          message bytes.
             255+----+----+----+----+


In C, the algorithm main loop looks like this:

   r=0;
   while (len--)
     {
      byte t = (r >> 24) & 0xFF;
      r = (r << 8) | *p++;
      r^=table[t];
     }

where len is the length of the augmented message in bytes, p points to
the augmented message, r is the register, t is a temporary, and table
is the computed table. This code can be made even more unreadable as
follows:

   r=0; while (len--) r = ((r << 8) | *p++) ^ t[(r >> 24) & 0xFF];

This is a very clean, efficient loop, although not a very obvious one
to the casual observer not versed in CRC theory. We will call this the
TABLE algorithm.


10. A Slightly Mangled Table-Driven Implementation
--------------------------------------------------
Despite the terse beauty of the line

   r=0; while (len--) r = ((r << 8) | *p++) ^ t[(r >> 24) & 0xFF];

those optimizing hackers couldn't leave it alone. The trouble, you
see, is that this loop operates upon the AUGMENTED message and in
order to use this code, you have to append W/8 zero bytes to the end
of the message before pointing p at it. Depending on the run-time
environment, this may or may not be a problem; if the block of data
was handed to us by some other code, it could be a BIG problem. One
alternative is simply to append the following line after the above
loop, once for each zero byte:

      for (i=0; i<W/4; i++) r = (r << 8) ^ t[(r >> 24) & 0xFF];

This looks like a sane enough solution to me. However, at the further
expense of clarity (which, you must admit, is already a pretty scare
commodity in this code) we can reorganize this small loop further so
as to avoid the need to either augment the message with zero bytes, or
to explicitly process zero bytes at the end as above. To explain the
optimization, we return to the processing diagram given earlier.

                   3    2    1    0   Bytes
                +----+----+----+----+
         +-----<|    |    |    |    | <----- Augmented message
         |      +----+----+----+----+
         |                ^
         |                |
         |               XOR
         |                |
         |     0+----+----+----+----+       Algorithm
         v      +----+----+----+----+       ---------
         |      +----+----+----+----+       1. Shift the register left by
         |      +----+----+----+----+          one byte, reading in a new
         |      +----+----+----+----+          message byte.
         |      +----+----+----+----+       2. Use the top byte just rotated
         |      +----+----+----+----+          out of the register to index
         +----->+----+----+----+----+          the table of 256 32-bit
values.
                +----+----+----+----+       3. XOR the table value into the
                +----+----+----+----+          register.
                +----+----+----+----+       4. Goto 1 iff more augmented
                +----+----+----+----+          message bytes.
             255+----+----+----+----+

Now, note the following facts:

TAIL: The W/4 augmented zero bytes that appear at the end of the
      message will be pushed into the register from the right as all
      the other bytes are, but their values (0) will have no effect
      whatsoever on the register because 1) XORing with zero does not
      change the target byte, and 2) the four bytes are never
      propagated out the left side of the register where their
      zeroness might have some sort of influence. Thus, the sole
      function of the W/4 augmented zero bytes is to drive the
      calculation for another W/4 byte cycles so that the end of the
      REAL data passes all the way through the register.

HEAD: If the initial value of the register is zero, the first four
      iterations of the loop will have the sole effect of shifting in
      the first four bytes of the message from the right. This is
      because the first 32 control bits are all zero and so nothing is
      XORed into the register. Even if the initial value is not zero,
      the first 4 byte iterations of the algorithm will have the sole
      effect of shifting the first 4 bytes of the message into the
      register and then XORing them with some constant value (that is
      a function of the initial value of the register).

These facts, combined with the XOR property

   (A xor B) xor C = A xor (B xor C)

mean that message bytes need not actually travel through the W/4 bytes
of the register. Instead, they can be XORed into the top byte just
before it is used to index the lookup table. This leads to the
following modified version of the algorithm.


         +-----<Message (non augmented)
         |
         v         3    2    1    0   Bytes
         |      +----+----+----+----+
        XOR----<|    |    |    |    |
         |      +----+----+----+----+
         |                ^
         |                |
         |               XOR
         |                |
         |     0+----+----+----+----+       Algorithm
         v      +----+----+----+----+       ---------
         |      +----+----+----+----+       1. Shift the register left by
         |      +----+----+----+----+          one byte, reading in a new
         |      +----+----+----+----+          message byte.
         |      +----+----+----+----+       2. XOR the top byte just rotated
         |      +----+----+----+----+          out of the register with the
         +----->+----+----+----+----+          next message byte to yield an
                +----+----+----+----+          index into the table
([0,255]).
                +----+----+----+----+       3. XOR the table value into the
                +----+----+----+----+          register.
                +----+----+----+----+       4. Goto 1 iff more augmented
             255+----+----+----+----+          message bytes.


Note: The initial register value for this algorithm must be the
initial value of the register for the previous algorithm fed through
the table four times. Note: The table is such that if the previous
algorithm used 0, the new algorithm will too.

This is an IDENTICAL algorithm and will yield IDENTICAL results. The C
code looks something like this:

   r=0; while (len--) r = (r<<8) ^ t[(r >> 24) ^ *p++];

and THIS is the code that you are likely to find inside current
table-driven CRC implementations. Some FF masks might have to be ANDed
in here and there for portability's sake, but basically, the above
loop is IT. We will call this the DIRECT TABLE ALGORITHM.

During the process of trying to understand all this stuff, I managed
to derive the SIMPLE algorithm and the table-driven version derived
from that. However, when I compared my code with the code found in
real-implementations, I was totally bamboozled as to why the bytes
were being XORed in at the wrong end of the register! It took quite a
while before I figured out that theirs and my algorithms were actually
the same. Part of why I am writing this document is that, while the
link between division and my earlier table-driven code is vaguely
apparent, any such link is fairly well erased when you start pumping
bytes in at the "wrong end" of the register. It looks all wrong!

If you've got this far, you not only understand the theory, the
practice, the optimized practice, but you also understand the real
code you are likely to run into. Could get any more complicated? Yes
it can.


11. "Reflected" Table-Driven Implementations
--------------------------------------------
Despite the fact that the above code is probably optimized about as
much as it could be, this did not stop some enterprising individuals
from making things even more complicated. To understand how this
happened, we have to enter the world of hardware.

DEFINITION: A value/register is reflected if it's bits are swapped
around its centre. For example: 0101 is the 4-bit reflection of 1010.
0011 is the reflection of 1100.
0111-0101-1010-1111-0010-0101-1011-1100 is the reflection of
0011-1101-1010-0100-1111-0101-1010-1110.

Turns out that UARTs (those handy little chips that perform serial IO)
are in the habit of transmitting each byte with the least significant
bit (bit 0) first and the most significant bit (bit 7) last (i.e.
reflected). An effect of this convention is that hardware engineers
constructing hardware CRC calculators that operate at the bit level
took to calculating CRCs of bytes streams with each of the bytes
reflected within itself. The bytes are processed in the same order,
but the bits in each byte are swapped; bit 0 is now bit 7, bit 1 is
now bit 6, and so on. Now this wouldn't matter much if this convention
was restricted to hardware land. However it seems that at some stage
some of these CRC values were presented at the software level and
someone had to write some code that would interoperate with the
hardware CRC calculation.

In this situation, a normal sane software engineer would simply
reflect each byte before processing it. However, it would seem that
normal sane software engineers were thin on the ground when this early
ground was being broken, because instead of reflecting the bytes,
whoever was responsible held down the byte and reflected the world,
leading to the following "reflected" algorithm which is identical to
the previous one except that everything is reflected except the input
bytes.


             Message (non augmented) >-----+
                                           |
           Bytes   0    1    2    3        v
                +----+----+----+----+      |
                |    |    |    |    |>----XOR
                +----+----+----+----+      |
                          ^                |
                          |                |
                         XOR               |
                          |                |
                +----+----+----+----+0     |
                +----+----+----+----+      v
                +----+----+----+----+      |
                +----+----+----+----+      |
                +----+----+----+----+      |
                +----+----+----+----+      |
                +----+----+----+----+      |
                +----+----+----+----+<-----+
                +----+----+----+----+
                +----+----+----+----+
                +----+----+----+----+
                +----+----+----+----+
                +----+----+----+----+255

Notes:

   * The table is identical to the one in the previous algorithm
   except that each entry has been reflected.

   * The initial value of the register is the same as in the previous
   algorithm except that it has been reflected.

   * The bytes of the message are processed in the same order as
   before (i.e. the message itself is not reflected).

   * The message bytes themselves don't need to be explicitly
   reflected, because everything else has been!

At the end of execution, the register contains the reflection of the
final CRC value (remainder). Actually, I'm being rather hard on
whoever cooked this up because it seems that hardware implementations
of the CRC algorithm used the reflected checksum value and so
producing a reflected CRC was just right. In fact reflecting the world
was probably a good engineering solution - if a confusing one.

We will call this the REFLECTED algorithm.

Whether or not it made sense at the time, the effect of having
reflected algorithms kicking around the world's FTP sites is that
about half the CRC implementations one runs into are reflected and the
other half not. It's really terribly confusing. In particular, it
would seem to me that the casual reader who runs into a reflected,
table-driven implementation with the bytes "fed in the wrong end"
would have Buckley's chance of ever connecting the code to the concept
of binary mod 2 division.

It couldn't get any more confusing could it? Yes it could.


12. "Reversed" Polys
--------------------
As if reflected implementations weren't enough, there is another
concept kicking around which makes the situation bizaarly confusing.
The concept is reversed Polys.

It turns out that the reflection of good polys tend to be good polys
too! That is, if G=11101 is a good poly value, then 10111 will be as
well. As a consequence, it seems that every time an organization (such
as CCITT) standardizes on a particularly good poly ("polynomial"),
those in the real world can't leave the poly's reflection alone
either. They just HAVE to use it. As a result, the set of "standard"
poly's has a corresponding set of reflections, which are also in use.
To avoid confusion, we will call these the "reversed" polys.

   X25   standard: 1-0001-0000-0010-0001
   X25   reversed: 1-0000-1000-0001-0001

   CRC16 standard: 1-1000-0000-0000-0101
   CRC16 reversed: 1-0100-0000-0000-0011

Note that here it is the entire poly that is being reflected/reversed,
not just the bottom W bits. This is an important distinction. In the
reflected algorithm described in the previous section, the poly used
in the reflected algorithm was actually identical to that used in the
non-reflected algorithm; all that had happened is that the bytes had
effectively been reflected. As such, all the 16-bit/32-bit numbers in
the algorithm had to be reflected. In contrast, the ENTIRE poly
includes the implicit one bit at the top, and so reversing a poly is
not the same as reflecting its bottom 16 or 32 bits.

The upshot of all this is that a reflected algorithm is not equivalent
to the original algorithm with the poly reflected. Actually, this is
probably less confusing than if they were duals.

If all this seems a bit unclear, don't worry, because we're going to
sort it all out "real soon now". Just one more section to go before
that.


13. Initial and Final Values
----------------------------
In addition to the complexity already seen, CRC algorithms differ from
each other in two other regards:

   * The initial value of the register.

   * The value to be XORed with the final register value.

For example, the "CRC32" algorithm initializes its register to
FFFFFFFF and XORs the final register value with FFFFFFFF.

Most CRC algorithms initialize their register to zero. However, some
initialize it to a non-zero value. In theory (i.e. with no assumptions
about the message), the initial value has no affect on the strength of
the CRC algorithm, the initial value merely providing a fixed starting
point from which the register value can progress. However, in
practice, some messages are more likely than others, and it is wise to
initialize the CRC algorithm register to a value that does not have
"blind spots" that are likely to occur in practice. By "blind spot" is
meant a sequence of message bytes that do not result in the register
changing its value. In particular, any CRC algorithm that initializes
its register to zero will have a blind spot of zero when it starts up
and will be unable to "count" a leading run of zero bytes. As a
leading run of zero bytes is quite common in real messages, it is wise
to initialize the algorithm register to a non-zero value.


14. Defining Algorithms Absolutely
----------------------------------
At this point we have covered all the different aspects of
table-driven CRC algorithms. As there are so many variations on these
algorithms, it is worth trying to establish a nomenclature for them.
This section attempts to do that.

We have seen that CRC algorithms vary in:

   * Width of the poly (polynomial).
   * Value of the poly.
   * Initial value for the register.
   * Whether the bits of each byte are reflected before being processed.
   * Whether the algorithm feeds input bytes through the register or
     xors them with a byte from one end and then straight into the table.
   * Whether the final register value should be reversed (as in reflected
     versions).
   * Value to XOR with the final register value.

In order to be able to talk about particular CRC algorithms, we need
to able to define them more precisely than this. For this reason, the
next section attempts to provide a well-defined parameterized model
for CRC algorithms. To refer to a particular algorithm, we need then
simply specify the algorithm in terms of parameters to the model.


15. A Parameterized Model For CRC Algorithms
--------------------------------------------
In this section we define a precise parameterized model CRC algorithm
which, for want of a better name, we will call the "Rocksoft^tm Model
CRC Algorithm" (and why not? Rocksoft^tm could do with some free
advertising :-).

The most important aspect of the model algorithm is that it focusses
exclusively on functionality, ignoring all implementation details. The
aim of the exercise is to construct a way of referring precisely to
particular CRC algorithms, regardless of how confusingly they are
implemented. To this end, the model must be as simple and precise as
possible, with as little confusion as possible.

The Rocksoft^tm Model CRC Algorithm is based essentially on the DIRECT
TABLE ALGORITHM specified earlier. However, the algorithm has to be
further parameterized to enable it to behave in the same way as some
of the messier algorithms out in the real world.

To enable the algorithm to behave like reflected algorithms, we
provide a boolean option to reflect the input bytes, and a boolean
option to specify whether to reflect the output checksum value. By
framing reflection as an input/output transformation, we avoid the
confusion of having to mentally map the parameters of reflected and
non-reflected algorithms.

An extra parameter allows the algorithm's register to be initialized
to a particular value. A further parameter is XORed with the final
value before it is returned.

By putting all these pieces together we end up with the parameters of
the algorithm:

   NAME: This is a name given to the algorithm. A string value.

   WIDTH: This is the width of the algorithm expressed in bits. This
   is one less than the width of the Poly.

   POLY: This parameter is the poly. This is a binary value that
   should be specified as a hexadecimal number. The top bit of the
   poly should be omitted. For example, if the poly is 10110, you
   should specify 06. An important aspect of this parameter is that it
   represents the unreflected poly; the bottom bit of this parameter
   is always the LSB of the divisor during the division regardless of
   whether the algorithm being modelled is reflected.

   INIT: This parameter specifies the initial value of the register
   when the algorithm starts. This is the value that is to be assigned
   to the register in the direct table algorithm. In the table
   algorithm, we may think of the register always commencing with the
   value zero, and this value being XORed into the register after the
   N'th bit iteration. This parameter should be specified as a
   hexadecimal number.

   REFIN: This is a boolean parameter. If it is FALSE, input bytes are
   processed with bit 7 being treated as the most significant bit
   (MSB) and bit 0 being treated as the least significant bit. If this
   parameter is FALSE, each byte is reflected before being processed.

   REFOUT: This is a boolean parameter. If it is set to FALSE, the
   final value in the register is fed into the XOROUT stage directly,
   otherwise, if this parameter is TRUE, the final register value is
   reflected first.

   XOROUT: This is an W-bit value that should be specified as a
   hexadecimal number. It is XORed to the final register value (after
   the REFOUT) stage before the value is returned as the official
   checksum.

   CHECK: This field is not strictly part of the definition, and, in
   the event of an inconsistency between this field and the other
   field, the other fields take precedence. This field is a check
   value that can be used as a weak validator of implementations of
   the algorithm. The field contains the checksum obtained when the
   ASCII string "123456789" is fed through the specified algorithm
   (i.e. 313233... (hexadecimal)).

With these parameters defined, the model can now be used to specify a
particular CRC algorithm exactly. Here is an example specification for
a popular form of the CRC-16 algorithm.

   Name   : "CRC-16"
   Width  : 16
   Poly   : 8005
   Init   : 0000
   RefIn  : True
   RefOut : True
   XorOut : 0000
   Check  : BB3D


16. A Catalog of Parameter Sets for Standards
---------------------------------------------
At this point, I would like to give a list of the specifications for
commonly used CRC algorithms. However, most of the algorithms that I
have come into contact with so far are specified in such a vague way
that this has not been possible. What I can provide is a list of polys
for various CRC standards I have heard of:

   X25   standard : 1021       [CRC-CCITT, ADCCP, SDLC/HDLC]
   X25   reversed : 0811

   CRC16 standard : 8005
   CRC16 reversed : 4003       [LHA]

   CRC32          : 04C11DB7   [PKZIP, AUTODIN II, Ethernet, FDDI]

I would be interested in hearing from anyone out there who can tie
down the complete set of model parameters for any of these standards.

However, a program that was kicking around seemed to imply the
following specifications. Can anyone confirm or deny them (or provide
the check values (which I couldn't be bothered coding up and
calculating)).

   Name   : "CRC-16/CITT"
   Width  : 16
   Poly   : 1021
   Init   : FFFF
   RefIn  : False
   RefOut : False
   XorOut : 0000
   Check  : ?


   Name   : "XMODEM"
   Width  : 16
   Poly   : 8408
   Init   : 0000
   RefIn  : True
   RefOut : True
   XorOut : 0000
   Check  : ?


   Name   : "ARC"
   Width  : 16
   Poly   : 8005
   Init   : 0000
   RefIn  : True
   RefOut : True
   XorOut : 0000
   Check  : ?

Here is the specification for the CRC-32 algorithm which is reportedly
used in PKZip, AUTODIN II, Ethernet, and FDDI.

   Name   : "CRC-32"
   Width  : 32
   Poly   : 04C11DB7
   Init   : FFFFFFFF
   RefIn  : True
   RefOut : True
   XorOut : FFFFFFFF
   Check  : CBF43926


17. An Implementation of the Model Algorithm
--------------------------------------------
Here is an implementation of the model algorithm in the C programming
language. The implementation consists of a header file (.h) and an
implementation file (.c). If you're reading this document in a
sequential scroller, you can skip this code by searching for the
string "Roll Your Own".

To ensure that the following code is working, configure it for the
CRC-16 and CRC-32 algorithms given above and ensure that they produce
the specified "check" checksum when fed the test string "123456789"
(see earlier).

/***************************************************************************
***/
/*                             Start of crcmodel.h
*/
/***************************************************************************
***/
/*
*/
/* Author : Ross Williams (ross@guest.adelaide.edu.au.).
*/
/* Date   : 3 June 1993.
*/
/* Status : Public domain.
*/
/*
*/
/* Description : This is the header (.h) file for the reference
*/
/* implementation of the Rocksoft^tm Model CRC Algorithm. For more
*/
/* information on the Rocksoft^tm Model CRC Algorithm, see the document
*/
/* titled "A Painless Guide to CRC Error Detection Algorithms" by Ross
*/
/* Williams (ross@guest.adelaide.edu.au.). This document is likely to be in
*/
/* "ftp.adelaide.edu.au/pub/rocksoft".
*/
/*
*/
/* Note: Rocksoft is a trademark of Rocksoft Pty Ltd, Adelaide, Australia.
*/
/*
*/
/***************************************************************************
***/
/*
*/
/* How to Use This Package
*/
/* -----------------------
*/
/* Step 1: Declare a variable of type cm_t. Declare another variable
*/
/*         (p_cm say) of type p_cm_t and initialize it to point to the first
*/
/*         variable (e.g. p_cm_t p_cm = &cm_t).
*/
/*
*/
/* Step 2: Assign values to the parameter fields of the structure.
*/
/*         If you don't know what to assign, see the document cited earlier.
*/
/*         For example:
*/
/*            p_cm->cm_width = 16;
*/
/*            p_cm->cm_poly  = 0x8005L;
*/
/*            p_cm->cm_init  = 0L;
*/
/*            p_cm->cm_refin = TRUE;
*/
/*            p_cm->cm_refot = TRUE;
*/
/*            p_cm->cm_xorot = 0L;
*/
/*         Note: Poly is specified without its top bit (18005 becomes 8005).
*/
/*         Note: Width is one bit less than the raw poly width.
*/
/*
*/
/* Step 3: Initialize the instance with a call cm_ini(p_cm);
*/
/*
*/
/* Step 4: Process zero or more message bytes by placing zero or more
*/
/*         successive calls to cm_nxt. Example: cm_nxt(p_cm,ch);
*/
/*
*/
/* Step 5: Extract the CRC value at any time by calling crc = cm_crc(p_cm);
*/
/*         If the CRC is a 16-bit value, it will be in the bottom 16 bits.
*/
/*
*/
/***************************************************************************
***/
/*
*/
/* Design Notes
*/
/* ------------
*/
/* PORTABILITY: This package has been coded very conservatively so that
*/
/* it will run on as many machines as possible. For example, all external
*/
/* identifiers have been restricted to 6 characters and all internal ones to
*/
/* 8 characters. The prefix cm (for Crc Model) is used as an attempt to
avoid */
/* namespace collisions. This package is endian independent.
*/
/*
*/
/* EFFICIENCY: This package (and its interface) is not designed for
*/
/* speed. The purpose of this package is to act as a well-defined reference
*/
/* model for the specification of CRC algorithms. If you want speed, cook up
*/
/* a specific table-driven implementation as described in the document cited
*/
/* above. This package is designed for validation only; if you have found or
*/
/* implemented a CRC algorithm and wish to describe it as a set of
parameters */
/* to the Rocksoft^tm Model CRC Algorithm, your CRC algorithm implementation
*/
/* should behave identically to this package under those parameters.
*/
/*
*/
/***************************************************************************
***/

/* The following #ifndef encloses this entire */
/* header file, rendering it indempotent.     */
#ifndef CM_DONE
#define CM_DONE

/***************************************************************************
***/

/* The following definitions are extracted from my style header file which
*/
/* would be cumbersome to distribute with this package. The DONE_STYLE is
the */
/* idempotence symbol used in my style header file.
*/

#ifndef DONE_STYLE

typedef unsigned long   ulong;
typedef unsigned        bool;
typedef unsigned char * p_ubyte_;

#ifndef TRUE
#define FALSE 0
#define TRUE  1
#endif

/* Change to the second definition if you don't have prototypes. */
#define P_(A) A
/* #define P_(A) () */

/* Uncomment this definition if you don't have void. */
/* typedef int void; */

#endif

/***************************************************************************
***/

/* CRC Model Abstract Type */
/* ----------------------- */
/* The following type stores the context of an executing instance of the  */
/* model algorithm. Most of the fields are model parameters which must be */
/* set before the first initializing call to cm_ini.                      */
typedef struct
  {
   int   cm_width;   /* Parameter: Width in bits [8,32].       */
   ulong cm_poly;    /* Parameter: The algorithm's polynomial. */
   ulong cm_init;    /* Parameter: Initial register value.     */
   bool  cm_refin;   /* Parameter: Reflect input bytes?        */
   bool  cm_refot;   /* Parameter: Reflect output CRC?         */
   ulong cm_xorot;   /* Parameter: XOR this to output CRC.     */

   ulong cm_reg;     /* Context: Context during execution.     */
  } cm_t;
typedef cm_t *p_cm_t;

/***************************************************************************
***/

/* Functions That Implement The Model */
/* ---------------------------------- */
/* The following functions animate the cm_t abstraction. */

void cm_ini P_((p_cm_t p_cm));
/* Initializes the argument CRC model instance.          */
/* All parameter fields must be set before calling this. */

void cm_nxt P_((p_cm_t p_cm,int ch));
/* Processes a single message byte [0,255]. */

void cm_blk P_((p_cm_t p_cm,p_ubyte_ blk_adr,ulong blk_len));
/* Processes a block of message bytes. */

ulong cm_crc P_((p_cm_t p_cm));
/* Returns the CRC value for the message bytes processed so far. */

/***************************************************************************
***/

/* Functions For Table Calculation */
/* ------------------------------- */
/* The following function can be used to calculate a CRC lookup table.
*/
/* It can also be used at run-time to create or check static tables.
*/

ulong cm_tab P_((p_cm_t p_cm,int index));
/* Returns the i'th entry for the lookup table for the specified algorithm.
*/
/* The function examines the fields cm_width, cm_poly, cm_refin, and the
*/
/* argument table index in the range [0,255] and returns the table entry in
*/
/* the bottom cm_width bytes of the return value.
*/

/***************************************************************************
***/

/* End of the header file idempotence #ifndef */
#endif

/***************************************************************************
***/
/*                             End of crcmodel.h
*/
/***************************************************************************
***/


/***************************************************************************
***/
/*                             Start of crcmodel.c
*/
/***************************************************************************
***/
/*
*/
/* Author : Ross Williams (ross@guest.adelaide.edu.au.).
*/
/* Date   : 3 June 1993.
*/
/* Status : Public domain.
*/
/*
*/
/* Description : This is the implementation (.c) file for the reference
*/
/* implementation of the Rocksoft^tm Model CRC Algorithm. For more
*/
/* information on the Rocksoft^tm Model CRC Algorithm, see the document
*/
/* titled "A Painless Guide to CRC Error Detection Algorithms" by Ross
*/
/* Williams (ross@guest.adelaide.edu.au.). This document is likely to be in
*/
/* "ftp.adelaide.edu.au/pub/rocksoft".
*/
/*
*/
/* Note: Rocksoft is a trademark of Rocksoft Pty Ltd, Adelaide, Australia.
*/
/*
*/
/***************************************************************************
***/
/*
*/
/* Implementation Notes
*/
/* --------------------
*/
/* To avoid inconsistencies, the specification of each function is not
echoed */
/* here. See the header file for a description of these functions.
*/
/* This package is light on checking because I want to keep it short and
*/
/* simple and portable (i.e. it would be too messy to distribute my entire
*/
/* C culture (e.g. assertions package) with this package.
*/
/*
*/
/***************************************************************************
***/

#include "crcmodel.h"

/***************************************************************************
***/

/* The following definitions make the code more readable. */

#define BITMASK(X) (1L << (X))
#define MASK32 0xFFFFFFFFL
#define LOCAL static

/***************************************************************************
***/

LOCAL ulong reflect P_((ulong v,int b));
LOCAL ulong reflect (v,b)
/* Returns the value v with the bottom b [0,32] bits reflected. */
/* Example: reflect(0x3e23L,3) == 0x3e26                        */
ulong v;
int   b;
{
 int   i;
 ulong t = v;
 for (i=0; i<b; i++)
   {
    if (t & 1L)
       v|=  BITMASK((b-1)-i);
    else
       v&= ~BITMASK((b-1)-i);
    t>>=1;
   }
 return v;
}

/***************************************************************************
***/

LOCAL ulong widmask P_((p_cm_t));
LOCAL ulong widmask (p_cm)
/* Returns a longword whose value is (2^p_cm->cm_width)-1.     */
/* The trick is to do this portably (e.g. without doing <<32). */
p_cm_t p_cm;
{
 return (((1L<<(p_cm->cm_width-1))-1L)<<1)|1L;
}

/***************************************************************************
***/

void cm_ini (p_cm)
p_cm_t p_cm;
{
 p_cm->cm_reg = p_cm->cm_init;
}

/***************************************************************************
***/

void cm_nxt (p_cm,ch)
p_cm_t p_cm;
int    ch;
{
 int   i;
 ulong uch  = (ulong) ch;
 ulong topbit = BITMASK(p_cm->cm_width-1);

 if (p_cm->cm_refin) uch = reflect(uch,8);
 p_cm->cm_reg ^= (uch << (p_cm->cm_width-8));
 for (i=0; i<8; i++)
   {
    if (p_cm->cm_reg & topbit)
       p_cm->cm_reg = (p_cm->cm_reg << 1) ^ p_cm->cm_poly;
    else
       p_cm->cm_reg <<= 1;
    p_cm->cm_reg &= widmask(p_cm);
   }
}

/***************************************************************************
***/

void cm_blk (p_cm,blk_adr,blk_len)
p_cm_t   p_cm;
p_ubyte_ blk_adr;
ulong    blk_len;
{
 while (blk_len--) cm_nxt(p_cm,*blk_adr++);
}

/***************************************************************************
***/

ulong cm_crc (p_cm)
p_cm_t p_cm;
{
 if (p_cm->cm_refot)
    return p_cm->cm_xorot ^ reflect(p_cm->cm_reg,p_cm->cm_width);
 else
    return p_cm->cm_xorot ^ p_cm->cm_reg;
}

/***************************************************************************
***/

ulong cm_tab (p_cm,index)
p_cm_t p_cm;
int    index;
{
 int   i;
 ulong r;
 ulong topbit = BITMASK(p_cm->cm_width-1);
 ulong inbyte = (ulong) index;

 if (p_cm->cm_refin) inbyte = reflect(inbyte,8);
 r = inbyte << (p_cm->cm_width-8);
 for (i=0; i<8; i++)
    if (r & topbit)
       r = (r << 1) ^ p_cm->cm_poly;
    else
       r<<=1;
 if (p_cm->cm_refin) r = reflect(r,p_cm->cm_width);
 return r & widmask(p_cm);
}

/***************************************************************************
***/
/*                             End of crcmodel.c
*/
/***************************************************************************
***/


18. Roll Your Own Table-Driven Implementation
---------------------------------------------
Despite all the fuss I've made about understanding and defining CRC
algorithms, the mechanics of their high-speed implementation remains
trivial. There are really only two forms: normal and reflected. Normal
shifts to the left and covers the case of algorithms with Refin=FALSE
and Refot=FALSE. Reflected shifts to the right and covers algorithms
with both those parameters true. (If you want one parameter true and
the other false, you'll have to figure it out for yourself!) The
polynomial is embedded in the lookup table (to be discussed). The
other parameters, Init and XorOt can be coded as macros. Here is the
32-bit normal form (the 16-bit form is similar).

   unsigned long crc_normal ();
   unsigned long crc_normal (blk_adr,blk_len)
   unsigned char *blk_adr;
   unsigned long  blk_len;
   {
    unsigned long crc = INIT;
    while (blk_len--)
       crc = crctable[((crc>>24) ^ *blk_adr++) & 0xFFL] ^ (crc << 8);
    return crc ^ XOROT;
   }

Here is the reflected form:

   unsigned long crc_reflected ();
   unsigned long crc_reflected (blk_adr,blk_len)
   unsigned char *blk_adr;
   unsigned long  blk_len;
   {
    unsigned long crc = INIT_REFLECTED;
    while (blk_len--)
       crc = crctable[(crc ^ *blk_adr++) & 0xFFL] ^ (crc >> 8));
    return crc ^ XOROT;
   }

Note: I have carefully checked the above two code fragments, but I
haven't actually compiled or tested them. This shouldn't matter to
you, as, no matter WHAT you code, you will always be able to tell if
you have got it right by running whatever you have created against the
reference model given earlier. The code fragments above are really
just a rough guide. The reference model is the definitive guide.

Note: If you don't care much about speed, just use the reference model
code!


19. Generating A Lookup Table
-----------------------------
The only component missing from the normal and reversed code fragments
in the previous section is the lookup table. The lookup table can be
computed at run time using the cm_tab function of the model package
given earlier, or can be pre-computed and inserted into the C program.
In either case, it should be noted that the lookup table depends only
on the POLY and RefIn (and RefOt) parameters. Basically, the
polynomial determines the table, but you can generate a reflected
table too if you want to use the reflected form above.

The following program generates any desired 16-bit or 32-bit lookup
table. Skip to the word "Summary" if you want to skip over this code.



/***************************************************************************
***/
/*                             Start of crctable.c
*/
/***************************************************************************
***/
/*
*/
/* Author  : Ross Williams (ross@guest.adelaide.edu.au.).
*/
/* Date    : 3 June 1993.
*/
/* Version : 1.0.
*/
/* Status  : Public domain.
*/
/*
*/
/* Description : This program writes a CRC lookup table (suitable for
*/
/* inclusion in a C program) to a designated output file. The program can be
*/
/* statically configured to produce any table covered by the Rocksoft^tm
*/
/* Model CRC Algorithm. For more information on the Rocksoft^tm Model CRC
*/
/* Algorithm, see the document titled "A Painless Guide to CRC Error
*/
/* Detection Algorithms" by Ross Williams (ross@guest.adelaide.edu.au.).
This */
/* document is likely to be in "ftp.adelaide.edu.au/pub/rocksoft".
*/
/*
*/
/* Note: Rocksoft is a trademark of Rocksoft Pty Ltd, Adelaide, Australia.
*/
/*
*/
/***************************************************************************
***/

#include <stdio.h>
#include <stdlib.h>
#include "crcmodel.h"

/***************************************************************************
***/

/* TABLE PARAMETERS
*/
/* ================
*/
/* The following parameters entirely determine the table to be generated.
You */
/* should need to modify only the definitions in this section before running
*/
/* this program.
*/
/*
*/
/*    TB_FILE  is the name of the output file.
*/
/*    TB_WIDTH is the table width in bytes (either 2 or 4).
*/
/*    TB_POLY  is the "polynomial", which must be TB_WIDTH bytes wide.
*/
/*    TB_REVER indicates whether the table is to be reversed (reflected).
*/
/*
*/
/* Example:
*/
/*
*/
/*    #define TB_FILE   "crctable.out"
*/
/*    #define TB_WIDTH  2
*/
/*    #define TB_POLY   0x8005L
*/
/*    #define TB_REVER  TRUE
*/

#define TB_FILE   "crctable.out"
#define TB_WIDTH  4
#define TB_POLY   0x04C11DB7L
#define TB_REVER  TRUE

/***************************************************************************
***/

/* Miscellaneous definitions. */

#define LOCAL static
FILE *outfile;
#define WR(X) fprintf(outfile,(X))
#define WP(X,Y) fprintf(outfile,(X),(Y))

/***************************************************************************
***/

LOCAL void chk_err P_((char *));
LOCAL void chk_err (mess)
/* If mess is non-empty, write it out and abort. Otherwise, check the error
*/
/* status of outfile and abort if an error has occurred.
*/
char *mess;
{
 if (mess[0] != 0   ) {printf("%s\n",mess); exit(EXIT_FAILURE);}
 if (ferror(outfile)) {perror("chk_err");   exit(EXIT_FAILURE);}
}

/***************************************************************************
***/

LOCAL void chkparam P_((void));
LOCAL void chkparam ()
{
 if ((TB_WIDTH != 2) && (TB_WIDTH != 4))
    chk_err("chkparam: Width parameter is illegal.");
 if ((TB_WIDTH == 2) && (TB_POLY & 0xFFFF0000L))
    chk_err("chkparam: Poly parameter is too wide.");
 if ((TB_REVER != FALSE) && (TB_REVER != TRUE))
    chk_err("chkparam: Reverse parameter is not boolean.");
}

/***************************************************************************
***/

LOCAL void gentable P_((void));
LOCAL void gentable ()
{

WR("/*****************************************************************/\n");
 WR("/*
*/\n");
 WR("/* CRC LOOKUP TABLE
*/\n");
 WR("/* ================
*/\n");
 WR("/* The following CRC lookup table was generated automagically
*/\n");
 WR("/* by the Rocksoft^tm Model CRC Algorithm Table Generation
*/\n");
 WR("/* Program V1.0 using the following model parameters:
*/\n");
 WR("/*
*/\n");
 WP("/*    Width   : %1lu bytes.
*/\n",
    (ulong) TB_WIDTH);
 if (TB_WIDTH == 2)
 WP("/*    Poly    : 0x%04lX
*/\n",
    (ulong) TB_POLY);
 else
 WP("/*    Poly    : 0x%08lXL                                      */\n",
    (ulong) TB_POLY);
 if (TB_REVER)
 WR("/*    Reverse : TRUE.
*/\n");
 else
 WR("/*    Reverse : FALSE.
*/\n");
 WR("/*
*/\n");
 WR("/* For more information on the Rocksoft^tm Model CRC Algorithm,
*/\n");
 WR("/* see the document titled \"A Painless Guide to CRC Error
*/\n");
 WR("/* Detection Algorithms\" by Ross Williams
*/\n");
 WR("/* (ross@guest.adelaide.edu.au.). This document is likely to be
*/\n");
 WR("/* in the FTP archive \"ftp.adelaide.edu.au/pub/rocksoft\".
*/\n");
 WR("/*
*/\n");

WR("/*****************************************************************/\n");
 WR("\n");
 switch (TB_WIDTH)
   {
    case 2: WR("unsigned short crctable[256] =\n{\n"); break;
    case 4: WR("unsigned long  crctable[256] =\n{\n"); break;
    default: chk_err("gentable: TB_WIDTH is invalid.");
   }
 chk_err("");

 {
  int i;
  cm_t cm;
  char *form    = (TB_WIDTH==2) ? "0x%04lX" : "0x%08lXL";
  int   perline = (TB_WIDTH==2) ? 8 : 4;

  cm.cm_width = TB_WIDTH*8;
  cm.cm_poly  = TB_POLY;
  cm.cm_refin = TB_REVER;

  for (i=0; i<256; i++)
    {
     WR(" ");
     WP(form,(ulong) cm_tab(&cm,i));
     if (i != 255) WR(",");
     if (((i+1) % perline) == 0) WR("\n");
     chk_err("");
    }

 WR("};\n");
 WR("\n");

WR("/*****************************************************************/\n");
 WR("/*                   End of CRC Lookup Table
*/\n");

WR("/*****************************************************************/\n");
 WR("");
 chk_err("");
}
}

/***************************************************************************
***/

main ()
{
 printf("\n");
 printf("Rocksoft^tm Model CRC Algorithm Table Generation Program V1.0\n");
 printf("-------------------------------------------------------------\n");
 printf("Output file is \"%s\".\n",TB_FILE);
 chkparam();
 outfile = fopen(TB_FILE,"w"); chk_err("");
 gentable();
 if (fclose(outfile) != 0)
    chk_err("main: Couldn't close output file.");
 printf("\nSUCCESS: The table has been successfully written.\n");
}

/***************************************************************************
***/
/*                             End of crctable.c
*/
/***************************************************************************
***/

20. Summary
-----------
This document has provided a detailed explanation of CRC algorithms
explaining their theory and stepping through increasingly
sophisticated implementations ranging from simple bit shifting through
to byte-at-a-time table-driven implementations. The various
implementations of different CRC algorithms that make them confusing
to deal with have been explained. A parameterized model algorithm has
been described that can be used to precisely define a particular CRC
algorithm, and a reference implementation provided. Finally, a program
to generate CRC tables has been provided.

21. Corrections
---------------
If you think that any part of this document is unclear or incorrect,
or have any other information, or suggestions on how this document
could be improved, please context the author. In particular, I would
like to hear from anyone who can provide Rocksoft^tm Model CRC
Algorithm parameters for standard algorithms out there.

A. Glossary
-----------
CHECKSUM - A number that has been calculated as a function of some
message. The literal interpretation of this word "Check-Sum" indicates
that the function should involve simply adding up the bytes in the
message. Perhaps this was what early checksums were. Today, however,
although more sophisticated formulae are used, the term "checksum" is
still used.

CRC - This stands for "Cyclic Redundancy Code". Whereas the term
"checksum" seems to be used to refer to any non-cryptographic checking
information unit, the term "CRC" seems to be reserved only for
algorithms that are based on the "polynomial" division idea.

G - This symbol is used in this document to represent the Poly.

MESSAGE - The input data being checksummed. This is usually structured
as a sequence of bytes. Whether the top bit or the bottom bit of each
byte is treated as the most significant or least significant is a
parameter of CRC algorithms.

POLY - This is my friendly term for the polynomial of a CRC.

POLYNOMIAL - The "polynomial" of a CRC algorithm is simply the divisor
in the division implementing the CRC algorithm.

REFLECT - A binary number is reflected by swapping all of its bits
around the central point. For example, 1101 is the reflection of 1011.

ROCKSOFT^TM MODEL CRC ALGORITHM - A parameterized algorithm whose
purpose is to act as a solid reference for describing CRC algorithms.
Typically CRC algorithms are specified by quoting a polynomial.
However, in order to construct a precise implementation, one also
needs to know initialization values and so on.

WIDTH - The width of a CRC algorithm is the width of its polynomical
minus one. For example, if the polynomial is 11010, the width would be
4 bits. The width is usually set to be a multiple of 8 bits.

B. References
-------------
[Griffiths87] Griffiths, G., Carlyle Stones, G., "The Tea-Leaf Reader
Algorithm: An Efficient Implementation of CRC-16 and CRC-32",
Communications of the ACM, 30(7), pp.617-620. Comment: This paper
describes a high-speed table-driven implementation of CRC algorithms.
The technique seems to be a touch messy, and is superceded by the
Sarwete algorithm.

[Knuth81] Knuth, D.E., "The Art of Computer Programming", Volume 2:
Seminumerical Algorithms, Section 4.6.

[Nelson 91] Nelson, M., "The Data Compression Book", M&T Books, (501
Galveston Drive, Redwood City, CA 94063), 1991, ISBN: 1-55851-214-4.
Comment: If you want to see a real implementation of a real 32-bit
checksum algorithm, look on pages 440, and 446-448.

[Sarwate88] Sarwate, D.V., "Computation of Cyclic Redundancy Checks
via Table Look-Up", Communications of the ACM, 31(8), pp.1008-1013.
Comment: This paper describes a high-speed table-driven implementation
for CRC algorithms that is superior to the tea-leaf algorithm.
Although this paper describes the technique used by most modern CRC
implementations, I found the appendix of this paper (where all the
good stuff is) difficult to understand.

[Tanenbaum81] Tanenbaum, A.S., "Computer Networks", Prentice Hall,
1981, ISBN: 0-13-164699-0. Comment: Section 3.5.3 on pages 128 to 132
provides a very clear description of CRC codes. However, it does not
describe table-driven implementation techniques.


C. References I Have Detected But Haven't Yet Sighted
-----------------------------------------------------
Boudreau, Steen, "Cyclic Redundancy Checking by Program," AFIPS
Proceedings, Vol. 39, 1971.

Davies, Barber, "Computer Networks and Their Protocols," J. Wiley &
Sons, 1979.

Higginson, Kirstein, "On the Computation of Cyclic Redundancy Checks
by Program," The Computer Journal (British), Vol. 16, No. 1, Feb 1973.

McNamara, J. E., "Technical Aspects of Data Communication," 2nd
Edition, Digital Press, Bedford, Massachusetts, 1982.

Marton and Frambs, "A Cyclic Redundancy Checking (CRC) Algorithm,"
Honeywell Computer Journal, Vol. 5, No. 3, 1971.

Nelson M., "File verification using CRC", Dr Dobbs Journal, May 1992,
pp.64-67.

Ramabadran T.V., Gaitonde S.S., "A tutorial on CRC computations", IEEE
Micro, Aug 1988.

Schwaderer W.D., "CRC Calculation", April 85 PC Tech Journal,
pp.118-133.

Ward R.K, Tabandeh M., "Error Correction and Detection, A Geometric
Approach" The Computer Journal, Vol. 27, No. 3, 1984, pp.246-253.

Wecker, S., "A Table-Lookup Algorithm for Software Computation of
Cyclic Redundancy Check (CRC)," Digital Equipment Corporation
memorandum, 1974.

--<End of Document>--



------=_NextPart_000_0A09_01C56B69.42F137D0
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD><TITLE></TITLE>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Diso-8859-1">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 5.50.4208.1700" name=3DGENERATOR></HEAD>
<BODY><XMP><FONT face=3DArial color=3D#0000ff size=3D2>Sorry for the =
length of this post</FONT></XMP><XMP><FONT face=3DArial color=3D#0000ff =
size=3D2>Matt</FONT></XMP><XMP><FONT face=3DArial color=3D#0000ff =
size=3D2></FONT>=A0</XMP><XMP>A PAINLESS GUIDE TO CRC ERROR DETECTION =
ALGORITHMS
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=

"Everything you wanted to know about CRC algorithms, but were afraid
to ask for fear that errors in your understanding might be detected."

Version : 3.
Date    : 19 August 1993.
Author  : Ross N. Williams.
Net     : ross@guest.adelaide.edu.au.
FTP     : ftp.adelaide.edu.au/pub/rocksoft/crc_v3.txt
Company : Rocksoft^tm Pty Ltd.
Snail   : 16 Lerwick Avenue, Hazelwood Park 5066, Australia.
Fax     : +61 8 373-4911 (c/- Internode Systems Pty Ltd).
Phone   : +61 8 379-9217 (10am to 10pm Adelaide Australia time).
Note    : "Rocksoft" is a trademark of Rocksoft Pty Ltd, Australia.
Status  : Copyright (C) Ross Williams, 1993. However, permission is
          granted to make and distribute verbatim copies of this
          document provided that this information block and copyright
          notice is included. Also, the C code modules included
          in this document are fully public domain.
Thanks  : Thanks to Jean-loup Gailly (jloup@chorus.fr) and Mark Adler
          (me@quest.jpl.nasa.gov) who both proof read this document
          and picked out lots of nits as well as some big fat bugs.

Table of Contents
-----------------
    Abstract
 1. Introduction: Error Detection
 2. The Need For Complexity
 3. The Basic Idea Behind CRC Algorithms
 4. Polynomical Arithmetic
 5. Binary Arithmetic with No Carries
 6. A Fully Worked Example
 7. Choosing A Poly
 8. A Straightforward CRC Implementation
 9. A Table-Driven Implementation
10. A Slightly Mangled Table-Driven Implementation
11. "Reflected" Table-Driven Implementations
12. "Reversed" Polys
13. Initial and Final Values
14. Defining Algorithms Absolutely
15. A Parameterized Model For CRC Algorithms
16. A Catalog of Parameter Sets for Standards
17. An Implementation of the Model Algorithm
18. Roll Your Own Table-Driven Implementation
19. Generating A Lookup Table
20. Summary
21. Corrections
 A. Glossary
 B. References
 C. References I Have Detected But Haven't Yet Sighted


Abstract
--------
This document explains CRCs (Cyclic Redundancy Codes) and their
table-driven implementations in full, precise detail. Much of the
literature on CRCs, and in particular on their table-driven
implementations, is a little obscure (or at least seems so to me).
This document is an attempt to provide a clear and simple no-nonsense
explanation of CRCs and to absolutely nail down every detail of the
operation of their high-speed implementations. In addition to this,
this document presents a parameterized model CRC algorithm called the
"Rocksoft^tm Model CRC Algorithm". The model algorithm can be
parameterized to behave like most of the CRC implementations around,
and so acts as a good reference for describing particular algorithms.
A low-speed implementation of the model CRC algorithm is provided in
the C programming language. Lastly there is a section giving two forms
of high-speed table driven implementations, and providing a program
that generates CRC lookup tables.


1. Introduction: Error Detection
--------------------------------
The aim of an error detection technique is to enable the receiver of a
message transmitted through a noisy (error-introducing) channel to
determine whether the message has been corrupted. To do this, the
transmitter constructs a value (called a checksum) that is a function
of the message, and appends it to the message. The receiver can then
use the same function to calculate the checksum of the received
message and compare it with the appended checksum to see if the
message was correctly received. For example, if we chose a checksum
function which was simply the sum of the bytes in the message mod 256
(i.e. modulo 256), then it might go something as follows. All numbers
are in decimal.

   Message                    :  6 23  4
   Message with checksum      :  6 23  4 33
   Message after transmission :  6 27  4 33

In the above, the second byte of the message was corrupted from 23 to
27 by the communications channel. However, the receiver can detect
this by comparing the transmitted checksum (33) with the computer
checksum of 37 (6 + 27 + 4). If the checksum itself is corrupted, a
correctly transmitted message might be incorrectly identified as a
corrupted one. However, this is a safe-side failure. A dangerous-side
failure occurs where the message and/or checksum is corrupted in a
manner that results in a transmission that is internally consistent.
Unfortunately, this possibility is completely unavoidable and the best
that can be done is to minimize its probability by increasing the
amount of information in the checksum (e.g. widening the checksum from
one byte to two bytes).

Other error detection techniques exist that involve performing complex
transformations on the message to inject it with redundant
information. However, this document addresses only CRC algorithms,
which fall into the class of error detection algorithms that leave the
data intact and append a checksum on the end. i.e.:

      <original intact message> <checksum>


2. The Need For Complexity
--------------------------
In the checksum example in the previous section, we saw how a
corrupted message was detected using a checksum algorithm that simply
sums the bytes in the message mod 256:

   Message                    :  6 23  4
   Message with checksum      :  6 23  4 33
   Message after transmission :  6 27  4 33

A problem with this algorithm is that it is too simple. If a number of
random corruptions occur, there is a 1 in 256 chance that they will
not be detected. For example:

   Message                    :  6 23  4
   Message with checksum      :  6 23  4 33
   Message after transmission :  8 20  5 33

To strengthen the checksum, we could change from an 8-bit register to
a 16-bit register (i.e. sum the bytes mod 65536 instead of mod 256) so
as to apparently reduce the probability of failure from 1/256 to
1/65536. While basically a good idea, it fails in this case because
the formula used is not sufficiently "random"; with a simple summing
formula, each incoming byte affects roughly only one byte of the
summing register no matter how wide it is. For example, in the second
example above, the summing register could be a Megabyte wide, and the
error would still go undetected. This problem can only be solved by
replacing the simple summing formula with a more sophisticated formula
that causes each incoming byte to have an effect on the entire
checksum register.

Thus, we see that at least two aspects are required to form a strong
checksum function:

   WIDTH: A register width wide enough to provide a low a-priori
          probability of failure (e.g. 32-bits gives a 1/2^32 chance
          of failure).

   CHAOS: A formula that gives each input byte the potential to change
          any number of bits in the register.

Note: The term "checksum" was presumably used to describe early
summing formulas, but has now taken on a more general meaning
encompassing more sophisticated algorithms such as the CRC ones. The
CRC algorithms to be described satisfy the second condition very well,
and can be configured to operate with a variety of checksum widths.


3. The Basic Idea Behind CRC Algorithms
---------------------------------------
Where might we go in our search for a more complex function than
summing? All sorts of schemes spring to mind. We could construct
tables using the digits of pi, or hash each incoming byte with all the
bytes in the register. We could even keep a large telephone book
on-line, and use each incoming byte combined with the register bytes
to index a new phone number which would be the next register value.
The possibilities are limitless.

However, we do not need to go so far; the next arithmetic step
suffices. While addition is clearly not strong enough to form an
effective checksum, it turns out that division is, so long as the
divisor is about as wide as the checksum register.

The basic idea of CRC algorithms is simply to treat the message as an
enormous binary number, to divide it by another fixed binary number,
and to make the remainder from this division the checksum. Upon
receipt of the message, the receiver can perform the same division and
compare the remainder with the "checksum" (transmitted remainder).

Example: Suppose the the message consisted of the two bytes (6,23) as
in the previous example. These can be considered to be the hexadecimal
number 0617 which can be considered to be the binary number
0000-0110-0001-0111. Suppose that we use a checksum register one-byte
wide and use a constant divisor of 1001, then the checksum is the
remainder after 0000-0110-0001-0111 is divided by 1001. While in this
case, this calculation could obviously be performed using common
garden variety 32-bit registers, in the general case this is messy. So
instead, we'll do the division using good-'ol long division which you
learnt in school (remember?). Except this time, it's in binary:

          ...0000010101101 =3D 00AD =3D  173 =3D QUOTIENT
         ____-___-___-___-
9=3D 1001 ) 0000011000010111 =3D 0617 =3D 1559 =3D DIVIDEND
DIVISOR   0000.,,....,.,,,
          ----.,,....,.,,,
           0000,,....,.,,,
           0000,,....,.,,,
           ----,,....,.,,,
            0001,....,.,,,
            0000,....,.,,,
            ----,....,.,,,
             0011....,.,,,
             0000....,.,,,
             ----....,.,,,
              0110...,.,,,
              0000...,.,,,
              ----...,.,,,
               1100..,.,,,
               1001..,.,,,
               =3D=3D=3D=3D..,.,,,
                0110.,.,,,
                0000.,.,,,
                ----.,.,,,
                 1100,.,,,
                 1001,.,,,
                 =3D=3D=3D=3D,.,,,
                  0111.,,,
                  0000.,,,
                  ----.,,,
                   1110,,,
                   1001,,,
                   =3D=3D=3D=3D,,,
                    1011,,
                    1001,,
                    =3D=3D=3D=3D,,
                     0101,
                     0000,
                     ----
                      1011
                      1001
                      =3D=3D=3D=3D
                      0010 =3D 02 =3D 2 =3D REMAINDER


In decimal this is "1559 divided by 9 is 173 with a remainder of 2".

Although the effect of each bit of the input message on the quotient
is not all that significant, the 4-bit remainder gets kicked about
quite a lot during the calculation, and if more bytes were added to
the message (dividend) it's value could change radically again very
quickly. This is why division works where addition doesn't.

In case you're wondering, using this 4-bit checksum the transmitted
message would look like this (in hexadecimal): 06172 (where the 0617
is the message and the 2 is the checksum). The receiver would divide
0617 by 9 and see whether the remainder was 2.


4. Polynomical Arithmetic
-------------------------
While the division scheme described in the previous section is very
very similar to the checksumming schemes called CRC schemes, the CRC
schemes are in fact a bit weirder, and we need to delve into some
strange number systems to understand them.

The word you will hear all the time when dealing with CRC algorithms
is the word "polynomial". A given CRC algorithm will be said to be
using a particular polynomial, and CRC algorithms in general are said
to be operating using polynomial arithmetic. What does this mean?

Instead of the divisor, dividend (message), quotient, and remainder
(as described in the previous section) being viewed as positive
integers, they are viewed as polynomials with binary coefficients.
This is done by treating each number as a bit-string whose bits are
the coefficients of a polynomial. For example, the ordinary number 23
(decimal) is 17 (hex) and 10111 binary and so it corresponds to the
polynomial:

   1*x^4 + 0*x^3 + 1*x^2 + 1*x^1 + 1*x^0

or, more simply:

   x^4 + x^2 + x^1 + x^0

Using this technique, the message, and the divisor can be represented
as polynomials and we can do all our arithmetic just as before, except
that now it's all cluttered up with Xs. For example, suppose we wanted
to multiply 1101 by 1011. We can do this simply by multiplying the
polynomials:

(x^3 + x^2 + x^0)(x^3 + x^1 + x^0)
=3D (x^6 + x^4 + x^3
 + x^5 + x^3 + x^2
 + x^3 + x^1 + x^0) =3D x^6 + x^5 + x^4 + 3*x^3 + x^2 + x^1 + x^0

At this point, to get the right answer, we have to pretend that x is 2
and propagate binary carries from the 3*x^3 yielding

   x^7 + x^3 + x^2 + x^1 + x^0

It's just like ordinary arithmetic except that the base is abstracted
and brought into all the calculations explicitly instead of being
there implicitly. So what's the point?

The point is that IF we pretend that we DON'T know what x is, we CAN'T
perform the carries. We don't know that 3*x^3 is the same as x^4 + x^3
because we don't know that x is 2. In this true polynomial arithmetic
the relationship between all the coefficients is unknown and so the
coefficients of each power effectively become strongly typed;
coefficients of x^2 are effectively of a different type to
coefficients of x^3.

With the coefficients of each power nicely isolated, mathematicians
came up with all sorts of different kinds of polynomial arithmetics
simply by changing the rules about how coefficients work. Of these
schemes, one in particular is relevant here, and that is a polynomial
arithmetic where the coefficients are calculated MOD 2 and there is no
carry; all coefficients must be either 0 or 1 and no carries are
calculated. This is called "polynomial arithmetic mod 2". Thus,
returning to the earlier example:

(x^3 + x^2 + x^0)(x^3 + x^1 + x^0)
=3D (x^6 + x^4 + x^3
 + x^5 + x^3 + x^2
 + x^3 + x^1 + x^0)
=3D x^6 + x^5 + x^4 + 3*x^3 + x^2 + x^1 + x^0

Under the other arithmetic, the 3*x^3 term was propagated using the
carry mechanism using the knowledge that x=3D2. Under "polynomial
arithmetic mod 2", we don't know what x is, there are no carries, and
all coefficients have to be calculated mod 2. Thus, the result
becomes:

=3D x^6 + x^5 + x^4 + x^3 + x^2 + x^1 + x^0

As Knuth [Knuth81] says (p.400):

   "The reader should note the similarity between polynomial
   arithmetic and multiple-precision arithmetic (Section 4.3.1), where
   the radix b is substituted for x. The chief difference is that the
   coefficient u_k of x^k in polynomial arithmetic bears little or no
   relation to its neighboring coefficients x^{k-1} [and x^{k+1}], so
   the idea of "carrying" from one place to another is absent. In fact
   polynomial arithmetic modulo b is essentially identical to multiple
   precision arithmetic with radix b, except that all carries are
   suppressed."

Thus polynomical arithmetic mod 2 is just binary arithmetic mod 2 with
no carries. While polynomials provide useful mathematical machinery in
more analytical approaches to CRC and error-correction algorithms, for
the purposes of exposition they provide no extra insight and some
encumbrance and have been discarded in the remainder of this document
in favour of direct manipulation of the arithmetical system with which
they are isomorphic: binary arithmetic with no carry.


5. Binary Arithmetic with No Carries
------------------------------------
Having dispensed with polynomials, we can focus on the real arithmetic
issue, which is that all the arithmetic performed during CRC
calculations is performed in binary with no carries. Often this is
called polynomial arithmetic, but as I have declared the rest of this
document a polynomial free zone, we'll have to call it CRC arithmetic
instead. As this arithmetic is a key part of CRC calculations, we'd
better get used to it. Here we go:

Adding two numbers in CRC arithmetic is the same as adding numbers in
ordinary binary arithmetic except there is no carry. This means that
each pair of corresponding bits determine the corresponding output bit
without reference to any other bit positions. For example:

        10011011
       +11001010
        --------
        01010001
        --------

There are only four cases for each bit position:

   0+0=3D0
   0+1=3D1
   1+0=3D1
   1+1=3D0  (no carry)

Subtraction is identical:

        10011011
       -11001010
        --------
        01010001
        --------

with

   0-0=3D0
   0-1=3D1  (wraparound)
   1-0=3D1
   1-1=3D0

In fact, both addition and subtraction in CRC arithmetic is equivalent
to the XOR operation, and the XOR operation is its own inverse. This
effectively reduces the operations of the first level of power
(addition, subtraction) to a single operation that is its own inverse.
This is a very convenient property of the arithmetic.

By collapsing of addition and subtraction, the arithmetic discards any
notion of magnitude beyond the power of its highest one bit. While it
seems clear that 1010 is greater than 10, it is no longer the case
that 1010 can be considered to be greater than 1001. To see this, note
that you can get from 1010 to 1001 by both adding and subtracting the
same quantity:

   1010 =3D 1010 + 0011
   1010 =3D 1010 - 0011

This makes nonsense of any notion of order.

Having defined addition, we can move to multiplication and division.
Multiplication is absolutely straightforward, being the sum of the
first number, shifted in accordance with the second number.

        1101
      x 1011
        ----
        1101
       1101.
      0000..
     1101...
     -------
     1111111  Note: The sum uses CRC addition
     -------

Division is a little messier as we need to know when "a number goes
into another number". To do this, we invoke the weak definition of
magnitude defined earlier: that X is greater than or equal to Y iff
the position of the highest 1 bit of X is the same or greater than the
position of the highest 1 bit of Y. Here's a fully worked division
(nicked from [Tanenbaum81]).

            1100001010
       _______________
10011 ) 11010110110000
        10011,,.,,....
        -----,,.,,....
         10011,.,,....
         10011,.,,....
         -----,.,,....
          00001.,,....
          00000.,,....
          -----.,,....
           00010,,....
           00000,,....
           -----,,....
            00101,....
            00000,....
            -----,....
             01011....
             00000....
             -----....
              10110...
              10011...
              -----...
               01010..
               00000..
               -----..
                10100.
                10011.
                -----.
                 01110
                 00000
                 -----
                  1110 =3D Remainder

That's really it. Before proceeding further, however, it's worth our
while playing with this arithmetic a bit to get used to it.

We've already played with addition and subtraction, noticing that they
are the same thing. Here, though, we should note that in this
arithmetic A+0=3DA and A-0=3DA. This obvious property is very useful
later.

In dealing with CRC multiplication and division, it's worth getting a
feel for the concepts of MULTIPLE and DIVISIBLE.

If a number A is a multiple of B then what this means in CRC
arithmetic is that it is possible to construct A from zero by XORing
in various shifts of B. For example, if A was 0111010110 and B was 11,
we could construct A from B as follows:

                  0111010110
                =3D .......11.
                + ....11....
                + ...11.....
                  .11.......

However, if A is 0111010111, it is not possible to construct it out of
various shifts of B (can you see why? - see later) so it is said to be
not divisible by B in CRC arithmetic.

Thus we see that CRC arithmetic is primarily about XORing particular
values at various shifting offsets.


6. A Fully Worked Example
-------------------------
Having defined CRC arithmetic, we can now frame a CRC calculation as
simply a division, because that's all it is! This section fills in the
details and gives an example.

To perform a CRC calculation, we need to choose a divisor. In maths
marketing speak the divisor is called the "generator polynomial" or
simply the "polynomial", and is a key parameter of any CRC algorithm.
It would probably be more friendly to call the divisor something else,
but the poly talk is so deeply ingrained in the field that it would
now be confusing to avoid it. As a compromise, we will refer to the
CRC polynomial as the "poly". Just think of this number as a sort of
parrot. "Hello poly!"

You can choose any poly and come up with a CRC algorithm. However,
some polys are better than others, and so it is wise to stick with the
tried an tested ones. A later section addresses this issue.

The width (position of the highest 1 bit) of the poly is very
important as it dominates the whole calculation. Typically, widths of
16 or 32 are chosen so as to simplify implementation on modern
computers. The width of a poly is the actual bit position of the
highest bit. For example, the width of 10011 is 4, not 5. For the
purposes of example, we will chose a poly of 10011 (of width W of 4).

Having chosen a poly, we can proceed with the calculation. This is
simply a division (in CRC arithmetic) of the message by the poly. The
only trick is that W zero bits are appended to the message before the
CRC is calculated. Thus we have:

   Original message                : 1101011011
   Poly                            :      10011
   Message after appending W zeros : 11010110110000

Now we simply divide the augmented message by the poly using CRC
arithmetic. This is the same division as before:

            1100001010 =3D Quotient (nobody cares about the quotient)
       _______________
10011 ) 11010110110000 =3D Augmented message (1101011011 + 0000)
=3DPoly  10011,,.,,....
        -----,,.,,....
         10011,.,,....
         10011,.,,....
         -----,.,,....
          00001.,,....
          00000.,,....
          -----.,,....
           00010,,....
           00000,,....
           -----,,....
            00101,....
            00000,....
            -----,....
             01011....
             00000....
             -----....
              10110...
              10011...
              -----...
               01010..
               00000..
               -----..
                10100.
                10011.
                -----.
                 01110
                 00000
                 -----
                  1110 =3D Remainder =3D THE CHECKSUM!!!!

The division yields a quotient, which we throw away, and a remainder,
which is the calculated checksum. This ends the calculation.

Usually, the checksum is then appended to the message and the result
transmitted. In this case the transmission would be: 11010110111110.

At the other end, the receiver can do one of two things:

   a. Separate the message and checksum. Calculate the checksum for
      the message (after appending W zeros) and compare the two
      checksums.

   b. Checksum the whole lot (without appending zeros) and see if it
      comes out as zero!

These two options are equivalent. However, in the next section, we
will be assuming option b because it is marginally mathematically
cleaner.

A summary of the operation of the class of CRC algorithms:

   1. Choose a width W, and a poly G (of width W).
   2. Append W zero bits to the message. Call this M'.
   3. Divide M' by G using CRC arithmetic. The remainder is the =
checksum.

That's all there is to it.

7. Choosing A Poly
------------------
Choosing a poly is somewhat of a black art and the reader is referred
to [Tanenbaum81] (p.130-132) which has a very clear discussion of this
issue. This section merely aims to put the fear of death into anyone
who so much as toys with the idea of making up their own poly. If you
don't care about why one poly might be better than another and just
want to find out about high-speed implementations, choose one of the
arithmetically sound polys listed at the end of this section and skip
to the next section.

First note that the transmitted message T is a multiple of the poly.
To see this, note that 1) the last W bits of T is the remainder after
dividing the augmented (by zeros remember) message by the poly, and 2)
addition is the same as subtraction so adding the remainder pushes the
value up to the next multiple. Now note that if the transmitted
message is corrupted in transmission that we will receive T+E where E
is an error vector (and + is CRC addition (i.e. XOR)). Upon receipt of
this message, the receiver divides T+E by G. As T mod G is 0, (T+E)
mod G =3D E mod G. Thus, the capacity of the poly we choose to catch
particular kinds of errors will be determined by the set of multiples
of G, for any corruption E that is a multiple of G will be undetected.
Our task then is to find classes of G whose multiples look as little
like the kind of line noise (that will be creating the corruptions) as
possible. So let's examine the kinds of line noise we can expect.

SINGLE BIT ERRORS: A single bit error means E=3D1000...0000. We can
ensure that this class of error is always detected by making sure that
G has at least two bits set to 1. Any multiple of G will be
constructed using shifting and adding and it is impossible to
construct a value with a single bit by shifting an adding a single
value with more than one bit set, as the two end bits will always
persist.

TWO-BIT ERRORS: To detect all errors of the form 100...000100...000
(i.e. E contains two 1 bits) choose a G that does not have multiples
that are 11, 101, 1001, 10001, 100001, etc. It is not clear to me how
one goes about doing this (I don't have the pure maths background),
but Tanenbaum assures us that such G do exist, and cites G with 1 bits
(15,14,1) turned on as an example of one G that won't divide anything
less than 1...1 where ... is 32767 zeros.

ERRORS WITH AN ODD NUMBER OF BITS: We can catch all corruptions where
E has an odd number of bits by choosing a G that has an even number of
bits. To see this, note that 1) CRC multiplication is simply XORing a
constant value into a register at various offsets, 2) XORing is simply
a bit-flip operation, and 3) if you XOR a value with an even number of
bits into a register, the oddness of the number of 1 bits in the
register remains invariant. Example: Starting with E=3D111, attempt to
flip all three bits to zero by the repeated application of XORing in
11 at one of the two offsets (i.e. "E=3DE XOR 011" and "E=3DE XOR 110")
This is nearly isomorphic to the "glass tumblers" party puzzle where
you challenge someone to flip three tumblers by the repeated
application of the operation of flipping any two. Most of the popular
CRC polys contain an even number of 1 bits. (Note: Tanenbaum states
more specifically that all errors with an odd number of bits can be
caught by making G a multiple of 11).

BURST ERRORS: A burst error looks like E=3D000...000111...11110000...00.
That is, E consists of all zeros except for a run of 1s somewhere
inside. This can be recast as E=3D(10000...00)(1111111...111) where
there are z zeros in the LEFT part and n ones in the RIGHT part. To
catch errors of this kind, we simply set the lowest bit of G to 1.
Doing this ensures that LEFT cannot be a factor of G. Then, so long as
G is wider than RIGHT, the error will be detected. See Tanenbaum for a
clearer explanation of this; I'm a little fuzzy on this one. Note:
Tanenbaum asserts that the probability of a burst of length greater
than W getting through is (0.5)^W.

That concludes the section on the fine art of selecting polys.

Some popular polys are:
16 bits: (16,12,5,0)                                [X25 standard]
         (16,15,2,0)                                ["CRC-16"]
32 bits: (32,26,23,22,16,12,11,10,8,7,5,4,2,1,0)    [Ethernet]


8. A Straightforward CRC Implementation
---------------------------------------
That's the end of the theory; now we turn to implementations. To start
with, we examine an absolutely straight-down-the-middle boring
straightforward low-speed implementation that doesn't use any speed
tricks at all. We'll then transform that program progessively until we
end up with the compact table-driven code we all know and love and
which some of us would like to understand.

To implement a CRC algorithm all we have to do is implement CRC
division. There are two reasons why we cannot simply use the divide
instruction of whatever machine we are on. The first is that we have
to do the divide in CRC arithmetic. The second is that the dividend
might be ten megabytes long, and todays processors do not have
registers that big.

So to implement CRC division, we have to feed the message through a
division register. At this point, we have to be absolutely precise
about the message data. In all the following examples the message will
be considered to be a stream of bytes (each of 8 bits) with bit 7 of
each byte being considered to be the most significant bit (MSB). The
bit stream formed from these bytes will be the bit stream with the MSB
(bit 7) of the first byte first, going down to bit 0 of the first
byte, and then the MSB of the second byte and so on.

With this in mind, we can sketch an implementation of the CRC
division. For the purposes of example, consider a poly with W=3D4 and
the poly=3D10111. Then, the perform the division, we need to use a 4-bit
register:

                  3   2   1   0   Bits
                +---+---+---+---+
       Pop! <-- |   |   |   |   | <----- Augmented message
                +---+---+---+---+

             1    0   1   1   1   =3D The Poly

(Reminder: The augmented message is the message followed by W zero =
bits.)

To perform the division perform the following:

   Load the register with zero bits.
   Augment the message by appending W zero bits to the end of it.
   While (more message bits)
      Begin
      Shift the register left by one bit, reading the next bit of the
         augmented message into register bit position 0.
      If (a 1 bit popped out of the register during step 3)
         Register =3D Register XOR Poly.
      End
   The register now contains the remainder.

(Note: In practice, the IF condition can be tested by testing the top
 bit of R before performing the shift.)

We will call this algorithm "SIMPLE".

This might look a bit messy, but all we are really doing is
"subtracting" various powers (i.e. shiftings) of the poly from the
message until there is nothing left but the remainder. Study the
manual examples of long division if you don't understand this.

It should be clear that the above algorithm will work for any width W.


9. A Table-Driven Implementation
--------------------------------
The SIMPLE algorithm above is a good starting point because it
corresponds directly to the theory presented so far, and because it is
so SIMPLE. However, because it operates at the bit level, it is rather
awkward to code (even in C), and inefficient to execute (it has to
loop once for each bit). To speed it up, we need to find a way to
enable the algorithm to process the message in units larger than one
bit. Candidate quantities are nibbles (4 bits), bytes (8 bits), words
(16 bits) and longwords (32 bits) and higher if we can achieve it. Of
these, 4 bits is best avoided because it does not correspond to a byte
boundary. At the very least, any speedup should allow us to operate at
byte boundaries, and in fact most of the table driven algorithms
operate a byte at a time.

For the purposes of discussion, let us switch from a 4-bit poly to a
32-bit one. Our register looks much the same, except the boxes
represent bytes instead of bits, and the Poly is 33 bits (one implicit
1 bit at the top and 32 "active" bits) (W=3D32).

                   3    2    1    0   Bytes
                +----+----+----+----+
       Pop! <-- |    |    |    |    | <----- Augmented message
                +----+----+----+----+

               1<------32 bits------>

The SIMPLE algorithm is still applicable. Let us examine what it does.
Imagine that the SIMPLE algorithm is in full swing and consider the
top 8 bits of the 32-bit register (byte 3) to have the values:

   t7 t6 t5 t4 t3 t2 t1 t0

In the next iteration of SIMPLE, t7 will determine whether the Poly
will be XORed into the entire register. If t7=3D1, this will happen,
otherwise it will not. Suppose that the top 8 bits of the poly are g7
g6.. g0, then after the next iteration, the top byte will be:

        t6 t5 t4 t3 t2 t1 t0 ??
+ t7 * (g7 g6 g5 g4 g3 g2 g1 g0)    [Reminder: + is XOR]

The NEW top bit (that will control what happens in the next iteration)
now has the value t6 + t7*g7. The important thing to notice here is
that from an informational point of view, all the information required
to calculate the NEW top bit was present in the top TWO bits of the
original top byte. Similarly, the NEXT top bit can be calculated in
advance SOLELY from the top THREE bits t7, t6, and t5. In fact, in
general, the value of the top bit in the register in k iterations can
be calculated from the top k bits of the register. Let us take this
for granted for a moment.

Consider for a moment that we use the top 8 bits of the register to
calculate the value of the top bit of the register during the next 8
iterations. Suppose that we drive the next 8 iterations using the
calculated values (which we could perhaps store in a single byte
register and shift out to pick off each bit). Then we note three
things:

   * The top byte of the register now doesn't matter. No matter how
     many times and at what offset the poly is XORed to the top 8
     bits, they will all be shifted out the right hand side during the
     next 8 iterations anyway.


   * The remaining bits will be shifted left one position and the
     rightmost byte of the register will be shifted in the next byte

   AND

   * While all this is going on, the register will be subjected to a
     series of XOR's in accordance with the bits of the pre-calculated
     control byte.

Now consider the effect of XORing in a constant value at various
offsets to a register. For example:

       0100010  Register
       ...0110  XOR this
       ..0110.  XOR this
       0110...  XOR this
       -------
       0011000
       -------

The point of this is that you can XOR constant values into a register
to your heart's delight, and in the end, there will exist a value
which when XORed in with the original register will have the same
effect as all the other XORs.

Perhaps you can see the solution now. Putting all the pieces together
we have an algorithm that goes like this:

   While (augmented message is not exhausted)
      Begin
      Examine the top byte of the register
      Calculate the control byte from the top byte of the register
      Sum all the Polys at various offsets that are to be XORed into
         the register in accordance with the control byte
      Shift the register left by one byte, reading a new message byte
         into the rightmost byte of the register
      XOR the summed polys to the register
      End

As it stands this is not much better than the SIMPLE algorithm.
However, it turns out that most of the calculation can be precomputed
and assembled into a table. As a result, the above algorithm can be
reduced to:

   While (augmented message is not exhaused)
      Begin
      Top =3D top_byte(Register);
      Register =3D (Register << 24) | next_augmessage_byte;
      Register =3D Register XOR precomputed_table[Top];
      End

There! If you understand this, you've grasped the main idea of
table-driven CRC algorithms. The above is a very efficient algorithm
requiring just a shift, and OR, an XOR, and a table lookup per byte.
Graphically, it looks like this:

                   3    2    1    0   Bytes
                +----+----+----+----+
         +-----<|    |    |    |    | <----- Augmented message
         |      +----+----+----+----+
         |                ^
         |                |
         |               XOR
         |                |
         |     0+----+----+----+----+       Algorithm
         v      +----+----+----+----+       ---------
         |      +----+----+----+----+       1. Shift the register left =
by
         |      +----+----+----+----+          one byte, reading in a =
new
         |      +----+----+----+----+          message byte.
         |      +----+----+----+----+       2. Use the top byte just =
rotated
         |      +----+----+----+----+          out of the register to =
index
         +----->+----+----+----+----+          the table of 256 32-bit =
values.
                +----+----+----+----+       3. XOR the table value into =
the
                +----+----+----+----+          register.
                +----+----+----+----+       4. Goto 1 iff more augmented
                +----+----+----+----+          message bytes.
             255+----+----+----+----+


In C, the algorithm main loop looks like this:

   r=3D0;
   while (len--)
     {
      byte t =3D (r >> 24) & 0xFF;
      r =3D (r << 8) | *p++;
      r^=3Dtable[t];
     }

where len is the length of the augmented message in bytes, p points to
the augmented message, r is the register, t is a temporary, and table
is the computed table. This code can be made even more unreadable as
follows:

   r=3D0; while (len--) r =3D ((r << 8) | *p++) ^ t[(r >> 24) & 0xFF];

This is a very clean, efficient loop, although not a very obvious one
to the casual observer not versed in CRC theory. We will call this the
TABLE algorithm.


10. A Slightly Mangled Table-Driven Implementation
--------------------------------------------------
Despite the terse beauty of the line

   r=3D0; while (len--) r =3D ((r << 8) | *p++) ^ t[(r >> 24) & 0xFF];

those optimizing hackers couldn't leave it alone. The trouble, you
see, is that this loop operates upon the AUGMENTED message and in
order to use this code, you have to append W/8 zero bytes to the end
of the message before pointing p at it. Depending on the run-time
environment, this may or may not be a problem; if the block of data
was handed to us by some other code, it could be a BIG problem. One
alternative is simply to append the following line after the above
loop, once for each zero byte:

      for (i=3D0; i<W/4; i++) r =3D (r << 8) ^ t[(r >> 24) & 0xFF];

This looks like a sane enough solution to me. However, at the further
expense of clarity (which, you must admit, is already a pretty scare
commodity in this code) we can reorganize this small loop further so
as to avoid the need to either augment the message with zero bytes, or
to explicitly process zero bytes at the end as above. To explain the
optimization, we return to the processing diagram given earlier.

                   3    2    1    0   Bytes
                +----+----+----+----+
         +-----<|    |    |    |    | <----- Augmented message
         |      +----+----+----+----+
         |                ^
         |                |
         |               XOR
         |                |
         |     0+----+----+----+----+       Algorithm
         v      +----+----+----+----+       ---------
         |      +----+----+----+----+       1. Shift the register left =
by
         |      +----+----+----+----+          one byte, reading in a =
new
         |      +----+----+----+----+          message byte.
         |      +----+----+----+----+       2. Use the top byte just =
rotated
         |      +----+----+----+----+          out of the register to =
index
         +----->+----+----+----+----+          the table of 256 32-bit =
values.
                +----+----+----+----+       3. XOR the table value into =
the
                +----+----+----+----+          register.
                +----+----+----+----+       4. Goto 1 iff more augmented
                +----+----+----+----+          message bytes.
             255+----+----+----+----+

Now, note the following facts:

TAIL: The W/4 augmented zero bytes that appear at the end of the
      message will be pushed into the register from the right as all
      the other bytes are, but their values (0) will have no effect
      whatsoever on the register because 1) XORing with zero does not
      change the target byte, and 2) the four bytes are never
      propagated out the left side of the register where their
      zeroness might have some sort of influence. Thus, the sole
      function of the W/4 augmented zero bytes is to drive the
      calculation for another W/4 byte cycles so that the end of the
      REAL data passes all the way through the register.

HEAD: If the initial value of the register is zero, the first four
      iterations of the loop will have the sole effect of shifting in
      the first four bytes of the message from the right. This is
      because the first 32 control bits are all zero and so nothing is
      XORed into the register. Even if the initial value is not zero,
      the first 4 byte iterations of the algorithm will have the sole
      effect of shifting the first 4 bytes of the message into the
      register and then XORing them with some constant value (that is
      a function of the initial value of the register).

These facts, combined with the XOR property

   (A xor B) xor C =3D A xor (B xor C)

mean that message bytes need not actually travel through the W/4 bytes
of the register. Instead, they can be XORed into the top byte just
before it is used to index the lookup table. This leads to the
following modified version of the algorithm.


         +-----<Message (non augmented)
         |
         v         3    2    1    0   Bytes
         |      +----+----+----+----+
        XOR----<|    |    |    |    |
         |      +----+----+----+----+
         |                ^
         |                |
         |               XOR
         |                |
         |     0+----+----+----+----+       Algorithm
         v      +----+----+----+----+       ---------
         |      +----+----+----+----+       1. Shift the register left =
by
         |      +----+----+----+----+          one byte, reading in a =
new
         |      +----+----+----+----+          message byte.
         |      +----+----+----+----+       2. XOR the top byte just =
rotated
         |      +----+----+----+----+          out of the register with =
the
         +----->+----+----+----+----+          next message byte to =
yield an
                +----+----+----+----+          index into the table =
([0,255]).
                +----+----+----+----+       3. XOR the table value into =
the
                +----+----+----+----+          register.
                +----+----+----+----+       4. Goto 1 iff more augmented
             255+----+----+----+----+          message bytes.


Note: The initial register value for this algorithm must be the
initial value of the register for the previous algorithm fed through
the table four times. Note: The table is such that if the previous
algorithm used 0, the new algorithm will too.

This is an IDENTICAL algorithm and will yield IDENTICAL results. The C
code looks something like this:

   r=3D0; while (len--) r =3D (r<<8) ^ t[(r >> 24) ^ *p++];

and THIS is the code that you are likely to find inside current
table-driven CRC implementations. Some FF masks might have to be ANDed
in here and there for portability's sake, but basically, the above
loop is IT. We will call this the DIRECT TABLE ALGORITHM.

During the process of trying to understand all this stuff, I managed
to derive the SIMPLE algorithm and the table-driven version derived
from that. However, when I compared my code with the code found in
real-implementations, I was totally bamboozled as to why the bytes
were being XORed in at the wrong end of the register! It took quite a
while before I figured out that theirs and my algorithms were actually
the same. Part of why I am writing this document is that, while the
link between division and my earlier table-driven code is vaguely
apparent, any such link is fairly well erased when you start pumping
bytes in at the "wrong end" of the register. It looks all wrong!

If you've got this far, you not only understand the theory, the
practice, the optimized practice, but you also understand the real
code you are likely to run into. Could get any more complicated? Yes
it can.


11. "Reflected" Table-Driven Implementations
--------------------------------------------
Despite the fact that the above code is probably optimized about as
much as it could be, this did not stop some enterprising individuals
from making things even more complicated. To understand how this
happened, we have to enter the world of hardware.

DEFINITION: A value/register is reflected if it's bits are swapped
around its centre. For example: 0101 is the 4-bit reflection of 1010.
0011 is the reflection of 1100.
0111-0101-1010-1111-0010-0101-1011-1100 is the reflection of
0011-1101-1010-0100-1111-0101-1010-1110.

Turns out that UARTs (those handy little chips that perform serial IO)
are in the habit of transmitting each byte with the least significant
bit (bit 0) first and the most significant bit (bit 7) last (i.e.
reflected). An effect of this convention is that hardware engineers
constructing hardware CRC calculators that operate at the bit level
took to calculating CRCs of bytes streams with each of the bytes
reflected within itself. The bytes are processed in the same order,
but the bits in each byte are swapped; bit 0 is now bit 7, bit 1 is
now bit 6, and so on. Now this wouldn't matter much if this convention
was restricted to hardware land. However it seems that at some stage
some of these CRC values were presented at the software level and
someone had to write some code that would interoperate with the
hardware CRC calculation.

In this situation, a normal sane software engineer would simply
reflect each byte before processing it. However, it would seem that
normal sane software engineers were thin on the ground when this early
ground was being broken, because instead of reflecting the bytes,
whoever was responsible held down the byte and reflected the world,
leading to the following "reflected" algorithm which is identical to
the previous one except that everything is reflected except the input
bytes.


             Message (non augmented) >-----+
                                           |
           Bytes   0    1    2    3        v
                +----+----+----+----+      |
                |    |    |    |    |>----XOR
                +----+----+----+----+      |
                          ^                |
                          |                |
                         XOR               |
                          |                |
                +----+----+----+----+0     |
                +----+----+----+----+      v
                +----+----+----+----+      |
                +----+----+----+----+      |
                +----+----+----+----+      |
                +----+----+----+----+      |
                +----+----+----+----+      |
                +----+----+----+----+<-----+
                +----+----+----+----+
                +----+----+----+----+
                +----+----+----+----+
                +----+----+----+----+
                +----+----+----+----+255

Notes:

   * The table is identical to the one in the previous algorithm
   except that each entry has been reflected.

   * The initial value of the register is the same as in the previous
   algorithm except that it has been reflected.

   * The bytes of the message are processed in the same order as
   before (i.e. the message itself is not reflected).

   * The message bytes themselves don't need to be explicitly
   reflected, because everything else has been!

At the end of execution, the register contains the reflection of the
final CRC value (remainder). Actually, I'm being rather hard on
whoever cooked this up because it seems that hardware implementations
of the CRC algorithm used the reflected checksum value and so
producing a reflected CRC was just right. In fact reflecting the world
was probably a good engineering solution - if a confusing one.

We will call this the REFLECTED algorithm.

Whether or not it made sense at the time, the effect of having
reflected algorithms kicking around the world's FTP sites is that
about half the CRC implementations one runs into are reflected and the
other half not. It's really terribly confusing. In particular, it
would seem to me that the casual reader who runs into a reflected,
table-driven implementation with the bytes "fed in the wrong end"
would have Buckley's chance of ever connecting the code to the concept
of binary mod 2 division.

It couldn't get any more confusing could it? Yes it could.


12. "Reversed" Polys
--------------------
As if reflected implementations weren't enough, there is another
concept kicking around which makes the situation bizaarly confusing.
The concept is reversed Polys.

It turns out that the reflection of good polys tend to be good polys
too! That is, if G=3D11101 is a good poly value, then 10111 will be as
well. As a consequence, it seems that every time an organization (such
as CCITT) standardizes on a particularly good poly ("polynomial"),
those in the real world can't leave the poly's reflection alone
either. They just HAVE to use it. As a result, the set of "standard"
poly's has a corresponding set of reflections, which are also in use.
To avoid confusion, we will call these the "reversed" polys.

   X25   standard: 1-0001-0000-0010-0001
   X25   reversed: 1-0000-1000-0001-0001

   CRC16 standard: 1-1000-0000-0000-0101
   CRC16 reversed: 1-0100-0000-0000-0011

Note that here it is the entire poly that is being reflected/reversed,
not just the bottom W bits. This is an important distinction. In the
reflected algorithm described in the previous section, the poly used
in the reflected algorithm was actually identical to that used in the
non-reflected algorithm; all that had happened is that the bytes had
effectively been reflected. As such, all the 16-bit/32-bit numbers in
the algorithm had to be reflected. In contrast, the ENTIRE poly
includes the implicit one bit at the top, and so reversing a poly is
not the same as reflecting its bottom 16 or 32 bits.

The upshot of all this is that a reflected algorithm is not equivalent
to the original algorithm with the poly reflected. Actually, this is
probably less confusing than if they were duals.

If all this seems a bit unclear, don't worry, because we're going to
sort it all out "real soon now". Just one more section to go before
that.


13. Initial and Final Values
----------------------------
In addition to the complexity already seen, CRC algorithms differ from
each other in two other regards:

   * The initial value of the register.

   * The value to be XORed with the final register value.

For example, the "CRC32" algorithm initializes its register to
FFFFFFFF and XORs the final register value with FFFFFFFF.

Most CRC algorithms initialize their register to zero. However, some
initialize it to a non-zero value. In theory (i.e. with no assumptions
about the message), the initial value has no affect on the strength of
the CRC algorithm, the initial value merely providing a fixed starting
point from which the register value can progress. However, in
practice, some messages are more likely than others, and it is wise to
initialize the CRC algorithm register to a value that does not have
"blind spots" that are likely to occur in practice. By "blind spot" is
meant a sequence of message bytes that do not result in the register
changing its value. In particular, any CRC algorithm that initializes
its register to zero will have a blind spot of zero when it starts up
and will be unable to "count" a leading run of zero bytes. As a
leading run of zero bytes is quite common in real messages, it is wise
to initialize the algorithm register to a non-zero value.


14. Defining Algorithms Absolutely
----------------------------------
At this point we have covered all the different aspects of
table-driven CRC algorithms. As there are so many variations on these
algorithms, it is worth trying to establish a nomenclature for them.
This section attempts to do that.

We have seen that CRC algorithms vary in:

   * Width of the poly (polynomial).
   * Value of the poly.
   * Initial value for the register.
   * Whether the bits of each byte are reflected before being processed.
   * Whether the algorithm feeds input bytes through the register or
     xors them with a byte from one end and then straight into the =
table.
   * Whether the final register value should be reversed (as in =
reflected
     versions).
   * Value to XOR with the final register value.

In order to be able to talk about particular CRC algorithms, we need
to able to define them more precisely than this. For this reason, the
next section attempts to provide a well-defined parameterized model
for CRC algorithms. To refer to a particular algorithm, we need then
simply specify the algorithm in terms of parameters to the model.


15. A Parameterized Model For CRC Algorithms
--------------------------------------------
In this section we define a precise parameterized model CRC algorithm
which, for want of a better name, we will call the "Rocksoft^tm Model
CRC Algorithm" (and why not? Rocksoft^tm could do with some free
advertising :-).

The most important aspect of the model algorithm is that it focusses
exclusively on functionality, ignoring all implementation details. The
aim of the exercise is to construct a way of referring precisely to
particular CRC algorithms, regardless of how confusingly they are
implemented. To this end, the model must be as simple and precise as
possible, with as little confusion as possible.

The Rocksoft^tm Model CRC Algorithm is based essentially on the DIRECT
TABLE ALGORITHM specified earlier. However, the algorithm has to be
further parameterized to enable it to behave in the same way as some
of the messier algorithms out in the real world.

To enable the algorithm to behave like reflected algorithms, we
provide a boolean option to reflect the input bytes, and a boolean
option to specify whether to reflect the output checksum value. By
framing reflection as an input/output transformation, we avoid the
confusion of having to mentally map the parameters of reflected and
non-reflected algorithms.

An extra parameter allows the algorithm's register to be initialized
to a particular value. A further parameter is XORed with the final
value before it is returned.

By putting all these pieces together we end up with the parameters of
the algorithm:

   NAME: This is a name given to the algorithm. A string value.

   WIDTH: This is the width of the algorithm expressed in bits. This
   is one less than the width of the Poly.

   POLY: This parameter is the poly. This is a binary value that
   should be specified as a hexadecimal number. The top bit of the
   poly should be omitted. For example, if the poly is 10110, you
   should specify 06. An important aspect of this parameter is that it
   represents the unreflected poly; the bottom bit of this parameter
   is always the LSB of the divisor during the division regardless of
   whether the algorithm being modelled is reflected.

   INIT: This parameter specifies the initial value of the register
   when the algorithm starts. This is the value that is to be assigned
   to the register in the direct table algorithm. In the table
   algorithm, we may think of the register always commencing with the
   value zero, and this value being XORed into the register after the
   N'th bit iteration. This parameter should be specified as a
   hexadecimal number.

   REFIN: This is a boolean parameter. If it is FALSE, input bytes are
   processed with bit 7 being treated as the most significant bit
   (MSB) and bit 0 being treated as the least significant bit. If this
   parameter is FALSE, each byte is reflected before being processed.

   REFOUT: This is a boolean parameter. If it is set to FALSE, the
   final value in the register is fed into the XOROUT stage directly,
   otherwise, if this parameter is TRUE, the final register value is
   reflected first.

   XOROUT: This is an W-bit value that should be specified as a
   hexadecimal number. It is XORed to the final register value (after
   the REFOUT) stage before the value is returned as the official
   checksum.

   CHECK: This field is not strictly part of the definition, and, in
   the event of an inconsistency between this field and the other
   field, the other fields take precedence. This field is a check
   value that can be used as a weak validator of implementations of
   the algorithm. The field contains the checksum obtained when the
   ASCII string "123456789" is fed through the specified algorithm
   (i.e. 313233... (hexadecimal)).

With these parameters defined, the model can now be used to specify a
particular CRC algorithm exactly. Here is an example specification for
a popular form of the CRC-16 algorithm.

   Name   : "CRC-16"
   Width  : 16
   Poly   : 8005
   Init   : 0000
   RefIn  : True
   RefOut : True
   XorOut : 0000
   Check  : BB3D


16. A Catalog of Parameter Sets for Standards
---------------------------------------------
At this point, I would like to give a list of the specifications for
commonly used CRC algorithms. However, most of the algorithms that I
have come into contact with so far are specified in such a vague way
that this has not been possible. What I can provide is a list of polys
for various CRC standards I have heard of:

   X25   standard : 1021       [CRC-CCITT, ADCCP, SDLC/HDLC]
   X25   reversed : 0811

   CRC16 standard : 8005
   CRC16 reversed : 4003       [LHA]

   CRC32          : 04C11DB7   [PKZIP, AUTODIN II, Ethernet, FDDI]

I would be interested in hearing from anyone out there who can tie
down the complete set of model parameters for any of these standards.

However, a program that was kicking around seemed to imply the
following specifications. Can anyone confirm or deny them (or provide
the check values (which I couldn't be bothered coding up and
calculating)).

   Name   : "CRC-16/CITT"
   Width  : 16
   Poly   : 1021
   Init   : FFFF
   RefIn  : False
   RefOut : False
   XorOut : 0000
   Check  : ?


   Name   : "XMODEM"
   Width  : 16
   Poly   : 8408
   Init   : 0000
   RefIn  : True
   RefOut : True
   XorOut : 0000
   Check  : ?


   Name   : "ARC"
   Width  : 16
   Poly   : 8005
   Init   : 0000
   RefIn  : True
   RefOut : True
   XorOut : 0000
   Check  : ?

Here is the specification for the CRC-32 algorithm which is reportedly
used in PKZip, AUTODIN II, Ethernet, and FDDI.

   Name   : "CRC-32"
   Width  : 32
   Poly   : 04C11DB7
   Init   : FFFFFFFF
   RefIn  : True
   RefOut : True
   XorOut : FFFFFFFF
   Check  : CBF43926


17. An Implementation of the Model Algorithm
--------------------------------------------
Here is an implementation of the model algorithm in the C programming
language. The implementation consists of a header file (.h) and an
implementation file (.c). If you're reading this document in a
sequential scroller, you can skip this code by searching for the
string "Roll Your Own".

To ensure that the following code is working, configure it for the
CRC-16 and CRC-32 algorithms given above and ensure that they produce
the specified "check" checksum when fed the test string "123456789"
(see earlier).

/************************************************************************=
******/
/*                             Start of crcmodel.h                       =
     */
/************************************************************************=
******/
/*                                                                       =
     */
/* Author : Ross Williams (ross@guest.adelaide.edu.au.).                 =
     */
/* Date   : 3 June 1993.                                                 =
     */
/* Status : Public domain.                                               =
     */
/*                                                                       =
     */
/* Description : This is the header (.h) file for the reference          =
     */
/* implementation of the Rocksoft^tm Model CRC Algorithm. For more       =
     */
/* information on the Rocksoft^tm Model CRC Algorithm, see the document  =
     */
/* titled "A Painless Guide to CRC Error Detection Algorithms" by Ross   =
     */
/* Williams (ross@guest.adelaide.edu.au.). This document is likely to be =
in   */
/* "ftp.adelaide.edu.au/pub/rocksoft".                                   =
     */
/*                                                                       =
     */
/* Note: Rocksoft is a trademark of Rocksoft Pty Ltd, Adelaide, =
Australia.    */
/*                                                                       =
     */
/************************************************************************=
******/
/*                                                                       =
     */
/* How to Use This Package                                               =
     */
/* -----------------------                                               =
     */
/* Step 1: Declare a variable of type cm_t. Declare another variable     =
     */
/*         (p_cm say) of type p_cm_t and initialize it to point to the =
first  */
/*         variable (e.g. p_cm_t p_cm =3D &cm_t).                        =
       */
/*                                                                       =
     */
/* Step 2: Assign values to the parameter fields of the structure.       =
     */
/*         If you don't know what to assign, see the document cited =
earlier.  */
/*         For example:                                                  =
     */
/*            p_cm->cm_width =3D 16;                                     =
       */
/*            p_cm->cm_poly  =3D 0x8005L;                                =
       */
/*            p_cm->cm_init  =3D 0L;                                     =
       */
/*            p_cm->cm_refin =3D TRUE;                                   =
       */
/*            p_cm->cm_refot =3D TRUE;                                   =
       */
/*            p_cm->cm_xorot =3D 0L;                                     =
       */
/*         Note: Poly is specified without its top bit (18005 becomes =
8005).  */
/*         Note: Width is one bit less than the raw poly width.          =
     */
/*                                                                       =
     */
/* Step 3: Initialize the instance with a call cm_ini(p_cm);             =
     */
/*                                                                       =
     */
/* Step 4: Process zero or more message bytes by placing zero or more    =
     */
/*         successive calls to cm_nxt. Example: cm_nxt(p_cm,ch);         =
     */
/*                                                                       =
     */
/* Step 5: Extract the CRC value at any time by calling crc =3D =
cm_crc(p_cm);   */
/*         If the CRC is a 16-bit value, it will be in the bottom 16 =
bits.    */
/*                                                                       =
     */
/************************************************************************=
******/
/*                                                                       =
     */
/* Design Notes                                                          =
     */
/* ------------                                                          =
     */
/* PORTABILITY: This package has been coded very conservatively so that  =
     */
/* it will run on as many machines as possible. For example, all =
external     */
/* identifiers have been restricted to 6 characters and all internal =
ones to  */
/* 8 characters. The prefix cm (for Crc Model) is used as an attempt to =
avoid */
/* namespace collisions. This package is endian independent.             =
     */
/*                                                                       =
     */
/* EFFICIENCY: This package (and its interface) is not designed for      =
     */
/* speed. The purpose of this package is to act as a well-defined =
reference   */
/* model for the specification of CRC algorithms. If you want speed, =
cook up  */
/* a specific table-driven implementation as described in the document =
cited  */
/* above. This package is designed for validation only; if you have =
found or  */
/* implemented a CRC algorithm and wish to describe it as a set of =
parameters */
/* to the Rocksoft^tm Model CRC Algorithm, your CRC algorithm =
implementation  */
/* should behave identically to this package under those parameters.     =
     */
/*                                                                       =
     */
/************************************************************************=
******/

/* The following #ifndef encloses this entire */
/* header file, rendering it indempotent.     */
#ifndef CM_DONE
#define CM_DONE

/************************************************************************=
******/

/* The following definitions are extracted from my style header file =
which    */
/* would be cumbersome to distribute with this package. The DONE_STYLE =
is the */
/* idempotence symbol used in my style header file.                      =
     */

#ifndef DONE_STYLE

typedef unsigned long   ulong;
typedef unsigned        bool;
typedef unsigned char * p_ubyte_;

#ifndef TRUE
#define FALSE 0
#define TRUE  1
#endif

/* Change to the second definition if you don't have prototypes. */
#define P_(A) A
/* #define P_(A) () */

/* Uncomment this definition if you don't have void. */
/* typedef int void; */

#endif

/************************************************************************=
******/

/* CRC Model Abstract Type */
/* ----------------------- */
/* The following type stores the context of an executing instance of the =
 */
/* model algorithm. Most of the fields are model parameters which must =
be */
/* set before the first initializing call to cm_ini.                     =
 */
typedef struct
  {
   int   cm_width;   /* Parameter: Width in bits [8,32].       */
   ulong cm_poly;    /* Parameter: The algorithm's polynomial. */
   ulong cm_init;    /* Parameter: Initial register value.     */
   bool  cm_refin;   /* Parameter: Reflect input bytes?        */
   bool  cm_refot;   /* Parameter: Reflect output CRC?         */
   ulong cm_xorot;   /* Parameter: XOR this to output CRC.     */

   ulong cm_reg;     /* Context: Context during execution.     */
  } cm_t;
typedef cm_t *p_cm_t;

/************************************************************************=
******/

/* Functions That Implement The Model */
/* ---------------------------------- */
/* The following functions animate the cm_t abstraction. */

void cm_ini P_((p_cm_t p_cm));
/* Initializes the argument CRC model instance.          */
/* All parameter fields must be set before calling this. */

void cm_nxt P_((p_cm_t p_cm,int ch));
/* Processes a single message byte [0,255]. */

void cm_blk P_((p_cm_t p_cm,p_ubyte_ blk_adr,ulong blk_len));
/* Processes a block of message bytes. */

ulong cm_crc P_((p_cm_t p_cm));
/* Returns the CRC value for the message bytes processed so far. */

/************************************************************************=
******/

/* Functions For Table Calculation */
/* ------------------------------- */
/* The following function can be used to calculate a CRC lookup table.   =
     */
/* It can also be used at run-time to create or check static tables.     =
     */

ulong cm_tab P_((p_cm_t p_cm,int index));
/* Returns the i'th entry for the lookup table for the specified =
algorithm.   */
/* The function examines the fields cm_width, cm_poly, cm_refin, and the =
     */
/* argument table index in the range [0,255] and returns the table entry =
in   */
/* the bottom cm_width bytes of the return value.                        =
     */

/************************************************************************=
******/

/* End of the header file idempotence #ifndef */
#endif

/************************************************************************=
******/
/*                             End of crcmodel.h                         =
     */
/************************************************************************=
******/


/************************************************************************=
******/
/*                             Start of crcmodel.c                       =
     */
/************************************************************************=
******/
/*                                                                       =
     */
/* Author : Ross Williams (ross@guest.adelaide.edu.au.).                 =
     */
/* Date   : 3 June 1993.                                                 =
     */
/* Status : Public domain.                                               =
     */
/*                                                                       =
     */
/* Description : This is the implementation (.c) file for the reference  =
     */
/* implementation of the Rocksoft^tm Model CRC Algorithm. For more       =
     */
/* information on the Rocksoft^tm Model CRC Algorithm, see the document  =
     */
/* titled "A Painless Guide to CRC Error Detection Algorithms" by Ross   =
     */
/* Williams (ross@guest.adelaide.edu.au.). This document is likely to be =
in   */
/* "ftp.adelaide.edu.au/pub/rocksoft".                                   =
     */
/*                                                                       =
     */
/* Note: Rocksoft is a trademark of Rocksoft Pty Ltd, Adelaide, =
Australia.    */
/*                                                                       =
     */
/************************************************************************=
******/
/*                                                                       =
     */
/* Implementation Notes                                                  =
     */
/* --------------------                                                  =
     */
/* To avoid inconsistencies, the specification of each function is not =
echoed */
/* here. See the header file for a description of these functions.       =
     */
/* This package is light on checking because I want to keep it short and =
     */
/* simple and portable (i.e. it would be too messy to distribute my =
entire    */
/* C culture (e.g. assertions package) with this package.                =
     */
/*                                                                       =
     */
/************************************************************************=
******/

#include "crcmodel.h"

/************************************************************************=
******/

/* The following definitions make the code more readable. */

#define BITMASK(X) (1L << (X))
#define MASK32 0xFFFFFFFFL
#define LOCAL static

/************************************************************************=
******/

LOCAL ulong reflect P_((ulong v,int b));
LOCAL ulong reflect (v,b)
/* Returns the value v with the bottom b [0,32] bits reflected. */
/* Example: reflect(0x3e23L,3) =3D=3D 0x3e26                        */
ulong v;
int   b;
{
 int   i;
 ulong t =3D v;
 for (i=3D0; i<b; i++)
   {
    if (t & 1L)
       v|=3D  BITMASK((b-1)-i);
    else
       v&=3D ~BITMASK((b-1)-i);
    t>>=3D1;
   }
 return v;
}

/************************************************************************=
******/

LOCAL ulong widmask P_((p_cm_t));
LOCAL ulong widmask (p_cm)
/* Returns a longword whose value is (2^p_cm->cm_width)-1.     */
/* The trick is to do this portably (e.g. without doing <<32). */
p_cm_t p_cm;
{
 return (((1L<<(p_cm->cm_width-1))-1L)<<1)|1L;
}

/************************************************************************=
******/

void cm_ini (p_cm)
p_cm_t p_cm;
{
 p_cm->cm_reg =3D p_cm->cm_init;
}

/************************************************************************=
******/

void cm_nxt (p_cm,ch)
p_cm_t p_cm;
int    ch;
{
 int   i;
 ulong uch  =3D (ulong) ch;
 ulong topbit =3D BITMASK(p_cm->cm_width-1);

 if (p_cm->cm_refin) uch =3D reflect(uch,8);
 p_cm->cm_reg ^=3D (uch << (p_cm->cm_width-8));
 for (i=3D0; i<8; i++)
   {
    if (p_cm->cm_reg & topbit)
       p_cm->cm_reg =3D (p_cm->cm_reg << 1) ^ p_cm->cm_poly;
    else
       p_cm->cm_reg <<=3D 1;
    p_cm->cm_reg &=3D widmask(p_cm);
   }
}

/************************************************************************=
******/

void cm_blk (p_cm,blk_adr,blk_len)
p_cm_t   p_cm;
p_ubyte_ blk_adr;
ulong    blk_len;
{
 while (blk_len--) cm_nxt(p_cm,*blk_adr++);
}

/************************************************************************=
******/

ulong cm_crc (p_cm)
p_cm_t p_cm;
{
 if (p_cm->cm_refot)
    return p_cm->cm_xorot ^ reflect(p_cm->cm_reg,p_cm->cm_width);
 else
    return p_cm->cm_xorot ^ p_cm->cm_reg;
}

/************************************************************************=
******/

ulong cm_tab (p_cm,index)
p_cm_t p_cm;
int    index;
{
 int   i;
 ulong r;
 ulong topbit =3D BITMASK(p_cm->cm_width-1);
 ulong inbyte =3D (ulong) index;

 if (p_cm->cm_refin) inbyte =3D reflect(inbyte,8);
 r =3D inbyte << (p_cm->cm_width-8);
 for (i=3D0; i<8; i++)
    if (r & topbit)
       r =3D (r << 1) ^ p_cm->cm_poly;
    else
       r<<=3D1;
 if (p_cm->cm_refin) r =3D reflect(r,p_cm->cm_width);
 return r & widmask(p_cm);
}

/************************************************************************=
******/
/*                             End of crcmodel.c                         =
     */
/************************************************************************=
******/


18. Roll Your Own Table-Driven Implementation
---------------------------------------------
Despite all the fuss I've made about understanding and defining CRC
algorithms, the mechanics of their high-speed implementation remains
trivial. There are really only two forms: normal and reflected. Normal
shifts to the left and covers the case of algorithms with Refin=3DFALSE
and Refot=3DFALSE. Reflected shifts to the right and covers algorithms
with both those parameters true. (If you want one parameter true and
the other false, you'll have to figure it out for yourself!) The
polynomial is embedded in the lookup table (to be discussed). The
other parameters, Init and XorOt can be coded as macros. Here is the
32-bit normal form (the 16-bit form is similar).

   unsigned long crc_normal ();
   unsigned long crc_normal (blk_adr,blk_len)
   unsigned char *blk_adr;
   unsigned long  blk_len;
   {
    unsigned long crc =3D INIT;
    while (blk_len--)
       crc =3D crctable[((crc>>24) ^ *blk_adr++) & 0xFFL] ^ (crc << 8);
    return crc ^ XOROT;
   }

Here is the reflected form:

   unsigned long crc_reflected ();
   unsigned long crc_reflected (blk_adr,blk_len)
   unsigned char *blk_adr;
   unsigned long  blk_len;
   {
    unsigned long crc =3D INIT_REFLECTED;
    while (blk_len--)
       crc =3D crctable[(crc ^ *blk_adr++) & 0xFFL] ^ (crc >> 8));
    return crc ^ XOROT;
   }

Note: I have carefully checked the above two code fragments, but I
haven't actually compiled or tested them. This shouldn't matter to
you, as, no matter WHAT you code, you will always be able to tell if
you have got it right by running whatever you have created against the
reference model given earlier. The code fragments above are really
just a rough guide. The reference model is the definitive guide.

Note: If you don't care much about speed, just use the reference model
code!


19. Generating A Lookup Table
-----------------------------
The only component missing from the normal and reversed code fragments
in the previous section is the lookup table. The lookup table can be
computed at run time using the cm_tab function of the model package
given earlier, or can be pre-computed and inserted into the C program.
In either case, it should be noted that the lookup table depends only
on the POLY and RefIn (and RefOt) parameters. Basically, the
polynomial determines the table, but you can generate a reflected
table too if you want to use the reflected form above.

The following program generates any desired 16-bit or 32-bit lookup
table. Skip to the word "Summary" if you want to skip over this code.



/************************************************************************=
******/
/*                             Start of crctable.c                       =
     */
/************************************************************************=
******/
/*                                                                       =
     */
/* Author  : Ross Williams (ross@guest.adelaide.edu.au.).                =
     */
/* Date    : 3 June 1993.                                                =
     */
/* Version : 1.0.                                                        =
     */
/* Status  : Public domain.                                              =
     */
/*                                                                       =
     */
/* Description : This program writes a CRC lookup table (suitable for    =
     */
/* inclusion in a C program) to a designated output file. The program =
can be  */
/* statically configured to produce any table covered by the Rocksoft^tm =
     */
/* Model CRC Algorithm. For more information on the Rocksoft^tm Model =
CRC     */
/* Algorithm, see the document titled "A Painless Guide to CRC Error     =
     */
/* Detection Algorithms" by Ross Williams (ross@guest.adelaide.edu.au.). =
This */
/* document is likely to be in "ftp.adelaide.edu.au/pub/rocksoft".       =
     */
/*                                                                       =
     */
/* Note: Rocksoft is a trademark of Rocksoft Pty Ltd, Adelaide, =
Australia.    */
/*                                                                       =
     */
/************************************************************************=
******/

#include <stdio.h>
#include <stdlib.h>
#include "crcmodel.h"

/************************************************************************=
******/

/* TABLE PARAMETERS                                                      =
     */
/* =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D                      =
                                     */
/* The following parameters entirely determine the table to be =
generated. You */
/* should need to modify only the definitions in this section before =
running  */
/* this program.                                                         =
     */
/*                                                                       =
     */
/*    TB_FILE  is the name of the output file.                           =
     */
/*    TB_WIDTH is the table width in bytes (either 2 or 4).              =
     */
/*    TB_POLY  is the "polynomial", which must be TB_WIDTH bytes wide.   =
     */
/*    TB_REVER indicates whether the table is to be reversed =
(reflected).     */
/*                                                                       =
     */
/* Example:                                                              =
     */
/*                                                                       =
     */
/*    #define TB_FILE   "crctable.out"                                   =
     */
/*    #define TB_WIDTH  2                                                =
     */
/*    #define TB_POLY   0x8005L                                          =
     */
/*    #define TB_REVER  TRUE                                             =
     */

#define TB_FILE   "crctable.out"
#define TB_WIDTH  4
#define TB_POLY   0x04C11DB7L
#define TB_REVER  TRUE

/************************************************************************=
******/

/* Miscellaneous definitions. */

#define LOCAL static
FILE *outfile;
#define WR(X) fprintf(outfile,(X))
#define WP(X,Y) fprintf(outfile,(X),(Y))

/************************************************************************=
******/

LOCAL void chk_err P_((char *));
LOCAL void chk_err (mess)
/* If mess is non-empty, write it out and abort. Otherwise, check the =
error   */
/* status of outfile and abort if an error has occurred.                 =
     */
char *mess;
{
 if (mess[0] !=3D 0   ) {printf("%s\n",mess); exit(EXIT_FAILURE);}
 if (ferror(outfile)) {perror("chk_err");   exit(EXIT_FAILURE);}
}

/************************************************************************=
******/

LOCAL void chkparam P_((void));
LOCAL void chkparam ()
{
 if ((TB_WIDTH !=3D 2) && (TB_WIDTH !=3D 4))
    chk_err("chkparam: Width parameter is illegal.");
 if ((TB_WIDTH =3D=3D 2) && (TB_POLY & 0xFFFF0000L))
    chk_err("chkparam: Poly parameter is too wide.");
 if ((TB_REVER !=3D FALSE) && (TB_REVER !=3D TRUE))
    chk_err("chkparam: Reverse parameter is not boolean.");
}

/************************************************************************=
******/

LOCAL void gentable P_((void));
LOCAL void gentable ()
{
 =
WR("/*****************************************************************/\n=
");
 WR("/*                                                               =
*/\n");
 WR("/* CRC LOOKUP TABLE                                              =
*/\n");
 WR("/* =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D                 =
                             */\n");
 WR("/* The following CRC lookup table was generated automagically    =
*/\n");
 WR("/* by the Rocksoft^tm Model CRC Algorithm Table Generation       =
*/\n");
 WR("/* Program V1.0 using the following model parameters:            =
*/\n");
 WR("/*                                                               =
*/\n");
 WP("/*    Width   : %1lu bytes.                                         =
*/\n",
    (ulong) TB_WIDTH);
 if (TB_WIDTH =3D=3D 2)
 WP("/*    Poly    : 0x%04lX                                           =
*/\n",
    (ulong) TB_POLY);
 else
 WP("/*    Poly    : 0x%08lXL                                      =
*/\n",
    (ulong) TB_POLY);
 if (TB_REVER)
 WR("/*    Reverse : TRUE.                                            =
*/\n");
 else
 WR("/*    Reverse : FALSE.                                           =
*/\n");
 WR("/*                                                               =
*/\n");
 WR("/* For more information on the Rocksoft^tm Model CRC Algorithm,  =
*/\n");
 WR("/* see the document titled \"A Painless Guide to CRC Error        =
*/\n");
 WR("/* Detection Algorithms\" by Ross Williams                        =
*/\n");
 WR("/* (ross@guest.adelaide.edu.au.). This document is likely to be  =
*/\n");
 WR("/* in the FTP archive \"ftp.adelaide.edu.au/pub/rocksoft\".        =
*/\n");
 WR("/*                                                               =
*/\n");
 =
WR("/*****************************************************************/\n=
");
 WR("\n");
 switch (TB_WIDTH)
   {
    case 2: WR("unsigned short crctable[256] =3D\n{\n"); break;
    case 4: WR("unsigned long  crctable[256] =3D\n{\n"); break;
    default: chk_err("gentable: TB_WIDTH is invalid.");
   }
 chk_err("");

 {
  int i;
  cm_t cm;
  char *form    =3D (TB_WIDTH=3D=3D2) ? "0x%04lX" : "0x%08lXL";
  int   perline =3D (TB_WIDTH=3D=3D2) ? 8 : 4;

  cm.cm_width =3D TB_WIDTH*8;
  cm.cm_poly  =3D TB_POLY;
  cm.cm_refin =3D TB_REVER;

  for (i=3D0; i<256; i++)
    {
     WR(" ");
     WP(form,(ulong) cm_tab(&cm,i));
     if (i !=3D 255) WR(",");
     if (((i+1) % perline) =3D=3D 0) WR("\n");
     chk_err("");
    }

 WR("};\n");
 WR("\n");
 =
WR("/*****************************************************************/\n=
");
 WR("/*                   End of CRC Lookup Table                     =
*/\n");
 =
WR("/*****************************************************************/\n=
");
 WR("");
 chk_err("");
}
}

/************************************************************************=
******/

main ()
{
 printf("\n");
 printf("Rocksoft^tm Model CRC Algorithm Table Generation Program =
V1.0\n");
 =
printf("-------------------------------------------------------------\n")=
;
 printf("Output file is \"%s\".\n",TB_FILE);
 chkparam();
 outfile =3D fopen(TB_FILE,"w"); chk_err("");
 gentable();
 if (fclose(outfile) !=3D 0)
    chk_err("main: Couldn't close output file.");
 printf("\nSUCCESS: The table has been successfully written.\n");
}

/************************************************************************=
******/
/*                             End of crctable.c                         =
     */
/************************************************************************=
******/

20. Summary
-----------
This document has provided a detailed explanation of CRC algorithms
explaining their theory and stepping through increasingly
sophisticated implementations ranging from simple bit shifting through
to byte-at-a-time table-driven implementations. The various
implementations of different CRC algorithms that make them confusing
to deal with have been explained. A parameterized model algorithm has
been described that can be used to precisely define a particular CRC
algorithm, and a reference implementation provided. Finally, a program
to generate CRC tables has been provided.

21. Corrections
---------------
If you think that any part of this document is unclear or incorrect,
or have any other information, or suggestions on how this document
could be improved, please context the author. In particular, I would
like to hear from anyone who can provide Rocksoft^tm Model CRC
Algorithm parameters for standard algorithms out there.

A. Glossary
-----------
CHECKSUM - A number that has been calculated as a function of some
message. The literal interpretation of this word "Check-Sum" indicates
that the function should involve simply adding up the bytes in the
message. Perhaps this was what early checksums were. Today, however,
although more sophisticated formulae are used, the term "checksum" is
still used.

CRC - This stands for "Cyclic Redundancy Code". Whereas the term
"checksum" seems to be used to refer to any non-cryptographic checking
information unit, the term "CRC" seems to be reserved only for
algorithms that are based on the "polynomial" division idea.

G - This symbol is used in this document to represent the Poly.

MESSAGE - The input data being checksummed. This is usually structured
as a sequence of bytes. Whether the top bit or the bottom bit of each
byte is treated as the most significant or least significant is a
parameter of CRC algorithms.

POLY - This is my friendly term for the polynomial of a CRC.

POLYNOMIAL - The "polynomial" of a CRC algorithm is simply the divisor
in the division implementing the CRC algorithm.

REFLECT - A binary number is reflected by swapping all of its bits
around the central point. For example, 1101 is the reflection of 1011.

ROCKSOFT^TM MODEL CRC ALGORITHM - A parameterized algorithm whose
purpose is to act as a solid reference for describing CRC algorithms.
Typically CRC algorithms are specified by quoting a polynomial.
However, in order to construct a precise implementation, one also
needs to know initialization values and so on.

WIDTH - The width of a CRC algorithm is the width of its polynomical
minus one. For example, if the polynomial is 11010, the width would be
4 bits. The width is usually set to be a multiple of 8 bits.

B. References
-------------
[Griffiths87] Griffiths, G., Carlyle Stones, G., "The Tea-Leaf Reader
Algorithm: An Efficient Implementation of CRC-16 and CRC-32",
Communications of the ACM, 30(7), pp.617-620. Comment: This paper
describes a high-speed table-driven implementation of CRC algorithms.
The technique seems to be a touch messy, and is superceded by the
Sarwete algorithm.

[Knuth81] Knuth, D.E., "The Art of Computer Programming", Volume 2:
Seminumerical Algorithms, Section 4.6.

[Nelson 91] Nelson, M., "The Data Compression Book", M&T Books, (501
Galveston Drive, Redwood City, CA 94063), 1991, ISBN: 1-55851-214-4.
Comment: If you want to see a real implementation of a real 32-bit
checksum algorithm, look on pages 440, and 446-448.

[Sarwate88] Sarwate, D.V., "Computation of Cyclic Redundancy Checks
via Table Look-Up", Communications of the ACM, 31(8), pp.1008-1013.
Comment: This paper describes a high-speed table-driven implementation
for CRC algorithms that is superior to the tea-leaf algorithm.
Although this paper describes the technique used by most modern CRC
implementations, I found the appendix of this paper (where all the
good stuff is) difficult to understand.

[Tanenbaum81] Tanenbaum, A.S., "Computer Networks", Prentice Hall,
1981, ISBN: 0-13-164699-0. Comment: Section 3.5.3 on pages 128 to 132
provides a very clear description of CRC codes. However, it does not
describe table-driven implementation techniques.


C. References I Have Detected But Haven't Yet Sighted
-----------------------------------------------------
Boudreau, Steen, "Cyclic Redundancy Checking by Program," AFIPS
Proceedings, Vol. 39, 1971.

Davies, Barber, "Computer Networks and Their Protocols," J. Wiley &
Sons, 1979.

Higginson, Kirstein, "On the Computation of Cyclic Redundancy Checks
by Program," The Computer Journal (British), Vol. 16, No. 1, Feb 1973.

McNamara, J. E., "Technical Aspects of Data Communication," 2nd
Edition, Digital Press, Bedford, Massachusetts, 1982.

Marton and Frambs, "A Cyclic Redundancy Checking (CRC) Algorithm,"
Honeywell Computer Journal, Vol. 5, No. 3, 1971.

Nelson M., "File verification using CRC", Dr Dobbs Journal, May 1992,
pp.64-67.

Ramabadran T.V., Gaitonde S.S., "A tutorial on CRC computations", IEEE
Micro, Aug 1988.

Schwaderer W.D., "CRC Calculation", April 85 PC Tech Journal,
pp.118-133.

Ward R.K, Tabandeh M., "Error Correction and Detection, A Geometric
Approach" The Computer Journal, Vol. 27, No. 3, 1984, pp.246-253.

Wecker, S., "A Table-Lookup Algorithm for Software Computation of
Cyclic Redundancy Check (CRC)," Digital Equipment Corporation
memorandum, 1974.

--<End of Document>--
</XMP></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0A09_01C56B69.42F137D0--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 7748 invoked from network); 21 Jul 2001 00:34:06 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 21 Jul 2001 00:34:06 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 18052 invoked from network); 21 Jul 2001 00:35:46 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 21 Jul 2001 00:35:46 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA00845; Fri, 20 Jul 2001 17:31:30 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 79881 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 21 Jul 2001 00:31:26          +0000
Received: from grucom2.gru.net (grucom2.gru.net [209.251.129.7]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA25239 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed,          18 Jul 2001 19:53:45 -0700
Received: from [209.251.150.199] by grucom2.sfcc.net (NTMail          6.03.0009/NU4112.00.db1c8a4b) with ESMTP id avehgaaa for          AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 18 Jul 2001 22:53:36 -0400
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (Win95; I)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <LPBBKJMJEOFKAMFJJNNHCELKCFAA.landofgrey@gnc.net>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B564BF0.CA7B5A3F@sfcc.net>
Date:         Wed, 18 Jul 2001 22:54:40 -0400
Reply-To: "James Yawn" <jyawn@SFCC.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "James Yawn" <jyawn@SFCC.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Non-black powder ejection
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

I discovered that a gram is indeed quite a bit of expellant if one is using
commercial black powder.  Got home before dark for a change and made a rough
ejection simulator out of 2 inch PVC pipe a foot long with a threaded cap on one
end.  It was packed tightly with rags and laid horizontally on the picnic
table.  One gram of BP fired the rags 30 feet, kicked the PVC off the table and
scared the cats.  One gram of Red Dot plopped the rags out a foot or two and
recoiled the PVC less than an inch.  Less BP would certainly have been
appropriate, but even more SP might be needed for a real launch with nose cone,
etc., unless it were pressurized.

I look forward to testing some pressurized SP ejection charges to see the
differences.  Perhaps this weekend...

Jimmy Yawn



Matthew Travis wrote:

> > Behalf Of James Yawn
> > Sent: Monday, July 16, 2001 12:28 AM
> >
> > Given the forcefulness of the ejection I witnessed in my simple
> > test yesterday, I
> > would question whether pressure containment of a smokeless powder
> > charge is
> > necessary, or even helpful.  The gram of Red Dot was contained
> > only by one layer of
> > two-ply paper towel, yet had no trouble in ejecting a big wad
> > packed in tight.  It
> > was more like a pneumatic device, less explosive than BP.  Trying
> > to raise the SP
> > up to explosive pressures seems counterproductive to me.
> >
>
> You did use a significant bit of powder, though. I'm not sure one would want
> to use that much anyway. Half that would probably be better, and then
> containment might be nice. Perhaps you prefer to use to powder and not
> contain it, but that goes against my own preferences. A gram seems like a
> lot of powder to me.
>
> Matt

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 15513 invoked from network); 21 Jul 2001 00:36:23 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 21 Jul 2001 00:36:22 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 9829 invoked from network); 21 Jul 2001 00:38:05 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 21 Jul 2001 00:38:05 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA00886; Fri, 20 Jul 2001 17:32:55 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 79887 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 21 Jul 2001 00:32:51          +0000
Received: from smtp4ve.mailsrvcs.net (smtp4vepub.gte.net [206.46.170.25]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA25369 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 18 Jul 2001 20:35:13 -0700
Received: from me-513q3sc0zun0.pengar.com          (adsl-64-223-147-206.mannh.adsl.bellatlantic.net [64.223.147.206]) by          smtp4ve.mailsrvcs.net (8.9.1/8.9.1) with ESMTP id DAA55130028 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 19 Jul 2001 03:34:42 GMT
X-Sender: seth-pc@hobbiton.shire.net
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
References: <Your message of Wed, 18 Jul 2001 02:21:13 -0700>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <5.1.0.14.0.20010718233432.0336cea8@hobbiton.shire.net>
Date:         Wed, 18 Jul 2001 23:39:24 -0400
Reply-To: "Seth Leigh" <seth@PENGAR.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Seth Leigh" <seth@PENGAR.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] CRC codes
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <CMM.0.90.4.995484347.billw@cypher>

I believe he probably means codespace efficient because he's probably using
a microcontroller, and doesn't have much memory to play with.

If that's the case, then why not use something very simple, like a
checksum?  If nothing else you could just use parity.  That would be *very*
simple and not require much code, but also would allow lots of errors to
cancel themselves out and still get the right parity.

Still, if you are very, very, very short on memory to hold your code in
your microcontroller, then something along these lines could well do.

Seth

At 03:25 PM 7/18/2001, William Chops Westfield wrote:
>There are some example algorithms in the RFC describing async HDLC.
>I'm not sure exactly what you mean by codespace-efficient - one common
>implementation doesn't use much code, but it has a big data table (this
>does byte-at-a-time CRC.)  Bit-at-a-time CRC generation doesn't use much
>code or data space, but is quite slow, of course...
>
>BillW

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 24172 invoked from network); 21 Jul 2001 00:39:01 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 21 Jul 2001 00:39:01 -0000
Received: (qmail 11020 invoked from network); 21 Jul 2001 00:40:44 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 21 Jul 2001 00:40:44 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA00965; Fri, 20 Jul 2001 17:35:43 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 79982 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 21 Jul 2001 00:35:41          +0000
Received: from femail22.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail22.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.0.95.147]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA27576          for <arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 19 Jul 2001 09:16:48 -0700
Received: from cc334751a ([65.13.214.65]) by femail22.sdc1.sfba.home.com          (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20 201-229-121-120-20010223) with SMTP id          <20010719161641.NPIY5657.femail22.sdc1.sfba.home.com@cc334751a> for          <arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 19 Jul 2001 09:16:41 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0A0D_01C56B69.42F381C0"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2462.0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <004701c1106e$49baa420$6401a8c0@home.com>
Date:         Thu, 19 Jul 2001 10:17:20 -0600
Reply-To: "Brian Kosko" <bkosko1@HOME.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Brian Kosko" <bkosko1@HOME.COM>
Subject:      [AR] TiO2 as Burn Rate Catalyst
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0A0D_01C56B69.42F381C0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Has anyone tried using this in AP/Al/HTPB propellant? I read an article =
that said you could get a 'plateau' burn rate with it. I know that's =
possible for DB propellants, but I hadn't heard of it for AP stuff. This =
could be worth looking into.

                                                                    =
Brian

------=_NextPart_000_0A0D_01C56B69.42F381C0
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Diso-8859-1">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 6.00.2462.0" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Has anyone tried using this in =
AP/Al/HTPB=20
propellant? I read an article that said you could get a 'plateau' burn =
rate with=20
it. I know that's possible for DB propellants, but I hadn't heard of it =
for AP=20
stuff. This could be worth looking into.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;=20
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; =
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;=20
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; =
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;=20
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; =
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;=20
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;=20
Brian</FONT></DIV></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0A0D_01C56B69.42F381C0--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 24362 invoked from network); 21 Jul 2001 00:39:05 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 21 Jul 2001 00:39:05 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 11051 invoked from network); 21 Jul 2001 00:40:47 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 21 Jul 2001 00:40:47 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA00923; Fri, 20 Jul 2001 17:34:19 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 79889 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 21 Jul 2001 00:34:17          +0000
Received: from smtp6ve.mailsrvcs.net (smtp6vepub.gte.net [206.46.170.27]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA25381 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 18 Jul 2001 20:39:00 -0700
Received: from me-513q3sc0zun0.pengar.com          (adsl-64-223-147-206.mannh.adsl.bellatlantic.net [64.223.147.206]) by          smtp6ve.mailsrvcs.net (8.9.1/8.9.1) with ESMTP id DAA43532973; Thu,          19 Jul 2001 03:37:52 GMT
X-Sender: seth-pc@hobbiton.shire.net
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
References: <CMM.0.90.4.995484347.billw@cypher>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <5.1.0.14.0.20010718234001.02b64e70@hobbiton.shire.net>
Date:         Wed, 18 Jul 2001 23:42:30 -0400
Reply-To: "Seth Leigh" <seth@PENGAR.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Seth Leigh" <seth@PENGAR.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] CRC codes
Comments: To: Henry Spencer <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010718160721.11842G-100000@spsystems.net>

I would guess that the gentleman who posed the question originally is using
a microcontroller, and may well be very much limited in terms of the size
of the code generated, as well as the speed at which the code can run.  If
speed is an issue then your bitwise algorithm on a small, slow
microcontroller is probably out if his framerate is high enough, and if
he's space-limited than that .5k table is probably out, as .5 k on most
microcontrollers is a lot of space.  If he's limited by both than he
probably needs to give up a true CRC and go for something simple like a
checksum or some scheme involving parity.

Seth


At 04:11 PM 7/18/2001, Henry Spencer wrote:
>On Wed, 18 Jul 2001, William Chops Westfield wrote:
> > ...Bit-at-a-time CRC generation doesn't use much
> > code or data space, but is quite slow, of course...
>
>The speed comparison is quite so simple any more.  Modern CPUs are getting
>monstrously fast, and memory is not keeping up (not even close), and
>caches can only do so much.  It is increasingly becoming worthwhile to
>expend a lot of CPU cycles to avoid a cache miss.  I wouldn't be surprised
>to see the bitwise CRC generation actually end up being faster...
>
>Mind you, that class of CPU hasn't yet made its way into small systems
>like flight computers, much.  But it's coming.
>
>                                                           Henry Spencer
>                                                        henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 9688 invoked from network); 21 Jul 2001 00:43:27 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 21 Jul 2001 00:43:27 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 13478 invoked from network); 21 Jul 2001 00:45:09 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 21 Jul 2001 00:45:09 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA01001; Fri, 20 Jul 2001 17:37:07 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 79995 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 21 Jul 2001 00:37:05          +0000
Received: from brighton.legacywireless.com (legacywireless.com [208.187.126.2])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA28009 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Thu, 19 Jul 2001 11:41:35 -0700
Received: from [208.187.122.40] by brighton.cogolink.com (NTMail          5.00.0010/NY4701.00.0f189dc1) with ESMTP id ydsroaaa for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Thu, 19 Jul 2001 12:50:14 -0600
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.77 [en] (Win98; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B572ACB.5CAC57E7@biomicro.com>
Date:         Thu, 19 Jul 2001 12:45:31 -0600
Reply-To: "Mark K. Spute" <mks@BIOMICRO.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Mark K. Spute" <mks@BIOMICRO.COM>
Subject:      [AR] Demonstration Launch
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Last Monday, 16 July, 2001, I gave a presentation to the board of the
Wah Wah Valley Interlocal Development Entity in Beaver, Utah.  The
presentation concerned the creation of a permanent launch site that
could be used by Amateur/Experimental rocketeers, HPR, as well as small
and large commercial operators.  We are envisioning a launch and
recovery complex with restricted airspace (similar to an MOA) and
permanent alititude waivers to (hopefully) 100km or higher.  The board
and local citizens are behind this, and have asked for a demonstration
of the types of rockets that would be launched.

The demonstration launch has been tentatively scheduled for 22 September
2001 at a site just south of highway 21 in the Wah Way valley of
south-western Utah, 30 miles south west of Milford, Utah.

This is a call for rocketeers to bring as many different kinds of
vehicles as they can to demonstrate them for the board, and also to just
have a great time launching.  I will be contacting the Utah Rocket Club
to see if they want to come out too and bring their HPR stuff.

We want to demonstrate candy and composite motors, NO2 Hybrids,
bipropellant liquid rockets, and I'd really like to get that steam
rocket out there too.

Note that this is a totally unimproved lauch site.  There are no launch
towers, no bunkers, nothing.  Power and water will be provided, and we
are planning to ask one of the local ATV clubs to assist with down range
recovery.  I've never organized a launch before, and I don't know what
we need, so counsel and advice is requested.

Anyone interested in participating in this in any way, please contact me
off list so we don't flood the list with mail.

Please help.  We are trying to build something here that all amateurs
can use, and that will minimize the paper chase and regulatory headaches
currently associated with our work.



--
Mark K. Spute
Senior Research Engineer
BioMicro Systems Inc.

KD7IWE,  RRS

"It is difficult to say what is impossible, for the dream of yesterday
is the hope of today and the reality of tomorrow."
     Dr. Robert H. Goddard

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 10179 invoked from network); 21 Jul 2001 00:43:35 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 21 Jul 2001 00:43:35 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 1648 invoked from network); 21 Jul 2001 00:45:30 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 21 Jul 2001 00:45:30 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA01047; Fri, 20 Jul 2001 17:38:32 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 79997 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 21 Jul 2001 00:38:29          +0000
Received: from avocet.mail.pas.earthlink.net (avocet.mail.pas.earthlink.net          [207.217.121.50]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA28151          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 19 Jul 2001 12:40:32 -0700
Received: from earthlink.net (dialup-209.247.139.63.Dial1.SanJose1.Level3.net          [209.247.139.63]) by avocet.mail.pas.earthlink.net (EL-8_9_3_3/8.9.3)          with ESMTP id MAA04150 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 19 Jul 2001          12:40:31 -0700 (PDT)
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (Win98; I)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B573AB9.E2055B13@earthlink.net>
Date:         Thu, 19 Jul 2001 12:53:29 -0700
Reply-To: <thomgaf@energyrs.com>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Thomas M. Mcgaffey" <energyrelease@EARTHLINK.NET>
Subject:      [AR] Test, Do not read
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a test message.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 21392 invoked from network); 21 Jul 2001 00:46:46 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 21 Jul 2001 00:46:46 -0000
Received: (qmail 14709 invoked from network); 21 Jul 2001 00:48:28 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 21 Jul 2001 00:48:28 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA01084; Fri, 20 Jul 2001 17:39:57 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 80001 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 21 Jul 2001 00:39:54          +0000
Received: from femail9.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail9.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.0.95.89]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA28591 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 19 Jul 2001 14:57:27 -0700
Received: from hal2001 ([24.77.53.16]) by femail9.sdc1.sfba.home.com (InterMail          vM.4.01.03.20 201-229-121-120-20010223) with SMTP id          <20010719215720.YCEU2119.femail9.sdc1.sfba.home.com@hal2001> for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 19 Jul 2001 14:57:20 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <002b01c1109c$affe3660$0400a8c0@hatjs>
Date:         Thu, 19 Jul 2001 14:49:29 -0700
Reply-To: "Jamie Morken" <jmorken@HOME.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jamie Morken" <jmorken@HOME.COM>
Subject:      [AR] AMSAT will be making an "opensource" satellite!
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Hi all,

This is copied from a public AMSAT mailing list:

Maybe there will be some good details in there for rocketry communication
aspects even if no amateur rocketeer needs a satellite for a long time.
Full schematics etc!

I think they chose to go opensource following what happened to their P3D
satellite and they think that if a wider community can see the development
of their next satellite they will have better luck with it.

best regards,
Jamie


Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2001 04:09:15 -0500
From: Dan James <nn0dj@wiktel.com>
Subject: [amsat-bb] JUly 2001 President's Letter

SB SAT @ AMSAT $ANS-200.01
JULY 2001 PRESIDENT'S LETTER

AMSAT NEWS SERVICE BULLETIN 200.01 FROM AMSAT HQ
SILVER SPRING, MD, JULY 19, 2001
TO ALL RADIO AMATEURS
BID: $ANS-200.01

Greetings,

It is with great pleasure that I write to you this month and talk about the
progress being made with our next satellite project, currently known as
"Project JJ".

Recently, a meeting was held in Denver, Colorado - attended by twenty
of AMSAT-NA's designers and officers. Their main objective was to
begin implementation of this project, as mandated by the AMSAT-NA
Board of Directors. While it is not my intention in this letter to go into
every detail about the meeting, it is important to note that one very
significant decision made was to make every aspect of this new satellite
(as it is being designed) completely available to the AMSAT community.
By every aspect I mean every drawing (including schematics), every
piece of code and all telemetry details, etc. The only details which will
not
be released are those which would possibly endanger the security of the
spacecraft when in orbit (should hackers become active on the bird), and
any proprietary commercial data (which I don't think that there will be
much, if any, of). In other words, Project JJ will be your satellite!

Yes, this new project will be an "open concept" design and the project
committee will welcome your constructive feedback as the project
progresses. In fact, I am pleased to announce that Paul Williamson,
KB5MU, will be posting all project information on the AMSAT-NA web
page and Russ Tillman, K5NRK, will be writing an initial article for the
AMSAT-NA Journal - with more articles planned as we progress. I am
also pleased to announce that Lyle Johnson, KK7P, and Chuck Green,
N0ADI, have agreed to act as joint managers at the start of this project.

As with any project it is always wise to review, and learn from, previous
projects. Accordingly, at the Denver meeting a review of the Phase 3
series of satellites was undertaken. Discussion took place on advantages
and disadvantages, things we want to repeat and things we can improve
on. Such a review is a very valuable part of the design process.

Some of the decisions made at the meeting included:

1) Sideband uplinks on L and U bands with a S-band downlink;
2) Digital communications (TDMA) L-band uplink with S-band downlink;
3) V-band telemetry beacon;
4) Gain antennas for U, L, and S-bands;
5) Omni-directional antennas (for initial commands);
6) Propulsion system only if absolutely necessary. This is function of
yet undetermined launch dynamics and may require some form of
cold gas propulsion system for perigee adjustment. A decision on this will
be made in the near future.

Now to the important question of finance.

It is quite apparent that the days of inexpensive launches is over,
especially if we want a good, reliable launch, which I'm sure, we all do.
Therefore, it is imperative that we immediately commence a fund raising
effort -for a launch (currently estimated) for early 2004. I encourage you
to become a President's Club donor at either the $100/month (Gold) or
$50/month (Silver) level. In addition, a meeting of the AMSAT-NA
Development Committee will take place in mid-August with the main
objective of determining the best way to raise the necessary funds and
to coordinate the fundraising effort itself.

Meanwhile, you can take the initiative by calling Martha at the
AMSAT-NA office and give her your details for President's Club
Membership! Remember - AMSAT donations are tax deductible in the
U.S.

Martha can be reached during normal business hours at:

(301) 589-6062

Again, this will be your satellite!

73,

Robin Haighton, VE3FRH
President, AMSAT-NA

/EX

- ----
Via the amsat-bb mailing list at AMSAT.ORG courtesy of AMSAT-NA.
To unsubscribe, send "unsubscribe amsat-bb" to Majordomo@amsat.org

------------------------------

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 21763 invoked from network); 21 Jul 2001 00:46:52 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 21 Jul 2001 00:46:52 -0000
Received: (qmail 25008 invoked from network); 21 Jul 2001 00:48:32 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 21 Jul 2001 00:48:32 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA01158; Fri, 20 Jul 2001 17:42:47 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 80032 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 21 Jul 2001 00:42:44          +0000
Received: from femail13.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail13.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.0.95.140]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA29759          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 19 Jul 2001 21:34:26 -0700
Received: from officenew ([24.1.27.168]) by femail13.sdc1.sfba.home.com          (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20 201-229-121-120-20010223) with SMTP id          <20010720043417.MTXU20529.femail13.sdc1.sfba.home.com@officenew> for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 19 Jul 2001 21:34:17 -0700
References:  <NEBBLECGKLLOLFCCBNPEEEBNDBAA.duncan@transim.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2462.0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <00fe01c110d5$3c24aec0$8300a8c0@olmpi1.wa.home.com>
Date:         Thu, 19 Jul 2001 21:34:16 -0700
Reply-To: "Tomm Aldridge" <taldridge@HOME.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Tomm Aldridge" <taldridge@HOME.COM>
Subject:      [AR] Smokeless Powder Burn Rates
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/Lobby/1221/powders.htm

not verified, use at your own risk, buyer beware and all that...

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 22399 invoked from network); 21 Jul 2001 00:47:04 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 21 Jul 2001 00:47:04 -0000
Received: (qmail 3845 invoked from network); 21 Jul 2001 00:49:02 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 21 Jul 2001 00:49:02 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA01199; Fri, 20 Jul 2001 17:44:14 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 80073 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 21 Jul 2001 00:44:10          +0000
Received: from fep3-orange.clear.net.nz (fep3-orange.clear.net.nz          [203.97.32.3]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id FAA31058          for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Fri, 20 Jul 2001 05:51:22 -0700
Received: from mkbs (203-167-163-174.dialup.clear.net.nz [203.167.163.174]) by          fep3-orange.clear.net.nz (1.5/1.8) with SMTP id AAA27163; Sat, 21 Jul          2001 00:51:17 +1200 (NZST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="Windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <012a01c1111a$cb6e2620$0100a8c0@mkbs>
Date:         Fri, 20 Jul 2001 22:01:35 +1200
Reply-To: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Organization: Applied Technology
Subject:      [AR] HTP Catalysts / Rockets / Jetbelt / Rocket drag bikes ...
Comments: To: erps-list@LunaCity.com
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

I assume this site must be known to the Peroxide people, but just in case
...
Quite a lot of Peroxide Rocket related material including some interesting
motor fabrication photos for 1000 lb odd thrust motor.

HTP motor hardware enthusiasts and motorcycle dragster enthusiasts probably
want to look at least at the last link below.


He claims a pentametallic catalysts system useable without poisoning or
melting at over 90% HTP concentration.

Also does -

HTP stills (50% to 90%)
Rocket belt development.
90% HTP rockets
Steam Rockets

    http://www.tecaeromex.com/ingles/indexi.html

HTP catalyst

    http://www.tecaeromex.com/ingles/cata-i.html

Rocket drag bikes (rider wears a g suit !)

    http://www.tecaeromex.com/ingles/sar-i/motoi.html

Rocket bike & HTP motor construction.
Many pictures.
Motors are surprisingly short.

    http://www.tecaeromex.com/ingles/sar-i/rbi.html




        Russell McMahon

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 347 invoked from network); 21 Jul 2001 00:49:17 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 21 Jul 2001 00:49:17 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 25977 invoked from network); 21 Jul 2001 00:50:57 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 21 Jul 2001 00:50:57 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA01236; Fri, 20 Jul 2001 17:45:38 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 80085 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 21 Jul 2001 00:45:35          +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (f137.law3.hotmail.com [209.185.241.137]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA31627 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Fri, 20 Jul 2001 09:31:21 -0700
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Fri,          20 Jul 2001 09:30:51 -0700
Received: from 213.224.83.46 by lw3fd.law3.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Fri, 20          Jul 2001 16:30:51 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [213.224.83.46]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 20 Jul 2001 16:30:51.0382 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[5704B960:01C11139]
Message-ID:  <F137aJY4kJSFsxf4yp800002218@hotmail.com>
Date:         Sat, 21 Jul 2001 00:45:35 +0000
Reply-To: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      [AR] Fwd: PRESIDENT BUSH MARKS VIKING'S SILVER ANNIVERSARY TO THE              RED              PLANET
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Yeah yeah but is he doing somethong about it?

jd

>From: NASANews@hq.nasa.gov
>To: undisclosed-recipients:;
>Subject: PRESIDENT BUSH MARKS VIKING'S SILVER ANNIVERSARY TO THE RED PLANET
>Date: Fri, 20 Jul 2001 11:10:36 -0400 (EDT)
>
>Bob Jacobs
>Headquarters, Washington, DC            July 20, 2001
>(Phone: 202/358-1600)
>
>NOTE TO EDITOR: N01-041
>
>PRESIDENT BUSH MARKS VIKING'S
>SILVER ANNIVERSARY TO THE RED PLANET
>
>      On this date, 25 years ago, NASA's Viking 1 lander did
>something no other space probe had ever done - successfully
>land on another planet. Viking's historic mission to Mars
>changed our understanding of Earth's neighbor and inspired a
>robust Martian exploration program that lives on today.
>
>This week, President George W. Bush honored the people who
>made this space odyssey possible. In a commendation letter
>sent to NASA Administrator Daniel S. Goldin, the President
>said "The exploration of Mars brings out the best in
>Americans. It challenges us to learn, to strive, and to
>achieve dreams that were impossible for earlier generations."
>
>Remarks from Administrator Goldin air today on NASA
>Television at 11 a.m. EDT. This afternoon, NASA TV carries a
>panel discussion from NASA's Langley Research Center,
>Hampton, VA, titled "Viking: The First Encounter" from 1:30
>p.m. to 3 p.m. EDT.
>
>Langley managed the Viking project until 1978, when it was
>turned over to NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory, Pasadena,
>CA.
>
>NASA TV is available on GE-2, transponder 9C, C-Band, located
>at 85 degrees West longitude. The frequency is 3880.0 MHz.
>Polarization is vertical and audio is monaural at 6.8 MHz.
>
>The complete text of the President's commendation is
>available on the Internet at:
>
>    http://www.nasa.gov/newsinfo/viking_potus2001.html
>
>                              -end-
>
>
>                             * * *
>
>NASA press releases and other information are available automatically
>by sending an Internet electronic mail message to domo@hq.nasa.gov.
>In the body of the message (not the subject line) users should type
>the words "subscribe press-release" (no quotes).  The system will
>reply with a confirmation via E-mail of each subscription.  A second
>automatic message will include additional information on the service.
>NASA releases also are available via CompuServe using the command
>GO NASA.  To unsubscribe from this mailing list, address an E-mail
>message to domo@hq.nasa.gov, leave the subject blank, and type only
>"unsubscribe press-release" (no quotes) in the body of the message.
>
>


_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 7819 invoked from network); 21 Jul 2001 00:51:19 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 21 Jul 2001 00:51:19 -0000
Received: (qmail 11213 invoked from network); 21 Jul 2001 00:52:37 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 21 Jul 2001 00:52:37 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA01324; Fri, 20 Jul 2001 17:48:27 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 80173 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 21 Jul 2001 00:48:25          +0000
Received: from femail22.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail22.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.0.95.147]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA00330          for <arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 20 Jul 2001 15:19:56 -0700
Received: from cc334751a ([65.13.214.65]) by femail22.sdc1.sfba.home.com          (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20 201-229-121-120-20010223) with SMTP id          <20010720221948.CXCJ6674.femail22.sdc1.sfba.home.com@cc334751a> for          <arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 20 Jul 2001 15:19:48 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2462.0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <007a01c1116a$2d453380$6401a8c0@home.com>
Date:         Fri, 20 Jul 2001 16:20:26 -0600
Reply-To: "Brian Kosko" <bkosko1@HOME.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Brian Kosko" <bkosko1@HOME.COM>
Subject:      [AR] Fw: Re: Predicted vs. Actual ISP
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

----- Original Message -----
From: "Brian Kosko" <bkosko1@home.com>
To: "Bill Westfield" <billw@cisco.com>; <CHEMROC@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU>
Sent: Friday, July 20, 2001 4:17 PM
Subject: Re: Re: Predicted vs. Actual ISP


> Bill,
>
> We've used both 'superfine' APs from Firefox with no problems. The latest
> was for a 98mm red motor that burnt great. It is certainly finer than any
of
> their other AP. The other AP more or less resembles regular sugar; the
> superfine stuff is like confectioner's sugar. It also has a real tendency
to
> clump up in storage. We've had a few different batches of the stuff and
> haven't noticed any differences. We originally tried the stuff in all of
our
> motors. The conclusion we reached was that it made our 85% to 88% solids
> AP/Al/HTPB propellant too fast burning. Our set of 6061 sheet metal that
was
> formerly motor cases bears witness to this. Our current use is with our
> special effects formulations (red, green, smoky). We find these can use
that
> extra umpphh that the finer stuff provides.
>
>                                                                     Brian
>
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 9196 invoked from network); 21 Jul 2001 00:51:41 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 21 Jul 2001 00:51:41 -0000
Received: (qmail 4886 invoked from network); 21 Jul 2001 00:53:39 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 21 Jul 2001 00:53:39 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA01296; Fri, 20 Jul 2001 17:47:03 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 80169 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 21 Jul 2001 00:47:00          +0000
Received: from tomts8-srv.bellnexxia.net (tomts8.bellnexxia.net          [209.226.175.52]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA32711          for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Fri, 20 Jul 2001 14:49:25 -0700
Received: from station1 ([216.209.40.84]) by tomts8-srv.bellnexxia.net          (InterMail vM.4.01.03.16 201-229-121-116-20010115) with SMTP id          <20010720214854.VATR3306.tomts8-srv.bellnexxia.net@station1>; Fri, 20          Jul 2001 17:48:54 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="Windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
Importance: Normal
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <NFBBKADEMLBLIEKNLLEPEEAHCDAA.bfeeney@davinciproject.com>
Date:         Fri, 20 Jul 2001 17:48:55 -0500
Reply-To: "Brian Feeney" <bfeeney@DAVINCIPROJECT.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Brian Feeney" <bfeeney@DAVINCIPROJECT.COM>
Subject:      [AR] Micro rocket engines
Comments: To: erps-list@LunaCity.com
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <012a01c1111a$cb6e2620$0100a8c0@mkbs>

A new link on progress in the microrocket engine field.

<http://www.technologyreview.com/web/leo/leo051801.asp>


Cheers,
Brian
------------------
Brian Feeney
The da Vinci Project
65 Carl Hall Road,Downsview Park,
Toronto, Ontario, Canada, M3K 2B6
tel: 416.631.6540
bfeeney@davinciproject.com
http://www.davinciproject.com

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 27122 invoked from network); 21 Jul 2001 01:05:55 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 21 Jul 2001 01:05:55 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 22527 invoked from network); 21 Jul 2001 01:07:37 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 21 Jul 2001 01:07:37 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA00528; Fri, 20 Jul 2001 18:00:52 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 80389 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 21 Jul 2001 00:57:30          +0000
Received: from hawk.mail.pas.earthlink.net (hawk.mail.pas.earthlink.net          [207.217.120.22]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA01466          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 20 Jul 2001 17:57:30 -0700
Received: from earthlink.net (dialup-209.244.104.176.Dial1.SanJose1.Level3.net          [209.244.104.176]) by hawk.mail.pas.earthlink.net (EL-8_9_3_3/8.9.3)          with ESMTP id RAA23323; Fri, 20 Jul 2001 17:57:27 -0700 (PDT)
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (Win98; I)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <3B572ACB.5CAC57E7@biomicro.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B58D682.46BEE7BC@earthlink.net>
Date:         Fri, 20 Jul 2001 18:10:26 -0700
Reply-To: <thomgaf@energyrs.com>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Thomas M. Mcgaffey" <energyrelease@EARTHLINK.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Demonstration Launch
Comments: To: "Mark K. Spute" <mks@BIOMICRO.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Hi Mark,

The demonstration launch sounds good,  To be able to determine our
participation we need to know the altitude we can launch to, our stuff
is in the 50,000 to 100,000 feet range.  We also would need plenty of
time to prepare.  Also note I talked with Dave Crisalli yesterday and he
mentioned a tentative RRS launch for late September or early October.  I
hope there is no conflict as we have tests to do at the MTA.

Thom

Thomas M. McGaffey
thomgaf@energyrs.com
KE6HKF,  LM RRS
408-226-7502
San Jose Ca.

"Mark K. Spute" wrote:
>
> Last Monday, 16 July, 2001, I gave a presentation to the board of the
> Wah Wah Valley Interlocal Development Entity in Beaver, Utah.  The
> presentation concerned the creation of a permanent launch site that
> could be used by Amateur/Experimental rocketeers, HPR, as well as small
> and large commercial operators.  We are envisioning a launch and
> recovery complex with restricted airspace (similar to an MOA) and
> permanent alititude waivers to (hopefully) 100km or higher.  The board
> and local citizens are behind this, and have asked for a demonstration
> of the types of rockets that would be launched.
>
> The demonstration launch has been tentatively scheduled for 22 September
> 2001 at a site just south of highway 21 in the Wah Way valley of
> south-western Utah, 30 miles south west of Milford, Utah.
>
> This is a call for rocketeers to bring as many different kinds of
> vehicles as they can to demonstrate them for the board, and also to just
> have a great time launching.  I will be contacting the Utah Rocket Club
> to see if they want to come out too and bring their HPR stuff.
>
> We want to demonstrate candy and composite motors, NO2 Hybrids,
> bipropellant liquid rockets, and I'd really like to get that steam
> rocket out there too.
>
> Note that this is a totally unimproved lauch site.  There are no launch
> towers, no bunkers, nothing.  Power and water will be provided, and we
> are planning to ask one of the local ATV clubs to assist with down range
> recovery.  I've never organized a launch before, and I don't know what
> we need, so counsel and advice is requested.
>
> Anyone interested in participating in this in any way, please contact me
> off list so we don't flood the list with mail.
>
> Please help.  We are trying to build something here that all amateurs
> can use, and that will minimize the paper chase and regulatory headaches
> currently associated with our work.
>
> --
> Mark K. Spute
> Senior Research Engineer
> BioMicro Systems Inc.
>
> KD7IWE,  RRS
>
> "It is difficult to say what is impossible, for the dream of yesterday
> is the hope of today and the reality of tomorrow."
>      Dr. Robert H. Goddard

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 20527 invoked from network); 21 Jul 2001 02:51:23 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 21 Jul 2001 02:51:23 -0000
Received: (qmail 13047 invoked from network); 21 Jul 2001 02:53:05 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 21 Jul 2001 02:53:05 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA00978; Fri, 20 Jul 2001 19:47:42 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 80410 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 21 Jul 2001 02:47:33          +0000
Received: from localhost (rcalkins@localhost) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with          ESMTP id TAA00960; Fri, 20 Jul 2001 19:47:30 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.LNX.4.10.10107201933420.925-100000@itc.uci.edu>
Date:         Fri, 20 Jul 2001 19:47:30 -0700
Reply-To: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
Subject:      Re: [AR] 2Binders for cast abrasives? Was --[AR] Cast Nozzle              Molds --              Was              -- Re: [AR] 2RE [AR]CERAMICS
Comments: To: al bradley <abradley@TOOLCITY.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <v01510101b77ae1234509@[63.169.101.188]>

Grog is a generic term for ground ceramic.

Most is SiO2 based, a good ceramic materials site
is:  http://www.matrix2000.co.nz/MatrialsWeb/default.htm

http://www.mrcgrog.com/popups/highdutygrog.htm
This analysis shows mostly SiO2 and Al2O3.

http://www.bpiminerals.com/zircon_grog.html
66% ZrO2, 32% SiO2.

Ray

On Wed, 18 Jul 2001, al bradley wrote:
>
> Grog, IIRC, is a form of silica?

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 25517 invoked from network); 21 Jul 2001 03:02:27 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 21 Jul 2001 03:02:27 -0000
Received: (qmail 10193 invoked from network); 21 Jul 2001 03:04:26 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 21 Jul 2001 03:04:26 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA01069; Fri, 20 Jul 2001 19:58:45 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 80422 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 21 Jul 2001 02:58:43          +0000
Received: from localhost (rcalkins@localhost) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with          ESMTP id TAA01052; Fri, 20 Jul 2001 19:58:42 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.LNX.4.10.10107201951330.925-100000@itc.uci.edu>
Date:         Fri, 20 Jul 2001 19:58:42 -0700
Reply-To: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
Subject:      Re: [AR] dark secrets
Comments: To: Philip D'Souza <pjur@123INDIA.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <20010718065933.23921.cpmta@c009.snv.cp.net>

aRocket is not a forum to discuss classified material.  If it's
classified, it's not "open source" and it's not amateur rocketry.
Additionally, it is off-topic will quickly get you removed from the list,
and is likely to jeapordize those on the list with security clearances.

The list policies will be updated to reflect this matter.

Thank you for your understanding.

Ray

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 10146 invoked from network); 21 Jul 2001 03:38:22 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 21 Jul 2001 03:38:22 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: (qmail 9898 invoked from network); 21 Jul 2001 03:40:03 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 21 Jul 2001 03:40:03 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA01303; Fri, 20 Jul 2001 20:34:03 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 80439 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 21 Jul 2001 03:33:58          +0000
Received: from cisco.com (cypher.cisco.com [171.69.11.18]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA01285; Fri, 20 Jul 2001 20:33:57 -0700
Received: (from billw@localhost) by cisco.com (8.8.8/2.6/Cisco List          Logging/8.8.8) id UAA07777; Fri, 20 Jul 2001 20:33:27 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID:  <CMM.0.90.4.995686407.billw@cypher>
Date:         Fri, 20 Jul 2001 20:33:27 PDT
Reply-To: "Bill Westfield" <billw@cisco.com>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "William Chops Westfield" <billw@cisco.com>
Subject:      Re: [AR] 2Binders for cast abrasives? Was --[AR] Cast Nozzle              Molds --              Was -- Re: [AR] 2RE [AR]CERAMICS
Comments: To: Ray Calkins <rcalkins@ITC.UCI.EDU>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  Your message of Fri, 20 Jul 2001 19:47:30 -0700

I thought that "grog" was basically fired, crushed, clay (and is thus
significantly harder than say, pressed and unfired clay.)

BillW


From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 17937 invoked from network); 21 Jul 2001 03:50:41 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 21 Jul 2001 03:50:41 -0000
Received: (qmail 17251 invoked from network); 21 Jul 2001 03:52:22 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 21 Jul 2001 03:52:22 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA01413; Fri, 20 Jul 2001 20:47:45 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 80463 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 21 Jul 2001 03:47:40          +0000
Received: from localhost (rcalkins@localhost) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with          ESMTP id UAA01396; Fri, 20 Jul 2001 20:47:39 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.LNX.4.10.10107202039050.925-100000@itc.uci.edu>
Date:         Fri, 20 Jul 2001 20:47:39 -0700
Reply-To: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
Subject:      Re: [AR] 2Binders for cast abrasives? Was --[AR] Cast Nozzle              Molds --              Was -- Re: [AR] 2RE [AR]CERAMICS
Comments: To: William Chops Westfield <billw@cisco.com>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <CMM.0.90.4.995686407.billw@cypher>

Hi Bill:

Ground, fired ceramic is my understanding of grog as well, sorry I didn't
make that clear.  I suppose ordinary silica sand could be used as grog.
Also note grog is coarser than ceramic flour, but is often distinguished
from ceramic "sand", which is coarser than most grog these days.

On Fri, 20 Jul 2001, William Chops Westfield wrote:

> I thought that "grog" was basically fired, crushed, clay (and is thus
> significantly harder than say, pressed and unfired clay.)
>
> BillW
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 18314 invoked from network); 21 Jul 2001 04:57:07 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 21 Jul 2001 04:57:07 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 9168 invoked from network); 21 Jul 2001 04:59:06 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 21 Jul 2001 04:59:06 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA01589; Fri, 20 Jul 2001 21:43:50 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 80479 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 21 Jul 2001 04:43:47          +0000
Received: from dns2.seanet.com (dns2.seanet.com [199.181.164.2]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA01572 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri,          20 Jul 2001 21:43:46 -0700
Received: from seanet.com (ssstolt.seanet.com [204.182.68.23]) by          dns2.seanet.com (8.11.3/8.11.2) with ESMTP id f6L4hh515650; Fri, 20          Jul 2001 21:43:43 -0700 (PDT)
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.73 [en] (Win98; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <v01510101b77794c2bed7@[63.169.102.240]>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B5906FD.D3CC45B1@seanet.com>
Date:         Fri, 20 Jul 2001 21:37:17 -0700
Reply-To: "Sherwood Stolt" <ssstolt@SEANET.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Sherwood Stolt" <ssstolt@SEANET.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] 3Re: [AR] Cast Nozzle Molds -- Was -- Re: [AR] 2Re:              [AR]CERAMICS
Comments: cc: al bradley <abradley@TOOLCITY.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

I wouldn't count on dental stone.  My dentist says that the constraint
of being completely non-toxic means they are probably not as good
mechanically as non dental materials (like water putty).

al bradley wrote:

> >Does anyone know what the "RockHard Water Putty" or the "Durhams Water Putty"
> >consists of? - is it a plaster of Paris derivative???
> >
> >Hans Olaf Toft
> >
> Durhams Rockhard Water Putty is a fine-grained, rather hard substance that
> comes in a powder form to be mixed with water and is often used by
> woodworkers as a filler in nail holes and around some joints. It is often
> used by beginning rocketeers to make their nozzles. It does erode some by
> motor gases through the throat. It is sold in the USA, perhaps under
> another name in Denmark.
>
> You might be interested in what we call "dental stone". Here, in the US,
> whan a patient requires artificial teeth the first impression is made in a
> wax-setting material in the mouth. From this a second casting is made in
> dental stone. I am sure that Danish dentists have something like this, but
> it not Plaster of Paris, it is much harder and far more heat resistant.
> Dental stone hardens by reaction, not by drying. Both the Water Putty and
> Dental Stone do not shrink upon setup, but expand very slightly! I cannot
> say that Dental stone may or may not make a reusable nozzle, but I think
> that it will erode much less than the Water Putty and will give you a
> source of inexpensive, easily-replaceable nozzles.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 17620 invoked from network); 21 Jul 2001 05:45:41 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 21 Jul 2001 05:45:41 -0000
Received: (qmail 8880 invoked from network); 21 Jul 2001 05:47:21 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 21 Jul 2001 05:47:21 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA01764; Fri, 20 Jul 2001 22:41:57 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 80499 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 21 Jul 2001 05:41:43          +0000
Received: from wrench.toolcity.net (root@wrench.toolcity.net [208.0.188.2]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA01746 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 20 Jul 2001 22:41:42 -0700
Received: from [208.22.189.184]          (dap-208-22-189-184.meadville-tnt-0.pa.toolcity.net [208.22.189.184])          by wrench.toolcity.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id BAA28912; Sat, 21          Jul 2001 01:41:36 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <v01510100b77ec9f92576@[208.22.189.246]>
Date:         Sat, 21 Jul 2001 01:43:55 -0500
Reply-To: "al bradley" <abradley@TOOLCITY.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "al bradley" <abradley@TOOLCITY.NET>
Subject:      [AR] 4Re: [AR] 3Re: [AR] Cast Nozzle Molds -- Was -- Re: [AR] 2Re:              [AR]CERAMICS
Comments: To: ssstolt@seanet.com
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Perhaps, I don't know. But I do know that the dental stone never comes into
contact with the patient's mouth.

On an extended note I have just recently finished another experiment with
dental stone. I have made impressions of some old coins in the "stone".
Followed this with pressing molten glass (maybe 1200 degrees F) into the
impressions. Where I didn't trap air I got some very good impressions.
Contact time with the mold was about 2 seconds.

More to the point, for rocket nozzles, I noticed some slight mould
degradation at the upper (sharpest) angles where the heat would have been
the most intense. So this may be something that would rule against the use
of the "stone" for nozzles unless the material may be modified.

best regards,
al bradley

------------------
SS writes:
>I wouldn't count on dental stone.  My dentist says that the constraint
>of being completely non-toxic means they are probably not as good
>mechanically as non dental materials (like water putty).
---------------
>> You might be interested in what we call "dental stone". Here, in the US,
>> whan a patient requires artificial teeth the first impression is made in a
>> wax-setting material in the mouth. From this a second casting is made in
>> dental stone. I am sure that Danish dentists have something like this, but
>> it not Plaster of Paris, it is much harder and far more heat resistant.
>> Dental stone hardens by reaction, not by drying. Both the Water Putty and
>> Dental Stone do not shrink upon setup, but expand very slightly! I cannot
>> say that Dental stone may or may not make a reusable nozzle, but I think
>> that it will erode much less than the Water Putty and will give you a
>> source of inexpensive, easily-replaceable nozzles.

------------------------------------------------------------------
Can you live Life with this?: "Unless there is a law, an agreement, or a
long-standing custom, No one `Deserves' Anything -- Either Good or Bad!"

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 15292 invoked from network); 21 Jul 2001 05:57:40 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 21 Jul 2001 05:57:40 -0000
Received: (qmail 3837 invoked from network); 21 Jul 2001 05:58:57 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 21 Jul 2001 05:58:57 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA01831; Fri, 20 Jul 2001 22:54:27 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 80511 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 21 Jul 2001 05:54:24          +0000
Received: from femail22.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail22.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.0.95.147]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA01814          for <arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 20 Jul 2001 22:54:23 -0700
Received: from cc334751a ([65.13.214.65]) by femail22.sdc1.sfba.home.com          (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20 201-229-121-120-20010223) with SMTP id          <20010721055417.QNVP6674.femail22.sdc1.sfba.home.com@cc334751a> for          <arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 20 Jul 2001 22:54:17 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0A10_01C56B69.430B7690"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2462.0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <011001c111a9$a9668ce0$6401a8c0@home.com>
Date:         Fri, 20 Jul 2001 23:54:52 -0600
Reply-To: "Brian Kosko" <bkosko1@HOME.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Brian Kosko" <bkosko1@HOME.COM>
Subject:      [AR] Book plug
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0A10_01C56B69.430B7690
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

I just got my copy of 'Understanding Zinc-Sulphur Propellants by Antoon =
Vyeverman. It's a great deal for the $15 USD or so that it cost. The =
cover photo would be worth that; a great shot of a Z/S motor during a =
static test.

If you have any interest in Z/S motors this would be quite useful.

                                                                    =
Brian

------=_NextPart_000_0A10_01C56B69.430B7690
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Diso-8859-1">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 6.00.2462.0" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>I just got my copy of 'Understanding =
Zinc-Sulphur=20
Propellants by Antoon Vyeverman. It's a great deal for the $15 USD or so =
that it=20
cost. The cover photo would be worth that; a great shot of a Z/S motor =
during a=20
static test.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>If you have any interest in Z/S motors =
this would=20
be quite useful.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;=20
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; =
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;=20
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; =
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;=20
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; =
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;=20
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;=20
Brian</FONT></DIV></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0A10_01C56B69.430B7690--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 12775 invoked from network); 21 Jul 2001 13:55:44 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 21 Jul 2001 13:55:44 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 14393 invoked from network); 21 Jul 2001 13:57:25 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 21 Jul 2001 13:57:25 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA03074; Sat, 21 Jul 2001 06:52:37 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 80604 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 21 Jul 2001 13:52:29          +0000
Received: from smtp6ve.mailsrvcs.net (smtp6vepub.gte.net [206.46.170.27]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA03056 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 21 Jul 2001 06:52:28 -0700
Received: from me-513q3sc0zun0.pengar.com          (adsl-64-223-147-206.mannh.adsl.bellatlantic.net [64.223.147.206]) by          smtp6ve.mailsrvcs.net (8.9.1/8.9.1) with ESMTP id NAA44260201 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 21 Jul 2001 13:51:57 GMT
X-Sender: seth-pc@hobbiton.shire.net
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
References: <20010718065933.23921.cpmta@c009.snv.cp.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <5.1.0.14.0.20010721095524.028d0a60@hobbiton.shire.net>
Date:         Sat, 21 Jul 2001 09:56:37 -0400
Reply-To: "Seth Leigh" <seth@PENGAR.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Seth Leigh" <seth@PENGAR.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] dark secrets
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <Pine.LNX.4.10.10107201951330.925-100000@itc.uci.edu>

Heh.  I didn't even open the attachment.  I don't willingly double-click
attachments I get from people I don't know.  Doing so is the fastest way to
get a virus.  Word to the wise.

Seth



At 10:58 PM 7/20/2001, Ray Calkins wrote:
>aRocket is not a forum to discuss classified material.  If it's
>classified, it's not "open source" and it's not amateur rocketry.
>Additionally, it is off-topic will quickly get you removed from the list,
>and is likely to jeapordize those on the list with security clearances.
>
>The list policies will be updated to reflect this matter.
>
>Thank you for your understanding.
>
>Ray

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 21956 invoked from network); 21 Jul 2001 19:20:32 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 21 Jul 2001 19:20:32 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 16267 invoked from network); 21 Jul 2001 19:22:14 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 21 Jul 2001 19:22:14 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA04245; Sat, 21 Jul 2001 12:14:35 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 80642 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 21 Jul 2001 19:14:27          +0000
Received: from grucom2.gru.net (grucom2.gru.net [209.251.129.7]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA04227 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat,          21 Jul 2001 12:14:27 -0700
Received: from [209.251.150.135] by grucom2.sfcc.net (NTMail          6.03.0009/NU4112.00.db1c8a4b) with ESMTP id ifckgaaa for          AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 21 Jul 2001 15:14:26 -0400
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (Win95; I)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <NFBBKADEMLBLIEKNLLEPEEAHCDAA.bfeeney@davinciproject.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B59D4D7.8A16B890@sfcc.net>
Date:         Sat, 21 Jul 2001 15:15:35 -0400
Reply-To: "James Yawn" <jyawn@SFCC.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "James Yawn" <jyawn@SFCC.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Micro rocket engines
Comments: To: Brian Feeney <bfeeney@DAVINCIPROJECT.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Speaking of microrockets, I would like to indulge a little nostalgia.  I
recently found my ancient copy of the Home Workshop Encyclopedia, circa
early 1950's, with directions for making a match-stick rocket.  I
believe it was published by Popular Mechanics but am not sure - the book
has lost its cover long ago and in the days before Xerox became a common
term publishers did not usually put their name on every page.

I scanned this article and uploaded it to:
http://user.sfcc.net/jyawn/matchrocket5.jpg

Yes, I know that Steve Culivan/Roger Storm have a very nice NASA
web-page on this topic
(at:
http://www.eecs.umich.edu/mathscience/funexperiments/agesubject/lessons/other/match_rocket.html)

but I thought some of you might like to see this old version.  It gave
me my first successful launch - and for many years my ONLY successful
launches!

Jimmy Yawn

p.s.  Another interesting feature was the rocket-glider, at:
http://user.sfcc.net/jyawn/glider2.jpg


Brian Feeney wrote:

> A new link on progress in the microrocket engine field.
>
> <http://www.technologyreview.com/web/leo/leo051801.asp>
>
> Cheers,
> Brian
> ------------------
> Brian Feeney
> The da Vinci Project
> 65 Carl Hall Road,Downsview Park,
> Toronto, Ontario, Canada, M3K 2B6
> tel: 416.631.6540
> bfeeney@davinciproject.com
> http://www.davinciproject.com

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 13484 invoked from network); 21 Jul 2001 19:51:18 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 21 Jul 2001 19:51:18 -0000
Received: (qmail 12237 invoked from network); 21 Jul 2001 19:53:02 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 21 Jul 2001 19:53:02 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA04312; Sat, 21 Jul 2001 12:34:57 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 80650 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 21 Jul 2001 19:34:54          +0000
Received: from localhost (rcalkins@localhost) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with          ESMTP id MAA04295; Sat, 21 Jul 2001 12:34:53 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.LNX.4.10.10107211111360.4055-100000@itc.uci.edu>
Date:         Sat, 21 Jul 2001 12:34:52 -0700
Reply-To: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
Subject:      Re: [AR] dark secrets
Comments: To: Seth Leigh <seth@PENGAR.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <5.1.0.14.0.20010721095524.028d0a60@hobbiton.shire.net>

On Sat, 21 Jul 2001, Seth Leigh wrote:
> I don't willingly double-click attachments I get from people I don't
> know.  Doing so is the fastest way to get a virus.

Very true, Seth.

I have received a few questions about my policy post on classified
material, I suppose an explanation is due.

Mostly, this is due to oversight on my part.  This policy should have been
in place from the beginning.  Hindsight is 20/20.  :-(

Many folks on the list have security clearances.  I sent in paperwork for
a new clearance earlier this week (not rocket related, unfortunately, but
I've gotta pay for propellant and hardware).  Posting classified material
to the list jeopardizes not only list members clearances, but also the
existence of the list.

While the post that started this thread didn't really have any classified
content, it strongly implied it.  Since I live about an hour down the
road from Las Alamos, I may be a little sensitive about this kind of
thing, but it is still inappropriate.

Thank you for your understanding.

Ray

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 13926 invoked from network); 21 Jul 2001 20:03:11 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 21 Jul 2001 20:03:11 -0000
Received: (qmail 4004 invoked from network); 21 Jul 2001 20:04:53 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 21 Jul 2001 20:04:53 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA04415; Sat, 21 Jul 2001 13:01:40 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 80658 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 21 Jul 2001 20:01:34          +0000
Received: from wrench.toolcity.net (root@wrench.toolcity.net [208.0.188.2]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA04397; Sat, 21 Jul 2001          13:01:32 -0700
Received: from [63.169.101.54]          (dap-63-169-101-54.meadville-tnt-1.pa.toolcity.net [63.169.101.54])          by wrench.toolcity.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id QAA29930; Sat, 21          Jul 2001 16:01:27 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <v01510100b77f9e1b7e76@[208.22.189.188]>
Date:         Sat, 21 Jul 2001 16:03:46 -0500
Reply-To: "al bradley" <abradley@TOOLCITY.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "al bradley" <abradley@TOOLCITY.NET>
Subject:      [AR] 2Re: [AR] dark secrets
Comments: To: Ray Calkins <rcalkins@ITC.UCI.EDU>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Hi Ray:
Question: How do we decide if what we know, or what we hear about, is --
classified?

best regards,
al bradley


---------------------------

>I have received a few questions about my policy post on classified
>material, I suppose an explanation is due.
>
>Mostly, this is due to oversight on my part.  This policy should have been
>in place from the beginning.  Hindsight is 20/20.  :-(
>
>Many folks on the list have security clearances.  I sent in paperwork for
>a new clearance earlier this week (not rocket related, unfortunately, but
>I've gotta pay for propellant and hardware).  Posting classified material
>to the list jeopardizes not only list members clearances, but also the
>existence of the list.
>
>While the post that started this thread didn't really have any classified
>content, it strongly implied it.  Since I live about an hour down the
>road from Las Alamos, I may be a little sensitive about this kind of
>thing, but it is still inappropriate.
>
>Thank you for your understanding.
>
>Ray

------------------------------------------------------------------
Can you live Life with this?: "Unless there is a law, an agreement, or a
long-standing custom, No one `Deserves' Anything -- Either Good or Bad!"

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 16730 invoked from network); 21 Jul 2001 20:38:51 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 21 Jul 2001 20:38:51 -0000
Received: (qmail 812 invoked from network); 21 Jul 2001 20:40:36 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 21 Jul 2001 20:40:36 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA04492; Sat, 21 Jul 2001 13:23:26 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 80666 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 21 Jul 2001 20:23:03          +0000
Received: from localhost (rcalkins@localhost) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with          ESMTP id NAA04475; Sat, 21 Jul 2001 13:23:01 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.LNX.4.10.10107211307480.4055-100000@itc.uci.edu>
Date:         Sat, 21 Jul 2001 13:23:01 -0700
Reply-To: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
Subject:      Re: [AR] 2Re: [AR] dark secrets
Comments: To: al bradley <abradley@TOOLCITY.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <v01510100b77f9e1b7e76@[208.22.189.188]>

On Sat, 21 Jul 2001, al bradley wrote:

> Hi Ray:
> Question: How do we decide if what we know, or what we hear about, is --
> classified?
Darn good question, Al!  At the risk of continuing an off-topic thread,
I'm sure others (Dave, Henry come to mind) can elaborate.

It's probably classified if:
...it's about nuclear technology
...it's about military weapons/delivery systems or submarines
All of which are generally off topic anyway.


Ray

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 4911 invoked from network); 21 Jul 2001 21:34:38 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 21 Jul 2001 21:34:38 -0000
Received: (qmail 24023 invoked from network); 21 Jul 2001 21:35:55 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 21 Jul 2001 21:35:55 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA04743; Sat, 21 Jul 2001 14:33:00 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 80679 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 21 Jul 2001 21:32:54          +0000
Received: from spsystems.net (spsystems.net [209.47.149.227]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA04725 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Sat,          21 Jul 2001 14:32:53 -0700
Received: (from henry@localhost) by spsystems.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id RAA06277;          Sat, 21 Jul 2001 17:32:12 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010721170115.6071A-100000@spsystems.net>
Date:         Sat, 21 Jul 2001 17:32:11 -0400
Reply-To: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] 2Re: [AR] dark secrets
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <Pine.LNX.4.10.10107211307480.4055-100000@itc.uci.edu>

On Sat, 21 Jul 2001, Ray Calkins wrote:
> > Question: How do we decide if what we know, or what we hear about, is --
> > classified?
>
> ...It's probably classified if:
> ...it's about nuclear technology

Well, specifically, nuclear *weapons* technology.

Nuclear weapons have a very strange legal position in the US.  Technical
information about them is "born classified":  *automatically* classified
(regardless of its origins!) unless the US military has declassified it.
That is:  if you, working in your basement in Podunk, with no security
clearance and no access to any classified data, start from openly
published material and design a nuclear weapon... then your design is
classified.  Even though it's entirely your own work.  Yes, this is the
law, not just a regulation dreamed up by some bureaucrat; an unusually
paranoid Congress passed it in the late 1940s.

This law is almost certainly unconstitutional, and people like the ACLU
would very much like to see a case reach the Supreme Court.  It's never
happened:  the government does its level best to win such cases by
intimidation and out-of-court negotiation, and when it becomes clear that
such tactics aren't working and the case might go all the way, the charges
get dropped.  Preserving the intimidation power of the law against the
weak is more important than winning against the strong.

So almost anything related to nuclear weapons is a very sensitive topic
indeed, all the more so because many security people have no concept of
just how much nuclear-weapons information *is* public knowledge.  That's a
problem in any field -- some of them seem to think that the Russians
wouldn't know the sky is blue if they hadn't stolen that information from
the US -- but it's lots worse for nuclear weapons.

> ...it's about military weapons/delivery systems or submarines

This one's a harder call, since there is plenty of public info, and the
"born classified" nonsense doesn't apply.

> All of which are generally off topic anyway.

Amen.  Amateur rocketry, while varied, doesn't usually get as far as
launching from submarines or using nuclear bombs as propellants!

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 6254 invoked from network); 21 Jul 2001 22:58:16 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 21 Jul 2001 22:58:16 -0000
Received: (qmail 848 invoked from network); 21 Jul 2001 22:59:59 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 21 Jul 2001 22:59:59 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA04969; Sat, 21 Jul 2001 15:56:46 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 80690 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 21 Jul 2001 22:56:38          +0000
Received: from wrench.toolcity.net (root@wrench.toolcity.net [208.0.188.2]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA04951 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 21 Jul 2001 15:56:37 -0700
Received: from [208.22.189.89]          (dap-208-22-189-89.meadville-tnt-0.pa.toolcity.net [208.22.189.89])          by wrench.toolcity.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id SAA02310; Sat, 21          Jul 2001 18:56:01 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <v01510100b77fc2cf83a0@[63.169.101.54]>
Date:         Sat, 21 Jul 2001 18:58:20 -0500
Reply-To: "al bradley" <abradley@TOOLCITY.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "al bradley" <abradley@TOOLCITY.NET>
Subject:      [AR] 3Re: [AR] 2Re: [AR] dark secrets
Comments: To: Henry Spencer <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

OK then, just to take an off-topic subject 1 more inch so my mind can drop it:

#1 Let's say that I take my table-top-fusion <grin> experiments a bit
further and claim I have modifed this into a rocket propulsion system.
(Just public claims, no proof up front) can I expect the feebies to show up
on my doorstep??

---------
>
>Well, specifically, nuclear *weapons* technology.
>
>Nuclear weapons have a very strange legal position in the US.  Technical
>information about them is "born classified":  *automatically* classified
>(regardless of its origins!) unless the US military has declassified it.
>That is:  if you, working in your basement in Podunk, with no security
>clearance and no access to any classified data, start from openly
>published material and design a nuclear weapon... then your design is
>classified.  Even though it's entirely your own work.  Yes, this is the
>law, not just a regulation dreamed up by some bureaucrat; an unusually
>paranoid Congress passed it in the late 1940s.
>
#2 Is this what happened to the college kid a decade or so ago who was able
to replicate (on paper, from beginning to end) the design of the A-bomb?

best regards,
al bradley

PS--I always wondered if he was able to get his degree after that, as he
had dropped out of the final exams to work on his project IIRC!

------------------------------------------------------------------
Can you live Life with this?: "Unless there is a law, an agreement, or a
long-standing custom, No one `Deserves' Anything -- Either Good or Bad!"

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 13015 invoked from network); 21 Jul 2001 23:47:05 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 21 Jul 2001 23:47:05 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 20953 invoked from network); 21 Jul 2001 23:48:49 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 21 Jul 2001 23:48:49 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA05122; Sat, 21 Jul 2001 16:45:39 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 80704 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 21 Jul 2001 23:45:32          +0000
Received: from mail.valinux.com (mail@mail.valinux.com [198.186.202.175]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA05077 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Sat, 21 Jul 2001 16:35:31 -0700
Received: from [206.247.167.100] (helo=valinux.com) by mail.valinux.com with          asmtp (Cipher SSLv3:EXP1024-RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 3.31-VA-mm2 #1          (Debian)) id 15O6HJ-0005gU-00; Sat, 21 Jul 2001 16:35:21 -0700
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.61 [en] (X11; I; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <v01510100b77fc2cf83a0@[63.169.101.54]>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B5A123B.62523CD4@valinux.com>
Date:         Sat, 21 Jul 2001 17:37:31 -0600
Reply-To: "Keith Whitwell" <keithw@VALINUX.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Keith Whitwell" <keithw@VALINUX.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] 3Re: [AR] 2Re: [AR] dark secrets
Comments: To: al bradley <abradley@TOOLCITY.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

al bradley wrote:
>
> OK then, just to take an off-topic subject 1 more inch so my mind can drop it:
>
> #1 Let's say that I take my table-top-fusion <grin> experiments a bit
> further and claim I have modifed this into a rocket propulsion system.
> (Just public claims, no proof up front) can I expect the feebies to show up
> on my doorstep??
>

Probably shortly after your neighbours find out what you've been up to...

Keith

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 17251 invoked from network); 21 Jul 2001 23:48:42 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 21 Jul 2001 23:48:42 -0000
Received: (qmail 18360 invoked from network); 21 Jul 2001 23:50:42 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 21 Jul 2001 23:50:42 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA05148; Sat, 21 Jul 2001 16:46:42 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 80716 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 21 Jul 2001 23:46:40          +0000
Received: from castor.ridgenet.net (IDENT:root@castor.ridgenet.net          [199.120.150.29]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA05131          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 21 Jul 2001 16:46:39 -0700
Received: from kristinscomp (pm112.ridgenet.net [204.154.246.112]) by          castor.ridgenet.net (8.11.0/8.11.0) with SMTP id f6LNdqS00326; Sat,          21 Jul 2001 16:39:52 -0700
References:  <v01510100b77f9e1b7e76@[208.22.189.188]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <002201c11240$70eef540$1b30fea9@kristinscomp>
Date:         Sat, 21 Jul 2001 16:54:11 -0700
Reply-To: "Kristin & David Hall" <thehalls@RIDGENET.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Kristin & David Hall" <thehalls@RIDGENET.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] 2Re: [AR] dark secrets
Comments: To: al bradley <abradley@TOOLCITY.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

> Question: How do we decide if what we know, or what we hear about, is --
> classified?

Al,

  A good rule of thumb for the amateur to work by is this:  If you have to
ask the question, it isn't classified.  With the exception of the nuke stuff
previously mentioned, pretty much nothing is classified that doesn't come
out of a DoD (or DoD contractor) facility.  So, if it came out of your
garage, it isn't classified - more or less by definition.

  Also useful for this thread is the fact that there really isn't that much
that's highly classified in the tactical propulsion world.  The
Russians/Chinese/etc. aren't idiots.  They know how to build a rocket just
as well as we do.  The primary differences between "their" technology and
"our" technology are budgetary in nature. But that doesn't mean that if Side
A wanted to build something like Side B has they couldn't - they just don't
feel it's worth spending X dollars/ruples/etc.  Seriously, the only stuff I
can think of that is considered highly classified information for any
fielded propulsion system is plume signature data....and I can't think of a
reason why anybody on this list would ever give a damn about such
information.


OBWhyNotClassified?:  As I said, the Ruskies aren't stupid.  You show them a
photograph of a rocket motor, tell them it's mission, and give them one
dimension and they'll be able to come pretty damn close to giving you the
thrust/time profile.  Seriously.  I've done some of this type work and was
able to guesstimate a total impulse that later data would indicate was
accurate to within 2%.  If we can do that, they can do that, and both sides
know it.  So neither side really sees much point in getting in a tizzy over
basic propulsion data.

-Dave

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 25426 invoked from network); 21 Jul 2001 23:51:57 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 21 Jul 2001 23:51:57 -0000
Received: (qmail 9328 invoked from network); 21 Jul 2001 23:53:15 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 21 Jul 2001 23:53:15 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA05206; Sat, 21 Jul 2001 16:50:07 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 80724 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 21 Jul 2001 23:50:06          +0000
Received: from castor.ridgenet.net (IDENT:root@castor.ridgenet.net          [199.120.150.29]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA05189          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 21 Jul 2001 16:50:05 -0700
Received: from kristinscomp (pm112.ridgenet.net [204.154.246.112]) by          castor.ridgenet.net (8.11.0/8.11.0) with SMTP id f6LNhxS00594; Sat,          21 Jul 2001 16:43:59 -0700
References:  <v01510100b77fc2cf83a0@[63.169.101.54]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <003001c11241$040e3a20$1b30fea9@kristinscomp>
Date:         Sat, 21 Jul 2001 16:58:18 -0700
Reply-To: "Kristin & David Hall" <thehalls@RIDGENET.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Kristin & David Hall" <thehalls@RIDGENET.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] 3Re: [AR] 2Re: [AR] dark secrets
Comments: To: al bradley <abradley@TOOLCITY.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

> #1 Let's say that I take my table-top-fusion <grin> experiments a bit
> further and claim I have modifed this into a rocket propulsion system.
> (Just public claims, no proof up front) can I expect the feebies to show
up
> on my doorstep??

Let me put it this way.....

Once upon a time there was a person who sent me some email that was asking
some very pointed questions.  Myself and some co-workers puzzled over the
questions and decided there really was no reason why a "Joe off the street"
would be asking such questions.

Fast forward a few weeks....

...and the NIS concluded that they really were just too curious for their
own good and that I shouldn't worry about it.

Yes, Virginia, at least one of you has been investigated by the men in
black.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 29319 invoked from network); 22 Jul 2001 01:10:11 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 22 Jul 2001 01:10:11 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: (qmail 9793 invoked from network); 22 Jul 2001 01:11:29 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 22 Jul 2001 01:11:29 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA05504; Sat, 21 Jul 2001 18:07:33 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 80746 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 22 Jul 2001 01:07:08          +0000
Received: from cisco.com (cypher.cisco.com [171.69.11.18]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA05487 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat,          21 Jul 2001 18:07:07 -0700
Received: (from billw@localhost) by cisco.com (8.8.8/2.6/Cisco List          Logging/8.8.8) id SAA24654; Sat, 21 Jul 2001 18:06:05 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID:  <CMM.0.90.4.995763965.billw@cypher>
Date:         Sat, 21 Jul 2001 18:06:05 PDT
Reply-To: "Bill Westfield" <billw@cisco.com>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "William Chops Westfield" <billw@cisco.com>
Subject:      Re: [AR] 2Re: [AR] dark secrets
Comments: To: al bradley <abradley@TOOLCITY.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  Your message of Sat, 21 Jul 2001 16:03:46 -0500

>    Question: How do we decide if what we know, or what we hear
>    about, is -- classified?

You guys don't have enough experience with the way "real" classified
material works.  In order to get access to classified material, you're
supposed to have both a clearance at the appropriate level AND a "need to
know" about the material in question.  One of the things that groups
dealing with classified material are SUPPOSED to be very careful about is
labeling of the classified material and access control to classified
material, and letting everyone know what material is classified and what
isn't.  If you come across a nuclear weapons document in a Los Alamos
dumpster that doesn't have "top secret" and similar plastered on every
page, either the document isn't classified, or security has already fallen
apart to an apalling extent (worthy of major investigations/etc.)  (dealing
with the labeling and access control is a major pain in the butt.
Traditional "business" communications (and more modern things like email)
are difficult or impossible to use.  (Think: The computer with the secure
data is inside an EMF-sheilded bank vault, and the only things that go in
and out when someone is actually accessing secure data are electricity and
air (both probably heavilly filtered.))

Similar care is/should be taken in commercial environments with respect to
"non-disclosure" agreements and materials.  If you want these things to
work, you have to be very careful about letting everyone know EXACTLY which
pieces of information you want not disclosed...

(At least, this is how things are supposed to work on the technical side of
things.  I'm not sure what's supposed to happen when you start talking
about nosy politicians, law enforcement, and armed forces hierarchies.)

I'm not sure to what extent you can get into trouble if you distribute or
redistribute what turns out to be classified information that isn't labled
and you had no way of knowing (other than guessing) it was classified.
Probably more if you have an actual security clearance (your guesses are
supposed to be better.)  I think there have been cases where assorted
officials have been highly annoyed at collections of admittedly
unclassified information that they feel are more sensitive AS a collection.
(and there's always the whole cryptography mess as a bad example.)

BillW


From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 11590 invoked from network); 22 Jul 2001 01:57:12 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 22 Jul 2001 01:57:12 -0000
Received: (qmail 4020 invoked from network); 22 Jul 2001 01:58:53 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 22 Jul 2001 01:58:53 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA05653; Sat, 21 Jul 2001 18:55:18 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 80763 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 22 Jul 2001 01:54:50          +0000
Received: from spsystems.net (spsystems.net [209.47.149.227]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA05632 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Sat,          21 Jul 2001 18:54:49 -0700
Received: (from henry@localhost) by spsystems.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id VAA10325;          Sat, 21 Jul 2001 21:54:07 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010721213602.8307B-100000@spsystems.net>
Date:         Sat, 21 Jul 2001 21:54:06 -0400
Reply-To: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] 2Re: [AR] dark secrets
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <CMM.0.90.4.995763965.billw@cypher>

On Sat, 21 Jul 2001, William Chops Westfield wrote:
> I'm not sure to what extent you can get into trouble if you distribute or
> redistribute what turns out to be classified information that isn't labled
> and you had no way of knowing (other than guessing) it was classified.
> Probably more if you have an actual security clearance (your guesses are
> supposed to be better.)

If you *haven't* signed the paperwork for a security clearance or some
similar commitment to observe security regulations, in general there is
not much they can do to you.  You have committed no crime; except in some
special cases, there is nothing actually illegal about spilling
information that somebody else (even the government) wants kept quiet.
Remember, it is unconstitutional for the government to impair your freedom
of speech and/or freedom of the press.

The essence of a security clearance is that you voluntarily renounce
certain freedoms in exchange for access to certain information.  (That can
include more than just freedom of speech; as I understand it, folks with
access to some kinds of highly sensitive information are subject to
restrictions on foreign travel as well.)  Once you say "I agree that if I
spill the beans without authorization, Uncle Sam can beat me up", you're
in a *very* different situation than a member of the general public.

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 15640 invoked from network); 22 Jul 2001 02:09:05 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 22 Jul 2001 02:09:05 -0000
Received: (qmail 19795 invoked from network); 22 Jul 2001 02:10:49 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 22 Jul 2001 02:10:49 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA05703; Sat, 21 Jul 2001 19:07:41 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 80771 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 22 Jul 2001 02:07:22          +0000
Received: from www.rocketry.org (root@rocketry.org [65.101.31.84]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA05686 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Sat, 21 Jul 2001 19:07:22 -0700
Received: from localhost (tim@localhost) by www.rocketry.org (8.10.2/8.10.2)          with ESMTP id f6M25Xw14301 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Sat, 21 Jul          2001 19:05:33 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.LNX.4.21.0107211842070.14207-100000@www.rocketry.org>
Date:         Sat, 21 Jul 2001 19:05:33 -0700
Reply-To: "T.J." <tim@ROCKETRY.ORG>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "T.J." <tim@ROCKETRY.ORG>
Subject:      Re: [AR] 2dark secrets
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <CMM.0.90.4.995763965.billw@cypher>

I guess it boils down to most classified material would tend to be
off-topic and not really related to "amateur" experimental rocketry
anyway. This thread was probably prompted by some misguided soul who
posted something that probably shouldn't have been posted here in the
first place.

More on-topic though.. I missed the first aRocket firing/launch due to
work, etc.. and was wondering when the next one would be held?

I still need to find a machinist here in Austin that can complete the
remaining parts, and drill my injector holes in the injector I have,
before the next one though. I started the project in late 1995 and
after getting some good feedback from some of the guys in the RRS like
Tom Mueller, Dave Crisalli and Scott Claflin in early 1996 I revised the
design a bit. I was really greatful that some of the main guys in the RRS
would take the time to review my calculations and designs, and offer their
input and suggestions. I really miss living close enough to drive out to
the various firings/launches the hold, I really enjoyed those.

While I was in Phoenix and had one of the good guys at Atomic Rockets
start the fabrication from my CAD drawings. I think they're out of
business now though, so I need to locate some place that will deal with a
small project like mine.. If anyone knows of a person or shop that will
machine custom parts for a reasonable price let me know. If I have to ship
what I have out of state to get the work done that would be ok too.

My small GOX/Methanol test motor project got derailed for a few years
after my divorce/bankruptcy/move, etc.. But I'd like to get it going again
soon. And since I'm no longer a short 6 hour drive from the RRS MTA Ray's
little outpost in the boonies of New Mexico would be a great place to test
fire the little beast once I'm able to get it finished. =)

Keep the cool (and on-topic, non-classified) posts coming. I don't have
the time to post alot, but I love reading most of them.. =)

Tim Patterson
tim@rocketry.org
http://www.rocketry.org

On Sat, 21 Jul 2001, William Chops Westfield wrote:

> >    Question: How do we decide if what we know, or what we hear
> >    about, is -- classified?
>
> You guys don't have enough experience with the way "real" classified
> material works.  In order to get access to classified material, you're
> supposed to have both a clearance at the appropriate level AND a "need to
> know" about the material in question.  One of the things that groups
> dealing with classified material are SUPPOSED to be very careful about is
> labeling of the classified material and access control to classified
> material, and letting everyone know what material is classified and what
> isn't.  If you come across a nuclear weapons document in a Los Alamos
> dumpster that doesn't have "top secret" and similar plastered on every
> page, either the document isn't classified, or security has already fallen
> apart to an apalling extent (worthy of major investigations/etc.)  (dealing
> with the labeling and access control is a major pain in the butt.
> Traditional "business" communications (and more modern things like email)
> are difficult or impossible to use.  (Think: The computer with the secure
> data is inside an EMF-sheilded bank vault, and the only things that go in
> and out when someone is actually accessing secure data are electricity and
> air (both probably heavilly filtered.))
>
> Similar care is/should be taken in commercial environments with respect to
> "non-disclosure" agreements and materials.  If you want these things to
> work, you have to be very careful about letting everyone know EXACTLY which
> pieces of information you want not disclosed...
>
> (At least, this is how things are supposed to work on the technical side of
> things.  I'm not sure what's supposed to happen when you start talking
> about nosy politicians, law enforcement, and armed forces hierarchies.)
>
> I'm not sure to what extent you can get into trouble if you distribute or
> redistribute what turns out to be classified information that isn't labled
> and you had no way of knowing (other than guessing) it was classified.
> Probably more if you have an actual security clearance (your guesses are
> supposed to be better.)  I think there have been cases where assorted
> officials have been highly annoyed at collections of admittedly
> unclassified information that they feel are more sensitive AS a collection.
> (and there's always the whole cryptography mess as a bad example.)
>
> BillW
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 10021 invoked from network); 22 Jul 2001 02:51:04 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 22 Jul 2001 02:51:04 -0000
Received: (qmail 3209 invoked from network); 22 Jul 2001 02:53:06 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 22 Jul 2001 02:53:06 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA05849; Sat, 21 Jul 2001 19:48:57 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 80780 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 22 Jul 2001 02:48:37          +0000
Received: from localhost (rcalkins@localhost) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with          ESMTP id TAA05832; Sat, 21 Jul 2001 19:48:36 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.LNX.4.10.10107211940070.5804-100000@itc.uci.edu>
Date:         Sat, 21 Jul 2001 19:48:36 -0700
Reply-To: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
Subject:      Re: [AR] 2Re: [AR] dark secrets
Comments: To: William Chops Westfield <billw@cisco.com>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <CMM.0.90.4.995763965.billw@cypher>

On Sat, 21 Jul 2001, William Chops Westfield wrote:

> You guys don't have enough experience with the way "real" classified
> material works.
Maybe so, but I've had a clearance about half my life.

You see, once again, I'm entering the shadow world, and just put in my
paperwork for my 4th Dpt o' Def clearance.

Suppose in review, they discover I'm running an internet discussion group
designing, building and testing vehicles with minimal extra continent
capability, AND discussing how to build a gizmo go atop.

Sorry about the job Ray, but here's an application for McDonald's.   And
Circle K is always hiring...

I don't ask for much from the list.  This is one thing I've got to be firm
on.  It's good for the list, too.  Nothing wrong with being on topic.

And as far as release of classified material, talk to Mark Goll.  He's on
a gag order about the N2O/Propane rocket he developed (without any
government funding or information).  When he applied for a patent, they
shut his work down completely for national security.

No kidding.

Sincerely,

Ray

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 20026 invoked from network); 22 Jul 2001 02:54:57 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 22 Jul 2001 02:54:57 -0000
Received: (qmail 3953 invoked from network); 22 Jul 2001 02:56:59 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 22 Jul 2001 02:56:59 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA05904; Sat, 21 Jul 2001 19:52:51 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 80779 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 22 Jul 2001 02:52:39          +0000
Received: from imo-r01.mx.aol.com (imo-r01.mx.aol.com [152.163.225.97]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA05814 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Sat, 21 Jul 2001 19:42:37 -0700
Received: from JMKrell@aol.com by imo-r01.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v31.9.) id          w.b8.188b6239 (4397) for <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Sat, 21 Jul 2001          22:42:30 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0A13_01C56B69.43234450"
X-Mailer: AOL 6.0 for Windows US sub 10528
Message-ID:  <b8.188b6239.288b9796@aol.com>
Date:         Sat, 21 Jul 2001 22:42:30 EDT
Reply-To: <JMKrell@AOL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <JMKrell@AOL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] 2Re: [AR] dark secrets
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0A13_01C56B69.43234450
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

I had one incident with government security clearances. I authored a report
on gas reactions that someone in the government thought should be classified.
I was working at a NASA facility that I knew had a copy of my report and
there was a formula in the report that I need. When I asked to see a copy of
"my" report, I was sternly told that the paper was "classified" and I did not
have any security clearance. It did not matter that I was the author, I could
not look at "my" paper.

I was very annoyed that I had to go back to the hotel to retrieve a copy of
"my" report. Upon returning I flashed "my" report in their faces and said,
"My copy doesn't have "classified" on it, and I can print a million of these
from my computer." Since my copy did not have the official "classified" stamp
it was not "classified" and I could use it as I pleased.

John Krell


------=_NextPart_000_0A13_01C56B69.43234450
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<HTML><FONT FACE=arial,helvetica><FONT  SIZE=2>I had one incident with government security clearances. I authored a report
<BR>on gas reactions that someone in the government thought should be classified.
<BR>I was working at a NASA facility that I knew had a copy of my report and
<BR>there was a formula in the report that I need. When I asked to see a copy of
<BR>"my" report, I was sternly told that the paper was "classified" and I did not
<BR>have any security clearance. It did not matter that I was the author, I could
<BR>not look at "my" paper.
<BR>
<BR>I was very annoyed that I had to go back to the hotel to retrieve a copy of
<BR>"my" report. Upon returning I flashed "my" report in their faces and said,
<BR>"My copy doesn't have "classified" on it, and I can print a million of these
<BR>from my computer." Since my copy did not have the official "classified" stamp
<BR>it was not "classified" and I could use it as I pleased.
<BR>
<BR>John Krell
<BR> &nbsp;&nbsp;</FONT></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0A13_01C56B69.43234450--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 22593 invoked from network); 22 Jul 2001 02:55:59 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 22 Jul 2001 02:55:59 -0000
Received: (qmail 2280 invoked from network); 22 Jul 2001 02:57:42 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 22 Jul 2001 02:57:42 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA05931; Sat, 21 Jul 2001 19:54:33 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 80803 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 22 Jul 2001 02:54:17          +0000
Received: from localhost (rcalkins@localhost) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with          ESMTP id TAA05913; Sat, 21 Jul 2001 19:53:45 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.LNX.4.10.10107211948580.5804-100000@itc.uci.edu>
Date:         Sat, 21 Jul 2001 19:53:44 -0700
Reply-To: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
Subject:      Re: [AR] 2Re: [AR] dark secrets
Comments: To: Henry Spencer <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010721213602.8307B-100000@spsystems.net>

On Sat, 21 Jul 2001, Henry Spencer wrote:

> If you *haven't* signed the paperwork for a security clearance or some
> similar commitment to observe security regulations, in general there is
> not much they can do to you.  You have committed no crime; except in some
> special cases, there is nothing actually illegal about spilling
> information that somebody else (even the government) wants kept quiet.
> Remember, it is unconstitutional for the government to impair your freedom
> of speech and/or freedom of the press.

Easy for you to say in Canada.  Ask Mark Goll about this.  Independantly,
with no direct government assistance, he developed a N2O/Propane rocket
engine.  When he applied for a patent to protect some part of his work, he
recieved a gag order for national security reasons.  Ironic thing is if he
released it public domain, everything would have been ok.

Sincerely,

Ray

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 23286 invoked from network); 22 Jul 2001 03:07:50 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 22 Jul 2001 03:07:50 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 5938 invoked from network); 22 Jul 2001 03:09:51 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 22 Jul 2001 03:09:51 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA05881; Sat, 21 Jul 2001 19:50:53 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 80788 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 22 Jul 2001 02:50:41          +0000
Received: from mail.localweb.com (mail.localweb.com [198.85.234.3]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA05864 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 21 Jul 2001 19:50:40 -0700
Received: from gecko.oops (durham2-135.durham2.dsl.gtei.net [4.3.2.135]) by          mail.localweb.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id WAA24989; Sat, 21 Jul          2001 22:50:41 -0400
X-Sender: mikeharris@mindspring.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.2
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <4.3.2.7.2.20010712075245.0455ce40@mindspring.com>
Date:         Thu, 12 Jul 2001 07:55:56 -0400
Reply-To: "Mike Harris" <mikeharris@MINDSPRING.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Mike Harris" <mikeharris@MINDSPRING.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Sugar Propellant progress
Comments: To: John Dom <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <F11Y30kkZIhTrBoe2U80000682a@hotmail.com>

Sorbitol/KN does remain malleable for a time. I've trimmed the ends too
soon and deformed the grain and I've waited too long and had to use a saw.
My experience is with Nakka style grain casting.

regards, Mike

At 03:20 AM 06/23/2001 +0000, John Dom wrote:
>Didn't I read sorbitol/KN remains malleable (gummy?) for a day or so and
>gets hard after?
>Probably the Nakka site. May have to do with crystallisation slowness
>instead of water content.
>
>The sugar type matters...before you start adding other compounds.
>
>Of course glycerine is sort of a sugar, chemically speaking. If it burns
>well with KN is another question.
>
>jd
>
>
>>From: Russell McMahon <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
>>Reply-To: Russell McMahon <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
>>To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
>>Subject: Re: [AR] Sugar Propellant progress
>>Date: Sat, 23 Jun 2001 13:31:12 +1200
>>
>> > > The propellant is mechanically *brittle*, that is, it does not
>>plastically
>> > > yield to redistribute stress.
>> > With various modifications to the recrystalization process, my test
>>samples have
>> > ranged from gooey to gummy to brittle to crumbly, largely depending on
>>water
>> > content.  Burn rates vary accordingly.  Somewhere in there is a sweet
>>spot
>>(no
>> > pun intended) where it's not too brittle yet has a good burn rate.  Last
>>night's
>> > batch got close, it was just a little wet.  One thing I have been doing
>>is
>> > substituting some of the corn syrup with honey, this inhibits crystal
>>formation,
>> > making the propellant less brittle.  Unfortunately, it also holds water
>>and
>> > makes the propellant hydroscopic.
>>
>>
>>I wonder if there are some other substances that would yield a lower
>>brittleness at the expense perhaps of some Isp loss and a greater degree to
>>creep. eg ?various alcohols, glycerine etc. The end product would have to
>>not "slump" in storage within a reasonable time and be able to withstand g
>>forces during burning with controlled deformation.
>>
>>
>>
>>         Russell McMahon
>
>_________________________________________________________________________
>Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 10233 invoked from network); 22 Jul 2001 03:14:32 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 22 Jul 2001 03:14:32 -0000
Received: (qmail 7814 invoked from network); 22 Jul 2001 03:16:34 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 22 Jul 2001 03:16:34 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA06035; Sat, 21 Jul 2001 20:13:07 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 80816 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 22 Jul 2001 03:12:47          +0000
Received: from spsystems.net (spsystems.net [209.47.149.227]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA06017 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Sat,          21 Jul 2001 20:12:46 -0700
Received: (from henry@localhost) by spsystems.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id XAA11356;          Sat, 21 Jul 2001 23:12:03 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010721231027.8307D-100000@spsystems.net>
Date:         Sat, 21 Jul 2001 23:12:03 -0400
Reply-To: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] 2Re: [AR] dark secrets
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <Pine.LNX.4.10.10107211940070.5804-100000@itc.uci.edu>

On Sat, 21 Jul 2001, Ray Calkins wrote:
> And as far as release of classified material, talk to Mark Goll.  He's on
> a gag order about the N2O/Propane rocket he developed (without any
> government funding or information).  When he applied for a patent, they
> shut his work down completely for national security.

I'd be curious to know the legal basis for that...  As far as I know --
with the obvious caveat that I'm not a lawyer -- unless he has a security
clearance or something of that ilk, they have no hold on him that can be
used to issue such an order.

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 22545 invoked from network); 22 Jul 2001 05:26:59 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 22 Jul 2001 05:26:59 -0000
Received: (qmail 8758 invoked from network); 22 Jul 2001 05:28:44 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 22 Jul 2001 05:28:44 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA06526; Sat, 21 Jul 2001 22:25:11 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 80870 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 22 Jul 2001 05:24:49          +0000
Received: from vail.net (vail.net [199.45.148.10]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7)          with ESMTP id WAA06503 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 21 Jul 2001          22:24:49 -0700
Received: from 0015771985 (vailmax5-19.vail.net [204.144.161.169]) by vail.net          (/8.10.0) with SMTP id f6M5MBX04331 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat,          21 Jul 2001 23:22:11 -0600 (MDT)
References:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010721231027.8307D-100000@spsystems.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <00e801c1126e$d38202a0$a9a190cc@0015771985>
Date:         Sat, 21 Jul 2001 23:26:13 -0600
Reply-To: "Connie Steiert" <steiert@VAIL.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Connie Steiert" <steiert@VAIL.NET>
Subject:      [AR] Lathes
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This might not be the right place to ask (I know you don't like machining
questions), but I need to find a used lathe that is affordable. I'm starting
in on another science fair project (my third on rockets, I've done really
well with projects on liquid and solid rocket propulsion) and can't really
complete it without a late. So if any of you have lathes for sale or know of
some or even just know of used machinery dealers that are reputable I would
be very grateful for any help.

Thanks,
Dak

P.S. I know it's kind of general, e-mail me at steiert@vail.net with any
help or if you need more information on what I'm looking for.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 4599 invoked from network); 22 Jul 2001 06:12:22 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 22 Jul 2001 06:12:22 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 7088 invoked from network); 22 Jul 2001 06:13:34 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 22 Jul 2001 06:13:34 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA06727; Sat, 21 Jul 2001 23:10:56 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 80883 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 22 Jul 2001 06:10:43          +0000
Received: from smtp09.phx.gblx.net (smtp09.phx.gblx.net [64.211.219.58]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA06710 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 21 Jul 2001 23:10:42 -0700
Received: (from daemon@localhost) by smtp09.phx.gblx.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id          XAA113204; Sat, 21 Jul 2001 23:10:21 -0700
Received: from 64-211-177-72.nas4.TBR.gblx.net(64.211.177.72),          claiming to be "frontiernet.net" via SMTP by smtp09.phx.gblx.net,          id smtpdVffOqa; Sat Jul 21 23:10:16 2001
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.74 [en] (Win98; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010721231027.8307D-100000@spsystems.net>            <00e801c1126e$d38202a0$a9a190cc@0015771985>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B5A6EF7.58C4F125@frontiernet.net>
Date:         Sun, 22 Jul 2001 02:13:11 -0400
Reply-To: <tbinford@frontiernet.net>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Tom Binford" <tbinford@frontiernet.net>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Lathes
Comments: To: Connie Steiert <steiert@VAIL.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Connie Steiert wrote:
>
> This might not be the right place to ask (I know you don't like machining
> questions), but I need to find a used lathe that is affordable. I'm starting
> in on another science fair project (my third on rockets, I've done really
> well with projects on liquid and solid rocket propulsion) and can't really
> complete it without a late. So if any of you have lathes for sale or know of
> some or even just know of used machinery dealers that are reputable I would
> be very grateful for any help.
>
> Thanks,
> Dak
>
> P.S. I know it's kind of general, e-mail me at steiert@vail.net with any
> help or if you need more information on what I'm looking for.

An industrial machinery clearinghouse, including up to huge lathes, is
http://www.surplusrecord.com

Tom

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 5682 invoked from network); 22 Jul 2001 06:54:43 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 22 Jul 2001 06:54:43 -0000
Received: (qmail 18791 invoked from network); 22 Jul 2001 06:56:24 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 22 Jul 2001 06:56:24 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA06833; Sat, 21 Jul 2001 23:45:30 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 80895 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 22 Jul 2001 06:43:50          +0000
Received: from wrench.toolcity.net (root@wrench.toolcity.net [208.0.188.2]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA06811 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 21 Jul 2001 23:43:49 -0700
Received: from [208.22.189.44]          (dap-208-22-189-44.meadville-tnt-0.pa.toolcity.net [208.22.189.44])          by wrench.toolcity.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id CAA24078; Sun, 22          Jul 2001 02:43:13 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <v01510100b78032c7354e@[208.22.189.89]>
Date:         Sun, 22 Jul 2001 02:45:33 -0500
Reply-To: "al bradley" <abradley@TOOLCITY.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "al bradley" <abradley@TOOLCITY.NET>
Subject:      [AR] 3Re: [AR] 2Re: [AR] dark secrets
Comments: To: Henry Spencer <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

>On Sat, 21 Jul 2001, Ray Calkins wrote:
>> And as far as release of classified material, talk to Mark Goll.  He's on
>> a gag order about the N2O/Propane rocket he developed (without any
>> government funding or information).  When he applied for a patent, they
>> shut his work down completely for national security.
>
>I'd be curious to know the legal basis for that...  As far as I know --
>with the obvious caveat that I'm not a lawyer -- unless he has a security
>clearance or something of that ilk, they have no hold on him that can be
>used to issue such an order.
>
>                                                          Henry Spencer
>                                                       henry@spsystems.net
---------------------------------

Aye, me friend. But then we musn't forget what 'appened to Gerald Bull. Right?

al bradley
---------


------------------------------------------------------------------
Can you live Life with this?: "Unless there is a law, an agreement, or a
long-standing custom, No one `Deserves' Anything -- Either Good or Bad!"

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 533 invoked from network); 22 Jul 2001 07:20:40 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 22 Jul 2001 07:20:40 -0000
X-Priority: 3
Received: (qmail 29416 invoked from network); 22 Jul 2001 07:22:23 -0000
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 22 Jul 2001 07:22:23 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA06962; Sun, 22 Jul 2001 00:14:12 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 80919 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 22 Jul 2001 07:13:43          +0000
Received: from mailgw1a.lmco.com (mailgw1a.lmco.com [192.31.106.7]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA06944 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 22 Jul 2001 00:13:41 -0700
Received: from emss02g01.ems.lmco.com (relay2.ems.lmco.com [166.29.2.54]) by          mailgw1a.lmco.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id BAA23045; Sun, 22 Jul          2001 01:12:15 -0600 (MDT)
Received: from CONVERSION-DAEMON by lmco.com (PMDF V5.2-33 #38887) id          <0GGV00G015CF0G@lmco.com>; Sun, 22 Jul 2001 01:12:15 -0600 (MDT)
Received: from emss02i00.ems.lmco.com ([166.29.2.48]) by lmco.com (PMDF V5.2-33          #38887) with ESMTP id <0GGV001AV5CCL0@lmco.com>; Sun, 22 Jul 2001          01:12:12 -0600 (MDT)
Received: by emss02i00.ems.lmco.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) id          <P13DHCGN>; Sun, 22 Jul 2001 01:12:13 -0600
Content-return: allowed
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19)
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <EDB5E5136094D311BF1800508B12205E08D2908E@emss02m07.ems.lmco.com>
Date:         Sun, 22 Jul 2001 01:12:11 -0600
Reply-To: "Bendel, Timothy B" <timothy.b.bendel@LMCO.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Bendel, Timothy B" <timothy.b.bendel@LMCO.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] 3Re: [AR] 2Re: [AR] dark secrets
Comments: To: al bradley <abradley@TOOLCITY.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

As someone whose boss just told him to get a security clearance AND is also
working on amature rocket technology, this thread has proven very
interesting. Am I to understand that if I sign these papers to get a
clearance that my own work outside the company that I currently work for
could be seized as "classified"?

Tim Bendel

-----Original Message-----
From: al bradley [mailto:abradley@TOOLCITY.NET]
Sent: Sunday, July 22, 2001 1:46 AM
To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
Subject: [AR] 3Re: [AR] 2Re: [AR] dark secrets


>On Sat, 21 Jul 2001, Ray Calkins wrote:
>> And as far as release of classified material, talk to Mark Goll.  He's on
>> a gag order about the N2O/Propane rocket he developed (without any
>> government funding or information).  When he applied for a patent, they
>> shut his work down completely for national security.
>
>I'd be curious to know the legal basis for that...  As far as I know --
>with the obvious caveat that I'm not a lawyer -- unless he has a security
>clearance or something of that ilk, they have no hold on him that can be
>used to issue such an order.
>
>                                                          Henry Spencer
>                                                       henry@spsystems.net
---------------------------------

Aye, me friend. But then we musn't forget what 'appened to Gerald Bull.
Right?

al bradley
---------


------------------------------------------------------------------
Can you live Life with this?: "Unless there is a law, an agreement, or a
long-standing custom, No one `Deserves' Anything -- Either Good or Bad!"

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 19534 invoked from network); 22 Jul 2001 08:42:35 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 22 Jul 2001 08:42:35 -0000
Received: (qmail 6970 invoked from network); 22 Jul 2001 08:43:53 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 22 Jul 2001 08:43:53 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id BAA07199; Sun, 22 Jul 2001 01:39:37 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 80931 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 22 Jul 2001 08:39:21          +0000
Received: from xena.urbi.com.br (IDENT:root@xena.urbi.com.br [200.185.120.2])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id BAA07162 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 22 Jul 2001 01:29:19 -0700
Received: from atenorio (alo02.urbi.com.br [200.185.121.126]) by          xena.urbi.com.br (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id FAA16067 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 22 Jul 2001 05:28:40 -0300
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0A18_01C56B69.4333E620"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <001201c11288$c7fa33c0$7e79b9c8@atenorio>
Date:         Sun, 22 Jul 2001 05:31:03 -0300
Reply-To: "Andre Tenorio" <atenorio@URBI.COM.BR>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Andre Tenorio" <atenorio@URBI.COM.BR>
Subject:      [AR] AP propellant
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0A18_01C56B69.4333E620
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Hi all,

This my first mail to this great list. As a quantum field theory =
physicist, I am
very new to all this amateur rocketry stuff. Would any of you, please, =
point out
some references in the style "do it yourself step by step" AP rocket =
propellant?
I have completely failed in finding out any.

Thanks,

A. Ten=F3rio.


------=_NextPart_000_0A18_01C56B69.4333E620
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Diso-8859-1">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 5.50.4522.1800" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Hi all,</FONT></DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>This my first mail to this great list. =
As a quantum=20
field theory physicist, I am</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>very new to all this amateur rocketry =
stuff. Would=20
any of you, please, point out</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>some references in the style "do it =
yourself step=20
by step" AP rocket propellant?</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>I have completely failed in finding out =

any.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Thanks,</FONT></DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>A. Ten=F3rio.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>&nbsp;</DIV></FONT></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0A18_01C56B69.4333E620--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 876 invoked from network); 22 Jul 2001 09:18:48 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 22 Jul 2001 09:18:48 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 28404 invoked from network); 22 Jul 2001 09:20:50 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 22 Jul 2001 09:20:50 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id CAA07278; Sun, 22 Jul 2001 02:00:48 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 80942 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 22 Jul 2001 09:00:40          +0000
Received: from cicero2.cybercity.dk (cicero2.cybercity.dk [212.242.40.53]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id CAA07261 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 22 Jul 2001 02:00:39 -0700
Received: from usr03.cybercity.dk (usr03.cybercity.dk [212.242.40.83]) by          cicero2.cybercity.dk (Postfix) with ESMTP id D77EBFFFA6 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 22 Jul 2001 11:00:37 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from vip.cybercity.dk ([217.157.69.251]) by usr03.cybercity.dk          (8.11.2/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f6M90a205434 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>;          Sun, 22 Jul 2001 11:00:36 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from          hot@vip.cybercity.dk)
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.75 [en] (Win95; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <NFBBKADEMLBLIEKNLLEPEEAHCDAA.bfeeney@davinciproject.com>            <3B59D4D7.8A16B890@sfcc.net>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B5A9846.26B5518B@vip.cybercity.dk>
Date:         Sun, 22 Jul 2001 11:09:26 +0200
Reply-To: "Hans Olaf Toft" <hot@VIP.CYBERCITY.DK>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Hans Olaf Toft" <hot@VIP.CYBERCITY.DK>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Micro rocket engines
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Very cute articles - especially the glider!
.... and even unclassified ;-)
Hans Olaf Toft

James Yawn wrote:

> Speaking of microrockets, I would like to indulge a little nostalgia.  I
> recently found my ancient copy of the Home Workshop Encyclopedia, circa
> early 1950's, with directions for making a match-stick rocket.  I
> believe it was published by Popular Mechanics but am not sure - the book
> has lost its cover long ago and in the days before Xerox became a common
> term publishers did not usually put their name on every page.
>
> I scanned this article and uploaded it to:
> http://user.sfcc.net/jyawn/matchrocket5.jpg
>
> Yes, I know that Steve Culivan/Roger Storm have a very nice NASA
> web-page on this topic
> (at:
> http://www.eecs.umich.edu/mathscience/funexperiments/agesubject/lessons/other/match_rocket.html)
>
> but I thought some of you might like to see this old version.  It gave
> me my first successful launch - and for many years my ONLY successful
> launches!
>
> Jimmy Yawn
>
> p.s.  Another interesting feature was the rocket-glider, at:
> http://user.sfcc.net/jyawn/glider2.jpg
>
> Brian Feeney wrote:
>
> > A new link on progress in the microrocket engine field.
> >
> > <http://www.technologyreview.com/web/leo/leo051801.asp>
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Brian
> > ------------------
> > Brian Feeney
> > The da Vinci Project
> > 65 Carl Hall Road,Downsview Park,
> > Toronto, Ontario, Canada, M3K 2B6
> > tel: 416.631.6540
> > bfeeney@davinciproject.com
> > http://www.davinciproject.com

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 19891 invoked from network); 22 Jul 2001 12:23:51 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 22 Jul 2001 12:23:51 -0000
Received: (qmail 10302 invoked from network); 22 Jul 2001 12:25:10 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 22 Jul 2001 12:25:10 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id FAA08013; Sun, 22 Jul 2001 05:20:01 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 80971 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 22 Jul 2001 12:19:50          +0000
Received: from femail21.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail21.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.0.95.146]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id FAA07990          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 22 Jul 2001 05:19:49 -0700
Received: from cx814151a ([24.14.55.118]) by femail21.sdc1.sfba.home.com          (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20 201-229-121-120-20010223) with SMTP id          <20010722121944.ICTG26648.femail21.sdc1.sfba.home.com@cx814151a> for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 22 Jul 2001 05:19:44 -0700
References:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010721231027.8307D-100000@spsystems.net>              <00e801c1126e$d38202a0$a9a190cc@0015771985>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.3018.1300
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <081001c112a7$1b4aa640$0a01a8c0@cx814151a>
Date:         Sun, 22 Jul 2001 07:09:05 -0500
Reply-To: "John Bolene" <jbolene@HOME.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Bolene" <jbolene@HOME.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Lathes
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Depends on what size lathe you are looking for.
I looked for used and bought new after not finding any.

Harbor Freight has a wonderful small lathe called the 7X10 which is really a
3X6 (less than $400).
Grizzly has a 7X12 which is a 4X10 (around $500).
Enco has a 13X40 (around $2500).

I have the Harbor Freight and the Enco.
Wish I had the Grizzly instead of the Harbor Freight for more capacity.
Lathe tools have run around $1000.
For tools, I have
a set of 3/8" indexable carbide bits
quite a few cemented carbide bits
drill chuck with MT2 taper
3/16" square tool blanks to grind bits from
and other stuff

http://www.harborfreight.com
http://www.use-enco.com

John Bolene
Tripoli Oklahoma Prefect and webmaster
Tripoli Oklahoma Web page -> http://members.home.com/tripoli-oklahoma/



----- Original Message -----
From: "Connie Steiert" <steiert@VAIL.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Sunday, July 22, 2001 12:26 AM
Subject: [AR] Lathes


> This might not be the right place to ask (I know you don't like machining
> questions), but I need to find a used lathe that is affordable. I'm
starting
> in on another science fair project (my third on rockets, I've done really
> well with projects on liquid and solid rocket propulsion) and can't really
> complete it without a late. So if any of you have lathes for sale or know
of
> some or even just know of used machinery dealers that are reputable I
would
> be very grateful for any help.
>
> Thanks,
> Dak
>
> P.S. I know it's kind of general, e-mail me at steiert@vail.net with any
> help or if you need more information on what I'm looking for.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 28515 invoked from network); 22 Jul 2001 16:53:47 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 22 Jul 2001 16:53:47 -0000
Received: (qmail 3430 invoked from network); 22 Jul 2001 16:55:06 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 22 Jul 2001 16:55:06 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA08706; Sun, 22 Jul 2001 09:52:29 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 81010 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 22 Jul 2001 16:52:27          +0000
Received: from pike.rtlogic.com (firewall.rtlogic.com [206.247.196.122]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA08689 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 22 Jul 2001 09:52:27 -0700
Received: from RTLWS18 ([192.168.3.14]) by pike.rtlogic.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with          SMTP id KAA03451; Sun, 22 Jul 2001 10:51:44 -0600
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <FGEJKGFBGDNDMLOJJDPOOENJCDAA.punder@rtlogic.com>
Date:         Sun, 22 Jul 2001 10:52:51 -0600
Reply-To: "Patrick Underwood" <punder@RTLOGIC.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Patrick Underwood" <punder@RTLOGIC.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Lathes
Comments: To: Connie Steiert <steiert@VAIL.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <00e801c1126e$d38202a0$a9a190cc@0015771985>

Do you mean a metal lathe, or a wood lathe?  i.e., combustion chambers or
nosecones?  :)

If wood, I just bought a 14" x 40" model from Harbor Freight--they have it
on sale for $80 through July 23.

Patrick

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU]On
> Behalf Of Connie Steiert
> Sent: Saturday, July 21, 2001 11:26 PM
> To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
> Subject: [AR] Lathes
>
>
> This might not be the right place to ask (I know you don't like machining
> questions), but I need to find a used lathe that is affordable.
> I'm starting
> in on another science fair project (my third on rockets, I've done really
> well with projects on liquid and solid rocket propulsion) and can't really
> complete it without a late. So if any of you have lathes for sale
> or know of
> some or even just know of used machinery dealers that are
> reputable I would
> be very grateful for any help.
>
> Thanks,
> Dak
>
> P.S. I know it's kind of general, e-mail me at steiert@vail.net with any
> help or if you need more information on what I'm looking for.
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 5322 invoked from network); 22 Jul 2001 16:56:00 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 22 Jul 2001 16:56:00 -0000
Received: (qmail 22364 invoked from network); 22 Jul 2001 16:57:43 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 22 Jul 2001 16:57:43 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA08745; Sun, 22 Jul 2001 09:54:45 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 81022 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 22 Jul 2001 16:54:42          +0000
Received: from castor.ridgenet.net (IDENT:root@castor.ridgenet.net          [199.120.150.29]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA08728          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 22 Jul 2001 09:54:42 -0700
Received: from kristinscomp (pm002.ridgenet.net [204.154.246.2]) by          castor.ridgenet.net (8.11.0/8.11.0) with SMTP id f6MGlgS18554; Sun,          22 Jul 2001 09:47:43 -0700
References:  <EDB5E5136094D311BF1800508B12205E08D2908E@emss02m07.ems.lmco.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <002701c112d0$092064e0$1b30fea9@kristinscomp>
Date:         Sun, 22 Jul 2001 10:02:03 -0700
Reply-To: "Kristin & David Hall" <thehalls@RIDGENET.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Kristin & David Hall" <thehalls@RIDGENET.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] 3Re: [AR] 2Re: [AR] dark secrets
Comments: To: "Bendel, Timothy B" <timothy.b.bendel@LMCO.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

> As someone whose boss just told him to get a security clearance AND is
also
> working on amature rocket technology, this thread has proven very
> interesting. Am I to understand that if I sign these papers to get a
> clearance that my own work outside the company that I currently work for
> could be seized as "classified"?

In the grossest sense, yes, anything you do after you have that clearance is
subject to their jurisdiction.

In the realest sense, it depends.  What are you working on (no need to
answer that)?  If it's something like say....radar jamming pods, then it
would be very difficult to see why/how your amateur work could be seen as
related to your classified duties.  If, on the other hand, your job involves
TVC nozzles, they hell yes they may classify your amateur work - even if it
doesn't directly involve TVC stuff.  The logic?  Take me for example - I
used to work on propulsion *systems*.  I never did propellant formulation.
But that doesn't mean I wasn't given access to classified propellant
formulation information.  Thus, any propellants I formulate "could be"
inspired by classified information and thus, classifiable themselves.
Result?  There are a number of topics on which I tread very carefully around
here (and there are amateur projects that I would never attempt because
they're "too close to home" if you catch my drift).

In the most practical sense, don't worry.  After you've played the
classified game for a while you get a pretty good feel for what's OK and
what's not.  Besides, these days slapping a secretary on the butt is a much
more serious offense than leaving a safe open (you only think I'm kidding
there...).

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 12605 invoked from network); 22 Jul 2001 16:58:44 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 22 Jul 2001 16:58:44 -0000
Received: (qmail 23472 invoked from network); 22 Jul 2001 17:00:27 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 22 Jul 2001 17:00:27 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA08650; Sun, 22 Jul 2001 09:43:30 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 80998 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 22 Jul 2001 16:43:15          +0000
Received: from c002.snv.cp.net (c002-h007.c002.snv.cp.net [209.228.32.171]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id JAA08633 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 22 Jul 2001 09:43:15 -0700
Received: (cpmta 25776 invoked from network); 22 Jul 2001 09:42:42 -0700
Received: from 1Cust71.tnt1.williamsburg.va.da.uu.net (HELO default)          (63.21.80.71) by smtp.peoplepc.com (209.228.32.171) with SMTP; 22 Jul          2001 09:42:42 -0700
X-Sent: 22 Jul 2001 16:42:42 GMT
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0A1B_01C56B69.4333E620"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <002101c112ce$e471a2e0$4750153f@default>
Date:         Sun, 22 Jul 2001 12:53:52 -0400
Reply-To: "David Muesing" <dmuesing@PEOPLEPC.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "David Muesing" <dmuesing@PEOPLEPC.COM>
Subject:      [AR] Particle Size Range
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0A1B_01C56B69.4333E620
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Hello Group,

The particle size concept in microns and mesh is pretty simple. Particle =
size with regards to oxidizer or fuel has a lot to do with burn rate, =
pretty straight forward sounds like. How true is this?

When the particle size is referred to as X mesh, I understand that all =
of the particles will go through an X mesh sieve. This specification =
sounds very simple but it doesn't tell me the range of particle sizes =
that go through the sieve. Suppose that 90% of the particles just go =
through. Or, 90% would infact go through a 10X mesh. To me, this would =
be 2 very different materials and therefore
make a very big difference in burn rate. Are we to assume that there is =
some natural and known particle size distribution? It seems like =
different grinding mechanisms would produce different ranges of =
particles sizes. It almost sounds like this specification is overly =
simplified. Perhaps 2 manufacturers would  produce 2 different materials =
both being X mesh.

May I have some illumination here? Thank you very much!

Dave Muesing
Yorktown, VA



------=_NextPart_000_0A1B_01C56B69.4333E620
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Diso-8859-1">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 5.50.4616.200" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=3DOCRA color=3D#0000ff>Hello Group,</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DOCRA color=3D#0000ff></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DOCRA color=3D#0000ff>The&nbsp;particle size concept in =
microns and=20
mesh is pretty simple. Particle size with regards to oxidizer or fuel =
has a lot=20
to do with burn rate, pretty straight forward sounds like. How true is =
this<FONT=20
color=3D#ff0000 size=3D4>?</FONT></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DOCRA color=3D#0000ff></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DOCRA color=3D#0000ff>When the particle size is =
referred to as X=20
mesh, I understand that all of the particles will go through an X mesh =
sieve.=20
This specification sounds very simple but it doesn't tell me the =
<U>range</U> of=20
particle sizes that go through the sieve. Suppose that 90% of the =
particles=20
<U>just</U> go through. Or, 90% would infact go through a 10X mesh. To =
me, this=20
would be 2 very different materials and therefore</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DOCRA color=3D#0000ff>make a very big difference in =
burn rate. Are=20
we to assume that there is some natural and known particle size =
distribution? It=20
seems like different grinding mechanisms would produce different ranges =
of=20
particles sizes. It almost sounds like this specification is overly =
simplified.=20
Perhaps 2 manufacturers would&nbsp; produce 2 different materials both =
being X=20
mesh.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DOCRA color=3D#0000ff></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DOCRA color=3D#0000ff>May I have some illumination =
here? Thank you=20
very much!</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DOCRA color=3D#0000ff></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DOCRA color=3D#0000ff>Dave Muesing</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DOCRA color=3D#0000ff>Yorktown, VA</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DOCRA color=3D#0000ff></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DOCRA color=3D#0000ff></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0A1B_01C56B69.4333E620--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 12933 invoked from network); 22 Jul 2001 17:20:39 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 22 Jul 2001 17:20:39 -0000
Received: (qmail 15541 invoked from network); 22 Jul 2001 17:22:23 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 22 Jul 2001 17:22:23 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA08838; Sun, 22 Jul 2001 10:19:17 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 81037 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 22 Jul 2001 17:19:15          +0000
Received: from c002.snv.cp.net (c002-h001.c002.snv.cp.net [209.228.32.165]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id KAA08821 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 22 Jul 2001 10:19:15 -0700
Received: (cpmta 25579 invoked from network); 22 Jul 2001 10:18:44 -0700
Received: from 1Cust71.tnt1.williamsburg.va.da.uu.net (HELO default)          (63.21.80.71) by smtp.peoplepc.com (209.228.32.165) with SMTP; 22 Jul          2001 10:18:44 -0700
X-Sent: 22 Jul 2001 17:18:44 GMT
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0A1E_01C56B69.433D8310"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <005a01c112d3$e9499e80$4750153f@default>
Date:         Sun, 22 Jul 2001 13:29:48 -0400
Reply-To: "David Muesing" <dmuesing@PEOPLEPC.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "David Muesing" <dmuesing@PEOPLEPC.COM>
Subject:      [AR] Erosive Burning
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0A1E_01C56B69.433D8310
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Hello Group,

How real is this erosive burning thing? It sounds like =
overpressurization because of it can be disastrous.

Are there guidelines to consider to prevent it? Can it be used to =
advantage?

About the only thing I've heard is "make the core area >4 x the nozzle =
throat area". It just seems like all of the other variables would also =
affect it.=20

Thanks!

Dave Muesing
Yorktown, VA

------=_NextPart_000_0A1E_01C56B69.433D8310
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Diso-8859-1">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 5.50.4616.200" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=3DOCRA color=3D#0000ff>Hello Group,</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DOCRA color=3D#0000ff></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DOCRA color=3D#0000ff>How real is this erosive burning =
thing? It=20
sounds like overpressurization because of it can be =
disastrous.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DOCRA color=3D#0000ff></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DOCRA color=3D#0000ff>Are there guidelines to consider =
to prevent=20
it? Can it be used to advantage?</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DOCRA color=3D#0000ff></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DOCRA color=3D#0000ff>About the only thing I've heard =
is "make the=20
core area &gt;4 x the nozzle throat area". It just seems like all of the =
other=20
variables would also affect it. </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DOCRA color=3D#0000ff></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DOCRA color=3D#0000ff>Thanks!</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DOCRA color=3D#0000ff></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DOCRA color=3D#0000ff>Dave Muesing</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DOCRA color=3D#0000ff>Yorktown, =
VA</FONT></DIV></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0A1E_01C56B69.433D8310--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 8850 invoked from network); 22 Jul 2001 17:30:06 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 22 Jul 2001 17:30:06 -0000
Received: (qmail 18409 invoked from network); 22 Jul 2001 17:31:52 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 22 Jul 2001 17:31:52 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA08898; Sun, 22 Jul 2001 10:28:43 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 81049 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 22 Jul 2001 17:28:42          +0000
Received: from castor.ridgenet.net (IDENT:root@castor.ridgenet.net          [199.120.150.29]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA08881          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 22 Jul 2001 10:28:42 -0700
Received: from kristinscomp (pm002.ridgenet.net [204.154.246.2]) by          castor.ridgenet.net (8.11.0/8.11.0) with SMTP id f6MHMhS20771; Sun,          22 Jul 2001 10:22:44 -0700
References:  <005a01c112d3$e9499e80$4750153f@default>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0A21_01C56B69.433D8310"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <003f01c112d4$ed4b8240$1b30fea9@kristinscomp>
Date:         Sun, 22 Jul 2001 10:37:05 -0700
Reply-To: "Kristin & David Hall" <thehalls@RIDGENET.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Kristin & David Hall" <thehalls@RIDGENET.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Erosive Burning
Comments: To: David Muesing <dmuesing@PEOPLEPC.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0A21_01C56B69.433D8310
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable


Erosive burning is very real.  And yes, if it happens and you aren't =
planning on it (some designs actually utilize erosive burning to achieve =
a get-you-off-the-rail-fast thrust spike early in the burn), then =
there's a very good chance you're going to blow up.

The guidline to prevent it is to keep the combustion gases below about =
Mach 0.4 throughout your motor.  Yes, it can be used to your advantage =
(see above).


  How real is this erosive burning thing? It sounds like =
overpressurization because of it can be disastrous.
  =20
  Are there guidelines to consider to prevent it? Can it be used to =
advantage?
  =20
  About the only thing I've heard is "make the core area >4 x the nozzle =
throat area". It just seems like all of the other variables would also =
affect it.=20
  =20
  Thanks!
  =20
  Dave Muesing
  Yorktown, VA

------=_NextPart_000_0A21_01C56B69.433D8310
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META content=3D"text/html; charset=3Diso-8859-1" =
http-equiv=3DContent-Type>
<META content=3D"MSHTML 5.00.2614.3500" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Erosive burning is very real.&nbsp; And =
yes, if it=20
happens and you aren't planning on it (some designs actually utilize =
erosive=20
burning to achieve a get-you-off-the-rail-fast thrust spike early in the =
burn),=20
then there's a very good chance you're going to blow up.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>The guidline to prevent it is to keep =
the=20
combustion gases below about Mach 0.4 throughout your motor.&nbsp; Yes, =
it can=20
be used to your advantage (see above).</FONT></DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE=20
style=3D"BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: =
0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; PADDING-RIGHT: 0px">
  <DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
  <DIV><FONT color=3D#0000ff face=3DOCRA>How real is this erosive =
burning thing? It=20
  sounds like overpressurization because of it can be =
disastrous.</FONT></DIV>
  <DIV><FONT color=3D#0000ff face=3DOCRA></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
  <DIV><FONT color=3D#0000ff face=3DOCRA>Are there guidelines to =
consider to prevent=20
  it? Can it be used to advantage?</FONT></DIV>
  <DIV><FONT color=3D#0000ff face=3DOCRA></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
  <DIV><FONT color=3D#0000ff face=3DOCRA>About the only thing I've heard =
is "make=20
  the core area &gt;4 x the nozzle throat area". It just seems like all =
of the=20
  other variables would also affect it. </FONT></DIV>
  <DIV><FONT color=3D#0000ff face=3DOCRA></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
  <DIV><FONT color=3D#0000ff face=3DOCRA>Thanks!</FONT></DIV>
  <DIV><FONT color=3D#0000ff face=3DOCRA></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
  <DIV><FONT color=3D#0000ff face=3DOCRA>Dave Muesing</FONT></DIV>
  <DIV><FONT color=3D#0000ff face=3DOCRA>Yorktown,=20
VA</FONT></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0A21_01C56B69.433D8310--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 1326 invoked from network); 22 Jul 2001 18:53:57 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 22 Jul 2001 18:53:57 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 4620 invoked from network); 22 Jul 2001 18:56:01 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 22 Jul 2001 18:56:01 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA09134; Sun, 22 Jul 2001 11:51:04 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 81062 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sun, 22 Jul 2001 18:50:58          +0000
Received: from iron.carolina.net (iron.carolina.net [208.170.147.84]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA09117 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Sun, 22 Jul 2001 11:50:57 -0700
Received: from ac.net (ip200-as5300-1-7lakes-nc.carolina.net [206.100.51.200])          by iron.carolina.net (Vircom SMTPRS 5.0.193) with ESMTP id          <B0002768928@iron.carolina.net>; Sun, 22 Jul 2001 15:05:54 -0400
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Win 9x 4.90; en-US; m18) Gecko/20001108            Netscape6/6.0
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <002101c112ce$e471a2e0$4750153f@default>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B5B2086.2010304@ac.net>
Date:         Sun, 22 Jul 2001 14:50:46 -0400
Reply-To: "Bill Shamblin" <wshamblin@AC.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Bill Shamblin" <wshamblin@AC.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Particle Size Range
Comments: To: David Muesing <dmuesing@PEOPLEPC.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Hi Dave,
   If they are doing it right, they use more than one sieve, i.e. one
that will just pass particle size "X", and then one which won't quite
pass particle size "X". When I get a chance, I want to get a stack of
sieves and run some AP through them. I figure there must be some fines
in there (at least due to handling).
Regs! Bill KU4QB TRA#07455 L2.


David Muesing wrote:

> Hello Group,
>
>
>
> When the particle size is referred to as X mesh, I understand that all
> of the particles will go through an X mesh sieve. This specification
> sounds very simple but it doesn't tell me the range of particle sizes
> that go through the sieve. Suppose that 90% of the particles just go
> through. Or, 90% would infact go through a 10X mesh. To me, this would
> be 2 very different materials and therefore
>
> make a very big difference in burn rate. Are we to assume that there
> is some natural and known particle size distribution? It seems like
> different grinding mechanisms would produce different ranges of
> particles sizes. It almost sounds like this specification is overly
> simplified. Perhaps 2 manufacturers would  produce 2 different
> materials both being X mesh.
>
>
>
> May I have some illumination here? Thank you very much!
>
>
>
> Dave Muesing
>
> Yorktown, VA
>
>
>
>
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 17158 invoked from network); 23 Jul 2001 05:53:42 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 23 Jul 2001 05:53:42 -0000
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 28672 invoked from network); 23 Jul 2001 05:55:02 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 23 Jul 2001 05:55:02 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA00765; Sun, 22 Jul 2001 22:51:28 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 80405 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 05:51:01          +0000
Received: from spsystems.net (spsystems.net [209.47.149.227]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA00647 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun,          22 Jul 2001 22:47:59 -0700
Received: (from henry@localhost) by spsystems.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id VAA27599;          Sun, 22 Jul 2001 21:48:01 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010722213303.27107B-100000@spsystems.net>
Date:         Sun, 22 Jul 2001 21:48:00 -0400
Reply-To: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] 3Re: [AR] 2Re: [AR] dark secrets
Comments: To: "Bendel, Timothy B" <timothy.b.bendel@lmco.com>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <EDB5E5136094D311BF1800508B12205E08D29090@emss02m07.ems.lmco.com>

On Sun, 22 Jul 2001, Bendel, Timothy B wrote:
> It seems to me that this entire system of security would stifle progress by
> eliminating communication between like-minded engineers except when working
> on a *specific* program.

Yep.  There have been stories of "the guys at the next table over in the
cafeteria giggling at your problems, because they've already solved them
but aren't allowed to tell you how...".

> Does that mean that all of the "new" rocketry ideas
> (like all the start-up rocket companies) have employees with no security
> clearances?

No; if nobody else, Mitch Burnside Clapp definitely has a clearance of
some flavor, given his USAF background and the fact that he's presented
classified briefings.  (Some of his unclassified briefings on Black Horse
featured slides with items blacked out...)

What it means is that companies with employees who have classified
knowledge *relevant to their company work* are taking their chances.
Startup companies do take chances sometimes.

> What would prevent the Feds from going to Kistler and seizing
> all their data if one of their employees had a clearance from a previous
> employer?

There are limits here.  The Feds have a hold on *that employee*, because
he signed a security-clearance agreement; that doesn't automatically
transfer to the company.  And even their hold on the employee is pretty
weak if what he's doing for Kistler has nothing to do with any classified
knowledge he has.  (If Kistler has any brains, they will not assign him
work that might lead the Feds to question whether he's in violation of
security rules.)

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 17280 invoked from network); 23 Jul 2001 05:53:45 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 23 Jul 2001 05:53:45 -0000
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 28714 invoked from network); 23 Jul 2001 05:55:05 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 23 Jul 2001 05:55:05 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA00786; Sun, 22 Jul 2001 22:52:10 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 80413 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 05:52:09          +0000
Received: from spsystems.net (spsystems.net [209.47.149.227]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA00649 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun,          22 Jul 2001 22:48:00 -0700
Received: (from henry@localhost) by spsystems.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id SAA25724;          Sun, 22 Jul 2001 18:46:41 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010722183752.25468B-100000@spsystems.net>
Date:         Sun, 22 Jul 2001 18:46:41 -0400
Reply-To: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] 3Re: [AR] 2Re: [AR] dark secrets
Comments: To: "Bendel, Timothy B" <timothy.b.bendel@lmco.com>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <EDB5E5136094D311BF1800508B12205E08D2908F@emss02m07.ems.lmco.com>

On Sun, 22 Jul 2001, Bendel, Timothy B wrote:
> Actually, my amatuer rocketry work is very close to my professional work. I
> am concerned that my option to market my own ideas will be severely limited
> if I got a security clearance...

It does sound like you have reason to be concerned, alas.  It's often a
bit tricky to be doing the same sorts of things for both your job and your
hobby, but when Uncle Sam gets involved, it's all too likely that you're
going to have to make a choice between the two.

Even at the best of times, it would be difficult to pursue unclassified
private ventures in an area where you also possess classified knowledge.
And these are not the best of times.

> Who is Gerald Bull? Did he have a clearance?

Bull was the guy who was building the supergun for Iraq, and advising them
on their missile programs; probably mostly because of the latter, he was
murdered by persons unknown, probably Israeli intelligence.

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net
es

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 25795 invoked from network); 23 Jul 2001 05:56:50 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 23 Jul 2001 05:56:50 -0000
X-Priority: 3
Received: (qmail 4125 invoked from network); 23 Jul 2001 05:58:34 -0000
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 23 Jul 2001 05:58:34 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA01036; Sun, 22 Jul 2001 22:55:37 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 80474 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 05:55:35          +0000
Received: from mailgw1a.lmco.com (mailgw1a.lmco.com [192.31.106.7]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA00937 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 22 Jul 2001 22:54:44 -0700
Received: from emss02g01.ems.lmco.com (relay2.ems.lmco.com [166.29.2.54]) by          mailgw1a.lmco.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id SAA04239; Sun, 22 Jul          2001 18:13:09 -0600 (MDT)
Received: from CONVERSION-DAEMON by lmco.com (PMDF V5.2-33 #38887) id          <0GGW00N01GLXMS@lmco.com>; Sun, 22 Jul 2001 18:13:09 -0600 (MDT)
Received: from emss02i00.ems.lmco.com ([166.29.2.48]) by lmco.com (PMDF V5.2-33          #38887) with ESMTP id <0GGW00G81GLTW0@lmco.com>; Sun, 22 Jul 2001          18:13:05 -0600 (MDT)
Received: by emss02i00.ems.lmco.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) id          <P13DHDAK>; Sun, 22 Jul 2001 18:14:12 -0600
Content-return: allowed
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19)
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <EDB5E5136094D311BF1800508B12205E08D29090@emss02m07.ems.lmco.com>
Date:         Sun, 22 Jul 2001 18:14:10 -0600
Reply-To: "Bendel, Timothy B" <timothy.b.bendel@LMCO.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Bendel, Timothy B" <timothy.b.bendel@LMCO.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] 3Re: [AR] 2Re: [AR] dark secrets
Comments: To: Henry Spencer <henry@spsystems.net>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

It seems to me that this entire system of security would stifle progress by
eliminating communication between like-minded engineers except when working
on a *specific* program. Does that mean that all of the "new" rocketry ideas
(like all the start-up rocket companies) have employees with no security
clearances? What would prevent the Feds from going to Kistler and seizing
all their data if one of their employees had a clearance from a previous
employer?

Timothy Bendel

-----Original Message-----
From: Henry Spencer [mailto:henry@spsystems.net]
Sent: Sunday, July 22, 2001 4:47 PM
To: Bendel, Timothy B
Cc: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
Subject: RE: Re: [AR] 3Re: [AR] 2Re: [AR] dark secrets


On Sun, 22 Jul 2001, Bendel, Timothy B wrote:
> Actually, my amatuer rocketry work is very close to my professional work.
I
> am concerned that my option to market my own ideas will be severely
limited
> if I got a security clearance...

It does sound like you have reason to be concerned, alas.  It's often a
bit tricky to be doing the same sorts of things for both your job and your
hobby, but when Uncle Sam gets involved, it's all too likely that you're
going to have to make a choice between the two.

Even at the best of times, it would be difficult to pursue unclassified
private ventures in an area where you also possess classified knowledge.
And these are not the best of times.

> Who is Gerald Bull? Did he have a clearance?

Bull was the guy who was building the supergun for Iraq, and advising them
on their missile programs; probably mostly because of the latter, he was
murdered by persons unknown, probably Israeli intelligence.

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 25999 invoked from network); 23 Jul 2001 05:56:56 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 23 Jul 2001 05:56:56 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 4160 invoked from network); 23 Jul 2001 05:58:40 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 23 Jul 2001 05:58:40 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA00964; Sun, 22 Jul 2001 22:55:32 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 80450 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 05:55:31          +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (f121.law3.hotmail.com [209.185.241.121]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA00884 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Sun, 22 Jul 2001 22:53:04 -0700
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Sun,          22 Jul 2001 12:59:24 -0700
Received: from 213.224.83.78 by lw3fd.law3.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Sun, 22          Jul 2001 19:59:24 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [213.224.83.78]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 22 Jul 2001 19:59:24.0562 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[CE47F720:01C112E8]
Message-ID:  <F121zhxRz3s2gu59Vvj0000334e@hotmail.com>
Date:         Mon, 23 Jul 2001 05:55:31 +0000
Reply-To: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] HTP Catalysts / Rockets / Jetbelt / Rocket drag bikes ...
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Ah, so Juan Lozano is still at it. Very pro looking site new sites.

Keep wondering where he finds the money and time for all these toys.
A pentametallic HP cat pack URL (not Juan's) I posted last year to Arocket
IIRC. I recall JC reacting to it. Does not melt like silver screens or
deteriorate like silver plated screens using above 90 % HP concentration.
Still have to read it all.

jd

>From: Russell McMahon <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
>Reply-To: Russell McMahon <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
>To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
>Subject: [AR] HTP Catalysts / Rockets / Jetbelt / Rocket drag bikes ...
>Date: Fri, 20 Jul 2001 22:01:35 +1200
>
>I assume this site must be known to the Peroxide people, but just in case
>...
>Quite a lot of Peroxide Rocket related material including some interesting
>motor fabrication photos for 1000 lb odd thrust motor.
>
>HTP motor hardware enthusiasts and motorcycle dragster enthusiasts probably
>want to look at least at the last link below.
>
>
>He claims a pentametallic catalysts system useable without poisoning or
>melting at over 90% HTP concentration.
>
>Also does -
>
>HTP stills (50% to 90%)
>Rocket belt development.
>90% HTP rockets
>Steam Rockets
>
>     http://www.tecaeromex.com/ingles/indexi.html
>
>HTP catalyst
>
>     http://www.tecaeromex.com/ingles/cata-i.html
>
>Rocket drag bikes (rider wears a g suit !)
>
>     http://www.tecaeromex.com/ingles/sar-i/motoi.html
>
>Rocket bike & HTP motor construction.
>Many pictures.
>Motors are surprisingly short.
>
>     http://www.tecaeromex.com/ingles/sar-i/rbi.html
>
>
>
>
>         Russell McMahon


_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 29716 invoked from network); 23 Jul 2001 05:58:27 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 23 Jul 2001 05:58:27 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 4926 invoked from network); 23 Jul 2001 06:00:02 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 23 Jul 2001 06:00:02 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA01108; Sun, 22 Jul 2001 22:56:51 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 80494 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 05:56:41          +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (f99.law3.hotmail.com [209.185.241.99]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA01091 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Sun, 22 Jul 2001 22:56:39 -0700
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Sun,          22 Jul 2001 12:42:49 -0700
Received: from 213.224.83.78 by lw3fd.law3.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Sun, 22          Jul 2001 19:42:49 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [213.224.83.78]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 22 Jul 2001 19:42:49.0437 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[7D23F0D0:01C112E6]
Message-ID:  <F99HHc1ORq7dg9ZD7G300003c96@hotmail.com>
Date:         Mon, 23 Jul 2001 05:56:41 +0000
Reply-To: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Micro rocket engines
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

BF wrote:

> > A new link on progress in the microrocket engine field.
> >
> > <http://www.technologyreview.com/web/leo/leo051801.asp>

>From this URL I quote a paragraph that is chinese to me concerning an
appalling thrust to weight ratio achievable by micromachining a rocket :

"...MIT's microrocket has reached 85, and its builders estimate a potential
ratio more than 10 times thatmore than enough to launch a satellite into
space."

I thought the bigger you go the better the T/W???

BTW boy they get a lot of money those guys at MIT. MEMS nanotech is beyond
the amateur of course. Not so for ministructures. Photolithography can work
miracles. They should have a new CATS contest for orbiting a 1 g sat, next!

jd

_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 11110 invoked from network); 23 Jul 2001 06:02:37 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 23 Jul 2001 06:02:37 -0000
Received: (qmail 14584 invoked from network); 23 Jul 2001 06:04:40 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 23 Jul 2001 06:04:40 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA01249; Sun, 22 Jul 2001 23:00:29 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 80520 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 06:00:28          +0000
Received: from castor.ridgenet.net (IDENT:root@castor.ridgenet.net          [199.120.150.29]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA01232          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 22 Jul 2001 23:00:27 -0700
Received: from kristinscomp (pm034.ridgenet.net [204.154.246.34]) by          castor.ridgenet.net (8.11.0/8.11.0) with SMTP id f6MMeUS08525; Sun,          22 Jul 2001 15:40:30 -0700
References: <EDB5E5136094D311BF1800508B12205E08D2908F@emss02m07.ems.lmco.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <003201c11301$52d3ecc0$1b30fea9@kristinscomp>
Date:         Sun, 22 Jul 2001 15:54:50 -0700
Reply-To: "Kristin & David Hall" <thehalls@RIDGENET.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Kristin & David Hall" <thehalls@RIDGENET.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] 3Re: [AR] 2Re: [AR] dark secrets
Comments: To: "Bendel, Timothy B" <timothy.b.bendel@lmco.com>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

> Actually, my amatuer rocketry work is very close to my professional work.
I
> am concerned that my option to market my own ideas will be severely
limited
> if I got a security clearance.

If your amateur work is "very close" to your professional work there is a
very good chance that you'll kiss off any chance of marketing your own work.
'Tis not guarenteed, of course, but the chance is there.  It all depends on
how you play your cards.  Heck, it can *increase* your ability to market(*).

(*) I know one guy (Dr. Frank Moore, for those who know of him) who wrote
some cool software for the government.  The gov't owns the software, etc.,
but there are some non-trivial, non-obvious fine points in the software's
configuration.  So what does he do?  He starts a side business in which he
teaches classes on how to use the software (for $1000 a person, of course).
And who does the marketing for him?  Well, to some extent, the government,
because they want their people well trained in using the software.....

> Who is Mark Goll and why is he in trouble? Did he have a clearance?

Mark is a small time rocket guy like the rest of us.  Beyond that, Ray will
have to respond.

> Who is Gerald Bull? Did he have a clearance?

Gerald Bull *WAS* an artillery genius.  He did all sorts of ground breaking
work with gun launched rockets and artillery in general.  I forget the
details, but somehow he got rather pissed off at the US gov't and turned
free lance.  Towards the end of his career he started working for a guy by
the name of Sadaam Hussein.  Shortly thereafter he was found dead of sudden
acute cranial cavity lead poisoning in the hallway outside his hotel room.
Who did it?  Unknown, but the conspiracy theorists favor either the CIA
or...uh....whatever Israel's equivelent is called (Mossad?).

> Sorry for all the questions but I want to know if I am being asked to sell
> my soul.

You're being asked to play by a new set of rules.  If you learn how to work
within these rules, it shouldn't be that big of a deal.  If you do not learn
how to work within them you will either feel as if you've sold your soul or
find yourself up against espionage charges.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 24974 invoked from network); 23 Jul 2001 06:07:41 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 23 Jul 2001 06:07:41 -0000
Received: (qmail 12446 invoked from network); 23 Jul 2001 06:09:25 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 23 Jul 2001 06:09:25 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA01327; Sun, 22 Jul 2001 23:05:33 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 80545 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 06:05:26          +0000
Received: from mss.emc4.sfba.home.com (ha2.emc4.sfba.home.com [24.0.95.187]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA01307 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 22 Jul 2001 23:05:26 -0700
Received: from cc334751a ([65.13.214.65]) by femail22.sdc1.sfba.home.com          (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20 201-229-121-120-20010223) with SMTP id          <20010722222807.UBUY6674.femail22.sdc1.sfba.home.com@cc334751a>; Sun,          22 Jul 2001 15:28:07 -0700
References:  <005a01c112d3$e9499e80$4750153f@default>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0A24_01C56B69.434E24E0"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2462.0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <028d01c112fd$89604c60$6401a8c0@home.com>
Date:         Sun, 22 Jul 2001 16:27:47 -0600
Reply-To: "Brian Kosko" <bkosko1@HOME.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Brian Kosko" <bkosko1@HOME.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Erosive Burning
Comments: To: David Muesing <dmuesing@PEOPLEPC.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0A24_01C56B69.434E24E0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

David,

As others have pointed out, it's real. We've blown up a couple of motors =
by forgetting about it. We'd made some fast burning 88% solids stuff and =
screwed up a couple. One had the core and the throat the same, both 3/8 =
in for a 38mm motor. The other had a somewhat larger nozzle throat, a =
brain fart day I know. The first worked, but the second immediately =
cato'd.

I'd suggest doing Kn calcs for all motors. The above incident got us =
doing that. We still occasionally blow up motors, but for other reasons.

                                                                Brian  =20


------=_NextPart_000_0A24_01C56B69.434E24E0
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Diso-8859-1">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 6.00.2462.0" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>David,</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>As others have pointed out, it's real. =
We've blown=20
up a couple of motors by forgetting about it. We'd made some fast =
burning 88%=20
solids stuff and screwed up a couple. One had the core and the throat =
the same,=20
both 3/8 in for a 38mm motor. The other had a somewhat larger nozzle =
throat, a=20
brain fart day I know. The first worked, but the second immediately=20
cato'd.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>I'd suggest doing Kn calcs for&nbsp;all =
motors. The=20
above incident got us doing that. We still occasionally blow up motors, =
but for=20
other reasons.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;=20
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; =
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;=20
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; =
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;=20
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; =
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;=20
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; =
Brian&nbsp;&nbsp;</FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE dir=3Dltr=20
style=3D"PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; =
BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: =
0px">&nbsp;</BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0A24_01C56B69.434E24E0--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 2326 invoked from network); 23 Jul 2001 06:10:45 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 23 Jul 2001 06:10:45 -0000
Received: (qmail 12479 invoked from network); 23 Jul 2001 06:08:47 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 23 Jul 2001 06:08:47 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA00843; Sun, 22 Jul 2001 22:52:46 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 80429 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 05:52:45          +0000
Received: from mailhost0.trib.com (mailhost0.trib.com [63.229.150.3]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA00823 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Sun, 22 Jul 2001 22:52:44 -0700
Received: from mail.trib.com (mail.trib.com [12.10.158.17]) by          mailhost0.trib.com (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f6MNm4B40718; Sun,          22 Jul 2001 17:48:04 -0600 (MDT) (envelope-from          jwckman@space-rockets.com)
Received: from [63.229.150.179] (HELO hppav) by mail.trib.com (CommuniGate Pro          SMTP 3.4.6) with SMTP id 40002475; Sun, 22 Jul 2001 17:48:03 -0600
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
Importance: Normal
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <NKEHJAOOKBPGIKOOPDEFOELPCAAA.jwckman@space-rockets.com>
Date:         Sun, 22 Jul 2001 17:46:37 -0600
Reply-To: "John Wickman" <jwckman@SPACE-ROCKETS.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Wickman" <jwckman@SPACE-ROCKETS.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] 2Re: [AR] dark secrets
Comments: To: Henry Spencer <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010721231027.8307D-100000@spsystems.net>

Sometimes patents are restricted due to export controls such as missile
technology.   This could be the case here, he would still get the patent,
but access to it would be restricted to US citizens.


John Wickman


-----Original Message-----
From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@itc.uci.edu]On
Behalf Of Henry Spencer
Sent: Saturday, July 21, 2001 9:12 PM
To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
Subject: Re: [AR] 2Re: [AR] dark secrets


On Sat, 21 Jul 2001, Ray Calkins wrote:
> And as far as release of classified material, talk to Mark Goll.  He's on
> a gag order about the N2O/Propane rocket he developed (without any
> government funding or information).  When he applied for a patent, they
> shut his work down completely for national security.

I'd be curious to know the legal basis for that...  As far as I know --
with the obvious caveat that I'm not a lawyer -- unless he has a security
clearance or something of that ilk, they have no hold on him that can be
used to issue such an order.

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 9841 invoked from network); 23 Jul 2001 06:13:47 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 23 Jul 2001 06:13:47 -0000
Received: (qmail 21652 invoked from network); 23 Jul 2001 05:56:13 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 23 Jul 2001 05:56:13 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA00867; Sun, 22 Jul 2001 22:52:49 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 80437 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 05:52:47          +0000
Received: from mailhost0.trib.com (mailhost0.trib.com [63.229.150.3]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA00826 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Sun, 22 Jul 2001 22:52:45 -0700
Received: from mail.trib.com (mail.trib.com [12.10.158.17]) by          mailhost0.trib.com (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f6MNjTB39673; Sun,          22 Jul 2001 17:45:29 -0600 (MDT) (envelope-from          jwckman@space-rockets.com)
Received: from [63.229.150.179] (HELO hppav) by mail.trib.com (CommuniGate Pro          SMTP 3.4.6) with SMTP id 40002331; Sun, 22 Jul 2001 17:45:27 -0600
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0A27_01C56B69.434E24E0"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
Importance: Normal
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <NKEHJAOOKBPGIKOOPDEFMELPCAAA.jwckman@space-rockets.com>
Date:         Sun, 22 Jul 2001 17:44:00 -0600
Reply-To: "John Wickman" <jwckman@SPACE-ROCKETS.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Wickman" <jwckman@SPACE-ROCKETS.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Particle Size Range
Comments: To: David Muesing <dmuesing@peoplepc.com>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <002101c112ce$e471a2e0$4750153f@default>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0A27_01C56B69.434E24E0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Dave,

Yes, you are right.   The particles can all go through say -325 mesh, but
the particle distribution can be completely different.  You can run it
through different seives to get the distribution.   Particle distribution
can also be done by using a laser to scan the blend.   In industry, a
certificate of analysis is usually required on the actual particle blend
size.

John Wickman
  -----Original Message-----
  From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@itc.uci.edu]On
Behalf Of David Muesing
  Sent: Sunday, July 22, 2001 10:54 AM
  To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
  Subject: [AR] Particle Size Range


  Hello Group,

  The particle size concept in microns and mesh is pretty simple. Particle
size with regards to oxidizer or fuel has a lot to do with burn rate, pretty
straight forward sounds like. How true is this?

  When the particle size is referred to as X mesh, I understand that all of
the particles will go through an X mesh sieve. This specification sounds
very simple but it doesn't tell me the range of particle sizes that go
through the sieve. Suppose that 90% of the particles just go through. Or,
90% would infact go through a 10X mesh. To me, this would be 2 very
different materials and therefore
  make a very big difference in burn rate. Are we to assume that there is
some natural and known particle size distribution? It seems like different
grinding mechanisms would produce different ranges of particles sizes. It
almost sounds like this specification is overly simplified. Perhaps 2
manufacturers would  produce 2 different materials both being X mesh.

  May I have some illumination here? Thank you very much!

  Dave Muesing
  Yorktown, VA



------=_NextPart_000_0A27_01C56B69.434E24E0
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Diso-8859-1">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 5.50.4611.1300" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><SPAN class=3D240363723-22072001><FONT face=3DArial color=3D#0000ff =

size=3D2>Dave,</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=3D240363723-22072001><FONT face=3DArial color=3D#0000ff =

size=3D2></FONT></SPAN>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=3D240363723-22072001><FONT face=3DArial color=3D#0000ff =
size=3D2>Yes,=20
you are right.&nbsp;&nbsp; The particles can all go through say -325 =
mesh, but=20
the particle distribution can be completely different.&nbsp; You can run =
it=20
through different seives to get the distribution.&nbsp;&nbsp; Particle=20
distribution can also be done by using a laser to scan the =
blend.&nbsp;&nbsp; In=20
industry, a certificate of analysis is usually required on the actual =
particle=20
blend size.</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=3D240363723-22072001><FONT face=3DArial color=3D#0000ff =

size=3D2></FONT></SPAN>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=3D240363723-22072001><FONT face=3DArial color=3D#0000ff =
size=3D2>John=20
Wickman</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE dir=3Dltr style=3D"MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
  <DIV class=3DOutlookMessageHeader dir=3Dltr align=3Dleft><FONT =
face=3DTahoma=20
  size=3D2>-----Original Message-----<BR><B>From:</B> Amateur Rocketry =
discussion=20
  list [mailto:AROCKET@itc.uci.edu]<B>On Behalf Of </B>David=20
  Muesing<BR><B>Sent:</B> Sunday, July 22, 2001 10:54 AM<BR><B>To:</B>=20
  AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU<BR><B>Subject:</B> [AR] Particle Size=20
  Range<BR><BR></FONT></DIV>
  <DIV><FONT face=3DOCRA color=3D#0000ff>Hello Group,</FONT></DIV>
  <DIV><FONT face=3DOCRA color=3D#0000ff></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
  <DIV><FONT face=3DOCRA color=3D#0000ff>The&nbsp;particle size concept =
in microns=20
  and mesh is pretty simple. Particle size with regards to oxidizer or =
fuel has=20
  a lot to do with burn rate, pretty straight forward sounds like. How =
true is=20
  this<FONT color=3D#ff0000 size=3D4>?</FONT></FONT></DIV>
  <DIV><FONT face=3DOCRA color=3D#0000ff></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
  <DIV><FONT face=3DOCRA color=3D#0000ff>When the particle size is =
referred to as X=20
  mesh, I understand that all of the particles will go through an X mesh =
sieve.=20
  This specification sounds very simple but it doesn't tell me the =
<U>range</U>=20
  of particle sizes that go through the sieve. Suppose that 90% of the =
particles=20
  <U>just</U> go through. Or, 90% would infact go through a 10X mesh. To =
me,=20
  this would be 2 very different materials and therefore</FONT></DIV>
  <DIV><FONT face=3DOCRA color=3D#0000ff>make a very big difference in =
burn rate.=20
  Are we to assume that there is some natural and known particle size=20
  distribution? It seems like different grinding mechanisms would =
produce=20
  different ranges of particles sizes. It almost sounds like this =
specification=20
  is overly simplified. Perhaps 2 manufacturers would&nbsp; produce 2 =
different=20
  materials both being X mesh.</FONT></DIV>
  <DIV><FONT face=3DOCRA color=3D#0000ff></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
  <DIV><FONT face=3DOCRA color=3D#0000ff>May I have some illumination =
here? Thank=20
  you very much!</FONT></DIV>
  <DIV><FONT face=3DOCRA color=3D#0000ff></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
  <DIV><FONT face=3DOCRA color=3D#0000ff>Dave Muesing</FONT></DIV>
  <DIV><FONT face=3DOCRA color=3D#0000ff>Yorktown, VA</FONT></DIV>
  <DIV><FONT face=3DOCRA color=3D#0000ff></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
  <DIV><FONT face=3DOCRA=20
color=3D#0000ff></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0A27_01C56B69.434E24E0--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 20946 invoked from network); 23 Jul 2001 06:18:29 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 23 Jul 2001 06:18:29 -0000
Received: (qmail 24158 invoked from network); 23 Jul 2001 05:58:35 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 23 Jul 2001 05:58:35 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA00990; Sun, 22 Jul 2001 22:55:34 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 80462 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 05:55:33          +0000
Received: from wrench.toolcity.net (root@wrench.toolcity.net [208.0.188.2]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA00897 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 22 Jul 2001 22:53:24 -0700
Received: from [63.169.101.176]          (dap-63-169-101-176.meadville-tnt-1.pa.toolcity.net [63.169.101.176])          by wrench.toolcity.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id TAA06550; Sun, 22          Jul 2001 19:07:00 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <v01510100b78111d9be83@[208.22.189.44]>
Date:         Sun, 22 Jul 2001 19:09:19 -0500
Reply-To: "al bradley" <abradley@TOOLCITY.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "al bradley" <abradley@TOOLCITY.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] 4Re: [AR] 3Re: [AR] 2Re: [AR] dark secrets
Comments: To: "Bendel, Timothy B" <timothy.b.bendel@lmco.com>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

>Who is
>Gerald Bull? Did he have a clearance?
>Sorry for all the questions but I want to know if I am being asked to sell
>my soul.
>
>Tim Bendel
>
-------------------
Gerald Bull was an ultra-long-range cannon designer, including, I think,
working on construction and design of a cannon whose highest trajectory
would have been sub-orbital. During his shortened life span he must have
had a number of security clearances, perhaps for different countries.
During the latter part of his earthly stay he had such a device under
construction in Canada. Can't remember which country (USA or Canada)
financed that project. When funding for that dried up he was said to have
moved his project (with a contract) to a near-east country. His life ended
in front of his hotel room door when an assassin's bullet just behind his
ear ended the project too.

Point is that in extreme classified research and knowledge thereof, firing
one from his job or jailing is not the ultimate penalty. That penalty could
be from one's own government or any number of other governments' agencies.

Generally speaking, one would not expect a punitive response for one's
affiliation with an amateur group. But for a particularly bright person who
embarks on an unexplored direction, his/her future may be drastically
changed.

After all, even in our "highly moral" government, didn't the CIA try to
hire assassins to kill Castro? Were the results of J. Edgar Hoover's
surveillance of Martin Luther King rigged?

I can't recommend paranoia as the most appropriate response but obviously
some thoughtfulness is in order.

respectfully,
al bradley

------------------------------------------------------------------
Can you live Life with this?: "Unless there is a law, an agreement, or a
long-standing custom, No one `Deserves' Anything -- Either Good or Bad!"

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 26448 invoked from network); 23 Jul 2001 06:20:25 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 23 Jul 2001 06:20:25 -0000
Received: (qmail 28451 invoked from network); 23 Jul 2001 06:02:16 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 23 Jul 2001 06:02:16 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA01156; Sun, 22 Jul 2001 22:58:45 -0700
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 80506 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 05:58:40          +0000
Received: from mailgw1a.lmco.com (mailgw1a.lmco.com [192.31.106.7]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA01138; Sun, 22 Jul 2001          22:58:39 -0700
Received: from emss02g01.ems.lmco.com (relay2.ems.lmco.com [166.29.2.54]) by          mailgw1a.lmco.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id QAA02147; Sun, 22 Jul          2001 16:05:37 -0600 (MDT)
Received: from CONVERSION-DAEMON by lmco.com (PMDF V5.2-33 #38887) id          <0GGW00F01APDC0@lmco.com>; Sun, 22 Jul 2001 16:05:37 -0600 (MDT)
Received: from emss02i00.ems.lmco.com ([166.29.2.48]) by lmco.com (PMDF V5.2-33          #38887) with ESMTP id <0GGW0074IAPBUS@lmco.com>; Sun, 22 Jul 2001          16:05:35 -0600 (MDT)
Received: by emss02i00.ems.lmco.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) id          <P13DHC8G>; Sun, 22 Jul 2001 16:06:41 -0600
Content-return: allowed
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19)
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <EDB5E5136094D311BF1800508B12205E08D2908F@emss02m07.ems.lmco.com>
Date:         Sun, 22 Jul 2001 16:06:40 -0600
Reply-To: "Bendel, Timothy B" <timothy.b.bendel@LMCO.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Bendel, Timothy B" <timothy.b.bendel@LMCO.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] 3Re: [AR] 2Re: [AR] dark secrets
Comments: To: Kristin & David Hall <thehalls@ridgenet.net>
Comments: cc: al bradley <abradley@TOOLCITY.NET>,          Henry Spencer <henry@spsystems.net>,          Ray Calkins <rcalkins@ITC.UCI.EDU>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Actually, my amatuer rocketry work is very close to my professional work. I
am concerned that my option to market my own ideas will be severely limited
if I got a security clearance. I currently have no security clearance.
Who is Mark Goll and why is he in trouble? Did he have a clearance? Who is
Gerald Bull? Did he have a clearance?
Sorry for all the questions but I want to know if I am being asked to sell
my soul.

Tim Bendel

-----Original Message-----
From: Kristin & David Hall [mailto:thehalls@ridgenet.net]
Sent: Sunday, July 22, 2001 11:02 AM
To: Bendel, Timothy B; AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
Subject: Re: Re: [AR] 3Re: [AR] 2Re: [AR] dark secrets



> As someone whose boss just told him to get a security clearance AND is
also
> working on amature rocket technology, this thread has proven very
> interesting. Am I to understand that if I sign these papers to get a
> clearance that my own work outside the company that I currently work for
> could be seized as "classified"?

In the grossest sense, yes, anything you do after you have that clearance is
subject to their jurisdiction.

In the realest sense, it depends.  What are you working on (no need to
answer that)?  If it's something like say....radar jamming pods, then it
would be very difficult to see why/how your amateur work could be seen as
related to your classified duties.  If, on the other hand, your job involves
TVC nozzles, they hell yes they may classify your amateur work - even if it
doesn't directly involve TVC stuff.  The logic?  Take me for example - I
used to work on propulsion *systems*.  I never did propellant formulation.
But that doesn't mean I wasn't given access to classified propellant
formulation information.  Thus, any propellants I formulate "could be"
inspired by classified information and thus, classifiable themselves.
Result?  There are a number of topics on which I tread very carefully around
here (and there are amateur projects that I would never attempt because
they're "too close to home" if you catch my drift).

In the most practical sense, don't worry.  After you've played the
classified game for a while you get a pretty good feel for what's OK and
what's not.  Besides, these days slapping a secretary on the butt is a much
more serious offense than leaving a safe open (you only think I'm kidding
there...).

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 2779 invoked from network); 23 Jul 2001 06:22:06 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 23 Jul 2001 06:22:06 -0000
Received: (qmail 4817 invoked from network); 23 Jul 2001 06:09:12 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 23 Jul 2001 06:09:12 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA01347; Sun, 22 Jul 2001 23:05:35 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 80553 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 06:05:34          +0000
Received: from mss.emc4.sfba.home.com (ha2.emc4.sfba.home.com [24.0.95.187]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA01310 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 22 Jul 2001 23:05:27 -0700
Received: from cc334751a ([65.13.214.65]) by femail22.sdc1.sfba.home.com          (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20 201-229-121-120-20010223) with SMTP id          <20010722223635.UHEJ6674.femail22.sdc1.sfba.home.com@cc334751a>; Sun,          22 Jul 2001 15:36:35 -0700
References:  <002101c112ce$e471a2e0$4750153f@default>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0A2B_01C56B69.435A0BC0"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2462.0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <029401c112fe$b801bf80$6401a8c0@home.com>
Date:         Sun, 22 Jul 2001 16:36:15 -0600
Reply-To: "Brian Kosko" <bkosko1@HOME.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Brian Kosko" <bkosko1@HOME.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Particle Size Range
Comments: To: David Muesing <dmuesing@PEOPLEPC.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0A2B_01C56B69.435A0BC0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

David,

You're right about oxidizer particle size. AP composite combustion is =
pretty much goverened by the breakdown and combustion of the AP. The =
reactions occur very near the propellant surface so the metals don't =
really come into play then. Finer AP means faster burn rate. Our work =
has certainly borne this out. The fastest burning stuff had 25 - 30% of =
the 'superfine' AP. We now just use it on our special effects =
propellants where it gives us good ignitability and quite decent =
performance.

The book we all recently discussed, "Solid Propellant Chemistry, =
Combustion, and Motor Interior Ballistics", has the latest and greatest =
explanations of these phenomena.

                                                                         =
   Brian=20

------=_NextPart_000_0A2B_01C56B69.435A0BC0
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Diso-8859-1">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 6.00.2462.0" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>David,</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>You're right about oxidizer particle =
size. AP=20
composite combustion is pretty much goverened by the breakdown and =
combustion of=20
the AP. The reactions occur very near the propellant surface so the =
metals don't=20
really come into play then. Finer AP means faster burn rate. Our work =
has=20
certainly borne this out. The fastest burning stuff had 25 - 30% of the=20
'superfine' AP. We now just use it on our special effects propellants =
where it=20
gives us good ignitability and quite decent performance.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>The book we all recently discussed, =
"Solid=20
Propellant Chemistry, Combustion, and Motor Interior Ballistics", has =
the latest=20
and greatest explanations of these phenomena.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;=20
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; =
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;=20
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; =
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;=20
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; =
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;=20
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; =
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;=20
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Brian</FONT>&nbsp;</DIV></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0A2B_01C56B69.435A0BC0--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 26980 invoked from network); 23 Jul 2001 06:30:19 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 23 Jul 2001 06:30:19 -0000
Received: (qmail 20741 invoked from network); 23 Jul 2001 06:32:22 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 23 Jul 2001 06:32:22 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA01495; Sun, 22 Jul 2001 23:27:05 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 80569 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 06:27:02          +0000
Received: from femail19.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail19.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.0.95.128]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA01475          for <arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 22 Jul 2001 23:27:01 -0700
Received: from cc334751a ([65.13.214.65]) by femail22.sdc1.sfba.home.com          (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20 201-229-121-120-20010223) with SMTP id          <20010722224129.UKHR6674.femail22.sdc1.sfba.home.com@cc334751a> for          <arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 22 Jul 2001 15:41:29 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0A2E_01C56B69.435A0BC0"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2462.0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <02a301c112ff$675a0dc0$6401a8c0@home.com>
Date:         Sun, 22 Jul 2001 16:41:09 -0600
Reply-To: "Brian Kosko" <bkosko1@HOME.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Brian Kosko" <bkosko1@HOME.COM>
Subject:      [AR] More about that Z/S book
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0A2E_01C56B69.435A0BC0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

I had a chance to look at this book a little more this weekend. It has =
some very interesting data. One was the creation of solid Z/S by melting =
the mix at 150 deg or so, then pouring it into the motor. They got a =
density of 4 g/cc or so, plus a higher Isp.

Another interesting observation they made was that the static tests =
didn't seem to correlate to the actual flight of the motor. They =
observed a much higher burn rate in the rocket vs the static test of the =
same motor. This was something they recently observed and they had no =
explanation for it.

All in all, some interesting stuff if you want to use Z/S.

                                                                        =
Brian

------=_NextPart_000_0A2E_01C56B69.435A0BC0
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Diso-8859-1">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 6.00.2462.0" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>I had a chance to look at this book a =
little more=20
this weekend. It has some very interesting data. One was the creation of =
solid=20
Z/S by melting the mix at 150 deg or so, then pouring it into the motor. =
They=20
got a density of 4 g/cc or so, plus a higher Isp.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Another interesting observation they =
made was that=20
the static tests didn't seem to correlate to the actual flight of the =
motor.=20
They observed a much higher burn rate in the rocket vs the static test =
of the=20
same motor. This was something they recently observed and they had no=20
explanation for it.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>All in all, some interesting stuff if =
you want to=20
use Z/S.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;=20
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; =
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;=20
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; =
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;=20
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; =
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;=20
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; =
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;=20
Brian</FONT></DIV></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0A2E_01C56B69.435A0BC0--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 9938 invoked from network); 23 Jul 2001 06:47:19 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 23 Jul 2001 06:47:19 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 4375 invoked from network); 23 Jul 2001 06:49:05 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 23 Jul 2001 06:49:05 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA01552; Sun, 22 Jul 2001 23:32:18 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 80583 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 06:32:16          +0000
Received: from idsoftware.com (predator.idsoftware.com [192.246.40.34]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA01535 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Sun, 22 Jul 2001 23:32:16 -0700
Received: from [192.246.40.144] (account johnc HELO pluto.idsoftware.com) by          idsoftware.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 3.4.7) with ESMTP id 311450 for          AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 01:31:02 -0500
X-Sender: johnc@mail.idsoftware.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <4.3.1.2.20010723012904.04870ef0@mail.idsoftware.com>
Date:         Mon, 23 Jul 2001 01:43:43 -0500
Reply-To: "John Carmack" <johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Carmack" <johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] HTP Catalysts / Rockets / Jetbelt / Rocket drag bikes ...
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <F121zhxRz3s2gu59Vvj0000334e@hotmail.com>

At 05:55 AM 7/23/2001 +0000, you wrote:
>Ah, so Juan Lozano is still at it. Very pro looking site new sites.
>
>Keep wondering where he finds the money and time for all these toys.
>A pentametallic HP cat pack URL (not Juan's) I posted last year to Arocket
>IIRC. I recall JC reacting to it. Does not melt like silver screens or
>deteriorate like silver plated screens using above 90 % HP concentration.
>Still have to read it all.
>
>jd

The pentamatallic cat pack WAS Juan's.

I tried to buy one of his new packs to test with our 98% peroxide in the
original engine I bought from him last year, but he ignored the request a
couple times during our emails, even though he has been happy to quote
prices on anything else.

Because he distills it himself, I would not be surprised if he was using
peroxide that wasn't quite as concentrated as he thought during
development, and later found out that when he did get a real 98% batch and
fired it for an extended period, there was still some molten silver.

Plain platinum screens should work fine for any concentration of peroxide,
but they are probably a bit pricey...

John Carmack

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 3238 invoked from network); 23 Jul 2001 06:57:33 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 23 Jul 2001 06:57:33 -0000
Received: (qmail 11964 invoked from network); 23 Jul 2001 06:59:16 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 23 Jul 2001 06:59:16 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA01743; Sun, 22 Jul 2001 23:56:02 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 80620 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 06:55:46          +0000
Received: from mta02.mail.mel.aone.net.au (mta02.mail.au.uu.net [203.2.192.82])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA01723 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 22 Jul 2001 23:55:45 -0700
Received: from unknown ([63.34.220.76]) by mta04.mail.mel.aone.net.au with SMTP          id <20010723010943.SVTF12944.mta04.mail.mel.aone.net.au@unknown> for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 11:09:43 +1000
References: Conversation <005a01c112d3$e9499e80$4750153f@default> with last            message <005a01c112d3$e9499e80$4750153f@default>
Priority: Normal
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Priority: 3
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	X-MAPIextension=.TXT;
	charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>
Date:         Mon, 23 Jul 2001 06:55:46 +0000
Reply-To: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Erosive Burning
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <005a01c112d3$e9499e80$4750153f@default>

----------
> Hello Group,
>
> How real is this erosive burning thing? It sounds like overpressurization
> because of it can be disastrous.

It's real but not always an *over*pressurization and quite often is more of
a benefit than a disaster.

>
> Are there guidelines to consider to prevent it?

Yep, use a larger core area is one of the most common methods.

>Can it be used to advantage?

Yep, as Dave mentioned.

>
> About the only thing I've heard is "make the core area >4 x the nozzle
throat
> area". It just seems like all of the other variables would also affect
it.

Yep, other things being core velocity (can be affected by propellant type
and motor geometry), Pc (higher Pc = lower EB effect, type of fuel/binder
used (less of an affect at higher chamber pressures), average oxidizer
particle size (larger = greater effect) and many other lesser misc things.

I've ran C-Slot motors at core:throat area ratios of ~1.89 @approx 800 Psi
with a measured propellant Isp of 223sec and encounted noticeable yet small
erosive burning spikes that didn't exceed (reach actually) the max
operating pressure of the motors (reasonably neutral) burn profile. I can
send a load cell curve through to illustrate what an erosive burning spike
may look like if that help at all.


Troy.


>
> Thanks!
>
> Dave Muesing
> Yorktown, VA

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 24530 invoked from network); 23 Jul 2001 07:05:33 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 23 Jul 2001 07:05:33 -0000
Received: (qmail 18590 invoked from network); 23 Jul 2001 07:07:18 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 23 Jul 2001 07:07:18 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA01674; Sun, 22 Jul 2001 23:49:18 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 80608 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 06:49:15          +0000
Received: from localhost (rcalkins@localhost) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with          ESMTP id XAA01657; Sun, 22 Jul 2001 23:49:15 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.LNX.4.10.10107222325380.926-100000@itc.uci.edu>
Date:         Sun, 22 Jul 2001 23:49:15 -0700
Reply-To: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Ray Calkins" <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
Subject:      Re: [AR] 3Re: [AR] 2Re: [AR] dark secrets
Comments: To: Kristin & David Hall <thehalls@RIDGENET.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <003201c11301$52d3ecc0$1b30fea9@kristinscomp>

> > Who is Mark Goll and why is he in trouble? Did he have a clearance?

> Mark is a small time rocket guy like the rest of us.  Beyond that, Ray
> will have to respond.
Mark used to be on the aRocket list.  He was making great progress on his
N2O/Propane self-pressurized biprop, testing an 8,000 lb thrust version
for just over $10,000 back in '98.  Some details can be found here:
http://www.houstonspacesociety.org/tsi/press.html
He is still a great proponent of lowered launch costs, and has quite a few
good points to make on his web site - http://web.wt.net/~markgoll/

He stated on aRocket he's forbidden to discuss the secrecy order or the
technology.  He did NOT have a clearance, he was only seeking to patent
his innovations.  (One of the reasons I'm a big supporter of open
source...)  The patent request came back with a gag order.  I don't know
any details beyond that and Mark isn't talking.

I did find this little tidbit: "The innovative low-cost rocket technology
developed by Texas Rocket Company is suppressed by an Air Force "Secrecy
Order". The question is how many other great advances in space technology
are suppressed by 'Secrecy Orders'".  From -
http://web.wt.net/~markgoll/mgcm9.htm

Here are photos of some of his tests:
http://web.wt.net/~markgoll/mg9.htm
http://web.wt.net/~markgoll/pic2.htm

He would have been close to orbit by now if he had kept going at the same
rate.

Ray

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 9350 invoked from network); 23 Jul 2001 07:11:16 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 23 Jul 2001 07:11:16 -0000
Received: (qmail 29365 invoked from network); 23 Jul 2001 07:13:20 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 23 Jul 2001 07:13:20 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA01764; Sun, 22 Jul 2001 23:56:10 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 80628 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 06:56:09          +0000
Received: from mta02.mail.mel.aone.net.au (mta02.mail.au.uu.net [203.2.192.82])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA01726 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sun, 22 Jul 2001 23:55:47 -0700
Received: from unknown ([63.34.220.54]) by mta05.mail.mel.aone.net.au with SMTP          id <20010723014739.XTKT28112.mta05.mail.mel.aone.net.au@unknown> for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 11:47:39 +1000
References: Conversation <002101c112ce$e471a2e0$4750153f@default> with last            message <002101c112ce$e471a2e0$4750153f@default>
Priority: Normal
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Priority: 3
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	X-MAPIextension=.TXT;
	charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>
Date:         Mon, 23 Jul 2001 06:56:09 +0000
Reply-To: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Particle Size Range
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <002101c112ce$e471a2e0$4750153f@default>

----------
> Hello Group,
>
> The particle size concept in microns and mesh is pretty simple. Particle
size
> with regards to oxidizer or fuel has a lot to do with burn rate, pretty
> straight forward sounds like. How true is this?

I wouldn't define it as "a lot", depends on what scales and extremes your
definitions are based on, although oxidizer particle size can have quite a
few different effects on the internal ballistic behaviour of the propellant.

>
> When the particle size is referred to as X mesh, I understand that all of
the
> particles will go through an X mesh sieve. This specification sounds very
> simple but it doesn't tell me the range of particle sizes that go through
the
> sieve. Suppose that 90% of the particles just go through. Or, 90% would
infact
> go through a 10X mesh. To me, this would be 2 very different materials and
> therefore
> make a very big difference in burn rate. Are we to assume that there is
some
> natural and known particle size distribution? It seems like different
grinding
> mechanisms would produce different ranges of particles sizes. It almost
sounds
> like this specification is overly simplified. Perhaps 2 manufacturers
would
> produce 2 different materials both being X mesh.
>
> May I have some illumination here? Thank you very much!

You're generally correct, in fact, there have been papers submitted
exclusively dedicated to that subject. It's not something I've really had
to worry much about though.

Troy.

>
> Dave Muesing
> Yorktown, VA
>
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 27233 invoked from network); 23 Jul 2001 07:40:52 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 23 Jul 2001 07:40:52 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 15902 invoked from network); 23 Jul 2001 07:41:16 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 23 Jul 2001 07:41:16 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA01915; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 00:38:12 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 80647 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 07:38:09          +0000
Received: from scaup.mail.pas.earthlink.net (scaup.mail.pas.earthlink.net          [207.217.121.49]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA01873          for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 00:28:09 -0700
Received: from earthlink.net (dialup-209.245.128.133.Dial1.SanJose1.Level3.net          [209.245.128.133]) by scaup.mail.pas.earthlink.net (EL-8_9_3_3/8.9.3)          with ESMTP id AAA05133; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 00:28:08 -0700 (PDT)
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.75 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.16-22 i686)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <Pine.LNX.4.10.10107222325380.926-100000@itc.uci.edu>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B5BD1BC.50A66C2E@earthlink.net>
Date:         Mon, 23 Jul 2001 00:26:52 -0700
Reply-To: "David Weinshenker" <daze39@EARTHLINK.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "David Weinshenker" <daze39@EARTHLINK.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] 3Re: [AR] 2Re: [AR] dark secrets
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Ray Calkins wrote:
[re: air force "secrecy order" on an amateur
design]

> He would have been close to orbit by now if
> he had kept going at the same rate.

That's probably what the Air Force thought...

(William S. Burroughs used to say: "Earth is a
prison planet. Nobody is supposed to escape."
It appears that Uncle Sam has gone and appointed
himself doorkeeper...)

-dave w

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 13135 invoked from network); 23 Jul 2001 07:47:13 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 23 Jul 2001 07:47:13 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 4234 invoked from network); 23 Jul 2001 07:48:31 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 23 Jul 2001 07:48:31 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA01967; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 00:45:19 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 80648 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 07:45:18          +0000
Received: from scaup.mail.pas.earthlink.net (scaup.mail.pas.earthlink.net          [207.217.121.49]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA01894          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 00:35:18 -0700
Received: from earthlink.net (dialup-209.245.128.133.Dial1.SanJose1.Level3.net          [209.245.128.133]) by scaup.mail.pas.earthlink.net (EL-8_9_3_3/8.9.3)          with ESMTP id AAA16303; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 00:35:17 -0700 (PDT)
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.75 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.16-22 i686)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: Conversation <005a01c112d3$e9499e80$4750153f@default> with last            message <005a01c112d3$e9499e80$4750153f@default>            <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B5BD3B6.F0635737@earthlink.net>
Date:         Mon, 23 Jul 2001 00:35:18 -0700
Reply-To: "David Weinshenker" <daze39@EARTHLINK.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "David Weinshenker" <daze39@EARTHLINK.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Erosive Burning
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Troy Prideaux wrote:
> I've ran C-Slot motors at core:throat area ratios of ~1.89 @approx 800 Psi
> with a measured propellant Isp of 223sec and encounted noticeable yet small
> erosive burning spikes that didn't exceed (reach actually) the max
> operating pressure of the motors (reasonably neutral) burn profile. I can
> send a load cell curve through to illustrate what an erosive burning spike
> may look like if that help at all.

It appears that many of the Aerotech RMS motors have a
noticeable "startup spike" (which is actually useful to
help accelerate a heavy rocket) - this seems especially
marked with the larger motors in a given case diameter
series (which have greater flow through a core of similar
diameter) - note, for example, the published curves for
the J570 and M1315 - which leads me to suspect that it's
a predictable erosive effect that tails off after the first
moments of the burn, once the core diameter increases a
sufficient amount.

-dave w

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 15949 invoked from network); 23 Jul 2001 08:00:53 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 23 Jul 2001 08:00:53 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 27495 invoked from network); 23 Jul 2001 08:02:39 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 23 Jul 2001 08:02:39 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA02033; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 00:59:05 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 80671 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 07:58:44          +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (f6.law3.hotmail.com [209.185.241.6]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA02016 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Mon,          23 Jul 2001 00:58:44 -0700
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Mon,          23 Jul 2001 00:58:14 -0700
Received: from 213.224.83.38 by lw3fd.law3.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Mon, 23          Jul 2001 07:58:14 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [213.224.83.38]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 23 Jul 2001 07:58:14.0497 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[39B9C510:01C1134D]
Message-ID:  <F6GmhZ26yJKs8TAGUjG00003ccf@hotmail.com>
Date:         Mon, 23 Jul 2001 07:58:44 +0000
Reply-To: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] HTP Catalysts / Rockets / Jetbelt / Rocket drag bikes ...
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

JC wrote:

>The pentamatallic cat pack WAS Juan's.

oops

>Plain platinum screens should work fine for any concentration of peroxide,
>but they are probably a bit pricey...

Chances are many other people 'd be looking where your rocket came down
besides yourself...

I read about Russian-made metal alloy disks which could do that. But that
was a few years ago. I'll try to find this back later.

Of course the honeycomb (Celcor monolyth) ceramic screens covered with MnxOy
after dipping them in 40 % NaMnO4 and calcinating them are very cheap packs
that can handle 100 % HP I reckon. You need a calcination oven for this:

http://www.ee.surrey.ac.uk/SSC/H2O2CONF/ckappenstein.htm

jd

_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 11628 invoked from network); 23 Jul 2001 08:11:46 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 23 Jul 2001 08:11:46 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: (qmail 8046 invoked from network); 23 Jul 2001 08:13:32 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 23 Jul 2001 08:13:32 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id BAA02147; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 01:10:18 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 80695 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 08:10:17          +0000
Received: from cisco.com (cypher.cisco.com [171.69.11.18]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id BAA02130 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon,          23 Jul 2001 01:10:17 -0700
Received: (from billw@localhost) by cisco.com (8.8.8/2.6/Cisco List          Logging/8.8.8) id BAA18788; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 01:09:10 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID:  <CMM.0.90.4.995875750.billw@cypher>
Date:         Mon, 23 Jul 2001 01:09:10 PDT
Reply-To: "Bill Westfield" <billw@cisco.com>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "William Chops Westfield" <billw@cisco.com>
Subject:      Re: [AR] 3Re: [AR] 2Re: [AR] dark secrets
Comments: To: Henry Spencer <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  Your message of Sun, 22 Jul 2001 18:46:41 -0400

> Actually, my amatuer rocketry work is very close to my professional work. I
> am concerned that my option to market my own ideas will be severely limited
> if I got a security clearance...

Hey, your ability to "market your own ideas" is (could be) severely limitted
regardless of whether or not you have or get a security clearance.  Haven't
you READ the employment agreement?  Anything the company thinks you might
have developed on their time belongs to them - in some cases they may think
that anything you develop on your own time while working for them belongs to
them too (although according to most lawyers, they're probably wrong.)  Many
a startup (including cisco) has their origin mired somewhat in an argument
over who owns exactly what "intellectual property."  Look at the
recent/current Avanti situation, for instance - it seems that it's pretty
easy to keep the argument going in the courts for long enough that it ceases
to be very relevant in terms of product development.

Probably the only way out of this sort of mess is to ASK your employer,
hopefully getting answers in writing (especially if you plan to make money
with an "outside project" related to your field of employment.)  Somewhere I
have a letter from SRI giving me permission to persue outside marketing of a
communications program for the (original) IBM PC.  Somewhere on file at
cisco is a letter stating that certain implementations of an IP checksum
algorithm were developed prior to my employment there and were placed in the
public domain.  One of the possible outcomes of cisco's patent process is
that the patent council will sugest that you publish an idea rather than
pursue a patent (which nicely creates "prior art" and prevents competitors
from patenting the same idea, without causing quite as much pain and expense
as going the full patent route.)  Your employer is not necessarilly a great
enemy from whom you need to hide all outside activities...

(What a security clearance causes would be...  Hmm.  If your amateur rocket
design starts to include features that "they" consider classified, you could
be a lot more trouble if you might have had legitimate access to that
classified material than if you had no security clearance and no possible
access to classified material.  Presumably you can be STOPPED in either
case, but if you had the security clearance you may be guilty of all sorts
security violations, while otherwise ... not.  I think.)

Furthermore, I think the average amateur rocketeer ought to keep in mind
that they can probably be charged with all sorts of crimes if they ever
happen to piss off the wrong people.  The line between a legitimate amateur
rocket and a terrorist destructive device is IN REALITY rather thin, and it
may be even thinner in the eyes of overzealous or paranoid law enforcement
agencies (and etc.)  Got your black powder for ejection charges stored in an
approved explosives magazine?  Doing all the appropriate paperwork each time
you remove some from the magazine for use in a rocket, or when you purchase
the BP?  I assume you've all heard of the legitimate, licensed, pyrotechnics
manufacturer who was charged and tried (and (eventually) found innocent) on
drug charges, based largely on purchase and possession of iodine and red
phosphorus?  I think it was "1984" where Orwell pointed out that laws aren't
necessarilly made because they're meant to be obeyed...

BillW


From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 14367 invoked from network); 23 Jul 2001 08:24:25 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 23 Jul 2001 08:24:25 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 17981 invoked from network); 23 Jul 2001 08:26:11 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 23 Jul 2001 08:26:11 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id BAA02102; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 01:09:34 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 80683 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 08:09:32          +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (f81.law3.hotmail.com [209.185.241.81]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id BAA02085 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 01:09:32 -0700
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Mon,          23 Jul 2001 01:09:02 -0700
Received: from 213.224.83.38 by lw3fd.law3.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Mon, 23          Jul 2001 08:09:01 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [213.224.83.38]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 23 Jul 2001 08:09:02.0093 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[BBB913D0:01C1134E]
Message-ID:  <F811IT18olkDTM9wGmA00000b4c@hotmail.com>
Date:         Mon, 23 Jul 2001 08:09:32 +0000
Reply-To: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] 3Re: [AR] 2Re: [AR] dark secrets
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Ha-ha, his dog Snert. In my language snert means "no good" actually.

jd




>From: Ray Calkins <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
>Reply-To: Ray Calkins <rcalkins@itc.uci.edu>
>To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
>Subject: Re: [AR] 3Re: [AR] 2Re: [AR] dark secrets
>Date: Sun, 22 Jul 2001 23:49:15 -0700
>
> > > Who is Mark Goll and why is he in trouble? Did he have a clearance?
>
> > Mark is a small time rocket guy like the rest of us.  Beyond that, Ray
> > will have to respond.
>Mark used to be on the aRocket list.  He was making great progress on his
>N2O/Propane self-pressurized biprop, testing an 8,000 lb thrust version
>for just over $10,000 back in '98.  Some details can be found here:
>http://www.houstonspacesociety.org/tsi/press.html
>He is still a great proponent of lowered launch costs, and has quite a few
>good points to make on his web site - http://web.wt.net/~markgoll/
>
>He stated on aRocket he's forbidden to discuss the secrecy order or the
>technology.  He did NOT have a clearance, he was only seeking to patent
>his innovations.  (One of the reasons I'm a big supporter of open
>source...)  The patent request came back with a gag order.  I don't know
>any details beyond that and Mark isn't talking.
>
>I did find this little tidbit: "The innovative low-cost rocket technology
>developed by Texas Rocket Company is suppressed by an Air Force "Secrecy
>Order". The question is how many other great advances in space technology
>are suppressed by 'Secrecy Orders'".  From -
>http://web.wt.net/~markgoll/mgcm9.htm
>
>Here are photos of some of his tests:
>http://web.wt.net/~markgoll/mg9.htm
>http://web.wt.net/~markgoll/pic2.htm
>
>He would have been close to orbit by now if he had kept going at the same
>rate.
>
>Ray


_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 25357 invoked from network); 23 Jul 2001 09:18:48 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 23 Jul 2001 09:18:48 -0000
Received: (qmail 26728 invoked from network); 23 Jul 2001 09:20:52 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 23 Jul 2001 09:20:52 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id CAA02328; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 02:16:10 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 80707 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 09:16:03          +0000
Received: from dune.gnc.net (root@dune.gnc.net [207.203.72.4]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id CAA02310 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon,          23 Jul 2001 02:16:02 -0700
Received: from beowulf (sw2-39.gnc.net [207.203.72.119]) by dune.gnc.net          (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id FAA26816 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon,          23 Jul 2001 05:15:53 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0A31_01C56B69.4365F2A0"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
Importance: Normal
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <LPBBKJMJEOFKAMFJJNNHAENACFAA.landofgrey@gnc.net>
Date:         Mon, 23 Jul 2001 05:15:52 -0400
Reply-To: <landofgrey@gnc.net>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Matthew Travis" <landofgrey@gnc.net>
Subject:      Re: [AR] More about that Z/S book
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <02a301c112ff$675a0dc0$6401a8c0@home.com>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0A31_01C56B69.4365F2A0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

I don't know if this would apply to melted ZnS, but one of the qualities of
ZnS is that if it's packed too loosely, a couple things can happen with the
burn rate. If the motor sits a long time or is handled roughly, the
propellant settles and packs more, increasing its density (and usually
causing unexpected side-effects). Also, if the propellant is too loose, when
it is launched, it may pack down more and alter the burn rate, and at worst,
may be blown out the back before burning. Good packing methods alleviate
this. Again, I don't know if this applies at all to melted ZnS, as I've
never tried it.

Matt
  -----Original Message-----
  From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU]On
Behalf Of Brian Kosko
  Sent: Sunday, July 22, 2001 6:41 PM
  To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
  Subject: [AR] More about that Z/S book


  I had a chance to look at this book a little more this weekend. It has
some very interesting data. One was the creation of solid Z/S by melting the
mix at 150 deg or so, then pouring it into the motor. They got a density of
4 g/cc or so, plus a higher Isp.

  Another interesting observation they made was that the static tests didn't
seem to correlate to the actual flight of the motor. They observed a much
higher burn rate in the rocket vs the static test of the same motor. This
was something they recently observed and they had no explanation for it.

  All in all, some interesting stuff if you want to use Z/S.


Brian

------=_NextPart_000_0A31_01C56B69.4365F2A0
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Diso-8859-1">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 5.50.4208.1700" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial color=3D#0000ff size=3D2><SPAN =
class=3D940221209-23072001>I=20
don't know if this would apply to melted ZnS, but one of the qualities =
of ZnS is=20
that if it's packed too loosely, a couple things can happen with the =
burn rate.=20
If the motor sits a long time or is handled roughly, the propellant =
settles and=20
packs more, increasing its density (and usually causing unexpected=20
side-effects). Also, if the propellant is too loose, when it is =
launched,=20
it&nbsp;may pack down more and alter the burn rate,&nbsp;and at worst, =
may be=20
blown out the back before burning. Good packing methods alleviate this. =
Again, I=20
don't know if this applies at all to melted ZnS, as I've never tried=20
it.</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial color=3D#0000ff size=3D2><SPAN=20
class=3D940221209-23072001></SPAN></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial color=3D#0000ff size=3D2><SPAN=20
class=3D940221209-23072001>Matt&nbsp;</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE dir=3Dltr=20
style=3D"PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px =
solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
  <DIV class=3DOutlookMessageHeader dir=3Dltr align=3Dleft><FONT =
face=3DTahoma=20
  size=3D2>-----Original Message-----<BR><B>From:</B> Amateur Rocketry =
discussion=20
  list [mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU]<B>On Behalf Of </B>Brian=20
  Kosko<BR><B>Sent:</B> Sunday, July 22, 2001 6:41 PM<BR><B>To:</B>=20
  AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU<BR><B>Subject:</B> [AR] More about that Z/S=20
  book<BR><BR></FONT></DIV>
  <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>I had a chance to look at this book a =
little more=20
  this weekend. It has some very interesting data. One was the creation =
of solid=20
  Z/S by melting the mix at 150 deg or so, then pouring it into the =
motor. They=20
  got a density of 4 g/cc or so, plus a higher Isp.</FONT></DIV>
  <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
  <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Another interesting observation they =
made was=20
  that the static tests didn't seem to correlate to the actual flight of =
the=20
  motor. They observed a much higher burn rate in the rocket vs the =
static test=20
  of the same motor. This was something they recently observed and they =
had no=20
  explanation for it.</FONT></DIV>
  <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
  <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>All in all, some interesting stuff if =
you want to=20
  use Z/S.</FONT></DIV>
  <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
  <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; =

  &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; =
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;=20
  &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; =
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;=20
  &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; =
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;=20
  &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; =
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;=20
  Brian</FONT></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0A31_01C56B69.4365F2A0--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 21784 invoked from network); 23 Jul 2001 09:53:23 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 23 Jul 2001 09:53:23 -0000
Received: (qmail 2789 invoked from network); 23 Jul 2001 09:55:28 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 23 Jul 2001 09:55:28 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id CAA02418; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 02:42:00 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 80719 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 09:41:58          +0000
Received: from dune.gnc.net (root@dune.gnc.net [207.203.72.4]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id CAA02401 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon,          23 Jul 2001 02:41:57 -0700
Received: from beowulf (sw2-39.gnc.net [207.203.72.119]) by dune.gnc.net          (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id FAA27085 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon,          23 Jul 2001 05:41:46 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
Importance: Normal
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <LPBBKJMJEOFKAMFJJNNHKENACFAA.landofgrey@gnc.net>
Date:         Mon, 23 Jul 2001 05:41:45 -0400
Reply-To: <landofgrey@gnc.net>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Matthew Travis" <landofgrey@gnc.net>
Subject:      Re: [AR] 3Re: [AR] 2Re: [AR] dark secrets
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010722183752.25468B-100000@spsystems.net>

Point is, when you go from small-time amateur stuff to anything meaningful,
like orbital capacity, the rules change. For amateurs, basically there are
no rules (hazmat shipping reqs., FAA waivers and such are tiny). When you
scale it up, the requirements are different, and the rules an order of
magnitude more complex. And there are many (multiple of dozens) small
business engaged in rocketry, launch vehicle and propulsion research and
development. And they have patents and all the other jaz. But... they also
have expended a great deal of time and energy to ensure they follow the
rules. There are no shortcuts, and you can't do something, and then make the
effort to comply with a rule. If you are going to develop an orbital
vehicle, then you have to begin traversing the waters of legalese as soon as
you make an initial paper proposal, *not* after you've static-tested your
engine. This is one of the biggest obstacles that amateurs and startups
have, and one of the main causes of contention and misunderstanding. The
government would not, and could not, just throw up a gag order in response
to a patent application and force a purely private citizen to not talk or
work on an idea, unless that person has developed the idea to the point
where it is no longer research and instead, production. (Note: they can
prevent someone from developing the idea to fruition, as one would want them
to be able to do. Otherwise, the domestic allies of Osama could build a
functional missile and, until they launched it, not be breaking the law.)
The time for complying with the law is before you've built the orbit-capable
rocket and have it ready for launch. This is one of the many restrictions on
personal liberty that we have in the U.S. in order to protect safety and
national security. And if someone thinks it's too strict, go to Canada and
try to buy a firearm for self-defense. Try building and launching an
O-powered high-powered rocket in England without having to lick the boots of
the Prime Minister. Every first-world nation struggles between personal
liberty and public safety. And I think they've all gone too far down the
road of socialism and totalitarianism. But, then again, the countries with
the most personal freedom are also the poorest and weakest and most
dangerous. Blah blah. In the end, one may think that amateurs and
professionals/companies are separate kinds of entities, but... everyone must
follow the same laws. It's just that when you scale up your activities, the
set of applicable laws grows as well.

> -----Original Message-----

> > Who is Gerald Bull? Did he have a clearance?
>
> Bull was the guy who was building the supergun for Iraq, and advising them
> on their missile programs; probably mostly because of the latter, he was
> murdered by persons unknown, probably Israeli intelligence.

This is someone the U.S. govt. and mainstream press don't exactly open up
about. Could've been offed by Israel or by CIA (more likely other govt.
agents since, conspiracy theories aside, the CIA itself no longer
assasinates people but, rather, works with others to d othe work for them).
Or Iran, or others. Given Saddam's history of killing his own allies for
even the most meaningless reasons (like shooting his brother in-law during a
cabinet meeting because the guy had a different idea from someone else), I
wouldn't rule him out, probably should be at the top of the list.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 16654 invoked from network); 23 Jul 2001 14:16:30 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 23 Jul 2001 14:16:30 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 4527 invoked from network); 23 Jul 2001 14:18:19 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 23 Jul 2001 14:18:19 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA03349; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 07:13:11 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 80825 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 14:11:39          +0000
Received: from spsystems.net (spsystems.net [209.47.149.227]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA03327 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Mon,          23 Jul 2001 07:11:38 -0700
Received: (from henry@localhost) by spsystems.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id KAA07598;          Mon, 23 Jul 2001 10:11:07 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from QUOTED-PRINTABLE to 8bit by itc.uci.edu id HAA03328
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010723100816.7284A-100000@spsystems.net>
Date:         Mon, 23 Jul 2001 10:11:06 -0400
Reply-To: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Micro rocket engines
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <F99HHc1ORq7dg9ZD7G300003c96@hotmail.com>

On Mon, 23 Jul 2001, John Dom wrote:
> "...MIT's microrocket has reached 85, and its builders estimate a potential
> ratio more than 10 times thatmore than enough to launch a satellite into
> space."
>
> I thought the bigger you go the better the T/W???

The scaling is not straightforward.  Historically, small engines have
mostly had poor T/W, although that is at least partly because many of them
were in applications that didn't care so much about it.  But there have
been a few small engines with *very* high T/W, e.g. some of the stuff that
was done for SDI.

Note, incidentally, that they're comparing to the SSME, whose T/W is poor,
as are those of hydrogen engines in general.  State-of-the-art T/W for big
kerosene engines is pushing 150.  (In Russia, of course.)

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 11788 invoked from network); 23 Jul 2001 14:43:57 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 23 Jul 2001 14:43:57 -0000
Received: (qmail 6783 invoked from network); 23 Jul 2001 14:45:37 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 23 Jul 2001 14:45:37 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA03479; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 07:28:41 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 80856 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 14:27:14          +0000
Received: from dune.gnc.net (root@dune.gnc.net [207.203.72.4]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA03461 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon,          23 Jul 2001 07:27:13 -0700
Received: from beowulf (sw2-20.gnc.net [207.203.72.100]) by dune.gnc.net          (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id KAA32075 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon,          23 Jul 2001 10:27:13 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
Importance: Normal
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <LPBBKJMJEOFKAMFJJNNHEENBCFAA.landofgrey@gnc.net>
Date:         Mon, 23 Jul 2001 10:27:12 -0400
Reply-To: <landofgrey@gnc.net>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Matthew Travis" <landofgrey@gnc.net>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Micro rocket engines
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <F99HHc1ORq7dg9ZD7G300003c96@hotmail.com>

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU]On
> Behalf Of John Dom
>
> I thought the bigger you go the better the T/W???
>

That's more of a general history-based trend-line than a numeric axiom. It
is true perhaps more often than not because bigger engines mean greater
thrust, and thrust scales up along a steeper curve than engine weight.
Usually. Also, you can really only compare the ratio for engines of similar
design. Different designs have different characteristic thrust/weight
ratios. So, it's not really fair to compare the microengines to, say, an
RL10. That's like comparing a mail jeep to a deisel semi-truck and judging
them by mileage.

Matt

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 26178 invoked from network); 23 Jul 2001 15:23:57 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 23 Jul 2001 15:23:57 -0000
Received: (qmail 7618 invoked from network); 23 Jul 2001 15:25:19 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 23 Jul 2001 15:25:19 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA03681; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 08:21:40 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 80878 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 15:20:12          +0000
Received: from spsystems.net (spsystems.net [209.47.149.227]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA03662 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Mon,          23 Jul 2001 08:20:11 -0700
Received: (from henry@localhost) by spsystems.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id LAA08500;          Mon, 23 Jul 2001 11:19:39 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010723111537.7284B-100000@spsystems.net>
Date:         Mon, 23 Jul 2001 11:19:39 -0400
Reply-To: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] More about that Z/S book
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <02a301c112ff$675a0dc0$6401a8c0@home.com>

On Sun, 22 Jul 2001, Brian Kosko wrote:
> Another interesting observation they made was that the static tests
> didn't seem to correlate to the actual flight of the motor. They
> observed a much higher burn rate in the rocket vs the static test of the
> same motor. This was something they recently observed and they had no
> explanation for it.

Acceleration can affect combustion processes.  For example, aluminized AP
propellants are known to burn faster in spin-stabilized systems, probably
because the spin tends to hold hot aluminum-oxide particles against the
fuel surface rather than allowing them to escape.  I know of no specific
effect of linear acceleration, offhand, but then I'm not a solids guru...

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 23435 invoked from network); 23 Jul 2001 15:30:35 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 23 Jul 2001 15:30:35 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: (qmail 8658 invoked from network); 23 Jul 2001 15:32:22 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 23 Jul 2001 15:32:22 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA03733; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 08:27:33 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 80890 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 15:26:08          +0000
Received: from volsb01.libertyville.com          (sdsl-216-36-100-106.dsl.chi.megapath.net [66.80.36.106] (may be          forged)) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA03714 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 08:26:08 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Message-ID:  <22B7BC0B5778D311B0B3000629507A965749F1@VOLSB01>
Date:         Mon, 23 Jul 2001 10:23:25 -0500
Reply-To: "Ed Dewey" <edewey@LIBERTYVILLE.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Ed Dewey" <edewey@LIBERTYVILLE.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] More about that Z/S book
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

I may have to look this up again, but I believe acceleration, either linear
or due to spin, increases the burn rate by increasing the heat transfer
rate.

-----Original Message-----
From: Henry Spencer [mailto:henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET]
Sent: Monday, July 23, 2001 10:20 AM
To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
Subject: Re: [AR] More about that Z/S book


On Sun, 22 Jul 2001, Brian Kosko wrote:
> Another interesting observation they made was that the static tests
> didn't seem to correlate to the actual flight of the motor. They
> observed a much higher burn rate in the rocket vs the static test of the
> same motor. This was something they recently observed and they had no
> explanation for it.

Acceleration can affect combustion processes.  For example, aluminized AP
propellants are known to burn faster in spin-stabilized systems, probably
because the spin tends to hold hot aluminum-oxide particles against the
fuel surface rather than allowing them to escape.  I know of no specific
effect of linear acceleration, offhand, but then I'm not a solids guru...

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 851 invoked from network); 23 Jul 2001 15:54:20 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 23 Jul 2001 15:54:20 -0000
Received: (qmail 22640 invoked from network); 23 Jul 2001 15:56:05 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 23 Jul 2001 15:56:05 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA03878; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 08:50:03 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 80916 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 15:48:41          +0000
Received: from dune.gnc.net (root@dune.gnc.net [207.203.72.4]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA03855 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon,          23 Jul 2001 08:48:41 -0700
Received: from beowulf (sw2-20.gnc.net [207.203.72.100]) by dune.gnc.net          (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id LAA01589 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon,          23 Jul 2001 11:48:29 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
Importance: Normal
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <LPBBKJMJEOFKAMFJJNNHGENCCFAA.landofgrey@gnc.net>
Date:         Mon, 23 Jul 2001 11:48:27 -0400
Reply-To: <landofgrey@gnc.net>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Matthew Travis" <landofgrey@gnc.net>
Subject:      Re: [AR] More about that Z/S book
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <22B7BC0B5778D311B0B3000629507A965749F1@VOLSB01>

You are correct, but for powders, there is an added factor. When you go from
a loose powder (dust) form to a very closely packed or completely solid
form, the burning rate can go down because the heat transfer may actually
decrease. And example of this is (as those of us who grew up in the midwest
know about) grain bin dust explosions. The fine chaff and dust is stable in
the grain bin until someone or something stirs it up. It turns the bin into
a huge bomb. However, a fire in the bin, absent any stirring of the dust,
merely burns. I have witnessed this personally.

If you have a copy of Bill Colburn's "The Micrograin Manual" (available from
Aerocon), in it he explains that for ZnS, too high a packing load can result
in too low a burn rate to generate adequate thrust. Too low a packing can
result in much of the powder being ejected before being ignited. The takeoff
acceleration (which can be in the hundreds of G's for ZnS rockets) will add
a tremendous downward packing force. The propellant can pack down before it
completely ignites (before the blowdown phase) and actually reduce the
burning rate.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU]On
> Behalf Of Ed Dewey
> Sent: Monday, July 23, 2001 11:23 AM
> To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
> Subject: Re: [AR] More about that Z/S book
>
>
> I may have to look this up again, but I believe acceleration,
> either linear
> or due to spin, increases the burn rate by increasing the heat transfer
> rate.
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 5908 invoked from network); 23 Jul 2001 15:55:34 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 23 Jul 2001 15:55:34 -0000
Received: (qmail 29569 invoked from network); 23 Jul 2001 15:56:55 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 23 Jul 2001 15:56:55 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA03810; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 08:40:35 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 80904 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 15:39:13          +0000
Received: from wrench.toolcity.net (root@wrench.toolcity.net [208.0.188.2]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA03787 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 08:39:12 -0700
Received: from [208.22.189.97]          (dap-208-22-189-97.meadville-tnt-0.pa.toolcity.net [208.22.189.97])          by wrench.toolcity.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id LAA09526; Mon, 23          Jul 2001 11:39:05 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <v01510100b781fcc46b89@[63.169.101.176]>
Date:         Mon, 23 Jul 2001 11:41:24 -0500
Reply-To: "al bradley" <abradley@TOOLCITY.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "al bradley" <abradley@TOOLCITY.NET>
Subject:      [AR] Alternatives to patents?
Comments: To: Bill Westfield <billw@cisco.com>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

>One of the possible outcomes of cisco's patent process is
>that the patent council will sugest that you publish an idea rather than
>pursue a patent (which nicely creates "prior art" and prevents competitors
>from patenting the same idea, without causing quite as much pain and expense
>as going the full patent route.)

--------------

This is a new framework of thought to me. I've always considered a patent
as being the only protection one has if they want to have income from their
concepts. Doesn't "publishing an idea" close off this source of income?

Where, how would one "publish an idea"?

best regards,
al bradley

------------------------------------------------------------------
Can you live Life with this?: "Unless there is a law, an agreement, or a
long-standing custom, No one `Deserves' Anything -- Either Good or Bad!"

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 4781 invoked from network); 23 Jul 2001 16:24:21 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 23 Jul 2001 16:24:21 -0000
Received: (qmail 24174 invoked from network); 23 Jul 2001 16:23:10 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 23 Jul 2001 16:23:10 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA04129; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 09:20:29 -0700
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 80939 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 16:19:08          +0000
Received: from zcars0m9.ca.nortel.com ([47.129.242.157]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA04090 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon,          23 Jul 2001 09:17:43 -0700
Received: from zcars04e.ca.nortel.com (zcars04e.ca.nortel.com [47.129.242.56])          by zcars0m9.ca.nortel.com (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f6NG8q901600          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 12:08:52 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from rftzy232.ca.nortel.com by zcars04e.ca.nortel.com; Mon, 23 Jul          2001 12:08:54 -0400
Received: from NORTELNETWORKS.COM (wftzh00e.ca.nortel.com [47.130.116.9]) by          rftzy232.ca.nortel.com with SMTP (Microsoft Exchange Internet Mail          Service Version 5.5.2653.13) id NKPL5Q8N; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 12:08:49          -0400
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.73C-CCK-MCD [en] (X11; U; HP-UX B.10.20 9000/785)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <v01510100b781fcc46b89@[63.169.101.176]>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Orig: <mleech@NORTELNETWORKS.COM>
Message-ID:  <3B5C4C22.CB16CFB@NORTELNETWORKS.COM>
Date:         Mon, 23 Jul 2001 12:09:06 -0400
Reply-To: "Marcus Leech" <mleech@NORTELNETWORKS.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Marcus Leech" <mleech@NORTELNETWORKS.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Alternatives to patents?
Comments: To: al bradley <abradley@TOOLCITY.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

al bradley wrote:

>
> This is a new framework of thought to me. I've always considered a patent
> as being the only protection one has if they want to have income from their
> concepts. Doesn't "publishing an idea" close off this source of income?
>
> Where, how would one "publish an idea"?
>
> best regards,
> al bradley
>
Off-the-cuff, I would guess that less than 1% of patents filed by companies
  are revenue-generating.  These days, they are largely used as playing
  cards as a defensive measure against infringing someone elses patent.

That is, if you sue me because I'm violating patent foo held by you, I dig
  into my patent portfolio, and threaten to countersue for your violation
  of patent bar.

In most large companies, the mechanics of patent filing are mostly handled
  by the company patent lawyers.  In both of my patent applications in the
  last few years, I think I spent at most 6 hours in helping do the
  patent application writeup.

--
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Marcus Leech                             Mail:   Dept 8M70, MS 012, FITZ
Advisor                                  Phone: (ESN) 393-9145  +1 613 763 9145
Security Architecture and Planning       Fax:   (ESN) 393-9435  +1 613 763 9435
Nortel Networks                          mleech@nortelnetworks.com
-----------------Expressed opinions are my own, not my employer's------

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 22472 invoked from network); 23 Jul 2001 16:28:37 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 23 Jul 2001 16:28:37 -0000
Received: (qmail 24625 invoked from network); 23 Jul 2001 16:30:22 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 23 Jul 2001 16:30:22 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA04185; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 09:25:26 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 80947 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 16:24:03          +0000
Received: from spsystems.net (spsystems.net [209.47.149.227]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA04150 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Mon,          23 Jul 2001 09:24:03 -0700
Received: (from henry@localhost) by spsystems.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id MAA09274;          Mon, 23 Jul 2001 12:23:31 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010723121126.7284I-100000@spsystems.net>
Date:         Mon, 23 Jul 2001 12:23:30 -0400
Reply-To: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Alternatives to patents?
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <v01510100b781fcc46b89@[63.169.101.176]>

On Mon, 23 Jul 2001, al bradley wrote:
> >One of the possible outcomes of cisco's patent process is
> >that the patent council will sugest that you publish an idea rather than
> >pursue a patent (which nicely creates "prior art" and prevents competitors
> >from patenting the same idea...
>
> This is a new framework of thought to me. I've always considered a patent
> as being the only protection one has if they want to have income from their
> concepts. Doesn't "publishing an idea" close off this source of income?

Either publishing it or patenting it largely closes off the possibility of
making money off it by keeping it to yourself.  Unless you are a big
company, with money and lawyers, patents are not a lot of help.  The big
boys (including the biggest boy, the US government) can and will commit
flagrant patent infringement, in the belief -- usually correct -- that you
do not have the will or the resources to sue successfully.

In practice, with few exceptions, you can't make money off a concept.  You
have to build and market a product using the concept, and make money off
the product.  Doing that well does not require a patent... but it can be
torpedoed if a big company gets a patent on the idea.  The point of
publication is to prevent *anyone* from patenting it, to ensure that you
can use it freely.  (So can others, but they would anyway.)

> Where, how would one "publish an idea"?

As prominently as possible.  Ideally, get a paper about it published in
the Journal of Propulsion and Power, which is the top of the line for
rocket-propulsion papers, or the Journal of Spacecraft and Rockets, ditto
for space technology in general.

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 11240 invoked from network); 23 Jul 2001 16:32:49 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 23 Jul 2001 16:32:49 -0000
X-Priority: 3
Received: (qmail 26236 invoked from network); 23 Jul 2001 16:34:35 -0000
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 23 Jul 2001 16:34:35 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA04243; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 09:30:31 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 80955 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 16:29:09          +0000
Received: from mailgw1a.lmco.com (mailgw1a.lmco.com [192.31.106.7]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA04210; Mon, 23 Jul 2001          09:29:08 -0700
Received: from emss02g01.ems.lmco.com (relay2.ems.lmco.com [166.29.2.54]) by          mailgw1a.lmco.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id KAA12047; Mon, 23 Jul          2001 10:29:04 -0600 (MDT)
Received: from CONVERSION-DAEMON by lmco.com (PMDF V5.2-33 #38887) id          <0GGX00K01PSF3H@lmco.com>; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 10:29:03 -0600 (MDT)
Received: from emss02i00.ems.lmco.com ([166.29.2.48]) by lmco.com (PMDF V5.2-33          #38887) with ESMTP id <0GGX00D3TPSBG4@lmco.com>; Mon, 23 Jul 2001          10:28:59 -0600 (MDT)
Received: by emss02i00.ems.lmco.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) id          <P13DHNHZ>; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 10:30:05 -0600
Content-return: allowed
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19)
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <EDB5E5136094D311BF1800508B12205E08D29093@emss02m07.ems.lmco.com>
Date:         Mon, 23 Jul 2001 10:29:59 -0600
Reply-To: "Bendel, Timothy B" <timothy.b.bendel@LMCO.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Bendel, Timothy B" <timothy.b.bendel@LMCO.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] 3Re: [AR] 2Re: [AR] dark secrets
Comments: To: Ray Calkins <rcalkins@ITC.UCI.EDU>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

        "The innovative low-cost rocket technology
        developed by Texas Rocket Company is suppressed by an Air Force
"Secrecy
        Order". The question is how many other great advances in space
technology
   are suppressed by 'Secrecy Orders'".

If Mark Goll did not have a security clearance, how can this stick? It is my
understanding that the Government cannot just simply tell someone to
"shutup" without violating First Amendment rights (not that the Government
is above ignoring the Constitution). Is he taking any legal action?

If he doesn't have a clearance, why doesn't he just keep talking until they
arrest him. The charges would be pretty easy to defend in court under a Free
Speech defense. Wouldn't the ACLU get upset about someone without a
clearance getting arbitrarily censored on Government whim?

This sort of thing greatly disturbs me. I share Mark Goll's sentiment that
we could be a lot farther along in spacetravel if people were allowed to
talk. Makes you wonder what the real motive for this censorship is...

Timothy Bendel

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ray Calkins [SMTP:rcalkins@ITC.UCI.EDU]
> Sent: Monday, July 23, 2001 12:49 AM
> To:   AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
> Subject:      Re: [AR] 3Re: [AR] 2Re: [AR] dark secrets
>
> > > Who is Mark Goll and why is he in trouble? Did he have a clearance?
>
> > Mark is a small time rocket guy like the rest of us.  Beyond that, Ray
> > will have to respond.
> Mark used to be on the aRocket list.  He was making great progress on his
> N2O/Propane self-pressurized biprop, testing an 8,000 lb thrust version
> for just over $10,000 back in '98.  Some details can be found here:
> http://www.houstonspacesociety.org/tsi/press.html
> He is still a great proponent of lowered launch costs, and has quite a few
> good points to make on his web site - http://web.wt.net/~markgoll/
>
> He stated on aRocket he's forbidden to discuss the secrecy order or the
> technology.  He did NOT have a clearance, he was only seeking to patent
> his innovations.  (One of the reasons I'm a big supporter of open
> source...)  The patent request came back with a gag order.  I don't know
> any details beyond that and Mark isn't talking.
>
> I did find this little tidbit: "The innovative low-cost rocket technology
> developed by Texas Rocket Company is suppressed by an Air Force "Secrecy
> Order". The question is how many other great advances in space technology
> are suppressed by 'Secrecy Orders'".  From -
> http://web.wt.net/~markgoll/mgcm9.htm
>
> Here are photos of some of his tests:
> http://web.wt.net/~markgoll/mg9.htm
> http://web.wt.net/~markgoll/pic2.htm
>
> He would have been close to orbit by now if he had kept going at the same
> rate.
>
> Ray

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 21177 invoked from network); 23 Jul 2001 16:34:56 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 23 Jul 2001 16:34:56 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 9741 invoked from network); 23 Jul 2001 16:36:41 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 23 Jul 2001 16:36:41 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA04098; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 09:18:58 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 80931 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 16:17:35          +0000
Received: from sys32.hou.wt.net (sys32.hou.wt.net [205.230.159.32]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA04077 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 09:17:34 -0700
Received: from localhost (216-119-138-140.ipset18.wt.net [216.119.138.140]) by          sys32.hou.wt.net (8.9.1/8.9.1) with ESMTP id LAA04270; Mon, 23 Jul          2001 11:17:36 -0500 (CDT)
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.388)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <200107231617.LAA04270@sys32.hou.wt.net>
Date:         Mon, 23 Jul 2001 11:17:42 -0500
Reply-To: "Donald McCorvey" <dlm3@NETAXS.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Donald McCorvey" <dlm3@NETAXS.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Alternatives to patents?
Comments: To: al bradley <abradley@TOOLCITY.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <v01510100b781fcc46b89@[63.169.101.176]>

There are numerous engineering societies that get into propulsion and
rocketry - SAE and AIAA come to mind. I'm sure there are others.

The other down side to patents is that they really don't 'protect' you
all that long anyway - and your competition, with no other choice but to
work around your patented idea, will be motivated to find another,
possibly better way. Easier for everybody if you sell them your product
to keep them from reverse engineering it for a while and make money that
way rather than trying to out-compete them on the overall design.

Of course, your employer may (like mine) have a long history of
patenting anything it can and keeping the remainder of its trade secrets
closely guarded. When you're big enough and have enough lawyers on
retainer, you can reasonably protect your patents long enough to milk
them for whatever they're worth.  The other stuff, often processes and
design methods, you can't protect with patents, so you simply don't talk
about it.

Don McCorvey
Houston, Tx


On Monday, July 23, 2001, at 11:41 AM, al bradley wrote:

>> One of the possible outcomes of cisco's patent process is
>> that the patent council will sugest that you publish an idea rather
>> than
>> pursue a patent (which nicely creates "prior art" and prevents
>> competitors
>> from patenting the same idea, without causing quite as much pain and
>> expense
>> as going the full patent route.)
>
> --------------
>
> This is a new framework of thought to me. I've always considered a
> patent
> as being the only protection one has if they want to have income from
> their
> concepts. Doesn't "publishing an idea" close off this source of income?
>
> Where, how would one "publish an idea"?
>
> best regards,
> al bradley
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------
> Can you live Life with this?: "Unless there is a law, an agreement, or a
> long-standing custom, No one `Deserves' Anything -- Either Good or Bad!"
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 9149 invoked from network); 23 Jul 2001 16:45:58 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 23 Jul 2001 16:45:58 -0000
Received: (qmail 16504 invoked from network); 23 Jul 2001 16:47:17 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 23 Jul 2001 16:47:17 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA04358; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 09:42:31 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 80966 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 16:41:04          +0000
Received: from spsystems.net (spsystems.net [209.47.149.227]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA04334 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Mon,          23 Jul 2001 09:41:03 -0700
Received: (from henry@localhost) by spsystems.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id MAA09459;          Mon, 23 Jul 2001 12:40:31 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010723122615.7284J-100000@spsystems.net>
Date:         Mon, 23 Jul 2001 12:40:30 -0400
Reply-To: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] 3Re: [AR] 2Re: [AR] dark secrets
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <CMM.0.90.4.995875750.billw@cypher>

On Mon, 23 Jul 2001, William Chops Westfield wrote:
> (What a security clearance causes would be...  Hmm.  If your amateur rocket
> design starts to include features that "they" consider classified, you could
> be a lot more trouble if you might have had legitimate access to that
> classified material than if you had no security clearance and no possible
> access to classified material.  Presumably you can be STOPPED in either
> case...

In the latter case, how?  What law would you be breaking?  With the
perennial exception of nuclear weapons, there is nothing illegal about
reinventing something already invented by a classified project.  Security
classifications basically are binding only on people who have signed
security-clearance agreements.

(Although, as Bill notes later in his mail, the government can hassle an
amateur rocketeer in all sorts of ways, which might encourage you to go
along with a "request" that you refrain from using or publishing your
idea.)

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 19796 invoked from network); 23 Jul 2001 16:48:33 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 23 Jul 2001 16:48:33 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 16676 invoked from network); 23 Jul 2001 16:50:09 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 23 Jul 2001 16:50:09 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA04397; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 09:45:58 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 80974 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 16:44:37          +0000
Received: from sys32.hou.wt.net (sys32.hou.wt.net [205.230.159.32]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA04375 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 09:44:37 -0700
Received: from localhost (216-119-138-140.ipset18.wt.net [216.119.138.140]) by          sys32.hou.wt.net (8.9.1/8.9.1) with ESMTP id LAA07311; Mon, 23 Jul          2001 11:44:39 -0500 (CDT)
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.388)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <200107231644.LAA07311@sys32.hou.wt.net>
Date:         Mon, 23 Jul 2001 11:44:45 -0500
Reply-To: "Donald McCorvey" <dlm3@NETAXS.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Donald McCorvey" <dlm3@NETAXS.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] 3Re: [AR] 2Re: [AR] dark secrets
Comments: To: "Bendel, Timothy B" <timothy.b.bendel@LMCO.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <EDB5E5136094D311BF1800508B12205E08D29093@emss02m07.ems.lmco.com>

Are you familiar with export compliance laws ? Rockets and
rocketry-related technologies are considered by the U.S. Government to
be munitions. Propulsion and guidance technologies, being critical to
successful development of ballistic missiles are most definitely
included.

Do you recall the mess Loral got itself in a few years ago when it
attempted to launch one of its satellites on a Chinese Long March
rocket ? The rocket failed and killed a number of people. During the
subsequent investigation of their loss, the Loral team identified the
problem in the Chinese rocket and told them about it.

A perfectly innocent-sounding sharing of information between engineers.
No money or hardware changed hands, yet the Chinese were saved man-years
of effort figuring it out.

The result was that the Chinese now have a very good intercontinental
ballistic missile. They already had the warheads, all they needed was
the launch vehicle.

Oops.

Don McCorvey
Houston, Tx

On Monday, July 23, 2001, at 11:29 AM, Bendel, Timothy B wrote:
>
>
> This sort of thing greatly disturbs me. I share Mark Goll's sentiment
> that
> we could be a lot farther along in spacetravel if people were allowed to
> talk. Makes you wonder what the real motive for this censorship is...
>
> Timothy Bendel

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 18055 invoked from network); 23 Jul 2001 17:10:05 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 23 Jul 2001 17:10:05 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 11774 invoked from network); 23 Jul 2001 17:11:51 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 23 Jul 2001 17:11:51 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA04546; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 10:05:39 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 80989 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 17:04:17          +0000
Received: from brighton.legacywireless.com (legacywireless.com [208.187.126.2])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA04523 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 10:04:16 -0700
Received: from [208.187.122.40] by brighton.cogolink.com (NTMail          5.00.0010/NY4701.00.0f189dc1) with ESMTP id byqxoaaa for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 11:13:06 -0600
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.77 [en] (Win98; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010723121126.7284I-100000@spsystems.net>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B5BA843.650F00B@biomicro.com>
Date:         Sun, 22 Jul 2001 22:29:55 -0600
Reply-To: "Mark K. Spute" <mks@BIOMICRO.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Mark K. Spute" <mks@BIOMICRO.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Alternatives to patents?
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Actually (since we are discussing this rather thoroughly at my place of
employment right now) any "public" disclosure can invalidate a patent claim.
Public disclosure means revealing your idea to anyone not covered by a
"non-disclosure" agreement.  That means your wife, kids, dog, whatever.

However, Henry is right.  The more prominently you publish something, the more in
the public domain it is.  For your purposes, if you can get your local newspaper
to publish an article with sufficient technical detail about your idea, that
would work very well as a public disclosure.  Keep several copies of the
newspaper and article on file.  Make sure you have the date and issue of the
paper.  Then if and when anyone is awarded a patent on your idea, you can (for
free I believe, or at least for a very minimum fee) send a copy of that paper to
the US Patent and Trademark Office and request that it be added to the patent's
file.  It may be enough to invalidate that patent or at least render it
unenforceable.


Henry Spencer wrote:

> > Where, how would one "publish an idea"?
>
> As prominently as possible.  Ideally, get a paper about it published in
> the Journal of Propulsion and Power, which is the top of the line for
> rocket-propulsion papers, or the Journal of Spacecraft and Rockets, ditto
> for space technology in general.

--
Mark K. Spute
Senior Research Engineer
BioMicro Systems Inc.

KD7IWE,  RRS

"It is difficult to say what is impossible, for the dream of yesterday is the
hope of today and the reality of tomorrow."
     Dr. Robert H. Goddard

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 9850 invoked from network); 23 Jul 2001 17:21:55 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 23 Jul 2001 17:21:55 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 12146 invoked from network); 23 Jul 2001 17:22:35 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 23 Jul 2001 17:22:35 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA04690; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 10:18:41 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 81007 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 17:17:31          +0000
Received: from ceres.triton.ch (ceres.triton.ch [212.254.218.98]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA04667 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 10:17:29 -0700
Received: from spl.ch (robot.triton.ch [212.254.218.101]) by ceres.triton.ch          (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id TAA32609 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon,          23 Jul 2001 19:17:27 +0200
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.75 [en] (Win98; U)
X-Accept-Language: en,ja
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <LPBBKJMJEOFKAMFJJNNHEENBCFAA.landofgrey@gnc.net>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B5C5C0C.66D22838@spl.ch>
Date:         Mon, 23 Jul 2001 19:17:00 +0200
Reply-To: "Bruno Berger" <bruno.berger@SPL.CH>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Bruno Berger" <bruno.berger@SPL.CH>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Micro rocket engines
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Yet another link to micro rocket motors (solid though):

http://bsac.eecs.berkeley.edu/archive/masters/dana_teasdale_ms.pdf

--
Bruno Berger
Swiss Propulsion Laboratory
E-Mail: bruno.berger@spl.ch
WWW:    http://www.spl.ch

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 14309 invoked from network); 23 Jul 2001 17:23:02 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 23 Jul 2001 17:23:02 -0000
Received: (qmail 6648 invoked from network); 23 Jul 2001 17:25:08 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 23 Jul 2001 17:25:08 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA04710; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 10:18:54 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 81015 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 17:18:43          +0000
Received: from spsystems.net (spsystems.net [209.47.149.227]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA04682 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Mon,          23 Jul 2001 10:18:26 -0700
Received: (from henry@localhost) by spsystems.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id NAA09857;          Mon, 23 Jul 2001 13:17:53 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010723125638.7284K-100000@spsystems.net>
Date:         Mon, 23 Jul 2001 13:17:53 -0400
Reply-To: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] 3Re: [AR] 2Re: [AR] dark secrets
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <EDB5E5136094D311BF1800508B12205E08D29093@emss02m07.ems.lmco.com>

On Mon, 23 Jul 2001, Bendel, Timothy B wrote:
> If he doesn't have a clearance, why doesn't he just keep talking until they
> arrest him. The charges would be pretty easy to defend in court under a Free
> Speech defense...

My tentative reading of this case, from what little information we have,
is that he'd based his plans on being able to patent his ideas, and does
not want to discuss them openly without patent protection.  (Which is kind
of sad, given how little protection that actually gives...)

One thing that *has* been said is that trying to patent his ideas was the
mistake, that he'd have been in the clear if he'd simply made them public
domain.  It's not clear precisely why that would be so, but to whatever
extent it is, it adds strength to the "don't patent -- publish" notion.

> Wouldn't the ACLU get upset about someone without a
> clearance getting arbitrarily censored on Government whim?

Usually they would, yes.  But they couldn't get very far if he didn't want
them involved, and he may not.

Overall, I would caution against building a great big bogeyman based on
one case where we have little information and all of it is secondhand.

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 9974 invoked from network); 23 Jul 2001 17:43:58 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 23 Jul 2001 17:43:58 -0000
Received: (qmail 8839 invoked from network); 23 Jul 2001 17:45:46 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 23 Jul 2001 17:45:46 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA04824; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 10:40:09 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 81031 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 17:39:58          +0000
Received: from spsystems.net (spsystems.net [209.47.149.227]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA04802 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Mon,          23 Jul 2001 10:39:57 -0700
Received: (from henry@localhost) by spsystems.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id NAA10033;          Mon, 23 Jul 2001 13:39:24 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010723132411.7284N-100000@spsystems.net>
Date:         Mon, 23 Jul 2001 13:39:24 -0400
Reply-To: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] 3Re: [AR] 2Re: [AR] dark secrets
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <200107231644.LAA07311@sys32.hou.wt.net>

On Mon, 23 Jul 2001, Donald McCorvey wrote:
> A perfectly innocent-sounding sharing of information between engineers.
> No money or hardware changed hands, yet the Chinese were saved man-years
> of effort figuring it out.

A note of caution here:  allegations and counter-allegations surround
almost all such incidents.  Don't blindly accept a version promulgated by
people who have a political axe to grind.  (Notably, a number of the
leaks-to-China allegations which came out of the Republicans' get-Clinton
campaign seem to have little foundation in fact.)

> The result was that the Chinese now have a very good intercontinental
> ballistic missile. They already had the warheads, all they needed was
> the launch vehicle.

They already had the launch vehicle.  That wasn't a new rocket; it was a
minor variant of a design that had flown successfully a number of times
before.  Which is why it was carrying a commercial payload on its very
first flight.

The Chinese have had ICBMs for 30+ years.  And the Long March 3, which is
what hit the village, is not one of them, since it has an LH2 upper stage
and is quite unsuited to military use.

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 25483 invoked from network); 23 Jul 2001 17:54:39 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 23 Jul 2001 17:54:39 -0000
Received: (qmail 13857 invoked from network); 23 Jul 2001 17:56:25 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 23 Jul 2001 17:56:25 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA04890; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 10:52:39 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 81041 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 17:52:27          +0000
Received: from spsystems.net (spsystems.net [209.47.149.227]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA04873 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Mon,          23 Jul 2001 10:52:27 -0700
Received: (from henry@localhost) by spsystems.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id NAA10225;          Mon, 23 Jul 2001 13:51:54 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010723134048.7284O-100000@spsystems.net>
Date:         Mon, 23 Jul 2001 13:51:53 -0400
Reply-To: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Alternatives to patents?
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <3B5BA843.650F00B@biomicro.com>

On Sun, 22 Jul 2001, Mark K. Spute wrote:
> Actually (since we are discussing this rather thoroughly at my place of
> employment right now) any "public" disclosure can invalidate a patent claim.
> Public disclosure means revealing your idea to anyone not covered by a
> "non-disclosure" agreement.  That means your wife, kids, dog, whatever.

Correct; the difficulty is documenting such disclosure.

> However, Henry is right.  The more prominently you publish something,
> the more in the public domain it is...

Exactly.  Ideally, you want it to be sufficiently well known that the
Patent Office rejects any attempt to patent it.  Second best is to have it
published in a major journal, so that anyone who cares can immediately
check on your claim of prior publication.  Third best is a minor technical
journal or even (as Mark notes) a local newspaper, so that verification
may take some digging but there's no doubt what the answer will be.

Things like self-published technical reports (or even books) get into the
gray region where significant lawyer dollars might be needed to establish
that they constitute prior publication.

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 2822 invoked from network); 23 Jul 2001 18:10:50 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 23 Jul 2001 18:10:50 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 20872 invoked from network); 23 Jul 2001 18:12:37 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 23 Jul 2001 18:12:37 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA04794; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 10:39:23 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 81023 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 17:39:03          +0000
Received: from brighton.legacywireless.com (legacywireless.com [208.187.126.2])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA04776 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 10:39:02 -0700
Received: from [208.187.122.40] by brighton.cogolink.com (NTMail          5.00.0010/NY4701.00.0f189dc1) with ESMTP id qxrxoaaa for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 11:47:49 -0600
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.77 [en] (Win98; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <EDB5E5136094D311BF1800508B12205E08D29093@emss02m07.ems.lmco.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B5BB066.3801D8CE@biomicro.com>
Date:         Sun, 22 Jul 2001 23:04:38 -0600
Reply-To: "Mark K. Spute" <mks@BIOMICRO.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Mark K. Spute" <mks@BIOMICRO.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] 3Re: [AR] 2Re: [AR] dark secrets
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Two things have changed in the last 50 years that allow this to happen.

1.  The U.S. is now a "Democracy", no longer a Republic.  The founding fathers
specifically decided against a democratic form of government in favor of a
republic in order to guard against "mob rule."  As late as 1928 U.S. Government
publications decried democracies as an inferior and unstable form of government.

2.  Rights are no longer "God Given" (since any mention of God is a violation of
the separation of church and state) but are given by the government.

What this means is the majority rules.  However there are no minority rights
that can be depended on.  Since the majority rules, if the majority decides it
wants your rights rescinded, they are.

The Bill of Rights guarantees that all rights not specifically granted to the
government by the people are reserved to the states and the people.

To bring this back on topic.  That includes the right to build and launch
rockets whenever and wherever and however you want, as long as you do not
infringe on other people's rights in the process.

Tell that to the humorless men in dark suits that show up at your door.



"Bendel, Timothy B" wrote:

> If Mark Goll did not have a security clearance, how can this stick? It is my
> understanding that the Government cannot just simply tell someone to
> "shutup" without violating First Amendment rights (not that the Government
> is above ignoring the Constitution). Is he taking any legal action?
>
> If he doesn't have a clearance, why doesn't he just keep talking until they
> arrest him. The charges would be pretty easy to defend in court under a Free
> Speech defense. Wouldn't the ACLU get upset about someone without a
> clearance getting arbitrarily censored on Government whim?
>
> This sort of thing greatly disturbs me. I share Mark Goll's sentiment that
> we could be a lot farther along in spacetravel if people were allowed to
> talk. Makes you wonder what the real motive for this censorship is...
>
> Timothy Bendel
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Ray Calkins [SMTP:rcalkins@ITC.UCI.EDU]
> > Sent: Monday, July 23, 2001 12:49 AM
> > To:   AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
> > Subject:      Re: [AR] 3Re: [AR] 2Re: [AR] dark secrets
> >
> > > > Who is Mark Goll and why is he in trouble? Did he have a clearance?
> >
> > > Mark is a small time rocket guy like the rest of us.  Beyond that, Ray
> > > will have to respond.
> > Mark used to be on the aRocket list.  He was making great progress on his
> > N2O/Propane self-pressurized biprop, testing an 8,000 lb thrust version
> > for just over $10,000 back in '98.  Some details can be found here:
> > http://www.houstonspacesociety.org/tsi/press.html
> > He is still a great proponent of lowered launch costs, and has quite a few
> > good points to make on his web site - http://web.wt.net/~markgoll/
> >
> > He stated on aRocket he's forbidden to discuss the secrecy order or the
> > technology.  He did NOT have a clearance, he was only seeking to patent
> > his innovations.  (One of the reasons I'm a big supporter of open
> > source...)  The patent request came back with a gag order.  I don't know
> > any details beyond that and Mark isn't talking.
> >
> > I did find this little tidbit: "The innovative low-cost rocket technology
> > developed by Texas Rocket Company is suppressed by an Air Force "Secrecy
> > Order". The question is how many other great advances in space technology
> > are suppressed by 'Secrecy Orders'".  From -
> > http://web.wt.net/~markgoll/mgcm9.htm
> >
> > Here are photos of some of his tests:
> > http://web.wt.net/~markgoll/mg9.htm
> > http://web.wt.net/~markgoll/pic2.htm
> >
> > He would have been close to orbit by now if he had kept going at the same
> > rate.
> >
> > Ray

--
Mark K. Spute
Senior Research Engineer
BioMicro Systems Inc.

KD7IWE,  RRS

"It is difficult to say what is impossible, for the dream of yesterday is the
hope of today and the reality of tomorrow."
     Dr. Robert H. Goddard

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 7574 invoked from network); 23 Jul 2001 18:52:55 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 23 Jul 2001 18:52:55 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 24493 invoked from network); 23 Jul 2001 18:54:42 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 23 Jul 2001 18:54:42 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA05258; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 11:47:44 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 81078 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 18:47:28          +0000
Received: from harrier.mail.pas.earthlink.net (harrier.mail.pas.earthlink.net          [207.217.121.12]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA05082          for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 11:37:28 -0700
Received: from earthlink.net (dialup-209.247.140.211.Dial1.SanJose1.Level3.net          [209.247.140.211]) by harrier.mail.pas.earthlink.net          (EL-8_9_3_3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id LAA14441; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 11:37:27          -0700 (PDT)
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.75 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.16-22 i686)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010723134048.7284O-100000@spsystems.net>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B5C6EE9.7D810E6@earthlink.net>
Date:         Mon, 23 Jul 2001 11:37:29 -0700
Reply-To: "David Weinshenker" <daze39@EARTHLINK.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "David Weinshenker" <daze39@EARTHLINK.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Alternatives to patents?
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Henry Spencer wrote:
> Things like self-published technical reports (or even books) get into the
> gray region where significant lawyer dollars might be needed to establish
> that they constitute prior publication.

I wonder if the internet counts - posting something to a usenet group
generates independently-confirmable timestamps as a message is
distributed on various paths from server to server...

-dave w

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 1063 invoked from network); 23 Jul 2001 19:04:41 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 23 Jul 2001 19:04:41 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 28826 invoked from network); 23 Jul 2001 19:06:24 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 23 Jul 2001 19:06:24 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA05330; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 11:58:26 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 81128 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 18:57:04          +0000
Received: from sys32.hou.wt.net (sys32.hou.wt.net [205.230.159.32]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA05309 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 11:57:04 -0700
Received: from localhost (216-119-138-187.ipset18.wt.net [216.119.138.187]) by          sys32.hou.wt.net (8.9.1/8.9.1) with ESMTP id NAA21389; Mon, 23 Jul          2001 13:57:06 -0500 (CDT)
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0A35_01C56B69.438C1840"
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.388)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID:  <200107231857.NAA21389@sys32.hou.wt.net>
Date:         Mon, 23 Jul 2001 13:57:11 -0500
Reply-To: "Donald McCorvey" <dlm3@NETAXS.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Donald McCorvey" <dlm3@NETAXS.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] 3Re: [AR] 2Re: [AR] dark secrets
Comments: To: Henry Spencer <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010723132411.7284N-100000@spsystems.net>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0A35_01C56B69.438C1840
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"


On Monday, July 23, 2001, at 12:39 PM, Henry Spencer wrote:

> On Mon, 23 Jul 2001, Donald McCorvey wrote:
>> A perfectly innocent-sounding sharing of information between engineers.
>> No money or hardware changed hands, yet the Chinese were saved
>> man-years
>> of effort figuring it out.
>
> A note of caution here:  allegations and counter-allegations surround
> almost all such incidents.  Don't blindly accept a version promulgated
> by
> people who have a political axe to grind.  (Notably, a number of the
> leaks-to-China allegations which came out of the Republicans'
> get-Clinton
> campaign seem to have little foundation in fact.)

In this particular case, I was referring to the incident as it was one
of those used to pound export compliance rules into my skull at work. If
those folks (our export compliance office) have a political axe to
grind, I haven't heard of it - keeping us out of trouble with the
customer is their #1 priority. My employer has been fined by the
government for inadvertent exports, so we're now receiving such training
annually to ensure that we don't do it.

>> The result was that the Chinese now have a very good intercontinental
>> ballistic missile. They already had the warheads, all they needed was
>> the launch vehicle.
>
> They already had the launch vehicle.  That wasn't a new rocket; it was a
> minor variant of a design that had flown successfully a number of times
> before.  Which is why it was carrying a commercial payload on its very
> first flight.
>
> The Chinese have had ICBMs for 30+ years.  And the Long March 3, which
> is
> what hit the village, is not one of them, since it has an LH2 upper
> stage
> and is quite unsuited to military use.

(which reminds me (again) not to extrapolate my rather minescule
knowledge on the subject on this list without proper weasel words,
"IIRCs" and other expressions of doubt <grin>)

Don McCorvey
Houston, Tx

------=_NextPart_000_0A35_01C56B69.438C1840
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Type: text/enriched;
	charset="us-ascii"


On Monday, July 23, 2001, at 12:39 PM, Henry Spencer wrote:


<excerpt>On Mon, 23 Jul 2001, Donald McCorvey wrote:

<excerpt>A perfectly innocent-sounding sharing of information between
engineers.

No money or hardware changed hands, yet the Chinese were saved
man-years

of effort figuring it out.

</excerpt>

A note of caution here:  allegations and counter-allegations surround

almost all such incidents.  Don't blindly accept a version promulgated
by

people who have a political axe to grind.  (Notably, a number of the

leaks-to-China allegations which came out of the Republicans'
get-Clinton

campaign seem to have little foundation in fact.)

</excerpt>

In this particular case, I was referring to the incident as it was one
of those used to pound export compliance rules into my skull at work.
If those folks (our export compliance office) have a political axe to
grind, I haven't heard of it - keeping us out of trouble with the
customer is their #1 priority. My employer has been fined by the
government for inadvertent exports, so we're now receiving such
training annually to ensure that we don't do it.

<color><param>0000,0000,DEB7</param>

</color><excerpt><excerpt>The result was that the Chinese now have a
very good intercontinental

ballistic missile. They already had the warheads, all they needed was

the launch vehicle.

</excerpt>

They already had the launch vehicle.  That wasn't a new rocket; it was a

minor variant of a design that had flown successfully a number of times

before.  Which is why it was carrying a commercial payload on its very

first flight.


The Chinese have had ICBMs for 30+ years.  And the Long March 3, which
is

what hit the village, is not one of them, since it has an LH2 upper
stage

and is quite unsuited to military use.

</excerpt>

(which reminds me (again) not to extrapolate my rather minescule
knowledge on the subject on this list without proper weasel words,
"IIRCs" and other expressions of doubt <<grin>)


Don McCorvey

Houston, Tx=

------=_NextPart_000_0A35_01C56B69.438C1840--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 25691 invoked from network); 23 Jul 2001 19:36:11 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 23 Jul 2001 19:36:11 -0000
Received: (qmail 13103 invoked from network); 23 Jul 2001 19:37:30 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 23 Jul 2001 19:37:30 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA05553; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 12:32:17 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 81167 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 19:32:14          +0000
Received: from spsystems.net (spsystems.net [209.47.149.227]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA05536 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Mon,          23 Jul 2001 12:32:14 -0700
Received: (from henry@localhost) by spsystems.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id PAA11373;          Mon, 23 Jul 2001 15:31:40 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010723153024.11181A-100000@spsystems.net>
Date:         Mon, 23 Jul 2001 15:31:40 -0400
Reply-To: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Alternatives to patents?
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <3B5C6EE9.7D810E6@earthlink.net>

On Mon, 23 Jul 2001, David Weinshenker wrote:
> > Things like self-published technical reports (or even books) get into the
> > gray region where significant lawyer dollars might be needed to establish
> > that they constitute prior publication.
>
> I wonder if the internet counts - posting something to a usenet group
> generates independently-confirmable timestamps as a message is
> distributed on various paths from server to server...

Like I said, "significant lawyer dollars required". :-)  Almost everything
concerning the Internet is in a big gray legal limbo, as yet.

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 1643 invoked from network); 23 Jul 2001 19:37:38 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 23 Jul 2001 19:37:38 -0000
Received: (qmail 17488 invoked from network); 23 Jul 2001 19:39:19 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 23 Jul 2001 19:39:19 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA05479; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 12:16:41 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 81155 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 19:16:13          +0000
Received: from albqpop1.albq.uswest.net (albqpop1.albq.uswest.net          [207.108.240.1]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id MAA05461          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 12:16:12 -0700
Received: (qmail 37843 invoked by alias); 23 Jul 2001 18:12:38 -0000
Delivered-To: fixup-AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU@fixme
Received: (qmail 430 invoked by uid 0); 23 Jul 2001 17:56:20 -0000
Received: from cc898542-a.prdise1.nm.home.com (HELO cc898542a) (65.7.151.152)          by albqpop1.albq.uswest.net with SMTP; 23 Jul 2001 17:56:20 -0000
References:  <LPBBKJMJEOFKAMFJJNNHGENCCFAA.landofgrey@gnc.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <008901c113a1$8f635a40$0100a8c0@prdise1.nm.home.com>
Date:         Mon, 23 Jul 2001 12:01:54 -0600
Reply-To: "Pax" <darkspunge@USWEST.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Pax" <darkspunge@USWEST.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] More about that Z/S book
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

I was wondering if you could bind it with dextrin and then pack.Any of you
pyro's think that would work? Sounds like it may make it burn too slow oddly
enough.

Pax


----- Original Message -----
From: "Matthew Travis" <landofgrey@gnc.net>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Monday, July 23, 2001 9:48 AM
Subject: Re: [AR] More about that Z/S book


> You are correct, but for powders, there is an added factor. When you go
from
> a loose powder (dust) form to a very closely packed or completely solid
> form, the burning rate can go down because the heat transfer may actually
> decrease. And example of this is (as those of us who grew up in the
midwest
> know about) grain bin dust explosions. The fine chaff and dust is stable
in
> the grain bin until someone or something stirs it up. It turns the bin
into
> a huge bomb. However, a fire in the bin, absent any stirring of the dust,
> merely burns. I have witnessed this personally.
>
> If you have a copy of Bill Colburn's "The Micrograin Manual" (available
from
> Aerocon), in it he explains that for ZnS, too high a packing load can
result
> in too low a burn rate to generate adequate thrust. Too low a packing can
> result in much of the powder being ejected before being ignited. The
takeoff
> acceleration (which can be in the hundreds of G's for ZnS rockets) will
add
> a tremendous downward packing force. The propellant can pack down before
it
> completely ignites (before the blowdown phase) and actually reduce the
> burning rate.
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU]On
> > Behalf Of Ed Dewey
> > Sent: Monday, July 23, 2001 11:23 AM
> > To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
> > Subject: Re: [AR] More about that Z/S book
> >
> >
> > I may have to look this up again, but I believe acceleration,
> > either linear
> > or due to spin, increases the burn rate by increasing the heat transfer
> > rate.
> >
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 23555 invoked from network); 23 Jul 2001 19:43:02 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 23 Jul 2001 19:43:02 -0000
Received: (qmail 19039 invoked from network); 23 Jul 2001 19:44:39 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 23 Jul 2001 19:44:39 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA05620; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 12:36:13 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 81177 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 19:36:12          +0000
Received: from cisco.com (cypher.cisco.com [171.69.11.18]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA05603 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon,          23 Jul 2001 12:36:12 -0700
Received: (from billw@localhost) by cisco.com (8.8.8/2.6/Cisco List          Logging/8.8.8) id MAA11805; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 12:35:10 -0700 (PDT)
8: 46:41 -0400
Message-ID:  <CMM.0.90.4.995916910.billw@cypher>
Date:         Mon, 23 Jul 2001 12:35:10 PDT
Reply-To: "Bill Westfield" <billw@cisco.com>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "William Chops Westfield" <billw@cisco.com>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Alternatives to patents?
Comments: To: al bradley <abradley@toolcity.net>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  Your message of Mon, 23 Jul 2001 11:41:24 -0500

    > One of the possible outcomes of cisco's patent process is that the
    > patent council will sugest that you publish an idea rather than
    > pursue a patent (which nicely creates "prior art" and prevents
    > competitors from patenting the same idea ...)

    This is a new framework of thought to me. I've always considered a
    patent as being the only protection one has if they want to have
    income from their concepts. Doesn't "publishing an idea" close off
    this source of income?

Keep in mind that in the computer business, the patent process is
essentially completely broken...

Publishing an idea doesn't provide any protection for your idea, but it
DOES prevent someone else from patenting that idea and then suing you for
infringement of "their" patent.  It's especially good for ideas you are
ready to ship whose useful competitive lifetime is shorter than the time it
would take to get a patent AND shorter than the time it would take for a
competitor to implement starting from scratch.  All too common in software.


    Where, how would one "publish an idea"?

Any established technical journal or arena would do.  For computer
stuff, there are the ACM and IEEE journals, the RFCs, and of course
"internally generated" things like application notes and manuals.
Legally, to prevent patentability, it's probably important that you be
able to demonstrate a "secure" publication date (so I would think that a
web page or usenet posting would not be such a good idea.  Yet, anyway.)
For amateur rocketry, something like the RRS journal, Sports Rocketry
(NAR publication; probably suitable for non-propulsion amateur ideas),
HPR magazine, or Extreme Rocketry.  (assuming that it's not suitable for
more...  prestegious... journals.)  Certainly a message on Rocketry
Online, UseNet, or here is better than nothing.

Yeah, this route would probably prevent you from sitting back doing
nothing other than send lawyers out to extort patent license fees from
manufacturers who are "infringing" on your idea, but that sort of person
has always pissed me off anyway :-)

BillW


From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 13345 invoked from network); 23 Jul 2001 20:00:59 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 23 Jul 2001 20:00:59 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 24461 invoked from network); 23 Jul 2001 20:02:47 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 23 Jul 2001 20:02:47 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA05682; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 12:41:46 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 81190 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 19:41:44          +0000
Received: from mailgw1a.lmco.com (mailgw1a.lmco.com [192.31.106.7]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA05665 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 12:41:44 -0700
Received: from emss02g01.ems.lmco.com (relay2.ems.lmco.com [166.29.2.54]) by          mailgw1a.lmco.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id NAA18019 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 13:41:43 -0600 (MDT)
Received: from CONVERSION-DAEMON by lmco.com (PMDF V5.2-33 #38887) id          <0GGX00H01YPCZY@lmco.com> for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 23 Jul 2001          13:41:42 -0600 (MDT)
Received: from emss02i00.ems.lmco.com ([166.29.2.48]) by lmco.com (PMDF V5.2-33          #38887) with ESMTP id <0GGX00J27YP9B4@lmco.com> for          AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 13:41:33 -0600 (MDT)
Received: by emss02i00.ems.lmco.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) id          <P13DHT05>; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 13:42:39 -0600
Content-return: allowed
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19)
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <EDB5E5136094D311BF1800508B12205E08D29095@emss02m07.ems.lmco.com>
Date:         Mon, 23 Jul 2001 13:42:36 -0600
Reply-To: "Bendel, Timothy B" <timothy.b.bendel@LMCO.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Bendel, Timothy B" <timothy.b.bendel@LMCO.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] 3Re: [AR] 2Re: [AR] dark secrets
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This sort of thing (Loral in trouble for helping the Chinese) doesn't bother
me as much as the Mark Goll in trouble for doing his own thing and telling
nobody (about the details). Since Mark Goll's intention was to market his
idea through his company (Texas Rocket Company) it is doubtful you could
even call him an "amateur". So, how *does* someone with new rocket ideas go
about trying to market them? How do you protect against a random "secrecy
order" as well as a big aerospace comany ripping you off? I know many of you
out there are not so hot about patents. Clearly Mark Goll got into a heap of
trouble for going to the U.S. Patent Office to protect his ideas (the
audacity of him!- (sarcastic)). But simply spilling all your hard-earned
data onto the web doesn't seem very smart either- there is no reward (i.e.
exclusive marketing rights for 17 years) -and therefore no incentive for
developing the data/design.

Tim Bendel

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Henry Spencer [SMTP:henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET]
> Sent: Monday, July 23, 2001 11:39 AM
> To:   AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
> Subject:      Re: [AR] 3Re: [AR] 2Re: [AR] dark secrets
>
> On Mon, 23 Jul 2001, Donald McCorvey wrote:
> > A perfectly innocent-sounding sharing of information between engineers.
> > No money or hardware changed hands, yet the Chinese were saved man-years
> > of effort figuring it out.
>
> A note of caution here:  allegations and counter-allegations surround
> almost all such incidents.  Don't blindly accept a version promulgated by
> people who have a political axe to grind.  (Notably, a number of the
> leaks-to-China allegations which came out of the Republicans' get-Clinton
> campaign seem to have little foundation in fact.)
>
> > The result was that the Chinese now have a very good intercontinental
> > ballistic missile. They already had the warheads, all they needed was
> > the launch vehicle.
>
> They already had the launch vehicle.  That wasn't a new rocket; it was a
> minor variant of a design that had flown successfully a number of times
> before.  Which is why it was carrying a commercial payload on its very
> first flight.
>
> The Chinese have had ICBMs for 30+ years.  And the Long March 3, which is
> what hit the village, is not one of them, since it has an LH2 upper stage
> and is quite unsuited to military use.
>
>                                                           Henry Spencer
>                                                        henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 27284 invoked from network); 23 Jul 2001 20:17:34 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 23 Jul 2001 20:17:34 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 26722 invoked from network); 23 Jul 2001 20:19:38 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 23 Jul 2001 20:19:38 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA05900; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 13:08:53 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 81215 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 20:08:50          +0000
Received: from fcexgw03.efi.com ([192.68.228.82]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7)          with SMTP id MAA05771 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Mon, 23 Jul 2001          12:58:50 -0700
Received: from 10.10.12.104 by fcexgw03.efi.com (InterScan E-Mail VirusWall          NT); Mon, 23 Jul 2001 12:52:55 -0700
Received: from earthlink.net (peroxide.efi.com [10.10.89.46]) by          EX-IMC3-CORP.efi.com with SMTP (Microsoft Exchange Internet Mail          Service Version 5.5.2653.13) id PL8VKNA4; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 12:58:40          -0700
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.14-5.0 i686)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <200107231857.NAA21389@sys32.hou.wt.net>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B5C8262.F449345D@earthlink.net>
Date:         Mon, 23 Jul 2001 13:00:34 -0700
Reply-To: "David Weinshenker" <daze39@EARTHLINK.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "David Weinshenker" <daze39@EARTHLINK.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] 3Re: [AR] 2Re: [AR] dark secrets
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Donald McCorvey wrote:
> In this particular case, I was referring to the incident as
> it was one of those used to pound export compliance rules
> into my skull at work. If those folks (our export compliance
> office) have a political axe to grind, I haven't heard of it -
> keeping us out of trouble with the customer is their #1 priority.

Sounds like they've got a definite incentive to describe the incident
in such a way as to make it sound like the sharing of information is
a Bad Thing For National Security. (It could equally well IMHO be used
as an example of why the restriction of information for "security reasons"
is a Bad Thing for the Progress of Space Technology...)

-dave w

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 20056 invoked from network); 23 Jul 2001 20:22:46 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 23 Jul 2001 20:22:46 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 16960 invoked from network); 23 Jul 2001 20:24:30 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 23 Jul 2001 20:24:30 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA05963; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 13:19:17 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 81237 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 20:19:08          +0000
Received: from idsoftware.com (predator.idsoftware.com [192.246.40.34]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA05945 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 13:19:08 -0700
Received: from [192.246.40.129] (account johnc HELO lightning.idsoftware.com)          by idsoftware.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 3.4.7) with ESMTP id 312185          for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 15:17:54 -0500
X-Sender: johnc@mail.idsoftware.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <4.3.1.2.20010723145517.02f02e98@mail.idsoftware.com>
Date:         Mon, 23 Jul 2001 15:16:44 -0500
Reply-To: "John Carmack" <johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Carmack" <johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] 3Re: [AR] 2Re: [AR] dark secrets
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <EDB5E5136094D311BF1800508B12205E08D29095@emss02m07.ems.lmc o.com>

At 01:42 PM 7/23/2001 -0600, you wrote:
>This sort of thing (Loral in trouble for helping the Chinese) doesn't bother
>me as much as the Mark Goll in trouble for doing his own thing and telling
>nobody (about the details). Since Mark Goll's intention was to market his
>idea through his company (Texas Rocket Company) it is doubtful you could
>even call him an "amateur". So, how *does* someone with new rocket ideas go
>about trying to market them? How do you protect against a random "secrecy
>order" as well as a big aerospace comany ripping you off? I know many of you
>out there are not so hot about patents. Clearly Mark Goll got into a heap of
>trouble for going to the U.S. Patent Office to protect his ideas (the
>audacity of him!- (sarcastic)). But simply spilling all your hard-earned
>data onto the web doesn't seem very smart either- there is no reward (i.e.
>exclusive marketing rights for 17 years) -and therefore no incentive for
>developing the data/design.
>
>Tim Bendel

This is also sort of related to the discussion of patents.

Ideas and designs are cheap, and you are better off not expecting them to
have any value by themselves.

Don't think that there is a "grand idea" that is going to make something
that is hard into something that is easy, and therefore make people want to
pay you for the idea.  It rarely works that way.

Accomplishing things involves hundreds or thousands of good calls in all
the little details, rather than a single epiphany.

Adding one more good idea to the large pile that already exists in the
rocketry literature probably isn't nearly as worthy a pursuit as actually
taking any existing idea and making it into something that works (which may
show that it isn't as good of an idea as it originally sounded).

I make no effort to protect ideas that I develop in the software field,
where arguably ideas are easier to exploit than in hardware fields.  Rather
the contrary, actually -- I release lots of source code and answer pointed
technical questions from direct competitors.  I've done pretty well like this.

I have gotten hundreds of contacts over the years from people that have an
idea or design of some sort, and are offering it to me for some form of
compensation.  When you have a good handle on all the effort that is
involved in creating a complex system from beginning to end, you have a
much better perspective on the relative "value" of the things being
suggested.  I usually get a little chuckle out of it.

John Carmack

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 25656 invoked from network); 23 Jul 2001 20:37:44 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 23 Jul 2001 20:37:44 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 22473 invoked from network); 23 Jul 2001 20:39:28 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 23 Jul 2001 20:39:28 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA06108; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 13:33:58 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 81265 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 20:33:56          +0000
Received: from mailgw1a.lmco.com (mailgw1a.lmco.com [192.31.106.7]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA06091 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 13:33:55 -0700
Received: from emss02g01.ems.lmco.com (relay2.ems.lmco.com [166.29.2.54]) by          mailgw1a.lmco.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id OAA08038 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 14:33:55 -0600 (MDT)
Received: from CONVERSION-DAEMON by lmco.com (PMDF V5.2-33 #38887) id          <0GGY00C0114FN2@lmco.com> for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 23 Jul 2001          14:33:53 -0600 (MDT)
Received: from emss02i00.ems.lmco.com ([166.29.2.48]) by lmco.com (PMDF V5.2-33          #38887) with ESMTP id <0GGY008FL14BJ4@lmco.com> for          AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 14:33:47 -0600 (MDT)
Received: by emss02i00.ems.lmco.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) id          <P13DHV7H>; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 14:34:52 -0600
Content-return: allowed
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19)
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <EDB5E5136094D311BF1800508B12205E08D29096@emss02m07.ems.lmco.com>
Date:         Mon, 23 Jul 2001 14:34:50 -0600
Reply-To: "Bendel, Timothy B" <timothy.b.bendel@LMCO.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Bendel, Timothy B" <timothy.b.bendel@LMCO.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] 3Re: [AR] 2Re: [AR] dark secrets
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Personally, I believe that the cost to the nation, in regards to technology
not developed in a timely manner, outweighs the cost to the nation of
keeping information "out of the wrong hands" by suppression of Free Speech;
(although it is impossible to quantify as we will never know what *hasn't*
been developed.) Furthermore, no one can really quantify how much our lost
Free Speech was worth (we, as a nation, used to believe it was *priceless*)

I understand the idea that we need to stay ahead of out enemies. Clearly,
there are countries out there whose governments don't like us and would wish
us harm. However, the idea that these other nations will never develop
technologies without stealing it from us is rather arrogant. They are
perfectly capable of developing it on their own. Rather than sending men in
darksuits chasing after every American with a new idea in order to "keep it
out of the wrong hands" the Feds should allow Free Speech and fund
applicable R&D to stay ahead of our enemies.

Our government's attitude seems to me a bit like the hare in "The Tortoise
and the Hare"; they seem to believe that after a great technological push
(like ICBMs and the H-bomb in the 50's) we can just sit on out butts and
remain "superior".

Timothy Bendel

> -----Original Message-----
> From: David Weinshenker [SMTP:daze39@EARTHLINK.NET]
> Sent: Monday, July 23, 2001 2:01 PM
> To:   AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
> Subject:      Re: [AR] 3Re: [AR] 2Re: [AR] dark secrets
>
> Donald McCorvey wrote:
> > In this particular case, I was referring to the incident as
> > it was one of those used to pound export compliance rules
> > into my skull at work. If those folks (our export compliance
> > office) have a political axe to grind, I haven't heard of it -
> > keeping us out of trouble with the customer is their #1 priority.
>
> Sounds like they've got a definite incentive to describe the incident
> in such a way as to make it sound like the sharing of information is
> a Bad Thing For National Security. (It could equally well IMHO be used
> as an example of why the restriction of information for "security reasons"
> is a Bad Thing for the Progress of Space Technology...)
>
> -dave w

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 14613 invoked from network); 23 Jul 2001 20:42:11 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 23 Jul 2001 20:42:11 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 8656 invoked from network); 23 Jul 2001 20:43:59 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 23 Jul 2001 20:43:59 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA06030; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 13:28:44 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 81249 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 20:28:39          +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (f133.law3.hotmail.com [209.185.241.133]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA06013 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 13:28:39 -0700
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Mon,          23 Jul 2001 13:28:09 -0700
Received: from 213.224.83.174 by lw3fd.law3.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Mon, 23          Jul 2001 20:28:09 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [213.224.83.174]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 23 Jul 2001 20:28:09.0218 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[FCAB5620:01C113B5]
Message-ID:  <F133c9LNYbDwMWbNsCB000046c4@hotmail.com>
Date:         Mon, 23 Jul 2001 20:28:39 +0000
Reply-To: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Micro rocket engines
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

AEL wrote:


>...This relationship only holds if the system does
>not use pressure-feeding because the requirements for tanks don't go the
>same.

Indeed, concerning wall thickness for blowdown designs I still feel the
bigger you go, the better the T/W ratio.

You cannot technologically build a tank like a cell membrane to hold, say,
20 bars feed pressure. Unless you find a way not to need such feed (or
close; chamber) pressures. A feat beyond me.

jd

_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 20118 invoked from network); 23 Jul 2001 20:50:24 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 23 Jul 2001 20:50:24 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: (qmail 25613 invoked from network); 23 Jul 2001 20:52:06 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 23 Jul 2001 20:52:06 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA06066; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 13:30:19 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 81257 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 20:30:18          +0000
Received: from 172.16.0.1 (hfrdesign.com [12.23.240.51]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id NAA06049 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon,          23 Jul 2001 13:30:17 -0700
Received: from HFR-Message_Server by 172.16.0.1 with Novell_GroupWise; Mon, 23          Jul 2001 15:07:19 -0500
X-Mailer: Novell GroupWise 5.5.3
Message-ID:  <sb5c3da7.052@172.16.0.1>
Date:         Mon, 23 Jul 2001 15:06:57 -0500
Reply-To: "Alan Pedigo" <APedigo@HFRDESIGN.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Alan Pedigo" <APedigo@HFRDESIGN.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Alternatives to patents?
Comments: To: henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

So, should somebody(ies) in this group set up an amateur rocketry
technical journal so that individuals might present their test results
and findings at length and also to provide an avenue for introducing
new concepts into the public domain?  Would it be considered a "major"
technical journal if it was confined to amateur rocketry enthusiasts?

Alan Pedigo

>>> Henry Spencer <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET> 07/23/01 12:51PM >>>
On Sun, 22 Jul 2001, Mark K. Spute wrote:
> Actually (since we are discussing this rather thoroughly at my
place of
> employment right now) any "public" disclosure can invalidate a
patent claim.
> Public disclosure means revealing your idea to anyone not covered
by a
> "non-disclosure" agreement.  That means your wife, kids, dog,
whatever.

Correct; the difficulty is documenting such disclosure.

> However, Henry is right.  The more prominently you publish
something,
> the more in the public domain it is...

Exactly.  Ideally, you want it to be sufficiently well known that
the
Patent Office rejects any attempt to patent it.  Second best is to
have it
published in a major journal, so that anyone who cares can
immediately
check on your claim of prior publication.  Third best is a minor
technical
journal or even (as Mark notes) a local newspaper, so that
verification
may take some digging but there's no doubt what the answer will be.

Things like self-published technical reports (or even books) get into
the
gray region where significant lawyer dollars might be needed to
establish
that they constitute prior publication.

                                                          Henry
Spencer

henry@spsystems.net


From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 14797 invoked from network); 23 Jul 2001 20:56:17 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 23 Jul 2001 20:56:17 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 26905 invoked from network); 23 Jul 2001 20:58:02 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 23 Jul 2001 20:58:02 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA06271; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 13:51:25 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 81296 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 20:51:23          +0000
Received: from mailgw1a.lmco.com (mailgw1a.lmco.com [192.31.106.7]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA06254 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 13:51:23 -0700
Received: from emss02g01.ems.lmco.com (relay2.ems.lmco.com [166.29.2.54]) by          mailgw1a.lmco.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id OAA11324; Mon, 23 Jul          2001 14:51:21 -0600 (MDT)
Received: from CONVERSION-DAEMON by lmco.com (PMDF V5.2-33 #38887) id          <0GGY00K011XFCN@lmco.com>; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 14:51:20 -0600 (MDT)
Received: from emss02i00.ems.lmco.com ([166.29.2.48]) by lmco.com (PMDF V5.2-33          #38887) with ESMTP id <0GGY00AI31XEBZ@lmco.com>; Mon, 23 Jul 2001          14:51:14 -0600 (MDT)
Received: by emss02i00.ems.lmco.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) id          <P13DHWMV>; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 14:52:19 -0600
Content-return: allowed
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19)
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <EDB5E5136094D311BF1800508B12205E08D29097@emss02m07.ems.lmco.com>
Date:         Mon, 23 Jul 2001 14:52:16 -0600
Reply-To: "Bendel, Timothy B" <timothy.b.bendel@LMCO.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Bendel, Timothy B" <timothy.b.bendel@LMCO.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] 3Re: [AR] 2Re: [AR] dark secrets
Comments: To: John Carmack <johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

John,

I respect your business strategy and agree that ideas are cheap (most of the
time). Your public disclosure of your rocket project is admirable. However,
business history is littered with instances where big companies have tried
to outright copy a smaller competitor's ideas and force them out of the
market with superior production and/or selling at a loss for a period of
time to kill the smaller company. Often, the only recourse a small company
has is the patent.

I agree that the courts have all but failed in protecting patents in the
software industry, but they are trying to catch up.

Also, I agree with you that the real value in a concept is the thousands of
"good calls" and details worked out to make a concept into something *real*.
However, isn't that what Mark Goll was doing? He didn't just type up the
idea and send it into the Patent Office, he built a working rocket- that's
what got him into trouble. It seems to me Mark was following the traditional
path to starting a company based on new technology. It appears that the
Government has created yet another catch-22 : either you have patent
protection from competitors and run the risk of a "secrecy order" or you
disclose all your information publicly to make it "public domain" but then
become vulnerable to big companies that can steal your idea and out muscle
you in the marketplace.

Tim Bendel

> -----Original Message-----
> From: John Carmack [SMTP:johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM]
> Sent: Monday, July 23, 2001 2:17 PM
> To:   AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
> Subject:      Re: [AR] 3Re: [AR] 2Re: [AR] dark secrets
>
> At 01:42 PM 7/23/2001 -0600, you wrote:
> >This sort of thing (Loral in trouble for helping the Chinese) doesn't
> bother
> >me as much as the Mark Goll in trouble for doing his own thing and
> telling
> >nobody (about the details). Since Mark Goll's intention was to market his
> >idea through his company (Texas Rocket Company) it is doubtful you could
> >even call him an "amateur". So, how *does* someone with new rocket ideas
> go
> >about trying to market them? How do you protect against a random "secrecy
> >order" as well as a big aerospace comany ripping you off? I know many of
> you
> >out there are not so hot about patents. Clearly Mark Goll got into a heap
> of
> >trouble for going to the U.S. Patent Office to protect his ideas (the
> >audacity of him!- (sarcastic)). But simply spilling all your hard-earned
> >data onto the web doesn't seem very smart either- there is no reward
> (i.e.
> >exclusive marketing rights for 17 years) -and therefore no incentive for
> >developing the data/design.
> >
> >Tim Bendel
>
> This is also sort of related to the discussion of patents.
>
> Ideas and designs are cheap, and you are better off not expecting them to
> have any value by themselves.
>
> Don't think that there is a "grand idea" that is going to make something
> that is hard into something that is easy, and therefore make people want
> to
> pay you for the idea.  It rarely works that way.
>
> Accomplishing things involves hundreds or thousands of good calls in all
> the little details, rather than a single epiphany.
>
> Adding one more good idea to the large pile that already exists in the
> rocketry literature probably isn't nearly as worthy a pursuit as actually
> taking any existing idea and making it into something that works (which
> may
> show that it isn't as good of an idea as it originally sounded).
>
> I make no effort to protect ideas that I develop in the software field,
> where arguably ideas are easier to exploit than in hardware fields.
> Rather
> the contrary, actually -- I release lots of source code and answer pointed
> technical questions from direct competitors.  I've done pretty well like
> this.
>
> I have gotten hundreds of contacts over the years from people that have an
> idea or design of some sort, and are offering it to me for some form of
> compensation.  When you have a good handle on all the effort that is
> involved in creating a complex system from beginning to end, you have a
> much better perspective on the relative "value" of the things being
> suggested.  I usually get a little chuckle out of it.
>
> John Carmack

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 18618 invoked from network); 23 Jul 2001 20:57:11 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 23 Jul 2001 20:57:11 -0000
Received: (qmail 27167 invoked from network); 23 Jul 2001 20:58:57 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 23 Jul 2001 20:58:57 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA06212; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 13:45:28 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 81285 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 20:45:22          +0000
Received: from wrench.toolcity.net (root@wrench.toolcity.net [208.0.188.2]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA06195 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 13:45:21 -0700
Received: from [63.169.101.165]          (dap-63-169-101-165.meadville-tnt-1.pa.toolcity.net [63.169.101.165])          by wrench.toolcity.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id QAA17219; Mon, 23          Jul 2001 16:45:14 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <v01510100b78245b22c17@[208.22.189.97]>
Date:         Mon, 23 Jul 2001 16:47:33 -0500
Reply-To: "al bradley" <abradley@TOOLCITY.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "al bradley" <abradley@TOOLCITY.NET>
Subject:      [AR] 2Re: Alternatives to patents?
Comments: To: Bill Westfield <billw@cisco.com>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Among other things Bill Westfield wrote:
>Publishing an idea doesn't provide any protection for your idea, but it
>DOES prevent someone else from patenting that idea and then suing you for
>infringement of "their" patent.  It's especially good for ideas you are
>ready to ship whose useful competitive lifetime is shorter than the time it
>would take to get a patent AND shorter than the time it would take for a
>competitor to implement starting from scratch.  All too common in software.
>

This line of thinking indicates that patents are essentially worth little
to the private individual (the little guy) and that publication of an idea
is little more than insurance from corporate lawsuits when the corporations
might actually have pirated the little guy's ideas.

Maybe so, but then, is it time to discard the all-American dream of
devising something so special that it has economic worth to others?

About all that is not excluded here are secret proprietary processes which
are usually in the domain of the R&D chemist/physicist (or professional
magicians)!

best regards,
al bradley

------------------------------------------------------------------
Can you live Life with this?: "Unless there is a law, an agreement, or a
long-standing custom, No one `Deserves' Anything -- Either Good or Bad!"

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 2961 invoked from network); 23 Jul 2001 21:36:13 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 23 Jul 2001 21:36:13 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 12136 invoked from network); 23 Jul 2001 21:38:10 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 23 Jul 2001 21:38:10 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA06620; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 14:30:44 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 81369 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 21:30:43          +0000
Received: from cicero2.cybercity.dk (cicero2.cybercity.dk [212.242.40.53]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA06603 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 14:30:42 -0700
Received: from usr00.cybercity.dk (usr00.cybercity.dk [212.242.40.34]) by          cicero2.cybercity.dk (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3A6B8FFFE7; Mon, 23 Jul          2001 23:30:41 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from vip.cybercity.dk (port10.cvx1-noe.ppp.cybercity.dk          [217.157.69.203]) by usr00.cybercity.dk (8.11.2/8.11.0) with ESMTP id          f6NLUdZ63284; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 23:30:39 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from          hot@vip.cybercity.dk)
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.75 [en] (Win95; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <LPBBKJMJEOFKAMFJJNNHGENCCFAA.landofgrey@gnc.net>            <008901c113a1$8f635a40$0100a8c0@prdise1.nm.home.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B5C9994.A78F54BC@vip.cybercity.dk>
Date:         Mon, 23 Jul 2001 23:39:32 +0200
Reply-To: "Hans Olaf Toft" <hot@VIP.CYBERCITY.DK>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Hans Olaf Toft" <hot@VIP.CYBERCITY.DK>
Subject:      Re: [AR] More about that Z/S book
Comments: To: Pax <darkspunge@USWEST.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Zinc-sulfur rockets rely on a phase transition for zinck-sulfide for setting its
chamber pressure.  Even though the propellants burns away very fast, the chamber
pressure limits at some 140 bar, wich may be quite high but  it is possible to
handle. From that point on, the zinc-sulfide evaporates and pressure decreases.
The limiting pressure may depend slightly on the ratio of zinck to sulfur as
there may be vapourised zinck also in the combustion chamber. Check out
http://inet.uni2.dk/~dark/Exhibition/Static/SmallTom/SmallTom.html for pressure
and thrust measurements on a (powdered) ZnS motor.

The addition of various organic materials like dextrin will remove (or rather
move) the pressure limitation, and You risk very high chamber pressures.

Hans Olaf Toft

Pax wrote:

> I was wondering if you could bind it with dextrin and then pack.Any of you
> pyro's think that would work? Sounds like it may make it burn too slow oddly
> enough.
>
> Pax
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Matthew Travis" <landofgrey@gnc.net>
> To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
> Sent: Monday, July 23, 2001 9:48 AM
> Subject: Re: [AR] More about that Z/S book
>
> > You are correct, but for powders, there is an added factor. When you go
> from
> > a loose powder (dust) form to a very closely packed or completely solid
> > form, the burning rate can go down because the heat transfer may actually
> > decrease. And example of this is (as those of us who grew up in the
> midwest
> > know about) grain bin dust explosions. The fine chaff and dust is stable
> in
> > the grain bin until someone or something stirs it up. It turns the bin
> into
> > a huge bomb. However, a fire in the bin, absent any stirring of the dust,
> > merely burns. I have witnessed this personally.
> >
> > If you have a copy of Bill Colburn's "The Micrograin Manual" (available
> from
> > Aerocon), in it he explains that for ZnS, too high a packing load can
> result
> > in too low a burn rate to generate adequate thrust. Too low a packing can
> > result in much of the powder being ejected before being ignited. The
> takeoff
> > acceleration (which can be in the hundreds of G's for ZnS rockets) will
> add
> > a tremendous downward packing force. The propellant can pack down before
> it
> > completely ignites (before the blowdown phase) and actually reduce the
> > burning rate.
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU]On
> > > Behalf Of Ed Dewey
> > > Sent: Monday, July 23, 2001 11:23 AM
> > > To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
> > > Subject: Re: [AR] More about that Z/S book
> > >
> > >
> > > I may have to look this up again, but I believe acceleration,
> > > either linear
> > > or due to spin, increases the burn rate by increasing the heat transfer
> > > rate.
> > >
> >

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 13654 invoked from network); 23 Jul 2001 21:38:44 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 23 Jul 2001 21:38:44 -0000
Received: (qmail 26730 invoked from network); 23 Jul 2001 21:40:32 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 23 Jul 2001 21:40:32 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA06565; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 14:29:39 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 81305 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 21:29:38          +0000
Received: from spsystems.net (spsystems.net [209.47.149.227]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA06295 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Mon,          23 Jul 2001 13:54:52 -0700
Received: (from henry@localhost) by spsystems.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id QAA12472;          Mon, 23 Jul 2001 16:54:15 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010723163555.12105B-100000@spsystems.net>
Date:         Mon, 23 Jul 2001 16:54:15 -0400
Reply-To: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] 3Re: [AR] 2Re: [AR] dark secrets
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <EDB5E5136094D311BF1800508B12205E08D29095@emss02m07.ems.lmco.com>

On Mon, 23 Jul 2001, Bendel, Timothy B wrote:
> ...So, how *does* someone with new rocket ideas go
> about trying to market them?

Make and sell a product/service based on them.  As simple as that (and
as difficult as that!).

One alternative to publication, of course, is to simply hold the ideas as
trade secrets.  The risk you run is that somebody else will patent them.

> ...But simply spilling all your hard-earned
> data onto the web doesn't seem very smart either- there is no reward (i.e.
> exclusive marketing rights for 17 years) -and therefore no incentive for
> developing the data/design.

To quote somebody or other:  "Don't worry about people stealing your ideas.
If your ideas are any good, you'll have to ram them down people's throats
to get anyone to pay attention."

Without a pile of money and a swarm of lawyers, there is *NO WAY* you will
get exclusive marketing rights for 17 years, patent or no patent.  Forget
about that; it's an unrealizable fantasy.  You have to figure out how to
profit from your ideas without that.  This is unfortunate but it's how the
world works.

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 23129 invoked from network); 23 Jul 2001 21:40:56 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 23 Jul 2001 21:40:56 -0000
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 12817 invoked from network); 23 Jul 2001 21:43:01 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 23 Jul 2001 21:43:01 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA06586; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 14:29:41 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 81295 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 21:29:40          +0000
Received: from c0mailgw12.prontomail.com (mailgw.prontomail.com          [216.163.180.10]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA06233          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 13:47:03 -0700
Received: from c0web110 (216.163.180.10) by c0mailgw12.prontomail.com (NPlex          5.5.029) id 3B5B8001000263D0 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 23 Jul          2001 13:43:08 -0700
X-Version: about 6.0.2393.0
X-Priority: 3
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-Mailer: Web Based Pronto
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <02A530FB6AF75D115A5600807CFBC69C@nickz5715.about.com>
Date:         Mon, 23 Jul 2001 16:30:16 -0400
Reply-To: "nick z" <nickz5715@ABOUT.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "nick z" <nickz5715@ABOUT.COM>
Subject:      [AR] Stump remover as potassium nitrate
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

<html><head><meta Name='keywords' Content='commtouch, pronto, mail, free email, free, branded, web based, free web based email, communications, internet, software, advertising banners, e-mail, free software'></head><body   ><div align='left'><font   ><blockquote><blockquote><TT>Is stump remover a pure enough from of potassium nitrate to use? Any <BR>
brand that you would recomend?<BR>
Thanks,<BR>
Nick<BR>
</TT><br><br><br><br><br><br><font><p align=left><br><TT>Sign up for a free About Email account at http://About.com </TT></blockquote></blockquote></div></font></body></html>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 21019 invoked from network); 23 Jul 2001 21:54:45 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 23 Jul 2001 21:54:45 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: (qmail 13790 invoked from network); 23 Jul 2001 21:56:26 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 23 Jul 2001 21:56:26 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA06748; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 14:44:31 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 81393 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 21:44:30          +0000
Received: from cisco.com (cypher.cisco.com [171.69.11.18]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA06731 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon,          23 Jul 2001 14:44:30 -0700
Received: (from billw@localhost) by cisco.com (8.8.8/2.6/Cisco List          Logging/8.8.8) id OAA24745; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 14:43:28 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID:  <CMM.0.90.4.995924608.billw@cypher>
Date:         Mon, 23 Jul 2001 14:43:28 PDT
Reply-To: "Bill Westfield" <billw@cisco.com>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "William Chops Westfield" <billw@cisco.com>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Alternatives to patents?
Comments: To: al bradley <abradley@TOOLCITY.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  Your message of Mon, 23 Jul 2001 11:41:24 -0500 09:54:03 -0400

> One of the possible outcomes of cisco's patent process is that the patent
> council will sugest that you publish an idea rather than pursue a patent

Hmm.  I oughta add that one of the interesting paradoxes is that it's a lot
easier from the engineer's perspective to submit the patent than to publish.
When we do a patent application, the (highly paid) lawyers take your idea,
format it into a patent application, and then you review and modify till
both the engineer an the lawyer are satisfied.  To get something publishable
requires a lot more "fleshing out" of the idea into an actual
implementation, and almost all of that will end up done by the engineer.

BillW


From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 16189 invoked from network); 23 Jul 2001 22:07:42 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 23 Jul 2001 22:07:42 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 1906 invoked from network); 23 Jul 2001 22:08:58 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 23 Jul 2001 22:08:58 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA06910; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 14:59:59 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 81429 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 21:59:50          +0000
Received: from brighton.legacywireless.com (legacywireless.com [208.187.126.2])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA06893 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 14:59:50 -0700
Received: from [208.187.122.40] by brighton.cogolink.com (NTMail          5.00.0010/NY4701.00.0f189dc1) with ESMTP id ycyxoaaa for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 16:08:29 -0600
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.77 [en] (Win98; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <EDB5E5136094D311BF1800508B12205E08D2909A@emss02m07.ems.lmco.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B5BED7E.8B5C0C35@biomicro.com>
Date:         Mon, 23 Jul 2001 03:25:18 -0600
Reply-To: "Mark K. Spute" <mks@BIOMICRO.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Mark K. Spute" <mks@BIOMICRO.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] 3Re: [AR] 2Re: [AR] dark secrets
Comments: To: "Bendel, Timothy B" <timothy.b.bendel@LMCO.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Definately.

"Bendel, Timothy B" wrote:

> Would the Space Access Society annual meeting constitute a "public forum"?
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Henry Spencer [SMTP:henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET]
> > Sent: Monday, July 23, 2001 2:54 PM
> > To:   AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
> > Subject:      Re: [AR] 3Re: [AR] 2Re: [AR] dark secrets
> >
> > On Mon, 23 Jul 2001, Bendel, Timothy B wrote:
> > > ...So, how *does* someone with new rocket ideas go
> > > about trying to market them?
> >
> > Make and sell a product/service based on them.  As simple as that (and
> > as difficult as that!).
> >
> > One alternative to publication, of course, is to simply hold the ideas as
> > trade secrets.  The risk you run is that somebody else will patent them.
> >
> > > ...But simply spilling all your hard-earned
> > > data onto the web doesn't seem very smart either- there is no reward
> > (i.e.
> > > exclusive marketing rights for 17 years) -and therefore no incentive for
> > > developing the data/design.
> >
> > To quote somebody or other:  "Don't worry about people stealing your
> > ideas.
> > If your ideas are any good, you'll have to ram them down people's throats
> > to get anyone to pay attention."
> >
> > Without a pile of money and a swarm of lawyers, there is *NO WAY* you will
> > get exclusive marketing rights for 17 years, patent or no patent.  Forget
> > about that; it's an unrealizable fantasy.  You have to figure out how to
> > profit from your ideas without that.  This is unfortunate but it's how the
> > world works.
> >
> >                                                           Henry Spencer
> >                                                        henry@spsystems.net

--
Mark K. Spute
Senior Research Engineer
BioMicro Systems Inc.

KD7IWE,  RRS

"It is difficult to say what is impossible, for the dream of yesterday is the
hope of today and the reality of tomorrow."
     Dr. Robert H. Goddard

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 26525 invoked from network); 23 Jul 2001 22:10:01 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 23 Jul 2001 22:10:01 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 3138 invoked from network); 23 Jul 2001 22:11:00 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 23 Jul 2001 22:11:00 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA06780; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 14:45:06 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 81401 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 21:45:05          +0000
Received: from mailgw1a.lmco.com (mailgw1a.lmco.com [192.31.106.7]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA06763 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 14:45:04 -0700
Received: from emss02g01.ems.lmco.com (relay2.ems.lmco.com [166.29.2.54]) by          mailgw1a.lmco.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id PAA24238 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 15:45:04 -0600 (MDT)
Received: from CONVERSION-DAEMON by lmco.com (PMDF V5.2-33 #38887) id          <0GGY00F014F31I@lmco.com> for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 23 Jul 2001          15:45:03 -0600 (MDT)
Received: from emss02i00.ems.lmco.com ([166.29.2.48]) by lmco.com (PMDF V5.2-33          #38887) with ESMTP id <0GGY007AN4EYC9@lmco.com> for          AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 15:44:58 -0600 (MDT)
Received: by emss02i00.ems.lmco.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) id          <P13DHYFN>; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 15:46:04 -0600
Content-return: allowed
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19)
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <EDB5E5136094D311BF1800508B12205E08D2909A@emss02m07.ems.lmco.com>
Date:         Mon, 23 Jul 2001 15:45:57 -0600
Reply-To: "Bendel, Timothy B" <timothy.b.bendel@LMCO.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Bendel, Timothy B" <timothy.b.bendel@LMCO.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] 3Re: [AR] 2Re: [AR] dark secrets
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Would the Space Access Society annual meeting constitute a "public forum"?

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Henry Spencer [SMTP:henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET]
> Sent: Monday, July 23, 2001 2:54 PM
> To:   AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
> Subject:      Re: [AR] 3Re: [AR] 2Re: [AR] dark secrets
>
> On Mon, 23 Jul 2001, Bendel, Timothy B wrote:
> > ...So, how *does* someone with new rocket ideas go
> > about trying to market them?
>
> Make and sell a product/service based on them.  As simple as that (and
> as difficult as that!).
>
> One alternative to publication, of course, is to simply hold the ideas as
> trade secrets.  The risk you run is that somebody else will patent them.
>
> > ...But simply spilling all your hard-earned
> > data onto the web doesn't seem very smart either- there is no reward
> (i.e.
> > exclusive marketing rights for 17 years) -and therefore no incentive for
> > developing the data/design.
>
> To quote somebody or other:  "Don't worry about people stealing your
> ideas.
> If your ideas are any good, you'll have to ram them down people's throats
> to get anyone to pay attention."
>
> Without a pile of money and a swarm of lawyers, there is *NO WAY* you will
> get exclusive marketing rights for 17 years, patent or no patent.  Forget
> about that; it's an unrealizable fantasy.  You have to figure out how to
> profit from your ideas without that.  This is unfortunate but it's how the
> world works.
>
>                                                           Henry Spencer
>                                                        henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 734 invoked from network); 23 Jul 2001 22:18:00 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 23 Jul 2001 22:18:00 -0000
Received: (qmail 19408 invoked from network); 23 Jul 2001 22:20:06 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 23 Jul 2001 22:20:06 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA06724; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 14:44:26 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 81385 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 21:44:25          +0000
Received: from spsystems.net (spsystems.net [209.47.149.227]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA06707 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Mon,          23 Jul 2001 14:44:24 -0700
Received: (from henry@localhost) by spsystems.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id RAA12907;          Mon, 23 Jul 2001 17:43:50 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010723173112.12105D-100000@spsystems.net>
Date:         Mon, 23 Jul 2001 17:43:50 -0400
Reply-To: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] 2Re: Alternatives to patents?
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <v01510100b78245b22c17@[208.22.189.97]>

On Mon, 23 Jul 2001, al bradley wrote:
> This line of thinking indicates that patents are essentially worth little
> to the private individual (the little guy) and that publication of an idea
> is little more than insurance from corporate lawsuits when the corporations
> might actually have pirated the little guy's ideas.

Or come up with them independently.  Simultaneous invention is common; a
particularly spectacular example is the hovercraft, which was invented in
at least four places at around the same time.

The extent of actual piracy by big corporations is greatly exaggerated.
Indeed, many of them refuse to examine unsolicited submissions from
outsiders, precisely because they might later be accused of piracy if they
develop the same thing independently.

> Maybe so, but then, is it time to discard the all-American dream of
> devising something so special that it has economic worth to others?

In the sense of striking it rich and never having to work again, yes, but
that has always been more dream than reality.  There's still plenty of
room to succeed by devising things, in the traditional way:  turn your
idea into a workable product and successfully market it, instead of just
counting royalty checks.

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 1005 invoked from network); 23 Jul 2001 22:18:04 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 23 Jul 2001 22:18:04 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 8642 invoked from network); 23 Jul 2001 22:19:53 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 23 Jul 2001 22:19:53 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA06815; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 14:46:21 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 81409 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 21:46:20          +0000
Received: from mail1.murraystate.edu (mail1.murraystate.edu [216.249.159.50])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id OAA06798 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 14:46:20 -0700
Received: from jjcomputer.murraystate.edu (216.249.158.67) by          mail1.murraystate.edu (NPlex 5.5.031) id 3B2AA235000A047C for          AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 16:44:26 -0500
X-Sender: terry.mccreary@mail.murraystate.edu
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <5.1.0.14.0.20010723165141.01d7a0a0@mail.murraystate.edu>
Date:         Mon, 23 Jul 2001 16:52:35 -0500
Reply-To: "Terry McCreary" <terry.mccreary@MURRAYSTATE.EDU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Terry McCreary" <terry.mccreary@MURRAYSTATE.EDU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Alternatives to patents?
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <sb5c3da7.052@172.16.0.1>

At 03:06 PM 7/23/01 -0500, you wrote:
>So, should somebody(ies) in this group set up an amateur rocketry
>technical journal so that individuals might present their test results
>and findings at length and also to provide an avenue for introducing
>new concepts into the public domain?  Would it be considered a "major"
>technical journal if it was confined to amateur rocketry enthusiasts?
>
>Alan Pedigo

I suspect that the Journal of Pyrotechnics would be willing to publish some
such material.

P'rfesser

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 14413 invoked from network); 23 Jul 2001 22:21:00 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 23 Jul 2001 22:21:00 -0000
Received: (qmail 22921 invoked from network); 23 Jul 2001 22:22:45 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 23 Jul 2001 22:22:45 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA07071; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 15:12:57 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 81465 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 22:12:56          +0000
Received: from spsystems.net (spsystems.net [209.47.149.227]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA07054 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Mon,          23 Jul 2001 15:12:55 -0700
Received: (from henry@localhost) by spsystems.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id SAA13268;          Mon, 23 Jul 2001 18:12:21 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010723175628.12105G-100000@spsystems.net>
Date:         Mon, 23 Jul 2001 18:12:21 -0400
Reply-To: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] 3Re: [AR] 2Re: [AR] dark secrets
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <EDB5E5136094D311BF1800508B12205E08D29097@emss02m07.ems.lmco.com>

On Mon, 23 Jul 2001, Bendel, Timothy B wrote:
> ...business history is littered with instances where big companies have tried
> to outright copy a smaller competitor's ideas and force them out of the
> market with superior production and/or selling at a loss for a period of
> time to kill the smaller company. Often, the only recourse a small company
> has is the patent.

The extent of this sort of thing is much exaggerated... and patents are
not much protection against it.  A sufficiently determined search can
almost always find enough hints of prior art to break a patent, given
plentiful resources.  And yes, a big company would usually prefer to bust
your patent rather than license it.

The key thing to remember is that big companies move slowly.  The real way
for the small company to survive is to stay ahead.  Once you show that a
new market exists, the big guys *will* move in on it, and patents won't do
more than annoy them.

(Quite apart from the possibility of breaking the patents, it's rare that
a patent is so fundamental to a whole market that they just cannot enter
the market without infringing on it.  Just as likely is that they will
find some clever way to skirt around it.  This is most especially true of
getting into space, where there are a dozen or more technical approaches
that ought to work.  Unless you discover antigravity paint, you won't have
such an overwhelming technical advantage that they can only compete by
copying it.  Space's problem is markets and financing, not technology.)

Unless you've managed to get big yourself meanwhile, the answer is not to
be underfoot when the elephants start to dance.  Be out front pioneering
the next market, not standing around, fat and dumb, waiting to be stomped.

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 25307 invoked from network); 23 Jul 2001 22:23:26 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 23 Jul 2001 22:23:26 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 11514 invoked from network); 23 Jul 2001 22:24:43 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 23 Jul 2001 22:24:43 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA07046; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 15:12:18 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 81457 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 22:12:16          +0000
Received: from sys27.hou.wt.net (sys27.hou.wt.net [205.230.159.27]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA07029 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 15:12:15 -0700
Received: from localhost (216-119-130-151.ipset10.wt.net [216.119.130.151]) by          sys27.hou.wt.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id RAA13953 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 17:12:08 -0500 (CDT)
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.388)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <200107232212.RAA13953@sys27.hou.wt.net>
Date:         Mon, 23 Jul 2001 17:12:23 -0500
Reply-To: "Donald McCorvey" <dlm3@NETAXS.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Donald McCorvey" <dlm3@NETAXS.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] 3Re: [AR] 2Re: [AR] dark secrets
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <3B5C8262.F449345D@earthlink.net>

I wouldn't presume that they're knowingly dishonest either, however.  As
Henry pointed out, there's more to it than the story that came up in the
press, but that's usually the only account anybody (except those closer
to the event) ever knows.

It goes along with the old adage: "Almost anything you read in the
newspaper is probably wrong or misquoted." Having seen how the Wall
Street Journal mangled a story about a project I was personally involved
in, and knowing that even our PR department would get things wrong,
simply because they didn't understand the context of the subject, you
inevitably come to the above conclusion - and none have any intent to
mislead or misinform.

---------------------

All this discussion does tend to reinforce the notion that the more you
publish in professional journals, seminars, and other forums, the better
off you and your project will be. While patents used to be worth
something, it looks like whatever benefits they once enjoyed have been
wiped out by the cost of litigation needed to enforce them (if they were
ever of any value).

(Sounds a lot like the "Open Source" model, in fact)

Don McCorvey
Houston, Tx

On Monday, July 23, 2001, at 03:00 PM, David Weinshenker wrote:

> Donald McCorvey wrote:
>> In this particular case, I was referring to the incident as
>> it was one of those used to pound export compliance rules
>> into my skull at work. If those folks (our export compliance
>> office) have a political axe to grind, I haven't heard of it -
>> keeping us out of trouble with the customer is their #1 priority.
>
> Sounds like they've got a definite incentive to describe the incident
> in such a way as to make it sound like the sharing of information is
> a Bad Thing For National Security. (It could equally well IMHO be used
> as an example of why the restriction of information for "security
> reasons"
> is a Bad Thing for the Progress of Space Technology...)
>
> -dave w
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 25531 invoked from network); 23 Jul 2001 22:23:29 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 23 Jul 2001 22:23:29 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 10382 invoked from network); 23 Jul 2001 22:25:17 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 23 Jul 2001 22:25:17 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA07116; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 15:19:59 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 81473 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 22:19:49          +0000
Received: from femail19.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail19.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.0.95.128]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA07099          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 15:19:49 -0700
Received: from home.com ([24.22.71.82]) by femail19.sdc1.sfba.home.com          (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20 201-229-121-120-20010223) with ESMTP id          <20010723221943.ZJHL14722.femail19.sdc1.sfba.home.com@home.com>; Mon,          23 Jul 2001 15:19:43 -0700
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.75 [en] (Win98; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <v01510100b781fcc46b89@[63.169.101.176]>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B5CA340.AD724C03@home.com>
Date:         Mon, 23 Jul 2001 18:20:48 -0400
Reply-To: "Mark Simpson" <mark.simpson@HOME.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Mark Simpson" <mark.simpson@HOME.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Alternatives to patents?
Comments: To: al bradley <abradley@TOOLCITY.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

I'm having an increasingly difficult time following the logic in this thread.
Publishing an idea instead of patenting it does nothing for you. Patenting it
give you 20 years of exclusivity. No contest. Patent whenever possible unless the
object being patented would be impossible for someone else to duplicate, like
Coca Cola's formula, for instance.  I live in the world of chemicals and the best
chance that you have of making money is to patent a new compound/process, etc. as
long as it is posible for your competitors to reverse-engineer your idea.  If
it's unlikely that they can, don't patent, keep it as a trade secret.
Chemical patents are very enforcable.  My company won an $80MM infringement suit
not too long ago.
As far as publishing in order to prevent someone else from patenting an idea, I
find that very counter-productive.  If I keep a good, legal laboratory notebook
and can demonstrate priority, I'd rather get an exclusion, in many  instances,
than voiding someone's patent. Voiding the patent opens up the idea for others to
use and compete with you both.  It's better to have one competitor than a handful
of competitors.

My $0.02 worth.

Mark Simpson

al bradley wrote:

> >One of the possible outcomes of cisco's patent process is
> >that the patent council will sugest that you publish an idea rather than
> >pursue a patent (which nicely creates "prior art" and prevents competitors
> >from patenting the same idea, without causing quite as much pain and expense
> >as going the full patent route.)
>
> --------------
>
> This is a new framework of thought to me. I've always considered a patent
> as being the only protection one has if they want to have income from their
> concepts. Doesn't "publishing an idea" close off this source of income?
>
> Where, how would one "publish an idea"?
>
> best regards,
> al bradley
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------
> Can you live Life with this?: "Unless there is a law, an agreement, or a
> long-standing custom, No one `Deserves' Anything -- Either Good or Bad!"

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 1654 invoked from network); 23 Jul 2001 22:24:48 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 23 Jul 2001 22:24:48 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 10935 invoked from network); 23 Jul 2001 22:26:38 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 23 Jul 2001 22:26:38 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA06960; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 15:01:00 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 81442 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 22:00:59          +0000
Received: from mailgw1a.lmco.com (mailgw1a.lmco.com [192.31.106.7]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA06941 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 15:00:58 -0700
Received: from emss02g01.ems.lmco.com (relay2.ems.lmco.com [166.29.2.54]) by          mailgw1a.lmco.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id QAA27788 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 16:00:58 -0600 (MDT)
Received: from CONVERSION-DAEMON by lmco.com (PMDF V5.2-33 #38887) id          <0GGY00J01552LK@lmco.com> for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 23 Jul 2001          16:00:56 -0600 (MDT)
Received: from emss02i00.ems.lmco.com ([166.29.2.48]) by lmco.com (PMDF V5.2-33          #38887) with ESMTP id <0GGY00I81551PV@lmco.com> for          AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 16:00:37 -0600 (MDT)
Received: by emss02i00.ems.lmco.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) id          <P13DHYS5>; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 16:01:43 -0600
Content-return: allowed
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19)
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <EDB5E5136094D311BF1800508B12205E08D2909B@emss02m07.ems.lmco.com>
Date:         Mon, 23 Jul 2001 16:01:35 -0600
Reply-To: "Bendel, Timothy B" <timothy.b.bendel@LMCO.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Bendel, Timothy B" <timothy.b.bendel@LMCO.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] 2Re: Alternatives to patents?
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

>In the sense of striking it rich and never having to work again, yes, but
>that has always been more dream than reality.  There's still plenty of
>room to succeed by devising things, in the traditional way:  turn your
>idea into a workable product and successfully market it, instead of just
>counting royalty checks.

Actually, this is what I had in mind (developing an idea into a workable
product as opposed to just sitting back and collecting royalty checks).
However, patents do play a role in production. As an example, a couple of
years back Smith and Wesson got sued by Glock for violating it's patents
with regard to a pistol design. Glock won, got compensation and forced Smith
and Wesson to cease production.

I think this is a closer example to the aerospace industry than the software
industry as software has progressed in terrific speeds in recent years-
outrunning the legal profession's understanding of it.

I am trying to weigh which approach would be more beneficial for a small
aerospace company : public disclosure of everything so as to guard against
"secrecy orders" and being sued by larger companies who patent your ideas,
or patenting your technology and fighting the likely "secrecy orders" as
un-Constitutional in court.

Not exactly a clear-cut decision.

Timothy Bendel



> -----Original Message-----
> From: Henry Spencer [SMTP:henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET]
> Sent: Monday, July 23, 2001 3:44 PM
> To:   AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
> Subject:      Re: [AR] 2Re: Alternatives to patents?
>
> On Mon, 23 Jul 2001, al bradley wrote:
> > This line of thinking indicates that patents are essentially worth
> little
> > to the private individual (the little guy) and that publication of an
> idea
> > is little more than insurance from corporate lawsuits when the
> corporations
> > might actually have pirated the little guy's ideas.
>
> Or come up with them independently.  Simultaneous invention is common; a
> particularly spectacular example is the hovercraft, which was invented in
> at least four places at around the same time.
>
> The extent of actual piracy by big corporations is greatly exaggerated.
> Indeed, many of them refuse to examine unsolicited submissions from
> outsiders, precisely because they might later be accused of piracy if they
> develop the same thing independently.
>
> > Maybe so, but then, is it time to discard the all-American dream of
> > devising something so special that it has economic worth to others?
>
> In the sense of striking it rich and never having to work again, yes, but
> that has always been more dream than reality.  There's still plenty of
> room to succeed by devising things, in the traditional way:  turn your
> idea into a workable product and successfully market it, instead of just
> counting royalty checks.
>
>                                                           Henry Spencer
>                                                        henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 7136 invoked from network); 23 Jul 2001 22:25:59 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 23 Jul 2001 22:25:59 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 25319 invoked from network); 23 Jul 2001 22:27:15 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 23 Jul 2001 22:27:15 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA06695; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 14:44:02 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 81377 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 21:44:00          +0000
Received: from femail17.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail17.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.0.95.144]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA06677          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 14:43:59 -0700
Received: from home.com ([24.22.71.82]) by femail17.sdc1.sfba.home.com          (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20 201-229-121-120-20010223) with ESMTP id          <20010723214342.ZIUB1000.femail17.sdc1.sfba.home.com@home.com>; Mon,          23 Jul 2001 14:43:42 -0700
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.75 [en] (Win98; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010723121126.7284I-100000@spsystems.net>            <3B5BA843.650F00B@biomicro.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B5C9AC6.2689D3F8@home.com>
Date:         Mon, 23 Jul 2001 17:44:38 -0400
Reply-To: "Mark Simpson" <mark.simpson@HOME.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Mark Simpson" <mark.simpson@HOME.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Alternatives to patents?
Comments: To: "Mark K. Spute" <mks@BIOMICRO.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Disclosure to a spouse wouldn't invalidate a patent claim from a practical sense.
There are all sorts of safeguards built into marriage. And I don't think that the
patent office makes distinctions based on the "publicness" of the disclosure. It's
the same argument as  being a "little pregnant", you either are or you aren't. ;-)
If you can prove priority over an invention that wasn't in the public domain, you get
an exclusion from the patent, allowing you to practice it (since it was your idea
originally). If you disclosed it in public, then someone would have to bring a case
before the Patent Office to have it voided.  It's not automatic and it's not free.

Mark Simpson

"Mark K. Spute" wrote:

> Actually (since we are discussing this rather thoroughly at my place of
> employment right now) any "public" disclosure can invalidate a patent claim.
> Public disclosure means revealing your idea to anyone not covered by a
> "non-disclosure" agreement.  That means your wife, kids, dog, whatever.
>
> However, Henry is right.  The more prominently you publish something, the more in
> the public domain it is.  For your purposes, if you can get your local newspaper
> to publish an article with sufficient technical detail about your idea, that
> would work very well as a public disclosure.  Keep several copies of the
> newspaper and article on file.  Make sure you have the date and issue of the
> paper.  Then if and when anyone is awarded a patent on your idea, you can (for
> free I believe, or at least for a very minimum fee) send a copy of that paper to
> the US Patent and Trademark Office and request that it be added to the patent's
> file.  It may be enough to invalidate that patent or at least render it
> unenforceable.
>
> Henry Spencer wrote:
>
> > > Where, how would one "publish an idea"?
> >
> > As prominently as possible.  Ideally, get a paper about it published in
> > the Journal of Propulsion and Power, which is the top of the line for
> > rocket-propulsion papers, or the Journal of Spacecraft and Rockets, ditto
> > for space technology in general.
>
> --
> Mark K. Spute
> Senior Research Engineer
> BioMicro Systems Inc.
>
> KD7IWE,  RRS
>
> "It is difficult to say what is impossible, for the dream of yesterday is the
> hope of today and the reality of tomorrow."
>      Dr. Robert H. Goddard

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 11831 invoked from network); 23 Jul 2001 22:27:02 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 23 Jul 2001 22:27:02 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 13897 invoked from network); 23 Jul 2001 22:28:03 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 23 Jul 2001 22:28:03 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA07183; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 15:23:23 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 81489 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 22:23:22          +0000
Received: from fw1-bv.tek.com (fw1-bv.tek.com [192.65.40.16]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA07166 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon,          23 Jul 2001 15:23:21 -0700
Received: from fw1-bv.tek.com (root@localhost) by fw1-bv.tek.com with ESMTP id          f6NMMp209365 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 15:22:51          -0700 (PDT)
Received: from tektronix.tek.com (tektronix.tek.com [128.181.6.43]) by          fw1-bv.tek.com with ESMTP id f6NMMoq09361 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>;          Mon, 23 Jul 2001 15:22:50 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from us-bv-u07.bv.tek.com (webshield.tek.com [128.181.2.130]) by          tektronix.tek.com (8.9.3+Sun/8.9.3) with SMTP id PAA04664 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 15:22:50 -0700 (PDT)
Received: FROM us-bv-m01.bv.tek.com BY us-bv-u07.bv.tek.com ; Mon Jul 23          15:22:49 2001 -0700
Received: by us-bv-m01.bv.tek.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2448.0) id          <3CMPCZ1X>; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 15:22:49 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2448.0)
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Message-ID:  <5832AFF5FC75D411844300508BC216B70A2800@us-bv-m07.bv.tek.com>
Date:         Mon, 23 Jul 2001 15:22:48 -0700
Reply-To: <john.w.lyngdal@EXGATE.TEK.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <john.w.lyngdal@EXGATE.TEK.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Alternatives to patents?
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

We often go the route of "Trade Secret" when we think that the information
in the patent disclosure would be of value to our competitors. For instance,
I developed a wet process that will selectively etch AlGaAS without damaging
a 100A thick layer of semi-insulating GaAs. A formulation modification to
common GaAs etchant was all that was involved, but it resulted in a process
that produced some really nice high speed devices. Another benefit of this
approach is that when the information is that it is gathered and packaged
like an unsubmitted patent application, and becomes a solid prior art
document.

        John


-----Original Message-----
From: William Chops Westfield [mailto:billw@cisco.com]
Sent: Monday, July 23, 2001 2:43 PM
To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
Subject: Re: [AR] Alternatives to patents?


> One of the possible outcomes of cisco's patent process is that the patent
> council will sugest that you publish an idea rather than pursue a patent

Hmm.  I oughta add that one of the interesting paradoxes is that it's a lot
easier from the engineer's perspective to submit the patent than to publish.
When we do a patent application, the (highly paid) lawyers take your idea,
format it into a patent application, and then you review and modify till
both the engineer an the lawyer are satisfied.  To get something publishable
requires a lot more "fleshing out" of the idea into an actual
implementation, and almost all of that will end up done by the engineer.

BillW

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 21188 invoked from network); 23 Jul 2001 22:29:07 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 23 Jul 2001 22:29:07 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 15415 invoked from network); 23 Jul 2001 22:30:28 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 23 Jul 2001 22:30:28 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA07234; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 15:26:56 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 81501 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 22:26:50          +0000
Received: from sys32.hou.wt.net (sys32.hou.wt.net [205.230.159.32]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA07217 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 15:26:50 -0700
Received: from localhost (216-119-130-151.ipset10.wt.net [216.119.130.151]) by          sys32.hou.wt.net (8.9.1/8.9.1) with ESMTP id RAA11581 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 17:26:54 -0500 (CDT)
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.388)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <200107232226.RAA11581@sys32.hou.wt.net>
Date:         Mon, 23 Jul 2001 17:26:57 -0500
Reply-To: "Donald McCorvey" <dlm3@NETAXS.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Donald McCorvey" <dlm3@NETAXS.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] 3Re: [AR] 2Re: [AR] dark secrets
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <LPBBKJMJEOFKAMFJJNNHMENGCFAA.landofgrey@gnc.net>

On Monday, July 23, 2001, at 04:20 PM, Matthew Travis wrote:

> ... It may also be a case where the
> government, also for security reasons, classifies the work as
> non-exportable, which then makes it nearly impossible for someone to
> talk
> about it in public forums (like this one) for fear of violating export
> restrictions.

Good point. And at least where our export compliance rules are
concerned, the only hard limits they place on anything is on design
data - no drawings, no dimensions, no software, few or no numbers of any
sort. Flight data and the like is considered fair game, as is anything
known to be in the public domain.

For example, if I were to publish a paper on a next-generation flight
control system, I could discuss its overall architecture, the types and
arrangment of computers used, even the types of sensors and actuators
the system used; but detailed interface data, software, and engineering
drawings would be a no-no (and hopefully wouldn't get past the review
and approval process). Some performance data might also be restricted,
but usually you can tell people how good you did, just not how you
accomplished it.

Don McCorvey
Houston, Tx

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 28527 invoked from network); 23 Jul 2001 22:30:48 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 23 Jul 2001 22:30:48 -0000
Received: (qmail 26368 invoked from network); 23 Jul 2001 22:32:52 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 23 Jul 2001 22:32:52 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA07259; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 15:27:14 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 81509 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 22:27:14          +0000
Received: from dune.gnc.net (root@dune.gnc.net [207.203.72.4]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA07242 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon,          23 Jul 2001 15:27:13 -0700
Received: from beowulf (sw2-20.gnc.net [207.203.72.100]) by dune.gnc.net          (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id SAA10931 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon,          23 Jul 2001 18:27:07 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
Importance: Normal
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <LPBBKJMJEOFKAMFJJNNHCENJCFAA.landofgrey@gnc.net>
Date:         Mon, 23 Jul 2001 18:26:28 -0400
Reply-To: <landofgrey@gnc.net>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Matthew Travis" <landofgrey@gnc.net>
Subject:      Re: [AR] 3Re: [AR] 2Re: [AR] dark secrets
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010723175628.12105G-100000@spsystems.net>

True. Also, patents are not mechanisms for a company to keep information
secret. They are a mechanism for a company to retain certain rights to
compensation when others use the invention. They do not protect the
invention, only the inventor's right to have first-use of the invention and
fair compensation for others' use of it. Also, patents are a mechanism
designed to enforce the right of people to use others' inventions legally.
That is, patents are to protect both the inventor and third parties wishing
to use the invention. Additionally, it is very difficult for a company
(absent national security concerns or export regulations) to patent and
invention and then refuse to license it. Indeed, it is almost impossible.
*That* requires litigation before a court system that does not favor such
action. In actuality, it is usually cheaper for a company to either buy the
inventor or license the invention for the 7 years that a patent is in force
than to try to truly bust the patent. Remember, patents are not forever. In
fact, the patent for the RSA encryption algorithm, just in the past year or
so, has run out and the algorithm is now usable by anyone without the
necessity of licensing.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU]On
> Behalf Of Henry Spencer
>
>
> The extent of this sort of thing is much exaggerated... and patents are
> not much protection against it.  A sufficiently determined search can
> almost always find enough hints of prior art to break a patent, given
> plentiful resources.  And yes, a big company would usually prefer to bust
> your patent rather than license it.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 2230 invoked from network); 23 Jul 2001 22:31:38 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 23 Jul 2001 22:31:38 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 16686 invoked from network); 23 Jul 2001 22:33:00 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 23 Jul 2001 22:33:00 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA07291; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 15:29:16 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 81517 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 22:29:15          +0000
Received: from mailgw1a.lmco.com (mailgw1a.lmco.com [192.31.106.7]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA07273 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 15:29:14 -0700
Received: from emss02g01.ems.lmco.com (relay2.ems.lmco.com [166.29.2.54]) by          mailgw1a.lmco.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id QAA03294; Mon, 23 Jul          2001 16:29:13 -0600 (MDT)
Received: from CONVERSION-DAEMON by lmco.com (PMDF V5.2-33 #38887) id          <0GGY00N016GOL8@lmco.com>; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 16:29:12 -0600 (MDT)
Received: from emss02i00.ems.lmco.com ([166.29.2.48]) by lmco.com (PMDF V5.2-33          #38887) with ESMTP id <0GGY00IF16GLV6@lmco.com>; Mon, 23 Jul 2001          16:29:09 -0600 (MDT)
Received: by emss02i00.ems.lmco.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) id          <P13DHZJG>; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 16:30:15 -0600
Content-return: allowed
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19)
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <EDB5E5136094D311BF1800508B12205E08D2909C@emss02m07.ems.lmco.com>
Date:         Mon, 23 Jul 2001 16:30:10 -0600
Reply-To: "Bendel, Timothy B" <timothy.b.bendel@LMCO.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Bendel, Timothy B" <timothy.b.bendel@LMCO.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] 3Re: [AR] 2Re: [AR] dark secrets
Comments: To: Henry Spencer <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Could there be a best of both worlds?

Could someone file for the patents on his/her new technology, and then
immediately publish it, give open source presentations and put in on the
web, before the patent is issued (or the Feds slap you with a "secrecy
order")? It would be letting the cat out of the bag as far as "public
knowledge" is concerned, but would establish you as the originator of the
technology.

Tim Bendel

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Henry Spencer [SMTP:henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET]
> Sent: Monday, July 23, 2001 4:12 PM
> To:   AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
> Subject:      Re: [AR] 3Re: [AR] 2Re: [AR] dark secrets
>
> On Mon, 23 Jul 2001, Bendel, Timothy B wrote:
> > ...business history is littered with instances where big companies have
> tried
> > to outright copy a smaller competitor's ideas and force them out of the
> > market with superior production and/or selling at a loss for a period of
> > time to kill the smaller company. Often, the only recourse a small
> company
> > has is the patent.
>
> The extent of this sort of thing is much exaggerated... and patents are
> not much protection against it.  A sufficiently determined search can
> almost always find enough hints of prior art to break a patent, given
> plentiful resources.  And yes, a big company would usually prefer to bust
> your patent rather than license it.
>
> The key thing to remember is that big companies move slowly.  The real way
> for the small company to survive is to stay ahead.  Once you show that a
> new market exists, the big guys *will* move in on it, and patents won't do
> more than annoy them.
>
> (Quite apart from the possibility of breaking the patents, it's rare that
> a patent is so fundamental to a whole market that they just cannot enter
> the market without infringing on it.  Just as likely is that they will
> find some clever way to skirt around it.  This is most especially true of
> getting into space, where there are a dozen or more technical approaches
> that ought to work.  Unless you discover antigravity paint, you won't have
> such an overwhelming technical advantage that they can only compete by
> copying it.  Space's problem is markets and financing, not technology.)
>
> Unless you've managed to get big yourself meanwhile, the answer is not to
> be underfoot when the elephants start to dance.  Be out front pioneering
> the next market, not standing around, fat and dumb, waiting to be stomped.
>
>                                                           Henry Spencer
>                                                        henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 7621 invoked from network); 23 Jul 2001 22:32:51 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 23 Jul 2001 22:32:51 -0000
Received: (qmail 27723 invoked from network); 23 Jul 2001 22:34:37 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 23 Jul 2001 22:34:37 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA06545; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 14:29:29 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 81338 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 21:29:20          +0000
Received: from dune.gnc.net (root@dune.gnc.net [207.203.72.4]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA06451 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon,          23 Jul 2001 14:20:43 -0700
Received: from beowulf (sw2-20.gnc.net [207.203.72.100]) by dune.gnc.net          (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id RAA09173 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon,          23 Jul 2001 17:20:42 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
Importance: Normal
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <LPBBKJMJEOFKAMFJJNNHMENGCFAA.landofgrey@gnc.net>
Date:         Mon, 23 Jul 2001 17:20:27 -0400
Reply-To: <landofgrey@gnc.net>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Matthew Travis" <landofgrey@gnc.net>
Subject:      Re: [AR] 3Re: [AR] 2Re: [AR] dark secrets
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <EDB5E5136094D311BF1800508B12205E08D29097@emss02m07.ems.lmco.com>

Read a history of the RSA encryption algorithm and its patent.

Most often, it's not exactly that the government "gag orders" inventors.
Usually, it may a case of someone's work being given national security
importance and becoming classified, in which case the individual needs to
get clearance to continue working. It may also be a case where the
government, also for security reasons, classifies the work as
non-exportable, which then makes it nearly impossible for someone to talk
about it in public forums (like this one) for fear of violating export
restrictions.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU]On
> Behalf Of Bendel, Timothy B
>
>
> John,
>
> I respect your business strategy and agree that ideas are cheap
> (most of the
> time). Your public disclosure of your rocket project is
> admirable. However,
> business history is littered with instances where big companies have tried
> to outright copy a smaller competitor's ideas and force them out of the
> market with superior production and/or selling at a loss for a period of
> time to kill the smaller company. Often, the only recourse a small company
> has is the patent.
>
> I agree that the courts have all but failed in protecting patents in the
> software industry, but they are trying to catch up.
>
> Also, I agree with you that the real value in a concept is the
> thousands of
> "good calls" and details worked out to make a concept into
> something *real*.
> However, isn't that what Mark Goll was doing? He didn't just type up the
> idea and send it into the Patent Office, he built a working rocket- that's
> what got him into trouble. It seems to me Mark was following the
> traditional
> path to starting a company based on new technology. It appears that the
> Government has created yet another catch-22 : either you have patent
> protection from competitors and run the risk of a "secrecy order" or you
> disclose all your information publicly to make it "public domain" but then
> become vulnerable to big companies that can steal your idea and out muscle
> you in the marketplace.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 15442 invoked from network); 23 Jul 2001 22:34:35 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 23 Jul 2001 22:34:35 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 27007 invoked from network); 23 Jul 2001 22:36:39 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 23 Jul 2001 22:36:39 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA07340; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 15:31:16 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 81525 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 22:31:06          +0000
Received: from brighton.legacywireless.com (legacywireless.com [208.187.126.2])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA07319 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 15:31:06 -0700
Received: from [208.187.122.40] by brighton.cogolink.com (NTMail          5.00.0010/NY4701.00.0f189dc1) with ESMTP id razxoaaa for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 16:39:52 -0600
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.77 [en] (Win98; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <v01510100b781fcc46b89@[63.169.101.176]>            <3B5CA340.AD724C03@home.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B5BF4D8.4D4BC561@biomicro.com>
Date:         Mon, 23 Jul 2001 03:56:40 -0600
Reply-To: "Mark K. Spute" <mks@BIOMICRO.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Mark K. Spute" <mks@BIOMICRO.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Alternatives to patents?
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Mark Simpson wrote:

> I'm having an increasingly difficult time following the logic in this thread.
> Publishing an idea instead of patenting it does nothing for you. Patenting it
> give you 20 years of exclusivity. No contest. Patent whenever possible unless the
> object being patented would be impossible for someone else to duplicate, like
> Coca Cola's formula, for instance.  I live in the world of chemicals and the best
> chance that you have of making money is to patent a new compound/process, etc. as
> long as it is posible for your competitors to reverse-engineer your idea.  If
> it's unlikely that they can, don't patent, keep it as a trade secret.
> Chemical patents are very enforcable.  My company won an $80MM infringement suit
> not too long ago.

How much did the lawyer make?  In other words, how much did it cost your company to
contest and win the suit?  If someone filed that same infringement suit against you
personally, could you pay the same lawyers the same amount?

Patent and maintenance fees are very expensive.  On the order of tens of thousands of
dollars over the life of the patent.  Unless you have that money at your fingertips,
ready to spend to maintain that patent, and unless you have the resources to fight
infringement or infringement suits brought against you, you might be (**might be**)
better off not to patent.

>
> As far as publishing in order to prevent someone else from patenting an idea, I
> find that very counter-productive.  If I keep a good, legal laboratory notebook
> and can demonstrate priority, I'd rather get an exclusion, in many  instances,
> than voiding someone's patent. Voiding the patent opens up the idea for others to
> use and compete with you both.  It's better to have one competitor than a handful
> of competitors.
>
> My $0.02 worth.
>
> Mark Simpson
>
> al bradley wrote:
>
> > >One of the possible outcomes of cisco's patent process is
> > >that the patent council will sugest that you publish an idea rather than
> > >pursue a patent (which nicely creates "prior art" and prevents competitors
> > >from patenting the same idea, without causing quite as much pain and expense
> > >as going the full patent route.)
> >
> > --------------
> >
> > This is a new framework of thought to me. I've always considered a patent
> > as being the only protection one has if they want to have income from their
> > concepts. Doesn't "publishing an idea" close off this source of income?
> >
> > Where, how would one "publish an idea"?
> >
> > best regards,
> > al bradley
> >
> > ------------------------------------------------------------------
> > Can you live Life with this?: "Unless there is a law, an agreement, or a
> > long-standing custom, No one `Deserves' Anything -- Either Good or Bad!"

--
Mark K. Spute
Senior Research Engineer
BioMicro Systems Inc.

KD7IWE,  RRS

"It is difficult to say what is impossible, for the dream of yesterday is the hope of
today and the reality of tomorrow."
     Dr. Robert H. Goddard

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 21545 invoked from network); 23 Jul 2001 22:36:02 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 23 Jul 2001 22:36:02 -0000
Received: (qmail 28799 invoked from network); 23 Jul 2001 22:37:48 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 23 Jul 2001 22:37:48 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA07364; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 15:31:42 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 81533 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 22:31:41          +0000
Received: from spsystems.net (spsystems.net [209.47.149.227]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA07347 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Mon,          23 Jul 2001 15:31:41 -0700
Received: (from henry@localhost) by spsystems.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id SAA13386;          Mon, 23 Jul 2001 18:31:06 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010723182501.12105I-100000@spsystems.net>
Date:         Mon, 23 Jul 2001 18:31:06 -0400
Reply-To: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] 3Re: [AR] 2Re: [AR] dark secrets
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <EDB5E5136094D311BF1800508B12205E08D2909A@emss02m07.ems.lmco.com>

On Mon, 23 Jul 2001, Bendel, Timothy B wrote:
> Would the Space Access Society annual meeting constitute a "public forum"?

In terms of "publishing" an idea to prevent patenting, you mean?

Maybe. :-)

(Caveat:  consult a lawyer, not me, before making any big decisions.)

I would think the big problem with that would be establishing, later, that
the idea had in fact been presented there... since Space Access does not
publish any sort of proceedings.  You'd need to find disinterested third
parties prepared to testify that they heard it there.  Possible, but not
nearly as straightforward or reliable as printed publication.

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 17218 invoked from network); 23 Jul 2001 22:42:09 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 23 Jul 2001 22:42:09 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 23070 invoked from network); 23 Jul 2001 22:43:30 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 23 Jul 2001 22:43:30 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA07428; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 15:39:15 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 81543 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 22:39:10          +0000
Received: from brighton.legacywireless.com (legacywireless.com [208.187.126.2])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA07410 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 15:39:09 -0700
Received: from [208.187.122.40] by brighton.cogolink.com (NTMail          5.00.0010/NY4701.00.0f189dc1) with ESMTP id iizxoaaa for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 16:48:00 -0600
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.77 [en] (Win98; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <LPBBKJMJEOFKAMFJJNNHCENJCFAA.landofgrey@gnc.net>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B5BF6C0.63E84320@biomicro.com>
Date:         Mon, 23 Jul 2001 04:04:48 -0600
Reply-To: "Mark K. Spute" <mks@BIOMICRO.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Mark K. Spute" <mks@BIOMICRO.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] 3Re: [AR] 2Re: [AR] dark secrets
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Remember that in the U.S. the patent rights go to the person who was first to
invent the device or method.  In europe, it is simply the first to file.  So
you could patent a new rocket motor or something here, but someone in Europe
could find your patent, apply for a  Eurpean patent there before you did, and
they would own the European patent rights.

This is why most companies with intellectual property have a small (but very
expensive) standing army of lawyers and registered patent agents on retainer.

Matthew Travis wrote:

> True. Also, patents are not mechanisms for a company to keep information
> secret. They are a mechanism for a company to retain certain rights to
> compensation when others use the invention. They do not protect the
> invention, only the inventor's right to have first-use of the invention and
> fair compensation for others' use of it. Also, patents are a mechanism
> designed to enforce the right of people to use others' inventions legally.
> That is, patents are to protect both the inventor and third parties wishing
> to use the invention. Additionally, it is very difficult for a company
> (absent national security concerns or export regulations) to patent and
> invention and then refuse to license it. Indeed, it is almost impossible.
> *That* requires litigation before a court system that does not favor such
> action. In actuality, it is usually cheaper for a company to either buy the
> inventor or license the invention for the 7 years that a patent is in force
> than to try to truly bust the patent. Remember, patents are not forever. In
> fact, the patent for the RSA encryption algorithm, just in the past year or
> so, has run out and the algorithm is now usable by anyone without the
> necessity of licensing.
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU]On
> > Behalf Of Henry Spencer
> >
> >
> > The extent of this sort of thing is much exaggerated... and patents are
> > not much protection against it.  A sufficiently determined search can
> > almost always find enough hints of prior art to break a patent, given
> > plentiful resources.  And yes, a big company would usually prefer to bust
> > your patent rather than license it.

--
Mark K. Spute
Senior Research Engineer
BioMicro Systems Inc.

KD7IWE,  RRS

"It is difficult to say what is impossible, for the dream of yesterday is the
hope of today and the reality of tomorrow."
     Dr. Robert H. Goddard

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 20774 invoked from network); 23 Jul 2001 22:43:01 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 23 Jul 2001 22:43:02 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: (qmail 1334 invoked from network); 23 Jul 2001 22:44:47 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 23 Jul 2001 22:44:47 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA07463; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 15:40:26 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 81551 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 22:40:25          +0000
Received: from cisco.com (cypher.cisco.com [171.69.11.18]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA07446 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon,          23 Jul 2001 15:40:25 -0700
Received: (from billw@localhost) by cisco.com (8.8.8/2.6/Cisco List          Logging/8.8.8) id PAA12378; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 15:40:02 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID:  <CMM.0.90.4.995928002.billw@cypher>
Date:         Mon, 23 Jul 2001 15:40:02 PDT
Reply-To: "Bill Westfield" <billw@cisco.com>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "William Chops Westfield" <billw@cisco.com>
Subject:      Re: [AR] 2Re: Alternatives to patents?
Comments: To: "Bendel, Timothy B" <timothy.b.bendel@LMCO.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  Your message of Mon, 23 Jul 2001 16:01:35 -0600

    I am trying to weigh which approach would be more beneficial for a
    small aerospace company : public disclosure of everything so as to
    guard against "secrecy orders" and being sued by larger companies who
    patent your ideas, or patenting your technology and fighting the
    likely "secrecy orders" as un-Constitutional in court.

It depends on whether your lawyer(s) is on-staff or pay-per-hour :-)

The modern way to get rich is to start your small company with trade
secrets, and hope that the whole company gets bought by someone "big"
as they attempt to acquire that technology (and expertise in that
technology.  And I.P. associated with that technology.)  At least,
this worked up to about a year ago...

 :-(
BillW


From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 3533 invoked from network); 23 Jul 2001 22:46:00 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 23 Jul 2001 22:46:00 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: (qmail 19889 invoked from network); 23 Jul 2001 22:47:50 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 23 Jul 2001 22:47:50 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA07155; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 15:22:36 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 81481 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 22:22:35          +0000
Received: from cisco.com (cypher.cisco.com [171.69.11.18]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA07138 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon,          23 Jul 2001 15:22:35 -0700
Received: (from billw@localhost) by cisco.com (8.8.8/2.6/Cisco List          Logging/8.8.8) id PAA07510; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 15:21:33 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID:  <CMM.0.90.4.995926893.billw@cypher>
Date:         Mon, 23 Jul 2001 15:21:33 PDT
Reply-To: "Bill Westfield" <billw@cisco.com>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "William Chops Westfield" <billw@cisco.com>
Subject:      Re: [AR] 2Re: Alternatives to patents?
Comments: To: al bradley <abradley@toolcity.net>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  Your message of Mon, 23 Jul 2001 16:47:33 -0500 2001 10:29:59              -0600

    This line of thinking indicates that patents are essentially worth
    little to the private individual (the little guy) and that publication
    of an idea is little more than insurance from corporate lawsuits when
    the corporations might actually have pirated the little guy's ideas.

Um.  Yeah.  They're still probably better than nothing, especially if you
can get the patent without incurring $$$$$ in legal expenses.  There's a
whole slew of "intellectual property crisis" in todays world, centered
around advancement happening more quickly than it can be documented.
That's why there is so much interest in "counterculture" solutions like
"open source."


    Maybe so, but then, is it time to discard the all-American dream of
    devising something so special that it has economic worth to others?

There's still "trade secret" protection.  Like most source code.  And I
think MOST companies are more likely to pay you (what they consider
reasonable terms) for an idea than to steal it outright.  Shucks, I had
college project code that I put on the arpanet "stolen" by a company that
made it into a product, and they offered me some compensation once they
found me (not much, but it's the principle of the thing...)

BillW


From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 12095 invoked from network); 23 Jul 2001 22:48:00 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 23 Jul 2001 22:48:00 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 29628 invoked from network); 23 Jul 2001 22:50:06 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 23 Jul 2001 22:50:06 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA07507; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 15:42:53 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 81563 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 22:42:52          +0000
Received: from melete.ch.intel.com (chfdns02.ch.intel.com [143.182.246.25]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA07490 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 15:42:51 -0700
Received: from snmeng1.rr.intel.com (snmeng1.rr.intel.com [128.215.231.11]) by          melete.ch.intel.com (8.9.1a+p1/8.9.1/d: relay.m4,v 1.41 2001/07/09          21:06:22 root Exp $) with ESMTP id WAA27063; Mon, 23 Jul 2001          22:42:50 GMT
Received: from snmeng30.rr.intel.com (snmeng30.rr.intel.com [128.215.52.76]) by          snmeng1.rr.intel.com (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id QAA01785; Mon, 23          Jul 2001 16:40:01 -0600 (MDT)
Received: from snmeng30.rr.intel.com (snmeng30.rr.intel.com [128.215.52.76]) by          snmeng30.rr.intel.com (8.9.1a/8.9.1/d: client.m4,v 1.3 1998/09/29          16:36:11 sedayao Exp sedayao $) with SMTP id QAA17866; Mon, 23 Jul          2001 16:39:57 -0600 (MDT)
X-Mailer: dtmail 1.2.1 CDE Version 1.2.1 SunOS 5.6 sun4m sparc
X-Sun-Text-Type: ascii
Message-ID:  <200107232239.QAA17866@snmeng30.rr.intel.com>
Date:         Mon, 23 Jul 2001 16:39:57 -0600
Reply-To: "Ray Calkins 100660207" <rcalkins@SNMENG1.RR.INTEL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Ray Calkins 100660207" <rcalkins@SNMENG1.RR.INTEL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Stump remover as potassium nitrate
Comments: To: nickz5715@ABOUT.COM
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

> Nick asks:
> Is stump remover a pure enough from of potassium nitrate to use? Any
> brand that you would recomend?
I have been using Green Light brand, and it works, but they have started putting
something in it lately, in increasing quantities.  This seems to attack the
sugar, causing it to carmelize in my recipie, as compared to the technical grade
material or older bottles.  It doesn't seem to burn as fast either, not is it
consistient from bottle to bottle.  I'm about to switch to ag grade (when I find
a supplier), I'll let you know how it works out.

Richard Nakka has a web page detailing his experiments with stump remover:
http://members.aol.com/nonillion/kn-exp.html
I highly recommend it.


Ray Calkins
rcalkins@snmeng1.rr.intel.com           raymond.calkins@intel.com
"My opinions are my own, and do not reflect those of my employer."


From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 4507 invoked from network); 23 Jul 2001 22:53:24 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 23 Jul 2001 22:53:24 -0000
Received: (qmail 4291 invoked from network); 23 Jul 2001 22:55:09 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 23 Jul 2001 22:55:09 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA07587; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 15:45:38 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 81585 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 22:45:36          +0000
Received: from dune.gnc.net (root@dune.gnc.net [207.203.72.4]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA07570 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon,          23 Jul 2001 15:45:36 -0700
Received: from beowulf (sw2-20.gnc.net [207.203.72.100]) by dune.gnc.net          (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id SAA11438 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon,          23 Jul 2001 18:45:17 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
Importance: Normal
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <LPBBKJMJEOFKAMFJJNNHIENKCFAA.landofgrey@gnc.net>
Date:         Mon, 23 Jul 2001 18:44:34 -0400
Reply-To: <landofgrey@gnc.net>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Matthew Travis" <landofgrey@gnc.net>
Subject:      Re: [AR] 2Re: Alternatives to patents?
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010723173112.12105D-100000@spsystems.net>

On Mon, 23 Jul 2001, al bradley wrote:
> This line of thinking indicates that patents are essentially worth little
> to the private individual (the little guy) and that publication of an idea
> is little more than insurance from corporate lawsuits when the
corporations
> might actually have pirated the little guy's ideas.

If patents are that pointless, then why does just aobut every single
consumer product have a stamp of "Patent" or "Patent pend." on it? Patent
laws do indeed protect the "little guy" (of course, assuming the little guy
can afford a lawyer). They protect the patent-holder, period. It doesn't
matter if it's some joe schmoe little guy or AT&T. The laws are the same and
will protect the little guy. There are many examples of this in law history.
For rocketry, admittedly it's an old case, look at Esther Goddard. Robert
Goddard had over 200 patents in his name. Everyone used technology that
resembled his patents. However, the U.S. government, who, in the 1940's
employed Dr. Goddard, not only used his knowledge and knowledge of his
inventions, but did not license the inventions in his patents. Esther
Goddard sued the U.S. government and NASA in the late 1950's/1960's for
patent infringement, even though many of the patents were, by then, expired.
Still, the feds had no choice but to settle out of court for $1million.
Today, she'd probably get a $Bil. If executed and handled properly, patents
are still the best protection an inventor has. However, simply getting a
patent and then doing nothing is not going to give anyoen protection. The
government doesn't go out on its own searching for patent violators.
Enforcement begins with the patent-holder and his attorney. One must take
proactive steps to protect the patent. Once that is done, the courts almost
always side with the patent-holder. Being a defendent in a patent case is
*not* an enviable position, assuming the original patent is fully proper and
legal to begin with. Patent laws, like any laws, are not self-enforcing.
They require the victim to take action to protect himself and to seek
justice when wronged. The justice system will only enforce a patent
infirngement when the victim formally complains, seeks compensation, and
begins the process by going to the court system. If the victim doesn't start
the process, and be active throughout, then the justice system will not do
his work for him. That would be unethical and unconstitutional (and
totalitarian and socialist).

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 8699 invoked from network); 23 Jul 2001 23:08:28 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 23 Jul 2001 23:08:28 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 9515 invoked from network); 23 Jul 2001 23:09:47 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 23 Jul 2001 23:09:47 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA07783; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 16:06:18 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 81614 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 23:06:15          +0000
Received: from femail17.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail17.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.0.95.144]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA07766          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 16:06:15 -0700
Received: from home.com ([24.22.71.82]) by femail17.sdc1.sfba.home.com          (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20 201-229-121-120-20010223) with ESMTP id          <20010723230600.FMFR1000.femail17.sdc1.sfba.home.com@home.com> for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 16:06:00 -0700
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.75 [en] (Win98; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <LPBBKJMJEOFKAMFJJNNHCENJCFAA.landofgrey@gnc.net>            <3B5BF6C0.63E84320@biomicro.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B5CADEB.D1F512C8@home.com>
Date:         Mon, 23 Jul 2001 19:06:19 -0400
Reply-To: "Mark Simpson" <mark.simpson@HOME.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Mark Simpson" <mark.simpson@HOME.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] 3Re: [AR] 2Re: [AR] dark secrets
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Europe's a little tougher than that, Mark.  A published patent in the US makes it
impossible for someone to file for a patent on the same invention  in Europe. A
European patent must be filed before ANY disclosure to the public.  A US Patent
IS a public disclosure, therefore, making it unpatentable by a third party.

Mark Simpson


"Mark K. Spute" wrote:

> Remember that in the U.S. the patent rights go to the person who was first to
> invent the device or method.  In europe, it is simply the first to file.  So
> you could patent a new rocket motor or something here, but someone in Europe
> could find your patent, apply for a  Eurpean patent there before you did, and
> they would own the European patent rights.
>
> This is why most companies with intellectual property have a small (but very
> expensive) standing army of lawyers and registered patent agents on retainer.
>
> Matthew Travis wrote:
>
> > True. Also, patents are not mechanisms for a company to keep information
> > secret. They are a mechanism for a company to retain certain rights to
> > compensation when others use the invention. They do not protect the
> > invention, only the inventor's right to have first-use of the invention and
> > fair compensation for others' use of it. Also, patents are a mechanism
> > designed to enforce the right of people to use others' inventions legally.
> > That is, patents are to protect both the inventor and third parties wishing
> > to use the invention. Additionally, it is very difficult for a company
> > (absent national security concerns or export regulations) to patent and
> > invention and then refuse to license it. Indeed, it is almost impossible.
> > *That* requires litigation before a court system that does not favor such
> > action. In actuality, it is usually cheaper for a company to either buy the
> > inventor or license the invention for the 7 years that a patent is in force
> > than to try to truly bust the patent. Remember, patents are not forever. In
> > fact, the patent for the RSA encryption algorithm, just in the past year or
> > so, has run out and the algorithm is now usable by anyone without the
> > necessity of licensing.
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU]On
> > > Behalf Of Henry Spencer
> > >
> > >
> > > The extent of this sort of thing is much exaggerated... and patents are
> > > not much protection against it.  A sufficiently determined search can
> > > almost always find enough hints of prior art to break a patent, given
> > > plentiful resources.  And yes, a big company would usually prefer to bust
> > > your patent rather than license it.
>
> --
> Mark K. Spute
> Senior Research Engineer
> BioMicro Systems Inc.
>
> KD7IWE,  RRS
>
> "It is difficult to say what is impossible, for the dream of yesterday is the
> hope of today and the reality of tomorrow."
>      Dr. Robert H. Goddard

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 10160 invoked from network); 23 Jul 2001 23:23:36 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 23 Jul 2001 23:23:36 -0000
Received: (qmail 17819 invoked from network); 23 Jul 2001 23:23:07 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 23 Jul 2001 23:23:07 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA07892; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 16:16:22 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 81645 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 23:16:21          +0000
Received: from spsystems.net (spsystems.net [209.47.149.227]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA07875 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Mon,          23 Jul 2001 16:16:20 -0700
Received: (from henry@localhost) by spsystems.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id TAA15167;          Mon, 23 Jul 2001 19:15:46 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010723184835.12105K-100000@spsystems.net>
Date:         Mon, 23 Jul 2001 19:15:46 -0400
Reply-To: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] 3Re: [AR] 2Re: [AR] dark secrets
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <LPBBKJMJEOFKAMFJJNNHMENGCFAA.landofgrey@gnc.net>

On Mon, 23 Jul 2001, Matthew Travis wrote:
> ...It may also be a case where the
> government, also for security reasons, classifies the work as
> non-exportable, which then makes it nearly impossible for someone to talk
> about it in public forums (like this one) for fear of violating export
> restrictions.

Not so.  Discussion *in public* never violates US export restrictions,
because it is protected by Freedom Of Speech and/or Freedom Of The Press.
The only issue is violation of voluntary agreements that you have entered
into, such as nondisclosure agreements or security-clearance agreements.

One of the things I do for money is encryption software, and this issue
comes up a lot there, and it has been studied carefully by real lawyers.
There may be some lingering doubts about whether mailing lists are
"public" -- although they probably are -- but there is no question that
public discussion, in a natural language, is constitutionally protected.
(Whether non-natural-language material like program source code is also
covered is currently being fought out in the courts.)  You may have to
be careful not to spill company-confidential stuff or classified stuff,
but there is no export issue.

What gets you in trouble is talking to foreigners about it in *private*,
without getting the government's blessing first.

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 13918 invoked from network); 23 Jul 2001 23:24:27 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 23 Jul 2001 23:24:27 -0000
Received: (qmail 5525 invoked from network); 23 Jul 2001 23:26:33 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 23 Jul 2001 23:26:33 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA07942; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 16:21:32 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 81657 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 23:21:30          +0000
Received: from spsystems.net (spsystems.net [209.47.149.227]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA07925 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Mon,          23 Jul 2001 16:21:30 -0700
Received: (from henry@localhost) by spsystems.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id TAA15179;          Mon, 23 Jul 2001 19:20:55 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010723191819.12105L-100000@spsystems.net>
Date:         Mon, 23 Jul 2001 19:20:55 -0400
Reply-To: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] 3Re: [AR] 2Re: [AR] dark secrets
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <EDB5E5136094D311BF1800508B12205E08D2909C@emss02m07.ems.lmco.com>

On Mon, 23 Jul 2001, Bendel, Timothy B wrote:
> Could someone file for the patents on his/her new technology, and then
> immediately publish it, give open source presentations and put in on the
> web, before the patent is issued (or the Feds slap you with a "secrecy
> order")? It would be letting the cat out of the bag as far as "public
> knowledge" is concerned, but would establish you as the originator of the
> technology.

Possible at least in principle.  In fact, in the US you have up to a year
after public disclosure to file for the patent.  (However, in most other
countries you have to file before disclosing.)

Of course, if the Patent Office rejects the patent application, then you
no longer have the option of falling back on trade-secret protection.
(Trade-secret laws only protect actual secrets.)

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 8319 invoked from network); 23 Jul 2001 23:29:54 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 23 Jul 2001 23:29:54 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 20821 invoked from network); 23 Jul 2001 23:27:38 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 23 Jul 2001 23:27:38 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA07975; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 16:23:48 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 81665 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 23:23:47          +0000
Received: from brighton.legacywireless.com (legacywireless.com [208.187.126.2])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA07958 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 16:23:47 -0700
Received: from [208.187.122.40] by brighton.cogolink.com (NTMail          5.00.0010/NY4701.00.0f189dc1) with ESMTP id jmayoaaa for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 17:32:38 -0600
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.77 [en] (Win98; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <LPBBKJMJEOFKAMFJJNNHCENJCFAA.landofgrey@gnc.net>            <3B5BF6C0.63E84320@biomicro.com> <3B5CADEB.D1F512C8@home.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B5C00F7.7B72E0CD@biomicro.com>
Date:         Mon, 23 Jul 2001 04:48:23 -0600
Reply-To: "Mark K. Spute" <mks@BIOMICRO.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Mark K. Spute" <mks@BIOMICRO.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] 3Re: [AR] 2Re: [AR] dark secrets
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Ooops!

Yup, I forgot about the public disclosure part.



Mark Simpson wrote:

> Europe's a little tougher than that, Mark.  A published patent in the US makes it
> impossible for someone to file for a patent on the same invention  in Europe. A
> European patent must be filed before ANY disclosure to the public.  A US Patent
> IS a public disclosure, therefore, making it unpatentable by a third party.
>
> Mark Simpson
>
> "Mark K. Spute" wrote:
>
> > Remember that in the U.S. the patent rights go to the person who was first to
> > invent the device or method.  In europe, it is simply the first to file.  So
> > you could patent a new rocket motor or something here, but someone in Europe
> > could find your patent, apply for a  Eurpean patent there before you did, and
> > they would own the European patent rights.
> >
> > This is why most companies with intellectual property have a small (but very
> > expensive) standing army of lawyers and registered patent agents on retainer.
> >
> > Matthew Travis wrote:
> >
> > > True. Also, patents are not mechanisms for a company to keep information
> > > secret. They are a mechanism for a company to retain certain rights to
> > > compensation when others use the invention. They do not protect the
> > > invention, only the inventor's right to have first-use of the invention and
> > > fair compensation for others' use of it. Also, patents are a mechanism
> > > designed to enforce the right of people to use others' inventions legally.
> > > That is, patents are to protect both the inventor and third parties wishing
> > > to use the invention. Additionally, it is very difficult for a company
> > > (absent national security concerns or export regulations) to patent and
> > > invention and then refuse to license it. Indeed, it is almost impossible.
> > > *That* requires litigation before a court system that does not favor such
> > > action. In actuality, it is usually cheaper for a company to either buy the
> > > inventor or license the invention for the 7 years that a patent is in force
> > > than to try to truly bust the patent. Remember, patents are not forever. In
> > > fact, the patent for the RSA encryption algorithm, just in the past year or
> > > so, has run out and the algorithm is now usable by anyone without the
> > > necessity of licensing.
> > >
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU]On
> > > > Behalf Of Henry Spencer
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > The extent of this sort of thing is much exaggerated... and patents are
> > > > not much protection against it.  A sufficiently determined search can
> > > > almost always find enough hints of prior art to break a patent, given
> > > > plentiful resources.  And yes, a big company would usually prefer to bust
> > > > your patent rather than license it.
> >
> > --
> > Mark K. Spute
> > Senior Research Engineer
> > BioMicro Systems Inc.
> >
> > KD7IWE,  RRS
> >
> > "It is difficult to say what is impossible, for the dream of yesterday is the
> > hope of today and the reality of tomorrow."
> >      Dr. Robert H. Goddard

--
Mark K. Spute
Senior Research Engineer
BioMicro Systems Inc.

KD7IWE,  RRS

"It is difficult to say what is impossible, for the dream of yesterday is the hope of
today and the reality of tomorrow."
     Dr. Robert H. Goddard

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 6697 invoked from network); 23 Jul 2001 23:49:57 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 23 Jul 2001 23:49:57 -0000
Received: (qmail 10626 invoked from network); 23 Jul 2001 23:52:02 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 23 Jul 2001 23:52:02 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA08136; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 16:46:25 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 81700 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 23:46:22          +0000
Received: from spsystems.net (spsystems.net [209.47.149.227]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA08119 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Mon,          23 Jul 2001 16:46:22 -0700
Received: (from henry@localhost) by spsystems.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id TAA15433;          Mon, 23 Jul 2001 19:45:47 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010723193849.12105N-100000@spsystems.net>
Date:         Mon, 23 Jul 2001 19:45:47 -0400
Reply-To: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] 2Re: Alternatives to patents?
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <LPBBKJMJEOFKAMFJJNNHIENKCFAA.landofgrey@gnc.net>

On Mon, 23 Jul 2001, Matthew Travis wrote:
> If patents are that pointless, then why does just aobut every single
> consumer product have a stamp of "Patent" or "Patent pend." on it?

Because almost any widely-sold consumer product, practically by
definition, comes from either a big company or a medium-sized company
that's aiming to get big.  Small companies simply cannot afford to get
into those markets.

Nobody said that patents were pointless for big companies.  But if you're
small, your effort is almost certainly better spent on making and selling
better products than on paying lawyers to sue patent infringers.

(Well, one exception:  if your business plan calls for a big company to
buy you out at some point, you want to maximize your value to them, even
if it's counterproductive in terms of actual results.)

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 20090 invoked from network); 23 Jul 2001 23:53:11 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 23 Jul 2001 23:53:11 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 24881 invoked from network); 23 Jul 2001 23:54:56 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 23 Jul 2001 23:54:56 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA08024; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 16:32:19 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 81673 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 23:31:56          +0000
Received: from smtp01.roc.gblx.net (smtp01.roc.gblx.net [209.130.222.196]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA08006 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 16:31:55 -0700
Received: (from daemon@localhost) by smtp01.roc.gblx.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id          TAA85904 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 19:30:55 -0400
Received: from 64-208-225-165.nas3.TBR.gblx.net(64.208.225.165),          claiming to be "frontiernet.net" via SMTP by smtp01.roc.gblx.net,          id smtpdov9g7a; Mon Jul 23 19:30:41 2001
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.74 [en] (Win98; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: Conversation <005a01c112d3$e9499e80$4750153f@default> with last            message <005a01c112d3$e9499e80$4750153f@default>            <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B5CB4B8.DF66929D@frontiernet.net>
Date:         Mon, 23 Jul 2001 19:35:20 -0400
Reply-To: <tbinford@frontiernet.net>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Tom Binford" <tbinford@frontiernet.net>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Erosive Burning
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Troy Prideaux wrote:
>

> I've ran C-Slot motors at core:throat area ratios of ~1.89 @approx 800 Psi
> with a measured propellant Isp of 223sec and encounted noticeable yet small
> erosive burning spikes that didn't exceed (reach actually) the max
> operating pressure of the motors (reasonably neutral) burn profile. I can
> send a load cell curve through to illustrate what an erosive burning spike
> may look like if that help at all.
>

You can get a good example from comparing the thrust curves of the
commercially available motors at the Tripoli motor testing pages.
Compare the Ellis Mountain L300, L600, and M1000. These have the same
geometry except the number of BATES grains.

Tom

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 18797 invoked from network); 24 Jul 2001 00:20:23 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 24 Jul 2001 00:20:23 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: (qmail 26099 invoked from network); 24 Jul 2001 00:21:40 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 24 Jul 2001 00:21:40 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA08396; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 17:17:58 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 81757 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 24 Jul 2001 00:17:55          +0000
Received: from cisco.com (cypher.cisco.com [171.69.11.18]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA08379 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon,          23 Jul 2001 17:17:55 -0700
Received: (from billw@localhost) by cisco.com (8.8.8/2.6/Cisco List          Logging/8.8.8) id RAA12488 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Mon, 23 Jul 2001          17:17:24 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID:  <CMM.0.90.4.995933844.billw@cypher>
Date:         Mon, 23 Jul 2001 17:17:24 PDT
Reply-To: "Bill Westfield" <billw@cisco.com>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "William Chops Westfield" <billw@cisco.com>
Subject:      Re: [AR] 2Re: Alternatives to patents?
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  Your message of Mon, 23 Jul 2001 19:45:47 -0400

> If patents are that pointless, then why does just aobut every single
> consumer product have a stamp of "Patent" or "Patent pend." on it?

I've heard of something called a "design patent" that's apparently somewhat
like a copyright for non-written goods.  It supposedly prevents someone from
copying your design exactly (closely?), even though there's no patentable
new idea involved.  These are easier, cheaper, and quicker to obtain that
'real' patents, and I suspect many of the retail device patents are of that
sort, and have been done for "prestige value" more than anything else.

I've no actual experience with 'design patents', so all of the above is
vague heresay...

BillW


From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 26732 invoked from network); 24 Jul 2001 00:22:10 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 24 Jul 2001 00:22:10 -0000
Received: (qmail 17093 invoked from network); 24 Jul 2001 00:24:16 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 24 Jul 2001 00:24:16 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA08452; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 17:19:24 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 81773 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 24 Jul 2001 00:19:23          +0000
Received: from wrench.toolcity.net (root@wrench.toolcity.net [208.0.188.2]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA08435 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 17:19:23 -0700
Received: from [63.169.101.22]          (dap-63-169-101-22.meadville-tnt-1.pa.toolcity.net [63.169.101.22])          by wrench.toolcity.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id UAA20286; Mon, 23          Jul 2001 20:18:02 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <v01510101b7827d8c41ae@[63.169.101.22]>
Date:         Mon, 23 Jul 2001 20:20:21 -0500
Reply-To: "al bradley" <abradley@TOOLCITY.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "al bradley" <abradley@TOOLCITY.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Stump remover as potassium nitrate
Comments: To: rcalkins@snmeng1.rr.intel.com
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

>> Nick asks:
>> Is stump remover a pure enough from of potassium nitrate to use? Any
>> brand that you would recomend?
>I have been using Green Light brand, and it works, but they have started
>putting
>something in it lately, in increasing quantities.  This seems to attack the
>sugar, causing it to carmelize in my recipie, as compared to the technical
>grade
>material or older bottles.  It doesn't seem to burn as fast either, not is it
>consistient from bottle to bottle.  I'm about to switch to ag grade (when
>I find
>a supplier), I'll let you know how it works out.
>
>Richard Nakka has a web page detailing his experiments with stump remover:
>http://members.aol.com/nonillion/kn-exp.html
>I highly recommend it.
>
>
>Ray Calkins
>rcalkins@snmeng1.rr.intel.com           raymond.calkins@intel.com
>"My opinions are my own, and do not reflect those of my employer."

------------------------------------------------------------------
Can you live Life with this?: "Unless there is a law, an agreement, or a
long-standing custom, No one `Deserves' Anything -- Either Good or Bad!"

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 27610 invoked from network); 24 Jul 2001 00:22:22 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 24 Jul 2001 00:22:22 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 17123 invoked from network); 24 Jul 2001 00:24:27 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 24 Jul 2001 00:24:27 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA08422; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 17:18:42 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 81765 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 24 Jul 2001 00:18:41          +0000
Received: from imo-r08.mx.aol.com (imo-r08.mx.aol.com [152.163.225.104]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA08405 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 17:18:40 -0700
Received: from Sociald84@aol.com by imo-r08.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v31.9.) id          t.16.fb89895 (3992); Mon, 23 Jul 2001 20:18:19 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: AOL 5.0 for Windows sub 138
Message-ID:  <16.fb89895.288e18cb@aol.com>
Date:         Mon, 23 Jul 2001 20:18:19 EDT
Reply-To: <Sociald84@AOL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <Sociald84@AOL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] More about that Z/S book
Comments: To: bkosko1@home.com
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

I think the difference in static vs. dynamic burnrates is cause by inertia. I
other words the rocket accelerates so quickly that the propellant wants to
stay where it is and burns a lot faster.

Mark

In a message dated 7/23/01 12:28:13 AM Mountain Daylight Time,
bkosko1@HOME.COM writes:

> I had a chance to look at this book a little more this weekend. It has some
> very interesting data. One was the creation of solid Z/S by melting the mix
> at 150 deg or so, then pouring it into the motor. They got a density of 4 g/
> cc or so, plus a higher Isp.
>
>  Another interesting observation they made was that the static tests didn't
> seem to correlate to the actual flight of the motor. They observed a much
> higher burn rate in the rocket vs the static test of the same motor. This
was
> something they recently observed and they had no explanation for it.
>
>  All in all, some interesting stuff if you want to use Z/S.
>
>
> Brian

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 29571 invoked from network); 24 Jul 2001 00:29:28 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 24 Jul 2001 00:29:28 -0000
Received: (qmail 5897 invoked from network); 24 Jul 2001 00:31:13 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 24 Jul 2001 00:31:13 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA08515; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 17:26:56 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 81785 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 24 Jul 2001 00:26:55          +0000
Received: from wrench.toolcity.net (root@wrench.toolcity.net [208.0.188.2]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA08498 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 17:26:54 -0700
Received: from [63.169.101.22]          (dap-63-169-101-22.meadville-tnt-1.pa.toolcity.net [63.169.101.22])          by wrench.toolcity.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id UAA22857; Mon, 23          Jul 2001 20:25:32 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <v01510102b7827ee39240@[63.169.101.22]>
Date:         Mon, 23 Jul 2001 20:27:51 -0500
Reply-To: "al bradley" <abradley@TOOLCITY.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "al bradley" <abradley@TOOLCITY.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Stump remover as potassium nitrate
Comments: To: Ray Calkins 100660207 <rcalkins@snmeng1.rr.intel.com>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Among other things you might find a supplier of green-house fertilizers for
ag grade of KNO3.
-------------------
>> Nick asks:
>> Is stump remover a pure enough from of potassium nitrate to use? Any
>> brand that you would recomend?
>I have been using Green Light brand, and it works, but they have started
>putting
>something in it lately, in increasing quantities.  This seems to attack the
>sugar, causing it to carmelize in my recipie, as compared to the technical
>grade
>material or older bottles.  It doesn't seem to burn as fast either, not is it
>consistient from bottle to bottle.  I'm about to switch to ag grade (when
>I find
>a supplier), I'll let you know how it works out.
>
>Richard Nakka has a web page detailing his experiments with stump remover:
>http://members.aol.com/nonillion/kn-exp.html
>I highly recommend it.
>
>
>Ray Calkins
>rcalkins@snmeng1.rr.intel.com           raymond.calkins@intel.com
>"My opinions are my own, and do not reflect those of my employer."

------------------------------------------------------------------
Can you live Life with this?: "Unless there is a law, an agreement, or a
long-standing custom, No one `Deserves' Anything -- Either Good or Bad!"

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 18412 invoked from network); 24 Jul 2001 00:54:07 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 24 Jul 2001 00:54:07 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 22353 invoked from network); 24 Jul 2001 00:56:13 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 24 Jul 2001 00:56:13 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA08612; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 17:44:25 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 81806 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 24 Jul 2001 00:44:15          +0000
Received: from imo-r03.mx.aol.com (imo-r03.mx.aol.com [152.163.225.99]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA08594 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 17:44:15 -0700
Received: from Sociald84@aol.com by imo-r03.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v31.9.) id          t.84.192506a0 (3992); Mon, 23 Jul 2001 20:43:57 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: AOL 5.0 for Windows sub 138
Message-ID:  <84.192506a0.288e1ed0@aol.com>
Date:         Mon, 23 Jul 2001 20:44:00 EDT
Reply-To: <Sociald84@AOL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <Sociald84@AOL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Alternatives to patents?
Comments: To: mark.simpson@home.com
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Getting a patent doesn't give you any exclusivity. It gives you a right to
exclusivity. To actually get it you have to fight for it. However you forfiet
that right as soon as you let someone violate it. If you find out about a
company building your patented object but they're not taking any of your real
business and you decide to do nothing about it, it negates your ability to
sue someone else who is seriously violating your patent.

Mark

In a message dated 7/23/01 4:21:36 PM Mountain Daylight Time,
mark.simpson@HOME.COM writes:

> I'm having an increasingly difficult time following the logic in this
thread.
>  Publishing an idea instead of patenting it does nothing for you. Patenting
> it
>  give you 20 years of exclusivity. No contest. Patent whenever possible
> unless the
>  object being patented would be impossible for someone else to duplicate,
> like
>  Coca Cola's formula, for instance.  I live in the world of chemicals and
the
> best
>  chance that you have of making money is t

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 28459 invoked from network); 24 Jul 2001 01:02:55 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 24 Jul 2001 01:02:55 -0000
Received: (qmail 17098 invoked from network); 24 Jul 2001 01:04:41 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 24 Jul 2001 01:04:41 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA08719; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 17:59:12 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 81831 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 24 Jul 2001 00:59:07          +0000
Received: from dune.gnc.net (root@dune.gnc.net [207.203.72.4]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA08702 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon,          23 Jul 2001 17:59:06 -0700
Received: from beowulf (sw2-20.gnc.net [207.203.72.100]) by dune.gnc.net          (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id UAA14303 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon,          23 Jul 2001 20:59:07 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
Importance: Normal
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <LPBBKJMJEOFKAMFJJNNHIENNCFAA.landofgrey@gnc.net>
Date:         Mon, 23 Jul 2001 20:57:58 -0400
Reply-To: <landofgrey@gnc.net>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Matthew Travis" <landofgrey@gnc.net>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Alternatives to patents?
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <84.192506a0.288e1ed0@aol.com>

Not total exclusivity. It gives the patent-holder first-rights to the
invention. It also requires any other users to license (sompensate) the
patent-holder for the use of it. Other user's than the patent-holder have
the right to seek a license, i.e. the fair compensation for fair usage
principal. Accordingly, outright refusal to grant a license is not generally
permissable. What is permissable is for the patent-holder to specify the
requirements for getting a license, which enables the patent-holder to set
requirements such that no-one is able (or wants) to obtain a license,
usually by non-disclosure agreements, derived product ownership agreements,
or non-disclosure and usage limitation agreements.


> In a message dated 7/23/01 4:21:36 PM Mountain Daylight Time,
> mark.simpson@HOME.COM writes:
>
> > I'm having an increasingly difficult time following the logic in this
> thread.
> >  Publishing an idea instead of patenting it does nothing for
> you. Patenting
> > it
> >  give you 20 years of exclusivity. No contest. Patent whenever possible
> > unless the
> >  object being patented would be impossible for someone else to
> duplicate,
>

Far more often than not, it is beneficial to seek a patent. Also, this is
often the only way someone finds out that their "revolutionary" idea was
patented by Dow or someone decades earlier (people often don't think to do a
patent search except when applying for one). There are many benefits to
seeking a patent. Ditto for copyrights and trademarks.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 3026 invoked from network); 24 Jul 2001 01:17:32 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 24 Jul 2001 01:17:32 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 1754 invoked from network); 24 Jul 2001 01:14:35 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 24 Jul 2001 01:14:35 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA08787; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 18:06:02 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 81846 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 24 Jul 2001 01:05:59          +0000
Received: from iron.carolina.net (iron.carolina.net [208.170.147.84]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA08770 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 18:05:59 -0700
Received: from ac.net (ip31-as5300-1-7lakes-nc.carolina.net [206.100.51.31]) by          iron.carolina.net (Vircom SMTPRS 5.0.193) with ESMTP id          <B0002784469@iron.carolina.net>; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 21:20:48 -0400
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Win 9x 4.90; en-US; m18) Gecko/20001108            Netscape6/6.0
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <84.192506a0.288e1ed0@aol.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B5CC9EF.7060203@ac.net>
Date:         Mon, 23 Jul 2001 21:05:51 -0400
Reply-To: "Bill Shamblin" <wshamblin@AC.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Bill Shamblin" <wshamblin@AC.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Alternatives to patents?
Comments: To: Sociald84@AOL.COM
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

I once had an employer who had a number of patents relating to auto
racing. He told me, one time, that he knew of someone copying one of his
products. He said he was going to wait for a while, and let them make
some money off of it, and then go after them. Sort of let them make some
money for him. ;^} I don't know how it turned out, but I've always
wondered if that would really work...
Bill KU4QB

Sociald84@AOL.COM wrote:

> Getting a patent doesn't give you any exclusivity. It gives you a right to
> exclusivity. To actually get it you have to fight for it. However you forfiet
> that right as soon as you let someone violate it. If you find out about a
> company building your patented object but they're not taking any of your real
> business and you decide to do nothing about it, it negates your ability to
> sue someone else who is seriously violating your patent.
>
> Mark
>
> In a message dated 7/23/01 4:21:36 PM Mountain Daylight Time,
> mark.simpson@HOME.COM writes:
>
>> I'm having an increasingly difficult time following the logic in this
>
> thread.
>
>>  Publishing an idea instead of patenting it does nothing for you. Patenting
>> it
>>  give you 20 years of exclusivity. No contest. Patent whenever possible
>> unless the
>>  object being patented would be impossible for someone else to duplicate,
>> like
>>  Coca Cola's formula, for instance.  I live in the world of chemicals and
>
> the
>
>> best
>>  chance that you have of making money is t
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 4092 invoked from network); 24 Jul 2001 01:17:45 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 24 Jul 2001 01:17:45 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 22525 invoked from network); 24 Jul 2001 01:19:32 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 24 Jul 2001 01:19:32 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA08825; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 18:10:02 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 81854 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 24 Jul 2001 01:10:00          +0000
Received: from inet03.citec.qld.gov.au (firewall-user@inet03.citec.qld.gov.au          [203.5.10.10]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA08803          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 18:09:59 -0700
Received: by inet03.citec.qld.gov.au; id LAA27909; Tue, 24 Jul 2001 11:09:58          +1000 (EST)
Received: from citec.com.au(pcux.citec.qld.gov.au 147.132.17.12) by          inet03.citec.qld.gov.au via smap (V2.0) id xma027291; Tue, 24 Jul 01          11:09:39 +1000
Received: from CITEC-Message_Server by citec.com.au with Novell_GroupWise; Tue,          24 Jul 2001 11:09:22 +1000
X-Mailer: Novell GroupWise 5.5.4
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by itc.uci.edu id SAA08809
Message-ID:  <sb5d5762.075@citec.com.au>
Date:         Tue, 24 Jul 2001 11:09:04 +1000
Reply-To: "Des Bromilow" <Des.Bromilow@CITEC.COM.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Des Bromilow" <Des.Bromilow@CITEC.COM.AU>
Subject:      [AR] OT: 320x240 camera Q
Comments: To: Sociald84@AOL.COM
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Hi ,

quick question.. I've been meaning to grab a digital camera for ages now, but never been able to afford a really good one.
Dick Smith is curetnyl offering the 320x240 ones for $70 AUD and I'm wonderign what pictures out of one of these look like (having problems imagining the resolution)

Uses... framing up ideas, possibly some webpage stuff, and introducung my kids to cameras without the cost of film and processing.

thoughts?

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 3498 invoked from network); 24 Jul 2001 01:39:09 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 24 Jul 2001 01:39:09 -0000
Received: (qmail 29782 invoked from network); 24 Jul 2001 01:40:57 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 24 Jul 2001 01:40:57 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA08997; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 18:37:00 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 81883 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 24 Jul 2001 01:36:58          +0000
Received: from spsystems.net (spsystems.net [209.47.149.227]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA08980 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Mon,          23 Jul 2001 18:36:58 -0700
Received: (from henry@localhost) by spsystems.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id VAA18865;          Mon, 23 Jul 2001 21:36:23 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010723213441.12105Y-100000@spsystems.net>
Date:         Mon, 23 Jul 2001 21:36:23 -0400
Reply-To: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Alternatives to patents?
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <3B5CC9EF.7060203@ac.net>

On Mon, 23 Jul 2001, Bill Shamblin wrote:
> ...He said he was going to wait for a while, and let them make
> some money off of it, and then go after them. Sort of let them make some
> money for him. ;^} I don't know how it turned out, but I've always
> wondered if that would really work...

I suspect it might depend on how many people he told about this little
scheme. :-)  The courts have a tendency to think that if you're not
aggressively enforcing your rights, you don't care all that much; this can
affect things like the size of damages awarded.

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 23394 invoked from network); 24 Jul 2001 01:43:42 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 24 Jul 2001 01:43:42 -0000
Received: (qmail 18454 invoked from network); 24 Jul 2001 01:39:31 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 24 Jul 2001 01:39:31 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA08959; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 18:36:00 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 81875 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 24 Jul 2001 01:35:54          +0000
Received: from c002.snv.cp.net (c002-h000.c002.snv.cp.net [209.228.32.164]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id SAA08942 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 18:35:54 -0700
Received: (cpmta 17469 invoked from network); 23 Jul 2001 18:35:18 -0700
Received: from 1Cust172.tnt3.williamsburg.va.da.uu.net (HELO default)          (63.15.116.172) by smtp.peoplepc.com (209.228.32.164) with SMTP; 23          Jul 2001 18:35:18 -0700
X-Sent: 24 Jul 2001 01:35:18 GMT
References:  <v01510101b7827d8c41ae@[63.169.101.22]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <000b01c113e2$7b476e20$ac740f3f@default>
Date:         Mon, 23 Jul 2001 21:46:35 -0400
Reply-To: "David Muesing" <dmuesing@PEOPLEPC.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "David Muesing" <dmuesing@PEOPLEPC.COM>
Subject:      [AR] Potassium Nitrate---K-Power
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Some of us use K-Power made by Vicksburg Chemical Company in Vicksburg, MS.
I got a 50# bag of prills for $15. You can take a look at what they offer
and where to get it at:  www.kpower.com

Stay away from Peters Water Soluble KN. It makes the finished grain very
very slow to harden even when cooled.

Dave Muesing



----- Original Message -----
From: "al bradley" <abradley@TOOLCITY.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Monday, July 23, 2001 9:20 PM
Subject: Re: [AR] Stump remover as potassium nitrate


> >> Nick asks:
> >> Is stump remover a pure enough from of potassium nitrate to use? Any
> >> brand that you would recomend?
> >I have been using Green Light brand, and it works, but they have started
> >putting
> >something in it lately, in increasing quantities.  This seems to attack
the
> >sugar, causing it to carmelize in my recipie, as compared to the
technical
> >grade
> >material or older bottles.  It doesn't seem to burn as fast either, not
is it
> >consistient from bottle to bottle.  I'm about to switch to ag grade (when
> >I find
> >a supplier), I'll let you know how it works out.
> >
> >Richard Nakka has a web page detailing his experiments with stump
remover:
> >http://members.aol.com/nonillion/kn-exp.html
> >I highly recommend it.
> >
> >
> >Ray Calkins
> >rcalkins@snmeng1.rr.intel.com           raymond.calkins@intel.com
> >"My opinions are my own, and do not reflect those of my employer."
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------
> Can you live Life with this?: "Unless there is a law, an agreement, or a
> long-standing custom, No one `Deserves' Anything -- Either Good or Bad!"
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 5831 invoked from network); 24 Jul 2001 01:46:31 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 24 Jul 2001 01:46:31 -0000
Received: (qmail 2463 invoked from network); 24 Jul 2001 01:48:15 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 24 Jul 2001 01:48:15 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA09066; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 18:43:32 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 81891 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 24 Jul 2001 01:43:30          +0000
Received: from spsystems.net (spsystems.net [209.47.149.227]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA09049 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Mon,          23 Jul 2001 18:43:29 -0700
Received: (from henry@localhost) by spsystems.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id VAA18921;          Mon, 23 Jul 2001 21:42:54 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010723213939.12105Z-100000@spsystems.net>
Date:         Mon, 23 Jul 2001 21:42:54 -0400
Reply-To: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] OT: 320x240 camera Q
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <sb5d5762.075@citec.com.au>

On Tue, 24 Jul 2001, Des Bromilow wrote:
> Dick Smith is curetnyl offering the 320x240 ones for $70 AUD and I'm
> wonderign what pictures out of one of these look like...

By quick rule of thumb, they'll start to look grainy if you print them
larger than a few centimeters on a side.  Fine for experimenting, for
small snapshots, for images that are going to appear *small* on a web
page.  They'll give you a general impression of a scene, but will be
useless for anything where you want people to see detail.

I'd say go for it -- if nothing else, the kids will have fun, and it'll
tell you whether it's worth your while to spring for a better one.

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 12664 invoked from network); 24 Jul 2001 02:29:23 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 24 Jul 2001 02:29:23 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 16091 invoked from network); 24 Jul 2001 02:30:43 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 24 Jul 2001 02:30:43 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA09315; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 19:26:17 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 81958 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 24 Jul 2001 02:26:12          +0000
Received: from femail17.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail17.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.0.95.144]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA09297          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 19:26:11 -0700
Received: from home.com ([24.22.71.82]) by femail17.sdc1.sfba.home.com          (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20 201-229-121-120-20010223) with ESMTP id          <20010724022605.NBUA11963.femail17.sdc1.sfba.home.com@home.com>; Mon,          23 Jul 2001 19:26:05 -0700
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.75 [en] (Win98; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <84.192506a0.288e1ed0@aol.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B5CDD03.8C47FC21@home.com>
Date:         Mon, 23 Jul 2001 22:27:15 -0400
Reply-To: "Mark Simpson" <mark.simpson@HOME.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Mark Simpson" <mark.simpson@HOME.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Alternatives to patents?
Comments: To: Sociald84@AOL.COM
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

It seems like many have a very skewed view of the rights granted to a patent
holder.  If I catch someone violating my patent, he gets a registered letter
informing him that he's infringing and politely asking him to stop.  The next
step is to file an infringement suit if the party continues to infringe.  If the
party is found to be knowingly violating your patent, you are entitled to 3X
damages, which includes your legal fees.
I've dealt with a number of patent infringement issues over the past 20 years and
I can guarantee you that any company that disregards a warning that they are
clearly violating a patent pays through the nose and doesn't last very long.
If our patent laws had no teeth to them, we'd be a third world country right
now.  Anyone that thinks differently is misinformed.
And you don't have to be a large company or have the greatest lawyers in the
world; if there's a clear violation, it's a no-brainer.

Mark Simpson

Sociald84@AOL.COM wrote:

> Getting a patent doesn't give you any exclusivity. It gives you a right to
> exclusivity. To actually get it you have to fight for it. However you forfiet
> that right as soon as you let someone violate it. If you find out about a
> company building your patented object but they're not taking any of your real
> business and you decide to do nothing about it, it negates your ability to
> sue someone else who is seriously violating your patent.
>
> Mark
>
> In a message dated 7/23/01 4:21:36 PM Mountain Daylight Time,
> mark.simpson@HOME.COM writes:
>
> > I'm having an increasingly difficult time following the logic in this
> thread.
> >  Publishing an idea instead of patenting it does nothing for you. Patenting
> > it
> >  give you 20 years of exclusivity. No contest. Patent whenever possible
> > unless the
> >  object being patented would be impossible for someone else to duplicate,
> > like
> >  Coca Cola's formula, for instance.  I live in the world of chemicals and
> the
> > best
> >  chance that you have of making money is t

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 20473 invoked from network); 24 Jul 2001 02:45:12 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 24 Jul 2001 02:45:12 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 22646 invoked from network); 24 Jul 2001 02:47:17 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 24 Jul 2001 02:47:17 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA09448; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 19:42:32 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 81991 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 24 Jul 2001 02:42:30          +0000
Received: from femail18.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail18.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.0.95.145]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA09431          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 19:42:30 -0700
Received: from home.com ([24.22.71.82]) by femail18.sdc1.sfba.home.com          (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20 201-229-121-120-20010223) with ESMTP id          <20010724024207.KCGG10527.femail18.sdc1.sfba.home.com@home.com>; Mon,          23 Jul 2001 19:42:07 -0700
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.75 [en] (Win98; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <LPBBKJMJEOFKAMFJJNNHIENNCFAA.landofgrey@gnc.net>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0A39_01C56B69.43EB7650"
Message-ID:  <3B5CE0C1.B558170F@home.com>
Date:         Mon, 23 Jul 2001 22:43:13 -0400
Reply-To: "Mark Simpson" <mark.simpson@HOME.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Mark Simpson" <mark.simpson@HOME.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Alternatives to patents?
Comments: To: landofgrey@GNC.NET
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0A39_01C56B69.43EB7650
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

US Code Title 35-Patents
Section 271D (d) No patent owner otherwise entitled to relief for infringement
or contributory
     infringement of a patent shall be denied relief or deemed guilty of misuse
or illegal
     extension of the patent right by reason of his having done one or more of
the following: (1)
     derived revenue from acts which if performed by another without his consent
would
     constitute contributory infringement of the patent; (2) licensed or
authorized another to
     perform acts which if performed without his consent would constitute
contributory
     infringement of the patent; (3) sought to enforce his patent rights against
infringement or
     contributory infringement; (4) refused to license or use any rights to the
patent; or (5)
     conditioned the license of any rights to the patent or the sale of the
patented product on
     the acquisition of a license to rights in another patent or purchase of a
separate product,
     unless, in view of the circumstances, the patent owner has market power in
the relevant
     market for the patent or patented product on which the license or sale is
conditioned.

If I hold a legal patent, I have exclusivity unless I chose to license it to
someone else. I can't be compelled to do so. That would violate the fundamental
purpose for acquiring the patent in the first place.
The cavaet to this is any invention made with recombinant DNA or similar
technology. All bets are off in this area.

Mark Simpson

Matthew Travis wrote:

> Not total exclusivity. It gives the patent-holder first-rights to the
> invention. It also requires any other users to license (sompensate) the
> patent-holder for the use of it. Other user's than the patent-holder have
> the right to seek a license, i.e. the fair compensation for fair usage
> principal. Accordingly, outright refusal to grant a license is not generally
> permissable. What is permissable is for the patent-holder to specify the
> requirements for getting a license, which enables the patent-holder to set
> requirements such that no-one is able (or wants) to obtain a license,
> usually by non-disclosure agreements, derived product ownership agreements,
> or non-disclosure and usage limitation agreements.
>
> > In a message dated 7/23/01 4:21:36 PM Mountain Daylight Time,
> > mark.simpson@HOME.COM writes:
> >
> > > I'm having an increasingly difficult time following the logic in this
> > thread.
> > >  Publishing an idea instead of patenting it does nothing for
> > you. Patenting
> > > it
> > >  give you 20 years of exclusivity. No contest. Patent whenever possible
> > > unless the
> > >  object being patented would be impossible for someone else to
> > duplicate,
> >
>
> Far more often than not, it is beneficial to seek a patent. Also, this is
> often the only way someone finds out that their "revolutionary" idea was
> patented by Dow or someone decades earlier (people often don't think to do a
> patent search except when applying for one). There are many benefits to
> seeking a patent. Ditto for copyrights and trademarks.

------=_NextPart_000_0A39_01C56B69.43EB7650
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<!doctype html public "-//w3c//dtd html 4.0 transitional//en">
<html>
US Code Title 35-Patents
<br>Section 271D (d) No patent owner otherwise entitled to relief for infringement
or contributory
<br>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; infringement of a patent shall be denied relief
or deemed guilty of misuse or illegal
<br>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; extension of the patent right by reason of
his having done one or more of the following: (1)
<br>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; derived revenue from acts which if performed
by another without his consent would
<br>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; constitute contributory infringement of the
patent; (2) licensed or authorized another to
<br>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; perform acts which if performed without his
consent would constitute contributory
<br>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; infringement of the patent; (3) sought to
enforce his patent rights against infringement or
<br>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; contributory infringement; <b><i>(4) refused
to license or use any rights to the patent; </i></b>or (5)
<br>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; conditioned the license of any rights to the
patent or the sale of the patented product on
<br>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; the acquisition of a license to rights in
another patent or purchase of a separate product,
<br>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; unless, in view of the circumstances, the
patent owner has market power in the relevant
<br>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; market for the patent or patented product
on which the license or sale is conditioned.
<p>If I hold a legal patent, I have exclusivity unless <b>I chose</b> to
license it to someone else. I can't be compelled to do so. That would violate
the fundamental purpose for acquiring the patent in the first place.
<br>The cavaet to this is any invention made with recombinant DNA or similar
technology. All bets are off in this area.
<p>Mark Simpson
<p>Matthew Travis wrote:
<blockquote TYPE=CITE>Not total exclusivity. It gives the patent-holder
first-rights to the
<br>invention. It also requires any other users to license (sompensate)
the
<br>patent-holder for the use of it. Other user's than the patent-holder
have
<br>the right to seek a license, i.e. the fair compensation for fair usage
<br>principal. Accordingly, outright refusal to grant a license is not
generally
<br>permissable. What is permissable is for the patent-holder to specify
the
<br>requirements for getting a license, which enables the patent-holder
to set
<br>requirements such that no-one is able (or wants) to obtain a license,
<br>usually by non-disclosure agreements, derived product ownership agreements,
<br>or non-disclosure and usage limitation agreements.
<p>> In a message dated 7/23/01 4:21:36 PM Mountain Daylight Time,
<br>> mark.simpson@HOME.COM writes:
<br>>
<br>> > I'm having an increasingly difficult time following the logic in
this
<br>> thread.
<br>> >&nbsp; Publishing an idea instead of patenting it does nothing for
<br>> you. Patenting
<br>> > it
<br>> >&nbsp; give you 20 years of exclusivity. No contest. Patent whenever
possible
<br>> > unless the
<br>> >&nbsp; object being patented would be impossible for someone else
to
<br>> duplicate,
<br>>
<p>Far more often than not, it is beneficial to seek a patent. Also, this
is
<br>often the only way someone finds out that their "revolutionary" idea
was
<br>patented by Dow or someone decades earlier (people often don't think
to do a
<br>patent search except when applying for one). There are many benefits
to
<br>seeking a patent. Ditto for copyrights and trademarks.</blockquote>
</html>

------=_NextPart_000_0A39_01C56B69.43EB7650--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 7163 invoked from network); 24 Jul 2001 03:11:19 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 24 Jul 2001 03:11:19 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 7017 invoked from network); 24 Jul 2001 03:12:39 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 24 Jul 2001 03:12:39 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA09599; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 20:08:19 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 82029 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 24 Jul 2001 03:08:11          +0000
Received: from smtp4ve.mailsrvcs.net (smtp4vepub.gte.net [206.46.170.25]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA09581 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 20:08:11 -0700
Received: from me-513q3sc0zun0.pengar.com          (adsl-64-223-147-206.mannh.adsl.bellatlantic.net [64.223.147.206]) by          smtp4ve.mailsrvcs.net (8.9.1/8.9.1) with ESMTP id DAA45633586; Tue,          24 Jul 2001 03:07:38 GMT
X-Sender: seth-pc@hobbiton.shire.net
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <5.1.0.14.0.20010723231125.02c0c798@hobbiton.shire.net>
Date:         Mon, 23 Jul 2001 23:12:21 -0400
Reply-To: "Seth Leigh" <seth@PENGAR.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Seth Leigh" <seth@PENGAR.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Stump remover as potassium nitrate
Comments: To: nick z <nickz5715@ABOUT.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <02A530FB6AF75D115A5600807CFBC69C@nickz5715.about.com>

Why not just go to www.firefox.com and order some potassium nitrate?  You
have to fax them your drivers license, but they don't bite.  ;-)  Seriously
you can get 10 lb or 20 lb or whatever of KNO3 from them for like $3.50 a
lb after shipping.

Seth


At 04:30 PM 7/23/2001, nick z wrote:
>Is stump remover a pure enough from of potassium nitrate to use? Any
>brand that you would recomend?
>Thanks,
>Nick
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>Sign up for a free About Email account at http://About.com

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 29977 invoked from network); 24 Jul 2001 03:32:45 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 24 Jul 2001 03:32:45 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 15069 invoked from network); 24 Jul 2001 03:34:05 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 24 Jul 2001 03:34:05 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA09729; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 20:28:59 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 82057 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 24 Jul 2001 03:28:53          +0000
Received: from smtp4ve.mailsrvcs.net (smtp4vepub.gte.net [206.46.170.25]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA09712 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 20:28:53 -0700
Received: from me-513q3sc0zun0.pengar.com          (adsl-64-223-147-206.mannh.adsl.bellatlantic.net [64.223.147.206]) by          smtp4ve.mailsrvcs.net (8.9.1/8.9.1) with ESMTP id DAA57033297 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 24 Jul 2001 03:28:22 GMT
X-Sender: seth-pc@hobbiton.shire.net
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
References: <02A530FB6AF75D115A5600807CFBC69C@nickz5715.about.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <5.1.0.14.0.20010723233230.02b1d7d0@hobbiton.shire.net>
Date:         Mon, 23 Jul 2001 23:33:06 -0400
Reply-To: "Seth Leigh" <seth@PENGAR.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Seth Leigh" <seth@PENGAR.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Stump remover as potassium nitrate
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <5.1.0.14.0.20010723231125.02c0c798@hobbiton.shire.net>

At 11:12 PM 7/23/2001, Seth Leigh wrote:
>Why not just go to www.firefox.com and order some potassium nitrate?  You

OUCH.  The above URL is not correct, I wasn't thinking when I typed it
in.  The real URL is http://www.firefox-fx.com.

Seth



>have to fax them your drivers license, but they don't bite.  ;-)  Seriously
>you can get 10 lb or 20 lb or whatever of KNO3 from them for like $3.50 a
>lb after shipping.
>
>Seth
>
>
>At 04:30 PM 7/23/2001, nick z wrote:
>>Is stump remover a pure enough from of potassium nitrate to use? Any
>>brand that you would recomend?
>>Thanks,
>>Nick
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>Sign up for a free About Email account at http://About.com

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 6644 invoked from network); 24 Jul 2001 03:42:30 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 24 Jul 2001 03:42:30 -0000
Received: (qmail 15239 invoked from network); 24 Jul 2001 03:44:17 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 24 Jul 2001 03:44:17 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA09798; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 20:39:50 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 82073 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 24 Jul 2001 03:39:44          +0000
Received: from castor.ridgenet.net (IDENT:root@castor.ridgenet.net          [199.120.150.29]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA09780          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 20:39:44 -0700
Received: from kristinscomp (pm076.ridgenet.net [204.154.246.76]) by          castor.ridgenet.net (8.11.0/8.11.0) with SMTP id f6O3XSS13566; Mon,          23 Jul 2001 20:33:29 -0700
References:  <EDB5E5136094D311BF1800508B12205E08D29095@emss02m07.ems.lmco.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <009601c113f3$6dacb3e0$1b30fea9@kristinscomp>
Date:         Mon, 23 Jul 2001 20:47:56 -0700
Reply-To: "Kristin & David Hall" <thehalls@RIDGENET.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Kristin & David Hall" <thehalls@RIDGENET.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] 3Re: [AR] 2Re: [AR] dark secrets
Comments: To: "Bendel, Timothy B" <timothy.b.bendel@LMCO.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

It seems to me that the answer is obvious.... You apply for the patent,
then, about 10 minutes after you get your delivery confirmation from
UPS/FedEx/Whomever, you publish.  How do you publish?  Two ways:  1)  A
webpage and through other internet venues, and (2) a paid "infomercial" in
some small town newspaper.  Voila!  Your patent application is in before
public disclosure, but public disclosure comes WAY too fast for even the men
in black to stop it.

--
Dave and/or Kristin Hall

> even call him an "amateur". So, how *does* someone with new rocket ideas
go
> about trying to market them? How do you protect against a random "secrecy
> order" as well as a big aerospace comany ripping you off? I know many of
you
> out there are not so hot about patents. Clearly Mark Goll got into a heap
of
> trouble for going to the U.S. Patent Office to protect his ideas (the
> audacity of him!- (sarcastic)). But simply spilling all your hard-earned
> data onto the web doesn't seem very smart either- there is no reward (i.e.
> exclusive marketing rights for 17 years) -and therefore no incentive for
> developing the data/design.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 15874 invoked from network); 24 Jul 2001 04:24:38 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 24 Jul 2001 04:24:38 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 16462 invoked from network); 24 Jul 2001 04:26:27 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 24 Jul 2001 04:26:27 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA10327; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 21:21:33 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 82131 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 24 Jul 2001 04:21:31          +0000
Received: from mailgw1a.lmco.com (mailgw1a.lmco.com [192.31.106.7]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA10310 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 21:21:30 -0700
Received: from emss02g01.ems.lmco.com (relay2.ems.lmco.com [166.29.2.54]) by          mailgw1a.lmco.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id WAA17876; Mon, 23 Jul          2001 22:21:30 -0600 (MDT)
Received: from CONVERSION-DAEMON by lmco.com (PMDF V5.2-33 #38887) id          <0GGY00N01MRT52@lmco.com>; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 22:21:29 -0600 (MDT)
Received: from emss02i00.ems.lmco.com ([166.29.2.48]) by lmco.com (PMDF V5.2-33          #38887) with ESMTP id <0GGY0080YMRTW0@lmco.com>; Mon, 23 Jul 2001          22:21:29 -0600 (MDT)
Received: by emss02i00.ems.lmco.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) id          <P13DH6BQ>; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 22:22:35 -0600
Content-return: allowed
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19)
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <EDB5E5136094D311BF1800508B12205E08D2909D@emss02m07.ems.lmco.com>
Date:         Mon, 23 Jul 2001 22:22:23 -0600
Reply-To: "Bendel, Timothy B" <timothy.b.bendel@LMCO.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Bendel, Timothy B" <timothy.b.bendel@LMCO.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] 3Re: [AR] 2Re: [AR] dark secrets
Comments: To: Kristin & David Hall <thehalls@ridgenet.net>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

>It seems to me that the answer is obvious.... You apply for the patent,
>then, about 10 minutes after you get your delivery confirmation from
>UPS/FedEx/Whomever, you publish.

This sounds like the most promising strategy to me, although it does appear
that you sacrifice the "trade secret" option (see earlier thread from
Henry). However, in rocketry, some innovation may be *obvious* once the
vehicle is on the pad, so losing the trade secret option may not be that
bad.

Tim Bendel

-----Original Message-----
From: Kristin & David Hall [mailto:thehalls@ridgenet.net]
Sent: Monday, July 23, 2001 9:48 PM
To: Bendel, Timothy B; AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
Subject: Re: Re: [AR] 3Re: [AR] 2Re: [AR] dark secrets


 It seems to me that the answer is obvious.... You apply for the patent,
then, about 10 minutes after you get your delivery confirmation from
UPS/FedEx/Whomever, you publish. How do you publish?  Two ways:  1)  A
webpage and through other internet venues, and (2) a paid "infomercial" in
some small town newspaper.  Voila!  Your patent application is in before
public disclosure, but public disclosure comes WAY too fast for even the men
in black to stop it.

--
Dave and/or Kristin Hall

> even call him an "amateur". So, how *does* someone with new rocket ideas
go
> about trying to market them? How do you protect against a random "secrecy
> order" as well as a big aerospace comany ripping you off? I know many of
you
> out there are not so hot about patents. Clearly Mark Goll got into a heap
of
> trouble for going to the U.S. Patent Office to protect his ideas (the
> audacity of him!- (sarcastic)). But simply spilling all your hard-earned
> data onto the web doesn't seem very smart either- there is no reward (i.e.
> exclusive marketing rights for 17 years) -and therefore no incentive for
> developing the data/design.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 4651 invoked from network); 24 Jul 2001 05:10:29 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 24 Jul 2001 05:10:29 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 4816 invoked from network); 24 Jul 2001 05:12:19 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 24 Jul 2001 05:12:19 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA10643; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 22:07:58 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 82199 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 24 Jul 2001 05:07:57          +0000
Received: from imo-d02.mx.aol.com (imo-d02.mx.aol.com [205.188.157.34]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA10626 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 22:07:57 -0700
Received: from Sociald84@aol.com by imo-d02.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v31.9.) id          t.f5.cd01817 (3843); Tue, 24 Jul 2001 01:05:48 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: AOL 5.0 for Windows sub 138
Message-ID:  <f5.cd01817.288e5c2b@aol.com>
Date:         Tue, 24 Jul 2001 01:05:47 EDT
Reply-To: <Sociald84@AOL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <Sociald84@AOL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Alternatives to patents?
Comments: To: mark.simpson@home.com
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is all true assuming that you have persued everyone you know of that has
infringed upon your patent. If you design a very simple toy, patent it and
sell it in KB toys, and you find out about some guy running his own toy shop
that hand makes and sells the same design toy as yours, but you choose not to
persue the person because his violation of your patent doesn't detract from
your sales (or for any reason at all other than a liscence) when you go to
file a lawsuit against a company producing your toy and selling it at Toys R
Us, their lawyers will be able to dig up information on this guys toy shack
and any contact you've made with him. If they're able to prove that you had
prior knowledge of violation and chose to do nothing about it, your rights to
sue the large company will be either severely punished or negated.

Mark

In a message dated 7/23/01 8:26:55 PM Mountain Daylight Time,
mark.simpson@home.com writes:

> It seems like many have a very skewed view of the rights granted to a patent
>  holder.  If I catch someone violating my patent, he gets a registered
letter
>  informing him that he's infringing and politely asking him to stop.  The
> next
>  step is to file an infringement suit if the party continues to infringe.
If
> the
>  party is found to be knowingly violating your patent, you are entitled to
3X
>  damages, which includes your legal fees.
>  I've dealt with a number of patent infringement issues over the past 20
> years and
>  I can guarantee you that any company that disregards a warning that they
are
>  clearly violating a patent pays through the nose and doesn't last very
long.
>  If our patent laws had no teeth to them, we'd be a third world country
right
>  now.  Anyone that thinks differently is misinformed.
>  And you don't have to be a large company or have the greatest lawyers in
the
>  world; if there's a clear violation, it's a no-brainer.
>
>  Mark Simpson
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 10718 invoked from network); 24 Jul 2001 05:12:14 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 24 Jul 2001 05:12:14 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 12450 invoked from network); 24 Jul 2001 05:14:00 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 24 Jul 2001 05:14:00 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA10619; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 22:07:48 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 82191 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 24 Jul 2001 05:07:43          +0000
Received: from priv-edtnes04-hme0.telusplanet.net (fepout2.telus.net          [199.185.220.237]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id          WAA10602 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 22:07:43 -0700
Received: from telus.net ([216.232.246.21]) by          priv-edtnes04-hme0.telusplanet.net (InterMail vM.4.01.03.10          201-229-121-110) with ESMTP id          <20010724050712.SXAI9260.priv-edtnes04-hme0.telusplanet.net@telus.net> for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon, 23 Jul          2001 23:07:12 -0600
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (Win95; I)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <CMM.0.90.4.995933844.billw@cypher>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B5D0321.1A6BC5B8@telus.net>
Date:         Mon, 23 Jul 2001 22:09:54 -0700
Reply-To: "David Wakarchuk" <dwakarchuk@TELUS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "David Wakarchuk" <dwakarchuk@TELUS.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] 2Re: Alternatives to patents?
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

William Chops Westfield wrote:

> I've heard of something called a "design patent" that's apparently somewhat
> like a copyright for non-written goods.  It supposedly prevents someone from
> copying your design exactly (closely?), even though there's no patentable
> new idea involved.  These are easier, cheaper, and quicker to obtain that
> 'real' patents, and I suspect many of the retail device patents are of that
> sort, and have been done for "prestige value" more than anything else.
>
> I've no actual experience with 'design patents', so all of the above is
> vague heresay...
>

Bill,

You are possibly thinking of an industrial design registration.  In Canada and
the US they cover designs that can be protected for 2 x 5 year periods and are
obtained for a small fraction of the cost of a patent.  A design registration is
different than a patent in that it covers only the form of an object not the
function.  Thus you could possibly use design registration to protect "artistic"
as well a utilitarian designs.  An example of something covered by a design
registration might be a plastic spoon that had concentric calibration rings
indicating various volumes contained within the spoon.

David Wakarchuk

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 11609 invoked from network); 24 Jul 2001 05:20:56 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 24 Jul 2001 05:20:56 -0000
Received: (qmail 1846 invoked from network); 24 Jul 2001 05:22:18 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 24 Jul 2001 05:22:18 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA10714; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 22:18:41 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 82219 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 24 Jul 2001 05:18:37          +0000
Received: from imo-m02.mx.aol.com (imo-m02.mx.aol.com [64.12.136.5]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA10697 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 22:18:36 -0700
Received: from Sociald84@aol.com by imo-m02.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v31.9.) id          w.30.1811e629 (3843) for <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Tue, 24 Jul 2001          01:18:00 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: AOL 5.0 for Windows sub 138
Message-ID:  <30.1811e629.288e5f08@aol.com>
Date:         Tue, 24 Jul 2001 01:18:00 EDT
Reply-To: <Sociald84@AOL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <Sociald84@AOL.COM>
Subject:      [AR] more patent crap
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

What rights if any to an invention would someone have to an invention that
someone else through no connection what so ever obtained a patent to if they
did not try to patent it themselves or publically disclose it, however they
were able to prove that they invented it before the other person.

Say I invent an injector plate design. Then document it, date it and mail it
to myself. I decide not to patent it however. Then two years later a nother
person obtains a patent on the same basic thing. Do I have any rights to my
invention?

Mark

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 1118 invoked from network); 24 Jul 2001 06:00:31 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 24 Jul 2001 06:00:31 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 18145 invoked from network); 24 Jul 2001 06:01:52 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 24 Jul 2001 06:01:52 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA11011; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 22:58:08 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 82264 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 24 Jul 2001 05:58:03          +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (f5.law3.hotmail.com [209.185.241.5]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA10994 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Mon,          23 Jul 2001 22:58:03 -0700
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Mon,          23 Jul 2001 22:57:32 -0700
Received: from 213.224.83.46 by lw3fd.law3.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Tue, 24          Jul 2001 05:57:32 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [213.224.83.46]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 24 Jul 2001 05:57:32.0858 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[87C919A0:01C11405]
Message-ID:  <F5QIzUheeFFr7MuhMg500005a7e@hotmail.com>
Date:         Tue, 24 Jul 2001 05:58:03 +0000
Reply-To: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] 2Re: Alternatives to patents?
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This patent thread was on last year for a long time too, from a somewhat
different angle.

So let's say a propellant combination or ignition system is patented. Small
timer guys hear about it and launch small time rockets with it.

How big (read high) can they go without comitting pat. infringement?

Now if they really want to launch a big one publicly, say, one to win a
contest with: any idea how big an amount of money can be expected to have to
be paid to the patent holder?

jd

_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 19418 invoked from network); 24 Jul 2001 06:05:41 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 24 Jul 2001 06:05:41 -0000
Received: (qmail 29722 invoked from network); 24 Jul 2001 06:07:29 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 24 Jul 2001 06:07:29 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA11055; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 23:03:15 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 82272 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 24 Jul 2001 06:03:09          +0000
Received: from dune.gnc.net (root@dune.gnc.net [207.203.72.4]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA11038 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon,          23 Jul 2001 23:03:08 -0700
Received: from beowulf (sw2-22.gnc.net [207.203.72.102]) by dune.gnc.net          (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id CAA19627 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue,          24 Jul 2001 02:03:03 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0A3E_01C56B69.43F78440"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <LPBBKJMJEOFKAMFJJNNHEEOACFAA.landofgrey@gnc.net>
Date:         Tue, 24 Jul 2001 02:01:29 -0400
Reply-To: <landofgrey@gnc.net>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Matthew Travis" <landofgrey@gnc.net>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Alternatives to patents?
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <3B5CE0C1.B558170F@home.com>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0A3E_01C56B69.43F78440
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

True. And what I said does not conflict with this. I did not say that
outright refusal to license was illegal. What the law says is that if you
refuse to license an invention that you have a patent on, and then someone
infringes on your patent without that license, that your refusal to grant
the license does not consitute reason to deny you relief (compensation) for
the infringement. While it says it is not misuse or illegal to refuse to
license an invention, it does not say that it is permissible to do so
without cause. It says that refusal to license, in and of itself, is not
cause to deny relief. In any case, the section of law that you are quoting
addresses the issue from the opposite direction as the direction my
statements were taking. Actually, the word "permissible" is probably not the
best word for me to use, and what is misconstrued. I couldn't think of a
better word off-hand that meant "not looked highly upon". Yes, a
patent-holder does have rights for the patent. But a patent-holder also has
responsibilities that, while he can ignore, are best followed through. The
ability to refuse to license is a necessity, duh, to protect the
patent-holder's property and intellectual rights. I'm not stupid. I know
that. But patent law is complex, and it ALSO protects the rights of those
who seek to utilize an invention.

Anyway, I was involved on the plaintiff's side in a patent and trademark
infringmenet lawsuit about 6 years ago against a major software company. Not
being at liberty to discuss the details of the settlement that was reached
(it's proprietary and I am still under non-disclosure), I can say that this
was one of the issues involved. I can say this. We owned the patent. We also
contracted out the licensing rights to another company (it was outsourced
under a public-private partnership agreement and not something that is
generally done in private industry). Then we (not the contractor) refused to
license the technology. Meanwhile, the defendant, upon being turned away by
us, instead of going to our contractor, used the technology. It became
apparent that the defendant infringed upon our patent, but also that we
created artificial barriers to getting a license. What they did we believed
was illegal, while what we did was not illegal, but was an extenuating
circumstance that harmed our position. It became the best interest of both
parties to settle out of court. The moral of the story: having a right over
something may give you the power to be a bully legally, but there are
potential ramifications especially if the you ever find yourself in court.
Refusal to license: legal? Yes. A risky thing to do without cause? Yes. And
note, I said "without cause".
  -----Original Message-----
  From: Mark Simpson [mailto:mark.simpson@home.com]
  Sent: Monday, July 23, 2001 10:43 PM
  To: landofgrey@GNC.NET
  Cc: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
  Subject: Re: [AR] Alternatives to patents?


  US Code Title 35-Patents
  Section 271D (d) No patent owner otherwise entitled to relief for
infringement or contributory
       infringement of a patent shall be denied relief or deemed guilty of
misuse or illegal
       extension of the patent right by reason of his having done one or
more of the following: (1)
       derived revenue from acts which if performed by another without his
consent would
       constitute contributory infringement of the patent; (2) licensed or
authorized another to
       perform acts which if performed without his consent would constitute
contributory
       infringement of the patent; (3) sought to enforce his patent rights
against infringement or
       contributory infringement; (4) refused to license or use any rights
to the patent; or (5)
       conditioned the license of any rights to the patent or the sale of
the patented product on
       the acquisition of a license to rights in another patent or purchase
of a separate product,
       unless, in view of the circumstances, the patent owner has market
power in the relevant
       market for the patent or patented product on which the license or
sale is conditioned.
  If I hold a legal patent, I have exclusivity unless I chose to license it
to someone else. I can't be compelled to do so. That would violate the
fundamental purpose for acquiring the patent in the first place.
  The cavaet to this is any invention made with recombinant DNA or similar
technology. All bets are off in this area.

  Mark Simpson

  Matthew Travis wrote:

    Not total exclusivity. It gives the patent-holder first-rights to the
    invention. It also requires any other users to license (sompensate) the
    patent-holder for the use of it. Other user's than the patent-holder
have
    the right to seek a license, i.e. the fair compensation for fair usage
    principal. Accordingly, outright refusal to grant a license is not
generally
    permissable. What is permissable is for the patent-holder to specify the
    requirements for getting a license, which enables the patent-holder to
set
    requirements such that no-one is able (or wants) to obtain a license,
    usually by non-disclosure agreements, derived product ownership
agreements,
    or non-disclosure and usage limitation agreements.
    > In a message dated 7/23/01 4:21:36 PM Mountain Daylight Time,
    > mark.simpson@HOME.COM writes:
    >
    > > I'm having an increasingly difficult time following the logic in
this
    > thread.
    > >  Publishing an idea instead of patenting it does nothing for
    > you. Patenting
    > > it
    > >  give you 20 years of exclusivity. No contest. Patent whenever
possible
    > > unless the
    > >  object being patented would be impossible for someone else to
    > duplicate,
    >

    Far more often than not, it is beneficial to seek a patent. Also, this
is
    often the only way someone finds out that their "revolutionary" idea was
    patented by Dow or someone decades earlier (people often don't think to
do a
    patent search except when applying for one). There are many benefits to
    seeking a patent. Ditto for copyrights and trademarks.


------=_NextPart_000_0A3E_01C56B69.43F78440
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Dus-ascii">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 5.50.4208.1700" name=3DGENERATOR></HEAD>
<BODY>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial color=3D#0000ff size=3D2><SPAN =
class=3D490593705-24072001>True.=20
And what I said does not conflict with this. I did not say that outright =
refusal=20
to license was illegal. What the law says is that if you refuse to =
license an=20
invention that you have a patent on, and then someone infringes on your =
patent=20
without that license, that your refusal to grant the license does not =
consitute=20
reason to deny you relief (compensation) for the infringement. While it =
says it=20
is not misuse or illegal to refuse to license an invention, it does not =
say that=20
it is permissible to do so without cause. It says that refusal to =
license, in=20
and of itself, is not cause to deny relief. In any case, the section of =
law that=20
you are quoting addresses the issue from the opposite direction as the =
direction=20
my statements were taking. Actually, the word "permissible" is probably =
not the=20
best word for me to use, and what is misconstrued. I couldn't think of a =
better=20
word off-hand that meant "not looked highly upon". Yes, a patent-holder =
does=20
have rights for the patent. But a patent-holder also has =
responsibilities that,=20
while he can ignore, are best followed through. The ability to refuse to =
license=20
is a necessity, duh, to protect the patent-holder's property and =
intellectual=20
rights. I'm not&nbsp;stupid. I know that. But patent law is complex, and =
it ALSO=20
protects the rights of those who seek to utilize an invention.=20
</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial color=3D#0000ff size=3D2><SPAN=20
class=3D490593705-24072001></SPAN></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial color=3D#0000ff size=3D2><SPAN=20
class=3D490593705-24072001>Anyway, I was involved on the plaintiff's =
side in a=20
patent and trademark infringmenet lawsuit about 6 years ago against a =
major=20
software company. Not being at liberty to discuss the details of the =
settlement=20
that was reached (it's proprietary and I am still under non-disclosure), =
I can=20
say that this was one of the issues involved. I can say this. We owned =
the=20
patent. We also contracted out the licensing rights to another company =
(it was=20
outsourced under a public-private partnership agreement and not =
something that=20
is generally done in private industry). Then we (not the=20
contractor)&nbsp;refused to license the technology. Meanwhile, the =
defendant,=20
upon being turned away by us, instead of going to our contractor, used =
the=20
technology. It became&nbsp;apparent that the defendant infringed upon =
our=20
patent, but also that we created artificial barriers to getting&nbsp;a =
license.=20
What they did we believed was illegal, while what we did was not =
illegal, but=20
was an extenuating circumstance that harmed our position. It became the =
best=20
interest of both parties to settle out of court. The moral of the story: =
having=20
a right over something may give you the power to be a bully legally, but =
there=20
are potential&nbsp;ramifications especially if the you ever find =
yourself in=20
court. Refusal to license: legal? Yes. A risky thing to do without =
cause? Yes.=20
And note, I said "without cause". </SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE dir=3Dltr=20
style=3D"PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px =
solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
  <DIV class=3DOutlookMessageHeader dir=3Dltr align=3Dleft><FONT =
face=3DTahoma=20
  size=3D2>-----Original Message-----<BR><B>From:</B> Mark Simpson=20
  [mailto:mark.simpson@home.com]<BR><B>Sent:</B> Monday, July 23, 2001 =
10:43=20
  PM<BR><B>To:</B> landofgrey@GNC.NET<BR><B>Cc:</B>=20
  AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU<BR><B>Subject:</B> Re: [AR] Alternatives to=20
  patents?<BR><BR></FONT></DIV>US Code Title 35-Patents <BR>Section 271D =
(d) No=20
  patent owner otherwise entitled to relief for infringement or =
contributory=20
  <BR>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; infringement of a patent shall be denied =
relief=20
  or deemed guilty of misuse or illegal <BR>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; =
extension=20
  of the patent right by reason of his having done one or more of the =
following:=20
  (1) <BR>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; derived revenue from acts which if =
performed=20
  by another without his consent would <BR>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; =
constitute=20
  contributory infringement of the patent; (2) licensed or authorized =
another to=20
  <BR>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; perform acts which if performed without =
his=20
  consent would constitute contributory <BR>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;=20
  infringement of the patent; (3) sought to enforce his patent rights =
against=20
  infringement or <BR>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; contributory =
infringement;=20
  <B><I>(4) refused to license or use any rights to the patent; =
</I></B>or (5)=20
  <BR>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; conditioned the license of any rights to =
the=20
  patent or the sale of the patented product on =
<BR>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; the=20
  acquisition of a license to rights in another patent or purchase of a =
separate=20
  product, <BR>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; unless, in view of the =
circumstances,=20
  the patent owner has market power in the relevant =
<BR>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;=20
  market for the patent or patented product on which the license or sale =
is=20
  conditioned.=20
  <P>If I hold a legal patent, I have exclusivity unless <B>I chose</B> =
to=20
  license it to someone else. I can't be compelled to do so. That would =
violate=20
  the fundamental purpose for acquiring the patent in the first place. =
<BR>The=20
  cavaet to this is any invention made with recombinant DNA or similar=20
  technology. All bets are off in this area.=20
  <P>Mark Simpson=20
  <P>Matthew Travis wrote:=20
  <BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=3D"CITE">Not total exclusivity. It gives the =
patent-holder=20
    first-rights to the <BR>invention. It also requires any other users =
to=20
    license (sompensate) the <BR>patent-holder for the use of it. Other =
user's=20
    than the patent-holder have <BR>the right to seek a license, i.e. =
the fair=20
    compensation for fair usage <BR>principal. Accordingly, outright =
refusal to=20
    grant a license is not generally <BR>permissable. What is =
permissable is for=20
    the patent-holder to specify the <BR>requirements for getting a =
license,=20
    which enables the patent-holder to set <BR>requirements such that =
no-one is=20
    able (or wants) to obtain a license, <BR>usually by non-disclosure=20
    agreements, derived product ownership agreements, <BR>or =
non-disclosure and=20
    usage limitation agreements.=20
    <P>&gt; In a message dated 7/23/01 4:21:36 PM Mountain Daylight =
Time,=20
    <BR>&gt; mark.simpson@HOME.COM writes: <BR>&gt; <BR>&gt; &gt; I'm =
having an=20
    increasingly difficult time following the logic in this <BR>&gt; =
thread.=20
    <BR>&gt; &gt;&nbsp; Publishing an idea instead of patenting it does =
nothing=20
    for <BR>&gt; you. Patenting <BR>&gt; &gt; it <BR>&gt; &gt;&nbsp; =
give you 20=20
    years of exclusivity. No contest. Patent whenever possible <BR>&gt; =
&gt;=20
    unless the <BR>&gt; &gt;&nbsp; object being patented would be =
impossible for=20
    someone else to <BR>&gt; duplicate, <BR>&gt;=20
    <P>Far more often than not, it is beneficial to seek a patent. Also, =
this is=20
    <BR>often the only way someone finds out that their "revolutionary" =
idea was=20
    <BR>patented by Dow or someone decades earlier (people often don't =
think to=20
    do a <BR>patent search except when applying for one). There are many =

    benefits to <BR>seeking a patent. Ditto for copyrights and=20
  trademarks.</P></BLOCKQUOTE></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0A3E_01C56B69.43F78440--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 10586 invoked from network); 24 Jul 2001 06:20:16 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 24 Jul 2001 06:20:16 -0000
Received: (qmail 4957 invoked from network); 24 Jul 2001 06:22:04 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 24 Jul 2001 06:22:04 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA11156; Mon, 23 Jul 2001 23:17:45 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 82291 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 24 Jul 2001 06:17:40          +0000
Received: from dune.gnc.net (root@dune.gnc.net [207.203.72.4]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA11139 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Mon,          23 Jul 2001 23:17:40 -0700
Received: from beowulf (sw2-22.gnc.net [207.203.72.102]) by dune.gnc.net          (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id CAA19823 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue,          24 Jul 2001 02:17:37 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <LPBBKJMJEOFKAMFJJNNHOEOACFAA.landofgrey@gnc.net>
Date:         Tue, 24 Jul 2001 02:16:03 -0400
Reply-To: <landofgrey@gnc.net>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Matthew Travis" <landofgrey@gnc.net>
Subject:      Re: [AR] 2Re: Alternatives to patents?
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <F5QIzUheeFFr7MuhMg500005a7e@hotmail.com>

> -----Original Message-----
> Behalf Of John Dom
> Subject: Re: [AR] 2Re: Alternatives to patents?
>
>
> This patent thread was on last year for a long time too, from a somewhat
> different angle.
>
> So let's say a propellant combination or ignition system is
> patented. Small
> timer guys hear about it and launch small time rockets with it.
>
> How big (read high) can they go without comitting pat. infringement?
>
Personal use is an exception when it comes to patents. If the small-time
guys aren't using it for a commercial purpose, i.e. not making money and
it's a personal activity, then they needn't worry about patent-infringement.
Patents aren't intended to keep invention a secret or keep people from using
them. They are designed to keep people from profiting from another's
invention (i.e. selling it) without the inventor's permission and due
compensation, and to keep people from stealing an invention. That does not
apply to someone who sees a patent for a new ignitor and makes one at home
for his club's monthly launch. If he then sells it to other club members,
and especially if he claims it as his invention, then it does constitute
illegal patent infringement.

> Now if they really want to launch a big one publicly, say, one to win a
> contest with: any idea how big an amount of money can be expected
> to have to
> be paid to the patent holder?
None. They are profiting from using a product of the invention, not from the
selling of the invention itself. It's not the end-user of an invention who
violates a patent. It is the person/company who sells a product based on the
invention to the end user who is in violation.

For example, in software patent infringement (this also holds for trademark
and copyright), let's say a company B steals a technology from company A and
then sells products based upon it. Then I buy that software for my work (as
a contractor) and use it, generating income and profit for myself. Company A
is a victim of infringement. Company B is the violator. And I am nothing in
to the whole issue. I didn't violate a patent. With the ignitor example, if
I use make it and use it, then it is personal use and not a violation. I am
my own customer. If I make an ignitor and sell it to someone who then wins a
contest, then I am in violation, but the rocketeer is not. I should say I am
"technically" in violation. The chances that I would be prosecuted are nil.
Unless I started a company selling them and advertised as such, and
especially if I claimed I invented it, then the chances of anything being
done are just about zero. Why? Because the costs of litigation to catch me
are far greater than the penny on the dollar license fees for a hundred
ignitors that I make. If I did a huge volume, then it would be different.
For a company to pursue me would be only to make an example or pure
vengeance. And, no matter what you may think, no company, not even
Microsoft, is motivated to destroy individual meaningless citizens for the
thrill of revenge. It's not profitable.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 8431 invoked from network); 24 Jul 2001 13:18:39 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 24 Jul 2001 13:18:39 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 16334 invoked from network); 24 Jul 2001 13:20:46 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 24 Jul 2001 13:20:46 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA12557; Tue, 24 Jul 2001 06:14:13 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 82426 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 24 Jul 2001 13:14:01          +0000
Received: from smtp6ve.mailsrvcs.net (smtp6vepub.gte.net [206.46.170.27]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA12540 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 24 Jul 2001 06:14:01 -0700
Received: from me-513q3sc0zun0.pengar.com          (adsl-64-223-147-206.mannh.adsl.bellatlantic.net [64.223.147.206]) by          smtp6ve.mailsrvcs.net (8.9.1/8.9.1) with ESMTP id NAA45782713 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 24 Jul 2001 13:13:30 GMT
X-Sender: seth-pc@hobbiton.shire.net
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <5.1.0.14.0.20010724091738.02b4f758@hobbiton.shire.net>
Date:         Tue, 24 Jul 2001 09:18:14 -0400
Reply-To: "Seth Leigh" <seth@PENGAR.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Seth Leigh" <seth@PENGAR.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] more patent crap
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <30.1811e629.288e5f08@aol.com>

At 01:18 AM 7/24/2001, Sociald84@AOL.COM wrote:
>What rights if any to an invention would someone have to an invention that
>someone else through no connection what so ever obtained a patent to if they
>did not try to patent it themselves or publically disclose it, however they
>were able to prove that they invented it before the other person.
>
>Say I invent an injector plate design. Then document it, date it and mail it
>to myself. I decide not to patent it however. Then two years later a nother
>person obtains a patent on the same basic thing. Do I have any rights to my
>invention?
>
>Mark

My understanding, unless you went public with your design, is no.

Seth
ps: IANAL, etc.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 22779 invoked from network); 24 Jul 2001 13:22:05 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 24 Jul 2001 13:22:05 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 12163 invoked from network); 24 Jul 2001 13:23:55 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 24 Jul 2001 13:23:55 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA12628; Tue, 24 Jul 2001 06:19:47 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 82442 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 24 Jul 2001 13:19:46          +0000
Received: from smtp7ve.mailsrvcs.net (smtp7vepub.gte.net [206.46.170.28]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA12611 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 24 Jul 2001 06:19:45 -0700
Received: from me-513q3sc0zun0.pengar.com          (adsl-64-223-147-206.mannh.adsl.bellatlantic.net [64.223.147.206]) by          smtp7ve.mailsrvcs.net (8.9.1/8.9.1) with ESMTP id NAA46866702 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 24 Jul 2001 13:19:14 GMT
X-Sender: seth-pc@hobbiton.shire.net
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <5.1.0.14.0.20010724091843.02afa6a8@hobbiton.shire.net>
Date:         Tue, 24 Jul 2001 09:23:59 -0400
Reply-To: "Seth Leigh" <seth@PENGAR.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Seth Leigh" <seth@PENGAR.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] 2Re: Alternatives to patents?
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <F5QIzUheeFFr7MuhMg500005a7e@hotmail.com>

At 01:58 AM 7/24/2001, John Dom wrote:
>This patent thread was on last year for a long time too, from a somewhat
>different angle.
>
>So let's say a propellant combination or ignition system is patented. Small
>timer guys hear about it and launch small time rockets with it.

My understanding of intellectual property laws is that you have to be
commercializing it to be punished.  If you are launching your own, private,
non-commercial amateur or high-power rockets using someone else's patented
idea, I think you are home free.  If you try to sell products based on the
patent, then you would be exposed to trouble.

>How big (read high) can they go without comitting pat. infringement?

My understanding is it can go 10000 feet without committing pat. infringement.

Just kidding.  ;-)

>Now if they really want to launch a big one publicly, say, one to win a
>contest with: any idea how big an amount of money can be expected to have to
>be paid to the patent holder?
>
>jd

Of course the amount is not limited as far as I know.  The patent holder
could demand whatever terms they wish.  They could offer terms so high you
would never pay them and just not use the patent, which may be what they
wish to achieve.  I recall reading once about a member of a famous rock
band who collaberated with someone on a web site and wanted to use clips
from some of his band's music, the rights to which are owned by their
record company (that's another topic, but basically musicians get the
*shaft* under the current schemes).  The record company said sure, the
license fee will be $1000 per unique web visitor per occurrence.  Hmm, I
bet the guy jumped on that bargain.

Seth

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 2242 invoked from network); 24 Jul 2001 13:31:23 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 24 Jul 2001 13:31:23 -0000
Received: (qmail 16683 invoked from network); 24 Jul 2001 13:33:13 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 24 Jul 2001 13:33:13 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA12586; Tue, 24 Jul 2001 06:15:07 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 82434 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 24 Jul 2001 13:15:05          +0000
Received: from spsystems.net (spsystems.net [209.47.149.227]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA12569 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Tue,          24 Jul 2001 06:15:05 -0700
Received: (from henry@localhost) by spsystems.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id JAA28548;          Tue, 24 Jul 2001 09:14:26 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010724090728.28319D-100000@spsystems.net>
Date:         Tue, 24 Jul 2001 09:14:26 -0400
Reply-To: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] more patent crap
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <30.1811e629.288e5f08@aol.com>

On Tue, 24 Jul 2001 Sociald84@AOL.COM wrote:
> What rights if any to an invention would someone have to an invention that
> someone else through no connection what so ever obtained a patent to if they
> did not try to patent it themselves or publically disclose it, however they
> were able to prove that they invented it before the other person.

If they can *prove* they invented it first, I think they can go through a
procedure which establishes their right to use it personally.  They have
no other rights; marketing rights etc. belong to the patent holder.

> Say I invent an injector plate design. Then document it, date it and mail it
> to myself...

Mailing stuff to yourself is of no value whatsoever in proving priority.
Your friendly neighborhood spy :-) can explain several ways to get stuff
into and out of sealed envelopes.  Either your document has to be in the
possession of a disinterested third party who is prepared to testify as to
when it came into his possession, or you need to have it signed and dated
by witnesses who are prepared to testify that they read it and understood
it on that date.

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 8984 invoked from network); 24 Jul 2001 13:46:56 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 24 Jul 2001 13:46:56 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 22876 invoked from network); 24 Jul 2001 13:49:03 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 24 Jul 2001 13:49:03 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA12704; Tue, 24 Jul 2001 06:36:29 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 82454 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 24 Jul 2001 13:36:22          +0000
Received: from smtp6ve.mailsrvcs.net (smtp6vepub.gte.net [206.46.170.27]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA12687 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 24 Jul 2001 06:36:21 -0700
Received: from me-513q3sc0zun0.pengar.com          (adsl-64-223-147-206.mannh.adsl.bellatlantic.net [64.223.147.206]) by          smtp6ve.mailsrvcs.net (8.9.1/8.9.1) with ESMTP id NAA45719313 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 24 Jul 2001 13:35:50 GMT
X-Sender: seth-pc@hobbiton.shire.net
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
References: <F5QIzUheeFFr7MuhMg500005a7e@hotmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <5.1.0.14.0.20010724093419.02b4fcc8@hobbiton.shire.net>
Date:         Tue, 24 Jul 2001 09:40:33 -0400
Reply-To: "Seth Leigh" <seth@PENGAR.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Seth Leigh" <seth@PENGAR.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] 2Re: Alternatives to patents?
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <LPBBKJMJEOFKAMFJJNNHOEOACFAA.landofgrey@gnc.net>

At 02:16 AM 7/24/2001, Matthew Travis wrote:
>None. They are profiting from using a product of the invention, not from the
>selling of the invention itself. It's not the end-user of an invention who
>violates a patent. It is the person/company who sells a product based on the
>invention to the end user who is in violation.

I believe you are mistaken here.  I have read of numerous cases in the
software patent (inarguably a totally fscked up area) arena of cases where
"inventors" of patented software concepts have filed lawsuits against not
only the company who sells an "infringing" product, but also their primary
(read: deep pocket) customers.  The key here, I believe, is that the
customers who were sued were also commercial entities, and were thus
profiting from the use of an infringing product.  Private individual
customers using an infringing product for personal uses may well be
shielded from liability.

A perfect example is that guy who claims to have invented the
fileserver.  He not only sued Novell for making fileserver products without
licensing his "invention", he also filed suits against dozens of major
companies known to be using Novell products.  The sick thing is, a
non-trivial number of these large companies settled with this
asshole.  There are many other examples of this as well.  As always, IANAL,
but from the cases I've followed in the past I am convinced there is
liability for a commercial entity who profits from the use of a product,
the production and sale of which had infringed a 3rd party's patent.

Seth

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 17262 invoked from network); 24 Jul 2001 13:48:50 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 24 Jul 2001 13:48:50 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 13381 invoked from network); 24 Jul 2001 13:50:11 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 24 Jul 2001 13:50:11 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA12746; Tue, 24 Jul 2001 06:42:48 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 82462 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 24 Jul 2001 13:42:46          +0000
Received: from smtp5ve.mailsrvcs.net (smtp5vepub.gte.net [206.46.170.26]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA12729 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 24 Jul 2001 06:42:46 -0700
Received: from me-513q3sc0zun0.pengar.com          (adsl-64-223-147-206.mannh.adsl.bellatlantic.net [64.223.147.206]) by          smtp5ve.mailsrvcs.net (8.9.1/8.9.1) with ESMTP id NAA30903264 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 24 Jul 2001 13:42:14 GMT
X-Sender: seth-pc@hobbiton.shire.net
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
References: <30.1811e629.288e5f08@aol.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <5.1.0.14.0.20010724094500.042d0cc8@hobbiton.shire.net>
Date:         Tue, 24 Jul 2001 09:46:59 -0400
Reply-To: "Seth Leigh" <seth@PENGAR.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Seth Leigh" <seth@PENGAR.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] more patent crap
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010724090728.28319D-100000@spsystems.net>

At 09:14 AM 7/24/2001, Henry Spencer wrote:
>On Tue, 24 Jul 2001 Sociald84@AOL.COM wrote:
>into and out of sealed envelopes.  Either your document has to be in the
>possession of a disinterested third party who is prepared to testify as to
>when it came into his possession, or you need to have it signed and dated
>by witnesses who are prepared to testify that they read it and understood
>it on that date.

And to head off the inevitable next question, no, having a document
notarized is not sufficient.  Notarization says nothing about the contents
of a document.  It only says that the notary is attesting to the fact that
it really was you who signed whatever document you are notarizing, and not
someone else.  That's it, literally.

Seth
ps: IANAL, etc.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 24949 invoked from network); 24 Jul 2001 16:33:05 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 24 Jul 2001 16:33:05 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 16030 invoked from network); 24 Jul 2001 16:34:54 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 24 Jul 2001 16:34:54 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA13697; Tue, 24 Jul 2001 09:29:48 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 82613 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 24 Jul 2001 16:29:38          +0000
Received: from mailgw1a.lmco.com (mailgw1a.lmco.com [192.31.106.7]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA13680 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 24 Jul 2001 09:29:38 -0700
Received: from emss02g01.ems.lmco.com (relay2.ems.lmco.com [166.29.2.54]) by          mailgw1a.lmco.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id KAA28314 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 24 Jul 2001 10:29:37 -0600 (MDT)
Received: from CONVERSION-DAEMON by lmco.com (PMDF V5.2-33 #38887) id          <0GGZ00J01KHBAI@lmco.com> for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 24 Jul 2001          10:29:35 -0600 (MDT)
Received: from emss02i00.ems.lmco.com ([166.29.2.48]) by lmco.com (PMDF V5.2-33          #38887) with ESMTP id <0GGZ00FGNKH7EH@lmco.com> for          AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 24 Jul 2001 10:29:31 -0600 (MDT)
Received: by emss02i00.ems.lmco.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) id          <P13D21YG>; Tue, 24 Jul 2001 10:29:32 -0600
Content-return: allowed
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19)
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <EDB5E5136094D311BF1800508B12205E08D290A4@emss02m07.ems.lmco.com>
Date:         Tue, 24 Jul 2001 10:29:26 -0600
Reply-To: "Bendel, Timothy B" <timothy.b.bendel@LMCO.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Bendel, Timothy B" <timothy.b.bendel@LMCO.COM>
Subject:      [AR] "secrecy orders"
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

It was mentioned in the patent/dark secret threads that Mark Goll got a
"secrecy order" classifying his propane/nitrous oxide rocket. He also got a
gag order preventing him from talking about it and/or developing it further.
It was insinuated that this is why he no longer visits this list. He did
*not* have a security clearance (he never signed an agreement precluding him
from developing said technology). My question is this: are there legal
actions someone in his position can pursue? How often does this happen? I
think it is clearly un-Constitutional for the Government to do this. As
someone interested in the development of commercial space technology this
seems to be a very dangerous precedent. No investor would ever invest in a
fledgling company that could be shut done on someone's whim without probable
cause.

Timothy Bendel

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 28067 invoked from network); 24 Jul 2001 16:41:15 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 24 Jul 2001 16:41:15 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 7836 invoked from network); 24 Jul 2001 16:42:33 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 24 Jul 2001 16:42:33 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA13883; Tue, 24 Jul 2001 09:38:00 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 82638 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 24 Jul 2001 16:37:55          +0000
Received: from lekstutis.com (emu.webminders.com [209.176.27.130]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA13865 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 24 Jul 2001 09:37:55 -0700
Received: from Lekstutis.com [12.34.119.118] by lekstutis.com with ESMTP          (SMTPD32-5.05) id A864FD1C0140; Tue, 24 Jul 2001 12:55:00 -0400
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.75 [en] (WinNT; U)
X-Accept-Language: en,pdf
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <EDB5E5136094D311BF1800508B12205E08D290A4@emss02m07.ems.lmco.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B5DA45B.8405443D@Lekstutis.com>
Date:         Tue, 24 Jul 2001 12:37:47 -0400
Reply-To: "Arthur J. Lekstutis" <Artie@LEKSTUTIS.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Arthur J. Lekstutis" <Artie@LEKSTUTIS.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] "secrecy orders"
Comments: To: "Bendel, Timothy B" <timothy.b.bendel@LMCO.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Hi,

I found that curious too. I did a search and found this on the web
yesterday. Interesting reading:
    http://www.fas.org/sgp/othergov/invention/index.html

Note that this happened 85 times in FY 2000, although some 245 where
rescinded.

Later,
Artie Lekstutis


"Bendel, Timothy B" wrote:
>
> It was mentioned in the patent/dark secret threads that Mark Goll got a
> "secrecy order" classifying his propane/nitrous oxide rocket. He also got a
> gag order preventing him from talking about it and/or developing it further.
> It was insinuated that this is why he no longer visits this list. He did
> *not* have a security clearance (he never signed an agreement precluding him
> actions someone in his position can pursue? How often does this happen? I
> think it is clearly un-Constitutional for the Government to do this. As
> someone interested in the development of commercial space technology this
> seems to be a very dangerous precedent. No investor would ever invest in a
> fledgling company that could be shut done on someone's whim without probable
> cause.
>
> Timothy Bendel

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 29962 invoked from network); 24 Jul 2001 18:07:13 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 24 Jul 2001 18:07:13 -0000
Received: (qmail 25991 invoked from network); 24 Jul 2001 18:09:19 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 24 Jul 2001 18:09:19 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA14760; Tue, 24 Jul 2001 10:59:39 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 82779 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 24 Jul 2001 17:59:26          +0000
Received: from spsystems.net (spsystems.net [209.47.149.227]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA14743 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Tue,          24 Jul 2001 10:59:25 -0700
Received: (from henry@localhost) by spsystems.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id NAA01561;          Tue, 24 Jul 2001 13:58:45 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010724135440.1045B-100000@spsystems.net>
Date:         Tue, 24 Jul 2001 13:58:45 -0400
Reply-To: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] 2Re: Alternatives to patents?
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <5.1.0.14.0.20010724093419.02b4fcc8@hobbiton.shire.net>

On Tue, 24 Jul 2001, Seth Leigh wrote:
> ...The key here, I believe, is that the
> customers who were sued were also commercial entities, and were thus
> profiting from the use of an infringing product.  Private individual
> customers using an infringing product for personal uses may well be
> shielded from liability.

No.  There is *NO* "fair use" or "personal use" exemption for patents.
Even personal use technically requires a license (which is normally
transferred to the user as he buys a licensed product).  Patent owners
have very nearly absolute control over their inventions, for the duration
of the patent.

It may not be worth *suing* small users for infringement, but that's a
different issue.

There *are* a few exemptions from patent licensing, but they are quite
specialized and the courts interpret them quite narrowly.

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 819 invoked from network); 24 Jul 2001 18:20:33 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 24 Jul 2001 18:20:33 -0000
Received: (qmail 7201 invoked from network); 24 Jul 2001 18:22:14 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 24 Jul 2001 18:22:14 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA14806; Tue, 24 Jul 2001 11:04:29 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 82787 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 24 Jul 2001 18:04:28          +0000
Received: from spsystems.net (spsystems.net [209.47.149.227]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA14789 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Tue,          24 Jul 2001 11:04:27 -0700
Received: (from henry@localhost) by spsystems.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id OAA01616;          Tue, 24 Jul 2001 14:03:47 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010724135917.1045C-100000@spsystems.net>
Date:         Tue, 24 Jul 2001 14:03:47 -0400
Reply-To: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] 2Re: Alternatives to patents?
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <5.1.0.14.0.20010724091843.02afa6a8@hobbiton.shire.net>

On Tue, 24 Jul 2001, Seth Leigh wrote:
> My understanding of intellectual property laws is that you have to be
> commercializing it to be punished.  If you are launching your own, private,
> non-commercial amateur or high-power rockets using someone else's patented
> idea, I think you are home free.

No.  A patent owner controls (essentially) all uses of his invention, not
just commercial sale of it, and there is no "personal use" exemption.
Intellectual property laws are not all the same; patents are much more
sweeping and have many fewer exemptions than, say, copyright.

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 17426 invoked from network); 24 Jul 2001 18:51:34 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 24 Jul 2001 18:51:34 -0000
Received: (qmail 899 invoked from network); 24 Jul 2001 18:35:55 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 24 Jul 2001 18:35:55 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA14908; Tue, 24 Jul 2001 11:17:51 -0700
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 82802 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 24 Jul 2001 18:17:49          +0000
Received: from zcars0m9.ca.nortel.com ([47.129.242.157]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA14891 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue,          24 Jul 2001 11:17:48 -0700
Received: from zcars04e.ca.nortel.com (zcars04e.ca.nortel.com [47.129.242.56])          by zcars0m9.ca.nortel.com (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f6OIBr929580          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 24 Jul 2001 14:11:53 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from rftzy232.ca.nortel.com by zcars04e.ca.nortel.com; Tue, 24 Jul          2001 14:11:56 -0400
Received: from NORTELNETWORKS.COM (wftzh00e.ca.nortel.com [47.130.116.9]) by          rftzy232.ca.nortel.com with SMTP (Microsoft Exchange Internet Mail          Service Version 5.5.2653.13) id NKPL5TAA; Tue, 24 Jul 2001 14:11:50          -0400
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.73C-CCK-MCD [en] (X11; U; HP-UX B.10.20 9000/785)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010724135440.1045B-100000@spsystems.net>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Orig: <mleech@NORTELNETWORKS.COM>
Message-ID:  <3B5DBA78.867FF198@NORTELNETWORKS.COM>
Date:         Tue, 24 Jul 2001 14:12:08 -0400
Reply-To: "Marcus Leech" <mleech@NORTELNETWORKS.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Marcus Leech" <mleech@NORTELNETWORKS.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] 2Re: Alternatives to patents?
Comments: To: Henry Spencer <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Henry Spencer wrote:

>
> It may not be worth *suing* small users for infringement, but that's a
> different issue.
>
If the small user violates the patent *unknowingly*, and assuming they
  can hire a lawyer of any modest ability, the complaintant would
  have a hard time compelling the court to assess damages.

--
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Marcus Leech                             Mail:   Dept 8M70, MS 012, FITZ
Advisor                                  Phone: (ESN) 393-9145  +1 613 763 9145
Security Architecture and Planning       Fax:   (ESN) 393-9435  +1 613 763 9435
Nortel Networks                          mleech@nortelnetworks.com
-----------------Expressed opinions are my own, not my employer's------

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 1577 invoked from network); 24 Jul 2001 19:08:42 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 24 Jul 2001 19:08:42 -0000
Received: (qmail 788 invoked from network); 24 Jul 2001 19:10:26 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 24 Jul 2001 19:10:26 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA15297; Tue, 24 Jul 2001 12:05:07 -0700
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 82845 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 24 Jul 2001 19:04:57          +0000
Received: from zcars0m9.ca.nortel.com ([47.129.242.157]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA15277 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Tue,          24 Jul 2001 12:04:56 -0700
Received: from zcars04e.ca.nortel.com (zcars04e.ca.nortel.com [47.129.242.56])          by zcars0m9.ca.nortel.com (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f6OJ44907743          for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Tue, 24 Jul 2001 15:04:04 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from rftzy232.ca.nortel.com by zcars04e.ca.nortel.com; Tue, 24 Jul          2001 15:04:09 -0400
Received: from NORTELNETWORKS.COM (wftzh00e.ca.nortel.com [47.130.116.9]) by          rftzy232.ca.nortel.com with SMTP (Microsoft Exchange Internet Mail          Service Version 5.5.2653.13) id NKPL5TFP; Tue, 24 Jul 2001 15:04:02          -0400
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.73C-CCK-MCD [en] (X11; U; HP-UX B.10.20 9000/785)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <EDB5E5136094D311BF1800508B12205E08D29097@emss02m07.ems.lmco.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Orig: <mleech@NORTELNETWORKS.COM>
Message-ID:  <3B5DC6B5.2EFBDC93@NORTELNETWORKS.COM>
Date:         Tue, 24 Jul 2001 15:04:21 -0400
Reply-To: "Marcus Leech" <mleech@NORTELNETWORKS.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Marcus Leech" <mleech@NORTELNETWORKS.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] 3Re: [AR] 2Re: [AR] dark secrets
Comments: To: "Bendel, Timothy B" <timothy.b.bendel@LMCO.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

"Bendel, Timothy B" wrote:
>
> John,
>
> I respect your business strategy and agree that ideas are cheap (most of the
> time). Your public disclosure of your rocket project is admirable. However,
> business history is littered with instances where big companies have tried
> to outright copy a smaller competitor's ideas and force them out of the
> market with superior production and/or selling at a loss for a period of
> time to kill the smaller company. Often, the only recourse a small company
> has is the patent.
>
> I agree that the courts have all but failed in protecting patents in the
> software industry, but they are trying to catch up.
>
> Also, I agree with you that the real value in a concept is the thousands of
> "good calls" and details worked out to make a concept into something *real*.
> However, isn't that what Mark Goll was doing? He didn't just type up the
> idea and send it into the Patent Office, he built a working rocket- that's
> what got him into trouble. It seems to me Mark was following the traditional
> path to starting a company based on new technology. It appears that the
> Government has created yet another catch-22 : either you have patent
> protection from competitors and run the risk of a "secrecy order" or you
> disclose all your information publicly to make it "public domain" but then
> become vulnerable to big companies that can steal your idea and out muscle
> you in the marketplace.
>
> Tim Bendel
You know, I've seen the various pictures of Marks N2O/Propane rockets, and I've
  run N2O+Propane through CPROPEP over various mixture ratios.  It does rather
  less well than N2O+Methanol for similar mixture ratios.  The photos I've seen
  leave me with the "clunky" impression--not a slur or anything, but it seems
  absurd that there could be anything there to slap a secrecy order on.

How do we know that there's a secrecy order?  Mark can't talk about it if
  there is, and if there isn't, the small tidbits that have been "leaked"
  are impossible to verify.

--
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Marcus Leech                             Mail:   Dept 8M70, MS 012, FITZ
Advisor                                  Phone: (ESN) 393-9145  +1 613 763 9145
Security Architecture and Planning       Fax:   (ESN) 393-9435  +1 613 763 9435
Nortel Networks                          mleech@nortelnetworks.com
-----------------Expressed opinions are my own, not my employer's------

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 26000 invoked from network); 24 Jul 2001 19:34:12 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 24 Jul 2001 19:34:12 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 12686 invoked from network); 24 Jul 2001 19:36:02 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 24 Jul 2001 19:36:02 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA15471; Tue, 24 Jul 2001 12:28:56 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 82871 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 24 Jul 2001 19:28:54          +0000
Received: from mailgw1a.lmco.com (mailgw1a.lmco.com [192.31.106.7]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA15454 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 24 Jul 2001 12:28:53 -0700
Received: from emss02g01.ems.lmco.com (relay2.ems.lmco.com [166.29.2.54]) by          mailgw1a.lmco.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id NAA09081; Tue, 24 Jul          2001 13:28:53 -0600 (MDT)
Received: from CONVERSION-DAEMON by lmco.com (PMDF V5.2-33 #38887) id          <0GGZ00F01SS3C7@lmco.com>; Tue, 24 Jul 2001 13:28:51 -0600 (MDT)
Received: from emss02i00.ems.lmco.com ([166.29.2.48]) by lmco.com (PMDF V5.2-33          #38887) with ESMTP id <0GGZ000QGSRYPK@lmco.com>; Tue, 24 Jul 2001          13:28:46 -0600 (MDT)
Received: by emss02i00.ems.lmco.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) id          <P13D2K47>; Tue, 24 Jul 2001 13:28:47 -0600
Content-return: allowed
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19)
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <EDB5E5136094D311BF1800508B12205E08D290A7@emss02m07.ems.lmco.com>
Date:         Tue, 24 Jul 2001 13:28:36 -0600
Reply-To: "Bendel, Timothy B" <timothy.b.bendel@LMCO.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Bendel, Timothy B" <timothy.b.bendel@LMCO.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] 2Re: [AR] dark secrets
Comments: To: John Wickman <jwckman@SPACE-ROCKETS.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

John,

You are in a similar position as Mark Goll (trying to lower the cost of
launching stuff into space through the advancement of new technology in a
small company). Does his predicament alarm you? Do you feel that if you are
TOO successful the Feds will come by and take all your stuff? What recourse
would you have? I guess these are pretty sensitive questions so do not
respond if you don't want.

Tim Bendel

> -----Original Message-----
> From: John Wickman [SMTP:jwckman@SPACE-ROCKETS.COM]
> Sent: Sunday, July 22, 2001 5:47 PM
> To:   AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
> Subject:      Re: [AR] 2Re: [AR] dark secrets
>
> Sometimes patents are restricted due to export controls such as missile
> technology.   This could be the case here, he would still get the patent,
> but access to it would be restricted to US citizens.
>
>
> John Wickman
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@itc.uci.edu]On
> Behalf Of Henry Spencer
> Sent: Saturday, July 21, 2001 9:12 PM
> To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
> Subject: Re: [AR] 2Re: [AR] dark secrets
>
>
> On Sat, 21 Jul 2001, Ray Calkins wrote:
> > And as far as release of classified material, talk to Mark Goll.  He's
> on
> > a gag order about the N2O/Propane rocket he developed (without any
> > government funding or information).  When he applied for a patent, they
> > shut his work down completely for national security.
>
> I'd be curious to know the legal basis for that...  As far as I know --
> with the obvious caveat that I'm not a lawyer -- unless he has a security
> clearance or something of that ilk, they have no hold on him that can be
> used to issue such an order.
>
>                                                           Henry Spencer
>                                                        henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 23671 invoked from network); 24 Jul 2001 19:40:42 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 24 Jul 2001 19:40:42 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 15693 invoked from network); 24 Jul 2001 19:42:30 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 24 Jul 2001 19:42:30 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA15408; Tue, 24 Jul 2001 12:23:37 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 82861 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 24 Jul 2001 19:23:24          +0000
Received: from mailgw1a.lmco.com (mailgw1a.lmco.com [192.31.106.7]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA15391 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Tue, 24 Jul 2001 12:23:23 -0700
Received: from emss02g01.ems.lmco.com (relay2.ems.lmco.com [166.29.2.54]) by          mailgw1a.lmco.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id NAA27959 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Tue, 24 Jul 2001 13:23:22 -0600 (MDT)
Received: from CONVERSION-DAEMON by lmco.com (PMDF V5.2-33 #38887) id          <0GGZ00D01SISQW@lmco.com> for arocket@itc.uci.edu; Tue, 24 Jul 2001          13:23:21 -0600 (MDT)
Received: from emss02i00.ems.lmco.com ([166.29.2.48]) by lmco.com (PMDF V5.2-33          #38887) with ESMTP id <0GGZ00EZ1SIPPI@lmco.com> for          arocket@itc.uci.edu; Tue, 24 Jul 2001 13:23:14 -0600 (MDT)
Received: by emss02i00.ems.lmco.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) id          <P13D2KLR>; Tue, 24 Jul 2001 13:23:14 -0600
Content-return: allowed
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19)
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <EDB5E5136094D311BF1800508B12205E08D290A6@emss02m07.ems.lmco.com>
Date:         Tue, 24 Jul 2001 13:23:07 -0600
Reply-To: "Bendel, Timothy B" <timothy.b.bendel@LMCO.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Bendel, Timothy B" <timothy.b.bendel@LMCO.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] 3Re: [AR] 2Re: [AR] dark secrets
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Marcus,

>How do we know that there's a secrecy order?

Mark Goll's website mentions it:

http://web.wt.net/~markgoll/
http://web.wt.net/~markgoll/mgcm9.htm

<The innovative low-cost rocket technology developed by Texas Rocket Company
is suppressed by an Air Force "Secrecy Order". The question is how many
other great advances in space technology are suppressed by "Secrecy
Orders".>

as well as this post from Ray Calkins (I do not know Mark Goll personally,
so I am simply repeating what I've been told by others on the list):

> > Who is Mark Goll and why is he in trouble? Did he have a clearance?

> Mark is a small time rocket guy like the rest of us.  Beyond that, Ray
> will have to respond.
Mark used to be on the aRocket list.  He was making great progress on his
N2O/Propane self-pressurized biprop, testing an 8,000 lb thrust version
for just over $10,000 back in '98.  Some details can be found here:
http://www.houstonspacesociety.org/tsi/press.html
He is still a great proponent of lowered launch costs, and has quite a few
good points to make on his web site - http://web.wt.net/~markgoll/

He stated on aRocket he's forbidden to discuss the secrecy order or the
technology.  He did NOT have a clearance, he was only seeking to patent
his innovations.  (One of the reasons I'm a big supporter of open
source...)  The patent request came back with a gag order.  I don't know
any details beyond that and Mark isn't talking.

I did find this little tidbit: "The innovative low-cost rocket technology
developed by Texas Rocket Company is suppressed by an Air Force "Secrecy
Order". The question is how many other great advances in space technology
are suppressed by 'Secrecy Orders'".  From -
http://web.wt.net/~markgoll/mgcm9.htm

Here are photos of some of his tests:
http://web.wt.net/~markgoll/mg9.htm
http://web.wt.net/~markgoll/pic2.htm

He would have been close to orbit by now if he had kept going at the same
rate.

Ray

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Marcus Leech [SMTP:mleech@nortelnetworks.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, July 24, 2001 1:04 PM
> To:   Bendel, Timothy B; arocket@itc.uci.edu
> Subject:      Re: [AR] 3Re: [AR] 2Re: [AR] dark secrets
>
> "Bendel, Timothy B" wrote:
> >
> > John,
> >
> > I respect your business strategy and agree that ideas are cheap (most of
> the
> > time). Your public disclosure of your rocket project is admirable.
> However,
> > business history is littered with instances where big companies have
> tried
> > to outright copy a smaller competitor's ideas and force them out of the
> > market with superior production and/or selling at a loss for a period of
> > time to kill the smaller company. Often, the only recourse a small
> company
> > has is the patent.
> >
> > I agree that the courts have all but failed in protecting patents in the
> > software industry, but they are trying to catch up.
> >
> > Also, I agree with you that the real value in a concept is the thousands
> of
> > "good calls" and details worked out to make a concept into something
> *real*.
> > However, isn't that what Mark Goll was doing? He didn't just type up the
> > idea and send it into the Patent Office, he built a working rocket-
> that's
> > what got him into trouble. It seems to me Mark was following the
> traditional
> > path to starting a company based on new technology. It appears that the
> > Government has created yet another catch-22 : either you have patent
> > protection from competitors and run the risk of a "secrecy order" or you
> > disclose all your information publicly to make it "public domain" but
> then
> > become vulnerable to big companies that can steal your idea and out
> muscle
> > you in the marketplace.
> >
> > Tim Bendel
> You know, I've seen the various pictures of Marks N2O/Propane rockets, and
> I've
>   run N2O+Propane through CPROPEP over various mixture ratios.  It does
> rather
>   less well than N2O+Methanol for similar mixture ratios.  The photos I've
> seen
>   leave me with the "clunky" impression--not a slur or anything, but it
> seems
>   absurd that there could be anything there to slap a secrecy order on.
>
> How do we know that there's a secrecy order?  Mark can't talk about it if
>   there is, and if there isn't, the small tidbits that have been "leaked"
>   are impossible to verify.
>
> --
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> Marcus Leech                             Mail:   Dept 8M70, MS 012, FITZ
> Advisor                                  Phone: (ESN) 393-9145  +1 613 763
> 9145
> Security Architecture and Planning       Fax:   (ESN) 393-9435  +1 613 763
> 9435
> Nortel Networks                          mleech@nortelnetworks.com
> -----------------Expressed opinions are my own, not my employer's------

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 22454 invoked from network); 24 Jul 2001 20:21:48 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 24 Jul 2001 20:21:48 -0000
Received: (qmail 28737 invoked from network); 24 Jul 2001 20:23:56 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 24 Jul 2001 20:23:56 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA15627; Tue, 24 Jul 2001 13:12:37 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 82880 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 24 Jul 2001 20:12:29          +0000
Received: from smtppop1pub.verizon.net (smtppop1pub.gte.net [206.46.170.20]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA15610 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 24 Jul 2001 13:12:29 -0700
Received: from [63.10.189.174] (1Cust174.tnt2.hilo.hi.da.uu.net          [63.10.189.174]) by smtppop1pub.verizon.net  with ESMTP for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; id PAA144182242 Tue, 24 Jul 2001 15:11:51          -0500 (CDT)
X-Sender: ttocs@mail.gte.net (Unverified)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <l03130301b7837ee4aeb9@[63.10.201.183]>
Date:         Tue, 24 Jul 2001 10:11:22 -1000
Reply-To: "Aaron Smith" <ttocs@GTE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Aaron Smith" <ttocs@GTE.NET>
Subject:      [AR] Numbers don't have opinions
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Hi list,

        I don't know if this is of interest, but I just got inspired to
compare different propellants while factoring in density.  Here is what I
got, ordered from "best" to "worst".

1) Nitric acid / Kerosene : 1.223 g/cc, 245 seconds - 3532 m/s
2) LOX / Kerosene : .968 g/cc, 270 seconds - 3437 m/s
3) 90% H2O2 / Kerosene : 1.236 g/cc, 224 seconds - 3252 m/s
4) LOX / LCH4 : .769 g/cc, 285 seconds - 3168 m/s
5) LOX / LH2 : .365 g/cc, 306 seconds - 2080 m/s

        These numbers are done at a Pc of 15 atm, expanding to 1 atm, using
the frozen performance method on C-Propep.  The velocity numbers at the end
of each line is the velocity attained from a hypothetical 10 Kg dry weight
stage with a fixed volume tank, when used with that particular combination.
        The highest number, Nitric acid and kerosene, has problems with
combustion instability, and so can be deemed unusable.  LOX/LH2, IMHO, can
be assumed useless by looking at this chart.  I don't know wether the
increased density (read: lower drag) of H2O2 / JP makes up for the lower
rating compared to LOX / JP.  Also, a simple CO2 or N2O pressurant system
would no work with LOX, as it would condense into the oxygen and not
pressurize it.  H2O2 does not have this problem.

This is my take on the "ISP vs. Density" war.  I was a little bored, too.

Aaron

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 9272 invoked from network); 24 Jul 2001 21:27:00 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 24 Jul 2001 21:27:00 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 13162 invoked from network); 24 Jul 2001 21:25:28 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 24 Jul 2001 21:25:28 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA16012; Tue, 24 Jul 2001 14:21:15 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 82935 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 24 Jul 2001 21:21:08          +0000
Received: from femail29.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail29.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.254.60.19]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA15991          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 24 Jul 2001 14:21:08 -0700
Received: from home.com ([24.22.71.82]) by femail29.sdc1.sfba.home.com          (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20 201-229-121-120-20010223) with ESMTP id          <20010724212058.QZPF553.femail29.sdc1.sfba.home.com@home.com>; Tue,          24 Jul 2001 14:20:58 -0700
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.75 [en] (Win98; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <30.1811e629.288e5f08@aol.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B5DE6E4.535BF499@home.com>
Date:         Tue, 24 Jul 2001 17:21:40 -0400
Reply-To: "Mark Simpson" <mark.simpson@HOME.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Mark Simpson" <mark.simpson@HOME.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] more patent crap
Comments: To: Sociald84@AOL.COM
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

You get an exclusion if you hadn't publically disclosed the invention but can
show priority.  You pay no royalties and are free to practice your invention
without fear of infringement.

Mark Simpson

Sociald84@AOL.COM wrote:

> What rights if any to an invention would someone have to an invention that
> someone else through no connection what so ever obtained a patent to if they
> did not try to patent it themselves or publically disclose it, however they
> were able to prove that they invented it before the other person.
>
> Say I invent an injector plate design. Then document it, date it and mail it
> to myself. I decide not to patent it however. Then two years later a nother
> person obtains a patent on the same basic thing. Do I have any rights to my
> invention?
>
> Mark

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 26210 invoked from network); 24 Jul 2001 22:13:16 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 24 Jul 2001 22:13:16 -0000
Received: (qmail 28191 invoked from network); 24 Jul 2001 22:15:07 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 24 Jul 2001 22:15:07 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA16434; Tue, 24 Jul 2001 15:10:47 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 83065 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 24 Jul 2001 22:10:45          +0000
Received: from deimos.idirect.com (deimos.idirect.com [207.136.80.182]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA16417 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 24 Jul 2001 15:10:44 -0700
Received: from .idirect.com (on-osh-ahp-01-10.look.ca [216.154.47.10]) by          deimos.idirect.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id SAA34162; Tue, 24 Jul          2001 18:10:36 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="ISO-8859-1"
X-Mailer: BeOS Mail
Message-ID:  <200107242210.SAA34162@deimos.idirect.com>
Date:         Tue, 24 Jul 2001 18:07:04 EDT
Reply-To: <earlcp@idirect.com>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Earl Colby Pottinger" <earlcp@idirect.com>
Subject:      Re: [AR] 3Re: [AR] 2Re: [AR] dark secrets
Comments: To: Marcus Leech <mleech@NORTELNETWORKS.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

>You know, I've seen the various pictures of Marks N2O/Propane rockets, and I've
>  run N2O+Propane through CPROPEP over various mixture ratios.  It does rather
>  less well than N2O+Methanol for similar mixture ratios.  The photos I've seen
>  leave me with the "clunky" impression--not a slur or anything, but it seems
>  absurd that there could be anything there to slap a secrecy order on.
>
>How do we know that there's a secrecy order?  Mark can't talk about it if
>  there is, and if there isn't, the small tidbits that have been "leaked"
>  are impossible to verify.
>
>--
>----------------------------------------------------------------------
>Marcus Leech                             Mail:   Dept 8M70, MS 012, FITZ
>Advisor                                  Phone: (ESN) 393-9145  +1 613 763 9145
>Security Architecture and Planning       Fax:   (ESN) 393-9435  +1 613 763 9435
>Nortel Networks                          mleech@nortelnetworks.com
>-----------------Expressed opinions are my own, not my employer's------

Do the words 'room temperature self pressurizing liquids' could be a clue.

If you could feedback just a small amount of heat energy back to the oxider/fuel tanks both propane and N2O would pressurize themselves.  No pumps, no pressurizing gas, just valves maybe.

Could heatpipes move the heat?  Could you make a heatpipe that stops transferring energy when it's heatsink (output end) reachs a certain temperature?

              Earl Colby Pottinger

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 3291 invoked from network); 24 Jul 2001 23:24:44 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 24 Jul 2001 23:24:44 -0000
Received: (qmail 14540 invoked from network); 24 Jul 2001 23:26:05 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 24 Jul 2001 23:26:05 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA17084; Tue, 24 Jul 2001 16:21:31 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 83206 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 24 Jul 2001 23:18:26          +0000
Received: from femail21.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail21.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.0.95.146]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA17059          for <arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 24 Jul 2001 16:18:26 -0700
Received: from cc334751a ([65.13.214.65]) by femail21.sdc1.sfba.home.com          (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20 201-229-121-120-20010223) with SMTP id          <20010724231819.XNNM15351.femail21.sdc1.sfba.home.com@cc334751a> for          <arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 24 Jul 2001 16:18:19 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0A42_01C56B69.442264D0"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2462.0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <022f01c11496$feb354e0$6401a8c0@home.com>
Date:         Tue, 24 Jul 2001 17:18:48 -0600
Reply-To: "Brian Kosko" <bkosko1@HOME.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Brian Kosko" <bkosko1@HOME.COM>
Subject:      [AR] Initial Motor Test Result
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0A42_01C56B69.442264D0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Well we just fired a small grain in our potential O motor. This grain =
only had 3.5 lbs of propellant instead of the 38 lbs or so the thing =
will have fully loaded. This was just to check the overall system =
integrity and to check our liner/insulation.

We were worried since this was using the leftovers from Terry's LOX =
hybrid. As it had a 60 lb solid graphite nozzle, welded on 1/2 inch =
steel closures, etc; we wanted to make sure we weren't overlooking =
anything by converting it to our 85% solids AP/Al/HTPB propellant.

I cast the grain into an EPDM liner which was then RTV'ed into our =
liner; an 8 inch PVC sewer pipe. The grain was 7,75 in O.D. by 6.75 in =
I.D and was 4.5 inches tall. The full motor will have 4 of these =
segments, but with a 4.5 in I.D.

The test burn was fine. It burnt for eight seconds or so and everything =
held together just fine. It looks like the O motor will be tested in =
September.

                                                                    =
Brian

------=_NextPart_000_0A42_01C56B69.442264D0
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Diso-8859-1">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 6.00.2462.0" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Well we just fired a small grain in our =
potential O=20
motor. This grain only had 3.5 lbs of propellant instead of the 38 lbs =
or so the=20
thing will have fully loaded. This was just to check the overall system=20
integrity and to check our liner/insulation.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>We were worried since this was using =
the leftovers=20
from Terry's LOX hybrid. As it had a 60 lb solid graphite nozzle, welded =
on 1/2=20
inch steel closures, etc; we wanted to make sure we weren't overlooking =
anything=20
by converting it to our 85% solids AP/Al/HTPB propellant.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>I cast the grain into an EPDM liner =
which was then=20
RTV'ed into our liner; an 8 inch PVC sewer pipe. The grain was 7,75 in =
O.D. by=20
6.75 in I.D and was 4.5 inches tall. The full motor will have 4 of these =

segments, but with a 4.5 in I.D.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>The test burn was fine. It burnt for =
eight seconds=20
or so and everything held together just fine. It looks like the O motor =
will be=20
tested in September.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;=20
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; =
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;=20
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; =
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;=20
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; =
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;=20
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;=20
Brian</FONT></DIV></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0A42_01C56B69.442264D0--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 24634 invoked from network); 25 Jul 2001 00:08:34 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 25 Jul 2001 00:08:34 -0000
Received: (qmail 26416 invoked from network); 25 Jul 2001 00:10:23 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 25 Jul 2001 00:10:23 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA17489; Tue, 24 Jul 2001 17:06:17 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 83274 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 25 Jul 2001 00:04:55          +0000
Received: from castor.ridgenet.net (IDENT:root@castor.ridgenet.net          [199.120.150.29]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA17468          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 24 Jul 2001 17:04:55 -0700
Received: from kristinscomp (pm137.ridgenet.net [204.154.246.137]) by          castor.ridgenet.net (8.11.0/8.11.0) with SMTP id f6ONwbS21027; Tue,          24 Jul 2001 16:58:38 -0700
References:  <30.1811e629.288e5f08@aol.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <005101c1149e$96701280$1b30fea9@kristinscomp>
Date:         Tue, 24 Jul 2001 17:13:08 -0700
Reply-To: "Kristin & David Hall" <thehalls@RIDGENET.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Kristin & David Hall" <thehalls@RIDGENET.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] more patent crap
Comments: To: Sociald84@AOL.COM
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

> What rights if any to an invention would someone have to an invention that
> someone else through no connection what so ever obtained a patent to if
they
> did not try to patent it themselves or publically disclose it, however
they
> were able to prove that they invented it before the other person.

Funny you should ask that.  My father was involved in a lawsuit not too
different from that.  The basics of the story are....

My father invents a circuit that was integral to the night vision systems on
the AC-47 (*).
Some other guy independently invents a similar circuit and gets it patented.
Years pass.
Other guy finds out that certain military hardware uses a circuit in
violation of his patent.
Other guy sues.
Government traces history of circuit (as they know it) to the AC-47 and my
father.
Puff is known to have been fielded 3 years prior to other guy's patent
application.
Patent law says that an invention that has been in regular use for 1 year is
no longer patentable.
Patent ultimately got revoked.

So the guy sued to get rich and ended up losing his patent.

Extrapolating to your scenario, it seems to me that you have to prove not
only that you invented it, but that it was in widespread use a full year
before the other guy's patent was filed.  If you can do so, then the best
you can hope for is that the other guy's patent gets revoked.  If you can
not prove such, then the other guy retains full rights.


And no, I've never even played a lawyer on TV.....


(*) In case I got the designation wrong, Puff the Magic Dragon.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 26345 invoked from network); 25 Jul 2001 01:17:17 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 25 Jul 2001 01:17:17 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 79 invoked from network); 25 Jul 2001 01:18:09 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 25 Jul 2001 01:18:09 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA17720; Tue, 24 Jul 2001 18:10:24 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 83307 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 25 Jul 2001 01:08:51          +0000
Received: from femail17.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail17.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.0.95.144]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA17696          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 24 Jul 2001 18:08:50 -0700
Received: from home.com ([24.22.71.82]) by femail17.sdc1.sfba.home.com          (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20 201-229-121-120-20010223) with ESMTP id          <20010725010527.ELHY22787.femail17.sdc1.sfba.home.com@home.com>; Tue,          24 Jul 2001 18:05:27 -0700
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.75 [en] (Win98; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <30.1811e629.288e5f08@aol.com>            <005101c1149e$96701280$1b30fea9@kristinscomp>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B5E1B9F.D504D75D@home.com>
Date:         Tue, 24 Jul 2001 21:06:39 -0400
Reply-To: "Mark Simpson" <mark.simpson@HOME.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Mark Simpson" <mark.simpson@HOME.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] more patent crap
Comments: To: Kristin & David Hall <thehalls@RIDGENET.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Puff the Magic Dragon is one mean aircraft.

Mark Simpson

Kristin & David Hall wrote:

> > What rights if any to an invention would someone have to an invention that
> > someone else through no connection what so ever obtained a patent to if
> they
> > did not try to patent it themselves or publically disclose it, however
> they
> > were able to prove that they invented it before the other person.
>
> Funny you should ask that.  My father was involved in a lawsuit not too
> different from that.  The basics of the story are....
>
> My father invents a circuit that was integral to the night vision systems on
> the AC-47 (*).
> Some other guy independently invents a similar circuit and gets it patented.
> Years pass.
> Other guy finds out that certain military hardware uses a circuit in
> violation of his patent.
> Other guy sues.
> Government traces history of circuit (as they know it) to the AC-47 and my
> father.
> Puff is known to have been fielded 3 years prior to other guy's patent
> application.
> Patent law says that an invention that has been in regular use for 1 year is
> no longer patentable.
> Patent ultimately got revoked.
>
> So the guy sued to get rich and ended up losing his patent.
>
> Extrapolating to your scenario, it seems to me that you have to prove not
> only that you invented it, but that it was in widespread use a full year
> before the other guy's patent was filed.  If you can do so, then the best
> you can hope for is that the other guy's patent gets revoked.  If you can
> not prove such, then the other guy retains full rights.
>
> And no, I've never even played a lawyer on TV.....
>
> (*) In case I got the designation wrong, Puff the Magic Dragon.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 4021 invoked from network); 25 Jul 2001 01:33:03 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 25 Jul 2001 01:33:03 -0000
Received: (qmail 12641 invoked from network); 25 Jul 2001 01:34:51 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 25 Jul 2001 01:34:51 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA17911; Tue, 24 Jul 2001 18:31:30 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 83341 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 25 Jul 2001 01:30:09          +0000
Received: from spsystems.net (spsystems.net [209.47.149.227]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA17846 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Tue,          24 Jul 2001 18:28:38 -0700
Received: (from henry@localhost) by spsystems.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id VAA06617;          Tue, 24 Jul 2001 21:27:56 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010724211934.6487A-100000@spsystems.net>
Date:         Tue, 24 Jul 2001 21:27:56 -0400
Reply-To: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Subject:      [AR] pressurization (was Re: [AR] 3Re: [AR] 2Re: [AR] dark              secrets)
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <200107242210.SAA34162@deimos.idirect.com>

On Tue, 24 Jul 2001, Earl Colby Pottinger wrote:
> If you could feedback just a small amount of heat energy back to the
> oxider/fuel tanks both propane and N2O would pressurize themselves.  No
> pumps, no pressurizing gas, just valves maybe.

At last, back to something technical...

The problem is that there's no very magical way to move heat back to the
tanks.  It's probably just as easy to run a bit of each fluid -- or even
an inert third fluid, like liquid nitrogen -- through a small heat
exchanger and run the gas back up to the tank, giving a classical
propellant-boiling pressurization system.

> Could heatpipes move the heat?

Possibly, although they are probably heavier and harder to control than
a propellant-boiling system.

> Could you make a heatpipe that stops transferring energy when it's
> heatsink (output end) reachs a certain temperature?

Such things can be done, but this gets up into the region where designing
and building the heat pipe is a tricky exercise, probably requiring
professional expertise to get something that works reliably.

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 9546 invoked from network); 25 Jul 2001 01:34:19 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 25 Jul 2001 01:34:19 -0000
Received: (qmail 29517 invoked from network); 25 Jul 2001 01:36:24 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 25 Jul 2001 01:36:24 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA17882; Tue, 24 Jul 2001 18:30:08 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 83331 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 25 Jul 2001 01:28:47          +0000
Received: from femail10.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail10.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.0.95.106]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA17841          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 24 Jul 2001 18:28:02 -0700
Received: from hal2001 ([24.77.53.16]) by femail10.sdc1.sfba.home.com          (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20 201-229-121-120-20010223) with SMTP id          <20010725012756.EHER8095.femail10.sdc1.sfba.home.com@hal2001>; Tue,          24 Jul 2001 18:27:56 -0700
References: <EDB5E5136094D311BF1800508B12205E08D290A4@emss02m07.ems.lmco.com>             <3B5DA45B.8405443D@Lekstutis.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <001101c114a7$ee7c44e0$0400a8c0@hatjs>
Date:         Tue, 24 Jul 2001 18:20:02 -0700
Reply-To: "Jamie Morken" <jmorken@HOME.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jamie Morken" <jmorken@HOME.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] "secrecy orders"
Comments: To: "Arthur J. Lekstutis" <Artie@LEKSTUTIS.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Hi Artie,

> I found that curious too. I did a search and found this on the web
> yesterday. Interesting reading:
>     http://www.fas.org/sgp/othergov/invention/index.html
>
> Note that this happened 85 times in FY 2000, although some 245 where
> rescinded.
>
> Later,
> Artie Lekstutis

Thats a good page.  (posting an interesting chunk of it below :)

http://www.law.berkeley.edu/journals/btlj/articles/12_2/Lee/html/reader.html

"Invention secrecy orders negatively impact private interests. Although
invention secrecy originally affected only military employees and military
technologies, in recent years the Invention Secrecy Act has increasingly
been applied to private inventors.11 Many of these inventors develop
dual-use technologies, i.e., inventions with both military and commercial
purposes.12 In 1991, over three-quarters of all new secrecy orders-506 out
of 774-were issued to private inventors.13 These orders covered technologies
such as computer hardware, advanced ceramics, laser systems, semiconductor
manufacturing technologies, automated process control systems, highly
specialized software, video display technology, space photography,
industrial plating, and advanced sensors.14 Thus, one may ask whether
peacetime secrecy orders place unnecessary burdens upon private inventors of
primarily non-military inventions."

I wonder if the best of these "secret inventions" eventually make their way
into a big companies technology - royalty free? :)

best regards,
Jamie

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 13530 invoked from network); 25 Jul 2001 01:35:14 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 25 Jul 2001 01:35:14 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 13696 invoked from network); 25 Jul 2001 01:37:04 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 25 Jul 2001 01:37:04 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA17945; Tue, 24 Jul 2001 18:33:37 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 83349 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 25 Jul 2001 01:32:16          +0000
Received: from smtp.snet.net (smtp.snet.net [204.60.6.55]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA17920 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue,          24 Jul 2001 18:32:15 -0700
Received: from snet.net (225.70.252.64.snet.net [64.252.70.225]) by          smtp.snet.net (8.11.1/8.11.1/SNET-mx-1.4/D-1.10/O-1.7) with ESMTP id          f6P1WEN29894 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 24 Jul 2001 21:32:14          -0400 (EDT)
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.75 [en] (Win98; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010724090728.28319D-100000@spsystems.net>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B5E2495.B6CDCE33@snet.net>
Date:         Tue, 24 Jul 2001 21:44:53 -0400
Reply-To: "Blake Mantel" <BMantel@SNET.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Blake Mantel" <BMantel@SNET.NET>
Organization: done through the use of very fuzzy logic!
Subject:      Re: [AR] more patent crap
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Henry Spencer wrote:

> Mailing stuff to yourself is of no value whatsoever in proving priority.
> Your friendly neighborhood spy :-) can explain several ways to get stuff
> into and out of sealed envelopes.  Either your document has to be in the
> possession of a disinterested third party who is prepared to testify as to
> when it came into his possession, or you need to have it signed and dated
> by witnesses who are prepared to testify that they read it and understood
> it on that date.
>                                                           Henry Spencer
>                                                        henry@spsystems.net

Keep a bound book with sketches and ideas that prove the flow of the Idea. If you
have something "wonderful" go get it notarized by a public notary. Cheap and
simple...
Blake
--
CUM CATAPULTAE PROSCRIPTAE ERUNT TUM SOLI PROSCRIPTI CATAPULTAS HABEBUNT.
(When catapults are outlawed, only outlaws will have catapults....)
Triumph Tiger Motorcycle page at: http://pages.cthome.net/bmantel/

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 24437 invoked from network); 25 Jul 2001 01:37:48 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 25 Jul 2001 01:37:48 -0000
Received: (qmail 11431 invoked from network); 25 Jul 2001 01:33:52 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 25 Jul 2001 01:33:52 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA17853; Tue, 24 Jul 2001 18:28:44 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 83321 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 25 Jul 2001 01:27:17          +0000
Received: from albatross.wgn.net (www.wgn.net [64.14.252.81] (may be forged))          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA17822 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 24 Jul 2001 18:27:17 -0700
Received: from hogwild (sc-66-74-70-20.socal.rr.com [66.74.70.20]) by          albatross.wgn.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id SAA20421 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 24 Jul 2001 18:28:37 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0A45_01C56B69.443577A0"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <020601c114a5$e21e9920$14464a42@socal.rr.com>
Date:         Tue, 24 Jul 2001 18:05:23 -0700
Reply-To: "Wedge Oldham" <wedge@WESTWORLD.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Wedge Oldham" <wedge@WESTWORLD.COM>
Subject:      [AR] Nike Hercules Flight
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0A45_01C56B69.443577A0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

I flew my 1/3 scale Nike Hercules at LDRS this last weekend. Now I know =
this is somewhat off topic, considering it flew on commercial motors. =
But a number of questions were answered by this group, and I just wanted =
to show the results of those answers. Thank you one and all.

See: http://nikeproject.com/launch/NikeLaunchPictures.html

Wedge Oldham
http://NikeProject.com

------=_NextPart_000_0A45_01C56B69.443577A0
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Diso-8859-1">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 5.50.4616.200" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>I flew my 1/3 scale Nike Hercules at =
LDRS this last=20
weekend. Now I know this is somewhat off topic, considering it flew on=20
commercial motors. But a number of questions were answered by this =
group, and I=20
just wanted to show the results of those answers. Thank you one and=20
all.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>See: <A=20
href=3D"http://nikeproject.com/launch/NikeLaunchPictures.html">http://nik=
eproject.com/launch/NikeLaunchPictures.html</A></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Wedge Oldham<BR><A=20
href=3D"http://NikeProject.com">http://NikeProject.com</A></FONT></DIV></=
BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0A45_01C56B69.443577A0--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 18487 invoked from network); 25 Jul 2001 01:43:19 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 25 Jul 2001 01:43:19 -0000
Received: (qmail 4387 invoked from network); 25 Jul 2001 01:45:06 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 25 Jul 2001 01:45:06 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA18050; Tue, 24 Jul 2001 18:41:33 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 83366 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 25 Jul 2001 01:40:08          +0000
Received: from imo-d02.mx.aol.com (imo-d02.mx.aol.com [205.188.157.34]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA18022 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Tue, 24 Jul 2001 18:40:07 -0700
Received: from Balthezar@aol.com by imo-d02.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v31.9.) id          w.14.177709d2 (3736) for <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Tue, 24 Jul 2001          21:39:33 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0A48_01C56B69.4437C190"
X-Mailer: AOL 6.0 for Windows US sub 10532
Message-ID:  <14.177709d2.288f7d55@aol.com>
Date:         Tue, 24 Jul 2001 21:39:33 EDT
Reply-To: <Balthezar@AOL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <Balthezar@AOL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Nike Hercules Flight
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0A48_01C56B69.4437C190
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

In a message dated 7/24/01 9:29:57 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
wedge@WESTWORLD.COM writes:


> I flew my 1/3 scale Nike Hercules at LDRS this last weekend. Now I know this
> is somewhat off topic, considering it flew on commercial motors.

Personally, I don't think it off topic at all! Getting all 4 motors to light
and successful staging of a complex project such as the 'Herc is quite an
accomplishment! Congrats! Flight details please.

Bruce Kirchner

------=_NextPart_000_0A48_01C56B69.4437C190
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<HTML><FONT FACE=arial,helvetica><FONT  SIZE=2>In a message dated 7/24/01 9:29:57 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
<BR>wedge@WESTWORLD.COM writes:
<BR>
<BR>
<BR><BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE style="BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px">I flew my 1/3 scale Nike Hercules at LDRS this last weekend. Now I know this
<BR>is somewhat off topic, considering it flew on commercial motors. </FONT><FONT  COLOR="#000000" SIZE=3 FAMILY="SANSSERIF" FACE="Arial" LANG="0"></BLOCKQUOTE>
<BR></FONT><FONT  COLOR="#000000" SIZE=2 FAMILY="SANSSERIF" FACE="Arial" LANG="0">
<BR>Personally, I don't think it off topic at all! Getting all 4 motors to light
<BR>and successful staging of a complex project such as the 'Herc is quite an
<BR>accomplishment! Congrats! Flight details please.
<BR>
<BR>Bruce Kirchner</FONT></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0A48_01C56B69.4437C190--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 9840 invoked from network); 25 Jul 2001 01:55:26 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 25 Jul 2001 01:55:26 -0000
Received: (qmail 9956 invoked from network); 25 Jul 2001 01:56:36 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 25 Jul 2001 01:56:36 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA18153; Tue, 24 Jul 2001 18:52:30 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 83394 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 25 Jul 2001 01:51:09          +0000
Received: from spsystems.net (spsystems.net [209.47.149.227]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA18123 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Tue,          24 Jul 2001 18:50:13 -0700
Received: (from henry@localhost) by spsystems.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id VAA07979;          Tue, 24 Jul 2001 21:49:30 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010724213748.6487C-100000@spsystems.net>
Date:         Tue, 24 Jul 2001 21:49:30 -0400
Reply-To: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Subject:      [AR] priorities (was Re: [AR] more patent crap)
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <3B5E2495.B6CDCE33@snet.net>

On Tue, 24 Jul 2001, Blake Mantel wrote:
> > Mailing stuff to yourself is of no value whatsoever in proving priority...
>
> Keep a bound book with sketches and ideas that prove the flow of the Idea.
> If you have something "wonderful" go get it notarized by a public
> notary. Cheap and simple...

And, as has already been noted, pretty much ineffective...

Right concept, but wrong details.  The way this is done professionally is
that *each page* of your notebook is read, signed, and dated by someone
who is competent to understand it and is willing to testify in court later
that he did indeed sign a page with those contents on that date.

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 26056 invoked from network); 25 Jul 2001 01:59:06 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 25 Jul 2001 01:59:06 -0000
Received: (qmail 26444 invoked from network); 25 Jul 2001 01:54:10 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 25 Jul 2001 01:54:10 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA18131; Tue, 24 Jul 2001 18:51:08 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 83386 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 25 Jul 2001 01:49:46          +0000
Received: from femail10.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail10.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.0.95.106]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA18105          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 24 Jul 2001 18:49:46 -0700
Received: from hal2001 ([24.77.53.16]) by femail10.sdc1.sfba.home.com          (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20 201-229-121-120-20010223) with SMTP id          <20010725014940.FIRI8095.femail10.sdc1.sfba.home.com@hal2001> for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 24 Jul 2001 18:49:40 -0700
References:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010724211934.6487A-100000@spsystems.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <002101c114aa$f77636c0$0400a8c0@hatjs>
Date:         Tue, 24 Jul 2001 18:41:46 -0700
Reply-To: "Jamie Morken" <jmorken@HOME.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jamie Morken" <jmorken@HOME.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] pressurization (was Re: [AR] 3Re: [AR] 2Re: [AR] dark              secrets)
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Hi all,

>
> The problem is that there's no very magical way to move heat back to the
> tanks.  It's probably just as easy to run a bit of each fluid -- or even
> an inert third fluid, like liquid nitrogen -- through a small heat
> exchanger and run the gas back up to the tank, giving a classical
> propellant-boiling pressurization system.
>
> > Could heatpipes move the heat?
>
> Possibly, although they are probably heavier and harder to control than
> a propellant-boiling system.
>
> > Could you make a heatpipe that stops transferring energy when it's
> > heatsink (output end) reachs a certain temperature?

Perhaps using a copper rod attached to the engine on one end and inside one
of the propellant tanks
(with an o-ring seal) on the other end.  When the pressure in the propellant
tank goes up, the whole tank could
lift up decreasing the surface area of the rod in the tank which would
reduce the heating effect from the motor.  And when the pressure in the tank
goes down the tank would fall towards the motor increasing the heat transfer
rate and boiling more liquid.

A set or variable pressurized gas could be used between the propellant tank
and the motor to "calibrate" the system.

This could be done for both propellant tanks but they would have to be half
cylinders and able to slide up and down beside
eachother inside the airframe.

Just an idea - too bad we can't find out if it is what was used  :)

best regards,
Jamie

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 27521 invoked from network); 25 Jul 2001 01:59:27 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 25 Jul 2001 01:59:27 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 26713 invoked from network); 25 Jul 2001 01:54:37 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 25 Jul 2001 01:54:37 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA18096; Tue, 24 Jul 2001 18:49:29 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 83378 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 25 Jul 2001 01:48:08          +0000
Received: from smtp7ve.mailsrvcs.net (smtp7vepub.gte.net [206.46.170.28]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA18077 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 24 Jul 2001 18:48:07 -0700
Received: from me-513q3sc0zun0.pengar.com          (adsl-64-223-147-206.mannh.adsl.bellatlantic.net [64.223.147.206]) by          smtp7ve.mailsrvcs.net (8.9.1/8.9.1) with ESMTP id BAA46912595; Wed,          25 Jul 2001 01:47:29 GMT
X-Sender: seth-pc@hobbiton.shire.net
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <5.1.0.14.0.20010724215041.01cbbc60@hobbiton.shire.net>
Date:         Tue, 24 Jul 2001 21:52:09 -0400
Reply-To: "Seth Leigh" <seth@PENGAR.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Seth Leigh" <seth@PENGAR.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Nike Hercules Flight
Comments: To: Wedge Oldham <wedge@WESTWORLD.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <020601c114a5$e21e9920$14464a42@socal.rr.com>

"Wedge, you are my hero!"

That was AWESOME.  I really thought that liftoff was very, very cool
looking.  And it looks like your second stage ignition went off perfectly
as well.

I have one question, at the very end it kinda looked like the chute
separated from the rocket, and the rocket looked like it was headed for a
faceplant on the desert floor.  Is that what happened?

Seth


At 09:05 PM 7/24/2001, Wedge Oldham wrote:
>I flew my 1/3 scale Nike Hercules at LDRS this last weekend. Now I know
>this is somewhat off topic, considering it flew on commercial motors. But
>a number of questions were answered by this group, and I just wanted to
>show the results of those answers. Thank you one and all.
>
>See:
><http://nikeproject.com/launch/NikeLaunchPictures.html>http://nikeproject.com/launch/NikeLaunchPictures.html
>
>Wedge Oldham
><http://NikeProject.com>http://NikeProject.com

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 29030 invoked from network); 25 Jul 2001 01:59:48 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 25 Jul 2001 01:59:48 -0000
Received: (qmail 13089 invoked from network); 25 Jul 2001 02:01:37 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 25 Jul 2001 02:01:37 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA18205; Tue, 24 Jul 2001 18:56:24 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 83406 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 25 Jul 2001 01:54:59          +0000
Received: from dune.gnc.net (root@dune.gnc.net [207.203.72.4]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA18176 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue,          24 Jul 2001 18:54:58 -0700
Received: from beowulf (sw2-10.gnc.net [207.203.72.90]) by dune.gnc.net          (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id VAA11176 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue,          24 Jul 2001 21:54:58 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <LPBBKJMJEOFKAMFJJNNHCEOGCFAA.landofgrey@gnc.net>
Date:         Tue, 24 Jul 2001 21:54:53 -0400
Reply-To: <landofgrey@gnc.net>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Matthew Travis" <landofgrey@gnc.net>
Subject:      Re: [AR] 2Re: Alternatives to patents?
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <5.1.0.14.0.20010724093419.02b4fcc8@hobbiton.shire.net>

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU]On
> Behalf Of Seth Leigh
> Sent: Tuesday, July 24, 2001 9:41 AM
> To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
> Subject: Re: [AR] 2Re: Alternatives to patents?
>
>
> At 02:16 AM 7/24/2001, Matthew Travis wrote:
> >None. They are profiting from using a product of the invention,
> not from the
> >selling of the invention itself. It's not the end-user of an
> invention who
> >violates a patent. It is the person/company who sells a product
> based on the
> >invention to the end user who is in violation.
>
> I believe you are mistaken here.  I have read of numerous cases in the
> software patent (inarguably a totally fscked up area) arena of cases where
> "inventors" of patented software concepts have filed lawsuits against not
> only the company who sells an "infringing" product, but also their primary
> (read: deep pocket) customers.  The key here, I believe, is that the
> customers who were sued were also commercial entities, and were thus
> profiting from the use of an infringing product.  Private individual
> customers using an infringing product for personal uses may well be
> shielded from liability.

More often than not, the customers are never judged against. The exception
is when the "customer" is more than a customer, read below. They are named
in the suit because that is the best way to bring them into the court
proceedings and make a case againsdt the vender. It does not mean that the
customer is really being accused of breaking a law. It seems odd, but civil
law is not the same as criminal law. The rules are much more relaxed. And
often the only way to ensure that a "witness" or "party" to the event will
actually be present in court and be able to be questioned in the desired
manner is to actually name them as a defendent. Subpeonaing a witness does
not guarantee the witness will ever testify, or testify truthfully. Perjury
in civil cases is rampant and the penalties not usually severe. Remember,
we're talking civil, not criminal, law. You can't apply notions about how
criminal law works to civil law. Civil law doesn't even have to deal with
someone breaking a law.

Lawsuits are not criminal, they are civil. You have to realize that criminal
law, dealing with breaking laws, is different from civil law, which deals
with a particular party who feels that he has been wronged. The way the two
types of law work are vastly different. Criminal-type justice and courtroom
laws don't apply as much and there is much greater latitude. In fact, you
can file suit anyone for anything that you want, and it doesn't have to be
because a law was broken. The caveat is that the suit may be thrown out and
you may get counter-sued, but there is nothing keeping you from suing for
any damn old reason. That is part of the poroblem with personal injury
lawsuits in this country and why we have so many friggin' lawyers here. We
have a gazillion civil law attorneys and not enough criminal law attorneys.
And there is a difference. So, in any case, the fact that a customer was
sued along with the seller for infringement does not mean that the customer
broke a law. In fact, it is common for all parties other than the plaintiff
to be named in the suit: seller, customer, distributor, even media carrying
advertising for the product. That doesn't mean they broke the law. Oddly
enough. Furthermore, a being sued is not the same as being indicted for
committing a crime. As well, losing a suit, as a defendent, does not mean or
imply that a law has been broken. Example: O.J. He was found innocent in
criminal court, but lost a wrongful death lawsuit. Yet, that does not mean
that he could be prosecuted as a criminal because of losing the suit. Also,
even losing the suit, he is not, in the eyes of the law, a convict or
criminal in any way.

Anyway, it depends on the relationship the "customer" has with the seller.
And it also depends to some extent on the concept of knowingly engaging in a
business relationship with an entity illegally marketing a product. There is
a resemblence to stolen goods - anyone who purchases stolen property is in
violation of the law. However, it is only when the person purchases property
that he knows is stolen is he committing a prosecutable criminal offense. If
he didn't know, then, in real life, the most that usually happens is he has
to give up the property (as evidence, return to owner or similar). Note that
there is a difference between being in violation of the law technically, and
doing something that is prosecutable. I have managed both multimillion
dollar b-b software contracts as well as hundred dollar b-c purchases.
Business-to-business deals, when it comes to technology, are quite often not
the same as business-to-consumer. In a b-b relationship, the consumer simply
purchases the software (license) and that's that. For a b-b relationship,
most often, there are contracts, terms, special provisions and the like. The
"customer" is much more than a simple consumer, and is in fact, an active,
knowing (key word), partner in the relationship. That's why
business-business relationships get so much more legal scrutiny then
business-consumer relationships.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 4596 invoked from network); 25 Jul 2001 02:07:56 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 25 Jul 2001 02:07:56 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 17249 invoked from network); 25 Jul 2001 02:09:43 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 25 Jul 2001 02:09:43 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA18268; Tue, 24 Jul 2001 19:04:04 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 83418 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 25 Jul 2001 02:02:43          +0000
Received: from mx2.snet.net ([204.60.203.164]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7)          with ESMTP id TAA18249 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 24 Jul 2001          19:02:42 -0700
Received: from snet.net (225.70.252.64.snet.net [64.252.70.225]) by          mx2.snet.net (8.11.1/8.11.1/SNET-mx-1.4/D-1.10/O-1.7) with ESMTP id          f6P22ek20704 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 24 Jul 2001 22:02:40          -0400 (EDT)
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.75 [en] (Win98; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <D30064BBFF2DD51180BC00508BDF3EE70113754E@pusehe07.eh.pweh.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Message-ID:  <3B5E2BB7.903181A4@snet.net>
Date:         Tue, 24 Jul 2001 22:15:20 -0400
Reply-To: "Blake Mantel" <BMantel@SNET.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Blake Mantel" <BMantel@SNET.NET>
Organization: done through the use of very fuzzy logic!
Subject: =?iso-8859-1?Q?_____Re:_=5BAR=5D_FW:_Mid-year_Letter_From_Louis__________?=
	=?iso-8859-1?Q?____Ch=EAnevert?=
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

"Mantel, Blake" wrote:

> >  -----Original Message-----
> > From:         Group Communications
> > Subject:      Mid-year Letter From Louis Chnevert
> > To the People of Pratt & Whitney:

> SNIP!!!!!!!

>
> > Space Propulsion's liquid hydrogen turbopump flies on the Space Shuttle
> > for the first time in July.  We also continue to develop the new 60,000
> > pound thrust RL60 upper stage rocket engine and have teamed with Aerojet
> > on a new 600,000 pound thrust booster engine for advanced spacecraft.

Also some information form another of the main company webpages.....


         Preparations continue on schedule at Kennedy Space Center for an early
morning
         (5:04 a.m. EST) liftoff of Space Shuttle Atlantis and its five-member
crew on Thursday,
         July 12. The Rotating Service Structure will be moved away from
Atlantis Wednesday
         morning, and the fueling of the External Tank is set to begin Wednesday
night.
         Currently, forecasts indicate a 60-percent chance of favorable weather
for launch on
          Thursday.  Atlantis is set to deliver the Joint
         Airlock to the International Space Station.

         The launch of Atlantis on mission STS-104
         will be the first for a new Space Shuttle Main
         Engine (SSME), called the Block II
       configuration.   The new configuration
      includes a new Pratt & Whitney high-pressure
       fuel turbopump.  Atlantis is also equipped
         with two Block IIA main engines to complete
        its full complement of three engines.

                                     Pratt & Whitney was awarded the NASA
                                     contract for development of Alternate
                                     Turbopumps for the SSME in August 1986,
                                     following a competitive proposal submittal
                                     process.  Simultaneous design work got
                                     underway in late 1986 for a new High
                                     Pressure Oxidizer Turbopump (HPOTP) and
                                     a new High Pressure Fuel Turbopump
                                     (HPFTP).  These turbopumps raise the
         pressure of the SSME propellants, liquid oxygen and liquid hydrogen, to
more than
         5,000 pounds per square inch (psi) to facilitate the operation of the
Staged
         Combustion Propulsion Cycle of the SSME.

         Because of the severity of the working environment (liquid hydrogen at
400 degrees
         F and turbine drive gas temperature of +1500 degrees F), and the high
energy levels
         required to elevate the propellant pressures (the combined turbopumps
produce
         about 100,000 horsepower during engine firing), the original turbopumps
had been
         unable to achieve the desired life and reliability in operation.  The
Alternate
         Turbopump (AT) designs were focused on eliminating the recurring
problems that
         limited life and drove maintenance, including weld inspections, bearing
wear, sheet
         metal cracking, and many others.

         Initial full-scale turbopump tests began in early 1990 at P&Ws High
Pressure Rocket
         Test Stand E-8, located in West Palm Beach, Fla.  Testing on the SSME
at the John
         C. Stennis Space Center (SSC) was
         begun in 1991.  Because of NASA
         funding limitations, work on the
         HPFTP was stopped at the end of
         1991 so that resources could be
         focused on the HPOTP, which was
         needed more urgently. Development
         of the HPOTP continued until
         Certification testing was completed in
         March 1995.  The HPOTP entered
         flight service as part of the Block I
         SSME in July 1995. As the HPOTP
         was nearing development completion,
         work on the HPFTP was resumed in
         April 1994.

         During development testing, the
         strenuous demands on the internal
         parts of the HPFTP caused several
         structural problems that required
         design changes and subsequent
         additional testing to validate the
         effectiveness of these changes.  The
         HPFTP alone produces almost 75,000
         horsepower but weighs only 1015
         pounds, making it one of the highest
         power-density machines (horsepower per pound) in the world.
Achievement of a high
         degree of maturity led to the Critical Design Review (CDR) in June
1998.  A rigorous
         Certification Hot-Fire demonstration was completed in June 2000, during
which 2
         HPFTPs were each tested for 22 simulated Space Shuttle missions on the
SSME.
         The condition of the hardware at the conclusion of these tests was
excellent.
         Following Certification, production of flight articles was initiated,
each of which is
         subjected to a simulated mission Acceptance Test at SSC.  A total of 20
flight units
         are to be manufactured and delivered by the end of CY2002.  Full
implementation,
         with P&W Fuel Turbopumps replacing the current units for all Shuttle
launches, is
         targeted for as early as February 2002.



         P&W will also provide overhaul and refurbishment for all delivered
turbopumps, both
         oxidizer and fuel, at the end of an overhaul life interval of 11
starts. Eleven starts is
         nominally defined as 10 missions plus 1 ground acceptance test, but
this may vary if
         additional ground tests are accumulated during the operational life of
a turbopump.
         Overhaul of the HPOTPs will begin in early 2002 as these units reach 11
starts in field
         operation.  After refurbishment, each turbopump will be returned to
field service for an
         additional 11 starts.  A minimum service life of 3 overhaul intervals,
or 33 total starts,
         is anticipated for each turbopump.  The Turbopump O&R activity will
continue
         throughout the Space Shuttles operational life, which is currently
expected to extend
         until 2012.

         In addition to the new HPFTP, P&W Space Propulsion will provide
Atlantis with 16
         booster separation motors and the three high-pressure liquid-oxygen
turbopumps.


Blake
--
CUM CATAPULTAE PROSCRIPTAE ERUNT TUM SOLI PROSCRIPTI CATAPULTAS HABEBUNT.
(When catapults are outlawed, only outlaws will have catapults....)
Triumph Tiger Motorcycle page at: http://pages.cthome.net/bmantel/

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 2736 invoked from network); 25 Jul 2001 02:14:37 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 25 Jul 2001 02:14:37 -0000
Received: (qmail 1388 invoked from network); 25 Jul 2001 02:16:23 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 25 Jul 2001 02:16:23 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA18311; Tue, 24 Jul 2001 19:08:57 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 83426 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 25 Jul 2001 02:07:29          +0000
Received: from femail10.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail10.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.0.95.106]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA18292          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 24 Jul 2001 19:07:29 -0700
Received: from hal2001 ([24.77.53.16]) by femail10.sdc1.sfba.home.com          (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20 201-229-121-120-20010223) with SMTP id          <20010725020716.GCZE8095.femail10.sdc1.sfba.home.com@hal2001> for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 24 Jul 2001 19:07:16 -0700
References:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010724211934.6487A-100000@spsystems.net>              <002101c114aa$f77636c0$0400a8c0@hatjs>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <003101c114ad$6ceaa7e0$0400a8c0@hatjs>
Date:         Tue, 24 Jul 2001 18:59:22 -0700
Reply-To: "Jamie Morken" <jmorken@HOME.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jamie Morken" <jmorken@HOME.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] pressurization (was Re: [AR] 3Re: [AR] 2Re: [AR] dark              secrets)
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

>
> Perhaps using a copper rod attached to the engine on one end and inside
one
> of the propellant tanks
> (with an o-ring seal) on the other end.  When the pressure in the
propellant
> tank goes up, the whole tank could
> lift up decreasing the surface area of the rod in the tank which would
> reduce the heating effect from the motor.  And when the pressure in the
tank
> goes down the tank would fall towards the motor increasing the heat
transfer
> rate and boiling more liquid.
>
> A set or variable pressurized gas could be used between the propellant
tank
> and the motor to "calibrate" the system.
>
> This could be done for both propellant tanks but they would have to be
half
> cylinders and able to slide up and down beside
> eachother inside the airframe.
>
> Just an idea - too bad we can't find out if it is what was used  :)
>

Woops!  Doh!  (wasn't thinking)

The above would need a modification of a pipe from the top of each
propellant tank (the pressurized propellant gas) to the seperated spaces
below each propellant tank to force the tanks up when they are pressurized.
The area above the tanks could be set to a calibration pressure.  There are
other things to think about too - like sealing the propellant tanks so that
they don't leak from above to below.. in the off chance anyone wants a
drawing I will make one up.  :)

best regards,
Jamie

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 18151 invoked from network); 25 Jul 2001 02:31:54 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 25 Jul 2001 02:31:54 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 28347 invoked from network); 25 Jul 2001 02:33:42 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 25 Jul 2001 02:33:42 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA18458; Tue, 24 Jul 2001 19:27:06 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 83447 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 25 Jul 2001 02:25:38          +0000
Received: from cyclone.comcen.com.au (cyclone.comcen.com.au [203.23.236.100])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA18438 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 24 Jul 2001 19:25:36 -0700
Received: (from nobody@localhost) by cyclone.comcen.com.au (8.11.1/8.11.1) id          f6P2PSE07469; Wed, 25 Jul 2001 12:25:28 +1000 (EST) (envelope-from          pkelly@comcen.com.au)
X-Authentication-Warning: cyclone.comcen.com.au: nobody set sender to                         pkelly@comcen.com.au using -f
References: <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010724211934.6487A-100000@spsystems.net>            <002101c114aa$f77636c0$0400a8c0@hatjs>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
User-Agent: IMP/PHP IMAP webmail program 2.2.3
X-Originating-IP: 203.2.125.3
Message-ID:  <996027928.3b5e2e18ad74c@webmail.comcen.com.au>
Date:         Wed, 25 Jul 2001 12:25:28 +1000
Reply-To: "Paul Kelly" <pkelly@COMCEN.COM.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Paul Kelly" <pkelly@COMCEN.COM.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] pressurization (was Re: [AR] 3Re: [AR] 2Re: [AR] dark              secrets)
Comments: To: Jamie Morken <jmorken@HOME.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <002101c114aa$f77636c0$0400a8c0@hatjs>

Quoting Jamie Morken <jmorken@HOME.COM>:
We're talking biprops right?
Just put the copper CC in the nox tank.
?

PK
> Hi all,
>
> >
> > The problem is that there's no very magical way to move heat back to
> the
> > tanks.  It's probably just as easy to run a bit of each fluid -- or
> even
> > an inert third fluid, like liquid nitrogen -- through a small heat
> > exchanger and run the gas back up to the tank, giving a classical
> > propellant-boiling pressurization system.
> >
> > > Could heatpipes move the heat?
> >
> > Possibly, although they are probably heavier and harder to control
> than
> > a propellant-boiling system.
> >
> > > Could you make a heatpipe that stops transferring energy when it's
> > > heatsink (output end) reachs a certain temperature?
>
> Perhaps using a copper rod attached to the engine on one end and inside
> one
> of the propellant tanks
> (with an o-ring seal) on the other end.  When the pressure in the
> propellant
> tank goes up, the whole tank could
> lift up decreasing the surface area of the rod in the tank which would
> reduce the heating effect from the motor.  And when the pressure in the
> tank
> goes down the tank would fall towards the motor increasing the heat
> transfer
> rate and boiling more liquid.
>
> A set or variable pressurized gas could be used between the propellant
> tank
> and the motor to "calibrate" the system.
>
> This could be done for both propellant tanks but they would have to be
> half
> cylinders and able to slide up and down beside
> eachother inside the airframe.
>
> Just an idea - too bad we can't find out if it is what was used  :)
>
> best regards,
> Jamie
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 4347 invoked from network); 25 Jul 2001 02:36:01 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 25 Jul 2001 02:36:01 -0000
Received: (qmail 29967 invoked from network); 25 Jul 2001 02:37:51 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 25 Jul 2001 02:37:51 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA18588; Tue, 24 Jul 2001 19:33:40 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 83467 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 25 Jul 2001 02:32:19          +0000
Received: from dune.gnc.net (root@dune.gnc.net [207.203.72.4]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA18568 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue,          24 Jul 2001 19:32:18 -0700
Received: from beowulf (sw2-10.gnc.net [207.203.72.90]) by dune.gnc.net          (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id WAA12030 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue,          24 Jul 2001 22:32:19 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <LPBBKJMJEOFKAMFJJNNHIEOHCFAA.landofgrey@gnc.net>
Date:         Tue, 24 Jul 2001 22:32:14 -0400
Reply-To: <landofgrey@gnc.net>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Matthew Travis" <landofgrey@gnc.net>
Subject:      Re: [AR] priorities (was Re: [AR] more patent crap)
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010724213748.6487C-100000@spsystems.net>

Sadly, probably the best preventative medicine is to have an attorney on
retainer. If you're doing ongoing work, and not a one-shot invention, it's
the most cost-effective way to go. And, contrary to perception, it is not
that expensive (depending, of course, on your means). $300-1000 per patent
should not be unreasonable. After all, the idea is that you are patenting an
invention that must have some worth, and, as such, a patent is an
investment. If you are seeking a patent merely out of pride and wanting to
make sure that someone else doesn't get credit, but the invention is in
reality worth less than the patent, then you are probably not being very
wise. Of course, it might be good to seek a patent for something that
*might* have worth later even if you don't know how much yet.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU]On
> Behalf Of Henry Spencer
> Sent: Tuesday, July 24, 2001 9:50 PM
> To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
> Subject: [AR] priorities (was Re: [AR] more patent crap)
>
>
> On Tue, 24 Jul 2001, Blake Mantel wrote:
> > > Mailing stuff to yourself is of no value whatsoever in
> proving priority...
> >
> > Keep a bound book with sketches and ideas that prove the flow
> of the Idea.
> > If you have something "wonderful" go get it notarized by a public
> > notary. Cheap and simple...
>
> And, as has already been noted, pretty much ineffective...
>
> Right concept, but wrong details.  The way this is done professionally is
> that *each page* of your notebook is read, signed, and dated by someone
> who is competent to understand it and is willing to testify in court later
> that he did indeed sign a page with those contents on that date.
>
>                                                           Henry Spencer
>                                                        henry@spsystems.net
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 8477 invoked from network); 25 Jul 2001 02:37:07 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 25 Jul 2001 02:37:07 -0000
Received: (qmail 14702 invoked from network); 25 Jul 2001 02:39:15 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 25 Jul 2001 02:39:15 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA18498; Tue, 24 Jul 2001 19:28:54 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 83455 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 25 Jul 2001 02:27:33          +0000
Received: from dune.gnc.net (root@dune.gnc.net [207.203.72.4]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA18479 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue,          24 Jul 2001 19:27:32 -0700
Received: from beowulf (sw2-10.gnc.net [207.203.72.90]) by dune.gnc.net          (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id WAA11910 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue,          24 Jul 2001 22:27:32 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <LPBBKJMJEOFKAMFJJNNHAEOHCFAA.landofgrey@gnc.net>
Date:         Tue, 24 Jul 2001 22:27:27 -0400
Reply-To: <landofgrey@gnc.net>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Matthew Travis" <landofgrey@gnc.net>
Subject:      Re: [AR] 2Re: Alternatives to patents?
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010724135440.1045B-100000@spsystems.net>

> > ...The key here, I believe, is that the
> > customers who were sued were also commercial entities, and were thus
> > profiting from the use of an infringing product.  Private individual
> > customers using an infringing product for personal uses may well be
> > shielded from liability.
>
> No.  There is *NO* "fair use" or "personal use" exemption for patents.
> Even personal use technically requires a license (which is normally
> transferred to the user as he buys a licensed product).  Patent owners
> have very nearly absolute control over their inventions, for the duration
> of the patent.
>
You're right that normally, when someone purchases a licensed product, a use
license gets transferred to him (in fact, with software, that is what you
purchase). If the seller does not have legal right (a license) to use and
sell the product, or part of it, then he doesn't have the right to transfer
a license to a customer. Because of this, the customer is unknowingly in a
technical legal violation. However, he is also in a different legal
situation than the seller of the software, who has knowingly infringed upon
someone's patent rights. As well, purchasing a licensed product, while a use
license is tranferred to the buyer for that product, use licenses for all of
the patented technology that the product is based on do *not* automatically
transfer as well. This is what's known as a derived work. So, just because I
buy a product made in violation someone's patent does not automatically mean
that I am violation of that patent. Additionally, matters are more
complicated by the terms by which a patent-holder licenses a patent. Many
patented technology is available for end-use or personal (i.e.
non-commercial) use, but restrictions are placed when it comes to *creating*
a work that is derived from the patented technology. Example, I purchased MS
Office. I have a license to use it. I do not have a license to make a new
product derived from Office and sell it. Now, these differences, and any
exceptions resulting from them, are not spelled out in patent law,
specifically. The reason is that the patent-holder has wide legal latitude
for determining the licensing and use requirements of his invention.
However, requirements that are excessive, though legal, are subject to more
scrutiny in the courtroom during a lawsuit. This, by the way, is part of why
the Open Source model of licensing has not been able to find general
applicability with patents. Anyone who wants to "open source" his patent can
do so through the specification of licensing terms of the patent, and actual
patent law is the same regardless.

Under U.S. laws, and keep in mind that different countries have differnt
patent protection laws, there isn't technically an "exception". What there
is, is a common law practice that provides, in effect, an exception. There
are practial exceptions, even if not legal ones. One should not take the
fact that someone used the word "exception" to mean that the person is
claiming that there is legislation in black and white that grants a legal
exception. Almost all of us who use (have purchased licenses for) software
sold by Microsoft, Netscape, Apple, Sun and Computer Associates have, at one
time or another, been using software created in violation of one or more
patents. We're not going to be sued. Additionally, patent law itself doesn't
specifically address the difference between being an end-user of an
invention and a party using an invention to create a derived work or base a
commercial practive on. However, that is something adressed in the courts
and there is a long history of common law and common practices that creates
a definite distinction between the two. I'll also add, for the heck of it,
that patent infringement is not a criminal offense. It is a civil offense
and the only recourse for a victim is to sue. There is no such thing as
being indicted or arrested or sent to jail for patent infringement. Even the
government has to resort to suing. Criminal law, and criminal law concepts
do not apply. That is why the idea of "excpetions" is more widelt
interpreted than in criminal law. In criminal law, the only exceptions are
the ones that the law spells out. In civil law, the exception may be spelled
out by the wording of the law, but they may also be more "ambiguous" or
"vague", common practices, and matters of common law. Because of that, in
real life, in the courtroom, there are exceptions. Trust me, I'm not
speaking from a vacuum here. A friendly judge in Illinois gave us a little
speech about "liability" and "culpability" in the suit I was party to as a
plaintiff dealiung with this subject, and how we could work out a settlement
that gave adequate relief and licensing terms.

> It may not be worth *suing* small users for infringement, but that's a
> different issue.
I agree. That is, in a more concise wording, part of my point.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 12553 invoked from network); 25 Jul 2001 02:45:53 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 25 Jul 2001 02:45:53 -0000
Received: (qmail 16368 invoked from network); 25 Jul 2001 02:47:43 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 25 Jul 2001 02:47:43 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA18752; Tue, 24 Jul 2001 19:41:19 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 83494 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 25 Jul 2001 02:39:57          +0000
Received: from dune.gnc.net (root@dune.gnc.net [207.203.72.4]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA18723 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue,          24 Jul 2001 19:39:56 -0700
Received: from beowulf (sw2-10.gnc.net [207.203.72.90]) by dune.gnc.net          (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id WAA12225 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue,          24 Jul 2001 22:39:57 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <LPBBKJMJEOFKAMFJJNNHCEOICFAA.landofgrey@gnc.net>
Date:         Tue, 24 Jul 2001 22:39:53 -0400
Reply-To: <landofgrey@gnc.net>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Matthew Travis" <landofgrey@gnc.net>
Subject:      Re: [AR] pressurization (was Re: [AR] 3Re: [AR] 2Re: [AR] dark              secrets)
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010724211934.6487A-100000@spsystems.net>

Perhaps just sa well to have a separate electrical heating unit. Heavy, but
no plumbing. I have heard of (marginal) success routing small amounts of
oxidizer and fuel seperately around the powerplant and then sending the gas
back up to their respective tanks. Seems very tricky though and more an
intellectual exercise than someting of practical use.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU]On
> Behalf Of Henry Spencer
> Sent: Tuesday, July 24, 2001 9:28 PM
> To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
> Subject: [AR] pressurization (was Re: [AR] 3Re: [AR] 2Re: [AR] dark
> secrets)
>
>
> On Tue, 24 Jul 2001, Earl Colby Pottinger wrote:
> > If you could feedback just a small amount of heat energy back to the
> > oxider/fuel tanks both propane and N2O would pressurize themselves.  No
> > pumps, no pressurizing gas, just valves maybe.
>
> At last, back to something technical...
>
> The problem is that there's no very magical way to move heat back to the
> tanks.  It's probably just as easy to run a bit of each fluid -- or even
> an inert third fluid, like liquid nitrogen -- through a small heat
> exchanger and run the gas back up to the tank, giving a classical
> propellant-boiling pressurization system.
>
> > Could heatpipes move the heat?
>
> Possibly, although they are probably heavier and harder to control than
> a propellant-boiling system.
>
> > Could you make a heatpipe that stops transferring energy when it's
> > heatsink (output end) reachs a certain temperature?
>
> Such things can be done, but this gets up into the region where designing
> and building the heat pipe is a tricky exercise, probably requiring
> professional expertise to get something that works reliably.
>
>                                                           Henry Spencer
>                                                        henry@spsystems.net
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 22932 invoked from network); 25 Jul 2001 02:48:39 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 25 Jul 2001 02:48:39 -0000
Received: (qmail 17323 invoked from network); 25 Jul 2001 02:50:25 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 25 Jul 2001 02:50:25 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA18870; Tue, 24 Jul 2001 19:46:26 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 83510 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 25 Jul 2001 02:45:00          +0000
Received: from castor.ridgenet.net (IDENT:root@castor.ridgenet.net          [199.120.150.29]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA18843          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 24 Jul 2001 19:44:59 -0700
Received: from kristinscomp (pm154.ridgenet.net [204.154.246.154]) by          castor.ridgenet.net (8.11.0/8.11.0) with SMTP id f6P2clS05754; Tue,          24 Jul 2001 19:38:47 -0700
References:  <LPBBKJMJEOFKAMFJJNNHIEOHCFAA.landofgrey@gnc.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <003f01c114b4$f6702ce0$1b30fea9@kristinscomp>
Date:         Tue, 24 Jul 2001 19:53:19 -0700
Reply-To: "Kristin & David Hall" <thehalls@RIDGENET.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Kristin & David Hall" <thehalls@RIDGENET.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] priorities (was Re: [AR] more patent crap)
Comments: To: landofgrey@gnc.net
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

> investment. If you are seeking a patent merely out of pride and wanting to
> make sure that someone else doesn't get credit, but the invention is in
> reality worth less than the patent, then you are probably not being very
> wise. Of course, it might be good to seek a patent for something that
> *might* have worth later even if you don't know how much yet.

Not necessarily.  In some circles, patents are the ultimate resume
padders....

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 29619 invoked from network); 25 Jul 2001 02:58:19 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 25 Jul 2001 02:58:19 -0000
Received: (qmail 22025 invoked from network); 25 Jul 2001 03:00:09 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 25 Jul 2001 03:00:09 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA18976; Tue, 24 Jul 2001 19:54:11 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 83522 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 25 Jul 2001 02:52:42          +0000
Received: from spsystems.net (spsystems.net [209.47.149.227]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA18954 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Tue,          24 Jul 2001 19:52:42 -0700
Received: (from henry@localhost) by spsystems.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id WAA08877;          Tue, 24 Jul 2001 22:51:59 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010724223924.6487N-100000@spsystems.net>
Date:         Tue, 24 Jul 2001 22:51:59 -0400
Reply-To: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] priorities (was Re: [AR] more patent crap)
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <LPBBKJMJEOFKAMFJJNNHIEOHCFAA.landofgrey@gnc.net>

On Tue, 24 Jul 2001, Matthew Travis wrote:
> Sadly, probably the best preventative medicine is to have an attorney on
> retainer. If you're doing ongoing work, and not a one-shot invention, it's
> the most cost-effective way to go.

This, I must agree with:  if any of this stuff really matters to you, you
should seek professional advice rather than relying on mailing-list posts
from amateurs.

(Do bear in mind the biases of the professional advisors, though.  Even
with the best intentions in the world -- which are not always present! --
such people inherently *think* in terms of what they can do for you, and
so they are unlikely to tell you that you do not need their services.  The
medical custom of getting a second opinion before doing anything drastic
and irrevocable, e.g. spending a lot of money, has much to recommend it.)

(For example, a patent attorney may be the right person for getting you a
patent, but he may not be the best source for an impartial opinion on
whether a patent is going to be useful to you.  You might want to talk to
a general-purpose attorney about that first.)

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 7756 invoked from network); 25 Jul 2001 03:00:22 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 25 Jul 2001 03:00:22 -0000
Received: (qmail 19903 invoked from network); 25 Jul 2001 03:02:30 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 25 Jul 2001 03:02:30 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA19031; Tue, 24 Jul 2001 19:56:38 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 83535 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 25 Jul 2001 02:55:17          +0000
Received: from spsystems.net (spsystems.net [209.47.149.227]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA19000 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue,          24 Jul 2001 19:55:14 -0700
Received: (from henry@localhost) by spsystems.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id WAA08896;          Tue, 24 Jul 2001 22:54:27 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010724225247.6487O-100000@spsystems.net>
Date:         Tue, 24 Jul 2001 22:54:27 -0400
Reply-To: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] pressurization (was Re: [AR] 3Re: [AR] 2Re: [AR] dark              secrets)
Comments: To: Matthew Travis <landofgrey@gnc.net>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <LPBBKJMJEOFKAMFJJNNHCEOICFAA.landofgrey@gnc.net>

On Tue, 24 Jul 2001, Matthew Travis wrote:
> Perhaps just sa well to have a separate electrical heating unit. Heavy, but
> no plumbing.

Certainly easiest to control, but batteries do get heavy.

> I have heard of (marginal) success routing small amounts of
> oxidizer and fuel seperately around the powerplant and then sending the gas
> back up to their respective tanks. Seems very tricky though and more an
> intellectual exercise than someting of practical use.

Refined versions of this are common in professional rocketry.  Even inert
pressurants like helium normally are heated before use, since hot gas is
lighter than cold gas.

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 17886 invoked from network); 25 Jul 2001 03:19:24 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 25 Jul 2001 03:19:24 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 19012 invoked from network); 25 Jul 2001 03:21:11 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 25 Jul 2001 03:21:11 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA19192; Tue, 24 Jul 2001 20:16:31 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 83569 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 25 Jul 2001 03:16:28          +0000
Received: from smtp08.phx.gblx.net (smtp08.phx.gblx.net [64.211.219.57]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA19175 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 24 Jul 2001 20:16:27 -0700
Received: (from daemon@localhost) by smtp08.phx.gblx.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id          UAA667868 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 24 Jul 2001 20:16:17 -0700
Received: from 64-208-236-181.nas1.TBR.gblx.net(64.208.236.181),          claiming to be "frontiernet.net" via SMTP by smtp08.phx.gblx.net,          id smtpdZJuqaa; Tue Jul 24 20:16:10 2001
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.74 [en] (Win98; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B5E3AD6.7DB1F276@frontiernet.net>
Date:         Tue, 24 Jul 2001 23:19:50 -0400
Reply-To: <tbinford@frontiernet.net>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Tom Binford" <tbinford@frontiernet.net>
Subject:      [AR] EX flight results
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

I flew a few of my motors at the experimental launch July 7 & 8.
I'll use the following to describe the motors and flights

NAR designation, total impulse, propellant type, Kn, grain dimensions
and weight, rocket name, rocket diameter and weight (without motor),
results.

H45, 290 N-s, 68-10 propellant, 300, single D grain 1.28" diameter with
1.025 web, 5.55" long, 153 grams in an Aerotech 38/360 case. Flown in a
LOC High-Tech H45 kit with altimeter, 2.6" diameter, 2 lb. Fully
successful flight to 3100 feet, 7 second burn.

K700, 2400 N-s, 68-10 propellant, 300, 6 BATES grains 3.32 x 1.835 x
75", 192g each in an Aerotech 54/2560 case. Flown in my Motoreater with
altimeter, 5.54" diameter, 13 lb. The motor CATO'd on the pad blowing
out the forward closure. Examination of the results indicated the
ignition transient pushed the lowest grain into the convergent section
of the nozzle choking off the outer throats of the Medusa nozzle. This
motor has a larger core than the shorter motors and apparently this
allows easier compression (along with the greater ignition transients).
A support washer will be included in future motors of this type.

K450, 1700 N-s, 68-10 propellant, 300, 4 BATES grains 3.32 x 1.835 x
.578", 212g each in an Aerotech 54/1706 case. Flown in Daniel's
Hyperactive with motor ejection and a RDF unit duct taped to the outside
of the rocket. The rocket was 4" diameter and 7 lb. empty. Nominal
flight, high and with parachute slightly before apogee. RDF not needed,
rocket was visible the whole time.

K160, 1590 N-s, 68-10 propellant, 300, single D grain 1.835 diameter
with 1.55 web, 13.4" long, 832 grams in an Aerotech 54/1706 case. Flown
in my Noname rocket, 4" diameter, 4 lb. empty with altimeter and RDF
duct taped to the outside of the rocket. The RDF was needed as the
rocket vanished against the haze after a 10 second burn. It was
recovered about a mile to the south only 100 feet from the trees.
Altitude was 1284 feet and a nominal recovery. The phenolic insulating
liners of the D grain motors is well toasted but the case doesn't seem
to be any hotter than a commercial Aerotech load.

C20, 11 N-s, 55-30zn propellant, 325, 3 BATES grains .68 x .393 x .125"
2.3g each in a reloadable case 1/2" diameter, motor ejection cut from 12
to 4 seconds. A cluster of 3 was flown in my 12 Pack rocket, 2.1"
diameter, 8 oz. All 3 motors fired but I had cut one too far, it ejected
after about 1 second, pushing off the nose cone. At the right time, the
other 2 ejected, getting the chute out.


The batch of 68-10 propellant used was vacuum mixed and gave a flowable
propellant   almost 99% theoretical density. Hopefully, I'll have
propellant cast for a P motor static test later this year.

Tom

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 5023 invoked from network); 25 Jul 2001 03:49:38 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 25 Jul 2001 03:49:38 -0000
Received: (qmail 7806 invoked from network); 25 Jul 2001 03:51:24 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 25 Jul 2001 03:51:24 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA19475; Tue, 24 Jul 2001 20:48:01 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 83617 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 25 Jul 2001 03:48:00          +0000
Received: from femail21.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail21.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.0.95.146]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA19458          for <arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 24 Jul 2001 20:47:59 -0700
Received: from cc334751a ([65.13.214.65]) by femail21.sdc1.sfba.home.com          (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20 201-229-121-120-20010223) with SMTP id          <20010725034750.KWWD501.femail21.sdc1.sfba.home.com@cc334751a> for          <arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 24 Jul 2001 20:47:50 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0A4D_01C56B69.444D4560"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2462.0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <031b01c114bc$a33d5f40$6401a8c0@home.com>
Date:         Tue, 24 Jul 2001 21:48:16 -0600
Reply-To: "Brian Kosko" <bkosko1@HOME.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Brian Kosko" <bkosko1@HOME.COM>
Subject:      [AR] LDRS EX questions...
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0A4D_01C56B69.444D4560
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Did anyone see the LDRS EX stuff? What day was it? And most importantly, =
did Bruce Kelly follow his own rules? It seems that at all other LDRS EX =
days he waived his magic wand and allowed both EX and certified motors =
to be shot. I hope he didn't since I just had to tell one of our club =
members he can't shoot his RDS O motor this week. I explained about the =
new interpretation of the EX rules where only those motors made by one's =
own hand can be flown. I wonder if Bruce thought about the fact that =
this will pretty much do away with any big motors (O and above) at any =
Tripoli event? Think of the big projects glowing written up in HPR that =
wouldn't be allowed now: the 1/4 scale V-2 with a Kosdon P, the 1/3 =
scale Redstone that was the main attraction at last years LDRS with JJ's =
motor, etc. None of those would be allowed under our new EX rules.

Plus it really pisses me off that there was no input solicited from =
those of us actually doing EX stuff. Nope, it was more important for =
Bruce to be sure NO Kosdon (not the Kosdon by Aerotech) motor is ever =
flown at a Tripoli event.

                                                            Brian

------=_NextPart_000_0A4D_01C56B69.444D4560
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Diso-8859-1">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 6.00.2462.0" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Did anyone see the LDRS EX stuff? What =
day was it?=20
And most importantly, did Bruce Kelly follow his own rules? It seems =
that at all=20
other LDRS EX days he waived his magic wand and allowed both EX and =
certified=20
motors to be shot. I hope he didn't since I just had to tell one of our =
club=20
members he can't shoot his RDS O motor this week. I explained about the =
new=20
interpretation of the EX rules where only those motors made by one's own =
hand=20
can be flown. I wonder if Bruce thought about the fact that this will =
pretty=20
much do away with any big motors (O and above) at any Tripoli event? =
Think of=20
the big projects glowing written up in HPR that wouldn't be allowed now: =
the 1/4=20
scale V-2 with a Kosdon P, the 1/3 scale Redstone that was the main =
attraction=20
at last years LDRS with JJ's motor, etc. None of those would be allowed =
under=20
our new EX rules.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Plus it really pisses me off that there =
was no=20
input solicited from those of us actually doing EX stuff. Nope, it was =
more=20
important for Bruce to be sure NO Kosdon (not the Kosdon by Aerotech) =
motor is=20
ever flown at a Tripoli event.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;=20
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; =
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;=20
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; =
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;=20
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; =
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;=20
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Brian</FONT></DIV></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0A4D_01C56B69.444D4560--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 15144 invoked from network); 25 Jul 2001 03:52:53 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 25 Jul 2001 03:52:53 -0000
Received: (qmail 2749 invoked from network); 25 Jul 2001 03:55:01 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 25 Jul 2001 03:55:01 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA19431; Tue, 24 Jul 2001 20:41:37 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 83609 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 25 Jul 2001 03:40:09          +0000
Received: from www.rocketry.org (root@rocketry.org [65.101.31.84]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA19412 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 24 Jul 2001 20:40:08 -0700
Received: from localhost (tim@localhost) by www.rocketry.org (8.10.2/8.10.2)          with ESMTP id f6P3cEe26688 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 24 Jul          2001 20:38:14 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.LNX.4.21.0107242037240.26686-100000@www.rocketry.org>
Date:         Tue, 24 Jul 2001 20:38:14 -0700
Reply-To: "T.J." <tim@ROCKETRY.ORG>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "T.J." <tim@ROCKETRY.ORG>
Subject:      Re: [AR] priorities (was Re: [AR] more patent crap)
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010724213748.6487C-100000@spsystems.net>

I already have Flight and Skydiving logbooks.. Now I need a "rocketry
experiments" logbook too. =)

On Tue, 24 Jul 2001, Henry Spencer wrote:

> On Tue, 24 Jul 2001, Blake Mantel wrote:
> > > Mailing stuff to yourself is of no value whatsoever in proving priority...
> >
> > Keep a bound book with sketches and ideas that prove the flow of the Idea.
> > If you have something "wonderful" go get it notarized by a public
> > notary. Cheap and simple...
>
> And, as has already been noted, pretty much ineffective...
>
> Right concept, but wrong details.  The way this is done professionally is
> that *each page* of your notebook is read, signed, and dated by someone
> who is competent to understand it and is willing to testify in court later
> that he did indeed sign a page with those contents on that date.
>
>                                                           Henry Spencer
>                                                        henry@spsystems.net
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 11655 invoked from network); 25 Jul 2001 04:20:18 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 25 Jul 2001 04:20:18 -0000
Received: (qmail 9379 invoked from network); 25 Jul 2001 04:22:26 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 25 Jul 2001 04:22:26 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA19595; Tue, 24 Jul 2001 21:13:53 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 83639 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 25 Jul 2001 04:12:20          +0000
Received: from dune.gnc.net (root@dune.gnc.net [207.203.72.4]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA19572 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue,          24 Jul 2001 21:12:20 -0700
Received: from beowulf (sw2-43.gnc.net [207.203.72.123]) by dune.gnc.net          (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id AAA13726 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed,          25 Jul 2001 00:12:18 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <LPBBKJMJEOFKAMFJJNNHOEOJCFAA.landofgrey@gnc.net>
Date:         Wed, 25 Jul 2001 00:12:17 -0400
Reply-To: <landofgrey@gnc.net>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Matthew Travis" <landofgrey@gnc.net>
Subject:      Re: [AR] pressurization (was Re: [AR] 3Re: [AR] 2Re: [AR] dark              secrets)
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010724225247.6487O-100000@spsystems.net>

Oops. I forgot about that. I would imagine there's morginally more
uncetainty if you try to do the same with the propellants. Of course, you
couldn't do it with room-temperature fuels I guess.

Matt

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Henry Spencer [mailto:henry@spsystems.net]
> Sent: Tuesday, July 24, 2001 10:54 PM

> Refined versions of this are common in professional rocketry.  Even inert
> pressurants like helium normally are heated before use, since hot gas is
> lighter than cold gas.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 8810 invoked from network); 25 Jul 2001 04:29:21 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 25 Jul 2001 04:29:21 -0000
Received: (qmail 24436 invoked from network); 25 Jul 2001 04:29:21 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 25 Jul 2001 04:29:21 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA19686; Tue, 24 Jul 2001 21:24:46 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 83656 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 25 Jul 2001 04:23:23          +0000
Received: from localhost (dmccue@localhost) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with          ESMTP id VAA19659; Tue, 24 Jul 2001 21:23:22 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.LNX.4.10.10107242116580.19454-100000@itc.uci.edu>
Date:         Tue, 24 Jul 2001 21:23:22 -0700
Reply-To: "David J. McCue" <dmccue@itc.uci.edu>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "David J. McCue" <dmccue@itc.uci.edu>
Subject:      Re: [AR] LDRS EX questions...
Comments: To: Brian Kosko <bkosko1@HOME.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <031b01c114bc$a33d5f40$6401a8c0@home.com>

There were no EX launches, but Frank Kosdon did static fire a large motor
that spit the nozzle.

Not that Tripoli had anything to do with it, the test was conducted
pretty much within California rules: the crowd was more than 1000 ft.
away, and a California Class 1 Rockets pyro op was present.

-Dave McCue

On Tue, 24 Jul 2001, Brian Kosko wrote:

> Did anyone see the LDRS EX stuff? What day was it? And most importantly, did Bruce Kelly follow his own rules? It seems that at all other LDRS EX days he waived his magic wand and allowed both EX and certified motors to be shot. I hope he didn't since I just had to tell one of our club members he can't shoot his RDS O motor this week. I explained about the new interpretation of the EX rules where only those motors made by one's own hand can be flown. I wonder if Bruce thought about the fact that this will pretty much do away with any big motors (O and above) at any Tripoli event? Think of the big projects glowing written up in HPR that wouldn't be allowed now: the 1/4 scale V-2 with a Kosdon P, the 1/3 scale Redstone that was the main attraction at last years LDRS with JJ's motor, etc. None of those would be allowed under our new EX rules.
>
> Plus it really pisses me off that there was no input solicited from those of us actually doing EX stuff. Nope, it was more important for Bruce to be sure NO Kosdon (not the Kosdon by Aerotech) motor is ever flown at a Tripoli event.
>
>                                                             Brian
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 13622 invoked from network); 25 Jul 2001 04:30:44 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 25 Jul 2001 04:30:44 -0000
Received: (qmail 3845 invoked from network); 25 Jul 2001 04:32:35 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 25 Jul 2001 04:32:35 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA19619; Tue, 24 Jul 2001 21:15:22 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 83647 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 25 Jul 2001 04:14:00          +0000
Received: from dune.gnc.net (root@dune.gnc.net [207.203.72.4]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA19588 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue,          24 Jul 2001 21:13:39 -0700
Received: from beowulf (sw2-43.gnc.net [207.203.72.123]) by dune.gnc.net          (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id AAA13760 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed,          25 Jul 2001 00:13:38 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <LPBBKJMJEOFKAMFJJNNHCEOKCFAA.landofgrey@gnc.net>
Date:         Wed, 25 Jul 2001 00:13:36 -0400
Reply-To: <landofgrey@gnc.net>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Matthew Travis" <landofgrey@gnc.net>
Subject:      Re: [AR] priorities (was Re: [AR] more patent crap)
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <003f01c114b4$f6702ce0$1b30fea9@kristinscomp>

Funny, I'm usually the cynical one :) I guess it's true though. Things like
patents, copyrighted works and such would tend to "spiff up" a resume.

Matt

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Kristin & David Hall [mailto:thehalls@ridgenet.net]
> Sent: Tuesday, July 24, 2001 10:53 PM
> To: landofgrey@gnc.net; AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
> Subject: Re: Re: [AR] priorities (was Re: [AR] more patent crap)
>
>
>
> > investment. If you are seeking a patent merely out of pride and
> wanting to
> > make sure that someone else doesn't get credit, but the invention is in
> > reality worth less than the patent, then you are probably not being very
> > wise. Of course, it might be good to seek a patent for something that
> > *might* have worth later even if you don't know how much yet.
>
> Not necessarily.  In some circles, patents are the ultimate resume
> padders....
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 19296 invoked from network); 25 Jul 2001 04:32:28 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 25 Jul 2001 04:32:28 -0000
Received: (qmail 12108 invoked from network); 25 Jul 2001 04:34:36 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 25 Jul 2001 04:34:36 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA19849; Tue, 24 Jul 2001 21:28:11 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 83671 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 25 Jul 2001 04:27:40          +0000
Received: from wrench.toolcity.net (root@wrench.toolcity.net [208.0.188.2]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA19830 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 24 Jul 2001 21:27:39 -0700
Received: from [208.22.189.112]          (dap-208-22-189-112.meadville-tnt-0.pa.toolcity.net [208.22.189.112])          by wrench.toolcity.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id AAA24921; Wed, 25          Jul 2001 00:27:33 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <v01510100b784055c9332@[63.169.101.158]>
Date:         Wed, 25 Jul 2001 00:29:53 -0500
Reply-To: "al bradley" <abradley@TOOLCITY.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "al bradley" <abradley@TOOLCITY.NET>
Subject:      [AR] 2Re: [AR] more patent crap
Comments: To: Kristin & David Hall <thehalls@RIDGENET.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

>Extrapolating to your scenario, it seems to me that you have to prove not
>only that you invented it, but that it was in widespread use a full year
>before the other guy's patent was filed.  If you can do so, then the best
>you can hope for is that the other guy's patent gets revoked.  If you can
>not prove such, then the other guy retains full rights.
>
>
>And no, I've never even played a lawyer on TV.....
>
>
>(*) In case I got the designation wrong, Puff the Magic Dragon.

-------------------------------
Hi Dave:
IIRC your previous account  of "Puff", both as an assault and defensive air
weapon tied to ground forces, was unprecedented in its firepower.

Am I off on the wrong track? Can't connect your dad's circuitry to that account.

Help,
al bradley

------------------------------------------------------------------
Can you live Life with this?: "Unless there is a law, an agreement, or a
long-standing custom, No one `Deserves' Anything -- Either Good or Bad!"

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 7369 invoked from network); 25 Jul 2001 04:37:43 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 25 Jul 2001 04:37:43 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 14137 invoked from network); 25 Jul 2001 04:39:51 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 25 Jul 2001 04:39:51 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA19922; Tue, 24 Jul 2001 21:34:24 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 83689 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 25 Jul 2001 04:34:19          +0000
Received: from smtp4ve.mailsrvcs.net (smtp4vepub.gte.net [206.46.170.25]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA19905 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 24 Jul 2001 21:34:18 -0700
Received: from me-513q3sc0zun0.pengar.com          (adsl-64-223-147-206.mannh.adsl.bellatlantic.net [64.223.147.206]) by          smtp4ve.mailsrvcs.net (8.9.1/8.9.1) with ESMTP id EAA58512360 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 25 Jul 2001 04:33:45 GMT
X-Sender: seth-pc@hobbiton.shire.net
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
References: <5.1.0.14.0.20010724093419.02b4fcc8@hobbiton.shire.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <5.1.0.14.0.20010725003428.02ad4b70@hobbiton.shire.net>
Date:         Wed, 25 Jul 2001 00:38:25 -0400
Reply-To: "Seth Leigh" <seth@PENGAR.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Seth Leigh" <seth@PENGAR.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] 2Re: Alternatives to patents?
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010724135440.1045B-100000@spsystems.net>

At 01:58 PM 7/24/2001, Henry Spencer wrote:
>On Tue, 24 Jul 2001, Seth Leigh wrote:
> > ...The key here, I believe, is that the
> > customers who were sued were also commercial entities, and were thus
> > profiting from the use of an infringing product.  Private individual
> > customers using an infringing product for personal uses may well be
> > shielded from liability.
>
>No.  There is *NO* "fair use" or "personal use" exemption for patents.
>Even personal use technically requires a license (which is normally
>transferred to the user as he buys a licensed product).  Patent owners
>have very nearly absolute control over their inventions, for the duration
>of the patent.

You are of course quite right Henry, I was completely confusing copyright
and patent law in my above conjecture.  Of course the final word is the
actual text of the law.  Here is the relevant snippet from the statute:

 From title 35, Part III, Ch. 28, sec. 271 (a):
"(a) Except as otherwise provided in this title, whoever without authority
makes, uses, offers to sell, or sells any patented invention, within the
United States or imports into the United States any patented invention
during the term of the patent therefor, infringes the patent." (my coloring
and emphasis)

Having read the rest of the statute, I found no provisions that would be
akin to copyright law's fair use.

Seth

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 10549 invoked from network); 25 Jul 2001 04:48:34 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 25 Jul 2001 04:48:34 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 4271 invoked from network); 25 Jul 2001 04:49:56 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 25 Jul 2001 04:49:56 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA20074; Tue, 24 Jul 2001 21:46:30 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 83730 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 25 Jul 2001 04:46:29          +0000
Received: from ares.idirect.com (ares.idirect.com [207.136.80.180]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA20057 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 24 Jul 2001 21:46:28 -0700
Received: from .idirect.com (on-osh-ahp-01-107.look.ca [216.154.47.107]) by          ares.idirect.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id AAA74995; Wed, 25 Jul          2001 00:49:47 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="ISO-8859-1"
X-Mailer: BeOS Mail
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by itc.uci.edu id VAA20058
Message-ID:  <200107250449.AAA74995@ares.idirect.com>
Date:         Wed, 25 Jul 2001 00:46:25 EDT
Reply-To: <earlcp@idirect.com>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Earl Colby Pottinger" <earlcp@idirect.com>
Subject: =?iso-8859-1?Q?_____=5BAR=5D______________Re:______Re:_=5BAR=5D_FW:_Mid-y?=
	=?iso-8859-1?Q?ear_Letter_From_Louis_____________Ch=EAnevert?=
Comments: To: Blake Mantel <BMantel@SNET.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Did everyone read what was said below carefully?

It has taken 15 years to develop these pumps!!!!!!!!!!

Lesson 1:
         High pressure pumps are hard!
         Low temperature pumps are hard!
         SSME pumps are hard!

Lesson 2:
         No wonder it take NASA so long to develop anything.

Lesson 3:
         NASA is not going to get us (the general public) into space.

Lesson 4:
         Liquid Hydrogen designs are for people with very deep pockets and lots of time on thier hands.

                Earl Colby Pottinger

>"Mantel, Blake" wrote:
>
>> >  -----Original Message-----
>> > From:         Group Communications
>> > Subject:      Mid-year Letter From Louis Chnevert
>> > To the People of Pratt & Whitney:
>
>> SNIP!!!!!!!
>
>>
>> > Space Propulsion's liquid hydrogen turbopump flies on the Space Shuttle
>> > for the first time in July.  We also continue to develop the new 60,000
>> > pound thrust RL60 upper stage rocket engine and have teamed with Aerojet
>> > on a new 600,000 pound thrust booster engine for advanced spacecraft.
>
>Also some information form another of the main company webpages.....
>
>
>         Preparations continue on schedule at Kennedy Space Center for an early
>morning
>         (5:04 a.m. EST) liftoff of Space Shuttle Atlantis and its five-member
>crew on Thursday,
>         July 12. The Rotating Service Structure will be moved away from
>Atlantis Wednesday
>         morning, and the fueling of the External Tank is set to begin Wednesday
>night.
>         Currently, forecasts indicate a 60-percent chance of favorable weather
>for launch on
>          Thursday.  Atlantis is set to deliver the Joint
>         Airlock to the International Space Station.
>
>         The launch of Atlantis on mission STS-104
>         will be the first for a new Space Shuttle Main
>         Engine (SSME), called the Block II
>       configuration.   The new configuration
>      includes a new Pratt & Whitney high-pressure
>       fuel turbopump.  Atlantis is also equipped
>         with two Block IIA main engines to complete
>        its full complement of three engines.
>
>                                     Pratt & Whitney was awarded the NASA
>                                     contract for development of Alternate
>                                     Turbopumps for the SSME in August 1986,
>                                     following a competitive proposal submittal
>                                     process.  Simultaneous design work got
>                                     underway in late 1986 for a new High
>                                     Pressure Oxidizer Turbopump (HPOTP) and
>                                     a new High Pressure Fuel Turbopump
>                                     (HPFTP).  These turbopumps raise the
>         pressure of the SSME propellants, liquid oxygen and liquid hydrogen, to
>more than
>         5,000 pounds per square inch (psi) to facilitate the operation of the
>Staged
>         Combustion Propulsion Cycle of the SSME.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 10084 invoked from network); 25 Jul 2001 04:58:09 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 25 Jul 2001 04:58:09 -0000
Received: (qmail 19051 invoked from network); 25 Jul 2001 05:00:18 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 25 Jul 2001 05:00:18 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA20048; Tue, 24 Jul 2001 21:46:06 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 83722 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 25 Jul 2001 04:46:02          +0000
Received: from dune.gnc.net (root@dune.gnc.net [207.203.72.4]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA20031 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue,          24 Jul 2001 21:46:02 -0700
Received: from beowulf (sw2-43.gnc.net [207.203.72.123]) by dune.gnc.net          (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id AAA14378 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed,          25 Jul 2001 00:45:59 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <LPBBKJMJEOFKAMFJJNNHEEOLCFAA.landofgrey@gnc.net>
Date:         Wed, 25 Jul 2001 00:45:57 -0400
Reply-To: <landofgrey@gnc.net>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Matthew Travis" <landofgrey@gnc.net>
Subject:      Re: [AR] LDRS EX questions...
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <Pine.LNX.4.10.10107242116580.19454-100000@itc.uci.edu>

You know, in the 15 years that I've been a member of Tripoli, I don't think
there has even been a time when it has been under attack form external
forces as much as in the past 2 years. The fact is, the freewheeling days of
lore are long gone. HPR is now (ugh) a "family activity", i.e. treated as
nothing more than really big model rockets. Now, it's the case that anytime
anyone does anything that can be construed as possibly wrong, TRA pays for
it dearly, in reputation and influence. This is even more true when
dumb-f***s like J.C. deliberately try to screw everything up for all of us
out of spite for one or two particular individuals. Talk to the members in
Georgia, who lost the ability to fly anywhere in the state because one
person, not a TRA member, misrepresented TRA's EX rules to the authorities
and cost the launch site and all semblence of respect from the authorities
to Tripoli. Unfoortunately, Tripoli, HPR, amateur rocketry and even model
rocketry are under considerable attack, from everyone from the ATF to
Million Mommers. It sucks and makes me angrier than most things ever could.
But I don't blame Bruce Kelly or any single individual within the
hobby/sport/activity who genuinely tries to preserve it. I do blame the
jerks who deliberately try to destroy it. now, the Kosdon thing, that's just
a mess of misunderstanding and miscommunication by all parties and it's a
shame, but neither Frank or Bruce would hurt the rest of us out of petty
personal animosity. I know for a fact that Bruce would not eliminate EX
activities for all of us just so he could keep Kosdon motors from being
used. That's just plain ludicrous. He has given time enough to be a
full-time job, financial support and sacrifice that would make you wince and
put himself on the front line of attack in defense of Tripoli. I don't think
he would devastate Tripoli just cause he doesn't like Frank. Finally, for
the record, at the past LDRS's the EX-only policy was waived not by Bruce
Kelly, but by the Board. A vote of the duly exlected representatives of the
organization. BTW, I'm not trying to attack anyone on this list or add fuel
to some underlying flames. I apologize if it seems so.

Anyway, I'm just ticked I couldn't get away to go to LDRS this year. The
GOES launch got pushed back from early July to right in the middle of LDRS
weekend.

Matt

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU]On
> Behalf Of David J. McCue
> Sent: Wednesday, July 25, 2001 12:23 AM
> To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
> Subject: Re: [AR] LDRS EX questions...
>
>
> There were no EX launches, but Frank Kosdon did static fire a large motor
> that spit the nozzle.
>
> Not that Tripoli had anything to do with it, the test was conducted
> pretty much within California rules: the crowd was more than 1000 ft.
> away, and a California Class 1 Rockets pyro op was present.
>
> -Dave McCue
>
> On Tue, 24 Jul 2001, Brian Kosko wrote:
>
> > Did anyone see the LDRS EX stuff? What day was it? And most
> importantly, did Bruce Kelly follow his own rules? It seems that
> at all other LDRS EX days he waived his magic wand and allowed
> both EX and certified motors to be shot. I hope he didn't since I
> just had to tell one of our club members he can't shoot his RDS O
> motor this week. I explained about the new interpretation of the
> EX rules where only those motors made by one's own hand can be
> flown. I wonder if Bruce thought about the fact that this will
> pretty much do away with any big motors (O and above) at any
> Tripoli event? Think of the big projects glowing written up in
> HPR that wouldn't be allowed now: the 1/4 scale V-2 with a Kosdon
> P, the 1/3 scale Redstone that was the main attraction at last
> years LDRS with JJ's motor, etc. None of those would be allowed
> under our new EX rules.
> >
> > Plus it really pisses me off that there was no input solicited
> from those of us actually doing EX stuff. Nope, it was more
> important for Bruce to be sure NO Kosdon (not the Kosdon by
> Aerotech) motor is ever flown at a Tripoli event.
> >
> >                                                             Brian
> >
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 17373 invoked from network); 25 Jul 2001 05:00:35 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 25 Jul 2001 05:00:35 -0000
Received: (qmail 19725 invoked from network); 25 Jul 2001 05:02:44 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 25 Jul 2001 05:02:44 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA20189; Tue, 24 Jul 2001 21:58:41 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 83759 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 25 Jul 2001 04:58:39          +0000
Received: from dune.gnc.net (root@dune.gnc.net [207.203.72.4]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA20172 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue,          24 Jul 2001 21:58:38 -0700
Received: from beowulf (sw2-43.gnc.net [207.203.72.123]) by dune.gnc.net          (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id AAA14599 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed,          25 Jul 2001 00:58:37 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <LPBBKJMJEOFKAMFJJNNHAEOMCFAA.landofgrey@gnc.net>
Date:         Wed, 25 Jul 2001 00:58:34 -0400
Reply-To: <landofgrey@gnc.net>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Matthew Travis" <landofgrey@gnc.net>
Subject:      Re: [AR] 2Re: Alternatives to patents?
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <5.1.0.14.0.20010725003428.02ad4b70@hobbiton.shire.net>

> -----Original Message-----
> Behalf Of Seth Leigh
>
> You are of course quite right Henry, I was completely confusing copyright
> and patent law in my above conjecture.  Of course the final word is the
> actual text of the law.  Here is the relevant snippet from the statute:
>
>  From title 35, Part III, Ch. 28, sec. 271 (a):
> "(a) Except as otherwise provided in this title, whoever without authority
> makes, uses, offers to sell, or sells any patented invention, within the
> United States or imports into the United States any patented invention
> during the term of the patent therefor, infringes the patent."
> (my coloring
> and emphasis)
>
> Having read the rest of the statute, I found no provisions that would be
> akin to copyright law's fair use.
>
> Seth
>

He's correct. Copyright law has some "favoring" of the
consumer/non-copyright holder. Patent law gives complete discretion to the
patent-holder. A difference with patent law, and where the questions come
up, is in interpretation and enforcement. As with most laws, blanket
jurisdiction tends to create widespread ambiguities and/or "practical"
exceptions. A big question is what consitutes use. Example, company A
patents an invention, then company B uses a derivation of it without license
to create another product which does not use any of the original invention
but could not be created without it. Then consumer C purchases that product,
which was made by a tool made in violation of a patent. Another issue is
what consitutes a derived work and how the license passes from the original
to the derivation and to items created with or from the derivation. These
issues are some of the things that don't get hashed out until a lawsuit
reaches court. Also, note that the paragraph above says nothing about
someone who purchases a work that is, without authority, derived from a
patented invention. Then the court has to decide whether or not the
subsequent use of that derivation constitutes a patent violation. Generally,
though, individual consumers are *in effect* given an exception and not
hunted down. Rather than re-spouting more about patents (a topci which is
beginning to lose my short-term interest), I'll just say that was what I was
trying to get across in my previous posts.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 14468 invoked from network); 25 Jul 2001 05:28:38 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 25 Jul 2001 05:28:38 -0000
Received: (qmail 28959 invoked from network); 25 Jul 2001 05:30:01 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 25 Jul 2001 05:30:01 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA20500; Tue, 24 Jul 2001 22:27:03 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 83839 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 25 Jul 2001 05:27:01          +0000
Received: from dune.gnc.net (root@dune.gnc.net [207.203.72.4]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA20483 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue,          24 Jul 2001 22:27:01 -0700
Received: from beowulf (sw2-43.gnc.net [207.203.72.123]) by dune.gnc.net          (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id BAA15000 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed,          25 Jul 2001 01:26:59 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <LPBBKJMJEOFKAMFJJNNHMEOMCFAA.landofgrey@gnc.net>
Date:         Wed, 25 Jul 2001 01:26:56 -0400
Reply-To: <landofgrey@gnc.net>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Matthew Travis" <landofgrey@gnc.net>
Subject: =?iso-8859-1?Q?_____=5BAR=5D______________RE:_=5BAR=5D______________Re:__?=
	=?iso-8859-1?Q?____Re:_=5BAR=5D_FW:_Mid-year_Letter_From_Louis___________?=
	=?iso-8859-1?Q?__Ch=EAnevert?=
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <200107250449.AAA74995@ares.idirect.com>

> -----Original Message-----
> Behalf Of Earl Colby Pottinger

>
> Did everyone read what was said below carefully?
>
> It has taken 15 years to develop these pumps!!!!!!!!!!
>
> Lesson 1:
>          High pressure pumps are hard!
>          Low temperature pumps are hard!
>          SSME pumps are hard!

Yep

>
> Lesson 2:
>          No wonder it take NASA so long to develop anything.
>
NASA didn't develop the pumps, Pratt & Whitney did. And it takes NASA about
as long, relatively, to complete a project than it does any other government
agency in the country. (Note I said "relatively").
Furthermore, if NASA had its way, those pumps would have been in use years
ago. funding delays, program delays, and crappy decision-making by our
finest minds on Capitol Hill are the reason. Similarly, ISS. If you
underfund and under-support a project, it will end up over-budget and behind
schedule - ALWAYS. And the bigger the project, the worse the situation. If
that body of so-called legislators had funded ISS at the levels the people
who designed the thing have always known it would cost, and not forced NASA
to squeeze the schedule artificially, then ISS would be within budget and on
time. BTW, Apollo cost far more than originally projected, but of course,
that didn't matter then. It was important. After all, look what it gave us:
moon rocks and memories. ISS can't even compare <=== frustrated sarcasm.

> Lesson 3:
>          NASA is not going to get us (the general public) into space.
After all, if NASA is as inefficient and wasteful as the critics claim, and
takes forever to do anything, then why the hell do those same critics say
that NASA should get involved in things like space tourism and establishing
a space industry *in* space? Wouldn't NASA just screw that all up too? And
destroy what little commercial space business there already is? Some space
advocates, some leaders, are so contradictory I don't really know what to
say. You can't say NASA sucks and then beg and demand it's assistance. If
the startup space companies weren't so cocky, haughty, virulent toward NASA,
maybe NASA wouldn't blow them off like it does. Hell, if you insult me, and
call me corrupt, inefficient, wasteful stupid, immoral and even *evil*, I'll
be damned before I give you any help to do anything whatsoever except get
away from me.

NASA getting the general public into space? Clue: It's not their job!!!
Remember that. NASA is neither legally mandated nor legally allowed to put
any private citizen in space. It's not the Navy's job to create a commercial
submarine industry. Their disinterest is not baseless, it's law and
competent choice. NASA is not a business and the U.S. is not socialized
enough that govt. agencies are required to make a profit. That thinking is
what got us the shuttle in the first place, and what caused Challenger, a
legacy we still live with every day here on the space coast. And, contrary
to some of my activist friends, NASA really does not have incentive to
discourage private enterprise in space. The idea that it woudl take business
away from the shuttle is stupid sincethe shuttle doesn't realyl have any
business to begin with and there are not profit/loss requirements for it.
And the idea that NASA is concerned that private enterprise in space would
make NASA an anachronism are similarly misplaced. What private business
would do in space and what NASA does are so vastly different that there
couldn't possibly be competition anyway. Furthmore the shuttle budget for
NASA is only about 25% of the overall budget. I think people get pissed
because NASA doesn't encourage or actively assist commercial space entities
(in terms of human space flight and tourism). Once again, NASA is neither
mandated nor allowed to do so by law. In fact, those things have absolutely
nothing to do with NASA'a mandate. So for NASA to get involved would be
illegal, irrelevant, and a waste of money redirected from the programs that
NASA *is* required to do (by your friendly pork-barreled congressman and a
president who's only real exposure to space was debated Al Gore's vacuous
mind). Also, don't mix research and science with product development or
selling. That's why private companies have separate R&D divisions. I'm all
for privat eenterprise. I've been in the private sector most of my career.
If it weren't for the commercial space industry, I would probably be yet
another dotcom failure. And rather than NASA's help, I want NASA to stay
out. Don't encourage. Don't discourage. Do nothing. Exactly what they're
doing now.

>
> Lesson 4:
>          Liquid Hydrogen designs are for people with very deep
> pockets and lots of time on thier hands.
>
Yep.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 29959 invoked from network); 25 Jul 2001 05:33:49 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 25 Jul 2001 05:33:49 -0000
Received: (qmail 6989 invoked from network); 25 Jul 2001 05:35:41 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 25 Jul 2001 05:35:41 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA20617; Tue, 24 Jul 2001 22:31:13 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 83874 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 25 Jul 2001 05:31:08          +0000
Received: from dune.gnc.net (root@dune.gnc.net [207.203.72.4]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA20600 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue,          24 Jul 2001 22:31:07 -0700
Received: from beowulf (sw2-43.gnc.net [207.203.72.123]) by dune.gnc.net          (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id BAA15074 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed,          25 Jul 2001 01:31:03 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <LPBBKJMJEOFKAMFJJNNHIEONCFAA.landofgrey@gnc.net>
Date:         Wed, 25 Jul 2001 01:31:01 -0400
Reply-To: <landofgrey@gnc.net>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Matthew Travis" <landofgrey@gnc.net>
Subject:      Re: [AR] priorities (was Re: [AR] more patent crap)
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010724223924.6487N-100000@spsystems.net>

> -----Original Message-----
> Behalf Of Henry Spencer

> (For example, a patent attorney may be the right person for getting you a
> patent, but he may not be the best source for an impartial opinion on
> whether a patent is going to be useful to you.  You might want to talk to
> a general-purpose attorney about that first.)

I actually had an attorney recommend to me that I get other opinions. Of
course, he was different, ethical :)

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 15482 invoked from network); 25 Jul 2001 05:38:35 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 25 Jul 2001 05:38:35 -0000
Received: (qmail 26869 invoked from network); 25 Jul 2001 05:40:18 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 25 Jul 2001 05:40:18 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA20418; Tue, 24 Jul 2001 22:23:43 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 83815 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 25 Jul 2001 05:23:38          +0000
Received: from castor.ridgenet.net (IDENT:root@castor.ridgenet.net          [199.120.150.29]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA20401          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 24 Jul 2001 22:23:38 -0700
Received: from kristinscomp (pm164.ridgenet.net [204.154.246.164]) by          castor.ridgenet.net (8.11.0/8.11.0) with SMTP id f6P5HUS21651; Tue,          24 Jul 2001 22:17:30 -0700
References:  <v01510100b784055c9332@[63.169.101.158]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <003501c114cb$23091940$1b30fea9@kristinscomp>
Date:         Tue, 24 Jul 2001 22:31:43 -0700
Reply-To: "Kristin & David Hall" <thehalls@RIDGENET.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Kristin & David Hall" <thehalls@RIDGENET.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] 2Re: [AR] more patent crap
Comments: To: al bradley <abradley@TOOLCITY.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

> IIRC your previous account  of "Puff", both as an assault and defensive
air
> weapon tied to ground forces, was unprecedented in its firepower.
>
> Am I off on the wrong track? Can't connect your dad's circuitry to that
account.
>
> Help,

OK, the story as I undestand it (Mind you, I wasn't even the proverbial
gleam yet...).

The Navy was interested in night vision capability.  Some basic research
indicated that it should be possible, but it had never actually been done.
And so, the Navy set out to develop some sort of pod that would fit under an
aircraft's wing that would allow for night vision (Today you would call it a
FLIR, but that term had not yet been coined.).  My father designed some
circuit in the pod - beyond that, I don't really know what the circuit did.
Anywho, the final product worked, but it was way too bulky to fit under the
wing of a tactical aircraft.  The problem wasn't in the electronics, it was
in the optics.  They were big and massive.  Then some optics guru at Hughes
Aircraft had a brainstorm.  He figured out a way to replace many of the
lenses, etc. in the pod with a spinning prism.  So we (the US) decided to
marry the electronics from the Navy-developed pod to the optics of the
Hughes system.  The old man ended up being the lead engineer on the Navy
side of this effort.  Whether it was because he was the best or because he
was the only fool who was willing to practically live at the Hughes facility
(away from home/family) for 6 months, I don't know.  The result was the
first FLIR.  The first application of the FLIR was Puff (although it was
mounted sideways...perhaps it should have been called a SLIR?).  What was a
FLIR doing on Puff?  Well, how else did you expect them to hit the bad guys
while missing the good guys at night?

Or at least, that was the way it went as I recall the story.


OBCool:  When I was in high school I had a summer job.  My boss asked me if
my father had worked on any weapons he may have heard of.  I mentioned Puff.
My boss ended up following me home from work that night so he could shake my
father's hand.  It seems that one night in Vietnam my boss had found himself
between the proverbial rock and a hard place.  Puff swept in and saved the
day.  Boss wanted to thank somebody....

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 2263 invoked from network); 25 Jul 2001 05:43:57 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 25 Jul 2001 05:43:57 -0000
Received: (qmail 10923 invoked from network); 25 Jul 2001 05:45:49 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 25 Jul 2001 05:45:49 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA20545; Tue, 24 Jul 2001 22:28:15 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 83854 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 25 Jul 2001 05:28:14          +0000
Received: from dune.gnc.net (root@dune.gnc.net [207.203.72.4]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA20528 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue,          24 Jul 2001 22:28:13 -0700
Received: from beowulf (sw2-43.gnc.net [207.203.72.123]) by dune.gnc.net          (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id BAA15020 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed,          25 Jul 2001 01:28:12 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <LPBBKJMJEOFKAMFJJNNHAEONCFAA.landofgrey@gnc.net>
Date:         Wed, 25 Jul 2001 01:28:10 -0400
Reply-To: <landofgrey@gnc.net>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Matthew Travis" <landofgrey@gnc.net>
Subject:      Re: [AR] 2Re: [AR] more patent crap
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <003501c114cb$23091940$1b30fea9@kristinscomp>

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU]On
> Behalf Of Kristin & David Hall
> Sent: Wednesday, July 25, 2001 1:32 AM
> To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
> Subject: Re: [AR] 2Re: [AR] more patent crap
>
>
> OBCool:  When I was in high school I had a summer job.  My boss
> asked me if
> my father had worked on any weapons he may have heard of.  I
> mentioned Puff.
> My boss ended up following me home from work that night so he
> could shake my
> father's hand.  It seems that one night in Vietnam my boss had
> found himself
> between the proverbial rock and a hard place.  Puff swept in and saved the
> day.  Boss wanted to thank somebody....
>

I love the anecdote.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 8383 invoked from network); 25 Jul 2001 05:55:53 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 25 Jul 2001 05:55:53 -0000
Received: (qmail 14666 invoked from network); 25 Jul 2001 05:57:43 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 25 Jul 2001 05:57:43 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA20855; Tue, 24 Jul 2001 22:52:16 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 83918 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 25 Jul 2001 05:52:11          +0000
Received: from smtprelay2.abs.adelphia.net (smtprelay.abs.adelphia.net          [64.8.20.11]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA20759 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 24 Jul 2001 22:42:10 -0700
Received: from jlgrady ([63.124.251.47]) by smtprelay2.abs.adelphia.net          (Netscape Messaging Server 4.15) with SMTP id GH0L4Y00.V0M for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 25 Jul 2001 01:41:22 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook CWS, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <000401c114cc$ae25a0b0$0200a8c0@prestige.net>
Date:         Wed, 25 Jul 2001 01:43:05 -0400
Reply-To: "Jeff Grady" <jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jeff Grady" <jgrady@GA.PRESTIGE.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] LDRS EX questions...
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <LPBBKJMJEOFKAMFJJNNHEEOLCFAA.landofgrey@gnc.net>

I have just joined this list and already I see something I would like to
know much more about. Can someone explain in detail, what this is about:

>>Talk to the members in
>>Georgia, who lost the ability to fly anywhere in the state because one
>>person, not a TRA member, misrepresented TRA's EX rules to the authorities
>>and cost the launch site and all semblence of respect from the authorities
>>to Tripoli.


I live in Georgia and am beginning to spend money on this sport. I have BIG
hopes for BIG rockets and if there are problems with the "Authorities" it
will help me make decisions early on.

Thanks,

Jeff Grady - North Georgia

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 25191 invoked from network); 25 Jul 2001 06:31:41 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 25 Jul 2001 06:31:41 -0000
Received: (qmail 29414 invoked from network); 25 Jul 2001 06:26:23 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 25 Jul 2001 06:26:23 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA21074; Tue, 24 Jul 2001 23:21:59 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 83998 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 25 Jul 2001 06:21:48          +0000
Received: from deimos.idirect.com (deimos.idirect.com [207.136.80.182]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA21057 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue, 24 Jul 2001 23:21:47 -0700
Received: from .idirect.com (on-osh-ahp-01-64.look.ca [216.154.47.64]) by          deimos.idirect.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id CAA04215; Wed, 25 Jul          2001 02:21:41 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="ISO-8859-1"
X-Mailer: BeOS Mail
Message-ID:  <200107250621.CAA04215@deimos.idirect.com>
Date:         Wed, 25 Jul 2001 02:21:41 EDT
Reply-To: <earlcp@idirect.com>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Earl Colby Pottinger" <earlcp@idirect.com>
Subject: =?iso-8859-1?Q?_____=5BAR=5D______________Re:______=5BAR=5D____________?=
	=?iso-8859-1?Q?_RE:_=5BAR=5D______________Re:______Re:_=5BAR=5D_FW:_Mid-y?=
	=?iso-8859-1?Q?e_____________ar_Letter_From_Louis_____________Ch=EAnevert?=
Comments: To: landofgrey@GNC.NET
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

>> -----Original Message-----
>> Behalf Of Earl Colby Pottinger
>>
>> Did everyone read what was said below carefully?
>>
>> It has taken 15 years to develop these pumps!!!!!!!!!!
>>
>> Lesson 1:
>>          High pressure pumps are hard!
>>          Low temperature pumps are hard!
>>          SSME pumps are hard!
>Yep

Just pointing development is not as easy as some people think.

>> Lesson 2:
>>          No wonder it take NASA so long to develop anything.
>>
>NASA didn't develop the pumps, Pratt & Whitney did. And it takes NASA about
>as long, relatively, to complete a project than it does any other government
>agency in the country. (Note I said "relatively").
>Furthermore, if NASA had its way, those pumps would have been in use years
>ago. [SNIP]

Consider myself royally slapped about the head for assuming NASA was at fault, and not making myself clear at the same time.  Really, I am just saying for the type of things NASA does (research and development) that long lead times are normal, people keep thinking NASA can do things at the drop of a hat if given enought money, infact NASA is by it's very nature and design very slow in delivering finished designs.

>> Lesson 3:
>>          NASA is not going to get us (the general public) into space.

>After all, if NASA is as inefficient and wasteful as the critics claim, and
>takes forever to do anything, then why the hell do those same critics say
>that NASA should get involved in things like space tourism and establishing
>a space industry *in* space?

This statement was not against NASA (I can see why you think it is) it is against all the people who state and even told me personally that private research into rockets is a waste of time as NASA will do all the development anyway, and they have the money.

[SNIP]
>NASA getting the general public into space? Clue: It's not their job!!!

No, but alot of people seem to think it is and NASA does not make any statements to remove that image.  Look at how it reacted to Tito trip to the ISS.

[SNIP]

>And, contrary
>to some of my activist friends, NASA really does not have incentive to
>discourage private enterprise in space.

But it sure acts that way, ask the people at Beal what they think of NASA.

[SNIP]

>>
>> Lesson 4:
>>          Liquid Hydrogen designs are for people with very deep
>> pockets and lots of time on thier hands.
>>
>Yep.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 7553 invoked from network); 25 Jul 2001 06:44:23 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 25 Jul 2001 06:44:23 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: (qmail 7093 invoked from network); 25 Jul 2001 06:46:14 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 25 Jul 2001 06:46:14 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA21185; Tue, 24 Jul 2001 23:41:33 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 84024 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 25 Jul 2001 06:41:30          +0000
Received: from cisco.com (cypher.cisco.com [171.69.11.18]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA21168 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Tue,          24 Jul 2001 23:41:30 -0700
Received: (from billw@localhost) by cisco.com (8.8.8/2.6/Cisco List          Logging/8.8.8) id XAA03918 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Tue, 24 Jul 2001          23:40:59 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID:  <CMM.0.90.4.996043259.billw@cypher>
Date:         Tue, 24 Jul 2001 23:40:59 PDT
Reply-To: "Bill Westfield" <billw@cisco.com>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "William Chops Westfield" <billw@cisco.com>
Subject:      Re: [AR] pressurization (was Re: [AR] 3Re: [AR] 2Re: [AR] dark              secrets)
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  Your message of Tue, 24 Jul 2001 21:27:56 -0400

> Could you make a heatpipe that stops transferring energy when it's
> heatsink (output end) reachs a certain temperature?

Don't heat-pipes rely on condensation of the working fluid at the "cold"
end?  That would mean that they all have an inherent "cold end" maximum
working temperature, wouldn't it?  In fact, by chosing your working fluid
carefully, you can probably pick the maximum cold-end temperature fairly
closely (after which you're left with a pipe of significantly poorer thermal
conductivity.  I wouldn't normally think any sort of heating mechanism would
work quickly enough for rocket-style flow rates.  Not without a substantial
weight and volume penalty.  Unless...

Hmm.  I wonder if you could combine regenerative cooling of the nozzle with
propellant heating by making the whole nozzle/fuel tank into a double-walled
cylindrical heat pipe?

BillW


From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 29509 invoked from network); 25 Jul 2001 07:09:02 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 25 Jul 2001 07:09:02 -0000
Received: (qmail 17469 invoked from network); 25 Jul 2001 07:10:54 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 25 Jul 2001 07:10:54 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA21311; Wed, 25 Jul 2001 00:05:40 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 84054 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 25 Jul 2001 07:05:31          +0000
Received: from dune.gnc.net (root@dune.gnc.net [207.203.72.4]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA21294 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed,          25 Jul 2001 00:05:30 -0700
Received: from beowulf (sw2-43.gnc.net [207.203.72.123]) by dune.gnc.net          (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id DAA16400 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed,          25 Jul 2001 03:05:29 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <LPBBKJMJEOFKAMFJJNNHIEOOCFAA.landofgrey@gnc.net>
Date:         Wed, 25 Jul 2001 03:05:23 -0400
Reply-To: <landofgrey@gnc.net>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Matthew Travis" <landofgrey@gnc.net>
Subject:      [AR] EZ-Rocket
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <003f01c114b4$f6702ce0$1b30fea9@kristinscomp>

XCOR's commercial rocketplane is coming along. They even got Dick Rutan to
test fly it.

http://www.space.com/missionlaunches/launches/xcor_flight_010724.html

Matt

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 22632 invoked from network); 25 Jul 2001 07:15:56 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 25 Jul 2001 07:15:56 -0000
Received: (qmail 17235 invoked from network); 25 Jul 2001 07:18:06 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 25 Jul 2001 07:18:06 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA21365; Wed, 25 Jul 2001 00:12:05 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 84065 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 25 Jul 2001 07:12:04          +0000
Received: from femail8.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail8.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.0.95.88]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA21348 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 25 Jul 2001 00:12:04 -0700
Received: from hal2001 ([24.77.53.16]) by femail8.sdc1.sfba.home.com (InterMail          vM.4.01.03.20 201-229-121-120-20010223) with SMTP id          <20010725071203.OXUC17219.femail8.sdc1.sfba.home.com@hal2001> for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 25 Jul 2001 00:12:03 -0700
References: <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010724211934.6487A-100000@spsystems.net>                      <002101c114aa$f77636c0$0400a8c0@hatjs>             <996027928.3b5e2e18ad74c@webmail.comcen.com.au>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <004d01c114d8$021979c0$0400a8c0@hatjs>
Date:         Wed, 25 Jul 2001 00:04:11 -0700
Reply-To: "Jamie Morken" <jmorken@HOME.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jamie Morken" <jmorken@HOME.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] pressurization (was Re: [AR] 3Re: [AR] 2Re: [AR] dark              secrets)
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Hi Paul,

> We're talking biprops right?
> Just put the copper CC in the nox tank.
> ?
>
> PK

Ya that would be a quick and good way to do this.  Has any rocket ever flown
with this method?

best regards,
Jamie

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 10357 invoked from network); 25 Jul 2001 07:42:04 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 25 Jul 2001 07:42:04 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 4572 invoked from network); 25 Jul 2001 07:43:55 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 25 Jul 2001 07:43:55 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA21513; Wed, 25 Jul 2001 00:37:01 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 84100 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 25 Jul 2001 07:36:58          +0000
Received: from stud.uni-goettingen.de (root@s2.stud.uni-goettingen.de          [134.76.60.22]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA21496          for <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Wed, 25 Jul 2001 00:36:57 -0700
Received: from router.atw.stud.uni-goettingen.de ([134.76.62.65]          helo=stud.uni-goettingen.de) by stud.uni-goettingen.de with esmtp          (Exim 2.12 #8) id 15PJDz-0006o2-00 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 25          Jul 2001 09:36:55 +0200
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [de] (Win98; I)
X-Accept-Language: de
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0A50_01C56B69.446C3F10"
Message-ID:  <3B5E772C.CE3FF176@stud.uni-goettingen.de>
Date:         Wed, 25 Jul 2001 09:37:17 +0200
Reply-To: "Wedge Oldham" <wedge@WESTWORLD.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Thomas Engelhardt" <tengelh@STUD.UNI-GOETTINGEN.DE>
Organization: =?iso-8859-1?Q?Rocket_Research_G=F6ttingen_=28RRG=29?=
Subject:      [AR] Nike Hercules Flight
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0A50_01C56B69.446C3F10
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Wedge,

congratulations - that is one of the most impressive videos I have seen
so far!! Now I am REALLY sad that I couldn't have been there to watch it
live....

Tom


I flew my 1/3 scale Nike Hercules at LDRS this last weekend. Now I know
this is somewhat off topic, considering it flew on commercial motors.
But a number of questions were answered by this group, and I just wanted
to show the results of those answers. Thank you one and all. See:
http://nikeproject.com/launch/NikeLaunchPictures.html Wedge Oldham
http://NikeProject.com

------=_NextPart_000_0A50_01C56B69.446C3F10
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<!doctype html public "-//w3c//dtd html 4.0 transitional//en">
<html>
<head>
<style></style>
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
<font face="Arial"><font size=-1>Wedge,</font></font><font face="Arial"><font size=-1></font></font>
<p><font face="Arial"><font size=-1>congratulations - that is one of the
most impressive videos I have seen so far!! Now I am REALLY sad that I
couldn't have been there to watch it live....</font></font><font face="Arial"><font size=-1></font></font>
<p><font face="Arial"><font size=-1>Tom</font></font>
<br><font face="Arial"><font size=-1></font></font>&nbsp;<font face="Arial"><font size=-1></font></font>
<p><font face="Arial"><font size=-1>I flew my 1/3 scale Nike Hercules at
LDRS this last weekend. Now I know this is somewhat off topic, considering
it flew on commercial motors. But a number of questions were answered by
this group, and I just wanted to show the results of those answers. Thank
you one and all.</font></font>&nbsp;<font face="Arial"><font size=-1>See:
<a href="http://nikeproject.com/launch/NikeLaunchPictures.html">http://nikeproject.com/launch/NikeLaunchPictures.html</a></font></font>&nbsp;<font face="Arial"><font size=-1>Wedge
Oldham</font></font>
<br><font face="Arial"><font size=-1><a href="http://NikeProject.com">http://NikeProject.com</a></font></font>
</body>
</html>

------=_NextPart_000_0A50_01C56B69.446C3F10--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 17401 invoked from network); 25 Jul 2001 08:47:48 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 25 Jul 2001 08:47:48 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: (qmail 29865 invoked from network); 25 Jul 2001 08:49:39 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 25 Jul 2001 08:49:39 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id BAA21808; Wed, 25 Jul 2001 01:30:53 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 84171 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 25 Jul 2001 08:30:37          +0000
Received: from cisco.com (cypher.cisco.com [171.69.11.18]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id BAA21791 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed,          25 Jul 2001 01:30:37 -0700
Received: (from billw@localhost) by cisco.com (8.8.8/2.6/Cisco List          Logging/8.8.8) id BAA17080; Wed, 25 Jul 2001 01:29:50 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID:  <CMM.0.90.4.996049790.billw@cypher>
Date:         Wed, 25 Jul 2001 01:29:50 PDT
Reply-To: "Bill Westfield" <billw@cisco.com>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "William Chops Westfield" <billw@cisco.com>
Subject:      Re: [AR] priorities (was Re: [AR] more patent crap)
Comments: To: Kristin & David Hall <thehalls@RIDGENET.NET>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  Your message of Tue, 24 Jul 2001 19:53:19 -0700

>> If you are seeking a patent merely out of pride and wanting to
>> make sure that someone else doesn't get credit, but the invention is in
>> reality worth less than the patent, then you are probably not being very
>> wise. Of course, it might be good to seek a patent for something that
>> *might* have worth later even if you don't know how much yet.
>
> Not necessarily.  In some circles, patents are the ultimate resume padders.

I don't think patents ever look bad on your resume.

Your company may have a rather liberal policy on patents, including
providing their lawyers and such for the actual work, bonuses, and explicit
provisions for profit sharing in the case where a product is created and
sold.  (All because of the questionable use of sizable patent portfolios in
fighting questionable patent infringment lawsuits.  Or perhaps just for
company prestige.  Or perhaps because that's what it takes to attract and
retain inventive employees. :-)  cisco's patent bonuses currently total $5k
per patent ($3k on filing, $2k more when/if granted.)  That may seem little
for signing the rights over to the company, but it's not bad for those
random ideas that you wouldn't have followed through on anyway.  (And it
DOES include patents/ideas that were one on company time FOR the company
that you couldn't legitimately claim rights to anyway...)

A previous employer would file, market, and sell your invention for a 50%
cut, half of which was fed back to your particular group.  Anybody remember
"Eunice" (a unix compatibility package, including tcp networking, for DEC
VMS.)  That's how it started out, make Dave Kashtan pretty well-off...

BillW


From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 3083 invoked from network); 25 Jul 2001 09:04:50 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 25 Jul 2001 09:04:50 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 9675 invoked from network); 25 Jul 2001 09:06:41 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 25 Jul 2001 09:06:41 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id BAA21883; Wed, 25 Jul 2001 01:48:00 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 84183 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 25 Jul 2001 08:47:54          +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (f61.law9.hotmail.com [64.4.9.61]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id BAA21866 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed,          25 Jul 2001 01:47:53 -0700
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Wed,          25 Jul 2001 01:47:23 -0700
Received: from 203.76.17.27 by lw9fd.law9.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Wed, 25          Jul 2001 08:47:23 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [203.76.17.27]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 25 Jul 2001 08:47:23.0505 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[6C4C2E10:01C114E6]
Message-ID:  <F61T3lEmFWqbTYP0Kli00006db0@hotmail.com>
Date:         Wed, 25 Jul 2001 08:47:23 +0000
Reply-To: "NOS N20" <nitrometho@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "NOS N20" <nitrometho@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      [AR] ZINC SULPHUR ROCKET
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Dear People

I need some help does anybody have plans or dimensions for a zinc-sulphur
rocket which takes more than 10kg of fuel, I have been building small 6kg
Z/S fuel rockets for some time now, and are looking for something
more exciting.

Thanks

Paul     NITROMETHO@HOTMAIL.COM

_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 25231 invoked from network); 25 Jul 2001 14:05:48 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 25 Jul 2001 14:05:48 -0000
Received: (qmail 19510 invoked from network); 25 Jul 2001 14:07:39 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 25 Jul 2001 14:07:39 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA23101; Wed, 25 Jul 2001 06:15:26 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 84389 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 25 Jul 2001 13:14:47          +0000
Received: from fep4-orange.clear.net.nz (fep4-orange.clear.net.nz          [203.97.32.4]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA23081          for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Wed, 25 Jul 2001 06:14:46 -0700
Received: from mkbs (203-167-160-78.dialup.clear.net.nz [203.167.160.78]) by          fep4-orange.clear.net.nz (1.5/1.7) with SMTP id BAA01951; Thu, 26 Jul          2001 01:14:42 +1200 (NZST)
References:  <F61T3lEmFWqbTYP0Kli00006db0@hotmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="Windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <0a2601c1150b$ed491da0$0100a8c0@mkbs>
Date:         Thu, 26 Jul 2001 01:14:17 +1200
Reply-To: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Russell McMahon" <apptech@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Organization: Applied Technology
Subject:      Re: [AR] ZINC SULPHUR ROCKET
Comments: To: NOS N20 <nitrometho@HOTMAIL.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

> I need some help does anybody have plans or dimensions for a zinc-sulphur
> rocket which takes more than 10kg of fuel, I have been building small 6kg
> Z/S fuel rockets for some time now, and are looking for something
> more exciting.

Probably time for a high energy propellant - like Candy perhaps :-)
Seriously though, while it's not in the AP class its Isp is far far (far)
higher than Zn/S (about double) and the difference is immense in performance
terms.
And it's cheap.
And easy to do.
And .........
Look at Richard Nakkas Candy Propellant site to see what can be achieved.



            RM

.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 26095 invoked from network); 25 Jul 2001 14:06:00 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 25 Jul 2001 14:06:00 -0000
Received: (qmail 14404 invoked from network); 25 Jul 2001 14:07:46 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 25 Jul 2001 14:07:46 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA23193; Wed, 25 Jul 2001 06:28:06 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 84411 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 25 Jul 2001 13:27:55          +0000
Received: from dune.gnc.net (root@dune.gnc.net [207.203.72.4]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA23176 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed,          25 Jul 2001 06:27:54 -0700
Received: from beowulf (sw2-18.gnc.net [207.203.72.98]) by dune.gnc.net          (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id JAA21902 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed,          25 Jul 2001 09:17:25 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
Importance: Normal
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <LPBBKJMJEOFKAMFJJNNHCEPBCFAA.landofgrey@gnc.net>
Date:         Wed, 25 Jul 2001 09:16:51 -0400
Reply-To: <landofgrey@gnc.net>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Matthew Travis" <landofgrey@gnc.net>
Subject:      Re: [AR] RE: [AR]              Re:      Re: [AR] FW: Mid-ye
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <200107250621.CAA04215@deimos.idirect.com>

What's up with this subject line?

Well, for what it's worth, I'm not as big a defender of "NASA" as I probably
came across in my posting. I *am* a defender of the thousands of people who
actually do the grunt work, like the 85 people Boeing is going to lay off in
the next couple months. These are "normal" people, like the rest of us. Less
defensible is the upper management of the agency. While I feel NASA is being
given, and has been given since the middle years of Apollo, a great
run-around, that does not mean they are blameless. I would note that a poll
last week showed that most people think NASA is budgeted far more than it
really is, which is, in fact, less than three-quarters of one percent of the
total federal budget. this is what leads to the public perception of waste
and mismanagement: i.e. NASA is being thrown all the money it wants and
*still* can't keep a budget or timeline. In reality, nothing could be
farther from the truth. In reality, Dan Goldin, whom I respect, has made
strategic blunders over and over again by rolling over and caving in to
every criticism and beudget decrease and everything else thrown at the
agency. In fact, in a hearing on Capitol Hill, he actually said that it
wasn't his job to defend the agency, that his priority was to serve the
president, period. What a load of c**p. He also likes to say "the President
proposes and Congress disposes". In other words, he himself has no role to
play in policy-making. funny, I always thought it was the Administrator's
responsibility to help educate and guide the President and to be an advocate
of ideas, and giving input into the President's decision-making process.
According to Goldin, his only job is to do whatever the White House asks and
Congress demands and has, at best, a minimal role in the formulation of the
programs and policies. In short, he is not supposed to be a leader, but
mrerely an over paid manager. Sadly, it's the rest of the 14,000 or whatever
employees of the agency who pay the price. And the way Goldin pandered to
Clinton was disgusting. Giving John Glenn political payback for defending
Clinton during impeachment by sending him in space again was a travesty at
best. And Clinton making the announcement of a shuttel crew assignment
because a woman was going to be commander for the first time? Well, that was
just a disgusting display of Clinton trying to show that he really cared
about women's issues. Sickening use of the space program for personal
pleasures. Gross. Given that, is it any wonder that for 6 of Clinton's 8
years in office, Pres. Clinton requested a budget decrease for the agency?
It was only Congress adding money to the request that kept the agency's
budget from being slashed even more than it has been. And Al Gore was no
real leader. His involvement consisted of palling around with contractors
for big donations and press coverage and little else. In fact, it was
largely because of good ole Al that the Lockheed Martin design won the X-33
contract when the final technical review put it in last place behind
McDonnel Douglas and Boeing. The experts said LM's design had the highest
chance of failure, but Algore had to pay back his buddies at LM and pressure
NASA to give them the contract.


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Earl Colby Pottinger [mailto:earlcp@idirect.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, July 25, 2001 2:22 AM
> To: landofgrey@GNC.NET
> Cc: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
> Subject: Re: [AR] RE: [AR] Re: Re: [AR] FW: Mid-ye ar Letter From Louis
> Chnevert
>
>
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> Behalf Of Earl Colby Pottinger
> >>
> >> Did everyone read what was said below carefully?
> >>
> >> It has taken 15 years to develop these pumps!!!!!!!!!!
> >>
> >> Lesson 1:
> >>          High pressure pumps are hard!
> >>          Low temperature pumps are hard!
> >>          SSME pumps are hard!
> >Yep
>
> Just pointing development is not as easy as some people think.
>
> >> Lesson 2:
> >>          No wonder it take NASA so long to develop anything.
> >>
> >NASA didn't develop the pumps, Pratt & Whitney did. And it takes
> NASA about
> >as long, relatively, to complete a project than it does any
> other government
> >agency in the country. (Note I said "relatively").
> >Furthermore, if NASA had its way, those pumps would have been in
> use years
> >ago. [SNIP]
>
> Consider myself royally slapped about the head for assuming NASA
> was at fault, and not making myself clear at the same time.
> Really, I am just saying for the type of things NASA does
> (research and development) that long lead times are normal,
> people keep thinking NASA can do things at the drop of a hat if
> given enought money, infact NASA is by it's very nature and
> design very slow in delivering finished designs.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 4131 invoked from network); 25 Jul 2001 14:15:03 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 25 Jul 2001 14:15:03 -0000
Received: (qmail 11715 invoked from network); 25 Jul 2001 14:17:09 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 25 Jul 2001 14:17:09 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA23143; Wed, 25 Jul 2001 06:23:28 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 84397 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 25 Jul 2001 13:23:22          +0000
Received: from spsystems.net (spsystems.net [209.47.149.227]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA23126 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Wed,          25 Jul 2001 06:23:22 -0700
Received: (from henry@localhost) by spsystems.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id JAA17780;          Wed, 25 Jul 2001 09:05:54 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSI.3.91.1010725090321.16896A-100000@spsystems.net>
Date:         Wed, 25 Jul 2001 09:05:54 -0400
Reply-To: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Henry Spencer" <henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] pressurization (was Re: [AR] 3Re: [AR] 2Re: [AR] dark              secrets)
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <LPBBKJMJEOFKAMFJJNNHOEOJCFAA.landofgrey@gnc.net>

On Wed, 25 Jul 2001, Matthew Travis wrote:
> > Refined versions of this are common in professional rocketry.  Even inert
> > pressurants like helium normally are heated before use...
>
> Oops. I forgot about that. I would imagine there's morginally more
> uncetainty if you try to do the same with the propellants.

It makes life a little more complicated, because it potentially adds
feedback loops.

> Of course, you couldn't do it with room-temperature fuels I guess.

Not readily.  They generally don't have a high enough vapor pressure at
any reasonable temperature.

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 28581 invoked from network); 25 Jul 2001 15:26:54 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 25 Jul 2001 15:26:54 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 2880 invoked from network); 25 Jul 2001 15:28:41 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 25 Jul 2001 15:28:41 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA23801; Wed, 25 Jul 2001 08:09:56 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 84521 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 25 Jul 2001 15:09:48          +0000
Received: from fw1-bv.tek.com (fw1-bv.tek.com [192.65.40.16]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA23784 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed,          25 Jul 2001 08:09:48 -0700
Received: from fw1-bv.tek.com (root@localhost) by fw1-bv.tek.com with ESMTP id          f6PF9HS01689 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 25 Jul 2001 08:09:17          -0700 (PDT)
Received: from tektronix.tek.com (tektronix.tek.com [128.181.6.43]) by          fw1-bv.tek.com with ESMTP id f6PF9Hn01683 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>;          Wed, 25 Jul 2001 08:09:17 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from us-bv-u07.bv.tek.com (webshield.tek.com [128.181.2.130]) by          tektronix.tek.com (8.9.3+Sun/8.9.3) with SMTP id IAA09145 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 25 Jul 2001 08:09:17 -0700 (PDT)
Received: FROM us-bv-m01.bv.tek.com BY us-bv-u07.bv.tek.com ; Wed Jul 25          08:09:17 2001 -0700
Received: by us-bv-m01.bv.tek.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2448.0) id          <3CMP104Q>; Wed, 25 Jul 2001 08:09:15 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2448.0)
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Message-ID:  <5832AFF5FC75D411844300508BC216B70A2821@us-bv-m07.bv.tek.com>
Date:         Wed, 25 Jul 2001 08:09:14 -0700
Reply-To: <john.w.lyngdal@EXGATE.TEK.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <john.w.lyngdal@EXGATE.TEK.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] more patent crap
Comments: To: thehalls@RIDGENET.NET
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

David,

        I've seen this occur on more than one occasion as well.

                John


-----Original Message-----
From: Kristin & David Hall [mailto:thehalls@RIDGENET.NET]
Sent: Tuesday, July 24, 2001 5:13 PM
To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
Subject: Re: [AR] more patent crap


> What rights if any to an invention would someone have to an invention that
> someone else through no connection what so ever obtained a patent to if
they
> did not try to patent it themselves or publically disclose it, however
they
> were able to prove that they invented it before the other person.

Funny you should ask that.  My father was involved in a lawsuit not too
different from that.  The basics of the story are....

My father invents a circuit that was integral to the night vision systems on
the AC-47 (*).
Some other guy independently invents a similar circuit and gets it patented.
Years pass.
Other guy finds out that certain military hardware uses a circuit in
violation of his patent.
Other guy sues.
Government traces history of circuit (as they know it) to the AC-47 and my
father.
Puff is known to have been fielded 3 years prior to other guy's patent
application.
Patent law says that an invention that has been in regular use for 1 year is
no longer patentable.
Patent ultimately got revoked.

So the guy sued to get rich and ended up losing his patent.

Extrapolating to your scenario, it seems to me that you have to prove not
only that you invented it, but that it was in widespread use a full year
before the other guy's patent was filed.  If you can do so, then the best
you can hope for is that the other guy's patent gets revoked.  If you can
not prove such, then the other guy retains full rights.


And no, I've never even played a lawyer on TV.....


(*) In case I got the designation wrong, Puff the Magic Dragon.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 16242 invoked from network); 25 Jul 2001 15:31:16 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 25 Jul 2001 15:31:16 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 447 invoked from network); 25 Jul 2001 15:33:23 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 25 Jul 2001 15:33:23 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA23856; Wed, 25 Jul 2001 08:22:06 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 84529 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 25 Jul 2001 15:22:04          +0000
Received: from fw1-bv.tek.com (fw1-bv.tek.com [192.65.40.16]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA23839 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed,          25 Jul 2001 08:22:03 -0700
Received: from fw1-bv.tek.com (root@localhost) by fw1-bv.tek.com with ESMTP id          f6PFLXc06180 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 25 Jul 2001 08:21:33          -0700 (PDT)
Received: from tektronix.tek.com (tektronix.tek.com [128.181.6.43]) by          fw1-bv.tek.com with ESMTP id f6PFLXo06176 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>;          Wed, 25 Jul 2001 08:21:33 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from us-bv-u07.bv.tek.com (webshield.tek.com [128.181.2.130]) by          tektronix.tek.com (8.9.3+Sun/8.9.3) with SMTP id IAA13073 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 25 Jul 2001 08:21:27 -0700 (PDT)
Received: FROM us-bv-m01.bv.tek.com BY us-bv-u07.bv.tek.com ; Wed Jul 25          08:21:27 2001 -0700
Received: by us-bv-m01.bv.tek.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2448.0) id          <3CMPFAQL>; Wed, 25 Jul 2001 08:21:26 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2448.0)
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Message-ID:  <5832AFF5FC75D411844300508BC216B70A2824@us-bv-m07.bv.tek.com>
Date:         Wed, 25 Jul 2001 08:21:25 -0700
Reply-To: <john.w.lyngdal@EXGATE.TEK.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <john.w.lyngdal@EXGATE.TEK.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] LDRS EX questions...
Comments: To: bkosko1@home.com
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

I didn't think that EX was permitted at LDRS this year, along with a 10,240
Ns single motor limit and a 20,480 total impulse limit. I think that is what
it said on the ROC website. No doubt the the governor of Kalifornia stepped
in with an executive order on BK's request.

        John




-----Original Message-----
From: Brian Kosko [mailto:bkosko1@home.com]
Sent: Tuesday, July 24, 2001 8:48 PM
To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
Subject: [AR] LDRS EX questions...


Did anyone see the LDRS EX stuff? What day was it? And most importantly, did
Bruce Kelly follow his own rules? It seems that at all other LDRS EX days he
waived his magic wand and allowed both EX and certified motors to be shot. I
hope he didn't since I just had to tell one of our club members he can't
shoot his RDS O motor this week. I explained about the new interpretation of
the EX rules where only those motors made by one's own hand can be flown. I
wonder if Bruce thought about the fact that this will pretty much do away
with any big motors (O and above) at any Tripoli event? Think of the big
projects glowing written up in HPR that wouldn't be allowed now: the 1/4
scale V-2 with a Kosdon P, the 1/3 scale Redstone that was the main
attraction at last years LDRS with JJ's motor, etc. None of those would be
allowed under our new EX rules.

Plus it really pisses me off that there was no input solicited from those of
us actually doing EX stuff. Nope, it was more important for Bruce to be sure
NO Kosdon (not the Kosdon by Aerotech) motor is ever flown at a Tripoli
event.

                                                            Brian

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 2486 invoked from network); 25 Jul 2001 15:43:13 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 25 Jul 2001 15:43:13 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 11321 invoked from network); 25 Jul 2001 15:44:56 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 25 Jul 2001 15:44:56 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA23991; Wed, 25 Jul 2001 08:38:17 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 84558 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 25 Jul 2001 15:38:11          +0000
Received: from mailgw1a.lmco.com (mailgw1a.lmco.com [192.31.106.7]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA23974 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 25 Jul 2001 08:38:10 -0700
Received: from emss02g01.ems.lmco.com (relay2.ems.lmco.com [166.29.2.54]) by          mailgw1a.lmco.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id JAA23726 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 25 Jul 2001 09:38:10 -0600 (MDT)
Received: from CONVERSION-DAEMON by lmco.com (PMDF V5.2-33 #38887) id          <0GH100L01CRJ0K@lmco.com> for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 25 Jul 2001          09:38:07 -0600 (MDT)
Received: from emss02i00.ems.lmco.com ([166.29.2.48]) by lmco.com (PMDF V5.2-33          #38887) with ESMTP id <0GH100AQTCR913@lmco.com> for          AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 25 Jul 2001 09:37:57 -0600 (MDT)
Received: by emss02i00.ems.lmco.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) id          <PS6QWX0N>; Wed, 25 Jul 2001 09:37:57 -0600
Content-return: allowed
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19)
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <EDB5E5136094D311BF1800508B12205E08D290AB@emss02m07.ems.lmco.com>
Date:         Wed, 25 Jul 2001 09:37:56 -0600
Reply-To: "Bendel, Timothy B" <timothy.b.bendel@LMCO.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Bendel, Timothy B" <timothy.b.bendel@LMCO.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] priorities (was Re: [AR] more patent crap)
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

        >This, I must agree with:  if any of this stuff really matters to
you, you
        >should seek professional advice rather than relying on mailing-list
posts
        >from amateurs.

True, however I think this discussion has been instrumental in several of my
personal decisions - I have decided *not* to apply for a security clearance
(at least for the time being) as I now feel that it *could* severely limit
my ability to pursue new technology and market it. As the space industry
moves towards a more commercial center of business (as opposed to government
launches) the ability to move quickly without government permission is very
important. On the other hand, it may limit my career with my present
employer. C'est la Vie.

Regardless, I will take your advise and talk to a lawer.

Thanks to all for discussing this topic- I know it can be rather dry at
times.

Timothy Bendel

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Henry Spencer [SMTP:henry@SPSYSTEMS.NET]
> Sent: Tuesday, July 24, 2001 8:52 PM
> To:   AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
> Subject:      Re: [AR] priorities (was Re: [AR] more patent crap)
>
> On Tue, 24 Jul 2001, Matthew Travis wrote:
> > Sadly, probably the best preventative medicine is to have an attorney on
> > retainer. If you're doing ongoing work, and not a one-shot invention,
> it's
> > the most cost-effective way to go.
>
> This, I must agree with:  if any of this stuff really matters to you, you
> should seek professional advice rather than relying on mailing-list posts
> from amateurs.
>
> (Do bear in mind the biases of the professional advisors, though.  Even
> with the best intentions in the world -- which are not always present! --
> such people inherently *think* in terms of what they can do for you, and
> so they are unlikely to tell you that you do not need their services.  The
> medical custom of getting a second opinion before doing anything drastic
> and irrevocable, e.g. spending a lot of money, has much to recommend it.)
>
> (For example, a patent attorney may be the right person for getting you a
> patent, but he may not be the best source for an impartial opinion on
> whether a patent is going to be useful to you.  You might want to talk to
> a general-purpose attorney about that first.)
>
>                                                           Henry Spencer
>                                                        henry@spsystems.net

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 4822 invoked from network); 25 Jul 2001 15:43:48 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 25 Jul 2001 15:43:48 -0000
Received: (qmail 27545 invoked from network); 25 Jul 2001 15:45:27 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 25 Jul 2001 15:45:27 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA23907; Wed, 25 Jul 2001 08:27:16 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 84541 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 25 Jul 2001 15:27:11          +0000
Received: from mail.conpute.com ([207.164.87.145]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7)          with ESMTP id IAA23890 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 25 Jul 2001          08:27:10 -0700
Received: by MAIL with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) id <PTRS3DR9>; Wed,          25 Jul 2001 11:25:48 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19)
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Message-ID:  <814DCE01F6D7D311994D204C4F4F50201889A5@MAIL>
Date:         Wed, 25 Jul 2001 11:25:47 -0400
Reply-To: "Earl Pottinger" <earlcp@CONPUTE.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Earl Pottinger" <earlcp@CONPUTE.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] pressurization (was Re: [AR] 3Re: [AR] 2Re: [AR] dark se              crets)
Comments: To: Jamie Morken <jmorken@HOME.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

What is a copper CC?

-----Original Message-----
From: Jamie Morken [mailto:jmorken@HOME.COM]
Sent: Wednesday, July 25, 2001 3:04 AM
To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
Subject: Re: [AR] pressurization (was Re: [AR] 3Re: [AR] 2Re: [AR] dark
secrets)


Hi Paul,

> We're talking biprops right?
> Just put the copper CC in the nox tank.
> ?
>
> PK

Ya that would be a quick and good way to do this.  Has any rocket ever flown
with this method?

best regards,
Jamie

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 22876 invoked from network); 25 Jul 2001 16:12:01 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 25 Jul 2001 16:12:01 -0000
Received: (qmail 28828 invoked from network); 25 Jul 2001 15:44:04 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 25 Jul 2001 15:44:04 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA24018; Wed, 25 Jul 2001 08:39:48 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 84566 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 25 Jul 2001 15:39:47          +0000
Received: from albatross.wgn.net (www.wgn.net [64.14.252.81] (may be forged))          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA24001 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 25 Jul 2001 08:39:46 -0700
Received: from hogwild (sc-66-74-70-20.socal.rr.com [66.74.70.20]) by          albatross.wgn.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id IAA21706 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 25 Jul 2001 08:41:35 -0700
References:  <5832AFF5FC75D411844300508BC216B70A2824@us-bv-m07.bv.tek.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <015601c1151f$87869c40$14464a42@socal.rr.com>
Date:         Wed, 25 Jul 2001 08:36:09 -0700
Reply-To: "Wedge Oldham" <wedge@WESTWORLD.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Wedge Oldham" <wedge@WESTWORLD.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] LDRS EX questions...
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Yes, we had a 10,240 single motor limit.
Yes, we had a 20,480 combined total impulse limit.
About 2 weeks before the launch we were granted a 20K MSL wavier.

As per the governor part, didn't catch the meaning, but we did not have an
EX day.

And I myself would have preferred to be able to burn more AP in a single
rocket, but the 20,410 NS I burned in the Nike was pretty exciting.

I sometimes wonder just *exactly* how many rockets loaded with more than 20K
NS of propellant had to be left at home because this years LDRS was held in
California?


Wedge Oldham
http://NikeProject.com
----- Original Message -----
From: <john.w.lyngdal@EXGATE.TEK.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Wednesday, July 25, 2001 8:21 AM
Subject: Re: [AR] LDRS EX questions...


> I didn't think that EX was permitted at LDRS this year, along with a
10,240
> Ns single motor limit and a 20,480 total impulse limit. I think that is
what
> it said on the ROC website. No doubt the the governor of Kalifornia
stepped
> in with an executive order on BK's request.
>
>         John
>
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Brian Kosko [mailto:bkosko1@home.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, July 24, 2001 8:48 PM
> To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
> Subject: [AR] LDRS EX questions...
>
>
> Did anyone see the LDRS EX stuff? What day was it? And most importantly,
did
> Bruce Kelly follow his own rules? It seems that at all other LDRS EX days
he
> waived his magic wand and allowed both EX and certified motors to be shot.
I
> hope he didn't since I just had to tell one of our club members he can't
> shoot his RDS O motor this week. I explained about the new interpretation
of
> the EX rules where only those motors made by one's own hand can be flown.
I
> wonder if Bruce thought about the fact that this will pretty much do away
> with any big motors (O and above) at any Tripoli event? Think of the big
> projects glowing written up in HPR that wouldn't be allowed now: the 1/4
> scale V-2 with a Kosdon P, the 1/3 scale Redstone that was the main
> attraction at last years LDRS with JJ's motor, etc. None of those would be
> allowed under our new EX rules.
>
> Plus it really pisses me off that there was no input solicited from those
of
> us actually doing EX stuff. Nope, it was more important for Bruce to be
sure
> NO Kosdon (not the Kosdon by Aerotech) motor is ever flown at a Tripoli
> event.
>
>                                                             Brian

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 11590 invoked from network); 25 Jul 2001 16:47:20 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 25 Jul 2001 16:47:20 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 20434 invoked from network); 25 Jul 2001 16:49:28 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 25 Jul 2001 16:49:28 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA24523; Wed, 25 Jul 2001 09:39:24 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 84679 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 25 Jul 2001 16:39:16          +0000
Received: from fw1-bv.tek.com (fw1-bv.tek.com [192.65.40.16]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA24506 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed,          25 Jul 2001 09:39:15 -0700
Received: from fw1-bv.tek.com (root@localhost) by fw1-bv.tek.com with ESMTP id          f6PGciY04757 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 25 Jul 2001 09:38:44          -0700 (PDT)
Received: from tektronix.tek.com (tektronix.tek.com [128.181.6.43]) by          fw1-bv.tek.com with ESMTP id f6PGciO04753 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>;          Wed, 25 Jul 2001 09:38:44 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from us-bv-u07.bv.tek.com (webshield.tek.com [128.181.2.130]) by          tektronix.tek.com (8.9.3+Sun/8.9.3) with SMTP id JAA02238 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 25 Jul 2001 09:38:39 -0700 (PDT)
Received: FROM us-bv-m01.bv.tek.com BY us-bv-u07.bv.tek.com ; Wed Jul 25          09:38:38 2001 -0700
Received: by us-bv-m01.bv.tek.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2448.0) id          <3CMPF1CK>; Wed, 25 Jul 2001 09:38:38 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2448.0)
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Message-ID:  <5832AFF5FC75D411844300508BC216B70A282D@us-bv-m07.bv.tek.com>
Date:         Wed, 25 Jul 2001 09:38:36 -0700
Reply-To: <john.w.lyngdal@EXGATE.TEK.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <john.w.lyngdal@EXGATE.TEK.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] LDRS EX questions...
Comments: To: landofgrey@GNC.NET
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Matt,

        Aside from JHC's obsessive campaign, I really don't think that TRA
"has been under attack from external forces". I do believe that some of the
TRA actions have been scrutinized and called into question by other folks.
Much of the issues are matters of opinion, which one can agree or disagree
with. I don't see a problem with this, as the last thing needed in the
rocketry community is an aristocracy.
        The Georgia situation involved EX, not "the members in Georgia, who
lost the ability to fly anywhere in the state". Which is bad, but a dire
situation. JHC convinced one Georgia State Fire Marshal official that EX
wasn't permitted under Georgia regulation, this person was ultimately
over-ruled by a more senior person. Stuff like this happens all the time.
The real issue arose when after JHC got an opinion that supported his
position on EX and communicated it to the folk who fly at Perry and stated
that he would contact the property owners if they flew EX at Perry, they
flipped him off and flew EX anyway. JHC contacted the owner of the sod farm
and the permission to fly at that site was rescinded(but hopefully it has
been since restored). The lesson really is don't play chicken with a person
who is obsessive-compulsive, because their sense of judgement isn't as
rational as yours.


        John







-----Original Message-----
From: Matthew Travis [mailto:landofgrey@GNC.NET]
Sent: Tuesday, July 24, 2001 9:46 PM
To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
Subject: Re: [AR] LDRS EX questions...


You know, in the 15 years that I've been a member of Tripoli, I don't think
there has even been a time when it has been under attack form external
forces as much as in the past 2 years. The fact is, the freewheeling days of
lore are long gone. HPR is now (ugh) a "family activity", i.e. treated as
nothing more than really big model rockets. Now, it's the case that anytime
anyone does anything that can be construed as possibly wrong, TRA pays for
it dearly, in reputation and influence. This is even more true when
dumb-f***s like J.C. deliberately try to screw everything up for all of us
out of spite for one or two particular individuals. Talk to  because one
person, not a TRA member, misrepresented TRA's EX rules to the authorities
and cost the launch site and all semblence of respect from the authorities
to Tripoli. Unfoortunately, Tripoli, HPR, amateur rocketry and even model
rocketry are under considerable attack, from everyone from the ATF to
Million Mommers. It sucks and makes me angrier than most things ever could.
But I don't blame Bruce Kelly or any single individual within the
hobby/sport/activity who genuinely tries to preserve it. I do blame the
jerks who deliberately try to destroy it. now, the Kosdon thing, that's just
a mess of misunderstanding and miscommunication by all parties and it's a
shame, but neither Frank or Bruce would hurt the rest of us out of petty
personal animosity. I know for a fact that Bruce would not eliminate EX
activities for all of us just so he could keep Kosdon motors from being
used. That's just plain ludicrous. He has given time enough to be a
full-time job, financial support and sacrifice that would make you wince and
put himself on the front line of attack in defense of Tripoli. I don't think
he would devastate Tripoli just cause he doesn't like Frank. Finally, for
the record, at the past LDRS's the EX-only policy was waived not by Bruce
Kelly, but by the Board. A vote of the duly exlected representatives of the
organization. BTW, I'm not trying to attack anyone on this list or add fuel
to some underlying flames. I apologize if it seems so.

Anyway, I'm just ticked I couldn't get away to go to LDRS this year. The
GOES launch got pushed back from early July to right in the middle of LDRS
weekend.

Matt

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU]On
> Behalf Of David J. McCue
> Sent: Wednesday, July 25, 2001 12:23 AM
> To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
> Subject: Re: [AR] LDRS EX questions...
>
>
> There were no EX launches, but Frank Kosdon did static fire a large motor
> that spit the nozzle.
>
> Not that Tripoli had anything to do with it, the test was conducted
> pretty much within California rules: the crowd was more than 1000 ft.
> away, and a California Class 1 Rockets pyro op was present.
>
> -Dave McCue
>
> On Tue, 24 Jul 2001, Brian Kosko wrote:
>
> > Did anyone see the LDRS EX stuff? What day was it? And most
> importantly, did Bruce Kelly follow his own rules? It seems that
> at all other LDRS EX days he waived his magic wand and allowed
> both EX and certified motors to be shot. I hope he didn't since I
> just had to tell one of our club members he can't shoot his RDS O
> motor this week. I explained about the new interpretation of the
> EX rules where only those motors made by one's own hand can be
> flown. I wonder if Bruce thought about the fact that this will
> pretty much do away with any big motors (O and above) at any
> Tripoli event? Think of the big projects glowing written up in
> HPR that wouldn't be allowed now: the 1/4 scale V-2 with a Kosdon
> P, the 1/3 scale Redstone that was the main attraction at last
> years LDRS with JJ's motor, etc. None of those would be allowed
> under our new EX rules.
> >
> > Plus it really pisses me off that there was no input solicited
> from those of us actually doing EX stuff. Nope, it was more
> important for Bruce to be sure NO Kosdon (not the Kosdon by
> Aerotech) motor is ever flown at a Tripoli event.
> >
> >                                                             Brian
> >
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 25151 invoked from network); 25 Jul 2001 16:57:32 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 25 Jul 2001 16:57:32 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 4086 invoked from network); 25 Jul 2001 16:59:19 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 25 Jul 2001 16:59:19 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA24616; Wed, 25 Jul 2001 09:49:59 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 84699 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 25 Jul 2001 16:49:57          +0000
Received: from pan.ch.intel.com (chfdns01.ch.intel.com [143.182.246.24]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA24599 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Wed, 25 Jul 2001 09:49:57 -0700
Received: from snmeng1.rr.intel.com (snmeng1.rr.intel.com [128.215.231.11]) by          pan.ch.intel.com (8.9.1a+p1/8.9.1/d: relay.m4,v 1.41 2001/07/09          21:06:22 root Exp $) with ESMTP id QAA25909 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Wed, 25 Jul 2001 16:49:56 GMT
Received: from snmeng30.rr.intel.com (snmeng30.rr.intel.com [128.215.52.76]) by          snmeng1.rr.intel.com (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id KAA14805; Wed, 25          Jul 2001 10:47:06 -0600 (MDT)
Received: from snmeng30.rr.intel.com (snmeng30.rr.intel.com [128.215.52.76]) by          snmeng30.rr.intel.com (8.9.1a/8.9.1/d: client.m4,v 1.3 1998/09/29          16:36:11 sedayao Exp sedayao $) with SMTP id KAA20198; Wed, 25 Jul          2001 10:47:04 -0600 (MDT)
X-Mailer: dtmail 1.2.1 CDE Version 1.2.1 SunOS 5.6 sun4m sparc
X-Sun-Text-Type: ascii
Message-ID:  <200107251647.KAA20198@snmeng30.rr.intel.com>
Date:         Wed, 25 Jul 2001 10:47:04 -0600
Reply-To: "Ray Calkins 100660207" <rcalkins@SNMENG1.RR.INTEL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Ray Calkins 100660207" <rcalkins@SNMENG1.RR.INTEL.COM>
Subject:      [AR]
Comments: cc: PLEASE@snmeng1.rr.intel.com, LIMIT@snmeng1.rr.intel.com,          OFF@snmeng1.rr.intel.com, TOPIC@snmeng1.rr.intel.com,          DISCUSSION@snmeng1.rr.intel.com
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Hello All:

The signal to noise ratio on aRocket has been steadily degrading.  Some
off-topic discussion is fine, probably even a good thing.  However, a quick scan
of my inbox subject lines shows off-topic threads dominating the posts by a
significant margin.  Greater than ten percent off-topic discussion is probably
excessive.

Please begin bringing the off-topic threads to a close, or move them to a more
appropriate forum.

Thank you for your understanding and assistance in this matter.

Ray Calkins                               aRocket list admin
rcalkins@snmeng1.rr.intel.com           raymond.calkins@intel.com
"My opinions are my own, and do not reflect those of my employer."


From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 1017 invoked from network); 25 Jul 2001 16:59:00 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 25 Jul 2001 16:59:00 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 5009 invoked from network); 25 Jul 2001 17:00:41 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 25 Jul 2001 17:00:41 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA24658; Wed, 25 Jul 2001 09:53:13 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 84710 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 25 Jul 2001 16:53:11          +0000
Received: from brighton.legacywireless.com (legacywireless.com [208.187.126.2])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA24641 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 25 Jul 2001 09:53:11 -0700
Received: from [208.187.122.40] by brighton.cogolink.com (NTMail          5.00.0010/NY4701.00.0f189dc1) with ESMTP id clnzoaaa for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 25 Jul 2001 11:02:00 -0600
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.77 [en] (Win98; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <CMM.0.90.4.996049790.billw@cypher>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B5EFA71.1459D6B7@biomicro.com>
Date:         Wed, 25 Jul 2001 10:57:21 -0600
Reply-To: "Mark K. Spute" <mks@BIOMICRO.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Mark K. Spute" <mks@BIOMICRO.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] priorities (was Re: [AR] more patent crap)
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

#@&*$#!!!

And all I got was a lousy buck each for mine.  :)



William Chops Westfield wrote:

[snip of stuff about patents]

> cisco's patent bonuses currently total $5k
> per patent ($3k on filing, $2k more when/if granted.)  That may seem little
> for signing the rights over to the company, but it's not bad for those
> random ideas that you wouldn't have followed through on anyway.  (And it
> DOES include patents/ideas that were one on company time FOR the company
> that you couldn't legitimately claim rights to anyway...)
>
> A previous employer would file, market, and sell your invention for a 50%
> cut, half of which was fed back to your particular group.  Anybody remember
> "Eunice" (a unix compatibility package, including tcp networking, for DEC
> VMS.)  That's how it started out, make Dave Kashtan pretty well-off...
>
> BillW

--
Mark K. Spute
Senior Research Engineer
BioMicro Systems Inc.

KD7IWE,  RRS

"It is difficult to say what is impossible, for the dream of yesterday is the
hope of today and the reality of tomorrow."
     Dr. Robert H. Goddard

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 11888 invoked from network); 25 Jul 2001 17:23:26 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 25 Jul 2001 17:23:26 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 1825 invoked from network); 25 Jul 2001 17:25:18 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 25 Jul 2001 17:25:18 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA24854; Wed, 25 Jul 2001 10:18:26 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 84751 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 25 Jul 2001 17:18:23          +0000
Received: from pan.ch.intel.com (chfdns01.ch.intel.com [143.182.246.24]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA24837 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Wed, 25 Jul 2001 10:18:23 -0700
Received: from snmeng1.rr.intel.com (snmeng1.rr.intel.com [128.215.231.11]) by          pan.ch.intel.com (8.9.1a+p1/8.9.1/d: relay.m4,v 1.41 2001/07/09          21:06:22 root Exp $) with ESMTP id RAA09130 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Wed, 25 Jul 2001 17:18:22 GMT
Received: from snmeng30.rr.intel.com (snmeng30.rr.intel.com [128.215.52.76]) by          snmeng1.rr.intel.com (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id LAA14991 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Wed, 25 Jul 2001 11:15:32 -0600 (MDT)
Received: from snmeng30.rr.intel.com (snmeng30.rr.intel.com [128.215.52.76]) by          snmeng30.rr.intel.com (8.9.1a/8.9.1/d: client.m4,v 1.3 1998/09/29          16:36:11 sedayao Exp sedayao $) with SMTP id LAA22452 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Wed, 25 Jul 2001 11:15:30 -0600 (MDT)
X-Mailer: dtmail 1.2.1 CDE Version 1.2.1 SunOS 5.6 sun4m sparc
X-Sun-Text-Type: ascii
Message-ID:  <200107251715.LAA22452@snmeng30.rr.intel.com>
Date:         Wed, 25 Jul 2001 11:15:30 -0600
Reply-To: "Ray Calkins 100660207" <rcalkins@SNMENG1.RR.INTEL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Ray Calkins 100660207" <rcalkins@SNMENG1.RR.INTEL.COM>
Subject:      [AR] PLEASE LIMIT OFF-TOPIC DISCUSSION
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Hello All:

The signal to noise ratio on aRocket has
been steadily degrading, and I have been
getting off-list complaints.  Some off-topic
discussion is fine, probably even a good
thing.  However, a quick scan of my inbox
subject lines shows off-topic threads
dominating the posts by a significant margin.
Greater than ten percent off-topic discussion
is probably excessive.

The list is focused on Amateur Rocketry and
issues directly related to it.  Please begin
bringing the off-topic threads to a close, or
move them to a more appropriate forum.

Thank you for your understanding and help in
this matter.

Ray Calkins
rcalkins@snmeng1.rr.intel.com           raymond.calkins@intel.com
"My opinions are my own, and do not reflect those of my employer."


From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 3492 invoked from network); 25 Jul 2001 17:57:28 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 25 Jul 2001 17:57:28 -0000
Received: (qmail 27259 invoked from network); 25 Jul 2001 17:59:18 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 25 Jul 2001 17:59:18 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA25131; Wed, 25 Jul 2001 10:50:29 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 84819 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 25 Jul 2001 17:50:17          +0000
Received: from femail21.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail21.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.0.95.146]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA25114          for <arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 25 Jul 2001 10:50:17 -0700
Received: from cc334751a ([65.13.214.65]) by femail21.sdc1.sfba.home.com          (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20 201-229-121-120-20010223) with SMTP id          <20010725175009.OBKV501.femail21.sdc1.sfba.home.com@cc334751a> for          <arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 25 Jul 2001 10:50:09 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2462.0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <00f301c11532$4a226240$6401a8c0@home.com>
Date:         Wed, 25 Jul 2001 11:50:27 -0600
Reply-To: "Brian Kosko" <bkosko1@HOME.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Brian Kosko" <bkosko1@HOME.COM>
Subject:      [AR] Fw: LDRS 21, its official!!
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

YEE HA!!

Now we're talking! Let's get LDRS back where we can shoot rockets without
all the helpful prohibitions Kalifornia so thoughtfully provided. And there
will be EX, and lots of it.

OK wild boys, here's an arocket challenge. I bet I'll fly something on at
least an O motor of my own making. Anyone want to top it? Let's start
planning now. I'd better tell Firefox Gary to stock up on AP.

                                                                    Brian
> Sent: Monday, July 23, 2001 9:47 PM
> Subject: LDRS 21, its official!!
>
>
> > Greetings peoples,
> >
> >     Just got off the phone with Bruce Lee, Calgary 0, Potrocs 1, another
> club
> > bid but withdrew when they found out we were bidding for it. The dates
are
> > July 11,12,13,14,
> > Commercial, 15 and 16 EX. It'll be hot, but the landowner put in for us
> > electricity and a water well at our site to accomodate us, gonna need
> water
> > for the pool. Yippers, finished negotiating a deal for a soft body 4
foot
> > deep by 17 wide by 32 foot long pool complete with deck and sandy beach
at
> > the site, charge is 7.50 per day per person, 1 hour max time so we don't
> have
> > people dominate pool time (Now you folks wouldn't do that would ya?). I
> know
> > I'll be a customer to cool off with frequent dips during the day. Colby,
> Jim
> > M, leave yore thongs at home, can't stomach that gig. We need volunteers
> to
> > make this show fast and greasy, there were people at Lucerne with
rockets
> on
> > the pad for over 2 hours, Kloudbusters, you know how to launch a rocket
a
> > minute ave. during the whole day, show us how it's done. I am gonna be
> asking
> > a lot from you folks (TX, OKLA, KS, NM) to pull this thing off, I know I
> can
> > count on ya. I will be posting further details on our web site,  <A
> > HREF="http://www.potrocs.org/">Tripoli Amarillo</A> , plus will start up
a
> > new site for LDRS 21, >>>>>>Http://www.LDRS21.org shortly, (give me a
> coupla
> > weeks). Neil Milburn, yure the guy that pushed me over the edge to bid
for
> > this, I need a Co-Launch Director, yore it bucko........To quote my dear
> old
> > limey buddy, "Time to put up or shut up". There are things in the works
> that
> > could easily triple HPR participation media wise, and if that happens,
it
> > could be a zoo at LDRS 21, (details forthcoming).
> >
> > Congrats ya pukes, you asked for it, ya got it.
> >
> > Pat G
> >
> > BTW  the presentation vid to the BOD is on our web site in the video
> section,
> > I was told they liked it.
> >
> > and PS   Derik Deville was the third man nominated for BOD, good man.
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 8854 invoked from network); 25 Jul 2001 17:58:47 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 25 Jul 2001 17:58:47 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 7533 invoked from network); 25 Jul 2001 18:00:55 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 25 Jul 2001 18:00:55 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA25007; Wed, 25 Jul 2001 10:39:15 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 84789 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 25 Jul 2001 17:39:02          +0000
Received: from zcars0m9.ca.nortel.com ([47.129.242.157]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA24988 for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Wed,          25 Jul 2001 10:39:01 -0700
Received: from zcars04e.ca.nortel.com (zcars04e.ca.nortel.com [47.129.242.56])          by zcars0m9.ca.nortel.com (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f6PHTx900642          for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Wed, 25 Jul 2001 13:29:59 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from rftzy232.ca.nortel.com by zcars04e.ca.nortel.com; Wed, 25 Jul          2001 13:30:03 -0400
Received: from NORTELNETWORKS.COM (wftzh00e.ca.nortel.com [47.130.116.9]) by          rftzy232.ca.nortel.com with SMTP (Microsoft Exchange Internet Mail          Service Version 5.5.2653.13) id NKPL545V; Wed, 25 Jul 2001 13:29:56          -0400
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.73C-CCK-MCD [en] (X11; U; HP-UX B.10.20 9000/785)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Orig: <mleech@NORTELNETWORKS.COM>
Message-ID:  <3B5F0228.C5D79FF1@NORTELNETWORKS.COM>
Date:         Wed, 25 Jul 2001 13:30:16 -0400
Reply-To: "Marcus Leech" <mleech@NORTELNETWORKS.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Marcus Leech" <mleech@NORTELNETWORKS.COM>
Subject:      [AR] A rocketry thread...
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

A couple of weeks ago, I reported on the sucessful loss of my rocket powered
  by a small-diameter (22mm) hybrid motor.

This coming weekend, I hope to have another go at it, but using the
  'D'-sized variant of the same diameter motor.  The loaded vehicle
  weight will be only about 200g, using a Galejs M.A.D. for recovery.
  I sincerely hope that I will fail to lose this one :-)

One of the things I've thought about was that in this very-small size range
  the usual practice of dumping vent gases out the side may have a negative
  impact on stability.  To this end, I've improvised a venting scheme that
  does away with the usual 0.015" drilled orifice.  I use a nylon
  1/8NPT to 1/8" tubing barb 90degree fitting, and I tap the NPT side
  for a 1/4-20 nylon screw that I've carefully sanded slightly flat on
  one side so that the fitting leaks ever-so-slightly.

If this flight works as expected it'll be one of the smallest hybrids
  out there, with the possible exception of Rene Calderas microhybrid.
  It is my intention to bring this 22mm series to market for the
  LMR/HPR community--possibly early next year.

--
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Marcus Leech                             Mail:   Dept 8M70, MS 012, FITZ
Advisor                                  Phone: (ESN) 393-9145  +1 613 763 9145
Security Architecture and Planning       Fax:   (ESN) 393-9435  +1 613 763 9435
Nortel Networks                          mleech@nortelnetworks.com
-----------------Expressed opinions are my own, not my employer's------

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 13033 invoked from network); 25 Jul 2001 18:51:02 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 25 Jul 2001 18:51:02 -0000
Received: (qmail 19829 invoked from network); 25 Jul 2001 18:53:08 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 25 Jul 2001 18:53:08 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA25440; Wed, 25 Jul 2001 11:48:55 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 84882 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 25 Jul 2001 18:48:53          +0000
Received: from femail16.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail16.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.0.95.143]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA25418          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 25 Jul 2001 11:48:52 -0700
Received: from hal2001 ([24.77.53.16]) by femail16.sdc1.sfba.home.com          (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20 201-229-121-120-20010223) with SMTP id          <20010725184845.DWRL11370.femail16.sdc1.sfba.home.com@hal2001>; Wed,          25 Jul 2001 11:48:45 -0700
References:  <814DCE01F6D7D311994D204C4F4F50201889A5@MAIL>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <005701c11539$53e4b060$0400a8c0@hatjs>
Date:         Wed, 25 Jul 2001 11:40:50 -0700
Reply-To: "Jamie Morken" <jmorken@HOME.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jamie Morken" <jmorken@HOME.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] pressurization (was Re: [AR] 3Re: [AR] 2Re: [AR] dark se              crets)
Comments: To: Earl Pottinger <earlcp@CONPUTE.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Hi all,

> What is a copper CC?

Most likely a very thermally conductive combustion chamber :)

best regards,
Jamie

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 15363 invoked from network); 25 Jul 2001 18:51:39 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 25 Jul 2001 18:51:39 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 20941 invoked from network); 25 Jul 2001 18:53:28 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 25 Jul 2001 18:53:28 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA25416; Wed, 25 Jul 2001 11:48:50 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 84874 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 25 Jul 2001 18:48:45          +0000
Received: from crotus.sc.intel.com (scfdns02.sc.intel.com [143.183.152.26]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA25399 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 25 Jul 2001 11:48:45 -0700
Received: from snmeng1.rr.intel.com (snmeng1.rr.intel.com [128.215.231.11]) by          crotus.sc.intel.com (8.9.1a+p1/8.9.1/d: relay.m4,v 1.41 2001/07/09          21:06:22 root Exp $) with ESMTP id SAA14183; Wed, 25 Jul 2001          18:48:13 GMT
Received: from snmeng30.rr.intel.com (snmeng30.rr.intel.com [128.215.52.76]) by          snmeng1.rr.intel.com (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id MAA15533; Wed, 25          Jul 2001 12:45:23 -0600 (MDT)
Received: from snmeng30.rr.intel.com (snmeng30.rr.intel.com [128.215.52.76]) by          snmeng30.rr.intel.com (8.9.1a/8.9.1/d: client.m4,v 1.3 1998/09/29          16:36:11 sedayao Exp sedayao $) with SMTP id MAA02338; Wed, 25 Jul          2001 12:45:21 -0600 (MDT)
X-Mailer: dtmail 1.2.1 CDE Version 1.2.1 SunOS 5.6 sun4m sparc
X-Sun-Text-Type: ascii
Message-ID:  <200107251845.MAA02338@snmeng30.rr.intel.com>
Date:         Wed, 25 Jul 2001 12:45:20 -0600
Reply-To: "Ray Calkins 100660207" <rcalkins@SNMENG1.RR.INTEL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Ray Calkins 100660207" <rcalkins@SNMENG1.RR.INTEL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] pressurization (was Re: [AR] 3Re: [AR] 2Re: [AR] dark se              crets)
Comments: To: earlcp@CONPUTE.COM
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

> > We're talking biprops right?
> > Just put the copper CC in the nox tank.
> What is a copper CC?
My guess would be Combustion Chamber...

Sounds like it could be tough to keep it sealed against high pressures and large
thermal differentials, but other than that a very good idea.  You'll have to
include a pressure relief/burst disk in case you get more heat transfer than you
need though.

Ray Calkins
rcalkins@snmeng1.rr.intel.com           raymond.calkins@intel.com
"My opinions are my own, and do not reflect those of my employer."


From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 22263 invoked from network); 25 Jul 2001 21:04:37 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 25 Jul 2001 21:04:37 -0000
Received: (qmail 17210 invoked from network); 25 Jul 2001 21:06:26 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 25 Jul 2001 21:06:26 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA26890; Wed, 25 Jul 2001 13:31:26 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 85006 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 25 Jul 2001 20:31:18          +0000
Received: from mtiwmhc26.worldnet.att.net (mtiwmhc26.worldnet.att.net          [204.127.131.51]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA26873          for <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Wed, 25 Jul 2001 13:31:18 -0700
Received: from ejabd ([12.83.22.103]) by mtiwmhc26.worldnet.att.net (InterMail          vM.4.01.03.16 201-229-121-116-20010115) with SMTP id          <20010725203055.IVKV18077.mtiwmhc26.worldnet.att.net@ejabd> for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Wed, 25 Jul 2001 20:30:55 +0000
References:  <00f301c11532$4a226240$6401a8c0@home.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <005b01c1154c$c1943d20$6716530c@ejabd>
Date:         Wed, 25 Jul 2001 15:59:54 -0500
Reply-To: "Rick VanVoorhis" <rickv2@WORLDNET.ATT.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Rick VanVoorhis" <rickv2@WORLDNET.ATT.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Fw: LDRS 21, its official!!
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Yes it is here in the great state of Texas and we do launch EX.  So far a P
motor has gone off the field that is being used for LDRS 21.  As one of the
workers and fliers in Texas that is helping to bring this event to you we
welcome you and hope that with two days EX we can have all of you amateur
folks there in mass.  Mark your calendars for July 15 & 16, 2002.

Rick VanVoorhis
----- Original Message -----
From: Brian Kosko <bkosko1@HOME.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Wednesday, July 25, 2001 12:50 PM
Subject: [AR] Fw: LDRS 21, its official!!


> YEE HA!!
>
> Now we're talking! Let's get LDRS back where we can shoot rockets without
> all the helpful prohibitions Kalifornia so thoughtfully provided. And
there
> will be EX, and lots of it.
>
> OK wild boys, here's an arocket challenge. I bet I'll fly something on at
> least an O motor of my own making. Anyone want to top it? Let's start
> planning now. I'd better tell Firefox Gary to stock up on AP.
>
>                                                                     Brian
> > Sent: Monday, July 23, 2001 9:47 PM
> > Subject: LDRS 21, its official!!
> >
> >
> > > Greetings peoples,
> > >
> > >     Just got off the phone with Bruce Lee, Calgary 0, Potrocs 1,
another
> > club
> > > bid but withdrew when they found out we were bidding for it. The dates
> are
> > > July 11,12,13,14,
> > > Commercial, 15 and 16 EX. It'll be hot, but the landowner put in for
us
> > > electricity and a water well at our site to accomodate us, gonna need
> > water
> > > for the pool. Yippers, finished negotiating a deal for a soft body 4
> foot
> > > deep by 17 wide by 32 foot long pool complete with deck and sandy
beach
> at
> > > the site, charge is 7.50 per day per person, 1 hour max time so we
don't
> > have
> > > people dominate pool time (Now you folks wouldn't do that would ya?).
I
> > know
> > > I'll be a customer to cool off with frequent dips during the day.
Colby,
> > Jim
> > > M, leave yore thongs at home, can't stomach that gig. We need
volunteers
> > to
> > > make this show fast and greasy, there were people at Lucerne with
> rockets
> > on
> > > the pad for over 2 hours, Kloudbusters, you know how to launch a
rocket
> a
> > > minute ave. during the whole day, show us how it's done. I am gonna be
> > asking
> > > a lot from you folks (TX, OKLA, KS, NM) to pull this thing off, I know
I
> > can
> > > count on ya. I will be posting further details on our web site,  <A
> > > HREF="http://www.potrocs.org/">Tripoli Amarillo</A> , plus will start
up
> a
> > > new site for LDRS 21, >>>>>>Http://www.LDRS21.org shortly, (give me a
> > coupla
> > > weeks). Neil Milburn, yure the guy that pushed me over the edge to bid
> for
> > > this, I need a Co-Launch Director, yore it bucko........To quote my
dear
> > old
> > > limey buddy, "Time to put up or shut up". There are things in the
works
> > that
> > > could easily triple HPR participation media wise, and if that happens,
> it
> > > could be a zoo at LDRS 21, (details forthcoming).
> > >
> > > Congrats ya pukes, you asked for it, ya got it.
> > >
> > > Pat G
> > >
> > > BTW  the presentation vid to the BOD is on our web site in the video
> > section,
> > > I was told they liked it.
> > >
> > > and PS   Derik Deville was the third man nominated for BOD, good man.
> >

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 1156 invoked from network); 25 Jul 2001 21:26:03 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 25 Jul 2001 21:26:03 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 25728 invoked from network); 25 Jul 2001 21:27:52 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 25 Jul 2001 21:27:52 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA27302; Wed, 25 Jul 2001 14:21:11 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 85097 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 25 Jul 2001 21:21:08          +0000
Received: from ns.vanguard.com (ns.VANGUARD.COM [192.175.173.31]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA27285 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 25 Jul 2001 14:21:07 -0700
Received: from eagle1.vanguard.com (eagle1.VANGUARD.COM [192.175.141.70]) by          ns.vanguard.com (Switch-2.1.3/Switch-2.1.0) with ESMTP id          f6PLL5v27334 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 25 Jul 2001 17:21:05          -0400 (EDT)
Received: from vgi4mail.vanguard.com (vgi4mail.vanguard.com [10.254.65.16]) by          eagle1.vanguard.com (Switch-2.1.3/Switch-2.1.0) with SMTP id          f6PLL4a01730 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 25 Jul 2001 17:21:04          -0400 (EDT)
Received: by vgi4mail.vanguard.com(Lotus SMTP MTA v4.6.6  (890.1 7-16-1999))           id 85256A94.007560B1 ; Wed, 25 Jul 2001 17:22:04 -0400
X-Lotus-FromDomain: VGINOTES
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Disposition: inline
Message-ID:  <85256A94.00746E84.00@vgi4mail.vanguard.com>
Date:         Wed, 25 Jul 2001 17:10:42 -0400
Reply-To: <Waysie_Atkins@VANGUARD.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <Waysie_Atkins@VANGUARD.COM>
Subject:      [AR] XCOR's test flight successful
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

http://www.space.com/missionlaunches/launches/xcor_flight_010724.html

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 23174 invoked from network); 25 Jul 2001 21:45:48 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 25 Jul 2001 21:45:48 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 1623 invoked from network); 25 Jul 2001 21:44:27 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 25 Jul 2001 21:44:27 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA27492; Wed, 25 Jul 2001 14:39:31 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 85147 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 25 Jul 2001 21:39:26          +0000
Received: from brighton.legacywireless.com (legacywireless.com [208.187.126.2])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA27475 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Wed, 25 Jul 2001 14:39:26 -0700
Received: from [208.187.122.40] by brighton.cogolink.com (NTMail          5.00.0010/NY4701.00.0f189dc1) with ESMTP id vywzoaaa for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Wed, 25 Jul 2001 15:48:17 -0600
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.77 [en] (Win98; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B5E91BA.34C69523@biomicro.com>
Date:         Wed, 25 Jul 2001 03:30:34 -0600
Reply-To: "Mark K. Spute" <mks@BIOMICRO.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Mark K. Spute" <mks@BIOMICRO.COM>
Subject:      [AR] FAA waiver help requested
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Hi List;

I'm running afoul of (hopefully) uninformed FAA bureaucrats while trying
to get a launch waiver.

Who knows who was the last person to get a waiver to 100k feet at Black
Rock?  Please contact me as soon as you can.

--
Mark K. Spute
Senior Research Engineer
BioMicro Systems Inc.

KD7IWE,  RRS

"It is difficult to say what is impossible, for the dream of yesterday
is the hope of today and the reality of tomorrow."
     Dr. Robert H. Goddard

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 7561 invoked from network); 25 Jul 2001 22:42:09 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 25 Jul 2001 22:42:09 -0000
Received: (qmail 15595 invoked from network); 25 Jul 2001 22:44:01 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 25 Jul 2001 22:44:01 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA27726; Wed, 25 Jul 2001 15:18:20 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 85182 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 25 Jul 2001 22:18:09          +0000
Received: from albatross.wgn.net (www.wgn.net [64.14.252.81] (may be forged))          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA27709 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 25 Jul 2001 15:18:09 -0700
Received: from hogwild (sc-66-74-70-20.socal.rr.com [66.74.70.20]) by          albatross.wgn.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id PAA31731; Wed, 25 Jul          2001 15:19:55 -0700
References:  <85256A94.0076BE60.00@vgi4mail.vanguard.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <006001c11557$268e90e0$14464a42@socal.rr.com>
Date:         Wed, 25 Jul 2001 15:14:19 -0700
Reply-To: "Wedge Oldham" <wedge@WESTWORLD.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Wedge Oldham" <wedge@WESTWORLD.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Fw: LDRS 21, its official!!
Comments: To: Waysie_Atkins@VANGUARD.COM
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Baja Oklahoma.

Wedge Oldham
http://NikeProject.com
----- Original Message -----
From: <Waysie_Atkins@VANGUARD.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Wednesday, July 25, 2001 2:35 PM
Subject: Re: [AR] Fw: LDRS 21, its official!!


> What part of Texas?
>
> Waysie

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 16293 invoked from network); 25 Jul 2001 22:44:21 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 25 Jul 2001 22:44:21 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 16958 invoked from network); 25 Jul 2001 22:46:14 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 25 Jul 2001 22:46:14 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA27629; Wed, 25 Jul 2001 14:58:50 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 85170 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 25 Jul 2001 21:58:44          +0000
Received: from ns.vanguard.com (ns.VANGUARD.COM [192.175.173.31]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA27612 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 25 Jul 2001 14:58:39 -0700
Received: from eagle1.vanguard.com (eagle1.VANGUARD.COM [192.175.141.70]) by          ns.vanguard.com (Switch-2.1.3/Switch-2.1.0) with ESMTP id          f6PLwVv04913 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 25 Jul 2001 17:58:31          -0400 (EDT)
Received: from vgi4mail.vanguard.com (vgi4mail.vanguard.com [10.254.65.16]) by          eagle1.vanguard.com (Switch-2.1.3/Switch-2.1.0) with SMTP id          f6PLwUa09598 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 25 Jul 2001 17:58:30          -0400 (EDT)
Received: by vgi4mail.vanguard.com(Lotus SMTP MTA v4.6.6  (890.1 7-16-1999))           id 85256A94.0078CD18 ; Wed, 25 Jul 2001 17:59:28 -0400
X-Lotus-FromDomain: VGINOTES
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Disposition: inline
Message-ID:  <85256A94.0076BE60.00@vgi4mail.vanguard.com>
Date:         Wed, 25 Jul 2001 17:35:56 -0400
Reply-To: <Waysie_Atkins@VANGUARD.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <Waysie_Atkins@VANGUARD.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Fw: LDRS 21, its official!!
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

What part of Texas?

Waysie

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 28736 invoked from network); 25 Jul 2001 22:55:22 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 25 Jul 2001 22:55:22 -0000
Received: (qmail 20734 invoked from network); 25 Jul 2001 22:57:15 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 25 Jul 2001 22:57:15 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA27817; Wed, 25 Jul 2001 15:29:24 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 85202 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 25 Jul 2001 22:28:08          +0000
Received: from mta04.mail.mel.aone.net.au (mta04.mail.au.uu.net [203.2.192.84])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA27799 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 25 Jul 2001 15:28:07 -0700
Received: from unknown ([63.60.247.45]) by mta04.mail.mel.aone.net.au with SMTP          id <20010725222804.OTJC12944.mta04.mail.mel.aone.net.au@unknown> for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 26 Jul 2001 08:28:04 +1000
References: Conversation <F61T3lEmFWqbTYP0Kli00006db0@hotmail.com> with last            message <0a2601c1150b$ed491da0$0100a8c0@mkbs>
Priority: Normal
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Priority: 3
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	X-MAPIextension=.TXT;
	charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>
Date:         Wed, 25 Jul 2001 22:28:08 +0000
Reply-To: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] ZINC SULPHUR ROCKET
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <0a2601c1150b$ed491da0$0100a8c0@mkbs>

Russell, I don't think people generally make micrograin rockets for their
"performance" value. Have a look at a picture of a large micrograin rocket
taking off and compare it to.....well...anything really. They look great.

Troy.

----------
> > I need some help does anybody have plans or dimensions for a
zinc-sulphur
> > rocket which takes more than 10kg of fuel, I have been building small
6kg
> > Z/S fuel rockets for some time now, and are looking for something
> > more exciting.
>
> Probably time for a high energy propellant - like Candy perhaps :-)
> Seriously though, while it's not in the AP class its Isp is far far (far)
> higher than Zn/S (about double) and the difference is immense in
performance
> terms.
> And it's cheap.
> And easy to do.
> And .........
> Look at Richard Nakkas Candy Propellant site to see what can be achieved.
>
>
>
>             RM
>
> .

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 29672 invoked from network); 25 Jul 2001 23:32:58 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 25 Jul 2001 23:32:58 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 2176 invoked from network); 25 Jul 2001 23:34:50 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 25 Jul 2001 23:34:50 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA28419; Wed, 25 Jul 2001 16:18:04 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 85315 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 25 Jul 2001 23:17:02          +0000
Received: from femail29.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail29.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.254.60.19]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA28397          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 25 Jul 2001 16:17:02 -0700
Received: from home.com ([24.22.71.82]) by femail29.sdc1.sfba.home.com          (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20 201-229-121-120-20010223) with ESMTP id          <20010725231654.EPPU553.femail29.sdc1.sfba.home.com@home.com>; Wed,          25 Jul 2001 16:16:54 -0700
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.75 [en] (Win98; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <LPBBKJMJEOFKAMFJJNNHOEOACFAA.landofgrey@gnc.net>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B5F53AD.A875F5D3@home.com>
Date:         Wed, 25 Jul 2001 19:18:05 -0400
Reply-To: "Mark Simpson" <mark.simpson@HOME.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Mark Simpson" <mark.simpson@HOME.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] 2Re: Alternatives to patents?
Comments: To: landofgrey@GNC.NET
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Matthew,
 The party that uses the patent illegally as well as the party selling an object
that infringes a patent are BOTH guilty of infringement.  There are numerous
cases in the chemical world in which the company selling the compound as well as
the final end user were co-defendents in an infringement  lawsuit.
As for "personal use" exemption, patent law has no such clause that I'm aware.
It is permissible to follow the teachings of a patent in order to prove that it
is valid (this is often done in academia, for example), but there's no allowance
made for anyone using an invention for either personal or commercial gain.

Mark Simpson

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 12036 invoked from network); 26 Jul 2001 02:38:35 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 26 Jul 2001 02:38:35 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 24557 invoked from network); 26 Jul 2001 02:40:44 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 26 Jul 2001 02:40:44 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA29420; Wed, 25 Jul 2001 19:13:08 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 85411 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 26 Jul 2001 02:12:14          +0000
Received: from cyclone.comcen.com.au (cyclone.comcen.com.au [203.23.236.100])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA29402 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 25 Jul 2001 19:12:13 -0700
Received: (from nobody@localhost) by cyclone.comcen.com.au (8.11.1/8.11.1) id          f6Q29ZM11969; Thu, 26 Jul 2001 12:09:35 +1000 (EST) (envelope-from          pkelly@comcen.com.au)
X-Authentication-Warning: cyclone.comcen.com.au: nobody set sender to                         pkelly@comcen.com.au using -f
References: <200107251845.MAA02338@snmeng30.rr.intel.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
User-Agent: IMP/PHP IMAP webmail program 2.2.3
X-Originating-IP: 203.2.125.3
Message-ID:  <996113375.3b5f7bdfc5b82@webmail.comcen.com.au>
Date:         Thu, 26 Jul 2001 12:09:35 +1000
Reply-To: "Paul Kelly" <pkelly@COMCEN.COM.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Paul Kelly" <pkelly@COMCEN.COM.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] pressurization (was Re: [AR] 3Re: [AR] 2Re: [AR] dark se              crets)
Comments: To: Ray Calkins 100660207 <rcalkins@snmeng1.rr.intel.com>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <200107251845.MAA02338@snmeng30.rr.intel.com>

Quoting Ray Calkins 100660207 <rcalkins@snmeng1.rr.intel.com>:

> > > We're talking biprops right?
> > > Just put the copper CC in the nox tank.
> > What is a copper CC?
> My guess would be Combustion Chamber...
>
> Sounds like it could be tough to keep it sealed against high pressures
> and large
> thermal differentials, but other than that a very good idea.  You'll
> have to
> include a pressure relief/burst disk in case you get more heat transfer
> than you
> need though.
O'rings are magic!

make the whole aft piston (snap ring motor)+nozzle+cc out of a chunk of copper.
Make the injector slide into the top of the CC (o'ring seal) no need to secure
it in place ullage pressure will do that (hard starts aside).

PK

>
> Ray Calkins
> rcalkins@snmeng1.rr.intel.com           raymond.calkins@intel.com
> "My opinions are my own, and do not reflect those of my employer."
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 17369 invoked from network); 26 Jul 2001 02:40:01 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 26 Jul 2001 02:40:01 -0000
Received: (qmail 25265 invoked from network); 26 Jul 2001 02:42:12 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 26 Jul 2001 02:42:12 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA29611; Wed, 25 Jul 2001 19:35:51 -0700
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 85441 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 26 Jul 2001 02:34:27          +0000
Received: from zcars0m9.ca.nortel.com ([47.129.242.157]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA29589 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed,          25 Jul 2001 19:34:26 -0700
Received: from zcars04f.ca.nortel.com (zcars04f.ca.nortel.com [47.129.242.57])          by zcars0m9.ca.nortel.com (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f6Q2XY910395          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 25 Jul 2001 22:33:34 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from rftzy232.ca.nortel.com by zcars04f.ca.nortel.com; Wed, 25 Jul          2001 22:33:43 -0400
Received: from nortelnetworks.com (acart18a.ca.nortel.com [47.129.9.139]) by          rftzy232.ca.nortel.com with SMTP (Microsoft Exchange Internet Mail          Service Version 5.5.2653.13) id NKPL5VSQ; Wed, 25 Jul 2001 22:33:35          -0400
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.77 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.19 i686)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <200107251845.MAA02338@snmeng30.rr.intel.com>            <996113375.3b5f7bdfc5b82@webmail.comcen.com.au>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Orig: <mleech@nortelnetworks.com>
Message-ID:  <3B5F825A.7D7AE9A0@nortelnetworks.com>
Date:         Wed, 25 Jul 2001 22:37:14 -0400
Reply-To: "Marcus Leech" <mleech@NORTELNETWORKS.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Marcus Leech" <mleech@NORTELNETWORKS.COM>
Organization: Nortel Networks: Information Systems
Subject:      Re: [AR] pressurization (was Re: [AR] 3Re: [AR] 2Re: [AR] dark se              crets)
Comments: To: Paul Kelly <pkelly@COMCEN.COM.AU>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Paul Kelly wrote:

>
> make the whole aft piston (snap ring motor)+nozzle+cc out of a chunk of copper.
> Make the injector slide into the top of the CC (o'ring seal) no need to secure
> it in place ullage pressure will do that (hard starts aside).
>
> PK
>
My friend with the all-graphite combustion-chamber/nozzle assembly uses
EXACTLY
  that technique in a monotube style bipropellant design.  The
injector/piston
  seats against the CC exactly as if it were seating against a fuel
grain in
  a hybrid.  His graphite CCs hang out the back of the rocket, and are
thus
  radiatively cooled.  His larger motor (6" 'P' motor) will be
regeneratively
  cooled using N2O as the coolant.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 9349 invoked from network); 26 Jul 2001 02:55:06 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 26 Jul 2001 02:55:06 -0000
Received: (qmail 24391 invoked from network); 26 Jul 2001 02:56:58 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 26 Jul 2001 02:56:58 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA29658; Wed, 25 Jul 2001 19:39:10 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 85453 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 26 Jul 2001 02:37:51          +0000
Received: from dune.gnc.net (root@dune.gnc.net [207.203.72.4]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA29635 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed,          25 Jul 2001 19:37:51 -0700
Received: from beowulf (sw2-34.gnc.net [207.203.72.114]) by dune.gnc.net          (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id WAA08431; Wed, 25 Jul 2001 22:37:50 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
Importance: Normal
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <LPBBKJMJEOFKAMFJJNNHAEPLCFAA.landofgrey@gnc.net>
Date:         Wed, 25 Jul 2001 22:37:43 -0400
Reply-To: <landofgrey@gnc.net>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Matthew Travis" <landofgrey@gnc.net>
Subject:      Re: [AR] 2Re: Alternatives to patents?
Comments: To: Mark Simpson <mark.simpson@home.com>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <3B5F53AD.A875F5D3@home.com>

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Mark Simpson [mailto:mark.simpson@home.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, July 25, 2001 7:18 PM
> To: landofgrey@GNC.NET
> Cc: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
> Subject: Re: [AR] 2Re: Alternatives to patents?
>
>
> Matthew,
>  The party that uses the patent illegally as well as the party
> selling an object
> that infringes a patent are BOTH guilty of infringement.  There
Only if the judge rules against them both. I know, it's nitpicking.

> are numerous
> cases in the chemical world in which the company selling the
> compound as well as
> the final end user were co-defendents in an infringement  lawsuit.
By way of clarification, I am currently named personally as a defendent in a
$500,000 lawsuit. It's not a patent suit, so this doesn't entirely apply,
except for me to make a specific point. I am named *not* because I genuinely
did anything wrong or because the plaintiffs want to get a judgement from me
personally. I have been named as a defendent because the plaintiff's
attorney is trying to get a judgement from a company of which I am a client.
After all, that's where the cash is, not with me. I am not worth the
trouble. My understanding is that, since in a patent case, a customer is
often culpable for infringement, being named as a defendent is a technique
used to ensure that the customer will help the plaintiff's case. This is
because the custoemr has the prospect of a judgement being leveled against
*him* to worry about. If he helps the plaintiff's, then he is more likely to
be dropped from the suit. This is especially true if there could never be
any hope of the customer being able to pay a judgement anyway. Attorneys
won't go after them unless necessary. For example, myself. I can't pay a
$500,000 judgement. I would instead declare bankruptcy and the plaintiff,
more importantly his attorneys, would never get a dime, because bankruptcy
in this case would not pay for lawsuit damages. Basically, I am a defendent
*not* because they want to get a judgement against me, but because the want
to get a judgement against the company.

The relationship between the seller and buyer plays a significant role in
who and how a part is named in a lawsuit. It is not unusual for an attorney
to name as many people as possible as defendents, buyers, sellers,
distributors, etc. as part of the strategy to get a judegement against just
the primary party or parties. We named not only the software company, but
their licensed distributor and large customers as defendents in our suit,
but that was part of the means to ensure that we got adequate testimony from
everyone in order to get a judgement against the software company. Patent
law is clear about selling, using and possessing patented inventions. It is
not as clear (not in the same way) about buying a product that uses in whole
or part a patented invention. The interpretation is that it's not the act of
buying that is particularly illegal (this is debatable) but the use of it by
the buyer. When this issue goes to court, many times, unless the buyer knew
there was a patent infringement involved, the buyer (particularly small-time
consumers who could never pay out a judgement anyway and would just declare
bankruptcy) usually ends up with little if any punishment. Of course,
ignorance of the law is not a reason for disobeying it.

> As for "personal use" exemption, patent law has no such clause
> that I'm aware.
I agree that there's no statutory "personal use" exemption. I didn't mean to
imply or state that there was.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 25627 invoked from network); 26 Jul 2001 03:00:02 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 26 Jul 2001 03:00:02 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 29678 invoked from network); 26 Jul 2001 03:02:10 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 26 Jul 2001 03:02:10 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA29703; Wed, 25 Jul 2001 19:44:18 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 85461 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 26 Jul 2001 02:42:56          +0000
Received: from cyclone.comcen.com.au (cyclone.comcen.com.au [203.23.236.100])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA29684 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 25 Jul 2001 19:42:55 -0700
Received: (from nobody@localhost) by cyclone.comcen.com.au (8.11.1/8.11.1) id          f6Q2gmk12071; Thu, 26 Jul 2001 12:42:48 +1000 (EST) (envelope-from          pkelly@comcen.com.au)
X-Authentication-Warning: cyclone.comcen.com.au: nobody set sender to                         pkelly@comcen.com.au using -f
References: <200107251845.MAA02338@snmeng30.rr.intel.com>            <996113375.3b5f7bdfc5b82@webmail.comcen.com.au>            <3B5F825A.7D7AE9A0@nortelnetworks.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
User-Agent: IMP/PHP IMAP webmail program 2.2.3
X-Originating-IP: 203.2.125.3
Message-ID:  <996115368.3b5f83a8110f8@webmail.comcen.com.au>
Date:         Thu, 26 Jul 2001 12:42:48 +1000
Reply-To: "Paul Kelly" <pkelly@COMCEN.COM.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Paul Kelly" <pkelly@COMCEN.COM.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] pressurization (was Re: [AR] 3Re: [AR] 2Re: [AR] dark se              crets)
Comments: To: Marcus Leech <mleech@nortelnetworks.com>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <3B5F825A.7D7AE9A0@nortelnetworks.com>

Sounds like your friend knows what he's doing, but just in case, don't try to
regen-cool a graphite CC using NOX, you'll quickly find out just how porous
that graphite is!

I built an ethanol/NOX biprop with a copper CC this way once. Unfortunatley I
tried to make it too simple and opted for pyrovalve ignition, much like Dave
G's early biprops.
What's the quote, "Loudest noise I ever heard" :-)

PK


Quoting Marcus Leech <mleech@nortelnetworks.com>:

> Paul Kelly wrote:
>
> >
> > make the whole aft piston (snap ring motor)+nozzle+cc out of a chunk
> of copper.
> > Make the injector slide into the top of the CC (o'ring seal) no need
> to secure
> > it in place ullage pressure will do that (hard starts aside).
> >
> > PK
> >
> My friend with the all-graphite combustion-chamber/nozzle assembly uses
> EXACTLY
>   that technique in a monotube style bipropellant design.  The
> injector/piston
>   seats against the CC exactly as if it were seating against a fuel
> grain in
>   a hybrid.  His graphite CCs hang out the back of the rocket, and are
> thus
>   radiatively cooled.  His larger motor (6" 'P' motor) will be
> regeneratively
>   cooled using N2O as the coolant.
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 25972 invoked from network); 26 Jul 2001 03:34:41 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 26 Jul 2001 03:34:41 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 24066 invoked from network); 26 Jul 2001 03:36:06 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 26 Jul 2001 03:36:06 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA29951; Wed, 25 Jul 2001 20:25:59 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 85503 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 26 Jul 2001 03:23:10          +0000
Received: from idsoftware.com (predator.idsoftware.com [192.246.40.34]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA29924 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Wed, 25 Jul 2001 20:23:10 -0700
Received: from [192.246.40.129] (account johnc HELO lightning.idsoftware.com)          by idsoftware.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 3.4.7) with ESMTP id 315149          for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Wed, 25 Jul 2001 22:21:55 -0500
X-Sender: johnc@mail.idsoftware.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.1
References: <85256A94.00746E84.00@vgi4mail.vanguard.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <4.3.1.2.20010725221715.02cda140@mail.idsoftware.com>
Date:         Wed, 25 Jul 2001 22:22:03 -0500
Reply-To: "John Carmack" <johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Carmack" <johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] XCOR's test flight successful
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <5.1.0.14.0.20010725230342.02aca918@hobbiton.shire.net>

At 11:03 PM 7/25/2001 -0400, you wrote:
>Do you guys think that they have a ghost of a chance of getting that high
>on the amount of fuel that plane appears to carry?  I honestly don't know
>what to think.
>
>Seth

I am an XCOR investor, so I have to be a little careful about what I say,
but I think the following is public knowledge:

This is NOT an X-Prize vehicle, or even the prototype of an X-Prize vehicle.

It won't even go supersonic, because the airframe just isn't made for
it.  Jef Greason went on at some length at Space Access this year about
"why you can't just stick a rocket on a Mig and fly to space".

The major point is to show people that rockets don't need to be expensive,
dangerous, and hard to operate.

XCOR would be happy to build an X-Prize vehicle if someone wanted to
contract them to do so.

John Carmack

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 24874 invoked from network); 26 Jul 2001 04:23:12 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 26 Jul 2001 04:23:12 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 2988 invoked from network); 26 Jul 2001 04:23:07 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 26 Jul 2001 04:23:07 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA30208; Wed, 25 Jul 2001 21:17:54 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 85542 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 26 Jul 2001 04:16:31          +0000
Received: from femail44.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail44.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.254.60.38]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA30185          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 25 Jul 2001 21:16:31 -0700
Received: from c1649002-a.earthlink.net ([24.20.95.67]) by          femail44.sdc1.sfba.home.com (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20          201-229-121-120-20010223) with ESMTP id          <20010726041625.UJN562.femail44.sdc1.sfba.home.com@c1649002-a.earthlink.net> for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed,          25 Jul 2001 21:16:25 -0700
X-Sender: forkbomb@mail.earthlink.net
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.0.2
References: <5.1.0.14.0.20010725230342.02aca918@hobbiton.shire.net>            <85256A94.00746E84.00@vgi4mail.vanguard.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <5.0.2.1.0.20010725211308.029cabf0@mail.earthlink.net>
Date:         Wed, 25 Jul 2001 21:16:21 -0700
Reply-To: "Pierce Nichols" <forkbomb@EARTHLINK.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Pierce Nichols" <forkbomb@EARTHLINK.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] XCOR's test flight successful
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <4.3.1.2.20010725221715.02cda140@mail.idsoftware.com>

At 10:22 PM 7/25/2001 -0500, John Carmack wrote:
>At 11:03 PM 7/25/2001 -0400, you wrote:
>>Do you guys think that they have a ghost of a chance of getting that high
>>on the amount of fuel that plane appears to carry?  I honestly don't know
>>what to think.
>>
>>Seth
>
>I am an XCOR investor, so I have to be a little careful about what I say,
>but I think the following is public knowledge:
>
>This is NOT an X-Prize vehicle, or even the prototype of an X-Prize vehicle.
>
>It won't even go supersonic, because the airframe just isn't made for
>it.  Jef Greason went on at some length at Space Access this year about
>"why you can't just stick a rocket on a Mig and fly to space".


         The above is all pretty obvious to anyone even marginally familiar
with the Long-EZ design. I would think that makes it reasonably public
knowledge.


>The major point is to show people that rockets don't need to be expensive,
>dangerous, and hard to operate.


         Which, once it racks up a few flights, will be amply demonstrated
:). Are they going to hit the airshow circuit with it?


>XCOR would be happy to build an X-Prize vehicle if someone wanted to
>contract them to do so.


         <g>

         -p


Mars or Bust!
www.marssociety.com

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 1794 invoked from network); 26 Jul 2001 04:44:53 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 26 Jul 2001 04:44:53 -0000
Received: (qmail 28195 invoked from network); 26 Jul 2001 04:46:19 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 26 Jul 2001 04:46:19 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA30319; Wed, 25 Jul 2001 21:40:59 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 85559 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 26 Jul 2001 04:39:25          +0000
Received: from femail24.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail24.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.0.95.149]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA30291          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 25 Jul 2001 21:39:25 -0700
Received: from hal2001 ([24.77.53.16]) by femail24.sdc1.sfba.home.com          (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20 201-229-121-120-20010223) with SMTP id          <20010726043906.QVSV586.femail24.sdc1.sfba.home.com@hal2001> for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Wed, 25 Jul 2001 21:39:06 -0700
References: <200107251845.MAA02338@snmeng30.rr.intel.com>                      <996113375.3b5f7bdfc5b82@webmail.comcen.com.au>                      <3B5F825A.7D7AE9A0@nortelnetworks.com>             <996115368.3b5f83a8110f8@webmail.comcen.com.au>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <000d01c1158b$cceb61a0$0400a8c0@hatjs>
Date:         Wed, 25 Jul 2001 21:31:12 -0700
Reply-To: "Jamie Morken" <jmorken@HOME.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Jamie Morken" <jmorken@HOME.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] pressurization (was Re: [AR] 3Re: [AR] 2Re: [AR] dark se              crets)
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Hi Paul,

>
> I built an ethanol/NOX biprop with a copper CC this way once.
Unfortunatley I
> tried to make it too simple and opted for pyrovalve ignition, much like
Dave
> G's early biprops.
> What's the quote, "Loudest noise I ever heard" :-)
>
> PK

What was the problem you had with the pyrovalve ignition?

best regards,
Jamie

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 19128 invoked from network); 26 Jul 2001 04:50:31 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 26 Jul 2001 04:50:31 -0000
Received: (qmail 15457 invoked from network); 26 Jul 2001 04:52:24 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 26 Jul 2001 04:52:24 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA30366; Wed, 25 Jul 2001 21:44:23 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 85572 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 26 Jul 2001 04:43:02          +0000
Received: from imo-d04.mx.aol.com (imo-d04.mx.aol.com [205.188.157.36]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA30343 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Wed, 25 Jul 2001 21:43:01 -0700
Received: from Sociald84@aol.com by imo-d04.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v31.7.) id          w.e3.180a56dc (4422) for <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Thu, 26 Jul 2001          00:42:52 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: AOL 5.0 for Windows sub 138
Message-ID:  <e3.180a56dc.2890f9cc@aol.com>
Date:         Thu, 26 Jul 2001 00:42:52 EDT
Reply-To: <Sociald84@AOL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <Sociald84@AOL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] pressurization (was Re: [AR] 3Re: [AR] 2Re: [AR] dark              secrets)
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Why not use regenerative cooling with a copper tube running from the cooling
jacket through the propellant tanks and into the chamber. Hell you could even
make the combustion chamber out of the tubing.

Mark

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 15167 invoked from network); 26 Jul 2001 06:40:29 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 26 Jul 2001 06:40:29 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 13106 invoked from network); 26 Jul 2001 06:42:38 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 26 Jul 2001 06:42:38 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA30789; Wed, 25 Jul 2001 23:29:45 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 85637 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 26 Jul 2001 06:28:14          +0000
Received: from cyclone.comcen.com.au (cyclone.comcen.com.au [203.23.236.100])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA30770 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Wed, 25 Jul 2001 23:28:11 -0700
Received: (from nobody@localhost) by cyclone.comcen.com.au (8.11.1/8.11.1) id          f6Q6Qi212718; Thu, 26 Jul 2001 16:26:44 +1000 (EST) (envelope-from          pkelly@comcen.com.au)
X-Authentication-Warning: cyclone.comcen.com.au: nobody set sender to                         pkelly@comcen.com.au using -f
References: <200107251845.MAA02338@snmeng30.rr.intel.com>                                 <996113375.3b5f7bdfc5b82@webmail.comcen.com.au>                                <3B5F825A.7D7AE9A0@nortelnetworks.com>                        <996115368.3b5f83a8110f8@webmail.comcen.com.au>            <000d01c1158b$cceb61a0$0400a8c0@hatjs>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
User-Agent: IMP/PHP IMAP webmail program 2.2.3
X-Originating-IP: 203.2.125.3
Message-ID:  <996128804.3b5fb824b39e0@webmail.comcen.com.au>
Date:         Thu, 26 Jul 2001 16:26:44 +1000
Reply-To: "Paul Kelly" <pkelly@COMCEN.COM.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Paul Kelly" <pkelly@COMCEN.COM.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] pressurization (was Re: [AR] 3Re: [AR] 2Re: [AR] dark se              crets)
Comments: To: Jamie Morken <jmorken@HOME.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <000d01c1158b$cceb61a0$0400a8c0@hatjs>

Quoting Jamie Morken <jmorken@HOME.COM>:

> Hi Paul,
>
> >
> > I built an ethanol/NOX biprop with a copper CC this way once.
> Unfortunatley I
> > tried to make it too simple and opted for pyrovalve ignition, much
> like
> Dave
> > G's early biprops.
> > What's the quote, "Loudest noise I ever heard" :-)
> >
> > PK
>
> What was the problem you had with the pyrovalve ignition?
The usual one with NOX biprops. If you don't dump MASSES of heat into the CC
then NOX's extra latency (Boil+disassociate) causes hard starts which lead to
detonation of the nox tank.

>
> best regards,
> Jamie
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 23481 invoked from network); 26 Jul 2001 14:21:59 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 26 Jul 2001 14:21:59 -0000
Received: (qmail 7582 invoked from network); 26 Jul 2001 14:23:50 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 26 Jul 2001 14:23:50 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA32294; Thu, 26 Jul 2001 06:56:16 -0700
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 85796 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 26 Jul 2001 13:56:00          +0000
Received: from zcars0m9.ca.nortel.com ([47.129.242.157]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA32277 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu,          26 Jul 2001 06:55:58 -0700
Received: from zcars04f.ca.nortel.com (zcars04f.ca.nortel.com [47.129.242.57])          by zcars0m9.ca.nortel.com (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f6QDt1908307          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 26 Jul 2001 09:55:01 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from rftzy232.ca.nortel.com by zcars04f.ca.nortel.com; Thu, 26 Jul          2001 09:55:00 -0400
Received: from NORTELNETWORKS.COM (wftzh00e.ca.nortel.com [47.130.116.9]) by          rftzy232.ca.nortel.com with SMTP (Microsoft Exchange Internet Mail          Service Version 5.5.2653.13) id NKPL5WCZ; Thu, 26 Jul 2001 09:54:53          -0400
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.73C-CCK-MCD [en] (X11; U; HP-UX B.10.20 9000/785)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <200107251845.MAA02338@snmeng30.rr.intel.com>            <996113375.3b5f7bdfc5b82@webmail.comcen.com.au>            <3B5F825A.7D7AE9A0@nortelnetworks.com>            <996115368.3b5f83a8110f8@webmail.comcen.com.au>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Orig: <mleech@NORTELNETWORKS.COM>
Message-ID:  <3B602141.EDD06894@NORTELNETWORKS.COM>
Date:         Thu, 26 Jul 2001 09:55:13 -0400
Reply-To: "Marcus Leech" <mleech@NORTELNETWORKS.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Marcus Leech" <mleech@NORTELNETWORKS.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] pressurization (was Re: [AR] 3Re: [AR] 2Re: [AR] dark se              crets)
Comments: To: Paul Kelly <pkelly@comcen.com.au>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Paul Kelly wrote:
>
> Sounds like your friend knows what he's doing, but just in case, don't try to
> regen-cool a graphite CC using NOX, you'll quickly find out just how porous
> that graphite is!
>
> I built an ethanol/NOX biprop with a copper CC this way once. Unfortunatley I
> tried to make it too simple and opted for pyrovalve ignition, much like Dave
> G's early biprops.
> What's the quote, "Loudest noise I ever heard" :-)
>
> PK
My friend has been using the same basic design for a couple of years, with
  29mm, 38mm, and 54mm versions all working quite well.  Hard starts *have*
  happened occasionally, resulting in shattered CCs.


A couple of weeks ago, when we were testing some new 38mm Propulsion Polymers
  stuff out at my test range, we also test-fired his 54mm biprop.  A tad slow
  starting, but once it was running, it was 9 seconds of pretty
  spectacular thrustage.  The cool thing about these (N2O+Methanol) motors
  is that there's *no* visible plume.  You get a flash of smokey yellow on
  startup (he coats the inside of his CC with Vaseline to boost his
  CCV+Steel wool ignition sequence), and then just *noise*.

--
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Marcus Leech                             Mail:   Dept 8M70, MS 012, FITZ
Advisor                                  Phone: (ESN) 393-9145  +1 613 763 9145
Security Architecture and Planning       Fax:   (ESN) 393-9435  +1 613 763 9435
Nortel Networks                          mleech@nortelnetworks.com
-----------------Expressed opinions are my own, not my employer's------

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: (qmail 25441 invoked from network); 26 Jul 2001 17:03:47 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 26 Jul 2001 17:03:47 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: (qmail 16600 invoked from network); 26 Jul 2001 17:05:40 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 26 Jul 2001 17:05:40 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA00452; Thu, 26 Jul 2001 09:40:03 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 85860 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 26 Jul 2001 16:39:57          +0000
Received: from wrench.toolcity.net (root@wrench.toolcity.net [208.0.188.2]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA00429 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 26 Jul 2001 09:39:56 -0700
Received: from [63.169.101.175]          (dap-63-169-101-175.meadville-tnt-1.pa.toolcity.net [63.169.101.175])          by wrench.toolcity.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id MAA23527 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 26 Jul 2001 12:39:51 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <v01510101b7860675f12f@[63.169.101.175]>
Date:         Thu, 26 Jul 2001 12:42:10 -0500
Reply-To: "al bradley" <abradley@TOOLCITY.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "al bradley" <abradley@TOOLCITY.NET>
Subject:      [AR] Off-list messages:
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Going out of town for a few days. Off list mail will not be being read till
later.

best,
al bradley

------------------------------------------------------------------
Can you live Life with this?: "Unless there is a law, an agreement, or a
long-standing custom, No one `Deserves' Anything -- Either Good or Bad!"

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 8005 invoked from network); 26 Jul 2001 17:45:09 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 26 Jul 2001 17:45:09 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 23811 invoked from network); 26 Jul 2001 17:47:19 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 26 Jul 2001 17:47:19 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA00940; Thu, 26 Jul 2001 10:28:05 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 85931 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Thu, 26 Jul 2001 17:27:55          +0000
Received: from ns.vanguard.com (ns.VANGUARD.COM [192.175.173.31]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA00922 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 26 Jul 2001 10:27:54 -0700
Received: from eagle1.vanguard.com (eagle1.VANGUARD.COM [192.175.141.70]) by          ns.vanguard.com (Switch-2.1.3/Switch-2.1.0) with ESMTP id          f6QHRrv26277 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 26 Jul 2001 13:27:53          -0400 (EDT)
Received: from vgi4mail.vanguard.com (vgi4mail.vanguard.com [10.254.65.16]) by          eagle1.vanguard.com (Switch-2.1.3/Switch-2.1.0) with SMTP id          f6QHRqa10749 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Thu, 26 Jul 2001 13:27:52          -0400 (EDT)
Received: by vgi4mail.vanguard.com(Lotus SMTP MTA v4.6.6  (890.1 7-16-1999))           id 85256A95.00600B50 ; Thu, 26 Jul 2001 13:29:03 -0400
X-Lotus-FromDomain: VGINOTES
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Disposition: inline
Message-ID:  <85256A95.005E5E61.00@vgi4mail.vanguard.com>
Date:         Thu, 26 Jul 2001 13:09:33 -0400
Reply-To: <Waysie_Atkins@VANGUARD.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <Waysie_Atkins@VANGUARD.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Micro rocket engines
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

<BF wrote:
<
<> > A new link on progress in the microrocket engine field.
<> >
<> > <http://www.technologyreview.com/web/leo/leo051801.asp>


At JPL's open house they had similarly sized engines, made on a chip.  It worked
by heating cold gas IIRC, and was quite effiecient but don't recall any t/w
numbers.  We're being developed as attitude control for micro-sats.  Wonder if
they're looking for a place to test them.  Perhaps AMSAT could work a deal with
them....


Waysie

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 28524 invoked from network); 29 Jun 2001 08:48:21 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 29 Jun 2001 08:48:21 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 15224 invoked from network); 29 Jun 2001 08:49:16 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 29 Jun 2001 08:49:16 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id BAA12284; Fri, 29 Jun 2001 01:40:06 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 67655 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 29 Jun 2001 08:39:52          +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (f178.law15.hotmail.com [64.4.23.178]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id BAA12262 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Fri, 29 Jun 2001 01:39:51 -0700
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Fri,          29 Jun 2001 01:39:21 -0700
Received: from 193.121.251.246 by lw15fd.law15.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Fri,          29 Jun 2001 08:39:21 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [193.121.251.246]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 29 Jun 2001 08:39:21.0354 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[FE2C46A0:01C10076]
Message-ID:  <F178CHOzyfyz5b6KZmc0001f136@hotmail.com>
Date:         Fri, 29 Jun 2001 08:39:52 +0000
Reply-To: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] nitrates oops
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

MT wrote:

> > nitrocellulose indeed has NO3 groups

Yes but they do not behave like inorganic nitrates.

NC: end group R-O-NO2  or R-NO3 with 3 Os around the N could be called a
nitrate yet it does not dissociate like one so probably rather call it a
nitrocompound. The 3rd O is a  remnant of the cellulose polymer hydroxyl
group attached to a carbon atom which takes away the nitrate behaviour

TNT or RDX end groups R-NO2 with 2 Os definitely a nitrocompound. No
hydroxyl was involved

Mol. Structures URL:
http://www.spie.org/web/oer/april/apr98/fred.html

NC water solubility is negligible:

http://physchem.ox.ac.uk/MSDS/CO/collodion,flexible.html

NC as a polymer indeed consists of 6 membered cellulose monomer rings
(Troys drawing). The third cellulose ring is heterocyclic (N) NCNO3 typo?

Organics RNO2 or RONO3 do dissolve well in water and do certainly not  form
anions NO2 or ONO2 (NO3). One can call them organic nitrates
(NO2- nitrite is an inorganic anion, but that is another subject
altogether). All real nitrates form the NO3- anion and all do dissolve well
in water.

I remember the subject was the JT Baker safety sheet which says KNO3 is not
safe to contact with  organics. True, the KNO3 comes in an inert white
plastic Merck bottle. In the 4th millenium that 'd be long gone...
In the lab, their pale yellow ones are falling apart after 20 years only.

Back on topic: the interest of most people of this list may be the safety of
keeping big KN/sugar cylinders locked up in their garage or driving around
with them to a launching spot I never heard of impact  tests of KN/sugar
blocks or explosion tests with a detonating cap. Has anyone?

jd




_________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 2582 invoked from network); 29 Jun 2001 09:43:37 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 29 Jun 2001 09:43:37 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 22980 invoked from network); 29 Jun 2001 09:44:20 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 29 Jun 2001 09:44:20 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id CAA12458; Fri, 29 Jun 2001 02:41:48 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 67669 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 29 Jun 2001 09:41:43          +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (f212.law15.hotmail.com [64.4.23.212]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id CAA12441 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Fri, 29 Jun 2001 02:41:43 -0700
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Fri,          29 Jun 2001 02:41:12 -0700
Received: from 193.121.251.246 by lw15fd.law15.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Fri,          29 Jun 2001 09:41:12 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [193.121.251.246]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 29 Jun 2001 09:41:12.0728 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[A2530180:01C1007F]
Message-ID:  <F212IJsaJbqJGNzscE800004d7f@hotmail.com>
Date:         Fri, 29 Jun 2001 09:41:43 +0000
Reply-To: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      [AR] nitrates oops
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Oooops;

Organics RNO2 or RONO3 do *not* dissolve well in water and do certainly not
form
anions NO2 or ONO2 (NO3). One can call them organic nitrates

jd

_________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 6170 invoked from network); 29 Jun 2001 09:44:46 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 29 Jun 2001 09:44:46 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 12969 invoked from network); 29 Jun 2001 09:45:52 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 29 Jun 2001 09:45:52 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id CAA12484; Fri, 29 Jun 2001 02:42:39 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 67677 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 29 Jun 2001 09:42:37          +0000
Received: from idsoftware.com (predator.idsoftware.com [192.246.40.34]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id CAA12467 for          <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Fri, 29 Jun 2001 02:42:37 -0700
Received: from [192.246.40.144] (account johnc HELO pluto.idsoftware.com) by          idsoftware.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 3.4.6) with ESMTP id 269020 for          AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 29 Jun 2001 04:41:52 -0500
X-Sender: johnc@mail.idsoftware.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.1
References: <4.3.1.2.20010628150201.03225ed0@mail.idsoftware.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <4.3.1.2.20010629045138.0380af28@mail.idsoftware.com>
Date:         Fri, 29 Jun 2001 04:53:21 -0500
Reply-To: "John Carmack" <johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Carmack" <johnc@IDSOFTWARE.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Portable data acquisition with PDA's/palm devices
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <3B3C0AC6.A4BCE99F@mindspring.com>

At 09:57 PM 6/28/2001 -0700, you wrote:
>John,
>If you mean code for a pc, than count me in. My real interest is for the
>DI-151RS which I can sorta run with basic (better on some computers than
>on others??) but I blieve that the code is very similar. So please, yes,
>some sample is welcome.

The code that drives the test stand control and data acquisition hardware
(idataq DI-151RS):

http://www.armadilloaerospace.com/pwm2.c

John Carmack

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 24087 invoked from network); 29 Jun 2001 11:15:19 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 29 Jun 2001 11:15:19 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 27706 invoked from network); 29 Jun 2001 11:16:26 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 29 Jun 2001 11:16:26 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id DAA12691; Fri, 29 Jun 2001 03:58:38 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 67699 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 29 Jun 2001 10:57:15          +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (f144.law15.hotmail.com [64.4.23.144]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id DAA12673 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Fri, 29 Jun 2001 03:57:15 -0700
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Fri,          29 Jun 2001 03:56:44 -0700
Received: from 193.121.251.246 by lw15fd.law15.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Fri,          29 Jun 2001 10:56:43 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [193.121.251.246]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 29 Jun 2001 10:56:44.0986 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[2FC2B1A0:01C1008A]
Message-ID:  <F144EoPXCFbN4TZyabY0000484c@hotmail.com>
Date:         Fri, 29 Jun 2001 10:57:15 +0000
Reply-To: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Composite motors and light waves
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

JMR wrote:

>Look at the book
>
>Tactical Missile Propulsion
>Progress in Astronautics and Aeronautics Hardcover , 529 page(s) , ISBN or
>Order Number: 1-56347-118-3 , Copyright: 1996
>>From www.aiaa.org
>
>does a decent job on propulsion plume signatures vs. chemistry (including
>light output).

What kind of apparatus/instrumentation is used to measure plume signatures
emission spectra?
Midac Corporation portable open path FTIR 0,5 cm-1 resolution for IR? That
instrument is used in air monitoring systems. Saw pics scanning active
volcanos with it. Newton mirror included.

But VIS/UV?

Could flame photometry scan (injecting a solution of the propellant mix into
a flame) establish plume signature?

jd
_________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 6998 invoked from network); 29 Jun 2001 14:05:11 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 29 Jun 2001 14:05:11 -0000
Received: (qmail 24495 invoked from network); 29 Jun 2001 14:06:17 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 29 Jun 2001 14:06:17 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA13350; Fri, 29 Jun 2001 06:58:26 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 67731 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 29 Jun 2001 13:58:09          +0000
Received: from mta05.mail.mel.aone.net.au (mta05.mail.au.uu.net [203.2.192.85])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA13332 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 29 Jun 2001 06:58:07 -0700
Received: from unknown ([63.60.249.157]) by mta05.mail.mel.aone.net.au with          SMTP id <20010629135803.CLQQ28112.mta05.mail.mel.aone.net.au@unknown>          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 29 Jun 2001 23:58:03 +1000
References: Conversation <F178CHOzyfyz5b6KZmc0001f136@hotmail.com> with last            message <F178CHOzyfyz5b6KZmc0001f136@hotmail.com>
Priority: Normal
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Priority: 3
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	X-MAPIextension=.TXT;
	charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Message-ID:  <MAPI.Id.0016.00723034373634383030303830303038@MAPI.to.RFC822>
Date:         Fri, 29 Jun 2001 13:58:09 +0000
Reply-To: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Troy Prideaux" <GEORDI@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] nitrates oops
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <F178CHOzyfyz5b6KZmc0001f136@hotmail.com>

>
> TNT or RDX end groups R-NO2 with 2 Os definitely a nitrocompound. No
> hydroxyl was involved

ummm, RDX is very interesting to me because it contains NN02 bonds which
raises a question that I've been pondering since the NO2ClO4 thread: if
it's possible to synthesize N02Cl04 (nitronium perchlorate) why is it not
possible to synthesize N02N03 or is it?

>
> Mol. Structures URL:
> http://www.spie.org/web/oer/april/apr98/fred.html
>
> NC water solubility is negligible:
>
> http://physchem.ox.ac.uk/MSDS/CO/collodion,flexible.html
>
> NC as a polymer indeed consists of 6 membered cellulose monomer rings
> (Troys drawing). The third cellulose ring is heterocyclic (N) NCNO3 typo?

Dunno, it was copied from a well respected book.

>
> I remember the subject was the JT Baker safety sheet which says KNO3 is
not
> safe to contact with  organics. True, the KNO3 comes in an inert white
> plastic Merck bottle. In the 4th millenium that 'd be long gone...
> In the lab, their pale yellow ones are falling apart after 20 years only.

They only say that because it's an oxidizing agent. They're obligated to
say that for all "strong" oxidizing agents. Geez, if it was soooo dangerous
why would you use it as a fertiliser for your "organic" plants & crops or
meats, in fact, all its non-pyrotechnic (that I'm aware of) & most of its
pyrotechnic uses involve contact with organics (VERY close contact in some
cases).

>
> Back on topic: the interest of most people of this list may be the safety
of
> keeping big KN/sugar cylinders locked up in their garage or driving around
> with them to a launching spot I never heard of impact  tests of KN/sugar
> blocks or explosion tests with a detonating cap. Has anyone?

I've performed some impact tests with a hammer - no reaction took place
(with candy that is). Haven't tried a detonating cap although if any
non-metallised composition based on KNO3 could be detonated, you'd suspect
it would be BP. If BP never had a history of detonating in the applications
in which is was used (re: extreme pressures and shocks in artillery) then
candy - a considerably more heterogeneous propellant than BP - would be
quite safe from that perspective. Yeah, lots of deduction there but I have
no historical records of any problems regarding KNO3 and detonation and I'm
sure I would have stumbled across something over the years I was playing
around with the stuff. Maybe I wasn't looking hard enough?

Troy.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 17214 invoked from network); 29 Jun 2001 14:41:22 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 29 Jun 2001 14:41:22 -0000
Received: (qmail 2132 invoked from network); 29 Jun 2001 14:42:28 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 29 Jun 2001 14:42:28 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA13482; Fri, 29 Jun 2001 07:37:30 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 67746 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 29 Jun 2001 14:37:26          +0000
Received: from femail3.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail3.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.0.95.83]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA13446 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 29 Jun 2001 07:27:26 -0700
Received: from ghartunglaptop ([24.255.146.25]) by femail3.sdc1.sfba.home.com          (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20 201-229-121-120-20010223) with SMTP id          <20010629142720.IHDU1621.femail3.sdc1.sfba.home.com@ghartunglaptop>          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 29 Jun 2001 07:27:20 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <GGEIJGNNFHFPEBENACBAKENGCEAA.ghartung13@home.com>
Date:         Fri, 29 Jun 2001 08:26:21 -0600
Reply-To: "Greg Hartung" <ghartung13@HOME.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Greg Hartung" <ghartung13@HOME.COM>
Subject:      [AR] nitrous:kerosene
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Anybody know the proper mixture ratio for nitrous and kerosene?
Thanks.
Greg Hartung

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 27828 invoked from network); 29 Jun 2001 15:31:46 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 29 Jun 2001 15:31:46 -0000
Received: (qmail 2373 invoked from network); 29 Jun 2001 15:29:01 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 29 Jun 2001 15:29:01 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA13695; Fri, 29 Jun 2001 08:23:30 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 67774 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 29 Jun 2001 15:23:29          +0000
Received: from c002.snv.cp.net (c002-h007.c002.snv.cp.net [209.228.32.171]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id IAA13678 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 29 Jun 2001 08:23:28 -0700
Received: (cpmta 22496 invoked from network); 29 Jun 2001 08:22:38 -0700
Received: from 1Cust249.tnt2.williamsburg.va.da.uu.net (HELO default)          (63.21.81.249) by smtp.peoplepc.com (209.228.32.171) with SMTP; 29          Jun 2001 08:22:38 -0700
X-Sent: 29 Jun 2001 15:22:38 GMT
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_09AF_01C56B69.3F5684E0"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <006b01c100b0$c4a9f000$f951153f@default>
Date:         Fri, 29 Jun 2001 11:32:53 -0400
Reply-To: "David Muesing" <dmuesing@PEOPLEPC.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "David Muesing" <dmuesing@PEOPLEPC.COM>
Subject:      [AR] Water in Solid Propellant
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_09AF_01C56B69.3F5684E0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Hello Group,

Sounds like some of us are using a little water in our candy propellant =
processing phase. Let's say that the finished product has 2% water in =
it. Besides displacing actual propellant, what would be the other =
effects, slower burn, lower Isp, ? Could it be of benefit in some ways?

Thank you for your comments!

Dave Muesing
Yorktown, VA, USA

=20

------=_NextPart_000_09AF_01C56B69.3F5684E0
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Diso-8859-1">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 5.50.4616.200" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=3DOCRA color=3D#0000ff>Hello Group,</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DOCRA color=3D#0000ff></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DOCRA color=3D#0000ff>Sounds like some of us are using =
a little=20
water in our candy propellant&nbsp;processing phase. Let's say that the =
finished=20
product has 2% water in it. Besides displacing actual propellant, what =
would be=20
the other effects, slower burn, lower Isp, ? Could it be of benefit in =
some=20
ways?</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DOCRA color=3D#0000ff></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DOCRA color=3D#0000ff>Thank you for your =
comments!</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DOCRA color=3D#0000ff></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DOCRA color=3D#0000ff>Dave Muesing</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DOCRA color=3D#0000ff>Yorktown, VA, USA</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DOCRA color=3D#0000ff></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_09AF_01C56B69.3F5684E0--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 17960 invoked from network); 29 Jun 2001 15:36:14 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 29 Jun 2001 15:36:14 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 4516 invoked from network); 29 Jun 2001 15:32:12 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 29 Jun 2001 15:32:12 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA13670; Fri, 29 Jun 2001 08:23:09 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 67766 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 29 Jun 2001 15:22:59          +0000
Received: from ns.vanguard.com (ns.VANGUARD.COM [192.175.173.31]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA13652 for          <ARocket@itc.uci.edu>; Fri, 29 Jun 2001 08:22:58 -0700
Received: from eagle1.vanguard.com (eagle1.VANGUARD.COM [192.175.133.75]) by          ns.vanguard.com (Switch-2.1.0/Switch-2.1.0) with ESMTP id          f5TFMvX28968 for <ARocket@itc.uci.edu>; Fri, 29 Jun 2001 11:22:57          -0400 (EDT)
Received: from vgi4mail.vanguard.com (vgi4mail.vanguard.com [10.254.65.16]) by          eagle1.vanguard.com (Switch-2.1.0/Switch-2.1.0) with SMTP id          f5TFMuY11136 for <ARocket@itc.uci.edu>; Fri, 29 Jun 2001 11:22:56          -0400 (EDT)
Received: by vgi4mail.vanguard.com(Lotus SMTP MTA v4.6.6  (890.1 7-16-1999))           id 85256A7A.00548897 ; Fri, 29 Jun 2001 11:23:19 -0400
X-Lotus-FromDomain: VGINOTES
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Disposition: inline
Message-ID:  <85256A7A.00548512.00@vgi4mail.vanguard.com>
Date:         Fri, 29 Jun 2001 11:22:41 -0400
Reply-To: <Waysie_Atkins@VANGUARD.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: <Waysie_Atkins@VANGUARD.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] 01-44 X-38 free-flight tests resume NTE
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

< I hate to dwell on semantics, but since my career
<depends on ISS and NSTS,




I appreciate getting an inside view of the processes invovled.


Enjoy the Day,

Waysie

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 9936 invoked from network); 29 Jun 2001 15:55:00 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 29 Jun 2001 15:55:00 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 19614 invoked from network); 29 Jun 2001 15:55:35 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 29 Jun 2001 15:55:35 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA13810; Fri, 29 Jun 2001 08:43:55 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 67794 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 29 Jun 2001 15:43:52          +0000
Received: from melete.ch.intel.com (chfdns02.ch.intel.com [143.182.246.25]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA13793 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 29 Jun 2001 08:43:52 -0700
Received: from snmeng1.rr.intel.com (snmeng1.rr.intel.com [128.215.231.11]) by          melete.ch.intel.com (8.9.1a+p1/8.9.1/d: relay.m4,v 1.40 2001/06/06          21:14:49 root Exp $) with ESMTP id PAA06329; Fri, 29 Jun 2001          15:43:51 GMT
Received: from snmeng30.rr.intel.com (snmeng30.rr.intel.com [128.215.52.76]) by          snmeng1.rr.intel.com (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id JAA17484; Fri, 29          Jun 2001 09:41:06 -0600 (MDT)
Received: from snmeng30.rr.intel.com (snmeng30.rr.intel.com [128.215.52.76]) by          snmeng30.rr.intel.com (8.9.1a/8.9.1/d: client.m4,v 1.3 1998/09/29          16:36:11 sedayao Exp sedayao $) with SMTP id JAA22228; Fri, 29 Jun          2001 09:41:02 -0600 (MDT)
X-Mailer: dtmail 1.2.1 CDE Version 1.2.1 SunOS 5.6 sun4m sparc
X-Sun-Text-Type: ascii
Message-ID:  <200106291541.JAA22228@snmeng30.rr.intel.com>
Date:         Fri, 29 Jun 2001 09:41:02 -0600
Reply-To: "Ray Calkins 100660207" <rcalkins@SNMENG1.RR.INTEL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Ray Calkins 100660207" <rcalkins@SNMENG1.RR.INTEL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] nitrous:kerosene
Comments: To: ghartung13@HOME.COM
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

There are several good software tools for this:

A web accessible version of Cpep, a newer package that handles the same thing:
http://rocketworkbench.sourceforge.net/equil.phtml  It only allows single runs,
unfortunately, but is highly accessible.

ProPep, THE tool for this kind of analysis...
http://sunsite.unc.edu/pub/archives/rec.models.rockets/PROGRAMS

GuiPep, a highly recommended windows graphical interface for the DOS ProPep:
http://www.htp.com/artlex/Hobbies/Rocketry/Xfer/GUIPEP.ZIP
Instructions:
http://lekstutis.com/Artie/LandShark/Hobbies/Rocketry/Software.htm#GPINTRO

I haven't tried it yet, but there is also availible, GDLPep:
http://members.home.net/jelanier/GDL_Propep120.zip

EQS4WIN Chemical Equilibrium Software
availible from http://www.mathtrek.com/
Free full working demo of the EQS4WIN thermodynamic equilibrium computation
software, very useful.

CHEMEQ
http://members.aol.com/ricanakk/soft/chemeq.zip
- Author: Richard Nakka. Calculates the chemical equilibrium concentrations of
reaction products in a C/H/O/N (carbon, hydrogen, oxygen & nitrogen) system, at
specified temperature and pressure.

(Thanks to Hans Olaf Toft.  I lifed much of this info from his excellent Amateur
Rocketry Links Library...)

Ray Calkins
rcalkins@snmeng1.rr.intel.com           raymond.calkins@intel.com
"My opinions are my own, and do not reflect those of my employer."


From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 18458 invoked from network); 29 Jun 2001 16:18:06 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 29 Jun 2001 16:18:06 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 17171 invoked from network); 29 Jun 2001 16:19:03 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 29 Jun 2001 16:19:03 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA13864; Fri, 29 Jun 2001 08:54:17 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 67804 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 29 Jun 2001 15:54:15          +0000
Received: from pan.ch.intel.com (chfdns01.ch.intel.com [143.182.246.24]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA13847 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 29 Jun 2001 08:54:15 -0700
Received: from snmeng1.rr.intel.com (snmeng1.rr.intel.com [128.215.231.11]) by          pan.ch.intel.com (8.9.1a+p1/8.9.1/d: relay.m4,v 1.40 2001/06/06          21:14:49 root Exp $) with ESMTP id PAA15714; Fri, 29 Jun 2001          15:54:13 GMT
Received: from snmeng30.rr.intel.com (snmeng30.rr.intel.com [128.215.52.76]) by          snmeng1.rr.intel.com (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id JAA17554; Fri, 29          Jun 2001 09:51:28 -0600 (MDT)
Received: from snmeng30.rr.intel.com (snmeng30.rr.intel.com [128.215.52.76]) by          snmeng30.rr.intel.com (8.9.1a/8.9.1/d: client.m4,v 1.3 1998/09/29          16:36:11 sedayao Exp sedayao $) with SMTP id JAA03483; Fri, 29 Jun          2001 09:51:25 -0600 (MDT)
X-Mailer: dtmail 1.2.1 CDE Version 1.2.1 SunOS 5.6 sun4m sparc
X-Sun-Text-Type: ascii
Message-ID:  <200106291551.JAA03483@snmeng30.rr.intel.com>
Date:         Fri, 29 Jun 2001 09:51:25 -0600
Reply-To: "Ray Calkins 100660207" <rcalkins@SNMENG1.RR.INTEL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Ray Calkins 100660207" <rcalkins@SNMENG1.RR.INTEL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Water in Solid Propellant
Comments: To: dmuesing@PEOPLEPC.COM
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Smaller crystal sizes and resultant faster burn rates.  More ductility, easier
forming at lower temperatures.  Isp is little affected by water content (ProPep
shows about 1% loss per percent below 10% water content.
Burn rate and ignitability is markedly changed, however.
Ductility is increased, but the material seems to be more hydroscopic and is
definitely stickier.

> Dave Muesing
> Sounds like some of us are using a little water in our candy propellant
processing phase. Let's say that the finished product has 2% water in it.
Besides displacing actual propellant, what would be the other effects, slower
burn, lower Isp, ? Could it be of benefit in some ways?

Ray Calkins
rcalkins@snmeng1.rr.intel.com           raymond.calkins@intel.com
"My opinions are my own, and do not reflect those of my employer."


From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 15676 invoked from network); 29 Jun 2001 16:24:05 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 29 Jun 2001 16:24:05 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 8652 invoked from network); 29 Jun 2001 16:24:46 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 29 Jun 2001 16:24:46 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA13974; Fri, 29 Jun 2001 09:12:41 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 67827 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 29 Jun 2001 16:12:33          +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (f36.law3.hotmail.com [209.185.241.36]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA13957 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Fri, 29 Jun 2001 09:12:32 -0700
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Fri,          29 Jun 2001 09:12:02 -0700
Received: from 213.224.83.46 by lw3fd.law3.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Fri, 29          Jun 2001 16:12:02 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [213.224.83.46]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 29 Jun 2001 16:12:02.0509 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[3B7B9FD0:01C100B6]
Message-ID:  <F36suZ2K4xDh9vXsFFs0000203b@hotmail.com>
Date:         Fri, 29 Jun 2001 16:12:33 +0000
Reply-To: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] nitronium compounds
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

TP wrote:

>ummm, RDX is very interesting to me because it contains NN02 bonds which
>raises a question that I've been pondering since the NO2ClO4 thread: if
>it's possible to synthesize N02Cl04 (nitronium perchlorate) why is it not
>possible to synthesize N02N03 or is it?
>

Beyond my knowledge. I have heard about nitronium salts when looking into
the matter of HAN monoprop but'd have to research this.

Besides, this is chemistry for isolated bunker or cave labs, no? Not my
piece of cake.

jd
_________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 28021 invoked from network); 29 Jun 2001 16:40:10 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 29 Jun 2001 16:40:10 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 21904 invoked from network); 29 Jun 2001 16:41:16 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 29 Jun 2001 16:41:16 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA14069; Fri, 29 Jun 2001 09:24:42 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 67837 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 29 Jun 2001 16:24:36          +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (f27.law3.hotmail.com [209.185.241.27]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA14052 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Fri, 29 Jun 2001 09:24:36 -0700
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Fri,          29 Jun 2001 09:24:06 -0700
Received: from 213.224.83.46 by lw3fd.law3.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Fri, 29          Jun 2001 16:24:06 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [213.224.83.46]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 29 Jun 2001 16:24:06.0308 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[EAE69640:01C100B7]
Message-ID:  <F27M3SOlbpH71yEXUIE00010f84@hotmail.com>
Date:         Fri, 29 Jun 2001 16:24:36 +0000
Reply-To: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      [AR] sub launch
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

There are one or two probably simple things which escape me concerning sub
launched missiles. Say Trident for instance. So their motor ignites the
instant it leaves the water or while say 1 or 2 m under the surface.

Questions here are: how come they can pop up that violently so they clear
the surface before ignition? I mean the specific gravity of the missile must
be larger than that of sea water... Even leaving the sub tube with
compressed gas, I'd expect the missile'd slow down going up, no? Even sink
again.

Next, what is the maximum depth such missiles can leave the sub? Only 10 m
equals 1 bar pressure.

jd
_________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 8740 invoked from network); 29 Jun 2001 17:08:49 -0000
Received: from smtpd.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.84]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 29 Jun 2001 17:08:49 -0000
Received: (qmail 9219 invoked from network); 29 Jun 2001 17:09:00 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 29 Jun 2001 17:09:00 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA14147; Fri, 29 Jun 2001 09:41:48 -0700
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 67850 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 29 Jun 2001 16:41:41          +0000
Received: from zcars0m9.ca.nortel.com (h157s242a129n47.user.nortelnetworks.com          [47.129.242.157]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA14130          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 29 Jun 2001 09:41:40 -0700
Received: from zcars04e.ca.nortel.com (zcars04e.ca.nortel.com [47.129.242.56])          by zcars0m9.ca.nortel.com (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f5TGRn008698          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 29 Jun 2001 12:27:50 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from rftzy232.ca.nortel.com by zcars04e.ca.nortel.com; Fri, 29 Jun          2001 12:27:40 -0400
Received: from nortelnetworks.com (acart13x.ca.nortel.com [47.129.8.173]) by          rftzy232.ca.nortel.com with SMTP (Microsoft Exchange Internet Mail          Service Version 5.5.2653.13) id NKPLZW4D; Fri, 29 Jun 2001 12:23:15          -0400
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.77 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.19 i686)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <GGEIJGNNFHFPEBENACBAKENGCEAA.ghartung13@home.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Orig: <mleech@nortelnetworks.com>
Message-ID:  <3B3CAC70.FCD37069@nortelnetworks.com>
Date:         Fri, 29 Jun 2001 12:27:28 -0400
Reply-To: "Marcus Leech" <mleech@NORTELNETWORKS.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Marcus Leech" <mleech@NORTELNETWORKS.COM>
Organization: Nortel Networks: Information Systems
Subject:      Re: [AR] nitrous:kerosene
Comments: To: Greg Hartung <ghartung13@HOME.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Greg Hartung wrote:
>
> Anybody know the proper mixture ratio for nitrous and kerosene?
> Thanks.
> Greg Hartung
Off the top of my head, somewhere between 4:1 and 8:1 should work
reasonably well.
  N2O is remarkably forgiving in this regard; Isp dropoff in the
vicinity of the
  ideal mixture ratio isn't too severe.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 3788 invoked from network); 29 Jun 2001 17:27:50 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 29 Jun 2001 17:27:50 -0000
Received: (qmail 14024 invoked from network); 29 Jun 2001 17:28:48 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 29 Jun 2001 17:28:48 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA14205; Fri, 29 Jun 2001 09:53:45 -0700
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 67860 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 29 Jun 2001 16:53:43          +0000
Received: from zcars0m9.ca.nortel.com (h157s242a129n47.user.nortelnetworks.com          [47.129.242.157]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA14188          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 29 Jun 2001 09:53:42 -0700
Received: from zcars04e.ca.nortel.com (zcars04e.ca.nortel.com [47.129.242.56])          by zcars0m9.ca.nortel.com (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f5TGqv011330          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 29 Jun 2001 12:52:57 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from rftzy232.ca.nortel.com by zcars04e.ca.nortel.com; Fri, 29 Jun          2001 12:52:49 -0400
Received: from nortelnetworks.com (acart13x.ca.nortel.com [47.129.8.173]) by          rftzy232.ca.nortel.com with SMTP (Microsoft Exchange Internet Mail          Service Version 5.5.2653.13) id NKPLZWVG; Fri, 29 Jun 2001 12:48:24          -0400
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.77 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.19 i686)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <GGEIJGNNFHFPEBENACBAKENGCEAA.ghartung13@home.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Orig: <mleech@nortelnetworks.com>
Message-ID:  <3B3CB255.264E6074@nortelnetworks.com>
Date:         Fri, 29 Jun 2001 12:52:37 -0400
Reply-To: "Marcus Leech" <mleech@NORTELNETWORKS.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Marcus Leech" <mleech@NORTELNETWORKS.COM>
Organization: Nortel Networks: Information Systems
Subject:      Re: [AR] nitrous:kerosene
Comments: To: Greg Hartung <ghartung13@HOME.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Greg Hartung wrote:
>
> Anybody know the proper mixture ratio for nitrous and kerosene?
> Thanks.
> Greg Hartung
A quick run of Cpropep shows that shifting equilibrium performance of
  a 4:1 N2O/JP-4 [close enough to kerosene for this exercise] mixture,
  at a Pc of 30atm gives an Isp of 223sec.  Assume that a real-world
motor
  will do rather poorer than this, perhaps as low as 180sec.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 23720 invoked from network); 29 Jun 2001 20:45:52 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 29 Jun 2001 20:45:52 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 4290 invoked from network); 29 Jun 2001 20:46:50 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 29 Jun 2001 20:46:50 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA14784; Fri, 29 Jun 2001 13:18:55 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 67886 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 29 Jun 2001 20:18:48          +0000
Received: from noralf.uib.no (noralf.uib.no [129.177.30.12]) by itc.uci.edu          (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA14767 for <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>; Fri,          29 Jun 2001 13:18:47 -0700
Received: from malurt.uib.no [129.177.30.50] by noralf.uib.no with esmtp (Exim          3.16) id 15G4iL-0003Dd-00; Fri, 29 Jun 2001 22:18:05 +0200
Received: from nobody by malurt.uib.no with local (Exim 3.16) id          15G4iK-0007dB-00; Fri, 29 Jun 2001 22:18:04 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
User-Agent: IMP/PHP IMAP webmail program 2.2.1/UIB-1c
X-Sent-Through: webmail.uib.no
X-User-Agent: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 5.0; Windows 98) Opera 5.01  [sv]
X-Originating-IP: 130.67.205.244
Message-ID:  <993845884.3b3ce27c6327e@webmail.uib.no>
Date:         Fri, 29 Jun 2001 22:18:04 +0200
Reply-To: <Emil.Johnsen@STUDENT.UIB.NO>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Emil Johnsen" <Emil.Johnsen@STUDENT.UIB.NO>
Subject:      Re: [AR] nitrous:kerosene
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

>N2O is remarkably forgiving in this regard; Isp dropoff in the vicinity of the >ideal mixture ratio isn't too severe.

Not surprising, as N2O is a powerful monoprop.


Emil

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 17616 invoked from network); 29 Jun 2001 22:25:56 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 29 Jun 2001 22:25:56 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 3836 invoked from network); 29 Jun 2001 22:27:03 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 29 Jun 2001 22:27:03 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA15537; Fri, 29 Jun 2001 15:19:26 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 67964 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 29 Jun 2001 22:19:23          +0000
Received: from femail18.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail18.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.0.95.145]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA15516          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 29 Jun 2001 15:19:11 -0700
Received: from home.com ([24.22.71.82]) by femail18.sdc1.sfba.home.com          (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20 201-229-121-120-20010223) with ESMTP id          <20010629221902.NQRS22639.femail18.sdc1.sfba.home.com@home.com> for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 29 Jun 2001 15:19:02 -0700
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.75 [en] (Win98; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <F36suZ2K4xDh9vXsFFs0000203b@hotmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B3CFF17.5A88E241@home.com>
Date:         Fri, 29 Jun 2001 18:20:07 -0400
Reply-To: "Mark Simpson" <mark.simpson@HOME.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Mark Simpson" <mark.simpson@HOME.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] nitronium compounds
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Steric hindrances play a big part in the amount of nitration that an organic
molecule can tolerate.  Oxygen atoms don't like being in close proximity to
other oxygen atoms. I once saw a formula for  calculating  the stability of
nitrated organics, but don't recall it at the moment.  My last chemistry
class, Advanced Organic, IIRC, was in 1978 and even though I have a Chemistry
degree, I haven't worked in a lab in 10 years.  Sometimes, it's good to be the
boss, sometimes it's not. ;-)

Mark Simpson

John Dom wrote:

> TP wrote:
>
> >ummm, RDX is very interesting to me because it contains NN02 bonds which
> >raises a question that I've been pondering since the NO2ClO4 thread: if
> >it's possible to synthesize N02Cl04 (nitronium perchlorate) why is it not
> >possible to synthesize N02N03 or is it?
> >
>
> Beyond my knowledge. I have heard about nitronium salts when looking into
> the matter of HAN monoprop but'd have to research this.
>
> Besides, this is chemistry for isolated bunker or cave labs, no? Not my
> piece of cake.
>
> jd
> _________________________________________________________________________
> Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 27143 invoked from network); 29 Jun 2001 22:35:24 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 29 Jun 2001 22:35:24 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 22961 invoked from network); 29 Jun 2001 22:36:22 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 29 Jun 2001 22:36:22 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA15511; Fri, 29 Jun 2001 15:18:25 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 67956 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 29 Jun 2001 22:17:52          +0000
Received: from femail18.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail18.sdc1.sfba.home.com          [24.0.95.145]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA15493          for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 29 Jun 2001 15:17:51 -0700
Received: from home.com ([24.22.71.82]) by femail18.sdc1.sfba.home.com          (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20 201-229-121-120-20010223) with ESMTP id          <20010629221744.NOWK22639.femail18.sdc1.sfba.home.com@home.com> for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 29 Jun 2001 15:17:44 -0700
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.75 [en] (Win98; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <F27M3SOlbpH71yEXUIE00010f84@hotmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <3B3CFEC8.8D52D062@home.com>
Date:         Fri, 29 Jun 2001 18:18:49 -0400
Reply-To: "Mark Simpson" <mark.simpson@HOME.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Mark Simpson" <mark.simpson@HOME.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] sub launch
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

IIRC, from Crimson Tide, launch depth is 300' max. below the surface for a nuke.

Mark Simpson

John Dom wrote:

> There are one or two probably simple things which escape me concerning sub
> launched missiles. Say Trident for instance. So their motor ignites the
> instant it leaves the water or while say 1 or 2 m under the surface.
>
> Questions here are: how come they can pop up that violently so they clear
> the surface before ignition? I mean the specific gravity of the missile must
> be larger than that of sea water... Even leaving the sub tube with
> compressed gas, I'd expect the missile'd slow down going up, no? Even sink
> again.
>
> Next, what is the maximum depth such missiles can leave the sub? Only 10 m
> equals 1 bar pressure.
>
> jd
> _________________________________________________________________________
> Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 4339 invoked from network); 29 Jun 2001 22:51:25 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 29 Jun 2001 22:51:25 -0000
Received: (qmail 9806 invoked from network); 29 Jun 2001 22:52:32 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 29 Jun 2001 22:52:32 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA15782; Fri, 29 Jun 2001 15:47:45 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 68001 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 29 Jun 2001 22:47:44          +0000
Received: from albatross.wgn.net (www.wgn.net [64.14.252.81] (may be forged))          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA15765 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 29 Jun 2001 15:47:43 -0700
Received: from hogwild (sc-66-74-70-20.socal.rr.com [66.74.70.20]) by          albatross.wgn.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id PAA12886 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 29 Jun 2001 15:48:22 -0700
References:  <NDBBIBAMIMKJPANDCAHGEELFENAA.greg@blastzone.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <01d501c100ed$49fdbf20$14464a42@socal.rr.com>
Date:         Fri, 29 Jun 2001 15:46:08 -0700
Reply-To: "Wedge Oldham" <wedge@WESTWORLD.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Wedge Oldham" <wedge@WESTWORLD.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Proppellant oops question
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

What we call experience is often a dreadful list of ghastly mistakes.

Wedge Oldham
http://NikeProject.com

----- Original Message -----
From: "Greg Deputy" <greg@blastzone.com>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Friday, June 29, 2001 3:34 PM
Subject: [AR] Proppellant oops question


> I mixed up a 1800g batch of AP based propellant yesterday, and made a
small
> error.  The formula I'm using calls for 2% MDI, 36g in this case.  I used
> 2g....  Anyways, I now have a bunch of tubes packed with this mud, would
it
> be worth the time to remix and add the remaining 34g of curative, or am I
> going to end up with something questionable?
>
> This is an 83% solids propellant that is packed, not poured, and is the
same
> consistency now as it was when it was packed last night, as far as i can
> tell.
>
> Any words of wisdom would be appreciated.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 15424 invoked from network); 29 Jun 2001 22:54:08 -0000
Received: from smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.83]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 29 Jun 2001 22:54:08 -0000
Received: (qmail 17322 invoked from network); 29 Jun 2001 22:55:03 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpc.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 29 Jun 2001 22:55:03 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA15580; Fri, 29 Jun 2001 15:25:01 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 67972 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 29 Jun 2001 22:24:56          +0000
Received: from conint.consumersinterest.com (consumersinterest.com          [207.195.143.118] (may be forged)) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with          ESMTP id PAA15560 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 29 Jun 2001          15:24:55 -0700
Received: from greg [208.187.15.138] by conint.consumersinterest.com          (SMTPD32-6.04) id A3461D0C0076; Fri, 29 Jun 2001 15:37:58 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <NDBBIBAMIMKJPANDCAHGEELFENAA.greg@blastzone.com>
Date:         Fri, 29 Jun 2001 15:34:40 -0700
Reply-To: <greg@blastzone.com>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Greg Deputy" <greg@blastzone.com>
Subject:      [AR] Proppellant oops question
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

I mixed up a 1800g batch of AP based propellant yesterday, and made a small
error.  The formula I'm using calls for 2% MDI, 36g in this case.  I used
2g....  Anyways, I now have a bunch of tubes packed with this mud, would it
be worth the time to remix and add the remaining 34g of curative, or am I
going to end up with something questionable?

This is an 83% solids propellant that is packed, not poured, and is the same
consistency now as it was when it was packed last night, as far as i can
tell.

Any words of wisdom would be appreciated.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 15863 invoked from network); 29 Jun 2001 23:08:28 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 29 Jun 2001 23:08:28 -0000
Received: (qmail 9211 invoked from network); 29 Jun 2001 23:09:23 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 29 Jun 2001 23:09:23 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA15841; Fri, 29 Jun 2001 15:58:34 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 68009 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 29 Jun 2001 22:58:29          +0000
Received: from cablecom.laribay.net (cablecom.laribay.net [66.20.57.4]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA15793 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 29 Jun 2001 15:48:28 -0700
Received: from billbull (dial110.laribay.net [66.20.57.110]) by          cablecom.laribay.net (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id RAA02829 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 29 Jun 2001 17:33:09 -0500 (CDT)          (envelope-from bpbullock@laribay.net)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_09B2_01C56B69.3F64DCC0"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <003501c100ed$9d49e780$6e391442@billbull>
Date:         Fri, 29 Jun 2001 17:48:06 -0500
Reply-To: "Bill Bullock" <bpbullock@LARIBAY.NET>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Bill Bullock" <bpbullock@LARIBAY.NET>
Subject:      Re: [AR] Sub Launch
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_09B2_01C56B69.3F64DCC0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

John:
    Actually, the max launch depth is classified as the max operational =
depth of the various submarines. "Normal Launch Depth" is simply given =
as "approximately periscope depth". Probably the only two organizations =
who know the exact figures for certain are the U.S. Navy and the Russian =
navy.
Bill

------=_NextPart_000_09B2_01C56B69.3F64DCC0
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META content=3D"text/html; charset=3Diso-8859-1" =
http-equiv=3DContent-Type>
<META content=3D"MSHTML 5.00.2614.3500" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT size=3D2><STRONG>John:</STRONG></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><STRONG><FONT size=3D2>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Actually, the max launch =
depth is=20
classified as the max operational depth of the&nbsp;various submarines. =
"Normal=20
Launch Depth" is simply given as "approximately periscope depth". =
Probably the=20
only two organizations who know the exact figures =
for&nbsp;certain&nbsp;are the=20
U.S. Navy and the Russian navy.</FONT></STRONG></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=3D2><STRONG>Bill</STRONG></FONT></DIV></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_09B2_01C56B69.3F64DCC0--

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 3515 invoked from network); 29 Jun 2001 23:12:28 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 29 Jun 2001 23:12:28 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 11738 invoked from network); 29 Jun 2001 23:13:27 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 29 Jun 2001 23:13:27 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA15915; Fri, 29 Jun 2001 16:09:20 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 68028 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 29 Jun 2001 23:09:17          +0000
Received: from hotmail.com (f108.law3.hotmail.com [209.185.241.108]) by          itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA15898 for          <arocket@itc.uci.edu>; Fri, 29 Jun 2001 16:09:17 -0700
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Fri,          29 Jun 2001 16:08:46 -0700
Received: from 213.224.83.134 by lw3fd.law3.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Fri, 29          Jun 2001 23:08:46 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [213.224.83.134]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 29 Jun 2001 23:08:46.0909 (UTC)                       FILETIME=[734446D0:01C100F0]
Message-ID:  <F108gWUP5t27eRBx9bu000024c0@hotmail.com>
Date:         Fri, 29 Jun 2001 23:09:17 +0000
Reply-To: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "John Dom" <j_dom@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] sub launch
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Meaning 9 bars water pressure on the missile hull. Could be. Wow.

jd


>From: Mark Simpson <mark.simpson@HOME.COM>
>Reply-To: Mark Simpson <mark.simpson@HOME.COM>
>To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
>Subject: Re: [AR] sub launch
>Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2001 18:18:49 -0400
>
>IIRC, from Crimson Tide, launch depth is 300' max. below the surface for a
>nuke.
>
>Mark Simpson
>
>John Dom wrote:
>
> > There are one or two probably simple things which escape me concerning
>sub
> > launched missiles. Say Trident for instance. So their motor ignites the
> > instant it leaves the water or while say 1 or 2 m under the surface.
> >
> > Questions here are: how come they can pop up that violently so they
>clear
> > the surface before ignition? I mean the specific gravity of the missile
>must
> > be larger than that of sea water... Even leaving the sub tube with
> > compressed gas, I'd expect the missile'd slow down going up, no? Even
>sink
> > again.
> >
> > Next, what is the maximum depth such missiles can leave the sub? Only 10
>m
> > equals 1 bar pressure.
> >
> > jd
> >
>_________________________________________________________________________
> > Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at
>http://www.hotmail.com.

_________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 11689 invoked from network); 29 Jun 2001 23:14:19 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 29 Jun 2001 23:14:19 -0000
Received: (qmail 12557 invoked from network); 29 Jun 2001 23:15:17 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 29 Jun 2001 23:15:17 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA15755; Fri, 29 Jun 2001 15:46:09 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 67993 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 29 Jun 2001 22:46:02          +0000
Received: from albatross.wgn.net (www.wgn.net [64.14.252.81] (may be forged))          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA15738 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 29 Jun 2001 15:46:02 -0700
Received: from hogwild (sc-66-74-70-20.socal.rr.com [66.74.70.20]) by          albatross.wgn.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id PAA12737 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 29 Jun 2001 15:46:37 -0700
References: <F27M3SOlbpH71yEXUIE00010f84@hotmail.com>             <3B3CFEC8.8D52D062@home.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Message-ID:  <01c901c100ed$0b8fb0e0$14464a42@socal.rr.com>
Date:         Fri, 29 Jun 2001 15:44:23 -0700
Reply-To: "Wedge Oldham" <wedge@WESTWORLD.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Wedge Oldham" <wedge@WESTWORLD.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] sub launch
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

For the older Polaris boats, launch depth was 130'...I think this is
measured from the bottom of the boat, which puts the top of the missile
hatch at a depth of approx 97'.

4500 psi was used to impulse the missile out of the tube. The motor ignited
*after* the missile left the water, in some films you can actually see the
missile falling back into the water before the motor comes up to pressure.

The Poseidon system used a rocket engine instead of air to impulse out the
missile. This rocket engine was built into the missile tube itself. It's
exhaust was directed downward to a bilge area below the missile. This area
had an amount of water in it, that was instantly (or almost) flashed into
steam. It was the steam that supplied the force to eject the missile.

It was said that the missile (both Polaris & Poseidon) left the water
perfectly dry...being encased in the air/steam bubble when the broke the
surface.

Interesting note, the missile tube hatch closes when the missile leaves the
tube. The timing of the hatch closing is very exact. The hatch closes at a
speed that allows enough water to enter the missile tube that exactly equals
the weight of the missile. This allows boomers to launch all 16 missile with
bobbing to the surface like a cork, or worse yet, sinking to the bottom.

Wedge Oldham
5 patrols on the USS Ethan Allen SSBN 608 Gold Crew.
http://NikeProject.com

----- Original Message -----
From: "Mark Simpson" <mark.simpson@HOME.COM>
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Sent: Friday, June 29, 2001 3:18 PM
Subject: Re: [AR] sub launch


> IIRC, from Crimson Tide, launch depth is 300' max. below the surface for a
nuke.
>
> Mark Simpson
>
> John Dom wrote:
>
> > There are one or two probably simple things which escape me concerning
sub
> > launched missiles. Say Trident for instance. So their motor ignites the
> > instant it leaves the water or while say 1 or 2 m under the surface.
> >
> > Questions here are: how come they can pop up that violently so they
clear
> > the surface before ignition? I mean the specific gravity of the missile
must
> > be larger than that of sea water... Even leaving the sub tube with
> > compressed gas, I'd expect the missile'd slow down going up, no? Even
sink
> > again.
> >
> > Next, what is the maximum depth such missiles can leave the sub? Only 10
m
> > equals 1 bar pressure.
> >
> > jd
> >
_________________________________________________________________________
> > Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at
http://www.hotmail.com.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 3050 invoked from network); 29 Jun 2001 23:49:05 -0000
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 29 Jun 2001 23:49:05 -0000
Received: (qmail 26265 invoked from network); 29 Jun 2001 23:49:48 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 29 Jun 2001 23:49:48 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA16024; Fri, 29 Jun 2001 16:35:20 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 68042 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 29 Jun 2001 23:35:13          +0000
Received: from conint.consumersinterest.com (consumersinterest.com          [207.195.143.118] (may be forged)) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with          ESMTP id QAA16006 for <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 29 Jun 2001          16:35:13 -0700
Received: from greg [208.187.15.145] by conint.consumersinterest.com          (SMTPD32-6.04) id A3C829E00FC; Fri, 29 Jun 2001 16:48:24 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <NDBBIBAMIMKJPANDCAHGEELIENAA.greg@blastzone.com>
Date:         Fri, 29 Jun 2001 16:45:07 -0700
Reply-To: <greg@blastzone.com>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Greg Deputy" <greg@blastzone.com>
Subject:      Re: [AR] sub launch
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <01c901c100ed$0b8fb0e0$14464a42@socal.rr.com>

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@itc.uci.edu]On
> Behalf Of Wedge Oldham
> Sent: Friday, June 29, 2001 3:44 PM
> To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
> Subject: Re: [AR] sub launch
>
<<SNIP>>
> Interesting note, the missile tube hatch closes when the missile
> leaves the
> tube. The timing of the hatch closing is very exact. The hatch closes at a
> speed that allows enough water to enter the missile tube that
> exactly equals
> the weight of the missile. This allows boomers to launch all 16
> missile with
> bobbing to the surface like a cork, or worse yet, sinking to the bottom.
>

I wonder if this was ever tested?  Would be quite impressive (scary?) to
see.

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 20499 invoked from network); 30 Jun 2001 00:00:39 -0000
Received: from smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.81]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 30 Jun 2001 00:00:39 -0000
Received: (qmail 23235 invoked from network); 30 Jun 2001 00:01:46 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 30 Jun 2001 00:01:46 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA16074; Fri, 29 Jun 2001 16:45:36 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 68050 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Fri, 29 Jun 2001 23:45:34          +0000
Received: from mta01.mail.mel.aone.net.au (mta01.mail.au.uu.net [203.2.192.81])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA16057 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 29 Jun 2001 16:45:33 -0700
Received: from win2pk ([63.60.247.192]) by mta01.mail.mel.aone.net.au with SMTP          id <20010629234530.PXRM18810.mta01.mail.mel.aone.net.au@win2pk> for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Sat, 30 Jun 2001 09:45:30 +1000
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Importance: Normal
Message-ID:  <NEBBJIGOELOLIBCCPKDCEEJFCBAA.geordi@c031.aone.net.au>
Date:         Sat, 30 Jun 2001 10:03:58 +1000
Reply-To: "Troy Prideaux" <geordi@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "Troy Prideaux" <geordi@C031.AONE.NET.AU>
Subject:      Re: [AR] nitronium compounds
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <3B3CFF17.5A88E241@home.com>

Note though, what I'm talking about here has absolutely nothing to do with
organics.

Troy.

>-----Original Message-----
>From: Amateur Rocketry discussion list [mailto:AROCKET@itc.uci.edu]On
>Behalf Of Mark Simpson
>Sent: Saturday, 30 June 2001 8:20 AM
>To: AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU
>Subject: Re: [AR] nitronium compounds
>
>
>Steric hindrances play a big part in the amount of nitration that
>an organic
>molecule can tolerate.  Oxygen atoms don't like being in close proximity to
>other oxygen atoms. I once saw a formula for  calculating  the stability of
>nitrated organics, but don't recall it at the moment.  My last chemistry
>class, Advanced Organic, IIRC, was in 1978 and even though I have
>a Chemistry
>degree, I haven't worked in a lab in 10 years.  Sometimes, it's
>good to be the
>boss, sometimes it's not. ;-)
>
>Mark Simpson
>
>John Dom wrote:
>
>> TP wrote:
>>
>> >ummm, RDX is very interesting to me because it contains NN02 bonds which
>> >raises a question that I've been pondering since the NO2ClO4 thread: if
>> >it's possible to synthesize N02Cl04 (nitronium perchlorate) why
>is it not
>> >possible to synthesize N02N03 or is it?
>> >
>>
>> Beyond my knowledge. I have heard about nitronium salts when looking into
>> the matter of HAN monoprop but'd have to research this.
>>
>> Besides, this is chemistry for isolated bunker or cave labs, no? Not my
>> piece of cake.
>>
>> jd
>> _________________________________________________________________________
>> Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.
>

From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>
Delivered-To: baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET
Received: (qmail 26323 invoked from network); 30 Jun 2001 00:30:43 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received: from smtpb.ha-net.ptd.net ([207.44.96.82]) (envelope-sender <>)          by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with QMQP          for <>; 30 Jun 2001 00:30:43 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Received: (qmail 13814 invoked from network); 30 Jun 2001 00:31:41 -0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Received: from itc.uci.edu ([128.200.71.129]) (envelope-sender <owner-arocket@ITC.UCI.EDU>)          by smtpa.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP          for <baumans@PTDPROLOG.NET>; 30 Jun 2001 00:31:41 -0000
Received: from itc.uci.edu (itc.uci.edu [128.200.71.129]) by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA16209; Fri, 29 Jun 2001 17:22:55 -0700
Received: from ITC.UCI.EDU by ITC.UCI.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with          spool id 68070 for AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU; Sat, 30 Jun 2001 00:22:44          +0000
Received: from mail-srv1.micron.com (masquerade.micron.com [137.201.242.130])          by itc.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA16192 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 29 Jun 2001 17:22:44 -0700
Received: from mail-srv1.micron.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by          mail-srv1.micron.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id SAA25609 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 29 Jun 2001 18:22:13 -0600 (MDT)
Received: from ntexchange01.micron.com (ntexchange01 [137.201.104.84]) by          mail-srv1.micron.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id SAA25605 for          <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>; Fri, 29 Jun 2001 18:22:12 -0600 (MDT)
Received: by ntexchange01.micron.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19)          id <NWWP0CP0>; Fri, 29 Jun 2001 18:22:11 -0600
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19)
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Message-ID:  <2DCA36C44BF3D211917F0008C7C9C9DD067ECEE4@ntexchange06.micron.com>
Date:         Fri, 29 Jun 2001 18:22:11 -0600
Reply-To: "gacrowell" <gacrowell@MICRON.COM>
Sender: "Amateur Rocketry discussion list" <AROCKET@itc.uci.edu>
From: "gacrowell" <gacrowell@MICRON.COM>
Subject:      Re: [AR] sub launch
To: <AROCKET@ITC.UCI.EDU>

Can they launch from the surface?

There was an idiotic TV movie on a few weeks ago (the name of which I have
thankfully forgot), about a Russian sub accident.  In it they seemed to have
the idea that the sub had to surface to fire.  And, if it submerged while a
missile hatch was open, it would flood the sub.

GC

